was with states as with men. There was a period in which they were not qualified to enjoy perfect liberty. In youth a human being must necessarily be subject to some restraint and guidance; and it was only when a state had become mature that it could safely be trusted with unlimited liberty. If in the constitution of the Ionian Islands there existed a frequent reference either to the Lord High Commissioner, or to the British government at home, he denied that Sir T. Maitland had exhibited in his conduct, with respect to that reference, the slightest disposition to arrogate to himself any undue power. As to the elections, he would ask if it was not Sir T. Maitland's duty to assemble (as he had assembled) in the primary council, all those from whose abilities and local knowledge he might expect to derive the most beneficial advice and aid? Let the House look at the names of those individuals. It was impossible to select men of greater rank, property, influence, and other qualities calculated to render them competent to the execution of the task imposed upon them. The proceedings against individuals had been all legally conducted, and were justified by the crimes proved against them. In regard to the insurrection at Santa Maura, although the ostensible cause was the imposition of a new tax, the real cause was, the apprehension that the British government were on the point of sending the militia to the West Indies. On the 29th of September, a large body of peasants in arms approached the town. Instead, however, of repelling force by force, the commanding officer desired them to send the representation of their grievance in the shape of a memorial to Corfu. To this they assented; but on the following day the resident induced several gentlemen to endeavour to ap

pease

the people; two of them, however, were arrested, and a constable was assassinated by the peasants; and that took place before it was possible an answer could be returned to the memorial. It was not until the day after the assassination of the constable that Sir F. Adam ordered a reinforcement of troops from Corfu. On the 3d of October, the insurgents began the work of destruction, by rushing down on the town, and setting fire to a magazine. Upon this, the officer on duty very properly thought it necessary to act. The moment that the insurgents were defeated, all hostile proceedings were stopped; and the principal delinquents were arrested and brought to justice. So far were the subsequent proceedings from being sanguinary in their character, that only four of the principal ringleaders were executed. With respect to the disturbances at Zante, and the prosecutions which followed, the honourable member had contended that those prosecutions ought not to have been instituted, because the disturbances emanated from the act of government. But even if that had been the case, he must deny that the disturbances were justified. The fact was, that the disturbances originated, not in any alarm for the interests of the church, but in the alarm of those who feared that the property which they had iniquitously obtained, would be taken from them. The governor had been active in suppressing the monopoly of grain, and had thus been the means of preserving the islands from famine, which otherwise they could scarcely have escaped.

A short conversation ensued, in which Mr Bennett characterized the constitution given to the Ionian Islands as a mere mockery, a trick, a juggle. It was high sounding and pompous, indeed; something to the ear; a little to the eyes; but, in fact

-in substance-nothing; while Mr J. P. Grant was satisfied, that the more Sir T. Maitland's conduct was inquired into, the better it would appear. The motion was finally negatived by a majority of 97 against 27.

In the volume for 1818, we had occasion to observe, when Parliament were arranging the incomes of the Royal Dukes, consequent upon their numerous matrimonial engagements, that the Duke of Clarence, being refused the extra allowance of 10,000l., asked for him on special grounds, declined accepting the 6000l., offered to him in common with his royal brothers. This step, however, had given rise to inconveniencies, the nature of which may be easily conjectured, and which at length became so pressing, as to induce his Royal Highness to retract the measure. He now, therefore, professed his willingness, not only to accept the addition offered by Parliament, but to receive the arrears which would become due, by reckoning from the year 1818. In the committee of the House, formed on the question, the Marquis of Londonderry said, he hoped there would be but one feeling in the House on the subject, and that, in order to support the dignity of the Royal Duke, they would suffer the bill to take its operation from the original period of the vote. It should not be forgotten that his Royal Highness was the next brother to the Duke of York, and that this provision was absolutely necessary to support his rank and dignity. In fact, he required no more than was already granted to his young. er brothers. He did not wish to found this application on any personal comparison of the members of the Royal Family, but he could not avoid saying, that in that illustrious family no greater example of domestic proprie ty could be witnessed than that dis

VOL. XIV. PART 1.

played by the Royal Duke, whose union with his amiable Duchess had produced blessings to themselves, and might be productive of great advantages to the nation.

Mr Hume, though not prepared altogether to resist the grant, could not omit the opportunity of making a few strictures. He had no objections to place the Duke on a level with the other Princes; but there was a grant of 2500l. which he had, and the others had not; and therefore, 3500l. was sufficient for the purpose. With respect to any arrears, he should strenuously oppose them. The Queen had formerly refused 50,000l. a-year, and only accepted 35,000l. a-year; the Duke of Clarence had been also offered 24,000l. a-year, but he then refused it. The arrears due to the Queen since her refusal were 90,000l. If it was right to give the Duke his arrears, surely the Queen ought to get her arrears also; but that circumstance entirely escaped the notice of the noble lord, when he lately proposed a provision for her Majesty. The conduct of ministers to another branch of this illustrious family was most reprehensible. He alluded to the infant daughter of the Duke of Kent, the heir-presumptive to the throne. She was supported by an individual, she was not allowed the smallest portion of assistance from the state. He conceived that some parliamentary provision ought to be made for her maintenance as well as for other branches of the Royal Family. An annual income was, it was true, granted to her mother; but those who knew the expenses attendant on the high rank which it was necessary for her to maintain, would perceive that of 6000l. a-year little could possibly be left for the support of the legitimate infant Princess. He could not be answered by being told that the brother of the Duchess of

M

Kent had taken charge of this child of his own free will. He looked upon the offspring of the Royal Family as the children of Great Britain; he thought they should, as such, be supported by the public, instead of being maintained as this child was now supported. With respect to his Royal Highness's domestic behaviour and private virtues, they might bear out the picture given of them by the no'ble lord; he could not, of his own knowledge, agree with, or deny, the assertions. To these he did not advert; he looked only to the public conduct of his Royal Highness. Would any gentleman stand up, and state manfully, that he would sit on the trial, almost for life or death, of a near relation? Would it not have been better, in every point of view, if the Duke of Clarence had shewn some of that delicacy which appeared to have actuated other branches of the Royal Family? He would appeal to the conduct of the Duke of Sussex. Report said, that a will had been made, by which his late Majesty's property was divided amongst his sons, the Duke of Clarence being one. This fact ought to be ascertained, before they increased his income; because, in the event of considerable property having been left to his Royal Highness, which might be sufficient, in addition to his present allowance, he could see no reason for calling on the House to add to his income.

The Marquis of Londonderry explained, that the 2500l. had been granted to the Duke at an early period of life, to compensate for the want of any professional income, which his other brothers enjoyed. His Royal Highness's income had been rendered inadequate, through the impossibility of residing abroad in consequence of the state of the Duchess's health; while in the case of the Queen there was no such

change of circumstance. As to the will of the late King, he believed he might say that it had not turned out to be an effectual one. At the same time, he could assure the honourable gentleman, that, on a future occasion, there would be no hesitation to lay the matter before the House. The fact was, that all those idle tales which were afloat about the 1,000,000l. of property which his late Majesty was represented as having died possessed of, were the mere fabrications of illinformed, or ill-designing persons. The property that his late Majesty did leave behind him was very trifling, not much exceeding 80,000l.; and that amount was subject to many claims which might naturally be supposed to arise.

After some conversation, Mr Hume withdrew his motion for reducing the grant to 3500l., making way for another, proposed by Mr Harbord, against granting the arrears. This, however, was negatived by a majority of 119 against 43.

On a subsequent occasion, (June 18,) Mr Hume again pressed his amendment, which was negatived, first by 144 to 18, and then by 167 to 30.

Mr Bernal then proposed a new motion, throwing out the arrears, which was negatived by 131 against 81.

On the 15th May, after the presentation of numerous petitions, complaining of the proceedings at Manchester on 16th August, 1819, Sir Francis Burdett moved, that a committee of the House should be appointed to inquire into that subject. The honourable baronet supported this motion in a speech of great length, and the deliberations were continued for two successive nights; but an analysis of such long debates on so beaten a subject, could not, we apprehend, have much interest for

our readers. The motion was finally negatived by 235 against 111.

Lord King, on the 14th June, made a motion on a subject which had excited very considerable interest. It related to the mode of examining candidates for church livings, adopted by Dr Marsh, the present Bishop of Peterborough. Lord King held in his hand a petition from the reverend Mr Neville, stating that he held two liv ings in the diocese of Peterborough, to one of which it was necessary he should present a curate. The Reverend John Green was accordingly presented. He came forward with proper testimonials of character and ability. He had already signed the 39 articles, and was ready to be examined, and to subscribe them again. This, however, was not sufficient to satisfy the right reverend prelate opposite, (the Bishop of Peterborough,) who insisted upon answers to 87 questions, previously framed and printed, and, on refusal to answer them, signified his determination to exclude the applicant from the curacy. This determination the petitioner remonstrated against; but the reverend prelate peremptorily refused to relinquish his demand. He then appealed to the Archbishop of Canterbury, to whom he wrote on the 19th of June, but received no answer until the 7th of August, having, in the interval, written a second time to request a prompt decision. The archbishop, in his letter, after apologizing for the delay in replying, by stating that he had been more than usually occupied, observed that there was no doubt of the right of examination belonging to the bishop of the diocese, and that that right was so obvious, that he supposed the applicant must have since complied with what the bishop required of him. Lord King, admitting the rights of a bishop, still conceived he must be

bound by some rules and principles, otherwise the decision was arbitrary. If a judge in Westminster-hall committed error, or was guilty of abuse, his conduct could be brought under the consideration of that House by a writ of error; and surely there must be some remedy in the case of misconduct by an episcopal judge. The 87 questions of the right reverend prelate opposite, which were printed, sent by post, and answers desired to be returned in the same manner, could have no reference to ability; they were a test, and nothing else. The noble lord read some of the questions, and argued, that, from their leading nature, it was impossible to regard them as anything else than a test; and if the right reverend prelate meant them as a test, his objection then was, that the law had provided a much better one, and that neither the right reverend prelate, nor the whole of the reverend bench opposite, had any right to impose another. The 39 articles were intended by the law to draw a line, to a certain extent, about the church, and no other authority was entitled to alter that boundary. The bishop had boasted, that, with the knowledge of these questions, he had been promoted from one diocese to another, and seemed thus to hint that they had been adopted as a test by ministry. Lord King had heard this new standard of doctrine described as cobwebs for catching Calvinists, and that it could give pain to nobody but Calvinists. The comparison did not appear perfectly correct; for flies sometimes escaped from a spider, even after being entangled in his toils; but, with this cobweb, the unfortunate Calvinist must unavoidably fall under the fangs of his powerful antagonist. He regretted that such a practice had been adopted, for nothing was inore likely to create a schism in the church. Ano

ther prelate might choose to put a different construction on the 39 articles from that given to them by the right reverend prelate opposite; and thus a spirit of dissension would be excited. It was, therefore, most important that the 39 articles, which might justly be called articles of peace, should be the only standard of doctrine. He referred their lordships to the history of the 39 articles, and observed, that there was reason to believe that they had been drawn up in a Calvinistic sense. Upon the whole, he thought that a prelate of the church of England might be content with the articles of religion as they had been drawn up by the reformers of the church. Certainly he never could have supposed that the right reverend prelate, who, he was told, was the greatest polemical writer of the age, would have been guilty of the imprudence of endeavouring to force on the clergy of the country a new standard of doctrine.

The Bishop of Peterborough began by expressing his surprise that Mr Neville, having since filled up the vacancy in question by an unexceptionable candidate, should, six months after, come forward with the present petition. He then proceeded to the essential circumstances of the question in the following terms.-"The case now submitted to your lordships is a case of pure theology. For the questions, which the petitioner submits to your grave consideration, relate entirely to the doctrines contained in the Liturgy and Articles. Now, my lords, an inquiry into subjects of this description, is an inquiry which I believe your lordships' House has never instituted on any former occasion, The Liturgy and Articles derive, indeed, their authority, as standards of faith, from acts of Parliament, which require subscription to them. But, if it were deemed expedient to

revise the Liturgy and Articles, the revision would be referred either to the convocation, or to commissioners specially appointed by the crown. For an inquiry into the truth or falsehood of religious doctrines, is not the proper business of either House of Parliament, though it would be presumptuous to say what they shall or shall not do. Let us suppose, then, that the said theological inquiry were instituted in your lordships' House, and let us farther suppose, that the inquiry ended in this result, that it would be very desirable to make an alteration in regard to the said questions. I apprehend, my lords, even in this case, that your lordships' House could not, consistently with the constitution of the established church, interfere for the purpose of correcting them; and, if not for the purpose of correcting them, much less for the entire removal of them. My lords, I will state the grounds of this opinion. The 48th canon, which requires an examination of curates before they are licensed, has prescribed no mode of examination whatever. It has left, therefore, the mode of examination to the discretion of the bishop; and, my lords, it has wisely done so. For, in every diocese, the bishop is most likely to be acquainted with the peculiar wants of his diocese; most likely to understand, and best able to judge of irregularities, either in doctrine or in discipline, to which his diocese may be exposed; best able, therefore, to determine what kind of examinations will most effectually check them. The examination required for a curate's licence, is required for the purpose of ascertaining whether his doctrine is "sound doctrine;" the expression used in a curate's licence. Now the mode of examination which is best adapted to such a purpose, is unquestionably that which is best calculated to detect deviations from