HOME NEWS SUMMARY.

Inangahua Times, Volume IV, Issue 62, 31 August 1877, Page 2

HOME NEWS SUMMARY.

In the House of Lords on June 14, j some discussion ensued by Lord Eedes- j dale calling attention to a book entitled ; "The Priest in Absolution," which, he i said, deserved the serious consideration of all persons interested in the religion and the Church of this country. The work was privately printed, and circulated among the clergy by an association called the Society of tho Holy Cross, of which Mr Mackonochie was the Master, | and it advocated what bad always been supposed to be contrary to the doctrine of I the Church of England. In reference to confession and absolution, there were passages of a prurient nature in the work, and he thought it was time that some authoritative notice should be taken of it. In conclusion, Lord Redesdale reid some passages from the publication in question, for the purpose of showing that the character which he gave of it was not unwarranted. Tho Archbishop of Canter* bury said that Lord Redesdale had read enough to prove that no modest person could read the book without a blush, and it was a disgrace that such a work should be circulated under the authority of any clergyman ; but lie believed that they were very few in number. Tho subject had engaged the attention of the bishops on more than one occasion, and he trusted that right views in reference to it prevailed generally among the clergy. The bishop of Gloucester and Bristol stated that his attention having been called to the fact that a clergyman, whose name was connected with the Executive of the Society of the Holy Cross, was seeking to obtain preferment in his diocese, he took such measures cs induced that clergyman to withdraw his name from the society. Lord Oranmore and Browne | thought that the bishops should let the { clergy understand that they would give no preferment to olergymen connected with such a society — an opinion in which Lord Harrow by coincided. In the House of Commons on May 31 Lord Elcho pressed upon the Govern-' ment the importance of being ready> for any emergencies which might be brought upon Great Britain by the war between Russia and Turkey. Iv the House of Commons on June 4, Sir C. O'Loghlen asked the PostmasterGeneral if he would state under what statute the Post Office claim to have the right to render compulsory tho pre-pny-ment of letters from the United Kingdom to our Australian colonies ; under what statute letters from the United Kingdom lo our Australian colonies, posted in the United Kingdom witit no stamp or insufficient stamp, were now open and read at the General Post Office ; if he could lay upon the table of tho House a retura of such letters opened ami read at the Geueral Post Office, and if be could state on what ground* tho senders of letters from the United Kingdo'n to our Australian colonies had not the same option of pre-paying or not those letters as they now possessed with regard to letters between different parts of the United Kingdom. Lord J. Manners stated that the Treasury warrant of 1864, issued in com* plianoe with the Act 3 and 4 Vie, cap' 96, gave the Post Office the right of rendering compulsory the pre-payment of letters from the United Kingdom to our Australian colonies ;, and, under the same _ statute, letters to the Australian colonies posted in the United Kingdom with no stamp, or with an insufficient Rtarap, were now opened and read 1 at. the General Post Office. No returns had been kept of the i number of letters opened. As long ago j as ,1855 the Imperial Government were in communication with the Colonial Governments, with a view of simplifying the tariff and to relax the rules ; but the objections raised by the colonies were, so great that no further steps were taken. The House had a morning sitting on June 5, at which Mr Gourley put seme questions to the representative of the Foreign Office in reference to the effect of the war between Russia and Turkey oh the freo navigation of the Suez Canal. Mr Bourke, in reply, stated that he believed it was the intention of both Russia and Turkey to abide by the Declaration of Paris in regard to that , matter. Mr Gourley was about to move the adjourn* ment of the House in order to explain the reason which had induced him to ask for this information, but the Speaker having advised him against ihat course, he corn* tented himself with giving notice of the motion for another day. On this Mr Jenkins at once moved the adjournment, much to the general dissatisfaction of the House, but after some discordant remarks on the nature of the motion, he after* wards withdrew it. In the House Commons on Jua© 6, the Marquis of Hartington asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he would lay upon tho tabb a copy of aiy clespatoh containing the terms of the intimation slated in the papers, Egypt No. 1, to have been made to the Russian Ambassador, to the effect that an attempt to blockade or otherwise interfere with tho canal or its approaches would be regarded os it menace to ludin, and as a grave injury to tho commerce of the world ; and whether, if Her Majesty's Government bad received a»y reply from tbo Russian Government, lie would lay it on Hie table. Tho Chnncellor of the Exchequer said there were no other papers besides the despatches already laid on /he table whic'.i could be published at present jt

without inconvenience, Those despatches bad been laid before Parliament because it was understood that a meeting of the Suez Canal directors was to be held in Pari« this week, at which, probably, a statement would be made of what had passed between M. de Lesseps"<and the Government, and it was thought desirable to prevent any mistako by publishing an authentio account. '' At the evening sitting of the House of Common on June 11, Sir J£. Wilmot moved a resolution declaring that while it is not possible at the present time to remote the penalty of death altogether from the Statute Book, ifc is desirable to consider whether the laws, under which offenders are liable to capital punishment should not undergo revision. Mr_ Peasa moved an amendment to the effect that it is expedient to abolish the penalty of death, and to substitute for thai penalty in the case of murder, penal servitude for life, and in the case of treason penal servitude for life, or for any term not less than seven years. After some disoussion the amendment and resolution were both i negatived. In the House of Commons on June 11 Mr Leatham called attention to the traffic in- livings, ond moved that, in view of the simoniacal evasions of the law and other scandals and abases in | counection with the exercise and disposal \ of private patronage in the Church of England, remedial measures are urgently required of a more stringent charactor than any recently introduced into the House. At the outset he disclaimed any hostility to the Church in raising the question, and his chief object, he said, was to strengthen the hands of the Government and to elicit from them a declaration that they would deal with the question at an early period. At the present time, he showed,- then were 1 no fewer than 2383 livings in the market ©ither for sale or etchiinge, and he amused the House by reading extracts from the advertisements in which they ' were offered to the public. These pro* ceedings led to simoniaoal transactions, which the law was unable to prevent, and which the bishops were powerless to cheek. Mr Fibbcrt seconded the motion in the interests of the Church, and urged the Government to take up thequostion. Mr Hardcastle thanked Mr Leatham for raising the question : but thinking that the motion went too far, he moved, as an amendment, that it is desirable to adopt measures for preventing simoniaca} evasion of the law, and checking abuses in the sale of livings in privato patronage. After a discussion, the amendment of Mr Hardcastle w»s carried. On June 25, a discussion took place on the merits of the Inflexible ironclad, which led to Mr Aslilmry giving notice of his intention to move for the correspon* dencp between Mr ReM and the Admiralty on the subject.— The free passage of tW Suez Canal wes then taken into rnnsideration, nnd the Chancellor of th© ■Rxoheqner stated that as tho Porte 'had declared it shonld be free for all neutral vessels, and Russia bavins given 1 her Essuranee that it was not her mktation I© Wockad* thecflnnl..-or in any wajMo interrupt its freo navigation, the British Government <iid nbt think it necessar* to lake any uittwws for the furhter pr&tectionof thp canal. The Berlin correspondent of the Cologne Gazette remarks with t respect to the r P cent discussion of the question of the Suez Canal in the British tfouss of Commons, that in Germany .noboby can even remotely understand the object of the Opposition in embarrassing the CroverumenUysuch attacks upon its policy n« have been recaritly winessed. Such debates excite., interest abroad o.K' in so ,far as they elicit declarations o policy from Her Majesty's ,^ p . *** statement, thou-h,H coos^ ; (ml^ftft^ word Bi fmmn member pf.tJi^Goverotacnfe is. read with incomparably, grsatermtt>re»ii tlia« fho mosfr^lahprate iindfimpnsofnnod oration* ofMr. Gln(lat<>nc, u A Paris cirrp-poridfint TO«l sq see ifc stnterl that ■ Marshal jMaeMlhon and Mr pri-ate ad»iwwi»«. distinct from tKe Ministry, are anxious to keepitbo Bonapartists at elbow's lenfelhirW-I am in a position to assert J that the Marshal * priJate^secretary, M./H.arcour^n of the French Ambassador itt L&ndonyhaa frequent inten iew* .~ I *** i f^ o £ say daily-with Generally, who w now the trusted counsellor Pf the Prmc© Imperial" •