a third time, and passed on the 15th of July.

The second reading was moved in the lords on the 22nd of July. Lord
Melbourne briefly explained its provisions, observing that it was not
necessary for him to go into any lengthened argument on the subject.
It was read a second time without opposition, the Duke of Wellington
declaring that he was prepared to consider it in committee, with a view
to make such amendments as might render it consistent with the interests
of the church and the people. The house went into committee on the
25th, and the bill was passed on the 28th. When passed, however, all the
provisions for what was called appropriation were struck out, and all
the other important arrangements in the bill were modified. By the bill
the clergy were only to receive seventy per cent.; the lords raised it
to seventy-five; they raised also the minimum stipend to be paid in any
benefice to L300. In this shape the bill was sent down to the commons.

Lord John Russell brought the amendments of the lords before that house
on the 2nd of August, when he started a question of privilege, as if the
lords had interfered with a money-bill, thereby leaving the commons no
other choice than to reject it, independently of the merits or demerits
of the alterations which had been introduced. He entered subsequently
into the merits of the amendments at large; and having explained them,
he said, it was for the house to say whether, after having solemnly
affirmed certain principles, it would, because the lords had rejected
them, yield them up, and then endeavour to agree with the lords in the
alterations of this bill, or in the provisions of a new measure. For
himself, he would say, that if the members of the house of commons
were to go up to the bar of the house of lords in such humble guise,
admitting that they had been in error, and that the wisdom of the house
of lords had taught them a lesson of policy they had never learned
before, he, for one, would not accompany the commons on such a message.
Sir Robert Peel, who followed the home-secretary, moved as an amendment
that the lords' amendments should now be taken into consideration; but,
after a brief debate, the motion for rejecting the bill was carried by
a majority of two hundred and sixty against two hundred and thirty-one.

COMMUTATION OF TITHES IN ENGLAND.

One of the leading measures of the session, as regarded England, was for
the commutation of tithes; a measure whi