and two against forty-one, and the bill then passed.

SEES OF BANGOR AND ST. ASAPH.

During this session the Earl of Powis renewed his proposition for
repealing so much of the act of the 6th and 7th William IV. as related
to the union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor. In Ins speech the
noble lord laid great stress on the numerous petitions from every county
in North Wales, and from many in South Wales and England, as testifying
the unanimous feeling pervading the clergy throughout both countries
and all classes in Wales against the suppression of one of those ancient
bishoprics. On its second reading, the measure was opposed by the Duke
of Wellington and the Archbishop of Canterbury; and supported by the
Bishops of St. Davids, Lincoln, Exeter, London, and Salisbury, and the
Earls of Winchilsea and Harrowby. On a division, it was carried by
a majority of forty-nine against thirty-seven; but though the second
reading was thus carried, a difficulty arose in another quarter, which
frustrated the endeavours of the friends of North Wales to preserve the
integrity of its episcopate. On the motion for its third reading, the
Duke of Wellington announced that the bill was one which touched the
prerogative of the crown, and that he was not authorized to give her
majesty's consent to its further progress. The manner in which the
question of the crown's prerogative arose in this case was explained by
the lord-chancellor. His lordship remarked, that during the vacancy of
a see, the temporalities belonged to the crown; and any alterations in a
see, therefore, affected the pecuniary interests of the crown; and there
could be no doubt that where the pecuniary interests of the crown
were concerned, its consent was necessary. He doubted whether he was
authorized in putting a question affecting the royal prerogative without
the consent of her majesty; and he suggested the appointment of a
committee to search for precedents. A committee was appointed, and under
these circumstances Lord Powis announced his determination to withdraw
the bill, stating at the same time his conviction that the matter would
not rest where it was. He believed that during the whole period the
house of Hanover had been on the throne there was no precedent to be
found to sanction the present course adopted by government. There was
no measure that parliament had expressed a wish for them to consider,
in which the crown had introduced its authority to prevent