§ Lord John Russell(in answer to a remark made by Lord Sandon, which did not reach us) said, that it had been his intention, after the next order of the day was read, to state the course which he intended to take with respect to the above Bill. On the last day that the Bill was before the House, it gave rise to a desultory conversation which had not advanced the measure. Since then he had seen some notices on the subject—one by the hon. Member for Finsbury, on a subject which he had thought had been dropped till the next Session—namely, the revenues of cathedrals. Now, if the Bill was to be discussed in connexion with that and other subjects, he had only the alternative—looking at the state of the other business in the House—either to bring it forward early, and discuss it from day to day, to the great delay of other Bills, and the prolonging of the Session, or to let the other measures take precedence, and, when they should be disposed of, to bring on this at a period in a House too thinly attended to consider a measure of that importance. Under these circumstances, and considering that several hon. Members had already left town, who would, if present, take an active part in the discussion of the measure, he thought he should best consult the convenience of the House, and the due consideration of this Bill on a future occasion, by postponing it to the next Session. He would not then enter into the merits of the Reports of the Church Commissioners, on which this Bill was founded. He would content himself for the present with observing, that the measures recommended in those Reports were efficient measures of Church Reform, and he should be able to maintain that proposition at the proper time.
§ Subject dropped.