The Press. — London, England, 1857-06-20 00:00:00

JUNE 20, 1857. of what Lord DERBY actually did often taunt the Noble Lord with his reduction of the number of Irish bishoprics; but the Noble Lord steadily refused to allow the State to confiscate any portion whatever of the Church property, which he re distributed in a more Judicious manner. His complete acquaintance with every branch of this great subject was evidenced in the Noble Lord's most mas terly speech on Thursday night. His Lordship clearly explained all that had been done by the Legislature in 1833, and in subsequent years ; and he showed also how only two years since the present Prime Minister held upon " Ministers' Money " the identical views now advocated by himself. How the scheme of the Government invades the right of property was completely proved by the Noble Lord. He drew an analogy between the proposed action of this reckless measure and the hypothetical case of buying a house subject to the payment of 501. per annum to a Jewish Synagogue. " I should like to know," said Lord DERBY in his racy and vi gorous manner, " what would be said of me, " if from conscientious motives I refused to pay " money for such a purpose ?" This was putting exactly the case of the Cork Corpora. tion in its relation to " Ministers' Money ;" and Lord DERBY then answered the question thus : A wise man would call me a fool, and an honest man would call me a rogue, and the law would say that being liable, I must put my conscientious scruples in my pocket, and take my money out of my pocket and pay the amount. This plain method of putting the case was loudly cheered . and that it told upon the portion of the House present at the debate is seen in the fact that it was only by the use of proxies, which were anxiously sought for, that Ministers were able to gain a majority of five, while of the Peers " present " a clear majority of six (71 to 65) sided with Lori DERBY. The appeal made by Lord DERBY to Lord Chancellor BRADY'S evidence on this question ought to settle the question for any one who has yet to make up his mind upon it. The whole bill is nothing better than a " pro-Catholic " job, perpetrated by the ever-yielding Premier and his colleagues, in order to please their Irish friends who helped in the scheme for giving the Chinese a specimen of " Liberal' rule. We trust that on a third reading the House of Lords will throw out this dangerous measure, or, at all events, introduce into it such provi sions as will effectually guard against its being drawn into a precedent. The sum at stake is small, but the principle at issue is of vast im portance. In his attempt to connect the argument of Lord DERBY with the abolition of church rates, Lord HARROWBY seems to have committed an extraordinary blunder. If, said he, only im ports which are fixed in amount are to be regarded as inviolable, then church rates are at once condemned, for their amount is fluc tuating. Now, one would have thought it was obvious at a glance that the essential distinc tion drawn by Lord DERBY between church cess and ministers' money was that the latter was a fixed charge on property, subject to which it was bought, sold, and inherited ; while the other was levied only as occasion required rather in the shape of an income tax. Thus it turns out to be ministers' money and church rates which stand upon the same foot ing, and not church rates and church cess, as Lord HARROWBY thoughtlessly argued. The growth of Protestantism in Ireland was finely touched upon by the Bishop of KILMORE, as affording an additional reason why at this critical moment not even a show of discou ragement should be inflicted on the Irish Church CHURCH RATES. TIIERE are some reforms which are imperfectly accomplished because they are too late, and others because they are too early. In the one case, statesmen are driven into the adoption of some ill-considered measure by the public discontent ; in the other, they are betrayed into the negligent performance of their work by the public apathy. Nor is this the only clanger to which such legislation is exposel. THE PRESS. When the mass of the people are uninterested in any particular change, yet yield at the same time a theoretic assent to its expediency, men of extreme measures are able secretly to mature their plans and then surprise the people into acceptance of them, through a sort of reluctance to resist proposals framed in seeming, though not real, concordance with all their previous convictions. Something of this sort is what we fear with regard to the church-rate question. Church rates are felt as a practical hardship by an almost inappreciable fraction of the commu nity ; but that they are just now a theoretical anomaly is what a great number of well-dis disposed persons may be inclined to believe. Of this feeling it is possible that the enemies of the Church may take advantage, and that persons will thus be committed to the support of measures which, had the question possessed any practical interest for them, they would have examined for themselves and rejected. The church-rate difficulty is not one of those which demand instantaneous legislation. As the law stands now, few people are ever se riously aggrieved by church rates. There is no cutting of throats or breaking of heads, no seditious meetings or midnight conspiracies, involved in their continuance. In point of fact, we believe that the only sufferers by the present uncertainty of the law are Churchmen themselves ; and if they desire more time for consideration and a fuller investigation of the subject, they are surely entitled to a hea►ing. The fact is that if church rates at this moment pressed heavily on so numerous and influential a body as the English Dissenters, our readers may depend upon it they would hear more about them. Their silence is in its way quite as convincing as the figures which prove that ninety-five per cent. of English parishes pay church rates without reluctance. We are not bringing forward these arguments for the purpose of refuting the expediency of any change whatever. We merely mean to show that there is no such pressing hurry in the matter, and that Lord PALMERSTON need not trouble himself to bring forward a bill this session under the idea that he would be thereby complying with an urgent demand. To say that a law cannot be enfored, and therefore must be repealed, is a fallacy we have frequently exposed. Every law can be enforced ; and it is only when such a consum mation is so manifestly opposed to truth and right as to be productive of civil disturbances that the argument in question can avail. If every law were repealed, or the principle involved in it renounced, whenever a difficulty occurred in giving effect to it, our Statute book at this moment would be waste paper, and the British Constitution could never have existed. Minorities so small as almost to have sunk into cliques cannot be allowed to dictate to the nation, or the people forced into the abolition of church rates against their will, because such an impost does not happen to square with the theories of pedants. All we recommend is that church rates should be steadily maintained till an approved substitute is provided ; and an improved substitute is not likely to be found at the fag end of a session, at a period when the subject has as yet been little ventilated, and Church men themselves scarce fully awakened to the necessity of dealing with it. What may be the Government intentions we can only conjecture. But this we know, that tampering with the Church of England has more than once proved fatal to the power of a great party ; and sure we are that it is not Lord PALMERSTON with his large but wavering majority at his back who can venture with impunity on so dangerous and unpopular an experiment. THE NEW ROMAN CATHOLIC MOVEMENT. IT was once well observed in Parliament that " the Emancipation Bill of 1829 was the last " measure in one, and the first in another " series of concessions." The remark came from the philosophic lips of the Right Hon. T. WYSE, our present Minister in Greece, and the historian of the Roman Catholic Association. Protestants would do w ell to consider the latter 595 part of that observation, which is critically correct. Since 1829 the Roman Catholics have vastly increased their representative power. The exaggerated influence of the agitating priesthood not only gives them an average of thirty-five Irish Roman Catholic :WY's., but it produces also a " pro-Romanist " influence of a most anomalous character, and undermines the Protestant interest in other directions. The Corporations, also, have beett reformed—a change which in England and Scotland was one chiefly of class, but which in Ireland has been one of creed ; some of the results of which are visible in the organ ised opposition to " Ministers' Money." Along with concessions of a political and Parliamentary character, there has been a large official increase in the social influence of the Roman Catholics. A Chief Justice- ship, a Mastership of the Rolls, the office of Lord Chief Baron twice, Puisne Judge ships, Privy Councillorships, and a variety of posts of honour, have been placed at their disposal. These concessions, so far from having a sedative, have had a stimu lating effect on them. They stood together as one man for the "Cardinal Lord Archbishop of Westminster," when the aggression was made ; and at the present time the zeal of their body in England and Ireland appears to be concentrated again with a view of some ulterior purposes. The rapidity with which all the chief social notabilities of their persua sion have come together, along with the un usual cordiality of tone between the English and Irish Roman Catholics, and the astuteness with which some of their proceedings have been managed, indicate a controlling and managerial power, and proves that some further objects, not yet revealed, are now being aimed at. Whenever Roman Catholicism bends its nerves and sinews for a great purpose, it is remarkable how simultaneous is its action amongst its votaries in every country. In Paris the organisation and concert of the Roman Catholic journalists is matter of re mark in literary circles, and it is not unlikely that they act in harmony with the Belgian Ultramontanes. In Belgium the privileges conferred by popular representation are used as weapons of the Pope. In Ireland " Minis ters' Money " is cried out against, not for the sake of the twelve or fourteen thousand pounds at stake, but in order to introduce the fine point of the wedge, and break in upon the Act of Union. Even while we write, intelli gence is just received from Naples of new Church laws of ti most extraordinary character —one of their significant provisions being that, "in cases of penal proceedings against ec " clesiastics, the criminal and correctional " magistrates should, as far as possible, avoid all publicity, and conduct the discussions with " closed doors." Amongst ourselves we have this sudden burst of energy from the English Roman Catholics, who on former occasions have been most averse to pulling oars in the same boat with their Irish coreligionists. It is specially to be noted, also, that our English Roman Catholics are not much concerned in the nature of the Roman Catholic Oath, as only one member of their body (Lord E. HOWARD) 15 in the House of Commons. It may be said that they come forward for the sake of a principle, but it is singular how tame and in active they have been on other occasions, compared with the sudden energy that has now appeared in their body. We rejoice, therefore, that their new designs were signally defeated on Monday night. Out of the eighty-three Members who voted with Mr. DEASY on Monday more than one-half were Irish Members, and we observe only one English " statesman" in the minority. As might have been anticipated, that " statesman " was Sir JAMES GRAHAM. The speech of Mr. DEASY was cautious in its argument and calm in its temper; but his facts refuted his reasoning. Mr. WHITESIDE, the eloquent Member for Enniskillen, de scribed Mr. DEASY as "acute, intelligent, and sly," the latter word being either a playful touch in " pretty Fanny's way," or intended as a compliment to a " counsellor." Mr. DEASY is one of the most eminent members of the Equity Bar in Ireland ; we readily admit that his personal qualities and intellectual worn?