The Press. — London, England, 1856-10-04 00:00:00

OCTOBER 4, 1856. economist) has stated in his " Life of Sir Robert Peel" that " even now the Tories are " the richest party in England ;" and we are convinced that, as things are managed by the " Libe,rals," the Conservative interest is de prived of its legitimate influence in the House of Commons. The eve of a general election is not an improper period for considering such a subject. and there is one phase of it which we shall illustrate to-day. We alluded last week to the great official influence given to the Roman Catholics. We believe that the disproportionate power given to them should become the object of severe scrutiny. There are some persons to whom such questions are distasteful, as being mixed up with polemical considerations and with Irish provincial politics. We have no liking for them ourselves. But there are times when provincial politics assume imperial im portance ; and, recollecting how seventy Irish " Liberal " members have turned the scale at every : crisis against the Conservative party, and that, in point of fact, the " Irish vote ' has decided our party struggles in the House of Commons, we cannot refrain from examining some new aspects of the question. This subject, we repeat, has derived new in terest from the stream of official patronage which has recently been flowing to the Roman Catholics. We have no desire to cheek the legitimate claims of talent and character, but we cannot allow the Conservative interest to be unfairly swamped. The state of the Par liamentary representation in Ireland is one of the primary causes of this exaggerated in fluence given to the Roman Catholics. We stated last week that there were six Protestants only out of the twenty-seven mem bers for the province of Munster. But the case we find to be still stronger. The Con servatives of the south of Ireland have only two members to represent them. The over whelming majority of the Protestants are " Conservatives" in politics, for only one to every twenty amongst them is a " Liberal." With the exception of the estates owned by absentee Whigs (like the Duke of DEVON SHIRE, Marquis of LANSDOWNE. and Earl of Coax), the great territorial properties of the district are owned by Protestants. The fee of the soil of Tipperary is owned by Protes tants. There is a large Protestant gentry in Limerick which has contributed many bril liant military celebrities to our modern army. In Clare the estates are decidedly Protestant, and also in Waterford. The professional classes are divided between the two religions, but no one can deny that the overwhelming preponderance of accumulated wealth and hereditary rank is on the side of the Pro testants. Yet, in the present state of things, Lord Viscount BERNARD (the worthy Member for Bandon), and Mr. IsAAc Burr (the Member for Youghal), are its only representatives in the House of Commons! The bare statement of such a fact is enough to show how unjustly the Conservatives are swamped, and how unjustly their influence is overborne. To the six counties of Clare, Limerick, Kerry, Cork, Tipperary, and Water ford, including their chief cities, besides many thriving towns, only two Conservatives are assigned ! How comes that fact ? We are compelled to answer—Because the Roman Catholic interest is allied to Government patronage ; and, as Mr. HATTER well knows, the elected members are incessant in their applications for promotions for their con stituents. Let us look at the case in another light. Let us leave out the words " Protestants" and " Romanists," and put the question, as if it were locally an English one, between " Conserva tives and Radicals." Would Sir BENJAMIN HALL, or Mr. WILLIAMS of Lambeth, or even Mr. RALPH OSBORNE, have the hardihood to assert that two members were enough for such an aggregate of wealth and respectability as the Conservatives of Munster possess? It is nothing to reply that there are, besides, four " Liberal Protestants " in the represen tation of that district. These gentlemen, doubtless, are respectable characters, but their line of politics is in many respects more ob jectionable to the Conservative Protestants than that of thorough-going Roman Catholics. THE PRESS. They are for abolishing the Established Church, and leavin ,, no harrier against the ascendancy of the Homan Catholic influence. In the modern military history of this empire, a reader will be struck with the names of the Beresfords, Hutchinsons, Massies (in cluding " Redan MASSY"), the Verekers, and Gough ; and the chivalry of the Conservatives of Munster has been glo riously conspicuous in many a famous field. To the Church and Bar they have contributed many celebrities ; and if the Senate were prae tically open to them, they would distinguish themselves as in other times. But, owing to the existing Coalition between " the Castle " and Roman Catholic electoral influences, the House of Commons is virtually closed to the ability and eloquence of the Protestant gentry of Munster. To what practical conclusion, it may be asked, would we point these remarks ? We answer, firstly, that we desire to con centrate public notice on the unfairness with which the Conservative interests are treated in Ireland. Twenty-five " Liberals " from Munster voting against two Conserva tives from the same district, which is fairly entitled to at least one dozen Conservatives in the representation ! There is thus a balance of ten members (counting twenty in a division) withdrawn from Parliamentary Con servatism. Secondly, we desire that, while this state of things continues without practical redress, stricter regard should he paid by Conservative opinion to the appointments made by the party now in office. If the old Protestant Ascendancy was condemned for its jobbery, why should Roman Catholic in fluence escape the wholesome effect of public scrutiny. Some recent appointments by the Executive would justify severe con demnation. In conclusion, we would observe that En glish public opinion should be brought to bear against the practical ascendancy which the Roman Catholics are obtaining in Ireland. The Relief Bill of 1829 was mainly carried by the divided state of the public mind in England, for even so late as 1825 a majority of the Irish Members was opposed to concession. Emancipation was precipitately yielded with out securities ; and it is therefore more incum bent upon the Consorvatives of the empire to take care that their wealth and social influence should not be overborne by a junction between unscrupulous " Liberals" and active Roman Catholics. DIVISION OF BISHOPRICS. THE division of the metropolitan see into the two dioceses of London and Westminster, and the contemplated division of the see of Dur ham, ate measures which the friends of the Church cannot pass over without comment. Precedent and presc►iption are so deservedly strong in this country, that it has almost come to be an established maxim never to allow mere inconvenience of detail to be made a pretext for tampering with any long recognised minciple ; and that where any reforms are necessary in our institutions to suit the changes of the times, we should always endea vour in the first place to effect them through such machinery as the institutions themselves afford, and not proceed to any radical innova tion till all else has failed. Had this rule been acted upon in the case of our Ecclesiastical Reforms, we think it possible that the measure now under discussion might never have been found necessary, and that the desired results might have been produced by expedients less injurious to the dignity of the Church and more in accordance with the spirit of the Con stitution. We suppose we may assume that the more new bishops are created, the more bishops will there be without seats in the House of Lords. But if the design of in creasing our Episcopate be followed up on a scale sufficiently extended to exercise a prac tical influence on the position of the Church, and does not stop where it has begun, after merely gratifying Government with a little additional patronage, it is very clear that the number of prelates without seats will before long bear no small proportion to those who possess them. It is very easy to foresee the use to which this circumstance will bo turned. 939 Here are eight or ten bishops, it will be said without seats ; the system works well. Why not relieve the remaining number of the onerous duty of attendance upon the House of Lords? That the multiplication of sees with out seats would be the first step towards the ejection of the bishops from the House of Lords altogether, and that their ejection from the House of Lords would be a great step towards the separation of Church and State, are probabilities at least sufficiently imminent to deserve the attention of all those states men by whom this consummation would be considered undesirable. We may fairly grant that it was beyond the power of any one man to superintend in de tail so extensive a diocese as that of London had become. But we deny that a division of it into two was the only possible remedy. That division should only have been adopted as a last resource. For, independent of the objections we have already pointed out, this measure tends to lower the dignity of the highest bishopric in the Church, a loss which cannot readily be afforded at the present day, as her friends would do well to consider. Some half-dozen ecclesiastical dignitaries, of widely felt influence and considerable wealth, are, we believe, necessary to the welfare of the Church at present. Nor will any man of common sense assert that she ought to revert to the example of the Apostles, and give up all the aids which are afforded her by worldly position. Such notions are absurdities which in discussin g practical reforms require no thing beyond a passing notice. If then her social rank could be maintained without de triment to the confessedly more important in• terests of Church extension and supervision, it ought to have been done; and it is, further more, our opinion, that it could have been so maintained There are two ways in which this might have been effected. The revenues of our cathedral establishments might be made con ducive to the assistance of the bishop, and the deanery converted into an active office, instead of the resemblance to a sinecure which it is at present. This is a plan which we believe would be by no means distasteful to the majority of the chapters, and which many of the younger deans would accept with pleasure. This is one alternative. The other is to recur to the ancient system of suffragans, against which we have never heard a single argument even so much as attempted. At the Reformation provision was made for no less than twenty-six suffragans ; and we cannot discover any valid ground why the scheme was abandoned, except that in those days, after the creation of several new bishoprics, one man was probably sufficient for the duties of one diocese, and it was found, consequently, that the aid of suffragans was unnecessary. It seems to us that the revival of this plan at the present day would be a far more legitimate measure of reform than the creation of new bishoprics under the conditions imposed by the Legislature, which seem equally adverse to the interests of the Church, and the in tegrity of the Constitution. THE CLERGY OF LONDON on the 27th ult. presented an address to the Bishop upon his retirement, ex pressing their high sense of his vigilant, able, con scientious, and affectionate administration of the duties of his office. The Bishop replied : I had long felt that the duties of tha► see required all the energy and activity of a younger and stronger man than myself; and it has pleased God to visit me with such a measure of sickness and infirmity as not only to justify me in seeking to be relieved from a burden which has become too heavy for me, but to impose upon me the ab solute necessity of doing so. An act of Parliament has been passed enabling me to resign my bishopric. For the provisions of that act I have great cause to be thankful ; though I must confess that I would rather have seen a general measure applicable, with certain safeguards, to the cases of all bishops of our Church disabled by age or infirmity from the active discharge of their duties." After making an allusion to his friendly intercourse with his clergy, the Bishop observed : Let me aid that i am not conscious of having ever allowed any difference of opinion upon matters not affect ing the foundation or essential doctrines of our holy faith, to influence my conduct towards any individual of my clergy, but that I looked only to his faithfulness and dili- gence in winning souls to Christ. He concluded with an earnest appeal to his clergy to keep up the system of personal intercourse with their flocks.