Star. — London, England, 1824-05-07 00:00:00

Could a syltem like ibis be permitted to go on *hen each distress existed in the country ? Could anything be more insulting to common sense than the general stipendiary payment of the Clergy, amounting to no more than 701. or 801. a-year, while the incumbent re ceived from 6001. to 7001. or 8001.? 'This individual, Mr. Alexander, had also a union of two parishes in the diocese of Ossory. Richard Allen, in the diocese of R ep eoe, had a union of six parishes, eighteen miles in circumference, and the curate received only from 701. to 751. a-year. (The Honourable Member referred to tee cases of the Rev. John Bailey, Gilbert Austin, Mr. French, and others, as persons holding a plurality of em ployments). It was impossible that any Church could prosper under such circumstances. He must charge the Bi s hops with a neglect of duty, in not enforcing the bedding of glebe-houses as the Act required. There were twenty or thirty instances of incumbents who bad 'resided from ten to twelve years without building any house. This alone was sufficient ground for instituting some inquiry. Why did the Bishops not do their duty ? He had been informed, and he believed the information was correct, that, since the Bill enforcing the residence of the Clergy passed, one Bishop had conferred two be nefices on persons who could not possibly reside in their parishes. A curious circumstance had lately occurred, which, in his view of it, proved that the Government was greatly to blame. It was well known that there were such things as First Fruits. They were made over by the Crowd to the Church, for the purpose of equalising ec clesiastical livings. He wished to call the attention of the House to the practice in Ireland upon this subject. It was twice if not deice as rich as the Church of Eng lind. There was this difference between the two, tho u the tenths were reserved, but not exacted in Ireland. lir eigland they were re gularly paid. The gravamen of his charge against the 'Government was this. In Eng land the first fruits were so valued as not to:be re-valued at any future period. In Iceland, however, it was so fixed that they were to be re-valued from time to time. In England the first fruits of the Archbishops were va lued at '21,331/. In Ireland the valuation was 10511. for t ee ,Archbishops—(llear)—and that from the other Sees e 1251. though of one alone of them he would undertake to make 50,000/. a-year. Could anything be more semi serious th in this? It was thus that the people of Eng land and Ireland had been called upon to pay millions trom time to time for the improvement of small livings, when, it justice were done, nothing of the kind would be necessary. In Ireland all that. had been paid for seven years WAS 90114 not one-sixteenth of the amount paid in Eigland. A patent had been granted to two indivi duals, Mr. Shaw M4lOll and Mr. Glasscock to collect the first fruits. The whole amount paid by the higher order of beneficed Clergy for the last seven years was re/. For four of these years not 10/. had been paid, though in that time a number of promotions took place. He was astonished how the Secretary fur Ireland could shut his eyes to this.—(hero the Honourable Member read the Act relative to the payment of First Fruits.) — ?'he Act respired the payment of the clear yearly va- Ine, meaning, as it appeared to him, the improved value. Mr. Mason called on the Bishops and Archbishops to pay the value, as ascertained from time to time, and the Governmeat of Ireland upon that interfered. The .Attorney-General gave it as his opinion, that all bene fsee were to be re-vale sel, except such as were ex empt by Act of Parliament. The Secretary for Ireland coesteptence wrote to Mr. Mason, informing him that If he continued to refuse the First Fruits as charged in the feral-di of the Court of Exchequer, he would he deprived of his patent. Mr. Mason was supported by the opinion of Mr. Allen, a barrister, in the course he had adopted, and as there existed a difference of opi nion on the subject, one would have thought the best tour se to be pursued was that most favourable to the poor Clergy. When they found such men as those now s: the head of the Itish Government pursuing this line se conduct, it became a grave subject for inquiry. It s'iewed the difficulty of getting rid of those abuses 'which so long existed in that unfortunate country. Why would Mr. Mason, or any other man, be placed in a situation to execute a duty, without the power of doing so? Tee papers detailing all these facts were laid upon the table in April, 1823. They were well worthy of perusal, and formed a good specimen of the manner in. which business was conducted in Ireland. Mr. Mason had done himself great credit by his conduct in the business, and he should like to see many other servants of the Government perform their duty so well.— fie would now proceed to another part of this subject. He hrld in his hand a book printed in Oxford, in 160 E. seccordmg to a passage in this, which he should read by and !Ile, so far were tithes from being granted to the Clergy for ever, that by the express declaration of Hem y the Eighth, they were to be considered as trans firma to the Crown, to be disposed of as it should think 6 t any future period. The result of his cdnduct 'hewed that he had the tight. lie gave to many indi videels grants out of that property, which had since re mained in the undisturbed possession of their descend ants: he gave to those individuals what he thought pro per, and in like manlier to the new Clergy of the Re formed Church, he gave such portions of that property as he thought fit. The declaration of 1539, re-pub lished at Oxford in 108, which lie (Mr. Hume) was about to read, considered the right of the Crown to in terfere in regard to tithes as he did, for it contained these words :—" And also that all the said tithes be con traued as they %sere until it shall please the King to alter or alienate any of them." The result of the inquiry fur which he was contendi rg, might be a recommendation from the Commission or Committee by whom it was conducted, to reduce the number of Bishoprics by unit ing two or more in one, as had been recommended in the case of the Diocesan Schools. In that case whet an advantage would be gained in the opportunity afforded of reducing the tithes in those districts. The Honourable Member then proceeded, for the information of many Meneuer s who had not been present at the early part of his speech, to recapitulate some of the statements which !:ad before made. But, he said, this was not a mere matter of calculation re . the pounds, shillings, and pence, which might be saved, though even in that point of view was an important subject fur consideration, but it was a qecstion revolving considerations of the most serious interest, dceely affecting the condition of the people of Irelaed, and eaten acing the great principle of the tolera tion and relief which ought to be given to the Catholic enpeletian re' that count' y. He had shewn strong grstinds for inquit y ; and he thought it impossible for any nern,how ever much he might despise the considera tion of que,zious of peunds, shillings, and pence, to dis reeard the eicture which he had drawn of the state of !reland. With rel:ea to the particular mode in which sr might be preferable that such an inquiry should be pursued, th-ugh his own opinion was quite made up, " s h ould not Rie s s it, but leave that point entirely for Hesse to decide. He concluded by moving a Tbat it is expedient to inquire whether the present Church Establishment of Ireland is not more than com- mensurate with the services which it performs, both in regard to the number of persons employed, and to the income which they receive." Mr. STANLEY rose to oppose k. The Honourable' Member began by expressing his regret at being obliged to oppose the motion. His regret was increased by the very temperate nature of the motion, and the manner in which it was made. Agreeing, as he did, in many points with the Honourable Mover, and not hav ing any objection that the Church should be befo r e the House in its moral, political, and pecuniary relations, he could no; think that the mode proposed by the Ho nourable Memb er cou ld b e pursue d w i t h a d vantage or without danger. The time cho-en for this was most unfortunate, and he thought the motion itself calcu lated to lower the character of the Established Church. Prejudice to the Church Establishment in Ireland he had none, and in disposition to relieve Ireland he would yield to no man. It was but too well known that within the last few years, attempts had been made by the press, and through the more dangerous channels of, private insinuation, to cast odium on the Established Church, by maliciously aspersing the character of its Clergy. lie would assert, that had one half the zealr which had been exerted against the Church been used to bring forth the high chat acter, the many virtues, and amiable qualities, the unostentatious discharge of their sacred duties, of the great body of its tnembets, that Church would now stand above the reach of all that malice and calumny could invent ; but this was not done. On the contrary, the vices of s o me i n di v id ua l s , an d t h e failings of others, were put forth in a most prominent manner ; and, being contrasted with the unassuming vir- I tnesof that body, served t o s h e wth e c o ntrast m o re cl e arly. , The I lonourable M em b er t h en pi ocee d e d to conten d, : that in a matter of such vital importance to the nation, the utmost care and caution should be used, lest by an indiscreet zeal for doing good we might inflict an irre parable injury. He would not assert that there might not be circumstances which would justify an interference with the property of the Church, but he would main tain that no such circumstances could exist:which would not equally justify an interference with landed, funded, and commercial propetty—(llear, hear). Such circum stances did not exist now, nor was there any probability of their existence at any future period. He then pro ceeded to contend, that as a measure of finance the in quiry would be unjust and unnecessary, and that as . a measure of conciliation, it would be worse than useless. lhe motion either went too far, or not far enough. The Established Church of Ireland should be supported, or given up altogether. He could not consider this motion as any approach to a system of conciliation : it was, on the contra' y, rather to hold up to the Roman Catholics of Ireland, the Protestant Church as one to wet ing above their heads " in pride of place," and enormous influence of wealth, or one which in turns excited their indignation and envy. He complained in the strongest terms of the exagge ration which prevailed, and was circulated under anony mous insinuation, respecting the Church property of lie land, and the efforts which, under the specious pretexts of correcting ecclesiastical abuses, were directed against the existence of the establishment itself. lie conjured the House to shew itself the protector of the Church of Ire land, and prevent the triumph which would follow from the adoption of a motion like this. The Hon. Gentleman then quoted several passages from pamphlets circulated in Ireland, to shew the violent temper which prevailed among certain Catholic 'ladies respecting the lista bli lied Church, and also extracts from the Bishop of Limerick's charge to his Clergy—a Prelate distinguished by the highest worth—to slum , the different temper with which these charges were met. lle then argued at some length that the peasant of Ireland, whose condi tion was truly unfortunate, could derive no benefit from a reduction of Church property, as it was obvious that the landlord woulsizetain the amount of whatever di minution of tithe could be effected. This must be the case even where the consumer paid the tithe, for the poor peasant could not be well said to stand in anything like the situation of a consumer. He was most anxious to see the condition of that peasant raised and improved, and imbued with a moral sense of what ought to be inculcated into his situation of life ; but this motion had no tendency to relieve or improve the Irish peasant. Ireland laboured under four principal wants —the want •of a resident gentry, the want of capital, the want of employment, and of adequate education. Not one of these wants could be relieved by the proposed inquiry—(Hear.)—It was, he thought, clear that the residence of the Clergy, the value of which he enforced, supplied in some degree the place of the absent gentry; and would not that be diminished by the operation of such a motion as the present ? He then reverted to the mischievous exaggerations: contained in certain pam phlets which were circulated in Ireland ; one of which stated, . that according to Parliamentary returns, there were in Ireland 1,309 Benefices, which averaged SOU a-year—a statement which he declared was totally un founded, and the estimate most unfairly and untruly formed from an average taken from one of the richest dioceses (Cloyne), and when the maximum was very high. In reviewing some of the statements of the value of Church property made by the Honourable Mover, he saw, that instead of its amounting, according to one com putation, to 1.041,200/. a-year, it did not exceed, in that part of the Church revenue, more than 327,5001. In describing the real value of Church property in Ire land, the amount of fines and Bishops' leases, he said he was authorised by a Prelate who had the best infolma tion on the subject, to declare that the value of the Bishoprics was greatly overrated by the Public, and that, in point of fact, of eighteen Bishoprics, eleven were under 5000/. a-year ; four of the remaining seven under 60001. a-year, one under 7000/. a-year, and the remaining two not stated. It had also been said, that the Archbishop of Dublin had 144 rich livings in his gift, which averaged 8004 a-year each, and that the Bishop of Kildare had 131 such livings. Now the fact was, that the Archbishop had only the patronage of 20 benefices, eleven of which were of very inferior value. He pointed out errors of a similar nature, which he had eve• y reason to believe characterised the Honourable Mover's statement respecting the Deaneries, Aeclideacon ries, and Rural Deaneries, and was also astonished to find how the Honourable Member had undervalued the in comes of the Catholic Clergy, many of the Parish Priests of which enjoyed 2001. 3001. and 400/. a year, and some, considerably more; indeed, there were instances where', Protestants made them valuable offerings to propitiate their good opinion among the Catholic population. He had heard that such was the fact. He admitted that Ireland had suffered from that species of corruption in her institutions, which was in a degree more or less in. separable from human frailty ; and he knew that the Prelates of the Established Church were anxious to have a fair and full inquiry made into the nature of their si's tem but, however d es i ra bl e i t m i g h t b e to i ssue a Com mission for such a purpose, he could never give his sup port to that species of inquiry which prejud4ed institu tions before they were investigated, and which at once stamped with injustice an Establishment, on the faith of exagtetatid and unfou n d e d m i st a tement , before a syl lable of evidence was offered to substantiate such severe allegations—( Low? cries of Hear). Mr. DAWSON addresed the House, but in the midst of so much confusion that his observations seldom reached the gallery. After complimenting and thank ing the last speaker, he contended that the attack of the Honourable M em b er f or A b erdeen was unjust, and that it was the duty of the House to discountenance it. He would not attempt to deny that many abuses existed in the Church, and he had the strongest desire to see them remedied. He was of opinion that right I the .1 which the tithes were held by the Clergy incon trovertible, and that its violation would destroy the se curity of every other kind of property. He was inclined to think the Hono ura bl e M em b er f or Aberdeedwas not correct in his estimate of the number of Non-resident Clergy and Ab-entees. The Clergy of Ireland were, in his opinion, must respectable. In the north of Ireland the service of the Church was per formed with the greatest' solemnity and regularity. Mr. DOMINICK BROWNE, could not withhold his tribute of praise to the Established Clergy of It-eland, but he was compelled to say, nothing, in his opinion, but a more equal division of Church property would secure the peace of Ireland. The population of Ireland was seven millions ; of that number five millions and three quarters were Catholics. The members cf the Estab lished Church were 500,000, and the rest Dissenters. The Established Clergy possessed one-fifth, or one fourth of the property of the whole island. The prin ciples introduced at the Reformation had been accepted by the majority of people in England. In Ireland the Reformation was rejected, and, if the people of that country had constantly rejected it, it was impossible to say the Established Clergy had a right to the Church property. Toe Roman Catholic Clergy were the legal Clergy. He should vote for the motion, conceiving in quiry into the subject highly nece ssary. Mr. ROBERTSON said, the hope of restoring peace to Ireland depended on the union of the Roman Catho lic and Protestant Churches. He thought there was a probability of effecting that object. There was not much difference in ihe creed of both Churches. The Lutheran and Calvinist Churches were formerly op posed to each other, yet the Governmeut of Prussia ac complished an union of both these Churches. A Bishop of Durham had expressed his belief that die union of the Protestant and Roman Churches might be brought about. The Honourable Member was convinced, that until such a union was effected, nothing could be ex pected from Ireland. Mr. GRATTA N was desirous of stating shortly a few observations. If the residence of the Clergy could be procured it would be most desirable. With respect to education in Ireland, be thought there had been some remissness in the application of the funds advanced for that purpose. Upon the view he took of the ques tion, he should vote for the motion of his Honourable Pr iend,. not from any hostility to the Established Chinch, but from an anxious desire to serve the people of Ireland. Mr. PLUNKETT said it was not his intention to trespass at any length, and he was sure the House would excuse him. Having been alluded to by the Honourable Member with whom the motion originated, it was quite impossible he could suffer the House to adjourn with out saylbg a few words. Rising for that purpose, he considered it his duty also, to make some observations on the general question. He did so more especially for the purpo.e of rescuing a cause to which he felt great attachment, namely, the Catholic question, from the danger in which it had that night stood. He re gretted it had been introduced into the argument of the Honourable Member for Aberdeen, because the use made of it must be injurious. Every person must see the Roman Catholic question had been improperly introduced. When the Honourable Member joined the Catholic question to his plan of taking away the pro perty of the Irish Hierarchy, he should protest against his advocacy. In supporting the Roman Catholic ques tion he should always do it with strict regard for the vested rights of all classes. No infringement of the rights of the Established Church should ever make part of his argument in suppor t of that question. He entreated the House not to suffer the Catholic body to be im plicated in any opinion subversive of public right. He did not know there was a great deal to complain of in the wording of the Honourable Member's motion -( Hear, hear, hear); but he should judge of the mo tion by the arguments which supported it. Looking to the opinions expressed with respect to Church propel ty, he could not say, as a friend to the Catholic question, that it was safe in such company. He would never consent to embark with the Honourable Member under sealed orders. lie had no desire to quit terra firma and sound argument. 11 Take notice, Mr. Speaker and the House," said the Right Honourable Gentleman, , g of the nostrum held up for the cure of the evils of unfortunate Ireland. The Honourable Member says we are to throw aside the principles of our own coun try, and take for model those of a Republic—those of America." lle did not wish, in one part of his argu. merit, to abide entirely by the American model. The Honourable Member did not wi.h to give the property' of the Hierarchy to the State, but to the Roman Catho; lies. He was quite at a loss to know how the Honour able Member could carry his intention into effect: The State would not be justified in meddling with the pro.. perty of the Church, unless in case of exigency, when all property might . be liable. In common cases the Crown could not i nterfere with it more than with private property. He could not avoid congratulating the House and the Public on the display of talent shewu by an Honourable young Member under tl.e gallery. —He might freely compliment the noble stock from which the Hon. Member came, on having so much ta lent ready to be called forth for the benefit of the country. The speech of the Hon. Member had pl ace d the question in a proper point of view. He might ask whit'"' i was to be the consequence t the motion were car ried? Tithes were to be abolishel For the purpose of the Hon. Member's argument, it was a 'natter of indif ference which portion of property was taken by the . landlord, and the proposition was to take away the pro perty of the Clergy to give it to the landed Gentlemen. 'faking away property tics: one to give it to another could not bear a better harm than that of spoliation, and when once that system began, let the owners of other property take care. Let the FuadhGL!er be upon his guard. Spoliation justi fied in one case, wo u ld b e a precedent for spoliation in another. The Hon. Member had reverted to the number of Non-resident Clergy, and the number was stated to be 531. 16 Now, Mr. Speaker (observed Mr. Plurskett) I sLa!l hardly ban: when I say if you strike off SOO from that number, the SI will be a considerable exaggeration. The fact is, the Hon. Member has been painfully laborious in making himself inaccurate on the subject." He had been in formed there were not twenty beneficed Cergymen non-resident. If they mere wandering ab,n, as the Hon. Member described, why were they not seen ? 11, no part of Ireland had he witnessed the absence com plained of. The Right Hon. Gentleman begged leave to ask whether it was fair to tail upon him to explain an opinion given in 18'22? He should, however, state to the House the circumstances which led to his opinion that the First Fruits were vestej in the Crown. The Acts passed in the reigns of I VIII. mid E:izabeth, he contended, gave the Crown the amount of first fruits, as they appeared in the King's books. During ‘2CO ye:it s the first fruits were collected actor ding to the rate in the King's books. A Gentleman who collected said he would controul the Clergy, and take the value without the King's books. Tile !Light Hon. Gentleman decided that the individual had no right to change the practice of 200 years.—Szcoirdly, he held, that .1 any change was to be ma Ic, the individual had uo autho rity to make it. With respect to the Protestant Esta blishment of the country, he considered it nece-sary for the preservation and toleration of a:1 other religions.-- The heads of that establishment ought to rank with Nobles of the land. The Ministers should also be most respectable; but speaking in a political sense, he thought the existence of the Protestant Establi,liment was the bond of security to both countries. The moment they robbed it of its rights, the doom of separation of the two countries would he sealed. Sir JOHN BR YDGES rose and said—“ Deprecating as I do the constant practice of dragging the Church Establishment before the Public, in order to degrade it, I congratulate those Honeur.ible Members who are friendly to it on the total failure of the Hon. Nlember for Aberdeen, and the triumphant answer of the Hon. Member who succeeded him in the debate; and here am contented the question shall rest. Hut I feel I have a right to answer an unfounded assertion of the Hon. Member for Aberdeen. He has stated that my Hon. Re lation the Archbishop of Armagh, has augmented the profizs of his See since his appointment to it. I will tell this Honourable Member he has been imposed upon, and I care not from what source he has derived his in formation—but I say, it is equally false as malicious. If there is one Hon. Prelate who discharges his duty beyond another,!l would say this was the Archbishnp Armagh: charitable, pious —able, strictly, and conscientiously fulfilling every duty of his station. He may be justly held up as a bright example to be followed. Perhaps the HonouraLle Member may say I am a prejudiced advocate; if so, I refer him to the Gentry. Cleo gy, and poor of the dioceses of Itaphoe, Croghei , a id Dublin, in each of which he was received as .1 ble.sing, and parted from with the greatest regret. S much for the Hon. Member's accuracy of information. I ill not detain the House longer, but only add, as a firm friend to the Church, I shall give my oppoiition to this measure, in which, I trust, I shall be joined by such a majority as will set this question at rest for ever." Sir F. Bum)Err felt he should not discharge his duty were he to abstain from an endeavour to oppose the arguments against the motion. With regard to Ireland, one opinion seemed to be universally enter tained, namely, that the people of that country were exposed to evils of great magnitude. He was aware that the consideration of those evils involved feelings of importance, and he felt so much embarrassed that he scarcely knew how to separate the question before the House from the question of general grievances. When ever the question was brought on they were sure to meet with repulse. If they brought forward the state of the country, it was such a mass of difficulty that they could not grapple with it; it, on the other hand, a specific grievance was brought under consideration, they were told it was no grievance at all. The Right Hon. Gentleman had excited his astonishment by making the assertion that the present state of the Church in Ire land was not considered a grievance in Ireland. lie held that declaration to afford a melancholy prospect for the people of Ireland, who had looked to the Right Hon. Gentleman with confidence as the supporter of their tights. It held out to the Catholic population a melancholy prospect, and very little hope of relief. He could state his views with respect to Ireland, but they would be considered visionary. lie would, however, say, that unless they got out of the hacknied routine of measures, Ireland would sink. under accumulated disa tress. Something must be done. The wotiads of that buffering couatry must be probed. The Hon. Baronet allowed that great praise was due to a young Member unties- the gallery, who bad spoken well ; but he could not admit that any argument could fairly be urged in support of the conduct of Ministers. Until the Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman got up it was thought that the speech of the Hon. Member to whom he had alluded was an answer to the argument of his Hon. Friend. He did not, however, join in that view. It was said his Hon. Friend was inaccurate. If so the re turns laid on the table were inaccu; ate ; but what was the language of the Right lion. Gentleman on the sub ject of property? He was not disposed to look at the property of the Church as he would private property. They all knew it was given to the Church for pious uses, and his hope was, that Gentlemen in that House would have the manliness and sense to hold in utter contempt such an application. It was given to the Clergy to be beneficial to that body, and he would go the length of saying of the Church establishment it was injurious to the Public. With respect to its possessions the Parliament could take it away. The Protestant as cendancy had been one of the greatest scourges of Ire land. When it was shewn that ascendancy never would allow the people of Ireland to have equal rights, was it not time to alter the system? The Catholics had perse vered so long in not gibing up their faith, that they bad proved themselves worthy to possess all the advantages hich they demanded. It had been said loans c auld not be advanced to Ireland because the people were net in a con6:ion to enjoy good things. heard a story, " An Irishman was working on the high road, and a Gentleman knowing the man had some time before teceived a legacy, said, That, Vat, are you working? Yes, your honour. Why you had a legacy? Ves, Lu: it is ad gone. I wanted to see how a Gentle man of La o hundred a rear lived." The fact was. the people of eland had a taste to elloy the good things admired in England, - hut ti-.ey w:uited money. So great was the misery of Ireland, and so connected was that country with England, that the misery of the founer threatened :o reach, if net to oyerwhelm, the latter. He had no doubt that much of our own distress was car by the influx of the poorer Irish, though he, of cot did not blame them. He did not w;.-11 to undue, the benefit which would be detiaed from Catholic cipatior.. He tholght, on. the contra7y, that this w, 1 I' aused purse, , rvalue mart... 6,,ouid