The Sun. — London, England, 1835-04-08 00:00:00

Noble Lord opposite (Russell) what he considered to be a surplus? Did he consider it a surplus after the clergy were paid at a rate the Legislature chose to lay down, or did he adhere to the line laid down at the time the Noble Lord, the Member for Lancashire,_ formed part of the late Government, at which period Earl Grey stated that after the payment of the clergy, there was to be a portion set apart for the augmentation of small livings, the building of 'churches, and the payment of church cess, which the Noble Earl stated would take 160,0001. a year ? (Cries of " Hear, hear.") Did the Noble Lord intend there should be a surplus, which he ( Sir H. Hardinge) de nied, that small livings should be augmented to the extent of forty-six thousand pound a year—or what course did he mean to take? There had been a report printed within the last few days by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, which stated that applications had been made for loans to build churches, but such was the state of the funds that they could not possibly accede to the applications.— The Committee were called upon to expend upwards of 70,0001. a year, while their receipts exceeded very little more than 30,0001. The Commission, therefore, instead of having a surplus had a deficiency. - Everything like an improvement in the Church, had therefore been at a stand still since the passing of the Church Temporalities Bill. With respect to the resolution of the Noble Lord opposite, he felt that it would place the Government in such a situation, that it would be impossible to pass any Tithe Bill with such a resolution attached to it, and that it would be equally impossible to govern Ireland on such principles. He would, therefore, be no party to such a measure, and it would be impossible for them, holding the opinions they did—(Hear)—to carry on the Government with such measures. Lord JOHN RUSSELL—In answer to the observations of the Right Hon. Gentleman as to the non-existence of a sur plus, he would say that there were many parishes in which there were but very small flocks, or none at all, and that he would transfer the income from those parishes to others which need an increase of spiritual aid, and to the general wants of education. Mr. BARING said, that they were called upon to proceed upon the supposition of the existence of a surplus, although, if they waited but a short time for the report, of the Commis sion, they would be enabled to judge with certainty whether it really did exist or not. If the Noble Lord were not treating the House and the country with bad faith, if he brought for ward the present question not for any party purpose, and not with the view of placing his antagonists in a position of diffi culty, but from a sincere and honest wish to afford some real and substantial means of tranquillizing Ireland—he must say, that the obvious and reasonable course would be to ascertain what surplus existed. He would ask the House in what man ner it was possible to act upon the plan proposed by the Noble Lord? Was the Tithe Bill, into which he wished to intro duce his clause, to contain provisions respecting every parish in Ireland in which he might wash to diminish the Church Es- tablishment ? The Noble Lord had not given the House a glimpse of the principle on which he would proceed with the practical execution of his plan, as to what was the precise line which he would draw between parishes from which the Pro testant pastor was to be withdrawn, and those in which he was to be retained ? Was the possession of 50, or 100, or 150, or 200 Protestants, to be the number which was to determine that point ? When the whole interest and peace of Ireland was concerned, it was an indecorous mode of proceeding to pass a resolution such as this to be introduced' into a Bill not yet before the House, especially when it was known that in a few weeks the information necessary to ena ble them to act with more certainty would he laid before them. Supposing, however, that the Noble Lord was cor rect in the facts which he had assumed, how could he word the clauses by which he proposed to carry his principle into execution ? He was to provide, not only for the circum stances under which the Protestant pastor was to be with drawn from a parish, but also for those under which he was to be restored to it. How was the House to legislate on such principles ? Almost every Hon. Gentleman who had spoken on the opposite side had taken different views on this subject. Some Hon. Gentlemen had expressed an opinion broadly, that the whole Protestant Church of Ireland ought to be destroyed. --(Ministerial cheers.) His Right Hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Mr. Littleton) had seemed to say that the Pro testant establishment was a nuisance to that country.—( An expression of dissent from Mr. Littleton.) He (Mr. Baring) had understood him to say so, and to express an opinion that the sooner it were got rid of the better. Another Hon. Member for Halifax, (Mr. C. Weed) would not withdraw a pastor from any parish in which there remained a single Pro testant. There were thus two distinct opinions amongst Hon. Gentlemen opposite —one, that the Protestant Establishment ought to be wholly destroyed; and the other, that only the sinecure portion of it ought to be done away with. The Noble Lord talked of his measure being one for the final paci fication of Ireland. He (Mr. Baring) wished any Hon. Gen tleman to consider whether it was possible for the wit of man to conceive a measure more conducive to the maintenance of perpetual feud and warfare, than proceeding upon the princi ple that a decrease in the proportion of the Protestant popu lation was the signal for the destruction of the Church in that country ? The removal of the Church Establishment in a parish where there were no Protestants, and all were Catho lics, could not be necessary to establish harmony, because in such a parish there would be no collision and feud. Where there was a parish with 500 Protestants to 5,000 Catholics, there would be g in the real dissension. What would be the consequence of establishing the principle that the existence of the Protestant Church in any district should depend upon such a proportion of its population being Protestants? What would be the state of constant feud and warfare existing in every community where the number of Protestants just ex ceeded the proportion ? Suppose it should appear by the census—which every one would be watching with the greatest eagerness, that such was the case, and the Catholic could find that if he could only get five or ten more out of the district —(hear, hear)—if he could succeed in worrying a few of the remaining Protestants out of the parish, what would be consequences ? He would maintain that the roost cunning man ever born never could devise a system more calculated to promote warfare, strife, and discord in Ireland, than that which the Noble Lord proposed to them. The Hon. Member for Weymouth says indeed—when you have worried out your remaining Protestants, if you can only get them back again the Church will be re-established. But could it be possible in such a case for the Protestants to rear their heads again? If it were the intention of the House that the question of appro priation should be dealt with, surely the fairest and most just course would be to introduce a distinct and substantive measure with reference to that subject, and not emtarrass his Majesty's Ministers in passing a Bill which had been brought forward merely for the purpose of commuting tithes and regulating their collection.—( Hear, hear. ) Mr. H. GRATTAN said that it had been declared by the Right Hon. and Gallant Gentleman opposite ( Sir H. Har dinge), that if the present resolution were passed, he should find it impossible to carry on the Government of Ireland. No doubt it would, under such circumstances, be no longer pos sible to carry on a Government on the principle of Orange ascendancy. Sir H. HARDINGE was understood to say, that he did not intend that his words should convey any such meaning as that which had been put upon them by the Hon. Member. When he had said that if this resolution were passed it would be impossible for him to continue to carry on the Government of Ireland, he never meant either to declare that the Govern ment of Ireland had been conducted upon the principle of Orange ascendancy, to which the Hon. Member (Mr. Grattan) had alluded, or to assert that if the Noble Lord's motion re ceived the sanction of the House, he could no longer act upon such a principle in the Government of Ireland. Mr. H. GRATTAN—The Right Hon. and Gallant Gentle. man had certainly announced that if the motion of the Noble Lord passed it would be impossible for him to continue the present Government of Ireland on Protestant principles. Pro testant principles, however, in his (Mr. Grattan's) opinion, meant nothing more or less than ascendancy principles.— (Hear.) To this conclusion the people of Ireland and the Members of that House had come, by looking not at the words but the acts of the present Government, as well as by consi dering (according to the advice of the Right Hon. Baronet the Chancellor of the Exchequer) the political opinions and characters of the men who formed the Administration.— ( Hear.) He must be permitted to tell the Government that they were not such friends to the Church of Ireland as they would fain have it believed. The ministers of the Church in Ireland must starve unless, some measure were introduced which differed from that brought forward by the Right Hon. and Gallant Gentleman ( Sir H. Hardinge,) by embodying the principle of appropriation.—(Hear, hear.) He asked the Right Hon. and Gallant Gentleman whether, if his Tithe Bill were now passed by the House, he could carry it into execution in Ireland? Sir H. HARDINGE—Yes. Mr. H. GRATTAN contended that it would be utterly impossible, under the existing state of things in that country, even to attempt to carry the Tithe Bill of the Right Hon. and Gallant Gentleman into operation, without calling in military aid.--(Hear.) He maintained that those on his side of the House were the true friends of the Church, who were anxious, by removing, at once and completely, all the abuses by which it was encumbered, to render it more secure and efficient. ( Hear.) Those who were opposed to his Majesty's Ministers, in reality stood up for the interest and permanency of the Established Church in Ireland.—( Hear, hear, hear.) It was utterly impossible that that Church could exist in its present shape, when it required 31,400 men to collect its revenues. —( Hear, hear.) He was most anxious to pass over all the re crimination and personal allusions which had been used in the course of the debate ; but he felt compelled to advert to the phrase of " vile religion," which had been applied to that which the Roman Catholics professed. He would say that no man had a right to use such language : no man dared to utter it in private ; it disgraced the senate to whom it was addressed, and the religion in whose defence it was urged.—(Hear, hear, hear !" and loud cries of " Name, name !") He had a note of the words to which he al luded, which, if they pleased, he would bring down and read - to the House. The difference between the present posi tion of affairs, and that in which Parliament was placed last session, was, that the Legislature reposed confidence in the former Government with respect to the question of appropria tion, but they had no reliance whatever on the intentions of the Members of the present Government as to that most impor tant question. He found by the returns of 1821 and 1825, that the Church of Ireland had in its possession lands to the extent of 1,200,000 acres, and lands and money amounting in value to 1,250,000/. Of this income, no portion was set ex clusively apart for the purpose of promoting the religious edu cation of the people. It was not in the nature of things that a 4 .7,; * - Church, which reckons amongst its members only about I — .l 750,000 out of a population of 8,000,000, cou ld d raw su ch re venues from the people without exciting jealousy , discontent , and dissatisfaction. How different was the state of re l i g i ou s .\'''.\-' establishments in other countries of Europe ! If they looked - icFrance, for instance, they would find that out of twenty -lilve millions of francs devoted to the support of the Church, one million was allowed for the purpose of diffusing the be,neFi fits of education amongst the people. The Church in Irelan was established upon a different principle from that upon which the other establishments of Europe were based. It was founded upon the principle of Protestant ascendancy. There must be something wrong—there must be some injustice com mitted—in the government of a country, the inhabitants of which were pitted one against the other—where the Roman Catholics, which he would say in answer to the taunts of some Hon. Members; were as honest, moral, and religious a class of people as could be found on the face of the earth, but who were placed in a position in which they felt themselves almost compelled to entertain feelings of strong religious ani mosity against the members of that Church by which they were so aggrieved and oppressed.—( Hear, hear.) Upon what grounds, then, did the Hon. Members on the opposite side of the House, who professed to have in view the attain ment of peace in Ireland, refuse to affirm a proposition, the sanction of which by the Legislature would be the sole means of putting an end to the government of faction in the country, and to those divisions of party, and those religious animosities, by which the country was now distracted ?—( Hear, hear.) The only security for the tranquillity of Ireland was to govern every class of her people by means of just and fair laws. If he believed that the result of the motion before the House would be the spoliation of the Church, or its abolition, he should be the last man to vote for it. Mr. SINCL AIR began by observing, that the motion of the Noble Lord was, in his opinion, of a revolutionary character and tendency.—( Hear, hear, from the Ministerial side.) The old proverb said " noscitur ex sociis." We might judge of the nature of the proposition before the House by observing the character of those by whom it was welcomed with joy. It was not welcomed with joy by the clergy of the Church of England.—(A laugh.) He was sorry to observe that the lame of the clergy was always received with a sneer by the Hon. Gentlemen opposite. By the clergy of the Church of England the proposition was not welcomed with joy ; but it was welcomed with joy by the Unitarian, who abjured the church of God ; by the infidel, who denied the existence of a Deity; and by the Papist, who sought the supremacy of his own religion. All the clergy of the Church of England looked at the resolution with dismay. The great mass of society in the country regarded it with consternation and dismay. The Hon. Member for Meath had made al lusion to Orangemen. It appeared to him (Mr. Sinclair) that the Orangemen of Ireland were the most uncom promising friends of British connection ; the most intrepid opponents of the repeal of the Union ; the greatest advocates of the Established Church, and of the Pro testant faith. They united in the public defence. They united, because they saw on the part of the Roman Ca tholics a determination to make every possible endea vour to exterminate the Protestant faith.—( Hear, hear.) The House had been told that the adoption of this proposition would tranquillize Ireland. He believed, on the contrary, that its effect would be to ensure lasting dissentions in that coun try. He had heard a great deal of the advantage of religious schools. He honoured all attempts at diffusing the benefits of religion ; but he would not endeavour to do immediate good by invading the remote rights of others. The right of the clergy to tithes was as sacred as the right of landlords to their estates ; and there was no distinction between them. Con trasting the days of Roman Catholic persecution in Scotland with the present state of Ireland, he asked whether there was any similar persecution on the part of the Protestants in Ire land ?—( Some Hon. Member observed that there had been.) But was there now ? Was there any part of Ireland in which a Roman Catholic chapel might not be built ? As to any surplus of the funds of the Irish Protestant Establishment, he believed that there would be none. The proposers and supporters of such a motion as the present ought to beware. The com mencement was with the property of the Church ; the next step would be to relieve leymee from the incumbrance of their property ; eventually, all titles and distinctions would be abo lished, and Woburn Abbey might perhaps be converted into one of Owen's national schools, placed under the superinten dence of Citizen John Russell the elder.—( A laugh.) Lord F. EGERTON sail, the Noble Lord by whom the resolution was proposed, and his friends, were undoubtedly a formidable party. But there were other persons whom he (Lord F. Egerton) must consider as the leaders in this busi ness. For instance, there was the Hon. Member for St. Al ban's. That Hon. Gentleman went much further than the No ble Lord, for he valued the principle in the resolution because it would bring under the control of the State, meaning of the House of Commons, all corporate property whatever. The Hun. Member for Meath had termed this question a renova tion of the Catholic Question. Now one of the great promo ters of Catholic Emancipation, to whom he (Lord F. Eger ton) had listened with that delight and enthusiasm with which a young mind ever received the impression of eloquence--he meant Lord Plunket—had contended on that occasion that one of the great results of emancipation would be to induce the Catholic to maintain inviolate the principles, ay, and the pro perty, of the Protestant Church in Ireland. He (Lord F. Egerton) had given his humble assistance to Catholic Eman cipation on that ground, and he therefore felt bound in honour and consistency to maintain the rights of the Protestant Church in Ireland. It had not been his intention to address the House at all on the question ; but when those who opposed the resobition were taunted with proceeding to ring the highly objectionable, unless indis, ensably necessary, alarm-bell, " the Church is in danger," he felt bound to say that, in his opinion, the Church was in danger; and that present events were a justification of a recourse to that expedient.—( Ilear. ) Mr. CAYLEY expressed his belief that the cry " he Church is in danger" had never been raised but from factious motives He could look upon the resistance to the Resolu tion in no other light than as an attempt to force another reli gion down the throats of the Irish people. For his own part he desired to see the Church Establishment of Ireland cut down to the wants and wishes of the people; for he could not but disapprove of a Church Establishment in any country, the effect of which was to produce general discontent.— (Hear, hear, hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, the present Resolu tion, besides involving all the objectionable principles of the former Resolutions, went far beyond them, and would he at tended with results so widely different, that no necessity existed for those who voted for the former Resolutions voting for this. He did not mean to put himself in competition with the Noble Lord the Member for Devonshire as a statesman ; but be would humbly suggest to him the question, whether so large a minority, perhaps the largest that had ever divided on a question of this importance, should be called upon to vote on a proposition of this kind without being afforded the means of clearly seeing to what it was to lead.---( Hear.) The proposition was to take the surplus of the Church re venues, supposing any existed, and apply them to the pur poses of education. Now these welt , propositions perfectly distinct, without any natural or necessary connection, and which, fairly to be considered, must be separately consi dered.—( Hear, hear.) As regarded the extension of edu cation, he would not be behind any man in advocating that ob ject. He owed too much to the great institutions of this coun try connected with education, both school and college, not to desire that the benefits he had derived from them should be as widely diffused as possible. But was it necessary to apply the property of the Church to that object? Would no education be valued by the Irish scholar but that which came from a schoolmaster whose salary was paid from the income of the clergyman ? Was knowledge only acceptable there, unless ac quired in somewhat the same way as forbidden fruit ? If there was any deficiency of the means of education in Ireland, which he had not heard established, let funds be provided to supply the deficiency ; but let them not be voted from the sur plus revenues of the Church, till they had ascertained that there was something to vote away. According to the Noble Mover, care was to be taken to meet the wants of the Church —but according to the Hon. and Learned Member for Tip perary, the Church was bloated and dropsical ; and another Hon. Member described it as a wide spread nuisance, which ought to be wholly abated. The similies of the Hon. and Learned Member for Tipperary were, he must say, somewhat unsavoury, and perhaps he was not so good a physician as he was a lawyer, and might not be aware, that although the cure prescribed for the dropsy was tapping, it was almost immedi ately hazardous, and ultimately universally fatal.—(Laughter.) He supposed, however, that the Honourable and Learned Member did not mean to carry his simile so far as the death of the patient. But what could be the meaning of the Ho nourable Member, who spoke of the Church as a wide-spread nuisance ? Whatever might be the moderation of the views of the Noble Lord, dill not this language indicate the existence of the same fierce, unrelenting spirit that in former times cried out Delenda est Carthago l_( Hear, hear.) He should like to see the plan by which the Noble Lord proposed to lop off different branches of the Church ? The Noble Lord, the Member for Lancashire, had been asked how he so easily saw the necessity of schedule A in the Reform Act, and could see none in the Church ?—but in the Reform Bill discussion, schedule A was before them, containing each borough to be disfranchised, with the reasons for disfranchising each. Let them have the schedule A of the Church, and they should know what they were about. Now they could not tell what they were next to have, except that, idging by the majority of the speeches on the other side, there would, if the princi ple of this resolution were carried into full effect, be nothing left to do, for the whole Church would be gone._( Hear.) He asked the Noble Lord how he proposed to carry his prin. ciple into effect? How did he intend to embody his resolu tion in the Tithe Bill ? Would he be content with a short clause, setting forth the principle ?—or did he mean that the important measure brought forward by his Majesty's Govern ment should wait for the gradual developements that were, week by week, or month by month, to proceed from the Church Commissioners? The Noble Lord, on a former occasion, opposed a proposition similar in principle to the present, in order to avoid a collision with the Upper House. —( Hear, hear.) He did not remind him of this for the purpose of reproaching him with inconsistency, but to show that to come into collision with the other House was a mis fortune which all sides deprecated, and desired, if pos sible to avoid. Why, then, should they come into collision with the Lords for the assertion of a mere barren principle ? Did the Noble Lord think that, by not waiting for the Tithe Bill, but by taking this opportunity of bringing the House to some resolution upon this subject, he had hit upon an inge nious expedient that would render it impossible for his Right Hon Friend (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) after the de claration he had made, to carry on the Government ?—( Hear. ) Upon this part of the question it did not become him to speak much, but he had a right to adopt as independent atone as the Hon. and Learned Member for Edinburgh. I sought no I (continued the Hon. and Learned Gentleman,) I sought not a seat in this House—l sought not office under the Govern ment--I derive no benefit from either. lam placed here in a situation of independence quite as great as that of any other Hon. Member, and I can assure the Noble Lord that as far as 'I am concerned, if he can form an Administration that will perfect, that will purify, and not destroy the institutions of this great country, I, for one, will cheerfully resign my place to some Member of that Administration that will pos sess the confidence of the country, and that will not atise that THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 8, 1835. confidence.—( Hear.) But let me warn the Noble Lord, that if he goes on, he must be prepared to see the principle of this resolution carried into effect by others with whom I cannot think he wishes to coincide. Let me caution him, as an emi nent writer has said of an illustrious statesman (Lord Chat ham) that whilst he only intended to hamper a minister, he lost us America ;—let me caution the Noble Lord, I say, that history, to which he has alluded, do not say of him, that while he only intended to hamper a Minister, he de stroyed a Church, and dismembered an empire.—( Cheers.) Mr. PERRIN valued the principle of this resolution, not only because it was calculated to give peace to Ireland, but because it would tend to give increased and just efficiency to the Established Church. He was surprised, therefore, at the opposition which had been given to the resolution by some Hon. Gentlemen opposite. It was said by the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland, that after all the deductions to which the income of the Church would be subject, it would be re duced from 700,0001. to 450,0001. Now, he was ready to allow a deduction of 25 per cent., and a deduction on account of the vestry cess ; but that would still leave 130,0001. surplus over 450,0001., and was that a trifle to devote to moral and religious education ? The Hon. and Learned Member for the University of Dublin had said no addition was wanted to the funds at present devoted to purposes of education, for that the Board of Education had such an abundance of funds as to be obliged to raise the salaries of some of the masters. Now he (Mr. Perrin) had been in communication with that Board, and he could say, from his own knowledge, that it was miserably short of funds.--( Cheers from the Reformers.) As to the reduction of ten per cent. from the value of Church pro perty, by a waste to that amount that would be occasioned by its conversion, he could only say that he was not disposed to agree to the Bill which would occasion that waste. He could as little allow of the deduction of 59,000/., on account of the suppressed Bishoprics, as of 22,0001. on account of the tax on the incomes of the clergy, for these two sums did not cease to exist.--( Cheers.) They were still applicable to ecclesiastical purposes.—( Hear.) But besides that, they must not forget the state of many parishes in Ireland. He would bring the state of a few before the House. They would not be extreme cases, such as those brought forward by the Right Hon. Member for Cambridge, who named parishes in which there were no Protestants ; not cases from the diocese of Ossory, but cases occurring in the Protestant county of Monaghan, in the north of Ireland. In that county, on the borders of Armagh, there was a barony called Farney, con taining five parishes, the condition of which he would state to the House. The first was the parish of Magheracloon, in which there were 41 Protestant families, and 1,400 Catholic families. The value of the living was 4301. in tithes ; besides which there was a glebe-house, with 42 acres of land, making the total value 556/. The incumbent resided at Bath. The second was the parish of Carrickmacross, in which there 80 Protestant families, 10 Dissenting families, and 1,400 Catholic families. The value of the living was 700/. in tithes under, composition, and with glebe-house, and one hundred and forty acres of land, 1,1201. The third was the parish of Donaglimoine, in which there were fifty Protestant fami lies, and 2,000 Catholic families. The value of the liv ing was 1,0501. in tithes, or with glebe-house and sixty acres of land, 1,2301. The fourth was the parish of Killannej , in which there were four Protestant families and 1,000 Ca tholic families. The value of the living was 500/. in tithes, and with glebe-house and eighty acres of land, 7501. The fifth parish was Enniskeen, in which there were ten Protestant families and 1,000 Catholic families. The value of the living was also 5001. in tithes, and also with glebe-houses and eighty acres of land, 7501. In all these cases the incumbents were non-resident, and the duty 'was performed by curates, much to the satisfaction of the Protestant inhabitants, some of them at 751. per annum.—( Cheers.) These were not extreme cases. but such as might be outmatched in all the southern, western, and eastern counties.—( Hear, hear.) Was this state of things to continue ?—( Hear, hear.) Could any friend of the Church wish it to continue ?—( Hear, hear.) Could any friend of religion wish it to continue ?—( Hear.) Could the Noble Lor (Egerton) opposite expect to controvert these facts by talking of popular clamours ?—( Cries of Hear, hear. ) He ( Mr. Perrin) might be asked, " Will you suppress the Established Church? Will you transfer its property to the Catholic Church?" He would do no such thing. He would take the case of the last parish to which he had alluded, where, as he had stated, there were 1,000 Catholic families, and only four Protestant families. " What 1" he might be asked, " though the number of the Protestant families be small, will you not respect their feelings and scruples ?" As a Protestant himself he valued the Protestant Establishment : but for the support of that Establishment was it necessary that in a parish where there were but four Protestant families, 750/. a year should be taken out of the parochial funds for the maintenance of a Protestant clergyman ?—( Cheers.) He cared not for the argument of whether it were bad for the tenant or bad for the landiord—to one or the other it must be bad—to the parish at large it was of no benefit ; and he for one never would consent to this state of things, that whilst 750/. a year were abstracted to meet the claims of the Church, the whole of the religious duties should be performed by a person receiving only 751. a year, and that the remaining 675/. a year, should go to he dissipated by an individual re siding at Bath or elsewhere.—(Loud cheers.) He (Mr. Pcrrin) said that was not religion.—(Cheers.) He said that that was not good sense. He said that it was not honesty.— (Reiterated cheers.) He begged pardon of the House for trespassing at so much length upon its time ; but he wished to represent to Englishmen the real state of things in Ireland : knon lug that if that state of things were fully known to the English Members of the House they would act with as anxious a desire to etf.xt what was right and useful to the community, as the most warm and passionate Irishman ( Hear, hear.) He begged to recal the attention of the House, for a moment, to the particular parish to which he had referred. In that pa rish, for the accommodation of four Protestant families, there was a lane, well-built, well-furnished, well-aired church ; a curate performed the service. Contrast that with the ac commodation afforded to the Roman Catholics. There were a thousand Roman Catholic families in the parish. Ig norant and superstitious as those persons might be, was that a valid reason why they should not be taken care of?—why they should not be adequately furnished with the means of religious education ? Look at their situation, and look at their chapel —generally ill built, never furnished, no pews, no seat, no bench—a plain damp floor—and, even such as it was, not of sufficient size to contain half the congregation.—( Clicers.) He appealed to his friends and countrymen on the other side of the House to bear him out in this fact—to answer him this question. On riding by a Catholic chapel on Sunday, had they not frequently seen a great portion of the congregation kneeling on the outside, because there was no room for them within. Was that a state of things to continue ? Was that a state of things calculated, in any way, to conduce to religion, to peace, or to tranquillity? When such a state of things existed, could any man wonder at the animosities, the ex asi,erations, the dissentions, and the heartburnings, that had produced so many evil consequences in Ireland.—( Hear, hear, hear.) 111.:5.e were facts—indisputable facts. Was it possible that they should he allowed to continue? He would not withdraw the income of the Protestant clergyman in Ireland. So far from it—so far from diminishing the means of the working clergyman, he would place him in a situation more becoming his avocation. He would make him more independent. He would give to the Protestant minister who had to take care of the four, or the twenty, or the fifty Protestant families in any parish, 2001. a year instead of 75/. a year.—( Hear, hear.) In a parish such as that to which he had referred, where the tithes amounted to 7501. a year, it was admitted even by the Hon. Gentlemen on the opposite side of the House, that 2501. a year would be a fit and proper sum to allow to the Protestant clergyman. Taking these Honourable Gentlemen upon their own admission—agree ing with them that 2501. a year would be a fit and proper sum to allow to the clergyman, then, he asked, what was to be done with the remaining 500/. ?—( Hear, hear. ) He (Mr. Perrin) would devote it to the moral and reli gious education of the poor of the parish..—( Hear, hear. ) But it was said that that would be robbing the Church.— ( Laughter and cheers.) The Hon. and Learned Member for the University of Dublin had stated that this was not the pro perty of the State, and that the State had no right to inter fere with it. He (Mr. Perrin) said that it was the property of the State ; ibut whether it were the property of the State or not, he contended that the State had a right, and was bound to interfere, to see that it was usefully and properly appro priated. He contended that the property now claimed and possessed by the Church in each parish, was property held in trust for the use and benefit of the parishioners at large, and that to the use and benefit of the parishioners at large it ' ought now to be appropriated.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Those were the terms of the statute-book. By the 15th Richard 11. it was provided Because divers damages and hin drances oftentimes have happened, and daily do happen, to the poor parishioners of divers places by the appropriation of benefices of the same places, it is agreed and assented, that in every licence from henceforth to be made of the appropriation of any parish church, the diocesan of such place shall ordain, according to the value of such church, a convenient sum of money to be paid out of the fruits and pro fits of the same church, and distributed yearly to the poor parishioners in aid of their living and sustenance for ever"— ( Cheers.) But it was said that an appropriation of 300 years had given to the Established Church a prescriptive right. That argument was completely defeated by another statute. By the 4th Henry IV., it was provided, " and from henceforth in every Church so appropriated, or to be appropriated, a secular person to be appointed to do divine service, to keep hospitality, and instruct the people."—( Cheers.) Such was the proper and legal application of the Church funds ; and those who con tended that they could not be applied to the promotion of moral and religious education amongst the people, after the wants of the Church had been sufficiently provided for, grossly misunderstood the purposes for which they were originally de signed.--( Hear, hear.) Supposing that Ireland were a new plantation—supposing that it were now occupied for the first time,would the Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite begin by giving a clergyman 750/. a year for attending to the spiritual wants of four families.—(Hear)? Such a system would not be to lerated in a new settlement. It was not the more defensible because it had existed for a number of years ; and he asked the Right Hon. Gentleman whom he saw opposite, " Will you persevere in it when you see it gives rise to such scenes as Carricshock and Rathcormac ?—( Hear, hear.) If you persist in it, call it policy, call it wisdom, call it expediency, call it what you will, but do not desecrate the sacred word con science,' say not 'tis done for conscience' sake."—( Cheers. ) He did not suppose that the measure proposed by the Noble Lord (John Russell) would be productive of all the great ad vantages that had been ascribed to it. No one measure would tranquillize Ireland—the present measure would not alone be sufficient to tranquillize Ireland, but it would certainly go a great way towards the mitigation of the spirit of exasperation which now unhappily prevailed. —( Hear.) Some Hon. Gen tlemen had spoken of the Noble Lord's proposition as if it were an insult to Preetestants. He was sure the Hon. Mem ber for Monaghan would not say that. The Hon. Member said it would lie wise to extend education to the Presbyterians. The Noble Lord's proposition only carried that principle out a little farther, and said it would be wise to extend education also to the Roman Catholics. He (Mr. Perrin) agreed with the Noble Lord ( Stanley) the Member for North Lanca shire in his opinion of the Protestant faith ; he wished that every man in Ireland was a Protestant ; and he thought that the best way of attaining that most desirable end would be to afford a general moral and religious education to the whole of the community. In the course of his speech he (Mr. Perrin) had alluded very particularly to a parish where the Protestant families amounted only to four, where a Pro testant curate received only 751. a year, but where the tithe amounted to 750/. a year; in conclusion, he would only ask who was the incumbent of that parish ? Sir Harcourt Lees. —( Loud cheers.) Mr. Serjeant JACKSON, notwithstanding the respect that he entertained for the opinions of his Hon. and Learned Friend who had just sat down, differed from him upon many questions, and upon none more strongly than that under the consideration of the House, he was rejoiced, however, to hear his Hon. and Learned Friend make one admission— the necessity of maintaining an Established Church in Ireland; but he much doubted whether many of those by whom his Hon. and Learned Friend was surrounded, would agree with him in that opinion. It was true that some few had conceded it—but if this measure were once passed he thought his Hon. and Learned Friend would find that those who agreed with him at the present moment would soon retract their opinions and express themselves ready to combine with any who should be prepared to take another step against the Church. Of the ultimate intentions of the Roman Catholics it was impossi ble to doubt when they referred to a letter written by the Hon. and Learned Member for the city of Dublin, in Sep tember last, in which that Hon. and Learned Gentleman vindi cated himself in the eyes of his Catholic countrymen by declaring that he had limited himself to an at tempt to otain the remission of three-fifths only of the tithes of Ireland, because he felt that three-fifths was all that he could then reasonably expect to ob tain, adding, " I will make sure of the first instalment, and afterwards labour to obtain • the residue of the debt." The Hon. Gentleman proceeded in a tone of voice scarcely audible in the Gallery, to enter into a statement of figures to show that the revenues of the Church in Ireland had been greatly over-rated. The surplus, if any, could not be very great, but as yet they could not tell that there was any at all. The course pursued by the late Government had been most unstatesmanlike and impolitic. He did not deny the necessity of education—he had never opposed himself to edu cation ; but he maintained that the funds now in the hands of the Board of Education in Ireland were amply sufficient. One of the objections that he made to the proposition of the Noble Lord was this—that so far from being a healing mea sure, so far from producing peace and harmony in Ireland, it would, in his opinion, be impossible to find a measure more calculated to produce and' even bloodshed, in that country.—( Hear.) And why ? Because by that measure it was proposed that wherever a certain number of Protestants were not found in a parish, or where the Protestant population did not bear a certain proportion to the Roman Catholic, a Protestant clergyman should not be appointed at all. What would be the result of such a provision ? Why, that the Roman Catholics would take care, by every means in their power, to discourage the residence of Protestants. That course was already pursued to a certain extent, and the conse quence of it was, that great numbers of respectable Protestant yeomen were annually emigrating from Ireland, with the view of seeking in a distant land the peace and security denied them on their native soil.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") Mr. GISBORNE said, the point between the two sides of the House appeared to him to be this—that whereas the Gen tlemen on the Ministerial side of the House, together with the Noble Lord ( Stanley) and the Right Baronet ( Sir James Graham) asserted that tithes were, in fact, by reason of the mode of collection, the sole cause of the disturbances in Ireland so far as related to ecclesiastical matters, whilst they on that (the Opposition) side of the House, asserted that they were not the sole cause of those disorders; but that the exist ance of the Irish Church, as a Pr .testant Establishment main.... tained solely for a small part only of the inhabitants of that country, partook also with the tithes in causing those disturbances. That, he apprehended, was the point of difference now arising between the two sides of the House on the reso lution then before them. He conceived that the House could hardly come to a right solution of that point of difference without first considering the system on which the Irish Church was founded. The Protestant Church in Ire land bad always been the corner stone and foundation of our system of government in that country. Protestant Lord Lieutenants of counties, Protestant magistrates, Prosestant Sheriffs, a Protestant court, a Protestant judicial bench, packed juries, and an Orange yeomanry—these were the in stitutions—a part of them now rescinded, and a part retained —that formed part and parcel of the same exclusive system of Protestantism. The real question which affected the feelings of the people of Ireland, was this—for whose benefit had these institutions been maintained? Had it been for the banefit of the Irish people ? When he heard the Noble Lord ( Stanley) say that he could not believe that the Protestant Church, maintained out of its own resources, could be the cause of the discontents in Ireland, it seemed to him (Mr. Gisborne) that the Noble Lord did not understand the elementary principle on which society rested. What was the principle on which law and order were maintained in society ? Surely, not the principle of force. The idea of maintaining order and law by force was a monstrous and barbarous idea. Social insti tutions were of no value, nor were they capable of promoting either the happiness or the prosperity of a people unless main tained by public feeling and public opinion.—(Cheers.) In England and Scotland there was a feeling in every man's mind that, with some causes of complaint, the institutions of the country mainly existed for his benefit; but in Ireland the insti tutions were not in accordance with the feelings of the people. That was the cause of the alienation of the people from those institutions, and that was the cause of the necessity that existed there for the maintenance of order and law by force. —( Cheers. ) It was not simply the existence of the Irish Church, but it was the fact of the general feelings of the people being alienated from the institutions of the country, of which the maintenance of that Church was the foundation, that produced a state of society in Ireland under which no security and no prosperity could exist.—( Cheers. ) The ecclesiastical institutions in Ire land not being in consonance with the feelings of the great bulk of the people, was the foundation of all the insecurity and all the misery which existed in that country. This Resolution of the Noble Lord was the last, the sincere—he trusted it might not be the desperate—attempt to save the Protestant Church in Ireland.—( Laughter from the Ministerial side, and loud cheers from the Opposition.) He would say that it was with such an intention, and with the view to make the Pro testant Church tolerable to the feelings of the people of Ire land, that the Resolution was now proposed.—( Renewed laughter and cheers.) He had nothing to disguise from the House. H e wou ld sa y, th a t if the Protestant Church could not be made to exist in consonance with the feelings of the people of Ireland, it was impossible that the Government or the people of this country could maintain it. The only way to maintain the Church in Ireland was by letting the people feel that they had an interest in it. The Noble Lord ( Stanley) had said, that if there were only ten Pro testants —nay, if there were only one Protestant in a parish— he had a right to have a Church Establishment maintained for him ; and the Noble Lord also said, that the Catholic had not even the paltry right of having the surplus revenue of the Pro testant Church applied to the education of his children. If that were the Noble Lord's principle, then he had, indeed, di vided the people of Ireland into two classes—into 500,000 Spartans on the one side, and seven millions of Helots on the other.—( Cheers.) Did the Noble Lord really maintain this principle, even with regard to a surplus ? Because, if this were indeed the principle of the Noble Lord, then, much as he respected the Noble Lord's talents, and highly as he ad mired his character, he must say, that he would most unwil lingly ever see that Noble Lord conducting the administra tion of the affairs of this country.—( Very great cheering from the Opposition.) Any connection of the Noble Lord with any Administration, if made inseparable from such a prin ciple as that, would, in spite of his talents and his character, be a great national calamity.—( Great cheering.) The Noble Lord had told them, and other Hon. Gentlemen had since re peated the observation, that our resolution proposed at once to give peace and satisfaction to Ireland. Now, he (Mr. Gis borne) never thought such a thing, and he had never heard of such a proposition.—( Cheers.) But he would tell the Noble Lord what the object of the resolution was, and what it would do :—its object was to remove, and he believed it would remove, an impediment, without the removal of which peace could not come to Ireland. It would remove an insu perable impediment out of the way, and that was all it pro fessed to do. He sincerely hoped that they might be able to attain that object.—(Cheers.) But if that impediment should not be removed by the resolution being now rejected, he most earnestly believed that peace never could be produced in Ire land without the total destruction of the Established Church. (Cheers.) He, perhaps, might be allowed to say a few words on the subject of the right of interference with Church pro perty. It had been said that Parliament could not interfere with property over which there existed in no way and supreme power. The Church itself could not alienate the property, nor, it was said, could the State in any manner deal with it. How did the Church become possessed of property of this un intelligible quality? " Why, Sir (continued Mr. Gisborne), in some dark and ignorant age, some gross profligate, some enormous sinner, some oppressor of the people, some despoiler of the widow and the orphan, when lying on his death-bed is visited by a wily priest, who tells him his sins arc so great that unless he gives his property to the Church his soul will re main in purgatory till the day of judgment, and in eternal tor ments ever after. That is the foundation of the right of the Church to that property ; and the consequence of such a gift—a gift made perhaps after the wavering reason had ceased to guide the act or the intentions of the donor—is to be, that to the end of society this estate must be devoted to ecclesiastical purposes. That is your first absurdity.—( Cheers.) Then, this gross and unscriptural attempt to expiate sin —this, which you yourselves bold to be impious, heretical, and anti-christian, you construe into an unalienable title to this property for Pro.. testant purposes. That is your second absurdity." Now, to show that he was not exaggerating nor mis-stating anything, he would not bring any paltry instance, nor cite any small por tion of property which some wretched sinner had been deluded out of at the end of his life. He would read the preamble of an Act which was made the foundation of large possessions held by the Church. That Act was made by a King who was an usurper, and who, in the first year of his usurpation, being anxious to secure the clergy on his side, presented them with this large donation. The preamble of the grant of tithes by King Stephen, in 1135, ran thus :—" Because, through the Providence of Divine mercy we know it is to be so or dered, and by the churches publishing it far and near, every body hath heard, that by the distribution of alms persons may be absolved from the bonds of sin, and acquire the reward of heavenly joy, I, Stephen, by the grace of God, King of Eng land, being willing to have part with them who, by a happy kind of trading, exchange heavenly things for earthly, and smitten with the love of God, and for the salvation of my own soul and the souls of my father and mother, and all my forefathers and ancestors, confirm tithes and other do nations to the Church."—( Hear, hear, hear.) That was the foundation of a large portion of the Church property. It was in conformity with Stephen's intentions, who, while speaking of heavenly joys, was intriguing for an earthly crown, that you founded your title to all your conscientious feelings, which will not allow you to propose any part of this property to be devoted to other than strictly ecclesiastical purposes.—( Cheers, and cries of " Question.") It was ob jected strongly by the Noble Lord (Stanley) against gentle men on this (the Opposition) side of the House, that if a new Government should be formed in consequence of this resolu tion, it must be supported by persons of very incongruous opinions.—( Ironical cheers from the Ministerial benches.) He was surprised to hear that objection come from the Noble Lord.—(Cheers and cries of " Question.") Lord STANLEY was understood to say that he made no such objection. Mr. GI SBORNE—Gentlemen would remember that a very prominent part of the Noble Lord's speech was, that the Opposition was formed of men entertaining the most incon gruous principles—( Cheers from the Opposition)--that they were persons who had agreed together on this occasion for the purpose of embarrassing the Government ; but who, when they should succeed to their places, would move together very badly indeed. Now, there was a remark he wished to make to the Noble Lord, because the Noble Lord either agreed in principle with the present Government, or he did not. If he agreed with them, why did he not join them? If he did not agree with them, then he (Mr. Gisborne) would ask, was the Noble Lord the person to make an objection to those who acted together on the Opposition side of the House? When the Noble Lord was in office, he (Mr. Gisborne) was for two or two or three years not certainly a regular, but a general, supporter of the Noble Lord. He supported him on all questions, he believed, in which the Noble Lord was in any trying difficulties with the House. He voted with him on the malt•tax ; also against inquiry into agricultural distress— (Laughter in several parts of the House)—he voted also against an inquiry into the Pension List—( Renewed laughter) —and lastly, he not only voted but spoke for him on the ques tion of the Russian-Dutch Loan. Now, he would ask the Noble Lord whether he thought it was any objection to his Government that it had his (Mr. Gisborne's) support on those questions, or whether he thought on that account that it was less worthy of the confidence of the country? And yet he (Mr. Gisborne) as widely differed from the Noble Lord then on the general subject of ecclesiastical property, and especially on the state and government of Ireland, as he did now. If a new Government should be formed, he would give to that Go vernment the same disinterested support as he did to the Government of the Noble Lord. The consequence of such a change would probably be, that the Noble Lord would come to this side of the House, and that he ( Mr. Gis borne) would occupy that section of the House where the Noble Lord now sat—(Laughter)--though, perhaps, not in so distinguished a manner. But the difference between his situation and that which the Noble Lord now held, would be this—that he (Mr. Gisborne), when filling the Noble Lord's seat, would be supporting Ministers in whom he had con fidence, while the Noble Lord was now supporting Ministers in whom he had not any.—( Loud Opposition cheering.) He was sure the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Goulburn) would allow him to refer to the times of Henry VIII. These words frequently occurred in the preambles of the statutes of that reign : " When love could teach a Monarch to be wise, And Gospel light first dawn'd from Boleyn's eyes." —( Laughter.) It was under these religious auspices that the Gospel first became an element in English legislation. For his (Mr. Gisborne's) part, lie did not see why it should dis turb the general harmony of the empire to have so many sects, especially if they gave up at once all pretence of determining in this House what was Gospel truth. It was a pretence which never had succeeded to any good purpose. It never had produced harmony in any society ; but it had produced persecution in every country in the world. He would say only one word in reply to the Noble Lord (Castlereagh), who had stated that he should consider it his duty to endeavour to raise the cry of " the Church in danger 1"—( Opposition cheers.) He believed that cry would be like mere sounding brass.—(Laughter and cheers.) It would, in all probability, have the same effect as the advice given to Macheath by one of his associates, when he was at the gallows, and which was very pithy and appropriate to a man in his situation. It consisted of two words, which were simply these—" Die hal d!"—( Great laughter.) He rather apprehended that the effect or the address presented to-day to the Right. Hon. Ba ronet opposite would be somewhat similar, and that the cry of " The Church in danger," which was to be raised, would simply give that exhortation to the Right Honourable Baronet which was given to the noted highwayman—" Die hard ;" and which advice, by the by, the Right Hon. Baronet did not at all seem indisposed to adopt.--( Laughter and cheers.) In conclusion, he would declare that he cordially agreed with the resolution before the House. He was told, indeed, that one of its effects was likely to be the shortening of the duration of the present Ministry. It was not, on that account, that it recommended itself to his mind. If that should be the conse quence, and if that consequence should be calamitous to the country, he should be entirely innocent of it, for he supported it on account of the principles it embodied, principles which he ever maintained in opposition to the last Government, and which he now, with equal consistency, maintained in opposi tion to the present. He supported it, equally careless as to the consequences or effects—( Loud cheering on the Ministe rial side)—it would produce.—(Renewed cries of " Hear, hear !" from the Ministerial side, echoed back by the Opposi tion.) I should like (said Mr. Gisborne) to finish one sentence more.—( Laughter.) I say, then, that I support the resole tion, equally careless as to the effects it will produce on the existence of the present Government, or on the question who shall be their successors.—( Continued cheering. ) Mr. C. NV. W YNN then rose to address the House—Every one of the Hon. Gentleman's arguments went not to the re gulation, but to the total subversion, of the Irish Church. The Hon. Gentleman had, strangely enough, taken the dona tion of King Stephen as the foundation of the rights of the Church in Ireland ; totally forgetting, it would seem; that King Stephen had not a foot of land in Ireland, and that he was as perfect a stranger in that country as the King of France or the King of Spain. The Hon. Gentleman had stated that the title of the Church to its property rested upon the dona tion of some old sinner, whom, upon his death-bed, a wily Priest had induced to make an atonement for his sins by a pro fuse gift to the Church. But was there, he would ask, a single title to land in Ireland which was not posterior in origin to that Church ? and the land was always granted out by the King, subject to the right of the Church to tithe. But it was said that the parish had the right to tithe, and that the clergyman was only a trustee; and that there was no injustice in taking the tithe from the Church, and appropriating it to the purposes of na tional and general education. But how far did that argu ment go ? Was it to be applied to lay impropriators as well as to the Clergy ? Was it to apply to the property of the Duke of Devonshire, Lord Lansdowne, and Lord Donegal? The proposition now before the House was, that whenever there was a surplus in any parish, it should be taken away and applied to the diffusion of general knowledge among the Ro man Catholics as well as Protestants ; but that, whenever there was a deficiency in any parish, it was not proposed by the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) to make up that deficiency. He was one of the few Members now remaining in that House who had sat in it previously to the Act of Union ; and he well remembered that it was then held out to the Protestants of Ire land, as one of the principal advantages to result from that measure, that the Protestant Church in that part of the coun try would be protected. He trusted, however, that the Church of Ireland, and its other institutions, which the Hon. and. Learned Member for Dublin now threatened, would be pre served, by the wisdom of that House of Lords for which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman proposed to substitute a Re presentative Chamber ; and that they—believing the Union with Ireland to be endangered—and, looking at this propo sition as the first step towards its destruction, would treat it accordingly. Colonel SIBTHORP then rose, together with another Honourable Member, and after a short pause (during which the cries of " Divide I" were very general) proceeded to ad dress the House. The Hon. and Gallant Member, after re marking that he had no doubt the Hon. Member for Derby shire ( Mr. Gisbourne) entertained the expectation of inducing the Right Hon. Baronet to resign, and of placing himself in some very important situation, made some allusion to ham and beef warehouses, and pastry cooks' shops in the immediate vicinity of Westminster-bridge, which we were unable to comprehend. We rather think the effect of the allusion was that placards, calling upon the people to sign addresses to Lord John Russell, were exposed in windows which bore in viting placards of another description, intimating that hot sausages, small Germans, and saveloys were to be had with in. The Hon. and Gallant Member then proceeded in the following words :—I am desirous to express my consternation at that—l will say—unconstitutional proceeding to which the Noble Lord has lent his sanction,—( Mock cheers.) I think, at least I hope, that the Noble Lord, on a future occasion— he who undertakes the appropriation of the surplus property of the Church—will give usfsome opportunity of hearing from the same quarter a declaration that he means to leave Ire land in the possession of lay impropriators.—(Cheers.) I hope, when a Bill for the Reform of the English Church is brought in, that we shall hear something of the House of Russell—(cheers)—of the House of Russell giving up their lay impropriations. I will not believe the sincerity of the Noble Lord unless I see this take place. He will allow me also to say that I doubt his sincerity, because I believe him to entertain—to hold—l may say to be actuated by—(cheers)— the wish to turn out an honest Ministry, and bring in another, whose condemnation is well known in the public opinion of the liberal portion of the country. I am perfectly satisfied— (vehement cheering)—l am perfectly satisfied that the Right Hon. Gentleman below me will retain his post so long as a sense of honour will induce him to keep it ; and I am satisfied— (cheers)--and I am satisfied that when he does leave it he will carry with him the gratitude of one side of the House, and the overthrow of the other.—( Renewed cheer ing.) This question has already undergone considerable discussion ; I have heard many arguments from this side of the House, but I have heard little more than vox et preterea nihil on the other.—( Cheers and laughter.) Sir, what said the Hon. Member for Derbyshire? Why he told you that this was the last attempt of the Noble Lord to keep up the Protestant Church in Ireland. But he also told you that this would not pacify Ireland. Why, what will the Hon. Member—the great man—the Prince of Dublin—say to this ? —( Laughter.) What has he said ?—( Cheers.) He said that this was but an instalment. He well knew (continued the Hon. and Gallant Member, sinking his voice from its highest pitch to a stage whisper)—he well knew that the only way of attaining his point was to bring all your heads toge ther—(cheers)—and when your heads have been together a little time, they will become more divided than ever.—( Loud cheers.) Of the body opposite, I know not what the head may be, but I believe the tail will leave the other part. What wil be the result ? Unprecedented confusion—an unheard of breaking up of the v.1.01e system, the head will be at one end, and the tail will be..-at the other.—(Tremendous cheering, and laughter.) Mr. HOGG addressed the House amidst the loudest mani festations of impatience. His voice was too feeble, his iuflu•at ence was too small, to attach any importance to any cry th might emanate from him; but he did there avow and declare in the face of his country that he believed the Church to bees in danger—in imminent danger—from the Noble Lord's ro lution ; and had he, the power, he would sound the loud trumpet of alarm both within those walls and without. He be lieved that the people of England would respond to th at cr y ; he believed that the time was not yet come when they would show that they were callous or indifferent to the interests of that faith, to the perseverance in which, by the blessing of God, they were indebted for many of the blessings which were now so liberally showered upon them. They were told that there was no danger in the terms of the resolution. Why did the House believe that the spoliator would rouse their indigna tion and excite their horror by rushing at once to the altar, and there commencing his work of spoliation ?—(, Oh," On " Divide.") Allusion had often been made to the Catholic Relief Bill. He, for one, regretted that that measure should have been delayed so long ; but when gen tl eme n were taunt ed with the fears they had expressed, he would say, that that debate had gone far to realize those which he himself had en tertained. What would have been said if, when the Hon. Learned Member for Dublin first took up his seat in that House, he had put it forth, even as a problematical supposition, that within some few years a motion would be made, and sup ported by Catholic Members, for the diversion of the propertY, of the Protestant Church from Protestant purposes? — ( Cheers.) And yet such a motion was now made, and supported by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman himself—the distinguished leader of the Catholic interest in that House. Mr. LUCAS said, that as allusion had been made toi hbeir: by the Hon. and Learned Sergeant opposite, he wo ud leave to answer his remarks. The Hon. and Learned Ser geant had alluded to five parishes in the county of Monagh an ' in which the landholders were principally Catholic, while thet:e was but a small proportion of Protestant landholders, and 0 1 which there were large livings, and scarcely any residen! rectors. He admitted that the statement was correct, an!, that it was not a state of things which be could approve of. —( Cheers from the opposition.) But in this, and shllilar instances, the fault was not so much in the individual clergr, man as in the system.—( Loud cheers.) The Irish Chu like all other human institutions, was in the course of centu-. ries liable to imperfections. The Hon. and Learned Sergeant had said, that he would restrict the incomes of the clergy to a certain sum. In that he (Mr. Lucas) would go with the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, and he was convinced that, 10 saying so, he merely expressed the opinions of a large body 0, the Protestants of Ireland.—( Hear, and cries of " Question, " Divide.") Sir R. PEEL then rose and said—Sir, Ido not k now that . it would be necessary for me to say a single word on the P.n.l sent occasion if, during almost the whole of this disc ussion ' ,; had not been assumed that we had a right again to discuss the precise question which furnished the subject of the six previ n so nights' debate which has taken place. But I apprehend tvii.t that question was entirely set at rest by the House last nig“; when it affirmed the resolution of the Noble Lord, and wh n e , that resolution was allowed to be reported by the Constnit t s , without debate. It was in point of fact considered that aft what had passed there could be no change of opinion resp!es: ting that resolution, and therefore it was that I deter min * permit it to pass this evening without further discussion. P O what is the resolution which this House is now called ue° ll ., affirm? Why, it is a resolution of a totally different charaol,76 to the former.—( Hear, hear.) The resol ut i on which ta House is now called upon to affirm, is nothing more nor 1 1 9 . than this—that no measure which can be introduce d on ( subject of tithes can lead to a satisfactory or final settlement ev°, that question which does not embody in it the foregoing es lution. Now, Sir, I for one have very great objection to any s_tfe. proposition, as the effect of it will be to establish a P re' d dent as novel as it is dangerous ; a precedent the prudeneV,, ut which the Noble Lord himself seems to doubt.—( Hear.) I',„ is not this an obvious departure from the course which i IP; Noble Lord meant to have pursued when he first brought Ifss ward his motion ?—( Cheers.) The Noble Lord then deer it that if he should "succeed in having his resolution passeutos was his intention to notify to the Crown that such resoluti 0. had been carried, and that it was intended to found a Bill sill . , it ; but what was the course which he now proposed acil es s ing ? He had passed his resolution, but he now p ropo„, making no notification whatever respecting it, eithe r to ut t Crown or the House of Lords. He abandoned th e ue s which he had originally chalked out for himself, and 0 . now. l , he meant to do was that which in reality amounted,to hey hag, simply to inform the members of this House that theYe passed a resolution, and that, having done so, all who ee f s t after them ought to be bound by it.—( Cheers.) Th is iF iv, the Noble Lord now calls upon us to do ; but I obje ct, to 11!se proposition, because I think that nothing could be mare un le t , i so or less safe than for this House to declare that one m or sel alone could lead to a final and satisfactory adjustment dos question. The course which the Noble Lord wishes to P° fi b object to, and the course which I am anxious to ?adop t la t oly he jetted to by the Hon. Gentlemen on the other side of os s House. It is quite true that a majority of the Islouse- --$ got jority of twenty-five—has affirmed a certain resolution ;cow then it should not be forgotten that against that same r e- tef tion no fewer than 289 members have protested b'y th e v e ° ol ll which they gave, and yet in the face of this the 'N o ble e• now calls upon the House to declare— s e led' rev Lord J. RUSSELL, interrupting, observed that ea' jority was even greater than the Right Hon. Berms e t had s`-oslo Sir R. PEEL—Sir, I am perfectly aware twat the , h at Lord's resolution was carried by a still greater• nulob ee ' s sba there being a minority of 289, independently of tho se se paired off and those who were absent, I am er &titled too, that there were at least 300 Members adverse t o the re told tion, and yet, in the face of such a minority, the Nou' st f,, the calls upon the House to affirm a proposition wifnieh whole length of deciding that there shall be IWO furtPwiistea cussion, and that it would be useless for the I muse to all be to any more argument upon the subject—that ibere sh l s ei only one measure, and that that measure shall be 6 teiel satisfactory. Why, Sir, I must say that this I the tY r Tbat P act of a majority.—( Loud cheers.) I must c leder° , ; s el $ the House of Commons were proud to establiesh so , 1)- of precedent as that of precluding the further iligcuss'n, fr question, avoiding to listen to what may be pole anee" - or, your of er against a particular measure before it b,econley so d vocable, declaring that no measure should be saftisfa ntere ll b e final, unless it embodies a specific principle, tb at it w r i ou sli acting not only unwisely as regards itself, ,bar t da t ng t e is t bo as respects the public.—(Great cheering.) air t l'iP a s i s ose resolution which the Noble Lord now calls U p! the Chung adopt? Why, it is, that if there be a surplus cif the s aria te rtvenue beyond that which is required for th© prop er be nance of the Church Establishment, that surpf us slat oth er s ; propriated to a single object, to the exclusion e g v e s „ . 'b e rg ff —(Loud cheers.) You (addressing the Hon . 1 %" -e.- ; ion the opposite side of the House) have your Comm' 016 Public Instruction—you have the power of v rs e jog report of that Commission without rashly pled' sing to that which at present you admit to be 1111 :Xplic a " 00 9 ; are at liberty, if you think fit, to avail yours elves of so o t, formation to be derived from that source, a‘tia yet Y ou s hoat satisfied to grant even a short delay ; no, a t it eel; area the Noble Lord has with such singular ca ndoair deO g plO l you that he is unable to bring forward any sP e t s c iell/ h until he has first seen the report of thds C.A olllrn- t hat : (Loud cheers.) The Noble Lord himself' told yo u OP, could not explain either the details of his plan or ",; ( 15 0 ; principles upon which it was to be founded. - until he 1- is s this report ; and yet you refuse to wait until such thlle v el e can have access to the information which he deems t l3 ) indispensable before he can frame any plan Be t zni l eet e " House of Commons adopt any such course?--C' Ft' Will the House of Commons adopt a course which 111 rbe elude it from profiting by the information which 1 4 ' e ste se il e sented to it by this Commission. Sir, I must be alle" l a isOf that it is a most unusual course to pursue to adopt such Il i ' s sipl e , s o ° as the one involved in this resolution—to a.dapt a P T , '," 1 0 1 . 1 ) ," prophecy that only one plan can be satisfac . tory whil l .ijof t ' o l wholly unprepared to furnish a single one ofoft the dota l , ss ioo o o plan.—( Cheers.) A short time will put y in po s t jo full information cn the subject, and there fcire whY e s ;t: adopt a resolution which must cut off the I, robability topo, promise ? Why will you put on record ses .absurd al e obj e ; tion as that one measure ? and only one e2fr carry. . tie °„ you have in view into effect. This, I believe s Sir ss , s , 0020 time in the history of the legislation of this ca urn", W ith it branch of the Legislature has adopted such a c°' -e a nd 7,0 the concurrence, much less consulting, the oil her ss io1 0 ,0" has been occasionally found necessary to make con ne- fs - essw sa s sacrifices for the purpose of carrying p as s ticislar sha" o r through both Houses of Parliament, why i va,,Y )„; necessity arise in the present instance ?- -( 1 -eu e-s , s e . a l s egi s should well consider this before you procee a to e l '"? i' r ' ° —( Cheers.) Now, what is it that you are ab out tO do;befor: you are about to say—before any Bill is bi-( lugh t s in es-e l s /l ir a you have seen the report of the Church Corn toissi e f irs " her t s you will preclude yourselves from listening to, anY % s o d s c ' Es cussion—that you will determine this tours e, h m e a a y r ,. ) to I b i e th th is e b o e nly th o e ne cou w r h se ic w h h s i h c a h ll yo b u e • sersue.• soo t L an to adopt c lar e , the House of Commons will establish any 'such Oe vel ,:at o f gerous precedent--all I can say is, that it will P re: o o l '4 possibility of compromise on the subject, as what Ye s e sa ioes tp seems to be to insist on a ccom pli s hi ng y our o wn 'u'" 5, 1 °,4 the exclusion of all o th ers , even b e f ore y ou h a ve bee s ' ) mould those designs into any tangible shapc.—(Cho ers :st ° i ts then is to be the act of the majority. But do you t be ' s , s lY re the precede n t y ou es t a bli s h i n t hi s case w ill eq ually 1 3e. all others, a n d th a t if y ou carr y th e p resen t reso lution , ani er . el l ; majority hereafter may enforce a similar principle, h nvre slou° 0 just, in a n other proposition that may come before the ni• —( Cheers) But why will you not wait for the repor t i c sof°, Commission ? Wh a t i s it y ou mean to d ec lare by Ol e A. tion? But perhaps you do not yourselves know• of it will be this—you will go the whole length °I s e s Thone,. o s ) have confidence in our own resolution, though we have each other.--( Vehement cheering.) Why is it n e le ecnf e swear eternal friendship upon a given subject?!( otlo cheers.) For the last six, or rather for the last twe t e eote • you have been busily endeavouring to find some colninr i d ss , s to unite you, differing in opinion from each other as ra nd so many subj ec t s , an d at length you have found one, 4 ; 41 1 , wish to adh ere t o i t , unnatural as it is, with a desperat,a sdr;sore —(Cheers.) Y ou say we will not trust our own jissrePos judgment, or opinions, but we will rather take a pe rfectisi o stly vel course-_a course that will tie us rigorous' s) , to, 0 ,1 ; 0 ie out the possibili t y o f d eparture f rom , this ''.esolution, tv" ecre fact is the only common bond that binds l Ss together; an d . tha t fore it is that I object to the precedent. I must say, SI lis or, Ido not think it is prudent of any majority to act 1 11 t 5 111 bitrary way before it is prepared with its plans, or ". ode' notion of the details, on which those plans arg to b e fo' givi r. 74 , " ( ? 6 0/ t 150/ At ic