The Sun. — London, England, 1833-07-19 00:00:00

them as to the causes of the then existing disturbances, and •he leg al remedies which it was desirable might be applied for the suppression of them. For the suppression of the disturbances, the Committee recommended nightly watches, and gave it as their opinion that an increased rissour of the law would not effect the object. They then went on to state the causes of the evil, and the remedies to be applied. The first cause was the removal of tenants from their old holdings. This they stated as the main cau.e— (Hear, hear)—the hardship arising from driving out tenants from their holdings in a country where, from the amount of the population, the competition for land was very great. The second cause was the extent of vagrancy and mendicity, and the immoderate use of spiri•uous liquors. Here there was not a word about the vestry cess, and therefore so late even as August last, when that report was preeented, no part of the distractions and disturbances of Ireland were attributed to the stese— (Hear, hear)—and in truth the amount was so trifling as to be utterly inadequate to account for the evil. He was sorry he did not see the Noble Duke in his place, as he would in that ease venture to suggest to him what he had no doubt, from the character of the Noble Duke, be would not be unwilling to concur in, that it would be much better, and more consonant with justice, to fix his charge upon the land than to call upon the impoverish: d clergy of Ireland to pay it.—(He-tr.) The next authority to which he should refer was that of Dr. Murray, the Ro man Catholic Archbishop of Dublin. In his examination he stated that, if the cess was charged on the landlords, then, in his opinion, the dissatisfaction would cease. This evidence, it was true, was given seven years ago, but that made no difference. In this as in all other cases right and duty survived the lapse of time. He would next quote the testimony of Mr. O'Connell. He Was asked whether, if Roman Catholics were allowed to vote in vestries, there would be any difficulty thus put in the way of building and repairing churches? He said he thought no fair case would be resisted ; he was deeply convinced it weuld not. Where there were Protestants he thought a place of worship should be erected for them as convenient as possible, In 1830 a Select Com mittee was appointed to inquire into the state of the poor in Ireland, and the report they made was founder: upon a great variety of evidence. They stated that the existing difficulties of Ireland were rather incidental, arising from a change from one state of things to another. What were the remedies they proposed ? The first evil to which they alluded was the Grand Jtity cess, which they stated to have risen from st.SIIITI of 470 106/. to 800,0001., and was the heaviest burden pressing on the people. Now the vestry cm was not more than the one-twelfth of the Grand Jury grievance. It was a burden borne by tenants, by the poorest class of cottiers, and was expended in im provements in which these very Grand Jurors who im posed it were interested, in roads and other matters tend ing to the permanent improvement of their land. The Committee recommended that the occupying tenants sboul ihe relieved from this assessment altogether. What was the result? Three years had elapsed, and yet nothing had been done.—(Hear, hear.) A Bill, be believed, was now on the table of the other House ; but three whole years were suffered to elapse without affording any relief from this pressing evil.—( Hear, hear.) He might also refer to the report of the Committee which sat in 1827. This Committee recommended a series of remedies for the relief of Ireland, and the thirteenth of these remedies was to amend the laws respecting vestry cess, and to relieve the occupying tenant from the burden of this payment, and to throw it upon the landlord. Now who were the members of this Committee? It was named by Mr. S. Rice, who was Chairman. The following were seine of the members, he would not name tive whole:—Sir J. Newport, Lord Milton, Mr. Lamb e Sir H. Parnell, Lord Althorp, Mr. C. Grant, and Lord J. Russell, acme, as their Lordships might see, members of the pre . sent Cabinet; Mr. O'Connell, who was not yet a mem ber of the Cahinet—(A laugh)—Lord Palmerston, and Mr. Stanley, who claimed to be considered as the main patron of the proposal for this alteration. Three years back a Committee, of which, with two exceptions, all the Members of the present Cabinet formed a part, recommended that the vestry cess should be thrown upon the landlords, and now this very Cabinet came forward with a proposal to impose it upon the clergy, not upon the land —(Ct eers from the Opposition benches.) How was this to he accounted for? Were they to be looked upon as spoiled children of fortune, who, as members of a Committee, could take up one toy and throw it away when they became Ministers ?—(Cheers.) If they were indeed the spoiled children of fortune, would their Lordships be such children as to accept a measure of this kind from them ?—(Hear, hear.) This Bill, they were told, con templated other objects besides the cess, to which the fund would be applied, and among the rest the augmen tation of small livings. This was a mere delusion. There would be no funds for any other purpose ; the whole would be exhausted by the cess. There was, however, another source from which it was proposed to augment the fund ; that was, the suppression of bishop rics. It had often been asserted that the lands of the Protestant Church of Ireland were transferred from the Roman Catholic to the Protestant Bishops by Act of Parliament. Now the fact was that no such transfer was ever made. (The Right Reverend Prelate here read an extract from the works of Jeremy Taylor in confirmation of this view of the case.) Not only in the north of Ireland, but also in many parts of the south, the Bishops' lands were not transferred from the Roman Catholic to the Protestant Church. They were endowed by a Protestant King. This was effected in various dioceses of the south of Ireland (the Right Reverend Prelate mentioned the t;iocesEs of Limerick, Clcnfert, and others) by the Act of the 13th and 14th of Charles 11., the Act of Settlement. Now the 101st clause of this Act contained a provision for the die. posal and settlement of a very extensive property, in which not the Church, but a layman, was interested. The proviso was this :—" Provided always that all those lands conferred on Sir William Petty be held by him and his heirs for ever." The Noble Marquis (Lansdowne) therefore, who gave his support to this measure, to this most unjust seizure of church lands, did himself hell ex tensive property in Ireland under the very same species of tenure. He would not presume to admonish the Noble Marquis, but would venture to throw out a suggestion by which he might profit, if it was indeed meant that the Bill should pass into a law. Did he poaseas lands under a similar tenure he would forthwith prove, d to Ireland and sell such lands, otherwise he might depend upon it they would very soon share the same fate as the Bishops' lands.—(Cheers from the Opposition benches.) It was only twelve months hack that Mr. O'Connell predicted the destruction of church rate and church cess. In a letter of his, dated July 16th, he said, " My plan em bract s, first, extinction of tithe and cess ; at condly, a charitable fund for the relief of the poor; thirdly, a fund for the maintenance of the Protestant Church ; fourthly, the providing of glebe-houses for the clergy; and fifthly, a domestic Legislature." The first p art of the plan was now in progress, and when the fifth would come to pass God only knew.—( Hear.) There were other grave con siderations independent of those" of a financial nature connected with the proposed reduction in the number of Bishops.—s Hear, hear.) The language of the Bill was very modest. It said merely that the present number of Bishops might be conveniently reduced. Conveniently to whom? Not to the Irish Bishop., not to the Church of Ireland, not to the Protestants of England or Ireland. It would satisfy only a greedy and clamourous faction who were on'y encouraged to further demands by yielding to their menaces and feeding their rapacity.—(Chet re.) The Noble Earl (Grey) in his speech last night stated various grounds in support of the reduction. The first was the great disproportion between the number of Bishops in both countries and the extent of superfices. The disproportion in point of superfices between Eng land and Ireland was allowed to be as about eighteen to thirty. It was true that in this respect there was a great difference. But it might be said that the dispro portion arose as well from having too few in England, as from having too many in Ireland. The Noble Earl said he never heard a complaint made that the number was too few in England. Now he not only heard frequently but read of such complaints. In the beginning of the Re formation steps were taken to augment the number of Bishops in England, and one of the reasons as signed by Henry the Eighth for seizing upon the al bey lands was to make provision for the erection of sixteen additional bishoprics.—(Hear, hear.) However, not more than six new ones were erected. Of these Westminster was one, but it was afterwards surrendered, the revenues not being sufficient to maintain a Bishop. A reserve was made of a portion of these revenues to re. pair the church of St. Paul, and hence came the saying of " robbing Peter to pay Paul." Cranmer r ecommen d e d an augmentation of sixteen in the number of Bishops, and had this been done, the number would be 37 in England to 12 in Ireland, and the proportion as related to super.. fices would then be right to a fraction. The Noble Earl, however, argued the question on the relative amount of population, and expressed his surprise that there should be 22 Bishops to attend to the spiritual wants of only one million of persons in Ireland of the Established Church, while the number was only 26 in England for a Protestant p o pulation of eight millions. The 'Stehle Marquis said he was determined to rescue the Church from such a scandal. The Noble Marquis might leave rescued his mind from the pain of this scandal merely by opesing his 'maser-break. The Protestant clergy of Ireland_ were, he believed, more numerous than those of the Roman Catholic persuasion —the latter being, accor ding to Mr. Blake and Mr. Foster, one thousand parish priests, and about the same number of curates. It should be recollected that a Protestant Bishop was bound to devote his spiritual care to all residing within his diocese, whether of his own communion or not, whether Roman Catholics or Protestants. Dr. Newland some years hack published a defence of the Protestant Church of Ireland, in which he said that the duties of an Irish Protestant Bishop were sufficient to engross his whole time; he knew nne who devoted seven or eight hours of each 'day to them. Now this very Prelate to whom Dr. Newland alluded would, by the present Bill, have the superintendence of another diocese transferred to him. He really felt ashamed to croupy so much of their Lordships' time, belt he ventured to think the importance of the stbject would plead his excuse, and that what ho read from others would make their Lordships 'endure what he said from himself. He would theta say that if none of the reason! which he had urged were sufficient to justify and ev-eri de mand the eontinuance of the present number - 0T Bishops in Ireland, as in every respect right and wise for the pro per constitution of the Church rued the due administration of its sacred function., theta was one reason still remain ing which ought not ) and which could not, be regartiecl by their Lordships with any feeling but that of tae deepest interest and concern—he meant the consideration of what would be and what must be the Feelings of the great body of the Protestants and Roman Catholics in Ireland, if their Lordships eleould think fit to pass this Bill, and if it should ultimately become law. Was it possible tbtt they would do otherwise than regard Protestantism as having lost all confidence, favour, and support in this House and in Parliament ?—(Loud cheers from the Opposition benches.) Was it possible that they could consider that their Lordships any longer regarded their Church as an object worthy of their highest respect and firmest support ?—.( Hear, hear.) It was very remarkable that at this very time, as he need not tell their Lordships, the feeling of the Roman Catholics in that country was very different from what it was wont to be. They now exhibited a port, and assumed a tone of defiance unknown a few years ago. It was not long since that they did not even call their community in that country a Church. They spoke of their prelates as of the Roman Catholic communion in Ireland. He need not tell their Lordships that all that was now very much changed. Not only did they call their communion the "Roman Catholic Church in Ireland," but they called it "The Church in Ireland." Dr. Doyle, in a published letter to a Nohh' Lord who was not now in his place, distinctly called the Roman Catholic communion "The Church ;" and he spoke of the Bishops of the Protestant Church as being no Bishops at alk—as Bishops, in short, merely in name, saying that he was willing to recognise the title because his Majesty was at perfect liberty to give the title of I3ishop to any man ; indeed the very title of Bishop had been conferred by heathen Sovereigns upon heathens, and therefore in that sense he was willing to ackowledge it, but only in that sense. Another very remarkable thing had textured, and of a more grave and serious nature than this declaration of Dr. Doyle : he meant the circurnstance of a class book used at the College of Mayntrth, which college was main tained at the expense of the Protestants, being dedicated to whom ? "To the Most Reverend Father in God, Pa trick Curtis. Archbishop of Armagh, and Primate of all Ire land." Ile might be permitted to say that this did not rest . itself mere ly i n wor d s , h u t s h owe d i tse lf i n con d uct. H e begged to refer their Lordships to part of the testimony of James Latter, Esq.;given in the report of the Committee last year on the state of Ireland. He was a gentleman very liberal in his politics, and in his evidence suggested grounds of erClise for the conduct of the Priests ; but when he eras asked " whether, upon the whole, he thought the conduct of the Priests in any way tended to provoke or lead to the disturbance of the peace of the country ?" his answer was, " I think their conduct, generally, has tended to promote a very great degree of excitement and agitation." He was asked how long since he had ob served that to be the case ? and he answered, " It existed in some when I first came into the country; but it has increased very much of late, especially since Catholic emancipation was granted ?" " Do you think since then that the Priests have taken a more active part in politics than before ?" " Decidedly." "Do you think that has led to the increase of excitement which you have observed ?" " Most certainly." So much for the con. duct of the Roman Catholic c'ergy generally. A parish Priest, by the name of Burke, at Castlepollard, had been the cause of a most extraordinary degree of excitement in Ireland. This man, it appeared, had addressed his flock from the altar—for the altar was a place whence the Priests of Ireland were in the habit of asserting those whom they regarded as enemies, and of denouncing them to the vengeance of their deluded flock--the altar where the people believed their God himself was corporeally pre sent—from that altar this Priest was in the habit of de nouncing to the execration and hostility of his bearers all the Protestant gentry of the neighbourhood, and par ticularly those concerned in the management of the estates of the Noble Duke he now saw in his place. In consequence of that Priest's denunciation the life of the agent of the Noble Duke was threatened ; but providen tially he escaped. It appeared that the language of this Priest was so inflammatory that it was found necessary to report him to the Government. Their Lordships were aware that by a very proper regulation an officer always attended those soldiers who were Roman Catholics to the Roman Catholic chapels. It happened that when stationed at Castlepollard Ensign Mansell attended at the chapel where this Mr. Burke preached, and ad• dressed the people in his usual violent manner, and acted with great impropriety against Ensign Mansell. Mr. Burke was examined before the Committee as to that point, and was asked, " Do you recollect having shown any disrespect in your manner to Ensign Mansell ?" "No ; Ido not." "Do you recollect using in his pre sence on the Sunday he went to your chapel in charge of the soldiers, words to this effect—' Boys, the tottering fabric of the heretics is falling around us, while the Catho lic religion is rising in glory every day. Ireland was once Catholic ; boys, it shall be Catholic again ?' " He an swered, " The word 'Boys' I,did not use ; I said that the Protestant church was falling, whilst the Catholic church was rising in glory, certainly." "On the next Sunday do you recollect addressing the people in these words : • Boys ! I shall want you to attend me here half err hour after duty. Yes, we shall follow it up, and see if . the police of Ireland are to trample upon the people? , He answered, " I believe I did ; but I did not use the word Boys.' "—(Laughter.) But this conduct was not con fined to the priests; it extended to the Roman Catholic hierarchy. It happened, a very few weeks ago, a gentle. man put into , his hand a newspaper, called the Bally mahon Independent, in which a letter appeared addressed to the editor, informing him that the writer had attended yesterday a Catholic place of worship, where Dr. M'Cabe preached, and was most violent in his abuse of the Esta• Wished Church, denouncing it as oppressive to the people and the source of every evil to Ireland. In fact his sermon was a violent tirade against the Church and the Govern• ment, and an appeal t '‘e worst passions of the people, already too much infl• .nd hostile to the law of the country. At the commee ement of the sermon, the mili tary were sent out of the chapel, but the writer asked why the police were suffered to remain. This being an anony mous communication, he told his Hon. Friend that it was quite impossible to make use of it, and that gentleman undertook to ascertain whether the facts;were such as were related by this writer. His Hon. Friend had since put into his hands a letter which he (the Bishop of Exeter) had full permission to use, and he was very ready to put it into the bands of the Noble Secretary of the Home De partment, if that Noble Lord thought it worth attending to. This letter, which was from a highly respectable indi. vidual, stated that " Dr. M'Cabe preached a most violent influence the on that occasion, admirably adapted to the passions of his hearers. He attacked the Church, the Government, the magistracy, and the constabulary; in fact, every thing that tended to the preservation of the peace and good order of society. He if that enjoined union among the Roman Catholics, and promised that, were the case, in three months they would be released from the constables, and have every thing their own way. He rejoiced greatly at the destruction of our Church, and the reduction of our Bishops—(Hear, hear)— who being, he said, appointed by the Government, might, by the Government, be done away, but that over his order Government had no control, because they had a higher appointment than that of man." In order to give full effect to that declaration, it was right to say that Dr. M'Cabe, who so preached, and so excited the people to the destruction of every thing valuable in his country, and especially of that church which it was their Lordships' duty to uphold, would, if this Bill should take effect, be the Bishop of Killala, because our Bishop would cease to bear that name, the bishopric of Killala being one of those bishoprics which were to merge in another see. He took the liberty of addressing himself to those of his Right Rev. Brethren, if any there were, who intended to vote for this Bill, and thereby to sanction its principles, and especially that most important part of it which united certain bishoprics, and forced those who had even pro tested against the Bill to be Bishops whether they would o r not ; he would, he said, ask his Right Rev. Brethren to tell him upon what Christian doctrine or Christian principle it was that such a right of making Bishops ex isted ? My Lords, I deny (said the Right Reverend Prelate) your right to do it: nay, I deny your power.— (Cheers from the Opposition benches.) I deny that there a any human authority whatsoever that can do it. 1 entreat my Right Reverend Brethren to contradict me if I am wrong ; but I deny your power to enforce a man to be a Bishop against his will _.(Laughter from the Ministerial benches, and cheers from the Opposition side.) I am not at all surprised at the mirth of Noble Lords. It is quite natural and quite right that persons should in dulge in a laugh at that which they have treated with so much levity..-..(Loud cheers.) I repeat what I say— (Hee.r, bear)—whether it excites a Irugh or not, you have not the right, my Lords, and you have not the power, to do what you have proposed to do, namely, to enforce the Bishop of A. to be Bishop of B. also, whether he will or not.—(Cheets.) Some years ago a motion was made embodying in a resolution something very similar to wha't was embodied in this Bill, and that rreastre was then de. scribed in the following manntr'.—" If it were meant as a measure of conciliation he (the Speaker, who was a most distinguished Member of the other House) would ask tore Ilotee what single advan'age it was calculated to give to the Catholics of Ireland ? But he beliered that it was an at tack made on the EstablieheA Church in a point where it was supposed to be most vulnerable, under the specious pt•itext of affording relief to Ireland. It was at present only proposed to clip the rylngs of the church, and to exhibit her in a mutilated condi tion to her rival." Was it pnstitte that a description could be more appropriatet.y applied to the present mea• sure ? It wee Wry right that the individual who gave that titecliption of the former motion should also take part upon this. Yes ! it was the same Right Hon. Gentle man who said that he had been the principal stttl'o'r and framer of this Bill, and who claimed tb'e full share of responsibility in bringing forward This Bill. It was be who, in 1824, when that ticsolution was moved, described it as a measure proposed "to clip the wings of the Church ) and exhibit her in a mutilated condition to her tivai." He was very well aware that the Right Hon: Gentleman had since given a different opinion; tut in the conflicting authority afforded by that Right lion. Gen tleman he certainly paid much mote attention to his earlier opinions. He saw in them then the authority of a young man of high pro:hist and of great public and private virtue. Undeabtedly he was now of great public and hrivaro virtue, but at that time his high morality was fresh from those generons streams whence lie derived his acquirements; he had not then bowed his lofty spirit to the level of more ordinary mind! ; he had not then accustomed himself to brook tlie taunts and insults of those whom be now fohnd by bitter experience that no thing he could do, no condescensions to which he could Stoop ) could conciliate or make his friends. Those who engaged in such a course, who sought to convert enemies by concessions into friends, would always 6nd them to be such as the arch agitator of Ireland bad been to his Ma jesty's Ministers. He was their enchanter—he was their Prospero; and whether at one time he assumed towards them the gentle tone of an Ariel, or at other times used the harsh and sullen and grumbling language of a Caliban, yet still they were always sure in the end to become his vic tims. He would endeavour to abridge what he wished to say upon another very important topic, be meant the Com mission, in which they savd things that were perfectly new —en Ecclesiastical Board formed not merely of spiritual but also of lay men. He thought it very probable that the Crown would appoint laymen in those cases where the ap pointments were left to its discretion ; and thus laymen would be intrusted to appoint persons to the cure of souls, an act completely and purely of spiritual jurisdiction. That Bishops should be bound to obey the command of lay com missioners (for if commanded he supposed they would be bound to obey) to appoint some neighbouring clergyman in certain cases to have the cure of souls, was not only without example but contrary to all principle. If their Lordships looked at it in a lower sense, and in a more temporal view, he should submit to them whether there was ever an instance of a perpetual corporation created in which no less than eight out of eleven members were ab solutely removeable at pleasure ?—(Hear.) Was ever such a thing before heard of? But that was a matter of such trifling importance, in comparison with the rest, that he would not waste their Lordships' time by dwelling upon it. —(Hear.) What most surprised him, perhaps, in the whole affair was the quarter from which this Bill hail proceeded : he meant in reference to what bad been said in that quarter in former rirn,s.—(Hear.) Their Lord ships must have borne in mind that during the lengthened discussions on that measure which ended in removing the disabilities under which the Roman Catholics laboured, the advocates of that measure, more especially one of the ablest, most zealous, and most consistent advocates of it—the Noble Earl now at the head of his Majesty's Government —constantly urged as the principal reason for promoting that measure that it must tend to increase Protestantism in Ireland; that it would remove the great weight that now pressed down the spring of Protestantism, and which, as soon „a that was removed, would rise up with a force that it would be impossible for the mere doctrines of Po pery to oppose. At the same time there were divers Noble Lords who repeatedly urged that it was impossible Roman Catholics could look to the destruction of the Protestant Establishment or be hostile to it; at least, if it were possible, still, by removing their complaints, it was the only way of conciliating them as enemies, and, in fact, making them friends; but at all events it was supposed that to adopt that measure it would secure the undivided co-operation of all Protestants in our favour, for no Protestant, if once that measure of relief should be granted, would dare in decency to be the enemy of the Roman Catholics. He held in his hand a printed letter of a Noble Baron, written with great vigour and eloquence, in which the Noble Lord stated that, if that boon, emancipation, were granted to the Catholics, he should certainly give his warmest support to the Established Church in Ireland ; and that as long as there was a prospect of eff: cting a real as well asa nominal union between the Catholics and Protestants of that country, by admitting the Catholics to enjoy the rights of the Con stitution, so long he was ready to maintain the Protestant Irish Church and her enormous revenues. " I call, then, upon the Noble Baron," said the Right Rev. Prelate, "to fulfil that pledge. No doubt he will. He must either show that this Bill does not affect the revenues of the Church, or he must resist its being passed into a law." --(Cheers.) With respect to the amount of that revenue it was very justly said by the Noble Lord who introduced this Bill into the other House that there had been the greatest misconception. It was a fact that the annual in come of the Established Church in Ireland was not 300,000/. Another Noble Lord of great and acknow ledged talent, the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, spoke much of the high honour and probity of the great body of the Roman Catholics, who were, he said, excluded from the privileges of the Constitution, because they conscientiously refused to take the oath then required to be taken before admission to place or Parliament. By the Bill then proposed (this was in 1821) the Roman Catholics were required to swear that they would not use their privileges to disturb or in any way weaken the Protestant Establishment. The Noble and Learned Lord on that occasion said he could not understand what was meant by saying that you believed a man was able to exercise all the duties of life, and yet you would not believe him on his oath ; they were willing to bind them selves by a solemn oath not to use their privileges for the purpose of doing directly or indirectly any thing that should affect the stability of the Protestant Church. The Protestant Establishment in Ireland (continued the Noble and Learned Lord) was indissolubly bound up with the Establishment in England—(Hear, hear)—and neither the Catholics of England nor Ireland, he would take upon himself to say, had any such extravagant notion as that of destroying those Establishments, which could not be ac complished without heaving the British empire to its centre; nor did it enter the imagination of any man to at tempt so impracticable a scheme. The N , ble and Learned Lord continued to say that the Roman Catholics knew that the Protestant established religion in England was, in Ireland, established at the Reformation, confirmed at the Revolution, and perpetually incorporated at the Union ; that it formed part of the fundamental and unalterable— (Hear, hear)—law of the empire. He considered the pos sessions of the Protestant clergy were their absolute pro perty, as certainly and securely as the private possessions of any individual; that he was obliged by the oath he had taken to continue that establishment, and which, so far from considering himself under any obligation to sub vert, he held himself by the most solemn ties bound as a member of society, as a man, a citizen, and a Christian, to resist all attempts to overthrow. H e was not at all surprised that such should be the language of the Noble and Learned Lord, because, warm and ardent as it was, it proceeded from a mind rich in learning, and able to bring forth on all oocasions words that did justice to his own high conceptions. When he looked at the oath taken by the Roman Catholics, he was not surprised that the Noble and Learned Lord, considering them as honest men, should say for them all that he had said. They now spoke as if they thought the interferin g with the Protestant revenue was not interfering with the establishment; and that if they did not introduce a law to interfere with the articles or ritual of the Church they Thad done all that was required by their oath, though it was absolutely impossible that they could he ignorant that that oath was devised and drawn up with the full intention to bind them to behave not only with forbear• once, but with entire kindness towards the Established Church. It was too well known that the obligation of an oath in Ireland was held to be very slight upon the con sciences of the people. The Right Rev. Prelate then adverted to the mischievous power exercised by the Ca tholic clergy over the minds of the people of that country, and referred to the celebrated pastoral letters of Dr. Doyle, in order to show the artful manner in which the passions of the deluded people of Ireland were ex cited and rendered turbulent for the purposes of evil to the country. He then went on to say that these people were wicked, and, further, that their resistance to all-powerful oppression was wicked and vain. It was wicked because it confirmed the power of the oppressor, and vain because no effort of a dis organized rabble could he productive of success, He (the Bishop of Exeter) would not go futthet• with these et tracts, but he v?ould beg to remind their Lordships that this letter *as one in which Dr. Doyle undertook to teach the whole people of Ireland that resistance to the law of tithes was not criminal ; tbat it was, in fact, a penal law ; and that submission to a penal law was all that was required, at id he quoted the authority to justify that opi nion. Sir Hussey Vivian had said, in his testimony be fore the House of Commons, in offering an opinion on the state of Ireland, that he begged to notice the e::tt•aordinary carelessness of human life which aistinguished the charac ter of the people; and that he had endeavoured to find ort froth what means it arose that men who appeared to be so kind in their disposition as the lower classes in Ire land should exhibit so little reluctance to destroy their fellow creatures ; that he had stated this fact to the Roman Catholic clergy, and had expressed his astonishment that they, who had so much influence, did not prevent this; but that neither 'they nor any other persons pretended to account for this. Again, there was the evidence of another person—namely, that of John Burn (as we un derstood), of the city of Cork, a Dissenting Minister, who, having sworn to his evidence, felt it necessary to correct or enlarge upon the testimony which he bad given the day before in respect to the state of Catholicism in Ireland. The evidence of the Dissenting Clergyman to which he had allttded, upon his being recalled to enlarge or correct the evi dence which he had given on a previous day, stated that the view which he had then given was the truth, but not the whole truth, and that he wished to add a few words upon the influence of the Roman Catholic religion. On the subject of school books he had stated that books subversive of the very first principles of morality and religion were known by the Roman Catholic priesthood to be in circulation, though they might prevent that circulation, as they did i❑ a great degree the circulation of the Scriptures, but that they had never attempted to do this ; and he (ale witness) would mention one book particularly, called " The Cord of St. Francis " (as we understood), which contained acts of charity, prescribed certain forme, and referred more particularly to the doctrine of purgatory, which formed so essential a consideration with the lower orders of Roman Catholics, to the belief in which doc trine was to be ascribed the fact that no Roman Catholic entertained any dread of final perdition. He (the witness) had spoken frequently with Roman Catholics upon this subject, and had never found one who supposed he should go to hell. The Right Rev. Prelate then proceeded to detail the remainder of the evidence which related to pur gatory and absolution, and to the belief that future punish ment would be only temporary, to which doctrine was to he attributed the most injurious effects on the feelings of the peop'e. The evidence further stated that to the doc trine of, and belief in, absolution was owing the feeling which went to destroy the fear of future punishment. The witness stated that he found this to be generally the case, and that where persons were condemned by the Courts of Justice they seldom showed any feeling of their situation ; that this arose from the convictionof the efficacy o f absolution; which they believed would do everything ; that he had seen thirty-five individuals sentenced to deatb,and could not per ceive the betrayal of any emotion on their parts. Now he (the Bishop of Exeter) would put it even on no higher grounds than that of human legislation, looking merely to the good of marl in this world, whether it was not the bounden duty of all intrusted with any share in the Legislature to struggle to resist the introduction of such doctrines, and to lessen the authority of such teachers as those which he had quoted. This consideration brought him to the last topic, which was one of a grave nature. It was a duty upon them all to uphold the Protestant religion, and it was especially their bounden duty as Legislators in this Protestant nation to see what obliga tions the Sovereign had undertaken. If unhappily that illustrious individual who would have to decide the point for himself, and who their Lordships were bound to be lieve would decide upon the dictates of his own conscience, should sanction this measure, it was still the duty of their Lordships, as Members of that House, to bear in mind what was their duty in respect to that oath in tendering to his Majesty a Bill for his approbation ; and to abstain entirely from pressing on, or even offering to, the accep tance of his Majesty any measure which they did not think was in full accordance with those great obligations which the Sovereign had undertaken at the coronation. If they thought the tendency of any measure was to shake the security of the Protestant Established Church of this country, they ought above all to maintain the influence of the Protes tant religion. If they thought that any measure which was brought before them could violate that which his Majesty had sworn to maintain inviolate, namely, the present settle ment of the Church in Ireland, with all the doctrines, discipline, and government thereof, he thought no one would say that it was not their Lordships' duty to abstain from voting for this measure. He had no hesitation in saying that this was his own opinion. But if the measure should hereafter receive the Royal assent he should be en tirely convinced that the Royal assent, had been given from the most conscientious feelings. A difference had been drawn as between the legislative power of the Sovereign. Now it would be in the recollection of their Lordships that the Noble Earl considered the question of the coro nation oath as one to be kept quite out of thought in any matter connected with the Royal assent to any Bill passed in that House not affecting his Majesty as sitting in his legislative capacity in the House of Peers, with his legis lative body around him. Now he had hoped the Noble Earl would have stated what these unanswerable reasons were, because, as he had stated them to be unanswerable, he (the Bishop of Exeter) was quite sure the Noble Earl was not afraid of bringing three reasons forward if he knew them to be unanswerable.—(Earl Grey here ex pressed his dissent from this latter statement.) The Bishop of Exeter continued :—He certainly had not caught the qualification to this assertion ; be certainly l'ad understood the Noble Earl to have used the terrii " unanswerab'e ;" but, however, he would say no more upon that subject. Not having, at any rate, these argu ments to support him which be had expected, because the Noble Earl would have the opportunity to reply, be (the Bishop of Exeter) was at a loss to know what arguments to address himself to. It was very true that the Noble Earl on a former occasion had spoken on this subject, and he had referred to the authorities which they ordinarily had for information for what had passed in former Parliaments. The Noble Earl, on the sth of April, 1829, did not attempt to show that the coronation oath should be binding on the King in his legislative capacity with respect to the Church ; but he then stated that there was a proviso in the corenatio❑ oath which gave rise at one time to an opinion that the King was limited i❑ his legislative capacity with respect to the Church, and a Bill was introduced for the purpose of declaring the contrary. But the conclusion to which he (the Bishop of Exeter) came to was very different. It was not supposed that any thing which had occurred would go to impair the legisla tive power of that House, but that was the utmost to which the argument had been applied. The Right Rev. Prelate proceeded, after a few observations, to quote the opinion of Lord Somers upon this point. But still, looking to those authorities, he could not think that the language of such men was to be considered as conclusive in law ; and so far from it, be held that the language of debaters on either side was not to be taken ; and whatever might have been the opinion of the Lower House, it did not go to show the authority of their Lordships' House. But an authority f 0 which the Noble Earl had upon this occasion alluded, was the fact of a letter having been written by Lord Yester, the second Marquis of Tweedale, to his father, dated in April, 1769, stating that the King had himself declared in Council that the sense in which he under stood the coronation oath in respect to his executive capacity was, that it bound him to maintain the Church as by law established, but did not limit him from reserving to the Legislature the power to make what alte rations they might hereafter think fit. Now he (the Bishop of Exeter) wondered that so much importance had been attached to this document; and he would put it to their Lordships whether, if any of their sons chose to give their fathers intelligence of the rumours of the day, they would think such a communication an authority u po❑ a grave question of law ? Would they consider it as the authority of the King in Council because a rumour were picked up perhaps in St. James's-street ? If the communication were made, was it the more credible be cause it had occurred 150 years ago, than it would be if it bad been told only yesterday? And surely ❑one of their Lordships would ascribe much importance at the present time to this document. h considering whether the coronation oath was binding on the Sovereign, it was ne c•essary first to consider whether this Constitution and the laws of the country recognised the distinction, in the person of the King, of a legislative and an executive power, and whether he was or was not bound by the co ronation oath in those separate characters. He held that every notion and intentio❑ of a monarchy implied that the whole Government was in the King; and that by limited monarchy the King should be limited according to the provisions of the State or Constitution over which he should preside. I❑ this country their Lordships knew tout the Government was limited, he might say in every particular, without exception ; that the King, as King, could do nothing without the aid of his advisers in the highest point of duty in legislating for the country. By the advice of his Ministers he acted, while the Parlia ment settled what should be the laws of the land. —(Hear, Lear.) He held that Parliament was sitting there to make laws, as the Privy Council did when they issued Proclamations, and he would say that the authority attaching to all their proceedings, must be held in that light. Therefore, to say that they could separate the character of the Sovereign by placing him in two capa cities, by one of which they bound him while by the other they loosened him, was an argument which could not by possibility hold good. It was a remarkable fact in the history of the Constitution of the country that a detailed account of it was to be found at the early period of King Edward the Confessor, in which reign many of our laws were originated. With Edward the Confessor originated the bot•obation oath, which then stated that it was the duty of the King to fear God and love him above all things, and to defend against all injury the Holy Church ; to grant good laws, and to see that they were properly constituted, but to expunge bad laws; to do right judg ment in kingdom, &c. &c. Thus it was clear that, according to the laws of 'Edward the Confessor, the coronation oath was originated. The King was bound to make good laws. Perhaps some of their Lordships were not aware of the fact that there were statutes of this land recognising the coronation oath as becoming the King in his legislative capacity. The Right Rev. Prelate produced an authority which did not reach us, stating that every Sovereign from Edward the Confessor to Edward the Third was bound to make good laws, and that the way in which the coronation oath was regarded served as a landmark for the Constitution. The first statute applying to this was the 7th of Edward the First, which made a reservation that nothing therein granted should be contrary to this oath. Now could it be doubted that the King recognised himself, and that the law of the land recognised the principle, that it was binding upon the Soy& reign to make goad laws by the coronation oath ? In the statute of the 15th of Edward the Second similar evidence was to be found, wherein it was expressly stated that nothing should be enacted against the coronation oath. Then, in the reign of Edward 111. several statutes were repealed by reason of their being contrary to the corona tion oath. The Right Rev. Prelate then alluded to the Union of Scotland, at which period the Church of Scot. land, apprehensive of the consequences which might arise from a Parliament of Prelates, demanded that a statute should be framed to settle the establishment of the Church of Scotland. They called a commission, the General Assembly of Scotland held a meeting, and sub mitted what their views were, while an Act was drawn up, when this commission sent a second petition to the Government, stating that they should like to arrange 0- e settlement of the coronation oath; and upon this the English Bishops desired to draw up a Bill far the protection of the Church, and they required that the King should take an additional oath to maintain inviolate the settlement of the Church of England and Ireland. He was happy to be able to quote the authority of a Noble and Learned Lord near him (Lord Plunket) on the subject of the co ronation oath, whose opinion was in unison with his own. —(Here Lord Plunket said "No.") He was surprised at the Noble and Learned Lord dissenting from this asser tion.—(The Right Rev. Prelate then referred to an opinion of Lord Kenyon's, which was in effect that the whole system of law was to guard against the introduc tion of Popish influence in any branch as far as regarded the Sovereign, &c.) Lord Plunket, on a former occa sion, in alluding to this opinion, said that it was that of a sound lawyer and an honest man. There might be cases in which the King would not be justified in accepting the advice of his Council in violation of the coronation oath if it were an act to overturn the Protestant hierarchy, &c. This was the opinion of the Noble anti Learned Lord in June, 1828. The Right Rev. Prelate concluded by thank ing their Lordships for the patient attention with which they heard him. Lord STOURTON rose up in that House to give his conscientious support to the Bill. Their Lordships had been told that they were to consider this measure as re pugnant to the principles of Protestantism, and as opposed to the interes's of a Protestant country—that it was intended to weaken, and in reality to destroy, the Pro testant Church. He denied the assertion.—(Hear, hear ) Doubtless the evidence of a Roman Catholic Peer might be regarded with suspicion, but he called on their Lord ships to remember that the Bill came down to their Lordships' House backed by a great majority of what he could, for the first time for many years, call the real re presentatives of the people.—(Loud cheers.) When turning from the Commons of England, be looked to the Bench of Bishops themselves; he found that even they were divided in opinion on the principles of this Bill.— (Hear, hear.) From them he looked to the Protestant population of the country generally, and here, also, he found an overwhelming majority in favour of the rnea sure.--(Hear, hear.) Finding this to be the case, and finding, also, that this plan was recommended to them by those who were the responsible advisers of the head of the Protestant Church, and who had so large a share in the control of its temporalities—how, he asked their Lordships, could he refuse his assent to a measure which, under all the circumstances of the times, he thought would prove highly beneficial and advantageous both to Church and Stare.—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord then pro ceeded to comment on the observations of the Right Rev. Prelate with regard to the Catholic Bishops, and clergy. The Right Rev. Prelate had passed a general censure on the Irish pliesthood, but he had contented himself with referring to the instances of Dr. Doyle and Dr. M'Cabe. Now he would ask were there no other Irish Catholic Bishops? And even if censure could be justly applied to those two individuals, were all the rest to be condemned on their account?—(Hear, hear.) He differed in some respects from the arguments of Dr. Doyle, whom, however, he could not but highly respect. Still he could discard the arguments which he thought objectionable without throwing away his religion, or maligning its priesthood.—(Cheers.) The Right Reve- rend Prelate had most appropriately alluded to the evils resulting from absenteeism. With regard to the system of eduction, however, of which the Right Reverend Prelate so much complained, it was not a little singular that he and many other Noble Lords should have bestowed so much time in opposing a more improved and extended system of education. At least half of the recent debates in that House had been occupied by such opposition. (Hear, hear.) Much was to be said in extenuation for those streng expressions of some Catholic Priests, to which allu,ion had been made. It should be remembered that these persons were the actual witnesses of and sharers in that distress, which had been so forcibly described. It was they who went into the cabin of the peasants, and who saw the miseries to which they were exposed. How could they avoid describing in warm and excited language that which was so powerfully calculated to appeal to their feelings?—(Hear, hear.) He was quite sure, that were the Right Rev. Prelate himself placed in a similar situation, even he might he tempted to indulge in a greater degree of warmth than subsequent reflection would perhaps justify.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord concluded by declar ing his determination to support the Bill. Lord PLUNKET said that he, could not attempt to follow the Right Rev. Prelate through the wide range of argument which lie had taken. The Right Rev. Prelate had certainly introduced into the discussion a vast quantity of matter of a very subduing nature in every sense of the word.—(Hear, and a laugh.) He felt the greatest admi ration of the eloquence which the Right Rev. Prelate had displayed, but nothing about his speech had struck him with so much surprise as the address with which he had drawn away their Lordships' attention from that which was really the question before the House.—(Hear, hear.) During a great part of his able and eloquent speech he had employed himself in discussing the Catholic question. \Vas that the question now in debate ? What had the Right Rev. Prelate to propose upon that subject ? Did he mean to propose that the law which had passed should be repealed ? Would he say that the doors of that assembly should again be closed against the Roman Catholics ? Il not, what object, in Heaven's name, what argument was there in his reference to it ? And why should the Right Rev. Prelate, on rising to address the House for the Church and the truth of God, drag in a topic which could have no other effect—though he would not say that it was in. tended than to excite ill.blood—(Cheers)—and to make it impossible—let the Catholic Relief Bill be in conception ever so wise, or in its natural consequences ever so bene ticial—that it could produce any thing but discord and interminable ?—(Hear, hear.) If, as the Right Rev. Prelate asserted, the cure for the vices inherent in the nature of the Catholic religion, and growing out of the system of Ca6olic education, was only to be found in the ministry 01 Protestant Bishops in Ireland, he could riot help rejoicing exceedingly that there was no pro. bability of the Right Rev. Prelate being sent to that country.—(Cheers and laughter.) The Right Rev. Pre late said that the predictions which bad been made of the ood consequences that would result from Catholic eman cipation had not been verified. Their Lordships would do well to recollect the period at which those predictions were made, and the manner in which the measure of re lief bad been delayed, and thence they might deduce a I. sson of experience. Their Lordships might learn from that example the folly of delaying a measure the efficiency of which depended upon its being willingly and timeously granted, and be hoped that they would bear that circum s..auce in mind in considering the present measure, How had their Lordships de alt with respect to that wise, 3 1 ' and necessary measure—for so he must still contind.l call it—Catholic emancipation? For his own part, should never regret the part he had taken in endeavor to obtain that great measure of national justice.--(1 4 1 Their Lord s hips d e l a y e d th e a d o pti on o f th a t mea sure a quarter of a century after the good sense of the PO of this country had acknowledged its necessity and j O4l l , Even so late A s 1825, if t h e i r L or d s hi ps h a d a d o pted Bill which was then sent up from the House of Comp° how different would h ave b een th e s t a t e o f I re l an d AC , . present moment! They were now tasting the b" fruits of their own tardy justice.—(Hear ) hears) : 1 1 were suffering not for the ac t w hi c h th e y h a d p ass ed', for having delayed to pass it in spite of their convie ll of its necessity, from personal considerations of eA diency and convenience.. Let it not be supposed what he was now saying, that hb fotgot how much country was indebted to the Noble Duke npptisite for conduct respecting that question. He would never fe and be hoped that no person connected with the Cat' cause ever would, the debt of gratitude which they e, to that illustrious individual ; but what he wished tO press upon their Lordships' minds was, that if Cat', emancipation bad been conceded in 1825, instead of ' delayed till 1829, some of the consequences t o w hich Right Rev. Prelate had adverted would never have occu The measure which, yielded in proper time, would I° been received with gratitude as a boon, was unjustly I/ poned, and the parties who were entitled to obtain it 0 driven to the necessity of entering into illegal combinati and keeping up a spirit of agitation, and by this 11 1 , the people of Ireland were placed in a situation in ' every person who chose to take an extrav a gant pat , : politics obtained an ascendancy over them. The comb' Lions and other evils which rendered the coercive mos which Government had lately obtained from Patna' so necessary were the fruit of the postponement of e o _, cipation. For upwards of one hour the Right Reves Pr elate entertained the Hous e w ith di scuss i ng th e ow of Dr. Doyle. What had Dr. Doyle to do with, question ? If he were an angel from heaven, or Lug °° - himself, what bearing, he asked, had his merits or deal% upon the subject under discussion ?—(Hear, hear.) l i 'd Right Reverend Prelate had als o d we lt a t consider/ length upon the sayings of a Dr. M'Cabe, who bad!, t: seemed, made a speech containing a great deal of non which the Rev. Prelate described as calculated to su 1, every feeling of Christian charity, and to excite ill blel Suppose this were all true, what had it to do with question ?—(Hear, heir.) If his eyes would allow and he had no consideration of mercy for their Lordab he could read speeches—he would not mention the now' of the persons who delivered them—..which were to l more foolish, and more wicked than the spe e ches of Doyle or Dr. M'Cabe, if such speech es th e y h a d r ' made, though they had actually proceeded from POI cant divines.—(Cheers and laughter.) Did he say i in disparagement of the Protestant Church or Proten, clergymen ? No person living entertained a more profo7 respect for both. He felt th a t t h e P rotestant clergy 113! .. d land had, on accou n t o f t h e i r present melancholy situatir every claim on the compassion and justice of the Ifol He would never be a party to any measure which 6 , have the eff e ct of d e p r i v i ng t h e c l ergy o f t h e i r j ust r i g il but that was no t t h e c h aracter o f t h e present Bill, .11' any arguments of that nature were therefore thrown aw:j upon the question before the House. It would apn from the statements of the Right Rev. Prelate, and e; Noble Lord who spoke last night, that there was a ca r , spiracy at work in Ireland against the Church. He rt l, lieved there were persons who would be delighted to down the Protestant Chur c h i n th a t coun t r y.—(l7i from the Opposition.) He would ma k e a p resen t of ' declaration to those who cheered him. In his opinio was essential to the safety of the Protestant Church t' i some measure should be speedily adopted for the pur of strengthening it, and making it pr o of aga i ns t the I chinations of its enemies. Last night a N o bl e L or d, P, generally supposed himself to be the representative of Protestants of Ireland in that House, but w h o m he I not then see in his place—(H ea r, f ro m th e gad . ' Roden). He was glad that th e N o bl e L or d kn e w his, ; by his description..—(A laugh.) It was the truth ts t t the Nobl e L or d some ti mes persua d e d hi mse lf th a t all Protestantism of Ireland was centred in his own per I —(A laugh.) The Noble Lord stated last night t, I was a conspiracy existing in Ireland against the Prow g rant Church, and he even went so far as to say that 1 vernment were parties to it.—(TheEarl of Roden, "Di g:,/ The Noble Lord certainly said that it was the intee° i of Government to overthrow the Protestant religion. ~) i The Earl of RODEN—I said chat th e tend e ncy of r" 1 measure was to overthrow the Protestant religion. Lord PLUNKET said he bagged leave to as s ure , Noble Lord of one fact, which was, that the persons 0 were now watching with the deepest anxiety for the hill of the present Bill, were the very persons who were c ....) , ing on the conspiracy against the Protestant COP' There was nothing which could impart so much satis tion to these conspirators, and to persons in Ireland rally, who entertained objections to the Protestant relin, as the failure of this measure, which was brought fortryi for the purpose of giving strength and stability to i i establishment.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Rev. Prelate !, s : not been very candid in stating the purpose of the mese w o e for be had argued as if the Bill proposed to effect onlYlo, object, and that the abolition of vestry cess. Now 1 1.0,' though a very material, was not the only object of theL, He was not disposed to quarrel with the Right Rev. 1 ::d late's statement that the establishment of the Proteil, church in Ir e land, c o ns id e r e d as a w h o l e , w as no t a n rig , l," grown one; but he certainly thought that th ere w as v s ?, portion of the establishment very much overgrown, 4 n another portion he would sa y, f or wan t o f a b etter t very much undergrown. The Bill proposed to take 1 ' some of the members of the establishment a portion their superabundant w ea lth, an d to di v id e it amongs t tg", t ii less fortunate brethren. W ou ld an y one sa y t h a t this lip; not a good object ? W ou ld any one sa y t h a t it was pi calculated to bring the church into greater repute the ° o l at present stood in, if the working clergy were 03 1 effectually provided for?—(Hear.) That was ol d the objects of the Bill which the Right Rev. Pre : k would not allow to go into Committee. Another 0 17 ) di was the building of churches, and another the buildieffg, , glebe houses. The Right Rev. Prelate had entered 11 calculations, to show that no fund could be raised 013 the Bill beyond the sum which was necessary to meet payment of vestry cess ; but he bad no doubt that il t y Bill should go into Committee, it would be found tho b y Right Rev. Prelate was entirely mistaken. The 14° 01 and Learned Lord h ere entere d i nto an expos i t i o n of mistake of 200,0001. comm i tte d b y t h e Ri g h t R e veres Prelate; but here, a n d i n many o f th e subsequent fiS . of his speech, wh , re his Lordship turned from the T 1 lery, he was quite inaudible. These were specieueo J I I the absence of consideration which the Right Rev. Pre l :4 q had brought to this discussion. He said that the vrii cess was not considered by the Irish as an evil ; but „et (Lord Plunket) spoke in the presence of Noble 10 acquainted with the state of Ireland, on both aides of A , House, and he appealed to them whether the vest/ rd, was not considered a grievance of the utmost enort, and felt as such by the poorer classes—from its I r ,t nature it was calculated to be so.—(Hear, hear.) i wretched being unable to provide for the sustenane e idi his family, to be taxed for the service of a church ' W of 1 which lie had no connexion, and for which, as 0 1 Right Rev. Prelate contended, he entertained a n babi S i i. dislike?—(Hear.) He' (Lord Plunket) wanted DO e 4F I deuce further, and he asked those Noble Lords who 1 50 attached to the Prote s t an t i n t erest i n I re l an d , and li d I wished to strengthen that interest, to remove 000 1 those burdens of which agitators seek to avail th .. ,0 selves in their attempts to overturn the Protestant C 1 31 , 01 of Ireland. It was a ser i ous gr i evance , an d o n !,,i account alone they wanted this soothing and salt? measure to protect the interests of that Church. : 41 0 the Right Rev. Prelate contended that this measure 0 defective (as we understood) in respect to the rerie fund ; and on what ground ? The Right Rev. rt e '" j had gone back to some distance into the history of the ;01 fruits; but there could be no doubt that in the ti ll 3, of Henry VIII. first fruits were paid by the clergy o h , r every living that became vacant in Ireland. It so_ . e pened that in the books no livings were taken doW O O liable to the tax, except such as were rated above a ce f , d oi amount at that time; and questions a ft erwa rds 0 r " whether livings which bad increas e d i n va l ue should-9f, His (Lord Plunket's) opinion bad been taken ° : 0 0P Attorney-General, and he was of opinion th a t they e' 1 4 .,il not. He had given that opinion under his hand, e s/ (110 was now on their Lordships' table. His colleaglit.,, Solicitor-General) differed from him. His (Lord r ,10 ket's) opinion consisted of two parts—one was, ths t off officers collecting the first fruits were not entitled le 0 them, in the present circumstances; and Mr. PP se S eicitor-General, agreed with him on that poie, 6 o: oo, differed on the second; for he thought that the id t er cauld issue a commission of revaluation. Since D A time other law officers of the Crown had been colle ls of and they concurred with him (Lord Plunket) 0.0 the Crown could not make a reva l ua ti o n. But the re ; no doubt, that if they were now v a lu e d, niall.d , 0f livings would be liable to the first fruits. Re " l ye:, think that this could b e ca ll e d spoliation. Their 0 P,, ships bad been ,told, an d by none more strongly t o e', Ll,ght Rev. Prelat e , o f th e d angers i n which the out, ,1 Ireland was pl ace d, an ti it h a d been thrown ou t , di chage against the Government, that it was boodle If the l ' , ntr actea Qath diverted to 'rpm r4 , sory dies °lth"'e w ould W hO in th e ( tare Protette tw ee 44 a soh xi ri th e ~ N act, lik e "E ro e a With th e c t e(1 Wheti e ktt ?etv reen ttl which Looaer e i k le oL i e thi, ti( 41()-g thighs illisate desi: ,(" °tv Cooki! 11 1 t he oath R . i 4l su, i'lt)Yettl nte e