The Sun. — London, England, 1833-07-20 00:00:00

ions to their Lordships. He would advert very shortly to the proposal for reducing the number of the Bishop , . It was said that bishoprics had been frequently united and frequently disjoined ; and that where the sees were inconsiderable they might b e very proper l y un i te d to ' getber. He was not inclined to contest any of those pct.!. sitions ; but one circumstance was left out of considerai tion, which was this, that in former times the union oi bishoprics was from the necessity of the thing, because the revenue of one bishopric was insufficient to maintain the Bishop ; therefore they were united, and the right still existed to grant sees in commendam. They were united for the mere purposes of property ; but their Lordships could not raise upon so small a basis such a. sweeping measure as the one now before them, more tispe , dally in a country where the Bishops tvere the principal residents, and who, living tinder those moral restraints which persons so high in the Church must always observe, could not fail robe most useful in their several districts. But what was to him of still greater importance upon this part of the plan was that the Roman Catholic Establishment was altogether left un. touched. It must be so, because their Lordships had no right to interfere with it. Indeed he should oppose more strenuously any interference with that establishment that, with the Protestant one, as connected with the Legislature. Still, he would ask, was it good policy for those who wished to support the Protestant religion to take away ten of its Bishops at once, while the ground was opened to a Roman Catholic Prelate, who might in all proba bility not only take the see, bat live in the Bishop's palace? But there was another point, namely, ti:e ap pointment of Bishops by Parliament. This was highly objectionable, and he knew it was most strongly felt as a ground of serious apprehension by the clergy of Ireland. It was on that ground that he should object to this part of the measure, and he trusted, if it should reach the Com mittee, that that clause would at least be altered so as to meet the feelings of the clergy of Ireland. He thought it would be very unwise to offend that body of 'men, already so touch excited, in a matter so easily remedied, by re turning the right of appointment to the Crown, to whom it properly belonged, or to adopt some other un exceptionable mode of exercising it. With respect to the hardship on those Bishops who would have addi tional labour imposed upon them, he did not lay much stress, though he thought some provision should be made so relieve such of them as might be advanced in years, especially when he might very conscientiously be un to subject himself to the addition I charge, upon the ground that it was a species of plurality. If any pecu niary interest were attached to these unions of the bishoprics what an noway would he raised against them It was observed last night that the Bishop was mem penned for any loss of revenue he might sustain by an in .crease of his patronage. Patronage appeared to hint to be soo highly estimated; if it was on any account a desirable thing it was that it might enable the possessor to sewers merit, and assist the deserving. Its value in other re sin's:nit he could not speak of from his own experience; and even that pleasure was not without a drawback, for, while he was rewarding one deserving men, he knee.. that ten equally de:serving men were left destitute of all re ward. With respect to the tux on ti e clergy, he would admit that to a moderate tax he had no objec ion, p:ovided it was raised for purposes exclusively connected with the Church. The Church in both countries wanted many thing , . They wanted the power of providing education lire their Ministers; and be hoped th.tt funds wpuld be 'provided to support with efficiency the College in the county of Durham, a part of the country where such en establishment was much required. But as far as his Mower went he woub l resist the appli ca ti on o f even a angle sixpence to any object not promotive of the welfare of the Church. He wished to advert again fur a mo ment to the Board of Commissioners to be appointed under this Bill. He did not distrust any of those who were to he members of that Commission by virtue of their offices, ctor of the Bishops : but his fears were that many occasions arise for the necessary absence of those distinguished persons; and he had always bound in those who constantly managed any society or instilu ion a dispos ition to get the entire direction of it into their own hands. It was to those persons he. looked with suspicion ; it was the paid Commissioners for whom he 'confessed be could not help ureeling a degree of distrust, They would no doubt bet very respectuble persOns, such, for instance, as the Commis -sioneri of strops or customs, among whom he had had many friends; but that they would be qualified to conduct the affairs of the Church was a thing very much to be rlonbted ; while no doubt whatever could exist that they would be the persons who wouli obtain a control over the ruttier members of the Commission—a control, he meant, 'not by undue influence on the minds of those eminent in dividuals, but from the almost inevitable circumstance of their frequent absence from the Board. He (bought, however, that this evil might easily be provided ugaint, by directing in this Bill that no business which concerned ?he discipline or immediate interests of the Church should lie transacted except at stated periods, when it should be requisite that three Bishops, or two Bishops and the Arch- Eishop or the Primate, should be present. That, in his opinion, would he a very proper caution to be adopted ; for, though it had been said that the three additional Commissioners might be clergymen, still, except they were necessanily clergymen, it was right to assume that they would be laymen. But what he objected to was the eaiNtence of the Commission altogether, in reference to ea:: management of the affairs of the Church. He did not think that any remedial results would follow the ap pointment of this Commission. But, not to detain their Lordships any longer, he objected to the Bill because re form was only a subordinate principle in it ; its real kin iniple was conciliation, which, in his opinion; would come to nothing ; he objected to it because it was a viol .tion of some of the right's which were still held sacred with respect `to public property; he objected to it because it would give the Roman Catholics (of whom he wished not to speak in the spirit of unkindness) a temporaty triumph over the Protestants, and would be a source of provocation on the minas of the Protestants, which would not tend to pro• duce harmony between those two classes which it was the professed object of this Bill to effect; and be also objected to it because it was the most sweeping measure that ever entered into the contemplation of any Government since the days of the Reformation. It would operate as a total• revolution in church property ; the ancient posse•sots of its lands would be despoiled, and it would be transferred to strangers Add to all this, there was not a stuo word hi the whole Bill to prove that this was a special case of necessity ; there was not a single expression in it to guard against the application of the same principle to every cur poration in the kingdom.--(Cheers.) The Duke of WELLINGTON would trouble their LOrdships with a few observations, in order to state to them the course which he meant to take upon this im portant occasion ; and he would have gladly confined himself to the statement of that course, and in the spirit of the advice which was given by the Most Rev. Prelate, and have avoided any thing like an angry discussion, if the Noble Earl opposite, in his observations, upon what be (the Duke of Wellington) had stated on a former occasion in presenting a petition to the House, had not done so with more than his usual asperity, and had not referred to topics which made it necessary that heshould say a few words, and more particularly had not endeavoured to throw upon the Government which hninediately preceded that of which he was so deservedly the head, the blame of having caused all the difficulties which now existed. It was itn possible for hint to hear those charges, however desirous he might be of atrending to the recommendation of the Most Reverend Prelate, without making some reply to them, and without stating some observations with re• spect to the causes which led to the Bill now before their Lordships. The Noble Earl thought that lie (the Duke of Wellington) on a former occasion referred to the measure of Parliamentary Reform as a measure of reproach to the Noble Earl. He would solemnly declare that since that All had passed lie had never made the slightest reference to it. He considered it his duty, now that it was the law of the land, not only to submit to it, but to endeavour to carry its provisions into execu tion by every means in his power. The Noble Earl re garded Parliamentary Reform as the means to accomplish certain ends, and only as the means. This he would say, that if the people of this country were delighted with the Rs formed Parliament, lie had no objection to their enjoy ing it. But it was, nevertheless, the duty of all those who r commended any measure to Parliament, whether in or out of office, to remember that the British constitution was framed not only for the protection of the life and liberty of the subject, but likewise for the protection of his property —(Hear)—and that property was not protected by attend ing to the representations of one party one day to do away with the great interests of a large portion of the people, and to attend to the suggestions of another party on another day to do away with the revenues of the Church, and ulti mately to destroy the constitution of the country. The Noble Earl had also thotight proper to make accusations a : :ainst hies respecting the foreign policy he had advocated, and had charged him with a desire to set np another Holy Alliance in conjunction with the despots of Europe. Earl GREY did not accuse the Noble Duke of wishing to set up such a course of policy. What he said was, that there was but one of two courses of policy to pursue, either that of coercion, by putting a atop to all reform, or that of adopting those salutary measures which the spirit of the times required ; and he added, that if they acted upon the former system it was likely to lead in its consequences to the formation of something like another Holy Alliance. The Mike of WELLINGTON upon that subject would t, only remark that be had not on the occasion alluded to' etuee use of scarcely a single observation. What he stated was this, that tee policy pursued by the present Govern 'meta, from the moment they came into office, had been the cause of their being in the situation in which they now were, and that this measure was the earnest of that line of policy which the Noble Earl adopted when he first introduced the measure of reform. The Noble and Learned Lord who spoke last night sta.ed that this mea sure was occasioned in consequence of the delay after 1825, in granting Catholic emancipation. But he begged to ask that Nebte and Learned Lord how long the spirit of agitation had existed in Ireland ? It had existed est, r wince the discussion of the Roman Catholic question—that was to say, ever since the day of the restricted Regency. From that period to this moment there had been nothing but agitation in Ireland, except in 1829. Agitation re commenced in 1330, upon the occasion of the events in Paris and at Brussels, and which placed the Government of that day under the necessity of carrying into execution the Proclamation Act by the Noble Duke (Northum berland), whom he did not see In his piece. Upon the change of Government, the INoble Earl sent out a Noble man, for whom he (thc Duke of Wellington) enter tained great respect, but who certainly was the very last meson who ought to have been selected on that oc casion. What was it that the Government ) aimr the passing of the Roman Cathclic Relief Bill, ought to have done? The Roman Catholics were conciliated by that measure. The Government ought then to have con ciliated whom? Why the Protestants.—(Cheers.) But instead of that they soot the Noble Lord over to that country ) who immediately lie arrived there issued a sort of proclamation, urging that agitation should be continued for the purpose of obtaining political reform, as they had by agitation obtained religious relief. This agitation was founded upon a conspiracy of priests and demagogues to obtain a purpose by force and menace, whether justifiable or not was not the question; but it was force, and me nace, and tame, and the use of mobs wherever that terror and those mobs could be used to produce effect by his Majesty's Government. This was done by seditious speeches at public meetin g s, by publications by the libel lous part of the Pre-s, by exaggerations, by flattery, by all the means it was in the power of that description of persons to use in order to excite the multitude. They' were excited, and assembled in large bodses to terrify the people. If any parson ventured to oppose these dema gogues he was either immediately murdered or his house was destroyed, and he and his family ruined. Combina tions were then formed, and every effort was made to de stroy the Constitution itself. This was what occurred, and it was this system of agitation which the Noble Lord at the head of the Government in Ireland recommended to be adopted, that Noble Lord being chosen by the Noble Earl opposite. Then came the refusal to poy tithes. Combinations were funned to resist their payment, funds were subscribed, distresses were levied, and then terror was used to (1, ter persons from becoming purchasers, and many of the Protestant clergy were reduced to poverty and wretchedness, and compelled to exist upon charity. Now while these things were going on, the Lord Lieute nant of Irel and certainly did mere than any man to ex cite that spirit of combination against tithes. The understanding was that tithes were not to he enforced. Many people were tried and sentenced, and many fines of 1001. were imposed upon jurymen (as we understood the Noble Duke) who refused to serve, but absolutely nothing was done. The police did what they could ; no mea sures, however, were adopted, except that the Lord Lieu tenant had the manliness to carry into execution the Proclamation •Aet, an Act which, in his individual capacity, he had expressed his disapprobation of. Now the Lord Lieutenant was eminently successful, hut the Noble Lords who formed his Majesty's Cabinet advised their Sovereign to dissolve the Parliament, and, conse speedy, the punishment of off-nders was not carried into execution; and then what happened? Why, not only did the Noble Lords when Parliement assembled bring in an Act empowering the Lord Lieutenant to adopt the only measure to put a stop to these combinations against the payment of tithes, but they came down to that House, and brought down his Majesty also, to, open the Parlia ment, and dictated on the first day of the session in June, 1831, as part of the speech from the Throne upon the state of Ireland, the language which he was about to read to their Lordships :—" Local disturbances unconnected with any political causes have taken place both in this part of the United Kingdom and in Ireland. In the county of Clare, and in the adjoining parts of Ros common and Galway, a system of violence and out rage has for some time been carried on to an alarm ing extent, for the repression of which the consti tuted authorities of the law have been rigorously and successfully exerted. By these means the necessity of enacting new laws to strengthen the executive Government with further powers will, I trust, be prevented. To avert such a necessity has been, and ever will be, my most earnest desire; but if.it should unfortunately arise, I do not doubt your firm resolution to maintain the peace and order of society by the adoption of such measures as may be required for their more effectual protection." Now ti:eir Lordships would observe that at that very time, in June, 1831, the affair at Wexford happened under Capt. Graham, and if they would only refer to the Appendix to the Report of the Committee of the Home on the subject of tithes, they would there find the correspondence on which that speech was founded ; they would there see the state of the country to which that speech ought to have referred ; they would there see that the country was then in a complete state of disorganization ; that property in tithes no longer existed. And that being the state of the Protestant religion in Ireland, that was the speech which his Majesty's Ministers had put into his Majesty's mouth. Then his Mijesty addressed the 1-I,,use, in December, 1831, in the following terms:—" In parts of Ireland a systematic opposition has been made to the payment of tithes.' This, it was to be observed, was one year after the opposition to the payment of tithes had com- meneed, end yet the Ministers put into the mouth of his Majesty these words, in December, 1831 :—" In some parts of Ireland a systematic opposition has been made to the payment of tithes, attended in some instances with afflicting results; and it will be one of your first duties to inquire whether it may not be possible to effect improvements in the laws respecting this subject which may afford the necessary protection to the Established Church, and at the same time remove the present causes of complaint." Now it was upon that occasion the Tithe Committees were pro posed, and from that moment, it appeared in evidence, the collection of tithes ceased in Ireland altogether in fact ; and the Noble Lord having no plan to propose, the Com mittees were to fish cut evidence, they were to find out a plan to alter the existing system. But from that time until a few weeks after list Easter, when what was called the Irish Coercion Bill was passed, no tithes hid been collected in Ireland except a few thousand pounds which were collected by the Government. In the course then of this Session, as their Lordships were aware, the Co ercion Bill was passed, and the effect of it was, that for a certain time the clergy diri collect their tithes, and in point of fact some of the tithes for 1633 had been col• lected under the operation of that Act. That description of property at this moment no longer existed ; in fact no one thought of paying tithes. Frum three to four years tithes were now due, and there was not the smallest chance of any part of these arrears being collected. Now the notice of the Solicitor to the Treasury in Ireland, was to this effect :—.‘ That no proceedings will be had at the approaching Quarter Sessions against persons owing tithes for 1831, due to his Majesty, agreeably to the Act 23 William IV." From the day that notice had app-tired, no tithes had been collected. Now he begged to ask whether, when the Duke of Northum berland was in Ireland, this property was not secure under his Lord Lieutenancy ? Ile aske l whether it was fair and just to throw upon the predecessors of the pre sent Government all the blame of these subsequent trans actions, or whether they were not fairly bound to take it upon themselves; or whether the policy of his Majesty's late Government was not the best calculated to protect the Protestant religion, a duty which the Noble Earl admitted to be the paramount duty of the King's Govern ment? He thought he had said enough to show that at the present moment the parochial clergy had in fact no property; and to prove that the more strongly, he begged to refer their Lordships to the statement which bad been made by the Right Rev. Prelate on the lower bench a short time ago, the force of which he would not weaken by dwelling up,,in it. He had said fairly, however, that the clergy were totally ruined ; he had told their Lord ships that at the present moment they were the objects of the charity of the Government; that his Majesty's ser vants hail given notice of their intention to propose a measure to Parliament to pay their salaries for the last three years, but that measure had never yet been pro duced, and therefore these men were at the present mo ment absolutely at the mercy of the Government. Then let their Lordships look at another branch of the Pro testant clergy, he meant that branch who were partly de pendent upon the revenue called church cess. The church cess, it was true, was always obtained with extreme diffr culty ; there was a greater facility in opposing the levying of the church cess than in the case of tithes. The Noble Duke made some further observations upon the nature of church cess, the mode of appeal, &c., which did not reach us. The provision fur the services of the Church arising from this source now no longer existed, any more than that of tithes existed for the payment of the salaries of the Ministers. Then there] was nothing for repairing the fences of the churchyard, paying the salaries of clerks anti other persons, and for many articles which were essen tially necessary for the performance of the service. But there was another class of persons attached to the service of the Church in Ireland, namely, the Bishops ; and he begged to state that these Bishops, who formed the hierarchy of the Church of Ireland, were understood generally to have amongst them a revenue of '150,000/. ; and it appeared that two-thirds of that amount, say 100,0007. a y e ar ; were paid to them in fines, and those fines were paid annually for the renewal of leases by the tenants. Under the law of the last Session the Bishops were under the necessity of insisting upon receiving from their tenants the fines on those lands which they as tenants held by lease under the Bishoph. The tenants, however, in anticipation of this measure, refused to renew the leases; they refused to pty their fines to the . Bishops, who ivere thus deprived of two-thirds of their ineofnes, and of their means of subsistence. Then, as to curates, nothing was left for the sus tentation of the in come, and and the Bi s hop s were d epr i ve d o f their and nothing was left to them but the rent of their lands, which, upon the gross of all their incomes, amounted to 50,0001. This, then, was the state of the Church in Ireland at this moment, and these were the means left for the performance of the whole duties, for the maintenanc e of the churches of the Protestant religion in that country. Now a Noble Marquis, who bad spoken two nights ago, had talked of the magnificent revenues of the Church, and of the 1,000,000 acres of the church lands. But the Bishops had now nothing hut the rents which they derived from their tenants, and the rent received last year was not more than 50,0001. for their 1,000,000 acres. But that which induced him not to oppose the committal of this Bill im possibl e that that it appe are d t o hi m to b e a bsolutely that the Church of England established in Ireland could continue to exist f o r a s i ng l e d a y if some measure of thi s description wer e n o t p as s e d t o re li eve it from the unfortu nate situation in which it was pl a ced. It was impossibl e to carry on its duti e s unl ess some m easure of relief w as adopted by Parliam e nt ; an d on th e 19 t h July, when th ey were called upon to effect this measure, the Noble Duke said he would stand upon principle, and he had said, " Do not allow the property of the church to be touched on any account whatsoever; maintain your principle firmly, and with honour. And what then must happen ? Why, the church of Ireland must be destroyed, it is true ; but we shall have the honour of having maintained our principle !" If the world were governed by principle alone nothitig would be co easy as for a man to conduct the greatest possible affairs. But in all affairs it was the custom of most men to choose the lesser of two contending d , fficulties; and in this case he would say that the lesser of these two contending or conflicting difficulties was to go into Committee upon this Bill, and to see what mea sures could be devised to give relief to this church. One Noble Lord said, " Reject the Bill, and let those persons who brought it in be respoesible." Their Lordships were now on the 19th of July called upon to entertain this measue, and it was absolutely impossible to delay it, so urgent was the matter; something must he done im mediately to give relief, and if this were not done the church must go.--(n•ar. ) The Right Rev. Prelate who bad spoken with so much ability last night had urged upon their Lordships' 'consideration the different measures which might be adopted in order to give relief to the Church of Ireland ; and a Right Rev. Prelate, whose authority was not to be deub•ed, hid likewise stated some measure which might be adopted. Now he (the Duke of Wellington) would not dispute that it might he very proper that the cess should be thrown upon the proprietor of the land rather than the occupier; but lie would beg to remind those Right Rev. Prelates, that that teas as much contrary to principle as it was to call upon the clergy to remit a certain part of their property. But he wanted to know why they were to call upon the owners of land to pay that for which they snade an allowance to the occu piers.—(After some observations which did not reach us, the Noel Duke proceeded.) He therefore entreated their Lordships to believe that they could stand upon no prin ciple in this case except that of the destruction of the Church, and it was their Lordships' duty to protect the Church, and to allow the Bill to to into Committee. He now came to some of th e d eta il s o f t h e measure. He must say he could not see the principle of levying a tax in lieu of the church eess in order to enable the Pro testant clergy to perform divine service. He objected, also, to the formation of the Commission under this Act. He confessed be bad not yet heard from any one Peer who had spoken upon this subject, excepting from the Noble Marquis opposite, who had said a few words against it, anything urged against the Board of First Fruits. He roust likewise confess that be objected to the diminu tion of the number of bishoprics in Ireland, and he could not concur in the argument upon which that diminution was founded and justified by tl,e Noble Earl. This with drawal of a number of the Bishops &ion Ireland could not be done without a proportional withdrawal from the Pro testant religious establishments in Ireland that protection arid countenance which it had throughout enjoyed from the Government and from the Parliament; and he would say that that circumstance alone was sufficient to induce them to make every effiirt to maintain the same number of Bishops. There was another consideration which had been most ably stated by a Right Rev. Prelate and a Most Rev. Prelate, and that was, that wh er e ver a Protestant Bishop should be withdrawn there a Roman Catholic Bishop would be left ; and moreover, that that Roman Catholic Bishop would remain in the enj o y men t p er haps of the domain, and not only of the d oma i n , b u t ev en o f th e furniture pro • bably, of the Protestant Bishop who would have been ptr. down. Again, it was not a fair mode of calculating the duties of these Bishops to sly that so much expense was incurred to so many benefices in comparison with the du ties of the Bishops in England. It was probably true, and indeed he believed it was true, that the Irish Bishop, with thirty, forty, or perhaps fifty benefices within hit diacese, had more trouble and mote anxiety than any Bishop in England had with 600, or even 1,000, benefices to superintend. But there was another circumstance which was well worthy of attention in discussing this subject, and that was, that whereas the English Bishops derived great assistance from the archdeacons and deacons, in the Church of Ire and the Bishops had no such assistance. The other part of the Bill to *hie) he cer tainly ha I strong objections, was that which prevented the building of churches in those parishes where divine service should not have been performed in a period of three years; and their Lordships would observe that that was a pro vision which was wholly inapplicable to Ireland, where, from scenes of violence, or (ruin any particular opposition to the attempt, clergymen were prevented perhaps from proceeding. in the performance of their duties. That clause was in direct contradiction to all previous provisions of the Parliament on that subject. The old previsions of former Acts, on the contrary, went to give assistance to the build. ing of churches in those parishes where divine service had nut been performed for twenty years. He happened to have in his hand a statement of the number of churches which had been built in Ireland under former Acts of Parliament, and he must beg LI- eir Lordships' attention, whilst he stated what would be the consequences of the measure then brought before them, and what would have been the consequences if former Parliaments had pursued a course in accordance to the principles of this measure. Previous to 1805 the principle was to grant money for building churches in parishes where divine service had not been performed for 20 years ; and the substance of a paper from the Board of First Fruits proved that, previous to 1805, 202 churches and 41 glebe-houses bad been built; that from 1808 to 1826 there were built 562 churches and 537 glebe-houses. Now, supposing that the Parliaments of 30 years past had acted upon the principle of this Bill, and had said, " You shall give no money to build churches in any parishes in which divine service shell not have been performed for three years," the con sequence would have been that out of 1,199 churches now inlreland they would have had to take away 6 39,being more than one-half the number which now existed. Now lie w everytt h b e o u p g r l o lt atsee i s t t at m no u t d s o t be admitted religion, everything w h h iehi nt he e a it theirt i n powerb their is conscience to promote o duty i be lievedn to be the best and most pure system. to say Noble t l l e ia Duke ut the e The Bishop of EXETER explained. The had misunderstood him. He never meant charge should be laid upon the landlord. Lord MELBOURNE said, considering the very severe attack which had been made on his Majesty's Ministers, their Lordships would not be surpris e d at hi s immediately ' rising to reply to it. The Noble D u k e h ad adverted, in terms of commendation, to that part of the speech of the Right Rev. Prelate (the Bishop of Exeter) which re commended an abstinence from all party politics w hil s t discussing this Bill—an absence from all crimination and recrimination—but it appeared to him the Noble Duke had only done so for the purpose of showing how far he could Hear.) himself depart from his own advi ce .-- -( In stead of a calmness suited to the importance of the sub ject, their Lordships had been compelled to listen to a i speech of the most bitter invective—a speech abounding in personalities—a speech full of attempts at critnination— and one wholly anti solely calculated to rip up all ancient he had hoped, buried animosities, a n d re -i ntro. and, as duce every topic which, for the last two or teree years, had agitated and inflamed the public mind.-...(ch eers. ) Such was the Noble Duke's idea of th e ca l mness and temper recommended by the Right Rev. Prelate, and which it was the duty of their Lordships, ou a ll Occas i ons, and throu g h o ut all their proceedings, rigorously to ob serve. The Noble Duke had taunted his Majesty's Mi nisters, on the ground that changes did not end with the passing of the Reform Bill. Why, what mattered such changes as these ? The Noble Duke must well recollect if he chose to do so, that on the second reacting of the Reform Bill, he (Lord Melbourne) had distinctly stated, that if that Bill ever passed, it roust and would necessarily leol to other great and very important changes.—(Loud cheers.) there was no deceit then—there was no ground for taunt now. He had distinctly stated the ulterior con sequences of that great measure—consequences, forsooth, which every man must have seen that chose, or strove to see at all.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Duke went through a variety of matters, drawing from them all most sweeping censures on the Govern ment, although he himself admitted, that in every one of them some step or other would have to be taken—some alteration or ether to be effected. The Noble Duke had also chosen wholly to misinterpret what had fallen from his Noble Friend (Earl Grey), in proposing the second reading of this Bill, for their Lordships would all recollect, that his Noble Friend did not attribute the many evils of our system to the government of the Noble Duke, hut to, that series of Governments to all of which his Noble Friend It td, throughout his life-time, been opposed. But, said the Noble Duke, they had not introduced one mea- sure but what tended to produce that disorganized state of society which all good men lamented so much. Their very first act, on entering office, had been stigmatized as b ; for, according to the Noble Duke, they had appointed as Viceroy of Ireland an individual the most unfit of any man that could be found in the whole kingdom. If the Noble Duke had rested there, he should have gone no fur ther either, but merely denied the truth of the observation, thus throwing assertion against assertion. But the Noble . Duke had gone on to state that the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland had written a letter recommending agitation, and' described that letter as laying the foundation of a con spiracy between the priests and the people, which acted by a tax on property—by murder—and by everything that would degrade and disturb society. Now he (Lord Mel bourne) must say this was not fair—it was not generous— no, nor was it just.—(Cheers from the Ministerial, echoed from the Opposition benches:) The Duke of WELLINGTON said something in a low tone across the table, which was inaudible in the gallery. Lord MELBOURNE proceeded—Then the Noble Duke disconnected the Marquis of Anglesea from the agitation, as far as intention went. The Duke of WELLINGTON again said something in a very low tone. Lord MELBOURNE resumed—Why,the letter alluded to was imprudent, he freely admitted.—(Cheers.) It was not such as he himself would have written, or as be would have advised another to write. But had the Noble Duke never written an imprudent letter ?—(Vehement cheer ing.) Was there no letter contemporaneous with this unfortunate one ?—(Cheers.) One, too, not the roost wise or most prudent that any man could wr ite, especially . . if that man happened to be Prime Minister of England._ (Continued cheers.) If that letter then were not the most wise that ever Prime Minister wrote, surely it was some ground for expecting a little consideration towards ti,e errors of others.—(Herr, hear.) As to the Noble Duke's remarks about the tithe disturbances, he should only say, that if the Government, of which he was a Member, bad been unsuccessful, even by a vigorous application of the law in putting them down, he did not believe that the power of the law would, under the circumstances, have been effectual had it been wielded by other hands. For the recovery of tithes there was still a legal remedy, nor was there any difference as to the right to them. It had been asserted by a noble individual that this Bill was an entire departure from that system of policy in respect to the Irish Church which had been pursued by this c,iuntry from the revolution to the present time. What, how ever, was the system previous to the reformation but extirpation and extermination ?—(Hear, hear.) To ex terminate the Catholics, to extirpate their religion, and establish the Protestant Church was the policy of Ed• ward the Sixth, of James the First, of Strafford. At the Revolution this policy was changed and penal laws were enacted. These two systems, however, produced precisely the same effects—by strengthening and increasing the proscribed religion. Such policy brought over the higher orders to the dominant religion, but left the lower orders to nourish in secret the love of their own and tile hatred of a persecuting and foreign church. In 1759 the exist ence of the Catholics was first acknowledged by an address received in Dublin from that body. Thence they had power of mortgage—from that the power of taking leases and then of holding freehold property. Then it was that the penal laws were really abolished. From that moment followed all those measures which necessarily led to those which the present Government were solicitous of putting in force. They must recollect that Ireland was in a most peculiar situation—that her condition was without a parallel—that she had an established religion different from that of the great majority of her population, and they must legislate accordingly. As to the suspension, he wished to say one word. The Noble Duke argued as if it would be imperative on Commissioners to close up any church where divine worship had not been performed for three years. Now he begged to state, that by the Bill they were expressly empowered to exercise a discretion— to consider the reason and causes for the non-performance of the ri.ual—and to act accordingly.—( Hear, hear.) He would not longer detain their Lordships on a subject so exhausted. lie thought the Bill well calculated to meet the object they had in view, and be therefore entreated their Lordships to consent to that which was for the good of the Church, and the safety, repose, and well-being of the whole kingdom. The Earl of LONGFORD had heard no arguments sufficiently strong to induce him to consent to the second reading of the Bill. Among the reasons urged for their Lordships' adopting it, was one that it hid been sent up from the other House by so large a majority. But, he asked, while they paid respect to a majority, was there nothing due to the opinion of a minority which, without the least disrespect, was in its composition quite as influ ential as the numerical strength which overpowered it? Another reason urged was, that if they rejected the Bill the expectations of the people would be disappointed, and a clamour he caused. But he would ask who raised those expectations? Those who brought in the Reform Bill, as they called it—the revolutionary measure, as it appeared to him, a measure concocted in madness, forwarded in manoeuvre, arid concluded in mischief—this was the grand origin of all the clamour now .made; but the clamour would soon end, if the Lords showed themselves deter mined upon an inflexible perseverance in the execution of their duty. It was said that t, eir Lordships' House would be in danger if it did not give way to the desires of the people; but he believed that the danger would consist is yielding to their wild caprices, and administering to their passions. As to this Bill, in bringing it forward, Ministers had set loose a political spring which they had not perception to understand the force of, nor mental power enough to control. Much stress had been laid upon the al leged nece-city for giving this conciliatory measure, in order to counterbalance the effects of the Coercion Bill, as they called it. He saw no such necessity ; for, in point of fact, the Coercion Bill was no Coercion Bill ; it was a Bill intended to put an end to the most appalling description of outrage, and violation of law. The Noble Earl proceeded to protest against the sweeping away of so many Bishops, and the unjust and unjustifiable tax on the clergy of Ireland. It had been pretended that be cause the Protestant population was small, their pastors need not be many. Yes, if they were the sole popula tion—(Hear, hear)—but was it right to leave such an immense Catholic population uncared for? Was it no thing to neglect the diffusion of Protestant principles? So far from withdrawing any of the Protestant teachers, the greatest possible number that could he spared from our own establishment ought to be sent as teachers of the true faith among the Catholics. But while the number of Protestant Bishops was cut down by half, the whole 27 Roman Catholic Bishops were allowed to remain. This was clearly encouraging their religion to the detriment of our own. He hoped the House would not allow the Bill to pass as it was. Even its supporters did not seem to have a very positive notion of its merits. It certainly had its merits, and he thought that if delayed to another session—a delay which could do no harm—its defects mig • ht be omitted or rectified—its merits retained, and thus, with perhaps an additional proviso or two, a really good Bill might be made up. The Noble Earl, after hesi tating a moment or two, said that there were two or three other remarks which he bad intended to make, but which were now gone out of his head, and he would, therefore, not trouble their Lordships any further.—(A laugh.) The Duke of NEWCASTLE protested against the measure. Tre Duke of WELLINGTON was willing to make the best use he could of the beneficial parts of the Bill, and endeavour to obviate those that were otherwise. The Bishop of BATH and WELLS svauld give his vote for the second leading of the Bill, because it had been adopted by a large majority of the other House, and he hoped that it would be adopted by as large a majority of that House. The Bishop of HEREFORD would give his support to the second reading of the Bill. He felt great confi dence io those who had proposed the measure, and he felt a conviction that they would never have sanctioned, far less have brought forward, a measure which they did not believe would be beneficial to the Church. He be lieved his Majesty's Government to be sincere friends to the Established Church. There were several of tile pro visions of the Bill, indeed, on which he looked with uneasiness and distress, but he hoped that they would be modified in the Committee, Several modifications bad been made which had done away with the must ttiateri objections which he had to it. The withdrawal of that clause especially, which went to appropriate the pro. perty of the Church to secular purposes, had made it much less objectionable. Still, however, there was much in it of which he could not approve. He would not then enter into details, but would simply say, that much as he disliked some of the details, he would vote for the second reading, from a conviction in his mind that some measure of the kind was necessary for the safety of the Church of Ireland—(Hear)—and that much gre iter injury would befal the Church from a rejection of the Bill than by its adoption. On those grounds, as they were not lightly taken up, he had come to the eon. elusion that it was his duty to support the Bill. He could not support it with the same cordiality with which he 'ound himself enabled tb support the other measures of his Noble Friends, but he still would vote for the second reading, as he considered the Bill essential to the tran quillity of Ireland..---(Hear.) Earl De GREY meant to support the second reading; of the Bill. He did so on the same principle with the Right Rev. Prelate who had last spoken, and who bad stated that he would give a reluctant vote in favour of the s cond reading of the Bill ; but that he would give that vote with much pain. He thought that no man would deny but the Church of Ireland was in a state which called for interfrrence.—(Hear, hear.) He thought that the withdrawing of the clause which had been withdrawn had wry much diminished the danger, and though lie con sidered that there was still some danger, yet he hoped that by the wisdom of Parliament it would also be with drawn. The LORD CHANCELLOR entirely agreed with the Right. Rev. Prelate who had last spoken, and with the Noble Earl who had just sat down, in considering that an absolute necessity existed of introducing a measure of the nature of that which was before that House; but he en tirely differed from them in the reluctance with which they would give their votes in favour of this Bill. It had been admitted by the Noble and Gallant Duke that this measure, or a measure of the same kind, was absolutely necessary, both on account of the safety of the Church, and the security of the state.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The Noble Duke had not proposed any other mea sure instead of the present Bill ; he had not brought forward even the outline of a measure which he would recommend to their Lordships as a substitute for the pre sent measure, and he (Lord Brougham) therefore under stood, that though the Noble and Gallant Duke was by no means pledged to the Bill in its details, and might accordingly vote for any modification of those details— still, that he was pledged to the admission of the principle upon which the Bill was founded—and that on that ad mission of the principle he was prepared to send the Bill to a Committee of their Lordships' House.—( Hear, hear.) He (Lord Brougham) thought that among the Noble Lords who had spoken in opposition to the Bill, there existed a great degree of misunderstanding both as to the principles on which the Bill was iounded, as to the ends proposed from the measure, and also as regarded the con nection which existed between this Bill and another mea sure which had occupied their Lordships' attention at an early period of the session. They had heard from a Right Reverend Prelate, that doubtless this measure was brought forward as a boon to the people of Ireland in conjunction with, and to counteract, the Coercion Bill. He said that the Coercion Bill was brought in t as Ireland, t e pr, present mea surethat was a i begged people bri o f bring te ll their Lordships, the in s a t thereforenecessary boon. yupon ßt be the t o that the Coercion Bill could only be justified by stern necessity, and to preserve the peace of the Empire and the lives of his Majesty's subjects; and that it could not therefore be considered as an infliction, but as in itself a boon.—(Cheers.) But no one connected with the. Government had put the juAlfication of that measure upon such grounds. What had been said by them was chi,._ The peace of Ireland was broken, and there was no odor way of restoring tranquillity to that country. The first duty of a Government was to preserve the lives and pro perty of the King's subjects, and as in these circumstances there was a necessity to use strung means, however pain ful to themselves, but still as there was a necessity, they proposed the Coercion Bill, and it was passed by their Lordship. In equal proportion to the necessity of using strong measures was the pain which the Government felt in being obliged to yield to the measure ; and in exact proportion to the sufferings of that class of society which suffered front the state of Ireland was it the duty of the Government to recommend that the laws should be suspended. But it was the duty of the Governmeut in stantly to devise and bring forward such other measures as they thought would prevent the recurrence of such a state of things, and would allay the heats and discontent out of which they had arisen, and which had rendered the Coercion Bill a case of urgent necessity ; and it now had become necessary to consider how they coal prevent the recurrence of those mischiefs. It was in that view that these two measures were connected ; and he main tained that he not only would have been guilty of a breach of duty to his country, and of a breach of hie professional and ministerial duty to his King, but that he would have been totally unworthy of the confidence and respect of the country, if he had abstained from taking the very first opportunity of allaying the anxiety of the minds of the people of Ireland, and of meeting the great body with measures of kindness and conciliation.—(Hear, hear.) Now, that the measure should produce the full effect which was expected from it, that it should produce that conciliation and satisfaction which were essential to the full effect intended from it, was more than he would take upon himself to hold out. But it was enough to justify the Government, that it had been founded upon that principle, and that the same principle was followed out in all its details; that it was a measure, which, what ever its effects might be, ought to give satisfaction— (Hear, hear) —and which ought to produce conciliation, and if such was the nature of the Bill, that it was such a measure as the Government was bound to propose.— (Hear, hear.) When he considered the great grievances which existed in Ireland, and which it was mani!est had produced the state of disorder to which the country was 'educed, and the acts of violence which had been com mitted in it, he could hardly wonder that such were the effete produced by them. He did not wish, however, to be understood as intending to praise any of those acts. He disapproved of them as much as any man, and though be could find something like an excuse for them in the grievances from which they suffered, still he condemned them, on broad principles, as much as if they had not had any such extenuation. Let them look in the first place to the church cess. Could they conceive any thing more galling titan that tax was ? (Hear.) Did they recollect the manner in which that t a x was collected—tor what purpose it was raised—andby whom it was raised ? Let their Lordships put themselves in the same situation, and consider how they would bear it. Let them suppose that the Catholics of England raised a cess upon the Protestants of that country for the support of the altar, for the repairs of the Catholic churches, for vespers, and all the other different services of the Catholic religion, which they, as Protestants were inclined to treat, though not with contempt, still with abhorrence; and such was exactly the situation in which the Catholics of Ireland were now placed in regard to the members of the Esta blished Church in that country. He would ask if they could conceive any tax more painful to the persons on whom it was forcibly levied, however trifling its amount might be ; especially when they received no benefit from it, and it was exacted to support a religion for which they had not the least respect. That was the state of tee Catholics of Ireland, and to relieve them of that church cess was one of the great objects of this Bill.—(Hear.) It was a grievance which came round every year, and was con stantly rankling in their breasts, and irritating them, sod their Lordships bad only to suppose themselves placid in the same situation to be made aware of the force of the grievance of which the people of Ireland were now to be rid. It had been sail that the Catholics and Dissenters of England had to contribute to the support of the Esta blishedhwa a dsthat to C pay a h l u lr r i i mee — ns ; et h yl a tb t yt t hs h ai e itn y nt il had dthtelsl t e o wy e p nr a ne y t ntaoi as well s eh t el a rp r a t py d r c a oe s pses t r. h t— e y y , (Hear, hear, from the Opposition b enc h es .) Th e answer but that it teas part of the property held by the Church. But that was very different from the cess, which was a tax—and that a tax to be paid for the purposes of a tell gion for which those that paid it had the same sort of abhorrence which their Lordships had for the Cathol.c religion. They had heard a great deal of the fund from which the purposes of this Bill were to be car ried into ex e cutio n . Th e y had heard from a Right Re verend Prelate that an error had been made by the fGo vernment in the calculations on which the measure was founded ; but the Right Rev. Prelate had himself corn milted as gross au error as well could be. He said that the Government had made an error of 100,0001., because they had taken the amount to be derived from the sale of Bishops' leases at bOO,O OO /., which , he said, they had over-estimated, because, instead of founding their calcu lation on the amount to be derived from the net valise of those taxes, they had taken the gross value, which error made a difference of 100,0001., and that consequently 400,000/. was all that they could reckon upon from that source. He (Lord Brougham) would at once admit that if the Right Rev. Prelate's preinises were correct, the conclusions were, perfectly right. But so far were the premises from being correct, that they were radically wrong, and there was a fundamental error is his whole calculations; for, in fact, the calculations had been from the net amount of the value of thes , ..! !rages. Noble and Learned Lord then entered into a long /1 lation to show that they had tak en t h e 'net amount j, value of the leases, from which it a pp eare d t h a t ion the am oun t b e i ng over - sta t e d, th e G overnment bad P ci these ealculati, ns oh a lower scale th an th ey we re eilj j s to do.] He then said that he had gone into this e tion because be wished to set their Lordships right it that head, as i t was one o f t h e pr i nc i pa l foundatiostA, the whole measure. As he had set the Right Retr, Prelate right on that great point, it might be as well; him also right on some smaller points; for it was not is calculations only that the Right Rev. Prelate cogrfi n ..!' gross blunders, fo r w h en h e came to smaller sums accuracy was fully as great. He had stated tha t saving in the bishopric o f D erry woul d b e only two ty sand pounds. The Bishop of EXETER had stated that the 61/1 saving would be 2,000/. The LORD CHANCELLOR resumed—The 1 1 Rev. Prelate was still wrong, fd r th e i thme di ate on the bishopric of Derry would be 4,160 E.; /IP ultimate saving would be 6,160/. The Bishop of EXETER had given them cr e dit fOO, 4,1601., and that there would be an additional e.a / ' hereafter of 2,000/. The LORD CHANCELLOR certainly then hadn nederstood him, for he had underst oo d t h e Ri g ht e' Prelate to say that the ultimate swing would 01 2,0001. It did not, however, much signify how 4 , been stared, for the fact was, that the immediate in would be 4,1601, and the ultimate saving 6,160/. he had also said that 264,0001. was to be deducted , that sum, which the Commissioners would be to pay for arrears due by the Board of First Fruits. e it would be found, that though 264,000/. had bre' down to the debit of the Commissioners, as they wet` succeed to the Board of First Fruits, yet that they to succeed to ail sums which appeared at the credit of the Board, as well as those on the debit side, and , l ;i a sum appeared on the credit sid e. which exactly co , / the sum due. So that both sides might be struck and therb would not he one fraction to pay over of sum of 261,000/.---(Cries of as Hear, h ear .") lie ' only entered into this calcul to show th a t it incorrect to sly that the Government had foufi this measure newt false grounds, or that they ~,I not right in supposing that th e y s h ou ld h ave ample le e at their disposal for the accomplishment of the ohjee ti f o view. He was not disposed to agree with those who that the arrangement of the church cess was the only ject of the Bill, although he admitted that that pa t the Bill was very important, in order to afford securiti l . the Church. But so far from thinking that the s ole?? did not even think it the principal merit of the Bill. ) said at once—and he did not fear to be contradicted 0 , he said so—that the diminution ejigin,hr, g: f mn_a t bt l ii i .ete, e :rant i os i r u fada t s n ntte b e yhteel o r mpo o pana f se ; doi pastors in Ireland had become absolutely necessary.—(Chl Let any one compare the number of Irish Bishops ) the :ppieer cent number th u ot ne m mit : he t e rew r oni ftuh o m f t eEee regard a g o, r, Englis h f he the number of benefices ; and when he saw the disprei thin between the labourers and those benefitted, and cially when he saw the gross disproportion between ot number of the English and of the Irish clergy, the Woej,' would be that the feelings of the people of Ireland hadL' fered them to bear it so'long as they had done. nine times the same number of members of the Establl Church of En g land s h ou ld h ave on l y t h e same nunahep i•relates as were inlrel an d, sure l y cou ld not b ut he deemed, be monstrous. And whether the subject was looked i with regard to the revenue or t h e population, 4 equally monstrous. The net revenue of the Archbis' and Bishops of Ireland was 128 0001., and the re ' of the Archbishops and Bishops of the whole of Bog' was little mere. Now was it to he endured that for a po' tion .1800,000 or 900,000, which was the nurnberof pe professing the established religion in Ireland, and where number of clergymen was only from 1,300 to 1,400 , same expense should be incurred, and nearly the number was kept up as for the Hierarchy of the wheP' England, where there was a population of 9,00 0,1 ,' professing the established religion, and from 9 to 10 ,1 :i clergym n ?—( ( - fear hear.) He was sure that En4 l would never be satisfied unless an adjustment of the Cb° of Ireland was entered into. It had been said, that Parliament h no right to reduce the number of NO and, encroachment it was an interference with th e c h urc h, "' eneroachment on the rights of property. AlthouP (Lord Brougham) knew that nothing came more quently within tile ordinary jurisdiction of Parliatno than the interference with property, still he of°, , admit, that if this w ere an un d ue interference ' property, he would think it a great iroP ment, though he would not say that it an insurmountable objection to the passing of this 01 sure. Be denied, however, that such was the case. Noble and Learned Lord then said, that he regretted to see the Noble and Learned Earl who opened the de that evening then in his place, as he was anxious to le some remarks on a few of the observations which j 'fi fall n from that Noble Earl. The oath canno t b e he l ot high as not to be liable to the change that evert human is liable to. The time would come when the ,0 of the people—the will of all—would call for c hs . o l l that no oath that could be devised cou:d prevail aalnT i O, All admitted in the C a tholi c Ch urc h, th at t h e o ath of invested in th e Bi s h o p o f R ome —i n t h e P ope — an d he had a right to dispense with the obligation Ot t o oath. But ma this subject it had been said, that if r e oath originated with certain quarters—with the el e „/ for instance—it might be dispensed with. He should"ot stop to examine that assertion. But he would call eV their Lordships to consider in what situation they Ple j i by their doctrines the fame of Princes, the Acts of 1' 0 . 4 1i meats, and the co ns i stency o f Learned Counsele`i What would they say to the abolition of a hishopri 6 O 1745, and a similar abolition in 1752? What would Notile and Learned Friend (Lord Eldon) say to tbl Was it not a violation, according to him, of the corone;sr oath ?It was—a n d th ere was not t h e slightest posu4 difference between the smallest violation of a right, and t o; greatest violation. H e w h o sto l e a s il ver penny f rog s, , rich man, and be who robbed a poor man of his all, °el equally guilty of the crime of larceny, and conserine si o the slightest infraction of the rights of the Church, eve ° o l the amount of on e s m a ll bi s h o p r i c or p re b en d ar y o r ou r o t ' was a violation; an d h e w h o s h ou ld b e gu il ty o f it vie,ol much a violator of a solemn oath a s if h e a b o li s hed P or i the bench of Bishops, or cut down all the revenues et. 4 fell swoop. Tha l was t o w h a t t h ose w h o h e ld t h e doctrl P n o of the Noble and Learned Earl would be reduced, 1 : 0 0 1 upon th a t p o i n t h e wou ld ta k e hi s s t an d. If his '(‘‘ Majesty, Georg e t h e Second--a religious King, andA whom they all prayed—if he abolished in 1745 and in I in each year 'latish bishopric,what were they to think 0 11 0 ,1 But perhaps Noble Lords would make a differences 1/ 0 / say, as the lady slid of her cake, that it was lost on the ot t j side of the Bristol Chann e l, or as t h e ot h er lady, who der,. having a child because she had twins.—(Laughter.) Bugle far as the principle of right was concerned, one 31 70 Bishop reduced in Ireland was as touch as if ten vi ,bi reduced on this side the Bristol Channel. Who WO person who had advised George the Second to that st e a l,; Why the Chancellor of that day. But perhaps lo o ti Lords would say, that the Monarch was obliged to i, to a Prime Minister, who was neglectful of the Prote6t4l interests. What firould Noble Lords say, if it wag ham who advised the reduction of th e fi rst hishoprit, aye, who advised thos e measu res on b ot h these reality tile occasions? Yes, it was Pelham who advised j 1 Majesty to reduce by two the Bishops of the kingdotn 0 Ireland. In r egar d, t h en, to the memory of prince' not these doctrines about the coronation oath be broach o 0 Perhaps Noble Lords might object to this instance L eo being of too remote a d a:e. Well, he coul d give "'Jr another of a later date, which a Minister advised•;ol who was Chancellor in 1817. He said 1817, heqtill all Noble Lords m i g h t not r e collect that i n 1807. 5 , was introduc d by Ministers, which was thought a infraction of the Protestant institutions, and so muc h it violation of the coronation oath, that the same argon 1 ; 0 1 were then used as had been used since, and the Bill thrown out ; but in 1807— 0 11 The Duke of CUMBERLAND sa id th ere mus t be '- 0 mistake as to the date. 11' The LORD CHANCELLOR meant 1817. T ll5 lustr:ous Duke knew all that happened in 1807; b et ) was not so well acquainted with what took place in 113 1 because the Illustri ous D u k e was a t :roa d at t h e times it mistook not. He did not mean anything di sres pect the Illustrious D u k e , an d b e f u lly a d m i tte d I s i s coo ` tency, for on m easures o f t hi s d e s cr ip t i on , whether ,"0 or mad, he invariably showed strong opposition. 0 0 exceedingly regretted—he exceedingly lamented O t t] no Illustrious Duke should be so consistent. He lamente account of the benefits the country was deprived of b lflt ° Illustrious Duke being so steady in his opposition. )1 1 Illustrious Duke then knew all that passed in 10 / Of knew that away went the Bill, and at the same tittle at " went the authors of it, because it was thought tlitl!` or a' doing a mischief to the church, and violating the b' o l‘ e nation oath. Put then came 1817—the Illustrioto d i e° being abroad, was not perhaps aware of what il l passed. The same measure as the fir,t—the feria then passed, and was recommended by a °i ;,,td e i adviser of the Crow n , b y hi m w h o sue see d e d his 0 0' and Learned Friend now no more. Ilis Noble