The Sun. — London, England, 1836-07-05 00:00:00

means of supplying the future rent-charge. Now, the num ber of the livings to which he had just alluded, and in which the income was limited to 1001. per annum, exclusive of glebe, would, under their Bill, be 1201. But let the Bill be taken divested of the appropriation clauses, and the income of this class of livings would then not amount at most to more than 1001. a year without glebe (many of them falling far short of thlt :um), and the number of livings thus circumstanced would be 237.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Thus it would be seen that those who had the most severe duty imposed on them would be worse provided for by the Noble Lord's pro position than that of the Government. He was prepared to maintain that this measure would have the effect of much more nearly apportioning ecclesiastical revenues and duties ; and, in addition to this advantage, it had this sovereign and crowning recommendation, that in the present perverse and lamentable state exhibited by the Church in that country, the clergy of which might well be said to be composed of mili tants or litigants—of men who are either starving or enduring the worst privations, or who were drawing down upon their heads the curses of those who were supposed to be their flocks. --(Cheers from the Ministerial, and some faint cries of Oh ! from the Opposition Benches.) I dont, said the Noble Lord, say that this is a right state of things. I don't say that it is either proper or Christian that it should so continue, but I only lament that such is the fact.—( Renewed cheers.) Coupling the other provisions of this measure with that which has, I am led to believe, the sanction of public opinion, without which no adjustment can be real or satisfactory, we hope and think that there is sufficient advantage resulting from it to the bulk of the people to induce them to give it their cordial acquies cence.—( Much cheering.) Mr. Sergeant JACKSON did not impute any improper motives to these gentlemen, but he did undertake to show that the returns which they made were not correct. In the pro vince of Armagh there were three dioceses in which the Com missioners stated that there was not a single school in connec tion with the Kildare-street Society. Now, in the province of Armagh alone there were more schools connected with this Society than tile Commissioners gave credit for throughout all Ireland. But with respect to the three dioceses of Connor, Down, and Dromore, he could prove that there was a return of 150 schools made to one of the Commissioners named Strangways, and which, when it was sent to the Board in Dublin, it was answered that they received no information to that effect from Mr. Strangways. Now he could prove that this return was put into the hands of Mr. Strangways by the clergyman of the parish, giving an account of the number of masters and scholars. Yet these dioceses were returned as having " none" in the Report of the Commissioners. He asked, after such evidence, was he not justified in using the language which he did with respect to these Commissioners? In the parish of St. George, Dublin, the Report of the Com missioners gave but four schools, while there were 12 actually existing. It was a curious fact, with regard to these returns, that whereas the Commissioners of Education Inquiry in 1824 and 1825, returned 11,823 schools, as established in Ire land, the Commissioners of Public Instruction who reported in 1835-36 stated the number to be but 9,567 ; while at the same time it was perfectly notorious that within the last ten years education had advanced considerably in that country. But there was another circumstance even still more curious than the one he had mentioned. The Commissioners of Edu cation Inquiry of 1824 and 1825 gave the number of children educated at the schools in connection with the Kildare-place Society as 663,946, while the Commissioners of Public In struction of 1335-36, stated the number at 568,564. He con tended, therefore, that the . Report of the Commissioners of Public Instruction, as regarded the schools, was altogether in correct. He would next allude to the parish of Dysart, in the county of Cork. His informant in this case was the Hon. and Rev. Charles Bernard, who in consequence of the ad vanced age of the incumbent, the Rev. Mr. Longford, per formed the parochial duties. Upon the authority of that in dividual he was in a situation to assert that there were fifty more Protestants residing in the parish of Dysart than the re turns gave to it.—( Hear.) Then with regard to the Rev. Mr. Hudson, of Wicklow. The Returns gave but 13 Pro testants in that gentleman's house, while, in point of fact, there were 13 Protestants actually residing in his house, and no less than 56 more in his employment.—( Hear, hear.) It was on these grounds that he asserted that the Reports were false. Mr. H. BRIDGEM A N would be glad to know from the }for. and Learned Sergeant whether there were not two :tellools in the county of Clare in connection with the Kil &re-place Society, on the estate of Captain Scott, his ( Mr. Sergeant Jackson's) brother-in-law, which were now inhabited t he one by Captain Scott's coachman, and the other by a car penter? Mr. Sergeant JACKSON admitted that such was the fact, but added that the circumstance was absolutely occasioned by the Catholic priests having interfered to prevent the parents from sending their children to the schools. Mr. FINN wished to know if the two schools alluded to by the Hon. Member for Ennis were included in the returns read by the Hon. Member for Bandon ? Mr. Sergeant JACKSON replied that there was not a sin gle s•chool mentioned in the return he had read which was not In active operation. Mr. S HE IL.—The Hon. and Learned Gentleman has pronounced a funeral oration upon the Kildare-street So ciety. That body is, for all Parliamentary purposes, ex tinct. The Hon. Member for Tamworth withheld the grant to it, and it is somewhat singular that the Learned Sergeant did not recollect, while he was inveighing against the n ew system of education, that the Members for North Lancashire and for Tamworth, with one of whom the new system originated, the other of whom continued, and even augmented, the grant, were beside him.—(Loud Cheers.) Some persons are of opinion, that after the very significant intimation which has been given by that House which is sometimes called the Upper (and it must be owned that its tone corresponds with its designation), it is useless to carry this Bill through its remaining stages in this House, and worse than useless to send it, for the purposes of abrupt re pudiation. to the House of Lords. I do not concur in that view.—( Cheers.l, I do not think this Bill will suffer by the condemnation of those to whom every opportunity ought to b e afforded of confirming the impression which they have taken al much pains to produce in their own regard. If they wilt not do justice to Ireland, let us give them means enough to perform another act of justice, of which Ireland will not be the object.—( Hear, hear.) For my part, not withstanding- the temporary obstacles in the way of this measure, of its ultimate success I have no doubt. Mark the progress which this question has made within the last four Years. In 1832 it was treated with a disregard amounting almost trt.,disdain ; and now we not only command a ma jority of this House, but I firmly believe that the majority of the English people are on our side.—(Loud ironical cheers from the Opposition.) I repeat it. In this, the Peel Parliament, we have a majority of the representatives of th e people, and by that test I abide. Sir, I think it suf ficient to peruse the preamble of this Bill, and to reflect upon the facts and inferences which that preamble con tains, in order to be convinced that this question must be settled, and that the principle on which this Bill is founded affords the only basis on which it can rest.—( Cheers.) If the ponderous folios of the Irish Parliament were upon that table, I should be able to prove that almost every penal Act has some reference to tithes. " Laws," says Arthur Young, " fit oply for the meridian of Barbary, were passed to repress excesses which oppression in the exaction of tithes had pro duced." The Riot Act," says Grattan, " was a Tithe Act, and the Wir iteboy Act was a Tithe Act." It is now upwards of 70 years wince that great man raised his voice in the Irish Parliament to exhibit those anomalies against which we are to this day protesting—a Catholic people, a Protestant Church --millions upon one side, thousands upon the other. Against this monstrous abuse, this inversion of every course of policy, with a matchless eloquence he unremittingly and vehemently inveighed.—(Hear, hear.) That illustrious man, whose de votion to his country, whose elevation, moral arid intellectual, was never disputed, is no more : he lies hard by—the depo sitory of the glorious dead ; one of the greatest Statemen ever produced by Ireland was borne by its greatest warrior. It w as a noble and heart-touching sight to see Arthur Duke of Wellington sustaining the remains of Henry !Grattan to the grave. I wonder—l shall be pardoned by the illustriouii survivor for wondering—when sadly and slowly he laid him down, the Great Captain whispered to hims e lf, that it would have been well if the policy of his great comp a ,li it, from whom he differed in life, but whom in death lie honour ed. with regard to their common country, bad at an earlier period been adopted. He has lived to carry that policy upon o n e gr-'at question into effect. I remember, it would in deed be ditierilt to forget, his exclamation, when, in speaking of the necessity by which concession was dictated, he pro tested that, rather than his country should for a single month be exposed to the horrors of a civil war, he would gladly lay Blown his life.—( Hear.) It was a noble sentiment, worthy of teat conjunction of humanity and of heroism which is found in the truly brave. Would that those who are perpetually giving Way to a dark and sanguinary wish, who say that it must come to a fight at last, who deal in frightful inuendos, and who Would shed blood as heedlessly as they quaff wine—would that they c c , nld impress that merciful sentiment upon their own heart s , p.id that the celebrated person who gave it utterance Would ex t, , nd it beyond the question to which it was applied; and in fol.:ON-ing up that great measure to its necessary conse quences, in order to avert the evils that impend upon his coun try, l ie w ouiil wake to the crowning immolation. There are in one province in Ireland 45,000 Protestants, and one Million one hundred thousand Catholics. Propose a new dis tribution after that 1 New distribution ! until new appropria tion became irresistible, of new distribution you never spoke, of new distribution you never thought, no not even when Queen i\Tsb was with you, and tickled you with a tithe-pig's tail, of new distribution you never dreamed. This single fact is sufficient to establish the surplus, if there were no other. What e the spiritual wants of the Irish Protestants ? H ow much mc ney do they want? The Scotch Church has not three hundred thousand pounds; why should the Irish Church haye more? Because the Irish Church has got Bishops. You cut them down to twelve ; they are not to be more ; bow does it rppear that they ought not to be less? Why should the Primate have more than the Lord Chan eellor ? the Bishop' of Derry mire than Chief Justice? Your dik'culties about a surplus are imaginary, and are, indeed, of Your own creation. Apply the principle of the Church Tem- Porahl , ies Act, and a surplus will be straight produced. You dir n i n i s lied the number of Bishops ; why should not the number of parsons be also cut down ? You provided that bene fices, i n 7 - ilia divine service had not been performed for three. Year s . m i zt .t be suppressed. Do not suppress, but consolidate, and diffiec i ty is at an end.—( Cheers.) But how is the sur plus to ? To none, it is said, but Protestant eccle siastical I naposeg. But I shall not enter into abstractions ; it is far bete to devise some construction of the words " eccle siastical pd-pose; by which all differences may be adjusted." When men .are determined to quarrel, they find ingredients for hostility - in a word : when awn are anxious for accommo dation, they - discover the waterials for friendship in a phrase. How fortun, Ile it would be it we could devise some liberal but sot illegitin,ato interpretation, )17 which the purposes of Christian morality and all the feelings attached to it could be promoted, even if it were necessary to strain an expression, and it might perhaps be justifiable to do so, in order that peace might be extracted from it. But no violence need be done to language in order to obtain from ecclessiastical purposes what I may venture to call a benevolent, Christian, and, consider ing all the evils it may remedy, a merciful signification. Sir, I insist that the instruction of the people in the precepts of morality is a Protestant ecclesiastical purpose. The truth you believe to be with you (for the sake of argument let it be for a moment supposed) : the increased intelligence of the peo ple must be subservi en t t o it s p ro p aga ti on . You perpetually (in my opinion without the least reason) complain that the priests, for their sinister purpose, keep the people in dark ness ; that ignorance is an expedient of sacerdotal dominion, and that they avail themselves of their barbarism for their subjugation. Break the chain; throw off the yoke, and edu cate the people. You hare tried every other resource of pro selytism—confiscation, penalty, national degradation—all has been resorted to except public instruction ; put the experiment to the test.—( Cheers.) This day the respectable chaplain of this House, on the behalf of every man that hears me, no matter what may be the difference of sect, offered up an orison for the union and knitting of men's hearts in the brotherhood of Christianity together. I appeal to the sentiments and to the language contained in that benevolent invocation, in order to rescue your religion from the misrepresentations of its pro fessors. These sentiments and that language are the language and the sentiments of every Christian in every part of the world where the prophecy, in regard to the name of our Re deemer, is fulfilled. Yes, Sir, the knitting of men's hearts together in the brotherhood of benevolence, the propaga tion of the habits of pure Christian morality—the diffusion of those feelings of forbearance and of charity which teach us to love one another, is a Christian purpose.—( Hear, hear.) It is, I hope, a Protestant purpose—it is, lam sure, a gospel purpose. When, to shepherds abiding in the mountains, attending flocks by night, it was announced that there should be glory to God in the highest, with that angelic intimation there was associated a prediction scarcely less holy, that there should be peace on earth.—(Cheers.) But for us there is in the name of religion to be no peace. There is in the name of religion to be malice, hatred, and the name of religion, our distractions are to be perpetuated, and our rancours are to be exasperated—every bitter spring of ca lamity, every fountain of atrocity, is to be unsealed—the soil is to be drenched in the blood of the people, and, at last, in the name of religion, the fell horrors of civil warfare are to be let loose. To God, we were told a few days ago, to none but God, are the men on whose decision our destinies must rest responsible. In the smile to which that unexpected announce ment gave rise, I did not participate—oh, that they would feel that the men who abuse the power to do good, by the infliction of incalculable harm, to the power which reads the secrets of the heart are, indeed, responsible, and that for the calamities in which they will have been instrumental, they will have to pass a terrible account.—(The Hon. and Learned Member resumed his seat amid loud cheers.) Lord STANLEY said that whoever expected to hear from the Hon. and Learned Member for Tipperary the display of a vivid imagination, and a flow of brilliant and polished elo quence, would seldom be disappointed. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had observed that at the first annun. ciation of the Gospel it had been declared that its object was to bring on earth peace and good will amongs t men . T o an authority so solemn he (Lord Stanley) should be sorry to refer with anything like levity, but he must be allowed to remind the Hun. and Learned Gentleman that it was one of the first principles of Christianity to adapt itself to every state of society, and that it inculcated on its disciples that they should not resist the ordinations of man, that they should submit themselves to the authorities of their country, and that they should render to every man what was his due.— ( Hear, hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman said that the people of England were favourable to his views ; and that it would otherwise be strange that the majority of their representatives should maintain the same opinions. But let the Hon. and Learned Gentleman speak out at once, and tell the people of England what his objects really were.— ( Hear, hear.) Let not the Hon. Gentleman delude himself with the belief—let not his Majesty's Government delude themselves with the belief—that because a bare and insigni ficant majority of that House might be prepared to give their sanction to the delusive and mischievous provisions of the Bill under consideration, therefore a majority of the people of England, ay, or a majority of the Members of that House, would be disposed to proceed to the consummation which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman showed was the true aim hich he had in view, namely, the abolition of the Pro testant Church Establishment in Ireland.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The people of England were with them, were they?—( Hear, hear, hear.) Did the people of England, then, wish for the abolition of the Protestant Church Esta blishment in Ireland ? What the people of England wished to see in Ireland was the restoration of that peace of which the expectation held out by the Bill was utterly delusive. Let the Hon. and Learned Gentleman and his friends say to the people of England openly and publicly what many of them said in private.—( Hear, hear.) Let his Noble Friend look to his majority, and ask himself in his closet of how many of that majority the object was the abo lition of the Protestant Church Establishment in Ireland. The Honourable and Learned Member for Tipperary asserted that the people of England began to ask them selves of what use was a Church Establishment at all in Ire land. If that really were the question, in God's name let it be discussed fairly and openly.—( Hear, hear.) Let the peo ple of England, and of Scotland, and of Ireland join issue on the question whether or not there should be a Church Esta blishment in Ireland ? He should be glad of so undisguised a proposition ; for he hated this kind of bush-fighting.— ( Hear, hear.) Those who thought with him ( Lord Stanley) laboured under this difficulty. If they declared that the ob ject in view was the destruction of the Protestant Church Establishment in Ireland, they were met by clamorous pro testations that nothing could be further from the thoughts of the supporters of the Bill ; the only purpose of which was to take from the extravagant and exorbitant revenues of the Protestant Church in Ireland the surplus, after providing for the full supply of religious instruction to the Protestants of Ireland, for the purpose of applying it to education, which it was contended was a strictly Protestant and Ecclesiastical purpose. When the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said that if they bad a desire to extend the Protestant religion in Ireland, they would educate the people—( Some Hon. Mem ber here uttered a shrill and strange cry )—a little educa tion might occasionally be well applied in that House— (Laughter and cheers)—he (Lord Stanley) would say that the Honourable and Learned Gentleman well knew that such would not be the result of the Bill. He well knew that the object of the Bill was anything but the promotion of the Protestant religion in Ireland.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Kerry, with a want of logic that was astonishing, contended that because, by the Church Tempo ralities Act, there was a reduction of ten Protestant bishop rics in Ireland, there should therefore be a reduction of the parochial clergy. Why were those ten bishoprics re duced? Because it was considered that the hierarchy was disproportionately largo to the clergy. —( Hear, hear.) And because the just proportion had been established, and be cause the ecclesiastical revenue so saved had been applied to augment the stipends of the working clergy, who had no other mode of obtaining a competent remuneration for their labours, the Hon. and Learned Member came to the illogical conclusion that the proportion between the bishops and the clergy thus adjusted, ought again to be disturbed.— ( Hear, hear 1) Why ? Because, as the Hon. and Learned Member asserted, the number of the Protestant clergy in Ireland was too great for the number of the Protestant laity. On that proposition he (Lord Stanley) took his stand. It was dangerous to give the State an interest in reducing Church property as much as possible. Such an arrangement must eventually lead to a disturbance of the har mony which ought to subsist between the Church and the State ; and render the former obnoxious to the excessive eco nomy of the latter. If, however, that dangerous principle were admitted, it became necessary that every possible guard should be put upon its injurious operation. Yet in the clauses of the Bill under consideration (to which, by the bye, no lion. Member had thought it worth while to refer) the dangerous principle which he had described was worked out by the most dangerous details. By this Bill the State would have a sepa rate pecuniary interest at variance with the pecuniary interest of the Church. What security was there that in any dispute between the two, that House would not consult the tempo rary pecuniary interests of their constituents to the lasting in terests of the Church? And in whom were the powers com prehended in the Bill to be vested? In the ecclesiastical Com missioners, and in them alone. The Lord-Lieutenant of Ire land would be a mere cipher in their hands. What were they to be empowered to do ? To divide onto unite benefices ; to fix boundaries for new benefices, and to give names to them; to fix the incomes of new ministers ; to consider the suitableness of glebes ; to decide on the appropriation of glebes to churches, cha pels, &c., and other matters of equal importance. And who were the persons to be thus empowered? Were they persons celebrated for their attachment to the Protestant Church ? Were any of them persons at the head of that Church ? No such thing. They were to be members of the Established Church ; but it was evident that they would be the creatures of his Noble Friend, or of any other Minister, let him be adverse, favour able, or indifferent to the interests of the Protestant Esta blishment. They would be his nominees; bound to do his bidding, and removeable at his pleasure.—( Hear.) Would they be enjoined to take care that the Protestant clergy had enough ? No ; their duty would be to take care that they had not too much, to take care that their stipends just passed the point of starvation.—( Hear, hear.) It was not merely a question of 50,0001. a year; it was a question of establishing a principle which might hereafter be applied to dishonest purposes. Ilis Noble Friend had com pared the condition of the clergy of the Church of Ireland with the condition of the clergy of the Church of England. It appeared according to his Noble Friend's statements that the average income of the benefices in Ireland was 294/. ; in England 2851. It also appeared that the average number of members of the Church of England in the parishes of Ireland was 640, while the average number of all religious persuasions in the parishes of England was 1,017. Lord MORPETH had stated that the average number of members of the Church of England in the parishes of Eng land was 1,017 Lord STANLEY thanked his Noble Friend for his correc tion. The average number of members of the Church of England in the parishes of England was 1,017. In England the average size of the parishes was five miles square ; in Ire land the average size of the parishes was 25 miles square. Now he was sure that his Noble Friend would not pretend to maintain that a clergyman who did duty in a parish 25 miles square, containing 640 inhabitants of his persuasion, had not a lunch more laborious task than a clergyman who did duty in a parish only five square miles, but having 1,017 inhabitants of his persuasion. Nor, he was sure, would his Noble Friend contend that 2241. was an exorbitant average of salary for a clergyman of the Church of England doing duty in a parish five and twenty miles square. His Noble Friend stated that under this Bill, there would be only 129 clergy men in Ireland with incomes under 1001. a-year, while now there were 287 so situated ; and had exclaimed, " See what an improvement this is I " But nobody thought of leaving things as they were. But his Noble Friend had not stated the case fairly. He forgot. that under the provisions of the Bill, of 1,259 benefices, the Ecclesiastical Commissioners might, if they thought proper, reduce 799 to 100/. a-year. Now he (Lord Stanley) could not consent thus to leave the pecuniary interests of the Protestant Church Establishment in Ireland subject to the caprice of any Government. He could not sit down without adverting to another fallacy on this subject. His Noble Friend at the head of his Majesty's Government had, with a rashness which belonged to a younger man, admitted, in the other House of Parliament, that the Bill would inflict a heavy blow on the Protestant interest in Ireland.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Let it go forth to the people that the Prime Minister of England acknow ledged that the measure he proposed would inflict a severe blow on Protestantism in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) " I hnow," said the Premier, "that we are inflicting a severe blow upon Protestantism in reland, hut (let the House mark the sequel) we cannot help it."—( Cheers.) Was this a fit argu ment for the Prime Minister of England to use ?—( Cheers.) " We know our measure is dangerous to the Protestant Estab lished Church—we know that it inflicts a severe blow upon Protestantism ; but we cannot help it—( Cheers)—and we can not help it because we are driven on to it by those who are aim ing at other things—( Great cheering from the Opposition)__.. because we can neither defend our measure on its own merits nor resist the power of those who compel us to adopt it.".—. ( Continued cheering.) The House was told they must give con tentment to 7,000,000 of Irishmen.—Great cheering and laughter, in the midst of which the cheer of an Hon. Gentle man behind the Treasury bench was remarkably conspicuous.) Perhaps the Hon. Gentleman whose cheers were always so significant, and which sometimes drew down upon him a degree of notice not usually extended to other Members, would tell him, from the accurate investigation he had made into all the merits of the Bill, whether, when by his significant cheer he expressed so ready and decisive an opinion, he thought, vary ing in that respect from all the rest of the House, that this measure would afford the slightest degree of contentment to the 7,000,000 of Irishmen who were spoken of.—( Cheers.) Let him (Lord Stanley) say that out of this 7,000,000 there were somewhere about 1,500,000 who had no direct interest whatever in the settlement of this question; and that fact the Hon. Gentleman, who should know as well as he (Lord Stanley), could tell him.—( Hear, hear.) But then it was said it was not the amount of the reduction that was to be considered, but the feelings of the people.—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Nottingham cheered that expression : then of course he was quite prepared to go to the full extent required to gratify the feelings of the people of Ireland.—( Cheers.) And let him ask, whether the Hon. Mem_ ber for Kilkenny, in a recent publication addressed to the people of England, had held out a prospect of that peace on earth, and goodwill towards men, which it had been promised should follow the adoption of this Bill ?—( Hear, hear.) In that publication the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said, reduce the Established clergy 30 per cent.; apply 50,000/. a year of the revenues of the Church to the purposes of general education ; but the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said nothing of the 40,000 which was to be appropriated to the consolidated Fund; and he (Lord Stanley) would say nothing of it either. It appeared, however, from all that was stated upon the report, that of the 90,000/. to be deducted from the revenues of the Church, 50,0001. only were to be devoted to the purposes of education. But when the Hon. and Learned Gentleman in his address to the people of England spoke of the applica cation of that sum to the purposes of education, did he hold out the slightest prospect that such an application of the revenues of the Protestant Established Church would afford anything like perfect contentment to;the 7,000,000 ?—( Cheers.) If then they were told that the present measure, though it were (as he believed it was) objectionable to the people of England-- though it inflicted, as the Prime Minister had declared, severe blow upon Protestantism in Ireland—though it were carried only by a bare majority in the House of Commons, and opposed by a very great majority in the House of Lords—if, in spite of all this, they were told that the Bill was still necessary for the sako of giving contentment to Ireland, was it too much to require, was it unreasonable to ask, what that contentment would be ?--( Cheers, and cries of " Ob.") The Hon. and Learned Gentleman, in his address to the people of England, said, " The Rev. Mr. Longueville insists that I shall pay him 50/. a year for tithes ; and because I deem this demand, as it manifestly is, most unjust and unreasonable, he causes a bill to be filed against me in the Court of Exchequer.—(Hear, hear.) But the Hon. and Learned Gentleman did not say that if this Bill passed he should be content to pay 70 per cent. of the present amount of tithe to the Rev. Mr. Longue ville.—( Cheers.) On the contrary, he said, alluding to Mr. Longueville, " I think my religion better than his ; and there fore I never will pay him one shilling —no, not one farthing.— (Loud and continued cheering from the Opposition.) Here was a distinct assertion on the part of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman that he never would pay one farthing in the shape of tithe to a Protestant clergyman ; and will , ? Be cause he thought the religion he professed better than the re ligion of the State.—( Renewed cheering from the Opposition.) That might be the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's private opinion ; but was the Legislature to sanction or to recognize the doctrine of every man who thought his own religion bet ter than that of the State ?—( Cheers. ) It was impossible that the Legislature could do so, and therefore, following again the advice of the Hon. and Member for Kilkenny, which they had often done before, very much to their own detrirnent—( Oh, oh 1 from the Ministerial side, answered by loud cheers from the Opposition)--it could not be doubted that even after the passing of this Act they would continue their resistance to the payment of tithe.—[During the deli very of the latter part of this sentence great excitement ap peared to prevail on both sides of the House. The laugh and cheer was thrown from side to side, while stronger and warmer feelings appeared to influence particular Members. Something fell from Mr. O'Connell which caught the ear of Lord Stanley, and to which the Noble Lord adverted in these terms :]—The Hon. and Learned Gentleman will allow me to say, he is the last man who ought to make use in this House, or elsewhere, of offensive expressions such as that which he has just used—most indecently interrupting me.—( Great cheering from the Opposition.) Mr. O'CONNELL (amidst cheers and cries of " Oh 1") said—l rise to order. Have I not a right to express my feel ings when a charge is untruly made against me ?—( Hear, hear, and cries of "Oh 1") In the first place; the Noble Lord garbles my letter.—( Oh, oh !) I repeat it.—( Oh 1) I repeat it distinctly that the Noble Lord, in the first place, read garbled extracts from my letter.—( Hear, hear.) In the next place the Noble Lord said that the people of Ireland had often fol lowed my advice to their detriment.—( Hear, hear.) When such assertions, so foreign from the fact, are made, I conceive that I have a right to reply to them.—( Hear, hear.) If such a mode of argument is unworthy of any man, it is still less be coming in th Noble Lord, whom I have observed shrink from every man in the House but me.—( Cheers from the Ministerial benches, and cries of " Chair I" from the Opposition.) The CHAIRMAN, interfering, said—l would remind the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny, that he will have ample opportunities of replying to the speech of the Noble Lord in a regular manner.—( Cheers from the Opposition.) Lord STORMONT, amidst great confusion, rose to order. He felt it to be a duty he owed to the House to ask the Chairman (Mr. Bernal) whether in the exercise of his functions as Chairman, he conceived it to be within the bounds of order that such words should be allowed to pass from one Member towards another as within the hearing of the House had passed from the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny towards the Noble Lord.—( Oh, oh, and cheers.) The words used by the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny in reference to the observations made by the Noble Lord were these—" That is untrue." He (Lord Stormont) begged to ask whether the use of such words came within the bounds of order ?—( Cheers from the Opposition.) The CHAIRMAN—When a question upon a point of order is thus directly and formally put to me I have not the slightest hesitation in replying to it. Strictly speaking, no one Hon. Member has a right in the course of a speech, or after a speech, to say it is not true.—(Hear ' hear.) B u t then I must appeal to the recollection o f e ve r y Hon. Member present to bear me out when I say, that however this kind of expression may not be warranted by the strict rules of debate, unfortunately it is but too much warranted by example.— (Cries of " Oh" from the Opposition, answered by cheers from the Ministerial benches.) Since I have had the honour of sitting as chairman of Committees in this House I have heard many Hon. Members under the surprise of the irrita tion at the moment, contradict, in perhaps no very courteous terms, particular allegations made in the speeches of other Hon. Gentlemen.—( Hear, hear.) But upon the present oc casion I will not shrink from giving a direct answer to the direct question which has been put to me, and therefore give it as my opinion that such expressions as the Noble Lord has described passing from one Hon. Member to another are not in order.—( Hear, hear.) Dr. BALDWIN vainly endeavoured to obtain a hearing. There was a general cry for Lord Stanley, in the midst of which Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose and said—Undoubtedly what you have said, Sir, upon the point of order, is perfectly correct, and I have not the slightest hesitation in saying that, in my opinion, the interruption of the Honourable and Learned Member for Kilkenny was most disorderly.—( Cheers from the Opposition.) But I now appeal to you, Sir, that in the future part of the speech of the Noble Lord (Stanley) opposite you will not allo w hi m t o b e ma ki ng charges against this side of the House—( Loud cheers from the Ministerial side)—imputing to us that we are not acting upon our own opinions—( Renewed cheers from the same guar ter)—but that we are driven on by others to adopt a course which in our hearts we do not approve.—( Loud cheers from the Ministerial Benches, immersed by as loud cries of '• No," from the Opposititn. The most extraordinary confusion ensued. The Noble Lord continued to speak, but not a sound of his voice reached the Gallery.) Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL rose, and endeavoured to address the House, but the attempt served only to increase the confusion. Continuing on his legs, the cry of " Chair" became general. The CHAIRMAN rose, and pointed to Lord JOHN RUSSELL, who, after an interval of some minutes, was allowed to proceed. I say (said the Noble Lord) that, according to the orders of the House. no Hon. Member ought to attribute motives to others. The Noble Lord has attributed motives to us of (as we understood the Noble Lord, for his voice again was well nigh drowned by the rising confusion) a most scandalous nature.—(The remainder of the Noble Lord's observations were lost in the din which ensued.) Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL and Lord STANLEY rose together. There was a general cry for the latter, but Sir Edward would not give way. It is impossible to describe THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, JULY 5, 1836. the excitement of the House at this moment. After the lapse ' of some time— Sir E. KNATCHBULL was allowed to proceed— Sir (said he) I humbly submit to you and to the Committee at large, whether the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who has been guilty of the disorder you have pointed out ought not, before the Noble Lord (Stanley) adverts to any other public topic, to offer some explanation of his conduct.—( Cheers from the Opposition, answered by loud cries of " Oh !" from the Ministerial benches.) I leave the matter in your hands, Sir, satisfied that you will call upon the Hon. and Learned Gentleman to explain.—( Hear, hear !—and cries of "Oh !") Mr. O'CONNELL—I am quite willing to withdraw the words which have given offence ; but, at the same time, I caution the Noble Lord against indulging in such attacks as called forth this unguarded expression of feeling from me.— (Cheers. ) Mr. METHUEN endeavoured, amidst the loudest laugh ' ter, to address the House—but the attempt was vain. Lord STANLEY then continued ; It appears that my Noble Friend (Lord John Russell) has taken umbrage at some expressions contained in my speech. I only think it would have been more consistent with the rules of the House if my Noble Friend had reserved any observations he felt it neces sary to make upon that point, and until he had the opportunity to make a general reply.--( Hear, hear.) I think lam not passing the bounds of parliamentary freedom of speech when I give as my interpretation of the text afforded me by the Prime Ministei, that the Government as a Government, are driven to the adoption of measures such as men acting upon their own individual judgments they would be desirous to avoid. (Cheers from the Opposition). Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose to order. I was perhaps to blame for not interrupting the Noble Lord when he used these words in the first instance ; but as he has now repeated them, I will not evade the opportunity of pointing out why I conceive them to be disorderly.—(Cheers from the Ministerial side.) I can conceive nothing conve3ing kgreater imputation of dishonour to any set of men than the assertion that they are driven on by others to adopt measures which, in their hearts as individuals, they would be anxious to avoid.--( Hear.) I should have thought, indeed, that the Noble Lord would have been one of the last to prefer such a charge, because, however others might have been ignorant of it, I should have thought that the Noble Lord, of all men, knew the difference of opinion which long prevailed-- [The remainder of the sentence was drowned in the cheer with which this observation was received.] The Noble Lord having now repeated th e words which I conceived to be objectionable and disorderly, I am now obliged to ask you, Sir, whether it is in order for any Hon. Member to lay upon any Member of the Government a charge which implies, as I conceive, the greatest dis bonourp and which could not be attributed to any individual Member of the House without a palpable breach of the order of debate.—( Cheers. ) The CHAIRMAN—.The Committee will see the great difficulty of the situation in which I am placed.—(Laughter and cheers.) I repeat the expression—the Committee must not only see, but I should hope it would feel, the difficulty of my situation.—(Cheers.) If I were spontaneously—(A cry of " Oh I")—Does any Hon. Gentleman refuse to hear the opinion of the Chairman after it has been asked 2—( Hear, and cries of" Order 1") I say that the difficulty under which lam placed is not one of a light nature. If I were sponta neously to interrupt every Hon. Member who transgresses the rules and orders of the House, I should indeed have a laborious duty to perform.—( Hear, hear.) I abstain from doing, so because I am afraid of protracting the business of the House; but at the same time I see I shall never be deterred by any feeling from taking the proper course when any Hon. Member seriously transgresses the rules of the House.—(Hear, hear.) If. I be directly appealed to, to say whether it be disorderly or not for one Hon. Member to attribute motives to another, I can only reply—undoubtedly it is —(Hear, hear)--but the Noble Lord must pardon me if I say that a distinction is to be drawn between the application of particular terms to indivi duals and to bodies of men. —( Hear, hear.) I certainly did not consider it as of a nature imputing dishonourable motives to the Government, and therefore I did not interfere. Lord STANLEY—I am of your opinion, Sir, that in the observations I made, founded as those observations were upon the declarations of the Prime Minister, I did not transgress any of those rules of order which govern the conduct of de bate in this House-4 Hear.) The Noble Lord then conti nued to observe that the argument he was pursuing at the time he was interrupted was, that if the great inducement held out for the adoption of the Bill was the producing a feeling of con tentment amongst a large portion of the people of Ireland, he (Lord Stanley) wished in the first instance to be satisfied be fore he made the sacrifice demanded of him, that the general object for which it was made was likely to be obtained— ( Cheers from the Opposition)—and in order to show that this Bill would not effect that object, he was stating the opinion of the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny, who accused him of garbling his letter, and whose attention be now there fore ventured to request to some passages taken from the same letter which he was about to quote. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman proceeded, in a subsequent part of his last address to the people of Great Britain, in these terms :—" Let me add, bovretter, that in the case of the Catholics, there is a feature of greater strength, and more distinctness.—( Hear.) It is this : here tithes were instituted there glebes were set apart, not by Protestants for Protestant worship, but by Catholics for Catholic worship. They were ours ; we assigned them for our purposes—the purposes of the ten thousand—the force of law, or rather the law of force, has unjustly torn them from the Catholics, whose property they were, and given to them the 200 Protestants, whose property they were not." What was the inference to be drawn from this passage? With such opinions addressed to them, what sort of satisfaction was a measure such as the present likely to give to the people ?—( Hear, hear.) What, too, was the head ing of this letter ?—" Justice : justice for Ireland."—(Hear, hear.) " Here tithes, there glebes," said the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, " were ours—they were unjustly torn from us—you the people of Great Britain, do justice and restore them to us."—( Cheers.) There would be some sense, some reason, some logic in that argument—(Cheers) '—but the re i s no s e ns e, n o r eason , no - logical deduction to be found in the proposition, which, after th e p rem i ses laid down by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman in his letter, says, " Let us take from the revenues of the Es tablished Church a miserable portion for the purposes of general education, leaving the whole of the remainder to Protestant uses.—( Hear, hear.) Let us give nothing to the Roman Catholics, who formerly had all, but let us apply a small portion to the purposes of general education, and then the people of Ireland will believe that you have done them justice, whilst at the same time they. have this letter of the Hon. and Learned Member in their hands—(cheers)--and they will be contented, and all will be peace and tranquility." —( Renewed cheering.) But the Hon. and Learned Gen tleman went further, and said " Th e p eo pl e o f I re l an d are mo derate (laughter)— they are easily satisfied—(renewed laughter)—they do not demand all this at present. Less would now content them."—(Hear, hear, from the Ministerial side.) Yes; but for how long?—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite were prepared to do all that was now necessary to satisfy the demands of the Irish people—let him just point out in the words of the Hon. and Learned Mem ber what those demands were. The Hon. and Learned Gen tleman concluded his address in these words :—" Well, the Irish are at present more moderate—less would now content us—we desire to have tithes totally abolished; or if any part remains to be levied, that it shall be applied to the purpose of giving education to all classes of the people. We do not at present demand the glebes for the residence of the pastors whom the people prefer; but I candidly acknowledge that, as the contest continues and grows warm—as the Pro testant clergy identify themselves with the wholesale slaughterers in the field, and with the more vexatious and exasperating villainy of the Exchequer attorneys—as the ideas they excite are of the Kathcormacs, red with the blood of the sons of vridows,Thr of the odious Exchequer rebellious writs— all connection with religious institutions is forgotten, and the Irish Juggernaut of plunder and massacre stands prominent, as demanding those sacrifices which we formerly thought were only made to a mere difference in religion. The time is, from these causes, fast arising when a compromise will be impos sible, and those who now refuse an amicable and moderate arrangement will have to blame themselves when a similar arrangement shall be rejected indignantly, contemptuously, by the people of Ireland." A compromise impossible !—a compro mise upon what terms ? The total abolition of all tithes, and the application of whatever might be left of revenue to the.Estab lisbed Church to the purposes of general education !—( Hear.) This was the amicable and moderate arrangement which, ac cording to the Hon. and Learned Gentlemau, the House would have to blame itself f or no t adopting.—( Cheers.) Did his Noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland (Lord Morpeth) recol lect the discussion which took place in that House two or three days ago? Did his Noble Friend recollect that, of the twenty-two representatives of Ireland who voted on that occasion, four only, including the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny, were found to support the mo tion of the Government, the other eighteen voting at once in favour of the proposition for the total abolition of tithes.— ( Hear, hear.) This, then, was a specimen of the sort of con tentment which was to be afforded by this Bill to the 7,000,000 of Irishmen who professed the Catholic faith.—.(Cheers.) It was a measure which would tend to the destruction of the Pro testant Church in Ireland. The Prime Minister himself ad mitted that it would give a great blow to Protestantism in that country.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. POULTER, amidst loud cries of " Divide," begged in explanation to say, that in reference to the point alluded to by the Noble Lord ( Stanley), he (Mr. Poulter) was now aware that he might have referred to the Tithe Commutation Act, and not to the Church Temporalities Bill.—(Loud and general cries of " Divide.") Mr. O'CONNEL L said, the Noble Lord had rendered it impossible that he should be wholly silent.--(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had selected a happy illustration in favour of the present measure from that very letter of his (Mr. O'Con nell's), from which he had quoted some passages. It was stated in that letter, that in one parish in Ireland 9,990 Ro man Catholics were made to pay tithes to a Protestant pastor, who had only a congregation of 77 Protestants, being the whole amount of the Protestants in that parish. He (Mr. O'Connell) supposed that this was all in consonance with the reason, the common sense and the sound logic, of which they bad heard so much from the Noble Lord—(Laughter and cheers)—but was it Protestantism? Whilst such things were allowed to continue, who was it that gave the blow to Protestantism ?—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) Was it lie who insisted on the plunder of the 9 990 Roman Ca tholics to supply the spiritual wants of 77 Protestants, who never saw their clergyman ? Or was it he who said that this was a state of things which brought scandal upon the Protestant Church, inflicted an injury upon the Catholic people, and ought, therefore, to be discontinued.—(Cheers.) Nay, it was a fact, that in the instance to which he had re ferred the Protestant Clergyman had- never slept three nights in his parish since he had been in possession of the living, though it was true that he had on one occasion taken the trouble to go all the way from Bath or Cheltenham to Ireland for the purpose of giving a vote against him ( Mr. O'Connell) at his election for Kerry.--( Hear, hear.) Was this Protest antism ?—(Cheers.) He maintained that the Noble Lord (Stanley) was the bitterest enemy to Protestantism.—(Hear, hear.) What was the first Bill brought into Parliament upon the subject by Lord Hatherton ? It was a measvre which would have given to the Protestant Clergy in Ireland 771. 10s. per cent, upon their tithe compositor, throughout Ireland, pay. able at the Treasury.—(Hear, hear, hear.) That Bill the Noble Lord ( Stanley) opposed ; and then, to be sure, he talked to them of his Noble Friends. He (M r. O'Connell) thought be had shamed the Noble Lord out of the use of that terms. Instead of Noble Friends, Noble thimble-riggers lie should have called them.—(Loud cheers.) He had heard the , Noble Lord call his previous colleagues his Noble Friends one moment, and the moment after describe them all as thim ble-riggers.—(Laughter and cheers.) No phrase, indeed, was too vulgar for the Noble Lord, provided it was virulent enough. When the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, came into power, what was the Bill which the Gallant Officer opposite (Sir Henry Hardinge) brought in ? A Bill reducing the income of the clergy from 771. 10s., which was the amount fixed by his (Mr. O'Connell's) to 751. a year. The Noble Lord ( Stanley) supp or t e d th a t Bill ; and it would have been carried through the House of Lords if it had met the sanction of the Commons. But was that all ? Last year another Bill was brought in and passed this House ;it contained an appropriation clause. How much did that Bill give the Clergy ? It gave them 721. 10s., five per cent. less than his Bill gave them. In the Committee of the House of Lords that part of the Bill was adopted. And these were the friends of the Protestant Church ?—( Hear. ) These were the friends of the clergy, who charged him with wishing to deprive them of their property ?—( Hear, hear.) If the majority had consented to have given up the appropriation clause, that Bill would have been law at the present moment. What had happened si,nce ? By the Bill now before the House, the clergy would get 671. 10s., exactly 10 per cent. less than the Bil which he had proposed would have given them. This was what the common sense and logic of the Noble Lord had done.—(Cheers.) Was he (Mr. O'Connell) notright, then, in warning the Noble Lord and his party that they would not have such another opportu nity of arranging this question as was now presented to them ? The Noble Lord, in commenting upon the letter which he (Mr. O'Connell) had addressed to the people of England, omitted to notice that part of it in which the conduct of the clergy of Ireland was signalised by their proceedings in the Court of Exchequer. Did the Noble Lord think that that conduct was making no impression in Ireland ?:--( Hear, hear.) I tell the Noble Lord (said the Hon. and Learned Gentleman) that a compromise he may get this year. He may not get it next year.--( Hear, hear.) I had almost said he shallnot get it next year.—( Very great cheering from the Ministerial side of the House, responded to by ironical cheers from the Opposition side.) Every hour is diminishing the valise, and increasing the price. That was the style in which the Noble Lord gave protection to the Church of Ireland. Was there the slightest hope that while the people of England and Scotland were enjoying Corporation reform, and the people of Ireland were declared unfit and unworthy to enjoy those rights—( Loud cries of " Question, question," and loud cheers)—as long as that injustice was done them, and done them, too, as he had h ear d, th oug h it h a d b een denied, upon the ground of thAr alicnage from this country, it was impossible that satisfaction could be given to Ireland. Yes, that was another and an additional 'insult cast upon his country. But the plan he was about to propose was not that the amount should be reduced to 701., and 21. 10s. for the collection, but that it should be reduced to 601., and that ten per cent. should be collected from the quit-rents of the Crown lands in Ire land, and which were now applied to beautify towns in Eng land, but which ought to be applied to the benefit of Ire land. This would make 701., and the 21. 10s. he should pro pose to be given as a bonus to every tithe-payer who paid his tithe. That, with the appropriation clause, would have sa tisfied those who were now calumniated as being the enemies of the Protestant Church, and who, at all events, would be paying men to that amount from whom they derived no ser vice whatever. If that plan were adopted, he was quite convinced that at present, at least, it would be accepted with gratitude, and would lay one of the foundation-stones for the tranquilization of Ireland. But he did not propose that motion, nor would he. The Noble Lord had talked of the motion which had recently been 'made for the total extinction of tithes, and had referred to the di v isi on u p on it. He (Mr. O'Connell) opposed that motion. He did so, be cause he knew Ireland as well as any Noble Lord or Hon. Gentleman in that House. For six hundred years the same system had been pursued towards Ireland. When the Irish petitioned Edward the Third, who was called the English Justinian, to admit them into a com munity with the English, and to share the protection which they enjoyed—what was the answer ? He referred their pe tition to the great Lords—and what was their reply ? That it was not for their own interest that the Irish should be admitted into a community with the English. That was the answer given in 1336—just five hundred years ago; and here was a Noble Lord, just five hundred years afterwards, as ready as ever to carry that resolution into effect.—( Cheers.) The difference of race was your first pretence—aliens in blood ; a difference in religion was your next pretence—aliens in religion I —the cruelty always the same, the paltry excuse varying. It was now the sublimity of the Protestant Church. Why, what was it to the Irish who did not believe in the Pro testant Church, who did not think it the best ? The Protes ants were quite right who thought it the best, to use it as an argument, but to the Catholics it was no argument at all. He had heard one young gentleman to-night, while talking of the rights of the Irish, by way of a set-off, ask, had not the En glish rights too? He (Mr. O'Connell) would ask whether whether any English Member had ever stood up in that House for the rights of Englishmen who had not been supported by Irishmen ?—( Cheers.) Why, then, did the Hon. Member taunt him with the rights of Englishmen ? Did he conceive that the English were not powerful or free without having the plea sure of trampling upon Ireland, and without-being able to gra tify that spirit embodied in the Noble Lord, who was go verned by a species of half fanaticism, which might be religion, but was not charity ? He should not have risen if the Noble Lord had not spoken; but he had now declared his mind freely. This Bill, if passed, might conciliate the people of Ireland. Yes, it might have that effect, but he despaired of its being allowed to pass. He was ready now to give his ut most aid in earring it into effect; but he would not promise to do so another year.—( Hear, and cheers.) Mr. F. SHAW then rose to address the House amid loud cries of " Question" and " Divide." The tumult was so in cessant that it was impossible to collect a perfect sentence of the Right Honourable and Learned Gentleman's speech. All that we could collect, was a denial that the people of England were in favour of the views entertained by the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny upon this question, as that Hon. and Learned Member had assumed. Lord J. RUSSELL—Sir, it is in conformity with the opi nion stated by the chair, and in which I think the justice ~of the House will acquiesce, that I venture to implore your at tention while I do give some reply to the charges which, as I have already said, although I might have expected them from others, although I should have little attended to them from the mouth of the Right Hon. Gentleman who has just sat down—( Laughter)—yet coming from the quarter that they do, and surprising me as they do coming from that quarter, I can not consistently with our character—( Laughter from the Op position, and loud cheers from the Ministerial side of the House. ) Sir, the amount of this charge as stated by the Noble Lord, and re-asserted in a different form by the Right Honourable Gentleman, is this, that upon the question we have been driven by others, we have consulted others ; and finally, that this clause has been introduced for some purpose, which purpose, as it has been sometimes expressed, and as it was clearly in dicated throughout the speech of the Noble Lord, was, that of introducing a question on which we had no settled opinion, with the view of defeating the Ministry of the Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite. lam obliged therefore to ask the atten tion of the House while I most unwillingly refer to something which passed when the Noble Lord and I were colleagues together. When the Noble Lord and I were colleagues in 1832, the Noble Lord stated the opinion which he has since so frequently and so consistently stated with respect to the Irish Church. I stated, on the other hand, that that Church was too great not only for religious purposes, and for instruct ing the flock committed to it, but that it wrs too large for its own stability.—(Hear, hear.) At the latter end of 1832 a plan was prepared for the consideration of the Cabinet of that day, in accordance with the views of the Noble LoA, but containing no appropriation for the benefit of the ire mass of the people of Ireland. I did not conceal from that Cabinet, above all, I did not conceal from the head of that Cabinet, or from the Noble Lord, my decided opinion that some part of the revenues of the Church of Ireland ought to be devoted to purposes of instruction, in which Roman Catholics might participate. Sir, the Noble Lord who now charges me with being driven along into this opi nion —(Loud cheers)—and who countenances and abets in this House the charge that we are basely endeavouring to retain office by means of upholding an opinion which was not ours, but which was pointed out to us by others, that Noble Lord has heard from me, as his colleague, sentiments as decided—if possible, more decided—than those which I have ever uttered in this House upon the subject. I com mitted those opinions and sentiments to writing, in the form of a letter, to Lord Grey, with which I intended to accompany my resignation of office—( Loud cheers)—but I found that that resignation would have brought on, in a very short time, as he assured me, the resignation of Lord Althorp, who was then the leader of the Ministerial party in this House. I was told by a colleague whom I esteemed, an d w ith w h om I have the honour still to sit in the sam e @ a bi ne t, th at t h e breaking up of the Cabinet at such a time, just after the passing of the Reform Bill, when the party of the Right Honourable Gentleman opposite was so diminished and when the country considered that the Government could only be conducted by Earl Grey—l was told that I should be taking upon myself a very awful responsibility, and that it might be the means of preventing the settlement of quiet and good government in this country. I yielded to these opinions, but I did not yield to them without informing the Noble Lord that, although I agreed to suppo r t th e Bill o f w hi c h h e was the authority, and though I agreed not to divide against any clause in the Bill, yet that I maintained my own opinions ; and that I considered the Bill as only the commencement of reforms and changes which I wished to introduce, and that, when that change was completed, and when Parliament should have given its assent to that Act, I should consider myself at liberty to bring forward and support the principle of which I had been, with others, the advocate in the Cabinet ; and yet that was the principle which the Noble Lord now spoke of, as if it were an opinion taken up by me on the yesterday or to-day. Well, Sir, I believe it will not be contradicted either by the Noble Lord or by my Right llon. Friend the Member for Cumberland that I did support that Bill heartily and effectively in this House. As soon as that Bill had passed, I remember —I knew not whether my Right Hon. Friend the Member . 0 1.1. 1-f (=r --r ~"'. for Cumberland will recollect it; but if he has any recollec tion of the circumstance he will confirm me in it-that . I told him that my opinion was the same as ever, and I begged him to inform the Noble Lord the Member for Lancashire of it; but at all events I desired him to take it for his OwTinfortna;,,_:\.. tion, that I considered myself at liberty at any time is mei in the Cabinet and in Parliament that question, namely the question of appropriation of church revenue to purposes not now strictly called ecclesiastical. Well, Sir, in the course of the following year that question came to ba a matter of dis cusa•ion, and I was ready at the time, as far as I could to de fer for one year that division in the Cabinet which was evi dently approaching, but I declared, and that openly, in my place in this House, that if ever there was a just complaint of a people, it was the complaint of the people of Ireland against the appropriation of the Church revenue, and that if it caused me to make the sacrifice of parting from those with whom I was united in affection and respect, yet I thought the cause was so mighty and important a one, that I should not hesitate to make that sacrifice. The opinion of the majority of that Cabinet was declared to be in favour of the opinion which I professed, and the Noble Lord, with three of my other col leagues, retired from office upon that very question, it being distinctly understood what what his opinion, on the one hand, and what was our opinion on the other. During a great part of the time that I have just gone over the Hon. and Learned Gen tleman the Member for Kilkenny was opposed for the most part to the Govornment. In 1834 be was very much opposed to the Government, declaring his mistrust of our intention. At a later period, indeed, when I brought the question for ward, he of course, seeing the resolution was in conformity with his own views, supported it ; but I think I may ask the [louse, such having been my opinion for so long a time, both in the Cabinet and in the House, whether this imputation be well founded which has been thrown upon us ?—( Hear, hear, hear.) And, above all, I will ask whether, although it might be repeated as a useful cry by some of the retainers of the party of which the Right Hon. Gentleman the Mem ber for Tamworth is the head, whether, if among the cries, the imputations, and the calumnies of the party, it was una voidable that such calumnies should be used, still I do ask the House, and I ask it with all solemnity, whether the Noble Lord the Member for Lancashire ought to be the person to use it? The Noble Lord says that the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny has written a letter, in which he de clares that he will not pay, and never will be satisfied while he is required to pay tithes, and he proceeds to quote other opinions of the Hon. and Learned Member. Sir, that Hon. and Learned Gentleman, in the exercise of his own judgment. and in his own view of what is best for Ireland, bas supported the present Government. The present Government has re ceived from him undoubtedly strong, and I must say, very fair and honourable support.—(Great cheering.) But I never found that the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny ever gave up or at all renounced any one of his opinions upon the many subjects which have engaged his attention—opinions varying from ours, and which he carried to a much greater extent than we have ever carried them, calling for reforms not only with respect to the Irish Church, not only with respect to Irish tithes, but with respect to many questions relating to the domestic policy of this country. But, Sir, if he has not given up, or retracted, or swerved from his opinions, I think I may say that upon this subject at least we neitherhave changed our opinions. The Noble Lord has asked me to look at the list majority on this question, and to analyze that m;x in - jority, and see if I shall n o t find many persons it who wish to destroy the Church of Ireland, and to carry measures much further than I do. I might ask the Noble Lord look back to the majorities upon the Reform Bill, and upon many other Bills, in which he will find men of various opinions. Let him look upon the majority when the Reform Bill was first brought forward, and lost by one vote. Were there not in that majority advocates of universal suffrage, and many who called for far more extensive changes than that which we advocated? Did this circumstance afford any grounds why those who considered the measure calculated to benefit the country should not bring it forward at all, or, having passed it, should not abide by it ?—( Hear, hear.) It was stated that in the course of the last debate he had said that the purpose of a Church Establishment was not to pro pagate a doctrine but to instruct a people, and from this it had been inferred, not unjustly, that he disconnected from the objects and business of the Established Church in Ireland the promulgation of its doctrines. What he had said agreed fully with the opinions of Paley, and neither Paley nor any other man would say that it was not the duty of a Minister to propagate his doctrines. The object was so to instruct the people as to have them versed in the doctrines of religion and of morality, and to take care that that instruction is given in the best possible manner. —( Hear, hear.) It was of no use merely to have a Protestant Establishment in Ireland. What he (Lord John Russell) wished was to diffuse through that country a system of instruction, not limited to Protestant in struction, but which should partake of the common doctrines of Christianity—love to one's neighbour, charity to all men—the great and sublime doctrines in which the Roman Catholic was of one mind with us.—(Hear, hear.) At this late hour of the night it was not his intention to carry the House into ques tions of figures, but in reference to some of the general results he might describe in what state this plundering and spoliating measure left the Church of Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) These same words, plunder and spoliation, though applied by a bishop in giving a charge to the clergy of Exeter—(Hear, hear)—and re-echoed by the Noble Member for Lancashire, were somewhat outrageous phrases, but they did not frighten him from his well-considered purpose.—(Hear, hear.) He would now proceed to exhibit the state o f th e Irish Church as it would be fixed by the proposed Bill. The expenditure and receipts of the Irish Church under the Bill would stand thus : EXPENDITURE. Archbishops, two £17,780 Bishops, ten 1 / 4 £67,367 To dignitaries and prebendaries, with cure 11,042 To minor canons and vicars choral, having duties To parochial clergy (1,250) 368,350 To curates (241) To vestry cess and repair of churches Building new churches 20,000 Ditto glebe houses . lO,OOO Expenses of commission and interest on £100,000... 14,000 Income of general fund applicable to meet defi ciencies and pay loans To surplus 35,140 65,439 £683,737 After repaying loans, the total surplus will amount to £100,579 RECEIPTS. Net Revenues arising from the continuing archiepis copal and episcopal sees £67,367 Net revenues belonging to dignities and prebends, with cure 11,042 Net revenue from junior canons and vicars choral estates 14,324 Net revenue from rent charges, glebe lands, minis tors' money, and other funds of small amount 4M,864 Amount of the general fund in the hands of the Eccle siastical Commissioners arising under the Church Temporalities Act, the Act to alter and amend said Act, and the present Tithe Bill £683,737 The average net income of each archbishop will be £8,890 Ditto Ditto Ditto The Noble Lord proceeded to observe that it should be recol lected that the duties of the archbishops and bishops thus libe rally remunerated, would be far less onerous than those of the prelates of England. Was it too much, then, having pro vided such an establishment for Ireland, to ask that Parlia ment would so:far indulge the wishes of the people of Ireland as to show them that the Roman Catholics of that country were not considered a total blank, but were taken into account in considering the important question of national education.— ( Hear.) If the sum was not a great one in amount, he con ceived that he might rely upon its being gratefully accepted as a token and sign that the British Parliament took an interest in the people of Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord opposite hinted that the majority of a former night might on this occasion be found somewhat lessened. He (Lord John Russell) left it most confidently with the House to decide on which side of the question lay justice and good policy. No system which had not kindness and moderation as ingredients, would ever succeed ; and having such feelings as these, he could assure the Noble Lord that, whether in that place or in any other, he should ever oppose any vote which the Noble Lord might have to propose for the purpose of carrying on expensive and sanguinary campaigns in Ireland. The Committee then divided.— For the clause 290 Against it Majority for Ministers ... ... —26 The clause was accordingly agreed to. The House resumed, and the CHAIRMAN reported progress and obtained leave to sit again. The other Orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Half-past One. FEMALE BEAUTY is alone to be attained and preserved by Vinceitt'a Gowland's Lotion. This entirely innor;ent balsamic lotion produces a beautiful roseate com plexion, and a clear, white brilliant skin, thoroughly cleansing all discolouration, every imperfection and coarseness, and im parting the transparency and bloom of beauty. It preserves the complexion from the heat and rays of the sun and dust, and to families travelling, enjoying excursions, promenading, &c., is indispensable to comfort and attraction. It imme diately allays any unpleasant heat of the face, all inflamma tion, parched skin, &c., diffusing a delightful refreshing cool ness. It totally eradicates all cutaneous eruptions, tan, sun burns, freckles, spots, redness, &c. Gentlemen after shaving will find it cooling and grateful. Prices 2s. 9d., 55. 6d., and Bs. 6d. Observe the signature "M. E. Vincent" on the label, and " Robert Shaw, 33, Queen -street, Cheapside," en graved on the Government Stamp. Sold by all respectable medicine venders, perfumers and druggists. Ask for Vin cent's Gowland's Lotion. MRS. TROLLOPE'S NEW WORK ON AMERICA.- Great as was the popularity of Mrs. Trollope's sketches of the " Domestic Manners of the Americans," her new work upon the same subject, which includes pictures of life in the backwoods and on the shores of the Mississippi, has vastly ex ceeded it in public estimation, t'ae demand on the first day of publication having nearly absorbed a large edition. The native cunning and disregard of principle of Jonathan Jefferson Whitlow, the prominent character in the book, the son of a settler in the wilds of America, elevates him in sr ite of his lu dicrous ignorance, to power and consequence i.n the States. Mrs. Trollope's treatment of such a subject may be easily imagined.