The Sun. — London, England, 1844-06-13 00:00:00

entillieni G ov ernMe n b n with Wbig obseriratOs otil• - •1‘ i t t ijj % c) au ee o :rf,otes" 03, tile , - . _ . .,,.r.... - / , 4110.1 THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, JUNE 13,. 1844. -- In the _ b e utscharge of their duties, and whatever might the success of that Church, its abuses would Gn.. 'e t t i lger an impediment to its progress. An Hon. t_7 epan had asked whether they would create the MLblished Church de novo if it ceased to exist ? He (Sir j a t est b mei Graham) did not think that was a fair c b ,i which to try the advantage of the Protestant ister from There were several institutions which ex ver m the earliest time, and which they valued cr e S at "eh, and which they would not, perhaps, L e e again if they were no longer in existence. But t an w t e v e , cl not deal w,ith that now, for the Irish Protes t Ch deal was yet in existence. They found that tie, Ch arch had been brought under the considera at" of both the British and Irish Parliament th e Pet th at ti me of the union. He would not fereril article of the union, to which re of the bad be en ma d e, higher than the necessity arti c l e ekse required. He would not say that that ratifies prohibited all interference with the tempo- Ras le s of the Protestant Church of Ireland, but it solemn consideration that any interference ii‘o te mporalities should be an . inteference based bathe maintenance and prosperity of the Church. were on that ground that he and his . Noble . Friend, the e eParties to the Church Temporalities Act and ration Commutation Act. The greatest exagge pr'or prevailed out of doors as to the revenues of the jaellestant Church. They had been 800,0001. a year, l aced ng all sources of revenue. They were now re the to 650,000/., and if deductions were made from ti er bey income he did not believe that the Ho n . In t h. tu for Sheffield would dispute the fact with th a t ab out the revenues from all sources were now Wasutere 59 % 00 04, certainly un d er 600,0001. Nothing wbe common than to have recourse to threats, spokereason failed, and the Gallant Commodore wit() fi rst ' si On thi s subject would be quite . decided by the and not fired in Europe. He had given them wars P r►n tno urs of wars, and he had given them the not' e de Joinville in the chops of the Channel, and fer e tt st ,hey gave up thi s question there was no safety did " Aloritish Empire. That assertion, he thought, Ireitteat injustic e t o th e R oman Catholics of 11a" did not think that the accustomed es """Y and l o y a lty o f th e R oman C a th o - ThesWould be f oun d want i ng w h en occas i on o ff ere d . leg th at they had come from one so distinguished for t kele ra p ve rY as the Gallant Commodore, the best jo g nullifying such danger would be by employ leekit;e Gallant Commodore himself.—(Cheers and 'lin ger '' el% ) He did not believe there was much d to be feared if that Gallant Commodore . did els w li b tY, not in uttering threats, but in conquering for e n er e• The Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member Wer e h'r`earripton, said that the present Government °Pini n ' tl able to do justice on questions involving theof t t h e and feelings of Roman Catholics, on account th at li e warm feelings of some of their supporters in tiled -° use• How was that statement to be recon te with the conduct of the Government in reference rnatienal edu ca ti on i n I re l an d, w hi c h was opposed Prien; an Y of their supporters in that House . lat e ? hear)—or with their conduct on a they ‘easion towards the Unitarians, whom The ? i! ° PPorted from a sense of justice alone . varlet , 'gut lion. Gentleman, who had diverged into a deh a j of topics which did not properly belong to the ogle' h ad observed that even for the Church of 1 11 1 - ttiley had failed to perform their promises, a st v ,„"" t he measure which they had brought forward e s llYc a r to increase its usefulness, had not issued in ueeifsefical benefit. Now he must remind the Hon. 11 Poe -e 4 11 1 , 1 a0 that the borrowing of 60,0001. of capital, !salt ~,ue security of the ecclesiastical revenue, had 15 0• 47,the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to place from 'istrh, - ,`°o additional clergymen in the manufacturing !y ea csi with an income varying from 1501. to 2001. th e When such a great addition had been made th Parochial strength of the Established Church, t site -i° ußbt the Right Hon. Gentleman was asti r premature in declaring that the had n o t b een a tt en d e d w ith any benefit. t„rnpb, e s,r) hear.) N ow h e was qu i te prepare d to d o she Jus tice to the speech of th e H on . M em b e r f or tit C'd in introducing the motion before the House ; mu st be p erm itt e d t o say th a t, a lth oug h h e h a d l oti a ° very e x t ens i ve p rem i ses , no thi ng cou ld be "rie Z ti sfactory as the conclusion at which he h a d .I st o n i Ile appeared to have ransacked a ll th e s t ores , Partnj• $e Han sar d, b u t o f hi s t or y genera lly, i n p re - NA t oat spe ec h. Th e y h a d h a d ex t rac t s f rom ~s t l‘ tor e a ns in the H ou s e o f C ommons and i n th e H ouse extracts from history, extracts from ser <di• a'6 ext racts from pamphlets, extracts from the tis tlee r , 47. B ll Review ; they had had puffs of auc ,'kte,:ni,eeehes i n t averns an d a t di nners , speeches at , 41 tes, - Val], Mr. Glover's book, Mr. I‘l4Neil's lec ;ras-Isitast.lArontgome,ry Martin's repeal newspaper, e travellers comments on Ireland; in ell , ere b t he Hon. Gentleman's historical . researches b i t to bear upon this subject, and yet, he 4 4 red, although nothing could be more ample than ! l ets :1 11 ;es, nothing could be so narrow and incom i42l3, yo is conclusions.—(Hear, hear.) He would s. ‘"th e ' b "te one or two of his expressions with respect ran protestant Church. He said that the mai.n -tisil4-e of that Church was a grievance to the Irish i Zra t ,Lao said that Europe desired to see Ireland S"'at h - ' 4 from the last remnant of the yoke; he said We e ke r prepared to concede at once . what . it was i t tee a , °llB . to withhold ; and then, entertaining these e el:unions, he contented himself with mo . ving tb°lrmaittee of inquiry. Now, as a preliminary s 'ettia - ' 4 t might be intelligible, if the Hon. Gen ttb'e-tli W er.e - more with . reference to the tgat „which he had in view in proposing et the House should go into Committee. t! l e t l,l said he did not ask the House by its vote to thae:tself to any specific plan ofiproceeding. If he t heard the Hon. Gentleman before last night t• ied subject, he should have believed that he 1 - Td very extensive view of what appeared to him e7°ser livery subject, attended with considerable . the but that he had no preconceived opinion as it! rern eoly which ought to be applied. The Hon. ee aa , eeth a s opinion last session was that seven fl)t re ßa ci r f e the temporalities of the Irish Church, hay •hste it, u to all existing interests, should be taken t , 1 1 " proe_llld those seven-eighths should be transferred, '0 MT • to the different reli it Its se leo to their numbers, l i i. 4 l)p h ,."`S in Ireland. He must say, therefore, that . ' p - en to him,thatthe House could not entertain t tke tes ent L. a ~._a p roposition unless they were prepared to i ( ,tt N ue ur t ch st i ep l t r ow l towards the spoliation of the Pro (Hear, hear.) It should t l j it h i t, fc ' r gotten n that e those a who were best acquainted h i lt ed t - 7, Roman Catholic clergy in Ireland had de -tel - "at the • 'sten of that Church would abso be y ref. mm th e u u se the offer of endowment.. If that were t , i att i h k - Lemourable Gentleman's object could not jt C a C e d except by depriving the Protes in th ll reh o f all i ts revenues, and p l ac i ng ced e Positi on o f a vo l un t ary c h urc h, w ith ou t tesre h °wrn ent.—(Hear.) To that proposition, if he , io e ll eit c ;tottioitaken, the Noble Lord, the Member for ti o th at London, had declared on a former occa %tit Whi e l'e felt insuperable objections. The clues % the r e : they were then debating . was, in reality, k; Pa s't not they should go into Committee for . o N t par t l : ,?f Viteet,'Nek not the whole, of its revenues. He did ae art. it at all necessary to cavil about the terms hi e l ele of union. He was not prepared to deny ..telz,„`°ptieal fact brought forward by the Hon. t t li hNi‘a 'or Sheffield, that Mr. Pitt had considerably fore, the fifth article of union, as compared with tiq ‘,,ur Words adopted by the Irish Parliament, ti t ,7 of uf ,`Tiol frankly admit, that he believed the er rs ru " 1 ") as now formed, would admit of C the akin° • p rie e some endowment for the Roman a il) w 'Mood in Ireland. But without . casuistry, th 4 % ); c ° „ ° ,. 114 be unworthy of a deliberative body,.he IltLk tet e - I. e u° l that the proposition of depriving C e s "nt Church in Ireland of its revenues was eh ,W frain'eonsistent with the fifth article as it was 15 0 ,,Ntes t e d• Some reliance had been placed on the ti e s4o l I.l ; ee that there was no reference to the tem e,4,ll-ied An that article of union, and allusion had -11e00 Scotland snore than once in reference h i e of S e J,eet• Now he did not consider that the 1:- to b e and was at all analogous. It appeared to 434,very converse of the case in point. In ki b tkity ; s tile time of the union the religion of the tete. of this the religion of the State, a_ . nd . the reli 14,4eserlta't.t majority constituted the religion of the A ori at th2v body at the time of the union. In Iresee . w ae - , t ,i_ute of the union the religion of the mi -1 religion of the State, and the repre- Npa v e b k)o to°dY—the parties to the union— be- t ql 14 r th the religion of the minority. r er efore, from the cases being pa terera on appeared to him to be the con of the other. But with respect to the . 4 tt l3°l.4l lti - e : of the Church of Scotland and tonicif ef the Church of Ireland a . di all" was made in the articles ttc, :aeh ea that they should be preserved inviolate. t ( pr e upo n tile maintenance of the Establishment !eta' a nc e to b P o r th e el t ,sely the same ground ; and with re let act -'-aogland was bound by the most so k aet and esernents to maintain the Establishment Iti: 11115 er f or She hear.) Now, the Hon. 0, th e tr Sheffield, and the Right Hon. Gentle- Wegea-L`-kember for Northampton, had both referred 11 1 ': 41 o f ye at the time when the motion for a thencla e. e u nion was brought forward in that je:u th at thtuat occasion it was said Parliament de- N e c allse of c Y would do their utmost to remove any the',Y Well- c o omplaint, and that they would grant 1,41 t W ere sdered measure of improvement ; and of Ir t e o i lti that an absence of measures for the he tae it w a ud had d e b (gild no , marked the present session. !Ilee t ate t b be consistent with that period of i ntr With' r at he should go into any detailed argu nlerqueed l e 3 sPect to the measures which had been alt k a te th e ,,Y the Government; he would only enu haitationha In the first place, a very important the eo had the been made in the Irish poor-law, which _effect of relieving he oorer portion of nity from an Oppressive rate p which had been imposed upon them;—he believed that measure was a substantial benefit.—(Hear, hear.) He had heard with extreme regret the comments made upon two other measures proposed by the Government, which, however, they might have been received in Ireland, had been framed by the Government with a sincere desire to remove just causes of complaint. He alluded to' the Irish Registration Bill and the Mu nicipal Franchise Bill. He thought he could show that a considerable addition was made by one of these Bills to the county constituency; and not content with dealing with the county franchise, they proposed to take off a number of taxes from the occupiers of 101. houses. They proposed to give the same municipal franchise to Ireland, as already existed in England. They had also in troduced a measure to remodel the com position of the Board of Charitable Works. The Government proposed to bring in a Bill relative to charitable bequests, and also that a certain number of Roman Catholics should be placed upon the hoard, in order that this might ensure the confidence of the Roman Catholic population and the administrators of the board, and further the Bill would enable them to make endowments to Roman Catholic bodies. That measure would be introduced forthwith, and he could say no more upon the subject at present. A measure of the late Government, to which he (Sir J. Graham) gave his support—namely, the Tithe Commutation Act, had had the effect of relieving the Catholic occupiers from oppressive burdens. The present Government had further shown their disposition to ameliorate the grievances of the Irish people by extending the county franchise, and by placing the muni• cipal franchise upon the same foundation as it was in England ; and they had further pledged themselves to increase the grant for national educa tion in Ireland by the sum of one-third of its present amount.—(Hear, hear.) It was possible, on account of the unhappy religious differences, of which ,the Right Hon. Gentleman who spoke last truly said that they embittered even that which was intended in a spirit of kindness and charity—it was possible, he (Sir J. Graham) repeated, that the good intentions of Government might be frustrated ; but it was their sincere desire to prove to their Roman Catholic fellow subjects that the Government were actuated by motives consistent with their sense of duty—con sistent with sound policy—consistent with a desire to transmit entire those solemn engagements into which this country had entered, and to do all in their power to remove the existing discontent in Ireland. It had been said that the Established Church of Ireland had been a type of inferiority to the Catholic popula tion. Well, then, the question before the House was not whether the Catholic priesthood should be endowed—not whether a State provision should be made for them ; but the question was a question of degree, he admitted, among Hon. Gentlemen oppo site, some of whom were for taking away the property of the Established Church, and applying it to Catho purposes, and some for applying it to secular pur poses; but the great question was whether the Esta blished Church in Ireland should not be despoiled of its revenues, or of a large portion of them. He felt bound to state that to that proposition he could not give his sanction or support ; and he should also add—for he felt bound to be frank with the House— that he feared that if the Protestant Church were despoiled of its revenues, no other description of pro perty would be safe.—(" Oh, oh," from the Opposi tion.) A century ago it would not have been for a moment believed that such language would have been held towards the Protestant Church by Roman Ca- Roman Catholics. If it had been said at the time the Emancipation Bill was passed that an attempt would be made to despoil the Protestant Church of its revenues, the idea would have been laughed at, and scouted.—(Hear.) He repeated, if the property of the Church of Ireland were to be confiscated, the inva sion of property would not stop there. Those were his opinions, and he thought it to be his duty to state them fully and fairly to the House, for although it might not be competent for those entrusted with power to resist the course of events, yet they might show the danger of adopting any hazardous and rash resolution which could only involve the country in ruin ; —it was much better for those entrusted with power to state what they would do, and what they would not do—what they could do, and what they could not do. He would not say that this was an attempt to subvert the Protestant Church, although there certainly was an attempt to abstract a large por tion of its revenues from that Church, for other purposes than their original intentions, namely, for the pur pose of bestowing them upon Roman Catholics, or for other similar purposes ; and such being the case, it appeared plainly to him that justice, honour, and the original contract, forbade the House to accede to the proposition. The Crown, the Parliament, and the British people were restrained from acceding to such a course by the highest moral obligations, and upon those grounds he felt bound to give his most unhesi tating and uncompromising opposition to the motion. Lord J. RUSSELL then rose and said—Sir, the question now before the House is of so much im portance that I will endeavour to confine myself to that question, and to touch as lightly as possible upon any of the other important questions regarding the state of Ireland. I do so the more willingly because I had an opportunity, in an earlier part of the session, of stating my opinions with respect to several of those qnestions which now stand upon the notice paper of the House, and also because I per ceive it is the intention of my Right Hon. Friend, the Member for Waterford, to bring two of these im portant subjects under the consideration of the House. —(Hear, hear.) But at the same time, whilst I wish to avoid dilating upon other questions, it is impossible, in considering this question, to put out of view the present state of Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland, in his speech of last night, rested his defence of the Irish Church mainly upon the ground of prescription, and he adverted to the speech of his Right Honourable Friend the Member for Edinburgh, delivered a few nights ago, and therefore considered that a prescription of 300 years was a sufficient rea son to induce the House not to interfere with the temporalities of the Irish Church. Now, passing by the question to which my Right Hon. Friend has addressed himself, and which is a totally different question from that now under the consideration of the House.—(Hear, hear)—l should say that that argument of the Noble Lord might have force, if there were not circumstances of great difficulty, great peril—in the present state of Ireland. It cannot, I think, be urged that prescription is paramount in every question: of this kind—(hear, hear)—because it might be asked, if such a principle were admitted as inviolate, how we could justify our interference 300 years ago.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") There was then a longer prescription.—(Hear, hear.) But I find that prescription was overturned. I think the circumstances of that day, and the revolution in religious opinions which took place in England, was a sufficient ground for the change in the ecclesiastical establishments and in the tempo ralities of the Church of England, and for the enact ments of Parliament. But we had set aside prescrip tion, a very long prescription, and interfered largely with the temporalities of the Roman Catholic Church. If we look at the present state of Ireland, and looking at the proceedings which had taken place there during the last year—three or four millions of people assembled to declare their discontent with the Government under which they lived—when we see that after legal proceedings were taken there still re mains discontent—that there still remains a Repeal Association, as an evidence of that discontent, with an exchequer more flourishing (if he were rightly informed) than ever—(" Hear," from the Tory benches) —I must say, Sir, that, looking at these things, there must be some grievance in the state of Ireland of which the peopls of that country have to complain—(Hear, hear)—to which the House ought seriously to look; and as one of those who wish to maintain the union, who deny that the repeal of the union would be beneficial to Ireland, I feel myself obliged to look to other remedies. I cannot admit that so much discontent pervades such a large mass of the people, showing itself so continuously m mani festations which cannot be mistaken, and at the same time believe that it is baseless and unfounded. — (Hear, hear.) I cannot admit, on the other hand, that the remedy proposed to the people of Ireland—the repeal of the union—would be a remedy which this House ought to sanction in order to remove the ginev vances of that people. Among the questions to which our attention has been turned, one of the most important is that which my Hon. Friend, the Member for Sheffield, has brought under our notice.—(Hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had said that the Hon. Member for Sheffield stated his case very fairly, and with great ability and perspecuity. The defence of the Church of Ireland has been undertaken first by the Noble Lord, the Secretary of Ireland, and then by the Right Hon. Gentleman who peculiary represents, as Member for the University of Dublin, the clergy of the Church of Ireland. I listened to that Right Hon. Gentleman as the avowed defender of that Church, and I was surprised that the Right Hon. Gentleman altogether left out of the question the condition and state of religion in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) Any one listening to the Right Hon. Gentle man must have supposed that there was a Protestant Church, and that my Hon. Friend had stated that there were certain abuses in it, and that the Ri g ht Hon. Gentleman not denying the existence of these abuses, was showing that they were in course of re form, and that he was proving, as he thought, sa • tisfactorily, that the Church ought to be maintained in its present size and extent. But 13 that the ques tion ? Is that the present state of Ireland ? (Cheers.) Does not the Right Hon. Gentleman, who is the defender of that Church, show what I think is generally the case—an extraordinary . inattention and neglect to the faith of the great majority of his countrymen in Ireland—when he puts the question on that issue? Sir, I am ready to make greater con cessions that any yet made to the Right Hon. Gentle man, For the sake of argument I will admit that the eighty-one cases of pluralities, and the 109 cases of non-residences are in course of reduction, and that in a very few years there would be no case either of plu rality or non-residence. I do not think I could make a larger admission than this. Putting the case in that shape, I still say that the Church of Ireland is an anomaly and *a misfortune to that country, and re quires the most serious attention of this House. But the case of the Church of Ireland, as a cause of com plaint, is a very short one. It is, that here are 800,000, more or less, to go to the extreme, say 850,000, the only part of a population of 8,000,000 who are cared for by the State, and the only persons who are in enjoyment of 650,0001. a year, which is given to them for the support of their Establishment. That appears to me to be a case to which there is no parallel in any other country in Europe.—(Cheers.) That is the plain and obvious cause of the complaint made by the people of Ireland, and anywhere else it would be called an oppressive and intolerable grievance. The Right Hon. Gentleman, an Irish Member, in stating the case of the Church of Ireland, altogether omits this question. He entirely forgets that there do exist six and a half millions of Roman Catholics ; and he considers them as no part and parcel of our constitution, when the question of the Church of Ireland is before us. I believe there is no such case at present existing in Europe of a church of this kinl ; I believe that the only parallel to it to be found in history in the state of the Episcopal Church in Scotland during the reign of the Stuarts, when that country was convulsed with insurrection, and was dis turbed and oppressed by tyranny and by wrong. The same uneasiness existed, the symptoms being different only because the present age is different from the seventeenth century. The same symptoms of a dis position to monopoly, and to inflict a religion upon the people, existed with respect to Ireland, as formerly existed in Scotland; and I cannot but believe that the same remedy will be required before we can ex pect peace or tranquillity there.—(Cheers.) I will now take the objections which have been urged against our entering upon the consideration of this question in a Committee of the whole House. The Noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, says there is the article of union ! The Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State, urges that ground not in the very temperate manner in which it was treated by the Right Hon. Gentleman, the First Lord of the Treasury. He advances that argument in a manner such as I have never heard before. He puts it in this way, and says, the words being the same with respect to Ireland in the treaty of union, that they are with respect to Scotland, then you are obliged and bound to maintain in effect and inviolate the Church of Ireland in its property, as it existed at the time of the union. Why, I must say that I was astonished when I heard that statement fall from the Right Hon. Gentleman, because the Right Hon. Gentleman himself was a party to a Bill which took away a considerable portion of the property of that Church.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman supported a Bill which took away property to the amount of, I should say, nearly, if not more than, 300,0001. a year from the Irish Church. It is quite true that those revenues were not to be devoted to Catholic purposes; but they had been devoted to no ecclesiasti :al purposes, having been applied to the secular purpose of swelling the rent-rolls of the owners of land. But I say that the Right Honourable Gentleman was a party to a Bill that was brought in either by Lord Althorn, or the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley), with respect to the temporalities of the Church of Ireland, Were there no objections stated then ? Yes, I will give you the objections ass they were stated by two very high outhorities. The first authority I will quote is that of Mr. Lefroy, now Baron Lefroy, who pos sesses very high legal recommendations, and a very extensive knowledge of law, and who had been re commended by her Majesty's Ministers to the high situation of filling one of the judicial benches in Ire land. Now, what said he to the Bill to which the Right Honourable Gentleman was a party. Mr. Baron Lefroy, in speaking of the Pro testants of Ireland, said, "much dissatisfaction and discontent exists among them with re spect to opposing this measure, which I think they will consider as violating the Legislative union. They consider that this measure not only violates the Coronation oath, but also directly violates that Act of the Legislature on which the union of the two coun tries was originally established. The Protestants of Ireland, who had been hitherto such firm supporters of that union, will now be ready to join with those who cry for its repeal." Mr Baron Lefroy as strongly stated his objections to that Bill as the Right lion. Gentleman had stated his objections to this Bill. His ground was a very firm ground, according to the Right Honourable Gentleman's present statement. There was still a higher authority who made objec tions to that Bill—l mean the Archbishop of Canter bury. When I quote the words of the Archbishop of Canterbury, I quote the words of a prelate who is not accustomed to deal in declamation, or use terms of exaggeration, with respect to any measure which he may think it his duty to oppose, but one who states temperately and firmly what he thinks. He stated his objections to the measure to which the Right Hon. Gentleman was a party :—" He should object to this Bill, because the principle of the reform it contained was only of a subordinate kind—that the conciliation contemplated would fail in its object, be cause it went to apply the property of the Church to the purposes for which it was not intended. He ob jected to it because it gave a triumph to the Catholics over the Protestants, which would not tend to the harmony of that country. He objected, to it because it was the most sweeping measure ever applied to the Church, and disposed of the property of the Church to those who had no right to it whatever;" and he stated that he feared the Bill would be taken as a precedent. These were the objections which the Archbishop of Canterbury stated to the Bill to which the Right Hon. Gentleman was a supporter—objec tions as strong as any that he can apply to the mo tion of my Hon. Friend. The Archbishop of Canterbury feared that it would be taken as a precedent. Certainly, if it had not been intended to farm a precedent, I should not have supported that Bill, because, although I considered that it would be a useful measure, I felt that there were other reforms that would subsequently be required. If this be the case, let not the House be frightened by the denun ciations of the Right Hon. Baronet. Let them not take alarm at the statement that the Act of Union will be violated. The Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member for the University of Dublin, at the time the Bill wasbefore the House,,said, that if it had been proposed at the time of the union, one half of the benefices in Ireland would have been abolished. He now speaks of that measure as a measure which was brought forward by the friends of the Church, and says, having done so much in the way of reform, I hope you will not now listen to the enemies of the Church. It is very consoling now to find that such an appeal is treated with so much respect by the Right Hon. Gentleman. During the time I have sat in this House I have heard measures denounced as being calculated to destroy the Constitution two or three times over, and two or three years afterwards, when those prophecies were found to be groundless, I have heard some person interpose, and beg that we would not destroy the Constitution, which he proved to be so flourishing and so healthy.—(Hear.) I therefore apprehend that if my Hon. Friend be so fortunate as to persuade the House to go into Committee on this question, and should adopt a measure in accordance with his views, in the course of a few years we should have the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite saying, do not make any further innovations in the Church; the last measure was a very wholesome and friendly one, and was adopted on the very amicable suggestion of the Honourable Member for Sheffield ; don't trust to any hand less friendly to the Church. The statement made by the Right Hon. Gentleman was, that there should be endowments for the Roman Catholics ; that might be all very well, but there was great objection to it. He would now proceed to the question whether the Protestant Church of Ireland answered so completely the purposes for which it was designed, as to render it necessary not to interfere with it. What was the ground on which the Esta blished Church rested ? 'Was it not to give the means of religious instruction to the people ? The great question was, did the Church of Ire land answer the purposes of a great State ? He thought it had been clearly shown that it did not. If they would cut down the Protestant Esta blishment to something like what was wanted by the people, they would do something. In Ireland not an eighth or ninth of the people were connected with the Establishment. The Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, had been pleased to say that the motion of the Hon. Mem ber for Sheffield with respect to the Church was not so explicit as usual; and added to that, it was to be remembered that the party opposed to the mea sure were not particularly united in their views. He (Lord J. Russell) begged to state, that it would not be very difficult for him and his Hon. Friend, the Member for Sheffield, to discuss the merits of the question in their minutest particulars at the proper time, and he should not despair of framing something that might meet with a general concurrence and support on that, the Opposition, side of the House. —(Cheers.) But did the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir James Graham) think it necessary that all who voted for the motion then before the llouse must have agreed on some specific plan before doing so ? —(Laughter from Sir James Graham.) The Right Hon. Baronet seemed amused with what he said ; and yet he and the Right Hon. Gentleman had before that day contended in a cause in which persons of various views and opinions supported them, and by so contending together, succeeded in carrying the measure called the Reform Bill.—(Loud cheers.) Some Hon. Members on the occasion he alluded to, said, with Lord Carnarvon, it was best to go for a moderate and graduated portion of reform—others were for annual Parliaments—others for the most extended suffrage—and yet they all went out together with the greatest harmony into the lobby, and by so acting, and not pulling against each Ater, got the Rouse to consent to go into Committee, and, diverse as were their opinions, managed, by the aid of that Right Hon. Gentleman himself, and of the Noble Lord next to him (Lord Stanley), to pass a Bill for a very considerable reform in the representation of the people.—(Loud cheers.) This was the conse quence of acting together, and he had little doubt that by the same plan they would eventually be enabled to effect important and desirable changes in the tem poralities 9f . the Established Church of Ireland.— (Hear, hear, and Cheers.) In the course of the remarks which had fallen from the Gallant Commodore (Napier), that Hon. and Gallant Gentle man had warned the House that if a time of war and danger arrived, then Ireland could command, and would have the rights she sought ; and the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir J. Graham) in reply had said that they were not to be deterred by threats. But it did so happen that history furnished them with in stances where danger had secured rights which had been refused to justice and reason.—(Hear, hear.) In 1779 they were as violently opposed to the demands made by Ireland as they were now, but when the vo lunteers were in arms, and danger from France was impending, they had conceded those very demands. — (Cheers.) Lord Granville used the same warnings in those days, and they were unheeded. And since Lord Granville had spoken was there not another instance to the point ? Were they not told in 1828 that they would not be intimidated, and the very next year, 1829, the demands then made were granted by the very men who had previously boasted so much of their courage.—(Loud cheers.) In his (Lord J. Russell's) opinion they should seriously delibe rate upon this subject now before the House, when they could do so without the appearance of fear, for he thought it would be a great calamity indeed to do so when danger might be impending over the country.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") It was said from the benches opposite that the Irish were loyal. So they were loyal ; but was that any reason why they should impose wrongs upon them which no other country in Europe would submit to ? —(Great cheers.) When the people of the sister country saw what was the rule in England—when they saw what was the rule in Scotland—but that they strenuously refused the same rule to Ireland— let him ask the Government if the warmest loyalty might not grow cold, if the strongest attachment might not be converted into enmity.—(Cheers.) He said, if such was the condition of Ireland—and if Hon. Gentlemen opposite could not find some better and more reasonable arguments to justify such con dition—then ought they to go with his Hon. Friend into the Committee he invited them to. Let them in that Committee consider all the various circumstances incident to the case. Let them consider the best arrangement that could be devised regarding it. Let them consider what ought to be done for that worthy clergy (for in spite of all the taunts that had been heaped upon them, they were a worthy clergy) —let them see what these worthy men would agree to—let them try to make them independent, and to ascertain what their views and feelings were, and let them give to the laity of Ireland the same privileges as were enjoyed in England. Let them, he said, go into Committee with those intentions, and he did not despair of the result.—(Cheers.) Until they showed that spirit—until they showed that they were willing to be guided by reason in their government, and that their disposition was really, not merely by words, but by acts to conciliate the affections of the Irish people—(Hear, hear)—they had no right to say that they were doing that which was right, or that they had any sincere desire to do justice to Ireland.—(The Noble Lord resumed his seat amidst loud and continued cheering.). Sir H. PEEL said the motion for the House to go into Committee, with a view to consider the question of the temporalities of Ireland, had been supported by the usual plausible and specious asseverations. What was the nature of the proposition of last year ? At that time a distinct intimation was conveyed to them, that the Hon. Member thought it was no use their voting for him, unless they were prepared also to adopt and carry out his plan. He assumed that the revenue of the Church in Ireland was about 558,0001. ; and the Hon. Gentleman most fairly and candidly said, " Do not vote for me, unless you are prepared to adopt my proposi tion." He said that those who voted for him must not be content with Church Temporalities Bills, or Appro priation Clauses.--(Hear, hear.) He proposed that the present revenues of the Church should be divided among the Presbyterians, the Wesleyans, and the Roman Ca tholics, appropriating to the latter Church abOut 412,0001. of the amount. That was the course he proposed iast year. Any one who remembered this declaration, and was not prepared to adopt the Hon. Gentleman's plan, was therefore fully justified in refusing to keep up a de lusion, and to follow the Hon. Gentleman into a Commit tee.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to the allusion that had been made to a former declaration of his (Sir R. Peel's), as to the compact that had been made with the Church, he did not wish to disregard that compact, unless it could be shown that an advantage would arise from doing so. He wished not to alter the language he then used) he abided by what he then said. The opinion he then expressed was the opinion he still entertained, but it was not the opinion that had been imputed to him by the Hon. Gentleman. He stated distinctly that, though they were not bound irrevocably to the letter of a compact, if their- own convictions told them that an adherence to that compact inflicted wrong and injury upon the country—(Hear, hear)—yet, at the same time, be distinctly said, " this compact is a most material element for our consideration, and nothing would have a greater tendency to lower the authority of Parliament than not keeping the faith they had pledged.' The Hon. Member had referred to the speech he (Sir R. Peel) had made in 1817 ; he had referred to it on every occasion on which he had brought this subject before the House. That speech was deliveredltwenty seven years ago ; in it he expressed the apprehension he entertained at the time—that the removal of the Catholic disabilities would not ensure tranquillity. He apprehended that, after that removal this very question would be raised, that it was consistent with what they knew of human nature that the Roman Catholics should endeavour to depress the Protestant Establishment, and raise their own. He was rather surprised that the Hon. Gentleman should so constantly remind him merely of the opinion he then delivered, and not of the state ment made in answer to that opinion—the statement that went far to destroy the arguments on which his opinions had been founded. In 1821, the chOsen advocate of the Roman Catholic body, the most powerful advocate they ever possessed, the present Lord Plunket, referred to those apprehensions he (Sir P. Peel) had expressed, and he did ask the Hon. Gentleman and the House to hear the counter statement of Lord Plunket, which did, at the time it was made, produce a great impression on reasoning men : it satisfied many of the Protestant com munity. That speech was one that stood almost alone; it displayed great eloquence, united with powers of rea soning such as he had rarely heard. In commencing that speech in 1821, Lord Plunket presented a petition which he said was signed by some thousands of the Ro man Catholics of Ireland. He then proceeded to pass a glowing eulogy on the late Mr. Grattan. lie endea voured to create an impression in the Protestant mind of this country that there was no danger to be appre hended from the removal of the Roman Catholic disabi lities. Mr. Plunket declared solemnly that if he could entertain the opinion that there would be any peril to the Protestant Church from the removal of those disabilities he would abandon the cause he espoused, and range himself on the other side, and referring to what had been said by him (Sir R. Peel), Mr. Plunket said, that he would be bold to affirm the Roman Catholic body har boured no feelings of hostility to the Protestant Estab lishment, and that they would no more attempt to de stroy the Protestant Chui oh Establishment than they would deprive individuals of their property. That argu ment of Mr. Plunket's prevailed over him (Sir R. Peel). A great change was made in public opinion, and in 1829 he felt it to be his duty to propose to Par liament the removal of the Roman Catholic disabilities, as he had good occasion to conclude from the declara tion of their chosen champion, that the Roman Catho lics would not make any aggressions upon the Protes tant Church.—(Hear, hear.) Then, with regard to the union, there could be no doubt that in4the opinion of Mr. Pitt, and all those who spoke at the time of the union, it wit; their intention to assure the Protestant mind in England and Ireland that the Protestant Esta blishment, as it then generally existed, shOuld thereafter be maintained.—(Hear, hear.) It was quite a different question whether a contract was to be literally ad hered to, if it was proved to be injurious. Vhthel799fr' brought forward- hi s reso l ut i ons, which frame-work of th e A ct o f U n i on, e n were M r . Pitt, to be in he followed the precedent of the Scotch union. The words used in one of those resolutions, were that the doc trine, and discipline, and revenues of the Established Church should be maintained. In 18t)13 additional words were introduced in the Irish Parliament, which claimed for the bishops and clergy the power of sitting in convocation, and other words which would heve ren dered it impossible to grant any endowment to the Ca tholic Church. Mr. Pitt proposed the omission of those words. There was nothing to be found in-the language of Mr. Pitt, or Lord Grenville , or Mr. nuncios, or Lord Cornwallis, to induce the belief that the temporalities of the Irish Church were not to be maintained. His im pression was that at the time of the union Mr. Pitt con templated the removal of' the Roman Catholic disabili ties—(Hear, hear) —and assurances were Aiven which would lead them to expect that.—(Hear,- hear.) He also believed that Mr. Pitt intended a separate endow mentneler for intended,the C t a t; o l b i ce (SirChu r Robert ch.— (Hear, hear.) But be any portion of the temporalities of the Irish. Protestant Church should be appropriated to that purpose. He held that engagements were made both at the period of the union, and in 18:39, that the Protestant Church should be maintained in its integrity. He, therefore, thought it most important that this should not be lost sig . lit of in coming to a decision upon this question, becausdahe con fidence of the people in the good faith of ParliatAnt and public engagements was involved in the result.=(Hcar, the e o gpruoubnlidc compaets.--,(Hear.) upon which he gave hear.) But he defended the maintenance of th e Es tablished Church on other grounds aVwell as on tHhee would shortlyyi ofadhsetraitneg his vote for the maintenance of .the Estahlished Church. He thought it of the highest importance, looking at the public, and particularly at the ecclesiastical, pax" of the country, that there should be an established religion in each part of the United Kingdom, that is; folm of the 1 Christian faith, supported by, and incorporated with the State.—(Hear, hear.) There were some who supposed that they would have religious peace if they had no esta blishment. He must say that he did not concur in that opinion. He had seen a recent occasion, in which the cause of dispute was not b e t w een the Established Church and those who dissented from it, but between certain par ties who were opposed to that Church. There was, then, an opportunity- of seeing whether or not the existence of an establishment was the sole cause of animosity and ill-will; and without wishing to utter a word which was disrespectful to those who dissented from the Established Church, judging from the interviews he bad had, and the letters he had received, he must say that he had seen greater instances of religious animosity and jealousy among different classes of Dissenters—(Cheers) —than he had ever seen between Dissenters and the Church.—(Hear, hear.) He had thought it probable that having long been engaged in opposing the Church, they would not display much hostility towards each other ; but his expectations had not • been realised; and he believel the removal of the Establishment, therefore, would not be a guarantee of peace. Now, if that were conceded, the question was —What form of faith should be incorporated with the State in Ireland ? The public policy of this cau stry would give a preference to a Protestant Establishment. There was a Protestant Establishment in other parts of the empire. The religion of the Sovereign, and the general course of constitutional law seemed to be decisive of the selection of the Protestant religion. Was he at liberty even to select another when they were told by the professors of the Roman Catholic faith that they preferred total spiritual independence to union with the State, upon the condition that their independence would be fettered.—(Hear, hear.) He did not think they could have an Established Church connected with the State, and in possession of all the emoluments of the State, without being subject to stringent laws, and to the influence of the Crown over its affairs. He would be sorry to see perfect inde pendence on the part of the Church; he thought it of great importance that the spiritual authority of the Church should be restrained, as it was now restrained, and that it should be made subordinate to Parliaments— (Hear, hear.) But the Roman Catholics told them dis tinctly that they were not prepared to admit the exercise of any such control; and therefore the terms offered by the two parties were not equal. They would not allow the nomination of their prelates by the Pope—they claimed for themselves the right of regu lating all their spiritual affairs by their own authority. Under these circumstances, it did appear to him that to propose to abolish the revenues of a Church, which had existed for 250 years, was altogether unreasonable.— (Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord contended for civil equality. Did he mean that the Catholics should be re presented in the House of Lords, or did he wish to ex clude Protestant Bishops ? Were the churches which had been built by Protestants from their own contribu tions to be given up to the Catholics ? It appeared to him that the principle of religious equality, which sounded so specious, would lead to a total alteration of the ecclesias tical policy of this country ; and he thought there was the greatest danger of such principles re-acting upon this country. They could not expect much satisfaction from a trifling alteration. When the present Lord Spencer brought in a Bill for the extinction of ten bishoprics of the Protestant Church, the measure was hailed by Mr. O'Connell and the Catholic body with delight. One Hon. Member, in the course of the night, said it made no difference to the Roman Catholics what appropriations or reforms were made in the Irish Church, if there was not some privation of emolument. But the measure of Lord Althorp was admitted by those who entertained the same opinions as Hon. Gentlemen who sat on the Opposition benches, as a most useful reform. Ten years had only passed away, and although reform had been extended, and although the revenue of the Church had been curtailed, yet now, in 1844, language still stronger was held with respect to the Protestant Church, and it was denounced as an injury and an insult.—(Hear„ hear, and cheers.) Even suppose they were to go into Committee, what good could they hope to effect? He was not prepared to go one-tenth of the way with the Hon. Gentleman; but he really could not see if the Committee were granted, how they could possibly arrive at a satisfactory result. At the same time he was perfectly willing to admit that every reform compatible with the main tenance of the integ rity of the Church ought to be in troduced—(Hear, hear)—that those pluralities which now existed ought to be extinguished, where they could be extinguished with a due regard to the maintenance of the minister;; also where there were non-residents the evil should be remedied. Although unwilling to enter into the Committee, he would not say that the present state of the Church was perfect.--(Hear.) He would not say that he was not willing that greater equalisation of the revenues of that Church should take place, and greater emoluments be given to the working clergy. He would not, a these accounts alone, refuse to enter into a Committee ; but he saw that it was not a question of revenue—of any alteration in the pecu niary amount of the revenue —or, that any deduction of the sum of 50,000/. or 100,0001. from the emoluments of that Church should be made ; but he stood upon the pledged faith of Parliament, and would continue to stand upon it, unless convinced by some overwhelming politi cal necessity which would compel him to depart from them. —(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," from the Opposition benches.) He was not convinced that there was that overwhelming necessity. He believed the Church was more secure in its present position, opposed as it was to a formidable hostility, by retaining the whole amount of property, than by making any partial con cession in respect to pecuniary amount. Believing that it was for the interests of religion that that Establish ment should be maintained, although he was willing that it should be improved in the details of its constitution, yet after the avowal of the Hon. Gentleman opposite, who contemplated the total subversion of that Church, he could not consent to raise the delusive hope that he knew would be raised if the proposition to go into Com mittee on the subject were acceded to.—(Cheers.) Lord J. RUSSELL explained. The Right Hon. Baronet misunderstood him ; he did not by any means infer that, under any regulations, the Catholic Church should be placed in a position of supremacy. Mr. SHEIL commenced by saying that he wished the Right Hon. Gentleman had spoken at a later period of the debate, that he might not be placed in the somewhat presumptuous position of replying to him ; but the sub ject was one so intimately connected with the state of Ireland that he might be excused for trespassing on the indulgence of the House.—(Hear, hear.) There did not seem much coincidence of opinion between the Members of the Government on this subject. Lord Eliot commenced his speech by expressing himself favourable to an endowment of the Catholic clergy. The Home Secretary differed from the Noble Lord, and the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Govern ment did not say a syllable on the subject. The Noble Lord the Member for South Lancashire proposed that 400,0001. a year should be granted by Parliament to pay the Roman Catholic clergy of Ireland. But if the Secretary for Ireland, he who had Ireland under his control—if the Government were prepared to endow the Catholic Church—he would ask, what course did they intend to take with respect to Maynooth ? They were told that the Catholic clergy would not ac cept the endowment, and surely they were not suffi ciently disingenuous as to offer that which they knew would not be taken, and withhold that which would be accepted.—(Cheers.) The endowment of the Catholic clergy was liable to a great objection, but an increased grant to Maynooth would not be liable to any. No new precedent was involved—they were building on a foun dation which was already deeply deposited. They felt the necessity of that increase, and they ought either to sweep it away altogether or to make it what it ought to be; and yet they were tendering an endowment to a clergy who would not accept the slightest boon from them.—(Hear, hear.) But then they passed over in silence—a silence which was most ex- • pressive, indeed—that which the Catholic clergy were willing to accept. They did not seem to care whe ther an endowment was consistent with the principles of British legislation. If they were to endow the Ca tholic clergy, did they think that the people of this coun try would consent to having both the Churches kept up ? Did they think the people of England would consent to have the support of the Catholic Church defrayed from the Consolidated Fund ? There was a fund in Ireland applicable to the Church of Ireland, and to other reli gious purposes. The moment they endowed the Catholic Church they incorporated it with the State, and a portion of the revenues of the Protestant Church must be made applicable to the support of the Catholic Church. If they endowed the Catholic Church they must be prepared for a large reduction in the resources of the Protestant Church, for, suppose that they were to propose that the Irish landlord should be taxed for its support, would he not say, " What, am I to be taxed for the support of both Churches ?—(Hear, hear)—you first impose tithes on me, and increase the poor. rates, and after all you tax me to support an idolatrous Church !"—(Hear, hear.) He thought that the Right Honourable Baronet would be only involving himself in great difficulty, by as senting to the endowment—the hypothetical endowment, of the Catholic Church. The Right Hon. Gentleman conceived that it was contrary to the Act of Union to diminish the revenues of the Established Church. It had already been said by the Noble Lord, the Member for London, that the protestations of the Right Hon. Baronet were at variance with his practice. If it were contrary to the Act of Union, how could the Right Hon. Baronet consent to the abolition of Church-rates in Ire land ? How could he consent to confiscate one quarter of the tithes of Ireland ?—(Cheers.) Sir Henry Har dinge—but he begged pardon of the Right Hon. Baro net, he was not a Member of that Administration ; nei ther he nor the Noble Lord were Members of that Administration—but Sir Henry Hardinge brought in that Bill, and the present Prime Minister supported it, and now the Noble Lord and the Right Hon. Gentle man were in conjunction with those by whom the pro position was received. Lord STANLEY—I supported it then. Mr. SHEIL continued—One quarter of the tithes — twenty-five per cent.—were subtracted from the Church, and not for the purposes of religion—no, it was de posited in the coffers of the Irish landlords. Was that the case ? Everybody knew that twenty-five per cent. was given to the landlords. This was confiscation. Mr. SHAW—It was an allowance, in consideration of the tithes being paid by the landlords. Mr. SHEIL—The Right Hon. Gentleman called it al lowance ; he (Mr. Shell) called it confiscation. Out of every 1001. that were paid for tithes, the parson only re ceived 751. now. Mr. SHAW—That is not the case. Mr. SHEIL did not think he had been guilty of mis representation; but, :however, " by any other name 'twill —(Laughter)—smell as sweet" to the landlord and as offensively to the parson. There was only-one part of the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary for the Home Department, which he had heard with pain— pain on account of the Right Hon. Baronet himself. He said that if the Church property was touched, the whole property of Ireland might be set at nought. Was he not falling into the error for which lie con ' downed the Hon. Member for Marylebone ? The sug • - ► gestions that had been thrown out by the Right Hon. Baronet were of the most exciting kind. The Right Hon. Baronet ought not to have raised the ghost of Cromwell, to mount guard upon the revenues of the Established Church.—(Hear, hear.)—(The Right Hon. Gentleman then read several extracts from the work of M. Kohl, and the Life of Lord Sydenham, and proceeded to state, that the case of the clergy of Ire land rested on the Act of Union, in which there was not one word with respect to temporalities, but, they came to the conclusion that temporalities was meant.) It was clear to him that the word " temporalities" would have been inserted in the clause of the Act of Union if it had been meant. He had already occupied the House some time with quotations, but he must trespass on its patience still further, by quoting from a document drawn up in 1833 by the Marquis of Anglesey, and addressed to the head of the Government (Earl Grey), the Noble Lord the present Secretary fur the Colonies being then Chief Secretary for Ireland. The Noble Marquis, whose heart was full of affection for Ire land—(Hear, hear)—had in that document distinctly laid it down that the Irish Church greatly exceeded the religious wants of the Protestant population—that it ought to be materially cut down—and that the revenues thus saved should be formed into a national fund to be applied to national purposes. Here, again, was a re markable coincidence with the case of the Clergy Re serves in Canada—a coincidence which, in his opinion, justified a similar remedy to that suggested by Lord Sydenham, and applied by the Government and Parlia naent. Let the House remember that they did not seek for the subversion of the Protestant Church in Ireland.— (Cries of " Oh, oh, mixed with Opposition cheers.) They did not seek its subversion, but for a reduction of its re venue.—(Oh, oh.) He had never asked ,for anything else. He for one protested that a modification of that Establishment was all that he had ever sought or asked for.—(Cheers.) He felt for that:Establishment, for it was an ancient institution, and to sweep itsuddenly, away, leaving no wreck behind, appeared to him to be highly impolitic. But, in his opinion, it was perfectly possible to introduce salutary reforms into it, and so make it ample for the wants of the people, and consonant to the spirit - of the age.—(Hear, hear.) Their complaint was, that the Protestant Establishment in Ireland was totally and inordinately disproportioned to the wants of her communicants. This was one com plaint, and the other was, that the heads of the Church were greatly overpaid for the responsibilities which at tached to their office, and the duties which they had to perform.—(" Oh, oh.") Why, were they not too highly paid ? The Commission which had sat on Church revenues in England had reported that 5,000 L per annum was sufficient for a Bishop in England? Was not 17,0001. a year too much for the Archbishop of Armagh? Sir J. GRAHAM—That is thegross return-14,000/. is the nett. Mr. SHEIL continued—He did not understand these nice distinctions on certain occasions between the gross and nett returns. They were never made in the estates of your territorial proprietors. But he ad mitted it was proposed this should be reduced. To what? His successor was to have 10,0001. a year. Now, they said there was no violation of morality, no infringement of the solemn obligation of an oath, in their contending that 10,0001. a year was too much. Why should an Irish Archbishop be paid more than the Lord Chancellor of Ireland?—(Hear, hear.) Why should he be paid more than the Chief Justice, particularly since Chief Justices had more onerous duties ?—(Cheers and laughter.) Why should he be paid more than any judge of the land? The Bishop of Derry had 14,000/. a year ; he agreed to give up 4,000/. of it. His succes sor received 6,0001. a year, but the next bishop will have 8,0001. That exceeded the salary of any Chief Justice, or of any judge. They did not ask for these bishoprics to be suppressed ; they only asked that they should be paid a sum more adequate to the labours they had to perform.—(Mr. Ward here touched the Hon. Gentleman's arm, and said " the English bishops.")—The English Bishops had from 4,5001. to 5,0001. a year. Why should an Irish bishop, in a coon • try where there were eight millions of Catholics and 800,000 Protestants, receive more .than was thought sufficient for a bishop in England—(Cheers)—for a bishop in this great Protestant country?—(Cheers.) The Member for the University of Dublin said that the in come of the Church, divided among all the clergy, would only amount to 2001. a year for each. But they said, let the number be diminished, for they contended that where there was no congregation, the living ought to be suppressed. Let them reduce their divisor.—(Hear.) At this hour he would not go into these general ques tions ; but there was one point to which he could not refrain from calling the attention of the House. A re ference was made, by the Right Hon. Secretary of State, to what the present Government had done for national education in Ireland. He thought that was a subject which the Right Hon. Baronet ought to have avoided. In their Factoriesßill theyhad declared that the Church ought to be the national instructress of the people. In Ireland they had declared the Church incompetent to administer the fund appropriated to the purpose of edu cation. In England the Church was the church of the people. In Ireland they had gone so far as to say that no clergyman should be promoted who was not in favour of the system of national education.—(Hear.) There was one observation more. It was this : the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) had adverted to the Registration Bill. He did not think that the introduc tion of this Bill into the discussion of the Irish Church was so irrelevant as might at first appear. He thought the Bill was connected with the Irish Church. He thought that every measure brought in with regard to Ireland was connected with the Church. He regarded that Church as the source of every , difficulty. He thought the Right Hon Baronet had not delayed the measure from any such motive. When the Whigs were in office, they were repeatedly taunted by the Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Colonies, and others, that they did not venture to bring forward the mea sure. The Noble Lord himself then undertook the task, and ventured upon premature legislation. When the gentlemen opposite came into office, they naturally asked for a Registration Bill. In the first year they were silent on the subject; the second year the Noble Member for Dorsetshire declared, as Chairman of an Irish Election Committee, that a Registration Bill was immediately required. That year passed and nothing was done. At length the Right Hon. Baronet announced a Bill for this session. It had been brought in, but it had been delayed week after week to such an extent that now any inquiry after it only created bursts of laughter, and the Secretary for the Home Department himself could hardly answer the question without betraying, by his tone and manner, that there was something peculiar in the reasons that prevented it from being brought for ward. They had agreed to the reading the Bill a second time on the Ist of July, when it was manifest they could not pass it through the House. Did he blame them ? No ; because when they came to legislate for Ireland they were met with difficulties at every step.—(Hear, hear.) They might be anxious to give a fair and legiti. mate constituency to Ireland, but they were afraid of increasing the popular power, lest the Church Es tablishment should be disturbed.—(Hear, hear.) They were afraid—he did not mean illegitimately afraid—but they were most positively apprehensive that, by giving Ireland a larger constituency, the popular power would be increased, its action in this House would be aug mented, and consequently be fatal to that institution which they so much cherished.—(Cheers.) Difficulties met them at every step, arising from the Established Church. They had been for ten years asking them to make alterations in the Church Establishment, but that House had resisted the majority of the Irish people, and of the Irish representatives, when they asked for those alterations, which events might render peremptory —when they asked for new appropriation clauses. With Canada (continued the Right Hon. Gentleman) I commenced, and with Canada I will conclude; and as in Canada you have found it necessary to act in con formity with the wishes of the majority of the people, as expressed by their representatives, and as by adopting that principle you procured peace, and are likely to pro cure prosperity and happiness, if you take the same course in Ireland the same results will follow; and if you do not, the time may come when, amidst public calamity, the Right Hon. Gentleman may take a retrospect of his public life, and lament, when repentance would be fruit less, and contrition would be vain, that he omitted the great occasion of winning everlasting fame, and that the opportunity of rendering his country incalculable ser vice was disastrously thrown away. - The Right Hon. Gentleman sat down amid loud cheers. Mr. SHAW rose to explain ; but in consequence of i the noise which prevailed in the House, and the cries of " Divide, divide,' " Spoke, spoke," none of the Right Hon. Gentleman's observations were heard. Sir R. INGLIS rose amidst cries of " Oh, oh." He said he resisted the motion of the Hon. Member for Sheffield, not on the ground of any public contract, but because the Protestant Church in Ireland was the-trust —(lronical cheers)—committed to their care by a gracious Providence.—(Laughter.) lie had made no concessions —(Hear, hear, and ironical cheers)—but he admittted that the Protestant Church in Ireland was neglected. Mr. WARD replied. He merely wished to say, in reference to what had fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) that his resolutions last session contained no plan whatever; they merely expressed an opinion that the Church of Ireland sreuglduebsetimonorheechaond formable to justice. In introducing the which nsan r d eq a u l i l r h ed e m fel u t ch th f a o t rb it ea w ra a n s - ce on a e n , d th in e s u e t t u t a le l n c ie o n n t ce o ss f io asked now was, that they should go into Committee and when there appeared— disTphases}ioinoautseelythiennqudiirveidiendt,othe subject. For the motion 179 Against it Majority in favour of Ministers —95 The other orders of the day having been disposed of, the House adjourned at Half-past One o'clock. MEMOIR OF A BABYLONIAN PRINCESS.—We are requested to state, that Mr. Co'burn, of Great Marl borough-street, has this day published i n t wo vt ,l s ., small octavo, with portrait., price 21s. bound, " The Me moirs of a Babylonian Princess, Maria Theresa Asmar, daUghter of Emir Abdallah Asmar," written by herself, and translated into English ; containing a narrative of the persecution and destruction of her family, on ac count of their adherence to the Christian faith ; of the scenes she has witnessed, and the trials she has expe rienCed during her residence in Mesopotamia, Jerusa .lern i Mount Lebanon, K ur di s ta n , Ispahan, Teheran, and Schiraz ; togeth e r with a n acc o un t of her travels in Italy, France, and England. Her Majesty the Queen Dowager, has graciously permitted these Memoirs to be dedicated to her Majesty. WONDERFUL INCREASE !-Mr. John Buttery, of the Railway Tunnel Tavern, near IN hitby, last week, c" received a marvellous increase to his"live Saturday , his favourite sow littere thirteen d gave birth stok. On " little grunters ;' on Sunday morning dun cow to two healthy calves ; and the following; morning his wife presented him with two fine boys All which "are doing well."—Thill.Packet. DRURY-LANE THEATRE. Mr. Stretton took his benefit at this theatre last even. ing, and, we are happy to say, the house was crowded. This was but a proper tribute to the merits - of Mr. Stretton ; but, independently of his own claims on Vie public, it was impossible that such a bill of fare as he had provided should fail to attract. The performances commenced with Acis and Galatea, with Staudigl Polyphemus. In the hands of other performers this character has been either a nonentity or an absurdity; Staudigl, however, makes it the character of the piece-- his is the true Polyphemus of Handel the un couth, unwieldly, but impassioned Cyclop. To Staudigl is due the merit of having developed the capabilities of this remarkable character, and Of having made Polyphemus a musical Caliban. Nothing could exceed the gusto w ith which be gave the " Ruddier than the cherry." His acting was most cha racteristic and appropriate, and lie gave the music in the true Handelian spirit. To Acis and Galatea sue ceeded the celebrated closing scena of Lucia de Lam mermoor, with Sal, i, the most perfect of tenor singers, and the most impassioned of lyrical actors, as Edgard° ; and then followed a grand concert, consisting of nine teen different pieces of music, in which Madame Cas tellan, Mrs. Alfred Shaw, Miss Dolby, Miss Maria B. Hawes, Miss Rainforth, Mr. Stretton, Mr. Harrison, Mr. Ilorrani, Herr Staudigl, Signor Cammillo AL Thalberg, M. Vivier, and M. Prospere Sainton, took part. Last night may be considered as the first public ap. pearance of M. Prospere Sainton in England, for although he performed at the Philharmonic on Monday, before her Majesty and Prince Albert, with the greatest suc cess, which alone is sufficient to stamp his character ; yet the Philharmonic concerts, as we know, are not only caviare to the vulgar —on whose approbation, after all, every performer must ultimately rely for his success but even to many of the dilettanti. M. Sainton is a violinist who has attained great celebrity in Paris, and who certainly well d eserves t h e celebrity he has attained. He performed last night a concerto of his own composi tion with great smoothness and taste, and exhi bited a thorough knowledge of his instrument, and great powers of execution. We were highly pleased with the manner in which M. Sainton wet t through his performance. He did not appear until after Sivori had performed both his pieces, the first, Paganini's variatio ns i n " N e l cor p i u, " and the other his celebrated " Carnival de Venise." - An inferior artist would have either attempted a servile imitation of Sivori, in which he must have failed, or he would have cramped himself by cautiously eschewing the most remote approada to Sivori's style. M. Sainton did neither. He played his concerto as if there had been no such person as Sivori in the world—where there was a pizzicato passage, he gave it as it was written, and gave it admirably, but he went not out of his way in search of any Sivori-like efforts. He played smoothly, correctly, and beautifully, and was re warded with the enthusiastic and justly merited ap plause of his audience, who, after he had quitted the stage, again called him on to applaud him. Last night was the second appearance in England of M. Vivier, who is decidedly the first performer on the Fren2ll horn in the world. M. Vivier is one of the few men who are worth more than their reputation. We had heard great things of M. Vivier. We knew that Balte had reported wonderful things of M. Vivier's per formance, and we had been told that he could produce four distinct notes at the same time on the French horn. We were certainly sceptical as to his capabilities of pro ducing four notes at once from the horn, but, to use a Parliamentary phrase, we are free to confess that we were mistaken—that M. Vivier, from an ordinary French horn, without keys, without pistons, without any mechanical contrivance, does pro duce four distinct and separate notes at one and the same time, is a fact of which we last night had auricular• demonstration. In the first piece which he performed he produced two distinct notes, and this we thought most marvellous, but in the second piece, a pastoral fantasia, concluding with " God Save the Queen," he produced, incredible as it may appear, four distinct notes; but, in dependently of this remarkable power, he infuses a pathos and an expression into his performances, of which we have hitherto thought the horn incapable. The horn is to him what the pianoforte is to Thalberg, or the violin was to Paganini ; he is the greatest horn player the world has ever pro duced. Madame Castellan gave us the " Bel raggio," from Semiramide, and the " Assesu a pie d'un Salice," with exquisite expression, delightful clear ness, great power, and perfect intonation. In these days, in which everything seems sacrificed to effect, and to astonishing exhibitions of power, it is delightful to hear a thorough musician, like Madame Castellan, give us these delicious gems in all their purity. Would that all our vocalists, would imitate Madame Castellan i n the correctness of her intonation. She is not, however, a mere coldly correct singer —she is all soul. Nothing could exceed the melancholy tenderness with which she gave "Assesu a pie d'un Salim." There was something quite Shaksperian about her manner of giving that most exquisite romanza. We have dwelt upon the per formances of Madame Castellan, M. Sainton, and M. Vivier, because they are as yet comparatively unknown to the English public. The,oth er ar ti stes are a ll of them well known, and justly appreciated. They all exerted themselves to the utmost, and were applauded to the echo. The farce of My If ife's Come concluded the even ing's entertainments. -/ - ,--- .7~ w /7...4 " -.0 , , ,go •r-OP .- illie, ... 1" ~? ". 5 2 -. ,, _ LLOYD'S SHIPPING. BLOCKADE OF SAN JUAN DE 'NICARAGUA. The following has been received at Lloyd's:— "Foreign-office, June, 10, 1844. " It is hereby notified that the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty have received a dispatch, dated May 18, from Sir Charles Adam, K.C.8., Vice-Ad miral of the White, and Commander-in-Chief of her Majesty's ships and vessels in the North American and West India station, and the seas adjacent, stating, that, in virtue of authority duly conferred on him, he had de clared a blockade of the port of San Juan de Nicaragua, and that the measures sanctioned by the l aws of nations will be adopted and executed with respect to all vessels and cargoes attempting to violate the said blockade." MISS CLARA SEYTON'S LECTURE ON COMEDY.—The Dowager Countess of Essex, and a party of distingui , led fashionables, honoured Miss Clara Seyton with their presence at her lecture on comedy at the Princess's Con cert-room on Tuesday. The room was crowded to excess. The reserved seats were more than full, so that many wlio had tickets for them were obliged to be ac commodated with chairs. Miss Seyton, who was in ex cellent voice, was encored in several of her songs, and was loudly applauded throughout. It was impossible for any one to have achieved a more brilliant success than Miss Clara Seyton. SOCIETY OF ARTS, JUNE 10.—After the distribu tion of the rewards, Prince Albert, accompanied by the Duke of Sutherland, the Marquis of Northampton, and many of the nobility, together with the Foreign Princes and their suite, visited the model room of inventions, and here they were greatly delighted with some extra ordinary improvements of the pianoforte ; the greatest attraction, however, was an instrument termed by the inventor "an expressive orchestra pianoforte," from the strings alone of which (without th e aid of wind, bows, or even friction upon them) were elicited the tones of all bow and wind instruments ; together with the most delicate and comprehensive expression peculiar to each, from the softest breathing of the Eolian harp to the effect of a grand orchestra. The numerous ques tions of the Royal parties were explained by the inventor, Mr. Mott, of the Strand. FRIGHTFUL OCCURRENCE AT THE WAKEFIELD ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS.—Two FEMALES WORRIED BY A BEAR.—On Saturday last, ahout eight o'clock, a bear about three years of age, which had been confined in a pit in the above establishment, suddenly leaped overthe boundary, and got admission into the gardens. The proprietor, Mr. liasel grave, was from home at the time, but his wife and sister-in law attempted to drive it back again, when it turned upon them, and worried them in a shocking manner." Their shrieks of agony brought some persons to their assistance, and among others Mr. William Stead, of West gate, who attacked the bear with a garden hoe, and succeeded at imminent hazard to himself, in attracting the attention of the brute from the unfortunate females. Mr. Stead himself had a narrow escape. The excitement that now prevailed WiS very great, as it was feared that the enraged brute, rendered furious after the taste of human blood, would leap the outer walls o the gardens; but such a calamity was happily prevented by the gallant efforts of Mr. Broughton Boston, son of Mr. Boston, gnu maker, who, having armed himself with a gun heavily charged, entered the garden, accompanied by Mr. William Drake, plumber, also armed, and on the bear advancing towards them with a savage growl, Mr. Drake fired, but without waiting until within- a proper distance, as the animal was merely turned in its course, without being seriously injured.. Young Boston, however, followed it to the lower part of the garden, and there, at about two yards distance, delivered the charge into his head, rolling the huge creature over, but not dispatching it ; he then retireated, pistols, arri ved hatchets, and were othei too • lateand having reloaded his gun with slugs, aga i n approached, , but, as and after two other shots succeeded in destroyi ng t h e b rute. Several with ter mur derous weapons parties afterwards for the fight, contented themselves by claiming a great deal of the honour. The two females On being taken up were found to be dreadfully lacerated about h t eir arms, thigh, and other parts of their bodies, and several medical men being speedily in attendance, every attention was paid to them; those attentions have been unremittingly continued, and at the time of our account leaving - Wakefield, it was hoped that the lives of both the females might be saved. A report has been circulated in Wakefield, that the bear was rendered savage from want of food, but this, we are assured, is incorrect, and that the savageness of the animal is pot at tributable to any cause over which the proprietor had control. It. as sickening to see the eagerness of the bear in following the course where the females were carried, licking the blood as it went, and on reaching the room where they were placed, forcing its paws through the windows, and endeavouring to burst its way through them in pursuit of its prey. Great praise is due to Mr. btead, Mr. Drake, and Mr. Boston, fur their prompt and courageous conduct.—Leeds 3lercury. ACCIDENT AT THE CALEDONIAN CANAL —We regret to state that, en Saturday last, a man, employed on the repair of that part of the canal which joins the sea at Corpach, was killed, in consequence of the break ing o f the chain of a crane, whereby a b!ock of stone , of about three tons weight, fell upon the unfortunate man and crushed him to death.—Ross-shire Advertiser. A W O NDERFUL CURE OF AN OLD SEA CAPTAIN ' S BAD LEG BY IL'LLOWAY'S OINTMENT AND PILLS.— Captain James, of the brig Amity, lying at Limehouce, was lately cured of a bad leg of fifteen years' - standing, in which there were twenty ulcers. He had previously been laid up at home on crutches for two years. To make the .matter worse, he was nearly eaten up with scurvy, which the pills, however, soon eradicated frOm the blood. Soldiers and sailors find these medicirrs the finest remedy in the world, as they heal all ulcers and wounds, while the pills remove every scorbutic h amour and impurity from the blood.—SOld at Professor Hone k%ay's establishment, 244, Strand (where advice may be had .gratis), and by almost all respectable vendors of medicine throughout the civilized world. The Earl of Glengalthad an interview with the Chan cellor of the Exchequer yesterday. •- .-.• I 4 i