The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-04-05 00:00:00

th e move . 'y; o r oat h s of Celibacy made by th e C a th o l ic I ;aight be dispenses( with by the authority which made but all other oaths were binding on Catholics in the sense they were administered, no matter to whom they were and no power on earth had a right to absolve from them, 'tolic believed that any such power:existed ; but only 41 on this question—what had kept Catholics so long wer but their regard for the validity of oaths ? (Hear, they believed th at they could be absolved from such s likely they wou ld h ave taken that which gave theta ; but they had remained d epr i ve d of such power , and a halt; rather than take oaths against their (Hear, hear.) That was not the place for po sion, or, if it were, he might s h ow t h e h on. gen - instance s i n which members of his own communion /eat/rams which he now wrongfully attributed to the AIGUSSON begged to disclaim any concurrence in is of the hon. member (Mr. A. Johnstone) near him. o! hot keeping faith with persons from whom they ~',l _ gtOn was most unfounded and had been disclaim 4t4lics, and strongly condemned by the whole of a Catholic archbishops and bishops of - Ireland. The were not bound by their oaths in that house to do any than Protestants with respect to the established 44 / 7 would not offer any opinion on the subject until urse take n by Catholic memb ers ti n ma t ters w hi c h a... befor e them. , l'ooP said tsat, in the progress of the Catholic Re use had had b een proposed to prevent the intercourse ,i,neinners in any matt ers relating purely to the Tie house had rejected it ; and as that was the case i n ta aUatholic members had as much right as Pro , - - ths ,part in the di scuss i on o f any matter t h at 181//,,,,T0N 'louse. (Hear, hear, hear. said, as his name had beeti alluded to, he %ch ord L in explanation of, and to correct, a mistake sn nti at i l uad fallen from him on the occasion alluded chur c h , Va. member, a Catholic, had talked of destroy oath tike did, in the warmth of the moment, read to With e hy Catholic members of that house—not, , t heyiew to contend that Catholic or any other , e or t a k e "lging to the established church, had no right to Irieb efo _ Part in any question, no matter what, which of ( t ut re the house—but to show that hon. member that talk of ) ,,and of' his obligation on oath ought not to permit iin kett gestroying an establishment which, as a member w e e t ' le had sworn not to injure or weaken. He o f !Trained his meaning on that evening, but au f or Weech of two hours, by the hon. and learned att e hblin, having intervened, he was unwilling to a fawistioa of the house back to another subject. 1 ,7 1 words from Mr. A. JOHNSTONE, the subject ,r'th me house went into committee. said that the subject to which the resolutions o n a 4 .0 was about to move having been opened to to tace'°rlner evening, it would be then unnecessary it 14 , 11 up its time by going over the same ground. of t h Y non- members were . prepared to discuss the not e rueasure in the committee, to which, of course, 011 ° f b i, Jeet ; but on his own part it would be only ' ll a former time of the house to re-open what he had j t f il tt e - e ;o e He would make only one remarls sriolisiegdhtplan as the house was aware, was the , sea church cess; but if the bill which had been brought etreet,arried through, there would not have been timl Lbsl3Ellie abolition of the church cess this year ; bot as it 1 ,, t41 :1e that such cess should no longer be collected. 'for th - I llought it right to say that government would ;It 410 at abolition this year by other means. The noble ni ve . 4 the following resolutions (the first of which 't theis the ' opinion of this committee that it is expel s Lor d - Lieutenant of Ireland should be author ize d eclesiastical commissioners for the purpose of carry- Jent aa y act that may be passed in the present session of the alter and amend the laws relating to the tem st ue church in Ireland; and that the said Lord ilnme emPowered to,order and appoint such salary dr rs, e f il t 4 as he shall deem fit to be paid to such copi lot it ' n ; b eing bishops. rusk" the opinion of this committee that it is expe acid ° Provision fo r the abolition of th e fi rs t-f ru it s ii )tics nt lieu there o f t o l ev y an ann u al assessmen t u p o n and archbishoprics, and upon all benefices, id oth er spiritual promotions above the yearly cin churc to be appli e d t o th e building, re b u ildi ng , an d t hes, and other such like ecclesiastical par s ° the augmentation of small livings, and to such s n Akin as may conduce to the advancement of religion, permanency, and stability of the united it -: ~gi.and and Ir e l an d. is the opinion of this committee that vestry as allY of the purposes to defray which the annual 0-entioned in the preceding resolution may be ap- Pfkui be abolished ; and that any law, statute, or usage, iOI assessment, should be repealed." t - I ° i ! S aid, he felt himself particularly called on to it a ' discussion as the representative of a body parli eested. Many of those immediately interested did ° an arrangement of church property for church ut t heydid object to any interference with it for t4tinet from those connected with the church. He tasortie observations as to the expediency and propti n °llse interfering with church property as was now Os" house done; and he should also call the atten -I,bieeh Tmse to the contemplated measure, as to the . it would produce with reference to the vested 'nuiterests of the present possessors. In his opinion a 044 just principle on which the house could interfere t g l i ) Nerty in general, except for church purposes. to aand there to - oppose any appropriation of church any 4 Purposes of the church he did not stand there arch' reform with respect to sinecures and pluralities but he should object, first, to the application of arty to any other than church purposes; and, raid endeavour to prevent any infringement of o an d interests of the present possessors. The first sewsre • noble lord was purely ancillary to carrying into Iti nd and third, and therefore it was not necessary ;bra ced observation upon it. The second and third reso ;t ;aced three distinct points, namely—lst, the abolition sit, lll „ i ts.; 2d, the abolition of the parish cess; and 3d, . mplace of the' first fruirs and the parish cess a tax a ;,,uenefices above the yearly vaiue of £2OO. If an to - .e..re proposed in lieu of the first fruits, he would the i " . When the house was put in possession of the first fruits, and of the tax which was proposed to a • for that i m p os t, th ey would find, that under the lit T o ll - notation ' the noble lord was about to impose ts e l greater th an that which the church was at present kdy,hPaY- That was nut all; individuals would be called "° Ought to b e a lt og ether exempt from such charge. iy o uld not legislate on this subject unless- the facts r nevefore it, and these facts he would immediately detail. tf in tl red authentic documents connected with this ques ig.;,accounts relative to the amount-of first fruits, pro s"' and 1828, it would appear that the sum total de 4rst fruits for 31 years was 1:9947 Ils. 2d. That was ~ includin g benefices of every _sort. Of that amount total 17 7 Is. 4d. was "paid by bishops ; so that, taking afor 31 years, the • average did not exceed the °f f.:321 (hear, hear,) of - Which £214 was paid by dig clergy of Ireland, o n accoun t o f fi rs t f rui t s .— Bit°l,the no bl e l ord propose ? Why, that a charge of lis 4 11 ; c1 - he annually levied on the whole church of Ire ', he ar.) This, together with other charges, would,, ti es ant to an annual sum of £55,000, instead of £321, Paid arl~t _present on account of first fruits. (Hear, s s 80 T't of commutation was very like asking a man °‘ a shilling, and taking from him a £lO not in lieu what justice could this be viewed as a commons ,' of the first fruits? Could it be considered other "' a Plundering of the church ? (Hear, hear.) If 418 action took place between man and man on the it would be deemed a highway robbery ; but because 'ht forward by a Chancellor of the Exchequer, in a lament, he supposed it must be considered just • The first fruits were not one farthing in the this tax would be from 5 to 15, and even on the no '11:1 showing would amount on the average to 7 per cent. st ants of Ireland should find their sovereign violate 44 1, oath and those principles which had established ° Pon the throne where they had been maintained by Protestants of Ireland was it not probable that they leraselves whether they'might not consider themselves the reciprocal obligations which had been imposed If this measure should lead to a separation of , 1 1,, t e r ieS, without a se p ara ti on o f th e C rown , w h a t thi s e °rile of the ab s entee property ? H e wou ld hot that It lstem of legwas ied for but he lY would lead st to, the overthrow ntend of the , Protes .lll 'l44 t; and he would implore the house, therefore, 44 d its hands upon such a work, to reflect upon what it 'Y of this country hitherto had been with a national to the consider that this country had been made made by first amongst nations while it possessed a na it y o °4 and a nati ona l c h urc h , an d to pause therefore ' nationsa h - any, measure give countenance to the sloe uld do without a - national religion. .Let the money t t * ought e t the Pr" e 't: a il ia ro per otl • the p .. . n ,fe n Lacy w , ineoln's-I°e I n land no P( Th e b°u n t od e atholfe ion wer„eij°o4o( tail on tl d a f. l ) , , wer but one „„ . t if they 1 )a ne LIPIJ , t i e e 'rras like no ini u d a ',, al Pow„. thl be "3 a ilki:ntitry an of the bil l 't ticaln es s eli s Co ,d h° 3 1:0 11. " . I ( l l, a ,' i me ins i a ij s u e s o u f e- g rea i t t holi e k . n time • t a i l r e "ei ' l% C. p epi ai „ -Rot. g° ll °,t the 3 chag S of t prise , erect ` of n, for tht l r e reli • ave d to. [id cath g o li ish iget noD . tti:1, 1 ,. 44 Catli be re o s it p oge. I'g tn -1 0 %,Ivere n r the P. e 1 N t h e that lie nat' i c ne ae cat e° l-1 1 . c' l sa%. Haw. wo latioil ° co .the eenr ; tndalg e j, 3 d tier i d t rile bet iaY e ' r od e ' ; [ 'Non ] ht to F e ea t '? ela tis( All h ot io ar t h tqlo met an y clil io est thet;alad the hick d 1 .„," 'tlet s g° , l that , e w ith ` j e o tir ta, s et,„ f 4 o take I.ual ut, 1 , °Ye the Vtl 05 0 ✓al ,fib Word ',it' JO 6 lO/.1, v BPtetiwv, wh at by (.1 Ith e b! b' the 0 4re ll, ,e 'ever a9i Lll newt 4 alh er !, w 'th tl vortb, t beh air J ol ' ll o, 'gh( te e °r take s h • I tas e ln e hefor ler for ; -1 , 11 0 4 d uty a .11 to Pa r rk ef de r ()1 1 1 4 i_ kta etit Pr ri gla re • Sti t'4 l/ 114e (if : XPI 3/11 b e 11° er i nr 13,, P j 4t Ater eatteati( tnabliDg;of op. ped a few id Iw °ll ' 10 4 14, 1 an d th e , n • thei edkutilua Pas' ew l f lous l ` Li ch hE r s , rioa e p hita e en a 1.. ' ittea. 1. doubt tale o %, • , . a 1 11 e of t i le ca.- -11° e tlias' s t not A tei (,),, DP'fr Pa ' ll a form]" he h of th ousolialtt haciatoftilePri eel - , a ll b een 0, 1 t 4efre tdri ,h?t aid at 3 I, oYili!4, e de . rubl he th k. ' th en ' .' th at L' r i e ( p ) o . r t Tit; 4 1 43 cede d - titieriia& it t h -t hat i t i D a vid th e ,"! been re': ro glat tee' 1); he pet it° ; Par? erect :si • i4 iti l e aln etti, 4 3 he bore ° iets,,,:s p.. ' r 44 41 3 11 a k,Notem e ern o a , ss ial° c cl e ia t te rt hal la i t ° ,l B b r Ijourn , i ‘atid reak e f t y. i it P i f rdcr ( itart.'Pries it ,oralitie ries, auuu gi ii ) ti : 41, to [n the t io g o f Of 1, ~' arid Chur erg., th the pa r o f . tt" 1 1)(is es a s teesse-', to r t h of ti,411( Ten aa etl table. „ i sk ts f or s t rrow eat k -11 3 t res ec o ii '.'ho l d e t i nt i( litico 'lest . 'tl., be statc ° , suc h .teniee% .11t o 4 1 1 1 0 y jajc6tY! i ste ' r at qeet e es td. .Ar.;p• ) f iot i t Fos its 1 • 0 a Id e3 disti e 3 „ ue stl (if ,Offe r ' ste / .4 h: ) . l t ipo 'e s Pi•etP; 4 4 to b' c c et th e e tat 11°°fel o ft which,rtunl s° °l's e t , a nd it It interest doio6 ..as by a0 ,1 : 4 e e , t l (i har e n h ° p .i r tlst ich ,Pett l ii . a t st and was ite, ?A ts ,4 s to t4 e . :nting thew ,e p, in th,a Er, iit t hhtirehY ; 1 0 1 en t oi 'l d p ro ) nu be ill te tia i ts er tY in in atto,or a „ s 'eute o f wa , ol ll , t °4 of - ti t ,' jilt( h e las t el id ti le e JO '4 • eeond calf (1 18 ao y a Lhjee t, i re e f t he t nlbra G e 9 ,.. a ,, e ' he •1 1 4rSt I t he 4: ei ,ef r O tit ot rUs . ; thelD:, NI '444154 all n,e m t .h°""''o 3l tax he rre'i t ". ere ver ) ha` co , / , tof the it.. ia i t to etY o r , tl l l , 3 ,* l Ll l 'll " r . 3 o t f it u II a te u q e P e r : s" r • i c 7 % . 414 ' ijur e t o -a te e p ip re or i r t he 1 1 14 3 r 5 still '. f° se beo On 7, 11 41 • wery , o c i , p ree e ll ere a her Vl' th e Cured , t4 1 1 !,,, 4 1g9 7 4 ee0 . the ‘ l 'bi 111‘°111 and bere,ol fri to sub'o° withi°,l ,Q 1.7; st r o3 rio'l fo l t of , the` (ivl, 4 lll g el ~ t rr,c , -or 4 1 , s h at, th e L linit c .Y c ei (tl e ° , ll44 be prof"lo ft 11 14 0 , a te : , hea „Tr), ,\ w as 5 of U fit ti l'h• Paid eser l ' i, ? 1 • la sort r , in 'c iP o 1 \Vtr ash and d,!l,‘ Live '4l l ' o f ti `l)`' tr as api 04 ' it sa e ti ° p :rfl)r e . o ,;l l 4 l er Out; houli t L Y for ° t h . p er c ei , 4 it abi ta m that to loevhil e • hi , lot 1$ 4 (1 1 s , e thi s hou e , e s she' • b ei eo s ta t sna .ost annr t. oa he 1 1 t4 ilyr 4 q e 5P oe 14 V1 h; 1) ° 11 tl v ho:1:, 0 0 •qit' t h_lOtes . nos . ' e f ',l% t Pal t i"; nl sel „bers , eta ,e r e ($ 4 4 'lf : , 0 1 ‘ ed + ° , s f l ", l r i eal4 )l3 , l triel Al t o°' tii e; 5 151, 14 t th ?econ lated that le aloa f rol: .. , , k stahl tsi at thei r li d 3 :Pt It l e i . ,; t Pien „, its 11 ha a c rit v t . iv, io tO co 3 atn , o rer 141 eh ee reed'o cc, cc\ - 1 ;,“° 4 an fro o. 1114 t fh . t! ' n at i o h :~~~ ~.' V THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD. Oxford had observed, that very serious duties would devolve on thosetornmissioners who were not sworn servants of the King, as in them would be vested the power of superintending church property in Ireland, which now rested with the Crown. They certainly would be armed with authority to suspend appoint ments in cases where duty had not been performed for three yearsTriar to the passing of the bill. Some new powers would undoubtedly he given to them, but not such powers as the Crown now possessed for superintending the church property of Ireland. The hon. member had asked, what was to become of the church patronage that now belonged to the see which it was proposed to abolish ? It was the intention of the government that such patronage should remain with the bishop, to whose see the diocese that was no longer to possess a bishop should be an nexed. It - was not intended, as the hon. member seemed to think; to place that patronage at the disposal of the Coininis sioners. The commissioners would not have any of those powers which the honourable gentleman seemed to imagine would supersede the authority of the crown. No intention of the kind existed. The uniting of sees had not only been done in Ireland, but frequently in England, by acts of parlia ment: There was a remarkable instance of the union of-iNest minster with the see of London, which took place wiih the ap probation of Cranmer and Ridley. Certainly this alteration as to the levying of the church 'cess would impose a burden upon the church, but then it would be for solely ecclesiastical pur poses. He did not feel it necessary to go further at present, confining himself, as he did, to the resolution immediately be fore them. When the other resolutions came successively un der consideration, he should go into the details connectedwith them. Sir R. PauL said, that it was plain that the ecclesiastical un salaried commissioners would be frequently called away to the performance of Other duties; that they would be frequently called to London, to attend their parliamentary duties in the House of Lords, and that therefore the whole practical Work of the commission would devolve upon those salaried commission ers who held their situations at the pleasure of the Crown. (Hear, hear.) He should therefore reserve to himself the right of objecting to the granting of salaries to those commissioners. „Ile should now proceed to the main subject of the debate whiCh' ,had been raised by the second and third resolutions. The' second resolution regarded the abolition of first fruits. and prOvisiOn of a substitute in lieu thereof ; and the third resolution proposed the absolute abolition- of vestry cess. Now, it did appear to him that it would have been a wiser and a better course of proceeding that the abolition should take place who the substitute had been provided. In the way they were proceeding at present*they Were only re-acting the part which they had acted last session, when they decided on the "extinc tion" of tithes, without providing a substitute; and see what had bees the result! The second resolution provided that any loss which the abolition of the Church cess would occasion should be proVided for by a tax to be levied separately upon the clergy of Ireland. The noble lord in his first speech, in introducing the former bill, had calculated the vestry cess, the abolition of which was contemplated, at £60,000 or. £70,000 a year, and he said then that it would not be necessary to provide a substitute to a greater amount. - Surely the noble should recollect that there were two species of vestry cess—one, from the levying of which in vestry Catholics were excluded, and which was appned to the maintenance of the church, and other ecclesiastical purposes. When the noble lord proposed to lay a tax upon the clergy, he should know the amount of that cess for which the said tax was tot?e a substitute. (Hear.) Surely, if they wished to attach the principles of permanency to the reform which they were about to effect, they should go through all those preliminary con siderations by which any thing like justice could be had. lie was not one of those who thought that the coronation oath pre sented an insuperahle obstacle to grantin the great measure of Catholic emancipation. Though lie should always be as stre nuous as any man for upholding the privileges of the Crown, yet:he did not think that all the privileges which existed in 1688 ought necessarily to be maintamed. The right hon. baronet then again alluded to the state of the Irish clergy, which he de scribed as melancholy in the extreme. It was a disgrace to the country, he observed, that so many of the Irish clrgy should be dependent for their subsistence on eleemosynary aid. No rearm:in the church, he was confident, could bei)ermanent un less it were founded in justice, and he therefore hoped the. house would reject the proposition laid down in the second resolution, inasmuch as it was contaminated by principles of paltry and unprofitable injustice. Lord J. Itussiad. contended that the only object the govern-• merit had in view in proposing the measure was, to maintain the church in Ireland. The plan proposed by government did not go further than the necessity of the case required, and he repeated it was calculated to consolidate rather than to weaken the interests of the church in Ireland. Mr. GOULLIVILN rose to address the house, but the calls for an adjournment were so loud and general that the hon. gentleman thought fit to resume his seat. Mr. SHAW then proposed that the first resolution should be agreed to, as there was no difference of opinion regarding it, and that the discussion on the second resolution should be ad johrned till this day. Lord ALTlione said he had no objection to .that arrange and the first resolution was accordingly put and agreed to, and the discussion adjourned till to-morrow (Tuesday). The other orders of the day were then disposed of, after which the house adjourned at half-past 1 o'clock. TUESDAY. ..Soon after 12 o'clock the SPEAKER took the chair. "A message from the House of Lords tiunounced that their lnidships had agreed to the Commons' amendments in the Dis trirbances Suppression (Ireland) Bill, and to several private bills. On the motion of Mr. O'CONNELL the Dublin and Kingston Railway Bill was read a second time arid ordered to be com mitted, and at 3 o'clock the Speaker left the chair. The SPEAKER resumed the chair at five o'clock. SOUTHAMPTON BOUOUGH ELECTION. ~Lord. l tonr.UT GROVESNOR presented the report of the com mittee appointed to try the merits of the petition against there turn of James narlow Hoy, Esq., as a burgess for the borough of Southampton. It stated that Mr. Hoy was not duly elected, and ought not to have been returned; but that .I. Esq., was duly elected, and ought to 'have been returned to Par liament. On the motion of Lord R. GR OSVENOR, the Clerk of the Croton was ordered to attend the house to-morrow, to amend the return. HERTFORD BOROUGH ELECTION. Mr. BERNAL reported frbm the Hertford election committee, that Lord Viscount Ingestrie and Lord Mahon were not duly elected, .and ought not to have been returned; that the election for the borough was void; and that neither the petition Mir the opposition to it was frivolous or vexatious. The hou. member also stated, that he was further directed by the committee to re port that it appeared to the committee that bfibely and treating had prevailed in the borough previously to and during the late .election. He then moved that the minutes of the proceedings of the committee and the evidence be laid before the house.— .Ordered. _ _ The hon. member then gave notice, that he would to-morrow move that no new writ be issued for burgesses to serve for the 'borough of Hertford before the'l6th of April. BOROUGH OF DUNDEE. Mr. klumu moved a new writ for the bUrgh of Dundee, in the oom. of,George KinlOch, Esq., 'deceased. The hon. gentleman raccompanieu his motion with a brief eulogium on the late mem ber for his consistency and perseverance as au advocate for re , ,form, and for his diligence the discharge of his dudes during the 'short period he had sat in the house.—The motion 'was agreed to. them try what experiments they pleased in political matters, but let them not, he would entreat them, try the experiment how they could do without a national religion. The hon. gen tleman concluded by saying that he would not propose an amendment upon the first resolution. Mr. PRY ME contended that it was the undoubted right of the legislature to deal with church property in whateVer manner it should consider most conducive to the public good. '1 he hon. and learned gentleman had compared church property with private property, but it would be found upon examination that such a comparison would not stand. The property of private indiViduals had been acquired either by their own labour, or by that of their progenitors ; but the property of the church was in every sense of the world public property ; it consisted of stipendspaid to the clergy for public services, and the clergy were as strictly public functionaries as were the judges, or other seritants of the state. He was sure that the Protestants of Ireland were not so short signed as to join in calling for a mea sure which would be certain to be followed by such results. He would give his cordial support to the resolution. Ile was confident that this measure would be beneficial, not only to the interests of the state and the country, but also to the interests of the clergy themselves. Sir JOHN HANMER said if this bill should pass into a law it would be a. violation of the coronation oath—a direct violation of the articles of union ' and a great violation of the the sacred rights of property, and he felt it his duty therefore to give it all the opposition m his power. This measure, one of the first born of that the reformed House of Commons, was for mon strous injustice tinparalled in the history of any former Parlia ment. He felt the necessity there was for passing some meas sure of reformation for the security of the church, but to such a measure as this lie would give his utmost opposition.— He would not nswer for the consequences of such a measure if it should be once passed into a law. He would not say that it would lead to things equal in atrocity to the murder of Arch bishop Sharpe, and the downfall of the episcopal establishment. Mr. Sitim., said that the argument drawn from the sth article of the Act of Union had been relied on by Mr. Canning and refuted by Mr. Brougham. In 1825 Mr. Canning had called on the clerk to read the article on a motion of the member for Middlesex relative to the church. Mr. 13rongham observed that the two churches were to - be united in "government, dis cipline, and faith." Temporalities were not mentioned. "Ex presruin facit cessare taciturn." The framers of the ACt of Union could not have omitted the word " temporalitida" with out a purpose. He (Mr. Sheil) thought that this observation was conclusive, unless "discipline and government" were a paraphrase for riches, and in the vocabulary of the ecclesiastics "faith" was synonymous with gold. He was the worst enemy of the union who relied on it in sustainment of the establish ment, and he was the worst enemy of the English who asso ciated it with the Irish church. The member for the Univer sity of Dublin had threatened the government with the anger of the Irish Protestants, and hinted that they might throw their allegiance off. Surely the hon. gentleman, the representative of the subordination and peaceful habits of a learned and tran quil body, did not mean to say that Protestant loyalty was the result of Protestant monopoly, that the devotedness to England of that respectable body was of a mercenary character, and that their attachment to their sovereign was derived from the meanest of all motives, and was little else than the sordid product of pecu niary calculation. The hon. gentleman then made some copi ous references to the earliest writers on the history of the church, and continued them down to the act abolishing episcopacy in Scotland, all tending to show that the church was public pro perty, and liable to Parliamentary interference, and concluded by saying that those accumulated facts established beyond all doubt the constant interference in almost every country with ecclesiastical possessions, and •it only remained that the legis lature should, in the present circumstances of the country, act boldly and frankly on the principle which must obviously afford the basis of their enactments. A compromise 'among them selves would avail nothing. They must build their legislation on some principle, and what could it be, except the right of ap propriating the surplus revenues of the establishment? Let them say so, let them make proclamation of this principle, and it would do more for the pacification of the country than is whole code of rigour could accompliSh. (Hear, hear.) Mr. HALCOMB expressed his determination to oppose the bill. He considered it most unjust to relieve the land from the pay, ment of the vestry cess and to place a tax upon the working clergy. By agreeing to the bill the house would establish a principle most dangerous to the church of England. Mr. WARRE said that as the hon. member who spoke laSt had raised an objection with respect to the coronation oath, he would take the liberty of reading a passage from an opinion. expressed by the Bishop of Llandaff in 1800, in reply to a simi lar objection. The passage was as follows :—" The coronation oath is the confirmation of a promise made by the King to the people, but the obligation of that promise is absolved when the people, speaking °by the two houses of Parliament, declare that they do not on certain points require the performance of it"— He cordially supported the plan prOposeatby ministers, because he thought it impossible to avoid making some change with re spect to the church establishment in Ireland, and he believed that the present moment was the best period for effecting it. Mr. GILL ON thought that the plan proposed by ministers was not sufficiently extensive; it ought to have embraced the aboli tion of tithes. • . . Mr. MACAULAY said he was so convinced of the importance of carrying this measure, and that rentlering it more strong would render its progress more difficult, that he 'was . prepared to meet any amendment to that effect with the " previous ques tion." The objection that the agreeing to the proposed mea sure would be a violation of the King's coronation oath was, he' contended, altogether without force. The same argument had been used against the Test and Corporation Act ana the Catho lic Relief ; but what did that oath imply? That the King should govern the church with such rights as by law shall ap pertain to her, thus leaving the operation of the legislature for any enactment which it might feel necessary. If the legisla ture, as was contended, had no such right, Ilion every emcct mentof the legislature interfering with the church would imply perjury in every case. The object of the oath was not to pre vent any interference of the legislature with the conceins of the church, but to guard against such measures as those which Were proposed by James 11. - . Sir R. 'INGLIS said he little thought that he should have been called on to enter into a defence of the Protestantism of Eng land, and much less of the Protestantism of any of her great and learned institutions. Those who formerly left bequests to their academic institutions did so for the glory of God and the instruc tion of the youth of the realm, and to such purposes their be quests were still applied. The question was not now Whether they should support the Protestant Church of Ireland, or the Protestantism of the University of Oxford, or whether they were to impose a graduated property tax on a small portion of the community without the consent of the ministers of the church who were interested in it; no, the immediatiate question was, whether an ecclesiastical commission should be appointed to su perintend the affairs of the church. That was the practical ef fect of the first resolution, which declared—" That it is the opi nion of this committee, that it is expedient that the Lord-Lieu tenant of Ireland should be authorised to appoint ecclesiastical commissioners for the purpose of carrying nit() effect any act .that may be passed in the present session of Parliament to alter and amend the laws relating to the temporalities of the church in Ireland; and that the said Lord-Lieutenant be empowered to order and appoint such salaries or other emoluments as he shall deem fit to be paid to such commissioners, not being bi shops." That was, to divest the crown in a great measure of the superintendence over church proorty in 'lreland. No reason whatever had been shown for taking from the crown its right of superintendence over church property, and as little had been advanced to .proye the necessity. of contracting the number of bishoprics. He should like to know what WitS to be done with the patronage of the reduced sees. Was it also to be placed at the disposal of these commissioners? Mr. FINCH said, that the Protestant clergy of Ireland had exerted themselves with great zeal and with not a little success. They had entered on the task of disseminating education with much alacrity; and the - consequence was that 20000 Roman Catholic children were educated by their efforts. That success, too, it should be observed, was obtained in opposition to the ex ertions of the Roman Catholic priests. '1 he next thing they endeavoured to do was to establish a standaid of faith; and with' that view tens of thousands of copies of the Bible were distri„ buted through Ireland; and that likewise in opposition to the exertions of the Catholic priesthood. The Irish language was also studied, and the clergy were thus enabled to preach in that language. So much for what the Protestants had done. But, ' on the other hand, what was the conduct of the. government Did ministers, during the last parliament, evince adesire to up hold that species of education in Ireland? They did not. Jri stead of proceeding on the old system, they had patronized a new system Of education that hid been approved of by Dr. Doyle. These ware riot the' parties that ought to be conciliated. Ministers ought, on the contrary, strenuously to support the church party. If the incomes of any of the bishops were too large, why let them be diminished, but let not the legislaturecut down the number of bishops. As vacancies'. occur, let Men' of apostolic habits, of pure morals, who had studied the IriAli language, and who could, like the Bishop of 'Nam, preach that tongue,—let such men be appointed, and reformation in ' religion would soon spread throughout Ireland. The noble lord, in introducing his. proposed alteration, had declared it was necessary on account of abuses. He would ask, what abuses? Assuredly no abuses had been proved? Lord Aymara. said the hon. 'member' for the University Of LONGFORD COUNTY ELECTION. Colonel WOOD reported; from . the Longford Election Com mittee, that .Luke White,Esq, and ,Thmes Halpin Rorke, Esq., were not duly elected, and ought not to have been returned for the county but that Lord Forbes and A. Lefroy, Esq., had been duly elected, and ought toßave been returnee . The com mittee also reported that they had altered the poll by striking off 72 votes. • _ The Clerk of the Crown was ordered to attend in the house to-morrow, to amend the return. CARRICKFERGUS ELECTION, Mr.. O'CoriNELL moved for leave for this committee to ad journ, at its rising on tomOrrbvo, to Tuesday mkt. The hon. member complained of the conduct of some parties in obstruct ing the production of Some documents before the committee ; but the committee would withhold their names to a future occa sion.—The motion agreed to. BIRMIN6IIAM AND LONDON RAILWAY. On the motion of Sir E. D. SCOTT; this bill was read a third time. The hOn. Member said he had'a clause to propose, that all those who had signed the deed should, on the bona fide disposal of their glares, be freed from all further respoMibilitv. The further consideration of this subject was (in the absence of Mx. Lawley) poStponed till to-morrow (this day.) Lord MORPETIi postponed his Motion for receiving the affir mation of Quakers to qualify them for odes under government till the Bth of May. After some conversation bet Ween Mr. W. Patten and Lord' Althorp, the former consented to postpone his motion for a torn mission to coned evidence as to the state of children employed in faetOrieS till to-morrow (this day.) MARyI,;:roNE iL-gCTION. •••="1. • A petition against the late rAttra • for this borough was pre sented (we did . nothear by Whore.) was ordered to be taken into consideration on the 21st of May. 307 DRAWBACK ON SOAP:• Lord ALTHORP, in answer to a question from Mr. Alderman WooD, was understood to say, that it was intended to prosecute those parties who were recently concerned in exporting soap to Ireland for the purpose of receiving the drawback. MINISTERS AND POLITICAL UNIONS. Sir J. TYRELL rose to put a question to , ministers owthe sub ject of a statement made on a former evening by the hon. mem ber for Tralee, (Mr. M. O'Connell,) in which it was alleged that some of his Majesty's ministers had signed ar considerable number of franks, addressed to members of the political unions.. As the hon. member was prepared to repeat his statement, and. to.produde the gentleman from whoin he heaid it, he thought it was due to the members of the government generally, and to the noble lord who was at its head, that some satisfactory an swer should be given to that statement. It was also due to the lion. member who had made it, and who was ready to repeat it. He (Sir J. Tyrell) would let his future motion on this subject depend on the answer which he might hear from the noble lord., Lord ALTIIORP might feel himself justified in not returning any answer, seeing that the hon. baronet had fa.gotten to put any question to him. (Hear, and a laugh.) He would, how ever, go into the explanation which the hon. baronet wished.— The statement of the hon. member for Tralee was, that cne of his Majesty's ministers had franked 50 letters addressed to mem bers of political unions for the purpose of exciting those unions to urge the return of ministers to power. He had asked the hon. member to whom he had alluded, and he answered that Lord Grey was the minister by whom those franks were . signed. He had seen Lord Grey on the subject, and his noble friend stated to him that he did not remember having franked any let ters about that time, and that he had never franked any letter for any member of a political union knowing him to be such, hear.) For his own (Lord Althorp's) part, he had new ver franked any letter for that purpose. He made application to the hon. member who was then the private secretary of Earl Grey, and at present secretary . to the Treasury, and he stated that he did not recollect having given any such franks ; - he might have given a few franks about that time, but he had never given any franks for the purpose of being me m be rs addressed to mem b e of the political unions, with any kuowledge that they were or with anv knowledge what ever o f th e contents. (Hear, hear 4 Mr. M. - O'CONNELL said that the gentleman (Mr.'Rushtpn we understood) from whom he bad received the statement Was ready to repeat it at the bar of that house. Mr. C. Woon said that he had never given any franks for members of political unions. Ile would not say thatthe franks which he-had given might not have been for members of such unions ' but he had no knowledge of th e f ac t, nor o f t h e contents Of any letter which might have been sent under any covers.- Sir J. TYRELL hope,d the noble lord and the hon. member would not deem him guilty of any want of courtesy if he should persevere in pressing the subject, and following it up with a motion; but after a few remarks, which were not audible in the gallery, consented to withdraw his motion. POOR LAWS FOR IRELAND. Lord ALTIIORP brought up certain documents emanating front the commissioners appointed to inquire into the poor-laws. The noble lord observed, that the commissioners had made no report. These papers, which were very important, consisted,of extracts from the evidence. Au hon. MEnnEn inquired whether the whole of the evidence was brought up ? Lord ALTEORP.—No, it is not. Mr. O'CONNELL said it had been repotted that he had given. notice of his intention to bring forward a motion relative to the establishment of poor-laws in Ireland. He had not done to. His intimation was, that he might possibly- feel himself called upon to take such a course. But since he has seen those ex tracts, he was bound to say that h e wou ld not give his consent to the introduction of poor laws into that country. Ireland was afflicted with many evils—but he was glad to say that she had hitherto escaped this misfortune. When those extracts were read, the house and the country would see thatpodr-laws would not do there. Mr. RiciiAnus said that nothint , which had fallen f rom th e hon. and learned gentleman had changed c his opinion on this subject. Sir E. KNATCHDULL was of opinion that a system of poor laws 'Was necessary to -Sectire peace nrid tranquillity in Ireland, as well as for the relief of this country. Mr. HUME suggested, that before poor laws were framed for Ireland, it woulci be well if they set about correcting the abuses which were connected with those of England. (Hear, hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL said, before they introduced poor laws into a country where they never Were before established, they should take care that they were so framed as to be advantageous to the poor, and at the same time divested of the evils which were connected with the poor laws in this country. If by any con sultation or deliberation they could arrive at a system of poor laws that would be advantageous to Ireland, and which would at the same time evade the abuses of the English poor laws, he conceived that it would be a great improvement in the state of Ireland. (Hear, hear.) Mr. H. GRATTAN argued that Ireland was in such a fright ful state of poverty and distress as rendered it absolutely neces sary to introduce poor laws. Sir R. PEEL said the time would very soon. come when the whole question must be considered, and when the views of lion gentlemen would be subjected to the most severe scrutiny. He therefore called on ministers not to do any thing until the Sub ject was most maturely considered. (Hear, hear.) A com mission composed of persons of high cha rac t er mig ht b e ap pointed to inquire into the condition of the Irish poor; they. might report as to the best Means o f ex t en di ng re li e f to them, and they might further declare what part of the English poor laws might with advantage be-Applied to Ireland. (Hear.) The papers were laid on the table. IRISH DISTURBANCES BILL. The Deputy Usher of the Black Rod summoned the house to attend in the House of Peers, to hear the Royal assent g i ven by commission to certain bills. The SPEAKER and several members proceeded there accordingly. On his return, the SPEAKER informed the house that th e R o y a l assen t had been given to the Irish Disturbances Bill, and to several private bills. CHURCH TEMPORALITIES (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion of Lord ALTHORP, the house resolied itself into - a - committee-on the above bill. . Lord ALTHORP said that, in moving the second resolution, he felt it necessary to make a very few observations. The dis cussion which took place last night, and the speech of the right hon. gentleman opposite, had a very close application to what he was about to state. The right hon. gentleman and others' objected to the principle of laying the tax on the present in cumbents for the purpose of relieving the people of 'lreland from the vestry cess. In making that proposition some time ago, he obSeryed that he had every reason to believe, from all the inquiries which his Majesty's government had made on the subject, that the clergy of the church of Ireland would not feel any objection to the tax which was about to be thus imposed on them. His right hon. friend, Mr. Stanley, who was not now a member of the house, had written down what he had authorised him (Lord Althorp) to state with reference to this point: His right hon. friend said, " In all the conversations which I have had with the primates and the clergy, there never was any ob- Mjection taken to the principle of tax ing th e p resent i ncum b ents.. Many of them expressed an anxious wish to me that no differ ence .Should be made between them and their successors." When he spoke thus on the occasion to which he referred, he therefore had reason to hope that the clergy of Ireland had no , objection to the proposition. Now it undoubtedly did turn oute that many of the clergy of Ireland did object to the system of taxation proposed, (hear, hear,) and he was perf ec tly rea d y t o say, that if any other mode of relieving the people of Ireland from the vestry cess could be pointed out or discovered; which would be advantageous to the clergy, by rendering the proposed. tax unnecessary, he should not object to it. (Hear, hear) It was, however, R under all circumstan ces , an o bj ec t o f OI im portance that the vestry cess in Ireland should cease—of such importance to the church itself—of such impoi Lance to the in terests of the establishment in Ireland—and almost to tire very existence of the church—that this cause of dissatisfaction shoula be removed, that he could not recede from it. (gear, hear.). If; in the , consideration of this question, any mode could he found for providing for the vestry cess witliont touching the present incumbents, he should be most glad to adopt it. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman last night confined himself almost entirely to the poor clergy ; he, however, could not see, in the present state of information on the subject, how he could alter the tax as it was now proposed to be collected. He should be. well pleased, however, if any other mode were shown by,which. the impost could, be avoided. But the committee would ob serve that a very large portion of the tax would not fall on the parochial clergy, but on the hierarchy of Leland; and the. argionentma ad inisericordiam could not, therefore, be advanced with all that fotce and effect r hich the right hon. gentleman seemed last night to attach to it. The hardship on the people was, that a vestry exclusively Protestant had at pre pent the right of increasing.. at their pleasure au assessment which others, who had no share in apportioning it were obliged to pay. This was an hardship that pressed , peculiarly on the people of Ire land, and therefore the Boman Catholic owners and occupiers. of land felt it severely. The noble lord again insisted on the necessity of removing the vestry cess, anu observed that if no, other mode could be devised for .getting - rid of it,-Parliammt, had better agree to the proposition of his Majesty's ministers_ With respect to the proposition of the right hon. member fee. Montgomeryshire, that the schedule which was appended to the- bill should lie attached to this resolution, it.appeared -to him, that it would make no difference in the discussion whether it (To be contioded on page 309.)