The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1869-06-19 00:00:00

DM

iIADAN T.

the Rouse of Leeds, June 14, at five o'clock, when the
In
Gseery " doers were opetted, there was a hue. of excitement
aDd
crowilleg to the table bisoirino armsful of ?"" were
E if II
gall! ous Dad itzwalter and th e at o arrow by carried
•sos,i a petitious, which moult hate tested the
mc
capmities of )echoer men than they. II R H the
Vt.; Csmbridge teas armee; the first of the Peer, to find
se tray terrugh the crowd at the entraece to the cross
keeess; and he was won followed hy 11. Itii. the le-ince of
wane, who took his seat between the noble L'emtuander-in-
Cbief and Earl Grey,
The conservative benches were almost fully eccepled ; the
„sseers bang much less oil the Ministerial beschts. The
r; of Derby, Lord Ceirtos, Me Earl of nainoesbury, the
i'elte of Marlborough, Lord Clielmeford, the Duke of
,iontrose, sod the Duke of the kiiiehant eat upon the front
ao.posdlon bench ; anal os,the Treasury bn ech were seated
• Granville. the Earl id tiarendon, the Duke of Argyll. the
ride grey, the Earl of Kimberley, Lord Dufferin, etc. The
thins o ccupied a quarter of an hour in presentation.
'The Earl of Derey before the commencement of the di,- us-
took occasion to remark on tie character of the p4l-
- hail just been presented. Those from Man-
chester represented a body—estimated on good authority—
ad less than 211-ineo persons ;cheers), aud that at Liver-
tool at from 25,We to 30,4(0 (cheers).
Lord Grenville moved the second reading of the Irish
Church Bill, which he introduced by directing the last three
@wieners of Her Majesty's Sr eech to be read by the Readitog
co k. Lord Grenville said it was hardly necessary to argue
that the Irish Church was a great anomaly, and an injustice
W the Ireh people, and that it had net fulfilled ita oetensible
weeks That had always been his own conviction, anti
it had been, in fact, acknowledged by all parties, as
"sod Mayo's scheme showed. With reference to the
ee,mel principles of the bill, Ile denied that the
Ttet of viol, pawed 70 years ago, and which had
tom already infrieged by the Church Temporalities Act,
ss be star to a change like this, sanctioned, as it would
se, If at all, by a Parliameht representing Ireland as well
s, England. Nor was the bill, he argued, antagotoistoc to
the doctrine a the Royal supremacy accord otog to the
Us , 00 which Lord Klegatlown& judgment in " Long e.
the bishop ..f Capetowu " had rested that doe, rime.
tat, &estever the view adopted of the theory of
Its Royal supremacy, at any rate Ireland would not
be put by the fell :5 a worse position than Scotland
ws. How flow ationtalous, again, the state of things
which the measure ettempted to cure was appeared frein
the fact thift the Irish Church was, as compared with the
number of its monitors, with poesibly one exception. by far
the richest reltgitous establishment in the world. That the
bins, no attack on Protestantism was sufficiently proved
by the Liberal majority at the tact election.. But the great
deface of the boll was its necessity, lie w mid nut despair of
thellense of I. •rils, nor elf the Epiecopal Bench itself, per-
weine its necessity and its justice Ile combated earnestly the
argumeut which it was suppesed might weigh is ith the B shops
tithe Buglioli Chat ch,—that if the preseht nieasure were
passed their turn would come next Disclaiming any wish
or poser of dictating to the House, he would not presume
that to House would take one step without considering
whod the next step must be. It would be absurd, in troth,
to doubt the itidepeedence of the House, composed as at
the present moment it showed Itself to be, of men possess, o
fig enornoons property, and of men who had rendered
great pubic and private services, mad attended as
it use by representatives of the Privy Council,
sreat foreign realms end republics, and, as the
galleries tweeted, by that portion of humanity, too,
which ezercised by uo means the least lullawics over affairs.
But, freewill po•erfiel as the Rouse was, there was one thing
then which it was less powerful, and that was a clear ex-
pre...slut of the national will. Indeed. the whole tone of the
debate on the Sutpensory Bill, as he showed by extracts
from the speeches of lwrola Cairns and Derby. towheel that
the Opposition then pledged itself to abide toy the will of the
country whenever disclosed. Now, however, it wonlii ap-
pear as If certain peers had taken for the keynote
at their policy the schoollmy's principle, " Heads I
win. and tails you lose " The Goverunieht had been ae-
rated of an imperious determination WILLMAR no amendments
to the MIL The totmerous bona fide amendmrnts which had
been accepted proved this was not soo. Those of Mr Disraeli,
Witch had neen rejected, were clot bona fide, since, as statistics
thowed, they could not have been adopted except at a cost
tar beyond the actual resources of the Irish Church, even as
tow endowed. The Government could not, it was true, sur-
render the principle of the bill; halo- herwise they were pre-
pared to admit amendno.nts not merely of detail, but which
might affect the whole of the bill. After criticising a remark
by Lord ilarrowby that the matter INII9 one loot of politics.
bat of the bible, on w Mch he observed that the Irish Church
bed been &Iwo ye unfortenately too much mixed up with
politics, he concluded with an earliest appeal to the House
too look at the question as if irelasad ware the stronger and
England sere the oppo eased and the weaker country.
Lord liarrowhy, who repudiated the character either of a
leader or of a party man, moved an amendment that the bill
should be reads second time that day three months. lie
oat leek on the Government and its Mende the charge of
themselves being origmally cut Dad Mayo's much-abused
opinion silo the propriett of levelling up; and he muted
from stiller el Mr. Dillon in the fabl.l in prime His owe
objection to the bill was that it was revolutionary, that it
lecptieti m a certain senses violation of the Coronation Oath,
and that it was opposed to the Act of (lion Circumstances
might, he confessed, be imagined when such extreme
me.sures would be justifiable; but his complaint was that
none such had been shown to exist in the present
Instance. liow little necessary in the cause of justice wan
thedeetruclion of the Iri-h Courch Etablishinetot he showed
by citation, from Grattan, Burke, Plunked, Castlereagh, and
feet The present measure, which he traced to a toe-gotta.
eon between the Montan Catholics and the Liberation
Soddy, had been curiously anticipated in a proposal of Mr.
even down to the application of the surplus funds to
the endowment of lunatic am hens and the like. But that
proposal had been opp.sed hy members of the present
Gores moot, and in reined to them it was an entirely new
project. Ile proceeded to discuss the iticionveniet.ciee of
dealing in this abrupt and violent way with sixteen milli us'
worth of property, and the great probability that the effect
would he to diminish the touraloor of Irish Protestants, thus
depriving the Irish peasantry tof kindly friends and em-
ployer., and England of its truest friends. The hill had
leen rested. indeed, on the argument of justice to Ireland.
But, at the highest, it was only halt justice to the irieh
Roman Catholics, who, on the same plea, might logica'ly
rime to have their confiscated property restored to them,
and it was e holly injustice to the Dish Pretestauts Be
urged, finally, on the House its obligation, considerong its
place in the State, hoc. slat this revolutionary attempt on the
grout' of the already extremely democratic chic aeter of the
tenth Constitution—more democratic, he asserted, than
that of any ether country, not even excepting the Cuffed
States
Lord Clarendon compared the expressions 0! feeling on
this Irish Church question with the told fanatical opposition
to the repeal of the Teat anal Corporation Acts, mod the
pretreat rancour against Mr. Gladstone with that against
the hate Sir Robert Pod is, reference to the repeal of the
Corn Laws. It was, be felt, inipos-ible to awaken much
interest In so thoroughly exhausted a discussion as (tile; hut
the one queation to be considered was whether the measure
were just soli necessary. Ile referred to his own IrDh
experieecet, sincere Protestset as he was, in proof that
It was just. How neceasaty it was, tutticoently appeared
from the ch an intpoesibility—which, es was always
the case, had only made itself evident tardily—of governing
Ireland Oil the old principles But the reasons for giving the
beta secomi reading on account of its justice end its necessity
Were, in his opinion, even interim to the reasons in its favour
Which might be drawn from the danger its summary rejection
would cause to the Meuse of Lords. As a majority in the
Rouse hail accepted Household Suffrage, front 'a Inch it was
probably more averse than even from the present meaeure, so
he hoped it would net now again, mid not throw this bill
back on the ROM e of Commons.
The Duke of Rutland was hostile to the bill, as opposed
to the rigids of property and toe Coronation Oath, and as
dissolving the salutary connection between church and
State. Ile cited tee awhinity of Mr. Pitt, Sir R. Peel, and
lord Palmerston against the arguments of Lord Clarendon.
The tell had been rested on the ground that the Irish CMirch
wka the ehttrch of a minority but he debied that, if the
Putted Kiugdom were looked at as one, it was the Church
at a minority. Then, again, it had been supported as a
rename of equality; but how, he asked, could there be
equoility between Romabism and Protestantism, between
truth and error? As or the argument that the Established
Church was the badge of couqueet, it was, he thought, much
truer in point of history that the Roman Catholic Church in
Ireland was that. He Could discover no generosity in the
eompensatiou which the bill provided for the Froteetant
Church. The Fault neat be that the Church would he thrown
back on the voluntary principle, ...hide he himself thought a
very object enable principle, and the success of which in
Seethed hail been greatly exenzwerated. That the Roman
Catholic Church maintained itself in, Ireland on that princi-
ple was no proof that the Protestant Church, which heel
no doctrine of pergatory to appeal to, could be thus
mairdsiued. He dewed that the llou.e was engaged
by steything which had occurred last year to let this bill pass.
Last year they had not beet. inferno ti toy Mr. Gladstone that
Maymmth was to be endowed out of the property of the Pro-
testant Chnrch,
Lord Stretford de Redeliffe thought it was necessary to
look at the question as affecting red merely the Irish Church,
but also the relations between this and the other House. Ile
thought this disestablishment as proposed by the bill was nn-
just to the Irish Protestant.. lie thought, too, thet this •
rower° being put forward as only one part o. the Dish policy
of the Government, the Meuse hail a right to complain that
the other two portions of this policy had not been declared
at the same tone. He feared. looking at the character of the
bill, that we might be sacrineing the substame to the shadow,
and lie treated very lightly the argument that the bill was an
act of justice to Ireland. But, then, when he considered
the events oft. t year, and the place of this House in the
State, arid its relation to the other House, he reluctantly
felt reneged to vote for the second reading, though he
should reserve his liberty to vote against the third reading,
If his objections to the bill were not removed in Committee.
Lord Itornilly defended the bill as an attempt to put all the
religious in Ireland on an equality. It was in its favour, and
timely mt astalnat it, that it was the epoutaneolie offer of
England to Ireland, and net the result if direct Irish pees-
sine. Ile did not see why the destruction of ecclesiastical
machinery should desires religion, .shad been urged. A like
Belies of mesterei in Scotland hail not had that effect, and
the origin of Chredianity was itaelf a proof to the contrary.
He believed the result would he the reverse of what was pre-
dicted M Lord Removal ; there would he more zeal and less
jealousy. The Irish Chnrch, as an Established Church, had
not heen sue:cent ul, and act:ordinal, on the principles on
which the Court of Chan dry acted. it had become the duty bf
the state to pet an etal to it. at least as acirporation of its pre-
teacher* ter. He warned the Romeo the danger of attempt-
ing to raise map Tete to the level of private property, lest
they sheuld only lathe cud halo reeling private property to the
levelof public. Asforthe ao gement upon the C. ronetion Oath,
lord ilarrowhy had misapprehended the real sanction and
objects of such a pledge. In concleation, he reminded the
House of the blow, the effects of which still lasted, of its
original rejection of the Reform Bill of 1832, and he entreated
• it not to repeat the blunder.
11 e Archbishop of Canterbury acknowledged that this was
a trod erisie Be and his brethren must act by the advice
of :wither side, but only In obedience to their own con-
sciences Me own opinion was that they must neither
swept the measure as it was, nor reject it in its pretent
stage. lie had gladly hailed Lord Granville's assurance that
any amendments a, add be carefully co neolered. Ile mould
ntot match himself on a purely legal question against Lord
auohernty—althotigh he doubted the correctness of
his view as to the rights of corporate property—het he WY
elltitlCll to contest Lord Roomilljes advice to the Irish Church
to accept disendowment gratefully as a benefit. He
did hot believe that it could be for the advantage
of a Church to make the maintenance of its ministers
proportionate to heir displays of fanaticism. But It was a
very different queetion whether the HflllsB ought summarily
to cast back the meosure without attempting to aniend it.
However much the bill might, by diseetablishing the Irish
thumb, separate it front the Church of England, it
could clever break off the trite conuexien in spirit iwtween ,
the two Churches. But arnetelmenta, astut esseetial ones,
it did need. In is pretest state it held out no adequate
indinownents to the Irish Church to re-incorporate itself.
What.ver the bill gave to the menthers of that Church, iu the
shape of the power of holding promrty, of buying back their
owl houses, aral the like, they COlall 4111 egotelly well with-
out tine pewees uuder the bill. It was but a petty amount
Wtiittu the 1411 offered, in saltation to the life incomes of the
lenient iticumbeets, which were theirs of right lie deeired,
in rile find piece, however, to clear away twit fallacies which
had leer, made large use of, the one in relation to Soothed,
where he denied the volubtary system hail been successful
either as to the lipbcopal or as to the Free Kirk, mod the
other as to Canada, ss'htecea large part of the Church funds hail
Intact never been confiscated, alai which nevertheless reitiered
lusplementary mist/ince from the Propagatir n of the (.1 .spel
sectety. But with all these defects of the hill, he did not
feel sure it was incapable cf 'whit turned into a good measure,
mid made tornewhat more emoostent with the recital In its
preatulde for a desire fee equelity, which would certainly
not be satiefled by the adoption of the date 1660 as the time
from n hitt pu ivao e gifts were to be respected. Ile saw more
Fp .1 in the revision of the bill by the Holum than in any
tumultotes meetings at Manchester or Liverpool.
Lord Carnarvon desired to explain to what extent he could
accept the bilL He did not believe the hill would pacify
Del cud ; but, on the other hand, he recognised a certain
merit Is the freedom it would confer on the Irish Church,
Which had suffered so much from its connexion with the
Mate. Then, too, the Irish Church was the Church of •
• mmority, and his experience in the Colonial 11111cr ha-el in
• pressed on him the linpossibtlity of a Church of s minority
eveiding hecomieg a fossil. Ile debied the undoes} ot
Indeed with Wales, where the Episcopal Church was
said to be in a minority. The difference was, that Die'
merit was an exotic in Wales, but Catholicism wa-
net an exotic 11, Irelootal. This tionestion et the Irish
o: c belch, r, loe 1. 'Ant upon 0,1. like tou qt. stion et
lees, more of a liational than a religious queetion. As for
pistiessioz stassater ata prim% moms, his observed