The Express.
London, England, 1851-03-25 00:00:00

ght erproo.

TO CORRESPONDENTS.
otontirementatateMed T►t Espresa" Loodoa !Teals!: paper,
aunt oe Mho, 10, lioucericattaft. by Two o'clock on the
day of pubLicatioa.

111011 WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
Tots WA—Morning, Th. 3:ra -Urraism. ti. 4n.
To-ressow—llormair, Ss. Oa. Atinate4 •.Oa.

LONDON; TrESD4Y, MARCIE 25.

Sta lons Y ir's(fs was a very remarkable speech
and well worth studying, as the key to the motives
and feelings of several Irish protestant members of '
parliament, who stand in opposition to the present
bilL Sir Jolts YOI:NG declared that the presby-
terians of the west of Ireland, though offended at
the aggression of 1)r. WISEMAN and the Pon; were
dill not in favour of resisting it or avenging it by
legislation. And the honourable member followed
this up by the declaration that a large number of
liberal protestants, like himself, were of the same
way of thinking.
The reasons given by the honourable member for
Cavan for entertaining these opinions agreed per-
fectly with the reasons of 'Mr. SADLEiIi. Both
said, I►o not proceed with the bill, because it
will excite the hostility of the eatholics, and
neither allay their arrogance nor stop the ag-
gression. In England, perhaps, it might have
such an effect, for in England its operation
would be comparatively unfelt and unimportant.
But in Ireland it would produce a struggle; and the
whole penalties and evil consequences of that
struggle would fall apes' the protestant established
church in that country.
Consider, pleaded Sir Jolts Torso, in a lone that
bespoke commiseration, consider the consequence
of the last struggle, in which the protestants of Ire-
land took part with the high churchmen of England.
The protestants of Ireland were beaten in the legisla-
ture, and the protestant church was obliged to pay
forfeit in the diminution of her tithes, of her bishops,

and her emoluments.
Let um pause for a moment to point out the utter fal-
lacy of this argument, and of the view on which it is
founded, a view of past and present legislation, which
Sir JOHN YouNu takes in common with Sir JAMES
GRAHAM. Both assume as an irrefraguble fact the
most gratuitous falsehood, that the present bill, pro-
hibiting the same titles worn by peers of the realm
to bishops nominated by the Porr., is penalty and
persecution ! Both rank such a prohibition as this
with a law forbidding Roman catholic% to sit in
parliament or hold Mikes in the state. The ansimi-
lation is on the fact of it so monstrous an absurdity,
that no man of good faith or common sense could

make it.
What SirJOIINYOUNG means is that it will be received
by the Irish human catholics and their hierarchy with
as much resentment as any real restriction ; and that
such is the power and predominance of that religion
and that hierarchy in Ireland that the protestants
cannot stand before it. Provoke a struggle or a re-
ligious quarrel in Ireland, inflame the Roman catholic
body to hostility —no matter what the cause, just or
unjust—and they will take the opportunity to fall foul
of the protestant church in Ireland, which cannot
stand before them. That is the plain English of
what Sir JOHN YOUNG declared, as he rose from a
colloquy with Mr. GLADSTONE.
Now, we will not deny that this is a very serious
state of things, and that such belief existing in the
minds and fulling from the mouths of Irish pro-
testants, is a matter most worthy of con-
sideration. It is an admission, neither more
nor less, that the established church in Ireland
exists but at the mercy of the Irish Roman catho-
lies ; and that if that Irish protestant church and
the government in connexion with it, do not conci-
liate the Irish Roman catholics, and give up any
state defence of protestantism in Ireland, then the
established church in that country must be shorn of
its honours, its wealth, and its ascendancy.
We must confess that if any large or respectable
body of Irish protestants assume this tone, make
this admission, and take this attitude, they must
and they will be listened to. If Ireland is so irrevo-
cably and puissantly Roman catholic, that protestants
must bow for their existence before their
rival religionists, the doom of the Irish protestant
establishment is scaled. And the Peelite statesmen
pronounce that doom. For as to a ehureh,possessed of
all tithes, and honours, and territorial ascendancy
in a country, pretending that it can keep all these
things by conciliating and being humble to a rival
and a rampant church, which in the great struggle
, for civil and religious liberty was deprived of these
privileges, and by force of arms too—to suppose that
it can keep them by mere humility and blandish-
ment—that is the acme of absurdity. If Sir JOHN
YOUNG and Sir JssrEs GRAHAM be right, the sooner
pretestantism evacuates Ireland the better.
In thispanic—this satire etuipeut—of a certain num-
ber of Irish protestants, it is too evident that the
feelings of the landlord suite extinguish or dominate
the feelings of the religionist. These gentlemen are quite
ready to fling the church overboard, provided they
can retain their rents. They foresee that a downright
breach with the catholic hierarchy would deprive
them not only of their church, but of their land. 'ley
think that a synod at Thurles would be just as
powerful to issue a law securing tenant right and
defining it, as one prescribing education or mixed
marriages: and they crouch before its shadow.
sow, these gentlemen may be right. Our own
opinion is, that, notwithstanding much truth, there
is still more exaggeration, in their fears. But
there may be enough of truth in it to
render it imprudent to include Ireland even
in the present bill. But, at all events, we have
England to safeguard. We have a great objection
to the POPE nominating our peers or the equals of
111. peers. We have a great objection to the acquisition
sf rty for the founding of ascetic and monastic
aEa~Ushmeats, which rob fathers of their chil-
dren and families of their property. We have
a right to take precautions against these things ;
mad we ought not to be deterred from do-
fag so, either by a band of clamourers, which
o• we side cry out against legislation as trivial, and
am bather side cry out that it is persecution. The
lAA exclaim that unless their bishops have the
amos at a town tagged to their title they cannot
prlbem an act of devotion or ecclesiastical duty. And
• serious and respectable Irish landlord gets up
and tells us, that if the Roman catholic bishops
be not allowed to wear these handles to their names,
it is all over with the established church, with
landlordism and with society. When we hear and
read all these assertions, got up by folly, by fanati-
cism, and by party, we cannot help believing our-
selves for the moment in the world of Oullirer and
Manchausers instead of living, as we are supposed
to do, in the regions of matter-of-fact, plain truth,
and common sense.

WREN Louts NAPOLEON lately applied to M.
()DILLON BARROT to resume his old post at the head
of a ministry, the latter is said to have replied, that
the first condition which he should stipulate was a
declaration on the part of the PRESIDENT that the "
moment his presidency expired he would walk '
quietly out of office, as WASIIINGTOM and JEFFERSON
had done, and resume the character of a private eiti- ;
:en. If LOVIS NAPOLEON would paythissolemnhomage
to the republic, and this adhesion to its constitu-
tion, M. amain as minister, or as deputy, would do
his utmost to procure an abrogation of the clause
forbidding the PRESIDENT'S re-election, and would
promote that re-election to the utmost of his power.
This so fully fixes and describes the political atti-
tude taken by M. BARROT, that it is important to
narrate it. There is no moderate republican who'
' would not rally to the same opinion. And we
do not see what the Bonapartists can aim at,
or rationally hope for, more favourable to their re-
tention of power. The frank adhesion of such a man
as M. BARROT to the principles of the republic is
important, for he was more than suspected of a lean-
ing to monarchy. But a more striking and remark-
able concession of the kind is that of M. TRIERS,
who has completely taken refuge under the shadow
of the republican constitution, and vows that he will