The Sun.
London, England, 1830-03-05 00:00:00

MILITARY PUNISHMENTS.

Sir F. BURDETT begged to know from the Hon. and
Gallant Officer whether any objection would be mate to a
Return of the Punishments in the Army, distinguishing
the Inflictions in each Regiment, during the last twelve
Months?
Sir H. HARDINGE felt a very strong objection to such
a Return.
Sir F. BURDETT inquired whether in former times
such Regimental Returns had not been made? •
Sir H. HARDINGE added, that no such Returns had
ever been made. At the same time he should have no ob-
jection to state to the Hon. Baronet the number of punish-
ments in. each regiment, although he could not consent
that it should be made the subject of a formal Return.
CHURCH OF IRELAND.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT brought forward his motion
on the State of the Established Church of Ireland. Before
he stated the precise nature of his motion, he wished very
shortly to call the attention of the House to the progress
of the Establishment at different periods. The com-
mencement of the Reformation in Ireland presented
one of the most extraordinary instances of legislation
in the history of legisletive absurdities. The Act of
Uniformity passed in the reign of Elizabeth was verbatim
extended to Ireland, with the addition of a remarkable
clause, which provided that inasmuch as in some parts of
Ireland neither the Priests nor the people understood Eng-
lish, the matins and the rest of the service should be per-
formed in Latin, of which both Priest and people were
equally ignorant. Neither was it fair to impute this blun-
der to Ireland—she had enough of her own to answer for,
without the addition of those of Elizabeth, Lord Burghley,
and the rest of the Privy Council. Coming down to the
reign of James the First, he would refer the House to the
statement made by Sir John Davies to the Earl of Salis-
bury on the Ecclesiastical state of Monaghan; Fermanagh,
and Cavan. He complained that such of the churches as
were said to he in repair were only covered with thatch—
that the whole district was within the diocese of Kilmore,
and that the Bishop held also the living of Trim—that in
fact he had two bishoprics, and that Divine Service was
performed in neither. Sir J. Davies added, that the Bishop
of Kilrnore might have saved himself the labour of in-
quiring touching matters Ecclesiastical, if he had been as
careful in the repair of his churches as he had been indus-

trious in visiting his barbarous clergy, in order to procure
their contributions, which had made it in Ireland a pro-
ver!,, that a parish priest was better than a mulch cow. In

that diocese at the present day, one living had a— glebe of
1,300 acres ; yet the incumbent was non-resident,' and in
another diocese had a glebe of 400 acres. The 12th Geo.

I. deprived Roman Catholics of the right of voting in
Vestries, because they obstructed votes for the repairs of
Protestant churches; and as from that time Protestants
had the sole management of the affair, if the churches
fell into decay, they had only themselves to blame. Never-
theless, since the Union, large sums had been borrowed
'to be repaid by the parish at large, for the repair of
those churches ; and the Roman Catholics might naturally
think it hard, that having been excluded from all share in
vestry proceedings, they were required to pay because the
Protestants had neglected their duty. In 1819 a docu-
ment had been lain upon the table, showing the progress
made in uniting and disuniting parishes in Ireland; and
hence it appeared that in the sixty- two years after the 2d
George 1., thirty-seven parishes had been united, and as
many disunited. At that time the country was very much
in pasture; but from about 1780 to 1800, the tillage of
Ireland was very much increased, and of course the ne-
cessity for uniting parishes was so •far diminished; yet, in
that period, twenty-five parishes had been united, and only
seven disunited—so that the operation proceeded in an in-
verse ratio to what it ought to have been. In the eigh-
teen years down to 1818, ' the same result was more
strongly exemplified, for thirty-four• parishes were united,
and only four disunited. NOtwithstanding the expense to
which the country was fi ut for the maintenance of the
Established Church—notwithstanding the large revenues
the Bishop derived from lands belonging to the See,
many of the Cathedrals were out of repair ; and of many
that were not dilapilited it might be truly said that
they -were not made use of for the purposes for which
they were intended—there were in many instances no
services performed in them. From a paper which Bishop
Pococke left left behind him, it appealed that in the
diocese of Ossory, in 1731, the number of Protestant fa-
milies amounted to 1,180; and from the survey of Mr.
Tyghe, it appeaied that in 1800, the number was reduCed
to '7ll. In the former year the aggregate population was
41,200, ill the latter year 83,000. To show the House
the plan on which the union of Irish livings • was effected,
and the consequences of those unions upon the inhabitants,
he would instance his own parish; that parish was united
to another, and the effect of that union was that many of
the inhabitants were removed to the distance of eleven
miles froth the parish church. Thus were they obliged
to pay church-rates for repair and building of churches,
though it was utterly impossible, both from the religious
peritiasion and tlie situation of the residences, that they
could derive any advantage from the use of that church—
not even those whose interest lay the contrary way, could
fail to see the injustice of per Sons paying for 'the'repair and
building of a church which was in the parish they did not
reside. in. The injustice was so apparent, that the
parishioners of the one parish came to a resolution that
the others should pay only two-thirds. of the rates hereto,
fire imposed on them ; and a Noble Lord, the Member for
Kilkenny, and he (Sir John Newpntt), took upon them-
selves to see that arrangement carried into effect; but they
found they could not • do it. The inhabitants of the parish
in which the church was not situated were riot obliged to
pay as before. But he did himself and the. Noble Lord in-
justice—us they had undertaken to see that the thing
should be' done, they would not allow the poor people to
suffer any disappointment ; they paid the money themselves.
The grievance of which he complained was one which
called for an immediate remedy, for it operated on one of
the most flagrant pieces of injustice that could well be ima-
gineel—an injustice not surpassed in any country but in
Ireland. Complaints had been made in various places bf
the unnecessary splendoUr of the new churches in Ireland--
unsuited as they were to the circumstances of the peop!e,
and the character of the surrounding buildings. In answer
to that complaint, he heard it said that no more was ever
granted by the Board of First Fruits for rebuilding than
I,4ool.—that was the highest sum. This he should not
have mentioned, had it not been generally stated, and cur-
rently believed throughout Ireland. He made it his busi-
ness to inquire into the matter at the proper office in Dublin,
and there he learned that so far from 1,400/. being the
maximum, there were instances as high as 3,7001., and
even 4,000/. having been granted for rebuilding, and in
one case the sum of 10,000/. Since the Legislative Union
between this country and Ireland, a sum of 250,000/. was
expended in the rebuilding of churches, the whole of which
expence devolved upon the people—a people, not only not
interested in the repair•, but a people no way concerned in
permitting the dilapidation which made that rebuilding ne-
cessary: The subject to-which he would next advert, was
the condition of the unbeneticell curates—that condition
was most forcibly exemplified in the case of a poor gentle-
man, 'from whom lie had received a letter, some portions
of which, with the permission of the House, he would read.
The Hon: Bart. then read extracts, which in substance
were as follow :—The writer stated that he was ordained
on the 241 or June, 1773—that he entered upon his duties
p,fiat.eontf,tu,ya,:n.is,,fil,a:,rl:taertyb
fi4foty/,. a year—that he had officia tea 'at that
rate dining a period of thirty-six years, always, of course,
en
residing with his parish—that for the first few years he
ingag
appointed.ain 1) e cait;:)er vaa ep:ec.ir
ittg, and
not
of
lebe house,
iug
and had ever since been paying rent for one. On the bene-
lhiiit'elllein, hean n551('.115g provide‘s..l' B:rens residence fur uninha-
bitable, ri'tinnseh f,
fiee where he did duty beconilitg vacant, lie applied to lie
appointed to it, but a young gentlenitin was sent to fill
the vacancy, who had not been hot n till after the writer
years he hail done the duties of a Curate for non•
t
then sixty, and at length, uni►er the
gentleman enit'lemaTnhleviiii:
dent inctimbents. That his salary was first forty
entered t,l,i,em(.)B.'h
Act Of Parliament, it was raised to seventy-live pounds;
at that amount it remained till within these few years,
when the Incumbent, agdiil all incumbents iu Breland—re

duced it from seventy-five pounds to sixty-nine pounds firm
shillings. The Act of which he spoke was that for the
assimilation of the currency of Great Britain and Ireland.
During those fifty-five years he had been under the givern..
ment of six several Bishops, to each of wham he appli-d
—they admitted his claims, but gave him no preferment.
He was at the time of writing the letter seventy-nine years
of age—was likely soon to be incapable of performing the
duties of a Curate--and as there was no fund for super-
annuated Curates, he was in the utmost danger or being
reduced to want. On this letter be had to observe,
that it presented one of the strongest cases that could
easily be supposed capable of occurring. He had made in-
quiries into the character of the writer, and found that
that character was perfectly unimpeached—none need be
more respectable; yet six successive Bishops plotted him
by, and promoted those who were junior to him, and who
had, to say the least, no better claims than his. It was
rather remarkable that one of these six Bishops happened
to be the present Bishop of Ferns—the transactions of
which he spoke took place in the See of Limerick. Now
it was pretty well known that the Bishop of Ferns could
see no abuse in the present state of the Irish Church—yet
that Bishop went out of the See of Limerick, leavit g this
poor Curate exactly as he found him, though his claims
were stated to, and admitted by, that Prelate. It is gene-
rally supposed that the Curates receive a salary of 75/.,
that has been reduced to 691. 45., though the incumbents
do not receive their incomes in the depreciated currPncy.
But that was not the only deduction from their salaries—
the law declared what their salaries should be, but it spe-
cified no deductions ; nevertheless deductions were made.
He next called the attention of the House to a letter from
Cork, from which it appeared that in that city there were
but three Curates possessing salaries of 751. From this
subject he again returned to the ease of the Curate whose

letter he first read, and dwelt upon the injustice of leaving
a man of his excellent character so long as 30, 40, and
50 years in the subordinate and distressing situation of
a Curate, at the same time putting boys, just ordained,
over his head. He then mentioned the case of another
Curate, who had been a Curate eight-and-twenty years,
and doing the duty of three parishes—for ona of
these he received 18/. 9s. 2d., for another 9/. 4s. 7d., for
the third 91. ss. 311., making his total income 361. 184.
that was an income upon which he could net lire, did he
not possess some private property. Could there then, he a
stronger case calling for a modification of the laws relat-
ing to the salaries of Curates ? The situation of the un-
happy Curate was just this—the Rector might refuse to
pay him any thing but what he pleased ; and in any man-
ner he pleased ; and the unfortunate Curate was without
remedy, for did he venture to complain the incumbent im-
mediately would reply— Do as you please; go about
your business ; I can do the duty of the parish myself, or

I can find others who will." He would now come to the
subject of pluralities. He understood it to be the fact
that the Primate had no power of refusing faculties for
holding pluralities, provided the livings are within thirty,
miles of each other. Some time since he (Sir J. New-
port) introduced a Bill for remedying that defect in the
state of the law, and he was induced to withdraw it, on
the assurance that the Primate was doing all in his power

to remove the inconvenience, and the injustice, against
which the Bill was directed. Those exertions, however,
were not attended with success ; and, therefore, some
new measure on the subject became absolutely necessary--
something of the sort must be done; there was no postpon-
ing it any longer, the time for legislating upon the subject
of the union of Irish livings had arrived ; and an attempt to
protract the period must be attended with the worst effects.
He should now state to the House the motion w;th which
he intended to conclude. He should move that an

humble Address be presented to his Majesty, praying that
he would be graciously pleased to appoint Commissioners,
to be selected from the Privy Council of Ireland, to
examine into the Unions of Parishes in the several Dio-
ceses of Ireland, the authority under which those Unions
had been effected, and the value of each ; also whether
the Parishes so united were contiguous or remote, and how
far remote; with the number of Churches which they
contain. .Finally, to direct their attention to each va-
cancy.of such .Unions as they may arise, whether by death
or otherwise, and to report the same, with their opinions
thereon, to his Majesty. Secondly, he should seek to
make it compulsory upon
.the Archbishops and Bishops
to institute. a strict inquiry at their annual visitations into

the payments nude by the beneficed Clergymen to .their
Curates, for the purpose of seeing that those Curates re-
ceceive their full salaries of 751. in British currency., and
that no deduction are made from them except suell'as are
expressly authorised under the Act of Parliament.._.
Thirdly, he should move that there be laid tnicire the
House information respecting the authority exeteised by
the Primate, with respect to faculties for holding plurali-
ties—the number of faculties granted or withheld.—
Fourthly, he should move an Address, humbly recom-
mending to the consideration of his Majesty to suspend
the appointment by the Crown to any dignity or benefice
that may happen to become vacant, by death or other-
wise, until a strict inquiry should be made into the state
of the Cathedral; and should rebuilding or repair be-
come necessary, that the first year's income of such dignity
or benefice should be applied to that purpose, deducting
what might be necessary for the celebration of divine ser-
vice, and the duties of the office ; as in the reien of his
late Majesty had been done with respeet to the Cathedral
of Lichfield.

Sir ROBERT INGLIS observed that the number of
resident clergymen had greatly increased within the last
twenty years. The increase amounted to 697, which was
nearly equal to the whole number of resident clergy in
Ireland in the reign of George I. When such were the
operations' of the Church when left to itself, he thought
that any legislative Act of the House would otily retard the
object which was already in progress. That there were
insulated places where curates were pining in obscurity
and poverty, he admitted ; but he did not think thit they
formed a sufficient ground for interference. There was
already an Act in existence for the diminution of this evil,
(71(1 it was in the power of the bishops and the
,curates
themselves to obtain a fair hearing of their case. In the
diocese of Armagh the number of residents' in 1828 was
equal to the whole number of residents in all Ireland
in 1792. In his opinion, the facts stated by the
Right Honourable Baronet were not sufficient to evince

that the Church of Ireland was too largely endowed ;
and it was to be remembered that there were 1480
glebes in the hands of laymen; so that if he could concur
in any part of the Right Hon. Baronet's motion, it would
be for the purpose of ascertaining what portion was paid
by impropriators, being laymen ; and he believed that it
would turn out to be a . very small proportion indeed._
( Hear, bear.)—lf the Right 'Hon.. Baronet had contented
himself with moving such an Address is that which he had
moved on the 22d of April, 1819, in which "the Prince
Regent was requested to direct an inquiry by communi..
cation into the state of the Church of Ireland, bra com-
munication with the Archbishops and Bishops of that part
of the United Kingdom, similar to the inquiry instituted
in June, 1806." . lie (Sir R. Inglis) would not have ob-
jected, though he still should have been of opinion that the
better course would have been to have left the matter
quiet: As it was, however, be felt-bound to move the pre-
vious question. The Right Hon. Baronet had said that
the ReformatiOn never Idly took effect in Ireland, and
certainly it was. a. long time before it was fully embraced
and at work there. This being the cue, he would ask
whether the actual state of the Church of Ireland was not
Much better now than could have reasonably been Ex.
pected, under the discouraging circumstances with Which
it bad met ? With such discouragement on the p;irt of Thu
Crown from the period of the Revolution to that cf the
Union, he would ask whether there had nut been more
done, or whether there was not more thing by that Church
than could have been fairly anticipated? lie put it to the
Right Hon. Baronet's candour wholuir this was' not the
case? and he therefore requested him not to retard wILIA
was already doing, by im attempt at anY legislative: measure.. .
Lord F. L. GOWER—IIe Was not able to aioaent to

the proposition tither -of the Right Ifunouvatde Ba-
ronet, or of the Hon. Member for Oxford, The Right
iHmocnk.
sßomareowneht, in the
atfuroiecrotirse of
than
w go;te
but i perhaps necessary i
there were one or two ottservations on which it might be
tof
Qyuneenfe%Eviizib
worec;h
fHe should ' .ay that
toli:s.
service in the Litin language was a proof that
's
mil(t:el el r:t ti
oea to
fl
she was desirous of acting with more regard for the feel-
ings and prejudices of the pecldt(etti itiac,ks ,far
whichi:iai..
thatcountrye_thiair
tii:i4
her father•, Henry the ia:
_i
attacks
membered rightly, one of the
tu~tde ors the prejudicci
of the
1 Irish, was t 6 com
signal
pel thewto tell their bi ads in the Engliih tongue: it strn4
daughter gigs
that the eagac;ty o the
her disc
Baronetu :l meet
there
e 7that
failure. The Right llon. h
d said th,►t
y o
hail been a great increase of unions since the Revolutio..
Ile could not profess the great knowledge of the Right
Honourable Baronet on this pint ; but as lie lookect
in it, :null a circumstance ',might have ati,eit without
attaching, any odium to the 13isi:op. 4He believed that it
had sometimes happened that the unions of nine pal ishea
had been dissolved into unions of three; and if that were

the case, the account would stand—one dissolution against
three unions.--(Hear, hear.)—in which event, -what Litt
Hon. 134ronet was standing tip tea was substintially of
fecto.l,—( Hear, hear.)-11dancholy as the facts were
which th.. Right lion. Baronet had stated with regard to
the Citra'es of Irelaud, Le Lutist say ttiat he knew of au

profession (not even excepting that of the law) in which
the merit of particular individuals would so long linger on
in ohscnrity. He could take upon himself to state that
there was every disposition in the Bench of Ireland to
bring forward and remunerate the Curates of that country.
—(Hear.)—For the reasons which lie had stated, he
should, in the Amendment which he was about to propose,
agree with every part of the Right lion. Baronet's motion,
which would tend to enlighten the House by information,
and enabling them to judge more accurately of the real
state of the Church of Ireland. He was convinced that ii
would be wrong to attempt to wrap the situation of that
Church in mystery—(Hear, hear)—and he was confident
that he spoke the sentiments of the heads of that Church,
when he said they were ready to afford the fullest informa-
tion on every particular connected with it.—(lleari)._
There was one paragraph in the Right Hon. Baronet's
motion to which he must offer his opposition. The Right
lion. Baronet proposed that the House should recommend
to the consideration of his Majesty the propriety of sus-
pending the appointments by the Crown to any dignities
or benefices which hereafter may be vacant, and in the gift
thereof. In proposing this, the Right Hon. Baronet !eel
certainly proposed what was within the power of the
Crown to do; but when he went on to propose, that in
the event of its being necessary to build or repair any of
the Churches, his Majesty should be pleased to appoint the
revenues arising from such dignities or benefices, after de-
ducting what may be necessary far the celebration of divine
service, and the discharge of the customary duties, it was
not within the Crown to make this arrangement—for he
apprehended, that although, when benefices became vacant,
they might remain so, it was obligatory on the Bishop to
sequester the revenue for the use of the next incumbent.
He therefore had a distinct legal objection to this portion
of the proposed Resolutious ; h, sides which, he thought it
improper to mix up with a motion for information, any-
thing an like a radical change of the present state of the
The Noble Lord then concluded by moving, by
way of Amendment, a series of Resolutions, to the effect
that an Address should be presented to his Majesty, pray-
ing for the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the
state of the parish benefices of Ireland—into the annual
value of the eee end parishes—into the contingencies of
their respective churches and chapels—into the possibility
of dissolving the existing unions—and into the several other
details.
Mr. C. MOORE—He should support the Hon. Mem-
ber for Oxford's amendment in preference to the others.
The Right Hon. Baronet had stated, that in one district
there had been an alerming decrease of Protestantism ; and
on that ground had insinuated, that the sante circum-
staneess extended to the whole of Ireland. The Hon.
Baronet would find, that by the last census taken—he be-
lieved in 1824—there had been of late an apyroximation
between the number of Protestants and the number of
Catholics, and that now the latter did not exceed the
former in so great a proportion as they did some yeeis
back. There were, he believed, now 2,000,000 Protes-
tants to 5,000,000 Catholics. It was stated that the
Irish Church did not reform abuses; but in that Church,
and particularly in the Hierarchy, there watt a great dis-
position to reform abuses. During the last twenty years,
net less than 132 beneficed Clergymen had been added to
the Establishment, by the dissolution of unions. During
the same twenty years also, there had been a great number
of pluralities dune away; so that the 600 beneficed Clergy_
men, of which the Establishment formerly consisted, were
now converted into 1,200. Something had been said by
the Right Hun. Baronet of the Bishop of Ferns, when
Bishop of Limerick, not having promoted a deserving
Curate. Of that particular case he knew nothing; but he
knew that the Bishop of Ferns, since he had been in pos-
session of his present See, had shown a great disposition to
promote deserving Curates. He had promoted fifteen,
from livings of 1501. to livings of 5001. a year, though
he had no other acquaintance with them than that which
lie lead formed by becoming acquainted with their services.
Mr. HUME was glad to hear these sentiments from the
Hnn. Member, and should found on them a claim to hie
support, when he should make a motion for a Committee
to inquire into the. state of the Irish Church.—(A laugh.)
—At the raise time the lion. Member's statements were
quite inconsistent with his vote. The proposition of the
Right Hon. Baronet was but a milk-end-water one. It
wee high time that the whole establishment of the Irish
Church should he inquired into, revised, and reduced, so
as to accord with the state of the country. He should
vote for the motion of his Right Hon. Friend ; but he did
not do so from supposing that this motion was adequate to
the circutnetances of the country. Inquiry must, in his
opinion, go much further—(Hear, bear)—and he hoped
to see the establishment reduced to two or four Bishops.
—(A laugh.)—lle should like that sixteen or eighteen
Bishops were swept off at once—(A laugh)—and he
heartily believed that, in this respect, the population of
England and Ireland would go along with hint. Instead
of repairing the cathedrals, if they could not be converted
into parish churches, he would pull them down. Why
should the people be compelled to keep structures of brick
and mortar of which they made no use? Instead of appro•
priating the revenues of benefices, as they became vacant,
to clerical purposes, he would cause them to be paid into
she Consolidated Fund.--(A laugh.)—.That would he of
some benefit to the people. He would support the mo-
tion of /14 Right lion. Friend, though he thought it
wholly inadequate, being persuaded that if the Adis of
the Irish Church were inquired into fully, a great reduc-
tion might be made with great advantage. When he
brought forward his motion on the subject, he should ex-
pect thee support of the lion. Member for Dublin.—(Bear.)
Mr. I.IOORE was understood to say that when the
lion. Alen:her made a motion for inquiry, he would
second it.
Mr. S. RICE thought that of the motions before the
House the preference was due to the Amendment proposed
he the Noble Lord. The Members of the Irish Church
did not participate in the Hon. Member's views; and
though disposed to resist every change, they had now
become sensible that changes were not necessarily injuries.
They had at first opposed the Tithe Composition Bill, hut
they had afterwards assented to it, and they found that
much good had resulted from that Act to them. The
Vestry Act was another Act of the same kind. Whatever
charges had been made against that Act, and a great many
bad been made, it hail never been said that it was inimi-
cal in its results to the interests of the Clergy. If the
Hon. Member for Oxford looked at the Acts of the Legis-
laterc, he would know that the right of the Legislature to
interfere with Church property for Church purposes was
recognized by tnany Acts of Parliament, and acted on.
The Legislature might therefore again interfere with it to
rare the stipends of curates, as it had before. The lion.
Member also seemed to have confounded parishes with
benefices ; but in Ireland they were not the same. If the
previous question should be carried, he hoped that then
they should all concur in the proposition of the Noble Lord.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER expressed
his surprise at the amendment proposed by the lion. Mem-
ber fur Oxford ; and be wait still more surprised that the
amendment was supported by the Hon. Member fur Dub-
lin, who thought inquiry would remove false impreteioes
concerning the Irish Church, and be a full refutation to
the charges brought against it. The Right Hon. Cent.
concluded by requesting the lion. Heather for Oxford to
withdraw his amendu:_ent.

Mr. TRANT maintained that the Church of Ireland
was not to blame—it had no abuses, it was in the moat
progressive and satisfactory state of amendment. If the
Church of England was to be pulledilown, let it be pulled
down by honest hands.
Mr. PEEL presumed that gentlemen who had just
enters d the House, and had not been present at the debate,
must, from the speech of the Hon. Member for Dover,
suppose that some formidable proposition was under con-
sideration for the destruction of the Church of Ireland.
The course of proceeding that the Ili& Hon. Baronet
proposed was, that the Crown should be advised to appoint
a Commission to examine into the state of the Church of
Ireland with reference to the union of benefices—that it
should inquire into the value of each parish which consti-
tuted such union, and in the proceedings adopted to sever
such unions, as well as for the purpose of facilitatiag the ap-
pointment of a greater number of Ministers of the church
of Ireland, as for the purpose of the better performing of
the sacred duties of the Ministry. It was proposed that a
Commission, composed of Privy Councillors, should in-
quire into the grant of faculties, or dispensations, by which
pluralities were had. A further proposition was, that the
Crown should not appoint to any benefice in whis.!) there
was a deficiency of a glebe house, a church, or cathedral
and that the profits of such benefice should be appropriated
to the building of such glebe-house or church, or to the re-
pairs of such cathedral. His Noble Friend objected to that,
and the Right Hon. Baronet bad submitted to the validity
of that objection; and tlus whole proposal, as it nowstpod,
was for a Commission to inquire into the state of the Union
of Benefices, and to facilitate a greater appointment of '
working Ministers, and to prevent the holding of plurali-
ties. Did the Hon. Member for Dover (Mr. 'grant) pro-
fessing his anxiety to maintain the interests of rgligino,
conceive that he could impose upon any man by his cry of
the Church in Danger.—(Hear, hear.)---Did the Hun.
Member not know—was he so totally ignorant of all that
was passing around hint as not to know that the Crown

had already appointed a Commission to inquire into the
whole state of the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction of this corsntr}•?
That Commission had not yet extended to Ireland. He
(Mr, Peel) would venture to say that the Church of Ire-
isad was gaining in strength, by adoeini moderate And

well considered reformation. For that Church he pro-
!osed as sincere a respect as the Hon. Member for Dover ;
and he could affirm, from his own knowledge, that, for
twenty-five years, great efforts had been made by the
Church to improve its condition ; and, at this moment,
the Church of Ireland could present a Ministry, speaking
eollectively, as devoted to the discharge of its spiritual
functions as the Ministry of the Church or Ecclesias-
tical establishment in any country. If the time should
ever arrive when an attempt should he made to deal
with the property of the Church upon other prin-
ciples than with the property of other establishments,
then would be the time for the exertions of those who
dreaded the subversion of that Church. The Honourable
Member for Oxford could not mean to push his doctrine so
far as others that night hail pushed it. He could not mean
to say that any part of the revenue of the church, such as
the stipends of Curates, was beyond the reach of the law.
With r:.ferenoe, however, to the appropriation of the reve-
nue of the Church the question ought to be approached
with the utmost delicacy, and an enlarged view ought to he
taken of the effect of an unequal distribution of that re-
venue upon the promotion of learning and religion. When
any attempts were made upon the revenue of the Church,
he would resist them; but he would not permit the impu-
dent sarcasms of the lion. Member fur Dover to prevent
his acceding to a motion, whick, he believed, was not
couched in the spirit of hostility to the Church, and which
would tend to pro7,te its best interests.
Mr. SADLER had not been present during the whole
of the discussion, and he should address himself only to the
observations of the Right Hon. Secretary opposite. Ile
must say that the proposition came with a peculiarly bad
grace from those who refused all Commissions of Inquiry
into Civil Establishments. It would as well heroine the
House to attend to Cis it pluralities, which were evils as
crying as the Ecclesi tstical ; and in many cases civil plu-
ralities were held which were totally incompatible with
each other.
Sir C. WETHERELL said that the Right Hon. Secre-
tary had argued that there was no harm in granting this
inquiry quoad Ireland, because it was already granted quoud
England.—(Cries of " No, no.") If the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman's argument was not so, why it was not so.—
(Laughter )—lf this was not his argument, wh stover he
said about the Commission in England ought to be struck
out of his speech; and if it was his argument, he (Sir C.
W.) would take the liberty of saying it was no argument
at all. The Ecclesiastical Commission in England was

confined to the nmelioratiton of the Ecclesiastical Courts

and every bo* well knew that that branch of the admi-
nistration of justice in England, like all other branches, re-
quired in a certain time to be rebuilt. But the present
Commission was to address the Crown to carry into effect
the grossest violation of the law, if bishoprics were to be
kept vacant where Cathedral Churches wanted repair.—
(Interruptions, and cries of No.)—He wished his friends
would set bin] right, and not set him wrong.—(A laugh.)
He did not mean to say that there were not provisions to
prevent pluralities which the Crown might carry into ef-
fect, though, generally speaking, this was out of the power
of the Crown. Two-thirds of the Address called upon the
Crown to violate the Law and the Coronation Oath; and
therefore, when Ministers approved of part of the Addres.,
he did not think their approval was in very good company.
This was not the mode in which the inquiry ought to be
admitted. Every gentleman who had spoken from the
Ministerial Benches had given arguments against that part
of the motion which they were disposed to support ; and
why ? Because there already existed in the Privy Council
a right to do that which was to be done by this Com-
mission. If the Privy Council of Ireland had violated its
duty, that would have been a good argument forithis
inquiry ; but instead of this, Ministers said--" We
don't object to inquiry, although there exists a com-
petent authority to make the inquiry, and which is
unimpeached." This was to stigmatise the Privy
Council of Ireland for not performing its duty, and yet the
Right Hon. Baronet had not been able to state anything
against the Privy Council of Ireland. Under these cir-

eumstanees, he did feel Limself disposed to support the
motion of the Member for Oxford. On neither side of
the House had there been suggested any reason why the
powers of the Privy Council of Ireland should not be

called into action. He never could approve of any address
which called upon the Crown and the Government to com-
mit a gross infraction upon the rights and property of the
Church ; and though he concurred in the Right Hon.
Baronet's object, he could not concur in the mode of at-
taining that object. Where sits the Government ?
(Laughter)—There sits the Government—(pointing to
the Opposition benches.)—that Government opposed
every thing proposed by this side of the House, whilst
every thing they proposed was enacted by Ministers.
There resides the initiative—(Pointing to the Opposition--
loud laughter)—they are the persons who look after the
agricultural and manufacturing distress; they put their
proposals on the table of the House; they are the
active, efficacious agents, who bring under the con•
troul of Parliament those great practical measures
' which the necesssities of the country called upon them
to discuss.—(Laughter.) Under these circumstances,
be should take the liberty to say, that if the Ho-
nourable Member for Oxford carries the previous
question to a division, he would vote for it ; and if, after-
wards, the Right Hon. Baronet brought forward his mea-
sure in better company—not to address the Crown to de-
molish and despoil the Irish Church—(Merriment)--if
that cheer comes from an Irish Lawyer—
Mr. O'CONNELL—No, no.
Sir C. WETHERELL—I, then, am in the wrong, and
the cheer comes from an Emeritus lawyer (Mr. M.A.
Taylor), who sits behind him—(Laughter)—however,
some person sarcastically cheered my statement ; or if no
persons sarcastically cheered, why then I ant in possession
of my statement.—(Laughter.)—But he was to be put
down not by cheers, but by arguments.
Mr. PEEL rose to explain. He must confirm the just
and striking observation of the Learned and Hon. Gent.,
that if a certain argument was not his (Mr. Peel's) argu-
ment, why then it was not. He (Mr. Peel) had never
represented the Commission in England as precisely the
sante as that now proposed for Ireland, but he did doubt
if the Commission upon the whole Ecclesiastical Jurisdic-
tion of England, and upon the controul of the Bishops over

the Clergy, were not as important and as extensive as the
Commission now proposed.
Mr. M. A. TAYLOR had certainly felt very indignant
at his Learned Friend's expression of the spoliation of the
Church ; and he (Mr. Taylor) did express himself more
loudly than he ought to have done. He would, however,
say that the imputation of a wish to despoil the Church
against those who only wanted to reform it, was un-
founded and unjustifiable. He looked upon the Church
Establishment of England and Ireland with veneration; and
he considered that the only effect of. the proposed Com-
mission would be to put the Churches of England and
Ireland on the strongest footing.
Mr. BROUGHAM rose amidst cries of Qacation, and
turning round and shaking his finger at the criers, he said,
" You will have Question in proper time." He could not
let the observations of the Learned Gent. pass without
some explanation ; for, without any explanation, he might
be supposed to give his vote upon grounds which he re-
pelled as much as any man. He bad never heard a more
complete misrepresentation, even in that House—(A laugh)
—than that of the Right Hon. Secretary's speech by the
Learned Member. The Hon. and Learned Gent. must
surely have forgotten all that had taken place during the
last three years. He must have forgotten, at that moment,
that a Commission was issued in this country for inquiring
into matters connected with the Church Establishment.—
But then the Hon. and Learned Gent. would say there was
a difference between this English Commission and the Com-
mission moved for by his Hon. Friend the Member for
Waterford ; inasmuch as the latter referred to Ecclesia-
stical property, and the former to Ecclesiastical Courts of
Judicature. But if there was any one thing which the
Church was anxious to avoid, it was any interference in
their administration of justice. There was no one right
or privilege so dear to the Church as that administration.
For ages the Church had most zealously defended it.—
By whom were the Judges in those Courts appointed?
In whom was the patronage veatcd ? One of the highest
of the Judges was appointed by a Bishop, and another by
an Archbishop. If the motion bad been for an inquiry
into t11:1 Ecclesiastical Courts of Judicature in Ireland,
it would have been more objectionable to the Church
than an inquiry into their property. In no way what-
ever, however, did his Hon. Friend'z motion deserve the
name of a spoliation of the Church. The lion. and
Learned Gentleman had declared that nine-tenths of the
motion cunk4ggd of illegality, and that it was contrary to
the Coronation Oath, Were it not fur his knowledge of
the extraordinary vivacity of his Hon. and Learned
Friend's imagination—were it not that he knew his Hon.

anii Learned-Friend's imagination sometimes superseded
his uw;ory of the fact, he should have been exceedingly
surprised at tli;s last assertion. What was the case ?
That at the end of the motion came a little clause which

certainly did appear to cad upc.r. the Crown to exercise a
power not justified by the law. To that clause an objec-
tion was made, and his Hon. Friend (the Memb,:r fpr
Waterford) naudidly consented to withdraw it from his
motion. He (Mr, 'Brougham), however, objected to the
application of the phrase "spo►;ation of the Church,"
even to that small part of his Hon. Friend's original mo-
tion. All the rent of the motion was mere inquiry. It
had no tendency to any charge. It went to examine—
not to (41'4 That alone—that mall part—calling

upon the Crown to order the suspension of certain eccle-
siastical revenues until certain repairs of the Church
were carried into effect, was the objectionable pas-
sage. But who, except his Honourable and
.Learned
Friend, or one of equally inflated imagination, could
consider this as an attempt at despoiling the Church.
So far from being for the spoliation, it was for
the protection and improvement of the Church.—
The same thing had been (lone by Act of Parliament, in
the case of the Cathedral at Litchfield. But his Hon. and
Learned Friend, in his indignation against his Majesty's
Ministers for acquiescing in the substance of the present
inotiJn, charged them with constantly adopting the mea-
sures of their political opponents. But that was no more
their practice at present than it was (luring the period when
his Honourable and Learned Friend sat on the Minister ial
Benches. Why (lid he not then say that Ministers took
their measures from their opponents, who were the real
efficient Ministers? Never did anything of that sort drop
from his I'lon. and Learned Friend until the Catholic Ques-
tion had been carried; and yet there had been many mea-
sures adopted by his Majesty's Government which would
have been Elide to a similar remark. There were the Free
Trade measures, the Commissions of Education, the Orders
in Council, the CJmniissions for Judicial Inquiry, the Irish
Census, and many other measures which proceeded from
his (Mr. Brougham's) side of the House ; but which, W ith
great candour and bounty, were adopted by his Majesty's
Government ; although never, until now, had a charge for
doing so been brought against Government by his Hon. and
Learned Friend ; and yet there was no man of more honour-
able feelings, and who had shown himself more disposed
to speak his undisguised sentiments, at whatever sacrifice
of personal advantage. To return, however, to the ques-
tion before the House. I❑ the first place, it was said to
he an interference with the power of the Privy Council in
Ireland. That he denied. They had the power, by the
Act of George the First, of forming unions, and dissolving
them, in particular cases. But he had yet to learn, that
by either common or statute law, the Privy Council had
the power of sanding a roving commission all over Ireland.
In the next place, it was said to involve a censure on his
Majesty's Government. It did no such thing. What !
Was every Address of that House to the Crown to issue a
Commission, which the Crown had a right spontaneously
to issue, to be considered a censure? It amounted to no
more, in all cases of the kind, than to this—that the
House advised the Crown to reuse into action a power
which it possessed, but which was dormant. He altogether
denied that the Motion was conceived in a spirit hostile to
the Established Church. The Hon. Member for Oxford
had told the House kand a new kind of legal doctrine it cer-
tainly was), that there was something so peculiar in the cha-
racter of church property, that it was not competent to the
House of Commons to interfere with it. That was denying
the supremacy of Parliament. That was maintaining that the
Church was not only sacred, but that it was sacro-sanct.
He had frequently heard of Church and King ; and he
knew that under that name many abuses had been com-
mitted, and many false principles maintained. But he had
never heard the most wild or fanatical supporter of Church
and King principles place the claims of the Church on a
level with those of the Sovereign. But the Hon. Member
for Oxford went much further than this. He declared that
the Church was higher than the King, that it was higher
than the Parliament. According to the Hon. Member,
Parliament had no power to interfere with the property of
the Church. But had they never so interfered ? Why
they had done nothing else for centuries. Did the Hon.
Member for Oxford recollect the Stipendiary Curates'
Bill ? Did he recollect that in old times—in good old
times, as the Hon. Member would call them, in good old
Catholic times—that interference with the property of the
Church was by no means infrequent? Did the Hon.
Member recollect the statute of Richard 11. on the sub-
ject? The Hon. Member for Oxford maintained that it
was not competent to Parliament to interfere with the
property of the Church. By that statute, a fourth of the
proceeds of a living were set aside for the Bishop, a fourth
for the repairs of the Church, and a fourth for the
support of the poor. If his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hume), or
any other Hon. Member were to propose the revival of that
statute, of course the Hon. Member for Oxford would call
the proposition a spoliation of the Church. Yet it would
be only a return to what had been the law on the subject.
He confessed, however, that he was surprised to hear any
Hon. Member at the present day urge the old and ex-
ploded doctrine that inquiry weakened the authority of
any establishment, or sapped its foundation. They who
really valued an establishment, and highly estimated its
privileges and authority, were in his opinion called upon
to promote and not to discourage inquiry. The time had
passed by when the character of any establishment was
considered venerable in consequence of the obscurity by
which it was enveloped. Let the light shine upon all our
institutions. On that principle he was prepared to vote
for his Hon. Friend's motion. So long as the object was
to inquire into the existence of abuses, that object lie was
prepared to support ; although he would be the last man
in the House to retrench eighteeen Bishops, and pull down
the walls of the Irish Cathedrals.
Sir J. NEWPORT, after what had been stated on the
other side of the House, would withdraw his motion.
Sir R. INGLIS, to save the time of the House, would
withdraw his Amendment.

Lord LEVESON GOWER then moved the Address in

the terms which he had described in his speech.
The Motion was agreed to; and the Addles 3 wa or-
dered to be presented by such Hon. Gentlemen as were
Members of the Privy Council,