The Sun.
London, England, 1830-11-20 00:00:00

illoy waiver! In 1701 rartoerl could not afford to pay
war rents, war tithes, and war wages. Landlords must
make large concessions, and the benefit would soon be felt
and willingly acknowledged. He trusted that the clergy
would practice the virues. of charity and forbearance, as
well as inculcate them weekly.
Mr. CURTEIS added that in Sussex rents had been
generally reduced one-third.
Mr. LONG WELLESLEY was understood to speak
in favour of the Church Establishment, and to reprobate
any modification of the tithe system that might possibly
be inconsistent with its security.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY protested strongly against the
language held by the Hon. Member for Colchester, regard
ing country gentlemen, and maintained, that if common
feeling did not actuate them in reducing their rents, com
mon sense would show that that reduction was necessary.
The value of hind was regulated like every other column-
dity, by the demand. The imputation upon landlords. was
most unfounded. They did not deserve the charge, either
of want of sympathy with distress, or want of generosity
in doing their utmost to relieve it.
Mr. HUME reminded the Hon. Member for Colches-
ter, that he had kept out of view the important fact, that
the value of land bad greatly increased since 1702, in
consequence of the capital laid out upon it. Land that
was worth SOL per acre in 1792, was now worth, per-
haps, 60/. per acre. Rent was like the price of every
thing else, it could not be controuled by law, but must be
regulated by demand and supply. If Government would
but take off taxes, all classes would participate in the re-
lief, and that was the best remedy that could be applied.
He hoped that the House would take care to have a cheap
Covermnent—that every individul employed should be
paid, but paid no more than their services deserved.—
The Honourable Member for St. Iva (Mr. Long
Wellesley) had alluded to the Church ; and he (Mr.
Ilume) might take this occasion for saying, that the
Church had been allowed to be dominant, instead
of continuing subservient. The. question was, whe-
ther the supremacy of the Clergy had not incapaci•
treed them from doing their work. The interest of the
Clergy themselves required that they should be placed
upon a proper footing, and among other points the new
Government must take into its early consideration the
present system of tithes. It was fit that the land should
bear the ex peace, but either by adopting the Scotch eystem
or some other, the tithe payer and the tithe receiver ought
to be kept upon a good understanding. The time was
approaching when, if tithes were not modified there
might be no tithes ut all. He admitted that the Clergy
were not half so rigorous as the lay improprietors, and yet
they endured a vast deal:, more odium. In his opinion a
clergyman of 2.0001, n-year was no more At for a.parish
priest than a Nobleman was fit for a menial servant.
Mr. R. COLBORNE remarked, that measures regard-
ing the poor seemed easy at the first blush, but the diffi-
culty of the subject became apparent as it was examined.
Ho doubted whether the Bill now proposed by the Noble
Lord (Nugent) would be practically beneficial.
Mr. L. WELLESLEY explained.
Lord NUGENT said, that his Bill did not touch either
of the two principal topics discussed to-night. It had
nothing to do with the duty of landlords to their tenants,
or of clergymen to their flocks.—Leave was then given, and
Lord NUGENT afterwards brought in his Bill, which
was read a first time, and ordered to he read a second time
on Friday next.
Sir 0. MURRAY gave notice, that on Monday he
would move for heave to bring in a Bill, as we understood,
for regulating same portion of the trade with the Colonies,