The Sun.
London, England, 1854-03-10 00:00:00

THE SUN, LO ND
V -1
M., if,

. 1 .4,4 r tI , i .J.l- I
thougl the tieSt Iliing "the house could 'do was to abo- ;
lisp the tax altogether. (gear, bear.), , -
Mr. NAPIER felt bound in honour and conscience to
support the amendment,' 13e'cause when he sat on the other
side of the house there was a kind of pledge given that this
'question should be settled. Not, however, that he agreed'
with all the views expressed bythe Tight hon. baronetwho .
had moved it', or at all sympathised with him when he con-
fessed himself favourable to tiving Roman Catholic
clergymen ‘some` Asistance or support frOm the state.
With regard to the tax itself, he could not concur with
those 'who talked so lotidly of its injhstice. It was
chafged by the crown upon its own property in the
reign 'ot Charles'lL,' when Protestants were invited over
td Ireland, and those who had succeeded to the pro-
'perty hid taken 'to it with the full knowledge that the
charge' existed. ' Where, then, was the injustice ? As
well might they say that a Roman Catholic who came
into possession of an estate under the Encumbered
Estates Act has a right to repudiate the just and law-
ful charges he found upon it because the previous owner
who first imposed them was a Protestant. The two
cases were precisely analagous, and there was no more
injustice in the one than the other. He decidedly ob-
jected, then, to relieving the owner of the property sub-
ject to this tax in the manner about to be proposed by
the Government. The fund placed at the disposal of
the Ecclesiastical Commissioners was chiefly devoted to
equalising the stipends of Protestant clergymen in the
counties, and it would be the height of injustice to re-
duce their incomes for the sake of keeping up those of
their brethren in towns whose incomes had hitherto
been charged upon the proprietors of the houses that
were to be relieved by the right hon. baronet's measure.
If it was viewe I simply as a question between man and
man, as it undoubtedly was, the injustice of the pro-
posed change would become too glaring to be tolerated
for a single moment ; but views and sentiments of a re-
ligious character had been improperly imported into the
dispute, and by that means no doubt the injustice he
complained of would ultimately be effected. Divesting
the question of all religious feeling, he appealed to the
good sense of the house whether the measure proposed
would not open up the whole question of church tempo-
ralities. Some members had a great idea of the value of
the voluntary principle ; there was room enough for that
principle, but could not they let the church alone ? (Hear,
hear.) The fact was, they wanted to make their volun-
tary principle compulsory. (Laughter.) He thought
the house would act wisely by adopting the amendment.
Mr. J. D. FITZGERALD said that he had listened
attentively to the speech of Sir J. Young, and the rea-
son he had given would induce him to vote for the
motion. (Hear, -hear.) He admitted that it was an,
anomaly and an injustice that Roman Catholics should
be required to pay this tax ; but the proposition he
founded on this was altogether a delusion. He laid down
as a principle that the property of the established church,.
loughtnot to be interfered with ;'but his own bill actually
committed this interference, for be proposed to take from
the Protestant clergy 25 per cent. of their income from
this source ; therefore his amendment was condemned
by his own argument. Would he seek to make up the
difference out of the Consolidated Fund ? The Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer himself would not allow this.
(Hear, hear.) If parties were left to themselves it
would be seen how ready and willing they were to assist
themselves: Sidney Smith had well said that the Esta-
blished Church was a church of beggars and bishops.
(Hear, hear.) In his own parish a sum of 30,0001. had
recently been raised by voluntary contributions from the
poorest of the inhabitants for the erection of a church.
(Hear hear.) The right hon. baronet the Secretary for
Ireland could never show the justice of a law which
taxed the Roman Catholics of Ireland for the support of
the' church of the rich minority. He was in error as to
the property of corporate towns having been confiscated
and re-settled in the time of Wm. 111. This was not
the case ; the corporations were removed from their
office, and replaced by Protestants, but their property
was not confiscated. (Hear.) It had been laid down by
Lord Campbell that this was not a tax upon property, but
upon persons; for if the housee were unoccupied they
did not pay the tax. In Dublin 'it was known that the
majority of the' householders were Reman Catholics, not-
withstanding the number of Protestants in that city ;
the proportion of Catholics was still greater in Limerick,
Cork, and other large towns ; how then could it be said
than the Catholics were not taxed by this ministers'
money ? (Hear, hear.) For 200 years the Catholics
had raised their voices against this unjust impost ; and
now a remedy was proposed which was sufficiently con-
demned by the statement of Mr. Napier, that it was the
very measure which the late Government would have
proposed. (Hear, hear.) It appeared to relieve Dublin
to the extant of one-ninth ; but it should be remembered
that the impost could never be levied from the poor in-
habitants.; and now it was proposed to enforce it by
'legal pideess. 'Meer,' hear.).
Mr. POTTER referred to the losses which the Pro-
testant clergy in Ireland had recently, suffered, and con-
demned the proposal to strip them of other 25 per cent.
of their income.' It' was fortunate for the place he re-
presented that, owing to some ancient arrangement, the
inhabitants had never been subject to this tax. He
thought that a substitute for this tax might easily be
found in the surplus revenues of Trinity College. (Hear.)
Mr. COWAN said that his constituents had suffered
severely from a similar tax, the annuity tax. The Govern-
ment had supported a bill for its abolition last year, which
was not carried ; but he hoped it would be re-introduced
and passed. Nothing could be more prejudicial than the
disputes and bickerings which this tax gave rise to. If
this was a grievance, it was one of the first duties of the
house to redress it ' • for there was nothing worse for the
peaple than class legislation and class taxation. He
hoped that justice would be done in Edinburgh as well
as in Ireland.
The house then divided—
For the amendment
Against it BB-15
Sir J. YOUNG said he proposed to introduce the
bill next day.
Mr. HADFIELD gave notice that he should offer
every opposition to it.