The Sun.
London, England, 1838-07-24 00:00:00

SOCIETY BILL.

On the motion of Lord BROUGHAM this Bill was read a
third time and passed.

(LEFT SITTING).

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS,
.JULY 23.
TITHES (IRELAND) BILL.
Lord J. RUSSSE LL moved that the House should go
into Committee for the further consideration of the Tithes
(Ireland Bill.
The motion having been agreed to the Speaker left the
chair, and the House went into Committee.
Mr. BERNAL havine•' put the first clause from the chair,
Lord J. RUSSELL proposed to strike out the first
clause and to substitute instead thereof a clause to the effect
that the right of all persons to tithes, or to arretlr3 of tithes
which had already accrued, or which might hereafter accrue,
should cease and determine.
On the amendment from the Chair,
Sir R. PEEL rose and said, Sir, I have an amendment to
propose to the clause which the Noble Lord has m.wed should
he substituted in lieu ut the first clause of the Bill, and which
has been just read from the Chair —( Hear, bear.) The No-
ble Lord's substitute clause proposes that the rights of all per-
sons to tithes and composition for tithes which have already
accrued, or which may hereafter accrue, shall altogether
cease and determine. The effect of this proposition would
be to rive a le..ri;lative .extinction to all tithes, or arrears cf
tithes that have already accrued. With respect to the extinc-
tion of all right to tithes which may hereafter accrue, I do
not so much object to that part of the proposition, for Parlia-
ment proposes to give a substitute in lieu thereof, a perma-
nent and secure rent charge. Bet, Sir, I very much doubt
the policy of extinguishing all right to tithes which ma) have
heretofore accrued. At the same time, when I say this, I
fully feel the difficulties by which the subject is environed,
and I agree in the desire, sn far as it can be cone, without
violation of soy principles, to make a final and satisfactory set-
tlement of this question by the legislative extinction of tithes.
I agree in the Noble Lord's proposition that a sum should be
applied to the extinction of all arrears of tithe, and I altoge-
ther agree that a definite sum should be applied to that pur-
pose. I am altogether satisfied with the proposal of the No-
ble Lord, that a sum of three hundred thousand pounds should
be applied to the liquidation of those arrears. That sum is to
ba, composed of the remainder of the million, namely,
268,0001., and over which the Noble Lord has absolute con-
troul, and of 40,000/., which the Noble Lord expects to be able
to make up from the recovery of the amount of claims still due
by solvent -parties. The Noble Lord then proposes that that
sum, which for the sake of clearness, I shall assume to be
300,0001. shall be together applied to the liquidation, exclu-
sively of the arrears of 1836 and of 1837. On these parties
to whom the arrears for these two years are due, waiving their
portion of the amount to be applied to this purpose, the pro-
vision of the Noble Lord's clause is, that then, and thereafter,
the claims to arrears of all persons being tithe-owners should
be extinguished by law. Now I very much doubt the jastice,
as well as the policy of that proposition. In the first place let
us take the case of an incumbent who vacated his living at
the commencement of 1836, and who bad claims for arrears
for 1834 and 1835. Now, would not the peculiar force of this
case be considerably augmented if it should appear that such
an incumbent had forchorne to enforce these claims from a
desire to wait mufti he should be
crtaWed to understand
what cp4aion Parliament would express wi h resit;ci to the
final s•-..ttlernent of this question.—( Hear, hear.) .11, then,
et us take another case. Let us take the case of a widow
whose husband died at the commencement of 18361 and

who had unsatisfied claims for arrears of tithes that accrued
in 1834 and 1835. Now, would it not be unjue.t that this
party, without having received any kind of compensation
whatever, should he deprived of her undoubted legal right to
recover the amount of these unsatisfied claims?—( Hear, hear. )
I doubt the policy of your declaring as you do by th s clause,
that under no circumstances in future shall tithes be enforced.
I fully agree that Parliament must interfere for the settlement
of these arrears by a specific grant of a sum of money, chick
:um, I agree, should be that which the Noble Lord proposes
to apply to this object. I also agree in the propriety that
Parliament should clearly understand what amount of pecuniary
burthen should be placed on the United Kingdom for the set-
tlement of this question. Ido not call upon the Government
to make any proposal that the amount of arrears, which
amount is indefinite, should be paid in the proportion of 75
per cent. or of 60 per cent. It seems to me reasonable that
Parliament should on'y be called upon to grant a defi-
finite sum'; but that Parliament should ascertain what pro-
portion this sum bore to the arrears, and that an option should
be given to the party to whom the arrears are due, to
accept or reject the terms offered by the Government. I
would also propose that in every case where the offer was
accepted, the Government should inherit the right of the
titheowner, and should be left the power of determining whe-
ther they would enforce the payment of the amount due by
the debtor or not. By the adoption cf my proposition you
will save two principles. You will avoid any violation of the
rights of property, which will not be the case if the proposal
of the Noble Lord, in its present state, be carried into effect.
You would do injustice to no one, because you would leave to
every party the power of rejecting or accepting the offer you
made them. My own opinion undoubtedly is, that your offer
will be accepted, and that the tithe-owner will consent to ac-
cept his proportion of the 300,0001. I think that the opportu-
nity of accepting or refusing that offer should be given. To
those who declaim so eloquently, and object so strongly to the
application of the public money to any such purpose as this,
I very much fear that neither the Noble Lord's proposition or
mine will be likely to give much satisfaction. But, Sir, no
one can deeply and fully consider this question without be-
coming fully sensible of the difficulty of bringing it to a satis-
factory conclusion; or without, on the other hand, being con-
vinced of the beneficial consequences that would result from
the final settlement of the question on a permanent and satis-
factory basis.—( Hear, hear.) However, if the advance of
300,000/. would secure the permanent and satisfactory settle-
ment of the Irish tithe question, I firmly believe, in even
the narrowest view of the question, that with respect to the
pecuniary buithen to be placed on England and Scotland, I
say that I firmly believe, if such a result could be secured,
that the peace of Ireland would be cheaply purchased by the
payment of 3 _‘o,ooo/.—( Cheers. ) Nay, more; if it depended
solely on my own wish, I do not hesitate to say that I would
not shrink from even a farther advance if I felt that we could
thereby place ourselves upon the threshold of a satisfactory
settlement.—(Hear, hear.) Because it appears to me that
we are going to place the question on an entirely new foot-
ing, and to place the payment of the Clergy on a dif-
ferent system. We are going to place the Irish landlords
under an obligation universal throughout Ireland of contri-
buting to the support of the Clergy of the Established
Church. Weare going to give to the Clergy of the Esta-
blished Church the greatest and most enlarged powers for
the recovery of their rights, which we have thought fit
should be reduced in amount in consideration of the in-
creased security to be derived from the altered system un-
der which they are placed. We are going to remove the
Clergy from all contact with the occupier in the relation of
titheowner and tithepayer. Well, we ail agree that this is de-
sirable to be done. But then we cannot do this without first
making some just and reasonable provision for the settlemert
of the arrears. Now, in concurring in the necessity of doing
this, I can by no means concur in the opinion expressed a few
days ago by the Hon. Member for Southwark, that this is
only the first of a series of demands which this country will
have to suffer on the part of the Irish Church. Iby no means
think that any such thing is likely to be the case. Nay, more ;
I can hardly see the circumstances under which, after what we
are doing now, it is possible that there can be a fresh demand
on the part of the Irish Church.—( Hear, hear.) I will, then,
assume that the sum of 300,0001. is to be applied to the settle-
ment of this question. Our single wish is to effect that settle-
ment in a satisfactory manner. As lam anxious to do justice
to the clergy of the Established Church in Ireland, I would
even consent that within certain limits the sum of 300,000/.
should be still further increased ; but it seems that, under ex-
isting circumstances, that is impossible. Whatever is to be
the amount with respect to the law itself, it seems to me that
it would be desirable that the Government should take the ad-
ditional suns out of the Consolidated Fund. Whatever the
sum is to be, let them make it a definite sum, and let the
whole of it be taken out of the Consolidated Fund. I believe
the Noble Lord calculates with considerable certainty on be-
ing able to recover 40,000/., which was to make up the re-
mainder of the 300,000/. Ile therefore thought it would be
much better, and give an increased feeling of security, if the
Government would advance the whole sum of 300,000/., and
hold themselves responsible, or at least should themselves un-
dertake the collection of the 40,0001. which the Noble Lord
expects to be able to recover. Let them repay the advance
of the 40,000/. by applying to that purpose the sums that they
expected to recover from the landlords. Let us then be
agreed that the sum of 300,000/. should be the amount ad-
vanced by Parliament. My proposal is, that nothing should
be done until we first ascertain the amount of the arrears due.
I hope, ui on the whole, that Hon. Members will be con-
vinced that by adopting my proposition they will commit no
violation of any principle—that they will not interfere with
any rights of property ; and that my plan, whilst it possesses
those advantages, has an equal tendency to the settlement of
the question.—( Hear, hear.) I propose no appropriation
whatever of the money advanced without full preliminary in-
quiry. As I said before, I would appoint a Commission to
inquire. Should the expense of a Commission form any
ground of objection, I do not think there would be the least
difficulty in finding persons, sufficiently alive to the interests
of the Church, as to be willing to undertake those duties if
it should so be wished, without compensation, and as a volun-
tary labour. Well, then, I w old propose that for this pur-
pose let three Commissioners be appointed. Let two of them
be appointed by the Government, and let the third be ap-
poieted by the Primate of Ireland. Well, if this was objected
to let the Government have the appointment of the three
Commissioners, but let it be understood that one was to be
appointed specially to watch over the interests of the Esta-
blished Church. I would then propose that these Commis-
sioners should proceed to inquire into and to review the whole
affairs of the Church. That they should collect information
warirteha spoueectotno tchceoatimn
tooufn
Iso f36t haen adr ra3r s7,n
bo wut d
ke ,e
v.inote oe
onf e
tt
ee
arrears due on account of 1834 and 1835. I would propose
that the amount due for alt the years should be stated, and that
the Commissioners should class those arrears under dif-
ferent heads—that those of 1834 should be classed
by themselves, and so on for each year down to
the arrears of 1837, thus including in this way each
of the four years for which the arrears are due. I would also
propose that the Commissioners should mention in their re-
port any special circumstances connected with any particular
portion of those arrow's, that those matters of a special nature
might afterwards be taken into consideration. After the Com-
missioners had ascertained the amount of the arrears, and what
proportion was due for each year, I would then propose that
the money advanced should be applied, not for the liquidation
of the arrears of any one or two years, but that it should em-
brace within its scope the whole of the four years. I
would not apply the same principle to the whole of the ar-
rears, but I would not exclude the whole or any part thereof
from the benefit of the compensation, not of course giving the
same amount of compensation with respect to 1834 and 1835
as with respect to those of 1836 and 1837. I would, more-
over. propose that these principles suggested by the Com-
missioners should not be binding until they should have re-
ceived the sanction of Parliament. Nothing would then re-
main to be done in this respect but that the 300,0001. should be
divided on such principles as would appear to be most con-
sistent with justice for the settlement of those arrears. Well,
then, now to come to another point of the Noble Lord's pro-
posal. The Noble Lord proposes that in paying
the arrears for the two last years the right to the
recovery of all arrears which had previously accrued
should altogether cease, and be enthely forfeited. Now
surely there would be no justice whatever in that proceeding.
( Hear, hear.) You could introduce or promulgate no more
dangerous p.inciple than that of acknowledging a claim and
denying a remedy. Take the case of a clergyman who, at
great expmie and by great trouble and eyertious, brought his
claims for the arrears due to him in the two antecedent years
to a successful issue, but though he bad succeeded in placing
them on this footing, had himself received no benefit. Well,
he dies, or is transferre ito another parish. A new incumbent
comes in in 1837, and reaps the whole benefit of the exertions
of his predecessors. You then eive this new incumbent all the
benefit of your compensation, whilst his predecessor, the bene-
fit of whose exertions he has reaped, gets nothing in respect
of the arrears relating to the two antecedent years.
It would be easy to show that if that principle were recognised,
in our legislation (as we understood the Right Hon. Baron,4),
no propetty would be safe. But then as to what should he done
my Proposal c ,mprises the enti, e case. I would include ';tie tithes
of 1834, as well as those of 1837. I was represented to have said
on a former occasion that fifty per cent. would be an adeouate
compensation. I have since got several letters from Ireland
staing that fifty per cent. was too little. But I. have this
difficulty to deal with—the sum to be approus-gated to this
purpose is definite, whilst the amount of ttie
arrears is indefi-
nite; so that I only know one part of one question. It strikes
me, however, that the proportion loot ween the arrears and the
sum advanced for compensation may enable you to offer fifty
per cent. fur the arrears of the two first years and sixty-five
substitute the fih
f t
per cent. for the arrears of the two last years. I have this to
observe, that in case your offer is refused by some of the par-
ties the more will remain to be divided amongst those who
laicncee po tf yt
boeu re
Iparnospeo
wb h
s abl e 11t1yn
amendment Noble Lord i
psro hpoi ses I t
on
for the first clause of the Bill, I propose that after the word
ts
" accrue," to insert words to the effect that the rights of all
persons to compositions for tithes, or arrears of tithes, shall in
cases hereinafter mentioned—(as we understood the Right
it will imply that in certain cases,
Honourable Baronet)—vest in her Majesty, and 'that
the rights of all persons to tithes to be hereafter
shall altogether cease and determine. If due,the words
farocmce
tIo rioter)c hereafter he
adoptedmore fully and speaciallf•
the
rofferigbt mofadtiethteost tithe-ownerlstbeoushould.
e tr
a n
ssfhterlile prnttbeeedn,titoh mentioned,
Clergyd , exist-
ingtiof
her Majesty's Government. M
„ PrZrposal does not involve a
greeter advance of the public P:ione-
y than that of the Noble
keel. The sum propeeed e.. 0 be granted to ill be sufficient, as
far as I can et preteens see. sincerely hope ncere y tope that neither my
proposi,t.;;,4 nor th.4i of the Noble Lord will be rejected on the
wound tveuch Was put f dthe '
orws.r ot,.er nieht—namely, that the P rotes.ent Church in Ireland is on a "rotten foundation..
For any part, Sirs it is my sincere belief and my strong COw.