The Sun.
London, England, 1838-08-04 00:00:00

i years since that estleteletioY, As instituted, and with that result ;
and we tsee e.Oas tSlah'verting the loan into a gift, and at the time
i wieess. At had well hoped that the• repayment of
,the ni'llion
Might have been effected, instead pf 5.:V%...5 !i•eis'estneht we
have been favoured with cenectestssa, Iin(0. what was a lean we
are to abandon et once e4SI rer.ever. Now, 'therefore, I have
a right to
.sees taet 11S!a is not the ineasnre.whiteli liesbeen so
often iaarH~ before.—that this i not the P'''4.ll',6 argument
ietn which we hate already c'at'ad—'that they who appreved
of the forrrer measur :';ay most consistently, as they do con-
scientiously, din'.l.';i:rove of this measure. But that measure
Isinned. egainst n ) prineiple, and, if I am not tenth deeeived,
I shall satisfy some at least of those AO agreed with me in
patronising that measure; that the present measure sins against
all. My Lords, so much for the changes in the Bill as re-
gards wintt is still in it ; but a great (deal hat been left out.
The Bill wants the jewel in the head of the ft mer measure—
I find nothing of that ...I-itch mainly recommended the former
measure. I sec a blank in that portion of the Bill which in
former times tonteined all that smoothed the path. to the sup-
port whic'e many a man gave ite peel, at all events, to that
a hie's) chiefly Made iiiik.,.y Who desired much more rest
' satisfied with flit;11111e that was then bestowed. I allude to
what ts•es Mninonly edict' the appropriation clause. What 1
tklstelds, ittl t.,,,hie,hnatmoesonyf
istvalit.;,,oettne,k_ll,,itilltht‘e.he.tnhme 9f c9llSistes e. -
of principle—whet it it Ow 'ss alll .....
I add in the name
:,11.71eetritilnr4t1: te7estetn't expunged the appropriation
ing eves t 'Area Per it in Vain.
present et"nt:llos,,,iail,,e4it;eatthos hin *IW tc4h
( L ' la Je, vi.4i; g 1). e
who eret is
approvednot i nothing
it on principle—there to libthing to comfort my Noble Friend
the Secretary fief the Home- Department, one of Elie tteest
strenuous eSiVecates for that rinciple) l'_,ol,h. 111 the Cabinet,
svity''‘ 1 ',sad the honour of sit.T.tie ‘.'iith him, and out of the
teltshinet, and in the centAree ?steA gin his writings, and in hie
,nt._ t
speeches, and in hits InotiOns in the other Notest Of tkafila-
m IsaUtSieter.) No comfort ha* Oibt: hi! or i in look-
ing Ktthe provisions of this, ewes:tingled, new. fashioned Bill
appropriation is ns tsessea. passed over—as much given to the
winds—as absekklely and is entirely abandottedseeste if it had
never beers Inentioned, or the name covet` Coined, or the word
derived from the Latin, or tliV_ thing never debated in the
' ether House of Perlin...od, .`these who sit on the opposite
side of the flottee Mktet be as much surprised An myself—
( Hear, heat, Ilaent Lord Lynahurst)-selett for a different rea-
sonse-a( Laughter. ) I wished to have seen it in the Bill—
had hoped to find It there ; because it was a prig-
' ciple which it tesserted, and it was said to derive
its whole valtko, because of the principle which it did assert.
' Those sOlo sit opposite dreaded to find it in the Bill—they
toedd scarcely expect to b.:: raieved from it—they hardly dared
to hope they would not find it. For why? They well recol-
lected how meth they, in other times, had suffered under that
word and from that cause.—( Hear.) I might have forgotten
the recent history of this Bill, for it has a tendency to pass
from one's recollection—it has a tendency to obscure and ob-
fuscate cite', memory on the subject—(Laughter)—but if I
have n°t very much f irgotten the state of parties in this
country—l go no farther back than three years—there was a
motion somewhere or other—( Laughter)—for the very express
purpose of asserting this great principle, which no liberal man
could possibly abandon—the principle of appropriation as to
the Irish Church. As one of the great political parties felt it
impossible, honestly, to abandon that principle, in which I
partly join with them, so another of the great parties
found it as impossible to accede to that doctrine of appro.
ptiation—( Hear)—and in that other House of Parli anent
(I may speak of it without great irregularity, because it was on
the votes at the time, and as that House has since died a violent
death, and is no longer in existence—( A laugh)—in that
House, there was a vote passed, the result of which was, that
one Government was broken up. And the Noble and Learned
Lord opposite (Lyndhurst) whom I remember I saw on the
very day of his going out—(Laughter)—will recollect, that
I had the pleasure of some conversation with him on the sub-
ject, and we ventured to offer predictions as to the future, al-
most all of which have been by the event fulfilled.—(Hear,
hear.) But amongst those-predictions in which our fancies
that morning indulged, I will freely confess that I never did
reckon on one, and I believe he was as guiltless of fancying as I
was, that we should ever live to see the day when appro-
priation should be given to the winds as if the thing had never
been talked of, as if it had never been the means of seating one
Ministry and unseating another.—( Hear, hear, hear.) So
much for appropriation—the chapter of appropriation, its
origin, history, flourishing, decline, and fall—(Laughter)—its
use, how it has been taken up, how used for the purpose of un-
settling one Government, and settling another, and how, in
the fullness of time, having answered every good purpose, it
has been gently laid aside, and .put to rest with asing.le requiem •
sung over its grave, not even in one sentence of the Noble Vis-
count address, but in one or two words, namely—and this is
what is meant as a tribute over the grave of the late appropria-
tion,
that useful and excellent friend—that the present mea-
sure, excluding the late appropriation "is as good a measure
as, everything being taken into account, we can now hope to
pass."—(Laughter and cheers.) To have passed over so dear
and valued a treasure—to have paid it less honour would have
been the grossest ingratitude-4 A laugh)—ingratitude worse
than the witchcraft, and that worst species of witchcraft, which
gave rise to the transformation of the Bill we have now
witnessed, but surely it was unnatural and unkind in the
Nob Viscount to a deceased and valued friend to
have dismissed it so unceremoniously.—( Renewed laughter.) -
To have said less upon such a subject—to have paid a slighter
tribute to the vast services of this extremely important and va-
lueble assistant, dum
.fuit—( Hear, and a laugh)—to have said
less in its praise was absolutely impossible, for even the most
concise of all the orators who ever uttered a funeral oration in
the city of Lacedemon.—(Great laughter and cheering.)
Now, my Lords, it is on these two grounds of what is in the
Bill for the first time, and what is now for the first time left
out, that I take my stand, and give my serious and solemn
protest against the course about to he pursued by her Ma-
jesty's
Ministers.—( Hear, hear.) That it may be lawful—
that it may be consistent with the most perfect and scrupulous
regard to the rights of conscience and the great interests of
religious liberty—and that it may be also consistent with the
most perfectly sound administration of the principles of the
Civil laws of the realm, as regards its duties and obligations
to all parties, for the Government to interpose in difficult cir-
cumstances with a temporary loan and an advance of money to
parties whom it is the policy of the State to protect, and who,
from accidental circumstances, or under the pressure of im-
mediate ones, from the non-performance of the debts, the du-
ties, or the obligations of others, are compelled to resort to it,
is a proposition which I am perfectly ready to admit as true
( Hear, hear.) It is one which all Governments have in
difficult circumstances acted upon, whether it be the Clergy
now, or the laity at a different time—whether it be mercantile
men in one state of distress, or the agricultural interest at
another period of public suffering, or the Colonial interests at a
third period, in each and all of those cases temporary ad-
vances have been made by way of loan from the public funds,
to relieve the necessities of private individuals—( Hear, hear)_
the Church in this case being in one sense a public body, but
for the purposes of the present argument I view it in the ca-
pacity of a private individual—in that of tithe-owners, as
contra-distinguished from tithe-payers—in that of creditors, as
contra-distinguished from debtors. No principle of religious
liberty or perfect toleration could ever be said from any act
of temporary accommodation or mere succour to have been
infringed. So long as the Church was to be protected at
all—so long as the State took upon itself the task of providing
a remedy for the violation of rights, no one could deny that
this Act, which was indeed further recommended to all parties,
and most of all to those parties whose consciences were most
tender, by the amiable name and pleasing character of a
charitable measure, was a measure not inconsistent with jus-
tice, and sanctioned by sound policy. Therefore I will say
that I never met any persons, either those who were against
all religious establishments, or those who, not being for the
Voluntary principle, were still against any further endowment
of the Church. other than that derived from tithes and Church
lands which had been already given to the Church—l
uevcr heard from any of these quarters objection taken to the
principle of a temporary advance of money. --( Hear, hear.)
But, my Lords, it is indeed otherwise with gifts out-and-out,
and not to be repaid. These gifts 1 maintain are exception-
able on every ground. The Church is endowed with- lands
and with tithes ; and no man, be his creed what it may, be
his dissent as wide as you please front the Church in doctrine,
and be his disapproval of the ordinances of the Church as wide
and his practice as different as you please, earl have any right
whatever to disapprove of a loan. But he has a right to dis-
approve—he has a duty to disapprove—not of the
loan made in the first instance—not of tithes in their
regular course—( Hear, hear)—not of Church lands in the
ordinary case, and for why ? Because these prop•Tties never
were in him—l-c never had more than nine-tenths of his free-
hold. the remaining tenth belonging to the Church ; and as
for Church Inds they never were his at all ; but he has a right
to disapprove of gifts, and therefore, although I am one of
those who hold that all Church property—tithes in England,
tiends in Scotland, and Church-lands in England and Ireland,
are all properly speaking, public property—( Hear, hear)—and
may be dealt with by the Country and the Legislature for na-
tional purposes, if the wisdom of Parliament so think fit
--for purposes immediately connected with the Church,
if the wisdom of Parliament so think fit ; or for pur-
poses tint immediately connected with the Church, be-
cause the State having its faith inseparab'y bound up
and connected with the Church, nothing which the wisdom of
Parliament can do for the appropriation of its property, either
to temporal or secular purposes, can at all be said to he alien
to the interests of that Church ; yet I have no hesitation in ac-
knowledging the right of the Church to receive such tempo-
rary advances as it may require upon its own property. If a
national Establishment be held in the opinion of the country
to he fit for the people, and beneficial to them, the support of
that Establishment mar be said to be immediately and di-
rectly the interest of the. State itself ; but I take it,
nevertheless, that there is a broad and deep line to be drawn
tetvveen that Church property, the tithes. and the Church
lands hitherto wholly enjoyed by the Church in severalty, And
never enjoyed by any other party, and money raised by taxes
off the people of this country, raised by way of lean, the in-
terest upon which loan the people in the shape of taxes most
pay—and this difference is all and everything. You will ob-
serve that no Dissenter, be lie Quaker or Presh)teriati, Bap-
tist. or Unitarian, ever makes the slightest objection (except the
Quaker) to the payment of tither ; but none of them ever make
the slightest objection to the Chits -h retaining
for the present
and until the wisdom of Parliament shall otherwise decide, er-
tirely and exclusively its property in the Church lands. I. it
the same with rates? Name but the subject of chill-ell-rates,
and every Dissenter, of every shade of religious •.opinion
throughout the island, from one end to the other, was up in
arms. The strongest Government that ever existed in this
country, even in the most flourishing period of its power, when
public affairs prospered most, and when private influence at
• home was most -extensive, and kept pace with the prosperity
abroad—the strongest Government has not die power in the
I titres in which- we live to levy off' the people of t)lis 'country
the fraction of a fartking for the fabric of the Church by the ic.-

crease of Church-ratge, Thelqueltion nap ken with allfthe
mecteanieVi of die State, with al! the I.nnerit.:e of the 0.C..
vs6rinSient, and With all the shpreMe power Of Parliament, can you
maintain Church-rates on the footing on which they now rest ?
N? man; be he thp greatest 'Zealtdt in
,politiq pr religion, or;
WbO no 1:, ire with that, unoatural
Alliance between Church and State, which must be stigma-
tised as having been productive of nothing but clerical corrup-
tio.r—no one of these zealots could maintain the physical
possibility of raising one penny additional for the rated of the
Church by force of any nese law. ?To /to of Parliament
sanctioning such gross oppression, cruelty, and injustice, an or
will pass in the present day. Why is it CH:SO atid unjust?
Reeause those melt ate taked oil account d' their religious
scruple s, their honest conscientious dissent, and they are com-
pelled to pay twice when they should only pay once. They
arc compelled to pay to the support df yotir Church ; and they
choose to pity, under the letitterlde tff their bonSt..iltititts opi-
nions, for the support of their own, and they tliereroid Tiny
double tax, as a tax upon wor,hipping God according to their
own cot:sei snces. Why, then, my Lords, what is this measure?
\Vhat is the object of this Bill ? It is by a tam to take 900,0001.
from the people of Englend to stay the Irish. (-40,0-0,
14 plain it. 1401 Y, my Lords,have presented
hundreds hundreds of petitions from Scotland,in which may parts of Eng-
land synapathiied, againet ,one farthing Additiqnal endowment
lb the ScotEh Clittreiti " NoVernment,
Who Were the authors of the appropriation clause; yoti—cellt
all )our professions of liberality and sound principle ; you.—
who brought forward a plan for relieving Dissenters—can you
think. of giving- additional etiddartttent iii the Church of
Scotland, which mutt be paid by tales to be levied oil its-
renters from the Church ?" Your answer to that—how will
it be receiYed " Oh, no, we mean to do no such thing
There is a difference between the seceder and the member of
the Church—not in doctrine, but he diiciplineedd A question
of Church patronage alone—not upon coniCientious gatipleg,
or religious prineiple at all. The seceder differs from the
Church, therefore God forbid that wee the patrons of Reli-
gious Liberty, that we, the authors of` Vie appropriation
clause—we, the proposers of the abolition of Chtne3h-rates,
on the greundt Of Religious Liberty ! God forbid that
we should use any such violence to your conscientious
scruples, as to make you pay one farthing for a Church,
in every one article of whose profession of faith you
textually and entirely agree, and from which you are only
separated by some slender, evanescent, and hardly tangible dif
ference on political grounds." " But, do you mean to give
any money to any other Church?" "Oh 1 to be sure," is the
reply. " we mean to givenot 20,0001., or 50,0001., as was
asked and refused, for the Church of Scotland—no, but we,
the advocates of civil and religious liberty—we, the great
patrons of the Dissenters—we, who without the Dissenters
could not exist as a Government for half an hour—( Hear, hear,
hear)—we, who to repay them, brought in a measure so ill
framed, that it could not pass either House—but which was
founded on the principles of civil and religious liberty—we, to
manifest the consistency between our professions and our
conduct, we mean to give not 20,0001., but 900;0001.—not to
a Church from which the Scotch Dissenters differ only on
points of discipline, but to a Church of bishops, priests, and
deacons, which all good Presbyterians, and all Dissenters,
regard as an utter abomination !"--( Hear, hear, and a laugh.)
Well—well, my Lords, may this be looked upon as a viola.
tion of all principle—as a " heavy blow, and great discourage.
mens"_( A laugh)—to the hopes of the Dissenters.—( Hear,
hear.) But, my Lords, is there nothing in the peculiarities
of this case, which make it worse? Ever) thing. I will
not enter, my Lords, into the great question of religi-
ous establishments. Ido not stand here upon the ground of
what is called " tha voluntary principle." My opinions arc
strongly in favour of a religious establishment. I think it is
better for the teaching of religion—l think it stands upon
safer grounds than the American experiment—for I can
hardly call it a doctrine, it has not lasted long enough to have
stood the test of experience—the plan, letting every
man choose his own religion, and having none to whom
the Government lends its support. It is quite unimportant to
me which way this argument is determined. My present pro-
position stands entirely apart from it. If I were the enemy of
religious establishments—or if I carried my regard for religi-
ous establishments to the utmost extent—l should still hold
precisely the same opinion on the present measure. Dr.
Paley, and all those who have ever argued this question in
favour of Church establishments, hold that such institutions
ought to be in accordance with the opinions of the great majority
of the people. Ido not remember one argument in support of
these establishments which would sanction anything so mon-
strous as a Church amply endowed, richly provided for at the ex-
pense of the whole community, which only ministers to the spiri-
tual wants of a very small fraction of the people. I well remember
a phrase used by one, not a foe to Church Establishments—l
mean Mr. Burke—" Don't talk of its being a Church !—it is
a wholesale rubbery 1" My Lords, I should hesitate to use
such language—it would be called everything noxious, and
grating to your Lordships' cars, attuned as they are to more
silvery tones on questions relating to Establishments.-4 A
laugh.) Yet this is the language of Mr. Burke, who some-
times carried his advocacy of Church Establishments into the
bounds of enthusiasm. My Lords, here is a Church supported
by a people, in number 8,000,000, of whom 6 000,000 are Catho-
lics and 1,000,000 Protestant s. I say nothing of the
endowment of the Church by tithes, wit ch is—most wieey, I
think—by this Bill to be converted into a rent-charge. But I
say that the principles of religious liberty are outraged by a
Government who, while they will not allow it to be said that
Is. is to be paid by the Seceder to the Scotch Church, bring
forward a measure by which the Seceder, and all Dissenters,
will be compelled to pay 900,000/. to the Irish Church. My
Lords, I object to the measure therefore as being at variance
with all the principles of religious liberty. But I object to it
upon another, and, though perhaps a lower, not an unimpor-
tant ground. I object to the Bill upon this principle, that it
allows persons to escape the payment of tithes, which is a
debt due from them, and because they will not pay it, the
State is to step in and pay it for them.--( Hear.) That is,
persons refuse to obey the law, for the payment of tithe ; and
you, the Government, instead of lending, which would be the
natural co rot—all facilities to the Church to obtain payment
of its lawful dues, you interpose and tax those woo have
already paid their dues, to relieve those who have refused to pay.
That is the character of this Bill ; is it, my Lords, according
to the principles of justice, or is it consistent with common
sense ?—( Hear.) Certainly not; it is contrary to every
principle of justice and a gross violation of common sense. Far
different is it to the old doctrine of the Eivelish Common Law;
far otherwise were the old institutions of the country with
which I have been acquainted from a child. According to
those institutions, every man was made answerable for his own
acts, and the defeulter was not allowed to go free; ti
were made to keep watch and ward over their neighbour, and in
case he should escape them the, law brought him to justice ;
but here the case is different; by the present Bill it is said
You have committed yourself ; you have been contumacious
you have refused to pay the dues of the Church ; the Church
was a creditor of yours; you have riot paid your debt, and
therefore we will make others who have discharged their
lawful obligations, not those who have shown a refractory
spirit, we will make thorn pay f r you. Instead of
your paying twenty shillings in the pound, you shall
not pay one farthing, but we will make those pays who have
not broken the law. Upon what principle of justice, or upon
what principle of common sense, can such a measure, my
Lords, be framed.—( Hear.) My Lords, I look upon the
gift of 900,000/. which is to be paid by the Dissenters to the
Irish Church, as one which is mule in violation of all the
great rights of which men in the ordinary transactions of life
arc so justly jealous and tenacious. Is there anything, my
Lords, in the situation of the Irish Church that makes it ad-
visable title such a state of things should exist. I should
think that every reasoneWe and sensible man would say no ;
and how those who wish to perpetuate such a state can brine
their feelings to justify themselves upon it, Ido not know. It
is no argument with them that the apsropri itioa clause might
be dispensed with, bccaus if there should be a surplus, it
might be but small, and might belong ere it arrived, come it
soon or late,be it great or small, at all events it is a beginning ; it
is a principle asserted, it is a mater of principle, and we are
here upon principle.—( Hesr. ) We are, say the propounders
of this measure, men of principle, and we would sooner die
than give up our opinions up m Civil and Religious Liberty,
and our opinions, above all, upon the question of the Church.
We would sooner die than give up this dear, cherished, and
sacred principle—we would sooner ruttier any thing, except
indeed to be shut out of official existence.—(Great laughter. )

Any thing ..,hort of that species of suicide they ;acre prepared
to encounter and defy s loner than give op that principle.
How, then, is this luster of pr'n2iple to be given up. In this
HooFe and the House of Commons there nuiy be a difference

of principles. A few nights ago, on a question of great im-
portance,
one of the highest importance as it affected
the relation of this county with neutral Powers, two
Noble Lords in the same Ministry, had differed most ma-
terially with each other, set strange to say they ,kept
their opinions, and what was infinitely better thee 'plaecsl. ;
be the same adhesion to principles, though differing tot 9
(Great laughter.) So it may be here, my Lords;. there
mayln-
rdo, and here may be also the same adhesion to office.---
creased laughter.) NOw, how has the principle been
have pref. rrecl anything rather than have given up the ap-
propriation .cii,use—(Hear, hear)—l should have infinitely
preferrs. d the Bill with the principle being reieet ,i
rather than have the Bill carried without the appropriation
clause. The only thing said by the Noble Viscount, in
the
few words he uttered upon the subject, was, that " in pre-
sent circumstances, and situated as they were, it was all that
they could.do." It was carried in the House of Commons by
abandoned? I declare to you, my Lords, that I should
some small majority—eight or fifteen.—(Oreat laughter-)
Noble Lords on the other side of the House may laugh, but
I firmly believe, if they had been- in the -Ministry. they would
not have had a larger majority.—( Cheers.) The days ere
gone by, svlien you will see great majorities in the House of
Commons ; they have been put an end to—whether that he
good or bad. I will not say —but great majorities have been
put an end to by the Reform Bill. The Ministry have been
oblieed, in order to lighten their sinking bark—( Cheers trom
the Opposition)—to throw the most valuable part of their cargo
overboard—the appropriation clause. The present state of the
measure is, in my opinion, very much like a certain animal
which when hunted emasculated itself in order to escape itc.
nursuers. —( Cheers.) The pursuers who were in chase of
t sis Bill, sour Lordships, would not be satisfied with anything
short of cutting out and emaseulating this appropriation
clause. —k Cheers.) The Ministry cut it nut, and arc now
flinging it in the face of its pursuers.—( Cheers.) The ob-
ject of the Noble Lord in resorting to this operation—l mean
so this measure—(Great laughter)—is to reduce it to such a
woeful plight and such a pitiful condition, as to render it un-
worthy of being caught, and thereby enable it to escape, and
prevent your Lord Ships from reeking your vengeance upon it.
Is not this most unnatural conduct on the part of the parents
of this measure ?—( Cheers.) I confess,• my Lords, that it
seems to me it would have been far more feeling that the rne2Ell7o
should have suffered from the hands of your: Lurdslqi

SUN, LONDON, SATVRDAV, AUGU-ST 4, Ist",

than froM those got;its; unnatural,,and wretched parents.—
? Kula:a:sae s 11,;1 id,onsfstelicy of thin4e, viii.'e itti'oduced this
measure, and then deprived ;t Of Ita iitali4, / never before
saw exceeded or equalled.—( Cheers. ) Now, illy Issai,lai
bafore I close the remarks I have to make, I must say that I
see „
~,,,taai
n ,thy peaspects of the Irish Church which
‘..spipci., p,.3a;s . so 'sleets
,iippn it the enormous sum
of 900 0001. 'There is ugly,:''" se. !bat , Civil-eh that
reconeilea na_ to pin with the money or the serintiasie, I
hay, upon former occasions stated my conviction, my paneled
conviction.-1 did so on the last stage of the Irish Poor Lay
Illfleseeaa tb (Merril of Ireland was so unnaturally circum-
sianeeeit a, siiviA;med,E7::. r,,,,,,trefrom without, that all the
luipreen`ieiitS' YOU giro beatear 14(V?
,it e0:1 lee fr aoile in comps.
rledn yFitb thatire.S'si!Ye. Stich being tlio etitca rats ;aards, it
appears to me fr'rl.t ties t.lturCh 6r. f t‘el add. is iv eap able of fast leig
much longer without change, t.ir)ei. clian'ge Which the friends
and advocates of the Church would say ittessisi toad to its de-
'ts presed `,.-...1.t. nasal t Years longer. Does any body. or can
Jrdctio». ( hear.) It cannot be expected that it will 'mot in
any body, raally s 'el-liar:l-N that this alf,r9tra Ecclesin,
I Will not eiee it a harsher terni, Ciiii '.:!_. reepeturiteti ;roach
o. esatateics, and oie.a? asehlietzs oti
in,gari Tliat SIX-assillions e r. 1
iseaedkra. a4S:ra edttsoni. an Establishment while the whole CP
the wealth of the t'searif:? 'vats given to an Establishment of
some 800,000 inlividuals. Tilers? i's. enerseth•ng, my Lards, in
such a vase of things that is shocking to diii';',S of, and incon-
soaft 5 o
o on
6, thli
?ige4it asith eommon sense.—( Cheers from one or iiia!".eaate,
Lords 6,i fig rtsipiaterial benches.) If the Noble Lunn
wlio
4 -11,55 ”ddse were on the other, in-
stead I
have heard it called by various natanSo-e-adtle Elf them your
should lki have liad i.)li air t:' Ceiteera —( Laughter. ) .
LortigiiiPs Yaae heard me use, onla in a more decent diegreiee, ,
I have, my Lora, liitlf4 is "willed an anomaly, and I say that
it is an anomaly of so groS.; i It.?ttlt that it ou;asaaaos every
principle of common sense ; and every f.'t.V4 endowed with
cortimen reason, must feel that it is the most gross Gtetarase to
that comma, ...tnlt Ai it is also of justice. Such an Establisii-
talent, kept up for such a Ptirrasta. kept up b , such means, and
upheld by such a system, is a IWO who} y peculiar to Ire-
-1
land# and could be tolerated nowhere else. iis!4rf""thaa system
should go Oat hi the 19th century—that such a thing fnrea2.l no
on while all the aria's& n seforward and onward course —while
all the sciences are progressitig-7Thiss all morals and religion
too—for, my Lords, there never was thOrii tiff religion and mora-
lity then is now presented in all parts of the edtleitleaeselliat this
gross'abuse—llle most outrageous of all—should be iikilitrti to
continue, is really aston:gtiftsea. It cannot be upheld, unless '
the tide of knowledge should turn tiele-satsnless we return to
the state in which things were a couple of n'rleries ago.
*There Is a aOphistry which was used by Mr. Burke—tall, it is
impossible that ally peraen possessed of reason or common
sense but must see througd It ea once, nor do I think
that that eloquent man believed in it Ithweelf--it is im-
possible that a man with his powers could do Sea • At
the time of the Union the proportion of Catholics. ft)
Churchmen vette as fire to cne ; but Mr. Burke said, It is
not the Church of Ireland, Ind the United Churches of Eng-
land and Ireland, arid by that meant i 1 lefotta ht
of .Churchmen to assume the relative prdilortifile proportion
oti df flees,. to
i
one Catholic. Any one who could put faith in stitch an argu-
ment must have lost all sense of right and wrong. Vs ht, Mr.
Billie in using it must have forgot the positim of the Bristol
Channel ; he must have forgot that they here a different
people, of a different country, of a different lineage, with
different habits and prejudices—(Loud cheers and laughter)
—I will not call them " aliens," &c.—( Loud Cheers)—l
knew that my
bneaelxsepvnalay.sistoieedonbsyidmeryedNt9hbalte iatndwaLs
emarenreedl Y
his lips--( Noble and Learned Friend had that ward on
Cheers and laughter)—but I. my Lords, never
usoitngusiFtdinw with 0
ua
was one of those- who cried out against my Noble and
lausp g e a a
rg gee g reanpt Y
Learned Friend for the use of the words, for I
uannfodrtiutnei.itacveinxg.
pression.—( Cheers.) I understood it as it was aftefWatatie
explained away, we are bound to believe that it was
Farievnerdy;
rnyofinthteentliroinshofeoinsluelt.andl,nhooltwaegvaeirn,satmon..n.mow;
Lords, what a monstrousp knowledge therefore I will go back to myp posiiio
Why, mymay so use
bit.
those mutt possess who use such a monstrous
they must forget that the sea cut and dividedgm the two
countries—they must 'forget that the I • rish people have
old feelings and associations different to the English
people—they must not only forget that their very blood
and language were different, but they must
also
the habits of the Irish people which are broadly marked
by forget
the
hand of nature, and more strongly stilt, by the monstrous na
of the civil polity under which they have been ruled for
centuries. —( Haar, hear, from the Marquis of Clanricarde.)
It is easy then, but is idle, for the people to talk of nankin,' one
kingdom of the two countries so far as the Church is concerned,
it is easy so to join them for the purpose of making the
Catholics appear in -a minority.--( Hear, hear, hear.)
The question is, what is the relative proportion f Catho-
licism and Frotestakism in Ireland now. My Lords, it is as
ten to one—there are now in Ireland ten Dissenters to one
Churchman. The answer, as regards the Church, is decisive
and triumphant. As regards the Church, the answer, then, is
decisive, If you assume the proposition of Mr. Burke, then
you must assume that tine Church of Ireland and the Church
of England being the Establishment, is so for the whole of
the people of England and Scotland, as well as the people of
Ireland. What, my Lords, is the fact? "Why, that in Ire-
land the Churchmen amounted to 800,000 out of a popu-
lation of 8,000,000, and that is the fact, my Lords,
which makes it the monstrous abuse which it is felt
and declared to be. - Therefore it is, my Lords, that I
bumbly stated my opinion a few days ago to be, that even the
oldest member of your Lordships' House may live to see a very
great change in the endowment of the Irish Church Esta-
blishment, even if he might not live to see the end
to its very existence.—(Hear, hear.) I have not a word
to say respecting' the endowment of a Catholic Church.
No Catholic Church will. be borne by the people of England
or of Scotland, or even 'of Ireland. Make a stated stipendary
provision for the Catholic clergy, which would not only be
borne but would be hailed aathe one real mode of solving the
diffieulties in which ,we arc placed, as.the only mode of restor-
ing peace to that aliatracted country, and it would be at once
easy and safe. I- eine* last man in the world to desire the
establishment of the Catholic religion ; I verily believe that
the Catholics theniselves would spurn at ite-they disavow such
a wish, and Lbelievethem to be sincere. Can that, how-
ever, be any additional reason -for me to embark the
million as well as.. my principles in so frail a bark,
go
.down by lading it a little more
to help it, to
without the chance of saving it. and so perish in what I fully
believe to be a political wreck ? Surely no. Yet, my Lords,
strange, most strange to tell—at least, I have been informed,
and 1 beliea, my information to be correct—strange, I say, to
tell, that ass been given as a reason for inducing us, the
country, contrary to all economy, contrary to all principle,
eonttary to all tne great principles of toleration and religious
liberty, that has been given as a reason why we should em-
bark the 900,0001. in a frail bark that is going down.--( Hear,
hear.)
That reason was given by a Noble Lord out of whose
'
book I should be happy to take a leaf, but I stand
liable to the same curse as the German , who complained that
some other persona had said all the good things he intended
to have said.—( L...ughter. ) In my place in Parliament, here,
where I now stand, some fortnight or three weeks ago, I said
as regarded the Church of Ireland, but the same things cer-
tainly, my bards, I did not expect that I should so soon he
• a
uonfia by
nea, and that Noble Lord who formed one of the
Cabinet of her Majesty's Ministers. I did not expect that I
would so soon hear from one of the Government that the
Church of Ireland is doomed. I confess that I was not
sanguine
enough to expect to hear such language
deliberately, for I have been informed that the N 'obleLord
repeated the expression after his attention had been strongly
called to it by an attack made upon him and the ,a
• • Government.
to which he belonged, for that expresnon_l say my Lords, I
was not sanguine enough to expect to hear from such autho-
rity, and so soon, that it days are. numbered—that. the bark is
' it is imnossible that it can last any
longer, or keep
frail —that 'i • .f. r • mark
and th..t, t rare o (.--1 , tsar, my Lords, I could not
' the sea,
myself so soon arrive at sack a conclusion from the same pre-
mises—t , ,
hat therefore, it is worth our while to embark a
money in it. This,
million of sterling s . my Lords, is not acting
ld adage of" throwing good money after h 1 " '
up ta the 0.. _ .
isO a a' • —(it
howl,. ) N.., it is throwing a o money away—throw it.- sinkina- vessel, without
it into a fral al _ ,
the hope of the'
slightest berwtit ; and in addition to the million, not content
with that which might have been considered enough—not con-
eta that—theyare preparing also to throw in their prin • 1
tentwi 1 cip ca,
as Well as to saer.fice in the same frail bark the whole princi-
ples of toleration. My Lords, by this step you disappoint the
fervent liepcs of seven millions in Ireland—you di=sappoint the
exi eetations of tour millons of Dissenters in this country ;
they have been fervent in their prayers for perfect
equal liberty and exception from all taxes, which they cannot
pay. conscientiously pay—You will deeply
disappoint
the imps of those million their
s who regard principles
more than the pressure of the amount, and who
woutilob'iet.;
on principle to the t x :were it only a farthing, because they feel
that the principle is a violation of their consciences. Yet, Inv
Lards, you are about to pas; a Bill, to close a Session in
which 3ou have done little or nothing- else, which will damp
their hopes, and they will, having lost all confidence in Parlias
1 ineyt, look in vain for relief, and the Irish portion or them will
no longer know where to turn. Do the Government hope
that they are recommending, themselves to the country. or do
they hope thet by this. abandonment of their principles they can
solve the pest ion which presses upon them, or eau pacify Ire-
land . I recollect meeting in my reading a phrase which was
used by Chadas
the First, which is most applicable to the pre-
sent case. That Monarch in writing by his favourite the Duke
of Buckingham, said, " Ireland is the only egg we have been
sitting on for some years, but the shell of it is so hard that
we have not hatched anything yet."—( Loud laughter.)
These are my sentimenta, and they have alwaz s been the guide
of my conduct. The affections of the people I will never
court at the expense of their interests,- their delusion:, their
passing delusions; I is ill never share, though by thwarting
weir wishes I may incur their displeasure. But their delibe-
rate opinions, their well considered principles. those judg-
ments Which they
form after long observation and much expe-
rience, we are bound to regard with profound respect; and I
[sever will be deterred from. supporting their sober and reasonable
prayers, by any senseless apprehensien of wild and urgent de-
mands
. . succeeding. Never fear the people. Believe ow, the aafest
Nile is—treat that on May be trusted. The more you confide
in them the more they will have confidence in you—the more
you listen to their prayers, the less they will vex you with
greedy encroachments - and unreasonable demands. I now
give you the result of all my observations—all my experience
--',dl niy intercourse with them—l have never feared them-a
citizen, senator, stetestnan minister, I never for an instant
• "'l'd the people. Why should I now ? Liberty anti
popular rights are mixed up with our whole Con-
I stitution. Oppression, exclusive monopoly, oligarchy_
any sacrifice ofthe few, whether in State
• e ilia, many to
or. in unto-eh—is -utterly alien to its whole nature. How
I often have we seen popular rights and liberal principles
or ex:are:nee: almort preetrated, an..l oppessbn cud iutc,