The Sun.
London, England, 1836-04-26 00:00:00

I have heretofore tweed against the principle involved in this
tileasere,---( Loud cheers from the Opposition.) The Noble
Lent it, the Bourse of his able speech, had appealed to him on
one or two maffeie to which he should confine his remarks on
this oeeasne;:. And first, the Noble Lord asked his testimony
as ie nether „mu,: eiven to his question on
.Friday last
'-nt to an expression -of his
tt' is coti.eideeed he, jeerievees.,.. given last year.
depertute freal the: piedeed seifieli - • A
to tO
IL Was bolind id elys W tieoi pechplir of the -
submit a mere formal resolution did ea ill,* that bus es."
Government were prepared to abatidoi; thee4e former
e!(*(7.--e-(llear, hear.) At the same time, he could not lielee
tfiet die& maS something in the expressions used by
the ',PelsOe feeed thet, nit ht with reference to that part of the
question, partieideli-ly whol+'e he mentioned his inability "to
sleelee'et off"—( Great latieebtee)---there was something in the
elenificahet *time with which that expression was accompanied,
and which teal LIMA according to the models of the ablest
orators, that did conelnee feine tleet he would have fled if he
ac old from the embarrassment of fleet question.—( Opposition
clitiefg drei laughter.) The Noble Lord's manner and ap-
pearance, deileg fleet part of the speech, reminded him strongly
of the graphic pictufe dereeirelly Horace, when lie says—
Demitto auriculas ut Wye mentis asellus,
Cum gravius dorso subiit onus—
(much latightee, ire which Lord Morpeth joined.) He trusted
tine Noble Lord would not consider him as intending to apply
td Mai any expiessicm in the slightest degree offensive. The
Noble Lora eotehl not imagine for a moment that he enter-
tained such a meanin`, when he called to mind that Horace
addressed the expression .elrich he quoted to himself.— (Hear,
lied laughter.) He could well believe that the Noble Lord
was tray tine/isms to " shake off'' the troublesome incumbrance,
but he foetid hireeelf in a state which'rendered it impossible
for him to make the attempt with any chance of success.—
Opposition cheers.) The etierend point in the course of the
I^io le Lord's able seeech, which Is then felt called upon to
notice, swig thee with refereece to his speech, an extract from
which the Noble teoftl had read, With the respect which he
entertained for the Noble leued'e attainments and abilities, he
did feel some regret at being compelled to disewn the justness
of the culogium which he had pronounced upon him.—at being
compelled to restore those praises to those to whom they rs:_allY
belonged.—( Hear, hear.) In order to show that he had no
title whatever to the eulogium of the Noble Lord, it was only
necessary for him to refer to the speech from which the Noble
Lord had quoted, in which the following sentences immediately
followed those which the Noble Lord had read ?—" I may be
asked why I have assumed 2001. as the minimum of the scale
of allowance to be made to parochial ministers ? My answer
is not on any vague assumptions of my own, but on the acts
and recorded declarations of the authors arid supporters of
this Bill—(Opposition cheers,) The estimate is theirs, not
mine—(Cheers again from the same quarter.) I may think
2001. (as I do think it) a very insufficient provision ; but I
am arguing throughout on the principles of my opponents,
and claiming their support of my proposal on Those princi-
ples."—(Much cheering.) The Noble Lord, therefore, having
made a partial quotation from his speech, and thereby paid
him a compliment which was meant for his own colleagues,
he must restore it to the quarter to which it was really due.
—( Hear, hear.) He made no concession whatever on the
great principle which he, in common with his friends, op-
posed in the last Bill, but gave his assent to the formal mo-
tion, in order that he might be enabled to enter on the full
and unshackled consideration of that principle, at a future
stage of the measure,—(Cheers.)
Lord STANLEY was understood to ask to what purpose
it was proposed to apply the balance of 47,6171. beyond the
sum of 50,000/. intended to be paid into the consolidated
fund ?
Lord MORPETH replied, that for some considerable time
to come there could be no eiteplus under this head. He and
the Government with which he was associated never could and
never would be parties to its appropriation to any but reli-
gious purposes; it should be devoted in conjunction with the
sum of 50,0001., already alluded to, to the religious and moral
education of the people.
Lord STANLEY retained the whole of the objections
which he had so frequently and so earnestly pressed with re-
gard to the principle of appropriation, and he would only say
that the speech he had just heard, proved to him clearly not
only that the House had adopted the principle of appropriation
unnecessarily, but that the Noble Lord felt himself compelled,
for the purpose of creating a surplus, to do that which he
(Lord Stanley) was convinced the Noble Lord himself be-
lieved to be an injustice and a hardship.—(Loud cheers from
the Opposition benches.) In the opinion that it was extremely
desirable to come to a final settlement of the Church ques-
tion, he entirely agreed with his Noble Friend ; but he could
not agree with those of that House who, allowing that it
was practicable to make such an alteration in the law as,
while it should prove generally satisfactory, would not require
any Members of the Legislature to violate principles
, which they held to be sacred, contended that it was far from
being desirable to do so, and that, no matter how useless or
superfluous the adoption of the principle might prove, it was
incumbent upon the Legislature to assert the right of Parlia-
ment to deal as it pleased with the surplus, or more properly
speaking, contingent surplus revenues of the Church.—( Hear,
hear.) What, in point of fact, was the gravamen of the
Noble Lord's argument ? It was this :—" Feeling strongly
as we do," observed the Noble Lord, " that it is the object
of both sides of the House to come to an early settlement of
this question, agreeing as we do in that object, aware as we
are that it is an object, in the expediency of which both
branches of the Legislature concur, we, the Government,
tell you that we will not attempt to reform the Irish Church
unless you acquiesce with us in the principle of appropriat-
ing its surplus revenues to such purposes as we may decide
upon."—( Cheers.) And on what did that surplus depend?
It depended upon the reduction of the income of every clergy-
man below 5001., which 500/. was only to be earned by a
close attendance upon a cbngregation of three thousand
souls.—(Cheers.) The evil in the Church Establishment
throughout a great portion of Ireland being the immense
extent of the benefices, the Noble Lord, for the sole and
avowed purpose of creating a surplus, proposed to reduce the
number of those benefices from 1,380, containing a propor-
tion of souls admitted to be much too large for the due per-
formance of the clerical duties to 1,250, necessarily con-
taining a much larger proportion. In other words, the evil
being that the Clergy had too large a flock to attend to, the
Noble Lord proposed as a remedy a measure by which those
flocks must of necessity be considerably increased.—(Cheers.)
It was, however, to his mind quite clear, that if Government
left to every Irish clergyman for the support of himself and
his family, and for the necessary distribution of charity among
his parishioners, the miserable pittance the Noble Lord pro-
posed, the minimum being 1751., and the maximum 375/. that
the whole of the surplus upon which he calculated would be
altogether absorbed.—( Cheers from the Opposition benches.)
By clinging, therefore, to an imaginary surplus—by clinging
to the principle of appropriation in regard to a surplus which
could only be made available by the adoption of a course
calculated to increase the evil of the existing system, his
Majesty's Government were about taking that course which
must effectually prevent the two branches of the Legislature
from coming to the so much-desired settlement of this
question.—( Cheers.) How far they were justified in encoun-
teeing such a responsibility—such an awful responsibility, he
must term it—he must leave to themselves and their con-
sciences to say.—( Loud cheering.)
Lord J. RUSSELL—My Noble Friend is unable to re-
press his indignation, at the notion of the revenues of the Irish
Clergy being in any respect rendered proportionate to the
duties they shall have to perform.—(Cheers, and laughter. )
What, in point of fact, is the grievance?—that great and
horrifying grievance against which my Noble Friend has pro-
tested, and to which, in terms of such combined alarm and
wrath, he has called the indignation of the Commons of Eng-
land? Why simply that a Clergyman having to attend to
3,000 parishioners, should not have more than 500/. a year.--
( Hear, hear.) Now let me fora moment remark what hitherto
was the state of these Clergymen—of that body of which my
Noble Friend has been so long the ardent and enthusiastic de-
fender? What was the case as regarded those Clergymen
brought out by the discussions of last year? Was it not most
clearly proved on the testimony of more than one individual,
that in many instances there were absentee Clergymen receiv-
ing from their livings 8001. and 900/. a year, while the super-
intendence of their parishes was Committed to a curate receiv-
ing not more than 751. a year ?—( Loud cheers.) Sir, such
was the state of things permitted, and continued even
after the reform of the Church of Ireland, and now that my
Noble Friend near me proposes that there shall in future be
some proportion between the income to be received and the
duties to be performed by the clergy, up starts my Noble
Friend opposite, and in a speech of great brevity, but propor-
tionate acerbity, plainly evinces that the very idea of such a
proposition excites his indignation, and calls for the expression
of his determined hostility.—(Loud cheers.) If not in words,
in substance at least, my Noble Friend tells us lie cannot bear
that the stipend of the Irish clergy should be proportioned to
the duties they shall have to perform; and so alarming in his
eyes is the idea of such a proposition, that he finds it impossi-
ble to wait for that discussion which the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet promises shall take place upon the general question—
a discussion which I have no doubt, as far as the Right Hon.
Gentleman is concerned, will be conducted with all that
temper and discretion for which he is so remarkable—but
upon the occasion of a merely formal resolution he starts up to
tell his Majesty's Government that by supporting this alarm-
ing proposition, they are likely to endanger the settlement of
the Irish Church question.—( Cheers.) Doubtless it is through
a desire to show off through the force of contrast the tempe-
rance and unassuming 'bearing of his Right Hon. coadjutor
in opposition that my Noble Friend upon every possible occa-
sion enacts the Hotspur of his party. —(Cheers and lauehter.)
It is clear lie has closely studied the character, and so ad-
mirably has he caught up the picture with Shakspeare
drew, that there seldom passes an occasion upon which the
hot-headedness of his declamation fails to get the better of
his reason, and make him diverge from that more natural
course, which the more prudent and less impetuous leader of
his party lays down.—(Loud cheers.) Upon this principle,
and on this principle alone, can I account for the Noble Lord's
refusing to postpone his observations until the measure before
the House comes to a more regular debate and discussion.
For my part I shall wait for that debate.—(Hear, hear,
hear.) It think it is wise and prudent to reserve the
discussion until we can go into the details, and see
whether or not the plan which my' Noble Friend pro-
poses is feasible and proper for our adoption.—( Hear,
hear, hear.) Before I sit down I must say I fully admit
to the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, that he did not,
in submitting to us the proposition alluded to by my Noble
Friend, offer it as a proposition good in itself, and in ac-
cordance with the principles he entertains; but rather as a
proposition which, if our principles were to be adopted, was
better than the proposition of the previous year. I must,
however, say, I think my Noble Friend near me was jus-
tified in asserting that in one respect the authority of the
Right Hon. Baronet was with him—conceding the principle
of appropriation ; a principle which i and my colleagues