The Sun.
London, England, 1836-07-05 00:00:00

CHURCH LIVINGS.

Mr. R. COLBORNE presented a petition from the
acting procurator of Wells, praying that a compensation
clause might be introduced into any law that might be
passed for the regulation of ecclesiastical matters, whereby
his interests would be in any degree affected.
Mr. DANIEL WHITTLE HARVEY presented
four petitions from Bury and Manchester, praying for
a Ten Hours' Factory Bill ; from Halifax praying for the
Total Repeal of the Stamp Duties on Newspapers ; from the
medical practitioners of Colchester, praying for compensation
to them upon Coroners' Inquests ; from the retailers of beer
in the borough of Southwark, for an equalization of the hours
for the sale of beer ; also a similar petition from Roxburgh ;
also a petition from the Surrey Radical Association, for the
total repeal of taxes, and that their value might be applied
to the support of the poor ; also a petition from the great
Radical Association, held at the Mechanics' Institute, Mary-
lebone, complaining of no good having been effected under
the Reform Bill, to ameliorate the condition of the poor ;
also a petition for the total repeal of the Duties on News-
papers, from the parish of St. Martin, Norwich.

Sir A. LEITH HAY presented a petition from South
Mims, in favour of the Scotch Reform Bill.
Sir G. SINCLAIR presented a petition against the
Maynooth College. The Hon. Baronet gave notice that
he should draw the attention of the House, to the subject
when the Irish Miscellaneous Estimates were brought forward.

Mr. HARVEY presented a petition from Radnor, stat-
ing that several manors in that county had been sold at an
under-value. In proof of this he would mention that in
the case of the property bought by Mr. Watts, formerly
alluded to by him, many tenants had been induced to attorn.
He considered the prayer of the petition ought to be com-
plied with, namely, that the dealing with this estate by
private contract should be the subject of a special exa-
mination.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the names
of the petitioners, or a great number of them, were actually
in the hand-writing of Mr. Parsons himself.
Mr. HARVEY considered the statement just made by
his Majesty's Attorney-General as an additional ground for
inquiry. He had never seen Mr. Parsons, but he thought
he ought not to be thus attacked and prejudiced by the
high stamp of the Attorney-General, and therefore he
should move, if that gentleman wrote to him wishing it, that
he should be examined at the bar of the House.
IRISH CHURCH BILL. _

Mr. DUNLOP presented a petition from Ayr, signed
by 7,000 individuals, praying the House to retain the
appropriation clause in the Irish Church Bill.
LORDS' AMENDMENTS.
Lord CLEMENTS presented a petition from Leitrim
against the Lords' Amendments.
IRISH TITHES.

Mr. MONTESQ UE BELLEW presented a petition
from the County of Louth, praying for the total abolition
of tithes.

EDINBURGH MAIL.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL presented petitions
from Edinburgh, praying for an acceleration of the mail
between London and Edinburgh.
Mr. HENRY GRATTAN presented a petition from
the county of Longford, signed by the High Sheriff and
5,000 inhabitants, praying for the abolition of tithes.
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON presented several petitions
against the appropriation clause in the Irish Tithe Bill.
SECULAR JURISDICTION (YORK AND ELY.)
On the motion of the ATTORNEY-GENERAL
the House went into Committee on the Secular Jurisdic-
tion (York and Ely) Abolition Bill.
Some compensation clauses were added, and the House
resumed.

Mr. F. SHAW presented a petition against the Irish
Tithe Bill. . _ _

...... ........
A... Message from the Lords summoned the House of
Commons to hear the Royal Assent given by Commission
to several Bills. . _

The SPEAKER, accompanied by several Members, imme.
diately quitted the House.
The SPEAKER having returned,

Sir G. SIN CL AIR iose for the purpose of asking the Go-
iernment some question with respect to the appropriation
clause, but the Hon. Baronet spoke in such a low tone of
voice that it was impossible for us in the Gallery to hear
two consecutive sentences. He was replied to very shortly
by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the same tone of
voice, so that the matter was wholly lost.
Mr. POWER presented a petition for the total abolition
of tithes from inhabitants of Davidstown, county of Wex-
ford ; and a petition from some place in favour of
Corporate Reform.
STAMP DUTIES.

Mr. ROBINSON wished to know if the Chancellor
of the Exchequer could name a day when it was his inten-
tion to go into the Stamp Duties Bill ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
was utterly impossible for him at the present moment to
name any day.
IRISH CHURCH BILL.

The House, on the motion of Lord MoitrETH, went into
Committee on the Irish Chureh Bill.

Upon clause 50 being put,
Lord IVIA HON said if this clause had been discussed
in a proper spirit, it might have been discussed in a satis-
factory manner to all parties ; but as the House had arrived
now at a point of principle, he must say, after the fullest
discussion, he thought the principle of inalienability of
Church property admitted of no compromise. Upon
that principle he should stand ; and upon that principle he
moved that the 50th and the 51st clauses be omitted.
In the discussions that had taken place upon that ques-
tion, it had been asserted by one party that the Irish
Church Establishment had been 'so negligent or so cor-
rupt, that it was not deserving of the same consi-
deration as the English Church. Others again rested
their objections solely on the ground of the great dispro-
portion between the Roman Catholic and Protestant
population. He (Lord Mahon) was not prepared
to assert that the Church had been at all times
free from blame. He presumed that the Protestant religion
was the cause of truth, and it might be objected
that it had not made that progress which might be
expected from such a cause. But to this be would reply,
that the difference in language and lawless habits of
the people in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,
and the operation of the Penal Laws in the 18th, had
interfered with the exertions of the Protestant Clergy.
If the Dissenters in a parish in England happened to be
more numerous than the members of the Church of Eng-
land, would that, he asked, be an argument for making an
alteration in the system ?—(Hear, hear.) Were there
not many institutions in our Constitution which they
admitted to be anomalous ? Let them, for instance, take
the case of property—when it would be found that, while
some men possessed 50,0001. a-year, a man of the greatest
virtue and attainments had not a roof to cover his head.
The property in Ireland was greater in proportion than the
population was Catholic. A commutation of tithes would
therefore place the burden upon the Protestant property,
and not upon the population. That would remove the
anomaly : the anomaly would be greater if the Church
were assimilated to the population, for then the Church would
be supported by nineteen-twentieths of those who were
hostile to it. He took his stand upon the speech of the
Noble Lord the Member for Lancashire (Stanley). The
details of the question were there most ably discussed.
The case of Prussia had been mentioned. Now, what was
the fact ? Prussia was a despotic government, in which
proselytism was punished by imprisonment. How would
Hon. Members like the idea of seeing a Protestant clergy-
man taken to the county gaol for havinc, warned his
flock against transubstantiation, and a Catholic clergyman
for having warned his flock against heresy ? Such a state
of the law was incompatible with the nature of our institutions.
He would conclude by beseeching of those impartial Members
to whom he appealed not to look to the triumph of a party,
and neglect a national benefit.
Mr. PO ULTER denied that the Bill, as it stood, would
trench improperly on Church property. It was mere mockery
and deception of those on the Opposition side to talk of
Church Reform, or any other Reform. They never thought
of reform until it was thrust upon them, as was proved by
their conduct on the Municipal Bill, the Reform Bill, and
every other measure of amelioration and improvement. They
never recognised an abuse until they were compelled to do so.
The Bill before the House was a far more advantageous one
for the Church than the Church Temporalities Act. It
was framed on a new principle, and did not trench on vested
rights, nor deal in reductions. It was, however, to be
hoped, notwithstanding the present opposition of the
Noble Lord opposite (Lord Mahon), that as he came to
discuss the principle of population, and made it, however
distantly, an ingredient of his argument, that he would
eventually come up to the measure of the Government.
—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) He was sure as his existence
that Hon. Members on the other side must come over to the
principle. With regard to the relative position of the two
Houses be would say one word. If both Houses 'always
agreed there would be no use of the other House ; but then
the differences between them should be of details, not prin-
ciple. There should be a general agreement at the same time
that one House watched and amended the errors of the other ;
but as the Houses were at present placed it was a state of
hopeless hostility. The House of Lords had thrown out
every measure beneficial to Ireland which had been introduced
during the session. The question then was how to remedy
this state of things? A new creation of Peers was out of the
question.—( Hear, hear.) To meet the present difficulty they
should be created,

...-......-." Not in single files,

;in 'the House of
He was opposed to any Bourgtainnibcatlaalinognes.
Lords. He was opposed to the doctrine of the Hon. and
Learned Member for Kilkenny on this subject_( Hear, hear)
—but after the unfair treatment which that Hon. and Learned
Gentleman and his country had received, allowance should be
made for his vehemence. He wished the Lords to retain
their privileges, but be hoped to see those privileges better
exercised.

Mr. PLUMPTRE was understood to say that the measure
proposed by Ministers would tend to the destruction of the
Established Church in Ireland. It was a measure which
would give one party a triumph at the expense of another.
Mr. E. TENNENT would not follow the example of
the lion. Member for Shaftesbury (Mr. Poulter) in discuss..
ing its details, as well because he regarded it as a waste of
time to protract the debate on a measure which all parties
admitted could never pass into a law so long as this appropria-
tion clause was retained—(hear, hear)—as because in its other
main provisions but little difference of opinion existed in the
House. He, of course, excepted those extraordinary provi-
sions for wiping away the tithe arrears, which were at present
accruing due, and for exempting the landlords of tenants at
will from those liabilities which were now imposed upon them
by Lord Stanley's Act, and under which the greater majority
of them had already charged themselves with the tithes of
their estates.

Lord M OR PET H explained—They, were struck out.
Mr. E. TE NNE NT continued—He could state from per.•
sonal knowledge that it was less popular at the present moment,
after two years' consideration, than it was at its first intro-
duction in the last Session of Parliament. Was it justice
to Ireland to keep open this fertile cause of discontent, fos-
tering and irritating from year to year, for no other assign-

able object than the retention in place of one set of men who
could not effect a satisfactory adjustment to the exclusion of
others who could ? Above all, was it justice to the poor Irish
tithepayers who had it in their power for some time past to
*btain an abatement of from 20 to 30 per cent., which the
titheowners were willing to pay them, in consideration of the
increased facilities of collecting their income, which an equi-
table commutation would afford them—was it fair and just
he would say, to them, to declare that they must forego this
advantage, because the abstract resolution of 1835 prohibited
them from enjoying it ? He (Mr. Tennent) knew that those
were considerations which now occupied the minds of men
out of doors who last session were eager for the adoption of
the appropriation clause, and he felt satisfied that in that
House there was no party more anxious for the abandonment
of that clause than the partisans of the Right Hon. Gentle-
men who occupied the opposite bench, provided any decent
expedient could be " devised for shaking off their engage-
ment." The Noble Lord who introduced this Bill ( Lord
Morpeth) professed to regard it as a measure of Reform, and
not as a project of destruction ; and he (Mr. E. Tennent) had
no reason to question the sincerity of his profession ; but
was there any man in his senses who knew the real condi-
tion of Ireland who would say that such were the feelings with
which it was regarded by the Roman Catholics of Ireland ?
The Noble Lord was a stranger in Ireland, and placed in a
position with regard to it above all others obnoxious to mis-
representation and deception, and he might possibly be per-
suaded of the reality of a spirit of moderation which did not
exist ; but those who were in habits of association with the
people, and who heard the indignant expression of their feel-
ings and objects, know too well the extent to which they were
disposed to carry every measure of (so called) Church Reform.
However those sentiments might have been concealed during
the previous Administrations, they had been avowed since the
present Ministry came into office, and, above all, since the
passing of the appropriation resolution, with a boldness which
amply evinced a belief, whether well or ill founded, in a cor-
respondent sympathy on the part of the Government. At the
present moment it was chiefly as a question of principle, and
not as a question of amount, that the present proposition was
especially formidable. As a matter of finance, the 50,0001.
which it proposed to alienate was too contemptible in itself to
afford grounds for contention on the part of the Roman Ca-
tholics. What they asserted was the precedent of confiscation,
and not the acquisition of a sum which—
" Not enriches them, but makes us poor indeed."

But, that precedent being once conceded—the sacredness of
property being once invaded, and the first process of the sa-
crilegious sorytes achieved, could we for a moment imagine
that they would be content to let it remain as a question of
principle, and they would not speedily convert it into a matter
of gain to themselves, and of ruin to the Establishment?
The anxiety which the Noble Lord (Morpeth) had evinced to
manufacture a surplus on which to make the first essay of
this important precedent amply attested that the party were
not disposed to allow the resolution of 1835 to remain a dead
letter. Like the horse in the fable they sought the aid of an
ally, but have effectually saddled themselves with a rider.
There was but one other point connected with the question on
which he (Mr. E. Tennent) was desirous of offering an ob-
servation, and that was the power of Parliament to interfere
in the manner which had been contemplated with the pro-
perty of the Church. He did not mean the absolute and irre-
sponsible power which Parliament possessed to effect on any
other object, but the right and equity of such a proceeding
as was threatened. He did not mean to enter upon the
general question of such a power, but simply to allude to
one of the most prominent arguments which had been used
in favour of it by the supporters of this Bill, and which he
conceived, though constantly adduced, by no means afforded
a case in point. He referred to the argument drawn from
the confiscation of ecclesiastical property at the period of
the Reformation, and its appropriation to the uses of the
Protestant Church. Parliament, they were reminded, gave
its sanction in the reign of Henry VIII. to the transfer of
Church property from the monasteries and Clergy of the
Roman Catholics to Protestant establishments, and conse-
quently, they argued, it possessed an equal power to reconvey
it from the Protestants to the Roman Catholics, or to any
other parties at the present day. The assertion was made
in a total forgetfulness of the relative positions of the Par-
liament and the Church at the period of the Reformation
and at the present time. The Roman Catholic Church
then claimed to hold its property altogether as an inde-
pendent and irresponsible corporation, confessing its alle-
giance to Rome alone, and acknowledging no authority
or right of interference in the Crown or the Parliament.
Mr. AI. O'CONNE L L supported the clause. It had been
said by some that the object of those who promoted the Bill
was the destruction of the Protestant Church, and the eleva-
tion of the Roman Catholics on its ruins. Now this he denied.
God forbid the day should ever come when the Roman Catho-
lic religion in Ireland would be allied with the State ; for as
it was at present he was convinced its doctrines were more
pure, and its duties better discharged, than they would be in
such an event. It had been said by his Hon. and Learned
Friend the Member for Tipperary, that the Noble Lord the
Member for North Lancashire, in order to have been perfectly
consistent, should never have supported the Reform Bill.
Now, he must go a step further, and assert that, in order to
have secured the Noble Lord's consistency, he should never
, have supported the Church Temporalities' Bill.
' Sir F. TRENCH protested against the retention of the
clause. As far as the education of the people was concerned,
no man was a greater advocate for it than himself, because he
conceived it would be the most effectual means of increasing
Protestantism in Ireland, and limiting the pernicious power of
the Catholic priesthood ; but whilst, for this purpose, he was
ready and willing to tax his own private property, he would
not consent to the diminution of their resources or the effici-
ency of the Protestant Church. The clause was, he believed,
part of the bargain made by the Hon. and Learned Member
for Kilkenny with the Government, who were his tools and
instruments, and who sacrificed to him in this respect their
own better judgment and conscientious feeling.
Dr. B A LD WIN said the Opposition betrayed more igno-
rance of the state of Ireland than would disgrace the people
of India.—(Laughter.) The Irish people, he would tell the
House, did object to a Church forced upon them by a foreign
nation.—(oh, oh, and Hear, hear, from the Opposition,
echoed by cheers from the Government benches.) Yes, by a
foreign nation ; and they would ever object to it. The Church
was forced upon the Irish people by the English, who were
foreigners to them.—(Exulting cheers from the Opposition.)
Would England allow a foreign nation to impose a Church on
her ? And the Irish people would sooner see general confu-
sion, and the country dyed in blood, rather than submit to an
Establishment that was alien to them.—(Renewed cheers.)
He would not go behind the bush, but would tell the whole
truth out.—( Cheers and laughter from the same quarter.)
The Irish people were determined to resort to force, and by the
strong hand defend themselves from injustice. They would
have their claims if they were not voluntarily conceded. The
Irish Members did not wish to break the integrity of the
empire.—(Laughter from the Opposition.) But when the
House recollected the physical force of Ireland, the republics
growing up in the west, and the military despotisms established
in the east, they should not overlook the claims of Ireland,
and the value of the support or hostility of her people.
Mr. HARDY looked upon what had fallen from the Hon.
and Learned Doctor—( A laugh)—who had just sat down, to
be a decided intimation that force was about to be resorted to
in Ireland. To come, however, to the arguments of this
question. It had been said that tithes originally belonged to
the Roman Catholic Church. Now that he utterly denied,
and on this ground : there was not one of the errors or super-
stitions belonging to the present Romish religion, but had
crept into it since the time when tithes were originally insti-
tuted. With respect to the prrsent clause of this Bill, he
begged to remind the Committee briefly of the history of the
appropriation principle in that House. In was in 1834 that a
motion of this kind was made by the Hon. Member for St.
Alban's, and then it was opposed by every one of his Majes-
ty's Ministers, as being a matter not at all connected with the
settlement of tithes. In 1835, however, when it had become
an object to drive the Hon. Member for Tamworth, and the
Gentlemen who supported his principles, from the opposite
(the Ministerial) side of the House, then the present Minis-
ters did not hesitate to frame a resolution, which was carried
by the House, that no Bill on this subject would be satisfac-
tory to the House, which did not embody that very principle
of the appropriation of surplus revenues.—(Hear.) The
Noble Lord opposite talked the other night of supporting a
Church Establishment, as if that consisted only in having a
certain number of churches. He thought, however, that there
was something else to be attended to, and that those who un-
dertook the charge of this matter should use all the influence
in their power to promote to promote the growth of that reli-
gion which they considered most likely to benefit the souls and
elevate the moral character of the people. As to converting
the tithes into a rent-charge, he did not conceive that that
would be looked upon as any substantial benefit to the people
of Ireland ; if they objected to it under the denomination of
tithe, he thought they would also cry out against it when it
was demanded of them in the shape of a rent-charge. The
Hon. Member concluded by stating that the members of the
Protestant congregations in Ireland were not diminishing to
the extent sometimes alleged. Out of 1,440 benefices 855
were increasing in the number of their flocks, 495 were sta-
tionary, and only 90 diminishing.
Lord MOR PET H said, the Hog. Member for Scarborough
had attacked his Right Hon. Friend the Attorney-General for
Ireland. Now, his (Lord Morpeth's) memory went far
enough back to recollect an attack which the Hon. Gentleman
had made on his Noble Friend the present Lord Chancellor of
I Ireland when he (Lord Plunkett) filled the office of Attorney-
General. And, from what he could call to mind of that
event, he was certainly induced to think that attacks on At-
torney-Generals were not amongst the most fortunate of the
Hon. Gentleman's reminiscences.—( Cheers and laughter.)
The Hon. Member for Kent had also addressed the
Committee; and, though the general terms of his speech
were soft as snow-falls, yet they were not, he must sav, alto-
gether unmixed with some hard sayings against his Majesty's
Ministers, containing the charge that the Protestant religion
was not sufficiently appreciated by them. Now, he was wil-
ling to give the Hon. Gentleman credit for an anxious desire
to promote the Protestant religion ; but when the Hon. Gen-
tleman persisted in saying that we did not in our hearts and
consciences appreciate the value of the Protestant religion,
which we professed, he must tell him that he was endeavour-
ing to fathom motives which he could not reach, and departing
from that spirit of candour which he no doubt wished to couple
with the other virtues that adorned his character.—( Cheers. )
With respect to the argument of the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman who spoke last, he did not wish to grapple with that,
because it did not appear to him to carry on the face of it so
arbitrary an assumption that every thing which happened to
be out of the pale of his own opinions and religion must ne-
cessarily be immersed in flagrant error. For his part, be could
only say that he would not assert that salvation was not to be
found within the Church of Scotland or the Roman Catholic
Church.--( Hear, hear.) Whilst ho was ready to resist any
attack on the principle on which the Church Establishment

was founded, still he confessed he felt comparatively erilous to
those objections to be urged against the appropriation clause
which were merely founded on the large amount still retained
for the provision of the Established Church in Ireland.—( Hear. )
The Right Hon. Baronet had pointed out some inaccuracy in
that part of his statement which bore upon the question, on
the number of members and the extent of country attached to
each pastoral cure in the churches of the three countries. Now
it would be in the recollection of the House, that he had spoke
subsequent to the time at which his Noble Friend the Mem-
ber for North Lancashire had made his motion ; and if he
allowed himself to be guided by his Noble Friend's calcula-
tions, he did so because he thought his Noble Friend had too
much of the skill as well as the zeal of the advccate to -,weaken
his cause by any incorrect statements in support of it.—( Hear,
hear.) However, a mistake was undoubtedly made, and he
was now most happy to give the Committee a correct state-
ment. The Noble Lord then read a statement, the substance
of which, it appeared, was to this effect :—ln England and
Wales the number of benefices were 10,718, the average
income 2851. for each, the population 1,014, and the number
of acres 3,460. In Scotland the number of benefices was
900, the income for each 2401., the population 2,000, the
number of acres 2,148, and the square miles 231. In Ire-
land the number of benefices belonging to the Established
Church were 1,250, the average income 2941., the population
681, and the number of square miles 25. He considered it
necessary to have said thus much with respect to the state-
ment which the Right Hon. Baronet had made. The Hon.
and Learned Member for Bandon (Mr. Sergeant Jackson),
was pleased, in a speech which he made to the House on a
former night, not only to throw a degree of general discredit
over the Report of the Commissioners of Public Instruction,
but also to bring forward specific statements in support of his
allegations. He (Lord Morpeth) had upon that occasion no
opportunity of replying to the Learned Sergeant, and if he
had he must, necessarily ignorant as he was of the particular
circumstances connected with this part of the subject, have
done no more than express his entire disbelief in the accuracy
or justice of the statements which had been then made.
Since that he had been overwhelmed, or he might rather say
flooded, with remonstrances from the parties whom the asser-
tions of the Hon. and Learned Sergeant had affected ; from
Mr. Sergeant D'Oyley, Mr. Barrington, and Mr. Hamilton,
and other Gentlemen stated in the Commission, who expressed
their opinions with an energy and warmth which he was anxious
to dilute, and which made him desirous of believing that the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman was a dupe, and not the origi-
nator, as to those statements which he had made. These Gen-

tlemen requested, they required of him, in justice to their cha-
racters as Gentlemen, and to their trustworthiness as men em-
ployed in the discharge of a public duty, to submit that expla-
nation to the House which he would do as briefly as he could,
consistently with what was due both to the House itself and to
them.--( Hear.) The particular cases to which the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman referred to were four in number ; the
first, and that which alone he was bound in justice to say the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman had a len- to stand upon, was
with respect to the Kildare-street schools. The other three
were with reference to the population returns, giving the
numbers belonging to the Established Church in each of the
benefices. The st of these statements to which he would
call the attention of the Committee was from the gentleman
who acted as secretary.

" Dublin, June 11, 1836.
" He first asserts that the Commissioners only report the
number of schools under the Kildare-place Society' to be
236, whilst he states the true number to be 1,050. Now, it is.
worthy of observation, in reference to these schools, that 0111
the 4th day of October, 1834, the Commissioners of Public
Instruction, applied by letter to the Kildare-place Society for
a return of the schools in connection with it. The applica-
tion was refused, but a series of annual reports were sent,
ending however with that for 1831. These reports merely
contained the list of the schools, of which the masters had re-
ceived • gratuities' as appearing to be deserving of encou-
ragement.' A list like this could have been of little values
a guide to the Commissioners at any time, but it was of no
value at all. After a lapse of three years, during which pe-
riod as is now stated, the changes had been so extensive. thLt
the number of schools was reduced from near 1,700 to 1,050.
Thus the society declined giving any assistance towards iden-
tifying their schools, as other like institutions did.
" In the next place the report does not profess to state the
different establishments under' which the schools may be for
any other purpose than that of pecuniary support. The in-
quiry was a financial one. The heading of the report, there-
fore, is Sources of Support' of each school ; and after refer-
ring, in about twenty instances, from the schools returned in
the report of the Society for 1831 to the reports of the COm-
missioners for the dioceses of Down, Connor, and Dromore,
I find that every school has been reported upon, with the
statement that its source of support' is payments by the
children,' 101. a year from Lord A.,' and the like. It may
be very true that the Kildare-place Society give gratuitous
rewards to the masters or grant books for the children in every
one of these cases, and thus entitle itself to number these
schools amongst its dependents ; but the Society did not there-.
by become a source of support' in the sense in which that
expression was understood by most of the visiting Commis-
sioners, particularly the two who visited the above diocese-5.
In every case where it was shown that the schools deY.ive
pecuniary support from the Kildare-place Society, it has 'been
so stated.

" There is however an obvious error in the general report
at page 15, where it professes to sum up the schools in con-
nection with the Kildare-place Society. This should have
been explained as meaning a connection in the: way of sup-
port. That such must be its true meaning is'. evident, in-
asmuch as the heads of the summaries cannot differ in kind
from those of the reports. The latter give merely the source
of pecuniary support. How then could the former sum up
both these and all other sources of reward, nominal conned-
tion, &c. ? _ _

" Mr. Sergeant Jackson next alleges error in the popula-
tion returns ; and, to prove this, asserts, that the number of
members of the Established Church in the parish of Dromore
was returned by the enumerator at 56, whilst the Commis-
sioners have only reported 49, insinuating that the motive was
to reduce the number below 50. Now, perhaps, the in-
cumbent may have had the opposite motive ; for it was proved
by evidence, with which, as the visiting Commissioner informs
me, the incumbent, after some time, expressed himself satisfied
that he had included in his census of the parish a family of
seven persons not belonging to it. It appeared that these
seven persons properly belonged to the adjoining parish of
Killenane, and were assigned to it by the Commissioner.
" The enumerators had taken a wrong common boundary
in 1831. The Commissioner merely adjusted the conflicting-
claims of the two neighbouring incumbents.
" Mr. Jackson next asserts that he had seen the census
made by the excellent clergyman' of the parish of Desert-
serges, near Bandon, and that the members reported were 50
under the actual number of Protestants of the Established.
Church. Now, it so happens that the number in the report,.
viz. 432, is precisely the same as that given in the original
census made and delivered to the Commissioner by the very
same clergyman. The Commissioner took the number from
the census; so that if what Mr. Sergeant Jackson states be
correct, this excellent clergyman' has shown him, a census
differing from that which he had lately sworn to contain a true
census of the population.
" The Right Hon. the Viscount Morpeth, &c. &c."
The next was from Mr. Acheson Lyle.
" Gardiner's-place, June 11.

_ -
" MY LORD—In the report of the debate upon the Irish
Church Bill, Mr. Sergeant Jackson is reported to have said—
' That Mr. Hudson of Springfarm, in the comity of Wicklow,
had been requested by the Roman Catholic Clergyman of the
parish in which he resided, to make a return of all the Protes-
tants and Catholics employed by him, and he gave a return of
fifty-six Protestants in his house and employment, and ten
Roman Catholics. He received a letter from the Roman Ca-
tholic Clergyman thanking him for the return, but when the
Commissioner appeared in the month of December, a list was
handed to him by the Roman Catholic Clergyman of only
thirteen out of the fifty-six Protestants. He asked again was
it fair, was it safe to act upon such return?'
" As I was the Commissioner who visited the parish re-
specting which the above observations were made, I think it
right to give your Lordship a correct statement of the facts,
that you may be able (as I think you will) to correct the mis-
representation.
" Your Lordship is aware that both the census of 1831 anti
our enumeration was founded upon the number of inmates irs.
every dwelling-house within the parish, those persons only
being reckoned in each family who slept in the house at the
time the enumerator visited it. A return, therefore, of the
number of persons, Protestants and Roman Catholics, who
were in the house and employment of any person, could mot
have been adopted by the Commissioners, or used for any
purpose. Those who did not reside in the house of the per-
son making it, must be enumerated in their own dwelling..
houses. Whether any such return was made by Mr. Hudson
to Mr. Stennett, the parish priest of Delsany, I know not ;
but if it were, it is plain that it could have been of no manner
of use.

" My report of the number of Protestants in Mr. Hudson's
family was made from an original census of the Protestants
made by the Rev. Thomas Grey, the Protestant curat e of the
parish of Delsaney, verified by him upon oath, in wb ich the
number of Mr. Hudson's family is stated to be 13.
" The list made out under the directions of. Mr. steonett,
the Roman Catholic clergyman, gives precisely the
same
number—as does the census made by the enumr4ratc.r of the
parish employed by the Commissioners, and bolmcoyitain the
names of many Protestant labourers H
in the who may
Parish
have been in the employment of Mr. udson. It is a gross
misrepresentation, however, to say that because t'aey are not
returned with Mr. Hudson's family, that therefore they have
been subtracted from the Protestant population of the parish,
and that our reports are not to be depended tip”..
" I enclose the original census made by
.1 dr. Grey, and
the list handed me by the Roman Catholic. priest! which was
made of each townland separately ; in both
.of. which you will
see Mr. Hudson's family returned as consistr.ig of 13 persoes,
all Protestants.
" I understand that
e• Mr. Hamilton writes you respecting the
other misrepresentations in Mr. JaFkson's speech, and r
only
therefore trouble your Lordship with the above, as it person-
ally concerns me.—l have the honor to be,
" My Lord, your obedient servant,
" ACHESON LyLE.
" The Lord Viscount Morpeth, &c."
These documents proved the accuracy of the returns in every
fact and particular attested in the Report. Now let the two
propositions for the adjustment of this question be
emnPar ed.
The lowest amount of annual income according to this Bill
could not exceed 1001. exclusive of glebe. Now, sur,pose
they were to stop with the measure where it was propost
Id by
the Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire, au( I they
were to leave out all the appropriating and re-disti .buting
clauses, it should be borne in mind by the Committee that
it had been already decided that 30 per cent. shemlr , he de-
ducted from the present amount at tithe composition us the

I

means of supplying the future rent-charge. Now, the num-
ber of the livings to which he had just alluded, and in which
the income was limited to 1001. per annum, exclusive of glebe,
would, under their Bill, be 1201. But let the Bill be taken
divested of the appropriation clauses, and the income of this
class of livings would then not amount at most to more than
1001. a year without glebe (many of them falling far short
of thlt :um), and the number of livings thus circumstanced
would be 237.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Thus it would be
seen that those who had the most severe duty imposed on
them would be worse provided for by the Noble Lord's pro-
position than that of the Government. He was prepared to
maintain that this measure would have the effect of much
more nearly apportioning ecclesiastical revenues and duties ;
and, in addition to this advantage, it had this sovereign and
crowning recommendation, that in the present perverse and
lamentable state exhibited by the Church in that country, the
clergy of which might well be said to be composed of mili-
tants or litigants—of men who are either starving or enduring
the worst privations, or who were drawing down upon their
heads the curses of those who were supposed to be their flocks.
--(Cheers from the Ministerial, and some faint cries of Oh !
from the Opposition Benches.) I dont, said the Noble Lord,
say that this is a right state of things. I don't say that it is
either proper or Christian that it should so continue, but I only
lament that such is the fact.—( Renewed cheers.) Coupling
the other provisions of this measure with that which has, I
am led to believe, the sanction of public opinion, without which
no adjustment can be real or satisfactory, we hope and think
that there is sufficient advantage resulting from it to the bulk
of the people to induce them to give it their cordial acquies-
cence.—( Much cheering.)
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON did not impute any improper
motives to these gentlemen, but he did undertake to show
that the returns which they made were not correct. In the pro-
vince of Armagh there were three dioceses in which the Com-
missioners stated that there was not a single school in connec-
tion with the Kildare-street Society. Now, in the province
of Armagh alone there were more schools connected with this
Society than tile Commissioners gave credit for throughout all
Ireland. But with respect to the three dioceses of Connor,
Down, and Dromore, he could prove that there was a return
of 150 schools made to one of the Commissioners named
Strangways, and which, when it was sent to the Board in
Dublin, it was answered that they received no information to
that effect from Mr. Strangways. Now he could prove that
this return was put into the hands of Mr. Strangways by the
clergyman of the parish, giving an account of the number of
masters and scholars. Yet these dioceses were returned as
having " none" in the Report of the Commissioners. He
asked, after such evidence, was he not justified in using the
language which he did with respect to these Commissioners?
In the parish of St. George, Dublin, the Report of the Com-
missioners gave but four schools, while there were 12 actually
existing. It was a curious fact, with regard to these returns,
that whereas the Commissioners of Education Inquiry in 1824
and 1825, returned 11,823 schools, as established in Ire-
land, the Commissioners of Public Instruction who reported
in 1835-36 stated the number to be but 9,567 ; while at the
same time it was perfectly notorious that within the last ten
years education had advanced considerably in that country.
But there was another circumstance even still more curious
than the one he had mentioned. The Commissioners of Edu-
cation Inquiry of 1824 and 1825 gave the number of children
educated at the schools in connection with the Kildare-place
Society as 663,946, while the Commissioners of Public In-
struction of 1335-36, stated the number at 568,564. He con-
tended, therefore, that the. Report of the Commissioners of
Public Instruction, as regarded the schools, was altogether in-
correct. He would next allude to the parish of Dysart, in the
county of Cork. His informant in this case was the Hon.
and Rev. Charles Bernard, who in consequence of the ad-
vanced age of the incumbent, the Rev. Mr. Longford, per-
formed the parochial duties. Upon the authority of that in-
dividual he was in a situation to assert that there were fifty
more Protestants residing in the parish of Dysart than the re-
turns gave to it.—( Hear.) Then with regard to the Rev.
Mr. Hudson, of Wicklow. The Returns gave but 13 Pro-
testants in that gentleman's house, while, in point of fact, there
were 13 Protestants actually residing in his house, and no less
than 56 more in his employment.—( Hear, hear.) It was on
these grounds that he asserted that the Reports were false.
Mr. H. BRIDGEM A N would be glad to know from the
}for. and Learned Sergeant whether there were not two
:tellools in the county of Clare in connection with the Kil-
&re-place Society, on the estate of Captain Scott, his ( Mr.
Sergeant Jackson's) brother-in-law, which were now inhabited
t he one by Captain Scott's coachman, and the other by a car-
penter?

Mr. Sergeant JACKSON admitted that such was the
fact, but added that the circumstance was absolutely occasioned
by the Catholic priests having interfered to prevent the parents
from sending their children to the schools.
Mr. FINN wished to know if the two schools alluded to by
the Hon. Member for Ennis were included in the returns read
by the Hon. Member for Bandon ?
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON replied that there was not a sin-
gle s•chool mentioned in the return he had read which was not
In active operation.
Mr. S HE IL.—The Hon. and Learned Gentleman has
pronounced a funeral oration upon the Kildare-street So-
ciety. That body is, for all Parliamentary purposes, ex-
tinct. The Hon. Member for Tamworth withheld the
grant to it, and it is somewhat singular that the Learned
Sergeant did not recollect, while he was inveighing against
the new system of education, that the Members for North
Lancashire and for Tamworth, with one of whom the new
system originated, the other of whom continued, and even
augmented, the grant, were beside him.—(Loud Cheers.)
Some persons are of opinion, that after the very significant
intimation which has been given by that House which is
sometimes called the Upper (and it must be owned that its
tone corresponds with its designation), it is useless to carry
this Bill through its remaining stages in this House, and
worse than useless to send it, for the purposes of abrupt re-
pudiation. to the House of Lords. I do not concur in that
view.—( Cheers.l, I do not think this Bill will suffer by
the condemnation of those to whom every opportunity ought
to be afforded of confirming the impression which they have
taken al much pains to produce in their own regard. If
they wilt not do justice to Ireland, let us give them means
enough to perform another act of justice, of which Ireland
will not be the object.—( Hear, hear.) For my part, not-
withstanding- the temporary obstacles in the way of this
measure, of its ultimate success I have no doubt. Mark the
progress which this question has made within the last four
Years. In 1832 it was treated with a disregard amounting
almost trt.,disdain ; and now we not only command a ma-
jority of this House, but I firmly believe that the majority
of the English people are on our side.—(Loud ironical
cheers from the Opposition.) I repeat it. In this, the Peel
Parliament, we have a majority of the representatives of
the people, and by that test I abide. Sir, I think it suf-
ficient to peruse the preamble of this Bill, and to reflect
upon the facts and inferences which that preamble con-
tains, in order to be convinced that this question must be
settled, and that the principle on which this Bill is
founded affords the only basis on which it can rest.—( Cheers.)
If the ponderous folios of the Irish Parliament were upon that
table, I should be able to prove that almost every penal Act
has some reference to tithes. " Laws," says Arthur Young,
" fit oply for the meridian of Barbary, were passed to repress
excesses which oppression in the exaction of tithes had pro-
duced." The Riot Act," says Grattan, " was a Tithe Act,
and the Wir iteboy Act was a Tithe Act." It is now upwards
of 70 years wince that great man raised his voice in the Irish
Parliament to exhibit those anomalies against which we are
to this day protesting—a Catholic people, a Protestant Church
--millions upon one side, thousands upon the other. Against
this monstrous abuse, this inversion of every course of policy,
with a matchless eloquence he unremittingly and vehemently
inveighed.—(Hear, hear.) That illustrious man, whose de-
votion to his country, whose elevation, moral arid intellectual,
was never disputed, is no more : he lies hard by—the depo-
sitory of the glorious dead ; one of the greatest Statemen
ever produced by Ireland was borne by its greatest warrior.
It was a noble and heart-touching sight to see Arthur
Duke of Wellington sustaining the remains of Henry
!Grattan to the grave. I wonder—l shall be pardoned by
the illustriouii survivor for wondering—when sadly and
slowly he laid him down, the Great Captain whispered to
himself, that it would have been well if the policy of his great
compa,li it, from whom he differed in life, but whom in death
lie honour ed. with regard to their common country, bad at an
earlier period been adopted. He has lived to carry that policy
upon one gr-'at question into effect. I remember, it would in-
deed be ditierilt to forget, his exclamation, when, in speaking
of the necessity by which concession was dictated, he pro-
tested that, rather than his country should for a single month
be exposed to the horrors of a civil war, he would gladly lay
Blown his life.—( Hear.) It was a noble sentiment, worthy of
teat conjunction of humanity and of heroism which is found in
the truly brave. Would that those who are perpetually giving
Way to a dark and sanguinary wish, who say that it must come
to a fight at last, who deal in frightful inuendos, and who
Would shed blood as heedlessly as they quaff wine—would that
they cc, nld impress that merciful sentiment upon their own
hearts, p.id that the celebrated person who gave it utterance
Would ext,,nd it beyond the question to which it was applied;
and in fol.:ON-ing up that great measure to its necessary conse-
quences, in order to avert the evils that impend upon his coun-
try, lie wouiil wake to the crowning immolation. There are
in one province in Ireland 45,000 Protestants, and one
Million one hundred thousand Catholics. Propose a new dis-
tribution after that 1 New distribution ! until new appropria-
tion became irresistible, of new distribution you never spoke,
of new distribution you never thought, no not even when
Queen i\Tsb was with you, and tickled you with a tithe-pig's
tail, of new distribution you never dreamed. This single
fact is sufficient to establish the surplus, if there were no other.
What e the spiritual wants of the Irish Protestants ? How
much mc ney do they want? The Scotch Church has not
three hundred thousand pounds; why should the Irish
Church haye more? Because the Irish Church has got
Bishops. You cut them down to twelve ; they are not to
be more ; bow does it rppear that they ought not to be less?
Why should the Primate have more than the Lord Chan-
eellor ? the Bishop' of Derry mire than Chief Justice? Your
dik'culties about a surplus are imaginary, and are, indeed, of
Your own creation. Apply the principle of the Church Tem-
Porahl,ies Act, and a surplus will be straight produced. You
dirninis lied the number of Bishops ; why should not the
number of parsons be also cut down ? You provided that bene-
fices, in 7- ilia divine service had not been performed for three.
Years. mizt.t be suppressed. Do not suppress, but consolidate,
and diffiecity is at an end.—( Cheers.) But how is the sur-
plus to ? To none, it is said, but Protestant eccle-
siastical Inaposeg. But I shall not enter into abstractions ; it
is far bete to devise some construction of the words " eccle-
siastical pd-pose; by which all differences may be adjusted."
When men .are determined to quarrel, they find ingredients
for hostility- in a word : when awn are anxious for accommo-
dation, they- discover the waterials for friendship in a phrase.
How fortun, Ile it would be it we could devise some liberal but
sot illegitin,ato interpretation, )17 which the purposes of

Christian morality and all the feelings attached to it could be
promoted, even if it were necessary to strain an expression,
and it might perhaps be justifiable to do so, in order that peace
might be extracted from it. But no violence need be done to
language in order to obtain from ecclessiastical purposes what
I may venture to call a benevolent, Christian, and, consider-
ing all the evils it may remedy, a merciful signification. Sir,
I insist that the instruction of the people in the precepts of
morality is a Protestant ecclesiastical purpose. The truth
you believe to be with you (for the sake of argument let it be
for a moment supposed) : the increased intelligence of the peo-
ple must be subservient to its propagation. You perpetually
(in my opinion without the least reason) complain that the
priests, for their sinister purpose, keep the people in dark-
ness ; that ignorance is an expedient of sacerdotal dominion,
and that they avail themselves of their barbarism for their
subjugation. Break the chain; throw off the yoke, and edu-
cate the people. You hare tried every other resource of pro-
selytism—confiscation, penalty, national degradation—all has
been resorted to except public instruction ; put the experiment
to the test.—( Cheers.) This day the respectable chaplain of
this House, on the behalf of every man that hears me, no
matter what may be the difference of sect, offered up an orison
for the union and knitting of men's hearts in the brotherhood
of Christianity together. I appeal to the sentiments and to
the language contained in that benevolent invocation, in order
to rescue your religion from the misrepresentations of its pro-
fessors. These sentiments and that language are the language
and the sentiments of every Christian in every part of the
world where the prophecy, in regard to the name of our Re-
deemer, is fulfilled. Yes, Sir, the knitting of men's hearts
together in the brotherhood of benevolence, the propaga-
tion of the habits of pure Christian morality—the diffusion
of those feelings of forbearance and of charity which teach
us to love one another, is a Christian purpose.—( Hear,
hear.) It is, I hope, a Protestant purpose—it is, lam
sure, a gospel purpose. When, to shepherds abiding in the
mountains, attending flocks by night, it was announced that
there should be glory to God in the highest, with that angelic
intimation there was associated a prediction scarcely less holy,
that there should be peace on earth.—(Cheers.) But for us
there is in the name of religion to be no peace. There is in
the name of religion to be malice, hatred, and the
name of religion, our distractions are to be perpetuated, and
our rancours are to be exasperated—every bitter spring of ca-
lamity, every fountain of atrocity, is to be unsealed—the soil is
to be drenched in the blood of the people, and, at last, in the
name of religion, the fell horrors of civil warfare are to be let
loose. To God, we were told a few days ago, to none but
God, are the men on whose decision our destinies must rest
responsible. In the smile to which that unexpected announce-
ment gave rise, I did not participate—oh, that they would feel
that the men who abuse the power to do good, by the infliction
of incalculable harm, to the power which reads the secrets of
the heart are, indeed, responsible, and that for the calamities
in which they will have been instrumental, they will have to
pass a terrible account.—(The Hon. and Learned Member
resumed his seat amid loud cheers.)
Lord STANLEY said that whoever expected to hear from
the Hon. and Learned Member for Tipperary the display of a
vivid imagination, and a flow of brilliant and polished elo-
quence, would seldom be disappointed. The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman had observed that at the first annun.
ciation of the Gospel it had been declared that its object was
to bring on earth peace and good will amongst men. To
an authority so solemn he (Lord Stanley) should be sorry
to refer with anything like levity, but he must be allowed
to remind the Hun. and Learned Gentleman that it was
one of the first principles of Christianity to adapt itself to
every state of society, and that it inculcated on its disciples
that they should not resist the ordinations of man, that they
should submit themselves to the authorities of their country,
and that they should render to every man what was his due.—
( Hear, hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman said
that the people of England were favourable to his views ; and
that it would otherwise be strange that the majority of their
representatives should maintain the same opinions. But let
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman speak out at once, and
tell the people of England what his objects really were.—
( Hear, hear.) Let not the Hon. Gentleman delude himself
with the belief—let not his Majesty's Government delude
themselves with the belief—that because a bare and insigni-
ficant majority of that House might be prepared to give their
sanction to the delusive and mischievous provisions of the
Bill under consideration, therefore a majority of the people
of England, ay, or a majority of the Members of that House,
would be disposed to proceed to the consummation which
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman showed was the true aim
hich he had in view, namely, the abolition of the Pro-
testant Church Establishment in Ireland.—( Hear, hear,
hear.) The people of England were with them, were
they?—( Hear, hear, hear.) Did the people of England,
then, wish for the abolition of the Protestant Church Esta-
blishment in Ireland ? What the people of England wished
to see in Ireland was the restoration of that peace of which
the expectation held out by the Bill was utterly delusive.
Let the Hon. and Learned Gentleman and his friends say
to the people of England openly and publicly what many
of them said in private.—( Hear, hear.) Let his Noble
Friend look to his majority, and ask himself in his closet
of how many of that majority the object was the abo-
lition of the Protestant Church Establishment in Ireland.
The Honourable and Learned Member for Tipperary
asserted that the people of England began to ask them-
selves of what use was a Church Establishment at all in Ire-
land. If that really were the question, in God's name let it
be discussed fairly and openly.—( Hear, hear.) Let the peo-
ple of England, and of Scotland, and of Ireland join issue on
the question whether or not there should be a Church Esta-
blishment in Ireland ? He should be glad of so undisguised
a proposition ; for he hated this kind of bush-fighting.—
( Hear, hear.) Those who thought with him ( Lord Stanley)
laboured under this difficulty. If they declared that the ob-
ject in view was the destruction of the Protestant Church
Establishment in Ireland, they were met by clamorous pro-
testations that nothing could be further from the thoughts of
the supporters of the Bill ; the only purpose of which was
to take from the extravagant and exorbitant revenues of the
Protestant Church in Ireland the surplus, after providing for
the full supply of religious instruction to the Protestants of
Ireland, for the purpose of applying it to education, which it
was contended was a strictly Protestant and Ecclesiastical
purpose. When the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said
that if they bad a desire to extend the Protestant religion in
Ireland, they would educate the people—( Some Hon. Mem-
ber here uttered a shrill and strange cry )—a little educa-
tion might occasionally be well applied in that House—
(Laughter and cheers)—he (Lord Stanley) would say
that the Honourable and Learned Gentleman well knew
that such would not be the result of the Bill. He well knew
that the object of the Bill was anything but the promotion
of the Protestant religion in Ireland.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
The Hon. Member for Kerry, with a want of logic that was
astonishing, contended that because, by the Church Tempo-
ralities Act, there was a reduction of ten Protestant bishop-
rics in Ireland, there should therefore be a reduction of
the parochial clergy. Why were those ten bishoprics re-
duced? Because it was considered that the hierarchy was
disproportionately largo to the clergy. —( Hear, hear.) And
because the just proportion had been established, and be-
cause the ecclesiastical revenue so saved had been applied to
augment the stipends of the working clergy, who had no
other mode of obtaining a competent remuneration for their
labours, the Hon. and Learned Member came to the
illogical conclusion that the proportion between the bishops
and the clergy thus adjusted, ought again to be disturbed.—
( Hear, hear 1) Why ? Because, as the Hon. and Learned
Member asserted, the number of the Protestant clergy
in Ireland was too great for the number of the Protestant
laity. On that proposition he (Lord Stanley) took his
stand. It was dangerous to give the State an interest in
reducing Church property as much as possible. Such an
arrangement must eventually lead to a disturbance of the har-
mony which ought to subsist between the Church and the
State ; and render the former obnoxious to the excessive eco-
nomy of the latter. If, however, that dangerous principle
were admitted, it became necessary that every possible guard
should be put upon its injurious operation. Yet in the clauses
of the Bill under consideration (to which, by the bye, no lion.
Member had thought it worth while to refer) the dangerous
principle which he had described was worked out by the most
dangerous details. By this Bill the State would have a sepa-
rate pecuniary interest at variance with the pecuniary interest
of the Church. What security was there that in any dispute
between the two, that House would not consult the tempo-
rary pecuniary interests of their constituents to the lasting in-
terests of the Church? And in whom were the powers com-
prehended in the Bill to be vested? In the ecclesiastical Com-
missioners, and in them alone. The Lord-Lieutenant of Ire-
land would be a mere cipher in their hands. What were they
to be empowered to do ? To divide onto unite benefices ; to fix
boundaries for new benefices, and to give names to them; to fix
the incomes of new ministers ; to consider the suitableness of
glebes ; to decide on the appropriation of glebes to churches, cha-
pels, &c., and other matters of equal importance. And who were
the persons to be thus empowered? Were they persons celebrated
for their attachment to the Protestant Church ? Were any of
them persons at the head of that Church ? No such thing.
They were to be members of the Established Church ; but it
was evident that they would be the creatures of his Noble
Friend, or of any other Minister, let him be adverse, favour-
able, or indifferent to the interests of the Protestant Esta-
blishment. They would be his nominees; bound to do his
bidding, and removeable at his pleasure.—( Hear.) Would
they be enjoined to take care that the Protestant clergy had
enough ? No ; their duty would be to take care that
they had not too much, to take care that their
stipends just passed the point of starvation.—( Hear, hear.)
It was not merely a question of 50,0001. a year; it was a
question of establishing a principle which might hereafter be
applied to dishonest purposes. Ilis Noble Friend had com-
pared the condition of the clergy of the Church of Ireland
with the condition of the clergy of the Church of England.
It appeared according to his Noble Friend's statements that
the average income of the benefices in Ireland was 294/. ; in
England 2851. It also appeared that the average number of
members of the Church of England in the parishes of Ireland
was 640, while the average number of all religious persuasions
in the parishes of England was 1,017.
Lord MORPETH had stated that the average number of
members of the Church of England in the parishes of Eng-
land was 1,017

Lord STANLEY thanked his Noble Friend for his correc-
tion. The average number of members of the Church of
England in the parishes of England was 1,017. In England
the average size of the parishes was five miles square ; in Ire-
land the average size of the parishes was 25 miles square.
Now he was sure that his Noble Friend would not pretend to
maintain that a clergyman who did duty in a parish 25 miles
square, containing 640 inhabitants of his persuasion, had not a
lunch more laborious task than a clergyman who did duty in a
parish only five square miles, but having 1,017 inhabitants
of his persuasion. Nor, he was sure, would his Noble
Friend contend that 2241. was an exorbitant average of
salary for a clergyman of the Church of England doing duty

in a parish five and twenty miles square. His Noble Friend
stated that under this Bill, there would be only 129 clergy-
men in Ireland with incomes under 1001. a-year, while
now there were 287 so situated ; and had exclaimed, " See
what an improvement this is I " But nobody thought of
leaving things as they were. But his Noble Friend had not
stated the case fairly. He forgot. that under the provisions of
the Bill, of 1,259 benefices, the Ecclesiastical Commissioners
might, if they thought proper, reduce 799 to 100/. a-year.
Now he (Lord Stanley) could not consent thus to leave the
pecuniary interests of the Protestant Church Establishment
in Ireland subject to the caprice of any Government. He
could not sit down without adverting to another fallacy on
this subject. His Noble Friend at the head of his Majesty's
Government had, with a rashness which belonged to a
younger man, admitted, in the other House of Parliament,
that the Bill would inflict a heavy blow on the Protestant
interest in Ireland.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Let it go forth
to the people that the Prime Minister of England acknow-
ledged that the measure he proposed would inflict a severe
blow on Protestantism in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) " I
hnow," said the Premier, "that we are inflicting a severe blow
upon Protestantism in reland, hut (let the House mark the
sequel) we cannot help it."—( Cheers.) Was this a fit argu-
ment for the Prime Minister of England to use ?—( Cheers.)
" We know our measure is dangerous to the Protestant Estab-
lished Church—we know that it inflicts a severe blow upon
Protestantism ; but we cannot help it—( Cheers)—and we can-
not help it because we are driven on to it by those who are aim-
ing at other things—( Great cheering from the Opposition)__..
because we can neither defend our measure on its own merits
nor resist the power of those who compel us to adopt it.".—.
( Continued cheering.) The House was told they must give con-
tentment to 7,000,000 of Irishmen.—Great cheering and
laughter, in the midst of which the cheer of an Hon. Gentle-
man behind the Treasury bench was remarkably conspicuous.)
Perhaps the Hon. Gentleman whose cheers were always so
significant, and which sometimes drew down upon him a degree
of notice not usually extended to other Members, would tell
him, from the accurate investigation he had made into all the
merits of the Bill, whether, when by his significant cheer he
expressed so ready and decisive an opinion, he thought, vary-
ing in that respect from all the rest of the House, that this
measure would afford the slightest degree of contentment to
the 7,000,000 of Irishmen who were spoken of.—( Cheers.)
Let him (Lord Stanley) say that out of this 7,000,000 there
were somewhere about 1,500,000 who had no direct interest
whatever in the settlement of this question; and that fact the
Hon. Gentleman, who should know as well as he (Lord
Stanley), could tell him.—( Hear, hear.) But then it was
said it was not the amount of the reduction that was to be
considered, but the feelings of the people.—(Cheers.) The
Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Nottingham cheered
that expression : then of course he was quite prepared to go to
the full extent required to gratify the feelings of the people of
Ireland.—( Cheers.) And let him ask, whether the Hon. Mem_
ber for Kilkenny, in a recent publication addressed to the people
of England, had held out a prospect of that peace on earth,
and goodwill towards men, which it had been promised should
follow the adoption of this Bill ?—( Hear, hear.) In that
publication the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said, reduce the
Established clergy 30 per cent.; apply 50,000/. a year of the
revenues of the Church to the purposes of general education ;
but the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said nothing of the
40,000 which was to be appropriated to the consolidated Fund;
and he (Lord Stanley) would say nothing of it either. It
appeared, however, from all that was stated upon the report,
that of the 90,000/. to be deducted from the revenues of the
Church, 50,0001. only were to be devoted to the purposes
of education. But when the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
in his address to the people of England spoke of the applica-
cation of that sum to the purposes of education, did he hold out
the slightest prospect that such an application of the revenues
of the Protestant Established Church would afford anything
like perfect contentment to;the 7,000,000 ?—( Cheers.) If then
they were told that the present measure, though it were (as he
believed it was) objectionable to the people of England--
though it inflicted, as the Prime Minister had declared, severe
blow upon Protestantism in Ireland—though it were carried
only by a bare majority in the House of Commons, and opposed
by a very great majority in the House of Lords—if, in spite of
all this, they were told that the Bill was still necessary for
the sako of giving contentment to Ireland, was it too much to
require, was it unreasonable to ask, what that contentment
would be ?--( Cheers, and cries of " Ob.") The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman, in his address to the people of England,
said, " The Rev. Mr. Longueville insists that I shall pay him
50/. a year for tithes ; and because I deem this demand, as it
manifestly is, most unjust and unreasonable, he causes a bill
to be filed against me in the Court of Exchequer.—(Hear,
hear.) But the Hon. and Learned Gentleman did not say
that if this Bill passed he should be content to pay 70 per
cent. of the present amount of tithe to the Rev. Mr. Longue-
ville.—( Cheers.) On the contrary, he said, alluding to Mr.
Longueville, " I think my religion better than his ; and there-
fore I never will pay him one shilling—no, not one farthing.—
(Loud and continued cheering from the Opposition.) Here
was a distinct assertion on the part of the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman that he never would pay one farthing in the
shape of tithe to a Protestant clergyman ; and will, ? Be-
cause he thought the religion he professed better than the re-
ligion of the State.—( Renewed cheering from the Opposition.)
That might be the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's private
opinion ; but was the Legislature to sanction or to recognize
the doctrine of every man who thought his own religion bet-
ter than that of the State ?—( Cheers. ) It was impossible
that the Legislature could do so, and therefore, following
again the advice of the Hon. and Member for Kilkenny,
which they had often done before, very much to their own
detrirnent—( Oh, oh 1 from the Ministerial side, answered by
loud cheers from the Opposition)--it could not be doubted
that even after the passing of this Act they would continue
their resistance to the payment of tithe.—[During the deli-
very of the latter part of this sentence great excitement ap-
peared to prevail on both sides of the House. The laugh
and cheer was thrown from side to side, while stronger and
warmer feelings appeared to influence particular Members.
Something fell from Mr. O'Connell which caught the ear of
Lord Stanley, and to which the Noble Lord adverted in these

terms :]—The Hon. and Learned Gentleman will allow me
to say, he is the last man who ought to make use in this House,
or elsewhere, of offensive expressions such as that which he
has just used—most indecently interrupting me.—( Great
cheering from the Opposition.)
Mr. O'CONNELL (amidst cheers and cries of " Oh 1")
said—l rise to order. Have I not a right to express my feel-
ings when a charge is untruly made against me ?—( Hear, hear,
and cries of "Oh 1") In the first place; the Noble Lord
garbles my letter.—( Oh, oh !) I repeat it.—( Oh 1) I repeat
it distinctly that the Noble Lord, in the first place, read garbled
extracts from my letter.—( Hear, hear.) In the next place
the Noble Lord said that the people of Ireland had often fol-
lowed my advice to their detriment.—( Hear, hear.) When
such assertions, so foreign from the fact, are made, I conceive
that I have a right to reply to them.—( Hear, hear.) If such
a mode of argument is unworthy of any man, it is still less be-
coming in th Noble Lord, whom I have observed shrink from

every man in the House but me.—( Cheers from the Ministerial
benches, and cries of " Chair I" from the Opposition.)
The CHAIRMAN, interfering, said—l would remind the
Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny, that he will have
ample opportunities of replying to the speech of the Noble
Lord in a regular manner.—( Cheers from the Opposition.)
Lord STORMONT, amidst great confusion, rose to
order. He felt it to be a duty he owed to the House to
ask the Chairman (Mr. Bernal) whether in the exercise of
his functions as Chairman, he conceived it to be within the

bounds of order that such words should be allowed to pass
from one Member towards another as within the hearing of
the House had passed from the Hon. and Learned Member
for Kilkenny towards the Noble Lord.—( Oh, oh, and
cheers.) The words used by the Hon. and Learned Member
for Kilkenny in reference to the observations made by the
Noble Lord were these—" That is untrue." He (Lord
Stormont) begged to ask whether the use of such words came
within the bounds of order ?—( Cheers from the Opposition.)
The CHAIRMAN—When a question upon a point of
order is thus directly and formally put to me I have not the
slightest hesitation in replying to it. Strictly speaking, no
one Hon. Member has a right in the course of a speech, or
after a speech, to say it is not true.—(Hear' hear.) But
then I must appeal to the recollection of every Hon. Member
present to bear me out when I say, that however this kind of
expression may not be warranted by the strict rules of debate,
unfortunately it is but too much warranted by example.—
(Cries of " Oh" from the Opposition, answered by cheers
from the Ministerial benches.) Since I have had the honour
of sitting as chairman of Committees in this House I have
heard many Hon. Members under the surprise of the irrita-
tion at the moment, contradict, in perhaps no very courteous
terms, particular allegations made in the speeches of other
Hon. Gentlemen.—( Hear, hear.) But upon the present oc-
casion I will not shrink from giving a direct answer to the
direct question which has been put to me, and therefore give
it as my opinion that such expressions as the Noble Lord has
described passing from one Hon. Member to another are not
in order.—( Hear, hear.)

Dr. BALDWIN vainly endeavoured to obtain a hearing.
There was a general cry for Lord Stanley, in the midst of
which

Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose and said—Undoubtedly
what you have said, Sir, upon the point of order, is perfectly
correct, and I have not the slightest hesitation in saying
that, in my opinion, the interruption of the Honourable and
Learned Member for Kilkenny was most disorderly.—( Cheers
from the Opposition.) But I now appeal to you, Sir, that
in the future part of the speech of the Noble Lord
(Stanley) opposite you will not allow him to be making
charges against this side of the House—( Loud cheers from
the Ministerial side)—imputing to us that we are not acting
upon our own opinions—( Renewed cheers from the same guar-
ter)—but that we are driven on by others to adopt a course
which in our hearts we do not approve.—( Loud cheers from
the Ministerial Benches, immersed by as loud cries of '• No,"
from the Opposititn. The most extraordinary confusion ensued.
The Noble Lord continued to speak, but not a sound of his
voice reached the Gallery.)

Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL rose, and endeavoured
to address the House, but the attempt served only to increase
the confusion. Continuing on his legs, the cry of " Chair"
became general.
The CHAIRMAN rose, and pointed to

Lord JOHN RUSSELL, who, after an interval of some
minutes, was allowed to proceed. I say (said the Noble
Lord) that, according to the orders of the House. no Hon.
Member ought to attribute motives to others. The Noble
Lord has attributed motives to us of (as we understood the
Noble Lord, for his voice again was well nigh drowned by the
rising confusion) a most scandalous nature.—(The remainder
of the Noble Lord's observations were lost in the din which
ensued.)
Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL and Lord STANLEY
rose together. There was a general cry for the latter, but
Sir Edward would not give way. It is impossible to describe