The Sun.
London, England, 1838-07-03 00:00:00

punity—( Cheers)---and he had understood that the Hon. nd
Learned Gentleman himself (Mr. O'Connell) had lately given
an example of obedience to it by paying his tithe.—( Hear,
hear.) It wns net from any consideration of consistency that
he supported this measure, but because he was willing to con-
sent to any reduction which the titheowners themselves desired
to make for the security of the Church—( Cries of " Hear,
bear")—and if he should support the amendrrer t which his
Right lion. and Learned Friend (Mr. Shaw) intended to
propose in Committee, it would only be because that amend-
ment would go to make the reduction of 25/ per cent. instead
of 301._( Hear, hear.) lie was, however, of opinion that no
reduction at all would be found to be necessary, provided the
law was properly enforced ; and he believed it was amply suf-
ficient, if properly supported, to secure the payment of all the
tithe in Irelend.—( Hear.) He should oppose the principle of
appropriation to the utmost of his ability.—( Cheers, and cries
of " Di. 'ale.")
The House then divided_
For Mr. Ward's amendment l6
Against it
a!,ijerity 034
On the re-admission of strangers, we found
Sir CHARLES STYLE addressing the House. The
lion. Member said that he was fully impressed with the im-
portance of the subject, and was as anxious as any man could
be to see the tithe question finally settled. The only effect
which the present system had was to excite the people of Ire-
land to discontent, and to render life and property in that
country insecure. The fact was, that this 8.11 was based on
false principles of legislation, for lie contended that it was a
radical error to say that the revenues of the Church ought
riot to be applied to other than Church purposes. The people
of Ireland were hostile to the pad merit of tithes in any shape,
and the conversion of that impost into a rent-charge would
not get rid of their objection. This Bill, though it changed
the name of tithes, would not get rid of the evils of
the present system, as the only alteration proposed to be
made by it was to render the landlords the parties who were
to collect the tax, instead of the clergy. This, they might
depend on it, would not he satisfactory. Tithes, they should
recollect, were a tax imposed for one single object, and as
the purpose to which they were applied was one in which the
great balk of the Irish people could have no par,icipation,
it was idle to suppose that they would be satisfied with any
change that might be made which did not embody the prin-
ciple of appropriation. He opposed the Bill, believing it to
be a gross delusion on the public, and not from any factious
or party motives ; and therefore it was that be felt it la's duty
to me-ve that it should he committed that day three months.
Viscount MORPETH said that owing to the position in
Which the Government were placed with regard to this ques-
tion it was wholly impossible that he could acquiesce in the
motion of the Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Scarborough.
Whether they had acted right or wrong in giving up the ap-
propriation clause, one thing was clear that the House had ex-
pressed itself significantly on the point. After what had
passed, it would be somewhat whimsical on the part of the
Government if they were now to say that they would stop
short and proceed no farther with this Bill, when it likely
to give satisfaction to all parties, and set at rest a question
which had for so long a time operated so injuriously on the
peace and tranquillity of Ireland. At all events, so far as the
Government were concerned, it was impossible that they could
entertain the proposition of the Hon. Baronet.
Mr. BENETT said that although he was no party to the
bribe which this measure gave to the landlords of Ireland, he
yet felt it to be a matter of expediency to support the mea-
sure, on the ground that it would promote peace, unanimity,
and conciliation in that country. Such a measure he consi-
dered as most material at the present moment, and for that
reason he felt himself called on to vote against the motion of
the Hon. Member for Scarborough.
Lord DUNG ANNON said that, objecting, as he did, to
the whole principle of this Bill, to all spoilation of the property
of the Church, and feeling moreover that the measure was an
unjust one, he should vote for the motion of the Hon. Baronet
the Member for Scarborough, or any other motion, the object
of which was to get rid of it.
The motion was then put, and negatived without a division.
The House then resolved itself into Committee on the Bill,
Mr. Bernal in the Chair.
The preamble was postponed, and the first clause agreed to.
On clause two being put,
Mr. SHAW said he could not believe that the Government
were serious in the intention expressed in this clause to en-
force the repayment of the advances or instalments which bad
been made under the Million Act. The whole sum which had
been distributed under that Act would become due in No-
vember next, but he at the time stated, and such was the
feeling which now prevailed in Ireland, that he had no expec-
tation that the repayment of this money would ever be de-
manded by the Government. If they persisted in their de-
mand for the repayment of the sums advanced under the
Million Act, the consequence would be to force the Clergy
to come for the payment of the arrears due to them upon
the occupying tenant. The object of this Bill was said by
the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite to be to secure peace
and tranquillity in Ireland, but it was in some of the
most disturbed as well as the poorest counties in Ire-
land that the largest portion of these arrears was due.
He wished that the Government would consent, therefore,
to give up all demand for the re-payment of the advances
thich had been made to the Protestant Clergy of Ireland
under the Million Act. He moved the omission of the
second clause.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
the question one of considerable importance, but he thought
that in point of form, the Right Hon. Gentleman could not
move his amendment. He believed that the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman was prevented by the forms of the House from moving
the omission of the clause, and, of course, also from substitut-
ing another clause. The first clause of the Bill repealed the
right of all persons to tithes or composition for tithes, and
stated that a rent charge should be substituted in lieu
thereof ; the present cause merely provided for the continuance
of the rights of the Crown to the repayment of the advances
wider the Million Act until such time as Parliament should
otherwise provide ; meaning, of course, thereby, that the sub-
ject would be brought under the attention of Parliament. With
respect to lay impropriators, he was sure that the Right
Hon. Gentleman did not contemplate that they who were
rich and wealthy, and in many instances owners in fee, should
be relieved from the repayment of the money they had re-•
ceived. At the same time, he would have no objection
hereafter (as we understood the Right lion. Gentleman) to
enter upon the consideration of some arrangement by which
the occupying tenant should be relieved of the payment of the
arrears. The effect of the Right Hon. Gentleman's proposi-
tion, even if it could he carried, would be to deprive the
country of the repayment of no less a sum than 640,000/. He
hoped that the Right Hon. Gentleman would not persist in
his amendment.
Lord STANLEY did not think that the objection in point
of form possessed so much importance as the Right Hon.
Gentleman opposite had attached to. If his Right Hon. Friend
pressed his amendment to a division, he (Lord Stanley) would
be happy to support it.
After a few wprds from the CHANCELLOR of the E X_
CHEQITF,R in explanation,
Mr. SHAW said that with respect to the question of form,
ho was not aware that there was any difficulty as to the
omission of the clause ; but he believed that there might be
some difficulty with respect to the substitution of another
clause. However, as there was a doubt upon the subject, he
would, for the ',resent, withdraw the amendment.
Mr. HARVEY said that if instead of 640,0001. they made
the sum 640,000,000/, he would still consider the expenditure
small, provided that by this application they secured the
peace of Ireland. But he did not expect any such result,
for the Honourable and Learned Member for Dublin hal t..ld
them that when this Bill passed there would lie as great a
scramble about the rent-charge as there was at present about
the tithes. He therefore protested against any surrender
of this money. It would be nothing Film/ nor less than
depriving the people of this country of 640,000/. Ile
should be happy if by any magic he could throx the two
parties who disagreed on this question into a sort of political
sieve and shake it so that no residuum should be left but a few
4:ay Radicals.—( Loud taught-1..) Ile was nn Irish landlord
himself, and had Irish sympathies, and, for his own plrt, did
not care if the thousands were made millions, particularly if
it could be done in Committee when all the reaort ers were
asleep and the great men gone to dinner, or the Queen's
Drawing-room ; but as an English M •mber, and looking
to the interests of the people of England, he must protest
against this advance. He hail consideration for the distresses
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer; he sympathised deeply
With him—( A laugh)—and, above all, he thought that it ought
to be proved that the tithes fur which the loan was intended
as a substitute had not been received. He understood that
the Iridt Law Courts had even proved too mighty for the
master of that House; that judgments ha 1 been obtained
against the Honourable and Learned Member for Dublin.—
( Laughter.) For all these reasons be would oppose the re-
mission of the loan.—( Hear.)
Mr. JACKSON_, would not pretend to f-dlow the Hon.
.r who had just set down through his very facetious
speech, but would confine himself to treat the question of
outie,httretr the million ought to be remitted. Ia his opinion it
thought s
2 remitte I.—( Hear, hear.) The reason why he
s o
that the Irish Clergy had all along been given
e
reason to nbewliaeve that they never would be called on to refund
times
money, and Bills for the settlement of tithes had at various
omes been brought ia,. remitting the claim. An Hon. and
Learned Member; °bPuPto.lte had steted that he had volunteered
to ay his ties
werpe beforeth the Irish cvi ? because four causes against him
( Hear, hear.) From
thhancellor at the time of his offer.—
inatisqsluarter he (Mr. Jackson) thought
that opposition to the re
SHE I L that ss.:" was hardly decent.
was under,tood on all sides that
the sums remitted we-enot latfterwards to be enforced, the re_
• .on might be considered as a
as to the Clergy. boon to the people as well
lie trust that lion G.mils to •n opp.aite
\you'd now be willing to
give 411 good 'term-were of-red
11 the Gallant Officer (Sir lin.ot
aorndllnge) in 18:35. The Gal-
lant Officer then proposed
only to remit the 600,000/.
iliredy paid, but to (rive the balance million to pay the
arr-irleearsieTrrothis the Lord
(Stanley) made no objection.
her
fur hilkenny had, or course, e!ject( A
to a man suo »rted it.
11"'-'-'111)—but the Irish Members then
' er these eircurnst inecs be trusted that the million would
be grao.ed.
1.
"10Mr. O'CONNELL said that as, when his lion. Friend the
, !Taber for Southwark talked of lights of the Church, an
('lr•
Baronet opposite had owned the soft impeachment, he
i O'Connell) trusted that he should not be guilty of much
t'ON:sonal vanity in considering himself to be the person alluded
O by the Hon. and LearnedThember for Bandon.herb, The facts
tat he (111 r. O'Connell)'- had net as yet paid his tithes
0.
.ns,lt. offered the money without costs, and his answer `vas
r of four causes before the Chancellor. If
biz
butrifwere accepted, lie should consider himself hound by it,
sold hocests Were enforced, he wuuld permit the bed to be
In Under him rather Than pay one faTthing.—( Minis-

terial cheers.) Ile had always said that the million would
new, rbe paid—it never would.--( Hear.) As to the Bill it-
self, it was idle to suppose that the people of Ireland would
afire. to any compromise respecting it. They would consider
nu arrangement final which should not contemplate an appro-
priation of the tithe far different from that now proposed.
They might pass what Bill they pl"asci, but they would then
be as flr from a final arrangement as ever. In the coe iction
that any hope of giAting the money would be perfectly roman-
tic, he would give his consent to its remission.—( Hear.)
Mr. SHAW said that he would withdraw his clause for the
present, but would again propose it on the b' :nging up of the
rein; t.
It was then agreed that clause 2 should stand part of the
Bill.

On clause 3,
Mr. SHAW prop,lscd a 3 an amendment,
,‘ At line 22, to fill up the blault with the words three-
fourths ;'"
He said that this arrangement would make a deduction of
27!. 10s. per cent., and leave him but 64/. after all eedue-
tioos. Anything further he thought would be unreasonable.
There was one other consideration he wished to press upon
the House, it was that of the Irish livings, nearly one-half
Vicre at this moment under the operation of Lord Stanley's
Act.

After one or two observations from Mr. LUCAS,
Lord M 0 R PE TH said that it was extremely painful to him
to le obliged to oppose any propositions for increasing the
incomes of a meritorious class of persons, but the amount of
reduction had been fixed on all sides of the House at 30 per
cent., in all the Bflls which during the last four years had
b en unsuccessfully introduced ; and he did not see why an
additional bonus should now be given for the delay. He did
not consider it would be prudent, looking at the excited state
of public feeling in Ireland at this moment on the subject of
tithes, to make any further allowance.
Mr. LEFRO Y proceeded to make some observations, but
from the low tone in which the Right Hon. and Learned Gen.
tleman spoke, and the loud cries of " Question," they were
inaudible in the gallery.
Mr. GIL LON proposed the omission of the clause alto-
gether.
The CHAIRMAN informed the Hon. Member that he was
premature in proposing his amendment, as the question had
not as yet been put " that the chaise do stand part of the Bill."
After a few words from Mr. ARC H BOL D,
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON, in reference to a petition which
he h; d presented from the Bishep and Clergy of Elfin, said
that if the clause pi ss d, incumbents at 1654 per annum, and
even at this trr all income requiring a curate, would be reduced
to the sum of 1161.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For Mr. Shaw's motion lBB
Against it
Majority
—2l
On our return to the Gallery we found Mr. SHAW moving
another amendment to the same clause, namely—
" At line 31, after the word and' to insert the following
%lords, subsequent to such first day of November; such rent-
charges shall become payable by two equal half-yearly pay-
ments, one whereof to become due on the first day of May,
and the other,"'
Lord MORPETH said that such an arrangement would be
exceedingly inconvenient to the landlords of Ireland, whose
rents were not paid with such a regularity as would warrant
such a provision.
Mr. LUCAS also objected to it as inconvenient to the te-
nant whose money only came in after the harvest time.
Mr. O'CONNELL said it was quite immaterial whether
the payment was to be made in one or two parts, for the tithe-
owner would be fortunate if he got it at all. For his own
part, if the Bill should happen to go to a third reading, he
should vote against it.
Sir R. BATE SON said that, in the part of the country
with which he was acquainted, the 'Tithe Composition Bill
worked well at 15 'per cent. The landlord paid the tithes
due at November, though he himself was not paid up until
the following May. He would therefore support the half-
yearly payment.
Mr. LITTON supported the amendment as founded on
justico and by no means oppressive to the landlord. If the
payment of the clergyman's income were postponed to the end
of the year cases of great hardship must necessarily occur.
If he had his own will in the case, he would even submit the
reduction of income 25 per cent., as he was aware that in
several instances such a reduction would deprive the incum.
bent of some of the necessaries of life.
After a few words from Lord Clements, Mr. Ormsby Gore,
Mr. S. O'Brien, Mr. Lucas, Mr. Goulburn, Lord John Rus-
sell, and Mr. Shiel, the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. SHAW then proposed the following proviso :—" That
if at any time such rent-charge shall be in arrear and un-
paid for the space of six months next after the same shall have
accrued due and payable, then and in such a case a sum equal
to four-fifths of the annual amount of such tithe compositions
shall, pro illa vice, be due and payable in lieu of such three-
fourths."
Mr. O'CONNELL objected that such an important provi-
sion should be introduced at so late an hour, when it was now
near twelve o'clock. He hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman
would not press it to a division.
Mr. SHAW said that he had already made toe large an al-
lowance for the sum to be deducted ; but as his amendment
had passed, he thought it necessary that some means should be
devised to secure prompt payment.
Mr. D. ROCHE was not opposed to any measure which,
if the Bill should pass, would provide for the payment of the
Clergy in the most convenient way. But after the division
which had taken place he considered that the Bill was not likely
to pass.

Mr. SHEIL said they were speaking of Ireland as if it
were as tranquil as this country. It ought to be remembered
that Ireland was in a state subsequent to six years of agita-
tisn.—( Cheers from the Opposition Benches.) There were
two kinds of agitation, and the agitation to which he alluded
was the constitutional agitation amongst those whose personal
rights and interests were concerned. It would not be denied
by Hon. Gentlemen at either side of the House that, during
the last six years, there had been a vast deal of confusion in
Ireland upon the subject of tithes, and consequently it was
evident that in any attempt to settle the question they should
not proceed as if no excitement of that description existed.—
, ( Hear, bear.) Meetings of twenty, thirty, and even forty
thousand persons had been held in Ireland, and at those
meetings the multitudes of thoEe from whom tithes were claimed
pledged themselves in the most solemn manner never again to
pay tithes either in substance or in name. Let them then bear
in mind that it was those people who were to be affected by
this Bill. It was a fact worth recollecting that, three years
ago, the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth had
declared that tithes could not be collected in Ireland, and
evinced his willingness to grant a million of British money
with a view towards their abolition, so far as it was practica-
ble. If it had been found difficult to collect them in 1835, it
would be found more difficult to collect them in 1833. But,
apart from this question, he ( Mr. Sheil) objected to the
reduction which the Bill offered, inasmuch as it did
not appear that there was any reduction upon the arrears of
tithes; the proposed reduction was upon the accruing
tithes, so that all the weight of the arrears were allowed to
press with undiminished weight upon the persons by whom
they were due. The Right Hon. Baronet opposite had, in
1835, proposed a reduction of 251. per cent., and it was surely
no more than common justice that the same reduction ought
to be allowed upon those arrears IA }licit became due since
1835. By adopting this arrangement they would give a sort
of bonus upon the payment, and thus offer an inducement to
defaulters to pay up the arrears; but the reduction upon ac-
cruing tithes wonld be quite insufficient. They should in the
present state of Ireland offer every inducement to the people
to pay nothing, instead of passing any law that would have a
contrary tendency.
Mr. SHAW would remark with respect to the non-appli-
cation of the reduction to the arrears that the landlords would
not have to iay the arrears.
Mr. ORMSBY GORE did not:consider that the justice or
equity of the case ought to he afkete I by the state of Ireland.
If the proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman were a just
one, if it would be found calcu'a•ed to carry out the previous
motions which had been anticipated as ho believed it would,
then it was clear they ought to adopt it ; if, however, the prin-
ciple of the motion was unjust they should reject in either
case, acting not with reference to the s ate of Ireland, but to
the justice and propriety of the motion.—( Hear, hear.) With
respect to the reduction lie should remind the Committee
that it was upon the landlords the sole burthen of the titters al-
ways lay, for however it might at first sight appear to he paid
by the occupier, it was quite evident diet the charge, like all
other charges of a similar description, should come upon the
landlorl. If the occupier paid it the landlord would be
obliged to let his land at a lower r.tnt ; and if the landlord
himself paid it the land of course would let higher. He sup-
ported the motion.
Mr. LUCAS said, with reference to a statement that Pro-
testants refused to pay tithes in Ireland, it was true in some
cases, but it was because they were afraid to act in opposition
to those around them.
Mr. BROT II ERTO N, in consequence of the lateness of
the hour, moved that the Chairman report progress and ask
leave to sit again.
The Committee then divided, when thers appeared—
For the amendment

Against it
Majority .
Upon our return to the gallery we f.uad—
Mr. J. G RATTA N übj, c log to the discussion of so im
portant a motion at that late hour. The Hon. Member con-
cluded by stating- that he would move as an amendment that
the Chairman report progress and obtain leave to sit again.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL o ,jeted to the proposition of
the Right lion. and Learned Gentleman, and stated his in-
tention of voting fw aay form of II o House which would have
the effect of postponing the discussion at that late houre.
Mr. LITTON was decidedly in favour of the proviso
which would ,have the effect of preventing litigation between
the clergymen and the people to a great extent.
Mr. O'CONNELL objected to the proviso.
Le.rd J. RUSSELL said it would have the effect of re-
ducing, of lessening still further the reduction upon the tithes.
Sir' R. B ATE SON felt confident that if the majority had
been It the other side there would be no efforts made to
postpone the discussion of the proviso. —( Loud cheery.) 1.31 t
those efforts now were evidently caused by the majority at
that side.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion to adjourn
Against it 137

.. 219
... -161

Majority against the motion ... -59
0.1 our re-admission to the gallery we found anuther Hon.
Me:nb.•r proposing the same motion.
S:r T. ACL AND said that if these divisions went on,
w:iouver gained the day both parties would lose the night.--
( A laugh.)