The Sun.
London, England, 1833-05-14 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS, M 4113.

The SPEAXER took his seat at a little after five o'clock.
A message from the Lords announced that their Lord-
ships had passed several private Bills.

TIVERTON ELECTION.

Mr. ABERCRONIBIE presented the report of the
Tiverton Election Committee, declaring the eleetion of
Mr. Kennedy for that borough to be void, and the defence
frivolous and vexatious.

Sir THOMAS FRENIANTLE said that the late
Member having had no qualification, and having indeed
it-fused to defend his seat, it was hard upon the petit:quer,
who had gone through all the expense of prosecuting the
petition, to be left to pay the costs, whilst Mr. Kennedy
went to the borough to be elected, Surely the law wanted
amendment.

The SPEAKER said that if be had heard the report read
rightly, he should, when the que,tion came before him in
rt.gular course, decide that the late sitting Member must
pay the costa of the petition.
_ _ _

Two nom MEMBERS having spoken in defence of Mr.
Kennedy's character, and given reasons for his not defend-
ing this petition, although he had a qualification, a new
writ was ordered to be issued for the borough.
Mr. HUME brought up the report of the Select Com-
mittee appointed to inquire as to the best means of en-
larging the House of Commons. He said he was anxious
to put the House in possession of the evidence adduced
before the Committee, and the conclusion to which the
Committee had arrived upon that evidence. For the
present he should confine himself to moving that the
evidence be printed.—Printing ordered.
Mr. SLANEY brought in a Bill for the better rating
of the town of Weymouth.—Read a first time, and
ordered to ha read a second time on Monday.—The
Hononralde Member also brought in a Bill for
tha promotion of societies for procuring employment to
the pear.—Read a first time, and ordered to be read a se-
cond time on Wednesday next.
Mr. Alderman WOOD withdrew his motion that stood
for this day.
Col. DAVIES made some inquiries respecting the im-
prisonment of juvenile offenders, and whether it had been
ascertained by Government that Dartmoor Prison was
I available to the proper classification of such prisoners. He
said be was given to understand that the prison was ca-
pable of receiving 1,400 inmates, and that the annual
cost need not exceed 20,0001.
Mr. GEORGE LAMB made some reply, which,
from the con!usion in the House, was quite inaudible.
Lord ALT HORP moved the order of the day for the
House resolving into Committee on the Church Tempo-
ralities (Ireland) Bill, and intimated (as we understood) his
Majesty's assent to the placing his interest in the Church
l'emporalities (Ireland) at the disposal of Parliament.chdacon
Sir R. PEEL presented petitions from.
i
staLted,
:ncidosl
,etnr:ghtyhaf
treootfmhlterlyittsehhc
considered
rndcesbehiadduneerearerenhydeoroßtyelf:neof
Gentleman
Exeter,fßl
adill aßidlniael.is el.nsadsonidprTttenrhhecfets
:trio! avnpemietdoetlidic:
Tonersoi
opyine,en peti-
tion
rayedaboitlisthioonulodfneloatypearyss.
law. The Right Hon.
immediatenr ef
ore p
into a
ted a petition from the Chan-
et' eolAnOrfr; oltGmlfsTtUearTs,Bwa°Unrdßthiprholars, of the University of Came
t• e coronation oath, and: therefore
-

bridge to the same effect. Also a petition from the Arch-
deaconry of Wells against the Irish Church Bill.
Mr. PRYME said the first petition from Cambridge
University had not been unanimously agreed to.
Lord G. SOMERSET asked the Honourable Member
r Rochester (Mr. Bernal) whether he intended to
icing forward his proposition relative to the borough of
Hertford on Wednesday next, and what the nano e
of his proposition would be? There were several other
matters in the book for that evening, and be hoped
another day would be fixed.
Mr. BERNAL said any day might be fixed for consi-
&ring the case of the borough of Hertford, which would
suit the convenience of the House. His first proposition
would be that the state of the borough of Hertford demanded
the serious consideration of the House ; but as to the
substantive proposition he could not give any positive
information to the House, as he was not at present suffi-
ciently informed of the exact district of country surround-
ing the town of Hertford.
Mr. WYNN said the question should be brought
torward on the first open day, as it was, both as a ques-
tion of privilege and as a judicial matter, a subject of
the greatest possible importance.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
Sir R. PEEL said that the Hon. Member for Oldham
had fixed his motion for his (Sir R. Peel's) removal
from the Privy Council for Thursday, a notice day,
hut there were other notices before it which he hoped
Hon. Members would postpone till that of the Hon.
'Member was disposed of.—(Hear, hear.) He did not
mean to say that be felt any great degree of anxiety upon
the subject, but these frequent shrinkings of an address
to the Crown were ludicrous, and the necessity of an im-
mediate attendance was irksome. The motion of the Hon.
Member for Oldham would not probably take much time,
and he trusted Hon. Members would allow it to take pre-

eedence.
Mr. O'CONNELL, as one having a motion for tl at
retelling, would willingly agree to the request of the Hot..
Baronet.
Mr. W. HARVEY and Lord G. SoetraseT also con
tented to do the same.
IRISH CHURCH TEMPORALITIES BILL.
On the motion by Lord ALTHORP, that the House go
into Committee on this Bill,
Mr. LEFROY objected to the House legislating for the
church of Ireland on any principle that would not be
acted upon fur that of England. The present principle,
in his opinion, would decidedly endanger the union of the
two countries. He contended that before the promoters
of the present measure brought it under the consideration
of the House, they should have shown that the duties of
the B shops could be executed by a smaller number than
at present were called upon to perform those duties. In
his opinion, the consolidation of the bishoprics would be
attended with the very worst effects. To pass from mat-
ters of moment, in a national point of view, and important
to the interests of religion, he should warn the Heine of
the material injury, in a pecuniary point of view, which
those towns would sustain in which Bishops at present
resided, in the event of those valuable residents being
removed from them ; and amongst other evils which would
result from the proposed change, was this, that, after the
passing of tie Act, if unfortunately it should pass into a
law, ten see houses would become vacant, which would
immediately be put up to sale, and disposed of to the highest
bidder, as fast as they became vacant. It was not difficult
to anticipate who would become the purchasers.—(A
laugh.) Yes, Hon. Members might sneer and laugh, but
he had no hesitation in saying that those houses would be
purchased for the Roman Catholic Bishops. Such an
alteration in the state and condition of the two religions
would, in his opinion, tend greatly to the injury of Protes-
tantism in Ireland ; according to his apprehension, it
would be injurious alike to the feelings and the rights of
Protestants. Protestantism formed the link which bound
the two countries together, and they might forthwith
look to the dissolution of the subsisting union if that link
were once broken. He objected also to the Bill on the
ground that it was contrary to the articles of that union, as
agreed upon in the year 1800. By the promoters of the
measure it was said that it had the support of a majority of
the Prelates of the Irish Church ; that assertion he altoge.
ther denied. Of all the-Bishops of Ireland there were on'y
live who had expressed opinions favourable to it ; and
of that five three had been appointed by the present
Government. Was it, then, be would a•ls, a mode 01
legislating consonant with what the Irish church had a
right to expect, thus to legislate for it in such a manner
es no Legislature would venture upon with regard to the
English church ? It was in effect verifying the statement
of an Hon. Member of that House, that they proceeded
to legislate at all times for Ireland as fur a province. He
did not think such had been the general conduct of suc-
cessive British Legislatures towards Ireland, and, there-
fore, was he anxious that, in the present case, they should
not give a colour to the charges brought against them by
the Hon. Member to whom he had been alluding. It was
often said the Reform Bill had been introduced for tl,e
purpose of abolishing an oligarchy in the state. Let not
the Reformers of the present day permit it to he said of
them that, in removing it from the state, they established
it in the church. He would ask this plain question ;
would not the effect of this Bill be to place in the hands
of twelve Bishops the patronage heretof ere dispensed by
two and twenty ? That certainly would place the patronage
to which he referred within the grasp of the Government.
--(Hear, hear. ) In his opinion it would be much better
to diminish the incomes than reduce the number of the
Bishops. It might be that four Archbishops were too
much ; perhaps it would be better to reduce the number
still lower than was proposed, and strike off three instead
of two, and also to reduce the larger sees. Thus as great
a pecuniary reduction might be effected as the Noble Lord
required, without any diminution of the number of the
Bishops. As to the power of converting Bishops' leases
into perpetuity, that presented itself in two points of view;
rst, as regarded the Bishops, secondly, as regarded the
tenants. He considered this part of the measure as
fraught with great danger to the Bishops, for it would be
quite as easy to offer passive resistance to the payment
of their rents, as it bad been to resist the payment of
tithes.—(Hear.) Then as to the Bishops tenants, it was
not a boon they desired. He looked upon the whole of
this part of the Bail as an infringement of private rights,
and as calculated to throw the whole of the Irish
church prop .sty into confusion—he thought the remedy
worse than the disease. He condemned, too, the appro-
priation of the money expected to be derived front this
conversion—it should not be applied to any other than re-
ligious purposes. It was said that by this change a new
'species of property was given to the church which it had
not before. That he altogether denied ; it. in fact, drove
the Bishop out of the property they had previously pos-
sessed—it was doing what in Ireland was called improving
a gentlemen out of his estate.—(Hear, hear.) He chal-
lenged any man acquainted with the law of the land, to
dispute the statement he had made, that there was no re-
version of church property to the state. What, he begged
to ask, was the value of the charter of the Crown, if thus
the fee simple of the church, secured to it by charter,
could be invaded ? In the same way the state had not
even the pretence of right to any improvement of church
property, for the improvement belonged, as in the cases of
private individuals, to the owner of the property. He
ellnstrated this point by reference to the endow-
"latst. of Dissenting places of worship, where if a
Court of Equity would allow Leases in perpetuity,
she advantage belonged to the trustees of the chapel, and
not to the state. Why then, he inquired, was the
church of England and Ireland to be placed on a diae-
rent footing? Surely, to say the least of it, the church
of Ireland should have as much protection as a dissenting
chapel. A moire injurious change was contemplated in the
Bill with respect to the building and repair of churches
and glebe-houses in Ireland. The proposition for a lay-
commissioner was most oppressive and unjust, eepec ally
as the Board of Commissioners was intended to be con-
stituted. Ile objected most strongly to the constitution of
that Board, consisting of four Bishops and five laymen,
all to be appointed and removed at the pleasure of the
Lord Lieutenant. He more than feared that the influ-
ence of the Board would be employed for election pur-
poses, and that the church of Ireland would then be placed
under the direct political control of the Government.
Under the new system, it was only the poor parishes
which were to be deprived of assistance in the building
and repair of their churches. He called the attention of
the House to what the Board of First Fruits had
accomplished for the benefit of the Church of Ireland
since the Union. It had expended 1,192,0001. in the con-
struction of 746 new churches, of 552 glebe-houses, in the
purchase of 202 glebes and of impropt iate tithes to be added
to small vicarages, while all this vast improvement bad
cost the church only 006/. He contended that such a
measure as that now proposed ought not to have been
brought forward until the report of the Commissioners of
Inquiry into the Ante of the Church in Ireland had been
made, pnd the true rta,on .or hurrying the Bill forward
was, that it might be taken ae a set-off to the Coercion
Act. He entreated the House to remember that the first
sacrifice to the French Revolution was the church ; and
that the downfall of the aristocracy and of the monarchy
soon follow,d as a necessary constquence. If Ministers
and Parliament thus proceeded in giving way to popular
clamour, the only choice left would soon be between Bell-
gion, the Monarchy, and the Aiistocracy, or Democracy
and an Agrarian Law.—(Cheers.)
Mr. FRENCH was disposed to admit, and witluatt
pledging himself to the details of tl:e plan, that as a whole,
with one exception, the measure was wise, compreLeusivr,