The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-21 00:00:00

liiI"ERIAL PARLIAMENT

itIOUSE OF LORDS, Friday, Feb. 20.
1
The Earl of SHarrEssucir, in the absence of the Lord I
Chancellor, took his seat on the Woolsack at Five o'clock. 1
THE CORN-LAWS.
Lurd FEVERSHAM presented forty-six petitions from the
North Riding of Yorkshire against the repeal of the corn-laws,
land in favour of protection. The petitions were signed by
landowners, tenant-farmers, merchants, millers, manufacturers,
tradesmen and mechanics, and others in the townships of Gains-
borough, Pickering,_ Easingwold, and forty-two other town-
ships
in the North Riding. He (Lord Feversham) concurred 1
in the views and sentiments of the petitioners, said he viewed
with alarm the measure brought in in the Lower House of Par-
liament, and they prayed their Lordships when the Bill was
sent up to that House that they would not assent to it. They
alluded also to the practices of the unconstitutional body calling
itself the Anti-Corn-law League. He considered that if the
sense of the country were taken, it would be found that the
prevailing opinion was in favour of protection.
VAN DIEMEN'S LAND.
Lord LYTTLETON requested the Marquis of Lansdowne
to pospone his motion on the subject of Van Diemen's Land,
which stood for Thursday next, to a future day, as further
papers relative to the matter were about to be presented.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE postponed the motion to
Monday week.

IRISH GRIEVANCES.
Lord CAMPBELL rose, pursuant to notice, to present a
petition of very great importance. It came from the inha-
bitants of the city of Cork, and emanated from a public meet-
ing held in that city, and was signed by the mayor and alder-
men and so many of the inhabitants, that the petition had been
charged to him 8/. for postage, but which, by the courtesy of
the Postmaster-General had been returned to him. The
petitioners stated that they approached the Honourable
House most respectfully, and that, ever loyal to the British
Crown and the public institution, and mindful of the
pledge entered into by the Sovereign, that the grievances
of the people should be redressed, they laid before
the House what they considered a very great evil
—namely, the compulsory payment of a tax called
" ministers' money." So little was known of the impost in
England, that since he entered the House he had been asked
by a Noble Peer of great standing and intelligence, if the im-
post of ministers' money meant the grant of Reaium Donum,
which was voted to the Dissenting clergy by the Parliament.
Now, the petitioners did not mean to interfere with the bounty of
the Crown, nor was it their wish that the grant should in any
way be intercepted or limited ; all they did was to lay a state-
ment before the. House of the weighty grievances that affected
themselves personally. In the reign of Charles 11. an Act,
which he should pronounce a very arbitrary one, passed, by
which the inhabitants of certain corporate towns were subjected
to individual taxation for the maintenance of the pastors of the
Episcopal Protestant religion in Ireland.
A NOBLE LORD—Yes, the tithe.
Lord CAMPBELL should state that it was an impost
quite different from tithes, and one paid to the clergy
of the minority, by the Catholics and Dissenters.
The late Secretary for Ireland, Sir Thomas Fremantle, had
likewise admitted in his place in the House of Commons,
that it was a very great grievance. Now, after
so universal a condemnation of this tax, the only
question for their Lordships to consider would be, what
means they should adopt to remove it. He was rather
astonished that when the Noble Lord opposite introduced his
Act respecting Church Temporalities, that this tax was not
removed at that time, for though the pressure of it was lighter,
that very circumstance made it a greater grievance. While
the former amounted to about 60,0001. the latter did not
come to more than 13,0001. or 14,0001. a year, and for
that paltry sum it was too bad that all the
religious sects in Ireland should consider themselves aggrieved.
He did not wish to say anything invidious of the Church, but
he earnestly implored their Lordships to take measures for its
removal, that the odium of it might no longer attach to the
Church. He did trust, therefore, that their Lorships would,
look favourably on that petition. He did trust
that along with the measures of concession which
were contemplated, that the removal of this
would also be included, for, under the circumstances of
that country, it would have a most favourable tendency. He
would conclude by moving that the petition do lie on the table.
The Earl of ST. GERMANS willingly admitted that he
had stated in the other House of Parliament that this impost
was a practical grievance, but he did not admit that it was evil
in principle. He looked upon it as simply a grievance of a
practical nature, and not to be considered as an insult-
jog act towards her Majesty's Roman Catholic sub-
jects. The Noble Lord was correct in stating that
the impost was originated for the maintenance
of the Protestant clergy in certain towns of Ireland, but the
Noble Lord ought also to have recollected that at that time
the Roman Catholics were by law incapable of holding any
real property, and therefore the tax fell exclusively on the
Protestants. It was only recently that Catholics were per-
mitted to hold property in towns, and they purchased those
properties subject to the payment of this tax. It
was a grievance of a much lighter character than
the tithes, inasmuch as it was levied on the
occupiers of those houses in those towns. The basis on which
it was levied had remained unchanged since the time of Charles
the Second. In Dublin it so happened, therefore, that houses
which in the reign of that monarch had been occupied by opu-
lent families, were now tenanted by the humblest families ;
while the rates had remained, comparatively speaking,
the same. The same held good in other large towns—
in London, in Glasgow, and in Edinburgh, where
an impost of a similar character existed for the
maintenance of the Protestant clergy. He had more than
once directed his attention to the subject ; and he had been in
hopes of being enabled to submit some other provision in lieu
of it. Difficulties had, however, supervened, and he was not
at that moment in a condition to say whether her Nfajesty's
Government were engaged in the considerations of introducing
any alteration with respect to it. He was not aware that
he had anything further to say ; he admitted that it was a
grievance, but as he 11.,,thefore stated it was only a grievance
of a practical nature and not orrs serinded on prinelpi, .1- in-
tended to insult the Roman Catholic subjects.
Lord CAMPBELL had heard with great satisfaction the
explanation given by the Noble Lord.
Lord STANLEY could answer the question why ministers'
money had not been dealt with in the same manner as the
vestry cess.' The ministers' money did not ap-
pear to him to partake in the slightest degree of
the.: nature of a personal tax. It bad been a tax
existing since the time of Charles 11., and was levied, not on
individuals, but upon houses, and was as much a tax on house
property as tithe was a tax on landedproperty in
the country. It stood precisely on the footing.
It was in no way a capitation tax, but was
an ad valorem tax. All house property was purchased subject
to this tax, and to abolish it would only be to put so much into
the pockets of the house proprietors. The difference between
the vestry cess and the ministers' money was this, that the latter
was a certain tax, and the former an uncertain one. He ad-
mitted that the present mode of levying the tax was a defect,
one, but he did not see how it could be remedied.
Lord MONTEAGLE fully agreed with the Noble LI
that ministers' money stood on the same footing as tithe.
would venture to say, that of all classes of the Irish clert
those who had the most onerous duties to discharge were ti
least remunerated. He (the Noble Lord) was not then goin
to deal with the question of the principle of the law of tithes
All he should say was, that it gave rise to a most unhappy
struggle between the pastor and the farmer, as regarded ap-:
cultural produce ; for certainly distraining the furniture
stock of the poor farmer, and selling them off, by pub,
auction, was a most grievous proceeding. Now, the, impos
of minister's money differed from tithes in this way, that thr
former was levied under an old valuation, made as far: back as
the reign of Charles 11., the consequence of which as that
the heaviest taxation fell on those parts of towns that were in
the greatest state of decay, and in which resided the, poorest
class of inhabitants. His Noble Friend opposite hid done
himself great credit by stating that, when he had been chi:
Secretary for Ireland, he was most anxious to find a remed'
the impost. Many of the clergy were obliged in confequr
of the difficulty of collecting the tax to give it up alr,oget
and in such a state of things he submitted whether it sva, w,
while to allow it to remain any longer on the Stattite_b,
He was perfectly persuaded that if half the ingenu4,y
wl
was bestowed last year by a Noble Lord on a Bill Nein:
landlord and tenant was devoted to this question, it yoult
satisfactorily settled.
1 he subject then dropped.
THE GAUGE QUESTION.
Lord KINNAIRD gave notice that, on Monday next
would put a question to the Noble Earl, the Preside t of
Board of Trade, as to the intentions of her Majesty' Gov
ment with respect to the report of the Gauge Comm scion,
PROTECTION TO LIFE (IRELAND) B LL.
The Earl of ST. GERMANS said that he int °dues
Bill a few nights ago for the better protection of life i Irel
and since that certain suggestions had been made to bn
he wished to introduce in the Bill in the shape of am ndme
He therefore moved that these alterations be printed, that
might be added to the Bill.
Lord CAMPBELL suggested that the Noble E rl sh
withdraw the first Bill, and that a new Bill, incl ding
amendments, be introduced.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the alter tions
of a technical nature.
The Bill was then introduced with the suggested lterai
and read a first time.
The second reading was appointed for Monday ne '
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMOAS, Friday, Fti. 20
The SPZAKER took the Chair at a few minutes efore
o'clock.

NEW MEMBERS.
Sir DE LACY EVANS took the oaths and his se t for
minster, in the room of Captain Roue, who has cepte
office of one of the Lords of the Admiralty. Th Hon.
Gallant Member, who was introduced by Mr. B uveric
Captain Pechell, was received with loud cheers on is entr
Mr. Goocx took the oaths and his seat for Eas Suffol
the room of Lord Henniker.
Mr. FLOYER and Mr. SEYMEa also took th oath:
their seats for the county of Dorset, in the room of ord
and Mr. Sturt.

Four

RAILWAY BUSINESS.
A petition was presented against the Aylesbur and
Junction Railway Bill.
The following Railway Bills were read a seco d tim,
were ordered to be committed, via:—
London and Brighton Railway (Dorking Branch •
Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland June ion Ra
Mold Junction Railway.
North and South Junction Railway.
General Terminus and Glasgow Harbour Railwa •
Stirling and Dunfermline Railway.
Edinburgh arid Leith Atmospheric Railway.
Bristol and South Wales Junction Railway and erry.
Windsor, Slough, and Staines Atmospheric Rail ay.
Aylesbury and Thome Junction Railway.
The O'CONOR DON moved that it be an instruct
the Select Committee on Petitions, that in all cases o
railway Bills, wherein the promoters shall havp prove(
pliance with the standing orders in the House lof Lord;
do give priority to the investigation of the compliant.
the standing orders of the House of Commons applicable •
Bills over all other cases which may stand for inquiry
before them, provided due notice of the sitting of the Com-
mittee for such purpose has been given, and that the promoters
of such Bills propose to prove the compliance with the standing
orders, either wholly or in 1 art, by rivet voce evidence." The
Hon. Gentleman proceeded to point out the difficulties at-
tendant on the present system, one instance of which he
would point out to the attention of the House ; it
was the case of the county surveyor of Westport.
who, having proved his case in the House of Lords, had been
wouldin the have
tHee%eof Commons.
come back again,
obliged to go back to Ireland in order to attend the assizes, and
he
case
same
case
Anotheronoptave
rwas
that of a friend of his, who having
proved compliance
with the standing orders in the other
House,
found that there
were 184 cases on the list of the House of Commons to be
. beard before his case would come on thereby
t great inconvenience by the delay he w,
dvexby putting him toience.
Mr. GROGAN said his own motion on trer
sub-
' stantially the same as the one the Honourabnler
just proposed. It would be in the recollection of ther d
Houseber ha
that at an early period of the present session both branches
of the Legislature adopted a resolution to establish the prac-
tice of commencing Irish Railway Bills iii the House of Lords.
' His own motion, and that of the Hon. Member opposite,
was simply to carry out that measure more practically and
effectually, and seeing that it would facilitate rather than retard

such