The Sun.
London, England, 1834-08-02 00:00:00

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

A message from the Lords announced that their Lordships
had agreed to the County Coroners' Bill.

IRISH TITHES BILL.

On the order of the day being read for the House to resolve
itself into Committee on this Bill,
Mr. O'CONNELL said he wished to call the attention of
the House to a portion of the subject which was not
involved in the present Irish Tithes Bill, but which was
very pressing upon a large portion of the inhabitants of
Ireland. This Bill applied to the agricultural parishes in Ire-
land, but did not apply to parishes in cities and towns where
the clergyman was paid by an impost in the nature
of ministers' money. The, agricultural parishes were
relieved to the amount of 40 per cent., and he wished those
other parishes to be put on the same footing. It would be
an extraordinary state of things that the Clergyman,
who just lived about a mile out of town, should
still receive his income, with a certain reduction
whilst within the town the clergyman should be compelled to
collect his money from house to house, and from cabin to cabin
without reduction. He did not mean to press the subject this
session, but he hoped that it would be considered next session.
Mr. LITTLETON said he believed that an arrangement
similar to that adopted in the present Bill would be very much
in favour of the town clergymen, as he believed that within the
last two or three years they had collected less than 60 per cent.
It was thererefore desirable that the matter should be placed
on a different footing. The payments, however, were so ex-
?remely small that he did not know in what other less objec-
tionable measure it could be raised.

Mr. O'CONNELL said he believed that in the report of
the Commissioners upon the Corporation Inquiry if not totally
forgotten or gone to sleep, it would be recommended that in
each town all the taxes should be levied by one body of per-
sons, and by one collector, which would greatly lessen the
present expense of collection.
The House then resolved itself into a Committee of the
the whole House on the Tithes (Ireland) Bill ; Mr. BERNAL
in the Chair. .

On the motion that the first new clause be read,

Mr. G OULBURN rose and said, that he had hitherto
taken very little part in the discussions on the Irish
Tithe Bill, broUght in by the Right Honourable Gentle-
man opposite, nor should he have now called the atten-
tion of the House to these clauses, but that they involved a
principle contrary to sound policy and justice. He (Mr.
G.) was surprised that the Right Hon. Gentleman should
have put these clauses into the hands of Honourable Members
without at least stating the grounds on which he called upon
Parliament to take a course, which, in his recollection of
Parliamentary annals, had never been taken by any Minister
of the Crown. The present Bill called upon the House to revise
an agreement entered into under the sanction of an act
of Parliament, seven years ago ; an agreement entered
into with the full consent of both parties, and which
had been unappealed against in the mode pointed out by the
act, for rectifying any errors that might occur ; an agreement
he might add, which had given universal satisfaction to both
parties. (There was here a good deal of noise in the body of
the House.) If the House would only give him ( Mr. G.) its at-
tention, and if the Hon and Learned Member (Mr. O'Connell)
would only lend him his silence for a few minutes he should be
enabled to satisfy the House that these clauses cannot pass.
In 1823 Parliament, feeling the difficulties in which the
parties having an interest in tithes in Ireland were placed,
and anxious to promote a • settlement, passed a law by
which a power was given to the incumbents of parishes to
agree with their parishioners for a term beyond their incum-
bency, namely, 21 years, for a composition to be taken* in lieu
of tithes. The law provided that the parishioners should ar-
range those matters in Vestry, and to appoint a Commissioner to
take care of their interests. The composition was then to be laid
before another vestry, and a right of appeal was given
to a superior tribunal, before which all the facts and
circumstances could be brought.—( Hear.) This composition
so entered into it now was sought to annul—not at ,the
pleasure of the two consenting parties—not at the wish
of those making the agreement, for he (Mr. G.) was satisfied
that one of the parishes could never agree to it. This agree-
ment, solemnly entered into eleven years ago, was now to be
remitted and set aside on the application of any seven persons
paying tithes in the parish to the amount of 201. per annum.
So that any seven of the lowest classes of society might over-
turn an agreement entered into eleven years ago. Various ex-
cuses might be made to effect this object. Such injustice had
never been attempted before in the face of that House.
He objected in toto to the clauses, upon the principle that an
agreement entered into between the parties, with a full under-
standing that it was to be binding and final, ought not to be
disturbed.

Lord ALTHORP said the clauses, instead of being unjust
in their effects, were measures of strict justice. The agree-
ment alluded to by the Honourable Member was merely a
temporary agreement and entered into under circumstances
which did not now exist. The bill provided that when any
grievance was discovered, an appeal against it might very pro-
perly be admitted.
Mr. O'CONNELL said Government might as well abandon
the Bill at once as give up the clauses, for the Bill would not
work well without them. He thought them not only wise,
but extremely necessary, for the working of the Bill.
Mr. GOULBURN explained.
Mr. O'CONNELL also explained.
Mr. LE FRO Y opposed the clause as an act of injustice to
those who had entered into compositions.
Mr. O'REILLY supported the clause. Its tendency was
to do justice between the clergymen of Ireland and the tithe-
payers.
After a few words from Mr. Shaw, Mr. Walker, Mr. Grat-
tan, and Mr. Lefroy,
Mr. LITTLETON said, that the question had been so
well discussed, by the Members for Ireland on the one side,
and the Members for the Universities of Cambridge and Dublin
on the other, that it was quite unnecessary for him to trouble
the Committee at any length upon it. Although the Com-
missioners executed their duty with punctuality,. he still
thought that an appeal ought to be allowed in justice to all
parties ; whilst, at the same time, he did not think that ap-
peals in voluntary cases would be frequently made.—(" Di-
vide," " Question.")
Mr. GOULBURN stated, that having on several occasions
given his opinions at full length, he would now content him-
self with once more entering his protest against the Bill and
all its details.

Lord AIiTHORP said it was evident that luny. men