The Sun.
London, England, 1834-07-05 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY 5, 1834.

the voice and the confidence of the people. If, in endea-
vouring to carry such a-project into effect, they should be
driven from their station, it would be but for a season. They
would shortly be borne back on the shoulders of the people,
and supported by a principle maintained and established by the
consent of every rational being in the empire.—( Cheers.)
Then they would enjoy in Ireland that peace which England
did not know until the religion of the country was consonant
with the opinions of the great bulk of the people, which Scot-
land only exhibited when her clergy were identified and com-
bined with the population, and which never could be known in
Ireland until this grievous and harassing oppression was
removed.

Mr. LEFROY contended that the church property in Ire-
land stood upon exactly the same footing with the church pro-
perty in England. In answer to a question which had been
asked, he would say, that the tithes in Ireland were in reality
paid by the persons who possessed property in Ireland. His
principal object in rising was to call the attention of the house
to one point which had been urged, and to which he did not
think the Noble Lord opposite had given a satisfactory answer.
He wished to know what new light had broken in on the Go-
vernment since February? What additional information had
they gained since bringing forward their former Bill ? What
further facts were added to the report upon which that Bill had
been founded ? That Bill went upon the principle of convert-
ing the tithes into landed property. The Committee, upon
whose report the Bill was founded, and to which report the
Right Hon. the Secretary for Ireland was an assenting party,
came to the resolution that the conversion of tithes into
landed property was the only way to obviate the objections
made to them, and ultimately to set the question of tithes
at rest for ever. In another Committee of the Lords, the
Noble Lord the President of the Council concurred in
the same principle. And yet, notwithstanding this, they now
all of a sudden threw the Bill overboard, abandoning as well
the resolution contained in the reports as the Bill itself. Why
was this—what was the motive ? The only one which sug-
gested itself was, that Government was acting on the advice
of his Majesty's confidential adviser on Irish affairs, the Hon.
and Learned Member for Dublin.—( Hear, and a laugh.) The
resolution of to-night was in substance the same as that pro-
posed by the Learned Member for Dublin, and adopted his
his principle. Would such a measure, he asked, contribute to
the establishment of peace in Ireland? It would decidedly
not. No one class of persons agreed that it would. Enter-
taining
these opinions, he felt himself bound to oppose the
measure brought forward by Government.
Mr. LAMBERT was understood to say that he was at first
disinclined to support Ministers on this question ; but giving
them credit for a desire to do all in their power to ameliorate
the condition of Ireland, and seeing the unnatural alliance
which had taken place, had altered his determination. When he
saw a Right Hon. Gentleman who had so recently been con-
nected with the Government, and who had then described the
party with which he was now co-operating as the contemptible
remnant of an expiring faction ; when he witnessed such unions
he could no longer reconcile it to himself to be in opposition
to the Government. When the Right Hon. Gentleman could
so speak of men with whom he had been so long connected,
and whose measures he had supported—when he could speak
of them as a company of shoplifters—describe them as swin-
dlers and persons prepared to commit petty larceny, because
they wisely consented to give up a small portion of church
property to ensure tranquillity in Ireland, he should like to
know by what title the Right Hon. Gentleman would desig-
nate the 20,000,000/. granted by this country as a compensa-
tion for negro emancipation ? Last year that House granted
20,000,0001. for the purposes of humanity, and he would con-
fidently appeal to any gentleman who knew what the conse-
quences of the tithe system were in Ireland, whether it would
not be an act of the greatest humanity to the people of that
unhappy island to put a stop to them ? He would ask gen-
tlemen who were anxious for the interests of the church,
whether it could possibly injure the moral and religious inte-
rests of that church if its revenues were derived from a less
odious source than at present—partly from the State, and
partly from the voluntary payments of the landlords of
Ireland ?—( Hear, hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman
had used a phrase which he often heard repeated in
that House ; he had said that the law must be vindi-
cated.—( Hear.) He could not understand the meaning of
that expression.—(Laughter and loud cheers.) They had
said over and over again that the law was bad, and conse-
quently it was their duty to rectify it----( Hear) —but after
having told the people that it was bad, they did nothing to
amend it, and the people consequently took the law into their
own hands. He did not justify that, but he thought at least
they ought not to punish them for refusing obedience to a law
which they themselves had pronounced to be bad.—( Hear,
hear.) In fact, there was only one way of settling the ques-
tion, and that was by inducing the landlords of Ireland to take
the payment on themselves. It was in vain to tamper with
the evil, it must be finally and fairly settled, or it would be
vain to expect peace in Ireland.
Mr. SHAW said that Hon. Gentlemen had professed to
support this Bill as doing away the atrocious system of tithes.
Now, what he wished to point out was, that it did not do them
away. It was merely a question of degree. Was that House,
was Ireland, was the country, to be imposed upon by the belief
that tithes were abolished because the name was 'changed ?
( Hear.) Call it tithes, call it land-tax, call it rent-charge,
call it what you will, the yearly payment, which is the griev-
ance complained of, still remained to be paid. The Hon.
Gentleman alluded to the 20,000,0001. given last year to the
Colonies. What was the meaning of that allusion, if not to
insinuate that there was not wanting a precedent to give
English money to the Irish landlords ? But then after a great
deal of careful winding about the subject, the Noble Lord at
last let drop that he was ready to enter into the question of
appropriation. Ile did not doubt he was ready to talk about it
—(Hear,bear)—but why, if ready, did he not do it? How was
it that the Noble Lord and his colleagues did nothing, and
yet were ever making declarations ? He believed it was only
to get the votes of that House.—( Hear, hear.) Why also
should the Noble Lord ever be making declarations contrary
to the course he pursued ? If the Noble Lord were ready to
appropriate Church property, what need of the shuffle of a
Commission ? Why not at once come forward with a proposi-
tion to that effect ? The Noble Lord would insure an im-
mense majority,—( Loud cheers.) Oh ! he was perfectly
ready to admit that.—( Hear.) But that would be extremely
inconvenient to the Cabinet. It was more convenient to
tickle the ears of the House with church plunder than to
take any measures towards it. The only solution of the mys-
tery was, that the principle of the Members of the Cabinet in
that House were not the principles of the Cabinet as a cabinet.
Really there was no knowing how to meet the various plans
proposed. One day one measure was introduced, and another
day another. Nothing but shuffling. The Right Hon. Se-
cretary for Ireland blows hot and cold-4 No.) Really, be-
fore the Right Hon. Gentleman said no, he had better recall
the original plan to his recollection. The House knew that
the Right Hon. Gentleman's memory was none of the best.—
(A laugh.) The plan proposed was certainly very different
from that which originally had the Right Hon. Gentleman's
sanction. Why were the lay impropriators left out of the
Bill? Was this some paltry evasion? He was sure it was not
to please the House, for the House was as ready to apply the
principle to lay as to clerical impropriators.—( Hear.) As to
the country ever getting a farthing back for their advance,
it was entirely out of the question.—( Hear, hear.) They
had now only got 3,000/., out of which they proposed to pay
120,0001. a year. He would not call them fools.—( A laugh. )
He would not say they were guilty of an act of folly in giving
it ; but this he would say—give it if you like, but do not ex-
pect to see one farthing of it back--( Hear.) The measure
was not a certain or a perfect measure. It was originally one of
redemption. Now, as to part of it, it was so no longer.
Ministers, in short, found themselves in a predicament, but
they had neither the manliness to go back or - forward, and
they came to the House as usual to get them out of their
scrape, at the modest expense of 120,0001. a year. As to
the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, where was his
consistency ? He (Mr. Shaw) did not negociate with Govern-
ment—(" Nor I!" from Mr. O'Connell.) Why the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman denied negociation, and the negociation
was going forward now.—( A laugh.) He should have none of
his confidence. But he would put it to him, did he not expect
that the Coercion Bill would not meet with the support—the
cordial support of some of the members of the Cabinet in that
House 2—( Hear.) He inferred so from the Hon. and Learned
Member's acts, for had he not been urging upon them. that
night what a terrible thing it would be if the present Ministry
were out, and that if they, too, were to meet with that misfortune,
they would be brought in on the shoulders of Vie people ? and
yet, some days ago, when it was that Hon. and Learned
Gentleman's sincere conviction that the Coercion Bill would
be revived, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said, now is the
time for the House of Lords to come down and turn out the
present Ministry, and oh ! how we Repealers and Radicals
would support them—( Laughter, and hear, from Mr. O'Con-
nell.) So much for the consistency of that Hon. and Learned
Member.

Mr. GISBORNE said that when this measure was first
brought forward, and he was called on to vindicate the right
of property in tithes, leaving the question of appropriation, on
which it was intimated the Cabinet differed, unsettled, he cer-
tainly hesitated as to his vote ; but he considered the case
changed. Since the recent change in the Cabinet, the case
stood on very different grounds.—( Hear, hear.) The Mini-
sterial appointments had given the utmost satisfaction, and the
real question was, whether they should quarrel with people
who were travelling the same road with them, because they
did not travel fast enough for their wishes, and throw them-
selves into the arms of those who wished to travel in an oppo-
site direction.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite would in vain hold out his blandishments to you about
what he pleased to call the generous party with whom he acted.
—( A laugh.) Toryism had indeed hidden its diminished head
in that House ; it held a higher attitude in a House adjoining ;
but if they wished to see it in its genuine purity and spirit,
let them seek it at Oxford. There the child was first cradled,
nor did he doubt that its cradle would prove the dying bed of
its decrepitude.—(Loud laughter, and cheering.) The fact
was, that whatever disguise it might put on, Toryism was as
insolent, overbearing, and unteachable as it ever was, and so it
would ever continue to be.—( Hear, hear.) It had been
said that Ministers had not raised the question fairly, hut
he really thought that had not the question of appropria-
tion been raised, they would not have heard so vehe-
ment an opposition from the Hon. Gentleman, and the gene-
rous party with whom he was connected.—( Hear, hear.) The
Right Hon. Gentleman had talked of the difficulty of finding
the Church property of Ireland under any of the thimbles.
Let him (Mr. Gisborne) have the management of them, and
they should find it under the thimble of the Crown.—( Hear,
hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman had contended that a
beneficial principle---the principle of redemption—had been
removed from the Bill. But how did he make out that pro-
position ? He argued that the landlord was charged so low an
interest, that he would not think it worth his while to redeem
the title. He (Mr. Gisborne), however, was ready to admit
that the power of redeeming tithe was valuable; and he hoped,

therefore, that although it might be postponed, it was not
abandoned. Although it was highly desirable, also, that the
tithe should merge in inheritance, and should be no longer
known as tithe ; yet he could not help thinking that it was
unjust, and might be found inconvenient to lay out so large a
sum of money in land. There were other modes, such as
the funds and public securities of different kinds, in which at
least a portion of it might be invested. Nothing could be
more injurious than the pertinacity with which the Church
had always thrown impediments in the way of any satisfactory
arrangement. Some years ago, when everybody was desir-
ous of relieving. both the Church and the people from the
evils of the existing system, if the Church had not per-
tinaciously and doggedly set itself against any change a
plan for the redemption of tithe would have been car-
ried into effect. We were now called upon to make up any
deficiency that might arise from the operation of the proposed
measure out of the consolidated fund. He was willing to take
that course, but at the same time he pledged himself that he
would never cease his endeavours to repay that money to the
consolidated fund out of the revenues of the Irish Church.—
(Hear, hear.) He was willing to adopt the proposed resolu-
tion, not because it was perfectly satisfactory, but because it
was the best he could get ; but he repeated, he would never
cease to endeavour to effect a repayment to the consolidated,
not only of the ecclesiastical deficiency, but of the lay
tithe deficiency also. He hoped the Hon. Member for Mid-
dlesex would not persevere in his amendment. For himself,
whenever subjects of this kind were discussed, he always felt
disposed to move an humble address to his Majesty, praying
that he would be graciously pleased never to make another
Irish Bishop, and on the death of every Bishop in Ireland that
he would be graciously pleased to withdraw a regiment from
that country, and on the death of every Dean to withdraw a
battalion.—( A loud laugh, and cries of " Move, move.")
No, he would withdraw his amendment, and he hoped his
Hon. Friend the Member for Middlesex would withdraw his,
and allow them to get a concurrent- vote in favour of the
resolution before the House. He had a high opinion of his
Majesty's Government, and he was confident that the more
the hands of Government were strengthened, the further and
the faster Government would be able to go on the road which
they wished them to travel.

Mr. SHE IL did not desire to throw any vexatious obstacle
in the way of the Government where they had manifested the
least disposition to take a single step towards justice to Ireland
—but he could not avoid remonstrating with them on their
perverse, their weak, adherence to the doctrine that the per-
petuity fund was to be only applicable to the Church purposes.
—( Hear, hear, hear.) The resolution charged the entire de-
ficit on the Consolidated Fund, and then reimbursed that fund,
as far as ecclesiastical tithes only were concerned, out of the
surplus perpetuity fund ; apply it to the deficit of lay tithes,
and then we have at once the recognition of the great principle
of disappropt iation from the Church..-4 Cheers.) The 147th
clause originally provided that the surplus fund should be ap-
plied to such purposes as Parliament should think proper.
That clause was abandoned, and a sacrifice made to the
churchmen ; now is the time to reassert it, instead of sticking
to the conservative principle that ecclesiastical possessions are
to be applicable to none but ecclesiastical interests.—( Cheers.)
Good God ! do the Government, after all their declarations
pertinaciously adhere in practice to the principle which we
are told that they have relinquished ? But of what avail
would be the intreatics of men disposed to support them, where
they were right, when they are not roused and excited by the
taunts, the contumelious jeering of their conservative antago.
nists ? The Member for the University of Dublin re-
proached them with their pusillanimity, and their former
colleague, the late Secretary for the Colonies, whose
insiduous friendship was worse than open hostility, had
poured out all his acerbites upon his late associates. It was
not a little surprising that the Right Honourable Gentleman
who sat beside him, in such interestingjuxta-position.—( Loud
laughter)—the late First Lord of the Admiralty had contented
himself with nodding assent to all that was said by his Right
Honourable Associate, and had not, since his desertion of the
Ministers, broken a silence which might be judicious, but was
certainly remarkable. There they were together, a sort of
Parliamentary gemini, shedding their radiance in Conserva-
tive splendour over the fortunes of Toryism, and intimating
serenity to those who had hitherto held their way in the midst
of clouds and storms. The Secretary for the Colonies had
already spoken three times, explained his motives, and poured
forth his amiable emotions ; but the First Lord of the Admi-
ralty had remained profoundly silent. Is it that it would have
been superfluous in him to have spoken, and that all that he
could say or feel has been adequately expressed by his brother
in resignation 7—( Cheers.) What ! has the Secretary for the
Colonies proved a faithful representative, not only of his opi-
nions, but. of his sensibilities, and expressed all his tender re-
collections of his old official friendship, and former political
associations ? He should address a word or two to both those
Hon. Gentlemen, and have done. How could they reconcile
their former conduct with their present virulent opposition to
Government ? When they voted for reform, and supported it
with great vehemence, and resorted to such means to effect it,
did they not foresee that the reform of the Church must be the re-
sult ?—( Cheers.) Did they look before them ? Theydid not want
warning at least. The Member for Tamworth again and again
exclaimed that the downfall of the Church would inevitably follow
what he called their revolutionary innovations. How could
they think that the democracy of Ireland could be so
strengthened, and the Orange ascendancy laid prostrate,
without producing the consequences that are passing before
us ? Again, let them look at their own measures. Did they
not upset the very cradle of Protestantism when they de-
stroyed the Kildare-street Society ?—( Loud cheers.) Does
the Right Hon. Gent., the late Secretary for the Colonies,
remember how he was reviled and reproached by the men who
now join him in the church cry ? " You are robbing us,"
they exclaimed, "of the Bible."—(Loud cheers.) He des-
pised the Bible shout, and those whom he has abandoned may
hold in equal scorn the efforts which are made to arouse the
religious passions of the English people. Those endeavours
have failed; not a petition comes from England to this
House, in favour of the abuses of the Irish establishment.
Look at Finsbury.—( Laughter from the Tories.) They might
laugh at the mention of Finsbury ; but who was the Conser-
vative candidate ? The man who went with the Member for
Dover, on his celebrated hackney-coach expedition to Wind-
sor, to petition the late King against Catholic emancipation ?
_(Loud cheers.) This was the individual set up on High
Church principles, and his discomfiture was not a little omi-
nous of public sentiment. But to return to the two Right
Hon. Gentlemen. Did they not vote for the abolition of ten
Irish Bishoprics ? Did they not vote for the suspension of
Protestant incumbency in every parish where Divine Service
had not been performed for three years ? Was there no prin-
ciple involved in that measure ? Was it not an admission that
the extent of Protestant population was to be taken into
account in a parish ? Why not, then, in an entire country ?
( Loud cheers.) The late Secretary for the Colonies exclaims
against a reduction of 40 per cent. He himself supported a
Bill, reducing the Church property 20 per cent. Then it was
only a question of degree. The Right Hon. Gentleman said
that it was monstrous to charge the deficit on the consolidated
fund. Did he not support the proposition for abolishing Eng-
lish church-rates, and substituting a charge on the consolidated
fund ?—( Loud cheers.) Thus his whole conduct was a tissue
of inconsistencies. Let the Government bid him and his con-
federates defiance. Some one had said, " Now is the time for
the Lords." His answer would be " Now is the time for the
Commons and the English people."--( Cheers.) Nothing but
a little vigour on the part of the Government was requisite to
ensure their stability. The Conservatives did not dare take
office.—( Laughter from the Conservative benches.) Where-
fore, then, do they not accept it ? The:Lords are with them ; and
the late3Secretary for the Colonies made a significant reference
to an illustrious person on a former occasion. Yet, with all
their vaunting, they did not venture to stretch the hand to that
which was within their reach. Why ? Because they knew
that England was against them, and that the weakness, inde-
cision, and infirmity of the Government, afforded them their
only chance.

Sir ROBERT PEEL observed, that there were two prin-
ciples involved in the proposition under the consideration of
the Committee to which he objected. The first was, that the
public was called upon to contribute a certain sum to make
up the deficiency in question; that there was tot be an ab-
solute charge on the public purse, for which they had no
prospect whatever of remuneration of no less than
60,000/. He objected to the principle of that arrange-
ment.—( Hear, hear.) He objected to the proposition,
that, by way of providing for that deficiency, the sum
that was set apart last session by a solemn act of the legisla-
ture, on which arrangement a reform of the Church of Ireland
was asked for, was to be violated ; a course of proceeding
tending to shake all the confidence in the good faith both
of the Legislature and of the Government.—( Hear, hear. )
He objected further to the present proposition, because it was
much more open to objection than the measure of Government
which was brought in in February, and which constituted the
only security for the Church Establishment in Ireland. He
had thought that the object of Government had been to en-
courage the redemption of tithes—to effect the extinction
of tithes by the means of redemption.—( Hear, hear,
hear.) That was certainly the object of the measure of
February. They were now, however, going to make
tithes a permanent charge under the name of rent. His
Majesty's Government had adopted on this subject the pro-
position of an Hon. Gentleman; but, to use a figure of She-
ridan's, having stolen the Hon. Gentleman's child, they so dis-
figured it that its own father could hardly know it again.:---( A
laugh.) Indeed they had been cutting and hacking at it, so
that it now it now made a most miserable figure. But the
Noble Lord said " Pay this money out of the Consolidated
Fund, and be at peace with Ireland." If indeed the Noble
Lord were sure that peace with Ireland would be the result of an
acquiescence in his proposition, he was:perfectly warranted in
making it. But what shadow of argument had the Noble Lord
urged to show that such would be the consequence ? Of all
the vulgar arts of Government, the solving of political difti..
cultics by putting their hand into the public purse was the
most vulgar.—_.( Hear, hear.) It was a course which in all
countries, and in all times, was a symptom of weakness and
decay. ( Hear, hear.) His Majesty's Government had not the
courage. to enforce the law ; they had not the firmness to main..
tam just rights ; and ono year after another they called upon
Parliament for grants of public money, to meet the evils which
their conduct had occasioned.—( Hear, hear.) He would now
address himself to the question of redemption of tithes. An Hon.
Gentleman had said that it was the Tories who had called for
that redemption ; but it had been called for by the Whigs.
The course pursued by his Majesty's Government was most
complicated and unintelligible. First a commission was ap-
pointed to value the land ; then the tithes were to be sold
for four-fifths of their amount : then a charge was to be made
on the land ; then remuneration was to be granted out of the
Consolidated Fund : then the deficiency was to be made good
out of the public purse. The w'iole object seemed to be to
complicate and delude. Instead o' an open and intelligible
Bill of three clauses, they bacl a complicated and unintelli.
gible Bill of fifty clauses. But why had they changed their

views with respect to redemption ? He did, not compare the
present opinions of his Majesty's Government on this subject
with theopinions of the Tories ; he did not compare them with
their opinions at former and distant periods • but he merely
compared their opinions in this year with their opinions last
year.—( Hear, hear.) He asked what were the new circum-
stances which had occasioned their change of determination
with respect to the question of redemption ? Evidence was strong
and conclusive in favour of redemption. He would not
advert to the evidence of any High Churchman or of any
Tory, for he knew that that would be far from satisfactory to
his Majesty's Government. But there was Archbishop
Whately—he must be in full possession of the confidence of
his Majesty's Government ; he was a member of the Poor
Laws Commission ; he was a member of the Ecclesiastical
Commission ; His Majesty's Government must consider
him a high authority ; and he' ( Sir Robert Peel) therefore
confidently quoted Archbishop Whately's testimony to the su-
periority of redemption to a rent charge. To his evidence was
to be added that of the Lord Lieutenant, that of Mr. Blake (an
individual in whom the Government had great confidence),
and that of the Marquis of Lansdowne. All were in favour of
redemption ; all were in favour of securing tithe, as soon as it
was possible to do so, by providing a system of redemption.
The Bill which was brought in by his Majesty's Government
in February had that effect ; the object of the present propo-
sition was directly to the contrary. It was not absolutely ne-
cessary that the value of the tithe should be entirely vested in
land. The principle of redemption might be sanctioned with-
out a complete investment in land, although he certainly
thought the investment in land was an additional security.
But the Noble Lord did consent to its application to land.
Why had he now relinquished the principle of redemption
altogether? The redemption did not necessarily imply an in-
vesting in land. Would the Noble Lord consent to the fund
being invested in an Ecclesiastical Corporation? If not, he
should, at least, not say that the redemption necessarily implied
an investing in land. He had, however, heard the Noble Lord
admit that, at least, the landed proprietor had no right to
the tithe. They all agreed that it did not belong to him.
They all agreed that the Legislature had a right to exact
from him the full amount of the tithe, with a reasonable deduc-
tion for the trouble and risk of collection. If so, why ask the
people of England to take a charge upon themselves, by pay-
ing 60,0001. out of the consolidated fund ? He ( Sir Robert
Peel) thought that the first principle of his Majesty's Govern-
ment on this subject was to secure the property of the Church.
If so, were they prepared to enforce that principle in Novem-
ber next ? If they were thus prepared, why not take those
measures which were calculated to effect that object ? The
Noble Lord's present statement, however, was quite inconsist-
ent with the course which he had before recommended. .His
Majesty's Government might have adopted one of three
courses with respect to the condition of tithes in Ireland.
Either they might have declared the perfect inviolability of
Church property, which was the course that he ( Sir Robert
Peel) and those who thought with him would have chosen ;
or, secondly, they might have declared that they thought the
establishment too ample, and have recommended a differ-
ent appropriation of it, which was the course proposed
by the Honourable Gentleman ; or, thirdly, they might have
declared that they were not prepared to affirm the inviolabiiity
of Church property, or the right of Parliament to appro-
priate it—that they had not made up their minds on the
subject. Undoubtedly he had conceived that that third, that
intermediate course, was the course which his Majesty's Go-
vernment had resolved to adopt. He had supposed that,
having appointed a commission to examine into the subject,
they would not say a word about it until the report of that
commission had been received. Nay, he had heard the Right
Hon. Member for Cambridge say that it would be a most Irish
proceeding to pursue a different course. The Noble Lord
said, however, to-night, that he was perfectly ready to act on
the principle of the 147th clause ! The Noble Lord who,
three night's since, was not sure that there would be a surplus,
or, if there was, would limit it to moral and religious pur-
poses, was now ready to apply it to secular purposes; for cer-
tainly to give forty per cent. to the Irish landlords was not to
apply church property to moral and religious ppurposes.—
( Hear.) Why, what mockery was this ? He held in his hand
an Act of Parliament, brought forward by the Noble Lord
himself, and supported throughout by him and his colleagues,
in which he proposed to relieve the Irish Church Establish-
ment by abolishing twelve bishopricks. The Noble Lord
invited them to assent to the measure, on the grounds that the
proceeds of such reductions were to be formed into a fund ap-
plicable, according to the preamble, to purposes connected
with the Church, and in a few months afterwards he asked them
to consent to a measure the principle of which was of a totally
different character.—( Hear.) They had abandoned the 147th
clause of the Irish Church Temporalities Bill, and by so doing,
obtained the assent of the other House ; and they had agreed
to a preamble, which declared the number of bishoprics could
be conveniently diminished, and the funds derivable from them
be beneficially applied to the advancement of religion, and to
the more assured stability of the United Church of England
and Ireland. This they passed in 1833 ; and now, in 1834,
they came—to do what ? To show how well the act had
worked in the interim—what sums had been realized—how
beneficially they had been disposed of?—( A laugh.) No
such thing I They had not a shilling to apply for the ad-
vancement of religion ; and what they did was to lay hold of
the first proceeds of the fund—of the first dawning, more pro-
perly speaking, of that fund—and make a present of it to the
Irish landlords, of all persons in the world—( Cheers and
laughter)—and not one reason had they assigned for it I If
they would take some clear and consistent course—if they
would endeavour to act on something like an intelligible prin-
ciple—if they, for instance, proposed a vote of Parliament for
the redress of the wrongs of the Irish clergy—and then a
plan for the redemption of tithe, the fund to be placed
at the disposal of a corporation ; if they would take
such a course as that, assert the supremacy of the law,
and then strike at the root of the evil, Honourable Mem-
bers might indulge some hope of a better state of things ;
but when they followed the same unintelligible line of policy
—never sure, always varying—when they brought in Bills one
day and denied their principle the next—when they passed
Acts one Session and went directly in the teeth of them in the
following Session—when they told them the first day of the
week their minds were really made up--that the surplus, if
surplus were found, must be devoted to objects strictly in con-
nection with religious purposes—and on the last day of the
week were found consenting that it should be appropriated to
such merely secular purposes as they might hereafter decide
upon—to his (Sir R. Peel's) plain view of things, they went
on in such a way as to give satisfaction to no party, and to re-
pudiate that confidence without which the functions of Go.
vernment could never be carried on worthily to individuals, or
usefully for the interests of society.--( Loud cheers.) But
there were reasons for this vacillation—( Cheers from the Con-
servatives, echoed from the Ministerial benches.) They knew
well on those benches opposite there were reasons for all this
Cheers.) Depend on it there were reasons—
there must be reasons, though all did not yet know them.—
( Cheers.) They were not even then agreed on the question
of appropriation.—( Great cheering.) Their commission
11 bad been born in a week—the offspring of necessity—of a
desire to get any how through the Session.--( Cheers. )
Why Was not the Noble Lord prepared to deal with the
principle of appropriation ? Why did he not come
to some determination upon it ? ( Hear, hear.) Why thus
play with it ?—why longer postpone it? It was better for
him, for them, for the people, that the question should not be
longer postponed.---( Great cheering.) When they saw the
course which the appropriation question would take in regard
to the Irish Church, then would they have some data from
which to draw their conclusions as to the English Church.
He (Sir Robert) would consent to reform ; but he would not
consent to any thing which would, in the slightest degree,
trench on the inviolability of Church property.—( Cheers. )
But under what circumstances had they passed through the
recess ? He ( Sir Robert Peel) smiled at the congratulations
which had been indulged in at the arrival of that happy hour
when Ministers could boast of an united Cabinet.--( Hear,
hear.) Oh yes, they had at length an united Cabinet.
( Laughter.) Now all incumbrances were got rid of—the
dead weight was thrown overboard--( Peculiar cries of " Hear,
hear")—the clogs on the easy movement of the well-jointed--
the united Cabinet—were all removed—they were unanimous;
only let them show confidence in each other, and they would
go on excellently.—(Laughter and cheers.) Now, let them
look fora moment into the whole of that portion of the
Cabinet which constituted the Irish Government. There was,
first, his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant ; and then the
Lord Chancellor; and then the Chief Secretary. This
was what might be termed the Cabinet of Ireland. —( Loud
laughter.) When the Right Hon. Chief Secretary returned
to Ireland—(Laughter)—of course the Lord Lieutenant (who,
it was well known, had been for years the steady and consistent
advocate of redemption in conjunction with Mr. Blake, Arch-
bishop Whateljr, the Marquis of Lansdowne, and other emi-
ment authorities), would naturally say to him " well have you
brought over the redemption clause ?"—that clause, be it ever
remembered, which the Government solemnly sanctioned the
principle of by their Bill of last session—" have you brought
that clause over? because you know my opinion that there
cannot be peace in Ireland till a redemption of tithe is deter-
mined on, and the principle put into operation. Did I not, in
1824, when I was Lord Lieutenant, send Blake over to Lord
Liverpool to persuade him to give effect to the principle of re-
demption ?" Such would be the natural language of the Lord
Lieutenant. The reply of the Chief. Secretary he ( Sir R.
Peel) could not divine.--( Hear, hear.) But what would the
Lord Chancellor of Ireland (Lord Plunket) say to the com-
mission ?—( Loud cries of hear, hear.) The extract from the
speech of Mr. Plunket, maintaining the inviolability of Church
property, and declaring that guarantee there was none for pri-
vate property if Church revenues were touched, had, according
to the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, been quoted six
or eight times in that House. This speech accorded but
strangely with the issuing of the commission.—( Hear, and a
laugh.) Why, he would ask, was not the Lord'Chancellor Plun-
ket named one of the commissioners ?__( Great cheering.) Re-
posing full confidence in his ability—.acknowledging his great
experience—admitting his practical knowledge of the subject—
how was it that they did not appoint their own Chancellor on
their commission ?—( Cheers.) They appointed their English
Chancellor on it—Lord Brougham was one of the Irish com-
mission.—( Great laughter.) Lard Brougham was appointed
one of a commission which was to scour every parish in Ire-
land, to make important and extensive inquiries, to furnish a
vast quantity of valuable statistical information ; but he could
not go there—the roving commission must leave him behind,
for he was wanted in England.—( Cheers.) Now, he really
believed Lord Brougham had never been in Ireland—he cer-
tainly had no personal knowledge, to any extent, of the
country, and yet he was appointed one of the Commissioners ;
while Lord Plunket, an Irishman—thoroughly acquainted
with the country, filling the highest judicial station—having,
of course, much to do from time to time with ecclesiastical
matters, was left out of that commission. How was this?
Did Lord Plunket disapprove of the commission ?—( Great
cheering from the Opposit-i,, answered from the Ministerial

benches.) Did Lord Plunket concur or not? Did the Irish
Chancellor approve or not of the ultimate object which, accord-
ing to Ministerial declarations, that commission must have in
view ?—( Continued cheering.) If he did approve of it, why
was he not on the Commission ? There must be some reason
for so unusual an exclusion--what was it? He (Lord Plun-
ket) was naturally after such a speech as that from which an
extract had been read, adverse to the ultimate object of Minis-
ters, and the omission of his name as one of the Commission,
convinced him ( Sir Robert Peel) that the Noble Lord, the
Chancellor of Ireland, dissented from that Commission.—
( Great cheering.) Would any one of the now united Cabinet
answer his question ? Would any one account for the omis-
sion of the Irish Chancellor's name?--( Hear, hear.) Well,
he could hardly expect an answer to his question—doubtless it
was an awkward one.--( A laugh.) Then there was the
Coercion Bill.--(Laughter.) There was union for them.—
( Great laughter.)
An HoN. MEMBER—The Catholic question.
Sir ROBERT PEEL—To be sure it did remind them of
old times ; on the Catholic question there certainly was a dif-
ference of opinion ; but then it was acknowledged—it was
openly avowed, and they inherited their lesson from whom—
the - Government of 1807.—(Cheers.) But here, on every
practical measure, Ministers differed one with another—
( Hear, hear)—on the question of the reduction of tithes--
on the Church Commission—on the Coercion Bill—they all
held different opinions, or, at all events, different shades of
opinions.—( Hear, hear.) There were three Ministers `for
Ireland—the Lord Lieutenant, the Chancellor, and the
Secretary ; there were three measures—Tithes, Church
Commission, Coercion Bill ; on these three measures these
three men all held different opinions, and yet they had an
united Cabinet.—( Great laughter, and cheering from both
sides of the. House.) But they were told that, within these'
few days, all things had been settled ; that they formed now
a firm and compact body agreed on principles—all bound by
the same opinions. He did not believe it. He was not satis-
fied. And when he looked to the country—when he saw the
rights of property delivered over in Ireland to a Commission
—when he saw a number of gentlemen strolling about collect-
ing information as to the relative number of Catholics and
Protestants—when he found rent charges proposed as a sub.
stitute for tithes—when he saw the principle of redemption,
so heartily avowed last Session by Ministers, now cast
heedlessly to the winds—there was, indeed, a prospect
presented to his mind much better calculated to depress
and alarm, than to encourage and support it.—(Cheers.)
Seeing these things—seeing the ambiguous policy that
was pursued—the devious and ever-varying path that was
taken—that at the very moment he ( Sir Robert Peel) was
speaking, there was no such thing as an united Govern-
ment in the country—that the Cabinet was, in fact, a double-
minded one, unstable, unequal to the rigorous 'execution of
the functions of office—he would consent to no such proposi-
tion as the one which had been submitted, the ultimate con-
sequence of which Ministers themselves were totally inade-
quate to comprehend.—( The Right Hon. Gentleman was
loudly cheered for some time after he resumed his seat.)
Lord ALTH 0 RP said a few words in explanation, the
exact import of which he could not catch.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL spoke at some length in defence
of a rent-charge in lieu of the present system ; but his argu-
ments were precisely the same as those used by Mr. Littleton
and Lord Althorp. The Noble Lord afterwards proceeded
as follows :—The Right Hon. Gentleman had spoken of the
Cabinet as a disunited one. He begged to inform him,
though he had ventured on the assertion, he bad not proved
the fact. He had failed in his object--( Great cheering) he
Cabinet was not disunited, whatever hopes might have been
indulged on the subject.—( Continued cheers.) On that and
on every subject, without an exception, which had reference
to Ireland, there was not a shade of a difference of opinion
in his Majesty's Government.—( Hear, hear.) They had ap-
pointed a Commission, through whose agency they would ob-
tain facts—positive facts, and not mere opinions—as to the
real state of the Protestant Church in Ireland andthe Protes-
tant and Catholic population ; that commission, he begged to
say, was not a recent thought ( Hear, hear, from several
of the Ministers), as the Right Honourable Baronet seemed
to say ; and never, in his whole life, was he (Lord John)
more astonished than when he heard the assertion that it was
so.—(Loud cheers, in which Mr. Littleton's voice was parti-
cularly heard.) He should maintain his already expressed
opinion, that on a subject like this, to legislate effectually, they
must know their ground—they must proceed upon facts.--
( Hear, hear.> Sure, indeed, was he, that if they had not
proposed this commission—if they had proceeded at once to
legislation, without instituting proper inquiries—without having
undeniable data on which to work—they should have been very
soon met from a certain quarter of the opposition side of the
House, with the argument that inquiry should be first entered
on—with the taunt why had it not been entered upon.—( Loud
cheers.) They would have heard some very fine sentences
indeed in the indignant tone of reprobation—such as they had
had a specimen of that night, about sacrilege and so on. But
he (Lord J. Russell) would not be taken in the trap.—( Hear,
hear.) He would not be induced, by the taunts of the Right
Honourable Gentleman to go forward and discuss a question
which, when it came properly before them, he would never
shrink from ; he was sure the facts would be all before
them without any very great loss of time, and he did not
think it wise to go more into the subject till that was the
case.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The Right Honourable Baronet
had spoken tauntingly of certain members of the Govern-
ment not being of the same mind on one or two matters
Now, whatever he might suppose, it was not in his (Lord
John's) power, perhaps, to correct; but this he could assure
him, that he could have conjecture only for his authority.
But, supposing it otherwise, should the Right Hon. Baronet
be the one above all others to tell them of it? Did he not
once belong to a Cabinet where there was openly a difference
of opinion on the most vital subject of the period ?—( Hear,
hear.) When in that House Secretary answered Secretary—
(Loud cheers)—and Minister voted against Minister ? And
what was the end of that disunion ? Was it not ended by the
Right Hon. Baronet himself coming down to that House and
stating that his opinions were not changed, but that such was
the state of disunion which the question had wrought in the
Cabinet and the Parliament, that there was no hope for the
peace of Ireland but by an ample measure of concession and
justice.—(Loud cheers.) Supposing the Right Hon. Baronet
and others who acted with him came into power and deter-
mined on maintaining the present appropriation of the revenues
of the Irish Church, what would be the result ?—(Hear,
hear.) They might, perhaps, by good luck and management,
keep their places for two or three uneasy Sessions—they
might, with almost adverted eyes, get through two or three
cruel and bloody winters—(Hear)—they might see insurrec-
tion in one point--misery and despair in another—they might
for a time- keep down the people of England goaded into
a state of wild religious fanaticism—(Loud cheers)—but
could this last—could they hope for any length of time to
maintain a government whose acts were contrary to every
maxim of reason, of policy, and of justice—( Loud cheers.)
Could they—would they do this merely in the 'hope of making
the Irish a religious people according to their own tenets ?
would they have religion instilled into them by troops of dra-
goons and heaps of Exchequer processes--(Great cheering
and confusion, with a cry of " No, no.") He (Lord John)
said yes—( Confusion.) He repeated it, such was their object
—( In the confusion something was said which we could not
catch.) Oh ! to be sure, they did not oblige any man to
attend a place of worship if he dissented from their religion—
but why, then, he asked, if such was not their object sooner or
later—why keep up the Church at its present size, but in the
belief that the Roman Catholic would one day or other be
brought to their faith—( Loud cheers.) Then he (Lord John)
was not wrong in saying that if they were in power, and
attempted to keep up the Irfsh Church as at present, there
would be one endless scene of warfare and of blood, and after
two or three years of vain attempts at maintaining their sys-
tem, the Right Hon. Baronet would again have to come down
to that House, and say my opinions are unchanged.—
( Cheers and laughter.) But the truth must be told—
our course of policy is hateful to suffering Ireland—
intolerable to indignant England—( Cheers.) You, gen-
tlemen fro m Oxford and other places—(Loud laughter)—must
renounce the opinions you have hitherto acted upon, and join
in giving effect to a measure of concession and justice as large
and as ample as that which was wrung from us some years
back by the Catholic portion of our countrymen.—( Cheers. )
Feeling persuaded that this would have been the course of
those who now opposed the government, he thought it the bet-
ter and wiser way to undertake this question at present. If
gentlemen choose to say that the resolution involved spoliation,
involved sacrilege, he would not now dispute the point with
them.--( Hear.) It was not his opinion. He thought, on
the contrary, that by agreeing to this Bill, they were laying
the foundation of what had not been hitherto effected—that
was a permanent commutation of tithes ; and he did hope that
in the course of the next year they would settle that other
more difficult question of the appropriation of tithes?
Mr. CHRISTMAS rose amid great confusion, and cries of
" Question." He was understood to declare that he would
vote against the measure, because it did not go to support the
principle of a Church Establishment.
Mr. WALKER, amidst similar interruptions, expressed
his adhesion to the Government, because the alterations pro-
posed were concessions and improvements as now proved by
the kind of opposition they excited. No greater boon was
granted to the landlords of Ireland than under the circum-
stances of the case they were entitled to receive.
Mr. HODGE S wished Ministers would not delay bringing
in a measure to correspond with their declarations respecting
appropriation. It was not, therefore, on account of the ap-
proximation of this Bill, and the principle of the 147th
clause, that he should be obliged to vote against them.—
( Laughter.) What he objected to was the grant of a sum
of money out of the consolidated fund. (Hear, hear.) If he
thought it would tranquillize Ireland, no man would be more
ready to grant it than himself; but could any one suppose that
the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin or his friends
would, directly or indirectly, give a pledge not to agitate the
repeal of the Union ?—( A laugh..) It was vain to expect
tranquillity in Ireland till legal provision was made there for
the relief of the poor.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. ELLICE said, that if he thought the proposition now
before the House was to have the effect of taking money out of
the consolidated fund, to apply to the uses of Irish landlords,
he would join the Hon. Member for Middlesex in opposing it.
—( Hear, and a laugh.) He wished to explain what the pro-
position before the House was. According to the original
provisions of the Bill, twenty per cent. was to be deducted from
the rent charge compulsorily imposed upon the Irish landlord.
This additional twenty per cent. was to be offered to him as
an inducement to undertake the voluntary payment of that
rent charge. That additional allowance would be made to
him when that great good was effected for the public, of
absOlutely relieving the occupying tenant from the burthenof
tithes.—(Cheers.) He could not conceal from himself the
increased danger which accompanied every renewed attempt
to force this wretched payment from the peasantry
_of re-
land,--‘ Cheers. ) Gentlemen pretend to compare the con

dition of the Church in Ireland with the condition of the
Church in England, and the condition of the Irish with that
of the English payers of tithes ; but he asked now, as he had
before, on the occasion of the debate so often referred to, would
any county in England have submitted for one year to the
10,000 tithe processes which had issued out of the Ecclesiasti-
cal Courts of Ireland ?—( Cheers.) He asked gentlemen
whether any English county. would, for half the time Ireland
has, have endured these grievances—have submitted to see
poor cotters, labourers, dependent upon the rates, processed
for these miserable three-pences and four-peuces. at was to
put an end to this system that the Government now stepped
forward.—( A cry of "No ! " from the Opposition.) Whe-
ther right or wrong, that was the honest intention of Ministers.
He was willing to take the risk of non-repayment of this ad-
vance for the certain good it would produce, for it must be al-
ways borne in mind that not one shilling would be paid to the
landlords without our having previously obtained the advan-
tage of relieving the Irish tenant from this burthen.—( Cheers. )
Mr. GO ULB URN denied that the Bill would relieve the
cottier from the charge of tithe. Tenants who had no leases
were excluded already by the Bill of the late Right Hon. Se-
cretary for the Colonies, which had in such cases imposed the
burden at once upon the landlord.—{ Hear, hear. As to te-
nants with leases, he denied that they either would get any
relief whatever under this Hear, hear.) The landlord
would get a remission, but would have the power of exacting
the whole amount from the tenant in the first instance, in the
direct shape of tithes, and ultimately in the shape of rent. It
was, therefore, a false representation of the Bill to say that it
would relieve the cottier tenant. _

Mr. ELLICE said, that the landlord, when he made a vo-
luntary composition, would only recover from his tenant the
reduced amount, and that surely was a relief to the tenant.
The tenant would be a gainer by three-fifths of the tithes.
Mr. GOULBURN—That is a very different statement
from the last.--( Cheers from the Opposition.) The grievance
stated was the issuing of 10,000 processes, and the persona
liable to process remain the same, except in so far as they
have been reduced by the Bill of the late Right Hon. Secre-
tary for the Colonies.—( Cheers.)
Mr. ELLICE—The question of advantage entirely depends
upon whether the landlord takes the debt upon himself volun-
tarily. Unless he does there will be no advance from the con-
solidated fund.

Mr. O'fi.E IL LY, amidst much confusion, was understood
to say, he should support the measure as a boon as far as it went.
• Mr. LITTLETON also rose amidst much noise and mani-
fest signs of impatience to divide. He said : "My Right
Hon. Friend (Mr. Stanley), if he will permit me so to call
him—( Laughter)—in his very temperate and singularly friendly
speech, was pleased, in adverting to the manner in which the
clauses of this bill had been changed, to designate me as a
thimble player. —( Loud laughter.) I receive his joke in per-
fectly good part I assure him, although I certainly think it of
a strange nature to come from one who, if any man deserves
the title, is certainly the greatest performer of legerdemain that
ever practised upon the tithe laws,of Ireland.—( Cheers and
laughter.) I do not mean to say anything that can give
offence. By no means ; but it is impossible for any gentle-
man who bears in mind the part taken by the Right
Honourable Gentleman on the tithe question in 1831,
in 1832, and down to the period he quitted the
post I have now the honour to fill, not to be
aware that no individual could in the same space of
time have made more experiments in legislation with re-
gard to any species of property, or could have more signally
failed.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Do I mean to reproach my
Right Hon. Friend in saying this ? Far from it. I supported
him, as I thought, with reason—certainly with zeal ; and if ho
failed, it was in common with the Government and the majo-
rity of the House ; but I do still say, that the observations he
permitted himself to make on the part it has been my misfor-
tune to be obliged to take, came with a singularly bad grace
from my Right Hon. Friend.—(Hear, hear, hear.) After all
his honest and able efforts, how does the property of the tithe-
owner stand now ? Not three weeks have elapsed since I
forwarded to the Treasury a bill for 6001. to defray the charge
of a waggon-train, which my Right Hon. Friend, in his in-
genuity, had ordered out in Ireland, for the purpose of trans-
porting the smaller and more valuable effects of the peasantry
from the districts where they were taken to remote parts,
where the sources from which they were derived might be un-
known.—(Tremendous cheering.) I blame not my Right
Hon. Friend for the invention of this ingenious resource ; but
again I say that the remarks he has made come with a pecu-
liarly bad grace from him.—( Cheers.) The Right Hon.
Gentleman opposite, the Member for the University, on this,
as on former occasions, has indulged in predictions as to the
course of events with respect to this property. Let the
House bear in mind that he has solemnly predicted that we
shall never be able to recover one farthing of the money ad-
vanced out of the Consolidated Fund. Now I beg the Com-
mittee to recollect that he made an equally solemn prediction
Jest session with respect to the course which would be pursued
by the clergy of the Established Church in reference to the
advance of money then offered. He said that if he knew any-
thing of the spirit of devotion which animated the clergy,
they would not pollute their fingers with one farthing of that
money.—( Hear.) Yet, sir, a week, aye, a month before the
period limited for the delivery of their memorials and sche-
dules, the castle-yard in Dublin was blackened with the coats
of these great men, the constituents of the Hon. Member,
whose principles of acting he was so well acquainted with,
coming to make their claims.--( Cheers.) Ido not yield to
him in my respect, for that body of men ; for I believe that, as
a body, they are as exemplary and excellent as the clergy of
England themselves. For their sufferings and privations,
therefore, I have the sincerest sympathy. When the Hon.
Gentleman and my Right Hon'. Friend insist so strongly on
the injustice of our course, let them reflect on the state of
the property of the Church at this moment.--( Hear, hear,
hear.) Let me tell them one short story as an illustration of
what is now passing in the middle, west, and south of Ire-
land, where the clergy have not had the prudence to avail
themselves of the relief offered them under the act of
the last session. I will not mention names, but the case is
one of a clergyman, who is also an impropriator, and occurred
in the south of Ireland. The tenantry were indebted to him
altogether about 3,9001. or thereabouts. For seven weeks he
had the assistance of a large military force : it was employed,
unceasingly, on the most harassing of all duties; but after a
time it was found vain to employ the troops by day, for a uni-
versal alarm was spread through the country, and the cattle
disapperred. The plan of marching them by night was
adopted ; but as very cottier keeps his dog, the trampling of
the horses made them give the alarm, and by the time the
troops arrived the cattle were driven by the peasants into
their houses, where the law made it impossible to touch them.
What was the result ? That this individual wrote to the Lord
Lieutenant at Dublin on the subject, stating that after all his
efforts for thirty days and nights he had not at the utmost col-
lected more, on the average, than 81. per day. He, therefore,
prayed the Lord Lieutenant to order an increase of force to
be encamped in small detachments all over the property, as
the only means of obtaining success was to starve the cattle
out.—( Hear.)
Mr. 0' CONN E L L.—Were there not five lives lost?
Mr. LITTLETON—The Hon. and Learned Member for
Dublin says that five lives were lost. I was not aware of the
fact, or it has escaped my memory ; but it may be so. I re-
gret extremely having been forced to make any statement of
this description, for I know that the mere recital of such a
successful effort of passive resistance may operate as an en-
couragement to it in future. For this reason I should not
have mentioned it, except in the hope of convincing Hon.
Members by so forcible an example of the consequences of the
course they would have us pursue, what an erroneous view
they take of the interests of this country. The Right. Hon.
Gentleman complained of the abandonment of the plan of in-
vesting the funds of the Church in land. But if redemption
was abandoned, the plan of investment in land was necessarily
so likewise ; for in the present state of the Money-market I
do not see how we could have raised an income for the clergy.
But the investment of land, although it had its advantages,
was open to some objections. In the first place, it was ob-
jected to by the great majority of the landowners, which, in
legislating for Ireland, I deem an objection to be attended
to. A further objection was found in the increased poli-
tical influence which it would have given to the clergy ; this
also I think a fair objection : I should not, however, have
yielded to it, unless I had been able to discover a mode of
realising an income for the tithe owners, independently of this.
My Hon. Friend concluded his able address—when are not his
addresses able ?—by inveighing against the commission which
is to be issued. lam proud to be at liberty to say, that no
member of the Government has been more zealous for the
appointment of that commission than myself. Any attempt
to settle the Irish church question by any other mode would
be unavailing, because unjust. Those who object to it do so
for good and sufficient cause.—( Hear, hear, hear.) They
know that that commission must produce a report, which will
contain a statement of facts, on which, if cunning and party
should not succeed in shifting the honesty and common sense
of the country—( Cheers)—something must be done. It will
bring about such a knowledge of facts as must put an end to
the grievances complained of. It will be a most useful ma-
nual for the people of England, and will explain fully the
grounds on which the Government proceed, and if this mea-
sure should fail, it will serve as a sure basis for future opera-
tions. I must beg leave to read to my Right Hon. Friend
what I must own struck me some time ago as worthy of his
attention. It is an extract from his celebrated speech
against the motion of the Hon. Member for Middlesex in
1824. It was, I believe, the first he delivered, and pro-
duced a great effect upon the House.—( The Right Hon.
Gentleman here read an extract from Mr. Stanley's speech
delived on the occasion referred to, in which Mr. Stanley ex-
pressed his hope that some impartial commission should go
forth to examine into the whole of the political and moral rela-
tions of this question.) Now, till this commission was ap-
pointed, had any such commission as is here described gone
forth ? My Right Hon. Friend appointed a commission to
inquire into the revenues of the Church ; but that was certainly
partail in its bearing.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The commission
now appointed is completely and accurately described in the
the speech of my Right Hon. Friend, as the one thing neces-
sary to be appointed.—(Cheers.) I have only one more re-
mark to make, which will beaddressed to the Hon. and
Learned Member for the University of Dublin. I know not
what share he may have had in the production I am about to
read to him, but I have no doubt he has some acquaintance
with it, for it speaks what I believe to be his own sentiments.
isteotsf
making origin
here At no distant period this circular was submitted to the clergy
of Ireland, havingad i
:G—Llrtnmiseunntdteermstpooordarythat the
trus-
teese the
l'it
of tli
Tithe
l3ille
n
land tax, will make them permanent trustees, with-
out power of redemption or limitation. Will the clergy con-
sent to their friends resisting, in a manner which may even-
tually throw out the Bill, and leave them to the composition,
or will they submit to the partial plunder of themselves and
total ruin of their sucessors ?"—( Hear, hear, hear.)
Mr. SH A W—l never heard o it.
Mr. LITTLETON—I know not what answer the elerr