The Sun.
London, England, 1833-02-27 00:00:00

do
nothing.—(Hear.) Many years ago, Sir Wm. Petty
when the Catholic population of Ireland was much less
than at present, said that two Bishops for Ireland were
sufficient, but for his own part he thought that even two
were too many.—(Laughter.) Contrasting:the Protestant
population of Ireland with that of England, he believed
that the Bishops who would be left by the plan of Minis-
ters, would he by far too many.—(Hear.)
Mr. P. BARRON said that he would plead guilty
to the charge that his ancestors had enjoyed too
great a portion of Church property, but they supported the
poor. He charged the Protestant clergy with a gross
ttadernusi
pdtcalaecnt,retidm,
ea.n d
Thehad th
Protestant ere by dri
snt
atbhiej
smh
rnt oe
npto
fp rltrye,l a
violation of their oaths, for th,y had left the people une-
mndisewray;
npaeypultatiinotnr.uplec,hwurhcaht
pwraospenrteycewssaasryerfoigrinthaellyPirno:
tended for the instruction of the people, and he
asked how had the holders of it fulfilled
their trust?—(Hear.) With respect to the measure of
Church reform in Ireland, it did Minister, great credit,
for he believed they had gone as far as they could.
(Hear, hear.) But if they wished for the prosperity
of that country, they must adopt some speedy means
of appropriating the tithes in Ireland—(Hear, hear)
to the support of the poor, and the education of the
people.—(Hear, hear.) However strong or virulent the
measures of Ministers might be—although they might put
down violence and tumult for the moment, it would
only be for the moment, unless they educated the
people, and supported the poor. He was sorry that the
Noble Lord (Althorp) was not in his place, but, perhaps,
some Geotleman on the Treasury Bench could answer a
question, upon which several of his constituents wished to
have information. They wished to ascertain what the inten-
tions of Government were with regard to what was termed
Ministers' money. He did not know how that was re-
gulated in England, but in Ireland the money was col-
lected according to some ancient valuations, and in some
parts, particularly in the city of Waterford, which he re-
presented, many houses were valued at ten pounds
and under, which let at thirty or forty pounds a year.
The collection of that money often led to acts of violence,
and he thought it was a subject which well deserved the
consideration of Ministers.
An Host. MEMBER, in reference to the assertion that
the tithes in Ireland had been transferred by Act of Par-
liament from the Catholics to the Protestants, said
he believed there was no such Act in existence ; if
there were, he should be glad to know where to find it.
Certain he was that in this country there was no such an
act. There were acts passed in the reign of Henry VIII.,
not for the transfer of tithes, but for their levy, for it ap-
peared that at that time there was as great
difficulty in collecting tithes in this country as there was
at this moment in collecting them in Ireland.
Mr. HILL believed there was no such act; indeed none
was necessary, for the Catholic clergy of that day
became convinced of their Catholic errors, the
very moment that the head of the Church—the King--
became convinced. The Catholic clergy then sud-
denly became Protestants, and those who had enjoyed
the tithes as Catholics then received them as Pro-
testants. With respect to the abolition of tithes,
tnany persons, himself among the rest, believed that they
came in iinly from the pockets of the landlord, and that a
total abolition of them would not be in favour of
the poorer classes ; but would go to the land-
lord who would then have ten tenths the value of the
land, instead of six or seven tenths, as at present..
(Hear, hear.) That might be a fallacy—it might be
erroneous, but many eminent men had strong opinions
upon it.—(Hear.) With respect to remunerating the
clergy, he should vote for paying them in a different manner
from that now adopted. The use of the Church was to
teach the great doctrines of religion ; and it was most
unfortunate that there was a mode of payment which put
the clergyman and his parishioners in opposition to each
other, and rendered the latter much less inclined than
they should he to seek the excellent advice of the former.
An Hole. MEMBER said, that he knew practically, as
well as theoretically, that the burden of tithes fell upon the
landowners, and not landholders.
Mr. COBBETT—Some Hon. Gentlemen to the right
and left of me have been making some assertions which
I must beg leave to examine the foundations of. It has
been stated that two-thirds of the property of the whole
kingdom rests upon the same foundation as tithes
and other church property. It must, however, be granted
that the possession of much of the land in the king-
dom arises from grants from the Crown, or from for-
feitures. Now, the rights of the parties holding
church property are very different. That property was
conferred upon them by an Act of Henry VIII., but it was
conferred upon them, subject to certain conditions, viz.,
that the new proprietors should for ever discharge the
duties consequent upon holding that property, and satisfy
the demands to which it had before been subject. Now.
I say, that no part of the tithes were granted
away without being subject to these commissions, as also
all conventual and monastic property. The case therefore
is not quite so clear as the Hon. Member near me sup-
poses. If he imagines that the Act of Henry was
intended to be forgotten, let him look to the
different Acts of Edward and Elizabeth, and he
will perceive the same spirit running through them. I
do not wish to anticipate the regular and full
discussion we must have upon this subject, but another
great error prevails upon it, with respect to which I wish
to disabuse the House. Gentlemen speck as if it were
the parsons in Ireland who own ail the tithes, and ate
suffering by the difficulties of its collections—(Hear,
hear)—but the parsons held a very knoll share of the
great mass of property which the people pay under the
name of tithe. It is the aristocracy which holds
that property. The House, perhaps, are not aware
that there are dioceses in Ireland, in which there
are not more than seven Protestant clergymen, and
there is, I believe, one diocese where the Bishop has only
to look after five parsons.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
The House is not perhaps aware that lay tithes
form three-fourths of the tithes of Ireland, and
that the Bill which the Noble Lord the Chancellor
of the Exchequer is to move to-night for the esta-
blishment of Courtsmartial in Ireland, in the the first in-
stance, and afterwards in England, is to compel the p op •
to pay their money to the aristocracy. We he ird with gnat
feeling the stage-coach stories about the sufferings of the
Protestant clergy of Ireland, and I believe that many of
the people of England, thinking that there is a parson in
every parish, as there is in this country, began to think it
too hard that the poor parsons should have the trouble
of doing their duty without getting any thing for it
'Hear.) Now, the fact is, that the tithes, as

said before, are for the must part in the hands m
laymen. There does not appear to be more than 500
Protestant Clergymen receiving tithes in Ireland, whilst
the number of Cabolic priests performing the duty is no
less than 2,500.--(Cries of " No, no.") I speak from
returns which ad the House will have an opportunity of ex
atnining. I say again that Lords, Baronets, and Squires enjoy
the ti hes, and, generally speaking, not the clergy, al-
though, of course, there are a few ot them who do. It is
nut correct, ttieretore, to say t ,at it is the hierAt chy ot
Ireland w htch is the main cause of the oppression of that
country, but th. squirearct:y.—.(H• ar.)
Lord SANDON rose to set the anise right with re-
spect to an asttertion w'iich many Non. Members scented to
think uncontroverted. He meant the supposed tourbtld
appropriation of ti hes. Now, it appeare•t by the evidtnce
taken before the Tithe Committee of this Honourable
littuse last year, that no such general ecclesiasttcal
division of the tithes existed, and that there was only ontt
pari.li which could be adduced as a proof of the existence
ot the practice at all. He perfectly agreed with

'he Hon. Member for Oldham that it was the squirearch)
and not the hierarchy enjuyed the greater part of the
tithes in Ireland. In older, perhaps, to give Gen-
tlemen some clue to the cause of the wierchedness of that
country more correcty than that of the oppression of the
Protestant clergy, he would mention a fact whicif
was proved before a Committee, of which he was
a member. A gentleman who was examined, toad
them that on his coming of age he had found
his estate overburdened with population, and determined
to clear it. This was a very simple phrase, but what
did the gentleman mean by it ? Why, he turned forth one
thousand one hundred p-ople without a home into the
highways to starve and shift for thernselves.—(fear,
hear.) He stated that he gave them nothing, and
when asked what hal become of them, be said
that some had gone into the town, others had gone
on to neighbouring estates, and others again had become
thieves anti vagaboads.—(Hear, hear.) No landlord it.
England could act in this way for shame, if nothing
else would prevent him,—(llear, hear.) lie did not
mean to aft), that the gentlemen of Ireland were deficient is