The Sun.
London, England, 1834-02-17 00:00:00

ward by Mr. Macculloch should be discussed elsewhere
than in this House. He would ask whether any harm

was done by absenteeship from Ireland, by the spending

of fortunes - and rents 'collected there at Rome and

Paris ?—(Hear, hear.) The petition laid on the table

lust now for the commutation of tithes was indefinite, so

much so, that it would mean anything. The Hon.
Member's opinion was, in his mind, quite untenable. He
took it for granted that tithes were injurious to agriculture
—in fact, that their existence was an impediment to agri-
cultural improvements. But it should be remembered
that tithes had existed a thousand years ago, and
he would put it to the Honourable Member whether
agriculture had not been in a high state since ; all the
shtep shearing and cattle shows took place since then,
and agriculture had arrived to the greatest improvements.
Tithes were taken in kind, and if any commutation took
place, the paying of them in kind would be of the great-
est service. The Hon. Member for Kent must know that

during the war husbandry had advanced ; drilling and
the application of machinery, new manures, bones were
used for the purpose of manure, and he at present under-
stood that bones were being imported for the purpose, and
a great outcry raised here,—(A laugh.) It was a bad
argument to make use of that tithes, were an impediment to
agriculture; it was one upon which their opponents could
beat them easily. He should be glad to know whether,
if tithes went, would the enormous pensions and sinecures
he dealt with in the same way ? He (Mr. C.) was always
an advocate for giving the parsons nothing but glebes, and
to allow them to depend upon voluntary contributions ;
and last year a petition was brought up, in which it was
shown that the clergy would be better off with such an
arrangement. There were seven parishes not far from
London in which 5,0001. a year was collected ; yet the
seven clergymen enjoyed only 2481. ; the rest going
amongst lay and clerical impropriators. If a proper al-
teration were made in the collection and disposal of tithes,

.hey would be rather a good than an evil.
Mr. CUTLAR FERGUSSON stated, in explanation,
that his argument went to show that tithes pressed upon

the industry of the people.
Mr. O'CONNELL considered tbrt there was no tax
more discouraging to the people than tithes ; and he was
astonished that the Hon. Member for Oldham, possessing,
as he did, such powerful common sense, held the contrary
opinion. He would coincide with the Hon. Member for
Oldham'a plan concerning the appropriation of a glebe to
each parser, and allowing those who were preached to
by the parson to support him.—(Hear, hear.) It was
fa:se that a people could not support a Church, for the
poorest people in the world supported one, not in splen-
dour certainly, but in a manner compatible with the dig-
nity and comfort of the clergy. He alluded to the people
of Ireland, who supported the Roman Catholic Church in
all its gradations—Archbishops, Bishops, Deans, Arch-
deacons, Parish Priests, and Curates: there was no forced
levy made on that people—they did all voluntarily; and
when a people in such poverty were able to do so, it was
lan experiment, the success of which proved that the peo-
ple of England could do so much more easily; but then
no man who did not work received any pay—(Hear,
hear)—and it was the best stimulant to the exertions of
the clet gy, th it their reward should be commensurate
with their labour.
Sir 11. W. RIDLEY said he did not agree with those
who thought that the Church could be supported by vo-
luntaryeeatthaeiisctlaekregyhatdo
letraibeuatiaoininsonsuffideceieenateyt.o eAnaghrl
gone forth with respect to the measures which it was the
ive w
itloevn
to tithes ; and it was now generally expected that any
the Government should bring forward for the
plan which
intention of his Majesty's Ministers to propose with resp ect
commutation of tithes would amount to a total abolition.
He would put it to those to whom his arguments were
addressed whether the abolition of tithes would be, in
fact, giving any advantage to the occupiers of land ?
Landlords must know that if tithes were totally abo
fished, land would be far more valuable to the tenant, and
the landlord would get a better rent ; so that the only
difference would be that the tithe would go into the
pocket of the landlord and not the clergyman.—(Hear,
hear.) He would willingly support any measure for the
commutation of tithes that would get rid of the present
vexatious manner of collecting them, but he would oppose
any plan that would merely transfer tithes from the
pockets of the clergy to those of the landlord.
Mr. HODGES said that since the war the tithe system
had been pressed to an extent that was extremely preju-
dicial. He knew himself more than one large and at one
time, flourishing parish, that had been totally ruined by
tithes. He trusted that the measure which would be
brought for ward by the Government, whatever it might
be, would be temperately and fairly discussed, and be sin-
cerely trusted that it would dissipate that uncertainty and
those disagreern:nts which prevai'ed under the present
system.
The petition was then ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. PLUMPTRE presented a petition which he said
was signed by 1,000 freeholders of the Isle of Tbanet,
with respect to the regulations of the Trinity House with
regard to the superannuation allowance made to pilots,
and complaining that there was no regular account of the
receipts and expenditure of the Pilots' Fund. The peti-
tioners complained that the superannuation allowance to
the pilots had been reduced from 40/. a year to eight
guineas, and that out of the 180 almshouses only twenty
were appropriated to the use of the superannuated pilots,
whilst the rest of them were tilled by the friends of the
captains of vessels, who had never contributed to the
fund. They complained also that the mast rs of
docks, porters, &c. &c., who contributed but little or
nothing to the fund, received very large allowances, while
the pilots themselves were in the most distressing circum-
stances, and actually dying from want, or reduced to the
poor-houses upon a very small pittance. He would not
venture to say that all the facts contained in the petition
were accurately stated, but he was sure that the House
would agree with him that the facts demanded inquiry.
Mr. A. CHAPMAN replied to the Hon. Member on
the part of the Corporation of the Trinity-house, but as
he spoke in a very low tone of voice and with his back to
the gallery, vary few of his observations were heard. We
understood him to sly that the complaints made by the
petitioners were totally without foundation, that the Cor-
poration distributed the funds exactly in the way they
were ordered to do by Act of Parliament, and that the
accounts of the Corporation were laid on the table of that
House 20 days after the commencement of every session.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition front Clondal-
kir!, in the county of Dublin, praying for the repeal of
the Legislative Union. He would not tut they detain
the House on the present occasion, than by observing that
the petition was most respectably signed—the first name
to it being the signature of a gentleman who was one of
the oldest Grand Jurors in the county, and who only a
very short time ago held very different sentiments on the
question. If any of the Ministers had been present he
would have asked them to look at that petition—at the
effect of the language which they had put into his Ma-
jesty's mouth.
The petition was most cordially supported by Mr. Frrz -
SIMON and Mr. RuTrives.
Mr. O'CONNELL torn presented petitions for the re-
peal of the Legislative Union, from the parish of Crews-
town, in the county of Meath, from the parishes of
L.dy's Island, Gorey, Templetown, and St. Josses's, in
the county of Wexford, from Carnew, arid the men of
Shillelagh—(A laugh)—from Kilmartin, and several pa-
rishes in the county of Cork. Also, petitions from
nearly all the above places for the total abolition of tithes.
Mr. PLUMPTRE said he could not let that opportunity
piss without expressing his extreme sorrow that the peti-
tioners had n led into so much delusion upon those
two subjects. They could not possibly entertain any
thing like the slightest hope that either the one or the
other of their petitions would be granted. They c-aild not
foragtwhievaret up
theyme i t
sot ht
due:
teptiliii:ol:(siesureeptlnyypeeo(m): eitefiti:f;rca tni:ottirrlmeeh,olßiimanritetoini:ettlilietbPlie:
(laa:unre
gdlvi
hesa
otmfi etttnhhtpoasotwes:w:iitillhilaltoetl
r
would soon petition. He
comellet
drtimiiie,g(ael
huun(Fit3nl eteu(d)rinv,,
.doaaeu:nriist:lleti
hi; surriegl niowotboph:et(oloithethnlatei Idea)
obedience to
h(ts)to:
e=tysitihete:musta
o(nillyeai
. proceeded
T notwithstanding
ie gitralorewa
icnagnstit
feelingsu statements
tion of
only again express his sorrow that they had been so grossly
Union
ntAihloern.
people
Ups
inevitable.—(Hear.)
down,iws afeltrepeal
e p aal
o f convinced,otlie
ng
f
the people of that country rendered it almost impossible
ultimately to doubt of success. With reference to the
abolition of tithes, a pretty strong opinion had been ex-
pressed in England, and those opinions had been as
strongly expressed in Ireland.
Mr. A. JOHNSTONE trusted that there were not many
intelligent persons either in this country or Ireland who
would much longer continue under that most extraordi-
nary delusion, that the payment of tithes in either country
was a sort of personal tax, whereby one individual of or,
persuasion was compelled to support a clergyman of an
other. It astonished him that any person could have
been led into such a belief. He would take upon himsel!
to assert that it was no personal tax. Should, however,
it ever be proved to be so, then, most unquestionable, th
question would assume a different complexion.—(He ir,
hear.) He agreed with the petitioners, if they
could make out a case where they as individuals had b en
called on to support a clergyman of ano her persuasion
than that they bad a case ,for the interference of the