The Sun.
London, England, 1833-02-13 00:00:00

LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 13, 1833.

ther he intended to diminish the number of the Irish
Bishops in the House of Peers ?
Lord ALTHORP said that it was not the intention of
Government to diminish the number of Bishops in the
House of Peer.. _

Mr. HUME begged leave to ask the Hon. Member
for Staffordshire opposite (Mr. Lyttleton), who was
a member of the Ecclesiastical Commission, whether the
Ministers had directed their attention to the subject of
the motio❑ of the Hon. Member for Colchester? The
Noble Lord's objection seemed to be, that there was
at present no measure before the House which would
require the assistance of these returns. It was clear
however, that if the Church of England were at any
time to come under the revision of the House like the
Church of Ireland, it would be absolutely necessary
that the House should have the information now
sought to be obtained. Besides, if the returns should
show that the amount of property in the hands of
the Bishops was large, that of itself might be a rea-
son for bringing the subject under the revision of the
House. It had been said that the property in the hands of
bishops and clerical corporations, was not more than suffi-
cient to pay the whole clergy ; and he was not prepared
to say in opposition to those who had made the subject
their study, that the case was not as they said ; but sup.
posing that, instead of being worth a million of money,
that property were worth ten millions, would not the
Noble Lord consider this amount so excessive, compared
with the duties to be performed, as to make it his
duty to revise its distribution? The Noble Lord had
stated last night, that much exaggeration had existed with
respect to the vslue of Church property in Ireland, and
that he himself had thought it much more than it proved to
be. Now, might it not happen that the property of the
Church in England had been equally exaggerated ? At
any rate, they ought not longer to be kept in ignorance.
Perhaps, in altogether opposing the motion of the Hon.
Member for Colchester, the Noble Lord had better lay it
before the ecclesiastical commission, and consult them as to
the possibility of obtaining the information required. Cer
tain he was, that some way or other it must soon be bad.
Mr. LYTTLETON, as one of the ecclesiastical com-
missioners referred to, had no hesitation in saying,
that compliance with the motion of the Honourable
Member would not produce the information required.
The only way in which it could be obtained was by va-
luing all the Church property, which would materially
delay the report which the Commissioners were
anxious to make. He would tak,..: that opportu-
nity of observing, that never in the whole course of
his life, had he met with any body of gentlemen more
anxious to forward the public business, and give the fullest
information required of them, than the Prelates of the
Church of England, with whom he was brought in
contact. He had not met with a single instance of
conduct which did not do them credit.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY said that the Noble Lord's prin-
cipal objection, namely, the expense of procuring the in-
formation, hardly afforded a sufficient answer to a motion
of this kind. He did not see there would be mnch delay oc-
casioned i❑ furnishing this information, because it was not
an inquiry that would have to be directed to all those per-
sons whe were in any way connected with Church property,
but merely to the Bishops and Corporations. He submitted
that this was not only proper information to be given,but that
this was the fittest period at which it could be given.
He was, as the Hon. Member for Middlesex had said,
quite sure sooner or later this information would have to
be supplied. If the Noble Chancellor of the Exchequer
had come to a determination not to yield to the mo-
tion, he would not push the question to a divi-
sion at this moment, but at some future
period he assuredly would. The Hon. Member then
withdrew his motion, and gave notice that he would
bring it i❑ this day week.
. . _

The Marquis of CHANDOS was desirous from a cor-
respondence he had seen yesterday, to put a question to
the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Ad-
miralty, which was, whether or not there was
an order of the Admiralty which precluded officers
in the Admiralty having command being in Parliament.•
If so, how was it that a Member who served in the House
last Session, had the command of a frigate, and another was
in actual command in the River during the whole time he
was in Parliament ?

Sir JAMES GRAHAM had not the least hesita-
tion in saying, that there was no order of the
Admiralty which disqualified a naval officer sitting in
Parliament from having the command. It was the in-
variable practice, and it appeared to be the paramount
duty of the individual holding the office he now had
the honour to fill, of exercising a discretion in the
selection of the officers who were appointed to a command
connected with great public duties. If the Noble Marquis
should think proper to call in question before that House,
the exercise of his discretion in the particular cases to
which allusion had been made, it would be desirable that
he should bring the question forward in the shape
of a specific charge.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Mar-
quis was correct in the two instances he had referred to.
There could be no doubt that, generally speaking, there
was a great difference between the situation of a gentle-
man chosen by a large body of constituents to represent
them in Parliament, and being able to devote the whole
of his time there, to that of a gentleman whose active
duties required constant residence elsewhere.
Mr. O'CONNELL moved that an humble address be
presented to his Majesty, praying that his Majesty would
be pleased to direct returns of all the electors resident in
each town and city in Ireland entitled to vote at the last
general election.
Mr. HENRY GRATTAN wished to know whether
the Hon. Member had excluded from that return the Uni-
versity of Dublin?
Mr. O'CONNELL observed that his motion did not
include the University of Dublin. That must be the
subject of a specific and separate motion.
Mr. SHAW saw no objection to the motion, but he
confessed he could not see the object of it.
After some observations from Lord ALTHORP, which
were totally inaudible in the gallery, the motion was agreed
to.
Mr. O'CONNELL observed that yesterday, in conse-
quence of the statements of the Noble Lord opposite,
the Right Honourable Member for Cambridge had
moved for a return of all the benefices in Ireland,
in which the Divine service of the Church of
England had not been performed during the last three
years. With the permission of that Right Hon. Member
he should wish to substitute in that return the word
" parishes" for the word " benefices." If the Right Hall.
Member would not allow the adoption of such an altera-
tion, he (Mr. O'Connell) would feel it his duty to make
a specific motion on the subject.

Mr. GOULBURN thought the alteration contemplated
by the Hon. Member was calculated to produce great
injustice, because in many cases, where parishes had been
joined, in one of those parishes the service of the Church
of Ireland might not have been performed for the last
three years, and yet the petitioners had received the benefit
of divine service in the other parish.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that the result of his motion
would he, that the House would have a return from all
the benefices, and from all the perishes within those bene-
fices. He knew of one benefice that was twenty-seven
miles in length. In one parish, there were but twenty-
six Protestants, and there was not a Church within a
distance of twenty-five miles.
Lord ALTHORP objected to the notice, as framed by
the Honourable and Learned Member.

Mr. O'CONNELL consented to withdraw his motion,
and said he would shape one in such a manner as would
afford all the information which he required. The motion
was then withdrawn.

Mr. WARRE moved for a return of all vessels belong-
ing to the Royal Nsvy that have been lost by shipwreck
since the Ist of January 1816.

SESSIONAL ORDERS.

On the motion of Lord ALTHORP, the order of the
day for resuming the adjourned &bate upon the Sessional
Orders was read. The Noble Lord, after observing that
the motion which he had made did not on the first
discussion meet such a favourable reception, stated
that he was not prepared to press it, but would move that
it be referred to a select committee. The Noble Lord
then moved the usu d sessional order relative to the inter-
ference of Peers, Lord Lieutenants of Counties, Sze., at
elections.

Mr. D. W. HARVEY, after alluding to the late case
of the Baron Le Bode, said that the Committee
of Justice, which fornp-rly been a mere for-
mal matter, would, if now appointed, be must h
to take such cases into their consideration. In such
Committee they could be much better considered than be-

fore the whole House, attended as it was likely to be now
after being reformed.
Lord ALTMORP agreed with the Hon. G,mtleasn,
but he did not see there was any necessity to have a stand-
ing committee for such a purpose, as the House could nt
any time appoint a Select Committee, if a cage requiring
it came before it.

Mr. BARING said that very few of those personal
claims came before the House, but were some of the greatest
jobs.
After a few words from Mr. LITTLETON, Mr. GOUL-
BURN, and Mr. ROEBUCK, the sessional order relative to
bribery was put.
Mr. O'CONNELL proposed a slight alteration in it.
As it at present stood it denounced the vengeance of the
House only upon an individual who had procured for
himself to be returned to that House by means of bribery.
He proposed that the order should he so altered as to in-
clude the individual who had either procured himself to
be returned by bribery, or through the bribery of others.
Lord J. RUSSELL thought the amendment might
lead to the implication of innocent parties.
After a few words from Mr. GOULBURN, and Mr.
O'CONNELL,
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, that, with all
submission to the House, it was of very little conse-
quence in what form their order was put, for till the
law was amended, all hope of putting down bribery must
be laid aside. The courts of justice had determined, and
that House had recognized their decisions, that there was
no bribery unless by previous contract. The " miller "
might go round, or " cheesecake" might be distributed
after an election, it having been perfectly well understood
from the beginning that five or ten pounds should be given
to every voter, and yet legal bribery would not have taken
place. He, therefore, most earnestly expressed his hope the'
his Noble Friend, the Paymaster of the Forces, would
give his best exertions to the subject, without which
the Reform Bill would not be perfect.
Mr. SHEIL said it struck him that there were but two
effectual preventives against bribery. Respecting one or
them there might be raised doubt, namely, the imposition
of an oath upon the candidates. The next was, that if
an Act of Parliament was introduced to give the power
of exhibiting interrogatories by the House to the candidate
without releasing him from the necessity of answering
questions that might implicate himself, that would be
the most effectual mode of putting a atop to the carrcpt
system.
Mr. O'CONNELL proposed, as one of the modes of
punishment, to make the guilty candidate liable to the pay-
ment of all the expenses upon the bribery being proved.
He could not but regard the practice of giving sumptuous
breakfasts, dinners, to two or three pounds by indivi-
duals, as in substance bribery. His great object was to
bring before the House cases of unsuccessful bribery, and
which were not likely otherwise to be brought forward.
Successful cases of bribery were likely to be brought for
ward by the defeated candid ite, and they would be more
frequently brought before the House if it were not
for the outrageous expense attending it. No person could
bring a ease of bribery before the House from a remote
part of the kingdom, or from a borough in Ireland with-
out the expense of from 1,0001. to 5,0001. There
ought to be some cheaper mode—some cheaper stimulant
of getting at justice. He proposed that there should be
a standing committee of probably twelve Hon. Members,
entitled to take into consideration all undue interference
of Peers and others in the election of Members to serve
in Parliament. In his own county he had known
no less than five, six, or seven Peers advertising
in the public newspapers for a gentleman to
come forward and stand for a county, they pledging them-
selves to support him. He could mention several cartes in
Ireland in which enormous sums had been refused by per-
sons for their vote. In one instance, which be could
name, an individual who was not worth twenty pounds in
the world, had not refused less than two hundred pounds
for his vote.

The SPEAKER then put the question, and
Mr. RUTHVEN rose—He did so, not for the purpose
of opposing the proposition, but for the purpose of en-
treating the House to preserve their character. He had read
a report of a Noble Marquis's speech some time ago, how
for it was true he could not say, in which that Noble
Marquis had been pleased, in speaking of the House, to
use language which he considered highly improper;
he had said that hitherto it had been an honour
to he a representative of the people in that
House, but it was now no longer so,—it had been con-
verted into a receptacle for gamblers, and men who wished
to avoid the payment of their debts, and not of persons
who came there for the interest of the nation. It was
also full of persons belonging to Political Unions.
(LEFT SPEAKING )

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEBBU ARY

(Concluded from our Second Edition of Yesterday.)
Mr. CLAY presented a petition from the inhabitant
householders of Shoredirch, praying for a repeal of the
house and window tax. The petitioners expressed their
confidence in the intentions of his Majesty's Government
to reduce the taxation of the country, and they were most
unwilling to embarrass them. At the same time they
considered it necessary to call the attention of the Legis-
lature to the unequal and very grievous nature of the
taxes. The lion. Member expressed his entire concur-
rence in the prayer of the petition, and would take another
opportunity of expressing more at large his sentiments
on the subject. At present he would only say that the
tax was most objectionable, especially as it pressed with
such peculiar severity on the working classes.
Mr. COBBETT gave notice to the Noble Lord oppo-
site, that on his proposal to go into a Committee of Supply,
his intention was to submit to the House a statement of
the grievances of the people with regard to taxation, to
show its monstrous inequality—to demonstrate, that in
some cases the poor man paid forty times as much as the
rich man, and that on an average he paid ten times as
much. He hoped he could then show to the satisfac-
tion of the House, that until some specific pledge was
given as to its reduction, they should not go into a
Committee of Supply.—(Hear.)
Mr. HUME begged to ask, whether his Majesty's Go-
vernment were prepared to state the day on which they,
would come down to the House, and announce their in.
tention respecting the reduction of taxation.
Lord ALTHORP said the balance sheet, as far as it
had gone, at present looked I...vourable, but he could not
at present say how it was likely to be at the end of the) ear.

evils under which that country labolirs. Nine years
ago, I bad the honour of submitting to this
House a motion with respect to the state of Ireland,
though I do not pretend to say that, at the time, I
was fully acquainted with the circumstances in which
Ireland was placed, or that, unconnected as I am with that
country, I could be wholly aware of the grievances
which afflicted it. But it must be evident to the House
that the grievances which I then selected would be those
which then pressed most prominently on our attention.
I wish to recall to the recollection of the gentlemen who
then heard me, what the grievances were which I
then stated to exist. I stated then, as t must state
now, that many of the grievances of Ireland were entirely
beyond the reach of legislative enactments—Cl-fear, hear;--
were grievances which it was utterly impossible any laws
could entirely remedy. I said then, as now, that those
grievances must depend on the inhabitants of the country
itself; upon the good feeling of parties one towards
another; and upon the conduct of both the richer
and the poorer classes in their relative conditions.
The grievances I then stated were several. Catholic
disabilities was one which I brought forward ; the ex-
clusion of office by law at that time ; the existence
of Orange and Ribbon Societies, which occasioned
great evil to the country ; the tithe system ; the
Church Establishment; the Grand Jury cess ; the taxes
that pressed heavily on the people of Ireland ; and the ob-
jectionable laws between landlord and tenant. I should
wish now to draw the attention of the House
to those as they now exist, and in their
altered state. The Catholic disabilities are remov.d.
and therefore I have nothing to say on that point. With
regard to Catholics being employed under Government,
to which reference has been made, the only rule Go-
verntnent ought to have in view is not to con-
sider the religion of the party employed, but
impartially to select those who will best discharge the
duties of office.—(Loud cheers.) In a former de-
bate, it was stated that in the case of stipendiary Ma-
gistrates, no Catholics had been employed. I believe
that to be a mistake. I don't know the number, but
some Catholics have been appointed. Mr. Gahan and
Mr. Baldwin, I believe are both Catholics; but whether
that be so or not, I can assure the House the question of
religion was not made a consideration in the appointment.
The appointment being one of a temporary nature, the
individuals selected were selected impartially to ful
fil the office. Another observation has been made with
respect to the Sheriffs. That is accidental, because in
former years Catholic Sheriffs had been appointed, and it
is merely accidental that in this year they are not; they are
all, I believe, Protestants.—(A cry of " All but one.") But
with respect to the Lord Lieutenants of the counties,
several of them have been selected from the Catholics.
With respect to other appointments, Catholics have
been in them; and I sin sure Government will not
do its duty if it does not continue to appoint Catholics
where they are fit for office, just as readily as they
would appoint Protestants_(Loud cheering)—end as
the majority of Irishmen are Catholics, I apprehend,
as their education and fitness for office increases, no doubt
in proportion appointments will be given to the Catholic
population. Now the next grievance is the state of the
Orange Societies. I sincerely believe that the feelings
which produced those societies still continue to exist.
We showed our inclination to put down these societies
by the Bill which we passed during the last Session.
With respect to the tithe system, Sir, the great griev-
ance is, the mode in which it interferes with the
power of the occupiers in the cultivation and im-
provement of the soil, without the improvement going
against the interest of the party who has im-
proved the land. In the principles on which we
have gone, in endeavouring to eradicate these
evils, we have not given satisfaction to all ; but that prin-
ciple has always been based on an endeavour to take away
from the occupier of the soil those burdens that bear most
upon him. With respect to the Grand Jury presentments
my Right Honourable Friend will shortly present a
measure for the consideration of the House, and it will be
for it to amend or alter it as it may think proper.—(Cheers.)
With respect to the Church establishment, the tithes that
press upon Ireland, the internal tithes, are not great in
smothers, but they press heavily upon Ireland. I admit,
Sir, the pressure of taxation upon Ireland, which at pre-
sent acts most grievously upon one of its principal manu-
factures, namely, soap, which, though not taxed in Ireland,
but in England, yet from the mode in which the drawback
is paid in England, produces a most unjust pressure on
the people of Ireland. With respect to that, Sir, 1
have a remedial plan to offer to the House. I can assure
the House that whatever can be done, shall be done for
Ireland. We have always shown our inclination to do
so and ever will ; but the great cause of the evils
of Ireland, Sir, is its want of capital.—(Hear,
hear.) That, Sir, can only be remedied by the
preservation of peace and good order, by which means
people will be encouraged to lay out their capital in the
country.—(Loud cheering.) Now, Sir, the only other
point to which I alluded at that time was, the transactions
between I indlord and tenant. This must be considered as
without the range of legislative enactments, but at that
time great complaints were made of the interpretation put
upon contracts oetween landlords and tenants by the Courts
of Justice. Several witnesses, Sir, who appeared to be
acquainted with the state of Ireland, were of that opinion.
I new come to the question of the Church Establishment
of Ireland, of which it might be said, that, like all
other important question., the longer it was delayed,
the more would it be expected that the remedy
should be effective which it would be proposed to have
provided.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Upon this question
many others had arisen, and of these not the least was
the exaggerated difference between the amount of the
population of Ireland, and that of the Church Este-
blishiment. I confess that I believe I have ex-
aggerated that difference in my own mind. The
first part of the revenues of the Church of Ireland
comprises the revenues attached to the bishoprics. I ant
sure I shall surprise the House, after what they have heard
upon this subject, when I state that by the returns we
have had of the actual revenues of the Bishops,
the net amount of the sees is only 130,0001. a
year. The gross amount is 150,0001., but the net
amount is only 130,0001. It is certainly true that a very
large tract of country belongs to the Bishops of Ireland,
but, Sir, the Bishops have not themselves the beneficial
interest in that value. Those, in fact, to whom they
lease the land, have five-sixths of the value. The
amount of the real value is somewhat about
600,0001., but obviously the Bishops do not receive more
than 100,0001. This, I apprehend, partly accounts for
the exaggerated ideas which gentlemen entertain of the
ecclesiastical revenues in Ireland. With respect to the
deans and chapters, their whole incomes amount to
23,606/. a year, but the necessary expenditure, before it
can be divided, amounts to 21,400/, being little more than
a surplus of 2,206/. a-year. With respect to the value
of the other benefices in Ireland I am not prepared to
give any very accurate statement. The Church com-
mission has called for returns, but from a number of these
no returns have been made. It is, therefore, only from a
calculation, founded upon the average of the returns we
now have before us, that we can arrive at any proper
estimate. The whole of the other benefices amount to
1,401 ; those from which we have received returns
amount to 1,149, which leave 373. The whole amount
of the revenue will be 580,000/. a year ; but we may
take it at 600,000/., and in that we do not go below the
fair calculation. According, then, to the statement I have
made, the Bishops receive 130,000/. ; and the
Deans and Chapters, not the holders of other benefices,
receive 23,606/., and the amount of the other benefices
is 600,000/., so that the total revenue of the Church of
Ireland, applicable to its support and maintenance, does not
exceed 800,0001. I have wished, Sir, to go into
this detail, and to press it particularly upon the
House, in consequence of the exaggeration that prevails,
and which might prevent gentlemen from corning
cahnly to the consideration of the subject. Now I appre-
hend that whiaever difference of opinion there may be as
to the right of Parliament to interfere with this property',
all those who think it has a right to take a part of that
property and apply it to the State, as well as those
who think Parliament has no such right! ell will
agree that the first claim upon the property is
from the Church itself, if the Church Establishment is
to be maintained at all. If not, those who think
so will not agree with me. It will, however,
be generally agreed that the revenues of the Church, as
at present existing, ought to be applied to the necessary
purposes for supporting and giving to the people the benefit
of the Church. Now Sir, are these purposes at presei.t
provided for as they should Ire? Sir, we have heard
statements of benefices where there its no duty performed,
or where there is no church? aid wherc there is