The Sun.
London, England, 1869-05-04 00:00:00

The Times refers to the brief "distussion in the House of
Lords on Monday respecting the retirement of bishops
lisabled by age or infirmity, and remarks that it is difficult
to understand how so obvious a necessity can have been
so long neglected. In no other profession or service would
such a state of things be possible as has existed for many
years in the diocese of Exeter. In the law or the civil
service, in the army or navy, no man could retain posts
If active authority who was no longer able to perform
active duties. Due arrangements are made for superan-
nuation and for pensions, and it is found that, in
spite of the love of work or of power which
s.n energetic career may induce, men are generally
very glad, as infirmities increase upon them, to avail
themselves of opportunities for retirement. There cannot
be any insuperable difficulty in providing similar facilities
in the Church. The difficulty, in fact, has already been
surmounted in three recent instances, and arrangements
which were rendered possible by special Acts of Parlia-
ment for the dioceses of London, Durham, and Norwich
must be equally practicable under a general Act of Par-
liament for all dioceses. As often happens, however, in
this country, it has needed an extremity of inconvenience
to bring about this Simple and common sense reform.
When the whole South of England, from the Fore-
land to the Lard's End, is practically destitute of
episcopal superintendence, the abuse can be no longer
overlooked. In other affairs, however good the
organisation, everything depends upon the fre-
quent presence of the chief among his subordinates,
upon personal vigilance, and the encouragement of .
the eye, the hand, and the voice. Religion, we
are constantly told, and we fully believe, needs this per-
sonal influence more than anything else, and nothing is
more evident-than the vigour which is at once inspired into
diocese by the appointment of a new and energetic
prelate. The great scheme, for instance, of the Bishop of
London's fund is due, above all things, to the earnest per-
sonal efforts of the present Archbishop of Canterbury.
The machinery, in a word, may be very perfect, but what
is needed is a man to make it work. The bishops,
perhaps, are rarely well-advised on such paints as these by
those who surround them, but their clergy are much less
contented with these mechanical arrangements than they
are themselves. We may now hope that the evil will be
remedied. But it must be owned, with Lord Lyttelton, that
it would be more satisfactory if the bishops themselves
shewed a little more anxiety for the efficiency of their
order.

The Standard says that Mr. Fawcett could hardly have
used a more dangerous and more imprudent argument
than to remind the House that the Irish Church Bill is
likely soon or late to be drawn into a precedent for the
construction of a measure to disestablish and disendow
the Church of England. This is undoubtedly true; as
undoubtedly it is a truth which Mr. Gladstone has obsti-
nately denied, which his party have done their utmost to
conceal, and by ignoring which they have succeeded in
za.rrying the constituencies with them. The avowal of
that which has been so long, so loudly, so passionately
denied, not only gives the lie to his leader and
his colleagues, to the Liberal party and the Liberal
press ; it gives the alarm at a critical moment to the
friends of the Church throughout the country ; it warns
tens of thousands of honestly deluded Liberals what they
have really been doing, and what are the real intentions
of those who have deceived and bamboozled them ; and it
enhances in no ordinary degree the perils which still await
the bill. The amendment might not be peculiarly
obnoxious to Mr. Gladstone ; but the speech certainly
must have dismayed and annoyed him extremely ; and he
would no doubt have given away for ever the benefit of Mr.
Fawcett's vote and support to have silenced him on Monday
night. But the truth has been avowed ; the warning has
been spoken ; and it behoves the friends of the Church to
take note of it, and to see that Parliament and the country
are not allowed to forget or to overlook it.

The Telegraph declares that Monday's discussion in the
House of Commons will be memorable as the battle of the
Tithe Commutation Rent Charge. A majority of 148—
the largest which has yet been recorded in a division on the
Irish Church Bill--affirmed Clause 32, by which the
Government provides for the redemption of that charge at
the hands of the landlords. The greatnessof the majority
is worthy of remazk, for the clause is unquestionably the
most puzzling part of the bill. Mr. Gathorne Hardy has
called it a specimen of financial hocus pocus. Sir Michael
Beach brands it as a combination of sacrilege and bribery.
Sir Stafford Northcote has spoken of the pro-
posal in much the same terms. Mr. Fawcett
thinks that it robs the Ireland of the future in
order to benefit the Irish landlords of the
present. Even Mr. Gladstone has termed the scheme
" a financial puzzle ;" and, as Mr. Fawcett hints, it has
been defended by some Liberals, not because they consi-
dered it just, but because they fancied that it would
"grease the wheels" of Irish landlordism, and help to
push the bill through the shoals of committee. Nor, at
first sight, can any wonder be excited by these conflicting
statements. At present the tithe-rent is a charge payable
on all the soil of Ireland for the support of the Church,
and payable for ever. But the Government proposes
that, after the disestablishment and disendo‘vment of the
Church, the landowners shall be enabled to make such a
bargain with the State as shall for ever free their property
from the burthen. With the passage of Clause 32, one of
the main remaining difficulties of the measure has been
overcome ; and we may confidently rely on the correctness
of Mr. Gladstone's anticipation, that before Whitsuntide
the bill will have passed through committee.
The Herald thinks that the work of Church spoliation
goes on bravely in the House of Commons. One of the
most important clauses in Mr. Gladstone's bill was
passed on Monday night, after an animated discussion, in
the course of which objections were raised to it on
both sides of the House. As far as the principle of
the measure is concerned it matters little what is done
with the tithe rent-charge—that tax upon the landlords
which has hitherto been devoted to the maintenance
of the Establishment. The justice of the disposal of it
provided
for in the 32nd clause will seem fair or unfair
according to the manner in which it is regarded. The
view which seems popular now-a-clays is that these Church
funds are the property of the State, and may be applied
by the State to any other purpose which it may think
best. This view, as suggested by Mr. Fawcett on Mon-
day night, may be brought to bear at no distant date on
the question of the disestablishment and disendowment
of the Church of England. This vaster project has not
yet occupied the mind of the leader of the Liberal
party, but the possibility of it seems continually suggesting
itself to a large number of his supporters. Whether the
intellect which we suppose still to be slowly ripening will
in course of time mature to the full grasp of this grand
conception, whether the appetite for confiscation will
grow keener with what it has fed upon, time only can
show. We can never profess to bestartled by any develop-
ment of Mr. Gladstone's convictions, and it -cannot be
doubted that the success of his onslaught on the Irish
Cnurch, supposing it to succeed, will pave the way to the
demolition of a system coeval with it.

The Daily News, in commenting on Mr. Sumner's, extra-
ordinary speech on the Alabama claims,
sass.ntothiasht Ed at thenglls
h-
men have read his speech, and have been astonished
boldness of its rhetoric and the still greater boldness
logic, and they are asking, " Is it possible that these
can
its
be the words of a responsible statesman, one of the fore-
most men of the American Republic? There can be no
doubt that the tendency of a speech like this, by a man of
Mr. Sumner's eminence, is of a nature to produce in certain
circumstances a grave situation. At present nothing has
been done, the consequences of which it is not in Presi-
dent Grant's power to control. At the same time, it is
not too early to point out what must be the effect of
declarations of this kind, if they receive any sanction
from those who are the official representatives of the
United States towards this country. Englishmen, of
course, can have nothing to say to any decision which the
Government and people of the American Union may
think called for by their honour and interests. But we
are sure we may express the canfidence and expectation
of the whole country that the Queen's Government will
maintain a firm position against all exorbitant demands,
of whatever nature they may be. Our Government has
been supported in a policy of conciliation and concession
for reasons of which, happen what may, we shall never
be ashamed ; but there is a line beyond which
concession is weakness and renunciation of duty. Mr.
Motley, or whoever else may be sent here to represent the
United States, will find the same honourable desire for
peace, and the same good will towards his country which
dictated our part in the treaty rejected at 'Washington ;
but the Queen's Government will disappoint the expecta-
tion of the country and prove itself unworthy of its trust
if it did not entirely and fir-nly repel every attempt to
trespass upon the honour and rights of the nation. We
have clone what lay in us to compose diqltt!S and settle
di cnliies . which grew up far incr.:2 out of the unhappy
circumstances of the time than ozJ of any want of good
feeling. tryxtrils the illncricn Popnblic ; now it is for the
Government of the United statics to consider \I hat it
owes to the cau3e of peace, justke, and inernational

Ton oN. VELocirr6Es.- -At nornsey, On Friday,
a turnpike COliector was summoned for illef.;Ally demand-
ing and receiving the sum of 2s. ed. as toll for a velo-
cipede. The defendant contended that he was em-
powered to make the charge under the Act; but the
Bench told -him that neither in the Local Act or
the General Highway Act was there any clause under
which the toll could be demanded. He was fined six-
pence and costs, the magistrates at the same time crder-
ing the restitution to the plaintiff of the 2s, Gd. illegally
nceived. • --

SPIRIT OF TEE PUBLIC JOURNALS, I