The Sun.
London, England, 1869-06-15 00:00:00

Tin'', lICISII CHURCH DILL.

A great numter of petitions having been presented
against the bill, and the peragr.tph in her Majesty's Speech
relating to the Irish Church having been real,
Earl GRANVILLE rose to move the second reading
of the bill. lie said he was fully alive to tt e importance of
the task that had devolved upon him, and he had to ask
their lordships' forbearance, because in per7orieing his
duty he should be able to add nothing t ow to that which
had already been said. Ho believed that the Irish Church
as it now existed was a great anomaly, aid as it
had never fulfilled the position it was intended to holt',
the time had row arrived when it became disendowtd
and disestablished. It had been sa'd that the country
had been desirous that Mr. Gladstone should have an or-
portunity of putting in form his views with respect to
the Irish Church, but that it had expressed no opinion
on the sul jest, but be could not agree that ,uch had h, en
the case. On the contrary, it appf ered to him that the
country had expressed its opinion in the strongest possible
mamner, and that that opinion was decidedly in favour of
the measure which had passrd the House of Commons
by such very laree majorities. (Hear, hear.) And that
hill he lied now the honour to su'-mit to their lordships
tier Majesty's Government hoped that one gAent source of
the discontent and uneasiness teat had existed, more or
ess, for many years in Ireland would be removed.
The noble earl then proceeded to explain the
efiect which the passing of the bill would
have in Ireland, also the provisions that had been made
for the care of the churches and schoolrooms that then
existed in Ireland, and also the purposes to which the
surplus revenue of the Church w0;;.1,t he devetetl. The
noble e„rlthen referred to the state of the Church of ec•it-
land, and said the condition of that core try was Axon evi-
deuce in favourof the bill, and he concluded by expressinga
hope that their lordships would not hastily reject a bill,
the object of which was to give peace and prosperity to
Ireland. Such a rejection could only produce the utmost
uneasiness, and leave the question in such a state of un-
certainty that would result in a continuance of that state
of things which it was the great object of her Majesty's
Government to ameliorate and impreve.
The Earl of HARIZOWDY move,l that the bill be read
a second time that dry three mouths. He opposed the
measure on the ground that it was revolutionary, against
the Coronation Oath, against the Act of Union, and that
there were no sufficient circumstances to justify its intro-

suction.

The Earl of CLAR7,NDON was quite unable to reci-
procate the gloomy views with which the last speaker re-
garded the probable effect of passing this bill. Similar
forebodings were expressed when the questions under dis-
cussion were the repeal of the Test and Corporation Act,
the Reform Bill of 1832, and Free Trade. What had been
the result? Ho believed the feeling of the country ball
been fully tested on the subject. It had been freely dis-
cussed for the last year and ahalf, and indeed was so tho-
roughly exhausted and understood that it was difficult to
say anything new upon it.
The Duke of RUTLAND opposed the bill.
Lord STRATFORD DE REDOLIFFE strongly ob-
jected to many of the details of the bill, and warned their
lordships that they would find themselves in the end sacri-
ficing the substance for the shadow.
Lord 1103IILY considered it absurd to suppose that the
disestablishment of the MAI Church would destroy the
Protestant religion in Ireland. All it did was to deprive
the Crown of the right of appointing bishops, to declare
that there should be no specific endowments, and to do
away with the Ecclesiastical Courts. But in what way was
that to destroy religion ? Why should not a man hold
exactly the same views after that was done as he did
Wore? Why should it interfere with the doctrine and
discipline of the Church ? He pointed out that in Scot-
land such a state of things had not been introduced, and
it had not been found antagonistic in the slightest degree
with the progress of religion. He warned the house
against resisting the national will, and reminded them
that the severest blow they had received was when they
rejected the old Reform Bill, and were finally compelled to
pass it.
The Archb,shop of CANTERBURY could not agree
either with those who urged them to accept the measure
with alteration, or those who Advised them at once to cast
it aside without alteration. Ile was therefore glad to hear
the hope held out that any amendment made by their 101-.1-
ships would be setiously considered by the Government
and the other house. _ _ .

The Eail of CARNARVON strongly advised the se-
cond reading, and ti en they could amend the bill in coin-

mittec.

The Bishop of DEURY opposed tLe b:11 in au animals, d

address.
Ou the moti'n of Lord I,YrTON the debate ras
journed, and the other having been dispo,ed of
their lorckhirs

HOUSE- OF Co MOMS.—LA` T EVENING
Thu SPEAKER. took the chair at four o'clock.
THE IVORKS AT EXKOUTII DOCKS.

Mr. I.EFF.VRE said the attention of the 13-Jar,l of
Trade Lad been called by persons at Exeter to the pro-
ceedings of the dock authorities at Exmouth, and the
board thought the subject was ono that cught to be
arranged between the tw•o bodies, with a view to their
mutual accommodation. The Board of Trade would be
glad to afford all the assistance in its power to arrive at a
satisfactory arrangement.
THE CASE OF THE SEAMAN JONES.

Mr. OTWAY said the attention of the Foreign Office
had been called to the sentence of twenty-three months
imprisonment by the Spanish authorities at Barcelona for
stealing a piece of sail cloth. As the sentence appeared very
severe, representations to that effect had been made to the
Spanish authorities, and an answer to those representa-
tions had been received, to the effect that the matter had
been referred to the Supreme Tribunal of Marine:
THE CASE OF MARY LOWELL.
Mr. OTWAY, in reply to Sir John Hay, said the whole
of the matters in dispute between this country and Spain
with respect to the seizure of the Mary Lowell had been
referred to the law officers of the Crown, and until they
had given their opinion he could not lay any of the cor-
respondence on the table.
THE STATUE OF SIR R. PEEL.

Mr. LAYARD. in reply to Mr. Grenville, said the st:due
of Sir B. Peel was now in a Government store waiting the
decision of the committee charged with its re erection.
Two other statues, viz., those of Brunel and Stephenson,
were also in stor until a proper site could be fixed upon for
their erection. The Thames Embankment appeared at
present to be the most appropriate pace for the statues
and not Parliament-square, on either side of Canning, as
had been proposed. The latter place was most inappro-
priate, the more so as Canning's statue was lift, high,
Brunel'e was fift., and Stephenson's 9ft. (Laughter.) The
pedestal outside the mailings at Palace-yard WitS• fur a cast
of the statue of Lord Palmerston, permission to erect which
at that particular spot had been given some time ago.
DIRECT COMMISSION EXAMINAIONS.

Mr. VIVIAN, in reply to Mr. Stacpoole, said he could
not sby when the next direct commission examination
would take place.