The Sun.
London, England, 1869-07-10 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF 'IRE PUBLIC JOIJRNALB,

The Times observes that notice has been given of at least

,wo attempts to modify the provisions of the Irish Church

Bill before it is returned to the Commons.

There will

be an attempt to take another vote on the
principle of the Duke. of Cleveland's proposal. Our
opinion in favour of the policy of that proposal
remains unchanged, and it has beenindeed confirmed with

Singular unanimity by persons of free and independent
thought, yet we cannot conceal from ourselves that the
suggestion will probably meet the same fate as it espe•
rienced last week. We have reason to believe that the
Cardinal-Legate convened the leading members of the
Roman Catholic Church, and intimated his opinion that

gratitude to the Government for pa3t favours should con-
strain all Catholics to vote for the Ministry on this issue,
and it need not be added that an opinion from such a

quarter is equivalent to a command. If the Ministry
themselves saw in the Duke of Cleveland's proposal
the means of reconciling their own promises with religious
equality, the Catholic peers would support them in accept 7
ing it, as otherwise in rejecting it. But, whatever may be the
result on Monday—and Lord Russell declared on Friday
that he had not given up hope—we shall have the satisfac-
tion of knowing that our testimony has been given on the
side of reason, policy, and justice.
The Daily News declares that it would have been well
for themselves if the Peers had considered whither the
path leads in which, in spite of prudent advice, they
persist in marching. Like some incautious mountain
travellers, they may find it narrowing as they advance,
until it leaves them with an abyss at their feet at a
point whence they cannot move forward. The only course
then open to them will be a retreat, which cannot be
dignified, which must be difficult, and which may even
be dangerous. Into such an impasse as this the Lords are
blindly hurrying. Lord Clanricarde sees it to be abso-
lutely iroro3sible that the Government, the House of
Commons, the country should accept the bill which the
Lords have substituted for the original measure. The
Upper House will, then, have two courses before
it. It must acquiesce in the rejection of its own
amendments ; or it must throw out the bill.
The result will be a new bill, possibly of a more
stringent character than that now before Parliament, and
a new House of Lords devised for the express purpose of
passing it. The constitutional obstacle. in the way, not
only of one particular measure, but of the harmonious
action of the two Chambers, will have to be removed by
the creation of new peers. Considerations of wider range
than those arising from the controversy of the present
session point to the necessity of some such step as this.
The Star says that the Government are pledged to
nothing, unless'the royal grant glebes of Ulster are treated
by the Peers as part of the general property of the Irish
Church. The discussion made a great impression on those
who heard it, and it left wounds, the rankling of which
may, perhaps, affect the temper of the discussions in the
House of Commons. Be this as it may, it will greatly
cheer the spirits of the country. Lord Denbigh's decla-
ration shed new and welcome light ou the
concurrent endowment question, for one thing ; and for
another, Ministers have repelled with indignation the
overtures of those who would induce them to re-endow
the minority Church with millions of money sacred to the
use of the whole Irish people. Opposition Peers have
confessed, by their excitement on the subject of the
Government promise, that they do not rely upon their
numerical strength to secure for the Church any advan-
tage whatever. After all their vapouring, their only hope
lies in a few and slight concessions which the Government
have made.

The Telegraph thinks that the advocates of "concurrent
endowment" cannot read the signs of the times. In the
name of the Irish Roman Catholicrrefates, Lord Denbigh
bluntly told them that no scheme of indiscriminate endow-
ment would be accepted by the Irish Roman Catholic
Church. At another stage of the bill he expressed a dif-
ferent opinion ; but, as explained on Friday night, he bad
then been misinformed, and a council of the Roman
Catholic prelates, which was held the other day,
has set the matter at rest. As for the country,
the Commons, and the Government, their minds are
finally made up on the subject. On no condition will they
sanction religious inequality, and on no condition will they
sanction " concurrent endowment." To borrow an expres-
sion from Mr. Gladstone's speech on the first reading, that
decision is written with a pen of adamant. The more
sweeping the changes which the Peers make in the bill,
the more imperatively are the Commons called upon to
restore the original outlines of the measure.

It is asked, says the Saturday Review, what is to happen
if the Lords insist on their amendments, and whether it
would not be better to have a bill embodying a compro-
mise than no bill at all. What is to be done if the Lords
insist on these amendments may be discussed if it turns
out that they do insist on them. But the first thing is
to decide whether the bill shall be restored substantially
to its former shape, and be dropped if the Lords will not
accept it in this shape, or whether a bill answering none
or scarcely any of the purposes for which Mr. Gladstone
introduced his measure shall be got through, in order that
it may be said a bill of some sort has been made law.
There can, we think,. be no _hesitation whatever in the
minds of those who approve the bill as originally framed.
Let the bill be dropped altogether for this session rather
than have a bill not worth having. If the Lords wish,
when pressed, to give way, something may be done very
easily to smooth the path of retreat for them. Many
concessions were made by the Government through Lord
Granville while the bill was in committee, and the
amendments which the Lords would have to withdraw
are not at; all numerous. They might be allowed
to seem to have done a few good turns for their
clerical friends, provided they quietly reverse such decisions
as that respecting the Ulster glebes, which in the twink-
ling of an eye puts a million of money into the pocket of
the disendowed Church. But there arc clear limits to the
possibility of compromise ; and if the Lords really mean
to maintain their theory.of the bill against the theory
which has found acceptance with the Commons, the
Government, it is to be hoped, will not waver for an
instant, but will face all the Consequences of the bill being
dropped, rather than see their measure deprived of the
greater part of its power of doing good. Mr. Gladstone's
bill must become law if the constituencies support it.
The only question is, whether the issue shall again be
taken directly or in a special autumn session, or early
next year. This is only a matter of detail, although it
would involve some difficult questions which the Ministry
could onlydecide after ascertaining, as they best could, the
temper of the country. But, at the worst, it could' only
involve a delay of a few months, and it would be much
better to wait than to hurry through a bad measure now,
in order to have the poor pleasure of saying that an Irish
Church Bill was really passed before July was over.
The Spectator declares that the Lords must yield in
conference nearly all they have taken ,in committee, and
so surrender precisely the thing for which they were most
interested, their own appearance of power as an indepen-
dent House. Nor can they wrap themselves up in their
dignity, and say that wisdom and statesmanship have ,
been defeated by prejudice, for they have brought their
defeat entirely upon themselves. Never was there such
a muddle as their management of business on Friday
se'nnight. The majority changed their leaders half-a-
dozen times in one evening, now voting with Lord Gran-
ville, then with Lord Salisbury, then with Lord Cairns ;
took half an amendment and rejected the other half ; con.
sidered every proposition on the plan of the simpleton
who took about a brick as a specimen of his house; and
generally behaved snore like a mob than a great party
acting at a grave crisis. They would neither say what
they wanted, nor let anybody else say it ;
would obey no general, and follow no standard ; but kept
snaking undisciplined little rushes whenever they saw a
fair chance of plunder, or of flaunting even for a moment
the standard of ascendancy. And all this, while they are
fighting a leader whom they dread at least as much as
they dislike, and who, as they are never tired of saying,
has drilled his army into an obedience almost abject. The
scene in committee has destroyed all the moral force the
Peers had obtained from the debate on the second reading.
That, no doubt, was a great achievement ; but it was an
achievement carried through by the officers, whom the
rank and file immediately after refused to obey con-
sistently. Tlse Lords eho speak may be able revisers of
the Commons' decrees, but the Lords who vote seem
incapable of conducting business so as to secure the
results the y themselves at heart desire. At the last
moment they would not have the very compromise they
wished, and cannot be either surprised or offended if they
übt&n no other.
- - -

The John Bell says that the great question of the day
is concurrent endowment. To deny the difficulties of the
question would be childish. On principle, of course, we,
who object to the alienation of Church property at all,
and who therefore wish to defeat the bill, do not approve
of it.. Ent having been defeated on the second reading,
the qnestion is, What is the hest course, on moral and
religious grounds, non to adopt? We conscientiously
believe that the amendment of the Duke of Cleveland
would have done-far less to advance the interests of the
Church of Rome than the scheme of the Government. For
while the bill proposes to devote the money to purely
secular uses—which we believe sacrilegious—it really
places the whole control of the money in the hands of an
irresponsible priesthood. For who will manage the hoe.
pitals, lunatic asylums, and other similar institutions?
Practically the Roman Catholic priests. It is surely pre•
ferable to provide them with suitable residences, and at
the same time to maintain the great principle that money
Inute applied to religious use shall not be secularised.
From a purely party point of view, the division on the
Duke of Cle'•eland's amendment was, no doubt, a fortu-
nate one ; for an appeal to the country in favour of con.