The Sun.
London, England, 1869-03-23 00:00:00

BERIT OP THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The Times, in discussing Sir Roundel' Palmer's argu-
ments against the disendowment of the Irish Church,
observes that the property which has been devoted to the
eastenance of Protestant ecclesiastics in Ireland is neither
more nor less subject to State control, because it has been
vested in corporations. " Corporation "is a word of
charm which seems to have run away with the judgment
of many statesmen and thinkers—Mr. Disraeli, as Mr.
Lowe sheaved, played with it most dexterously—but the
ground for the intervention of the State does not lie in the
accidental form of tenure of the legal estate of eccle-
siastical property; it is to be found in the nature of the
trusts under which it is held. National property has been
applied to certain uses, and the partiality of the
application is now seen to be prejudicial to the peace and
harmony of the nation to a degree outweighing all pos-
sible advantages resulting from it. This is not all, for the
application itself is recognised to have been unjust from
the beginning, and to be, in its maintenance, a violation of
all the principles of free government, and of all the maximl
of equity and justice. These considerations support and
require the disendowment— for we do not scruple to use
the term—the confiscation of revenues which, belonging
to the fiscus, have for a time been kept apart from it. Nor
has this resolution any necessary connection, as Sir
Roundel' Palmer seems to have supposed, with the act of
- _ .

- -
disestablishment. If we could conceive the Irish Church

endowed with national funds, but not established, the
necessity of resuming the endowment would be not a whit
less strong than it is. In violation of all policy, of all
justice, of all religion, the governing body of the nation
.violently transferred, three centuries since, endowments
se. Bich had been appropriated to the use of all to the use
of a few. The Parliament of to-day wishes to undo this
tranefer, and, the altered circumstances of the time no
longer admitting the application of endowments to their
formernses, they will be devoted to fresh purposes of general
national utility.
The Standard observes that the position from which Sir
Boundell Palmer addressed the House of Commons was
at once the most favourable and the most embarrassing
10.1. a speaker. On the one hand, both aides of the House,
rewecting his evident honesty of purpose and his noble
sacrifice of his personal interests to his convictions, and
curious, moreover, to know the exact nature of his objec-
tions to the Government measure, were prepared to give
him the most attentive hearing. On the other hand, he
had to perform that most difficult task for any speaker
who addresses a popular assembly— to express views in
which, as a whole, neither party could thoroughly agree,
and whilst proclaiming his personal attachment for 8
Government, and his general sympathy with their princi-
pies, to denounce a measure to carry which they came
eseto office, and upon which they have staked their
existence, as a scheme alike unjust and unwise
violating every rule of equity, and fraught with the
most mischievous consequences to the empire. Sir
Boundell Palmer succeeded where many a man of great
ability would have failed. He kept the attention of th.
'louse from first to last throughout a speech lasting mor
than two hours, less by charms of oratory than by force of
argument ; and much as has been said and written against
the abolition of the Irish Church, be urged reasons against
it new to the House of Commons, and of the utmost
cogency, completely disposing in his speech of the assertion
made the other night by Mr. Miall that there was nothing
new to say upon the question, and proving the utility of a
discussion which the advocates of the Government have
declared to be superfluous. With much that the learned
gentleman said we cannot concur, with more we heartily
agree, and at this moment we are more concerned to find
points of agreement than of opposition. We take leave of
his speech for the present with an earnest recommendation
to every man who cares to get at the truth, whatever the
views he now holds, to read it attentively, to weigh its
arguments carefully. It will add to Sir Bounden
Palmer's reputation as a speaker ; it will enhance, if it be
poesible, the respect universally entertained for him.
The Post remarks that on Monday, as on Friday, the
Irish Church debate was resumed by two lawyers. The
place of the ex-Attorney-General of Ireland, Dr. Ball,
was supplied by the ex-Attorney-General for England, Sir
Roundell Palmer ; whilst that of the present Irish
Attorney-General, Serjeant Sullivan, was filled by Sir
John Duke Coleridge, her Majesty's Solicitor-General.
But in many respects there were wide differences not only
between the combatants, but between the circumstances
under which they addressed the House. Sir Roundel!
Palmer, who, having moved the adjournment on Friday
night, followed Mr. Bright in the debate, is a Liberal the
sincerity of whose political convictions no one would
dream of questioning. In fact, in recent times
no one has given so conclusive a pledge of
that sincerity as the hon. and learned member
for Richmond. It is no secret that had h.
chosen he might have been presiding in the House or
Lords instead of occupying a seat in the House of Cori
mons behind the Treasury bench, and have secured the
blue rihand of his profession, the custody of the Great
Seal. But Sir Rounder, Palmer, though prepared in all
other respects to go with his party, could not bring him-
self to assist in stripping the Irish Church of its endow-
ments, and rather than do so, he preferred to sacrifice, at
least for the time, the prize which was within his reach.
The intimation that such a man would reopen the debate.
and bring to it all those resources of learning and persua-
sion which he is so well known to possess, naturally filled
the House. Nor were those who came to hear the staunch
Churchman and eloquent lawyer disappointed. In a
speech of upwards of two hours' duration he explained
with incomparable perspicuity the grounds on which he
disapproved of the measure ; and if he did not gain con-
verts, he unquestionably proved that much more was to be
said at least against one branch of the bill than any
member on the Conservative side of the House had,
apparently up to that moment, thought of.
The Telegraph says that before the appointment of the
commission the public had been startled by the atrocion
outrages at Sheffield. That, for refusing to comply with
the rules of a particular union, a man should be waylaid
and beaten, should have his tools stolen, should find gun-
powder thrown down his chimney in a canister, or scattered
loose in a work-trough exposed to the sparks from his
lathe, should be shot at with air-guns, and, finally, killed
—such a congeries of enormities bore a dreadful resem-
blance to the worst practices of Thuggee. But Sheffield
presented the black side of unionism. The great majority
of the unions were as innocent of such crimes as the
London and Westminster Bank ; and, when society was
horror-stricken by the Sheffield revelations, those bodies.
came forward to make acharge against society itself. " We
unionists," they said, " only use the privileges of English.
men in combining for mutual protection and advantage.
We do precisely what is done by lawyers, physicians
railway companies, and limited liability shareholders.
We seek the strength which lies in union." The orthodox
commissioners would draw a hard and fast line between
what they would sanction and what they would forbid.
They would not hold a trades union to be illegal, nor would
they refuse to say that it was "not illegal," merely because
its rules might seem to restrain trade. But with that con-
cession they stop. If a unionist refused to work with
any non-unionist, or with any number of apprentices, they
would punish him. They would prohibit a combination if
its aim involved a breach of contract, and they would
punish the offence by a special law. When one union is
on strike it often gets aid from others; but that also is a
practice which Sir William Erle and his friends would
sternly forbid. Into the work of discussion we do not
enter at present. We merely point out, for the public
edification, that, after listening to evidence for months,
some of the ablest men in England are still as far as ever
from agreement respecting the most elementary principles
which must govern legislation on the subject of trades
unions. A commission made up of rival theologians could
not have presented a spectacle of greater discord.
The Daily Rem declares that if America and American
institutions are to be perpetually referred to in parlia-
mentary debates, it would at least be well if honourable
gentlemen who make the reference would confine them-
selves to matters within their own individual knowledge
or experience. On such a question as the adoption in Ire-
land of the voluntary system in religion there is, however,
every excuse for references to the example of a country
which took the lead in the adoption of that system several
generations ago. A comparison of its results in that
country with the results of the opposite system on the
continent of Europe, and with the mixed system
in this country might throw very little light on
the road along which all civilised nations are travelling.
It is evident that voluntaryism in the United States hay
amply provided for the religious wants of the people. No
such provision as this exists even in England or Ireland ;
and so far as church accommodation is concerned America
far outstrips us all. Nor does this give the full view of the
voluntary activitywhich religion exhibits when nopolitical
connections entangle its action. All this has not only
been done without church rates, without tithes, with-
out parliamentary grants, without endowments, but
with the cowurrent demands of voluntary provi•
sion for universities, and for all the needs
scholarship and learning. In these, of course, America
cannot eclipse the older world, but she is fast treading on
our heels. American example is, in fact, full of hope for
the future of Ireland. It is clearly not only, as Sir
Ronndoll Palmer says, "not less religions," but better
provided with the material aids on which religion leans.
Religion, put out of politics, takes its own place, and fill::
it well. It is lifted at once into a calmer atmosphere, and
lives more naturally its spiritual life. It may no longer
" raise its mitred head in courts and senates," but it
sheds it quiet influence over common life, and does an
humble but effectual work in the byways of the world.

An Alabama paper announces that it will not
hereafter. take PPYMMIt in dogs.