The Sun.
London, England, 1869-03-20 00:00:00

T m SUN, LONDON, 541 URDAY EVENING, MARCH 20,

in g sentences of his address. Firstly, " I say, I see
tr anquillity given to our people, greater strength to
the realm, and new lustre and new dignity added to

the Crown." And lastly these impressive words—
. " I dare claim for this bill the support of all thought-
' ful and good people within the bounds of the British
empire, and I cannot doubt that it will be accom-
panied by the blessing of the Supreme in its
beneficent results ; for I believe it to be founded
upon those principles of judtice and of mercy
which are the glorious attributes of His eter-
nal reign." It was almost like calling down the
benediction of Heaven upon the gigantic measure,
then under the consideration of the Legislature.
Upon the close of Mr. BRIGHT'S oration, the adjourn-
ment of the debate until Monday evening, was moved
by no obscure, member of the House of Com-
tnons—by no less distinguished or ICES conscientious
an antagonist of the Biil than the eminent juriscon-
suit, whose personal objection to it was the sole
reason why he was not elevated to the Wool-
sack upon the inauguration, in December last,
of Her MAJESTY'S present Government. What
is particularly noticeable already about the
debate, night after night, in the House of Commons,
for and against the Irish Church Bill introduced to
Parliament on the first instant, by the Prime Minis-
ter of England in one of his most elaborate ora-
tions, is this—that the opposition raised against
the measure is, after all, little more than
a show, than the merest make-believe and
pretence. The Leaders of the Opposition know
that nothing will come of it, that the Bill is safe to
be passed through the House of Commons, what-
ever arguments they may adduce against it.

Similarly, of course, the Leaders of the
Government have the consciousness upon them
that it is safe, and that therefore it really matters
little or nothing what they may say about it.
Hence all that familiar touch-and-go jocularity
upon which we have already cemtnented as cha-
racterising the principal speeches delivered upon this
intrinsically most grave and serious measure-- a
jocularity, at any rate, serving the good purpose
of enlivening this memorable and historical discus-
sion.

WHEN the great champion of the sacred union of
Church and State, finds in the threatened dissolution
a subject for laughter, the end is not far off. We do
not blame Mr. DisnitEm for being funny on Thurs-
day night. We think that to be funny was the
wisest thing which he could do. A year ago he
attempted the grand heroic style, and the failure
was so complete that he prudently resolved he would
never try it again. It is bettor for men to
laugh with you than at you. So the clever
member for Buckinghamshire, being no longer bound
by the restraints of office, but enjoying the
freedom of Opposition, made up his mind to
abandon the impassioned appeals to antiquated
prejudices which no one more than himself despises,
and, remembering the Horatian epigram about the

value of ridicule, gave free vent to his natural
disposition, threw the reins to fancy, and was
as amusing as though he were answering
Mr. -WHALLEY instead of pleading for a doomed
establishment. The House expected quite another
style of speech. Remembering the " foreign prince,"
the dangerous encroachments upon the tenure of the
Crown, the conspiracy between the Ritualists and the
destractives, and, above all, the fervid appeals in
behalf of the above-mentioned " sacred union,"

members anticipated a speech full of fervour
invective, passion, and fire. But Mr. DISRAELI
is like a good singer. Encored, he will not
repeat his song, but give another of a wholly
different character. Ile felt that the high pitch of

last year did not suit his voice, did not suit
his face. It required all his bound-
lesss
o nof Olympic
laughter
self-control
a t
s he
o prevent
appeared
the
an ex-
in
plocharacter of a new Sir ROBERT INGLIS or Lord
GEORGE GORDON. lie would not play that role again.
He would take one in which he felt more at home.
And so, trusting to his inexhaustible fertility of
imagination and pungency of sarcasm, he came for-
ward, not as the great Protestant hero of these latter
days, but as the polished, finished satirist, who makes
it his object to ridicule the beliefs of others. How far
the gentlemen who sat behind him approve this change
of part it is not for us to say. It is conceivable,
however, that they did not like it. They
did not last November make fiery speeches,
nor print hysterical placards illustrated with crown
and bible and sceptre, in order to make the great
controversy between light and darkness a tournament
of rival wits. They looked for denunciations, and lo
epigrams! for arguments, and lo jests ! They could
not, of course, help laughing, for they are not Scotch-
men, and do not need trepanning to receive a joke.
But reading over in the morning the brilliant witti-
cisms of the previous evening, they must have been
painfully reminded of the comparison between certain
kinds of laughter and the crackling of thorns under
a pot.

We do not mean to say that Mr. DISRAELI used
no arguments. A speech of over two hours all
jokes would be like a cake all sugar. It was neces-
sary to set off the wit by a little discussion, to give
flavour to the rhetoric by an infusion of logic. But
the leader of the Conservative party avoided the
arguments most familiar to his followers. There
was that most humourous picture of three sets of
clergy, all discontented because all disendowed.
There was the vision of perplexity, called
up for Mr. GLADSTONE'S special advantage,
the vision in which the Church would absolutely
refuse to assist him in reorganising itself, and throw
upon him the burden of looking after all the church
fabrics and rectory houses and glebes. There was,
however, with two exceptions, no resort to the old
weapons. The duty of maintaining pure the light of
the gospel in Ireland, the duty of maintaining Pro-
testant ascendancy in order to keep down Popish
error, the duty of preserving the Act of
Union, and all the other venerable engines of
the Tory and Orange armouries were thrown aside.
Mr. DISRAELI did so far condescend to the pre-
judices of his party as to argue in behalf of
a State religion, though he carefully avoided enter-
ing upon the question as to how there could be any
advantage from the State supporting a religion
which the nation abjured. He also dwelt at some
length upon what he called the policy of confiscation.
It is on this point alone that it is necessary to com-
ment. All the rest was sparkling, brilliant, clever,
but not intended for any purpose more serious than
that of enabling the speaker to damage as far as
possible the Ministerial proposal without committing
himself to the defence of a position which he knew
to be untenable.

What is meant by confiscating the revenues of
the Church ? In order to understand, we must have
a definition of two terms, " Church " and " confisca-
tion." Mr. DISRAELI'S theory is that the Church is
a definite permanent corporation, with rights of
property as inalienable as those of any private pro-
prietor. It would be difficult for him to establish that
theory. The Irish Church consists really of a number
of corporations which, for the most part, have no
rights of property beyond the lifetime of those who

now hold it. This is proved by the fact that
Parliament has dealt with this property in time
past as it chose, has taken it from the Church of a
large majority of the nation and handed it over to
the Church of the small minority. What Parlia-
ment had power to do in the sixteenth century it
has power to do in the nineteenth. Moreover, while
the first transfer was essentially an unjust act, and
accomplished in accordance with the policy of the
time—the policy of coercing the Irish into loyalty—
a re-transfer of the revenues to their original
holders would be perfectly just. There are
other circumstances which prevent this trans-
fer, although it is one which Mr. DisnAELI
would, if we are to judge from his speech, like to

make. Another course has to be adopted. If
England will not sanction the diversion of the Church
funds to Roman Catholic uses, it has no objection to
their diversion to Irish uses. And here we come to what
is called confiscation. It is no more confiscation than
that change which occurs whenever the -Charity
Commissioners order that the funds of a charity
which can no longer fulfil the objects set forth
in the trust shall be applied to objects
having the nearest possible similarity to them.
In fact, Mr. GLADSTONE'S measure even less
deserves to be called confiscation than does the
order of the Charity Commissioners. Had he pro-
posed to use the funds in purchasing railways and
draining bogs, there would have been some ground
for the charge; though even those uses would have
been better than the handing over the Church '
property to private persons, as happened at the
Reformation. But he does not propose that; he does
not even propose to apply the Church funds to a purpose
akin to those for which they were originally destined ;
he proposes to apply them to one of those very pur-
poses themselves. The relief of the sick was
as much one of the objects for which Church endow-
ments originated as the teaching of religion. It has
been found that the funds are far too large for the
second purpose, just because the great bulk of the
people refuse to accept the teaching. It is therefore
not only expedient, but strictly just and wholly in
accordance with the original purpose, to apply the
surplus to such religious uses as are available for the
whole people.

• 1869.

CORRESPONDENCE FROM PARIS.

(FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.)

PARIS, FRIDAY, March 19.
•The rumours of war frequently do great injury, but in
this instance they have produced at least one good effect.
The French people some years ago discovered that foreign
conquest does not necessarily imply domestic bliss,
and they have accordingly received these rumours with
a very unanimous protest against war. As I have
previously remarked, the great majority of the candidates
for the Corps Ldgislatif have decisively pronounced against
war in their addresses to the electors. In this respect at
least they represent to the letter the spirit of the nation
at large. The Frenchman may love aggrandisement
abroad as much as ever, but he is certainly not inclined to
, pay such a heavy price for it. Recent expeditions, too, in
search of glory have produced anything but a satisfactory
result. There can be no doubt that public opinion is now
generally on the side of peace. The Opposition journals—
which are the only papers read by the masses—arc mostly
against war, the Libertj being the chief and almost the
only representative of the opposite policy. Now the
Opposition papers are not only read by the bulk
of the nation, but they represent it, and are
fat too prudent to write against a sentiment
which is at once popular and wise. They see that the
bias of French thought is in the direction of internal
reform, not foreign conquest, and almost unanimously are
they engaged in fostering this feeling. The people and
their organs are united in demanding better government,
more liberal institutions, and an end of irresponsible rule.
As one of them says : "Of all the conquests of which
France would be most proud is that of recovering by wise
modifications her constitutional liberties, of becoming
mistress of her own destinies, of no longer being obliged to
consult oracles, or, to speak prosaically, to guess riddles,
in order to know if some months hence she is, yes or no, to
undertake a war of extermination against all Germany."
There can be little doubt that this fairly represents French
public opinion. The war of the future will be a war
against Imperialism. This is no vague general impression,
but is the openly manifested spirit of the nation.
It is rumoured that the unhappy Princess Charlotte is in
a very critical state of health at present. Dr. Jenner has
arrived from England in order to attend her.
Amongst a great variety of unfounded political rumours

one or two items of undoubted fact deserve attention. One

of these is that the Chevalier Nigra is to be retained as the
Ambassador at the Tuileries. The King of Italy has tele-
graphed to the Legation here that the reports of General
Cialdini's appointment are utterly untrue. The second is
that a marked change has of late come over Prince Napo-
leon. Formerly the ballast of the Empire, the great ad.
vocate of peace, he is now observed to be on the most
intimate terms with the war party. The fact may be of
little significance, but it is eagerly noted.
The most extraordinary project of a gathering of sove-
reigns and their consorts is seriously put forth ma positive
fact by one of the journals here. The Viceroy of Egypt,
lit is affirmed, is expected shortly. His-journey has been
attributed to some projects of navy constructing, but, in
reality, it has another objeit. Ismail Pacha, informed of
the Empress Eug6nie's desire to be present at the
inauguration of the Suez Canal, is coming over to invite
her in person, and he will, according to this scheme,
make a tour, inviting the sovereigns of the other leading
States. "The affair has been arranged with the Prince
and Princess of Wales, and hence it may concluded that
Queen Victoria will also honour the ceremony with her
presence. The war-ships which will accompany the Royal
personages to this great international rendezvous will
render it an imposing spectacle." Undoubtedly the assem-
blage will be imposing if it ever meets together. But I
can hardly bring myself to believe that the Queen of
England, who cannot undergo the fatigue of opening
Parliament, is likely to find herself equal to opening the
Suez Canal.
The explosion at the Sorbonne is still the topic of the
hour. Thousands of people visit the scene daily. The
number of deaths has been increased by two : one a girl
whose ribs were broken by one of the flying fragments, the
other a woman who was crushed by the fall of a beam.
One incident which occurred during the first moments of

the disaster shews that even a catastrophe of
this kind does not always induce human nature to
display only its better feelings. One of the tenants of the
house had in a portfolio different securities of the value of

£2,000. Ire was absent at the moment, his wife, child,
and a servant girl being alone in the apartment. These
persons were all saved from the windows by ladders. The
mother carried the infant in her arms, and entrusted the
portfolio to the woman. The latter in her descent, how-
over, dropped the treasure, and on looking for it after
reaching the ground found,that it had disappeared.
The collection of pictures kept by M. Delessert is being
sold by auction. They are fetching enormous prices, for
indeed the collection was one of the finest ever got
together by a single amateur. It includes one real Raphael
which is, of course, deemed the gem of the collection,

though there are many finer pictures. "A Dutch In-
terior," by Hooghe, fetched £6,000, and "A Fish
Market," by Teniers, rather more. The sum realised the