The Sun.
London, England, 1835-04-03 00:00:00

ciples now sought to be established.—( Cries of '6 Hear.") I
But when -that Government had retired, and a new Govern-
ment was formed which utterly repudiated any such principle
as proceeding to legislate on the ecclesiastical affairs of Ire-
land, in such a state of circumstances, he would ask was there
no difference between presenting their motion to the House
with a Government pledged to act on the principles they had
embarked with, and that all its legislative as well as
executive measures would be directed to the applica-
tion of that principle—( Hear, hear)-esand a Government
who repudiated it ? A Government who repudiated it would
act the reverse • all its Legislative measures, all its executive
measures, would be directed to a totally different course.
It had become, therefore, important with this Tithe Bill in
the House—it had become, therefore, important with this Go-
vernt to know, first of all, whether the state of the Irish
Church was an abuse or not—whether they were prepared,
as it had been understood the Government wished it to be
believed, they were prepared to look into the institutions of
the country with a view to their practical utility, and with a
view to the application of their funds to that practical utility, or
whether they were to be totally neglected? It being important
to ascertain the views of Ministers on that, the motion of the
Noble Lord became perfectly expedient and proper. But much
' as they were interested on that side of the House in all that
could lead to the advancement of the honour and the stability
of the consistency of the Noble Lord, the House of Commons
would decide the merits of the present motion in its effects,
and as it regarded the interests of the country.—( Hear, hear.)
He begged to say that in rising to address the House, he had
risen as a zealous Protestant. He acis:ressed it as one firmly
convinced of the necessity and advantage of a public Esta-
blishment, ready and determined to support any v evernment
to the full extent of his most humble power in the support
and maintenance of that Establishment.—( Hear, hear.) He
would not be a party to give away its profits or its emoluments
in any way, and in what he offered to the House, he called
upon it, as a Protestant and a friend of Protestantism, to fur-
ther Protestantism and not to further Catholicism.--( Hear.)
He called upon the House, believing his duty, and the duty of
every Protestant would incline him, to support most heartily
this resolution. He could very well conceive a Catholic
objecting to a proposition of this kind, but he could not give
credit for statesman-like reasons to a Protestant who would
object to it.—(Hear, hear.) He could assure the House
he had paid the most profound attention to what passed
in the course of the debate—he listened with great attention
to the speech of his Hon. and Learned Friend the Solicitor-
General, from whom he knew he could have whatever lights
upon the subject that great talents and diligence could supply.
He heard that Learned Gentleman say, that the present pro-
perty of the Established Church was originally Catholic pro-
perty ' • but he never said that it was inviolable. He (Mr. W.)
defied him or any other Hon. and Learned Gentleman to
state, with any regard to his character, that Church property
was inviolable.—( Hear, hear.) There was no colour for such
a doctrine in English law. Much time would be saved to
the House, if they on his ( Mr. W.'s) side of the House had
none to contend with but the Right Honourable Baronet
(Sir J. Graham). He advocated no such absurd notion as that
Church property was inviolable; but, on the contrary, he ex-
pressed himself in favour of an equitable transfer of the reve-
nues of the Church, never doubting the power of the legisla-
ture to dispose of it, as, appeared most admissible. What, ar-
gued the Right Hon. Gentleman, can you make by passing a
resolution recognising again and again that Parliament has the
power to regulate Church property ? He ( Mr. W) would
refer to history on the subject, and with confidence would as-
sert that at various times, Parliament had applied the surplus
revenues of the Church to other than ecclesiastical purposes.
At various times, after Henry the Bth had suppressed the mo-
nasteries, he granted the revenues to lay impropriators, and to
the ecclesiastical establishment. One statute was enacted by
Parliament imposing 10 per cent., another imposed 20 per
cent., on the Church revenues for State purposes. Pray, he
would beg to ask, what became of the title of lay impro-
priators—.if it was not in the power of the Legislature to im-
pose taxes upon it. Parliament, supposing that the ecclesias-
tical establishment possessed excessive and undue wealth,
took possession of the monasteries. This property was granted
to individuals, and here he could not help expressing his
sur-
prise at one remark made by the Hon. and Learned Soliciter-
General. The property, he said, belongs to the Church
Establishment, whether as a gift of individuals, or a grant
from the Crown ; and he adds, that it was not transferred, from
the Catholics to the Protestants, but that the religion of
the country had changed, and instead of the property
leaving the Catholics, he contends that it was only the Catho-
lics left the property.—( Laughter and cheers.) That pro-
perty, which zeal for a religion that excites as much as any
other to acts of beneficence and piety, was all intended, as the
Learned Solicitor-General argues, for the established religion
of the country for the time being, as if a particular religion had
no place in the bosoms of the men from whom the property
was taken. Many Members of that House were zealously devoted
to the Protestant Establishment; he thought if they compared the
acts of beneficence which took place in former times, whether the
Established Religion were Catholic, and not Protestant, with
those of the present, they would not have much to be proud of,
or to say in its favour. What was the Establishment in Ire-
land ? Originally it was devoted to the support of the Catho-
lic Religion ; afterwards it was appropriated to the support of
Protestantism by Parliament. Parliament had a perfect right
to make such appropriation, when the religion ceased to be
the religion of the State.--e( Hear, hear.) In many instances
the property could no- be applied as the donors intended.
What was then to be done ? It could not be returned to the
donors, because they were dead and gone. Parliament there-
fore took possession of it, and applied it as public property for
the maintenance of religion ; it remained so now, and he
would be no party to withholding or shrinking from the pur-
poses to which it was now applied, till every want of the Pro-
testant Church was amply supplied. In a reformed Parliament,
however, could any party doubt that the Irish Church required
reformation, when its property increased and its religion de-
creased ? He would now look at the subject in the way it had
been considered by the Right Hon. Bart. the Member for Cum-
berland ; he would consider it as trust property, and doing so
he would ask whether they were notgrossly abusing that trust?
—( Cheers.) The present motion called upon the House pro-
perly to execute that trust—( Cheers)—and he trusted, there*
fore, the House would adopt it. A great mistake appeared
to have been made by all who had taken part in the present
discussion. For whom was the Church Establishment pro-
vided—for the Minister or the congregation ?—( Cheers. )
The question appeared to him to have been argued, as if the
Church Establishment had been erected merely for the pur-
pose of supporting so many clergymen.—( Hear.) What had
Dr. Paley said upon the subject ? Why, that the Church
Establishment was no part of Christianity, but only the means
of inculcating it.—( Cheers.) That the funds of the Church
should be applied in the most beneficial manner to the country,
must be the natural conclusion of every rational mind. He
was surprised, on account of his unfeigned respect for the
judgment and abilities of the Noble Lord and the Right
Honourable Baronet opposite—he was surprised at his own
want of intelligence when he could not understand how they
could contemplate the present state of Ireland with so many
parishes without flocks, and yet consider that this was a faith-
ful discharge of the trust for which Church property had been
given. Were there, then, to be Ministers without flocks, and
an establishment without a people ? But those who could
despise Schedule A in politics were contented with it in reli-
gion.—( Hear, hear.) If they reflected upon the wretched
paupers who they were told were misled, and open to improper
influence through their ignorance, surely it was time to
remedy such a state of things.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Looking,
therefore, to the destitution of the poor Catholics in
Ireland, he would ask the House not to deprive Protestants
of any means of propagating their religion, still less of de-
priving them of spiritual aid to their flocks. But he would ask
them to practice the principles of the religion they professed,
by applying the surplus of such property to purposes generally
beneficial to the community. The Right Hon. Baronet had
declared of himself that which he Sergeant W.) hoped every
Hon. Member could say of himseff—that he was a religious
man. But he trusted that they would not be called
upon to make each such a declaration, for that was a
characteristic of a worse age than the present. He
knew that such sentiments had place in that House, but he
was well aware that it did not apply to the Right Hon. Baro-
net, whose sincerity and manliness of character were well
known. But he would now ask, had the appropriation of the
revenues of the Church been so applied as to produce all the
benefit of which they were capable ? If they had not, what
should be done ? It was stated they were not in a situation to
act, and they had heard, arguments from various gentlemen
on the necesity of waiting for the report of the Commis-
sion. He would wish to call the attention of the House
to the opinions urged in favour of this course, particularly to
those advanced by the Right Hon. Baronet on the issuing of
that Commission. He had declared that he objected to the
opening of that Commission, because all that could be required
on this great principle was known, and of the practical institu-
tion of that great principle they were already in possession.
Now, much time had been expended to show that they were not
in that situation. If the question were important then, it was
certainly more important now, when a different impression was
entertained in that country with respect to its ancient privileges.
Did they think it proper to keep the people in Ireland in abey-
ance ? He answered them it was destructive to keep them in
abeyance. Yet they were in abeyance now, and was it ha
would ask in a more fit or proper state to keep it in abeyance
now than it was then ? They had been urged to keep this
question back, as this was not the best time for its discussion.
The resolution proceeded also to observe that the question
was merely this, whether Parliament had the right not the
abstract and legal right, for there could be no doubt about its
right in that sense —( Hear, hear,)—but whether Parliament
had really the right to a;tpropriaae the Church propertty to
secular purposes ? That was the opinion of the Right Hon.
Baronet, then, and the House must he anxious to have this
subject decided. Let them settle this with the Right Hon.
Baronet whether, if he was correct in stating that there
was a power sufficient in the Government to enable it
to adjudicate on this question, there was not also now ?
One said the question was not ripe for discussion--another
maintained the contrary. He thought it was in a position for
the decision of that House. The public would notice, or at
least would suspect, that the question then stood on a ground,
not for partial but general enquiry. Let them look to the
state of the Irish Church. The Noble Lord, whose confidence
in opposing his views to the opinions of every one else in that
House, no one could doubt had not fairly dealt with the argu-
ments in the speech of the Member for Cambridge. How did
he treat the arguments from that side of the House ? Why,
in no way. They presumed to say, and with the sanction of
the Right Hon. Baronet, that Parliament had the power of
dealing with Church property. What answer was given to
that argument? Now was the time to debate a principle
of so much importance, not limited to some paltry question.
He hoped the cause of reform was but begun.—( Hear, bear.)
He was glad that a question was brought forward, not of
trifling moment, but involving a mighty public principle—he
was happy that it related to the National Church, for if abuses