The Sun.
London, England, 1835-03-31 00:00:00

<u&thp-)Hon,, Nlpmhor.

hn the Canada Committee, and he had never heard from him an clij c.
tioa against the CrAliolic Church as being the established religion in that
coutl►.ry. If Protestantism acre, in his Right Hon. Friend's opinion,
the true religion—if he were to adhere to it as the true religion, and as
Arch to force it upon others, why should not his Right Hon. Friend have
added this cause of vexation (which possibly was wanting in Lower Ca-
nada) by abolishing the Cathode and establishing the Protestant Church
there?—(Cheers.) lie confessed that he was grieved and surprised that
any man calling himself a Protestant, should conic down with such lan.
guage as they had heard from Lis Right lien. Ft lend. He always thought
that one of the greatest services accomplished by the authors ofthe Refbr.
!nation was their emancipating the human mind from the fetters it had
long groaned under, and establishing conclusively the right of private judg.
meat. And yet, after this, was a Protestant to interfere with the private
and conscientious opinion of another Is it because they were a ma-
jority, then, that they had a right to insult the people of Ireland by
talking to them of toleration ?—( Hear, hear.) He did say that it was
an insult to talk to any man of toleration—(Hear, hear.) For his own
part he was a sincere and conscientious Protestant. He not only dl'.
seined from the Catholic Church, but he would say (and he was sure the
Catholics in that House would not be offendcxl for his saying so) that
he owned he was not able by any effort of his mind to ima.iine how men
could reconcile themselves to the superstitions of the Catholic creed—
it appeanxl to him to be a lamentable corruption of the purity of the
Christian faith. Was he to be reproached for intolerance in avowing
his opinions He was no less convinced of the propriety of his own
opinions than he was of the sincerity of those woo entertained opinions
quite opposite, and this would never lead to any difference between them.

—(Hear.) For he would. putting aside all ungenerous attempts on the
part of one man against the right of another—giving up all attempts at
proselytism—looking steadily to those principles which were the foun-
dation of all Christian faith, he would leave it to time, discussion.

and reason, to discover which religion was the true one—(Hear,
hear.) The Right Honourable Baronet put his defence upon the ground
that the Church of England rested upon its public utility, and the
affections of the English people. He was happy to believe that the
reform promised by the Right Honouroble Baronet (Sir R. Peel)
would increase its utility, and give more force to the hold it had upon
the affections of the people of England. But it was only upon its utility
and the affections of the people that the Church of England could ever
rest. If, unfortunately, those foundations should fail, it would be in
vain for the Right Hon. Baronet, or fur any of than, to endeavour, by
pi-caching the excellence of its doctrines and the purity of its discipline,
to maintain it.•—(l;ear.) His Right Hon. Friend had alluded to some

letter written by the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin on the sub.

ject of tithes. It might be said he concurred in the principles laid down
in that letter. He unhesitatingly avowed that he did not. He said,
further, that it was because he wished tithe property to be preserved
that he supported the proposition of his Noble Friend.—(Hear, hear.)
It was idle to conceal that the real grievance of the Irish people was not
the manner in which the tithes were collected—it could not be abated

by removing them from the tenant to the landlord.—(Hear, hear.) He
had listened with great attention to the speech of the Right Hon. and
Gallant Officer, the Secretary for Ireland, in introducing his Resolutions
respecting tithes, and he did not rind, in the course f that
speech, the assertion made that it was on the ground of
the manner of their collection that the people disliked them.
—(Hear, hear.) He admitted to his Right Honourable Friend,
that there was a considerable mistake on the subject of tithes. He ad-
mitted that the people regarded them as a tax. He admitted that there
would be no benefit to the great body of the people by their remission, as,
from the great compt•tition for land, it would be thrown into the hands

of the landlord.—(Hear.) But did it follow from th:.t, that there was
no real grievance ? He was slow to believe that there was great and
permanent discontent for a long series of years amongst a people without
any foundation. The people might be deceived as to the real grounds
of their grievances; they might be still more easily deceived as to the
best remedies for them.—(Hear.) So he believed in respect to the
Irish. He believed that the people of Ireland groaned under the griev-
ance he had already mentioned, that a property intended for the most
useful purposes, and to he beneficial to all, had been applied in a manner
to be useful to none.—(Cheers.) It was acknowledged to be of no use
to the Catholics, and from the reasons which he had taken the liberty
to state, it was not conducted nor managed for the real interests of Pro..
test. nts.—(Elear.) He believed it would be better for the peace and
' •

permanent interests of Protestantism that the property should be

swept away, rather than it should continue the subject of the
strife and struggle which now prevailed in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.:
In 1831, they were told by a high authority, the Bishop of Ferns, that it
was not the mode in which tithes were paid that were objected to in
Ireland, but there should not be any such revenue. In 1832, Mr. Brown-
low told his Noble Friend, then Secretary for Ireland, when introducing
his Bill upon this subject, that he would entirely fail, unless he consented
to give up the whole. It was in the hope that the question would be
settled, he voted in support of his Noble Friend's Bill. The warning of
Mr. Brownlow had proved too well founded. Tithes never since then
had been fully collected, and at that moment it was utterly hopeless to
do so. A new attempt was now made to preserve the property still re-
maining. That was the very last attempt to settle it. The difficulties
of the question were increased by the colleagues of the Right Hon. Be.
ronet opposite, for when they rejected the Bill of last year, they made it
utterly impossible to secure that property, unless they were prepared to

yield to the just demands of the Irish people.—(Hear.) This was an an.
saver to the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet, which consisted of per.
sonalities from the beginning to the end. Upon the Member for St.

Albans motion last year the previous question was voted. The resolu-
tion now proposed was different from that of last year; but even if were
specifically the same there would be no inconsistency in his supporting
it, for when the Government moved the previous question last
year, it had recognised the principle by the appointment of a Com-
mission. The Right Honourable Baronet comes forward with
an opposite principle. It was now necessary to know whether the
Irish were to be governed upon the one principle or the other.—
(Cheers.) The report of the Commissioners might be necessary for
working out the details of that principle; but, in the mean time, they
had all the great leading facts to enable them to judge upon the prin-
.

ciple.—Hear.) If they did not adopt that principle, what were they
to do ?—(Cheers.) Were they to vote permanently the existence of
the Church of Ireland in its present state of luxury—were they to

maintain that struggle which was only now commencing P—(Cheers.)
No man would be so mad as to incur all the evils of that struggle,
even when there was a possibility he might be worsted.—(Hear,
and cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet himself had not acted upon this
principle with respect to emancipation. After thirty years of disorder
and misery, the Right Hon. Baronet was compelled to come down to
that House and acknowledge that all theattempts to oppose that measure
hail utterly failed.—( Hear, hear.) That great measure was at length
carried in a mariner that robbed it of halt' its benefit, and more than
half its grace.—(Hear, hear.) That was the point at which it fairly
aimed after a struggle of thirty years. At the time it was conceded
what was the argument used by the Right Hun. Baronet opposite (Sir
It. Peel) ? He first alluded to the impossibility of continuing any
longer the effort to carry on a divided Government ; he declared it im.
possible to continue a Government that was not unanimous either for or
against the concession of the question. The Right Hon. Baronet pro-
ceeded to say—

" Can a Government he formed on the principle of permanent resist-
ance to Catholic Emancipation ? I would put it to the House whether
the principle of continued resistance can be acted upon without endan.
gering the local interests of the empire ?—(Hear, hear.) I wish that,
in the discussion of this point, the arguments may be put fairly ; for, if
it can be shown me, as a Minister of the Crown, that permanent re-
sistance cannot be made with safety to the State, then, I say, that no
other course is open to us than concession on such terms as I have stated.
I ask, then, is the Government of this country to be formed on theground
of permaaently opposing the claims of the Catholics ? It is very easy to
say that it is to be so formed ; but the question here is not as to what is
to be said, but what is to be done ?''
Were these circumstances, he would ask, more or less applicable to
those of the present period ? At that tme the Right Hon Baronet had
been anticipated in his concession by the ,xpressed opinion of the House
of Commons ; for, in the year IS3S, the year preceding that in which
the Right lion. Baronet had spoken what he (Lord Howick) had just
quoted, the principle of concession to the Catholics had been carried
in the House of Commons by a majority of sixty. What was the
state of the present question ? Three fourths of the last House of
Commons were opposed to the continuance of the Protestant Establish-
ment in Ireland on its present footing. The present Ilouse had not yet
expressed its opinion, but he hoped it would do so, as unequivocally,
and by a still greater majority than its predecessor—which, by a majo.
sits' of six, had declared for the principle of appropriation. As to the
possibility of carrying on the principle of resistance to ecclesiastical re.
form on these broad and equitable terms, the Bight Hon. Baronet had
got a pretty significant hint the other night, on the tithe question.
Although he (Lord Howick) did not vote, neither did his Right Hon.
Friend the late Secretary for Ireland, on that question the Right Hon.
Baronet had only a majority of 15. Was it likely, then, the Right Hon.
B:ronet could carry through his resistance to the great principle on
which so large a portion of that House were united ? The next argu.
ment the Right Hon. Baronet adduced at the time of conceding the
Catholic claims, was that the difference of opinion would, if a settlement
were not effected, produce a collision between the two Houses, most
dangerous in its effects. Have, he would ask, events lost their force
since 1829, or have recent events seemed less likely to produce colli-
sion, or were they more free from danger than on the occasion of the
Catholic question ? If not, he (Lord Howick) called on the Right
Honourable Baronet to concede now, on the very same grounds
of policy on which he then made concessions.—(Loud cheers.)
But there was one other and still stronger argument used at that time
by the Right Hon. Baronet. The main argument on which he relied,
and with the greatest effect, in behalf of the concession, was the un-
happy state of Ireland. He well remembered the feeling eloquence
with which the Right Hon. Baronet called on the House to end the de.
stractions of that livid d country, and equally well did he (Lord

Howick) remember the answer given to that appeal by the Right Hon.
Baronet's present colleague, now sitting by his side. " Oh," said that
Right lic.n. Gentleman, " this is only the old story with which we have
been familiar for the last twenty-five years." The Bight Hon. Baronet
replied, " I am told that this is the old story with wl ich we have been
familiar fort, e last twenty-five }ears. It is because it is the old story
—(Cheers)—•that I desire to put an end to it.—(Continued cheering.)
It is because that which so long existed has failed—(Renewed cheering)

—that I am tired of maintaining the present system."—aremendous

cheering.) The Right Hon. Baronet might well liaxe been tired of it.
He (Lord Ilowick) called on him to put forward thesame views to.night.
He called on him to change that system, the success of which he

certainly could not allege, and the continuance of which would

be productive only of disunion and weakness.—(Hear, hear.) He
called on the Right Honourable Baronet to follow that very same
course which, under similar circumstances, he had formerly taken; and
he called on him the more earnestly because they were this night to
decide whether they were to maintain the Protestant Establishment in
reference to the benefit it was capable of conferring—in fact they were
to try it by the test of its comparative utility to the people of Ireland.—
(Hear, hear.) The question c n which they had to decide, he (Lord

Howick) was willing to judge on the same arguments used by the Right
Hon. Baronet himself, when he proposed that they should concede.
The Right Hon. Baronet, after using the arguments already quoted, went
on to state that the public feeling should be gathered from the large
constituency whose representatives spoke their wishes in that House;
and as evidence of the prevailing desire to concede the Catholic
claims, he said that sixty two of the Irish Members were favourable to
concession, and only 3'2 were opposed to it. The 6'2 Members in its
favour were the Representatives of the most populous districts. He (Lord
Howick) believed the numbers expected to divide on the present question
would not be much altered. From 00 to 63 of the present Members
from Ireland will be in favour of this question, and these representatives
of the largest constituencies.—(bear, hear.) "It is," said the Right
Honourable Baronet, " impossible to go on. You must do either of
two things. You must go back to the penal laws, and again crush
the Catholics down to that state from which you have raised them, or
you must at once concede to them their claims." Was not such an
argument of tenfold greater force in the present instance? Having
conceded emancipation, and still further invested the Irish people with
power by the Reform Bill, did they hope to govern that country now
on other terms than those of the period at which the Right Hon.
Baronet had thus spoken ?—(Cheers.) Already, he believed, he had
said enough on that view of the question ; he should no longer pursue
the parallel between the circumstances attendant on Catholic Emanci.
patios and those so remarkably connected with the subject before the
House; but he called on the House and on the Right Hon. Baronet
to bear in mind what followed from the former struggle being un.
wisely, as it was fruitlessly protracted. He would not now say, or un-
dertake to remind the Right Hon. Baronet, on whom the responsibility
rested of preventing the settlement of Catholic Emancipation four or
five years earlier than it had taken place; but he (Lord Howick)
called on him, ere he repeated the error in judgment, which in so
many respects was so productive of such irreparable Injury—he
cf,aolnledt
tohlai t higinueittioona, vatihl
ehscmosneclf,,soiofn theof e:.hpiecrhienchee hheadderhivirmed.
Roifghtitmel,loitih.
eßar
settlementonet, anodf
tot) ne
self personally proposed.
depended,LatOhiniin'iP°tnhoeitnctmmit the fatal mistake of noto
present
ceonutrgsereirt
question.took
conceding in due season a settlement from which no Governmeat