The Sun.
London, England, 1832-08-02 00:00:00

fair to Ireland to proceed with this till at so late a period
of the Session. There were 600 Members absent—(A
laugh)—and instead of going on with the measure when
the benches were nearly empty, it would have been more
proper to direct a call of the House.—(A laugh.) This
question involved the whole state of Ireland, and the reci-
procal feeling of amity which ought to subsist between
the two countries. It was far more important to Ireland
than the Reform Bill, because it was intimately connected
with the security of property and the internal peace of that
country.
The gallery was then &eared for a division, but no divi-
sion, we understood, took place.
The motion was then put and agreed to, and the House
went into Committee on the Bill.
On the first clause being read,
Mr. WALLACE protested against theßill, as one fraught
with the most mischievous consequences in the present
state of Ireland ; and for the purpose of rendering it in
some degree more satisfactory, moved, as an amendment,
the insertion of the words contained in the reports of the
Tithe Committee of both Houses, to the following effect
—" That an extensive change in the present system of
providing for the Ministers of the Established Church in
Ireland was required, and that such a change in that sys-
tem, to be satisfactory and secure, should involve a com-
plete extinction of tithes, both lay and ecclesiastical,
substituting in lieu thereof a permanent charge on the laud
of that country."

Mr. STANLEY said that the insertion of such words
as those in the first enacting clause of the Bill, would ren-
der the Bill perfectly absurd and unintelligible ; and he
did not think it was necessary for him to state the other
grounds on which he would oppose their introduction.
Mr. WALLACE said his object was to have them
tacked to the end of the preamble of the Bill.
The CHAIRMAN begged to remind the Hon. and
Learne I Member, that the preamble was net at present
before the Committee, as it had been postponed.
Mr. WALLACE said, under such circumstances he
would withdraw the amendment. The Hon. and Learned
Member then proposed another amendment in the enacting
clause, to the effect that from and after the passing of this
Act, all the Tithe Composition Acts specified in the re-
cital should he repealed, that a commutation of tithes
should take place in Ireland, and that Commissioners
should be appointed to value the land there, for the pur-
pose of forming a sufficient fund, out of which provision
should be made for the support of the Ministers of the
Established Church, and compensation afforded to the lay
impropriators of tithes in that country. The lion. Mena-
her said, that the object of this amendment was the im-
position of a fair and equitable land tax in Ireland, suffi-
cient for the support of the Ministers of the Irish Esta-
blished Church.

Mr. LEADER supported the amendment.
Mr. IVY SE addressed some observations to the House
in support of the amendment.
Mr. WALLACE proposed to add to the amendment
which he had moved, that the Commissioners to be ap-
pointed under this Bill should be at liberty, at the same
time that they placed a valuation upon land in parishes, to
ascertain in whom the fee simple of such lands was
vested, in order that the charge might be made upon fair
and equitable proportion on persons bolding different in-
terests.

The Chairman (Mr. BERNAL) said, that the amend-
ment had already been put and discussed in its original
state, and in that form it must be disposed of.
Mr. WALLACE said, that if it was irregular for any
Hon. Member to make au addition to any amendment he
might propose, before that amendment was disposed of by
the House, then, of course, he must submit to the usual
course of the practice of the House. However, he lieggrd
to say, that he should mention this addition in a future
stage of this Bill.

The original amendment baying been put by the
CHAIR:A/AN,

Mr. SHAW said, that he conceived the present oppo-
sition to the measure before the House not to be bona fide,
but merely with a view to ifs present postponement. A
more important measure could not have been brought for-
ward, and ought to be pressed on, in order not only to
support the clergy of Ireland, but to vindicate the law.
It was time that Ireland should know whether she was to
have the support of the Government, or to remain in a
lawless condition. At present it was an ascertained fact,
for he had recently returned from that country, that in
Ireland the mowers of the crops were obliged to be pro.
tected in the fields by armed men during their labours,
and who guarded them while at work. If the present
system was allowed to continue, a conflict must ensue,
endangering the persons, the liberties, and the lives of the
community.

Mr. WALKER supported the amendment, because he
thought it was calculated to obviate the injustice which
otherwise would occur.

Sir HENRY WILLOUGHBY observed, that, judging
from the evidence laid upon the table of the House, it
would appear that the clergy of Ireland did not receive
more than one-fourth of the tenth of the produce of that
country.

Mr.-WALLACE, in reply, said that a tithe-composi-
tion in any form would not content Ireland. Abolish
tithes altogether, and the causes of discontent would be
then removed. If 500,0001. be necessary for the clergy,
give it in any way but by a composition of tithes.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared--
For the amendment 8
Against it 6O
Majority against the amendment —5.
On the fourth clause,
Mr. STANLEY proposed an amendment, the object of
which was not to render it absolutely necessary to have
meetings for the arrangement for a composition, and
merely to empower the Lord Lieutenant to send a commis-
sioner if it should be requisite.
Sir J. EtTRKE objected to this compulsory chose, and
moved the entire omi,siou of the clause. He objected to
the appointment of one Commissioner instead of three,
under the former Act, which was much better than in-
trusting the power to one.
Mr. STANLEY said, by the former Act, one Corn.
missioner was named by the parish, and one by the in-
cumbent; the other was merely an umpire, if the others
could not agree. He now proposed that, if the parties
could not agree, the Lord Lieutenant should have the
power to send a Commissioner.
_ _

Mr. SHEIL objected to the amendment of the Right
Hon. Secretary, and contended that the whole machinery
of the Bill was altered by

Mr. WALLACE said it was extremely objectionable
that one Commissioner should have such an arbitrary
power as was give❑ by this Bill.
. _

Mr. CRAMPTON said, the Bill still left it optional
with parishes to have two Commissioners as before. The
single Commissioner would act under the obligation of an
oath.

On a division there appeared,—
For Sir J. Burke's amendment to leave out the 4th clause 10
Against it
Majority —47
Mr. SIIEIL contended that the provisions of the pre-
sent clause, which went to take away the right of the
tithe-payers of a parish to appoint their own arbitrator,
enjoyed by them under the Tithe Composition Act,
would be felt to be arbitrary and injurious. The clause
made the decisions of the Commissioner appointed by the
Lord Lieutenant peremptorily anal, and so far, must be
productive of justly •founded dissatisfaction.
Mr. STANLEY could not deny the force of the Learned
Gentleman's objection, and would therefore assent to plac-
ing the clause on its original footing—namely, that the
Lord Lieutenant's Commissioner's decision shbuld not be
given for three mouths, and even not then, unless re-
quired by the parishioners.
Mr. SHEIL said that an amendment to that effect
would, in a great degree, remove his objections to the
clause as it stood.