The Sun.
London, England, 1832-01-23 00:00:00

of Reform. The petitioner@ considered themselves by
'right, and not. by favour, entitled to free representation in
Parliament, and they lamented that the other branch of the
Legislature had thought fit to throw out the Reform Bill.
The Hon. Member perfectly agreed with the prayer of the
petition, and trusted that the time was not far distant
when the petitioners would have all that they asked for.
Mr. O'CONNELL agreed entirely with the statement
made by the Hon. Baronet, and could assure the House
that such was the state of feeling in Ireland, that the
people there would be satisfied with nothing unless
justice way dealt out to all with an even hand. The
people of Ireland wished to be dealt with upon the
same principles as the people in England were.
They wanted the sattie species of franchise given to
them as was given to the people of England—they
insisted upon having the same basis of representation__
he considered the Irish Reform Bill which had just been
introduced as a complete mockery, and ke had no hesita-
tion in saying that the people of Ireland would take the
same view of it. The general feeling of the people there was
that the Reform Bill as brought in for Ireland wart
an insulting measure to that country.—(Hear, hear,
hear.) He did not want any thing for Ireland that
might be considered as a sacrifice of the rights
of the people of England. All that he wished was, that
Ireland should stand upon its own basis, and he claimed it
as an act of justice due towards that country, that they
should have the same species of franchise as was given to
England.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT, in rising to move that the
petition be printed, observed that so convinced was
he of the necessity of Reform in England, that if he
thought Reform was as essentially necessary to Ireland, it
should have his warmest support, but he thought the Bill
of Reform for Ireland ought to stand upon its own basis,
and ought to be discussed upon that ground.
Mr. SHELL said he was anxious, not to take away from
the real representation of England, but to take the right
of returning Members from the nomination boroughs of
this country, such as retersfield and Midburst, and giving
that representation to populous places in Ireland, which
at the present moment were totally unrepresented.
Mr. O'CONNELL did not wish to transfer the fran-
chise from any borough in England to any place in Ire-
land ; he wished the case of Ireland to be tried upon its
own merits.
The LORD ADVOCATE gave notice of his in-
tention to-morrow to move for leave to bring in a Bill to
prevent obstructions in the business of the Court of
Sessions.
Lord MORPETH presented a petition unanimously
agreed to at a meeting of the inhabitants of Leeds,
arid signed in the course of two hours by up-
wards of six thousand persons, praying the House to
enact some permanent provision for the poor of Ireland,
and not to saddle that country with any poor laws
until the Church property, which originally belonged
to the poor, should be applied for their relief. The Noble
Lord entirely concurred with the prayer of the petition,
arid trusted that it would meet with the consideration of
the House.
Mr. STRICKLAND had on a former occasion
expressed his opinion on the benefit of poor laws to Ire-
land, but he thought to afford that benefit they ought to
be strictly refined and limited. He agreed with the
petition, that nothing could be done effectually
for Ireland till the question of tithes was settled, and lie
thought the time wes not far distant when something
roust he done for the settlement of tithes sod poor lews in
England.
Mr. JAMES GRATFAN considered there would not
be much difficulty in making au arrangement with respect
to tithes, but in making that arrangement he certainly
admitted that Church property must bear its proportion.
He trusted that the Committee which were now sitting
upon that subject would report that a portion of the tithes
or helanil should be made available for the relief of the
poor of that country.
Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice that it was Iris intention
of dividing the House before five o'clock to-morrow on the
notion of Lord Killeen, if it should be opposed.
Mr. HUME wished to call the attention of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer to the petition now be-
fore the House (the petition presented by Lord Morpeth).
The introduction of poor laws into Ireland would add much
to the disturbed state of that country. With regard to
Conch property, he was quite satisfied that the measure
proposed by his Majesty's Ministers would not settle the
question. The question had been settled by the people °fire-
lend, they had refused to pay tithes. He asked his
Majesty's Government, as the first step of settling the tithe
question in Ireland, to institute an immediate enquiry how far
the property of the Church was improperly applied for the
uses intended. He thought the Church of Ireland and its
property ought to be placed on a proper footing, and if he
had the management of it, it should be all brought
to the public Exchequer—(Laughter)—and those clergy-
men only should be paid who laboured for it.--(Loud
cheers.) That, in his opinion, was the only means
of putting an end to all sinecures in the Church,
both on this and on the other side of the water.
In conclusion he thought the petition was one well de-
serving of the consideration of the Legislature, and lie
trusted it would meet with that attention from the House
which it deserved.
Mr. WEYLAND considered that if tithes ought to be
abolished—they ought to be abolished by law. He
thought it di•grec‘ ful, that when men stood up and
opposed the passing of the Bill, that others allotted
consent to it contrary to their own feeline'e.—(Cheers.)
Measures such as these were not objected to, and that
objection to take effect, un account of the clamours of a
mob.—(Cheers.) If, however, upon the inquiry which
bad been instituted on the subject of tithes, it
should appear that they ought to be abolished,—
that abolition should receive his support.—( Hear.)
Ile should not n,)," have Laid, d to the suhjecr, but for
what had fallen front the Hon. Member for Middlesex on
the subject. He considered it beneath the character of an
Englishman and the Legislature to hear such sentiments
without toast unequivocally and decidedly giving theta un-
qualified opposition.—( Hear.)
Air. BLAKENEY considered himself bound, from the
knowledge he had of Ireland, to state that be took a very
different view of tile smatter from what had been taken by
the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. He was a
resident in Ireland, and particularly affected by that
unjust system of tithes which at present existed in that
country, and he entirely concurred with the Honourable
Member for Middlesex in regard to that important
subject. He came from that part of the country
which was disturbed by that most vital question to the
peace of Ireland. He did not speak from any sectarian
feeling, but he thought with the Honourable Member
fur Middlesex, that there was indeed an end to
tithes in Ireland under the present system. He
spoke from a knowledge of what was going on in six or
seven counties, Kilkenny, Wexford, Tipperary, Carlow,
Queen's County, and Kildare. The people had begun to
protect themselves against procedure by legal process—were
they to pay tithes under the present system, which was both

unbecoming, the credit of the Church and the existence of

religion? Although the people united themselves vin
a body to resist the payment of tithes, they did not
consider that they broke the laws—(Cries of " Hear,
hear, hear")—and it was his firm belief that until

a change was made in the present system of tithes, unti,
indeed they were abolished in Ireland—that country would
have no peace.
Sir EDWARD SUGDEN could not see the consis-
tency of the Hon. Member'; statement. In the six coun..

ties he had enumerated the people were determined it

appeared not to pay tithes and yet they did not break the
law, which, however they somehow evaded. Such persons, he
considered, acting in huge numbers, whil,t they effected to

be obedient to the law, Were the worst subjects of the King,
and the greatest enemies of their country. He did not say
the altered state of circumstances might not demand a

partial extension of the franchise, but he could not see
how it was wise, politic, or safe for Government to pro-
pose at this time so materially, as under the Reform Bill,
to extend the franchise and political power of a people
who were thus in array against the law and determined to

oppose it in every respect.
Mr. O'CONNELL did not believe that the Hon. and
Learned Member had paid much attention to the Irish
Reform Bill, when he said that it was calculated so
materially to extend the franchise in Ireland. At the
Union, the franchise amounted to 300,000 voters, that
was brought down to 150,000, and the Reform Bill will
only add :300 more to the Irish constituency. As to the ques-
tion of non-payment of tithes, it was said the people violated
the laN:when they resisted legal process. There was no law
requiring moan to pay tithes, because he could not be in-
d'acted for non-payment. The law said tithes should be
paid, or a distress should he levied. The property dis-
traind was carried for sale, hut no law existec to oblige
any one to purchase thetn,and theditTcrence between England
mid Ireland was this, that in England people were found
to purchase the articles, but in Ireland they had them-
selves to refuse. They could not compel the payment of
tithes in Ireland, otherwise than by obliging men to pur-
chase the di,trained property, and ally attempt to do so
would be utterly abortive.
Mr. WEYLAND, in explanation, did not mean to ad-
vocate the continuance of an improper law. If bad, it
WAS for the Legislature to alter it, but so long. as it existed,
he could not but entertain the opinion that it must be
obeyed.