The Sun.
London, England, 1835-07-23 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TiIURSDAY, JULY 23, 1835

ti3n should the Protestant religion_ remain the Establishee
religion of this kingdom ? ( Loud cheering from the Oppo-
site% benches.) He entirely agreed with the Right Hon.
Member for Tamworth that the Bill before them was infi-
nitely too much or too little. It was too much, as irivolt-
in; a great violation of principle, ithout effecting and
great object ; and it was too littla—it was indeed
aa a mere speck in the horizon—if regarded as a means of
compounding the differences existing already in Ireland.
He was not for pushing any vain scheme of proselytism in
Ireland ; but at the same time he was desirous of giving the
Protestant religion a fair chance of spreading, and he cer-
tainly joined with his Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of
the Exchequer in congratulating this Protestant country—
and England more especially—that notwithstanding all the
numerous disadvantages under which it has recently laboured,
the Protestant religion has been recently gaining ground in
Ireland. He could conceive a means of aiding its further ex.
tension, by employing catechists and schoolmasters speaking
the Irish language and professing the Protestant religion, t
impart instruction in its principles to the young among tilt
Population of Ireland. He would mention another mode of
contributing to the same end. He had cordially supported
Sir John Newport and his Right Honourable Friend
through many years of opposition in their efforts to
effect a removal of the vestry cess ; and it certainly was
to him d source of pride and joy that he had been a
Member of ijie Government by which it was at length re-
moved. There ins an impost still remaining, which was
quite analogous to vestry cess, and which might be with equal
propriety remitted—he meant the ministers' money, which was
levied in towns to the amount of about 12,0001. a year. If
this Bill were to pass, he was quite sure that before three years
had elapsed there would be a cry raised for its removal much
stronger than was ever heard against vestry cess or against
tithe. Tbe Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, when once
contrasting the Catholic Church in Ireland with the Protestant
Church, rejoiced that his Church at t was not tainted with
the mammon of gold—Oluding, he supposed, to the poverty
of the Roman Catholic clergymen there. But how stood the
fact? He shrewdly suspected tat the parochial clergy of the
,Roman Catholic Church in Ireland tzere in the receipt of very
'arge incomes.—( Hear.) He had been present at a Com-
mittee the other day, when it was distinctly stated that at Clon-
rnel the annual receipt was 1,000/. ; and yet they were ,now
about to debate concerning the propriety of fixing the maxi-
mum of the livings in the Protestant Church at 300/. If they
retained a Church Establishment for Ireland, it was absolutely
necessary that they should place its ministers above poverty
and dependence. He had been asked by an individual, as one
living in the neighbourhood of Scotland, what his Scotch
neighbours said on this subject, and he had the means of
satisfactorily answering the question. He lived on the bor-
ders of the- country—Scotland, at the south western extre-
mity of Scotland; and within the last six weeks the Synod of
that county and the lay elders had assembled, turd come to the
resolution of sending an address to his Majesty, which he had
had the honour of placing in his Majesty's hands, to this ef-
fect:_" We consider any attempt to interfere with the inte-
grity of the Protestant established religion, by appropriating
the revenues of the Reformed Church to any other purpose
than the maintenance of the ministers, and the due dispensa-
tkm of her ordinances among the people, and the support of
truly Protestant education, as a violation of the fundamental
laws of the Conetitution, as dissolving the bond of allegiance
between your Majesty and your subjects—(lronical cheering
the Ministerial benches)—as an act of injustice to the
Whole community of Protestants, in whose birthright is in-
cluded the maintenance of their' religion, as tending to destroy
all confidence in the security of every description of property
-1--(llear)—and as encouraging the machinations of those reek-
tess Uproar)—who are pursuing a course which, if the
fiestimony of history may be believed, will lead to general con-
fi, scation and robbery.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) We
gs leave humbly to offer our hearty thanks for your Majesty's
inost gracious expression of regard and affection towards
t_heat. portion of the Protestant Established Church, to which
welfare, which,
and your Royal solicitude for its extension and
which, in our humble opinion would be put in immi-
nent danger by the recognition of the principle publicly
avowed in reference to the Protestant Established Church in
stoat,
th_ a• That was his answer to the question put to him by
Hon. and Learned Member for Tipperary, as to what his
neighbours on the opposite side of the border said on this
sttestion: The Hon. Member for Middlesex had reminded
e House that the storm now runs high. He would reply to
that observatlon, by saying, that when the storm runs highest
You must steer with the compass. Arid what was the corn-
Itilsa of public men ? It was not, he maintained, public expe-
itiency : it was a firm adherence to great first principles, which
Would be dangerous to compromise, and unmanly to desert.
(Great cheering from the Opposition.) He would again
n)
.'ure the House that he most unwilling to occupy their time
ZNll!'eading long passages to them ; but there was one passage
'eh bore on this question so strongly, and which was fraught
With so much wisdom and instruction, that although he feared
e had exhausted their patience, he trusted that they would
reend to bim a further share of their indulgence whilst
y read it to them. It referred to a melancholy passage in
ne history of this country, when a question arose on a
Principle somewhat analogous to that now under discussion—
rormdesant the expulsion of the Bishops from the House of
t
the The Monarch who reigned over this kingdom at
ed Oci
to which he referred, was Charles 1., who had con-
sentand quaiPsut Lord Strafford to death, with what reluctance
m
_as
to state.
pulsi9n of of conscience it was then unnecessary for him
The next measure pressed on him was the ex-
was the Bishops from the House of Lords, and he
induced, in opposition to the stern dictates of con-
science, to accede to the necessity which he was led to
suppose the danger of his situation imposed on him. Now,
he begged -the attention of the House to the arguments
urged for the adoption of that unhappy Prince, as well as
the remarks which Lord Clarendon made upon them. These
arguments, too, were not advanced by false advisers, but by
honest Ministers who erred in judgment. " Now the Bill
for the taking away the votes of bishops out of the House of
Perms, which was called a Bill for taking away all temporal
Jurisdiction from those in holy orders, had no sooner passed
:be House of Peers than the King was earnestly desired to
give big Royal assent to it." The King returned, "that
was a matter of greet concernment, and therefore he
would take time to advise, and would return an answer in
convenient time." But this delay pleased not their appetite •
they could not attempt their perfect reformation in Church
and state, till those votes were utterly abolished ; there-
'ore they sent the same day again to the King, who was
Yet at Windsor, and gave him reasons to persuade him im-
nediately to consent to it, one of which was the grievances
Itie subjects suffered by the Bishops exercising of temporal
Jurisdiction, and their making a party in the Lords' House :'
af
second, the great content of all sorts by the happy con-
luretion of both Houses in their absence ;' and a third, that
.11e passing of that Bill would be a comfortable pledge of his
,nesty's gracious assent to the future remedies of those
Ills, which were to be presented to him, this once being
pressed.' 'Reasons sufficient to have converted him, if he had
the least inclination or propensity to have concurred with
For it was, upon the matter, to persuade him to join
With than in this, because that being done, he should be able
t.. 0 deny them nothing. However, those of greatest trust
abut the King, and who were very faithful to his sevice,
tit ugh in this particular exceedingly deceived in their judg- ,
nieuts, and not sufficiently acquainted with the constitution
the kingdom, persuaded him " that the passing this Bill
742 the only way to preserve this Church, there being so
:be mited a combination in this particul that he would not
able to withstand it. Whereas, by the passinn• of this
till' SO many persons in both Houses would be °fully sa-
Ced, for they would join in no further alteration;
,_uti on the other hand, if they were crossed in this, they
;:°.,uld violently endeavour an extirpation of the Bishops, and
ai
he
renlOilShing of the whole fabric of' the Church.' " " They
eged that he was upon the matter, deprived of their votes
tahireeady, ty being not suffered to come to
of high treason,
the House, and
of. major part in prison under an accusation
which there was not like to be any reformation, till these
present distempers were composed ; and then that by his
power; and the memory of the indirect means that had been
led against them, it would be easier to bring them in again,
_an to keep them in now.' They told him, there were two
Tatters of great importance pressed upon him for his Royal
!sent, but they were not of equal consequence and concern-
rut to his sovereign power : the first, that Bill touching the
tt ahops' votes; the other, the whole militia of the kingdom,
:0 granting of which would absolutely divest him of all
(‘gil4l power, that he would not be able to deny both ; but
j. granting the former, in which he parted with no matter of
rrnent, he would, it may be, not be pressed in the second;
he were, that as he could not have a more popular guar-
y, to take up arms than to defend himself and to preserve
"!t power in his hands which the law had vested in him,
h*".l vvithout which he could not be a so he could not
tCe a more unpopular argument forthat contention than
). preservation of the Bishops in the House of Peers,
prel,eh few men thought essential, and most men believed
to the peace and happiness of the kingdom.' "
etc passing that 'Bill for taking away the Bishops votes
eedlngly weakened the King's party, not only as it swept
;:.viILY so considerable a number out of the House of Peers
h were constantly devoted to him ; but as it made im-
Pressi
on on others, whose minds were in suspense, as when
mindations are shaken. Besides, they that were best ac-
;lnainted with the King's nature, opinions, and resolutions,
ad reason to believe that no exigence could have wrought
Pon him to have consented to so anti-monarchical an act ;
andtien therefore never after retained any confidence that he would
,Y what was importunately asked ; and so either abolutely
dress. themselves from those consultations, thereby avoid-
n. tvi
the envy and the danger of opposing them, or quietly
stered themselves to be carried by the stream, and to con-
rnet to any thing that was boldly and lustily attempted."
would not pursue the history of that unhappy Prince
oer : his history, as well as that of his country, was,
course, familiar to every Hon. Member of that House,
tad he had only to express a sincere and ardent hope
481 no similar consequences would follow from acting on
diVesentations made at this time, which were not widely
tikerent from those then pressed on the attention of
e Monarch. It was thrown out at the other side (on
principle, no doubt, that ridicule prevailed otten when
are
__nnment failed), that the cry of the " Church in danger,"
s now attempted to be raised. Now, if this sneer had
Pair roceeded from those who considered an Established Church
evil, arid that of Ireland a national grievance, 1141 should
b_ much surprised : but when it came from those who ap-
I
e to consider a national Church a benefit, he could not
elp
saying, that he was astonished how it could, for one e
nt, he considered by those who held those opinions a
matter of indifference, that the existence of the Church
n.n uld be in the slightest degree endangered, or that a cer-
Ze. profession of faith should continue to be the favored
tha6(ll°ar.) If they believed that the Establishment of
Church formed an essential part of the Constitution of the
"utrY—tbat it afforded the most favorable means of spread-

ing rational and sound religion—if they believed that it con-
- tamed the sources of consolation in pain, poverty, sorrow,
. and anguish, and that it exercised a just authority over
those attached to it, without precluding full and fair in-
piiry, then ft behoved them to cling to this Establishment—
to defend it manfully and boldly—(Cheers)—not to surrender
I the cause of their Protestant brethren in Ireland ; and, above
I all, to make no second concession to the influence of Catholic
agitation.—( Cheers.) He admitted that tolerance was the
I first principle of Protestantism ' • but the question now was,
whether the Catholics should be kept within the bounds of to-
leration, or allowed to act in a spirit of ascendancy.—(Re-
' flowed cheers.) He had every respect for conscience.—
( Hear, hear, and oh, oh 0 Did he not support Catholic
emancipation, and remain for many years in hopeless opposi-
tion on that question ? Did he not support the repeal of the
Test and Corporation Acts? He repeated that no man in that
House had a more sincere respect for the scruples of con-
science.—( Hear, mingled with cries of "Oh !") But he
confessed he had no regard for conscience when it assumed
the shape of resistance to the monied payment of a legal im-
post.—( Cheers from the Opposition.) And for the conscience
of passive resistance—for the conscience of agitation—for the
conscience of repeal—for the conscience of the " annual tribute"
—( Cheers)--and, last of all, for the conscience of Death's
head and cross bones—(Cheers again)—he, for one, was not
prepared to make the smallest possible concession.—( Cheers.)
For the Reformed Religion, as it was -established in these
realms, there was no sacrifice which he was not ready and will-
ing to make.—(Loud cheers.)
Lord HOWICK began by saying that he was most anxious
to have addressed She House after the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Member for the University of Cambridge, because he
thought he had addressed himself to the question as it affected
him and his colleagues, but he now rejoiced that he had given
way to the Hon. Member for Berkshire ; and he was happy
to have an opportunity of expressing the extreme satisfaction
with which he heard the speech of the Hon. Member—a speech
which did equal honour to his head and heart—a speech in
which it was proved, that one who possessed a candid and
sound judgment, would not hesitate, in spite of personal feel-
ing, to sacrifice his opinion to conviction produced by facts
clearly brought before him.—(Cheers.) He felt also bound
to say, that the Hon. Gentleman had stated in the clearest
and most convincing manner, the main arguments on which
this question rested. He was happy, too, to have an oppor-
tunity afforded of expressing a somewhat different feeling with
respect to the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Cumber-
land. He was now most happy in being allowed the opportu-
nity of answering some of the arguments of his Right Hon.
Friend (Sir J. Graham), arguments which, coming as they
did from one who professed that tolerance was the first prin-
ciple of Protestantism, really filled him with infinite astonish-
ment.—( Loud cheers from the Opposition.) But before he
proceeded to call the attention of the House to his views, in op-
position to those of the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for
Cumberland, he hoped he might be allowed to notice the re-
' marks of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for the
University of Cambridge, though they might not perhaps be
strictly and immediately connected with the particular ques-
tion before the House. The Right Hon. Gentleman occupied
a considerable portion of his speech in answering what fell
from my Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer. His Right Hon. Friend had said, and he thought said
most truly and unanswerably, that a great part of the difficul-
ties which now encompassed this question arose from the con-
duct in by-gone times of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite in hav-
ing refused at periods of more quiet than the present to make
the necessary provision for the coming embarrassments which
they must have felt must inevitably await any future Govern-
ment in the satisfactory settlement of this question.—( Hear. )
The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of
Cambridge, in answer to that charge, asked, " Are we patrons
hf Church abuses ? have we done nothing for the improvement
of the Church in Ireland ?" and he entered on a long and warm
encomium of the measure which had been passed during the
administration of Lord Liveipool, of the Bill which lie had
kindly introduced on the subject of tithe composition, of non-
residence, and disseverance of unions, and wound up all by re-
minding the House that some of these many improvements
had been effected while Lord Liverpool's Aministration ex-
isted, and at a time when war was raging. Why, surely,
the Right Hon. Gentleman could not have been in the House
when the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth had
addressed them. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Member
for Tamworth came forward and said, " lam ready to give
up all existing abuses. I admit• that the statement of the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Attorney-General for Ire-
land, with respect to some particular parishes, is probably true;
and for that reason, and a readiness to deal, not prospectively,
but immediately, with the existing abuses of non-residence,
because I don't think that any vested rights are compatible
with abuses."—(Hear, hear.) I am no friend to clerical
sinecures ; of all sinecures they are the worst. I would abo-
lish those ministrations under which the starving curate is left
to perform the real duties, while the rich and well-paid rector
resides at Brighton. lam no friend to such abuses, and lam
prepared to remove them.—( Hear, hear.) But while the
Right Hon. Baronet and his friends were formerly in office
they did, it might be said, all that they could to effect these
improvements of the system. Why the simple question by
which the truth of that assertion might be tested was, Did
these abuses now exist, or did they not ?—(Loud cheers.)
Had the statement of the Honourable and Learned Gen-
tleman the Attorney- General for Ireland been im-
pugned in any one particular ? did those abuses, he re-
peated, to which that Hon. and Learned Gentleman referred
exist or did they not? and were not the Right Hon. Gentle-
man opposite and those with whom he acted in command of
the destinies of the empire for a long series of years ?—a period
abundantly sufficient to enable them to apply some real remedy
to such anomalies.—( Cheers.) He believed the Right Hon.
Baronet was Secretary for Ireland in 1812, that he remained
Secretary till 1819 ; that he became Secretary to the Home
Department in 1822, and remained in that situation, a leading
Member of the Cabinet, presiding, of course, over the affairs
of Ireland, for a period of not less than five years. He asked,
then, whether it was not natural to expect that the Right Hon.
Baronet, having such power, would not have allowed these
abuses to remain unabated to which be now expressed such
determined opposition ?—(Cheers.) But the Right Hon.
Gentleman (Mr. Goulburn) said that they held power during
those troubled times. Why there were only two years of
those during which they held office, that there was a war car-
ried on ; all the rest were years of the most profound peace.
( Hear, hear.) He would, too, ask those who talked of trou-
bled times, whether there was any comparison between the
opposition with which we had to contend since the Ist of Au-
gust, 1831, and the Opposition which was nick-named " his
Majesty's Opposition," during five years of the Administra-
tion of Lord Liverpool ?—( Hear, hear.) He did aver, that if
ever there was a Government situated in favourable circum-
stances for entertaining large and comprehensive views, and
for the calm consideration of distant futurity, it was the Ad-
ministration which then existed.—( Cheers.) There never yet
was a Government so powerful in that. House—there was no
political excitement of any kind in the country—there was
profound peace abroad—and there was no cause whatever to
prevent the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite from giving his
whole attention to the correction of those abuses of which he
avowed himself one of the boldest enemies.—( Cheers re-
peated, and a cry of " Hear" from Sir Robert Peel.) The
Right Hon. Gentleman had cheered him, as if he understood
b:na to imply that nothing bad been done by former Admi-
nistrations towards the remedy of abuses. He did not say
that they had not done any thing; but he only called on
the House to compare what they had done with what they
left undone—(Loud cheers for some minutes),--and with
what had been done since, with the facilities which they had
for carrying great measures, and our facilities : let such a
comparison, he repeated, be instituted, and he would assure
them that the deficiency exhibited on the part of the Right
Hon. Gentleman would not for one moment stand unro-
proved in the eyes of the country.—( Cheers.) But he would
deal fairly and candidly with the Right Hon. Gentlemen. He
had alluded to one ground of defence which he had brought
forward ; but there was another and much more substantial
ground o defence, which, though he ( Lord Howick) could
well imagine, the Right Hon. Gentleman would not be de-
sirous of putting forward, might, he thought, be most suc-
cessfully advanced by him. He might say, "It is true we
were very powerful in this House ; but in this House, as it was
at the time we held ;Ace constituted, we held our power by this
tenure—that we should not deal too rigidly with abuses."—
( Loud cheers.) If the Right Hon. Gentleman had rested his
defence on that ground, he would at once admit its fairness ;
but he should, on the other hand, have called on him to re-
nounce all that he had said four years ago on the subject of
Parliamentary Reform, and to agree with him that that measure
was the greatest blessing ever conferred on the people of this
country.—( Cheers.) He should now address himself to the
main and most important question before the House, after
having said so much in answer to the challenge which had
been thrown over by the Hon. Gentleman, the Member for the
University of Cambridge. One great—indeed, he might say,
the single argument urged ih the speeches of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Tamworth, for the University of Cambridge, and of his
Right Hon. Friend who last addressed the House, was, that
there was no real surplus after providing for all the expenses of
the Protestant Clergy. Now, in arguing this question, he
would not go into any calculations.—( Hear, hear, hear, and
cheers from the Opposition.) He could not do so with
effect, without occupying a much larger share of the time
of the House than they would, at that late hour, be in-
inclined to concede to him. But that was not his only reason.
His principal reason for declining to enter into these calcula-
tions was, that they were brought forward in support of an
argument in itself essentially unsound. If those calculations
which had been made on the other side were correct (and he
tools the liberty of denying that they were so) they would find
a most insufficient basis for the conclusions which were at-
tempted to be drawn from them.—(Hear, hear.) Now what
was the real and practical ground on which the measure before
the House was founded ? We find that the people of Ireland
complained that very large endowments were applied in such a
manner as to render them unproductive of those morally be-
neficial results which might be expected from the proper dis-
posal of such funds. That was the chief complaint which the
people of Ireland put forward—and when he came to consider
whether that comlaint was just or unjust, it led him to the
pi inciple on which an Established Church and such endow-
ments were founded in Ireland. The Right Hon. Gentleman
here addred
•
himself to the question as if the support of the
Church merely was L1‘..7 object for which these national endow-
ments were made. Now itappearL4 to him, and, he. was corro-
berated in the opinion by the most eminent autss......":ies. among
whom were Dr. Paley and the present Bishop of London—
that the Established Church, like every other human institu-
tion, was founded for the benefit of the great body of the
people, for the purpose of diffusing the truths of Christianity
amongst them.—( Cheers.) When a Church Establishment
answered that object, he scrupled not to say that it was the
most useful of all human institutions. He perfectly concurred
in the truth of the passage which had been quoted on a former
occasion by the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Cumber-

land, on the advantages derived from religion. He quite
agreed in the opinion that the maintenance of religion should
be one of the first objects to which the attention of the State
should he directed. And be would go further and state it as
his opinion that a national Establishment was the best means
of extending the benefits of religion.—(Hear, hear.) He
considered that the object of a religious Establishment was to
bring the means of religion to the doors of the whole popula-
tion of the country where it was placed. If this, then, were
the rule by which the efficiency of such an Establishment was
to be judged, what, he would ask, was the state of the popu-
lation of Ireland ? He should not wish to go into any parti-
culars with respect to population. But when he found, not
individual parishes, but whole districts in the south and south-
west of Ireland, in which the proportion of Protestants to
Roman Catholics was extremely small, he trusted the House
would bear with him while he addressed to them some fur-
ther observations, founded upon the comparative number of
those professing different religions.—( Hear, hear.) The
Protestants in Ireland were about a twenty-eighth part of
the population; and ought, therefore, so large a majority
of the Irish people to be defrauded of their rights ? The
tithes were not a tax. The landlord had no mole claim to
the tithes than he had to his neighbours's estate. The tithe
was money set apart for certain purposes. Now, what were
these purposes? His Right Hon: Friend opposite had said
that the purpose for which tithe was set apart, was for the
maintenance of the Church. He (Lord Howick) said that
the purpose for which tithe was set apart, was for the mainte-
nance of religion.—( Hear, hear.) To maintain that the Church
and religion were the same thing, was a fallacy which he had
not expected his Right Hon. Friend would have uttered; for
it was a fallacy which an infant might detect.—( Hear, hear.)
Religion lived in the hearts and minds of men. It could not
be created where it did not exist, by human aid ; nor could it
be crushed where it did exist, by human neglect. But a
Church Establishment was merely a human institution, for
the promotion of religion ; and by its success or its failure in
forwarding that object, it ought to stand or fall.—( Hear,
hear.) Now, would any man of any party venture to say
that the Church of Ireland had proved a successful instru-
ment for the encouragement and diffusion of religion ?—( Hear,
hear.) It had been said by some, that the Roman Catholic
religion in Ireland had been gradually yielding to Protestant-
ism. What was the fact ? He would not trouble the House
at that late hour with minute calculations. But he would

just observe that Sir William Petty, in the reign of Charles
the Second, estimated the Protestants in Ireland, as com-
pared with the Roman Catholics, at three to eight. A similar
estimate was made by the Bishop of Dromore in 1736; for
ha estimated the Roman Catholics, as compared with the
Protestants, at two and a half to one. The Bishop of Ossory,
in 1731, considered them to be nearly equal. Now, taking
the least exaggerated of these statements, namely, that the
Protestants formerly bore the proportion of three to eight ;
what ground was there for contending that the Roman
Catholic religion in Ireland had been gradually yielding to
Protestantism, when it appeared from the recent Report of the
Commissioners, that the existing proportion of Roman Ca.
tholics, as compared with Protestants, was twelve to three and
three quarters.—( Hear, hear.) But the real object to which
the property in question ought to be applied, was not so much
to the maintenance of the Established religion, as to the diffu-
sion of the great truths of Christianity—those truths in
which all were deeply concerned ; and to the bringing the
whole of the population under those rules of moral conduct
which has been prescribed by the Divine Founder of our
religion.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The object was to diffuse mo-
ral knowledge indifferently among the great body of the Irish
population (for the soul of a Roman Catholic was as valuable
as the soul of a Protestant;) and how was that object at pre-
sent fulfilled ?—( Hear, hear.) He would not pursue that
branch of the subject further at present, for it was too pain-
ful to dwell upon. He would return to his argument,
which was, that a portion of the property raised for the na-
tional Church ought to be applied to the moral instruction of
the great body of the people. The question was, how could
it be advantageously applied ? The Roman Catholics would
not receive instruction, as it had been offered to them, through
the medium of Protestant Clergymen. We might call them
bigotted or erroneous ; but the fact was, that they would not -
receive instruction in the form in which it had been offered to
them. Then, in his opinion, we were bound; in some degree,
to modify that form, so as to render it acceptable to the Roman
Catholic.—( Hear, hear.) In his opinion, it was essential to
the diffusion of Protestantism itself, that the minds of the Ro-
man Catholics should be enlightened : if, therefore, they would
not receive instruction in the form in which we had hitherto
tendered it to them, let us tender it in the form in which they
would receive it.--( Hear, hear.) His Right Hon. Friendwho
had just spoken, had himself acknowledged the utility of esta-
blishing schools in the remote districts of Ireland. The only
difference between his Right Hon. Friend and himself was,
that his Right Hon. Friend would establish schools to which
the great body of the Irish population would not allow their
children to resort; while he (Lord Howick) would establish
schools to which the great body of the Irish population would
allow their children to resort.—(Hear, hear.) He sincerely
believed, that when the great body of the population of Ire-
land had become more enlightened than-at present, they would
be more disposed to receive the tenets of our faith.—( Hear,
hear.) In every point of view, therefore, it would be expe-
dient to apply a portion of the property in question to the ge-
neral instruction of the Irish people.—( Hear.) His Right Hon.
Friend had acknowledged the justice of the principle, but
said that he could see no resting-place if it were carried into
effect. Now that was no answer to the case of the friends of

the measure. If his Right Hon. Friend could refute the prin-
ciple of the measure, let him do so. But let him be cautious
how he declared that the principle was a just one, but that
it would lead further than he chose to go. He ( Lord Howick )
was apprehensive that the people of Ireland might correct that
inconvenient moderation in the adoption of a just principle.
—(Hear, hear.) If his Right Hon. Friend admitted the
principle, that the Established Church in Ireland ought to be
supported only as it afforded the means of instruction among
the population of that country, and if he could not agree to
the measure which his Majesty's Government had brought
forward on that principle, let him bring forward his own mea-
sure. He (Lord Howick) would listen to his Right Hon.
Friend's proposition with every respect and attention. But he
could never yield his consent to the absurd doctrine, that al-
though a principle was just, it ought not to be adopted, lest it
should be carried too far.--(Hear' hear.) He would now
make some observations on what had fallen from the Right
Hon. Member for the University of Cambridge, the only
Member who had hitherto spoken during the discussion,
and he (Lord Howick) had listened with ,the greatest at-
tention throughout, who had stated a single argument in
favour of the motion of the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth.
The separation of the Bill into two had been touched upon
only by the Right Hon. Member for the University of Cam-
bridge. Now what was that Right Hon. Gentleman's argu-
ment ? That the two subjects were perfectly distinct ; and that
that view of the subject had been acted upon by a former Go-
vernment to which he (Lord Howick) had had the honour to
belong. His (Lord Howick's) answer. was, that the two sub-
jects, instead of being distinct questions were indissolubly con-
nected. What was the great and real cause of all the diffi-
culties which had occurred in the collection of tithes in Ire-
land ? The hostility of the great body of the people of Ire-
land to what they felt to be a crying injustice; the exclusive
appropriation of tithes to purposes in which they did not feel
the remotest interest.—(Hear.) He (Lord Howick) thought
that the Irish people had good grounds for this hostility ; and
that they would be more or less than men if they had not
evinced it..—( Hear.) But be their complaint well-founded or
ill-founded, be that of which they complained a grievance or
not, certain it was that the hostility of the great body of the
Irish people to the principle of tithes, and not tithes them-
selves, was the great cause of the difficulty which had been
experienced in the collection of them. So long ago as in
the year 1832 this had been distinctly stated in Parliament.
It had been first stated in that House by Mr. Brownlow. It
had afterwards been stated in a manner still more indisputable.
A member of the other House of Parliament, on presenting a
petition on the 13th of July, 1831 (four years ago), expressed
himself as follows :—" He hoped it would not be said in that
House, as it had been said in the public papers, that the tithes
were the cause of the disturbances in Ireland. It was not so:
in those parishes where a composition had been entered into,
they might be considered as rent, and yet, notwithstanding
that, they were not paid. In such parishes tithe-proctors had
disappeared, and with them all the objections which had been
made to the payment of tithes. The tithe, then, might, in
such instances, be considered as rent ; and if the opposition
to the payment of the tithe-rent in those places should be suc-
cessful, it aid not require much sagacity to foresee that oppo-
sition would be made in the next instance to the payment of
tithe itself." By whom were those observations made? By
any one hostile to the Irish Church Establishment? No. They
were made by the Bishop of Ferns, one of the dignitaries of
that Church.--( Hear.) It thus appeared to be admitted on all
hands that the difficulties which had arisen in Ireland in the
collection of tithes mainly arose from hostility to the prin-
ciple of tithes; to the exclusive devotion of tithes to a single
religious purpose. And that being admitted, the House
was, nevertheless, called upon by the Right Hon. Member for
Tamworth to strike out of the Bill under consideration that part
of it which was directed against the main root of the existing
evil.—( Hear, bear.) The origin of the difficulty in the col-
lection of tithes being that which he had described, the diffi-
culty would remain in full force if the proposition of the
Right Hon. Member for Tamworth were adopted. The
Hon. Baronet had said—" If you convert the tithes into a rent
charge, are you sure that the great body of the population of
Ireland will pay that rent charge ?" The evil here pointed
at by the Right Hon. Baronet would be the inevitable conse-
quence of passing the Bill, mutilated as that Right Hon.
Gentleman proposed to mutilate it. He did not state this on
general presumption. What he apprehended had already oc-
curred. Already Irish landlords, who, under the Composi-
tion Act, had converted tithes into a rent-charge, had found
it impracticable to obtain that rent-charge from their tenants.
A case which had been stated by a Noble Friend of his
showed the rooted hostility entertained by the great body
of the people of Ireland to the present application of the
tithe. What had occurred on that occasion, would occur
from one end of Ireland to the other, if the Bill wove prasod
without the principle of appropriation which it at present con-
tained. Now if landlords were unable to enforce the payment
of this rent-charge from their tenants, what could be done?
Could it be believed that the present, cr that any other Go-
vernmeut, would be able to enforce the payment of the rent•
charge from the landlords, If fh3 landlords were unable to en.
force the payment of it from their tenants ? Certainly not—
e,' the inevitable consequence would be, that the Church of
gn
, with, nnnrmities, would pe saddled on the pco-
Irelana, with au
pie
and En
tenant
Ireland (lear,
present The relation
character. When resistance was sucpes4ily 1114a0 ti? the
eery
precarious between
payment of a part of the rent, might not that resisianpe_iiNif
extend to the payment of the whole of the rent.—( Hear, hear,
hear.) Would the House throw all the landed prop9rty. of
Ireland into jeopardy, by adopting the Right Hon. Member
land-
lordini
t

for Tamworth's proposition ?' tWas that a course likely to
produce that general tranquillity in Ireland which alone could
induce capitalists to go to a country so capable, under favour.
able circumstances, of benefitting by commercial enterprise ?
Much, however, as. he should regret the loss of the property to
which he had been alluding, he would rather that that loss
should take place at once, than that they should embark in a
course; their progress in which must shake all the foundations
of civil society in Ireland. The Right Hon. Member for
Tamworth had expressed his hope that each portion of the
Bill was able to .bear a separate discussion. He (Lord
Howick) was of the same opinion ; but he would separate
the Bill in discussion only, not in reality.—( Hear, hear,
hear.) If they passed the one part of the Bill without the
other, it might be that they should find themselves de-
ceived with respect to the separate discussion.—( Hear, hear,
hear.) He took his stand upon the resolution to which that
House came on a former occasion.---( Hear, hear.) He main-
tained that no measure upon the subject of tithe could be final
or satisfactory unless it embodied the spirit of that resolution.
—( Cheers.) He said more, that he would infinitely rather that
the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) had met the Bill
by a direct negative than by the indirect and inconclusive
amendment to which he had resorted.—( Renewed cheering.)
If anything should occur to defeat the Bill, or even to destroy
any of its principal provisions, he for one should deeply regret
'it. He believed that the Bill was calculated in every respect
to advance the interests of a Church which, whilst he was
anxious to Reform, he for one should be one of the last to wish
to subvert. His conscientious conviction was that it would be
less fatal to the prosperity and peace of Ireland to pass the
Bill as it then stood, than to give it the effect of law in a Mu-
tilated shape.—( Hear, hear.) He was aware that tho eter-
dons of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. O'Connell)
near him, had produced a greater effect than they (the Go-
vernment) could wish—( Loud cheers from the Opposition).—
and he dreaded the furnishing that Hon. and Learned Gentle..
man with an argument so difficult to resist as this. Here is a
measure on which the great bulk of the people of Ireland have
iet their hearts and minds ; here is a measure in which three-
fourths of the national representatives of Ireland concur ; but,
on the other hand, here is the United Legislature refusing to
listen to it : refusing to hearken to tho complaints which we
have brought forward—( Hear, hear)--here is the United
Legislature saying, in the words of the Right Hon. Baronet
( Sir James Graham) the Member for Cumberland, " Your
claims are just, but they are dangerous, therefore we wil
resist them."

Sir JAMES GRAHAM-1f the Noble Lord is drawing
an inference from what I said, I cannot contest the fairness of
his doing so ; but if he says I ever asserted the proposition
he has just attributed to me, I must be allowed to say he is
utterly mistaken, because I am certain I never said any thing
of the kind.—( Hear, hear.)
Lord HOWICK continued— His Right Hon. Friend's
argument was this, that the measure was not a final one—that
it proceeded on a dangerous principle, and though it might be
founded in a just claim, its details were of a description that
could not be wrought out without danger.—( Hear, hear.)
All that he (Lord Howick) would say was, that the Imperial
Parliament should deal with Ireland on those principles of
eternal justice which ought to govern a Parliament sitting in
England.—( Cheers.) At that moment they claimed to them:
elves a Government founded on the consent of the great body
,f the people.—(Renewed cheering.) He knew no other
foundation on which a Government ought to exist.—(Reite-
rated cheers.) He wished to bind the people of Ireland to
the Government of this country by the bond of affection and
good-will—he wished that Ireland, if ever a war should un-
fortunately arise, should take her share in every danger and in
every sacrifice.—(Cheers.) He did not wish to gover.► Ire-
land as a'province, which in times of difficulty and of danger
must be watched with greater vigilance than an open and de-
lared enemy.—( Cheers.) If that were the true policy to be
adopted with respect to Ireland, the House must adopt the
Bill which the Government now called upon it to sanction.
Mr. BROTHERTON moved the adjournment of the de-
bate till to-morrow.—Question put and agreed to.
The other Orders of the Day were disposed of. An at-
tempt was made to proceed with motions, but on the motion
of Mr. BROTHERTON, the House adjourned at One o'Clock.

2
fig
t o

... ..,
cl 7

u
§ F
P
11111.
t.D -
o Fr

imi W F;11,

M'' co

0, :6--

.• 9• '
11111 a' .4 2
7, t•E• co

t''. 6. '''

1.0
'
8 A
111 I I,- ,P.,

.... ~..
-1 ~1:r

-A 5

lal VI Ezi R
. -..,
Or CJ ii.C.3,4. g

111 I II "•

I c,
'1 841 §iltoil

c cz. br, v. -4 t''
a =
F

19,
lal figi
co 0 .4 c

Ld
~
'o F
H O

't --!IPi3
y,;=-at..s
3 54,1T2.
alm

n 5
2 T.g
F. 74 :1
246. a
r - 3
S

111 I°lll'
m 4

6 co
pin 1-

-
.•

Et% B/:8
es>
t
A°o-'

r 7 R
A
g

I -,
.9, a

1 0-

2

?' F• '••••
IQ; roll 11 aol:c..tc.i.,

I
IC7) c— otO ts:4 ,

I t 3
• 48tLaee

00 MC.,..Ch.-,C..1-:.

Pc
C Sti 2
111 I I- ~.,

Vd
s
ei."o ".
g, 8
- pi"

g - cz
ta P.

n
c
ooh
ma a.
Fj:

e
a F.
.§;
5g

0 b;)

to._ . .__ .
k 'S .4). .... ioir,g
,F........,
-itP;g F i.z.' 1 ~..,;?., 02111••:,q;g 2
.. G.D OD ...11 Vd IQ 0 CP.
CA 110 C," 2
• ..
, C01C,C.71.1:.t.51-,=
0 R g F-7- 5.

r-gE s',:
-.L mge•
""at.7
;t"

C' n
A
~ ~
aK
r.
.h ~

By order of the Commissioners,
C. A. SCOVELL, Secretary.
Custom-house, London, July 20, 1835.

The quantity of spirits legally distilled last year in
England, Scotland, and Ireland, was 23,216,272 gallons, and
the duty paid thereon amounted to 5,243,501/. Qs. 10d.