The Sun.
London, England, 1832-07-14 00:00:00

lords; and it Would at the tame time give into their hands
the means of telieving themselves to a great degree of all
the real evils of the system. At the same time it would
!save which the resolutions of his Hon. and Learned Friend
did not, the question of the appropriation of Church pro-
perty to a future Parliament. On these grounds he ven-
tured to hope that the House would negative those resolu-
tions, and allow him to bring in his Bill.—(Cheers.)
Mr. MULLINS said, that if there existed at the pre-
sent period a case in which deduction was manifestly at
variance with evidence, it was to be found in the second
tßheep
evidenceo r t ofthe
committeeon which on Irish
that
a t
Reportwa compared
founded.
He
called upon the Right Hon. Secretary to say what part of
the evidence justified him in his opinion of the beneficial
results of a compulsory composition? The state of the . -
case appeared to be this—the tithe-payer complained, first,
of the injustice ; next, of the pressure of the impost : and
what did the Right Hon. Secretary say in reply to his
appeal ? " You shall have immediate relief ; I'll place
every one of your neighbours in a similar condition, and
you shall all henceforward enjoy the inestimable advantage
of a compulsory burden." This would be the necessary
consequence of the proposed enactment ; and there was
something so trifling in this mode of legislation, that he
could scarcely bring himself to believe that the Right Hon.
Gentleman was in earnest in his proposition. It was well
known that the enforcement of the composition would not
enable the clergy to collect their tithe with less difficulty di
han at present; for the opposition was not so much to the A
omannerfthe of o
impost.
cll e cTtiho o
en
evil,
i modeofl
therefore,
payment,
still a
nseteod
et
dh eexistence a
remedy,
which could only be found in the immediate, not prospec-
tive—the unequivocal and total abolition of the present
system. All parties were equally opposed to that system,
and could only be eontented with a remedy as satisfactory
as that alluded to. These were not his opinions alone,
they were the opinions of the very witnesses on whose
evidence the proposed measure was founded. Of twenty-
six witnesses examined, sixteen were decidedly opposed to
the composition, compulsory or otherwise; seven had been
questioned on points not exactly relating to that branch of
the inquiry ; there remained therefore but three in any
degree favourable to a compulsory enactment, of the six-
teen. Stephen Wright, the first witness, declared " the
composition not to be an improvement, but the reverse."
Robert Delahoe, the second, states "that though the com-
position should. be compulsory, it would not be likely to
extinguish the present feeling on the subject of tithe ; it
being his own conviction that tithe, whether required by
usage or under composition, would not long be submitted
to in Ireland." John Dunn stated that " the Composition
Act had every where disappointed the expectations first
formed of it." Christopher James declared the opposition
to be general, as much in compounded parishes as others
that the composition was not an improvement, but the
reverse ; and that he objected both to the principle and
details of that Act." The Rev. Theophilus Blakeley
" thought that tithes should be abolished ;" the Rev. H.
Montgomery " knew now that the people did not like
the composition as much in operation as in anticipation;"
and Mr. William Collis said, " that so far from being an
improvement, it was the very reverse." With such evi-
dence before him, he could not in his conscience, support
the proposition of the Right Hon. Secretary, seeing that
that proposition was directly at variance with the opi-
nions of men in every way competent to form a correct
judgment on the subject.
Lord EBRINGTON expressed his determination to
give his unqualified support to the measure of his Right
Hon. Friend. He should have been ready to give his con-
sent to any more palatable means of relieving the people
of Ireland, but no such more palatable means had been
proposed. What had been proposed, instead of the plan
of his Right Hon. Friend ? Nothing but a general tax ;
and he, as an Irish landlord, protested against a plan
which relieved his land at the expense of the community.
As an English Member of Parliament, he protested against
advancing anything from the general property of
the State to pay those sums which were due from
the land of Ireland.—ln conclusion, he pro-
tested against the combinations, by which gentlemen,
such as Mr. Bourne and Lord Cloncurry, were placed
out of the pale of society, because they paid their tithes.
He thought that the gentlemen of Ireland ought to make
a stand against these combinations. It was easy to fore-
tell, that if they did not, the next thing destroyed would
be the rents of absentees ; and the rents of resident pro-
prietors would soon follow. He, however, begged to ob-
serve, t let he was most anxious that a Reform should
twee place in the Church of Ireland, because he considered
all such establishments to be made for the benefit of the
State, and liable to the regulation of Parliament. if the
subject of Reform in the Church Establishment were not
proposed by any person more worthy, he pledged himsel f
that he would bring it forward in the new Parliament.
Mr. DAWSON did not think this measure would pro-
duce tranquillity in Ire. He looke uon the Right
i.eeland inns .8 the mostd fatal wounds the
Irish Church had ever received. The Right Hon. Gentle-
man had sent forth an anathema against the tithe system,
and he was responsible for the combinations which had
been made to extinguish them. He had done his duty in
statements
terlfapee
Atlntrealehtmnrsief.edeun.nci
stating that this measure would not satisfy the people of
opportunity
iAtoh nlaslt P‘a
scatteredvtl. hdi
ctnN,
itvgtawnhnhteaadht sfflverHot
ymiehrolodelolanevens
n.detdcrt
.asehoanemi
tn
ixemorni
oeo,Btntiubotaogset
rtesyhtebeeo
otxfoothirfahriai take
dtlpeghhr
auetaprlextinguished
Ireland,
theadvantagebHieedlsoid:
umhhtsbaeiyddse,_
Commons,
tt
ohaatd
tithes were to be extinguished; but both
hadhild declaredsomittede of
f
commutation. That omission :changed the character of
the whole affair. Was it not known that such a thing
had been done before now ? There was an Act of Par-
liament passed in the Ist and 2d Wm. IV. for extinguish-
ing the tithes in certain parishes in Wal es, and for afford-
ing compensation for the same. It was not true that tithes
had ceased to be paid in Ireland. Such a statement was
only true as it regarded parts of two provinces—Leinster
and Munster, for they were still paid in Protestant Ulster
and Catholic Connaught. The combination, however,
that existed was of a most dangerous character—it was a
combination, not merely against tithes, but against the
law of the land ; and the Government must put it down.
If the Right Hon. Gentleman was not an English Mem-
ber, and, above all, if he was an Irish, seeking the suf-
frages of an Irish county, he could not have made a better
electioneering speech than be had just now uttered.
Mr. G. DAWSON called the Hon. and Learned Mew-
her to order, and said he was an English Member.
Mr. CRAMPTON knew the Right Hon. Gentleman
was an English Member, and knowing that, he thought
he was justified in saying that had not the Right Hon.
Gentleman been an English 'Member, and had he been an
Irish Member, and a candidate for an Irish county, he
could not have made a better electioneering speech.
(Hear, hear.) He should again refer to the subject of
the combination existing in Ireland—it was a dangerous
combination, which must be put down, and which the
Government were endeavouring to put down. In their
recent special commissions in the county of Wicklow, six
men had been convicted, and these convictions had been
followed by 46 pleas of guilty. In the same manner out
dtlesepejotees%utis of adjourn-
ment.
39 cases presented in the Queen's County, there had
been 38 convictions, and there was no pretence for saying
that Judges or Juries had not done their duty. The
landlords of Ireland had no wish whatever to defraud the
clergy, but they wished to secure the peace
oofutthheeioguennetrrya.l
was of opinion that the Right Hon.
Mr. G. DAWSON and Mr. CKA:ArToN mutually ex-
plained.
Sir R. PEEL rose to address the House, but was met
Wqeurees tiqounitien answeruninte
with loud and general cries of " Spoke, spoke !" The
st
acnryi e so
other
e
yLbsaptokheen ohn4
quaHueoi‘ennsit.tr.i BaronetonL—A3h
feßi
Edaedßn
Tioe
ndl
to his
The SYEAlTtilreotno
say
ying appealed few words
n eLtahma
bdt
oesrptt:osek) spoken on
House,
Which
hnmisca.
hi n
Spoke," and " Chair," that
Colonel PERCEVAL rose to order, and addressed a
ligible
what period of the two nights' pifiraroedmvoanitihete:nisumsuebr numerous
to, said—lf any
that he perfectly recollects at
Hon. Member is
Hon. Member addressed the sa
discussion that we have
House, he is able to do ,41
During those two • more than I can.—(A laugh.) „TA
tions for nights we have had three or four mo-
adjournment. On eachofthose each
Member, although he had
,eg
titled to add before spoken, was again en-
oft
address the House. Many did • •
se.avail themselves ,
of that
privilege; and iii these discussions on motions for e
adjournrne • • •
nt the main question was frequently introduced ;s .Les
Into debate. If, under theBe c'ecumstances, lam called on j
to say
at what period of each distinct discussion any Hop.
Meinlier .81
spoke, and whether he spoke only to the question
of Adjournment or introduced into his speech the maim 'T.4I.
subject of debate, I shall be called on to ez, that to whiehlt
aro quite n”equal.—(Laughter.)
Sir ROBERT PEEL thin addressed the House,
pro- e*
milling to be very brief. They were called en to support
the Government because it was said that the Govera'ment
were endeavouring to put down dangerous combinations,
and to restore tranquillity to Ireland. The opponents to ,/
the clergy often spoke of liberty. 'What liberty was that
s
which existed in some parts of Ireland, vele e, if a man
desired conscientiously to pay what lie owed, there
was a 101
conspiracy not to employ him? The • question was not