The Sun.
London, England, 1832-03-14 00:00:00

of It cland—(Hear)—hut he would only say at once tha)
the system could not last—that it was founded in a great
mistake--that it was bottomed in delusion—that it was a
gross anomaly.--(Hear.)

Mr. HUME reminded those who were now so anxious
to adopt some measures to redress the grievances of Ireland
that when he proposed to them to be wise in time and to
avert by concession the evils which he saw awaited them,
he was greeted from all sides with the cry of spoil itor and
plunderer. What the Government were about to do now
was precisely what he recommended then; and although
he could not lint approve of a portion of their plan, he
must say he could not see why they did not go along with
him still further, and remodel the whole establishment of
the Church of Ireland—for until that was done he was
confident the people never could he satisfied.—( Hear.)
The Right Hon. Gentleman had told them that it was the
intention of the Government to hold out the hand of con-
ciliation to the people of Ireland ; but how did he propose
to commence his system of conciliation? 'Why by calling
on the House for extraordinary powers to suspend the laws
in order that the people may be compelled to pay up the
cures already due to the Church. They had :30,000 men,
they were told, in Ireland at that moment, and if they
were found insufficient hitherto to collect even a tithe of
the tithe, how, lie would ask, did they hope to collect it
hereafter, or what force did they suppose would be ne-
cessary for that purpose? How did they imagine they
could overcome the resolves of an united people—of a
people determined to resist to the last?—(Hear, hear.) He
could read to them, if it was necessary, speech upon
speech, delivered at the commencement of the contests
which led to the American war, iu which one Memner of
the House after another said that all they wanted was more
force and efficient laws; and yet what, after all, did the
whole power of England do against an united people.—
(Hear, hear, hear.) In just the same way would the
Irish resist, if driven to extremities. He was rejoiced th it
the Government had determined to make sacrifices to con-
ciliate their feelings ; and although an Hon. Member ex-
pressed doubts respecting the willingness of the people of
England to consent to give money out of the Consolidated
Fund for such a purpose, he thought the Hon. Member
was mistaken. He (Mr. Hume) was, for one, quite wil-
ling to give the money. He gave it in confidence to the
Government ; not because they were about to put the law
in force with additional severity, but because tithes were
at last to he abolished, and a system of compensation in-
troduced in their stead.—(Hear, hear.) He was confi-
dent the people of England would not object to the ar-
rangement. The question was not an Irish so much as it
was an English question; because it would enable England
to conduct the Government of Ireland for the future
without an immense expenditure, and that unfortunate
spirit which had hitherto marked their connection. Let
the Government try to bring the Irish within the pale of
the Constitution by acts of kindness and conciliation.
They asked but for justice. Let the Government give
them that justice ; but let them not, at the same time,
profess to bestow a boon on the Irish, while they insisted
on the rigid administration of laws which left them no
better than formerly. By the resolutions before the House
the Government professed to conciliate the people ; but
at the same time they, in the last resolution, intimated
that they would first try again what coercion was
likely to do, and how far they could succeed with
fire and the sword ; and he was confident, if the
House adopted their recommendation, they would
he placed in a situation with regard to Ireland which few
of them would like to contemplate. He thought it would
be both wisdom and prudence, on the part of the Govern-
ment, to declare their intention to go into a review of the
whole Church Establishment of Ireland. He knew they
had business enough on their hands; but if they were
mice to announce their attention, they might take their
time with it ; and if they were to allow the Committee
now sitting to take all the evidence they could collect, and
make a report on it, he was certain that evidence would
satisfy every impartial._ man in this country that all at-
tempts at coercion would utterly fail for the collection of
tithes.—(Hear, hear.) He believed the Ministers meant
as well as any men could do; but they were proceeding
under bad advice, and they would fail. For his part, he
regretted being compelled to differ from them ; but he
could not give his consent to the fourth resolution, and
he would vote against it.—( Hear.)
Mr. HUGH O'CONNOR agreed with the Right Hon.
Gentleman and the Government that the clergy should, as
parties to a compact, be relieved ; but he thought at the
same time that the Government were bound to take means
to prevent the recurrence of the disputes which rendered
such an arrangement necessary. As to the recovery of
the arrears of the tithes, he considered it, however,
next to impossible. He thought that the Government
were bound to make the House acquainted with the nature
of the remedies they proposed as a compensation for the
extraordinary powers they demanded' for the enforcement
of the existing law, because he fully agreed with the Mem-
ber for Middlesex, that if measures could be adopted to
satisfy the people, all coercion would be unnecessary. He
differed from those who asserted that tithe was a tax on the
land. He thought,on the contrary, that it was is tax on land,
capital and labour united. There were thirteen millions
of acres in Ireland. Of these one million belonged to the
Church ; and he was satisfied that, if fairly cistrihuted
and properly applied, they wouls be found fully adequate
to the support of the Protestant Establishment. He did
not measure religion by its temporalities, and he was con-
fident that the most effectual way to alienate the Catholics
from their parties would be to con'er on them advantages
such as those possessed at this moment by the Protestants.
—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member, after some observa-
tions on the effect which the abolition of tithes would have
on the property of landlords, concluded by expressing his
determination to vote for the three first resolutions, and
against the fourth.
Mr. W. PEEL said, there was no organized system of
opposition to the tithes in Ireland before the present Go-
vernment. Parliament had no more right to seize on the
property of the Church than they would have to seize on
the property of tire Right Hon. Gentleman. The King
had tagen an oath to support the Protestant Est iblish-
ment, and God forbid that he should have a Minister who
would advise him to violate it.—(Hear, hear.)

Mr. CAREW admitted that the clergy of Ireland ought
to lie relieved, but did not think that the relief ought to
come out of the pockets of the people of England.
Colonel CONOLLY thought that the state of Ireland
at the present moment was more awful than it had been at
any period during the last thirty years; and expressed his
hope that his Majesty's Government would enforce the
power which they had in their hands to vindicate the
laws of the land. He recommended that the landlords of
Ireland should be empowered to levy for tithes as they
were now empowered to levy far rents ; giving them a
rate not larger than that which the Protestant clergy now
received for compensation.
Mr. M. O'FERRALL heartily concurred in the resolu-
tion fur making a grant to the Protestant clergy to relieve
their distress. But with respect to the general law of
tithes, what be wished was to see it amended, and then if
the people disobeyed the law it might be properly enforc, d
against them. His objection to the tithe was not so much
to the manner in which it was levied, as to the manner in
which it was appropriated. He confessed, however, that
he had never paid tithe in Ireland without a feeling of de-
gradation—without considering it as a tribute paid by the
conquered to the conquerors. If Louis the Fourteenth had
invaded and conquered England, and had established the
Catholic as the religion of the State, would the Protestant
inhabitants of the country have paid tithes to the Catholic
clergy except -on compulsion? It was of a similar com-
pulsion;towards the Catholics of Ireland that he complained ;
and he protested against the Committee's being hurried on,
without hearing any evidence upon the subject, to the
adoption of measures of a severe and compulsory nature.
Sir RICHARD RIUSGRAVE did not object to ad-
vancing money to the Protestant clergy, who were at pre-
sent suffering so much distress. But they were told that
the money was to be repaid; and that coercive measures
would, if necessary, be resorted to for that purpose. To
such a proposition he most decidedly objectel The
question at issue embraced the people on the one side, and
the Protestant clergy on the other. But before having
heard half the evidence on the subject, the Committee h td
determined to remunerate the clergy, and to prosecute the
people. The Hon. Baronet here read several extrac's
from the evidence to show the evils and hardships to
which the people had been subjected, in consequence of
the demands of the clergy. To coerce the people for the
object in view would require not only a large army, but
an enormous army ; and it was highly probable that even
an enormous army would fail in acc mplishing the
purpose.
Mr. D. BROWNE was convinced that before many
years there must be a readjustment of Church property in
Ireland, and then it would be given to the three promi-
nent sects of Christians, and not, as now, exclusively be-
stowed upon one, which was not professedly inure than an
ei2hth of the people. He would wish to go farther than
Government; but he did not think this was the time, and,
indeed, he was sorry that anything had been said about
tithes that session, as it could not fiil in some degree to
interfere with the progress of the Reform Bill; but the
oppositi-n to the law, and the combination against it in
Ireland, rendered it imperative on the Right Hon. Gentle-
man to introduce some measure upon the subject fiirthwith.
Captain JONES, in explanation, stated that it was
true, as the Hon. Baronet observed, that the Roman C,L-
tholic clergymen were not charged by the parson with
tithes ; nor was the priest of the parish of Craig (if we

heard him rightly) for the land which he held in his cle-
rical capacity ; iiut the fact was, this priest took a farm
of forty acres on lease, and the Tithe Composition Act
b •ing in force in the parish, the landlord stipulated that
the tenant should pay the tithe; but he, however, ten-
drred the receipt of the parson for tithes in part payment
of rent, whtch was refused by the landlord, and the priest
being obstinate, the matter was ultimately referred to ar-
bitration, when Dr. Doyle, as one of the arbitrators, de-
cided against the priest, and in favour of the landlord.
Mr. CRAMPTON inceiglod against the tone and tem-
pi r of the speeches made by certain Hon. Members for
Ireland, and observed that the Hon. Member for Kildare
had made himself not the advocate of the people, but the
apologist for the agitators and combinators and violators of
the law. The fact was, Government should either put an
end to combination, or the combination would put an end
to Government.—(Hear.) The opposition which was
now directed only against tithes would soon extend to rent,
and from the seven counties in which it now prevailed,
spread throughout the four provinces. In proof of this
psition, he read extracts from letters published in the
appendix of the report of the Tithe Committee, and
from a threatening notice (signed " Lady Clare," and
now circulated in the Queen's County), wherein land-
lords were, on pain of death, called upon to reduce their
ren's. He declared that if the Government did not at
once interfere, insurrection, anarchy, abandonment of the
law, and the tyranny of agitators and mobs, would inevi-
tably come to pass. But the measure of the Government,
he contended, would restore tranquillity in the country,
afford relief to the clergy, and, combined with the healing
measures in contemplation, produce universal satisfaction.
Tee measure then under the consideration of the House,
had been most untruly represented as a measure of coercion.
It was no such triing ; it was a measure of mercy and of
leniency—it would give relief to the clergy, and justice to
the tithe-payer.

O'CONNOR DON—Appreciating the difficulties with
which Government are encompassed, and fully impressed
with the conviction of the sincerity of their intentions,
and their wishes to promote the general good of the
(ternary, I own that it is with great reluctance that I feel
obliged to dissent from any part of any of the measures
which are proposed in the resolutions that have been sub-
mitted for the consideration of this House. The first of
these resolutions is merely declaratory—the others recom-
mend the advancement of a sum to meet the exigencies of
the present incumbents, from whom tithes have been
withheld—the recovery of the arrears of tithes by extraor-
dinary measures of coercion—the abolition of tithes in
future, and the substituting for them either a land tax or
a portion of the land itself. In the first proposition I
sincerely concur. I think that with the present incum-
bents the country has contracted a solemn covenant
which it would be cruelty and injustice to violate. With
respect, however, to the collection of the arrears of tithes
by measures of extraordinary coercion, I question its pos.
; for, in every free State, there is a moral force
which is paramount to every physical power that can be
brought against it—l mean the force of public opinion ;
that force which, in many cases, supersedes the necessity
of all law ; and, in other cases, is the best sanction that
imparts to lite its stability and efficacy—that force of
public opinion has Most undoubtedly set in against the
tithe system ; and I do think that any recourse to extra-
ordinary measures of coercion will only precipitate the
ruinous downfall of that Establishment, which might have
been remodelled and secured by an earlier adoption of mea-
sures to lighten its pressure on the community. But the
recovery of the arrears of tithes has been always one of the
features in the system that has excited peculiar aversion,
and been the source of the most unjust exactions. And
upon whose testimony are those arrears to be recovered ?
Upon the oaths of the tithe proctors, the most heartless, the
most unprincipled set of men in existence. I speak of them
from experience as a Magistrate ; I have known the
most exorbitant demands to be made and sworn to
as just and equitable, arid at the lowest valuation ;
and yet upon inquiry they were found to be most
unjust exactions ; but without dwelling on these in-
stances, I shall mention a circumstance that lately oc-
curred in the county which I have the honour to repreeent.
Two of the most upright intelligent Magistrates were im-
peached on the oath of a tithe.proctor for neglect of duty.
The Lord-Lieutenant deputed two of his Deputy-Lieute-
Ilail!S to inquire into their conduct, and these Magistrates
had to descend from the bench, where they administered
justice with credit to themselves and to their country, and
to appear as criminals at the bar before Deputy Lieute-
nants who differed from them in politics, but who, being
men of honour, pronounced the charge to be false, frivo-
lous, and vexatious. But, Sir, it is asserted that it is
necessary to vindicate the majesty of the law. Without
at all meaning to detract from that reverence to which the
law is entitled, may it not be questioned if the law does
not divest itself of half its majesty front the moment that
it forfeits that high attribute that best entitled it to respect
tie attribute of justice? From that moment it may still,
it is true, retain power, but may it not too closely re-
semble the power of despotism ? and certainly there arises
this worst of all possible consequences from its conti-
nuance, that the hatred it engenders, and the hostility it
awakens are extended to the most just, the most equitable
authority. The remedies for the grievances of the tithe
sys ern should have been earlier applied ; delay has been
dangerous ; the evils were known to exist, and yet they
were not redressed until the people extorted from the
country and this House the confession of their exist-
ence. The Right Honouratile the Secretary for Ireland,
when he first brought this question before the House, de.
tailed sonic of these grievances, and this House acquiesced
in the truth of his statements; but it should not be
lsrgotten, that but for the reclamations of the people
the injustice wile which they were treated would have re-
mained unnoticed. I wish not to palliate the excesses
hick they occasionally committed. I deplore their corn-
m'ssion deeply, sincerely, unaffectedly ; but let those who
condemn them remember the grounds of dissatisfaction so
long allowed to remain unredressed ; and let them not be
disposed to undervalue just complaints because they were
attempted to be redressed, unhappily, through the infrac-
tion of the law. If their endurance has been long, it may
Se wise to make some remission of arrears that may he
difficult to prove, and still more difficult to collect. At
all events, before this House accedes to invest the Govern-
ment with additional power, the Government should dis-
tinctly state what that measure of relief is which is to
compensate for extraordinary coercion. If the measure
Le satisfactory, coercion will be unnecessary ; if unsatisfac-
tory, coercion will be useless. That relief from the
present system should be granted is universally conceded.
Should the balance of the former evil lie rigorously ex-
acted, because it is so written in a bond that ought long
since to have been cancelled ? The physical power of the
executive there is no necessity to prove ; convince the
people that the measure in contemplation will effec-
tually relieve them, and they will, I trust, cease to
offer even passive resistance to the collection of much
of these arrears. What that measure should be is,
that I
lam aware,
not presume
a question
to be equal of such complicated
to
its
lu
dsofiifctinuolty:
but when arguments have been advanced in which I
cannot agree, I may be allowed to express my dissent from
them. I must premise that I concur with those who
are of opinion that the landlord should not derive any ad-
vantage from the abolition of tithes, but I cannot conceive
that tithes are on the land alone, and that, therefore, the
land alone should be responsible for their whole amount.
I think I could adduce a case in which the tithe was not
on the land in the least ; I knew an experiment to be
made on a bog 36 feet deep, so wet that it was necessary
to place boards under the feet of the men who were tilling
ir, and yet with considerable labour, and an immensity of
manure, that bog that very year produced the finest crop
of potatoes I ever saw. Now, if the tithe of these pota-
toes were exacted, would it not be entirely the tithe of
the labour an I capital, and not of the land, which was
worth nothing—which was absolutely nothing but the lo-
cde on which to expend labour and capital _and which
ceases to be worth anything from the moment the crop
was extracted from it? And, therefore, is it not fair to in-
fer that tithe is a compound, not a simple charge, and that
industry and capital are some of its ingredients? A land-
lord may lease ten acres of ground to each of two tenants :
one is idle and poor—die other industrious and rich ; the
one pays no tithe—the other pays tithe to a considerable
amount. In shirt, I think there are numerous instances
which would prove that tithe is not on the land alone;
and that, therefore, the landlord alone should be respon-
sible for the full amount. I know that in refutation of
this, my opinion, it is asserted that the landlord receives
even a higher rent for land that is tithe free than the amount
of tithe added to the usual rent. This does not bring con-
viction to my mind; he wee receives a higher rent because
such land is used for the evasion of tithe. A man will till that
ground alone ; he will have on that ground all his titbeable
articles, and thus free the rest of his grounds from their
produce. But it does not follow that if all lands were tithe-
free they would rise in the same
.proportion. Again, it
is said that the abolition of tithes would benefit the land-
lord alone ; would it out benefit the occupying tenant--
would not new leases be modelled by the surviving leases
of the adjoining grounds? Is it not a well known fact,
that the more a landlord is distressed the more he will
distress his tenantry; and if it be true that the tenant will
not be in the least benefi=ted by the abolition of tithes bee
cause the whole amount would go into the pockets of bit
landlord, it must follow that he cannot he benefitted.by the
wh le amount being taken out of the pocket of his • land-
lot d, except is so. Ist as tine landlord might be a more tar: