The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-25 00:00:00

4Z(I
-

Several petitions against the Irish Chitich Bill Were pre-
sented by Lord FARNHAM and others.
CORPORATION REFORM.
The Marquis of L 0 ND 0 ND E RR Y called the attentiotrof..*
the Duke of Cleveland to a letter he had received respectknethe
petition from Darlington, Durhani, in favour of the Corporation
Reform Bill, denying that the petition was agreed• to at a
public meeting, and that it was hawked about and signed by
boys. The letter was signed by Thomas Horner, solicitor,
Darlington.
The Duke of CLEVELAND knew most of the persons
of respectablility in Darlington, but very much doubted that
this Mr. Horner was one of that class. He had Also received
a letter informing him that such a communication would be
made to his Noble Friend ; and though he did no: feel at
liberty to disclose the name of his informant, the conteats of
his letter were sufficient to convince him that Mr. Horner was
no very safe authority to rest on.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY explained.
Lord BROUGHAM had presented a petition from Gates-
head, which was as much in Durham as Darlington. •
Lord DUNCANNON presented the Report of the Com-
mittee appointed to inquire into the necessity of providing a
temporary addition to the House of Lords. The Committee
had resolved that such a provision was unnecessary.
The Tonnage Duties Bill went through Committee.
Lord BROUGHAM presented petitions in favour of the
Corporation Reform Bill from Dunbar, the Corporation of
Aberdeen, from a township in the West Riding of York, and
from Chorley, in Lancashire.
On the motion of the Earl of MINTO the House went into
Committee on the Scotch savings' Banks Bill. The Report
was ordered to be brought up to-morrow.
Lord GLENELG presented a petition from Inverness, and
one from another place in Scotland, in favour of the, Corpora-
tion Reform Bill.
On the motion of Lord AUCKLAND the Timber Duties
Bill was read a second time.
IRISH CHURCH BILL.
Lord MELBOURNE moved that the House resolve itself
into Committee on the Irish Church Bill.
The Duke of CUMBERLAND rose to express his regret
that the Noble and Learned Lord opposite had charged him with
not acting in a fair and straightforward manner in his opposition
to this measure. Now he begged to say that he had acted in
a straightforward manner, for he declared at once, in plain
terms, that he was decidedly opposed to the principle of the
Bill.

Lord BROUGHAM said the Noble Duke was never more
mistaken in his life—for to say the truth he never knew a more
fair or straightforward opponent—he had left him no cause to
complain, for he had declared himself an open enemy.
The Duke of CUMBERLAND—the Noble and Learned
Lord at the same time said that he (the Duke of Cumber-
land) was generally in the wrong, and that he (Lord
Brougham) was generally in the right. The Noble and
Learned Lord also said, that his conduct on this measure was
most extraordinary.
Lord BROUGHAM—The Noble Duke was quite right in
saying, that he thought himself in the right, no:: generally,
but always.—( Hear, hear, hear, and great laughter.)
The Noble Dube thought he had made a discovery,
but he discovered nothing at all, except that he (Lord
B.) acted upon the opinion he held, believing himself
right, and that was the way all their Lordships hal acted, and
continued to act, which he sometimes wished they would not.
On Clause 1 being read,
The Duke of WELLINGTON had an amendment to pro-
pose, which lie believed would be more conveniently intro-
duced upon a future clause.
The clause was agreed to.
Clause 2 being put,
The Marquis of WESTMEATH was very desirous that
some effort should be made to save the rights of the clergy.
He would now, and always, resist a principle of spoliation.
For this clause they had to blame the late Ministers, for they
proposed one similar to it. In justice to them, however, he
must observe that it was entailed upon their Lordships by Lord
Grey's Government.
The clause was agreed to.
Clauses 3 and 4 were agreed to.
Clause 5 being proposed,
The Marquis of WESTMEATH said it was hard to call
upon the landed proprietors of Ireland to advance a year's
tithe without knowing in what situation that country might be
placed before a year elapsed.., Sceing what course matters
were now taking in that coantry he felt most unwilling to
concur in this clause, which imposed a rent charge upon the
land of Ireland.
The Marquis of DOWNS 11 IRE said the effect of this
clause might be different in different parts of Ireland—it the
south, for instance, where it was customary to pay muTh of
the tithe in kind. The more tenants placed confidence in
their landlords the less difficult would it be to carry this cart
of the Bill into operation. How others ought feel he did not
know, but he found the principle to operate beneficially in the
north of Ireland, where the landlords had the merit of first act-
ing upon it.
Lord CAR BER.Y said that in the South of Ireland the
operation of this clause upon the landowners would be very se-
vere and unjust.
The Earl of WICKLOW said the clause would be a
source of severe injustice. It was, however, introduced by the
late Government, and it was impossible for them not to ac-
quiesce
in it now.
The clause was agreed to.
Clause 6 was also agreed to without observation.
On clause 7 being put,
The Marquis of WESTMEATH expressed a wish that
some Noble Lord would explain to hint what was meant by
rack rents in this clause.
Lord PLUNK ETT explained the legal meaning of the
word rack rent, but the Noble and Learned Lord was quite
inaudible in the gallery.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH did not yet understand
what rack rent meant.
The clause was agreed to.
Clause 8 being put,
The Duke of WELLINGTON had an amendment to
propose to this clause. It was provided by the clause that the
amount of rent charge was to be handed over to the Land
Tax Commissioners, which Commissioners were to pay it
away, upon orders from the Ecclesiastical Commissioners.
The clear and obvious tendency of this was to make the
Clergy stipendiary. Now it seemed to him of the utmost im-
portance that they should be independent. The effect of his
amendment would be to leave the collection of these rent
charges in the hands of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners,
or the Woods and Forests. He should propose to leave
out the words, "To Majesty," in the clause, and substi-
tute and insert the words " Ecclesiastical Commissioners."
Lord DUNCANNON said the Noble Duke did not in-
form their Lordships how the Ecclesiastical Commissioners
were to collect these rent charges. One main point proposed
by this Bill was to avoid, as much as possible, bringing the
Clergy into contact or collision with the people in the collec-
tion of tithes, or what was proposed to be substituted for
them. He believed the Clergy of Ireland would much pre-
fer this mode of proceeding to that proposed by the Noble
Duke.
Lard HATHERTON begged to ask the Noble Duke who.
ther he meant to charge the Ecclesiastical Commissioners
with the collection of Tithes.
The Duke of WELLINGTON did not. He meant to
impose on them the collection of Ecclesiastical tithes only.
Lord PLUNKET said the effect of the amendment pro-
posed by the Noble Duke would be to vest the collection in the
Ecclesiastical Commissioners, but yet to leave the Crown an-
swerable. If the Crown was to be answerable it seemed but
natural that the officers of the Crown should be the collectors.
The Noble Duke seemed to think that the clergy as a body
would prefer the course proposed by him. He did not know
what the opinion of the Church as a corporation might be, but
he never met with an individual clergyman in Ireland who ex-
pressed the opinion entertained by the Noble Duke. They
seemed most desirous to be exempt from the trouble of this
collection. It was easy for Noble Lords to talk of the value
and importance of a principle, and to wish that the collection
should be vested in the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. It was
not very long since the experiment was tried, and it was found
that the Crown itself, with all its authority, could not collect
tithes.
The Earl of WINCHIL SE A could not approve of the
amendment proposed by the Noble Duke. No one was more
desirous than he was to prevent by all means any collision be-
tween the Clergy and the payers of tithe. He, however, main-
tained the principle that the revenue of the Church was pri-
vate property.
Lord DUNCANNON said though the collection was to be
in the hands of the Land Revenge Commissioners the produce
would be handed over to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, to
be distributed by them as the Act directed.
- The Earl of RIPON saw no necessity for the amendment.
The whole principle was saved by the clause as it now stood.
He hoped the Clergy .would see that this clause was for their
advantage.
LordELLENBOROUGH said what the Clergy objected
to was not the temporary, but the permanent investment. By
the course now proposed they had the security of the Conso-
lidated Fund. He wished some means might be found to re-
cmcile with the rights of the Clergy this provision of the
Bill. It was utterly impossible that this, or any other Bill
upon the subject of tithe, could be effectual unless it was so
framed as to conciliate goodwill. He believed the landlords
of Ireland were friendly to it. The collection of tithe was
admitted by the late Secretary ( Sir H. Hardinge) to have
ceased in Ireland. Something, therefore, must be done. He
should propose to make large concessions for the purpose of
securing the collection of tithe in such a way as to secure par
ment to,the Clergy.
Lord FARNHAM said it would be most desirable to re-in-
troduce the Redemption clause.
The Earl of WICKLOW must protest against the princi-
ples laid down by the Noble Viscount.
The clause was then agreed to.
Clause 9 was agreed to.
On clause 10 being put,
Lord ELLE NB OItOUG fl said that as the Noble Vis-
count hadtidmitted the provisions of this clause to be indefea-
sible, he hoped their Lordships would not adopt it. The clause
as it at present stood opened the composition of the tithe with-
out any limitation. He should therefore move that the clause
be omitted.
Viscount MELBOURNE hardly knew a case of compul-
sory composition which did not require revision. He thought
that the striking out of this clause would be most unsatis-
factory, for same provision of this kind was absolutely ne-
cessary.
The Earl of WICKLOW had not been prepared to stip-
sphoortultdhevoatme efro,rdm itesnint
coef
he haNdoibleleordFritehned
o;
bbseiirtvahtieoncserotfaitnhlye
Noble Viscount, which, he thought, were the strongest argu-
ments that could be adduced against the clause.
A long and desultory discussion then followed, in whits