The Sun.
London, England, 1835-04-08 00:00:00

IRISH CHURCH.

Mr. BERNAL brought up the Report of the Commissioners
on the Irish Church.
Mr. GEORGE SINCLAIR would wish to ask the Noble
Lord whether it was his intention that the resolutions now on
their hands should be recommended to the House of Lords.
He thought, from all they had seen with respect to a similar
question, they had reason to suppose that any proposition
which had a tendency such as those resolutions contained would
be rejected by the House of Peers by as large a
majority as that by which it would be carried by them-
selves. He thought it, therefore, highly necessary that
this question should be brought to an issue in order that
they might know whether the House of Lords would assent to
it or not. He could not conceive that any Government would
be prepared to recommend to his Majesty the carrying into
effect an imaginary measure, which he believed when further
investigated would be found to have no existence at all.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the Hon. Member who
spoke last had asked him whether it was his intention to pro-
pose this resolution to the House of Lords.—( Hear,
hear.) He said his opinion was, that no resolution
of that or even of a similar tendency could be adopted
by them. His answer to that question was that he should not
propose it, though he could not agree in the opinion of the
Honourable Gentleman, that when it was proposed as a
Legislative measure it would not pass that Housse. He
founded his opinion on a precedent in respect to the course
pursued by that House on a late question—a question which
certainly had excited the religious feeling of that House more
than any subject he had ever known.—(llear, hear.)
He referred to the great question entitled Catholic Emancipa.
tion. On that question, in 1828, after a resolution had been
agreed to by a majority of 0 in that House, it was resolved to
communicate it to the Rouse of Lords. It was moved by the
Marquis of Lansdowne, and so far as he ( Lord J. Russell)
recollected the numbers, it was rejected by a majority of up-
wards of 40. That would have induced one to think that no
Bill embracing the principles of Catholic Emancipation would
have passed the House of Lords, but history informed them'
otherwise. It informed them, that in the following year a Bill
containing the same provisions which was brought forward by
his Majesty's Ministers did pass the House of Lords by
a majority of 90 or 100.—( Loud Opposition cheers.) With
the Honourable Gentleman's leave he (Lord John Russell)
would profit by that experience. He would not pro.
pose to communicate it in the first instance to the
House of Lords, but he felt that when his resolution
had obtained the sanction of the Crown, the House of Lords
would not refuse to pass a legislative measure nhich would
contribute to the security of the Church of Ireland, and at the
same time to the peace of the empire.—(Loud cheering.)
The Clerk having read the resolution agreed to in Com-
mittee last night,
Sir ROBERT PEEL asked, was this the resolution which
they were now called upon to vote ? It was, in his opinion,
exactly the same that the House had come to a vote on
the last night. He supposed there could be no ground
for inducing the House to take a different view of it
from what they had done on that occasion. The
Noble Lord, he supposed, had no reason to imagine
that there would be the slightest change in the opiiiiens of
that majority, if the resolution were allowed to pass without a
division. The Noble Lord, however, had another resolution,
to the effect that the House would not allow any Tithe Bill
to pass without embracing the principle of that resolution. On
that second resolution of the Noble Lord, it was his (Sir R.
Peel's) intention to take the sense of the House._( Hear,
hear.) With respect to the other, which had just been read to
the House lie should offer no opposition, as lie conceived it would
merely be a waste of the time of the House.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL then rose, and moved that no
measure for the settlement of tithes in Ireland should be
entertained by the House which did not contain the
provision of the motion just agreed to. After having long oc-
cupied the attention of the House already, he would not now
intrude upon it at any greater length of time than he
was compelled, from the nature of the subject, so to do.—
( Hear, hear.) As the House had agreed to resolve itself
into a Committee on this question, and in that Committee to
carry the resolution for the future appropriation of the
surplus of the revenue of the Irish Church, it would
certainly cause disappointment, and no doubt excite the
feelings of the people of Ireland if they contented them-
selves with passing such a resolution, and did not, there-
fore, pass some Bill on the subject of the Irish
tithes, containing the principle of the resolution. After
having agreed to that resolution, and declared that opi-
nion, and naturally excited the hopes of the people of
Ireland, whatever measure might be brought forward,
it ought to contain that principle.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
Every one who considered this question fairly must
agree that this was the great principle upon which it alone
could be settled. This was the principle upon which the late
Government was disposed to act ; in proof of which he referred
to a speech of Lord Spencer in that House at the end of the
last Session, that this was the principle of the Bill which it
was the intention of the Government to have4brought
The Right Hon. Bart. has declared that he will abide by the op-
posite principle, and that he does not consider the revenues of
the Church can be appropriated to any other purposes than those
strictly connected with the furtherance of the doctrines
of the Established Church. It was upon the great question of
principle, and not as to the removal of Ministers (although that
was a question of great importance)—it was upon that para-
mount question of principle that the House decided the other
night. Having so decided, it behoved the House to continue
what they had begun, and to carry into effect that prin-
ciple, so essential to the peace of Ireland, without which
it would be impossible to expect its restoration to that
unfortunate and distracted country.—( Hear. hear.) A
Right Hon. Gentleman stated, that this resolution, even if
carried into effect, would not be satisfactory. He (Lord
J. R.) had not the smallest hesitation in stating, that
the Bill of the Right Honourable Baronet would not effect a
an equitable or final adjustment of the Tithe question. No
measure with reference to .that country could be sa-
tisfactory which did not contemplate the moral and reli-
gious instruction of the greater portion of the Irish people.
The Bill of the Right Hon. Baronet was originally a great
fault, but not an original fault with the Right Hen. Ba-
ronet. It was a fault connected, time out of mind, with
the Government of this country towards Ireland.—{ Hear.)
He must say, that he thought that the object of any Tithe
Bill should be to give, if at all possible, some encou-
ragement and reward to those who obeyed the law, and came
forward to pay what was legally due, arid not to give an ad-
vantage to those who disobeyed the law over those who
obeyed.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") He thought, therefore,
that this Bill, although it contained many good provisions,
still contained many subjects of grievances, upon which,
he thought, he had spoken sufficiently the other evening, and
that it could not be satisfactory without some provision
in accordance with the expressed opinion of the House.
—( Hear, hear, hear.) He must say that he did think that
if the minority stood against this principle, it were far
better that the principle should succeed, and the Mi-
nistry should fall, than that the Ministry should succeed,
and that the principle should fall. —( Tremendous cheering from
the Opposition.) Without therefore intending to intrude further
on this subject upon which he had spoken so much, he would
conclude by moving a resolution to the effect, that " it is the
opinion of the House, that no measure upon the subject of
Tithes in Ireland, can lead to a satisfactory and final adjust.
ment, unless it includes the principle contained in the resolution
come to by that House."
Sir H. HARDINGE wished to say a few words respect-
ing what had fallen from the Noble Lord with regard to the
Tithe Bill, which the Government were to introduce. The
Noble Lord assumed that there great was injustice to be
done by that Bill, if those who obeyed the law were to
be made to pay tithe, while those who had not obeyed the
law were to escape. That was not what he had stated to be
the intention of the Bill of which he had given notice; what he
meant to state was that those who had entered into a composition
for 1834 were to be sued, and that those small tithe payers who
had not paid, and from whom it would require a military force
to exact it, were not to be proceeded against, on the ground
that the Govehament were unwilling to employ the military
upon such proceedings ; and that, as the late Government
found it necessary to advance a loan of a million for
1833 and 1834, was an example they were willing to follow in
these small matters—for even then they found they could not
levy tithes with the military. When the Noble Lord
saw the Bill, he would find that the rich tithe payers who
had entered into a composition were to be sued by civil
process, and that the Bill could not be fairly charged with
allowing the rich man who had set the law at defiance to escape.
With regard to the objection he must be allowed to 3* the