The Sun.
London, England, 1868-06-26 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVEN

cated ; and as for the qualification that, at all events, Par-
liament might take away what Parliament had given—iu
the first place, Parliament could not properly take away
what it had given (else Blenheim and Strathfieldsaye
were not safe) ; and, in the second place, Parliament did
not give the Church of Ireland its property. But what,
he asked, was the Roman Catholic erievanco which called
for so violent a remedy as this ? The Catholics in Ireland
had at present equality, unless equality implied equality
of possessions. They had, in fact, everything they
wanted, except their neighbours' goods. The present
movement was, in fact, due to a strange combination of
Catholics and of enemies of all religions endowments.
How novel a view it was that such a disendowment could
be legitimate he showed by quotations from Lords
Plunkett, Palmerston, and Grey, and Mr. Gladstone.
After adverting to the special difficulties of a gradual
dis-establishment, and to the impropriety of call-
ing on her Majesty to act in direct opposition to the terms
of her Coronation Oath, he dilated on the positive evils
which would result from depriving Ireland of the class of
resident gentry supplied now by the clergy, and the sub-
stitution of a more intemperate ministry. It would be a
conclusion dangerous to England, and inconsistent with
the preservation of the Union ; but to Ireland it would be
fatal. Ho warned the house not to shrink from deciding
as it thought right by the fear of a conflict which it had
not provoked with the other house, or with a current of
public feeling of which ho doubted the existence.
The Earl of KIMBERLEY missed in the preceding
speech any reference to justice to Ireland. Ho himself
still saw a distinction between private property, to which
there were natural heirs, and Church property, to which
he thought the whole nation was heir; and ho could not
perceive the distinction between the principle of the pre-
sent proposal for dealing with Church property, and the
not very distant dealing with tithes, which was not usually
represented as confiscation. Ho defended, moreover, the
plea for the bill drawn from the consideration of Fenianism.
It would be dangerous to legislate in a panic on threats of
disaffection; but it was wise, when there was disaffection-
to legislate with a view to remove its cause. As for the
kind of legislation, he himself had at one time been some-
what in favour of concurrent endowment ; but to carry
out that the consent of the different religious bodies must
be obtained, and it now appeared that they repudiated any
such plan.
The Bishop of LONDON explained certain expressions
of his which had been construed as imputing unworthy
motives to the author of the bill. He denied that this
bill was founded on the precedent of that of 1833, or of
any other Suspensory Bill, and showed that the present
bill would entirely stop the action of the Church wherever
a vacancy occurred. But his main objection was that
there was not before them any scheme of disestablishment.
When there was, their lords Lips would doubtless consider
it carefully ; but at present, besides discovering numerous
difficulties in the way of forming such a scheme, he could
not discover the need for it, or, indeed, among moderate
Irish Catholics the desire for it. Peace was what Ireland
required. Tho Irish Church Establishment might be
modified with advantage ; but to destroy it would he to
hand over Ireland altogether to the Roman Catholic
Church, and to bring on the repeal of the Union.
The debate was adjourned on the motion of Lord
Lyttelton.
The house adjourned at 35 minutes past 12.

HOUSE OF COMMONS-LAST EVENING.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at 4 o'clock.
NEW MEMBER.

Mr. HEYGATE took the oaths and his seat for Stamford.
THE BRISTOL ELECTION PETITION.

Mr. HOWES brought up the report of this committ 0
which stated that Mr. Miles was not duly elected, and
that the last election for Bristol was a void elec-
tion. That bribery had been committed to a great
extent, but that it was not proved to have been com-
mitted with the knowledge of Mr. Miles. That
personation and treating took place, but the committee
wore not of opinion that extensive corruption had taken
place considering the large number of registered electors
for the city. _ . .

Mr. Sergeant GAZELEE gave notice that to-morrow
he should move that the Attorney-General be instructed
to prosecute the parties found guilty of bribery at the last
election for Bristol.