The Sun.
London, England, 1868-08-11 00:00:00

,A 11?, MOTET, COY;

STITUENTS,

Mr. Forster, M.P., on Monday night delivered him
annual address to his constituents at Bradford. After
referring to the local contest, declaring that he sapasurted
Mr. Aliall because he believed he was the choice or the
Liberal party, he said that the great question now
before the country—the Irish Church—was one which
might well make them wish utterly to dispel
all personal piques and local jealousies. It was
a question that stirred men's minds throughout
the country, and it had stirred the minds of the men
of Bradford. What was the motive of the Liberal party
in these efforts? They believed that unless they carried
out these measures we could not preserve the union
between England and Ireland without —for there was no
use in mincing matters—having, first or last, civil war.
Now, what was the motive of their opponents ? These two
fears—that the interests of Protestantism would be endan-
gered, and that the English Church would be endangered.
What did governing Ireland by force mean ? By terror,
with the possibility, as the Irish were a high-spirited
people, of a civil war breaking out every moment.
Mr. Disraeli congratulated the Lord Mayor and his guests
upon the state of Ireland. Ile (Mr. Forster) could not
congratulate them upon the state of Ireland ; and Mr.
Disraeli and his friends had done all they could to alarm
the country upon the state of that land. And what was
the cause of that alarm ? In considering that question ho
had had to look deep into the meaning of a union between
the two countries. A union between England and Ireland
was not a union in the minds of the Irish people. If we
kept up by force in Ireland the church of a minority,
which would be instantly swept away were Ireland an
independent country, how could it be said that we pre.
served a union upon terms of political equality? The
question was not imperial, because it was one that specially,
affected Irish interests and Irish feelings ; and Irish feelings
should be considered upon many questions, and most of an
that which lay deepest in men's minds—that of religion,
The question ought to be considered upon the principles of
the Union, not upon those terms which were partly bribed
and "partly bullied out of the Protestant minority who
then governed Ireland, but upon those principles which
an Irish patriot could accept, those of a real union upon
equal terms of the three countries. Now he came to the
fears which inspired the policy of their opponents; and,
first, that of Protestantism being endangered by the die-
establishment of the Irish Church. He was as much
opposed to the Roman Catholic form of religion as they
could possibly be with his, but he did not believe that the
interests of Protestantism had been advanced by the Pro.
testant ascendancy. He believed that they could not have
adopted a plan less likely to advance the interests of Protes-
tantism than the present. The old system of force and fierce
persecution might have succeeded, but by no possibility..
could they have adopted a system less likely to do it than
that they adopted in Ireland. The Protestant ascend-
ancy in Ireland had damaged the interests of Protestant-,
ism, and the result was, that whereas in most Catholic
countries there was a very strong party in opposition to
that ultramontane policy which he was sorry to say now
was practised at Rome, in Ireland there were scarcely any
Catholics who did not belong to the ultramontane party,
After replying to Dr. 11`Neile's arguments on this point,
he said lie should be sorry if, by any action of those
within, the Church came to an end, and he would tell
them wily. Not because he thought there was any great
advantage of bishops being in the House of Lords. Not
because he conceived that in the present state of society
and civilisation an establishment was necessary—for
if be were a colonist he should probably, as the colonists
did, be they Conservatives, Whigs, or Radicals,
have perfect equality of religion ; but for this rea-
son, that as England was now constituted and
circumstanced, the Church of England and the
clergy of that Church did great good ; and he should
feel that if the Church were disestablished and
disconnected with the State, a great engine of good
was removed. That engine of good he considered
to be the parochial system. There was a parochial system
in England which did good, but the parochial system in
Ireland was an insult to the people. (Cheers.) How could
a man look after the spiritual interests of his parishioners
when the enormous majority of them were taught week
by week to believe that he was a heretic ? That was a
glaring anomaly, and he asked who were the real
friends to the Church of England—those who wished
to separate her from the Church of Ireland or those
who wished to keep her indissolubly united with the
Church of Ireland ? Allowing that the two churches
must be united, and that they must remain one, and
that the English Church could not be separated
from the Trish Church, at the same time they would
believe that the English Church could not be maintained
in Ireland except at the-point of the bayonet ; and then
they should be obliged to ask the question—Was the
English Church with its blessings worth preserving at the
cost? The friends of the Church ought to be very
careful before they put that question to the country,
and he asserted that they said that at this moment, and
it was because that was said, that we found so little
response to the appeal which he grieved to say the Bishop
of London had made to twenty thousand clergymen,
an appeal which even at that moment he must regret that
lie had ever made. He (the speaker) was not the less a
friend of the Church of England because he argued with
ell his might in favour of the disestablishment of the Irish
Church. As to the endowments of the Irish Church, with
respect to the anxiety to know his views on that matter, ho
should not have the disposal of it, and could only give
them the general principles, and these general principles
were these —that all individual interests should be gene-
rously treated, and that the State should not attempt to
dispose of any property which was not State property.
(Hear, hear.) He should be asked what was State pro-
perty. Well, he should say that the State ought not to
interfere with such an endowment as that which was given
by the late Sir Benjamin Guinness to the cathedral of
Dublin. But it was impossible that he could enter upon
this phase of the question, and he expected that in the
event of any Irish Church Bill being passed, a committee
would be appointed to examine into the case. As to the
surplus which there would undoubtedly be, and how
they would dispose of it, these two principles would guide
—that, having abolished one State Church, he should not
set up another, and that if there were anysurplus (letthem
not think it would be any great quantity), after individual
interests were looked after—and nobody was greedy for the
money, it was a question of principle and not of money—
he should say it must be given to Irish interests, and in
doing that lie should very much consult the feelings of the
Irish people. (Applause.)