The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-17 00:00:00

cause he believed he would find himself on this occasion in the
same lobby with those from whose principles he entirely dis-
sented. And, atter the speech of the Nebte Lord the Nlember
for Bandon, he theught that any man who should vote on the
same side with him ought to explain his grounds for doing so, for
anything more intolerant, he might say irsene, is ith regard to the
policy which oughtto be pursued towards Ireland he had never
heard—( Hear)—and he could not believe it till he had heard
it that any person coming from Ireland would have used
such language.—(;;ear.)
He did not think that this question
should be favourably or unfavourably regarded on account of
the party from which it proceeded. The Right. lion. Gen-
, tletnan had been charged with inconsistency with regard to
this measure, but he thought that the grounds for that charge
arose from the unfortunate circumstances connected with the
late Opposition, and which were of such a nature that he could
not, when in power, propose any good measure without
being charged with inconsistency of conduct.—( Hear, hear.)
He (eft.. Bright) should consider the measure on its own merit!,
without reference to party. His opposition to the measure was
grounded on his ob,ection that the public taxes should be made
to contribute to the support of ant institution purr ly ecclesias-
tical, or the rearing of the priesthoosi of any particular sect.
lie opposed it because, from all he could learn from bosh
side; of the House—from the public press—and even the
organs of the Ministry, there was no argument used in defence
' of the present measure which would not be as valid in defence
of further measures, not for the endowment of the Roman
Catholic Collage of Maynooth only, but for the endowment
and payment of all priests connected with that Church in
England and Ireland.—(" Hear, hear," and " Oh, oh.") He
admitted that the principle of the argument which justified
the original grant would be good to the same extent to justify
the present vote. The Right Hon. Baronet said the principle
was already conceded, anti that the question now was as to a
difference of a few thousands. But in ten rr twenty years
hence some Prisie Minister would stand up and say
that in 1795 the principle was conceded, aid again
in 1845, and arguing from those two case.: it wou'd
be easy to demonstrate that there ought to be the es-
tablishment of a new Church in Ireland, and this adding to the
monstrous evils which had already flowed upon Ireland from
one Church connected with the State.—( Hear, hear.) The
Right Hon. Baronet paid no great compliment to the Roman
Catholic gentlemen of Ireland when he slid that the grant of
9,000/. was sufficient to damp their genero:ity. If 9,000/.
damped their generosity 27,0001. would be likely to destroy it
altogether ; and when he recollected that the Roman
Catholic gentry in Ireland paid no income-tax—
( Cries of " Hear, hea." )—no property-tai—no assessed
taxes.—(Hear, hear).—He thought that it ought not to be
altogether impossible or unhooked for, that they should support
a college for the education of the priesthood- of a religion to
which they were so much devoted.—( Hear, hear.) But he
also objected to the measure in another paint of view—a point of
view which was totally opposed to that of the Hon. Member for
Leicester, who approved of the measure because it
weuld scothe the discontent of Ireland. Did that
discontent arise from the priests in Maynooth
not being sufficiently well educated ? He thought it arose
snore from the fact of one-fourth of the population being
paupers, and there being no regular employment. That was
a state of things which was most disastrous, and he should not
like a measure which would have the effect of making the
wrong; of Ireland less known to the people of Ireland. One
great means of influence possessed by those who agitated the
wrongs of Ireland was to be found in the support which the
Roman Catholic clergy gave to the various associations which
had for their object the removal of those wrongs. His objec-
tion to the Bill was that it would tame down agitation—it was
a " sop" given to the priests—it was " hush-money," that they
might not proclaim the wrongs of the Irish people to the whole
country, to Europe, and to the world. The Protestant Church In
Ireland was at the root of the evils of that country ; and the
Irish Roman Cathelie priests would thank them more for sweep-
ing out that foul blot than if they established their own church
alongside of it.—( Hear, hear.) They had everything Pro-
testant. in Ireland—they had a Protestant clique dominant there
—they had a Protestant Viceroy, who distributed all the places
and emoluments of office amongst that clique—they had Pro-
testant Judges win polluted the stream of just ice.—( Cries of
" Oh, oh.") They had Protestant magistrates, before whom
in a thousand cases no Catholic peasant could hope for justice.
—( Renewe i marks of dissent.) They had Protestant ex-
terminating landlords, whose extermicating principles chiefly
fell upon the Roman Catholics upon their estates.—( No, no.)
They had more than that—they had a Protestant soldiery who,
at the beck and command of a Protestant priest, killed a son
even in the presence of a widowed mother.__(" Hear, hear,"
and marks of disapprobation.) Why, these things were
notorious —he merely stated them without bringing
any proof to establish their accuracy—(Hear, hear)—
but the person who was not convinced of their truth
must have paid very little attention indeed to passing events.—
( Hear, hear.) The consequence of all this was, the extreme
discontent of the people of Ireland; and because they were
not prepared to take those measures which would be really just
towards Ireland, anti do away with that Protestant Establish-
ment which was certainly the most disgraceful institution which
existed in Christendom. Because that House was not pre-
paredtoadnod that,t iet
flan% going to muzzle the watch-dogs of the
Mr. O'Connell the sympathy of the
people,
pri ,sts, in rousing the people of Ireland to a sense of their
iwrongs.tl e
ine Theyof
fgG to give the priests of Ireland a
t reek, in order that they might
l Lat eren
become as tame as the priests of Suffolk and Dorset, who,
when the horizon was blazing around with incendiary fires,
were got
had not dared to speak of the wr stage of the
people amongst whom they lived. (Hear. hear.)
And when pauperism was staring them in the face, the priests
would not dare to assist in wresting from an oppressive Go-
vernment those rights to which the people had a just claim.
He objected altogether against the system of paying priests
for any purpose, under any circumstances, or at any time what-
ever. Nothing could be more disastrous to civil liberty—
nothing more injurious to religion itself, than such a system ;
and if they wanted to make the Catholic priesthood of Ireland
as useless for all practical purposes as the paid priests of their
own Establishment, he asked them, by all meatte, not only to
give this 26,000/. a-year, but as much as the Government
could induce the House to grant. His firm conviction was
that Ireland suffered from one Church, and not from
having two churches. He admitted that equality must
be obtained by the abolition of one or by the establish-
ment of the other, for whilst there was a Church with
a small congregation and overpaid ministry, costly establish-
, ments and little work, it was impos-ible they could have peace
arid contentment in that country. But this measure, notwith-
standing all that had been said by lion. Gentlemen marmite,
wits for the purpose of staving off the nece city to which they
had nearly arrived, of making some change in the Establish-
ment. If it were possible to give to the Catholic priests a por-
tion of the public funds, as they had already given the regium
donuts to the Presbyterians of the north of Ireland, they
would find them united with the Established Church, as the
Presbyterians then were, against any step taken for the pur-
pose of overturning the whole system of Church and State in ,
that country. lie was of opinion that the experience of a
State Church was net of that favourable character
which would admit of their going further in that
direction.—( Hear.) They had a State Church in this
country, and many excellent men were connected with its
ministry, but from time immemorial a spirit of persecution,' of
a most deplorable and inju ious character, had existed, and
even now did exist, pressing with relentless malignity, as in
the cnse of an unfortunate shoemaker in Cambridge, who re-
fused to pay, out of his hard earnings, some 16s. or 18e. for
Church-rates.—(Hear, hear.) This poor man was pursued
from court to court with a relentless spirit, which, one would
hope, did not exist at this period. Some Hon. Gentlemen
applied hard words to the Catholic Church, but they should re-
collect that all the errors which they attributed to it, found a
home and a warm welcome in the Established Church. In Wales,
three-fourths of the whole people were dissenters from that
Church. In the manufareuring districts of Lancashire and York-
shire, the Established Chung' was but an unwieldy machine,
unable to minister to the growing wants and intelligence of
the people. In Scotland, where the most perfect model of a
church establishment was said to exiet, they had there a Seces-
sion Church—a Relief Church—a. Free Church, and that which
the State upheld by compulsion—the Residuary Church. If
the English, and Scotch, and Irish Churches of this description
did so little good—if they had been productive of such serious
evils, he would ask whether it was proper they should do any-
thing for the establishment of another? If he were at all in
favour of this endowment, he would vote for this Bill with all
his heart. He believed that if the principle of endowment
was right, a more just or wise measure than the present was
never intredusted to the Parliament of this country—
( Hear, hear)—because lie had no doubt that the effect
must be in soale degree to create a kindlier feeling
on the part of the people of Ireland toward; the Government.
—( Hear, hear.) He regretted as much as any man could
regret that there should be anything in the agitation against
the Bill that tended to impair tint feeling.—(Hear, hear.)
There were two parties opposed to it. One party represented
by Hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House—they
stated that they considered the Catholic faith as a thing which
should net be established, or helped by the State; but when
their own Church was absorbing millions of the public money,
whilst millions of their countrymen refused to enter its doors,
he asked how could they for a moment object to the passing of
this measure which would give some sort of show of assistance
to that Church in Ireland to which millions of the people of
that country belonged ? There was another party of non-con-
formists in Great Britain who were opposed to the measure,
anti he was sorry to say (it would be uncandid of him not to say)
that these non-conformists allowed a spirit to enter into their
agitation, which showed they did not understand, or did not
feel, the force of that great principle of nonconformity for which
their forefathers struggled.—( Hear, hear.) A large class,
more especially a portion of the Wesleyan body, did not re-
pudiate the principle of endowment ; if those who remained
persisted in agitation, it ought to be against the principle of en-
dowment altogether. When the Dissenters looked back to all
their forefathers had suffered, even within a late period, they
would be so recreant to their own principles as to merit the
contempt of this House, and of the world, if they did not come
forward and apply their own principle, and dissent from and
oppose, to the utmost of their ability, the measure now
under the consideration of Parliament. He ( Mr.
Bright) would oppose the measure in every stage,
simply on this ground, that he believed the principle of endow-
ment was most unjustifiable and injurious to the country.
Whatever might be the effect of his opposition on any Govern-
ment—whether on that of the Right Hun. Baronet, or any pre-
ceding or succeeding one—there was no attachment to party or
Government which would induce him for one moment to tam-
per with what lie held to be the greatest and dearest principle
which any man or body of men could take up.—( Hear, hear. )
When he looked back at history, he saw that all they possessed
of liberty did not issue from the portals of cathedrals and parish
churches, but from the conventicle; ; and when a good and
liberal measure was to be carried in the House, it was generally
carried by the representatives of the non-conformists of Great
Britain. They must see from the past and the present, that State
religions had been always opposed to civil and religious liberty;
that they, in a great measure, destroyed the vitality of religion ;
and, holding these opinions, it was impossible he could give a
vote which should in the smallest degree give any assistance to
the principle of endowment. Ia conclusion, he would say to
the Dissenters of England that in all opposition to this or any
such measures they should form no union—make no alliance
with men in favour of endowment —they should stand on the
great. pure, and u iassailable principle of non-endowment ; for
that they should manfully contend; and if they continued to do
so, the time might come—nay, the time would come—.when
that principle would be adopted by the Legislature of the
country..h
Lord J MANNERS Fait the Hon. Member had charac-
terised the speech of the Noble Lord the Member for Bandon
in terms which, if they had fallen front any other Hon. Member,
he should have considered as being rather strong ; but
it ap.
peered that. they were applied to the premises rather than to
the conclusion, fir in the latter both seemed to agree. The
Noble Lord having displayed considerable knowledge of the
subject as well as theological ability, he was at first surprised to
hear such terms applied by the lion. Member ; bat when he
had listened to some of his statements his surprise ceased, for
the Hon. Gentleman appealed to English history, and asked
what traces of religious liberty were to lie found in conneeion
with our cathedrals and churches? Why, was it to the eon_
ventieles of the English nation that we owed Magna Charta ?
( Hear.) Ile could not congratulate his Hon. Friend the
Member for the University of Oxford upon scuds an ally as the
lion. Member for Durham.—( Hear, and a laugh.) But to
pass from that Hon. Member, who certainly spoke under very
unfavourable circumstances to himself, he would endeavour to
address himself to the subject immediately before the
House.
He was one of those few Tory Membsrs who, when in
the year 1813 the affairs of Ireland were discussed
at great length, anti spider cireqmstanees qi eo oediiiery
gravity in that House, ventured to express a strung opinion
that there were remedial measures, which a Tory Alinister