The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-12 00:00:00

ANATOMY ACT.

The TioS:. "M;.::iraf.if then .presented several petitions,
p. flying for tl,e lippointment of a: Committee to inquire
into the ope;orion. of the: Anatomy Act.
Petitions to,f he same effect were, likewise presented
by Mr. Muntz. Mr. Fitzstephen French, Mr. Sharman.
Cruwfiira, anal M r..linrd v. , „ .

-Mr. PETER lIORTHWICK was sensible of the great
interest y% h'eh was attached to thelnotion of which the
Hun. 7.iem her 64. Sheffie'd had given notice, and he
would sle:w 1.0,,v tutu+ he 'participated in that feeling
by being as brief as possible in - the obscrva-
thins with which he intended to preface
his 'notion. lie brought forward this motion
both on public snit private grounds.. He would at once
admit that it was necessary for medical science that
anatomical in, estigatiaris should, take place—that was a
point which he would not dispute., in the year 1832 the
present Anat my Act had been introduced for the purpose
of relieving, 1111;316nd from the perils of the odious system
by which anati,laical schools were supplied with subjects,
and which Caeed in danger not only the graves of the
dead, but the safety of the living. The Hon. Gentle-
man's plan hail succeeded, and he tendered to him his
thanks fur wl; at he had done ; but the measure, as it at
pres. nt stove':, contained within itself the seeds of the
resurrection of the horrid traffic. Although the Bill
made it unlaw till for certain persons to possess bodies for
anatomical pin poses, it had not provided against the sale
of dead bodie-, nor against the illegal possession of
_parts
of babes. 'lie consequence had been, that a traffic in
bodies had fait( a place in some of the schools, to the
deiriint nt of oilers. This was an abuse that re-
quired correction. He also took exception against one
of the prinetp:es on which the Bill was founded. As
the law stud at present, when a person died without any
friend] to ctsini his body, it was given up for dissection,
on the prinetple that he owed a debt to the public for his
Maintenance. He protested against the doctrine. Society
owed to every person the debt of protection, and if there
was on person more than another who was entitled to that
prot, etioo, it was the poor man who died without friends.
Fie Loic,4-41 that the proposition he had put forward was
not founded upon the principles of justice, and upon
that gluon I I.e moved for a Select,Committee. It had
been said by the Right -Hon, Secretary for the Home
Depart,. cot, when speaking on another and more im-
ponant subiect, that the agitation which 'had been got
up hi connection with it was a noxious agitation. But
was it n‘-eessary to have agitation on any subject which
it wan desired to bring under the serious consideration
of that Rinse? Already much good bad been 'done by
the agitation upon the.suhject of anatomy7--goOd in very
many quarters, and in very many ways. In the year
Roberta produced his invention, by which as
much could he learnt from two hundred bodies as could
lormerly from six hundred. The most eminent practi-
tioners had borne testimony to the value and.importanee
of Mr. I:eheres preparation, and a great desire was ex-
pressed that it should not be -taken to other countries,
but that such a protection should be given to the in-
ventor as would induce- him to retain it in England.
It was a,dinitted that Mr. Roberts was deserving of re-
muneration for his useful invention, and the lion. Mem-
ber for Kendal himself had asked
,him to name the
amount he, thought. would remunerate him ; and Mr.
Robe, ts, in reply, stated that he thought 5,0001. would
be a lair sum. The most satisfactory testimony was
given of Mr. Roberts's process. He could not see hops
either the Government or the Hon. Gentleman could
oppose his motion; but if 'they had any doubts as to the
efficiency of Mr. Roberts's plan, all he wanted was 'a
Committee to prove it. Mr. Roberts had given a secret,
for which he
.ought to. have been compensated, but for
which he had, not. The present Bill, he owned, afforded
considerable protection, but it did not protect those who
were the most helpless and the most deserving of pro-
tection. In the present state of things, scarcely a year
pa,sed that some student's life was not sacrificed in the
noxious operation of the dissecting room. By the adop-
tion of Mr. Roberts's plan those dangers might be re-
moved. Ile concluded by moving for a Select Com-
niittee to inquire into the operation of the Anatomy
Act.

• Mr. HARDY seconded the motion. It was most de-
sirable and must important that the feelings of the
'ambler classes, which were so much excited on this
point, should be. soothed. thought the conduct of
the Government on this measure required. investigation,
and he would Ore his most strenuous support to the ap-
pit:01111-m of the Committee.

The question having put,
Sir 3 GRAHAM could assure the House that he
would address it a ith the_ most studious brevity. Ile
thought the proposed inquiry, so far from soothing the
pubic fcel]nbir, would rather irritate it, and on this score
Moue it might be avoided. The present Act was most
guarded, and strict in its provisions regarding the dispo-
sal of bodies--the dying wish of a person, of whatever
condition, must, in all cases be adhered to, and the most•
dis.ant relation of the deceased, if he claimed the body,
must not be refused it. If there was, as the Hon Mem-
lax snit. d.. gross infractions of the present law, the de:
lingtients ought to be ptinished, • and would be pun-
ished, if tie proper means were taken for arraigning
them before a legal tribunal. Two Com Missions had
b. en app.inted to inquire into the subject, and the re-
ports iT these CoMmissions, particularly of the latter,
the Government were about to act upon. The silence on
the sultiect, which had prevailed since the passing of the
resent Act. was the best proof of its success. Regard-
tog Mr. Roberts, on whose account he believed the pre
sent mo:ion was made, he (Sir J. Graham) entirely
disputed the success of his plan. It was true
it Astley Cooper and Sir Benjamin Brodie had ap-
proved of ir. in 1836, but he had good reason to believe
that Sir Astley changed his opinion on the subject before
his death, and Sir Benjamin Brodie he was authorised
to say had entirely changed his. Mr. Roberts had ex-
perimentalised on sixteen subjects in Guy's Hospital,
and he was empowered to say that in all these cases he
had decidedly tailed. Science must have subjects, and
undt r the present system they had them, but there was
'no abuse or desecration. Ile called upon the House
strentnaisly to resist the motion.
Mr. F. FRENCH said the lion. Baronet's statement h
regarding Mr. Roberts was without foundation.. Head
not expel imentalised on sixteen, but on four and a half,
and on these four and a half he had been eminently
successful. The Hon. Member felt bound to support the
motion for the Committee, considering that the subject
ought to be inquired into.
Mr. WAIII3URTON said there bad been no single
instance brought forward of the bad working of the Bill,
and he shc-uld therefore give it . his support. In his
opinion the Hon. Gentleman(Alr.Borthwick) ought to have
made careful inquiries before coming down to the House
and making the statement he, had done. There was not
a tittle of evidence to support any of the charges except
one; and therefore be trusted the House would not be
induced to take any step which might lead to, the re •
seinding of the Anatomy Act, or the buying off of the
opposition or the . agitation of any such men as Mr.
Roberts. •

Alderman COPELAND said he certainly attached
some weight to the declarations of the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman (Sir James Graham), who stated he had insti-
tut. d inquiry, but to what had fallen from the Hon
Gentleman opposite (Mr. Warburton) he could not at-
tach any importance_ whatever. That Hon. Gentleman
should refer to the evidence taken before the Health of
"owns' Committee, and then, instead of saying there
was only one case of wrong-doing, he would be coin-
paed toadtnit there. were hundreds, all of which, in his
(Alderman Copeland's) opinion,
.demanded close and
searching int:inky. For these reasons alone he should
support the motion for a Committee.-
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said he had always•thought
that by the rules and usages of that House, no Minister
of the crown was allowed to refer to reports which were
not upon the table of the House.—(Hear, hear.) The
.Right lion. Baronet (Sir J.. Graham) had stated that
th o result of the Commission of Inquiry he had insti-
tut( d wte: the acquittal of Dr. Somerville ; but he (Mr.
Duncombe).wislied to know where the report of that'
Committee was ? It was not fair or candid in that
Right 81,11. Gentleman to come down there, and quote
from reorts of which the House had never . been in
possessior. Such conduct as that now being pursued by
the Government would create . great. indignation in the
country, as it was evidently their wish—as this was a
medical subject, he might be allowed the word—it was
widently their wish to "burke" inquiry —(Laughter.)
Ile must say he was sorry the subject had been brought
before the lh was, at least, a very delicate if not
a dangerous one ; but as it had been so brought, they
could only deal with it so as to arrive at the truth or
falsehood 4.f the matters stated. This they were bound
to do ; and therefore he should feetit his duty to vote
for the motion of the lion. Gentleman, the Member for
Evesham. •

Lord JOHN RUSSELL warned the House of the

course it. might determine on with respect to the mea-
sure. Jt every complaint of the bad working of this
Act Were, .as now ch sired, , to. be made the subject of.
special inquiry,. the consequence would be the repeal of
the law, and the consequent return to those abuses and:
those horrible , crimes which some years ago had so
shocked the public mind.. One assertion made on this
subject h:IS that some parties in a certain workhouse
made mot.ey by the' sale of the bodies of the paupers..
NVhy, then, what .were the guardians of that unichr
about? 1..4 them be compelled to du their duty by in
quirirg irt the case, and,- if true, instantly dismissing
the delinquoit party.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped the
House ould not consent to'a Committee, but leave such.
subj, els to the 'authority of the Right Hon. Gentleman
i.pposite-(Sir J. Graham), who, he was sure, had had
thcient inquiry made into complaints brought before him..
Ile implored the llouse not to take the perilous step
hich the Bon. Gentleman, the Meinber for Eveshami
desired it to dn.
Geneml JOHNSON thought that a sufficient case
bad. bet n made out forinquiry. He saw no reasonable
gruund of objection to the granting of a Committee at
sll events.
Mr. ilowrinvwx having replied,
Ti e !louse divided, when there appeared—
. • F..r the motion lO
Against it .• . 49

Majority against the motion —39
EsTABLISHED CHURCH OF IRELAND.
Mr. WARD then rose to bririg forward the motion of
wl.i• h he had given notice, respecting the tstablished
Cl trch -of Ireland. He said that nobody could feel
m, re strongly -than he did the difficulty and re-
spnsitility which attached to any-'attempt, under
the yrusent circumstances of England and Ireland, to re-

1844.

open.the question he was about ao bring under the con-
sideration of the House that evening ; and strong as
were his feelings respecting it—deep as was his convic-,
tion that any delay- in dealing with it would only-add
mischief. 'to past proCastination—he should shrink
from the task of again calling the attention of the House
to a subject so largely and ably discussed at the begin-
ning of the present session, if he saw anything like a
hope, however distant and faiiit, that her Majesty's Go-
vernment were prepared to entertain the principle upon
which the setaement of the question must, ultimately
depend.—(Cheers.) He did not for a moment suppose
that, this question. would or could be advanced by indivi-
dual efforts; or that the,inveterate feelings or strong pre-
judices, he would call them, which had plunged them for
three hundred years into a'course of vicious legislation.
and whiCh still retained such a hold on the-minds of
many; would be remelted by individual effort.' 'Oa the
contrary, whenever- the time for dealing practically with
this question arrived, it would require the best effOrts of
the best men of both sides to-remove the obstacles which
stood in the way of a settlement. Much fOrbearance,
much mutual concession, would be required ; and he
believed that men on all sides must follow the opi-
nion of -Bishop Watson, who, in the debate on
the union, said that ''"-they must learn to give up
small things to 'secure great things, as tranquillity, con-
cord, and peace."—(Hoar, hear.) He 'admitted the
question was difficult and complicated, but that was no
reason why it should not be entertained.—(Hear. hear.)
Catholic Emancipation was. difficidt, yet Catholic Eman-
cipation was carried. Nay, the more difficult and corn-
plioated the question was, the more indispensible did it
becorne that the House should entertain and promote it
before it was forced on it by events over which they
would have no control—the more incumbent it was to
curtail those difficulties and unravel that complication,
and to place, if possible, the Irish Church upon a foot-
ing more consistent with its own professed objects, and
the great interests it was intended to promote. With
this feeling, if he saw anything like a progressive policy
on the part of the Ministers—anything like an. honest
determination or desire to grapple with the real difficul-
ties which the Government of this country had to con-
tend ' with to regard Catholic Emancipation as
Mr. Pitt regarded it, as the first of a
great series of measures for the 'amelioration
of Ireland, framed on a large and comprehensive
spirit and carried out with a vigorous hand—stich a
policy as that would have no Warmer.sUpporter than
himself. He adopted on this point the words of an Hon.
Friend'of his, whom he was sorry not to see then in his
place, with whom he often concurred in opinion, though
he sat on the other side of the House—the Hon. Member
for Weyinouth—,who said, on the first debate, " that his
wish was to 'see his Right Honourable Friend
at the head of the Government' announce 'his in-
tention of altering the anomalous position of the
'Protestant Church in Ireland. while he maintained
the principle upon which a Church Establishment
ought to be maintained in any country for the' purposes
of religion, but giving up the doctrine that it was to be
looked on as a Protestant stronghold." He (Mr. Ward)
adopted.that principle altogether, but he would ask any
Gentleman on either side of the House whether the
least intention was indicated by Honourable and
Learned Gentlemen, either by word or deed,
which would warrant hiin in entertaining the belief
that such are the sentiments of her Majesty's Govern-
ment. Was there any good legislation at all in prospect
for Ireland ?' Had the Government announced any
great change in their policy,: ..any change that might
reasonably be expected7-had any one thing been said
or done. calculated to remove or to Play the just cause of
discontent, the just cause of excitement which prevailed
in'lreland, and thus bringing brick the alienated feelings
of the people of that country to England and this House.
—(Hear, hear.). The only measure .commenced was
the Irish Registration Bill, which the Right Hon. Gen-
tlemanfthe Secretary of State for the Home Department,
had announced his intention of proceeding with on the
Ist of July, if the state of public business admitted it.
The fact, he believed, was, that the Bill bad been every-
where received with such an universality of condemna-
tion, that they would never hear of it again. There was
also the Bill which the Right Hon. Baronet the First
Lord of the Treasury alluded to at the beginning of the
session, for further endotvment of the Catholic clergy.
He did not know whether that was included in the list
of measures to be introduced by the Government in the
present session. But there was, in truth, no legislation
at all for Ireland since this time. twelvemonths, and if,,
passing _from their works to their words, they looked at
their declarations as a criterion of what their future
conduct was to-be, he found that there never was a time
when there was so little of what was good expected,
and so much of what was bad anticipated.—(Hear.)
They had not only taken up a position which was un-
tenable, but they had pledged theinselves to maintain it.
They had had a series of declarations within the last
twelve months, from almost every member of the Mi-
nistry, offensive to Ireland, discouraging to those who,
like himself, wished it well without any direct reference
to party objects, and destroying all hope of good to arise
from men who had been tying their own hands upon the
most important questions which could possibly be brought,
before them. His Noble Friend the Secretary of State
for the Colonies had declared that he could see no differ-
ence between a Protestant Establishment and a Pro-
testant Sovereign ; that in 1.829, when Catholic Eman-
cipation was carried, there was an implied agreement,
which it would be a gross breach of faith in those who
carried that measure to depart from. Now he really had
not been aware that the present Government was composed
entirely of those who carried Catholic Emancipation.
(Hear, hear.) If the Right Hon. Baronet the Member
for Kent had been told, at that period, that he would
one day find himself in a Government of' which the Right
Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) was a member, he would
have been much surprised at such a declaration. Such,
howelter, was the first declaration illustrating the,inten-
tiOns of the Government. In the next place, an Hon.
Gentleman, whose opinions on Irish affairs were entitled
to considerable weight—and they derived more weight
just now from his recent appointment as Secretary to the
Treasury—had declared that the Church was a line
of separation between parties ; that no Conserva-
tive statesman could, without' 'dishonour to him-
self and ruin to hid party, make any other de-
claration than that he was determined to do all
in his power to maintain inviolate and intact the dignity
and position of the Established Church. Then came the
Right. Hon. Baronet, the Home Secretary, who, while lie
spoke of Ireland as the fatal field which had separated
him from his former friends; who he could never hope to
meet again, except as opponents, in answer to many
most moderate and rational suggestions made by his
Noble Friend the. Member for the city of London, said—
" I reject all these nostrums ; they are all incompatible
with that preference which the Protestant• State 'of Eng-
land, as a fundamental principle, has decided on giving
in favour of the Protestant Establishment." " I stand,"
he added,'" upon the choice made by this country
at the Reformation —confirmed at the Revolution
sealed by the Act of Settlement--aud ' ratified
by the Act of Union. I •hold that preference to be
amongst the firmest foundations of our liberty ; I be-
lieve it to'be the work' of the greatest statesmen, and
do, not belieVe it will be overthrown by any Repeal As
sociation."—(Hear,hear.) Now, the Right Hon. Baronet
at the head of her Majesty's Government, had had the
merit of considerably modifying these declarations. He
said, indeed, " If we were now convinced that the social
amelioration of Ireland requires an alteration of the law
and a departure from the compact which has been made,
I for one shoUld not be prepared to maintain that com-
pact." 'But still he came to the same conclusion, in sub-
stance, as his colleagues; because he said afterwards,
" I bring reason and conviction in aid of compact and
authority, and I come to the conclusion that the best
course, and the course which, I for one, as far as my
humble powers can be exerted, can pursue, is to main-
tain in its integrity the 'Protestant Church." . Now,
these declarations held out very little hope as to the
future fate of Ireland, but a still stronger and a still
more signal declaration on the same subject had been
Made in another place, to which he could not allude more
directly than by saying, 'that there were certain organs
which took the liberty of imparting.' to them all that
passed in the place to which he referred. On the occa-
sion of the presentation of a petition on the subject of the Irish
Church, the Duke of Wellington said, " The Protestant
Church has subsisted in Ireland for 300 years. It had been
retained there during a system of contests, rebellions, and
massacres ; it was part of the compact. made with • Ireland at
the time of the union ; it was the foundation on which the.
union rested, and yen cannot' depart from it without being
guilty of a breach of faith worse than those pecuniary breaches
of faith- which have been alluded to on such occa-
sions." Novi, all these declarations were, in his humble
judgment, very uselfss and very impolitic. They irritated
but did not convince—they settled nothing; they could not re-
concile old people to-a system which was indefensible-upon any,
principle of natural right. He could not bit help referring to.
a memorable occasion, on which a Royal Duke, in alluding to
the question of Catholic Emancipation, had made a remarkable
declaration. The speech of the Duke of York did more in
twenty lines to alienate and exasperate Ireland than .all the
treachery and suffering of which he had complained—( Hear,
hear.) He said concession to Catholics would be a total change
in the fundamental principles of the Constitution and a blow
struck at the very root of it—that nobody could be more in-
clined to toleration than his late Majesty, but there was a great
difference between toferation and emancipation. He said that
the Coronation Oath stood in the way of concession, from the
obligation of which the King could not release himself by any
act of his own or be released by act of the Legislature. He
said
subscribed to their id .Itehadimbibed
er those
i Justice
afteriplesinthe m
his- earliestust mature
myoauth
and ree
consideration. To those principles be still adhered,
andmeu
twoof hisuld
existence—somai andntain
help hi
m God.—(
act upto
Hear,t ha r.
otheela)stirra-t
declaration, did not, however, stop the course of events, for the
Catholic Emancipation Act was carried four years afterwards.:-.
the only effect of it was to delay a great and wise measure,
and to deprive it of half its grace and utility: There was a- re-
markable speech of the Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary oL
State, which, at the time of its delivery, made an impression.
On the country. When he (Mr. Ward) had -quoted it on a
'former occasion, the Right Hon. Baronet, said' that if the Ca-
tholics had the same organs, senses, affections, and' passinn as
themselves, they would never be satisfied if Catholit Emanci-
pation were carried, to leave an intrusive Church in Ireland',
and that the very first use they would
.make of that political
power, would be to reinstate their own' Church 'yet, within
ten years atter the delivery of that speech, the Roman Catho-
lics were,adroitted to the enjoyment Of political power..:—(Rear. )
He. put it to the Right Hon.. 13arenet, then, how _they could
hope to satisfy Ireland without doing that which, 27 years ago,
he declared it wouldbe utterly impossible to withhold' if Ca-
tholic emancipation were carried. New, let hiin recal to the
attention of the House what was the real . subject of dispute :
be would not weary them with any lengthened statisticaldetails
in reference to the revenues of the Irish Church ; it was the
less necessary to do so, beeanse his Noble Friend had placed at
his disposal all the most recent data which could 'be sup-
plied by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. The qiiestion was
now brought before them in such a .shape that be believed
there would be very little difference of opinion as to the amount
of the revenue. Last year his estimate of the avenue of the
4rish Church, which was exceedingly imperfect andincom-
plete, was 552,753/. The estimate of his Noble Friend,
w
owing
s
to circumstances Which were after Wards explained,
432,026/.., leaving a difference of 120,000/. Beth those
mseeistiii
mates Were very much under the mark. He believed might
take the episcopal revenues—the revenues held by deans, pre-
bends,the parochial tithes at
i
486,omthineoirpcaisenoopnasl,, aatt 99163
,000.11.i2/i;thes held by dignitaries

at 24,000/. ; making in all 524,6601. Deduct from this 25/.
dsehhmui which
sce hdme appearedss to 31
thebe per cent.' for the 'rent-charge, and there remained 390,4951:
tithes,2'a7nsd.;
Add for episcopal revenues, after deducting tithes, 162,000/ ,
v
add6tso,2t.
652,0
col.
present
nHe thet income
believed
ileuvee
d r.
offt
he el glebestesti
Irishmaat t
Church de
formed by Lord Morpeth some years ago, was 744,4426/•
Well, now, thr y had to provide out of this ir:co me fora popula-
tion of 750,000 Episcopalians. In the original returns the Wes:
leyans were improperly included. Thity amounted to .at least
100,001 persons, and were totally independent of the Establish-
ment.—(Cheers.) In England there were 14,000,00 Pro.;
testants. There were in Ireland 2,450 parishes, and 1,422
:beneficed elergy. In England there were 10,7e0 parishes. In
Ireland there were two archbishops and ten bishops ; in Eng:
land, with an episcopal population ten times larger, there were
only two archbishops and twenty bishops.—( Hear, hear.) To
one, bishop there were in Ireland 115 benefices; in England
there were 412. The diocese of Lincoln contained 1.259
benefices, and that of Norwich 1,033 ; so that there
wete two bishops in this country for 2,292 benefices, whilst
there were 1,422 benefices in Ireland with ten bielicps and
two archbishops to superintend them.—( Hear, hear.) Ile put
it to the House whether one archbishop and three bislions
• wshld not be an ample provision for 1,422 benefices, with
752,00 Protestants, costing eighteen or twenty shillings each?
But that was not all. Including educational grants, grants
:for building churches, and other objects, not less than
3,310,0001. had been 'voted since the union, to support the
Irish Establishment. The charter schools, founded by a
Primate Poulter, were proselyting schools, in which the
Catholic children were taught to regard their parents
as heretics. How could they be expected to turn out well.
when they were educated in' such a belief? Ir point of fact
• they had not done so. He did not wish to repeat anything
which he had stated already ; but some of his former state-
ments having beers denied, he felt bound to allude to them.
The Right Hon. Gentleman the Recorder of Dublin said that
the neglect of the native language had been greatly over-
rated. The Honourable Gentlemen then referred to events
which occurred in the reigns of Elizabeth and James
to bear out bis statements on this subject. The
Hon. Gentleman then went into a series of statements, to
show that from the first establishment of the English dominion
in Ireland. the object of the Government had constantly been
to enrich the Church at the expense of the people. • The Hon.
Baronet the Member for Oxford had on a former occasion al-
luded to' the great improvement which had lately taken place
in the Episcopal-clergy in' Ireland. According to the Hon.
Baronet the Apostolic age was on the eve of returning in
that country. Now, it so happened that he (Mr. Ward) was
constantly receiving communications from Ireland on the sub-
ject of the Church. He believed that be might say that his
desk was the general receptacle for all documents relating to
the abuses of the Established Church in Ireland. Now he
held in his hand a document, of the authenticity of which he
had no doubt, it was entitled a catalogue of the genuine effects
of the late venerable Thomas De Lacy, Archdeacon of Meath,
to be sold by auction, and was dated in February last. Among
the articles for sale, he found enumerated forty thorough-bred
horses and mares, justly celebrated in all the hunts and steeple-
chases in Ireland an entire Spanish ass ; a spanish donkeyin foal; thirty couple of beagles, and thirteen brace of greyhounds
well known in the county of Meath.—( Hear.) These things
seemed certainly very little like the Apostolic age as he under-
stood it. The Hon. Baronet would find that there was still
small rooom for improvement. These documents had been
transmitted to him by a Catholic clergyman, who,• in his letter,
had stated that the placard enclosed would illustrate the man-
ner in which the wealth of the State was lavished on the
Church of the minority in Ireland, but he protested against
the wealth being transferred to the Catholic Church. His de-
sire was to see it employed in some purpose which should be
useful to all classes of the people. Such were the doctrines
entertained by the whole Catholic prelacy and priesthood. Now
how could they imagine that the people of Ireland, when they
saw these revenues, which had been originally left for the sup-
port of the Catholic religion, thus lavished on the members of a
sinecure Church, who wasted them in the profusion of worldly
luxury—how could they imagine the people of Ireland could place
any reliance on their sense of right or of justice? He admitted
that the late Archdeacon De Lacy was a kind, hospitable, li-
beral man—he did not complain of him, but of the system.
Nature had intended him for an excellent fox-hunting squire,
but the law had made him a bad archdeacon.—( Laughter.)
But then they were told that to meddle with the Irish Church
would be a breach of the Act of Union. If the lAct of Union
had no better foundation to stand upon than that, God help
them and it—it' would not stand twelve months.—( Hear. )
He could not forget the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet at
the head of the' Government on the Dissenters' Chapel 1111•-a
measure which met with his hearty concurrence. The Right
Hon., Baronet had spoken of the good effects of perfect tolera-
tion at Tamworth, where they were like a happy family, with a
Unitarian chapel at one end of the town, a Catholic chapel at
the other, and the ;church, like the cut in the Honourable
Baronet's caricature, keeping the peace between them.
—( Hear, hear.) Surely Tamworth was not to be the
exception—why was not the Tamworth system made co-exten•
,sive,with the empire ?—( Hear, hear, from Sir R. Peel.) He
knew the meaning of that cheer. In Tamworth the Church
had her rights, and the Dissenters were tolerated. That was
right, for the Church was the Church of the majority ; but let
the Right Hon. Baronet transfer the revenues of the Church
to the Unitarian or the Catholic minority, and he would have a
little Ireland at his park gate in a fortnight. He utterly denied
that they were bound to support the Irish Church, either by
the Act of Union, or by the Emancipation Act of 1829. The
Catholic oath, in 1829. was framed without any participation
or compact with the Catholics, and, at the time of the union.
not only was there no compact in favour of the Church, but
there were assurances given by Mr. Pitt, and by Lord Corn-
wallis, that the union should be immediately followed by
Catholic emancipation. As a proof of this, he would refer, not
only to the communications of those distinguished men, but to
the who'e course of the union debates. As a proof of Mr.
Pitt's sincerity in this instance, he would remind the House
that when Mr. Pitt found he could not carry his measures in
favour of the Catholics into effect, he resigned office' in 1804.
and yet the men who dined at Pitt clubs coupled Mr. Pitt's
name with Protestant ascendancy.--( Cheers.) Why, Mr.
Pitt had actually struck out the sixth article of the union as it
came from Ireland, which saved the Church all the rights,
privileges, and jurisdictions which then belonged to it, and had
substituted the article as it stood at present, guaranteeing to
the Church its discipline and doctrine in the place of the
original sixth article ; and he made this substitution on the
ground that he wished to reserve to the Imperial Parliament
the power of considering what it might be expedient to do fur
his Majesty's Catholic subjects. Now, it was not possible for
a Minister of the Crown to hold stronger language than this.
But, even supposing the Act of Union had guaranteed the pre.
servation of the Irish Church interest, still he might ask the
Right Hon. Baronet how he proposed to deal with the
question? This was the last remnant of the old system. The
Right Hon. Baronet must have foreseen some years ago that
it must come to this. He had emancipated the Catholics, and
he also stated that when they were emancipated, if they had
the feelings of men they must necessarily use their power to
endeavour to obtain the restoration of their own Church, and
that 'the union with Scotland had never been completed until
that hadbeen effected. How did the R.ght Hon. Baronet mean
to deal with this question? Did he mean to fall back on the
" No Popery" cry, and to re-enact the Catholic disabilities? Ile
had lately seen a remarkable suggestion on this point from a gen-
tleman who had at one time been honoured by a high eulogium
by the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies, he meant the
Rev. Hugh M'Neill, who, although he was not now so im-
portant as he was some years ago, before the present Ministry
came into power, was still a gentleman possessed of considerable
local influence. That gentleman as late as December
last, 'in addressing the Conservative Operative Associa-
tion of Liverpool, had given it as his opinion,
that the British Constitution would be destroyed unless
political disabilities were again imposed on the Roman Catho-
lics.—( Hear, bear.) He hardly thought the Right Hun.
Baronet would agree with that gentleman. Then there was
another gentleman, the Rev. Mr. Glover, who, in a re-
cent work on Ireland, had stated it as his opinion that all the
agitation in Ireland was owing to the double episcopal rule of
the Roman Catholic Bishops and of the Bishops of the Esta-
blished Church, which was the ancient Church. Mr. Glover
stated that it was entirely in the power of the Home Secretary
to stop the agitation at any time, by issuing a royal proclarna-
tion informing the people of Ireland that the Roman Catholic
Church was a new Church, not dating to a later period than
the seventeenth :century, and that the Bishops of the Esta-
blished Church were the true representatives of the Apostle.,
and of the Saints in general, and of St. Patrick in particular ;
that that was the old religion, which was not the
less old because it was preached in the English language.
Those were professions made by men who professed the sin-
cerest regard for all classes of their fellow.couutrymen, and one
of them at least had been lauded for his miliness by the Noble
Lord the Secretary for the Colonies. Was the Right Hon.
Gentleman at the head of the Government prepared to say that
Catholics were not justified in voting for those reforms in the
Established Church which a large portion of the Protestants of
this kingdom were in favour of? Did he mean to go back to
the days of 1753 or of 1792, when Lord Westmoreland indig-
nantly rejected a petition from the inhabitants of Cork, because
it contained a paragraph which prayed for the remission of
some of the penal laws which then afflicted Catholics? Did the
Right Hon. Baronet subscribe to Mr. Montgomery Martin's
recommendation—to punish every Irishman who happened to
be a repealer with the loss of his goods ? Did he believe in the
soundness of the triumph over " the convicted conspirators ?'
Did he believe that that success would insure the peace of Ire-
land ? He thought that would be a most unsound conclusion,
and one which he saw nothing in the present condition of the
affairs of that country to warrant—he saw nothing in Ireland
now but a sullen dogged feeling of dislike to England, and a
distrust of our justice.—( Hear, hear.) There was a general
feeling there, that if O'Connell had been an Englishman and
tried in England, be would have been acquitted--( Loud cries
of " Hear, hear")—that he was in prison because he was an
itishman, and because ho eat • tried in Dublin.—( Hear, hear.)
-Such a feeling naturally gave rise to strong and general re-
sentment. He saw no sign of discouragement or despondency
on the part of those who had joined Mr. O'Connell in the re•
peal agitation. He saw no sign of any disposition to ask un-
worthy favours of the Crown to effect the release of' a roan who,
whatever his faults might be—and he (Mr. Ward) did not be-
lieve they were greater than what would naturally fall to the
lot of one engaged in active public duty—a man whom history
would pronounce to be the most eminent of his age and coun-
try—he saw no disposition, he repeated, to Ale for even his
liberty, although it would be, no doubt, to the Irish people a
source of unspeakable satisfaction. lie feared, if the wounded
feelings which at present existed were not allayed, that the
struggle would soon be of a different nature—a struggle
for. separation instead of repeal. Were the sympathies
of. Europe with them in this persecution of Ireland? He
thclight not—he did not think the Government could rely on
them for a moment. Ireland was our Poland, and what was
'felt for Poland we ought to feel for Ireland. He did not ask
them to go to Catholic Belg;um sr Catholic France, but he
would go to Protestant Switzerland and Protestant Ger-
many. The Hon. Membsr then referred to a passage in a
French work, the " Bibliotheque Originel," lately published,
411 which it was stated that the present condition of Ireland was
Lrotterly untenable, The work was circulated over the whole
'Continent, and the Continental newspapers generally had 'per-
fect horror of our policy. They could not understand the mi-
serable inconsistency of our applauding public liberty, and yet
practising the most illiberal policy upon a large portion of our
fellow-subjects. For three centuries the greatest cruelties
had been practised on them in the name of the
Irish' Protestant Church Establishment.—( Hear.) Why
the treaty of Westphalia, although its territorial re-
gulations had been w
long since blown to the wind, as prized
by the Germans, because it conferred civil and religious
liberty. Germany sympathised with Ireland, and
_ished to
see her shake off that yoke of oppression, that
cruel
yoke, by
the tortures of which, as Judge Jebb remarked, you might
track Ireland by her blood, like a wounded man.—( Hear,
hear.) Whilst we were voting away 800,000/. a year for the
emancipation of the blacks, we were annually higgling and
haggling about a
paltry
sum of 8,000/. a year for the education
of 7,000,000 of our fellow-subjects.—( Hear, hear.) Was it
not lamentable to see us risking the peace of Ireland, to pre-
serve a paltry rotten system, which Pitt had, twenty-seven
years ago, declared must be abandoned, and which, he said,
could not survive Catholic emancipation. We saw the King of
Prussia laying the first stone of the Catholic cathedral at
Cologne amid acclamations, and yet the Queen
of England could not place the name of the -most
distinguished Catholic in her realms on the Privy
Council, without encountering the vulgar abuse of Exeter'
Hall. lie would call upon the House that night to take the
first step to put an end to this system. lie trusted that this
subject of the Irish Church would receive ample oonsideration
at the hands of the Commons of England, and that that fends
source of discontent would be removed, and that tranquillity