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

would be permanently established. Ireland would have her
rights, however they might slight them. Our only choice was
whether Ireland should receive her rights from our justice or
through our humiliation. preferred conceding at once
what it would be dangerous and unjust in us longer to with-
hold. On a subject so exhausted as the present, he would not
longer dwell, but he believed the House had no other means of
averting the repeal of the union than by proving that the
Imperial Legislature can legislate for the whole people of Great
Britain and Ireland on the principles of equality and justice,
and that they were not only able, but willing, to consummate
at once this work of civil and religious renovation.—(Cheers.)
Lord ELIOT said, that during the last session of Parlia-
silent the subject of the Irish Church had been so thoroughly
changed, that he did not think it necessary to trespass, for any
length of time, on the attention of the House. He had on that
occasion so fully stated his opinions, that he thought it the less
necessary to trespass on their attention. If he rightly under-
stood the motion of the Hon. Member, it was much more
limited in its nature than the motion of last year. Neither did
the Hon. Gentleman go into the same ample details as on a
former occasion, but contented himself with requesting of the
House to accede to his motion for inquiry. The principal
argument of the Hon. Member was, that as the Members of the
Established Church in Ireland bore a small proportion to the
whole people of Ireland, that, therefore, the Established Church
should be stripped of its temporalities. He admitted the pre-
mises, but denied the conclusion. It was not a mere question of
numbers, it was a question of principle, of right. They were
not now called upon to consider which was the best mode of
supporting the Established Church in Ireland. They had now
to deal with the Church which had a prescriptive right to its
temporalities nearly 300 year,. He did not think the argu-
ment of prescriptions could be altogether disregarded by Hon.
Gentlemen on the other side of the House. There was no part
of the speech of the Right Hon Gentleman, the Member for
Edinburgh, on the Dissenters' Chapels Bill—that eloquent,
argumentative speech—which seemed to have made a greater
impression on the House than that in which he treated of pre-
scription. He showed how much his right was cherished, and
to what an extent it prevailed, not only in the polished
States of Greece and Rome, but even among the
uncivilized nations of the East. But he (Lord
Eliot) did not, by any means, altogether rely on
prescription. The temporalities of the Established Church
were secured to her by the Act of Union, and were confirmed
by the Catholic Emancipation Bill. The fourth article of the
union was decisive on this point. Mr. Pitt, who had been
frequently quoted as an authority by the Hon. Member for
Sheffield, was decidedly adverse to the abridgthent of the tem-
poralities of the Established Church. The Noble Lord then
quoted the speech of Sir Henry Parnell in 1811. in which that
distinguished man stated that the Established Church in Ire-
, land bad been secured in strength by the Act of Union, which
was one of the objects of that union ; and he quoted Mr. Pitt's
authority to the same effect. Mr. Pitt was of opinion that the
Established Church in Ireland would derive security from being
consolidated with the Established Church in England. The
people of England had been assured at the time the Catholic
Relief Bill was passed, that the Protestant Church in Ireland
would be secured by it. Mr. Grattan, in 1823, thought the
revenues of the Established Church should be supported, and
should not be subjected to any species of spoliation. Lord
Plunkett deprecated in 'the strongest manner the transfer of
any portion of the temporalities of the Established Church to
the Roman Catholic Church. He sad he respected 'the rights
of the Established Church, and would resist any encroach-
ment on them. He maintained that the property of the
Church ought to be held as sacred as any other species of pro-
perty ; and down to 1832 the present Earl Spencer,
then Lord Althorp, held language of the same nature. He
was adverse to any spoliation of the revenues of the Church.
After dwelling on this portion of the subject at some further
length, the Noble Lord proceeded to notice the argument of
the Hon. Member for Sheffield regarding the mal-administra-
firm of the Irish Government in respect to Church patronage.
The Hon. Member said that appointments had been made in
the Irish Church which were calculated to excite the discon-
tent of that people, and that those dignitaries who were so
appointed were unfriendly to the people; and the Hon. Member
attempted to bolster tin his case by reading a placard, announcing
the sale of some of the property of one Archdeacon Lacy—an
elderly, eccentric gentleman, who, be it remembered, was not
dependent upon the revenues of the Established Church, but
had an ample peoperty of his own, The Hon. Member had
somewhat misrepresented his (Lord Eliot's) sentiments; he
bad not said atWhing which could be construed into an opi-
nion that. Catholic Emancipation in any way invalidated the
Establishe I Church. Neither could it be urged as a reason for
spoliating the revenue,' of the Established Church, that they
should be applied to the Roman Catholic Church, or to the
endowment of the Roman Catholic clergy ; for the Roman
Catholics, as well as their clergy, repudiated the idea of a State
provision. Then, what would they do wish the property of the
EetaLlished Church were they to confiscate it?
Mr. M. O'CONNELL—AppIy it to secular purposes.
Lord ELIOT was entirely averse to any such application,
. and he believed if the revenues of the Established Church
were taken away none would lament it more than the Roman
Catholics themselves. Whateveropinionhe (Lord Eliot) might
entertain regarding the endowment of the Roman Catho.ic
clergy, and he owned he was not unfriendly to it, must, during
the present state of feeling on the part of the Roman Catholic
population and clergy, be altogether abandoned. But this was
not the tame to discuss that sutject. In fine, he conceived that
the Hon. Member's plan was unjust, inexpedient, and incapa-
ble of producing the effects which he anticipated from it ; and
firmly entertaining these opinions he called upon the House in
the most earnest manner to reject the motion.
Mr. ROSS said ,he had heard it stated by Hon. Members
. on the other side of the House, on several occasions when this
question was under disCussion, that there was no real grievance
in the establishment of the Protestant Church in Ireland; but
. he and others knew well, from practical experience, that these
asseverations had no -foundation in fact, and that wrong did
exist. There was one Hon. Member on the Ministerial
benches (Mr. Shaw, we believe), who never hesitated to say
. that, for his religion, he was ready at any moment to lay down
his life. He for one did not doubt his sincerity, but he disap-
proved the feelings which prompted such an avowal. He be-
.• lieved such sentiments to be irreconcilable with the Christian
dispensation. - There were some occasions when his sense, of
, duty would compel him ( Mr. Ross) to fight ;he would fight for
. his country, but he would not fight for his religion, because, in
doing so, he must necessarily be attempting to violate the con-
science, the scruples, and the religious feelings, of his fellow
man. It was said by the opponents of the present
- motion that, if it were agreed to, it would be consenting- to
the destruction of the Protestant religion in Ireland. He
. hoped he was as good a Protestant as any man in that House,
arid his opinion was that no injury could ever accrue to the
, Protestant faith by any. such step. He believed the Protestant
religion to be placed on too solid a foundation ever to be shaken,
even though all its endowments were swept away. But, for his
part, be was prepared to contend that even if this was a real
grievance, they were bound to consult even the preju-
' dicea of those from whom they differed. And when
the Roman Catholic population of Ireland looked at their
own clergy, and; then at the rich clergy of the Estab-
. lished Church, and contrasted the two, they felt keenly hew
strange and strong that contrast was. Under these circurn-
.. stances, then, the question arose, what was to be done? ilt
had been said that evening, as on previous occasions, that a
• Committee only was asked for, and that no specific measure; of
relief had been suggested. Now, in his (Mr. Ross's) opinion,
the Han. Member for Sheffield (Mr. Ward) had acted ranch
- more suitably and respectfully by leaving the remedy to the
- • wisdom of the House itself. The Honourable Gentleman
called on the House to consent to take the first and
necessary step towards a remedy, and that was iby
• • going into a Committee of the whole House. 'le
• thoughe they ought to act towards the Roman Catholics as
tb-ey acted towards the Presbyterian clergy, who received the
Regium Donum. It was due time for the House to turnlits
attention to the subject. There was danger in delay. Be
. • did not mean to say there was any danger of a rising on the
-• part of the people of Ireland, for peace and order had hien
• . preached to them. But human nature was human nature,
• and the Irish people might avail themselves of the first opp.pr-
- turrity presented so them, and when that House would too late
s repent it had not hearkened to the advice of the Hon. Member
for Sheffield.—( Hear. )
• Mr. SHAW said he was not surprised at the weariness
• which seemed to pervade the House upon this subject,
whether it arose 'from a consciousness of what the result would
be, or from its having been so frequently discussed before.
The Hon. Gentleman the Member for Sheffield, as usual led
; the attack on the. Established Church of Ireland, of which
(Mr. Shaw). was the , humble advocate in that
Howe, but he perceived from the speech of the Hon. Gen-
tleman that :the tactics of the party with whom he suited
• were considerably changed. The mask of. professed friend-
, ship towards the Established Church had been at length
... cast off. -He was glad of it, for the professing friend was
,more dangerous than the open foe. There was no naore
• . talk of surplusses and appropriation clauses. The destine-
., tion of the Established Church was now put forward, and
• this he believed was always the object which. Hon. Gen-
. tlernen opposite had in view. The issue now sent to the House
• ~ and country to try, was whether the Established Church, after a
~ possession of 300 years, was to have its property confiscated, and
the Roman Catholic Church established in its place?—(No, no. )
The Hon. Gentleman again said that there should be no hig-
. filing about terms. He would not admit of terms, but would
• . take his stand on the ground of justice. As the representative
' s .of the Church of Ireland in that House. he would repeat the
• terms of the Hon. Gentleman. The Hon. Gentleman bad
. spoken of the failure of the Established Church in Ireland in
.• winning over the people. A main cause of that, perhaps, was
the mal-administration and neglect of the -Irish Church. The
1 Hun. Gentloman..again alluded to there being no Protestant
• . prayer-books printed in the Irish language for the use of the
people. Nenes-he begged to tell the Hon. Gentleman that
t the Protestant ~prayer-book was the first ever printed in
Dublin, and• during the last twenty years thousands of them
1 had been .eirculated by the Society for the promotion of Chris-
- tian Knowledge. The Hon. Gentleman then went to parti-
ti cuter cases, and referred to Archdeacon De Lacy. Now, this
- clergyman was the owner of a considerable private fortune,
- e which he spent in works. of charity, and if he kept a great
• number of cows, he gave away the milk to the poor. If be
- .was fond of sporting, there were perhaps .not , far from where
he had lived Roman Catholic clergymen who were also fond of
their gun and their hounds, but he should be sorry to adduce
- this. as an instant* of the conduct .of the .Roman Catholic
• clergy generally.. The Hon. Gentleman then quoted a hard-
.b
of the auction.of this clergyman, which he supposed was
il
drawn up by some George Robins, giving as flourishing an
account as possible-of the property to be sold.—( A laugh.)
The character, of. no Church should be estimated from
a the conduct .of individuals.
.cumstances sof _the What were the cir-
Established Church in Ireland?
1 • Now,: he believed there was .no practical grievance now felt by
s . the Roman Catholics of Ireland._ evert; grievance they
• s bad suffered withrespect to tithes had been
Elicit
being transferred from Catholic to Protestant landlords. The
nett income of the beneficed clergy was now. about 350,0001.,e
including curates, 377,0501. The income of the archbishops
• and.bishops was about 6 ;,000/. a year, Adding the incomes of
i deans,. chaplains, &e., the total would be about 550,000 L a'
• year, • The:average of the benefices, supposing • them abe
1,400,.was 332,0001. That was 2251. for each beneficed carry
• • man.— •Lie believed that the Hon. Gentleman ..had understaied-
• 'the number of' Episcopalians in Ireland. According to the
• Commissioners of Instruction, it was 850,000 ; but the
- • Wesleyan Methodists of Ireland .considered them-
e selves as belonging .to the Established . Church, and
supposing , that to be the case, the entire . number of
• Episcopalian Protestants in. Ireland was not, he believed, less
than la. million. Fifty sinecures had been abolished since
s 'August, 1833,• and thirty-two pluralists had been taken from
• . the, list; there were at present only eighty-one pluralists
, remaining. In 1837 it was roported that there were 345 non-
e• residents; there were now only 100.. When the Temporalities
.! -Act had been brought into full operation, he believed there
Is would not be two beneficei worth 1,5001. a year, and not ten
) • s worth 1,0001. There were, under the bishops and clergy of
1, the Irish Church, 1;873 sehools, containing 102,52') scholars.
• --,Now he could not help observing that such motions as
•`•4 s that before the House would rather tend to excite than to
"- -allay the animosities which had hitherto existed. He did not
••••• • ,believe that the abolition of the Irish Church .would give the
Catholic: population a single meal ; and he thought it was hard
sk..,
th tallese who bad been the firmest friends of British connexion,
st and who had suffered so many privations, should now be threat-
' 'tried witeevh theot
the
of that institution.—( Hear, hear. )
s • - The ob
▪ Unit -he should nevmeat:ion could not be mistaken; but he trusted
proposition.
t. vrouldt countenanter.slive to see the day when the. Government
' Mr.
and Learned Gentleman mightkeg to what new party the Hon.
consider himself to belong;
ab_sutn..r.heheounldthiatnliniche the shouts siuosuttsbeen derision with which such
In &land. The Hon. Gentleman and-ma thea wpaTtlay tobewlehicechiYhede