The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-01 00:00:00

Qrintfl ti krn,

LONDON, MONDAY, JANUARY 1, )844

Instead of ushering in the new year with a smile l
of welcome, the Post puts on as Yong and sour a phiz
as an old maid at a conventicle, and sighs, and groans,
and wrings its hands, and shakes its head, through
three tedious, heavy columns of lamentation, which
it must have been painful to write, and is a positive
calamity to read. Not a single sun-beam bursts
through the gloom of this triste and foggy diatribe.
It begins with a grievance, and it ends with a
grievance. To no one quarter of the political horizon
can our disheartened Contemporary turn with hope
and confidence. All is darkness in his sky—all
barrenness beneath his feet. Visions of coming
horrors present themselves to his fancy in every sen-
tence, and he seems to take a perverse delight.in
throwing himself into hysterics with the spectres
of his own creation. Not satisfied with draw-
ing the materials of disquietude from the pre-
sent condition of England, he sends his jaun-
-diced imagination across the Channel, and gleans
in France a rich, supplemental crop of ripe grievances.
Hear his groan on this subject :—" That France may,
ere many years, plunge from present danger and con-
fusion into the chaos of a new anarchy is a fear that
grows stronger in the hearts of the best and wisest,"
among whom our Contemporary of course ranks
himself. Returning to England, for he is such a
zealous patriot that he never quits his country for
any length of paragraph, he tells us—and we can
imaghie the gloomy satisfaction with which he im-
parts the intelligence—" We see landlords throwing
away their rentals, their tens, and twenties, and
thirties per cent., to rally and inspire the bankrupt
farmer, to help him in his struggle to preserve
cultivation, and continue the labourer's customary
wages. Landlords are absolutely impoverishing
themselves ! Does the farmer benefit by the sacrifice?
Does the labourer find comfort from the ruin of
rentals ? Let the straight answer be looked for in
the actual condition of the country districts. Land-
lords struggling►, farmers despairing, labourers fast
rushing towards the abject, sordid misery that was
erst the peculiar disgrace of the great manufacturing
bee-hives." This is pretty well for a New Year
chaunt, but what follows is still more delectable.
Addressing himself to the landlords, whom he seems
to consider as his own peculiar prOperty, to be abused
or praised just as he pleases, "proceed," adds our
troubled Contemporary, " in your career of concession,
and the landlord may give his rents away till he finds
himself with no rents to give ; the farmer may stint,
and the labourer may starve ; and what will
then become of . England? With such a
question you will then have no right to
interfere. Your inheritance will have passed into
hands more skilled to hold it. The legacy of your
downfal will be a terrible warning to futuie genera-
tions of the faint and feeble .hearted." The Post has
indulged in much needless despondency as regards—
what is usually called—the Condition •of-England
question. The country is by no means in so dis-
astrous a state as he would have us believe. It is
not without its difficulties and embarrassments, but
these are by no means of so hopeless a character that
they may not be removed by a little seasonable
energy and-liberality on the part of Government.
Let Ministers but boldly resolve on doing justice to
Ireland, and repealing that oppressive impost, the
corn-laws—which, whether willingly or not, they
must repeal ere long—and the clouds that now brood
over our prospects will disperse like the mists of night
before the morning sunshine.

In the discussions which are now being carried on
by the Press, with reference to the affairs of Ireland
one point has been raised which appears •to have ex-
cited a remarkable swell in the already turbid waters
of Irish controversy. It has been proposed to endow
the Irish Roman Catholic clergy out of the funds pro-
vided by the State. This proposition, whatever may
be its merits, is certainly no new one, it having been
mooted as long back as the time of the Union. But,
as might be suppo3Kl, the proposition has excited a
spirit of energetic resistance on the part of many, even
at the present premature stage of its reception. M
over, the opponents to the scheme are actuated by
var►ous 'and totally distinct principles. Some, for
histance, regard the project with displeasure, because
it appears to them to sanction Popery. Others, less
disposed to interfere with the religious sentiments of
8,000,000 of their fellow-subjects, object to the plan,
simply because it recognises an Established Church,
and is, in fact, a violation of that independence of
religious-opinion which they deem best for the general
good.

We shall refrain at the present time from discussing
this branch of the question. But, in the meantime,
we would throw out for consideration, a plan for en-
dowing the Roman Catholic priesthood, which may
he effected, we think, without compromising a por-
tion of that conscientious feeling, which is likely to
be invaded by any.otber mode of payment, We be-
lieve the-scheme has never yet been broached.

Any traveller who has visited Ireland, and who
has employed his opportunities to any purpose, must
have remarked one obvious fact, and that is the ge-
nerally inferior condition of the lands belonging to
the Church. On no estates is cultivation at a lower
mark than those in question. How does it arise? The
cause is chiefly this—the tenure upon which these
lands are let is of a kind peculiarly unfavourable to
the interests of agriculture. The Bishops' lands
hich comprise, we believe, about 669,000 statute
acres, producing 45,2581. per annum, are let •to a
hody of raen called undertakers, who take them on
lvases of twenty-one years duration, subject to a fine
for renewal, which is paid annually. The lands are
again re-leased to under-tenants, and the process of
under-letting seldom ends there. The fines
paid for the renewal of the leases amount
to yearly 83,6301. It will be seen that the
effect of this tenure is to leave the Middleman in per-
manent possession of a lease of twenty-one years'
duration, so long as the yearly fine ,is paid. It has
sometimes happened that a strong, healthy, and
moderate aged Bishop has chosen to " run his life
against the lease," that is, he has preferred refusing
the yearly payment upon the chance of his surviving
the term, in which case he has received a very large
SUM at once in the shape of a permanent renewal tine.
The late Bishop of DERRY made such a bargain.
But now what is the effect of this peculiar kind of
tenure ? Does it not clearly throw impediments in
the way of the improvement of the soil. Is it the
Bishop's interest to fertilise, at some considerable
cost, an estate which Hill descend, with all his im-
provements, to a stranger ? Is it the Middleman's
interest to lay out funds on the property ? Clearly
not, fur, immediately he has done so, there is a chance
of the Bishop's declining the annual renewal fee, and
then, at the expiration of the term, the rental is
.raised
just in proportion to the amount the tenant has in-
vestedin its improvement. To suppose that it is the
lower tenant's interest to do anything, is to suppose
an absurdity, and-therefore it follows conclusively, that
1-.0 party is interested in the beneficial cultivation of the
laid.

Cana tenure of4such a kind be advantageous either
for indk iduals or for the Church ? Is it desirable
that 669,000 acrOs of vod pasture and arable land
should be left to itself, with no means, no efficient
means, employed to develope its latent resources, and
this in a country where labour is cheap, and where there
is the greatest dearth of employment ? Is it noLdesir-

able that some alteration should be speedily devised

whose effect may. be, at the same time that it provides
employment for a now starving and ill-clad peasantry,
to furnish funds also for other useful purposes. It