Star.
London, England, 1830-04-28 00:00:00

THE CHURCH.

Mr. It. KING rose to present a petition from the town and
county of Cork respecting the Established Church of Ireland.
(Hear.) The petition, to which he wouid shortly draw the at.
tention of the house, was numerously and respectably signed.--
(Hear, hear.) There was attached to it the name of one Peer,
a considerable number of Magistrates, and a very large pro.
portion of the Protestant inhabitants of the town and cot.n.
ty. The object which the petitioners had in view was a mere equal
distribution of Church patronage, the abolition of pluralities, and a
more speedy remedy against the immorality or delinquency of the
Clergy. The petitioners were convinced of the purity of the Esta-
blished Church, of the excellency of Episcopal Church Government,
and were anxious to defend her privileges. They also acknow-
ledged the right of the clergy to the church revenues, and
wished the established church to be preserved, but with recce
alterations, which were specified in the petition. - The peti-
tioners felt that the revenues of the church were not superabun.
dant, if they were more equally distributed; they admitted, awhile
also concurred in this statement, that any alienation of church
property to the laity, or in any way which might withdraw it
from the Church, would be pmiluctive of revolution and ruin to
the Establishment. They wish that a suitable provision should lie
made for the Clergy, and are convinced that the only proper way
to accomplish this was to diminish the enormous income of those
in the higher ranks of the Church, and apply the residue to
provide for the inferior Clergy, who were not paid at all in pro.
portion to the duties performed. The petitioners also complain
of the abuse of patronage, and point out as one of the effects of•it
the evils arising front the appointment of one incumbent •to
several parishes. They therefore pray that there should be
a more equal distribution of Church livings in order tight
the inferior Clergy may be appointed to some of those ph.
rishes which are now held by pluralists. The petitioners also
complain of the absentees In the church. They say that many
of the beneficed clergy absent themselves from their flocks, and
thereby weaken those ties which ought to exist between the pasta .
and his flock. They also complain of the difficulty and expense of
ejecting an immoral clergyman, and contend that the church ought
to have the power of dispossessing in a mere summary manner
profligate ministers who but too frequently at present are allowed to
enjoy their livings, to the injury of the churth and the scandal Al
religion. t ..
'Colonel BERESFORD said he had no intention suppses the Pt- .
tition, but he thought it right ti state that though IMP Plitidialill‘e.
respectably signed, the names attached to it Saesad boa,' INA
portion of the Protestant inhabitano 4( 10 of the phno -
.104:
one peer, by 38 magistrates out of may, and MSC a
inhabitants; and, besides that, since de_ —,Worehe it cheat
by one of her prelates, a number of thl pgkiiiiaMS. iPkballioril
their names. u-
Mr. HUM Heald it would be remembered be had 'tia'4uendy
called the attention of the House to all those evils, sod a rat many
mote, complained of by Lord bbousteashelL The feet wee the
state of the Irish church was quite inapplicable to that eodittty.

;~,

The hes. member opposite had stated that there were only 3,000
eul of 30,000 inhabitants, and only 38 magistrates out of 300, who
had signed the petition. But what dici that prove ? The honour.
. shit member could not deny what was stated in the petition, or
pane that any false assertions had been made. And was it nothing
to And such a number of Protestants in one county praying
fee a reform in the Church, and at the head of them a Peer ? He
"mild not say that the signature of a Peer was of more value
.has. that of a commoner; but this he would say, that the Peen
:p• nil it for their interest to support the present system in order
to come in for a share of the immense revenues, and that this
Uri itch patronage was made use of for political purposes—for
Itribuig both Peers and commoners. He differed entirely from the
swimmable member who had presented the petition, and denied
that the Church of Ireland was fit for the country as at present
maintained. He would say that the subject ought to be taken into
Ow serious consideration of his Majesty's Ministers, and that a
return; was loudly called for by every disinterested person. It ap-
peared from the petition that the revenueof the Church was dispro-
portionate sad extravagant, and that great evils arose from absentees
and pluralistic He could not agree with the noble lord who had
got up the petition that the revenues of the Church were not too
great. For his part, he thought they were a great deal too
large, and requised Immediate revision. He would say also that
the property of the Irish Church was public property. It
bad been taken from one party and given to another, and ft
depended on the Legislature .to dispose of it at its will. He
would put a case. Suppose that house should say that the Quaker's
religion was the established religion of the country, what would be.
some of the revenues of the Church ? Would they say that these re-
venues should remain in the hands of the present possessors ? Cer-
tainly not. What ought Parliament to do in such a case but take pos-
armies of the property and dispose of it as they might judge fit. He
so.ild not agree with the honourable gentleman that any alienation
of the Church property would produce a revolution, or sap the
f..ondation of the Church. He could see no such danger; and he
trerefore thought it was the duty of the House to institute the in.
qt.iry prayed for in the petition; and he was quite sure that, if
evidence were taken at that bar, the main facts would be borne out
by the result. He could not conclude these remarks without ex-
pressing a strong hope that his Majesty's ministers would soon
;radium an inquiry for the purpose of a more equal distribution of
church property, which, he believed, was equally desired by Eng-
land, Scotland, and Ireland.
Mr. KING explained.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had al.
ways protested against any lengthened discussion on presenting a
petition, and he probably would not have troubled the house on that
Asensio:was it not that his silence might be construed into an ac-
quiescence in the principles laid down by the hon. gentleman. It
was a consolation to him that these principles were not generally
adopted. The hon. member seemed to insinuate that his Ma.
jesty's Government were blind to any defects in the Irish
church establishment; but be was sure the house would do him
the justice to admit that, whenever the subject had come under
discussion, he did not deny—and this was in accordance with
the feelings of the clergy of that church—that there were evils
arising out of the present system which required correction._
It could not be denied that abuses had existed, but he could say with
confidence that for the last few years a strong desire had grown up
among all classes of the establishment to remedy these evils, and
which evils, by the way, were, in his opinion, attributable not to the
church in Ireland itself, but to the peculiar circumstances under
which it was placed. He was sure the question when it came to be
discussed would be treated on principles far different from those laid
down by gentlemen in the various observations on the subject. He
was certain that care would be taken not to interfere with private
rights, and that, while it might be made out that blame was due
to particular individuals, the interest of the whole body would not
be injured.
Lord L. GOWER rose to protest against the assertion of an hon.
gentleman opposite, that his former statements on the subject of the
church in Ireland were borne out by the present petition, which was
signed by 38 magistrates of the county of Cork. The honourable
member might see that the petition set out by admitting the great
service which the established church had rendered to Ireland—an
opinion quite contrary to that so often declared by the honourable
member. The honourable member also said, that the property of
the church would be treated by parliament u freely as any other
public interest which came before it; hut, in his judgment, that
phophecy was not likely ever to be fulfilled, for he could not find in
history any instance where Church property had been thus arbitrarily
disposed, without that of the whole community being exposed to the
same convulsion. He was sure whenever the Church could be dolt
with in that liberal manner, that his property, as well as that of the
hon. gent. would not escape the general destruction.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT deprecated a discussion on this salmi'
at present, because the Crown had appointed a Commission to in.
vestigate all mum connected with the Irish Church, and it wadi
be only proper to wait until the result of that inquiry had been laid
before the house.
Mr. MOORE ton only to say that the general feeling of the
people of Ireland was better known on this subject by the fact,
that though the petition had been in progress two months before
the sitting of Parliament, and though the whole country were
challenged to support it by similar petitions, no other had appeared
than by the statement of any Hon. Member.
Mr. BARING protested against the doctrine that Parliament
wee not competent to deal with the Church revenue, end that it
was not to be considered in the light of private property. With
regard to the plans of the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, he oriel*
would not leave the organization of the Church to that lion. Gast. but
it was evident, and admitted on all sides, that there were abeam whisk
should be remedied. The greatest injury which the Estahlhament
could receive was through the abuses which it sullied to alai
within itself, and he considered the disproportion of inseam as ens
of the greatest. Some of the dioceses in Wales, for instance, wen
tooor in income to admit the residence of the bishop in it. One
e7Wrwas obliged to live in London for that rearm The Wisp
ereford resided at Winchester for the same reams, end the
Bishop of Llandaff was compelled to remain in London. Tide
woe not tight at the moment when more than one see was Mem
to be worth 100,000 a year—(hear, hear.) Such a statement as
this was sufficient to convince the house that there must he a
distribution of church property for the sake of the church Motif
--(hear hear, hear). He had no wish to despoil the church, wed
his sentiments were not to be taken in that light ; but he was am.
Tinned that the interests of the establishment required a men
equitable arrangement of its revenue than at present existed, and he
could not agree with the right hon. the chancellor of the exchequer
that parliament ought to have no control in the case. With respect
te the church in Ireland, he only knew the state it was in from
nimour, and be had not the opportunity of making himself penonafy
acquainted with the facts ; but he protested, with regard to it, as
wall as of England, against the doctrine that its affairs were not cog.
amble by Parliament. He treated the property of the establish.
mast as a whole, and not in parts, and contended, not for Is despo.
Nada), but for the more equal distribution of it among its own pro.
lissom. He thought that the subject should be inquired into, and
he felt that a rigorous correction of abuses was the best way of
securing the prosperity of the church.
Dr. LUSHINGTON said he would make one or two observations
ea what had been said by the hon. member (Mr. Baring), in order to
correct the imeesion which his remarks with respect to the two
Right Rev. Prelates,p and the general emoluments of the Church
might make. So far from it being the fact that any see was worth an
income of 100,0001. he could state to a certainty that the Archbishop.
tie of Canterbury, which was the largest, was not more than 32,0001.
It was supposed that the see of Durham exceeded that sum ; but he
was assured that it was under 22,0001. These were the principal sees:l
but it was evident that London was becoming daily more advents.
rand the great increase which would be derived from the new
ivili ldings was admitted. With regard to the observations of dm
noble lord respecting the licensing of curates—be had it in le
power to state that the law made the granting of the license ans.
pulsory on the pan of the Bishop ; and Bishop Howley, on taking
the see of St. Asaph, gave notice to incumbents and tunas; that
he would proceed against them one and all, unlesstatel2 cam far
ward to receive licenses from him. The law expressly thawed,
that no man should be authorised to perform the howl duty can.
less he should have Institution as an incumbent, or license. With
regard to the observations which had been made on the propriety el'
respecting the revenue of the church as if it • ere private he
would mduivour to show the true distinction on which it be
preserved. Sane of the pprroopp was undoubtedly private, such as an
alltrowson, and any inter erases with It would be • violation if
private rights; but where the right of preferment existed kt
the crown, the legislature had a right to interfere, and then no prin.
eerie would be dostreyed. He would not try the question whether
the revenues of the Church were in some instances too large, and in
ethers too smell, becaushe well knew that the Inconveniences at.
wading that sheiinistriece were not to ba compared to the incomes!.
MOP which would miss from any attempt at equalisation. He
felt the danger, and would not encounter it, and he preferred the
present system, with its Ault', to any advantages to be derived
theoretically trots a &mtge. He had no wish to defend the phi.
talkies and nen.raddesces of the Church of Ireland. He ad.
omitted that great injury arose therefrom, and he would readily
join in correcting It, and he thought the safest way of doing so,
without any injustice to existing rights, would be for Pullman to
}as s a retrospective law, that no clergyman should, after a amide
Ow, take a plurality, unless it were contiguous to his former living,
end sakes be were competent to paform the duty of both. (Hear.)
he was of *ion that reiMi should in all cease be strictly
eatoesed, ea go believed in his conscience that the residence of a
good
.f.ilemilen was a gtlo blessing to the country where be
VIM Mess, hart be. m) The Chancellor of the Rs.
chequer d
el gem *edit for his conduct with respect to
the Irish Church. &Ores the first to reheat the. abuses which
he found subtle', aril which had Woad for a bag pried.
Up M a certain peer every thing connected with the Irish church

had been bought and sold; but a different system had been called
into action by the right hon. gentleman; and no establishment
could be conducted on sounder principles than it now was. With
respect to the Bishop of Llandaff, the hon. member was certainly
under a mistake ; for so anxious was that right reverend prelate to
do his duty, that he hired a place within the diocese, where he
resided the greatest pan of the year. The advanced age of the
Bishop of Hereford should be taken into consideration when his name
was introduced. That right rev. prelate was now 80 ; and, though
it could scarcely be expected from him, he went down last year to
the diocese, in order personally to inspect it. And it should be re-
collected, that if be were now at an age which precluded active ex-
ertion, he had long been distinguished for the zealous and efficient
performance of his duties. He could only say, in conclusion, that
he would hesitate a long time before he consented to any measure
which would operate as a revolution in Church property.
Lord OXMANTOWN said, if the law with respect to license
was such as the Learned Civilian had stated, it ought to be more
generally known. He could only say, that he knew an instance
where a curate, after doing duty for Ave years, was refused a license
by his Bishop.
Mr. BARING hoped that what he said would not be construed
into a desire to deprecate the character of the Bishop of Llandaff
or Hereford. He only introduced their cases as instances where
it was proper to add a revenue from the overgrown pro-
perty of other sees. He doubted whether it was for the in-,
tercet of the Church of England that one Bishop should have
32,0001. a-year, while another had only 1,3001. (hear, hear.) He
feared the learned civilian had underrated the income of some of
the sees in the statement he had made, or neglected to add the ex-
traordinary revenue arising from fines and other sources, to the
ordinary income. He (Mr. B.) was assured is naming 100,0001.
as the income of one see, be was not exceeding the truth, if every
source of emolument was taken into account.

Sir R. INOLIS said he was pretty certain that the income of any
see, including the ordinary and extraoridnary revenue, did not ex-
ceed the estimate made by the learned gentleman. With regard to
the assertions which he had made of Irish revenues, he believed
that misrepresentation or great exaggeration had occurred ; for in no'
case did they amount to a fourth of the sum which they were stated
to produce. It was not necessary for him to eulogise the Bishop of
Llandaff, as no charge was introduced against him, but he could
only say that he had known that distinguished prelate for twenty.
live years, and he could bear testimony to his great virtues and vs.
luable services.

The petition was then laid on the table, and, on the question that
it be printed being put,
Mr. HUME regretted that what he had said with respect to the
church property had been misstated by the right hon. gentleman
opposite. There was all the difference in the world between church
property belonging to the Dean and Chapter, and that derived
from advowson. The last as private property, and he had no
desire to interfere with It ; but he thought that the Legislature
had a right to deal as the country required with Church property
belonging to the Bishop and Dean and Chapter. He was content
with the notice which had been taken of the petition, and he was
convinced that this short debate would lead to further inquiry. The
result showed that further inquiry was necessary; and when he
heard the contradictions given by Iwo. members to each other, he
thought no further proof was necessary. In conclusion, he hoped,
before the end of the Session, to have from Ministers that full
explanation which was so necessary to the future interests of the
country.
The petition was then nrdered to be printed.
IRISH VESTRY ACT.
Mr. O'CONNELL rose, in pursuance of notice, to move for leave
to bniig in a Bill to amend the Act of the 7th of Geo. IV. which re-
gulated Vestries in Ireland. He said that the Act passed in 1827
considerably affected his Majesty's subjects. It was much com-
plained of by petitioners. He had himself presented 30 or 40 peti-
tions against it, while three times that number had been presented by
other Members. He knew that it gave universal discontent, and
its provisions fully justified that disfavour. He quoted from a
newspaper the authority of a Clergyman of the Established
church, in order to show how it was considered by a class
worthy the attention of the house. At a meeting in Galway,
at which Mr. Daly, the Protestant warden, was present, a ques-
tion arose as to taxation, and the difficulty of levying a certain
tax was agitated. One of the parties present observed, that gen-
tlemen were greatly discontented with the act. Mr. Warden
Daly said, " Not gentlemen alone, but magistrates, for I myself
know a case to have been brought before magistrates, when they
pronounced the vestry act to be an abomination, and a substi-
tute for the penal code." He read this to show that he did not ex.
aggerate, in stating the feeling entertained; and, although he was
not inclined to use such language, he felt bound to say that he
considered the Act as one sanctioning an invasion of private pro-
perty, and that the right given by it to the few over the property of
the majority was neither just nor constitutional. the Act was re.
cent, and made an alteration in the former laws, at a period when
the parties most interested had no one present to defend their rights:
and he considered it a great benefit of the Relief Bill that now there
was at least one individual in the House, however humble, who
could defend those rights, and would lay a fair statement be.
fore the Legislature. The evil of the Act was, that it left the
power of assessment to a few, to the exclusion of the votes of
the rate-payers. This power extended to the building of churches
and chapel" of ease, and the rebuilding, enlarging, and repairing
of those edifices. It excluded Roman Catholics also from voting
on the election of churchwardens, or on the salaries of parish
clerks, and also empowered the Protestant inhabitants to pro.
vide every thing necessary for the due celebration of Divine
Service, according to any of the canon In force either in Enlgand
or Ireland. The law went on to exclude Catholics from voting
at vestries for the making of rates necessary for these purposes. Up
to the passing of this statute Roman Catholics were only excluded
on the building of churches, but not on the repairing and enlarging;
and there was no other exclusion with respect to them, save on
the election of churchwardens, or the devising of parish estates.
The number, therefore, of exclusions was increased by the new Act :
and this was not justified by any complaints against the Roman
Catholics, either of endeavouring to obstruct the building of
churches, or any other neglect or criminality; on the contrary, the
Act was passed because it had been shown that the greatest abuses
had prevailed in Protestant vestries. In England there was no rate
for building churches, and neither the building nor rebuilding were
vestry matters; but in Ireland they were. It went on to say that
the Roman Catholics in Ireland had to complain of a burden which
did not fall upon England. While the Roman Catholic Church
existed in Ireland the churches were kept in repair, and at the time
of the reformation there was, at least, one in every parish. The
canon law obliged the clergymen to keep the churches in repair; andl
that continuing after the reformation, made it a duty upon them to
do so. This, however, was neglected, and the churces went to
ruin, through the negligence of the incumbents. The Irish
legislature threw the onus on parties who wee not guilty, and
taxed the people instead of the incumbents. Even after the
reformation, and the introduction of the penal code, Catholics were
still entitled to vote at vestries; and up to the 12th of Geo. I. this
power was not taken away. That Act was passed upon false
grounds, for It recited that Roman Catholics had prevented the
building and repairing of churches, and therefere excluded them from
vestries. But the legislature had forgotten that, two years before this
period, an Act had pissed that Roman Catholics should not vote upon
such subjects; in other words, that the majority of Protestants alone
could vote on any question for the building eta church. This state
of things continued up to the 7th of 01:0. IV. which he complained
of, as enabling one class to take away the property of others. That
was net the sole complaint, because, by the 29d section of that act,
if the vestry omitted to make a rate, and that the bishop was of
opinion that a church was in want of repair, be was empowered to
assess the parish to any amount he thought proper—to issue his
monition for that assessment, which became as binding as an
act of vestry. The bishop was thus rendered absolute over the
property of protestant*, dimmest% and catholic'. Another_peo-
vision gave full costs to a churchwarden, or any other offiletr,
in any anion, even although a verdict were bad •against him;
and these were to be added to the cos and parish tax. Suppose,
for instance, a churchwarden had committed a trespass—not by
virtue of his authority, of course; for if he acted within that be
was secured treble costs—still if be acted beyond his authority
and illegally, the parish were still to be encased for his costs.
There was another point also to be considaed—namely, that one
set of statutes enabled the Lord Lieutenant to make unions of
livings which were perpetual, while other statutes enabled
to unite parishes pro Mc via; but the statute dth George IV.
enabled bishops, where there was no church in • parish, to unite
that with another, however remote. The right honourable member
for Waterford bad given an instance where there was one parish
united to the other ten miles off; and he himself knew instances
where an union was effected solely for the purposes of taxation. He
could give a list of fifty parishes in Ireland, containing upwards of
280,000 Catholics, and little more than 2,000 Protestants, where one
man was allowed to tax SS. It might be said that Roman Catholics
would prevent repairs of churches ; but he denied that, althouigh his
own private opinion was, that every class should tax itself for the
maintenance of its own places of worship. Hiseseaeure, however
would not trench upon any right of the Iddellehed Chum*. lis
would suggest that a mandamus should Imo dm the Court of
King's Basch to compel a rate, when doers was say hapeepor la.
terference on the part either at Catkelle or Pseesstant pawn s
legal rate being levied. The Hon. Gentlemen, daft a at ethic
observations telative to abuses at present tolerated, amehidsd by
moving for leave to bring in a BILL
The CH ANCELLOII of the =CH Ie:QUES, meld, that as be
was the Individual who had the beau, to laemedess dile hill into
t, he mated he should be excused if he awed Mosup o
garret/Teo; a measure which hod ea other mailer Me die *at of
misrepresentation sad sank, sad the repeal of add& wee sisibt
foe by the boa. member Ise Clare. Ile would do es without ad•
suds( es say of these Weeks, sad was glad to dad dot tie

temper which prevailed now was so different from that which ,
tad on former occasions ; but he would show that this Act was
not deserving of the accusations that were cast upon it, but was, on
thelev se ot no tnr roofetehmoe,tenwohfosethe
cattle
rthlae whom, andanadgreues,Ledal-
gentlemen especially professed to advocate. The hon. gentlentan
of 'tLT:rd"cl,7
had said that this act was because the people had no repre-
sentatives in this house. At hearing this proceed from one not at-
tentive to what passed in that house, he should not wonder; but be
must be allowed to think, that although the hon. and learned gen-
tleman was absent from the house at that period, there were still
others as attached and attentive to the interests of the Roman Ca-
tholic population as it was possible for any one to be who professed
a faith in unison with themselves ; and he could safely say that of
the late Attorney-General for Ireland, who had assisted hint in
preparing the bill. And he would declare that that distinguished
individual exhibited the most ardent desire to serve and relieve
the Roman Catholics from the burdens which they laboured
under. It was said that the Established Church should depend
on those only who professed the creed of the Church of Eng-
land. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) conceived that
the word establishment implied that it was supported by the
general contributions of all classes. The honourable gentleman
said that the Bill gave a large power of assessment to Protestant
vestries; but, lie admitted that, as far as related to the re-building
and repairing of churches, the law had previously conceded the right
to Protestant vestries. The honourable gentleman had adduced •
statement of particular hardships which affected Ireland. It might
be true that, in England, persons were not assessed (and, practi-
cally speaking, in Ireland they were not assessed); but the fund
was provided under an antecedent Statute—that which regulated
first-fruits, and enabled individuals to advance the sum the
parish was substantially chargeable. There was not that dis-
similarity between England and Ireland, upon which the honour-
able gentleman insisted. Whatever might be the hardship or in-
convenience of obliging parishes to repay the funds advanced for
rebuilding Protestant churches, the evil did not arise under the
Bill of which the honourable gentleman complained. The law pro-
vided that money should be lent to the parish, and that the parish
should repay the money so advanced. The first evil under the
former law was, that Roman Catholics were compellable to bechurch
wardens, and this was made an instrument of oppression. For
that the subsequent law provided a remedy. It did not ex-
empt Roman Catholics from the office of churchwardens when it
was to their advantage to fill the office; but gave them the option
of filling the office or not—stating that they should not be com-
pellable to fill it if they disliked the office. The objection to the
previous Act was, that all matters of right were brought before a
tribunal which was an ecclesiastical tribunal, and which pronounced
judgment in its own cause and that parties were subject to dilatory
pleas, leading to endless litigation and expense. They were brought
before a tribunal of which either the Judges were clergy or connected
with the clergy. The jurisdiction was subsequently transferred
to the Magistrates. This single Instance showed that there
was a desire of treating the whole matter fairly. The next objec-
tion was, that the bill confirmed the power to levy any sum on the
parish which was thought proper. Those who looked at the bill
would observe how the power of the bishop was restricted. It was
then objected, that if a churchwarden unjustly and unsuccessfully
proceeded against any parishioner, he was entitled to costs. He
admitted that it was so, and defended the system. The act
provided for a general assessment, without going into particulars.
the accounts were open to all the parishioners, and there was
an appeal, and power of redress, in every stage of the proceeding.
It had given the power of appeal for the rectification of abuse which
might have occurred in the administration of the law. He could
not give his consent to the bill of the hon. member as it stood, or
with the amendments he proposed. The whole of his amendments
came to this—that every ratepayer should in future vote on all
questions connected with the maintenance of the church. Previous
to the law now existing being brought forward he (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) had sent to the various parishes for a specification
of the various rubrics and canons relating to the subject, in older to
prevent the possibility of misunderstanding. He thought the pre-
sent bill would be an aggravation of existing evils ; and he trusted
he had satisfied the house that there was nothing in the law as it
stood to entitle it to the appellation of unjust.
3ir. S. RICE said that it was hie misfortune to differ from the
Right Hon. Gentleman, both in his statement of facts and in his
arguments. Had a ease been made out that the present state of the
law was one which it was expedient to continue ? If this Bill
were rejected there ought to be a distinct pledge on the part of
Government that no time should be lost in carrying the amend-
ments into effect. He would rather see the amendments under-
taken by the Government of the country, than by any private indi-
vidual. He was convinced that whatever defects there might be in the
present law, they were not to be imputed to Parliament, or any per-
sons who had felt an interest in the proceeding. He was ready to
vote with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he obtained a pledge
from the Government that they would introduce a Bill to remedy
the present inconveniences. Better remedies might be devised than
those which the Hon. Gentleman had suggested. The first would
be to remove the pressure of Church rates from occupying Roman
Catholic:a, and impose these local burdens on the ownets of the land.
(Hear bear.) He wanted to have it distinctly ascertained what
were the objects for which parochial levies might be made. The
Right Honourable Gentleman had inquired what were the directions
of the rubrics and canons, but bow could he expect that parish
Vestries would be able to give such information ? There were
perhaps, not ten pedants lathe house who could say a single word
upon the subject of rubrics and canons. If there was now • re-
sistance to the amendment of the principle of the bill by the govern-
ment, he would remind the house that, two years after the passing
of it, his right hon. friend nor him (Sir John Newport) and him-
self, brought in a bill to amend it, and that amending bill included
the two propositions which he had mentioned.—vis. the assess.
meat upon the landlord instead of the occupier of land, and a
check by the Leal Lieutenant and Coun:il of Ireland upon
the building of new churches by vestries. That bill went to
a second reading in that house, and was dropped only on ac-
count of the lateness of the session. If the government of
Ireland would give a pledge for the speedy amendment of the bill,
he would be content with that; but, if not, he would vote for the
motion of his hon. and learned friend the member for Clue ; and in
so voting he would consider himself pledged only to vote for the
amendment of the vestry laws of Ireland, and would have nothing
to do with any scheme of his hon. and learned friend. He was in
hopes he would not be driven to vote so, bat that the noble lord,
who is responsible for the working of this measure, would find a
remedy for its evils.
Mr. G. MOORE dissented from the principle that Catholics and
other Dissenters in Ireland should be exempt from the payment of
church.raus. He was glad that such a principle was now dia.
claimed ; but, though disclaimed, the next stage of amendment that
would be voted for, if the present amendment was to be granted,
would be a repetition of that principle. (Hear, hear.) After the
able speech of his right honourable friend, and after the aban-
donment of the material part of the motion by bis honour-
able friend the member for Limerick, he need not dwell on the
subject, but he would content himself with saying that more
irritation would be produced by adopting the propositions now sub.
mined by the Hoo.Member for Clare, than by lea the Bill as it
was. The House was aware that there were many Protestants in
Ireland without a plate of worship in their own parish, and by the
Act of 4th Geo. IV. they might attend at the next parish church;
and, as long as they attended, so long were they liable to be as-
sessed to the pariah rates for that church ; but when they built a
church for themselves the annexation of their contributions fell to
the mead. The Hon. Member then referred to Burn's Eccle-
siastical Law for an explanation of the Rubrick and Canons, and
said that the Act of Parliament was in those matters sufficiently
defined.
81r J. NEWPORT said that the boa. member's explanation
of the Rubrick, from Burn's Ecclesiastical Law' made the matter
more incompewbensible than it was before. The right bon. potle-
man the se- • of the Exchequer dealt more liberally, by
sending a circular to all the parishes in Ireland to explain the
Rubric ks and Casson He knew, however, that many of the in.
cumbents of parishes in Ireland said they would not pay deference
to that authority in their construction of the law, and some of
them laughed at the letter. The assessments for e various ob.
jests, as organists, tuners, catechists, Re. were so numerous as to
be quite oppressive, and be was sure that they were not all contests.
plated by the of the Bill. He wished some amendment
to be made to away with all the litigation arising out of these
matters in the way of appeals, the experts/of which always fell, not
on the Clergy, nor on the vestry, but on the parishes. He hoped
the noble Wd (Lunen Gower) would give an assurance to the
house that the Bill would be amended. All seemed to agree in the
propriety of some amendment, except the honourable and lamed
gent. (Mr. Moore), who thought it enough to refer to Burn's Rale.
siastical Law for an explanation of the Subekl. He would
vote for the motion, Solna Government gave a pledge that they
would amend the Bill.
Lord I. GOWER began by saying, that, under any dream-
stances, he would consider it his duty to grate the meth* and
be would state his views. When be uninteek the slim AM
be now held, he entered upon it with great illieulty in slum Is
that law, which was then so much diamond in lwissi Ile
found it to be a ems et Moguls, failure of the dime of Lord Mao.
kett and his right honourable Mend. The *bilk -be
derived from the working et the law was, tbst regubed mem&
meet, but net that it wriabliebed a wreng ease et swim
mimed beim the law. It was net tor to to the
fall nplanatien given by his right boa hills of dm ili et
the law, bat be would any that Us bum. liked the neiriber he U.
aterkkabould name hiss bt sea pledglog bind! Man bemeediele
intosemtlea of an amendment et Ali la-. tr—OrmA He bestowed
ONO roleeties on disuse dna ble trenommNe Mad was aware
et; It might be imeaded mid unseated, bat be meld notrai
bow dm be mild adept doe resememodedens be bed hem d

parts of Ireland. To deal candidly with his honourable friend, ihr
would tell him that if he rested his vote upon the hopes eat
he (Lord L. Gower) would introduce any measure this sac,,,
for the amendment of this law, he could not purchase Ins
honourable friend's vote—valuable as he thought it—on such a
condition. The motion of the honourable and learned tuemit:t
would go to admit to a vote in the vestry all those who were no,
excluded by this law ; and the honourable and learned tumult t
thought that all bad feeling would be excluded from the vestry
missions by the temper of conciliation which watt now beginning
prevail in Ireland. That might be so, if he could hope that tl.r
tone and temper of discussions in that House extended to Ireland
but he need not tell the House that the tone and temper of the d:r
Cussicms in Ireland on such subjects were very different. (Heat,
hear.) Upon that ground he would say that the expectation of the
honourable and learned member for Clue for the waking of 'is
proposed measure would be disappointed.
Mr. THANT rose to offer his decided opposition to this motion.
The hon. member for Clare had said that he had no wish to alter
the system by which the professors of one religion were made ts
pay for the support of another; but he could never give hut
credit for sincerity in this respect. He had no doubt whatever es
to what the hon. and learned member was about, and, knowing turn
to be earnest in his belief of his own religion, he had front di-
commencement felt convinced that the hon. and learned men*.
would not allow one Session to pass over without aides.
vouring—he knew not what to say—(a laugh.) Well, he would
say, without endeavouring to undermine what the hon. and
learned member was pleased tocall an " intrusive Church."—(heat,
hear.) It was quite clear that both the hon. and learned member
and his fellow religionists now assumed a power over the established
church In Ireland. It appeared that the hon. member for Limerick
would not be satisfied unless there was a schedule of rates for the
Church of England established by act of parliament ; but in Ha
(Mr. Tram's) opinion such a proposition as this was not for a
moment to be tolerated. It behoved the house to watch with the
uunost caution and jealousy every measure which came from the
Roman Catholics, and which affected the Established Church.
Ale. Secretary PEEL was quite ready to admit, with the boo
member for Dover, that they ought to look with vigilance and sus.
picion upon any measures of this description that might originate
with persons differing In communion from the established church,
and more particularly after the opinions and sentiments which had
been expressed by the hon. and learned gentleman who had brought
the present question under the consideration of the house. That bon.
and learned gentleman had stated that he would not at present urge
any proposition for relieving catholic' and dirsen tees from the payment
of church-rates. He (Mr. l'ce!) wished very much that the hon. and
learned gentleman would state to the house at once what his real
views were ; for it was tolerably evident that he contemplated some.
thing more than he had mentioned. Looking at this measure in the
shape in which it had been brought forward, he (Mr. Peel) was not
to be deceived by paltry arguments about any defects that might
exist in the Vestry Act. He looked to the main principle of the
measure, and found that the great object of the honourable ant!
learned gentleman was to make Catholics and other Dissenters eli.
gible to vote in the assessment of church.rates in Ireland. To this
proposition he (Mr Peel) could never accede, believing that, if it
were once adopted, it would be productive of endless confusion if:
Ireland. (Hear.) Nothing was more evident than that the kook'
was bound to consult the due maintenance of that branch of the
united church of Great Britain and Ireland which existed in the
latter country. Very great reforms had already been effected by
those who had the superintendence of the established church is
Ireland; but such reforms were, in a great degree, counteracted by
the want of places of worship, and who, be would ask, were bouts:
to provide them ? Who but the possessors of land in Ireland?—
(Hear, hear.) It could not be expected that England should do so;
fax she had, on many former occasions, contributed much towards
the maintenance of the Irish Church by the purchase of land anll
glebe houses. If, then, the Irish possessors of the soil wcre the
parties who were bound to support the established church in Ire.
land, the only way to do so was by making a parochial charge;
but to allow persons who did not belong to that Church to have a
eoin asseannents for maintaining it, would, as he had already
stated, lead to universal confusion, or very probably to the total
denial of pecuniary means. With respect to the proposed inter.
fames of the Court of King's Bench by mandamus in matters or
this nature, he must deprecate it altogether. He should regret very
much to see the Court of King's Bench made a sort of political tri-
bunal in parochial affairs. How could that Court take upon itself
to decide as to whether or not churches ought to be bulk in parti.
cube parishes ? But, while he was decidedly hostile to the prin.
ciple of the Bill, he concurred with his lion. Friend, the Member
for Limerick, that the cases in which rates should be imposed for
building and repairing churches ought to be defined by Act of Par.
Bement, instead of being left to the Canons and Rubrick to de.
terming.

Mr. O'CONNELL, in reply, said that he had two powerful ob.
Sections to the present Act. The first was, that under it Catholics
were taxed without being allowed to vote ; and the second was,
that the purposes which it contemplated were undefined. In his
opinion the Rom member for Dover took a very erroneous view of
the question now before the house. This was a question of taxation,
and not of religion, for religion did not consist of pounds, shillings,
and pmos—(cheers .) If the poor man was distrained for
that which he ought not to pay, it was not religion, but ado,.
don. He denied that any one sect of religionists had a right
arbitrarily to impose taxes upon another—(hear, hear, hear). If
things were reversed in Ireland, and that the Protestants there, and
' not the Catholics, formed the majority, he should have very little re-
spect foe the independence of that Protestant who would allow the
Catholic minority to tax him at their discretion.--(Hear.)—Tte
Protestant Church of Ireland was well known to be the richest in the
whole world, and ought it not thus to pay for its sacramental ele-
ments, for its ornaments, and pew openers ? This surely was only rea-
sonable, considering the enormous wealth it possessed, yet the people
were taxed for all thae and various other:charges.Tho practice of the
Court of King's Bench was always to issue a mandamus for a rate,
where a rate was necessary ; and that being the case in England, why
should not the same practice extend to Ireland ? There were in
Ireland fifty parishes, in which the proportion of Catholics to
Protestants was as eighty to one ; and was it not monstrous to give
to the one the exclusive right to tax the eighty ? (Hear, hear.)
From his heart he disclaimed any thing like sectarian feeling
with him the question of religion was always confined to the temples
of his Goo. He had been sent to that House by the freemen of
Clare, faithfully and conscientiously to represent their interests,
and he should endeavour to do so to the utmost of his ability. If
the mottoo should be lost, his constituents and the people of Ireland
would have the satisfaction to learn that it was lost upon its merits
and not upon his demerits. He stood there as the advocate of jus-
tice, and he appealed for justice to a British House of Commons.
(Cheers.)
The House then divided

For the motion 47
Against it
Majority — 130

inacztna.
Sir J. MACHIN I'OSH, on our re.entering the gallery, was in
Yof the house. He was recommending to his right hon. Z:1 11;r. C. Grant) to postpone his motion respecting Terceira to
same other evening, when it might be brought on at an earlier
hour. It was then half-past ten o'clock, and be contended that the
importance of the subject demanded that an evening should be de.
voted to its discussion.

Mr. C. GRANT would willingly adopt the suggestion of his
right. boo. friend, if any other evening could be fixed upon. lie
I begged leave to sarthat on Thursday next there were several no-
tices, but that, with one exception, the hon. gentlemen who had
given them, bad consented to give him the priority. The one notice
to which he had alluded bad been given by the hon. and learned
'member toe Knaresberough, and he should consider it u a personal
favour if his hon. and learned friend would give way.
Mr. BROUGHAM was most desirous of accommodating his
right hat. friend; but really, en looking at the order book, he did
not see bow it wasp ble for him to di) so. From the notice, it
might be mppoeed that his motion would have reference only to a
corner of the, great question of legal reform; but be begad to say
that, in reality, it would embrace the whole question of a 'cheap, ef-
fectual, and convenient administration of justice. If be were to
waive his precedence upon Thursday next, he feared that he meet
pompon—Dot for a few dap, but h this month and the next
month, and until the middle of J a laugh,)—tne order book
was so fully occupied. He would not stickle for a day or two, and
if any arrangement (reasonable one,) could be made, he should be
most ready to accede to it.
Mr. R. GRANT reminded his hon. and learned friend (Hr.
Broughham) that if the debate upon Terceira came on at that four
it must to a moral certainty be adjourned to Thursday, and then it
must take the precedence.
Mr. BROUGHAM said it might be adjourned to Thursiay,
but could net cut out his notice. The adjourned debate would be
an order of the day, and on Thurdays motions had the precedence
'of ceders.

11;:iseretatty PEEL said justice could not be dose to the quo-
Sea at that hoer of the aiiot. Would not Tuesday the 4th of
May do ?
Nr.;BROUGHAM said there were six notices of motions for
that day.
Mr. Secretory PEEL thee recommended the 6th of May.
Len J. RUSSELL sold he had a motion fixed for that day o but
he would glee way if the boa sad lamed nanaber he Clam would
do the came, with reiguet tea modal which lobed gins coomrols6
refona.
Mr. O'CONNELL did not know of my subject of half the le-
Intone of :Am. (Latogistrs, sod aftof "Go ea," sod
" No,
Aft, non litzdwis esevandise, the motion was periPmell t•
todwlwrow (We=aad Mr. Semetexy Prot. expeisold • bore
that it would hi to some is at fire o'clock.