The Sun.
London, England, 1827-03-06 00:00:00

and several other gentlemen, and the petition was styled the
petition of the Catholics of lieland. He knew that an Act
of Parliament had been passed last Session for the relief of
the Catholics, but the petition stated, that the Act had ag-
gravated their sufferings. He himself did not know the fact,
but it was the opinion of the petitioners that the law in-
tended for their relief had not bad the desired effect. He had
looked at the Act, and there were many parts of it which
bore very hard on the Catholics, and were quite inexcusable. It
was true, the Act gave them the right of appeal, but it was clogged
with a condition, that each party making the appeal must give
security ix 1001. to pay the costs, should the appeal be disallowed.
To shew their Lordships that the petitioners did not complain
without reason, he would refer to a Parliamentary Report, and
really these were of such a nature, that he thought if they had
been stated on any other authority than that of Parliament, they
would he unworthy of belief. The first part of the Report he
would refer to was that relative to the parish of St. Thomas,
Dublin, and here their Lordships would find that a Protestant
Vestry levied large sums on their Catholic fellow -sul,3ests year
after year to pay Protestant clerks, Protestant organists, and Pro-
testant curates. The first article he would quote was for sac es
mental wine twenty-eight pounds ; the next for a sextornees thirty
pounds, and then for a sexton thirty pounds, it beadle 201.: ti:.
came what he thought a most extraordinary charge, a sum
as a compensation to the Rev. J. Field, am! a sum of 50/.
as a
compensation to the Rev. J. Hooper, for their labeer in per-
forming the early morning service. They were paid for perform-
ing the service ; and the next item, two women SOI. for attending
the morning service. They first paid the Clergyman fur per-
forn:ing, and then they were obliged to pay for a conAtegation
to
attend the morning service, that it might not be said they preache/5
in empty churches. Their Lordships would remark, tat thid,
payment for two clergymen and two women was continued froni Yea!'
to year, and was not for a single year. Then, he thought,
charge of 28/. for sacramental wine enormous, considering th4i.
congregation ; and this sum also was paid year after year ; there
was no falling off in the number of communicants; the same
quantity of wine was drank year after year, and the same sum
charged for it. He would then refer to another parish ; and here
he found 150/. charged as a compensation to one Reverend Gentle-
man for performing the early morning service, and 1001. to
another. Then there was the clerk and organist, with 60/. and
701. a year each ; Mary Reynolds with 201. a year for keeping the
church clean ; and Anne Reynolds, an assistant cleaner, with 10/.
a year ; an organ-blower received 111. a year ; and there were
four other females, with salaries, he supposed, also, for forming a
congregation. In this parish also, there was a charge of 201. a
year for sacramental wine, and this charge was made year after
year, so that there was also no falling off in the nuMbet or coin-
municants here. His Lordship then referred to another patisto:
in which the charge for sacramental wine was 59/. 11 Bd.-ti
pretty sum, he thought, for the Protestants to levy tel theif
sacraments on their Catholic fellow-subjects. To show tire,
Lordships that these charges were not confined to one part
Ireland, be would quote the case of a Parish in another dio-
cese. In England, he believed, it was the law and the prac-
tice for the Dean and Chapter to keep the Catkaltals in repair
out of the revenues belonging to the Church. In Ireland he
found that these repairs were provided for by a tax levied by the
vestry. Thus he found that 2201. had been levied in the diocese
of Waterford, and in the united parishes of the Trinity, for the
repairs of a Cathedral. He would then refer to the Cathedral of
Lismore, and here he found an extraordinary Church. In 1812.
no less a sum than 95/. was charged for the repair of a church
gate. He thought this enough, but the next year he found re-
pairing the church gate, 100/. ! And the next year, repairing
the church gate, 1221. ! ! And the year following the church
gate cost 51/. In 1816 the same gate, he believed, cost 511.,
and in the year following, no less than 79/., making, for repairing
this gate, no less a sum than 498/. ! Michael Angelo had said
of the gates of the Medici Church at Florence, that they were fit
for the gates of Paradise. He did not know whether or not the
gate of the Cathedral at Lismore was fit for the gate of Paradise,
but the charge was, he thought, the most exorbitant that was
ever made for a gate. His Lordship then referred to a parish in
the diocese of Cork, in which the parish clergyman, a Charles
Magrae, received 20/., another clergyman 941., a clerk 22/, an
organist 341., a sexton 24/. and the sacramental wine 221. Then
there was a charge for washing church linen of 9/. 2s. every
year ; and wherever that charge of 9/. 2s. was met with in the
Report it was for washing church linen. He found, also, that
there was a sum of 2001. paid for repairing the Cathedral of El-
phin, as well as 50/. paid to my Lord Bishop, on two or three oc-
casions, for sums be had advanced for repairing the Cathedral.
The sum of 3/. was also paid for the Bishop's cess ; and in all
these expenses the Catholics, who paid nineteen-twentieths of them,
had no voice. The conduct of these parish vestries reminded
him of the proceedings which took place in a room not far off.
It was a humble imitation, though, he was ready to admit, a very
humble imitation, of the occurrences in another certain assembly.
It reminded hint of a person who went into that assembly, where
he was not much in the habit of going, and said lie thought it
was a very strange place, and where many strange things occurred
-as, said he, for example, a man comes to a table with a bit of
paper, mumbles over a few words, which another mumbles over
after, and a vote for a few millions is passed. In the vestries
there was a Protestant plumber laying his head together with a
Protestant carpenter, to get up a good job for repairing a Cathe-
dral, and to make a long bill, which a Protestant Vestry approved
of, and made a Catholic population pay. Few persons, it was
stated, eve. attended such vestries, and they were perfectly satis-
fied : this was, no doubt, true; he never knew that people were
discontented with sharing large emoluments among them. He
thought the petitioners had made out a strong case, and which be
would state in better language than his own. His Lordship then
read a short extract from some book, which described the exac-
tions made under the Vestry Act, in very severe terms, and con-
cluded by calling them a downright robbery under the forms of
law. It was an excellent protection which had been afforded to
the Catholics by the new law, by which, before an Irish farmer
could receive redress, it was necessary that he should be acquaint-
ed with all the technicalities and forms of law, and he able to find
two sureties to be bound in the sum of 100/. His Lordship con-
cluded by moving that the petition be read.
The Bishop of CHESTER did not feel himself
called on to defend the abuse to which the Noble Baron had called
their Lordships' attention He was, on the contrary, willing to
admit that it appeared very hard that so large a majority of the
people should be taxed by so small a minority. It appeared very
partial, and in principle was not to be defended. He thought,
indeed, that it ought to be rectified. Neither was he disposed to
defend the jobs to which the Noble Baron had called their Lord-
ships' attention ; he had been too long acquainted with the jobs
carried on under the name of the Church in England, and knew
too well their injurious effects, to defend those carried on in Ire-
land. He had, however, read through the ponderous volume out
of which the Noble Baron had quoted, and lie must say, consider-
ing the vast number of returns, that he was surprised to find so
few instances of abuse There were some of the items quoted
by the Noble Baron which, as far as he could judge, did
not appear extravagant ; and when he had stated the cir-
cumstances under which they were made, he thought the Noble
Baron would alter his opinion. He had been severe in his re-
marks on 501. a-year paid to the Clergyman for performing the
early service ; but by law a Clergyman was only obliged to per-
form service twice a day; and it was customary, if a parish re-
quired the Clergyman to perform service more than twice, to
pay him for it out of the parish funds ; and he did not suppose
that the Noble Baron would think 501. a-year was too large a
sum to give a Clergyman for this purpose. Cases of this de-
scription frequently occurred in this metropolis ; and was the
practice in the parish of St. James's. Another item adverted to
by the Noble Lord was the large sum expended for sacramental wine,
which was probably not all used for the sacred rite. He under-
stood it was their practice to vote a larger sum for this purpose
than was actually required, and the wine which was not wanted
for the sacrament was given to the poor sick of the parish-a
truly Christian mode of giving charity, performed by those who
bad the best means of knowing who most needed this chari-
table assistance. He was surprised it did not occur to the
Learned Lord, that the two women whom he had described
as being paid for forming a congregation, were not in reality
paid for any such purpose, but to keep the Church clean, and to
look after the lights, and to open the pews. Ac to the various sa-
laries of tke organists and clerks, and people to teach singing, he
knew that the Catholics did not always object to these charges.-
On the contrary, they had in more than one instance cordially
united with the Protestants in giving such salaries. In the
parish of Saint Catherine's in Dublin, the parish clerk had com-
plained of the trouble of going round to collect Bd. from each
person ; a Vestry was called, at which the Roman Catholics at-
tended, and that Vestry had voted the clerk a salary of 70/. In
1819, his salary had been, on the motion of a Catholic, raised to
90/. ; and this also had been agreed to by the Catholics. In 1820,
10/. had been added to the Organist's salary, which was also
agreed to by the Catholics. He admitted, however, that
though Catholics might attend vestries, they had no right to
oppose any grant of money; but in the measure be had mention-
they had cordially concurred. His Lordship then referred to
the evidence given by Mr. Justice M'Carthy, to show that on
many occasions the Catholics had voted several sums of money
themselves. He believed, whatever abuses might formerly have
existed, they were now much lessened ; still he did not justify the
principle, and would admit that it was a hardship which ought
to be removed. In practice, however, he did not believe that so