Star.
London, England, 1809-05-20 00:00:00

GAS LIGHTS.

' Mr. WILBERFORCE moved for the printing of the Minutes
of the evidence on the Gas Lights. This he did because it was
a subject of great importance to the manufactures of the country.
Mr. H. BROWN seconded the Motion.
Mt. SHAW LEFEVRE supported it.
The SPEAKER observed, that it was not usual to print the
Minutes of Evidence on private Bills, but where these were more
connected with important public matter the House would depart
from the general rule.
The evidence was then ordered to be laid before the• House,
with A view to be printed.

IRISH TYTHICS
. •
Mr.PARNELL moved that the Petition of the Free-
holders of the King's County and County of Kerry,
presented last &won, against Tythes, be' read.,
These being read, Mr. Parnell said, that other Irislc,
Counties had expressed their opinieus to the same el-
fect by their resolutions.. In cossequence:of these
opinions he would submit. 'a motion on this subject.
He said, that not only 014, general popidation, but
even the majority of theirish Clergy, desired an alte-
ration in the system of tythes.. The Clergy Nese in
fact. equally aggrieved, with-the COmmon people. The
generality of Clergy in Ireland were not the op-
pressors, although some instances of oppression from •
'the Clergy. of the Established Church might be pro=
duced. Generally speaking, the Clergy did not leyy
nearly the *nth to which they were entitled. Oii an
average they only raised from one-half to one-third of
their dues.. These petitions were not from the body.
.of the Irish Catholics. On the contrary, theythd de-
isted systematically from having any thing to do with
meetings on this subject.- In the course of last Ses-
sion hehad given notice of a motion on these petitions.
But wishing the subject should be taken up by his
Majesty's Ministers, he had chosen to leave it to them;but understanding that they intended to do nothing
this Year,, he would now move for leave to bring in a
*Bill to enable the Incuinbents to grant leases of 21
-years:to their parishioners... Front what the Right
Hon. Geontlemai (Mr. Pereval) had said to him on •
a forme4,9Ecasicn4tad some reason to calculate.
Upon his sijaport. the agriculture of Ireland would
denve esi&tial advantage- from this- measure. .To
prove' this, •Ise, quoted Dr. Smith and• Di.• Bailey on
the influence of tythes on a,, hurl. lie also Stated
some. practical instances frorrthe work of Mr. Thom-
son-oa the agriculture of Herefordshire; and observed
that the injury _to agriculture in Ireland was much
greater than in England, owing 'to certain local cir-
, cumstsnces, such as the bringing of ugelesi land ii*o
cultivation. The.present mode of Collecting tythoa,
too, in Ireland, was very oppressive and liable to all
evils.of an uncertain tax. This formed a scene of
greateroppression in -Ireland than any that existed in
I any other country. The divison of labour had not so
far advanced in Ireland, but that the very lowest or-
, ders were occupiers of land, and the Clergymen could
I not, therefore, collect the tythes himself, but was nil-
! der the necessity of em ploy ing a proctor, against whose
• oppression the people could, from their poverty, obtain
no redress. Ey means of vexatious .proctsses and •
, other modes of oppression, such as threats of holding
up refractory persons as disloyal, the collector had a
despotic power over these poor people. He then ad-
.verted the disturbances in Ireland, and inentioned

~,1.

77,

rsr,Frp

~: .

~;~,

• . •
where a Multitude of test deluded per:.
having been persuaded to deliver up their arms,
and swear allegiance to his I 4jtsityi had.tcleclared on
their' oaths that the only reasnp, for their taking arms
was their being goaded to madness by this system of
collecting tythes or proctorships. Mr. r'arnell then.
combated the argument thap thecomrnutation of tythes
was nothing more than putting an additional sum in
the pockets of the land-owners. The difference was
that rent was a portion of the net produce after all ex-
pences paid. 'rythes, on the contrary,, were a consi-
derable portion of the gross proditeei and in many
cases so much curtailed the estittated -Pfofits of ittia:
provernent as to operate as a prohibition.. Mr. Par-
nell next observed that the sviteiti.was most mjnrioui
to the interests of religion, that it -encouraged seces-
sion front the-Established church, and that in fact only I
one-tenth of the popuhnion of Ireland belonged to the
Established Choi...h.—He also thought k committation
highly expedient on political grounds, rand. said that
had it not been for the oppression of tythe-proctor-
ship the calamities of the last eleven years 'in Ireland
would never have been heard of. He also reminded
the House that expectations of an alteration in the
present tythe-system had been held out to the people
of Ireland at the Union. If he thought there was
any chance of the House agreeing with him he would
immediately propose an entire conuriutaxiOn of tythes
for a corn rent ; but as he supposed the Frouse would
not at present go that length,. he would only propose
that Clergymen should be enabled to grant leases of
years, which would be productive of great though
limited advantages He accordingly concluded by
moving for leave to hripg in a Bill to that effect.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER felt
it incumbent on him to state his reasons for dissent-
ing from the motion. He wished that the Honourable
Member had.more fully explained the nature and ob-
ject of his bill ; whether it was with a view to an
amelioration, or a total abolition of the system of
tithes; and if the latter, to what *purposes the reve-
nues of the clergy were to be diverted. The subject
was' one of most important consideration, and which
required that' it, should be maturely weighed before it
was adopted. He was desirous to, know what was to
be the substitute for tithes, ,as well as the basis of the
principle of commutaXion He was convinced that
the abolitian:of tithes atrailld not in the least degree
improve the condition of'the tenant, and that he would
pay that rent in an aggravated propoition to the land-
lord, that he now' paid' to the clergyman. He con-
tended there was no exaction in the system of tithes
:is it existed in Ireland. The occupier of the lamd
does not in fact pay one half of what he was obliged
by law to do. • He was averse to any commission to
ascertain the value of tithes ; the effects of which he
was persuaded would be to raise. the amount thereof.
In fact the remedy proposed by the Hon. Member
was as bad as the evil he proposed to remedy. It
would improve. the rent of the landlord, but would
be of no adsointage to the tenant. The bill besides
was unnecessary. It gave no power to the clergyman
that he did not possess at present. As .the law Low
stood, there was nothing to prevent an incumbent from
letting his tithes during the whOle period of his in-
cumbency. He thought it best to negative the mo-
tion at the outset, than to countenance expectations
that could not be realized. The conclusion that he
drew from much application to the subject was, that
nothing could be usefully done on it.

Mr. TIGHE lamented the disappointment that
Ireland would feel when .she should hear that this
measure was abandoned, and that the Chancellor of
the Exchequer declared he was obliged to give it up
as being impracticable. With respect to the pledge
mentioned by his Honourable Friend, he must •say a
few words. He did think it binding, because the
Government of that day had industriously circulated
it into every part of the sister kingdom, thereby
taking it upon themselves. It even contained terms
stronger still than those stated by his Hon. Friend,
as adverting to the claims of the Catholics of Ireland,
and a provision for their clergy; and Mr. Pitt was
made; t.oay, that these were the grounds upon the
fulfilment eof which he_ventured to propose an union
1 between- ; the tip countries. Would it be said he
*enntpa beifinin his promise—or that he meant to
dell* the peOpie of Ireland ? Did the present dis.
ina *
jiiiitedAdmstmtioir imagine they had more strength
than he pOssessid to effect the latter ? or did they con-
Sider the present a fit mppnent, when clouds overhung
the political hotkon ? He declared he did not stand
up for one plan iiftfre thiin.anothei, being instructed
to support any plait, as being better than the present J
system. It 'would be recollected, that in Ireland
there were three religions recognized by the law of
the land, and it was requisite that all their Ministers
should be decently maintained. In this respect she
differed materially from England, and therefore he
ecUild.not agree to the necessity of extending the alte-
raiion-proposed to this country. In Ireland also the
prior found themselves fOrced to pay whatever was.
demaided 9f them in the shape of commutation of
tithe, or expect to hear a thunder more dreaded by
them than the French artillery!,-the censuresiMitted
by the Canons of the Church, in the shape of citations.,
This was the more hard upon them, as the doctrines:
of the Church of England had not been preached to
them in the mild language of the gospel, but enforced
at the point of the British bayonets, p?trticularly in
the time of Elizabeth. Upon. 1100.61 V, 'he warned
Ministers, that if they refused-to redeem the. rudge
made on the subject, they might expect to find the
table of that 'House *covered with petitions from all
pnrti if that kingdoo, praying a repearof that which
would relieve them trot:fall further care on the sub-
ject of gat pledge. .
Hon. D. BROWNE thought it was the most se-
' rious duty of Government to attend to the evils arising
out of the present systetn of tithes in Ireland. He was
friendly to the motion of the Mon. Member, and to
any proposition which had for its object the amelio-
ration of the state of the rich peasant. He feared it
was too late in the Sessio .to . enter with due delibe-
ration on so importantaret Jict ;,but if it was brought
1111
forward early in the neit,‘ it.' should have his sup-
port. . . .

Mr. GRATTAN reprob tied the whole cf the pre.
sent sygem of tithes—,they c seated the tithe-proctor, I
and he was the greatest and Arst pernicious litigant
upon earth--he cheats two wap,' for he takes morel
than his. dye from the farmer,; and the Parson does
not receive that which he is entid ed to. The Protes-
tant Church establishment should be popular in Ireknd,
1.-mcauNe it supported the Protestan r.-.ipterest in the ccun-

f or. .

..

'm+,: but if public odium fell upen the Proctor, Prat
naturally transferred itself to the Parson, and througS
him it reached to the Government. The question it;eif
was to be debated on two grounds, both as respecting
the measure itself proposed, and as leading to a system.
of commutation. To the latter hee professed he 1,,,a
been always friendly—lie was also friendly to the
Church establishment, yet he could not but think that
the nature of tithes eerved only to render the clergy
disrespectetl. :He would not diminish their income,
although he considered it abundantly ample—but
he w( uld not have it remain uncertain. He al,
lowed there was .difricuity in applying a remedy to
the :evil, but he would not allow it was impossible.--
If Gentlemen svill not inquire, they cannot expect to
be informed ; and the only "Altv he knew of to acquire
infizmation, seas to go into a Committee, and therein
Ito learn the state of the Irish Church. If the Right
I Ho:iourable Gentleman had good grounds for the
change iu his sentirneine, he thought he was equally
welt-founded in adhering to his. It was idle and ridi.
culons to talk of inquiring into the real value of tithes,
for, if they did so, they should equally inquire into
their application, and the purposes for which they
were originally granted ; and, in that event, he ap.
prehended the Clergy would be found to be no great
gainers by this inquiry ; the true object of inquiry
wenild be, what was a tit and proper support for the
I Clergy ? and upon that inquiry he was sure they
would not be left less rich ; and he did not wish they should
be more so. In respect to Ireland, it should be recol-
lected, that the Catholics pay to two churches the
one from choice, the other from necessity; and that
without receiving any spiritual compensation whatever.
—Another hardship in tythes was, that they were not
merely a tithe upon the produce of the land, but also,
.• of necessity, upon the labour in the attainment of
that produce. The uncertainty of that produce was
likewise the foundation of disputes every year, unless
they did that by.agreentent which should be done br
Act of Parliament. He had himself, at two different
periods, proposed what he considered a remedy for
the•evil, and he thought either ofthem was prefera-
ble to the present system ; in like manner he consi-
dered the present Bill as proposed at lea.st feasible.—
At the period of the existence of that description of
disturbers called White Boys, he had proposed, and
a clergyman had adopted a system of comtnutaziai,
by which he had obtained an income considerably
larger, and with mutual saeisfaction, than he cond
have obtained by the regular mode of leveing his
tithes. The system of leases he by sic means consi-
dered as impracticable ; and they' would certainFi
hive the good effect of enabling the Ltriner to follow
and enjoy his industry without the dread of any fresh
demand being made upon that industry. He consi-
dered the principle a good one, and commutation
eligible, as securing to the farmer the greatest blessing
he was capable of receiving—a security against tie.
certainty.

Mr. MAT.! .ICE FITZGER,ALD supported the
motion, and in doing xo, represented the hardships of
a million of the people of Ireland, who were exposed
to greater burdens in regard to tithes, than the people
of England ; and in Ireland no -poor rates and ro
paupers were, supported at the public expence, while
those here were supported by poor rates and in work.
houses. •

Mr. MACNAUGHTEN argued against the nto
tion. Hie should be glad to hear of any plan thatw.:s
likely to effect a change that could add to the corn.
forts of those paying tithes, but he had as yet heard
of none that could meet with bis approbation. He
recommended to Gentlemen not to bring forward any
trwasure of this sort until they could prepare a proper
substitute for that which they meant to remedy.
Mr. CROAKER spoke against we motion'.

Colonel H UTC HlNSQNsuppoitedit. He thought
the tithe syszem in England was perfect in comparison
to that of Ireland, and although t'ie present proposi•
tion did not go to remedy the evil, yet it pledged the
House, that early in next session they would turn
their attention to it.

Mr. FR ENC Amov ed the previous-question, as he
saw no prospect the House beitT *We to discuss the
measure during this session, andrat was only encou•
raging a feeling which they cauldiaot gratify.
Upon the previous question 'being put from
Chair, •
Mr. WILtERFORCE rose, and stated h
anxiety that some remedy should•be adopted for the
evils complained of, but he saw no prospect of dec.
ting any thing effectual during the present Session.—
The House were at present much in want of infor-
mation upon the subject of Irish policy, a circum
stance which was much to be .rcgretted but as it
could not proceed to propose a remedy, he should
wish this question to be dis?osed of by the prerio.is
question, rather than an actual negative.

_
Mr. CANNING thought it artrio unted to the same
thing, .whethi;r the House disposed blithis question by
a direct nega.tive, or by the previous q'trdst;on being
pat, as it was evident to him, that the time; propriety,
or texpediencyof the measure, hijld out no prospectt
ot its being possible to remedy the • evils complained
'adoring this Session. • It was not by sudden fits nor
starts that any great evil could be got rid of ;—bitt
there must necessarily be many donsiacrations of all
its bearings, and much disc Asi3n upon every point,
and every interest affected by a change, previous to
its adoption. Although
.the union of the two coon•
tries had' identiSid the interests of them both, yet stsll
there was a necessity far nice discrimination befere
any. alteration of a particAir systeM should take place
as to, or so as to assimilate it with that of the other,
as much depended upon local circumstances. He
should. vote for the previous question, although it was
not usual to propose it upon the bringing in a bill, as
he did not object to the motion upon principle.
however, he thought, that it had been *proposed with
a few to infringe upon the • established • church, he
should certainty object to the measure upon its prin•
ciples.
I • Mr. PONS ONBY said there was 'no reason to ap-
prehend that the measure, for remedying the evils
complained of could infringe upon the Protestant
Church, as it was one. of the essential provisions of
the Union that that shotild be maintained as the esta-
blished religiart of the land. He understood that the
generality of the ecclesiastical bodies in Ireland were
all in favour of a change in the system of collecting
tithes, and it was only a few of the higher order %V
objected to it.
! Mr. PARIZELL, in reply, said it was astonis4is3.

sear the Chancellor of the Excheepier stating, that
this was too late a period of the session to enter upc%
th.e sal:jeer of the government of Ireland, when in a
fel- days he would have to propose Bills to impose
rises noon the pinple, to the amount of 3 or
41-41001. a year, in .iddition to the enormous amount
of b.irdens already proposed.
A d;vislon then took place,-when the previous
cuestion was carried a majority.ror the previ
our Thiestion 137—Against it 62--Majority 75.
Lord HENRY PETTY, in the absence of his
Eollourable Friend, (Mr. Henry Miriin.) suggested
the nroprie:.y of postponing the consideration of the
two sets of Resollitions relative to the public expendi.:
sure, to Tuesday se'nnight.
After some observations frorn the CHANCEL-
LOR of the EXCHEQUER, it was agreed to post-
pone that subject to Friday next.

SEATS IN PARLI4MENT BILL.
Mr. CURWEN moved the, order of the day for a
Committee on the Seats in Parliament Bill.
Lord FOLKSTONE, after the long discussirti
which had already taken place, submitted whether it
would not be desirable to postpone the debate upon
this important subject to a future day ?
Mr. CURWEN was at all times anxious to hear
the sentiments of the House upon this question ; but
as he was aware that some of the clauses in the Bill
Wee e disapproved of, he should not feel indisposed to
postpone the discussion, because he should thereby
have four or five days to reconsider these clauses.
Mr. G. JOHNSTONE thought, that after a dis.
cession which had lasted for six hours, this question
could not receive a full discussion, and he evas there-
fore for the postponement.

On the motion of Mr. CUR WEN, the question having
been put that the SP!.AK,Lrt do leave the Chair,
Mr. COLBURNE declared, that it this bill were to
pass, four-fifths of the boroughs would be affected by
U. The motion of which an Hon. Friend of his had
given notice for a Reform in Parliament, was less ob-
jectionable than this measure, and therefore this Bill
should have his decided negative.
Sir W. W. WYNNE observed, that he was descen-
ded from those persons whb had originated the Acts
against bribery at Elections, and for the trial of con-
troverted Elections, and consequently a friend to any
measure calculated to promote the objects professed
in those Acts. Those who gave money for their seats
did it with a view to get it back ; and though some
of those who get into Parliament in that way were
good Members, others were bad, and consequently
he shi)uld support the Bill.

Mr. Q. JOHNSTONE contended, that no ground;
Sad been made out for the Bill, or to induce the
Souse to hazard the consequences that might result
from its adeption. In his mind, it would be madness
to risk what they pessessed in pursuit of that, which, I
if they could ettein, would not be equally advantage.
teas: He agreed with the Honourable &Tanta that
.1
the Bills for preventing bribery, and the trial ofi
tontroverted elections, were wise acts, but contended,
that it was contrary to the practice of Parliament to
adopt any legislative provision until it wee proved;
that eels existed which reqoired correction. It was.l
tot by speculative opinions but by the practice of their
ences..ors, that they were to regulate their conduct.
—They should not, because there was a d:rebrition
without doors to calumniate Parliament, by their i
conduct calumniate themselves. That House eehi-
bited a model of eiwity, which no other a.ssembly had I
ever possessed. Whea the present practice of that
House W4S compared with what it had been formerly,
it would be obvious that a greater degree of purity
existed in it at this moment than at any forme:- pe-
riod. He wished Gentlemen to consider the enor-
mity of the public expenditure in every quarter of
the globe ; azti he was persuaded that they would
be of opinion that greater impositions were prac-
tised iri proportion upon Gentlemen possessing
nool. a year then upon the public. The corruptions
of the present times were not to be compared with
those of the times of Marlborough or Sir Robert Wal-
pole : and whatever abuses now existed were in a
train of amendment. For his own part, he was sa-
tisfied with a gradual improvement, and he looked
upon the late investigation into the conduct of the
Duke of York as a proof of the efficiency of the po-
pular branch of the Constitution ; because that illus-
trious person, upon a charge brought against him by
a Gentleman not much known to that House, kad
been obliged to resign his office of Commander in
Chief; and that illustrious person might become re-
gent, nays sovereign of these realms.
Mr. LETHBItIDGE.caIIed the Hon. Member to
order, as going into matters unconnected with the
question fco the Speaker leaving the chair.
Mr. JOHNSTONE contended, that it was compe-
tent to him to shew, when a radical change WAS sought,
that the existing system was fully sufficient for every
bmeficial purpose. When it was said that it was
desirable to restore the Constitution to its original
parity, he asked, where and when thin purity ex- •
isted ? Were they to go to the times of the Stuarts or
the Tudors It was not till the Administration of
Mr.:Pelharn that corruption had been put dawn. Even
in the Administration of Lord North, when Sir Co
.:ville moved for an account of the Pension List, it
had been refused except as to the pensions payable at
the Excacquer. Such was the purity ofthe present tiniess
that i,i a few years it *as likely that with the exception
of burgage tenures, all Boroughs would be extricated
from any predominating influence. In the Sessions
of 17`e3 and 1797, there tad been eighty controverted
eiectionss and not one case of hi ibery. In 1802, there
had been forty-six controverted cases, and only two
ef tlicin involved a question of bribery. The Hon.
Gentienian therefore contended, that though the prac-
tice intended to be prevented by this bill was odious,
rio practical result could be expected frorn its adop-
tion ; and after several other arguments drawn from
history, to spew the superior purity of. the present
times, concluded that the Parliament of the present
day was eminently honest, eminently pure in the dis-
tharge of all its functions, and that therefore they
should pause before they should make any radical
change in the Constitution of the Parliament.

Mr. LEMAN then moved that the debate Le ad-
.journed, and it was accordingly adjourned to Thurs.:
day next.
The other Orders of the Day were then d'sposed
Adjourned at half 9ast twelve,

:0 hear th.
this was t.
the suhjec
dad''
• rises
41-0001
of b trdem
. d;vis
cuession v
Lord F
Eollourab
the proprt'
two sets of
cure, to T
s
FOR of tl
pone that
Mr. CL
Corn-ni ttt
Lord f
which hac
would not
this impel
Mr. CL
the sentirt
as he was
was disaf
postpone
have four
Mr. G.
cussion wl
could not
fore for th
On the
been nut t