Star.
London, England, 1816-05-23 00:00:00

wards
tion of k
the cow

people .
increased
he frosted _ debate ipan
Majesty's Ministers to consider of the practicability
of bringing forward awn. .generik and comprehen-
sive tneasure on the subject. • •
Mr. SMITH explained. •
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
felt all the importance of the subject now tinder the
consideration of thesHotese. •He was • aware of the
embarrassments now complained of under the existing
system, and of the more than common anzictr w;th
which any change in those laws was regarded esicis
had sn long continued in force-from year to year, and
he might say from age to age. He was far from
wishing to appeir desirous of . throwing any obstacle
in the way of effecting an amicable adjustment of
.the difFerenceii which at present subsisted betwein
the Clergy and the cultivators of the soil. He, on
the contrary, was of opinion the 'time of Parliament:
could not be better employed than in acting as medi-
ator and arbitrator between the parties, thotigh fir.
was.far from eotettaining any very sanguine elem..
tation that • ttie phkct in view—an amicable adjust-,
meat, would &likely to be attained by agreeiv to
the present motion. He, in fact, most feel diffident,
of any remedy that might be suggested, when he
recollected how many had been brooght forward at
different periods, all of .which had failed. He should:
move as amendment 'to the motion, and after the.
first pan of it., ,ropose to substitute words tor what
followed to direct the viristriiiter to iainire into•
the expediency of enabling .the proprietors of tithes
to grant eases thereof, miner due regulate.iesb,” Hr
*icily set forth die reasons which ..ccurred to him in.
&tour of pursuing such a mete. wh els he consider-.
ea would secure the property of the Church, and
would have th • ifect, where the proprietor of the•
land let it to an ,sccopier tithe-rree, of causing a pro.
porticnate advance on the rent, and would rather
scent to snake a ch• Age i.s the proprietary of the
land, than to give any immediate advantage to the
occupier. He then moved his amenJment.
Sir W. scarf. hoped the proposition of his
Right Hon. Friend (the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer) would tend to allay that dissatisfaction which
bad been onjustly excited ms the subject of tithes'
and for that reason, and that alone, should give it
his vote. He had read with astonishment some of
those publications or. this subject, which had the
sanction of respectable names, and which had even'
received premiums from Public Boards, and had
thought them most contemptible, as well for the
misrepresentations of fact'. which they coeitaiwd, as
for their resuming, if the term might be applied to
such a composition. The publica.ion of Mr. Mid-
dleton on a Survey of Middlesex, and a work which
had been rewarded with a premium from a provice ad
Society for Vnenuraging Agricoltuet in Bath and in
the West of England, he mentioned as enuing uncle'
this diocription. He pronounced an animated pane.
grit on the Clergy of England, and contended it
was proved from the proceedings in the Courts of
Justice, that in cases where disputes out the subject of
tithes arose, that the fault lay generally not with the
Clergy, but with those who resisted payment of the
tithes demanded, thoagh that'there might not be
'acme exceptions he did not presume to say. The
proposition of the Honoerable Gentleman to refer
this subject generally to a Committee, was virtually
to propose to open a :bop, or. as the more fashion.
able term was, a bazaar, for the reception of all the
charges that avarice, malice, or • disappointment
might be disposed to bring into it against the Clergy,
If such an establishment were formal, he would leave
the House to judge what would be the probable
consequence. Ile motion went, in substance, to

recommend that the Clergy should be deprived of
the right of collecting their tithes in kind. This he
objected to, as tending to remove them from that
solid ground on which they had stood frotn
memorial. In giving his consent, as he did rather
reluctantly, to the motion as amended by the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, he held it to be a subject
which deserved the most serious consideration. and
he assented to it only in the hope that it might pos.
sibly tend to vanquish those feelings, ea as he should
rather say, those prejudices which -had unfortunately
existed.
Lord CASTLEREAGH observed, it he could
for in instant imagine there was any intention of in.
vading the rights and property of the Church, and
of the possessors of Tithes, be should instantly and
strongly oppose k; bald it was merely intended to
enquire how rights dad privileges belonging to cer-
tain individuals might be best exercised for their
own advantage mad for the advantage of the Public,
then he should consider it is a proper subject of Par-
liamentary enquiry. Fur himself, however, he saw
many insurmountable abstieles to the establishment
of a fixed commutation ; he did not perceive how it
could be done- without injustice to both pasties at
different times. If, however, .tbe, enquiry of the
Committee was to be limited to -the expediency or
inexpediency, the possibility or impossibility, of
allowing or empowering the proprietors of Tytbes to
grant lases, he would not oppose the appointment
,of such a Committee:'

Mr. W. WYNNE saw nn objection to the motion
'of his Hon. Friend, as it stood, .originally tbat
could not be obtained, however, he thought conside-
rable advantajo would arise ,from the adoption ptn-
posed in the amendment.
Mr. WETHEKALL was aping the motion. .
Mr.-BROUGIIAM wished at to be understood,
that nothing 'could be 'further from the intention
of himsdif and his Hon. Friends than to attempt to
question the right of the Clergy to their tythes. The
Church had a right to one-tenth of the produce of the
soil u absolute and inviohne as the right of the prof
pfietor of the land to the mint vine-tents. All that'
they urged waa,-that some reguntieds should take
place.s and that the Church should not cladis one.
tenth pf the capital laid out upon the laird, as .well as'
one-tenth of the prodice. This had latish held right'',
.by our ancestors ; who, in the reign of Edataard
a time when no very lice modes of thinking existed
as regarded the rights of the Chutich:--the Laity
seisetrthe Church's rents of all lands previously. bar-
ren upon which capital was, for chit 'kit time then,
upuwkd, and Since that -dorm madder had bees'
14 .4
onosoptad from trio. Tits Hum TassOuss,..aiii•

.
which tad barn *red in Scut-
the aye eras itirmitly bought up, and
made of a stationary valueti none
year, and 'few above dISOO; so that
Pere no. very rich incumbents, as in
heithet %were there any paupers set up in
as, to its diserace, was the case in this
country. He did not mention this circumstance as
meaning to Say the same course could he adopted
in this conntri. He was aware such a course would
'be called '
an invasion of Church property. • He only
mentioned it to shew that there was not the
d.inger apprehended in touching these *subjects.—
Tne Honourable Gentleman stated a case in which al
mutual accommodation-had taken place between thi.
clergynsareOf a psrish in one 4 the counties and his.
parishioners, under the last Tithe Act ; and a eels•
taro sons was • Settled on him' in lieu of his tithes in,
kind. He recommended the adoption of a Bill to
take away the commutation of tithes, and where an
estate in lieu was vested in the clergyman, that the
successr should take that estate wh.cli would• settle;
the questian of commutation for ever. A variety oft
means he conceived should be laid down for settling
the differences, not compulsory, bat amicably. in
such a manner as that the ,interests; of the Church
should not be dis'urbed, nor the property of indivi
deals *led. His object in such a Bill being to pre.
Tent all squabbles in the different parishes through-
out the kingdom. With respect tie the income of the
Church, it was said there were 10,700 living, in the
kingdom, the overage revenue from each being 5100.
per annum. This would give about 1.000,000.-!-
But suppose it was £2,000,000, that sum could
amount to more than a tenth of the real claim of thei
Church on the proprietari .of the kingdom. Event
this sum was obtained at the expense of so much dis=
pate and squabble between the Pastor and Ms flocks;
that it must be desirable to avoid such proceedings im
future; and therefore it would be better to avoid liti4
Ration. by some modification of t. e present laws.,
With respect to the present motion he felt a prejudice!
supposing nothing was to arise out of it. We could-
not agree with his Riebt Honourable Friend (Sir!
W. Scott). that the operation of the measure upon.
the agricultural tithes would lead to perpetual litiga-
tion among the *Clergymen and their parishiouers ;
on the contrary, he thought it would tend to encou•
rage the laying out of capital on land, which cense.
fluently must benefit the Church. He observed.that
hops were nut taken in kind ; a composition of some,.
where about 20s. or 30s. an acre was allowed in lieu.'
The more lie considered the subject, the more he wits'
convinced it was full time for the House to interfere,
and settle the question, for the. betiefit of all parties.'
Mr. PEEL hoped the beialts of this measure
would be extended to the Sistei Kingdom by a corn..
mutation of Tythes. They were an alleged cause of.
complaint; and as the Protestant Churches of the two
kingdoms were recognized under the 6th Article of
the Union as one, the Judges of the United Empire
were bound to uphold the law on the subject. The
Right Honourable Gentleman noticed the various
opinions which lad gone forth in Ireland in respect
to alleviating the grievances of the lower order on
the subject of l'ythes ; and suggested.. that some ar-
rangement should be made for making them sausiled
that the imposition ut 'l'ythes was not a grievous bur-
then, but a measure of arkt justice between them
mid their Pastors.
Mr. H SUMNER observed, that the system of
Tythesbad long been an object of his consideration,
and he thought this the proper time for endeavouring
to remove the grievance. He felt infinite ciisappoint-
ment in the measure now sugeested, because the
powers proposed to be given to the Committee sere
not ample enough. He would rather have sent the
Petitions to a Commi‘tee of the whole House, and
then, if any complaint required further elucidation,
would have sent the inquiry to a Select Conditittee.
He neatived both the Committee and the amendment.
Simi. PARNELL having presented certain Pe-
titions from Ireland against the present Tyl6 Systeme,
had intended to introduce a Bill on the subject, in the
course of the ensuing week. The present proposition
would afford relief to fat as it went. but something
more was necessary to remove the grievance, which
was very heavy on the lower orderh who are occu-
piers of s they not holding leases, 'could not,
under this proposition, enter into contracts with their
Landlords. The Honoureble Baronet was of opi-
nion that some well digested plan, io the shape of a
Bill, would be better for the iuterests of all parties.
Mr. D. BROWNE enforced the necessity for
some alterition in the Tythe system of Ireland, which
Was one otthe greatest evils of 'that country ; it was
neither satisfactory to the Clergy nor the people.—
He contended, that the adjustment of Tytbes was a
part of the-understanding at the tialeof.the Union.
Lord MILTON, in respect to the propositions
which, some entertained for a commutation of tythes,•
land, as an equivalent, was stated. to be a desirable
mode of commutation. But of the propriety of this

he bad strong doubts, it led the Clergyrnag trorn,hir
proper duties. He objected to the Tythe in respect
to minerals, which did not affect the profits ot the
occupier, but the capital—a proceeding • which the
Legislature never einitcuiplated. A great portion ot
the Tythea were in the hands of persons who did no
duty tor their Tythes r be suggested to call on the
lay impropriatore end- ecclesiastical ones, also; to
afford a betteretipend to the Vicars holding under
them. Noble Lord did nor approve -of the
amendment, and wished the House rather to-have
adopted the nsetion of the Hon. Gentteesan.
• igtr. L. FOSTER. denied that the Church of Ire.
had were entitied-to be charged with running counter
to the inclinations .of the people. Hi defended the
Mode of keying Tythes on the products of that
country. For turnips no Tythe was demanded and
tor bay only 4s.san. acre. He knew a Clergyman in
Ireland, who had proposed to set his Tythes at 2s.
per acre; but, instead of accepting the proposal, the
parisltiotters entered into a combination. and seceded
kom his Church. The Honourable Gentleman
stated, that there was this difficulty in respect' to
Tythes twe-thirds belonged to the,
:Church;. the other third was the property of lay im.
prokieson ; and to meddle with the interests ,of the,
!tatter desiription would be matter Al unrch.cosit-s,
•Plezit7. • - • •••
Sir J. S,ZWisOILT aritooteledge,ll.hit jkt torms:
of the amendment were autroir ; yet it the result of.,
Cousinittee was a measure which enkibied
der to make e leases with the.tiffiepayerk It would
beariciail # .4retsumisraoiogea .160144511.,i
, _ c. •

. -
I
' iittittlifi. ireitai the - 1
1.-brit • .hi /141,:utittsiosfilse_ to' • fol
Is tlin Clergy._ l'bey t milliliter& ad* latif 'Where thif
of a elifelas TAW. sroild napinii the incepts or the trititis were
•ommunity, and have . the effect of teaching the under £2OO a 1
de to look en die Religious gatablishments with though there w
lased veneration. If the motion were rejected. this country, be
listed the debate raised upon It Would lead his the pulpit, as, 1