The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1835-04-03 00:00:00

INVERNESS-SHIRE ELECTION

Mr. PRINGft moved, that in consequence of the death of the
petitioning candidate (Mr. M'Leod), in the Inverness-shire elec-
tion, an additional fortnight be allowed to the-electors to con -
Bider the propriety of petitioning against the return.
Mr. MURRAY thought this 'a most extraordinary application.
Was it to be said, that because a petitioner died, notice was to
be sent to the county by that house of the circumstance, and an
invitation to some one or other of the electors to come forward
with a new petition ? Every person who chose had had an
oppdrtunity of petitioning, and the law ought not to be violated
by the granting of such an application as the present.
Mr. WYNN could not find that there was a single word in the
act of parliament that would authorize such an interposition as
was now sought for. _ _

The motion was negatived without a division and the order of.
the day for considering the petition against the return was
discharged.

CHURCH OF IRELAND.
On the order of the day'being read for the debate to be re-
sumed on the church of Ireland.

Mr. Susit. went into a long explanation of his conduct in
answer to the remarks on his evidence before the committee of.
1824-5, upon which Sir James Graham had commented on the

previons evening. When lie was a candidate for the county of
Louth his earnest entreaty to the tenants on several estates was,
that they would not vote against the wishes of their landlords ;
he earnestly entreated them not to commit themselves with those -
who could exercise so much power over them ; he denounced
,hriberv—he said that evil fortune would attend those who sold
'their political principles. and' accepted a sordid recouipence for.
their- independence. In the year 1825 the Irish catholics
were willing to accept a provision for their clergy ; how
totally different would have been the relations between.
• tilis country and Ireland had the great work of emancipation
been accomplished on those terms. After making some obser-,
catkins of a general nature on the history of the catholic ques-
tion, the hon. and learned member referred to the settlement

of church property in Scotland. Spottiswood, the historian of
the Scotch church—that writer, in speaking of the state of the,
church as preserving the company and fellowship not only of
the godly but of hypocrites (a laugh), the distribution of church
property, he said, was fourfold—one for the sustentation of the
pastor, one for the elders and clergy, one for the poor, and one
for the whole body, of the church, and in addition thereto, for
the benefit of the schoOls and the schoolmasters, and the super-
plus to be bestowed, as we understood, upon education. Here,
then, was the doctrine of a protestant writer relating to a pro-
testant church. He further said, that two sorts of men were to
be supported out of the funds of the church—the poor, and the
teachers of youth. The other authority to which he desired• to
refer was one short act of parliament for abolishing prelacy in
Scotland; it declared that prelacy was contrary to the inclina-
tions of the, people of Scotland, that it should be in all time
coming abolished, and such form, of church government substi-
tuted in its stead as should be agreeableto the wishes and

ingsof the ifeople. That ,was the Act. upon which the present
form of church government stood in Scotland. Did he desire so
much for Ireland? So far from it, he fully remembered that
the great mass of Irish property. was in the hands of protestants,
and in whatever place there existed a protestant congregation,
there did he wish to see a respectable protestant clergyman
fixed. If you (said the hon. and learned gentleman) will only
be just, be assured that you will find us moderate. The hon. and
learned gentleman, in answer to the objection raised to this
discussion that the commissioners' report had not been received,
said the archiepiscopal see of Armagh was wortlri23,oooa-year,
and that he needed no report to convince him to allow that pre-
late to receive a higher income than the lord chancellor of Ire-
land. In conclusion he said the conduct of the government of
Ireland had been the burying-place of many ministries, and if
he did not take care it would prove the grave of this administra-
tion. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. limos- in a speech of great length reviewed the allega-
tions both of law and filet which hid" been put forward in the
course of the debate. In the course of his speech he disproved
the assertion-of Lord John Russell, that the revenues of the
Irish church amounted to £BOO,OOO. It did not, in point of fact,
realise even £500,000. Lord John's annual estimate of it bad
each year decreased. It was 'not more than sufficient for its
wants. The learned gentleman concluded by saying:—lf the
church was to fall, he hoped that before such an event, it would
be ascertained that it fell with the good-will of the protestants of
England; and that they should, at least, have an opportunity
of declaring whether, with their consent, the religion,—the va-
lue, the blessings, and the comforts of which they had so long
enjoyed—a religion which had raised this country to the high
station amon,,,,,st nations which she filled—whether they would
,submit that this religion should be first taken away from the
protestants of Ireland, and eventually destroyed and trampled
under foot here by such a faction—such a party as was now
united for that purpose in this house? (Hear.)
Mr. C. Woon spoke in favour of the motion: He denied
that the motion was brought forward for factilas purposes.
Colonel DAMER was opposed to the discussion in the absence
of the commissioners' report; this was the noble lord's argument
last year; remembering this, and bearing in mind what had
passed since the meeting of parliament, he could discoier up
reason for this hasty attempt to entertain a question of such diffi-
culty and importance, except that of embarrassing his majesty',
government, and finally driving the chancellor of. the ex-
chequer from the station which, in his judgment, he filled so
ably, and with such equal advantage to the country. (Cheers.)
He was of opinion that the most effectual way of settling down
Ireland would be to create a connexion between the state and
the catholic clergy of that country. Were the people of Eng-
laud only, half as generous to the catholics of Ireland as they
had been to the slaves of Jamaica, and their former masters, an
income would be provided that would go very far to accom-
plish that purpose. Holding himself perfectly unpledged on
the question, reserving to himself the right of acting on a fu-
tuie occasion as his judgment might dictate, declining to give
an opinion on the merits of the noble lord's motion, he should
vote against it.
Sir R. IsoLis contended that the arguments in support of
this resolution went to the substitution of the church of Rome
for that of the protestant establishment. Why was not that
proposition boldly avowed, instead of attempting to carry it by
degrees—by crippling the Protestant church gradually, instead
of crushing it. at once? Alluding to Lord John Russell's decla-
ration, that he wits friendly to the established church, Sir R.
Inglis said he could not understand how any one could enter-
tain such a feeling, and yet desire to withdraw from the church
a portion of its means of subsistence, in the midst of a catholic
population.

Mr. POULTER, after referring to the reformation in the reign
of Edward VI. and to the foundation of the English and Irish
churches, thought no lapse of time should deterthem from the
redress of national injury. He yielded to no man in his re-
spect for religion, and nothing would induce him so vote for the
motion of thee noble lord but the conscientious conviction that
the overgrown and unnaturally excessive church of Ireland had
historically obstructed the progress of protestantism in that mis-
governed and unhappy country. (Cheers.)
Mr. W. E. GLADSTONE said that the proposition of the noble
lord opposite was founded on the assertion that a surplus existed
iu the revenues of the church of Ireland, but that assertion
remained unproved. The noble lord, instead of inaliteg an
accurate statement of the number of protestants and the total
amount of ecclesiastical revenues in Ireland, produced the
particular cases of a few parishes, and called on the house, in
consequence of his partially selected instances, to give up the
great and fundamental principle of a national establishment
in Ireland. He required some more clear and definite reasons
before he could give his assent to the proposition of the noble
lord. His mind was made up on the motion of appropriation
as much as that of any gentleman in the house. There was, a.
sacredness, according to bis mind, in church property, and yet'
he saw a distinction -between church property and private pro'
perty. Private property was sacred to persons and church
property was sacred to purposes. (Cheers.) Did the reforma-
tion violate the sacredness of church property ? That sacred-
ness could not in all cases be strictly maintained; but it was
always desirable to keep the property as sacred as circumstances
medic! permit. (Hear.) Such was the case at the reformation
but would such be the case if the motion of the noble lord
opposite were carried? (Hear.) At the time of the reformation
the legislature, composed of the representatives of the.
country, having changed the established religion, changed„
to the same extent the appropriation of church property. Is
the protestants should.ever happen to be again in a minority in
that house, he for one avowed his conviction that a return
to the ancient appropriation would be the fair and legitimate
consequence.. Until that should be
.the case—until the legis-
lative union should be dissolved—until the representatives of
the catholics constituted the majority in the house—he for one
should raise his humble voice as a protestant against the prin-
ciple involved in the motion before the house. (Hear, hear.)
The charge made against the protestant church in ffeland was,
that it was paid for by Roman catholics. Was this the case T
Was the tithe paid by the occupier in reality or in appearance
only ? Was it not admitted that tithe was part of the surplus
profit of land which did not accrue to the cultivator but to the
landlord ? (Hear, hear.) In this case the tithe was substanti-
ally paid by the landlord, and the grievance which existed in
Ireland waean apparent and not a real one. (Hear, and cries
of " No.") Still it was not the intention of the government
to leave that apparent grievance unredressed, for a tithe bill
had been introduced having for its very object and purpose to
place the payment of tithe in appearance as well as in reality
on the landlord. (Hear, hear.) One of the arguments used
against the church in Ireland was, that it had not been made
effective for the conversion of the people. Now admitting, for
the sake of argument, that there had been great abuse, great
negligence and corruption in the church establishment of Ire-•
laud, had not, he asked, similar abuses prevailed in the political
government of that country? (Cheers from the opposition.)
What, then, was the remedy proposed in either case? As re-
garded religious abuses, the Roman catholics cried out " Take
away the protestant church, aisd give us bark our own church.
(Cries of No, no," and "Hear.") He would not consent to
treat the present motion—which was plainly initiatory—as a
final one. ( Hear, hear.) It was, he was convinced, merely an
initiatory motion, which would open the way to a really bound-
less wood. Measure after measure would be brought forward;
expedient after expedient would be resorted to; principle after
principle would be changed, until at last the only intelligible
conclusion, after the adoption of the present motion, would be
arrived at in the recognition of a Roman catholic establishment.
(Cheers, and cries of " No.") The Roman catholics of Ireland
called on the house to abolish the present church establishment,
because it was abused. ("No; no.") Why, the grievance COil'
plained of was, that the Roman catholics were called on t°
support the protestant church in Ireland, and what would they
gain if a paltry saving of £50,000 or £lOO,OOO was only effected,
and the Roman catholics were still called on to support the
protestant establishment? (Hear, hear.) What was desired,
then, must be to do away with the protestant establishment i&
Ireland ? Would the house be prepared to act on the same
principle with respect to the political government of Ireland?
Because Ireland had been, as had been asserted, neglected--
because her resources had remained undeveloped—because the
character of theepeople, with all their noble capabilities, coo"
tinued uncultivated, would the house consent to the dissolution
of the legislative union ? ( Hear, bear.) When it was CO,
sidered that the supposition of the surplus was the basis of tic
motion before the house, he thought that the noble lord crag
bound to prove the existence of that surplus before he took 6
step calculated to convulse that house and perhaps the country
lie (Mr. Gladstone) would endeavour to inform the house
of the amount of the revenue received by the Irish clergy:
The hon. gentleman then entered into some details with respec
to the revenue of the Irish church, which, he contended, in coi,)e
sequence of the deductions to which it would be subject, 0 out'
not exceed £400,000, or, if divided by the number of benefice!!
£275 for each benefice. In continuation he said. the Scoteh.
church, which was quoted in that house as the beau ideal at,
economy, allowed to each clergyman £250 a-year. (Cries or
" Hear," and "No.") He would put it to the house whetle
£275 was a high or excessive sum. (Hear.) With refereuFe
to the amount of parochial collection, the noble lord himself we°
had drawn his facts, he said, from imperfect sources, stated the
protestant population of Ireland at 750,000; he believed it s°
be 1,000,000. (" Oh.") But whose fault was it that more ae:
curate information was not obtained? (Hear.) Had the
ble lord any right to lay the blame at that (the ministerial) si
when it should have come from the party with whom be acteo
( Hear.) But taking them at 1,000,000 of persons, if that sir',
the number, what would be the result of dividing that- nurnDete;
amongst the 1,450 benefices ? Whyi it would give 700 soulsdi..
each flock. (Hear.) Wheu it was considered-that these in
13,
viduals lived at a distance from each other, and were not ee,b
cent rated as in England, was the amount of 700 person da
ft,
to L
benefice so very trifling a number to occupy the care an

APRIL 3, 1f.V35.

tention of the clergy ? From whence was the surplus to come ?
---otilvhat ground had the assumption of the other side pro-
ceeded ? If we supposed the case of the population bf Ireland
becoming all protestant, and to have a church establishment,
the present church establishment would be totally. and ludi-
truusly inadequate. (Hear.) The wealth of the Irish church
establishment was spoken of frequently as a fact not to be dis-
puted; but taking it that 1,000 persons would be placed under
each clergyman, and that the income, on an average, was £3OO
to each benefice,—and it was absurd to say that 1,000 persons to
eachbenefice, with only £3OO a-year, would be a sufficient pro-
'sien—(hear)—if it were so, let it be so said; but he would
IViin say, that the amount of the parochial revenue of the church
et Ireland would then be four or five times the amount of in-
latio.rne demandable now, and six times what it will be. The
t1:0" of persons. in this house may have been influenced by
lash false rumours, and by the audacity of the enemies of the
church, by whose distorted statements many minds may
h.
been unconsciously biassed. But let them look at the case
a anrty, _
d their mistakes would, then ,disappear, and their cott-
age revive. He (Mr. Gladstone). thought there would be uo
surplus, as far as the house could judge, under the present cir-
Fetestanees of the Irish church: Mr. Senior, in his pamphlet,
(lad u remarkable
in assage with reference to the parochial re-
/venue of Ireland, which he threw entirely overboard the no=
,31°11 of any considerable surplus arising from the parochial re-
eque of the church of Ireland, and confined his views of aliena-
nef church property to the church establishment. He (Mr.
Gladstone) considered the proposition of the noble lord as alike
ittulirecticable and unjustifiable. It was unjustifiable, because
ta:ias not possible that a church establishment could be rightly
wifil,tulned, except on the principle that it was an establishment
dicilen taught the truth. (Hear, hear.) . He (Mr. Gladstone)
not mean anything offensive to the .feelings of any hon. i
t,Zuer ; but they would allow him to say, as a protestant, that
protestant church contained the largest portion of the ele-
rhieh, ts of truth, and the smallest mixture of error. 'lt was on
principle that the church establishinent 'was built. But
the noble lord invited the house to give up this principle; the
iiita).,l)le lord said that with the truth of the religion the house
nothing to do; that a government had no right to operate
ou the belief of its subjects; but he hoped few -would assent
hat doctrine. (Hear.) It had been refreshing last night to
the house to have its attention withdrawn from the low range
of argument on the other side to the high and elevated princi-
tee inculcated in the highminded speech of the right honourable
,4„"et, the member for Cumberland. (Hear.) The tone and
Oupies of that speech had elevated the character of the de-
e.l (Hear.) 'the most important of all the consequences of
Ls question, and they were. many, he (Mr. Gladstone)' con-
,eleed to be, its tendency first to enfeeble and debase and then
:levew the principle of a chtirch establishMeht. (Hear.)
Le Ouble lord invited the house to. invade the property of the
Church of Ireland, and abandoned the political reasons for main-
tit.nßit. The house would observe what had been the course
connexion between -religion and the state. At the be-
ref ailed produced oppression and tyranny, but when the
;formation took place the tyranny was broken, and the fabric
"ih°PPression attempted to be raised crumbled into atoms.
the principles of our present church establishment were
down, combining efficiency and energy with
.pure and per-
'et Moderation. Would to God that these principles had been
tarried as rightly into effect as they had been nobly conceived.
if they had been, we should notbe now arguing the case of Ire-
where a disproportion in point of religion did exist, be-
i4ll,,,se he believed (as a protestant, at least, he believed) that
Ireland would nut now have remained catholic. But the system
h„,,'
been abused by the weakness and 'infirmity of mankind;
sad what remedy did the noble lord propose ? What was his re-
source?t To cure the abuse of a good principle he proposed to
:airrefuge in a had one. (Hear.) But the government were
Upon to discuss the principle of a church establishment,
as ff r they had no choice, as if it was necessary to recognize one
elution or another, as if the establishment merely existed de
,facto, and not according to rights based upon the purest princi-
ples,The question now so generally discussed, when first
eard of, was in America, where each person contributed a
`"&n sum to support the worship of the sect to which he be-
keged- There was scarcely time for this system to become
ivil.n in this country before it had vanished from the country
. 'eh gave it birth. In -America, at the present day, there
w" otily a traditionary recollection of it ; and yet we were invited
to
desert what was definite and intelligible and adopt teat which
(73 indefinite and unintelligible, and involved the destruction
LBllpri church establishments. If we lived to see the day when
nciple should be acknowledged in the country, it would
i'eet the character both of the government and of public men
0 a degree lamentable beyond all example; religion would
tia-7Se, in time, to attract the noblest aspirations of mankind. If
e who administer public affairs were to exclude from their
!pu sideration the element of religion, and be indifferent whether
n creed of the people were the purest form of truth, or any va-
tt:etY of error such men, though they might administer the
:61est functions of society, and wear the badges of power,
0 aid be unfit counsellors to the crown, and their measures
~,,,"64111 end in confusion. If they were to administer public
Fairs in that mode, to neglect matters the highest of all, only to
eubserve caprice and the absurdest-whims, ho prayed that day
not arrive whilst he was here to see it. (Hear.)
be remaining speakers ou this night's debate were Mr. F.
Connor and the Solicitor-General.
Mr. GOCI.BURN moved the adjournment of the debate.
,he report of the supply committee was brought up and read.
the other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
''Otite adjourned at twenty, minutes to one o'clock.

. ..
ri-IHE MARQUIS DE - MUTT PAPAZURRI has the
1 honour to inform the Nobility and Gentry of. Liverpool
and its Vicinity that, under the Patronage and Superintend-
ence of a Committee of Gentlemen, who have kindly offered
him their countenance and support, he intends giving
ix/
TWO CONCERTS,
At the WELLINGTON Rooms,
the first on TUESDAY next, the 7th of April • '
FRIDA rnhe 10th of A ml
The principal Performers will be ame Kyntherland,
Miss Hamilton, (who, by. the liberality he
,Managers of the-
Liver • Theatre, has been permitted to accept of an engage-
ment,) Marquis de Muti Papazurri, Signors Deval and Marani,
Mr. George Holden, Mr. Caird, Mr. Gillows, Mr. Pemberton,
and Mr. Brown. The names of the other Performers will be
announced immediately.
Books of Subscription are open at Mr. Dassores, and at the
Newspaper Offices, where Tickets will be ready for delivery in
a few days.'
,
Subscription for the Two Concerts 14s. Os.
Single Ticket
. .

The second on

- GRAND ORATORIO,
AT THE ROYAL AMPHITHEATR
THE SEVEN TRUMPETS.
firIHE Nobility, Gentry, and the Public ar respectfully ba-
ll formed That
THREE SPIRITUAL CON RTS
Will take place in PASSION WEEK. whe the Grand Oratorio
of THE SEVEN TRUMPETS, corn used by Signor H. J.
PANOR24IO, will be performed, and ISCELLANEOUS
ACT, selected from the Works of Ha n Handel, and others.
The whole will be conducted by Signor H. J. PANORMO.
Principal Vocalists, Madame Panormo, Miss Leach, Miss
Bruce, Messrs. Dodd, Melvin, Pemberton, Davies, and Bed-
ford, with a numerous Chorus and an efficient Band.
Leader—Mr. G. Eyton.

Books of the words, price 6d. each, may be had at the doors.
Boxes, 4s.—Body, 3s.—Pit, 2s.—Gallery, ls. Children Half-
price, except to the Gallery.
Places may be taken at the Box-office from Elev.en till Four,
on Monday next.
Tickets and BillS of particulars may be had of the Music-
sellers, and at the Hubbard Gallery, 28, Lord-street.
Triasferrable Tiekets for the Three Concerts, Boxes. 105.6 d.
—Body, Bs.—Pit, ss.