The New York herald., 1868-06-07

The Church and State Question In Eng
Iand-Tbe Ministry and the Opposition.
In the HERALD of yesterday we published
cable despatch giving summary Of the pro-
ceedings which took place in the British House
of Commons on Friday night. The Protestant
Established Church Appointments Sus-
pensory bill was read and passed in
committee. It was not passed, how
ever, until some very dexterous movements
were made by certain friends of the Ministry
1t is the object of the bill to prevent all further
appointments to existing or possible vacancies
in the Irish Church Establishment until the
fate of such Establishment be finally deter
mined by act of Parliament It 80 happens
that in Ireland there are two other bodies be-
sides the Church established by law which re-
ceive State aid. These are the Presbyterians
and the Roman Catholics. The Presbyterians
have enjoyed since the time of William III.
special gift from the Grown, hence called Re
gium Donum. The grant is not large-has
never, in fact exceeded seventy pounds to
each minister, and, of course has done little
more than barely keep Presbyterianism alive
The Roman Catholics have since l845 received
an annual grant of thirty thousand
pounds-a grant for which they were in
debted to the catholic spirit of the late
Sir Robert Peel. 1t was moved as an amend
ment on Friday night, in the course of the
debate on the Irish Church, that similar sus-
pensory bill be passed in regard to the Re
gium Donum appointments and also in regard
to Maynooth College. The amendment was
negatived and the original motion carried by
a large majority, amid the ringing cheers of
the Gladstone liberals. The Suspensory bill
now awaits the decision of the Lords. Such
is the state of things up to the date of our
latest news.
The situation in England is peculiar and
deserving of special attention. For the first
time since the earlier years of George the
Third the Ministry, in spite of series of the
most damaging defeats, continues to hold the
reins of government. Nothing, in truth, of a
precisely similar kind has ever been witnessed
in the entire history of Parliamentary govern
ment in England. Mr.. Disraeli and his
friends retain Office with all the accompanying
emoluments and opportunities. Mr.. Gladstone
and his friends. without Office and the attendant
emoluments, opportunities and responsibilities,
do the legislation. In other words the op-
position rules the country in spite of
the Ministry, and, from the nature of
the case, without the advice or consent of the
ton, this itself is revolution with vengence.
The question which naturally arises to the
mind of the reader is why such state Of things
should be tolerated by party which commands
not only an unquestioned majority in the coun-
try, but, as the facts themselves show, sweep
ing majority in the House Of Commons. The
difficulty is not hard to explain. 1t has been
the custom in England since the government
began to be conducted by responsible minis
ters for the chief of the Cabinet, on the occa-
sion of an adverse vote-certainly so soon as it
became manifest that on any great leading
question he was in hopeless minority-to see
his Sovereign and give place to the leader Of
the opposition. 1t has not only been the Gus
tom, but it has been point Of honor which no
leading statesman up to the present time has
ever dreamt of violating Pitt, Wellington,
Melbourne, Russell, Peel, Palmerston, Derby,
each in his day by voluntary resignation
recognized the principle that the majority, not
the minority, should rule the country. II was
reserved for Mr. Disraeli, who is evidently
possessed of that tenacity which is charac-
teristic Of his race, to ignore this ancient GUS
tom and to despse this point of honor. The
plain reason why Mr.. Disraeli is not driven
from power by an actual vote Of want Of conf
dence Is to be found in the fact that In the
event Of vote Of want of confidence being
passed he would, as he has threatened to do,
| appeal to the country. This is the whip which
| he holds over the members Of the House of
Commons. A general election would not
conduce to Mr.. Disraels advantage it would
not establish him in his position; but IL would
prove both an annoyance and an expense to
every member of the House. II is provided
IN the new Reform act that whenever bills
similar to that which has been passed for
England shall have been passed for Scotland
and Ireland Parliament shall be dissolved and
an appeal made to the new constituencies. The
Scotch and Irish bills have not yet passed into
. law, consequently dissolution Of Parliament
a anI . a.