The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-07-13


on the woolsack the debate on the second reading OF
the Established Church Qreland) bill was resumed
srv HdHe S Sa accepted Sm ann
from Lord Grey, the type Of crotchety politicians,
the reproach that the disestablishment OF the Iris
Church had been brought within the domain OF
party questions out OF the region OF abstract specu
aton. lie defended the bin on the ground Of
economy OF the funds of the Irish Church. This
was its object. Members of the other House who
had voted for the first resolution might consistently
hereafter vote against measure OF disendowment
and Peers who voted for this bill might con-
OF disestabshment. Nor would this bin kin the
tensions 1t would In all probability, insure speedy
compromise among religious parties In Ireland, and,
sent Of this House. AS to its origin he denied while
severely rebuking Lord Derby for his "parody" OF
Mr.. Gladstone's speech aud opponents speeches in
general the cogency OF the accusations against the
late Ministry for not having brought forward this
question OF the Irish Church while absorbed by the
conspiracy, though not connected directly with the
Irish ~, CHURCH WAS most most occasion snm
o e nas been 'a To- ne
sity Of diminishing the traditional disatiection
which was the pdouun OF Fenanism. The
present government as represented by the Secretary
for Ireland (since he could not appreciate the Duke
OF Marlborough's distinction between endOwing pro-
evinced sense of the necessity OF doing something
But it had done nothing. The occupants OF the
Episcopal bench, with the esprit De corps existing
between all established churches, had adopted the
ecclesiastical motto, "Non possuneus." Hence the
task was forced on the liberal party. And in the
plan 1t had chosen he was convinced 1t had decided
rightly in not attempting to effect that for which,
independent of other objections, the funds would
have proved totally inadequate-viz., ndiscrminate
religious endowment. Their plan had been assailed
as a violation. OF the rights Of property But the
present question was one OF policy not of property
1t was not the fact that the property enjoyed
by the Irish Church was the property OF corpora
tlon, for it was the property OF any numberof sepa-
porate property was essentially dinerent from the
right to private property; and the State guided by
conscience enlightened by reason, had perfect right
other public uses He himself, as public man, felt
free, and even bound to restore me property Qfths
grantv unjust use; and believed, Protestant though
he was Of Professionals that the interests of Protest
anSism in ireland would suffer no detrimsnt
speech. the title. "Presbyterian.n He asserted
intention to disendow, and the expediency and
justice OF this he denied. The circumstances OF the
sa charc nation or Church in its youth
could dispense with endowments. nations youth
was the time Of endowments; but o church which
had once been endowed formed. as did men, habits
from these circumstances and 1t was ungenerous
and unfair, in spite of Mr. Surgeons congratula-
tons to the Irish Church its threatened fate, to
abandon it, despoed Of its ancient endowment, to
unequal conflict with religious bodies which had
not been endowed. He maintained l that to conils-
still the Church OF ST. Patrick, would, besides being
most unjust to the seven hundred thousand Pro.
itself, and would be to aot the penalty before
allotting the blame-6a,ne ,ohic1 oen the accounts
an to the English government, schich had as Boui-
ter, SpeRser, Stcly p,OUed, made the IRISH Church
the naeanest tnst,71'aent OF our nets,7te He urged,
finally, the rejection OF this measure, what might
be- he would repeat, represented as an attempt to
buy or assassns as unfair, since it made the Irish
aud ungratefu since it would deprive ireland Of the
most intelligent and energetic class OF the commu
nifty, and as O scheme which would, in Difference to
the sentimental grievance which persons felt at the
possession OF property by their neghbors, endanger
the highest religious and political interests OF the
country.
Lord sHATTEsBuRy was vehemently opposed to the
dsestablishment Of the Irish Church. He, moreover,
considered the bill feeble, meagre and Insignificant.
But he feared that its rejection on the eve OF an cleo
ton might be used to induce feeling that the House
was opposed TO full inquiry on this subject and
might thus prove injurious TO the Irish Church. He
concluded by announcing his intention, out OF re-
gard to the opinion OF friends OF taking no part in
The DUKE or RICHMOND thought the minority argu-
ment dangerous one. AT all events'the Legislature
would certainly not IN past times have entertained
plan disesablishing the Irish Church, and the
proportion of its members to the population had in-
creased there less reason for doing 1t now than
formerly. lie believed that the Irish Church had
perfectly good title TO its endowments and that 10
deprive it of them would be on all grounds npoiitic
Lord BANDoN considered that the Irish Church
could make out good historical claim to its esta ies,
which were not, IN fact, spoils. OF the Roman
Catholic Church, and that there was no connection
between Fenianlsm and this question. lie had been
history of the sorceress Medea The Church OF Eng
land and OF Ireland one, and injury to the one
would be injury to the other As for the question OF
the interests OF Ireland supposed To be likely TO be
promoted by this bill, the best thing for Ireland
would be to give it peace and develop It's natural re-
sources, but politically to leave 1t alone.
Lord GRANARD thought there was good deal in
the argument for the bill based upon Fenianism, and
very little in that against 1t derived from Che proba
bty that establishment would have the effect OF
doing away with the clergy IN their character OF
resident gentry.
been used In avoiding the real question ut ISSUE and
throwing dirt on opponents; and he drew par
members OF the houses of Russell and STANLEY:
Passing lightly by objections to the bill on points OF
detail, which might be easily corrected in committee,
and the advantages alleged to accrue to Ireland
from the presence Of the clergy as body Of resident
gentry he contcnded that the Irish Church not only
were the only true objects OF church, but worked
great harm by keeping up among the people tue
feeling Of an Inequality Rad Is s
given at the Union, been redeemed. As 1t
was, cure OF this grevous inequality was impera.
thought, but he thought no longer, that an endow-
ment OF the other religious bodies In Ireland would
Sp ready ret the Of reef WHICH
this bill contained Notwithstanding its approval by
majority OF the House of Commons; but he warned
them, by reference to the precedents OF the Catholic
Relief, Corn Law Repeal and Reform bills, that IL
this bill were rejected bills would be sent up from
the other House by still increasing maiorities for the
disestabshment ana dsendowment OF the Irish
Church. lie proceeded to defend the conduct OF the
late Ministry In not having undertaken a measure
Of this sort together with Reform bill, and con-
Guided by expressing his confident conviction that
none Of the fatal consequences predicted by the OPP
ponents OF this bill would follow.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that this bill protested
to be % mere corollary, aud that the proposition
whence II followed which had not been brought, In
deed, before THIS House, was embodied In the rcso
luton OF tae House OF Commons that the Church OF
Ireland should cease TO exist as an Established
Church, which implied both abandonment and
at stake. But the bill, the very title OF which was
missioner, was, apart from the consequences which
II involved. full OF faults OF detail that the only
possible way OF rerodying 1t in committee would be
by striking out every clause. BY IL the succession
OF the Church, uninterrupted for ages, would
be broken OF, not because something had
been determined, bnt because II might be-
with the result that the national Church would
be placed In worse position than any voluntary
Church, and that the working in the different do
ceses OF the island would become entirely unequal.
In the course Of avery elaborate review OF the BILL