The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-07-24
BY TELEGRAPH.
EUROPE.

EUROPE.
EXCITING SESSIONS OF THE BRITISH PARIIA-
MENT-PRoPesED PRoRoaATIoN AND TACTICS
OF THE GOVERNMENT.
LONDON, July 21.-In the House Of Lords
last night the Irish Church bill, as returned
froal the House Of Commons, was taken up.
Earl Granville complimented the Lords on the
ability and statesmanship developed in the late
debate and the moderation shown by the op-
position towards its close. The government
thought some Of their amen Giments good, some
bad, others quite inadmasslbe. He did not
CONSIDER the Commons had dealt supercilious-
~ or contemptuously with them, for out Of
sixty amendments only thirteen had been abb
solutely rejected. He Analysed the amend
ments having effect to re-endow what the bill
intended to d'sendow, and said concurrent en-
dowment, notwithstanding the ability with
which it had been supported, the government
was obliged to consider breach Of faith with
their constituents, while an overwhelming ma
jority Of the House Of Commons and public
opinion were opposed to it.
In respect TO the disposal of the surplus
fund, the more he saw and heard the more he
was convinced that it was disalyantageous to
keep the question open. apd he copdemued the
proposal to keep 2s 900 900 dangling before the
people to excite and stimulate agitation. He
urged the House not to adhere to these amend
ments, and proposed reinstating the words
struck out OF the preamble in the original
bill. r.
Lord Cairns complained in strong terms
that the governments had not adhered to Earl
Granviles pledge. that the Lords amendments
would be respectfully considered, for on the
faith OF this promise many who objected to the
bill on ITS own merits were induced to vote for
Q second reading. He thought Mr.. Gladstone
had used language in the other House un-
worthy OF himself and OF his position. He con-
tended that OF the amendments which hsd
been rejected oil except two had been disposed
of without the slightest consideration The
notifications made in the other amendments
were utterly iIlusory and unsatisfactory.
He hoped the House would insist on the
reservation Of the surplus for future disposi-
tion, and on the amendments with respect to
curates and to Communication life interests.
The remaining amendments, beng OF minor
importance, they might give up, in order not
to provoke needlessly q collision between the
two houses.
Earl Kimberly said the government could
not give way.
Earl Grey thought the words of the pream-
ble were offensive to the religious majority of
Ireland, and urged the government to concur
in the amendment. IT the bill failed on ac-
count Of it's. refusal to yield this point, it
would be the fault Of the government.
Lords Halifax. Clanrlcarde and Shaftesbury
supported the government.
Earl Russell favored the disestablishment
and disendowmens. subject TO existing rights.
He thought the words in the preamble unne-
cessary and impolitic. 1.-THE real object Of the
bill was to be declared, it should state that the
decision Of the last election was against all
Chu -ch establishments-thoseo of England and
Scotland "a xell as Ireland--and the s sxistenca
of the Irish Church ought to te made direct
issue.
He believed the preamble was capable Of any
Interpretation. He thought the grant Of
globes to all denominations was the wisest
plan for establishing religious equality: He
declared he would feel obliged to vote against
the government on the question of the pream-
BILE. Should the bill fail to pass, the govern
rnent would only have itself to blame. He
thought they ought to reciprocate the concili.
atory disposition manifested by Lord Cairns.
The Duke Of Argyle denied that the govern
ment desired to provoke collision between
the two houses Of Parliament. He denounced. /.
concurrent endowment, and defended the pro-
visions OF the bill as not only just but geuer-
Ous. u 7 u x S r
The Marquis Of Salisbury reproached the
government party for its change Of opinion
with respect to disestablishment and olsen.
dowment. Before taking Office it held them to
be distinct matters. Now it ulged tfat they
were bound together indlssolubly. He believ-
ed the adoption Of concurrent endowment
would have been wise and statesmanlike.
He opposed the preamble and the appro-
priation OF the surplus as false and foolish
effort Of the government to bind future Parlia-
ments. The government wished to guard
against the employment Of the surplus for re-
lgous purposes. He insisted that the Lords
had a clear and well defined duty to perform to
themselves in this matter. Ia resisting the
demands of the government they wero not re-
sisting the verdict Of the country, but the will
of q single individual. They had exhausted all
q forts at Cancellation and compromise. To
give way now would be to sacrifice the indie.
pendence OF ths> Peers as we'll as the Church
Earl Granville protested against the Ian.
guage applied to the government. and appeal
ed to the Lords to support the government in
this grave aud critical moment. The House
then divided on the motion Of Earl Granville
to'restore the, preamble with the folio wing re-
suit: For 9b. against 17S-major,ty against
the government 70.
Earl Granville then moved ON Adjournment
that be might consult his colleague and at
late hour the House adjourned.
EXCITING SCENES IN THE HOUSE OF LoRDs-rHE
PEERS GIVE WAY. AND A COMPROMISE rs Ao-
cEPTEDs
LONDON, July 23.-There was q full atten.
dance Of inc House OF Lords. many OF the
Commons being present. Lord Granville
opened the debate, stating that the ministers |
regarded the vote rejecting the preaAable Of the
Irish Church bill as grave affair. but were un.
willing to prevent the consideration of other |