The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-07-22

JemptuOuSly WlJn JueH, LOT, out OF Sixty
only thirteen had been abso-
lutely rejected. He urged the House not to
adhere to these amendments, and proposed
the reinsertion of the words struck out of the
preamble of the original bill.
Lord Cairns complained in strong terms
that the Government had not adhered to Earl
Granville's pledge, that the Lords amend
ments would be respectfully considered, for,
on the faith of this promise, many who OBJ
jected to the bill on its own merits were in
duced to vote for the second reading. He
thought Mr.. Gladstone had used language
in the other house unworthy of himself and
of his position. He contended that of the
amend dments that had been rejected, all ex-
cept two had been disposed of without the
slightest consideration. He hoped the House
would insist on the reservation of the surplus
for future disposition, and the amendments
with respect to curates, and to the commuta-
tion of life interests.
Earl Kimberly said the Government could
not give way.
Lord Russell favored dsestablishment and
dsendowment subject TO existing rights lie
thought the words in the preamble unneces-
sary and impoltic. If the real object of the
bill was to be declared, it should state that the
decision of the last election was against the
church establishments, those of England and
Scotland as well as Ireland, and the existence
of the Irish Church ought to be made direct
issue. He believed the preamble was capable
Of any Interpretation. He thought the grant
of globes to all denominations was the best
plan of establishing religious equality. He
declared he would feel obliged to wage war
against the Government on the question of
the preamble. Should the bill fail to pass,
the Government would only have itself to
blame. He thought they ought to reciprocate
the conciliatory disposition manifested 10y
Lord Cairns.
The Duke of Argyle denied that the Gov
eminent desired to provoke a collision be-
tween the houses of Parliament. He de-
nounced concurrent endowment, and de-
Tended the provisions of the bill as not only
just, but generous.
The Marquis of Salisbury reproached the
Government party for its change of opinion
with respect to dsestablishment and disen-
dowment. He opposed the preamble and the
appropriation of the surplus as a false and
foolish effort of the Government to bind
future Parliaments. The Government wished
to guard against the employment of the sur
plus for religious purposes. He insisted the
Lords had clear and well-defned duty to
perform to themselves in this matter in re-
sisting the demands of the Government.
They were not resisting the verdict of the
country, but the will of a single individual.
They had exhausted all efforts at Cancellation
and compromise. To give way now would be
to sacrifice the independence of the press as
well as the Church.
Earl Granville protested against the Ian
guage applied to the Government, and ap-
pealedto the Lords to support the Government
in this grave and critical moment.
The House then divided on the motion
of Earl Granville to restore the preamble,
with the following result:-For, 80; against,
173. Majority against the Government, 7S.
Earl Granville moved an adjournment,
that he might consult his colleagues, and at
late hour the House adjourned
A short time after the division against the
Government in the House of Lords had been
declared, Mr.. Gladstone entered the House
of Commons His appearance was the signal
for a remarkable outburst of enthusiasm.
Cheer after cheer came from the Liberals.
The business of the session was entirely sus-
pended, and it was some minutes before the
excitement subsidized and the House resumed
its proceedings.
The press to-day is occupied on the action
of the House of Lords. The Times is salts
fed the bill may be carried this session if the
principal agents on both sides divest them
selves of the passions and preiudices by which
they are influenced. The imminent peril is
that the heat of Parliament will be carried
into the Cabinet, and hasty resolution be
taken to defer the progress on the bill until
another session, to the distraction of the
country and immeasurable hurt of the Church.
The Star says the Lords have rushed upon
certain consequences in defying the national
will. The division of last night has revealed
the spirit in which the bill has been opposed
from the first.
The Telegraph thinks the Lords have vir-
tually settled the fate of the bill for this ses-
sion. A new bill will be presented, more
stringent in form, and it must be accepted.
If anything was needed to damage the Church
and arouse the country to passionate resis-
tance, the reckless debate of yesterday has
furnished it, The country has reached O
great crisis. The nature of the course which
the Ministers should adopt admits of nc
doubt
The NearS considers the country in the
midst of constitutional crisis The Lords,
in giving full swing to their reckless impulses,
have rushed into collision with the Govern
| ment The duties and responsibilities of the
situation should be weighed by the ministers
with the calmness and confidence of men sure
| of ultimate and speedy victory. The bill when
presented at the autumn session, will become
| a law with great speed. The Lords will not
require the threat of the creation of new
peers to lead them to assent to a more
| stringent measure. They certainly will moi
| be allowed to oppose themselves a third time
| to the will of the nation. The country must
| decide whether an irresponsible debating
society is to be allowed to interpose betweeI
| it and its deliberate purposes and conviction
constitutionally expressed.
THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES..
| Arr cd uT n ha NJ al