283.415 
 
 SK4s 
 
MR. SHEIL’S SPEECH 
 
 THE 
 
 UPON 
 
 IRISH CHURCH 
 
 
 IN THE 
 
 HOUSE OF COMMONS, 
 
 ON THE 2.3d OF JULY, 1835. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 HENRY HOOPER, 13, PALL-MALL EAST. 
 
A C< 
 
 
 / « . L 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 Printed by William Clowes and Sons, 
 14, Charing Cross. 
 
7 Ocf &7 
 
 MR. SHEIL S SPEECH. 
 
 The Honourable Baronet who spoke last, and who de¬ 
 signates himself as one of the representatives of the intel¬ 
 lect of Ireland, (intellect appears to be an item of Protestant 
 monopoly,) contradicted in his peroration the bold asser¬ 
 tion with which his exordium opened. At the outset he 
 talks ol those Irish Members who dissent from him, and 
 coincide with the Government, as persons of very small 
 account; at the conclusion, he describes their great and bane¬ 
 ful power. The Honourable Baronet indeed, and those 
 with whom he is in the habit of acting, have had an 
 ample experience of the efficiency, the energy, the vigi¬ 
 lance, and the union of that body which he affects to treat 
 with disregard, but to which, in his arguments, he offers the 
 acknowledgment of his involuntary respect. We are the 
 majority; the great majority of the Irish Members. Among 
 us are men of as high station, and as large possessions, as 
 the Honourable Baronet: we speak the sentiments of the 
 great mass of the Irish people on a question that almost 
 exclusively, and most nearly touches the interests of Ireland. 
 If for a series of years the majority of Scotch representatives 
 y had, upon a Scotch question, declared a strong and unvarying 
 opinion, there are few would suggest that, to their opinions, 
 no attention ought to be paid ; and when, by the majority 
 of Irish Members, it is insisted that justice and expediency 
 require that a particular policy should be adopted in refer¬ 
 ence to a subject by which Ireland and her tranquillity are 
 so immediately affected, it is strange that any individual 
 , should speak with disparagement of those by whom mil¬ 
 lions of his countrymen are represented. I have thought it 
 right to advert to a topic on which the honourable gentle¬ 
 man has indulged in insinuations by which our hostility may 
 be imbittered; but our real influence never can be impaired. 
 
 The measure which the Government has brought for- 
 
 O ward, is founded upon that principle, for the adoption 
 
 ' of which those who know Ireland best have uniformly 
 
 %! 
 
4 
 
 contended, as affording the only basis oil which a sa¬ 
 lutary system of corrective legislation can be founded. 
 That principle is now for the first time embodied with 
 distinctness in an Act of Parliament. Its germ was in¬ 
 deed to be found in the Church Temporalities’ Bill, which 
 is commonly known by the name of Stanley’s Act. The 
 noble Lord opposite, in the suspension clause, had the me¬ 
 rit of furnishing a most valuable precedent, and indeed (al¬ 
 though unconscious of it) laid down, in that Act, the princi¬ 
 ple upon which this Bill in a great measure rests. 
 
 Lord Stanley. No, no. 
 
 Mr. Sheil. That Bill contained a clause providing for the 
 suspension of benefices. 
 
 Lord Stanley. For what purpose ? 
 
 Mr. Sheil. 1 take not the will for the deed, but the deed 
 for the will. I care little about the purpose contemplated 
 by the noble Lord, but look to the results to which his 
 measure must lead. He provided that, in certain cases, 
 whole districts of country might be left without a Pro¬ 
 testant clergyman, and that in those districts the Church 
 should have no external visible sign. No spiritual con¬ 
 solation, as it is called, was to be administered to the Pro¬ 
 testant parishioners in the localities which were to fall within 
 the provisions of the noble Lord’s celebrated measure; no 
 opportunity for conversion was to be given to the Roman 
 Catholic inhabitants. That Bill went much farther than the 
 present project; because, by the latter, a Protestant traveller, 
 whose itinerant orthodoxy chances to stand in need of spiritual 
 aid, is to find a Protestant clergyman at hand, and bound to 
 administer to his religious need; a stipend is to that end 
 provided: but by the Bill of the noble Lord all trace of 
 Protestantism was to be swept away, and unmolested Popery 
 was to be left in complete and undisputed possession of the 
 ground from which, and under the auspices of the noble 
 Lord, its competitor was to be driven. It concerns the 
 House little what object the noble Lord might have had in 
 view: the inference from his measures is irresistible. Such 
 premises are supplied by his expedients, as to afford an irre¬ 
 sistible conclusion against the policy to which he still in¬ 
 consistently and obstinately adheres. Did not the Right 
 Honourable Baronet, the Member for Cumberland, on a 
 former occasion, admit the force of these observations, when 
 he expressed his regret that he had ever given his assent to 
 that clause in the Church Temporalities’ Bill ? I wish that 
 he were here, in order that he might give upon this sub- 
 
ject some more satisfactory explanation than his noble 
 confederate can furnish. On ordinary occasions it is per¬ 
 haps sufficient that the noble Lord should be present, as 
 representative of his Right Honourable friend; there is 
 such a unity of sentiment, such a singleness of object, on 
 the part of both those distinguished associates, that the opi¬ 
 nions of the one always afford an adequate intimation of the 
 views of the other; but, in the present instance, it is not un¬ 
 reasonable to desire that the Right Honourable Baronet should 
 have condescended to be present. His speech was of such a 
 character—he has assailed his opponents in terms so unqua¬ 
 lified—that, after the delivery of a vituperative harangue, 
 he ought to have attended the House, and encountered those 
 to whom he had offered defiance. I own that I was anxious 
 that the Right Honourable Baronet should be present, when 
 to his historical references from Clarendon an answer, which 
 he might have anticipated, is given. That Right Honour¬ 
 able Baronet, not satisfied with invoking the religious preju¬ 
 dices of the English people, has resorted to citations, of which 
 the object appears to be to awaken a feeling of alarm in the 
 mind of the highest personage in the realm. Was it to 
 produce an impression at Windsor that the Right Honour¬ 
 able Baronet last night assigned as a cause of the fall of the 
 
 o o 
 
 monarchy, the abandonment, by Charles the First, of the 
 interests of the Church ? It is not a little amusing to hear 
 tlie Right Honourable Baronet avail himself of the same 
 
 o 
 
 expedients which were employed by Mr. Croker in his speech 
 against Reform. To what a pass has an ex-Reformer ar¬ 
 rived, when from Mr. Croker he borrows, without acknow¬ 
 ledgment, the arguments employed by the literary leader of 
 conservatism, and against the measure in which the Right 
 Honourable Baronet and the noble Lord bore so conspicuous 
 a part. But did he forget, when he was quoting Clarendon, 
 and describing the steps which led Charles to the fatal window- 
 in Whitehall, that the noble Lord opposite had given of those 
 events a very different account; and in taking Mr. Croker 
 to task, had uttered the following striking and fervid passage ? 
 This was Lord Stanley’s language on the occasion to which 
 I refer,—“ At length, when Charles wanted to force Episco¬ 
 pacy upon Scotland, &c. he was forced to call together that 
 Parliament which he had for so many years endeavoured to 
 dispense with. But they knew him too well to put any 
 trust in him. When he spoke of grievances, they spoke of 
 subsidies; and wffien they properly refused them without 
 better security than promises, the insincerity of which they 
 
6 
 
 were convinced of, he had recourse to a prompt and abrupt 
 dissolution, and thus added wanton insult to continued in¬ 
 jury. He was soon again compelled to call them together. 
 Again he thought to temporize, and again he met the same 
 resistance; and. his tyranny ended, as I hope tyranny ever 
 will end, in base, and timid, and degrading concession.'’ 
 Such is the account given by the noble Lord opposite, of 
 transactions which his colleague in the opposition has endea¬ 
 voured to apply, in a manner so different, in order to awaken 
 apprehensions, where I trust that no susceptibility of impres¬ 
 sions so erroneous ever will be found. But in the crisis of their 
 political fortunes, the opponents of this Bill resort to every 
 means by which, in any quarter, excitement may be gene¬ 
 rated. Here all the opponents (the strangely combined 
 opponents of the Government) are resolved to try their 
 strength. No stand was made on the Corporation Bill; the 
 Conservatives had the virtue not to resist, what they had not 
 the courage to propose. But on the Irish Church, prejudice 
 may be roused, fanaticism may be kindled, misrepresenta¬ 
 tion may be circulated; accordingly, round the standard of 
 sinecurism a rally is made, and an alliance (a holy one) 
 formed between the Conservative party (whom no one can 
 fairly blame) and the ex-Reformers, the antagonists of their 
 old friends, and the friends of their old antagonists—dealers 
 in pious philippics and religious intrigue. To popular ex¬ 
 citement, connected with the old horror of Popery, it is 
 manifest that these united forces look; but they will find (to 
 use a phrase of the honourable Member for Tam worth), that 
 they mistake the echo of their own delusions for the confirma¬ 
 tion of public opinion. Where are the petitions of the 
 people ? Have even the Cumberland yeomen stirred ? We 
 have heard of a declaration from a fanatical Scotch Synod; 
 but from the mass of the Scotch people has any remonstrance 
 been preferred? How did the majority of Scotch Mem¬ 
 bers vote on the resolution on which this Bill is founded ? 
 No, Sir; the people of that country look to this Government 
 with a confidence which appeals to antiquated theology can¬ 
 not disturb. They see that, in the short period during which 
 they held office, they have carried through this House one of 
 the most important measures of Reform which has ever yet been 
 propounded; that they have carried it without the aid of the 
 Members for Cumberland or Lancashire—without whom it 
 now appears possible that a Government can go on; and 
 seeing such practical benefits already effected, they will 
 listen with incredulity to those whose zeal for religion is not 
 
7 
 
 a little heightened by their emotions as partisans. Out 
 of the House their policy will fail; and in the House the 
 stratagem to which they have had recourse in moving an 
 instruction would be of little avail. The course pursued is 
 remarkable. After the second reading they oppose the prin¬ 
 ciple; and before the House goes into Committee, they 
 criticize the details. In the last session they resisted the 
 Tithe Bill in the second reading, although it did not include 
 any new appropriation: this Bill, besides the appropriation 
 clause, contains much that is condemned, and contains 
 nothing which is approved; yet the second reading passes, 
 not only without division, but without comment. You desire 
 to divide the Bill into two parts: having done so, which will 
 you select ? You disapprove of the entire in its aggregate 
 form: which of the fractions will you approve, if your in¬ 
 struction should be carried ? There is not a principle, there 
 is not a detail in this Bill which has not been the subject of 
 condemnation. The men who would subtract 25/. per cent, 
 from the revenues of the clergy by the Tory Bill, (which fell 
 stillborn, and whose authors died in political childbed,) cry 
 out against any diminution of their incomes; and the great 
 author of the metallic currency, who has reduced rents 50/. 
 per cent., insists that the Church ought not to be affected by 
 the revolutions of Mark-lane. Will the great Cumberland po¬ 
 litical economist, who would have subtracted 30/. per cent, 
 from the demands of every mortgagee in the country; will he 
 give to the opinion of the eminent transmuter of paper into 
 gold, the benefit of his disinterested coincidence on this head ? 
 Talk, indeed, of not reducing the compositions ! If there had 
 not been any compositions, tithes would have fallen one-half. 
 How do they stand in this country? A gentleman, a 
 considerable proprietor in Warwickshire (whose name I 
 shall mention to any body who desires it), told me that for 
 his lay tithes, not very long ago, he received upwards of 
 2,000/. a year, and that they have since fallen to 800/. 
 
 It is insisted that there will be no surplus. If there be 
 not, no practical harm will be done to the Church; but the 
 recognition of the principle will be a just and conciliatory 
 tribute to the reasonable feelings of the Irish people. But 
 how do you make out that there will be no surplus ? You 
 expatiate on the poverty of the Irish Church. Why did 
 you always refuse a committee on the subject ? It was re¬ 
 peatedly proposed by the honourable Member for Middlesex. 
 You state that the revenues have been exaggerated; but 
 what test will you employ to ascertain them ? What is the 
 
8 
 
 amount of the bishops’ revenues? You say that they do 
 not exceed 130,000?. a year; but their amount really is 
 150,000/., as returned by the dignitaries themselves. Whe- 
 therYHis^ ought to be conclusive I will not determine; but 
 this I do know, that in calculating the net income, the 
 bishops have deducted agents’ fees and all expenses inci¬ 
 dental to the collection of their fortunes. The income of 
 the Archbishop of Armagh, which is now 17,000/. a 
 year, will rise to 23,000/. a year byj his own return, and 
 thafc neither this increase nor any other is included in the 
 150,000/. It is stated that the glebe lands of Ireland are 
 worth only 70,000/. a year. Even the honourable Member 
 for Tamworth has stated that Lord Althorp has underrated 
 the value of the glebe lands : they are 85,000 Irish acres 
 (five Irish make eight English). Most glebes have good 
 houses on them, and 120,000/. a year is not an exaggerated 
 estimate. But why has not a return of their value been ob¬ 
 tained ? Again, on what authority is the amount of Minis¬ 
 ters’ money set forth ? I come to a most important item. Minis¬ 
 ters’ money (a tax raised on every house), which illustrates the 
 spirit of depreciation with which the wealth of the Church is 
 reduced by its advocates. I hold a return of the amount 
 of the property of the minor ecclesiastical cor poratio ns: it 
 is stated, by the return, to be 57, 000 /. a year. At what 
 sum did Lord Althorp, before that return was macle, estimate 
 this portion of the ecclesiastical possessions? At 2,000/. 
 a year. But it is alleged a large portion of that sum is ap¬ 
 plicable to the reparation of cathedrals. Granted : but still 
 is it not Church property ? and is it not most unfair to ex¬ 
 clude it from the account ? Why are the surplice fees 
 never mentioned ? They are not fixed, permanent property : 
 true;—but in estimating the means of livelihood of the 
 clergy, we must take this detail of sustenance into considera¬ 
 tion. Thus it is manifest that there never has been a just 
 and full account of Church property; and if there be not, 
 the blame lies with those who have refused committees, and 
 never given us access to the true sources of information. 
 I venture to say, that if to-morrow a committee was 
 moved for on the Irish Church, it would be opposed by the 
 Conservatives and their associates. But the real object of 
 the opponents of the Bill in the course which they have 
 adopted, is, by running into collateral topics, to lead away 
 the attention of Parliament from the simple question. Whether 
 the resolution passed deliberately by the House should be 
 rescinded ? That resolution has nothing to do with details. 
 
9 
 
 It affirmed a great principle; and the Conservatives having 
 been flung by that resolution out of power, endeavour by 
 indirect means to nullify, and render it of no avail. But to that 
 resolution the House would adhere ; and if the Bill shall return 
 from the Lords mutilated in that essential particular, this House 
 will repudiate the wretched fragment. That resolution was 
 passed without the Report. The Report gave it the strongest 
 corroboration. It has changed the opinions of the Member 
 for Berkshire, who made a great sacrifice of his personal feel¬ 
 ings and his parliamentary attachments to his duty. To the 
 leading features in the Report, and to no other, I shall 
 refer. What has become of the three millions of Protestants, 
 of which the Member for the University of Oxford has so 
 often said so much? There appear to be o nly 852 ,000 ' 
 Epis copa l Protestants in Ireland, and even they include the 
 Methodists, who are attached by so slender a tie to the 
 Church ; "ithey have no episcopal ordination, no imposition of 
 hands (I cannot understand by what medium their clergy 
 receive the Divine Spirit). They may have the same faith, 
 but they have not the same discipline nor the same govern¬ 
 ment ; and an alien priesthood will soon become a hostile 
 one. But look to the Presbyterians. I n t he province of 
 Armagh (the north of Ireland), the fortress of o rthodoxy, 
 there are upwards of 600 ,000 PresByterian^~and th ere 
 are not 600,000 Episcopal Protestants . What inference 
 do I draw from thence? This! that the allegation that 
 the Church is the tie between England and Ireland is fal- ^ 
 lacious. The Presbyterians are attached to England; they 
 are hostile to the Church (so says the moderator of the Ul¬ 
 ster Synod, Mr. Montgomery). The conclusion is obvious : 
 you do not need the Church treasure to supply the chest, / , 
 out of which the garrison of I reland (t he Irish P rotestants! / 
 are to be remunerated for their mercenary allegiance. Thus , 
 far for the North: descend to other districts. I shall 
 take one only—the province of T uam . What is its eccle¬ 
 siastical wealth? The returns~sKow that the episcopal 
 revenue in that province amounts to 22,000/. a year, at the 
 least. The glebe lands, prebendary revenue, and tithes 
 amount to at least 100,000/., including the first item. I 
 believe that it is much more. This is a large sum. \ 
 Now comes the question, How many Protestants are there 
 in the province?” There are 1,100,000 Catholics; and 
 what will the House think?—300,000 Protestants? No. 1 
 200,000?—No. One?—No, no; only 45,000. Gracious 
 Godl 100,000/. a year for the “spiritual consolation” of ) 
 
10 
 
 45,000 Protestants! This is in itself most gross; but con¬ 
 trast makes it monstrous. Turn from Tuam to a neighbour¬ 
 ing country,—not France, because there is a foolish notion 
 that the French are all infidels, and therefore no analogy can 
 be derived from their example : turn to a country just near 
 you, where there is great zeal in religion; a zeal which Pro¬ 
 testants might regard as almost equivalent to fanaticism— 
 turn to Belgium, your a 
 
 much—4he Catholic country with a Protestant king (we 
 Catholics are, after all, not so very exacting)—turn to 
 Belgium, and what state of things do you find there? 
 Four millions of Catholics. What hierarchy suffices for 
 that number? One archbishop and four bishops. How 
 much money do they receive ?—for that, after all, is the ques¬ 
 tion—17,000/. a year, by which the seminaries attached 
 to their sees, as well as their own "dignities, are sustained. 
 The‘Irish' 'Primate"vtitii 23,000/. aT“yeaf7”ahd the whole 
 Belgian hierarchy, and all their establishments, with 
 only 17,000/.! Pass to the priesthood. Here is the 
 Belgium budget. I have the official document. The 
 entire church establishment of Belgium does not cost more 
 than the sum devoted to the salvation of 45,000 Pro¬ 
 testants in the province of Tuam; and mark—the duties of 
 the Catholic clergy are infinitely more laborious. The prac¬ 
 tice of confession is alone sufficient to render the functions of 
 the Catholic priest far more onerous than those of the Pro¬ 
 testant pastor. And, with this small sum, religion thrives in 
 Belgium (religion never dies except of pecuniary repletion) ; 
 while the Protestant Church in Ireland, with all its wealth, 
 makes in conversion no way. How much more rational 
 it is to appeal to the example of the Belgian people than 
 to the doctrines, the detestable doctrines, of a Belgian 
 professor, and to try the Catholic religion by the practice 
 of a great body of its professors, than to determine it by 
 ponderous volumes of exploded theology, which give 
 aliment to prejudices viler than the worms by which those 
 tomes of virulent divinity are consumed. I n Belgium 
 the Protestant cl ergy are supported by grants made by 
 aTJafholTc Parliament, and not oidy is not the allowance a 
 narrow one, but, in consideration of the charges attendant on 
 the Protestant pastor, he receives a larger stipen d tha n the. 
 Roman Catholic rector. The statesmen of Exeter Hall, 
 however, shutting - out these facts, would blow the dust 
 that covers the works of Dens into the eyes of the Bri¬ 
 tish people. Because there are abominable opinions in 
 
 lly, for which you have sacrificed so 
 
11 
 
 Dens*, there are to be abominable sinecures in Ireland; 
 because priests are charged with a disposition to propa¬ 
 gate religion with the sword, parsons are to levy tithes 
 with the bayonet ? Are you to have your Rathcormacs, be¬ 
 cause we have had our auto-da-fes ? Look, I say it again, to 
 the Belgian Catholic Church—its tolerance, its small cost to 
 
 * Since this speech was spoken, the copy of Dens, which was in 
 the possession of Dr. Doyle, has been put into my hands. A com¬ 
 mentary is attached, in the hand-writing of that eminent prelate, to 
 the passages which have excited some sensation in this country. To 
 the question, “ An hccretici , recte puniuntur morte ?” Dens answers 
 in the affirmative. Dr. Doyle annexes the following pithy remark to 
 the text, “ Shockingly false." Dens appeals to the old Jewish law. 
 Dr. Doyle says, “ a theocracy is no rule for us.” Dens lays it down, 
 “ Infideles baptizatipossunt compelli .” Dr. Doyle observes, “ Domi - 
 nus non indiget auxilio hominum: non sic docuerunt Apostoli 
 
 The opinions stated by Dr. Doyle in manuscript notes upon Dens, 
 are of the same liberal and enlightened character as those which he 
 uniformly expressed in his admirable writings. In his reply to Dr. 
 Magee, he says, “ If the person who is in error has been seduced into 
 it by others, if he have received it as an inheritance from his fathers, 
 and if his education, his habits, his passions, his interests, his con¬ 
 nexions, raise a barrier about him which the light of truth cannot, 
 morally speaking, penetrate, or the force of argument approach, still 
 less break down; to cherish for such a person any other feeling than 
 that of the most unmixed and ardent charity, would not only be un¬ 
 christian, but inhuman; to consign such a man to future suffering 
 on account of his error, would be an usurpation of the divine know¬ 
 ledge and power ; and whosoever should pass judgment on him, should 
 fear that a similar judgment without mercy would be passed upon 
 himself.” 
 
 Those who ascribe to Roman Catholics an intolerant spirit, 
 ought to ] recollect that in the Protestant Church the doctrine of 
 exclusive salvation is strenuously maintained. “ Unless a man 
 doth keep entire and inviolate the Catholic faith, without doubt he 
 shall perish everlastingly.”—Atlianasian Creed. The 18th article of 
 the Thirty-Nine says, “ They also are to be held accursed that pre¬ 
 sume to say that every man shall be saved by the law or sect which 
 he professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that 
 law, and the light of nature.” 
 
 In the Confession of Faith of the Scotch Church, Article 17, it is 
 laid down, that “out of the Kirk there is neither life nor eternal feli¬ 
 city to be hoped for : and that it is blasphemy to affirm that men who 
 live according to equity and justice shall be saved, in whatever reli¬ 
 gion they have lived.” The French Protestant Catechism holds, “ that 
 no one obtains pardon of his sins who is not incorporated with the 
 people of God, and the unity of the Church, out of which there is 
 nothing but death and damnation .” 
 
 o . 
 
 Of the mitigation given to a tenet which is certainly no longer 
 adopted in its rigour by the Roman Catholic Church, but is mer¬ 
 cifully explained away by the benevolent spirit of some of its most 
 eminent divines, an account is given with great eloquence by Lord 
 Shrewsbury, in his “Reasons for not taking the Test.” 
 
12 
 
 the State, its humble and apostolic circumstance, a priesthood 
 without wealth, a hierarchy without pomp—turn from thence 
 to your Irish Church ;—to the spirit of the Gospel, deter¬ 
 mine which is most conformable. But I may be told that I 
 ought not to seek in a foreign country for illustration—be it 
 so. I appeal t o Scotland . The Right Honourable Baronet, 
 the Member for Cumberland, has invited me to cross the 
 border. He tells me that some Scotch Synod or other 
 has interfered in Irish affairs. I stop not to inquire into 
 their discretion ; I stop not to ask whether they, whose ances¬ 
 tors revolted against episcopacy, and won the enjoyment of 
 their religion with their broad swords, and established the 
 great principle, that the Church of the minority should not 
 live at the cost of the majority of the people, are justified 
 in taking part with eight hundred thousand against seven 
 millions, including 600,000 Presbyterians, who bear to the 
 Irish Church as great a disrelish as the Roman Catholic 
 Irish people. Putting these considerations aside, I ask this 
 plain question. How much does the Scotch Church cost? 
 Notjcertainly 300,000?. a year. There are nearly two IrniP" 
 lions of churchmen in Scotland ; they have less than 300,000/. 
 a year (I really believe less) for their spiritual wants. There 
 are in Ireland not half the number, and three times as much 
 money is dedicated to their salvation. If the religion of two 
 millions of churchmen in Scotland costs so much, how much 
 ought the religion of eight hundred thousand cost in Ireland? 
 By what rule of proportion is that problem in church arith¬ 
 metic to be solved ? But it is said that each individual Scotch 
 clergyman receives a comfortable stipend. Compare the 
 thousands a year payable to an Irish sinecurist with the 
 few hundreds payable to a Scotch working clergyman, and 
 what inference will be deduced ? When did this compassion 
 for the poor Irish curates with large families arise ? When 
 to their conservative sensibilities did honourable gentlemen 
 
 o 
 
 first begin to give way? We never heard a word against 
 pluralities, and the wretched dependence of the lower class of 
 the Protestant priesthood upon the gorged and pampered 
 dignitaries of the Establishment, until the agitators, as they 
 are called, denounced the enormous wealth of the Church, and 
 called for retrenchment. Of new distribution not a syllable 
 I was said, until new appropriation was demanded, and it is 
 only to escape from the one, that in the other you now seek 
 a tardy refuge. Curates and their children might stand 
 ‘ starving at the bishops’ gates, if the opulence of the Esta¬ 
 blishment had never been assailed: it is only when that opu- 
 
13 
 
 lence is held out to public condemnation that the condition 
 of the humbler clergy is made a topic for the excitation of 
 sympathy; and gentlemen, habitually satirical upon the 
 rights of the people, become pathetic upon the privileges of 
 the Church. Not contented with a reference to Scotland,^ 
 the advocates of the Irish Church, speaking of the amount 
 which ought to be paid to a Protestant clergyman without a 
 flock, advert to the sum voluntarily paid to the Catholic 
 priest by those thousands to whom he stands in the relation 
 of pastor, adviser, guardian, protector, friend. You have no 4 
 right to compare them. At the bed of sickness, beside the j 
 straw r where agony is laid, the priest is found : from morning j 
 to night and from night to morning he is subject to the call j 
 of the meanest of his flock, and, through storm and darkness, 
 through glens and morasses, to the expiring peasant he is 
 bound to make his w ay ; nor business nor pleasure ever can 
 supply him with an excuse for an omission in his laborious 
 and exhausting tasks ; his heart, his soul, his entire existence 
 are devoted to those whom he emphatically and tenderly calls 
 “his people.” Turn from him, and look at the sinecurist of 
 your religion, without congregation, without employment, 
 ministering occasionally, if at all, at a deserted altar; utter¬ 
 ing to lonely walls the diatribes against the creed of the 
 country, having no manner of effective occupation but that of 
 eating his tithes and begetting others to do the same after j 
 him; and then, if you dare, draw from the livelihood paid j 
 of their accord by his parishioners to the priest, the standard j 
 by which the parson ought to be compulsorily sustained. ] 
 Out of what resources, from what fund are the clergy, to 
 w T hom you venture to assimilate the sinecurists of the Esta¬ 
 blishment, furnished with the means of life? One would 
 imagine, from your comparison, that they were maintained 
 at the national charge, by some parliamentary grant, by 
 some sort of regiurn donum , at the least. But whence is it 
 that these revenues, on which you expatiate, are derived? 
 The treasury is in the nation’s heart:—out of their own spon¬ 
 taneous liberality, unassisted by any contribution from the 
 State, the Catholics of Ireland have maintained their Church, 
 affording a triumph to the voluntary over the compulsory 
 principle, proving the virtue of the priesthood, the gratitude 
 of the country, and supplying evidence of the noble qualities 
 that belong to the character of the Irish people. 1 cannot 
 help giving way to pride when I consider what, in the midst 
 of poverty, of circumstances the most untoward, of obstacles 
 the most deterring, we have accomplished. There stands the 
 
14 
 
 Church of the State, supported by galling imposts, with enor¬ 
 mous episcopal revenues, with wealth exceeding that of _ any 
 establishment in the world; and there beside it stands the 
 unaided Church of the people. We maintain our priesthood 
 in comfort, and our hierarchy in the dignified and Christian 
 mediocrity that, between their precepts and their conduct, 
 prevents all offensive contrast; while to our clergy, we award 
 the stipend that becomes them—to the worship of our God 
 we raise magnificent temples, worthy of the lofty recollec¬ 
 tions associated with our religion; the sight of which fills 
 the traveller with admiration, delights the eye of the artist, 
 and to the poor man’s heart imparts delight and pride, in the 
 consciousness that he has assisted the splendid edifice in its 
 ascent by his humble contribution. And when, out of our 
 own resources, we do all this, when paupers as we are repre¬ 
 sented to be, we have thus not only given sustainment but a 
 just elevation to our ancient Church, how paltry it is of Pro¬ 
 testantism, with its enormous revenues, boasting as it does 
 that all the Aristocracy belong to it, to come here, making a 
 poor face, and with its coffers replenished with the public 
 gold, whining and whimpering about the wretched destitution 
 to which it is about to be reduced. Sir, I own to you that, 
 in considering this subject, with a view to speak upon it, I 
 had collected a great deal of materials connected with topics 
 which are not unfrequently introduced, such as the distinction 
 between individual and corporate property, the old division 
 into four parts of the Church property, and I was pre¬ 
 pared to cite various authorities to establish a proposition, 
 on which schoolmen might dissertate, but with which poli¬ 
 ticians have little concern. After reflecting, however, on this 
 vast question, it struck me that the interests involved were 
 really too important to be discussed with the subtlety of 
 scholastic disputation or the musty pedantry of antiquarian 
 research; and that where interests of such incalculable im¬ 
 portance are at stake, it is our duty to discuss them upon the 
 grounds of public expediency, or, I should rather say, of 
 public exigency alone, in a spirit becoming men in whose 
 hands the destinies of an empire are placed, and by whom, 
 in such an emergency, all regards independent of public 
 usefulness ought to be dismissed. Abandoning all meta¬ 
 physical disquisitions, I proceed, not to a consideration of 
 mere expediency, but of paramount and dire necessity; 
 and I lay down a very plain proposition, and it is this (I 
 do not mean it to be offensive, but, however harsh the 
 truth, it must be told)—and it is this: Whatever may be 
 
15 
 
 your inclination, you have not the ability to maintain the 
 
 Irish Establishment . Why ? because the power of the Irish 
 people Has risen to such a pitch, that to the mistaken in¬ 
 terests of an impuissant minority, the rights, undoubted al¬ 
 though not undisputed, of the enormous majority cannot any 
 longer with impunity be sacrificed. What is the great ques¬ 
 tion into which all these matters of incidental consideration 
 really resolve themselves ? The policy upon which Ireland 
 must be governed. At first view, the subject seems to 
 be a wretched dispute between Catholic and Protestant— 
 a miserable sectarian controversy. It is no such thing; 
 it is the very self-same question by which Cabinet after 
 Cabinet has been annihilated—of which the Catholic Ques¬ 
 tion was but one shape;—it is the struggle for complete 
 political equality on the part of the overwhelming majority 
 upon one hand, and for political ascendancy on the part of 
 the minority upon the other. Can that ascendancy be main¬ 
 tained? Look at Ireland, and at the circumstances by 
 which the existing state of things has been produced? I 
 should be justified in going back half a century, and in tracing 
 the growth of the popular power from its small and slender 
 beginnings, to the elevation and the extent to which it 
 has spread and ascended. There are men now living, who 
 recollect the time when the great bulk of the Irish people 
 were reduced to a state to which serfship and helotism might 
 be justly applied. We had no property, and we could not 
 by law acquire it; w r e had no intelligence, and all access to 
 the sources of education was denied us; we were not only 
 excluded from every political privilege, but shut out from 
 every honourable profession. The mass of the Irish peo-1 
 pie appeared to be a dull, inert, inanimate, and almost! 
 brute heap of senseless matter ; yet within it, the principles 
 of vitality were contained. Those principles were by great I 
 events brought out. America was ma de free; the Irish 
 Protesta nt Parl iament a sser ted its independence; then came 
 "that, resuscitation of nations through an appalling process of 
 conjuration, the Revoluti on of France : but all this I pass 
 by, and comeTto evenbs~much more proximate to the time, 
 which is within the remembrance of us all. There are two 
 men in this House, who, of the power of the Irish people, 
 have had the most painful, the most dear-bought—I hope it 
 will prove to be the most instructive experience—the Members 
 for Tamworth and for Lancashire. Both entered official life 
 as Secretaries for Ireland—both devoted themselves to ascen¬ 
 dancy—and both became its victims. In 1813 the Member \ 
 
16 
 
 for Tamworth was appointed Secretary to the Lord-Lieute - 
 nant; and as he united great capacity with great anxiety to 
 do good, had circumstances been less unfavourable, and had 
 he had just laws to administer, how different would have been 
 his government. But he was attached to a party which 
 neutralized his talents, and frustrated his purposes. He 
 could not go to the root of the evil; and although he now 
 expresses a strong disrelish for ecclesiastical abuses, of that 
 disrelish while he was in office he gave no very unequivocal 
 evidence, and allowed sinecures (those objects of his virtuous 
 abhorrence) to remain undisturbed. He had, indeed, no re¬ 
 source, except in measures of repression; the Insurrection Act 
 was renewed, and on the 3d of June, 1814, a proclamation 
 was issued under his auspices, to prevent the assemblages of 
 the people. The Catholic Board was put down; not so the 
 spirit of the people ; it was only dormant ; it never can be 
 dead. It was raised again in that celebrated confederacy 
 which embraced an entire people, and made such a display of 
 union and of strength, that in 1825 it was deemed requisite 
 by the Ministry, of which the Right Honourable Baronet 
 was a Member, to suppress it. Vain and idle effort! We 
 laughed it to scorn. We returned from London, where 
 we had agreed to connect the Church by money with the 
 State, provided the State should by liberty connect itself 
 with the people. The offer was repudiated:—we invoked 
 the Irish peasantry, who were armed with the elective fran¬ 
 chise ; those gallant, devoted, dauntless, heroic men rushed 
 to the hustings with the courage and devotion with which 
 Irish soldiers, led by you (pointing to Sir H. Hardinge), 
 rushed to the breach: the holds of ascendancy were car¬ 
 ried ; the Beresfords were annihilated in Waterford; the 
 Aristocracy was beaten to the earth in Louth : these were, 
 however, but the preludes for the great encounter. In tw r o 
 years after, Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald, having vacated his seat as 
 Member of the Cabinet, stood for Clare: he was opposed by 
 the leader of the Irish people ; he was discomfited; the 
 heart of Ireland thrilled w r ith exultation; the national sym¬ 
 pathy became contagious ; the soldiers shouted, and threw 
 up their caps for joy upon the hills, whence they surveyed the 
 popular ovation. Astonished by wffiat they saw—appalled 
 by what they anticipated, the Duke and his distinguished 
 colleague gave way to the power of which they beheld 
 these marvellous manifestations. But all had not been ac¬ 
 complished ; it remained that, having won Emancipation for 
 ourselves, we should secure Reform for you:—there was a 
 
17 
 
 majority of English, and a majority of Scotch Members 
 against Reform; it was achieved by the men whom the 
 Irish people had poured, in a noble exercise of their privi- 
 vileges, into this House. “We did the State some service, 
 and they know it;” and the first to acknowledge it was the 
 Noble Lord, the Member for Lancashire. Strange that, 
 with that confession upon his lips, he should not have felt 
 deeply conscious that the power to which he had resorted as 
 an auxiliary, might be converted into an irresistible anta¬ 
 gonist ; and that when, with that incendiary eloquence of which 
 he is the master, he was setting the passions of England on 
 fire,—strange, that it should never have occurred to him that 
 we should avail ourselves of his example, and in as strong 
 and peremptory a tone as that in which he had demanded 
 the Reform of the Parliament, the Reform of the Church 
 would be required. But he had a great abhorrence for rotten 
 boroughs, while for rotten livings he entertained an equally 
 vehement, and not very unnatural predilection. He set up 
 as the champion of the Church, and entered into a struggle 
 with the Irish people. It was not long before he alienated the 
 whole Irish party, not only from himself, but from those col¬ 
 leagues who have since been released from the incumbrance 
 of his co-operation, and between whom and Ireland, an honest, 
 sincere, and permanent reconciliation, founded upon wise 
 measures, and upon a just sense of the honourable motives 
 from whence they have originated, has been since effected. 
 The first proceeding, on the part of the Noble Lord, which 
 indeed affords tolerable evidence of his genius for govern¬ 
 ment, was the Stanley Arms’ Bill; this even his associates 
 scouted from the Cabinet. He then proceeded with his Church 
 Reform, and in order to conciliate the Irish Catholics, ex¬ 
 cluded every Roman Catholic Member from the Tithe Com¬ 
 mittee. In 1831 he gave sixty thousand pounds to the 
 clergy, and passed a Bill by which he transferred certain 
 arrears to the Attorney-General, and commenced in the in¬ 
 ferior courts a scene of unexampled litigation. The pro¬ 
 fuse shedding of human blood ensued. In 1832 his Tithe 
 Bill, by which a final adjustment was to be accomplished, 
 was produced. It was instantly denounced as pregnant with 
 the most baneful consequences. Mark, Englishmen ! mark 
 this :—At the period when that Bill w T as brought forward, the 
 Irish Cathol ics did not demand a reduction of tithes; there 
 was no million then due; no sacrifice from the clergy, no 
 sacrifice from the country, was required. All we asked, was 
 a recognition of the principle which is at last expressed in 
 this Bill; and if that principle had been recognized in time, 
 
18 
 
 how much misfortune to the actual incumbents, how much 
 loss to the English people, would have been saved. But 
 the Bill was passed, in despite of reiterated admonitions, to 
 which its projector was as insensible as the animal from 
 ■which the Scriptural illustrations of deafness are derived. 
 The people assembled to petition Parliament: their meetings 
 were dispersed at the point of the bayonet, and the petitioners 
 tried and incarcerated under the verdicts of juries from which 
 Roman Catholics were excluded. The popular indignation 
 rose to the highest point, and at the general election the 
 standard of Repeal was planted upon every hustings. The 
 Coercion Bill is passed—a million is given to the Irish clergy 
 -—the Church Temporalities’ Bill is introduced, with a great 
 but latent principle of improvement—the influence of the noble 
 Lord prevails, and the 147th clause is struck out; meanwhile 
 the clergy starve.—The session of 1834 is opened. The letter 
 of Lord Anglesey (whose heart was full of the love of Ireland, 
 but whose good intentions were marred by his coadjutor in the 
 Irish Government) is produced: it calls for a new appro¬ 
 priation.—Mr. Ward brings his motion forward—the Church 
 Commission is issued by Lord Grey: the noble Lord (who 
 affects to consider Lord Grey as opposed to Irish Church 
 Reform, when the Commission stares the noble Lord in the 
 face) retires from office, lets go a Parthian shaft at his asso¬ 
 ciates—and there he now is, facing his former friends, and 
 in juxtaposition with his former antagonists. How far he 
 has descended or he has risen in public estimation, I leave 
 to his own judgment, and that of the party, of which he is 
 the leader, which has been rapidly diminishing in num¬ 
 bers, and has undergone, to use the mathematical phrase 
 of the Member for Tamworth, “ a process of exhaustion.” 
 The Government in 1834 having been relieved from the 
 assistance of the noble Lord, brings a Tithe Bill forward, 
 which would have given the clergy bread, and have gone a 
 considerable way towards an adjustment of the question. It 
 receives the approbation of a large body of the Irish repre¬ 
 sentatives ; it is thrown out, and the clergy are left to perish 
 by those sinister auxiliaries who support the Church by 
 making martyrs of its ministers;—Parliament is prorogued— 
 Lord Melbourne is dismissed from the Cabinet with as little 
 ceremony as a menial would be discharged from the Palace. 
 Suddenly, and to himself, I believe, unexpectedly, the Right 
 Llonourable Baronet is raised to the Premiership; the for¬ 
 tunes of this great country are placed by his Sovereign in 
 his hands ; he arrives, declares himself the champion of the 
 Church, dissolves the Parliament, strains every Treasury 
 
19 
 
 nerve to return a Conservative House of Commons; the 
 Parliament of his own calling meets; he is beaten on the 
 Speakership, and does not resign; he is defeated on the 
 Amendment, and still retains his office; he is discomfited 
 upon the Irish Church, and he no longer considers it com¬ 
 patible with his dignity, his duty, or his honour, to remain in ' 
 place; he surrenders the trust reposed in him by his Sove¬ 
 reign, and retires with disaster, but without humiliation,—for 
 he fell in a contest with millions; he had chosen a nation 
 for his antagonist, and it was impossible that he should not 
 be overthrown. Far be it from me to dispute the great 
 talents, the consummate skill, the various attributes for 
 government, which he displayed: the greater the talents, 
 the more consummate the skill; the more various the at¬ 
 tributes for government of which he gave the proof, the 
 more unquestionable the evidence of that power against 
 which he sought to make battle, and by which he was struck 
 down. Of that power I have traced the progress: that 
 power vested in millions, deputed to the great majority of 
 Irish representatives, developed, not created by Emancipation, 
 confirmed by Reform, and which, so far from being attended 
 with any likelihood of decrease, is accompanied by the 
 splendid certainty of augmentation. Three millions have 
 swollen since the Union to seven : they return the majo¬ 
 rity of the representatives of the country: they are led on 
 by men of unalterable determination : in intelligence and 
 in property they are making rapid advances: with Roman 
 Catholics of high ability the Bar is crowded : by them the 
 highest law offices are filled: they are within a step of the 
 bench of justice : if there were no further change by the Le¬ 
 gislature, the advance by the people would be still inevitable : 
 the Corporation Bill (for you cannot legislate for one country 
 on different principles from those which you apply to the 
 other) is at hand. Can you wish, and if you wish, can you 
 hope, that this unnatural, galling, exasperating ascendancy 
 should be maintained? Things cannot remain as they are: 
 it is impossible that they should retrograde :—what expedient 
 are you prepared to adopt ? Would you re-enact the penal 
 code, let loose orangeism from its den, (is it for this that, 
 under illustrious auspices, even into the army that confede¬ 
 racy has made its way ?) : would you drive the country into 
 insurrection; cut down the people, avail yourselves of the 
 most horrible instrumentality that a faction, panting for new 
 confiscations, can supply, and bid the yeomanry draw forth 
 the swords, clotted with the blood of 1798, that they may be 
 brandished in massacre, and sheathed in the nation’s heart ? 
 
20 
 
 No, no. From so horrible a conception you instinctively 
 and virtuously recoil. But, shrinking as you do, from such 
 a purpose, to what expedient (for I repeat the question) 
 will you 11 y? Will you dissolve the Parliament? What! 
 after you have already had recourse to that perilous expe¬ 
 dient ? You thought that you could manage the House of 
 your own calling: you declared it at Tamworth. Have you not 
 too deep a stake in fame, in fortune, in property, and in renown, 
 to renew these terrible experiments ? If a Conservative Parlia¬ 
 ment should be assembled, its duration must be brief, its exis¬ 
 tence will be stormy and agitated while it lasts; but if the ex¬ 
 cited people should infuse an undue proportion of the democra¬ 
 tic element into the representation, you will have raised a spirit 
 which you will have no spell to lay, exposed an institution 
 more valuable than the Church to peril; and put, perhaps, 
 what is more precious than the mitre, to a tremendous 
 hazard—and all for what? For what are all these risks 
 to be incurred ? for what are all these appalling hazards 
 to be run ? for what stake is this awful die to be cast ? 
 For what are Cabinets after Cabinets to be dissolved, appeals 
 after appeals to be made to the people, the public credit 
 to be annihilated,—the Lords brought into collision with 
 the master power of the State,—the royal prerogative, by 
 5 its repeated exercise, abridged of the reverence which is 
 due to it,—the palace shaken to its foundations, and the em¬ 
 pire itself brought to the verge of that gulf to which, by 
 causes of less pressure, so many countries have been irre¬ 
 sistibly and fatally driven ? For what, into all these 
 affrighting perils are we to rush? For what, into those 
 territic possibilities (for likelihoods I will not call them) 
 are we madly, desperately, impiously to plunge? For 
 the Irish Church! the Church of the minority, long the 
 Church of the State, never the Church of the people; the 
 Church on which a faction fattens, by which a nation starves; 
 the Church from which no imaginable good can flow, but evil 
 after evil in such black and continuous abundance has been 
 for centuries, and is to this day, poured out; the Church by 
 which religion has been retarded, morality has been vitiated, 
 atrocity has been engendered, which standing armies are 
 | requisite to sustain, which has cost England millions of her 
 1 treasure, and Ireland torrents of her blood ! 
 
 London ; Frin+cd by W. Clowes and Sons, 14, Charing Cross* 
 
t 
 
 /vj y 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 VISCOUNT MORPETH, M.P. 
 
 UI'ON THE 
 
 IRISH CHURCH QUESTION. 
 
SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 VISCOUNT MORPETH, M. P. 
 
 UPON THE 
 
 IRISH CHURCH QUESTION, 
 
 DELIVERED IN 
 
 THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, 
 
 JUNE 28th, 1835. 
 
 LONDON : 
 
 JAMES RIDGWAY AND SONS, PICCADILLY. 
 
 MCCCXXXV. 
 
SPEECH, 
 
 $’C. SfC. 
 
 It may well be conceded to me, in rising to 
 bring forward a motion, professing to have for its 
 object the Settlement of Irish Tithes, and the 
 future regulation of the Irish Church Establish¬ 
 ment, that to bespeak the usual, and more than 
 usual, indulgence and forbearance of the House, 
 is not to use mere words of course, or to preface 
 my speech with an unmeaning common-place.— 
 For, when I recall, and when the House remem¬ 
 bers, in the first place, the inherent difficulties and 
 complexities of the subject itself, the numerous 
 experiments through which it has wandered, and 
 the various aspects which it has, from time to 
 time, assumed, when we consider, further, the 
 industry, the perseverance, and the ability, which 
 have, from so many quarters, been successively 
 brought to bear upon it, but which, great and 
 laudable as they have been, have all, hitherto, suc¬ 
 cessively failed in accomplishing at least the main 
 part of the object at which they all have aimed— 
 the satisfactory and final adjustment of the question 
 at issue ;—well may I find my present endeavour 
 arduous, and the prospect it presents to me almost 
 appalling. 
 
 B 
 
2 
 
 I know, indeed, that as I have assumed the 
 responsibility of taking the important office which 
 I now have the honour to hold, I have almost put 
 myself out of condition to plead that at a time when 
 it had necessarily accumulated considerable arrears, 
 I found myself with but very inadequate means of 
 preparation, called upon at once to grapple with 
 perhaps the most difficult question of State Policy 
 that ever presented itself, and upon which I have 
 not ever happened previously to take any material 
 part. There is indeed one consideration that alone 
 tends to lighten this pressure of difficulty, which I 
 gather from all retrospect of the subject, and this 
 is, that for the first time, it devolves upon me to 
 suggest a solution of the Tithe Question, accom¬ 
 panied by the assertion of a principle based, as it 
 seems to me, on grounds of most just policy, of 
 most honest conciliation,—such as I believe to be 
 almost indispensable to reconcile the parties con¬ 
 cerned—in other words the nation at large—to the 
 embarrassments and sacrifices which any settle¬ 
 ment must in some degree entail. At all events, 
 although the view which I myself take, and which 
 I am thus the humble organ of submitting to the 
 House on this momentous topic, cannot fail to en¬ 
 counter very decided—in many quarters very con¬ 
 scientious—in some, perhaps, very vehement, op¬ 
 position ; still I may venture to hope that my very 
 abstinence from the discussions which have marked 
 the previous progress of the question may back my 
 request that it should now be received with all 
 
3 
 
 possible calmness and temper, and that I may allow 
 myself to think that with all its difficulties I inherit 
 none of its animosities. 
 
 With respect to the form of my proceeding, after 
 the best consideration I have been able to bestow 
 upon it, and some consultation with those whose 
 opinions are entitled to have weight in the matter, 
 I have felt myself warranted in moving for leave to 
 bring in a Bill, without previously going into a 
 Committee of the whole House. 
 
 The motion of which I have given notice, asma}/^ 
 be collected from its terms, embraces two leading 
 heads—the Settlement of the Tithe Question, and 
 the future Regulation of the Irish Church Estab¬ 
 lishment. With respect, first, to the Settlement of 
 the Tithe Question, I think that the precedents of 
 the Tithe Composition Act, introduced in 1823, by 
 the Right Hon. Member for the University of Cam¬ 
 bridge, and of the Bill for the Commutation of 
 English Tithes, introduced by Lord Althorp in 
 1833, are sufficient to justify me in pursuing a 
 similar course. There are, however, one or two 
 regulations which I shall propose ultimately to 
 embody in the Bill, for which I must ask the sanc¬ 
 tion of a Committee of the whole House, previously 
 to introducing them in the Committee on the Bill. 
 With respect to the second head—the future Re¬ 
 gulation of the Irish Church Establishment and 
 its Revenues—I have thought that the resolutions 
 moved in this Session by my Noble Friend the 
 Secretary of State for the Home Department, and 
 
4 
 
 adopted by the House, which, with this view, have 
 been read to-night at the table, will furnish ade¬ 
 quate authority for the proposition which I intend 
 to submit. 
 
 The subject has been so much and so recently 
 before the House, that a very brief statement in¬ 
 deed will be sufficient to explain to Honourable 
 Members the position which it at present occupies; 
 as I proceed, too, to state the particulars of the 
 measure which I am about to introduce, and thus, 
 necessarily as it were, to put them into some sort, 
 not so much of contrast as comparison, with the 
 particulars of the two previous measures, the one 
 introduced by Mr. Littleton, and, after undergoing 
 considerable alterations, finally sent up to the 
 House of Lords in the late Parliament; the other 
 announced by the Right Honourable and Gallant 
 Member for Launceston in the present, I find that, 
 notwithstanding all that warmth of discussion and 
 heat of feeling which have arisen, there is so much 
 real similarity and agreement in all the propositions 
 that come before the House, that the chief part of 
 this branch of my subject will be pretty nearly 
 achieved by marking such prominent points of dif¬ 
 ference as do occur while I go on. It would 
 hardly be necessary to inform any person who 
 had given any portion of his attention to these 
 topics, that the Compos i tion for Tithe in Ireland, 
 which, under the Act of Mr. Goulburn, was volun¬ 
 tary, temporary, and renewable, wus ^ made , under 
 the Act of Lord Stanley, compulsory and perpe - 
 
5 
 
 tual, subject only to a period ical re-valuation ac- 
 
 cording to the price of corn. This composition is 
 now complete and fixed, or, in the technical phrase, 
 applotted, upon every piece of land liable to the 
 payment of tithe, ecclesiastical or lay, in Ireland. 
 The am ount of the whole composition, according 
 to the latest returns which have been made out, is, 
 
 I believe, 665,000/ ., of which 555,000/. is for 
 Ecclesiastical , 110,000/ . for Lay Tithe. Now the 
 opening proposition of this measure is that in which 
 both the previous measures—the Bills of both 
 Governments, as well as the opinion of every per¬ 
 son who has spoken, written, or thought upon the 
 subject, have uniformly concurred— that Comp o- 
 sition for Tithe throughout Ireland should wholly 
 cease and determine. The reasons which make 
 this an Act not so much of expedient as of neces¬ 
 sary policy, are so obvious in themselves, and have 
 received such copious illustration, both from all 
 that has been said within these walls, and from all 
 that has been done, and is doing, without them, 
 that I feel it would be worse than superfluous to 
 add another word on this part of the subject. But 
 before we arrive at a proper provision for the 
 future, there comes across us that which is not the 
 least difficult and thorny branch of the whole 
 matter—the chapter of arrears. What is the state_ 
 of the arrears ? It will be in the recollection of 
 the House that the liberality of a former Parlia- 
 ment granted the sum of a_ million pounds, subject 
 to the understanding that it was to be repaid, for 
 
6 
 
 payment of the Tithes due for the year 1833, and 
 for the outstanding arrears of Tithes for the years 
 1832 and 1831. Of this sum I understand that 
 about 637,000/. has already been advanced. But 
 the whole million was thus appropriated to the 
 temporary relief o f t he Tithe -owners, and every 
 one who chose to apply for it received his portion, 
 subject to a prescribed deduction. Those who did 
 ! not choose to avail themselves of it were left to the 
 ordinary legal modes of recovery ; in aid of which 
 \ the use of the civil and military force was never 
 \ withheld, and was sometimes applied with very 
 \unfortunate effect. The Bill sent up. to the House 
 of Lords last year allowed the yet unexpended re¬ 
 sidue of the million to meet the then remaining 
 amount of arrears, and it enacted the repayment 
 of the whole advances actually made under the 
 Million Act by instalments, and on and after the 
 1st of Nov. 1835, for five successive years from the 
 landlords , in additio n to the yearly amount of rent 
 charge to which, by that Bill, they were to become 
 subject. The loss of that Bill brings a new feature 
 into the case—the arrears of Tithe for the year 
 1834 ; which, I much apprehend, include a large 
 proportion of the whole amount payable. With 
 what provisions the Right Honourable and Gallant 
 Member opposite was prepared to meet the arrears 
 I am not able accurately to pronounce, as, by no 
 fault undoubtedly of his (that responsibility rests 
 elsewhere), he had not the opportunity of intro¬ 
 ducing his Bill. I collect from his statement that 
 
7 
 
 lie intended to apply the unappropriated residue 
 of the million to the payment of the arrears of 
 1834 ; I do not remember or find that he took 
 notice of any previous arrears, and he expressed 
 his apprehension, which I believe to be too well 
 founded in fact, that for the arrears of 1834 alone 
 the sum in question would be greatly inadequate. 
 The Right Honourable Gentleman also intended 
 to remit the quinquennial instalments of the sums 
 advanced upon the Million Act. Now with the 
 arrears of 1831, 1832, and 1833, we do not pro¬ 
 pose to inter fere . The means of relief were ten¬ 
 dered to the acceptance of the Tithe-owners— 
 the legal modes of recovery were at their disposal 
 —we, therefore, think it fair to leave them to 
 the consequences of their own option. But, at the 
 same time, in equal fairness, we do not think our¬ 
 selves warranted to interrupt any suits now pending, 
 however desirable we must consider it; were it in 
 our power to remove at once, and for ever, every 
 vestige of those ancient grounds of irritation, and 
 collision. How then do we meet the arrears of 
 1834, which rest on very different grounds, 
 inasmuch, as in the first place, no relief has been 
 proffered, and, in the next, one branch of the 
 Legislature had gone beyond merely talking of the 
 extinction of Tithes, and had enacted the final 
 determination of all Tithe Compositions? To meet 
 the arrears then of 1834, which we subject to a 
 deduction of 25 per cent, we find for it, that in 
 many parts of Ireland, especially in the Northern, , 
 
8 
 
 and more Protestant districts, several landlords, 
 under the provision of Stanley’s Act, have of 
 themselves voluntarily undertaken to pay to the 
 Clergy the tithe accruing to them, subject to a 
 bonus of 15 per cent. I believe £102,087 of the 
 composition for Tithe have been thus undertaken 
 for. Those Landlords so undertaking we keep to 
 the observance of their own liability. Will it be 
 said that we are acting unfairly towards them in 
 giving an advantage over them to those who have 
 not taken any step to discharge their liabilities ? 
 It is true that we wish to exempt, both prospectively 
 and retrospectively, the occupying tenant from all 
 
 j but we empower the 
 Privy Council to levy any arrears which have 
 become due from the year 1834, from those 
 persons who have permanent estates in the land, 
 upon whom the liability had already, by law, 
 devolved. We calculate the amount thus to be 
 recovered will be between sixty and seventy 
 thousand pounds. Hence, while in this respect 
 we do so far connive at a non-fulfilment of legal 
 engagements in the person of the occupying tenant, 
 yet, in the instance of the generally wealthier, and 
 more solvent, proprietor, (who is more likely, too, 
 to be a Protestant) we at least give no preference 
 to those who have not discharged their legal 
 obligations, over those who have either obeyed, or 
 have undertaken to obey, the Law. For any 
 remainder of the arrears of 183^ which these 
 provisions may fail to satisfy, we shall ask leave to 
 
 future payment of tithe 
 
9 
 
 e mploy s uch portions as may be necessary of the 
 residue of the million ; and following the example 
 of the Right Honourable and Gallant Member, we 
 shall endeavour to obtain the sanction of a Com¬ 
 mittee of the whole House for the remission of the 
 instalments of the^ sums advanced under the 
 Million Act. I do not pretend wholly to justify 
 this course. The repayment of the sum was 
 certainly promised, and, I feel assured, as certainly 
 contemplated by those who proposed its advance. 
 But, after what every day tends to convince me 
 more and more, was the unfortunate rejection of the 
 Tithe Bill of last year—after the admission made 
 in the House of Lords, even before that rejection, 
 by Lord Melbourne, then Prime Minister, of the 
 slight chance he foresaw of the sum being actually 
 repaid—after the positive announcement of the 
 Right Honourable and Gallant Gentleman, then 
 Secretary for Ireland, that he intended to propose 
 the absolute remission of the repayment, I believe 
 that almost every one has begun to be convinced 
 that this million has in fact long been gone past 
 recovery ; that it is wholly out of the question to 
 recover it from, still in a great measure, I fear, a 
 destitute and impoverished Clergy, except by 
 involving them, and co-operating with them, in 
 those means of military interference, and san¬ 
 guinary collision, w hich , besides all their graver 
 consequences, have already signalized their fitness 
 for their immediate object bv levyin g the amount 
 of 12,000/. at th e cost of 28,00 0/, But it has 
 
TO 
 
 been contended by many who sit on the same side 
 of the House with myself, that they were not 
 prepared to consent to so large a freegift_on the 
 part of this country, to relieve the embarrassments 
 of the Irish Clergy, or to prop up the tottering 
 condition of the Irish Church, without receiving 
 as ajpequrralent such an alte ration ^ in the appro¬ 
 priation of its future disposable funds, as might be 
 more consistent with the justice of the case; more 
 congenial with the feelings of the country; more 
 conducive to the real object of any settlement— 
 the maintenance of civil and religious peace. 
 Such an altered appropriation we propose to engraft 
 on our Bill; and on the strength of this we now 
 come forward, and appeal to the generosity of the 
 Representatives of the Empire at large for con¬ 
 firming this preliminary grant, in order that we 
 may not only adjust the pressing exigencies of the 
 case, but address ourselves with more facility and 
 freedom to the remedial arrangements which 
 follow. 
 
 Having thus dealt with all that appertains to the 
 past, I now arrive at our proposed arrangements 
 for the future. In common with the Bill of the 
 Government of last year, and the proposal of the 
 late Government of this year, we convert Jjh e, pre- 
 sent Composition for Tithe into an annual Rent 
 Charge, payable, as in the previous cases, by the 
 owner of the First Estate of Inheritance, or other 
 Equivalent Estate to be defined in the Bill, equal 
 in the present case to 7-10ths of the amount of 
 
11 
 
 Composition, or £70. in every £100. The pro¬ 
 posal of the late Government made the Rent Charge 
 equal to 3-4ths, or £75. in the £100. I need not 
 apologize to the Irish Landowners, at least, for the 
 diminution. The Bill of last year made the Rent 
 Charge equal only to 3-5ths, or £60. in the £100.; 
 but then it charged 17 \ per cent, first, on the Con¬ 
 solidated Fund, then on the Perpetuity Purchase 
 Fund, and made no remission of the million. The 
 Landlord will, of course, concede the amount of this 
 bonus to all the intermediate tenants down to the 
 occupier of the land. He will be entitled to re¬ 
 cover, as so much additional rent, from the lease¬ 
 holder under him, the amount, and not more than 
 the amount, of the Rent Charge fixed upon him¬ 
 self. But though we make the Rent Charge pay¬ 
 able by the Landowner £70. instead of £75. per 
 cent, as proposed by the late Government, we do 
 not quite mulct the existing Clerical Incumbent in 
 the same degree ; we charge the cost of collection, 
 which we rate at sixpence in the pound, on the 
 Tithe-owner, inasmuch as we transfer from him all 
 its risk and trouble. The net amount, therefore, 
 which would naturally fall to the Tithe-owner, 
 under the arrangement which I have stated, would 
 be 68/. 5s. on every 100/. of composition. But we 
 think that here it is allowable to make a distinc¬ 
 tion between not only the future and existing Cleri¬ 
 cal Incumbent, but also between the Lay Tithe- 
 owner, who has no duties to perform in return, and 
 generally has other sources of income, and the 
 
12 
 
 Clergy now in possession, who have, or are as¬ 
 sumed to have, duties exceeding all others in impor¬ 
 tance to discharge; and who are but in too many 
 cases, from the circumstances of the few last years, 
 reduced at this period to a state of severe distress 
 and privation, not brought on them, still less de- . 
 served, by any demerits of their own (in most in¬ 
 stances I believe it is quite the reverse), but by 
 that oblique retribution which generally, sooner or 
 later, involves in the penalties of a vicious system, 
 even its most unoffending instruments. We 
 therefore allow to all existing Clerical Incumbents 
 five per cent, more on the composition, which 
 comes to 73/. 5s. on every 100/. of the existing 
 amount of composition ; falling, altogether, it is 
 true, 41. 5s. per cent, below the Bill of last year, for 
 the rejection of which they have not to charge the 
 Members of the present Government, but coming 
 up with only the trifling deduction of the cost of 
 collection to the amount proposed by the late Go¬ 
 vernment. This additional charge, temporary, 
 not permanent like that of last year, of five per cent, 
 not of 17£ per cent., like that of last year, we fix 
 upon the Perpetuity Purchase Fund; of which, 
 considering the order of men to whom it is to be 
 applied, and the object which it is intended to 
 serve, that of producing a Final Settlement of the 
 Tithe Question, and thus giving repose to the 
 I ? Clergy and the Church, it can hardly be deemed 
 an unappropriate or unecclesiastical use; and I 
 rejoice to think that this view receives countenance 
 
13 
 
 from the statement made by my Right Hon. and 
 Gallant Predecessor in introducing the Tithe Bill 
 of the late Government, inasmuch as if, during 
 the process of the investment of the redemption 
 money for which that Bill was to provide, any loss 
 of interest should have been sustained, the present 
 Incumbents were during their lives to have had 
 the annual income of 7 51. guaranteed to them; and 
 this indemnification was to have been charged on 
 the Perpetuity Purchase Fund. The two appro¬ 
 priations are therefore identical in principle. I 
 am not aware that they would have been very dif¬ 
 ferent in amount, unless indeed that for some little 
 time, probably, the charge on the Fund proposed 
 by the Right Hon. Gentleman would have run 
 much a-head of mine. 
 
 The machinery of the Bill, by which these pro¬ 
 visions are to be carried into effect, is so nearly 
 similar to that of last year, that it will not require 
 any detailed notice on the present occasion. The 
 Rent Charges are made payable to the Crown, and 
 are put under the management of the Commis¬ 
 sioners of Woods and Forests. As far as I can col¬ 
 lect the intention of the Right Hon. and Gallant 
 Gentleman, he intended the Incumbent to receive 
 the Rent Charges himself from the head landlord, 
 and, if it should not have been paid when due, he 
 was to apply to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, 
 who were to have recourse to a Crown process to 
 obtain it; an arrangement which I humbly sub¬ 
 mit might tend to involve Ecclesiastical persons 
 
14 
 
 and bodies in the recurrence of disputes and alter¬ 
 cations, and in the purely secular province of the 
 whole matter, to a far greater extent than I can think 
 expedient or creditable. We also propose to allow 
 under certain circumstances, a power of revision, 
 and revaluation of the existing Tithe Compositions. 
 I certainly should have very much desired to have 
 closed the whole question at once ; but, upon hear¬ 
 ing the number, as well as urgency, of the com¬ 
 plaints that are made, some, I think, proceeding 
 from those who yield to none in good will and 
 friendship to the Church—many of them alleging 
 strong instances of fact in corroboration, it did ap¬ 
 pear that it would be most difficult, if not impossi¬ 
 ble, to reconcile the Irish people to any settle¬ 
 ment that did not include some such power; and 
 our care must be to adopt such just and fair pre¬ 
 cautions as, on the one hand, will insure the deal¬ 
 ing with real and solid matter of complaint, as in 
 the case of Promissory Notes from insolvent par¬ 
 ties, or adjudications by tribunals before which the 
 parties did not appear; and, on the other hand, 
 will be a security against the revision being frivo¬ 
 lously, capriciously, or groundlessly resorted to. 
 After they have been once decided, the Rent 
 Charges will, thenceforward, be only subject to 
 variation as the compositions are now in reference 
 to the price of corn at stated periods. The provi¬ 
 sions of Lord Tenterden’s Act for the Limitation of 
 the Suits are likewise extended to Ireland, as in the 
 Bill of last year. 
 
15 
 
 These, then, are the principal provisions of the 
 present Bill, as far as regards the immediate settle¬ 
 ment of the property in Tithe, and the interests of 
 the existing Incumbents. I recommend them to 
 the favour of the House, not assuredly because they 
 obviate all difficulty, and steer clear of all objec¬ 
 tion—the very nature of the question, and the 
 actual circumstances of the time make that impos¬ 
 sible—make every thing, we can select, a choice 
 between the counteracting embarrassments which 
 beset the attempt to do the utmost practicable 
 good to all parties, with the least avoidable unfair¬ 
 ness to any. We encounter the disadvantage, too, 
 of running counter to that specific and favourite 
 project which almost every one who takes an in¬ 
 terest upon so important and extensive a subject 
 will have been sure to set his own heart upon. 
 One is for an entire new valuation, and general 
 Land Tax, to which the chief objection, I conceive, 
 is the necessary consumption of time, and the em¬ 
 ployment of a new machinery ; another, and a 
 large party, too, I am aware, in this House, is bent 
 on Redemption. This part of the Bill of last year, 
 after much trial and discussion, was resisted by the 
 late House of Commons. I do not think it would 
 find much favour in the present; and I cannot at 
 all see how it could be carried into effect without 
 a sensible additional loss to the Clergy. Still 
 I do recommend this scheme to the House as 
 liberal in the foremost place to the existing Clergy, 
 to whom it remits the liability for the repayment 
 
16 
 
 of a very large sum of money that has been ad¬ 
 vanced, and secures a payment for the time to 
 come, and from and after a certain day in such 
 year, with a running interest until discharged, 
 subject to deduction certainly, but guaranteed to 
 them beyond the chance of failure, and without 
 any trouble or risk of collection—as satisfactory to 
 the occupying tenant, from whom it removes all 
 the vexation incident both to the payment, and, 
 among well-disposed persons, even to the resistance 
 of an obnoxious impost—as conducive to the real 
 interests of the Landlord, to whom, besides all the 
 indirect advantages that would flow from the com¬ 
 parative tranquillization of the country, it gives, as 
 to the land of which he is owner, a direct bonus of 
 30 per cent.—as calculated to find acceptance with 
 the great body of the nation, especially when cou¬ 
 pled with that fairer and more equitable adjust¬ 
 ment of Ecclesiastical Revenues, which we hope 
 ultimately to establish, of which we here seek to 
 lay the foundation ; and which I will now address 
 myself to submit briefly to the notice of the House. 
 
 In approaching this part of the subject I know 
 we must abide the double risk of shocking what I 
 consider the untenable positions of one party, and of 
 falling probably short of what I may also think the 
 too high-flown expectations of another; inasmuch, 
 as we both deny the inviolability of.Church Pro¬ 
 perty, and^yet^are determined to maintain the 
 exis tence , and ad d, we hope, to the effic iency of 
 the Established Church even in Ireland. We have 
 
17 
 
 to deal with a state of things there, which, in the 
 present state of public opinion, would have pre¬ 
 cluded any sane man from dreaming to found in 
 that country, if every thing had now to begin 
 afresh, a Protestant Episcopal Church—yet*finding 
 it there , with its long prescription, interwoven with 
 so much of the every day working of our Civil 
 Policy, we are not prepared to uproot its founda¬ 
 tions, or destroy its framework. At the same time 
 I Teel so sensibly the anomalous and precarious 
 ground on which it now, upon the clearest evi¬ 
 dence, is found to rest, that of nothing am I more 
 convinced than that, if you refuse to modify it, you 
 will find it beyon d the power of man, at least, to 
 preserve it. 
 
 I am aware that a strong, perhaps, to some ex¬ 
 tent, a reasonable, objection is felt to the exact 
 specification of numbers, when any result supposed 
 likely to be acceptable to other parties, especially 
 in a loose and turbulent state of society, would en¬ 
 sue upon the precise number falling short of the 
 fixed point. We endeavour, therefore, as much as 
 possible, to avoid the exact specification of num¬ 
 bers ; and in the one instance where we find it 
 necessary, if at least we are prepared to do any¬ 
 thing towards correcting these glaring dispropor¬ 
 tions which exist in many parts of Ireland between 
 the pay and the duties of Clerical Incumbents, we 
 have happily the means of making the reference to 
 numbers retrospective instead of prospective. We 
 must fix some point below which the appo in tment 
 
 c 
 
18 
 
 to the vacant Benefice is to be suspended. If we 
 will not do this, we do nothing at all.—If we will 
 < not do this, we still determine to keep up Livings 
 without Cures ; Clergymen without flocks ; pay 
 without work ; the worst gains of the Sinecurist, on 
 | the worst plea of the Bigot. There is now upon 
 the table of the House the Report of the Commis¬ 
 sioners of Public Instruction, who, in pursuance of 
 the directions given to them, have furnished a 
 census of the Population of Ireland, specifying the 
 respective proportions of the different religious de¬ 
 nominations. Now I certainly cannot pretend to 
 claim for this work, or for any work of such a 
 nature, especially when completed within so limited 
 a period, the merit of perfect and undeviating accu¬ 
 racy, but I contend that as far as the circumstances 
 permitted, the Report has been framed in such a 
 manner as to make it as accurate and authentic as 
 any document of such a character could pretend to 
 be. The House will observe that the Census of 
 1831 is taken as the basis of the present Census. 
 The Census of 1831 was not framed with any ex¬ 
 pectation of its being used for the purpose of ascer¬ 
 taining the relative proportions of the different 
 religious denominations in Ireland, and cannot be 
 consequently liable to any imputation of partiality 
 on that score. The Enumerators, by whom that 
 Census was made, were appointed by the Magis¬ 
 trates for the different Counties, who were not 
 persons likely to entertain any very violent, or 
 subversive, views. Those Enumerators were or- 
 
19 
 
 dered on this occasion to communicate with the 
 Ministers of all religious persuasions ; the Clergy 
 in the Established Church were especially requested 
 to assist them, and the Ministers belonging to all 
 the different bodies were invited to prepare distinct 
 censuses of their own. In many instances this 
 assistance was afforded to the Enumerators, espe¬ 
 cially, I am happy to say, by the Clergy of the 
 Established Church, who, in some cases, visited 
 themselves every house in their parishes. The list, 
 which was verified on oath, was left fourteen days 
 open for public inspection. After it had so re¬ 
 mained open, the Commissioners visited the diffe¬ 
 rent parishes, and then held public sittings of en¬ 
 quiry, at which the Ministers of every religious 
 persuasion were invited to attend, for the purpose 
 of giving in their district censuses ; and every one 
 was at liberty to tender evidence, which was taken 
 in the face of the assembled parish. If there was 
 likely to be any very marked inaccuracy in the 
 enumeration of the numbers of the different deno¬ 
 minations, it would most probably occur in the 
 census of a large population, where some difficulty 
 might be found in ascertaining and fixing the pre¬ 
 cise number. In the census of Belfast, for instance, 
 which contains a population of 67,000 and odd 
 inhabitants, and 17,000 members of the Established 
 Church, the mistake was more likely to occur, 
 than in the midst of a population among whom no 
 Protestants, or but very few, were to be found; 
 because if, in the latter case, any Protestant had 
 
20 
 
 I 
 
 4- 
 
 64 . 2 .. 
 
 £ V ,J laJ> 
 ,^ 7 •]' 2 
 
 been overlooked in the enumeration, if it had been 
 asserted and recorded that nothing like a Pro¬ 
 testant was in existence there, was it likely that he 
 would abstain from coming forward, pointing out 
 the falsity of the return, and removing the slur 
 which he would conceive was thus attempted to be 
 cast upon his parish. I contend, then, that this 
 report, on the whole, is entitled to be considered 
 as authentic and accurate, for the purposes at 
 which it aims, as any document of such a nature 
 can be. I will not enter, here, into any minute 
 dissection of its contents, for which other oppor¬ 
 tunities may occur ; and, for the object of a general 
 statement, it will be sufficient to mention general 
 results. The whole population of Ireland is stated 
 .to be 7,943.940 persons . Of this total the number 
 of members of the Established Church is 852,6 64 
 persons; of Presbyterians 642,356 ; of other Pro¬ 
 testant Dissenter s 21,808 ; and of Roman Catho¬ 
 lics J3,427, 712—or, putting the calculation in an¬ 
 other form, the number of members of the Esta¬ 
 blished Church is 852,064 p ersons, while the total 
 number of Dissenters from the E stablishe d Church 
 is 7,091.876 persons. The distribution of the 
 members of the Established Church is nearly as 
 disproportioned as their total amount. It is well 
 known that they are to be found in the greatest 
 numbers in the northern province of Ulster; and, 
 not to enumerate more than one or two instances 
 of the great disproportion that prevails in their 
 distribution throughout Ireland, I find, adopting 
 
 * /jLU ^ //L- 
 
 s/’i-rz, 6>64- 'v.w? - 
 
the authority of a book which, I believe, is entitled 
 to great weight on such subjects, u Beaufort’s Eccle¬ 
 siastical Map of Ireland,” that, in the Diocese of 
 Dromore, there are 264 members o f the Esta¬ 
 blished Church to every thousand acres; in the 
 Diocese of Tuam but about eight^members of the 
 Established Church to every'fhbusa nd acres. In 
 the Diocese of Clogher the members of the Esta¬ 
 blishment are as twenty-six to one hundred of the 
 whole popul ation; while, in the Diocese of Kilfe- 
 nore, the proportion is less than one hundred. 
 Many nearly parallel cases might be quoted. Now 
 with what provision do we propose to meet these 
 glaring instances of disproportion, both in the total 
 amount, and in the relative distribution, of the 
 members of the Established Church? We shall 
 ask the House to give its authority for the suspen¬ 
 sio n of the Presentation or Appointment to any; 
 vacant Benefi ce, in which it appears, upon the 
 face of this Report, that the number of Pro test¬ 
 ants doe s not exce ed fifty . We do not, how¬ 
 ever, even apply this limitation so. strictly that 
 if circumstances should have been materially 
 changed in the interval, there should be no 
 power of preventing the rigorous enforcement 
 of the rule. The appointment is to be sus¬ 
 pended, upon the vacancy, by the Ecclesiastical 
 Commissioners, in whom we think that the su¬ 
 perintendance of all these matters will be most 
 properly vested; unless the Lord Lieutenant in 
 Council should otherwise direct. But will it be 
 
asked whether we are prepared to leave all those 
 parishes in Ireland, in which the number of mem¬ 
 bers of the Established Church does not^exceed 
 fifty, entirely without any means and opportuni¬ 
 ties of spiritual instruction, or public worship ? I 
 have never, either here or elsewhere, previously or 
 to-night, dissembled my adherence to the principle 
 of a Religious Establishment, and, therefore, in 
 introducing a measure which is to regulate the 
 future constitution of a Religious Establishment 
 now in existence, and in endeavouring to adapt it 
 to the state of society in which it is found, while I 
 will not hang back, or shrink, from any limitation 
 of its privileges, or diminution of its revenues, 
 which seem to be prescribed by the circumstances 
 of the case, and a sense of fairness and justice 
 towards other parties, while I will be scared by 
 no names of confiscation, spoliation, and sacrilege, 
 when I think myself justified, on the plainest 
 grounds of policy and truth, I yet cannot but de- 
 derive satisfaction, as a Protestant, and a Church¬ 
 man, wherever I feel that I may combine, without 
 prejudice to the just and equal rights of all, any 
 special mark of adherence either to the faith which 
 I profess, or the form of Establishment to which I 
 belong. I take then the strongest case, though by 
 no means a solitary instance in Ireland,'—I take a 
 parish in which there is no Glebe-house, no Church, 
 no Churchman ; and even in this spot, supposing 
 a Member of the Established Church should come 
 to reside there, or even a casual passer by should 
 
23 
 
 chance to require the performance of a religious 
 duty, even in this spot he shall find that the Legis¬ 
 lature of his country has provided some one on 
 whom he, the solitary resident, or casual stranger, 
 may be authorized to call for the ministrations or 
 the consolations of his religion. At the same time ] 
 we do not affect to make this provision do more 
 than just comply with the principle which leaves 
 no foot of the State’s Dominions without the pale of 
 the State’s Religion ; a principle which, I am sorry 
 to add, is not in operation in many districts of Ire¬ 
 land, which do not come within the operation of 
 this Bill. The amount of provision, however, we 
 endeavour to proportion to the extent of service. 
 
 I need not say that in such a case it would be very 
 scanty. In a parish wi thout Glebe-house, Church, 
 or Churchman, we consign the care of souls, which 
 
 I believe is a correct, though it sounds a contra¬ 
 dictory, expression, to the care of the Minister of 
 some adjoining parish, to be named by the Bishop, 
 at an additional stipend of not more than five 
 pounds a year.* In which case we indulgently 
 
 '* “ The Ecclesiastical Commissioners are directed, in the case of 
 the suspension of a Clerk to any Benefice, in which divine service has 
 not been celebrated for the three years preceding the 1st February, 
 1833, to appoint to the Incumbent or officiating Minister of the 
 parish adjoining such suspended Benefice, such moderate stipend as 
 they, associated with the Bishop of the Diocese, shall think fit in 
 consideration of the occasional Ecclesiastical duties he may have to 
 perform in such suspended benefice.”—See Sect. 117, 3 and 4 
 Will. 4, chap. 37. 
 
 By the first Report of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, ordered 
 
depart from the proper rule that, where there is no 
 duty there shall be no pay. I understand that, by 
 the Church Temporalities Act, introduced by my 
 noble friend the Member for North Lancashire, the 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners were, in certain cases, 
 empowered to assign the stipend of four pounds 
 per annum; this was not specified distinctly in the 
 Bill, but such a stipend has been actually assigned; 
 so we improve in liberality as we go on. In the 
 case where there are any Members of the Esta¬ 
 blished Church—where there is but one—where 
 there is any number below that which has occa¬ 
 sioned the suspension of the Benefice, the care of 
 souls is either to be committed, as in the case where 
 there is no Member of the Establishment, to the 
 Ministry of some adjoining Parish ; or, if it should 
 appear to the Board of Ecclesiastical Commis¬ 
 sioners that by such means adequate provision was 
 not likely to be made for the spiritual wants of the 
 parish, a separate curate is to be appointed, with 
 the consent and approbation of the Lord Lieutenant 
 in Council; and it is to be specially enacted, that 
 wherever there is now a church, and a resident 
 inister, there shall always be in future 
 
 LCiatino; 
 
 O 
 
 a separate Curate. With respect to the payment— 
 wEereTHe CunTTs put into the hands of a neigh- 
 
 to be printed by the House of Commons, 31st March, 1835, they 
 state, that stipends varying from four to twenty-five pounds yearly 
 have been appointed to tbe Incumbents or officiating Ministers of 
 the parishes adjoining those Benefices which have been suspended 
 under the act. 
 
25 
 
 bouring Minister, the stipend, avoiding the exact 
 specification of numbers, is to be proportioned to 
 the duty to be performed; being in no case less 
 th an ten pou nds, or more than fifty, according to 
 the judgment of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, 
 acting under the same approbation and consent. 
 Where a separate Curate is appointed his salary 
 is not to exceed seventy-five pounds; he will be 
 permitted to occupy the Glebe-house, should there 
 be one, if he so wishes, and undertakes to keep it in 
 repair, and is also to have whatever portion of the 
 Glebe-land may be thought proper, not exceeding 
 the annual value of twenty-five pounds.* The 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners may let the Glebe- 
 house, unless the Curate or officiating Minister 
 desires to occupy it; and may also let the Glebe- 
 lands, or such portion of them, as shall not be 
 allotted to him. They are to pay off all charges 
 for buildings, dilapidations, &c., on suppressed 
 Benefices; and will, in the same manner, be en¬ 
 titled to receive all those dues that fall in. They 
 are, in these respects, to hold the place of a single 
 Clergyman who might have succeeded to the 
 
 * So that in such cases the income of the Curate arising from 
 tithes and glebe-land will amount to one hundred pounds per annum, 
 in a parish where the number of members of the Established Church 
 does not exceed fifty, with the use of the Glebe-house, subject to no 
 other charge than that of keeping it in repair,—and he will receive 
 this stipend exclusive of any sum for any adjoining parish, the cure 
 of which may be committed to him in case there are not more than 
 fifty Members of the Established Church in such adjoining parish. 
 
Living. Provision is to be made that, in every 
 parish, where the cure of souls is committed to a 
 neighbouring Minister, if his own church is not so 
 situated as to afford sufficient accommodation for 
 the members of the establishment in the annexed 
 parish,—and also in every parish where a separate 
 Curate is appointed, if there is no church or 
 chapel,—a suitable place of public worship sha ll 
 be built or provided; the cost being suited to the 
 probable extent of the congregation;— if to be 
 LjiiJLfc, not t o exceed the sum of one hundred 
 pou nds; if to be provided, or hired, n ot exc eed- 
 ing fifteen pounds per annum. # Little indeed may 
 be thought of these places of public worship, to be 
 provided at so modest a cost. I admit they are not 
 such as would have suited the palmy days of Vestry 
 Cess,—of Architectural Churches, and Parish paid 
 Organs; yet, for the accommodation of some ten 
 or twenty persons, in the midst of a large popula¬ 
 tion who are to derive no benefit from them, I trust 
 they may answer all the purposes 
 
 “ Of such plain roofs as Piety can raise ; 
 
 And only vocal to their Maker’s praise.” 
 
 It is enacted that wherever the Ecclesiastical 
 Commissioners are about to provide for the spiritual 
 
 * Where there is no church in a suspended parish, it is intended 
 that the School-house shall be used for the purposes of divine wor¬ 
 ship ; or that a room in the Glebe-house, if any, shall be set apart for 
 the purpose ; or if neither of these accommodations can be afforded, 
 that a place of worship he erected at a cost of one hundred pounds; 
 or a room hired at a rent of fifteen pounds per annum. 
 
27 
 
 wants of a parish, or to apply any money in building, 
 or providing, a place of worship, the Archbishop 
 of the Province, and the Bishop of the Diocese 
 s hall be associated with.them, as Commissioners^ 
 pro hac vice. In the case which will very frequently 
 happen, of one of these parishes, in which the 
 number of members of the Established Church 
 does not exceed 50, forming part of an union with 
 other parishes, it will be enacted, that the Eccle¬ 
 siastical Commissioners, subject to the approbation 
 and consent of the Lord Lieutenant in Council, 
 are either to disunite from the union the parish in 
 question, and deal with it as with a separate 
 suppressed benefice under this Act; or, if they 
 shall think fit to continue the Union, to direct that 
 the Incumbent is to receive such part of the 
 income of that particular parish as would have 
 fallen to his share as a neighbouring minister or a 
 separate curate, under the provisions which I have 
 detailed, in case the parish had not formed part 
 of an Union. If the Church, and Glebe house, 
 of the Union should be in this parish, the Com¬ 
 missioners will be empowered to make such special 
 provision for their use and occupation, as may 
 seem to them most fitting. Further, upon every 
 future vacancy of a Benefice, the annual value of 
 which, after allowing for the deduction on the 
 amount of Composition effected by this Bill, as 
 well as for the tax on Benefices, proposed by the 
 Church Temporalities’ Act, shall exceed £300, 
 the Ecclesiastical Commissioners will be required 
 
28 
 
 t o report to the Lord Lieutenant, the circumstances 
 of such Benefice, and the extent of the Ecclesias¬ 
 tical duty, whereupon the Lord Lieutenant in 
 Council will be authorized to reduce the Income 
 in all cases when it should appear to them to 
 exceed the requirements of the casej provided 
 
 >w 
 at 
 
 the disposal of the Crown, and the Bishops, the 
 right will hardly be denied to Parliament, provided 
 it seems to them to be for the good of the Country, 
 and the Church, to deal with them at once. But 
 it will suggest itself that Lay or Private Advow- 
 sons stand on a different footing. With what 
 degree of violence the Honourable Member for 
 St. Andrew’s was prepared to deal with Lay 
 Patronage in Scotland, the House was, unfortu¬ 
 nately, prevented from fully ascertaining; but I 
 feel it to be most desirable, in endeavouring to 
 effect a great settlement of this nature, to shew as 
 scrupulous a regard as possible to all claims bear¬ 
 ing on the nature of private property, and we shall 
 therefore introduce special provisions for enabling 
 the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to indemnify the 
 owners of Lay Advowsons which come under the 
 operation of this Bill, by borrowing money, on the 
 security of the Fund, to be established from the 
 various sources I have mentioned. We propose 
 to call this the Reserve Fund , and it will be 
 - applicable, in the first place, to the payment of 
 ) stipends, or salaries, assigned to the Ministers or 
 
 that the reduct i on never brings the income b el 
 £300 a year. Now, with respect to the livings 
 
29 
 
 Curates interested with the cure of souls in the * 
 suppressed Benefices,—to the payment of the 
 charges on such parishes,—to the provision of 
 Chapels, or places of worship, and other like 
 purposes mentioned. After all such purposes ' 
 shall have been satisfied, in just accordance, I 
 conceive, with the Resolution of my Noble Friend, 
 the Secretary of State for the Home Department, 
 all the further sums that accrue in each year will 
 be applied by the Commissioners of National 
 Education in Ireland to the religious a nd moral 
 instruction of all classes of the Pe ople, without 
 distin ction of religious persuasion . As to the pro¬ 
 priety of diverting the revenues of the Church to 
 any but Ecclesiastical purposes, and the propriety 
 of applying them to the religious and moral 
 Education of the whole body of the people, without 
 distinction of religious persuasion, I feel there are 
 points which it is quite out of my present province 
 to labour; they have been already entertained, 
 debated, and decided, by this House ; and it is in 
 consequence of that decision that I now submit 
 this whole measure to their consideration. I have 
 already adverted to the objection which has been 
 expressed in some quarters on account of appre¬ 
 hended peril to the safety, nay, to the lives of the 
 existing Clerical Incumbents. I cannot, for my 
 part, anticipate, that results so horrbile could be 
 brought about by any such ardent zeal for educa¬ 
 tion, coupled with such a ruthless propensity to 
 crime as this, in my view 7 , rather morbid alarm 
 
30 
 
 pre-supposes ; and let it be observed that, although 
 the wants of the District from which the funds are 
 drawn will of course be primarily and mainly 
 consulted, nothing makes it imperative to apply 
 them within the actual bounds of the Benefice 
 become vacant; and, also, this Government, and, 
 I make no doubt, all succeeding Governments, 
 will still be prepared to call on the liberality of 
 Parliament not to stint or starve the objects of 
 popular education in Ireland, during the unavoid¬ 
 able scantiness of means which must prevail in 
 the infancy of our Reserve Fund, and through the 
 lives of existing Incumbents. 
 
 But, I maybe asked, as the Resolution, to which 
 the House has agreed, states that the spiritual 
 wants of the members of the Established Church 
 should be fully provided for in the first instance, 
 and as the Funds at present in the hands of the 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners do not by any means 
 yet meet those Ecclesiastical purposes to which 
 they are assigned, are we at liberty to apply any 
 surplus which arises under this Act, to the purposes 
 of General Education, the fund for the Ecclesiastical 
 purposes being still inadequate? I think we are 
 clearly so entitled. Beyond the 5 per cent on the 
 Composition for Tithe which we charge on the 
 Perpetuity Purchase Fund, for the benefit of the 
 existing Clergy, and which comes under the Tithe 
 Settlement, and not under the Appropriation 
 Branch of this Bill, I believe we shall hardly 
 make any trespass, beyond, at least, what we 
 
31 
 
 repay, upon the funds in the hands of the Eccle¬ 
 siastical Commissioners. It is true they are in debt 
 at present; it will take some time for them to 
 redeem it; but still, eventually, they will be in 
 possession of a surplus. With that surplus we now 
 in no way propose to deal; we leave that to the 
 disposal of future Parliaments, when the moment 
 for their interference shall have arrived. We leave 
 it just as it would have been left by the late Govern¬ 
 ment ; but under this Bill we propose certain fresh 
 modifications and curtailments of which the state 
 of the Established Church seems to us to admit; 
 within the sphere of their operation we first do 
 what we think necessary duly to provide for the 
 spiritual wants of the Members of the Established 
 Church; and it is the remaining surplus, thus 
 created anew, which we deem ourselves at liberty 
 to apply at once to the object designated in the re¬ 
 solution, the Religious and Moral Instruction of the 
 entire Irish people. 
 
 But will it be thought that when we speak of 
 Parishes without Churches or Churchmen, or with 
 but tens and twenties, out of the whole population, 
 we are but counting shadows, and making a great 
 outcry over one or two extreme instances, and that 
 this Reserve Fund will in fact have no feeders to 
 supply it? I call the attention of those who are so 
 ready to sneer at our giving only five pounds to a 
 neighbouring Clergyman, for doing the duty in 
 Parishes where there is no duty to be done, to the 
 statement of the numbers of Parishes which come 
 under the operation of this Bill :— 
 
32 
 
 
 • . 
 
 *■< CO 
 
 •■3 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O) CZJ 
 
 ^ ^ s 
 
 
 3 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 r* k 
 
 a c e 
 
 
 J s 
 
 Number of Parishes containing in 
 
 ^ a 8 
 
 
 • r- 1 
 
 number, Protestants, less thun 
 
 . o 
 ^ c ? 
 
 DIOCESES. 
 
 5 Oh 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • $J0Oh 
 
 1 No. of F 
 i out arty 
 
 r 
 
 • 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 Twenty. 
 
 Thirty. ' 
 
 i 
 
 Forty. 
 
 & 
 
 ® £ 
 
 »:is 
 -2 £ 
 ^ OrC 
 
 1. Cashel .... 
 
 14 
 
 11 
 
 16 
 
 18 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 58 
 
 2. Emly .... 
 
 10 
 
 9 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 34 
 
 3. Waterford 
 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 5 
 
 nil. 
 
 1 
 
 nil. 
 
 16 
 
 4. Lismore .... 
 
 7 
 
 14 
 
 12 
 
 9 
 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 52 
 
 5. Limerick 
 
 9 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 7 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 51 
 
 6. Ardfert and Aghadoe 
 
 7 
 
 13 
 
 12 
 
 rt 
 
 i 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 52 
 
 7. Cork. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 17 
 
 8. Ross. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 nil. 
 
 10 
 
 9. Cloyne .... 
 
 12 
 
 9 
 
 16 
 
 13 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 61 
 
 10. Killaloe .... 
 
 1 
 
 11 
 
 11 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 4 
 
 42 
 
 11. Kilfenora 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 nil. 
 
 nil. 
 
 14 
 
 12. Dublin .... 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 29 
 
 13. Kildare .... 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 39 
 
 14. Ferns .... 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 7 
 
 12 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 44 
 
 15. Leighlin .... 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 21 
 
 1 6 . Ossory .... 
 
 17 
 
 21 
 
 11 
 
 5 
 
 10 
 
 8 
 
 72 
 
 17. Tuam .... 
 
 11 
 
 13 
 
 6 
 
 9 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 43 
 
 18. Elphin .... 
 
 19. £ Clonfert and Kil- 
 
 3 
 
 10 
 
 1*2 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 34 
 
 20 A macduagh 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 33 
 
 Killala & Achonry 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 14 
 
 23. Armagh .... 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 22 
 
 24. Meath .... 
 
 6 
 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 16 
 
 6 
 
 13 
 
 84 
 
 25. Ardagh .... 
 
 nil. 
 
 nil. 
 
 1 
 
 nil. 
 
 nil. 
 
 nil. 
 
 1 
 
 26. Down .... 
 
 nil. 
 
 nil. 
 
 nil. 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 nil. 
 
 2 
 
 27. Connor .... 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 nil. 
 
 14 
 
 28. Derry .... 
 
 nil. 
 
 nil. 
 
 nil. 
 
 nil. 
 
 nil. 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 Totals 
 
 151 
 
 194 
 
 198 
 
 133 
 
 107 
 
 77 
 
 860* 
 
 * Of parishes there are stated to be at present, in Ireland, about 
 2405; and of benefices, composed either of single parishes, or of 
 unions of parishes, or parts of parishes, there are about 1385 in 
 number;—so that although one or more parishes in an union will be 
 suspended, still the benefice itself may continue although in a modi¬ 
 fied and reduced shape, as regards the amount of income. Of 
 unions of parishes there are 478, which form the principal portion of 
 the benefices affected by the contemplated provisions. 
 
33 
 
 The consequence will be that the funds, which, 
 in all these Parishes, are wholly devoted to the 
 maintenance of what I must consider a super¬ 
 fluous portion of the Established Church, because 
 it is devoted to the maintenance of sinecurists 
 
 s v 
 
 and absentees, will also in some measure be ap¬ 
 plied to the benefit of the overwhelming majority 
 of persons belonging to other persuasions, now 
 wholly unprovided by the State with the means 
 of religious, or of any, Instruction ; who will 
 thus be acknowledged as entitled to share with 
 their fellow-countrymen in that access to religious 
 and moral Education, which a paternal Govern¬ 
 ment ought not to refuse to any class of its sub¬ 
 jects. I have also had an account made up, as 
 far as it could be calculated, upon the amount 
 of the Reserve Fund likely to accrue under this 
 Bill, from the Parishes which it would affect. 
 This account does not include any sums to be 
 derived from the reduction of Benefices above 
 £300. a-year in value, because as the amount of 
 that reduction is to be discretionary, and propor¬ 
 tionate, it would of course be hardly possible to 
 form an estimate sufficiently exact; nor, for the 
 same reason, does it include any sums to be 
 derived for the letting of Glebe Houses and Glebe 
 Lands ;— 
 
 D 
 
34 
 
 DIOCESES. 
 
 Gross Amount of Reserved Fund 
 
 arising from Parishes. 
 
 Total Amount of 
 Reserved Fund. 
 
 r 
 
 In Royal or Eccle¬ 
 siastical Patronage 
 after existing in¬ 
 terests. 
 
 In Lay Patronage 
 after existing inte¬ 
 rests and indemni¬ 
 fication of Patrons. 
 
 
 
 £. 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £. 5. 
 
 d. 
 
 £» s§ d* 
 
 1. Cashel 
 
 
 5,520 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 nil. 
 
 
 
 2. Emly 
 
 
 1,760 
 
 13 
 
 6 
 
 503 15 
 
 5 
 
 
 3. Waterford 
 
 
 520 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 nil. 
 
 
 
 4. Lismore . 
 
 
 2,159 
 
 11 
 
 2 
 
 1,603 3 
 
 10 
 
 
 5. Limerick 
 
 
 2,087 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 1,512 3 
 
 10 
 
 
 6. Ardfert, &c. 
 
 
 1,762 
 
 19 
 
 6 
 
 1,178 10 
 
 6 
 
 
 7. Cork . 
 
 
 1,862 
 
 19 
 
 9 
 
 308 18 
 
 0 
 
 
 8. Ross . 
 
 
 464 
 
 16 
 
 2 
 
 nil. 
 
 
 
 9. Cloyne 
 
 
 8,802 
 
 10 
 
 9 
 
 nil. 
 
 
 
 ] 0. Killaloe . 
 
 
 1,717 
 
 0 
 
 10 
 
 1,241 0 
 
 11 
 
 
 1 1. Kilfenora 
 
 
 327 
 
 11 
 
 7 
 
 51 4 
 
 11 
 
 
 12. Dublin 
 
 
 1,013 
 
 4 
 
 9 
 
 176 12 
 
 0 
 
 
 13. Kildare . 
 
 
 1,320 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 45 15 
 
 7 
 
 
 14. Ferns 
 
 
 1,925 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 nil. 
 
 
 
 15. Leighlin . 
 
 
 1,829 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 46 3 
 
 1 
 
 
 16. Ossory 
 
 
 4,727 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 1,841 4 
 
 0 
 
 
 3 7. Tuam 
 
 
 2,668 
 
 3 
 
 5 
 
 nil. 
 
 
 
 18. Elphin 
 
 
 1,599 
 
 8 
 
 7 
 
 nil. 
 
 
 
 19. ) Clonfert and 
 
 Kil- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 20. ) macduagh 
 
 • • 
 
 512 
 
 17 
 
 4 
 
 267 12 
 
 8 
 
 
 > Killalla & Achonry 
 
 800 
 
 12 
 
 10 
 
 nil. 
 
 
 
 23. Armagh . 
 
 
 1,003 
 
 10 
 
 7 
 
 271 0 
 
 11 
 
 
 24. Meath 
 
 
 2,788 
 
 5 
 
 11 
 
 1,005 9 
 
 6 
 
 
 25. Ardagh . 
 
 
 16 
 
 16 
 
 4 
 
 nil. 
 
 
 
 26. Down 
 
 
 56 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 nil. 
 
 
 
 27. Connor . 
 
 
 588 
 
 16 
 
 5 
 
 125 10 
 
 6 
 
 
 28. Derry . . 
 
 
 63 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 nil. 
 
 
 
 
 
 47,898 
 
 11 
 
 7 
 
 10,178 5 
 
 7 
 
 58,076 17 2* 
 
 
 
 l Exclusive 
 
 of Glebe Lands. 
 
 
 * The principle upon which this calculation has been formed is as 
 follows :—From the existing amounts of composition, £30. per cent, has 
 been, in the first place, deducted as contemplated by the Bill;—and, after 
 allowing a sum of £5. per parish, for those parishes in which there are 
 not any Protestants, an average stipend of £25. per parish for those in 
 which there are less than 50 Protestants, without Church or Glebe 
 House; as also an average stipend of £65. per parish for those in which 
 there are less than 50 Protestants, but having either a Church or Glebe 
 House, the surplus, as above stated, will arise in each diocese from and 
 ter the cessation of existing interests. 
 
35 
 
 I think that the mere statement of facts con¬ 
 tained in these enumerations must make an im¬ 
 pression beyond the compass of any declamation 
 to reach; and that all the arts of diction cannot 
 come up to this bare arithmetic. 
 
 It will be remembered that, in the debates on 
 the Church Temporalities’ Act, we heard much of 
 the expansive force of Protestantism, and I am 
 glad so far to find, in the shape of corroboration 
 to that expression, that the Report of the Com¬ 
 missioners of Public Instruction states the numbers 
 of many of the Protestant and Church of England 
 congregations in Ireland to be on the increase. 
 We have not been inattentive to this branch of 
 the consideration, and we provide that, if, at any 
 subsequent time, the number of members of the 
 Established Church should increase in such a 
 manner as that the arrangements adopted under 
 this Act should be found, in the judgment of the 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners, inadequate to the 
 spiritual wants of the Parish, they are specially to 
 report the circumstances to the Lord Lieutenant 
 in Council, and to submit at the same time the 
 proposition which they may think called for by 
 the circumstances of the case. If the Lord Lieu¬ 
 tenant in Council should approve of this Report 
 and Proposition, they are to be laid before Parlia¬ 
 ment ; and, after the expiration of six months from 
 that period, the Ecclesiastical Commissioners may 
 carry their proposition into effect, unless Parlia¬ 
 ment shall have otherwise directed. 
 
36 
 
 I believe that the Bill only contains, further, 
 two or three clauses for the purpose of amending, 
 filling up, and extending, some portions of the 
 Church Temporalities Act, but as they are only 
 framed with the view to act in the obvious spirit, 
 and fulfil the evident intentions, of this Act, I need 
 hardly enter into any detail of them at present; 
 they mainly provide that the property of Minor 
 Canons and Vicars Choral should be vested in the 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners, subject to provisions 
 for existing interests, and the discharge of actual 
 duties. The Tithes disappropriated from Dignities 
 in case of Vicarages, or other Cures, being specially 
 endowed, may be carried to the general account 
 of the same Commissioners ; and the tenants of 
 Bishops, instead of paying down the purchase- 
 money for Perpetuities, may give a Mortgage, at a 
 reduced interest, payable within a limited period. 
 I ought, perhaps, to add, that any additional sums 
 arising out of these provisions, being subsidiary to 
 the operation of the Church Temporalities Act, 
 will, conformably with the principle to which I 
 before adverted, be applied to the General Fund 
 under the administration of the Ecclesiastical Com¬ 
 missioners for the purposes of that Act. 
 
 I have now gone through the main provisions of 
 the measure which I have the honour to submit to 
 the House. It comprises many heads ; it covers 
 much ground; it touches important principles; 
 and, therefore, I know that in its progress it must 
 expect to encounter many assailants, perhaps from 
 many quarters. 
 
37 
 
 I believe the settlement of the Tithe Question to 
 be as indispensable to a suffering Clergy, as I think 
 a fresh appropriation is called for by a superabun¬ 
 dant Establishment; and, therefore, I think the 
 Bill rightly and fairly connects and couples them 
 together. I also am pleased to think that while 
 the Bill does not shrink from grappling openly and 
 boldly with the question of Appropriation—while 
 it assails all Sinecures, in spite of any prescriptions, 
 I believe, in my conscience, that its tendency will 
 be to give to Protestants themselves—to that very 
 Church, which it may probably be represented 
 merely as an attempt to rob, defraud, and pillage, 
 sources of strength and vitality which have been 
 long dried up before : and it is hardly fanciful to 
 hope, that in many Parishes where the untended 
 flock has hitherto been unconscious of the ministra¬ 
 tions, and even of the existence, of their Pluralist 
 or Absentee Incumbent, it may, for the first time, 
 cause “ the sound of a church-going bell” to be 
 heard. Such advantages however, invaluable as 
 they would be in my eyes, 1 admit to be almost in¬ 
 cidental to the main object of the measure, which 
 is, that when you are calling upon the country to 
 ratify and secure, at considerable cost and sacrifice, 
 the future maintenance of a Church Establishment, 
 which alone ought to exist on the plea of the na¬ 
 tional good, you are called upon to give to it that 
 decent conformity with the tenure of its existence, 
 and with the extent of its duties, as may render it 
 an object of unforced esteem, and respectful for- 
 
38 
 
 bearance, instead of an unfailing source of con¬ 
 temptuous reproach, and angry resistance. If the 
 proposition I am now making is calculated, in the 
 slightest degree, to operate against the interests of 
 Truth and real Religion, no one more heartily 
 desires its failure. It is with the most confident 
 wishes for its success that I now move for “ leave 
 to bring in a Bill for the better Regulation of Ec¬ 
 clesiastical Revenues, and the promotion of Reli¬ 
 gious and Moral Education in Ireland.” 
 
 THE END. 
 
 NORMAN AND SKEEN, IRINTERS, MAIDEN LANE, COVENT GARDEN 
 
PROSPECTUS. 
 
 In July , 1835, will be Published , 
 
 Price Four Shillings, 
 
 (BY JAMES RIDGWAY & SONS, PICCADILLY,) 
 
 N° 1, 
 
 OF 
 
 THE BRITISH AND FOREIGN 
 
 REVIEW; 
 
 OR, 
 
 EUROPEAN QUARTERLY JOURNAL. 
 
 “ In primisque hominis est propria veri inquisitio atque investigation’ 
 
 Cicero de Off. 
 
 It is commonly said, that charity begins at home. Might 
 we not add, that it too frequently ends there ? With nations 
 and individuals, domestic interests are apt to absorb those 
 affections, the influence of which might be extended benefi¬ 
 cially, without injury to the rights of those who from nature 
 have the first claim upon them. If we consider that the 
 blessings of charity are upon him that gives, as well as upon 
 him that receives; that the good which is done to others 
 returns upon its author in a thousand ways; we shall find 
 even the selfish passions enlisted on the side of enlarged 
 beneficence. However true this observation, it is yet seldom 
 that nations are sensible of its advantages. Selfishness, 
 condemned in individuals, has been considered the privilege 
 of communities ; restrictions upon commerce have been 
 thought the most effectual means of acquiring national 
 wealth; and free institutions at home have been held to be 
 best protected by crushing every germ of liberty abroad. 
 
 Indifference to the condition of every nation but their 
 own, has been the peculiar reproach of Englishmen. To 
 amass riches and to enjoy them, have been said to be the 
 occupation of their lives. Our exertions are about to be 
 directed to calling the attention of the Public to the close 
 
% 
 
 Prospectus. 
 
 connexion which exists between the progress of social and 
 intellectual improvement in England and in other countries. 
 
 A work, conducted upon this plan, seems, at the present 
 moment, to be particularly required. The periodical meetings 
 of men of science in the different capitals and large towns 
 of Europe, indisputably show, that there is a general desire 
 to be acquainted with scientific discoveries. The human 
 mind begins to be impatient of the trammels, which narrow 
 policy, or ignorant prejudice, had imposed upon it. What 
 reason can be assigned that the division of labour should 
 not produce as important results in speculative science, as 
 in the mechanical arts? It is our good fortune to live at a 
 time, when the anxiety for useful reform is unbounded. 
 We earnestly hope that our efforts for its gratification may 
 not be entirely fruitless. 
 
 The literature of our own country is, we believe, acknow¬ 
 ledged to be at a low ebb. No poetical work of the first 
 order issues from the press. History is very little cultivated, 
 and Philosophy seems to be neglected. Cheap publications 
 for elementary education abound, composed with a skill that 
 is admirably adapted for its great and useful purpose. Essays 
 on ephemeral subjects, and Novels, certainly well written, but 
 of temporary interest, have filled the place of works calculated 
 to instruct the mind in solid truths, and elevate the feelings 
 above the passions and interests of the moment. Much as 
 this is to be regretted, the remedy is not easily suggested. 
 While the mind continues to be agitated by the hope or 
 fear of great changes, it will not readily subside into a 
 temper suited to philosophical inquiry, or to the calm 
 enjoyment of intellectual occupations. We are, however, 
 not discouraged by the prevalent inclination for the agitating 
 topics of the day, since we shall have ample opportunities 
 of ministering to that taste in our Review of foreign and 
 domestic politics. 
 
 Throughout Europe, an anxious struggle is going on between 
 liberal and anti-liberal opinions, or, if we may so describe it, 
 between the voluntary and compulsory principle of Govern¬ 
 ment. After what we have already expressed, it is scarcely 
 necessary for us to declare our warm attachment to the former. 
 We should be glad to see England take a more generous view 
 of the contest, which is shaking the throne of the despot, and 
 
Prospectus. 
 
 3 
 
 encouraging the hopes of every sincere lover of freedom. Her 
 insular position cannot now, as formerly, protect her from 
 foreign interference. The power of steam has thrown a bridge 
 over the channel, which separates her from the continent—a 
 bridge which no storm can scatter. Her liberty can no longer 
 exist alone. If sympathy with others be wanting, self-defence 
 should awaken her to the necessity of taking unequivocally one 
 side or the other, in a contention of principle, where the crisis 
 is not only inevitable, but fast approaching. 
 
 The Conductors of the British and Foreign Review do not 
 disguise their anxiety to see the restoration of Poland to an 
 independent place among the nations of Europe. Nor is this 
 desire founded solely on motives of humanity and justice. They 
 consider, that upon her reinstatement may depend the issue of 
 the question, whether England and the Western States of 
 Europe shall remain in undisturbed possession of their free 
 institutions, and be able to improve them in tranquillity; or, 
 shall be continually exposed to degrading and jealous inter¬ 
 ruptions from powers less civilized than themselves, who fear 
 that the example of reform, if successful, may not be lost upon 
 their own subjects. Russia seems to be the last hold of con¬ 
 servatism in Europe, to which all anti-reformers turn their eyes 
 for succour in their distress. Against her encroachments, Poland 
 would be an impassable barrier. It is as friends of freedom, 
 no less than of humanity, that the conductors of this Review 
 desire to see the spoliation of Poland avenged, and the example 
 of justice, though tardy, substituted for that of unpunished 
 crime. 
 
 But in this work Poland shall have her place, and no more. 
 Her cause shall have its share, and no more than its share, of 
 the attention which every European Journal, conducted upon 
 honest and liberal principles, must bestow upon the most op¬ 
 pressed nation of the world. Our object is truth—our motive 
 charity; and we trust that over our conduct, as reasoners and 
 as critics, fairness and candour will be found to preside, without 
 fettering the freedom of inquiry, or narrowing the province of 
 just censure. Those who are opposed to us in politics, shall 
 be treated with tolerance and respect; whilst in literature and 
 science, our arguments shall be advanced with the caution 
 becoming men who are in search of truth, and be studiously 
 stripped of the arrogance which denotes the propagandist. 
 
4 Prospectus. 
 
 We are still painfully aware, how difficult may be the task 
 of engaging the public mind in the investigation of anything, 
 considered to be of so uncertain attainment, as truth. We are, 
 however, inclined to believe that this uncertainty may be over¬ 
 rated. Some one has said, that there is a question often put, 
 and never answered, “ What is truth?” But Lord Bacon ob¬ 
 serves, that it was put “ by jesting Pilate, who would not stay 
 “ for an answer.” His conclusion seems to be correct, for truth 
 may generally be found, if honestly and industriously pursued. 
 But if the path to her abode be choked up by party animosi¬ 
 ties and pedantic jealousies; if the light of reason be neglected; 
 if vanity beguile, if impatience entangle, or ignorance weigh us 
 down in the investigation; ought we to complain, or be sur¬ 
 prised, if we miss that reward, which never was sincerely sought, 
 and fail of attaining the end, for which we had not provided 
 ourselves with the means ? 
 
 It only remains for the conductors of the British and Foreign 
 Review, to entreat from the public its kind indulgence towards 
 their future labours. In their politics, they will be found the 
 zealous and steady advocates of peace, when it can be main¬ 
 tained consistently with the national safety and honour: but 
 should they be compelled to choose between the alternatives, 
 they will not hesitate to express their preference of a just and 
 honourable war, to a precarious or disgraceful repose. In their 
 criticisms and discussions, they will be anxious to avoid giving 
 personal offence. They will ask assistance from the wise and 
 the learned, and spare no exertions to provide for their readers 
 useful and agreeable entertainment. 
 
 CONTENTS OF THE FIRST NUMBER. 
 
 1. —Introductory Essay. 
 
 2. —French Government and Parties. 
 
 3. —Poland. 
 
 4. —Municipal Corporations. 
 
 5. —Progress of English Science. 
 
 6. —Taxes on Knowledge. 
 
 7. —Ecclesiastical Reform. 
 
 8. —State of English Literature. 
 
 9. —Diplomacy of Russia. 
 
 10. —Quadruple Treaty. 
 
 11. —English Parties. 
 
 12. —Postscript. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ...