him, that it was an appropriation to pay | there was no ground for the taunt of the to the landlord 251. per cent.; and he would noble Lord below him. He rejoiced at say, it was an infinitely worse appropria-hearing the speech of the noble Lord, the tion than to apply the same amount for the purposes of education, or to any other charitable purposes. He was anxious to preserve the fund, but, at the same time, he was anxious for a final settlement; and it was, because the present proposition would not effect such a settlement, because it would only temporarily heal a wound, which would afterwards break out worse, and because he believed it would not accomplish an object, which he, for one, thought it most desirable to accomplish, and for which, if it could be accomplished, he would be most willing to increase a grant, that he opposed the present motion.

Sir B. Hall fully concurred, in what had fallen from the two hon. Members who had preceded him, and having recorded his vote in the year 1833, when a similar resolution was before the House, against the grant of money to the clergy of Ireland, he should vote with them on the present occasion, as no argument had been advanced, and no reasons assigned why a different course should be pursued now. The noble Lord, as stated by his hon. Friend near him, had taunted some hon. Members who took a course adverse to the Government for not having expressed their objections to the grant before that evening. He must say, that he did not consider that it was very wise or very considerate, on the part of the noble Lord, to do so. He must have known, that many Members were now n the House who formed part of the Parliament of 1833; and it might naturally be supposed, that those who voted in the minority then, would take the same view of the matter now, that they did at that period. Circumstances remained the same, excepting that the people were placed in rather a worse position, because, instead of a loan of one million, they were now called upon to give up positively about 740,000l., and to make another grant of the remainder of the million. But what opportunity had been afforded to make any objections? The plan was first pro posed by the Gentlemen opposite on Saturday; it was agreed to by the noble Lord on the Treasury-bench, and that evening was fixed for the discussion. The earliest possible moment had been taken by them to explain their sentiments, and

Secretary at War; he was glad that the
opinions entertained in that respect were
not merely entertained by the noble Lord
as a Member of the Government, but that
they would be placed upon record, and he
trusted the time would soon arrive when
those opinions would be acted upon, and
form part of the policy of a Government.
The policy pursued now was of a very
questionable nature, and the noble Lord
(Lord John Russell) had given great cause
for alarm in the latter part of his speech;
for he had intimated that he should adapt
his course to such measures as he thought
would be carried; but he hoped that the
noble Lord would never give up his own
opinions in deference to those of his
opponents. Independent of the present
resolutions, a bill had been passed in that
House, whereby a municipal franchise had
been granted to the people of Ireland-it
was well known, that great alterations had
been made in another place, and it would
be too bad, if, when hon. Members had
given their support to Government for the
lower franchise, if they should be called
upon to support the bill in its altered form
according to the views of the hon. Gentle-
men opposite. As regarding the present
grant of money, he considered it unneces-
sary. It was another instalment they were
called upon to make, and he believed
many more would follow; and seeing no
change in the position of circumstances,
and retaining the same sentiments as those
he recorded upon a former occasion, he
should vote against the resolutions.

Mr. C. P. Villiers would not have risen upon the present occasion, if the Liberal Members had not been charged by the noble Lord with not expressing their opinions. He did not dread the reproaches of the noble Lord, nor the expressions of hon, Gentlemen opposite; but he was somewhat alarmed lest those who sent him to that House, or if any body of his countrymen should call upon him to explain any vote which he might give, if it were not in support of the amendment of his hon. Friend, the Member for Kilkenny. In common with many English Members, he felt, that a great debt was due to Ireland for the manner in which we had long misgoverned her; and if the noble Lord had held out any hope, that this grant would make any improvement, or form

Members say, if Ireland were called upon to pay the church rates of England? What would they say, if, instead of seeking to repeal the law, the English Dissenters had refused to pay church rates, and had called upon Ireland to pay their debts? Was not this an illustration precisely in point? He had not heard any Irish Member state what he had understood, that some had avowed, that they were ready to take the English money, and still to agitate for the abolition of tithes. He did not believe, that this was the general feeling in Ireland. Such was not a morality which any one could defend. When they considered what the Dissenters in England had done under the same cir cumstances, he did not believe, that there was such a difference between the morality of an English Dissenter and of an Irish Catholic as to lead to such a different course of action. The English Dissenters had been offered to have the church rates charged upon the consoli dated fund, but they had said, that they would not allow of this: they insisted, that church rates should be altogether abolished. But, if they had adopted the suggestion which had been made, they might have taken the money from the public fund, and still have continued to agitate for the abolition of the rates. And he was sure, that the English people would consider it a dangerous and serious violation of the security of property, and of the principles of justice, if they sanctioned this arbitrary resistance to the law.

any permanent basis for a settlement, | payment of church rates, but what would there was not a man in the House who would not have been willing to grant a much larger sum. But in the total absence of any kind of hope on this ground, he would vote with his hon. Friend against this unjust appropriation of the public money. The noble Lord had said, that the great object was, to have a practieal settlement; but this was, in his (Mr. Villiers's) opinion, a practical question; because, if it were not practical, and if he did not hope to derive benefit from it, he could not support it. If the vote had been proposed on the ground that that people were too poor, and that the occupying tenants could not pay the amount, the noble Lord might come forward with a good plea to relieve them from the amount; but if it were proposed on the ground, that the people did not object to the amount, but to the distribution, what became of the plea? The whole question turned upon this-had any hon. Member ventured to state, that the destination was not what was objected to? And when that was the ground for resisting the payment of the arrears which were due, he would ask, whether England ought to be called upon to pay them? The bill in no way provided for the better management or disposition of the tithes, and therefore he objected to it. And what answer could they give to the people of England why they voted away the 260,000l., in addition to the 640,000l. already lent, without a prospect of benefiting Ireland, or of relieving her from any of her grievances? Was not every species of reform Mr. O'Connell did not think, he said, in England stopped for the want of money? that he had ever heard a more unfounded Was not the education of the people attack upon the people of Ireland than was not a better means of internal com- that which had just been made by the munication-was not an uniform rate of hon. Member for Wolverhampton. He post-all stopped because they could not might be mistaken in entertaining such an spare 100,0007.? And yet they were now opinion respecting that attack, as he was called upon to vote away a larger amount a party in the cause. Yet he thought, of the publie money for a useless purpose that he could satisfy every reasonable -a purpose which, if he were called person, that the whole of the attack of upon, he would describe as one for en- the hon. Member, even according to that couraging in one party resistance to all hon. Member's own principles, was utterly reform in the Trish Church, and others to unfounded. That hon. Member had said, disobey the law. What were they to that the people of Ireland had as much tell the Irish, that they were to suffer right to call upon the English people to nothing for resisting the law, and for re-pay their tithes, as the English people fusing the payment of tithes? What a would have to call upon the people of moral would they be thus inculcating; Ireland to pay the church rates, which the what encouragement were they giving to Dissenters of England refused to pay. persons to stand in the way of reform! Why, the people of Ireland did not insist The Dissenters in England objected to the upon the people of England paying church

rates, and therefore it would be most un- But it was also said the English would just to charge them with the payment of willingly contribute if the cure were to be church rates; but the people of England, radical, but they would not pay for a paron the other hand, insisted upon the people tial cure. They could not answer for the of Ireland supporting the Protestant church event. He did not tell them, that it in Ireland. He appealed to hon. Gentle- would be a radical cure; but, then, would men on the other side, whether the people they not contribute some portion of their of England had not sent a great majority wealth, when they were about to soften of Members there pledged to support the and ameliorate the evil that oppressed the Protestant church in Ireland. He thought country. The history of the transaction they were wrong in doing so. Hon. Gen- appeared to be totally forgotten. Both tlemen opposite thought, that the English Tories and Whigs agreed, that the system people were right. There was no disputing could not go on in Ireland. Both agreed, the fact. Then what did it come to? that there must be an alteration. The The people of England sent their Repre- right hon. Baronet opposite (Sir H. Harsentatives there to insist, that an over- dinge) had brought in a bill on the subwhelming majority of Irishmen that ject. that ject. By that it would be found, that a 6,500,000 men should pay tithes for the diminution of tithes to the amount of 25 benefit merely of 800,000 persons. Was per cent. was sanctioned by the right hon. not this the fact the admitted fact? Baronet. They might talk of injustice if And ought not, then, the people of Eng- thy pleased, but injustice to that extent land to pay for that? He turned then as had been sanctioned by hon. Gentlemen to the morality of the thing, and asked his opposite. The present Government then hon. Friend what morality or what justice accedes to that proposition. They said, could there be in the people of England that things could not remain as they were. sending a majority of Members there to If they refused the experiment, that was secure, that the Church of the few should now about to be made, he asked them if be supported by the many, and then re- they thought, that things could remain as fusing, when they were called upon, to they were? The right hon. Baronet had pay for that which they themselves had proposed, that the arrears should be prowished for. The Church of the few in vided for. Now, for the first time, a bill Ireland was an English luxury at the ex- had been proposed without providing for pense of Ireland, and it was only fair, that arrears. He asked them if it would be a little of the expense should now be right to have those arrears unprovided for. borne by England. He then turned He could understand their opposing the round upon them, and asked them if Government bill altogether; but then he the people of Ireland were strong enough could not understand their opposing to maintain the Catholic Church in this the only means, and the only country, and to appropriate to it all the emollient to such a measure, which revenues, tithes, and wealth now possessed gave it a chance of succeeding, or could by the Established Church-if the Irish soften its harshness and asperity. The were strong enough to do this, and to send enormous grievance of the tithe system bayonets to this country to uphold the was, that it compelled the nine-tenths to Church, as the hon. Member for Lambeth pay for the support of the Church of the had called the Irish establishment "the one-tenth. That was the evil, that the Church of bayonets"-and if they made original sin, that the original injustice; the English Protestants pay tithes to the and it was to that they ought to apply the Roman Catholics, they being the one-six- proper remedies. Seven millions of Cateenth of the population of England-then tholics and Dissenters paid for the Church he said, that nothing could be more just of one million-nay, not for so many, as than that the people of Ireland should pay the members of the Established Church for compelling the people of England to did not exceed 800,000. They might so contribute to the Church of the minority. far degrade the Irish, that they could exWithout meaning any personal disrespect tinguish their resistance for a time, as to the hon. Member for Wolverhampton, he they had done, when they had abominably must say, that he regarded with infinite violated the treaty of Limerick, which an scorn the argument which went to show, that hon. Baronet ventured to defend in that the English would not payfor that which they House, but shrunk from its defence elsethought it was good for the Irish to pay. I where. After 1759 not less than seventy

that of conciliation would require the

The Committee divided on the original motion :-Ayes 170; Noes 61: Majority 109.

List of the AYES.

Adam, Admiral
Anson, hon. Col.
Archbold, R.
Baker. E.
Baillie, Colonel
Bannerman, E.
Baring, H. B.
Barnard, E. G.
Barrington, Lord
Bateson, Sir R.
Bellew, R. M.
Blair, J.
Blennerhassett, A.

Ferguson, Sir R.
Fitzgibbon, Colonel
Fremantle, Sir T.
French, F.

Gibson, T.

Gladstone, W. E.

Gordon, R.
Goulburn, H.

Graham, Sir J.

Grant, F. W.
Grey, Sir C.
Grey, Sir G.

four capital felonies had been placed on the statute book for resistance to tithes. smaller sacrifice from them. Were they For the forty years following, during the determined by force to compel the people Irish Parliament, the resistance to tithes of Ireland to submit to the exaction in its continued, and now for thirty-eight years present form? He hoped not. Were since the Union, it had been persevered in. they prepared to refuse the bill? He did It had lulled for a time. They might at- not think so. Were they resolved upon tempt to put it down by brute force, but refusing the grant? He did not suppose it would rise again, Both sides were so; but then, if they had faith in their agreed, that they ought to put an end to own nostrum, and to make the experiment the existing state of things. At least they by conciliation, at length they ought to do ought now to attempt the experiment; but so, and for the first time in Ireland. how were they to go on with it, if they were to leave the arrears to be collected. In that case it would be impossible for them to succeed, and he did not say they would succeed, even if they paid the arrears; for the original injustice remained. The noble Lord (Howick) had spoken of the superior force and truth of Protestantism. He differed with the noble Lord as to that superiority; but then what chance had truth in making its way with the people, when it was only known, to them, as the cause of every oppression and every injustice they endured. They could not have corporations for Ireland, because they were not members of the Church; and then there was the holy alliance of corpo-Brabazon, Lord ration abuses and the truth of Protestant- Bradshaw, J. ism. They could not defile Protestantism Bridgeman, H. more than they had done, by representing it as a bayonet Church, as a taxing Church, as an exclusive Church, and as the excuse for every abuse continuing in Ireland. They who supported such a system were the apostles of anti-protestantism. He had risen merely for the purpose of protesting against the doctrine that it was to be said, that there was any immorality in their looking for that money which gave the only chance of settling the question, or of promoting conciliation. When hon. Gentlemen on his side of the House taunted Government with not following out the appropriation principle, he asked, what chance would the Ministry have of pushing the principle further than that House? No delusion, in his opinion, could be greater than that which would tell the people of Ireland, that the Ministry could carry the appropriation principle. desired, that the present experiment should be made fairly. It might be said, that a large sum was asked for; but if not granted, would they not have to pay a larger sum for the maintenance of the army and artillery in Ireland? They must have a system of force, or of conciliation; and

He

Broadley, H.
Brownrigg, S,
Bruges, W. H. L.
Bryan, G.
Burrell, Sir C.
Campbell, Sir H.
Campbell, Sir J.
Carnac, Sir J. R.
Cavendish, C.
Chetwynd, Major
Childers, J. W.
Clements, Lord
Clayton, Sir W.
Coote, Sir C. II.
Corry, hon. H.
Cowper, W F.
Crawley, S,
Curry, W.
Dalmeny, Lord
De Horsey, S. H.
Dalrymple, Sir A.
Douglas, Sir C.

'Dick, Q.

Duffield, T.
Dunbar, G.
East, J. B.
Eaton, R. J.
Egerton, W. T.
Ellis, J.
Estcourt, T.
Evans, G.
Farnham, E. B.

Grimsditch, T. Grimston, Lord Grimston, hoa. E. Hardinge, Sir H. llenniker, Lord Herbert, bon. S.

Hillsborough, Earl of

Hobhouse, Sir J.

Hobhouse, T. B.

Hodgson, R.

Hogg, J. W.
Hope, hon. C.
Hope, G. W.
Hotham, Lord
Howick, Lord
Hurst, R. H.
Hurt, F.
Hutton, R.
Ingestrie, Viscount
Inglis, Sir R. H.
James, Sir W. C.
Jermyn, Earl
Jones, T.

Kemble, H.

Kerrison, Sir E.

Kinnaird, bon. A.
Knight, H. G.
Knightley, Sir C.
Labouchere, H.
Lefevre, C. S.
Lefroy, T,
Lincoln, Earl of
Loch, J.

Lockhart, A. M.

Lowther, Lord
Lowther, J. H