Lords Sitting of 23 February 1832

MINUTES.
Bill. Read a first time; for Assimilating the Processes in the Common Law Courts.
Petitions presented. By Earl SEFTON, from the Licensed Victuallers of Windsor for an Alteration of the Law in regard to Property left at their Houses:—By Lord CLONCURRY, from the Inhabitants of Derrypatrick, in favour of Parliamentary Reform, and for the Abolition of the Tithe System in Ireland:—By Lord KING, from the Inhabitants of Carrickbeg, for the Abolition of Tithes and Church Hates; from the Members of the National Trades Political Union, Dublin, for the Repeal of the Irish Vestry Acts:—By the Marquis of LANSDOWN, from the Students of Medicine, Glasgow; and by the Duke of SUSSEX, from the Surgeons of Lancaster, to facilitate Anatomical Studies.

TITHES (IRELAND).
Lord Kinghad several petitions to present to their Lordships from places and persons in Ireland, praying for the abolition of Tithes, and for resuming the Church lands. They were from Old Leighlin, Wells, Killinane, Tallowcreen, Killrew, Tryvett, and from the members of the National Trades Political Union of Dublin. The latter contained statements which fully showed the injustice of the existing system. In presenting these petitions, he begged leave to point out the enormous amount of many Church livings. In the county of Down, the petitioners stated, there was one worth 3,700 l. a year; in Cloyne, some were 2,000 l., others 1,800 l.; and six were worth 1,500 l. In the county of Cork, there were fifty-six livings worth 46,000 l. per annum; and the Bishop's land in that county consisted of 671,0,00 acres. The petitioners concluded by stating, that, between the years 1817 and 1822, there had been 3,039 tithe causes tried. Their Lordships must observe the difference which existed between the tithe system of England and that of Ireland. In England it was a tax on

675
profit; in Ireland it was an immediate tax on the cultivation of the soil, and, if not abolished, the people must starve; it had become a question whether the people should exist or not. He believed the matter had gone as far as it could, and that it was impossible longer to maintain the present system of tithes in Ireland: indeed, he considered that the question of their extinction was as much settled as if an Act of Parliament for effecting that object had already passed the Legislature. He trusted that there would be no contest with the people of Ireland—no coercion; for, sure he was, that the people of England would not consent to pay one single pound sterling in support of such a cause. The people of Ireland were unalterably determined on the total extinction of tithes. The question would be settled in the same way as Catholic Emancipation was settled: the law would be passed when it was impossible longer to resist. By not giving timely relief to the Catholics, they had brought that Association into existence, which no one could deny was the means of carrying Catholic Emancipation. So it would be with tithes. The most impolitic course possible would be, to enter into a contest with the people, either for the purpose of enforcing the payment of tithes now due, or for the collection of those which might become due hereafter, for certain it was, that the result of such a contest must be, that those who undertook the office of collecting them would be defeated.
The Earl of Limerickdid not wish to raise a debate on the presentation of petitions—a course which he considered to be highly inconvenient; but he wished to ask the noble Baron, whether he was aware of the consequences likely to ensue from the declarations he had made, and if he was really serious in giving the weight of his rank and character to the doctrine that the property which had been vested for hundreds of years in the Church was at once to be destroyed and made away with, because the people of Ireland, or any portion of them, thought proper to say, that should be the case? He wished to know, if the noble Baron was aware of the extent to which such a doctrine would lead him? He observed the presentation of petitions similar to the present with regret, and it was with much pain that he witnessed the excited state of the public mind on this subject in Ireland. He thought that these evils could be mainly traced to the prompt-
676
ings of a person holding a high station among the Catholic clergy of Ireland, who had advised the uneducated and wild peasantry, of whom his flock chiefly consisted, not to obey the law, but to keep their money in their pockets. Again, many of the evils of Ireland were attributed to a pauper population, which increased without limits: but were their Lordships aware that the great cause of that increase arose from the Catholic priesthood encouraging marriage in all descriptions of people, the old and the young? He regretted to find that those who ought to preach conciliation and peace, and who had sworn not to do any thing to injure the Protestant religion in Church or State, had set so fatal an example. It was not to be borne, that the doctrines advanced by such persons should receive the least countenance in that House; and he hoped their Lordships would consider well the consequences of any measure which might be introduced, before they agreed to strip the Church of that property which it had enjoyed for so many years, under the protection of the law.
Lord Cloncurryhaving been requested to support the prayers of several of the petitions intrusted to the noble Baron, did so with great pleasure. He would take the opportunity to offer a few observations in answer to what had fallen from the noble Earl, who, he (Lord Cloncurry) was sure—had he been resident on his estate in Ireland—would have found how utterly impossible it was for the people to pay their tithes. With respect to the conduct of the Catholic priesthood, they were pressed forward by the force of public opinion, and they would have no influence, if they were not to obey it. It was impossible, therefore, that they could remain silent, when they saw demands made upon the people which it was out of their power to satisfy. With reference to another question, in some degree connected with this, he (Lord Cloncurry) had, on a former evening, said, there were many persons who had been appointed to the magistracy who were not eligible persons to fill such situations; and the noble Earl (the Earl of Limerick) seemed then to think that he had been misinformed He had, consequently, made further inquiry on the subject, and he found, that when the Road Sessions Bill passed about six years ago, which Bill required that the Commissioners should be Magistrates possessed of pro-

677
perty to the amount of 250 l. a year, there were only a few capable of qualifying for the office. In his own county, he recollected seeing a gentleman, who had served the office of Sheriff three times, actually chased out of the county for a debt of 100 l. His observations, he would admit, only applied to times past; because, certainly, the persons who had recently held the office of Lord Chancellor, had purified the list of Magistrates to a very great extent.
The Earl of Limerickdid not think the noble Lord was quite in order, in referring to what had taken place in a former debate; but notwithstanding that, he wished to set him right on the point in question. The noble Lord said, on that occasion—and he went back, not for six years, but through a much longer period—that a moiety of the Magistracy of Ireland who had been appointed, were men without either property or character. In reply to that remark, he (the Earl of Limerick) asked, whether the noble Lord was prepared to say, that the Magistracy of Ireland, in the year 1798, were of that character. They had then, in that crisis, stood nobly forward, and had done their duty manfully and fearlessly.
Lord Kingsaid, that the noble Earl asked him if he was aware of the consequences of yielding to the present applications, and of the extent to which the doctrine which he advocated would lead him. In reply, he could only declare, that the tithe was a most anomalous possession—that it interfered with production, and taxed the industry of the people; and, therefore, the advice he gave to the clergy was, "make the best compromise you can before it be too late: the tithe must go—the system is indefensible: compromise while you have it in your power." Neither he nor the petitioners contemplated the extending of the doctrine to any other species of property; and some of the petitioners expressly declared that "they disclaimed all interference with any other property," and they repelled such a charge as a gross and scandalous libel upon them.
The Earl of Eldonwished to draw attention to the manner in which these petitions had been referred to by the noble Lord who presented them. He (Lord Eldon), as a member of the Church of England, felt it his duty to acknowledge the attention paid to this subject by the noble Earl (Grey), and the noble Marquis (Lansdowne) opposite, and he would also say, that, whether extinction or commuta-
678
tion of tithes was contemplated, when the bill came before the House it should have his best attention. But, for God's sake, he implored noble Lords to take care how they meant to deal with acknowledged property. The petition, as opened by the noble Lord, expressed nothing whatever with respect to the merits of the clergy: "it stated that the Church property, formerly belonging to monasteries, had since become that of the Established Church, and now prayed its total abolition." Now, he would ask the lay impropriators, who possessed a great portion of tithe property, whether they could agree to such a proposition as this, simply because the people said they would not pay? Such a declaration ought to be a reason why they should be careful even how they received such petitions. The appropriation of this particular property was in accordance with the principle of British law, which gave the Crown the disposal of all property left to charitable uses. It became in part the property of the Church, and of those lay owners who now were in the House, and heard him; and he again begged leave to ask those lay impropriators, what they thought of a petition which called on them to abolish a revenue which had been in their possession for generations? He had lived long—for some people, perhaps, too long; but God forbid he should live to see the House of Peers disgrace itself by passing any measure which he conscientiously believed to be a wrong one, without his at least offering it his strongest opposition.
Lord Kingbegged to tell the noble Earl, his observations did not apply to lay impropriators. His observations were intended to be general: the petitioners declared they had no intention to avoid paying their landlords.
Lord Wynfordsaid, that no one who attended to what was going on in the country for the last twenty years could pay much attention to the declaration of the petitioners, that they would be content with destroying one species of property only. For his part, he could make no distinction between one kind of property and another established by law. It was all based on the same right, and supported by the same law, and if one kind came down the other must immediately follow. He presumed that the petitioners, in declaring they did not go beyond the abolition of tithe in Ireland, wished the

679
House to understand they did not contemplate any invasion of the Church property in England. To that he had only to say, in his mind, the Church in both countries was the same. The Church of England and of Ireland had the same foundation, and together they must stand or fall; and when the Establishment was pulled down, he ventured to predict that every thing worth preserving would share the same fate, and be involved in the same ruin. He regretted to find that the spirit of resistance against tithes was fostered by the exertions of a Roman Catholic prelate, who, a few years since, declared, in a Committee of the House, that if Catholic Emancipation were granted, the people of Ireland would be content, and readily enter into a commutation of tithes. The result had shown how much the reverend Gentleman had mistaken that measure; and he thought that he, of all other persons, was called upon not to excite the people to any systematic opposition against the laws. He regretted to find that the main spring of the resistance to tithes was this reverend personage. He looked upon the works he had published as the orign of all the evils which at present afflicted society in Ireland; and he thought that nothing could be more fatal to the peace of any country than the inculcation of the doctrines he broached. They contained an odd species of casuistry, for though the collection of tithes was not to be resisted with violence, it was to be resisted in every other manner. The petition, he observed which had led to these remarks came from Old Leighlin, the very seat of the diocess of the Prelate to whom he had referred. He called upon their Lordships maturely to reflect on the measures which were about to be submitted to them; and he must again remind them, that if the Church of Ireland went, the Church of England must follow; and that if both Establishments were destroyed, the Monarchy could not last. He would again solemnly warn their Lordships that they held their own estates by the same title as the clergy held their tithes. Property in land was vested nine-tenths in the landlords, and one tenth in the Church, and if the latter right were not regarded who could answer for the former. There was no distinction between them known to the land, and certainly the title to tithes was quite as good, if not better, than the title to land.
The Marquis of Clanricardedeclared, that the noble Lords opposite were altogether in error. The people of Ireland did not call for the extinction of the property of the Irish Church, but they demanded a change of the system under which the tithes were at present collected. The petitions now before the House did not pray for the abolition of the Church property, but of tithes in their present shape. With regard to the reverend Prelate alluded to by the noble and learned Baron, he submitted to the House if it was not unfair to charge that Reverend Prelate with wilful deceit, for that was insinuated by the noble Baron because he expressed an opinion which the result proved to have been ill founded. The reverend Prelate, in his examination before a Committee of the House, delivered an opinion, and swore that it was his conviction, at the time. Events proved that he was wrong, and he thought it was rather hard that he, or any other man, should be held pledged by opinions, particularly when they went to the extent of anticipating the feelings of the whole people of Ireland.
Lord Kinghoped and trusted that the gloomy predictions of the noble and learned Lord would not be fulfilled; when the noble Lord stated, that the English tithes must go, if those of Ireland went, by that remark he gave but poor consolation to the titheholder here. Indeed, the noble Lord would do the worst thing possible, could he succeed in establishing his assertion, that the Irish Church formed one of the outworks and safeguards of the Church of England. He was of a totally contrary opinion, and did not believe there could be any two things more different.
Lord Wynfordbegged to remark, in reply to the observation of the noble Marquis, that it was not merely a change of opinion in the mind of the reverend Prelate alluded to that caused his observations. What he complained of was, that that reverend Gentleman addressed his flock in the face of his previous declarations, and told them that tithes were odious, and ought to be resisted, when he had formerly said, that the emancipation of the Catholics, was the sole thing the people of Ireland desired.
Petitions to lie on the Table.

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.
The Duke of Rutlandrose, in pursuance of his

681
notice, to present a Petition to their Lordships on the subject of Parliamentary Reform. He had great gratification in presenting this petition; in the first place, because he could, from his own personal knowledge, testify to the respectability of very many of the numerous individuals who had signed the petition; and, in the second place, because the petition contained sentiments completely in unison with his own on the question of vital importance which had so long occupied the attention of the Government, the Parliament, and the people. The petition which he had now the honour to present proceeded from the freeholders, and other owners and occupiers of land in the county of Cambridge, and the Isle of Ely; and was signed by 1,465 persons, each of whom had annexed to his signature, his place of abode and occupation. The petitioners expressed their deep sense of gratitude to their Lordships for having refused to pass the Reform Bill which was introduced into that House in the last Session of Parliament; and at the same time, they expressed themselves in favour of a safe and temperate Reform, or rather of a revision of our present Representative System. In these sentiments he entirely concurred; and, further, he trusted, with the petitioners, that the same principles which enabled their Lordships justly to appreciate the demerits of the Bill of last year, would be applied at the proper time, to the measure of the same nature, which was now in progress towards that House. He considered this petition of the greater importance, because it had been so confidently asserted that there was no re-action in the country on the subject of Parliamentary Reform. At all events, the assertion was not applicable to the districts from which the petition proceeded. There was not one of the petitioners who could for a moment admit that a theoretical and visionary proposition of Reform ought to supersede the existing Constitution. Strongly attached to the institutions which they had derived from their ancestors, and which they hoped to transmit to their posterity, they were not disposed, lightly or wantonly to put those institutions to hazard. This was a feeling implanted in them from their very birth, and of which it was impossible to divest them:—
"Naturam expellas furca, tamen usque recurret."
He had felt it is duty to oppose the Reform Bill in the last Session of Parliament,
682
because it was his firm conviction that it tended to change the most valuable institutions in the country, and that it would ultimately lead to Revolution. He voted fearlessly against the Bill, because he voted conscientiously against it. He had been very desirous of stating the grounds of his opposition on the Motion for the second reading of the Bill, but the blaze of eloquence, and the depth of argument which characterised that memorable discussion, induced him to abstain from doing so; and he, therefore, gave a silent, although not on that account a less conscientious, vote against, the Bill. With reference to the new Bill which it might he their Lordships' lot to have to consider, he had no hesitation in saying, that unless it came before them in a state very different from that of the measure to which their Lordships had so properly and so justly refused their sanction in the last Session of Parliament, he should consider it his duty to give it his most decided opposition; and in so acting, he should feel the great consolation and satisfaction of knowing that he concurred in the opinion, and that he should receive the hearty good wishes of the numerous and respectable body of individuals whose signatures were attached to the petition that he had the honour to present. He would conclude by expressing his obligation to the House for the attention with which they had listened to him, and he requested that the petition might be read at length.
Done accordingly, and petition to lie on the Table.

THE GLOVE TRADE.
The Bishop of Worcester,in rising to present a Petition from Worcester against the importation of foreign gloves, said, that he congratulated himself at the present moment, when so unkind a disposition was manifested in the country against the Bench of Bishops, in having an opportunity of showing that so large a portion of the community with which he was more connected had intrusted their interest in his hands. He only regretted that he could not do the subject justice, and he, therefore, earnestly hoped that some noble Lord, who was better acquainted with commercial matters than himself, would take it up, as he believed the glove makers of the country were labouring under great, difficulties, in consequence of the unfair competition to which they were exposed with the foreign

683
trade. It had been asserted in another place that the large importation of foreign skins was a proof that the condition of the trade was not in a declining condition. This statement he believed was not founded in fact, as he would endeavour to demonstrate. Until recently there were fifty manufacturers at Worcester each of whom made 50,000 pair of gloves a week. These were chiefly made from English sheep and lambskins, but the importation of foreign skins had the effect of changing the fashion, and no gloves could now find a market, unless they were made from foreign skins, or by foreign manufacturers. By these means the consumption of English skins of which those gloves called beaver gloves, were made, had fallen off two-thirds. The importation of foreign skins did not make up anything like this deficiency, and the consequence was, that many workmen were now thrown out of employment, which, of course added very much to the distress of the manufacturers, for the poor-rates had materially increased upon their diminished means of payment.
Petition to lie on the Table.