The Bishop of Derry,in presenting a Petition for protection to the Established Church, took occasion to express his sincere regret at the retirement of the noble Earl, lately at the head of the Government. One of the declared objects of that noble Earl had been to give security to the Established Church. What were the intentions of the present Government upon that subject he would not pretend to say; he was willing to presume, that they were the same as those which had been entertained by the noble Earl, and he believed they were; but if he should prove to be mistaken, it was almost unnecessary for him to say, that, should the Government attempt to carry any measures that would be injurious to the Church, he should feel it his duty to offer those measures his humble but zealous opposition; he should not hesitate one moment, as far as his individual efforts went, to prevent them from being adopted. He should have done so, had such measures been introduced by the noble Earl, and he was sure that, in so doing, he should have had the Noble Earl's approbation for exercising an honest and sincere discretion on the subject.
The Marquess of Londonderrytook that opportunity of putting a question to the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Lansdown) opposite. The Government of which the noble Earl lately had been at the head, and of which the noble Marquess was a member, had declared, that they would respect the rights of the Established Church of Ireland. This had been said when the noble Earl was at the head of the Government; but while the noble Earl was so, he must say, that measures had been introduced to pull down the great supports of that Church. As the noble Earl had now retired, it might not be necessary to speak of him, but he should think it quite proper to call on his Majesty's Ministers to state what were their intentions with respect to the Commission which had been issued for inquiring into the Church of Ireland, and whether the Government would really be guided by the principles on which they professed to act. He said this, because they did not seem to agree among themselves as to what they meant to do. He referred for proof of this to a statement made in another House of Parliament by a right hon. member of the Government. Under these circumstances, he thought, that he should stand excused, if he asked the noble Marquess whether the intentions of the Government were misunderstood by the right hon. Gentleman in another place, or not—or if not, how the noble Marquess could reconcile his own opinions with the opinions of the right hon. Gentleman? The contrast was so monstrous, that it was impossible they could be overlooked in the position in which they now stood. The whole thing was the most flagrant, unparalleled, disgusting departure from principle that he had witnessed for many years. It was as impossible to reconcile these two statements with each other, as it was to reconcile the statements of his Majesty's Ministers on the subject of the Coercion Bill, made ten days or a fortnight ago, with those made by them at the present time. This subject of the Commission had been before discussed in their Lordships' House. They were then told, that the contents of the Commission were not what was supposed —that there was gross error abroad on the subject; but it turned out that there was no error at all. But that was the way in which individuals on that side of the House were diverted from what was the 202 fact. That was said with regard to the statements of his noble friend near him on the subject of that Commission. He now came to the statement of the noble Marquess, and he did not think that the noble Marquess would deny what was put down for him. He was sure it was rightly stated, and he wished to know how the noble Marquess would reconcile the statement he was now going to read, with the statement made relative to the Established Church in another place, Upon the 27th of May last, on occasion of presenting a petition to that House, the noble Marquess said, that there was but one opinion in the Cabinet of what ought to be done with the Established Church, and that, if he had one opinion more fixed than another, it was on the necessity of preserving the safety and well-being of the Established Church.
§ Viscount Melbournerose to order. If he understood rightly the course which the noble Marquess was now pursuing, it was this: he proposed to read an extract from a newspaper, which purported to be the speech of a noble Lord delivered in that House, and he meant to contrast the statement in that speech with another statement of another member of the Government uttered in another House, in order to call on that noble Lord for an explanation. He (Lord Melbourne) appealed to their Lordships to say, whether this was fair or orderly—whether a mere newspaper was to be argued upon as incontestably accurate, and whether, upon the supposition that it was so, one member of the Government and a member of their Lordships' House was to be called on to explain a difference between his speech and the speech of another member of the Government delivered in another place.
The Earl of Wicklowdiffered from the noble Viscount upon this point. It might, strictly speaking, be irregular to state what had taken place there, but the practice of publishing what did take place was too general to allow them to be ignorant of it. The noble Marquess might put himself in order by saying, that he was reaching a report of what was said to have been uttered by the noble Marquess opposite in that House, or what was said to have been uttered by a right hon. Gentleman in another House of Parliament. He must say, that he did not admire the noble Viscount for thus rising to prevent an explanation on so important a subject,
§ Viscount Melbournerepeated, that the use of a report in this manner was clearly irregular. All he meant to put to their Lordships was, whether it was a wise thing for the rules of the House thus to be infringed?
The Marquess of Londonderrysaid, that if the noble Viscount would consult the noble Earl (Earl Grey) near him, he would find that this was no breach of order; for the noble Earl would, no doubt, declare that a noble Lord might take from his pocket a speech of a right hon. Baronet, and read it out to the House. If he (the Marquess of Londonderry) had done wrong, it was the noble Earl who had set him the example. He was sure, that he should stand excused with the people of Ireland for endeavouring to extract from the noble Marquess what was the intention of Government with respect to the Established Church, and what was now the opinion of the noble Marquess on the subject. The noble Marquess had said, that this was a measure for maintaining inviolate the rights and privileges of the Established Church. Now, let them look at the speech of the noble Marquess's right hon. Colleague. After the recent change in the Government, the right hon. the Secretary at War said, that 'if he had thought there had been the least difference on any one great principle, and especially upon the application of the surplus revenues of the Church of Ireland for purposes not dissonant from that stated in the Resolution of the hon. member for St. Alban's, he should have been the last man to have joined the Administration. He agreed with the hon. and learned Member as to the abuses, anomalies, and oppressions of the Irish Church.' He called then on the noble Marquess opposite, to say, whether his opinions were the same. The right hon. Gentleman then went on to say, that he was not afraid to announce this opinion, nor to declare that he was ready to give his assistance to remove the abuses of the Church, abuses which diminished its strength and impaired its usefulness. The right hon. Gentleman intimated, too, that he thought the people might be benefited by the appropriation of the surplus funds of the Church. He had discharged his duty in saying this, and he thought no one could entertain the least doubt as to the intentions of this Government. The Commission that had been 204 issued was appointed to report on the surplus funds of the Church, and after what he had read to their Lordships, he thought their Lordships would agree with him, that they ought to know what appropriation was meant to be made of the funds of the Church, and whether the present Ministers agreed with the sentiments expressed in the speech of the right hon. Gentleman.
The Marquess of Lansdownasked, whether the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Londonderry) was about to make any Motion?
The Marquess of Londonderry—"Yes, certainly." The noble Marquess made some further observations, but concluded without moving anything.
The Marquess of Lansdownsaid, that the only interruption he had given to the noble Marquess opposite, was to ask, whether he intended to make any Motion, and he understood the noble Marquess to answer, that he should do so, yet no Motion had been made, and he had even sat down without putting a formal question. He (the Marquess of Lansdown) thought he had a right to complain of a lengthened statement made upon the authority of a newspaper report, and treated as perfectly accurate, in order to form the ground of an attack upon him. [The Duke of Cumberland, we believe, made some remark across the Table.] He told the illustrious person opposite, that his objection to this course was in support of the order and of the privileges of that House, and he, therefore, called on the noble Marquess to make the Motion he said he was going to make.
The Marquess of Londonderrysaid, that be had spoken upon a petition, which he had a right to do. The objection taken by the noble Marquess was, he thought, a miserable expedient, unworthy of his station or character. He might easily get over the difficulty by moving an adjournment.
The Marquess of Lansdownsaid, that he had asked the noble Marquess whether he was about to submit a Motion to their Lordships, and the answer he had received was distinctly in the affirmative.
The Marquess of Londonderrybegged leave to say, that the noble Marquess must have misunderstood him.
The Marquess of Lansdownrepeated, that he had asked the noble Marquess the question, and he did most distinctly 205 understand the noble Marquess to say, "Yes certainly," that he should make a Motion. This was distinctly the impression made by the noble Marquess's answer.
Lord Kenyonrose to order. He said he thought there was some misunderstanding between the noble Lords. The question certainly was put, and he believed that the words, "Yes, certainly," were uttered; but he did not think they had been uttered by the noble Marquess, but by some one near him.
The Marquess of Lansdownrepeated that he had asked the question, and he understood the answer to be what he had stated, as the other noble Lords around him understood. It was certainly competent for the noble Lord to make a speech upon a petition, or even by way of form to move an adjournment upon the Motion that the Petition do lie upon the Table; but if he chose to avail himself of the opportunity afforded by the presentation of a petition, to make observations founded upon a report, and an incorrect report—for he had heard enough of it to say that, for the purpose of the contrast intended by the noble Marquess, it was incorrect; and if he chose to do this in order to place it in contrast with what was said in another place, not by way of illustration in debate, but for the purpose of arbitrarily calling on a member of their Lordships' House, not only to say What he had himself once spoken, but what he now thought, and not only what he now thought, but what, at a future time, he intended to do, the noble Marquess exceeded the privileges which the customs of that House allowed him, A course more inconvenient than that which he had adopted could not be pursued; and though the noble Marquess indulged his taste in pursuing it, he was not bound to follow the example. If the noble Marquess thought fit to raise a debate upon a newspaper report, he might have introduced the discussion on a preceding day, when he (the Marquess of Lansdown) distinctly stated the grounds on which he supported the Commission. He had stated these grounds, and also the reason for which the Commission had issued; and at that time he had reserved to himself the liberty to consider afterwards what measures might be adopted in consequence of the report made upon that Commission; and having reserved to himself that liberty, he should not be induced upon this night, or upon any other, by 206 any statement now made by the noble Marquess, or any that he might afterwards make, to enter upon a discussion which he knew would be premature, inconvenient, and improper, and for the inconvenience of which, he thought he might say, he had the authority of the noble Marquess himself; for though the noble Marquess had a strong wish to enter upon the discussions and though he had had ample time and opportunity to originate the discussion, he had not done so; and if he entertained the strong opinions which he said to-night he did, he had not done his duty in not making the matter before now the subject of a regular discussion, and of a substantial and definitive Motion. If he thought it was his duty to do that, he might still do so, and he (the Marquess of Lansdown) should be ready to meet the discussion, and to re-state his opinions, or to modify them; but till the noble Marquess did discharge that duty which he shrunk from, he should not be induced to enter into a premature statement on the subject.
§ The Marquess of Londonderry began addressing the House, when
The Earl of Mulgraverose to "Order." A question had been twice put irregularly by the noble Marquess opposite; the noble Marquess to whom it was addressed declined to answer it; and now the noble Marquess asked the question a third time. He submitted that these irregular discussions could not be allowed to continue.
§ The Marquess of Londonderry said, he was about to reply.
The Earl of Mulgraveanswered, that there was no Motion before the House, and there was a subject of the utmost importance fixed for discussion. He wished to know whether their Lordships would allow their time to be taken up in so disorderly a manner?
The Marquess of Londonderryrose to explain the reason why he had not made this Motion. It was because be did hope—
§ The Earl of Eldonrose to "Order," and said, that he felt it his duty to state, that the noble Lord could not go on, for he was out of order.
§ The Marquess of Londonderry then sat down.
§ The Petition was laid on the Table.
The Lord Chancellordid not, in the least degree, dispute the right of the noble Marquess to originate a discussion at this 207 moment; but he appealed to the noble Marquess on behalf of himself (the Lord Chancellor), and of the important subject which he had undertaken to lay before their Lordships. He had undertaken to bring before them (a task from which the state of his health at this moment might almost sufficiently excuse him) a difficult, complicated, and extensive subject; and he put it to their Lordships, whether this was not the time when they ought to proceed with the greatest possible calmness and absence of party and personal animosity, and to avoid engaging in contests like these, which might possibly be fit for to-morrow or the next day, but not for this moment? If, however, these things did proceed—if in this way they went on whetting themselves—he should feel it to be his duty to put off for this night the discussion of the question of the Poor Laws.