If we

we regard as representing the general and for going into Committee upon it. sentiment of the members of the Estab- If we take the limited scope of the plan lished Church in Ireland ; and I must of the right hon. Gentleman, it would say that, so far as our experience has only place us in a position of hopeless gone, the information we have received and absurd inconsistency with the leadis directly and diametrically at variance ing provisions of our measure. with the proposal of the right hon. adopt the most simple and natural conGentleman the Member for Bucking-struction of the negative upon this clause, hamshire. So far from calling on us to it is a new form, of which I have neither continue to them, after having stripped the title nor the disposition to comthem of their property, an enforced con- plain, of aiming a mortal blow at the formity with the Church of England, substance of the Bill, and that subthey insist, as their right, on that free- stance, I believe, it is the fixed inten

dom which we are not disposed to deny. tion of the majority of the House to • There is but one other point on which I maintain.

wish to say a few words. Some hon. MR. DISRAELI: Sir, the right hon. Members who had spoken to-night have Gentleman (the First Lord of the Treasaid—“What a dreadful thing it is that sury) gives me credit for wishing to level you are not going to secure the continued a mortal blow at this Bill, and I am conformity of the members of the Irish bound to say that he has rightly interChurch to the Thirty-nine Articles and preted my desire. If I could devise to episcopal government!” They may any plan by which I could defeat a meaobtain, they say, the provisions of the sure which the thought of every day Bill in their favour to-day, and to-mor- more and more convinces me is the most row they may alter the doctrines and pernicious measure that has ever been constitution of the Church. Certainly introduced in my time into this House, they may do so; d, no doubt, if they I certainly should not shrink from any do so, it will be because their convictions fair attempt to accomplish that end

. direct them to do it; and if their convic- But I can say with equal sincerity of the tions so direct them, does the right hon. Amendment which I have proposed toGentleman think that we shall obtain night that I did not propose it in that any advantage by compelling them to spirit; and, although I will not avoid any make professions in which, on his own fair occasion of giving a complete defeat showing, they will no longer believe? to this measure if I can, I was influenced I am as anxious as the right hon. Gen- by very contrary sentiments in making tleman about the end—though we may the proposition which I have suggestdiffer as to the means by which it is to ed this evening. Sir, I hope the Combe secured—and I hope and desire, nay mittee will not be diverted from the more, I am firmly impressed with the point before them by antiquarian disconviction that the sympathies which cussions about the Queen's supremacy in unite the members of the Church in Scotland. The right hon. Gentleman Ireland with their brethren in this coun- has occasionally referred to it in his try, will not only continue but gain and speeches, and reminded the House that grow in strength after this act of dises- the Queen's supremacy was not acknowtablishment has been completed. But I ledged in matters ecclesiastical in Sootam quite certain that in order that this land, and that it has been abolished in sympathy may have scope you must not that country; but I have always been of attempt to apply to them the hand of opinion, from what I have read, that force ; but you must recognize their the Royal supremacy in matters ecclesiright and title to perfect freedom in all astical, as far as the Common Law is conmatters ecclesiastical, if either you would cerned, never existed in Scotland. There make the connection between them and was a forced intrusion of the doctrine you beneficial, or would wish it to con- into that kingdom by Charles II., and tinue. With these views there can be every one is well aware that that was no doubt as to the course that the Go- the origin—the fatal origin—of those vernment will take, nor any, I should unhappy proceedings which were the think, as to the course that will be taken consequences of that unwise Act. But by hon. Members who voted for the Re- both the statutes referred to by the right solution of last year, or who have voted hon. Gentleman were repealed, one difor the second reading of the measure, rectly, and the other, as lawyers say, in

ed by us.

ferentially; so that, referring to Scot- one to which I have made this excepland as illustrative of the doctrine or tion—that anything so fatal to this counof the practice of the Royal supre- try would ever occur as would occur if macy in matters ecclesiastical, is to my the policy of the right hon. Gentleman mind perfectly superfluous, and can have with regard to the Protestant Episcono bearing on the practical decision pal Church in Ireland were ever of the House. Sir, whatever may ried into effect. Sir, what I have dehave happened in Scotland, the question sired, and what has led to this confor us to decide is—“Is that portion of troversy, is that the members of the the people of Ireland who have profited Protestant Episcopal Church in Ireland by the action of the Royal supremacy in should continue to enjoy the advantages their affairs ecclesiastical to be deprived of the supremacy of their own Sovereign. of it, as we maintain to-night, unfairly Is it an unreasonable or an unconstituand unnecessarily, even if we admit, for tional request ? Well, on that the conthe sake of argument, that the policy of troversy arises, and the Attorney Genethe right hon. Gentleman ought to be ral follows me in the debate in order to carried out.” I will remind the Com- answer the principal points in my remittee, which is much fuller than it was marks. I confine myself now to the when I attempted to lay before it the point concerning the supremacy. What views which induced me to recommend then, does the Attorney General say ? the course I suggested this evening with He says that which was said ad nauseam regard to the 2nd clause, that I have in the debates of last year, and which never for a moment admitted that even I verily thought we should not hear if the 2nd clause is rejected the policy of again in a new Parliament-namely, the right hon. Gentleman will be accept- that the supremac yof the Queen, such as

All I have said in argument we on this side of the House express it is this, which no one has denied or at- to be, is a perfect shadow, that it is an tempted to question or refute—that if illusion, and that the only supremacy of they will consent to omit this clause, the Queen is that which Her Majesty posupon which I will make a remark or two sesses in Her Majesty's courts. Why, hereafter, it will not affect in the slightest that is a supremacy which is enjoyed by degree the power and privilege of the every Sovereign in every country in the Committee to carry into effect the whole world. If a Sovereign is not supreme in of the policy of the right hon. Gentle- his courts he ceases to be a Sovereign. man with regard to the Protestant Epis- Justice cannot be administered except in copal Church in Ireland. I have said the name and by the authority of the that the Committee, if they think fit, can ruler of the country. I utterly deny, despoil and plunder that Church; that if however, that that is the supremacy in they think fit they can divest its Prelates matters ecclesiastical to which I referred, of their Parliamentary rights; and that and on which my right hon. and learned if they think fit they can shut up the Friend (Dr. Ball) ably enlarged. Sir, the ecclesiastical courts, and put an end to hon. Member for Richmond (Sir Roundell and abrogate all those circumstances in Palmer) although he appeared to supcident to the present established position port the view of the Attorney General of the Church, which are the subject of on the subject of supremacy, is too much so much envy, and occasionally of so a master of the subject to lay down promuch invective and criticism in this positions with the same barren nakedHouse. They may do all this, and at ness. The hon. Member for Richmond was the same time make this concession quite consistent with the ecclesiastical which is so greatly desired by the con- views which he has so often and so ably sciences of so many of their fellow-coun- developed and expressed in this House. trymen, and which will not in the least It is of course quite consistent with his interfere with the completion of the views to question our assumption of the policy which hon. Gentlemen opposite Queen's supremacy and our definition support. But I am not contemplating of its nature. The hon. Member for Richthat the Committee will seriously sup- mond does not deny that the ecclesiastiport the right hon. Gentleman in all his cal power which we claim for the Sovepropositions, nor can I bring myself to reign of our country does exist, but he believe-even if the Committee should says it does not exist in the person of pass all the clauses which follow that the Sovereign because the hon. Member

[Committee-Clause 2.

for Richmond is in favour of the supre- |Episcopal Charch in Ireland the slightest macy of the Church and not of the So- symptom of a desire to lose the advanvereign. This circumstance explains tage of the Queen's supremacy. On the the view which the hon. Gentleman has contrary, at this moment of exigency taken on the present occasion.

and of trial, do they not cling to that And now, Sir, let me call the atten- name and authority as their only chance tion of the Committee to what after all, and consolation, as the only means by though a most important is, the very which they possibly may get through simple proposition which I have placed the immense difficulties and dangers before them. I have called their atten- that surround them ? Mr. Dodson, tion to the fact that by the 2nd clause I hope the Committee will remember of the Bill we are asked to terminate the that this issue before them—I do not union between the Church of England say this gigantic issue, it is a very and the Protestant Episcopal Church of simple issue—is what we have to decide

. Ireland. I have asked the Committee And I did appeal to the Committee, to consider, before they assent to that which was then thinner, but it was well proposition, what are the terms of that attended by those who represent Roman union, what are its conditions, and what Catholic opinions in this House I did are the objects which are accomplished appeal to Gentlemen who are of the by the union. They will see if they look Roman Catholic communion and did say -and I have no doubt they have well to them—“You have the advantage in ascertained the terms of the Act of your Church of a supreme head – Union—that the objects to be attained you acknowledge that to be a great by the union between the Church of advantage—you boast of that great adEngland and the Protestant Episcopal vantage and probably you justly boast

. Church in Ireland are identity of dis- Why should you deny your Protestant cipline, of worship, of doctrine, and of fellow-subjects the same advantage, esgovernment. I have asked the Com- pecially as it is no novelty to be intrmittee—“Are these privileges, so vener- duced, no anomaly to be brought in and able and so legitimate, and which all of thrust into this new Constitution, but you must have prized in your own the custom of the country, which has spiritual relations, whatever creed you now existed for centuries, and which the may belong to—are these privileges, un- Protestant population of Ireland geneder the present circumstances, such as you rally regard with confidence and affecwill deny in a spirit of justice to the tion?” Well, I did also impress on the Protestant Episcopal Church of Ire- Committee, irrespectively of the simple land ?” That is the real, the sole, the sim- but great issue on which I call on them to ple issue before us. I say it is not mixed decide-I did ask the Committee to conup with the endowments of the Irish sider what, as public men and as statesChurch. It is not mixed up with its na- men it was their duty to consider—that, tional authority. It is not at all mixed up when the point which I have raised was with its temporal magnificence. And so unquestionable, when it was self-eriyet it is said to us— Would you let dent and not even denied by the right this Episcopal Church of Ireland be hon. Gentleman and his followers, that denuded of its property and authority;" his policy could be effected without this

as if it were a crime to denude it of violation of the Act of Union, it wasits property and authority, and as if totally irrespective of the merits of the we were the persons who proposed such views that I was placing before the measures -would you allow that body, Committee - it was a consideration of whose only chance of salvation is to deep import whether it were wise un. be left to themselves, to be under the necessarily to tamper with the Act of control of the Sovereign, whom, for Union. Why, Sir, whatever may be more than 300 years, they have acknow- our opinion upon the general policy of ledged as their head? I say, that the the Government, every sensible man must Protestant Episcopal Church in Ireland agree in this, that, if you can accomis the best judge of that matter; and no plish that policy without tampering with person of any authority on this subject the Act of Union, it would be a great who has addressed us has pretended for benefit, a source of strength to the State, a moment that there is among any part and one on which I think our society, not of the laity and clergy of the Protestant in some degree of danger, might be co

a

gratulated. Well, can you or cantion to leave out this clause of his Bill. you not ? The right hon. Gentleman He says he will not do it, because it does not deny that if the other clauses secures that freedom which is the preof his Bill are carried his policy would rogative of every body of Christians in be effected. He has never for a this country. But, if that be the case, moment maintained, with any appear- why is your policy not more comprehenance of conviction, that it is neces- sive ? You who are so learned in the stasary to his policy that this clause should tutes of Scotland; why do you not come pass, which at the same time violates forward at once and secure that freedom, the Act of Union and wounds the con- which is the prerogative of every body of scientious feelings of the whole body Christians in this country, to that body of the Episcopalian Church of Ireland. of Christians, the minority of the Scottish I, also, in making that appeal to the people who do not enjoy it? Why does Roman Catholic Gentlemen, asserted, the right hon. Gentleman who to-night and I assert again, notwithstanding some has announced this policy, which he observations that have been made, that never announced so distinctly before-a the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland, policy which is to secure the freedom and in every other country where it ap- which is the prerogative of every body pears, is an established Church. I say of Christians in the country-why does that without the slightest hesitation. I he not extend it to the people of Engmaintain as a political truth, as a point land ? Sir, a prudent statesman might not to be controverted, that when a say—“Whatever may

be
my

ulterior Church is instituted by a foreign Power designs, you have no right to judge me -a Church without influence over its except by the public propositions that I own doctrines, discipline, worship, or have made—you have no right to impute government—it is an established Church, to me a future policy, which on your part and can be no other than an estab- may be a rash and unfo nded inference lished Church. It is as much and as com- from my present propositions.” That pletely organized and regulated, with would be the position of a prudent out the slightest influence and power statesman; but we have a frank statesof its own, as any Church which can man who does not condescend to be be established by Act of Parliament, prudent. I say, on the part of the Proand I say, therefore, that not only theo- testants of Ireland that, when we are retically-which some may question, but told that a new policy is now to be init would only be a criticism of words, augurated, when we have from the but practically, the Roman Catholic Prime Minister a definition of that new Church is an established Church; and policy-namely, that it is to secure to all I say, if that be the case, how can you, that freedom in religious matters which in the name of ecclesiastical equality in is the prerogative of every body of ChrisIreland, permit the Roman Catholic tians in the country—the Protestants of Church to have all the advantage of es- Ireland have a right to say—“Carry your tablishment—that is, of having a sove- policy into effect completely, or at least reign control over it which secures all postpone our fate till there is one verdict these advantages of discipline and doc- of general ruin and an entire dissolution trine, and deny that to the Protestant of the bonds of society." Episcopal Church in Ireland ? It is im- MR. GLADSTONĚ: Sir, I am not possible to contend that under these about to make a speech, or to abuse the circumstances you are establishing a po- indulgence of the Committee; and I could licy of ecclesiastical equality. Why, not find it in my heart to weaken the Sir, it is impossible—whatever the vote effect of the animated peroration to may be—to divert and distract the minds which we have just listened, but, now of intelligent men, on whatever side that it is over, I am bound to tell the they may sit, by entering into contro- right hon. Gentleman that I think he versies about Scotch Acts of Parliament laboured under a delusion as to the regarding the supremacy of the Crown words used by me, which was not shared in the time of Charles II. and William with him by any other Gentleman in III. No, Sir, we know to-night what the House, with reference to the freethe right hon. Gentleman is aiming at, dom, the absolute freedom, or any what is his real defence of his policy, freedom, which was the title or right or what is his real answer to my proposi- prerogative of “every body of Christians VOL. CXCV. (THIRD SERIES.]

2 M

[Committee— Clause 2,

men."

in the country." I say “of every body a state of things should exist, without of Christians subsisting upon its own any notice being taken of it in Parliaresources.” I therefore, Sir, am greatly ment, and it was desirable that the Gorejoiced to think that I may still, per- vernment should have an opportunity haps, be included in the right hon. Gen- of showing, either that the provisions of tleman's category of “prudent states the Bill were not touched by the terms

of the Oath, or that there was something

in the conditions under which the Oath Question put, " That the Clause stand was imposed which did not render it part of the Bill.”

binding on Her Majesty with regard to The Committee divided :-Ayes 344; giving her assent to any measures preNoes 221 : Majority 123.

sented to her by Parliament. It apHouse resumed.

peared to him very difficult to show that Committee report Progress; to sit the terms of the Oath did not directly again upon Monday next.

condemn many of the proposals of the

Bill; but, at the same time, it was posHouse adjourned at One o'clock, sible that Her Majesty's servants might till Monday next. be able to offer satisfactory explanations.

The conditions, moreover, under which the Oath was originally imposed were worthy of consideration, in order that

the House might understand what its HOUSE OF LORDS, obligations were. As to the Sovereign

.

not being bound by the Oath in her Monday, 19th April, 1869.

legislative capacity, many persons ap

peared to think that any measure which MINUTES.)-PUBLIC Bills-First Reading, had passed both Houses must necessarily

Park Gate Chapel Marriages * (59); Govern receive the Royal Assent; in fact, that, ment of India Act Amendment (62).

from the lapse of time and the change Committee Report – Colonial Prisoners Ro of circumstances, the power of the Crown moval* (55); Merchant Shipping (Colonial), 1869,* (56).

to exercise its veto has become a thing Third Reading—Governor General of India * of the past, and that there was no power

(42); Naval Stores * (57) and passed. in the Crown to resist the acts of the Royal "Assent-Brazilian Slave Trade [32 Vict. two Houses of Parliament. He could c. 2);

Lord Napier's Salary [32 Vict. c. 32; not, however, suppose that this opinion Mutiny [32 Vict. c. 4]; Marine Mutiny [32 Vict. c. 5); Railway Companies Meetings was shared by any of their Lordships, [32 Vict

. c. 6); East India Irrigation and for this important Prerogative had been Canal Company (32 Vict. c. 7].

preserved in the United States under

one of the most democratic constitutions CORONATION OATII.- QUESTION.

in the world, and he believed that the LORD REDESDALE, in putting to more our institutions were extended in the Government the Question of which that direction the more important it was he had given notice— Whether there is to retain the Prerogative of the Crown. any intention on their part to propose What, then, were the obligations of the any alteration of the Coronation Oath, Oath? Those who imposed the Oath or any legislation in relation thereto ? were obviously the parties to judge of said he thought it desirable to bring the the extent of its obligation; and, to consubject before the House, on account of sider, therefore, what that obligation the feeling that prevailed among great was, it was necessary to refer to the numbers of persons in the country that proceedings of Parliament at the time some of the provisions of the Bill intro- it was enacted. The question was raised duced by Her Majesty's Government in the reign of George III., in relawith regard to the Irish Church were tion to a measure for granting to Roinconsistent with the obligations of that man Catholics political privileges, but Oath. That opinion had been strongly a disadvantage, he thought, had ne expressed by many persons in England, sulted from its having been considered while he believed that in Ireland it was mainly in connection with that question held by nine-tenths of the members There was nothing in the Oath which of the Established Church. Now he directly applied to any measure of that thought it very undesirable that such kind; but it was the belief of George III