to it as a disability and a clog on the freedom of the Church, and Mr. Walpole also doubted whether it would operate beneficially, asking what would occur if no Church body were formed. On the other side, the Attorney-General for Ireland and the SolicitorGeneral explained that the clause was only meant to be transitional, to carry the Church over the period between the extinction of the ecclesiastical courts and the formation of a tribunal by voluntary contract between the members of the Church. Mr. Hardy was in favour of the clause, and Mr. Gladstone also defended it, attaching to it great importance. In reply to Mr. Walpole, he said that the Bill was framed entirely on the supposition that the Church would organize a governing body, but if that were not done further legislation would be necessary. Clause 22 caused an animated discussion. It constituted the new Church body with power, among other things, to hold lands to an extent to be defined in a future clause; and Dr. Ball proposed to strike out the words of limitation. On the one side it was urged by Mr. Hardy, Mr. Bentinck, and Lord J. Manners, that the amendment was a measure of equality, as the Roman Catholic Church, by means of the Ecclesiastical Bequests Act, could hold any amount of land, and that it was tyranny to fetter the discretion of the Church body as to the mode of investing its property. But Mr. Gladstone, the Attorney-General for Ireland, and others, argued that no corporation in Ireland could hold land, and that it was unadvisable that the Church property should be so invested, for clergymen were usually the worst landlords. On a division the amendment was defeated by a majority of 102. Upon the important clause (23) which related to the commutation and redemption of life interests, Mr. Disraeli proposed a long amendment, which, instead of individual commutation, or leaving to each incumbent to decide whether he will commute, substituted a plan by which the Church body should apply to the commissioners for a general commutation of all life interests, and the capitalized sum should be paid over to the Church body. It proposed, too, that each life interest should be capitalized on the footing of fourteen years' purchase, and from this change Mr. Disraeli anticipated that the process of commutation would be quickened, and the successful operations of the Bill facilitated. Mr. Gladstone remarked that the immediate effect of the amendment would be to increase the amount of compensation which would come to the Church, but his objections to it went deeper. It contemplated an interference with the individual liberty of each incumbent as to commutation, which would be unwise; it would give a Parliamentary title to each incumbent, however deficient the arrangements of the commissioners as to commutation might be, and the term of fourteen years was unintelligible. The Attorney-General for Ireland vigorously denounced the amendment as a covert attempt to obtain a second endowment. Sir R. Palmer looked on the amendment as a chance of doing some little justice to the laity. He saw no reason why their permanent interests should not be as favourably dealt with as the permanent interests of Maynooth and the Presbyterians, and intimated that he should support that portion of the Bill. A division showed a majority of 100 against the amendment. The next material conflict of opinion arose on the 25th clause, which contained the enactments respecting the Church edifices to be vested in the Commissioners. Mr. Disraeli, in moving the first of a series of amendments on this part of the Bill, remarked upon what he described as the harshness of these provisions, and on their failure to carry out the pledges of the Liberal party when in opposition. Last year, "gracious and generous was the treatment which Mr. Bright proposed to apply to the Irish Church, and Mr. Gladstone joined in that pledge, and repeated it on the hustings; but now Mr. C. Fortescue had thrown that declaration over, and had officially recommended the Bill as "sweeping and severe," while Mr. Lowe repudiated with a sneer the notion of "being generous with other folks' money." Referring to a charge of the Attorney-General for Ireland on a former night-that all the amendments of the Opposition were made with the sinister design of perpetuating establishment and endowment-Mr. Disraeli declared that their sole object was to carry out the pledges which the Government had broken, and to protect the vested rights of the laity. Mr. Gladstone declined to be led into a controversy. He contented himself with replying that the measure fulfilled all the conditions mentioned by Mr. Disraeli, contradictory though they might seem. Its supporters believed it to be "gracious and generous;" but nevertheless they did not deny that from its opponents' point of view it was "sweeping and severe." He offered no opposition to Mr. Disraeli's first amendment, which only made it clearer that the ruins to be handed over to the Commissioners of Public Works were to be preserved as national monuments. On clause 27, which contained the conditions with respect to the transfer of Ecclesiastical residences, Mr. Disraeli moved the omission of the latter part of the clause, by the effect of which the glebe-houses would be handed over to the Church body free of the building and other charges which the clause imposed. Sir Roundell Palmer supported Mr. Disraeli, contrasting the ungracious and niggardly provisions of the Bill with the liberal promises of last year, and with the treatment of Maynooth. Dr. Ball also urged the Government to reconsider the clause, about which he assured them there was much feeling in Ireland. Mr. Gladstone, Mr. C. Fortescue, and Mr. Sullivan pointed out that to hand over the glebe-houses without payment would only half settle this question, and would still leave behind a perceptible remnant of ascendancy. Besides the 250,0007. of building charges to be paid before the Commissioners got possession of these glebehouses, a charge of at least 150,000l. had been spent on them out of the public taxes. In answer to the numerous taunts of broken pledges-and he reminded the House that they were necessarily more opinions than pledges-Mr. Gladstone declared that his promise was that the Church should be dealt with as generously as was consistent with the leading principle of religious equality, and he contended that virtually the glebe-houses were given to the Church, for the State in the end would be a loser by the transaction. Mr. P. W. Martin, as a strong supporter of the Bill, appealed to the Premier to have some mercy on those of his followers who, like himself, trusting in his and Mr. Bright's declarations, had pledged themselves on the hustings to hand over the glebe-houses without charging for the sites. Mr. Gladstone stated that the Government were unable to consent to any material modification in the clause, which he justified once more on the principle of religious equality. When he spoke on this subject last year he was not aware of the large sums which had been spent on the glebe-houses from public grants, nor of the large building charges on them. These would have to be paid by the Commissioners, who, even under the conditions complained of, would lose considerably on the transaction. Lord J. Manners contrasted the different principles on which the Maynooth buildings and the glebe-houses were treated, and contended that Mr. Gladstone had made out no case for this signal breach of faith. Mr. Bagwell, speaking from the Liberal side, while earnestly protesting his desire to see the Bill passed, expressed his regret that the Government had not made the concession prayed, as a message of conciliation to the Irish Protestants. Mr. G. H. Moore, as a Roman Catholic Liberal, urged his coreligionists to join in requesting the Government to hand over the glebe-houses as a mark of goodwill to the Protestant clergy. Mr. O'Reilly, Sir J. Esmonde, and the O'Conor Don, on behalf of the Roman Catholics, refused to join in this appeal, and expressed a decided opinion that it would not be sanctioned by them. Mr. Bright pointed out that unless the Irish people were convinced that the Bill dealt with every question in a spirit of perfect equality, it would fail in its fundamental object. He admitted that at Birmingham he had proposed to hand over the churches and glebe-houses to the Church, but at the same time he had recommended that the Presbyterians and Roman Catholic clergy should be dealt with in the same way, and should receive a certain sum of money. That policy, however, had been found impossible, and the plan now submitted for obtaining perfect religious equality was the best possible plan which could be devised consistently with the principle of the Bill. The Government had drawn a line, and could not go beyond it. Mr. Ward Hunt denied that religious equality would be established if the Maynooth clauses were carried in their present form. Sir G. Grey, though agreeing that the Church ought to repay the building charges, concurred with those who regretted that the Government had not freely given over the glebes, on which there were no such charges. He agreed with the scheme shadowed out by Mr. Bright, and he added that a great want of moral courage had been shown in assuming too hastily that it was impracticable. On a division Mr. Disraeli's amendment was rejected by 318 to 227 majority 91. Among the arrangements proposed by the Bill, much interest had attached to the question, how far post-Reformation endowments ought to be considered as the private and special property of the Protestant Church, and consequently to be excepted from the general rule of disendowment. Mr. Gladstone had specified the year 1660 as the date subsequent to which donations to the Church should be regarded as rightfully appertaining to it. Upon this proposition Mr. Disraeli founded another of his amendments, by which he desired to include in the reservation all endowments without reference to date. In support of his proposal he contended that there had been complete identity and communion between the Churches of England and Ireland from 1562, that the Thirty-nine Articles were adopted by the Irish Church in 1634, and that the government of the two Churches had been uniform from the same date. Mr. Harcourt argued at some length in favour of the right of the State to deal with private endowments. Mr. Chaplin, in an effective maiden speech, contended that for three centuries-save for about 19 years-the English and Irish Churches were identical, and challenged the Government to defend a clause which had taken the country by surprise. Mr. Gladstone accepted the challenge. He maintained that 1660 was the earliest date at which the Irish Church took so definite a Protestant form as to give a reasonable presumption that it was now the same body as that to which the private endowments were given. To constitute a private endowment which should be exempted from confiscation, Mr. Gladstone argued that it should proceed from private sources; that it should be given to a definite religious body, and not as an Establishment; and that this should be the same body as that which was to retain the benefit of it; these conditions had been interpreted most liberally for the Irish Church in the Bill; for no doubt, if the matter were looked into, many of these endowments had been given to the Church as a national institution. As to the amendment, Mr. Gladstone remarked that it was most astute in its vagueness, because it not only included the century reaching back to the Reformation, which would be very barren in endowments, but the pre-Reformation grants also. Here, however, he pointed out the claims of the Roman Catholics would come in. Sir Roundell Palmer dissented from the vague character of the amendment, and argued the right of the Church to retain all private endowments since the Reformation. Dr. Ball stated that the effect of going back a century would be to secure to the Church Archbishop Bramhall's endowments, and some endowments of the London Companies. After some further debate a division was taken on the question for substituting 1560 for 1660. The latter date was carried by a majority of 86. This was the lowest majority which the Government obtained in any of the numerous divisions on the provisions of the Bill. A proposal by Sir J. Heygate to return to the Church the glebe-lands included in the Ulster Grants was rejected by a larger majority. The next point which occasioned much debate was as to the terms on which the landowners should be allowed to redeem the tithe rent-charge. The Bill had fixed the amount at 22 years' purchase, or by annual instalments for 45 years of 4 per cent. of the purchase-money; but now, on Mr. Gladstone's own motion, the time was lengthened to 52 years, and the instalment fixed at 47. 98. per cent., with a deduction for poor-rates. Various amendments were proposed on these terms. Mr. Herbert moved to reduce the time to 18 years' purchase. Mr. Fawcett desired to expunge the power of redemption from the Bill. Mr. Raikes sought to empower landowners to annex the rent-charge to the purposes of any religious denomination they thought fit. Mr. Gladstone pointed out in vindication of his own proposition, that of the three parties affected by this part of the clause all were benefited and none suffered damage. The Exchequer lent money at 3 per cent., the Commissioners got 22 years' purchase instead of 17, and the landlord would pay for 52 years only instead of for ever. No doubt there was an apparent mystery in the extinction of a perpetual charge in 52 years, but he showed how this was done by converting the one per cent. difference between the rates at which the landowner borrowed and paid into a sinking fund. A suggestion made by Mr. Brodrick that the payment of the principal and interest of the commutation might be discharged in a lesser number of years by agreement, was accepted by Mr. Gladstone; but he strongly opposed the amendment of Mr. Raikes, to allow landowners to devote the tithes to the purposes of any religious denomination at their choice. The clause as modified by Mr. Gladstone was carried by a majority of 148. Clause 36, the first of the Regium Donum and Maynooth clauses, which provides the compensation to the Presbyterian ministers, was not opposed. Its provisions were extended so as to include those congregations which were at that time passing through the preliminary stages to entitle them to a grant. Upon the provisions of the Bill affecting the College of Maynooth, a warm controversy arose, and some division of opinion |