Page images

employed as a means of aiding the return of Government candidates. He should vote for the amendment.

The Marquis of Salisbury said that his reason for opposing the Government project for appropriating the surplus was that it was false and that it was foolish. In the first place, it implied a partial application of the fund for spiritual teaching, and in the second place it was a vain attempt of the House of Commons, which distrusted its own resolution against concurrent endowment, to bind itself, like a drunkard taking the pledge, against changing its mind in the future. In truth, the only argument for it was that the House of Commons had passed it, and the only reason why that House had done so was that the Prime Minister had bid it. Why the Prime Minister bid it he could not search deep enough into the labyrinthine recesses of that mind to detect, unless it were that Mr. Gladstone had desired to give this House a slap on the face. So far from agreeing with the Earl of Shaftesbury's appeal to the House to waive its amendments in deference to the Commons, he believed this was just an occasion on which it was the duty of this House to interpose between the country and the arrogant will

of one man.

The Bishop of London intimated his intention to vote for Lord Cairns' amendment, on the ground of his objection to the secularization of Church property, which he would not declare must be always unjustifiable, but which he was convinced was in this case both unjust and inexpedient.

Earl Granville repudiated the imputation of Earl Grey, which he characterized as both offensive and without foundation. He entreated the House not to be induced to take a course which at so critical a moment must have the most grave and serious results.

The Lord Chancellor vindicated Mr. Gladstone and the Government from the injurious criticisms of Earl Grey and the Marquis of Salisbury, and he justified in eloquent terms the proposed application of the surplus to the relief of physical suffering and destitution. After a warm, and, in the conclusion, somewhat disorderly debate, the motion that the House do insist on the amendment in the preamble was carried, on a division, by 173 to 95. Upon this, Earl Granville declared that after such a manifestation of opinion, he could not take the responsibility of proceeding farther with the Bill without consulting with his colleagues. The debate was therefore adjourned to the 22nd. Meantime, the political situation seemed highly critical, and serious forebodings were entertained, should the Lords persist in their attitude of antagonism to the other House, as to the consequences which might ensue to the Bill, the Government, and even to the upper branch of the Legislature itself. No rumour of a pacific solution of the controversy had transpired when the Peers met at the usual hour on the 22nd, and, therefore, the arrangement that was shortly afterwards announced took the public entirely by

surprise. There was an unusually large attendance of peers, as well as of strangers of both sexes, when Earl Granville rose, and informed the House that, having consulted his colleagues with regard to the course to be pursued after the decision of their lordships on the 20th, he found that, although they viewed that decision as one of a grave character, they were unwilling to prevent the further consideration of the other amendments, and were anxious that the discussion of them should be conducted in a spirit of peace and conciliation. He then moved that their lordships should not insist upon their amendment altering the date for the operation of the Bill from January 1, 1871, to May 1, 1871; and that the words as they originally stood in the Bill should be restored, at the same time intimating that if the feeling were against the adoption of that course, he would not press his motion to a division.

Lord Cairns then rose, and stated that a conference had been held since the last meeting of the House between himself and Earl Granville, and that the result had been an understanding that the questions in dispute were by no means incapable of solution. He should not insist on the date. On the point of the liability of incumbents for the salaries of curates, he could not consent to the amendment of the Commons as it stood, but his objection would now be in some measure removed by the offer of the Government to confine the liability to the case where the curate had been employed for five years, in connexion with certain other limitations. Next came the scale of commutation. In place of the plan comprised in the Earl of Carnarvon's amendment for a compulsory general commutation at fourteen years' valuation, the Commons had devised a scheme of diocesan commutation, and had added a sum of 7 per cent. to the amount of the annuities. There were grave objections to this arrangement, but they had been met partially by the readiness of the Government to add another 5 per cent., and to make the acceptance of three-fourths instead of four-fifths of the clergy of a diocese of a commutation sufficient. The Government had also agreed to except from the commutation any residence and land in an incumbent's own occupation, if the incumbent should so desire. He understood, indeed, that the Government still refused any concession on the point of the building charges on glebe-houses, and he expressed his concern at this; but as the sum at issue, after the last-mentioned concession, was scarcely more than 100,000., he was not prepared to advise the House to hold out on such a question. Lastly, not to dwell on more trifling matters, there was the question of the disposal of the surplus. The Government, on this point, had consented to amend clause 68 to the effect that it should provide for the employment of the surplus for the relief of unavoidable calamity, and in such manner as Parliament should hereafter direct. He apologized for having entered on such a negotiation without the express authorization of his party, and intimated his own opinion, much as he disliked the whole Bill,

that concessions were preferable to leaving the whole controversy in suspense for an indefinite time.

The Archbishop of Canterbury admitted that the sum of 500,000%., offered by the Government in substitution for private endowments, was a very favourable bargain for the Church, and would go some way to make up for the refusal to concede the Ulster glebes. He professed himself generally content with the terms of the compromise as sketched by Lord Cairns, and although he held the sacrifice of an Established Church, where a nation possessed one, to be of the gravest import, it was yet something saved to retain, as the Irish Protestants, to a certain extent, under the present plan would, an endowed instead of a purely voluntary Church, to which he declared his profound objection, as a kind of ecclesiastical machinery which might indeed present the truth, but not in the purest form.

The Earl of Carnavon allowed that the extraordinary difficulties, affecting alike the question and the House itself, excused the very unusual course which Lord Cairns had adopted. He felt bound, under the circumstances, to accept the substitute for his own amendment, and also the rest of the arrangement offered, although he doubted their equivalence to the benefits which the amendments of the House had secured for the Church.

The Marquis of Salisbury admitted the perplexity and responsibility of Lord Cairns' position, and by way of a set-off to the lenity of the bargain struck with the Government, he suggested that any delay would have diminished the value of the lives on which the Church had to rely for its future support.

Earl Russell congratulated the House, and especially the Opposition and its leaders, on the arrangement. He regretted that the glebe-houses could not have been granted free from building charges to the clergy; but this was impossible, without conceding corresponding advantages to the other religious bodies.

The Earl of Malmesbury agreed to the compromise, and was convinced that after the House had affirmed the principles of disestablishment and disendowment, it would have been a scandal both to it and to the country, could no arrangement have been made. As it was, if the House had not got all it might have desired for the Church, it had, at least, vindicated its place in the Constitution.

Earl Grey was satisfied with the compromise, as well as with the conduct both of the Opposition and of the Government, which had now given the best possible answer to the charge he had brought against it on a former occasion. He congratulated the country and himself on his views respecting the Irish Church having been now, after five and thirty years, acceded to.

Viscount Halifax thought no grave question had ever been satisfactorily settled except by mutual concessions. He was persuaded of the fairness of the present compromise.

The Earl of Harrowby, while retaining his former objections to the Bill, rejoiced at the compromise, but he reminded the House

that the Church had even now obtained a mere 5 per

cent. beyond that to which it had a strict positive right. The House had advanced its position greatly in showing respect for public opinion. -too much respect indeed, he thought, considering the change he believed to have occurred recently in that public opinion.

Lord Athlumney regretted that the opportunity had been missed of sending forth a message of peace and conciliation to Ireland by granting glebe-houses to the other religious communities. But he was ready to accept the terms which had been made, and he predicted the benefits which might result from the Bill to his country.

Earl Stanhope would have considered the loss of the Bill, great as were the objections to it, as a public misfortune. He deprecated discussion of the amendment to clause 68, and while defending his own amendment in favour of co-ordinate endowment, maintained also the expediency of not now insisting upon it.

The Duke of Marlborough and Lord Lyveden, from opposite sides of the House, expressed their satisfaction with the compromise. The Earl of Fingall expressed the gratitude of the Irish Roman Catholics to the House for the result.

The Earl of Bandon by no means sympathized with the exchange of mutual congratulations on the great work crowned on that evening. He dwelt particularly on the injustice of requiring payment of the building charges on the glebe-houses.

After a few words from Earl Granville in acknowledgment of the manner in which the compromise had been received, and for the purpose of explaining that the addition of 12 per cent. was a suggestion not originally of the Government, but of Lord Cairns, and after a solemn protest by the Bishop of Tuam against disestablishment, as a national sin, and against disendowment, as a national injustice, the House proceeded to consider and, subject to the compromise stated by Lord Cairns, to agree to the several amendments of the Commons to the Lords' amendments.

One division only took place, viz. on the question with respect to residences of incumbents, but the Commons' amendment was carried by 47 to 17.

In this manner the long and fierce controversy which this Bill had engendered seemed to be happily set at rest. It was no doubt a matter of great satisfaction to many politicians, to whatever party they might belong, that a question so embarrassing, and of such urgency that it could never be set aside until dealt with in some shape or other by legislation, should be terminated. The public, too, were weary of the controversy, and rejoiced to hear of a settleMany, however, who held staunchly to the Conservative side in politics, and many ardent adherents of the Church Establishment and of the Protestant cause, were greatly disappointed at the concessions which had been made by their representatives; and severe reflections were cast in some quarters, and especially from the other side of the Irish Channel upon the motives of those

Parliamentary leaders who were considered to have betrayed the cause. The spokesmen of the two parties, indeed, alike expressed satisfaction with the terms of the compromise, but from various expressions of public opinion it might be gathered that on a broad view of the matter the conditions of the treaty left a considerable balance of advantage in the hands of the authors of the Bill.

There was an unusually full attendance in the House of Commons on the next day, when the amendments agreed to by the Lords were to be taken into consideration. Mr. Gladstone was received with much greeting from his party when he rose to move that the House should accept the amendments without exception and without reservation. He assented to the excision in the preamble, on the ground that in the 68th clause enacting words would be inserted sufficiently indicating the application of the surplus; the retention of the date at 1871 he regarded as a token not of victory, but of the harmonious opinion of both Houses; and on the deduction of the curates' stipends, the arrangement of the Lords he considered as fair and reasonable. As to the glebe-houses, he observed that the Government originally would not have been disposed in the last resort obstinately to stand by the clause, but the discussions here and elsewhere had so complicated it with the question of equal treatment of the clergy of all religions, that it was impossible for them to yield. Substantially, therefore, it would remain unaltered, though there would be an advantage to the clergy in allowing them to except from the commutation of their life interests the commutation for the house and land they occupied. The surplus clause would be reduced to a very simple form, for while it would declare that the surplus should be applied in the main for the relief of unavoidable calamity, it would leave the particular mode open for the direction of future Parliaments. This would substantially carry out the intention of the Government that this great sum of money should not be held back as the subject of intrigue, bargains, and pledges at every future Irish election. Mr. Gladstone vindicated the original determination of the Government not to shrink from the disposal of the surplus, expressing his firm conviction that to have followed the precedent of the Reform Bill of 1866, by attempting to separate the two parts of the subject, would have been equally fatal to the measure. Passing to the last point of the compromise the 5 per cent. added in the commutation clause-he did not conceal that he held it to be of great importance, and a concession against the principle of the Bill. But looking to the mischief of leaving the controversy open, and in deference to the opinion of the House of Lords, and wishing to preserve the harmony between the two Houses (which had never been so severely tried, but which, thank God, had stood the trial), the Government had not felt itself justified in refusing the overtures made to them on the point.

Mr. Vance, the Conservative member for Armagh, expressed his opinion frankly upon the arrangement, which he characterized as

« PreviousContinue »