Government had promised to correct them in a supplement, but equally failed to redeem these promises. There were but few of the more ancient Records in the Irish Office. One of Henry III. was considered apocryphal; but in the English Office there were Records of the earliest date, even to Henry II. He had suggested that where those Records were so mixed with English that they could not be separated, they should be copied, and the copies sent to Ireland, where they would be of infinite value. This, also, was promised. He could not understand the reason of this apathy on the part of the Government. It was unfair to neglect, on account of the expense, to publish Records of the greatest importance to Ireland and without which no satisfactory history of that country could be written, while the English Records were being proceeded with without any reference to cost. MR. BLAKE suggested that the tens of thousands of copies lying in Dublin Castle and becoming mouldy, should be issued to the public at a reasonable rate. The matter was as important for the whole of the country as for Ireland itself. MR. SCLATER-BOOTH said, he had been taken by surprise, the hon. Member for Dublin (Mr. Pim) having concluded his speech with a specific Motion of which no Notice had been given, and he should object to the House pledging itself to any expenditure in reference to these documents without obtaining the advice of the officers conversant with the subject. According to arrangement, these publications were offered for sale at the cost of printing and publishing, but still they were not purchased. The country was under obligation to the noble Lord (Lord Romilly) at the head of the Record Office and his able staff for their services, and this subject had frequently been brought under the notice of the Government. In 1857 an annual sum was voted for the publication of the Records, at a reasonable price. With respect to the suggestion that those books, instead of being kept in store at the Record Office, should be sold at a cheap price or given away, he could state that the giving of them away had been found of no benefit, for nearly all of those which had been so disposed of found their way to second-hand booksellers' stalls, or into waste-paper shops. The only mode by which the documents could be brought to the knowledge of the public was by the labours of literary men, who published their contents in a condensed and sifted form. The volumes of Froude showed in every page the assistance he had derived from his researches in the Record Office. A Treasury Minute of the 23rd of April, 1866, contained a statement of all that had occurred in reference to these documents. If copies were given gratui tously to public libraries great expense would be incurred to little purpose, and it was not thought advisable that they should to any extent be gratuitously circulated. The hon. Member might rest assured that the attention of the Government was directed to the Records, not only in Dublin, but in Edinburgh and London. He hoped the hon. Gentleman would not press his Resolution. MR. BENTINCK said, he thought the hon. Member for Dublin (Mr. Pim) had done good service in bringing the question before the House, and it was highly desirable to show that there were some Members of the House who took an interest in matters of such importance. After hearing the statement of his hon. Friend the Secretary for the Treasury, he was bound to say that he did not think it was desirable that any further reduction of price should take place. Great credit was due to the Government for the endeavours they had made to place at the service of the public Records and ancient documents, not only those belonging to England, but also those belonging to foreign countries. They could not expect Her Majesty's Government to incur a loss in publishing those Calendars, considering the liberality which they and their predecessors had evinced in regard to the compilation of them. It might be a question whether the prefaces to the Records might not be produced separately in a cheap form. The services of Messrs. Burganrot and Brown in connection with this subject were worthy of great praise. A key had been discovered by which to read some most interesting historical documents connected with the history of Isabella of Spain, and other matters intimately connected with important portions of English history. The Government had displayed no parsimony on the subject. Amendment and Original Motion, by leave, withdrawn. Committee deferred till Monday next. MINUTES.] — PUBLIC BILLS-First Reading Admiralty Suits (182); Contagious Diseases Act (1866) Amendment (185); Lodgers Property Protection* (186); Children, &c. Protection (187). Second Reading-Fairs* (141); Drainage Provisional Order Confirmation* (158); Inclosure (No. 2) (159); Local Government Supplemental (No. 4) (165); Local Government Supplemental (No. 5)* (166); Established Church (Ireland) (157), negatived. Third Reading Thames Embankment and Metropolis Improvement (Loans) Act Amendment (156); City of London Gas * (168). ESTABLISHED CHURCH (IRELAND) BILL-(No. 157.) (The Earl Granville.) SECOND READING. DEBATE RESUMED. [THIRD NIGHT]. Order of the Day for resuming the adjourned Debate on the Amendment to the Motion for the Second Reading, read. Debate resumed accordingly. THE DUKE OF ARGYLL: My Lords, it was not possible, and, in my opinion, it was not desirable that this debate should be confined within the narrow limits of the Bill before us. The truth is that all eyes, and I think I may say all hearts, are fixed on the great questions which lie behind it; and this Bill has no interest whatever except in the relation which it bears to these; and yet, my Lords, I cannot help observing that, since the speech of my noble Friend who proposed the second reading of this Bill-the able and exhaustive speech of my noble Friend-attacks have been made and arguments employed against those who sit on this side the House which impose upon those who have had any responsibility in this measure the duty of giving to the House some further explanations of its origin and of its object. My Lords, the first great object of this Bill has been this-to give an assurance to the Irish people that the Imperial Parlinment will deal, without unnecessary delay, with the whole question of the Established Church of Ireland. My Lords, I rejoice to say I believe that object has been gained. Not even an adverse vote of this House upon the Bill which is now before us can prevent the substantial accomplishment of that object. We have raised the question of the Irish Church out of the domain of abstract and somewhat languid speculation, and we have placed it in the fore-front of the living politics of the English people. We have-I avow it, I claim it as an honour, and I do not repudiate it as an accusation-we have made the disestablishment of the Irish Church a great party question. This has been the accusation of noble Lords opposite-they have flung it in our teeth in every form of language. For this we have been censured severely, but not, I think, offensively, by many members of the right rev. Bench. For this we have been censured in somewhat coarser tones by the members of the Government. The noble Duke the President of the Council (the Duke of Marlborough), who spoke on Friday night, told us in so many words that our policy was a dishonest policy. The noble Earl (the Earl of Derby), who was lately at the head of the Govern ment, and who is still, I presume, its guardian angel, talked on the preceding night of the personal ambition of my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Liberal party in the House of Commons; and he added some insinuations still more offen. sive, as it appeared to me, which he was good enough to say that he nevertheless did not insinuate. I can assure both the noble Duke and the noble Earl that this language excited in me no feelings either of irritation or of surprise. It is perfectly [Third Night. natural that men in whose hands the noble at all, for he appeared to stand absolutely instrument of party government has been alone-will, on these great questions of for more than two years so much degraded, public policy which are coming on in reby whom it has been entirely dissociated spect to the Irish Church, be absolutely from all definite political opinions, and there- powerless and without any influence on the fore from all public principle-it is perfectly course of public affairs. Well, my Lords, natural that they should denounce party that was our first object to assure the government and party movements as op- Irish people that this question of the Irish probrious imputations. My Lords, I have Church would be dealt without unnecessary not so learnt the Constitution of this coun- delay; and in order to give that assurance try. I hold it to be the duty of great party it was our bounden duty to connect our leaders to associate their party with great opinions, whatever they might be, with the public principles. I hold it to be their conduct and with the fate of our political bounden duty and their highest honour to party. My Lords, there is no other test place in the hands of their party a stand in this country, under our system of goard, and to give them a political faith, pro- vernment, of the sincerity of a great public vided that standard be a noble standard party than that of being willing to connect and that faith be a true faith. And, my their fortunes with the measures which Lords, I can understand also the denuncia- they propose. But, my Lords, we had also tions of my noble Friend on the cross- another object; and this object, I frankly Benches (Earl Grey). He likewise com- confess may be entirely frustrated by the plained of what he called our party move- vote of your Lordships' House. That object ments. I can understand this from him, was to save unnecessary waste in the funds because my noble Friend-with all his of the Irish Church. I own I was infinitely powers, with his long experience, his great surprised to hear the observations on this abilities, and his incorruptible honesty-is subject that fell from my noble Friend who nevertheless the very type and leader of moved the rejection of the Bill. He said what may be called-I do not say crotchety he thought the only conceivable object of politicians, but at least of eclectic poli- the measure was a little saving of money, ticians. But I was surprised to hear my and that he held to be an object of noble Friend, in his speech on the first perfect indifference; that there was no night of this debate, say that our conduct want of money; in fact, there was such in this respect had given offence, and would an abundance of money that he did not ultimately give greater offence, to those know what to do with it. This is the wise and moderate men who ultimately, he opinion of a noble Lord whose own project said, had in their hands the destinies of it is to divide that £650,000 a year of the this country. If my noble Friend really Irish Church-which we are told is barely means those who are in the position that sufficient for the spiritual wants of the he occupies, and that in their hands are 700,000 Protestants-among the whole the destinies of the country, he is much 6,000,000 of the Irish people! That is the mistaken. My Lords, it is perfectly true project of my noble Friend; and yet he is that it is very often in the power of third the man who tells us that the funds are so parties-small third parties, such as that ample that in point of amount he does not with which my noble Friend is connected- know what to do with them. My Lords, I to upset a Government; but it is hardly ever apprehend that if there is one man in this in their power to determine a policy. It was House who, to be consistent with himself, in the power of a third party in the year ought, above all others, to desire to save 1866 to turn out the Government of my money and economize the funds of the Irish noble Friend (Earl Russell); but it was Church, it is that Peer who proposes to dinot in their power to turn out the question vide them among all the sects of Ireland, of Reform. On the contrary, their con- and to introduce religious equality by the duct and their language did but precipitate indiscriminate distribution of the revenue Reform, and compelled it to be granted, among the various Churches. I beg even with larger concessions to extreme the House to observe that even in the opinions than if they had never interfered. Conservative view of the question it is no And I warn my noble Friend-indeed, unimportant matter to save the funds of he almost seemed to be conscious of the Established Church from needless the fact I warn him that the small waste. We have not before us as yet the party he represents in this House I Report of the Royal Commission; we do am not sure that he represents any party not know exactly what amount of surplus they may think may be derived from the tion that the word disendowment was funds of the Established Church; but we all avoided and disestablishment was inserted know this, that there are more Bishops than in the Resolution. That course was adopted are necessary for that Church, and more for the very good reason that, as far as I livings than there are congregations re- know, no human being proposes to disquiring spiritual provision; and we cannot endow the Established Church altogether. for a moment doubt that among the recom- The noble Earl referred to endowments demendations of the Royal Commissioners rived from private benefactions. Although must be, in any case, a certain diminution I think there has been some misunderstandof bishoprics and a certain amount of con- ing on that point, nobody has ever prosolidation of livings. Well, then, I say posed to derive the Church of endowments that every year you lose you are running derived from private benefactions. But the risk of losing the value of money, more than this, under the scheme sketched even although you should apply it strictly by Mr. Gladstone, the Church is to be left to the purposes of the Irish Church. For in possession of the churches and parsonremember this, that the Crown has not ages and of some land adjacent, so that the power or the right of keeping vacant it could not in perfect strictness be said bishoprics that fall vacant-the Crown is that the Church under that scheme is bound to fill up the bishoprics; and, there- to be wholly deprived of its endowments. fore, if one fell vacant next year when two, Besides, it is at the option and discretion three, four, five, or six bishoprics might of Parliament to what extent disendowment be deducted from the Irish Establishment, shall go; and an uncertainty would be created you are burdening the funds and the assets if the word disendowment were introduced. of the Established Church in Ireland with Therefore those Members of the House of a new life-interest, to the detriment of Commons who voted for that Resolution are those to whom Parliament may ultimately perfectly free to vote for any sort of comdetermine to apply those funds. There promise in respect to the endowment of fore, in rejecting the Bill you are doing the Church. There is another point which nothing but pure mischief, even though I wish to notice with regard to the Resoyou determine to apply these funds in the lution of the House of Commons. That most Conservative sense to a system of re- Resolution distinctly pledged the House to distribution among the members of the the principle of disestablishment, and it has Established Church alone. been argued in this House during the proMy Lords, having said so much with re-gress of this debate that the Bill is to be gard to the two objects of the Bill-and I read as one for disestablishment frankly admit that the latter is one of com- necessarily a Bill for disendowment, but for paratively small importance-I wish to say disestablishment. Now, I entirely deny a few words on another point connected that statement. It is perfectly open to with this Bill to which reference has been any Member of this House to vote for this made in the course of this debate, and that Bill and afterwards vote against any Bill, is the relation which this Bill bears to the even for the disestablishment of the Irish Resolution which has been passed by the Church. This is a Bill in its terms for House of Commons. It appears to me that the purpose of saving the waste of funds, a very indistinct conception of that Resolu- and nothing else; the ultimate disposal of tion is entertained by many Members of those funds will remain at the discretion this House. The noble Earl lately at the of Parliament, and of this or of any head of the Government, in speaking the future Government. Now, with regard to other night, referred to the fact that the one of the accusations brought against us Resolution of the House of Commons did on account of this Bill, I wish to notice not contain the word "disendowment." an observation made by the noble Marquess He was cheered from this side of the (the Marquess of Salisbury) who spoke House, and in noticing that cheer he said the other night with such distinguished he hoped we did not mean to take refuge ability. If, he asked, this Bill had been in the quibble of a distinction between dis- aimed only at the saving of funds, why endowment and disestablishment. I can did we not adopt the usual and well-known assure the noble Earl that no quibble was course under such circumstances, and intended by that cheer. There is a great bring in a Bill that all Bishops appointed distinction between disendowment and dis- during the period of transition should establishment, and it was not without a set hold their offices subject to the pleasure purpose and deliberate and careful inten- of Parliament? I can assure the noble [Third Night. not Marquess-and I am sorry that he is not here to hear me that this course also was carefully considered by those who framed this Bill, and it was rejected for reasons which, I think, would be respected by the noble Marquess himself. We thought it inconsistent with the dignity and functions of such high officers in the Church that Bishops should be appointed to sees with an uncertain vote of Parliament hanging over them as to the emoluments afterwards to be attached to their position. The most rev. Prelate who presides over the Northern Province in England, and who spoke with so much energy on Friday night, said that, even with regard to vacant parishes, it would be difficult to get competent men to fill parishes under such conditions as this Bill imposed. With how much greater reason would the most rev. Prelate have argued that it was impossible to ask any clergyman to accept the office of Bishop under such conditions as those indicated by the noble Marquess? This argument seemed conclusive. We conceived it impossible to propose that such high officers should be appointed under such restrictions, and therefore we took the only other course which was open to us for the purpose of saving the funds of the Church-namely, by providing that during the interval no new appointment should be made to vacant bishoprics. Before passing from the immediate provisions of this Bill, allow me to notice some of the objections taken with regard to the interim arrangements which are contemplated. The most rev. Prelate (the Archbishop of York) argued strongly that these interim arrangements would kill the Church by inches. Of course, that argument was entirely founded on the supposition that this Bill would not last only for one or two years, but for five or ten years, and that the Church would, therefore, be brought into a state of complete anarchy. Now, I can assure the most rev. Prelate that I agree with him that nothing could be more dangerous or more fatal to the interests of the Church in Ireland than such a state of uncertainty and confusion, and I must say that if I thought this would be the result of the Bill I should not support it. But I believe the only effect of this Bill would be to place all parties-the Church and Parliament, too -under such conditions that a compromise would certainly be come to in one, or, at the most, in two years. And on this point let me remind your Lordships that the renewal of this state of suspension will remain absolutely in the hands of the House of Lords. This Bill cannot be renewed without the assent of your Lordships' House; and, therefore, I would say that the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack who to-night will probably direct his great legal knowledge to show the technical difficulties that are in the way of the Bill, that if these are his only objections to the Bill-if he is willing to save the funds of the Church from need. less waste, for purposes of which he might approve-then I beg him to allow the second reading of the Bill, and to propose in Committee such Amendments as he thinks necessary for carrying on fully the spiritual jurisdiction and functions of the Church; and I believe these Amendments would meet with no opposition from this side of the House. I pass now to another question - not to the object but the origin of the Bill; to the question how and why it is that we came to propose it. On this point also we have been vehemently attacked. Your Lordships must have seen lately an account of a great public banquet given by certain Merchant Taylors, at which addresses were delivered by the Prime Minister, and by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack. The noble and learned Lord said that during the last thirty years the Liberal party had been smothering their convictions on this question. Well, I am going to confess to the noble and learned Lord that, putting aside the ironical tone of this remark, I do not think his observation was substantially unfair. It is perfectly true of the convictions which on this subject have been long in the minds of men, and especially of the great majority of the Liberal party, that in one sense they have long been smothered. Your Lordships all know that public men cannot act upon their abstract convictions, except under certain conditions of the public mind. Every man concerned in public life must know that public men have many opinions in regard to the institutions of the country which they would be willing, if they could, to put into the shape of measures, but which the exist ing conditions of public feeling render it hopeless or even harmful to propose; and this has been long the case with the convictions of the Liberal party respecting the Irish Church. Can any one doubt-has it not been in fact notorious-that the Liberal Leaders, whether speaking in Parliament |