*MR. H. J. ROBY (Eccles): I said there were two questions. First: Is the property national? And, secondly: Is there a large majority of the inhabitants in favour of the Disestablishment of the Church? I said the first part of the argument applied to England as well as Wales, but that the second part of the argument distinctly did not apply to England.

which renders all further reasoning unnecessary for the policy and principles of this Bill. But, strangest of all, it is said that the position of the Church of England has been strengthened by the Disestablishment of the Irish Church, and that is held out as an inducement to members of the Church of England, who might otherwise hesitate, to join in this Bill for the Disestablishment of the Church in Wales. As to the first of these propositions, namely, the success which has been achieved by the Irish Church, certainly I shall not endeavour in the smallest degree to depreciate the credit which is given to my Church brethren in Ireland for the courage with which they encountered the blow which seemed destined to crush them, and for the energy with which they have struggled to their feet again. By great patience, by great generosity, by benefactions, by willing services gratuitously rendered to their Church, often by great self-sacrifice, the members of the Disestablished Church in Ireland have succeeded, I am proud to say, in carrying on with undiminished vigour the services of their Church, and they have also managed to provide for it a modest Endowment. [Cheers.] I heard a cheer from hon. Gentlemen opposite. I suppose that was meant to imply that all these

*MR. PLUNKET: We have a second edition of the learned thesis of the hon. Member, but I do not think it makes much difference. He has now stated with much greater brevity the first part of it, and the second part I venture to challenge. But, whatever the reason was, I rather imagine that the reading of the hon. Member's speech could not have been received this morning with great enthusiasm either by the constituents to whom he had given the pledge, or by those friends of his with whom he holds such agreeable relations amongst the dignitaries of the Church of England. I do not intend, in my remarks this evening, to make any attempt to go over the general ground which has been traversed so well by others. There is only one set of arguments brought forward in support of this Bill as to which I should like to be permitted to say a few words. I mean those arguments which are derived from what is called benefits had accrued as a result the Irish precedent, and as I, of course, of the Irish Church Act, for which may speak in a certain sense at first the Irish Church should be thankful. hand, on some of these points, at all Can anything be more absurd? When events, and as extraordinary misrepre- the Irish Church started on its new sentations have been made upon all of career, all that they could scrape tothem, I trust the House will permit me gether out of the fragments of the profor a short time to endeavour to throw perty which had been taken away from Some side-lights upon those statements. it, by economy and by self-denial, was a The Irish precedent is made use of in sum which, if capitalised, would be convarious ways. In the first place, the siderably less than one million sterling. Disestablishment of the Church of Ire- Since then, by the voluntary contribuland is presented to the public, and the tion of its members between four and English people are called upon to admire five millions have been added to that the extraordinary success and excellence sum. But I must explain that the of the Church and its members. Then words of Irish Churchmen, speaking in there comes a transformation, and in the satisfaction of the work they have been second scene the ministers and members able to do, speaking with hope for the of the Church of Ireland are exhibited future, have again and again been quoted in the character of the awful example to by the supporters of Disestablishment as show how much of pilfering and plunder- if the members of the Irish Church who ing may be done in the national pro- used these words were witnesses to a perty, as it is called, of the Church. desire that a similar measure should be And then, again, the fact that Parlia- meted out to the Church in this country. ment did, in 1869, Disestablish the Irish Nothing could be more untrue. Church is cited as a conclusive argument, doubt many members of the Irish Church,

No

says

"Now, however, the very disaster which seemed to threaten our downfall has been overruled for our good."

remembering the position in which they inconsistent in that and at the end he were placed in 1869, and what has since happened, readily admit that what has followed since 1869 has not been an unmixed evil. Some of the more sanguine ministers, of whom the Archbishop What contradiction is there in treating an of Dublin, my brother, to whom the Act of Parliament as a national sin and It is most learned Solicitor General referred last describing it as a disaster? night, is, perhaps, the strongest type, set unfair, I must say, the way these pamphlets are cooked up, and the way in very high the advantages as compared which these garbled, these misleading, with the disadvantages. A much larger these lying pamphlets are put forth. But number of Churchmen in Ireland hold I pass away from that. I desire to point the opposite opinion; but, whatever out one or two differences between the opinion they may hold as to that, to tell spirit and the method of the Act of them that they have anything to be 1869 and the Bill now before the House. grateful for in their present position to The main difference between the two the Act of 1869 seems an absurdity, and, measures is in the matter of commufurthermore, I do not believe, whatever tation and compounding. The power of opinions they may hold upon that sub- commuting and compounding contained ject, there is one in a thousand but sym- in the Irish Church Act was what really pathises with the Church of England in enabled the Irish Church to escape from its present difficulties and wishes it well; absolute beggary and ruin. What was and I am sure there is not one who has the scheme of commutation which is now studied this Bill, or knows anything of put aside as something quite unworthy its provisions, but would say of consideration? Why, it was simply say now, that under such a measure this. It gave us no new Endowments, as is now proposed to this House for the nothing was given to us except the English Church in Wales, such a degree bare value of the life interests of the of success as they have obtained in clergy who chose to commute, and 12 Ireland would have been absolutely im- per cent. added in consideration for possible. May I say one word with the State being relieved of collection reference to the quotation which the and management. There was no obligaSolicitor General made last night from a tion on the clergy to commute if they charge which was delivered in 1882 by did not choose; but the scheme enmy brother, who was then Bishop of abled the Church body to constitute Meath? By the courtesy of the Solicitor itself into a kind of insurance society General I saw the paper from which he was reading, and observed that it was one of the leaflets published by the Liberation Society, and I should not be surprised to find that the passage was torn from its context. It is a fact that in recent years the Archbishop of Dublin has had again and again to write to the

as I

for the purpose of securing to the Incumbents entitled to those annuities the payment of what was due to them. We also received what was given to us by our own clergy-namely, their services— and it was in that way that the Church body was enabled to set its house in order again. The Church being thus to protest against the use provided with the services of its which was made of words of his by taking ministers was in a position to make them away from the natural collocation the best they could of the capital in which they stood. I am quite willing, sum, and being advised by able however, to take the extract as it financiers who gave their services willstands. It is a passage evidently spoken ingly and gratuitously, they were able in the light of the Land League agita- judiciously to invest on good conditions tion in 1882, and he said

newspapers

"By ways that we should never have selected for ourselves, our Church has been prepared to abide the fury of the storm."

the sum which was paid to them. In the meantime private benefactions were allowed to accumulate, in order to make a fund for the carrying on in future of the services of the Church.

I do not see that there is anything But the framers of this Act have pro

Mr. Plunket.

ceeded on exactly the opposite course. when I contrast it with the policy and They have merely preserved the life provisions of this Bill, I am reminded interests of the clergymen. There is of the old saying that "Love is strong control given to the representative as death; jealousy is cruel as the grave.' body. There is no opportunity for There is only one other difference compounding, and, therefore, what must between the Act of 1869 and this Bill follow is this—that it will be absolutely to which I wish at present to call attenimpossible for the Disestablished Church tion. It is in the treatment which is in Wales, if this Bill passes, to make any awarded to the curates. I should have provision for parishes falling vacant. In thought that, if there were any persons some instances a number of parishes may who would have been entitled to consoon lose their clergymen, but in other sideration-such consideration as was cases, perhaps for 40 or 50 years, the granted by the framers of the Irish clergymen may live on and become old. Church Act of 1869-it would have There will be no means of removing been the unfortunate young men who them, and they will remain to the end will have all their prospects in life of their lives. And so the Church in blighted if this Bill is passed. And Wales will be condemned to die out what is the excuse? A curious thing parish by parish. Its energies will be about this Bill is that, mean as are the crippled, its power of reorganising provisions of it, the reasons which are itself will be paralysed, and it will given for them are still more unworthy. be left to bleed to death. Saigner What is the excuse given? It is that à blanc is literally the fate reserved certain curates in the case of the Church for this religious body, for whose of Ireland were paid too much money. future Ministers express so much benevo- The President of the Board of Trade lence. When I heard the Home Secretary said there were many who entered the explain the reasons for the course which is now adopted in preference to that which was embodied in the Irish Church Act, and when I heard him say, as a sufficient reason for departing from that precedent, that if the State were to get into its hands a large sum of money it really would not know what to do with it;-that of this charge? It is an old charge that there would be the greatest danger that is made. The whole of this sweeping it would be squandered and frittered charge seems to me to involve an indictaway, I could not help asking myself, ment of the framers of the Act of 1869; was there ever such a feeble insufficient of the Commissioners who administered explanation as that? I could not help it, as well as against those clergymen of feeling that the spirit which inspired the Church whom it affected. It dethose who framed this Bill was of quite pends upon this-that, whereas there a different character from the motives were in July, 1869, 720 curates in the which the right hon. Gentleman professes. Irish Church, in July, 1871, which was Yes, Sir! The framers of this Bill have the period at which these gratuities were studied carefully the provisions of the paid to them, the number was 921, a differIrish Church Act for the purpose, appa- ence of 201. I do not know whether the rently, of finding out how it was that right hon. Gentleman who made this charge the Irish Church escaped its fate, and the other day das read the Debate which for the purpose of taking care that the took place in this House in 1875 on this Welsh Church shall not save its life in subject. I gather the right hon. Gentlethe same way. I say it is the most man has not, and yet he has made this cruel proposal that could possibly be charge! Will the House credit it that a made, and it is supported by the most Minister comes forward to make frivolous excuses. When I compare the argument in support of this provision, provisions of this Bill with the Irish and bases it on a sweeping charge against Church Act, when I see how the right a certain set of clergymen who were hon. Gentleman who framed that Act then in the Church of Ireland, many really tried, as he said, to temper what them are still, and yet has never taken he thought was justice with mercy, and the trouble to inquire into the truth of

ministry for the express purpose of obtaining compensation. Of course, if that were true, one would say that the natural inference would be that you should make provision in this measure against such an abuse of the intention of Parliament. But what is the truth

an

of

the mover, and he said he himself that when the

sure

elti

this charge? He gave no proof; he provisions of this Bill, to make such mentioned no names. Fortunately, how- charges as that? There is another view ever, this particular charge, together with of the question which I should like to the rest of the indictment for such pecula- deal with for a short time, and it is, in tion against the Irish Church, the whole my opinion, the most important aspect of this case was tried out on the floor of of this Bill. It is its bearing on the this House at the time when all these wider and greater question of Disestabcircumstances were fresh in the recollec- lishment of the Church of England. It tion of Members, and when it was pos- has been stated in the course of these sible to give particulars and to answer Debates that the Church of England the charges when made. I remember was made stronger by the Disestablishwell the Debate, because I took part in ment of the Irish Church, and that is it. Mr. Jenkins, the then Member for used as an argument to lovers of the Dundee, moved for a Commission to English Church that they should not inquire into what he considered the mal- hesitate to support this Bill. In 1869 administration of the Irish Church Act, it was argued by the opponents of but so much had Mr. Jenkins apparently the Irish Church Bill, that, if the prinbeen misinformed by whoever instructed ciple of Disestablishment were conceded him, that the seconder of his Motion in the case of the Irish Church, that an Irish Nationalist Member of that concession would be made use of for the time-actually had to throw over purpose of attacking the Establishment felt in England and especially of attacking case the Establishment in Wales. It was was inquired into it would be found answered by the Liberal Party of that that there had been great exaggeration. day that there was no foundation for The charges were replied to by Mr. such a fear; that the cases were totally Mulholland and by Mr. Gibson, now different, and that the Church of England Lord Ashbourne, on behalf of the Irish would be strengthened by the sacrifice Church, and also by Mr. Hugh Law, who of the Irish Church, and that the forces himself drafted the Irish Church Act, of Disestablishment would be checked who had been Attorney General to the on the shores of Britain. I could right hon. Gentleman the Member for quote many instances to illustrate my Midlothian, and who after this event meaning, but there is one instance so I am now speaking of was his Lord picturesque, so pregnant of warning on Chancellor in Ireland. Law this subject, that I hope the House will answered all the accusations that had allow me to read a few words. They were been made, and as to this particular spoken by a man since passed away, but charge he said :— then a very distinguished scholar and "With regard to the question of commutation divine, and who was himself a Bishop on the part of the curates, it was only fair to of the Church in Wales. Some other remember that a number of young men were sentences from the same speech are, I qualifying themselves to serve as curates at the am sure, fresh in the recollection of time when the Irish Church Act suddenly passed, and a short period was allowed to enable them Members of this House, because they to become ordained, and so to he entitled to were quoted in praise of apostolic compensation. Under such circumstances 201 poverty by the present Prime Minister could not by any means be considered a large in his great oration at Cardiff. Dr. number for the year and a half that intervened Thirlwall was Bishop of St. David's before the 1st of January, 1871." in 1869 when the Irish Church Act was There was a Division, and the figures passed. He was one of the few Bishops were 148 and 34, or a majority of 118 who were prepared to vote for the against Mr. Jenkins. When men have Second Reading of the Bill in the been tried here at the time when it was House of Lords. He had heard the warnpossible to make a defence against these accusations, and when men have been acquitted under the circumstances I have described, I ask, is it not a scandalous thing for a Minister to come forward and, in order to trump up a defence for the miserable and mean Mr. Plunket.

Mr.

ing I have spoken of that the principle of Disestablishment would probably be carried from the Irish shores to his own diocese in Wales, and this is what he said :—

"I am thankful to the noble Earl who ad

dressed the House last but one yesterday for

relieving me from the necessity of touching on another topic which I should otherwise have been bound to advert to. I mean the argument founded on the fancied analogy of the case of Wales to that of Ireland; but, far from there being an analogy, there is the strongest contrast between the two, not only in the fact that there is no broad channel flowing between England and Wales, but also in the circumstances that the whole population of Wales are of one way of thinking on religion, and do not differ from the Established Church in any essential point in a greater degree than the members of the Estab

lished Church differ from one another."

we shall be quite content to accept a graduated application of it to the northern dioceses of England."

were.

The case is stated even more clearly in a publication which I think must be accepted by many hon. Members as an authority upon the subject-"The Case for Disestablishment." I have no means of knowing the exact numbers of the claims to have on its side a majority of supporters of the Liberation Society. It the Liberal Members of the House, and So, the Bishop said, that without any hesi- I observed the other day that at its tation or scruple, he voted for the Second annual breakfast there were many Reading of the Bill. The strong contrast Members of Parliament, including two is now ignored; the fancied analogy Members of the Government, and that which the Bishop ridiculed is made the several Members of the Government, basis of this Bill. And what of the broad including one Cabinet Minister, sent channel? Certainly there is no broad letters of apology and, I presume, of channel between the four dioceses of sympathy. This festive meeting was in Wales and the rest of England; but the very good heart and well satisfied with hand of the destroyer has found no diffi- the progress of this Bill, claiming it as culty in carving out, parish by parish, an earnest of future success, and frankly as with a sharp dissecting knife, from stating that they had never concealed the living body of the Church of what their ultimate intentions England, those portions which are to That brings us face to face with the be included within what we are told now gravest question-the most important is the circumscription of the Principality question that ever has been, or ever of Wales. And what about this extra- can be, submitted to Parliament. It is ordinary unanimity of the people of no less a question than this-Is the Wales? Why, in the same speech at House willing now to lend itself to the Cardiff, the present Prime Minister told first step of a process by which it is hoped us that the Church in Wales was an alien to bring about at no distant time the DisChurch,and that its clergy, instead of being establishment of the Church of England? a means of reconciliation, were a cause of This is the first time that a responsible hostility amongst the people of Wales! Government has asked the House of But let me press this argument further. Commons to commit itself by the Second Is it or is it not a fact that this Bill is Reading of a Bill to the principle of advocated in the interest of the cause of breaking into the Establishment of the general Disestablishment throughout the Church and of taking away from it those country? I think it would be easy to Endowments which have been given to it adduce a great weight of authority upon by the generosity and piety of Englishthat subject. The late Prime Minister men for centuries. This particular Bill on one occasion said that so intimately is not framed exactly upon the model united were the different dioceses of suggested in the works of the Liberation Wales and England that it would be impossible to distinguish between them. The present Leader of this House has said that if you raise the question of the Church Establishment in Wales you raise the whole question. We have heard in this Debate one very striking confirmation of that view. The hon. and learned Member for Leeds, in his most interesting and attractive, and very frank speech, said:

Society, but I know it is part of their Programme, and that the arguments used in support of it are the arguments which they use in support of larger measures. Therefore, I say that no man can blind himself to the fact that in supporting this Bill he is doing what he can to advance the larger measure. I know there are many Members who, the more clearly that is laid out, the more strongly will they be in favour of this Bill.

But

I would venture to appeal to others We who want Disestablishment altogether, in this House and to many men and we form the majority on this side, think you may establish the precedent in Wales, and next outside who will have the decision of