I have not said a word--I never said a word in this House, and, I

believe, never out of it, to depreciate the character of the clergymen

of the Established Church in Ireland. I think no religious ministers are

placed in a more unfortunate position, and I am satisfied that many of

them feel it to be so. I have not the least doubt, when this transaction

is once accomplished, that they will breathe more freely. I believe they

will be more potent in their ministrations, and that their influence,

which must, or ought to be, considerable, will be far more extensive

than it has been, and far more beneficial in the districts in which they

live. But being so great a question, as the Home Secretary described it,

it can only be settled by mutual and reasonable concession. The main

principle being secured, that State Church supremacy is abolished in

Ireland, and that the Irish Churches are henceforth to be free Churches

upon the voluntary principle, then I should be willing, and I would

recommend every person in the country whom my voice may reach, to make

any reasonable concession that can be suggested in the case. So anxious

am I that it should be done, that I should be delighted to co-operate

with the right hon. Gentleman, and with hon. Members on the opposite

side of the House, in support of any just measure for settling this

great question. But I say, if it ever does come to be dealt with by a

great and powerful Minister, let it be dealt with in a great and

generous spirit. I would counsel to all men moderation and justice. It

is as necessary to Protestants as to Catholics and to Nonconformists

that they should endeavour to get rid of passion in discussing this

question.

We are, after all, of one religion. I imagine that there will come a

time in the history of the world when men will be astonished that

Catholics and Protestants have had so much animosity against and

suspicion of each other. I accept the belief in a grand passage, which I

once met with in the writings of the illustrious founder of the colony

of Pennsylvania. He says that 'The humble, meek, merciful, just, pious,

and devout souls are everywhere of one religion, and when death has

taken off the mask they will know one another, though the diverse

liveries they wear here make them strangers.' Now, may I ask the House

to act in this spirit, and then our work will be easy. The noble Lord,

towards the conclusion of his speech, spoke of the cloud which rests at

present over Ireland. It is a dark and heavy cloud, and its darkness

extends over the feelings of men in all parts of the British Empire. But

there is a consolation which we may all take to ourselves. An inspired

king and bard and prophet has left us words which are not only the

expression of a fact, but which we may take as the utterance of a

prophecy. He says, 'To the upright there ariseth light in the darkness.'

Let us try in this matter to be upright. Let us try to be just. That

cloud will be dispelled. The dangers which surround us will vanish, and

we may yet have the happiness of leaving to our children the heritage of

an honourable citizenship in a united and prosperous Empire.

* * * * *

IRELAND.

IX.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, APRIL 1, 1868.

[This speech was made in the debate on Mr. Gladstone's resolutions for

disestablishing the Irish Church.]

The House will not expect me to follow the legal argument of the hon.

and learned Member who has just sat down. I entertain a firm belief that

those legal cobwebs which are spread, and which are supposed to, and do

in the minds of many Gentlemen, interpose between the completion of a

great act of justice, will be swept away before long by the almost

unanimous opinion of the people of the three kingdoms.

During this debate, which has yet lasted only two nights, there has

been, if not a remarkable change of opinion, a remarkable change of

expression. Last night we had an interesting speech from the noble Lord

who generally sits opposite me, the noble Lord the Member for Stamford.

I refer only to the beginning of his speech, in which he spoke of his

affection for the principle of a Church Establishment. There was a

hesitation in his manner; he had a strong love for his principle, but it

appeared to me that he thought the time was come when even that

cherished principle would have to be surrendered. From the Treasury

bench we had a speech from the noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign

Affairs, and when he sat down it is difficult to say what was the

precise impression made upon the House; but I think, on the whole, the

impression made on the other side of the House--his own side--was by no

means a comfortable one. Now to me it is, and I think to the House it

is, a misfortune that we have a Government that speaks with a different

voice from night to night. We had it last year, and I presume, from the

example of the debate which lately took place on the motion of the hon.

Member for Cork, and from the debate on this motion, we are about to see

a repetition of it.

The fact is, that the position of the Government is one of great

difficulty and perplexity; to speak plainly, it is one which I should

call, in our Constitutional system, altogether unnatural. They are the

Ministers, the leaders of a minority of the House, and whilst they sat

as leaders of the minority in opposition they defended the principles of

their party, and they apparently regarded all their past career with

satisfaction; but the moment they are transferred to the Treasury bench

they find themselves in this difficulty, that although their party may

still wish to cling to their past opinions, there is something in the

very air, there is something throughout the mind of the whole kingdom,

which teaches them that their past opinions are impossible in their new

position.

The noble Lord the Member for King's Lynn made a speech not long ago at

Bristol, and in that speech he expressed what I am quite sure were his

honest opinions with regard to the condition of Ireland. He stated that

the condition of Ireland was one painful and dangerous, and to us, in

appearance at least, discreditable. He said we had a strange and

perplexing problem to solve; that in Ireland there was a miserable state

of things. Then he said, 'If we look for a remedy, who can give us an

intelligible answer? Ireland is the question of the hour.' And that is

not altogether at variance--in fact, I should say not at all at

variance--with the speech of the Chief Secretary for Ireland, who told

us, as far as he knew, the facts about his country. But immediately

afterwards we had the description of the right hon. Gentleman at the

head of the Government, to the effect that there was no crisis at all--

that, in point of fact, the condition of Ireland was a normal condition,

and that there was no necessity for anything remarkable or unusual in

the legislation that was required. Now, to-night we have had a speech

from the Home Secretary. I may say that every speaker on that side of

the House has admitted that his speech is entirely in opposition, in its

tone, its purpose, and its principle, to the speech of the noble Lord

the Member for King's Lynn. It seems to me that the Home Secretary to-

night answered the Foreign Secretary of last night--and I suppose if the

debate goes on until Thursday, probably the right hon. Gentleman at the

head of the Government, or perhaps the Secretary of State for India,

will answer the speech of the Secretary of State for the Home

Department.

But all this shows us that the House is in a wrong position. We have a

minority in office which cannot assert its own views with safety, nor

can it with any more safety directly adopt our views; and thus, when, on

that side of the House, a Minister gets up and makes what is called a

liberal speech on this question to us who are in opposition, that

creates discontent; and then another Minister rises and makes a speech

of an exactly opposite character, to reconcile that discontent. There

is, in fact, confusion and chaos in the House. We have a Government

which is not a Government--and we have an Opposition which is not an

Opposition, because really we do not oppose anything that you propose.

Your propositions are not based upon your own principles, which you held

when you sat on this side of the House, but on our principles, and

therefore we are not in opposition at all, but we help you as much as

possible to enforce, not your own principles, but ours. Whatever

compensation it may be to right hon. Gentlemen who sit on that bench and

enjoy the dignities and emoluments of office, I think there are many

honourable men on whom I am looking at this moment who do not observe

the course of these proceedings with entire satisfaction.

But now, notwithstanding these difficulties, there remains this great

question which we must discuss, and which, if possible, we must settle.

I say, notwithstanding some observations to the contrary, that the

people of the three kingdoms are looking with anxious suspense at the

course which Parliament may take on this question. The right hon.

Gentleman the Home Secretary on one occasion spoke of this question, of

this proposition, as being something in the nature of a revolution. But,

if it be a revolution, after all it is not so great a one as we might

suppose from the force and energy of the speech which he has delivered

to-night--a speech which, although I differ from his views, was, I must

say, a very good speech--in which he brought into the House a good deal

of the energy of the people of that great county (Yorkshire) from which

he comes. But we are now about to deal with a question which only

affects, according to the census, something under 700,000 people. I

observe hon. Gentlemen talk of the Protestants of Ireland as being one-

fourth of the whole population--of being a million and a half. All that

is fanciful exaggeration. According to the census the Episcopalians are

not more than 700,000, and let hon. Gentlemen bear this in mind--when

the census enumerators go round, if a man is not a Catholic or a

Presbyterian, he is put down, unless he can state he is of some other

sect, as an Episcopalian. And judging from what we know, there must be

out of the 700,000 a considerable number who never go to church, and,

politically or religiously, have no interest in it. Therefore, I

believe, speaking correctly, it would not be possible to show that there

are Episcopalians in Ireland in intimate connection with the Established

Church to the amount of more than from half a million to 600,000.

Now, this will not come to more than 100,000 families, that is, will not

be very much more than the population of Liverpool, or Manchester, or

Glasgow; so that, in point of fact, this question, which is held to be a

revolution,--this great question affects only a population equal to that

of the city of Glasgow, or of Liverpool, or of Manchester. And it is for

a population so small as this, I am told--for I am not versed in

computations of this kind--you have no less than twelve bishops and

archbishops, and that you have devoted for their services--for their

religious services--not less than the annual income arising from a

capital sum estimated to be, at least, ten or twelve millions sterling.

Now, if their system of teaching is really very good, I must say there

ought to be in Ireland a more perfectly moral and religious population

among the Church Protestants than there is in any other country in the

world.

What, then, are we about to do? What is the House about to do if we

adopt the resolutions of the right hon. Member for South Lancashire? If

the House accept the advice of the majority sitting on this side, what

will be done? We are not going to commit any vital wrong upon that one

city population of 500,000 or 600,000. When we have done everything that

I have suggested should be done, we shall leave them in as comfortable a

position as the majority of the people of Scotland are in at this

moment. We shall leave them as well off as eight or nine-tenths of the

population of Wales are; we shall leave them as well off as half, and

not the least religious half, of the people of England are; we shall

leave them as well off as the English, Scotch, Welsh, and Irish people

who form the population in our colonies, whether in North America or

Australia. And what can be more monstrous than for Gentlemen to come

here from Ireland--and there may he some from England--and tell us we

are bringing about a revolution, that we are committing an enormous

oppression, that we are hazarding the loyalty of the people of the North

of Ireland, when, after all, the most and worst which any of us proposes

to do is that the Church population of Ireland will be left at least as

well off as any of the various populations of the Empire I have just

described? I hope hon. Gentlemen opposite will be convinced that it is

not a bottomless abyss we are going to plunge their friends into.

Although it is a very small question for the Church in Ireland and for

the Church people, I hold it is an infinitely larger question for the

Catholic population. The hon. and learned Gentleman who spoke last

relies much upon law. I suppose it will be admitted that there are only

two pretences on which this State Church--the Protestant Church--can

exist in Ireland. The one is religious--the other is political. Now, has

anybody been able to show that, as a religious institution, it has not

been a deplorable failure? because clearly, the original intention, the

original hope was, that the people of Ireland would be drawn from the

Church of Rome and brought into harmony with the Church of England. I

undertake to say, from the time of its first establishment until now,

reckoning up all the Catholics on the one side and the Protestants on

the other, that it could not be shown, and is not to be believed, that

it has ever added really one person in every hundred persons to the

actual number of Protestants in the kingdom of Ireland. It has been an

entire failure--a failure deplorable, and almost ludicrous, as an engine

for converting the Catholic population. But it has not only not made

Catholics into Protestants, but it has made Catholics in Ireland more

intensely Roman than the members of that Church are found to be in any

other country in Europe or in America. And what is more than that, I

think it can be demonstrated that the existence of the Protestant Church

in Ireland, whether missionary or not in pretence, has not only not

converted the Catholics themselves, but has made it absolutely

impossible that anybody else, or any other Church, should convert them.

Because, if you look how the Church has been connected with the State,

and with the politics of the country, with the supremacy of the landed

proprietors, with the supremacy of the Protestant party, with all the

dark records of the past, you will see the effect has been to make

Catholicism in Ireland not only a faith, but absolutely a patriotism.

I think I might appeal to every Member of the House who now hears me

whether, if he had been placed in Ireland with his father before him

among the Catholic population--I might ask him whether he would not have

felt that if he threw off his allegiance to his Church, and if he

entered the portals of this garrison Church, that it would have been to

him not only a change of faith, but a denial as it were of his birth and

of his country. I have felt always in considering this question--and I

have considered it much for twenty-five years past--that all the

circumstances of that Church in Ireland have been such as to stimulate

the heart of every Catholic to a stronger adherence to his own faith,

and to a determined and unchangeable rejection of the faith and of the

Church which were offered to him by the hands of conquest. There is one

point on this, too, which is important, that the more you have produced

dissatisfaction with Imperial rule in Ireland, the more you have thrown

the population into the hands of Rome. Now, I hope I shall offend no

Catholic Member in this House when I say that I consider it one of the

greatest calamities of the world that there are in many countries

millions of Catholic population who are liable to be directed in much of

their conduct, and often in their political conduct, through their

bishops and clergy from the centre of the city of Rome. I think that is

a misfortune--I think it is a misfortune to the freedom of the world.

And I think, moreover, that it is a misfortune to every Catholic Church

in every country, for it tends to prevent it from being wholly national,

and it prevents also such changes and such reformations as, I believe,

are necessary in the progress of every Church. We see some result of

this in other countries of Europe. Notably, at this moment, in Austria,

even in that country which we lately thought was the very last in the

race of freedom, there is a contest going on with Rome. But there

probably is no country in Europe at this moment in which the Catholic

Church and population are more entirely subject than in Ireland to the

direct influence of a certain number of persons, of whom most of us know

nothing, who pull the strings of the Catholic world in the city of Rome.

I attribute much of this, which I think a great evil, to the existence

of the Protestant Church in Ireland. You know perfectly well that the

great discontent of Ireland is chiefly entertained by the Catholic

population, and you know that this population is even at this moment,

more than it was some years ago, subject directly to political

influences from Rome. But I am satisfied that it is for the interest of

the Catholic population, and that it is for the interest of this great

nation and of this Imperial Government, that whatsoever be the tie

between the Catholic population of Ireland and the Government in

Ireland, we ought at least to take away every obstacle that can lessen

in the smallest degree the loyalty of that people to the Imperial Crown.

And if this Church has failed as a religious institution, how stands it

as a political institution? It was intended not only to convert the

Catholics, but to secure the Union. An hon. Gentleman, with a courage

that I should not like to imitate, said that if the 5th Article of the

Act of Union should be altered, then in point of fact the Union is as

good as abolished. I see the hon. Gentleman up there, and I think he is

not the only one who has said it in the course of this discussion. It is

a very old and not a very strange device to expect the people to be made

loyal through the instrumentality of the clergy. I know that many

centuries ago a monk of some celebrity at the Court of Louis of Bavaria

told that monarch, 'You defend me with the sword, and I will defend you

with the pen.' We have been during all this time defending this Church

with the sword. The sword has scarcely ever been out of the hand of the

governing power in Ireland. And if a fair, simple, and unadorned

narrative were given of the transactions of this Parliament with

Ireland, with regard to its different enactments, coercive restrictions,

suspensions of the Habeas Corpus Act, and so forth, it would form a

narrative which would astonish the world and would discredit us. Sir, I

am afraid it is not too much to say that, in support of this supremacy,

many victims have perished on the scaffold in Ireland, and that the

fields of Ireland have been more than once drenched with the blood of

her people. But, after all this is done, we are not a bit more secure.

It is no matter what Government sits on the bench opposite. The right

hon. Gentleman the Member for South Lancashire was there two years ago,

and on that occasion, by the consent of his Colleagues, the then Home

Secretary had to introduce the Bill for the suspension of the Habeas

Corpus Act. Now you are on that side of the House, and you have to do

the same. Nobody says it is not necessary. I am not prepared to say it

has not been necessary at other times. But surely if this be necessary--

and if there is this painful duty to perform at various times--it shows

that the Union is not very secure in Ireland. In fact, Sir, it is the

most painful thing that we have witnessed lately, that the suspension of

the Habeas Corpus Act has become so common that it causes almost no

remark. The measure is introduced into the House. An Irish Member makes

a feeble protest against it, and it is passed, and we suspend the

liberties of one of the three kingdoms from year to year. And the Prime

Minister has the courage--I might almost use another word--he has the

courage to say there is no crisis, and that things are going on very

much as usual, and that the House of Commons is not required to do much

or care much for that country.

What you have in Ireland is this. There is anarchy, which is subdued by

force, and after centuries of rule--not our rule, but that of our

forefathers--we have got no farther. We have not reconciled Ireland to

us, we have done none of those things which the world says we ought to

have done; and at this moment--in the year 1868--we are discussing the

question whether it is possible to make any change with reference to the

Established Church in Ireland which will bring about a better state of

feeling between the people and the Imperial Government. Sir, I am afraid

there has been very little statesmanship and very much neglect, and I

think we ought to take shame to ourselves, and try to get rid of some of

our antiquated prejudices on this matter, and look at it as men would

look at it from a distance, as men whose vision is not impaired by the

passionate feelings which have so often prevailed in this country with

regard to this question. What, then, is the remedy that is now offered?

What do people say of it? Now, I challenge any hon. Gentleman on the

other side to deny this, that out of half a million Episcopalians in

Ireland there are many--there are some in the Irish nobility, some

landed proprietors, some magistrates, even some of the clergy, a great

many Irishmen--who believe at this moment that it is of the very first

importance that the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman the Member

for South Lancashire should be carried.

I am not going to overstate my case. I do not say that all of them are

of that opinion. Of that half-million, say that one-fourth--I will state

no number--but of this I am quite certain, that there is an influential,

a considerable, and, as I believe, a wise minority, who are in favour of

distinct and decided action on the part of Parliament with regard to

this question. But if you ask the whole Roman Catholic population of

Ireland, be they nobles, or landed proprietors, or merchants, or

farmers, or labourers,--the whole number of the Catholic population in

Ireland being, I suppose, eight or nine times the number of

Episcopalians--these are probably, without exception, of opinion that it

would be greatly advantageous and just to their country if the

proposition submitted on this side of the House should receive the

sanction of Parliament. Now, if some Protestants and all Catholics are

agreed that we should remove this Church, what would happen if Ireland

was 1,000 miles away, and we were discussing it as we might discuss the

same state of affairs in Canada? If we were to have in Canada and in

Australia all this disloyalty among the Roman Catholic population, owing

to the existence of a State Church there, the House would be unanimous

that the State Church in those colonies should be abolished, and that

perfect freedom in religion should be given.

But there is a fear in the mind of the right hon. Gentleman the Home

Secretary that the malady which would exist in Ireland might cross the

Channel and appear in England; that in fact the disorder of

Voluntaryism, as he deems it, in Ireland, like any other contagious

disorder, might cross the Channel, by force of the west wind, lodging

first in Scotland, and then crossing the Tweed and coming south to

England. I think the right hon. Gentleman went so far as to say that he

was so much in favour of religious equality, that if you went so far as

to disestablish the Church in Ireland, he would recommend the same

policy for England. Now, with regard to that, I will give you an

anecdote which has reference to Scotland. Some years ago I had the

pleasure of spending some days in Scotland at the house of the late Lord

Aberdeen, after he had ceased to be Prime Minister. He was talking of

the disruption of the Church of Scotland, and he said that nothing in

the course of his public life had given him so much pain as the

disruption, and the establishment of the Free Church in that country;

but he said he had lived long enough to discover that it was one of the

greatest blessings that had ever come to Scotland. He said that they had

a vast increase in the number of churches, a corresponding increase in

the number of manses or ministers' houses, and that schools had

increased, also, to an extraordinary extent; that there had been

imparted to the Established Church a vitality and energy which it had

not known for a long period; and that education, morality, and religion

had received a great advancement in Scotland in consequence of that

change. Therefore, after all, it is not the most dreadful thing in the

world--not so bad as a great earthquake--or as many other things that

have happened. I am not quite sure that the Scottish people themselves

may not some day ask you--if you do not yourselves introduce and pass it

without their asking--to allow their State Church to be disestablished.

Speeches on Questions of Public Policy, Volume 1 · 第 32 / 41 段