Earl Gmrronn has, in obedience to the advice of the
'Standard, re- fused to make a return of Isis emoluments as a clergyman. He stands mpon the Constitution ! Lord help the Church and Constitution too, if they have no better defenders ! By the by, why should parson lords have a seat in Parliament, more than parson laymen? If the duties of the latter be incompatible with Parliamentary cares, how happens it that the duties of the former are not? Lord GUILFORD must have a hit at the Press, while he is servilely obeying its mandates. His " pri- vate property in the Church"—a pretty combination of terms—has been greatly exaggerated "by the revolutionary Press." When and where did the Press find time or inclination to waste a sentence either im him or "his private property in the Church?" His Lordship's private Catholic property was, it seems, "freely bestowed on him by the original proprietors," and "neither the King nor the Great Lord has a right or has the power to reclaim or alter the tenure of his grant." Even Parliament cannot resume ; it can only grant !—Suppose the King, or the Great Lord, or Parliament on their behalf, called on this little Lord to perform mass, would that alter the tenure? Did they not call on the little Lord's predecessors to do so? was not the free grant, "by the original proprietors," clogged with that small condition? If Parliament took it from Peter to give it to John, may not Parliament take it from John to give it to Peter again? What would Lord Gull, Joan say to such a scheme? Can Parliament take the whole, and cannot Parliament take a part?
Previous page
