ce. The only boon secured to them was exemption
from their share of vestry cess, for, though Althorp intimated that the
ultimate surplus to be realised by the union of sees and livings would
be at the disposal of parliament, they well knew how many influences
would operate to prevent its reaching them. Not even O'Connell, still
less the ministry, ventured to propose "concurrent endowment" as it was
afterwards called, and the very idea of diverting revenues from the
protestant establishment to Roman catholic uses was disclaimed with
horror. More than a century earlier, a partition of these revenues
between the great protestant communions had been seriously entertained,
and Pitt had notoriously contemplated a provision for the Roman catholic
priests out of state funds. But no such demand was now made, and the one
feature of the bill which commanded the vigorous support of O'Connell
and his adherents was the 147th section, or "appropriation clause,"
which enabled parliament to apply the expected surplus of some L60,000
in income, or some L3,000,000 in capital, to whatever purposes, secular
or otherwise, it might think fit to approve. The far-reaching importance
of this principle was fully understood on both sides. To radicals and
Roman catholics it was the sole virtue of the bill; to friends of the
Irish Church and tories it was a blot to be erased at any cost.

The progress of the measure was not rapid. Its nature had been explained
by Althorp on February 12, but it was not in print on March 11 when,
notwithstanding the reasonable protest of Peel, he induced the house to
fix the second reading for the 14th. It was then found that, owing to
its form, it must be preceded by resolutions, in order to satisfy the
rules of the house. These resolutions, containing the essence of the
bill, were proposed on April 1, but were not adopted without a long
debate, and the debate on the second reading did not begin until May 6.
It ended in a majority of 317 to 78 for the government, chiefly due to a
moderate speech from Sir Robert Peel, who, however, denounced the policy
of "appropriation". The discussion in committee was far more vehement,
and radicals like Hume did not shrink from avowing their desire to pull
down the Irish establishment, root and branch. The attack on the
conservative side was mainly concentrated on the appropriation clause.
In vain was it argued that a great part of the expected surplus was not
Church property, inasm