untry as to require exceptional
treatment; in short, that it must be governed by Irish ideas, with
little regard to English principles of sound policy or economy. Such
was, in effect, Fox's contention, adopted by Russell; and yet, like
future supporters of "Ireland for the Irish," he argued in the same
breath that every liberal institution suitable to Englishmen, with their
long training in self-government and instinctive reverence for law, must
needs be extended to Irishmen, with their long training in anarchy and
instinctive propensity to lawlessness. He prevailed, however, in the
house of commons, where a hostile amendment was decisively rejected, and
the bill, having passed rapidly through committee, was read a third time
by a large though reduced majority.

Had it been possible to isolate the Irish municipal bill, and to compel
the house of lords to deal with it singly, the peers might possibly have
shrunk from another collision with the commons. But it had been coupled
in the king's speech with two other projects of Irish legislation, a new
tithe bill, and an Irish poor law. Both of these were, in fact,
introduced, the former by Russell in February, the latter by Morpeth
early in May. The course to be taken by the conservative party was the
subject of anxious consultation between Peel and Wellington, and that
ultimately adopted had the full sanction of both. They regarded the
separate presentation of the municipal bill as a "manoeuvre," and,
while they overruled the wish of Lyndhurst to defeat it by an adverse
vote on the second reading, they resolved to meet it by a
counter-manoeuvre. Accordingly Wellington induced the house of lords
to postpone the committee on the municipal bill until they should have
the other two bills before them, and Peel not only approved of his
action but stated reasons for regarding them as essentially connected
with each other. June 9 was originally fixed as the date for going into
committee, but this stage was afterwards deferred until July 3, before
which unforeseen events arrested all further progress.

[Pageheading: _CHURCH RATES._]

In the meantime, the prestige of the government had been weakened by the
failure of their scheme for abolishing Church rates. The dissenters, no
longer content with religious liberty, were beginning to demand
religious equality. In the forefront of their grievances was that of
paying rates for the repair of parish churches which they did not
attend,