The Liberal party, I feel it my duty to say, had not acted fairly by this question.  In their adversity they held out hopes to the working classes, but when they had a strong government they laughed their vows to scorn.  In 1848 there was a French revolution, and a republic was established.  No one can have forgotten what the effect was in this country.  I remember the day when not a woman could leave her house in London, and when cannon were planted on Westminster Bridge.  When Lord Derby became prime minister affairs had arrived at such a point that it was of the first moment that the question should be sincerely dealt with.  He had to encounter great difficulties, but he accomplished his purpose with the support of a united party.  And gentlemen, what has been the result?  A year ago there was another revolution in France, and a republic was again established of the most menacing character.  What happened in this country?  You could not get half a dozen men to assemble in a street and grumble.  Why?  Because the people had got what they wanted.  They were content, and they were grateful.

But, gentlemen, the constitution of England is not merely a constitution in State, it is a constitution in Church and State.  The wisest sovereigns and statesmen have ever been anxious to connect authority with religion—­some to increase their power, some, perhaps, to mitigate its exercise.  But the same difficulty has been experienced in effecting this union which has been experienced in forming a second chamber—­either the spiritual power has usurped upon the civil, and established a sacerdotal society, or the civil power has invaded successfully the rights of the spiritual, and the ministers of religion have been degraded into stipendiaries of the state and instruments of the government.  In England we accomplish this great result by an alliance between Church and State, between two originally independent powers.  I will not go into the history of that alliance, which is rather a question for those archaeological societies which occasionally amuse and instruct the people of this city.  Enough for me that this union was made and has contributed for centuries to the civilization of this country.  Gentlemen, there is the same assault against the Church of England and the union between the State and the Church as there is against the monarchy and against the House of Lords.  It is said that the existence of nonconformity proves that the Church is a failure.  I draw from these premises an exactly contrary conclusion; and I maintain that to have secured a national profession of faith with the unlimited enjoyment of private judgment in matters spiritual, is the solution of the most difficult problem, and one of the triumphs of civilization.