When, my Lords, I know that that conspiracy exists, and that it goes to prevent a large proportion of his Majesty's subjects from enjoying their property--when I know that the same conspiracy may be applied to any other description of property--to any man's life, to his house, to his honour, or to anything else that is most dear to man, I do say, it becomes the noble Earl at the head of his Majesty's Government to adopt some measures, in order to do that which Government can do, to get the better of that conspiracy. It must not be said that, under the British Constitution, there is no power to prevent such a conspiracy: I say, there is a power, and that power resides in Parliament, which can give the Government, under this best of all Constitutions, the means which shall at the same time protect the property and the liberty of every individual in the state. Yes, my Lords, Parliament possesses the power to bestow on the Government the means of putting down this conspiracy--a conspiracy not against the Government itself, but against those whom the Government is bound in honour to protect. I take this question of tithes to be one of the most serious questions that can be brought under the consideration of Parliament. I do not object to the noble Earl's measure--indeed, I really do not know what that measure is--but what I say is, that the noble Earl is bound, and the King is bound by his oath, to protect the property of the Church--yes, his Majesty is sworn especially to protect that property. But it is not the property of the Church alone--what do you say of the lay impropriator? Is a man to be robbed and ruined, because he possesses property in tithe?