The Sun. — London, England, 1837-03-01 00:00:00

than them all, and which I am sure I need not mention—it is the grand and paramount importance of the su'uject—( Hear, hear)—the great and paramount importance of it to that . part of the country whose there exist so many and so great difficulties to its progress—the great objects to be obtained to that part of the country in the first place, by communicating the blessings of education to the inhabitants of thet part of the country ; and if education is to be communicated to them, surely it is the duty of your Lordships to take care that that education should be of a pure and wholesome character. My Lords, I beg to move that a Select Cosnruttee be appointed to inquire into the progress of the new plan of Education in o' md, and to report thereon to the House. The Bishop of EXETER then rose. He would not tres pass at any length on the time of their Lordships if the pre sent wa.s an ordinary case. Their Lordships he was sure etould be ass are from the motion of the Noble Viscount that he had moved fur the appointment of a similar Com mittee to that which he ( the Bishop of Exeter) had moved for hot year, and on that ground it must be supposed that there was no longee any occasion for further discussion, but that the House should go immediately into the Committee, where all inquiries into the merit.; of the case might be gone lute. It would doubtless be in the recollection of their Lordships that the case now was not so simple as it was last year, in consequence of what had occurred since. lie had been most seriously attacked, and as an injured man he threw himself upon the indul g- lace of the House, while he defended himself against the . charges' that had been brought against hint. A Noble Lord, it would be in the recollect eft of the House, had also attacked him ; besides this, upon his giv:eft notice of his intention to bring the subject before the flcese upon motion, a Noble Lord had the boldness to state that he (the Bishop of Exeter) would not come forward anu :tend by the intention of which he had given notice. The case, how% CC er, did not remain there, for the same Noble Lord had said that he had never known a case which had met with so complete an answer as that which he had brought forward against the Commissioners. He wished to let that Learned Lord see that he intended to keep his word. The first charge brought against him by the Commissioners was of a very se rious nature, after quoting from hint as follows :—" But these t 'achers are not merely to benefit the people of Ireland, though the schools committed to their charge are identified in interest with the State, and therefore anxious to promote a spirit of obe ?fence to lawful authority. We are confident (says the report) that they would prove a body of the utmost value and importance in promoting civilization and peace." The ori ginal sentence it will be observed, contains the words " trained to good habits," whereas, as quoted in the pamphlet, these w zds are left out, and the reader Las the impression conveyed t him that we depend for the conduct of the teachers not on a virtuous training, but on interest only. Ile had been charged with wilfully omitting the words " trained to good and virtuous habits" with a view -to misrepresent. He admitted that he had omitted the words, as they appeared - to him superfluous, and did not affect the point that he was alluding to, namely, the • steps taket to•ensure the character of the teachers. He never intended to lessen the importance of young persons being trained in virtuous habits; but the course pursued by the Commissioners prevented the possibility of their having a vir tuous training. It appeared that there were to be 5,000 mas ters, and all of them were to be trained at Dublin for the space of three years. Here, then, were several thousand young persons, during the most perilous period of their lives, to be taken from their homes, and to be carried away from the parental eye, and brought to a large metropolis, where they would be left without any one to watch over their proceedings or to check their conduct. Here, then, were thousands of young men, of the humblest origin, to be exposed to all the evils of a great metropolis, which was one of the most frightful schools that it ever entered the heart of man to send them to for a virtuous training. It is required that they should live three years at Dublin, and it appeared that no college or other building was to be built to receive them, in which, by proper discip'ine, they might be brought up in a course of virtuous training. Under the present arrangement there was not the slightest chance of such a result. During the tirst year 500 of these young men were to reside at Dublin. After three years 500 of them were to be appointed to the primary schools ; each of these young persons, therefore, must be two years in Dublin. In the first year, then, there were to be .500, at the end of two years the number was to be increased to 1,500, and at the end of three years to 2,000, and the number was for some years to go on increasing until the pro posed number was trained. They were told that these young men were to be educated by professors of moral philosophy, political economy, logic, and, indeed, were to go through a whole course of philosophical education. Again, all the re ligious instruction winch these young men were to receive was to be voluntary ; and was it to be supposed that this large number of young men, from all parts of Ire land, would go to the clergyman of the parish in which they resided to obtain religious instruction ? There was also nothing compulsory on the clergy to devote their time to the instruction of these persons ; and even if they were willing to undertake the task, it would be physically impossible for them to execute the duty. For some years a model school had been held in the parish of St. Thomas, in Dublin, in which a great number of young men were trained for schoolmasters. In this parish, which is a very extensive one, there were a rector and two curates, and it so happened that the whole clergy of the parish were opposed to the system. One of these curates, however, stated that he was willing to incur the risk of being supposed favourable to the system, by attending the school at certain periods, for the purpose of g iving religious instruction. Th e on l y t i me t h e curate could spare was one hour, or rather three quarters of an hour a day. This was not surprising when the House recollected that this parish contained upward; of 20,000, and therefore the duties on the clergy were necessarily heavy. The number of children that attended this model-school was very great ; lie believed up wards of 400. The average number that attended the reli gious instructions of the Rev. Gentleman to whom he had re ferred was only fifteen. But how many of these were being trained for schoolmasters? The Rev. Gentleman had writ ten to him, and informed him that on two occasions three or four of the teachers went into the school, not to be catechised, or to receive religious instruction, but to hear the lectures given to the children. How, he would ask, was it possible to give, under such a system, religious instructions to those thousands of schoolmasters? Such, then, was the religious instruction to be given to all these schoolmasters, who were to carry moral instruction into every part of Ireland. He had omitted to say that the Commissioners directed that persons should be appointed schoolmasters in consequence of their peculiar fitness for teaching ; " but that their moral character and literary qualifications would he re garded ; " the latter words were put in italics. He felt it his duty to go into these details in order to justify him se!f from the charges brought against him. He had been accused of getting up trumpery cases, and that the authority on which he rested was void of foundation. He should note proceed to point out some. of the places at which circum stances to which he had adverted on a former occasion actually occurred. The first case to which he would allude occurred in the parish of county of Londonderry, in the diocese of Armagh. His au thority was a most respectable clergyman, the brother to a Noble Lord. This gentleman stated that when the census was to take place in 1831, under the Population Act, he was extremely anxious to ascertain the number of persons of different religions in his parish. In consequence of this he was brought in contact with the master of the national school in the parish, who, he found, was avowedly au infidel. He now came to a case which he could not mention or allude to without disgust. He held in his hand some papers relative to the conduct of a schoolmaster in another parish in Londonderry, the name of the clergyman of which was the Rev. Mr. Townsend. This gentleman went into the national school-room, and on going up to the desk of the schoolmaster he found thet it had no lock. On looking into it, he found that there were some papers, althoutch not many, of such an indecent and disgusting character that he would not presume to describe them. It had been asserted by the master that he saw these papers in the hands of some of his boys, and he took them away and flogged the boys ; but still they were left in an open desk in the school-room. He had also received that day some copybooks, which were written by the boys. They were regularly written from the top to the bottom of the page, and if the most reverend prelate be fore him was anxious to satisfy himself, he would put these books on the table. Many of these copies are of a highly im proper and indecent tendency, and they appeared to have been written in this school as a matter of course. He now came to the case of a school near Dublin. This school had been built by the board of schools. Now this was not at such a distance from the board that they could not have something like a good superintendence over it. This school had been established for two months, but still the master had made him self most notorious by his conduat. Ile had received a letter from a gentleman who lived in its vicinity, who informed him that dancing was the only art or science taught in this school, and this was practised for some hours each day, and it was attended by all the blackguards in the neighbourhood. He now came to another case of great importance : he alluded to the conduct of the master of the National School at Carlow. This place, he believed, was within a comparatively short dis tance of Dublin. It was a most notorious place, and What ever occurred there was sure to find its way into the news papers. The schoolmaster of this place was one of the most remarkable agitators in the country, and was the agent and friend of the well-known priest Father Maher. At the recent election in Carlow he acted as poll-clerk, but was turned out for his partiality' ; but he abandoned the duties of his school to attend to the election. This schoolmaster, in the autumn of 1335, was proved to have joined with the priest Maher in one of the most foul conspiracies ever concocted. It related to cer tain charges that had been brought against some soldiers who were accused of drinking party toasts. In consequence of this, a military investigation into the matter was ordered, but priest Maher did not approve of this mode of proceeding. Upon this, the Lord-Lieutenant, in the exercise of his discretion, el o e to direct an investigation of another kind, and Colonel Ward and Mr. Mahony were ordered to inquire into the par ticulars of the case. The inquiry continued for thirteen days, and it appeared that dut tug the whole of this time the school tster loft his school, and attended to drilling the witnesses and teaching them what they were to swear. He (the Bishop of Exeter) was using strong language, but he was only using language which he should be able to prove. Every one of the witnesses examined admitted that he had been asked to attend by Priest Maher and Gorman the schoolmaster. He would new proceed to some of the attacks made on him. He had been accused in the pamphlet published by the Com missioners with having accused them of giving utterance to positive falsehoods. lie did not charge them with positive falsehood. Ile contradicted the fact " that 140 of the Protestant clergy had applied for schools under this system." lie called for a return of the 140 persons who were said to be clergymen of the Establishment for this fact, and referred to this to prove his correctness. These persons, however, said that " the author had in the first place misrepresented the re port, and then thought proper to charge them with falsehood ; and that the report did not state, nor did it pretend to state, the number of clergymen so applying." Now, from the assertions used in different parts of the report, in one place it might be fairly inferred that the 140 persons alluded to were all clergy of the Established Church. The extract he alluded to, and which he quoted, was in a part signed by the Secre tary of the Board, but in another part of the report there was an abstract which stated that several Protestants, both lay and clergy, had applied for schools, and this part was underlined, and the numbers given were 123 and 17, making together 140. It might be well to suppose that this was merely a clerical error that had crept into the report, and not front other motives. In the third report there was made almost a similar statement, and there was an abstract of the numbers, and they took care to correct the part of the former report, for it merely stated the number of signatures of persons so applying,. This also might have the effect of deceiving, but not him, because he had taken the pains to inquire into the subject. In reply to an observation from the Noble Earl, he recommended him to look at the report, where he would find that in one province, namely, Ulster, there had been 26(1 applications made by Pro testant clergymen. Ile had moved for a return which would have rendered the matter tolerably clear, but the production of it had been continually delayed. The report gave the names of 116 clergymen of the Established Church who had signed a declaration in favour of this system, but it appeared that some of the names put down were gross forgeries. It was stated that to the application for a school in Dublin the name of a Rev. J. G. Robertson was subscribed. He (the Bishop of Exeter) had made some inquiry respecting this gentleman of a friend very high in the Church in Dublin ; and the answer was, that he could not find any such person. He (the Bishop of Exeter) ventured to state this in the speech he made last year. Upon this point the Board said, " The author states that Mr. Robertson, who signed one of the Dublin applications, was not resident within the parish from wh;;.,' , it came ; neither did we state that he was." But he t ee ( t h e Bi s te or Exeter) did more; he stated that no such clergyman could be n , und to have existed in Dublin at all. The Board did not find it Convenient to deal with that part of the charge. But the Commissioners told their Lord ships this :—" Mr. Robertson, we understand, died about two years ago in Queen-street." Now he (the Bishop of Exeter) had made further inquiry ; and the result was, that Mr. Ro bertson's existence was totally unknown. A clergyman had gone and searched the register of every parish in Dublin ; but nowhere could this reverend gentleman be found, There was a remarkable circumstance stated in a note of the report in contradiction to a statement of his. He had averred that a. much larger proportion of the fund had gone to the Roman Ca tholic than to the Protestant schools. That was answered by its being-stated that whenever effective applications were made for grants to Protestant schools, those grants were larger than to Catholic applications. He was quite ready to believe this. He believed the Board would be more eager, if possible, to encourage Protestant education, especially if Protestant applications were made. In consequence a return had been made, showing that the average granted to Protestants had been greater than the sums granted to the Roman Catholics where applications had been made. But, unfortunately, who ever concocted this report did that which very crafty mon were sometimes apt to do, for he proved too much ; for he proved that whatever might be the proportion of the grants, yet the numbers of resident Protestant applications and of resident clergymen who corresponded with theßoard were very few in deed. He had looked into the list of those persons who had corresponded with the Board ; and he had taken the trouble of looking also at those records which told of the conduct of the parish priesthood, and especially at the records contained in the reports of the committees of the other House of Parlia ment on bribery and intimidation ; and it appeared, almost without exception, that every individual who was there exhi bited was a person who, under the garb of a clergyman, was seeking to break the peace of society, to carry discord into families, and even large his unhappy thralls; to murder their fellow-creatures.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") These were correspondents with the Board of Education. He would trouble their Lordships with one instance of the conduct of one of these priests. He alluded to Father Tyrell, of the county of Carlow. He was a correspondent from the school of Timriddon (as we understood it). Father Tyrell attended Mr. O'Connell on that celebrated occasion when Mr. O'Con nell made a speech that would not easily be forgotten by any who heard it, or who heard of it. What he was going to read was a speech by Mr. O'Connell when this Father Tyrell was by his side as his great eider and supporter. Father Tyrell, therefore, was morally responsible for all which Mr. O'Con nell said on that occasion. The words of Mr. O'Connell were :—" Boys, the names I call your enemies do you call every friend of theirs you meet in the streets. Girls and women, when you meet the Bruenites spit on them, spit in their faces, particularly if they are Catholic Conservatives. Write traitor on their doors with chalk, and tell your friends at home to do the same. You who are wives of the Catholic elec tors, if your husbands do not vote for their religion, bless your selves, and then swear on your prayer-books to separate from your husbands if they don't obey your commands ; you who are their daughters, I tell you if your fathers vote against you spit in their faces ! and call them the names I taught the boys to call them." But it did not rest there. He would read to their Lordships a speech which the priest Tyrell himself made on a more re cent occasion. The speech was made during the contest at the late election for the county of Carlow. After much prefatory matter, Father Tyrell proceeded at great length to show that the Catholic priests did not want ascendancy. " No, they want- justice and equity, and they shall have both !" in other words, the Established Church in Ireland must fall. Father Tyrell then proceeded to say :—" You persist in your votes. Your landlords hove no more right to them than they would have to your wives and daughters. The landlords used to do so formerly, when you Catholics were in gaol, and I tell you they used to do so by laws of their own creation. Will you send to Parliament men who fasten these chains and renew the penal !awe ? Tell your landlords that before you are exterminated you will make them feel your power. Let those who would re-enact the penal laws be hurled from the place of power; and don't forget we are eight millions."—So much for the schools in Ireland being under the auspices of the priests. —( Hear, hear.) A clergyman of the utmost respecta bility had written to him an account of what he had seen at a school at Carrick-on- Suir. The school was altogether Popish, under the entire dominion of the nuns. The nuns re ceived an annual salary, which went of course to the support of the convent. This was not one of a few instances, but one of many, where the sums supplied by the Board, taken from the people of this laud, went directly to support the monaste ries and nunneries in Ireland. There was an exhibition at the school twice a year, where the children heard mass ; and if they were pronounced fit they were immediately admitted to the eucharist. The Right Reverend Prelate then adverted to the statement made by him last year with respect to the cele bration of the mass at a school in which was erected an altar. Ile was informed that mass was performed there every day— but probably his informant was mistaken ; but still the Roman Catholic service was performed there every day, and the altar remained there with the permission of the Board. The Board had been pleased, in their strictures upon him, to speak of his having. nu acquaintance with the rector of this parish, but making application to the curate. Now whether he should have recourse to time rector or to the curate greatly depended upon whether the rector deserved confidence. He would say nothing of the character of the rector of this parish ; but of the curate he could say, that he was a man of the highest respectability, and most vigilant in the discharge of his duty. The rector, he believed, was a person of that cha racter that it was impossible to find any one so wolully un mindful of his pastoral charge.----( Oh, oh, and lat b uditer.) The Right Rev. Prelate th e n ad ver t e d t o t h e statement he had formerly made respecting the language used by Dr. M. Hale at the Island of Ackill. A Roman Cetliclic Priest having iu the course of a sermon, preached before Dr. M' Hale, among other violent things, said that " the Pro testant religion begun in hell and would end in hell," Dr. NP Hale rose up and expressed his strong approbation of all that had been said by that Minister of God from the pulpit. The Right Rev. Prelate next referred to the case of the Rev. Mr. Nangles, upon whom the Board had by construction cast some discredit. From the manner in which they spoke of that gentleman, it could not help being inferred that his con duct was at least called in question. N% hat was the fact ? %%Thy, that Mr. Nangles had to complain of so grievous an outrage on time part of the schoolmaster on that island that he went into a Court of Justice to obtain redress A report of that case was sent to the Board ; and the ordinary notion would be, from the manner in which he was spoken of by the Board, that Mr. Nangles had been mentioned to them with disadvantage in the report of those proceedings. The report of the Board went on to say, " He is, as your Excellency is aware, neither rector nor curate of the parish, nor, as we understand, at all connected with the district, 'save by a mission which he has undertaken for the conversion of the Roman Catholics there." Now, that seemed to him to savour much of a sneer at the occupa: tion which that gentleman was pursuing in that island. Ile was confident that the most Reverend Prelate near him did not draw up the report. This gentleman having heard that Jame; O'Donnell, who was connected with the national school in that island, had been dismissed from the coast-guard service for having used seditious language, communicated this fact to the Board ; but they made no inquiry into the circumstance, although Mr. Nangles told them where they might obtain evi dence of the truth of what he said. No ; but the Board, with the greatest anxiety to protect innocence, directed O'Donnell to institute a prosecution against the publishers of this com municasion. After the Commissioners sent forth their re port containing this advice, Mr. Nangles sent forth a let ter on the subject, and in August that gentleman re ceived a letter from Lieutenant Irvin, an officer of high character in the coast-guard service, in which he stated that he recollected that in 183:3 he had dismissed a per son of the name of O'Donnell from the coast-guard for using seditious language. Their Lordships would therefore perceive that the statement made by him (the Bishop of Exeter) in their Lordship's I-louse was all most true, and was at all events entirely justified by the facts within the know ledge of the Board. The Right Rev. Prelate next complained of the use of a book called the " Catholic Christian Instructor" in a school situated on one of the Irish estates of the Noble Marquis ( Lansdowne) near him. It was true the Commis sioners denied that that book had been recommended by them; but on looking at the report published by the Commissioners, he found, from their own declaration, that though not " recom mended" by them, it had been read with their " sanction and approbation." Now to him it appeared that the words " sanction and approbation" went further than the word " re commendation." The next point to which he wished to call their Lordships' attention was the mutilation of the gospel of St. Luke. The Commissioners had led their Lordships to believe that the whole of the gospel of St. Luke was used in the National Schools of Ireland ; and when the fact was pointed out that certain passages of it were entirely omitted, they replied that no harm had been done, as the sense of the whole was given. That might be true ; but why did they state in the first place that the whole of the gospel of St. Luke was given ? Did they not know that one of the great complaints against the Board from the very first had been. that the selected extracts did not give the pure word of God ? He had already stated that the Commissioners, on a former occasion, declared that the whole gospel was given ; but on investigation it was found that the fact was otherwise. What he complained of was, that under the existing system there could be no extracts used from the real Scripture, be cause Dr. Murray, one of the Commissioners, had sworn be fore one of the Comteittees upon the subject of national edu cation in Ireland, in 1824 or 182 G, that he would not con sent to any exhibition of die word of God in any school where Roman Catholics attended, unless' the exhibition so made were founded upon the Douay version of the Serie tures. He (the Bishop of Exeter) felt the full force of the responsibility he incurred, when lie made that statement. If Dr. Murray did not swee.r what he (the Bishop of Exeter) said he did, lie had greatly injured him. If he (the Bishop of Exeter) had entertained a doubt upon the subject, he had been guilty of a calumny. If he (the Bishop of Exeter) had nn doubt upon the subject, acid yet Dr. Nitirray did riot sr.ear in the manner he had described him as dointi, he had b. en guilty of the most culpable rashness. But upon the fullest, the most deliberate, the closest inspection of the Re port of the Board of Commissionere, he (the Bishop of Exeter) again re-affirmed the charge. He declared that Dr. Murray, on the occasion to which he referred, did swear what the Corn s . missioners say be did not swear, He took leave to direct their Lordships' attention for a moment to certain proceedings_ of recent occurrence in Irel a nd. In D ecem b er l a st, the Com mittee of the Female National School at Drogheda thought fit to give a public dinner to two very great persons—Mr. O'Connell and a personage whom they called the Primate of Ireland. In quoting again the words of Mr. O'Connell, he begged to repeat that he did not quote them in reference to that individual himself, but merely as illustrating the subject with which lie was dealing.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Air. O'Connell, in returning thanks for a compliment paid to him after dinner, said, " I want to bring back the prosperity which will make Poor Laws unnecessary, and, if by no other means, by a domestic Legislature.—( Cheers.) But I am mak ing an experiment to obtain justice from England without that alternative; and till it is fully worked out I cannot think of falling back upon my favourite measure of relief. Let this experiment be one of five years' duration as well as the other. Two are already passed ; and when the others have terminated, if we see that England does not give us justice, we must take it for ourselves.—( Loud cheers.) I make the experiment fairly and honestly, and without any shade of chicanery. I will take the fullest means, and use my best efforts, to make it success ful ; and if we get justice it is all we seek ; but if we fail in the experiment, then shall we demand the power of legislating for ourselves.—( Cheers.) I call upon the people to support the King's Ministers, who have promised us justice. We should be untiring in our efforts to enable them to fulfil that promise, or the fault of the failure will be ours.—( Hear, hear.) Lay aside your wishes for repeal, but do not lay aside your efforts for justice." Their Lordships, he (the Bishop of Exeter) thought, need not to by reminded of what " justice " meant in the vocabulary of this individual. He continued— " Let the good men of England see that, while you have assisted them, and all who sought justice, to obtain it, you will not consent to be deprived of it yourselves. Why do I, whose life has been spent as a disciple of peace, preach ing that no alteration in government can be good if brought about by force, and that one drop of human blood would be too dear a purchase for any victory—talk of physical power ? Irishmen, because we have beets insulted.—( Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) I would rather see your river again red with Irish blood than that we should be degraded and insulted.— ( Hear.) We might submit to the destruction of our property, and the danger of our lives ; to the ferocity of the ruffian soldier, and the heartless camp-follower. In all these, and a thousand other shapes, injury was heaped upon us, and we bore it, and perhaps would again ; but we will never consent to submit to insult.—(Cheers.) In this industrious and intelli gent town it will be seen what is the opinion of the contumely thrown on our country. Ireland will rejoice in your senti ments, and the Press will tell the whole British empire that it is not safe for England to be a patty to the insult.__ (Tremendous cheers.) Chains of adamant, and the force of the Russian empire, would not be sufficient to bind us under insult. It must, then, be wiped off; or else —___,e Here the Learned Individual appeared to have parsed, as if the sequitur were too dreadful for utterance. He repeated that he had not quoted these words on account of the indi vidual by whom they were uttered, but on account of what followed. The chairman, at this dinner at Drogheda, stated that he had next to propose the health of the Primate of Ire land, the Most Reverend Dr. Crolly, the friend of civil and re ligious liberty. Dr. Crolly, in returning thanks, said :_ " Liberty, civil and religious, is the birthright of all bearing the image of the Creator, as well the black as the white; and' no man should assume the right of the Deity to force the opinions of his fellow men, and men who venture to do so have reason to fear that they will suffer for it here or hereafter. I feel complimented by the kindness and attention with which you have listened to me, particularly in the presence of the in dividual who has done more for the cause I speak of than any other person in ancient and modern times." Such was the language used by Dr. Crony at Drogheda, and having quoted it, he would leave their Lordships to form their own opinions, and to draw their own conclusions from it. But before he sat down, he would just quote a few more lines from one of the speeches made at a dinner lately given at Carlow to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, and at which Mr. O'Connell was reported to have said :—" My friend the Chairman, in alluding to the Conservative festival in this town or, yesterday, talked of respectability. Respectability ! What does my valued friend mean by respectability ? They may have the respectability of the bogget or the ox that fatten on the land—they are as stupid as they are malignant, and as ugly as they are contemptible. Like the ghouls of the Eastern tale, they live and delight to live upon sucking out the warm heart's blood while life is still in vigour, and reducing their victims to the grave before the chill of years or the course of natural events carry them away. They love the wail of fa mishing children and the agony of ruined and agonized pa rents." " Poor old Kavanah," Mr. O'Connell continued, " Alas ! poor Kavanah. If he had not made the fatal al liances he did, one would be glad that he would sink into his grave in the peaceful obscurity in which, for his own sake, lie ought to have remained, and not to have the dead cats and dogs of the neighbourhood thrown into it along with him." It appeared to him that one of the most important inquiries which could be made was whether this system afforded increased means on the part of the Roman Catholic clergy of domineer ing over their flocks. He was sure their Lordships would see the impossibility of making any modification of this system. though at the same time he was open to conviction. The Archbishop of DUBLIN rose not for the purpose of prematurely entering into a discussion which ought to be re served for the Committee. He would say nothing of the Board of Education, or of the body of Commissioners ; but with respect to the charges made against himself, although lie thought their Lordships were called upon to give him a hear ing in his own vindication, yet he felt he should better con sult propriety in not detaining their Lordships with matters eelating to individuals. As that was a legislative and a ju dicial assembly, the rules established in the schools of education would be examined day after day before a Committee ; and he trusted that on all points time would bring the truth to light. If all men's minds were so constituted as not to receive truth, he was sorry for it, and th e y were not the persons whose esteem he had any wish or anxiety to cultivate. Various measures had been suggested for the extension and improvement of the system of education, and of course this would require that the reasons for and against its adop tion should be well anti maturely considered ; and this could be done in the Committee alone. Supposing the sys tem in the main were to be continued, it would be for the Committee to consider what modifications they would adopt to put it on au extensive footing, and bringing it into greater operation. The Committee was wished for by the Corn. missioners with a view to save their Lordships' House from being involved in fruitless and unsatisfactory debates, and the public mind from being poisoned by vague, irregular complaints - which were brought forward, and which could not be stopped until a satisfactory inquiry was made. From time to Aim° various complaints were brought forward, and if the Commissioners were present on these occasions would be well ; but they were not always present, and _ . was quite impossible that those who were connected with the system could carry all the particulars in their memories, seeing that there were 1,500 schools. If anything were com plained of in these schools in this country or in Ireland, the Board immediately instituted an inquiry into those corn p:aints. But these things were generally brought forward without first consulting the Commissioners as to the alleged misconduct of their servants. One complaint had been that some little schoolboy had scribbled this or that in his copy book.----( A laugh.) Oh I nothing was too small or too great to he debated with the most eloquent declamation night after night. Li many of these cases flying rumours came round to the Beard that some one had heard such and such a matter had taken place ; and in all these instances he knew there was very great exaggeration, distortion, or even fabrica tion of facts ; but still he supposed there were many persons who, being ignorant in many cases of the circumstances, did believe what they stated. But there were many who came down to the Court, and by their conduct raised some suspicion, if not of their veracity, certainly of the purity of their zeal, _ ( Hear.) Their Lordships would never credit them when he said that they were too nugatory to be brought before the Commissioners, but not so before the House of Lords. These facts oftentimes reminded him of the circumstance which ho had read of in a favourite old comedy, where a newly-elected Member of Parliament, returning from some distant part (Si r Francis Wroughead), elated with his success, was run against by a rude carter, and his carriage was damaged. In great indignation the son suggested to his father, " Oh, father, bring him before the Parliament-howe." Now, it seemed more honest to bring these matters before the Legislature than before the Court. If they sent to Ireland, an inquiry was made by the inspector, when the statement was found to be generally partly fabricated, and there was some distortion of facts in all these cases. Ile knew that when a week or ten days had expired, and when the attention of the House and the public had been directed to something else, and after errone- - ous statements had gone forth, no regret was ever expressed; not one word of apology was given ; never anything like re pentance was evinced by those who had originated the, calum nies; no repentance was shown by those who accused the Commissioners of having struck out all about repentance from the gospel of St. Luke. No; but it appeared as if the sup porters of St. Luke had struck out repentance from their own hearts, and thus the time of the House and of the public was taken up, and prejudices were raised, which a calm consideii_ tion of facts before the Committee must verify, and thus put an end to such irregular proceedings at once.—(Hear.) In respect to this subject, there was two classes of ques tions which were very distinct, which ought to be kept apart, but which were perpetually confounded with each other; he meant the question relating to the system as ori. ginally laid down, and the question relating to the conduct of the Commissioners. He would appeal to their Lordships whether they were not mixed up together continually, not to say anything of speeches made at Conservative, Radical, and Repeal meetings. At one time they had a debate in re ference to the various versions of the Scriptures, to the diffe rent force of their Hebrew particles, and various manuscripts of the Old and New Testament.—Those considerations were mixed up with the general reading of the copybooks of the schoolmaster. Then there were the questions raised whether the reading in these schools should be compulsory or volun tary ; whether people should be permitted or forced to read ; whether the school-houses were erected on the best sites, or whether they were not often too near the chapel yard. Then they were appealed to in respect of the Dimay version of the Bible. Again, it bad been made a matter of complaint to the Hoard that sense schoolmaster had done something some years before his appointment. Thus, they had to contend with this mixture of questions ; and he would say, let them all be thoroughly examined into. The Curnmittee to whom these matters would be referred would be very different frqsn Oily ethos that ever was if it did not classify the various heads of the subject, and leave the House to de liberate dispassionately upon it. Now, as to the system of education in Ireland, the Commissioners wore not responsible for it, crept so far thet they conseiontiously acted upon it. If the Vommiseioners, however, and those who were the par ties to wort; the plan, had conducted themselves unwisely, let them be examined before the Committee, and if the system were hopless, let it be abandoned; if it were necessary to make an alteration, let the roma of education be increased. If the comesissioisers had been false to their duty, if they had harboured improper servants for the public service, let the system be tried under the direction of other parties. But let not this mixture of the questions be resorted to, seeing that they were much more easily discussed in an animated de. bate, than they would be in a calm discussion before the Com mittee. Ile would give one or two specimens of the sort of questions which he supposed, in nine out of ten cases of charge, would be made. He was not speaking of this in reference to individuals, but with respect to the conduct of the Commissioners, and the merits or demerits of the system. Supposing a witness examined with reference to the model school at Dublin, he would ask—ls it attended by Roman Catholics and Protestants ? and, if so, iu what proportion ? lie would answer, so and so. He would then be asked—Can you account for the proportions being such as they are ; or do you apprehend that they are different in other cases ? The answer would be, Certainly. Because in the Model School of Dublin almost every parish had its school; the Protestant children were fed and partly clothed. The schools were under the guidance of Protestant clergymen. Then the witness would be a s k e d, D o t h ey receive instruction from their respective ministers on the same day ? Now how came it that they received so little instruction ? Why most of them went to their own parish. Some come many miles to attend the Model School every day, and when the instruction was not going on there they went to the respectibe schools of their parish, some of which were Presbyterians. Thus their Lordships would see how very different a turn the case took under the investigation of a Committee to that which it as sumed in a debate in that House, conducted perhaps with all the skill, the eloquence, and powers of a practised debater. A Mr. Perrin, in company with Mr. Price, visited the school where it was said a treasonable sentence was set as a copy by the master of the school. Mr. Perrin, it hap pened, had a living in his diocese, and he turned the character of the transaction entirely; and the report which had been spread, according to this gentleman's account, was totally false. He had told him (the Archbishop of Dublin) moreo ver, that see the false statement had appeared in the Standard newspaper, he thought it proper to put the matter right, and he accordingly assured the parties that they were mistaken. The notice taken of this communication was to the following effect :—" We have received a letter stating some inaccura cies, Re. We have not time to insert this letter, but we shall do so some time hence." This had occurred half a year ago ; but the parties were still waiting for a convenient opportunity to bring this letter forward. lie had told their Lordships that in some instances he knew these statements were believed by persons whom they could not conceive would put them forward. A complaint had been very properly brought before him by the court of a person in the neighbourhood of a small town in Ire land, who declared that the Protestant children could not in con science attend the school, because there was no way to it but by going in at the gate of the Roman Catholic chapel-yard. Now he had said that in some instances the schools had been erected on objectionable sites, but they were prevented in a va riety of cases from selecting better sites. He therefore said he would see in this instance how far the site was really ob jectionable, and that he would go and see the place himself. With this view he accompanied the curate of the parish to the spot. They passed along the street, and saw a board up with the words " National School." He (the Archbishop) asked him whether that was not the entrance to the school, but he assured him no, it was not, and that they must go through the chapel-yard. They went accordingly through the yard—went to the back of it, where there was no entrance—and went to the entrance from the street, which had been the entrance for many years. But the parties, nevertheless, who had made the complaint in the first instance, no doubt believed it, or they would have sent the case up for the consideration of the En glish Legislature; they would never have appealed to him who was on the spot. He immediately found that the grievance here complained of was totally without foundation. Their Lordships had heard of one petition which had been presented that evening from the clergy of the diocese of Derry and Raphoe. The petition was virtually for the withdrawal of the grant for the united system of education, and in some in stances it argued against the division of the grant amongst Roman Catholics, and the schools which were exclusive they proposed should have it all. Tim petition of the Bishop of Raphoe was informal, but that petition contained suggestions for several important alterations which might be introduced with advantage The Earl of WICKLOW—Not the petition ; but the re solutions upon which the petition was founded. The Archbishop of DUBLIN resumed. He begged pardon—the resolutions. He assured him, as an individual, that the Commissioners would be glad to receive any sugges tions calculated to improve the system, upon the foundation that they themselves had laid down, that there should be no restriction, and no coercion; and any thing against that prin ciple they would not consent to. Of any thing like coercion he could not approve. As to petitions presented on the oppo site side, there were many things often stated which appeared to him to be very right from the premises ; but those premises were not founded on facts. He knew it was strongly urged that these schools had failed for the purposes of united educa tion ; and this was equally strongly set forth as a ground for abandoning it. Persons of some importance in the north of Ireland had stated this as a reason fur the division of the grant. The Right Reverend Prelate proceeded to comment again on the difference of opinion which existed, and the contest carried on in reference to the authorised ver sion of the Scriptures and the Douay version. How was an unlearned person to judge in such a case ? When he spoke of -unlearned persons he meant the great mass of the people, who were not profound Hebrew scholars, who naturally said, " 011, you tell us that there is a dif ference in many essential points of doctrine. You may be right ; but we take the word of our clergyman." In fact, so little different were the two versions, that the great body of the Roman Catholics would not object to the authorised version, but as a point of honour. That an objection was raised by them to the authorised version of the Scriptures on important and fundamental points he did not believe. It was, indeed, a most dangerous principle to establish that there was an essential difference between the two versions ; for their Lordships well knew that the great mass of the unlearned must depend upon the learned for the meaning of Greek and Hebrew words. It was indispensable on the part of the uninformed to depend on the authority of the informed. Few of the lower classes could say from their own know ledge that there was such a place as Rome ; few, especially on the Continent, could say from their own knowledge that there was such an object as the sea, for they had never seen it ; but they depended on the relations and descriptions of others ; for althuugh those relations and descriptions might differ in some particulars, the difference was not so great as to impeach their general veracity—so they believed. It was the same with matters of religion. The Commissioners had undertaken a most laborious task, in the discharge of which they had undergone every form of vituperation and obloquy. Of all this they never complained, but went on doing what they conceived to be their duty. They were anxious, how ever, that the system itself should be properly appreciated. They were not at all anxious about their own characters ; for however deeply they might for a time suffer, they felt it could not he in a better cause than in endeavouring to en lighten the people of Ireland, and they knew that in the long run the slander uttered against them would be mischievous only to their opponents.-(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The House of Lords was a deliberate assembly, not a criminal court ; and the commissioners had no complaint to make in it.—( Hear, hear, hear.) They had been abused by false reports of their conduct. They looked with satisfaction to the appointment of the Committee proposed by the Noble Viscount. But the great question to be determined was, whether the people of Ireland, who could not be coerced into the adoption of any religion, should be left in darkness, or worse than darkness, or whether an attempt should be made by conciliatory means to enlighten an d i mprove them ? Of this he was perfectly sure, that without some measure of that kind, all other measures, however important they might seem, for tranquillizing and benefitting Ireland would utterly fail.— ( Hear, hear. ) The Earl of WICKLOW observed that the Most Rev. Prelate seemed to have forgotten the circumstances under which the Right Reverend Prelate who preceded him had spoken. When the Right Reverend Prelate had ineffec tually endeavoured to prevail on their Lordships to appoint a Committee on the subject, he lied, of course, brought for ward a great many circumstances in support of his view of it. What was the consequence ? That the Board of Com missioners, of which the Most Reverend Prelate was at the head, had thought proper to publish, in the shape of a Report, an answer to the Right Reverend Prelate, couched in the most angry and vituperative terms. Although the Most Reverend Prelate had said that he did not think that House a place for statements of such a nature, he had concurred in the formation of a Report composed of such statements, and which Report he knew would, as a matter of course, be laid on the table of the House. In that public Report the Most Reverend Prelate charged the Right Reverend Prelate with falsehood ; and now he censured the Right Reverend Prelate for standing up in his place and defending himself from the imputation. Now this was not fair dealing. He was not in the country when the report was made ; but he had read it a few days ago, and was struck with one passage, in which it was stated, that on communicating with Lord Stanley, when that Noble Lord was a Member of the Irish Government, he had intimated to them that he thought it desirable that schools belonging to monasteries, nunneries, &c. should b e b roug h t under the consideration of the Com missioners. He (the Earl of Wielclovv) would venture to say that Lord Stanley never gave any such intimstion ; for it was a direct violation of the principle on which the system was formed, and which had reference only to such schools as the Commissioners had complete control over, which of course they had not over the schools of nunneries and monasteries. The Noble Earl had alluded to the motion which he (the Earl of Wicklow) had on a former occasion made on this subject. He had made that motion, because he thought that the system which the present system superseded had been eminently beneficial. The Kildare -street system was now, however, totally superseded ; and the present system had been for some years in operation. Admitted so far by the Legis lature, it was impossible now to abolish it ; and theref we lie was anxious that it should be carried on in the best way pos sible. That was the view which the petition he had that night presented took of the subject. A modification might he adopted conciliatory to all parties. Lord PLUNK ET said that the philosophical, liberal, and enlightened speech of the Most Reverend Prelate had given the debate a complexion totally different from that which it had previously worn.—( Hear, hear, hear.) In that ,Host Reverend Prelate's observations he ( Lord Plunket) entirely concurred. The sentiments of the Most Reverend Prelate were such as ought to belong to every Protestant and Chris tian divine ; they were imbued with charitable feeling, and were calculated to do great good, and to remove exaspera tion in the minds of the Catholics, and of a great portion of the Protestants of Ireland. The Right Rev. Prelate having brought a charge against the Board of Commissioners, which charge they had refuted, he (Lord Plunket) as a kind of grand juror, had ignored the bill which the Right Rev. Prelate had preferred. He was satisfied that there was no ground for the Right Rev. Prelate's charges. But the defence of the Com missioners did not rest on their own - statements. The present was a great experiment ; the Commissioners had shown how far it had been successful. This was no hasty matter. The subject had been four or five and twenty years under consi deration. Commissions had been appointed in 1812 and in 1822, from both of which several Reports had been pre sented—those from the latter perfectly agreeing with those from the former. Those Reports went the whole length of declaring that Scripture extracts were proper, not (as the Right Reverend Prelate still maintained with extraordinary obstinacy) to supersede the Bible, but to steer clear of the difficulties attendant upon requiring the reading of the Bible. Well, after these two Commissions had made their Report, a Select Committee of the House of Commons was appointed, who, after due consideration, recommended the present system of education, and one Parliament granted a sum of money for carrying it into effect. After all this bad been done, and after a Board of Commissioners was appointed on the recommenda tion of the Legislature, lie thought no person—and, above all, no Legislator—had a right to show any bitterness, or any feel ings of anger, that the Board had prosecuted the plan en trusted to their management. He was, indeed, quite at a loss to discover the cause of the Right Rev. Prelate's violent in dignation, or account, in any possible way, why he should denounce the system in the extraordinary manner he hail done. That Board was composed almost entirely of members belong. ing to the Right Rev. Prelate's own Church. The Acts they were carrying into effect were the Acts of the Legislature ; and what, he would ask, could be in their proceedings, or in the regulations which they had adopted, to kindle such a degree of excitement in his mind ? The language of the Right Rev. Prelate was, that the present system of education was cal culated to disturb the peace of the community, to produce immorality, to put an end to all religious feeling among the people, and cause dissensions between the teachers and pupils in these institutions. lie was utterly at a loss to see any ground for such results as the Right Rev. Prelate thought the system calculated to produce. Could it be the lessons recommended by the Board that were calculated to bring about a total ab sence of religious feeling? What were these lessons? The first lesson inculcated the duty of " living peaceably with all men, even with those who differed from them in religious per suasion." Another lesson was to the following effect :—" Our Saviour Christ commanded his disciples to love one another-- to bless them that cursed them, and to pray for their persecu tors. He called on them to adhere to the truth, but not to act harshly towards those who were in error, and believed not in the truth. He prohibited his disciples from fighting in his be half, and commanded them not to return evil for evil, but to do unto others as they wished to be done unto, anti show to all that they were followers of Christ, who, when reviled, reviled not again." Now he would ask whether a Right Rev. Prelate, or any other Christian, ought, in the spirit of the Gospel, to make such charges against any class of Christians, and call the Catholic hierarchy of Ireland a rabid priesthood ?—( Hear, hear.) He had a published speech before him in the shape of a pamphlet. It purported to be the speech of the Right Reverend the Bishop of Exeter, but he did not know whether the statements were made by him, or whether it had been pub lished under his authority ; on examining the pamphlet he found it was not exactly the speech spoken by the Right Re verend Prelate ; he must say there had been some cookery, some dressing up, but the substance of it was the same. This pamphlet had an anonymous preface beginning in these words : " It has been deemed necessary (he did not know by whom) to publish the speech in a separate form, in consequence of a Bill having passed since the speech was delivered to grant 50,000/, for the religious instruction to all classes, with out distinction of religion." The pamphlet was published by Mr. Murray, a most respectable publisher; and as the Right Reverend Prelate had not put his name to it, he must treat it as anonymous. He took up the pamphlet-- he could not say written in a Christian spirit —to mark the passages which were incorrect, but he found it need less to do so, for in every page there were passages, not only incorrect, but actually unfounded. It was a pious vituperation from beginning to end. The Right Reverend Prelate had censured him for a charge made against the Right Rev. Prelate on a former occasion. The charge was, that the Right Rev. Prelate said the system adopted by the Commis sioners sanctioned the mutilation of the Bible (he understood that assertion had been avowed), and he then proceeded to justify himself. He (the Bishop of Exeter) admitted that he did not consider it a mutilation of the Bible to use extracts ; but he was satisfied such extracts as would be acceptable to all persons never would be agreed on. Now, what were the grounds on which he came to such a conclusion ? lie had availed himself of the evidence given by a Roman Catholic bishop, who, he insinuated, had asserted that such extracts never could be agreed on : he stated these words had been given on oath before a Committee of the House, by Dr. Murray, that he had been led into error by evidence given on oath by a Roman Catholic bishop, but would never fall into such an error again ; and would never give credit to Dr. Murray or any Roman Catholic bishop. Now, such language never was used by Dr. Murray. He had explicitly denied it ; and after this explicit and distinct denial had been made, the Right Rev. Prelate said Dr. Murray had given a different interpretation to his words, and that therefore no Roman Catholic bishop was to he believed on his oath. Why was there ever such an unjustifiable, disgusting proposition to come, not only from a Christian bishop, but from any person of gentlemanly feel. ings ?—( Hear, hear.) There was charity in such an assertion ! and the logic (as a Noble Friend hinted to him) of the Right Reverend Prelate was merely palmed on the charity. The fact was, the words never were uttered. A conclusion had been made on the assumption that they had been uttered ; and the Right Reverend Prelate considered himself justified, on such premises, to say that he would not believe a Roman Ca tholic bishop on his oath. He would ask if any charge could be made more galling, more i n fl am i ng , or more insulting— ( Cheers)—or any stronger language adopted for maligning the entire body of the Catholic hierarchy in Ireland? But the Right Rev. Prelate, not content with maligning the hierarchy, attacked the inferior clergy. At a speech made by Mr. O'Connell at Drogheda it appeared Dr. Crolly was pre sent, and because that gentleman was present, lie is to be made answerable for whatever Mr. O'Connell said.—( !fear.) But what did Mr. O'Connell say ? He said ho did not want the rep ea l o f th e un i on, b ut h e wanted justice to Ireland.__( Hear, hear.) He did not see any great delin quency in a Roman Catholic priest being present at such a speech, or why he should on that account be involved in the srveeping anathema pronounced against the whole Catholic hierarchy of Ireland. But it would be a waste of words to dwell on such a subject. The Right Rev. Po late said the Report contained a falsehood (he did not say error)—it con tained a falsehood respecting the number of clergymen who had made application for grants of money to establish schools in their districts. But he said more ; and though he did not charge the Bishops, lie charged some others with having re course to such a miserable artifice to deceive the public mind. But that subject had been already explained. Again, the Right Rev. Prelate had taken upon himself to charge the Commissioners with forging the names of several clergy men, and had instanced those of Messrs. Morrison and Cockburn ; but the charge had been shown to be utterly without foundation, for both the parties named, on being shown their signatures by the Commissioners, fully acknow_ hedged them. So much for the charge of forgery, and he trusted the House would fully appreciate the injustice, the gross impropriety of a Right Rev. Prelate coming forward with these vague, random charges, and endeavouring- to create an impr ess i on on th e p u bli c mind on the strength of allegations which, on the slightest investigation, turned out to be utterly devoid of foundation.—( Hear, hear.) As to the case of Mr. Robertson, the charge here was, not that his name was used without his authority, but that there was no such person as Mr. Robertson. And the Archbishop of Dub lin was vituperated for not having looked over his books for the purpose of ascertaining Mr. Robertson's identity in his diocese. Now, in the first place, it was not stated that Mr. Robertson was in the diocese of Dublin ; and if it had been so stated, it was no part of the duty or business of the Arch bishop to look over his books for the name unless represen tations had been made that such a person was erroneously stated as being within his diocese. There was one remark on this point which he (Lord Plunket) could not avoid making. The Right Reverend Prelate had not chosen to apply to his brother in Christ to learn from him what the real state of the case was. No, the Right Reverend Prelate stated that the information that no such clergyman as Mr. Robertson was in the diocese of the Archbishop of Dublin came to him from the Archdeacon of Dublin. How came this about ?—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") He (Lord Plunket) knew and highly respected the Archdea con in question, and he was perfectly clear that ho would ne ver have written to the Right Reverend Prelate on the sub ject had he not done so in answer to an application to that effect from the Right Rev. Prelate.—( Hear.) Now, he would put it to their Lordship e , w h ether such a proceeding, on the part of the Right Reverend Prelate was worthy or becoming—( Hear) whether it was right or proper on the part of that Right Rev. Prelate to write to an archdeacon for the purpose of endeavouring to extract out of him something on which to found an allegation against his Archbishop.—( Hear, hear.) This proceeding, however, was only of a piece with Mr. Cleaver's letter on which the Morrison portion of the Right Reverend Prelate's case was made out. Did the Right Reverend Prelate mean to say that Mr. Cleaver or any person on his behalf Mould have written to him on the subject had he not been written to by the Right-Reverend Prelate? No, the Right Reverend Prelate had been furnishing. his armoury wit accusations —pumping the inferior dignitaries of Ireland, an , he (Lord Plunket) would again put it seriously to the Hous: whether such a mode of proceeding- was worthy or proper ? I was:monstrous that any Member of their Lordships' House shoul found upon rumours and assumptions of this sort such hear" charges against persons who could not possibly be there ti answer him.—(llear, hear.) He would not delay the Hous by adverting at any length to the distribution of the funds i the hands of the Commissioners. It appeared by the repot that while the Roman Catholics of Ireland constituted seven eighths of the whole population, the proportion in which th money was distributed was, that the Protestant correspondent received 2,100/. per annum, and the Roman Catholic corres pondents 8,72 1 1. As to Mr. Nangles, while he ( Lord Nun ket) concurred in applauding the object of that gentleman ii his mission to Achill_n))., doubtless, it was a most disinterest ei one which would prompt hint to go that wretched part of tin country in the desire of converting the Roman Catholics ti Protestantism--lie was not prepared to say that he admire( that gentleman's discretion, or consi bred that he proeeede( on his mission in a way at all calculated to promote peace it that part of the country. Ile denied, however, that the Com. missioners had meant to throw any imputation on Mr. Nangles or to involve him in any way in a charge of creating a hreacl of the peace. The Commissioners had examined, closet examined, into the case of Mr. O'Donnell, the school . master, and the result of that examination was sucl as to satisfy them that Mr. O'Donnell was entirel; blameless. The charge as to the use of seditious languaga was proved to be absolutely unfounded. As to the Commis sioners enabling O'Donnell to try his action agains the publisher of the libel, all he ( Lord Plunket) could sa; was, that had the Commissioners neglected to do so, the: would have been greatly to blame. The next b ranc h of t h e Right Rev. Prel a t e ' s attack, referred to the alleged falsifica tion of the passage in St. Luke. Now, what the Commis sioners stated was perfectly clear and true, that any person looking at the extract from St. Luke, and the passage allude( to in the authorised version, would say there were reasons will that passage should not be given out to be read by young, persons—by young females; that however proper the passag, undoubtedly was in its place in the Scriptures, it was not on( which the father of a family, the director of a school, woult wish to present to the eyes of young girls. Indeed he (Lore Plunket) was altogether astonished at the Right Rev. Prelat( adopting such a course in reference to this passage. The Pro. testant bishops and clergy of Ireland, when applied to, in 1826 by the Commissioners then appointed, to furnish extracts fron the Scriptures, in furnishing extracts from St. Luke carefully left out the passage which the present Commissioners-6i heretical Commissioners—we re so vituperated for omitting, There was another fact ; the society for the dicountenancing of vice—a peculiarly Protestant society—in making extract: from the Scriptures invariably left out this passage. As t( the proportion of Roman Catholics and Protestants, it ap. peared from the returns that the number of Protestants h attendance on the schools was 17,874, while the number of Roman Catholics in attendance on them was 96,514, exhibit. ing a far greater proportion of Protestants than their propor tion as to the whole population would warrant. 'Was it not satisfactory to the Right Rev. Prelate to see 17,874 Protes tants uniting in amicable intercourse with the Roman Catholic portion of the population ? Surely it could be no disappoint ment or annoyance to a just and good mind to see this.— ( Hear, hear.) He regretted very much to see the Protes tant clergy put forward to bear the brunt of the battle. The Protestant clergy, when the Kildare- street Society was first established, set themselves in decided hostility to it; but no sooner did they find that the Roman Catholics also objected to it than they turned round and as cordially supported it. Let the House consider how large were the funds already sub sisting for the promotion of Protestant education. There vas Wilson's Charity producing 8001. a-year, Erasmus Smith's Charity 5001. a year, the Bluecoat School 500/, a year, Morgan's Charity 3,0001. a year, the Endowed Schools 25,0001. a year, the Hibernian School, Parliamentary grant, 2,000/. a year, and another Charity 1,2001. a year, all in landed property. All these funds were available for the education of Protestants, without assistance from the State ; while the Roman Catholics had no charitable funds of this description on which to rely. Lord Plunket went on to say, the whole ten dency of the Right Reverend Prelate's harangues on this sub ject was to swell the cry of No Popery, which attempts had been making to revive in the country. Now, as an antidote to this, he ( Lord Plunket) could not help referring to something, though it did not arise exactly, out of the present debate, and that something was the Charge delivered by the Right Rev. Prelate to the clergy of the diocese of Exeter —( Hear.) Now, as to that Charge, he (Lord Plunket) must take the liberty of saying that so unwarranted a proceeding as that, such unwar ranted language, such unwarranted sentiments as were embo died in that Charge, he had never before met with in any com position, lay, or clerical, or a more unconstitutional proceed ing.---( Hear.) He begged to ask what right had the Right Reverend Prelate to say that the majority of the Representa tives of the people, and the majority also of the Commons of England were guilty of perjury or of the subornation of per jury.—( Hear.) The charge was a very grave one. He would say it was an impeachable offence.—_( Hear.) He did not wish to involve the Right Rev. Prelate in any more un pleasant business than he was at present engaged in--( A laugh)—but he would say he had a difficult duty to perform to substantiate his cha rge , t h at t h e majority of the Commons of England were perjured. To bring such a charge against the House of Commons, the Government, and the majority of the Commons of England —a charge which was made in the most unqualified terms—was unexampled in offensiveness in the history of the country. Such a flagrant act was not to be found recorded in the history either of the State or the Church.—(Cheers.) The Earl of FINGAL remarked on the Right Reverend Prelate having described the Roman Catholic clergy as a "rabid priesthood," notwithstanding the difficulties and dan gers wi h which they were surrounned. The Right Reverend Prelate also asserted that he did not believe the Right Reve rend Dr. Murray had stated the facts on his oath. Now the Right Reverend Prelate was known to be a man who had been respected in every situation he had occupied. There was another allusion made by the Right Reverand Prelate which he set down to the account of the oath. He should be glad to know was there ever to be an end to that charge. Tho Right Reverend Prelate contended that the model schools should not have been established in Dublin. What more proper place, however, than the metropolis of Ireland wag there for the establishment of model schools ? After a few words from Lord CLONCURRY, The motion was agreed to, and the Committee appointed, Their Lordships adjourned till Thursday. C .OLI3URN'S NEW MONTHLY MAGAZINE AND IIcMORIsT FOR MARCH, EDITED BY THEODORE thl()K, Eye The present Number of this popular magazine amply sustains its character for wit and humour. The various articles aro all good. The editor continues his inimitable " Gurney Papers." Captain Marryat has coramenced a new story, en titled " The Phantom Ship," which promises to become as popular as any of his preceding works--(Mr. Colburn has added a new attraction to his Magazine, in securing the aid of this distinguished writer.) Mr. Poole's " Opening- of the Little P edlingtonTheatre" is capital ; and the distresses of Douglas Jerrold's " Mr. Peppercorn" are ludicrous in the extreme. We have also a third and concluding Epistle from the Grand Kentucky Ballooners, by one of the authors of " The Rejected Addresses;" and " Jack Abbott's Breakfast," by Leigh Hunt, in addition to articles by the lion. E. Phipps, Mrs. Norton, N. P. Willis, Alfred Crowquill, &c. &c. We must not omit to mention that the Magazine is embellished with a portrait of Mrs. Gore, the authoress of " Female Domination," accompanied by an interesting memoir of that popular writer. PICCIOLA ; OR, CAPTIVITY CA PTIVE.—The merit of this novel, which has been freely translated by a dis tinguished English writer, ought to be sufficiently attested by the fact that it has attained a fourth edition in Paris within two months of its first publication. But so much disgust has been justly directed in England, by the guardians of public, taste, towards the novels of In Jeuise "twice, that it may be necessary to bespeak indulgence for " Picciola," as opposed, alike in spirit and execution to all classes of her rivals. " Picciola," says the translator, " is ' an herb of grace'—we would not have assisted to transplant a noxious weed into the literature of our native country." ----- FAMILIES RESIDING ..IN THE COUNTRY are supplied with TEAS and COFFEES at the WHOLESALE PItICE for CASH : Itlack...2s. OW 2s. 4d. 2s. sd. Si. Bs. 64. 4s. 45. lad. Green..3s. Bd. 4s. Od. 4s. Bd. ss. 55. 6d. 65. , 75. OW Bs. Coffee, Is. 6d. Is. Bd. Is. 10d. 2s....Finest Mocha, 2s. When the order exceeds £lO, the Carriage is Paid. G. T. MANSELL, and CO., Wholesale Tea Dealers, 2, Ilucklersburv, Cheapside. HORIZONTAL FLAT WATCHES with accurately finished jewelled movements, warranted, are offered in Silver cases, price Five Guineas each ; or in Gold cases, pried Nine Guineas each, at T. COX SA VO Y'S, Watchmaker, Jewel. , ler, and Silversmith, -17, Cornhill, London. N.B.—Second-hand Watches purchased in exchange. 81/?' On the 24th ult., at Knightsbrid S. te e, the l a dy o f John Babel', Esq., of a s on . On the 25th ult., at Croydon, the lady of J. W. Sutherland, Esq., of a son. On the 27th ult., the lady of B. Hebeler, Esq., of York-place, Portman-square, of a daughter. On the 25th ult., at Plymouth, the lady of Sir Henry Black wood, Bart., of a daughter. On the 27th ult., in Bruton-street, the Right Hon. Lady Cot tenharn, of a daughter. On the 27th ult., Mrs. Simpson of Oxford-terrace, Edgeware" road, of a daughter. MA R R lED. On the 211 ult., John Itoyds, Esq., jun., to Maria, third daugh ter of the late J. Dennistoun, Esq., of Golf Hill, near Glasgow. On the 4th ult., at P erez d e l a Fronteira, in Spain, Peter - Chag• Gordon, Esq., younger, of Wardhouse, Aberdeenshire, to Rosa' eldest daughter of the late J. Prendergast, Esq., of Cadiz. DIED. At St. Petersburg h, on the 18th of January, aged 71, his Eicel; lency Vice-Admiral Sir Thomas Candler, of the Russian Imperial Navy, Knight of the several Orders of St. Anne, St. G e orge, an" St. Vladimir, Grandson of the Venerable Henry Candler, of Cal lan Castle, in the county of Kilkenny, Archdeacon of Ossory. At Cheltenham, on the 27th ult., Elizabeth Lewis, forty-tv v° years housekeeper to Admiral Manley. On the sth ult., at Blackwell, Durham, J. D. Nesham, E s q . ' aged 64. On the 24th ult., at Salt Hill, John Smith Barry, Esq., of Mar bury H a ll, Ch es hi re. Packe' On the 26 t h u lt . , i n Wi mpo l e - s t reet, aged 86, Mrs. R. sister of C. J. P ac k e , E sq ., o f P restwold Hall, Lancashire. London: Printed and Published by MUiWO YOUNG, of N u ' 112, Strand, at The ,cl4ll Office, No. 112, Strand, in the ceuntr of MiddleuX.—Wednesday, March 1, 11437.