The Sun. — London, England, 1841-03-03 00:00:00

VRMING EDITION! itandos to what was deduced by many Hon. Members. The compact on which the College of Maynooth was founded was established betwcee three parties. The eve Was the Roman Catholic laity, who were very anx'cus for the establishment of a College for the education of the Catholic clergy. On the other side, a desire was ex pressed and evinced be the Roman Catholic hierarchy, who desired that Maynooth should be a College for the general purposes of education; and in a document drawn up by Mr. Keogh, on the part of the Roman Catholic Committee who represented the Roman Catholics of belied, it would appear that the , r views were, that taci persons should be excluded on account of their religi us oreinions ; that the College shall depend upon the peopte for its supitert, and be subject to the joint control if the clergy and laity. The v.ews of Mr. Pitt were altogether unequivocal; ,and on the 23d of April, 1795, leave was given to bring in a Bill for applying the sum of 10 0001. to establish a College, the object of which was the bett r education of persons professing the Roman Catholic reli gion, and intended f,r tl e clerical mini-try there_.f. The lot point had teen introduce I surreptitiously, for the Bill was under tie conduct of a very clever man, Mr. Haasey, and when introduced by him was limited to education ; but tbo 'moment the Government discovered th,t the B:11 had :ha- title, it was instantly withdrawn.—( Hear.) The Crailege xas to he under the ch a rge of lay teen as well P eccletiletica, and there was to be not a College f ti.e education of ecclesiastics alone but one for the jeint cdemation s f laymen and ecclesiastic?. The Roman Ca tholic laity wished . that Protestants as well as Roman Ca tholics should he educated in the College, but Mr. Pitt, who saw too clearly the abuses to which that would lead, refused to sanction that plan. Bet upon those two pciats they agreed--best, that the College should be a general one for ecelestatti.is and laymen; and, secendly, that it should be uni 4 .er the control of laymen as well a, ecclesiastic!, and, iv point of fact, as he (Mr. Celquhoun) had alre rdy eh awn to the House, laymen formed the majority of the first Board whe took charge of the College. Now, the whole of th a t system — t h a t w i se system—teas eat:, ely changed at the present time. The College no longer ex isted, as Mr. Pitt bad designed i•, for the education of laymen as well as eceleritstics, and under the control of laymen as well as ecclesiastics. But at the present use. meat t! e College was solely under the superinteedence of ecclesiastics, who possessed all the posters of appaiefng professors, &c., and even the power of the exclusion of vis . tations—for no visitation was toleaatcd by the Roman Catholic disciplire. The compact between the British Minister and the ecclesiastics of In 1 tad was broken, and it eat of the utmost importance to Government to know TLe compact was broken by those who elterei the College of Maynooth, in which, at the present moment, no lay education was carried on ; ccelesiasticel educat i on was established exclusively, and the en tire coat:a was placed in the hands of ecclesiastics. The compact thirefere between Mr. P.tt and the Roman Catholic la i ty of the country was broken. He was bound to :ay that as matters now stood, the position of Maynooth was or.e of very serious alarm, and certainly well-founded ei,sa , i,faction t t the people of this country. Without any :allusion to the cilierencaa tetecen the Roman Catholic and the Prete dant laity on this question, there was a dis tinc.ion in the It'man Catholic Church, and a diiticcti in of inost material importance to this country between two shedes of opinion that prevailed there. He alluded to the patties charactet iced in that Church as the Montaan-ts and ul r -Mantaeists.—( Hear, hear, from Mr. O'Connell.) Ti.e Hor. and Learned Gentleman opposite cheered. Did he ti ink that a matter c f no consideration ? He (Me Col. quhoun) thought it a matte.- to be considered by the whole of the S.ates of Europe. There was a Com mittee of that Howe appointed in 1816, to ieve•tigate the position which the Ro.nan Catholic Church occupied in tee sa ious couutrie.s of Europe. The Report of that Committee 1 raught out those significant fac:a, that a con federacy, such as the ultra-Montane system—a confe le raey possessing laws and c woos by oafish Bishops were bound to a central conference—eaeons, by which Pi 'hops were bound to eaforce the oh,e.vation of certain laws within the country of which they were citizens—a confe deracy peasearing such power scented so formidable to all the States of Europa, that they teak those precautions against conaeqm.rices likely to result from it. They would not allow any resctipt from Rome without i:s being seen by tl:e Secre•ary of Stats for that country into which it was to be iterardoced. They would rat sallow any com munication to pass tete eel the central conference and the Bishops of that c runtry, tt i'hout its Laving been sir a by the Seerrtary of St ce. They would not allom the ap pal: tut. nt of the Bishops to be vested in any hinds but tit i • owe. They, in fact, rcsolved, and executed that rc soluticu, that there should nit exist in their own dornieions a Church whit It dial tact own any close connection v ith the iSt.ta. and which had a close and direct connection wit') a foreign Power. Such wire the Galliean liberties for wl ich, in Frantic, the French wisely con'ended. Such was the Itw in Austria—such the Itw in Rusei e and such the law in Prussia. In no one of the count ies of Europe was it tolerate] that the appointment of Bishops t f the Church should be vested with the sea of Rome. But the rescript of the Pope passel into that ceuntry (Irtlsnd) without using seen by the Sacre'ary of State.—(" lit aa, hear," from Mr. O'Connell). He (Mr. Colquhoun) must say that, notwithstandiag the cheers of the Hoe. and Learned Gentleman opposi e, those States had adopted a wise course. He would show the House, from the opi nions of Lord Castle: Tub, who was a long time the distinguished advocate of the Catlad;cs—(Hear, from Mr. O'Connell)—Lord Casilereagh war, he must n prat, a long time a moat ardent supporter a Catholic Emanci pation. He would show from the opinions entertained by that Minister that great danger was to be apprehended from the system (ultra-Moetane) to which he had alluded. Lord Callereagh did not speak his own opinions only, but ia his speech on the subject in 1810 he adverted to the opiei ens of Mr. Pitt as coinciding with lis( L rd Calle:cagh's), and Mr. Pitt, he should say, was a else auther . ty on the subject. It was h's with tett the Carp lies sheuld continue to be such, but that they shou'd cue tect themselves with ther own Government, and lia've no dependence upon fsre;gn Powers. The Hoe. Gentler! a I then quoted the opieions of Dr. Doyle and Dr. 11.11 a e rcsiecting the a:ceptance by Romer, Cathol.cs of rh! Bulls of the Pope, rvl Lth were opposed to the laws of the country in which they lie ex) eeted to he.r from the Honourable and Learned Member from Dublin that these were quesions which belonged to other ages a - :d to a different state of societ , e But he had the authority of a F ich nobleman and a Roman Catholic, the Count de Mout d'Oeiers, that in 1816 the confederations of the French priests, under the name of Sodalities, became formidable to the Government; and in the previous ye_r, in a country to which the lion. and Learned Member Iva; fond of referring, the Catholic Bishops of Belgium made a protest t ► the King cf the Nab, rtalds, declaring the . . the canonical law, which was sanctioned by the ancient laws of t te country, were oe posed to the measures agreed to in the States, and that it it were at 2mpted to enforce those Inca:urea, and the King I would not follow their advice, they would pl,ce thcrusel, es in c rlliaion with the authorities, and would stir up the people against the Government.—( Hear.) Now ev.iiy body knew whit had been the consequences of that t1e:.:13. zat'on in Belgium. At all events Mr. Pet intended that the Co 1 ge of Maynooth should be founded and conducted on d , ffete,e and more sound and literal principles. Ile had not teal to the Hoese any passages from the works studied in the Ccllege of Maynooth, but this he would say, that authors who taught the doctrines most opposed to the tivll rights of the Crown, to the laws of the coun try and the Fence of the State, were the authors who were read, and whose doctrines setre inculcated in the minds of the students. Among the books return, d as those studied at the Career., founded with a view to liberalize the Ito laze Catholics, were the works of Be'larminc, Thomas Aquinas, and others, in which were to be found the fel lowing duct, roes :—" He tvlio owes anything to a here ie by means of purchase, promise, pledge, deposit, loan,_or other c attract, is, ipso facto, fie e from the contract, and not bound to redeem his tilted faith, even though under an oath'.''—(oll, oh!) If lion. Gentlemen douleei his oerreetness, they would find the passage in the s:h Book of Deeretals. Dr. Slevein, in page 220, said—" All who separate from the body of the Roman Catholic Church are excommunLeted. The Roman Catholic Church has the spiel ual authority ever Protestants as over Catholic:." Dr. S'evein did not positively assert there should be a con fiscr.tion of property, yet the authorities referred to as studied at t Coll •ge, int:, the minds of Vie t.i dents 01 there abornira; le doctrines._('' oh , „b r, from Mr. O'Connell.) No doubt the Hon. and Learned Go.- tl•tmari truly and sincerely repudiated such dectrines, but what he (Mr. Colquhoun) regretted was, that they should be inculcated i I the Co I've Was the object cf Mr. Pitt thereby attained ? And if why were such books as the svcandum secunthv of Thomas Aquinas is their hands? The Noble Lord the S, , creeary for Ireland said, in the last debate on this subj et, that he did not think it impor tant t ► exa nine what books were read at the College cf Maynooth. Now, he was persuaded that if it were shown that doctrines similar to those he had referred to, bal c heen protnula'ed in the University o f Oxford or of am bridg, they wouldmeet with the vehement denunciation of II n. Gentlemen opposite. Those doctrines tend to in dissolve the bend of society ; and the books no e w n u i. s n ed .3 11a)nostia hal a most pernicious influence on th_. There the e!ergymen educated in that College. '11? 48 therefore a marked d , fferenee batten the Catholic clergy tn of Ireland at the present day and the clergymen of celier period. That feet had been admitted by the Hon . . and Learned Gentleman for Dublin himself, in his ev:- deuce given before a Committee of the House in the year 1825, The Hon. and Learned Gentleman spoke as fol lows on that occasion :—" The priests who were educated in France were old, I may ray, when I became a man. They had a natural abhorrence of the French Revolution, which had bort e so much on the Catholic clergy. They were strong anti-Jacobins. By this means there were among them a good deal of what were called ultra-royalists, but with the priests educated in Maynooth the anii Jacobin feeling was dying away. They are more identified with the people, and they do not come within the phrase of loyal ista so much as the priests educated in France." Mr. Dennis Browne stated in his evidence that "the Catholic priests of Ireland were not the same men they were when t he first knew them ;" and Mr. Inglis s a id, t h at l in his journey through Ireland be had found the old foreign educated priests of that country gentlemen, and men of frank and easy deportment and general information, but by no means in general such good Catholics as their brethren of Maynooth. The litter were men of stiff and rigi I , Ira might be men versed in ~t oolr acters, and though they they were profoundly ignorant of all that cool! leeri er the mind more liberal. They were but z , alms in religion and men full of a sense of their own conpquence. [l e had no doubt that the change originated in the system pursued at Maynooth. It was that system which made the priests agitators ; and if at present a foreign educated parish prieit happened to be too liberal minded a man and leas a biter of Protestants, a substitute was seat in his stead ready hot from Maynooth, and the old priest was virtually disgraced." These extracts winoumldaypronnovetht.he lenvilncooncsences of system pursued the in s pa i n _ wasthe spirit of Popery retry is Europe—not even t intensely anti-Protes . arr as in Ireland; and it wasmtst" important to the eivieae. tion and peace of that country that better i order of Ca tholie fpnests should be eaablishead. been used to an unparalleled extent b y . etimidation had the priests in Irc- I land at the elections 6f 1835. Parties were held up to I 1 execration, and denounced from the al'ar in consequence of the votes they had given. That was a system perfectly consistent with the doctrines inculcated at Maynooth; but he woeli ask the House and the people of this country if they would allow such a system to be continued. No one wished that any man professing the Raman Catholic faith should be, after the Act of 1829, in a worse posi tion than a Protestant. They were placed, wisely as he thought, on the same footing, but be com plained that tile priests should be allowed to denounce from the altars those who exercised as they thought fit their civil rights. Other Roman Catholic States had peremptorily forbidden those excommunications on matters of a temporal nature, and they were neither tolerated in Austria, Prussia, or France. No man in those countries could use religion for any other than religious purpose!. He conceived that the principles of the Roman Catholic prests of Ireland proceeded from the system of eduction adopted in Maynooth. It was natural to suppose that when young men entered the college at a time of life when they weie most susceptible of impressions, and ell ,n they witnessed frothing but the most barbarous and et• ploded tyranny, aid doctrines the most obnoxious to the rights of the subject and the allegiance due to the Crowo; it was natural to suppose that they should themselves be come intolerant. But he said that was a system which Parliament ought to inteif re with, and which should not receive the yearly sanction of the Lord Lieu:c 'cant and of the Judges. It must, however, be Auctioned so long as the present Act of Parliament re mained in force. It might not be in their poser to pre vent such duct ices being taught, but it would be in their power to withdraw from them the continuance of a Lrgi - lafve sanction. Whether it would afterwards be their duty to grant any money to a college which woul I teach such doctrines was a question for separate consideration, and one which he did not then wish to deal with. He wiehed hoe ever to put an end to that system of visitation, which was attended with no effect, but which misled the public out of doors, from a supposition that something was done. Is would afterwards, he should repei t, be the duty of the House to say whether they would continue the grant which was now maee to the College of Maynooth. Colonel BRUCE seconded the motion. Lord MO RPETH snit, that if the question before the House had been, whether leave should be given to bring in the 8.11 of the Hon. Member who had just sat down, he, for one, considering how much that speech abounded in matter highly criminatory and vituperative against the priesthood, and the religious tenets of a large majority of the third part of the empire—be for one would have no scruple in caking on the House not to receive any such statements or allege. ions.—( Hear, hea-.) The Hon. Member can didly declared the ietention with which he had made his motion. He intended to open a new fit ld, and leave it free for those who had hitherto felt themselves somewhat shackled in giving th ir votes against the annual grant to the College of i%layraooth. He had said that he had felt precluded from giving his vote against the grant, in con sequence of existing statutes. By that means it appeared to him (Lord Morpeth) that the Hon. Member had cast some reproach on those of seneitive and tender consciences who had opposed the grant. He did not see what dis tinction the Hors. Member could draw between the Act of 1800 and the Act of 1795. Mr. Pitt had, no doubt, been a party to the introduction of the Act of 1795, but he (Lord Morpeth) bad yet to learn to learn that Mr. Pitt was not in office in 1800, and that be had net accepted the Act introduced by the Irish Parlia-nont on the subject of Maynooth. It had been adopted, together with the Lsg . sla it e statutes then existing ir, Ireland, as part of the union, and from that time the vote had annually passed by the Imperial Parliament. He did not propose to follow the Hon. Gentleman in his dissertations with respect to the disparity between the ultra- Montanisti and the Cii‘- Alpine party and the various cord eternities and societies, with the enumeration of which the lion. Member amused the leisure ef the House. It had been one of the benefits of the Emancipation Act ; but there were many Hon. Members of the House more competent to enter into such discussions than he could pretend to be, or than he apprehended the Hon. Member himtelf could be. He was happy to find that there were members of the Roman Catholic commurity in the House who would he able, when they heard any statements derogatory to their religion, to contradict it. The lion. Member had sa tsd that in Roman Cath she countries on the Continent of Europe—in France and in Austria—everything relating to religion fell under the cognizance of a secretary ofstste. But how did the Honourable Geneernan propose to deal with the qaestion in this country ? Was net the Hon. Gentleman aware that the Secretary of State who cc rrespondtci with t'!e See of Rome upon the subject would incur the penalty of prenernire? The Hen. Gen tleman ought, therefore, while he proposed the introduc tion of such a system, to have first called on them to repe 1 the Act which imposed that penalty. The Hoe. Member had saisl, that in ether countries the Sate imposed condi tions on the Catholic clergy, to renouhce certain doc trines, and refrain from err stn practices. The Hon. Gentleman should, however, have remembered that in those countries not only did the State control the con duct of the clergy, but it also paid them ; it maintained and encouraged them. If the Hon. Gen:len:al thought they should interfere with the conduct of the Roman Catholic c'ergy in Ireland, he should have asked the House to provide some more adequate means for keeping that clergy in a state of greater respectability and comfort. The Hon. Member had quoted extracts from several books, which ho stated to be used in the libraries and lec ture-rooms of Maynooth ; he had mentioned Bailey, An toiee, and Thomas Aquinas, among the numter, but he must have known that those books were probably in use in the time of Mr. Pitt, and they were certainly in u‘e when Mr. Percival and Lord Castlereagh supported the annual Brant for the Institution. But even it the Hon. Member had shown that there were twiny doctrines inculcated, and many books read is Maynooth which did not meet vitt) his approbation, he would sti.l have proved nothing in the case. Wiint was that for wl ich the College of Maynooth had Le:in instituted? The Hon. Member oppos.te had said that it was intended that a portion of the L ity should be educated there, as well as clergymen ; but it was the ob j:ct of Mr. Pitt, in founding the College, to withdraw those who were to form the future body of tie lush priesthood from the influence of the principles and education of France. It was intended that those who were to firm the ministers of ti'e Roman Catholic Church in Ireland should be educated in this country. That being t . ie ob ject of the institution, unless tho Hon. Member could show that the doctrines inculcate] there were in contradiction with :he known principles cf the Roman Catholic Church, he bas made out no case for the interference of Par,iament. If he could show that the dca - ines taught there a ere con trary to the known rites and ordinances and inst . tutions of the Roman Catholic Church, he would then admit that the Hon. Member had proved his case —( Hear, hear.) He would give an illustration of his meaning. Suppose that Nlaynooth, instead of being instituted fur the purposes of aching the doctrines of the Roman Cath lie Church had been instituted for the purposes of educating clergymen in the faith of the Protestant Establishment; suppose that its main object had been the education of Protestant Church of England, as distinguished from Roman Catholic c'ergy men ; and suppose that the professors and lecturers of that College. instead of carrying out the avowed object for which they were instituted, should be found continually declaring that there was no very great dis'inction between the Pro te,tant Church of England and the Catholic Church— ( Hear, hear, hear)—denouncing in strong terms what they were pleased to call the terrors of a reformation, and inculcated on their pupils that there was no very essential difference between the doctrines of the two churches—( Loud cheers)— under such circumstances, they would not be sssrprised to find that many cf these pupils were deserting the Established Church, and en tering into the Catholic Church.—(Loud cheers.) If the Hon. Ger,tleman had brought forward such a case as that, he would then admit that the Institution had not answered the purpose of its establishment, and that he had stale out a case calling for V:e interference of Parlia ment. Honourable Gentlemen opposite seemed to think tat he was not bo:no out in the allusions which he bad made ; fir their information, be would quote from a work of authority, The Church of .Eng land Quarterly Review, a passage from their critique on the Oxfe Tracts.-IThe Noble Lord here quoted a passage from the work alluded to, denouncing the Oxford Tracts aQ a direct approach to Papacy, and as cale.tlated to sap ihe foundation rf the Church of England from within, while Infidels and Papists were attacking it from Without.] These accusations were brought forward not against the professors of the Roman Catholic religion, but agisst the professors of the Protestant religion in a Pre tettant University.—(Loud cheer..) Nu such accu sation had been brought against the Prof.ssors of Msynooth. And, whatever they might have been charged with, they had never been charged with any laxity in up holding the doctrines and discipline of the Catholic Church. —( Cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman had touched upon the conduct of the priesthood with reward to their conduct as rela ed to the common relations of life in Ireland. When speaking of a body so numerous as the Roman Catholic priesthood of Ireland, he would not attetrpt either to deny r defend every action of every member of that body. More patticularly did he join with the Hon. Gentleman in repudiating those denunciations from the altar, to which he had alluded. Such topics of political excitement, when uq,e I from such a placo, must be considered as a desecra tion of the Most High.—(Loud cheers.) It was taking from Ciesar the things which were Caesar ' s.—(Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) But with respect to the general conduct of the Roman Catholic clergy in Ireland, and to the influence which they exercised over their flacks, with out meaning to flitter the Irish people, and without mean ing to say that the people.of this country did not possess sclvantages over them in many point., he would say that he did believe that the male portion of that people ex hibited more sobriety—( Cheers)—the female portion more chastity —( Cheers) —and both mete patience und er in • • tense suffering than could be saido f much, u ofch. the distinctly countries.—(Loud cheers.) He said thus either rd bout to adopt on this occasion should be himself against the inference that the conduct g w u h a ieh ing he was a considered as hereafter precluding him from the tight of voting that the i nf favour Stateofg thera granted dtry towardsgr nt o t f h ,000/., support of which the was all re ligion of the great majorit y of h Ire land.—( Loud cheers ) Seei ng that they people outwho of ccu theie House they opl w e er n e f t told ' h v e erY llo d n a o 3 l;ra b b o le th G i e n ntlm a e nd en opposit: were ready, ray, that they professed them opd the bene t l i ! e a selves ready, to assume the rt igns of power, and that they represented that those reins were likely to fag n itbin their grasp in a short time—(Cheers)—he thought it eeiir able that the country and the people cf Ireland—(Loud cheers)—should see before them fully explained and de veloped--( Continued cheerieg)—the means and policy ;Oriel' they were prepared to adopt, respecting the Go vernment of Ireland.—(Loud and continued cheering.) He should, therefore, offer no objection to the present motion himself—( Loud cheers)—and he begged the House to allow the Hon. Gentleman the opportunity of bringing forward all he bad to urge against the institution. —( Loud cheers.) Sir ROBERT INGLIS said that although the Noble Lord bad not, in distinct w.trds, mentiosed the University of Oxford, yet he had alluded to it'in so significant a man ner that he felt himself eall : d upon to protact that venerable body vgainst the misr epresentation s of the Noble Lord. The publications to which the Noble Lord had alluded were not deliberate acts of rho Unhorsity. Th e y w e re no t 1 THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNTSDAYI MARCH S i 1841. established as test beioks by the University of Oxford, ant the Noble Lord had quoted teem from t' e works of an opeonent.—(Hear, hear.) The University of Oxf a; no more answerable for the works published ie Ox ford, than the Ci.y of London can for every work pub lished in London. It was chiidi,h, therefore. to content; that the Un:v, rsity of Oxford was responsible for eveie work published in that city. There was this great differ ence between the cases—these books had never been made class-books. Did the Noble Lord mean to say that aly person had ever lectuzei from them? Had they ever been enforced an doctrines upon classes of the young men? The Noble Lord had quoted them from the repre. sentation3 of their opponents. Lord MORPETEI had not quoted the publication as expressing the sense of the Uraversity of Oxford, but as expressing the sense of a groat multitude of persons with regard to the doctrines promulga eel in the Oxford Tracts. Sir ROBERT INGLIS would not now discuss those points.—(' Hear, hear," from Mr. o.Connell.) lie agreed with the Hon. and Learned Gentleman that that [louse was not a proper arena for theological discussions. —( Omar,. ) There were some parts with which he differed with his Hon. Friend the Member for Kilmar nock. He Lai always opposed the grant to May nooth, because. beiieving as he did that the doctrines of the Roman Catholic religion were funded in error, he could never conscientiously vote for the appropriation of money for the teaching of that doctrine which he believed to be erroneous. As there was no opposition to the motion, and as whatever speeches might now be spoken would iu all probability be spoken over again, he would not detain the House any longer, but support the motion of his lion. Friend. Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL would not allude to what had been said respecting the doctinea of the Catholic Church. The Hon. Gentleman had ststed that he hal bean hitherto withheld from voting against the grant because it was sanctioned by an Act of Parliament, and an express compact ectered into when that Act was passed, but be bad no scruple in moving tor peal that Act and that compact. If such a propositiou bad been brought forward by a Member of his (\lr. M. J. O'Conntles) religieun communion, lie could not help thinking it would have been denominated jesuitical. (Cheers and laughter.) But Hon. Members on the other side seem to possess peculiar privileges in that respect.— ( Cheers and laughter.) With respect to the grant its, lf, he was perfectly indifferent, believing, if it was withdraws', that greater exertions would be made by the Roman Ca tholics to place the College on a respectable footing. (Cheers.) Tee principle of the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford was au intelligible one, but it might have a twofold application, and if it should be found in convenient in its application, they had nobcdy to thank for it but themselves.—(Cheers.) This motion was brought forward for the purpose of supporting the Mayncoth tation, which had rather been discontinued of late. The agitation having been recently confined to the differences between the Evaagelicels and the Puseyites, and he would not allude further to that subject, as he should be sorry to throw any obstacle in the way of one of those parties con forming to the communion to which he belonged, to which they seemed rapidly approaching.--( Cheers and laughter.) The Hon. Member had quoted Inglis's Travels in relation to Maynooth College, and had attempted to excite a pre judice against the Roman Catholic clergy, and uefortu natelytherewere many ready to believe any story, however im probable, provided it was circulated of the Roman Catholics. He did not think this feeling was confined te the unein catad and the vulgar, there was a publication which was cornett red the organ of the high Tory party, he alluded to the Quarterly Review, which, in an article headed " Re manism in Ireland," afforded an example of that kind of spi.it to which he bee adverted, that of shadowing out a spirit—giving nothing tangible to lay hold of, but doing everything that could raise prejudices and excite schism. The Hon. Member then proceeded to read several extracts from the Quarterly Review, and proceeded—Such state ments disgusted all rational and thinking men. He hoped they would see tha Bill of the lion. Member for Kerner neck shortly, as he hoped the Hon. Member would lose no time in bringing it in. As he had said before, he thought the Bill was not so much an object with the lion. Member as the making of a speech.—( Laughter.) The Hon. Member in the opening of his speech had talked about avoiding asperities, now lie (Mr. M. J. O'Connel) would have it to the House to say how far he had done so. —(Cheers.) Ho trusted the House would not lightly pass censure upon the Roman Catholic 'priesthood in Ire land ; time, howevee would be gicea en the second reading of the Bill fur considering that subject. Tee Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland bad not overdrawn the influence that that body of men had over their flocks, and he thought they n,i ht challenge comparison for piety and devo ion with any body of men, whether connected with the S.ate or not.— (Cheere.) Mr. CUMMING BRUCE was disposed to agree with the Hcn. Member who had just sat down, that many of the Roman Catholic priests had performed their dufes in a manner that could not be questioned. As the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland had stated that it was not his inteetion to oppose the introduction of the Bill, he should not occupy much of the time of tee House. lie thought the speeches that had been made on the other side had not answered in the slightest degree the excellent speech of his Friend who had introduced the subject. The Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had expressel a hope that the Bill would be introduced as soon as possible. Now for his own part he must say, after the postpone ment by the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies the other z ight of so important a int a-sure as the Registration of Voters (Ireland) Bill in consequence, as he said, of the pressure of other public business, he ( Mr, C. Bruce) thought his Friend was bound not to introduce his Bill till after that most important period fixed upon by tire Noble Lord, of the 24th of April. He trusted his Friend would not be so uncourteous as ti introduce it be fore that period. Mr. LANGDALE wished to make a few observations with reference to what had fallen from the Hot. Member fur Kilmarnock. That Hon. Member had repeatedly re ferred to the word allegiance, and from it he deduced these the Roman Catholics were disloyal. Now, with referece to that, he must be allowed to say that the Catholic held a very diffrrent allegiance to his Sovereign from that which he held to the head of his Church. They were as totally, as entirely distinct as the two principles of spiritual and temporal authority. He had repudiated over and over again the doctrine that Catholics did not bold the same allegiance to their Sovereign as was held by those who were members of the Protestant Church. Tee Honourable Gentlernaa said that the Catholics denounced the Protestants as heretics and schis matics. Now, he should like the Hon. Gentleman to state the difference between the Church of England and the Rorn. i-h Church in that respect? Did not the Church of England call those heretics and schismatics who differed from tv-ern ? The Hon. Member for Oxford hart stated that he was a Churchman, and any doctrines incompa tible with that Church he felt bound to deprecate. The Hon. Gentleman had said that 'there was strong antis Protestaetism in Ireland. He would ask that lion. Gen tleman whether aere was not a strong anti-Catholic feel ing in Ireland. Was there not a party there who, when the claims of the Catholics were acceded te, kept op that feeling against them that existed in Ireland before ? Then it was said there was strong preaching in the pulpits in Ireland. Was there, he would ask, any stronger language used than that adopted by the itinerant preachers of the Protestants in this country? He alluded to Mr. M'Neilo and others who had gone through all the large towns of the kingdom, raising a cry against the Catholics. If the spirit with which the Catholic Emancipation Bill was brought in by those great men who had introduced it, bad been acted upon in Ireland in the spirit in which it had been acted unon in England, those prophecies that had been made at the time the Bill was brought in, that it would turn out a failure, would never have been accomplish° I, for it would then have I been an entire settlement of the question, and the lion. Gentleman would sever have had occasion to bring for. ward a motion of the description he had called the atten tion of the House to that night.—( Hear, beer.) Mr. LITTON said that if he beli.ved that the Roman Catholic doctrines, as taught by a great portion of the priesthood of Ireland, were of the nature which had just been described, he fir one would not be anxious fur the success of the motion before the House. He believed that the Hon. Gentleman had se:if truly, ftr himself and for a very large body of the Roman Catholics of this country and Ireland, that they had rcpudi del upon their oaths the doctrines which were imputed, and which he was obliged to say he continued to impute, to the teacl:ers in the College of Maynooth. But if the statements which had been made both in and out of the House for five cr six successive years were not true, he was surprised that re spectable and conscientious Roman Catholics, who pro fessed to be the friends of that College, should not be the first to challenge inquiry, and refute the charges which had been brought forward. If the Hon. Gentleman would fairly meet the charges, he (Mr. Litton) would be most happy to assist him in the investigation. There were none who were mere keel e tad in having this question settled than the respectable, loyal priesthood of Ireland; none ought to fe,l half so much anxiety to grapple with the subject, not by reading scraps of books, but by b Idly and fairly testi:sg the whole of the state meute.—(Hear, hear.) He would not then go at any length into the contents of the class-books used at May nooth,—but he pledged himself to prove, on a future oc casion,- that they inculcated, in almost every is , ge, all the intolerance and disloyalty which was evinced by the few paragraphs read by his Hon. Friend the Member for Kilmarnock. The Hon. Gentleman who last addressed the House had candidly stated that he had never looked at those books, and that he did not even know their names Yet it could not he said that the motion then before the House had taken them by surprise. For five successive years exactly the same statements bad been made ; for three or four years the same divisions had been taken; and Hon. Gentlemen could not therefore be unaware of the nature of this motion. He would ROW give notice that upon the second rending of the Bill be would call upon the Hon. Gentlemen opposite to deny if they could, o e w openedwo r o k r s d s t o whichtha twhdcoh hen b a aht d b b a an d e d ro f r ,o c r t a i or to explai n away if they could, the distinct palpable e t in H a ioenanen.di meaning f u n t d h t o l i o . c h s h i c e d r b . s y c o fi h n i e ! should then show that no man reading thole works could doubt that their plain and palpable meaning, especially as cddresscd to youth and to the unlearned, was, first, to inculcate the absence of all eg i ance to the. Crown, and next, to inculcate that ot.ths need not be kept with heretics, if the interests of the wman Catholic Church required that they should be brOken, and he thought that no conscientious Roman Catholic should suffer such allegations to be unansee e 1 or twin w. qre into, d if he was convinced that th e y cou ld b e dis proved.—(H ar, hear.) Mr. O'CONNELL rose and said, Sir, I begin first by saying that I believe all that is taught at Maynooth, and next, that I will check, from respect, to the Howe, my co ntempt for some assertions that I have heard m a d e to • ht ) I have heard it said that the charge s which have IRen made to night have been made frequently in this House bt fore. I have been longer in the House than the Han. Member, and I never heard anythin g ut tered thin ain House so indecent a s the ass e r t ion s I have heard made te-night. He says Viey have been made else where. Oh, I admit that they hav e been made e lsewhere. He says they have not been denied. Oh, Sir, they , save been denied as often as they 'have been merle, rid their falsity has been demonst-ated to such a- ire that I am astoriihed that e ey men's pri iudices, or his inte rest, or his prejudii e•! intere- . . could induce hen too r est asser. iens wiiie'a have been soi..i: . gaantly denied. He has talked r f aileeiance beiag !rite red away by our r eleeten. I ail( pM him to that—l will prave t him, w. ensves tine uhject comes ferward, that t'ere ntver was a more un founded assertion, that bigotry Lever mattered nor did malice ever utter a calumny more untrue. He has, in talking to gentlemen, who are hi; equals at least, • presumed to say that they disreg rd their oaths. I will not trust myself to say how that may be answered. If it was answered out of this House I should say it was as f ilse as Lel. He never can prove it—he ha; proved noti lag. He has quoted the ribaliry which has been uttered , at fanatic meetings, and he has called for en loves ligation of these charges without attempting t r give page or chapter. If he had done so I have that by me by means of which I could in three minutes hulas reputed his statements. The Hon. Memher who speke last stated that the Hon. Gentleman quoted book. Ah he did so; he quoted two passage; by pages; I have them before me, and if it were not that I have something more important to do at present th an to go through these pas races I would show that there is not a single word ie tee m which a Christian should be in the slightest deeree ashamed of tr shrink from avowing, or that a Christian should not utter; and that there is not in the passages quoted a single word which is inconsist .at with the charity which belongs to any creed.—(Hear, hear.) He has quoted from Dr. Slevin, wad a number of other works, but e did not give me the Large. I called to him fur tee gas •. He tattler had it or he had it not. If he had it and concealed it I leave him to the jutieent of the House. If ho had it not, I ask how could be presume to come down to this House and write out the passego and nut give the page in which that pile ' sage was to be found ? I will tell Lain why he did it. It was because he knew that if he gave the page he %vauld be contra lieted in a momest, and confuted, too, with ease. The Hon. Gentleman is, in. his general conduct, a gen tleman of perfect candour. He avows what he thieks, and fellows it out to all its consequences. Sir, I would wish tis imitate him—it is my ambition to bo like him ha that reseed. lam a Catholic as he is a Protestant, and I wish only to express my real feelings upon this subji et. He has given his opinion upon every occasion hitherto without the least discourtesy. I always respected him f it ; but I cannot say that I was satisfied with his answer this evening._( Hear, hear.) Sir, the Noble Lord, who has spoken of the Puseyite doctrines, did not attri bute those doctrines to the University of Ox ford ; but he did impute them to several cler gymen of the Establishment who had been educate ! there ; he did impute them to the professors et Oxf ntd, and, I believe, he imputed then to a Bishop educst yd there; and be said that, contrary to the oaths which they had taken, they were preaching Popery through the me dium of Protestantism. B 1 used be God, their doctrines are very near those efihe Roman Catholic Church. 1a n very glad than they have commenced this charge; I re joice in the triumph which it give.; to our religion. The Hon. Gentleman commeacei his speech with a declaration that lie would not willingly say one word to wound the feelings of those who differed from him in religion. Such was the commencement rf his speech, and yet in that speech he introduced one of the most violent tirades of :he most abominahle calumnies that were ever heard.—( Hear, hear.) Now, if instead of being a sincere gentle man he had been an arrant hypocrite, wool t he not have followed the same course, bi - ginning with profeisions of liberality, and ending with vituperation and calumny ? That is a course which is altogether un becoming in him, He quoted authorities, and he referred to the Cisalpine and ultra- Montanist doctrines; and cer tainly he has got the most left•handed views of those dh c. trines that I ever heard.—( H ar, hear.) If any Catholic clergyman had heard his statement of those doctrine, Jre must have been exceedingly auewel. The quartet in that case was an invasion by the State upon the Church, and he has quoted a running commentary upon the violeare of many of the French is that quarrel. Yes, Sir, he is qui c right—the Parliament; were opposed to the Reny of the Church. And what was the result ? The French Reva lution, with all its hone r:, the infidelity which brought on tl.e Revolution, and the trampling upon all institutions which accompanind that Revolution. But I may remark, is passing, that there seems to be no g eat symbathy on some points between himself' and the Hon. Gentleman who seconded hp motion. If I mistake not the Hon. Gerais man is a Non-intrusionist whilst the Hon. Gentlemen who seconded his motion is as letrusionist. I saw the other day a speech of the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Kilmarhock, in which he disclaimed any connection with that party who thought net the State should presume to interfere with the Ciurch. Do the Honourable Gentle race agree on that.point? No they entirely differ. Tne Non-intrusianist sets the State at defiance, deriving his views from John Knox ; the other is fur giving the State control over the Church. I tell the Hon. Gentleman that I don't think the quarrel of the Scotch is likely soan to termiiiate—it seems to be as pretty a quarrel as any per son ibitnical to the peace of that Church could dealt e. I beg to tell Lim also that tie ultra-Montane doettitie, as far as we are concerned, is now at an end in all Catholic countries. Let him go into any State of Europe aid show me a state in which Catholicity is not Weed ing. Let him go through the world and show me a state in which Protestantism is extending. I am sorry to make these remarks, but I Lava been forced into a polemical discussion, and I should be ashamed were I not prepared to give the reason for the hope that is in me. He talked f Bulls which were required to be published in the addresses to the Catholic Bishops. We struggled fir emancipation—it was offered to us if we gave up the ap poietmest of our Bishops. Wo flung en.aacipation to the winds, rather than our Church should bow her head to any Church whatever, or have her tarnished by any adul teraus connection with State authority. We have Tel triumphed the less. The Hon. Member talks of the cif ference betwem the Irish priests educated in France aid those educated at Maynottia—(Hear, hear, hear.) He quotes Inglis as an authority the water, not tits Member.—(A laugh.) The House will see at once what discrimination the Hon. Member possesses. when he tells them that Inglis wrote in 1832, and that there had been no education of Irish priests iri France since 1792. Ia that year the French Colleges were suppressed, and no man was afterwards allowed to go'to France to be edu• cated. I will leave the House to say how many of these who were educated before 1792 are now alive, It is manifest that the priests educated before that peri id were not, as a body, living in 1832. I give the Honourable Gentleman credit for not discerning fast from falsehood—truth from error. H e i s un d er a happy kind of delusion on this sehject. The Hen. Gentleman has alluded to Lord Castlereagh as being a great theo logian; that is a quality for which I never before had given him credit. lie has also referred to Emmett and he has read part of Emmett's evidence before the Com mittee of the House of Lords when he acknowleeged ltime. self a traitor, and consented to be examined. Let me not t e of Em me tt. He was an accomplished gentleman; he was a consc i ent i ous gen tleman ; he was a man adorned with a ll t h e v i rtues o f pri supposed to speak slightingly rate life ; he was rising exceedingly fast in his profession, ienee; he was a rigid schemes Presb yterian of the French li e ye lution,f his talents an d v i r t ues ; h e was sec and was a a l ce e a a eu r ms n e e b d aurnk i in od e rt ir iin e u r t y oh one of the United Irish Executive Directory; when I.e was captured he gave that evidence. But what authority is he for Catholics? He had no connection with the Catholi .s. In that insurrection there was scarcely one Catholic gen tleman implicated. ALuost every gentleman executed was &dial- a Protestant or a Presbyterian. I do net remember one Catholic who was executed for taking pat t in it, though I remember many Protestants and Presbyte rians. He kiss, indeed, made a long dissertation on the in timidatioa useii by the priests, aid ae has ventured in t' is House to say that he can prove to demonstration that such intimidation is ia force. Oh I Si-, the facility with which Honourable Gentlemen can make as.ertions they have no means of proving ! Does he know that there has been no less than thittsen Committees before ev ery one of which the electors were influenced imgroperly by the intimidation of the priests ? In six cut of these Committees, the popular Members were unseated, but not in one of then was there an attempt made to prove inti midation or misconduct on the part of the priests. Not in one of them was the charge which he makes established. An opportunity for proof was offered ; and I implore the House only to remember that that opportunity ef support ing the statement on oath was neglected, and flinched from by those who continued to repeat the calumny. To be sure these priests have taken a part, they spoken in disparagement of bribery and of perjury ; but I deny that ti:ey have done aught that is unworthy ` of tl ear sacred office. Mr. Singleton be mehtions. as Mr. Singleton es er wltbin the walls of a Cithslic Chapel? Was he ever within the precincts of a Catholic altar ? Such men speak wbst they have heard, and what they would have others believe ; bet throughout the wh(he. ,f that eviLnee there is but one wi:ness who speaks of being pre sen t, an d as we h ave tad a discussion abut him before I need not now relent his statements. But I treat that cal umny upon t h e pr i es thood with contempt. I c!,l imagine, Sir, that Exeter Hall was the place in which alone such low, filthy, loathsome, falsehoods against the Catholic clergy could be uttered.—(Cheer..) I thought that the utterance of these mean calumnies would be confined to Exeter Hall. Is that, Sir, to be t aas planted into this House? Are we to have Exeter H 11 here? The speech of the Honourable Gentleman has teen called an able speech ; Sir, I say that it :was a s'anderous and calumnious speech.—( Loud checr , .) He brought forward charges against ua, but he took espe cial care not to en a bl e me to c ontradict him, and would not give me the page from which he quoted, after I had asked him. I repudiate these doctiines, every one of them.—(Cheers.) They have Leen repeatedly repeated and repu6ated. —( Hear, bear,) My sternal salvation de pends on my sincerity. I speak in the presence of a God, who will j u d ge me; and I canno t atfod to annihilate a single portion of the comfort, consolation, and hope, that is in me. —(Cheers.) And who is it that uttera those calumnies against my religion ? A disciple of John Knox. If the Hon. Member for Newels (Mr. Glad_ stone) was here, he would not allo w the Church of ,he Honoin a l l a ilr'ealber (Mr. Colqub on) to be a Church at a 11..( L ou d l aug h: cr .) there any ordination in his Church? The Hon. Member for Newark will m t allow it. And who was the founder of his Church ? Has the Ilins Gentleman ( Mr. Colquhoun) read Mr. Tytlei's welt raspectirg Q ueen Eli za b et h, a nd his charges against John Knox ? Does he know Oat Tytler proves him to have been as accessory before the fact to two murders? H .s he read the works of John Knox himself ? And does he know that John Knox says that faith is not to be kept with Catholics ? W e h are ever di sc l a imed such doctrines, and I defy him to prove that Catholics ever held them.__ (Cheers.) Faith is to be kept with every body, and that man, let him call himself what ha may, breaks the law of God who violates faith with any human being.—( Cheers. ) John Knox argues distinctly that faith ought not to be kept with heretics, and he kept none, for having obtained power by means of Catholics, his first act was to abuse it hY procuring laws to be enacted. against Papists. Talk Cf allegiance! Had the disc'ple of John Knox never heard •f his " Blast egsinst the monstrous regiment of women ?" Did he not preach up rebellion, and condemn sovereign authority? I have been unwillingly forced into this polemical _ . discussion. My religion has been attacked, and it is my pride tad my duty to defend it. It is the ancient religion this land— it is the religion of Alfred and of E.lward,oFe seee. nod of Sir Thos. Mere It is a religion which ca: e e g the persecution of the early Christ tins, and h eue the flames an a l wild beasts of the Reinsn leeiene e t,.., and it will exet when some traveller from Zealeiet shall sketch the ruins of St. Paul's from the last ar eh of L :noon Bridge. As I said, I did not provoke tbis discus sion ; but I have other topics. Can anything exceed the bigotry of the petitions which have boon preheated ? Do they net breathe all the rancour of the early Reformation, as it is called ? And was not that rancour exhibited by the Gentleman who gloated over the bigotry of those petitions ? "It was time," said the Hon. Member, " that the House should respond to the sentiments that had so long existed abroad." I know there are millions in this country who scorn such sentiments.—(Cheers.) lie talked of a response in this House, and I saw Ho r.ourable Gentleman on the other side cheer the must malignaut and unfoundel of his assertions. Blessed be God, the pe Tie of Ireland know that big try so foaming and boiling over, never polluted this House before. I wish I could prophesy it never would again. It shall not do so with impunity. Talk of the people of Ireland ! Do not judge of them as they are calumniated, and their religion perverted in this Huse. Has not the Noble Lord given you their character ? Are not our women among the purest—are not our men among the most temperate ?—( Loud cheering.) Is not their relieious feeling the strongest? The Hon. Gen tleman tells me he has bests in Ireland. His visit was nut one of mercy and charity, but to discover what he could blarre.—( Hear, hear.) . lu his own evidence there is no mark of candour, or I would read it for him. He has been there ; arid does he know any people on the face of the earth so many of whom are communicants every Sunday in the yr ar ? The altar rails are thronged with them, and let Honourable Gentlemen remem ber hew they regard the solemn mystery there consum mated, and tell me where, on the face of the t ar:h, they find a people with so much zeal for their religion, with so much practical piety as the poor people of Ire land.—(H, a-, hear.) True, they have their errors,—re venge is perpetrated among them, and under its influence many are scattered at road and meet with untimely deaths; vengeance has broken down the restraints of religion and the feeliogs of humanity ; but look at the country, and contrast it with your own, or with Scotland, and you will find crimes infinitely less in proportion and atrocity. No horrible murdes arc committed there, from the base motive of acquiring a little property.—( Hear, hear.) I am proud el being the representative of such a people. They are a religious and a moral people, and true religion and morals is still spreading through the land. I hold in my hand a document from which I will read to you what the state of the population it. You talk of Protestant Ulster. There aro 976,088 Protes tat;ts of every description in Ulster, but there are 1,992,828 Catholics, giving us a majority of 116,740. In Leineter our majority it 1,334.014: In Munster it is 1,975,964, and in Connaught 1.166,280, do luctin ,, only 57,750 Protestants. Is it then in this Hou se that the cry of bigotry is raised and propagated against that country ? It is not wise--it is not prudent—above alt, it is not Christian.—( Hear, and cheers.) Would 10 God an end were put to these polemical discussions; and they would be put an end to if the Hon. Member would mind his own religion more and that of others lees. Let blip study Presbyterianism, let hiru study the principles of the , English Church—it is said he communicates with it. al hope it is a calumny as he is a Pie3eyte ion. I conjure him, therefor e. to look at his own religion, and not at the religion of others—of others who are no more then him sof tainted with any one doctrine inconsistent with the purest morality or the precepts of the Divine law, either expteased or and whose ancestors had the courage to sacrifice the last drop of their blood rather than aea-- don by deed, or word, cr insinuation, one p rtiele of their faith.—( Loud cheers.) I beg leave, Sir, to support the Hun. Member is asking leave to bring in his Bile but I believe he %ill never 17ring . it ire —(Hear, hear, and laughter.) Mr. :Sergeant JACKSON began by eulogising the character of the Hon. Member for Kilmarnock, thae whom, he said, there was no man in this country e h possessed more moral and religious feeling. Was this question to be met by an attack on such a man, or by an attack on John Knox ? His Hon. Friend's statements had teen deeisd, but he (Mr. Sergeant Jackson) was ready to prove, and to give chapter and verse for their. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. O'Conre'D had misrepresented, as was his custom, what had fallen from his Hon: Friend, who had not stated that he quoted from Mr. M.Nevin before the House of Lords, but from the work published by Mr. M'Ncvin himself. Mr. M`Nevin was a member of the Roman Catholic Commit tre for establishing a Roman Catholic College in Ire land—a feveurite project at that filo.. What he hal written, and what had been quoted by hi s. H oe . F i sn d, was as follows :—" The Education Committee for the united education of Roman Catholics and Protestants to be dependent on the people for support, and under the joint control of the clergy and the laity. But the clergy men determined to have the sole control, and procure] the assent of the Crown by addresses against Defenderi rr." That w as the statement of his Hon. and Learned Friend. The lion. arid Learned Geotleman the Member for Dub. lie stated that the conduct of his Hon. Friend was inde cent in the highest degree. What was the facts of this case? This College was established in Ireland for the purpose of promulgating sound moral principles. Such was the intention of the Legislature ; but, as his lien. Friend had said, " was that the result ?" He raid no, bemuse he found books containing objectionable m. ter used in tee course of eiticaii m. He could refer to them. The. Comm;ssioners is 1834-5 applied to the Principal of the College of Maynooth to be furnished with a list oft he becks used by the students, and a return was made which might be fonnd at page 11 of their Report. In it he found I! e names of all the books the students were required to per cheo-, and alio a list of those recommended to 'heir use by the Professors. Among them would be found all those from which these objectionable passages had been quoted. It was a question whether the Roman Catholics believed these thirg:: He ( Mr. Sergeant Jackson) thought they did not believe them. He beieved no educated Catholic in that House or out of it behe:e.l them, and that if they were a sate of the use of such books by the students, they would denounce it. He agreed with what had been said by the Noble Secretary for Ireland as to the religious charac ter of the Irish people. He (Mr. SergeantJaskson)beli ved there was hot a more pious and singularly religious people upon earth than the poor Roman Ca belie popu lation of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) Could anything, there fore, be conceived mere cruel than to allow those who were to be their teachers to:be instructed in such books ? —( Hear, hear.) He said it would be a great wickedness in that Assembly if this fact were proved to their sari:_ faction if they continued their support to at inst;tution in which such abominations were tolerated and promulgated, They had been told no references had been made, awl therefore, though he was sorry to weary the House, he would give one cr two :—ln Bailey's Modern TI en logy on the subject of theft, chapter 7, page 232, was as follows : " How great may be the quantity of things stolen in order to constitute the theft a moral sin ?" Arid the answer was, that the question was not easily determined, and that the offence was less with re spect to a rich man than a poor ore, who could less afford the loss. Then "Dens' Theology" distin guished four classes of men. First, the illustrious, or those who lived in splendour; 2dly, those who lived on their own estates, and in competence ; 3dly, artificers and those who supported themselves by their own labour ; and, 4teily, the poor who supported themselves by b g girg ; and it was clearly laid down, that, in order that theft should constitute a moral sin, from the first rank fifty or sixty ponce were sufficient; from the second rank, fur iy pence ; from the third rank, twenty or thirty pence ; and from the fourth rank, four-pence, or even a penny, if they had nothing else to live by than beggisg. Such was the scale given to regulate what amount of theft was required to constitute mortal sin. It was also alleged in the same work that a woman might steal from her husband, if it were for the support of her children, and to keep them from want. Such were the morale in culcated in a seminary established for the education of the Roman Catholic clergy and laity. Again, on the sub ject of oaths, it was held that a man might violate an oath under certain circumstances, and on the express order of his superior, and it would be remembered that all the monastic criers in Ireland, the Dominicans, the Fiansis cans, the Augustins, and the Jesuits, bad their In ads or snpei iota resident at Rome, and yet these men were to be allowed at the dictum of their superiors to violate any calm they had taken.—(Mr. LaeArdale—" No, no—it is not so.") It was so stated, hoe ever, in the book, unless his understanding was very obtuse. He should be glad to hear some explanation of it. He should not occupy the time of the House by giving other quotations from the Rr rk to show that that was the doctrine held with respect to oaths, but he could an hundred other instances. He had been induced to refer to it, in consequence of the challenge thrown out on the other side, that there was no ground for the statements of his Hon. Friend. The Noble Lord said, of the works read in the College of Maynooth, many taught the Roman Catholic doctrine that that House had no right to quarrel with them.--( Cries of " Hear, hear.") Now these atrocious doctrines which had been referred to in the course of the debate, had been condemned end censured, and denied both in and out of the House, and it was acid that they were merely a pact of the series of calumnies which had been heaped upon the Roman Catholic body. The books were now set forth—their names and titles were given, and if these doctrines were repudiated and scouted by the Catholic body (and he sincerely believed they belonged to no religion), why not have them erased from the list of books which were presented for the instruction of the Roman Catholic laity and clergy ? He thought the House owed a deep debt of gratitude to his Hon. Friend for having brought the subject before the House, and it was scarce just or equitable to heap odium and abuse upon him for doing so, when the quotations he had made fully bore out his statements.—( Hear, hear.) There was one thing he was delighted to hear from the Noble Lard, namely, that these denunciations from the altar, of which they had heard so much, and which could not be deni:d, were an intolerable nuisance and ought to be put down.-- ( Hear, hear.) It was well known that the soldiers were frequently prevented from attending chapel in consequence of the language used by the clergyman from the altar. The lion. Member for Kerry had reed a long extract from the Quarterly Review, and among the passages the fol lowing—" How many Retinae Cathelic clergymen are R p tilers?" and had made a commentary upon the question of the editor. Why, it appeared to hies, and that was alto the opinion of her M.jesty's Government, that no honest or loyal man ought to be a repealer, orouglat to belong to any society having for its object the dismemberment of the empire.--( Hear, hear.) And yet, at a late meeting at the Corn Exchange in Dublin, a letter was read from Dr. Higgins, the titular Bishop of Ardagh, inclosi the subscriptions of himself and 74 clergymen of the diocese, to the Repeal Association In addition to that, they had the testimony of the lion. and Learned Member for Dublin, that all the Catholic clergy and hierarchy he_ longed to that Association.—( Hear, hear.) He had tres- passed too ling upon the time of the Hoube, but h, could not sit down without observing, that nothing was mere foreign to his intention, and be should be exceed- ingly grieved, if he had said anything unkind or hurtful to the to :jags of a ter R enan Catholic. He gsve thew far creeir for she:trey, Men there seid lee wiiceo when tie y nee tbs.,e obilexiaus due': Ines. But thee ht.d tau- d nil ell we, e read by the stud, eta iti the Col lege of N 1 :stein,: le and it wes the duty of his flux. Frletel to lheett t,e n under the coeside-ati ;u of the House mid the public.—( Hear.) Mr. W. BARRON sail it was not surprisirg it Roman Catholics in that douse were willing to stand up and deny ie the most solemn manner the doctrines which had been attributed ti them by Hon. Gentlemen opposite. He (Mr. B.) should think taut henvas not fulfilling his duty either t COLISIi :lents or t his own feelings if he cis not in the most solemn enamor repudiate the abonneanle and aerocious doctrines'ereught forward tonight in that House, by Hon. Gentleman opposite, with regard to not placing faith in heretics—with regard to taking oaths from which they might be absolved, and by which members of othe: persuasions should be bound, and other doctrines of that kind, which he would not trouble the House with detail leg. The Reiman Catholics bad ra: verious times, io the most solemn inenntr, denied the truth of times doctrines. They had denied that there were such doctrines bell ored by them. Their divines, arid esery reason of any authorty iii the Roman Canealic Church who had written on the subject, had equally denied the exigence of these doc - rines. tie was only astonished that in the precht age, and in that Legislature, there should be found any one individual in that House, or in any community of Christians, oho would attribute such abominable doctrines to any class of their fellow-countrymen, They must have known in their hearts that what they thus attributed was false. They ought to have known it when they came forward in that lisuse— they ought to have examined into ths subject bef sre they attributed such horrid doctrines to their Roman Catholic countrymen.—( Hear.) He could not restrain himst if front stating in the strongest manner possible, thin, such doctrines were not those of his ( Mr. Barrow's) Church, and those who attributed then to that Church should make more diligent impiry before they had the asidactty impute to t • ute to their fellow-Christians,—men in as high sta tion, and of as high feelings as thernselves—such abomina ble and unfounded doctriees. If the Hon. and Le irned Member for Dublin were now in his place, he (Mr. Bar row) would be congratulating him on the effects that would certainly be produced in favour of the Repeal ques tien by the motion of the Hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Colquhoun) That Honourable Member's motion and speech would go far to enlist the Catholics of Ireland is the Repeat agitation. It would show there that there was a spirit' of rancorous bigotry still in existence among a portion of the more enlightened people of this country, which had found it; way into the House of Commons, and bad at least nivel rise to the expression of feelings which he hoped had been long laid at r , st by the Bill of 1829. But with re respect to the charges brought against what had been termed the "denunciations from the altar," he (Mr. Bar ron) must say that having heard the exhortations of the Catholic elecrey or, various occasion?, for a period of twenty-five years, he could safely buy in the presence of that House, and of the country, that he never yet beard one single word on any single occasion utterer?, that would not do honour to the clergy of any Church or any Christian assembly. Thote exhortations inculcated the duties of subjects to their own country and to their so vereign, and ohelience to the constituted authorities, and were it not for the exertions of the priesthood of Ireland the people of that country would on many occasions be driven to a state of desperate rebellion. He regretted exceed ingly that those religious differences should form a matt,r of discussion at the present day in that enlightened a e sembly, b2cause he thought (het it was a disgrace to them before the nations of Europe. They were the only Le gislature on earth in which subjects would be heard dis cussed in such a manner. Would it be said that while the rest of the world was progressing in liberality, that Eng land alone should be retrograding ? Austria, France. Prussia, and Holland, had adopted a line of conduct on this heal, which should make England blush. The Hon. Member here proceeded at some length to institute a com parison between the line of policy pursued on this subject by England and the four States be had just mentioned, and contended that the peace and harmony which prevailed among ihe various religious sects i i those countries re. sultel from the enlightened views taken by their res t e:- tive Governments, which, in the Protestant States, namely, Prussia au? Holland, proui led that the education of the Catholic subjects of these kingdoms should be as carefully a.tended to as that of the Protestants, to whom no pre ference regarding emo!ument or distinction in the uni versities was given to the exclusion of their Catholic fellow-countrymen; and in support of those statements, the Honourable Member mentioned that the PreEssor of History in the University of B o h n (Prussia) had, in reply to a question from him (Mr. Bairon), as to whether the professors of that University were equally Protestant and Catholic, lord told him that that was a question that never entered into the ideas of any matt there to ask ; the only thing inquired into, when a candi date far a Professorship appeared, was, who was the most eligible person ? In Austria and France the same liberal amt just policy was followed. In Austria, an empire possessing 35 millions of inhabitant=, of all languages, he might say, and of different religions, but possessirg only four millions of Protestants, the University of the ci yof Vienna was endowed with a Professorship of Di. vinity of the Protestant faith. When, he would ask, would a similar enlightened policy be put sued in Oxford or Cambridge ? The University of Dublin, established for the education of the Protestant iriesthood of Ireland, had a yca-ly re venue of 40,000/., and that for the clergy of only one million of the inhabitants of that cenntry. Was it common sense—was it prudence—for Hon. Merri -1 beri to come down to that House to oppose the pal ry grant of 8,000/. a-) ear for the education of the clergy of seven millions of the inhabitants of that country ? The grant should be eight times that amount. Sure, policy_ prudence would dictict! a far different course frem that pursued in the course of that night's discussion by Hon. Gentlemen opposite, if they were determined to do away with the effects of the iron rule and despotic sway ef the governors of Ireland in a by-gone time. They might be assure] of it until they did that—until they gave an increased grant to the Cr liege of Maynooth, they would never hate a class of men completely fittel for the mission as he should wish them. At the same time, be maintained that they were, upon the whole, a moral, teli gious, and excellent set of iron ; and it was only asto nishing to him that, with such stnallsadvantagere they had been able to do so much. The House could not forget that the present discussion was looked to with great in terest in Ireland. They could not forget that discon tent in Canada had been but recently a ll a y e d, and that in many of their other colonies a large proportion of the people were Roman Calh elics. D:d they suppose these pe tple would be pleased with the line taken by the Hon. Gentlemen opposite, and that their tics of friendship and good feeling towards England would be increased in consequence of the present discussion ?—( Hear, hear.) lion. Gentlemen talked of their consciences ; but if tkey did use that doctrine, let it be carried to its fullest ex tent. The Honourable Member for Oxford had talked of his conscience, but when he did so, surely he ought to have some little respect for the consciences of J: in Thorogood and those other Dissenters who refused to pay Church-ra'es. The Hon. Member could hot take the consciences of every other man into his safe keeping ; and how could he le cone le it to his conscience to vote tor the grant to the Irish Presbyterians if he believed the Church of England was the only true Church; or did his conscieuce extend to Presbyterianism while it refused to admit Cstholicism? There could be but one true religion, that must be gi a fled ; but which it was was the main point of discussion. It was a question that had puzzled the most eminent statesmen, philosophers, and divines, and they could net suppose. that their discussions and di visions in that House would set the question at rest. They never would.—(Hear, hear.) He had every respect for the consciences of other men; but he expected that they would, in return, respect his. Whstever the Hor. Mem ber's conscience was, however; he was bound to act for t 1 e good of the country, without reference to religious opinions cr dis.inetions. Now, Hou. Members on the other side should not forget that choir Universities were founded by Roman Catholics. They had been unjustly and unfa:rly deprived of the benefit of these Universities which they had founded from their 'private fortunes and private resources, and it was nothing less than spoliation and robbery when it had been conin ited by the atmettors of lion. Members opposite. Why did he ref. r to that circumstance? Because they now grudged to grant the small pittance ihrtt was asked by the Irish people. fie had said that they were retrograding in this country. He was afraid that there were many people in this country who were retregtaiing in a proper sense of liberality. This had been increasing frorMthe agitation of the Gen. tlemen opposite for the last three or four years, who had been anxious, at the expense of their country and their good sense, to get into office; and it was in consequence of that that they hut brought forward the motion of ' the lion. Member for Kilmarnock. He hoped that they should soon see this Bill in Ireland, as be could assure the Hon. Member-that it would prove a great accession of strength to the Hon. Member for Dublin on the question of the repeal of the union. _(Hear, hear.) Sir R. BATE SON supported the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Kilmarnock. Maynooth was founded to educate the Roman Catholic youth in a liberal spirit, but he thought it had failed in that object. He was glad that his Friend had brought forward this subject, and he hoped he would follow it up by moving for a Select Committee to inquire into the system of education in the College of Maynooth. The Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland had talked about this Leing a poor and miser able grant ; why did he not come forward, therefore, and ask for a larger one ? He objected to the grant, hecause he thought the system adopted at Maynooth was founded on bigotry and superstition, and his wish was that his fellow-subjects of the Roman Catholic persuasion should be educated liberally. He opposed the grant, not because it fostered the religious feelings of his countrymen, but because it tended to en courage feelings and acts which were equally opposed to their own free sentiments and to the laws of the land.— (Cheers.) If the people of Ireland sera geverned in a firm and decided manner, and the laws were properly put in force, the people of. Ireland would he as well conducted and obedient to the laws as the people of any other part of the empire. Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. Sergeant JACKSON then moved for a copy of a letter cf Colonel Carey, Mlitary Secretary to the Commander of the Forces in Ireland, dated the 4th day of April 1814, addressed to Sir E. B. Littlehales, Under Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland ; and of the letter of Sir E. B. Littlehales, date.l the sth day of May 1814, ad dressed to Sir George Hewitt, Commander of the F A o d r i c u. es in Ireland ; also, Copy o f t h e l e tte r o f L or d A y l mer, rant-General is Ireland, addressed to the Military Secre tary of the Commander of the Forces, dated the 4th day of March 1819 ; and o f th e l e tter o f Si r E . B. Baker, . addressed to Sir George Beckwith, Commander of the Forces in Ireland, dated the 16th day of March 1819; also, Copy of the Memorial of H. B. Bowles, Clerk in the Adjutant-General's offi ce i n Ireland, to the Lords Commissioeers of the Treasury, and of the answer there to, dated the 2d day of March 1838. The Lion and I....arr.ed Gentleman then m ove d f or a return . of the quantity of deals and planks imported into the port of Cork during the year ending the sth day of Janua-y ' fiVENT INTO - ••;•11 ; dt. „ ,f;d • • ri'he t () e A„1 r a: c v (.'(;1 is PIRLIA MEN TA I? V DIVISIO' . \4 . roal,the reres and Prvcenliili,;, rd the Haase oj Optimum-, TUE'SDAV, MA ncia 2. SHERIFF I'l A R CII) A L (SCOTLANDittIe Motion wade, and Question put, " That a Select Cor i d o • bl appointed to inquire into the nature and extent of . tne., r , o , ties still ineur&)ent OM the lie tiers •1 the Ake cipal, or Chief Stipendiary Judge, for each Coun t Y in f the land ; and, also, to inquire into the stature and effects o f go system under which the above class of Stipendiary Judg s lv o urinate abd appoint Stipendiary Deputy Judges :"--( 3jr * lace : )—The tiouse divided : MINOR'. CY—AYES, 37. Gillun, W 1). o'Conlicii, J. . Gisborne, T. O'Connell, AL .si Ilastie, A. Smith, 13. w Ae.:tor, C. J. . iii e Sir • ' ~,OnICIV I liumphery, J. 01 Sheri ff r:et, stcuart, B. Johnson, (choral Stuart, Ni hers , Lister, K C. Turner, Etlinuno I turner, Willow' M`Taggar - r, J. Morris, trav ia Warburton, Ili Mont; r.i. F. Wood, 13. Murray, A. O'Brien, W. Smith O'Connell, Li Ferguson, Colonel Aglionby, H. A. Ire ht.),4d, Robert Barron, 11. W. licllew, 11. M. Blako, M. J. Bridgman, Hewitt Broctilehurit, J. 111,therton, J. Deunistoun, J. Dundaa, W. 1). Elliot, Hon. J. E. Ellice, E. W MIAMI. . Wailace, it Fiume, J. Abercromby, G. It Adare, Lord Ainsworth, Pe' or An' rohus, Ed w ird Arbuthnot, Hon. H Baring, F 'l'. Barnard, E. G. ,JOR I T Y-NOES, Ferguson, Sir Robert Fresttheld, J. W. Gladstone, W. E. Gordon, Robert Gon burn, Henry Gr ham, Sir James Halford, H. Hamilton, Lord C. Harcourt, G. G. Hepburn, Sir T. B. Herries, John C. Hodgson, Richard :lope, Hon. C. Hope, G. W. Horsmau, Edward Houston, George Howard, C. W. G. Hurt, Francis Inglis, Sir It. H. Eernal, it. Blair, James Bodkin, John James Bloadley, H. Broadwood, Henry Br co, C. 1.. C. Bruen, Colonel Bruges, W. H. L. Busrelic', William Campbell, Sir H. P. Campbell, Sir J. Chute, W. 1,. W. Clerk, Sir George Co:quhoun, J. C. Conolly, E. Corry, Right Hon. II Craig, %V G. Creswell, Creswell pouglas, Sir C. I),w:in;it, 11. H Dunt,ar, George Egerton, Lord F. Feilden, W. Jackson, Serjcant Jernyn, Lord Johnstone, slope Jones, John Kemble, Henry Uckhait, Lowther, J H. • Mackenzie, Thomas MacKenzie, W. F. Morpeth, Viscount Neeld, Joseph 86. Parker, J. Parker R. T. d Peel, lion. SIt~V Pluwptre. J• p • Rae, it W Richards, R Round, C. a rtus i thro ok, Cow. Rutherford, A. Shell, R. I , Smyth, Sir 1 -1 : 0, Smyt h e , 110 Stewart, JaiDeLo,l .- yy%Tl'ivlvv,aoeihsobtiour.:edintfibn:stecgr,e,h:::Joi:,,.°JujaJs:"..sroieh'rE.:nitaoll:'. $ m Sta a n u l i e e :y! H L L':: ) . l" •;,% THAMES TUNNEL. Yesterday the annual meeting of the Proprietors 7: unde,•taking was held a t th e L on d on T avern , for t he . P., to pose cf receiving a re p ort f rom t h e Di rec t o rs, reill eg , the progress of the woi ks, an d on ot h er a ff a irs, M r ' • j Amin Has e 3 in the chair. j „,' re' Tie CHAIRMAN, in o f en i ng t h e b us i ness o f the . a ,";;04 mar ked th.A from the first commencement of the a pll Tutu el, now fif ee.i years ago, he had attended the a i t he reee:ing of the Propr,etors. During that p,' r ',Litieh ° progress of the wo t k hat met w i t h grea t "",, t beer but now, he hop e d, t h ey m i g h t congra tulate he selves that tieir bills were ov e r. At Periedl4,7o state cf their affairs was most alarming ; iede l r itea' much so, that the Directory had become almost dlgV e tire It was, therefore, with pleasure that the Directors to • -0 Proprietors on the present occasion, a,' they CO ultt..ol:4 pre . ip state with cer‘ainty that the dangers that bad the completion of the work, mere surmounted , ee rg 7, :t r, the talents and extraordinary resources of the err t ot Mr. Brunel, in overcoming ti e many difficult ies c o. had to be encountered. The Tunnel might now rA i 40 1 sidercd all but compleed, and tie period as 11 Tfir when benefi c i a l r esu l ts m i g h t be anticipated to to e pri Th etors. -b ee r appeared statement of accounts was rea d, from 01 ° 1 . 1 , yel l appeared that th ere had been received is the 1,705/. from visitors to the Tunne'. 34rUw The CHAIRMAN, i n re pl y to quest i ons, sta ted that l osil persons h i d v i s i te d t h e wor k s ra the past year . " 1 . 0 0 there bad been 31,344 visitors. Last year 10, 0 °P t i o e visit •d the Tunnel ab ove t h ose who paid for adm ise o lit 1837. The Die t ors cou ld not gate part ieulaelfbttt period the Tun ne l wou ld b e opened for public to deo) -- they thought it wo u ld b e a b out Mi c h ae l mas ne x , .S re ci The Report and accounts were received and com e be printed. 141 A Lallot then took place for three Directors auditor. . 11.9 Tie CHAIRMA N remarked , that since the TOitn e d ter been in op erat i on, t h e Ministers of the country titre lit th e i r rea d y support. T he D u k e o f W"7 . 10P Sr Hubert P ee l, an d h er M a j esty ' s presen t adj'i s " shown the utmost desire to aid the undertaking. 41r M. BRUNEI, explained briefly the difficulties be locisig to contei,d with in sinking the Shaft on the Mi n ossl e side of the river, and remarked that there wa il OF". doubt of the completion of the work, which w?„, for ages. Notwi , lstandino , the influx of th e Tbse 3 : o tlo the works, not a fractu ' r e or the settlem . :AO work of a hair's breadth had taken place. T" had had to cont nd with fire as well as water in gre%s of th e w or k e , st ill, s i nce t h e resuropii' n fts eSP l f , operations, only on e man h a d l ost hi s lif e . r t et , i li r e#s the men had to he ca rr i e d ou t that. was gem.rated in ne prrgress of h e works; th s difficulties had b een overcome , an d i n t h e present Y e Tunnel could be completed. $1 It y,a3 stated during the proceedings that the t 0 trOv• - _, lay, Inc!udit - g the Governvent loan,pwa4 about...lEo'ov The th tnks o f th e meet i ng were given to t he and ne Court of Director..., and th e ass embly br°- THE ARMY. -- -'..e. - - A r illw , t ; e r Colonel Webber S m ith, comman di ng t h e R o yal P t h e re„ ' " Ireland, has p rt p ose d t h e f o ll ow i ng arrangemen t fo r -to c"" of the companies of t h e A r till ery i n t hi s cornrna" A 0 mence on the ht cf April next : Bar r . Alajor Whitty's company, from Island-bridge .y - a . 0 re:ieve Captain Ft eers s at the outposts. t Wier Major Ci. G. Palmer's company, from Charlemola 0 1 ,, Island-bridge, to be rep!aced by Captain Freers sm; t •Clu" Chalmers's corps at Island-bridge, and Captain Law* mel, to exchange quarters. e a of The Lieutenant-General Commanding has aPPr OI 10 ° foregoing. , c/ ilr., i 'S '1 he troops employ e d a t T u ll amore , i n a id o f the t i, e l•7ol in preserving the peace (luting the late election for „ r idge ' county, have returned t o th e i r f ormer quarters , Ne 9l- . Athlone. 1 -----=- ,_,' u s flis he • ATTEMPT To ESCAPE FROM T— . -e h boa l ot, PalsoN. —Sunday night Sir Willi rm Boyd, r , " ° bet'" confined in the Firet Prison for debt since N o vara o f Or o made a second attempt to escape from that Pla ce i d - 011 0 finement. lu both instances, however, 111 11 , er Oa 1 .0 were (f rtunately for the Warden) trustrateo. i . o fcl o- ' first occasion, Fiday last, having dressed himself t o to Pat, attire, with bonnet, veil, curie, &c., I , e [Pillag e w oe", through the cuter gate. The turnkey,' hower en coll' ° ; irg something wrong, followed him as far as he a pil. r o 'g cross, where, in order, it it presumed, to bre° „ i eat atmosphere, be raised Lit veil, when the turok el : o ol l° 4 g the opportunity, stepped forward with, " I l e g (0 4 0 don"—madam, he wou ld h ave sa id , b ut f o r his la dy e once rt. cognised in the p a rs o n o f t h e would-b e a 0 000 truant prisoner, whom he i ns t ant ly, i n a s polite . 0 OS ° F t as possible, handed into a cab, and re-conveye d ; ; atter e lc quarters. Sunday night he again made a fo'';', 6 1,111 0 to escape in the garb a a Jew, with false 1 4 7 0ti al be . w 1 i,kers, a long beard and o ig, and his f acc otog es . f it with sane ingredient which gave his cotatenance-,. be - 40 , a peculiarly Jewish cast. IL re again, hoge";:g.i. -,;if f;iled, and the adroit! . C , ll cf tie turnkeys vra ° oo kid n d prrent, as tl ey instantly recognised him on, 40 alt o appeal ante bt tween th e ga t es . H e wa s quic k, , 0 " be t f his ornarnunts, and conveyed to tl.e strong r° " o g 0 the, Warden is determined l e s h a ll :Ir win so 1° rem. ins L-ader his jurisdiction. ----- -I.ll' O. PLATE.—A. B. SAVORY and S ONS o ppogle 4 acturing Silversmiths, No. 14, Cornhill, Londocs.jo'f•-ild. Bank of England. The best wrought FIDDLE rrio , fecol SPOONS and FORKS. at 7s. 2d. per ounce. ',„ s y b e. ing are the we i g h ts recommended, but the articl es.- 4. i lighter or heavier at the same price per ounce J, L i ll i 12 Fit! d ' 20 30 e Pattern Silver T a bl e S poons . 0 i t...... i s 15 .3 : 02 ditto Dessert tilt," 3 . 7 i 9 It ditto 'table Folks 20 7 1. 1 * . *: a 1 i 12 ditto Dessert ditto lil 7 2.. 3 16 0 2 ditto -- Gravy Spoons lO 1 ... 6 a ° 1 ditto Soup Ladle. 4 ditto • Sauce ditto 10 ... ~• , 10 • 4 ditto t lilt Spoons (gilt strung) .......... . ..... ~ it i 1 ditto l'isli Slice .......................... ' 9 ... 1, I) . ° 12 ditto Tea Spoons JO • .... -• jalf 1 pair ditto Sugar Tongs ( strong ) ...........• 00 , N. I 3 A Price Current, stamped a s a NewsPaP e ° urell ° °,lbe drawings, and every information relative silver or Sheffield plate, may be had en applicatiealhela le° to the Y e . oli, er , sent into thecountry, tree of postage, in answer I ° G .'S!' WA 'rC IIP 'rr z° SECOND HAND SILVER A , variety of some dozens, may be selected fror ° o 'i o d il,i b ree :guineas each ; some rather more modern, T y e ° , tfb_ A s od Guineas each; anti an assortment quite equa l ° a:Ow"' • Guineas each. The whole have been carefully ex a printed warranty will he given. oreli.," T. COX SAI t)RY'S, ,I ace° Watchmak er , 47, C orn hill ( Seven d oors from u' r street ), London. c hange' MB. Second-hand Watches purchased i n ex ~ffS, Ol v fl .; SUPERIOR LONDON TABLE , ni fir, - ,.:30 withcary Carvers, H . a6ndd.leps,e per pair; p ; er Ta d b o l z e en K t ni D ve ar w rt i ;i;g a b o i7 ,o :3, oo 4 : handles, Bs. J. per dozen , Dessert, 6e. 14 ' s ow:of per Fair ; Globe-shape Tea-urns, 4 quarts, 2 7 5h 4; th• ° 395. ; Papier Macke Tea-t ra y s , g othic shapes " every article ° fu rollb. full sizes. Catalogues, contai n i ng th e p r i ce of - d ., Wer t ' ing ironmongery and cutlery, gra W ti ells-strea s. RIPPON and BURTON, for Established 1820. _---- . On the 27th ult., the IfifielltoTiff snewlett, Esq., •ilsr-WI-Lgi. the-hill, of a daughter. Atu gt er. On the 28th ult , at . Actoa Mrs. J. Barwise, (1, 11 ;Ju l " On the 28th nit., at Lav:nder-hill, Mrs. J. 1 - ° l. n oll cf a son. 'Ow h On the Ist inst. , at Nor.hwich- terrace, St. John t e o l ri cly of A. I'. de Macedo, Esq., of a daughter- h, 0/3 0' the Ist inst., at North Brixton,•s. W. F ait. of M.4IIRIED. -4, EA; At Adaire, count Limerick,De Courc • O'Gr 6-, ' ofv - Lieu rick, to ' Elizallth,utr of the late tirnore House, Cerk. JO DIED. ad M r ' On the 27th ult., at Harley-place, -- 1 c Bow -Po ' 3 P '!e , Or Breath, aged 69. V ilii°° On the 27th nit., Mary Ann, the of Mr. 1 ' wife v Pt , of the Brixton-road. Gurney, On ti e 27th ult., Ja.-.e, relict of the late J. •-• of Lakenham.grove, near Norwich, aged 85. ~,,, rawlY ll o f O'Driscol, On the 27th ult., in Leadenhall-street, Dies . Ro berto! On the 28th ult., Sarah, the wife of Mr. D• 1 ., Ye rk-plAce, Knnington. e l ? of P ° On the 2Sth e ult., Eliza, the wife of M r. E. 11°w set-terrace, Clapham-road, ;wed 9 8. --- -I jl4l° London: Printed anti Published by MURDO 12 5 ' No. 112, Strand, at The Sun Office , No. 1 , 1 51. the county of Middlesex.—WednesAry, M arch - Mc 14 t1 1 k‘rtt d _Y