The Sun. — London, England, 1845-04-18 00:00:00

, - eoniolation. It was not a question whether Maynooth was to have twenty or thirty thousand pounds a year, for no matter how it bad been disguised by the Government, the real principle in the measure was the endowment of the Roman Catholic religion in Ireland. He could not support the motion of the Honourable Member for Sheffield, because he d'd not understand the idea of plundering one Church for the support of another, but he aid understand that if they adopted this measure it would become imperative on them to endow a second State religion in Ireland. Disguise it as the Government might, that was the principle. Let them adopt the plan which prevailed io Scotland if they liked; but to suppose that the people of Ireland would submit to have two State religions in the country waa quite absurd. Mr. RICE said that many of his constituents had opinions very strongly opposed to this measure, but he would state, in as few words as possible, why he should not act in accordance with those opinions, but should give his support cordially and sincerely to the measure. He did not think that the question before them was whether they should endow the Roman Ca tholic priesthood, but whether the grant should be effectual in giving education to the priesthood of Ireland or not ? He could understand the observations of those Gentlemen who had constantly voted consistently against the grant, but he did not understand why they voted against the increased grant, who had given their support to the grant on former oc casions. The Honourable Gentleman who had just sat down touched two questions ; first, as to the question of compacts, he did not understand whether there was a compact or not. But he knew that statesmen who had many years' experience re commended the increase of the grant as an act of justice. He also said that there was a new principle in the increase of this grant ; but he was of the opinion of the Hon. Secretary at War, who said that there was no new principle involved in the increase. Some also objected oa religious and conscientious grounds, but he was not going to yield to any in attachment to the religion which he believed to be true ; he would respect their opinions and conscientious objections, but he could not disregard the feelings and religious opinions of his fellow sub jects and fellow-Christians in Ireland.--( Hear, hear.) Others objected to the measure, on the ground; that it would tend to increase the number of Roman Catholics, and to decrease the number of Protestants in Ireland. He denied that the Bill would produce such an effect, for by making them more en lightened men they would make them more enlightened Ch istians, and it could not be contended for one moment that by making them more enlightened they were rendering them less susceptible of becoming converts to the truth. Nothing could be more injurious to the Protestant Church in Ireland, than the existence of grievances on the Roman Catholic side. Nothing could be more prejudi cial to the Protestant religion in that country, than the suppo sition, on the part of the Catholics, that they were treated with injustice. If they wanted to see the grateful feeling with which the Irish people received the measure, they had only to look to the Irish representatives. who in the House expressed their gratitude for the Bill. Looking upon them as the repre sentatives of the Irish feeling on the question, they found that feeling better and more extensive than their most sanguine expectations led them to hope for. Were they prepared to take upon themselves the responsibility of refusing a measure which had been so proposed and so received—were they prepared with a refusal which would have the effect of disuniting the United Empire ? He was not so prepared, and he would give his vote in favour of the second reading of the Bill, which his con science and his judgment told him was the right course. Mr. PLUMPTRE said that he confessed that he approached the consideration of this subject with considerable pain and anxiety. He was in the habit of hearing remarks directed against him by the Hon. Member for Kent, which were not at all of a pleasant description, and which may have been in tended to give great discouragement to him in the defence which he was about to make of Protestant principles. lir-- confessed that though they were unpleasant, they had not had the effect of crushing his feeling, and the desire which he en tertained, of maintaining the course which he intended to pursue on this question. The Hon. Member for Lambeth said that from the petitions which had come before the House it appeared that this question was considered by the people of England as one of vital importance ; he agreed with the Hon. Gentleman that was the view taken by the people. If it were not a subject in which religion was a part it was a matter to him of insignifieance, whether they gave a certain sum of money to a certain college in Ireland or not, but he felt that it was a mast important question when he saw how closely connected with this Bill were the interests of the Protestant Established Church. He had heard of a meeting which had lately been held in this great city, convened by the first magistrate of the city, who presided upon the occasion, and that meeting was attended by all the great merchants and bankers, and other traders of this great city. At that meeting resolutions were adopted which were, to a certain extent, of a religious character, and advo cated religious separation.—(Cries of " No, no.") He had heard an Hon. Member express dissent, but he should say that at every meeting held upon this question, religion was the ques tion and the only one, and he believed he might say that reli gion in this case had taken away the four trumps. Then, there had been a meetint , held in one of the city theatres, at which epee hes were made against this measure ; and what were the leading features of that discussion ? Were politics introduced there ? No ; nothing but a religious aspect alone charaterised the proceedings, and formed the leading features of the discus sion. Amidst some of the petitions presented against this measure were two which had been ordered to be printed in extenso, and which, therefore, became Parliamentary papers; and he would ask were not those petitions well worthy the con sideration of that House? He ( Mr. Plumptre) had had the pleasure of presenting hundreds of petitions to the House upon various occasions ; hut, amongst them all, not one was there that more deeply affected a religious question than the present. —( Cries of " Hear, hear.") He did not understand why, if the present Government were determined upon carrying this measure, that a different course should be adopted towards Ireland than was pursued in other countries where the Raman Catholic religion was endowed.—( Hear, hear.) In Rueia, Austria, Spain, and other countries, there was a wholesome control exercised over the Catholic institutions ; and, therefore, he would ask, if the Roman Catholic religion were to be endowed in Ireland by the Government, why the Coeernment should not have some control over it ? The lion. Member then read some passages from a pamphlet en titled " Maynoeth, the Crown of the Country," which he con tended supported his arguments ; but the low tone in which he read the extracts, as well as that in which he spoke, rendered it almost impossible to catch the connexion of his sentences. He continued by saying that if evils did arise from such a state of thugs a, he believed would follow this grant, let the Go vernment remember that they had been warned, and made ac quainted with the difficulty in which they had been placed. Nothing could he further from his intention than to give pain to his Roman Catholic neighbours by any express liens he should make use of ; but he felt he Lad a duty to perform—that duty he would NM no matter how painful to him. Ho had heard the Noble Lord declare, that he did not believe that the Roman Catholic reli gion was the religion of Anti-Christ ; but he (Mr. Plumptre) should say, he regretted that he could not agree with the Noble Lord. He had heard a great deal from the Hon. Mem ber for Canterbury; but he (Mr. Plumptre) begged to tell that Hon. Member that he did not want to take advice of enuesel from him. The Hon. Member concluded by declaring his determination to oppose the motion. Mr. TRELAWNY said he wou'd support the measure of the Government ; but, at the same time, he should say, he was averse to the endowment of any Church Establishment ; awl he contended that the further the Government went in making' such endowments, the deeper they became Involved in the difficulty. But as an endowment was to be made, he would contend for it, that in this instance much that was useful and beneficial would follow. There was another argument, that this would be an induce ment to agitation, and that other Dissenters would demand endowment. But he thought there could be no parallel be tween the ease of the Roman Catholics and the Dissenters of England. The priests of the Irish Catholics had been perse cuted to death—a price had been put by statute upon their heads. This was a persecution to which the English Dis een.Pers had never been subjected. And he further agreed with those who argued that if the union had never taken place the Roman Catholics of Ireland would before this have ob tained more than the Government now proposed to give them. From all considerations of justice and expediency he would support this measure—no matter what unpopularity it might involve. He was glad that the Right Hon. Baronet who brought it forward did not shrink from his purpose in consequence of the taunts which had been cast upon him. The Honourable Member for Shrewsbury had attacked the Right Honourable Baronet for his inconsistency, but the Right Hon. Baronet was very consistent in the way in which he treated the past adulation and present abuse of the Hon. Member.—( Hear, hear.) The argument that the mea sure ought to be rejected on account of the inconsistency of its proposer, was worthy only of the Member for Shrewsbury and Fielding's philosopher, Square.—( Hear.) For his own part, he gave the measure his hearty support.—( Hear. ) Lord COURTENA Y had weighed well all the arguments of those who opposed the measure. They could not oppose it on principle, so long as they allowed a grant of a smaller amount. Looking to the physical destitution, and the spiritual wants of the people of Ireland, he would ask would that House do its day if it did not, to the best of its power, promote the educa tion of the priesthood. He thought it was a duty of the Impe rial Parliament to effect that object. But that was not his only reason for supporting the measure, but he thought also that it would have the effect of binding the connexion between the two .countries, and promoting the happiness of both.—( Hear. ) Mr. WYKEHAM MARTIN was in the same predicament as the Hon. Member opposite, who had been required by his constituents either to vote against this measure or to resign his seat. But he thought the measure of so much importance to the good of the United Kingdom, that he felt it his duty to support her Majesty's Government. He thought those who supported the regiwn donuni to the Presbyterians could not, upon principle, oppose a similar support to the more numerous and mire impoverished Roman Catholics. He did not see why they should ask the Roman Catholics to contribute to the astpport of the Protestant Church, if they were not, en the other hand, willing to give something to maintain the College of Maynooth. It was painful for him to be obliged to differ from those who sent him the memorial, for many of whom he entertained great respect, but he felt that the step he was taking was the correct one, and he was deeply convinced that he was only acting according to his duty in supporting the pre sent measure.—( Hear.) Me. H. M. TUI FE would support the measure of the Goaernruent, as an Irish Member, and he begged to remind those Hen. Gentlemen who spoke of the Pro testants of I re l an d , that there were great number anumber of Irish Pro testants who were i n tavour of the measure.—( Hear, hear.) He considered , that the measure of the Government would not only be an advantage to Ireland, but to the empire at large. He regretted the acrimonious feelings w hi c h had been exhibited during the accused the Government, debate, and those who thecriesetnalked of being deceived, abould remember thatßightt I ::) o n n h our w ab it l h e Baronet gave ample notice of regard to this measure—( Hear, hear intention e had not done so with regard to the tariff and other inCeasi:ires upon which reat deal had so many in that House were interested, been said of the conduct of the Roman Catholic it was only last Sunday week that he heard tese c e je l r e g r congregation, y g m y, an bu o t f Christchurch, St. Jo'in's-wood, request his both gentlemen and ladies, to come down to the after the service to sign petitions against the MaynoosttrlaY-r°anuat. When that conduct was pursued by a Protestant clergymangr the Established Church, he did not think that they oigit to f be so bitter against the Catholic clergy of Ireland for allowing the usst.tf their chapels for political purposes, especially as here they had k'iteter-hall and such places to hold their meetings in. He thought that the Roman Catholics would feel deeply grate ful to the Right Lion. Baronet for this measure.—( Hear. ) .Jr. CAREW (Cornwall) expressed his intention of voting for the present measure, though he had presented petitions against the grant. He agreed with the Hon. Member for Kent, that the question had taken a religious complexion though he deeply regretted it. He thought they awed some thing to the people of Ireland ; and they should not forget the trickery by which the Union was brought about against the consent of the majority of the Irish people. He did not sympathise with those who thought the present measure would destroy the Established Church in Ireland. He could not see how the affording of increased education to the educators of the people of Ireland could have that effect. Lord LE YESOti regretted the tone of bitterness used by the Hon. and Gallant Member for Lincoln. He did not think he was called upon to enter into the consideration of theq ques tion, how far the Government de served the censure be so liberally bestowed by those who sat behind t he m ? It mast evident to every one that the Go v e rnment had be g un to re g ret the line of policy which they pursued when in Opposition. He wished to drop that subject. He felt anxious to support a measure, which Ile really believed to be good in itself; and which he thought good, because unaccompanied by any inj udicious and harsh re. strietions, and because, from what he had seen of the state of the country, and from what he could hear from the speeche ' made in that House, he believed no other party in the king dom could carry such a measure, except those now in power.—( Hear, hear.) Allusion had been made to the length of the debate. He thought it a matter of regret that the debate was so lengthened, because a favourable oppor tunity was afforded to excite what he believed to be the con scientious, bu, at the same time misguided feelings of a large portion of the British public. He regretted that clergymen had on such oecasions considered it to be their duty to raise such feelings in the minds of their flocks—feelings of hostility and ill-will towards their fellow subjects and fellow Christians. -(Hear, hear.) But o n th e o th er h an d t h o d e b ate w hi c h taken place in that House must go far to assnage those feelings. He thought that when the public read speeches, such as that of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Devonport this evening—speeches delivered night after night since the debate began, it would go far to create a favourable impression of the Government policy. When they read the report of the speech of his Noble Friend for Dorsetshire—a speech admirable for its tone and temper towards the people of Ireland, and a speech which, while opposed to the measure, appeared to him to state in the closest manner the anomalous state of the religious instruction of the Irish people at this moment, and which demonstrated, in the most logical manner, that the step to which the Government had come was the most equitable basis for the religious instruction of that portion of the people. He thought that when the English public saw that some of the advocates against the measure were obliged to have recourse to the poverty of the Irish church—when they saw advocates, not the least able, refuse to urge an argument which had been urged on the House on every previous measure, when a benefit was about to be conferred on the Irish people, namely, that if the Government persevered in such a course, England would lose its station among the nations of the earth. When the public compared the speeches made upon both sides, he thought they would not long continue in the present state of excited feeling. In his opinion the chief boast of Eng lishmen was not their commercial prosperity, not the power of the country in war, but the acknowledged superiority in the civil liberty of the subject. And were they to be told that a step in the direction of toleration would degrade Eng land among the nations of the earth ? The Noble Lord the Member for Lynn, in a speech which he thought good in itself, but better as an evidence in the present generation of a more kindly sympathy felt by the Irish Protestants towards their Catholic fellow-subjects. That Noble Lord, who had supposed the case of a stranger visiting that House, might have carried his supposition a little further—that a stranger had actually visited that house—a great statesman— whose high intellect was known throughout Europe, who, though a Protestant, had been much among Roman Catholics, a man eminent for high reputation and great learning, and phi lanthropy, and who would consider religious denominations of all sorts on the same comprehensive and philanthropic basis a man deeply studied in the principles of the British Constitution, and if he had supposed such a strareer watching the debates, would that Noble Lord nest have blushed for shame to find the Imperial Legislature of this kingdom disputing about a miserable pittance for the religious instruc tion of a portion of their fellow-subjects.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) [The Noble Lord alluded to the Duke de Brcgl'e who, on a former evening, was present during this debate.] For his (Lord Levison's) part he cordially approved of the measure, and would not weary the House by bringing further arguments in favour of it. He was sorry for having trespassed so long on the attention of the House, and thanked them for the patience with which they had listened to him. Mr. R. SPOONER said that if he had consulted his own private feelings he would have given a silent vote, but as the representative of a large community that felt deeply on the question, he considered it to be his bounden duty to state, as shortly as he could, the reasons which reluctantly obliged him to oppose the Government. He did not treat this question with any feelings of bigotry, neither did he mean to treat it as a mere money question. He treated it as a question of a reli gious principle to which he would adhere as long as he held a seat in that House. He agreed with the Right Honourable and Learned Gentleman who had spoken on a previous night, in the view which he had taken upon this subject. He divided the opponents of the Bill into three heads. The first resisted it because of the increased amount. Now, he thought those who could vote for the small sum could vote for the larger. But there was certainly this broad distinction between the two grants, that whereas the one was only annual and under the control of Parliament. this was perpetual, and removed from that control. The Chan cellor of the Exchequer had added that Parliament endowed the Roman Catholic Church on a former occasion. He (Mr. Spooner) denied that this was the case, and he made this dis tinction, that whereas the one Bill merely enabled Roman Catholics to endow with their own money, this Bill would endow a Roman Catholic establishment with State money. The second class of objections he could perfectly understand. They went upon the voluntary principle, but he could not see how any Honourable Member who entertained such views could vote for the second reading of the Bill.—( Hear, hear. ) To the third class of objections he declared himself zealously, firmly, and conscientiously attached.—( Hear, hear.) He had a strong religious feeling, on this matter, and never would con sent to endow the Church which, he really believed, taught doctrines dangerous, unsound, and unscriptural. Upon this subject he must open his mind freely, and declare that he never, never would consent to the endowment of a Church which, in his opinion, was dangerous to those to whom its dangerous doctrines were taught doctrines so de lusive, and a Church which, at the hour of death, instead of administering to its followers the comforts of religion led them to trust to an awful delusion.—( Loud cries of " Oh," from the Opposition.) The Right Hon. Gentleman alluded to mistakes in translations, but this step was a delibe rate sanction of error, not an accidental encouragement of mistakes in translations ; and they were voting a sum of money for the purpose of teaching doctrines which they conscientiously denied, and believed to be full of error, and to which he trusted the House would never eonsent. Looking at the question as a political one, and viewing it on the grounds advanced by his Right Hon. Friend at the head of the Government, he could not see its utility, although he firmly believed the Right Hon. Gentleman and the Government were actuated by the best motives, for what else but a high sense of duty, and a desire to confer a benefit on the State, could have induced tisem to make such sacrifices ? He, therefore, gave his Right Hon. Friend full credit for sincerity and honest motives, and he trusted the same credit for sincerity and honesty would be given to himself. Ile would give an extract from a speech of a de parted Right Hon. Gentleman, one which had been quoted by his Right Hon. Friend, not, however, very fairly quoted, for the flight Hon. Gentleman had left out a most material part. He could not mention the name of that departed Right Hon. Gentleman without regretting that some younger Members of that House had spoken of him so slightingly.—( Hear, hear. ) He (Mr. Spooner) had known him, perhaps not so intimately as many Hon. Members of that House, but he was sure that all who heard him would concur with him in this, that if a conscientious discharge of leis duty as Prime Minister—if a life devoted to his country—a man who met with his death at the very door of this House in the execution of his office—if such chime as these did not call for generous remembrance—it' a conscientious discharge of all social public and private obli. gations, which recommended him to the veneration of all who knew him—if all those claims did not entitle his memory to respect, he feared that few public men could hope to receive it.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. Percival said that "he disclaimed the odious principle of intolerance ; but he observed, at the same time, that the memorial of Roman Catholics, which was the foundation of Maynooth, claimed no pecuniary relief. The Roman Catholics promised to defray all expenses themselves, and though Government and Parliament had given 8,0.01. in aid of the object—(" Mind," said the Hon. Gentleman, " Mr. Percival did not use the word perpetual")—that was no rea son that the country should be subjected to constant and in creasing demands fur a purpose for which no precedent existed in aray age or country that of educating a priest hood differing widely from the Established Church."—( Hear.) He conceived that they had, on the present occasion, begun at the wrong end. They proposed to educate the priests, and they said that the educated priests would enlighten the people. If he really believed that they would be really enlightened, he confessed that much of the sting would be taken away, though that would not justify him in voting for the present moasure. But they would be disappointed in this expectation. If they educated the priests they would require to pay them. If they did not pay them they would be obliged, as before, to go among the ignorant and the poor, who had not the means of paying them. He would ask what, under these circum stances, must he the nature of the machinery which the Roman Catholic priests must use—what but exacting from the super stitious ignorance of the peasantry what they would not other wise get from them, spontaneous charity. The House might depend on it that the people would not be enlightened, for ig norance wasthe parent of superstition, and superstition was their very means of support. They had not been able to draw from the Right Hen. Gentleman any declaration as to whether this was to he a final measure, or whether they had in contem plation some future measures of a similar character,—( Hear, hear.) He had well observed whether the Right Honourable Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer would reply to the speech of the Noble Lord, the Member for Dorset, but the Right Hon. Gentleman answered only satisfactorily upon one point and that was, nothing should induce them to touch the funds of the Established Church, but not one word did he say relative to the payment of the priesthood. He ( Mr. Spooner) thought that this would furnish a very bad precedent, for the Government might come down et an after period to that House, and using the same arguments as in the case of Maynooth (for they had already broken down the prin ciple), say that they would pay the priests for them to carry out the objects which they had in view when they intro duced the first measure. The very facts of the case enabled every Member in that House to draw that conclusion. f he Ministry seemed to be acting up sn the principle of giving the se boons by instalments, anti he thought that the people of Eng land had a right to complain that they were likely to go further and further until the Roman Catholic Church should be regularly endowed. Let them go to every populous town in England, justly stated his Hon. Friend the Member for Warwickshir e h a d stated the other night, let them go to that county or to his (Mr. Spooner's) part of the country, or in the neighbouring counties, and there they would find schools, colleges, and seminaries for the very purpose of creating congregations by a display of pageantry, by a lavish expenditure, and by the at. tractive character of the services they placed before the people. If they had no other objects than t , gain congregations. why not commence where the congregations really were ? Why not themselves establish schools and colleges and seminaries in Ire land ? Why come to England and lavish their money in search of' congregations? Ignorance was the grand work on which they reared their superstructure. He would now allude to another part of the subject; but he would merely allude to it in a few words, and he would quote on this subject the illustrious individual to whom he had already referred. The Hon. Member then quoted whieh Hansard t e d the a f o f3r making l . t Percivalhe grant in t l :0 8, to h f e ro d ni epreca May nooth a perpetual one. He now came to aseutbijing, and which subject which ich had caused him great surprise on the previous ev me the ri N t i ed ein t b h e e r e f a e r r n N es e t w a a tt r e k o , tn a io fter of st t a h t e i n i g io t u h s a e t . in The the Noble L or d, remarkable work of Dr. Christopher Wordsworth, it was stated—" that whereas by all other countries, whether Protestant or Roman Catholic, in which the Roman Catholic religion was acknowledged, and sanctioned, and supported by the State, every precaution was taken, and every safe guard was devised, to secure the temporal supremacy of the monarch against the Roman power—in these realms alone no such nation e ther r autions were taken, and that here alone was `free e with Rome.' The inglish nation," it continued, " Pays for Maynooth, and the Pope governs it ; s . hal . l not , the priest takes aneavOwe to o bishop swears to maintain rights and royalties of St. exer cise his sacred functions till Rome. Priests, bishops, e r archbishops, the ex p e a l is to them that we make over of Rome, rather than the Ps ;uls' support, or the Pope • . to rule it 7 " 1 he of Peter;behetnhcee Papacy, the Roman Pontiff; the the archbishop may not exer and he has received the pallium of a ra re a a rA l a l g t e h m e e v r a a ss o a f ls th o e f Queen Victoria, and yet it establishments for the education of He ehe Roman Catholic ' t ' re T e h ; osbeewt ewrebattbe,iparsemtbisees. conclusion tb at i which the p to rie b st e s. had admitted them Rev. Gentleman and those who agreed w —to have nothing whatever to say to that enormous (xi s:rived ? which they themselves admitted to be so greatly influential formidable. It was a case, in his opinion, for a course of land cuyi'eanl to preserve the con duct totally different. He would say to these gentlemen" Admit frankly and freely into your union and intercourse that power which you acknowledge to be so great and exten sive. Accredit a Minister to the Vatican —receive a Nuncio at St. James's—and see whether you cannot thus do what you never can effect if you continue by the most miserable and childish weakness to ignore the existence of a monarchy which was great before England was a kingdom, and to which is yet permitted the exercise of such tremendous power over every portion of your cast dominions." Such was the statement ' of the Noble Lord. Yes, the Pope arcs strong, and they in England must submit to him. He was followed in the same argument by the Hon. Member for Canter bury. The whole of his speech in substance was, " do that which absolutely con tradicts the Coronatien oath ; that which i- subversive of the constitution of the country ; that which, if adopted by her Majesty's Ministers, woole render them liable to impeach ment." He would tell the Right Hon. G,itlernen below him that the country expected from the Government an entire and unequivocal renunciation of the doctrines propounded by the Noble Lord and the Hon. Gentleman.--( Hear, hear.) He thanked the House for the attention with which they had aid him in the expression of his honest opinions. Sir J. GRAHAM said—Sir, the Right Hon, Member for Devonport has expressed a wish that the debate upon this queetion should not pass without some declaration on the part of my Right Hon. Friend at the head of the Government or of myself, as to what the ultimate intentions of the Government may be on this subject.—( Hear, hear.) It has been complained of, on the other hand, that this debate has been too much prolonged. (Ironiaal cheers. ) Sir, I do not think so. I think that neither the Government nor the country has reason to regret the prolonging of the de bate.—(Hear, hear.) Because, Sir, I feel that in this moment of excitement—in any moment of the greatest excitement—an appeal to the feelings and understanding of the people of this country never fails to produce the best results--( Hear, hear) — and, I believe, that the appeal to their reason in the very matter of this debate has already produced the best results, and that the feeling which we are, not beginning, but carrying out— (Cheers)—is triumphant —( Cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman the Member for Renfrew has stated that if we had foreseen the storm which we were raising, we would not have pursued our present course. But I beg to assure the Hon. Gentleman and the House, that this proposition has been deliberately, earnestly, and with forethought of all consequences introduced to the consideration of the House by my Right Hon. Friend and his colleagues. Sir, I deplore, as much as the Hon. Member fur Birmingham can deplore, the division which this qu, stion creates upon this side of the House. Sir, it is deeply painful to me that there should be any division—it is deeply painful to me that we should lose ( I hope the loss will not be permanent) that we should lose for a time the support of those gen tlemen who, upon this side of the House, have declared them selves adverse to this proposition.—( Hear, hear. ) Whilst I deeply deplore the loss of their support upon this occasion, when we propose to the House a measure of great importance, and one which upon our responsibility we could not fail to propose, and we must not hesitate to persevere in. I think it is our duty to redress any real wrongs of which Ireland ha' to compain.—(Cheers. ) And I do not hesitate to say, that this measure is a commencement of a better state of things.—( Great cheering.) I must say still further, that I act confident, that if we did not lay the foundation of that better policy by this measure, any other would give way.— ( Cheers.) But what are the arguments on the other side ? My Right Hon. Friend, the Member for the University of Oxford, argues that the effect of the measure will be to damage the Protestant Establishment in these realms— whilst the Hon. Gentleman, the actual if not the virtual re presentative of the University of Durham, opposed the measure because it was calculated to perpetuate that Establishment. Yet, Sir, I have heard no speech so conclusive in favour of the measure as that of the Hon. Member for Durham, who spoke so fervently against all establishments and all endow ments —(Cheers.) But the Hon. Member at the same time admitted that if it were not fur his opposition to establishments of every kind, he would support the measure for its conciliatory tendency.—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Member for Edin burgh charges me with inconsistency as a Member of the Go vernment, in supporting this measure.--( Hear, hear.) He says that the policy which we have hitherto pursued has been to uphold the Protestant ascendancy in Ireland.—( Cheers. ) Now, Sir, observe what is the answer of the Government to that aceusation.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") '[he various accusations against us repel each other, and many of them refute themselves.—(Loud cheers.) Some Gentlemen have told us that we were conferring greater strength and permanence on the Established Church. The Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin says that the clergy are reduced to the most grievous state, by the measures of those now in opposition to the Government. Well, what was the first mea sure which he mentioned, as an instance of our inconsistency? Why, the Church Temporalities Bill. But that was the mea sure of my Noble Friend the Secretary for the Colonies. ( Cheers.) The next was the Tithe Composition Act. That also was introduced by my Noble Friend the Secretary for the Colonies. The measure was adopted by the Government of Lord Melbourne, in 1834 ; and Lord Stanley and myself, being in Opposition, gave it our most strenuous and decided support.—(Cheers.) Of what other measure does the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin complain ? Why, of the national system of education. That also was the work of my Noble Friend the Secretary for the Colonies.—( Cheers. ) Another Hon. Member complained that in all offices stransers were preferred by the present Government. Is that the fact ? —(Hear, hear.) When vacancies occurred upon the bench, we preferred to the bench Pennefather and Blackburn, and Lefroy and Jackson.—( Cheers.) But these are not the accu sations against which I think it most difficult to defend the Government. But allow me to tell the Hon. and Learned Re corder for Dublin, that if he thinks the day when Protestant ascendancy could be maintained in Ireland is not yet passed, he is mistaken. —( Great cheering.) The day is passed— ( Renewsd cheering)—and I will not be one to attempt to go vern Ireland upon his principles.—( Very great cheering. ) Now, Sir, I think that so far as my consistency is concerned, I have stated enough to show that uniformly, whether in Opposition or in the Government, I have endeavoured to act steadily up to the principles as enunciated by us in the Temporalities Act. Again, in the scheme of national education, and practically in principle, by the Tithe Commutation Acts. With respect to the Hon. Gentle men opposite, I entertain but little difference with them, for I have never expressed an opinion as an individual that I was at all opposed to the endowment of the Roman Catholic clergy of Ireland. That point was raised repeatedly. 1 think it was raised when I was in Opposition ; and I am Suite sure it was raised two or three years ago ; and in the course of the dis cussion the Hon. Member for Kilkenny said with respect to the endowment of the College of Maynooth. it was an arrange ment to which he would not give his consent. I stated then that it was my belief, whatever might have been the circum stances which at any former period would have rendered such a course impracticable, and although there existed an unwilling ness on the part of the Irish clergy and the British public to maintain such an institution, yet my own private feelings and judgment would not then prevent me from mak ing such an endowment. A slight differ nee, however, has always existed between me and the Noble Lord opposite, namely, with respect to the propriety of withdrawin g the funds for endowing such an insti town from the pro er y of the Protestant Church Establishment in Ir, land. Upon that point I have a decided opinion, and I have endeavoured to aehere to it uniformly, and I still adhere to it, because I have an insuperable objection to such an arrangemer.t. I repeat, I have never swerved from that opinion—l have ever kept to it, and certainly I will not give it up now. Now, Sir, the lion. Gentleman the Member for Belfast, in common with many other lion. Gentlemer who have addressed the House in the course of this debate, has referred to a particular expres -ion I used in my place in Parliament—not when in Opposition, but since I have assumed office. It was used by me in 1842, during the discussion on the Arms' Bill. Now I will beg the House to remember the circumstances of that Act. I have stated that some time before a discussion arose relative to this institution, in the course of which it was announced to the House that it was the intention of the Government to fulfil a pledge which they had given in Opposition, to bring forward a measure for the registration of county voters in Ireland, and for enlarging the elective franchise in that country. It had also been announced on the part of the Government, that they intended to take an early opportunity to bring in a Bill relative to the regulation of the municipal franchise in Ireland. That measure was conceived in a spirit which we had hoped and believed would have been most satisfactory. Well, we redeemed all our pledges, given while we were in Opposition, with respect to taking precautions against the con tinuance of perjury which might follow a defective registra tion. We took certain precautions which had the effect of preventing a great amount of perjury in Ireland. We brought in those measures which brought the county franchise upon a defined and settled principle ; and in the year in which they were introduced, and almost co-existent with these propositions, measures were brought forward of a very different character, certainly, on the part of the Government. It became their duty to revive the Arms' Act, and certainly upon that occasion I (lid make use of the expression which has been attributed to me, but really I do net think it altogether fair that I should be taunted now with having used it, seeing that it was suffi ciently explained in this House soon after it esaaped my lips. The expression I used was " that concession towards Ireland had already reached its utmost limits." I have said that that expression was explained. I will do more. I admit that ex pression, and I regret having used it.—(Loud Opposition cheers.) I say more, that where the feelings and interests of a nation are concerned an intemperate or ungarded expression on the part of a Minister is a serious offence. I say I am sorry for having used it. I deeply regret it, and I can only say that upon my conscience, and from the bottom of my heart, my at tachment to Ireland was better than my word.—( Loud cheers. ) Now, Sir, I am bound to say, that after I had used this ex pression the public mind of Ireland became very much ex cited, and the measures to which I have adverted, after they had received the Legislative sanction, and notwithstanding they were introduced for the relief and at the wish of the people of Ireland, were all but rejected. The Government last year acting upon a suggestion which had been thrown out by an Honourable Member who sits on the opposite of the House—l think it was the Noble Lord—the Member for Tiverton, brought in a measure which, without proposing on the part of the State a direct endowment of the Roman Catholic clergy, enacted something which was less ob jectionable in principle. It was introduced by the willing con sent and co-operation of the wealthy landlords of Ireland, and enabled them to leave property to the Roman Catholic clergy which would progress and gradually reach endowments— ( Hear, hear.) I say her Majesty's Government directed their attention to that subject, and we introduced the question in'o this House after great deliberation. 'the measure certainly produced an effect which far exceeded our expectations, and which satisfied us. It was a measure which would be followed by, and must be productive of, the greatest possible good. Individually a portion of the laoman Catholic clergy had been opposed to that measure, and they resisted it for a time with great force and strength. On the other hand, it was supported by others of the clergy boldly arid firmly, and they had co-operated with the Government in effecting and carrying out that useful measure. The hierarchy of Ireland were divided in o e inion with respect to that measure, but the majority of them have since aided the Government in carrying the measure into op ration. Previous to the Bill which is now under the consideration of the House being contemplated, the Roman Catholic archbishops and bishops of Ireland sought fur an in crease of this grant, and the question then, for the first time, presented itself to us. We felt ourselves that there was no thing wrong in principle—that there was nothing inconsistent with our duty to our Protestant Sovereign, or to the Pro testant Church in Ireland—to increase the grant, because it was not like a direct endowment. —( Hear, hear.) No ! we were certainly not prepared to endow the Roman Catholic clergy directly; but here is a particular grant which the Roman Catholic hierarchy say, "If you will extend we will accept," and seeing that there was no:objection to it on principle, we thought it our duty to concede it. We give it and the Roman Catholic clergy gratefully accept it. We contend that in principle it is not only justifiable, but it is ex pedient, and hence the origin of the measure we are now dis cussing. Now, Sir, my Honourable Friend the Member Gtr Dublin has commented on the speech made by my Right Honourable Friend the Member for Edinburgh , who has said that the money question of this grant was unimportant, but my Hon. Friend the Member for Bir mingham considers it of great importance. Now, Sir, I must say that the argument of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Mem ber for Edinburgh on this point was put possibly with more than his usual force; and it appeared to me to be perfectly triumphant. In the question which we are now discussing, there is though not in the letter at least in the spirit something more important than the additional sum of money. But, as '1 said before, that part of the question has been triumphantly disposed of.--( Hear.) Now, with respect to the religious part of the question. 1 admit that, in the year 178.5, when eively t teaching Maynooth was fi rst f oun d e d — fi rst recogn i se d by a Parliamen tary v o t e , t h e religious question was then ra i se d , w h e th er a Protesta n t S tate should establish and endow a sem i nar y f o r chinwgitthhethßeoir egi m r an li Ca o t u h s d olic i that to b e a grave reli • question, and I believe it was so e considered at ths c p i r p i l e i s n t e h time, or Lord od i o n Kingsley would not have been religious c n short, ceivea xclus all interfering sent over to Ireland in the room of Lord Fitzwilliam, who had held out, in his speeches as Lord-Lieutenant, expectations to the Irish people of larger concessions than the Government was prepared to give. Be it observed that, two years pre viously, the right of voting had been given to the Reman Ca tholics of Ireland, who had a great numerical superiority over them Protestant fellow-citizens. But to return to the cir cumstances of 179:5. Lord Kingsley was sent to Ireland. and although he Ras not authorised to mike promises of future civet qualification to the Roman Catholics of that country, yet hi' was distinctly instructed to propose to the Government of the country 'further concessions to his Ma jesty's Catholicoßfomcaonmmons,and Mr. Farrell subjects. Iho w.l Alter asChancellor consulting of Lord Chancellor Clarke, Mr. Foster , who was then Speaker of the xchequer, Lord Kingsley sent to the Home Govern tHhoeus*E. ment, and advised them to grant the Act of 1795, which endowed the College of Maynooth. The Home Government deliberated upon that proposition, but I must first state to the House, before going further, that the Home Secretary of the time was Mr. Foster, who was Chancellor of the University of Oxford. The measure of 1795 was adopted by the Home Government, and the Bill was submitted to the con sideration of both Houses of Parliament. It is impossible that more cautious deliberation could have been given to the matter. Well, that Bill became law, and it proceeded in die. tinct terms to endow the College of Maynooth as it is now es tablished. Yet it is said that we are now discussing for the first time a Bill which recognises by vote the ex istence of the Roman Catholic religion and hierar chy in Ireland. But, Sir, I deny that proposition. There is nothing in the constitution of this country which ren dered it impossible, impolitic, or inexpedient to endow a semi nary set apart for the Roman Catholics. Without the inter ference of religious education, the Government directly recog nised the Roman Catholic religion as existing in Ireland with its hierarchy. How do I endeavour to show that? First of a.l, if any bye law was made respecting tie College, it should come to the Lord-Lieutenant, who had the power of giving it his veto, tnd when it was thought expedient that trustees should be appointed, Protestant, were appointed as rustees, as well as Roman Catholics ; and or, account of more interference being displayed in the affairs of the College by those who were Protestants, it was ultimately thought expedient that they should be abrogated. But to show the connexion between the State and the College of Maynooth, it is only necessary to show that every bye-law must be submitted and has been for fifty years subnii•ted to the Lord-Lieutenant for his sanction ; they submit a bye-law and he can sets) it, and it can only become a bye-law by his having given it his veto--([dear, hear.) A president of the College cannot enter on his du ties without his having been acceded to by the Lord- Lieutenant. I hold in my hand a return which was laid on the table of the !louse of Parliament, which showed by the re gulations of the College of Maynooth, according to the bye laws, the number of students receiving endowments, for they were fixed to a certain number. which had been distributed amongst different Bishops of different districts in Ireland, and there is further s tated in this return from Maynooth the name of each stude'.t and the name of each diocese. Now here is a bye-law sanctioned by the Lord-Lieutenant and laid on the table by order of the House of Lords, showing how the Roman Catholic religion and its hierarchy were recognized by the State. It is stated that all those who object to this grant on account of the voluntary principle might entertain a doable oh jectien in this case because the grant is abut to be increased. I do not think that that reasoning is very effective, and if there is any principle in the objection on the part of the Protestants, that principle is violated by the application of the public funds to numerous endowments in the colonies ; they are not only given to the orthodox Presbyterians, but also every year we are in the habit of voting a sum to the Presbyterian establish ment in Scotland, and to the Dissenters in the Hebrides. I think that there are no religious grounds for objecting to a practice which has for so long a time been uninterrupted. I will not rely on a compact, that has been already argued; I do not think that there was a compact, but I think that there was a nominal engagement which the Parliament ought to recog nise. Some state that there was a compact, it transpired after the Union. It has been shown that a compact existed for twenty years, and, at the expiration of that period, the matter was reconsidered, and the Government, by the adoption of the endowment, bound themselves to the contract acain. Whether it is the matter of a compact or of an honorary engagement, I think that it rests on the strongest possible grounds ; but I do not wish to rest it on any such grounds.—( Hear, hear.) I look upon it in this light, that seven millions of the population of Ireland profess the Roman Catholic religion.—( Cheers.) I differ altogether from the Hon. Gen tleman who has just. sat down ; he said that the Roman Ca tholic religion was an awful delusion.—( Cheers and laughter. ) I agree with the sentiments laid down in the admirable speech of the Hon. Member for Devonport ; I am a sincere uncom promising Protestant ; I am not ashamed to be a Protestant; but still I cannot for a moment imagine that the Roman Ca tholic religion is an awful delusion.—(Cheers.) I remember that it is a Christian creed, that it is the creed of the great majority of Christians—( Hear)—and though there is an impor tant difference between the Protestant acid Roman Catholic religion, yet we agree with them in the main points, and to say that the Roman Catholic religion is an awful delusion, would be the destruction of every religious hope. I do not deny that the policy of Great Britain to that country has been at different times cruel—(Cheers —but the people always ad hered to their religious tenets most uninterruptedly. Penal laws, penalties and privations have be-n equally unsuc cessful in destroying their religious feeling. The Roman Catholics are now the great majority of the population of the people of Ireland, and are one-fourth of her Majesty's subjects in the United Kingdom. You cannot interrupt them ; but they are now willing to accept this small boon in aid of the educati. n of the clergy who are to be spiritual advisers of the greater number of the people. Can we then refuse a grant so accepted and so offered on the grounds of a religious princi ple ? On the contrary, I think that the religious principle has been settled fifty years ago. We cannot refuse it through pecuniary motives, for such would be beneath our contempt ; it is nothing for us, and it is everything to those who receive it. I will now refer to what was stated by my Honourable Friend with respect to the institution itself. He commented on the miserable appearance of the professors and students. Why do you keep them beggars and then blame them for being so?—(Cheers. ) They were, after all, the clergy of the people, and they must be taught.—( Loud cheers.) I do not believe the assertion that they be long to the lower grade of society. They are drawn not from the lower class, but from the middle class. They are trusted by the people, and they perform their duty to the people. There exists the power of constant visitation, and we have commur.ication with the president, who inspects the seminary. Mr. Ft ank land Lew is, who was the head of a Com mission to inquire into the system of education in Maynooth in lB'3i, assures us that he was for two days present at the College examination, and that the curriculum of ecclesiastical education was such as to ensure honours in any of the English Universities. The facility of turning English into Latin, he says, surprised him, and that, as a literary seminary, it is by no means to be despised. Now, let me ask some Honourable Xlembers who have opposed this measure upon grounds affecting the interests of Irish landed proprietors, one ter two questions. Suppose that certain Mem bers of this ~ ouse happen to be Protestant landlords, and that they have a Roman Catholic tenantry on their estates, I would asic these Gentlemen would they prefer an uneducated pepulation to take charge of the cultivation of their estates, instead of a number of well-in formed, educated gentlemen ?—( Hear, hear.) I be lieve I need not wait for a reply.—(Cheers. ) I will not go over the various points already discussed before this House upon this subject, for I should only weary the House by doing so, without perhaps s•rengthening my argument. I shall therefore content myself by saying that I have the strongest and deepest conviction that, such is the feeling of grati tude in heart in the Irish people, and so keen their sense of being laid under obligation for fa vours conferred, that they will thankfully accept this measure as a boon, and that the result will be to bind them to this country by bonds more enduring than any hitherto known, and that the union between the two countries will become more lasting than ever, because it will now be consummated by the blessings of happ iness, p eace, a nd good feeling; and Ihp happier days for both countries will: be the result. I do think, besides, that this measure will tendto the better security of the Protestant Church, both in this country arid in Ireland —(Cheers)—but I deny that a refusal of it will have any such effect.—( Hear, hear.) There are many ether important ques tions bet' ire the Government in reference to Ireland; but this is on I of the most' import an t o f t h em a ll, and, therefore, tell you that, after having daeply and painfully reflected upon it, I fe e l sa ti s fi e d t h at no proposition of the S tate could be brought forward, the rejec tion of which would be attended with more dangerons conse quences to both countries.—( Loud cheers from both sides of ' the House.) I have listened to the speech of the Hon. Mem ber, who may well be called the father of this House—he is a Gentleman of great and many years' experience, and one of undoubted authority upon all questions upon which controverted opinions may exist.—( Cries of " Hear, hear".) That Gentleman has stated frankly and fairly his opinion upon this subject, but he has also stated what he considered to be the justice of it more strongly than he has upon any other measure. And what did that Hon. Mem ber say? Why, that he came down to the House last night, and declared that though no circumstances could compel him to give a vote upon such a question in favour of it some time age, yet he now felt so convinced of its justice and necessity, that he never gave a vote that afforded him more sincere gratification, and therefore he gave the measure his most cor dial support.—( Loud cheers.) Some Hon. Member behind me has laughed; but I say this is no laughing matter; it is a measure introduced to this House, after having received the approbation of her Majesty, and above all, it is one that will be received in Ireland with feelings of the deepest gratitude ; but the rejection of it would be attended with results that would spread the greatest dismay in that country, and the greatest excitement in this.—( Loud cheers.) Mr. MA CLEAN next rose to address the House, but he was speaking for a considerable time before a word he uttered could be heard in the gallery, owing to his own low time of voice, and the continual noise kept up by the incessant crowd of Members, who thronged the door-way, in their eagerness to leave the House. He was understood to say that this proposiGes of the Government had placed the country in circumstances of great and peculiar excitement, for he contended that the proposition was one which involved a violation of principle. tie would ark, was there a doubt upon the mind of any rational man that the result of this measure, if carried, would be, that the Government would be called on to pay the Roman Catholic Clergy ?--( Hear, hear.) He did not speak in any hostility to that Church. He would not advert to the arguments respecting the destitution of the Catholics.—( Hear, hear. ) The measure now before the House went to prevent the evil o f which his Hon. Friend had complained, and he had asserted that it was the reasonable result of this measure that they would not send the Catholic priests into the world to live on the eleemosynary provi s ion of their flocks; that if they intended to make them communications gentlemen, they sh ou ld not l ea ve them with the p revision of nhee), Might beggars. lie had be en muc h astonished at the s p eech of his iaidhsto the Honourabl e F rien d the Memb er for Ne wark of his the hi head of the G overnment, seemed s gl 'h t o' H in oura th bl e e Baronetur not to have understood the reaso ns on w hi c h he l e f t t h e Cabinet, or at least not to have made th e m c l ear l y k nown t o the House. It' the plea w ere to he put f orwar d, t h at this grant was to be made in considera tion of the n um b er of t h e Roman C a tholic subjects of her oneo Ma jesty, on what principle, he would ask, was it that they refused endowments to th e numerous congregations of Dissenters. If the project int ro d uced b y h er M a jesty s Ministers had been merely f ur th e i mprovement o f aca demical education , he (Mr. Maclean) conceited that no objection would have been made to any such relief to the Roman Catholic subjects of her Majesty in Ireland. But when the advantage to be COl termed on the College of Manooth, was not only to place it on a level, b u t above theposition of Oxford, Cambridge , and Dublin, it was not to be wondered at that in that House great opposition should have been offered to the mea• sure, nor could it be matter of surprise that the clergy of the country pp should ha ve b een o osed to this gra nt to the College, when it was recollect e d what had been the opposition of the members of the College to the Church of England. And when he recollected what these doctrines were, he was surprised, thongh he could not but admire the zeal and ability which characterised the speech of his Noble Friend the Member for Newark (Lord John Manners), when ho spoke of that portion of our eventful history by which the religion of these kingdoms had been settled, and which he (Mr. Maclean) must look upon as one of the greates t events in the annals of the country. Th e N o bl e Lord had s poken of the stadth ol der of Holland as merely the agent of that Dutch conquest which had unsettled the Rornish religion in these realms, but he must continue to think that the stadtholder of Holland was one of the greatest characters of that history, and that had it not been for him their country never could have en joyed the advantages of religious education which it now pos sessed, and those many advantages which had towed from it. THE RUN, LONDON, FRTDAV MORNING, APRIL 18, lAA He could not but congratulate the Right Honourable B .tenet and his Honourable Friend on their obtaining a new ally in the Honourable Member for Durham,- but be did not think that the Honourable Gentleman was paying any very distinguished compliment to Ireland, when he derided the Protestant clergy of England ; and he conceived that the R-roan Catholic clergy themselves would not feel inclined to accept this boon as hush money ; and he thought nothing would be reit as more insulting than that this should be thrown to them as a sop, and as bush money to abate their agitation. He bad, indeed, no hesitation in asserting that this hush money would act neither as a bribe nor as a reason to induce them to forsake that which they felt to be their duty. What he would ask on this point, what was really the case, and what bad been the cause of the foun daton of the College of Maynooth. It was notorious that it had been projected and established for the purpose of prevent ing the increase of democratical principles. It was hoped that at the establishment of a Roman Catholic College that the stu dents for the priesthood would provide them wi.h all the fa cilities which they required and thus l revent that tendency to wards foreign connection which bad always been felt as a weak ness by England. But what, he would ask, had been the expe rience of the list fifty years of Maynooth ? Had that demo cratic feeling subsided, or was it not notorious that it had very largely increased ? Was it not notorious that the whole of the Roman Catholic clergy were at this moment in a decided and open opposition to the Government ? Let the Roman Catholic and the Protestant clergy be com pared in their allegiance to the throne, and the inquisition would soon show the difference of their principles, and he was led to believe that if their claims were not satisfied that the principles of the Roman Catholic clergy would be still more evident. He might ate the opinions of the Hun. Member for Waterford, of whom it was impassible to speak without senti ments of the deepest respect, and whom he believed to be one of the most useful Members in that House, and in saying this he intended no disrespect to the Hon. Member for Dungarvon, and he desired to speak 31 that he should not offend the moll sensitive feelings. He told them that the course pur • stied at the College, and the consequences of that course, were alike calculated to foster feelings of t he most earnest affection and delicate regard for the Establishment to which then were attached. It was known that the members of the Catholic Church would stop at nothing in propagating their faith. This measure would have the effect of establishing two Churches, and a bulltan inlestinum of the most ferocious description would be the result. Let them remember the words of a great man in his dying moments—the words which he (Mr. Maclean) had heard the Right Hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary himself quote—let them remember the words of Lord William Russell when on the scaffold—" I do believe that Popery is making great strides in this kingdom, and those who wish to forward it will hesitate at no step for its advancement, and I lament that many Protestants lend their helping hand to it." Mr. S. CRAWFORD then moved the adjournment of the debate, which was immediately agreed to. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned shortly atter Twelve o'Clock. PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 16. The North Wiles Railway Bill was brought in and read a first time. London, Worcester, and South Staffordshire Railway . (Dudley and Sedgley Branch),—Report from Select C( m mittee on Standing Orders read ; Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Robert Clive, Mr. Tancred, and Mr. Benbow. Eastern Union and Bury St. Edmunds Railway (No. 2), — Petition for Bill reported. and Bill ordered to be brought in by Captain Gladstone and Mr. Lane Fox. Glasgow, Barrhead, and Neilston Direct Railway,—Peti tion for Bill reported ; report referred to the Select Committee on Standing Orders. NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE BILL OFFICE. Whitehaven and Furness Railway,—Committee on petition, Monday, April 28. Edinburgh and Northern Railway (No. 2),—Second read ing. Monday, April 21. Glasgow Harbour Union Railway,—Committee on petition, postponed from Monday 21st till Thursday, April 24 Birmingham and Gloucester Railway Acts Amendment, — Committee on petition, adjourned till Tuesday, April 22. London and Greenwich Railway,—Second reading, Mon day, April 21. lily and Huntingdon Railway,—Second reading, Monday, April 21. London and Brighton (Horsham Branch) Railway,—Com mittee on petition, Monday, April 28. Liverpool and Bury Railway ( Bolton and Wigan and Liverpool and Bury Extension),—Second reading, Monday, April 21. Staines and Richmond Railway,—Committee on petition, postponed from Friday 18th till Monday, April 21. RAILWAY COMMITTEES. Committee No. 3, consisting of Mr. Aglionby, Mr. Thornely, Mr. Buller, Captain Jones, and Mr. Standish, assembled yes terday morning in room No. 13. EAST DEREHAM AND NORWICH RAILWAY. The Committee proceeded with this case. An objection had been raised that the plans in the private Bill-office were not correct. An error of forty feet appeared in one point of the plans. For the promoters evidence was produced to show that when the plans were deposited they were correct. The room was cleared : on our return, The Committee decided that the standing order had not been complied with. SOUTH EASTERN LINE. This Committee met yesterday at Twelve o'clock, in Commits , Sub-room No. 4, Sir W. Heathcote in the shah. The first question argued before the Committee by the petitioners against this line was, that the contracts were bad, inasmuch as that the money subscribed had been burrowed money, and not the money of the parties themselves. The Committee decided that they had nothing whatever to do with the question. MAIDSTONE AND ROCHESTER LINE. The Committee decided that the standing orders in this line had been complied with. TUNBRIDGE WELLS LINE. In this line it was decided by the Committee that the standing orders had not been complied with. ASHFORD AND HASTINGS LINE. Standing orders not complied with. DEAL EXTENSION LINE. In this case the Committee declared that the standing -..rders had been complied with. LONDON AND GREENWICH LINE. In this case the Committee found that the standing orders had not been complied with. SPIRIT of the tiUBLIU JOURNALS. FROM TUE EVENING PAPERS 4)F YESTERDAY GLOBE.—The Tory supporters of the Maynooth Bill (we now speak only of those) chiefly patronise two lines of argu • ment—one cheap and easy—the other in a very high degree damaging and dangerous. It is cheap and easy to deride fanaticism, and condemn calling the Pope " AntOchrist." These may be fit answers to ignorant declaimers, but not to calm critics. They may be answers to those who would deny all large measures of justice to Roman Catholics ; but not to those who think themselves at liberty to question the structure or the source of this one small one. We should no more adopt the Biblical Billingsgate, of calling his Holiness the Pope " Antichrist," than enlightened Roman Catholics would approve the Tablet in almost calling Mr. Sheil "Anti christ," because he expresses some sort of esteem for the Church of England. the other Tory line of argument— the damaging one—is that which, as we have said, has been most practised by those Members on the Ministerial side, who have hazarded any wide range of argument at all. What a damaging speech was Lord John Manners', to the Ministerial party, as regards the consequences of the n ea sure which lie accepts and contemplates. It would be un fair to say that those consequences are contemplated by its supporters generally ; but it is quite fair to say that such anticipations, from that section of Anglican churchmen, who have recently won themselves a " bad eminence" (as regards public opinion in England) are enough to warrant alarm in all who still call themselves Protestants ; and to demon strate (if the will of churchmen like Lord John Manners were seconded by the power) how soon all that constitutes Protestantism—all independent and private judgment— would be crushed under the Juggernaut wheels of Church idols—irresponsible clerical powers. It is these, as we have said, that constitute Popery—we care not one single button whether their future head-quarters should be established at Rome or Lambeth—or rather, if we do care, it is merely because Rome combines the dangerous qualities of irresponsible spiritual dictatorship with the subtlety, and foreign standing room, of an Italian Court. To that extent, we maintain " No Popery" is a rational ral lying word—to that extent every vigorous prince in our history inscribed it on his banners ; and it was left for a soft scion of the " old nobility," misrepresented by him, to find out that the way to manage Rome is to admit, and exaggerate; its " tremendous power " That power is a power founded on moral weakness in those who truckle to it. None of the great States of Europe do ; but if Lord John Mannerses fishify our flesh, we shall. We repeat, that Protestants would have a right to be alarmed (were the champions a shade more vigorous) at the new-old notions of exclusive Catho licity (a contradiction, by the way, in terms) which these Young Englanders would import from college cloisters into political affairs. Catholicity is asserted by Rome of herself solely—and by these young gentlemen of Rome and England. Until we force ourselves into Roman alliance (an alliance which Rome disclaims, and knows of nothing but re bellion or subjection to her authority)—until we do this impossible, we " separate ourselves from the whole of Catholic Christendom"—Catholic Christendom, according to these fancy churchmen, not including the Scotch, German, or American Churches of any model but our own—and, according to Rome, just as little including the Greek Church, and the English Church. This will-o'-the-wisp if we pursue properly, in couples with those who won't couple with us, Lord John Manners almost engages " to render England again what she was once, the queen of the nations, towering aloft amid the empires of the world, striking her roots down deep and wide into the richest memories of the past, and spreading her fruitful branches to the measureless expanse of an un seen futurity." It is difficult to nail Young Englanders (gentlemen who seem resolved never to get older) to any thing in the nature of facts and dates. if we could hope to do so, we should ask Lord John Manners which is the happy era he refers to, when England was once " the queen of nations ?" We, however, partly learn when it was net. " Those who liked," said this young Old. Noble, " might refer all the glory and renown of old English monarchy back to the Dutch conquest of 1688, which subverted it, but he claimed a right to ascend higher, and to consider it just as if William 111. had died Stadthol der of Holland." If William 111. had died Stadtdolder of Holland, Louis XIV. bad very handsome prospects of adding England to his European dependencies. We are sorry to learn that Somers and Marlbo rough did nothing for England's greatness—but let that pass. How far back are we to go for times truly imperial? William and Mary won't do. Will Philip and Mary do ? Cer tainly not Elizabeth, erroneously supposed to have done Eng land some credit. That heretical drubbing of the Invincible Armada, doubtless aided by le diable, qui nova les autres— separated us sadly from " the whole of the Catholic Chris tendom." Shame, shame on the son of England who reads her annals through priests' spectacles! England, to have retained her greatness in Lord Manners' eyes—must have lost it. She must have first tyrannised, then stagnated, like Spain —must have lain in cold obstruction, and rotted, beneath her Jesuits and her Inquisition. Truly, Austrian and Bourbon Charleses and Philips, who preserved that monarchy, were other guess people from Dutch William, who subverted this one. Th ere can be no doubt that the " monarchy" would have flourished vastly under Kirke and his lambs, under Jefferies and his juries, under the pupil of Father Petre, the introducdi of standing atmies, the royal restorer of Oxford back to thir-bosom of" Catholicity." Why will these boys provoke us thbeselemembrances? We will be provoked no further by therh: STANDARD.—The debate on the Maynooth grant was once more adjourned last night. The best speeches delivered in last night's discussion were those of Mr. G. Hamil ton, Member for Dublin University, and Lord Ashley against the Bill, that of the Chancellor of the Ex chequer in its support. Mr. Hamilton, who is, indeed, a fine contrast to his colleague in talent, as in all else, judiciously for his purpose seized upon the mis chievous arguments of Mr. Gladstone and M- - founded upon the duty of religious ....caulay, disposed of them, pat the— - —aence, and easily • .7. ,--- are not the arguments upon which the real friends of the Protestant faith found their support of the Bill. We must ever approach Lord Ashley as an opponent with the greatest diffidence, and we have given, we trust, sufficient proof that no difference of opinion can ever impair our veneration for his noble character. On the question now before the public, it is our misfortune to differ from Lord Ashley, but as his Lordship has reminded us, not fa- the first time, Though sixteen years have intervened. Lord Ashley was a party to the granting of power to the Roman Catholic popu lation in Ireland. We trust that we need not say what part we acted upon that occasion. Lord Ashley too, as he stated last night, was not, like the Minister, an unwil ling giver in 1829, and he seems still to adhere to the wisdom of that most unhappy gift, irrespective of the temporary necessity, which is the real justi • fication of the Duke of Wellington's Cabinet. His Lordship says that in 1829 he assisted to give freedom of action to the Roman Catholics; as if they had not, as a body, far more freedom of action before the Emancipation Act than they have had since. His Lordship, no doubt, (lid give freedom of action to the Roman Catholic priests with a vengeance, as has been proved by their power of driving electors to the hustings and to monster meetings— as has been proved by their extortion of hundreds of thousands of pounds from the most miserable population of Europe to bribe lay agitators, and millions upon millions for themselves—the priests. Yes, ample freedom of action was given to the priests, but to the Roman Cat holic popu • lation, such freedom of action as is enjoyed by the cattle driven to Smithfield, and the sheep shorn tk the quick. Once mistaken, even if not still under a delusion upon a matter so important, Lord Ashley may be mistaken again ; and, indeed, even in the matter of fact his Lordship is plainly misinformed. Generally in his speech the Noble Member fbr Dorsetshire rates the Irish Protestants as below one million ; and, in one calculation, actually rates their number as less than half a million. The truth being, that the Irish Protestants are in number much nearer to three than to two millions. We rejoice to cite these inaccuracies, because they prove that one who always feels rightly and always reasons rightly when his premises are sound, forms an erroneous judgment, solely be cause he is mi :informed. Lord Ashley, again, says that if he voted for the Bill before the Ifinise of Commons, he must feel hound in honour to follow up the vote by voting for the endowment of the Roman Catholic clergy ; because he could not think of educating men to qualify them fir a certain rank without maintaining them in that rank. What does Lord Ashley say to all our public schools, in all gradations of rank ? Take a medium school—tke Blue-eoat School, in Newgate-street. Are all the boys educated in that noble establishment annuitants for lite upon its funds? Has any such princi, le as that r sserted by Lord Ashley ever been admitted as a condition upon the gift of education? And here let as parenthetically remark, that in considering the Maynooth Bill as arything less than a part of a general system of education, much too narrow a view is taken of the religious as well as the po litical bearing of the subject. The religious grounds upon which the question is opposed. carried to their legitimate ex tent, would withhold all education from all Roman Ca tholics, lest they should read the Breviary or the Cate chism of Trent. We are not, however, afraid to teach Roman Catholics to read, even though the first use they will probably make of the power will be to read Roman Catholic books, because we know that with the power of reading these books, we give them the power also of reading the Bible. Apart from this consideration, Lord Ashley may be perfectly at ease upon the point of honour. There is no danger of the Roman Catholic priests being edu cated above their means of living. On the average, the Ro man Catholic priests, single men, living in the very c h ea p es t country of her Majesty s European dominions, h ave " i n moneys numbered' , larger incomes than the highly educated English clergy from Oxford and Cambridge, far higher incomes than the clergy educated at Trinity Col lege, Dublin. As to any other reason why the grant to Mavnooth must be followed by an endowment of the Roman Catholic clergy, we are wholly at a loss to guess at it. We are quite persuaded, too, that not one of twenty who support the Ministerial Bill acknow ledges the obligation in honour to which Lord Ashley refers, and of course they who, upon principle, oppose the grant to Maynooth of 1 7, 0001 ., are not very likely to approve of a grant of two millions or two millions and a half to the Roman Catholic clergy ; and less would not compen sate to them their present revenue. Nimovalaseawawakw~mmerawormwmawmpaeumeroP't multitudes, they denounce doctriUes as false and imarrs they do not give admission to a shade of hostile feel ing towards those by whom the doctrines ar e held. WO do not know how far this blending of the ficrcen . gks of zal and the mildness of charity can take I'l e ( d i in our frail human nature, but it will hardly be detv that the hot No-Popery invectives, in which members (. the Tory party are and have been so much seen turned to indulge, do produce irritation and bad feeling in Ireland. If the tone of Exeter-hall o°,le unfortunately become so prevalent as to a ppear tu i : tone of the English people, and to govern the dec b sion of the House of Commons, we really dc not knew what arguments the connexion between the two co t" is to be maintained. By " shrapnell and grape'sh% the thing may, no doubt, he done; but it will not ,beirio.. to the honour of our Christianity if we should ever ha" to think of such means.—Chronicle. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Aprill'. (Sittings in Banco.) WILSON . . Mr. Sergeant MullPxY v moved ROBINSON for a rule to ' -'" f° if t cause why the verdict in this case, which paid of the defendant, should not be set aside on the gro g " (Mr. Ju s ," t te misdirection on the part of the Learned Judge Wiglitman), before whom the case was tried a till , 'l d assizes for Durham. The defendant and a pers°,., ll , 11 ;„ s i on. Tinmouth were part owners of a vessel called the ttou'i e d, On the 27th of April, 1843, the partnership was the defendant having purchased Tinmouth's eharheleet. the usual way. The letter which was the sn"is t h matter of the present case, was written on the uti , of August, 1i43, was by the defendant to Tin ° ° and in that letter the defendant stated t hat a nd plaintiff had destroyed property to tile amount of 22 , 6 ":, u th. embezzled part of the cargo at Holyhead and Fau" t o The Learned Judge left it to the jury to vt , whether this letter was not a confidential cotneihnich cation from the plaintiff to his partner, in W O the matter complained of was introduced aceidenio, without a view of imputing anything malicious to th e P iQ tiff. The Learned Sergeant contended that his Lordito, was wrong in leaving the question to the jury in Tin' was disso v in ner, as the partnership b, tween Robinson and lin''' . %CM dissolved four months before the letter was writteu• Rule refused. TUE QUEEN V. . Mr. KELLY was about to move f O or PER a rule in th is -le : which was an indictment for libel, preferred against theo; Pendant at the instance of the Rev. Joshua ~tea published in the Liverpool Chronicle, when it was sofb d ot by Lord Denman that it was better to wait till the defer was brought up for judgment. • soLostogas v. rAwamt. w bicl This was a case of libel against the Times newsPaP er 'ha'atP was tried at the last assizes for Surrey, in which the P obtained a verdict to the amount of 5001. damage& i n the The case originated in some letters which appear__,,'gerl Times, respecting the state of health in which the PaL7„ -- c e of of the ship Moffat arrived in this 'country, in consetPittei the badness of the water supplied to her from a ve ssel, !sir the P up, as was alleged, with copper tanks, belonging to tiff, who is an hotel-keeper in St. Helena. Ve al Mr. Sergeant SURE now moved for a rule for a re n o sice novo, or for an arrest of judgment, on accountr - ot . & IC damages.—Rule granted on the latter ground. 45 0 32 2 45 1 32 2 45 5 32 4 45 10 32 4 45 5 32 3 46 3 32 5 21 7 21 4 21 8 21 5 21 4 20 9 30 5 31 1 30 5 32 0 29 6 30 6 BAIL, COUR7, 4)41 17. (Before Mr. Justice COLERIDGE.) Mr. PETERSDORFP moved for a rule calling aeon,l,l4rbo° torney, whose name he would not for obvious resor,boir give, to answer for certain malpractices, and all ° 1 4 ‘, cause why his name should not be struck off the r o t poi made this application on an affidavit of the presen rne i Ot Wellesley, who stated that he had employed the present question as far back as the year 1832. In 1 54 :„' 936 then abroad, he was desirous of returning kr , n d A land, but, as Mr. Crockford retained a his for the sum of 2,0001., he was anxious that tu,i - he sfr should be discharged before he arrived in London, ife rirl torney in question communicated with his LordshiP, ?raper to make an arrangement that would remove eve r)? I Cer ment to his Lordship's return, if ho granted notes t? P bo tain amount, and at certain d'stes. On these conditl°pre undertook that the bond should be discharged. T b t e e s6 4 missory notes were transmitted by h is Lordship, but /11%04 applying them to the purpose for which thoy were namely, the releasing of Lord Wellesley from the this bond, he took them into the market, got t ' n e lied"i' counted, and applied them to his own uses. He s l l / 4 ,, in the rule on other grounds also—one of them, that in the said attorney suggested to his Lordship that if heB . o, certain bills, he (the attorrey) should be able to ratr", derable sums upon them. He took these bills also in c .,„, market, and applied their proceeds to his own P2 n st t 1 3 , 61 There were other charges of a similar character ag u4. l 6 br i said attorney, but he (Mr. Petersdorff) thoue"„„jes stated enough to induce the Court to grant th e '- . sought for. Mr. Justice C OLERIDGE tho ug ht th e matter ell°old I# to sifted in a criminal court. A &We a s Mr. PETERSDORFP was of opinion, with all ue --- fl ogb,. - i his Lordship's judgment, that there was hardlY the face of the facts to warrant them in adoptinb wow; course. If, therefore, it pleased his Lordship , b e ,„ 4 T" rather that his application wer e gran t e d. —The O w-- granted. ~~ ~ th Dot • _ GRANT TO MAYNO TH. The great question raised by the Maynooth Bill is really this—How is the government of Ireland to be carried on? This is the question which every man who pretends to statesmanship must answer clearly to his own mind, before he can say " ay" or " no" to the Go vernment proposition. Is the government of Ireland to be maintained by force, or by gaining the good will of her people? Looking to the safety and integrity of the empire, this is the greet and urgent question of the present time. The: repeal of the union may be impos sible, but war with America or with France is not im possible, and in either case a union supported by Eng lish troops would add at least as much to our anxieties as to our strength. The main argument for the May nooth Bill, then, is, that it is a measure of conciliation. It will confer solid benefits on the religious instructors to whom the Irish people are attached, and, however it may be used by the leaders of agitation, it will be re ceived by all men of common sense as an evidence of the friendly disposition of an imperial Parliament. We have no doubt, indeed, that many of the most ardent opponents of the union secretly dread the success of the measure, on account of its tenderey to allay the fervour of the popular hostility to England. By whom, then, is the Bill opposed? By two earties who, on all other questions, religious and political, and even in the reasons of their opposition to this measure, are as much opposed to each other as light and darkm - ss. Of one of these parties we would always speak with the respect which is due to honesty and consistency. Protestant Dissenters, who, _on the ground of the voluntary principle, oppose the Maynooth grant, are open to no imputation, except one, and that is, that they are suffering themselves to be egregiously duped by the more powerful party, from whose intolerant and exclusive principles they themselves have long suffered. The voluntary principle is in itself free from every taint of injustice, end, whatess r may be thought of its practical effects, it must be admitted to be a grand conception. It arises in religious mit,ds from zeal for the purity of the Christian faith, and it implies an entire reliance on the power of that faith to main'ain its hold upon soci -ty without legal institutions. Its ad vocate , too, may plead that it would furnish one male of rem .ving the difficulties of government in Irel nd. They say, " Leave the education of Lish priests to be supported by those who want their services. Withdraw the Maynooth grant altogether—but withdraw also the endowments of the Protestant and Presbyterian Churches. Sweep away every vestige of the legal establishment of religion now existing in Ireland. L..t the whole of its Church property, the Prs.bytetian reqium donum, and the paltry Maynooth grant, be applied to general education, or to some other purpose of general utility. Plane the ministers of all sects on the equal footing of dependence on the contributions of their flocks, and leave Protestantism to contend eith Popery, by its own intrinsic strength alone." This is, at least, a clear and consistent answer to the question, " How is Ireland to be governed?" The scheme, too, is precisely that which would be most welcome to the Irish Catholics. They would admit its perfect justice, and close with the proposition at once. Whatever might be its effects upon the character of religious teaching, it would undoubtedly remove that which supplies the chief fuel to popular dis content. But the reasons for insisting on the voluntary principle in reference to Ireland derive all their force from the assumption that it can be applied there in its 1 integrity. To enforce it upon the Church of the ma jority, and not upon the Church of the minority, is both unreasonable and flagrantly unjust; and it cannot be re garded by the Irish in any other light than as an injury. The Irish Catholics are very well disposed to the volun tary principle; but if they find its English advocates em ploy it to defeat a Maynooth grant, while they are unable to disturb the rich establishment of the Protestant mi nority, they will hardly give those advocates credit for the friendly feeling and love of equal justice which they profess. We cannot but think, therefore, that Pro testant Dissenters, who upon this ground are joining in the present No-Popery agitation of Tories and High ' Churchmen, should consider well what is likely to be the result of their efforts, and whether, if successful, they will not contribute to the triumph of the greatest ene mies of religious liberty. Let it not be forgotten that a Whig Government tried, not to abolish, but to reduce within moderate limits the Irish Protestant establish ment, and failed in that attempt for want of popular support. The history of the appropriation clause does not furnish much ground for expecting that Protestantism in Ireland can be made dependent oat the voluntary sys tem. Is it wise, then, that Liberal Dissenters should now aid the supporters of Protestant ascendancy in that country, in withholding from Roman Catholics a slight but welcome alleviation of the injustice which they sus tain? Under the circumstance of the case, neutrality would be wise and becoming. If they ever become strong enough to enforce their principle, let them get rid of Maynooth grant and Protestant establishment to gether ; but in the mean time let them not lend the strength and moral influence of that principle to the achievement of a most sectarian triumph for its greatest foes. It is obvious that the defeat of the May nooth grant, if it should be defeated, will not be a 'elisemsiemeeeeeiseeseieer —.----- 7 /1 114. triumph of the voluntary principle. It will be a ii f RTH 6. lillgt °l3 ' ii triumph of No-Popery passions and prejudices. The On the 14th inst., at Tibberton-square, Is , p victory may be won by the junction Of two parties, Field, of a son. t 6 WI s° l3. to but the stronger of the two will absorb the fruits of On the 14th inst. at the Vicarage, St- 1, „, 5 ... , the conquest. When Liberal Dissenters find themselves Hitchin, Herts, the lady of the Rev. T. H. S t.e . e s .sqSo l 'si following Sir Robert Inglis and Mr. Plutnptre, and ad- On the 15th inst., at the Crescent, Ameri o e . _ t ill .40 ding their voices to a No-Popery war-cry raised by wife of Captain Griffin, Royal Artillery, of ase f t ho I `. o# On the 15th inst , at John-street, Bedford-row, ..., clergymen of the Establishment, they ought surely to Al o ex n an th d e er l H st e h nry, * Esq., of a son. . . i f, of V toos t have coins misgivings as to the course which they are inst, at Upper Tulse-hill, the n taking. It may be true that ziir Robert Inglis and his Loughborough, Esq., of a daughter. ii pets friends are using suicidal arguments ;it may be true On the 15th Mi at Stanhope-street, 5. 4133 ` that, in declaring it wrong to be obliged to - pay fur the Mrs. David W. Raimbach,. of a son, still.born• t o inculcation of doctrines from which we dissent, those Kall persons acknowledge a principle fatal to all State endow. .y.... 1 itit I. b. Li . the the Reivns John Jervis St. Geo l rg ‘ e h 's it , On l6th • ments ; but after such arguments have served their tern- Rector, f r p.rar y purpose, of what value will they be ? Are tle.y College, Dublin, * eldest son of Sir Henn ble` — ,,, r - d,rel not evidently taken up for the occasion, and will they White Jervis, Bart., ofßally-Ellis, county WeX' -- of .4 not be throe n aside with the same discreditable facility? third daughter of Thomas Massa Alsager, Esq.' 11et4 What if Dissenters, attracted by the voluntary principle square, Bloomsbury. re 0 0° 07 e n J a erTis ve . r i sl . , l m ii: Fp l i e• J arguments of Sir Robert Inglis, should first enable him On the Bth ult., at St. James's Cathedral, T o ,to io to to defeat the Maynooth grant, and then beg the very Canada, Francis D. Gwilt, Esq., of Woed e t: o plet small favour that be would embody his new views in a Sophia, only daughter of Mr. Benjamin Sviee" Bill for the abolition of church -rates, would tot the High Basingstoke, Hants. , Tii lif .h .r . 6 : 1 0 14-1 Church leader smile at their simplicity ? The present On the 15th inst., at St. Mary's, Cheltenott—'4oo-- Wingrave, of St. Paul's churchyard, Londn e ,,t, e e n 'i t ali' l agitation is, we repeat, a No-Popery agitation. No- daughter of Mr. D. Primer, High-street, Cie " li e . Popery is the burden of the speeches by which it is carried on, and even some advocates of the voluntary DiEb. , w acelt h ig , principle are so far carried away by religious excitement, On the 29th of November, at Sydney, s'e .of ,Al as to mix up that principle with appeals to sectarian and Charles Frederick, son of John Robinson, Esq' 00 0, 7. unsocial feelings. We cannot but think that the excite- Surrey. Wellto I A 01 meat of a No-Popery cry, however honestly engaged in, On the 24th ult., near Ancaster, Canada v , 0 4 involves at the present time a peculiarly deep respon- of John Craven Chadwick, Esq. , 10 04 roo k On the 28th ult., Joseph Andrew de Ida sibility. Considering the difficulties of the question Heaton, Hertfordshire. , .0 Hertfordshire with which we started—the question of how Irentral is Onthe Bth inst., il Tho m as Hath Will, - r. 9 ,- to be governed—it is a course fraught with peril to Cambtzwell, aged 4. develop to the utmost possible extent the religious an On the 11thmst ,at Jersey. tagonisin between the two countries. When theof Wick-house, Hoinert , -- - ' Ol itw ,th religious a-toll feelings, potent as they are, become blended with On the 110 1- N T w fna- 0 ,- party , it,.. , . sust., in High-street, . e movements and popular agitation, ,they easily acquire aI E . , ge ts ' t ' lli fierce and fanatical character. What will be th , On the 12th inst., at Hadham Palace, itt pa , pects of the empire —of the union c • .....-f , pros- the wife of J. Smith, Esq. b the .„"j'of --of social tranevillity. if' 3 - religious liberty On the 9th inst., at Shrewsbury, Rand* s ~.Cm, Catholicism in - .- -. rotestantism in England and only son of the Rev. Dr. Kennedy. 6l ! ,' 17 same' _ ...reland are excited by all imaginable --- ---------, ir so , .., DIVE —taints to mutual and deadly hostility? Men may London: Printed and Published by Di.- - 01fiee'oer • C. ' harles WilkinsOet ...0, persuade themselves that they always distinguish No. 112, Strand, Philter. it The Su n , tb• between the belief and the behevers, and that when, Strand, in the Precinct of the Save!, ''" .'„ •' with passionate femur, and in the presence of excited Middlesex, Friday, April 18, 1845. ihit Mar. 8.... April 5.... IMPERIAL AGGREGATE A Wheat ...... 458 8d Oats .. Barley 32s 4d I Rye • • DUTIES ON 208 Od Oats . . 6s Od Rye ... `~. c~~c li la t Ptit 1 kg' t 4 ii Wheat ... Barley ... 5. 4 h . u. r,, - ,7 1 1x 4 4 3 , total ot ti c :17, 4 q 04,11: T o I Mg t ~ b POLICE INTEELIGESC (YESTERDAY.) CLERKEIV WELL. til $r A man named Chapman was charged with v i°— un bes saulting and wounding Mary Anne Johnson. On the previous night the prisoner's son attacked t.% 0 0 the child of the prosecutrix. She interfered betvmoir 14 boys and endeavoured to separate them, but the P 6° sgsl slated on their fighting it out, and when the moth her _ interfered on behalf of her son, the prisoner strue!,:aeiti blow with his clenched fist on the upper lip cutting %;41. open, and loosening two of her teeth. The wouleo retet..; great deal, and was conveyed from her res id e nce tP" street, Smithfield, to St. Bartholomew's Hospital, IC' wound was dressed. ii°ll° ..„....._ ..____. He was fined 21., or a month's imprisonment in the of Correction. MARKET NEWS. (YESTERv`", O , 5o ; LI ' y of SMITFIELD.—Coarse Meadow Hay, 3/ 15s to 4/ 1 00, fug ditto, 4/ 16s to 5/4s ; tine Upland.do., 5/5s to 8/ 145i Stre d i Hay, 4/ lOs to 6/; Oat Straw, I/ 18s to 21: Wh e ' ,t t igb °. 2/ to 2/ 2s per load. A moderate supply. Trade thro , 1 61. firm, at full prices. 1 pi CUMBERLAND.—Coarse Meadow Hay, 3/ 16s to y 5 /1 useful ditto, 4/;l7s to 5/ 8s; fi ne Upland ditto, 5 / 1 0 I t to I ,h i o; Clover Hay, 4/ 8s to 51 18s; Oat Straw, 1/ 1 83 ,,,, 06' Wheat Straw, 2/ 2s to 21 3 9 per load. SuPPJ i pi limited, and trade somewhat brisk. 41 0 WHITECHAPRL.—Coarse Meadow Hay, 3/ ii,eful ditto, 4/ 16s to 5/ 8s; fine Upland ditto , , l l, to /i 5/15s ; Clover Hay, 4/ lOs to 613 s ; Oat &raw , 11 ' d s°' On Wheat Straw, 2/ to 2/ 2e per load. Both HO sold steadily, at the above quotations. 10 10 DUCAT NIA itIEETS. f no d SOUTHALL, APRIL 16.—Although the suPP ,, ,,, ° ler V. and Sheep was seasonably extensive have e' , we, 40 steady demand for those kinds of stock, at an au` e - pre' 5 1 , per Sibs. Otherwise the trade ruled eve a "toe'oo mac gut quotations. Beef, from 2s 10d to 4s 2d ' 6dk, 111 6 to 4s 8d; Lamb, 5s to 6s • Veal, 3s 8d to ' 3 :„1 0 os Pork, 3s 4d. to 8d per ' Sibs. Nearly the I"' to' stock found buyers. , bee ROMFORD, APRIL 16.—We had a pleasant trau : e hs ,. i 5/ 1 day for most descriptions of stock at our quotiqi,, ° , 43 " S.; 0 1 from 2s 8d to 4s 2cl • Mutton, 2s 10d to 48 8d ; 14 „5 - to ' 4O O 16s to 41 to 6s ; Veal, 3s 10(.1 ' to 4s 6d ; and Pork, 3s x" . ,P o s per Bibs. Suckling Calves, 18s to 30.3 ; Quarter ji Pigs, 16s to 19s ; and Milch Cows, with their Oi l poi , 16/ to 191 each. rather tic° HAlLsiinm, APRIL 16.—The supply being , ol d P the demand was better than for some time pit ! t oy 9 1 were somewhat on the advance. Beef, from 2s '7, ir Mutton, 3s 4d to 4s 10t1 t Lamb, 4s 8d to 5s 8 "/ 10d to 4s 4d ;and Pork, 3s to 3s 6d 81b 40 13 ;0 per s• . ARUNDEL, APRIL 15.—Beef, from 3s 2d to 4s n , 46 t 3s 4d to 4s 10d ; Lamb, 5s to 5s 10d ; and Vea l ' A 6d per 81bs. Supply moderate, and trade firm. A ppise,,, l ' CHICHESTER, APRIL 16.—We had a better fro, o '" most kinds of stock, at improved quotations. B e t' 50 " - io 0' 2d to 4s 4d ; Mutton, 3s 4d to 4s 10d ; Lara,, A L " per' 16 1 , 8d ; Veal, 4s to 48 4d ; and Pork, 3s 4d to 35 p e r it Suckling Calves. 18s to 28s ; Quarter-old Stor e to 18s; and Mulch Cows, with their small Calv e ' s ' 108 each. CORN AVERAGES. , 0 02 1 1 .6 0 GENERAL AVERAGE PRICES OF BRITISH - 011 0 ,01r For the Week ended April 12,1+45, made up tlom the g ds ti Inspectors in the different Cities and Towns In EnglA ll 0 per Imperial Quarter. Wheat ...• 46s 3d I Oats ...... • • 20s 9d I Beans ' ..• Barley ...• •. 32s 5d Rye.... •• • • 30s 6d Pease •" AVERAGES OF THE LAST SIX WEE ICS. iO" . BOO' A - so 0 I o 34 I 0, Weeks ending Wheat. Barley, Oats. Rye. 9 34 34 6 3 4 34 1° 9 34 35 _.....- ERAGES OF THE r •••• • 2 1 4d Bean Bea • • I :: .• ••••• 30 4d Pease •• •• ti FOREIGN CORN. •• •• • 6a Od BeanS" I •• • • 103 Gd Pease••