The Sun. — London, England, 1832-03-23 00:00:00

He denied that by the Bill there could he an improvement in the Constitution of that House. He denied that accord ing to.their pledges Ministers were bound to bring in a measure so sweeping and so dangerous.—(Cheers.) The Hun. and Learned Member had alluded, not for the first tithe, to- the history of the French Revolution, and he took for granted be had very correctly translated the pas sages which he cited—(Laughter)—and which had no great reference to the subjects under consideration. — (Cheers.) But when he referred to the case of the Re volution) in Paris, and above all the late Revolution, he (Sir R. Peel) thought it behoved the House to consider the consequences of that Revolution, and to see if we might not naturally anticipate the same? What were these consequences ? He spoke in fearful sincerity, and without, it was well known, the slightost tinge from per eons' interest--(Cheers)—and he was sure the House would permit him to quote a very recent authority, and one which, it could not be disputed by the ministry at least, was perfectly impartial. The proposition set forth most frequently by the other side was, that the elective franchise ought to he in the hands of the middle claws- But what said Mr. Fox? He alluded to the very arguments used by the Honourable Members.— [Here the Right Hon. Baronet read an extract from a Speech of Mr. Fox's, wherein it was declared that although men said the middle classes were those best en titled to the franchise, and most likely to use it advan tageously to the common-weal, because removed alike from the corruption of courts and the temptations of poverty, yet that this was a mere fallacy. 3—The authority, how ever to which he had alluded with respect to the conse quences of the French Revolution, was the chosen corres pondent of the Times newspaper, and he said :—" We have now a melancholy experience of the reduction of the electorial qualification. That imprudent measure could not have been more formally condemned by its results. In that Chamber, which doubtless contains men of high talent, though of these the greater portion sit in silent dissatisfaction, the most conspicuously indiscreet keep up an agitation, and too often succeed in effecting their objects. Town-bred envy, and the spirit of animosity which animates the petty provincial land-owner, are the Prominent characteristics of the elective Chamber. Those who are averse to all superiority, offended at all splen dour, and hostile to all dignity, amuse themselves by decrying the ermine and purple with which the law has invested the Magistrates. The term economy' was never more ridiculously abused ; it has become a watch-word, a sort of bell, which is rung in the ears of the ignorant claws, to elicit applause in the cafe or the estaminet, What do you think of the President of a sovereign court, Whose emoluments are reduced to 300 of your pounds sterlin g , and whose salary is lower than that which you grant to an obscure clerk in one of your public offices ? What say you to the war which is waged against science and literature in the persons of professors, for whose ser vices and capacities the most degrading bargains are made? By empty words, scholastic sophistry, and declamation de void of sincerity, the service of the State is degraded and disorganized. It is a great misfortune to a country when Power falls into the bands of the lower classes, and is exercised only to gratify the petty passions of petty per- Bons, Our Director-General of Bridges and Highways, Who annually executes public works at the cost of 6 0,000,000, has bad his salary, which under Napoleon Was 80,000 francs, curtailed, first to 50,000, and then is 40,000, and it is at length reduced to 20,000. For 20,000 francs the Director-General of Domains and Re gistrations must superintend a department which pro duces to the State an annual revenue of 200,000,000. As good neighbours, and men who know what be loop to the dignity of a great nation, pray do us the favour to flagellate our modern Lycurguses. Let them be taught a lesson from the other side of the Channel, even though they should regard it as contraband erchandize. We may reciprocally exchange these little friendly services, and as for myself personally, I am at Your command." This came from the correspondent of that paper which was so incessantly spurring the galled sides of the jaded Ministerial mule Reform.—(Cheers and laughter.) He maintained that all the expectations enter tained by the partizans of the French Revolutions had been Proved false. Expeditions were still indulged to propitiate the military spirit of a reckless democracy.—(Cheers.) Her finances were in a ruinous condition. There was no Public order, no tranquillity, no security, no prospect of repose.—(Cheers.) lion. Members had spoken even in t list House in favour of a National Guard. Let them now turn their eyes to Grenoble.—(Cheers.) In a word, the condition of this country was deplorable ; and if they did not admire the consequences, it would be mere mad ness for them to follow the example.—(Cheers.) He feared that, by the introduction of a perpetual round of elections, the whole peace of society would be forfeited, as it was in the United States ; that the free and joyous, the open and honest character of Englishmen would be con tracted and poisoned by the universal devotion of heart and mind to the means, and not to the end.—(Cheers.) And he could not avoid fancying that when, in after times, some liberal and enlightened individual, sighing after the blessings which we now enjoyed, would breathe forth a hitter reproach against those who had forfeited for him his bright and precious inheritance.—(Cheers.) " - a-adrnitting the principle, so highly varnished, of demo aratic influence—admitting the contemplated reductions in the public expenditure, and the relief from th e b ur th e n °_`, taxation—admitting all the tangible benefits which Were held forth to the public, would not that man say, W 25 it for this—for those—for all—for all that could pos 81,u1Y come to p ass —that you put rancour into the breasts of man where it h a d before no resting place ?—(Loud . h vers.) Was it for this you disturbed the harmonious action of that mixed Government which has solved the great probl em o f a G overnmen t i n w hich security is blended with liberty a n d power ?—(Great cheering) Was it for this that you disorganised that ancient Monarchy which United all that was estimable in the character of the pre sent age with all that was useful in the days of Feudalism ? "(Continued cheeriug.) Was it for this that, by a v innovation, you have subverted all our ancient— all lir cheri s h e d in s tit u ti ons —was it for this that you ui,B turhed th a t a d m i ra bl e system of manners which ad rnitted of all distinctions, and which was accessible in all _its ranks, d e p r i ve d o f a ll i nv idi ousness , f ree from all re- Or" allch' because it o pe ned an honourable p ath of ambition men, an d t h e most h onoura bl e th a t could be in a State, becau se becaubecause leas sordid than the accumulation of wealthi Whichconstituted the only and the fleeting elevation which teolsibl is hesecu re d i n t h e ot h er coun tries. Was it f or you dissipated all those pleasing delusions that made Power a n d o b e di ence li g ht? W as i t f ur thi s t h at ~o u destroyed that time-honoured system of society, which harmonised all the gradations of life, which blended the security and stability of the Monarchy with all the ad vantages of a for t hat you Government?—(Cheers.) Was it thislvl,ichwtansatpyuoreu in n uby t erted the domination of that religion doctrine and tolerant in its principle —(Cheers)—and su bstituted for for it all those conflicting sects which have g herb an i shed foul Christianity from amongst us, and left little s ave' ashes—su perstition ? .—(Cheers.) tie did not overcharge tlie io : n picture.—(LoudG en tl eman, Cheers.) And, continued the Right that I may not he called to the bar af posterity —that may not be visited with that censure which willnaturall arise from the evile, public and private, which I foresee y this Bill must create—that I may carry with me to the last the satisfaction of haviug struggled in this conflict with perseverance, but without effect, and the consolation of having surrendered without dishonour—my last vote shall be given as my first, in opposition to the Bill,—(Loud and long continued cheering.) Mr. STANLEY was too well aware of the exhausted vacate of the House, and of hi s own i na bilit y t o f o ll ow so able As,howeveraspeech, to detain Ho n . M em b ers a t any length.-- the present w as th e l a t es t occas i on on w hi c h he sh ou ld have an oppoitunity of combating the argu ments of the Rig ht 110 n. Baronet, he could not entirely omit to take advantage of it. He admitted that th e whole rest e d resporrsibility with Ministers, and he rejoiced in it. The res pons ibility of advising the Sovereign to create Peers was great, as d bens f or 13 orou ghbrid i .r a been truly observed by the Mein e and St. Mawes; but when the two a Houses of Piiairtliiament were at hopeless variance, it Was undoubtedly the difference,power of the Crown thus to decide Toe me Right Hon. Gentleman then referred to the impeachmentpoeferLord Oxford, contending that the charge of makin g which Lord Oxford had s :38a very minor accusation, Sovereign so to exercise et by asserting the right of the met his ti jai twohis, prerogative e.r mero motu.— He over his head, and at las t ) felleiatrs the charge was hanging witted. Whatever Ministers to the ground unpro might in this case advise, this he (Mr. Stanley) would say, oti that th e y wou ld not shri n k f rom the respomib Y. —(Cheers. ) I in- Pacliment m i g h t b e a wor d to frighten children ; but it gft, wou ld onot alarm those wh o k new t h e stake they were play sake of a ndai,,,who disregard e d mere bridum f u l nien for the charging their conscientious duty.—(Much cheering.) Sir R. w Upon thi s po i nt h e quote d the authorities of undoubted ai p r p e o t l o e g aatn4 of Sir the ß Crown . Ste to After create as Peers, s er ting he the Right came toHon. the viiiiairt n o i i magini ngs an d g l oomy forebodings of the et of the evils this Bill would produce when corrupti on w "atan end, and w h en t h ose w h o for merly flourished by look e d h ack with regret to the .4 flesh pot s o f l said that this Bill retnedie 1 The Right H on . B aronet h a d no evil; but he (M r . S tan l ey ) would a.k, wa s i t the reme dy Governn of no ev il to teach the peo ple to know good ient and to pr i ze i t? He agreed that the Bill would not d irectly relieve distress ; but it could make the people more contented under it, knowing that they were fully and fairly represented. Although it was true, as the Right Hon. Baronet had said, that Mr. Canning resigned Liverpool when he became a Minister, he was succeeded by his friend Mr. Huskisson, who filed no less an office than that of the President of the Board of Trade. So much for the danger that public men would be warped by the wishes and opi nions of their constituents. He reminded the Right Honourable Baronet, who had referred to Mr. Fox, that the House was now legislating, not for 1784, but for 1832. The Right Hon. Baronet bad admitted that the hopes of the people of England had been greatly excited upon this subject ; but he had contended that Ministers might have proposed a more moderate, but a sufficient Re form. Why, then, did not the Right Hort. Baronet point out how far the present Bill exceeded his own measure of Reform ? The Right Hon. Baronet had argued that Mi nisters should have waited until the popular excitement had passed away—Rusticus expectat, &c.—and if the present Cabinet had adopted this course, what cries would nut have been raised of broken faith and of excitement, pro duced only for the sake of gaining office, while the wishes of the people were totally neglected, and their hopes eruelly disappointed.—(Cheers.) All the opponents of the Bill (the Members for Oxford only excepted) were for Reform —for moderate Reform; but none of them could agree on the degree of concession, beyond the point that not one borough should have been found in schedule A. The Opposition during the whole contest consisted of the re presentatives of rotten boroughs, who were fighting—not for opinions, but life itself. The Right Hon. Baronet had frankly admitted that he had no plan of Reform to offer ; and did he suppose that if this Bill were lost, another Government could be formed upon the principle of granting no Reform ? When he talked of the danger of the Bill, did he think nothing of the danger of reject ing it? Did he think nothing of the excitement of keep ing the measure pending, and paralysing trade and indus for another year?—(Cheers.) Much had been said of the licentiousness of the Press ; but was that licentiousness all on one side ? And according to the doctrine of the Hon. Member for St. Mawe's, a strong Government might despise it without driving the Attorney-General into a cru sade against the Press. He contended that the state of the Funds showed the condition of the public mind on the Reform Bill ; they rose and fell as appearances were in fa vour of it or against it, and when the Duke of Wellington made his celebrated declaration, the Three per Cents. were at 75, while at this moment they were nearly 83. ( Cheers, and no.) The Right Hon. Gentleman then en tered into some details to show that the middle classes were interested in maintaining public credit, inasmuch as they were the chief proprietors of the National Debt, and read an extract from the speech of Sir R. Peel, on the Roman Catholic Relief Bill, applying the reasoning to the pre sent state of the country as regarded the Refoatu Bill. He (Mr. Stanley) adopted every word of that reasoning, and only regretted that the Right Hon. Baronet on the present occasion repudiated his own arguments. The House was now taking leave of the Reform Bill, he hoped, to hear of it no more, and that it would receive the assent of the other House. After quoting the authority of Hume, re lating to the proceedings in 1688, on the Resolutions of the two Houses of Parliament, when the Peers gradually gave way to the Commons, the Right Hon. Gentleman concluded as follows :—We have now reached the latest stage of this Bill, and in taking leave of it I must say, that it is charged with the welfare and destiny of the na tion. I call upon all who hear me to join with us in bringing to a successful issue a measure, perhaps one of the most arduous, perhaps one of the most important, perhaps one of the most perilous that was ever agitated.-- (Cheers from the Opposition benches.) Yet, perilous though it may be to pass it, there may be greater danger in rejecting it.—(Cheers from all sides.) " Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety ; " and the flower can only he plucked by grasping the nettle boldly. I earnestly hope that the other branch of the Legislature will join with this House in adopting a measure on which depend the future tranquillity and happiness of this realm, the maintenance of the prerogative of the Crown, and the independence, security, and liberties of the country.— (Continued cheers from all sides.) Mr. HUNT rose and obtained a hearing with great difficulty, but he said that he was determined to give the Bill one embrace before it left the House. He then con tended, as on a former occasion, that it would afford no relief to the working classes, and read an extract from the Times of January 6, 1832, in order to show how cheaply the business of Government was transacted in America compared with this country. He concluded by declaring that he meant to vote for the Bill, as nothing better could be obtained. Col. SIBTHORPE termed the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland the Magnus Apollo of the Ministerial side of the House, who was put up on every Occasion to stand the brunt of debate, and stated that he should persevere in his votes against the Bill. Not being able to obtain a patient bearing, the Hon. Member moved that the farther debate be adjourned until to-morrow (this day.) Mr. HUNT (we believe) seconded the motion of ad journment ; but we understood that it was subsequently withdrawn, and the cries of " Question" becoming univer sal, the House proceeded to divide on the original question. The numbers were these : For the third reading '155 For Lord Mahon's Amendment 239 Majority for the third reading -116 The Reform Bill was accordingly read a third time. On our re-admission to the gallery we feund the Howe in great confusion, and— Lord ALTHORP on his legs, stating, that previous to the passing of the Bill, it would be necessary for him to submit some amendments. This he should hope to do to-morrow, unless the debate on the Sugar Duties should occupy too much time. In case of disappointment, he hoped the House would not object to sit on Saturday. The House then adjourned at aQuarter past Five o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS, Maßcir 22. The Duke of WELLINGTON' presented a petition from Welli ng t on , aga i ns t th e new s y s t e m of education in Ireland. Lord LORTON presented several petitions to the same effect. On the motion of Lord AUCKLAND, the Irish To bacco Bill was read a third time. Lord BEXLEY presented a petition from Reading and Maidenhead, against the system of education in Ireland. Lord AUCKLAND moved that the House go into Committee on the Irish C.ial Lord ELLENBOROUGH could nut consent that the Bill should go any further, unless he had a personal as surance from the Noble Lord that compensation should be granted to the coal-meters of Dublin. Lord AUCKLAND assured the Noble Lord that the claims of the coal-meters of Dublin would be considered not only fairly, but indulgently. The Bill then went through a Committee, and was re ported without amendments. The Earl of RODEN presented petitions from Ware ham, Bandon, Monaghan, and several other places, against the new system of education. Lord ELLENBOROUGEI moved fur returns of the number of vessels employed by Spain, Portugal, and the Brazils, for the Suppression of the Slave Trade. On the motion of the Marquis of LANSDOWNE, returns of the population of several counties were ordered. The NOBLE MARQUIS also presented a petition from two parishes in Queen's county, for the abolition of the tithe system in Ireland.—Ordered to be referred to the Committee. IRISH EDUCATION. The Earl of WICKLOW presented a petition from Murragh against the system of Education in Ireland. The Noble Earl, in bringing forward his motion on this subject stated, that as the subject which be had now the honour to bring before their Lordships had been so very lately discussed upon the presentation of petitions, he should feel much apology was due from him to their Lordships in thus even calling their attention to it, did he not feel strongly impressed with its vast importance, not only as it regarded th e f u t ure we lf are o f t h e country to which it more imm e di a t e ly app li e d , b ut a l so o f i ts tranquillity. Upon one pat t of this subject all were agreed, namely, that a sound, wholesome, and moral system of edu cation, adapted to the wants and circumstances of the coun try, would do more than any measures brought forward by Parliament to effect its future civilization and tranquil lity. While, however, all were agreed u p on t h at po i nt, they were lamentably at variance as to the beat method of carrying it into effect. Were their Lordships now, for the first time, called upon to establish a systemof education in that country , they might well indeed hesitate and feel difficulties in overcoming the case, for while upon the one hand they found the whole Prot es t an t population of the country , the hierarchy of the country, the whole Presbyterian portion of the country deprecating a system of education, in which the Scriptures are not enforced ; on the other, they were t a ught to believe the Roman Catholics considered the Scriptures to be at variance with the doctrines of their church , and with their religious principles. Those who took this view of the case consi dered that there was but one way of overcoming the difficulty, that of establishing two different systems of education. Another diffi cu l t y th e n stared their Lordships in the face, far they had the united declarations and the opinions of all parties o f th e vas t population, of the Bishops of ` lie country , and the declaration also of Dr. Doyle, that such a system of separate education was extremely The declaration of 17 Bishops stated that such a system would be injudicious, and Dr. Doyle observed that it would destroy the peace and happiness of the country. As it was notorious to their Lordships, for several years past, Parliament had made large grants for the purpose of carrying on the limi ted system of education in that country. The ques tion therefore, was, had those grants been unproduc tive. lie had no hesitation in stating that they had not; `or by means of those grants a system of education, calcu lated to the wants of the country had been in active operation. That system had first received its support from Parliament in 1816, and not a whisper was heard against it on the part of the Catholics till the year 1825, when there was a disposition shown against it by the demagogue Ca tholics of Ireland.—(Hear.) Such being the case, he (Lord Wicklow) had been extremely anxious to know the reasons which had induced his Majesty's Go vernment to withdraw their support from it, and he found that they had three reasons for doing so first, that it was partial in its operation ; secondly, that the subscriptions in favour of it were exceedingly small and inconsiderable, in comparison with the grants of Government; and thirdly, that its regulations were o' jetted to by the Roman Caholics. To the first reason he would say, that any man acquainted with the Society must be perfectly aware of the utter impossibility of its being carried on with partiality, without its being known; and with respect to its being objected to by the Catholics, as he had before stated, from 1816 to 1825, such an intimation was never heard, arid the general opinion was, that it was more favourable to the Catholics than to Protes tants, and it was only, when the aspersions of a base faction were made against it that it was thought fit to remodel it. He would next be told that his Majesty's Government acted under the repeated recommendations of Boards of Commissions appointed to investigate the sub. ject. He judged that such a point would be relied on, as the Lord Chancellor for Ireland, on a late occasion, said as much ; but he well knew that the Noble and Learned Lord was constrained to adopt that line of argument ; for, if he advanced any other, he must have cast a slur on the Administration with which he was now connected. There were three Commissions or Boards appointed at different periods for the purpose of investigating the sub ject of education in Ireland. The first was in 1812 ; the Lord Primate of Ireland was at its head, and several Bishops were members of it. That Board came to a re solution, he was baund to admit, very similar to that which the present Board bad adopted; and it recommended that extracts should be made from the Scriptures, from which the children were to be taught. The Kildare-street Society adopted that recommendation, and it agreed that the Scriptures, without note or comment, should be read in the schools, and that no controversial books or catechisms should be introduced into them. In 15315 a report nas made by a Committee of the House of Com mons, and the very same words were adopted in it. From 1812 to 1825, no opposition was made to the Society ; and, in fact, the report of the Board of that day was in words and substance the same as the letter so much alluded to of Mr. Secretary Stanley. In 1825 another Board was formed, which did not go the length of recotnmend ing the abolition of the Society, but it undertook to put a system of its own into operation within it. They tried the plan for two years ; but after having given it a fair trial, the Commissioners declared that they met such diffi culties as induced them to desist altogether from the un dertaking. That Rerort was signed by every Member of the Board. The next Commission met in 1828, under the Government of the Noble Duke below him, of which the then Irish Secretary was Chairman. It came to a re solution recommending that copies of the New Testament should be introduced for the use of the children, under the care of their respective teachers—the Protestant version to the Protestant children, and the Douay edition for the Catholics. Now he wished to call the attention of the House to the difference between that recommendation and the letter of Mr. Stanley. The one proposed that the Scriptures should be read in a qualified manner, but Mr. Stanley did not say one word about it. He took up vari ous other parts of the Report, but he carefully left out all that appertained to the most important consideration. He would next be told that the new Board did not prohibit religious instruction, inasmuch as two days in the week were appointed for that purpose ; but the House would soon see how inefficient such a proposition was when they considered that the new system was founded in opposition to a Society which required the use of the Scrip tures—(Hear, hear.)—and, when Mr. Stanley's let ter alleged, that the reading of the Scriptures without note or comment, would be objected to by the Roman Catholics. The friends to the new system could triumphantly appeal to the reports of the various commis sions, but if he were to grant that these recommendations were entitled to respect, he would, at the same time, ap peal from the reports to the Government that appointed the Boards, and ark why it was that the respective Go vernments did not act upon them ?—( Hear.) He put that question more particularly in reference to the Government of the Noble Duke, who was anxious to make some im provements in the system of education, but hesitated before he rashly adopted the recommendations contained in them. In short, the caution of the Noble Duke was so great, that, up to the last moment of his Administration, there was neither a change made nor any prospect of its being introduced.—(Hear.) No sooner, however, did the late Government go out of office, and no sooner was the fresh Administration in possession of it, than the work of havoc began—(Hear)—the axe was laid to the root of all our institutions.—(Hear.) Revolution, under the name of Reform, became the order of the day—(Hear)—Refortn in finance—Reform in foreign and domestic policy—Reform in Parliament, in Church and State—lastly, Reform in the system of education.—(Hear.) Nothing was too great for their Ministerial comprehension, nothing too small for their inquisitorial execution.—(Hear, hear.) In their Reform mania the system of education in Ireland, which had rendered so much practical good, was subverted, and a system of theory placed in its room,—(Hear.) When he stated that the Roman Catholics were not averse to the system of the Kildare-street Society, he must admit that a large portion of the priesthood were hostile to it; several of the children were removed, though the parents, in many instances, refused to withdraw them; and, so far as his own experience went, he did not know an instance of any child being removed in his neighbour hood, and he was in possession of a memorial from several heads of families complaining that attempts were made by the priests to keep back their children.—(Hear.) He was aware that he would be asked did he mean to excite the people against their priests, and to discharge them films the influence of that body. To that he could only if the authority of the priesthood be on the decline, it was not for the Protestants to step in to revive it—(Hear, hear)._ and if the chains of the Catholics were wearing out, was it for the members of the Established Church to forge them again ?—(Hear.) He should be sorry to see the people of Ireland suddenly and violently withdrawn from the confidence of their priests, and transferred to the hands of agitators and demagogues; but he would wish to see religion and morality allowed to work their way, and the gradual light of knowledge let it upon them, by which they would be enabled to judge for themselves, and for their offspring, on those matters where their great interests were concerned. He would consider the converting a system of national education into a cloak for making prose lytes as unwise and unjust, but he would not shut out the light of knowledge from a whole people, lest proselytism should follow in its train.—(Hear, hear.) What caused the reformation ? And why were the people of the nineteenth century to be excluded from those sources which led their ancestors, in the fifteenth century, from darkness into knowledge ? Was it because the light of the Scriptures brought them from error into truth that the people of the present day were to be debarred from access to them ? Their Lordships were called upon to consider this question as affecting not only the established religion of Ireland, but of England also. He should expect the support of all those who wished that the Scriptures should be circulated in every part of the world ; he should likewise expect the support of all the orthodox friends of the Church of England. He should beg leave to submit the following resolution :- -• Resolved,—That inasmuch as, by the plan of education adopted by his Majesty's Government in Ireland, the Bible is practically excluded, this House cannot view that plan with approbation." The Duke of NORFOLK wished to correct an error into which the Noble Earl had fallen respecting the Ca tholics. The Noble Earl had stated that the Catholics were opposed to the reading of the Scriptures. Now the very contrary was the fact, for they always encouraged the reading of the Scriptures. What they objected to was, the right of private judgment which was sanctioned by persons of the Reformed Church. He %vas convinced that the best way to make good Catholics and good Protestants was to avoid all religious discord. The Earl of WICKLOW explained. He had not him self expressed any opinion on the subject, but merely stated what he bad been told. The Bishop of CHESTER said that the principle of the Catholic Church was to withdraw the Bible from the people at large. The principle of the Protestant Church, on the contrary, was to inculcate it as widely as possible. Mr. Stanley's letter acknowledged and sanctioned the Catholic principle, in opposition to the Protestant. He trusted that this new system of education would not be persisted in. The Duke of LEINSTER said that the most anxious desire of the Board was that the Scriptures should be read by the Catholics as Catholics, by the Protestants 39 Pro te,tants, and by the Presbyterians as Presbyterians. It was a foul reproach to say that the Scriptures were withheld by the new system. Lord SUFFIELD said that never was there so miser. able an expedient as this to raise an outcry agaiust the Cabinet. Two days in the week were allotted to religious instruction, and surely nothing more could be desired. He very much wished that Noble Lords on the other side would go through the public schools of England, and join with him as a parent in seeing to what extent religious instruction was given in them. He greatly feared it would be found that the pupils were more conversant with Homer's heroes than with the characters recorded in the Bible. He contended that this was a most miserable shift of a most rancorous opposition. The Bishop of LONDON maintained that religious in struction was by no means neglected in the public schools, and a very great improvement had taken place within the last twenty years. He knew that at the public school at which his own son was placed,youth received as good a re ligious education as the fondest Christian parent could de sire. If the Catholics were not opposed to the reading of the Scriptures, how did it happen that they were opposed to the Kildare-street system? The new plan was an in novation on Protestant principles, and therefore he, as a Protestant minister, could not agree to it. Lord SUFFIELD, after speaking briefly in explana tion, was proceeding to advert to some other points, when he was called to order by Lord TENDERDEN and the Mar quis Of SALISBURY. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE denied that the Bible was excluded from the schools. Within the short time that the new system had been commenced there were 40,000 applications for admission to the schools, and, under the Kildare-street system there were not more than 47,000 since the year 1811. The Bishop of EXETER said that this system was not sanctioned by any of the Committees that had been previously appointed. Mr. Stanley's letter made no men tion of the Scriptures. The Right Rev. Prelate then quoted several portions of evidence from the report of the Committee of 1824., and contended that the plan proposed by Government was not founded upon it, because it was not in accordance with that report, which recommended Scripture readings as the basis of education in Ireland. It would be recollected that the report of 1824 was sub sequently abandoned, because there was no standard com mon version of the Scriptures equally acceptable to the Catholics and Protestants. It might be imagined from Mr. Stanley's instructions that Scriptural readings were not prohibited, because any selections meeting the concur rence of the Board of Education might be used for the purposes of education. This, however, was not the case, for a word was introduced, he believed without any autho rity, but which would have a material effect in altering those instructions. That word was " entire," which was introduced before the words " of the Board ;" so that no portion of the Scriptures could be used unless with the approbation of every member of the Board. Thus every individual member had a veto upon the introduction of any selection from the Scriptures for the use of the public schools He should now advert to the system pro posed for educating Protestant children in Ireland, and in so doing lie must allude to Dr. Sadler and the Arch bishop of Dublin. Of the latter Right Reverend Prelate he had a personal knowledge, and be would say of him, that a more estimable character was not to be met with. Their Lordships would recollect that there had once been a Prelate of Socinian principles as Archbishop of Dublin, and should such be the case under the proposed plan the religious instruction of all the children in Ireland would be in the hands of this person. The Rev. Prelate then quoted several papers, in order to show that the plan of Mr. Staley was directly in the face of all the documents with which it professed to be identified, and contended that it was the bounden duty of a Protestant Legislature to take especial care that the Word of God should have free course amongst all classes of the people. The Rev. Pre late next adverted to the petition of the Catholic Bishops in 1824, and to the enciclical letter of Leo XII. to the Catholic Bishops of Ireland, i❑ which it was stated that the indiscriminate circulation of the Scriptures could not fail to be productive of great mischief. The Commissioners of 1824 had acted with great propriety, and without de parting from the duty of making the Scriptures the basis of education in Ireland. They succeeded in obtaining from the Catholic Bishops a Testament which the latter would nut object to have used in schools. This was obtained before the Catholics felt themselves so strong as they afterwards found themselves. The Testament, which was the Rhenish, had notes to it, but they were such as no reasonable Protestant could object to. In those notes the Catholic Bishops put forward their own interpretation of the Scriptures, but in a fair and candid manner, and cautiously abstaining from offending the feelings of any other religious persuasion. It was very strange that the use of this Testament was not insisted upon in all future plans of education. According to Mr. Stanley's plan there was no provision whatever made for printing Bibles, while, according to the Catholic rules, the Bible was practically prohibited, so that, in effect, there could be no such thing as Scriptural education in that country.--( Hear, hear.) He had now gone through the whole of Mr. Stanley's plan; and he was sure he did not overstate it when he put it thus:—lt divorced morality from the Word of God—it controlled the Protestant clergy iu the exercise of a right, and subjected them to a tyranny which neither the laws of God nor of man could acknow ledge.—it conspired with the Catholics in shutting out from the people the truth contained in the Book of Light, and consigned the Catholic peasantry to a state of irremediable darkness.—(Hear, hear.) Why did they (the Bishops) sit there as legislators ? Why was a strict union main tained between the Church arid the State? Was it to mike the Church political ? No ; but, in the language of hi s Noble and Venerable Friend, who had so long sat upon the Woolsack, it was not to make the Church political, but to make the State religious.—(Hear, hear.) He stood there as an advocate of the religion which he professed—a religion professed by the ancestors of their Lordship's, who had driven a bigot from the throne. He would not go on his bonded knees, as had been done after a most eloquent appeal to the House on a former oc casion, imploring their Lordships to entertain a measnre then under discussion, but he would implore their Lord ships to sanction the resolution which had been submitted. The Right Reverend Prelate then, in a lower voice, made some allusion to the necessity of Monarchs being under the influence of religion; and concluded with quoting the words, "Because thou hest rejected the word of God, he has rejected thee from being King over Israel." The Bishop of CHICHESTER contended that the plan devised appeared to him unobjectionable. Their Lordships would bear in mind that the greater portion of the children to be educated were not Protestants but Ca. tholics.— (Hear.) The Commissioners had proposed that five days in the week the children should be educated in various branches of instruction, and that two days the Bible should be read. This appeared to him very reason able, notwithstanding the complaints urged against it by the Right Rev. Prelate. Could any one doubt that John Knox was a staunch Protestant? Knox had entered, in his Treatise on Education, most fully upon every part of the Scriptures, as applicable to education. He said that " the reading of the Holy Scriptures indifferently is what I think very inuonvenient for children—(Hear) —until they have some notion of the plain fundamental parts thereof." The Right Rev. Prelate here quoted a passage from Burke, containing the opinion of that emi nent man on the vast variety of subjects contained in the Bible, and then went on to say it was impossible that the great mass of mankind in their edu cation could be always reading the Scriptures ; nor was it desirable they should. Now, he had made inquiry into the mode of education in Scotland—a country in which it was admitted there was great morality—and the result was, that the religious education was chiefly carried on at home, and the usual branches of education were taught at the schools. After all, he was of opinion that religious instruction No's best adapted for domestic education.— (Hear.) It was the duty of Government, doubtless, to take care that the religious views of all parties were not ' obstructed by a plan of education—(Cries of, " Hear, hear")—and the Committee, he thought, had acted in conformity with that view. He could not forbear observ ing that his Right Rev. Friend had made some remarks of an invidious ❑ature respecting the Archbishop of Dublin —(Hear)—which the facts would not warrant—(Hear) —and if Dr. Murray, or any other Member of that Board had acted unreasonably, he (the Bishop of Chichester) thought the Noble Duke at the head of that Coenwitsion wou?al have noticed it. Lord MONTAGU wished to state that in Scotland the Bible was considered essential in advancing the education of the young.—(Hear.) The Earl of RADNOR said he could not remain silent altogether, after hearing the speech of the Right Rev. Pre late (the Bishop of Exeter), although it bad been ably answered by the Rev. Prelate who had just addressed the House. The Bight Rev. Prelate, to whom he had first alluded, had pronounced an anathema which was neither called for under the circumstances of the c ase--(Hear)-- nor justifiable.—(hear.) In what the Right Hon. Pre late had asserted he had begged the question, and had pro nounced an anathema against all who ventured to differ from him in opinion. The Right Rev. Prelate had as sumed to himself the words of the Prophet addressed to Saul, applying them in a way which their Lordships would understand—(Hear)—but which he would not repeat, if lie had heard him correctly. Their Lordships would de termine whether the mode in which it was done was quite consistent with the charity which that religion taught.-- (Hear.) As to the complaint made against the Kildare• street Society, it was a little singular that the very things now complained of by the Catholics, who objected to the Bible being given to the children, unless it were accom panied with note or comment, so did many of the orthodox clergy, twenty or thirty years ago, :abject to the Bible Societies, when they were first introduced, and refused to become subscribers for distributing the Scriptures.— (Hear.) He was old enough to recollect the day when three-fourths of the Bishops would have objected to the introduction of Bibles without note or comment.—(Hear.) The Bishop of EXETER said that he had pledged himself to the world, and had maintained the necessity of obtaining strong security before the measure ought to be carried. When the Noble Duke had determined to bring forward the measure, he did him the honour to commu nicate with him, because he had said it ought net to be granted without some strong security, and he believed that such a security was possible. He told the Noble Duke the nature of the security which he thought necessary to be obtained; and the Noble Duke took the subject into consideration. Subsequently to this the Noble Duke told him what was the measure he was about to introduce ; and he (the Bishop of Exeter) disapproved of it. From first to last he distinctly and decidedly objected to the Bill, considering that the security was inadequate. Lord STOURTON had always avoided taking a part in similar discussions; and, i❑ so doing, he hoped that he was interpreting correctly the feelings of the House, as well as following his own. He certainly dissented entirely from the opinions and the tenets that he had heard often ascribed to persons of his religious belief. But yet he ab stained from any expression of his own sentiments, and mingling in discussions, that might, in his regard, appear to be somewhat of a personal nature. If he departed from this general rule upon the present occasion, it was singly and solely because the tenet ascribed to Roman Catholics of withholding the Scriptures from the people, which had been rebutted by a Noble Duke, a friend of his, had been again attributed to the Roman Catholics by the Right Hon. Prelate who immediately followed that Noble Duke in this debate, and he wished, therefore, to bring before the House the evidence of Doctor Doyle as taken upon oath before their Lordship's Committee in 1825. And the Noble Lord who opened the debate had acknowledged that Doctor Doyle was authority on those points. Doctor Doyle is eked, " In the address of the Roman Catholic Bishops to their clergy, published at the end of last year, and to which your name is affixed, it appears that you object to the possession of the Bible by the Roman Ca tholic laity ; does that apply to the Bible attempted to be circulated by the Bible Society, or does it equally apply to any other version of the Scriptures, such as that called the Rheims or Douay version? It applies to the version sought to be circulated by the Bible Society amongst us, and not to the Rhenish or Douay Version, which is sanctioned by our Prelates. That we have no aversion to the reading of the Bible, and the possession of it by the laity of our Churches, is best proved by the great many editions it has gone through in Ireland, under our express sanction, and to which editions there is affixed a Rescript of Pius the Sixth, directed to a prelate in Italy called Martini, who had translated the Bible out of the Vulgate into the Italian Language. We prefix this rescript of Pius the Sixth to our editions in English of the Bible, in order to spew that not only we, but the bead of our Church is joined with us, in exhorting the faithful to read the Word of God. We have not only procured editions of the Bible ; I believe three by Coyne, two by O'Reilly, and one by Cross (perhaps it is two) ; but this very year we have procured a stereotype edition of the Bible, of a small print and low price, to circulate it among all. So that of all things said of us, there is not any thing said of us more opposed to truth, than that we are averse to the circulation of the Word of God. Have the editions which have been circulated of the Douay or Rheitns translations been accompanied with notes ? They have very short notes. You think it necessary that notes should accompany the Bible for the purpose of ex planation ? In our country, where religious controversy prevails to such an extent, I do think it neces sary that short notes, explanatory of the texts, on which our differences turn, sli.iuld b? prefixed to the Bible." Now, only one word as to Doctor Murray, a person exer cising episcopal functions in Dublin, whose name had been brought before the House. Of that Right Rev. Person he would only say that lie knew no one who, from his great talents and virtues, and amiable and mild and conciliatory character, was more calculated to render important and valuable services to a country, in which conciliation and forbearance and charity were the highest requisites, as leading to that tranquillity and concord which was so truly and eminently desirable. The Earl of RODEN said that the Kildare-place So ciety had answered all the purposes that could be expect ed, and had only been opposed by the demagogues and Roman Catholic Pr iests, for be denied that the Catholic people were in hostility to that Society. The Noble Earl then referred to the number and respectability of the peti tions which had been presented on this subject from the Protestants of Ireland, and he had in his hand a declaration signed by 3,221 Roman Catholic Scripture Teachers, in which similar sentiments were avowed. In answer to the aspersions thrown on the Irish Protestants, he should only say that they had united and formed themselves into so cieties in self-defence, to uphold the law, and for the pro tection of their liberties, their properties, and their reli gion.—(Cheers.) The Earl of GOSFORD would readily admit that the Protestants of Ireland would have been justifiable in coming forward as they bad done on this occasion, if the statements made to them on this subject had any foundation in truth. If those statements had been correct, he, for one, must have united himself with his Protestant fellow country men, and withdrawn all confidence from the present Ad ministration. The most incorrect representations, how ever, had been made, and zealously disseminated amongst the Protestants of Ireland. Emissaries had been sent through the country to tell the people that the Bible was to he taken away from them by the Government, and the most unwarrantable means had been resorted to, for the purpose of exciting their feelings, and awakening ancient prejudices and animosities.—(Loud cheering from the Ministerial benches.) To such a system he could never give his countenance, and the difficult situation in which Ministers were placed, he conceived, ought to have pre vented every sincere friend to Ireland from sanctioning so unjustifiable a species of political warfare.—( Hear. ) Under the new system, 200 schools were applied for, and 61 granted. The Government was steering a middle course between two parties, and therefore he was determined to support them, feeling convinced that, in doing so, he was promoting the peace and security of the empire. The Bishop of BRISTOL deprecated the new system. The Bishop of LLANDAFF defended the conduct of the Archbishop of Dublin, and said at the same time that he must support the resolution, though he wished it had been more mildly worded. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said that the grand object of the demagogues of Ireland was to separate the two countries, and make the Catholic religion dominant over the Protestant. Lord PLUNKET said that all possible arts and delu sions were practised on the Protestant mind of Ireland, in order to create an excitement against this measure. He hoped that holy names had not been introduced into this debate for political purposes. The Roman Catholics were dissatisfied with the late system, and the only question was, whether or not there should be a joint system cf education for Catholic and Protestant Children. It was a doctrinal maxim with Roman Catholics that no individual should set up his own private interpretation of the Scriptures, in opposition to the dogmas of the Church. If it did so, he was no longer held to be a member of that Church. Now, the Protestants held that the Scriptures should be circulated, but that the doctrines of the Protestant Cnurch should not be impugned. If the Protestants insisted that the Bible should be a school-book, it was quite impossible there could be any joint education. The Prot 'tants by urging such a demand, called upon the Catholics to abjure one of the very first principles of their religion. The argument of the Right Re'erend Prelate was one which had encroached uu the jurisdiction of law itself, and went indeed so far as to render it impossible for him conscientiously to enforce the observance of the Fourth Commanilment--(Hear.) From a candid perusal of the plan of the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland, it was im possible to pronounce that the Scriptures were to be inter dicted to students in the schools on the new system. So far as the use of extracts of Scripture, or lessons from thence embodying the substance of the Scriptures, being interdicted in these schools, as had been vulgarly reported in Leland with a view to inflame the Protestant mind in that country, there was no truth in the assertion. The Duke of WELLINGTON said he hail always re gretted that the Government bad adopted the measure now under consideration, because it had rendered the Protestant population apprehensive of their conduct, and so far weak ened the Government in the affections of the Irish Protes tants, who, whether from historical recollections, their su perior information, or their possession of five-sixths of the property of Ireland, were the real strength of the empire there, and the pledge of union between the two countries. The worst feature of the change of the system was that it unhinged that valuable system of education ex isting there, imparting its beneficial influence to above 600,000 individuals, and making rapid progress through out Ireland. Was it nothing to check such a syst em i n its benificent course? It wa s impossible to read this cor respondence and not say that the Legislature was not rls!ing the interests of the Protestant population—the in !,nests of the rising generation, 1 ,01 Protestant and Ca ,ll,.lie, in thew schools, and !).I'tiTiq to hazard the bast in rr,sts and the safety of the Protestant establishment in I t Earl GREY said the Noble Duke had been particularly pointed in his insinuation that the measure had been adopted by him and his colleagues in consequence of their ho:ng practised upon and deceived, as if he alone had authen tic means of information, and was alone incapable of being misled or deceived. He was sorry to find that, during the debate on this subject, opportunities had been seized upon for the purpose of expressing party or religious feel ings, which were always inimical to the maintenance of peace and a good understanding in a community like this, c imprehending Members of different religious persuasions. He was the more concerned to hear from the Noble Duke himself any thiug which might have the effect of again awakening that religious animosty or di s trust which he had hoped the great measure of that Noble Dukes'e life had done so much to soften down and to extinguish. If he saw, as he thought he bad seen, a measure which was likely to conciliate parties of different religious persuasions, and induce professors of opposite creeds to send their chil dren to acquire in public schools that information which they could not otherwise obtain, and which was always of s ► much importance in the improvement of the condition of society, but more particularly in Ireland, were we to be de. terred from adopting that measure as part of the policy of the Government, because there were not wanting some who were ready to tell him, as they had told the Noble Duke in reference to the great measure of Catholic Emancipation, " Yon are going to dissolve the ties which boud the Pro testant interests in Ireland to the throne of England. You will strengthen the hands of those•whose political and re ligious feelings are opposed to the union of the two coun tries, and weaken that party in the State on which you can alone depend."—(Hear.) He was not, be trusted, to be de terred from doing what he clearly conceived to be his duty as a Minister, by language which had failed to have any effect on the Noble Duke when in office with reference to a measure of much greater importance ; and, least of all, ought so give to them any weight when coming from that Noble Duke's own lips.—(Loud cheers.) On that occasion he (Earl Grey) had felt the force of the arguments adduced in favour of that measure, and supported the Noble Duke in the great object then contemplated. Least of all shoo d he be disposek to listen to arguments drawn from vulg. r bigotry, or religious fanaticism, in determining upon a question of such vital interest to society in that part of 0 .r empire, where the want of education was most sensibly felt and acknowledged by all. If partial dissatisfaction might be the result of the measure, he begged to say that the conduct of the Noble Duke on some occasions had met with op position from the Protestant party in the north of Ireland, who continued their processions in despite of the presence of the King's troops sent to enforce the order of the Noble Duke's Government. Nor was there wanting a mouth piece for that party, in that very House, in the person of the Noble Lord who in partrepresented that interest there. For on the first day of the Session, 1830, that Noble Lord told the Noble Duke, in his place, that he had weaned from him and his Government that party on whom alone he could with safety have depended in the hour of trial. He wished that it would be permitted to his Majesty's Go vernment to proceed with the measure which they contem plated, as being alike beneficial to the Protestant and Ca tholic population of Ireland. And, notwithstanding any insinuations—(Hear, hear)—that might be thrown out, he could yet truly say that no one could be more attached to the great truths of Christianity, or to the support of the Protestant Church, than was the humble individual wile then addressed them.—(Hear.) He had, however, still to learn that in adhering to a line of conduct which had proved disastrous to other religions, and which alienated trona this country the affections, not only of the people of Ireland, but also the good-will of other nations—he had yet to learn that such a line of conduct was calculated to preserve the Protestant Church.—(Hear, hear.) He had been educated in a different school. He had been taught that where grievances existed, the first step taken should be to examine into them, and, if redress was requisite, to grant it without delay, and not wait until it was forced upon the Government, in which case it would not be received as a boon, and would, of course, fail to couciliate.—(Hear.)— The Noble Duke, however, had said that every thing was well ; but the information which he (Earl Grey) bad re ceived relative to the Kildare-street Society convinced him thee it was not operating benefically for the people of Ire. land—( Hear, bear)—that it was not giving to them that which was contemplated--a system of national education. The Noble Duke had said that 600,000 children bad been educated in Ireland; and, from the way in which he said it, one might be led to imagine that they were all educated by the Kildare-street Society. Such, however, was not the case. All that had been done by Government was to withdraw the Parliamentary grant from the Kildare-street Society, and to place it in the hands of a Board. Every thing else was left precisely as it was.—(Hear.) The fact was that 560,000 children had been educated in Ireland altogether, by all of the schools, Catholic as well as Pro testant, and of that number only 57,000 were educated by the Kildare-street Society. The Duke of WELLINGTON—Yes, 147,000 wer educated by that Society. Earl GREY was willing to give even that number to the Noble Duke, though he believed it to be exaggerated, and still it left 400,000 educated by the other schools. The chief part of those educated by the Kildare-street So ciety were educated in Ulster ; very few in Connaught, anti very few in Munster. This fact alone showed that it was not operating beneficially as a system of national education. Government had taken fur their guide in the plan which they had adopted the reports of the two Commissions. The only question was whether they were or not to have a system Of national education in Ireland. If they were to have such a system, it must be upon a plan agreeable as well to the Catholics as to the Protestants. Was there, he would ask, in that plan any want of attention to the religious interests of the country ? He was certain that no reasonable person could answer in the affirmative. Its beginning was most auspicious, and the most sanguine expectations were entertained of its ultimate success. He was so convinced of this, that he would do his utmost to support it, and he trusted that it would also receise the support of their Lordships. It was for their Lordships to determine whether they would defeat at its outset a project calculated to promote peace and good will amongst man kind, and to promote the welfare of the Protestant Church, which could not be safe without the prevalence of peace and good-will in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) The Earl of WICKt.ow replied, and Their Lordships then divided— Non Contents—Present Proxies Contents—Present Proxies 27— 87 Majority for Ministers The House adjourned at Oue o'clock. Prince Puckler Muskau, the celebrated, "Ger man Prince," is the head of a noble house in Prussian Saxony, but he is not entitled to the rank and privileges of a Sovereige Prince of the empire, although in many respects he exercises considerable power in his own domain. The Prince is alliedby marriage with the family of the late Prince Hardenberg, Chi. Minister to the present King of Prussia, his Highness having formed an alliance with a daughter of the deceased Prussian Statesman. The Princess Puckler Muskau, before her mar riage with this distinguished tourist, was relict of a Prussian Nobleman, by whom she had a daughter who became the con sort of Prince Carolath, and who, with her husband, came to this country in the summer of la), on a visit to their Ma jesties. Prince Puckler Muskau, on his last visit to England, was chaperoned by Baron Bulow, the Prussian Envoy, who in. troduced him into the Travellers' Club. RECOLLECTIONS OF AN ASSIZE WEEK.-- A man was indicted for setting fire to a stack of straw. An ob. jection was started that it was a stubble stack. The Judge de. tided that the term straw did not apply to stubble, and the pri. sorer was acquitted.—The Counsel for a man convicted of sheep-stealing endeavoured to get rid of the case by showing that the leg bones of the sheep did not fit in the way described in the indictment. Objection over-ruled, on the ground that the non-fit was owing to the sinews having become dry and contracted.—The prosecutor in a case in which a man was con victed of robbing him of his handkerchief, whilst he was at tending a funeral sermon at a Baptist meeting-house, being asked by the Judge why he did not take care of his property when he was in a crowd, replied, " My Lord, I was attending to what the minister was saying." Judge—" Oh good, very good. I wish every hearer was so attentive."—ln the case of a man convicted of stealing some barley, his Counsel asked the prosecutor why he grew barley in a particular field ? The Judge - to the Counsel—" Why do you carry a 5/. note in your pocket ? I never heard such a question put- I will not allow such non. sense before me. The Jury, myself, and the auditory deserve better treatment." —Two men were tried for stealing a hand. vice, and acquitted. The prosecution will cost the county more than is usually allowed by parish officers for the support of a man and his wife for twelve months. THE BITER BIT.—A farmer's wife not many miles from Spalding, and who usually attends the market with her butter and eggs, one week lately being busily engaged, which prevented her attending the market, for the sake of convenience consigned her butter and eggs to a shop not far distant from the town. Being a new custo mer, old split-plum commenced trying her honesty , and th e butter being found de titc,ieenretpi, weight, if it is not weight it ought t o b e , for my pound it was soon communicated to the old lady. She weight, which has stoo d the test of ages, is somewhere not to b e youribu'ld ,and I was compelled to weigh my butter against one k pounds of sugar.—Boston Paper.