The Sun. — London, England, 1847-04-23 00:00:00

Ilwooti— of Fau- f• Owen, r, 6 Yr s ' st. 1011r— iree paid. 5 yrS--- c!GHT. Acid (t) is (t) (t) rtitl 3ess. t. Burgu- • AS GUltle oek, bridge, s td thence , 1847. kes. st 6 l b ' '5 1! 5 6 ° 3 6 1 3 6 , 6 1 3 3 5 13 3 5 1 / 1 3 5 k 3 5 " 3 6 5 3 5 3 4 13 was ( aefi Bst Illh gat) ; ...... tads 111 stoplo a °rids• if de" C. (11 Isle) 2 Owen Bower, Mr. R. CX s4f. ' MfOrd'S i glepot" nk into ii9e l Y es b e auA. 1 win' r three- cat) , .... : 5 ..... Broor l ade the 0 0601 ; ra eralt" Cle w to it tIP ilander• 3 yr* ;st 81b; ;on) 1 _. 2 t 0 111 0 6 b 10 1! eCer i * , s t by 14 te• 3A 7 ' l ' 4 sostio ,tit) !'''''o° do Iw 5y l'be tol mad e ..eeti 2 e en, Bst ed that :onday, TO IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, Apra 22. Ito Lo RD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool sick at F ive _ o'clock. LAW OF LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND). Lio n on marquis of 'WESTMEATH said he had a mo nn the notice paper connected with the law of 40,2010 rd and tenant in Ireland, which he begged to post- Pone till after Thursday the 29tn, in order that the secon dreading of the Government Bill upon that subject is . mightnot be int e r ru pt e d. Th e Noble Lord then read "l Motion, which was partially altered. He continued to a ay, that as h e was upon his legs, i t was hi s mos t painful haveto bring f orwar d a matter w hi c h he would rather refrained from. But as he had the crime resting ur n hint of being an Irish proprietor he would not , Lordships might be assured, stand as a butt to any order whatever in the performance of his duty as a member of P ar li ament. Il e a d m i t t e d, th a t if any mem erinf the B r iti s h P ar li amen t rose u p in his place and spoke on any subject he was open to have his conduct Criticised. th He fo un d no f au lt w i t h that ; but he did not bbb a t3e3 e, when he rose in the House as an Irish Peer, to mi s i e e the ground cut from under him by misstat e fou m n e di ts, h were nut forth for the purpose of n ng 11 P° 11 those ' or b grounds arguments that might cejol. ansbooxle—(L aug h ter ) the friends of Ireland. e l e might possibly have laid himself open to ridi but th e t en d ency of such misrepresentation ballet had been the subject of would Le to direct the of the assa ss i n t o his person. The Times news tfPec of Wednesday last, in the report of the business he had Lord s hip s ' H o u se , had put into his mouth what nad not said, an l had as carefully kept out what he , le . t aa n nY did say. Th = N o ble Lord then referred to thk - O V nrt in the co l umns c i the Times, and lakuied that he I complained of ridicule on the pAt of the Noble and arned Lord.—(The Noble Lord here entered int o a :Petition of hi s statement and the provisions of the ; L e asure, whi c h was w i t hd raw n on Tuesday evening.) He repeated that he did not complain of ridicule on the part tblthe Noble and Learned Lord, who he knew was as in the discharge of his peculiar duties as any Lord Chancellor that had ever acted heretofore, and charac st,ed for the amiability of his nature. But he did - "LIK that Noble Lord had misrepresented both his ar - "eats and his measure. Some one, however, for some hatito Ind—some miscreant unseen, scribbling for his hire, chosen to m isrepresent his wiirds and his statements. . 3144 newspaper also contained the same serious said P resentation. He assured their Lordships that he :_ ald no such thing as was imputed' to him. He objected :1 the attempt which had been made to raise a laugh in c 4 , l e rfouie, instead of meeting the objections of his Bill. it edse vv vy aa as there asa representative Peer of Ireland, present do n h t is a d w u fu ty. determined, cost what it might, in the which hung over his , country, the Earirnters to put a e hop e d, by their Lordships support, stop to this evil, and he begged to move that ns , _otion. the of those two newspapers should be called to of t he House. He intended to persevere in the The Noble Lord concluded by saying "I beg Ilbpseertacar _I•o a move that the printers of the Times and Sun news trtlled to the bar of the II u-e Co answer for the privileges of your Lordships' House." Lord BROUGHAM said, that if their Lordships t iii it sved the galleries to be occupied, there was no doubt voultdhat the rep or t s w hi c h were ma d e to the public be m a d e i n a sp i rit perfectly f a i r an d h o nest. felt the necessity for that as entirely as his Lord eoLdid, and he thought the departure from such a re mind deserving of censure. He would, however, re both his Lordship that the plan usually acted upon in tee _ g ooses of Parliament was to avoid needlessly in ee.',ering in such things. That their Lordships had an ga-erubted right to prevent strangers from entering the diertiyheoißrf their Lordships' House there could be no uLtort Lordships were not excluded, and at the same ships should consider . that those persons ea : gave an account of their proceedines were, he might Wi t h, not in 99 cases out of 100, but in 999 cases out of W r t u h o , actuated by strictly honourable motives, and cave the singular ability and most admirable impartiality; account of what passed within their Lordship douse.es, „, He ho ed, therefore, that his Noble Friend q n - r deem th e notice he had taken of the circumstance ti - ."? sufficient, without pressing the matter any further. 4o v " ed es t. d , never seen any - any good arise, either to their ens ." 1 1 38 House or to the other House, from needlessly ernes into a conflict with any portion of the public 4" of this country. It bad been said that he (Lord esZg h atn) had expressed . it as his opinion that the press not, tlebes t public instructor of the country. Be did Press however, mean by the term "press" the newspaper n ern i t only, but what he meant was, that the press ge l-le-I:Cr a t d h v e is b e es a t ie possible instructor of the country. krth w Noble Marquie not to take any t b_ er step in the matter; fur it was his opinion, that was which his Lordship had taken of the subject 4 Sufficie nt . di se Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that the great Panurt"ltY in this case was to prove malevolence on the ace _ Of those who were accuse-I. It aa, merely en iti- A, L 7ra . cy of the reporter. Such practices as the N,ble ts (Westmeath) spice of could not pos yit_ take place on any respectabl. new,paper. sid es opportunity was alli-rded to any . :40°1 Noble es' :Mer a n n ber Who might be misrepresented ?t I.4''p.ng any mistakes that might be eche:mated. Their r epor , c iPs should consider the difficult position in which th at, port ers were laced—bear( hear )—and he trust, d not e imder theses ircumstances, the Noble Lord would Th e in his motion. h e Marquis of WESTMEATH said, that since es: found it was the wish of their Lord- I V; he would not persist in his motion. r o wever, he must say, that in the pres , nt state of Ire anl, it was very necessary that there should be a true st atement of what he said, and that the mi.representa t,VuS of the press should not be used against him. There was an article in the 7 irtzes containing most scurrilous abuse of him. Upon that he looked with contempt ; but still he must say that, coupling that ar ticle with the report, he believed the misrepresentation was deliberate. But, as their Lordships were agreed, he would not persist in his motion.--(hear, hear.) The LORI) CHANCELLOR said that the observa tions which he had made, he confined entirely to the Bill before their Lort ships. The Marquis of WESTMEATH said he believed that the Noble and Learned Lord was incapable of actin g in any unamiable manner, but he did feel that he had not been well treated. The motion was then withdrawn. POOR-LAW (IRELAND) BILL. Lord KENYON presented a petition from the vestry of Alarylebone in favour of the Poor-law (Ireland) Bill. The Earl of CLANCARTY laid on the table petitions from the county of Roscornm n, and the medical profes sion in the county of 'Trine, against the Poor-law (Ireland) Bill. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE, who was imper fectly beard, was understood to say that the Poor-law (Ireland) Bill was not what the Noble Earl had repre sented it, and did not contain any clause conferring a general right to out-door relief to the poor of Ireland. The Earl of FITZ WILLIAM wished to ask the Noble Marquis (Lansdowne), if, in the event of the Bill for the Suppression of Vaisrancy in Ireland not passing i nto law in the other House, the Government would pro „Ceed wi t h t h e o th er two measures, the Poor-law and the ""'anded Property Bills? The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said it would be Presumptu o us in him to sate what course would be adopted in the event of the other House not passing into a , law the Bill referred to. No exertion, however, would oe wanting on the part of the Govt rument to carry all the measures they bad introduced in connexion with Ireland. The subject then dropped. Lord MONTEAGLE presented a petition against any alteration in the Navigation Laws. EDUCATION. . The Bishop of LLANDAFF presented several peti tions in favour of the Government scheme of education. Earl FITZWILLIAM. presented several petitions against the Government scheme of education. Similar petitions were presented by Lord VIVIAN and the Marquis of LANSDOWNE. The Martinis of LANSDOWNE presented petitions from the inhabitants of Wakefield, the churchwardens arid others of the parish of Stepney, and other places, in favour of the Govornment scheme. • Lord DENMAN presented two similar petitions on the same subject. POOR-LAW (IRELAND). Lord RODEN presented a petitiou against a poor-law for Ireland. FEVER (IRELAND) BILL. The Earl of CLARENDON moved that the it Lord. ships should go into Committee on this Bill. The pre sent Bill was one brought in for the purpose of making some amendments in the Bill passed last session upon this subject. Lord MONTEAGLE considered that some difficulty - would be found in obtaining the necessary super vision under the provisions of this Bill, arising from the great extent of the unions of Ireland, some of them containing upwards of 500.000 acres, and he thought that some amendments might be intro • duced in the Bill to remedy this defect. Any amend ments that he might at a future stage of the Bill propose to their Lordships should be framed in such a manner as not to defeat or affect the principle of the Bill. This . Bill has been more or less obstructed by disputes among the medical profession itself, and Parliament had allowed its efforts to be neutralised by the party squabbles of local medical boards. He thought that the time had now arrived when such considerations should not ope rate, but the Government should come forward and Make such enactments as the emergency of the case re quired. The Marquis of WESTMEATH said, that consider ing the expense of the education of the medical profes sion in Ireland, and the facility that was afforded for obtaining diplomas in Scotland, and ,elsewhere, he t hought that there should be an amendment to protect t he members of the medics! profession in Ireland, and would propose an amendment to that effect. Th e Earl of CLANCARTY—His Noble Friend op- P rl site had spoken of the disputes among the medical p r ofession in Ireland having impeded the efforts of the u L ov of that en this subject. He must say , in justi ce t o tu e medical profession, that those distinguished mem bersthat profession, who had come before the House l ast session, and to others who had sent petition s, su p - Porting th © views of the Government, that they were actuated by motives quite different to those attributed to them. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE could assure the , Rouse th at i t was t h e earnest w i s h o f her Majesty's Government to deal satisfactorily with the medical pro fession in Ireland; but they had to deal first with that subject which concerned all parties. After a few wor d s f rom t h e E ar l o f CLARENDON and Lord MONTEAGLE their Lordships went into Committee. The Rill having gone through Committee, the Chair- PAU reported accordingly, and the Bill was ordered to be read a thi rd time to-morrow (this day). Their Lordships then adjourned. TR P, SUN HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 22. The SPEAKER. took the Chair at Four 'o'clock. Mr. Go Abody, the Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms, pre sented returns from the Gmrt. of Chancery. REPORTS. _ _ The reports of the Totiowing Bills were brought IT and agreed to : Hartlepool West Harbour and Dock (Dock Extension). London and South , Western Railway &c.) THIRD READINGS. The following Bills were read a third time and passed : Darwen Waterworks and Reservoirs. Newhaven Harbour. Ouse Lower Navigation, and Lewca and Laughton Drainage. Newmarket and UheaLerford Railway (Extensbn to Thetford). Newmarket and Chesterford Railway (Extension to Bury St. Edmund's, with a Branch to Ely). RAILWAY BILLS. Sir J. GRAHAM moved, pursuant to notice, to amend the firs resolution of the 23d day of February last, relating to Railway Bills, by omitting the words " considered in Colnioit:ees of this ' and to sub stitute the words " reported by Committees to this Hottse." Mr. STRUTT was not responsible for the resolution that it was noN siou,•4lit to alter. Every exertion had been made by the Commi: join rs to draw up the re- Inns. He should ffer no objection to the motion. Mr. ELIOT YORIiE supported the motion, and stated tsist toe Commatee of which he was a member was one, among others, that showed the necessity of its adoption. Atter a short discussion, the motion was agreed to. REGISTRATION BILL (SCOTLAND). Sir R. H. INGLIS presented a petition from the Sy nod of Glasgow, against this measure. GOVERNMENT EDUCATION. GRANTLEY BERKELEY presented several petitions against the Government scheme of education. Mr. UISBORNE presented five petitions from Not tingham, and other places, against the Government scheme of education. Sir R. H. INGLIS presented petitions in favour of the measure. Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE presented petitions from Nottingham in favour of the measure. Mr. MILES presented petitions from the county of Somerset in favour of the measure. Mr. B. B. CABBELL presented petitions in favour of the measure. Sir J. lIANMER and Mr FELLOWES also presented petitions in favour of the measure. Mr. OSBORN E presented a petition from Wesleyan Methodists in favour of the Government scheme of education. Mr. BRIGHT presented 350 petitions against the edu cational measure. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a number of petitions against the measure. Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from Lea mington, Hants, acsainst the Government scheme of edu cation, and several others to the same effect from other places. Mr. PUSEY presented a petition in favour of the Agricultural Tenant-right Bill. Mr. FERRAND presented two petitions from places in Yorkshire in favour 01 the Government plan of edu cation. Mr. S. CRAWFORD presented a petition from a place in Middlesex against it. Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from St. An drew's, Holborn ' praying for a poor-law for Ireland ; also a petition from Finsbury, praying the House to give the Raja of Sattara, an opportunity of proving his innocence ; also a petition in favour of the Ten Hours' Bill The HoN. MEMBER gave notice that, as the Secretary of State fur the Home Department was not in his place, he would postpone till Monday the motion he had on the books, to present a petition from Mary Young, of Fincham, Nortblk, complaining of the conduct of a magistrate. Mr. HUDSON presented a petition from the city of Yolk against any further concession to the Roman Ca tholics. UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE. Mr. CHRISTIE postponed for a fortnight the notice of motion which he had placed on the paper—to move the presentation of an address to her Majesty for a Com• mission to inquire into the condition of these Univer- sities. SALE OF FIRE-ARMS IN IRELAND. Coloncl VERNER also postponed for a fortnight calling the aVention of the Government to the impor tation and sale of fir—arms in Ireland. CONFERENCE AT LEEDS. Mr. BRIGHT gave notice that to-mit-cow he should in,ve that the petition presented from the Leeds Con ference be printed. TIIE l'OoR-LAW, AND POOR REMOVAL ACT. Mr. IiANKES wished to know from the Right Hon. Baronet the st-cretury of State tor the Home Depart ment whether the notice which he had on the paper for this day week, with respect to the poor•law, had any releo nc^ to tiie Po,r R moval Act of last s,ssion? Sir G. GREY said it had no connexion whatever with the Poor Removal Act. Mr. BANKES then gave notice that, on this day weilc, he should }repose the repeal of the Poor Removal Act of last session. Mr. FERRANI) inquired whether the Right Hon. Baronet positively int , nded to bring forward the motion to which the lion. Gentl-man had referred? Sir GEORGE GREY said it was his intention; but it was possible that the state of public business might prevent him from bringing it forward on that day. COMMITTEES ON PRIVATE BILLS. Mr. HUM E postponed until to-morrow (Friday) his motion of which he had given notice, namely, that all Co.mittees on Private Bills be constituted of five Mem bers only, who shall be appointed by the Committee of Selection, in the same manner PS Committees on Rail way Bills. That the Comrnitt*e of Classification shall form into groups all Bills which, in their opinion, it would be expedient to submit to the same Committee. That the resolution of the House of the 3d day of February. 1847, relating to Railway Bills be extended to all private Bills. That at the commencement of each session a panel of chair men of Committees on Private Bills be appointed by the Committee of Selection, and reported to the House ; and that the chairman of every Committee be selected from such panel ; and that the House do agree with the Select Committg e on Private Bill 3 in the second re port, that all Committees on private Bills be con stituted of five Members, selected in the same man ner as committees on R dlvsay Bills are constituted. MEDICAL REFORM. Mr. WAKELY, i❑ answer to a question from Sir R. Inglis, stated tliar. it was his intention to bring on the question of Medical Reform on Wednesday week. It was a Bill of the utmost importance; and he trusted that the discussion on its merits would take place on the second reading st the least. TIDAL HARBOURS. _ Mr. HUME postponed, till Thursday next, the fol.. lowing notice, namely—To move to discharge the mo tion for copies respecting Tidal Harbours, No. 42 of the 29th March. The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member is clearly out of order. Mr. COLLETT said that he would then rest satisfied with 'proposing the terms of his motion. Mr. WAIibEY seconded the motion. Sir G. GREY said that he could not conser.t to the motion of the Hon. Member until he had taken legal opinions upon the subject. It was never contemplated ti consolidate the bishoprics, on the vacancy of one see, without the consent of the other. A correspondence had already!taken place upon the subject with theaßishop of St. Asaph, and no obstacle appeared to stand in the way of the consolidation. Mr. COLLE 1."1.' said that he should persist with the motion, and take the sense of the House upon it. He did not see that these sees should be consolidated with , ut the consent of all parties, or dining their lives. Sir G. GREY said the Hon. Member had misunder rood him; he had said that the consolidation of the sees could not take place on the vacancy of one without the consent of 0-e bishop of the other. Mr. COLLETT—They might perhaps die at the same time. Strcngers were then ordered to withdraw. But the motion was u . timatplv negatived without a division. SERVICE IN THE ARMY. On the motion of Colon.] THOMAS WOOD, returns were granted of the number men enlisted for limited ~ervice, since the year 1806.1 of the number of men discharged atter the first period of service; the number of men who enli.ited for a secorid period of service; also the number of men who, during their first period of limited service, enlisted for unlimited servicei of the ut.mbcr of m-n who enlisted for a third period of service-; of the amount of bounties, if any, paid to men enlisting for a second and third period of service, or from limited to unlimited service. On the motion of the LORI) ADVOCATE leave was given to bring in a Bill to regulate the drainage of lands in Scotland. ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONERS. Mr. lIINDLEY wishad to ask the question. of which he had given notice, viz., as to whether there was any inter on the part of the Government to bring in any stthscquent m. asure in the event of the proposition for itp- regulation of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners +ailing; or whether they would suffer the Act William IV. to fall? Sir G. GREY said that provision had been made to save the inconvenience th would be felt in the event of such a contingency. BUSI/sTESs FOR TO-MORROW (THIS DAY). Lord MAHON wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Home Department what course it was intended to pursue with respect to to-morrow ? Sir G. GREY believed that the greater part of the evening would be occupied by the Committee of Supply, and should that be the case it was not proposed to take any important debate towards the end of the night. EDUCATION. Sir W. CLAY presented seven petitions against the Government scheme of education, and one in favour of it. IMPORT DUTIES. Mr. HUME wished to know whether it was the in tention of the Government to introduce any Bill this session to repeal certain anomalies in the import• laws, which inflicted great injury upon the trade of the country, and the community.at large ? Lord J. RUSSELL said, in reply to the general question of the Hon. Member, he had to state that it was not the intention of the Government to introduce such a Bill. Mr. HUME said, then, as the Government had not made up their minds on the matter he should on Mon day specify the laws to which he referred, and repeat the question. NATIONAL EDUCATION.—ADJOURNED DEBATE. On the order of the day being read for resuming the adjourned debate, Sir %V. CLAY rose and said, it was his intention to support the motion of his Honourable Friend the member for Finsbury; but he could not do so with out stating the reasons which had induced him to come to that determination. He wished to guard himself from any misconception as to his views, as one of the inconveniences of the mode by which this great question had la.!en brought before the House— namely, by a resolution for the proposed grant rather than by a Bill—was, that it could not be so easily separated into its various divisions and discussed in detail; therefore Honourable Gentlemen were more liable to misconstruction. He intended, by his vote, to express his disapprobation of the Go vernment plan; but by that vote he did not mean to declare his opinion that the State ought not to extend education among the people ; still less did he intend to give a vote of censure on the Government. If it had been intended to convey a vote of censure, he should not have voted for it. lie thought, however ' that the Noble Lord ought not to hav e yielded to the pressure which had been made. The Noble Lord said he did n , ,t approve of every part of the scheme—he would be very much surprised if he did agree with it. He himself, after anxious consideration, was o: opinion that ?here were so many and such serious objectiJ ns to the scheme that it woild be better to wait for some time, until they were able to propound a better measure, fre:(l from these objections. This was not_a mere grant for one hundred thousand poun is; they were about to lay the foundations of a wide and cemprehensive scheme, and they wcrie therefore, bound to establish a sound principle. His objections to the measure were insuperable. It was with regret he eiffered from the Noble Lord, but he did so conscien tionsly. He had endeavoured to state the grounds of his opposition as bri, fly and temperately as possible. He had the consolation to support him that the eloquent speech of his Right lion. Friend had not at ail touched the real merits of the question. That speech, and the other speeches delivered on that side, had convinced him that there was a great lack of education ; but they had not all proved to his satiseaction that this measure would meet the evil. He believed that this Bill would in a very great degree tend to place a great amount of pow,r in the hands of the Church of England. He thought the Church was rich enough to support its own schools, instead of coming to the House for assist ance. Were the present measure passed, then the Church would be able easily to fulfil its conditions re specting the schools, and by obtaining the proposed grants their power would be immensely increased. Not less than from 80.000 t o 100,000 p ersons wou ld b e broughtinto the pay of the State, each person receiving on an average from 151. to 201. yearly. To the appoint went of these parties as eligible to receive the pro posed grant: the clergymen of the Church were parties. Was the House prepared to grant this addi tional power? Now, he would ask, did history show that such an arrangement could be made with advan tage? No wonder the Church was so much in favour of the scheme, and the clergy attended at all the meet ings got up in favour of the plan.—(Hear, hear.) He had no doubt that, in one sense, this scheme would prove beneficial, for it would give the clergy a very im pot taut influence over nine-tenths of their parishioners. He thought, however, that the power given to the mem bers of the Church would be injurious to their manly independence and freedom of thought, be sides introducing amongst them an occupation foreign to those duties for which they were originally intended. It was quite impossible for the Roman Catholics to avail themselves of the benefits of the scheme , for it was coupled with such conditions as entirely precluded the attendance of their children at the schools, and this, in his opinion, was a fatal objection to the scheme. Nor had the speech of his Right Ho nourable Friend the Member for Edinburgh tended in the slightest degree to increase his approval of it, and if the brilliant ability of his Right Hon. Friend was in sufficient to throw around it anything like justification, whence was it to be obtained? The favouritism of the Right Honourable Member was threefold. In the first , place, he asserted that the members of the Church of England constituted the great majority of the popula tion, suppssing a village to contain a thousand inhabi tants—and nine hundred of them were members of the Church, they were obliged to leave the hundred. Secondly, the Dissenters, he con ten.di d, would be no worse off than th e y were before ; awl, finally, that th e Di ssen t ers wou ld obtain the advant age , i n common w i t h a ll ot h er parties in the country, of the increased security for prcp-rty w hi c h t h e i mprove d education would in duce. Such was the b es t excuse which his Right Hon. Friend had been enabled to make, but what would be said But posing the same argu nimbi were to I e adopted with regard to the pour law which they were atA,ut to pass for Ireland. What wotill be said, surposing it was to be alleged that the m n rity was to Imo no IL , ru fit from that law ?In that country the Church of England happened to be in the minority, and what would its members say if none but those who held the doctrines of tran , ubstantion were to be allowed relief ? Well, but let them look at it in its best aspects—in those aspects in which the promoters of the scheme wished it to be viewed. The Right Hon, Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Macaulay) said, if there were four schools in a particular locality, one connected with the Church of England, another with the Free Church of Scotland, a. third with the Wesleyans, and a fourth with the Inde pendents, they would equally participate in the grants, and asked if this would be injustice? But if four chools were opened in a district which had only sufficient children for one, they would have four bad schools in 'lead of one good school. Rather than bring about such a result it would be better to leave education as it was at present, leaving it as hitherto in a great measure to voluntary aid, instead of repudiating that principle and retaining its worst characteristics. He denied that the question was surrounded with difficulties, and that this was a step in the , right direction—(Hma., hear) — as he considered that it was a step in the opposite direc tior , as it would promote sectat ia - i differences, instead of a gin , ral and national system of education, and would lead to an unequal distribution of the grant. He had said that he was in favour of the Government promoting the education of the people ; but in a country where private opinion prevailed to so great an extent as it did in this, he considered that the religious education of the child should be left to the parents. Public opinion had materially altered :ince 1839, and therefore the adoption of such a scheme as that proposed in 1839 might be adopted without difficulty, and without materially interfering with the rights of consietice. He would have left things as they were ; he would have left it optional with the localities whether they would accept the grant or not. In a short time it would be' exceedingly, widely, and extensively, accepted. That would be a sound and comprehensive scheme, worthy of the House to adopt and fight through. In the mes.n time, so great were the objections to this scheme, that he considered it would be better for th em t o l e t t h e voluntary principle work its way—let them trust to it for by accepting the present measure ti aey would be sanctioning the very worst error that they )03 . sibly could. Let them then wait for some auspi. Jlons moment, when they would have a great national a , jheme, GAS COMPANIES. Mr. HUME moved for a statement from every gas company established by Act of Parliament in the United Kingdom, stating the several Acts of Parliament under which established, the rates per 1,000 cubic feet at which each company or corporation have supplied gas in each year since 1820, or if later established, in each year from the year the company commenced to supply gas, and the price of the best coals in each year for the same period ; also stating the amount of fixed capital of each gas company, and the rate per cent. of dividend to the shirt holders or proprietors on their shares in each year during that time.—Agreed to. •_ EAST INDIA. COMPANY'S SECRET PAPERS. Mr. HUME desired to know, whether the Goverm ment hal any objection to his motion for a list of secret papers laid before the Court of Directors of the East India Company by the Board of Control, since January, 1840, dis:ingutshiag those papers that were kept in secret Court of Directors. Sir J. 11013 HOUSE said, that his great objection was tliat if they were given they would no longer reimiim si-cret; and, in Let, it would be impossible to furnish their. Mr. HUME said that all ho wanted was a list of the papers, and not what they contain( d. Supposing the paper was on st , am-boats let the paper be named as such ; if on negotiation, let it receive that tale. He would, however, postpone it. EDUCATIONAL PLAN. Colonel LINDSAY presented a petition from Wake. field against the G,verionetit educational grant. MILITARY TRANSPORTATION". Mr. HOPE wished to ask a question of which he had givk n notice. It had relation to the transportation of military offenders. He understood that in future it was intended to convey them, at least, from India to the Cape of Good Hope. He asked if this were correct, and that, also, in case of transportation from England, whether a different arrangement was to prevail? He wished likewise to know whether the arrangement was made with the concurrence of the colonial authorities? Mr. HAWES said the Hon. Gentleman's questions were longer than the motion of which he had given notice. Re garding transportation from the colonies, it was arranged. that military convicts from the Mauritius and India should proceed to the Cape of Good Hope, where a depot was established for their reception. With regard to the support of these establishments, they were not to be supported out of the Colonial fund, but out of the Im perial treasury. No other provision was in contem plation at present. REFUSAL TO BURY PAUPERS AT WAR- MINSTER. Mr. BOUVERIE postponed the motion of which he had given notice, relative to the refusal of the Vicar of Warminster to bury Sarah Garrett, a pauper of that union, till that day week. BISHOPRIC OF ST. ASAPH. Mr. COLLETT, in moving for copies of all corre spondence with the Bishop of Bangor, of any case sub mitted to the law officers of the Crown, and of their opinion on the subject, previously to the appoint• ment of a Bishop of St. Asaph, in July, 1846 said that he would trouble the House with very few ob servations, because, although he had not been in com munication with the Government, he had every hope that his motion would be acceded to. It would be re membered that in the early part of last session he had taken the liberty of asking the First Lord of the Treasury the following question: whether there was any intention, in the event of creating the new Bishopric of M. nche,ter, it was also determined to unite the sees of Barigor an i St. Asaph. (The Hon. Member then prec ed .d to read fr om the jour nals the debate which had taken place in the beginning of the session.) Mr. FERRAND—I rise to order. The Ron. Member has read a part of a debate which took place in this House in the early part of the Benton. LONDON, FRIDAY MORNING, APRIL 23, 1847. worthy of the Noble Lord, worthy of the name be bears, and hio belies el that the career of the Noble Lord would be yet the brightest illustration of that name. Sir JOHN PAKINGTON desired to offer his thanks to the Noble Lord (J. Russell) for his course upon the present question, and to tender him his support. There was no part of the Hon. Baronet's speech that he dissented from so much as that portion which allegtd that the Government plan had been triumphantly re futed. So far from agreeing in this opinion, he thought that the case of the Government had been most clearly and conclusively maintained. Why had the speeches of the Hon. Members for Finsbury and Durham been so feeble ? Why, but because that they bad no system of their own to propose—no scheme or plan on which to proceed. He considered the opening speech of the No ble Lord at the bead of the Government had anticipated every objection, and completely made out the necessity of the proposed grant. Fortified, as that speech had been by the able speeches of the Right Honourable Member for Edi:iburgh, and the Right lion. Baronet the Home Secretary, little remained for him to say. He would only refer to one point. It was that which proposed to leave out certain Dissenters from participating in the grant. He could not agree with that exclusion. As a member of the Claire!) of England, and also as a member Of the National Society, he wished to deal with the subject befor e th em i n a c haritable spirit. There were several most important institutions in the country which would not be eligible for the grant He might instance one of t h e most va l ua ble establish ments in the country, at which the children of the Churchmen and the Dissenters met together, end were educated, in the most harmonious manner. No . difficulty whatever h a d ever ar i sen on account of religion. The establishment to which he referred eas King Edward's Grammar Schot 1 at Birmingham. The Hon. Member then read an extract from the rules under which the school was manized —The following was a statement of the child ren o f t h e different persuasions in that school:— Church of England 798 Independents Wesley arts Baptists Socinians Lady Huntingdon's 8 Jews 4 Roman C a th o li cs 4 Swedenborgians Calvinists 1 Quakers ... 1 This large school was conducted is this harmonious manner. He confessed that he wished most earnestly that he could confine the schools in such a manner as to give religious education to the children, in accordance with the principles of the Church of England ; but, whatever might be his own private opinion on the sub ject, he must allow some weight to the principles and opinions of the other great sects and parties throughout the country.—(Hear, hear.) He thought the ar guments of her Majesty's Government, in bringing forward this measure, perfectly conclusive, and he hoped that the attention of Government would be shortly turned to the condition of the labourer, and to the sanatory condition of the people of this country. He must confess, however, that he was to some extent dis appointed, because her Majesty's Government had not proceeded in a more comprehensive manner than they had done upon these subjects.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. HUME was anxious to say a few words upon this subject, as he must say that from promises and pledges given by the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London to his constituency he did expect to have seen a plan more comprehensive than that introduced upon the present occasion. The Noble Lord stated in the com mencement of the present session that he was prepared with a more extended plan of general education, and he was quite surprised that at the present time, when a vote of 700,0001. was taken for the army alone that the paltry sum of 100,0001. only should be required to carry out the plan of the Government with respect to the education of the country. He thought that the people of England were willing to bear a much larger sum for that purpose.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Macaulay) had made a most eloquent, and a most forcible speech upon the subject, and the arguments brought forward in that speech were in his opinion perfectly unanswerable, and he most cordially agreed with the Right Hon. Gentle. man in considering the present state of education in Scotland as resulting from the improved and general system of education which prevailed in that country.— (Hear, hear.) The system of establishing schools in every parish of Scotland was a most desireable and effi cient one, and one which he should be most happy to see carried out in this country. He quite agreed with the conduct of the Prussian Government, in prosecuting the education of the people, he believe with the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh, that it was the duty of every Government to do its utmost to promote the education of the people, and he regretted to hear any Hon. Member in that House say that it was not the duty of the Government to endeavour to edu catete fi r the t p i e f o i n l o e t . th H e r fi r r s e t a , l(yiu tithoughtduties of the t h a s t t t a h t e a . t w i a i s e o c n o e u o l d f not reconcile the statement of the Hon. Member for Derby, that the people 4 Scotland could most of them write a good letter, and yet he went on to say that the people were little better than " barbarians." He would dismiss the subject from his mind, and hurl back the charge thus made upon his country, by saying that the statements of the H on. Member were perfectly incon sistent and irreconcileable. The lion. Menitier then proceeded to contrast the state of education in Pru , sia and the United States, where a system of State edu cation prevailed, with the state of education in this country, where there did not exist any general system of Government education. The result of the analysis of crime in England for the last three years, showed teat there was a decrease of 32 per cent. in the countri. s where the people were best educated. Mr. Neeson, who made out these tables, made it evident that wherever there was crime there also was ignorance, and the complete absence of the means of education. To show that Mr. Laing never intended to say that education did no good, he would refer to the ob • servations he made in favour of the penny postage, of which he was an anxious supporter. He agreed with Mr. Laing that every measure ought to be sanctioned which even indirectly promoted education. He was told by the Noble Lord at the head of the Government, and the Noble Lord at the head of the Woods and Forests, that they were beset with difficulties m this measure, and that they deplored they could cot carry out a more extensive system o f education. He ma i nta i ne d th a t it was the right o f every one to have education, an d i t was nota was sattaers o g f oo t d oler a at m ion a . o A as orCaachmooliaacber a Dis senter was so so his generally e judgment g t iven to the Noble Lord. — ( Hear, of the a Church of E g l and, and had , g ood a claim to the a d vantage of State educat i on . He did not as sent to the character of moral courage w hi c h hear.) O n thi s question the Noble Lord d i sp l aye d t h e greatest cowardi ce . lie was afraid to ta k e t h e course approved, He was goi ng to answer the gm. u nds on which Mr. Baines proceeded in hi s opposition to the education sc h eme , b u t h e would not all u d e to them now. His own opinion was, that the adoptive an o s f c u t l h k e e d right in the h e most course. He m anner f rom the dissenters an d t h e members of the Church of England ought to be put into the same boat and sent across - the channel. He thought an effort should be made to unite all classes, and he did not doubt, ,judging` from the evidence they had from Holland and from Ireland, that this was practicable. He thought if her Majesty's Government agreed to appoint a Committee to enquire what each party wanted, t h a t means could be devised for thi s purpose. They adopted such a proceeding with regard to the navigation-laws, the poor•laws, and other questions, and he did not doubt, but if this were done with regard to educa tion, a mode would be pointed out to reconcile all differ ences. When Holland was under subjection to France, at the time of the French revolution, an attempt was made by France to give education combined with reli gion to the people of Holland, and this attempt was met by the ministers of the various creeds in a spirit of good will. The conseque, co wasp that the clergymen of the different persuasions and the schoolmaster—each in their respective sphere--carried out the intentions of the Government. The next case he had to bring before them to show the practicability of combining a religions and secular education, was the national system of education adopted in Ireland, and he would refer to the 9th report of the National Board, to show the per fect success which had attended their efforts. He attributed muoh of the crime which existed in this country to the religious differences which prevailed; and those who fomented them could not lay their hands on their hearts and say, that they were doing their duty to God and man; and if crime could be repressed by education, as he thought it might in a great degree, it would be cheaply purchased at 500,000/. a-year, instead of 100,0001., or at almost any cost. lie considered that the state of things in this country required a greater and more comprehensive measure than the one proposed, and if the Committee sought were granted he should be able to prove that a truly national system of education might be carried out without any of the evils wbich appeared to be involved in the Government plan. He also considered that there ought to be a Minister of Instruction in this country, assisted by a board of persons selected from the most competent in the community, to whom the task of superintending the education of the people should be intrusted. It was on these grounds that he felt it his duty to vote for the amendment of his Hon. Friend. Sir W. JAMES said he should support the plan of the Government, because he considered that the time had come when it was the incumbent duty of the Stsee to promote the education of the people by every means in its power. If they wanted evidence of this necessity, it was to be found in the fact that out of every 100 of the population, only were, as 30 a profession. I to4ocould read,tappeared a 1,000,0 00 or 800,000 of the children of the poor were re ceiving no educatio n at all, and were being brought up re to rapine, as itpe l t i tr d ed th t a o t him that a great proportion of the public feeling was in favour of the plan. Looking at the state of the Church, of the different dissenting denominations, there was as large a 'lsms of public feeling in favour of it as was ever given in support of any other public measure which had of late years engaged the at tention of that House. The Hon. Gentleman the Mem ber for Montrose was the only one in that House who had advocated a compulsory system of education ; but he did not agree with him, as he considered that the plan of aiding the voluntary efforts of benevolent indi viduals was the best that could be adopted, and that a compulsory system was foreign to the habits of the people of this country.—(Hear, hear.) But where a school was required in a district, such as a colliery district, where there were no benevolent persons to aid it by voluntary contributions, he thought that the state should step forward and provide the necessary funds.—(Hear, hear.) He was strongly opposed to a secular system of edu cation, as he considered that reli poargooofdethduancateiovnil ;; y a e a t d, hebe there fore, that mode of e d uca ti on t o those were in favour of it, l g o i i f e o v n h el i w sh i a e t s f e t w o l a too n c uw o l dni.inct nota l o po n o r more t t r g ey n n mtye who leaving the religious portion of the education to the clergymen of the different denominations, and to the parents of the children. He perfectly concurred in the remarks of the Noble Lord, the Member for Arundel, (Lord Surrey), who spoke so much to his credit the other night.—(Hear. hear.) As, he said, that although those of the Roman Catholic persuasion were not to participate in the grant that he should not, on that ground deny aid from the funds of the State for the purpose of aiding in promoting education amongst other sects.—(Hear, hear.) Yet he (Sir W. James) could not help thinking that the exclusion of that portion of the community would be another Catholic disability.----(Hear, hear.) He thought the speech of the Hon. Member for Durham was one more against the Church and the aristocracy than anything else ; and he regretted to see a Gentle man, who had attained such a position in the country, would come forward and give utterance to such preju diced sentiments as he had dune. Sir JOHN EASTHOPE said it was with the deepest regret that he saw her Majesty's Government submit to consult the expediency of the moment, which they had done in the present measure. There were great objec tions to it, and there was one greater, and that was the unfortunate compromise made between tha Church of England and the Wesleyans, by which the Catholics were excluded.—(Hear, hear) He admired the speech of the Noble Lord (the Earl of Arundel), and he hoped that the Wesleyans would from it learn true sentiments of Christian charity. _ _ Mr. SHARMA'N CRAWFORD said it was his intention to vote for the Hon. Member's amendment, for he did feel that the measure of the Government was a violation of the rights of the people, and was a violation of religious liberty becsase it gave undue advantages to one sect over another. He was as anxious to support education as any man in the House; but the exclusion of the Catholics was most unworthy of the Govern ment. He did give great praise to the Earl of Arundel for his speech, but it emanated rather from the goodness of his heart than anything else; but he would say that the people of England would respect the Catholic body if they stood upon their rights, for he did not know on what principles any Catholic Member in that House could vote for the proposition of the Government. The Methodist bodies in the town of Rochdale were not parties to any compromise which might have been en tered upon. They had commissioned him to present many addresses, which emb , died the truest principles of religious liberty. On the subject of the Maynooth grant. he was one of those who opposed that grant, on the ground that it was hostile to civil and religious rights, and he now opp,sed this grant on the ground that - the civil and religious rights of the Catholics themselves were interfered with. He did not wish that the Church to which he belonged should exercise any undue influ ence over the religious or civil rights of any sect which differed from it. For these various reasons, he would give his vote in favour of the amendment. Sir W. MOLESWORTH entirely agreed in the opinion of the Hon. Member who had last spoken, and with the Hon. Member for Montrose, that a system of national secular education. divested of every interference in religious opinion, would be far preferable to the measure proposed. With regard to the measure itself, the first ques tion was, should the Government interfere at all in the education of the people ?—secondly, to what extent it should do so ?—and, thirdly, as to the nature of the education to be given by them ? There were many opinions upon this subject outside, in favour of the non-interference of the Government under any circumstances ; but he would ask whether it was not the duty of every Government to promote the interests of the public and of the Government by educating the people? The Government should teach the people the difference between right and wrong, as that alone would make them willingly obedient to the laws ; and,:there fore, the education of the people was a matter of primary importance to the State. He thought that the State should educate the people. With regard to crime, they were at that moment at their wits' end to prevent its increase. He was chairman of a Committee which had to deliberate with reference to this subject, and they could devise no means to prevent its increase. Although good gaols and good gaolers might in some degree check the progress of crime, yet he thought that good schools and good schoolmasters would check it still more. No person objected to large expenditure on the part of the State in matters of less importance than the education of the people, and there should, therefore, no objection be offered in any expenditure for that edu• cation. He would ask those who were the opponents of State interference, if there were not hundreds of thou sands of people in this country too poor to educate their children ? How then were they to be educated, except by private charity,-under which such an efficient system of superintendence as could be exercised under a na tional regulation would be impossible. Many of these educational charities, especially those supported by voluntary contributions, were deficient in funds, depending upon accidental donations for their resources, to increase which they were obliged to have recourse to the most unfortunate, and he might almost say degrading solicitations. If he were a member of the humbler class he should feel it more consonant with his feelings to have his children educated at the expense of the state than by private, charity. He should rather claim the education of his children from the State as a right, and to which he was entitled for the benefit of the community, than receive it from the uncertain bounty of his fellows citizens, from whom he should take it as a boon and as a favour.— (Hear, hear.) The next question was as to what extent, and in what manner the State should interfere in edu cation? In his opinion the State should interfere so far as that, no children should from want of means re main ignorant of so much of the elements of an educs tion as would tend to save them from crime. —(Hear.) Ills system should be carried out without reference to creed or belief. There had bt en three methods pro posed in which this interference en the part of the State should have been made, of which he considered that the only practicable one was the proposal that the State should contribute to the support of the alrerdy existing schools of each sect. The dissenters of a certain class had, to some extent, thrown an obstacle in the way of the last measure which he had mentioned, as they had a conscientious objection to receiving any grant from the State. In our eastern dominions the people were-some times in danger of perishing by starvation, from the failure of the rice crop, and the Government attempted to remedy the deficiency by supplies of animal food, to which the people had an insuperable objection, founded on their religion. lie thought that what food was' to the body, education was to the mind. the last objection to which he would refer, was a very grave one. It was the proposition to leave out the Ro man Catholic altogether. He had been much astonished at this arrangement, and up to this week he believed no one out of the Government knew that such an exclnsion would be proposed. lie regretted the interpretation which had been given to the minutes of 1839. This in terpretation had not, however, been given to it till 1847. Since 1839 till then, no such interpretation had taken place. The Noble Lord said, that as soon as Roman Catholics applied for the grant their application would be taken into consideration, but that, as yet, no such ap plication had been made. This was, however, incorrect. In February last a Mr. Landon applied to the Council in respect to the educational grant, and Dr. Kay Shut tleworth replied to him, that their Lordships would, if a definite application was made to them in respect to the Roman Catholics, they would give it their most careful consideration. That this was the interpretation of the minutes would seem to be the case, from the proceeding • of the Wesleyan Committee of Education, in March and April 1844, according to certain letters and documents of theirs, published in last week's Watchman. To the letters there addressed to the Coun cil of Education they replied that they wouli be disposed to give every consideration to any objections the Wes leyans might have to offer to the mode recommon led by the former. A conference ensued, in which the Council made such explanations about the Scriptures being either read daily entire, or extracts from them, in the schools, such as to remove the objections of the Wesleyans. This would have included the Catholics, as nothing was then said about the authorised verson being alone used. (The Hon. Member then quoted the resolutions of a public meeting, held a few days ago, the Earl of Shrews bury in the chair, complaining of the exclusion to which the Government proposed to subject them in this grant.) After the speeches made by the Noble Lord the. Member For the West Riding of Yorkshire (Lord Morpeth), and the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Devonport (Sir G. Grey), he felt encouraged to give notice that he would move, in some stage of the present question, a re solution declaring that in any future grant the Roman Catholics should be admitted to participate in it on the same footing as other religious seots.—(Hear, hear.) Lord MAHON supported the proposition of the Go vernment. When they considered the enormous amount of ignorance which prevailed, he could not see what other course they could take than supporting this grant. By re ferring to the various reports submitted to this House, they would find the enormous amount of iguorancewhich prevailed and the necessity which existed for the change It was impossible that they could have things ae they were, and a change was, therefore, necessary. If this plan of the Hon. Member for Dumfries were im practicable, as he thought it was, then there remained only some such measure as that of her Majesty's Government. He thought, for instance, that the propo sition of providing retiring pensions and situations, under certain circumstances, under Government, would require to be abandoned. Still, as a whole, he would undoubtedly support the Government, believing their scheme to have been brought forward in an earnest and truthful spirit. When he looked to the present artificial state of society, he could not think that they were alto gether faultless who opposed even this limited measure of education ; he thought that they should, before punishing crime, give the people the means of knowing good from evil. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that he was always very unwilling unnecessarily to occupy the time and attention of the House, but as he concluded that the Hon. Member for Finsbury intended to press his motion to a division, he could not reconcile it to his sense of duty to give a silent vote on that occasion. The motion made by the Noble Lord at the head of the Government was that they should resolve themselves into a Commit tee of Supply for the purpose of voting 100,0001. of the public money in aid of education. Tne motion moved as an amendment by the lion. Member for Finsbury was that a Select Committee be appointed for the purpose of inquiry. Now it app eared to him, in reference to this subject, that an inquiry was altogether superfluous. The facts were notorious; and that there was a great inade quacy of the means of educ ation in En g land wa s admitted on all hands. This motion then, he presumed, was made (as had been hinted at) for the purpose of conveying a censure on her Majesty's Government—(ex pressions of dissent from different parts of the House) — and although he was not prepared to say that some had not been committed in this matter. yet it would, considering the difficulties which surrounded the question, be in his opinion unjust in the extreme to mark with severity anything that might have been done amiss. lie was well aware of the extreme difficulty that attended this question, and he felt bound to sky, therefore, that they should rather ende. your to rectify their =loins, than ensure what they might discover to be wrong. - It was in this spirit that he should direct his attention to the matter under discussion ; and on the threshold of this subject the abstract question presented itself, as to whether it was, or was not, the duty of the State to in terfere with the education of the people. He could not hesitate, in discussing this abstract question, at coming to the conclusion that it was not only one among the highest duties of the State, but among the noblest, if not indeed the most noble, functions of the Government, to do everything to extend and diffuse knowleds,e, to elevate the moral, and cultivate the religious feeling of the people committed to its care, and looking at this as a Christian assembly, he could not hesitate to state that the noblest and purest system of education for tho people was that system of morals which bad received the Divine sanction, and which held out to mankind on the one hand a future state of eternal reward, or on the other a state of eternal punishment. But this view of the subject would lead him into considerations which at present he did not intend to enter upon. To pass them fi otn that subject, and to turn from the abstract to the practical question, if it were to be admitted for the pur poses of the debate, that in the abstract it was the duty of the State to promote the education of the people, the real question as a practical one would be, how could that duty be best performed? Now, as was the case with all matters of poliey, the practical question must be considered in reference to the varied circumstances in the different parts of the United Kingdom. The question had been transferred to Scot land by the most able and eloquent Gentleman vi ho re presented the metropolis of that country, and in refer ence to Scotland, it should be remembered that at an earl) period of its history the happy circumstances oc curred of the one religion being embraced by the entire people, and the education of the coun t r y was d e l ega t e d to the Church. There was here no difficulty, ss, when the Presbyterian religion was first introduced in the reign of James 1., and again in the reign of William 111., edu cation was altogether confided to the national Church, formed part of its social and prac tical system, and received the sanction of the Scottish Parliament first, and afterwards of the Parlia ment of the United Kingdom. The education of the people progressed in strict alliance with the Church as by law established until the late disruption, which he to that day deplored. Religious feelings and secular edu cation went hand in hand, and very many circumstances combined to elevate the people of that portion of the island in history, and enabled the country, notwith standing its natural disadvantages and its poverty, to rise to a level with the highest and most civilised nations in the world.—(Rear, hear.) In Ireland, again, the circumstances were exactly different. There the reli gion of the State was the religion of a small minority ; dissent from that religion was the distinguishing fea ture of the great majority in that country. Their religion was not recognised by the State, bat Parliament had granted, year by year, considerable sums of private money, not in alliance with the Church, indeed, but still by this system Dissenters were admitted to partake of benefits in which Churchmen also parti cipated. It was, therefore, consistent both with the practice and policy of the case that the views of the Go vernment should vary with the varied circumstances of the United Kingdom. And now let them turn to Eng land. Here from an early period, unhappily to the latest period, to that very hour, the greatest differences had arisen on the subject of religion, and every class of the community had been bitterly divided on the subject of their religious faith. In that difference of opinion on religious matters had consisted the real difficulty of legislating on the subject of education. The State had encountered violent and uncalled-for interference both from the members of the Church and the supporters of different religious persuasions. Now he felt bound to say that in his own person he had some experience with reference to the attempts of Ministers of the Crown to interfere on this subject,—(Hear, hear, and laughter,)--and he had never been enabled to do as much for education as his zeal would have led him to do. But he bad done this at all events; ho had navigated the channel, he had sounded all the depths, and he had marked the rocks and the shoals which were to be avoided by future Governments.—(Hear, hear.) If be had done no more, he had at least done this ; he had shown the Government that succeeded, that which they ought to avoid if they wished to bring forward a measure calculated to extend the education of the people. Ho thought then, that it was indispensably necessary that the course which had been hitherto pursued should not be persevered in, namely, that an annual vote should be taken, and that from time to time rules and regulations should be determined upon in the deliberations of that House. Now, he did not think it altogether superfluous to point out how occasional assistance ought to be administered with caution, by the State for the education of the people. Under the Government of Lord Grey, a small sum was asked for the aid of building school-houses. That small sum was, he believed, 20,0004 or 30,0004 to be disposed of under the inspection of the Government; but by other, and after regulations, the distribution of that sum was placed at the disposal of the Committee of Privy Council. Of course, under the circumstances, to which he had adverted, the difference of opinion in matters of religion rendered it exeeedingly difficult to give any aid for the purposes of religious and secular education; and, therefore, it was limited to the mere external fabric of the schools. Grants were subse • quently made to two institutions, the one the National Society, immediately connected with the Established Church, and the other, the British and Foreign Society, which had the confidence of a large portion of the Dis senting bodies. Until a recent period, in the year 1839, no assistance was given, except for the single pur pose of building schools, and a further restriction was observed that the schools to be built must he con nected with one or other of those societies. The first relaxation of that rule took place when Lord Melbourne was at the head of the Government, but the order of Council of 1839 still maintained, as an indispensable con dition that these schools should be conne2ted with one or other, of these two - societies. The rule was also maintained that the assistance of Government should only be given for the building of the fabric, except in special cases; these special cases were to be connected with one or other of these two societies. lie was not aware that the Government of Lord Melbourn, ever en tertained any more than two or three of these special cases, and they took care that in these cases the requirements should be rigorously executed. He thought that the first time assistance was given, to the amount of 50001., for 1842, to two normal schools in connexion with the two societies, In the year 1843 an annual vote of 1,0001. per annum to the National School, and 7501. to the British and Fo reign Schools, was substituted in lieu of occasional grants, and annual contributions were also given in aid of the Normal Schools of Scotland. After this depar ture from the original rules, applications were pressed upon the Committee for annual contributions in aid of maintenance of the members connected with those Schools. When these cases were to be considered, he felt it his duty to state t 3 the House, that these cases would be sure to be interrupted, and they would be in volved in such a discussion as they were now engaged in ; and they would find it necessary altogether to desist from allowing these grants. If it could be shown that the means of education were deficient, and that Parliament determined to give grants to one denomination, then he showed that on the same prin ciple they were bound to extend that provision to all persuasions. —(Hear, hear.) A time had now, however, come when they felt it necessary that some assistance should be afforded to the Dissenting bodies in the cause of education, and he was greatly rejoiced that they should, at last, be allowed to receive that assistance which they so well merited by their exertions. But he was bound to say that if they admitted the principle, that assistance should be given to the Dissenting body, the Roman Catholics should also be alloy' ed to parti cipate in the benefit. The only ground of exclusion which was alleged, was, that they did not use the authorised version of the Scriptures ; but what was the authorised version of the Roman Catholics ? It was the bible from which Bossett and Fenelon drew the texts from which they preache3, and from which Pascal drew his immoral thoughts. Would it be told them that this version was to be the sole barrier against the admission of Roman Catholics to the benefits which the State had provided ? Surely Protestant zeal would not go so far as that. The Hon. Member for Southwark had referred to Mr. Landell, he (Sir I. Graham) had long had the honour of an intimate acquaintance with that gentle man, and he assured the House that his every word might be depended on implicitly. He was of opinion that an effort should be made by the Government in order to ascertain whether terms could not be agreed on by which the Roman Catholics might be enabled to come in for some share of the benefits of Government assistance.—(Hear, hear.) He was bound to say that he could see something like expediency in not doing so on the present occasion, but he did not see any justice in doing so. (Cheers.) The preseiA vote was not a vote of 100,000/. only, it was in addition to the sum authorised to be expended under the new minutes. By this vote, which might cause an outlay— which he for one did not grudge—of not less than 1,000,000/.—some persons had set it down at 2,000,000/. —now, lout of all this sum the Catholics would not receive one shilling, and the whole subject was to be put off to an indefinite period, when the con sideration of the question would be brought forward by itself, and, he must say, invidiously.—(Cheers.) He thought that the proper time to do justice to his Roman Catholic fellow subjects was the present moment. He should not vote on the present occasion with the Hon. Member for Finsbury, because he thought that tha course taken by Government was justifi able and p rueent outto h w a i v t h e this all ow s i e n d g t l e h e R exception, om a n c h a t o h w e e li v e e a r vote.—(Hear, hear.) He thoug ht it was infinitely better to proceed by order in Cou ncil in the p resent state i f top th a a t r t t i h jp y ate g in h the feeling in this country, than to attempt by Act of Parlia ment to establish any uniform system which would not be in accordance with the general wishes of the Tropic. The good, however, that might arise from the course pur sued by the Government, he would net purchase at the expense of what he thought was due to his Roman Ca tholic fellow subjects.—( i tear, hear.) H e must, there foreent repeat that he entirely approved of the Government measure, with the single exception he had named, and he really thought it would b e averse to all religious li berty and religious toler a ti on it' his Roma n C at h o li c fel low subjects were to be, excluded from participating in this plan. J Lord JOHN RUSSELL —Sir, I own after three nights' debate, I r i se apprehension I very considerably relieved of any might have entertained with respect to the course the discussion might have taken. The great objection stated to the front of this measure was, that the State ought not to interfere with the education of the people, and the various petitions presented to this House on the subject, or at least the greater part of them were declared to be against that principle, while the 500 delegates assembled from various parts of the country declared that experience has convinced them that a rule ought to be laid down that the state should not interfere with the education of the people, or rather, I believe that the State ought not to educate the people. Well, Sir, what do I find when this measure comes under consideration ? When I in vited the attention of the House simply to discuss Me subject, I find the Hon. Gentleman who moved the amendment, who was considered to be the Congrega tionalists, the Baptists, the Dissenters, and Anabaptists, has not in any part of his speech declared in favour of this principle, nor has he in any part of his speech de fended the grounds urged against the state's educating the people. I really thought that before he spoke I was to suffer under the same sort of indictment which the clerk of Chatham undergoes when he is brought before Jack Cade:—" Here is a fellow whom we have found who can read and write." Oh, the monst er , we found him settingcopies to a boy. Oh, the villain."— t H ear, hear.) I really thought some such charge as that would have been made against us, but after three nights' debate, with the exception of the Hon. Member for Durham, every Hon. Member who has addressed the House has spoken in favour of educa tion by the State. The resolution sets forth that it is contrary to the duty of Parliament to provide State education—that this measure is calculated to increase the powers of the Crown—that it would undermine the constitutional functions of Parliament, and interfere with the religious rights of large masses of the people. Looking at the first part of that resolution, I can form no other opinion than it was intended to constitute a censure upon us who have introduced this measure. Yet some of those who mean to vote for the resolution, s a y they do so only, not because they wished to throw any blame upon the Government, but because they were anxious for inquiry. The Hon. Member fo r Durham has, however, declared himself strongly against the in terference of the House with the education of the people, and he declar« d at the end of his speech, in rather curi ons words, that certain consequences might follow the adoption of this resolution, to the House. That is the Hore:urisble Gentleman's opinion, be argued it, as indeed he always does, with great force and pwer ; but I. must protest against one psrt of hia speech. The Hon. Gentleman said that with regard to the Church schools we admitted an inspector, who was a clergyman, who inquired into the religious sects and the religious instruction of the pupils; that he had heard we intended to make the same inquiries with regard to Dissenting schools ; but he was convinced no Government dared interfere in that manner with Dissenting schools. Now what has there been in our conduct to induce him to make the imputation against us ? Have I not always taken my part along with others in bringing to an end the religious disabilities which fall upon different sects. The repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts we pro posed and succeeded in carrying against the Govern ment, and we did the same when in Government with regard to many Acts which conferred heavy disabilities upon Dissenters. I think certain sects were obliged to have their marriage solemnised in the Established Church, but they objected to the terms used in the Church ser vice, which was a hardship upon their consciences, and was carried through both Houses of Parliament, a mea sure by which they were freed from such obligations, and they were allowed to conduct their marriages according to the obligations which they could conscien tiously undertake. What right, then, has the Hon.. Member for Durham to impute to us a wish to interfere with their religious feelings ?—(Hear, hear.) There was, however, another ground of opposition which was taken with respect to this measure—taken here, and taken also at the meetings held in the country. It was said at these meetings that the Government are pre pared to go so far that all distinction between truth and falsehood would be lost, and it was in point of fact repre ser.ted that their principles were latitudinarian. Sir. that objection was taken to this measure, and it was evi dent at the time that there was preparing a very great opposition to this measure on the part of the Dissenters, because it was understood that it would not embrace Roman Catholic schools. In their re solutions these opponents stated that they con sidered it a great hardship and a great injustice, that Roman Catholic schools could now come within the terms of the present minutes. This was a strong opposition coming from parties who opposed the May nooth grant. I find amongst those who voted against that measure the name of the Hon. Member for Dur ham, and I cannot understand how the Hon. Gentleman can complain of an omission now which a short time ago he would have considered a grievous error.—(Hear, hear.) But, Sir, I come now to the statement of the Hon. Baronet the Member for Suffolk. The Right Hon. Baronet who last spoke entered into some further explanation of our conduct with regard to this matter. The Hon. Baronet the Member for Suffolk has gone much into detail upon this subject, but he omitted several important passages when he read from the correspondence which took place with the Secretary of the Wesleyans. I must state that that correspondence nas unsought by the Government, but was brought about by Lord Ashley. (The Noble Lord then pro ceeded to read a passage from the correspondence, in which it was stated that the Council intended to take into consideration a minute for making grants to Roman Catholic schools, which would be brought forward in Parliament after the public had had sufficient time to examine its bearings.) Now, I say, continued the Noble Lord, that passage entirely frees us from the charge that we have been endeavouring to deceive the Wesleyans, by inducing them to believe that we had no idea of making grants to Roman Catholic schools. I think this passage entirely puts an end to the charge of the Hon. Member opposite, that for the sake of pleasing the Wesleyans the Roman Catholic body was to be overthrown. Now. Sir, the observations of the Right Hon. Baronet who last addressed the House makes it necessary for me to recall, for some minutes. to the recollection of the House the occurrence of 15:39. We proposed et the commencement of that year that there should be a model school, and with regard to Roman Catholic schools it was provided by the minute of the committee of conned that the Decay version of the Bible ini. : ht be introduced for their use. That part of the proposition excited great apprehension and alarm, and a strong opposition was got up through out the country against it. Feeling that a very general resistance would be made to the Fran, it was the opinion of the Government that the only course left them was the one pursued att_rwards by the Right Hon. Baronet opposite., namely, to withdraw the measure, seeing and feeling, as they did, that it was not likely to meet the approbation of the population of this country. Other minutes were then proposed, to which great ob jections were also made ; and the principal of these objections was, that the Government had not entirely given up the notion of, at some time or other, reviving those former minutes authorising the use of the Douay version in the schools, and, so far as I can remember, there was no person more strong in his opposition than the Right lieu. Baronet the Member for Dorsetshire (Sir J. Graham). Upon that occasion the measure was car ried by a majority of only two. The large minority upon that occasion, it was supposed, did in a great de gree, represent the opinion of the country. A large portion of them were possessed of a dread of seeing the Roman Catholic schools established under such cosditions. The impression upon my mind was, that however ami able it might be to extend aid to the Roman Catholic schools, that for some years to come we should have to make cur choice between aiding all the other schools belonging to the church and to protestant dissenters, and not aiding the Roman Catholic schools, or of giving up all hope of assisting education altogether.—(Hear.) My conclusion, and the conclusion of those with whom I acted, was that the better way was to go on giving what aid we could, by the adoption of which course great benefits might be produced, although we could not , say that we were satisfied with the terms with respect to the Raman Catholics.—(Laughter.) That which excluded the Roman Catholic schools was. that they were to de rive aid in connexion with the schools of the National Society, or those of the British and Foreign School Society. It was that regulation which shut out the Ro man Catholics in the years 1839, 1840, and 1841, during which time the Whigs were in office ; and it also shut theta out from the years 1841 to 1846, in which period the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham) was a member of the Government. If, then, the Right Hon. Baronet was of the same opinions then as he is now, that would have been the time to have impressed his opinions upon the minds of his colleagues.—(Cheers.) I think, sir, that the Right Honourable Baronet had the ca meo which. we thought a valid one the ex cuse which we had in the years 1839, 1840, and 1841 —that the opinion of the country was so strong upon those points that the whole aid to education would be endangered by bringing in the subject of the Roman Catholic schools. lam happy to hear the night Hon. Baronet say, with respect to the authorised version, that the Vulgate used by Pascal and Fenelon was good enough to be recommended by the Committee of Council. I do - not know exactly w hat version was used by Pascal and Fenelon, but the Right Hon. Baronet must be aware that iu E ,, glish schools the Vulgate would be of little service.—(Laughter.) Was it desirable that the Govern ment should how add that element of conflict to that which they had already had to endure ? Had the Government revived the pr. - position of 1839 in favour of the Roman Catholic schools we should have been unable to carry the vote w bieh w p e ite no: f propose.—(Hear, hear.) a _that, in s the great liberality shown the debate.—(Hear, hear.) A remarkable instanc e of the unwillingness of the House to give further aid to the Roman Catholics took place but a few days ago. A Bill was introduc e d by my Friend the Member for Kinsale (M r . W a tson) relieving the Roman Catholics from the penalties to which it appears to me so obvious that they should not be subjected to, that I do not know any Hon. Member can make a decent argument against the • measure.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth (Sir 11. Peel) and the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn (Lord G. Bentinck) and the whole of the Members of the Government, voted in favour of goin g i nto Committee on the Bill, and notwithstanding this the second reading of the Bill was only carried by a majority of 3, and upon the next stage of the Bill it was defeat( d by a majority of 38. If the Government professed that the rule made in 1819 should not be altered in 1846, if we have not time to deliberate upon future minutes to be made, it is not to be said that we have, especially upon this occasion, excluded the Roman Catholics from this grant. My opinion is that we should have failed if we had attempted it now; but it is possible that we may be able to frame minutes, by the terms of which, when Parliament is next asked to grant, and to those schools, Roman Catholics may be included with others, and where there is a poor population, may also have the benefit of this grant,— (Hear, hear.) The Government has not con cealed their opinions upon the subject, we say we will not force Parliament to come to an immediate decision upon the subject, but we do take a favourable view of the education of the Roman Catholic children. I do not agree with the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham), unit there is a reason why the Catholics should be included in the present vote. I think it far more likely to succeed if they were included in the next vote, or in another vote upon the subject. And I think the House and the country will agree with the terms upon which such grants will be made. I did not, Sir, expect that this would have been made a subject of the present 'debate; I thought that the rule which had E. week• 69 4 644 ,338 Ifn i : I%e u , 35 0 L ues- Dye d ,the fitted