The Sun. — London, England, 1817-07-09 00:00:00

the wish of the Offended, for - the - purpose of gain ing a reward of SOL Mr. Colit:Buitl4 said, that as to transporting convicts to New South Wales, when they had only three or 'four years of 'their sentence to run, that was done as a reward for their good conduct in the hulks, as their situation at Botany was forpreferable. , --Theneport was then brought up and laid on the table. SiTS.,l;tom.u.or. gave .notice that he should, to inorrow, move for the cop.y of certain dis gii444speo4-44-the -conduct of thi.t.ira4d4uty , at Dominica. Mr. W. SMITH __presented a Petition from the Unitarians in Kent and Sussex, complaining of tfte treressity snider which they lay to celebrate marriage after the forms of the Church of Eng an4 raiing for exemption from a law so in - -consistent with their creed and derv(' to lie on the table. _ . Si~• M. W. RrDLET presented a Petition front a tiergyrnan at . Andover, complaining of the hard • ships be hid suifefed in consequence of 'the Col• lector of taxes having assessed him 121. 'duty on' a • carri'Age drawn' by •asses and running on four 'and that when he had refused to' pay the duty, as he thought the carriage exempted from •it', lee lead been 'surcharged' 121. more, making iq ' alt 241. • ' The Citkittettott 6f the ExcitEat%Eit'aaid, that -sordv•itro u,d'Oclefl carriages drawn by asses were extimitell.--.-The Petition wai diem read, atid7Or.: derttillta•lle•oil the table. '• •• • - - ' • ,t)FricErts uF iTLE HOUSE. 114 EttmgcElL(ltt 'of the ExcuEiitmt ntoved • teverat.Addresses to the Prince Regeift•, 'praying 'that he swO'filaheia - as•ed toarder the iitial'Annual Grants to be ina(le to the Chiplailiand tb r e Officers • of 'the ifoilie'; and .exprtissittt; the deterniiitaiion make good the swipe ...=-Agi•eed to. ' The'C'liA : %cEr.i.On of the Eicti atie•tt then moved tt sirtt htr Address sum •oat 12,01)01. isli`cur revey,• to - cettiu'ticrac'e the Cditii.tiisSioners appoint 4 ''tad twitter a vote - of.tbat Hobse, to inquire into thd ditties of Courts of Jllstice in Ireland.—tagreed tA, 'after •a' woids- from Mr. W. Quin, Sir G: Hill, and Mr. lietrtrett.• ' • ' LYME HARI:Mutt. EXCHECILTER also ttiott e4ancyther. .41A1 a, for a sum of 10,0001. to re Pair : 1 1iG.tiatc,littne lky storms. to the Harboti of 1.,' - yi)e ; "but, on Nir, Gordon's suggestion, post poned it to Thursday, in prtler t ,llat the Re pert of the . tunatniitee . might be in' the hands o Nembet s. HIGM 'TREASON, • - I Mr. - Bizotimum inquired of a Nobre Lord op.! rnsite, whclher there was any chance of seeing • the Lim! Atk - ncate for Scotland -in-his place to-, ••plin.tovcl Lfod BrNtztNG did not know lioW the question ' tame to be put' to Vith." lie happened to know, however, that the Lord Advocate for Scotland had left London' last Friday. ' Mr. ilitouGstxm hoped •the' Noble Lord might Pilswer the que!.:tion 'Which he intended • to-frave pot to the Lord Advocate. It tegaided a person • of the name of Kerr, who had been arrested by a .warrint tinder suspicion of .11igh.Treason, and corlooitted. Ile was a most respectable master • tmtnnficturer, and after being imprisoned two .Trt.mtbs had been admitted to bail... He wished to whether arty atcrs had ibillCc bccn taken to bring that individual lo The ATTMINEY-GENERAL knew that such a • Verson had been taken up, and applied for bad, bur «mid not say whether his application had been admitted. Lord CAsrLetteAGH said, that the subject had alrrvrly been mentioned in the [louse. fie had : y a:rer received a written explanation from ti►e Lord Advocate, for which he would l►►ok, in order to give the Learned Gentleman a more de tailed answer to-morrow. CoLLFGE OF MAYNOOTH. Sir H. l'Autista. said, that in rising to bring lot ward the motiou of which he had given notice, lie was principally actuated by a desire to refute some I,lse statements which bad been pro pagated by persons who seemed anxious to revive all the old prejudices against our Ca rbolic brethren. Among other things it had been stated, that the College of Maynooth en cooraged wii3l were called the Transalpine Doc trine.. This charge vas brought forward in a speech puldished under the name of an Honour able Member (Mr. L. Foster). This charge was entirely unfounded. The Transalpine Doctrine meant a support of the temporal authority of the .Pope—a doctrine which every Catholic in the Uoitet! Kingdom would abjure, and which the Ps elates at the head of the College of Maynooth, of whom some had been in this country to afford information respecting the views of the Catholics, were well known to be hostile to. It was strange that in the next paragraph to that in which this charge was made on the College of Maynooth, the Honourable Member stated that he had not been able to learn what course of studies was pur sued at that College ! How the Hon. Gentleman could have such confidence as to the doctrines, :v-bile he was so ignorant as to the studies, he .could not conceive. The resistance of the Clergy to t! '• rescr.pt of M. Quarautotti, was a pledge of their iiidependence: That the Clergy of the Ca were well disposed to the Government was proved by their conduct not only in 174.5, but in 1798. .At the latter period all the leadrrs of the reirellion were persons tinder ecclesiastical cen sus e . hint the activity of the Catholic priests to .promote the education of the poor was quite no. •torions. It had, however, been stated, that the elluc,olr.ffl which the Catholic Clergy comminti cat.;(l was Int rely a supply of moral poison, but .5u , 711 ;1 statement could only rest on prejudice and igtoiran ye. For• nothing could be more moral th•oi tenour of those cheap hooks, which .were circulated among the population of Ireland, and ii•)iver , ally read in the Cathoiic Schools.- 1-I.tvin , !-n-a.l these books, he was enabled to speak to thew elaracter, and having consulted several o . the Ca: rric booksellers in Dubin), he could as sert the e.rent of their eirrulat , ou. One hook sei;er, in 1, had assured hint, that he bad with in one yl•ir plinted awl disposed o f no l e ss (hail 20000 of I is''e cheap tracts. 'then as to the read of toe Eihle, a nOcin prry . arled in this coientry,, mat. it was 'prohibited in Ireland, while the tact was, that ronnerans editions of the Bible had been published within the last year, in Dublin by four o 1 the Catholic Booksellers of that city, from• whoin 1)&10 his inforMation u p on the sohject. The version 'of the Bible read by the Irish- Catholics might be different : in some, perhaps ithirraterial, particulars from that published by the P . r . otestants, and it was notorious that there were several dif ferent.versions of.the Bible-circulatechin the Chris tian world ; but it was quite - a' fallacy to state , that the reading of the Bible was absolutely for bidden. among the Catholics of Ireland., or:VI any other CatholiC ccihnt ry-, The address of the Pope to the Catholic Divines 'of Poland, as .to'_fhis point, upon..which' so [Ruch. comment had-been . -made, was in fact totally misunderstood, as it would appear from accurate examination tbatthat Address or Bull did not forbid the reading of the 'Bible, but was aimed at certain . personi • in*Polarfd, who were endeavottringbY atudite meant, : to' convert.thePolish.Catirolle‘s, which the Pope de precated. Upon , ,) therefore, hgreat deal of grourilllesi gooe forth agaiest, the Catholic character. But this was not the only. calumny agwitrat the Catholics of Ireland - , at-whoni every variety of slander arid Misrepresentation was. pointed. . It ; was, statech o asoong. other thifigs to: pretudice 'their cause, that a iCollege.:ot Jesuits iiirC6eriblished its theemihty of' Kildaee, whereas Milg s ains:P.k fact seas, that..the ,schOOtsmaster of the aeminata , alluded4o. had been educated in a Col 1-egeof Jesuits, but it by nootneatts 'followed•that .h presided over a College le'Soi‘ts yin hreland:. A : further calumny against the Cottons; oh:erecter appeared in the Courier Newspaper some titre, ago, in a letter purporting . '. to' iirOceei,l frorciA e ' Bishop of Ossory. This calumny was, -contained in an assertion from the- writer, that the-nig-he before-the inauguration of the King bf the 'Ne-• sirerlands took place,„ Pastoral LetterfrsontheAreh-: bishop of, Mechliu was circulated in Briissels;oitid threat under the doors of-the inhabitants . , exhorting the Catholics not toswearallegiance to ta.Prcitestant Sovereign, and- Wedging, that such an oath would be incousistent-with:the•prineiples of the Catholic', - eIf7ETC. But that this. was altogether an Itiirodrole ed• statement , appeared front the answer of the King-of the Netherlands some time afterwards to an Address frorathe Cat . pc,licilishop of Totirnay, et whose hostse,hia.MejeoY I)" passed.soutealays,'' Cor in thisatiswert which was 'published in` the, Brussels Gazette„llre, Xing of the Netherlands: distinctly stated, that, he, Was • perfectly satisfied, tise:'eo4schiet of the Catholic Clergy ; though his Majesty had at the time some differ-, H erite - With - the See - of Rome, that difference hod: never been adjusted by the establishment of a sa-' • tisfaetOry Coneordit. To these several points - be had , thoit-glso :it ; necessary to advert, in order- to rt:pet the •atteinwsthat were matte to depreciate the eliaraiter, and- to injure : the cause of the. Ca tholics. :Tire Hoye :Baronet - concluded with mov ing'''" for 'ate AddreSs to the 'Regent, praying for, COnieilor 'Extracts. of :any CoMmunications re ceived from the College:of'Maynooth, respecting. the courses of Education pursued in that College sinceahe!3.3th of April,. 18.13." • • Sir—louts Co, HIPPISLE? seconded the motion, and: obset wing that the- 'subject: then betare the, Histise. was sine of the'greatest -importance to the' interests of the Empire at large,'he lamented_the absence of the' Noble . Secretary of Stavf, of the Right: Holt: th'e Secretary' - of Ireland, of the Hon. 'Meuher for Yarmouth (Mr. Foster),•and all the incalculable loss of otte rentoved for ever, by the high- dispensation of Providence, whose eulogy he would not attempt to pronounce, but whose fare he might be permitted to deplore. The tines , tion uv;us uoto whether they should grant 90001 3-year to the College of Alaynooth, or whether they should increase 'it by 3 or 40001. more, and thereby raise it to what .it had enjoyed under the, Administration of 'the Noble Duke then at the head of the Irish Government. The sehject now to be discussed was of tar wore consequence, for it referred to the religious and moral education Of the people, awl involved their own happines s and the safety of the Empire. Sir John Cox Hippisiey then answered the call upon hint, to ascertain what was to be understood by Transal pine Doctrines, stated to be maintained at May food). The infallibility, of the Pooe constituted, the first principle, and front thence flowed her superiority over General Courieilii, and the assump tion of a supremacy in Temporals as well as Spirituals ; but it was trot to be understood as the general maintained doctrine, even at the Vati can ;. a more liberal and rational code prevailed there. Individual and powerful Pontiffs, such as Gregory the Seventh, and many of his predeces sors, had asserted these arrogant principles, but • their adherents, he believed, were now but few ; nevertheless, they were to be guard ed against, and there was scarcely a, State in Europe, of whatever religious communion, but had so guarded itself against their coots (riot). The Honourable Baronet t hen we n t into further detail, and said teat lie had giveu notice of a motion for the production of the Concordat be.. tween the Court of Portugal and the See of Rome, and as he wished to spare the time of the House, lie should now shortly state his motion, as it was not unconnected with the o bject of the fltiilrla question, and thereby spare the House any fur ther comment. In one of many publications, ad verting to the late Report of the Select Commit tee on Catholic, regulation, a charge had been made of withholding this document, which, in fact, was only an agreement between Por tugal and Rome, to divide the patronage of the benefices tailing vacant in the Papal months of patroeage. It appeared, by the printed letter of Sir Charles Stuart, that it bad been sent by hint to the Foreign office ; but, us it was not deemed of sufficient importance to be printed, an implied charge was raised on the omission. The Hon. Baronet then proceeded to the work of Mr. Gan dolphy, a work which had been stated as approved by the official authorities of Route, and licensed as such. Well might it attract the observation and denunciation of those Honourable Members who noticed it. Nothing could be more insulting to the Establishment, and the Goverment of the country. The Honourable Baronet then read a passage, in which Protestants were charged with intentionally debauching the morals of then , own children, if they respected them inclined to lend an ear to Catholic teachers. Forte , irately, howeso_r, for the Catholics and fur the Palk, tbotigh (erelnlphy's Svruns Lad fur tively obtained the uncial Imprimatur of . ire now stood censure, by the same authority, and was ordered CO supfeess his books, and make a formal and public tecaetation of his errors to his immediate superior, do Apostolic Vicar of his dis trict. Such was the fate of Mr. Gandolphy's works—at one momett declared fit to be enclosed in cedar and gold—at he next doomed to censure and abrogation. But to return to the immediate subject of the motion. He begged to call the at tention of the House to the documents which had been moved for some years since. Nothing could be inure opposed to Transalpine opinions. The course of education was precisely conformable to the principles of the Gallican Church, and the courses of the Sorboune, where Dr. Dc la Hogue had been himself a professor. Under such a visitorial power as was obtained at Maynooth, it was scarcely possible that the exploded Transalpine doctrines could be suffered to be taught. The Lord Chan cellor, the Chief Justices, Lord Fingal, and other highly accredited and loyal persons, constituted .the visitors ; and the Hon. Baronet said, he had the satisfaction of receiving within a few days from: L4d Fingal, then in the ac t ua l exercise of his vi . dowers, the fun confir ma ti on o f t h e recti tude of their courses, as coeformable to the Tracts tVhicli `had been - laid before the'lloue.--.!, From Professor De la Hogue, he hail arso re-1 ceived a' letter '''complaining of the intput'afinn inl the printed speech of the"'Hon. Member for Yal: : mouth, and after particularising the eatiroc - ., ," Is this to teadeTeansalpine'doctrines He referred also in the , semeletter to the fact of the Hon. Baronet's having, , in .a former debate,. : led Mr. Chancellor Perceval to a confession' that he hestueot made 41 due distinction between the con-: struction of &crees of doctrine and discipline as the , former weee 1)0(1 to be immutable, and discipline might change and be adapted to times and cir-; ctunStances. He then stated, as an instance, the: discipline of the Council of Trent respecting mar e riages, which had been adopted by the Church of, 'England; it nevertheless was not received - or: acted nom in six of the principal diocese, of Ire land, inthiding Dublin, nor could, therefore, all, Decrees-of General Councils be held to be gene-, rally obligatory. The Hon. Bart. then adverted to the-Report of the Aggregate Meeting of Dublin,. on the 4th inst. in which they persisted in their: former Resolution, adYerse to the interference of - - the Crown, and supporting domestic nomination. A vote of thanks to Mr. Hayes alsoewas referred to the consideration of the Board—to Mr.' Hayes, the Delegateiof the Aggregate Meeting,teethe See. of Rome —to a person distinguishtl• by the iesoe, lence of his attacks npon the Constitution of .fiis country, upon its Goveenment,aed even - Upon the printipal Functianary of the tinveinnient, 'tile Cardinal Seeeetary of State—to aeirersone who, mi being4dmittesl to the Pope to teceiVe"his• benediction; :was dismissed with the Pontifical reproVal of ", Depart, rash man !" It was worth noticing that this Father, Delegate Hayes, loudly demanded associates in his embassy, or the whole would be lost. • Dr. Dromgoole, well known try his 4peec4s and -writings, and a Mr. M'Uawley, a brother of a Count of that name, attached to the Ex-Empress of France, was another associate., Sir John Cox Hippisley here read front a Dublin Jepet: !tin extract of a letter froin . PF.DrottigOiile, suggesting how necessary it was for Rome to be on its guard against the Government of England— in a word, of most mischievous import, and which merited the reprobation of every loyal subject. Of such materials were the accredited delegates of the aggregate meetings of Ireland composed!—Of the same complexion was a work which had been presented to the Ministers of Rome, and stated to " be got nearly by heart by one of them"—the .Statement of Penal Laws. It was sufficienteo refer to the speech of the Attorney-General, and the denunciation of the Judge who tried an informa tion against this book, to appreciate the value of the present, as coming front a British subject to a Roman Minister, Sir J. H. followed with a quo tation from Mr. Clinch's Inquiry. The works of this gentleman had been presented to the Mini sters of the Pope ; it was fair to Mr. Clinch, how ever, to state, that he was at issue with his pa trons when lie asserted, that " the Protestantism of the Crown would, even in the case of the con cession to the Catholic Claimseremein as a land mark to skew that our freedom has been a gift." The Hon. Baronet observed, that it had been ar gued that we had sedulously maintained securities for the Protestant Church. If by Protestant Church was meant the Church of England, he would ask, where was the security ; where was the security in any test now required, to exclude Dis senters of every denomination from sitting in Parliatnent—or even the Messelinan, if a natural born subject ? Sir J. H. regretted that in all the diselission S of this important subject, none had ever yet tak e n place that could be deemed satis factory, either to the Protestant or 11,e Catholic. No inquiry into the real tenets of the Catholics of the present day had ever been instituted—n few set speeches annually closed the dehateno inquiry—n u evidence whatever. ' Was it possible that such a course could be satisfactory ?—Sir J. 11. then teferred - to. a -pamphlet circulated by Dr. Milner, naming himself the agent of the Irish Bishops—an agency, however, which was strenuously denied by the Bishops them selves, when recently on a mission to London.— But Dr. Milner had great facilities of dispensing with the inaccuracies, to say the least, of his own statements. In this solemn address to the Mem bers of the House,'Dr. Milner was pleased coarsely to accuse Sir J. H. With the wilful statement of an untruth. Sir J. H. read the original words of Archbishop Egat's letter, which Dr. Milner attempted t o fasten on him as a 'fabrication.— Sir J..H. adverted also to this Prelate's vacilla tkba—et one moment the strenuous advocate of the Veto — at the next as strenuous an impugner of it. This Gentleman was pleased also to re, present Sir J. H. as the candidate for office—at one moment for an Embassy to Rome—at ano ther for the Alinistre de Calle. It is possible, observed the Hon. Baronet, that I may early revi sit that clime to which this Prelate alludes— tiequestiouelily, however, unaccredited and un paid. He should not be withheld from: attempt ing to render such services to his country, as at former period lie had not .1! nsuccessfidly affemPs ed, and t 5 represent the real state of tLis ant question to those whom it imports so much to he apprised of it, might, at such a crisis, be not unreasonably considered as an act of some public benefit. He should, at least, not be deterred from ihe denunciations of such commentators. His walls over this thorny ground had been undeviat ing ; nor should he now diverge from the course which, in his own humble opinion, was traced ofi the soundest constitutional ground of justice and expediency. lie should offer on the present oc casion no further observation, but second the motion of the Hun. Baronet who had moved the inquiry. Sir G. Hrt.r. rose, not to oppose the motion of the Hon. Baronet, but to complain of the unfair and disingenuous manner in which the Honour able Baronet opposite had undertaken to reply to the speech of his Hon. and Learned Friend, the Member for Yry:mantli, dining his absence. His Hon. Friend had attended sedulously to his busi ness•in Parliament for aeonsiderable period alter the speech had been printed and published, and it would have been more candid had the Hon. Bart:, replied to it while his Hon. Friend was present. His Hon.-Friend, however, had only to defend one half of his speech—for that part wherein he' had alluded to Mr. Gandolphy's . wnrk, was fully borne oat by the Honourable Baronet who seconded the motion. Mi. RUTTIMWORTH apologized for offering a few ob. serrations,. more especially as it could not he the desire of Members, in the present statea the House,' nor of himself - , to 20 3 5 4 bate noon the C a tholic Question. ; brit tftere wereasome points in the Speech of the Hon. Boomer, who had made the present motion, which he apprehended were ora incorrect, that they might makeroavrofig iniKession if lat without observation. Mr. B. did nut rise to -. 41C - feird — tlie printed Speech of 'the Hon. Member for Yarmouth, who was most able to defend himself, but every one who knew that Gentleman must be persuaded that his love of truth would never allow himto state in a Speech, and much less in print, any'firets, or to make any assertions, which he did not believe toile; true; and that Hon. Gentleman's judgment and rACCIP. racyavere such as to render him very unlikely to make auy incorrect statements ; and he was sorry that they bad been so represented by the Honourable Baronet. But Mr. B. 'oho served, that he rose - chiefly to • notice some misrepresentation -made by the Hon. Bar-ilet respectin a a the Hibernian Schools, • and the British and ForOgu Bible Society. With regard to tho former, the Hon. Baronet had described. them as greatly countenanced and encouraged by the Roman Catholic Priests, .of whom he had spoken in such high terms, as would insinuate that all their bigoffy and intolerauce.were:gone, and that they manifested nothing but candour and christian cordiality to wards their Protestant, .Brethren. .The Hon. Baronet had read some extract's of a work lately published by a Member of the HiberniaoSociety, to shew the friendly disposition of some of the Priests towards their Schools ; but he (Mr. 13.) would beg leave also to read Some extracts from the same work; which plainly strewed, that although there 'might he a few candid Priests who did not apprise these Schools, yet there were many of a very opposite description; and having himself been a Member of the Committee of the Hibernian Society, he could of his own knowledge state, that althqugh thotre schools were instituted for the most behevolent purposes, not with a view of making proselytes, but. simply to teach poop children the art of reading, and to give a little instruction tw the must degraded and WTrtehed part of the Irish population, yet t 12'6y-had in Many instances met with the most deterieinea hostility from the Roman Catholic Priests. It was evidently the desire of the Author of the Work in question, to throw a veil over these hostile demonstrations, but they nevertbelosa made their appearance, and he begged to borrow the Hon. Baronet's Moils to read a 'passage or two to the House.— Vir. B. here read two passages from Sir Henry Paruell's Boot.— We understood the hook to be an Account of the Chartera Schools in Ireland, arid of the Schools established by the Hibernian Society.)—The first is at page 160, where it is stated; that ." The Roman Catholic Parents have in a multi " tude of instances withdrawn their children from schools " kept by Catholic masters, because of the superior education ," to :be obtained in the Society's schools ; and this not on " frequently at the risk of the Priests' displeasure—of being 1" refused confession, yea, of excommunication!" —Nosy this is no great specimen of the candour of the Roman Catholic Priesthood hi Ireland, when the refusal of cornet. sion, and the risk of excommunication, is ineorred by l A, rents, fur sending their poor children to a charity scietol), simply to learn to read.—The :text passage is at page 216, 'where, speaking of the Sehook of the Hibernian Society, it is Stated, that " Many have been the attempts, on the part of " the Catholic Clergy, to break up and disperse the Schools; " and I ain sorry to say, that in not a few cases they have " been successful. These hostilities have elicited many gra " tifyiug instances of true' Irish independence of character. " How often have the poor parents pleaded with the priest " for permission to send their children to the Society's " Schools, and in the face of the most arbitrary refusal, thej , " have ventured to ask fora reason ; but no reason, except his " will, would be given. Often after a severe struggle be• " tween subjection to priestly domination and an affectionate " concern for their children's education, the latter has pre " sailed, and, braving all consequences, the,. have continued " to send their " children to the schools. - Whilst I record " these instances, of hostility, I am happy in being able to " mention some very pleasing instances of the reverse of all " this."—Now, said Mr. 8., I submit to the House, whether the work which the Honourable Baronet has quoted, notwith standing all its forbearance and desire to conciliate the Roman Catholics, bears him out in the high character for candour which he has given of their priesthood in Ireland The Hon. Baronet has stated, that the Pope's late Bull, which had been issued in Poland against the Bible, and Societies, was framed in consequence of attempts ma& in Poland by the Bible Society to proselyte the Roman Catho lics to the Protestant faith. Now it unfortunately hap pened for the Hon. Baronet's argument, that the Poliais .Bible Society was not in operation till, after the Pope's Buli bad been issued. There bad been a disposition manifested by sonic of the nubility and gentry of Poland to establish t Bible Society, and a plan was drawn up, but it was suspended by the opposition made to it by the Roman Catholic Primate of Poland, the Archbishop of Gaezn, who, fearing that his Opposition would be insittlicient, wrote to Roue for instruc tions how to prevent or oppose the Biole Society. The Pope's Bull of June, 181 G, was rssued in consequence of th'.s'applo cation, and it would have been effectual in preventing the formation of a Bible Society in Poland, had nut the Emperor Alexander happened to he at Warsaw in October, when the friends of the Bible submitted the plan of the Society, to gether oith the Pope's Lull, to his Imperial Majesty, who declared his desire of becoming . Patron of the Society ; and it was publicly formed at Warsaw in consequence of the Em peror's sanction, and in opposition to the Pope's Bull. The Hou. Baronet has statd, that the Polish Bible Society, and the Irish Bible Societies, were occupied in proselyting to the Protestant faith.—Now it is well known that the Bible Societies are not occupied in making any Pro selytes whatever. They merely circulate the word of Clod„ leaving that word to speak for itself, and to find its own level in the mind of Man. Their sole object is, not to Proselyte, but, to make both Protestants and Roman Catholics better Christians. Mr. 13. stated, that it was not any wish to create untriendly feelings towards the Roman Catholics, that had inducedhim to make these observations , as he entertaioc4 a great respect for some, individuals of that Body, both of the Clergy and Laity ; but as he knew that a strong spirit of into lerance towards Protestants existed in Ireland, arid as he could state many facts to establish this assertion, he hail felt it his duty to correct some mis-statements in the Hors. Ba ronet's speech, which might otherwise have made an undue impression • and be must conf ess th at, fro m the k nowled ge which he Lad of those tnis-statements, the rest of the Hon. Baronet's speech lost much of its weight with him. Mr. V. FITZGERALD presumed that the object of the motion had been effucted by the opportunity it presented th• two Honourable Baronets of making their statements. He defended the conduct of the Member for Yarmouth, who had, he firmly believed, been influenced by the most con scientious motives, but carefully stated, that he did not as sent to his Honourable Friend's opinions on the Cathviiq Question. Sir J. C. HIPPISLEY explained. Sir H. PARNELL declared, that in his speech this even. ing lie had by no means confined his reniarlis to the Speech of the Learned Member fur Yarmouth. The reason why he had not alluded to this st.bject earlier was, be apprehended, evident. The grant to Maynooth College had been repeat edly postponed, and be was thus •depri , ed of the lipportU nity of making the observations he had made. As to the imputations cast upon the Catholic Clergy. of 'either opposing any attempts of the Bible Societies, or any others, fur the diffusion of education in Ireland, or withholding their aid from so laudable a pursuit, be could.assalle. tale House that