The Express.
London, England, 1853-02-23 00:00:00

this aelablitinnentj if trice were not done, the Romish
priests Would become nimbus this country, which was
still seutially protestant, thank it might go far in the
way et concession. Let the government, as protestant
zalaietses of a protestant sovereign, stand by that ign,
and enable her to support that protestant constitution
which she was sworn to uphold. (Hear, bear.)
Kr. JAMES M'OREGOR seconded the motion, because
he had a perfect conviction of the necessity of inquiry.
(Hear, bear.) A large number of the middle class in this
country were dissatisfied with the state of things at May-
nooth, and the way to set them right—if they Wert wr?ng
wee el masa( a committee of inquiry. (Ironicas
cheer, from the Irish members, there being ao motion for a
committee of inquiry.) The motion before the house was
for the appeintment of a committee of inquiry. (Laughter,
. and cries of No, no.") The motion, he pereeivsd, was
for a committee of the whole house, but it was competent
for any of the members on his left (the Irish members) to
move for a select committee of inquiry. They should either
refute the statements made or show them to be false.
Mr. SCHOLEFIELI) rose to propose the following
amendment: "To leave out all the words after the word
' consider' and to substitute the following words, ' all
enactments now in force, whereby the revenue of the state
is charged in aid of any ecclesiastical or religious pur-
poses whatsoever, with a view to the repeal of such enact-
ments.'" He congratulated himself that the terms of the
amendment did not all on him to enter into any of
the controvenial topics which formed the staple of his
hon. friend's speech on this as on former occasions.
He would leave the statements of his hon. friend to be
replied to by others, but whether these statements we•e
true or not, the amendment he proposed was equally en-
titled to the support of those who, on both sides, professed
themselves the friends of religious equality. (Hear, hear.)
He concurred with his hon. friend in the propriety of
getting rid of the Maynooth endowment; but there were
two things in which he did not agree with him. He did
not agree with him in those unbounded fears which seemed
to fill his mind as to the danger which threatened their
protestant institutions from the college of Maynooth. He
would recommend his hon. friend to discard these fears,
and to have greater confidence in those protestant institu-
tions—(bear, bear)—which would never be so secure as when
they discarded state support, and relied on their own inhe-
rent strength. (Cheers.) It appeared to him, as to his
hen. friend, that Maynooth was en endowment the result
of which was the propagation of error; but then he recol
looted that what was truth to him was error to others.
(Ilea:, hear.) His hon. friend, on the other hand,
saw only one set of consciences, and those pro-
testant consciences. (Hear, hear.) He should know,
however, that there were other grants under acts
of parliament, which must violate the consciences
of Roman catholic., just as much as the May-
nooth grant violated the conscience of his hon. friend.
(Hear, hear.) And it was but common justice that their
consciences should he as tenderly treated by the House of
Commonsas that of his hon. friend. (Cheers.) He (51r.
Scholefield) claimed religious liberty for himself, and he
was prepared as freely to concede it to others. (Cheers.)
His hon. friend, he knew, would say that he wished in no
way to interfere with the entire religious freedom of the
Roman catholic* ; yet he (Mr. Scholefield) thought he
could point to disabilities of a somewhat onerous character
which still affected the Roman catholics—(hear, bear)—
and the principle of religious Lreedom was as much violated
by the denial of equal privilfges as by actual persecution.
If they endowed one particular sect at the expense
of others, it was pro tanto a religious persecution of those
sects. (Hear, hear.) The object of his amendment was
to piece all on a footing of complete religious equality.
He would make no reference to the Regium Donum, be-
cause that wu the subject of an annual vote in the
House of Commons. But there were other grants under
act of parliament, and therefore standing in precisely the
same position with the grant to Maynooth. He held in
his hand a return of such grants which was moved for
by a gentleman who he regretted was no longer a member
of the house—Mr. Anstey—and who did good service in
promoting the cause of religious equality under circum-
stances of singular difficulty. (Hear, hear.) He found in
this return that there was an endowment under act of par-
liament of 20,3001. for the malaria and expenses of eccle-
siastical establishments in the West Indies, 3,0001, for the
expenses of the office of the commissioners for building
additional churches, 11,9001. for the augmentation of the
stipends of the parochial clergy of the church of Scotland;
6,0001. for additional churches in the Highlands and
islands of Scotland. (Hear, hear.) Besides these, there
was a large number of items, small in amount, but equally
vicious in principle ; some of which were charged upon the
Woods and Forests, some on the Consolidated Fund, some
on the customs, and some on the inland . (Hear,
hear.) His object was to repeal the whole of these grants.
(Hear, hear.) He had no desire to avoid a decision on
the main question, for upon that be was as ready now u he
bad been on a former occasion to meet the public feeling on
the subject. (Hear, hear.) If his amendment were lost,
he frankly owned that he would vote against the proposi-
tion of his hon. friend. (Hear, hear.) If he had done no
other good by his amendment, he felt that the question would
gain progress in public opinion thereby. (Hear.) He had
been asked if he wished to get rid dell endowments why he
did not get rid of the Maynooth grant. Because he had a
strong opinion that the selection of Maynooth was the
worst that could be made—(hear, hear)—it wu evidence
of an unjust and ungenerous policy and therefore he was
not disposed to adopt it. (Hear, Lear.) If they were to
have piecemeal legislation on this subject, they should com-
mence with the most powerful first, and not with the
endowment for Maynooth, which was a college for the
education of the clergy of a religion professed by one-third
of her Majesty's subjects, and thou the most destitute.
(Hear, hear.) He begged to remind his hon. friend of the
language which had been used by the right hon. gentle-
man the Chancellor of the Exchequer last year on this
subject. Be said, "If this endowment be withdrawn,
then the parliament that withdraws it must be pre-
pared to enter on the whole subject of the recon-
struction of our ecclesiastical endowments." (Hear, hear.)
Was his hon. friend prepared for such a re-construo-
tion ? " Was he pre to introduce this new element of
danger into the established church, which was already sur-
rounded by dangen on e aide ? He was aware how
imperfectly he bad developed the subject he introduced to
the house, but he trusted he had at all events raised it from
the narrow sectarian grounds on which it bad been laid by
his hon. friend, and placed it on the broad ground of reh-
gions liberty, on which alone it could be treated with
common justice to all the parties Interested in the ques-
tion. (Loud cheers.)
Sir W. CLAY seconded the amendment. The corner-
stone of our faith was the right of private judgment, which
right was incompatible with the endowment of any parti-
eu religion by the state. The time was coming when it
would be necessary to revise our entire religions system,
and in Ireland he was not quite clear that the time had not
arrived. In the event of the amendment being rejected, he
would follow the course of Mr. Scholefield.

Mr. iTaitEVILLE defended the endowment and op-
posed the motion.
Mr. MULL spoke generally in favour of religious li-
be7l. BALL supported the motion.
Mr. DUFFY was glad that the bon. member for War-
wickshire bad made some additions to his case this year
in the shape of extracts frees seven Irish newspapers and
one English periodical. He (Mr. Duffy) knew something
of those Irish journals, and be avid declare that there was
not one of them but was a thorough partisan against the
=lof Ireland. Their very awes were enough in Ire-
, Saunderes Noss Lair, the Lansaw Ezyiress, the
Corks. Sentinel, the reksisim Moderstor. Why they
were notorious as cantina& ashmeniatees, end their state-
menb were not answered, ben no me thought them
worthy of an answer. Not em of the melded in
either ever saw them. They had ao droalatloa in Ireland.
They had too long traded fa lies and slander
for clergymen and gentlemen to admit them into
their houses. Then as to the work written by
Sir Francis Head, who spent a fortnight in Ireland, one
week of which wee spent in making his observations and
the other in pandering on what he had observed. Under
the head of " Priests published Swelter" he gave a very
ferocious extract from a speech of the Rev. David Bell.
Now, it happened that that ferocious priest happened to be
a presbyterian minister in Ulster. (Laughter.) Again, he
gave extracts from the speeches of the Rev. J. Hamilton
and the Rev. Mr. Ferguson, who were both also presbr
tartan ministers. Then was another speech so atrocious
that Sir Francis Head hesitated to give hie name, and de-
scribed as " the Rev. —, of —;" and he gave an ex-
tract of that rev. gentleman's speech to the effect " that the
time would come when It wonH be as hard for an extermi-
nating landlord to get into parliament as for a camel
to go through the eye of a nee" Now, it to happened
that the Rev. —, —, did not as hat, as it was
an extract from a speech of his (lir. 'a) own. (" Hear,
hear," and laughter.) With regard to English periodi-
cal referred to by the hon. saber kr Warwickshire, it
was rather hard that catholic gentlemen in Ireland should
be made answerable for the daserlass eta =wine pub-
lished in London. He (Mr. Daffy) knew keno wee each a
publication as the Earratier, but be refuel le be menet-
able for anything that appeared in it ; aml, ae is the doc-
trines contained in the extract read by the hem gentleman,
he repudiated it—it was no doctrine of his, and are Roman
catholic. He had anxiously listened to ameariaia what
practical result was sought by this motionr-what was
wanted. What was to follow the withdrawal tithe grant?
Was it expected that. it would prevent the teething of the
BOOM catholic religion, and the training of Irish
(Hear, hear.) When it was martyrdom kr Zoman
catholic priests in Ireland to teach their religion these were
plenty of them found to do their duty, regardless et easse-
queues. When there was no College of Maynooth, Roman
catholic priests were not wanting to Ireland, and they were
supported by foreign sovereigns. If this motion was car-
ried and the priests cast on their own resources, perhaps
the President of the United States and the Emperor of the
French would perhaps be glad to renew their relations with
them. There was only one practical result which would
ensue if this resolution was carried, and that was, that the
established church in Ireland would not long outlive it.
Were Roman catholic', if this small sum was refused them,
to go on paying the established church. He (Mr. Duffy)
fbr one said, that if the grant was withdrawn he would
never pay a shilling of tithes. If you could not stop the
Roman catholic teaching, was it to insult the Roman eatho-
UM that this motion was brought forward ? Did it become
parliament, year after year, to go through this farce? Who
were you email lag ? Two dozen ecclesiastics, the professors at
Maynooth, who, budded making that college an admirable
theological seminary, had contributed greatly to English
literature. As to the politics of those professors, they were
most of them more in accordance with those of that house
than with his (Mr. Duffy's). He knew the motion would
not be carried; for he had seen of late a tendency towards
• wiser principle of legislation, based on the wishes and
feelings of the people. That was evidenced in the manner
in which the wishes of the colonists at the Cape and Van