The Express.
London, England, 1868-06-05 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

IN the House of Donators yesterday, Mr. Q.
HARPY gave notice of his intention, on Monday
next, to introduce a bill to amend the law for the
registration of voters, so far as regards 1868.
A question which was put by SirT. BATRSON to the
First Lord of the Treasury raised a discussion as'
te the policy which the government had declared
respecting the endowment of the Roman catholic
clergy in Ireland. The hon. baronet asked Mr.
DISRAELI whether hie attention had been directed
to a letter written by Mr. Gladstone with re-
ference to the East Worcestershire election, in
which it was stated that the government was in
favour of endowing the Roman catholic clergy, and
Lad proposed to create and endow a Roman
catholic university.
Mr. DISRAELI said his attention had been called
to the letter in question, but he regarded it as one
of those effusions which at election times were
sometimes called squibs, and sometimes called
hoaxes ; and as it contained assertions which could
not be proved, he had given no further considera-
tion to it.
Mr. GtansroNE maintained that he was justified
in making the statement in question by the lan-
guage of the Earl of Mayo, who, when enunciating
the policy of the goverarnent with regard to Ire-
land, said they were for placing the different sects
in Ireland more on an equality, but that that was
to be done by creation, and not by confiscation ; by
levelling up, and not by depression. He also read
a letter from the secretary of the Earl of Derby,
dated March 19, 1867, road at the Presbyterian
General Assembly of Ulster, excusing the govern-
ment from proposing an increase of the Regium
Domini that year, on the ground that the estimates
were already prepared, but promising to take the
matter into favourable consideration the following
year.
Mr. Disitarti remarked that the only proof of
the charge that they had intended to endow the
Roman catholic clergy was that they had enter-
tained the idea of increasing the regium Donum.
He, however, was not responsible for the letter of
the Earl of Derby, and he had himself stated to
deputations from the Presbytery of Ulster, who
had urged him to propose an increase of the grant,
that it was impossible to accede to their request.
Ho denied that a fair construction had been put
on the speech of the Earl of Mayo, who, when re-
ferring to religious equality, did not mean the
endowment of the Roman catholic clergy, but the
raising of their status by admiting them as chap-
lains to prisons, and so on.
Mr. Cas.bwr.tt insisted on the importance of a
clear understanding of ministerial statements made
in that house. The Secretary for Ireland had told
them distinctly that the expenses of the catholic
-ersity were to be voted by parliament, but that
the endowment of the colleges was to be postponed
for the present. The other portion of his speech
pointed distinctly to the endowment of the Roman
catholic clergy, and was not to be met by the state-
ment that it referred merely to the appoint-
ment of Roman catholic chaplains in prisons and
barroc!;s.

.....
The Earl of MAYO said the whole gist of the ob-
servations that he made with regent to ecclesias-
tical arrangements in Ireland was that the govern-
ment would maintain the policy which the house
had adopted on that subject for a great number
of years, and with regard to the catholic university
he distinctly stated that it was not intended to
propose any endowment of the colleges connected
with it, but that the house would be asked to vote
a few hundreds for the professors. The govern-
ment never entained the proposal to endow the
Roman catholic clergy.
The subject then drooped, and one or two other
matters having been discussed, on the motion for
going into committee of supply,
Mr. CHILDEE9 said as the government was under
an engagement to dissolve parliament as soon as
possible, he presumed they would not ask, and that
the house would not vote, supply for the usual
period, but that they would follow the precedent of
11341, when a vote of want of coLfidence having been
carried against the administration of Lord Johu
Russell, parliament was dissolved, and the supplies
were voted fur six months only.
Th CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER objected to
such a question being asked without notice, and
said he could not then give an answer. The go-
vernment were desirous of bringing about u disso-
lution as soon as possible, but as the Reform Bills
for Scotland and Ireland, and the Boundary Bill,
were still to pass, it was impossible to say when it
would take place.
It was then arranged that the subject should be
renewed on bringing up the report on supply on
Monday.