The Express.
London, England, 1868-04-28 00:00:00

IMPEBL&L PAnlAhUml.

Is the House of Louie yesterday, the Karl of '
MALMESBURY moved an Banal to her Majewty
expreerive of the sorrow and indignation with
which the house had heard of the atrocious attempt
to assassinate the Duke of Edinburgh, and to
assure her of their heartfelt congratulations on the
preservation of his royal highness from mortal in-
jury. The crime, he said, was of no common de-
scription, because its atrocity was aggravated by
the fact that had it been consummated no political
consequences would have resulted from it.
Earl Roseau. seconded the motion, which was
agreed to unanimously.
The Duke of MARLBOROUGH moved the second
reading of the Education Bill.
The Earl of Mama moved that the bill be read
a second time that day three months. Ho ap-
proved of the proposal to take an educational
census, and of the conscience clause being intro-
duced into the bill, but he objected to the provi-
sion that uncertificated teachers should receive
grants. He further objected to the unequal
burdens which the bill imposed upon those who
would hare to maintain the szhools ; the needless
multiplication of schools, schoolmasters, and in-
spectors ; the total absence of local organization ;
while the bill failed to reach those districts which
required education most.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY thanked the go-
vernment for having introduced the bill, and said
it contained provisions of a most valuable nature.
He thought they had acted wisely in introducing
the conscience clause into the bill.
The Karl of KIMBERLEY concurred in the objec-
tions urged against the bill by the Earl of Airlie.
The Duke of ARGYLL strongly objected to the
bill, because it contained no provision empowering
important districts to assess themselves for the
establishment of schools. He considered that the
bill was a step in a wrong, rather than in a right
direction.
The Bishop of LINCOLN thought that to make
grants to uncertificated teachers would be prejudicial
to the future character of the education of the
country.
Earl GRANVILLE defended the revised code, and
deprecated any alteration of the principle, which
had already worked satisfactorily, of not paying
where there were no results. He saw no necessity
for appointing a minister of education, and said
full responsibility for all the acts of the Committee
of Council now attached to the President and Vice-
President. He approved of the introduction of the
conscience clause into the bill, and appealed to
the Earl of Airlie not to press the amendment.
The Duke of MARLBOROUGH replied to the
various strictures which had been made against the
bill, and said the government did not submit the
bill as a complete measure, but merely as an instal-
ment to be followed by future legislation.
The Earl of AIRLIB withdrew his amendment,
and the bill was then read a second time.
Several other bills were advanced a stage, and the
house adjourned at a quarter past 8 o'clock.

IN the House of COMMONS, Mr. S. CAVE stated, in
reply to Mr. W. E. Forster, thatthere is no intention
by the bill now before the house relating to railways
to interfere with packed parcels, properly so called,
though a clause in the bill justified the impression
that that was the intention.
Mr. DISRAELI, in feeling and appropriate terms,
which met with a cordial response from the house,
moved an address to her Majesty expressing the
sorrow and indignation with which the house had
learned the atrocious attempt to assassinate his
Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh when on a
visit to Australia' assuring her Majesty of the
sympathy of the house, and expressing an earnest
hope fur the speedy recovery of his royal highness.
Mr. GLADSTONE seconded, and the motion was
unanimously agreed to.
Mr. LAYARD having inquired whether the intel-
ligenceconcerning the war in Abyssinia was

authentic,
Mr. DISRAELI replied that it was, and stated that
it would be his duty shortly, by command of her
Majesty, to bring forward a motion on the subject.
Ho congratulated the house on the great events that
had occurred in Abyssinia. As a feat of arms it
was impossible to speak too highly of it.
The house then resolved itself into committee on
the Irish established church, and resumed the dis-
cussion on the first of Mr. Gladstone's resolutions,
uhieli affirms the necessity of disestablishing that

church.
Mr. \VATKIN said he found no fault with the re-
solutions except that they were not sufficiently
explicit. He had always looked upon the Irish
church as the greatest of all dangers to the Eng-
lish church. He thought that a new parliament
would make a far wider settlement of the Irish
question than any that could be made by this
house in its present condition, but he wished not
to throw any impediment in the way of passing the
resolutions, and he should therefore not move the
amendment of which lie had given notice.
Mr. Goma objected in toto to taking this or
any other question as a purely Irish question.
The party opposite supported these resolutions not
for the purpose of laying hands on the Irish, but
on the English church.
Sir F. Ideruare contended that they could not
separate the two countries in religious matters and
maintain union in all others, and moved an amend-
ment to the effect that so long as the union between
the two countries continued to exist the principle
of the established church should he maintained in

Ireland, and its endowment on a scale suitable to
the wants of the population.
The discussion was continued by Captain Grosve-
nor Mr. Dillwyn, Mr. Gilpin, Mr. Agar-Ellis, t•ir
P. Grosve-
nor,
and Mr. Allen in support of the reso-
lution ; and by Mr. Dyke, Mr. Walrond, Mr. Sel-
win-Ibbeteon, Admiral Seymour, Mr. E. K. Kars-
lake, and Mr. C. Beutinckagaitist it.

Tho O'D No..Hur. admitted that these resolu-
tions would effect a revolution in Ireland, but il
would be of a peaceful character, and carry bless
logs in its train. This was a moment of just exit'.
tation to the catholics—their cause was triumphant
But it was not exclusively a catholic triumph : it
was a protestant triumph as well. They could not
have advanced a single step towards success but for
the aid they had invariable received from many of
their protestant fellow-countrymen.
General PEEL characterised the resolutions as
a great party move. He disapproved of them, not
only because he objected to the disestablishment
of the Irish church, but because of the time that
they were brought forward. This'vras not a question
for a moribund parliament to determine.
Mr. Honataaw said all sorts of arguments had
been used for the maintenance of the Irish church
except that it fulfilled the object for which it
existed. He defended the liberal party from the
charge that they had been in office for 26 years
and had not brought forward the subject of the
Irish church, by sa3ing that they did bring it
forward at a time when they were in the high
tide of popularity, and were defeated by the tones,
and any minister who had brought it forward
again would have rushed on his own destruction.
They had not been able to carry even the aboli-
tion of the church rates. He denied that
the present parliament were not competent to deal
with this question. It was only when the govern-
ment discovered that their policy of "levelling up"
was not acceptable, and that the country preferred
the policy of the liberal party, of levelling down-'
wards, that they became of opinion that the Irish
church was not a question for a moribund parlia-
ment. But if a moribund parliament could endow
three churches it could surely disendow one. If it
could endow a Roman catholic university it could
disendow a Maynooth. He defended Mr. Glad-
stone from a charge of inconsistency on the ques-
tion of the Irish church by quoting comments from
tory and liberal papers on the debate on the ques-
tion in 1865. It was a mistake to suppose
that the question before the house was the main-
tenance of the Irish church or the carrying of these
resolutions; the issue was whether the house would
adopt the policy of the government or the policy
of the resolutions. The policy of the government
was to give a legal status to the Roman cathplia
bishops to endow a Roman catholic university, and
to endow a Roman catholic church. The policy of
the resolutions was to disendow all the churches in