The Sun.
London, England, 1852-05-22 00:00:00

having a tendency to subvert loyalty or destroy 0
lity.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of WINCHILSEA said : that pal
tiu
signed by some 1,500,000 persons against the Iller_71;
grant had been adopted by the people of this epn.
and therefore it was absolutely necessary that an IT;
tigation into the system of education should take pig
So convinced was he (the Earl of Winchilses) orm
nature Of the doctrines inculcated at that college ,b-e
he would not hesitate to place on the Committee olinal
quiry members of the Church of Rome. He was oit,
position to satisfy their Lordships that
.if this leg
were gone into, Maynooth would be found to be
Jesuitical college in Europe. Every not
and morality was subverted there; andLto its teitby
might be attributed the wretched condition of the Pl;ti
iple of NIA
of Ireland. There shortly would occur an (Welty tol
for the people of this country to speak out; and, oil
was not much mistaken the Protestant feeling 0; refr
great and mighty empire, the bulwark of civil and
gious liberty, would bo expressed in a manner alitt,ite
a vigour that no man could misunderstand.
present Parliament should refuse inquiry, he willeetlet
pared to say that the next Parliament would go L'")
and demand something- more than inquiry.—(llelirell
Earl FITZ WILLIAM deprecated the course net
his Noble Friend (the Marquis of Breadalbane), 131
he thought, would he productive only of ill-feeliagteo
object in rising was to express the satisfaction be 1(0
the answer of the Noble Earl the First Minister e`tht
Crown to the question put to him in 'reference tot tilt
grant. Notwithstanding what had been said she %re
course which the next Parliament veotild pursue kat)
forence to this grant, he hoped the opinions of the $1
Earl (Earl of Derby) would remain unchanged' pit
(the Earl of Firawilliam) had no fear of the PO
being converted by Romish priests; but be I'oo
that the Protestant aristocracy would be uotivlet
Konianising clergy of the Protestant Church. weto
The Earl of DERBY observed that there .411
question before the House, inasmuch as the cpeollrotil
bad been answered by him.—(Cries of "The petitlel,
The Earl of WICKLOW was perfectly satisfiedeve
the answer which the Noble Earl atehe bead of 000
vernment had given on this as well as on two pre, t,
Pee"ione.--(lsleer, hear.) No Minister could be
ptioosnsiobfledtooiniogreasetehin
peeled to say more than that he had no presentrs:
whatg— circumstances might asmigQhbtvio°oeugurpgjelll°
it would he imprudent and unwise togive allth Pied for the future... It was certain however! that oe:'
:
;tbeff
sons connected with the Notice Earl did not sr„ enr
plainly as he did, and one of his colleagues lied c°
to a motion which, from the confession Of 1'54-0..5
was directed against the existence of tho
pained him to make this observation, because bedtor• te
we'Ll to trio Noble Earl's Government, and desire dbotto
it well placed in the country. The equivocal Ortibe
which he adverted gave rims to an opinion that
pop
vernment was desirous of availin itself of the Pia tilt
g
clamour existing on the subject of Maynooth pke
purpose of influencing the elections about 10• the
place.—(Hear.) The conduct of the Government I'oo
other House in assenting to the proposed-int:lll4oK
very suspicious. That at present a strong feelittg
veiled against Roman Catholics in Great Britatrit op''
particularly in the northern part of the island, wit it
fertunately, too true and it was attributable tol•o die
Russell's letter to the Bishop of Durhatu, f
Act of Parliament founded on it. The author oites o
letter arid the Government which proposed that to a
Parliament were responsible fur the present 0 ogb1;
affairs.—(Hear, hear.) No one could dispute trotiolt
;of the Legislature to inquire into the state of °no fs,,r.
at the college, but there was a moral obligatioo:old
liament not to lay is finger on the grant. It en,"
remembered that Ireland was a Catholic coun7'ltatt
tributing her fair proportion to the revenue, 5° &tie'
being an endowed church for a minority ef the tool
it was the duty of the Legislature to provide the
for educating the priests of the majority. tad hie
Earl GREY concurred in the opinion eicarldstie'e
t
the Noble Earl who spoke last, that an Ardtaitutrete
was not called upon to speak for more .than its v lbe
ietentions, and should decline to pledge itself aggaestela
conduct it would pursue iu circumstances notlt- ~,
t.lor
and if he understood the answer given by t"".„
Earl at the head of the Government that siveniekelotr
same sense as that in which it was .reeeteed ,
eNoble Vords, he would be as satisfied with it 's° `-nt 0°
peered to be. Unfortunatelyelinwever, luedid
deratand the Noble Earl to say that no changelvy
cumatances had yet taken place which could ee-ce e 0"
to abandon the opinions which he expressedajn
n
jest in 1845, When a Member of Sir R. Peel's Gork,. fafi
Wheo, on a former evening, he asked- the Neuhiito
whether he adhered to the opinions expressed I/ 000
1845, the Noble Earl denied his right to put that .
(I°„dfso
tsrli
ie' to him. Then, again, the Noble Earl was partt
careful in having his words correctly quoted, stri,oll
hairbreadth distinctions between the phrases `,'
0
no intention to do a _thing at pre-sent, /lot
" having no present intention to do the thing." .0000'
-circumstances caused doubt as to the real intents
the'Govermiaeute and the feeling of uncertainty, ,040 of
Creased when it was found that persons) holding ()Tot'
the greatest importance connected with the A(1°3113• 011
lion made election speeches and issued placards, 'flop",
they distinctly pledged themselves to vottefdr the sled
of the Maynooth grant. AU these circurnstadees 004
a suapieton as • to the intentions of the Goferhoeoor
which it behoved the Noble Earl, for his ovia
of 001
and for the credit of the representative principle
vernment and the Constitution of the enfel
remove. 'A man of the high honour 50d Id 0°-
which should actuate a British statesman vffeuoastioo
consent to shelter his real intentions under atiatcsoasee
and subterfuge. Wnen they were told that the
nvieeta,
Catholic religion was so false, and that its r
were so disloyal, what must the conclusion id beieefer,
that one-third of her Majesty's subjects.' nou'lb tho
hope to be placed upon an equality !floor
rest of the Community, in which case they must 11 to iti°
rely be disaffected? Would it not then appear oadoe
Roman Catholics to be their ditty to prevent any be,
meta of the Protestant Church, and thus there volt
an end to religious peace in that country? Vitteaute'
be the effect Upon the Church establishment Englishlo,"*
He had had intrusted to him a petition from as P- .d
town, not only against the grant to Maynooth, buteat re
ing that .all.religtous grants in Ireland should 01;00
end to. This was the necessary conclusion .te viers
Parliament would be led if the grant to MaYne° evefl
to be withdrawn. For himself, he thought that art of
Christian church taught doctrines the greater Poo be
which were true and beneficial . to the .PectPle'ee sae
wished that each sect might continue to receivaSlo bate
grants as hitherto. He was disappointed n°: jot de
heard from the Noble Earl (Derby) a more diattheliga,
Claration on the part, of the Government whelPlinher et
hered or not to the policy of which the chi& I advocate
the present Administration was the principal
in 1845.
nt hot!:
The Duke of ARGYLL held that Parliament
Pna
perfect right to inquire-into the system
tirieeetcoan---sonerndeei,
sued in the College of Maynooth, and
which had arisen from its endowment. In 1845 dist
Russell, on the second reading of the Maynooth 13!", gas
tinctly asserted that, if it should be found that o.:iid
man Catholic clergy were teachers of rebellion, no °_:ha
compact could be pleaded why
made, and why, the grant should not be withdrawn. of
inquiry should notaat
the grounds upon which this grant was opposed were ,0
if Parliament adopted Pid
principle it would not stop.
a rellgious character,
and
Maynooth. 00°. They
this grant without withdrawine. all 01°..
er
ions bodies. He objected to the toe
not withdralwia
grants to re
which this cinestion had been discussed, and tine elreaPiti
stances unar which it bed been brought forward.
1;8
the grant were now to be voted, to Maynooth for
or
first time, he would on no account support it, but 11
great danger to the peace of the empire in laying u°,,
.principles in regard to one sect which did not OP.'
the other religious sects of the empire. od
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said it &Pe:ref
fromma the last report of the visitors of the Coutioil
Maynooth that no change whatever had of late ",
pt;
and placeih the system of education. in that eatablialt°3-oed
there could therefore be no ground for the pro
inquiry. Bat if the Government had thought that
haw• ,
tankinquiry ought to be instituted they oughtt. I/
.a en up the matter themselves, and not to be* *-,,0f,
in the hands of in independent Member of Parlia°3- d
ea But they were bound, at all events,' to. come forwp'-,
distinctly announce their intentions- upon the tinhietelte
The petitions were then ordered to lie on the
and.the subject dropped.

STOCK IN TRADE BILL.tII
On the motion of Lord COLCHESTER, this
passed through Committee.
HIGHWAY RATES BILL.
As did also this Bill.
01
IMPROVEMENT OF THE JURISDICTION
EQUITY BILL. jid.
The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the second re
tO
• A 1 i
ing of this Bill• pro forma, with a view to referrin.t,
the Select Committee of the Masters' Abolition Au"„ed•
Lord CRAN WORTH foresaw difficulty in pl:°tur
ing, in consequence of the limited time awarded for -
gestions and amendments.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the two 0
were the result of the labours of the Commission .libri;
pointed by the Crown, who had bestowed every Ri01,61 be
consideration upon the subject. The law Lorulhies
thought, would be able to deal with any diffiou'v-iil
which might arise; but if the Masters' Abolition mid
were to pass without this, he feared the judges IV%
find it very difficult to cArry out the due administratl"
of justice.