The Sun.
London, England, 1839-08-06 00:00:00

but if they refused to act thus wisely, it was no reason
for throwing their expenses upon the mother country.—
Wear. ) As to the emigration of 10,000 persons this year,
although there might be a temporary deficiency of funds arising
from the land revenue, yet there was a moral certainty of its
being made good at no very distant period. He was surprised
at the statements as to the expenditure of the colony, made by
his Hon. Friend opposite, who really did know something about
those things. In his comparison of the expenditure of this coun-
try and the Australian colonies, he had forgotten to mention that
in the amount of the expenditure he had included the expenses
of wards, of police, of the Church establishment, and of various
other matters, the whole of which, in this country, were pro-
-Tided for by ocal funds, so that at least one-half of the expen-
diture might be struck out of his list. He had also forgotten
the different state of the two societies. The high rate of labour
in the Colony made it necessary to pay high salaries, in
order to secure the services of competent persons in
places of trust which could otherwise be obliged to be filled, as
had formerly been the case, by convicts still under sentence,
which was very objectionable. An attempt had been made to
lower the salaries, and the consequence was that all the valu-
able officers had resigned, as they could get better pay from the
merchants. It should be recollected that the whole of the re-
venue of the colonv was raised by indirect taxation upon the
luxuries of life. He felt convinced that the expenditure of
New South Wales afforded no ground for the accusations of
jobbing and extravagance.
The Bill was then read a third time.

On the question that the Bill do pass,
Mr. C. BULLER said he wished to know whether the
words introduced in Committee relative to juries would have
the effect stated by the Honourable Member for Sheffield,
as he considered it a most objectionable way of settling
a dispute which had given rise to much debate in the
colony, and he trusted his Right Honourable Friend would give
the House an assurance that he did not intend to give the Go-
vernor power to alter the whole constitution of Juries. Tho
N.ble Lord had certainly pointed out some verbal inaccuracies
( A laugh)—in his statement, but still he was of opinion that
the expenditure of the colony was enormous in proportion to
the expenditure of the United Kingdom.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said that doubts had existed as to the
power of the Governor relative to the constitution of Juries,
which had been decided one way in New South Wales, and
another way in Van Dieman's Land—and these words which
were permissive were to clear up those doubts. He agreed
with his Hon. Friend as to the impropriety of taking this
method of settling the question as to emancipationists serving
on J uries.

Lord HOWICK considered the expression " verbal inaccu-
racies" as exceedingly mild in characterising mistakes to the
amount of several thousands pounds.—(A laugh.) The Bill
was then passed.
MFTROPOLITAN POLICE COURTS BILL.
_,. . _

Mr. BARNARD wished, before the Report was brought up,
to have the Bill re committed, in order to introduce a clause
giving compensation to the Clerks of Justices.
On the Order of the Day being read,
Mr. FOX MA ULE said that before going into the Bill, he
would state that he had told the Honourable Member if he
found the House inclined to favour his views of the subject
he (Mr. Fox Manic.) would not oppose him—and the Hon.
Member had proposed a clause in Committee which was invalid
ia point of form ; since that he (Mr. F.,p. ) had inserted some
words providing that where, in consequence of the establishment
of any Metropolis Police Court, the clerk to the justices shall
lose his situation, he shall be appointed clerk to the. Metropolis
Police Court.

Mr. BARNARD approved of the clause, as fax as it went,
but thought it ought to go farther, as he considered these clerks
were as much entitled to compensation as the ilagistrates.
On the motion of Mr. F. MAULE, a proviso was added
to clause 3, directing the names of all Alagistrates who re-
signed, or were superseded, to be hid on the Table of the
House within six weeks.

On the motion of illr. AGLIONBY, in clause 4, it was
provided that in place of baristers of seven years' standing alone
being eligible, any gentleman who had practised at the bar four
years, and as a special pleader fur three years previously, might
also he eligible.
Several verbal amendments were made.
Mr. HODGES moved the omission of that part of clause 54,
which limits appeal to certain cases only.
Mr. PR YM E seconded the motion.
Mr. FOX MAULE defended the clause, which was strictly
in accordance with the recommendation of the Committee. _

After a few words from Mr. Hawes, Lord Hotham, Mr,
Hodges, and_Mr. Estcourt, the House divided, when the num•
hers were—

For the motion 6
Against it
Majority in favour of the clause 34
After a few verbal amendments the Report was received, and
the Bill ordered to be engrossed, after which the House ad-
journed al a Quarter past Three until Five oClock.

The SPEAKER resumed the Chair at Five o'Clock.

Mr. GRINISDITC H presented a petition from
Stoke-upon-Trent against the profanation'of the Sabbath.
Sir E. WI Lmo'r presented petitions from Nuneaton
and several other places against the Poor-law Bill.
HILL COOLIES.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM, seeing the Right Ho-
nourable Gentleman, the Under Secretary for the
Colonies in his place, wished to put a question to him
relative to the treatment of Hill Coolies in the island
of Demarara. The Right Hon. Gentleman would re-
collect that some time since he had stated that the
papers on the subject would be laid on the table of the
House ; if they had been since that time, they had
out yet been circulated. Since that period
he understood a letter had been written by
two gentlemen connected with Demerara, justifying
:he treatment of the Hill Coolies. He wished to
know from the Right Hon. Gent. whether he had re-
ceived any such letters, and if he bad whether he should
have any objection to lay them on the table of the
House, together with the other papers ?
Mr. L A BO UCHE RE had received a communication
from two gentlemen in Demerara, and he should have no
objection to lay these letters, together with all the other
papers, on the table of the House.

111r.S HA W, seeing the Noble Lord the Secretary
for Ireland in his place, wished to know when it was
likely the arrears to the Irish Clergy would be paid,
also whether any steps had been taken to recover the
arrears due by the landlords to the Irish Clergy ; and
also whether the Clergy had any chance of receiving
the 100,0001.

Lord MORPETH Was in hopes that the arrears to
the Irish Clergy would be settled without delay. With
respect to the proceedings by the Attorney-General
against the landlords in Ireland, he thought that re-
quired further consideration. With respect to the latter
question, he could not hold out much expectation that
either Parliament or the Government would think itself
justified in voting the 100,0001.
Lord G. SOMERSET inquired when it was likely
the Metropolis Improvement Bid would be proceeded
with.

Mr. BARlNG—Probably this evening.
On the motion of Lord MORPETIL th© Consta-
bulary Force (Ireland) Bill was read a hind time and
passed. _ _

The Report on the Dublin Police Bill W&3 receive

and the Bill ordered to be read a third time to-morrow.
Lord U. SOMERSET wished to ask the Noble Lord
whether there was any chance of the Poor-law Com-
mission Bill, or the Bastardy Bill, being brought on
this evening.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL did not suppose there
would be time for proceeding with any Bill after the
Committee of Supply.
PROPERTY TAX.

On the Order of the Day being read for going into
Committee of Supply,
Mr. FIE LDEN rose to move, " That the taxes im-
posed on the necessaries of life in this country, render
them so dear that the working people cannot command
a sufficiency to supply their daily wants : That the taxes

.
imposed on raw material are an obstruction to the pro-
ductive industry of the country ; and that the inability
of the people to purchase a sufficiency of the things
which their labour would produce, acts injuriously
upon those who employ the people, and compels
them, from want of a market at remunerating prices,
to limit the employment of many, and refuse
employment altogether to others, who are anxious to
earn their bread by the labour of their hands, and who,
from being denied employment, are compelled to
accept relief from the parish in any way that they
can obtain it, or starve : That such a state of
:things is detrimental to the productive classes,
'and dangerous to all other classes : That, according
to a return ordered to be printed by this Hduse,
on the 10th day of June last, the taxes raised ks
Excise and Customs on the following articles amounted,
in the year ending the sth day of January 1839, to tht.
sum of 17,614,543/. ; viz. on malt, 4,232,0801.; hops,
302,906/.a.50ap,810,813/.; candles and tallow, 183,6694;
coals, sea-borne, 7,632/.; sugar and m01a55e5,4,893,6841.;
tea, 3,362,035/.; coffee, 684,979/. ; butter, 251,665/. ;
cheese, 113,9071. ; currants and raisins, 300,828/. ; corn,
186,7601. ; cotton wool and sheep's, imported, 725,4451 ;
silk, 254,874/. ; hideS and skins, 61,4781. ; and or
paper, 541,7881.: That justice, sound policy, and hu-
manity require that the laws imposing these taxes
should be repealed, the Corn-laws abolished, and that
the revenue should in future be raised by an equitable
assessmen ton property." The Hon. Member in his usual
low tone ofvoice proceeded to conten.d, that it was the duty
of that House to redress the grievances of the people, but
that hitherto the applications of the people to that House
to relieve their distress had been totally disregarded.
The wages of labourers were from .ss. to 65., 75., Bs., or
9s. a week, in the country. To obtain relief under the
Poor-law, it was required as a proof of destitution, that
the party should enter a workhouse. Was that fair deal.
ing? If' working men sent representatives to that House,
they might have a chance of equal and just legis-
lation. There were instances without number of la-
bourers with a wife and seven or nine children each, hav-
ing only at the rate of 2d. and 3d. per head, per day, for
their maintenance. With persons in such a condition it
would be in vain to attempt means of coercion. The
only way to quiet them would be to redress their
grievances, and the sooner the House considered them
the better. The country was on the brink of a pre-
cipice, pregnant with danger. Millions of the
lower classes were in such a condition of distress that,
to many of them, life itself was an intolerable burden.
Taxation had arisen to an enormous amount, and by the
monetary system which had been adopted, nine bushels
of wheat were now required to pay 31. of taxation
which in 1818 would have been satisfied by five bushels.
They might increase their police, they might increase
their army, but the people would be too strong for
them. He begged them to do what was right and just
by the people. He beseeched them not to permit the
great weight of taxation fall on the poor, but on the
r ch ando n for wealthy.th e pote
r Tcti
protection e
war f
property,had be
abegun
thereforean d car-
ried
it
was but fair that property should be called on to pay
the interest of the debt which had been incurred for that
purpose. For these reasons he would recommend the
abolition of all those taxes which pressed so hardly on
t'ie poor, and the imposition of a property tax in their
place.

Mr. WILLIAMS rose to second the motion, which
he regretted had not been brought forward at an earlier
period of the Session. He had recently had occasion to
express his dissatisfaction at the acts of the Government,
but he was convinced that the Members of that House
would never fairly put a stop to the career of extravagance
until the taxes should be fairly borne by themselves
At present all the weight of taxation pressed upon the
lower and middle classes, and to a considerable ex-
tent the richer classes were exempt, and therefore
Members of that House were indifferent to every pro-
position tending to check the increase of taxation. He
wished to draw the attention of the House to a list of
articles which afford thirty millions of taxes out of fifty-
one millions which were levied on the inhabitants of
this country, and which thirty millions fell in much
greater proportion on She poorer classes than the rich.
These articles were spirits, malt and hops, sugar, tea, to-
bacco, butter, and cheese, excise licences, and corn. No
Member could deny that the taxes on these articles fell
more heavily on the poor than on the rich. The tax
paid by the poor man on his beer, which was to him a
necessary, amounted to 130 per cent., while the rich
man paid on the luxury of wine a tax of only 25 per
cent., and on champagne and claret, which were exclu-
sively the wines of the rich, the duty did not exceed
20 per cent. The coarse sugar of the poor man paid
precisely the same amount of taxation as the refined
sugar of the rich man, and tea paid a tax of 2s. Id
per pound, being 200 per cent. of taxation on the
poor man's coarse tea while the rich man's fine tea
paid only 30 per cent. Was such a system of taxation
as this a just one ? Tobacco paid a tax of 300 per
cent. Butter and cheese were the food of the poor
man, and taxation was so placed on those articles as to
fall m ore particularly on the poorer classes. Had the
poor man been properly represented in that House,
would such injustice as this have been permitted ? How
could they hope to obtain relief until they should have
a voice in the election of representatives in that House?
Justice to the poorer classes demanded that they should
be relieved from this unequal pressure of taxation,
and that taxes should be imposed upon property in a
just and equitable manner. But the Members of
the House would never tax themselves, and could
they wonder at the dissatisfaction which was spread-
ing through the country ? These were the griev-
ances which the people complained of; and this
was the reason they sought to have a voice in the elec-
tion of Members to that House. He thought such a
case had been made out as called upon the House to
afford relief. The Hon. Member for Wolverhampton
had, in a manner which did him infinite credit, called
the attention of the House to the enormous taxation
imposed by the Corn-laws, amounting to 18 millions
per annum. This might be called a tax levied on the
poor and payable to the rich. Eighteen millions per
annum was screwed, out of the pockets of the poorer
classes by these laws, and transferred to thecoffers of the
rich. One observation he would make as to the operation
of the malt tax. In 1836 it amounted to 7,251,0001. ,
in 1837 to 5,596,0001. ; and in 1838 to 5,200,0001.
The difference between the malt tax in 1836 and last
year was upwards of one million sterling. If anything,
therefore, was wanting for the purpose of showing a
decrease in the consumption of the articles of life of the
poor man, he thought that would show it. But what
was the case with respect to the consumption of wine?
Why, that had increased one-tenth ! The Hon. Mem-
ber concluded by seconding the motion.
Mr. T. .ATT WOOD supported the motion. The
House had refused to increase the means of the people
to an equality with their burthens, it had refused to
make any alteration in the elective franchise, it had de-
nied improvement to the condition of the industrious
classes, and it bad denied them free representation ; and
having done that, his Hon. Friend called upon it to
take upon itself the responsibility of taxation as well as
representation. He would give his cordial support to
such a motion.

Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
House divided, when there appeared—
For Mr. Fielden's motion l5
Against it 5B
Majority against the motion —43
During our exclusion from the gallery we understand
the Chancellor of the Exchequer denied the accuracy
of the statements of the Hon. Member who had brought
the motion forward.
EDUCATION (IRELAND.)
On our re-admission into the gallery we found
Mr. DI L LON BRO IV NE on his legs, bringing for-
ward the motion of which he had given notice.
He felt sorry that he had not a different opportunity of
calling the attention of the House to the motion which
he rose to bring forward, but the fact was, that it was
grounded upon a petition which would not be received
by the House, and which was presented so late in the
Session that he could find no certain opportunity except
the present for bringing the matter forward. He felt
that he was about to give expressions to sentiments
which would place him in no very desirable position
either as regards the general mind or, what was more
ambitioned by a speaker, the general ear of the House,
for he expected to meet in every quarter considerable
resistance. He felt he would be opposed on the oppo-
site of the House, because Hon. Gentlemen might sup-
pose that the object of his motion was to maintain the
stability of the Irish Church by civil enactments, when
he only desired to assert its religious independence, and
he did not expect a more favourable reception from the
varied sections that compose this side of the House.
Her Majesty's Government would oppose him, some
because they were as hostile to the progress of the
Catholic faith as the most orthodox of Hon. Gentle.
men opposite, though they expressed themselves
in different terms ; and others because his
proposition was obviously opposed to the present sys-
tem of national education inlreland, of which the present
Government were sponsors ; and he felt he would be
opposed by another section at this side of the House.
whom he might denominate as the English and Irisl.
Protestant movement party. Many of them deriving
their belief so much from private interpretation, had in
common, no definite principles of faith, and conse-
quently thought it was impossible (and under the cir-
cumstances he agreed with them), to adopt any reli-
gous instruction agreeable to all ; and others, because
they wished to unite with secular instruction certain
moral instruction, based upon a vague, abstract, indefinite
principle which he could not comprehend, a species of
compound extract of all religions, a sort of ethical quin-
tescence, which they declared to be common to every
creed, but which he feared would be recnnized by
none. And he felt he would be opposed by another
section upon this side of the House, which gave him
much cause of regret, many of whom were his friends,
most of whom were his fellow-countrymen, and all of
whom were his fellow-credents. They would oppose
him not because they did not wish as sincerely as he
did to maintain the religious independence of the
Roman Catholic Church, not because they did not
acknowledge as fully as he did, that no religious
instruction can be received by Roman Catholic
children incompatible with Ecclesiastical autho-
rity, and not because they did not see as
clearly as he did, that the time was fast approach-
ing when, arising out of very potent reasons, the whole
Catholic hierarchy of Ireland would repudiate the pre-
sent system of national education in Ireland, but that
they might think that dwelling upon a subject of this
peculiar nature was imprudent in a Roman Catholic,
because the member of that Church who did so might
be designated by those who confounded civil with re-
ligious duties, as a political bigot when he was only a
maintainer of the religious rights and privileges of his
Church. And for another reason those gentlemen might
censure him because they saw him in opposition to a
favourite Government upon a favourite scheme, and saw
him assailing her Majesty's Government in Ireland in a
quarter in which they were found very vulnerable in
his country. Indeed it had been said, as he had been
informed by an Honourable Member, a particular friend
of his, that in consequence of his having held peculiar
opinions upon this subject that he had risked his seat.
However the Hon. Gentleman might have used the ex-
pression he could not 89 far forget early associations as
to reciprocate the wish. It had also been stated that
whatever might be his private opinions he had no right
to act in opposition to his party ; this was a system of
political philosophy he could never adopt, because
,t resolved itself to this, that a supporter of
Government should never have an opinion of his own.
In fact, in political matters, somewhat of the doctrine of

the barbarian who burned the library of Alexandria

,hould be established—that we should seek all wisdom

and principle in the Koran given from the Treasury
benches, and that it ought to be esteemed profanation to
look beyond it—that a man was not to think or act for
himself, or to propound any scheme emanating from his
own mine—that he was never to vindicate his own
principles ; though, Sir, at the present time, whatever
may be a mans opinions, and however they may be op.
posed to his party, and however slavishly and mechani-
cally he may serve that party, he need not, in the great
vaccination of parties, despair of seeing those opinions
vindicated ; for, in their gyrat;ons, they are sure to
come round to him, for he sees men advocate to-da)
the antithesis of that which they declared yesterday
to be the to kalon of political morality. Therefore, he
saw that he would meet with considerable resistance
from all sides, and little sympathy from any ; but he
hoped that the House, which was always inclined to act
generously, would accord to him its attention, particu
irly because he stood alone, and did not hearken to the
voice that would whisper to him,
" For party give up what is due to mankind."
In treating this important subject he would indulge
as little as possible in any polemical matter ;
he would only introduce it as far as it was
necessary for the illustration of his argument.
He knew that religious discussion was displeasing
to the House, but yet it was rather anomalous
to expect the entire rejection of it, when the House
legislated upon religious matters. They were to consi-
der this subject first as regarded the combination of
religions and secular instruction, and secondly, how
that combination should be made so as to sink the see-
tarian prejudices of all parties, and, as far as h s motion
extended, the peculiar state of society in Ireland. He
begged to be understood that he did not wish
,to press
upon the consideration or the House any peculiar reli-
gious opinions of his own ; he did not wish to maintain

whether these religious opinions were right, or those
religious notions were wrong, but that such being the
notions of the majority, that we should to a great ex-
tent legislate accordingly. He did not wish to attach
any peculiar importance to any peculiar opinions, but
he wished to maintain, that whatever were the opinions
of the masses, their laws should bear a neces-
sary reference to them. Whatever might be his
private opinions, he would not in that place de-
clare that the Irish people were right in submit-
ting the religious instruction of their children to
the pastors of their Church ; but that such being
the feelings of the Irish people we could not establish
a system of national education repugnant to those feel-
ings. He was of opinion that secular and religious
education should be combined. He held this opinion
simply as a citizen, without even referring to higher
considerations, for if he h,d been an unbeliever he
would maintain that religion was the best engine which
could be used to promote the prosperity and happiness
of the State. For he always thought that those
moral fears excited in the youthful mind by early in-
struction, did more in after life to deter men from the
commission of the greater crimes than all the penal enact-
ments with which you could crowd your statute-book.
Many a man, instigated by bad passions to take away
the life of his fellow, would despise the authority of the
law, and, perhaps, anticipate its judgment with his own
hand, did he not, in consequence of early impressions,
fear a tribunal which is not of this world, and an inevi-
table justice whose vigilance never sleeps, and whose
course cannot be diverted. Religious instruction being
combined with secular, the next consideration was
how could that combination be best made to suit the
sectarian prejudices of all parties. Could it be done
under a lay supervision ? The Government say they will
adopt a Committee on authority common to all, and
! communicate religious instruction common to all. Could
this be done in a community composed like this, of mul-
titudinous sects, some of whom acknowledged Church
authority, and some of whom did not ; and many
of whom differed in essentials ? Those who did not re-
cognise any Church authority, might receive religious
instruction however it came ; but those who did ac-
knowledge it would repudiate this joint-stock company
in religion. Where they differed in essentials,could you
find any religious instruction common to all ? To
achieve that desirable undertaking, you should discover
some resting place so elevated above all sectarian pre-
judices, where each could find a neutral ground to join
in bonds of amity. Could you find this neutral ground
between the Roman Catholic Church and the Church
of England ? Can you find for them any principle
common to both, which they consider so paramount
above all others that they will reject the consideration
of all others to obtain instruction upon this ? You will,
perhaps,say this principle is the abstract question of re-
demption. Now, Sir, the Roman Catholic is bound to
consider that a belief in the sacrifice of the mass, and in
the seven sacraments is as essential to salvation
as a belief in the redemption, and any Catholic
teacher •who is conscientious, would be obliged
to inculcate this principle. Therefore, you should
exclude Catholic teachers from giving religious in-
struction, or you should employ men who ought not to
to be trusted. Amongst the other Dissenters, are there
any brighter hopes of coming to an understanding ?
Suppose there were established in this town a school
upon your joint-stock principle amongst a community
which comprehends different sects—members of the Es-
tablished Church, Pre.byterians, Socinians. and Uni-
tarians—and that the majority (and it is no very remote
contingency) were Unitarians; suppose Mr. Fox, the
Unitarian preacher, were chosen as the spiritual in-
structor. Now, Sir, Mr. Fox declared—he, (the Hon.
Member) used the expression with the greatest reverence
—speaking of the godhead of the Saviour, " that our
Saviour was merely a prophet ; that he was the first
radical Reformer of his time ; and that if he were in-
carnate in those days, he would be taken up as a Char-
tist!" Could any Protestant, could any Roman Ca-
tholic, could any Christian parent submit his child
to receive religious instruction from this man
And Mr. Fox would have as good a right as any
member of the Established Church to lay claim to
be made religious instructor under the joint-stock
company in religion. Therefore, he thought that secular
and religious instruction could not be combined under
a lay supervision. And then be came to the peculiar
state of society in Ireland ; he was not cognizant of
any country less calculated from its social condition to
receive a combined system of religious education. There
had been two parties in Ireland long contending, the
one for equality, the other for domination ; and religion
was the weapon they most constantly made use of in
their conflicts. When civil concessions were granted
on the one side, and when licentious power was bridled
upon the other, the state of things was not much im-
proved. Catholic emancipation and the suppression of
Orange societies did not much improve the moral con-
dition of the country ; for afterwards two evil passions
raged the least calculated to promote that object, arid
the most to disturb the social order—eon one side the
keen memory of wrong, and, on the other, the sullen
mortification engendered by the loss of power. Those
passions are ever fermenting, being kneaded by the
vigilance of one party or another, and however they may
assume to-day the aspect of tranquillity, like the
yeast of the housewife a small portion is always
laid by to feed the excitement of to-morrow.
Under those circumstances how can you adopt a system
of religious education common to all and acceptable to
all ? Will those who have lost power receive religious
instruction from their Helots, or will those who have
pined equality allow their former tyrants to minister to
them ? No more than will the emancipated negroes of
Jamaica (and we know this from sad experience) re-
ceive their laws prescribed to them by their former task-
masters. No, Sir, there cannot be adopted a joint
system of education in Ireland. Any system of educa-
tion you adopt in Ireland must have respect to the
Roman Catholic religion. There are seven millions,
forming the majority of the population of that country
any education you may introduce must respect the feel-
ings of that majority, or as far as they are concerned
it will be inoperative. They cannot receive religious
instruction except from their pastors or persons accre-
dited by them, because every Roman Catholic is
obliged to submit with implicit obedience to the au-
thority of his Church. That implicit obedience has
procured for the Church its most distinguishing mark,
its unity, which has been undisturbed by time,
and space, and clime, and taste, and language ; which
has adapted it to flourish under every Constitution,while
it can be affected by none. But, Sir, let us take those
opinions from the Catholic hierarchy themselves. In
1826 the Catholic Bishops in Ireland assembled in
synod, and after frequent conferences with Government,
promulgated certain resolutions as the analysis of their
aggregate opinions, and as an example to their flocks. I
shall take the liberty of reading a short extract from
those resolutions :—" That the admission of Protestants
and Roman Catholics into the same schools for the
purpose of literary instruction, may, under existing cir-
cumstances, be allowed, provided sufficient care be
taken to protect the religion of Roman Catholic children,
and to furnish them with adequate means of instruction-
That in order to secure sufficient protection to the reli-
gion of Roman Catholic children, under such a system
of education, we deem it necessary that the master of
each school in which the majority of the pupils profess
the Roman Catholic faith, be a Roman Catholic; and
that in schools in which the Roman, Catholic children
form only a minority, a permanent Roman Catholic as-
sistant be employed, and that such master and
assistant be appointed upon the recommendation, or
with the express approval, of the Reenhan Catholic
Bishop of the diocese in which they are to be employed;
and further, that they, or either of them, be removed
upon the representaticth of such Bishop. The same
rule to be observed for the appointment or dismissal of
mistresses ,and assistants in female schools. That in
conformity with the principle of protecting the religion
of Roman Catholic children, the books intended for
their particular instruction in religion shall be selected
or approved of by the Roman Catholic Prelates, and
that no book or tract for common instruction in liters

1 ture shall be introduced into any school in which Ro-
man Catholic children are educated, which book or
tract may be objected to on religious grounds by the
Roman Catholic Bishop of the diocese in which such
school is established. That, appointed as we have
been by Divine Providence tv watch over and pre-
serve the Catholic faith in Ireland, and responsible
as we are to God fur the souls of our flocks, we
will in our respective dioceses withhold our concur.
rPnce and support from any system of education
which will not fully accord with the prin.
cip!es expressed in the foregoing resolutions."
Such, Sir, were the resolutions passed in the year 1826,
by the Irish Bishops assembled in Synod; their opinions
are there given distinctly upon the terms upon
which they are willing to receive Government assistance
for the purposes of national education. 'These opinions

have not. since been altered, and they are not to be
mistaken. They declare that they will not recognize
my system of education, except with the following pro-
isions they will not allow Catholics to be
educated in the same schools with Protestants, unless
that there is a Catholic teacher appointed where the

inajority are Roman Catholics, and that when Roman
Catholics only form the minority that there is ap-
pointed a permanent Catholic teacher, approved of by the
Bishop of the diocese, ant subject to removal upon his
recommendation. These principles are as distinctly
opposed to the regulations of the Board of National
Eltication in Ireland as principles can be ; but it may
he said that the Catholic hierarchy in Ireland have

and that, when on a late ccea.
stiloten:ecderthtaeiior
resolutionsopinions hostile to the Board were pro.
posed
by the Archbishop of Tuam, that th,,s,
resolutions were negatived by a majority. This is a
fact. But a minority of 8 supported the propositions
of Dr. WHale, which would, independently of other
considerations, be a sufficient reason aloHe to prove that
the national system of education could not be general!)
efficacious, for those Bishops superintend districts which
comprehend one-third of the population of Ireland, and
they have concurrent with them in opinion a large ma-
jority of the members of the Established Church ; and
the majority of Bishop,. in approvio: of it, gave h•it
qualified approval, and subject to a reservation which
must be ultimately fatal to the system. They said, we