The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-02 00:00:00

iftt 111:1"t'0 n

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(THIS EVENING.)
(Continued from our First Edition.)
MAYNOOTH.
Mr. HUIVIE considered that the property of the
Church was public and not private property,- given for
the promotion of religion among the people ; but instead
of being used for that purpose, it had been reserved for
the support of the members of certain families. If they
meddled with religious endowments at all, they should
sweep them away altogether. Nothing would contribute
so much to peace and unanimity among the people in
Ireland as the adoption of such a course. He confessed
he felt in a somewhat difficult position in regard to the
way he should vote ; but, on the whole, he thought the
best course would be to withdraw the amendment.
Captain BELLEW said, though he approved of the
principle of the amendment, he should vote against it,
because it did hot go far enough and include all religious
grants. If the amendment was made to extend to the
Regium Donum and the Established Church, he would
have great pleasure in supporting it.
Mr. STAPLETON could not recognise any distinc-
tion between the income of the Established Church,
derived from laud or tithes, and that obtained from the
consolidated fund ; the whole he treated as the property
of the public, and therefore he could not see by what
rule of justice the hon. member could omit the Regium
.Donum from his amendment.
Mr. MAGUIRE • also objected to the amendment
because it was not sufficiently comprehensive. Though
he was a conscientious Protestant, he denied that the
Established Church was either a blessing or a boon to
Ireland, and he thought that a great benefit would be
conferred on that country by its removal.
Mr. W. J. FOX said that neither the voluntary prin-
ciple nor the principle of the Established Church was
involved in the amendment. To what it really related
was, whether taxation drawn from the whole people
should be applied for the benefit of particular classes,
sects, or denominations. To such a grievance the
amendment was opposed, and he trusted it would
obtain even the support of the honourable mem-
ber for North Warwickshire, because it was as
hOstile to the Maynooth grant as his own resolu-
tion: He might say it put the resolution in a
better shape, and gave it a dignity which it did not
formerly possess—it raised it, in fact, from an attack at•
a particular creed into the dignity of an assertion in
favour of a general principle. He was altogether op-
posed to all religious sects being equally supported by
the Government ; for if clergymen-, and priests, and
ministers were alike in the receipt of Government money,
it would be supposed they had an interest in supporting
the existing Government, however oppressive might be
its administration of affairs. It would be imagined that
they did not preach against one another in order to at-
tain the truth, but to promote some personal and sinister
objects of their own, and thus people would take an
aversion to religion altogether. He should support the
amendment, believing that all grants to particular sects
impaired the character of religion, and destroyed its in-
fluence on the population.
Mr. J. BALL considered that the time was not far
distant when the whole subject of religious grants must
be considered by the house. He deprecated, however,
making the house the arena for religious controversies,
and trusted, when questions of this kind were again
brought before it, they would be discussed in a different
spirit.
Sir J. SHELLEY hoped the hon. member for Bir-
mingham would not withdraw his amendment. He was
in favour of even-handed justice being dealt out to all
creeds and religions in the country, and, as a step in
that direction, he would give his assent to the amend-
ment. Though the hon. member for North Warwick-
shire spoke so harshly of the oppression of the Roman
Catholic Church, he believed that if he had it in his
power he would flay and roast every member of that
Church.
Mr. LUCAS denied there was the slightest ground
for the assertion, that the Maynooth grant was diverted
from the objects which properly belonged to it. It was
said that the Roman Catholics should be ashamed to re-
ceive so paltry a sum, that the grant was a mere out-
post of the Established Church, and that they ought
to co-operate with Dissenters in trying to get it
removed. (Hear, hear.) Let the hon. member so
frame his amendment as to raise the whole question
fairly between all sects and classes of the community,
and he should obtain the cordial support of all who
acted with him (Mr. Lucas), not only on the present
occasion, but on every other occasion when he brought
it forward. What he now complained of was, that the
whole 'question was not fairly raised by th• amendment.
It was not his object to obtain any undue advantage for
the Roman Catholic Church, but to secure perfect reli-
gious equality in Ireland.
Mr. PHINN deprecated all religious discussion as
hurtful. and mischievous to the progress of public busi-
ness. He had voted against the motion of the hon.
member for Nbrth Warwickshire, because he thought it
was founded upon principles unfair to his Roman Catho-
lic brethren. He intended to vote for the present mo-
tion, because tie thought that the time was come for the
house to inquire into the religious endowments of the
country. (Hear, hear.) He was afraid that the
difficulty of supporting this amendment, however,
would largely increase by the language which had been
held in the course of this debate by the Nonconformist
members, who had gone with some bitterness into the
whole subject of the endowment of the Established
Church in this country. He believed that the inquiry
proposed by the motion would be a great boon to the
Established Church, because it would prove that that
church was not so much more favoured as it was thought
to be.

Mr. WHITESIDE asserted that the Established
Church in Ireland had never at any period of its history
been so strong, powerful, and firm as it was now. What
he wanted was to inquire, not into the fasts, discipline,
and ceremonies of the Roman Catholic Church, but what
Were the relations between the priests of Rome and the
foreign power—whether the doctrines taught at May-
nooth were incompatible with civil Government. Those
he thought were fair topics to be enquired into. If
there were a committee appointed—a fair cnnamittee—
he would undertake to demonstrate to the satisfac-
tion of the Roman Catholic laity that these were grave
and serious questions. The hon. member for Meath on
the hustings had, in a long speech, maintained that an
Act of Parliament was not binding on Roman Catholics
-without the consent of the Pope, and that, in fact, the
Pope was more powerful than the Queen and Parlia-
ment. But the hon. member to-day had made a very
ilifferent sort of speech. It was one thing for the hon.
member to make a speech to the priesthood, and an-
other thing to address the British House of Commons—
there a very different doctrine was necessary from that
which would make this free assembly slaves to the
Papacy. He thought it was a fair question to in-
quire into whether or not these were the doctrines
taught at Maynooth. What was the fact at this mo-
ment I But a few weeks ago a gentleman of great learn-
ing a-nd ability, a Roman Catholic clergyman, had been
appointed by her Majesty to the vice-presidentship of
tire Queen's College. The Pope forbade it, and, with much
reluctance, he was obliged to resign it. Whose subject
was the gentleman—the Queen's or the Pope's ? Then,
again, he was informed that no gentleman could
enter into the College of Maynooth without the
written assent of Dr. Mac Hale or Dr. Cullen. These
two prelates were known to be the great advocates of
ultra-Montane doctrines, and he thought it was a prac-
tical question to inquire into, whether no one was al.
lowed to enter into the college unless he was known to
be a believer in these doctrines. Again, the commission
which had formerly been appointed, and which had
never reported, had been unable to ascertain whether
the order of Jesuits had an establishment in the heart
of Maynooth, and he thought that was another
question for inquiry. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. Serjeant MURPHY deprecated the reintroduc-
tion of religious topics into this discussion. He spoke
in no sectarian spirit, but rather could with pleasure
testify to the alacrity with which the Protestant clergy
laboured during the time of famine in Ireland. At the
last general election the priests so far from leading the
People into the contest were dragged into it by them.
4. feeling, had been created in Ireland, not only by the
Stockporte riots but also by the Government proclamation.
Boßill Bishop of Oxford had lately said on the Clergy Reserves
that a claim of justice was involved in the request
lFanada, and he said that a similar observation
;747;1 apply to this question. He denied that the May-
encour wns for religious purposes, it was solely to
gra
age education, and was not on the same footing
as the Regium, h(oire7.l:
hear.)
any other grant of a like re-
ligious nature.
Mr. KIRK said
ear.the only Irish PreslWmn
in the house, and therwefaaor
than 700,000 of the Irish e he represented no less
le He could not sit
still and hear the Regium, people.
.Regiura Donum was granted het7:ll, grant abused. The
tion of certain rights which Clergy to
he Crown in considera-
whom it was
granted gave up ; but the continuing or discontinuing
that grant was not now under discussion, or he should
have been prepared to defend it at greater length
. He
was -well acquainted with the views of the Protestant
population of the north of Ireland, and he knew that they
were favourable to inquiry into the system of management
at Maynooth. They felt that it would be unjust to with-
draw the grant before that inquiry had been had, and
though he should resist the original motion to the ut-
most, he was not directly opposed to the amendment.
Mr. COGAN was not opposed to inquiry, but this
Was too great a question to be disposed of on an amend-

ment.
Mr. O'BRIEN regretted that the tone adopted last
week. by the hon. member for Bath was not taken up by
the bon, member for Enniskillen, and he was not sorry
that this debate was drawing to a close. Of course, be
could have no objection to a motion for inquiry into the
state of Maynooth, though he deprecated some of the
language which had been applied to that institution.
The hon, and learned member for Cork had, however,
fully expressed his views upon the whole subject, and he
*Quid nut trouble the house further, seeing that the
house was anxious to come to a division upon the
question.
Mr. AITT.NTZ valued no religion that required the
assistance of a Government grant, and he therefore
1845 against the increase of the Maynooth grant in
' Icon.
members who represented Ireland did not
object to •
agitating the repeal of m• •
thou h ministers' money,
they clamoured loudly against those who opposed'
*As grant to
grAtaanytnso)th. He repeated that he was op-
hopeless td epect, asors purposes, but it was
these grants could be sw°lnet hon, members did, that all '
at once. They must
be removed piecemeal, and aawaeaycommencement in that
direction he was ready to reL the grant to Maynooth.

"Sir J. E ITZGERALD complained of the continued
agitation of this subject, as it had and was still creating
considerable uneasiness in Ireland.

Mr. SPOONER replied. The hon. and learned mem-
ber for Enniskillen had so fully entered into and dis-
posed of the whole question that it was hardly necessary
for him to say a word by way of reply, but an
appeal had more than once been made to
him to say something about the motion for
inquiry, that he could not resist the desire to detain the
house for a few moments longer. Last year all the
Irish members seemed favourable to an inquiry, though
then, as now, they did all in their power to prevent it ;
and if they were really consistent and sincere in their
professions, they could not suffer the charges against
Maynooth to go uncontradicted, or to remain without an
inquiry into their truth or falsehood. What
he complained of was not so much the doc-
trines that were taught at Maynooth, as the
circumstance of the Legislature granting money to assist
the teaching of those doctrines. Of course the Roman
Catholic Church enjoyed perfect toleration to teach what
it thought proper, but it had no right to call upon the
country to pay for the teaching of doctrines that were
not only injurious to society at large, but were diame-
trically opposed to those Protestant principles which the
Legislature and the Crown were bound to support. He
would not, however, purchase the withdrawal of the
grant at the expense of a principle, and he could not,
therefore, adopt the amendment in preference to the
original motion. (Hear.)
_ _

The house then divided on Mr. SCHOLEFIELD'S amend.
ment to the original resolution, when there appeared—
For the amendment 6B
Against it 262

Majority
MUTINY BILL,

. 194 i

This bill was read a second time; and ordered to be
committed to-morrow.
MARINE MUTINY BILL.

This bill was read a second time and ordered to be
committed to-morrow.
SELECT COMMITTEES.

Mr. BARING WALL moved for a return of the
number of select committees appointed since November,
1852 ; distinguishing each ; showing the names of the
members serving on each :—Also, the number of days
on which each committee had sat, and the name of each
member attending.'
Agreed to.

wasted and neglected the greatest riches are yet to be
recovered. The company in having Mr. Charles Watt's
assistance is in possession of the knowledge necessary of
success, of which there appears to be the fairest possible
prospect.—Plyntauth. Mail.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT-(THIS DA Y.

OLD COURT.
(Before Lord Campbell and Mr. Justice Maule
THE ALLEGED MURDER ♦T THE REGENT'S CANAL.

On the application of counsel for the prisoner, the trial
of Thomas Mackett, 30, labourer, who stands indicted
for the murder of Eliza Lee by thrusting her into the
Regent's canal, was postponed until next sessions.

THE SUN, LONDON,- WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 2, 1853.

EMIGRATION TO MELBOURNE.

--~-

The following is an extract of a letter from William
How;tt, dated Melbourne, Oct. 20 :—" It cannot be too
widely or too publicly made known what those who
come here have to expect on landing. They should be
well informed of this, that they may calculate their funds
accordingly. There are numbers of our fellow-passen-
gers who have not yet got their effects out of the ship,
and thus have had to stop a month in this exorbitant
place. All luggage has to pay 11. per ton measurement
by the lighter, 1/. 10s. by the steamer ; but, in truth, I
have seen none of the goods measured—they are merely
guessed at. The clerks at the wharf; after they have coma
up the river in the lighter, as soon as a cart is loaded with
a passenger's effects, say That cart is 31. or 41. lighter-
age,' and they will not let it go out of the yard till the
money is paid. I was made to pay 4/, for one cart load—
the whole of my effects having cost 71. 10s. from London.
But, as I happened to have with me my London mea-
surement, I got it corrected. Such, however, is not the
case with many people ; they know that it is wrong, but
they are obliged to pay. This is a strange way of doing
business ; but they have many strange ways here, and
they now only look on 20s. sterling as so many pence.
Passengers should know that guessing is not measuring,
and should be prepared to show what the true measure-
ment is. People coming hither should reflect, too, that
they are coming into a colony abounding with expert
thieves, who have been shipped from England to Sydney
and Van Diemen's Land, and have assembled here to
dig for gold in the pockets and coffers of the immi-
grants. There is no safety for the goods in the
lighters, as the lighterrnen are very frequently finished
thieves of the convict class, and they employ themselves,
as the lighters come slowly up the river, in explor-
ing the interior of the packages entrusted to them, and
selecting what suits them best. If the passengers find
themselves minus such articles, there is no chance of re-
covering the value, unless they can prove that the
packages went safely out of the ship into the lighter, and
that they themselves saw the packages come out of the
lighter. But this is a very difficult matter, and cannot
be done, unleFis the passengers go down to the ship every
day and watch the things put in ; and to do this they
must often go down for a month together, at a cost of
16s. per day for a single individual. Once out of the
lighter 11. per load is demanded for carting your things
into the town ; once in the town another great difficulty
is to be encountered—the difficulty of getting into any
lodgings, even at the most astounding prices. Notwith-
standing the temporary wooden houses erected and the
tents pitched on all sides of the town, the price of the
poorest lodgings is four times what it would be in Lon,
don, sometimes tenfold. Even for the tents you are
charged ss. a-week standing room on the common round
the town. I think that Government should allow immi-
grants the privilege of pitching their tents on the waste
lands without charge at a time when they are profess-
ing great anxiety to accommodate them. Some of our
fellow passengers are giving 21. and 31. a-week for poor
empty rooms. I saw a cottage yesterday at Coiling-
wood which would let for about 101. a-year in England,
but for which 2001. a-year is paid, without any garden
at all. I saw another which a few years ago was pur-
chased for 1501.; the same has been sold several times,
each time advancing in price, till now it is 12,0001. I
saw a house to-day which might be built in England
for 1,0001., and which was offered to Government for
the use of the officers of the barracks for 4,500/., but as
they hesitated the price then rose to 6,6001., and the
Government took it lest it should go still higher. The
Melbourneites have taken a few leaves out of the books
of the Sybil. In this oddly circumstanced place, there-
fore, when the immigrants get their goods liberated and
are ready to proceed to the diggings, they are next met
by terrible accounts of the state of the roads, which
early in the year are only too true, and they must pay
from 701. to 1201. per ton for carriage for about 80 miles,
or they must purchase a cart for 501. and a strong
horse for 100/., or a couple of lighter ones for 80/,,
to get their effects up the country. They must
carry up all sorts of stores, especially flour, or they
must pay at the rate of 101. per sack, and 3s. and 4s. for
the 41b. loaf; and so on. They must do this, or they must
trudge upon foot, as thousands and thousands do, with
only a bundle on their backs containing a basket and a
pick, and a spade on their shoulders. These mon,
hardy as they are, have to stop under a tree or the open
heavens, and become, many of them, cramped with
rheumatism and attacked with dysentery. Such are the
realities which meet the adventurer on the thres-
hold of the land of gold. These are followed by hard-
ships and severity of labour that men accustomed to
offices and banks are totally unfitted for. Hence there
are so many failures, and number are met coming down
again in perfect dejection and destitution. I hope that
long before this reaches England these facts will have
been published—these obverse features of the golden
medal of Australia Felix. But what must be the amount
of distress when the number here is augmented by the
tens and hundreds of thousands coming from America,
Jamaica, England, and the Continent I perceive a
considerable number of French and Germans here al-
ready. It begins now to be an opinion that in a few
months, such is the swarm of people pouring in, there
will be plenty of labour of all kinds, and then things
will speedily find their level, to the astonishment of those
who have purchased houses and land at the present
exorbitant prices. In a while the colony will absorb
them all."

FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE of YESTERDAY.

RES FOR 1853.

LORD CHAMBERLAIN'S OFFICE, FED. 17.

lesis denote the number o:

-acing.
UL.
York Spring (2)
Malton (2)
Newmarket F S. (5).
.AY.

Redditch (2)....
Bath (2)
Man Chester (3).
Epsom (4)

Notice is hereby given, that his Royal Highness Prince
Albert will, by the desire of her Majesty, hold Levees at
St: James's Palace, on behalf of her Majesty, on the fol-
lowing days, at two o'clock :
Wednesday, 2d March next.
Wednesday, 9th March next. . . .

It is her Majesty's Pleasure that presentations to his
Royal Highness at these Levees shall be considered equiva-
lent to presentations to the Queen.
Addresses to the Queen may either be forwarded to her
Majesty through the Secretary of State for the Home De-
partment, or may be reserved until her Majesty shall hold
a Levee.