The Sun.
London, England, 1841-03-03 00:00:00

ingly grieved, if he had said anything unkind or hurtful
to the to :jags of a ter R enan Catholic. He gsve thew
far creeir for she:trey, Men there seid lee wiiceo when
tie y nee tbs.,e obilexiaus due': Ines. But thee ht.d
tau- d nil ell we, e read by the stud, eta
iti the Col lege of N 1 :stein,: le and it wes the duty of his
flux. Frletel to lheett t,e n under the coeside-ati ;u of
the House mid the public.—( Hear.)
Mr. W. BARRON sail it was not surprisirg it Roman
Catholics in that douse were willing to stand up and deny
ie the most solemn manner the doctrines which had been
attributed ti them by Hon. Gentlemen opposite. He
(Mr. B.) should think taut henvas not fulfilling his duty
either t COLISIi :lents or t his own feelings if he cis
not in the most solemn enamor repudiate the abonneanle
and aerocious doctrines'ereught forward tonight in that
House, by Hon. Gentleman opposite, with regard to not
placing faith in heretics—with regard to taking oaths from
which they might be absolved, and by which members of
othe: persuasions should be bound, and other doctrines of
that kind, which he would not trouble the House with detail-
leg. The Reiman Catholics bad ra: verious times, io the most
solemn inenntr, denied the truth of times doctrines. They
had denied that there were such doctrines bell ored by them.
Their divines, arid esery reason of any authorty iii the
Roman Canealic Church who had written on the subject,
had equally denied the exigence of these doc-rines. tie
was only astonished that in the precht age, and in that
Legislature, there should be found any one individual in
that House, or in any community of Christians, oho would
attribute such abominable doctrines to any class of their
fellow-countrymen, They must have known in their hearts
that what they thus attributed was false. They ought to
have known it when they came forward in that lisuse—
they ought to have examined into ths subject bef sre they
attributed such horrid doctrines to their Roman Catholic
countrymen.—( Hear.) He could not restrain himst if front
stating in the strongest manner possible, thin, such
doctrines were not those of his ( Mr. Barrow's) Church,
and those who attributed then to that Church should
make more diligent impiry before they had the asidactty
impute
to t • ute to their fellow-Christians,—men in as high sta-
tion, and of as high feelings as thernselves—such abomina-
ble and unfounded doctriees. If the Hon. and Le irned
Member for Dublin were now in his place, he (Mr. Bar-
row) would be congratulating him on the effects that
would certainly be produced in favour of the Repeal ques-
tien by the motion of the Hon. Member for Kilmarnock
(Mr. Colquhoun) That Honourable Member's motion
and speech would go far to enlist the Catholics of
Ireland is the Repeat agitation. It would show there
that there was a spirit' of rancorous bigotry
still in existence among a portion of the more
enlightened people of this country, which had found it;
way into the House of Commons, and bad at least nivel
rise to the expression of feelings which he hoped had
been long laid at r ,st by the Bill of 1829. But with re-
respect to the charges brought against what had been
termed the "denunciations from the altar," he (Mr. Bar-
ron) must say that having heard the exhortations of the
Catholic elecrey or, various occasion?, for a period of
twenty-five years, he could safely buy in the presence of
that House, and of the country, that he never yet beard one
single word on any single occasion utterer?, that
would not do honour to the clergy of any Church or any
Christian assembly. Thote exhortations inculcated the
duties of subjects to their own country and to their so-
vereign, and ohelience to the constituted authorities, and
were it not for the exertions of the priesthood of Ireland the
people of that country would on many occasions be driven
to a state of desperate rebellion. He regretted exceed-
ingly that those religious differences should form a matt,r
of discussion at the present day in that enlightened a e
sembly, b2cause he thought (het it was a disgrace to them
before the nations of Europe. They were the only Le-
gislature on earth in which subjects would be heard dis-
cussed in such a manner. Would it be said that while the
rest of the world was progressing in liberality, that Eng-
land alone should be retrograding ? Austria, France.
Prussia, and Holland, had adopted a line of conduct on
this heal, which should make England blush. The Hon.
Member here proceeded at some length to institute a com-
parison between the line of policy pursued on this subject
by England and the four States be had just mentioned,
and contended that the peace and harmony which prevailed
among ihe various religious sects i i those countries re.
sultel from the enlightened views taken by their rest e:-
tive Governments, which, in the Protestant States, namely,
Prussia au? Holland, proui led that the education of the
Catholic subjects of these kingdoms should be as carefully
a.tended to as that of the Protestants, to whom no pre-
ference regarding emo!ument or distinction in the uni-
versities was given to the exclusion of their Catholic
fellow-countrymen; and in support of those statements,
the Honourable Member mentioned that the PreEssor
of History in the University of Bohn (Prussia) had,
in reply to a question from him (Mr. Bairon), as
to whether the professors of that University were equally
Protestant and Catholic, lord told him that that was a
question that never entered into the ideas of any matt
there to ask ; the only thing inquired into, when a candi-
date far a Professorship appeared, was, who was the most
eligible person ? In Austria and France the same liberal
amt just policy was followed. In Austria, an empire
possessing 35 millions of inhabitant=, of all languages,
he might say, and of different religions, but possessirg
only four millions of Protestants, the University of the
ci yof Vienna was endowed with a Professorship of Di.
vinity of the Protestant faith. When, he would ask, would
a similar enlightened policy be put sued in Oxford or
Cambridge ? The University of Dublin, established for
the education of the Protestant iriesthood of Ireland, had
a yca-ly re venue of 40,000/., and that for the clergy
of only one million of the inhabitants of that cenntry.
Was it common sense—was it prudence—for Hon. Merri-
-1 beri to come down to that House to oppose the pal ry
grant of 8,000/. a-) ear for the education of the clergy of
seven millions of the inhabitants of that country ? The
grant should be eight times that amount. Sure, policy_
prudence would dictict! a far different course frem that
pursued in the course of that night's discussion by Hon.
Gentlemen opposite, if they were determined to do away
with the effects of the iron rule and despotic
sway ef the governors of Ireland in a by-gone time.
They might be assure] of it until they did that—until they
gave an increased grant to the Cr liege of Maynooth, they
would never hate a class of men completely fittel for the
mission as he should wish them. At the same time, be
maintained that they were, upon the whole, a moral, teli-
gious, and excellent set of iron ; and it was only asto-
nishing to him that, with such stnallsadvantagere they had
been able to do so much. The House could not forget
that the present discussion was looked to with great in-
terest in Ireland. They could not forget that discon-
tent in Canada had been but recently allayed, and that
in many of their other colonies a large proportion of the
people were Roman Calh elics. D:d they suppose these
pe tple would be pleased with the line taken by the Hon.
Gentlemen opposite, and that their tics of friendship and
good feeling towards England would be increased in
consequence of the present discussion ?—( Hear, hear.)
lion. Gentlemen talked of their consciences ; but if tkey
did use that doctrine, let it be carried to its fullest ex-
tent. The Honourable Member for Oxford had talked
of his conscience, but when he did so, surely he ought
to have some little respect for the consciences of J: in
Thorogood and those other Dissenters who refused to
pay Church-ra'es. The Hon. Member could hot take
the consciences of every other man into his safe keeping ;
and how could he le cone le it to his conscience to vote tor
the grant to the Irish Presbyterians if he believed the
Church of England was the only true Church; or did his
conscieuce extend to Presbyterianism while it refused to
admit Cstholicism? There could be but one true religion,
that must be gi a fled ; but which it was was the main
point of discussion. It was a question that had puzzled
the most eminent statesmen, philosophers, and divines,
and they could net suppose. that their discussions and di-
visions in that House would set the question at rest. They
never would.—(Hear, hear.) He had every respect for
the consciences of other men; but he expected that they
would, in return, respect his. Whstever the Hor. Mem-
ber's conscience was, however; he was bound to act for
t 1 e good of the country, without reference to religious
opinions cr dis.inetions. Now, Hou. Members on the
other side should not forget that choir Universities were
founded by Roman Catholics. They had been unjustly
and unfa:rly deprived of the benefit of these Universities
which they had founded from their 'private fortunes and
private resources, and it was nothing less than
spoliation and robbery when it had been conin ited by the
atmettors of lion. Members opposite. Why did he ref. r
to that circumstance? Because they now grudged to
grant the small pittance ihrtt was asked by the Irish people.
fie had said that they were retrograding in this country.
He was afraid that there were many people in this country
who were retregtaiing in a proper sense of liberality.
This had been increasing frorMthe agitation of the Gen.
tlemen opposite for the last three or four years, who had
been anxious, at the expense of their country and their
good sense, to get into office; and it was in consequence
of that that they hut brought forward the motion of '
the lion. Member for Kilmarnock. He hoped that they
should soon see this Bill in Ireland, as be could assure
the Hon. Member-that it would prove a great accession of
strength to the Hon. Member for Dublin on the question
of the repeal of the union. _(Hear, hear.)
Sir R. BATE SON supported the motion of his Hon.
Friend the Member for Kilmarnock. Maynooth was
founded to educate the Roman Catholic youth in a liberal
spirit, but he thought it had failed in that object. He was
glad that his Friend had brought forward this subject, and
he hoped he would follow it up by moving for a Select
Committee to inquire into the system of education in the
College of Maynooth. The Noble Lord the Secretary
for Ireland had talked about this Leing a poor and miser-
able grant ; why did he not come forward, therefore, and
ask for a larger one ? He objected to the grant, hecause
he thought the system adopted at Maynooth was
founded on bigotry and superstition, and his
wish was that his fellow-subjects of the Roman
Catholic persuasion should be educated liberally.
He opposed the grant, not because it fostered the religious
feelings of his countrymen, but because it tended to en-
courage feelings and acts which were equally opposed to
their own free sentiments and to the laws of the land.—
(Cheers.) If the people of Ireland sera geverned in a
firm and decided manner, and the laws were properly
put in force, the people of. Ireland would he as
well conducted and obedient to the laws as the people of
any other part of the empire.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
Sergeant JACKSON then moved for a copy of a letter
cf Colonel Carey, Mlitary Secretary to the Commander
of the Forces in Ireland, dated the 4th day of April 1814,
addressed to Sir E. B. Littlehales, Under Secretary to
the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland ; and of the letter of Sir
E. B. Littlehales, date.l the sth day of May 1814, ad-
dressed to Sir George Hewitt, Commander of the FAodricu.
es
in Ireland ; also, Copy of the letter of Lord Aylmer,
rant-General is Ireland, addressed to the Military Secre-
tary of the Commander of the Forces, dated the 4th day
of March 1819 ; and of the letter of Sir E. B. Baker,.
addressed to Sir George Beckwith, Commander of the
Forces in Ireland, dated the 16th day of March 1819;
also, Copy of the Memorial of H. B. Bowles, Clerk
in the Adjutant-General's office in Ireland, to the
Lords Commissioeers of the Treasury, and of the
answer there to, dated the 2d day of March 1838.
The Lion and I....arr.ed Gentleman then moved for a return.
of the quantity of deals and planks imported into the port
of Cork during the year ending the sth day of Janua-y '