The Sun.
London, England, 1840-06-24 00:00:00

THE St , LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 24, J.

IMPERIAL PNitLt OIENT.

HOUSE• 01' LORDS, JUNE 23.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his saat on the Woolsack
at Five o'Clock.
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR presented several
petitions from Manchester, Northumberland, and other
places in favour of the Bill introduced by his Lordship for
the better administration of justice in the Court of Chan-
cery,

REMOVAL OF THE COURTS.
The NOBLE and LEI.ENED Loan also presented a peti-
_on from 1,500 solicitors practising in London, praying
for the removal of the Courts of Law from Westminster
Hall to Lincoln's Inn.
IRISH MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BILL.
Lord KENYON, for his Noble and Learned Friend
who was unable to attend (Lord Wynford), gave notice
that on the Irish Municipal Corporation Bill going into
Committee, he would move that the city of Dublin be
exclu led from the operation of that Act.
POOR-LAW ACT (IRELAND).
The ;Marquis of NOR M ANBY complained of the Mar-
quis of Westmeath having entered a notice of motion on
the books for Thursday next, for a Committee of inquiry
into the operation of the Irish Poor Law Act without having
publicly intimated his intention of doing so. Such a course
was contrary to the rule generally observed by their Lord,
ships.
The Marquis of WE STME ATH had not intended to
take any advantage. Mr. Nichols having been in Eng-
land, he thought the Noble Marquis had had the neces-
sary communications with that gentleman ; and that he
(the Marquis of Westmeath) would be fully justified in
proceeding with his motion.
The Marquis of NORM ANBY said that Mr. Nichols
had returned to Ireland. All he wished was, that time
might be afforded for obtaining possession of those facts
that could be derived only from Mr. Nichols.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH'S object was to pro-
duce an amendment of the law, for at present the machinery
of that measure was a mere farce.
The Earl of WICKLOW thought the most judicious
course would be to postpone the motion till next Session,
because it was impossible that any Bill could result from
the appaintment of a Committee during the present Session.
Lord BROUGHAM observed that the Noble Marquis
must net expect that those who had opposed the Irish Poor-
law Act would support his motion. He, for one, had op-
posed that Act, but now that it was law he was anxious to
give it a fair trial.—( Hear, hear, bear.)
Lord EL LENBOROUG II deprecated any such mo-
tion being brought forward as that of which the Noble
Marquis had given notice. He thought such a discussion
would only revive party feeling, and produce more evil than
good.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH'S main object was to
amend the valuation.

The Earl of GLENGALL hoped the Noble Marquis
would persevere with his motion.
After some further conversation,
The Marquis of WESTMEATH postponed his mo-
tion till Friday week.
A mes'age from the Commons brought up the Colonial
Passengers' Bill, the Timber Duties Bill, and the Admi-
ralty Bill, which were, on the motion of Lord DUN-
CANNON, severally read a first time.
BRITISH AUXILIARY LEGION.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY had a notice on
the books for Thursday next, relative to the claims of the
officers of the British Auxiliary Legion and the Spanish Go-
vernment. He was not anxious to cabal rass the Noble Vis-
count, and if an assurance were given him that negotia-
tions were going on, he would put that motion off till a
future day.
V!scount MELBOURNE replied, that a negotiation
was in progress and near its termination. Bills had been
received in London to the amount of 50,000/., and Sir
De Lacy Evans had left Madrid satisfied with the nego-
ciation as far as it had gone.
PATRONAGE IN THE COLONIES.
The Duke of WELLINGTON moved fora return of
the answers returned from the provinces of Newfoundland,
New Brunswick, Prince Edward's Island, and Nova
Scotia, to the letter of the Secretary for the Colonies, re-
lating to the distribution of patronage in the colonies.
Lord MELBOURNE said that there was no objection
to present the despatches from Newfoundland and
Prince Edward's Island. That from New Brunswick
had not been received ; and he thoaght it would
be inexpedient for the public service to lay on the table
fle despatch that had been received from Nova Scotia.
The Dnkc of WELLINGTON said that perhaps the
inse►tion of the words, or abstracts," would include all.
Lord MELBOURNE assented, and the words having
been inserted, the returns were ordered.
The Earl of WARWICK presented a petitien from
Birmingham, praying for the extension of the Metropolitan
Police to that borough.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH presented a petition
from Abbe; lacy, in the County of Longford, against the
natilnal system of education in Ireland. The Noble
Marquis then, pursuant to notice, called the attention
of their Lordships to the conduct of a. certain Roman Ca.
tholic priest, of the name of O'Reilly, in the parish
of Ballymacue, who, from the altar, said that some of
his Protestant neighbours ought to have their ears cut off
like pigs or asses.—( Hear.) The Government ought
to account for not having prosecuted that man; al-

though it was not wonderful that they did not, as
they owed their maintenance in oflice to the friendly and
active support of the Catholic priesthood. The Govern-
ment were not forgetful of that support. At the Assizes of
Cork, a priest named Bourke, had suborned a witness to
swear away the life of another man. Bourke was convicted
of the subornation and sentenced to three years' imprison-
ment and a fine of 50/. The Government mitigated the
fine to 201. at the expiration of the imprisonment. In an-
other case the pu❑iahment of a priest named NV Carol was
mitigated from 201. to 40s. The Catholic priests did no:
merit the protection which Government extended to them.
Ho said, as a class, they did not merit it. In the recent
improvement which had taken place in a large portion of
the people of Ireland in respect to a particular vice—which
improvement he hoped would be permanent—tbe parochial
clergy were superseded in the performance of their duties
in their own parishes by to humble and well-meaning in-
dividual. He concluded by moving for a return of cor-
respondence relating to the conduct of a priest named

o' Reilly.
illy.
The s of NORMANBY said that any one who
heard the Noble Marquis would suppose that the case re-
ferred to was one between Catholic priests and their Pro-
testant neighbours. It was, in fact, a case between Ca-
tholie and Catholic, or, more strictly speaking, between
priest and priest. The complainant was a priest of the name
of O'Reilly, and the priest complained against was of the
same name. It arose out of the customs of a fair,
which, although a right of property was illegally en-
forced, by requiring people going out of the Lair with
cattle to swear whether they were sold or not, as the pay-
ment of the customs depended upon the Cattle having been
sold. The priest, O'Reilly, complained of denounced
this practice on the part of his brother priest of the same
name, who was proprietor of the fair, and warned his flock
from the altar against taking land under bite, using some
very violent language, hut not such as the Noble Marquis
had represented. A Government prosecution was com-
menced on account of that conduct ; but, in the mean time,
the matter was brought before a bench of magistrates,
upon whose mercy the priest complained against threw
himself, apologising for his conduct, and promising never
to use such language again, or to interfere with the pro-
perty of his brother priest. The magistrates accepted his
apology, and his offer to pay the complainant 501., and,
subsequently in a memorial to the Government, stated
their opinion that enough had been done for the peace of
the country, and that the laws had been sufficiently vindi-
cated. On that ground the Government prosecution was
abandoned. He resisted the motion.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH said, that the de-
fence of the Noble Marquis was a total failure. --( A
laugh.) The Noble Mai quis admitted the truth of his
statement, and snowed that there had been a Government
prosecution, which was abandoned, without the laws
having been in any way vindicated.—( Hear, and a laugh.)
He considered the case one of very great importance to
the peace of the country, and he felt he was justified in
calling the attention of their Lordships to the manner in
which the Government protected the Roman Catholic
clergy from deserved punishment. He would persist in
the motion.
Their Lordships then divided, when the numbers were—
For the motion lB
Against it l9
Majority
Their Lordships then adjourned to Thursday.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, JUNE 23.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.
Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR. rn,,ved, "that the
promoters of the proposed railway from Chester to Holy-
head be allowed to bring in a Bill, in the next Ses-
sion of Parliament, for carrying the same into effect,
'on giving notice, and depositing plans and sections as ro_
quired by the Standing Orders relating to other Bills of the
second class, except railways; and that the Standing Order
requiring a portion of the capital to be deposited in the
Exchequer prior to the application to Parliament be dis-
pensed with."
Mr. WILBRAHAM seconded the motion.
Mr. GREENE resisted the application, on the ground
,f Standing Orders had over and

that the Committee cm
over again decided that those orders were absolutely men.
tial for the protection of the public. There was no rea-
son why they should be departed from in this instance.
Unless the portion of the capita required by the Orders,
that is, 10 per cent., were deposited in the Exchequer,
prior to the application to Parliament, the door would be
opened to the formation of such visionary or fraudulent
schemes as the Order was designed to prevent.
Mr. JARVIS said that if this were a mere private spe-
culation, or an ordinary railway, he might concur in the
observation of the Gentleman who had last addressed the
House. But this was a great national undertaking, by
which the country would' be relieved from great expense,
d a large portion of "_the public

murderers was taking away every motive for offenders to show
mercy to their victims, and in fact giving them the inducement
of personal safety to commit murder. These were the reasons
for making a difference in the punishment assigned by law to
murder, and to the attempt at murder. If the punishment of
death prevented murder, it would prevent attempts at murder,
because the attempt was, as far as the perpetratoi• himself was
concerned, murder, until it had proved unsuccessful; whereas,
if the robber felt his life was safe, he would seldom or never be
induced to commit murder, as there would be no motive of
present safety to induce him to do so. With regard to rape
and unnatural crimes, he would say that an irrevocable judg-
ment of death ought only to be pronounced by an infallible tri-
bunal. The offence of rape was proved only by the evidence
frequently of a single witness;
id Jur and in
thit witness was under the

, • • , - ~
, ,',,•:::, ..,t,,,-.1,7Li:,..,,.,,,it:, :Lt.L.M.,,2; ' : :....y1;•: f ...";,L: 1,,1: •',U 1 ,C: r.,, . :;..,, c.,,,, E. •,._ „ . , -
was ot the wgiiest importance in a netional point 0/ view, he eouist admit incur Ll.u.,e inutieent. iiyeinusi, run tile rlskvi be-
that there should be as little as possible delay in the corn- ing sacrificed. But unless the necessity could be shown it became
niunication between Dublin and London.—( Hear, hear.) a crime before God and man to continue such a system for a
He hoped that a mere technical rule would not be single hour. It being doubtful if capital punishments were ne-
allowed in so important a case to obstruct a measure of cessary for the repression of those crimes, he beseeched the
so much benefit to Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) House to give mankind the benefit of that doubt—to try
Mr. SHAW was of opinion that that technical rule some systenhi of secondtaryipunishment, and see if they could
ought not to be lightly set aside; but he thought this was of. th t
oendiennoncee ~h w i
wile they punished the guilty. But
i md n w
o ere innocent, 8 had been executed,
otsPealre 7 c
a cese in which the strictness of the rule in question and n one of these cases saved the reprieve had arrived only
should be relaxed.—( Hear, hear.) four hours before the time fixed for the execution. There
Mr. L ABO UCH ER E admitted that since the union it were cases which he had discovered almost without investiga-
was of the highest importance that the communication tion; and if he had had time to investigate the subject.
between London and Dublin should be as much facilitated he had no doubt but that he should find the number
as possible. But he thc ught it of paramount importance touch larger. In the case of rape would it not be
that the Standing Order should be strictly adhered to. enough that a man gulty of that crime should be
He, therefore, could not accede to the proposition of his secluded from the society of his fallow-creatures? It was o'-e
of the grievous effects of this system that it tended not ir.e.ely
able Friend,
to the punishment of the innocent but to the escape of the
Dr. LEF R 0 Y said that the case before the House guilty. He would apiwal to every professional man's exP eri-
was very different from those to which the rule was in- once to furnish cases without number of guilty men -being
tended to apply. The object of the Bill had been, since thrown loose upon societv'ehrough the conscientious scruples ot
the Union, recognised as one of public importance, witnesses, prosecutors, juries, and even judges A case had
and large sums of public money had been advanced fix occurred not three years ago, in Bucks. A farmer possessed of
the purpose of expediting the communication between property was barbarously murdered, his son was indicted for the
Dublin and London. He supported the motion. murder, the case was proved, and yet the prisoner was acquit-
Mr. WARBURTON said that if the House did not ted. Ile was subsequently indicted for robbing his father's
wish to return to the abuses which the Orders were intended crallebody, was instantly convicted, and was now in New South
showed how the punishment of death militated
to prevent, they should not relax them in the present againsts obTtahianting convictions in the clearest cases. With re-
in stance, which would be drawn into a precedent if they Bard to cases of arson, the burning of a house wilfully still re-
did. Twined a felony, but if life was sacrificed in consequence, the
Sir ROBERT PE EL regretted the necessity of en- offence twcame murder, and the offender's life would be aerie
forcing the Standing Orders in the present case, and in that ficed. He hoped this would be a sufficient answer to those
of the Edinburgh Railway, as nothing would be of greater who wished to retain the punishment of death for that
importance than a facility of communication between the offence.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He would now allude to
three eapitals of the United Kingdom.—( Hear.) But the lamentable effect upon public morals, produced by
he considered the Standing Orders of such paramount im- Public executions. Some among the crowd to witness an
eortance that he must oppose the motion. execution were struck with awe, but these virtuous men were
those on whom it was intended that executions should pro-
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL supported the me- notdu ee an effect ; it was upon the depraved, the uneducated, and
tion. He thought that the work was a great national one, wretched that it was desirable an effect should be produced•
and if he considered there was any thing of the nature of a and he would appeal to the account of everyexecutin
owhich
job in it, he should join in the opinion just expressed by had appeared of late years, whether the effect of an execution
the Right Hon. Baronet. He was pursuaded, however, had not been to encourage vice and crime of every sort. In
that -no such suspicion could be attached to the under- none of the cases in which capital punishment had been abo-
taking, and that a deviation from the general rides of the lished of late years had crime increased in consequence ; in
House would be attended with no inconvenience on the many instances it had considerably diminished ; and while
occasion. crime had decrease 1, prosecutions had increased in proportion
Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR called on the House to the number of crimes, and the number of convictions in
not to postpone, indefinitely, the progress of a work which
proportion to the number of prosecutions had increased also;
and the House must beatin mind, that while there was an ap-
was admitted to be a great national one.
parent equality in commitments, there was a real de-
The House then divided, when the numbers were— crease in crime; because population and commerce had
Fir the motion llO increased without a proportionate increase of crime.
Against the motion
Majority —lo the Noble Lord, to his eternal credit, brought forward
The motion was consequently rejected. his series of Bills, this had been the case. The experiment of
Lord ELIOT gave notice that on Tuesday, the 7th the abolition of capital punishment had succeeded, and why
of July, he would call the attention of' the House should they stop where they were? For those reasons, and
to thepetition of the merchants, shipowners and other
upon those principles he beseeched the House to take those
inhabitants p
of London, relating to the colonization of New ,
measures into its consideration, and he beseeched the Noble
Lord to complete the work he had so well begun, and for which
South Wales. he would derive greater and more lasting fame than from the
Mr. HA WES gave notice, that on Tuesday next he brightest political triumphs.—( Cheers.)
would ask leave to introduce a Bill, declaring the holders Mr. EWART seconded the motion. He was the more
of judicial offices incapable of being elected, or of sitting pleased to do it, emanating as it did from a gentleman on the
as Members of the House of Commons. other side of the House, because it showed that their principles
Mr. GILLON gave notice that on Thursday next be were making progress among men of all parties. He had
would move that a ballot should be taken for the purpose brought foward a similar motion three years ago, and although
of giving priority to Notices of Motion over Orders of the it had been lost by a majority of one, yet he was happy to say
that since that time there had been no executions, except for
Day on certain days of the week.
Mr. CRESS WELL gave notice that he would move murder, or attempts at murder. He thought the Hon. and
an Address to her Majesty (we could not learn on what Learned
improve secondary
hanot clone justice to the Noble
effortLoLord's to d
punishment. The Noble Lord had
day) on the subject of Danish Claims. done more for the improvement of secondary punishment, than
Sir F. TRENCH gave notice that on the first day of any one who had ever presided at the Home Office. Arguing
Sepply he would take the opinion of the House, whether as he did that transportation as a punishment ought to be abo-
they preferred gas or candle light.—( Hear, and a laugh.) lished, he still wished to retain it as a supplement to punishment ;
Mr. WARBURTON gave notice that on the Ist day that after a person had undergone confinement in this country
of July he would move that the House should resolve itself he might he enabled to seek a home in a foreign land, where he
into a Committee on the subject of medical Reform. might retrieve his character; and he knew that this was the
Lord JOHN RUSS E LL gave notice that on Tuesday opinion of a celebrated foreign jurist. It was a great anomaly
next he would move for leave to brio in a Bill far the go-
in our law that a man entering upon a crime, not having murder
in his contemplation, yet if the consequences of the clime were
next heat of the colony of New Sou. g h Wales. murder, he should be punished as a murderer. This was an
Mr. A G LIONBY begged leave to ask the Right Hon. anomaly that ought to be remedied. He would have wished a
Gentleman below him ( Mr. Fox Meule) why the Papers distinction had been made in crimes of high treason between
laid on the table this morning, relating to the regulations those in which the death of the head of the State was contem-
of York Castle, did not contain those two rules of which plated and those in which it was not. Monsieur Guizot, aboiit
the Marquis of Normanby had expressed his disapprov Al ? twenty years ago, published a work of great ingenuity on the
Mr. F. MAUL E'S answer was not heard in the gallery. abolition of the punishment of death for political offences, in
BANK OF IRELAND. which he proved that in revolutions leaders are almost always
In answer to Mr. O'BRIEN, - . impelled onwards, and obliged to act by their followers, and
that consequently it was wrong to punish the capitals
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHQUER said he
for crimes of which in reality they were not lt .
should shortly move for leave to bring in a Bill relativo to The popular feeling was strongly against capital punisligmuzlnt3S,
the renewal of the Bank of Ireland Charter. and he trusted it ssould soon procure their total abolition.
POSTAGE. Lord J. RUSSELL said the House and the country were
In answer to Sir R. PEEL, greatly indebted to the Hon. and Learned Member for the zeal,
The RIGHT HON. GENTLEMAN said he should also have talent, and industry, which he had displayed on the question._
to bring in a Bill to settle the Post-office arrangement, ( Hear, hear.) He should not oppose the bringing in of the Bill,
not entirely to continue all the powers of the past Act, nor but he thought it fair to add that he could not 'support it in any
essentially to alter the plan. further stage. Undoubtedly the feeling against capital punish.
MANUFACTURE OF GLASS. ments had greatly increased of late years, while in 1827 the
The RIGHT HoN. GENTLEMAN further stated that the number of capital convictions was as one in ten, in 1837 it was
practice for seine years had
one in 317—( Hear, bear)--and the-
would make inquiries as to what information he could pro- been to execute only in such cases as would be left capital by
duce relative to the improvements in the manufacture of this Bill. But, on the whole, he did not think he should be
glass; and experiments lately made by the Government on justified, without further experience, and more mature consists-
the subject. ration, in adopting a further relaxation of the criminal code.
BILLS OF EXCHANGE, &c. Mr. HUME was of opinion that capital punishments did not
Mr. WA RBURTON asked if the Right Hon. Gentle- prevent crime, even when applied to eases of murder.
man intended to bring in a measure settling the temporary The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said there were certainly
Bill passed by the Lords last year, as to the interest on many cases of capital offences at present, in which the punish-
bills, &c. went of death might be dispensed with —( Hear)--but he
No answer. begged his Learned Friend to postpone the measure till next
CAPITAL PUNISHMENTS• Session--and then he would include Scotland and Ireland,
without including which the measure would be imperfect.
Mr. F. KELLY then rose to britig forward his motion
Mr. F. KELLY said he must, from a sense of public duty,
for the further abolition of the punishment of death—a say to this request decidedly, no. He thought, however, life
measure he considered alike required by the interests of and public opinion ought not to be trifled with. Nor was there
justice and the character of the country.—( Hear.) He any necessity for postponement. Ireland and Scotland wild
was sensible to the difficulties of that question, and had easily he included in the measure.
indeed way lately been asked how he could venture to Leave given to bring in the Bill.
bring it on at a time when the public mind was agitated MAYNOOTH COLLEGE.
by -many• tragit 'ttecurrenetnn— He—considered; however, Mr. PLUMPTRE having presented several petitions against
that experience had sufficiently demonstrated the ineffi. the grant to Maynooth, proceeded to bring before the House a
ciency of capital punishments, and required their further resolution in accordance with that prayer. He stated that
diminution—as their•dirninntion had been followed by the among the books taught in the College were Den's Theology.
desired results. He deeply regretted that the punish-
The object of the grant -had been, that the !Popish priests
.
meat of death had not in this country been ere taught in the College might be induced to inculcate subordina-
teSrred-id
this entirely abolished.-(Hear, hear, and cheers.) tire amongn thee
tpttelaesmananr peasantry. Such,
however,oerlandonoot been,en
httease.
It may not be known to unprofessional Gentlemen in Committee of the House, commonly called the 13.‘"Intimidarteioan
this House, that in this Bill as it now stool, high treason Committee," and quoted evidence there given to prove the'in-
or the murder of the Sovereign was not included as a timidation exercised by the Catholic priests over the electors
capital punishment. Of the number of cases which of Ireland. He objected to the grant therefore on that ac-
in former days were punishable with death, the count. Another ground of objection to it was; the books used
greater part of them have been abolished, and in no for the purposes of education in the College. These were
instance has the abolition of capital punishment been theological works in which doctrines were inculcated which
found to be attended with an increase of crime.—
had a tendency to invalidate the sanctity of an oath, and to re-
( Hear, hear, hear.) As it had been before stated present the extermination of onfdhsetrietteicsetaist
inoimeceereissaorny andti) j ustl ifi a-
the punishment of death for the murder of the IA
tho.ught thesmselves bseougnd grounds
conscienceP to do all they'. could to
Sovereign was not included in the en esent Bill, he begged prevent any grant of public money fir the propagation of
to state that a clause to that effect was about to be intro- such unchristian doctrines. It was always painful to him to
duced. He also wished to say that there was another intrude himself upon the House, but on these grounds ho had
point to which he wished to call the attention of the House felt it his duty to do so, and he therefore moved, that after the
_namely, the extension of the provisions of this Bill grant for the current year no further payment of public money
to Ireland and Scotland. He had wished to know what be made to the Roman Catholic College of Maynooth.
the feelings of the Representatives of Ireland were on this Lord MORPETII said there were two modes of objection
subject, and in his interview with those Hon. Gentlemen to the grant ; first, to the mode in sell'eh the grant was adini-
he found them almost unanimously favourable to its exten- nistered ; and, secondly, to the system of education sup-
sion to Ireland. If the House would sanction the Bill he ported by it ; in both of which objections the Hon. Gentleman
should be happy to introduce or to support a Bill extending concurred. Now, with regard to the first—the mode in
which the grant was. administered—he thought thet wa, rather
its provisions to Ireland and Scotland, should the Mem-
subject for the consideration of the authorities of 3litenooth Col-
hers for those countries be disposed to agree in lege than of the Hon. Member for Kent. He thought, as to
( Hear, hear.) But it had been asked what se- the doctrines taught there, and which lie assumed were those
coodary punishment he would devise to prevent afro- of the Catholic religion, he had no more to do with them than
cious crimes being committed? Here he admitted that the Catholic Members of that House had to do with those which
law was very defective—that transportation was by no were taught at Oxford or Cambridge ; and, with respect to the
means the system which the Legislature should adopt. course of tuition there, a commission was appointed, which in
But no Christian Legislature would offer its own negli- 1827 made a most elaborate Report relative to the College, and
stated that it did not differ materially from that of the
gence, indolence, or incapacity, as an excuse for putting
human beings to death unjustly and unnecessarily. It was College Paris;
hadofhouoht
inai that
alteration,ieriod no Govern-
lamentable that the Noble Lord (J. Russell) had not 91
brought forward a general system of improved secondary tthneeartigtrant etnnunly iPniaole to the sCeollnegye.
great good would result from the greater cultivation of the
punishments. Now he begged to impress upon the humanities of science and literature, in addition to the graver
House that in no one case had the abolition of capital studies of theology ; but lie was persuaded the withlee:geng of
punishment been followed by an increase of crime. this grant would be the cause of the greatest commotion and
There were still four offences against property merely angry feeling among the Roman Catholics. The lion. Mem-
which were punishable by death—embezzling by any sere ber had indulged in many wholesale charges against the Roman
vent of the Bank, or of the South Sea Company. of certain Catholic clergy, and no doubt there had been souse improper
kinds of stock. Surely no one would justify that? Then there Persons among them, as where was the institution in which
were the riotously destroying houses or King's ships.
there were not? The Noble Lord then read. a quotation of an
There were also rape, a nameless offence, and the carnal anddaresys
rdeealhivwtreerdianbecflorre t,lmmanadmwihnoistirnattitionnatoefd communiontheatli he
knowledge of young females. There were further as- "debar from 3 the Lored'sg3table all who voted at elections for the
saulting with intent to kill, burglary with violence, and supporters of an unchristian Goverument."—( Hear, hear. )
highway robbery and piracy, with violence against life. But the Hon. Gentleman's chief objection to the grant ap-
The last was arson. In all these asses the Bill proposed peered to be because it was to the Catholic, or, as the Hon.
to abolish the punishment of death now existing Gentleman charitably called it, an unchristian and idolatrous
against them. In answer to most of the objections Church. He (Lord Morpeth) could riot understand how any
against such a measure, be would say that the time be person could obj°ct to this without being an advo-
hoped was past when the moral guilt of a crime was to be cate of the voluntary principle. (Hear, hear, hear.)
considered in its punishment—moral criminality was no ele - The Noble Lord concluded by saying that it had been nude a
ment for the consideration of human laws. Hence it was that ground of objection for continuing the grant, that many of the
the law of England punished not adultery or seduction
students and professors of Maynooth had taken the temperance
ledge from Father Mathew. He thought, for his past, that
criminally, yet no offences produced more mischief Fn doing so they had given the best proof of their aptitude for
and misery. Neither was the object of human the situations which they would be one day called to fill; and
laws to inflict vengeance on the offender ; bat he felt that the Hon. Member would be better employ, din
simply to deter others from the commission of crime. teaching temperance to some of his own neighbours in Kent—
That one principle conceded, he believed his men- (Hear, hear)—than in the moving for the withdrawal of so
sure must necssarily follow.—( Hear, bear.) It was inadequate a grant for the education of the clergy of so large a
said, indeed, that capital punishment deterred from crime, portion of the inhabitants of these kingdoms.—( Laud cheers. )
Under this Bill all that security would be re- Sir R. H. INGLIS condemned the allusions of the Noble
tanned 'in cases of murder and high treason re- Laid to a religiqats establishment in this country. It was on
luctantly, he admitted, on his own part—but in deference
such an establishment that the constitution was founded
and with it no Minister could meddle. The Honourable'
to the House.—(Hear.) It was grossly impolitic
.to Baronet said that for his part he never could lend
inflict the same punishments on attempts to murder himself to the maintenance of a ereed of which he wholly dis-
whether successful or unsuccessful—for what inducement approved.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord was not entitled
was held out thereby to the criminal to forbear quite de- to object to the designation applied by the petitioners to the
stroying his victim ?—( Hear, hear.) There were doubt- Roman Catholic religion, as if that designation were un-
less offences Which they might be inclined to punish with death, charitable, for the Noble Lord had himself taken a solemn oath
but the putting ravishers and mutilators on the same footing as which involved an opinion of a similar nature.--( Hear, hear. '
--. orincinle -1

He maintained the great principle that the State was not at
liberty to support any other than the one true Church ; but
when a tax was established parties were bound to contribute to
its payment. The Hon. Baronet concluded by expressing his
approval of the amendment.
Mr. SHIEL said that the opinions which the Hon. Baronet
had expressed would be more worthy of a student of Salamanca
than of a Member of that House.—( Hear.) The grant to the
College of Maynooth was guaranteed by two distinct Acts,
of the Irish Parliament—the one passed in the year 1796 and
the other in *he year 1800. The Hon. Member for Kent
should not, therefore, merely move for a withdrawal of the
grant, but for the repeal of these two Acts. The Hon. Baro-
net was an advocate for establishments, but the Acts of Parlia-
ment in question were part of the instiluti,,ns of the cout-tr•
The Hon. Baronet should have lived two hundr,