The Sun.
London, England, 1856-04-16 00:00:00

to see that in the sweep something did not come 'down
that they ware not at all prepared for.
Mr. MEAGHER denied that the Catholics were op-
posed to civil liherty. He called on the. Government to
came forward and declare their opinion on the question.
Mr. DEASY at some length defended the Roman
Catholic Church from the various allegations that had
been made against her, and reminded the house that
they were not there to support one creed at the expense
of others. They were as trustees of a great number of
different creeds and denominations whose funds they
were bound to administer with judicial impartiality. He
appealed to the Voluntaries in the house to reserve their
votes till Mr. Miall's motion gave them an opportu-
nity of condemning all endowments, and not to vote
for this motion, which would alienate the minds of
the people of Ireland. He need not remind the
house that, if the grant were withdrawn to-morrow,
the college would still remain, but it would then be
supplied from voluntary donations, either at home
or 'abroad probably from the Imperial family of
France—and, in either case, Parliament would have no
control over its management; and he concluded by warn-
ing the members of the Church E lablishrnent that if this
grant were onee removed, the Establishment itself would
not long remain.

Mr. NE WD EGA.TIA contended that if the teaching
at Maynooth was ultramontane, it did not matter
whether those doctrines were taught at Paris or Ireland.
What he wanted was, that the Government should wash
its bands of the responsibility of teaching them at all.
Much had been said of the loyalty of the Church of
Rome, and there could be no doubt that at present she
was loyal, but that was because the monarchs of
Europe, especially the Emperor of Austria, had bowed
themselves at the feet of the Pope. It was proved
that the teaching of Maynooth was ultramoutane,
and that he believed the people of England would
not continue to sanction. (Hear, hear.) What might
be the issue of this debate he did not know, bat of-this
he was sure that the people of England would tole-
rate no Government which was so disposed as to hold
its place at the sufferance of the Catholic members.
Mr. ROEBUCK reminded the hOuse that the May-
nooth College was first established and afterwards con-
firmed by Protestant Legislateres, in which no Catholic
member had a seat. Then came Sir R.Peel, who removed
the vote from the annual estimates and placed it on the
Consolidated Fund. But now came the hon. member for
Warwickehird, and told the house that they must abate.
don Mr. Pitt and Sir R. Peel, and must follow him.
Now he (Kr. Roebuck) had great faith in Mr. Pitt and
he had some faith in Sir R. Peel, but he had• no faith in
the honourable gentleman.
_Looking at the question
in a broad and statesman-like view, be thought it would
be' madness to disendow the college. He. adverted
to the significant absence of the leaders of the Op-
position, who refused to support Mr. Spooner, he
said, because they were statesmen, and expected
some day to govern the country. After referring to the
change in the conduct of the Irish priesthood, as shown
in the Rebellion of 1798 and in 1848, he concluded by
stating that he was for maintaining the grant and for
maintaining the authority of the Legislature over the
college and the priesthood.
Mr. KIRK reitnintledethe hon. metriberefbr Warwick-
shire that his chief supporters on this occasion were the
enemies of his own Church.

Lord PAIZIERSTON—Sir, I confess I have felt great
regret that the hon. member for Warwick should have
thought it his duty again to bring this subject under dis-
cussion in Parliament. I think that nothing can be more
injudicious than these repeated discussions on matters
which have no connection with political objects, but which
Mini almost entirely as this discussion hais turned=follow-
hag the example .of the hon: member—on doctrinal and
theological questions. No doubt the hon. member for
Warwick wishes, as every good Protestant naturally wishes,
that all the subjects of the Queen should be of the same
creed as himself, while-those ,41.. l profess the Roman Ca-
tholic religion, on the other hand, have similar wishes
with regard to their own persuasion. But this is not a
question which rats be settled by discussion in this house.
It is not by stirring up angry passions in polemical contro-
versy that we can hope to win those who differ from us
over to our creed. • Ou the contrary, the more those clues-
tions 'are disoussed in the spirit which I am sorry to say
the hon. member for Warwick introduced his motion, the
less likely that harmony which might lead to approxima-
tion in religious opinions. (Hear.) But I look on thisquee-
tion simply from a political point of view. The question
before us is not as to the comparative doctrines of two
creeds, the way in which it was put by the hon. member ;
it is simply one of political expediency as to whether or no
the endowment should continue, and also whether its abo-
lition would be consistent with the engagements we have
entered into with the people of Ireland. In the first place,
I should say that the course of events has shown that there
is an engagement towards the Irish people leading us to
retain the institution as it now stands. It has been well
said in the course of the debate that this institution did
did not originate on Catholic authority, but was first esta-
blished by the "Protestant Parliament of Ireland, after-
wards secured by the Protestant Parliament of England,
and placed in its present state on the recommeadation of a
highly Protestant Minister 'of -this country. I will not
enter into any question as to the teaching that prevails in
Niaynoleth. It has been argued that that teaching is in-
consistent with loyalty to the Sovereign of these realms ;
but, sir, I look to results. will not raise the question of
doctrine, but I will ask the hon. member for Warwick
.whether the people of Leland were ever mere loyal than
they are at the present moment, whether they were ever
more turning their attention to social improvements and
the develop.nent of the national resources, whether the
country was ever more tranquil and quiet; and whether
there ever was a monaeut when, if you are to judge of in-
struction by results, you had ever better reasons for being
satisfied with the teaching of the people of Ireland ? Much
stress has been laid on the conduct of Irish soldiers and
sailors in the late war, but there never was a period in
the history of this country in which :Irishmen engaged
in the army and navy did not do their duty to admiration,
anti in a manner which made them an honour to the na-
tion to which they belong. (Cheers.) There b, there-
fore, nothing peculiar, however praiseworthy, in the con-
duct of our Irish fellow-subjects during the operations
which have been closed in the peace which has lately been
eigned. (Hear.) But I look ou this question as one of
political expediency, whilst the hon. member for Warwick
and those who support his melon Say, " Oh, there is a
Leniency in the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church
to direct the attention of Men towards foreign authority
and montane doctrines. Well, 'there may be 041 in those
sloctrinhs —l' will not dispute that with the hon. gentle-
man. But would he add to the evilsof having their priests
thus educated, the evil of having chain brought up in a
foreign country, strati:o'6'm Wert land, and coining
bacnnbued with feelings totally at variance with nation-
ality and patriotism? Does the hon. member think that
by educating the priests abroad he would amend that con-
dition which is the great object of this animadversion?
We say, whether these priests do or do not entertain pecu-
liar doctrines of ecclesiastical description, at all events let
there be brought up as Irishmen • let them not be sent for
instruction abroad ; let them not back imbued with
foreign feelings. If- their doctrines be ultramontane, let
their feelings at least be those of Irishmen, and 1 am wil-
ling to trust to their loyalty. On these grounds, without
'oiug through matters too long to discuss, and on which I
could not hope to change the hon. - member's opinion, I
shall vote against the motion. I hope that this matter
may never come before us again, but I should never be in-
clined to follow the example of the hon. member. I should
much rather fellow the examples mentioned by the hou.
and learned member for Sheffield, men who were not
worse Protestants than the honourable member, but were
better statesmen, and batter understood the interests of
the coantry—inen who were animated by sentiments
more. avorthy of Erglish legislators, and who felt that
they• Were not in any way sacrificing then' own principles
by affording to the clergy of a large portion of their fel-
low-countrymen the means of acquiring their education
at home. I shall certainly vote against both the motion
and the amendment, and I should' hope the house will
think it time at last to put au end to these irritating pole-
mical discussions. (Hear.)
Mr. SPOONER, iu reply, denied that he had intro-
duced the subject in an irritating manner. With him the
question was one of principle.
The house divided, first upon Mr. A. Black's amend-
ment 'to extend the inquiry into the endowments of the
Established Church and the Presbyterian religion in Ire.
land.

Ayes
Noes
Another division then took place on the original clues-

Ayes- 159
Noes
The amendment was received with loud cheers by Mr.
Spooner's friends. "
The house then went into committee, Mr. NEWDEGATS
having taken the chair amidst some cheering.
Mr. SPOONER at once moved, " That the chairman do
ask leave to bring in a bill to provide for the withdrawal
of any endowment out of the Consolidated Fund to the
College of Maynooth, due regard- being had to vested rights
and interests."
Mr. HUTCHINS moved as an amendment, that, the
Chairman should leave the chair and report progress.
Lord PALMERSTONoexpeessed hie •approval of the
amewiraent, and hoped that the progress proposed to be
reported would be the only progress made in the matter.
(Laughter.)
The committee divided, when the numbers were—
For the amendment .. .
Against it
Majority against —22
Mr. H. HERBERT rose, amid cheers and laughter, and
said—l am anxious, Mr. Newdegate, to have the benefit
of yoer opinion on a matter of some moment. I have had
the honour of hearing you put the question in as distinct
a manner as it is possible for a question to be put, and,
melees my ears deceived me strangely, when you called
upon such members as were of opinion that you should re-
port progress to say " Aye," I hear,' the hon. member for
North Wz.rwiekeltire utter that word. (Cheers, laughter,
and much,confusion.) lam not sufficiently versed in the
usages of the house to know how that fact should affect
the division list.. (Cries of "Oh !") The subject under
discussion is one of very deep interest to my constituency,
and as it is of great importance that there should not be
any misrepresentation as to the numbers who have voted
on this occasion 1 take leave to ask you whether we of the
minority may not claim the vote of the hon. member for
North Warwickehilre, who, I repeat, distinctly said "Aye'
to the question that you do leave the chair. - (Laughter:)
The CHAIRMAN—In reply to the hon. gentleman, I
beg to say that as no notice was taken of the circumstance
at the time it cannot now be entertained. (Cheers.)
Captain D. O'CONNELL moved, that the chairman do
leave the chair. (Cheers and cries of "Oh !")
Mr. JAMES M`GREGOR expressed with much warmth
his surprise that- the solemn decision of the house should
be treated as a farce by the First Minister of the
Crown. (Cheers.) Notice of the intention to move for the
present committee had been given to all members in the
usual manner; and he had not expected that after the
honae.had pronounced its deliberate judgment on a ques-
tion of such importance the noble lord at the head of the
Government should have met- the motion for reporting
progress with such levity as to express a hope that that
was the only " progress" that would be made in the mat.
ter. (Hear.) Though a humble member, he (Mr. M•Gregor)
would raise his voice against such a mode of dealieg with
a solemn question, regarded by.the people of this country
as one of vital importance in principle. (Cheers.)
Lord PALMERSTON-L-1f anything I said was deficient
in soLeanity, I certainly cannot retort the charge on the
hon. geetlewan—(laughter)---rwhoes speech was as solemn
as anything I remember to have heard. At the none time,
he must 311317 me to say that I am nob at All sensible that
there is any impropriety in a member who is opposed to a
certain measure expressing a hope that it will make no
141:440Z i'Wereel• Pilitekkoße .x' 044 BOAR* Wi•
4 -