The Sun.
London, England, 1832-03-07 00:00:00

2ru Per Ceti

. ,
Pk 4,-c.)ln
. - -
of Bible oircnlation, could thtee he 1: eiterthitter sarcasm
on the Catholic religion th!n to wort that the diffusion
of the Scriptures without note or comment among
its adherents, must nectssarily lead to proselytism?
What got the principles ofThe Rerormation established in
Great Britain and Irelasi until they became the national
eligion, but that it as granted that every man should
lave the liberty of juo:mg for himself, and arriving at
such conclusions as his ,conscience could justify? He
would refer to what hat been done by the prohibited
system. Through its aperation between 40,000 and
a
50,000 Roman Catholics —are in the enjoyment of reading
the Scriptures in the schools of the Kildare-place Society.
Be it recollected, that it was not compulsory on parents to
send their children to these schoole. They were free in
this particular ; and it appeared likewise, by the report of
1828, that they were paid Sehools, and in every one of
them were the Scriptures introduced. In 4,000 and odd
schools, the Catholic masters amothited to 2,607. It had
ein stated that the Roman Catholic were not disposed to
make tr,e of the Scriptures. He would meet this state-
ment by declaring, what was a fact, that some Roman
Catholics had preferred to be debarred from communion
with their Church rather than withdraw :heir .ehildren
from the schools where the Scriptures were read. PO
less than six Catholics had been excommunicated for assert-
ing their right to select a place of education for their
children. The evidence annexed to the report of the Com-
missioners in 1825 went to substantiate the point, and by
the report itself it appeared that the priests were nut
unanimous in opposing the education of the Catholics
en the plan of the Kildare-place Society, seventy-five of their
body haviag co-operated with the association. It bad been
advanced, as a taunt against the Society, that to accom-
modate the Catholics they had made selections from their
own Scriptures for the use of schools ; but the Society
had never set itself up for being high Protestant or low
Protestant, but was a medium merely for bestowing the
advantages of education without attempting proselytism.
That system had worked well, and a serious charge lay
against the present Government for having extinguished it
in a country where it was so surpassingly difficult to pre-
vail upon men to co-operate for the maintenance of any
system. He would ask the House what system had ever'
given universal satisfaction in that country, or in any
other ? Even the great Reform Bill bad fallen short of
affording general contentment, and were they to reject a
tried and useful plan because it had failed to satisfy a pare
ticular order of clergy, or a certain section of the people?
From the letter of the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stan-
ley) it would be seen that the Scriptures would be inter-
dicted under the present system. That letter alleged that.
according to the tenets of the Roman Catholic Church,
children could not be permitted to read the Scripturee
without note or comment, and in this way they were not
to be entrusted even to adults.

Mr. STANLEY requested the Hon. Member to read
the passage of his letter, which he said had been suite mis-
represented by the Hon. Member.

Mr. LEFROY was quite as incapable of misrepresent•
ing as the Right Hon. Gentleman. He did not anticipate
tich a charge from the Right Hon. Gentleman's habits in
the House.—(Cries of " Read.")

STANLEY admitted that he had used a harsh ex-
pression, but insisted that the words of his letter bad
been misrepresented, although, he was sure, quite unin-
tentionally.

Mr. LEFROY referred to the letter in question, and
cited a passage, stating that the principles of the Roman
Catholic Chinch were totally at variance with the indis-
criminate reading of the Scriptures, and that it denied
even to adults the right of private interpretation with re-
spect to articles of religious faith. Now, added the Hon.
Member, the Right Hon. Gent. has had the benefit of his
own letter, and it appeared that it was in deference to this
principle of the Catholic Church that the Kildare-place
Society was to be extinguished, and a novel system of ex-
periment put in its atrad. He would again refer to the
Right Hon. Gent's. letter, which stated that the Board
would exercise control _over the books to be used in the
schools for moral and literary instruction. Of course
into these schools the Scriptures, without note or com-
ment, were not to be admitted. But further, in the se-
parate schools for religious instruction, the introduction of
books was to be expressly regulated by the Members of
the Board of the particular persuasions of the pupils. The
direct tendency of this would be of necessity to preclude
the Catholics from the perusal of the Scriptures, and he
could not but characterise a system of education which,
omitting to provide for the introduction of the inspired
writings, provided for their exclusion, not only as unpro-
testant but unchristian. He had no objection to the in-
troduction of a book composed of selections from the
Scriptures; hut he had strong objections to any rule, of
which the tendency was to exclude the Scriptures without
note or comment.—( Hear.)
Mr. CRAMPTON was surprised to hear his Hon. and
Learned Friend charging the Irish Government with sup-
porting a system which was at once anti-national and anti-
Christian. He denied that their system of education
deserved any such opprobious epithets. If it were either
anti-national or anti-Christian, why had his Hon. and
Learned Friend not produced some other plan to supersede
it? He maintained that there was not an objection which
the gentlemen opposite had urged against the Govern-
ment plan of education which did not apply with equal
force to the plan of the Kildare-place Society. His Hon.
artd Learned Friend had arraigned the Irish Government
for not giving a Christian education to the children of Ire-
land ; but if his Hon. and Learned Friend would only
refer to the evidence which Mr. Beever had given respect..
ing the system of the Kildare-place schools, he would ask
him whether, if it were such as Mr. Beever described it
to be, it deserved the name of a system of Christian edu-
cation ? He contended at considerable length that the
principles and spirit of religion were more consulted in the
plan of Ministers than in the plan of the Kildare-street
Society. The Protestants of the north of Ireland were
not unanimous in their opposition to the plan of education
proposed by Ministers; and he could venture to assert,
that where opposition most prevailed, it was because the
people had been deceived in being told that the Bible was
to form no part of the education proposed. It bad been
so stated at the meeting held at Exeter-hall, and which
had btea attended by many Noble Lords and Hon. Gentle-
men, and at which many eloquent—he wished he could
add wise—speeches bad been made. He had Leal in-
duced to attend that meeting himself, and was pre-
pared to have defended the Government to which he
had the honour to be attached from the imputations by
which they were assailed ; but on looking to the ticket of
admission, he had found an endorsement on the back,
containing the direction that no one would be allowed to
take part in the proceedings of the meeting but such as
were opposed to the proposed plan, and favourable to the
resolutions to be adopted by the meeting—("Hear," and
laughter) ;—and now the Hon. Member for Dundalk tri-
umphs in what lie is pleased to designate the unanimity
which pervaded that meeting." Was this, he would ask,
fair, and was it not rather too Parliamentary a mode of
proceeding ? The question was simply, whether the Ro-
man Catholic population of Ireland were to have any or no
education. He could not conceive any thing fairer than
the plan proposed, by which the children, for four days in
time week, were to receive moral and literary instruction,
not excluding the Scriptures, which could be used for the
purposes of instruction on the evenings of those days ; and
on the remaining two days in the week the teachers of the
children of each denomination or sect would have an op-
portunity of inculcating those principles which they se-
verally and respectively professed. —(Hear, hear.)
Sir ROBERT BATESON dwelt at some length on the
question, and averred that the whole of that respectable
body of clergy composing the Synod of Ulster were
unanimous in their opposition to the prrtpored plan, with
the exception only of Mr. Carlisle, himself a member of
the Board of Education. lie denied that any thing like
partisanship or political feeling had been manifested at any
of the numerous meetings which had been held, and parti-
cularized that at Exeter-ball, which had been alluded to.
The example had been followed in Scotland, and he had
no doubt would be responded to by the whole country.
The proposition was generally unpopular, and in the north
of Ireland so much so, that he was prepared to state, that
from that quarter not one single application had been made
to the new Board of Education on behalf of any of the
schools. Indeed, 90 out of 100 of all sects in Ireland
were opposed to this Ministerial plan of education.
After a few words from Lord ACHESON, Sir R. BATE
SON, and Mr. CRAMPTON, in explanation,
Mr. J. BROWN expressed himself in favour of the
system proposed by Government, which, in his opinion,
was admirably calculated to impart instruction to the
people of Ireland generally. The existing system was
founded in a spirit of proselytism, and could never effect
•ay good.
Lord MANDEVILLE said they were told that the ob-
ject of the new system of education was to remove those
feelings of asperity which prevailed in Ireland. He, how-
ever, believed that it would have no such effect, but that,
on the contrary, it would rather tend to increase dissension.
What Government proposed was not a national system of
education by which the Scriptures would be fully taught,
but one from which they would be absolutely excluded.
He therefore was unfriendly to it.
Mr. WYSE said the whole argument on the other side
went to this,—th at Parliament ought to legislate exclu.
'lively for one party, instead of adopting a system really
national, that would extend to all. Such a proposition
was most utij,tst. if Ireland possessed those institutions
which it was formerly intended she should posseni—if

-$2;

111

'k

~' .