The Sun.
London, England, 1835-06-26 00:00:00

THE SUN. LONDON, FRIDAY, JUNE 26. 1835.

c. 84, as relates to the salary of the office of Clerk of the
Crown in Chancery, consisting of the following members :
Baring, F. T. Hume, Joseph Pollock, Sir F.
Aglionby, H. A. Inglis, Sir R. H. Rice, T. S.
Campbell, Sir John Lynch, A. H. Rolfe, R. M.
Carter, J. B. Nicholl, J. Sandon,_Lord
Esteourt, T. G. B. O'Connell, D. Shaw, F.
Follett, Sir W. W. Parker, J. Tooke, W.
Fremantle, Sir T. Peel, Sir R. Warburton, IL
Grey, Sir G. Pepys, Sir C. Wason, R.
Harvey, D. W. Perrin, L. Wynn, itt. Hon. C.
CONSULAR ESTABLISHMENT.
On the motion of Mr. HESKETH FLEETWOOD, a
Select Committee was appointed to inquire into Consular Es-
tablishments, consisting of the following members :
Fleetwood, H. Herries, J. C. Robinson, G. R.
Bowring, Dr. Hutt, W. Sandon, Lord
Bulwer, H. L. Lowther, Viscount Scarlett R. C.
Callaghan, D. - Mackenzie, J. A. S. Scrope, G. P.
Canning, Sir S. Mahon Lord Stewart, Sir M. S.
Colborne, N. W. R. M'Leod, R. Thompson, P.
Crawford, W. Palmerston, Viscount Thomson, C. P.
Fergusson, R. C. Peel, Sir R Vyvyan, Sir R.
Gordon, R. Ponsonby, J. G. B. Warburton, H.
Graham, Sir J. Ward, H. G.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at a quarter to one.

LIST OF THE MINORITY
Of 84 (Tellers included) who voted in favour of Mr. Wakley's mo-
tion for an Address to the King, praying that his Majesty would
be pleased to grant a pardon to, and direct the recall of, the
six Dorsetshire Labourers who were convicted at the Assizes held
at Dorchester, in the Spring of 1834.
Aglionhy, H. A. Ewart, W.
Ainsworth, Peter Fergus, John
Attwood, 'l'. Fielden, J.
Baines, E. Finn, W. F.
Baldwin, Dr. Forster, C.
Barnard, E. G. Gully, J.
Beauclerk, Major Harvey, D. W.
Bish, T. Hawes, B.
Blake, M. J. Hector, C.
Bodkin, John James Hindley, Charles
Bowring, lir. Hodges, T. L.
Brady, Denis C. Hutt, W.
Bridgman, H. Kemp, T. R.
Brocklehurst, J. Lawson, A.
Broth erton, J. Lister, E. C.
Buckingham, J. S. Lowther, J. H.
Buller, C. M'Calice, John
Bulwer, H. L. Macnamata, W.
Butler, Hon. P. S. Marsland, H.
Carley, E. S. Maxwell, J.
Collier, J. Molesworth, Sir W.
Crawford, W. S. Musgrave, Sir R.
Dennis, oun, A. 0 Brien, C.
Dobbin, L. O'Brien, W. S.
buncombe, T. S. O'Connell, D.
Duncombe, W. O'Connell, Maurice
Dundds, J. C. Philips, M.
Elphinstone, H. Phillips, C. M.
Euston, Earl of

Power, P.
Richards, J.
Rippon, C.
Roebuck, J. A.
Rundell, John
Ruthven, E.
Ruthven, E. S.
Scholefield, J.
Sinclair, G.
Spiers, A. G.
Strickland, Sir C.
"L'hompson, P.
Thomely, Thomas
Tooke, W.
Trelawney, Sir W
Trevor, A.
Tulk, C. A.
Wall, B.
Wallace, R
Walter, J.
Warburton, H.
Wason, R.
Whalley, Sir S.
Walks, J.
Williams, W,

TELLERS.
Hume, Joseph
Wakley, Thomas

ROUSE OF LORDS,

Jvms 25.

The Earl of DEVON took the oaths and his scat.
Lord DENMAN took his seat on the Woolsack at five o'clock.
A 'Message from the Commons, by Sir M. S. Stewart,
brought up the Gourock Harbour Bill, and other private bills,
which were severally read a first time.
The Bishop of LICE-WIELD and COVENTRY pre-
sented petitions from Matlock and other places against
any other appropriation of Church property than to eccle-
siastical purposes, such as the building of churches, schools,
or parsonages. He trusted the Ministry would reconsider
their opinions upon the subject, for their present avowed ones
would tend to subvert the Protestant religion.
A Peeress (name unknown) was sworn at the table by Lord
Denman.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition most respectably
signed to his own knowledge ; signed also without any of the
usual means of canvassing, by 2000 persons in two days. l'hey
stated they were of all opinions, both in politics and religion, but
they united in considering all taxes upon newspapers as a tax
upon useful knowledge, and the great cause of much of the
crime now so prevalent in the kingdom.
The Earl of HA RE WOOD presented a petition against
the Islington Market Bill, from Croydon, and Dunstable.
The Duke of B UCCLE UG H presented several petitions
from Dunkeld, Edinburgh, Dunglass, and other places, for a
further endowment of the Church of Scotland.
Similar petitions were then presented by the Duke of Mem-
MOND.
The N 0131.3 Duxt then presented a petition from Clare,
praying for the introduction of Poor Laws into Ire-
land, founded upon the forty-third of Queen Elizabeth. He
was most anxious to see such a measure proposed, because
he thought it would tend much to increase the comforts of
the poor, and to the diminution of crime in that country.
The Earl of LIMERICK was very sorry that he was
obliged to differ from his Noble Friend. He could not see
that it was at all possible to assimilate the laws of England
and Ireland. He wished that the events in the latter
country would allow of such an assimilation ; but no
one who was at all acquainted with Ireland and its• inha-
bitants but must allow that it was perfectly impossible.—
( Hear, hear.) He could not think that the introduction
of Poor Laws into Ireland, which had crippled the ener-
gies of rich England, and bowed them almost to the earth,
could by any possibility benefit Ireland. He would venture to
say that there was less real call for poor laws in that country,
for there were no cases of poverty that were not instantly re-
lieved by the neighbours and gentry ; and there was no country
in which the feelings of parent and child, and child and parent,
were so strong.
The Duke of RICHMOND then presented another peti-
tion to the same effect from Tullamore and its vicinity. He
would merely say in answer to his Noble Friend, that he was quite
aw,.re that the introduction of Poor Laws would take away, to a
certain degree, the superfluity of the rich—(Cheers)—but that
was the very thing he wanted—(Cheers)—it was the end he
proposed. In every country there ought to be a principle esta-
blished that no one should he allowed to starve. It was well
known that on a late occasion, a large sum of money was sub-
scribed from this country for the relief of the poor of Ireland.
Then if the rich in England were pressed to the earth with
their own poor laws, surely it was too much to ask them for
money to relieve those whom the landlords of Ireland ought
to support. He was glad, however, to hear, that the objection
to poor laws was now given up, because of the impossibility
of working out the details of the Bill, and that it was now
merely put on the ground of the charity in the country being
enough for the purpose. That might be the case on the
Noble Earl's estates, and those of some more Noble Lords,
but he was sure that there vast tracts of country where there
were no resident proprietors where the people were in the ut-
most misers-, and actually without the means of subsistence.
He would have moved a resolution on the subject last year,
had the Government not taken up the measure, and issued a
Commission, which he was sorry had not yet reported. He
trusted they would do so soon ; and he hoped they would next
year have the attention of Parliament called to the subject
by the Royal command.
The Earl of LIMERICK said the difficulty of carrying into

practice, the operation of the poor laws was as great as ever.
If the poor laws were extended. to Ireland—he now spoke of
the south and south-west parts of that country—the power of the
Roman Catholic priesthood would be immense, and that priest-
hood would have revenues higher than their Lordships. With
regard to the Report of the Commissioners alluded to by his
Noble Friend, he hoped it would be deferred to the Greek
Kalends—( Hear).
The Duke of RICHMOND trusted that the Report would
speedily appear, and he believed it would make out his propo-
sition.
The Bishop of LONDON presented several petitions from
parishes in Bristol and other places, against the Beer Act and
dram drinking.
COMPLAINT AGAINST A CATHOLIC PRIEST.
The Bishop of EXETER said before he presented the
petition of which he had given previous notice, he would take
the present opportunity of presenting another petition, of great
importance, which he should move to have read at length. The
petition was from the Rev. Edward Mangles, a clergyman of
the Established Church, of the Isle of Ackhill, who was most
highly spoken of by his diocesan, the Archbishop of Tuam, as
a man of excellent character.
The petition was then read. It set forth that the peti-
tioner having obtained a living in the island of Ackhill, where
there was no glebe house; he expended 1,5001. in erecting
one, with a school, spending as much as 701. a week in his
undertaking, by which many poor families were benefited ;
that a Roman Catholic priest in the island had. Sunday after
Sunday, dealt out to his congregation many charges against
the petitioner and the Protestant religion; that he condemned,
in severe terms, the parents of those children who were sent
to the school ; that the Catholics were instructed by him to
sharpen their pitchforks ; that persons who had worked on
the property were induced by the priest to relinquish their
labous, at which they expressed regret; and that the
persons who lodged with the Protestant schoolmaster were
publicly cursed by the priest. The petition also stated that
the number of Protestants in that place returned by the Com-
missioners of public instruction, was double the number re-
turned in 1831. Mention was made in the petition of a Com-
missioner named Newport, whose name, it will be seen below,
furnished some remarks.
Viscount DUNCANNON was not going to defend the
conduct of the priest, nor should he have made a single ob-
servation on this petition, had it not been for the notice taken
of the Commissioner, Mr. Newport, who was likewise the
subject of the petition of the Rev. Mr. Stoney, which the
Right Rev. Prelate had yet to present. He (Lord Duncannon)
thought the two cases ought to have been kept distinct; they
had nothing whatever to do with each other ; and the only
complaint against Mr. Newport in the present petition was,
as well as he had been able to collect, from its having been
now read, that Mr. Newport had made no mention whatever
of the schools. If their Lordships would take the trouble
to look at the report, however, they would find that it
was a report confined to the question of the Church, and
not to education, that subject being one for an after report.
The Bishop of EXETER said, instead of Mr. Mangles
having any complaint to urge against Mr. Newport, he was
grateful to him for his exertions. With respect to the Rev.
Mr. Mangles, he had been assured by the Archbishop of
Tuam, that a more zealous, inoffensive, quiet man could not
be found
Lord FARNHAM had known the Rev. Mr. Mangles for
many years, and he assured their Lordships a more mild, in-
offensive man could not be found in Ireland.
Viscount DUNCANNON said (on referring to the peti-
tion) that Mr. Newport was described as visiting the establish-
ment, and he (Lord Duncannon) had imagined that he meant
by " establishment" to allude to the "schools."
COTtemplestitsiolnowNasEßthsen loaiF u
d upponßthLeltcable.
INSTRUCTION
IN IRELAND. _

The Bishop of EXETER rose to present a petition of the
Rev. W. B. Stoney, of the parish of Borrishone, in the
county of Mayo, complaining of the conduct of certain Com-
missioners of public instruction. The Commission was under
the Great Seal of his Ma esty, and it was obvious, therefore,
that its object could not be to weaken the Established Church,
nor to interfere with the cause of true religion, nor to impair
any of the provisions of the law relating to that Church.
But in saying that he would not disguise from their Lordships
that there was one part of the Commission, namely, a recom-

dation to make inquiries as to the number of persons professing
different religious opinions in Ireland, would have been better
omitted, as he thought it tended to introduce ascerbated feel-
ing—feeling calculated to injure the Protestants of that
country.—( Hear, hear. It had been said in the other House
of Parliament, and much uneasiness had arisen- from it, by a
member of the former Government who was also a member of the

present, that it was-intended to apply the surplus funds of the
Church to other than ecclesiastical purposes. Now it had been
stated in their Lordships' House by a member of that former
Government, and which had afforded great consolation when the
subject of the Commission was under consideration—that there
was no thought, no intention, no wish whatever on the part of
government to appropriate the revenues of the Irish Church
to any other than ecclesiastical purposes. The most that was
then said was, that if after the revenues were applied, any sur-
plus should remain, that surplus would be employed for edu-
cation upon the principles of the Protestant religion.—( Hear,
hear.) This declaration had afforded much gratification. He
shuddered at the notion of any man who should desire a plan
for a measure to appropriate the surplus of the Church to pur-
poses other than ecclesiastical—( Hear)—and until such a mea-
sure was introduced, he would not believe it possible that such
a design was intended to be carried into execution. There was
a most important point, however, in the Commission, which,
if it had been faithfully executed, would have conferred a
greater blessing on the people of Ireland than anything what-
ever that could have been suggested. He alluded particularly to
one of the most important passages in the Commission, "to
inquire generally whether adequate provision is now made for
the religious instruction, and for the general education of the
people of Ireland, and to report such other circumstances with
the moral and political relations of the Church Establish-
ment, and the religious institutions of other denominations
dissenting from the Established Church, as may bring clearly
into view their bearings on the general condition of the people
of that part of our said United Kingdom called Ireland." Now
nothing could be more beneficial than to have a thorough in-
vestigation into the effects of religious opinions, with a view of
showing " their bearings on the general condition of the
people." It was with great regret he saw that the
Commissioners had not in their report followed up that recom-
mendation. He knew not what the Commissioners meant
by the inquiry being " essentially of a statistical nature."
—( Hear, hear.) What was meant by looking at the matter
in a statistical manner? In order that he might compre-
hend what was conveyed by those words he had re-
course, as undoubtedly their Lordships would in a like case.
to Johnson's Dictionary ; but on referring to that great work
be found that the word " statistick" was not there, but it had
crept into use since the death of that eminent lexicographer.
Ile then had recourse to Todd's edition of the work, who
gave this definition :—" Statisticks—that part of municipal
philosophy which states and defines the situation, strength, and
resources of a nation." Now, according to this definition, the
phrase would be of a political nature. Was it intended to
convey a sense of the strength and resources of Ireland? He
was very anxious to see what the Commission had said rela-
tive to an inquiry into the " situation, strength, and resources
of Ireland," but he found nothing. The Commissioners were
complained of by Mr. Stoney, because when the priest objected
to the number of Protestants said to be in the parish, and
he, Mr. Stoney, the petitioner, offered to give evidence of
the cause of the diminution of the number of Protestants,
the Commissioners refused to give him the opportunity of
offering such evidence, though it was part of their instructions
to receive such information. The petitioner, too, had, in
answer to the circular addressed to him, apprised the Com-
missioners of such persecution, and that he was ready to prove
it. The petitioner declared he was desirous to prove the per-
secution carried on for the last five years, and the manner in
which that persecution had been carried on—that stones had
been thrown at the children attending his school—that they had
been horsewhipped by the priests, and hunted upon the roads
—that the names of the parents were called out in the chapel,
and some of the children driven into the river or marked with
the cruel whip of the priest. The Commissioners, for a
reason with which he was not at all disposed to find fault, had
brought forward a statement to justify their conduct. It would
be in the recollection of their Lordships that the Noble Vis-
e...alit had presented a petition, to which full jit,tice was done
by the zeal and talent of that Noble Lord. That Noble Vis-
count had produced great effect upon their Lordships, and
certainly upon himself, by the statement to which he now called
their attention. It was to this effect—" When the Commis-
sioners first arrived in Dublin they sent round printed queries to
the different clergymen ; and, though some of their answers
were not satisfactory, they were all written with the exception
of the case of Mr. Stoney. That Gentleman had not chosen to
send a written answer ;" but, as we understood, " a printed
answer." The Noble Viscount stated what appeared to
him to be perfectly fair upon this circumstance ; and
the consequence was that he wrote to that gentleman,
stating what was his opinion as to the impeding of his
Majesty's Commission, and condemning the intemperate
and, in several instances, the improper language used in
his answers. To his utter astonishment, he received an
answer from this gentleman to which he should not
fail to call the attention of their Lordships. He had first
requested of the Noble Viscount to produce his original an-.
swer. In consequence of that gentleman's answer, he had
felt it his duty to move for the original letter of the Commis-
sioners and the answer. The Noble Viscount had placed a
written copy of his answer in his hands ; but he had remarked
to the Noble Viscount that it was not the original but the copy
that he requested, and this paper was put into his hands. The
paper he then held purported to be date;! t'ie 2dth November,
1834, 'out it bore no cover. If there was a cover to this letter,
he hoped the Noble Viscount would product! it. Mr. Stcney
declared that his answers to the Commissioners were not
printed. In the reply sent to him Mr. Stoney said " I did
not do so (that is, send printed answers.) They sent a list of
printed questions, to which I sent manuscript answers, and
sent them back by post. I sent no printed answers_ My me-
mory is refreshed on this subject by the man who helped me
as clerk, John Doyle, and I afterwards got them printed to
expose the violent attempts of the priest Hughes." The
writer then proceeded to say that he had no intention of offer-
ing disrespect to the Government or the Commissioners, but,
in common with most clergymen, he felt hurt at being called
upon to recognize the Romish mass as Divine worship, and
through him an humble apology was offered for whatever might
appear improper in his replies. Very few copies of those re-
plies had been circulated, and while he stased that he would
withdraw, any offensive language, yet every part of them
were true and capable of proof as to the priest preaching
cad using certain expressions as to the Bilk, and the
priest ordering the people to " wallop with sticks—(such
iris the priest's expression, and not Mr. Stoney's)—any
such as would dare to collect Mr.. Stoney's tithes ;" and
in consequence of a seditious harangue of the priest, the
officer was obliged to order the soldiers out of the chapel.
As to soldiers being brought out of chapel by their officers,
in consequence of the language delivered in their presence by
the priests, it was no rare occurrence in Ireland, as they knew
by the reports of their Committees. Soldiers were very pro-
perly sent with an officer to the chapels in Ireland, and fre-
quently the officer had to come out with the men when sedi-
tious harangues were made. This occurred in the case of
Lieutenant March, he forgot the name of the regiment, with
the celebrated priest, Burke, and was stated in the Report of
the Committee of Inquiry in 1832. Another case in which
this occurred was in that of no less a personage than Dr. Mac-.
Hale, now called an Archbishop. Dr. Mac Hale, then called
a Bishop, made a most violent harangue in the town of Bal-
lina—so violent that he felt it to be his duty to withdraw the
troops from the chapel.—( Hear.) He considered it wrong to
charge the Government with the intentions the writer did
charge them, and for the manner in which he reprobated the
Commissioners. He could not censure Mr. Stoney for saying
he would not consent to recognize the adoration of relics,
crosses, and wafers, as religious worship. The Commission-
ers, he thought, acted improperly when they called the mass
" Divine Service." The petitioner complained that when he
handed to the Commissioners a list of 500 Protestants, and
that this was handed by them over to the priest, who excited
ridicule by the mode in which he read them out to have them
totted.—( Hear, hear.) He next complained of the Com-
missioners, because they refused to enter into an inquiry
into the cause of the diminution of the Protestants. The
ground alleged by the Commissioners was, that they would not
enter into the inquiry because it would lead to altercation.
He considered that he had mentioned enough for inquiry. In
connection with this subject, he could not but allude to a dis-
closure made within the last few days—it was the principles of
the Roman Catholic Church, as set forth by the Roman Ca-
tholic Bishops. The work to which he alluded was ." Den's
Theology," and he would say, that more tremendous and guilty
principles than those set set forth never were maintained in the
worst days of Papery.—( Hear.) Most probably all their
Lordships had seen what he referred to—they, the members of
the Protestant Church, were pointed out as worse than Pagans
—they were also held to be subject to the Roman Catholic
Church, and thereby liable to punishment, not merely of an
ecclesiastical nature, not merely to excommunication, but also
to the gravest corporal infliction—that they were ipso facto ex-
communicated, and their bodies declared liable to banishment,
incarceration, and death itself—and that death was the pun-
ishment for them as heretics.—( Hear.) This was laid down
in the plainest and clearest manner—it was laid down by no
less a person than Dr. Murray, called the Roman Catholic
Archbishop of Dublin—by Dr. Murray, one of his Majesty's
Commissioners for Education in Ireland.----( Hear.) He moved
that the petition should be laid on the table.
Lord DUNCANNON remarked that, as to the queries sent
to all the Clergy in Ireland, the question as to the cause why
the diminution in numbers should take place, long before the
Commissioners left Dublin, it was distinctly laid down by the
two resident Commissioners, that the question which had been
observed upon should not be put. He really thought this was
a wise decision,. and if there was nothing else to convince him
its wisdom, it would be the answer sent by Mr. Stoney.
He could not state whether the answers of Mr. Stoney came by
post, as he had not the cover; he had sent for several of the
answers, and he found them all recorded by the proper officer
in the same manner.
The Commissioners had informed Mr.
Stoney it was not their intention to proceed with that portion
of the inquiry, which he afterwards sought to press upon them.
He should be, he declared, the last person in that House who
would defend the violent conduct of the priest—he believed it
had been violent as that of the Protestant clergyman ; and he
believed that, between the two gentlemen, they kept the dis-
trict in a state which every friend to peace must regret. The
children were not kept entirely in school, they were only edu-
cated in the school ; they formed a part of the population ;
and if the population went out to meet Dr. Nl' Hale, as being
a nopular character, he did not see how such a thing could be
prevented. The return of Mr. Stoney as to the number of
the Protestant population was controverted, and amongst
others by Mr. Stewart, who, though called " a nominal Pro-
testant," a term he did not understand, was a most respectable
gentleman. That gentleman and others declared that nothing
could be conducted with more impartiality than the whole of
the inquiry.—( Hear.) Ho considered that the Commission