The Sun.
London, England, 1857-05-22 00:00:00

TROOPS IN CHINA.

Major S. WORTLEY asked whether her Majesty's
Government had considered the expediency of keeping
the troops in China as much on board ship as possible
until the close of the unhealthy season rendered field
operations practicable ; and whether, when the troops
were encamped they were to be supplied with the Indian
tents I

Sir C. WOOD said that the Government had taken
measures for the protection of the troops as asked by the
gallant member.
EAST INDIA RAILWAYS.
Mr. CHEETHAM asked the President of the Board
of Control, when the returns relative to the East India
Railways ordered .by the house on the 3d of March last,
would be laid upon the table ?
Mr. V. SMITS said that the returns would be laid
on the table almost immediately.

MILITIA MEDICAL SERVICE.

Mr. BRADY asked the Under Secretary of War if
it was the intention of her Majesty's Government to in-
clude the Militia Medical Service in the inquiries about
to be instituted relative to the Army Medical Depart-
ment?

Sir J. RAMSDEN said that the Government did
not intend to include the Militia Medical Servic-4
amongst the subjects to be inquired into by the commit-
tee alluded to.

LEASES AND SALES OF SETTLED ESTATES

ACT.

,Mr. BEAMISH asked the Attorney-General for Ire-
land whether the Lord Chancellor of Ireland bad made
rules and orders under the 30th section of Leases and
Sales of Settled Estates Act, and when they might be
expected to be laid before Parliament, as directed by
31st section of said act t

Mr. FITZGERALD said the rules were this day
issued in Dublin. The delay arose from the act apply-
ing to England and Ireland, and it being desirable to
have the same rules for both countries.
TROOP SHIPS.

Major S. WORTLEY asked whether Government
would have any objection to appoint a board, consisting
of two military, two naval, and one medical officer, to
examine and report upon all ohips appointed to sail with
troops, in order to obviate the sending of troops in yes-
seb4 unfit for that service ?

Sir C. WOOD said that substantially what the gallant
member asked had been done.

NATIONAL EDUCATION (SCOTLAND).
Lord MELGUND asked the Lord Advocate whether

Mr. LOWE, in explanation, said a bill having refe-
rence to this subject had been prepared, and that it
would be speedily introduced.
After some remarks from Mr. HORSMAN, who
stated his determination to oe the introduction of
the bill, if its object was repud[ ioq
The house divided, when the numbers were—
For the motion
Against it
Majority against the motion l2O
MAYNOOTH COLLEGE.
Mr. SPOONER moved, "That this house do resolve

itself into a committee to consider the acts for the en-
dowment of IVlaynooth, with a view to the withdrawal of
any endowment out of the Consolidated Fund, due regaatel
being bad to vested rights and interests." Hav,ng
presented several petitions in support of his motion, tee
hon. member proceeded to claim the indulgence of the
house while he stated the reasons which had induced him
to make this 'notion. First, he begged to inform the Ro-
man Catholic members that he had no quarrel with them
for the course they tiok. As a Protestant himself be
respected individual opinion, and he wiseed them to have
the full and free exercise of their religion, and every pri-
vilege that was consistent with the security of a Protes-
tant state. He had no personal rnottve in bringing this
motion forward, nor any personal ambition to gratify, on
the contrary the task he had undertaken was to him a
most painful one, and as for his friends around him, he
knew that he should have pleased them better had he re-
frained from bringing his motion forward. But he was
stimulated by a c mscientious sense of duty, and should
persevere as much in the midst of ironical cheers as if he
were encouraged by shouts of sincere applause. In the first
place he must allude to a rather depreciatory observa-
tion of the hon. and learned member for Sheffield, who
had asked in a former debate what claims, iu piety or
intellect, he (Nile Spooner) bad that he should dictate to
the consciences or votes of his fellow men. He begged
to say that the hon. and learned member quite mistook
his argument, and the grounds on which he proceeded,
and he had never urged an opinion of his own when
making his motion, but had based his case solely on the
Scriptures and the articles of the Church of England, to
which the hon. and learned member professed to be
bound as wall as himself. He contended that the main-
tenance of the College of Maynooth was contrary to the
Scripture, contrary to the principles of our Protestant
constitution, and contrary to the oath by which gentle-
men became members of that house. He would now
proceed with his objections in detail. The articles of the
Church declared the sacrifice of the mass to be damnable
and blasphemous. The rubric declared that the sacra-
mental elements should not be adofed, and their adora-
tion should be abhorred of all Christians. Now, the
Catholics adored the elements, and he asked those
who followed the rubric how they could support a does

trine which in that rubric was declared to be "abhorred
of all Christians." The nest point to which he should
allude was, that the Roman Catholic doctrine was anti-
social and immoral, an opinion which the house had
already affirmed by having three several times given him
perruiFsion to introduce his bill. And, further, he Pegged
to remind the house that on those occasions not one of
his arguments were met or controverted by his oppon-

. .
eats. The next point was the oath of the sovereign, which
bound him or her to maintain the reformed church as

established by law. He asked was the maintenace of the
College of Alaynooth consistent with that oath ?—a col-
lege which trained priests who taught the people that their
first duty was the eubversion of the reformed church.
Then, with respect to the parliamentary compact upon
which the Union and Catholic emancipation were based,
he could not tee that the grant was sanctioned or perpe-
tuated by the Union. It was originally a grant to build
the college, and to prevent priests from being educated
abroad—a wrong. expedient in his opinion—but still the
cause for the creation of the grant had passed
away. Even if there were an understanding, hon.
members opposite had ignored it completely in
the debate of the preceding evening, when the
compact under consideration was of a much more
solemn nature than that now under discussion. The hon.
member quoted Sir R. Peel's speech in introducing the
Emancipation Bill, to show the liberal spirit of conces-
sion with which Parliament had treated the Roman Ca-
tholics, and then proceeded to examine the theological
errors of the Roman Catholic religion. He quoted Scha-
vini, Liguori, and several Roman Catholic writers, to
show that it was lawful to take oaths qual;fied by mental
reservations, and that ea,tis were only to be kept accord-
ing to the meaning of the words and promises they con-
tain, and that it was lawful fora just cause to swear with
equivocations. According to Liguori a just cause was any

"honest end for the preservation of gOod things for the
spirit or useful things for the body." Was the house pre-
pared to uphol ' a system which inculcated and perpetuatad
such iniquity ? He
_1 ad stated these facts before, and

the force of them bad been so great that despite the op-
pofotion of a ministry that had gone out, and of another
that bad come in, three times he ban ca, ried his proposition
in the He use of Commons. That of itself ought to weigh
with the house as to the righteou'rness of the cause he

was advocating. (Hear.) gchavini allo laid it down

. .
that, generally speaking, servants were justified secretly
to compi-mate themselves from their masters goods, if
in their consciences they considered they were ini,uffi-
ciently paid for their services ; or if they were compelled
to accept service for a smaller rate of reatuneratin than
they think themselves entitled to. Professor Furlong,
the professor of moral philosophy at Maynooth, con-
curred with Schavini and Liguori in these matters. The
hon. member next referred to the evidence taken before
the Maynooth commissioners to show that some of the
books directed to be read by the students at Maynooth

taught that the Pope bad the right to depose sovereigns
for a just cause, to transfer kingdoms from one prince
to another, and recognised the papal power for this pur-
pose in this country. Tne next question to which he
should refer was the teaching of the Roman catholic

tablished Church of England—that Church which called
on the Sovereign to see that the Romish Church did not
stand on a level with it, but which should be the domi-
nant church of this country. The Roman catholics
would not be content with equality, but aimed at supre-
macy, and if they got it they would deal with the poor
unfortunate Protestants in the way which the priests at
Maynooth were taught to deal with them. He would
read an account which appeared in an Irish newspaper
of what took place in a case tried at the quarter sessions
at Cavan. The hon. gentleman then read an account of
the case, which was to the following effect :—" An ac-
tion was brought by the Roman catholic Archbishop of
Kilmore, Dr. Brady, against a man named Reilly, to
rec iver from him the amount of certain dues payable by
him, according to the usage and customs of the Roman
Catholic Church. On the counsel for the plaintiff
stating the nature of the action, the chairman asked on
what legal ground he went ; and he replied, on the
ground of usage and custom ; to which the court replied
that that was no ground of actton ; besides which the
law held that the Rev. Dr. Brady was a teacher of the
doctrines which were damnable and heretical, to which
another member of the C nut added that yet the Govern-
ment sanctioned such doctrines by giving a grant to
Maynooth, and allowing such teaching in the gaols and
workhowee." It this question was raised in a great
matter, as it was in this trifling one, how was it to be
answered ? With regard to the dangerous doctrine of
confession, he would read an opinion delivered by the
later Sir R. Peel.
Mr. ROEBUCK—What is the date of it ?

Mr. SPOOIFER—The hon. gentleman meant to say
Sir R. Peel had changed his opinion. (Hear.) But if that
was the case be (Hr. Spooner) had a right to ti,e that
opinion, as he had not changed his. That opinion was
given when Sir R. Peel was resisting Catholic eruancipa
tion, when Mr. Canning was at the head of the Govern-
ment. He (Mr. Spooner) was bound to say that he him-
self influenced by the example of Mr. Canning, and of
bis brother-in-law, the late Mr. Wilberforce, who voted
for the measure, supported and assisted by every mea❑s
in his power the carrying of Roman Catholic Emancipa-
tion ; but he now knew that it was all very wrong, and
as he had aides in that matter, he felt it to be his duty
to do all in his power to remedy the evil to which he bad
been a party. The hon. gentleman then read un extract
from a speech of Sir R. Peel, in 1827, to the effect,
" that he owned, frankly, and candidly, that he enter
tained a distrust of the Roman Catholic clergy. He did
not object to the Roman Catbolics on account of their
faith. There were many of them for whom he had the
highest respect. In private life he made no distinctions
on religi.,us grounds. But in this case there was added
to religion a scheme of worldly policy, and he had a
right to inquire into its nature. Cuuld any one who was
acquainted with the state of the world doubt that there
was engrafted on the Roman Catholic system some•

thing more than a scheme, than the promotion of
mere religion? The doctrines of absolution, confession,

and indulgences, were calculated to maintain great power
over the hearts and minds of meu. If a man toll ano-
ther all his sins and transgressions, however trilling they
might be, was not the man who so confessed the slave of
the other in the worst sense I And yet that doctrine of
confession was taught at Maynooth." That was the opi-
nion of Sir R. Peel, and he (Mr. Spooner) held it to be
true. He would ask the house to prevent the continu-
ance of such a system, and to that end he asked them to
agree to his motion—" That this house do resolve itself
into a committee to consider the acts for the endowment
of Maynooth, with a view to the withdrawal of any en-
dowment out of the Consolidated Fund, due regard
beine, had to vested rights and interests." As regarded
the latter part of the motion, as the students now in the
college were induced to to go there by the law as it
stood, when the act of abolition passed, if it did pass,
they should be aflowed to complete their education.
No man knew the feeling of the country better than the
noble lord at the head of the Government. He was the
most able statesman in the country, and there were ele-
ments in the house which would enable him to maintain
the constitution unshaken and unbroken—to resist all
dangerous innovation—and to carry into effect all fair
and reasonable reforms that might be necessary. Al.
though he differed from the noble lord on many points,
he entertained the highest opinion of his abilities and
trusted he would not be led away by the fancilul then
ries of the reformers of the day. He trusted the noble
lord would bring his mind to the serious consideration of
the subject now before the house, and that the house
would not refuse to assent to the introduction of the bill
which he proposed to lay on the table, the only effect of
which would be to restore the Protestant character of
the nation, to satisfy the Protestant feeling, and at the
same time to teach the Roman Catholics that although
every civil and religious privilege would be accorded to
them, they should not be placed in a position to enable
them to attain the highest and last object of their ambi-
tion. (Cheers, and 1 .ud cries of " Divide, divide.")
General THOMPSON said the arguments of the hon.
gentleman appeared to reduce themselves to a statement
of his conviction—very sincere no doubt, but possibly
not well founded—that when clashing sects threw their
contributions into the same box, his sect ought to pre-
vent any other from taking anything, because his sect
was right and every other sect wrong. Was that or was
,it not idle pith of the argument which the right hen.
gentleman had propounded to the house. (Hear.) He
would invite hon. gentlemen who bite any hesitation on
this subject to consider the effect if the circumstances
were reversed, and the question arose of a Protestant in-
terest in Fiance or Sardinia struggling for a portion of
money which they themselves, out of their own pockets,
had contributed. Did any man doubt that the. Catholics
had contributed to the fund out of which the Maynooth
grant came ? If so, let him state the reimon ,vhy. Did
any man doubt that if the case existed w.'sich qe had put
the Protestants in those continental countries would feel
the injustice of being told that they were not to have a
portion of the money because the Catholic religi on was the
only right religion ? (Hear.) If the question were put
to the sects in genera!, there was not one wts ich would
not declare itself the only right one. There was not a
sect under whose feet he should like -to life- —not even
the Quakers, who were generally considers d the most
pacific and moderate. (Laughter.) He w ould not
enter into the consideration of the questioi i of mortal
and venial sins, as the hon. member had doi to . If two
steeds came to his gate be might be able to form a
pre. ty good judgment of their merits. But he would not
enter on knotty points as those to which the lion. mem-
ber had referred. His care would be condo ed to keep.
in; himself as clear as he could of either venial or mortal
sins. (Laughter, and cries of "Divide, divi
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD said, if the sense c ei the house
was in favour of goieg to a division he would not detain
it, although he was anxious to state his opi ion on the
subject. He would not stand in the way of a division,
and would net prod the amendment 01 51 sick he had

H HERBERT—Or that the interest of hon, mem-
bers was very great, those who had been present since
the commencement of the debate could testify that the
Opposition benches had been empty the whole time.
Mr. SPOONER did not complain of anything that bad
taken place. What had fallen from the bon. gentleman
opposite (Ur. H. Herbert) was perfectly true. (Loud
laught-r.) Very few members did think proper to attend.
They had a perfect right to exerci-as their judgment in
the matter. But it should not be forgotten that none
of the gentlemen on the other side of the house could
answer r.is arguments. (Laughter.) He wished them
joy of their triumph, but wished it to go the country that
the case had been answered not by force of argument but
by force of numbers. (Cheers.) •
Mr. ROEBUCK* congratulated the house on having
escaped the misery of along and dreary night's debate.
(Cheers.) The house had had the courage to endure the
infliction of a two hours' speech from the. hoc. member.
(Laughter.) He had heard the greater portion of that
speech. But, no doubt, hon. gentlemen opposite had
found a much more agreeable occupation, for their
benches had been very nearly deserted. (Laughter) He
again congratulated the house on having escaped the
mi ery of what he would call this bigotted—(cries of
" Order, order ")—this bigotted appeal—(cheers)—
which bad been so often made to the house. He was

glad it had been answered by a vote, and that no attempt
had been made to refute that which was not deserving of
refutation. (Cheers and laughter )
Mr. WHITESIDE wished to put a question to the
noble lord at the head of the Government relative to the

report of the Maynooth Commission of Inquiry. There
was not one branch of education on the establishment
which had met with the approval of the commissioners.
(Hear, hear.) It was in evidence both that the book and
the system of education—

An Ho'N. MEMBER rose to order• The question be-
fore the house was that of adjournment.
Toe SPEAKER intimated that the hon, and learned
member for Enniskillen was perfectly in order.
Mr. WHITESIDE resumed There were many
gentlemen who professed to be friends of free opinion
and free discussion, who nevertheless sometimes endea-

voured to stifle such discussion. (Cheers, and oh, oh.)
He had risen for the purpose of asking the noble lord at
the head of the Government what he proposed to do with
respect to the report of the illaynooth commissioners.
Lord PA.Lir4.ERSTON said ho bad entertained the
hope that the discussion would nut have beeen resumed

on the question of adjournment although that c3urse was
perfectly open. With regard to the remarks of the hon.
member (Mr. Spooner) that his speech had remained
unanswered because it was unanswerable, those who had
heard it might have inferred in their own minds otber
reasons—(laughter)—why those who differed with the
hon. member were unwilling to enter into a lengthy dis-

cussion upon polemical questions which could not be
carried, or without creating an amount of irritation

which it was most desirable- to avoid. He had never

heard a speech which gave a greater invitation to dissent

on the part of those who did not agree with the hon.
member on the topic which he was discussing. Now with
regard to the question put by the hon. and learned gen-
tleman the member for Enniskillen, the report of the

May n ooth commissioners recommended certain alters•

trove in the course of education carried on in that esta-

blishment.

The changes recommended were not very

material, but he believed that those who had the conduct

of the institution were endeavouring to carry them into
effect as far as possible. (Cheers.)
Mr. NEWDEGATE then withdrew his motion for
the adjournment, and the subject dropped.
FRAUDULENT BREACHES OF TRUST BILL.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said in moving for
leave to bring in a bill to render breacbes of trust crimi-

responsible, he was aware that he had under-
taken a task of no ordinary difficulty, because he was
about to propose a bill that would in a manner, at pre-
sent unknown to our law, affect one of the ordinary
relations of civilised life. The situation of trustee and

cestui que trust, was one of the most common and
most necessary of the functions of ordinary society,
and therefore it was a matter worthy of their serious
attention whether the manner in which it was proposed
to render trustees criminally responsible for breaches of
tru.t, could be done with safety and whether it was one
that would bear examination. But he was the more con-
fident in doing this becau-e it was a measure not brought
in on the spur of the moment, but ore introduced for
the purpose of meeting an acknowledged defect in our
law which stood in contrast with the jurisprudence of
almost every civilised nation. He did not know a code
of any nation in Europe in which fraudulent breaches of
trust were not held to be proper subjects for criminal
punishment. He begged the house to observe the re-
markable peculiarity of English law, by which that class
of criminals had hitherto been exempt from criminal pu-
nishment. In ail other countries it bad been deemed a
proper principle of law to hold that a violation of confi-
dence, a betra) al of trust reposed in ooe man by another
was one of the most aggravated crimes. But in our law
there was this peculiarity, that when a robbery was ac-
companied by a breach of trust it was divested of its cri-
minal character. If he stole 500/. our law punished him ;
and if he on his death bed called in his friend and said,
I propose to make you my executor, I commit to you
my property for the benefit of my widow and children,"
and the friend accepted that trust, and robbed the widow
and the orphan of that property, our law said he was not
a criminal but a debtor, and that which rendered the act
most odious and most abominable took from it, its felo

nious character. But the anomaly and the singularity
did not rest here. One could imagine that if they made
a trustee a debtor they would give great and ready faci-
lities for the enforcement of that debt. No such thing.
Stich was the absurdity, that their courts of law drove
the widow and the orphan from the judgment seat, and
told them they had no remedy at all. It was indeed
true that they had not left them without a remedy, but
it was one that added mockery to the injury. (Hear,
hear.) They told them that they might go to the
Court of Chancery. To telt the widow and the orphan
who had been robbed of their small pittance, per-
haps all they had in the world, to go to such a tri-
bunal was an aggravation of the injury. Now, it cool,
not be said that this was a thing not calling for the seri
oils consideration of Parliament. Surely such asystem ae
that they could not admire. This was one of their insti!