The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-04 00:00:00

MAYNOOTH.

Mr. DIVETT presented a petition from Exeter against
the increased grant to the Roman Catholic College of
Maynooth.
Sir G. SMYTH presented numerous petitions from
parishes in the county of Essex also against the grant.
Mr. PLUMPTRE presented a great number of peti
tions to the same effect from parishes in Kent, Bucking-
ham, Berkshire, York, and other counties.
THE BOARD OF TRADE—CROYDON RAILWAY.
Mr. DODD rose to move, according to notice, that
the report of the Board of Trade against the Bill in-
tended to be brought in by the Croydon Railway Com-
pany, to authorise the construction of a railway to Ash •
ford, be referred back to the Board of Trade for recon-
sideration.

The SPEAKER said, that before the Hon. Gentleman
proceeded with his motion, the House should decide
whether that motion could come on during the
time of private business. This was the first
case of the kind that had occurred, and it was his (the
Speaker's) opinion, that the motion involved a question
as to the conduct of the Board of Trade in the discharge
of a public duty. He, therefore, thought that it should
be brought on at the time of public business.
Mr. lIAWES trusted that the House would take this
matter into its serious consideration. With great
deference to the opinions advanced by the Speaker, he
(Mr. Hawes) conceived that, if they were acted upon, it
would be imposing a very great restriction on the pro-
gress of private Bills. The reports which the Board of
Trade made, he understood, were only for the information
of the House, and he should wish to know how these indi-
viduals could proceed with this Bill if they were not allowed
to question the accuracy and value of the Board which bad
decided against them. If this opinion were acted upon
it was perfectly clear it would stop the further erogress
of this Bill. He thought it would be in his power
to show that the decisions of the Board of Trade
were not entitled to the confidence of the House, and
under these circumstances he thought it better for the
House now to decide whether the Board of Trade should
thus be allowed efficiently to arrest the progress of pri-
vate Bills.

Lord G. SOMERSET, without entering into the
question of the principle sought to be established by the
Hon. Memb?r for Lambeth, certainly thought that this
was a most improper time for bringing the subject before
the notice of the House. It was quite true that if the
Hen. Member could get the House to support the
opinions he had advanced it would be most desirable
that the question should be at once settled. But the
House should remember that the reports of the Board of
Trade were nothing more than an opinion given upon cer-
tain schemes by a number of gentlemen ; and whether
these schemes were reported against or not, it was at the
option of the supporters to proceed with those schemes.
He trusted that the matter would be allowed to go on in
the proper order, and that, therefore, the Hon. Member
would not proceed with his motion now.
Lord HO WICK said that the House was placed in a
most anomalous position with regard to the Board of
Trade. Hen. Members might recollect that during the last
session it was decided that the reports made by the Board
of Trade should be referred to the Committees on the Bills
to which those reports had reference. But in this session
they had gone somewhat further. On the 4th of March
it was decided that when railway Bills and projects had
been reported on, these reports should be referred
to the single Committee, and under this re-
solution the Bill to which the Honourable
Member alluded, and the report upon that Bill
would go before the Committee appointed to examine
into the group of schemes of which that Bill formed a
portion ; and the Committee, therefore, in dealing with
the whole subject, would reject or approve in a great mea-
sure upon the report of the Board of Trade. He begged
to remind the House that the resolution by which these
schemes were referred to single Committees, was moved
by the Noble Lord (Lord Granville Somerset) and
agreed to by the House at the time of private business.
He thought it a great injustice to refuse a hearing to this
motion at the present time, for if the Hon. Member were
not allowed to bring it forward now, he might not be
enabled to do so for a very considerable time. In the
meantime, however, the private Committee might be
appointed ; it might proceed to the consideration of this
Bill, and to the report of the Board of Trade, which this
petition complained of. They ought, therefore, to be
given an opportunity of stating their ground of complaint
before the Committee was appointed. It would be folly
to refer the report back to the Board of Trade, because,
as the Noble Lord himself admitted they had not time
even now to get through their own proper business.
Sir GEORGE CLERK said it was not his intention
to follow the Noble Lord in the course of reasoning he
had adopted. The question simply was, whether this matter
ought to be brought forward at the time of public business.
He would not go into the details ; but he should say
that the uniform practice of the House was, that railway
matters should be disposed of with the private business.
But this question did not fall within that rule. As it
touched the character of a public board, he did not
conceive that it should be heard with the private business,
Mr. LABOUCHERE confessed that he was inclined
to take the view of the Right Honourable Baronet
opposite, in preference to the opinion of the
Honourable Gentleman who sat beside him. He could
not help thinking that this resolution differed in
its nature from any that he recollected, and was sure
that it would take the House, some considerable time to
discuss it. It could not be considered or disposed of as
the private business of the House, as it effected the con-
duct of a public board, and would open the door to other
and perhaps more serious petitions. If it were true that
the Board of Trade had hastily and negligently
reported on this Bill, he thought that a discus-
sion on the matter in this House in this mode
would be perfectly unsatisfactory. He was of
opinion thrt the House would do well to adhere to these
rules which they had hitherto observed, and wished that
the House would dismiss the Bill.
Mr. DUNCOMBE did not coincide with the reasons
offered by the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down,
for resisting the Bill. His complaint was that more peti-
tions could be presented to the House against the reports
of the Board of Trade ; but if there were petitions of
that description presented, it was the duty of that House
to hear them, and it was right that they should be heard.
In fact the discussions upon this question hid been the
cause of creating very great dissatisfaction in the public
mind against this department of the Board of Trade—
(" Hear, hear," from Colonel Sibthorp)—and that dis-
satisfaction would continue to increase if this inquiry
should not be gone into.—(Hear, hear.) But
the Right Honourable Gentleman opposite said,
" let the Committee decide upon this question ;" but
surely the Committee had quite enough to do already,
without imposing this additional duty upon them—
(Hear, hear)—but if it should be referred to them, see
the loss of time that would follow : there would be
counsel on the one hand, and counsel on the other,
and in fact there would be no end of the labour they
would have to perform.—(Hear, hear.) Then,
with regard to what had been said about not
allowing matters of this sort to interfere with
private business, surely the Right Hon. Gentleman
should recollect that their petitions had been allowed to
be presented and printed during private business ; and
therefore the time for bringing the subject forward
was the time during which private business was before
the House, in order to hear all just complaints and do
justice to those who had charges to make against the
public department of the Board of Trade.—(Bear.) If
those complaints ware not to be brought forward now,
he would like to know when they would ?—at the close
of the session?—up stairs, when all the falsehoods put
forward on one side should have been heard 2—(Hear,
hear.) He would say that there were very grave and
serious accusations made against the railway depart-
ment of the Board of Trade, and he was aware that
they could be supported, and when they were heard it
would be found that very great injury had been done to
masiy persons connected with railroads ; and therefore
• he did think that the proper time to hear those parties
wk., during the private business. On those grounds, he
begged to move that the Hon. Member for Maidstone be
now heard.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. GISBORNE conceived that Hon. Gentlemen
opposite had got themselves into a great mess by the
manner in which they had conducted this proceeding.—
(Hear.) The present was only one of a great many cases
of this kind, and they were all owing to parties
having a duty entrusted to them which they were in-
competent to deal with.—(Hear.) By referring these
complaints to a Select Committee who had already 23
independent railways to deal with, it would
be found that this addition to their labours could
not be satisl'actorily
dealt with by them. His opi-
nion was that the ease ought to be heard. The
li
on. Gentleman ought tobe allowed to make his state-
ment, and should the report of the Board of Trade
afterwards prove unworthy
of further notice it would
be the duty of the House at once
to
u ld defy
diligent cancelb
it.nd yg oh ft g
be
tn. t I
toe -
m n
eCn u, 1 o
nu
oe 1
mS laßt t'errfl °h
however vwe or
come to a correct decision within six months‘ -of a vast
number of railway schemes, and he should,
support the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsie3refore,
Sir G. GREY said that he could not altogether rY.'
cide in the opinion of the Hon. Member for MaidestTwn-
n
(Mr. Dodd), and the position which he had taken.e
Whatever might be the error committed by the Board of
Trade in their tactics, he believed their opinions to be
honestly adopted. Whatever decision the House
might come to on the case of the present petition, he
trusted that the object of the petitioners would not be
prejudiced thereby. It could hardly be expected the Board
could come to any sufficiently considered decision within
a month or six weeks. At the same time he must say
that the decision of the Board of Trade was not the de-
cision of the House of Commons, and he thought that
that decision, whether it militated against or was in

favour of any particular scheme, ought not to prevent
any discussion upon it when it came before a Commit-

tee. He should also remind the House that it was an
express declaration of the Board, that in the event of any
facts transpiring which affected their decision, that they
should reconsider it, and republish it in the Gazat'.
Thre was nothing to prevent the reconsideration of that
decision within the present session. And as these
reports were not considered at the usual hour for
public bnsiness, he trusted that if the motion of the
Hon. Gentleman was not acceded to, that circumstance
would not prejudice the petitioners in Committee.
Mr. DODD begged to thank the Right Hon.
Gentleman opposite for the interest be had evinc:d
in the object which he had the honour of bring-
ing before the House. He would also beg to
thank the "Vice-President of the Board of Trade
for the suggestion which he had made with respect
to the republication of the reports of that Board in the
Gazette. If the House would consider that the peti•
tioners were 57 miles from London, and by the alteration
that they would be brought within an hour and a-
half-

The SPEAKER must remind the Hon. Member that
he had no right at present to go into the merits of the
petition.
Mr. BORTHWICK thought that the present ditii •
culty arose from the constitution of the Railway De-
partment of the Board of Trade, which was partly
executive and partly legislative. What he would sug-
gest was this, IN nether they might not waive the general
rule in the present instance ?
Mr. lIAWES though., that the House would have
heard what the Right Hon. Geatletran opposite (Sir G.
Clerk) had to say in reply to the proposition of his
Right Hon. Friend (Sir G. Grey). If he considered
that the Speaker had pronounced an opinion upon the
matter, he would not say a word on the subject, but he
understood that the Speaker had left the matter in the
hands of the House. He thought that an early day
should be fixed for bringing on this subject.
Mr. MANGLES said that the Hon. Gentleman the
Member far Lambeth had suggested that an early day
should be appointed for discussing this subject, hut
he thought a Committee could very much better inves-
tigate the matter than the whole House. It ought not
to be heard by the House either in the light of private
or public business.—(lronicAl cheers from Lord Howick.)
The Noble Lord cheered him. He (Mr. Mangles)
was interested in railroads as well as the Noble
Lord, and preferred the whole matter to go
before a Committee. He could not conceive a better
mode of showing by proof that decisions of the Board
were wrong than by giving those who thought so an op-
portunity of going before a Committee.
Mr. RICARI)O did not think it quite consistent with
the dignity of the Board of Trade to object on a mere
point of form.
Sir G. CLERK said he did not raise any objection
on the part of the Board of Trade on a mere point of
form, but thought the House should act on a uniforre
principle, and be guided by what had taken place in
matters of this sort.

Mr. THOMAS S. DUNCOMBE thought the
matter was well worthy of consideration. He
should certainly take the sense of the House, even if
he stood alone, and the House might depend upon it that
on another day they would have similar petitions until
they brought the House to its senses with regard to this
matter.
The House then divided :

For the motion ... 73
Against it
Majority against the motion
NOTICE OF MOTION.

Mr. HUME gave notice that he should, on the 17th,
bring forward his motion relating to Sir 11. Pottinger.
PAYMASTERS AND PUR3ERS IN THE
ROYAL NAVY.

Captain PECHELL moved that the petition which he
presented yesterday from the paymasters and pursers of
the Royal Navy be printed with the Votes —Agreed to.
COLLIERIES RAILWAY BILL.

Mr. HODGSON HINDE gave notice that on the
order of the day for the second reading of the Colleries
Railway Bill (as we understood) being read, he should
call the attention of the House to a letter which had
been published on the subject, and should move that the
order of the day should be discharged.
NEW WRIT FOR GREENOCK.

Mr. HUME moved that the Speaker do issue his writ
to the Clerk of the Crown to issue a new writ for a
burgess to serve in Parliament, in the room of Robert
Wallace, Esq., who since his election had accepted the
office of Steward to the Chiltern Hundreds.
GRANT TO MAYNOOTH.
The SPEAKER said that those Members who had
petitions against the additional grant to Maynooth had
better present them at once.
At this announcement almost every Member on the
Ministerial side of the House rose and pointed towards
the table with a roll of petitions which he held in hand.
This simultaneous movement elicited roars of laughter.
There were upwards of 200 Members on the Ministerial
benches, and of these certainly not 20 kept their seats on
the announcement of the Speaker. On the Opposition
side of the House, on which there were abut 180 Mem-
bers, not more than twenty had petitions to present on
the subject. The first Member who came forward was
Mr. HAWES, who presented thirteen petitions from
various Dissenting congregations against any additional
grant to Maynooth.

Mr. STF,WART WORTLEY presented petitions
from the West Riding of Yorkshire to the same effect.
Mr. Greene. Mr. Vernon, Mr. Pakington, and Sir
Howard Douglas presented petitions to the same effect.
Sir R. INGLIS presented an immense number of
petitions to the same effect, but from the noise and con-
fusion in the House it was impossible to catch the names
of the places from which these petitions emanated.
Petitions, principally against any further grant to the
College of Maynooth, were presented by Mr. Pattisor,
Mr. Darby, Lot d Worsley, Mr. Greene, Lord J. Stewart,
Lord Palmerston, Sir T. Acland, Mr. Dickinson, Mr.
Bankes, Col. Sibthorp, Mr. Spooner, and Mr. M. Manes.
Petitions were also presented from Glasgow, Chippen-
ham, and various other places, against any increased
grant to Maynootb.

The House then resolved itself into a Committee of
the whole House, to consider the 40th of George 111.,
cup. 85, Mr. GREENE iu the Chair.

Sir R. PEEL rose and spoke as follows :—Mr. Greene,
Sir, in the course of the last session of Parliament I
took the opportunity of publicly declaring, on the part
of her Majesty's Government, that it was our in-
tention, during the recess, to apply ourselves
to the consideration of the state of acade-
mical education in Ireland. I accompanied that
declaration with a distinct intimation that the circum-
stances and position of the Roman Catholic College of
Maynooth would undergo the consideration of the
Government. I added that, undertaking the con-
sideration of the, state of Maynooth, it was
our intention to undertake it in a friendly spirit,
and I made that public declaration at that time in order
that due public notice might be given of the
intentions of her Majesty's Government. I
was not unprepared fur the demonstration of
opinion which has been made this day. I could
not look back to the discussions which have taken place
in this House with respect to Maynooth, without fore-
seeing that a proposition upon the subject of Maynooth,
connected with its extension, was likely to encounter
the risk of great opposition. I could not disguise
from myself that there were many entertaining
strong religious opinions and conscientious scruples, the
sincerity of which cannot be questioned, and which, on
account of their sincerity, are entitled to respect—l say
I could not but foresee that any proposal for an in-
creased grant to Maynooth was likely to be encountered
by an opposition such as that to which I have referred.
And it was because we were so placed that
we have deemed it our duty to enter upon this
difficult task, fully sensible that it would be such,
but also that it was one by which men were
not to be cowed. But, Sir, while we had resolved that
e should undertake this duty, and encounter this diffi-
culty, we had resolved that it should not be ace-
gravated by any such accusation as that we had
concealed our intentions from the country or the public,
or that we had taken any party by surprise.—(" Hear,
hear," from the Opposition.) Sir, it was upon this ac-
count that I declared explicitly and deliberately this in-
t, ntion, on the part of the Government, at so early a
period of last session—an intention not intimated in
any vague or equivocal terms, but plainly and deli-
berately stating that what we would pledge ourselves to
do was to give an improved system of academical
education to Maynooth, with an increase of the public
grant. Sir, in pursuance of the determination we have
taken this grave subject into our consideration I shall now
say nothing with respect to one portion of this question
which will become before the House separately. I mean
the question of academical education. The obser-
vations I shall have to make will entirely apply to
this question of the College of Maynooth ; and.
it is solely in reference to the institution
that I ana now speaking. In taking this sub-
ject into consideration, we had to take cognisance of the
extent of obligation which past Acts of the Legislature
might have imposad upon the Government and the
Parliament for; the support of this institution ; and the
practical effect of the past system, as well as the probable
effect of any alteration which might be made; and given ail
those poii ts our best and most mature consideration, I
now, on the part of the Executive Government
of this country, submit to the calm considera-
tion of the House of Commons the proposal
which we are prepared to make. Sir, it has appeared
to us that wo were at liberty to pursue one of these
courses with respect to the College of Maynooth. We
considered, first, that it was competent to us to
continue, without alteration, the present system
pursued in that institution, and the amount
of the Parliamentary grant annually made
hitherto; secondly, that it was competent to discontinue
that grant, and repudiate the institution altogether, and
all connexion with it, and, after providing for existing
interests, publicly to notify that, hereafter, no
connexion whatever should exist between the
Government of this country and Maynooth. But
I need not say that this course we were not prepared to
adopt. The third course open to us to pursue was, to
come forward in a friendly spirit and offer to improve
the present system of Roman Catholic education—(Op-
position cheers)—and to extend, to a liberal amount,
Parliamentary protection.—(Cheers from the Opposi-
tion.) This we propose to do, not by attempting any
interference with the doctrines of the Roman Catholic
creed, but by a more liberal grant to improve the system
Majesty'ste presentG overnna system,ent,
and elevate the tone of the Catholic people of Leland.
that it th
Sir, with regard to the first—the continuance, without
ald h
alteration or modification of any kind, of the present grant
declare,it i
s
our
deliberate
on e prt f
v hicer
-
tion that, of all courses that could be pursued,
that is the most objectionable. In giving the present
a coon
grant, we profess to make provision for the
education of those who are to give spiritual instruction
and religious consolation to man
y millions of people.—

(Hear, hear.) We jus; give enough, by voting annually
9,000/., to discourage aid paralise all voluntary contri-
butions.—(Hear, hear.) Remove the grant altogether,
and you will find, on the part of the people
of Ireland, I have no doubt, a disposition to
pecuniary sacrifices, and to provide some, perhaps an
imperfect, endowment for the religious education of the
Roman Catholic priestlood of Ireland. But the grant
of 9,0001. a year, and tie public undertaking on the part
of the Government to er.dow the institution, and to
provide instruction for the priesthood, has effectually
discouraged contributions from others, and yet the
sum we vote is ineffectual and insufficient.—( Hear, hear.)
By continuing this grata now what do we do? If it be
a violation of principle to provide instruction for the
education of the Roman Catholic priesthood, we are
guilty of that violation.—(Hear, hear.) The grant
of 9,0001. a year, professedly for the educa-
tion of the Roman Catholic priesthood, is a
violation of principle at least as great as
any I shall propose to-night. What is the effect of the
existing statutes ? It is not merely that you make a
Parliamentary grant annually, revocable at your plea-
sure, but in the statute-book there are three Acts of
Parliament—two passed before the union by
the Irish Legislature, and one passed since, in
IRS, which adopted and sanctioned this insti-
tution, for the support of which an annual grant
is made. By the combined effects of these Acts
of Parliament, you provide for the establishes ant of a
college for the education of the Roman Catholic priest.
hood, and the words you make use of, are,
" the establishment cf a College." And though
you may say, that the existing statutes dis-
claim all connexion with the College, and repudiate it
as a guilty thing with which you would have
no communion, yet whom do these statutes appoint as
the visitors of the College ? The Lord Chancellor, the
highest judicial authority in the country, and the
judges, are the persons whom those statutes appoint as the
visitors of that institution which you so much discourage.
You provide, it is true, by an annual vote only for cer-
tain. professors of that College ; but the Act which has
received your sanction expressly speaks of fellowships
of that College to be endowed. The Act originally con-
templated a perfect• system of collegiate education
consisting of scholars, masters, professors, and fellows.
—(Hear.) You have repealed the statute of mortmain
in favour of that body—you have permitted the trustees
to hold land—real property, to the amount of 1,0001. per
annum, far the purpose of providing for that body. By the
Irish Act they are permitted to hold real property to the
amount of 1,0001. a year, repealing the statute of mort-
main. That was the Act of the Irish Parliament, but
in 1808 this Imperial Parliament distinctly recog-
nised the institution so far as to make a
further provision, still further repealing the mortmain
statute in favour of the College, enabling the trustees
to make certain compromises, and to hold real property,
as contemplated by the Irish Parliament. You have
enabl-d the trustees by an express enactment to
provide and as :ign a chapel, in which the
rights of the Roman Catholic Church can be
performed by a chaplain appointed by the trustees. This
enactment received the sanction of the Legislature, and I
ask whether there has not been a complete violation of
the principle—if principle be involved in it—by the
nature of the connexion with the Roman Catholic priest-
hood thus deliberately sanctioned by the Government ?
Having then sustained the inconvenience—if inconveni-
ence there be in the departure from principle,
why should not the intentions of Parliament be
carried into effect ? You have assigned 9,000/.
a year for several years past, as a provision
for this College, in respect to which establishment a
vote has been annually made, to be expressly applied to
the annual salaries of ten professors in that College.
There are three professors of theology, which
you endow, and to which your grant is applied,
but that grant is so limited in amount that you are not
enabled to assign more to the professors than 1201. a
year.—(Hear, hear.) In seven out of ten cases, the
provision made for professors was less than the sum named.
In the case of the three professors of theology, you expect
to have the services of men of learning, of eminence, and
integrity, for a salary of 120/. a year.---(Loud cries of
"Hear, hear," from Mr. Shed.) And observe that that
salary cannot be increased by means of fees. No other
payment is awarded to these professors than that
which the Parliament provides ,• and the sum
which you give is all that they have. That
institution, at the present moment, contains 440
students. I think that 130 of these students belong to
the class denominated pensioners—that h to say. parties
who pay a certain sum for their admission, and
in addition provide for their own support. In
addition there are 250 free students whom the State
professes to maintain. The average sum paid by the
State for each student is 231. per year.—(" Hear, hear,"
from the Opposition.) For that sum of 23/. the student
has to provide his college dress, the furniture of his
rooms, his commons, and in addition, out of the 231. for
each student, there are to be provided for the repairs of the
College, the expense of coals and a variety of other in-
cidental expenses.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.)
Now, if this is a violation of principle, I ask you what
do you gain by it? Surely you gain nothing
by establishing professors of theology at salaries
of 1201. a year each.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.)
If you violate your principle, surely it is politic—surely
it is wise, to violate it in such a manner as to insure the
services of men of the highest character and of
the most competent attainments.—(Opposition cheers.)
I do not speak at all of those gentlemen who are at pre-
sent professors in that College. I do not mean at all to
derogate from their high character or from their great
attainments.—(Cheers.) But if men of high character
are found from their zeal for their religion, and from
their desire to promote the course of education, to de-
vote their time to the public for incompetent
salaries—( Hear, hear, from the Opposition)—
that is no reason why we should not
take measures to secure the services of men of compe-
tent learning, by giving them a proper and requisite pro-
vision.—(Hear, hear, and Opposition cheers.) All I
contend for is that you have no compen-
sation for your violation of principle by voting
so low a pecuniary grant, as to place the parties whom
you charge with your favour in a state of indigence.—
(Opposition cheers.) Now, with regard to the state of the
building. What must be the feelings of ayoung man who en-
tered that building for the first time—feelings which would
produce an effect upon him for the whole of his after-
life?—(Opposition cheers.) Why, the appearance of the
building is desolate in the extreme. It bears the charac-
ter of a deserted barracks, rather than that of a colle-
giate establishment.—(Cheers.) Now, recollect that
there are 440 students there, receiving your liberality,
It is impossible to insure to each of these students a
separate room. In many cases, according to the reports
of the Committees, several students are placed in one
room, and in some they are placed in one bed.
I hold in my hand a report which was made to the
Executive Government, and which was signed by
several, indeed, I may saYt by almost all the authorities
connected with that College. I am sure I need make no
apology,oust Ibreegaidns—th?,
Your Excellency, we beg leave statements contained in it to the
n
humbly to state, that the College of Maynooth has long
been struggling under great disadvantages for many
years, in consequence of the very inadequate accommo-
dation provided, and we beg to state that for the purpose
of carrying out the objects intended by the Government,
we instituted an inquiry with the view of laying the
state of its affairs before your Excellency. We exa-
mined first into the internal administration of the Col-
lege, and we find that not only are the salaries of the
professors lower than the usual allowances, but
that this reduction is so great as to interfere with
their comforts to a degree unbecoming a public
institution for the education of the youth of Ireland.
Thus they inflicted a great inconvenience in the removal
of that wholesome restraint which is so necessary to be
kept up during the short period of the student's proba-
tion, in order to render him a practically useful member
of society in that sphere in which it was destined he
should be placed. Notwithstanding every endeavour, a
debt of 4,6001. has been incurred. So insufficient was
the sum granted for the purposes of the College, that
during the term, the authorities were con •
pelled to give an additional vacation of two
months for the purpose of saving some of the
expenses. We beg further to state, that the increased
expenses of the College has had the effect of closing
its doors against that class of society in which candi-
dates from the Roman Catholic priesthood had been
most frequently found. Those who support the scholars
at Maynooth now find the expenses of doing so so
heavy, that numbers of the latter are obliged to with-
draw before the term of their probation is completed.
Their departure has in consequence caused a
diminution of the profits arising to the Col-
lege from the number of students there.
To such embarrassments are :they reduced, being fre-
quently obliged to withdraw tho students before they
have completed their ordinary ecclesiastical course of
study." I may state, in addition to that, that there are
many cases in which, from the inability of the provisions
to defray the expenses of the College, the sum of 231.,
the allowance for one student, is obliged to be divided
between two. Now, air, I have stated fully the state of
the College of' Ilaynooth, and I ask whether I am not
right in saying that you can take no course that is not
preferable to the one now pursued ? It contained a
Romanwise
?shall wes say
responsible.. to iolation, if it be a violation, of a principle in under-
taking to instruct the priesthood of Ireland, from whose
doctrines you dissent, and to make an inadequate pro-
vision for the education of those for whose instruction
you m
Wouldato
hliiet
be ake
prudentyourself
subjects we are bound by an inconvenient obligation
contracted by ourselves, and that obligation we will
respect in a surly spirit. We will continue
to
give you what you now have—there shall be no im-
provement—there shall be • i theit ? C
uo increase to the grant. We
shall allow the amount to remain so much as the statute
permits—we will, in a surly spirit, give you 9,0001. a
year—and we tell you that we do it, though our con-
science is violated, because it is our intention to adhere
to the statute. When we come to the consideration of
another matter, shall we al!ow that our conscientious
scruples are violated ? and shall we resolve to discon-
tinue all connexion with the College of Maynooth ? and
shall the burthen of educating the prie • sthood be thrown
on the people themselves ? There are some, I know,
who consider that a desirable object.—(Hear, hear.)
Are we, therefore, to adopt that course, and at the same
time must we tell the Roman Catholics that, on religious
grounds, we absolve ourselves from all further connexion
with the education of the priesthood ? Before you
adopt that course, you should weigh and fully deliberate
upon the circumstances which attend that establishment.
I do not hesitate to say that, apart from the obligation
of payment, apart from the consideration of the mortified
and irritated feeling which might arise from such an
avowal on your part, namely, that you have conscientious
scruples against the continuance of that vote, I do not
hesitate to say that I believe the absolute discontinuance
of the vote would be better for all parties than a con-
tinuance of such a state of things as that which I have
described. But I think I ca •
n assign a reason why, if
you will, as legislators, take into your account public

feeling, and the consideration of public policy, I think I
can assign reasons which might dissuade you from
taking that course, and repudiating all connexion with
that College. When did your connexion with it com-
mence ? Under whose authority, and bow long
has it been in existence ? Why, Sir, fifty years
ago you undertook to maintain a Parliamentary vote for
Maynooth. You commenced your connexion with it in
1795. The reigning sovereign was George the Third ;
the Minister of England was Mr. Pitt ; and the Secre-
tary of State for the Home Department was the Duke
of Portland, who was afterwards the Chancellor of the
University of Oxford. In the year 1795 the Lord-
Lieutenant of Ireland, Lord Fitzwilliam, called the at-
tention of the Irish Parliament to the state of education
there. That was in the critical period of 1795.—(Hear,
hear.) [The Right Hon Baronet read the speech of
the Lord Lieutenant to the Irish House of Commons at
the commencement of the session of 1795, and also a
quotation from a speech of Mr. Grattan.] In that
year the House of Commons of Ireland was told
that it was intended to establish Maynooth. Lord
Fitzwilliam was succeeded by the Marquis Camden,
who laid the first stone of the College of Maynooth.
At the close of the session of 1795 the Lord-Lieutenant
who presided at the inauguration, who laid the first stone
of the building, congratulated the Parliament in having
laid the foundation of the establishment of a Roman
Catholic college. In the course of that year the Irish
Parliament passed its first Act—an Act passed by the
Irish Lords and Commons—without difficulty, with-
out one dissentient voice. The Prelates of the
Protestant Church were present—the Parliament
was exclusively Protestant and yet, at that
period, in that year of 1795, at the instance of
the Executive Government, that exclusively Protestant
Parliament without a division—without a dissentient
voice—consented to this supposed violation of principle,
and voted the sum which they then thought requisite li
for maintaining the institution, and stamped upon it a
Parliamentary sanction. In 1800, before the union,
another Act passed. After the union the Imperial Par-
liament, finding those grants in existence, passed, as I
before observed, an Act in 1808, not interfering with the
system which they adopted and sanctioned, and for ex-
tending which they gave further facilities. For fifty
years, up to this very year 1845, has this vote continued
for supporting the College of Maynooth. I know there
is a prevailing impression that the Imperial Parliament
did nothing more than adopt the Acts of the Irish Par-
liament—that they found the vote, and continued it
without alteration, feeling themselves bound by the
contract into which it is supposed the Irish Parliament
entered. That is an impression which has prevailed. I
am about to prove that that is completely erroneous,
and to show that you have, at two distinct periods,
granted an additional sum for the support of Maynooth
—that you were not merely content with adopting the
vote of the Irish Parliament, but that, on two specific
occasions, you increased the vote. In 1807 the vote was
increased to 13,000/., the 5,0001. increase being applied
for additional buildings. In 1808 Mr. Percival lent his di-
rect sanction to the permanent increase of the vote. In that
year Mr. Foster, the Irish Chancellor of the Exchequer,
moved a resolution for granting to Maynooth College a
grant of 13,000 L, being 5,000 L over the grant of former
years, for the purpose of enabling that institution to
erect buildings capable of accommodating 50 additional
students. In former years the number of students being
200, a grant of 1,000/. was made, but as there was a
further sum voted for the maintainenee of 50 additional
students, Mr. Foster moved that a sum not exceeding
9,2501., Irish currency, should be granted to his Majesty
to defray the expenses. Mr. Percival said he was per-
fectly right after the grant was established, and after
the union was carried, that the grant of
the Irish Parliament should not be diminished.
The grant was extended one-fourth more for the pur-
poses of education. It appeared that 111 others were
educated for the Catholic priesthood in different parts of
Ireland. On the whole, he thought a supply of 360 stu-
dents would be sufficient to meet the demand. In 1808,
Mr. Percival being Minister, the Government consented
to extend the vote beyond that made by the Irish Cabi-
net, for the express purpose of providing education for
50 additional students.—(Hear, hear.) And further,
Mr. Percival implied that if he thought a greater num-
ber of students than 361 were requisite for the service of
the Roman Catholic Church, he would not be unwil-
ling to increase the grant.—(Hear, hear.) But here is
a distinct proof that in 1808 the Imperial Parliament
made an increased provision, in order that 50 more stu-
dents might be educated in Maynooth. Again, in 1813
—I can speak of that myself, for I was then in office—
an addition of 7001. or 900/. a year was made, in order
to be applied to the maintenance of senior students,
called the Dunboyne establishment. I have stated what
have been the circumstances of this connexion in
the first instance, and how the Parliaments both of Eng-
land and Ireland have, on different occasions, strengthened
that connexion by successive grants and endowments.
And I now ask whether, after this state of things existing
for half a century, it would be prudent or proper, on
an alleged violation of conscientious scruples, to give
notice to the Roman Catholics of Ireland that this con-
nexion, so continued-uninterruptedly for half a century,
must be abandoned.—(Hear, hear.) When this con-
nexion was formed, the Roman Catholics were labouring
under disabilities, but those disabilities did not then con-
stitute a ground of objection in the eye of the Irish Par-
liament.—(Hear, hear.) These disabilities have been
done away with—the Roman Catholics now stand on
the same footing with ourselves in respect to equality
of civil privileges—shall we now take the opportunity,.
in opposition to the deeds of our ancestors, of saying to
them, " That favour was granted under the reign of
George the Third, in the administration of Mr. Pitt,
but we must now withhold it on account of religious
scruples."—(Hear, hear.) What would be the effect of
such a declaration on the Roman Catholics? Why, it
would not be the refusal of the amount of pecuniary aid
which would be deprecated—it is the animus which dic-
tated that refusal. —(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," in
which the shrill piercing voice of Mr. Sheil was dis-
tinctly audible.) We never could convince them that
we were actuated by those conscientious scruples which
were not entertained by George 111 , by Mr. Pitt, nor
by an exclusively Protestant Legislature of their own
country, and which were never felt since that time.—
(Hear.) I should deeply regret that such a refusal
should be made, not merely on account of the Roman
Catholics, but for the sake of the general welfare of Ire-
land. Such a declaration would be in effect a proclama-
tion that we who dissented from the doctrines of
the Roman Catholic Church—that we who held a faith
which we considered more pure, and to which we are
devotedly attached, would not on account of these doc-
trines and on account of that devotion give any assis-
tance to Roman Catholics.—(Hear, hear.) If we make
that declaration what is the lesson we inculcate?—(Hear,
hear.) Now, take the case of the Protestant pro•
prietors of an extensive district—they had a large
Roman Catholic tenantry—they were probably Dis-
senters and Catholics who tilled the soil—would it be
right in these lauded proprietors to refuse to contribute
any assistance towards those Roman Catholic tenantry—
would they be acting in accordance with the will of the
Supremo Judge to refuse all means whereby those
poor people might obtain religious consolation?—(Hear,
hear.) I think they would be acting more in accord-
ance with the principles of the faith which they profess,
if they said to these poor people, " I wish you to have
religious consolation in the hours of need. I wish you
to have religious instruction from those who can afford
it. I will, therefore, contribute towards the maintenance
of the minister who will perform these duties."—(Hear,
hear.) Is there any precept in our religion to forbid
this? Do not great and enlightened bodies act so? I
will take for example some of the great companies of the
City of London, who do everything to improve
the condition of those dependent upon them.
They make great sacrifices to do so. Take
the Drapers Company—they allot a small sum as
a stipend for the payment of the Roman Catholic priest-
hood, and contribute to the repairs of the Roman Ca-
tholic chapels ; and am I to advise Parliament to take a
course, which would in effect tell the companies—" You
cannot contribute towards Roman Catholic purposes
without a violation of religious principle."—(Hear,
hear.) But what will be our own position? How shall
we act when we come to decide upon the grant to Pres-
byterian ministers ? Shall we continue that vote? Por-
tions of the public money are voted to men whose re-
ligious opinions we utterly repudiate. What position
will we stand in with respect to our own colonies?—
(Hear, hear.) If we avow such a principle, in what re-
lation will we stand towards the Roman Catholics at
Malta and Gibraltar—(Hear, hear)—in the Canadas and
in the Mauritius I—(Hear, hear.) In many of the West
India Islands it would be impossible to act upon the
principle of disclaiming altogether such religious support.
How shall we stand with regard to the Roman Catholics
of Ireland ? Shall we repeal the Act which provides
the payment of Roman Catholic chaplains for prisons?
An Act was passed enabling grand juries to appoint
Roman Catholic chaplains to gaols—nay, making it
compulsory upon them to do so when a proper requisi-
tion was made. The grand jury was required to make
provision for the maintenance of those .haplains, and
to prevent the assignment of unequal salaries to
ministers of the different religious persuasions. Will
you repeal the Act for the maintenance of Roman
Catholic chaplains for workhouses? There again you
have imposed an absolute obligation to appoint Roman
Catholic chaplains. Will you take away from the
wretched pauper that religious consolation which lie
seeks in his last moments before he is ushered into the
presence of his Maker.—(Hear, hear.) That faith
against which you protest, and those doctrines which
are not your doctrines, you have yet given a Parlia-
mentary sanction to, by providing salaries for its teachers.
Can I then, after reviewing our own position, and that
of the colonies, and that of the Roman Catholics of Ire-
land, who have for the last fifty years received this Parlia-
mentary grant—can I now come to the conclusion that
we are prepared to discontinue that grant on the ground
of the violation of religious scruples ? Will the House
continue the present grant or repudiate it altogether?
I know only one other course, and that course we are
prepared to take.—(Loud cheers.) Prepared—yes, I
will say prepared—believing that it will be conducive to
the welfare of the Irish people, and that it will generate a
confiding spirit among them. If we are to take that
course, all will admit that it should be taken in a conci-
liatory spirit. If these institutions are to remain, we
should consider them with a view towards improving
their condition. By improvement I do not mean inter-
ference with the course of education pursued there, which
would be poisoning all the good that our liberality would
effect, but I mean treating them in a really generous
spirit, with the hope that such treatment will create a
corresponding spirit, and that we may reap the
fruits of it in the improved feeling and, condition
of the Roman Catholic clergy and laity. Having
determined to take that course, we ought to take it
effectually, and make a provision which will be really
sufficient to supply the wants of the Roman Catholic
Church, so that the ministers of that religion may be
well educated and well disciplined. To increase the
grant by an addition of 3,000/. or 4,0001., would be
worse than nothing..—(Hear, hear.) I exclude that en-
tirely from my consideration. I cannot think that the

amount of pecuniary assistance can be said to be of any
very great importance when the principle is admitted.
I will now, with the permission of the House, proceed
to state the nature of the proposal which I am now, on
the part of the Government, instructed to make.—
(Hear, hear.) I have already stated that, by the exist-
ing laws, the trustees of Maynooth are expressly em-
powered to purchase and acquire land. That power was
confirmed by the Act of George the Third. They were
nowhere allowed to hold real property beyond
1,0001. a year. That is the enactment, but effect
was never given to it, because the trustees
were not nominated, they were never able to hold land.
They could not hold land by any other tenure than by
the lives of the existing trustees, and that land could
not pass to their successors. In order to remedy that,
I propose in the Bill I will lay before the House to
incorporate the trustees, to make them a corporate lord-
ship, under the name of the Trustees of Maynooth Col-
lege, thus giving them a real power and an ability of
holding land to the amount of 3,0004; that is to say, if
the members of the Roman Catholic faith are desirous
to endow and make a provision for the endowment of
particular localities. I can conceive no objection to
such a voluntary contribution; and I therefore propose
to admit a body so incorporated to hold real property to
the extent of 3,000/. I will next address myself to the
position of the chief officers of Maynooth. I propose to
make a liberal provision—liberal as compared with the
present stipends of the president and professors. At
present the stipend held by the professors does not ex-
ceed 1221 a year. Instead of defining what shall be the
amount of stipend to such professors, to allocate to the
trustees of Maynooth certain sums, which shall be
placed at the discretion of the trustees, from which
such salaries shall be drawn 6.0001. or 7,0001.
a year ; the salaries for professors to vary
from 250/. to 3001. In order to increase the number of
professors it would be necessary to make an additional
provision. I propose, therefore, that a sum not exceed-
ing.
6,0001. a year should be given to the trustees, in
order to make a provision for the president, professors,
librarian, and principal officers of the College. I now
come to the provision to be made for students, but I
must first remind the House of the ccnstitution of the
College. The College is divided into two departments—
ore of these has three senior classes, which are called
divinity students, and from these selections are made
for the priesthood. In the subordinate departments of
the College there are four junior classes; in addition to
these classes there are twenty senior students, or Dun-
boyne students, so called because Lord Dunboyne left a
grant of 5001. a year expressly for that provision. I
have also stated that twenty senior students were selected
by the president, who were allowed to remain three
years after they have finished the collegiate course, in
the same way as bachelors are at our universities. There
are in all four hundred and thirty students in the
College divided into these three classes: the Dunboyne,
the senior, and junior classes. We propose to allot to
each of the Dunboyne students the sum of 401. per annum.
We propose to make, in the whole, a provision for 500
students-250 in the four junior classes, and 250 in the
three senior classes, these being divinity students. We
propose that, for the maintenance of each student, in
order to cover the expense of collegiate education, that
the sum of 28/. a year should be allowed to the trustees
--that is, 281. a year for each—and, in addition to that
sum, amounting to 14,5601., we propose for the two
hundred and fifty divinity students in the supe-
rior classes a separate allowance of 201. a year,
making a further sum of 5,000/. The effect of this ar-
rangement, when sanctioned by the House, will be a
very considerable increase. For president, professors,
and librarians, we propose a sum not exceeding 6,000/.
a year For the twenty Dunboyne students 40/. a year ;
making a total yearly provision of 26,316/. Observe
here we admit of an increase in the number of students
in the College from 440 to 500. We propose that
such addition to the building itself shall take pla !e as
will enable a decent apartment to be assigned to each
student ; and that the College shall be made in appear-
ance, and, in fact, worthy of such an institution.—
(Hear, hear, and cheers.) We further intend that a
decent provision shall be made for the president, and
that the repairs of the College shall be annually attended
to. For the better accommodation of the president
and the professors we design suitable apartments for
them. The whole grant, then, will be a sum not ex-
ceeding 30,000L—(Great cheering from the Opposition)
—to be made from the public funds. We do not pro-
pose that the provisions made for the five hun-
dred students should be divided among an increased
number. We wish their education to be a liberal
one, and that the reminiscences of Maynooth should not
be revolting.—(Hear, hear.) We increase the grant,
but we limit the number of students to 500. We pro-
pose, also, that the Board of Works shall undertake the
repairs of the College of May nooth, the amount of such
repairs and improvements to come before the House
in the shape of an annual vote, included in the yearly
estimates of the Board of Work With respect to the
visitorial powers—we do not propose that any greater
powers shall be conferred on the visitors than they at
present possess, but we propose that instead of a trien-
nial visitation it shall be an annual one, and that five
visitors shall be appointed instead of three, and that the
Lord-Lieutenant shall have power to direct a visitation
whenever he may think fit. her Majesty will appoint these
visitors in addition to the three Roman Catholic
visitors which at present exist. These visitors, as I have
already stated, will not be invested with greater powers,
but their visit must be a bond fide one : it will
have no reference to doctrine or discipline. We
will not spoil this act.—(Hear, hear.) This bu-
siness was ascertained by three visitors, and the
visitors were the Earl of Fingall, Dr. Crolly, and Dr.
Murray ; and I can assure the House that this mea-
sure has not been brought before it without a considera-
tion of the feelings of the Roman Catholic body, or
without consultation with those who may well be sup-
posed to be acquainted with the feelings of that body,
and I think I may say that those gentlemen are pre-
pared to recommend it to the members of the Roman
Catholic Church. I believe, Sir, that this measure is
conceived in the spirit in which it was first announced,
and that it will meet with the general consent of the
Roman Catholic hierarchy. I believe, Sir, that they
are prepared to receive it with a feeling of satisfaction,
and that they are grateful for it. That it will meet with
the approbation of the most influential and respectable
of that powerful body, and that it will be accepted as a
liberal and efficient remedy for the evils under which they
have suffered. I do not use this as an argument for
the adoption of this measure by the House, but I do be-
lieve that it is a strong inducement for the House to
take it into its most favourable consideration. I am not
insensible of the difficulty of the position under which
I and those who act with me labour, in proposing this
increased grant to Maynooth ; but still I conceive that
this grant is nothing more than a liberal construction of
the obligations into which this House and the country
have entered with the Roman Catholic body in Ireland ;
and this measure is nothing more or less than a legiti-
mate fruit of that obligation. Nor do I conceive that
any misconstruction can be put on this grant, otherwise
than to say that this is an act of greater liberality than
might have been expected. I do not propose that this
grant shall be one for giving a title to intermeddle with
the doctrines of the Church to which this grant is made.
I believe that such an attempt would be both ungra-
cious, unjust, and uncalled-for. We do not give any-
thing by this grant, which in ptinciple has not been
yielded by previous grants. I am of opinion that you
will be amply rewarded by the improved system of edu-
cation among the Roman Catholic ecclesiastics of Ire-
land. And in doing this. Sir, I do not believe that we
violate any one conscientious principle whatever—(Hear,
hear)—for I hold stedfast and unwavering every prin-
ciple of the Church to which I belong ; but at the
same time, I do believe that we violate none
of the obligations of honour and good faith
in promoting improvement in the character of those who
are entrusted with the education of those who are to be
spiritual guides and instructors of millions of our fellow-
countrymen.—(lmmense cheering from the Opposition
benches).
On the motion that the Bill be brought in,
Sir R. INGLIS said that he regretted, on many ac-
counts, that no other person stood in the precise position
which he occupied, and the more so, because it hap-
pened that on this occasion he was more than usually
unable to address the House ; but, however that might
be, he felt thankful that he was able to offer some oppo-
sition, however feeble, to the proposition from his Right
Hon. Friend at the head of the Government. At the
close of his speech, as at its commencement, his Right Hon.
Friend had stated that the proposition which he had
brought before the House was one which violated nei-
ther honour nor good faith. Now, in the consideration
of this question they must take it as regulated either by
law or custom, and he felt assured, however reluctantly
he might do it, that it was impossible to resist opposing
the proposition of his Right Hon. Friend, and he felt
that his Right Hon. Friend must have entertained con-
siderable doubt of his ultimate success, by a circum-
stance which could not have escaped his practised ear,
that all the cheers with which this proposition was re-
ceived came from the Opposition side of the House--
(Cheering from the Opposition side of the House)—but
he believed that his Right Hon. Friend would find that
the general feeling of the country was against any grant
such as he had made to the consideration of the Rouse.
His Right Hon. Friend had stated that this proposition
would not take the country by surprise, for that at the
close of last session he had intimated that he intended
to introduce some provision for academical education in
Ireland, but he (Sir R. Inglis) must state, that neither
i© his declaration of last session, nor in that remarkable
speech which ho had made five years ago when
not a Minister of the Crown, he had professed that he
was not prepared to vote for the discontinuance of the
grant to the College of Maynooth. His Right Hon,
Friend had stated that he bad three courses before lain;
—the discontinuance of the grant, its increase, or the
endowment of the College. At that time, after the
speech of the Hon. Member for Kent, his Right Hon.
Friend had refused to give his pledge for the discon-
tinuance of the grant. Had it been merely the con-
tinuance of the grant, he (Sir R. Inglis) would have said
little in opposition to the motion ; but he, end those who
acted with him, could look on it only as a grant of en-
dowment to the Catholic Church in Ireland, and entirely
uncalled for by any circumstances of the present
time. This had been in fact an annual grant,
and when reference was made to the prac-
tice of fifty years as sanctioning this grant,
and as authorising the present measure, he must assert,
in opposition to the position of his Hon. Friend, that it
was merely a provision from year to year, and such as
never precluded the reconsideration of the grant even
within the session in which it was made. Ner was it
expected by the Roman Catholic body, at the time that
it should be anything more. When as a matter of course
the Irish House of Commons had passed the grant for
the support of the College, in 1799, the House of Lords
virtually negatived it by a motion which was equivalent
to voting the consideration of any question for this time
six months, by voting its application at an impossible
date. And what was the impression entertained
of any right to support from Government when
the College of Maynooth was first established ?

It N%as perfectly understood that the College was to be
e tablished and supported by the voluntary contribu•
tions of the Roman Catholic body, and on the present
3d of April there was no compact, statute or implied, or
existing even in feeling, that support should be de-
rived from Government. On the 29th April, 1808,
statement had been made by Sir Arthur Wellesley, at
that time Secretary of the Irish Government, that the
College of Maynooth was not to be supported from the
public purse. Now, if a plea were to be made that this
grant was necessary, in order that the peace of society
might be better secured, he (Sir R. Inglis) would ask,
what was the state of society in 1794 and 1795, and the
state of the Church of Rome, as compared with the pre-
sent time ? The experience of any man acquainted
with public affairs would reply to the ques-
tion, that it was expected that the Roman
Catholic Church was to be supported at its own expense.
Tbis was evident from the memorial of the Roman

Catholic Archbishop, presented to Parliament on the
4th of April, 1794, in which he had expressly declared
that if permission was granted to erect the College of
Maynooth, the members of the Roman Catholic Church
were prepared to support it from their own funds. Ble
Right Hon. Friend at the head of the Government had
referred to the opinion expressed by an illustrious states-
man in the course of his speech, to whom he could
never refer without bearing his (Sir Robert
Inglis's) testimony, and who had exhibited a consis-
tency of conduct and principle well worthy of the great
interests he was called upon to direct, but it should be
recollected that that great statesman had not originated
this grant, for it remained during his time just as it had
been previously conferred. It mattered not whether 10
was 8,000/, or any other sum ; he could say for himself,
and he believed he might assert for those friends who
acted with him, that it was perfectly immaterial whether
the sum voted was 8,000/., or double that amount, or ball
that amount; what they objected to was, any endowment
at all for the Church of Rome. He believed that they
would, none of them, be accused of want of toleration for
refusing to be parties to this grant, and he did not despair
in the hope that there would be found a majority 111
that House who would represent the majority of the
people of England—(Hear)—and if his Riglit
Hon. Friend was disposed to neglect the opinion of that
majority, he would beg to remind him, from the 111-
tluence of public opinion on the education clause which
her Majesty's Government had propounded some four
or fire years ago, on the discussion of that measure,
and to beg them to calculate what would be the effect
of the expression of that same public opinion on the
present measure, for he had sufficient confidence in his
countrymen to believe, that if even a majority of this
House were to confirm the grant which had been pry'
posed by his Right Hon. Friend, that it would be vir-
tually nullified by the opposition which it would en'
counter in the feelings and convictions of the country:.
If the opinion of Mr. Grattan were to be referred to, it
was plain that that opinion was in opposition to the
principles of this grant to Maynooth, for he believed
that it would promote anything but order and peace. lii
the discussion five years ago the Hon. Member for Dun:
garvon (Mr. Sheil), in speaking ;on this question, hs°,
expressed his opinion as being hostile to this grant; and
Lord Morpeth, then Secretary for Ireland, who on that
occasion came down to the House with the Irish sta-
tutes in his hand, had created a sensation from which 40
House did not recover so soon as he thought it ought
to have done; but he was surprised that ,the intly
mations of that Noble Lord had not been acted upon.
What was the language of the Act to which the Hoe.
and Learned Member had made reference ? He (Sir Rv
Inglis) believed that it would not bear the construction
put upon it by the Hon. and Learned Member. It wfki
the foundation on which his Right Hon. Friend had en-
deavoured to build the argument he had advanced that
evening. How r .1n the Act of the 35th George 111. ? It
ran thus :—" Whereas by law, as now enforced, it /5
not lawful to endow any college or seminary for the eda-
cution of Roman Catholic persons, be it therefore
enacted," and so forth. Then it went on—" The trustees
named in the Act and their successors will have power
and authority"—Did the House think it was to demand
an annual grant from a Protestant country ?-44 to re'
ceive subscriptions and donations, to enable them to
establish and endow an academy." Did this em'
power them to ask support for their College
at the expense of the nation ?—(Hear.) When
the Roman Catholics of Ireland asked in the year 1794
or 1795 for only one seminary to educate their pr:esfr
hood, they asked as much as the Parliament of that yesr
would grant, and more than the Irish Parliament of
few years before would have even entertained. So far
were the Roman Catholics of that day from maintaining
that they were entitled to support from Governments
that they were even contented with the permission t 0
apply subscriptions and donations to the purposes
.0f
education. In the construction of an Act of Parlor
ment the intentions of the parties making it should be
considered, and he was sure that the promoters of that
Act never intended to lay down the principle
that the support of the Roman Catholic priest'
hood should be binding on the country.—(Hear.)
He contended that the pledge given at the Act of Union
that 8,0001. should be given to this College for twenty
years had been fully redeemed. He was opposed t°
further concessions on this subject, for the experience of
the last twenty years proved that when concessions were
made by Parliament its power was just so much
weakened.—(Hear, hear.) In the same degree that they
endowed the Roman Catholics they withdrew their
support from the Protestant institutions of the country.
It was alleged that the proposition of the Government
would have the effect of conciliating Mr. O'Connell and
his party. But how could that be ? In 1831 Mr. O'Con-
nell said that the grant ought to be 70,0001., but that be
did not care whether it was abandoned altogether, as the
Catholic clergy would still be educated without Govern"
ment aid.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped that he had not
failed altogether in proving that the proposed measure,
if it could be defended at all, was not to be defended on
the ground of any compact, either by Act of
Parliament or by unbroken usage. If it could
be defended at all, it was only on the ground of expech-
ency—a word for which he had no particular favour'
and which was justified only when considered with *
view to correct principle.—(Hear, hear.) But he thought
that, even on the ground of expediency, the Ministers
would signally fail. He thought that the Catholics
were as well able to maintain the education of their
priests as the Dissenters of this country ; and he could
not recognise any claim of theirs to pre-eminence in this
matter. Surely the education by the State of a body Of
men whose conscientious desire it must be to root out
the Protestant, or State Church (as he would call it), lie
a nuisance in the sight of men, and a serious evil in the
sight of God, a as as great folly on the part of the State
as that of the Dutch who sold gunpowder to their own
besiegers. He did not suppose that the Ministers were
actuated in bringing forward this measure by any other,
motive than a wish to do what was right between ah
parties.—(Hear, hear.) But he hoped his Right Hon.
Friend at the head of the Government would believe
that he spoke in the most inoffensive spirit
when he said that it was to be regretted
that theeßight Hon. Baronet had not earlier made know*
to the House and the country what his views were upon
this question.—(Hear, hear.) He regretted that the
Right Hon. Baronet did not state those views in 1840.--
(Cheers.) For his own part, he (Sir R. Inglis) was not
ashamed to say that he took his stand on Protestant
Christianitv—(Hear, hear)—that had been the Consti-
tution of tliis country for three hundred years—and,
although the vessel had, of late, been much tossed and
shattered, yet there was still a Protestant feeling at the
mast head, and as long as one plank remained, he, for
one, would nail to the mast that flag of Protestant Chris-
tianity which, in better times, had waved over the whole
empire.—(Cheers.) He thanked the House for the
patience with which he had been heard, and concluded
by moving a negative on the question, in the terms of
the notice which he had placed in the hands of the
Chairman.—(The Right Hon. Baronet was inuo,
,t`
cheered at the conclusion of his speech, and immetu"
ately after his resuming his seat, Members in great
numbers left the House.)
Capt B. OSBORNE, who was for some minutes in-
audible from the noise of Members leaving the House!,
said, that for three hundred years the Government
this country had been endeavouring to root out the
Catholic religion from Ireland, but without success.
That religion had survived and flourished when ever)"
thing around it had been destroyed. He thought the
present Government was right in changing the policy ;
and as they could not make seven millions of people
Protestants, they should try to make them good Cr
tholics.—(Hear.) There was one fact which was get
sufficiently known in this country—that every pulpit at
Maynooth was required to be provided with a Bible
and, from the paltry allowance, the College had given
away last year 300 Bibles.—(Hear, hear.) The bishops
had also expunged, from the notes to the Catholic vere
sion, every passage which was considered offensive to
their Protestant fellow. countrymen.—(Hear, hear.) Ile
was not at all surprised that the opposition to this ;nor
suns arose from those who were the most ready to red
at the Roman Catholic priesthood for their want of eclue"
cation.—(Hear, hear.) A short time ago an Irish Lord.•
a Peer of Parliament, published a letter in the Evening
Mali relating to the controversy which be haft
respecting the shutting up of a path to a chapel.
In that letter the Noble Lord, the Marquis of West'
meath, was witty upon the bad spelling of the parish
priest, and designated the Roman Catholic priesthoosl,
as " emasculated vermin " and " amphibious creature,
who put their " unwashed feet upon the necks of the,
poor, unhappy, and much to be commiserated people.
He was surprised he had heard nothing of the lore
origin of these priests, but he could tell the House that
Roman Catholics prided themselves upon raising their
clergy from the lowest classes. In the middle ages the
higher classes monopolised all the higher stations and
offices of state, and it was through the instrumentality °I
the Romish Church alone that democratic principles
could find any outlet, and had it not been for this
system Luther himself would have remained a farmer'
peasant. He hoped, therefore, he should hear n°
more of the low origin of the priesthood.
Prussia boasted of a Protestant population, and the
King himself was .a Protestant. In 1815 the Rhenish
States, whose inhabitants were Roman Catholics, were
pitted to Prussia ; and what was the first step Prussia
took after this union ? Why, to found a Roman ca.'
thelic College, and to place themselves in communication
with the Pope ? In 1821 the Pope issued his bull, b
which he empowered the Prussian Crown to confer wits
the clergy in the election of Roman Catholic bishops ;
and now a correspondence between the clergy
and the Pope annually took place, under the
superintendence of the Crown. And, if this system
answered in Prussia, why, he would ask, should it not
succeed here? It appeared to him that there were two
classes of opponents to this measure. Some non'
Members objected to making any provision whatever,
while others, like the Right Hon. Baronet the Member
fur Oxford, who thought they had an exclusive monopoly
of the truth, and therefore they objected to what they
called the endowment of error. With reference to the
first class, he differed with them; but he had some diffi-
culty in meeting the objection of the Right Hon. Baronet
the Member for Oxford, The Right lien. Baronet objected

to the endowment of what he called religious error ; hut
he wool I ask the Right lion. Baronet who was to he the
judge of what was religious truth? Was that House to
go into Committee, to discover what was and what was
not religious truth ?—(Laughter.) But the Treasury
had no religious persuasion at all, and the question,
after all, was not whethsr there should be a Roman
Catholic priesthood in Ireland, but whether they should
be bad or gosd—literate or illiterate—clergymen or de-
72mgogin s. But where was the sum to support these
Clergymen to come from ? lie could not conceal from
hitu,slf that the resolution of the Right Hon. Baronet op-
posite would ultimately lead to the endowment of the
Roman Catholic Church ; and he was not prepared to
take so large a sum from taxes, which were principally
upon the English people. But were there no other funds
from which the money could be taken? He would put
it to the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Ec-
elt-siastir al Commissicaers, why were acting under the
Church Temporalities Act, had not had a great deal more
money in their hand than they well knew what to
do with ? He very much regretted the Hon. Member for
Sheffield had not, on that occasion, brought forward his
motion for abolishing the Established Church in Ire-
land, because he was convinced, until they put an end to
that Establishment, the question relating to Irish griev-
ances would not be set at rest. When he first entered
the present Parliament, he heard the Hon. Member for
East Kent express his delight at the Right Hon. Baronet
taking office, because the Right Hon. Baronet was op-
posed to the maintenance of Homanism in Ireland. The
Hon. Gentleman's opinion must be somewhat altered
now. He was afraid they would have to call in some of
the Custom-house authorities, to discriminate between
the views of the Right Hon. Baronet, and those of the
Noble Lord who sat on the Opposition side of the House.
He fully sympathised with the Right Hon. Baronet, and
hoped he would not be deterred from his present princi-
ples by a" No Popery" cry. The time was gone by, when
the House was to be deterred from doing its duty by a
bigoted agitation.—(Cheers.)
Mr. GREGORY confessed that he had heard some
singular arguments in favour of this measure. In the
first place the Right Hon. Gentleman who brought it
forward had told them that it would tend to encourage
Protestantism in Ireland. Why, if this were so, they
had only to make an additional grant to the Pro-
testant Church in Ireland to encourage Remanisna.
While the Right Hon. Gentleman was speaking, he
stated that it was in accordance with the wishes of the
Roman Catholic prelates that he introduced this mea-
sure. He (Mr. Gregory) however heard it perpetually
stated that this measure was decidedly against the
wishes of the Roman Catholic clergy, but that they were
forced to it by the laity. He was not of opiruan that the
clergy had lost their influence su far over the laity. For
a long time he could not understand how this measure
was to be brought forward. When the subject was on a
former occasion introduced by his Friend the Noble
Member fur North Lancashire, it was objected to his
measure by the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) that
he was unwilling to adopt any course that would connect
the State with any Dissenting Establishment. It was
said that this was a question whether the Roman Catho•
lie clergy should be educated or not. He never would
be an advocate for ignorance, but he would object to the
course of education pursued at the College of Maynooth.
He would ask, had there emanated from that institution
within the last twenty years one single constellation in
the literary world? He would contend against the
course of education proceed, d with there, and also
would vote against the grant. Had the Right Hon.
Baronet come to the House and said, Do away with
the College of Maynooth, and institute colleges through-
out Irelar7d, and let there be no exclusive religious edu-
cation, then he (Mr. Gregory) would support those
colleges. Maynooth had brought up the priest-
hood' in a manner that had rendered them
a repulsive body. It did not raise them to a
position that would do justice to their ardour and
zeel. It made them unwilling to enter into society. He
hoped he had not said anything that was in any way
calculated to offend the feelings of those who were op-
posed in religious opinion to himself, if he had, he hoped
that they would not attribute it to intention on his part. If
an exclusive religious education was adopted, and if this
establishment was disconnected with the State, they
would find they Roman Catholic priests loyal and or-
derly, not the leaders in agitation, but exercising that
influence, which should be used not to sever, but to rivet
those chains with which nature had bound down their
consciences.
Lord F. EGERTON said that he was deeply sensible
of the fact, that his vote this night would be at variance
with the views and opinions of those who supported him
—of those, the representing of whom he always
considered the greatest honour he could obtain.
It was, therefore, with regret that he could, with
reference to any subject, express a difference of
opinion from his supporters. He on that account felt
it incumbent upon him not to keep silent altogether,
though he was not anxious to interfere with the House
on a subject that was nearly exhausted. He would not
enter into the state of the establishment of Maynooth,
but it was clear, that whatever contracts were made
consequent on the arrangements of 1795, it was evident,
he would say, that no such contracts would bind them
at the present day. He was of opinion, that the other
course which was suggested by his Right Hon. Friend
who had just sat down—that of abolishing the grant
altogether—would be, under the circumstances, an un-
reasonable one ; he thought that such a measure would
be dangerous to the State ; it would be considered as
an insult and an injury—it would be perilous to the
Established Church, and an obstacle and a bar to any
increase of Protestantism in Ireland. It had been ex-
plained, that the expense at the College of Maynooth
was given per head, and it appeared to be three
Pori
less than was allowed to a private soldier.—
‘11,11,a, hear.) A private soldier got from the State 251.
21) 4 student at Maynooth was allowed 23/., which was
ess. He would take the occasion to say, and he was
sure that the House would agree with him in stating that
.the lion. Member who had just sat down had not used
"my language which could be hurtful to anybody, and
that what he had said reflected great credit on him. He
(Lord F. Egerton) had, on a former occasion, which
was referred to by his Hon. Friend, the honour of
moving for a larger grant to Maynooth, and he wished
to say that, with referenee to his constituents, he had
nothing te reproach himself with, as regarded consis-
tency. He would also say that, with reference to his
religious feeling, which could hinder him from sup-
porting the course now suggested, he did not
think that discussions on religious faith were
fit for the atmosphere of that House. He
hoped, however, that his religion would be only known
by his practices. From what knowledge he had of Ire-
land, and the views which he entertained towards that
country, he did not see anything that could deter him
from exercising that liberality which was to-night pro-
Pesed. He should have some difficulty in coming to the
conclusion of granting 30,000/. to the Maynooth College,
if his religious feelings were to be alone considered, but
he did not see how they could interfere. He recollected
that on his introduction of a measure of a like nature
some time ago, it was received with great consideration
by the House, and was not met by any uncontrollable
principles; even in the state of opinion in that day it
was not considered an inexpedient measure. He con-
fessed that he thought the measure a reasonable one,
and it would not be met by any objection from him. Ho
could not alter his opinion as to the expediency of the
measure which he on a former occasion proposed.
Mr. WARD said that he merely rose to state, in as
few words as possible, the rea-ons why he should press
the vote which he should make to-night. He should, also, express the heartfelt gratification with which he
ha'l heard the principles laid down by the Hon. Baronet
at the head of the Government. It should be pleasing
to any man to see those principles stated to the House in
such an irresistible manner. Whatever the Hon. Member
for Oxford might say, though he stood there as the repre-
sentative of a Protestant constituency, he could not believe
it could be the real and unaffected feeling of this country,
when the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet came to be
for ad deliberately discussed. The Noble Memb
eer
Dublin, considering the party which he re resent d
made a speech which did credit to his taste, but he said
he felt deep disappointment at the result of the experi-
ment tried in 1795. What better ground could he seek
for that disappointment than the fact that he had
arefused to educate the Roman Catholic clergy in
proper manner ? He assigned salaries to the students
of the College of Maynooth, which he would not
assign to his butler or his cook. When such was the
state of things, what else could result than disappoint-
ment? If they treated them as good subjects, and as
fellow Christians, they would find different results. The
Hon. Gentleman asked also why they should make a
grant to the Catholic clergy, when they did nos
allow such a thing to any other dissenting sect.
Why should they not give it to them when they conise
sated their property for their own purposes ?—(Hear.)
1:11e Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Ward) tn proceeded to
Observe that he never saw a nobler determination than
that which was displayed by the Right Hon. Baronet at
t:lrneenhdes for ad _ of- her Majesty's Government, to make
his former conduct in refusing to
increase the grant to that institution—(Hear, hear)--
and he could not see what inconsistency there was in
it.
th 'fh© principles laid down for the government of
the who made this grant at the time of the union were
iam as they were now; and when Mr. Pitt and Lord
on_ wick, andu many other Hon. Members, had agreed at ;
t4etfi a upon this subject, they were overruled by the
Power smallwhich but compact party in their thirst for that
was the principal element by which they
Were banded tom in that HOUse.—(Hear, hear.) The
Right Hon
bas
proposed increase
has made a liberal proposition in
increase of this grant, and he (Mr. Ward)
to followoppose it; but it would be his duty, in order
a consistent course, to contend that this sum
should
eountry. not
lelee paid out of the general taxation of the
that this—m(e ear, hear.) Therefore he could not say
it s a sasure had his cordial support, for he thought
mistake to supply the grant from the fund from
Ghtt IQ It leas proposed to take it. He did think that the
evernment ought
upon the to pause before they imposed a tax
the
support Dissenters of this country or of Scotland for
which they did
a faith to which they did not belong, and
e ey did not believe in ; and this part of the sub-
Ili' would take care to introduce to the notice of the
House again
i,tredpri uecd. at t h
e proper time when the Bill should be
But is the mean time he would give the
lUrheple
and believed it would have the effect of creating much
Llaamongst the Catholics of Ireland.
that it was hi said he would have no hesitation in stating
e would likestantention.to oppose this proposition ; but
the eatne tim reamne for doing so. And at
b) such e that he did express his objection
.ac_n e neasure, he should also express the obli-
-7.o:eut
fbor feltth under to the Right Honourable Ba-
pursued in e. extreme candour of the course he had
intention togiving a full and timely announcement of his
1"0 he (Mrprtlliose this measure ; and whatever objec-
41easure, awh
might have to the principle of the
nleasure neither e nor any one else opposed to the
Therecouldalsoas say they had been taken by surprise.
the last n another Act of the Government, between
.the present session, which afforded a clear

indication of the h t intion of the Government not only in
respt et to this, but to other measures of a like nature,
but of more extended and of greater importance. He
alluded to the Commission in reference to the Roman
Catholic Bequest Bill, in which he found the names of
the Roman Catholic prelates, not only placed iii juxta-
position with eminent divines of the Protestant Church,
but a precedence allowed to the former over
the latter, which gave to them, as it were,
by anticipation, a position superier in rank and degree
to Peers of the realm.—(Hear, hear.) But he did not
complain of this ; on the contrary, he did think that the
Right Ht n Baronet was entitled to claim cred,t for the
candour and honesty of the course he had stated his
intention to pursue in reference to the Roman Catholic
Church. end by w hich a certain amount of derogation
to the Estab4shed Church was certain to follow.—
(Hear, hear.) He felt it would be out of place for him
to quarrel with any increased grant proposed to he given
for the education of Roman Catholic priests in future ;
but he could not but regard this proposition, whatever the
intentions of the Government might be, as a precursor
of other measures for the ultimate endowment of
the Roman Catholic Church, and to place it in
a co ordinate position with the Established Church
in Ireland —(lfear, hear.) It was be cause he
could discover no resting-place for this proposed exten-
sion and liberality between a mere act of that nature, and
such a result as he had stated be feared would follow,
that he End, after much anxiety, been compelled, with
great regret, to state he had come to the determination,
as a part of his bounden duty, not only to the Established
Church, but to the sincerity and consistency of his own
opinions, to offer his decided opposition to this proposed
grant.—(Hear) For a considerable time his judgment
was in the balance, while he saw that the Right Hon.
Baronet's proposed liberality to Maynooth was mixed up
with a large scheme for a comprehensive system of aca-
demical education in Ireland ; but all doubt
and uncertainty was removed from his mind
when he heard the announcement that the
increased grant to Maynooth was to be a separate and
distinct proposition. He (Mr. Law) hoped it would not
be supposed that he meant to impute any but the purest
and most exalted motives to the Government in adopting
this course ; neither did he feel that, though he differed
from the Government upon this question, he should feel
called upon to withdraw his general confidence from that
Government which, for the last ten years, he had reposed
in them—(Hear, hoar)—and, in return, he claimed only
the same charitable construction for his motives that lie
conceded to others ; and that, therefore, the sincerity of
his views ought not to be questioned when he said he felt
confidence in this, the best Government that this
country ever possessed since the passing of the Reform
Act.—(Ministerial cheers.) He did very much regret
that the Right Honourable Baronet had not deemed
it expedient to develop his scheme fur academical edu-
cation in Ireland. If he had done so, and made it a
universal increase of general education for all creeds
and classes of the community, instead of making May-
nooth College an exclusive seminary for the education
of Roman Catholic priests, he would have deprived this
measure of much of the mischief which he (Mr. Law)
believed would attend it in its present shape. With re-
gard to the question of academical education, he begged
of the Right Hon. Baronet, and the House, to recollect
that there was at present Trinity College, at Dublin, in
which Roman Catholics were freely admitted, and had
open to them, if they chose to take advantage of it,
all the honours of that University. But in the
College of Maynooth there was now presented one of
the grossest anomalies ever exhibi•ed in any establish-
ment instituted fel- such purposes. It was true that
this was a boon which had been granted by the Govern-
ment of this country for the institution of Maynooth
College, and it was established for the purpose of afford-
ing education to Roman Catholic priests, and thereby
prevent them from resorting to foreign countries for
such, and imbibing with it revolutionary principles, or
sentiments inimical to the Government of their own
country.-- (Cries of ‘. Hear, hear," from the Mi-
nisterial benches.) He would not attempt to follow the
arguments of the Hon. and Learned Member for Oxford,
but he was willing to admit the truth of the assertion,
that in the year 1795, and at different periods since then,
several Acts were passed for the endowment and main-
tenance of this establishment, but he begged to remind
the House that these Acts invariably limited the period
over which this grant was to extend to twenty years,
which had long since expired, though of course subse-
quent enactments had amplified the time. However, if
he could persuade himself that this was an honourable
engagement which the Government ought to feel bound
to fulfil, he would be the last to oppose it, but he did not
feel that the Government were at all called upon either
to extend the grant to Maynooth or to continue it. But
there was a great difference between extending their
grant and continuing it at a fixed sum. This, he was
aware, would be met by the assertion that the fixed sum
was not sufficient. He could not deny the fair spirit in
which this proposition had been made; and he could
not doubt the purity of the intention of those who had
proposed it. If it was the determination of the House
that the grant to Maynooth should continue, then he
thought it was desirable that the annual discussion on
this question should be discontinued. Feeling satisfied,
however, that this permanent grant would involve the
destruction of the fundamental article of the Union, and
at no distant period that it would destroy that portion
of the united Irish and English Church in Ireland, he
should feel it his duty, as they were not to be permitted
to make the annual grunt without being told that they
conceded the principle of a permanent obligation,
he for one should oppose the measure, the effect of
which was—first to increase the grant, to render it per-
petual and national by Act of Parliament-, and through
that grant and through that admission of principle, ulti-
mately to destroy the united English and Irish
Church.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BELLEW thought that the majority of the ob-
servations of the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down
were quite irrelevant to the subject under discussion.
They had heard from the Hon. Member for Oxford, who
might be considered the Coryphseus of the party most
opposed to this grant, and from the Hon. Member for
lent, much about contributing to a system
oe
f idolatry by giving the grant to Maynooth.
He did not think that wary would be found to carry out
tt
ho
etheir s
of
nu
11
measure,
xe taes no tr the d
neither principles
the of f
ft
oh
roosee
ov cflitohooi
r rogs ppd
nor the charity of their sentiments
made up for
their numbers. What did he see lately in a Dublin
paper ? He would read an extract to the House—" The
policy of Sir Robert Peel is to declare war against Jesus
Christ. That the devil entered into his policy was as
manifest as if the inspired historians recorded the fact."
—(Laughter.) There was a petition presented that night
from Trinity College, which he thought might be better
employed. After stating in that petition that they heard
with regret of the measures about to be adopted by the
Government, they said that it was unwise to endow the
Catholic religion, which was opposed to revealed truth.
Let them act on that principle, and persecution would
be the result.—(Hear, hear.) Toleration would be but
a matter of degree. The Inquisition, the Dragonades of
Louis XIV., and the pena I statutes of William and
Anne would be justified.—(Hear, hear.) Why, lately,
when the Dissenters' Chapel Bill was before Parliament,
a prelate of the Protestant Church opposed it, because
Unitarianism was opposed to the land. And was there
so much uniformity in that House to justify any of them
in saying what was and what was rot right in religious
matters ? There were members of the Established
Church who were divided between Calvinism and Catho-
licity. There were members of the Calvinistic Church,
who were divided between Calvinism and Armenianism.
There was the Church of Scotland, divided not only in
discipline but in doctrine, he believed. And why should
it not be so? It was the great boast of the Protestant
churches that the Bible, and the Bible alone, was their reli•
gion. But it was hard that the gentlemen who opposed this
measure, who claimed the principle of a free interpreta-
tion, should also claim the advantage of authority by
establishing what was right and wrung, and what doc-
trines were alone worthy of consideration of the State.
The time had gone by when such a principle could be
acted upon. They got Canada in 1774, and there the
Catholic religion was endowed. When by their arms
they had extended their colonies, Spanish Trinidad and
Dutch Demerara were equally welcome, and the mainte-
nance of the Catholic religion was extended to the colo-
nies. There was not one among the forty-one colonies
which they possessed, in which the Catholic religion
was not supported by this country. In Newfoundland
the Catholics shared in the endowment of the State, in
a very small and inadequate degree, indeed, but still it
was endowed. Then, at home, they supported the
chaplain of the Irish military regiments, the chaplains
of the gaols were supported and those who officiated in
workhouses, and that was a stronger case, because the
payment was in proportion to the work done, and the
Catholic chaplains having, of course, more to do, were
paid more than the Protestant chaplains. If those
things were done when bigotry was strong and robust,
how absurd to object to it at the present time. They had
about 200 or 300 clergi men connected with their mili-
tary regiments in Ireland, and in their colonies, and in
their workhouses, who had received money for the dis-
charge of their duties. Why, then, should they object to
the payment of 30,0001. for their education in Maynooth?
The original endowment of that College was the re-
sult of a cold policy. At the time the College was
endowed there was a great dread of what were
called French principles, and being afraid that if those
who were intended for the Roman Catholic Church
would be inoculated with those principles if they were
educated abroad, the College of Maynooth was en-
dowed, but in the most miserable spirit, as the wretched
grant which was given proved.—(Hear, hear.) The
number of persons at present maintained at May-
nooth was 250, and there were about 200 educated else-
where in Ireland and abroad. Now, it was clear that

in a question like the present the State should be every-
thing or nothing. There must be a great national ob-
ject in view, or this subject would not be considered at
all. He would not enter into theological details, because
he considered that House was a most improper place to
enter into a discussion of theology; but he would refer
the Right Hon. Gentleman who spoke last, and the Hon.
Member for the University of Oxford, and all
others who thought that something exceedingly bad was
taught at Maynooth, to the evidence given before the
Commission of 1825 by the Professor of Moral and Dog-
matic Theology. If those Hon. Gentlemen read his
evidence, they would find that there was nothing taught
at Maynooth which was not taught throughout the
whole Catholic world ; that the dogmas of Maynooth
were the dogmas of the Sorbonne, and were the same
which were taught to the 120,000,000 of human beings
who composed the Catholic world. There seemed to be
a very erroneous impression also in favour of the Catho-
lic priests of Ireland in a time gone by. He would read
to the House the opinion of that sagacious man,
Edmund Burke, upon that point. That great man
said that those persons who were intended for the Roman
Catholic priesthood, after scraping up such scanty
education in Ireland as the penal •laws permitted them
to obtain, they went to the continent, and, after acquiring
a little theology, they came back, without any solid
knowledge, and ill-disposed towards this country. The
same eminent person, in reference to an exclusive

establishment for the clergy, to which objections had I
been urged that night, said that, in providing education
for any body of men, they ought seriously to consider
the particular functions they were intended to discharge;
that the authorities of the Roman Catholic religion, and
the celibacy required of its priesthood, rendered it
undesirable that they should be educated in common
with others intended for worldly occupations.
He (Mr. Bellew) did not think it would be right of him
to sit down without expressing his gratitude to the Right
Fee. Baronet for the manner in which he had brought it
forward, and next to the measure itself, for the language
he used.—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman
brought it forward in a liberal and confiding spirit, and
he believed and trusted it would be received in Ireland
in :e similar spirit. The Right Honourable Baronet
had i:not used a single expression to detract
from the grace and favour of the measure.
He hoped that as the Right Hon. Barcnet had been the
means of carrying Catholic Emancipation, it was yet re-
served for him to link together the two countries in the
bond of mutual friendship. Ile saw many occurrences
taking place which led him to hope that though unfortu-
nately there, was at present in Ireland considerable agi-
tation, still there was every day a better feeling spring-
ing up there by which the education board, the pro-
mised measure of academical education, and this Bill
showed the Right Hon. Baronet was determined to con-
ciliate the Irish Catholics, and no party feelings would
prevert him from expressing his gratitude to the Right
Hon. Gentleman, and he would further say, and he
wished he only leave utterance to the feelings of the
Roman Catholic people of Ireland, when he said that
such measures had their right good wisher.—(Cheers.)
Lord SANDON hoped the House would excuse him
for saying a few words in consequence of the position he
was placed in. He looked at this question as one of
compact, and, as he had already stated, it should have
his hearty support.—(Hear, hear.) That compact should
be carried out in that large and liberal sense by which
intercourse between the two countries should be guided.
He agreed with his Right Hon. Friend (Sir R. Inglis) that
there was nothing in the Act of Union which affected this
grant one way or the other, but in the discussions which
took place on the question in 1808, shortly after the
union, in which the men who carrted the union were en-
gaged, the propriety of this grant was distinctly recog-
nised. Then there was the lapse of time, fifty years of
unbroken continuance of this grant. If they had en-
dowed a college in Canada fifty years ago, would they
withdraw that allowance now? They would not. Then
why treat Ireland differently ? Next they should re-
member the circumstances under which the grant was
made. England was then involved in a continental war,
and nearly all the nations of Europe were leagued against
her ; and in order to obtain the hearty co-operation of
the Irish people, they promised to endow Maynooth.—
(Hear, hear.) Ought they now, after fifty years, to
violate that engagement. Succeeding Governments and
Parliaments—Whig and Tory—had all agreed to this
allowance, and why should a less liberal feeling now
prevail ?—(Hear, hear.) With respect to his own feel-
ings, he owned he was influenced by other motives than
those of a compact. He had always voted in favour of
the claims of the Catholics—he had no conscientious
scruples. They should not treat Ireland on different
principles from the colonies. They passed Acts of Par-
liarnent making provision for Roman Catholic ministers
in the colonies, and for chaplains of gaols and workhouses
at home, and if they were now to act otherwise, they
must pull to pieces the whole machinery of society.
There were nearly 7,000,000 of Catholics in Ireland, and
it was we who put them into the condition of suppliants.
—(Hear, hear.) We seized upon the Church property
in Ireland. and gave the people of that country no equi-
valent.—(Hear, hear.) Without any change in their
religion, we took their property from them.—(Hear,
hear.) These facts could not be overlooked. This
was not a simple question of endowment ; it was
one of retribution.—(Renewed cries of " Hear, hear.")
Ile repeated, the property of the Roman Catholics in
Ireland was extorted from them, and as England had
made compensation to other countries, why not compen-
sate the Irish people? He admitted the claims of our
Roman Catholic fellow-subjects to civil privileges, and
we should endow them with the means of educating their
clergy. Taking all these things into consideration he
thought that any opposition to this measure would be
worse than useless. Unless the House were prepared to
go back through the whole course of fifty years, they
must assent to the grant which the Right Honourable
Baronet had proposed. If they would but look at
the picture drawn by the Right Honourable Baronet
they could not but assent, in his opinion, to the propo-
sition which had been laid before them. The main con-
sideration was, whether there should be a removal of the
restrictions on the education of those who were to be
the spiritual instructors of the members of the Roman
Catholic church, and whether they should remain in a
comparative want of the necessary elements of their
utility, or whether they should be instructed in all the
elements of general literature. He, for his part, did not
think that there was any alternative between an entire
disruption of the principles on which the Government
of the country had been conducted and the acceding to
the grant which the Right Hon. Baronet had proposed. .
It affected no principle whether the grant proposed was
9,0001. or 20,0001., for the principle was the same, and
his Right Hon. Friend was equally justified in proposing :
the grant, which had for a series of years been made be-
fore he came into office, or a larger grant for the more
perfect education of the Irish ecclesiastical members of
the Church of Rome. This grant was simply an en-
largement of the usual grant, and it was no affection of
the principle that the giant was enlarged, and in the
present circumstances he saw no alternative between
going back and acceding to the proposition which had
been laid before the House. To go back was evidently
impossible ; and, therefore, there was no other alterna-
tive than to accede to the proposition of his Right Hon.
Friend. If they would refer to the case of Canada, it
was evident that they must either withdraw from the
population of that colony the means which they had
granted for the religious education of the people, or
carry out the same principle with regard to Ireland ;
and he thought that the mere mention of that instance
ought to be a sufficient warning to those who opposed
this grant. And deeply as he regretted refusing to act
with those who had been his coadjutors for many years,
yet he could not, in the present case, hesitate to support
the motion of his Right Hon. Friend.
Mr. PLUMPTRE said that he had been lately deeply
engaged in an anxious investigation of this subject, and
ho was now fully convinced that the opinion which he
had expressed on the first day of the session, that the
announcement the Right Hon. Baronet had made at
the end of the session would excite no ordinary sensa-
tion, and he now believed that that sensation would be
increased both in extent and intensity, when the inten-
tions of the Right Hon. Baronet were made known
throughout the country. He believed that he should re-
ceive ample credit for the assertion that any opposition
to her Majesty's present Government was to him ex-
ceedingly painful, but of the measure which had been in-
troduced on this occasion he must express his most decided
disapproval, for he must confess that it exceeded his
most enlarged expectations—(Laughter)—and to which
the objections of his Hon. Friend (Sir. R. Inglis) were,
he thought, unanswerable ; but there were other consi-
derations which ought to be taken into account. He
had, the other night, presented a petition from the
Archdeacon of Buckingham and eighty clergy.—
(Laughter.) Was this a class whose opinions and feel-
ings were unworthy of consideration ?—(Hear, hear.)
They had objected most strenuously to this measure.—
(Laughter.) He (Mr. Plumptre) did not think the t this
was a class of individuals to be neglected; and he would
ask her Majesty's Government whether the rejection of
their claim to consideration would put the Govern-
ment, with respect to the country, into any
better position than that in which they now stood?
What was the language of the petitions presented to the
House on this question ? They were strenuously op-
posed to this mea-ure. They said that a provision to
the Church of Rome was a provision to propagate idola-
try. They pronounced the doctrines of the Church of
Rome idolatry, and they knew that the displeasure of
God was pronounced against idolatry. This was the
opinion of the great majority of those who had flooded
that House with their petitions. They had expressed a
decided opinion upon the subject, and he (Mr. Plumptre)
would say, that if they passed this measure they might
expect the Divine judgment upon the country. The
great majority of the Protestants of this country were
influenced by this opinion, and he asked whether the
House was right in sitting that night to insult the people
—he should not, perhaps, say insult—but he would
ask if the House would slight the recorded opinion of
the people of England? Why should they measure as
nought the entreaties, almost the alarm, of the people
of England? He asked if the House would treat with
disrespect the petitions of the large body of her Ma-
jesty's subjects? He (Mr. Plumptre) believed that the
Roman Catholics themselves—for they had let their sen-
timents out—cared but little for this concession—
they pressed but little for this boon which
the Government was so very ready to accede to
them. If they wished to pander to the whims and hu-
mours of the Roman Catholics, then let them pass this
measure. Could they doubt that if this measure were
passed they would not be urged to further concessions?
He felt pained at being obliged to oppose her Majesty's
Government, but he also felt bound in principle to do so.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that no one would call into

question the sincerity and strong religious feeling which
actuated the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. He
(Lord J. Russell) did not think that it would be wise or
prudent, after the lapse of fifty years, to stop suddenly
and declare against any further grant for the education of
the Roman Catholic priesthood, but at the same
time if they found that grant was mischievous
to the community, if they found a significant reason for
its discontinuance, if they found that instead of being
educated for ministers of religion, the students of May-
nooth were brought up as conductors of rebellion, then
it would be equally wise and politic of the House to
withhold this grant. This would be a sufficient reason
why the grant should not be continued to Maynooth.
But if, on the other hand, it were admitted and affirmed
by a majority of that House, that a grant of the sum of
9,0001. and no more ought to be allowed for the sub-
sistence of tha College of Maynooth, no religious
scruples could, be alleged against the increase
of that grant to a larger sum. He thought
that all the appeals which had been made to the
religious prejudices of this country were beside the
question.—(Hear, hear.) If the Gentlemen who opposed
the present proposition had opposed the grant of 9,0001.,
be might be willing to admit their consistency. But it had
been proved that the means of instruction were not
sufficient—that there was not a sufficient provision for
the decent comfort of the pupils—that the instructors
were not adequately paid—then there was no room for
the interference of religious principles against the vote.
—(Hear, hear.) He could very well understand why re-
ligious scruples should interfere to prevent a Member of
that House from agreeing to any vote whatever for
Maynooth College; but no Member, who had consented
to the vote in any shape, could allege religious scruples
as a reason for denying increased comforts to the
students or increased pay to the ill-paid professors.—
(Hear, hear.) Those who had agreed to the previous