The Sun.
London, England, 1826-03-21 00:00:00

struction.. They had this instruction, and were in most eases
better instructed in this respect than the children of ProtestantS.
The Honourable Gentleman who spoke last seemed to lay some
streiti on giving the Irish Bibles and Testaments in the Irish
languige. Did he (Mr. Butterworth) know how many .in
Ireland could read the Irish language ? Did he know the
proportion which those who couldnot read the Irish bore to
those who could ? If the Honourable Gentleman thought that
the proportion of those who could read the Irish language was
great, he was grossly and scandalously ignorant as to the condi-
tion of that country. The fact was, that not one in a thousand, or
in ten thousand, in Ireland, mold read the Irish language
though the proportion-of those who could read the English was
nearly as great ea in England. The Irish language, though
spoken in most parts or Ireland, was little known in print, and,
indeed, there were very few books of it in existence. To talk.
then, of circulating the Holy Scriptures in that language as n
means of making the people better acquainted with them than
'they would be in giving them in English, was rank nonsense.
As to the general education of the people, he would admit that
a large body of them were vet in ignorance; but it was a most
gross libel to charge that ignorance to the Roman Catholic
Clergy. The ignorance winch existed was the effect of the
long-continued •misgovernment of that country. Let Hon-
ourable Members bear in mind the length of time during
which the penal code was in operation, under which it was
made a penalty of death for a priest to teach. It was made
highly penal for a Roman Catholic father to educate his child
•at home in his own •religions principles, • and not less penal
to send him to a foreign school for his education. It was
a most scandalous libel on the people of Ireland to assert
that there was no system of mor'al and religious education
amongst the Roman Catholic peasantry of that kingdom; and
it was wholly untrue that the Roman Catholic clergy denied
the use of the Bible to their flocks ; they certainly did not
wish it to be put into the hands of pereons of a certain time
of life, without any notes or remarks to assist them in pro-
perly understanding and fully comprehending certain passages
in it, but they desired that it should be accompanied with the
comments 61 these who were most conspicuous for learn-
ing amongst the Catholics. If the Lion. Member was for
,having no education in Ireland but what was connected with
religion, and fancied that he could work any good by such a
proceeding, he would find himself grievously mistaken. Ile
should like to know how this religious education could he
given in the way desired by the Hon. Member, without greatly
offending the clergy of Ireland. He was sure the Hon. Meat.
her was .not aware of the difficulties he would have to Contend
with if he attempted to interfere with the religion of Ireland.
lie would find it no easy matter, by any side.wind or cunning
artifice, to remove the attachment of the Catholics to their
religion.
Mr. SPRING RICE replied, hut declined pressing his
amendment to a division : after which the original motion, that
die Speaker do now leave the chair, having been put and agreed
to, the House resolved itself into a •
CO3l 31 I WEE OF SUPPLY. '
Mr. BA NK ES then moved that ii sum of 13,0921. be granted
to his Majesty for defraying the expences of the-British 31u.
scum for the year 10211: he observed that between 127,000 and
128,000. persons had visited the Museum lust year.
Mr. HUM H complained of the Museum only. being open
thr e days for the inspection of the public ; this regulation
often caused very greet inconvenience to individuals, which
would be materially remedied if it were to be open four days in
the week instead of three.
Mr. BANKES wished the museum to be as accessible as
possible to the public ; but it was necessary that one day in the
week should be reserved for cleaning it, and two days more
were required for the exclusive admittance.of students who lied
occasion to examine the different specimens more in detail than
the rest of the public. . .
The motion was then put, and agreed to.
PROTESTANT CHARTER. SCHOOLS.
Mr. GOULBURN moved that time sum of 19000/. should
be granted to the protestant charter schools in Ireland, without
any fee or deduction whatsoever.
Mr. J. S3IITH objected to the grant, on account of the
abuses which prevailed in the management of those schools ;
and he-thought the Bight Hon. .Gentleman ought not to call
upon the House to sanction this grant, unless he would assure
them that these abuses should be remedied.
Mr. GOULBUBN said that the vote was now reduced in
order to provide for the gradual reduction of the number of
scholars, provision would also be made for the reform of the
abuses. The Commissioners hod indeed found considerable
difficulty in getting rid of flail, but it would he hard that the
poor children should be turned adrift on this account. Prose-
cutions
had already been Instituted, and were now pending
against several of the musters, and lie conceived that the re.
medy would be best effected by submitting the conduct of the
offenders to the public tribunals of the country. Of course he
• could not (as the lion. Member had called upon him to do) lie
responsible for the good conduct of' all the schoolmasters in
Ireland, but lie would pledge himself to exert all his vigilance
in detecting and bringing to punishment all future misconduct
in these individuals.
Sir J. N KW PORT complained of the great inactivity of the
local committees, and observed, that during a period of nine
months, they had not made one single report to the committee
of 1815. Although these reports were paid for, he did not see
why the catechists should receive salaries for catechising the
children of their respective parishes; he was not satisfied with
the rate of the reduction which had been made, but he thought
we ought to be relieved from this grant altogether, unless there
was some likelihood of its being applied in u very different way
to that in which it had been heretotore applied. It was in evi-
dence, that a gre.it number of these children had been impro-
perly kept back from being apprenticed out, in order that the
masters might make a profit by their labours. The officers had
also been guilty of great misconduct, and had been improperly
concerned in contracts respecting die clothing of the children.
It was now more than seven months since this House came •to
its resolutions respecting these abuses, and still not one •single
prosecution of any of die offenders had us yet been brought to
a close. Ile could not, theretbre, feel any great confidence that
these malpractices would he abolished, when he saw those who
were charged with having perpetrated them still continued in
office. . . . . .
Mr. GOULBURN contended that most of the abuses had
already been corrected, and that lie would- vouch that there
should be no misapplicntion of the money now granted. As to
delay with regard to the prosecutions, he must observe that the
report haul not reached Ins•office until September. - • -
• Mr. HUME said that this was a pretty specimen of the
manner in which Ireland was governed, as also of the manner
in which the extravagant grants for that country were applied.
They were now called • upon to vote grants which amounted
altogether to 371,0001. for Irish charities. The greater part
of these charities were placed under authorities which Govern.
anent had no means of controulllng, and thus it happened that
die grant of - money to support them was, in general, a
gross abuse of the tundit of the public. He complained that
the Right Honourable Secretary opposite had greatly increas.
ed the amount of these granti,' during the time he had held
his present office. In 11122 the -aggragate of these votes was
322,01101., and it lied gone on increasing progressively from
year to year, until it amounted at present to :171.0001. He
wondered that the Chancellor of the Exchequer ( who before
the close of the present year would find a want of money, of
he I. Mr. Hume] was much mistaken) had not probed these
charities to . the bottom. 'rise amount of money voted to the'
charter schools in 1800, Wavtaken upon the average vote 'of
the three years. preceding the Union. It was then 13,0001.
In me g it hat! increased to
ittod2co4ol3oe/a;
c(i)nnsildtlelr3abtloy3,
(Vtritlliaidn
1817 to 41,000/.;
now raised itself' again to 19,0001. The aggregate amount Of
the sums vot;td for these useless and mischievous schools,
since die Union, was 732,3611/., independent 'of the funds which
they derived front priVate estates.—which, by the bye, were so
mismanagml, that they-did not produce more at present than
they did in 1796, though every man's private estate had trebled
in value since that time. Those funds amounted to 1113,0001.;
so that altogether 9111,0001.' bail been spent in the 'course of
25 years upon these idle and tnirchievous charter-schools. Ile
contended that the House ought not to lie content with the slow
and tartly pace which the Government was proceeding to re-
duce them ; anti in order to accelerate the reduction of them,
lie would suggeSt that the grant now proposed should be
placed at the disposal of the Lord Lieutenant, ind not of. the
commissioners. In conclusion, he objected very strongly to
the grant 73M 9s. 2d. for law expellees. How could :such
money be fairly expended in support of the Protestant charter
schools ? •
Mr. GOULBURN said, that any gentleman who would
take the trouble of inspecting the papers, would see that he
had not increased the amount of those grants since he had been
in 'office. In point of fact, the vote of this year was less by
19,000/. than it was in the year when he first carne into office.
Although there was apparently 'an increase in it, a large
amount of had been reduced, -Which had formerly
gone to the 'support of these schools. The Hon. Member for
Aberdeen had been guilty of a -curimis mistake in stating the
amount of law expences at 730/. In truth, they were only
464 ; and the Lion. Member had mistaken the sum of money
placed opposite to the repair of schools for the aunt placed op-
posite the next item—law expenses.--:(A laugh )
I%lr. lIUME observed; that he haul nothing to do with the
local taxation which had been reduced, he was only speaking
what was paid by the public. He then recapitulated his former
statementa and insisted upon their accuracy. . of
' Mr. MONCK could not see -why these schools should be
provided, for out of the public funds,- when similar schools in
England and Scotland were provided for out of private funds.
He would place a land-tax of • 6d. Or fttl. In the pound upon
Irish landholders, for the purpose ofsupporting these charities;
and be wapiti do this the -more readily, as the Irish gentry