The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-17 00:00:00

attracting- the attention of the country to his
change. of opinion—he would not say to his change
of principles. He had raised up obstacles to his
ability to render for
i the future any service to his coun-
try. He could not imagine any speech more calculated,
he would not say, to shake the confidence which the
public reposed in its public men, hut to bewilder the
minds of the people as to the principles professed in
public men, than the speech of the Hon. Gentleman in
this sudden change of opinion. He regretted it exceed-
ingly. lie did not question the sincerity of the Right
Hon. Gentleman's motives. No perscn was more en-
titled to the respect of the country than the Right Hon.
Gentleman, but he could not but feel that such would
be the effect of the Right Honourable Gentleman's sudden
change of odinion. The Right Hon. Gentleman might
depend upon it that if the mind of England could find
no exponent for its convictions among the leaders and
statesmen of that House, it was not so destitute of ability
as not ere long to find other leaders, or so benumbed
and paralysed as not to make any effort to endeavour to
find them out. He the more regretted the course the
Government adopted on the present occasion, because,
on all other occasions, he had been its advocate arid
supporter ; and he deeply regretted that anything
should have occurred to shake, not the position of the
Government—for he had no fears on that score-13W the
confidence and respect which they had hitherto so fully
enjoyed and deserved for the able manner in which they
had conducted the business of the country. The Right
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh, in a speech
characterised by that ability which characterised
all the speeches of that Right Honourable Gentleman,
had divided his argument into two branches. Like a
Scotch sermon, he had divided it under two heads, each
of which contained various subdivisions. Under one of
these divisions he gave her Majesty's Government credit
fur their superior party tactics in introducing this measure.
He had listened to the speech of the Right Hon. Gentle-
man opposite (Mr. Macaulay) with great attention,
and he felt compelled to say that the arguments of
the Right Honourabte Gentleman, in his wonderful
oration were rather falacious, while the speech it-
self was full of specious and unconvincing de-
ductions. It was a tissue of ingenious sophistries,
in which he had drawn a picture that exhibited
a magnificent embodyment of enthusiastic fanaticism
and indomitable courage in one of whom he was speaking,
and therefore it would not be wonderful if the Right
Hon. Gentleman had imbibed some of that religious
spirit which ha appeared desirous of infusing into
the House. In Maynooth the students appeared
to be still inspired with the spirit of that character, the
great original of which the Right Hon. Gentleman had
spoken of in such glowing terms ; but he (Mr. C. Bruce)
would be far from saying that this House had adopted
any of the views or feelings of the Right Hon. Gentleman
The Right Honotiiabie Gentleman abused the Go-
vernment for their conduct in respect to the Free
Church 'of Scotland ; but it was his opinion that the
Government had acted in accordance with the opinions of
nineteen-twentieths of those who were interested in
the matter, and they deserved the thanks of every
Scotchman for the course they had pursued.
He did not agree with the Right Hon. Member for
Perth in his statements respecting the flourishing condi-
tion of what was called the Free Church. And as to
boast of the six hundred new churches—that was only
part of their tactics. They built- a church in
every parish, and built it as near as possible
to the parish Church, whether the site was convenient
or not. With regard to the argument that the present
measure was necessary to carry out the implied faith of
the Act of Union, and the spirit of the Emancipation
Act, he must say that he did not think the en
dos meat of the Catholic Church was part of either
The grant to Maynooth by the Irish Parliament was a
measure for the removal of civil disabilities ; but it
would be absurd to say that the present measure
could be looked upon in that light. He thought
that the Irish Parliament were wrong in pass-
ing that measure ; but their conduct would be
much worse, arid they would be more guilty, by
agreeing to the present measure for it was of a much
graver and more serious character. He would judge of
the expediency of the grant to Maynooth from the
fi nits borne by Maynooth. Looking to the con-
duct pursued by the Roman patholic priests
—to the language which had been used by
Dr. Miele and others towards the Duke of
Wellington, he did not think the Duke of Wellington
could be accused using exaggerated language, if be
used the language which had been used by the Duke of
Ormond in speaking of the Roman Catholic bishops
of his time. His words, as reported by
Walsh, himself a Roman Catholic, were these :
He declared to me, " For these 20 years that I had to
do with the Roman Catholic Bishops, I never found any
of them either to speak the truth or or to perform
his promises."—(Loud cries of " Oh, oh.") These were
not his (Mr. C. Bruce's) words—(Cries of " Oh, oh.")
they were the words of Walsh, and he continued
by saying that the Duke put his hand to his
heart, as a man and a Christian, and spoke with
an earnestness which he had never seen before or after.
That state of things had lasted fifty years, and it could
not be denied that, it had utterly failed in the pur-
pose for which it was established. The grant should be,
therefore, altogether withdrawn. He might quote a living
author, to show that the education at Maynooth was
most imperfect and improper. Men who had been edu-
cated there—Crolly, O'Beirne, and Baptist Noel used
language of censure in this respect much stronger than
that used by Mr. Walshe. Did the Government propose
to remedy this state of,things.—(Hear, hear.) Far
from it—they meant to increase the grant without
any attempt to remedy the faults of education
there. He knew Roman Catholic Members would
tell him that they did not hold these doctrines.
—they repudiated them, bat if this were the case why
were they not expunged and rejected altogether.—
(Hear, hear.) But the Right Hon. Baronet at the head
of the Government said he slid not wish to detract from
the grace or favour of the grant.
[LEFT SPEAKING.]

NEWMARKET RACES.
(THIS DAY-BY EXPRESS.)

504 Plate. D.M.
Little Finch ................................ 1
Ajax......................................... 2
Match,
D.M.,AI 200.—Duke of Bed
Ford's
thelotran.lVonbyf a length.
ord's Prologue beat
Lord Powlett's Energy.

Sweepstakes of 100 sous. eaeb. D.M.
Lord Stradbroke's Idas . ............... 1
Lord Exeter's Wood Pigeon ............ 2
Won easy.

GRANT TO MAYNOI)TH.
The great question raised by the Maynooth Bill is
Ins the government of Ireland to
nment
really this—How is the government of Ireland to be
carried on? This is the question which every man who
pretends to statesmanship must anasnadvrinctleegarriltyy
ofto his
le
say " ay" or " no" to the Go-
vernment
o ls i mind,
proposition.befo rehe e "'
be maintained by force, or by gaining the good will of
The repeaal of the union may be Winos-
ph
empire,reers
epneo pt
time.
n ichli
es is Looking
the
greatto a
the
n
d safety
ursrent question
of the
sible, but war with America or with France is not im-
possible, o. and in either case a union supported by En-
lish troops would add at least as much to our anxieties
as to our strength. The main argument for the May-
nooth Bill, then, is, that it is a measure of conciliation.
It will confer solid benefits on the religious instructors
to whom the Irish people are attached, and, however it
ceived by all men of common sense as an evidence of the
may be used by the leaders of agitation, it will be re -
friendly disposition of an imperial Parliament. We
have no doubt, indeed, that many of the most ardent
opponents of the union secretly dread the success of the
measure, on account of its tendercy to allay the fervour
of the popular hostility to England. By whom, then, is
the Bill opposed? By two parties who, on all other
o ose, pp
questions, religious and political, and even in the reasons
of their opposition to this measure, are as much
to each other us light and darkness. Of one of these
parties we would always speak with the respect which
is due to honesty and consistency. Protestant Dissenters,
who, on the ground of the voluntary principle, oppose
the Maynooth grant, are open to no imputation, except
one, and that is, that they are suffering themselves to be
egregiously duped by the more powerful party from
whose intolerant and exclusive principles they themselves
have long suffered. The voluntary principle is in itself
free from every taint of injustice, and, whatever may be
thought of its practical effects, it must be admitted to be
a grand conception. It arises in religious minds from
zeal for the purity of the Christian faith, and it implies
an entire reliance on the power of that faith to maintain
its hold upon society without legal institutions. Its ad-
vocates, too, may plead that it would furnish one mode
of removing the difficulties of government in Ireland.
They say, " Leave the education of Irish priests to be
supported by those who want their services. Withdraw
the Maynooth grant altogether—but withdraw also the
endowments of the Protestant and Presbyterian
Churches. Sweep away every vestige of the legal
establishment of religion now existing in Ireland. Let
the whole of its Church property, the Presbyterian
regium donurn, and the paltry Maynooth grant, be applied
to general education, or to some other purpose of general
utility. Place the ministers of all sects on the equal
footing of dependence on the contributions of their
flocks, and leave Protestantism to contend with Popery,
by its own intrinsic strength alone." This is, at least, a
clear and consistent answer to the question, " How is
Ireland to be governed?" The scheme, too, is precisely
that which w ould be most welcome to the Irish Catholics.
They would admit its perfect justice, and close with the
proposition at ()Lee. hatever might be its effects upon
the character of religious teaching, it would undoubtedly
remove that which supplies. the chit f fuel to popular dis-
content. But the reasons for insisting on the voluntary
principle in reference to Ireland derive all their force
from the assumption that it can be applied there in its
integrity. To enforce it upon the Church of the ma-
jority, and not upon the Church of the minority, is both
unreasonable anti flagrantly unjust; and it cannot be re-
garded by the Irish in any other light than as an injury.
The Irish Catholics are very well disposed to the volun-
tary principle; but if they find its English advocates em-
ploy it to defeat a Maynooth grant, while they are unable
to disturb the rich establishment
of the Protestant mi-
nority, they will hardly give
h:
the friendly feeling and love of equal justice which they
profess. We cannot but think, therefore, that Pro-
testant Dissenters, who upon this ground are joining in
agitatitosoefadTvoorcieasteasnc(riehd:itgfho.r
*the present No-Popery
Churchmen, should consider well what is likely to be the
result of their efforts, and whether, if successful, they
will not contribute to the triumph of the greatest ene-
mies of religious liberty. Let it not be forgotten that a
Whig Government tried, not to abolish, but to reduce
within moderate limits, the Irish Protestant establish-'