The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-11 00:00:00

a very great degree. And on this subject alone, the Go-
vernment ought to institute a royal commission of inquiry.
Some of the arguments of the Hon. Gentleman who had
just sat down, seemed to him to be carried too far. Surely
in this instance, where the college was open to all stu-
dents of whatever persuasion, awl where office and emo-
lument might be held by Roman Catholic gentlemen
surely, he repeated, at this time, and under present circum-
stances, the Government might cause inquiry to be made
with the view of throwing the university open to all
sects, and placing Catholics and Protestants on exactly
the same footirg. He should be the very last person
to divert the property of the College to other than the
objects to which the founders meant it to be orp7ied, but
in these days, when they were building colleges in other
parts of Ireland, it might be wel to do away with the
objectionable statutes which only restricted education,
and he should, therefore, deeming the commission sought
for by his Hon. Friend truly necessary, support the
motion.

Sir R. H. INGLIS said that the foundation of the
university of Dublin was as purely Protestant as any
college in this country. It had been said by the Hon.
and Gallant Officer who mond the resolution, that the
statutes of Elizabeth did not contain the word " Pro-
testant ;" but did any Honourable Member mean to say
that that sovereign contemplated other than the ex-
tension of Protestant doctrines ? Having heard nothing
in the speech of the Hon. Gentleman opposite in its
favour, he should resist any interference en the part of
the Crown with respect to funds left by certain persons
for private purposes.
Mr. HUME was sorry to find this motion opposed by
her Majesty's Government. He was surprised at this,
seeing that her Majesty's Government had evinced a de-
sire to conciliate the people of Ireland. He thought his
Hon. and Gallant Friend, the Member for Wycombe,
in introducing the motion, had made out a very strong
case. He thought that the motion of his Hon. Fricnd
was particularly well timed, seeing that her Majesty's
Government had asked the House to grant certain sums
of money for educational purposes. He was right, under
those circumstances, in asking what funds were at pre-
sent in existence for such purposes, and -how they were
appropriated. He did not see how her Majesty's Go-
vernment could refuse this, when they were asking the
House to grant more money for education in Ireland.
On a former occasion an application was made for money
to be voted for Scotland, and a precisely similar
course had been adopted to that suggested by his Hon.
and Gallant Friend. He believed that his Hon. and
Gallant Friend's argument had been very unfairly met.
The Government, in opposing the motion, were not
carrying out the liberal view which they had lately ex-
pressed towards Ireland. It was his opinion, that all
Irishmen should be placed upon the same footing with
respect to education and religicn. He thought that Ire-
land was justified in callint, for the inquiry which had
been demanded. It was the policy of the Government
to grant such inquiries, for whenever a party had re-
course to concealment, the result would not be benefi-
cial to them. Upon these grounds, he should support
the motion of his Hon. and Gallant Friend.

Mr. LEFROY was opposed to this motion, because lie
believed the effect of it would be to open the honors and
emoluments of Trinity Collego, Dublin, to other pat ties
than Protestants. lie thought they were bound to sup-
port that College in its present position, He did not
believe that a single argument had been offered in favour
of the motion of the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman, and
therefore he should oppose it.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL did not think that the lion.
Gentleman who had just sat down had shown to the
House a very promising example of the logic tau ;lit at
Trinity College. He (Mr. M. J. O'Connell) hoped that
they would have some further exposition of
the principles upon which the Government
intended to oppose the motion.—(Hear.) They had,
he thought, exhibited as much inconsistency in that
matter as they had in financial matters. In Scotland
tests were to be imposed, in Cork they were not, but. in
Dublin the Government were determined to maintain
the tests in full force. lle had supported this Bill in
its early stages, because he believed it would, in its ef-
fect, advance mixed education. But mixed education
would never succeed while equality was rot
observed. The new colleges were to be thrown
open to all, while the old ones were to bo
exclusive. Until this inequality was abolished, discontent
would continue, and ought to continue. He could not
understand the inconsistency that was shown by the
Government with respect to this matter of education.
That which they believed to be good and essential in
one case, they repudiated in another. Their consciences
appeared to vary with the position of the places respect-
ing which they attempted to legislate. As he had said
before, they never could hope to conciliate Ireland
while the present inequality was allowed to continue.
Let them place every creed upon the same footing with
respect to the honours and emoluments of the colleges
in Dublin. and they might depend upon it that discon-
tent would rapidly die away.
Mr. SHAW believed that this motion had been
brought forward for the purpose of alienating funds from
the objects for which they were originally intended.
Trinity College was founded by a Protestant Queen, by
Protestant funds, and for purely Protestant purposes.
This had often been repeated, and he would repeat it
again and again, for this simple reason—that the truth
could rot too often be repeated. There were as it any
Roman Catholics now in the University of Dublin us
there were formerly, and he did not wish that the Roman
Catholics should be deprived of the advantages of acade-
mical education. The Hon. Gentleman who had hie tight
forward this motion had taunted him with being igno-
rant of everything connected with the government or the
University of Dublin. Ile had, however, had considerable
experience in that University. He had taken his degree of
Doctor of Laws there, and had two sons who entered it.
and consequently he must be somewhat acquainted with
its internal management. The Ilonourable and Learned
Gentleman then tent into details respecting the salaries
of the professors and fellows, which he defended on
the ground of the onerous duties they had to perform.
The senior fellows had more tine for literary pursuits ;
the time of the juniors was wholly taken tip in teaching
the students, and every one of them was actively en •
gaged in giving lectures and instructing the scholars.
There
was also another duty which the junior fellows
had to perform. The divinity students had to attend
two years, and the junior fellows, besides their ordinary
duties, had to instruct these students. He had, there-
fore, disposed of two of the objections which had been
raised against the fellows. lie would say that the Go-
vernment could not violate the funds, without doing
gross injustice to the intentions of the donors who had
endowed the college.
Mr. SHEIL entirely coincided with his Hon. Friend
the Member for Kerry that the members of the three
professions of theology, law, and medicine, should not
stand distinct. They started together in the same field of
life, and, if he might employ the sublime language of the
great poet whose remains were now entombed in the ad-
jacent cathedral, he would say,
" Leaving the world, with no blot on their name,
Looked proudly to Heaven, from the death-bed of fame."
They lived and they would die together. Surely, in the
morning of life, when the sweetest, and finest, and most
lasting friendships were formed, which would last
through life, religious means for directing those feelings
ought not to be rejected. Without the aid of religious
education, all secular education would be perfectly use-
less. The youth was transferred from his home, and
was no longer under the care of that best of all sentinels,
parental love. It was perhaps in religion that a little
learning was dangerous, for it was in silent monitions of
a well grounded religious feeling, probably first incul-
cated by a mother, and sustained by the exhortations of
the ecclesiastical adviser, that the rash and headstrong
passions of youth were restrained. These statements
were not imaginary, and the Government had not pro-
vided for them. They had not guarded against it. Re-
ligion, in his opinion, ought to have been made the basis
of the system. The Government ought to have made
religion the groundwork on which the entire scheme
should be founded. The Roman Catholic bishops had
asked the Government to erect Catholic chapels as well
as Protestant. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Secre-
tary for the Home Department had said that chaplains
must be appointed for the Unitarians and other sects.
Was he aware of the fact that in Ireland there were only
500,000 Presbyterians, 40,000 Unitarians, 180,000 Pro-
testants, and upwards of 7,000,000 of Roman Catho-
lies? And yet, looking at these facts, he said it was
necessary to provide chaplains for the Unitarians. Why,
Protestant, Presbyterian, and Catholic chaplains ought
to be appointed to the colleges. Ought religion to be
left out, when, compared with which, every other object
of secular education was evanescent and contemptible?
He would now refer to the appointment of professors.
He thought that the Catholic bishops, in seeking what
they did, were perfectly justifiable. They suggested
that the professors of metaphysics, of geology, and ana-
tomy, should be Catholics. The Government said such
a proposition was monstrous. Those professors in Dub-
lin University were all Protestants, and he would con-
tend that the bishops were perfectly right in pursuing
the course of refusing to recognise the principle of the
measure, unless sufficient means for the instruction of the
Roman Catholic youth in the proposed colleges, in their
proper religion, were fully recognised and provided for.
He would not complain of the distribution of offices, of
the appointment of magistrates, of the neglect of the
interests of Ireland, but he would content himself with a
fact. Fifteen years ago Catholic Emancipation was car-
ried—fifteen years had elapsed since that great measure
passed the Legislature, and he, who at that time led the
way in carrying it, was now the Prime Minister of Eng-
land. There were eight millions of Roman Catholics in
Ireland, and yet not a single Roman Catholic held office
under the Government—not one had the right of entree
at the Castle of Dublin or the Home-office.—([fear,
hear.) It was not so under the Whigs. Un-
der their Administration the claims of the Catholics
met at least with some consideration. Under the
Whigs these were appointed to office—Sir Michael
O'Loghlen, and Judge Ball, while Mr. Pigott was the
Attorney-General for Ireland. The Whigs in theiFap-
pointments to office consulted the interests and feelings
of the great Catholic community ; the present
Ministry had not. When proposing the present Bill, the
Academical Education Bill, whom did they consult? Cer-
tainly not the feelings or the remonstrances of the Catholics of
Ireland. The Hon. Member for Louth had told them that it
would be inconsistent for Roman Catholics to support the
Government so long as they adhered to the present Church
Establishment, and refused to open Trinity College. In that he
perfectly agreed. There was neither reciprocity or justice in
such a system. He now came to the amendment.' The Hon
Member for Wycombe (Mr. B. Osborne) had referred to the.
original foundation of Trinity College as not being of an
exclusive character. Ile could corroborate that fact.
It was not intended for ecclesiastical or sacerdotal
purposes, but as an institution for the education
generally of the youth. This was the object of the
establishment, as founded by Queen Elizabeth, who was a good
Protestant, but who was, nevertheless, a very y heathen in a
carnal point. He held in his hand a book, descrvive of the
state of Ireland, written 200 years ago, written by no less a
person than Lord Bacon. The work was entitled the' Queen's
Service in Ireland." That great man said, in the work in
question, " to tolerate the Roman Catholic religion;" and
then he went on to advise the people of Ireland in a state of
contentment, to pursue an even course isetween England

and Ireland, and to treat the people as one nation ; one great
me ins ofacomplishing which was by carrying out a liberal system
of education.—(Hear, hear) Coupling this passage, which
would be feund in the third volume of the work, with the pas-
s ,ge in the charter of Queen Elizabeth, already quoted in the
progress of the debate, he (Mr. Sheil) contended that
there was no ground whatever for excluding Roman Catholics
from the University of Dublin. But that was not the way to
meet the question in 1845. What they wanted were just prin.
ciples and practices to conciliate the great majority of the
people of Ireland. Trinity College, even with its present de.
fective constitution, had produced a galaxy of great men, yet
that blaze of literary glory had only emanated from 700,000
Iri.hmen, a mere handful of the people.—( Hear, hear.) What
then might they not expect if the whole waste mind of
Ireland was brought into the precincts of that institution, and
that instead of 700,000, there were 8,000,000 of people pro-
fiting from the mine of intellectual wealth accumulated there.
—(Cheers.) Let them not deny the great good that had been
done, but endeavour to change the system for a better. The
Right Hon. and Learned Gents man then proceeded to notice
the fellow,hips of Trinity Colle , which were at present re-
stricted to Protestants, particularising several instances of the
emoluments and advantages, which Roman Catholics were
altogether excluded from by the present constitution of the
College. He considered it would be of much greater service
to education in Ireland, instead of attempting to esta-
blish dwarfish colleges for academical education, to apply
18,0001. to improve Trinity College, and to throw it open
equally to Roman Catholics with Protestants. This course
would be returned in full value to England in pacificating re-
sults, and in the general welfare and improvement of the people
of Ireland.—( Loud cheers.) He thought that those conces-
sions ought to satisfy the House, and the advantages which had
been given to the Roman Catholic Church had been materially
diminished. At the conclusion of this, their fifth session, it
should be a subject for the consideration of the Minis-
try that it was unwise to take such a measure
as 'this at the conclusion of the session. This was no time for
half measures, for he felt that if they longer delayed the set-
tlement of this dispute, the consequence would be that there
would he a total disturbance of the peace of the community.
and if this we. e not cared for, he feared there would be a
fatal eruption, and the measure would be altogether destruc-
tive of the object for which this Bill was intended.
Sir R. PEEL said that the object of the Bill was to give
a perfect equality between the several parties. The Govern-
ment had certainly been very desirous to meet the religious
feeling of the country. Their object had been the liberal
endowment of the Catholic Church, and it was a little unfair
that the intentions of Government should he so misrepresented
as they had been n this debate. There was no doubt .but
that the feeling of the people in Ireland would,•by this debate,
be largely increased. The object of the original grant had
been to increase the resources of that country, and he thought
that the principle would be erroneous which made any differ-
ence between the honours. If they were to state any parti-
cular interest as being affected, they might say that
the Presbyterian interest was paramount in the north, and the
Roman Catholic in the south. The principle of this had been
allowed in the Bequest Act. The Right Hon. Gentleman
had given a very excellent speech in favour of the opening of
several colleges. The circumstance of the religious principle
being adduced, was sufficient to show that the intentions of
Elizabeth had not been carried out. The Hon. Gentleman
complained of a want of equality. Why, what could be a greater
proof of that equality than the:circumstance that the Government
had invariably adopted those plans which were likely to in-
fluence public feeling. Otte of their objects had been to raise
religious animosities, and he was happy to announce that those
feelings of opposition had subsided. The object of the Govern-
ment had been to subdue religious animosities, and they sue.
needed. There was no sacrifice, however great, or however
lasting, he would not incur, if, acting with justice to Protestants
and Roman Catholics, he could promote the peace and harmony
of the country to which the Right Hon. Gentleman belonged,
Sir V. BLAKE wished to correct a statement of the Right
Hon. Baronet opposite. The petition from Galway to which
he had alluded was not in favour of the Academical Bill, but
that of the Maynooth Endowment. The people of Ireland
were almost unammously.in.favour of the latter; would to God
the former measure was similarly acceptable to them.
Sir R. PEEL—Did not the Hon. Baronet call on me and
request that I would make Galway one of the localities in which
the colleges should be established ?—( Loud laughter.)
Sir VALENTINE BLAKE admitted the circumstance al-
luded to by the Right Hon. Baronet, but explained that, subse-
quently, the disadvantages of the measure had become so pal.
pable as to change his mind. (Loud laughter.) The
Hon. Baronet continued for some time the most emphatic
gesticulations, but from the indescribable uproar which pre-
vailed during his entire address, not one word was audible in
the gallery.
Colonel SIBTHORP said there was no one single act which
he did not believe the Right Hen. Baronet capable of, nor was
there a single measure, however monstrous, which he did not
think the Gentleman at the head of her Majesty's Government
would be disposed to carry in persuance of that course which
he ealled " expediency," but which he (Colonel Sibthorp)
could designate by no other term than " disgraceful subser-
viency."—( Loud cries of " Order," and laughter.) Well,
if that epithet were too strong, he would withdraw the word
"disgraceful," to suit the tender consciences of the House, and
leave the designation "subserviency." The conduct of the
Government had been of late so eittraordinary that he should
not feel at all surprised to see the Pope himself introduced as
a Member of that House by the Right Hon. Baronet, or if that
gentleman himself took his seat some day as Mussulman, Ma-
hometan, or Jew.—( Loud laughter. )
Lord J. RUSSELL admitted there were great merits in this
Bill, more especially as it contained the distinguishing feature
of withdrawing religious tests. But when he came to the general
question of education for the higher classes of Ireland, the
University of Dublin was presided ever exclusively by Pro-
testants, and scholarships and all offices of distinction were
similarly exclusive. This inequality might he remedied in
two ways—either by endowing a Catholic college similarly
as Trinity College was sustained; a second way, by giving the
meats of equality, as far as secular, if not ecclesiastical, benefits
could be attained in the university. But if the Government
really wished to remove these obnoxious distinctions and dis-
abilities, it could easily be effected, whether the political, social,
or religious equality of creeds was considered. The people of
England would speedily recognise and assent to the principle,
I and Ireland would at once be benefited and grateful. He
should support the amendment of the Honourable Gentleman
for the admission of Catholics into Trinity College, after which
he would cheerfully vote for the third reading of the Bill,
although it was not so perfect a 13111 as he could have desired.
'The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment
Against it
Majority against the amendment ----77
Sir R. H. INGLIS then proceeded to argue, that Govern-
ment would fail to make their system of education perfect and
effective if they wholly divested it of religion. No man was a
fit or competent person to be an instructor in natural philo-
sophy, or, in fact, in any of the sciences, who did not refer to
the name or the attributes of the Almighty, and he should,
therefore, move that the Bill be read a third time that day six
months.

Lord ERRINGTON declared his intention to oppose the
third reading of the Bill, because Government had not suffi-
ciently explained upon what principles these colleges were to be
governed.
The SPEAKER informed the Hon. Member for the Uni-
versity of Oxford, that a former amendment having been moved
upon the original motion, he could not put the amendment
Which the Hon. Member had just proposed.
Sir R. H. INGLIS replied that he would meet the diffi-
culty by withdrawing the amendment, and dividing on the
original question.
The House then divided, when there appeared--
For the third reading . ..... 177
Against it
Majority in favour of it -151
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
NEW ZEALAND.

Mr. HAWES asked the First Lord of the Treasury whether
he had any objection to lay on the table of the House the in-
structions recently forwarded to the Governor of New Zealand?
Sir R. PEEL objected to their production. They were
confidential,'and could not, consistently with the public service,
be produced.
DRAINAGE (IRELAND) BILL.
On the order of the day for reading this Bill a second time
being read,
Mr. S. O'BRIEN suggested its postponement.
Sir R. PEEL objected to such a course.

After a few obse-rvations from Mr. Redington, Sir R. Per•
guson, and Sir T. Fremantle, the Bill was read a second time.
PHYSIC AND SURGERY BILL.
The consideration of this Bill was postponed till next Monday.
The Joint Stock Companies Bill was read a second time; as
were also the Geological Survey Bill, and the Arts Union
(No. 2) Bill.
MERCHANT SEAMEN'S FUND BILL.
Mr. CURTEIS moved the consideration of the report on
this Bill.

Mr. HOWARD hoped that the Bill would be postponed till
the next session of Parliament. It would inflict great hard-
ship on his constituents, and ought not to be passed without
full consideration.

Mr. A GLIONBY had no objection to the postponement of the
Bill, if her Majesty's Government thought that by so doing they
coultl introduce the Bill in a more improved form next session.
If it was the opinion of the Government that by postponing
the measure till the next session of Parliament the interest of

all parties would be better attended to, he had no objection
to agree to that postponement. He did not wish to thwart
her Majesty's Government, but to obtain from them an as-
surance that in the next session the subject should meet their
earliest consideration, and a Bill would be brought in on the
subject.

Sir GEORGE CLERK 'fully believed that in the recess
the Government would be enabled to prepare a more satisfac-
tory and comprehensive measure, which would be brought for-
ward next session, and as the present Bill had not been re-
ceived favourably by the body whom it was intended most to
benefit, he trusted the House would allow the matter to be
postponed.
Mr. W AWN asked the House to read the reports of 1841
and 1844, to see the unjust way in which seamen were
treated, and he would only put it to the Right Ho-
nourable Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government,
whether, after these reports, it was not absolutely necessary
that some measure should be carried into effect to remove these
grievances.
After a few words from Mr. CURTEIS the Bill was
postponed.
The Speaker then left the chair,and Mr. Greene
onGreene having
taken his place, the House went into Committee
EaCndLAtßheATSlpOeaNkerßlLreLp.orted
p r
oTahrTee
stis.HE o üßs Ae
Nt
Kh
eRn rPe Ts
uCmYe d D,
The House then resolved itself into Committee on the
MERCHANT SEAMEN'S BILL.
Mr. HENLEY objected to the first clause, considering the
principle of granting licences to boarding-houses for the recep-
tion of seamen, as undefined, if not pernicious ; and he thought
that before the House acceded to it, it should learn from the
Government what was the definition of an " honest crimp."
After an explanation from Sir George Clerk, and a short
conversation between Sir George Cockburn, Mr. Wawn,
Captain Corry, and Mr. Lambton, that and the other clauses
were agreed to, and the Bill was ordered to be printed and re-
ported to-morrow (this day).
The House having resumed,
Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE obtained leave to bring in
a Bill to continue expiring Turnpike Road Acts in Ireland.
Mr. MANNERS SUTTON obtained leave to bring in a
Bill to continue certain Turnpike Acts; a Bill to continue
an Act for authorising the application of highway rates to
turnpike-roads • another, to continue the Act to amend the
law relating to loan societies ; another, to suspend the making
of lists and the ballots and enrolments for the militia of the
united kingdom; and another, to continue the exemptiognof
inhabitants of parishes, townships, and villages from liability
to be rated as such, in respect of stock in trade or other pro-
perty, to the relief of the poor.
Mr. M. SUTTON then asked leave to introduce a Bill to
continue two Acts, relating to the removal of poor persons
born in Scotland and Ireland, and chargeable to parishes in
England.
Mr. W. S. O'BRIEN intimated his intention of opposing
the introduction of so pernicious a Bill. The Acts whose con-
tinuance was now sought for, had been found to work most
prejediclally to Ireland; the power of removing wipers,
even after long industrial residence had entitled them
to a settlement, was a hardship alike weighing
heavily on the pauper and the country to which he
was removed. lie therefore should strenuously resist the in-
troduction of the Bill.

After a few words from Mr. Robert Palmer, Sir James