The Sun.
London, England, 1845-01-15 00:00:00

S PI RIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

'RIM THE EVENTICII Perim OF TESTERDAI.
'GrLOBE.—The protest of the nine Bishops of the
h Church against the system of National Educa-
tioi i in Ireland, is a document of portentous import
in the present state of that country. It is not merely
a manifesto against the policy of the Government,
frson a quarter which wields immense influence
(mar the minds of the party that materially as-
tti.steal in bringing Sir Robert Peel into office ; by
whose support he must be upheld, or fall. This
would, in a party sense, invest the document with
importance ; but in this only. It would, indeed,
indicate a deeply-seated dissatisfaction, embedded in
the minds of the clergy of the Irish Church, with the
course which the Government had marked out for
itself. It breathes a mortifying sense of the decep-
tions whichhad been practised upon them, under which
they had been induced to invest Ministers with power,
in the expectation and belief that the power they con-
ferred would he employed for purposes materially op-
posed to those for which it has been employed ; and that
the first opportunity would he taken to rectify the
mistakes they had made, and to undo the mischiefs
they had wrought against themselves. To mere poli-
tical partisans this state of things would be a source of
satisfaction. The disappointments and complaints of
the Epis'eopal Protesters and Remonstrants, and the
sYmP-athies they have moved in the clergy and laity
of die Irish Church, would be regarded as an admis-
sion of their chagrin. Having allowed themselves to
be duped into a belief that Sir Robert Peel would
abolish the National Education Board, and consign
Ireland to the curse of ignorance, to please the bigots
of the Church, they mourn their disappointment.
But this would be indeed a narrow and unworthy
view of the subject. The question is too important in
its character and consequences to admit of its being
confined within the contracted space of party politics
The protest of the Bishops is a manifesto against the
Roman Catholic religion—the religion of the great
mass of the Irish people. It is, in effect, a denial of
their right to the benefits of secular instruction by
means of funds provided by the State, except they
submit to have those benefits conferred under the di-
rection and control of the Established Clergy. The
creeds, prayers, and other formularies of the Protes-
tant Church are to be in constant use in the schools,
which the Protestors and Remonstrants insist are the
only schools which the State can consistently recognise.
To these schools, then, the Roman Catholic children
are to be brought for education by their poor Roman
Catholic parents, or to he excluded from the benefits
of secular instruction. It is even deemed a concession
—a large and liberal concession—that participation in
the use of these Protestant creeds, prayers, and formu-
laries is not exacted as an imperative condition. The
Roman Catholic children, we are told, are only to be
present when these Protestant prayers are used by the
Protestant children—they need not pray ! They are
required to be present when the creeds are rehearsed
by the Protestant children—they are not required to
express their assent to the articles of Protestant
belief. Roman Catholic children are to be the daily,
and almost hourly, spectators and auditors of
these religious practices and prayers, in the schools
to which they are to obtain admission only on
these terms. This is the modest request—the
rational desire of these Protestant Prelates, and
those who labour to advance the object at which they
aim ! The spirit of proselytism is so powerful in
Episcopal bosoms, and the means they would employ
to win poor deluded Papists from the errors in doc-
trine and practice of Rome, so well-adapted to etTs.ct
their purpose, that they would debar them from se-
cular instruction as a proof of the pious regard they
cherish for their immortal interests ! This may he,
and probably is, perfectly consistent with the spirit
of proselytism—we know that it is diametri-
cally opposed both to the genius of Protestantism
and to the precepts of Christianity. But what
will be its probable effects on the popular feel-
ing in Ireland ? There it will be regarded as an
aggressive nsovement of the Protestant Established
Church against the religion of the people. The ani-
mosities of rival churches will be roused by its means ;
and the hopes of returning quiet will be disappointed
by the animosities it will fan into a flame. The heads
of the Protestant Church are, we fear, answerable for
this. The flames of agitation will be stimulated by
the materials it supplies. Those who make a gain of
the dissensions and dissatisfactions which disturb
society in Ireland, and fan the feelings of discontent
when they appear to subside, will thank the nine Pro-
testant Bishops for their manifesto against Popery ;
and appeal to its contents as a justification for re-
newed vituperation of Protestantism.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Jan. 14.
There was nothing of the smallest general interes
came before the Court to-day.

BAIL COURT, Jan. 14.

(Sittings at Nisi I'rius, before kr. Justice WILLIAxs.)

DUNN V. HUMPHRIES.

This was an action to recover a certain sum •f money
for work and labour done. Defendant pleaded that he
was never indebted.

Mr. Allan appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Platt and
Mr. Wordsworth fur the defendant.

The plaintiff, a master plasterer, had been engaged to
complete the interior of some premises belonging to the
defendant, in Dorchester-place, Blandford-square. The
funds had, before October, 1841, been supplied by a Mr.
Nicholas, as agent for the defendant, but he about that
time failing to supply sufficient moneys to pay the work-
men, the plaintiff stopped work, and then the defendant
himself ordered him to renew it, stating that he himself
would provide future payments. These, however, were
not kept up regularly, and the plaintiff again, and finally,
threw up " the job ;" and it was for compensation for
the work done from the period of the order given by the
defendant that the present action was brought.
The bill of particulars laid the amount due at 1071.

Evidence was adduced to prove the labour done.
Mr. PLATT, for the defence, contended that the con-
tract for the completion of the houses had been entered
into with Mr. Nicholas, and not with plaintiff, and that,
therefore, to him, and not to the defendant, the plaintiff
shoald look for payment. But the facts of the case were,
that, on the 27th of November, Mr. Nicholas had dis-
covered that more money had been received by the
plaintiff, in partial payments, than work had been done
by him on these premises, and therefore he was turned
off, and a fui ther sum of 50/. was expended in remedy-
ing the bad work made by him.
After an elaborate address to the jury, witnesses were
called to support the defendant's case ; and after the
Learned Judge had summed up, the jury retired, and
returned with a verdict for the defendant.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Jan. 14.
(Sittings in Banco.)
BURGESS V. GRAY.
This was an action to recover compensation in da•
wages for injury sustained by the plaintiff, through the
overturning of a chaise in consequence of a heap of rub-
bish improperly left in the road by the defendant, or his
servants.
The verdict was for the plaintiff—Damages, loot.
Mr. Sergeant BvtEs obtained a rule nisi to set aside
the verdict, as against evidence, on the ground that the
heap was laid in the road by a person named Jackson,
who was not the servant of defendant.
ELLIOT V. ALLEN AND OTHERS.
This was an action for trespass and false imprison-
s anent; brought against the overseers and medical officer
of the parish of Islington, under the following circum-
p' stances :

It appeared that the plaintiff, wbo was conducting
clerk to the eminent solicitors, Austin and Hobson, hav-
ing let a part of his house in the parish of Islington, had
'repeated quarrels with his tenants, who on one occasion
,actually locked him out of his own house at night,
so that he was compelled to break open the
street-door. These quarrels caused great alarm
in the neighbour, and as the conduct of the plain-
tiff was somewhat eccentric in other respects,
.1 it was represented to the parish authorities that he
le.was dangerously insane, and ought to be secured.:, Upon
atthis information, the parish officers caused him to he
.a.taken to the workhouse, confined as a lunatic, and put
e4,lin a strait-waistcoat. He was discharged at the end of
a week. For the trespass and imprisonment the action
was brought, when the jury found for the plaintiff—
damages 400/. On Saturday, Mr. Sergeant Byles, with
whom was Mr. Sergeant Shea, for the defendants, men-
tioned the cause, which was again part heard yesterday.
This application was for a rule for a new trial, on the
ground that the verdict was against evidence. The
bearing was now resumed.
I Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD, at great length, showed
cause why a new trial should not be granted. He con-
tended that there was every evidence that the plaintiff
ant was not insane at the time of the trespass, or at any time
in before it, and further, that he was not at that time in
• -r destitute circumstances such as could warrant the violent
interference of the parish authorities. Mr. Elliot was
;b the son of a judge in India, but, having a strong. religious
tendency, want out to Canada to preach the Gospel to
the Indians. On his return, he took the situation of
clerk to the solicitors, that being the profession to which
he had been brought up. It was not to be denied that
disappointments respecting property which he thought
he was entitled to in India had rt ndered him very excit-
aisle, and that temper was aggravated by the misconduct
of his tenants. At the time when the persons sent by
the parish to take charge of him as a lunatic arrived, he
was sitting quietly in his parlour, arranging family
affairs with his brother inrlaw, who was a medical man,
and who remonstrated with the constables, assuring
them that the plaintiff was not insane. Even in the
workhouse the plaintiff was allowed to use his mars,
and was otherwise treated as a sane person, except
:a; that the first night it was thought necessary to control
his resistance, by putting on a straight-waistcoat. As
to the allegation t hat he was destitute, that rested entirely
.upon the fact that, after he was discharged from
the workhouse, he became very much distressed in his
circumstances, in consequence of what he had suffered,
, and he was obliged to apply to the parish for relief.
Mr. Sergeant SUEA, in reply, contended that the evi-
' dente for the defence fully established both the dan-
gerous state of mind and the destitution, which justified
the interference of the parish.
`'_ Mr. Justice Casswitu. asked, had the defendants
~,shown that the plaintiff was at the time in a stnte
11,-Ito pressingly dangerous as not to allow the parish
officers time to do as they required—namely, to apply
for an order to take him to a magistrate, instead of
,confining him on their own responsibility.
Mr. Sergeant SHEA argued at length that this was
4) roved in evidence
1 S

/2

~; ~

Ii

1 /

//