The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-14 00:00:00

CHURCH EDUCATION IN IRELAND.

The Bishop of CASHEL postponed the presentation of
certain petitions of which he had given notice until Tuesday
next.

The Marquis of NORNIANBY was sorry the Noble
Lord had put off the presentation of his petitions,
because he (the Marquis of Normanby) had
received some communications which he wished to have taken
the opportunity of reading to their Lordships. These com-
munications were from the Rev. Mr. Mackessy, who con-
sidered that his character had been impugned by a statement
which the Right Rev. Prelate had made on a late occasion
of the Reverend Gentleman's overweening and unfounded
estimate of his own abilities. Now he held in his hand extracts
of testimonials of the ability of the Rev. Gentleman, which ex-
tended over a period of nearly a quarter of a century, and cer-
tainly these testimonials contained as strong a claim for
professional promotion, founded on professional merits,
as any clergyman convected with the Established
Church of Ireland.t They had beets communicated to the
Right Ron. Gentleman, the First 'nd of the Treasury, and so
struck was he by their contents, that he had held a commu-
nication with the Lord-Lieutenant on the subject. The rev.
gentleman protested that he never knew that the charge of the
Right Rev. Prelate, which had been so often alluded to in
that House, had been published, until he saw a report of a
debate which had lately arisen on the subject amongst their
Lordships; but having been present at its delivery, the rev.
gentleman said it struck him at the time, as not being cal-
culated to produce a good feeling between the Protestants
and Roman Catholics of the Right Rev. Prelate's diocese.
In the letter of Mr. Mackesey, which he held in his hand,
he distinctly says that the Right Reverend Prelate had
stated in the charge that no Protestant clergyman
could, consistently with his duty, attend any national
school, even to see that the rules were observed. He had
taken down these words when he went home after hearing the
charge. He had also two other letters from Protestant clergy-
men in the same diocese, both of which were to the same effect,
and when he named the writer of one of them, the Rev. Mr.
Hogden, he was sure that the Right Rev. Prelate would admit
that he had been rather precipitate in so solemnly denying the
truth of statements which were deposed to by an individual
whose respectability even the Bishop himself would vouch for.
He (the Marquis of Normanby) did only what he considered
to be his duty in reference to this matter, after what had fallen
from the Right Rev. Prelate on a former occasion.
The Bishop of CASHEL denied in the most solemn man-
ner that he ever rebuked Mr. Mackesey on the subject of na-
tional education. The only time he was ever in his company
was at the visitation in 1843, and the only remarks
he then made were in reference to the propriety
of every clergyman keeping a school in connexion with the
Church of England in his parish. He might then have sug-
gested to the Rev. Gentleman his duty in this respect, but he
did not do so in harsh or severe terms. He had a letter in his
possession from Mr. Alackesey, written in May, 1843, when he
was a few weeks in the parish, recommending the establish-
ment of a Church Society's School, and stating that the first
thing to be done was to consult the bishop of the diocese. He
would show, on Tuesday, that he did not rebuke Mr. Mackesey
with respect to the school.
The Marquis of NORMANBY considered that no further
time should be occupied on the subject. He still adhered to
his statement that the Right Rev. Prelate rebuked Mr.
Mackesey, in the presence of an assembly of clergymen at
Lismore ? Did he deny that?
The Bishop of CASHEL—I do deny it.—(Cheers.)
The Marquis of WESTMEATH could not understand how
a person could recollect the exact words of the charge, after
being in a crowded assembly for some hours, and after going
home and eating his dinner.—(Laughter.)
The matter then dropped.
MA YNOOTH.

Lord KENYON presented a petition from the Rev. Arthur
Percival against the grant to Maynooth, and praying to be
heard at the bar of their Lordships' House.
The Marquis of BREADALBANE presented a great
number of petitions against the grant from various parts of
England and Scotland.

ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONERS.
n an answer to a question from the Duke of RICHMOND,
Lord WHARNCLIFFE stated that the report of the Ec-
clesiastical Commissioners would he presented to their Lord-
ships in the course of a few days.
STATE OF IRELAND.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE presented a petition
from the county of Leitrim, complaining of the lawless state of
the people, and the system of intimidation prevailing in that
part of Ireland. The Noble Lord said it was quite impossible
that the outrages complained of could be committed without
the cognisance of several persons residing in the neighbourhood,
and, to a certain extent, the whole country were indirect ac-
cessories to the fact. He held in his hand the copy of an in-
formation laid in the county of Leitrim on the `4th of last
May, wherein the deponent stated that he was returning home
about seven o'clock on a particular evening, accompanied by his
wife ; and, when he came to a certain spot, a man turned out,
dressed in female apparel, and fired three times at him. For-
tunately he missed his aim each time, but the following day no
one could be found who could
.give Information of the party.
He had given notice of a question which he intended to put
to the Ministry regarding a subject of not less importance
than the one he had just alluded to, which he should have felt
inclined to put without any preface were it not that he wished
to notice come speeches which had lately been delivered in that
House. He thought it necessary to say a few words before
he put the question, because those speeches were calculated to
produce no good effect. He understood it had been stated by
Noble Lords on the opposite aide of the House, that the late
State prosecution had had the effect of suppressing the desire
for repeal in Ireland. Now, if Government had done any-
thing effectual to put an end to the repeal excitement, it
would be as well for them not to talk about it, but he still
thought a strong feeling yet prevailed in Ireland in favour of
repeal. , Those persons were undoubtedly found guilty by a
defective jury, but even if that jury were good in vent of
law, he should like to know for what purpose their Lordships
sat as an ultimate tribunal, if not to reverse a decision so
much at variance with equity ? If those trials had
succeeded, they might have inspired confidence in the law as
administered in Ireland, but as they did not succeed, the result
had been to increase rather than abate the agitation. Their
Lordships themselves admitted the injustice of the imprison-
ment, or if not, why did they pass the Bail in Error Bill?
This imprisonment, he might observe, would make the 30th of
May long memorable in Ireland. And, as proof of the feeling
which at present existed in that country, he would take the
liberty of reading extracts from letters which he had lately re-
ceived from Members of their Lordships' House, and others of
a lower station, in reference to the late meeting that bad taken
place in Dublin, to honour Mr. O'Connell on the anniversary
of his incarceration. One of those letters stated that there
never was so numerous and disciplined a military mob assembled
on any occasion, and the writer went on to describe the formi-
dable appearance they presented, marching with banners and
music in military array. The other letters were in unison with
that account. He would now, then, beg to ask their Lordships
was there ever anything more ridiculous than to state that a
triumph had been obtained over the repeal agi-
tation ?—(Hear, hear.) It was a most extraordinary
fact that every attempt which had been made to suppress it,
only added new strength and vigour to it. The unseasonable
proclamation had failed. The State prosecution had resulted
in disgrace, and the dismissal of the magistrates gave an im-
petus to the agitation, and completely revived it. What effect
had this on the minds of the people ? About a fortnight before
that, the repeal rent was only 1171. weekly, and even that sum
was commented upon by the Irish papers, and considered a
strong indication of the feelings of the people in favour of re-
peal ; but immediately after the dismissal of the magistrates it
got up to 3001. And though it has risen to some thousands,
it has never fallen below that sum since. Stronger language
had been used in Conciliation-hall and elsewhere, since the re-
versal of the judgment in the Court of Queen's Bench in Ire-
land by the House of Lords, than before. At every meeting of the
Repeal Association, an authorised reporter from the Govern-
ment was admitted, and took notes of the proceedings. Was
this intended as a check on their proceedings ? He conceived
that this course of proceeding would not have that effect. The
newspapers advocating the repeal cause, more particularly the
Nation, the principal organ of the repeal party, in which strong
language against this country and the Government abounded,
were read by those who could read to those who could not on
Sundays and holidays. He regretted that the talent exhi-
bited in these newspapers was used in fermenting disturbances
among the lower order of the people. A. more fearful state of
things could not exist than at the present moment when
they saw great masses of the people arrayed in hostility against
the Government, and setting the law at defiance ? I o what
might it not lead ? Much anxietylhad even been expressed as
to the conduct of Ireland in the event of a war. This contin-
gency had been frequently referred to of late by the members
of the Repeal Association. He referred to a report of a meeting
held on the 30th of May in Ireland, to which Mr. O'Connell
was conveyed in a triumphal car, and at which the people car-
ried banners, and at which exciting language was used. He
gave the Government great credit for the measures which they
had lately brought forward for the benefit of Ireland, and hoped
they might have the effect of conciliating that country. He
should not have taken the present course if it were not for the
assertions which had been made on the other (the Ministerial)
side of the. House, as to the law having been vindicated, and
that the Government was as strong es ever. He denied that
this was so—he denied that the Government had either vindi-
cated the law, or was a strong one. But if they could answer
for the safety of Ireland he should not interfere; but, in his
opinion, Ireland had never been in so dangerous a state as it
was now. He apprehended that the Act for affording compen-
sation to tenants would not have the effect of satisfying the
people of Ireland, or of rendering them peaceable.
Lord BROUGHAM wished it to be distinctly understood
that he totally and entirely denied the statement that the result
of the reversal of the judgment of (he Queen's Bench inlreland
by the House of Lords, had led to disturbances in that country.
He denied that the judgment was reversed on technical grounds,
but on the merits of the case. Several of the counts in the in-
dictment were left untouched by the defendants in error, then
prisoners econvicted, and the judgment was reversed on the four
pleas found to be bad. It was not a technical piece of good
fortune. They did not reverse the judgment on the panel, but
on the question of special pleading. He was sorry that what
he had said with respect to his Noble Friend bringing forward
this motion without notice had given his Noble Friend pain.
He (Lord Brougham) ualnandwde,r
isnft
ooptordotit,oehrtalhtyeha
Ndi
‘s.rfihniooni teiisctoeef
rreledrfee:raarnne
ddd
it
to
was'. He
w‘
aCsO
(LI)
FT "county"
opiniono f Ltehi tart nnt
h,e
in good hands, was sufficient to meet the objections of the Noble
Lord with respect to party processions.
Lord DIs:NIMAN said his Noble Friend had stated the
gtounds on which the jegment was reversed with much cor-
rectness. He purposely obstained in giving hia judgment
from referring to the epithets used against the Government.
Lord FARNHAM said he had always been opposed to
party processions, as they had an injurious effect, and tended
to revive matters of history which, but for such demonstra-
tions, would be buried its oblivion. A magistrate infght act
on a sworn information to prevent any meeting being held
which might be expected to interrupt the public peace. It
was his duty as a landowner, anxious to promote the interest
of his country, to do what he could to prevent a breach of
the peace.

Lord CAMPBELL blamed the Noble Lord (Lord Broug-
ham) for raising the question of the reversal of judgment, who,
although not a Member of the Government, as far ac .}:e knew
—(Laughter)—rose up and answered the speech of the Noble
Lord who brought forward the motion. One of the principal
objections raised was that the jury list had been fraudulently
made up, and that the parties could not have had a fair trial.
Lord STANLEY said the assertion was made, but it w.as
net proved.
Lord CAMPBELL held that it had been proved.

The

fact was admitted in ths, demurrer. 1-1 c referred to the judg-
ment of the Learned Judges to show that what he had stated
was correct,

The LORD CHANCELLOR considered it very painful
to enter into a controversy with respect to the judgment of
that House in the case of Mr. O'Connell, which was reversed
subsequently on technical grounds. He considered that no
one could misunderstand this. Saying that the judgmernt was
reversed on technical grounds alone, inferred that they had
been acquitted on other grounds, whereas the parties w,,re
liberated from the punishment to which they were sentenced by
a slip in the entering of judgment. He felt confidence in the
correctness of his decision, and regretted that any judgment
which he had pronounced, after mature deliberation, should,
be called into question, as he considered it had been.
After a few words from Lord DENmAN and Lord BROUGHAM
in explanation,

Lord STANLEY said, that notwithstanding the discussion
that had taken place with respect to the reversal of the judg-
ment he still held his opinion that it was reversed on the
technicalities in the case. He did not understand the speech
of the Noble Lord who brought forward the subject, and was
of opinion that it would only have the effect of aggravating the
feelings of the Irish people towards England, more especially-
at a time when a better feeling was being promoted between
the two countries. He considered that no object would be
answered in bringing forward the subject. He denied that
the assertion of the Noble Lord with respect to the
difficulty of obtaining a fair decision from a jury
was true, and considered such an assertion would also aggravate
the feelings of the people of Ireland towards England. Politi-
, cal and religious feeling might in some degree interpose with
trial by jury, but that was no argument in favour of the abro-
gation of trial by jury in Ireland. The question of the state
of the country must be left to the Executive, who would not
fail to see that the law was not violated with impunity. But
the Noble Lord had not shown that the state of the country
was caused by the neglect of Government. With respect to
his quotations from newspapers, the acquittal of a person pro-
secuted for libel or for violating the law, was looked upon as
a triumph, and the person prosecuted as a martyr, and cliti
more injury than could bo easily conceived.—( Hear. ) With
regard to the state of the courts of Leitrim the Government
had taken every precaution for the protection of the peace,
increasing the number of magistrates and police, and he
thought they should be able to suppress any of those distur-
bances without seeking any further powers of their Lordships.
With regard to party processions, the Party Processions Act,
which had expired, was in every sense of the word one-sided,
and was introduced to suppress the dangerous proceedings of
the Orange societies, which caused much bloodshed and po-
litical and religions animosities among the people. Tt was not
the intention of the Government to renew the Party Processions
Act, believing that there was no eczasion for doing so, as the
time, he believed, had gone by when such a law was necessary.
The Ea.l of WICKLOW was glad that the Government
did not intend to renew that Act, and blamed the Government
for renewing the Act last year.
The Earl of ST. GERMANS said if they bad not done so
parties who might have rendered themselves amenable to the
law would have escaped punishment.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH blamed the Government
for not adopting measures which would give greater security
for the lives and property of persons in Ireland. At the late
assizes at Leitrim great difficulty was experienced in obtrining
convictions on account of the prejudices of juries ; in one cape,
the murder of Captain M'Lough, the jury was taken from the
♦ery class of which the prisoners were members.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE replied, and, after ad-
verting to the State trials and the reversal of the judgment,
concluded by saying that he considered it his duty to bring the
state of the county of Leitrim before their Lordships.
The subject then dropped.
LICENSING TOLL-BARS IN SCOTLAND.

The Duke of ROXBURGH presented a petition from Kelso
against licensing toll-bars in Scotland for the sale of spirituous
liquors.

THE TURNPIKES ROAD BILL.
This Bill went through Committee.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 13.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
DUBLIN AND DROGHEDA RAILWAY BILL.

The Dublin and Drogheda Railway Bill was read a third
time and passed.
LANCASTER AND CARLISLE RAILWAY.

The Lancaster and Carlisle Railway Bill was read a third
time and passed.

SHAW'S WATERWORKS BILL.

The report on Shaw's Waterworks Bill was brought up, and
the amendments were agreed tn.
GLASGOW, GARNKIRK, AND COATBRIDGE
RAILWAY.

The report on the Glasgow, Garnkirk and Coatbridge Rail-
way Bill was brought up, and the amendments were agreed to.
ABERDEEN RAILWAY.
The Aberdeen Railway Bill was read a third time and
passed.