The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-16 00:00:00

the petition said the first Minister of the Crown had been 1
guilty, he (Lord J. Russell), for one, even if he could find no
one else to agree with him, would give a decided negative to
the motion.—(Loud cheers. )
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD was anxious to say a few
words on this painful subject. He deeply regretted that such
expressions, so insulting to many of his fellow-countrymen, as
those which were to be found in this petition, should have
been used in any petition presented to that House. And even
had it been necessary that the petition should be printed, it
would only have been with the utmost reluctance that he could
Lave consented to such a motion. He was anxious on the pre-
sent occasion to express these sentiments because nothing could
be more injurious to the onosition t the Maynooth grant than
to have it placed on such groundso . He voted against that
grant because on principle he was opposed to the State esta-
blishing any religion. He was as reluctant as any man could
be in that House to oppose that grant on principles insulting to
his Roman Catholic fellow-subjects, and he, for one, would vote
against the printing of the petition.—( Hear. )
Mr. LIDDELL would not have troubled the House if it had
not been for the charge made against them by the Hon. Mem-
ber for Dundalk, of unnecessary squeamishness in refusing to
print this petition. The Hon. Member for Dundalk had alluded
to the Coronation Oath, and as the oath had been alluded to,
he (Mr. Liddell) would read it to the House.—( The Hon.
Gentleman here lead the Coronation Oath to the House. )
Now, he would ask the House if there was anything in the
Coronation Oath at all resembling the expressions made use
of in that petition? He might say that the Hon. Member's al-
lusion to the oath of abjuration was equally unfortunate. The
oath of abjuration simply called upon a Member to abjure that
doctrine which said that any person or prince who was excom-
municated or deprived of power by the Pope might be destroyed
or murdered by any of the subjects. Would they pretend to
sly that that doctrine was nut injurious and damnable. If it
were true, he should like to know what security there would be
to the life of the au. .jects of her Majesty..
Mr. REDINGTON said that he was still of opinion that
her Majesty did declare that the worship of the Virgin Mary
was damnable and idolatraus—now that was the doctrine of the
Roman Catholics.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said, that the object the House
had in requiring a Member to give notice of his intention to
have a petition printed was, to induce that Member to
make a notice of motion for some particular day. If a spe-
cific notice of motion were not necessary, he might have all
the petitions printed without the intention of founding a
motion thereon. If the Hon. Member for Knaresborough

made a specific notice of motion, the House could not refuse
the printing of the petition, and if the petition contained
anything calumnious or libellous, it were better to have it printed
for the use of the Members of the House only. The motion of
his Hon. Friend behind him was the best course that could be

taken for publicity, if that were his object. He took the best
course to find these objectionable passages on his breakfast
table to-morrow. Some kind friend from Dublin had favored
him (Mr. Duncombe) with a copy of this petition, and he
did not consider it of much importance, or likely to do much
harm.---( Hear, hear.) There was a public feeling that the
right of petitioning had been encroached upon, and they ought
to be very cautious in refusing the printing of any petition.
If the Hon. Member gave a specific notice that he would
found a motion on the petition, he had a right to have it

printed.
Mr. FERRAND said that it was not his intention to make
a distinct motion on that petition ; he would therefore with-
draw his motion.—( Laughter. )
• Dr. BOWRING presented petitions from Dissenting con-
gregations meeting in the towns of Blackburn and Oldham, in
favour of the grant to Maynooth.
Sir 11. H. INGLIS presented numerous petitions against
the grant.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN and Mr. COLLETT presented similar
petitions.
Lord WORSLEY presented above sixty petitions from
various places in England against the grant.
Mr. BRIGHT presented many petitions of a similar cha-
racter, and, among them, one from the Society of Friends at
Worcester.
Lord POLLINGTON and Mr. FERRAND preseated similar
petitions.
Mr. AGLIONBY presented three -petitions from as many
parishes in Cockermouth, against the grant.
The following Hon. Members also presented petitions having
a like object in view :—Lord Claude Hamilton, Mr. John
Stewart Wortley, Mr. W. Compton, Sir John Tyrrel (who said
that one of his petitions was signed by a great many ladies, who
were teachers in Sunday Schools), Sir G. Gore, Mr. Spooner,
Birmingham ; Sir George Staunton, from places in Hamp-
shire ; Mr. Holdsworth ; Mr. Wiltshire, from places in Yar-
mouth ; Mr. Buck, from Devonshire ; Mr. Masterman, from
places in the City of London ; Mr. Woodham, from Norfolk ;
Mr. Estcott, from Oxford; Colonel Sibthorp, from various
parishes in Lincolnshire ; Mr. Pattison, from one or two places
in the City of London; Mr. Sharman Crawford, from Roch-
dale ; Mr. Entwisle ' • Mr. C. Berkeley, from Cheltenham ;
Blewitt, from :Monmouth; Sir W. Clay, from Mile-end
and Stepney ; Mr. Bankes, frora Dorsetshire ; Mr. 0. Dun-
combo, from Yorkshire ; Mr. Ward ; Lord Clive ; Mr. Tolle-
ma che ; Mr. Evans, from plates in Derbyshire and Notting-
hamshire ; Lord Castlereagh, from Belfast ; Lord Ingestre ;
Mr. P. Stowart ; Mr. Hume, from Essex ; Lord Ebriugion,
from Devonshire ; Mr. M. Gibson ; and Mr. Ilinilley, 110
from various parts of England.
MAYNOOTH.

The order of the day fer the second reading of the May-
note!' Endowment Bill having been read,
Major BERESFORD said he generally gave a silent vote,
but thought it right on the present occasion to express his opi-
nions. lie stood before them in a double capacity of an Eng-
lish representative and an Irish Protestant. He diseiaimed all
intention of any offensive expressions towards his Roman
Catholic fellow subjects, for which he felt a great regard. In
1823, when a young man, he had been offered a seat in Parlia-
ment, if he would vote against Catholic Emancipation. But
he refused to do so, and remained out of Parliament. Let
him not therefore be called a bigot. There were limits to con-
cession, and when concession had been made to the Catholics
of Ireland, he would ask the Ilouse how it had been respoteded
to? The Right lion. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the
Home Department had stated that there was a
limit to concession ; but it woull seem that there was
no limit to concession. The motto of the Ministry seemed to
he toajours en avant. As for the question of the compact, he
denied that any such existed. I-he denied that there was any
contract at all with regard to the support of Maynonth ; but
there was at the time of the union a tangible and firm contract
with the Established Church, which was lout little regarded.
Had not ten bishops been swept away, and was not the in-
come of the ministers of the Established Church diminished
one-fourth ?—( Hear, hear.) This was a new measure altoge.
Cher—it was a measure for an endowment fur the first time pro-
posed, and he saw no special reasons why the Roman Catholic
religion should be endowed, which would not equally apply to
the endowment of other sects. On -hat principle he would
oppose this grant. He did nut think the Parliament and peo-
ple of England would consent to give an increased grant to
Illaynooth, which bad made such bad use of the means
already at its; disposal. —( Hear, hear. ) He who was acquainted
with Ireland knew that those who came out of Maynooth de-
voted themselves to the propagation of agitation, instead of
the dissemination of religion anti loyalty. The spiritual head
of the Roman Catholic religion was lately obliged to interfere
to check their proceedings, while the Right Hon. Baronet was
about to give them increased means of mischief. Both the
one and the other put forward pretensions to infallibility ; and
though the one checked agitation, and the other was inclined
to foster ir, he could only reconcile their rival claims by sup-
'menet ()icing permitted, as an Irishman, to commit a bull),
that bath were infallibly right. He also opposed this measure
because be feared it was but the beginning of further endow-
ment, and the payment of the Roman Catholic priests. The
men who hid obtained a higher degree of education,
and mere refined feelings, should be supported from
other sources than those from which they derived
their support at present. That was not his opinion—bon
;veils sermo. It was the general opinion in the House.
But from what sources were the Roman Catholic priests to be
put ? The people of England would not submit to any further
taxation for this purpoe, even if the present measure were
forced upon them.—( Hear.) A general election would soon
take place, and the people of England, though they might ab-
s'atnfrom vituperation for the past, would, however, exercise
a vigilant caution with respect. to the future —( Hear, hear. )
Whet: other means of paying the Roman Catholic clergy failed
them, he feared they would then have recourse to the Esta-
blished Church for the means, for it seemed that expediency
was now better than prineiple.—( Hear, hear ) Here, indeed,
they had scene-sh fters of a character that had seldom been
equalled ; for now those who had brought it forward, having
found that it was damned on one stage, would now have it -re-
enacted upon another with unbounded applause as the " Rival
Catholic."—( Loud laughter and cheers frum the Opposition.)
Besides the objection he had stated, there were minor ones,
with regard to the time and mode of bringing forward
this measure to which he wished to allude. With regard to
the time, there never was a time when, it was well known, the
Bill could be brought forward with greater facility by those
who hail introduced it than the present, for now that party
were under no control whatever. Another objection to the
time was, that the Government had introduced it at a period
when they had refused all aid for scriptural education in Ire-
land—( Cheers)—for the Government had refused the appeal
of the Venerable Primate of Ireland for the means of educating
the Protestants of Ireland in the faith in which they believed.
--(" Hear, hear," from the Ministerial benches. ) He main-
tained that the petitions presented against the grant
i to May-
nooth were fully equal to the number presented n former
times against the educational clauses of the Factory Bill. That
was withdrawn, and he trusted this would also be withdrawn.
They were told that these petitions emanated from agitation,
and ought not to be attended to. He denied the fact, he re-
probated the inference, and he trusted the people would know
who rejected their petitions. No part of the Established
Church had more reason to complain of disappointed hopes and
blighted expectations than the Protestants of Ireland. The
Protestants of Ireland knew that it was a sound maxim of re-
ligion that whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, but they felt
that to apply that principle in politics, and say " whom the
Premier loveth he chasteneth,'' would be most disagreeable in
theory, and oppressive in practice.—( Laughter.) The dis-
memberment of Maynooth would materially assist the stability
of the empire. He trusted, that though he had spoken plainly
and openly, he had said
nothing' uncourteous to those who dif-
fered from him in opinion - ' but he did consider that the Go-
vernment were bringing forward a measure diametrically op-
posed to the best principles of good government.—( Hear.)
Mr. BYNG wished to say a few words, and they would
w, on
be but afe in the thi s subject. He had felt in-
terestedßomanCatholics of Ireland for the
last fifty-seven years, and he could not allow this opportunity
to pass without saying' a few
upon. the question. He
supported this motion, not only on political grounds, but
What was far nearer to his heacra,tl6.religious grounds also.—
( Ireland had been
(Cheers.) He thought the
Europe—
worse governed than any other sub'
Scriptures that he was
and he could not find in the saerjecletaSterni
them all—that he was
(Hear)
ordered by the great God who had mad
ordered by that great God to hate
wasanye man
nothingm of all this in
a right to
fered from him in religion. Therebecause he dif-
fered
the Scriptures. He believed that ever
caohadhe tholht
worship God Almighty according to that i'ormanwhi'l
Almighty
would be most acceptable to the great God.
knew when a man prayed to him aright. He was th
of hearts, and He knew when they were sincere. Sincerityes
what He loved and He would bear with nothing in els was
He
( Mr. Beng). could not remain in that; gHousee.
could not, conscience, retain his vote,. if he' dide
not now give that vote in favour of the Roma
Catholics.—(Hear, hear.) He thought that, on coming ton
that House, he was on all questions to think of his fellow-men
and think of them alone. He must not think of self, " And
thank God," continued the Hon. Gentleman, " I can lay my
hand upon my heart, and say that I have never selfishly voted,
or voted in favour of that which I thought contrary to the
happiness and welfare of this great country—never, never,
never." He was sorry to see in this country so many Pro-
testants of all sects arrayed against this motion. He remem-
bered well that in former times they were arrayed in great
numbers against a friend of his, Harvey Combe, who sought
to introduce similar liberal measures. He (Mr. Byng) then
asked the Dissenters, if they voted against the Catholics on
that occasion, what would become of themselves next week ?
He asked them then, if they thought the Church of England
less barbarous to Dissenters than to Catholics? and he found
that, instead of being against him, the Dissenters were altoge-
ther for him.—( Hear, hear.) The more he thought of :it
the more convinced he was that conciliatory measures
were the best means the Government could adopt
to restore peace to Ireland.—(Cheers.) Let them consider
who were the Ministers at present, the Duke of Wellington
and Sir Robert Peel.—(Laughter.) And no two persons
could dislike this motion worse than the Duke of Wellington