The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-06 00:00:00

Lord J. RUSSELL said that it might be quite right that
they should not require a strict compliance with respect to
railways in Ireland, but it should be regulated by some rule of
that House.—( Hear, hear.) It would not be right that the
Committee of Standing Orders should be respected with regard
to all English Railway Bills, but whenever a report of an
Irish Railway Bill was to be made it was to be set at nought.
No public reasons could be given for upsetting their au-
thority. He wished that the House would came to 1101110 re-
solution with respect to Irish Railway Bills.
Sir T. FREMANTLE did not think that he was deserving
of the imputation of the Noble Lord, that he did not give his
authority for opposing this report. He was desirous that every
Member of the House should exercise his own discretion. He
would not say anything that would influence the mind of any
other person. He certainly did not vote in the capacity of
Secretary. In his own individual capacity, he could not think
that it was important that a railway communication, from the
east to the west of Ireland—(Hear, hear)—should pass this

present session.
Mr. AGLIONBY said he could assure the Hon. Member
that he had no personal feeling whatever on the subject ; but
having been a member of the Standing Orders Committee he
wished to say a few words in reference to this Bill. He was
not present when the discussion was brought on, nor did he
happen to be on the Committee on private Bills either at the
time, though a member of the Committee also; but he did now
seriously call on the Huse to pay attention to this matter, par-
ticularly as to what had been said on the subject of standing
orders.—( Hear, ltear.) The House well knew that the Com-
mittee on private Bills had been sub-divided into four sub-
Committees, and each of them had to sit three or four days in
each week, and the chairmen of some of them had frequently to
ask leave of the Speaker to sit after the House had met.—
(Hear, hear.) Now, surely, if the same rule that regulated
English Railway Bills was not to be applied to Irish Bills, he
would say the sooner the standing orders were altered to that
effect the better.—(Hear, hear.) At present the Committees
had somewhat of a judicial charactert and if that were not to be
kept up, and its decisions respected, the House had better alter
the standing oriers at once.—( Hear.) If the House did not
do that, then he would pray that it would respect the decisions
of its Committees—( Hear, hear)—for if it reversed those de-
cisions easily, or lightly, or inconsiderately, then neither the
public nor that House could have any confidence in those deci-
sions in future.—( Hear, hear.) He had heard something said
about the non-compliance with standing orders in certain cases
not being sufficient to warrant the House in rejecting a Bill.
Now, he was aware of an instance—that of the Manchester and
Birkenhead, in which there were but a few instances of non.
compliance with the standing orders, and the line was not per-
mitted to be proceeded with that session ; but here was an in-
stance of a Bill which contained more
.instances of non-com-
pliance, fifty per cent greater than those:in the one he had men-
tioned, and yet the House had declared that the Bill was to be
approved.—(Hear, hear). If the House meant to act with
consistency, let them not approve of a bill that had 300 or 400
objections in it, or else alter the standing orders so as to suit
Irish Bills.—(Hear, hear).
Mr. F. FRENCH said, that if he and others had not been
led to understand that there would be no opposition to the
Bill in question, he could have been:prepared to show the Com-
mittee that none of the important standing orders had been
violated.
Mr. WILSON PATTEN said it would be setting at
nought the labours of the Committee, if such proceedings as
had taken place here this evening were to be persevered in.
And he should also remark, that in his opinion the House could
not too strongly deprecate the practice of canvassing that had
been going on—(hear, hear)—for the purpose of procuring a
majority in favour of a Bill that had been reported against.—
( Hear, hear). If such a practice were to be continued—if the
House did not strenuously set its face against it, there would
be an end of the duties of Committees.—(Hear, hear.) He
now begged to give notice that he would, on to-morrow, move
a resolution, by which the whole merits of the case now in
question would be brought before the House, in order to show
that the Committee on Standing Orders had done their duty.
Lord HOWICK looked upon this question as one of great
public importance. They all knew how loud and general were
the complaints that this canvassing and other jobbing had been
going 01, and that by it many bills had been passed that never
should.—( Hear, hear.) If the Hou-e persevered in the deci-
sion it had just come to, all the old system of jobbing would
again be revived.—( Hear, bear.) The Right lion. Baronet
the Member for Buckingham had stat,d, in his capacity of
Chief Secretary for Ireland, the railway projects were of
great importance to that c untry. He (Lord Howick) knew
that perfectly well, but he em,,eived it would he much more
important not to make Ireland the victim of a jobbing system.
—( Cries of " Hear, hear.) Let this Bid now re-
main in its present position. A lapse of one year
was all the time that could be lost, and it would
be much better that that course should be followed than Mite
upon Ireland the evils that would be certain toll to
from the
effects of jobbing.—( Hear, bear.) They all knew the dan-
gerous resells that had flowed from doing business carelessly in
that country, and the Irish people should therefore be taught
to do it as it was done in England. He had heard of a deci-
sion that the House had come to in reference to one of those
Bills this evening ; he looked upon that as a step taken in a
wrong direction, width no time should be lost in retracing,
and he believed it was competent for the House to do so.—
( Hear, hear.) He would therefore suggest that when this
Bill should be presented, it should be postponed for six months.
—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for
Ireland had spoken in favour of this Bill ; hut it was well known
that it was not in his private capacity as Member for Bucking-
ham he did so, but as the Secretary of State for Ireland—
( Hear, hear)—and it would be impossible for him to divest
himself of the weight of influence and authori y that attached
to him in his official capacity. —( Hear, hear.) He would beg
of the House not to take any step in this matter which they
might have occasion te regret, but he hoped they would sup-
port the proper and wholesome authority of the standing orders.
Lord WORSLEY said that this was the first he had heard
of canvassing ; but ho was greatly surprised at it ; and he
would ask, if it were to be persevered in, where would it stop ?
—( Hear, hear.) If it were not put a stop to, it might extend
to the members of Committees.
Mr. DUNCOMBE contended that there ought to be some
appeal from the decisions of the Standing Orders Committee ;
if not, the appeals that bad been made would be a mere
mockery.
Here the subject dropped.
THE NEW ZEALAND QUESTION.
Captain ROUS wished to say a few words in reference to
the New Zealand question. Ile Would my that, in his opinion,
it would be impossible for any officer to rule that colony with
the present Company ; and if ever that Company brought the
question before the douse, he would prove that they had been
guilty of most discreditable practicer.
Mr. AGLIONBY, as one of the Directors of the Com-
pany, begged to say that he could show that the Gallant
Officer had been misinformed on the suNect.
Mr. RICE TREVOR said that no man could be more
amiable in private life, or better intentioned than Captain
Fitzroy.
Mr. WARD said that no act of the present Government
could have given more satisfaction than having recalled Captain
Fitzroy.
Sir ROBERT INGLIS said he knew that Gallant Officer
well, and was aware that he had made considerable sacrifice
when going out to New Zealand.
Mr. G. W. HOPE fully confirmed the statement which
had been made by the Hon. Member for Westminster, that
Captain Fitzroy had great difficulties to contend with.
Mr. B. ESCOTT inquired when the Hon. Member for
Sheffield intended to bring on his motion respecting burdens on
land?
Mr. WARD said, that if Government could not fix days for
public business, it was not to be expected that a private Mem-
ber could fix a day for any motion.
MAYNOOTH BILL.
The order of the day for bringing up the report on this Bill
was then read.
A number of petitions for and against the Bill were pre-
sented.
Mr. P. HOWARD presented a petition from Carlisle
against the Bill.
Sir R. PEEL presented several petitions in favour of the
Bill.
Mr. SPOONER presented petitions from Worcestershire
against the Bill.
Petitions against the Bill were presented by Mr. Hamilton,
Mr. Lockhart, and Mr. Granger.
The report was then brought up.
On the question that the amendments be read a second time,
Mr. S. CRAWFORD rose to move as an amendment, that
any provision for the separate or exclusive education of any par-
ticular religious denomination, or for the support or endow-
ment of any religious sect or sects by State grants or funds
raised by compulsory assessment, whether under the name of
tithes, rents, ceases, taxes, regium donum, or under any other
name or form whatever, is a violation of therights of conscience,
detrimental to religious truth, and dangerous to civil and reli-
gious freedom ; and that all such establishments, grants, or en-
dowments now in existence in the United Kingdom ought to
be discontinued, with as little delay as may be consistent with a
due regard to the rights of those who have life-interests in the
same. He had proposed this amendment in order to put on
record the opinion of a large body of the people of this country,
who had entrusted him with their petitions against this Bill.
He did not oppose this measure in a very hostile spirit to his
Catholic fellow-subjects. He believed that if this Bill were
allowed to pass, other denominations besides the Catholics
would call for endowments. He was against all State
grants for ecclesiastical purposes. He wished to go the
full extent of repudiating all State grants. Religion was an
ordinance of God, and not of man ; and man had therefore no
right to interfere with it. It might be said that it was not in •
terfering with the conscience of a man to impose a tax upon
hint. But he contended that to make a male pay for a Church
to which he did not belong, was to compel him to violate his
conscience. In matters of religion the State ought not to in-
terfere. Let them render to Cwsar the things which were
Caesar's, and to God the things which were God's. State
establishments and forced contributions were not calculated to
advance religious truth. The Established Church in this
country had large endowments, and yet they were im-
potent in extending their religion. The Dissenters were
invading them with great strides. The State Church and the
Church of the people in Ireland were always in a state of
hostility to each other. Let them look at the dissensions which
were at present tearing the Church in this country. There
were dissensions as to the colour of a gown, or the shape of an
altar. How was that state of things to be remedied? Could it
be done by that House ? No ; the only remedy that could be
found was in the Church itself. They did not find, in the
churches of the State, that any provisions were made for the
poor. If a State Church were necessary, why was there
not provision made for all its members. In the churches
of the State, provision was always made for the rich,
while the poor were not cared for. State churches were
hostile to religious liberty. State Churches were unjust and
impolitic, and the proposition which he now submitted to the
House, was a declaration against all Establishments. But
while his proposition affirmed this principle, it did not violate
any vested rights. He would propose that the revenues of
the lands now applied to: ecclesiastical purposes should, at
the decease of those parties who 'at present had a vested right
in them, be placed in the consolidated fund. He objected to
this grant to Maynooth simply because he supported the volun-
tary principle. The Protestants of England had, on other
occasions asserted the voluntary princ'ple :n preference to that
of an Establishment, and if they were now opposed to the
grant to Maynooth, on the voluntary principle, it ought not to
be construed into hostility to Ireland. lie was opposed to
monopoly in religion, as he was to monopoly in trade. He
might go into much detail in support of the proposition which
he now submitted to the House, but as this subject generally
was so
much before the House of late, he would not now
emnotteirounpoof wniht,ich he had ibut wotld
given
ntent
.himself with proposing the
Mr. HINDLF.Iir secondedg notice.
Mr.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS regretted that the motion of his
Hon. Friend was onitnepnorfusnot comprehensive a character, and
considerations, that he could not
embracedsupport it,s o
broughtm an many important forward, as it neidentally. He r: id
not say that he disagreed entirely
.. the motion, but for the
reason he had assigned he could
hnnotwgzit Isis support. Having
the reasons why
hoaft auTarrg:::.
voted for the present measure,
annudnti
he did so. When he considered the vasttagnatnnem,
ehres,
in
thisey contributed by
paid for the support of the Protestant religion,
tphoertißonomoafuthcis-atnhioolnicseyawnads
therai di
fromri ste n tt
he was astonished that the Hon. I3ar,net the Memabpe of taxes,
Ox-
ford, and the Hon. Member f,r Kent, and other Prpfors (h.
the Established Church should have given such oppositionsuers of
the Government measure. The an,ount of money so raid was
absolutely astounding. In the Army E,stim,-:Pa, the Navy
Fstimates, the Civil Contingencies, and the Miscellancous.
Estimates, he found large sums appropriated for the support or
he Protestant .Fetablishment. There was no less a sum than