The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-19 00:00:00

11 V"ENI N G, Ari 105 IA4 S,

~~~ !.J ~~ ~~~

They were toll, however, that it eeas too late to act upon
that principle. `the Hon. Member for Afentrose lied ap-
pealed to him as having, in his early life, been connected
with India, and ne asked him how he could consistently
advocate eny excliesive mode of religious instruction ?
He thanked that lion. Member for the delicate manner in
which he had referred to one of his relatives most dear to him
—he meant his late (ether. First of all, then, he did not be-
lieve that the British Parliament, for good or evil—in r.-spect
of the matter to which the Hon. Member lied referred, and
to which the lion. Member fir Canterbury had afterwards
adverted, namely, that the Presidency of Bombay had made a
tdais"tiinicut
ht,l(itat
atthiye Church of Rome should re-
authority
there was another question
was still more important for the purposes of that
ti,r
ont (siid!nrttetirefeir,e.
whßi
cult.
House, and to which he would advert for a few minutes. The
same lion. Member who had addressed the question to him
relative to India sail that they had no right to consider any-
thing but those mere eoetents which the Bill embodied ; that
they were not at 1 i hert y to consider the necessery touse-
quences of their measure, namely, the endowment of the
Horn in Catholic Chu, eh —to consider nothing more than that
contained it, the Bill, 'lamely, the eniboyment of the Roman
Catholic ele-gy
attenti in of the of
..;,..ifoauteloottio,— it! ihaet ,
shtea wobuylatibme
a very nerraw view of the qu,,iti n. lie woul I cal the
Secretary of State for the Home Department. lie ad-
mitted that this asure could not be longer delayed,
an expression which he ( Sir It. Inglis) considered net likely to ,
eeiar btenu vr t sto be directed. ills Hon. Friend the
secure a very favourable acceptance among those fur whose
pa!
Member for Newark represented himself—( Laughter)—and he
said that heeyfi t
mit ,
lirnprn, o go Honourable
Member for - Cork said that thisgreater
" further.
.asa 'r
great
earneste of
things ; but, wi'h reference to the Bill itself, he called it a
h
paltry eadcatior al grant. lie ( Sir R. Inglis) felt that it was
so; it was a renewal of Peter's pence—it was a new tribute to
the Church of Rome. The Hoe. the Sec:etary of War had
said that this was but the precursor of more. Of mote, aye,
the endowment of the Roman Catholic Church. He just
touched that question, and then at once turned from it.—
( Great laughter.) Anether Member of the Cabinet,
the First Comin;ssiouer of the Weeds and Forests,
had used the Caine familiar phrase, and said that this was but
one step. Now, one step must certainly 11121111 a second.—
( Laughter.) Then another Right lion. Gentleman the Chan-
e rtim ent
() was,f. t,
e that
Catholic there would
clergy,
cellor of the Exchequer had specifically said—no..hing.—(Great
laughter. ) Now ail that he could draw from these conclu-
sions, conclusions half admitted by the Members of the Ge-
v
and thatanbeat in
en-
dowmentaftteBr4dp,ereirodatanseme
future time, the Government would sooner or later proceed to
lay some such measure before the House. The Hon. Member
the late Secretary of War (Mr. Ellice) had also stated that
they were now embarking on a new had.
What
(lid that mean ? What, but the endowment of the
Roman Catholic Church; and yet they were told that they
were to eon eder nothing but what was embodied in that Bill.
A new course of policy ea! to be adopted--yes, a new course,
when they exchanged a small turn for a permanent endowment
of three times the amount, fixed on a similar scale of security
—namely, the vested civil establishment of the country.
In a speech made by the Hon. Member for Cork, on the 14th
April, 1845, he found an allusion made to the anticipated
restitution of property once held by the Roman Catholics in
Ireland. Now, he wished to know if the House was prepared
to admit the principle involved in this phrase " restitution." If
it began in Ireland, would it end there ? No, there were many
in that and the other House of Parliament to whom that
phrase restitution of abbey and Church lands-- ( Hear, hear)—
would not awaken most gratefnl recollections, or, at any rate,
which would not excite pleasing anticipations. But, if it be
just that the Church property in Ireland, which had been held
by the Protestants and their successors since the
Reformation, :should be restored to the Roman Catholics,
why should not the same priciple be elaimed and acted
upon in England? If they were to endow the Church of Rome
in Ireland, why should it not be endowed in England ? There
was nothing to prevent it, and the House might depend upon
it one would follow the other. They could, perhaps, form a
better opinion of this measure from the opinions of foreigners,
and what was the impression of their continental neighbours?
Whatever might be said of the leading articles which appeared
in the English newspapers, there was no doubt those that ap-
peared in the papers of the Continent, particularly those of
France, were far more important and influential, because they
were generally written by influential statesmen. And what
said the Journal des Debuts on this measure ? Why, it was
this, " The measure of the Prime Minister of England is
neither more nor less than a revolution of the policy pursued
by England since the Reformation. It is the greatest conces-
sion yet made by the Protestants, without excepting the
Emancipation Act of 1829." And such was the feeling of the
great body who had forwarded remonstrances against the mea-
sure. They did not object to their Roman Catholic fellow-
subjects enjoying equal civil rights with them, but they still
thought the measure they were discussing would lead
to another of 'a more important character, and even-
tually result in the downfai of Protestantism.—( Hear. )
Yet if by this series of measures they were led to embark in
one which would occasion the endowment of the Roman
Catholic Church, then he thought that the House ought to be
very careful to what they assented. He wished to ask his
Right Hon. Friend whether this was the erd or the beginning,
whether this was simply to authorise the education of 500
young men, or was it to go on to the endowment of the Roman
Catholic Church ? He would ask whether there was any ul-
terior measure in contemplation, for he thought that if a great
statesman had been four years in the uncontrolled possession of
power to go on with such a question as this he would have
chalked out for himself some particular course. He had been
surprised to hear the other night the Right Hon. Baronet the
Secretary for the Home Department, when this measure was
under consideration—he was surprised to hear that Right Hon.
Baronet say that he could not see the propriety of taking the
funds from the existing establishment in Ireland. This was a
curious phrase to come from the lips of the most determined
opponent of the Appropriation Hear, hear.) Was the
most powerful excitement which had prevailed since the Re-
form Bill to be disregarded ? He could not look at this as a
hasty question. It was of little matter to him who sat on the
benches on one side of the House, and who on the other. But
if they considered the petitions, almost without number,
and then looked at the general expression of the feeling
of the country universally, firmly, spontaneously expressed
on this question—he could not but perceive that if this measure
were catried it would be tarried aoinst the desire of the
whale of the Christian people of the country. He would tell
the Right Hon. Baronet that he had lost the good will of the
people of England. This was not like a mere political affection,
which you might gain to-morrow as you lost it yesterday.
They had given him their confidence because they believed
that he had a regard for the great institutions of the country.—
(Hear, hear.) But he could assure him that in dis-
appointing these
_expectations he had forfeited the
confidence of the people—( Herr, hear)—and in losing that
confidence, he had lost the power of governing them, and in
losing that, he had lost the source of his political power. He
would refer to the Hon. Member for Newark (Mr. Gladstone),
to the determined and energetic Member fur Stockport (Mr.
Cobden), and he would ask the Right Hon. Baronet whether
on any of the great questions to which they were committed, they
had either of them yielded their principles? In the course
which he (Sir R. Inglis) had taken, he had compromised
nothing, and he hoped that he should be able to maintain that
course to the end. The lion. and Gallant Commodore the
Member for Marylebone had appealed to his justice and his
fears. In his own profession it was well known that the Gal-
lant Officer had never known fear, and he would tell bias in
return, that on this occasion he was ready to do
him justice, and he felt that he need not entertain fear.
He begged to assure the House that he now regarded this as a
great .question of Protestant principle, whatever other Hon.
Members might think to the contrary, and while he felt sa-
tisfied on that point, and that he saw his way clearly is the
course he was about to take, he would act and vete, in the way
lie had already announced, perfectly regardless of consequences.
For he looked upon the discharge of his duty in that House
upon that question as of paramount importance, and he would
leave consequences to Providence. He now begged to conclude
ey saying that he most heartily concurred with the motion of
his lion. Friend the Member for Newcastle.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir R. PEEL—Sir, I trust we have now arrived at the
close of this discussion—a discussion which has been protracted
to a period unusually, and unprecedentedly long, but it has not
occupied near the time that it was necessary to devote to it,
considering the vast magnitude and importance of the subject
under discussion, and the sentiments elicited in the debate.
In the course of the debate it has been my good fortune to
listen to sentiments and feelings which the nature of the subject
naturally called for.—(Cheers.) I have listened to
esome
Honourable Members, declaring the course they irited
ed
to pursue, even at the hazard of the lossof
their
e Househeard
expressing their approval of the measure, while I have seats. I have heard many Members on this side of the
many more, actuated no doubt by feelings equally conscientious,
declaring that they differed from the former, and announcing
the course they intended to pursue, without permitting ititiaertsye
or political considerations to interfere. I beg to assure
Honourable Members that, however deeply I may regret the
opposition I have encountered, I honour those
at
hand—l. now
those hands
w
I have met it.—(Loud cheers.) On the other
speak of both sides of the House—l must say that the example
course because
them, because no doubt they have pursued that
of those Hon. Members is such as is
and I have no
they believed it to be politic and
just duct is highly
hesitation in saying that such con
orted and
those who have supp
honourable both to
for, in adopting that
highly honourable to
those who have opposed the measure,
(Hear, hear.)
the risk of relinquishing their political station.—(Hear,
any observation
1 have, up to this time, abstained from m
have been ex-
citedupon this discussion, and whatever feelings may
course, they have the anger of their constituents, and have run
debate, they hare been overpowered by, and merged into, one
feeling of deep interest and 'hope that this House would not be
within me, by the observations I have heard during the
a party to the rejection of this measure.—( Hear, hear.) You
will not, perhaps, be surprised that this measure should not
have emanated from those in this House who have hitherto
been known as the firm friends of the Roman Catholics
of Ireland, or that those who have brought it forward
should have forfeited your confidence.—( Hear, hear.)
Be that as it may, all I will say is, if we,..''''have
us of office,. withdraw youer confi-
dencel beg you, disregard th
forfeited the confidence of. his side of the House, punish us as
tell us—the Hon. Baronet the
rrniey.voeetto follow the rejection of this melt-
sAuireem.—be(rLfoeur dtchheeuerns;Lestihtyis
o u conse-
quences m
fatyo
thati
I stl think
but
fit, ldeseup
of Oxford tells
debate has taken, I think he will
confidence of a still more powerful
this House, but also the
to
of it. If any one looks the condition of Ireland,
forfeited the confidence, not only of the great. party we had in
party out
public duty could induce her
admit that nothing but a sense of
Pk hich
Ministers to incur the ris w we have incurred,
Majesty's
(Cries of " Hear, hear ") It cannot
and are incurring•—. who looks f•I. I will riot '
and to the course wide:
be doubted by any one
have beersau. )7—
There were immense meetings—
' interests and to conciliate the feelings of
heers.) In 1843 there was a
swaiyshwtieseplryeettoeoteurthceonideuct, that we governed by a
the Irish people ?—(
formi-
dable excitement in Ireland.
ugsitvieeeeexftrtahoierdineaarsey, powers.
We —or even of the empire. e determined to resist that move-
determined to check it—(Cheers)—
threatening to the tranquillity and, peaceofthe whole. country
move-
ment—(Cheers)—we
Legislature
eessity7and there
.was none—for
Leincitements to hasty and precipitate action,
bWeet callingwe
resisted
but when a case was established that the public peace was
duipdo nnaultlthtehs sec
of the Constitution. There was at the
enforced the powers
we did not
the° j
time a universal feeling that if vindicate the law
in danger, we relied upon
we should be accused of imbecility. We did so. And the
measures which we have since taken, with those which we now
propose, have been calculated to promote the happiness, and
to conciliate the affections, of the people of Ireland. There-
fore,not come from the English
the objections do ministers,
t I e
or those interested in the main enance of t I rotestant cause.
that time, whether it
—(Hear, hear.) At , was that
you had a more
lively recollection of the state of
Ireland in 1843,
I know not,you did almost
of a measure brought in by the G
unanimously approve
tted,
ment, which expressly permsanctioned, and encouraged
the endowment of Roman Catholic Bishops and Ministers, and
the advance of mone for the building of Roman Catholic
places of worship.—("leers.)
Well, but if you did that, why
are religious objections to be revived now ?—( Cheers.) You
appointed five Roman Catholic Commissioners (there were ten
Commissioners appointed, five necessarily Roman Catholic and
a Roman Catholic Secretary, and the expenses of that Com-
mission were defrayed out of the public funds ; we did that in
order that we should institute and encourage a voluntary en-
dowment of the Warren Catholic clergy. We were authorised
to use the discretion of the Crown' with respect to the

appointment of. some of tliat.e Commissioners—we proposed
that three of those should be prelates of the Roman Catholic
Church—they felt. it their duty to accept the appointment, and
they acted from publi.: and most disitits railed inotiv:sr. 'llsey
believed that you were honest in your intentions in doing an
act. of justice in a kind manner; and I trust that the result of
that Act was to break up that, in same degree, formidable
combination of the laity, clergy, and physical strength which
then existed. These prelates had great difficulty to encounter
in undertaking to co-operate with us in the execution of that
measure. There was a formidable agitation directed against
them, but confiding in the purity of their motives, and be-
lieving in the honourable intentions of the Government,
they resisted the force of that agitation, and we had the satis-
faction of seeing the prelates of the Established Church and
the prelates of the Roman Catholic religion acting in friendly
concert for the promotion of a common object. Let me say,
that that vial no small object to obtain. By the execution of
the first Act —that Act which received almost the unanimous
approbation of this 1I n r, and there was no violation of public
principle—no sacrifice of the interests of that Protestant re-
ligion to which I trust I limit), adhere, and the doctrines of
which I hold in as high estimation as any (dray lion. Friends
around me. But the result of the measure of justice
offered in the spirit of kindness was that which
I have described. It was an encouragement to proceed in the
same spit it. Ido not say it xas an encouragement to make any
concession inconsistent with religious principles and constitu-
tional principles; and I say no more than that it was a marked
encouragement to proceed in the course of conciliation and
justice. We had then to consider what eourse we should take
with respect to Maynooth. It was forced upon us. Neither
we, nor you, can escape the consideration. What will you do
with the College of Maynooth ? You supported it for fifty
years. My Honourable Friend ( Sir Robert 11. Inglis) to
prove the great difficulty of argument, makes the avowal that
he is prepared to withdraw the grant. Sir, lam n n.—( Cheers. )
When oprsed to her Majesty's Government, I came down here
expressly to support them in the maintenance of that grant. I
do not really believe that there can be ten men in this House
who, after having voted for the endowment Act of last year—
having acted in cordial concert with the Roman Catholic Pre•
lates who constituted the Commission (for the execu-
tion of that Act—l do not believe there are ten men who
think it would be possible for us to come down this year, and
state that we have conscientious scruples to prevent our conti-
nuing the grant to the C,llege of Maynooth. What would be
the feeling of the whole Roman Catholic community on such
an avowal ? We contend it is not merely a vote. You passed
three Acts of Parliament for cementing the connexion with that
institution. You appointed a visitor, and you appointed trustees,
and you subject their bye-laws to the revision of the LOT (1- Lieu-
tenant ; and the nomination of the President depends upon
his approbation. The relations in which you stand to May-
nooth have existed for 59 years, and can any one conceive it
possible that I, for instance, who in 1840 thought it impossible
to withhold the grant to that institution, should advise the
House of Commons to separate itself from all connexion with
it ? Surely there can be few who think that course desirable.
Shall we continue the grant? Sir, I say that is a
course worse even than the discontinuance of the vote.
Sonic Honourable Gentlemen have doubted the ac-
curacy of the statement which I made with regard
to Maynooth. The Right Hon. Gentleman read some
account which he had received of the comfortable situation
of the students, and appearance of the building. Sir, I
believe that I shall be confirmed by those who have been
there in all I said—namely, that it is an institution professedly
supported by the Government and Parliament, and is in a
condition utterly unworthy of the patronage of this House.
I find what I believe to be a much more correct account than
that to which the Right Hon. Gentleman has referred. It
was quoted by a Noble Lord, who is better acquainted with
the state of Ireland than almost any other Peer in the House
of Lords—l mean Lord Monteagle—who quoted from a book
which was written in the year 1834. It contained an accu-
rate description et the disagreeable necessities to which the
students in Maynooth were exposed. This writer said that
no Englishman could conceive who did not witness the state of
things a hich prevailed at Maynooth. ( Hear, hear.)
The dining-room, the kitchen, and students'-room,
were all the same, and the same writer asked why
should the condition of the place be so shamefully re-
duced ? And yet (said the Right Hon. Baronet), this is the
place in which those Roman Catholic students are to be edu-
cated, and to whom you assign some 9,0001. a year ? Some of
the objections which have been urged against Maynooth only
confirm my opinion of the policy of altering thissystem. My
Hon. Friend the Member for Dublin said that the Alayeooth
priests took a part in the late agitation. Can you be sur-
prised at it? The manner in which the grant was given—
the amount of that grant—so far from affording the
means of a liberal and enlightened education, compelled
them to make their education exclusively theologian,
and compelled them to make that theology exclusively
polemical. What has been the consequence of the vote that
you gave to Maynooth ? Three professors of theology had been
appointed—three professors living on some 100/.for 1201. a year,
endowed by you for teaching the doctrines of the Roman
Catholic faith. Is it, I ask, any practical compensation to
them ; or is it from dread of a violation of principle to you, in
that niggardly and parsimonious way. I read an account in
the evidence given in 1826, of the condition of the Professors
of Greek and Latin at Maynooth. A gentleman, highly dis-
tinguished for his acquirements, and who had gained every
prize, was asked what be was, before this Commission. He re-
plied, "the professor of Greek and Latin." He was then asked
if he received anything from the annual vote. He said that he
received 801. a year Irish, thirty guineas of which were de-
ducted on account of groceries and other necessaries. Can we
continue that state of things ? Do we violate any principle by
improving it?—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") If so, Sir, I
cannot be any party to the continuance of snch a state of
things. They could not send out theologists to be parish
priests of Ireland, clergymen capable of instructing their
flocks. who had received an education of this sort. We pro-
pose to increase the comforts of life, and better the condition
of the professors. We propose to hold out to them induce-
ments, in order that they may remain longer there. We wish
to have men of high acquirements and good character. At
present they devote themselves to this toil, at this
miserable salary, for the pure ze:l which they
feel for the interests of religion, and for the cause
of education. But do you act inconsistently with the prin-
ciples of the Christian religions if you raise their character, at
least their position, and give them the means of suppoiting
their religion with decency ? Now, mark what results from this
principle and endowment Act. You have given permission to
landed proprietors to make voluntary endowments. Sir, Ido
hope that the landed proprietors will avail themselves of the
facilities which are legitimately afforded them under the Act;
we cannot conceive any mode of endowment pregnant with
more advantages to the public interest, and tending more to
assuag,e the bitterness to which religious differences give rise
than is, such a connexion.: If you will make the Roman Catho-
lic priests net merely skilful polemics, but useful in every
respect, give them the means of acquiring scientific acquire-
ments, of making them good chemists, good proficients in
modern science, then probably the landed proprietors will feel
an inducement to avail themselves of this power, and by
voluntary contributions make endowments. The increase of
this vote has a material influence upon the Charitable Bequests
Act, and will greatly facilitate its execution. We are told 1
that the establishment is of a monastic and ascetic character.
Whose fault is that? Not the fault of the Roman Catholic
priests. In 1795, at the institution of Maynooth College, Mr.
Grattan presented a petition from the Roman Catholic body,
objecting to that clause in the Act which prevented the educa-
tion of Protestants there, and the trustees of Maynooth Col-
lege established a lay college there, and did riot wish that the
institution should be of an exclusive character. We interfered
to prevent this, and Mr. Abbott informed the secretary to
Maynooth College that the British Government would not
allow the lay college to continue, and it was
accordingly suppressed.—( Hear, hear.) Therefore the
Roman Catholic authorities were not responsible for
the peculiar character of the education pursued there.
At the same time my belief is, that any attempt to make, as a
condition of the education given them, that it should be of a
mixed and secular character—any attempt of this sort would
virtually alter the character of liberality, arid probably prevent
the acceptance of this grant. Mr. Burke inculcated on the
British Government the policy of giving separate education
to those who were destined to discharge the functions of the
Roman Catholic priesthood. Why, Sir, you determined then
that it was desirable to increase this grant, and you deter-
mined to increase it, and to make the offer in a manner which
should be thoroughly acceptable to the Roman Catholics of
Ireland. We considered well that question. We did not act
precipitately: We asked ourselves the question, shall we,
before proposing this increase, institute an inquiry
into the course of instruction pursued there. We referred to
the inquiry instituted in 1826, and came to the conclusion that
no beneficial result would arise from a Commission of Inquiry.
Was that inquiry conducted in a friendly or a hostile spirit?
We thought that that would give rise to hostile theological
controversy, because the Commission would contain necessarily
many persons hostile to Maynooth ; and I admit we thought it
better to adopt Maynooth as it was. We determined
to trust for the beneficial effects of our interference
to the liberality and confidence w ith which we acted.—( Hear.)
Sir, we proposed that the vote should be permanent instead of
annual. We did not think that by making it a permanent in-
stead of an annual vote we interfered with any existing prin.
ciple ; and we do think that by making it permanent we shall
remove annual controversy and discussion from the House of
Commons—(Cheers)—that we shall produce peace and relieve
ourselves from painful contention.—(Cheers.) We incorpo-
rated the trust because we thought that actual incorporation was
in conformity with the spirit which the original Act possessed.
You appointed trustees, and you enabled them to purchase land,
but you did not enable them to possess the land so acquired;
you engender great expense upon them— you admitted the
principle that trustees should be appointed—that they sheuld
have the power of acquiring land, we propose that they should
have the power of holding the necessity of constant supervision.
'that is the nature of the grant we propose—l say that in mak •
ing this grant, though we incorporate the trustees—though the
vote is permanent— I say that in this there is no
violation of principle, which does not apply to the
continuation of the vote for another fifty years,
that vote being applied distinctly under the authority of Par-
liament to the inculcation of the tenets of the Roman Ca-
tholic religion.—( Hear, hear.) It is said that the Roman
Catholic people of Ireland are indifferent to this—that this
grant will be without any effect on the people of Ireland—
that they will reject it as an unnecessary boon, and will not
be thankful for it. I think you do injustice to their feel-
ings.—(Loud cries of " Hear, bear.") I believe the gene-
rosity with which you shall have acted, will
produce gratitude in them.—( Hear, hear.) When
they heard of the proposition, they wrote immediately a letter
of which this is a part. I think there are 17 professors at
Maynooth ; and this letter, addressed tome, is signed by 16 out
of 17, the other being incapacitated from signing it by illness;
and they thus expressed themselves:—cc Sir, The undersigned
beg leave respeettully to :express their deep sense of gratitude
for the very liberal provision which you, as the head of the
Government, have proposed for the education of the Roman
Catholic clergy, and still more for the kind and gracious
manner in which you have recommended the mea-
sure to the favourable consideration of Parliament."
Now if you ask me whether I believe it more for the interest
of this country that the educators of youth should be influenced
by the grateful feeling here expressed, rather than that they
should be men whom you have starved on the pittance you
have hitherto given them—(Leud cheers)—l do not hesitate
to say that I believe it to be for the interests of peace and good
order—( Hear, hear)—nay, that I believe it rather for the
interests of the Protestant religion that I should commit the
instruction of young men who are to be the spiritual
guardians of the people of another faith, to in-
structors who will be grateful for liberality • rather
than to men who view with discontent and inclgnation
the paltry pittance which you assign to them, under the
pretence of supporting them. —(Loud cheers.) I do not
carry this too far —I do not mean to say that they are satisfied
with the law, or that the institution will be perfectly satis-
factory. Ido not mean to say that they have made any com-
promise or sacrifice of principle—l cannot guarantee to you
that they will receive any vote for Maynooth, as, in their
opinion, a complete and final measure.—(Hear, hear, from the
Ministerial benches.) No, I cannot say that ; but they are not
indifferent to your liberality, and in the first impulse of
a generous feeling they say this is an honourable and liberal
provision for us. That is the only inference I wish to draw,
and that is the motive upon which we actinpunit atkwinog(ptlhesi.s
grant. My Hon. Friend (Sir R. Inglis) has
Lions to me. He has said, " I call on you to state whether or
not this is part for a preconcerted system, the whole of which
we have not developed, and whether this proposition, • re-
ference to Maynooth, is brought forward designedly f:
purpose, and for a further endowment of the Roman Catholic
clergy. will answer him that this measure is

brought foroaril singly and individually on its own abstract
merits—that this proposition is not part of a preconcei ted sys-
tein—and that it is not brought forward with the design of
bringing, forward any fro thee measure. We have had no cum-
unicatione telist ever or) the subject, with any aatiroritie3 in
Irelarld or elsewhere. We have nothing upon that sub-
ject in oar contemplation. You may say I saw ru-
mours to the effect, that though there was no coin-
muuication with Roman Catholic authorPiee iu Ireland,
set that we have had. secret negotiitious with higher autho-
rities at Rome. Now I state explicitly that those reports ige
altogether without foundation, and I have a strong impression
that you will do no good in Ireland by secret and unavowed
negotiations with Rome to which the Roman Catholics
of Ireland are not made a party.—( Hear, hear. )
Ido nut believe that any attempt at negotiation for the pur-
psse of fettering the independence of the Roman Catholic
clergy of Ireland, or of establishing a connexion between the
Homan Catholic Church in Ireland and the State, could lead
to any satisfactory result unless the. Roman Catholic clergy and
the Ruiners Catholic laity Ireland were parties to that ne-
eirtia' ion.—(Cheers.) I have said that this measure which
we now propose is not a part of any general system. I have
said that it is not brought forward for the purpose of facilitating
any future proposal for the endowment of the Roman Catholic
Church of Ireland.—(Hear, Lear. ) But I say, also, with re-
spect to that question of endowment that it is a question sur-
rounded with g; eat difficulties.—( Hear, hear.) I see no
reason to believe that there exists on the part of the Roman
Catholic laity—l see no reason to believe that there exists on
the part of the Roman C ,tholic any intention to depart from
the declaration which was made oil a :scent occasion by the
Hon. Gentleman the Hon. Member for Kildare with respect.
to the endowment of the Roman Catholic Church. It was dist incly
stated by that lion. Gentleman, that both the Catholic laity
and the Catholic clergy were opposed to any State endowment
of the Roman Catholic church. It is also impossible not to
sac, after the demonstrations of feeling which have been made
in this country with regard to the measure under discussion,
that the subject is one of immense difficulty ; and in stating
simply and merely the truth with respect to this, then, I say
that we entertain on intention of proposing any measure for
the endowment of the Roman Catholic church ; but when
my Honourable Friend says, will you go on to say that it
is not consisrent with your principles to propose any endow-
ment for the Roman Catholic Church—will you say that you
have decided that at any future time you will not propose any
such endowment. I say that my Ilieht Hon. Friend has no
right to ask such a question.—( Cheers and counter-cheering.)
Now, I beg the House to draw no unfavourable inference from
what I have said.—(lronical cheers.) We have no ssch in-
tention ; but I will not consent to hamper and embarrass any
future Government by any declaration like that sought to be
wruag from me—that the difficulties in the way of the
endowment of the Roman Catholic Church are insuperable.
—(Cheers.) We have not any such measure in contemplation.
at present. I see very great difficulties in the way of such a
proposition, but no one has any right to call upon me to say
that those difficulties are insuperable, and I will not purchase
any relaxation of the opposition by which this measure has been
me t by placing upon record any declaration fettering the ac-
tions of those who may hereafter be responsible for the Govern-
ment. My Hon. Friend asks if I do not consider that on
principle there is a religious objection to this measure. Now I
cannot say that there is any decided religious objection to it.
I do not think that my Honsurable Friends can
fairly take a religious objection to this proposal.
( Hear, hear.) Now a religious objection might have
been much more fairly taken to the Endowment Act of
last session.—(Cheers.) By that Act you created a board
for facilitating the endowment of the Roman Catholic:clergy,
and for the building of Roman Catholic chapels. Now, that
measure was much more open to religious objection than the
proposition for an increased grant to Maynooth. I cannot
concur in the dictum of the Hon. Gentleman, that it is an
offence in the eyes of God and a dereliction of religious principle
in all circumstances, and at all times to grant money for re-
ligious purposes to those who differ from the religious tenets of
the Church to which we belong. Now let us see how:iny lion.
Friend gets over the difficulty of Malta. True, he says, we took
Malta under a capitulation, which we are bound to observe;
but why should we take Malta at all ?—(Lond cheers.) Why,
because it was a convenient possession in the Mediterranean,
and we are ready to go to war rather than abandon it.—( Hear,
hear.) But if a religious principle was involved in the matter
—if it were contrary to religious principle to undertake the
maintenance of the Roman Catholic Church, why did we accept
Malta at all? My Hon. Friend cannot get rid of the difficulty
by referring to the capitulation. The religious difficulty was
involved in the acceptance of it.—( Loud cheers.) But, Sir,
this is a most dangerous doctrine to advocate as respects
the interests of the Established Church itself.—( Hear, and
cheers.) The principle is this, that it is a violation of con-
science to call upon any one to support a religious faith
from the tenets of which he dissents.—( Hear, hear.) Now,
in arguing the question of establishments for the Dissenter, I
may say to him that the Established Church is a great national
institution, that as such, all have an interest in its welfare, and
all are equally called on to contribute towards its support, and
may say, too, in doing so, you violate no conscientious scruple.
You arc aiding the general cause of religion by supporting the
Established Church. But I say to the Dissenter no tax can be im-
posed for the maintenance of the Established Church, and if, after
that, I make him, whether he be willing or not, contribute to-
wards its support, if 1 subject him, not only to a pecuniary im-
post, in support of the Church, but accompanying that
impost by an avowed insult to his religious feelings,
in what a position am I not placing the interests
of the Established Church?—( Loud cheers.) I know that the
Hon. Gentleman says that tithes are an impost upon property,
and that Dissenters take property subject to that encumbrance,
and that therefore it is no violation of their conscientious
scruples to take from them tithes. I know that he says that
church-rates are likewise an impost upon property, but what
does he say to Church extensionl?—( Loud cheers. )
Is that a legal incumbrance on property ?—( Loud
cheers.) Now, suppose that the Government should
think it advisable to do as Government had done in
some former years, to propose a grant for the construction of
religious edifices, in connexion with the Church Establish •
ment, should we be able, in accordance with the principles of
the Hon. Gentleman to call upon the Dissenters to contri-
bute without any violation of their religious scruples?—(Loud
cheers.) I must confess that I see no difference in the cases,
and I believe that w c violate religious scruplea just as much in
calling upon members of the Established Church to contribute to
the support of the Protestant Dissenters of Ulster, as to call
upon those Dissenters to contribute to the support of the Esta-
blished Church. This is a most dangerous doctrine to propa•
gate with regard to the Established Church. Do you violate
any religious principle by calling upon the Quaker, who ob-
jects to all war, to contribute towards the support of the
standing army ? Sir, I do not believe that there is any religious
principle involved in this measure.—(Cheers.) I believe that
the measure which is now proposed by the tiovernment
for the permanent endowment of Maynaoth is just towards
the Roman Catholics, and that it is contrary to no principle
of religion. As to the effect which the vote of this House
may produce, I believe that the willing adoption of this
measure will produce a kindly feeling in Ireland. It has
already produced a great effect there. It has already produced
a great effect here. It has been received in a grateful and a
friendly spirit, corresponding with the spirit in which it has
been proposed.—(Cheers.) I hardly expected that it would
have produced this effect.—( Cheers. ) Ido not believe that the
gratitude which has been expressed by the Roman Catholics in
Ireland has been expressed in the expectation of future gain,
but I believe that the effect produced has been a natural effect,
which a kind and generous policy invariably produces as its re-
sult.—.-(Loud cheers.) Sir, I will not be tempted to refer to
the speech of the Right lion. Gentleman the Member for
Edinburgh, and to the taunts and imputations which he
thought proper to indulge in ; but I will rather fol-
low the example of the Noble Lord, and abstain
from everything that can create a feeling of irritation.
I think I could prove from the admissions in the speeches of
the Right Hon. Gentleman to this House—though I do not
mean to say that he has in those speeches committed the
slightest violation of principle—though Ido not mean to say
he spoke of the measure because of the difference between
9,000/. a-year and 26,000/. ; but I could prove from
the speeches of the Right lion. Gentleman, that
he is the last man in the House who should throw an
imputation upon the present Government.—(hear, hear.)
Every feeling with regard to what has been said about the in-
consistency or the security of the Government, I totally dis-
regard, for I say they should be, and they are subservient to
the one feeling which prompts me to utter this expression, do
not reject this Bill.—( Cheers. ) I do not know what the
consequences may be with regard to the kindly relations
between England and Ireland, but this I know that
the proposition has been the means of calling forth the most
kindly feelings in the minds of a grateful people. Therefore,
I say, let all parties combine and aid the Government,
in carrying out this measure.—( Loud cheers.) Take
what course you please in regard to the Government
but I say let not your indignation fall upon the measure, but on
those who have brought it forward.--( Hear, hear.) I shall
say no more about it slow on that point; but I mud,
remind the House that it is such a measure, and is now
in such a state as will render it impossible to
withdraw it without creating suspicion, and ,inflicting a deep
wound on the feelings of the Irish people.—( Hear, hear.) I
do not press the measure because it is competent for me to do
so, but because I believe it to be a wise, and a just, and an
equitable measure.—( Cheers.) I say also, recollect that
we are responsible for the peace of Irelantl.We must break
up the formidable confederacy that exists there against the Go-
vernment ; but I do not believe that we can break it by force.
I believe that with respect to the maintenance of the Union and
the Established Church, you can do much to break up that
confederacy by acting towards the Irish people in a spirit of
kindness, and of forbearance aud of generosity, and I believe it
is essential that we should do so, in order to carry on the Go-
vernment, and to preserve the peace and union of the two
countries —(Hear, hear, and cheers.) I gave notice of the in-
tention of the Government to bring on this measure
last session of Parliament, without the slightest reference to
circumstances that have since taken place. But upon the day
upon which I gave notice of our intention to bring it on, our
attention was called by the Noble Lord opposite to
another matter of great importance.--( Hear.) The
Noble Lord called our attention to a rather ominous
circumstance; and there certainly did appear some reason for
it, fcr a cloud appeared in the western horizon, small indeed at
first, but threatening in its position and aspect.—(Year. )
It became my duty, on the part of the Government, on that
day, in temperate but significant language, to depart so far
from the caution which is usually observed by a Minister as to
declare publicly, that while we were most anxious for the
amicable adjustment of the differences—while we would leave
nothing undone to effect that amicable adjustroent, yet, if our
rights were invaded, we were prepared and determined to
maintain them.—(Loud cheers.) I own to you, that when I
swa- at
is c s
faaletld
iennandupon
etno m n
sn
laakte i
nthatthat,
at
tine
before,did r e cIo I
ilieac,
it with i t
sent
nhteeerrbi nugr
y. )
rr.,
e—m(bletre n et
owl
Ca •elc
ofG peacent
Gentleman
at
it to
there l a n
tahemeHuoagne.,
Smythe) thought it not improbable that the time might
come when this country might be compelled to summon
all her energies in her defence. I heard the speech of that.
Hon. Gentleman with great satisfaction, from the ability anti
eloquence which it displayed.—( Cheers.) I heard the speech
of the Noble Lord (Lord J. Manners) on the same evening,
differing, as I did, from the Noble Lord in many of the posi-
tions which he took—differing altogether from him in his views
with regard to the Revolution and to that Prince whom he
called the Dutch Stadtholder ; but it was impossible for me,
enile e t
s this i toa
differing from him as I did, not to hear his speech and the
speech of the Hon. Gentleman, without very great satisfaction,
tantethllensnw.ouspeencttleomf
kfuntnuw notreeminbeentche;r hie foretolde
r
an earlier period, when others thought from a first
ment that. he had failed-1 tried to console him,
m
andembarrass-
I told him
my conviction was, that he was destined to
vfuture distinction.—
(Cheers.) My anticipations have bee
of the other night.—.( Renewed cheers.) Sir, in the course of
l n rea Bed by the display
that speech the lion. Gentleman said he thought it probable,
that in case it should be necessary
this country in the defence
of ry to summon tit© energies of
her honour and her interests,
that high trust would be committed to my hands. May God
forbid that so great an evil
May God forbid may fall upon us.—(Loud cheers.)
so great an evil may fall or u p r the world as
my lion. Friend has shadowed forth, in his
—(Cheers.) But whatever may be'
the result powerful speech.
ofthis debate
—to whatever hands thin
destinies
of this country
may be committed, I shall
take my place by the side
of sn
successors, and shall give them every
support in my power to this just and honourable cause.
—(Cheers) If the calamity of war should heft' us, it is
my earnest hope that when it occurs it will find the people of
this empire united in loyalty to the throne, in mutual confi-
dence, and in a love of those institutions from which
they derive the highett beuefits.—(Tremendous cheering.)

It is my earnest prayer that the result of our measure* Rai itek
SO to unite the people of this realm, as to ensure the triumph
of a just cause.—( The Right lion: Baronet sat down amictSfr
loud and continued cheering. )
The House then divided, when. there appeared—
For the amendment
Against it
i‘lajority
On cur return to the gallery, we fund the House in Com.
initt..e considering the bill merely pro, orn a, with a view to
its being recommitted on Friday next.
Sir R. INGLIS objected to i roceedinu with even a Single
stage of the Bill at that hour.
The Bill was then ordered to be considered in Committee
on Friday next, and the House resumed.
Mr. PLUMPTRE wished to know when it was understc od
that any further pro.eedinos would be taken on the Bill?
Lord J. RUSSELL said the Hon. Member had not heard
the discussion which took place at an early period in the evee-
ing on this subject. The Committee on the Bill was postponed,
as he (Lord J. Rusiell) understood, till Friday next ; but the
question of its being a charge on the consolidated fund must be
moved in a previous Committee, and that previous Committee
was arranged for Monday next, when the Hon. Member for
Sheffield would propose his motion.
Mr. DUNCO.IIIII-2 sail he should certainly bring on his
resolutions respecting the railway d-p..rtment of the Board
of Trade, of whieh he had given notice, before this, on Mon-
day night.
The SPEAKER—WiII you divide on it?
Mr. DUNCOSIBE—Yes.
The gallery was then cleared fcr a division. The number*
were--

For going into the previous Committee on
'AJonday
Against it
Majority for the Committee ••• —36
The other orders of the day were then disposed
of, and the
House adjourned at Half-past Three o'clock.
ALLE

GE D INDISPOSITION OF
THE DUKE OP WELLINGTON.
The following paragraphs appeared in the Morning Past of
yesterday, relative to the supposed illness of the Duke of Wel-
lington, in the House of Lords, on Wednesday night:—
" The Duke of Wellington, whose sudden indisposition in
the House of Lords, last evening, will be found noticed in
the summary of our Parliamentary report, was, we are re-
joiced to state, on inquiry at Apsley house, shortly before
midnight, pronounced ' perfectly convalescent.'
" Considerable excitement was caused during the discus-
sion on this question by the sudden departure from the House
of the Duke of Wellington, leaning on the arm of another
Peer, in a state of great apparent feebleness."
It will be wen, however, by the following letter, which we
publish at the request of the Noble Duke, that the matter
originated in mistake :

London, April 18, 1845.
F. M. the Duke of Wellington presents his compliments to
the Editor of the Morning Post.
His attention has just now been drawn to two paragraphs
in the Morning Post of this morning respecting himself, which,
considering the following circumstances, the Duke must con-
sider as neither more nor less than wilfully false.
It is true that the Duke of Wellington, during the debate,
got up from his place, and gave the assistance of his arm to a
Noble Lord standing on the floor of the House, who it is well
known has tke misfortune to be blind, and conducted him
towards the door of the House, when he placed him under the
care of another person.
The Duke then returned to his place, in which he remained
till the House adjourned, and even took part in the discus-
sion of the business transacted.

A person called at the Duke's house last night at eleven
o'clock, not twelve, to inquire how the Duke was. The
answer was, " perfectly well," and not that " he was con-
valescent."

lle has stated these facts as the foundation for his request
that the Editor of the Morning Post will be pleased to give
a positive contradiction to the paragraphs above referred to;
and that the Editor will be pleased to give directions that
when his name is inserted in his paper for the future, care
should be taken that it is not made the matter of a falsehood.
The Duke makes this request, in order, first, to relieve the
anxiety of many, and next, to save himself some trouble.
To the Editor of the Morning Post.
Apslephouse was yesterday morning besieged by in-
quirers after his Grace's health. The answer was,
‘• The l)ukc is very well." "Oh no," was the reply, "it is
stated in the paper that he was taken ill in the House of
Lords last night." " I can only say," rejoined the servant,
" that he came home from the House last night in his usual
health, and ate as good a dinner as ever he did in his life: he
says he is very well himself, and I suppose he ought to know
as well as the ' paper.'"

'e believe it will be conceded that we seldom fall into
even any of those accidental errors that must be unavoidable
in the management of a newspaper establishment; and we
feel assured of this admission even from our most ardent po-
litical opponents, that we are incapable of deviating into in-
tentional misrepresentation upon any subject. That we have
erred, therefore, in putting forth a groundless alarm as to
the state of the Duke of Wellington's health in our journal
of yesterday, will, we feel convinced, be attributed solely to
an " untoward " accident, arising from circumstances, which,
although in fact unsubstantial, were not altogether without
an appearance of reality. It is as generally known as it was
regretted at the time that, on a former occasion, his Grace
was suddenly seized with illness in the House, happily of a
temporary nature, and was conveyed to Apsley house in a
condition that gave pain to the whole nation ; and on that
occasion his Grace quitted his seat and left the House of Lords
leaning on the arm of a Noble Peer (we believe Lord Ellen-
borough) almost precisely under similar circumstances to those
which attended his apparent departure from the House
on Thursday evening. It appears by his Grace's letter, how-
ever, that on Thursday it was his Grace who gave support to
a nobleman, whose infirmity required safe conduct, by taking
his arm, and it is impossible that any can rejoice more than
we do at his Grace's ability to afford that aid, or can more
sincerely desire its duration. We think, therefore, his
Grace has been rather too hard upon us in attributing wilful
misrepresentation. Who would wilfully misrepresent the
Duke of Wellington's state of health? No; our error arose
from an impression that prevailed in the galleries of the
House at the time, that the Noble Duke was really obliged
to quit the House through illness, and had been assisted, as
on a former occasion, to his carriage, which led sur reporter
to notice the circumstance of the Duke's departure in his
report. We, however, not resting on this authority alone,
sent to make inquiry at his Grace's residence, when the an-
swer given, we regret to say, must have been misunderstood
by the person who was instructed on the occasion. The
Duke's most zealous menus tanu Wileit ttiv thy, uvt
found?) cannot feel more gratified than we do at his excel-
lent state of health, and if we ever allude to any deteriora-
tion of it, it is only because we know that he is not, what
we should wish him to be in life, as he is in fame—immortal.
Post.

COURT CIRCULAR.
The Queen, accompanied by the Princess Royal, and at-
tended by the Lady in Waiting, took an airing yesterday
afternoon in an open carriage and four. Colonel Xrbuthnot,
Equerry in Waiting, was in attendance on horseback.
His Royal Highness Prince Albert rode out on horseback
yesterday morning, attended by Colonel Bouverie. In the
afternoon his Royal highness presided at a meeting of the
Commissioners for promoting and encouraging the Fine Arts
in the rebuilding the I'alace of Westminster.
The meeting was held in one of the Committee-rooms of
the House of Commons. Prince Albert arrived at a quarter
before three o'clock, attended by Colonel Bouverie.
The Commissioners present were Lord Ashburton, Lord
Colborne, the Right Hon. the Speaker of the House of Com-
mons, Viscount Mahon, Mr. Gaily Knight, Mr. Benjamin
llawee, Mr. Wyse, Mr. Samuel Rogers, and Mr. Henry
Hallam.
After the meeting Prince Albert, attended by Mr. Last-
lake, the Secretary to the Commission, and Mr. Barry, the
architect, inspected different parts of the new Palace.
His Royal Highness took his departure at six o'clock,
attended by Colonel Bouverie.
Their Royal Highnesses the Prince of Wales, Prince Alfred,
and the Princess Alice were taken airings yesterday iu the
royal gardens.
Lord George Lennox and Captain Francis Seymour had
the honour of joining the royal circle at Buckingham Palace,
at dinner yesterday.
Iler Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent had a dinner-
party yesterday, at her residence, Clarence House, St.
James's. The company included her Royal Highness the
Grand Duchess Stephanie of Baden, Count and Countess
St. Aulaire, Count and Countess Dietrichstern, M. and Mad.
Van de Weyer, Baron and Baroness Moncorvo, the Che-
valier and Madame Bunsen, Baron and Bareness Gersdoff,
the Duke of Wellington, the Marquis of Douglas, the Earl
of Aberdeen, the Earl of Liverpool, Sir Robert and Lady
Peel, Baroness Strumfeder, Count Schreckenstein, Hon.
William Ashley, Baron Koller, Lady Anna Maria Dawson,
the Countess Wratislaw, and Colonel Sir George Cooper.
The Duchess of Kent had afterwards an evening party.
The Queen and l'rince Albert (attended by the royal suite)
and the Royal Family were present.
Madame bulcken, Madame d'Eiethal, and Mr. Wilson, at-
tended at Clarence House, and had the honour of performing
before the royal and august circle during the evening.
Iler Roya Highness the Duchess of Kent will have an
evening party on Wednesday, the 23d inst. We are autho-
rised to state that the company will assemble at Clarence
House, St. James's, at half-past nine instead. of ten o'clock.
His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge visited her
Majesty the Queen Dowager yesterday, at Marlborough
House.

Cam-
bridge, and the Hereditary Grand
- esebeck and
' ' attended by Baron kn
Mecklenburgh Strelitz,
Russian Minister with
d Mildniav, honoured the R
Their Royal Highnesses theDuk e
Dukeand Dauncdh epssoocfb
esscama-
Mr. Edmond
A Cabinet Council was
o'clock.
yesterday afternoon, at the
past four o'clock.
The meeting broke up
,athathdeanonleneteorfvitebwe
Metropolitan Association for improving
A deputation of the
industrious
with the Earl , ,
h deputation consisted of Lord Ebrin
Board ot Trade. 1 e
ie
y syesterday,
rd classes,
g-
ton, Sir Ralph Howard, Bart.., M.P., Mr. Joseph Toynbee,
Mr. W. A. Wilkinson, Mr. Gibson, Mr. J. W. Tottie, and
the dwellingsl
ofof
Dt hal ti ou 8
Mr. Charles Gatlift.
Count de Pollon, Sardinian Minister, transacted business
yesterday, at the Foreign-office.
Mr. Francis It. Rives left town yesterday morning to
take passage in the Hibernia, on his return to America,
having resigned the office of Secretary of the United States
Legation at this Court.
Colonel Barlow, Mr. Mildmay, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Lefevre,
Captain Ward, and Mr. Saintsbury, a deputation on the
subject of the Southampton Docks, 'had an interview with
Sir George Clerk yesterday, at the Board of Trade.
The Commission on the Slave Trade Treaties sat yester-
day at the official residence of Sir Robert Peel, in Downing-
street.
The Ecclesiastical Commissioners for England sat yester-
day, at the Office in Whitehall-place. There were present
the Bishops of Bangor, Ely, Hereford, and Lichfield, aud
the Earl of Besborough.
1 Dispatches for the Governors of the North American colo-
nies, and also for the Governor of South Australia, were sent
off yesterday evening from the Colonial-office.
IV

.ILITARY FOOT-RACES AT WINDSOR. On Thurs•
day afternoon an immense number of persons, including
several of the nobility and gentry, and. the officers of the
two regiments in garrison at Windsor, were assembled in the
Long-walk, to witness several foot-races between the privates
of the Coldstream Guards, got up by the officers of the regi-
ment, by whom the prizes were subscribed for, and distri-
buted. Twenty-three started for the first race, the distance
being two hundred yards, which was accomplished by the
winner (Pearson) in less than twenty seconds. A match
was then run by Lord F. Paulet's horse, rode by its owner.
against Lieutenant Somerset, on foot ; the distance being
one hundred yards, fifty out and in, which was won by
Lieutenant Somerset. Colonel H. Bentmck then rode his
horse over the same ground, against the same officer, the
horse winning easily. Lieutenant Somerset. then mounted
Lord F. Paulet's horse, and ran against his Lords
hi
were afterwards run
.by the privates,. _
gn to live shillings.
l
receiving prizes varying. from a
_e
was on foot and beat him by ten yards. S. etvheeraml
.),:notnheez
sr
a juilkerelpialaecaechbetowietehnearctgier:
aunts stationed at Windsor.
off tshkeillcr'avcilki spheolretli)t-s°rti
tAaigrn annudmtbricarl