The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-24 00:00:00

IRISH COLLEGES BILL.

Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL presented a great number of
petitions against the Irish Colleges Bill, signed together by
upwards of 144,000 persons : among them one from Dublin,
which alone was signed by between 50,000 and 60,000 persons.
Mr. ROSS presented a petition from Belfast, very nume-
rously signed, in favour of the Bill, and stating the satisfaction
the petitioners experienced from the equality with which all
sects were to be treated.
Mr. WYSE presented a petition from several distinguished
inhabitants ef Dublin in favour of the Irish Colleges Bill.
Mr. J. O'CONNELL was sorry that his sense of duty com-
pelled him to object to the reception of the petition.
The SPEAKER interrupted the Hon. Member by re-
minding him that it was out of order to enter into a discus-
sion oe the presentation of a petition.
Mr. J. O'CONNELL merely wished to enter his protest
against a petition which, without any offence, he must declare
was drawn up and presented under false pretences. He denied
that it represented the feelings of the inhabitants of Dublin
generally, er any but an unim;eirtant and comparatively insig-
nitleant portion. Several names had been obtained to it under
an impression that the petition condemned the principle, but
approved the motives that actuated the measure ; and one
gentleman in particular had, after signing, expressed his de-
termination ef withdrawing his name. For these reasons,
therefore, he felt justified in protesting against the petition.
Mr. WYSE rose to reply, but
The SPEAKER intimated that such a course was out of
order, and that the petition had been received.
Sir J. GRAHAM presented a petition from the professors
and students of the Belfast Institution in favour of the Irish
Colleges Bill.
Sir R. PEEL presented a petition from a large number of
the citizens ef London, including fifty barristers, against the in-
troduction of theology in academical institutions generally,
and in favour of the Irish Colleges Bill. Also a petition from
the literary institutions of Belfast in favour of the system.
This petition was signed by persons ef different religious per-
suasions.

ACADEMICAL EDUCATION (IRELAND).
Sir JAMES GRAHAM then rose and said, that con-
nected with the motion that the Speaker do leave the Chair to
go into Committee on this Bill, there were some matters which
he was desirous of explaining. Questions had been put to him by
Hon. Members connected with this measure, which with the per-
mission of the House he would answer. He would now endeavour
to avoid everything in the shape of argument, reserving that for
the motion of which his Hon. Friend the Member for Yar-
mouth had given notice. He wished to answer a question put
by his Hon. Friend the Member for Northampton, with refer-
ence to the class of persons for whose benefit the measure was
intended. The House would recollect that, upon the second
reading of the Bill, he stated to the House that his colleagues
were of opinion that, considering the great spread of educa-
tion among the humbler classes in Ireland, 400,000
of whom were now receiving education undcr the na-
tional education system, and 100,000 under the Cha-
ritable Societies, and considering the means of education
which the Dublin University afforded for the higher classes,
he thought it was requisite that some provision should be made
for the instruction of the middle classes. The inhabi-
tants of the great towns and cities of Ireland, Cork,
Waterford, Kilkenny, and Belfast, were without any
means of collegiate education ; and for the middle
classes, thel present collegiate education in Dublin was too
remote and expensive. The education provided by these
colleges would be equal to that in the Scottish Universities,
and not inferior to that of Trinity College, Dublin. He would
be doing the measure an injustice if he said it was In any
degree of an exclusive character—it was as open to the
higher as it was to the middle classes, and would, he expected,
be acceptable to most of them. A question of a more prac •
tieal character had been put to him by the Noble Lord, the
Member fur the City of London, regarding the appropriation
of the money voted. With respect to the 30,000/. for build-
ing the colleges, he must say that he did rot consider the sum
by any means exorbitant—it would be impossible to erect
them at a less cost. At the same time, he believed that sum
would be sufficient. He proposed to appropriate the sum of
7,0001. a year to each of the institutions. In each college
they contemplated the appointments of President and Vice-
President—the maximum of President to be a salary of 70s1.
per annum—the maximum of Vice-President, 500/. In each
co lege there would be from twelve to fourteen professors,
with a salary of not less than 2001. nor more than 300/. a year.
In each college there would be a librarian of 2001. a year; a
bursar, 100/. ; servants, 300/. Astronomical and other
scientific instruments, as well as a library, would be nes
oessary, for which 2,000/. a year would be allowed. He
would propose that in the first year there should be an exa-
mination of those pupils who were in their first year. In the se-
cond year he thought there should be public examinations for
those of the first year and of the second. He would in that
year propose premiums of from 20/. to 25/., and exhibitions in
the third year of not less than 30/. for twenty students. The
exhibitions in the third year may vary, if it seemed to be de-
sirable, from 2 1. to 30/., or to 411. That brought him to
another point, on which a question was asked of him, not, he
believed, by the Noble Lord the Member for London, but by
the Hon. Member for Dumfries, a point to which he knew
that great importance would attach, and in reference to which
the Hon. Member for the county of Limerick would address
the House: In opening to the House the reasons which in-
duced her Majesty's Government to propose this Bill in its
present form, he stated specifically that, consistent with the
principles on which it was founded, it was not possible for her
Majesty's Government to propose that any religious test should
be administered either to the governing b :dy, the students, or
any persons connected with these colleges. To that principle
he would steadily adhere. At the same time he was bound to
state that it might be found that ample precaution was
not secured by the statute against professors lecturing in these
colleges, abusing their power of giving instruction, and seek-
ing to undermine the religious doctrines of those students to
whom they administered secular instruction. He knew no
security which they could devise. He must say that when-
ever the State endowed, the Crown had generally the power
of nomination. It had the power of neminating the Regius
Professor• in the English colleges. So the rule was that
when the State endowed the Crown nominated. Ile was not,
however, prepared to say that with respect to the first nomina-
tion by which tt was necessary to give the first movement to
the new machine, it was iodispencable that the advisers of the
Crown should be responsible for their nomination. With re-
spect to the professors, he was not prepared to limit their
election, according to the desires of those on the opposite side.
When the measure should have been in operation for three
years then those appointments should b• regulated by Parlia-
ment. This role would be admitted to be absolutely necessary
when it was remembered that these colleges could not spring
uo by magic, or could not be brought into effisient working
order before the taper of considerable time ; therefore it had
been deemed necessary that those appointments should be re-
considered and renewed after the lapse of three years, and in
the meantime everything that could be devised to facilitate the
progress of those colleges to something like perfection,
should be done. It might be asked, why not limit the period
to one year ? He had already said that it could not be possible
that those colleges could he in active operation by that time,
and that it would be advisable not to renew those arrangements
moil such time as the colleges could be included under one
university—(Hear, hear)—in which the pupils should be en-
abled to sake out degrees in the law, and the arts and sciences.
—( Hear, hear.) There would also be examiners attached to
the university ; but before that university could be
granted an application should be made to Parliament,
and the appointments in it should vest in the Crown.
And to apply the ulterior arrangements of the university to
the
population, it would appear to him the natural way that
examiners and heads of colleges should have a power of
recommending. to the Crown the professor whom they thought
beste qn aided, with the power to the Crown of a veto upon all
h recommendations. Now, there had seemed to be a general I
opinion in the House that the control of the moral education of I the youth sent to the Colleges had not been sufficiently provided 1
Gee in the Bills. To m edy that defect, clarses had been introdaced which he believedre would be acknowledged to be '
perfect. Youths sent to those colleges should either be resi-
dent with their parents or
or
they
guardians, or resident with persons
:selected by their parent, should be congregated in I
boarding-houses or halls, under the control of the head of the colleges. When the pupils resided with their parents or
guardians, no other control over their moral
and er r gouseducation
eras necessary, and nothing could be worse than the inter-
ference of the Government in such cases. (Hear, hear.)But
i,‘ the students did not reside with their parents '
it would ouldbe
neorsoory that the persons selected should be approved of by
the 6 ,ads of the colleges. The houses, therefore, in which
studenots not resident with their parents should be placed were
to have licences, and the heads of the colleges were to have
the power of revoking those licences, if they disapproved of the
eanduct of the persons holding them. With respect to the
establishmeent of the halls, perfect facilities would be given to
the Board of Works to make advances for the building of those
places, and they would be governed by rules enacted by
the visitor*, The power also of appointing the princi-
pals of the halls would be vested in the visitors.
It was proposed that the heads of these establishments should
be appointed by those who possessed the confidence of the large
bodies of the different religious persuasions. There remained
bat one question to answer, and that was one of some im-
portance, which was put by the Right Honourable the
Jambes for Dungarvon, who asked if the Government
were prepared to appoint religious professors, and to make_
religion a part of the education in these seminaries
.'The Government had given the question their best considera-
tion, and ;they were of opinion that, in such a case, the per-
iltramutoe religicos worship with* the college, they were de-
mstatedly op*sed te.—(Hear, hear.) On that point they were

prepared to make no concession whatever. Having answered
all the questions, he thought he should now be but performing
his duty in moving that the House do go into Committee on
' the Bid.
On the question that the Speaker leave the Chair,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that he did not quite understand
the mode in which the professors were to be appointed, whether
the clause should be left open for the future consideration of
Parliament, or whether Government had determined on some
present mode of filling up these offices?
Sir J. GRAHAM was obliged to the Noble Lord for having
retpinded him of this point. He thought it would be desirable
to leave the point open until perhaps 1848, with the view of
securing the opinion of Parliament after they should have had
experience to guide them on the subject. He would read the
10th clause of the fill if the House would allow him, and he
thought it would be sufficient to satisfy the inquiry of the Noble
Lord.—( The Right Hon. Baronet then read the clause re-
ferred to.)
Viscoont MAHON then rose to bring forward the motion
of which he had given notice, that in the establishment of
colleges in Ireland, provision should be made for the religious
instruction of the pupils, by means of lecture fees, till such
time as private benefactions for that object may have taken
effect. He admitted the integrity of the motives by which the
present measure had been actuated, but believed that the in-
troduction of spiritual and secular education should be simul-
taneous, and that without this no system of education whatever
would be valuable or efficrecious.—( Hear, hear.) In the 15th
clause, it was provided that any person might bequeath land for
securing the benefit of religious instruction in the institution, and
Clause C and its amendments effected similar contingent
provisions ; but how could any reliance be placed
upon such an uncertainty, or how could the House
say that any bequests would be made for those purposes ? The
dependence on contingencies of private capital was not such a
basis as this measure ought to rest on.--( Hear.) If it could,
however, be even preyed that these anticipations would ever
take place, he for one should still object to the precedent of thus
endowing colleges, as it might subsequently be applied to locali-
ties or circumstances where no such contingency existed. In
what way must the student receive the advice of his tutor ?
" Astronomy is of great importance; there is a skilful pro-
fessor, attend his lectures, and acquire a knowledge of the
science. Mathematics also must be carefully learned; and
medicine, too, for which there is another skilful professor ; but
as to religion, learn it anywhere, or nowhere, or not at all."
That may not be the meaning intended by the House,
but it was that which the pupils would universally
and naturally put upon the system. By the 15th clause no
student was compelled to attend any theological lectures or re-
ligious instruction. To such a provision he unequivocally ob-
jected, and though the amendment brought forward in a good
spirit would go far to remove the objection, that was no reason
why the Government or the House should not go further. On
a former occasion it had been stated by his Right Hon. Friend
at the head of the Government, that even religious differences
would prevent religious education being sanctioned by any Act
of the State. There could be no doubt that it must be
a great advantage for students to have the opportunity of
acquiring secular learning with all the splendid discoveries of
science and art, but as far as religious instruction was con-
cerned the pupils would be left totally unprovided for, and re-
moved entirely from the cautious superintendence of parental
care, exposed to the inculcation of any strange doctrine.
With reference to that part of the subject he would call the
attention of the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Govern-
ment to a letter which he had received from Dr. Cahill, in
which he pointed oat, not by mere guess, but from positive re-
ferences, that it was very usual for professors, eien when
talking on abstract subjects, to indulge themselves in remarks
which had a decidedly religious tendency. The inference he
would draw from this was that the advantages to be derived
from secular learning were not to be diminished, but that the
pupil, in conjunction with these benefits, should have
every opportunity of enjoying religious instruction.
The Right Hen. the Secretary of State had contended that
the system of policy now proposed was founded on the same
principles as those on which the National schools of Ireland
were based. He had heard that statement with great surprise
from a Minister so well acquainted with Irish affairs as his
Right Hon. Friend. Setting aside the consideration whether
the system had worked well or ill, advantageously or adversely,
it was certain that, notwithstanding no regular general system
of religious instruction was professedly taught, a portion of re-
ligious education was insisted on and taught in those schools.
In showing the design and intention of the National schools of
Ireland, he could not find words that would better illustrate
that than those which were used by the Minister at the head of
affairs, when that measure was first proposed in another place.
Earl Grey, on the '22d of March, 1832, stated that, if they were
to have a system of National education for Ireland, it must not
exclude the Roman Catholics. who constituted the great part of
the population of Ireland. To meet this difficulty, he (Lord
Grey) said, though the indiscriminate use of the Bible would
not be permitted, instead of that, on certain days of the week,
in addition to literary instruction, extracts from the Bible, in
which all parties were agreed, would be used as a school-book.
It could not, therefore, be said that Earl Grey excluded the
Bible. That Noble Lord's description of the National system
was, that it was to be a system of education of which reli-
gion should necessarily form a part.—( Hear, hear.)
If he (Lord Mahon) were to state his views of a system of educa-
tion not for England, for Scotland, or for Ireland, but adapted
for all eountries and all ages, he could not better express him-
self than in the language of a Noble Lord (Lord Stanley),
not when he introduced this measure into that House, but
when speaking on it at a later period—namely, on the 14th of
June, 1639. He (Lord Stanley) said he was not contending
for absolute control over the direction of education, but only
for the principle that education, whether applied to Dissenters
or the Church, was not a thing apart from religion, but a
thing in which religion must be made not only a part but the
foundation. He (Lord Mahon) in agreement with those senti-
ments, would say that religion must form a necessary part of
every well regulated system of education. Could this be called
a new opinion? Had it not been held by the most
eminent men that secular should be blended with
spiritual education, by such men as Pascal, Fenelon,
Wesley, and Hooker. If the importance of religious
instruction was felt as essential in State education, was there
anything peculiar in the state of Ireland to forbid its applica-
tion? When the country was Protestant, there would be
no difficulty in applying it, but in Ireland he thought
it would not answer. If provisions had been made
by the State in this Bill for professors of different
religious denominations, he would certainly have op-
posed it.—(Hear, hear.) He would now state fully and ex-
plicitly the views which he intended to recommend to the
adoption of the House. He thought that there ought to be in
each college a professor of theology, according to the doctrines
of the Established and the Roman Catholic Churches, and in
the college of Belfast a Presbyterian professor It had been
correctly stated by the Right Hon. Baronet that evening, that
if the professorships were sanctioned by the State, then the
State was bound to endow them, but he ( Viscount Mahon) did
not require this endowment. He would afterwards explain
how it was he proposed to support them. He proposed that the
appointment of the Established Church professor should rest
with the Bishop of the Established Church, the Roman Cath6-
lie professor with the Bishop of that Church, and the Presby-
terian professor by the General Assembly. He should pro-
pose as a general rule that the students should study under and
be examined by one of these professors, but in many cases
he should allow exemptions. In the first place, he
should propose that exemptions should be granted
to every class of Separatists ; and there were particular ex.
emptions which might be regulated by the heads of the diffe

rent. seminaries. The amount of lecture-fee might be stated
by the Beard of Visitors, and if they would suppose a hundred
pupils, at perhaps two-and-a-half guineas per annum—a suffi-
cient provision would be made for the maintenance of the lec-
turers. He did not doubt that even with these limited means
they would be enabled, even at the outset, to secure the ser-

vicis of highly-gifted men—men of the highest character as
professors. Looking to what they saw daily in the public
offices, where young men of talent and education entered for
an inadequate salary of perhaps 1001. a year, in the hope that
a future period would find them more adequately provided for.
Looking to this fact he could not but think that persons could
be found equally ready to undertake the duty he referred to till
such time as the means could be provided for more adequately
remunerating them. He did not think that it would be ne-

cessary for him to enter more into detail, and he begged the
House to remember that however much they might wish to
conciliate Ireland, a good and sound religious education was the
best boon they could confer upon the people.
Mr. WYSE rose to second the motion of his Noble Friend.
He was strongly impressed with the conviction that education,
to deserve the name, must be based upon religion and mora-
lity. They had established colleges, and he thought they
should also have established professorships of theology in them.
He was anxious that there should be chairs in those colleges for
religious instructions, and he did not mean theological. But
he thought that the endowment of those chairs should be de-

rived from the communities for whose advantage they were in-
tended. He was so far in favour of the voluntary principle,
that he should support the proposition for defraying the charges
of those professorships by means of fees from the pupils whose
parents wished them to avail themselves of the instruction,
whether Roman Catholic or Protestant. At the same time,
he must declare his belief that if there were not such

professorships, the religtoug education of the Catholic
youth in the universities would not be neglected. For he
knew too well the untiring seal of that venerable body the
Catholic clergy to doubt that they would watch over the

youth of theiichurch —( Hear.) But, in order to prevent an
hiatus in the establishment of the colleges themselves, he
was willing to adopt the proposition of his Noble Friend, and

. . . ,
agree to the appointment of religious professors to be paid by
fees from the pupils. By such a course State endowment
would be avoided, and religious instrection would be provided
for; and he would rejoice if that plan received the general

concurrence of the House.—(Hear.) Indeed the Bill of the
Right Hon. Baronet did not, from the first, exclude religious

instruction, but left room for its provision, otherwise he should

have been unwilling to vote for a measure which contemplated
no means of providing for religions instruetion.—( Hear, hear.)
But he would not concur in the objections that had been made in

a quarter for which he had the most profound veneration, to the
appointment of teachers of geology and anatomy. —( Hear. )
He always deferred with humility to the opinions of that dis-
tinguished body of men—the Catholic Bishops of Ireland ; but
with all deference, he thought that if their objections were to
be carried out, it would apply equally to the teachers of astro-
nomy, of geography, of history, and all rudimental instruction
—(Hear, hear)—so that there would be no such thing as
mixed education at alt.—( Hear, hear.) An Hen. Member,
now behind him (Mr. J. O'Connell) had attacked him in his
absence in Conciliation-hall —( Hear, hear)—f,sr the views
he had expressed upon the subject, and had stated that he was
returned to Parliament as a Catholic, but had ceased to be one,
thereby implying that he was to lose his seat for the course
which he had taken.—(" No, no," from Mr. J. O'Connell.)
But he w.luld tell the Hon. Gentleman that he was not his

....___ _
( Mr. Wyse's) Pope.—( Cheers. ) He would:ask, why was the
objection to Protestant teachers of philosophy in Trinity Col-
lege objected to by the Catholic prelates? Why had they never
objected to Catholic youths being taught the sciences in that Col-
lege by Protestant professors? Why had they never objected to
Protestant teachers in all the medical schools ?—( Hest., hear. )
The Hon. Gentleman then referred to extracts from the

. -
ssepepeepe o
hh
which
ifir. John
chlgaveo O'Connell, andecasionsothe read
attack,
contending
from
ingt thee
hath
hhaedhbadeeenulmogisirseedpreasenptreuds,siaanndryesspteemcialolyf ienduthcaetiaolnle,gwathiolenhtehxa-t
eluded religious instruction He begged leave to tell the Hon.
Member that there would be shown more Christianity and
more Catholicity in an indulgence for the opinions of others,
than in denouncing Mr. Wyse of Waterford as an " Anything-
arian."—(Cheers. ) The Hon. Gentleman concluded amidst
loud cheers, by reading an extract from the Bishop of Down's
address •to the students of Trinity College on the subject
of tolerating the opinions of others, which extract, the Hon.
Member said, ought to be written in letters of gold.
Mr. J. O'CONNELL hoped the House would allow him to
ssy a few words upon the matter, in which he had been per-
sonally alluded to. He would not then go into the general
question, as he supposed that the Right Hon. Baronet would
give the House at least thirty-six hours to consider his amend-
ments. If that were not the case, he would state his opinion
of the amendments at a later hour of the night. He did not
think the Hon. Member for Waterford had a right to complain
of his (Mr. John O'Connell's) observations as having been
made in his absence. He had been required by his constituents
to attend in Conciliation-hall, and so had the Hon. Gentleman.
He (Mr. O'Connell) anted upon the instructions of his con-
stituents, and not being able to attend in the House, he com-
mented on the speech of the Hon. Gentleman in Conciliation-
hall, where he was obliged to be.—(Great laughter.) He
thought that in his speech he had modified the language of
which the Hon.be Gentlemani f ctohme pl a
Houseined ; b
knew
u the
t all t
hnee wspaper
report mightbusiness
that was dons icaorConCillation.hall—(Grest 4tughtc.)--tb.7

would not wonder if gentlemen were sometimes unable to say
all that they intended.—( Hear, hear.) He, however, was not
reported to say that the Hon. Member for Waterford was a
Protestant, but that be was very near one—(Hear, hear, and
laughter)—at all events, that in his opposition to his bishops
upon a religious question, he was a schismatic Catholic.—
( Cries of " Oh, oh.'') It was not a Catholic act to appeal
to the House of Commons against the authority of his
bishops—it was practical rebellion.—( Renewed cries of " Oh.")
He (Mr. Wyse) spoke of the demands of the Bishops as
petty and insignificant. These were the declarations of the
Roman Catholic Bishops, which he ( Mr. J. O'Connell) be-
lieved to be supreme authority in Ireland, controllable only
by the Sovereign in Council, that this Act was dangerous to
the Roman Catholic people in Ireland ; and that there were
certain terms which could alone render such a Bill at all safe.
They had declared that; and they had further declared, in
an interview with the Lord Lieutenant in Ireland, that these
were demands less than which they could not ask. He (Mr.
O'Connell) submitted to them, as in duty bound ; he ad-
vanced no other objection ; and if the Honourable Gentleman
called that objection petty and insignificant, he could only tell
him that he was not abusing him, but the Roman Catholic Bishops.
He also praised the law in Prussia, in 1819, that a priest
should not administer communion to the children at the public
schools. Nobody could deny that that was a gross infraction of
ecclesiastical right. They were ready to secure for the Pro-
testants and Presbyterians their colleges, and all they asked was
to be treated in the same way. He would ask them not to
force down the throats of the Irish Roman Catholics a system
which was revolting to their conscience, and which would
bring the utmost confusion, strife, and discord, in that country.
It would more strongly unite the people in the desire for their
own Parliament, and in the with not to allow theorists
to talk away their religious feelings, and would by no
means tend to put down the repeal agitation. He would
tell the Hon. Member that if the Bill passed into law, instead
of causing conciliation in Ireland, it would cause utter con-
fusion and would increase the determination of the Irish people
not to be mislegi slated fur by the English representatives, or those
calling themselves the representatives of the people of Ireland.
The Hon. Member said that he (Mr. J. O'Connell) wanted to
renew religious feuds in Ireland, by calling on the people of
Waterford to ask him to resign his seat in Parliament, as he
was not representing his constituents. He thought that it was
most unfair to impute to him that which he abhorred in his
soul, namely, the idea of renewing religious feuds in Ireland.
His words were misrepresented. He called upon the Catholic
electors of Waterford to take notice that he was not represent-
ing them as Roman Catholics. They were inclined to be led
by their bishops, and the Hon. Member for Waterford was ex-
claiming against them, and consequently he was not repre-
senting them as Reiman Catholics. It was on that account
that he asked them to call upon him to resign, or net to elect
him after next election.
Mr. WYSE then explained, and read the report of the words
of the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, as contained in
the columns of the Nation newsoaper.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM felt confident that he expressed
the opinion of the great mtjority of the House when he de-
clared his strong impression that that was not the place to
discuss what degree of submission Catholic gentlemen owed to
their ecclesiastical superiors. It must be very painful to the
House to hear some observations which had fallen from the
Honourable Member who had just sat down. The Honourable
Member for Waterford was not bound in explicit obedience to
the opinion of the Bishops in his representative capacity. He
was at liberty to express his own judgment on a matter whi h
was not considered spiritual but temporal. He ( Sir James
Graham) felt that he must also state what he considered to be
due to the Hon. Member for Waterford, namely that he had
not been guilty of any deception whatever towards his consti-
tuents. His religious opinions and his religious practice,
whatever they might be, were known to that constituency. So
much for his orthodox catholicity, and as far as his political
opinions went, to his honour be it spoken, he waa a friend to Bri-
tish connexion as founded by the legislative union. He invariably
declared that opinion to the electors of Waterford, who all
knew his religious and political feelings. He therefore prac-
tised no deception. He had discharged his duty to his consti-
tuency in the most honourable manner, and he (Sir J. Graham)
would despair of the welfare of Ireland, if the people of Ireland
held a different opinion. He attached the greatest importance
to the strict observance of the rules of the House, and the ex-
perience of every year taught him more and more their value
and importance. His Noble Friend must excuse him when he
would say, that while he (Lord Mahon) adhered to those rules
he had most decidedly violated their principles. The rule was,
that it was not competent for any Member to move any instruc-
tion to a Committee on a provision which, without instruc-
tion, it shall be competent for that Committee to make. The
spirit of the motion now made was nothing more nor less than
an instruction, and if it was it was grossly irregular. This de-
parture from the rule of the House had involved them in ex-
treme difficulties, to the disadvantage of the measure now be-
fore them. His Noble Friend should have introduced his plan
as a clause in the measure. Now that they were compelled to
discuss the motion of his Noble Friend, he must express his
surprise that the Hon. Member for Waterford seconded it.
Its object was the appointment of theological professors,
and in seconding it the Hon. Member for Waterford stated
that he had insuperable objections to that. After hearing his
Noble Friend's speech, he was still in doubt whether the object
of the motion was to have those professors paid voluntarily or
not. He, however, collected from the speech of his Noble
Friend that the Roman Catholic professors were to be nomi-
nated by the Roman Catholic bishops, and the Protestant pro-
fessors by the Protestant bishops, and the Presbyterian pro-
fessors by the Presbyterians. Was that rule to be confined to the
orthodox Presbyterians ? Were not the Unitarian Presbyterians
of the North of Ireland entitled to it also? The Hon. Member
for Waterford stated that religious instruction was excluded;
but any gentleman, looking to the 15th clause of the Bill,
would see, that so far from religious instruction being excluded,
every encouragement was given to the propagation of religious
doctrines. Considering w hat the principles of the Bill were,
he could not see how the motion of his Noble Friend could be
listened to. Religious instruction ought not, in his (Sir J.
Graham's) opinion, to be given within the walls of the colleges
while all facilities could he had for affording it without the walls.
It had been said also that it was the intention of the Govern-
ment. not to bear in mind, in`selecting the ecclesiastical instruc-
tors, the ecclesiastical authorities of the district; but again he
should remind Hon. Members that there was to be no ecclesiastical
instruction within the walls of the colleges. The Hon. Member
for Waterford had said that he, a Roman Catholic, had been
educated in Trinity College, Dublin. Well, then, he (Sir J.
Graham) need not remind the Right Hon. Gentleman that there
was no religious instruction given to Roman Catholics within
the walls of that institution. There were a great many Roman
Catholics educated within its walls, who received their
ecclesiastical education without, and therefore he could not see
why the same principle should not be applied to the new col-
leges.—(Hear, hear.) He conceived then upon the whole
that the general principles in the new Bill afforded a far better
principle of arrangement. Need he instance the educational
institutions of Scotland, where religious instruction was not
required to be given within those walls. In those institutions
the Presbyterian and Roman Catholic mixed and received alike
the same secular educational instruction, but religious instruc-
tion was given to no class of Christians in those colleges. In
further proof of this he held in his hand a letter which he
had recently received from a gentleman, a Roman Catholic and
member of the town council of the city of Edinburgh, by which
it appeared that by virtue of their charter a large number of the
town council of Edinburgh were members of the Edinburgh
University. The writer went en to state that he was opposed
to a proposition which had been introduced at the University,
having for its object religious instruction within
its walls—the question was put to the vote and was
negatived by a majority of the town council,
and, therefore, it was decided upon that religious instruction
should continue to be given as before without the wallr of that
University.—( Hear, hear.) He would not weary the House
by enterieg further into details, but he would beg leave
to be permitted to read an extract from the evidence
given before a Committee of that House by Dr. Crolley,
Roman Catholic Archbishop of Ireland, in reference to
the system of national education introduced into Ireland.
The evidence had reference to the rules enforced in the system
of education pursued in the Belfast Educational Institution.
The Right Honourable Baronet then read the extract, the sub-
stance of which was to the effect, that he (Dr. Crolly) had no
objection whatever to Roman Catholics intended for Maynooth
receiving their initiatory education at the Belfast Academical
Institution. Nor did he conceive that any danger could arise
to Roman Catholic students mixing with students of
other persuasions, so long as they were under the
control of proper masters. This he (Sir James
Graham) conceived was sufficient to show that the
Roman Catholic Bishops of Ireland had no objection to such a
system of education as that adopted in the Belfast Academical
Institution. His Noble Friend (Lord Mahon) had alluded to
the system of national education in Ireland, as introduced by
Lord Stanley. Now he ( Sir James Graham) begged to say,
from the first introduction of that measure, he had been a
warm and sincere advocate of that measure, and he should
say he felt bound to add, that that system, which compre-
hended what he might call a combined system of education,
might have been most successfully carried out in that country,
but for the Protestant hierarchy and parochial clergy, who
offered it from the commencement the most determined
opposition.—.(Cries of " Hear, hear.") But so far from
that opposition having affected the success of the measure,
be (Sir J. Graham) believed he could not give a better in-
stance of its popularity than the fact that four hundred thou-
sand children were receiving in that country a good general
moral education, under that system—a fact which, he believed,
was not exceeded by any other country, whether Roman
Catholic or Protestant.—( Hear, hear.) He regretted, also,
to observe that the Hon. Member for Waterford ( Mr. Wyse)
had fallen into the mistake of believing that scriptural extracts
were read in the school-books of the national schools during
school hours ; but he ( Sir J. Graham) begged to correct that
mistake, and to state that it was after school hours that every
facility was given for religious instruction.—( Hear, hear.)
A system of combined religious education in Ireland was an-

fortunately impossible. The great majority of the people of
that country were believers in Christianity; but still it was of
vast importance that there should be a combined national
system of secular education established, as a similar
system, combining religion, would be impossible. inasmuch as
such a system, under existing circumstances, would tend rather
to foster than soften down religious animosities.—( Cheers. )
Lord MA HON explained. He had drawn this clause in
strict conformity with the precedent established by General
Gascoigne upon going into Committee on the Reform Bill.
Lord CLIVE, after addressing himself to the difficulty of
bringing clauses under the consideration of the House upon a
Bill of this description, defended the clause introduced br the
Noble Lord the Member for Hertford. He thought the Noble
Lord had exercised a sound judgment in bringing forward this
question on principle.
Mr. M. I%IILN ES said it was painful to find that the hie-
. _ .

• •••••:••• • ••,
rarchy of the Catholic religion were coming forward to•
oppose
a large and liberal measure like the present. He believed that
the Catholic religion might be made the nurse of religious free-
dom ; but this opposition of the Catholic hierarchy would lead
a person to believe that their object was to crush everything
like religious liberty. Upon this ground, he felt called upon
to oppose the motion of his Noble Friend the Member for
Hertford.

Mr. J. O'CONNELL explained.
Mr. B. ESCOTT thought the opposition to the measure had
been as useless as it would be nugatory. The Hon. Member
for Semersetshire, who alone had objected to it, on the ground
that Ireland needed no education, had been very satisfactorily

answered by the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for the
Home Department. The only remaining objection was that
propunded by the Hon. Members for Oxford and Newcastle-
under-Lyne, that it was " a gigantic scheme of Godless edu-
cation," and that religion was eschewed in its principles.
Mr. COLQUHOUN—I beg your pardon, I have expressed

no opinion.
Mr. ESCOTT had misapprehended the course pursued by
the Hon. Gentleman ; but at all events the Honourable

Members for Oxford and Newark . bad based their oppo-

sition on those grounds. But he (Mr. Escott)
de-
fended it, . because it was essentially religious--(A

laugh)—and because he. thought
.that the only chance

of promoting true religion was by excluding sectarian
differences.—( Hear.) The measure was calculated to allay
those differences, and pave the way for an extensive and effi-
cient system of sound religious instruction, and the reason that
all previous attempts had proved abortive, was that they were
not bold enough to propose a measure so enlarged and compre-
hensive. When it was said that religion was the chief ob-
stacle to the pacification of Ireland, the very strongest argu-
ment was used in favour of a measure which supplied the defi-
ciency and avoided the obstacle and impediment to all efficient
education in Ireland.—( Hear.) When he heard Hon. Members
denominating this a Godless scheme of education, it put him in
mind of the history he had heard net long ago, of a worthy
man or good imentions, who lopt a school lu a country village,