The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-31 00:00:00

Lord at the helid of the Colonial department. He alone was
abigto do ilk. ed "'"'lore the colony to a state of prosperity and
semi,* Weslied upon the Right Hon. Baronet to step out
and :ake!Mie course for benefiting the colonies. The
RiWltt Hon. met was the only one who could do it, and he
rinnt,el es, dight Hon. Baronet that he who tolerated, par-
ticipated. licz.. Ling his hope that the Right Hon. Baronet
would edept decided measures, the Hon. Member concluded by
declaring his intention to oppose the vote.
Mr. SHELL traced many of the evils which had fallen upon
New Zealand to the Colonial-office. True, Capt. Fitzroy had
committed numerous errors, but upon the vicarious back of
Capt. Fitzroy all the chastisement ought not to fall ; for who
had appointed Capt. Fitzroy but the Colonial Department,
and should not the Noble Lord at the head of that office have
satisfied himself of the qualifications of Capt. Fitzroy previous
to his appointment ? He would not doubt that Lord Stanley
was influenced by humane motives towards the New Zealanders
in the policy which he adopted towards them; be would
not doubt that it was considered by the Government
that the treaty of Waitangi would conduce to the happiness of
the natives. But Lord Stanley deceived himself as to the ca-
pabilities of the New Zealanders, who had strong claims to
his commiseration. Let them look at the results which the
policy of that Noble Lord had wrought on the minds of the
New Zealanders. They were told by the principal protector
of the aborigines that, notwithstanding the interpretation of
the treaty of Waitangi, they held the Government of this
country in scorn. It was, therefore, manifest that a great
change was necessary, that small doses had no effect, that em-
pirical and homceopathic prescriptions did not suit. Korora-
rika was reduced to the state of Old Sarum. The Govern-
anent might think that the decision of Lord Stanley was irre-
vocable, but they would find that this was a mistake. The
Committee which was appointed by the Government to make a
report were two-thirds 'I ories and one-third Whigs. On that
Committee they put members of the Government—embryo
Ministers. The great majority of the Committee were sup-
porters of the Government, several of them members of the
Government, and he was quite surprised to find that their re-
port had been dismissed with utter disregard. The object of
his observations was to show that great mistakes had been com-
mitteil, and to show them that if they were not prepared to go
the whole length with the Committee, that it would be right
that the Right Honourable Baronet should use his influence in
inducing Lord Stanley to redress the grievances which had
been complained of. He would be the last man to say that Lord
Stanley ought to be treated with disrespect; but if he (Lord
Stanley) were ever so calm, and ever so enlightened, he would
venture to say that to him ( Lord Stanley) New Zealand ought
not to be subject, and that the preservation of that great posses-
sion of the English Crown ought to be better regarded.
Sir R. PEEL was sorry that the Right Hon. Gentleman
had deprived himself of the opportunity -of making that
speech on a former occasion. He, at the same time, sympa-
thised with the disappointment which he (Mr. Sheil) would
have been exposed to, if he had lost this opportunity of snaking
it. The discussion on the matter had already taken place,
and lasted two nights, and he (Sir R. Peel) would have
been rather better prepared to meet these observations on the
second opportunity. He should not be prevailed upon, on this
occasion, to enter into any discussion with respect to the
matter. He could not do that which even it was painful to
him not to do, namely, to enter into a defence of the Noble
Lord ( Stanley), and repel those accusations which had been
most unjustl cast upon him, without affording an opportunity
for another discussion, which he was desirous to avoid. He
thought that he had done everything in his power already
to vindicate his Noble Friend, and that he had succeeded.
Now, the Right Hon. Gentleman said that the Noble
Lord should be held responsible for the appointment of Captain
Fitzroy. He (Sir R. Peel) was of opinion that he was tech-
nically and constitutionally responsible, but he did not think
that he was to be considered as culpable for every act com-
mitted by Captain Fitzroy. Was the Member for London to
be held responsible for every act of Messrs. Spain and Hodg-
son, whom be bad appointed ?—( Hear, hear.) In the eyes of
the law, the Noble Lord was responsible for the appointment
of Captain Fitzroy, but would he be considered responsible for
every act of his by a person not looking technically at the mat
ter? He (Sir R. Peel) took the case of the militia. Captain
Fitzroy got orders to raise a militia, but he did not act in so-
cordanae with those instructions. Was his Noble Friend to be
held responsible for Captain Fitzroy's non-observance of his
orders? ' Captain Fitzroy declined to obey the instructions
given him under mistaken views, and he thought the responsibi-
lity should lest with himself. Never was a man appointed upon
more pure or more disinterested motives—he was thought to be
the most clever men for the performance of the duties assigned
to him. He was surprised that a man who had distinguished
himself in that house, should have acted so. He was selected
because ha was believed to be well qualified to discharge
the duties which would devolve upon him. He would Lot
enter any further into that question, because he thought it
might give rise to an untimely discussion. With respect to
municipal institutions, they should, he thought, choose the
lergest t eon in a district, and incorporate with that town as
large a district a. possible. The natives resident within that
district should, of course, have the advantages of British sub-
j 'cis.—( (-tear, hear.) He thought that at present tba law
provided that every male of 21 years of age had a right to
vote. It was necessary that the body which was entruseed
wish the powers of taxatiea should have as extenive powers a*
was consistent. He thought that the municipal Government
should have as extensive powers as were consistent with a
superior legislative body. There ought not to be different
principles of legislation in different parts of the country. The
constitution of this superior power was a matter of the greateet
importance. The governing body ought to represent the
public opinion of the colony. Weaght to have an influence
over the governing body. In what made that could be arrived
at ho would not lay down any precise rule. It would greatly
depend on the individual whom they would appoint as go-
vernor to that colony. He would not go any further into the
subject through the fear that he might provoke that discussion
which he was so desirous to avoid.
Mr. HAWKS believed that if a negotiation was once insti-
tuted between able and upright men, representing the interests
of the colony and the Government, they would arrive at some
satisfactory result.
Mr. C. BULLER said that he was glad t hear that nego-
tiations between the different interests wee ow taking place,
and be would be exceedingly disappointed if they did not meet
with the beneficial result which he anticipated. He wished to
call the attention of the House to the estimate now before them.
His Noble Friends at his side of the Hoase would see that he
objected as much as possible to the expenditure which had
been incurred in the colonies. The lion. Gentleman then
alluded to the estimates of Captain Fitzroy. He estimated that
the expenditure of the present year was 36,0001. ; but that the
expenditure of next year would be 26,0001. His calculation of
the revenue was modest, but it was, nevertheless, fallacious.
He made out that the income derived from the property-tax

would amount to 8,000/., but the return for the ' laat two

quarters would show that it would not amount to 4,000/. The
Honourable Gentleman then complained of the salaries given
to individuals employed in the Government of that colony, and
said that the Government ought to be enabled to pay salaries
which individuals had a right to expect for their services.
Mr. AGLIONBY was rejoiced that an explancion had been
given by the lion. Baronet. of the intention of her Majesty's
Government towards New Zealand. and he hoped and believed

that the resat would be to make New Zealand a self-support-

in' colony.
Lord EBRINGTON was glad that some prospect of an
agreement between the Company and the Government was
likely. He thought, however, that they would not arrive at
ony beneficial result until the Government laid down some defi-
nite and intelligible principle with regard to the management
of the waste lands in New Zealand.
Mr. HOPE explained.
Mr. WILLIAMS said that be thought that this vote was to
be opposed, but now that the Gentlemen had got possession of
a million acres in New Zealand, they were anxious that as
much money as possible should be expended on them. He had
no doubt that if the session lasted much longer, the Secretary
for the Colonies would come down with a supplementary vote
for Alew Zealand; he begged to know if such was not his in-
tention.
Mr. HOPE stated that he bad already said that the accounts
sent by Captain Fitzroy were so vague that the Government
were compelled to form false estimates upon these financial
statements.
Captain OSBORNE said that the present vote had nothing
to do with the family quarrel between the New Zealand Com-
pany and the Colonial-office. With reference to the imme-
diate vote, he must say that it was too small, and on that
ground atone be would oppose it.
Mr. HINDLEY said, that since the Bishop of New Zea-
land had gone out the peace of the colony had not been im-
proved, but rather the reverse.
Admiral DUNDAS defended the Bishop of New Zealand.
Ile knew no man who did his duty better, or was of greater
benefit to that colony.
Mr. ABEL SMITH concurred in that opinion. The
Bishop of New Zealand was deserving of the highest respect
for his conduct since his arrival in the colony.
Mr. HOPE, in answer to a question from Captain Os-
borne, said, that the salary of the Governor of New Zea-
land would be raised from 1,2001. to 2,5001; but it was not
contemplated that that should be a permanent arrangement.
After a few words from Mr. PROTHSROE arid Mr. HINDLEY,
Mr. AGLIONBY said that the New Zealand Company
bad always granted avistance to any religious denomination
that required it in the colony; and as the Protestants were
more numerous than any other class of religionists, of course
they received the largest amount of assistance.
The vote was then agreed to.
1,5001. was granted for the Health of Towns Commission,
as wet* also

3,4001. for the expenses of the " Digest of the Statutes " of
the Common Law Commission.
6,0001. for the expenses of towns survey of Ireland.
On 2,597/. being proposed to defray the expenses of the im-
provement of the river Shannon,
Colonel SIIITHORP objected to the vote. He cmisidered
it was a waste of the public money. The Hon. Gentleman en-
tered minutely into the history of these improvements, and con-
eluded by stating that it was a mere job for the improvement of
the properties of two Noble Lords, the Marquis of Lansdowne
Ind Lord Monteagle. . _

Captain OSBO"R NE—Does the Hon. Gentleman say the
properties of the Marquis of Lansdowne and Lord Alonteagle ?
Colonel SIB THORP— Oui.—(Laughter.)

Captain OSBORNE said that the Marquis of Lansdowne
had no property on the Shannon, neither, he believed, had
Lord Monteagle.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was happy to
assure his Hon. Friend that the money had been well applied,
and was productive of the greatest possible benefit to the public.
Lord SANDON did not agree with the Hon. Gentleman
that it was a job. He believed that it was an undertaking of
great public utility.
The vote was then agreed to.
71821. was then voted to defray the expenses in effecting im-
provements in the ambassador's house in Paris; as also
13,000/. for the expenses of the British embassy at Vienna and
.onstantitiople.
.50,0001. for the expeusee of steam communication to India
by the Red Sea.
16,000/. for the commission of volunteers in Canada.
On the vote of 150,0000. being proposed for the cor:struetion
of harbours of refuse,
gir C. NAPIF.R. said that, while approving of the general
;!aplieatioa of the public money to such beneficial purposes, he
-jected to Dover being included in the ports thus improved;
>t was
was a harbour that could never be used; the expense would
be thrown away.

Admiral DTSNDAS said that if the Gallant Captain would
read the report of the Commissioners on the construction of
harbours of refuge, he would soon change his opinion as to
the incompetency of Dover. Among the Commissioners one
only, Sir W. Symonds, entertained a doubt of the efficacy of
that pore, and even that Gallant Officer did not propose to
cmit it, but to couple Dungeness with it.
After a toe' Nv..;rd.4 from air. W ILLIMIS, the tote was

signed to
On the seal of 1
St. Margaret's Gnorcia,
Mr. P. 1.11)it Til WICK olijectqd lo the vota, on the grour.rl
of its !,e:ng a monstrous diql,,,ur•roent to the neighbinirlicol.
The Georgian Gothic style introduced in its interior rendered
it a!Uost glaring instance of bad taste, and he would rather see
it pulled dawn, and another erectei in a more populous part of
the pariah. Like We 4 rninster Abbey, whose original architec-
tural beauties vr,:re being hidden behind the unseemly mono-
inents sprawling their monstrous shapes along, like to nothing
in heaven above or earth beneath, the Church was a deformity,
and the sooner it was removed the better. . _

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that even
supposing the church was an eye-sore, it could not he taken
down and rebuilt in another place under a sum of 40,0001, and
the question was, whether the House was prepared to vote
That sum for such a purpose. Besides, it should be remembered

that the building was the parish church of the Parliament.
The speaker of their House, and all Members who chose to ac-
company him, once a year attended public worship there, and
it was for that reason that peculiar privileges were attached to
it, which ought not lightly to be withheld.
Captain OSBORNE hoped the Hon. Member (Mr. Borth-
wick) would press his opposition to a division, and he for one
would vote with him, and that upon the statement of the
Chancellor of the Exchequet, for it was evident that that Hon.
Member's private opinion was against the church, though as
Chancellor of the Exchequer he naturally asked where was the
money to come from for its substitute.
Mr. HINDLEY suggested the postponement of the vote.
Lord SANDON defended the vote, considering the state of
religious education and instruction in the country. He could
not consent to any course that would interfere with the appli-
cation of funds for such purposes as those set forth. He would
set himself against the feeling so generally expressed by the
House.

Mr. J. A. SMITH supported the postponement of the vote.
After a few words from Lord SANDON and Mr. OSBOB.NX,

Mr. SHEIL wished to know if ever her Majesty's Ministers,
or the Members of the House, attended St. Margaret's
church ?--(Laughter.) It was his impression that it was very
rarely used by them. He considered St. Margaret's church
was an eye-sore to the neighbourhood, and materially inter-
fered with the view of the Abbey. It would also interfere
with the view of that magnificent building they were now
erecting. It would be highly improper that they should sacri-
fice 800,0001. for the conservation of that, the removal of
which would only cost 40,0001., and which affected so much
the beauty of the neighbourhood.
Mr. HAWES objected to the church of St. Margaret's
being considered an eye-sore. He generally agreed with the
Noble Lord the Member for Liverpool.
Mr. OSBORNE explained. He thought that they should
remove any obstacle that would mar the general effect of the
great public buildings in this locality.
Sir J. GRAHAM agreed with the Noble Lord the Member
for Liverpool, and with the remarks made by the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He considered
the repairs ought to be provided for, and he did not think a
mare economic sum could be named than the amount stated in
the vote.
Mr. PROTHEROE considered St. Margaret's church a
fair specimen of undecorated Gothic architecture, and if it were
removed it would display the most defective part of the Abbey.
He was of opinion that the church in question was very well
adapted for the purposes of worship. He would support the
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL considered that it would be a
great advantage if the church and churchyard were removed.
He thought there would be no difficulty in getting a new site
for the church.
Mr. ENCOTT thought the church was a nuisance, and
ought to be removed.
Mr. P. BORT HWICK said he would press the motion to a
division, as he had not heard anything to alter his views on the
subject. The expense of pulling down the church and erect-
ing a new one in its stead in a more convenient site, would be
20,0001. He did not see why the churchyard should be pro-
faned by a public footway, and the funeral service disturbed by
idle smoking fellows lounging about there.
Sir HO WARD DOUGLAS said the Committee ought to
pause before they decided upon the subject. He would recom-
mend a postponement of the vote.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER declined to
accede to the suggestion of the Gallant Officer.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the vote 44
Against it
Majority
The vote was then agreed to.
The next vote proposed was 2,000/. for the repair of the
public statues of the metropolis.
Mr. WILLIAMS thought the statue of Cromwell should be
placed among the statues which were to adorn the new Houses
of Parliament. Few men placed in his position, and in his
time, were stained with fewer crimes. Surely the mime of
Cromwell de,erved as much respect in this country as that of
Napoleon in France.
Mr. Fl UTT jocosely observed that the eulo4ium of the Hon.
Member for Coventry must be gratifying to the manes of Oliver
Cromwell. He had not, however, heard that the statue or
Cromwell h►d been excluded from the design of the new Houses
of Pariiament ; in fact, he had been informed of the contrary.
The vote was agreed to.
A vote of I,Blbl. was agreed to, to defray the expenses of
certain officers in Scotland.

. -?3

A vote of 6,4641. was proposed for the payment of officers of
the t ousehold of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.
Mr. BERNAL OSBORNE said that last year there had
been a great deal of discussion on this subject, and it was un-
derstood that the Government were not anxious to continue
this useless expenditure of public money. It had been even
rumoured that the present would be the last Lord Lieutenant.
Ile wished to know if such was the intention of Government ?
Sir. R. PEEL said he could not then, the Hon. Gentleman
having given no notice of his question, reply to it.
Mr. B. OSBORNE said he had been deterred from making
a motion on the subject, in consequence of the hopes which the
Government held out of prope,ing the abolition of the office.
The vote Mai agreed to.
A sum of 39,000/. was proposed to defray the expenses of
her Majesty's foreign and other secret service.
Mr. WILLIAMS said he opposed the vote last year, and
would do so in the present year, on the same ground ; that, in
a tin” of peace, and when all nations were at amity with one
anothei, so large a sum should be employed for purposes which
properly belonged to periods of trouble and wart re. He woo"
move, as an amendment, that the vote be reduced to 9.0,090/.
The house then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion ...
Against it ...
Majority
EDUCA [ION IN ENGLAND

56
-47

75,000/. Ica; agreed to, without opposition, for promoting
education in Great Britain.
EDUCATION PI IRELAND.

75,000/. was next proposed to the National Board of Educa-
tion in Ireland, for the purl ose of defraying the expenses of edu-
cation in connexion with it.
Mr. G. A. HAMILTON protested against the principle
involved in the vote, as it excluded colter societies, having,
for their object the promotion of education, from it. Ile did
n it, however, feel it his duty to raise a discussion on its merits,
on account of the absence of Irish Members.
Mr. B. OSBORNE referred to a statement made by the
lii,hnp of Cashel at a meeting, in which he set forth that 75
out of every 1(10 of the people of Ireland could neither read
nor write. He could not charge that Right Rev. Prelate with
suggestio falsi, but with having been guilty of suppresio rent,
as his ebservatione could only apply to children under ten, and
not younger than five, years.
Air. WYSE wished to know whether it was the intention of
the Government to establish any model schools in Ireland ?
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said it was the intention of the
Board of Education of Ireland to establish model schools in
certain districts in Ireland.
Mr. FITZROY hoped the grant would effect great good.
Mr. J. O'CONNELL said the Board of Education in Ire-
land should be composed of persons of different sects, that they
might see that the money voted to them was properly expended.
He also hoped that they would meet in a friendly, instead of a
hostile spirit, for the purpose of promoting secular education,
and for emulating the youth of Ireland of different religious de-
nominations to a generous, not a jealous, spirit of rivalry. The
National Board of Education had done great good.
Lord C. HAMILTON had always opposed the National
Board, as he believed a better system might be adopted. The
most liberal education was imparted in the schools belonging to
the Church Education Society.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL referred to the report of a meet-
ing at which the National Board was denounced in a gross
manner by parties who were members of the Church Educa-
tion Society.
Mr. OSBORNE—When the Noble Lord asks why this was
not an united system he would tell him. The fact was because
the Protestant clergy bad refused to give their attendance to
these schools, while the Roman Catholic clergy had done their
utmost to prove that they were interested in the improvement
of the people. If the Noble Lord had thrown overboard his
consistency with regard to Maynooth, why should he not give
his consistency to the winds on other points?
Lord C. HAMILTON was quite prepared to defend his con-
sistency on both paints, but he did nut think that this was the
time to enter on such a discussion.
A vote of 4,9111. was then agreed to, for defraying the ex-
penses of the School of Design, after a few words from Mr.
WILLIAMS.
It was then moved that 7,3801. be appropriated to the pay-
ment of the professors of the Scotch Universities.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD meted the sum be re-
duced to 7,228/.
The House then divided, when there appeared:—
For the amendment
Against it ...
Majority against the amendment —s7
A sum of 2,1001. was then voted for the Belfast Institution,
which was disputed on the ground of its being enormous.
Mr. HINDLEY said that he felt that though the opinions
which he represented were very unpopular in that House,
they had a large constituency out of doors, and he therefore
felt bound to oppose the motion • but on a motion to divide
the House, Mr. Hindley said, that he saw his own movement
was fruitless, and he would accordingly withdraw it.
On the vote of 42,400/. being proposed for the British
Museum,
Mr. WYSE thought that a distinct building ought to be
appropriated to the reception of antique sculptures and other
treasures of antiquity. The expense would be but little in-
creased to the country, and the advantages to the fine arts
would be invaluable. He had no desire to take up the time of
the House, but he hoped the Right Hon. Baronet would give
this subject his full consideration during the recess, as it was
his (Mr. Wyse's) intention to bring the subject before the
House during the next session.
Sir R. PEEL said that he was fully aware of the importance
of the subject adverted to by the Hon. Member, to the arts
of the country, but it would be out of the power of the Govern-
ment to accede to his proposition, as there were already so
many claims of a similar character upon them, while they had
no fund to which they might refer for such a proposition. So
averse was he to any further vote on this subject, that he would
rather assist out of his own private means, to the erection of
t(s
hui
fee such
people
eac
ohs
pe
lape abfruoa ed r
the
eguitli
werehludi(
evj nEps
tog fory,riltireteioanofl
oth
ifpytutechb,
oelernigecnusciiei
denrwpee,
retdt
ttr
o) t
ihhoro
portion
than further
t.enhf
Heu.srfoet
the
eneArt antiquities
i Britishbtt iaeexrs
(Mr. yitse°)Tthat
Museum was so out of character, as regarded its architecture,
that these sculptures could not be received into it ; andbefore
voting an increase of money for a separate building, he should
wish to know where the antiquities to fill it were' to come
from.—( Laughter. )
Mr. WA RBURTON thought that such a space would be
required for the remnants of mediaeval architecture, that
the country should not be put to the expense of providing such
erections.

Mr. P. BORTHWICK did not consider that those rein-
uants were so numerous as the am. Member opposite seemed

to imagine.
After a fez words from Mr. WYSE, in explanation, the vote

was agreed to.
The stun of 50,0001. in addition to the former vote of
100,0001. was then proposed for civil contingencies.
Mr. WILLIAMS objected to that part of the vote which
cumnrchen,ied the cost. of excursions male by bishops in her
M.ijesty's ships of war. The Bishop of Gibraltar bed
brought an expenee upon the country of 3101. 103. 3d., in-
cluding 1001. for travelling expenses to Lisbon, and 181. thence
to Cadiz, while the Prince of Prussia performed the ,anie dis-
tance at a cost of 351. The Bishop of Antigua also had entailed
ao expense of 1471., the Bishop of Barbadoes 1691. 35., and
the ti s'nop of Nova Scotia 1891. 35., and of Newfoundland
IJI , making siltcgether a sum of sornewbat about. 900/. 1 1(1.,
wn,lch al-nlunt he pro, l,cl should be dAuctod from
hero; proposed for the purposes o° I a "

. . •
co.I as 1,20 'I., whicli been expenle,l upon Lptico-
pll;ar, (;lergyrnon in fi,,atlAnd fie di.; not sve cc.•iii, elm-

gre,:at ions who attended upon the tninstry of thr:3o eca•ii
t!es, sh.,ul I not support them in the I,anvi way that the Free
Church Mini,teri were mpported by their congregation!. He
should, therefore, deodetily oppose the grantin; of both these