The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-15 00:00:00

ardent and aspiring. He did not think that, when the Roman
Catholic priesthood were better educated, they would b' more
likely to give their acquiescence to the possession of half a mil- 1
lion by the Protestant clergy, while they themselves got no-
thing. He expected to hear from the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Member for Newark (Mr. Gladstone) some powerful argu-
ments on this subject, but though he 'gave him credit for the
motives which actuated him, he confessed he was disappointed
at the result of his speech. He was afraid that, if this mea-
sure passed, others still more alarming would follow ; and if so,
he believed that the nolumus episcopari of the Irish
Roman Catholic clergy would be converted, by an
easy alteration, into volumus episcopari.—( Hear, hear. )
If they endowed Maynooth, all the Dissenters of the country
would have equal claims upon their liberality. They had east
aside the principle, and could only refuse them on the shifting
grounds of expediency. But the Right Hon. Baronet should
bring forward proofs that the present measure was expedient,
and then he was bound to show that the argument of ex-
pediency was a justifiable one. The Right Honourable
Baronet should also clearly define the length to which he
meant to go in concessions of this nature—whether the
11Iaynooth grant was to stand alone or be accompanied
by other such concessions. After the manner in
which the measure had been received by Mr. O'Connell.
the organ of the people of Ireland, he could not wonder that
the people of England were displeased at. it. That Hon. Gen •
denten said it had been extorted by agitation, and as long as
the Established Church remained in Ireland, there would be
no cessation of that agitation. The Protestants abstained from
agitating repeal solely bemuse of their love of the Established
Church ; but if once this bulwark were overthrown, English
sway over Ireland would be uncertain and precarious. The
Hon. Member concluded by saying he would oppose the
measure.
Mr. MACAULAY rose and said—Sir, I have no intention
to follow the Hon. Gentleman who last sat down into the dis-
cussion of an amendment which really has nothing to do with
the subject under the consideration of the House.—( Hear. )
Whenever my Hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield thinks it
expedient to propose to us his motion on the subject which he
has so often introduced to the notice of the House, I may per-
haps require the indulgence of the House whilst I offer my opi-
nions. At present it is sufficient for me to explain my
vote on the second reading of this Bill, and I think
I cannot do better than to review, as rapidly as
I can, the objections which have been urged in and out of
this House against them. I think these objections for the
greater part may be ranged under three distinct classes. In
the first place, a large body of persons who it would seem did
not until now object to the grant to Maynooth, object to the
proposed increase., There is a second class, a large and re-
spectable body, who object to any grant whatsoever. They op-
pose the grant as well as the increase. They conceive that we
are not justified as individuals or a Government in supporting the
Bill. I must say that my opinion is, that they who voted
for the grant of 9,0101., are hound to vote for the higher grant
of 26,000/., and I shall be surprised, though it may not
he in keeping with Parliamentary tactics, that those who vote
for the 9,000/. this year should vote against it next. To the
principle of any public erant I do most decidedly object, but I
cannot understand on what principle they act who, while voting
for the 9,000/., object to any increase of that grant for the
sake of rectifying the errors of which they complain. They
may object to the claim of the Catholic Church, as be-
ing a Church teaching a system of error, but I cannot
understand how they can object to an increase of
the grant which Parliament has yearly voted for the
imperfect development of a principle which that same
Parliament has year by year allowed and advocated. You
rimy condemn that establishment as teaching errors, but if you
have once voted for its support, you cannot at least condemn its
rites as superstitious.—( Hear, hear.) You may shrink from
upholding Maynooth in all its ancient splendour, but if you do
so, you are at least blend to provide it with the means of
carrying that splendour into effective exercise.—( Hear, hear. )
You must not give to the able and effective minister of truth,
that which you would be ashamed to offer to your groom.
You are now called upon to make a grant which is worse than
that which you give to the Irish common soldier. You expect
to have your homestead calm, and yet you are anxious that the
pigs should rejoice in their stye. If you do really desire to do
good to the Catholic Church, why not do so effectually—why
question the propriety of giving 26,0001. when you have al-
ready
given 9,000/. for the same object ? If you are to sup-
port the Raman Catholic establishment respectably, at least
give them the means of obtaining that respectability without,
b 'ins dependent on your will or the caprice of a
Government, and if the matter is important, it is worthy of
immediate and instant consideration. Do you expect that a
religion like this is to be counted as a matter of course? Do you
think that this is to move as a matter of course? Do you
think that thishigh and holy work is t. be promoted as a matter
of duty—the cultivation of this 20,000 individuals? You have
your noble cathedrals and lofty windows, your stained glass
and all your affluent appliances, to make your religion honour-
able at present, and useful for the future. I have no desire to
restrict the principleof endowing established communities, and
therefore it is that I support a Bill which, like this, is most
likely to secure the weltare of the lower classes. It is well
known that the conduct of the universities in this country is
most likely to excite the sense of iiiitotice with which the
servitors of Oxford and the sizars of Cainbridee are implicated.
You have your Margaret of Anjou, your Margaret of Rich-
mond; you have your founders of colleges; and what a result
do you arrive at? You come to the end of the story ; you arrive
at the conclusion that all your royal colleges have to be supported
on the principle of Dotheboys Hall. There was, it is true, a con-
tract with the Irish Parlament, but how was that contract
ever fulfilled? By a disregard of all p-inciple, a shirking of
all obligation, and an utter contempt for equity and truth.
There are some who object to the grant to Maynooth, on the
principle that it is entirely needless, from its entire exoneration
from all claims of social and civil polity. To these I will only
say, what is the difference between 9.0001. a-year and
26,000/ ? I must come to the point as to what doctrines will
be preached by the Church of Rome, and I am satisfied that
a charge will be made upon her that she teaches error. If she
does teach such errors it is plainly evident that those
errors are the result of the system which has in this country
been imposed upon her ; and it should further be remembered
that in the inculcation of truth there is an obligation, in
some instances, far above the law, and that inculcation would
lead every one to appreciate his position in the social circle,
and enable him to arrive at a point, if he could arrive at all, in
which his doubts should be resolved and his hesitation be con-
cluded. You haveheard something of Church extension, and
while I desire to see that extension promulgated to its utmost
limits, 1 at the same time repudiate whatever errors there may
be in the Church of Rome, and acknowledge my fealty to
what I conceive to be the despotic Government of the Church
of England. Yet while acknowledging this despotic govern-
ment, I cannot, at the same time, appeal against rho e powers
which would render any Government the conservatoes of
public morals. With respect to the errors of the Church of
Rome, I will beg to say that I prefer that there should be the
religion of the Church of Rome rather than no religion at all,
and 1 think that while that religion is acknowledged, it is a
duty of the State to support it in its integrity.
Well, then, what are you to do which may conduce to their
religious benefit ? Will any man, after the last twenty years
only of experience, think, that by keepine away this grant, you
will give an impulse to the Protestant religion ? I any man
thinks so, I think he ought to vote against the present mea-
sure.—( Hear.) But Ido not think so.—(Cheers.) The
considerations which I have stated satisfy me ; and, although
.
It think
tire absence of religious instruction.—( Hear, hear.) Although
it
to
better propagate
that error s
Christianity not
mwiythw anyish formwhat is I bseytter is,
thanthat the
I do not approve of that form, which has a strong influence
open the people of Ireland, yet I think that if we
cannot in any other way provide for the religious instruction of
that people, it is better to confer upon them this boon, even in
spite of the error.—(Cheers.) I think that thereis great
force in the argument against the State endowment of the
Church of Rome. Yet I think that if that is to be taken as a
general rule, the argument in favour of the voluntary system
does apply to this case, which ought to be an exceptior!---
(Cheers.) For in that island, witha. population of eight
millions, a Church with a population of little more than 800 000,
possesses a million of revenue—the income of its archbishops
alone exceeding 70,0001.—( Hear, hear.) You have at the
same time, in the north of Ireland, an endowment in another
form.—( Hear, hear.) But you have in the back ground,
four-fifths of the population, without any assistance from
the State—(Hear, hear)—and theirs is the religion for which
all the original endowments were intended.—(Cheers.) This
is a case quite by itself. I was astonished to hear Gentlemen,
amongst others the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury—say that,
after passing this measure, it would be impossible to resist
the claim of the Wesleyan Methodists of England to a similar
endowment.—(" Hear, hear," from the Tory benches.) Well,
you think so.—( Hear, hear.) But are the case; analogous ?
Is there the slightest resemblance?—( Hear, hear.)
. There
are sixteen millions of people in Great Britain—are there
thirteen millions of Wesleyan Methodists ?—( Cheers. )
Yet you have a Church in Ireland, with a revenue of a million
endowment—and the Wesleyan Methodists have 100,000/. left
and a half—ydu have the Presbyterian Church, with a State
to the followers of John Wesley, and you exclaim against a
grant of 26,000/. for educating the clergy of four-fifths of the
whole population.--(Cheers.) Bring me the ease of the
Wesleyan Methodists, and I shall know how to deal with it.—
(Cheers and a laugh.) But here is a
.csse
.which could not
occur in England, in France, or in Prusteo nor in any country
not situated like Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) It could be
only in the case of a weaker country connected
with a more powerful one, which has abused its
power to enable the minority to triumph over the majority.
—( Cheers.) Havirg placed Ireland in such a position as this—
nothing like which could exist elsewhere—and whilst those
other great endowments in that country exist and are perpe-
tuated-1 think it is impossible for you to inset the case of the
Irish Roman Catholics by saying, when you are asked to
add 17,000 i. to the grant already conceded—" We are against
any endowment at all.''—(Cheers.) The question may remain
to be settled at a future stage, whence is this endo7ment to
come? What funds are the most appropriate ?—( Cheers. 1
Bet Ido not go into that now.—( Hear, hear.) In the firs't
place, it seems to be perfectly clear, that if you have
no scruple about the 9,0001. which you have,
hitherto granted, you can have none against the
increase. It seems to me, in the next place, im-
possible to maintain the voluntary principle, unless the State
and individuals desist to give endowments for religious pur-
noses at all, or make any efforts for the propagation of truth.
Therefore, when I see the case of a country in which other
religions are endowed, and the religion which the majority of
the people believe o be the best, and which alone they
will adopt, left without assistance, I consider the case one
of the most morbid anomaly.—( Hear, hear.) fthink
therefore, that, from every motive, we are bound to
make this concession to the Roman Catholics of Ireland.—
( Cheers.) Those were the chief observations I had to
make on the merits of the measure itself. But there
is another class of objections which have been forced upon us.
m couldagainea subnr
resiotsuhdatohmtsl
forward.
r.bwith r
dep.iegßrhsueotdnl abtlhyhi
naoknn
yo thisucro,
consideration
sos
aird
geuruiaet creditthsit,:nonowf
hp
On the first night of the debate, we were called on to resist
this me .sure, because it was brought forward by men who
lic
cpoanssdugcntndofl public I incn
and
et
men.— ( Hear, hear.) We have heard the same argument
ld
not be brought into consideration. Ido not think that the
ht
trhesalltewee tsohotuhled
ld
seem is have fixed principles.—( Loud and continued cheer-
ing.) I think that public men should seem to have
fixed principles, and to he guided by those fixed
principles in
.office and in opposition.—(lmmense cheers.)
It is most desirable that it should not appear to the world that
the. mere change of situation should produce a complete charism
in the policy of. pubic men.—(Cheers arid counter- cheer:.
But
.I do not think it needs any argument to prove that if the
particular measure be good, and it may yet be viewed in con-
!lemon with the former conduct and professions of those who
introduced it—this should lower them in public • •
estimation.—
( Cheers.) Yet our course is clear. We are to distinguish
between the men and the measure.—(Cheers.(.
We ought to
adopt the measure for its intrinsic merits, whilst
of the authors we might speak in such forms of
censure as the occasion cailed for.—( Hear, hear.)
In such form of censure, I feel bound to speak.—( Hear.) I
bear no personal hostility to any man, and the political hostility
which I ectertain, I avow. I believe the Right Honourable
Baronet has the qualifications of an excellent Alinitter—that he
possesses great talents for finance, and for the management of
this House, that he has great industry, great knowledge, and a
fall determination to carry on the Government of the country
,n the best manner for the interest of the Crown and the
people.--( Hear, hear.) But I cannot deny that those who, in
+pi te of bitter experience, a second thus have trusted
.him and
raised him to power, now find themselves a second time de-
lnded.—( Great cheering.) It is impossible to deny it has
been too much the habit of the Bight Renewable
nh
t public think
m iaecarnhi party, with