NEWS OF THE WEEK.
THE Popular House of Parliament has been engaged for three sittings this week in a contest of civil and religious liberty ; being challenged to the contest by the champions of both sides—by Mr. Spooner as the adversary of Maynooth, and Lord John Russell as the advocate of the Jews. Although Mr. Spooner's motion named the Maynooth grant alone, everybody felt that it was aimed, as usual, at the established regueition of Roman Catholics and their civil rights ; and Mr. Spooner made the most of the misconduct of Roman Catholics themselves,—such as the interference of their priests in elections ; with the usual citation of doctrines subversive of allegiance and good faith from the writings of the old standard authors. Ile moved, not for inquiry, as he did last year, but for a committee of the whole House, to " consider " the grant. The ground of debate was enlarged by Mr. Scholefield's amendment to include all Parliamentary grants for purposes of religious endow- tuent,—such as the Colonial grants, and the Reg= Donum ; but the speakers did not generally accept that broader ground. Mr. Mial entered upon the subject of endowments in general, hroaching the paradoxical opinion that he would rather endow er- ror than truth, because endowment, he explained, is a fatal sup- port. But the contest still raged around Maynooth, as the chosen standard for the battle of Anti-Papist and Anti-Perseeutionist ; Mr. Lucas's fiery and defying language adding to the intensity of the sectarian war. The practical arguments in favour of the spe- cific grant were the old grounds of good faith and policy. The result was peculiar. The division was taken on a Wednesday, just before six o'clock : Mr. Spooner's formula was negatived by 192 to 162 ; and then the clock adjourned the House, before Mr. Schole- field's amendment could be put. Many must have staid away, to avoid a display in which coward conformity obliges numbers to join, although they are ashamed of it in their hearts ; and the effect of the division is, that the House of Commons scouts the raising of the question.
The other chapter of active controversy was Lord John Rus- sell's reintroduction of his proposal to remove the last civil dis- abilities of the Jews; which he did in a speech recognized on all sides as conciliatory and dignified. Lord John moved a resolution in a Committee of the whole House as the preliminary to a bill. The spirit that is represented by Sir Robert Inglis of course came forth to resist ; and there were odd sallies of Members whom it would be difficult to classify,—such as the third Sir Robert Peel, from the Swiss Alps, with liberty on his tongue and a hostile vote in the lobby. The opposition was bootless. It is remarked that the net majority, 29, is the smallest that has yet been attained on the subject, although the attendance of Members was large. But the sequel must depend upon Ministers themselves: if they stand firm and no man make them afraid, they are most likely to carry all measures which they may consider necessary, this one among them. It is well understood that no Ministry of our time, whatever its majorities in the House of Commons, has had a better opportunity in the House of Lords.
Two other debates of purely critical purport have occupied the two Houses,—one raised by Lord Ellenborough, on the annexa- tion of Pegu and the Burmese war in general ; the other by Sir John Pakington on the concessions made to the colonists of Aus- tralia. Lord Efienborough arrayed a number of figures and facts to show that the English forces in Burmah have been ill provided; that the boundary of Pegu is a bad military frontier ; and that the war wanted the sanction of the Duke of Wellington. Lord Aberdeen and Lord Derby, both Premiers impugned, defended their common Governor-General, Lord Dalhousie, on the ground of necessity ; they ignored the exigencies of the troops; and they produced a despatch to show that the war had the authority of the Duke of Wellington, given three weeks before he died. Is the age of the former despatch, or the age of the writer when. he penned the last, the greater abatement from the authority ? Out of this debate the public gets no information, except an idea that the war was very much according to Indian routine, and a notion that perhaps a great deal of it is the fault of poor old General Godwin.
Not so in Sir John Pakington's debate ; whence we are to learn that some of the reforms carried on by the present Ministers are "Ms thunder "; and whence also we learn, somewhat more de- finitely, the extent to which Ministers are impressed with sound Colonial views, and prepared to act on them. The Law Bills, so many of which Lord St. Leonards has in charge with the concurrence of his noble and learned coadjutors, proceed independently of the Government : besides the Bank- ruptcy, Lunacy, Chancery, and other Bills, there in the Digest of the Criminal Law by chapters ; all of which advance hopefully, not- withstanding Lord Campbell's desire to delay the operation of the criminal digest until the whole be accomplished—so as to keep it back almost to the date of Lord Cranworth's " Code Victoria." The bill to extend the English Evidence Bill to Scotland is re- markable as comprising the result of an important recognition : Lord Campbell and the Judges had been opposed to the admission of the evidence of parties in their own ease: now, however, the Lord Chief Justice acknowledges that they were wrong, and in the name of all the Judges announces their unanimous approval of the mea- sure, from their experience of its working. The Commission on Limited Liability in Partnership, announced in the course of the short debate which was fatal to the bill of "Her Majesty's Theatre Association," belongs to the important class of reforms gradually but quietly maid] way.
The successful proposition of Sir Robert Inglis to appoint a Se- lect Committee on the appointment of a Deputy Speaker in case of the Speaker's illness, affects an arrangement of which the conve- niences are obvious enough, and not unreasonable. We will not ask whether Sir Robert has any friend in his eye for nomination to the post—Sir Frederick Thesiger, for instance, or Mr. Disraeli. But we may express strong doubts as to possible ulterior conse- quences. At present, Mr. Speaker is the only Speaker, and the Sergeant-at-Arms is his lietor, without diversion of authority ; the Speaker is ever present when " the Rouse" is sitting—the one continuous presiding mind; and if to go through with that duty he must be a strong man, so much the better—we want a man with a telling voice, a commanding presence and a healthy self- assertion. It is now essential that the Speaker be at his post : let there be two, and it will not be only imperative necessity that will excuse absences ; authority will be divided; and in process of time it will no longer be found essential to select for the post a healthy man in thorough repair. We grant that the Speaker must make many hard sacrifices to public duty : but we do not know that the day has yet come quite to extinguish the "lamp of sacrifice" which now burns in so few places, or quite to silence the peremptory voice of public duty.
