Debates ants iproctenings in Varliament.

ACADEMICAL EDUCATION IN IRELAND.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, before the resumption of the adjourned debate on the Colleges (Ireland) Bill, Mr. BLACKSTONE alluded to a statement made on Friday by Sir James Graham, who, in arguing that religious is not mixed with secular education, said, that when he was at Christchurch College, Oxford, there was no compulsory religious in- struction. Mr. Blackstone had written to the Censor at Christchurch; who referred him first to the statutes of the University, and then stated, that he had entered the University in 1827, and knew that a lecture was delivered On Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, during term, at which attendance was compulsory; and that it had been so for thirty years. Sir James GRAHAM said, the Censor was so much his junior that he could not speak Of what occurred in 1808 or 1812, the time at which Sir James was at College.

The discussion was resumed by Mr. MONCHTON MIMES; who said, that during the whole period of his University course at Cambridge he had never heard the subject of divinity mooted in any way. The only point Connected with it was, that he remembered being examined, not theologi pally, but critically, in one of the Greek Gospels. He charged the oppo- nents of the bill with a sophism in using the word "religion" when they meant Protestant religion; to enforce which as a condition of academical education in Ireland would be an absolute denial of all education to the Roman Catholics.

Lord JOHN Russxm spoke at considerable length, supporting the mo- tion of the second reading, but pointing out several imperfections in the bill. He insisted that Government is especially bound to promote a better organization of society in Ireland; where some of the influences which in England and Scotland are powerful for order are weakened: the Esta- blished Church is not of the people; landlord and tenant are not bound together by ties of protection and regard; the Executive is weak—not personally weak—no man will say that its weakness arises from any per- tonal fault of the Lord-Lieutenant to whom is at present intrusted the government of that part of the British empire. Under such circumstances, the influence of the Roman Catholic clergy ought, not humbly nor meanly but fairly and honestly, to be sought, for the promotion of order; and in any bill for academical education in Ireland, it woulcLbe a great omission not to obtain their concurrence. Unless,illerefore, the objections of the Roman Catholic Prelates be removed, it is to 13e feared that the measure will be not only null' but noxious. 'Lord John, however, combated the notion

that secular education without religious instruction is in itself an evil, though he thought it batter to combine both if possible; and he asked, what

there Vas to prevent the House from agreeing tcosome kind of proposal

which should be in accordance with the view of the Roman Catholic clergy? Sir James Graham had expressed his willingness to attach halls to each of the Colleges, for the purposes of religious instruction : that might mean much or nothing—would he permit the Deans of those halls to exer- cise authority over the students, and their attendance at religions worship or theological lectures; punishing defaulters by expulsion if necessary? He could see no degradation to the Government in taking counsel of such men as Archbishop Murray, distingaished no less by moderation in opinion and loyalty to the Throne than by unsparing fidelity to his own Church.

" If her Majesty's Government will take that coarse—if,beforegoing into Com- mittee upon the bill, they shall have made some communication which shall ena- ble them to say that they have the assent generally of the Boman Catholic clergy of Ireland, and that they see their way to the success of this plan—I think, then, it may proceed forwards, and that we may look to a favourable termination of it. With regard to the Presbyterians of Ireland, as far as I understand, they are -sa- tisfied with the plan as it stands. With regard to them, it is proposed to con- tinue the sums allotted by Parliament for the"Presbyterian teachers of divinity. It appears to me that her Majesty's Ministers have been alarmed by the outcry which has been raised against their plan respecting the endowment of Maynooth. Their plan with respect to Maynooth, whatever may have been the objections raised against it, was a good plan, and sufficient for its object. It went straight to its object. It was for the improvement of the education of the young men who will hereafter become candidates for the Roman Catholic priesthood. The right honourable gentleman told us in detail how it would do so; and if religious ob- jections were not allowed to prevail, there was no doubt that the measure would be a good and efficient one. But with respect to your present plan, you seem to have been afraid of your own wisdom, and frightened by the objections of those who have doubted whether you have pursued the right path." Lord lileman would support the bill, in hopes of its being amended in

Committee. He suggested, that theological professors might be ap- pointed, and paid not by state-salaries but by class-fees; and he would make religious worship compulsory. Mr. GLADSTONE advocated the measure, not as the best that could be devised, but as the best that could be contrived in the anomalous and dig- tracted condition of Ireland; entering into many minute points of criticism to show that other projectors of measures for academical education in Ire- land had failed to bit upon a practicable plan. He seized the present diffir culty as affording proof how necessary it is to renew diplomatic relations with Rome; for he would refer from the decision of the Irish Catholic Bishops to the Court of Rome. He denied Sir Robert Inglis's charge that the present scheme is " godless," since balls are to be provided for theo- logical instruction • and he glanced at the history of other universities, to show that, originally, internal religions superintendence of the pupils formed no part of their plan. Mr. THOMAS WYSE admitted great defects in the bill; but regarded it as supplying a vast -want in Ireland—education for a class between the highest and the lowest; and he thought that the objections to it might be obviated, especially if the question-were approached on both sides with can- dour and a desire to soften prejudices. As to religions instruction, he re cognized the difficulty of appointing two professors to teach adverse systema of theology; but he thought divinity might be taught; and he should cer- tainly like to endow such a chair, vesting the appointment of professor in the Bishop of the diocese. He suggested that Government should build chambers for the residence of the pupils under the control of Chaplains. He did not approve of vesting the appointment of professors in the Crown; but he did not think that a Board of mixed Protestants and Catholics would work well.

Mr. THOMAS DYKE ACLAND would vote against the second reading; be- cause he saw no prospect of the bill's succeeding, and because its necessity had not been proved. Sir ROBERT PEEL thought that the advantages of academical education in Ireland might be taken for granted. He read an extract from a work by Dr. Kane on the Geology of Ireland, for the purpose of showing that that able and excellent writer had attributed the poverty of Ireland to the want of industrial knowledge among its population, which prevented them from applying to the best advantage the resources of their country; and he showed that Dr. Kane followed up that passage by another, in which he stated, that no mode of spreading industrial knowledge would be so effica- cious as that of establishing local colleges in Ireland. He denied that it was proposed to banish religion from the Colleges. As Mr. Mines said, when Sir Robert Inglis talked of " religion " he meant Protestant religion; and what would he or Mr. Spooner, who declared Catholicism an "awful delusion," have said, had the religions instruction provided by Government been Roman Catholic? On the other hand, What would the

proper and respectful attention to the religious principles of the Roman Catholic scholars.' Here, then, is Irish religious experience; and I place that in juxta- position with your fears for the future. I believe that that which has happened in Belfast will happen again, if we are careful with respect to the selection of professors. These are facts urfavour of communions of different sects and united education."

Adverting to the objection of the Irish Bishops against appointing any but Roman Catholics to be professors of astronomy, geology, or anatomy, Sir Robert dismissed as ridiculous the notion, that a lecture on anatomy would be made the vehicle for sly sarcasms on Martin Luther or covert attacks on the Council of Trent, or that a second Newton would descend from the lofty sublimities of his science to paltry efforts at corrupting the faith of his pupils. He adverted to a point omitted by Sir James Graham —exhibitions-

" It has been thought, and, as it appears to me, on very good ground, that they would greatly stimulate industry and promote sound learning. It has been, I regret to eeaPerve, made a matter of complaint, that those who have brought forward this measure have made no declaration as to the establishment of an uni- versity. Now I do think, that under present circumstances it would be prema- ture to make any declaration upon that subject. I think it is a question which ought to be left for mature deliberation. Thus much, however, I may venture to say, that I think it would, on the whole be better to form a University by the

union of the three Colleges, than to attempt to establish three by erecting each College into an University. Considerations of this kind, however, will come time enongle. If these Colleges are found to work well—if they merit and obtain the confidence of the people of Ireland—we then can proceed to do whatever may be necessary with respect to an University, because some time hence will clearly be the fittest for its consideration. For those reasons, we think it quite as well to make no declaration on that point."

On a division, Lord John Manners's amendment, to postpone the second reading for six months, was negatived, by 311 to 46; and the bill was read second time.

SPEAKERS IN THE TWO-DAYS DEBATE (FRIDAY AND MONDAY.) For the Second Reading of the Bill—Mr. Ross, Lord Sandon, Sir James Graham, Mr. Redington Mr. Monckton Mines, Lord John Russell, idle Villiers Stuart, Lord Mallon, Mr. Bernal Osborne, Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Thomas Wyse, Mr. More O'Fer- rall, Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Morgan John O'Connell, Mr. Shaw, Sir Valentine Blake. Against it—Lord John Manners, Lord Mate, Mr. Edmund Burke Roche, Sir Robert Inglis, Mr. Alexander Beresford Hope, Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Thomas Dyke Acland.

letereoarer.

In the House of Lords, on Monday, the Duke of WELLINGTON moved the second reading of the Maynooth College Bill; stating its objects and principles less minutely than Sir James Graham did in the House of Commons, but not less comprehensively; glancing at the history of Ireland from the Reformation downwards—at the nugatory attempts to force the Reformation on that country by penal laws—plot succeeding plot, re- bellion rebellion, and so forth. The Duke, however, had scarcely begun before he was interrupted.

The Duke of NEWCASTLE rose to order. Apologizing for the interruption' he asked whether the Duke of Wellington had the Queen's permission to make this proposition to the House? Lord BROUGHAM—" This is not speaking to order. (" Hear, hear! ") This is the most disorderly thin.; I ever witnessed in my experience of Parliament. The noble Duke has not been speaking to order. This ought to have been after the speech of the noble Duke [Wellington]." The Duke of NEWCASTLE again rose, amidst load cries of " Order !" and said- " I wish to put the question, as it affects the Act of Succession, as it affects indi- viduals, and as it affects the nation." (" Order, order! ") Lord BEouGitAsi—" I never will sit here and allow any man to say that we have not a right to enter on, to continue, and to dose any discussion without the leave of the Crown. The leave of the Crown is required only in one case, but it may be given at any period of the discussion of the measure, and that is when such measure affects the revenues or the patrimonial interests of the Crown." The Duke of NEWCASTLE, having felt it his duty to make the interruption, must say he thought the present was a most improper discussion. The Duke of WELLINGTON said, that he would have answered the question, although put in a most disorderly manner, but he was afraid that his infirmity had prevented him from hearing it exactly at first. He pro- ceeded with his explanation of the bill; declaring his belief that the fears of' danger from it to the Established Church are quite nugatory; contending that the " endowment " was recognized at the time of the Union; and in- sisting on the policy of elevating the character of the Roman Catholic priesthood, and of educating them at home rather than abroad; -alluding to individuals from foreign countries who had mixed themselves up with the Repeal transactions. He believed that the grant did not involve any reli- gious question; but it did involve a very serious political question— "I beg leave to remind your Lordships, that you have now maintained this in- stitution for fifty years, daring twenty years of which you were engaged in war; and that you have maintained it through long periods, during the agitation and discussion of questions affecting the interests of Ireland, and when there were Ro- man Catholic associations, and other bodies, against which you had to make enactments. You have had Coercion-bills, and other measures of thatdescription. The greatest difficulty of all, the greatest discussion of all, was certainly put an end to about fifteen -years ago, namely, in the year 1829. But, my Lords, we cannot say that we have since had in Ireland a very tranquil state of affairs. On the very morrow of the day on which that bill was passed, mea- apres were taken for the purpose of exciting discussion and agitation on the ques- tion of the repeal of the Union; and a good deal of tumult and a good deal of difficulty arose out of that question. Particularly in the year 184.3 there existed that which excited a good deal of anxiety, and in some a degree of terror. Men doubted—I am merely drawing your Lordships' attention to those circumstances, and stating the effect which they produced in foreign countries—men doubted whether it would be possible to resist the attempt mode to carry by tumult and by violence the repeal of the Union. My Lords, whatever opinion may be enter- tained as to the legal effect of the decision of your Lordships' House upon a writ of error, delivered in the month of September last, I believe there is no man in his senses who now doubts that it is absolutely impossible—absolutely hopeless and impossible--to carry any measure by violence and tumult in Ireland against the wishes of the Government and Parliament of this country. I believe there is no man in his senses who now doubts that fact; and that is the situation in which your Lordships are this day called upon to take into your con- sideration this question. Now, my Lords, standing as you do at this moment in strength, and without any danger whatever pressing upon you—knowing as you do that thepried part of the persons concerned in these tumults and acts of violence were of the Roman Catholic religion—although there were certainly some exceptions, and I believe many Roman Catholics are as much attached to the Union as any, of ourselves, I beseech your Lordships to take that into your con- sideration. Look at our situation of strength at present, and see whether, having maintained this institution as you have done for fifty years, it would not seem a little like per :ecution if you were now to turn round and say, We are aware

of the necessity of its continuance, but we will not let it go on any longer.' Would it not look, I ask, a little like persecuting that party? Now, my Lords, I told yoel that there is no religion in this question; but 1 do say that there is a great Christian principle involved in that to which I have adverted. I say, that if yon are strong, it is your duty not to persecute the people,. and, further, it is your duty not even to appear to persecute the people. And I entreat your Lordships to stand by me in enforcing that principle, and to give your unanimous assent to the bill of which I have now the honour to move the second reading."

The Duke of CAMBRIDGE could not give a silent vote on this important question. He looked upon it as a political, not a religious question; and as such, he contended it was in every sense one of the most conciliatory and wise measures that had been proposed for many years in Parliament- The Government deserved the gratitude of the country for having brought it forward.

The Earl of RODEN opposed the measure at great length. He had al- ways opposed the annual grant; much more, therefore, the permanent en- dowment. He cited the petitions against it, and read extracts from a variety of documents,—from Mr. Wilberforee's speeches, to show that toler- ation of a religion does not necessarily imply endowment; from Bishop Higgins's letters, to show that the measure does not attain its professed object of conciliating the Irish Catholics; from a letter by Priest M'Genny to the Chairman of a monster-meeting at Dundalk, who told the Re. peelers to " go-where glory waits them," and he would bless their arms,--. to show how the Irish regard this as concession wrung through fear. He bitterly complained that the Repealers actually propose to hold a monster-t meeting on the banks of the Boyne—

Now, he asked, was this affront to the Protestants of Ireland to be suffered by her Majesty's Government? was it to be permitted that one of these monster- meetings should be held on the 1st of July on the banks of the Boyne—on the very spot and on the very day that William the Third, of glorious and immortal me- mory—(. A laugh)—yes, of glorious and immortal memory !—on the very spot where he fought and bled, and gained for England those liberties which she has ever since enjoyed ? was it possible that the Ministry would allow the feelings of the Protestants of Ireland to be so outraged? He went on with his documentary quotations,—from Mr. Inglis's Tour irr Ireland, in proof that " the Maynooth priest is an agitating priest "; from a report of disorders at Dingle, to illustrate the treatment of Protestant cone verts by Roman Catholic mobs at the instigation of priests, with a reply from Dublin Castle to a memorial, telling the memorialists that Govern- ment could not extend any special protection to the assailed converts, but must refer them to the protection of the ordinary law; from evidence taken by various Parliamentary Committees, from 1825 downwards, to attest that the principles of the priests are Inti-Jacobinical, that the doctrines there taught are of the Ultramoutane kind, hostile to allegiance to the tem- poral authorities; from Sir Robert Peel's speeches, commending inquiry into the course of the education at Maynooth. Inter alia, he quoted a statement by a gentleman, educated at Maynooth, at a meeting of the Priests' Protection Society in Dublin, that the students and professors at. Maynooth have an unconquerable aversion from taking the oath of alle- giance, and " feign sick" to avoid it: a Bishop boasted of having carried on the evasion for six years, by always having been ill on quarter-day. In another of his citations, Lord Roden traced a doctrine home; quoting Menochius, the writer of, a class-book used at Maynooth, who ;eters the student to lefaldonatus on the subject of treating heretics; and then Mal- donatus himself, who advises the slaying of heretics, and the burning espe- cially of Lutherans and Calvinists. In their profession of conciliating •the Irish nation, Ministers forget that the nation is not all Roman Catholic: there are about 2,000,000 Protestants, linked to the British connexion, and to them this measure will be a " heavy blow." The Protestants of Ireland are now thinking how they may best secure the safety of their families, their children, their altars, and their homes; for those in whom they had reason and a right to trust have deceived them. He would tell Ministers, that the Protestants of Ireland, who have stood by them in many a difficulty, are disgusted with their conduct. He concluded by moving,, as an amendment, that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the class-books used, and the general course of instruction imparted, at the. Roman Catholic College of Maynooth; and that this bill be referred to that Committee.

The Bishop of LONDON insisted that Lord Roden had fully made out a case for inquiry. He wished to avoid the dogmatical part of the subject,• not considering that House a fit arena for theological disputes, especially, since Roman Catholic Peers had been admitted to it; but he maintained that a knowledge of the system of instruction pursued at Maynooth was necessary to enable their Lordships to give a conscientious vote He de-. scribed the students at Maynooth as generally taken from an inferior class of society, and therefore as being of less refined and cultivated minds than those educated on the Continent, whose education is necessarily more ex- pensive. He explained what are the Ultramontane doctrines which are said to be taught at Maynooth, which unfit men for the faithful discharge of their duties to the state and are incompatible with the maintenance of peace—

He would only briefly enumerate them, to show the extreme importance of those, which were brought to bear upon the peace of the Roman Catholic peasantry of Ire- land. Those doctrines are, the Church's infallibility and the authority of the Pope; his deposing power; that faith needs not be kept with heretics; the condemnation of the right of private judgment; the assertion of universal dominion on the part of the Church of Rome over the conscience; the right of the Pope to insist on the resumption of Church property; and, lastly, the seven cause arcusantes, made to justify the violation of oaths with heretics, the Pope being judge in each case. It' is true that those doctrines, in their general form, may be held by Roman Catho- lics consistently with their duty to the state, but they must be held with certain modifications; for, as they are taught in the class-books of Maynooth, it is not possible they could be held by the subjects of any state consistently with their duty to that state. The modifications to which he alluded are briefly laid down in the four articles drawn up by the French clergy in 1682, and called "the. Liberties of the Gallican Church." But if those doctrines are not taught at. Maynooth, the reason must be because they are considered objectionable, and if so, the proposition against which they are directed must be approved. After all those considerations, then, a. most important fact in the institution of Majnooth is the various means adopted for promulgating the doctrines inculcated there, one of which is the establishment of education societies; and in point of fact, the College is as much a college of Jesuits as the College of Douay. Dr. Blomfield contended that the establishment of two antagonist churches implies indifference to all, and must inevitably lead to severance of the Church from the State. And he could not consent to disseminate doctrines which he considered dangerous, if not deadly. He knew that some thought that objection answered by the instances of the Regium Doe num and of Canada and Malta. Now with regard to the Regium Donnm, the original donation was a matter of comity on the part of the Crown, and it only became a State payment when the property of the Crown was given up to the Civil List: and if the doctrines taught at Belfast were Arian, they were so by accident; whereas they were now going to endow a college avowedly and exclusively Roman Catholic. With regard to Canada and Malta, they were conquered countries. He should very likely be asked- " If you will not do this for the Roman Catholics of Ireland, what will you do?" He did not feel called upon to attempt an answer to that question.

" I give the fullest credit to the pure and honourable intentions of the Govern- ment in bringing forward this question. I have not the least doubt they were fully convinced that this measure would tend in some degree to heal those wounds that so long have prevented the peace and prosperity of that country, and that us their hearts they did not believe it would be productive of any serious injury to the Established Church. But I cannot get over the difficulty of principle. I can- not convince myself that it is right to violate such a principle as I have stated, under any circumstances, especially under circumstances which seem to hold out no corresponding advantages which might be regarded in the light of compensation. I can easily conceive the embarrassment which attends the Government when they turn to the map of Ireland. How that country is to be governed I confess myself ignorant. I confess myself ignorant as to what is the right method of governing that country; but I have no scruple, no hesitation, in declaring what is the right principle on which it should be governed. It is briefly—and with this statement I shall conclude the observations I have offered to your Lordships—that in govern- ing that or any other country, never for any consideration do that which is clearly wrong in principle. Do your best to discover what is right; follow it out honestly and fearlessly, and trust for the issue to the Supreme Disposer of Events, who will, I am persuaded in my conscience, and I am justified in that by His own written Word, deal favourably with that nation which upholds His truth, or at least does nothing to impede its progress."

The Earl of St. Ganwarsis bore strong testimony to the wretched state of Maynooth, and argued that its evils would be removed by the improved condition of the students and the improved supervision.

Lord BEAUMONT, as a Roman Catholic, emphatically denied many of the statements which had been made by the opponents of the bill. If they really believed the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church to be as they described, the toleration would be a crime. He altogether repudiated the Ultramontane doctrine of allegiance; and it was not fair to quote books of no authority to prove that such doctrines were inculcated at Maynooth. He admitted that there is an antagonism between the two Churches in Ireland; but it is increased by the relative circumstances in which they stand, one elevated and the other depressed. But as they approached one another in position, so in proportion that antagonism would cease. In foreign countries the two religions exist together in perfect cordiality. The Bishop of CASHEL urged inquiry as necessary for those whose minds were less strongly made up than his own against a system of education which he thought full of evil. He declared, on the authority of the Educational Commissioners' Eighth Report, that there had certainly been an intrusion of Jesuits into the College of Maynooth. The State must unprotestantize

herself before she can endow a Roman Catholic college. •

Lord CLIFFORD spoke in defence of the bill; and then, at one o'clock, the debate was adjourned.

On Tuesday, the Earl of HARDWIDKE continued the discourse; repeat- ing several arguments in favour of the bill. He was followed by the Earl Of Canareuvoir, in a brief, moderate, and effective vindication of the measure, rather on grounds forcibly put than new.

The Earl of Wit:um-sae referred to the Emanoipation Act of 1621as having broken up the party of his friends; and lie warned those who felt remorse for having passed that measure, that they would feel no less for having sanctioned this—the greatest act of national suicide ever com- mitted—the endowment of Popery! He proceeded to condemn the bill in vehement terms, and on exclusively Protestant grounds; glancing by the way at Mr. Gladstone, for having asked what is Popery, in a speech so in- sidious and Jesuitical that he must have been brought up in some seminary of Jesuits. [Next day, the Earl disclaimed the word "insidious."]

The Marquis of NORMANDY defended the bill, as a proper concession to a nation of which seven-eighths are Roman Catholics. He bore strong testimony, founded on inquiries which he had taken pains to institute, as to the moral character of the students at Maynooth, and as to the loyalty of the priests; from whom he had often received the most valuable assist- ance in the detection of crime. As to the violent language which they have used towards religious opponents, that is not peculiar to them; and no more uncharitable language had been used than by the Bishop of Cashel Lord Normanby read an account by an ear-witness of a charge delivered by the Bishop to his clergy, at Lismore, in 1843; in which he was represented as saying of the Roman Church, that Satan himself never invented such a diabolical system for the destruction of men's souls—as ad- vising Protestants to employ none but servants of their own faith—and as calling the National Schools "Devil's schools." The Bishop of CASHEL declared that this account was an abominable falsehood from beginning to end; and he promised to send the Marquis an authenticated version of his charge. After a good deal of chaffering on a point of order, the Marquis of NORMANBY proceeded to read a letter by the Reverend Mr. Maskisson, Rector of Clashmore, a clergyman of thirty years' standing, who com- plained that he had been put into a most painful situation by the Bishop's saying that it was not consistent with the duty of a Protestant clergyman to visit the National Schools, even for the purpose of seeing that the rules were carried out; and Mr. Maskisson also said that he felt his prospects of promotion were blighted. (Laughter.) Lord Normanby alluded to the Duke of Wellington's peroration of Monday ;t expressing a fear that the Duke would be disappointed in the expectation that the Repeal cry had declined, and pointing for proof to the formidable meeting in Dublin on Friday. The Duke of WELLINGTON denied that he had expressed any opinion as to the decline of agitation, about which' no one could say what would be its course from day to day: what he said was, that, as the Go- vernment had enforced the law and the Repeal cause was weak, the House should take care not even to be suspected of persecuting those who were weak.

The Archbishop of Dunt.rx supported the bill, in a speech that riveted attention.

Among other statements which writers had used in treating this question, he had seen quoted something that he had said in reference to the education which prevails at the College of' Maynooth. He did not, on that occasion, recollect whether he had said what was attributed to him by those writers or not. Perhaps be had; for with the education afforded at Maynooth be had often expressed lus dissatisfaction, and he knew that in some cases that education had been leper

-

feet. It never occurred to him, however, up to the present time, that his opinion

of its insufficiency was an argument against his consistency in row wishing it to be improved. (Laughter and loud cheers.) He spoke, however, of the insuffi-

ciency of the education at Maynooth. He did not mean to say anything against the Professors for not bringing up the students as Protestants instead of Roman Catholics. That was not to be expected. (A laugh.) His object in supporting this measure was to obtain a better system of education—a more sufficient sys- tem; and be did not mean to say by that better education that he would be enabled to induce the Catholics to give up their pastors. They could not do that so easily. They could not by a legislative enactment induce six millions of Roman Catholics to become Protestants; but they could by a legislative enact- ment establish a system which would give them better pastors. It was said that by making this a perpetual grant, the Ministry gave another ground of objection: but so far from thinking its perpetuity an objection, he was of opinion that it was a recommendation, by affording a great check to the evil which arose from making this question a battle-field every year in Parliament.

He did not consider that his vow as a Bishop and clergyman was vio rated by charity— He had vowed that he would use all diligence in driving away strange and erroneous doctrine which was opposed to God's Word. But how was he to drive it away, and whence? Was he to drive it away. by secular proscription and at the point of the bayonet? Was the religion of Him who forbade his followers to draw the sword in his defence to be sup-

ported by those means? If it were, he would sooner renounce the office he herd, he would sooner renounce his profession—nay, he would renounce the religion, if it taught such a course, and draw his sustenance, if necessary, from the hum- blest manual toil. (Loud cheering.) How were they to drive out such doctrine? Was it in the manner that had been adopted by Ferdinand and Isabella in Spain, by driving away its professors? He would drive away strange and erroneous doc- trine from his own Church; he would oppose those who would introduce strange doctrine into the Established Church; no one would more readily than he drive

away what he considered strange doctrine from the Church. He claimed no ju- risdiction over the Roman Catholics; but he would repudiate and censure those in his own Church whose doctrine was inconsistent with the Word of God and the doctrines of the Church, and who continued to exhibit that which was inconsistent with her doctrines by holding the principles of one church and the emoluments of another. (Cheers.) He dealt with the arguments against supporting a faith from which you. dissent— He had heard a great deal on the sinfulness, and impropriety, and ungodliness, of giving money towards what they considered a religious error; and that had been so

often repeated that he thought it must have caused confusion in many minds. It should be recollected that it was not a question of giving money which was their own; it was money which belonged to the nation, and which did not belong to them as Protestants. If a man of known liberality and bountiful munificence were called on to contribute to a church which was not his own—a Roman Catholic chapel, for instance—and he declined to do so on the ground of conscience, he would consistently refuse to do so: but in this case the money which was proposed to be given away was the property of the nation; and in that nation there were six millions of Roman Catholics, to whom it would be vain to say that they were not part of the nation; and in addition to that, they contributed a large sum to the funds of the country. It was a claim which was not on the Protestant funds, but on the funds of the nation, of which nation the Roman Catholics were a part.

It is advanced, as a convincing argument against the measure, that it has not already effected conciliation—

The speeches made in opposition to it by some of the more active and notorious agitators in Ireland were adduced as proofs that the people of Ireland, so far from receiving the proffered extension with gratitude or satisfaction, scorned and re- jected it; and it was therefore at once set down that the measure would be as in- efficient as it was said to be objectionable in principle. Now, upon his mind, the speeches in question produced a very different effect; knowing, as he did perfectly

well, that any measure which was likely to tend to the pacification of Ireland would be distasteful to those who made a trade ofagitation, whose business it

was to keep Ireland in a ferment, and would meet with their bitterest hostility. Persons not so well acquainted with Ireland as he was, might, and did, entertain a notion that the clamours which from their louder noise must have reached their ears, were necessarily the voice of the whole Irish people. So long as a handful of men in Ireland were disposed for agitation, they would always find an agitator; and that agitator would always shout forth that he was the people of Ireland; but it did not at all follow that such was the case. Burke, referring to some noisy politicians, some brawling clamourers of his own time, who assumed to be the spokesmen of the whole nation, said, you might as well talk of the chirruping of a party of grasshoppers on a sunny bank as representing the voice of all the inhabitants of the field, when the burly oxen who were grazing over its broad surface were tranquilly silent. As little were the noisy politicians, the clamorous agitators of Ireland, entitled to call themselves her spokesmen, when they scorned and rejected on the alleged behalf of her people a measure calculated to do them so much good; a measure that was the more inestimable in reality, because it was denied to be so by men who for their own profit dealt in the trade of agitation. Lord DR Ros conceived that the present measure would cement the bond of union between the two countries. With reference to the doctrines taught at Maynooth, he stated on authority, that the head of the College had declared himself opposed to Repeal.

The Bishop of EXETER came forward to answer the Archbishop of Dub- lin. He devoted some space to arguing that the College was not originally meant to be endowed by the State, but that it was to be endowed by those who had wrongfully left it in the hands of the State, the Roman Catholics.

He denied that the improved visitation which the bill professed to give would secure a better system, since the visitors have no power over the course of education. The clergy ought to be men who, under God's blessing, would lead the people to peace and virtue: could the education of Maynooth furnish such a clergy ?— The students of that College were treated like serfs. They were shut up in a monastery, and treated in a manner which excited no association but that of dis- gust. The system of Maynooth could not give its students a manly character. During the seven years of their residence they were rarely permitted to depart even in vacation; but at other times they were never allowed to go out alone, not even for a country-walk. The evidence said, that they were confined in a square at the back of the building, except once a week, when they were allowed to walk beyond the limits of the building; but then it was with the Dean; and if they escaped beyond his inspection they were expelled. This was positive slavery; and if a man on the day he became a slave lost half his virtue, what amount of the residue would remain when the nay on which a man ceased to be a slave he be- came a despot? The student of Maynooth bore all his suffering's in anticipation of the day of his future despotism. He was taught to consider himself not merely as a priest, but as a ruler over the minds and habits of others. He objected to vesting in the Roman Catholic Prelates such a large patronage as the appointment of four hundred students, which constitu- tionally ought to rest in the Crown. He suggested another plan of educa- tion for the Roman Catholic clergy-

liet the Crown have the power of nominating four times the number of young men necessary to supply the vacancies; and let them be examined publicly in Dublin by the Roman Catholic Bishops, or persons appointed by them, so long as the examination was public. With such an examination, they would have well- conditioned persons appointed to Maynooth, and there would be some gratitude

the Crown: but if the Roman Catholic Bishops were to supply the vacancies, that gratitude would go, not to the Crown, but to the Bishops. That might be made the means of great benefit to Ireland; but certainly not if they continued the institution of Maynooth in its present monastic state. As to the expense of the measure, it was beneath the country to entertain it for a moment. But he should wish to see, instead of the College of Maynooth, four proper places of good education, connected, if they would, with the measure now before the House of Commons. Let there be appended to each of those three or four places pro- posed by that bill a special place of education for the Roman Catholic clergy, and let them be made places of liberal education. Let there be, if they would, that due discipline which there ought to be over the clerical students; but let them have the same examination with the gentry, as in this country.

Lord BROUGHAM took up several objections against the bill, and suc- oessively answered them; but with less of originality than is usual with him even when treating old arguments. He drew a distinction between the Roman Catholic faith, about which he expressed no opinion, and the State policy grafted upon it by the wit of men bearing mitre, crosier, and triple crown, against which he would yield to none in his opposition. It is taking up false ground to deny bad passages in the books of Maldonatus and other Catholic authorities: such passages are to be found in their books, but to think that nothing else is to be found there is a grievous error: the bad doctrine of these books shrinks into a few passages; and in all the remainder of their hundreds of pages is to be found the necessary education to the Romish clergy. Nor is bad doctrine to be found alone in Roman Catholic authors—

Even our own Anglican Church, the least persecuting Church, has had divines who have written, within the last three centuries—not in the thirteenth century, like Thomas Aquinas—but who put forward persecuting doctrines. You must not even say that you are quite free from intolerance at the present moment. What is said four or five times in the year, and what is the place in which it is said? " This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man have, without doubt he shall perish everlasting "—which, unless a man faithfully believe, he shall not be saved I Let the Dissenters, they who would carry on a crusade against their Catholic brethren, remember that they have persecuting doctrines. He would quote these doctrines, and he should like to know who it was that preached them? It was John Calvin—venerated by Presbyterians and Anabaptists. Calvin was one who not merely argued it as a duty, but actually carried it into operation. This did not rest on Calvin's precepts: it was not a thing said and then forgotten; but in the course of his life he acted on the precept, and that too by an act of the most atrocious perfidy—by opening letters. (Loud cheers and laughter.) Then he, as it was said even in a late case, entrapped his victim from Vienna; and having him in Geneva, his victim (Servetus) was accused of Arian or Socinian doctrines, there tried, and, after an absolute mockery of a trial, was condemned to death and burned.

About one o'clock, the debate was again adjourned.

On Wednesday, the Bishop of CASHEL laid upon the table a copy of the charge to his clergy at Lismore, to which Lord Normanby had alluded; observing, that what the Marquis had read was no mere perversion of what he said, but an original wilful fabrication of falsehood; and calling upon the Marquis to give up his authority. ''he Marquis of Nonsternir said that the writer of the account which he quoted was Dr. Fogarty, parish- priest of Lismore; who had been unable to procure an authentic copy of the charge. Was the charge delivered ex tempore t The Bishop of CASHEL replied, that it was a written charge. The Marquis of NORMANDY would dismiss it from his mind. At the same time, he intimated that he retain' ed his general opinion as to the conduct and arguments of the Bishop. The Duke of WELLINGTON said that he had received a copy of the charge, and it did not contain one word of what Lord Normanby mentioned on Tues- day evening—

It appeared to him to be a regular ecclesiastical charge, such as a person in the situation of the right reverend Prelate ought to deliver to his clergy. It did not contain one word that was injurious to anybody; and be was convinced that no- body could read it without receiving from it the greatest satisfaction, and con- ceiving the greatest respect for the right reverend Prelate.

Lord CAMPBELL observed, that the Bishop had cleared himself from the accusation made by Lord Normanby; but in the printed version of the charge he found expressions which might not unnaturally have led to the misapprehension complained of Here is one passage— "I feel that I need not enter into any particulars in warning you against this new or lately-revived heresy, as I have no reason to conclude that the clergy of this diocese are infected with its poison: we live so much in the midst of genuine Popery that we are in the less danger of being tainted by a kindred corruption. It has been said by a shrewd and pious man, that Popery was the masterpiece of Satan; and that he would never bring into the world another scheme equal in conning and mischief. This is not, however, a new scheme, but a modification of Popish virus, founded on those principles so congenial to human nature, and turn- ing towards the original source from whence they spring." The Bishop of CASHEL--" I used the words, certainly; but I said dis- tinctly, that some one else had so said; and what I said was—to speak it out—against the Tractarian doctrines of the present day." The adjourned debate was resumed by Lord CLANCARTT, in opposition to the bill; and continued at great length. But, however important the speakers who joined in it, and however ably put the arguments, they went, With scarcely an exception, so entirely over the old frequently-beaten grounds, that we can only touch upon some of the more important points of this concluding discussion.

Earl SPENCER strenuously supported the measure. He contended, that it is the duty of the State to provide religious instruction for the people— wherefore he is a friend to the Established Church in this country; and seeing how large a portion of the Irish people are Roman Catholics, he could not refuse his assent to the bill. He combated the opinion that the Roman Catholic Church is antagonistic to the Anglican; expressing sur- prise at hearing that doctrine from Prelates who believe that there is some mysterious sanctity in their own ordination, because it has descended through a course of Roman Catholic Bishops—Bishops who flourished, be it remembered, during the very worst times of the Roman Catholic Church. As to the doctrines of the Roman Catholics, he appealed to the facts for proof that they are all over the world good and faithful subjects; and although it is a dogma of their religion that it is immutable—meaning that it is always under the direct influence of the Holy Spirit—it has been modified by the progress of civilization and knowledge, which has overcome many of its ancient doctrines. The disaffection of the Irish people, if it exists, is to be attributed not to their religious doctrines, but to the systematic misrule and bad faith of this country. He supported the measure, in the hope that it was not to be an isolated one, but only the commencement of a different course of policy. The Bishop of Noawicn made some brief but forcible remarks—on the intolerance of those who charge the clerical supporters of the bill even with infidelity and falsehood; on the drift of the petitions, emanating prin- cipally from the Dissenters, against all endowments, and therefore not to be cited by the supporters of State endowments; and on the failure of harshness and intolerance to promote Protestantism in Ireland. He alluded to the spectacle which he had seen at Baden, of a church used in the morning for mass, and then appropriated in the afternoon, by order of the Catholic Bishop, to the Lutheran service. He wished to see, not exactly such an arrangement, but some of that spirit initiated in this coun- try. He considered the measure one of the most benevolent, one of the most called-for, one of the most useful, that have been proposed in the nineteenth century.

Lord MONTEAGLE advocated the measure as the most important that had been introduced, perhaps since the Union, certainly since the Relief Act. Its practical effect would be very great; as showing the Irish, not only that the English feel no jealousy of their religion, but are prepared to coun- tenance and support it ; supporting it, not as that religion which the Eng- lish would choose, but as that which the Irish themselves have chosen. He enlarged very effectively on the arguments derived from the British de- pendencies; showing how, if the grant were refused, the Legislature would deny to the Irish what is granted to the Hindoos in the institutions at Be- asses and elsewhere,—though, he thought, any form of Christianity must be regarded as superior to Hindoo doctrine. He looked on the measure as merely a step towards others; but he emphatically declared, that as he valued the peace of the country, he never would rob the Protestant Church to endow the Catholic. The measure, if it were carried by a large ma- jority, would tell upon the question of Repeal—it would show the people of Ireland that the Imperial Parliament did consult their interests more truly and effectually than the Irish Parliament ever had.

The Bishop of Sr. DAVID'S argued for the bill, in a long, close, and weighty speech. Though admitting the extent of the opposition to the measure, he could not approve of its manner; and he remarked, that it was conducted so as to disguise the wide differences of religious opinion among those who support the bill, and also to interfere with a just percep- tion of the differences between those who support and those who oppose it. He contended that no principle was involved in the measure; for the argu- ments against it apply equally to the annual grant. He showed how those who support it do not recognize that to be truth which on other occasions they have pronounced to be error. He strongly deprecated the use of the term "idolatrous and superstitious," which is liable to abuse as a provoca- tive of had feeling; and on that account he wished such language removed even from public documents. No one could be so absurd as to suppose that the bill directly recognized the truth of the Roman Catholic religion; nor did it appear that it would increase the number of its adherents. It cannot, therefore, be said to tend to the propagation of error. He showed how idle it is to deduce wide inferences from isolated passages picked out of books used in Roman Catholic colleges; and how passages of the most op- posite tendency might equally be selected; citing from a Roman Catholic authority the rule for the conduct of the confessional, that extreme caution must be used in questioning on the subject of purity, since it is better to fall short in a literal completeness of confession than to arouse passions which are dormant. You must test doctrine not in that way but by its practical effects; and where can there be greater domestic morality than in Ireland? With regard to oaths, there is, no doubt, in Catholic writers an overstrained anxiety to meet every possible case; but did any of their Lordships believe that a Roman Catholic is less sensible than a Protestant of the sanctity of an oath? Sup- posing the doctrines taught at Maynooth are of the Ultramontane kind, even that would be a most visionary source of alarm. It is true that the Pope has never recalled the most extravagant pretensions put forth by his predecessors: he is, however, not only a spiritual but a temporal sovereign, ruling a state subject to despotic authority; he is surrounded by political enemies, assailing his throne on Democratic principles; he is the ally of every despotic and absolute government: but there never can be any real sympathy and alliance between him and Irish agitators, entertaining the same Democratic principles as those from whom he dreads the greatest danger to his temporal authority at home. The priest is naturally dis- posed to preserve order, quiet, and submission to authority; and if it is otherwise in Ireland, it is owing to the state of the country. He supported the measure, as conciliatory; as placing the Irish clergy on an equal foot- ing with the Roman Catholic clergy in our dependencies; as fulfilling an implied contract; as tending to improve the character of the clergy, to re- move one of the great barriers to the physical' prosperity of Ireland, by helping a more general diffusion of knowledge in that country, and even as paving the way to the reception of a purer form of religion. If that were the last day of his public life, there was no duty which he should per- form with more satisfaction than that of supporting the bill under discus- sion.

The Earl of CHARLEVILLE supported the motion for inquiry; insisted that Roman Catholics entertained lax doctrines on the subject of oaths; and ad- verted to Mr. O'Connell's " levee " on Friday, as proving the necessity of more vigorous government to maintain the peace in Ireland. He cited the oath taken by Mr. O'Connell, on becoming Lord Mayor of Dublin, in Oc- tober 1841, solemnly abjuring, without mental reservation, all intention of subverting the Protestant Church Establishment; with a resolution proposed by Mr. O'Connell at a meeting of the Repeal Association, in April 1842, demanding the total abrogation of the tithe-rent-charge. He also cited a canon law, promulgated by Pope Gregory the Ninth in 1809, declaring ecclesiastics not bound by an oath of allegiance to their prince.

Lord STANLEY reinforced many of the arguments for the bill; treating Lord Roden's motion not as one really for inquiry, but as meant to defeat the bill. He declared his disbelief that all the petitions speak the.sponta- neous opinion of the English people. He did not admit that the bill would ne- cessarily lead to endowment of the Roman Catholic clergy; but he avowed that religious scruples would not deter him from consenting even to that measure. At the close of his speech, he called upon their Lordships to con- sider the deep responsibility of their vote that night—

While, however, he could not express the alarm and dismay which their rejec- tion of the measure would occasion in bis mind, be had too high a sense of the wisdom and patriotism of the illustrious assembly be was addressing to fear it would involve the country in the dreadful consequences of such a decision.

The House first divided on Lord Roden's amendment; which was nega- tived, by 155 to 59; majority against the proposed inquiry, 96. From MaldenkIrk to John e' Groat, We all prefer the one-pound note." The extreme circulation of notes in Scotland was 3,000,0001. or 4,000,0001.; arid when there was a paid-up capital of 10,000,0001. and deposits to the amount of 30,000,0001., what was the object of the change? As an instance of the mis- chiefs this change would produce, he might refer to three banks of rising business in the city of Glasgow—the Clydesdale, the City of Glasgow, and the Edinburgh and Glasgow. They were represented by a capital of 15,000,000e; and their cir- Culation under this bill would be restricted to 320,0001. Mr. Stewart assumed that the bill aimed at an ulterior object—to suppress all local and private issues, and establish one bank of issue.

Sir ROBERT PEEL denied that he'had ever expressed an opinion in favour of a single bank of issue: the difficulties of establishing such a bank would now be overwhelming. But he denied the doctrine that solvency or paid- tip capital suffice' as a foundation for issuing notes without reference to ex- changes or convertibility. Six or seven years ago, the Manchester Cham- ber of Commerce pointed to evils occasioned by an unlimited issue of notes in Scotland; and Committees of that House recommended measures to pre- vent a recurrence of those evils. Moreover, it is but just that Scotland should bear its proportion of the burden of providing gold.

Mr. HUME would vote for the bill: but would amend it so as to provide for an expansion of the currency at particular seasons, and for filling up a vacancy should any in the present number of banks fail.

Mr. HAWES argued at some length in favour of restricting neither the number of banks nor the total issues: he would combine the system of de- posit with a greater number of banks, only making paper convertible into geld at the will of the holder. Mr. CHARLES WOOD combated that doc- trine; pointing to the failures of banks in America to show the futility of mere convertibility as a guarantee of value.

- Mr. HENRY JAMES BAILLIE deprecated interference; pleading the suc- cess of the present system in Scotland; which has passed safely through panic and famine, rebellion and war— The banks of Scotland had never, like the Country-banks of England; abused their privilege of unlimited issue. This was proved by the returns regarding eirculation. For a population of two millions and a half, the circulation in Scot- land did not, on an average of a certain period, exceed 3,000,000L; while in Eng- land, during the same period, there were not less than 30,000,0001. of paper and B0,000,0001. of gold in circulation, for apopulation of 16,000,000 of people. After some further debate, the Flouse went into Committee. On the first clause, Mr. BANNERMAN moved an amendment, making the four Weeks ending on the 7th December 1844 the basis of the future maximum average, instead of the year ending on the 1st May 1845; for it was con- tended that the periodical increase at certain seasons was as four to three on the general average, and that it would therefore be inconveniently checked by the maximum established in the bill Sir ROBERT PEEL insisted that it would be no hardship for the banks to keep bullion as a basis for the excess of circulation over the average. The amendment was negatived, by 84 to 59. With some further opposition, clauses down to the 7th were affirmed, and the Chairman reported progress; the Committee to sit again on Monday. SPEAKERS IN THE FOREGOING DISCUSSIONS. For the Bill as it stands— Sir Robert Peel, Sir William Clay, Mr. Francis Thornhill Baring. Against it— Mr. P. M. Stewart, Mr. Hume (partially), Mr. Hawes, Mr. H. J. Baillie, Mr. Bonverie, Mr. Ross, Mr. Muntz, Mr. Oswald, Mr. Bannerman, Mr. Dennistonn.

THE RECESS AND THE RAILWAY BILLS.

On Thursday, Mr. LABOIICHERE drew the attention of the House to the ,state of private business. There were then 243 railway projects before the House, of which 140 were before Committees. The Committees often sit for some time, and the expense for each bill is enormous: in the case of .the London and York it has been 3,0001. daily. It is quite clear that the mass of railway bills cannot pass into law this session: and he thought that all bills which had been before Committees and reported ought to be taken up next session without fresh expense to the promoters. Accordingly, he moved a resolution, declaring that, as many bills could not pass in con- sequence of the delays occasioned by their number and by the reports of the .Board of Trade, the House would adopt measures next session to prevent additional expense; and directing a Select Committee to be appointed, to .consider the best way of doing so. Sir GEORGE CLERK objected, that there was no precedent for thus pledging the House to grant relief. He . moved an amended resolution, appointing a Committee to consider if it were expedient to take any measures, and if so what measures, to prevent farther delay and expense in taking up the bills next session. There was an animated discussion; but eventually, Mr. LABOUCIIBRB withdrew his motion, and Sir George Clerk's was affirmed.

PECULIAR Beraneers ON LAND.

In the House of Commons, on Tuesday, Mr. WARD brought forward his annual motion for a Select Committee, " to inquire whether there are any peculiar burdens specially affecting the landed interest of this country, or . any peculiar exemptions enjoyed by that interest, and to ascertain their nature and extent." . In his speech the other night on Lord John Russell's

• resolutions, Sir James Graham bad swept away all the minor agricultural fallacies, leaving but one standing—that the land has to support peculiar burdens; which Mr. Ward addressed himself to disprove: and he quoted an- gry comments made at agricultural meetings on the position of the inte- - rest and the conduct of the Ministers, manifesting the perplexed condition of the Protectionists. He cited statistics of the amounts paid by. the land . The House again divided on the original motion; which was carried; by 226 to 69 ; majority for the second reading, 157.

SPEAKERS IN THE FOREGOING DEBATE. For the Maynooth Endowment— The Duke of Wellington, the Duke of Cambridge, Lord Beaumont, Lord Clifford, the Earl of St. Germains, the Earl of Hardwicke, the Earl of Carnarvon, the Mar- quis of Normanby, the Archbishop of Dublin, Lord De Ros, Lord Brougham; the Duke of Cleveland; Earl Spencer, the Bishop of Norwich, the Earl of Mornington, Lord Monteagle, the Bishop of St. David's, Lord Stanley. Against it—The Earl of Roden, the Bishop of London, the Duke of Manchester, the Bishop of Cashel, the Earl of Winchilsea, the Bishop of Exeter, the Earl of Clancarty, Lord Col- chester, the Earl of Charleville.

BANwaeo in SCOTLAND. • In the House o Commons, on Thursday, on the motion that the Speaker Ile leave the chair in order to the Committee on the Banking (Scotland) Bill, Mr. PATRICK MAXWELL STEWART objected to any interference 'with the banking of Scotland; of which there has been no complaint—not even in the Report of the Lords Committee in 1826, though the Committee ivies composed of the same Peers that sat in theBullion Committee of 1819. AR Sco.land deprecates the measure; the universal cry being, in the words of an old poet, towards the state in other countries, and the comparative amount paid by the agricultural and other interests in this country, much in the same way in which it has so often been done before. Among the agriculturists them- selves there are the most conflicting statements— The present Lord Abinger, when he sat in that House as Mr. Seeded, stated that land bore all the burden of taxation, at least in the ratio of four to one. The honourable Member for Somersetshire stated that land paid more than half the Income-tax. The honourable Member for Norfolk stated that land paid all the poor-rates. The Duke of Richmond said that land paid all the charge of the Church and the administration of justice, from the constable to the workhouse chaplain. And then the Duke of Newcastle capped the climax—that noble Duke stated that not one good measure had proceeded from the present Govern- ment; that the amor patrice was extinct and the amor sui all-powerful; that he was milked like his own cows, and shorn like his own sheep, for the benefit of Mayneoth, and-so on.

A return obtained by Mr. Villiers, however, shows, that of the Income- tax, while the land pays 1,323,9691., trades and professions pay 1,466,0001.; of' the poor-rates, the land pays 52 per cent, other property 48 per cent. In fact, agriculturists have admitted that the Malt-tax is the only special burden on them. But they have exemptions—ethey pay no Legacy or Pro- bate duty on real property, besides a variety of exemptions from Assessed- taxes. The revenue of the whole country is 51,000,0001.; the Customs produce about 6,042,1351., while the land contributes something less than. 2,000,0001. Sir Robert Peel had absolutely admitted that he did not, mean to uphold the present system; had expressed a determination to persevere in his progress towards free trade, should it cost him the support of every agricultural friend: and how then, could he resist the present motion? Even Sir John Tyrell admitted that the question of protection turned upon the " peculiar burdens" on land; and into those burdens he chal- lenged a full and fair inquiry-

Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT denied that Mr. Ward had succeeded: in showing that the landed interest of this country enjoys peculiar advantages as com- pared with the same interest in other countries. In France, for example, the land-tax is larger than in this country: but then, land there does not pay tithes; which Mr. M'Culloch, Adam Smith, pr. Paley, and other authorities, admit to be a tax upon land. The poor who are sent back from the towns to the rural districts in times of depression also occasion great burdens on the landed interest. Mr. Herbert deprecated these dis- cussions on theoretical questions, instead of attending to practical legisla- tion. If evidence were required, or a question on which party feeling had no bearing, a Committee of that House was a good-tribunal for receiving it; but on such a question as the Corn-laws, the moment the Committee was struck, each party would anticipate the result, and the report would have no other effect than to bring discredit on the Committees of that House.

Mr. COBDEN contended, that traders and manufacturers in towns pay a great deal more in the shape of local taxation than the agriculturists. In- deed, the motion recognized a palpable absurdity; and he should recom- mend Mr. Ward, if he made this motion next year, to omit the word " pe?- culler " as applied to burdens on the land; for the common sense of the country treated such .a proposition as nothing more than a thing to be laughed at.

The motion was supported by Mr. VERNON 'Samna and Dr. BowaxEne opposed by Mr. NEwDEGATE and Sir Jose TrItELL ; and negatived, on a division, by 182 to 109.

SIB HENRY POTITNGER. In the House of Commons, on Tuesday, Mr. Hem moved a resolution for an address to the Queen, praying her Majesty to grant to Sir Henry Pottinger such a pension as she might think proper as a reward for his eminent public services, "and especially for having, as her Majesty's_ Plenipotentiary in China, brought the war in that country to a-conclusionby apace alike honour- able and advantageous "; the House undertaking to mike good the sum required,. Had Sir Henry Pottinger not accepted the mission to China, no doubt he would have had some Governorship or such post, worth 10,000/. or 12,0001. a year: by his brilliant services he has poured 21,000,0001. into the coffers of this country; yet were he now to retire from public life, 1118 pension as a Major-General in tfihe East India Company's service would be but 4901. a year. Mr. Hume men- tioned several 'other gentlemen who had been rewarded for'services at least not more signal. He stated that he had bad no communication on the subject with Sir Henry Pottinger; of whom personally he knew so little that he had never seen him except in aepublie place. Several Members supported themotion—Lord SANDON, Sir JOHN ROBHOUSE, Lord JOHN RUSSELL, Mr. JOHN ABEL SMITH, Mr. Ross, Mr. PHILIP HOWARD, and Lord PALMERSTON. Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that Ministers had resisted their personal desire to offer a penaion, because of the rarity of precedents. It is most unusual to reward civil or diplomatic ser- vices, which are mixed up with political considerations, otherwise than by con- tinuance of service; and he hesitated to renew a precedent so dangerous. He maintained that Government bad done all they could in the case; and he dwelt on the very narrow means placed at the disposal of the Crown (1;2001.) to reward distinguished merit. On the whole, however considering what appeared to be the general feeling of the House--(" Hear, hear! from both sides)—considering that Sir Henry Pottinger was withdrawn from India, and bad thereby lost the advantage of continued service in a diplomatic capacity—and considering that the grace and favour of the House of Commons ought not to be impeded by the ser- vants of the Crown—he should take upon himself to advise her Majesty to make asprovision for Sir Henry Pottinger as a reward for his eminent public services. The motion was accordingly affirmed—"Nemine conttadicenter cried Mr. HUME.

Mn. Olkuscoix. On Monday, the Loan CHANCELLOR stated the result of the reference which had been made to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, of the charges against Mr. Alexander O'Driscoll, the Skibbereen Magistrate, who in a dispute with a brother Magistrate had thrown out a challenge to fight a duel The Lord Chancellor of Ireland directed an inquiry to be instituted. Before that inquiry was brought to a termination, however, Mr. O'Driscoll misconducted seff in such a manner with iespect to .proceedings in the Rolls Court in Ireland, as2 in the opinion of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, rendered it necessary to dis- miss him from the Magistracy ; and he had accordingly been superseded.

REFUSAL OF RAIL In reply to Mr. HumE, on Monday, Sir JAMES GRAHAM stated, that he had inquired into the conduct of Mr. Twyford, the hlarylebone Magistrate, who had refused to take bail for the reappearance of Mr. Mayer. [1fr. Mayer had been charged with assault on a brother-in-law, who had seduced the defendant's daughter.] He was entirely satisfied that Mr. Twyford had acted bona/de and to the best of his judgment; but he did not think that that gentle- man had exercised a sound discretion, and he expressed that opinion in decided terms.