Debates anb poceebings inVarliantent.

• ENDOWMENT OF liTAYNOOTH COLLEGE.

In the House of Commons, on Wednesday, the order of the day was piard for going into Committee on the grant from the Consolidated Fund fop Maynooth College. On the motion that the Speaker do leave the oltir, Mr. Wean moved the following resolution as an amendment- ' That it is the opinion of this House, that any provision to be made for the of the present bill ought to be taken from the funds already applicable purposes purposes in Ireland."

He disclaimed hostility to the Government measure; but it was their duty to take care that in repairing one injustice they did not commit another.

ptove his sincerity, he referred to the obloquy which he had incurred by %fusing to join in the movement against the bill; and at the same time he rebutted the charge made by opponents of the bill, that he had betrayed tt_cense," in which, in fact, he had never embarked. He had received sug-

rs from Sir Culling Eardley Smith, with whom he had long been uainted, of alterations in the terms of his metiou, to make it more suit- . p0 these acting with Sir Ctilling; but he *lined eve g one Of those propositions. He had always consideerile4hat the Roman Catholics- of

Ireland had just as good a right to an Fritablished Church as the Epçopalian Protestant.% of England or tha fresbyterians of Scotland; w establishments anbsist, not becaose either is the " true* religion, but because ia suited to the common belief of the people. He agreed Trip; 4rehbisliop Whately, that Providence bile designedly suppressed re- Cords of the regulations in the early Christian communities, in order to leave such details to each church in each age and country. That they were now about to embark on a new course of policy towards Ireland, he learned on the concurrent testimony of Lord John Russell, Mr. Ellice, Sir George Grey, Sir James Graham, and Sir Robert Peel: in taking the pre- sent step, they ought to be prepared for all its consequences; and he thought with Grattan, that they ought to settle once for all the just claims of Ca- tholicism in Ireland, and to reconcile the_ Protestant feelings of -Scotland and England to the doing of that which all thinking men now believed to be not only right but necessary. For ten years he hadmaintained the principle, pay all or pay none. But, though the Voluntary principle might do very well in England, it will not answer in Ireland, where the religions teachers are de- pendent on the popular voice. The evil is illustrated by America, where teachers of religion have been found to palliate and uphold slavery; while in Ireland there is too great a mixture of ecclesiastical influence with po- litical movement,—a danger seen in the dissension among the Roman Ca- tholic clergy on the subject of the Charitable Bequests Bill. Mr. Ward contended that civil utility is the object of every clerical establishment.

He strongly censured the vituperative language addressed to the Roman Catholics by clerical and other agitators against the bill,—such ea that of the Reverend Mr. Robinson, at Covent Garden Theatre, on Tuesday ; and that uttered at a recent meeting in Hertfordshire by the Reverend Mr. Faithful, who said that the carrying of this measure " would show a most ruinous extent of apostacy, and those who assented to it worshiped the

Beast, which had ever been at war with the saints, and crucified afresh their Lord and Saviour." Was there ever such disgusting blasphemy as this? Ile entered into some long historical retrospect to prove that the Union could not have been formed without the aid of the Catholics who were induced to cooperate with the Government by the promise of Ewan cipation, and of favour to their clergy, by Lord Cornwallis and Mr. Pitt; and there was the largest body of evidence to prove that the sole bar to the fulfilment of those pledges was the unfortunate alienation of the King's mind, which induced Mr. Pitt to desist from his efforts at fulfilment—

Almost the first effort of the King's returning reason was to send a message to Mr. Pitt. "Tell him," he said, "I am now quite well; but what has lee not to answer for, who is the cause of my having been ill at all?" "This," it was stated, "affected Mr. Pitt so deeply, that he pledged himself to give up the Ca- tholic question during the King's life."

Mr. Ward entered into a variety of statistics, setting forth that the Irish Protestant Church, with 850,000 Protestants, enjoys a revenue of 650,0001.;

while with 3,000,000 of Presbyterians in Seotlandl the Established Church of that country has but 200,0001. There are m Ireland 860 parishes having less than 50 Protestants in each, or none at all; `the aggregate re- venue being 58,0001., or 2,0001. more than is required fore:he grant to May- 'moth. If Ministers took the money from that source, the Dissenting op

position to the grant would be neutralized. Mr. Ward concluded by ex- pressing a regret that Sir Robert Peel's concession to Ireland should have been made under the appearance of yielding to agitation in Ireland and warlike threats in America; giving countenance to Grattan's saying, that England's weakness is Ireland's strength. Let him not be answered that there were no funds in hand to fulfil his amendment: if Government would accede to the principle of his motion, he would give any credit they might wish—a vote out of the Consolidated Fund, And it was his wish to observe the most scrupulous regard to existing rights.

Sir Tnostas FREMANTLE declared that Government would not take Mr. Ward's bribe and give up the Irish Establishment to obtain the necessary supply. He asked Mr. Ward what progress he had made since the fatal time when he brought forward his Appropriation-clause in 1834? and re- minded him, that after repeated defeats, the Whig Ministers had abandoned that clause in 1838,.and carried the Tithe Commutation Bill without it. In 1843, the discussion on a similar motion was prevented by the counting out of the House; last year, Mr. Ward was defeated by a majority of 95. The present motion involved the whole question of the Church Es- tablishment: if once they touched the 650,0001. and applied any part to other than the purposes of the Establishment, they would violate the prin- ciple; and he went on to contend that there would also be a violation of the compact concluded at the time of the Union. He quoted from the work lately published on Ireland and its Rulers, the opinion that to confiscate the Establishment would be to teach the Irish a lesson of spoliation and poli- tical destruction, and to familiarize the mind of Ireland with the idea that the Union is not a permanent measure. He cited the declarations of Dr.

Doyle and other leading Roman Catholics, that they did not seek to deprive any other class of any right or privilege; and he finished by saying that he should most the amendment with a decided negative.

In objecting to the motion on technical grounds, Sir WALTER JAMRS expressed the opinion that the question of the Irish Church must before many years be brought under the serious consideration of the House; and he advocated endowment of the Irish Catholic clergy: though the question would remain, how to provide the funds; for it would be unjust to make English Dissenters, paying their own ministers and the English Establish- ment, pay also for a third church.

Mr. Mliautit Ginscor pursuing arguments against the Irish Establish- ment, reminded the House, that they had not scrupled to transfer 25 per

cent of the Church property of Ireland into the pockets of the landlords. The Roman Catholic population of Ireland bears every day an increasing ratio as compared with the Protestant population—

They might talk of Protestant congregations, but he fully believed that many professing Protestants in Ireland were in their hearts Roman Catholics. He had

once heard an anecdote of a Bishop who resolved to visit a parish in which it was said that there was no Protestant congregation; but the parson, in order to con- vince the Bishop that he had a congregation, borrowed one from a neighbouring parish, and so satisfied the Right Reverend Prelate that all was right. Sir Join.' Warm' argued against the motion, on the score of pacifica tin— It appeared to him that neither party had a disposition to take anything as an advantage unless it were taken from the other. Instead of allaying these feel- ings of animosity, Administrations had alternately endeavoured to govern Ireland through the instrumentality of one of these two great parties. Such a policy might be convenient, but it would be deeply injurious in the long run to the Lhap- pmetis of that country. Traqvillity could not he promoted, if while they ended,

vonred to benefit one they injured the other party. If they wished peace they must act as mediator between both parties. They mast not take from one to give to another.

Mr hfacaertar admitted that those who voted for the motion must be prepared to go farther; and that the real question at issue was, whether the Established Church of Ireland is an institution that ought or ought not to be maintained. In his opinion, it is a bad institution—a very bad institu- tion—utterly absurd and indefensible. The very course taken by its de- fenders proves it— They plead that the compact of the Union must not be altered; though Par- liament, with full consent of Sir James Graham and Lord Stanley, agreed to alter . the articles of the Union in the important point relating to the comparative awn- her of Members for Ireland in that House. They plead the badness of a Catholic oath,—which certainly does not prove the goodness of the Establishment. They plead Catholic Relief, and the declaration of Catholics fifty years ago, that if they ob- tained that they would dispense with our doing justice. Sir Thomas Fremantle now pleaded danger to "property,"—as if there were no difference between property in which some person has a vested interest and property in which no person has a . vested interest. "The right honourable gentleman might as well have said, that in 1817, when this House resolved to abolish those great sinecures the Tellerships of the Exchequer and the Auditorships of the Exchequer, and so on, you un- settled the security of the funded property of the kingdom, unless when Lord Grenville died you appointed a new .Auditor, and when Lord Camden died a new Teller of the Exchequer' with heavy salaries for doing nothing. But after all, what are these but shifts merely to evade the question?"

Is there in any other country so monstrous an anomaly as a minority of the people enjoying a princely ecclesiastical establishment? One argument constantly repeated is, that the Protestants of Ireland, though a minority, have the mass of property in their hands, and are distinguished by superior intelligence-

" There are cases in which property ought to prevail over numbers; but when we analyze these cases, we find that they ought to be ranged under two heads. One is, where the object of an institution is the improvement or preservation of property—for example, a railway company: nothing can be more reasonable than that a man having 500 shares should have more votes than five men having only one share each. Another is, where property is required as a qualification in order to judge, roughly and on a large scale, of a man's mtelligence: you seek for a su- perior intelligence in a superior class. But to apply this principle to the Church is the most preposterous thing that ever was done. So far from thinking more of one rich inan than of five poor men, you ought to think more of one poor man than of five rich: men: for observe in the first place, the public ordinances of religion are of far MOM importance to the poor than to the rich. I don't deny their importance to all classes; bat the assistance of a preacher is of much less importance to a man who may have in his library every subject of divinity—who may hold communication with Barrow, and Leighton, and Hooker. The poor man has no money to buy books, and no time for instruction. Without the public ordinances of religion, he may know no more of Christianity than a Hottentot. Then, not only is the public instruction of the Church of more importance to the poor than to the rich on that account, but if you abolish the Church of England, to-the rich and to people in that rank of life there is no difficulty in providing places of worship for themselves. The difficulty in such a case is for the poor man, who is called on to sell his pig in order to pay something for his religious teacher. I confess that this has always appeared to me to be the great difficulty of the Voluntary system. If I am not prepared to take a favourable view of the Voluntary system, it is not for the sake of the lords and baronets and country gentlemen of 4,0001- or 5,000/. a-year; because I know that whether you abolish Churches or not they will have them—they will have their organs and fine com- munion-plate. The person for whom I feel is the poor man, upon whom it is a Yerry great tax to ask tor 8s. or 10a. What is he to do with the Voluntary system ? Is he to go without religious instruction altogether? That would be a great mis- fortune to himself and to society. Is he to pay for it? That would be a heavy tax. Is he to get it from charity? That is a precarious mode, but above all a humiliating one. I see much good in that system, where in the remotest districts there is a house of God, where instruction is given of a kind generally applicable to the people, to which the poorest may go, and that not as a matter of favour but of right. But does this description apply to the Irish Church?" It is also contended, that although there are shepherds without flocks they are to find flocks, and that the Irish clergy are to spread Protestantism over Connaught and Munster; an argument that might have served in the time of Elizabeth; but when did clergy ever receive so much for doing so little? They are still barely defending the Pale; the Catholics are still ten to one of the Protestants; and in no country does the zeal of the peasant for his own religion exceed that in Ireland. That result might have been foreseen—

The error consists in our having treated the Church as if we were treating a

• machinery of a very different kind. There are many parts of the machinery Of a government which thus attain their end. An army, a navy, a preventive service, a police force—all these things perform their work in the same manner, whether we love them or hate them. But a machinery to teach, to be listened to with facility, to reach into the hearts and understandings of men, if it does not do this is worse than useless. The people of Manchester might not like the charge of the Yeomanry; but it dispersed them. You aimed only at a material end; your machinery did its work. But you cannot apply such methods to teach and win. You posted a hostile Church in Ireland as you posted garrisons. They were very rationally posted there: it did not matter that the people hated them. But the Church did not do its work; it could not do it At the best, it was very ill con- stituted for that work of proselytism of which people speak. A parochial clergy exists rather for the purposes of defence than for the purposes of proselytism.

i

The Church of Rome, when it has aimed at any aggressive movement, as t has often done, has employed, not the parochial clergy, but quite a different species of force—the religious orders, and orders of JCStlita. I don't believe that you will find that an endowed parochial clergy ever did yet in the history of the world effect a great proselyte movement. The difficulties which stood in the way of the Irish clergy were formidable indeed: they were two—they were endowed, and hated; and if they had exerted themselves, they probably would not have suc- ceeded. But the history of that Church is one of the deepest disgraces of Pro- testantism. I may mention a single circumstance which we all know—that the principal engines.among all the powerful means of proselytism, and which in all Protestant countries were the chief sources of the Reformation, were translations of the Bible into the native language. Look at the Church of Ireland: it was not till that Church had existed 125 years, magnificently endowed, that a trans- lation of the Bible into the Erse language was printed; and then it was printed, not at the expense of the Church, that lazy and wealthy hierarchy, but at the expense of that good man Robert Boyle. * * * In the name of common sense, then, tell us what purpose you do intend the Irish Church to effect. If you cannot show us that it has attained any of the ends for which a Church Establishment was originally devised and set up, you mast suffer me to call your Irish Church a bad institution.

We are told that to abolish it would estrange that party in Ireland who are friendly to the Legislative Union: he thought that it would cement the Union; and he founil a practical example in past history-

" We find England Connected by the closest ties with Oro other neighbouring kingdoms, each of which had a different system of religion to that prevailiog within her ovrn limits. We began our rule by trying to force the Anglican Chum* Establishment upon both those countries; and what was the result? In Scala* where our attempts to force our Establishment upon the people were first meek the Great Rebellion was fostered ; which ended in the downfall of the Church sod the Monarchy together. And when the Restoration took place, the same systemof

trying to force the Anglican Church upon the Scotch nation was resorted to; sad what was the result ? For the space of twenty-eight years there was an unintet-

rupted series of attempts, which rendered that country the scene of the most frightful government that was ever beheld. Then it was that Lauderdale on the bench, and Viscount Dundee in the field, exercised ferocities and cruelties to

which even Ireland itself could furnish no parallel. The horrible torture of the boot was succeeded on the morrow by the assassination on the highway; and the excited and savage Recusants were seen to attack the coach of the highest Prelate in the kingdom, and, dragging him from it, they cut his throat in the presence of

his daughter, whilst she was screaming for mercy. Peasants attacked dragoons one day, and were slaughtered by them time next. Such was the state of Scotland during twenty-eight years; when at last it was discovered that institutions are made for men, and not men for institutions. There mine a wise Sovereign to the Throne, who perceived this great truth; and what was the event ? The event was, that after some time the enormities that had existed subsided, and the

injuries were forgotten. It was natural that such irritations should exist; for all the evils that Scotland had suffered arose from English domination and English

arms, whilst the glories that she could boast of were the fair offspring of her sue easeful resistance. But at length, as England was contented with having united the two States without seeking to three stn union of the two Churches, that connexion was formed which not a man among them has since expressed a wish to dissolve."

That a remedy must be applied now to the evils of Ireland, it Is impos- sible to doubt-

" Whoever may then be in office, this is the inevitable, the infallible course. If the Ministry be of Liberal principles, they will apply that remedy in accord- ance with their long-recorded sentiments. If the opposite party hold the reins of government, the concessioes will be due to their fears. The right honourable Baronet has given us a clue to his policy—a clue that was, to say the truth, hut little needed; and in so doing he has afforded a lesson which rulers ought to have been very slow to give, but which nations will not be slow to profit by. The right honourable gentleman, who would concede nothing to the reasoners on behalf of Ireland, has at length told us in words of no ambiguous meaning, that the way to obtain concessions from him : is by having recourse to agitation." Mr. Macaulay proceeded to allude to the agitation in Ireland at the time of the Clam election—the offer of Catholic Emancipation, and the No-Popery cry which it provoked. "An interval occurs, at the end of which the same party, which by all its acts had shown how deeply rooted was its animosity to the Roman Catholics, came again into power; and those men, from one of whom the declaration that the Irish people were aliens in blood proceeded, were again called upon to act. We were all looking to them for some measures conceived in an intolerant and oppressive spirit, and we are surprised by pro- positions of a character precisely opposite. We accept those propositions with pleasure and satisfaction; but when we seek for an explanation as to the motives by which the right honourable Baronet has been impelled in bringing them for- ward, we arc answered that those reasons and motives are to be sought for in the monster-meetings of the year 1843, and in the state of our relations with the United States of America. It is not, therefore, to any sentiments of humani% or justice or fair dealing towards Ireland, that we are to attribute the concessions made by the present Government. Those motives may have pleaded as strongly and as uselessly as they have heretofore done. The concessions which the Govern- ment has made, are —we owe the admission to the right honourable gentleman's candour—to be ascribed to the fact that Mr. O'Connell and Mr. Polk have made the Ministry uneasy." "What can I now say, after having heard the right

honourable gentleman's declaration, except that I doubt very much whether the proper place for Irish Members is not Conciliation Hall. (Loud cheers sad laughter.) What, let me ask you, is to be the end of a system of policy which yields nothing. to reason and humanity, and which grunts everything to agitation and threats? "

He foresaw that the same machinery which has extorted this concession would again be put to work; and should the same Ministers be in power

five years hence, Sir Robert Peel would again come down and propose a measure in the spirit of Mr. Ward's resolution. He recommended the right honourable Baronet not to refuse it now—

I fear, if it is refused now, it will be granted—it will surely be granted here- after, and when, it is to be apprehended, it will be too late; when, as your other

concessions have done, instead of soothing, it will promote agitation; when, as all your other concessions have done, it will be manifest to all the world that it ie not an act of justice or of humanity, but an avowal of weakness • and when it may be doubted whether the Irish nation will have been more injured by your long re- fusal or by your constrained concession of it." Sir JAMES Gnattatt was surprised that Mr. Macaulay should have min- gled so much party bitterness with defence of the measure: the expression

of his feelings, from his high authority and the force which belonged to the utterance of his sentiments, appeared to present an aspect pregnant with danger to the public interests. He agreed with Mr. Macaulay as to the maintenance of the Union : he spoke the unanimous sense of the Govern- ment, he believed that of the House and the people of Great Britain, and he thought also of the people of Ireland, when he said that even in a last convulsive struggle any attempt to repeal the Union must be resisted, lie declared, that so far from concession having been extorted from Govern- ment by recent events, they had determined upon the present measure by

the end of November last, when the agitation in Irelaud had been con-

fronted, and the monster-meetings put down; and he positively and peremp- torily denied that the misunderstanding with the United States had in- fluenced their decision in the matter. Sir James opposed Mr. Ward's mo- tion, as calculated to light up a flame in Ireland; and he declared his opi- nion that it is the duty of this country to maintain the Protestant Esm- blishment in Ireland. He dwelt on the influence exerted by the Protestant minority in Ireland; and vindicated the clergy of the Establishment, as performing their duties in an exemplary manner. When the question of Appropriation was first mooted, he foresaw that it must assume its present shape, of a proposition to apply the funds of the Established Church to the use of the Roman Catholics, although that purpose was distinctly denied: but to that proposition he could never agree.

Mr. ROEBUCK observed, that Sir James Graham's speech was no anteing to Mr. Macaulay ; who had argued that the Protestant Church is a had In- stitution, because its original appropriation for Protestant uses has entirelY failed. He reproached Sir James with attempting to excite against the amendment a "Protestant feeling "; which was a strange return for the support that Liberal Members had given to the measure, risking their own popularity. The grand difference between the policy of the two sides is, that on one side there are feelings of kindness towards Ireland, a love of freedom, and a spirit of liberality; on the other, a shuffling, wavering, 'paltering policy Mr. O'Connell's constant language is" Agitate—frighten

the Prime Minister"; and what has Sir Robert Peel done, but almost reiterate that language? casting himself down in a state of prostration in the mud and mire of abject humility !— If he had not descried the small cloud of war in the West, he would not yet have made the concession. This was the fair interpretation of the language of the ri ht honourable Baronet. He was afraid of a war with America; that was the plain English of the matter. Being frightened by a possible rebellion in Ire-

and a possible war with the United States, the nght honourable Baronet had tudd to his colleagues, "Don't you think it better that we should give the Irish a sop?" He had never hitherto expressed hostility to the present Government but upon broad principles of difference; but after the declaration of the other night, it was hopeless to expect anything good from them but upon compulsion. They would do no justice until they were terrified into it, and make no concession until it was extorted by terror. Only let the honourable and learned Member for Cork frighten them a little more, and they would grant a little more; and then would be done tardily what ought to have been done speedily.

Sir ROBERT PEEL was unwilling that the House should separate without his protest against the gross misapprehension and misconstruction of what had fallen from him on Friday night. He had abstained from all party re- crimination; he had acknowledged the disinterested motives of public men on both sides of the House; [and in a subsequent part of his speech he especially recognized Mr. Roebuck's independent conduct in disregarding the demands of his own constituents;] he did not arrogate to himself the .inerit of this measure. He was surprised at the tone of Mr. Roebuck now-

" The bill received his support on the second reading; he was then perfectly

• aware of the nature of the measure. I explained fully that it was intended to pro- vide for the increased grant to Maynooth out of the public revenue, when I brought the measure forward. I never led him to suppose it was possible that we should consent to the revenue of the Established Church being interfered with. It was distinctly stated by me that the funds necessary for the improvement of Maynooth were to be taken from the Consolidated Fund. I never encouraged the impression of any man that during any stage of these proceedings we should consent to the appropriation of the funds of the Established Church. Therefore the honourable and learned gentleman on the second reading, was as well aware of the principle and details of the proposal as he is at the present moment. The honourable and learned gentleman says, that I stated that this measure had been brought in in de- ference to the opinion or in consequence of the agitation of Mr. O'Connell: I stated directly the reverse. I stated, that during the prevalence of agitation we met it -and combated it by law; that we succeeded, in Ireland at least, in our appeal to the law, in consequence of which there was a suppression of agitation, at least so far as -the suspension of immense meetings disturbing the public peace was concerned." The Charitable Bequests Bill received the general support of the House: were Ministers to be deterred from that measure by past agitation? In fact, they were not then

taunted with yielding to physical force. We were supported in the execution Of that act by the ecclesiastical authorities of the Roman Catholic Church who opposed themselves to agitation. Did I not refer to their conduct, to the support which they met with from men who had never joined Repeal, as an encouragement to proceed in the same course? Mr. O'Connell never asked for the endowment of Maynooth; Conciliation Hall never demanded it: but there was a great body of Roman Catholic clergy and laity, who, seeing the temper and spirit of the Go- vernment from passing the endowment act, and from the manner in which we executed it, were inclined to support the Government in pursuing the same course. And it was much more in deference to their opinions than to any threats or agita- tion that we did proceed in this course, and brought forward this measure. And when did I give notice of this measure of Maynooth? Did I give notice of it in consequence of the threatening aspect of the United States? Did I not give notice—in order that the country might not be taken by surprise—did I not give notice during a period of calm, of suspension of agitation, of discontinuance of mebtings ? did I not voluntarily, without any necessity, without any call for it, ran the risk of exciting the 'Protestant feeling ' of this country, by a distinct de- claration during the last session, that the subject of academical education should undergo the consideration of the Government in a friendly spirit, and that the College of Maynooth should be included in that consideration?" He had been taunted with not having noticed Mr. Macaulay's speech: he had purposely abstained from party recriminations, and he stated his reasons at the time- " I know the success of this measure was dependent on the support of honourable gentlemen opposite. Was it fitting in me to alienate that support by party at- tacks? Was it not much more consistent with my duty—being, as I said, per- fectly ready to take all the consequences of success or failure, yet feeling deeply satisfied that after the proposal of this measure the public interest required that it should be passed—was it not, I say, more becoming, in my position, that I should concentrate my efforts to insure the passing of this measure rather than provoke party attacks or indulge in party recrimination? Sir, powerful as is the right honourable gentleman, great as are his abilities, yet I do assure him it was not a fear of the conflict with him that induced my forbearance. The right honourable gentleman says, is it not very humiliating that you should have to

rpropose this measure? Sir, I feel no humiliation in the discharge of a public duty. should feel humiliated if, believing this measure to be of importance to the welfare of Ireland, I shrank from proposing it for fear I should be charged with inconsistency. Then I should indeed fhinkl was acting an unworthy part."

Sir Robert reminded the House that he had always supported the grant, sometimes had spoken for it when Mr. Macaulay was silent-

" Where then is the inconsistency, instead of continuing an imperfect system of education by a vote of 9,0001. a year, that I should advocate an improvement of the building—that I should wish to elevate the character of the education, to improve the position of the professors, to .give a decent allowance for the educa- tion of the youth—where, I say, is the inconsistency of this, when I had pre- viously voted for the continuance of the grant? And who was it that said he -could not conceive the mind so frivolous that would vote for 9,0001. a year and object to a fair and sufficient endowment? Who was it that said that some men -would be reconciled to the maintenance of professors provided they could starve them? Why, it was the right honourable gentleman himself, who, wishing to convince his constituents that he was not violating any principle by supporting the increased grant, made that defence of his own conduct; and then turned round on the Government and said, we were violating principle, not because we proposed to take it from the revenues of the Church, but because we proposed to transform it from an annual vote, which it had been for fifty years, into a permanent grant, and increase the amount. I did not make any comment on the speech of the right honourable gentleman, because I followed the noble Lord, who appeared to me in a generous spirit to fulfil that which I thought was at least a virtual en- gagement, namely, that if we would propose measures likely to conduce to the welfare of Ireland, without reference to party feelings or interests, we knew where

• there was a party to be found on whose support we could rely. (Loud cheers from both side,c of the House.) Well, we dal propose measures of this character; and then the right honourable gentleman comes down here bursting with indigna- tion I never saw a man who appeared so dissatisfied with a proposal, and the manner in which it has been received. He would appear to consider Irish discon- tent to be a particular dominion of his own." (Renewed cheers.) Sir Robert quoted the declaration made by Lord Monteagle, last session, that "the present was just the moment when the Government, after taking strong measures to enforce their own opinions, could most favour- -

ably introduce measures really tending to improve the character and con- dition of the Irish people"- and that " the establishment of Maynooth ought immediately to be placed upon a higher footing, so as to fit it for the reception and education of the better classes." Not a word was then said of agitation extorting such measures from them-

" We took a liberal course; we improved the institution and increased the vote; and then the right honourable gentleman comes forward and charges us with in- consistency and want of principle, and encourages as much as he can an atteinkit to defeat us in the measure which we have proposed—at least to extract from it every party advantage, although he cannot withhold his support from it. I must say, Sir, that such conduct is unworthy of his position in this House. I deeply regret that the renewed attacks of the sight honourable gentleman have obliged me to make this reference to him because while I make it I am anxious to do jus- tice to the course which has been pursued by the noble Lord and the party who support him. I do not want to take the gratitude of the Irish from those who have been their constant friends. We propose this measure from a belief that it will be conducive to the welfare of Ireland; but it is not right, on account of this temporary measure, that the obligations which the Roman Catholics owe to those who have been their constant friends should be transferred from them to us. Be the measure what it may, we want to derive no other advantage from it than the conscientious conviction that we have done our duty in proposing it."

As to the " Protestant feeling " of the country, who was so likely to suf- fer from it as Ministers? They had introduced the measure spontaneously in the same spirit that prompted the Charitable Bequests Act: but it now seems that the fear of America had some effect!-

" If I used an equivocal expression on a former occasion do not the facts speak for themselves? Have we altered this measure in the slightest degree in MOW- quern.* of the mesqage of the President ? Has not my right honourable friend [ Sir James Graham] stated that the outline of this measure was prepared in No- vember last, when we were led to believe that the discussion on the subject of the Oregon territory would soon be brought to a close? Did not the late Presi- dent refuse to present the papers to the Senate, because he said he was of opinion that the negotiations would soon be brought to a successful termination? It waS at that 'period that this measure was prepared. The speech of the present Presi- dent did not induce us to add one shilling to the grant, or alter the measure in any way that would be likely to make it more acceptable to the people of Ireland But, seeing the temper with which it was received in Ireland after it had been proposed, was it not natural for me to say, that I did rejoice, after having been compelled to use the expressions which I did in consequence of the motion of the noble Lord—was it not, I ask, natural that I should say I rejoiced to see the altered feeling which prevailed in Ireland, satisfied as I was that this measure was likely to prove a message of peace? But can the right honourable gentle- man infer from that that the fear of America had any reference to the proposal of this measure? Sir, this measure has not been extorted from us by agitation. We showed a resolution to contend against agitation with such means as the law of the laud afforded to us, without desiring to apply to Parliament for any in- creased powers and with regard to the threatmungs of the President of the United States, I have but to observe that these threatenings had no influence whatever on our conduct even in the most remote degree. So much for the con- struction that has been pat upon the speech which I made the other night."

Sir Robert abstained from entering at large into the question raised by Mr. Ward; wishing that that gentleman had introduced it as a substantive question, rather than complicating it with the grant to Maynooth. If he would so bring it forward, Sir Robert would be prepared to show the grounds on which he agreed with Burke, Grattan, Sir John Newport, Lord Minket, and other distinguished friends of the Roman Catholics. He hoped that the reply to Mr. Macaulay which had been forced from him would not induce honourable Members to alter their courso and oppose the measure; and he deprecated support for other amendments that stood in its way, especially one announced by Mr. Law, declaring simply that the funds should not be taken from the Consolidated Fund, which might unite opposite parties to defeat the bill.

Lord Joint RUSSELL stated the course which he should pursue- " I shall give my vote in favour of the motion of my honourable friend; but when the motion of the honourable and learned Member for the University of Cambridge comes before the Committee, I shall be_ prepared to give it my decided negative. I will go further, and say, that if the House is not prepared to concur with the proposition of my honourable friend the Member for Sheffield, I do not know that there is any other amendment which can be subsequently moved in the progress of the measure to which I shall give my support; and I shall then con- sider it to be my duty to advance this bill to the best of my power."

He could not agree that to vote for the amendment would lead to the destruction of the Protestant Church of Ireland-

" My opinion is, as I have expressed it on former occasions, that there should be a Church Establishment for the Protestants of Ireland; and I think that this is not only a matter upon which the Act of Union speaks, but I believe that the practical and actual union of the two countries is favoured by the maintenance of a Protestant Established Church in Ireland. But what I wish to see is, a church establishment suited to the number of the Protestants of that kingdom; and also an establishment suited to the Roman Catholic people of that country. (Loud cheers.) How this is to be brought about is a question too large to enter upon at present. I believe that there would be great and serious objections to granting out of the public revenue a large revenue of 300,0001. or 400,0001. a year to the Roman Catholic clergy of Ireland. I believe that the funds for the maintenance of any such establishment should be furnished by Ireland. As England supports the Church Establishment of England, and as Scotland supports the Church Es-. tablishment of Scotland, so I conceive Ireland should support any such Church Establishment. But before adopting any arrangement for that purpose, I should consider whether there is not a superfluous revenue belonging to the Church ex- isting in that country, or whether some steps might not be taken for annexing glebes to each Catholic cure. I therefore, without attaching any great import- ance as to whether this vote of 26,000/. is to be taken out of the Consolidated Fund or from the revenues of the Church of Ireland, wish to show by my vote, that with regard to the settlement of the question respecting the Church of Ire- land, I do not think that the mere grant of 26,0001 for the education of the priests of Ireland will settle the affairs of Ireland; that I am far from adopting any such opinion."

On the question of party he agreed with Mr. Macaulay-

" Should there be any future discussion, I shall feel it to be my duty to take the opportunity of contrasting the conduct of gentlemen opposite from 1836 to 1841, and their conduct from 1841. to 1843, with their present conduct and proceedings, and with the course they are now pursuing; and in doing so, I feel that I must come to this conclusion, that there was either great political blindness and want of foresight on their part from 1836 to 1844 and again from 1841 to 1843, and I therefore can have no confidence in their ability to administer the affairs of this empire satisfactorily, as there has been such a want of capacity on their part as regards Ireland for so long a time; or if, on the other hand, her Majesty's Minis- ters possess. such ability and capacity, I cannot give them credit for having acted with sincerity, or in a manner calculated to promote the best interests of the country."

The debate was adjourned a little before one o'clock. ,Before the resumption of the debate on Thursday, a curious colloquy took place. Colonel VERNER tusked, whether the Secretary for Ireland was aware of a Repeal demonstration to take place at Dundalk on the 1st of May? Sir Twomes FREMANTLE said, he had no communication on the subject; but he had no doubt that the Lord-Lieutenant would take such steps as the oreeeion might require. Mr. HUME wished to know if the right honourable Baronet at the head of the Government was aware of a great monster-meeting to take place in London on the 30th instant, of delegates from every part of the kingdom, the object of which was to coerce the votes of honourable Members in that House? [on the Maynooth College Bill.] (Loud laughter and cheers.) Sir THOILLS FREMANTLE had no notice either of—(Loud cries of " No, no!—not you—Feel!' and great laughter. Sir Thomas sat down.) Sir ROBERT PEEL rose amid renewed laughter, and said that he had no information on the subject. At the same time, he might be permitted to say, that he was not at all alarmed at the threatened demonstration or its probable consequences. (Laughter.)

Mr. Cow:motor recommenced the discussion. He began by answering an allusion to a speech which he had made several years ago, in which Mr. Ward said there were gross fallacies and errors as to historical facts: he admitted that there were sentiments in that speech which maturer reason induced him to modify; but as to the facts, he had taken them from a life of Wolfe Tone and a work by Messrs. M`Nevin and Emmett. Mr. Col- quhoun went on to object to the amendment, and also the bill, as leading to the endowment of the Roman Catholic clergy; which he had the au- thority of Mr. Sheil for saying would not satisfy the Irish people; but on the contrary, he foresaw that in place of conciliation it would cause in Ireland a sort of theological prize-fight between the rival Churches. This Maynooth question had brought on a kind of pressure both from England and Ireland, to which Sir Robert Peel was evidently prepared to yield, pro- vided it reached the height of an overwhelming necessity. Mr. Colquhoun quoted an attack on Sir James Graham in the Freeman's Journal, to show that concession was already made the occasion of new agitation; and con- cluded with an energetic declaration that he never would abandon one iota of the Irish Church property.

Mr. FRANCIS T. BARING could not support the resolution, for fear its success should cause the loss of the bill; which showed how ill-timed the amendment was.

Viscount HOWICK agreed that the great question of the Irish Church did not come before the House in a convenient shape or on a con- venient occasion; but he felt bound to support the resolution. He had always regarded the Irish Church on its present footing as contrary to every principle of justice and policy, the main source of oppression and misgovernment in Ireland, and the great obstacle to the spread of the Protestant religion which could not but have taken root and flourished in the Irish soil had it not been weighed down by the injustice of the system with which it was united. He always endeavoured to carry out the Appropriation-clause; but he consented to passing the Tithe Com- mutation Bill without it, in 1838, because he then thought that the time for that compromise had gone by, and that the language of those who op- posed the clause had been so far successful as to render it not worth the struggle. Had the House consented to the clause in 1835, the Church tevenues in Ireland might have been saved, for our time at least. Now, full justice must be done to the Catholic people of Ireland. He, for one, would never be a party to an incomplete reform: he never would disturb the country by proposing any measure that did not go to the root of the evil—that is, that did not deal on entirely equal terms with Catholics and Protestants. He explained his view of the manner in which the subject should be dealt with—

He would save all existing interests, and would pay their incomes to those who now receive them from the Established Church. As a temporary provision, he would take funds for that purpose from the Consolidated Fund. The prejudices of the English and Scotch people, which prevented the carrying of the Appropriation- clause in 1835, which caused the frittering away of the Bishops' lands in 1833, and which occasioned a sacrifice Of 25 per cent of the Irish Church revenue in 1838, would render it fair to make them temporarily pay for the religious wants of Ire- land; but ultimately, the funds should be supplied by Ireland herself. As the interests of the Established Church fall in, he would first make a provision for the Roman Catholic clergy: for the Catholics have the first claim on the funds. They are the majority; they are of the poorest class; the property originally belonged to them, until it was transferred to the maintenance of the Established Church; and he was no advocate of the Voluntary principle, which makes the teacher dependent on his flock. But baying provided in the first instance for the Catholics, he was quite willing to provide also for the Protestants; and if the Church funds should not suffice, he was prepared to take back from the landlords the sum which they obtained for Church property in 1838. Hitherto, the Government of Ireland has rested only on force, based on a hollow and false foundation. If they wished to legislate so as to obtain the good-will and affection of the Irish people, they must legislate as a Par- liament in Dublin freely representing the Irish people would: but would such a Parliament continue the Established Church? He exhorted Sir Robert Peel not again to subject himself to the painful necessity of violating his "consistency," praiseworthy as it might be manfully to do so when the necessity came—not by a hesitating and uncertain policy to sow the seeds of a future crop of disaffection and enforced concession. If he were determined to maintain the Irish Establishment, he might be sure that Irish agitation never would be put down.

Several other speakers alternately supported and opposed the amend- ment. In opposing it, Mr. HAMILTON described the Protestants of Ireland as a British garrison in a hostile country; which provoked a loud burst of Opposition cheers. Mr. EDMUND Rearm ROCHE regretted that for the sake of old principle he must support the amendment; because he regarded the measure as introduced in a good, honest, and kindly spirit. Sir /1ENRY BARRON, as an Irish Catholic, must oppose the amendment; because, Mi- nisters having changed their policy, he felt bound not to oppose them. Viscount PaLmEnsioN descanted on the tendency of all Governments in all countries to be too late in their measures; entered his protest against Sir Robert Peel's allusion to wax with America; hoped that Government would disband the "British garrison" in Ireland; and concluded by saying of Ministers, that if they go on in the course they have begun, they may be the means of accomplishing much for Ireland to counteract the mischiefs which that party of which they are the leaders unfortunately produced. Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT, with some strictures on Mr. Macaulay's studied ingenuity in perverting what Sir Robert Peel said, bore testimony to the fact that some time in last session, before the present measure was publicly announced in Parliament, it had privately been mentioned to him by the Premier. On a division about OHO o'clock in the morning, Mr. Ward's amendment was negatived, division, 322 to 148; majority, 174.

The House went into Committee pro forma, resumed, and gave leave for the Committee to sit again next day.

SPEAKERS DI THE FOREGOING DEBATE. For Mr. Ward's amendment— Mr. Ward, Captain Berkeley, Mr. Milner Gibson, Mr. Macaulay, Mr. Roebuck, Lord John Russell, Mr. Bernal, Viscount llowick, Mr. Bernal Osborne, Mr. Ellice, (Coventry,) Mr. Edmund Burke Roche, Viscount Palmerston. Against it—Sir Thomas Fremantle, Sir Walter James, Sir John Walsh, Sir James Graham, Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Colqnhoun, Captain Bateson, Mr. Francis Thornhill Ban Captain Gladstone, Mr. Hamilton, Sir Henry Winston Barron, Mr. Sidney Her The subject was referred to in the House of Lords on Monday; when the Earl of RODEN presented some petitions against the endowment, and specially supported those that prayed the House to institute an inquiry be- fore passing the bill. He intended to propose that before its second reading the bill be referred to a Committee up stairs.

Lord BROUGHAM let fall a variety of sarcastic observations on that pro- position, and on the petitions generally— As for his noble friend moving for more information on this subject, perhaps it would be more convenient to those whom he represented, and whose vehemence shone forth in their petitions,—it might be more beneficial to their cause, that if statements were to be made with respect to Maynooth College, they should be made in the freedom of debate rather than upon oath before a Committee. It would be better that such assertions should be made with that manly freedom with which persons were in the habit of asserting things in debate, and which was very different from statements made upon oath and liable to cross-examination. But it would not do for them to prove, even if they could, that those bad books and doctrines were taught in Maynooth College; it would not do to say, "Don't add so many thousands to the old grant." Why, did not his noble friend come for- ward every year, and with the same objection, for fifty years back? If it was bad to give 30,0001. to this college, was it not bad to give 9,0001. The amount did not alter the state of the case as to principle. The opponents to the increased grant reminded him of the frail and interesting lady who admitted that she had had a child, but said it was only a very small one. They objected to the present proposition, yet they never said a word against the grant before. It was a gross perversion of language to represent the grant as an endowment. But, let that be the case or not, they would only just be endowing what they had been endowing as hard as they could for the last fifty years: yet all at once, the four corners of the world were to be set in a flame by a report of the endowment of a Popish college. He felt humbled, degraded, and mortified in the greatest degree, to See so many of his fellow-countrymen led away by such furious nonsense. He recalled some past proceedings of the kind—

In the House of Commons, twenty years ago, he supported Lord Francis Egerton, who moved a resolution, "That it is expedient to grant a sum sufficient to provide for the maintenance of the secular Roman Catholic clergy of Ireland, exercising their religious functions "—those functions now called superstitious and idolatrous—" in Ireland." That was carried by 200 odd votes against 160 odd; giving a majority of 43. At that time he beard nothing like what wasati- vsneed at the present time. The present Chancellor of the Exchequer and the t First Lord of the Treasury took this ground: they said they had not the east objection to the principle, but, said Sir Robert Peel, "I should vote for it if the Catholic question were carried." That resolution involved the endowment of the Roman Catholic hierarchy and clergy in Ireland to the extent of 240,000L It was carried by a great majority, and would have been finally, bad the other question been carried. It was called the clerical wing, and the other the free- holder's wing; and the two were to go on paripassu. But the one being rejected, the other was not carried; otherwise there would have been an endowment of the clergy as a condition and stipulation—as one of the securities of the Protestant Church in Ireland.

The Earl of MorneTeaswEL deprecated discussion on the presentation of petitions; and said that he could answer every word of the noble and learned Lord, but that he would not follow his bad example.

Lord BROUGHAM stood corrected— He felt deeply grateful to the noble Earl for not inflicting upon him the hment he had threatened—for not doing what he said he would—answer m. (Laughter.) No doubt, the noble Earl would answer him; but he hoped the noble Earl would give him a further respite. (Laughter.) In fact, he Aid not wish ever to suffer under that infliction, after the specimen the noble Earl lied.

given that evening. (Continued laughter.) -

The subject was again alluded to on Thursday; when the Earl of CLAN, CARTY, presenting some petitions, declared that the experiment tried in establishing Maynooth College was a failure; and he deprecated supporting any system of education over which the State had no control. The Mar- quis of NORMANRY denied the failure. The Duke of WELLINGTON ob- jected to these discussions on the presentation of petitions. And after an irregular conversation, the matter dropped.

RAILWAY LEGISLATION.

In the House of Commons on Monday, Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE moved to discharge that section 11 Of Standing Order No. 87 which requires Com- mittees on Railway Bills to make a special report to the House of the rea- sons which may induce them to adopt or reject the recommendations of the Board of Trade. The time had come for a proper understanding on the subject; for the House had that day begun to take into consideration a portion of the many railway bills introduced in the present session. The decision on those bills involved an immense mass of property; not less than 100,000,000/. in value, and in extent four thousand miles of rail- way. On the decisions of the Committees would depend the fortune or the ruin of thousands. The decisions of the Railway Department have given the utmost dissatisfaction in England, Scotland, and Ireland; and how the Committees of the House would discharge their duties he could not imagine—

To Committee A there were refereed no fewer than 23 railway bills, including the Kentish and South-eastern lines; 23 lines would have to be decided on by the five gentlemen who had the misfortune to sit on this Committee. An at- tempt had been recently made to restrain the number of speeches of counsel before Railway Committees; but even if the proposition had been agreed to, still they

would have 23 opening 3 speeches in opposition, and 23 speeches in

reply, on every bill; in all 69 speeches from the counsel on these 23 bills. In addition to this, they would have the opposition incidental to all railways, ema- nating either from other companies or private parties. And besides all this,

there was to be, it seemed, a third party before the Committee. It was to be obliged to report the reasons why it differed from the recommendation of the

Board of Trade in reference to any competing line: thus, supposing the Board had recommended one line in preference to another, the Committee was to draw out its reasons for dissenting from that recommendation. The Railway Department of the Board of Trade was far from being efficient. As an instance of the manner in which they sometimes discharged their functions, he would remind the Hoar, that not long since the Speaker had discovered a clause that had been inserted in

the Midland Counties Railway Bill by the company which empowered them to go through any land. Information as to the decisions of the Board prematurely

transpired-, so that the prices-of shares of -the Direct Northern and Londeft and Mirk lines, for instance, were altered. The Board lay down prineiplert one day which they depart from the next. Citionen:Cueita opposed the modem He believed that. these accu- sations against the Railway Board emanated from parties interested. The Board was appointed in eonsequence of a necessity felt by the public and by. Parliament, not to supersede the dutiea of the House, but to collect in- formation. No member of the Board had ever conveyed to ieterested parties the slightest hint as to the decisions of the Board. The change in the value of the:shares en the Direct Northern Railway was the result of apeculations on the Stock Exchange, and was entirely uninfluenced by any thing which had been done by the Board of Trade: a coalition was effected between the Direct Northern and the Lincoln and Cambridge pro- jectors; and this was perfectly well known previously to the announcement of the decision of the Board. He believed that in the majority of instances the decisions of the Board would be confirmed by the House; though, as private and local interests were excluded from the considerations of the Heard, the final decision might in some cases be modified on those grounds. lEnt the experiment have a fair trial. Let the House wait till the end of Ike session, and see in what manner the reports were dealt with by the sev.eral Committees; and they would then be in a much totter position to euggest alterations and to make improvements. Mr. Leant:tom= regarded the constitution of the Board as a groat eldstake, and ite proceedings as most unsatisfactory; but he could not Mime the metabere of the Board; and taking the motion to imply censure, ho.could not support it.

The debate was continued; Mr. GLADSTONE defending . the Board on rounds advanced in this and previous discussions; and several other Members assailing it, for exercising too much influence on the decisions of the House. But many wbo attacked the Board objected to the motion, lita- one cause er other.

Mr. Burueso repudiated the notion that there was any ground for im- nnguing the condeet of the gentlemen composing the Board; but, to meet *.ebjection that parties interested in railways are excluded from informs- Sion furnishe41Py. their opponents to the Board, he moved the following tuttesehneot= That there be laid before this. House all doctunents and statements received bsi Abe Railway Department of the Board of Trade. in relation to any railway, bill staeroject. upon winch that Railway Department bas reported."

Viscount HOWICIL strenuously supported the amendment. He did not blame the members of the Board, considering that they have duties thrust upon them Which. it is physically impossible to perform; but he mentioned inatances to show the unsatisfactory working of the system—

if they looked at the reports of the Railway Department, they found the most direct and palpable blunders as to facts of the most serious importance. He might be allowed to point out one particular instance, which had been formally brought under the notice of the House, of the errors into which the Rail- way Department had fallen. A petition from the Croydon Railway Com- pany was lying. upon the table complaining of a report of the Board of Tredo upon the Kentish and South-eastern Railway Bill. There was in that pieition a distinct allegation of material errors as to fact into which the Lard had fallen. First, they had stated, in comparing the two lines, that one of them bad considerably heavier earth-work than the other. This the petition positively denied; and the petitioners stated that on their line the earth-work, in- stead of being heavier, was easier than on the other. Secondly, a distinct error was attributed to the Board of Trade with reference to the number of new lines of railway required for the increased accommodation of the public. But omissions and errors of still more serious importance were pointed out. The petitioners stated, for instance, that the Board of Trade mentioned in their report an offer of the South-eastern Railway Company to adopt a reduced tariff of fires; and they complained that the fact, that they (the petitioners) bad made a similar offer was omitted from the report. The Board of Trade stated that the one company bad offered to Gooses passengers at a lower rate of fares than had been heretofore therged; bet they did not state that the competing company had also offered La adopt a similar reduction. It appeared to him, from the reports, that the Beard had altogether neglected one of the most important points to which their attention was te have been direeted—namely, the /peens of providing; for the safety of the public while travelling by railway. On the South- eastern line of railway- which the Board had recommended,, there would be twenty-five level crossings of the high-road, including four crossings of public streets in the populous town of Deptford; yet this most material fact was not policed at all m the report on the table. But, to show that the Board did not consider such a circumstance immaterial; he might mention, that he held in his hand. a report relating to railway communication in Scotland, in which the Board directed the attentionof the Committee on the bill to-the fact that the turnpike- road from Glasgow to Paisley was crossed on a level by the Glasgow and Go- van railway. Yet, in the case of this Kentish bill, the fact that the projected callway would cross four public streets, on the level, in such a place as Deptford,

in!. passed over without notice. He thought the House would agree with him in

(qPinion that these were material omissions of filets, which rendered the reports of the Board of Trade most untrustworthy as guides for assisting the judgment of Mae House. The more be examined the reports of the Board of Tm&., the more he was struck by their inconsistency with each other. In one case, for instance, he found the most direct possible communication with the remoter districts of the country was stated to be an object of the utmost importance; in other cases such an object was treated as of the slightest moment. In one report he found steep gra- diente assigned as a remon for rejecting a bill; in another report it was stated

that, in consequence of the improvement of locomotive engines, steep. gradients

resented no obetacle. The grounds on which their decisions rested in different eases were, therefore, utterly inconsistent. But he thought a still greater ob- *moo to these reports arose from the,fact, that when they were attentively con- md, they rather _resembled the party-arguments of an able advocate than the judicial reports of an impartial authority.

KoentuallY, Mx. DHECOI,HIE withdrew his motion, in favour of the amend- ment ; which was not opposed. by Government, and was affirmed.

OPHAKERS IN THE FOREGOING DEBATE. Against the Railway Board—Mr. lb,ornas Duncombe, Mr. Labouchere. Mr. Gisbume, Colonel Sibthorp, Mr. Bernal; Lord Howick, Mr. RIMS, Mr. Beckett Denison, Sir George Strickland, Mr. George Beaker, Mr. Colqnhoun. hi Defence of the- Board—Sir George Clerk, bfr. Gladstone, Lord Granville Somerset.

912 Thursday, Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET moved a resolution, that Wray/ Cmulnittee on a Railway Bill should fix the maximum rate of charges far passengers, goods, fre., or report to the House the reason for not doing sos Mr. Jour SWAP= WOR12.RE thought that something should be-done to interrupt the system by- which railway companies are endeavouring to ruin the canals—namely, that of charging merely a nominal rate for goods, and making up the deficiency by an exorbitant charge for passengers; and that the exorbitant charges between intermediate stations should be cheelted: bet:Weed an amendment.to extend the resolution to those cams; hut withdrew it Lord GRAMTILLE SOMRHSET promieing a further easels-- tion en the subject of eel/way-fates fin Monday- next. The original reso- lution passed.

TA the House ef Lords, on Tuesday, on the motion that the Rallwsy Clauses Consolidation Bill be read a third time, Lord BROUGHAM expressee his conviction that the present progress of railway legislation is calcuiated: to operate mischievously. It is impossible the 24ft bills coming before Parliament, at one and the same time can receive due attention; nor can the President of the Board of Trade encounter the enormous mass a busis

ness thrown upon him as Chairman of the Railway Board, since there are

but five members of the Board and but twenty-four hours in the day. Like James the First, who said that it was much easier for a Judge to give

his decision after hearing only one side, instead of the mind's being plagued and confused by hearing the other side, so the Board find it miler to give their decisions after hearing only one aide. He went on to reiterate the complaints, that the reports upon which the opinion of the Board has been, divided are signed by all, and appear as the decisions of the whole Board; that its secrecy gives rise to increased gambling and speculation; and that if it is not itself actually jobbing, it gives rise to the suspicion that it io jobbing. He believed that in many cases Parliament would reverse the decisions of the Board; and that its reports would prove positive obstacles

and impediments to the passing of many bills. A reaction in the specula- tion must come, and Parliament must blame itself for having been in part the cause of the delusion leading to that wide-spread ruin. Be could not help remarking how much better our neighbours the French manage theiz railway legislation—

The Legislature of that country take the whole matter into their hands, and allow only a fe3v railroads to be constructed; and these not the mere projects of private persons, but the line prepared and selected by the Legislature itself as the best adapted to meet the wante ef the country. In addition to this also, in giving powers to parties to construct railways, it limits the holding of them to a number

of years, and gives leases for periods. of forty, or forty-five, or fifty yeare ; at the end of which period they, will revert to the public' who will, on reletfing thern, get the advantage of reductions of the fares. He could not help feeling that tbia was a much more statesmanlike course than that which they had adopted. , He reverted to some cases, of individual hardship—

Lie found that since his observations on Thursday, some of the partiea whose cases he had stated had received offers of satisfaction from the railway companies which proposed to interfere with their property, and they had shown that they were not indisposed to come to terms. This, he found, was the case when they had to deal with parties better off; but it was not so with regard to poorer persons.

In the case of the lady; [Lady Georgina Fans,] where the railway company pro-

posed to bring their line within a quarter of a mile of her house, and also in the case respecting the officer and his wife's two sisters, proposals bed been made to

conic to terms since he had stated the case to the House. In the first case, they offered to takes line at a much greater distance from the mansion-house; but the parties would not avail themselves of this, as they found that the proposed nevi lIne would pass through the gardens of a number of cottagers. The railwan people were therefore told that they must find some new course. He moved that the 32d. section of the bill before the House, giving the power to take temporary possession of land without previous payment ci

price, to take building materials, and to construct brick-works, be struck out. The railway companies ought not to be allowed to deviate from the line laid down; and instead of permitting to depart from it a hundred yards ois either side,, he would limit it to twenty yards.

The Earl of DALHOUSIE declined to follow all the irrelevant remarks or his noble and learned friend; to one only of whose assertions he could, assent—that there are, twenty-four hours in the day. He. distinctly denied that the Railway Board confine themselves to hearing only on one side: they announce that they are ready to hear all who seek interviews, and he believed that no interview had been refused. He referred to some reports that the decisions of the Board have oozed out, repeating the explanations already given. Speculation was rife before the Board was instituted, and

it is well known that large fortunes were made by speculation in the shares of the Brighton Railway. Lord Brougham approved of railways in the abstract, but took care to oppose each particular railway in detail. With- out the clause which he now proposed to strike out, it would be impossible to carry out any railway—

Hi a noble and learned friend said he would agree to the formation of a coin to make a railway from London to York; but he would take care that they should not have a barrow-fall of clay or a cart-load of gravel for the construction of the work. His noble and learned friend was, in fact, ten thousand times worse than the Egyptian tyrant. He not only ontheroded Herod, but he outpharoalied Phsroab. The persecutor of the Israelites refused that oppressed people straw, while he compelled them to famish bricks; but his noble and learned friend said, "You are to construct railways, you are to erect bridges and viaducts along the line; but you shall have neither bricks; nor clay, nor stones, nor gravel" There are many reasons why the company should not be prevented from deviating from the original course; but, one is obvious, that they. are not allowed to survey the ground before obtaining their bill. The powers given are great, but they are essential to the promotion of these under- takings.

Several other Peers addressed the House; and eventually, the bill, was read a third time.

Lord BROUGHAM then moved clauses to limit the deviation to. twenty yards on either side, and to secure compensation, to turnpike-trusts that are injured by railways. They were negatived; and the bill was passed.

SPEAKERS IN THE FOREGOING DEBATE. 4gainst the Railway Board— Lord Brougham, the Duke of Beaufort. In its-defence—the Earl of Dalhousie, Lord Ashburton, Lord Campbell.

Costeermariost FOR Faxes Acetone/v. In the House of Lords, on M0114 day, Lord Lorrourort moved the second reading of the Death by, Accidents Compensation Bill. At present, a person who suffered by an accident arising from the negligence of another might obtain conmensatoon in damages if he.reeot covered from the Wary; but if be died, the right of action died with him. BY this bill, his family, or his parents, if he left no wife or child, .would be entithd to the same remedy as he would (If he had survived) have been entitled' to. This was the kw alreadysin France:- and as the value of a man's life was calcultibl4 juries would soon get into the habit of assessing damages quite as well-as for an injury to his person. The motion was agreed to, on the understanding that UM bill would be referred to a Select Committee.

SERB OF Sr. ABAPH AND BANGOR. On Tuesday, the Earl of Powis-gave notice, that on that day week he should move the second reading of his bill to prevent the miter of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor; introducing certain alterations.

Several Nortcas op Mooaow have been postponed; inconsequence of the pre- tracted debates on the Maynooth THE ROYAL ASSIttaT wasgi$ee, t'dorainission, on Thursday, to the Sugar- dnties Bill, the Glass-duties Bill, the Clot:ens-duties Bill, the Mutiny Bill, the Marine Mutiny Bill, the Thames Navigation Bill, and Britten's Divorce Bill.

NEW Waft were issued, ori Maiday,fetPdebles County, in thffrooin of Mr. Wil- li/ma Forbes Mackenzie, apptfinted one of the Linde of the Treasury; for Denbigh, in'the room of Sir Watkins Wilffsma Wynn, accepted the SteivarcIshin.of the Ma- ncirial Courts of Denbighshire; Mid for -Leominster, in the moth of Mi. Charles Greenaway, accepted the Stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds.

A Writ was issued for Woodstock, on Wednesday, in the room of the Marquis of Blandford; who had accepted the Chiltern Hundreds.