§ SIR JOHN DUCKWORTHwished to put a question to his hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Spooner), who had given notice of Motion in reference to an inquiry into the system of education pursued at Maynooth College. That Motion had been postponed from time to time for reasons which had been stated by his hon. Friend. It had been fixed to be brought forward on the 4th of May; but he (Sir J. Duckworth) observed by the notice paper that it was again postponed for a few days. He begged to ask his hon. Friend why he had postponed his Motion on a subject on which so strong a feeling existed throughout the country, and whether or not it was positively his intention to bring it forward on the day for which it was now fixed?
§ MR. SPOONERthanked his hon. Friend the Member for Exeter for giving him the opportunity of stating his reason for postponing his Motion from the 4th to the 11th of May. That Motion now stood first on the list for the latter day; and he had been induced to postpone it in order to put an end to any uncertainty that might exist about his being able to bring it forward on the earlier day, owing to its not occupying the first place on the list of Motions. So far as anything human was certain, his hon. Friend might be, assured that he would bring forward his Motion on the 11th of May.
§ MR. ANSTEYwished to put a question to the hon. Member for North Warwickshire on the same subject. The Motion of the hon. Member, which was now fixed for the 11th of May, was for a Committee of Inquiry into the course of education at the College of Maynooth. On the 10th of February the hon. Member had given notice that he would move the House on the subject of the grant to Maynooth, as distinct from that of the system of education carried on there. No day had been fixed for that Motion before Easter; but 1029 on the list of business unappropriated to come on after Easter, he (Mr. Anstey) found still under the name of the hon. Member these words, "Maynooth grant—early day after Easter." The hon. Member had now fixed a day for his Motion for an inquiry into the system of education at Maynooth; and he (Mr. Anstey) wished to ask him on what day, if at all, he intended to move for a repeal of the grant to Maynooth College, or if he had abandoned his expressed intention to move for a repeal of that grant?
§ MR. SPOONERobserved, that the hon. Member was totally mistaken if he supposed that he (Mr. Spooner) had ever expressed an intention to move for the repeal of the grant to Maynooth. The facts of the ease were these: Early in February he had given notice that he should bring forward a Motion relative to Maynooth College, and he had stated that the precise nature of that Motion he would enter on the books before the Motion came on. He had fulfilled his promise by stating that his Motion would be one to inquire into the system of education carried on at Maynooth. How the original entry came to be continued on the list, he really did not know; it was not done by his direction, and he had nothing to do with it. When he had observed it, he called the attention of the officer of the House to it, and he thought that it had been by this time removed. But he never did intend to move for the repeal of the grant to Maynooth until the subject had been inquired into, because the grant being ratified by Act of Parliament, he had thought it incumbent on him to make out a case before proposing that it should be withdrawn, and he could not do so before moving for a Select Committee of Inquiry. To that object he adhered, and he had no intention of making any Motion at present relative to the repeal of the grant to Maynooth.