HC Deb 04 March 1807 vol 8 cc1079-88
Mr. Hobhouse

brought up the report of the committee of supply. The resolutions (grants for the service of Ireland) were read and agreed to, until the resolution for granting the sum of 13,000l. for defraying the charge of the Roman catholic seminary at Maynooth, in Ireland; on which a discussion arose.

Mr. Perceval

rose to oppose the said grant. Since he had last stated his opinion to the house on that subject, he had taken no slight means of acquiring information, and the result of his enquiry went more stedfastly to fix the motives of his opposition. It was not the amount of the sum, increased as it was in the present instance, that solely excited his bostility; it was in the growing nature of the demand, that he saw the strongest ground of alarm. As the Irish parliament had thought such a measure of policy advisable, he was still willing to retain the principle of meeting that determination; indeed, the united legislature were bound by the principles of good faith to continue the grant. But there was a wide difference between the allowance of a grant, averaged annually at 8000l., and the concurrence in demands, which were progressively increasing, and has, in the present estimate, actually amounted to 13,000l. There was, in his mind, another very strong ground of objection to the enlargement of this catholic seminary, that it operated to the prejudice of the University of Dublin. The house, by adverting to the Journals of the Irish house of commons, would find, that it was a growing practice with the Roman Catholic gentry in Ireland, to send their sons to that university, previous to the foundation of the Maynooth seminary. On a former occasion, when these estimates were submitted to a committee of the house, he had argued on the great and numerous benefits which would arise from the joint education of both Roman Catholics and Protestants, in the same university. It was affirmed by the right hon. baronet opposite, (sir J. Newport,) that, from the shortness of the period since the relaxation of the penal statute, which precluded the education of a catholic in the university of Dublin, it could not be expected that a great number of catholic students should have embraced that opportunity. But the actual number, whether great or small, could not affect the question; if the opportunity was taken advantage of by any catholics, however few, it went to prove, that in their minds there existed no prejudice against a participation with their protestant countrymen in the same collegiate education. The Journals of the Irish house of commons gave important information upon that point. In perusing them he had found, that at the period when the measure of founding the Maynooth seminary was submitted to the Irish parliament, the Catholics themselves presented a petition against the inexpediency of excluding the Protestants from the option of being educated there. The prayer of that petition was grounded on the great national benefits a communion of opinion and mutual good-will were so likely to produce. They certainly felt, what every true friend to England and Ireland must feel, that friendship and conciliation would follow, from the professors of the two religions being associated in their education; and it was with no light source of regret that the circumstances of the case made it necessary to declare, that the opportunity of effecting such beneficial consequences was suffered to escape. Had the public money been at that time expended in enlarging the university of Dublin, instead of adopting the policy of a separate institution, a great object would have been obtained, the benefits arising from which, would be found every day to increase. Indeed it was not saying too much, to assume, that the interests of the Protestant university appeared sacrificed to the advancement of the Catholic seminary. Within a few years, the professors of the latter institution were doubled; that is, from 9 professors originally, there were now 18: and for this in- crease there was no distinct notice ever given to the house. With respect to the other, or contiguous seminary for the education of laymen, there was something in the formation of it very inconsistent; inasmuch as the private subscriptions on which the parliamentary grant for the education of Catholic clergy was founded, were altogether applied to its support; and thus that annual grant, which was intended only as an aid, had now become the primary and only fund for defraying the expences attending the education of the priesthood. In the University of Dublin, provision was only made for 100 persons, including fellows, senior and junior scholars, and sizers; whilst the public were called on to defray the expences of 200 Roman Catholic professors and students in the seminary at Maynooth. The question then was, to what description of persons was this preference given? To a class of subjects, who, in their religious tenets, withhold from their lawful sovereign the admission of his supremacy. But, it had been contended, that it was wise to prevent the Catholic priesthood from being exposed to the mischiefs of a foreign education. It was to him rather extraordinary to lay so much stress upon the place of education, when the true and strong principle of danger and hostility, existed in the principles of that religion, in which, whether at home or abroad, they were uniformly educated. He wished to have an enquiry instituted into the nature of their bye-laws altogether; there seemed to him a great mystery about this institution. There was nothing like a visitorial inspection, no enquiry as to the mode of doctrine and discipline instilled and exercised on a number of youth, educated, if not in aversion, at least in hostility to the principles of the Protestant establishment. He felt it his duty to impress on the house, that, during the first years of this Catholic institution, the various grants given by parliament were founded on petitions. In the present case, he could not say whether a petition was ever presented; but of this he was aware, that no committee was ever appointed to enquire into the nature and extent of those plans, upon which this application was grounded. It was by accident that he had taken notice of this grant on a former occasion; the danger of admitting the growing principle, and of this house giving encouragement to such permanent expences and increasing demands, had made a considerable im- pression upon his mind; an impression which should induce him to move, "That the sum of 8,000l. be substituted for the sum of 13,000l. at present inserted in the resolution of the committee."

Sir John Newport.—Mr. Speaker ;

I feel myself able to convince the house, and I hope the hon. and learned gent. on the points of difference between us, by adverting to the acts of the Irish parliament which particularly referred to the catholic seminary at Maynooth. If, indeed, the learned gent. had adverted to them, his surprise that the demand for that institution had increased from the average grant of 8,000l. would have been considerably lessened; for he would have found, that the sums voted by the Irish parliament, varied almost every year from 8 to 9 and 10,000l. In fact, it would have been found, that, though the sum of 8,000l. was the averaged annual grant, yet the Irish parliament expressly recognized the principle of varying the amount of the grant, according to times and circumstances. With respect to the objection of the hon. and learned gent. that the existence, much more the enlargement of the Maynooth seminary, was prejudicial to the interests of the university of Dublin; this is an objection, which I by no means admit; but before I enter on an investigation of that objection, I beg leave to appeal to that liberal and manly spirit, which marked the conduct of the Catholics, when, in the petition alluded to by the hon. and learned gent., they strongly deprecated the intention of excluding their Protestant countrymen from the right of being educated at the college of Maynooth. But what was the true state of the question, and how did the facts fully exemplify that it operated in no such way? that the increase of Catholics at the university of Dublin had been progressive, and at this moment there was double the number than at any former period. But it was not in the university of Dublin that the number of catholic students had increased; many of the higher orders of that body are to be found at the universities in England—at Edinburgh and Glasgow. But the hon. and learned gent. has said, it would have been a wiser policy to have enlarged the university of Dublin, and directed the public money expended on the Maynooth seminary, to meet the provision for the education of catholics there. Enlarge that University, I answer, as you please; and you advance not one step to the object of your wishes. And the reason is obvious, because persons who are to be instructed in the doctrine and discipline of the Romish faith, persons whose intention is to instruct their flocks in certain articles of faith, and in the observance of certain religious ceremonies, will never be induced or forced to embrace a system of education foreign from those intentions, and which, though not hostile, are very different from the opinions of those whom you would select as their preceptors. Was the house to adopt such a line of policy, there would, under the present circumstances of the world, remain to the Catholic but one alternative, namely, no education, no religious observance. They are, at present, deprived, in a great degree, of foreign education; the monasteries and institutions, which were formerly noted for those pursuits, have been entirely overturned. To Flanders, Spain, and Italy, it is impossible for the Irish catholic to repair for education; and will not the house take advantage of such circumstances, and duly appreciate the great national benefits vhich must arise from granting to them a domestic education? To restrict them to the University of Dublin, is, in other words, to compel them to a state of ignorance. The thing would be an utter impossibility; it is indeed extravagant to expect catholic acquiescence in a scheme directly in defiance to the religion they profess; nor would the professors of Trinity college do their duty, unless they performed that part, which the Catholic could not conscientiously approve. The hon. and learned gent. has asserted, that the accounts, attaching to this branch of the miscellaneous expenditure, have not been vouched. Had he thought proper to have extended his enquiries, he would have found, that the commissioners of the imprest accounts had as regularly certified this branch of services as any other. The two seminaries have been said to be in a state of rivalry and hostility. If such rivalry and hostility exist, I am sure they exist not with the Catholics. We have also been assured, that there is no visitorial power, although it is distinctly specified by the statute, that the lord chancellor and the judges of the country shall be visitors of the morals and conduct of the scholars, as connected with civil policy; wisely and prudently abstaining from any interference either in their religious doctrine, or discipline. if this measure had not been over and over discussed by the parliament of Ireland, if its eligibility had not been generally admitted, if the diminution of catholic incumbents was not by deaths and other causes ye y considerable, then there might be some strong reasons for not voting this branch of expenditure without mature enquiry. But I am sure it is in the recollection of the house, that when I proposed the miscellaneous services of this year, I did most particularly advert to the increase of the Maynooth grant; and I was induced make the observation, anticipating as I did, an opposition, either to the principle or amount of the grant, from a certain quarter in this house. I did think there were certain persons disposed to quarrel with that measure. But why quarrel with me, and not quarrel with my predecessor in office? The objection, in consequence of its not being referred to a committee, as a money grant, was formerly as valid as it can be now. I have introduced nothing new, but have undeviatingly adhered to the plan, which was previously chalked out. But I cannot conclude, without impressing on the house the small provision which is claimed for the education of the priesthood of at least three millions of people. Every principle of humanity and sound policy seems to me to call on this house for its acquiescence.

Mr. Bankes

objected to the additional grant now moved for, because its object was to double the number of the students for catholic priesthood in Ireland, and would consequently make the sum of 5,000l. annual. He did not mean to say that the catholic priesthood should be neglected; on the contrary, he thought that it should be supplied, but this should be done in a different manner from that now proposed. He was certain that the object could be accomplished by means of private contributions. The house was aware that several institutions were supported in this way, and he could not discover why a catholic seminary might not be adequately supported in like manner. The state had not been formerly made a party to such an institution; he did not see, therefore, why it should be incumbered at present. On the whole, he apprehended that this measure would have the effect of making popery rival the protestant establishment in Ireland.

Mr. Grattan

thought that in a question of this kind, that involved the education of a great portion of the population of the empire, any sect of Christians should be tolerated, as any one sect of religion was better than no religion at all. He was as- tonished to hear from an hon. gent. over the way, that if the Roman Catholics of Ireland were to be educated in the principles of their faith, it was little matter whether they received that education in Ireland or in France. He was surprized to hear this, because it went to say that it was immaterial whether three millions of the king's own subjects were educated at the expence and under the protection of his majesty's government, or whether they should be pensioners on the bounty of the emperor of France. From the jealousy hitherto entertained of the growth of Catholicism, that jealousy was founded not upon the mere doctrine; not against it as a religion; but against its foreign views, its foreign connections, its foreign relations. But here the objection was changed; no danger was apprehended from those foreign relations; the Roman Catholic might go abroad; but if kept at home, if educated in the bosom of his country, then he would be dangerous. Was this the doctrine? If it was, let it only be repeated in order to be refuted. And if it was not; if foreign connections were dangerous, why promote those views and strengthen those connections, by exiling the Roman Catholic for the purpose of educating him? As to economy, 43,000l. had been just voted to the Protestant charter-schools; 21,000l. voted to the Foundling Hospital; that is, with a ready hand, 21,000l. had been given to the crimes of the depraved, and it was to be disputed whether 13,000l. was to be given to enlighten and to instruct three millions of a bold and hardy peasantry. Why so much freely to the Protestant, and, why dispute the little to the Catholic? Did not this do that which was complained of? Did it not encourage the rivalry so much apprehended, by setting up one religion against another; and was it justice so to do? He had heard it apprehended that the institution might tend to encourage the Roman Catholic professors in that seminary, in the latent dissemination of disloyalty: was it remembered that that seminary was subject to the controul of visitors, the chancellor and the judges of the land, and under their controul nothing in that way could be apprehended? He wished gentlemen to look more largely at the institution; it originated in wisdom, and would be productive of good.

Lord Mahon.—Mr. Speaker;

I can by no means coincide with the opinion and conclusions of the hon. and learned gent. opposite with respect to this measure of support to the Catholic priesthood. In my mind, it should be considered on the more enlarged principles of national policy, as one of those great and desirable means of connecting that religion, and the views of its professors with the interest of the state. The influence of the Catholic priests in that country, is well known to be extensive; unfortunately, the events of the rebellion have too strongly exemplified this; and, under such a conviction, I ask, is it not an inestimable benefit to have the care of their education committed to the government? I do contend, sir, that such a measure is more than a necessary one; it is a great act of national policy, and even were it not a legacy bequeathed by the Irish parliament, I, for one, should give my vote, even at this time, for a similar establishment.

Mr. Wilberforce

felt unaffected pain in offering his sentiments upon this subject. He wished, however, to be candidly understood. He was not, he confessed, one of those men who entertained those large and liberal views on religious subjects, insisted upon with so much energy by the right hon. gent. on the other side (Mr. Grattan); he was not so much like a certain ruler, of whom it had upon a late occasion been so happily said, that he was an honorary member of all religions. He could not help saying, that he thought the institution in question would tend to discourage the growth of protestantism in Ireland. He must add, however, that he thought the policy of this country's conduct towards that part of the empire had been a most illiberal and ill-judged one. This dangerous system of intolerance and persecution had been too long preserved, and could not be too speedily abated. At the same time, if protentantism was to be encouraged in Ireland, certainly the Maynooth seminary did not contribute to that most desirable effect. As a sincere friend to the Protestant religion, he was unwilling to extend an establishment which would prevent the propagation of that religion. He allowed it was not only criminal but cruel in the highest degree to oppress or restrain the Catholic religion; but it was no oppression not to favour it to the detriment of the Protestant establishment.

Lord Howick

agreed in the principle of his hon. friend, that it was not only criminal but cruel to persecute any religious sect, but it was something very like persecution to refuse the means of education to the ministers of the catholic religion. He was sure that his hon. friend would be the last man in the world to recommend the adoption of intolerance, yet, when he proposed to withdraw the protection of the state from the catholic priesthood, he recommended something like persecution. He was, from principle and conviction, a member of the established religion, because he thought it the best and the purest on the face of the earth. He should not, however, think himself a friend to the protestant establishment by recommending any measure which could excite the envy or the hatred of the Catholics. He deprecated any attempt which might appear like an inducement to abandon the persuasion in which they had been educated. It would be foolish to endeavour to force the Catholics into the Protestant church; but if this were impracticable, what could be done, but to assist in making them Christians? Not only the policy, but the necessity of such a measure, had been recommended by the duke of Portland to the lord lieutenant of Ireland in 1795, when his grace was secretary for foreign affairs. His lordship then referred to the letter, and proceeded to observe, that as the principle of the institution had been acquiesced in ever since 1795, it was very strange that the present grant should be resisted; for, as gentlemen had acknowledged the principle, it followed that they could not refuse such additional grants as times and circumstances might render necessary, as the operation of that very principle to which they had given their assent. This was the argument arising from their own concession; but in support of the argument he could instance a fact, which must, he was confident, establish the necessity for encouraging home education for the catholic priests of Ireland. He was sorry he had not the document about him then, but the fact was, that Dr. Walsh, a priest of talents, who was appointed head of the college established in Paris for the education of catholic priests, had used every influence, and all means in his power, to induce such of the Irish catholic youth as were in Lisbon for the purpose of their education, to go to his college. He had offered them not only education, but had opened to their view every temptation which he thought most likely to withdraw them from their king and country. On a representation of the matter to the catholic bishops in Ireland, they treated, it as it deserved, and denounced exclusion from the faith against any who might be weak enough to fall into the snare laid for their allegiance. This threat had the desired effect. But surely we should not leave his majesty's subjects of any description exposed to the temptations of the enemy; and what could more effectually give us security in the present instance than the establishment of a college for the education of the catholic youth for priesthood? It had been properly stated by his right hon. friend (Mr. Grattan), that the sums granted for Protestant establishments were very considerable; they were so; but what would naturally be the feelings of the Catholics if parliament refused this trifling addition? They were men capable of being roused by neglect or insult as well as others. They should not therefore be refused the protection of the state, and the participation of the advantages of religious education. Did they not contribute by their industry and property to the taxes of the state? Did they contribute nothing to the church establishment? Did they not pay tithes to the Protestant clergy? Did they not, as well as any other description of subjects, contribute to the wealth and security of the empire? This could not be denied. Why then should they be excluded by the house of commons from religious education, or, in other words, from Christianity itself? He really thought the arguments advanced by the right hon. and learned gent. (Mr. Perceval) on this subject, were the most futile he had ever heard from him. He fully agreed with his hon. friend (Mr. Wilberforce), that we had too long neglected to take the situation of Ireland seriously into consideration. He confessed that we were deeply criminal for the part we had acted; but he also hoped that we should begin to discharge the long arrear against us. For his own part, he candidly owned, that he should feel that the proudest and happiest day of his existence when he might be able to set about the work of making up for the time which had been mispent with respect to Ireland. On the whole, if circumstances made it necessary to have the grant larger, he should most cordially support it; of course, he gave his full assent to the resolution now proposed.—After a few words from Mr. May in favour of the grant, the original resolution was then put and carried. The other resolutions were also severally put and carried.