Lords Sitting of 15 May 1832

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By Lord DURHAM, from Stirling, in favour of Parliamentary Reform.—By the Marquis of CLANRICARDE, from Relclare, and other Places in Ireland, in favour of the Ministerial Plan of Education (Ireland.)

MINISTERIAL PLAN OF EDUCATION (IRELAND).
The Bishop of Kilmore presented a Petition from the clergy of his diocese, against the National Education System in Ireland.
Lord Kingwas convinced, that after the present week, they would hear no more of these anti-national education petitions, as they were part of a conspiracy, based in political fraud and delusion, against Earl

981
Grey's Administration; the main plot of which, he was happy to say, had wholly failed. The Pharisaic originators of those petitions had not stopped at what he supposed he must call pious frauds, in order to array the best feelings of the religious portion of the community against the present Government. They told the people, that the main object of Ministers in introducing the national education system into Ireland was, to "deprive the Protestant children of their right to peruse the Sacred Volume," though they well knew that, so far from that being the fact, not less than two days each week were wholly devoted to scriptural instruction and unrestricted scriptural reading.
The Earl of Rodendenied that the opposition of the clergy, and other well-meaning individuals, to the Irish national education system had any political origin. There was nothing like a plot against the Government, and the petitions would, he believed, be yet more numerous than at present, consequent upon a conviction, sanctioned by God's word, that that system was Anti-Christian in principle, inasmuch as it went to mutilate the Holy Volume. The opposition solely arose from a feeling on the part of the people of England against what they considered an unscriptural and unchristian system of education.
Lord Kingbelieved, that there was something political in the opposition, and that it did not arise altogether from such worthy motives as the noble Earl set up, on behalf of all the petitioners who came before the House. But, some how or other, it was a curious phenomenon in the proceedings of the "saints," that though their spiritual visions were, it must be presumed, ever fixed upon the "kingdom come," they seemed also to have an eye upon this "sublunary world below." In opposing, for instance, what the noble Earl designated the Anti-Christian education system of the Whigs, they contrived to make the opposition auxiliary—impotently so, he was happy to find—to the restoration of the Tories.
The Earl of Winchilseaagreed with his noble friend (the Earl of Roden), when he stated that these petitions had not originated in political feeling. He denied, too, that the House would hear no more of these petitions after this week. A feeling upon this question, of a nature far more powerful than that which prevailed upon the Catholic Question, would be excited throughout the country. It was the duty of a Christian Legislature, in a Christian
982
country, to connect that religion which they believed to be the pure religion with the education of the people. In the attempt, therefore, to bring that Legislature to a sense of their sacred duty, there was nothing of political hostility—nothing of a worldly character; and, for one, he never would cease from bringing the question in its true light before the people of England, and before that House. As for the unbecoming sneer of the noble Baron, respecting the views and feelings of those he was pleased to style "saints," he would only observe, that that noble Baron never possessed, and was incapable of appreciating the feelings of such persons. That noble Baron never spoke upon any sacred subject, except in such a tone as must excite the scorn and indignation of every Christian man. The noble Earl, with great energy, said he would repeat the words—the scorn and indignation of every Christian man.
Lord Kingsaid, the noble Earl had no right to assume, that because he had over and over denounced the abuses of the Church Establishment and the tithe system, that he was, therefore, unmindful or indifferent to the uses of religion. But this was ever the way with the monopolists of religion: venture to question the immaculate perfection of the tithe system, or the holding of Church pluralities, or the advantages of overpaying a Bishop for doing little, while the working clergy hardly obtained the means of subsistence, and, as a matter of course, you are denounced as the enemy of every thing sacred and orthodox. He defied the noble Earl to cite a single expression of his whole life at all reflecting upon religion, apart from its abuses.
Petition laid on the Table.

MINISTERIAL APPOINTMENTS.
Earl Grey: As there is no other important business before your Lordships, I move that this House do adjourn over till Thursday. I do so in consequence of a communication which I have this day had from his Majesty.
Lord Kenyonwished to know whether the House and the public were to understand from the noble Earl's declaration, that he and his colleagues were to be restored to their official stations?
Earl Greywas sure that the House would see, that it would be indiscreet in him to offer any further explanation, under the circumstances in which he then stood. He had stated that he had had a communication from his Majesty: of course their Lordships understood that that communica-

983
tion could only refer to the affairs of the State, so far as they were affected by the resignation of himself and his colleagues. It had, besides, been made to him so recently, that it would be impossible to afford further information, or to say more than this, that nothing decisive had ensued, and that it was not in his power to state what it was plain the noble Baron was so anxious to extort—namely, that it was decided that the present Government should retain office. He was not then authorized to state more, and therefore proposed that they should adjourn over to-morrow, in order to afford time for the completion of some arrangements.
Lord Kenyonwas quite satisfied with the noble Earl's second statement, and felt it would be unreasonable, in the present stage of the proceedings, to press him further.
Earl Greywas persuaded that his first explanation was to the full as explicit as his second—both amounting only to this—that he had had a communication from his Majesty, which had as yet led to no decided consequences.
The Lord Chancellorrose to prevent any misunderstanding on the part of the noble Baron (Kenyon) as to there being any difference between his noble friend's first and second explanations, and to prevent a repetition of such irregular questions as that put by him to his noble friend. It was highly irregular to ask a Minister the precise character of any confidential communication which he might have had from his Sovereign; and though his noble friends and colleagues had tendered a resignation of their respective offices to his Majesty, which his Majesty had been graciously pleased to accept, still he stood there as a servant of the Crown, to whom all communications from the Crown must necessarily be confidential. His noble friend, therefore, was not at liberty to state more than the fact that he had had a communication from his Majesty; and he was at a loss to know by what subtilty of interpretation the noble Baron could persuade himself that he had obtained more information from the second explanation of his noble friend than from the first. He had listened attentively to both, and could state, that if he knew no more of the communication than it was fair to presume the noble Baron and the House generally knew, he should not have been better acquainted with its purport by the second statement than by the first statement of his noble friend; and he was convinced that the first
984
simple declaration, that he had had a communication from the Crown, derived no increase of strength or explicitness from the second. As his noble friend had stated, every noble Lord must have understood the communication to refer to the state of public affairs. Further than this it would be improper to state—that it had led to no positive consequences, and might have no consequences.
The Marquis of Salisburydiffered from the noble and learned Lord as to the perfect identity of the noble Earl's two statements. This important fact was elicited from the second explanation, which the first by no means imported—namely, that it was by no means a decided consequence of the King's communication that the noble Earl and his colleagues would be restored to office.
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned to Thursday.