§ Viscount Duncannonseeing the right reverend Prelate opposite, rose to request that he would postpone, till Monday, presenting the petition complaining of the conduct of the Irish Education Commissioners, on the ground he had stated yesterday, namely, that he had not yet received from Ireland an answer to his communication, so that he was not prepared to go into the subject of the petition.
The Bishop of Exeter said, that it was impossible for him to resist the application of the noble Lord, though the granting it was highly inconvenient to him, as he hoped to be in his diocese by that time. However, as the noble Lord had made the request, he felt it imperative on him to stay till Monday. Perhaps he might now be permitted to move that an humble address be presented to his Majesty praying that he would be pleased to direct that there might be laid on the Table of the House copies of the instructions given to the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the state of religious and other education in Ireland, and also a copy of the appointment of Mr. Gibson Craig. The last part of his Motion he made because in the petition reference was made to the supposed instructions given to the Commissioner.
§ Viscount Duncannonstated, that he believed Mr. Craig was not included in the first commission. Only eight persons had been named in it, and it was afterwards found that more were required, and Mr. Craig was then placed in the Commission. If there was no objection on the part of the Government, and the right reverend Prelate would move for the second Commission, dated in August last, he would obtain the names of all the Commissioners and would then get the instructions given to them.
§ The Duke of Wellingtondid not know that there would be any objection if made at the proper time, but he submitted that under existing circumstances it was not regular to move for a grant of papers. The right reverend Prelate should wait until his Majesty had appointed his responsible advisers when the papers might properly be moved for. Under these circum- 987 stances he thought it was desirable that some delay should take place in calling for these papers.
Lord Broughamsaid, that nothing could be more correct than the observation of the noble Duke opposite. The King could do no act without responsible advisers. It was in this instance a matter of mere form, but form was sometimes of the essence of a proceeding, and for form's sake the Motion for papers ought to be postponed. He had no doubt that the right rev. Prelate would not object to the postponement. As to Mr. Craig himself, he thought that that gentleman's name might not be even in the second Commission, for one, if not two names, had been omitted; certainly Mr. Craig was not in the first Commission. He should consider it peculiarly unfortunate if anything could be alleged against Mr. Craig; for he had himself recommended Mr. Craig, whom he had known from childhood, who was the son of Sir James Gibson Craig, a gentleman well known to their Lordships, and who was the personal representative of Sir Thomas Craig, the celebrated feudal lawyer. Mr. Craig was himself a barrister of ten years standing, and to considerable attainments he joined an excellent understanding, and an unexceptionable character in point of integrity, as well as being judicious and courteous in his disposition; and this last quality he had thought most important, in reference to the task which Mr. Craig would be called on to perform.
§ Motion postponed.