The Bishop of Exetersaid, that before he presented the petition of which he had given notice, he wished to present another, on which he should make no comment, though it was a petition of great importance, but should move that it be read by the Clerk at the Table. It was a petition from the reverend Edward Nangle, who was a most highly respectable clergyman of the Church of England, and whose diocesan (the Archbishop of Tuam) gave him the highest character. Mr. Nangle stated in his petition the efforts he had made to bring into a state of cultivation the island of Achill, and to benefit the people there, especially by the establishment of a school—efforts which had been observed by Mr. Commissioner Newport, and approved of by him, though not mentioned in his Report. He moved that the petition be read at length. [The petition was then read.] It stated that the petitioner, who was resident Minister in the island of Achill, when he came to the island in July last found it without church or glebe house or resident Minister. He built the first slated house which had been seen in the island, and by this means and others enabled the poor inhabitants of the island to clothe their naked children. He also supplied them with schools and medicine, and hoped a note to that effect would appear in the Report of the Commissioners of Education Inquiry. So pleased were the people with his exertions that they greeted his arrival on the island by lighting bonfires, but still 1204 his attempts to serve the inhabitants were frustrated by the denunciations of the Roman Catholic priests. Week after week from the altars of their chapels they pronounced frightful imprecations on those who either sent their children to the schools, or assisted in the works which he had undertaken. As a specimen of the sort of imprecation was the following, uttered on a Sunday in April last, against those who dared to disobey the injunctions of the priests:—"May they be childless by that day twelve months, and at their deaths may they have no hand held out to them." The priests further desired the people to have their pitchforks sharpened, and one man to stand at the front door, and the other at the back, in the event of the petitioner visiting them, so as that there should be no means of escape, and added a prayer that if they did not do so, they might lose the power of their hands. Men came to the labourers who were at work for the petitioner, desiring them to desist, as they were at work for the devil, and adding, that if they came to their labour again they might as well bring their coffins with them. These circumstances the men were ready to prove on oath, The parties were indicted at the petty sessions, and some of them admitted their guilt, declaring that they had acted on the instigation of the priests. On the morning after the day on which they had been cited to the petty sessions one of them upbraided the priest for having brought him into such a situation. The priest's reply was—"Hold your tongue, you ruffian; do not mention my name in the transaction, and you shall have one of the ablest lawyers in Ireland to defend you." In addition to this, the children who attended the schools of the petitioner were beaten by persons total strangers to them, and who had no right whatsoever to interfere with their mode of education. The priest's schoolmaster had beaten these children, and yet he was still in the employment of the priest. The petitioner complained that in consequence of this tyrannical restraint he could not procure labourers to perform his necessary business, whereby he sustained material injury. It further added, with regard to the Report of the Commissioners of Public Instruction, that the population was described in the Returns as 156, whilst in 1831 it was double that number. Besides these annoyances the petitioner had been described by the reverend John M'Hale, who called 1205 himself Archbishop of Tuam, as having introduced the demon of fanaticism into the island.
§ Lord Duncannonunderstood from the Commissioners who had visited Achill, that the petitioner had laboured very zealously for the advantage of that place. He could not, however, avoid observing that the notice for the day was of a petition which the right reverend Prelate had long had in his hands; and it was impossible not to see, from the introduction of the name of Mr. Newport, the Commissioner, that this petition now presented was intended to be connected with the complaint made in the other petition by Mr. Stoney. They had, however, nothing to do with each other. The only complaint made of Mr. Newport was, that in his report he had not mentioned the school. If the petitioner had waited a little longer, he would have seen that the report now presented only related to the church, and did not at all refer to schools, which would form the subject of a distinct report, as voluminous as the first.
The Bishop of Exeterhad not meant to say one word more on the subject of this petition, but he was compelled to do so by the observations of the noble Lord, who had certainly misapprehended one part of it and misunderstood the object for which it was now presented. The petitioner did not intend to complain of Mr. Commissioner Newport, with whose conduct, on the contrary, he was highly gratified. The petitioner had certainly expected that his labours would have been noticed by that gentleman, who, when upon the spot, had expressed his full satisfaction with what he saw. The petitioner did not refer to the omission of any mention of the school—the Commissioner had seen the settlement, and the means there taken for humanizing, civilizing, and christianizing that island, and those means were the subject of panegyric by Mr. Newport, and the petitioner hoped to have seen them noticed by that gentleman in the report. He repeated that the petitioner was much gratified with the conduct of Mr. Newport, and with his observations when he visited the settlement. He wished to add, that he was assured that the petitioner was not only a pious and ardently zealous man, but that he was mild and temperate in his conduct, so as not to be likely to provoke such treatment as he complained of in this petition.
Lord Farnkamknew the petitioner, and a more zealous, mild, and amiable man did not exist in the Church of Ireland, He 1206 had known the petitioner for years, and he could positively say, that the petitioner was the last person in the world to provoke the outrages of which he had complained.
§ Lord Duncannonadmitted that the petition did refer to the establishment, and he supposed that word to mean the school and not the settlement.