Lords Sitting of 21 May 1852

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1ª Apprehension of Deserters from Foreign Ships; School Sites Acts Extension.
2ª Improvement of the Jurisdiction of Equity.
Reported. —Stock in Trade; Highway Rates.
3ª Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction; Protestant Dissenters.

IMPROVEMENT OF THE JURISDICTION OF EQUITY BILL—QUESTION.
LORD LYNDHURSTrose to put a question to his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack respecting this Bill, which stood for a second reading that evening. The Bill was read a first time about a fortnight ago; but, by some accident or mistake, printed copies of the Bill, which contained sixty-five clauses, and treated of the most complicated subjects, were not delivered till late yesterday evening. It therefore appeared to him to be quite impossible for their Lordships to enter into a discussion of it that night. He understood, further, that his noble and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor, that very day had gone through the clauses of the Bill with the Master of the Rolls and the three other Equity Judges. Notwithstanding the great attention and skill which his noble and learned Friend had applied to the Bill, he thought that it was very likely that that consultation had resulted in the suggestion of some valuable alterations. He therefore suggested that the Bill should be read a second time that evening pro formâ, that it should then be printed with the Amendments, that it should then be referred to a Select Committee, and that any discussion on the Bill itself should be postponed until the Motion for going into a Committee of the House; the report of which would probably be presented early next week. He merely threw this out as a suggestion, and not as dictating to his noble and learned Friend the course which he ought to pursue.
The LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that the course suggested by his noble and learned Friend was the very course which
852
he had himself intended to ask the House to adopt. Having framed the Bill on the recommendation of the Commissioners, he had given up the whole of that day to going over it word by word with the Equity Judges—he meant the Master of the Rolls, the Lords Justices of Appeal, and the three Vice-Chancellors. They had made some alterations in the Bill as originally framed; but he believed they were now unanimous in opinion with respect to the Bill as it stood after those alterations. He proposed that the Bill should be read pro formâ that evening, and that it should then be referred to the same Select Committee to which the Bill for the Abolition of the Masters' Offices had been already referred. He intended that that Committee should meet on Monday next, and he hoped that his noble and learned Friend would be able to give them his valuable assistance. When the report on the Bill was received from the Committee, it would be competent for any noble Lord to raise a discussion upon it at that stage. He hoped, too, that the Bill would pass through that House in time to be passed into law during the present Session.
LORD TRUROhad no objection to the course now proposed. As to the principle of the Bill, he believed that there was no dispute, but its details might become subject of discussion.
LORD LYNDHURSTshould be glad to see the Bill printed with the alterations. He had examined the Bill as printed, and found that its provisions substantially carried the recommendations of the Commissioners into effect.

SARDINIA.
EARL GRANVILLEwished to ask the noble Earl opposite, whether Her Majesty's Government had received any information with respect to the recent political changes in the Government in Sardinia? In so doing he wished entirely to disclaim any notion that it was the business of Her Majesty's Government, or of that House, to become the partisans of any party, or of any individual, in any foreign country. At the same time, so much interest had been manifested by the people of this country, firstly, with regard to the commercial relations which had been established on so satisfactory a footing between that country and this, and, secondly, with regard to the great constitutional experiment which was now going on there, that he hoped he should not be considered to

853
be overstepping the proper limits, if he asked for some information on the subject. It was stated that the Marquess d'Azeglio had tendered his resignation to the King, and that he had since been commissioned by the King to re-form a Government. During the last few years that the Marquess d'Azeglio, who had acquired distinction as a soldier and as a political writer, had been at the head of a constitutional Government in Sardinia, the people of this country had observed with great satisfaction the progress which had been made, in the good order and material prosperity of that country. He thought that great advances had been made in a duo appreciation of the advantages of religious toleration and commercial and civil liberty, as opposed to anything like the revolutionary licence which had taken place in other countries. He, therefore, hoped that, as all classes in this country took so great an interest in the prosperity of Sardinia, the noble Earl opposite would pardon his asking what was the nature of the latest information which he had received on the change of Government in that country?
The Earl of MALMESBURY: My Lords, the intelligence which my noble Friend has received with respect to the resignation of the Marquess d'Azeglio is perfectly correct; but I am sure your Lordships on both sides of the House will be glad to know that, on the 17th instant —a period subsequent to his resignation— he was sent for by his King, who asked him to resume the seals of office. His Majesty gave him a carte blanche to choose what Ministers he pleased to assist him; and, I believe, from a despatch that I have seen, that he has accepted the trust offered to him. I cannot sit down, my Lords, without expressing, on the part of Her Majesty's Government, the great pleasure which this news has given us; because it is impossible on our part to refuse to the Marquess d'Azeglio that justmeed of praise he so well deserves, for having conducted through three years of great difficulty and great danger, both within and without, the Government of that country on constitutional principles, which had been previously of great disrepute in that country, in a manner which had resulted in great prosperity. Her Majesty's Government should be sorry, indeed, to see so fair a promise marred by any events, whether those events came from without Sardinia, or from within its own territories.
854
But I am in hopes, from the news which we have just heard upon the subject, that the Sovereign has given an earnest that he intends to continue in that constitutional course which was commenced not long ago in that country, and that undeterred by any unwise attempts to propagate the doctrines of constitutionalism in those countries which are neither ripe nor ready to accept them, he is prepared at all events to uphold them within his own dominions, and to give an example to other nations that there is one country at least, besides England, in Europe which can prosper under a constitutional government.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE: My Lords, I have heard with the greatest satisfaction the statement of the noble Earl, although I am one of those who disapprove of any attempt in this House to pronounce directly or incidentally any opinion upon the conduct of foreign Governments in their internal affairs. Although I think that the utmost caution should be exercised with respect to this subject, I have nevertheless listened with the greatest pleasure to the statement of the noble Earl in reference to this illustrious person; but having had the advantage of longer opportunities than the noble Earl opposite, or than even my noble Friend near me (Earl Granville), of becoming cognisant of the disposition with which he has conducted the affairs of that country, and its relations with foreign countries, I wish to bear my testimony to the use which he has made of the great power which has been placed in his hands. Years have elapsed since we have seen an instance so strong as this statement has afforded of the efficacy of great judgment and great temper in restoring the strength of an apparently exhausted country, and bringing it back to that position in which it is entitled to command the affection of its own inhabitants, and the respect of Europe. It is an example to all countries of the effects produced by a happy combination of firmness and conciliation; it shows that by such means the interests of those whose interests a statesman is bound to attend to first have been promoted; and, secondly, that they have contributed to the preservation of the peace of Europe. I firmly believe that it is owing, in great measure, to the Marquess d'Azeglio's conduct that that peace has been so successfully maintained. My Lords, I thought it my duty to say this, having for some years observed the conduct of that illustrious individual; and

855
I cordially concur both in what has fallen from my noble Friend, and the satisfactory answer given by the noble Earl opposite.

WARNER INVENTIONS.
The DUKE of WELLINGTONrose, in pursuance of notice, to move—
"That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that Her Majesty will be pleased to give directions that there be laid before this House Copies or Extract of any Report made to the Master General of the Ordnance on the subject of the inventions of Mr. Warner."
His Grace proceeded to say: I have to apologise to your Lordships and to my noble Friend and relation opposite (Earl Talbot), that I was absent from the House on the 14th instant, when he made his Motion that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the Warner inventions, and the several reports connected therewith. By accident there was no House on the preceding Thursday, and I therefore was not aware of the Motion of my noble Friend until the day after he made it, and on that day, unfortunately, I could not attend. Had I been on that day in the House, my Lords, I should have represented to your Lordships that the subject into which my noble Friend desired that a Select Committee of your Lordships should be appointed to inquire, had been already under the consideration of the Crown in the office of the Master General of the Ordnance, in consequence, I believe, of an address from the House of Commons—at all events, I am certain, at the particular desire of the late Principal Minister of the Crown, Lord Melbourne—and, to my certain knowledge, under the Government of my late lamented Friend, Sir Robert Peel, and also, of Lord John Russell. Under these circumstances, my Lords, I confess it appeared to me that the subject of these inventions, having been submitted to inquiry in the office of the Master General of the Ordnance, and that, too, being a subject of an entirely scientific nature, it was not exactly a fit subject for inquiry in your Lordships' House; more particularly as that inquiry, if it should terminate successfully to the views of the projector, must lead to the expenditure of very large sums of money. My Lords, with this inquiry are connected a great many money speculations on the part of persons who have advanced large sums to this gentleman in the hope that he may receive a large reward from the
856
public for his inventions. If I had been in my place on the day on which my noble Friend made his Motion, I should have urged not only that this was not exactly a subject which the House of Lords ought to take under consideration, but also that your Lordships ought to have before you the proceedings on this subject which have already been taken under the direction of the Board of Ordnance; and it was my knowledge of those proceedings that induced me to give early notice of my intention to move that address to Her Majesty of which I have already given you the substance. I am well aware, my Lords, that Mr. Warner has undoubtedly objected to the competence of the officers appointed by the Master General of the Ordnance to make these inquiries, and particularly to the competence of my gallant Friend, Sir Howard Douglas. Indeed, I believe that my noble Friend and relation mentioned the objection of Mr. Warner to my gallant Friend when he made his Motion. Now, I beg leave to read to your Lordships a few words from a letter which Mr. Warner wrote to the Master General of the Ordnance, when he first heard that my gallant Friend was appointed a Member of the Commission. He says, "From what I have heard of Sir H. Douglas, I am highly gratified by the choice which the Government has made of this distinguished officer." My Lords, another officer appointed to act on that Commission, was Sir Edward Owen, an officer who had been oftentimes actively and successfully employed on the public service. That officer could not, however, act in that Commission, owing to some accidental services; but Sir Byam Martin did sit upon it, an officer well known to many of your Lordships, and than whom there was not a naval officer in the country more distinguished for his services, and more capable of coming to a just decision on this subject. I entreat you, my Lords, before you enter on this subject at all, and before you name this Committee, to see the reports made on it by the scientific officers of the Army and the Navy appointed by the Ordnance to consider whether it was expedient that these inventions, or alleged inventions, should be adopted for the service of Her Majesty.
The EARL of DERBY: My Lords, I am somewhat in the same position with the noble and gallant Duke who has made this Motion; for I also was absent from your Lordships' House upon the day that

857
the Motion was made for referring to a Select Committee the inventions, or presumed inventions, of Captain Warner. And if I had conceived that the case was as the noble and gallant Duke appears to suppose it to he, I should have come to the same conclusion to which he has arrived, namely, that it is not expedient that your Lord'ships should enter upon a discussion of the merits of these inventions. My Lords, if it had been that this Committee were moved for as an appeal against the decision of very competent officers appointed by the highest authority to examine into and to report upon the evidence laid before them, then I should have felt as strongly as the noble Duke can do, that nothing could be more inconvenient than—without meaning any disrespect to your Lordships—to appeal from a more competent to a less competent authority, for the purpose of investigating the same facts which have been referred and inquired into already on this subject. And, my Lords, if this were a question upon an appeal for the purpose of obtaining a Parliamentary contradiction of the opinion expressed by the gallant officers who have been examined as to these inventions, I should have objected to such an inquiry. But I apprehend that the noble and gallant Duke is somewhat misinformed with regard to the intentions with which this Committee was asked for, and I am certain he is somewhat misinformed with regard to the intentions with which it was granted by your Lordships, on the recommendation of my noble Friend (the Earl of Malmesbury). My Lords, I believe that all the papers which are the subject of the address moved for by the noble and gallant Duke, have been already submitted to Parliament. There can, at all events, be no inconvenience in their production, if my noble and gallant Friend should think it is expedient to have them reprinted in the same form for presentation to this House, or to the Committee if it should be appointed.
The DUKE of WELLINGTONhere made an observation which was not heard.
The EARL of DERBY: I am quite aware of the terms of the noble and gallant Duke's Motion; hut, my Lords, I take the liberty to say that the noble and gallant Duke is still under a misapprehension, as I stated, both with regard to the subject of that inquiry, and the terms upon which that inquiry was asked for, and the House granted it. The fact is this, that Captain Warner alleges that he has invented two
858
very important discoveries, one of which is known as the long range, and the other is the invention of an explosive substance, by which he professes to be enabled to produce very great effects. Now, my Lords, I do not pretend to express an opinion of the merits of either one or the other of these inventions. One of them—I mean that which is called the long range—has certainly had a fuller trial than the other, and has certainly been more unequivocally condemned by the parties who were employed to examine and report upon it. At the same time, there certainty were circumstances which Captain Warner alleges with regard to that trial, by which he was placed under difficulties and disadvantages that he could not control; but Captain Warner does not ask for another trial of a similar description of his new projectile. With regard to the other invention, there can he no doubt whatever that Captain Warner is possessed of the secret of a highly explosive power, which did produce very extraordinary effects upon the vessel to which it was applied. Now, the question as to how it was applied is totally separate from that of the existence of such an explosive power. How far it is capable of being applied to naval and military operations—how far it may be used for purposes of aggression or of defence—is a question wholly separate from the explosive power or substance itself, whatever it may be, which Captain Warner has invented. And there can be no doubt of this, because it was reported upon by all the officers to whom the invention was referred, that the destruction of a vessel which came in contact with this explosive substance, was more complete and more sudden than could have been produced by any explosive substance ordinarily made use of in warfare. But on all previous occasions, Captain Warner desired this: that an investigation should be made into the success of his operations, and that upon the report of the success of these operations, a large sum of money should be laid down, on the part of the public, without further explanation of the secret. Now, my Lords, this, I know, was the proposition which was made to the late Sir Robert Peel—and this proposition was rejected— and, as I think, most properly, by Her Majesty's then Government. Captain Warner now comes before your Lordships with a very different proposition. He has hitherto refused, except a large sum of money were previously paid down, to com-

859
municate either the secret of his composition, or the mode in which he proposed to apply it; but unless I am greatly misinformed with regard to the present proposition, the offer which is made upon Captain Warner's part, through the medium of the noble Earl behind me (Earl Talbot) is, that he is now prepared to go before a Committee without any promise or pledge, or even understanding held out upon the part of your Lordships with regard to any sum of money to be paid to him—that point was most distinctly, as I understand, insisted upon by my noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs—to lay before them the secret of his invention. Captain Warner desires, for the sake of his own character, and his own happiness, to have an opportunity of appearing before a Committee of your Lordships' House, before whom he is prepared to lay, as I understand, the whole secret of his composition and of his invention, and of explaining it to them, trusting to their honour as Peers of Parliament that which he never would explain to any person before, namely, the objects to which he conceives that his invention may be applied, and the mode in which he proposes to apply it. Now, when a gentleman, professing to be in possession of a most valuable secret, is desirous of explaining, fully and entirely, the whole of that secret before a Committee of your Lordships' House, and that, too, after a distinct declaration that the House, by granting a Committee, neither pledges itself to accept his secret, nor to give him any remuneration whatever, whether that secret be in their judgment a successful invention or not—I think, my Lords, that it would be a hard case that a gentleman, offering to make these disclosures, should not be allowed an opportunity of so doing. I think that that would have been a course hardly justifiable upon the part of those who are charged with the management of the affairs of this country, if they had refused to a gentleman that opportunity of fully explaining the whole of his system, of giving to a Committee of the House of Lords the fullest explanation with regard to all those details which he has hitherto kept a profound secret. My Lords, further than this I do not understand that your Lordships are pledged by the appointment of the Committee moved for by my noble Friend to any course with regard to this subject. Without at all desiring to look upon this Committee as an appeal from the decision of those officers who have
860
examined into the experiments previously carried on, I think it is important to remark, that the Committee, as at present named, will consist of a large proportion of naval and military officers, of men who will be able to understand and appreciate those explanations which Captain Warner now volunteers to afford to the Committee, The evidence and the facts to be brought before them are such as never were brought before those gallant officers who have reported upon the experiment, and who, most properly, as I think, refused to recommend the Crown to grant a large sum of money upon the faith of experiments which had partially failed, but to a certain extent were successful, but the application of which to any practical purpose, military or naval, was never explained, nor agreed to be explained, upon the part of the inventor. My Lords, I hope I have succeeded in showing that there is a broad distinction between the proposition which is now made by Captain Warner and his former proposition; and I confess I think your Lordships will deal hardly upon this person, whatever may be the merits or demerits of his invention, if you refuse him an opportunity of giving that explanation which he is desirous of giving, and which your Lordships have undertaken to hear, without expressing any opinion in reference to the inventions.
The DUKE of WELLINGTON: My noble Friend is mistaken entirely as to the nature of the Committee or Commission appointed by the Ordnance to inquire into these inventions. But the first point of inquiry is this — Is there an invention at all? My Lords, I say it is not an invention; and I found myself on the opinion of the Commission. Next, I ask, is it efficient for service? Is it of such a nature as can be applied in the service? Can it be concocted and formed in our laboratories? Can it be carried with safety in our magazines afloat, or in our fourgons on land? These were all questions that were considered by the Committee under the Master General of the Ordnance. These, my Lords, are nice questions for the decision I think, of a committee of naval and military officers, and not of a Committee of your Lordships' House. I say that where a case of this description has been placed in the hands of the Executive Government, and has been under a committee of officers, under these circumstances your Lordships should refrain from interfering in it, and your Lordships would do

861
well to consider the matter before you appoint the Committee. At all events, my Lords, I desire that this Committee should have all the reports which the Executive can give before it enters on the consideration of these inventions, if inventions they be.
The EARL of HARDWICKEperfectly concurred with the noble and gallant Duke as to the objects which ought to be contemplated in any inquiry of this kind— namely, the real nature of the various machines and substances suggested by the inventor, and, a point even more material, whether they were likely to become available for the purposes of war. It was for that very reason that the Select Committee had been appointed. In all the former efforts made to investigate the facts, and in every inquiry prosecuted by the military authorities of this country, they had been completely debarred from any chance of knowing anything about the machinery employed in the operations, or the chemical compounds. Mr. Warner was allowed an opportunity of exhibiting his novel experiments, and he said that if successful he should expect to be paid by a sum of money; but the question as to what the materials and the instruments were was completely withdrawn from every one of the Committees. The experiments instituted were successful in some cases, and unsuccessful in others. He was himself one of those sent down by the Government to witness the experiments, and would tell their Lordships what he saw and what he did not see. He did not see the machinery itself and the elements of the composition employed; but he had seen upon a sheet of water a boat built of oak, very strongly constructed, bound together by longitudinal and cross bulks of timber, put in motion and suddenly blown into atoms, so that not a particle of it was left. How was this done? Could any officer or other person who had witnessed the experiment declare? We had no evidence as to the mechanism or the compound; but Mr. Warner was now ready to come forward and state before the Committee how his machinery was contrived, and how his projectiles were filled. He could not help thinking that it would be both practicable and reasonable to supply from that House a Committee of naval and military authorities, on which the Master General of the Ordnance himself might sit, so that all the features of the case might be made intelligible to a Committee competent to form their own
862
opinion upon it. And such a Committee might, moreover, when they had inventions before them, call scientific officers of the Army and Navy, and ask them whether such compounds were fit for application in war. He apprehended there would be nothing inconsistent in that House appointing such a Committee, which might have useful results, as Mr. Warner now consented to make revelations.
LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, that he was induced to rise as having been cognisant of what occurred between the Government of Lord Melbourne and Captain, or rather Mr. Warner (for he had no military rank), on the subject of his marvellous invisible shell, and as to his still more marvellous long range. Mr. Warner had at that period applied to himself, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, on the subject of his inventions; and, as he (Lord Monteagle) was not a military man, and knew but little of military affairs, he had referred him to his friend the late Sir H. Vivian, who was then Master General of the Ordnance. On seeing Sir H. Vivian a day or two afterwards, he asked him what he thought of Mr. Warner's invention? Sir H. Vivian intimated that Mr. Warner must be either an absurd enthusiast or insane, for on his asking Mr. Warner whether he could by his invention destroy the fortifications of Gibraltar, he replied that it would not only blow up the works of Gibraltar, but could blow up also the rock itself. Sir Hussey Vivian regarded the pretensions of Mr. Warner as absolute insanity, and said he could not give any encouragement to them. He had seen with astonishment on their Lordships' Minutes the entry showing the appointment of a Select Committee on this subject. So little had he anticipated the possibility of such a result, that he had not attended in his place when it came on for discussion: so destitute of sense did the proposal appear to him to be that he took for granted that Her Majesty's Government would stand between the public and a Motion so unjustifiable. A Select Committee of that House would not stand much comparison, as a tribunal for such purpose, with a scientific commission composed of such officers as Sir Howard Douglas, Sir Byam Martin, Captain Chads, and Sir E. Owen. Yet it was from such a scientific and professional commission that it was proposed to appeal. Besides, there was no case made out sufficient to take the decision on this question out of the responsibility of the Executive

863
Government, and to cast it upon a Parliamentary Committee moved for by a private Peer. He utterly denied that this question had been disposed of by the Select Committee of the House of Commons, merely on the money question; that House had decided that the alleged invention was either an absurdity or an impracticability. He held at that moment in his hand a letter from the late Sir Robert Peel on this subject, which showed that the matter was not disposed of on the ground of the money claims of Mr. Warner. It ran thus:—
"Dear Sir Howard—I have read the speech you were good enough to send me. It is quite conclusive. I did not require such a demonstration of the charlatanerie of Mr. Warner. I deeply regret that so much valuable time has been thrown away on this man and his projects. Lord John Russell will, I trust, read your speech before the Committee himself.—Truly yours,
"R. PEEL."
Now this expression of opinion from Sir Robert Peel clearly showed that the objection made at that time was not on the question of the money reward Mr. Warner prayed for, but was based upon a conviction of the charlatanerie of Mr. Warner. He (Lord Monteagle) would also earnestly warn their Lordships against establishing by the appointment of this Committee what could not but prove a mischievous precedent. His official experience warned him that even the apparent countenance of the Government—the supposed establishment of a Parliamentary case, was regarded by many speculative persons as a valuable marketable commodity—as a sort of bill of exchange regularly negotiable in the City. The mere fact that a claimant had found favour and countenance in Parliament was sufficient to ensure him friends and support; he trafficked on his expectations, and claims of compensation for experiments made, and supposed loss of capital, were the result. Were their Lordships going to facilitate such purposes— to give Mr. Warner an undeserved locus standi —and to put it in his power, as the noble and gallant Duke (the Duke of Wellington) had said, to raise money upon the presumptions in his favour created by the concession of this Parliamentary inquiry? Mr. Warner professed to keep in view most disinterestedly the military defence and benefit of his own country; but was it not notorious that Mr. Warner had trafficked with foreign Sovereigns in order to induce them to purchase unconditionally his inventions? Had he not done so with Por-
864
tugal, and with Austria? Were not his inventions tried at the siege of Venice, and did they not fail altogether? Mr, Warner had constantly abused those tribunals, to the decision of which he had originally respectfully submitted. The result in this case would be, should the report of the Committee be unfavourable to him, that he would go about the country reviling and attacking those of their Lordships who might have served on that Committee. In this instance their Lordships found all the authorities on one side. They had that evening heard the noble and gallant Duke (the Duke of Wellington), His authority on all subjects was powerful; but upon a subject relating to the military service it ought to be conclusive. He (Lord Monteagle) therefore trusted that the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) would reconsider his opinion. He had, in point of fact, that evening, referred to the Committee proposed to be appointed by their Lordships as a court of appeal—as a tribunal superior to the professional tribunal which had already pronounced an emphatic opinion upon Mr. Warner's pretensions; and in taking that view, while consenting to the appointment of a Committee, the noble Earl was setting a most mischievous precedent for the future, weakening the authority and decreasing the responsibility of the Executive. Neither the Government nor their Lordships' House would be justified in acceding to the demand made unless they were satisfied on two points— first, that the matter deserved inquiry; and next, that a Committee of either House of Parliament was the fittest tribunal for such a reference. He ventured to doubt whether either of these questions would be affirmed.
EARL TALBOTcould not pretend to any readiness of language such as that possessed by the noble Lord who had just sat down; and his remarks would be very brief. He would not bandy words with the noble Lord whether the individual in question was entitled to be called "Captain" or simply "Mr." Warner, neither would he dispute with the noble Lord whether the appointment of a Committee by their Lordships to investigate the subject would act as a bill of exchange on the eastern side of the metropolis. He would in the first place remove a misapprehension under which the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) and other of their Lordships seemed to labour, that Mr. Warner had refused to make known his secret to the Government,

865
or to their officers, without receiving a previous pledge or promise of a considerable sum of money. He (Earl Talbot) might have expressed himself badly, when acting as the organ communicating with the Government for Mr. Warner; but it was a fact, that that gentleman was willing to throw himself entirely upon the discretion of the Government of the day as to the reward he was to receive, if, indeed, he should receive any. With regard to what had fallen on this occasion from the noble and gallant Duke (the Duke of Wellington), he would only say, that there was no man in this country who entertained a higher respect and reverence for the character and opinions of the noble Duke than he did, and he certainly had not intended any discourtesy to him in not giving him special notice of the Motion, having placed it on the paper in the usual way. He differed from the noble Duke with the deepest pain; but he could not on this matter agree with the noble Duke, because he felt convinced that he was acting under a misapprehension of a great portion of the case in dispute. He (Earl Talbot) was not aware that he had used, the other evening, a syllable disparaging to Sir Howard Douglas; he knew that that gallant officer was entitled to every respect; but he also knew that this question had never been fairly put before Sir Howard Douglas, and that Sir Howard Douglas, in reality, never went into the case at all. There had been mistakes and misunderstandings between Sir Howard Douglas and Mr. Warner; and the result had been unsatisfactory. Sir Howard Douglas told Mr. Warner that he wanted to know something about the "long range," and that he did not want to inquire about; the "invisible shell" in the first instance. Mr. Warner attached to the latter even greater importance than to the former; and when informed about the "invisible shell" by Mr. Warner, the shell being in fact a submarine explosion, Sir Howard Douglas replied, "Oh, we know that is nothing new; we do not want to inquire about that." So the matter dropped, as far as Sir Howard Douglas was concerned; and no report was made by that gallant officer further than a general opinion that the inventions were not worth looking any further into. It was now part of his (Earl Talbot's) case that these inventions had never yet been fairly sifted. As he had said on a former occasion, he had been the witness of three experiments with the in-
866
visible shells, and the first moment he saw the character of the explosion he felt that the power used was of an extraordinary kind. He alluded particularly to the explosion which had taken place in the presence of many of their Lordships, and certainly in the presence of a great number of competent judges of the experiment, at Brighton. In that case the proposal was made that the ship to be operated upon should be placed in the hands of officers of the Government, in order that that guarantee at least should be given by Mr. Warner against any unfair play; and there could therefore be no doubt of the integrity of the experiment. In order, further, that all ideas of collusion or trick should be forbidden, it was agreed that the explosion should be caused by Mr. Warner, on his (Earl Talbot's) raising the flag signal handed to him, and which he was left to raise at whatever moment he liked, and without any notice to Mr. Warner. The result was beyond all question. The ship came in contact with the explosive substance, and she was immediately destroyed. Of course, he might be mistaken; but he did, judging from that and from analogous experiments, most firmly believe that these invisible shells, or submarine shells, would prove of the greatest possible value as a means of defence to this country. The object which he had in view, in obtaining the appointment of this Committee, was not at all to cast discredit on, or to contravene the reports of, the officers who had been appointed to go into the matter. These officers were gallant men, and were proper persons to conduct such an inquiry. He had the honour of knowing all of them; and it would be impossible to speak otherwise than most respectfully of them. Colonel Chalmers, of the Engineers, and Captain Chads, who had commanded the Excellent with such valuable results to the service, had reported on the "long range" that that invention was a failure. But it could be made clear that Mr. Warner had been placed under very disadvantageous circumstances; and he (Earl Talbot) would show the Committee, if an opportunity were afforded him, that letters had been written at the time by those officers, in which they stated that the experiment waited for had been too long delayed, offering the explanation that a particular wind was necessary. They had made a demand of Mr. Warner to remove the whole apparatus, which at that stage was an impossibility; and Mr. Warner now desired to show that

867
the whole apparatus could be carried in a steamer, and that the difficulty which had occurred in the course of the first experiment could not possibly occur in actual service. He (Earl Talbot) certainly had taken great interest in this matter, and he had moved so prominently in the business because he felt that, without pretending to any science, he had more actual knowledge of the facts than any other individual after the inventor himself. It was a subject which was not very agreeable to thrust on their Lordships' attention, seeing as he did that he excited in many minds merely ridicule or distrust; but he was acting in the manner he believed duty compelled him to act, and he should be ashamed if he should be found wanting in moral courage in demanding that justice should be done. In a communication which he had had with the noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington) in reference to the course he had taken on this occasion, he (Earl Talbot) had assured him such was his confidence in these inventions, that he was quite willing that the committee of inquiry should consist of the Commander-in-Chief, the First Lord of the Admiralty, the Master General of the Ordnance, and the other heads of the military and naval departments. Captain Warner was not now asking for a single shilling—he threw himself entirely on the honour and justice of their Lordships. Captain Warner was entitled to an investigation, if only to clear his own character. The noble Lord opposite (Lord Monteagle) had used the phrase charlatanerie; and the only answer that could now be given to that charge was in the expression of his (Earl Talbot's) opinion; and one opinion could only be set against another opinion, that what was in question was a set of very valuable inventions; and he did live in the hope that some day or other he should obtain the acknowledgment of their Lordships that he was not, after all, so very visionary and wronghcaded in bringing this question so incessantly before Parliament and the country. He proposed that the following should be the Members of the Committee:—the Duke of Cambridge, the Duke of Wellington, the Duke of Northumberland, the Viscount Hardinge, the Marquess of Anglesea, the Earl of Combermere, the Duke of Richmond, the Earl of Hardwicke, Lord Seaton, the Earl of Wicklow, the Marquess of Normanby, the Earl of Ellesmere, the Duke of Buc-cleuch, and himself (Earl Talbot). For
868
all the various reasons he had stated, and which had been far more ably stated by the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby), he trusted that no further objections would be offered to the Committee. The noble Lord (Lord Monteagle) had said that it was a question whether their Lordships would establish a bad precedent. But this was not the question. The question was, whether their Lordships would lose the chance of now obtaining a good and cheap defence for this country.
The DUKE of WELLINGTONexplained that he had not intended to impute any discourtesy to his noble Friend, but he had not seen the notice on the paper. It was impossible that he should serve on the Committee, and he hoped he should be excused.
EARL GREYsaid, if he had had any doubt as to the impropriety of granting this Committee, it would have been removed by the speech of the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Derby), and he was completely satisfied that in acceding to its appointment Government and the House had taken a very hasty step, and one which, for reasons so ably stated by the noble Duke, he thought they should recall. On a former evening he had left the House in the full expectation that the Motion of the noble Earl opposite (Earl Talbot) would be negatived, and nothing could excite the surprise with which, on the following morning, he found that a Committee, which appeared to him so entirely out of the question, had been granted. Even if he were as convinced of the merits of this alleged invention as the noble Earl himself, he should certainly say that the appointment of a Committee of the House on the subject, would be a dangerous and improper step. They all knew the public departments were besieged by projectors, whose main object was to obtain large grants of money for themselves. Now, if those projectors were to get their claims discussed by Parliamentary Committees, which were completely incompetent to the inquiry, with a view to use the report of the Committee to extort grants of money from Government and Parliament, and obtain loans from sanguine persons out of doors—for there was hardly a scheme so absurd that speculators would not be found to advance money on it—then practices of very dangerous tendency would be permitted. The regular course was to leave projects of this kind to the consideration of the responsible advisers of the Crown. The main

869
reason alleged for the inquiry had been thrown over by the noble Earl who moved it, who told them that Captain Warner had made no conditions about money. He could not but express his deep regret that the Committee had not been refused in the first instance; and whatever damage to reputation might be incurred by reversing a decision already taken, it would be far better, instead of obstinately persevering in a gross blunder, to get out of it the best way they could. He would only suggest that, instead of deferring the nomination of the Committee until the papers were produced, as proposed by his noble Friend near him (Lord Monteagle), the nomination should be postponed sine die. Further inquiry, if any were necessary, should be conducted by the Government, and not by either House of Parliament.
The EARL of WICKLOWallowed readily that there was an essential distinction between the Committee to whom this question was now to be referred, and the former referees. What was now proposed to be disclosed was the secret; that which had hitherto been withheld; and the withholding of which no doubt impaired in some sense the value of the opinions which had been given by professional authorities. But because of that very description he altogether objected to the present proposal. For what was the object in view? Mr. Warner professed that he desired his own country to become possessed of his secret, and that the mystery should be hidden from other countries, who might at some future day he at war with us. But was a Parliamentary Committee a fit recipient for such a secret? It was absurd. What passed before an ordinary Parliamentary Committee was immediately made known to the whole world. In the Committee appointed, any of their Lordships would have the right to be present and to put questions to witnesses, although only the nominated Members of the Committee would have the right to vote. The result would be, then, that our neighbours would get the secret just as soon as we would get it ourselves; and thus, instead of providing a new means for our own defence, we would be putting new weapons in the hands of our enemies. An inquiry of this nature ought essentially to be conducted by scientific and professional men; and if their Lordships did name Members to the Committee, he hoped that no more than three or four would be appointed—that these would be scientific Peers—and that
870
instead of being a Select it should be called and be regarded as a Secret Committee. There would then, at any rate, be some chance of keeping the secret—if secret there was. As far as he was concerned, he must decline to serve on the Committee.
The EARL of WINCHILSEAbelieved the entire affair to be humbug from beginning to end. It would be establishing a very inconvenient precedent if experiments of this kind, the main object of which was to extort from the public a certain sum of money, were brought under their Lordships' consideration. If the opinion prevailed that Captain Warner had really made an important discovery, the simplest plan would be to let Captain Warner communicate again with those gentlemen appointed by the Ordnance who were not satisfied with his experiments on a former occasion, and let him lay before them the composition of his shells and the means by which he proposed to carry out his invention.
The EARL of ALBEMARLEdid not think that Captain Warner's conduct had been such as to entitle him to any great consideration from the British Legislature, because it was a mistake to suppose that this grand invention was intended to be confined to this country. When he (the Earl of Albemarle) was private secretary to Lord John Russell, this subject had come before him; and he remembered that Captain Warner then very significantly hinted that if his extraordinary demand were not satisfied, this secret of his might fall into the hands of those who might be the enemies of this country. In some of his pamphlets, too, Captain Warner had stated that "England, when in a crippled state, might lament the day when she refused this experiment," and also that he then considered himself a free agent to go wherever he pleased and sell his discoveries to any foreign nation that he thought proper. It was said that this grand experiment was to supersede the necessity of a Militia Bill, and in one way perhaps it might. If Captain Warner would sell his secret to our enemies, and they should use it at the time of invading us, like the elephants at the battle of the Hydaspes, it would probably prove more terrible to friends than to foes.
The EARL of ROSSEsaid, he did not speak at random when he expressed his conviction that there was no case for inquiry—he spoke from a perfect familiarity

871
with all these fire devices on a large scale; not, indeed, for the purpose of war, but for what was much better—for affording rational amusement to large numbers of people. He was satisfied Mr. Warner had done nothing that could not be accomplished without the least difficulty without any other agent than common gunpowder. He was not surprised that the noble Earl (Earl Talbot) should have been imposed on, as he (the Earl of Rosse) believed he had been, because gallant officers were not so accustomed to such attempts as those who were engaged in scientific pursuits. The fact was, that scientific men were continually persecuted with projects of all sorts and kinds—perpetual motion, and machinery of the most extraordinary description. But, of all the projects that had ever been brought before him in the way of explosions, the only one in which he thought there was any novelty or a suggestion not known to the scientific world, was a project that was mentioned to him by an Irish Ribbandman. The circumstances were these: On various occasions the banks of a canal in Ireland had been destroyed, and a great deal of mischief was done. Endeavours were made in vain to discover the means by which it was effected; at last a party turned approver, and divulged the secret; he was a Ribbandman, and was sent to him (the Earl of Rosse) for the purpose of testing him; he supplied him with gunpowder; he prepared a mine, but there was no fuse; instead of a fuse, he made a mixture of quicklime, oatmeal, and nitric acid. He (the Earl of Rosse) knew of nothing of the kind in any scientific work; however, the thing was tried, and the man said in about four hours the mine would go off. It went off in four hours and a half, and an explosion took place. He asked the Ribbandman where he got his knowledge of the secret, and at last he succeeded in tracing it to France. He thought the man had made a more important communication than Mr. Warner, and mentioned it to the Government; but the only reward the man received was a free passage to America. Being aware that this question had been thoroughly investigated by Sir Howard Douglas, one of the distinguished Fellows of the Royal Society, and an eminent writer on naval gunnery, he felt himself constrained to vote for the postponement of this Committee.
EARL TALBOTsaid, that his object was to obtain a full and impartial inquiry,
872
he did not care before whom it took place. If the House thought there should be a postponement, he would at once agree to the Motion, at the same time reserving to himself the option of again proposing a Committee. He was willing that the same officers who had before inquired into it should again be appointed by the Government to look into the matter. He was entirely in the hands of their Lordships, as he only wished for a fair and impartial inquiry.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEthought that no conditions should be imposed on the noble Earl if he now withdrew his proposition. The House ought not to take upon themselves the responsibility that belonged to the Crown.
The EARL of DERBYsaid, he was only desirous of doing justice to Captain Warner; but neither himself nor his noble Friend near him (the Earl of Hardwicke) had, on the part of the Government, expressed any opinion in regard to the merits of the invention. He could not concur in the observation of the noble Earl (Earl Grey) opposite, that the House had committed a blunder in acceding to the proposition for the appointment of a Committee, nor did he think that the noble Earl near him (the Earl of Winchilsea) was justified in using the expression that Captain Warner's invention was all humbug. He expressed no opinion whatever on the subject. But he understood the noble Earl (Earl Talbot) to agree that the papers that had been moved for by the noble Duke should be laid on the table of the House, and that the Committee should be postponed until that were done, reserving to his own discretion, after the production of those papers, whether he should or should not again submit to their Lordships the proposal to appoint a Committee. He thought this would be perfectly satisfactory to their Lordships. The Committee would not be appointed without giving the House a full opportunity of discussing the matter. In the mean time, the fullest information that had yet been obtained would be laid before them. At the same time, he thought that the appointment of a Commission by the Government, to inquire into the merits of the invention would be much more in favour of it than a reference to a Committee of the House, as Captain Warner might there appear, and depose on oath as to the merits of the invention.
The DUKE of WELLINGTONsaid,

873
there was no doubt that the Master of the Ordnance would cause such inquiries to be made as the noble Earl (Earl Talbot) opposite would think proper, and in a manner that would be perfectly satisfactory.
Afterwards, on the Motion of Lord MONTEAGLE, the naming of the Select Committee on the Warner Inventions (which stood appointed for this day) put off, sine die.

MAYNOOTH.
The MARQUESS of BREADALBANEwas about to present some Petitions, praying for the repeal of the Maynooth College (Ireland) Act, and had referred the question of which he had given notice as to the intentions of the Government with respect to the grant to the College of Maynooth, when
EARL FITZWILLIAMappealed to the noble Marquess to postpone it until Monday.
The MARQUESS of BREADALBANEsaid, he was about to ask whether it would not be more convenient to their Lordships if he were to postpone his question until Monday?
The DUKE of ARGYLLprotested against their Lordships adjourning merely because it was seven o'clock. He was sure the character of their Lordships' House would suffer if they were not to proceed with so important a subject as the grant to Maynooth merely because seven o'clock had arrived.
The EARL of DERBYthought it would be very convenient that the same question should not be asked more than once.
The MARQUESS of BREADALBANE,after the remarks of the noble Duke, if it was his wish and that of the House, would go on.
The DUKE of ARGYLLwas not at all anxious that the question of the noble Marquess should be put at all. The same question had been asked of the noble Earl at the head of the Government on a former occasion, and he had given an answer, the only one which the Government could give, namely, that it was not, at present, his intention to make any change in the Act which gave the grant to the College of Maynooth. Circumstances might arise in the course of time which might compel the Government to make some change in that respect; but he understood that there was no present intention to make any alteration in the matter. He (the Duke of Argyll) should be as glad as any one to
874
get away from this debate; but if the question was to be put, he did not see any reason why it should not be asked now.
The MARQUESS of BREADALBANEthen said, that he had a great number of petitions to present on the subject of the grant to the College of Maynooth. These petitions emanated in a great measure from members of the Free Church of Scotland, some of them being founded on the principle of religious objections to Maynooth, and others upon views of general policy. He concurred generally with the opinions of the petitioners on this subject; and it was upon this ground that he had used his humble efforts to resist the Bill when it was brought in by the late Sir Robert Peel, for augmenting the grant to Maynooth, and placing it on a permanent basis. The convictions which he entertained at that time had been strengthened and confirmed by after experience. The grounds upon which the grant was made, appeared to him to have totally failed of realisation—no good result had emanated from that measure; on the contrary, while it did not conciliate the Roman Catholics of Ireland, it had caused great dissatisfaction to our Protestant fellow-subjects. He trusted that he might express these opinions without feeling the least ill will or hostility to the Roman Catholics. He had always endeavoured to regulate his conduct by the great principles of civil and religious liberty; and he hoped that in considering that there were serious objections to this grant, he was not compromising those principles. But he could not conceal from himself that most important questions were involved in this subject of the grant to Maynooth, and that if they should come to the resolution to withdraw that grant, they must also consider the case of other grants made to various religious bodies in this country. That would be the only just course to pursue, and he believed it to be also the course dictated by sound policy; for it would disconnect the State from the discussion of religious questions, which, as it appeared to him, it was not at all the province of the State to inquire into. He had ever considered that religious disagreements ought to make no difference with respect to the enjoyment of civil rights, provided they did not favour any religion whose principles were hostile to civil society or to sound government. Considering the various conflicting questions and claims that mixed themselves up with the various denominations of this country, he

875
believed it would be the best gradually and judiciously to withdraw all assistance given by the State to those religious bodies, and to maintain their religious establishments, endeavouring to strengthen and confirm them by correcting abuses, by enforcing efficiency, and, above all, by rendering them the teachers of the pure Christian faith. His remarks applied more especially to the case of the Established Church in Ireland, which was a Church overgrown, and quite out of measure with the Protestant population of the country. He thought that this view was one which was involved in the question of the withdrawal of the grant to Maynooth; and viewing the subject in this light, and knowing that great anxiety was felt on the part of the Protestant inhabitants of this country, who believed that their principles were compromised by the continuance of the grant, he would appeal to the noble Earl at the head of Her Majesty's Government to give a declaration of his opinions as to the policy which he intended should be pursued by his Government upon this great, difficult, and important subject, in order to afford some satisfaction to the people of this country, and to remove the doubts which still existed in the minds of many as to their intentions. No doubt a similar question had been previously asked in that House when a short discussion took place, and the subject had also been brought forward in another place; but still he must say that some doubt and uncertainty prevailed in the public mind, which was most prejudicial to the public interests of the country, and most inconsistent with the representative system which in this country had been established. It appeared to him, that whoever undertook the responsibility of a Government, and was placed at its head, should have his principles ready for their application upon all the great questions which agitated the public mind, and that he should have a decided course of policy marked out as that which he should pursue. Without that qualification he maintained that there could be no real government of the country, but it would be left to this or to that wind, and it would be impossible to know how to steer the vessel of the State. It was only consistent with their representative system that there should be no concealment of the policy of the Government. Having made these remarks without any feelings of hostility to the Government, he hoped the noble
876
Earl at its head would explain to the country the principles which he meant to apply, and the policy he intended to pursue, with regard to the grant and the Acts at present regulating the College for Roman Catholic priests at Maynooth.
The EARL of DERBY: I feel great difficulty in giving the noble Marquess any more information than I have already afforded on a former occasion, and which has been this night repeated by the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) opposite. This is the third, and I hope it will be the last time of asking. What I have stated before is, that Her Majesty's Government have no present intention of making any alteration in, or proposing any repeal of, the existing Act, by which an endowment is granted to the College of Maynooth. I do not concur in what appears to be the view of the noble Marquess, and certainly is the view of a considerable number of persons in Scotland—that this is a matter upon which there can be no question of policy, but that it is an act of mortal sin for a Government to make a grant of money to persons of a different religious persuasion from themselves. I do not sympathise with that view—I do not adopt that principle. I consider that the question of the endowment of Maynooth is one purely of policy; and as a question of policy the Government must he left free to act in such a manner as the circumstances of the time may justify, without reference to any specific principle of right or wrong, but merely as with regard to the public welfare, the maintenance of the public peace, and the general well-being of the country, they may deem it wise and politic to act. We must be left to act with per-fact liberty with regard to the College of Maynooth; and I have to state again, as I have said before, that we have no present intention of interfering with the grant to that establishment.
LORD BEAUMONT: My Lords, I am at a loss to reconcile the answer of the noble Earl here with the conduct of Her Majesty's Government in the other House. If I understood the noble Earl rightly, he states that it is not the intention of Her Majesty's Government to interfere with the present grant to Maynooth, and that he considers the whole question to be purely one of policy. How then, my Lords, can that statement be reconciled with the consent which the Government has given in another place to an investigation not into a question of policy, but an investigation into

877
the principles and teaching of the College of Maynooth? If the noble Earl intends to make no alteration with regard to the College of Maynooth, and has already made up his mind on that point, how can the Government, with any reason or any propriety, consent to the appointment of a Committee which is to raise the whole question? I ask how they can consistently take that course, if they have already made up their minds, whatever maybe the report of that Committee, not to take any proceedings or make any alteration in the present state or condition of that college. Now, my Lords, I agree with the noble Earl that the question is one of policy. I must remind the noble Earl of his own words on a former occasion on this very subject. When the noble Earl in this House supported the additional grant, he justly defended it on these grounds—that it was required by the policy of this country, and that it did not matter at all whether the party to whom the grant was to be given met it with gratitude or ingratitude; that the policy of this country was straightforward, and that it being right to make the grant, the Government would not look to the effect it might produce on the persons to whom the grant was to be extended. The object of the grant was this —to give education to persons intended to be Roman Catholic priests. It happens that in Ireland you have a large proportion of Roman Catholics. So long as that is the case, it is necessary and requisite that they should have a certain number of priests. They must either pay out of their pockets for the education of men to fulfil the office of priest, or else the Government must do it for them. The Government wisely have undertaken on a principle of policy to relieve the people from this burden. Having once undertaken that burden, the Government have nothing further to do with the College of Maynooth than to see that it carries out the purposes for which the grant was made. That purpose was the education of Roman Catholic priests as Roman Catholic priests. Now, I maintain that the college has strictly fulfilled that object—that it instructs them merely as Roman Catholic priests, and nothing else. It gives them no other education but that which is suited to Roman Catholic priests. It confines itself narrowly to that sole object. In other words, it fulfils minutely and carefully the object of the grant. You have Commissioners appointed to visit this col-
878
lege. Their reports are confined to a certain number of simple questions, and they do not go into the result, or the end, or the nature of the teaching there given. They merely ask whether certain conditions are complied with; and hitherto the report has always been that those conditions have been complied with. The Government having this information, I maintain that it is not their business to investigate any further into the subject. It is idle and useless to make an investigation for the purpose of ascertaining whether certain books are used at Maynooth—whether those books contain doctrines—whether the teaching of certain doctrines must produce certain results on the minds of the scholars—or whether the reading of certain volumes may have an immoral or indelicate tendency, or questions of that nature. All that takes place in the establishment is the mere ordinary routine in all establishments where the object is solely to bring up persons for the priesthood; and knowing that, you know all you are entitled to know on the subject; and I maintain that all further investigation is not only uncalled for, but, I may almost say, is dangerous and impolitic. Yet it is to an inquiry of this nature that Government in the other House has consented. I can imagine perfectly well a Motion on the broad question whether it is right or wrong that the grant should be continued. That portion of the subject I allow to be a most legitimate subject of inquiry—that might be a very proper Motion or a proper matter to bring before Parliament. But as long as the Government maintain that it is right and proper that the grant should be continued—as long as they say it is not their intention to entertain any proposition to alter that grant—it is their duty to hesitate before provoking any unnecessary investigation into the matter. What can result from the report which such a Committee may produce? The Committee may examine into the studies adopted at the college—they may procure evidence, no doubt, in abundance, that the casuists are not the most delicate books—that there may be doctrines and opinions extracted out of the theologians which may be construed as not being calculated to promote feelings of loyalty or affection to this country. I have no doubt, on investigation, you will find such matters in isolated passages in the text books laid before the students; but, after all, the answer is, this is a part and portion of the

879
education of the Roman Catholic priests— these are the books which are adopted and studied in all colleges for this purpose— and you consented when you made the grant that they should study those books, and that, whatever might be the result of so doing, those books were a part of the necessary studies to be gone through. The question, therefore, resolves itself into this —that you are now pledged to the very system of education there adopted. When you made the grant, you did it with your eyes open. The same course of study which now exists was pursued at that time. It does not vary. Not a book has been omitted from those studies. You knew the books, and the doctrines contained in the books, and yet you freely, and willingly, and wisely made the grant. The proposed tiresome investigation appears to me to be—I am not fond of using an offensive word, but for want of another I am obliged to use it—it appears to me to be a sneaking out of the question—an evasion of the fair consideration of the subject. If there is any feeling in the public mind with regard to the question of Maynooth, it is as to the grant itself; and if you wish to investigate the question which is agitating the country, you must investigate the propriety of any grant whatever. But to adopt a sort of half measure, stating in one House that you are not prepared to make any alteration in the grant, and yet consenting in the other to a provoking inquiry, appears to me a line of conduct unworthy the Government of the country. However, I am not quite so much surprised at this as I might have been, because it is partly consistent with the only principle which as yet the Government has declared or adopted, namely, that everything in this world is a compromise, and everything being a compromise, I suppose they consider that the question of Maynooth must also be a compromise. Instead of taking a straightforward course, and saying, "We do not intend to alter our policy, and do not see the use of a Committee on the subject;" or, "We do intend to open the question, and will have the whole question considered as a matter of policy"—instead of taking this course, they are declaring one thing in one House, and acting differently in the other. In other words, they are making a compromise; and a compromise on a subject like this is totally unworthy of the Government of a great country.
The EARL of DERBY: My Lords, whilst
880
I entirely repudiate the doctrine of the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Breadalbane), that it is contrary to all principle that we should give any assistance to the education of Roman Catholics, so also I repudiate the doctrine just laid down by the noble Baron, that whatever may be the education given at Maynooth, it is a matter of indifference to the Government. My Lords, I said we had no present intention of altering the conditions or repealing the grant. But I did not say (as the noble Baron supposes me to have said) that whatever might be the result of the inquiry as to the system of education pursued in Maynooth, or as to the extension of the fund or the due application of the fund voted by Parliament for the education of the Roman Catholic priesthood—I did not say whatever might be the result of those inquiries or disclosures, that the policy of the Government with regard to the grant must necessarily remain unaltered. Nor can I adopt the expression of opinion which I heard with some surprise from the noble Baron, that if in the education of the Roman Catholic priesthood there were doctrines taught which were either inconsistent with morality or subversive of loyalty—
LORD BEAUMONT: Not inconsistent with morality.
The EARL of DERBY: If there are doctrines taught there subversive of loyalty, I cannot agree that this is a question with which the Crown has nothing to do. I understood the noble Baron to say, that the Ministers of the Crown had bound themselves to grant the money for what is necessary for the Roman Catholic priesthood, and that in his opinion the education of the Roman Catholic priesthood necessarily involves matters not consistent with morality, and subversive of loyalty. I-have a better opinion of the Roman Catholic priesthood generally, than to believe it essential to their education that they should be taught doctrines subversive of loyalty. If I find that the noble Baron gives a more correct representation of their views than I have hitherto been disposed to take, it would very materially alter my views with regard to the policy or propriety or expediency of the State supporting a system which inculcated doctrines subversive of loyalty and morality.
LORD BEAUMONT: My Lords, I never said there was anything necessary to the education of a Roman Catholic priest which was either subversive of loyalty or of morality. I said nothing of the

881
sort. What I said was this—that there are hooks of the casuists and other text books, from which might he extracted passages which would not he considered as tending to enforce the feelings of loyalty and affection to this country, and that in the writings of the casuists there were many passages which might he considered to he extremely indelicate, and that these are text hooks. But I never once stated anything approaching to what the noble Earl has put into my mouth—that it was necessary in the education of a Roman Catholic priest for him to adopt principles that were either subversive of loyalty, or which in any way tended to immorality. All I stated was, that passages of that sort are to be found in those books. There are passages of that nature to be found in the text books there, and it is necessary for a full study of the subjects taught that these passages, as well as passages of an opposite tendency, should be studied: these passages are essentially necessary to be studied, because without them an incomplete view of the conflicting opinions on controverted points would be obtained, but the principles contained in them need not be adopted. I should like to know whether in studying for another Church, it wa3 necessary to read only one side of the question. I ask if it is not necessary to investigate the whole matter; and if in their case there are not many books which they are required to study and become masters of, which contain passages which they would be extremely unwilling to adopt as the foundation of their own principles and conduct?
The BISHOP of OXFORD: My Lords, as the noble Baron has so pointedly appealed to the right rev. Bench, I will endeavour to give a very distinct answer to the question. There are no books in which the clergy of the Church of England are taught which have any tendency to subvert their loyalty or to destroy their morality.
The EARL of WINCHILSEAsaid, that a very strong public feeling was manifested against the grant to Maynooth, when the question of its permanency was before their Lordships on a former occasion. Petitions praying for its abolition, signed by 1,500,000 persons, were presented on that occasion. He wished very much that the Committee of Inquiry which he had then moved for, and which was to have been composed chiefly of the Roman Catholic Members of their Lordships' House, had
882
been granted at the time. He should have been perfectly satisfied with its result; for he was convinced that the evidence which would have been brought forward would have fully established the fact, that a great many of the evils which have for a long period afflicted Ireland had been caused by the college of Maynooth. That inquiry would have shown that the college of Maynooth was the worst nest of Jesuits in Europe. The people of this country were now aroused on this subject, and the time was fast approaching when they would be able to speak out in the most unmistake-able manner. The votes which would be given at the approaching general election would speak in plain language. The next Parliament would not only demand an inquiry into the nature of the doctrines taught at Maynooth, but would raise the question of the change in the oaths administered to Members of the Legislature by which its Protestant character had been perverted. Such a course of proceeding was necessary, for the Church of Rome would never be content with equal civil rights for its members, but would do all in its power to obtain absolute dominion. He had been accused of being a bigot and a religious enthusiast; but most of the predictions he had made in 1845 had been completely verified. The Church of Rome would never be content until it had forced this country into a civil war by an attempt to aggrandise her temporal power in England. The next Parliament would demand in an irresistible manner an investigation, the grant to Maynooth, and the principles on which the college was conducted.
EARL FITZWILLIAMsaid, that the noble Earl had pronounced a philippic against the Roman Catholics which, in his opinion, applied also to the Protestants. He (Earl Fitzwilliam) could not believe that the Protestants of this country, though temporarily excited by persons who desired to gratify their own ambition, would allow that excitement to become permanent, or that they would attempt to interfere with the liberties of their Roman Catholic brethren. The noble Marquess (the Marquess of Breadalbane), who had originated the discussion, had expressed a wish not to do anything which might be injurious to his Roman Catholic fellow-subjects; but he (Earl Fitzwilliam) would seriously beg the noble Marquess to consider whether the course he and the great body whom he represented were taking, commencing with a pure and disinterested denial of certain

883
principles held by certain persons, was not likely—nay, certain — to degenerate into dislike of the persons holding them? He, therefore, regretted that they should enter into discussions which he feared this country would long rue; but even if this crusade against the College of Maynooth were successful, it would excite as much indignation in Ireland as the Papal aggression. Did the noble Marquess imagine that less excitement would be created in Ireland, than was created by what was commonly called the Papal aggression? The attempts to create or continue such an excitement were most unjustifiable. He was, however, quite satisfied with the answer given by the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) to the question of the noble Marquess. It was, indeed, most desirable that the country should know how the question stood. The noble Earl who spoke last told their Lordships that the next Parliament would speak out; but he (Earl Fitzwilliam did not doubt that the opinions of the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) would remain unchanged, whatever might be the opinions of certain constituencies. No doubt would have existed on the subject, if certain persons connected with Her Majesty's Government, making use of it for electioneering purposes, had not pledged themselves to vote for its repeal. With respect to those persons who believed that the Protestantism of England was to be overwhelmed by the College of Maynooth, he would simply ask whether the individuals who had lately distinguished themselves by their hostility to Protestantism were educated in that establishment? Dr. Cullen was not a member of Maynooth. It was not Maynooth that was to be feared, but Oxford, and the corruption of the aristocracy of the country. He did not much like that House; a great effect was produced on the minds of many persons by the magnificent mode in which the worship of the Church of Rome was carried on. He did not like the gorgeous churches which were built all over the country, but preferred the plain and simple edifices of the Free Kirk. He had no fear whatever of the Protestants being converted by the Roman Catholic priesthood, but he entertained a great apprehension that the aristocracy would be corrupted by the Romanising tendencies of Protestant clergymen.
The EARL of WICKLOWexpressed himself perfectly satisfied with the answer given by the noble Earl on the present as
884
well as on the two former occasions. No Minister could be expected to say more with regard to his intentions than the noble Earl had done, for it was impossible to foresee what circumstances might occur. It was certain, however, that persons connected with the Government did not speak so plainly as the noble Earl had; and when he found that a time like this, when the public mind was agitated and inflamed, was the opportunity chosen by a Minister of the Crown in the other House to consent to a Motion, the intention of which, with the animus actuating it, were shown from the very words of the proposer, he was not to be deceived by a speech, but must judge of the motive by the act. He wished well to the Government, and therefore the more regretted that they should have given cause by their conduct to the suspicion alluded to by his noble Friend, that they were desirous of availing themselves of a popular clamour on the subject of Maynooth, for the purpose of influencing the elections about to take place. And when they talked of inquiry, on what ground was inquiry demanded? The very same reasons which were now asserted had been repeated over and over again in Parliament by those who were rigidly opposed to Roman Catholics and the Roman Catholic religion generally, and had been met and resisted by the noble Earl himself as strongly as possible. Yet the Government were found yielding now to those arguments; and this was at least extremely suspicious, was at least liable to a suspicion which the noble Earl should endeavour to remove before a dissolution. What was it, he naturally asked, that had occurred just at this time to justify inquiry? It was impossible, indeed, to deny that at the present moment a strong feeling against Roman Catholics had taken root. But to what was that attributable? To anything on the part of the Roman Catholics of Ireland? He said it was a most foolish, a most impolitic Act of the Legislature, that had led to all this; that it was to that Act and to the letter of Lord John Russell to the Bishop of Durham that it was attributable; and that those who proposed that Act were responsible for it. He still hoped, however, that the people of this country would not be guided by sentiments of bitterness, or by clamour, but by a true sense of policy, and not only of policy, but of justice. Parliament had a right to inquire, and a right, as far as a physical right went, to suspend the grant to May-

885
nooth; but there was upon it a moral responsibility not to lay a finger upon that established grant, which, though not actually stipulated, was in truth involved in the conditions of the Union. It would he contrary to the principles of policy and of justice, and would, in fact, amount to a confiscation, for any Government to withdraw the grant upon the grounds hitherto shown. But, independently of this, were they to forget that Ireland was a Roman Catholic country—that she paid her full, if not more than her fair share to the expenses of the country? Were they to forget that while they had for a small portion of her people the Established Church in that country, they were in justice bound to establish a priesthood, and afford the means of a religious education for the vast majority? He hoped not; and he said that no Government of this country, with I out such cause as did not now and probably never would exist, could, without a breach of faith and an act of spoliation, touch this grant.
EARL GREYconcurred in the opinion expressed by the noble Earl who spoke last, that an Administration was not called upon to speak for more than its present intentions, and should decline to pledge itself as to the conduct it would pursue in circumstances not yet arisen. He would therefore be perfectly satisfied if he could understand the noble Earl at the head of Her Majesty's Government to say plainly and distinctly that his opinions were now the same with those he expressed with so much force and eloquence to that House as a member of Sir Robert Peel's Government in 1845—a period when probably he understood the Roman Catholic religion, and the nature of education given to the Roman Catholic priesthood, just as well as at present—if he (Earl Grey) could understand him (the Earl of Derby) to say that he adhered to those strong opinions as to the importance to the peace, and welfare, and union, of the Empire, of the settlement of this question, which he then expressed; if he stated that nothing had yet occurred to change those opinions, that no new circumstances had brought him to different conclusions, and that, except by possible future events, his sentiments would not be altered, then he (Earl Grey) would be perfectly content. But, unfortunately, he could not quite understand the noble Earl's answer in that sense. When, on a former evening, he (Earl Grey) asked the noble Earl whether he adhered to the opinions
886
he declared in 1845, the noble Earl absolutely denied his right to put such a question to him. The noble Earl, too, was particularly careful in having his words correctly quoted, and drew hairbreadth distinctions between the phrases "having no intention to do a thing at present," and "having no present intention to do the thing;" and the noble Earl had this very night risen three or four times to detect and expose shades of mistakes which had been fallen into with respect to his opinion. But an opinion so difficult to be precisely understood was calculated to excite no little doubt and difficulty; such hairbreadth distinctions must leave it a mystery what, or whether any, meaning was intended to be conveyed. At the same time it was a very significant fact that whilst the noble Earl in that House told them that he had no present intention of asking Parliament to rescind the grant to Maynooth, persons holding under him offices of the greatest importance were distinctly pledging themselves to their constituents to vote for the repeal of that grant. All these circumstances tended to create a suspicion as to the intentions of the Government, which it behoved the noble Earl, for his own honour and for the credit of the representative principle of government and the constitution of the country, to remove. A man of the high honour and feeling which should actuate a British statesman, would not consent to shelter his real intentions under equivocation and subterfuge. As to the remarks made by another noble Earl (the Earl of Winchilsea), the opinions of that noble Earl—sincere as they must be admitted to be—were such that they could not be held by a large number of persons of this country without endangering the permanent union of the three kingdoms. When they were told, in such language as had been used by that noble Earl, by hon. Members in another place, and by the Press, that the Roman Catholic religion was destructive of morality, and subversive of loyalty, it seemed to be overlooked that to act on this opinion would imply that one-third of Her Majesty's subjects can never be put on an equality with the rest, can never be treated with confidence and fairness. But if such a policy is to be adopted towards the Roman Catholics, they must know that those thus esteemed, and thus treated, must, as the very consequence of the circumstances in which they were placed, become disaffected? And if their Lordships were to

887
object to a grant to Maynooth because the Roman Catholic religion was false, as they were told, did it not follow that a principle would be recognised the adoption of which must lead to very serious consequences? If it was their duty not to assist in teaching doctrines that were, as they believed, false: it was obvious that it was equally the right and the duty of the Roman Catholic to object to contributing to the teaching of doctrines which are in his judgment false; therefore as the doctrines of the Protestant Church are considered to be false by the Roman Catholics, it would, on the principle of the noble Earl, be the duty of every conscientious Roman Catholic in Ireland to do his utmost to relieve himself of the Establishment there. Would not this be an end to religious peace in that country? He called upon the right reverend bishops to consider this part of the question, and to beware of encouraging an opposition to the grant to Maynooth on a principle which tended directly to render the maintenance of an establishment impossible. He would call their attention to the fact that already the arguments used against Maynooth were being pushed to their legitimate conclusion as against any Church establishment whatever. In his hand he held a petition, agreed to at a public meeting, not in Scotland, not in Ireland, but in Wallingford. It objected to the grant to Maynooth; but, on the same grounds, it objected to all religious establishments in Ireland; naturally, for to the voluntary principle they must come, if they were to support no religious establishment because it taught some doctrines in which they did not concur. For himself, he thought that every Christian Church taught doctrines the greater part of which were true and beneficial to the people, and he was willing that all portions of Her Majesty's Christian subjects should receive assistance from the public funds for the promotion of religion—assistance such as they at present received. Of course in expressing his approbation of the principle of giving, as they now did, assistance to different denominations of Christians, he did not mean to say that he approved of the existing arrangements with regard to the Established Church in Ireland, which were susceptible of considerable amendment. He was disappointed not to have heard from the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) a more distinct declaration on the part of the Government whether they adhered or not to the policy of which the
888
chief member of the present Administration was the principal advocate in 1845.
The DUKE of ARGYLLconsidered it highly necessary that the public policy of the Government on this question should be clearly and fully explained; but while regretting the uncertainty which still existed on the subject, and not rising to support the Government, yet he could not agree with the noble Lord (Lord Beaumont) that the Parliament had not a clear right to inquire into the College of Maynooth, and the manner in which that institution was conducted. He would quote to the House a passage from a speech made by Lord John Russell on the Motion for leave to bring in the Bill for the endowment of Maynooth, proposed in 1845. In that speech the noble Lord said—
"But at the same time, I will say, that if you found you were doing that which was mischievous to the community, and that the religious scruples of the community would not allow of the continuance of this grant; or, with reference to civil and political reasons, you found that those you meant to be the teachers of religion had become the leaders and conductors of rebellion—if, I say, you found for any of these causes that there was ground sufficient to refuse this grant—then I can see no valid reason why any compact should restrain you, or why, upon strong grounds of this kind, the House would not be justified in declaring that it would give no further allowance.—[3 Hansard, lxxix. 91.]
Those were the grounds laid down by Lord John Russell, on which an inquiry might be made into the colleges. But at at present there was no specific charge brought against Maynooth; the only charge brought forward involved the discussion of abstract questions. With all due respect for the noble Marquess who had brought this subject forward, and for the body which the noble Marquess represented, he (the Duke of Argyll) could not agree to the withdrawal of the grant to Maynooth, on the ground that all religious endowments ought to be abandoned. If that principle were to be acted on, they would not stop at the College of Maynooth; they would have to go farther than the noble Marquess had probably anticipated. All grants made by Parliament for educational purposes would have to be withdrawn, to the principle of which Parliament stood committed. The Scotch people certainly would not wish the principle they had laid down in their petitions to be carried out to that extent. He objected very much to the tone in which the matter was discussed, and to the time chosen for introducing it. Had he been called upon to vote for the

889
endowment of Maynooth, he should certainly not have done so, for he did not think any religious principle was involved in the education of the priesthood; but he trusted that when it became known what would be the result of carrying out the principle on which the withdrawal of the grant to Maynooth was required, that many of those: petitions would be withdrawn, because dangerous to the peace of the Empire. He thought the present aspect of the question dangerous, as likely to lead the Roman Catholics to think themselves treated unfairly, and to promote religious disunion between the two countries.
The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDEconsidered that, in point of fact, there was an inquiry into the College of Maynooth, and it had been shown that no change had taken place in the system of education pursued at that establishment since the grant was: first carried; he was therefore at a loss to understand why the Government had, in the other House, assented to a Motion for an inquiry into that system. He quite agreed that Parliament had a right to inquire if grounds could be shown for instituting an inquiry: but if grounds could be shown to exist, it was the duty of Government to institute an inquiry, and not to leave it to a private Member of Parliament. When they saw the Government assenting to such a Motion for inquiry, they must look at what was the avowed object of the Member who proposed it? Was the object proposed the amelioration of Ireland? They knew well that it was proposed by a Gentleman who had been the consistent, and, he doubted not, the conscientious opponent of these colleges from first to last —whose whole politics were, that this establishment ought not to last. There ought, therefore, to be a distinct understanding what were the objects of the Government in going into this inquiry, and the explanation should be given before Gentlemen went to the hustings. In 1842 the noble Earl declared that the consequences of inquiry would be incessant, constant, and daily increasing acerbity and religious rancour and enmity between the different communities. What did the noble Earl think now? At present the inquiry asked for could not he gone into before the dissolution, and he did not think that anything was really intended to be done except to obtain a good hustings cry. When the noble Earl assumed office, he announced his intention to oppose what he called the democratic tendencies of the
890
times; but the noble Earl could have done nothing more calculated to promote those tendencies than he had done since he assumed office. He quite agreed with the noble Earl in thinking that this ought to be the last question on the subject; but he (the Marquess of Clanricarde) must say that the answer to it might have been more clear.
Petitions ordered to lie on the table.

IMPROVEMENT OF JURISDICTION IN EQUITY BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLORmoved that this Bill be read a Second Time, and referred to the same Select Committee as was now sitting on the Bill for the Abolition of the Masters' Offices.
LORD CRANWORTHsaid, he had had the opportunity of perusing the Bill, and, so far as he considered it, he very much approved of it. But, taking into consideration the very short time which remained for carrying this Bill through Parliament, and for suggesting amendments which might become necessary on a long series of clauses in case any very great difficulty should arise, it might be impossible to pass the Bill this Session; but he saw no reason why that should interfere with the Bill for the Abolition of the Masters' Offices.
The LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he could hardly conceive of any circumstances arising to prevent both Bills passing into law during the present Session. The two Bills had been introduced at different times, not for the purpose of separating them in their passage through Parliament, but because the subject naturally divided itself into two parts, the one the Masters' Offices, and the other the function and procedure of the Courts. There was despatch used in connexion with these Bills, but no hurry. They were the result of a Commission appointed by the Crown, composed of persons of great ability, who took as much time and gave it as much consideration as it was possible for men conversant with the subject to dedicate to it. For his own part, he had taken great pains and used much care upon so important a measure; and if any difficulty should arise to obstruct its progress, he would be as ready as his noble Friend to give it his attention. But he could not foresee that there would be any serious difficulty in the way of the course suggested. The same subjects would be considered in the Select Committee, that had upon it every one of the Equity Lords, including, of course, the

891
noble and learned Lord himself; and the fullest opportunity of correcting what was imperfect in the Bill would be afforded there. He could not bring himself to press one measure without the other, for, if the first Bill were to pass without the second, the Court of Chancery, or rather those who presided over it, would be placed in a position in which they would find it extremely difficult to carry on the full and proper administration of justice in this country.
Bill read 2ª, and referred to the Select Committee on the Master in Chancery Abolition Bill.
House adjourned to Monday next.