Sitting of 9 March 1824

EDUCATION OF CATHOLIC POOR IN IRELAND—PETITION OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS.
Mr. Grattanrose to present a petition from the Catholic Bishops and Clergy of Ireland, signed most respectably by men of exemplary piety and learning. They allege, that the funds appropriated by parliament to the Education of the Poor in Ireland amount to a very large sum; but they complain that from the manner they are regulated in their distribution, the practice is at variance with the principles of the roman catholic religion. The indiscriminate use of the Bible in the schools, which is uniformly insisted upon, is what these petitioners allege to be opposed to their doctrine. Their impression was, that as a very great proportion of the Irish poor are catholics, the education of their own poor ought to be under the superintendance of the Catholic clergy; and, consequently, a proportion of the charitable funds at their disposal. These funds, it would be recollected, amounted to 70,000 l. When, last session, the Protestant charter schools were under consideration, it appeared to be the general feeling, that a very considerable alteration ought to be made. From the year 1800 to 1817, the grants voted by parliament to these schools, amounted to nearly half a million; and yet, with such vast means, the House would learn with surprise, that only 2,000 individuals had been educated in them. But, the great grievance of which the petitioners appeared to complain was, the system under which the Kildare-street Association was managed. The funds of that institution, which had increased from 4,000 l. per annum, to 7,000 l. were misappropriated excessively. Schoolmasters, who availed themselves of such a grant, were bound, by a written obligation, to divest themselves of all superintendance and power in the school, and the Protestant minister, as the petitioners allege, possessed the power of regulating the schools; and,
838
in some instances, of ousting the schoolmaster. These subjects were of great importance; and, in the present state of Ireland, he prayed both the House and his majesty's government to weigh well the necessity of considering the condition of the great body of the people, in the application of the funds destined for the education of the people. His right hon. friend (sir J. Newport) had moved for the production of certain returns. When these were before the House, he would move for a committee, to take into consideration the distribution of the funds appropriated to that object; and to that committee it was his intention to have the present petition referred.
Mr. Goulburnsaid, that as there would occur future opportunities for the discussion of the points referred to in the petition, he should at present express his entire dissent from the principle laid down by the petitioners, namely, that a separate fund should be set aside for the education of the Irish catholic poor. Heretofore it was considered by the hon. gentleman who introduced the petition, and by those with whom he generally acted, that the great object of such exertions should be to correct, as far as it was possible, the many causes that led to separation and disunion in Ireland, and to substitute principles of union and conciliation, in their place. On what grounds the new view taken that night by the hon. gentleman was founded, he was at a loss to discover; but he felt that he was fortified by the repeated declarations in that House, that such a system of separation would never be sanctioned. Was it pretended that the Kildare Association refused grants to the catholic schools? No such a charge, he was convinced, could be established. The only restriction in the issue of such grants was, that the Scriptures should be read in such schools without note or comment. That was the only restriction; and it had been sanctioned over and over again by the voice of parliament. Where there were so many points of doctrine on which the protestants and catholics differed, surely it was of importance to fix on one main principle in which all christians agreed. Was it pretended that the catholics of Ireland were unwilling to avail themselves of these grants? The returns gave the answer to such a charge. Let the House look at the state of Ireland

839
before and since the Kildare-street Society was founded, and then they would ascertain the progressive improvement. In place of any indisposition there was the greatest solicitude on the part of the people, even in Munster, where the population was for the most part catholic, to avail themselves of the means of education.
Sir J. Newportlamented that this petition had been presented before the whole subject had been investigated by a committee. So long ago as June last, he had moved for a variety of papers, illustrative of the subject. To that motion no return had been made, and on the 9th of last month he had renewed his motion; when it was ordered by the House, that the papers should be furnished forthwith. This neglect in complying with the orders of the House, was extremely culpable. His object, in moving for the papers in the last session was, that they might be ready at the commencement of the present, to be communicated to a committee for the purpose of investigating the whole merits of the case. After an inquiry such as that to which he had alluded, it appeared to him that it might be very practicable to place the subject on a footing satisfactory and conciliatory to both parties; but he deprecated any discussion of the question, until such an inquiry had been completed. The Catholic body complained that they had not any part in the management of the funds in question. The trustees of Maynooth college were of both persuasions; why, therefore, might not the managers of these funds be so too? He trusted that both parties would moderate their temper, allay their prejudices, and approach one another in a way calculated to diffuse the blessings of education throughout the country.
Mr. Dawsonobjected to the form of the petition, and to the Catholic bishops of Ireland considering themselves as a Corporation. With respect to education in Ireland, it was increasing among all classes, Catholic and Protestant. Tracing the operations of the Kildare-street Society, in that respect, he stated, that in 1773 there were in the west and southwest parts of Ireland but eight schools; that in 1816 there were 800; and that now in 1824, there were 1,122. When the subject came to be discussed, it would be proved incontestibly, that of all the institutions of a similar kind in Ireland which had received the assistance of parliament, there was not one so deserving as the Kildare-street Society.
Mr. J. Smithconcurred in strongly recommending the furtherance of the objects of the Kildare-street Society.
Mr. Plunkettobserved, that whatever difference of opinion might exist with regard to the form of the petition, all persons must agree in the great respectability of the petitioners, and that their wishes must always be entitled to the utmost attention. On the subject of form, however, he thought his hon. friend behind him mistaken. It was clear to him that the petitioners did not assume any corporate character. They merely called themselves "the undersigned Roman Catholic Bishops." Now, the fact was, that a Catholic bishop in Ireland was as much a bishop as a Protestant bishop. He was a bishop of the Christian Church. He was competent to confer ordination. Nay, were any one of them to conform to the Protestant faith, he would instantly become a bishop of the Protestant church. One word as to the facts of the case. The opinions which had been expressed by the hon. members for Waterford and Midhurst were entirely his own. He entirely agreed also in some of the allegations of the petition. He agreed in the great importance of education, and he agreed in the still greater importance of making religious instruction the basis of all education. Every other notion on the subject was chimerical and impracticable. To make education rest on a moral basis alone, was not only useless but absolutely pernicious. Nothing, however, was, in his opinion, more to be deprecated than the separation of the schools in Ireland. But, if the union of morals and religion was to be converted into an instrument of proselytism, that was another question. How far that had been attempted, would be a fit subject for inquiry; as well as how far it might be practicable to separate the moral from the religious instruction in the same school.
Mr. Abercrombyobserved, that if he were asked whether he approved the system of reading the Bible in these schools without note or comment, he should answer "Yes." Great good had been effected where this was the practice; especially in the south of Ireland. It was extremely perilous, however, to allow the subject to become a matter of public discussion under the present circumstances; and therefore, without, of course, ascribing the slightest blame to the presentation of the petition, he regretted that it had been

841
presented; because, if once they came to debate the subject, or to balance the pretensions of both parties, with whatever calmness such a discussion might be entered upon, very serious differences were likely to arise. Whenever the grant for these schools should come before the House, he would be prepared to give the best opinion he could form on the subject.
Mr. V. Fitzgeraldalso regretted that the subject had been brought before the House, before means had been adopted to acquire the best information respecting it. He denied, however, what had fallen from an hon. gentleman opposite respecting it. He would state what had taken place in two of the counties of Ireland, almost exclusively Catholic; he meant Limerick and Cork. In 1817, the number of schools in these two counties was three. They increased progressively, until last year they amounted to 108. In other parts of Ireland he knew that there had not only been no partiality in the establishment or administration of the schools in question, but that even Catholics did not believe that there was; for within these few days he had received an application from two Catholic priests, soliciting aid for the establishment of schools of a similar nature. Of course they had no suspicion of any design of proselytising their flocks or they would have felt it their duty to resist such establishments. The fact was, however, that many persons were deceived with respect to the objects of the Kildare-street Association. To show the benefits which that association had conferred on Ireland, he would refer to two reports from the commissioners of education in Ireland. The first of those reports showed what was formerly the exclusive study of the lower orders in Ireland who had been taught to read. It stated, that the most productive, but at the same time flagitious articles of traffic, were cheap editions of publications of the vilest nature, calculated to pollute and degrade the minds of the people, instead of tending to their improvement and civilization. They had, in fact, therefore, become more corrupt as they became more instructed, and had degenerated into worse citizens, subjects, and men. By the second of the reports of the commission to which he had alluded, it appeared, that the Kildare-street Society, by printing and circulating cheap works of another character, had, to use their own expression,
842
"completely beaten out of the market" the authors and venders of the infamous publications in question. The number of volumes which the society had disposed of last year, was 121,000; and, during the six years of the existence of the society, the number was 784,000. He felt that the inquiry ought to be full and impartial.
Mr. Dominick Brownesaid, he could not agree with his right hon. friend the member for Waterford, in objecting to the discretion of the Roman Catholic bishops in presenting this petition. He thought it much better that the whole truth should be told relative to Ireland, than that we should be too discreet in our discussions relative to that country. The Roman Catholic bishops, if they thought the education of their communicants should be always combined with religious instruction, were right in declaring their sentiments honestly to parliament. Whether he (Mr. B. agreed with them or not, was of little importance, but he did not think their opinions were at all different from the promoters of the exclusive system in England, called the National System. The Kildare-street Society had certainly done a great deal of good, but not one thousandth part the good they would have done, had they not insisted, as a sine qua non, on the Bible being read in every school to which they afforded assistance. The Roman Catholics were equally consistent with the great body of the Church of England, and one of its most distinguished prelates in particular, the bishop of Peterborough, in objecting to the distribution of the Bible without note or comment, and had the same right to accompany it with their interpretation, as the Church of England with their prayer book. He declared it his conviction, that all the difficulties and misfortunes of Ireland arose from the monstrous absurdity of an Episcopal Church, with 5,500,000 communicants existing in Ireland, without any connection with the state. The feuds arising from this cause continually showed themselves, now on, the question of education, to-morrow on some other occasion; but, until his majesty should enter into a concordat with the pope, and connect the state with that church, there would never be permanent peace in Ireland.
Mr. Secretary Peelexpressed his great satisfaction, that on this important question all parties were agreed in principle.

843
In the education of the poor of Ireland two great rules ought never to be abandoned: first, to unite as far as possible, without violence to individual feelings, the children of protestants and catholics under one common system of education; and secondly, in so doing, studiously and honestly to discard all idea of making proselytes. The society, whose exertions had been referred to, seemed to him to have erred in this latter respect; although it might have begun its labours without any intention of procuring converts. He hoped that elsewhere, as here, no party feelings would be mixed up with the discussion of the subject, and that the example set in that House would be followed out of doors. When the right hon. baronet should bring the question before parliament in greater detail, his object would, no doubt, be to prevent the introduction of topics not necessarily connected with it, and which might give rise to less worthy feelings than the friends of education would wish to see excited.
Mr. C. Grantsaid, he did not mean to express his approbation of the whole of the conduct of the association, whose exertions had been so frequently referred to: he was, notwithstanding, well satisfied that the charge of proselytism was not one that could be fairly brought against it. He contended, that the society had shown a great degree of liberality in permitting the reading of the scriptures in the Roman catholic version.
The following petition was then brought up and read:—
"To the Right Honourable and Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in Parliament assembled. The Petition of the Undersigned Roman Catholic Bishops, on behalf of themselves and others professing the Roman Catholic religion in Ireland,
"Most humbly sheweth—That your petitioners are charged by the office they hold in the catholic church, to superintend in a special manner the education of the youth of their communion. That from the period when Roman catholics in Ireland were permitted by law to open schools and instruct youth, your petitioners and their predecessors have laboured unceasingly to promote the education of the poor, to check or to correct the abuses which prevailed in their schools, and to prevent persons of immoral or disorderly
844
habits from becoming teachers of youth amongst the rude and simple of their communion. That Roman catholics have not had hitherto any means whereby to prepare school-masters competent to teach, still less are they enabled to remunerate the teachers of the poor, to build convenient school-houses, or to provide them, if built, with those necessaries, without which no improved system of education can be adopted or carried on with success.
"That your petitioners are deeply impressed with the truth, that education, if well regulated, is one of the most efficient means of preparing for the inhabitants of this country a better state of society; that by it their industrious, social, and moral habits would be greatly improved, the laws more respected and better observed, and the government thereby enabled to promote the public interests with greater facility and effect.
"That your petitioners are satisfied that no system of education can produce such results, unless religious instruction be made the basis of it, youth being so liable to error, and so easily seduced by passion, when not enlightened and restrained by the truth and influence of religion. Your petitioners beg leave further most respectfully to submit to your honourable House, that in the Roman catholic church the literary and religious instruction of youth are universally combined, and that no system of education which separates them can be acceptable to the members of her communion. That the religious instruction of youth in catholic schools, is always conveyed by means of catechistical instruction, daily prayer, and the reading of religious books, wherein the gospel morality is explained and inculcated.
"That Roman catholics have ever considered the reading of the sacred scriptures by children as an inadequate means of imparting to them religious instruction; as an usage whereby the word of God is made liable to irreverence, youth exposed to misunderstand its meaning, and thereby not unfrequently to receive, in early life, impressions which may afterwards prove injurious to their own best interests, as well as to those of the society which they are destined to form.
"That when memorialists learned some years past that the legislature had granted a considerable sum of money for the purpose of promoting a well-ordered system

845
of education in Ireland, without religious distinction, they conceived the strongest hope that the money so granted would be partly employed in providing for the education of the Roman catholic poor; and that no regulations of a private or partial kind would be suffered to interfere with the benevolent intentions of the legislature. That such their hopes and expectations have been disappointed—the grant for promoting the education of the poor of Ireland, as well as that for assisting the building of schools, being subjected in their disbursement or application to such regulations or by-laws, as render them nearly useless to the Roman catholic poor.
"That the trustees of the former grant give aid only to schools wherein the sacred scriptures, without note or comment, are read by the children (a regulation which does not accord with the discipline of the Roman catholic church), and the latter grant, as your petitioners are informed, is applied, generally, only to the building of such schools as are leased in trust to the ordinary or minister, or other ecclesiastical person of the established religion in the diocese or parish in which such school is situated, vesting in them, by a special clause, a power of visitation, as well as a right to appoint or to remove the school-master at will. Memorialists further presume humbly to state, that such clause operates to the virtual exclusion of Roman catholics from such schools; the prelates and parochial clergy of the established church not being deemed by Roman catholics fit persons to whose control or superintendance the education of their children should be intrusted. That such schools, moreover, as well as all others, built or partly built at the public expense, are connected with some society, whose rules and regulations are not approved of by Roman catholics. Your petitioners also presume to observe, that the parliamentary grant to the Society for the Suppression of Vice is, as memorialists have heard and believe, partly applied to the building of schools, subject to a like influence, and to the supplying of them with books, tracts, and catechisms, such as Roman catholics cannot conscientiously make use of.
"Your Petitioners, therefore, deem it a duty to inform your honourable House, that the Roman Catholic Poor of Ireland continue unprovided with school-houses, school-masters, or with any such aids as
846
are necessary for promoting amongst them a well-ordered system of education. That the Parliamentary Grants are not made available to the education of the Poor without religious distinction, inasmuch as the Societies, or persons to whom their application has been confided, have subjected the schools built by them, as well as the systems of education promoted by them, to such influence or regulations, as render them generally inaccessible to Roman Catholics. That in all the instances wherein aid is given by the Society for the Education of the Poor of Ireland, to schools under the immediate influence of Roman Catholics, the laws of the Society are evaded, or combined with such regulations for the religious instruction of the children, as are consistent with the discipline of their church.
"That schools, whereof the master professes a religion different from that of his pupils, or from which such religious instruction as the Catholic Church prescribes for youth, is excluded, or in which books or tracts not sanctioned by it are read or commented on, cannot be resorted to by the children of Roman Catholics, and that threats and rewards have been found equally unavailing, as a means of inducing Catholic parents to procure education for their children from such persons, or in such schools. That your Petitioners most humbly suggest to your Honourable House, that any system of education incompatible with the discipline of the Catholic Church, or superintended exclusively by persons professing a religion different from that of the vast majority of the poor of Ireland, cannot possibly be acceptable to the latter, and must in its progress be slow and embarrassed, generating often distrust or discord, as well as a want of that mutual good faith and perfect confidence which should prevail between those who receive benefits, and those who dispense them.
"That your Petitioners are fully satisfied, that if the public money granted by Parliament within the last few years for the building of schools, and for promoting the education of the poor in Ireland, had not been controlled in its expenditure by laws and regulations, such as have been mentioned or alluded to, the diffusion of moral and literary instruction amongst them, and especially in the Western and Southern parts of Ireland, would even now be considerable, and would in a short

847
time pervade the entire population; but that no such result can be reasonably expected, while such by-laws and regulations continue to impede the effects which should follow from the public bounty.—That your Petitioners humbly submit to your Honourable House, whether it might not be more consonant with the paternal views of the Legislature, not to permit jealousies to be fomented, and religious acrimony to be excited, by entrusting the public funds granted for the education of the poor, without religious distinction, exclusively to persons not professing their Creed and to the promoting of a system of education which is opposed to the discipline of their Church.
"That your Petitioners also beg leave most respectfully to observe, that as the Roman Catholics of Ireland are allowed to profess freely their Religion, and as teachers of it are provided for them at the public expense, it would appear consonant to the liberal policy of your Honourable House, to promote education amongst them in a manner consistent with their religious belief. That the Trustees of Maynooth College form a Corporation already known to his Majesty's government, who, it is presumed, have faithfully administered the trust reposed in them; that they possess a peculiar facility of making themselves acquainted with the wants and circumstances of the Irish poor, and would, if intrusted with any Grant for assisting their education, be at once acceptable to them, and intitled to public confidence.
Your Petitioners, therefore, most humbly and earnestly intreat your Honourable House to take this their prayer into your favourable consideration, and to adopt such measures as may promote the education of the Roman Catholic poor of Ireland in the most effectual manner as to your wisdom shall seem meet. And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray:—P. Curtis, D. D. &c; D. Murray, D. D. &c; O. Kelly, D. D. &c; R. Laffan, D. D. &c; J. Murphy, D. D. &c; J. Magaurun, D. D. &c; J. Doyle, D. D. &c.; and K. Marum; D. D.&c."
Ordered to lie on the table.

CATHOLIC CHARITIES.
Sir H. Parnellsaid, he had presented a petition in the last session, from the Catholic Archbishops of Ireland, complaining of restrictions imposed, by the existing laws, upon endowing and building school-houses,
848
hospitals, chapels, and residence for clergymen, by Catholics. He had moved for leave to bring in a Bill to grant the relief required, and the House had acceded to his motion; but he had not proceeded with the bill, in consequence of the late period of the session. During the recess he had communicated with the petitioners upon the object of their petition, and learning from them, that they were still anxious to have a bill brought in this session, he had given the notice which had led to his now addressing the House upon the subject of Catholic Charities; but, since he had given notice of his motion, he had been informed by the Attorney-general for Ireland, that the petitioners had laboured under a misapprehension of the actual state of the law. It appeared, from the communication the Attorney-general had made to him, that a wealthy Catholic lady having left a will with several bequests in it for charitable purposes, the commissioners of charitable bequests had filed a bill in chancery, under the notion that those bequests were for superstitious uses, and ought to be set aside, and applied by them to legal uses. The case was argued last year before the lord chancellor, and in Hilary Term, upon his lordship intimating in court, that he was disposed to consider these bequests as valid and legal, an attempt was made to induce his lordship to order the case to be re-argued. But the Attorney-general, who had not been a party to the preceding argument, interfered, and having declared it to be his decided opinion, upon a full examination of all the papers, that the will was, in every respect according to law, the chancellor made a decree confirming all its bequests. The Attorney-general had assured him that this decree removed all doubts upon the subject; that Catholics in Ireland stood exactly in the same situation as Protestant Dissenters; that they could build and endow schools, chapels, hospitals and residences for their clergy. The motion he had prepared to submit to the House was, for leave to bring in a bill, to give to Catholics the power of granting property to charitable and religious institutions, in the same manner, and to the same extent, as Protestant Dissenters can grant it for these purposes, so that any thing that he had it in contemplation to require, had been effected already by the decree of the Court of Chancery. He had felt it his duty to make this statement, in order to explain to the petitioners how the law and

849
the case stood; and also, to explain to the House, the reasons which induced him to desist from making any motion according to his notice.

SILK TRADE.
Mr. Huskisson Mr. Huskisson moved the order of the day for receiving the report of the Committee on the Customs' Duties, and expressed a hope that hon. genlemen opposit ewould throw no obstacle in the way of bringing in the bill, as it was desirable that there should be no delay.
Mr. Baringsaid, he did not mean to oppose the bringing up the report. This declaration must not, however, be attributed to any alteration in his opinion, but to that due deference which he felt for the opinion of the House, of which he certainly must say, he never witnessed a more decided expression than on last evening. He was, therefore, bound to presume that he was wrong, and that parliament was right; and that none of those evils would ensue which his apprehensions for the interest of the silk trade had induced him to entertain. He nevertheless trusted, that sufficient time would be allowed for a full examination of the details of the measure.
Mr. Huskissonsaid, he felt much obliged to his hon. friend for the candid manner in which he had stated his intentions with regard to the future progress of the measure. He was not anxious for greater expedition than would be necessary to give all parties concerned the proposed relief at the earliest possible period. It was with this view that he wished the resolution to be now brought up, in order that the bill might be brought in as speedily as might be.
Mr. Baringwas aware that if these duties were to be taken off, it was important to proceed with their remission as soon as possible; but he thought that much difficulty would be found in dealing with the drawback to be allowed upon the stock on hand. Perhaps the parties would be better satisfied if government proceeded by degrees with this experiment, rather than remit the duty at once.
Mr. Humethought that the principles which had been laid down by every intelligent man connected with trade, who had spoken to this subject, were such as left no doubt of the policy which his majesty's ministers were in this instance pursuing. He could not concur, therefore, with his hon. friend, in considering the measure in question a mere experiment.
850
It proceeded upon such sound principles, that there could be no reasonable doubt of its success. Some difficulties might arise as to the mode of dealing with persons who had stocks on hand; but, surely, there could be no question, whether the duties ought to be remitted at once or by degrees. The general opinion of experienced men was decidedly in favour of their being taken off with the least delay possible. Every man connected with the silk trade would, in that case know what to do, and employ his workmen accordingly. He hoped that the case of the small shopkeepers would meet with due attention. If any parties should be in possession of goods uncut, he would propose that they should return their goods on a certain day, to a particular place; and then let the Excise take a proper account of them. The country would never grudge that proportion of bounty which it would be necessary to return to individuals, to save them from distress and ruin; and, as no private funds would be charged with the expense of these returns of duty, they would of course be borne by the nation.
Mr. Ellicesaid, he was satisfied that government was disposed to settle this question fairly, which would best be done out of doors, without a discussion in that House; and he thought he might safety state, that if justice were done to the parties interested by a return of the bounties on their stock, they would instantly resume their wonted occupations.
Sir H. Parnellwished to have it understood, that the proposed arrangement of duties on thrown silk, and foreign silk goods should not be considered as a final settlement of them. The duty of 7s. 6d. a pound on thrown silk, was particularly objectionable. It was wholly at variance with the principles of free trade, and while it gave a protection to the silk spinner, would operate as a direct tax upon the raw material of the manufacturer, and on the consumer. The duty on goods of 30 per cent would be nothing less than a prohibitory duty and it was not correct to say, that the intended measure was to make the trade in silk free. Both the duties on thrown silk and goods, in his opinion, ought to be reduced after two years, by degrees, until they were wholly taken off. For until this occurred, the silk manufacture of these countries would not be as perfect or as extensive as it ought to be.
Mr. Alderman Woodgave credit to ministers for a desire to meet all the difficulties of this subject; but feared that many would be encountered in dealing with the stocks on hand.
The report was then brought up, and the resolutions were agreed to.

TITHES COMPOSITION BILL.
Mr. Goulburnrose, pursuant to notice, to move for leave to bring in a bill to amend the Tithes Composition act of last session. He never had expected that that measure could at once have been rendered so perfect, as to supersede the necessity of future amendment. No one, therefore, could now be surprised that he took the earliest opportunity of submitting to the consideration of the House, such amendments as, in his judgment, the measure required, and which, he trusted, would, in their progress, give to it greater and, ultimately, complete efficacy. At the same time he thought it right to state, that from time to time, it might hereafter be necessary to submit still farther amendments, until at last the moment arrived, when he should be enabled to introduce a measure, which would carry into full effect the object and intention of parliament. The measure of last year had been open to a variety of objections. It was met by two classes of objectors; one of whom was adverse to the entire principle, and the other, though admitting the wisdom of the principle, disagreed with regard to the details. As to those who were altogether opposed to the principle of the measure, he saw no occasion to address himself to them; for parliament had pronounced an opinion, that some measure for the composition of tithes in Ireland was necessary. He had carefully examined all the objections that had been raised against the introduction of the measure; and, after full and mature consideration, he saw no reason to alter his opinion, that the principle of commutation of tithes for a limited time was essentially just: experience had abundantly proved, that the measure in its operation was practicable, and justice on the one hand, and policy on the other, required that he should stand forward, from time to time to submit such alterations as seemed likely to render the measure more perfect. He had now to deal with the second class of objectors; namely, those who admitted the truth of the principle, but disliked the details of the measure. These
852
persons came forward with a disposition to give the subject every fair consideration, and to carry into effect the intentions of parliament, in the manner which to them seemed the most advisable. Perhaps he ought to preface the details which he meant to submit with respect to the proposed measure, by stating the progress which had already been made by the act of the last session. No sooner had that bill passed this House, than it appeared right to the government of Ireland to transmit a copy of it to every parish in the country, and that transmission was accompanied by a brief exposition of its enactments, as it was conjectured, that it would not be very easy to wade through that mass of legislation which the intricacy of the subject had rendered inevitable. From that period up to the middle of the last month, more than a thousand applications had been made from different parishes for special vestries to carry into effect the proposed arrangements; and out of 579 instances, 240 had determined to act under the bill, and 339 had determined to adjourn the future consideration of the subject. An opinion was entertained, that the clergy were the only parties benefitted by the bill, and therefore it was natural to suppose that they would be forward in making the applications; but it would be found on examination, that an equal number of applications had been made on the part of the clergy and the lay impropriators, who seemed each of them sensible of the advantages which the measure held forth, and were ready to admit that parliament had consulted the interests of both. Of the 1,033 applications published in the Gazette, 507 were from the clergy, and 526 either from the lay impropriators, or (with only 23 exceptions) from the landowners of the parish. This clearly showed the advantages which the measure was capable of conferring—An hon. gentleman seemed anxious to know, at the beginning of the session, by what section of the bill the application for vestries was provided. He was now enabled to state, that almost all the arrangements which had taken place had been effected under that clause in the act which enabled parties in the first instance to agree upon the amount of composition, in preference to leaving it to commissioners to fix the value: and this was exceedingly natural; for there was scarcely any man who would not prefer coming to

853
some distinct understanding with the parties themselves, to leaving the matter in dispute to the arbitrary decision of three persons, whose competency might be doubtful, of one of whom alone he had any knowledge, and who he might not be satisfied was capable of arguing the matter with his brother commissioners. He therefore considered the introduction of the clause as one of great importance. It had been stated erroneously, that a clause at the end of the bill had rendered this provision inoperative. But the most satisfactory answer was this, that out of 500 cases, one half had agreed without a reference or complaint, and, as far as his information had led him to form an opinion, the intentions of the legislature had been carried into effect to a great extent. One great satisfaction arose from the operation of this bill; namely, that it was approved of by those who had suffered most from the oppression of tithes; he meant the lower classes. There was no parish in which the measure had been introduced, where the lower classes did not seem anxious to avail themselves of its benefits; but even where it had not been carried into effect, they invariably seemed to appreciate the liberality of parliament, in affording them the power to obtain relief from what they considered a grievous burthen, and which really did fall with great severity upon them; no matter how moderately or kindly it might be levied.—There was another satisfaction which arose out of this measure. It was the fashion out of doors, which was sometimes re-echoed in that House, to impute to the clergy a desire to grasp at enormous profits, and to wring from their parishioners the utmost farthing, Whenever that subject had been introduced, he had always felt it his duty to state what he believed to be the truth; namely, that, taking the whole clergy of Ireland, from one corner to the other, if their income could be ascertained, it would be found, that considering the extent of their parishes, their revenue was smaller than that of any persons in the empire, who derived an income from similar sources. The operation of this measure completely explained that point; and he trusted the House would excuse him, whilst he stated the rates at which the composition had been effected in different parishes. There were eleven dioceses. He would take the diocese of Cashel, which contained some of the finest
854
and most cultivated land in Ireland, and where it might be expected the rates would be considerable, if there was any disposition on the part of the clergy to extort. Now, in the diocese of Cashel there were five parishes in which the provisions of this measure had been carried into effect. In some, the rate of composition was 2s. 3d., in some 2s. 8d. and in some 1s. 2d., making an average of 2s. 1¼d. per acre. In the diocese of Clonfert, there were ten parishes in which this measure had been carried into effect. In the first of these the composition was 11 d. in the second 10 d. in the third 1s., in the fourth 9d., and so on; making an average rate of a composition, in lieu of all tithe, of 11 d. the Irish, and 6d. the English acre.
Sir J. Newportsuggested, across the table, that the mere statement of the rate per acre, without specifying the value of the land, would afford very little information. In some parishes of the diocese of Cashel, the land was very good; but in others it was exceedingly poor.
Mr. Goulburnsaid, that undoubtedly he should have wished to state the value of the land, and he should take the earliest opportunity of obtaining the information. But when they found that in 51 parishes, taken without any selection, except that the first desired to take the benefit of the act, the rate of composition was so extremely small, there was a prima facie case in favour of the moderation of the clergy.—He now came to the cases in which the vestries had adjourned, without making any agreement; and it was in reference to these cases that the proposed bill was necessary. When the bill of last session was in progress through the House, considerable difficulty was anticipated, when it was considered that they had to operate with entirely new machinery, and that the inhabitants of the several parishes had, in the first place, to perform certain acts, to form themselves into a vestry, and then to deliberate concerning the welfare of their parish, in a manner in which they were not accustomed. He gave the vestries credit for having discharged the duties of their new situation much more ably than he had contemplated. There was little to change in the manner of proceeding of these vestries, though somewhat in the manner of collecting the materials of which they were composed; not that he intended to change the class of persons who should

855
compose them; but some changes might be made in the manner of forming the lists.—The causes which had induced the vestries to adjourn, without coming to any agreement, had been various. In some oases, there was a misapprehension of the nature and objects of the bill; in others, there were local or temporary objections to an arrangement; in others, there were not the number of persons in the parishes necessary for the formation of special vestries. There were other cases that would be best explained in the bill itself. The house, however, was not to suppose, because in 335 instances the vestries had adjourned without coming to an agreement, that in all those cases there were permanent obstacles to the operation of the act; on the contrary, in many instances, they had adjourned to see the effect of the bill in other parishes; in some instances to meet at a subsequent fixed time, when obstacles actually existing were removed; and there were many instances in which the vestries, after adjournment, had applied for leave to meet again, and in some, having so re-assembled, the bill had been put into effect. There was a fair ground of calculation, therefore, that many of these parishes would also take advantage of the law.—There were, however, two great causes to be assigned for the adjournments. The first was, the indisposition of the proprietors and holders of grass land, to submit to assessment, to make up the sum to be paid to the clergymen in lieu of tithes. Hitherto, it was well known, grass land had been exempt from tithes. It was not therefore to be wondered that the proprietors of that land now felt it to be an evil to contribute to the composition, and that they not only resisted it openly, but exercised all their influence over their fellow-parishioners to prevent indirectly those measures which they could not oppose in fair discussion. He was bound, however, to say, that there were many proprietors of grass land, who, though fully aware of the weight which a composition would throw on them, had exerted their influence to get the bill put into operation, from their sense of the benefits it would confer on the country at large. But there were others who did not possess the liberal feelings of the proprietors of the land, and who in Ireland occupied the place, without filling the blank in society left by the absentee land proprietors. To these, and to the actual
856
tenants of the grass land, there was little inducement to subject themselves to the weight of the assessment. Holding grass land for a limited time, and under a fixed rent, it was not reasonable to expect that this class of persons should be willing to submit to an assessment in lieu of tithes which they did not now pay. Of this class of persons the objections were not easily removed, and it was necessary, with respect to them, to wait the operation of that part of the act which, on the granting of new leases, threw on the landlord the burthen of the tithes.—The other great cause of difficulty was, that the time during which the income of the clergyman was taken, so as to form the basis of the composition, was the seven years from 1814 to 1821. It had been objected, that the time so fixed upon was that during which the value of tithes had been the highest, and that it was not reasonable to bind the parishes to that rate.—He certainly had felt, that this was a matter of extreme difficulty, and indeed the moment at which the bill passed, was the most unfavourable to ascertain the real income of the clergy. During two years before the passing of the bill, the income of the clergy had been reduced almost to nothing, and to fix their incomes according to the rate of those two years would be little less than fraud. It was therefore necessary to take the seven years from 1814 to 1821. It was to be recollected, that in the majority of parishes in Ireland, the tithe had not been; raised to any tiling like its real value during those years: and certainly in the 240 I instances in which agreements had been made under the act, there was no complaint from the landlords, that the clergy had taken a higher rate than they thought it just they should pay. He was ready to admit that when the income of the clergyman had been raised to the extent of the real value of the tithe between 1814 and 1821, there was an obstacle to the bringing the act into operation. But, if there was a difficulty to the parishioners, there was a difficulty also to the clergyman; for, as his income was to be measured according to the price of corn in each three of successive years, as compared with the price from 1814 to 1821, it so happened, that, if the clergyman accepted an income which might be reasonable at present, it might at the conclusion of three years be reduced below what was reasonable. For example, suppose the

857
income of a clergyman, from 1814 to 1821 had been 100 l., and the price of corn then was 50 s., he might be willing to accept 80 l. a year; but if he did accept it, it would be returned, by the commissioners, in the certificate, thus: Income 80 l.—price of corn 40 s. Now, if at the end of three years the average price of corn fell, say to 25 s. the clergyman's income would be reduced to 40 l. It was very possible, therefore that the clergyman, who might submit to a present reduction of 20 l. would not submit to the probability of so great a further reduction. It was his intention, therefore, to introduce some alterations to make the agreements between the parties essentially just. He should propose to allow a voluntary agreement of the parties to settle the income of the clergyman in the following manner—that the price of corn in the seven years from 1814 to 1821 should be the first term of the proportion, the income of the clergyman during those seven years the second term, the price of corn during the seven years preceding the composition the third term, and the income to be received by the clergyman under the composition the fourth term.—In the constitution of the vestries under the present act, as votes were given to the members according to the amount of tithes they paid, three or four persons of the higher order might have the power to impede the wishes of the majority. He proposed in the bill which he wished to bring in, to alter the proportion of votes according to payment. When the composition was made for twenty-one years he intended to propose that the valuation should be made for every seven and not three years, an alteration which would be conducive to the comfort as well of the parishioners as of the clergy. As the act at present stood, every composition made took place on the 1st of November next ensuing. It happened that, after the passing of the act, it was utterly impossible for the parishes to come to any agreement before the first of November, though some concluded their agreements soon after. He should propose, therefore, that, when an agreement was entered into before the 1st of May, it should come into effect at that period, and when after the 1st of May, that it should come into effect on the 1st of November. Another provision of his intended bill was, to meet the cases in which various portions of the tithes were paid to various persons. In the diocese of Elphin, where there was
858
a composition of 8d., it was paid in six different fractions, some small; but as the law stood, they were obliged to pay different collectors. He proposed to enable one to collect for all the owners. There were other minor provisions in the bill, which it was not important now to detail, as there was nothing in them which should induce the House to refuse to give it at least their consideration, and to endeavour to bring about a general composition of the tithes in Ireland, on a footing of good fellowship, harmony, and friendship, between the clergy and the laity. He then moved "for leave to bring in a bill to amend the act of the last session for the composition of tithes in Ireland."
Mr. Grattanthought it was premature to talk of amending the act of last session, as they were as yet entirely ignorant of the operation of that act. When they were told that the act had been carried into effect in 250 parishes, he begged to state that it could not yet have been put into operation in any one. The commissioners had indeed, they were told, sent in a number of certificates, but these were merely certificates of the agreement; the rate remained to be assessed on the individual tithe-payers, and to be levied; and until; the House saw the operation carried through in some one parish they had no ground of judging as to the merits of the bill. He had taken some trouble with the bill, in its progress through the House, and had subsequently, endeavoured to put it into operation in Ireland; and as what the House wanted was practical knowledge on the subject, he should state what had taken place at two vestries which he had attended. Of the first vestry he had attended he was chosen chairman. His first business, therefore, was, of course, to attempt to explain the object and nature of the bill; but he found this was a hopeless task, for of the whole vestry, which was composed of about twenty persons, there were not two who could understand two lines of it; and this he believed would be found to be the case generally throughout Ireland. He had then resorted to the right hon. gentleman's circular letter, in which they were directed to an admirable clause, which had found its way into the bill by accident. The rector being present the vestry were afraid to say any thing before him, as to the value of the parish. No one would speak, It was then suggested, that the rector should state what sum he would

859
take; but he declined. They had then to bid up to the rector. At first 100 l. a year was offered, and rejected. The parishioners would make no offer that was accepted, and therefore adjourned. They met again; and the rector moved a series of resolutions which were all negatived, and so the vestry ended. At another vestry he (Mr. G.) was also chosen chairman. The rector then agreed to receive 400 l. a year, but then came the question, as to the average to be taken every three years. The clergyman adjourned the meeting for a month, and read the act very attentively. He calculated the effect of the averages, and said—"I will agree to take 400 l. a year; but three years hence, when the new average is taken, I shall lose 75 l. a year; which I shall not consent to." The clergyman proposed then, that the parish should agree in vestry to pay him 500 l. a year, he giving a bond to take no more than 400 l. He (Mr. G.), had doubted the legality of this contrivance; but the clergyman told him he had the sanction of the archbishop and was very anxious for an agreement; but the difficulties were not removed, and that vestry adjourned for six months. In fact, all were ready, clergy and parishioners, to come to an agreement: but as to the bill, it was utterly impossible to act upon it. As to the proposal to take the average for seven instead of three years, it would, he thought, be highly disapproved of, both by the gentry and the clergy. Of the prices for three years a guess might be formed, but not for seven years. He thought it would be better to let the act go on for a few years, to see the effect of it; or at least to leave it open to the parties compounding to agree for seven or for twenty one years.
Mr. Humedid not find himself informed by the statement of the right hon. gentleman, of the real nature of the alterations proposed; but he was convinced that by this sort of legislation no good would be done to Ireland. The real remedy for the evil was to break up the Church establishment in Ireland. Nothing else would be effectual [hear! hear!]. The members of the established church in Ireland were but as one out of fourteen, and they made the other thirteen pay for the support of their church. The government would do well to follow the example that had been set them in other countries, and to remove this source of irritation. They
860
might, at any rate, enable the proprietors of land to purchase up the tithes and extinguish them, instead of continuing the system of annual bargains, which was to go on under the proposed bill. The bill of the right hon. gentleman, so far from having succeeded, had entirely failed of its object. The measure was wrong in principle; for he ought to have begun by removing the causes of irritation, and enabling individuals to purchase up their titles. This would have been the right course, instead of coming down, as the right hon. gentleman did, year after year, to patch up a system which was rotten from its foundation. He hoped the House would not allow the bill, he should feel it his duty to oppose the motion for leave to bring in an amended bill, which would only have the effect of heaping legislation on legislation, and compounding that which was already too confused.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, that if the present were a motion for the Speaker leaving the chair, for the purpose of going into a committee, there might be some ground for the opposition of the hon. member for Aberdeen; but really there was not the slightest pretence for that opposition, when it was considered, that this was merely a motion for leave to bring in the bill. As to the documents which had been moved for relative to this subject, his right hon. friend was as anxious as the hon. member for Aberdeen could be, that the House should be put in possession of every information, and that those documents should be laid on the table before this measure was discussed. He should feel that he was fighting with a shadow, if he contended for one moment with such an argument as that which had been brought forward by the hon. member for Aberdeen. If his right hon. friend had deferred moving for leave to bring in this bill to a later period of the session, the hon. gentleman opposite would have been one of the first to object to the measure, on the ground of its not having; been brought early enough before the House. The present motion would pledge no man to any opinion on the merits of the bill: there would be ample opportunity hereafter for considering its details; and he should be wasting the time of the House, if he said any thing in reply to the opposition which had been made to so fair and reasonable a proposition. With respect to the observations which had fallen from the hon. member for Wicklow,

861
if ever he had heard a speech in favour of a motion, it was the speech of that hon. member; for the hon. member had stated, that he had been chairman at two meetings, at each of which he had been unable to explain to the vestry the object of the bill.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.

CLERK OF THE ORDNANCE.
The report of the Committee of Supply was brought up. On the first resolution being read,
Mr. Calcraftobserved, that the salary of the Clerk of the Ordnance was very inadequate to the labours he had to discharge, and to the rank and station of the individual; for the office was generally filled by a member of parliament. As he had formerly filled the office, he knew that the time of the Clerk of the Ordnance was wholly employed; and he thought the present salary, which was under 1,000 l. a year, much too low. The offices of Secretary to the Treasury and Admiralty, which were of the same scale as that of the Clerk of the Ordnance, were more amply paid. When he held the office, the salary was double its present amount; and yet he never thought he was paid too much [a laugh]. He did not speak with reference particular individual who might fill the to any office now, or at any future period, but he thought this officer justly entitled to double the salary he at present received. He did not intend to make any motion on the subject, but he trusted ministers would take it into their consideration.
Mr. Secretary Peelthought, without any reference to the comparative claims of the secretaries of the Treasury and Admiralty, that this subject was well worthy of the attention of his majesty's government. He was not, of course, prepared to give any assurance on the subject, as such an arrangement did not rest with him personally, but he repeated, that the subject deserved consideration.
Mr. Humetrusted that as the right hon. gentleman expressed his readiness to increase the salary of an officer in the Ordnance department, because the duties of the office were too heavy for the salary, he would also be ready to reduce the salaries of some other officers in the same department whose salaries were too heavy for their duties.

BARRACK DEPARTMENT.
On the resolution "That 114,531 l. be granted for
862
defraying the charge of the Ordnance Barrack department,"
Mr. Hobhouseobserved, that the hon. and gallant officer opposite was mistaken, when he had contended, the other night, that the system of Barracks was recognised by the petition of rights. Complaints were made, indeed, at the period to which the hon. and gallant officer adverted, of the billeting of soldiers, on the people, but there were no such thing as a standing army at that time. The barrack system had long ago been decided against, as a novel and unconstitutional mode of lodging a standing army. That system was calculated, perhaps, to turn out a finer soldier for the parade—a living machine, more likely to pay prompt and implicit obedience to his officers; but he was sure the hon. and gallant officer, who was not less an excellent citizen, than an honourable soldier, did not wish to make a mere automaton of a soldier, or to perpetuate a system which separated the character of the soldier and the citizen. Long before the existence of the barrack system, our soldiers had distinguished themselves by victories, as splendid as any which had since been obtained. The soldier who mixed freely with his countrymen might not make so good a machine for the parade, but he was a better man, and a better citizen. The union of the characters of the soldier and the citizen had been strongly insisted upon by our ablest constitutional writers. The gallant officer had told them the other night, and perhaps he could not be blamed for doing so, when surrounded with such applauders, that the people of England had themselves called for barracks throughout the kingdom. In support of that opinion he had quoted the bill of rights, but the bill of rights only denounced the quartering of soldiers on the people as a grievance. How, then, could the gallant officer, in mirth or in seriousness, as an argument, or as a piece of waggery, interpret such a declaration into a preference of the barrack to the billeting system? If he was anxious to ascertain the feeling of the people of England on the subject, let him look both to the practice of our ancestors, and to the sentiments entertained at the present day; or, rather, let him confess, that the system owed its support to those alone who maintained the necessity of arming one portion of the people against the rest. If there existed no other use in the motion with which he should conclude,

863
it would shew that there was one person in the House at least, and he was of opinion that there were many, who knew the feelings of the people of England better than to coincide with the gallant officer's account of it, and who respected the constitution of the country too well to approve of a system incompatible with its spirit.—The hon. gentleman concluded by moving the following amendment to the resolution:
"That it appears to this House, that since the conclusion of the war in 1815, more than 2,500,000 l. sterling have been expended in the Barrack department established in Great Britain and Ireland, and that 136,531 l are proposed to be devoted to the same object in the current year.
"That it appears to this House, that a part of the sum so required is to be laid out in the construction of a permanent barrack on the site of the King's Mews, at Charing-cross; and that thus, in the heart of the city and liberties of Westminster, another military station, separating the soldier from the citizen, is to be added to the many similar establishments to be found in various parts of the kingdom.
"That this House cannot but view with the utmost jealousy and suspicion, the continuance and increase of a system utterly inconsistent with the ancient laws and usages of England, such as they find them expounded by all the authorities who have treated of the constitution of this country, and more particularly by Mr. Justice Blackstone, who, in his Commentaries on the laws of England, after expressly declaring that the laws and constitution of these kingdoms, know no such state as that of a perpetual standing soldiery; makes use, in a subsequent passage, of the following remarkable words:—'Nothing, then, according to these principles, ought to be more guarded against in a free state, than making the military power, when such a one is necessary to be kept on foot, a body too distinct from the people. Like ours, therefore, it ought only to be enlisted for a short and limited time; the soldiers also should live intermixed with the people; no separate camp—no barracks—no inland fortresses should be allowed; and perhaps it might be still better, if, by dismissing a stated number, and enlisting others, at every renewal of their term, a circulation could be kept up between the army and the people, and the citizen and the soldier be more intimately connected together.'
864
"That this House partaking, therefore, those free sentiments with the great commentator on the laws of this, their country, and wishing to discourage the military system therein decried, will not vote a larger sum than 90,000 l. for the barrack department in Great Britain in the current year; and this House further humbly begs leave to urge, that no new barrack for soldiers ought to be erected in the midst or in the vicinity of the metropolis."
Sir H. Hardingesaid, that with regard to the constitutional question he would take the advice of the hon. gentleman, and avoid it altogether, as it had been sufficiently discussed on a former occasion. He would undertake, however, to shew how the barrack system came to be so generally extended. It was well known, that various petitions had been presented, from time to time, praying for relief from the billeting system, which, at the breaking out of the revolutionary war, was resorted to as an act of necessity. In 1803, when the war broke out again, government deemed it advisable to send troops to the coast, as a means of providing against invasion. It was impossible to provide the troops so employed with quarters at the public-houses in those districts, and various petitions against it were again forwarded to parliament. Accordingly it was determined, in order to relieve the people from the inconvenience of the billeting system, that several barracks should be built within those districts. Government could not, therefore, be charged with having built those barracks in opposition to the liberties of the subject, since they were for the protection of the country, and in compliance with the desire of the people themselves. Besides, the number of these barracks had been greatly diminished since the peace. The hon. gentleman had stated the intention of the government to erect barracks at Charing-cross, as one of his reasons for opposing the vote; but whatever might eventually be done upon that subject, he was not himself apprised of any intention to convert the Kings Mews into barracks for the soldiery. The Board of Ordnance, in met, had no power to decide the question, though he would confess that, in his opinion, such a change would be attended with great advantage. He would oppose this single fact to all the reasoning of the hon. gentleman—that before the revolutionary war, all the soldiery in London were

865
dispersed in billets about the town, and that their discipline was so far destroyed and their morals so corrupted by the opportunities thus afforded them, that in the years 1791, 1792 and 1793, among the number of public executions, out of every fourteen that were hanged there was one guardsman. Since the establishment of barracks, the case was so far altered, that it was a rare thing to hear of a guardsman being arraigned. It must be obvious to all who consider the subject dispassionately, that the soldiers were not only much more exposed to acquire profligate habits under the billeting system, and to commit outrages when removed from the control of their officers, but were also more likely to relax in their discipline; for when a soldier went to billet he deposited his arms in the armoury, from whence he did not take them again until he was summoned to parade; he had therefore less of the habits of a soldier. Upon the whole, there could be no doubt but that in a large metropolis like London, the establishment of barracks had a tendency to make better soldiers and better men, than the former practice of dispersing them through the metropolis in public houses.
Mr. Humecontended that the arguments of the gallant officer were not applicable to the present state of the country. He had described a state of expected invasion but we were now at peace, and consequently exempted from the necessity upon which he had rested his defence of the system. A man did not cease to be a citizen when he became a soldier, and should not be regarded as a mere automaton, to be moved only by the will of his commanding officer. If they wished to keep the soldiers separate from the people, that was no reason why they should multiply barracks through the town. They might remove them from the houses of the people. The sum called for by this grant was monstrous, and the object of it was, to maintain a military despotism. For these reasons he should vote for the amendment of his hon. friend.
The amendment was negatived without a division.

CATTLE ILL-TREATMENT BILL.
Mr. R. Martin having moved, that the House do resolve itself into a committee on this bill,
Mr. Humesaid, he had hitherto taken no part against the hon. member's mea-
866
sures, except that of voting against them. He now, however, felt it necessary to say a few words on the subject. By the bill which the hon. member had introduced this session, it was made an offence to overload a horse. Now, how was it possible to ascertain what load was suited to a horse's strength? He had seen a little pony who could carry his noble friend near him (lord Nugent) with the greatest ease. It would be difficult however to find many a large horse that would not find it difficult to do the same thing. He was willing to admit, that the hon. member would have done good, if he had allowed his bill of last session to remain unaltered. He would state why he must doubt the humanity of the hon. member. On a former evening, he (Mr. Hume) had made a motion to prevent the torturing of men, by flogging. As a matter of course he had expected that the hon. member would have given him his vote; but to his great surprise he found, that that hon. member who was so anxious to protect oxen, and who sympathized so much with the sufferings of dogs and cats, did, without the slightest remorse, consign, as far as his vote went, 73,000 British soldiers to the torture of the lash. He would move by way of amendment, M that this House will, upon this day six months, resolve itself into the said committee."
The Attorney-generalrose to second the amendment. The present bill, he said appeared to him to be vexatious and every way unnecessary. The definition of the offence in the bill which the hon. member for Galway had introduced last year was the wilful ill-treatment of horses and cattle. He understood, however, that the object of the present bill was to render the ill-treatment of those animals, arising from inadvertence and negligence, a misdemeanour. There was one clause of the bill which, in charity to the framer, he hoped would be withdrawn. He alluded to the clause which authorized any individual to apprehend a person in the act of ill-treating cattle. He knew from the zeal which the hon. member had heretofore displayed in the cause of humanity, that not a week would elapse before he would be forced into some desperate conflict in attempting to enforce the law. He remembered that the hon. member had been extremely anxious to introduce the word "bull" into the bill of last year. After a long discussion, however, the bull was rejected by a large majority. The

867
hon. member, however, contrived to introduce the words "or other cattle," and he had been endeavouring, during the last year, to persuade the magistrates that the-bull was included in that description. He supposed it was for the same object that the hon. member had introduced the words "or other cattle" into the present bill. He objected to having the bull introduced thus covertly. The hon. member should take the bull by the horns, and bring it in openly.
Mr. W. Smithwas convinced that the bill of his hon. friend, ridiculed as it had been, had already conferred great benefit upon the community. He conceived the object of the present bill to be a good one, and was therefore disposed to go into the committee upon it.
Mr. R. Martinsaid, he was not uninformed, that the hon. member for Aberdeen intended to shew him up. He would say further, that the hon. member for Aberdeen would not shew up the honourable man who represented the county of Galway, unless he had the license of the latter for so doing. With respect to bull-baiting the learned attorney-general had his (Mr. M's) two guineas in his pocket, and had given it as his opinion, that a bull was entitled to legal protection.
Dr. Lushingtonconsidered the present bill to be a necessary adjunct to the act of the last year; the effect of which act was, that the public feeling was no longer shocked with those atrocities which had so long disgraced the national character. Lord Erskine had, years ago, endeavoured without success, to provide that remedy, which it was the happier lot of the hon. member for Galway to effect.
Mr. Wynnsaid, he should oppose the measure for the reasons which had led him to oppose the existing act of the horn* member for Galway.
Mr. Buxtonsaid, he should cordially support the motion. He had asked a friend what effect the bill of last year had produced, and the answer was, that it had put an end to half the cruelty which formerly prevailed in the country.
Mr. Warresaid, it had been stated that the cases which measures of this kind brought before magistrates were in general of so doubtful a character, that it was a chance whether conviction would or would not take place. Now, he denied this to be the fact; for an overwhelming majority of the cases recently prosecuted were of so atrocious a character, that con-
868
viction had regularly followed accusation. He should support the motion for the bill going into a committee. The instances of cruelty to animals were numerous. How often were horses, in the last extremity, forced beyond their strength and urged forward by lighted straw being put under them. Would not any man who witnessed such an atrocity feel gratified at being enabled to send such vagabonds before a magistrate?
Mr. Alderman Bridgesadverted to the shocking barbarities which were every day practised on cattle, and said, that there never was a measure of more humanity than the one now proposed by the hon. member for Galway. He briefly pointed out the evil effects which an habitual practice of tormenting animals, or seeing them tormented, produced on the mind, and illustrated his proposition by an allusion to Hogarth, whose hero, commenced his progress in cruelty with tying a canister to a dog's tail, and ended it by committing murder.
Mr. Goulburnobjected to the bill, on account of the great disproportion would it would establish between punishment and crime, and in which he saw an attempt to proceed still further in the march of penalty. The bill of last session had, it was said, effected much good; but, because it did not do all that the hon. member contemplated, he now came forward, and called on the House to tolerate a most disproportionate punishment, by making the offence a misdemeanour, at the discretion of the magistrate.
Mr. G. Bankesexpressed his anxiety to go into a committee, where the House would have an opportunity of examining all the details of the measure. He must object most strongly to the spirit of levity with which the question had been treated, and the sort of argumentum ad hominem which had been so frequently resorted to.
Mr. Huskissonspoke against the bill. The House, he said, was now required to increase the punishment for this offence, although the hon. member for Galway had shown that this was not necessary. The hon. member had himself stated to the House, that, generally, when he obtained a conviction, he paid the penalty himself, the persons accused being mostly too poor to pay it. This, surely, proved, that the present bill was sufficiently severe.
Mr. W. Courtenayobjected to going

869
into the committee. If the act of last year had been duly executed and had been found inadequate, that might have been a good reason for fresh legislation; but as that was not the case, he could not consent to create a new misdemeanour.
The House then divided, when there appeared: For going into the committee 11. Against it 19. There being only thirty members present, the House, of course, adjourned.

CLERK OF PARLIAMENT.
The Earl of Liverpoolrose, pursuant to notice, to move for the appointment of a select committee to inquire into the present state of the office of Clerk of Parliament, and into the best means of hereafter regulating it. It was not his intention, he said, to trouble their lordships with any observations. It would be the object of the committee to inquire into this office, with a view of putting it on a permanent footing. The committee would have some little conflicting interests to attend to, but there was no doubt it would do justice to all parties.
Earl Grosvenorobserved, that no immediate advantage to the public would arise from this measure; but their lordships must be aware, that a very considerable saving might take place on the decease of the person who now held the office. The noble earl then alluded to the office of Remembrancer of the Exchequer. Notwithstanding the regulation for the abolition of that office, a person had recently been appointed to it.
The Earl of Liverpoolreminded their lordships, that with respect to the offices of the Exchequer, the law which had been passed for their abolition authorized the Lords of the Treasury to make what regulations they thought necessary in them. This had been done as far as possible in these offices. With regard to the Remembrancer of the Exchequer, it had, been found necessary to put it on a new fooling; but before it should be finally regulated, it was the wish of the barons of the Exchequer to ascertain precisely what ought to be done with it, and for
830
that purpose a gentleman had been appointed to execute the necessary duties, but without a salary.
The motion was then agreed to.

APPELLATE JURISDICTION.
Lord Calthorpesaid, he would take the opportunity of adverting to a subject in which the interest of the public, and the honour and dignity of their lordships' House were deeply concerned. He alluded to the new arrangement which had been made by their lordships for hearing appeals. This arrangement he had heard complained of within doors, and unsparingly censured out of doors, and not one word any where, either in doors or out of doors, in its favour except that it had promoted the convenience of their lordships. To him it appeared that this arrangement had done much to take from the country that confidence which it had once placed in the appellant jurisdiction of their lordships House. The first circumstance which, in his opinion, made this measure derogatory to their dignity was, that a commission had issued, naming the highest tribunal of the empire, to try causes in the absence of the highest judge. The whole arrangement was, in his lordship's opinion, a great error; inasmuch as it permitted an inferior judge to sit where only the highest judge of the land bad before presided. He was far from saying this with any wish to censure the learned lord who presided in the absence of the noble and learned lord on the woolsack, or in any way to depreciate his merits; but he could not have the high authority of the lord chancellor. The arrangement, besides created a great anomaly; which, though a temporary regulation had obviated it with regard to England, was in same measure true with regard to Scotland—the anomaly of bringing the decisions of a superior judge before an inferior judge, by appeal. This was the case with the Scotch courts, the decisions of which were brought for revisal before an individual inferior to the lord president in judicial authority, and which had never before been subjected but to the revision of the authority of the lord high chancellor. The arrangement was, in his opinion, therefore founded on a wrong principle, as far as regarded the presiding judge; and he thought it equally wrong as far as regarded the judicial colleagues of the learned lord who was to preside. Those noble lords were not brought here to at-

831
tend to the whole of the pleadings, but, according to the regulations, came on certain days, and those regulations went upon the principle, that noble lords would attend only one day. It was optional for noble lords to attend beyond that day, or not. In fact, except on extraordinary occasions, hardly any peers attended, but the two who were ordered. It was true, the regulations of the House did not prohibit their being present; but, if they attended through the whole of a case, it was not owing to the regulations, but to their own choice. Such an arrangement could not but tend to lower the high authority of the House in the eyes of the country; and he thought it worthy of the attention of their lordships to consider if, for the sake of some little convenience, they should run so great a risk. Then, adverting to another subject, his lordship said, it was not only as a judicial, but as a legislative assembly, that he feared their lordships were sinking in the estimation of the public. In the early part of the session, it was plain to all the world, that their lordships, in their legislative capacity, met day after day only to adjourn. The course of business in that House, and the manner of disposing of bills, was not such as to give due legislative consideration to the measures which received the approbation of their lordships. The extraordinary restriction thrown on the power of that House to originate bills, was, he believed, one cause of the impediments to their proceedings. This restriction did not apply to bills only for levying money, but also to bills effecting changes, the advantages of which were universally allowed. These restrictions at present went a great deal further than was warranted by the constitutional jealousy which it might become the other House to entertain. He stated this with less reserve, because he had a high respect for the authority of the other House; but at the same time it did appear to him, that their lordships were seriously aggrieved thereby. But, if at the early part of the session they had nothing to do, at its close the bills came up from the other House in such numbers, that their lordships had no alternative but to accede to or reject them without due examination. The business of legislation was therefore only half done, by that House being deprived of half its power. Other serious evils also arose from this mode of carrying on the public business. The dignity of both Houses of parliament was
832
lowered; and the country at large was proportionably injured. It was perfectly evident, that the members of their lordships' House were deprived of that great advantage, which was one of the most distinguished privileges of all men in a country like this; namely, that of contributing by their exertions, equally with their fellow-citizens, to the public welfare.
The Earl of Liverpoolthought it necessary to offer a few words on the observations of the noble lord. Though the remarks which had fallen from the noble lord did not apply in any degree to the motion before their lordships, it was of some consequence that the first part of his lordship's speech should not pass without observation. The noble lord had chosen to attack the regulation with regard to appeals, which he had described as having nothing to recommend it but their lordships' convenience. Their lordships did not, however, need to be told, that that regulation was not adopted until after long and deliberate consideration. Complaints were numerous of the number of appeals which were undecided from all parts of the united kingdom, particularly from one part; and to remedy this and to do justice, was the motive for the regulation. It was not adopted from any summary view of the matter, nor out of deference to any individual opinion, but it arose out of the recommendation of a committee appointed by their lordships from both sides of the House; and a committee more divested of passion or prejudice it was not possible to select. There were in it some of the most distinguished members of their lordships' House, and some noble lords intimately connected with that part of the united kingdom from which the greatest number of appeals came. The plan adopted came recommended by that committee, and it was not adopted until after long and anxious consideration. The committee was not closed against any proposition which might originate either with their lordships or with other persons, and the plan which was adopted was the best that could be found to effect the object. The great object proposed to be attained by the regulation was, to do justice to the appellants, who called for the decision of the House on their cases, and more particularly to those of that part of the united kingdom in which the greatest arrear was found. There certainly was some difference of opinion as to the mode proposed in the committee,

833
but there was no difference of opinion as to the necessity of getting rid of the arrear of appeals by some means or other. Their lordships must be aware, that a commission of inquiry into the administration of justice in Scotland was going on. The report of that commission would soon be laid before parliament, and he hoped that, in consequence of its recommendation, measures would be adopted to lessen the number of appeals. But, if their lordships were even certain that the system of administering justice in Scotland was perfect, still it would be necessary to get rid of the existing arrear of appeals. With respect to the discredit into which the noble lord was afraid the judicial authority of the House would be brought, he could not see how that was likely to be the result of an evident wish to do justice. As to the objection taken to the mode of securing the attendance of peers, he conceived it to be of little weight. He must maintain, that whether three lords or thirty were present, the decision which they came to was the decision of the House, and was as complete as if every noble lord was in his place when it was made. By the regulations made for their lordships' government, three peers constituted a House; and, by the regulations of the Commons, forty members must be present before that House was formed. But, was it ever meant by these regulations that the numbers required to be present at the commencement of a sitting must continue until its close, or until the business before them was concluded? There certainly was no obligation of that kind. A limited number was necessary in either House to set the proceedings a-going, and to continue them; but it was not expected that the same individuals should always be present. Though certain lords were summoned to attend on the hearing of appeals, it was not to be supposed that no other noble lords were present. Those to whose judgment, in matters of that kind, the House was accustomed to pay respect were generally in their places. A noble and learned friend of his (lord Redesdale), who was exempted on account of his age, and whose name had not been drawn, nevertheless almost constantly gave his attendance on appeals. In fact, the proceedings in appeals went on precisely as before, every member of the House being at liberty to attend if he pleased: the only difference was, that measures were now taken to
834
secure a House of peers. He hoped' for the credit and honour of the House' whatever might be thought of the plan abstractedly, that now it was established, their lordships would give it a fair trial.
Lord Hollandagreed with the noble lord opposite, that the subject had at the time been fairly discussed; still he felt it incumbent on him, after what had fallen from the noble lord, to say a few words. It was true that the plan had not been adopted till after a long consideration; and, although he had not the honour to be a member of that committee which had been so deservedly eulogised by the noble lord, he believed it had fulfilled its functions with great zeal. In justice, however, to himself, and to the noble lord who had first addressed them, he must say, that when he came to consider the plan proposed, it did appear to him the most unparliamentary resolution that had ever, within his recollection, passed that House. It was more directed against the honour and dignity of parliament, than any proceeding adopted in his time. This was the first instance in which the House, acting as the highest tribunal in the country, had declared to the public, that justice was administered here by one man. This was the first time the House had been laid prostrate at the feet of learned lords, and the first time it had been announced, that all the other peers were mere cyphers, attending to make up a House. This was the first time that individual peers were to be regularly called on to discharge a duty which belonged to all. He did not object to the measure on account of any inconvenience to which it might subject noble lords, but he protested against the principle of calling on individual members to discharge the duty which was common to all their lordships. It was pregnant with destruction to them in their united capacity to act on a principle like this. For the measure, too, there seemed to be no other reason than conveniency. It was the ratio suasoria, as well as the ratio justifica. The more he reflected on this plan, the stronger he felt the desire to censure it. If such a proceeding were neccesary, it should nave been a legislative measure, and not a resolution of that House. It was an alteration in the judicature of the country. After reflecting much on the matter, he was persuaded that it would have been better to have made a breach in a princi-

835
ple of the constitution, by making a permanent committee of that House an appellate tribunal for hearing of Scotch appeals, than thus, by a resolution of their own, break through the forms of the House, and thereby forfeiting the respect of the country. It was true that in coming to a decision, they had the benefit of the learning of the noble lord on the woolsack; and it was true that the House would come to no decision without paying a due respect to the opinions of the other learned lords in the House. But he knew of no distinction between learned and unlearned lords; they were all peers in parliament, whether they sat on a woolsack or on a bench; but now, for the first time, this resolution respecting the hearing of appeals informed the public, that there were distinctions among them—that it was not the body of the peers who gave judgment, but other persons who attended and decided for them. He knew it would be said, that it had always been so—that the decisions were formerly given by the law lords who attended—but the difference was very great, when the fact was so distinctly exposed. Every man in the country was now informed of the manner in which this business was managed, and knew perfectly well that one noble lord was summoned to hear an appeal on the Monday, and another noble lord to hear the continuance of the same appeal on the Tuesday. He did not mean to say that any practical injustice was done to the appellants by this regulation; but what he objected to was, the exposure which it created, and which, as a member of that House, in which he had spent a considerable part of his time to make it useful to the country, he could not but deplore. Indeed, he would not now have said what he had stated on this subject, had he not felt it to be his duty to support the observations of the noble lord who had so justly decribed the manner in which the House was lowering itself in the public opinion. The noble earl opposite had stated that this measure was merely a temporary one. He sincerely hoped that it would prove so. He hoped that the result of the commission in Scotland would soon enable their lordships to return to the ancient, regular, and wholesome practice. The commissioners would deserve well of the House and of the country if they should be the means of correcting the present irregularities in the appellant jurisdiction of the House, and
836
rendering it palatable. As it now stood, its exercise appeared a sort of juggle. One person heard and another decided a cause, or rather the same person both heard and decided, and the others attended merely for form.
The Earl of Harrowbysaid, that the noble lord who had last addressed their lordships had declared, now that the plan was adopted, that he would do what he could to make it palatable to the public, and yet he seemed by his speech anxious only to make it unpalatable. In point of practice, the system which the noble lords opposite condemned worked well; for since the short time it had been established nineteen causes had been disposed of. The only difference made by this regulation was, that the attendance of noble lords was no longer voluntary, which if it displeased those who were obliged to attend, saved the suitors who formerly came to the bar, and found no person to administer justice, a great deal of expense. The noble lord said, it was absurd for a peer to come during the middle of a cause; but this took place before, and would again take place, whether their lordships attended voluntarily or not. As to the observations made by the noble lord who brought on this discussion, of judgments being pronounced by an inferior judge, it was not to be expected that placing a man on the woolsack would inspire him with knowledge; and, though their lordships were accustomed to place high and deserved confidence in the noble and learned lord who had so long sat on the woolsack, it was not therefore a legitimate conclusion, that no other could be confided in. In fact also, it was not a novelty. For during the indisposition of the noble and learned lord, a commission had more than once issued, and causes had been decided there, under the presidency of persons whom the noble lord called, inferior judges. [The noble earl addressed the House at much greater length, but we were only able now and then to gather the meaning of a sentence].
The Earl of Darnleywished to direct the attention of the House to that part of the noble lord's speech who had first addresssed them, which referred to the proceedings of their lordships in their legislative capacity. He had frequently called the attention of their lordships to this subject, and entreated them to wipe off this stain. Some method, he thought,

837
might be adopted of apportioning the labours of their lordships more equally over the session, so that in the early part of it, they might not meet merely to adjourn, and in the latter part be so hurried, that business was disposed of without examination.
The motion was agreed to.