Sitting of 27 July 1835

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By Mr. GRAHAM SPIERS, from Paisley, against any Grant for Building Churches in Scotland; and by Sir MICHAEL SHAW STEWART, from Paisley and other Places, in favour of such Grant— By Lord COLE, and Messrs. Sergeant JACKSON, H. MAXWELL, and F. SHAW, from a Number of Places, against the Church of Ireland Bill.—By Mr. Sergeant PERRIN, from the Law Society of Ireland, against the Civil Courts' (Ireland) Bill.—By Mr. SINCLAIR, from the Postmasters and Others, on the Road between Dumfries and Edinburgh, for Abolishing the present System, of Farming the Post-Horse Duty.—By Mr. W. DUNCOMBE, from Richmond (Yorkshire), against the Ecclesiastical Courts' Bill. By Mr. LAW HODGES, from Lewisham, for the Repeal of the Malt Tax; from Hawkhurst and Cranbrook, for Poor-Laws to Ireland; from the Agriculturists of Tonbridge, Dartford, and Gravesend, for Relief,—By Mr. LEFROY,

1101
from Kilgariffe, in Defence of the Character of the Reverend Mr. Charles Townshenii.—By Mr. HALFOUR, from the Cotton Spinners of Renfrew, for Amending the Factories' Regulation Act.

COLONIAL TIMBER DUTIES.
Mr. Emerson Tennentpresented a Petition from the Chamber of Commerce of Belfast, against the equalization of the discriminating duty on Canadian and Baltic timber. The petition, after stating that the present import of North American timber into the United Kingdom was equal to 1,000,000 loads per annum, proceeded to show that the trade carried on by British shipping alone, fitted out by British capital, and giving employment to British Seamen, created a market for British produce to the amount of upwards of two millions sterling per annum; whilst on the other hand, the European timber brought into this country was carried exclusively in foreign bottoms, manned by foreign seamen, and took away none of our manufactures to any extent in return. The petitioners expressed their dread of the effect which any reduction of the duty on Baltic timber might produce on the current of emigration, as well as on the interests of British shipping generally, and they concluded by praying, that if the Legislature in its wisdom saw fit to introduce any alteration in the existing duties, no reduction should be made in those on Baltic timber, without a concurrent diminution on the produce of Canada, so as still to preserve the existing proportion between them, conceiving that a change on any other principle must be injurious to their trade, destructive of their shipping, and highly prejudicial to the progress of emigration. To these general observations of the petitioners, he was not disposed to add any lengthened observations of his own. Whether or not the petitioners had accurately stated the amount of our imports and exports from Canada, he was not immediately prepared to say; but if the former did not amount to 1,000,000 loads of timber per annum, he (Mr. Emerson Tennent) was aware that they were at least considerably above 600,000 an amount which of itself engrossed up wards of 400,000 tons of British shipping, and gave employment to 22,000 seamen nearly equal to the numbers employed in the Royal Navy of England. The importance of this branch of our commerce could not in fact, be rated too highly; in Liverpool alone it occupied between 300 and 400
1102
vessels of 130,000 tons burden. It gave m annual outlet for between 2,000,000 l. and 3,000,000 l. of our manufactures at least, and a vent for emigration, which ear by year drained off upwards of 55,000 of our redundant population. Compared to the importance of this trade with Canada, what was the value of all our intercourse with all the countries bordering on the Baltic? Even previous to the year 1809, until which period England was almost exclusively supplied with timber from that quarter, our imports in one year amounted to one half the quantity which we now draw annually from Canada, and, as to our exports in return, the whole Baltic never took from us more than 500,000 l. worth in any one year, and four-fifths of this was in cotton twists. On what principle then were we to sacrifice our present invaluable trade with our colonies for the sake of aggrandizing our Northern neighbours? As regarded our shipping interest at home, any alteration which would have the effect of bringing European produce into direct competition with that of Canada would be fatal to our shipping, the greater part of which would be thrown entirely out of employment. The same would be the case with the 20,000 seamen who now manned that shipping. This, therefore, was a most serious question. But there was another consideration which suggested itself on this question, the result of which he was not very clearly satisfied about. The whole theory on which they were called upon to make this change, resolved itself into this:—that the people should be supplied with such commodities as they wanted from any country which could supply them on the cheapest terms. Now, before they hastened to destroy one market, with which the country was at present pretty well satisfied, they had a right to be shown that the one which was offered in lieu of it would really be found to be the cheapest as well as the best. The object of the free trade advocates at present was, he (Mr. Emerson Tennent) believed, to reduce the duty on the timber of both countries to the same level; but if the superior timber of the Baltic could be introduced at the game cost as the inferior produce of Canada, the Canadian trade would soon cease altogether. If a remnant of it survived at all, it would be the import of the red pine, which might in some degree vie in quality with the Memel; but

1103
the ordinary American timber would cease to be introduced. Now, it was well known that there were purposes for which this inferior timber answered as well, if not better, than material of a better description; but when it was no longer to be procured, we should of course be compelled to make use of the other, at probably double the price. This might not perhaps be so important a consideration in England, where capital was more abundant, and where, besides, the poorer classes had a comparative resource in the growth of low-priced native wood; but in Ireland, where we had no such substitute, the case was widely different, and the effects of a stoppage in the import of cheap colonial deals, would be felt with corresponding force, since in that country the alteration proposed would thus have the inevitable effect of increasing, instead of diminishing, the price of timber most generally consumed. It was not, therefore, without cause, that he was induced to doubt the result of this experiment, at least in his own country. The petitioners had very properly alluded to another topic in which that country was more peculiarly interested, namely the effects of the alteration which was threatened upon emigration to Canada. This was, to every quarter of the empire, a matter of the most vital moment. Our emigrants from British ports to the British Colonies in America, were close upon 60,000 per annum: from the very town whence this petition was forwarded alone, there were last year between 8,000 and 9,000 passengers for the Canadas and New Brunswick. The rate at which these passengers was carried, was from 3l. to 4l. each, and he had understood that this season and the last, passengers from Londonderry to the nearest American settlement had been taken out for so trifling a sum as thirty shillings each; and how was it that the owners of shipping were enabled to carry them out upon such terms?—solely in consequence of that very trade which it was now threatened to destroy. The vessels which were des-patched for colonial timber, rather than sail in ballast, would carry their cargo of emigrants for almost any terms that would cover the bare cost of transport; and the competition was so great, that the fares were reduced to the trifle which he had mentioned. It was thus we were enabled to drain off that vast superabundant and impoverished population with which Ire-
1104
land was overrun, and to transport to Canada that enormous amount of labour which would otherwise find its way into this country, and inundate England with pauperism. All this would be inevitably destroyed by the contemplated change in the timber trade—since vessels for the sole purpose of carring emigrants, without the ulterior object of bringing home produce, could only take them out on such terms as the impoverished settlers could never afford to pay. But other causes under the same system would produce the same results of checking emigration. Canada herself would no longer afford the attraction; she could no longer hold out occupation and support for the unemployed labourer which now finds a settlement on her shores. Such a measure would involve Canada herself in difficulties and poverty from which generations must pass ere she would be fully extricated. Besides the floating capital of the Canadian houses which is now embarked in the timber trade, and which could only be withdrawn at a positive loss, in order to be invested in such other pursuits as the present limited resources of the colony would afford, what was to become of the vested fixed capital which was then embarked in that trade, and expended in saw-mills and machinery of every description? Not less than 1,000,000 l. was at present stated to be so employed; and all this—no insignificant sum in a distant colony—must at one blow be sacrificed, were a change in the trade to be effected. What in such an event was to become of the hosts of British emigrants who now find abundant employment as lumberers in cutting and draining and floating the timber down for exportation? He might be told that they could still betake themselves to agricultural labour; but even for this there could be but slow demand, when the destruction of the timber trade had ceased, as it would cease, to give an impulse to the clearing of the lands. We all knew at present the state of feeling towards this country which pervaded Canada. Even in the midst of our protection of her commerce, she took but little pains to conceal her dissatisfaction at not receiving still further favours. Was it, then, wise still further to provoke such a spirit, by threatening the destruction of the only profitable branch of commerce on which she rested her dependance? Was it wise to drive her to seek a still closer attach-

1105
ment than she already manifested towards the United States? It was a portion of our policy as a nation to afford support and protection to our colonies and our dependencies—we had strained every nerve to maintain and to perpetuate that protection to our colonies in the West Indies by protecting their sugars from foreign competition in our own markets. All that we asked for Canada was, an extension of the same fostering protection; a policy which was the more incumbent on us, since we could not inflict the injury now contemplated on Canada, without giving a blow to our own shipping and marine, which no length of time might be sufficient to remedy. He had to apologize to the House for the length to which these observations had run. But the subject he felt was one of the most vital moment to the nation at large, and his sense of its importance to his own constituents peculiarly, had impelled him to use every exertion to discharge the duty which they had in-trusted to him of conveying the impression of their sentiments to the House.
Petition to lie on the Table.

ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.
Mr. William Duncombepresented a petition from Richmond (Yorkshire) against the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill. He would take the opportunity of urging the Attorney-General to postpone the measure until next Session.
The Attorney-Generalbegged it to be recollected that this measure was introduced by the late Attorney-General, and he therefore trusted that it would be supported by both sides of the House. He could not say he was not disposed to press it. On the contrary, he should endeavour to advance it through its different stages, and not relinquish the attempt to make it law without serious opposition. At present, he was sanguine enough to think that no such opposition would be offered.
Colonel Sibthorperemarked that 166 petitions, with 10,257 signatures, had already been laid upon the table against the Bill, most of the names being those of professional men, upon whom it would be an evident and serious hardship. For his own part, he was resolved to give it the most determined opposition, and it was his firm belief that it would be considered by both sides of the House without any intermixture of party feeling. If the measure
1106
were pressed in the present session, he should persevere in the motion of which he gave notice early in the session, for a Committee to inquire into the necessity for the proposed change.
Mr. Cutler Fergussontrusted that his right hon. Friend, the Attorney General, would give no pledge not to proceed with the Bill in the present session. If hon. Members had attended to the Report of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners (of whom he was one), they would have seen that this Bill grew out of it, and was intended to reform very gross abuses found to prevail in the Ecclesiastical Courts. The principle of the Bill was adopted by the late Attorney-General, and it was approved of by every person who spoke on the debate whose opinion was of any value.
Mr. Wilksagreed that this ought not to be treated as a party question, and he hoped that on all sides it would meet with candour, impartiality, and discrimination. At the same time, he thought that the Attorney-General ought not to press the Bill in the present Session, but allow it to be printed and circulated throughout the country. [Mr. C. Fergusson: It has been printed.] At all events the country ought to have an opportunity of deliberately considering it. He wished that some Bill had been introduced to correct more important abuses pointed out in the Report of the Commissioners, for that which related to the measure under view, was one of their least valuable recommendations. Other abuses were allowed to remain which were a constant source of vexatious litigation.
Mr. Peaseobserved, that the Bill had certainly excited a good deal of alarm in the part of the country with which he was connected. He could not think whence the opinion had arisen that nothing could be well done that was not done in London; neither could he see the reason for depriving country practitioners of what had hitherto been a source of considerable emolument. If this measure were adopted, everything must be done by means of solicitors and agents in London.
Mr. Lowtherhad presented petitions embodying the sentiments of those who had spoken against the proposed change. He did not mean to object to any proper reforms in the Ecclesiastical Courts, but he hoped that the Bill would be withdrawn until next year, in order to give people time to consider its provisions.
Mr. Scarlettdid not perceive that there was any such crying grievance in the present system as to render an immediate alteration necessary. It was proposed to abolish the country jurisdictions, and to remove them to London; and for that part of the Bill he saw no sufficient reason. Having examined the Report of the Commissioners, he might say, that he was not of opinion that they had stated any practical grounds for such a measure.
Petition to lie upon the table.

DISTRESS IN THE COUNTY OF MAYO.
Viscount Morpethhaving moved the Order of the Day for the House to go into Committee on the Tithes and Church of Ireland Bill,
Mr. Sharman Crawfordrose, pursuant to the notice he had given, to call the attention of the House to the great distress which existed at the present moment, and which had continued for some time, in the county of Mayo. He had, so far back as the 6th of this month, mentioned the subject in a notice of Motion which he then gave for the 8th, for copies of certain communications made to the Government as to the great distress which existed amongst the peasantry in some districts of the county of Mayo; but since then, he had not had an opportunity of bringing the subject forward, owing to the state of other business in the House. Since his first notice of it, the distress had not abated; on the contrary, the communications which he had since received on the subject showed that it had increased in a frightful degree. He therefore felt it his duty not to delay any longer, but to take the first opportunity which presented itself of again urging the case on the House. He regretted that the task had not been undertaken by some individual locally connected with that county; for he had no connexion with it, but knowing as he did the extent of the distress, he felt it as a duty of common humanity to bring the matter under the notice of the House. In the former statements which he had made on this subject, he had relied on the communications made by the Catholic clergy, who had ample opportunities of witnessing the distress which they described. He would on the present occasion refer to other authorities; and first, to the reports of the Distress Committee, of which the Earl of Caledon was at the head. The Committee stated the distress to have
1108
existed to an immense extent since the early part of April. One of the communications which he had received was from Mr. Meredith, a chief constable of police, who said it would be a great charity to bring on the case of the starving peasantry of this district. The distress which existed amongst them was intense, and if they were not immediately relieved, many of them must perish. It was useless to talk of their purchasing food sold out at a cheap rate. They had not a penny to purchase potatoes, if they could be sold as low as 6d. per cwt., and one-third of the whole population of the district was in this dreadfully distressed condition. This statement was corroborated by the evidence of Mr. Ireland, the chief magistrate. He had further the Report of the Central Committee of Relief sitting at Castlebar, dated the 20th of July, which showed that their funds were all exhausted on that day. The Committee had come to a resolution to the effect, that they could not adjourn without expressing the deep and poignant sorrow they felt at not being able to extend relief commensurate with the extent of the prevailing distress; and further, they feel themselves called upon to express their conviction, that unless the Government interfered and came forward in aid of the starving population, recourse would be had by them to the premature use of the growing crops, from which would arise all the evils of epidemic disease. He could further state, that the utmost wages those even in employment could earn was 8d. per day, that twelve families out of twenty were without the means of purchasing a single pennyworth of bread. In further proof, if such were needed, he had also the letter of Mr. Yorke, the Secretary of the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, in which he stated that the Government was disposed to do all that was required at their hands, so far as it could be done by the Board of Public Works, but that it was impossible at present to provide to a sufficient extent to relieve the distress of so large a body. Surely, then, it was the duty of his Majesty's Ministers to interfere, and to afford relief to the starving population of Ireland. And in what manner was this to be effected? He should, with the leave of the House, refer to the proceedings which it had taken on former occasions under similar circumstances. In the year 1822, when the right hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth,

1109
came down to Parliament for assistance, and the Legislature placed at the disposal of the Crown 250,000 l., to be disposed of in affording relief to the distressed, and in giving labour to the unemployed, the right hon. Baronet, in submitting that application to the House, said it was not a mere pecuniary question, and supported the proposition in terms which did him honour both as a senator and a man. Again, when in the year 1826 great distress prevailed amongst the manufacturing population of England, the Government, though they did not come to Parliament for assistance as in 1822, yet did all in its power to promote subscriptions, and in that manner 290,000 l. was raised, of which 250,000 l. was advanced by the Government. In 1831 there again prevailed distress, and though no application was made to Parliament, yet under the patronage of the Government no less than 50,000 l. was raised as a relief fund by private subscription. It was proper that he should here remark, that the present distress in the county of Mayo was of that character and nature as to be calculated to lay the foundation of increased distress in the ensuing year, and if means were not speedily adopted to relieve the existing distress, as the people, having no means of providing for the failure of their own crops of potatoes by purchasing elsewhere, would be obliged to have recourse to the growing crops, as he had already stated, the result would inevitably be the increase of the distress year after year. He had adverted to the means of relief which in former times had been resorted to; but why should this be? Why should not the landlords of Ireland be made by the Legislature to contribute to the relief of the distressed occupants of their soil? It had been, he would say, the fault of Parliament to allow Session after Session to pass without attempting to enforce from the rapacious landlords of Ireland a contribution to the means of relieving the aged, the feeble, and the distressed. It might be said that the people of Ireland were an improvident race. In reply he begged to state, that the distress now prevailing in the county of Mayo was not the result of improvidence; on the contrary, its immediate cause was the entire and total failure of the potato crops in that district. Though that was the immediate cause, the distress had several causes, some of which, from operating at all times, might be said to be
1110
more influential than the failure of one crop. The first of these was the enormous rents which were demanded and promised in Ireland. That excess might be imagined, when he stated, that in many parts of Ireland the rents reserved exceeded the whole amount of the produce of the land. Next came the evils of an absentee landed proprietary. Again, another cause of distress was to be found in the expulsion of the small tenantry from the lands heretofore in their occupation. There were many grounds for this system of expulsion. He would take for one of those grounds the repeal of the franchise formerly possessed by the 40 s. freeholders in Ireland; the effect of which had been that the landed proprietary, in order to secure their political influence, had expelled the smaller tenants, in order to be enabled to consolidate the farms to an amount equal in value to the sum at which the elective franchise was now fixed in Ireland. Expulsion had even been practised in the cases of the tenants of these enlarged and increased farms, merely as a punishment upon the holder for having voted and acted according to the dictates of his own conscience. An instance of another cause of expulsion was afforded to him by a transaction which had occurred on the next estate to his own, and the case was that of an unfortunate man, who had been expelled from his holding, because he persisted in sending his children to the National School. Now, all these causes of distress were likely to increase, unless the Legislature and the Government adopted some measure calculated to compel the landed interest of Ireland to raise a fund for the relief of the poor. At present the people subsisted chiefly upon potatoes, and of that vegetable the crops in some seasons were short, and hence the population was liable to periodical privation and distress whenever it happened that those crops failed. Such was now the condition of the people of the district to which he had alluded. He submitted this matter to the House, not merely claiming its compassion, but demanding its justice, That justice would consist in returning to the population a part of that which was their own, and to compel the contributions of those who drew the revenue out of the country to resources which would afford relief to the distressed, and the means of employment to the industrious. However the House might be induced to procrastinate such

1111
legislation, it was bound to take care that the people of Ireland should not starve. For the present he should, therefore, ask the Legislature to grant a loan, and to institute a principle of taxation by which that loan should be repaid. As yet he had heard from his Majesty's Government nothing that was satisfactory upon this subject, or as to their intentions with respect to legislation upon it. It was but right that the people of this country should know what was the situation of the people of Ireland; and the only reason for secrecy in the matter was, that if the real state and circumstances of that country were known, they would impress upon the House and the nation generally the necessity of legislation for the relief of the poor of Ireland. Where could be the necessity of appointing a Commission of Inquiry into the subject, when it was known that the people were in a state of starvation, and that the landlords did not contribute to their relief? These were ample grounds for legislation; and a measure to remedy these evils would be more satisfactory to Ireland than either the Church of Ireland Bill, or the promised measure of Municipal Reform. The hon. Member concluded by moving, as an Amendment on the Order of the Day, "That an humble Address be presented to his Majesty, praying that he will be graciously pleased to take the distress existing in the county of Mayo into his gracious consideration."
Viscount Morpethhad before risen, on several occasions, after the hon. Gentleman who had just sat clown, to address the House on this subject, and he was much pained again to be called upon to admit, that great distress still continued in the districts in question, and would, he feared, continue until the new crops of potatoes came in. The distress he flattered himself, however, was not general, but was, he believed, confined to the districts mentioned by the hon. Gentleman. There distress unquestionably did prevail, and under such circumstances, the Irish Government had taken every step which to them seemed available to meet it. They had sent down to Mayo a chief inspector of police to superintend the arrangements which had since been carried into effect; they had shipped, by a great number of vessels, large quantities of meal and potatoes, commodities which had been sold at a cheap rate to parties who had some means, and which had been distributed in districts
1112
where the inhabitants possessed no means whatever. The landing and distribution of these provisions had been superintended by an intelligent officer of the coast-guard; but undoubtedly he feared that he had not been able to overtake the distress, and still further, he must corroborate the statement made by the hon. Gentleman who had brought forward the present Motion, to the effect that the local subscriptions had not been at all equal to meet the extensive evil of distress. It should be remembered, too, that many of the local proprietors were far from opulent themselves, and were unable to contribute. When the hon. Member, however, spoke of a Poor-law Bill as a remedy for existing evils, it should be remembered, that if the House, at this period of the Session, was to entertain such a measure, the Bill could not meet the exigencies of the existing state of things. He did not wish, on this occasion, to say one word on the subject of Poor-laws; he would only say, that the Government would continue to use and apply such means of remedy and relief as were now open to them, and in which he had received, he was bound to say, every support and assistance from his right hon. Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer. At the same time, if the House should propose a grant of its own, he should be the last person to complain of thereby being relieved from a responsibility which had pressed heavily upon him—the responsibility of affording relief to such vast distress.
Sir Richard Musgravesaid, the present distress was anticipated at the time he submitted his Motion to the House for the introduction of a system of Poor-laws. That Motion, however, was opposed by the Government. There was one provision in his Bill which would apply to this case. Some landlords might have contributed to relieve the distress; but, in place of such partial relief, falling upon a few, his Bill went to levy equally a sum upon the whole parish, and thus there would be no loss to the Consolidated Fund. Any money to be advanced would be on the security of a Grand Jury presentment. He trusted his Bill might yet be allowed to go into Committee.
Mr. Dominick Brownehad called the attention of the Government, three or four years ago, to the distresses which then prevailed in the same parts of the country. He admitted that distress now existed,

1113
but it was a little exaggerated, and certainly the landlords of the western coast did not come forward to contribute their share of relief as they ought to have done. It was but fair, at the same time, to say that they were not in very good circumstances themselves. The hon. Gentleman who spoke last talked of a Poor-law. There were parts of the country to which it could not possibly be applied. He would mention, for instance, one island along the coast, the island of Achil. There were 7,000 inhabitants, and the whole rental was but 900 l. a year. This would give no more than 2s. 4d. to each inhabitant. No one would say that a Poor-law could be applied under such circumstances. The potatoes, in these distressed districts, were manured with sea-weed, and the produce was rank in consequence. This part of the coast was subject to the westerly and north-westerly winds, which frequently destroyed the flower, and the consequence was a failure of the crop. The only way to better the condition of the people, was to provide labour for them. Though scarcity prevailed in these districts, arising in a great measure from the length and expense of carriage, potatoes were comparatively cheap in the interior of the county of Mayo. There was some distress also in the mountainous districts, where Lord Mountcharles possessed considerable estates, and had generously contributed to the relief of the poor.
Mr. James Grattansaid, that as it was clear the people in those districts were in a state of starvation, relief ought to be afforded. He would suggest to the noble Lord (Morpeth), that the best mode of relief would be, for the Irish Government to make the advance necessary, and then to apply to the Legislature for means to compel the repayment through a Grand Jury assessment.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerassured the House, that from the very first moment that the attention of the Government had been called to the existing state of things in the county of Mayo, they had been unremitting in their exertions to meet the distress. He hoped the hon. Member for Dundalk would consent to withdraw his Motion, for he could assure the hon. Member that the less such a subject was talked of, the better it would be for the country, and the sooner would matters readjust themselves. Nothing was more
1114
calculated to interfere with the good object the hon. Gentleman had in view than a discussion like the present. When the case of the distress of the county of Kerry had come under the attention of the Government, if the matter had been publicly discussed, the state of the markets for the supply of food would not so speedily have readjusted itself. The Government in that case had offered small bounties, not apparently made by the Government but by other persons, for supplies, and in the course of a fortnight after the first application, the markets were supplied, and thanks were given to the Government for not having had recourse to the Legislature for assistance. He fully admitted the present state of Mayo demanded the attention of the Government, and he could assure the hon. Member that there was no unwillingness or indifference, but, on the contrary, there was every disposition on the part of the Government to meet the case. Under all these circumstances, he hoped the hon. Member would consent to withdraw his Amendment, involving as it did a subject which ought at all times to be approached with the greatest possible caution.
Mr. William O'Brienthought the case of the county of Mayo afforded the right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, an excellent opportunity of having recourse to his favourite remedy for the want of employment among the labouring population. He (Mr. O'Brien) meant the erection of public works. By this means, employment would not only enable the population to meet the present scarcity of food, but a great benefit would arise from the improvements of which this county in particular stood so much in need.
Major Beauclerkhoped that early next Session the Government would give to Ireland the only remedy for these series of distresses, viz., poor laws. Though he might be a loser on the property he possessed in that country by such a measure, yet he should be glad to hear from the noble Lord at the head of the Home Department that it was his intention to bring forward such a measure. If so, he would give it his humble but strenuous support.
Lord John Russellsaid, that with respect to the Motion now before the House he must say, that though he was quite ready to concur in the kind of relief which had been in this instance afforded by his

1115
noble Friend near him (Lord Morpeth), yet he thought it unadvisable that the House should be called on to interfere in cases of local, partial, and temporary distress. With respect to the question put to him by the hon. and gallant Member who had spoken last, he would say (without in any way thereby pledging either the Government or himself), that the inquiries which were now going on, as to what would be the effect of Poor-laws in Ireland, were such as he thought would empower the Government, by next Session, to investigate and discuss the Question with a view to a permanent decision upon it.
Dr. Baldwinhoped that his hon. Friend the Member for Dundalk would not press the House to a division, as such a step would induce the people of Ireland to suppose that the House was divided on a question of mere charity towards them. Though he honoured the intentions of his hon. Friend, which he admitted to be of the purest and most beneficial character, he still could not feel him self jstified in voting against the Government on the present occasion.
Motion withdrawn.

TITHES AND CHURCH (IRELAND).
The Order of the Day for a Committee on the Church and Tithes (Ireland) Bill was again moved.
Mr. Goulburn, for the convenience of the House, would state the course which he should pursue with regard to this Bill. After the decision to which the House had come on a former night, which intimated the intention of the majority to refuse that consideration to this Bill which the minority thought that it deserved, he should not think himself justified in wasting his own time, and, what was more valuable, the time of the House, in offering a variety of objections to the further progress of the Bill. No amendments could remove the objections which he felt to it on the score of appropriation. Nothing could reconcile him to the latter portion of it, which went to appropriate the property of the Church to purposes foreign from Ecclesiastical purposes. Nothing could induce him to consent to the reopening of the tithe composition, except distinct proof that the tithe composition had been accomplished under circumstances of fraud. He had come to that resolution, first, because such a re-opening of the tithe composition would tend to
1116
shake the security of all contracts respecting property; and secondly, because having been one of those who, in common with hon. Members on both sides of the House, had held out to the parties interested that the agreements into which they entered under Acts of Parliament should meet with the sanction and support of Parliament, he could not lend his aid to opening those contracts under circumstances which were a violation of honesty, and in which justice could not be done to the parties. His objections to the latter part of the Bill which he contended seriously affected the prosperity and security of the Church in Ireland, remained unchanged. He should therefore forbear from giving the House any trouble on the Bill in Committee, and should reserve any objections which he might feel to the Clauses to the period when those objections might be put upon record—that was, till the bringing up of the Report of the Committee on the whole measure.
The Order of the Day was read, and the House went into Committee on the Bill.
The Preamble postponed.
Viscount Morpethavailed himself of that opportunity to state an alteration which the Government intended to make in one of the Clauses of the Bill. From certain quarters, to which they were inclined to look with every deference, a communication had been made to His Majesty's Ministers that strong objections were entertained to that provision of the Bill which directly assigned to the uses of the Board of Commissioners of National Education the excess of the Reserve Fund over and above all the purposes mentioned in the Act, on the ground, that it was calculated to give an invididious appearance in the eyes of some persons to the proceedings of that Board. Though it was to be hoped, that the liberality of Parliament would provide funds for the general education of the people of Ireland, should they fall short during the necessarily scanty beginning of the Reserve Fund; yet it had been inferred, unwisely he thought, that there might arise considerable impatience in districts liable to come under its operation—impatience, which might terminate in the most disastrou consequences. Now, as this was an alarm more apparent than real, yet it was of such a nature, and its existence had been communicated to him from such

1117
quarters, that Government wished to meet it in the first instance to the best of their ability. They therefore proposed to alter the destination of the funds by providing that the sums payable to the Reserve Fund, for the purposes of education should be paid by the Commissioners of the Land Revenue to the Consolidated Fund, and the Government therefore proposed to fix a charge of 50,000 l. to be paid out of the Consolidated Fund from the 1st of April, 1836, by warrant of attorney, for all purposes connected with the education of the different classes of his Majesty's subjects, without any distinction of religious opinions.
On the Question that Clause 1st stand part of the Bill,
Mr. Finchdid not know whether he should not be out of order in adverting to the Clause just referred to by the noble Lord, which was not regularly before the Committee. He wished, however, that the noble Lord would explain to him what he meant by the terms "national education." The first destination of the Reserve Fund was to be to parishes from which all Protestant pastors had been removed in consequence of their not containing fifty Protestant inhabitants. If that were the case, these funds, instead of being destined to the purposes of "national," would be destined to the purposes of "Roman Catholic" education. The first claim for schools would come from the 300 parishes, in which were no Protestants whatever.
Lord Morpethintended, by the words "national education," that system of education, which was now carried on in Ireland by the Board of Education, and which had been commenced under the auspices of his noble Friend, the Member for North Lancashire.
The first Clause was agreed to. On the second Clause,
Lord Stanleyrose to make a suggestion to his noble Friend, the Secretary for Ireland, on the course which he (Lord Morpeth) was going to pursue with respect to this Bill. That course was open to the same objection which had been made against the Bill proposed by the hon. and gallant Gentleman, who had preceded him in office. Before he entered into any explanation of that objection, he would state, that it was his wish in the first part of the Bill to offer such suggestions for the improvement of it, as he thought were
1118
desirable, avoiding at the same time all discussion on the latter part of it, to the principle of which no Amendment would ever reconcile him. The first suggestion which he had to make, referred to what was technically the ascending and descending scale of the Bill. He wished his noble Friend to consider, before he came to the 5th Clause, a part of it by which no compensation was provided for those who must be injured by its operation. He was sure, that the common object of all parties on both sides of the House, was to provide, that the owner of the soil, and not the occupying tenant, should be the person charged with the payment of the tithe, or tithe composition, or the rent charge in lieu thereof. That was the object of all the Bills which had been passed on this subject, from the year 1823, down to the present period. In 1823, by the first Tithe Composition Act, it was determined, that tenants paying composition should be entitled to deduct the amount from their rent, and under this arrangement the clergy were the receivers, and the occupying tenants the payers of tithe. To obviate the objection arising from bringing the clergy and the occupiers of land into collision, it was proposed by the Bill he had introduced, that all future leases of lands should be granted free of tithe, and that the grantor, and not the tenant, should be liable to that charge. A difficulty was felt as to the introduction of a like system with reference to current engagements and leases already granted; for it was considered to be a hardship, that the landlord, taking upon himself the entire burthen of tithe, should have to collect the amount in a number of small payments from a numerous class of occupiers. He therefore proposed, that any landlord, who, before the expiration of existing leases might voluntarily agree to pay the tithe should be allowed a deduction of fifteen per cent, with a right to collect the whole sum from his tenants. This was done with a view to compensate him for any loss he might sustain in collecting the tithe. It was now proposed, that the landlord should be compelled to take upon himself the responsibility of paying tithe, with a power of recovery against his tenants, and that he should be allowed a reduction, not of fifteen, but of thirty per cent, which, however, he was obliged to allow to the tenants. Thus, although the risk was entirely thrown upon

1119
him, the landlord reaped no immediate benefit from the arrangement; but it must be admitted, that at the expiration of existing leases, his land would become more valuable. This might be considered a sufficient compensation. However, the case of persons having an intermediate interest between the head landlord and the occupying tenant was different—here there was no compensation for the additional risk, and he suggested to his noble Friend, whether he might not be able to devise some remedy for the injustice. Suppose an estate let by a landlord to three middlemen, on leases of twenty-one years, and sublet by the middlemen at profit rents to fifty tenants. In this case, the head landlord incurred no risk with respect to tithes, the middlemen being liable and solvent. But what was their state? They were called on to pay to the landlord 70 l. for every 100 l. of tithes in a case where they had not covenanted to pay a farthing, and they were empowered to collect from the fifty tenants a sum not exceeding by a single farthing what they themselves must pay. Now, these middlemen had no permanent interest in the property to compensate them for any immediate loss they might sustain, —unlike the landlord, they would not be benefitted by the circumstance of the estate becoming eventually more valuable in their hands. He threw out this difficulty, which he felt to involve a serious practical evil, for his noble Friend's consideration. He did not mean to suggest any Amendment, but if his noble Friend had not time to consider the subject previously to the putting of the 5th Clause, on which the question arose, he hoped his noble Friend would pay attention to the subject before the Report, for if not, he apprehended an injustice would be done which the act provided no mode of remedying.
Mr. Walkerthought, that the middlemen ought not to be allowed to collect more from the occupying tenant, than the head landlord paid to the clergy. He took this opportunity of stating, that some Irish Conservative landlords, who were at first disposed, out of regard to the Church, and in order to avail themselves of the bonus of fifteen per cent, to take the payment of tithe upon themselves under the last Composition Bill, declined doing so when they found their tenants would not be likely to repay them.
Mr. Henry Grattansaid, that by the 5th Clause middlemen were empowered to recover tithes as rent by ejectment, a power that they never had before, and which was quite sufficient for their protection without giving them any bonus.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that the cases put by the noble Lord would become day by day fewer. The fact was, that in this Bill, as in that of the noble Lord, it was assumed, that as regarded existing leases, landlords and tenants would arrange so, that injustice should be done to neither party.
Mr. Shawpreferred the descending to the ascending scale. Upon the whole, he thought, that it would be best to throw the burden upon the first estate of inheritance.
Viscount Morpethstated, that he could see no other way of steering between the reduction to be given to the landlord, and the relief to be afforded to the tenant than that proposed by the Clause.
The Clause agreed to.
On Clause 5,
Mr. O'Connellobjected to the Clause, as throwing a burden on those who had lately been exonerated from it, but he was willing to waive his objections for the sake of good to be effected by the measure. So little had the people of Ireland been in the habit of paying tithes of late years, that the re-enactment of them by this Bill was almost like throwing a new burden upon the people. What would be the consequence if this Bill were rejected? By the noble Lord's (Lord Stanley) Bill, the clergy would have recovered seventy-seven and-a-half per cent of their tithes; by the Bill of the right hon. Baronet opposite, (Sir H. Hardinge) seventy-five per cent; and the Bill now under consideration insured the clergymen seventy-three and-a-half per cent; but if the Bill were rejected, what would they recover? Little or nothing. The people would refuse to pay tithes, and only the enemies of the Church could desire to see the Bill thrown out.
Lord Stanleywas sure, that no member of the Church objected to the settlement of the tithe question, or to the amount that was proposed to be awarded to the clergyman. He hoped, that the House would not let it be supposed that the payment of tithes to the clergy as a body, was likely to cease; as for the present measure being a boon for the clergy, he

1121
doubted whether a larger amount of tithes would not be paid if this Bill did not pass, than if it did. In the Act which he had introduced, provision was made for the payment of the clergy by landlords, and payment had been made to the amount, of from 180,000 l. to 200,000 l. The payments which would be made under this Bill would not, at the utmost, exceed 280,000 l. If this did not pass, 200,000 l. per annum would be paid without any difficulty to the clergy, and certainly many difficulties would arise under this Bill. He did not urge this as an argument against a fair arrangement; on the contrary, he was most anxious to promote it. He protested against the assumption that tithes would not be paid if this measure did not pass.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerobserved, that no doubt some tithes might be collected under the existing law; but he wished to call the attention of the House back to the case before them. He believed that, for the future, it would be highly dangerous to the interests of the Church, if this measure did not pass. If it were carried into effect, the clergy would never be brought in contact in any way with the tithe-payers, but would go and obtain the amount due to them from the collecting-officer of the Government. This, he thought, was highly advantageous to the clergy. He also begged his noble Friend to recollect, that the landlords were not always so willing to pay tithes.
Mr. Shawdeclared, on the part of the clergy, that they were willing to make any sacrifice for securing the peace of Ireland; but they could not, conscientiously or consistently with their duty, consent to sacrifice a principle. They never would be induced, by any apparent temporary advantage to themselves, to sacrifice the permanent good of the Church.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, that the right hon. Gentleman had not objected to the principle a few months ago, for he had applauded the measure proposed by the right hon. and Gallant Member (Sir Henry Hardinge), in which a deduction of twenty-five per cent, was to be made from the income of the clergy. By the Bill of last year, the clergy would have received 77 l. 10 s. percent; by the measure of the late Government they were to receive 75 l.; and by the present Bill, 73 l. 10 s. per cent. The right hon. Gentleman
1122
said, that he would not consent to yield up the principle—which he had already done —or to allow the claims of the clergy to be lessened, which appeared also to be the case, for the advance, which they made was very much like that in a Dutch auction, where each bidding was less than the former. He would caution the clergy against listening to the suggestion of the noble Lord. It would be a matter of absurdity to rely upon the landlords, or to suppose that they would willingly consent to pay tithes. They might not choose to resort to the committal of Whiteboy outrages to prevent the payment of tithes, but still they would manifest the strongest possible opposition to the Church. He believed, that the number of landlords who consented to the payment of their tithes, under the Bill of the noble Lord, did not exceed twelve in number. If the clergy were to rely upon the noble Lord's Bill to procure the payment of their tithes, they would obtain merely a mouthful of moonshine. It was a gross delusion to suppose, that the clergy would obtain their tithes if this Bill did not pass.
Clause agreed to.
On Clause 9 (compositions for tithes may be revised on application to the Commissioners of Land Revenue) being put,
Lord Stanleyobjected to re-opening the cases of commutation that had been entered into respecting the payment of tithes. This could not be done without instituting inquiries into the circumstances under which each case was entered into. In the Act of 1833, provision was made by which the Lord-lieutenant in Council was enabled to re-open the question of commutation in any case in which it could be proved that the commutation had been entered into—not merely in cases of fraud and wilful concealment—but wherever the parties were ignorant of the circumstances of the case. There had been only two or three instances of such appeals. In the next year, in the Million Act, opportunity was afforded to parties to open the question of commutation, not merely before the Privy Council, but before the assistant Barrister, in any case in which it clearly appeared that injustice had been done. The course proposed in this Bill, however, would be attended with great inconvenience, and would occasion great confusion. He objected that it did not appear necessary that notice should be

1123
given of the nature of the evidence to be brought before the Barristers. If anything had been fixed, it was the amount of the composition entered into fourteen years ago. Now it was proposed that three Baristers should be called on to alter the composition as they thought fit, and there was to be no appeal from what they might decide.
Mr. Perrinintended to move an Amendment to the Clause which would he hoped, remove some of the objections. The effect of the Amendment he should propose was this: That where the amount of the composition exceeded by more than one-fifth the actual amount really paid or adjudged to be paid on the average of the seven years preceding the time of the composition, the complainant was to prepare a primâ facie case; next, a notice by the party was to be posted upon the church doors; there every such application was to be accompanied by a statement in writing, specifying the facts, the grounds, and the reasons for making the same; and the same grounds and reasons were to be stated on affidavit. This was to be submitted to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, who were to certify as to the grounds of the revision to the Lord-lieutenant, and he thereupon was to issue his warrant for the revision. Thus the course to betaken would not be left altogether to the revising Barristers. They would be called upon to state the actual grounds of their decision.
Mr. O'Connellthought it would be better to leave the Clause out altogether, than that it should be carried with such Amendments. If it were amended as proposed, it would be a mockery—an idle mockery. It was most objectionable to involve it in so many technicalities and obstructions. Six weeks was too little time for notice of the intention to apply for a revision; three months at least ought to be given. What the people of Ireland complained of was, that the sums agreed to be paid on the average were colourably agreed to. In some cases the average for a whole parish was founded on a single decree.
Lord Morpethsaid, the object of the Government was to secure to the clergy the full amount to which they were entitled, and, on the other hand, to relieve the people from burthens that had improperly fallen upon them. All he asked was, that they should go deli-
1124
berately through the Clause, strict justice between all parties being what the Government sought.
Mr. Serjeant Jacksonsaid, that in many of the compositions which this Clause might open, the evidence on which they were made was lost, or the parties perhaps were dead. Some of the compositions had been made years ago on promissory notes, memoranda of agreement, and field-notes. When once a composition was entered into, it was considered final.
Mr. Perrindid not think his Amendment would be liable to the objections of the hon. and learned Gentleman. The party would have to state his complainton oath to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, who, if they saw fit, would grant a revision; and the Lord-lieutenant would issue his warrant for the revision, specifying what were the grounds. This appeared to him to be a simple course. He had no objection, however, to postpone the Clause, to afford time for the Amendment being considered.
The Clause, with the Clauses up to 12 inclusive,(those relating to revision of composition) were postponed.
On Clause 14,
Mr. Shawsaid, that there was no necessity for the new appeal to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, which the Clause established; the results of the present system of appeal to the Privy Council of Ireland, as provided by former Acts of Parliament, were fully sufficient to show that it could lead to no useful end. The decisions under the existing arrangements had been pretty well balanced; the cases of diminution and those of increase had been nearly equal, — very many of the appeals had been dismissed, and nothing whatsoever had been gained on the whole by the proceedings.
The Chancellor of the Exchequercontended that the new appeal was necessary to provide for the cases of hardship which would arise without it. The argument of the right hon. Gentleman, (Mr. Shaw) might apply if the property of the Church were to be viewed only as a whole; although a new appeal might not be necessary, because under that already existing the gross amount of composition had neither been increased nor diminished, still it was required for the sake of justice in individual cases, in which particular portions of that compo-

1125
sition ought to be decreased or augmented.
Lord Clementssaid, that under the system established by former Acts, particularly by that called "Goulburn's Act," the expenses of appeal were so great as to prevent its being resorted to in many cases in which it otherwise would be. Another cause of the smallness of the number of appeals under that system was to be found in the constitution of the tribunal to which they were made— the Privy Council of Ireland.
Mr. Sergeant Jacksonobserved, that there was no ground for throwing out any imputations upon that tribunal; the portion of the Privy Council by which their appeals were usually determined, consisted of some of the Judges of Ireland and other individuals whose characters were as high and unblemished as those of any persons, of whatever rank, in any profession whatsoever.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, that he had seen many a tribunal, and that he never saw one half so bad as that in question; it was such that there existed not the smallest chance of bringing down a composition before it—unless, indeed, in some very gross case, The hon. and learned Gentleman might fairly eulogize the individuals composing that tribunal, but could he eulogize the tribunal itself?
Clause agreed to.
Clauses to 49 were agreed to, with Amendments.
The House resumed—Committee to sit again.

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a third time:—Seamen Enlistment Bill; Sinecure Church Preferment.
Petitions presented. By the Earl of Aberdeen, from Kinnell, for Additional Accommodation in, and Protection to the Scotch Church.—By the Earl of MORLEY and Lord PRUDHOE, from Plymouth and Tynemouth,—against any Alteration in the Timber Duties.—By the Bishop of ROCHESTER, from that Town, for Protection to the Protestant Church.—By the Earl of GLENGALL, from Ross and Caher, against Drunkenness.—By Viscount MELBOURNE and Lord HATHERTON, from a Number of Places, in favour of, and by the Duke of BEAUFORT, Earls FALMOUTH, TANKERVILLE, and HAREWOOD, Lords PRUDHOE, WHARNCLIFFE, and RAVENSWORTH, from a Number of Places, against the Municipal Corporations' Bill.

CORPORATION REFORM.
The Duke of Newcastlesaid, that with reference to the Bill which was to be brought under their Lordships' consideration to-morrow, he wished to call their attention to a matter which, in his opinion, well deserved their Lordships' and the noble Viscount's consideration. He entertained very strong doubt whether, if they were to proceed with this Bill, they should not be guilty of committing a gross violation of the King's prerogative. In his mind that was a most important consideration. It was conceded that the Commission was illegal; and if so, it would not be right to proceed to legislate upon evidence obtained under it. Now, if their Lordships desired to proceed in a legal way, he

1097
should propose to them a plan which he thought would have the effect of enabling them to do so. His proposition was, that they should agree to an Address to the King, praying his Majesty that he would be most graciously pleased to authorize his Attorney-General to introduce a Bill into the other House of Parliament, to constitute a regular Commission to inquire into Corporation abuses.
Lord Broughamwas certainly most surprised to hear it taken for granted—to hear it treated as a matter of course—that the Commission to inquire into the state of Municipal Corporations was illegal. The noble Duke had made a proposition upon the supposition that the Commission was illegal, now he (Lord Brougham) was prepared to show that it was strictly legal; that, in framing it he had the best and most approved precedents of a century and upwards as his guide; and though it was hardly proper to enter into these matters in a discussion across the Table, yet he coveted the opportunity of satisfying the noble Duke that the Commission was not only not illegal, but that it was free from all taint of illegality, and that on that subject it was not possible to entertain a doubt. Whether the power of the Commissioners extended to compel persons to give up papers, and to submit to examination, was a matter standing on a different footing, but the Commission was drawn up according to the best precedents, and the giving up papers and submitting to examination was vexata questio, and it was expedient, therefore, for such a purpose to have the authority and Act of Parliament rather than of the Crown. He was by no means disposed to say, that the Crown had the power to compel persons against their will to answer, or that persons who refused to answer would be committing an illegality; but he knew well enough that other Commissions had been issued of the same sort, and though persons were not compelled to answer, yet they did answer. It was the confounding of these two things together which had given rise to so many errors on the subject, as if because power were given to inquire, that it was, therefore, imperative to compel persons to submit to be examined. The first was strictly according to precedent, and the second rested on the same footing with former precedents, and was the same as the Commission which had been issued in
1098
1830, and issued under the authority of his noble and learned Friend, then holding the Great Seal, under the authority of the noble Duke then at the head of the Government, of the right hon. Baronet, who was, at that time, his colleague, and signed, as Attorney-General, by the noble and learned Lord, now the Chief Baron of the Exchequer—he meant the Commission for inquiring into the state of the Irish Church. In that Commission he had read the grant of the very same powers as those contained in the Municipal Corporation Commission—there was not the least difference between the two, and there was one inquiry there, certainly, just as delicate—(he stated this that his noble and learned Friend, and any noble Lord who doubted the legality of the first Commission, might look into the precedent which he gave them fair notice he should quote against them if the question of the legality of the last Commission should be agitated)—there was one inquiry, certainly, just as delicate, namely, first into the revenues of the Irish Church, and next—and this was the delicate inquiry— whether the existing Act of Parliament had been complied with which required Rectors, and Vicars, and Perpetual Curates to allow a sum certain to their Curates for the performance of their duty. That was an inquiry which, he had little doubt, they were not compelled to answer—they might say, "I will not tell you whether I have or not complied with the Act of Parliament, for if I have not I might subject myself to an indictment for not, doing so." But noble Lords could not possibly doubt that, whether answered or not, this was an inquiry as delicate as any intrusted to the Municipal Corporation Commissioners by the Commission to which he had the honour to affix the Great Seal. He was ready, therefore, to defend the granting of this Commission. But even if it were found to be illegal, and they were to legislate on it, the noble Duke said, that they would be acting illegally, of which he was by no means sure, for they might use illegal means to get at knowledge, but having got at it, they might legislate on that knowledge without their doing so being illegal too. But even if the Commission were illegal, and if it should be thought irregular for them to act on the knowledge obtained under it, he was quite clear that the remedy which his Grace had suggested was the last in the world that their Lord-

1099
ships would think of listening to. It was this, that this House was to be called on by way of curing the irregularity—by way of retracing the irregular step that had been taken, by way of putting themselves right in fact and in form, and by way of adhering to the strict letter of the law —this House was called upon, by whom, and to do what? Why, by him who complained of irregularity, to pray the King to desire his Attorney-General to bring a Bill into the other House of Parliament to do what is required. No legislative man ever before heard of such a proposition. What, call on an independent Member of the other House, the Representative of the city of Edinburgh, to bring into that other House such a Bill as their Lordships' House might think fit to require? It was worse than it was in Scotland with the Lords of the Articles; it had something of the character of the feudal Parliaments of Scotland; and it was this which their Lordships were gravely recommended to import here, and to say what should, and of course what should not, be brought before the other House of Parliament. Whatever might be the irregularities of the Commission, certainly no man ever before heard of such a remedy for them.
The Duke of Newcastlesaid, that if their Lordships did not deem his proposition a good one, of course they would not adopt it. He should state why the Commission was illegal. The King, as such, was the visitor of Corporations, and as such he might have a right to inquire into certain matters concerning them; but it was impossible for him to do anything that would lead to an alteration of their Charters, without the consent of the two Houses of Parliament.
Conversation dropped.

JESUITS' MONASTERY.
The Duke of Newcastlewished to ask of the noble Viscount opposite a question of great importance, as it had reference to a subject which had created a strong feeling throughout the country. Some days ago he observed an article in a newspaper, in which it was stated that 236 acres of land had been sold to the rev. Mr. Hunt, a Roman Catholic clergyman at Loughborough, for the purpose of founding a Roman Catholic monastery for individuals of the order of Jesuits. It was added, that Mr. C. Gisborne, to whom the land belonged, meant
1100
to end his days in the new monastery. He wished to know whether the noble Viscount could give him any information on the subject. It was important that no colleges of this description should be founded. He considered that the principles taught in them contained the ground work of every thing that was injurious to the established religion of this country. He understood that, on a former night, the noble Viscount had stated that he was opposed to the formation of new Universities in this country, and he was very glad to hear it, because in that case he would set his face against establishments of this kind. He had observed also a report in the public papers of dangerous riots promoted by Papists in Liverpool, and various parts of the country, on the 12th of July. It would appear that the Papists had assumed a tone most insulting to their Protestant brethren, and he wished to know whether anything had been done to check those disturbances.
Viscount Melbournehad no further acquaintance than the noble Duke with the matter first referred to. He had no power whatever to prevent or prohibit any person from selling his land in the manner stated. The noble Duke mistook him in supposing that he had said he objected to there being any Colleges but those of the two Universities in England. What he did say was, that he thought it was desirable that all his Majesty's subjects, of whatever denomination, should have the opportunity of being educated, if they pleased, at the two Universities. With respect to the rest, he had no information on the matter; but if anything had been done that was illegal, the law should be put in force.
Subject dropped.