Mr. Whit bread. between Christianity and Deism; between foreign and domestic education. As the people increased, so increased the demand for religious instruction, and so ought the grant to be increased from which that instruction flowed. If the grant to the institution was not to be increased, then the principle of the institution was only poorly and inadequately met; half the people only could be instructed. Christianity was the title of the Irish to education; the grant was not to gratify a sect, but to cherish a branch of the Christian religion: to deny this grant was to attempt to starve the people out of their faith; which could not be successful. To deprive the people of Ireland of education was a struggle for a new victory over them. It was not only destroying their temporal rights, but their spiritual faculties; it was not only persecuting them in this world, but an endeavour to damn then in the next. Mr. Whitbread observed that he had no arguments to adduce in favour of the enlargement of this grant. The Right Honourable Secretary for the Home Department had thrown out his loose assertion with regard to the instances of proselytism merely, he imagined, for alarm. vernment are defeated; and confusion, anarchy, and disorder supply the place of sound government, unity, and peace. He defied him to mention where the proselytes were made, and how many they were. He called upon the Right Honourable the Chancellor of the Exchequer to follow up his intolerant principles by cutting up this establishment altogether, or to agree to the amendment of his right honourable friend. - cellor of the The Chancellor of the Exchequer observed, The Chanthat the grant proposed had been regularly Exchequer. granted from 1801 to 1806, without any alteration being made; but in 1807, when the then administration was doing every thing in their power to encourage the Roman Catholic religion (in which they were right, as they thought it wise to do so), they in one session of Parliament procured a grant of 12,000l. or 13,000l. for the support of Maynooth College. This grant was merely the act of that Parliament, it was not embodied in the Appropriation Act,—and consequently with that Parliament, when, shortly after, it was dissolved, it fell. After the new Parliament met, it was thought that the grant was not warranted by circumstances, and therefore he and his friends had conceived it to be their duty to return to the old one. It was for doing this, for setting aside that which was new, and returning to the old vote, that they were called innovators. It would now be understood what was the definition of the word innovation, according to the notions of the gentlemen opposite; and it would also be understood that, with Sir J. Newport. them, those who abolished a novel or new practice, to return to one which had been long established, were innovators. His opinions, however absurd they might appear on this subject, had remained what they were in 1801, and the memory of the Honourable Gentleman was not accurate, if he thought that the argument he had used that night was new. He had not supposed that there were no deaths at Maynooth; but when it was known that all these were professedly educated for the priesthood, he thought some latitude might be allowed to what he had advanced. When he said that, if the grant were enlarged, there was no knowing to what it might extend, he had not supposed that they might be called on for millions upon millions, but he thought it was not definable how far it might extend, if a line were not drawn where they now were. Sir J. Newport repudiated the charge that the late administration, of which he had been a member, had done all in their power to promote the Roman Catholic religion, though it was true that every thing was done necessary to protect the injured rights of the Catholics, and, by protecting them, to maintain the general interests of the united empire. In such an attempt he (Sir J. Newport) had borne his share of the duty, and he should never be ashamed of the part he had borne. After some further observations from Mr. Whitbread, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr. Wynne, the question was put, and the vote for 8000l. agreed to without a division: the amendment of Sir J. Newport being negatived. 1812. port. MAYNOOTH COLLEGE. - Sir J. Newport in- March 23. quired if the Right Honourable Gentleman the Sir J. New Secretary of State for the Home Department would have any objection to produce the documents on which he founded his assertion, that persons educated at the College of Maynooth had employed undue means to make proselytes, particularly in the north of Ireland, to the Roman Catholic persuasion? tary Ryder. Mr. Secretary Ryder answered, that the ex- Mr. Secrepressions he had employed in the debate upon this subject had been misunderstood and misrepresented. He had not stated that he had any reason to believe that persons educated at Maynooth had employed any undue means to propagate their religion. He had no hesitation in repeating what he had said upon that occasion, which was, that he wished the institution had never existed, as it had afforded the means of spreading Catholicism in districts where the Protestant faith had before been prevalent. On this ground, he had resisted the extension of the grant. • Cobbett's Parl. Debates, vol. xxii. p. 119. (March 23. 1812.) K Sir J. Newport. The Speaker. Sir J. Newport. Debate of 13th April, 1813. Mr. Ryder. Mr. W. Fitzgerald. Sir J. Newport. Sir J. Newport added, that he had taken down the words employed by the Right Honourable Gentleman at the time, and they were, "that individuals educated at the College of Maynooth had made use of the facilities they there obtained, to propagate, by undue means, the Catholic religion." The Speaker observed, that it was contrary to order for any member to refer to expressions employed by any member on a former debate as a ground for calling for documents to prove the veracity or falsity of the assertion. Sir J. Newport then gave notice that, tomorrow, he would move for any documents on which the Right Honourable Gentleman had founded his assertion. MAYNOOTH College. Mr. Ryder, in pur suance of his notice, moved "That there be laid before this House, copy of the course of instructions and lectures in divinity, dogmatical and moral, delivered at the Royal College of Maynooth in the year 1812." Mr. W. Fitzgerald was sure the professors of that college were not only willing, but anxious, to lay such a copy before the House. Sir J. Newport contended that a compliance with the motion would only cause the table of the House to be encumbered with an * Cobbett's Parl. Debates, vol. xxv. p. 811. (April 13. 1813.) |