tion of the law courts in Ireland, and he trusted that their lordships would not be induced to interpose their authority, and interfere with the courts of law. With regard to Mr. O'Connell, the poor-law commissioners did censure him, and most properly, for having addressed the voters at the election of guardians. He carnestly implored their lordships to give this motion a direct negative.

The duke of Wellington complained that in the amendment act to the Irish poor-law bill which had been introduced by her majesty's ministers in the last session, advantage had been taken of his absence to insert a clause on the third reading which provided, that all persons who were liable to pay the poor-rates, should be entitled to vote for the poor-law guardians. He confessed, that he looked at this amendment with a good deal of suspicion, because it altered the complexion of the original measure. That was one ground on which he should vote for the committee proposed by the noble marquess. He should, however, suggest the con venience of postponing the debate in order that time might be given to enquire if there were any papers which might be produced.

The marquess of Westmeath, in consequence of the suggestion of the noble duke, said he would postpone his motion till further information was laid on the table. If he did not receive a more satisfactory answer than had been given that evening, he would proceed with this motion after the Easter recess.

On the next night the marquess of Westmeath moved for copies of any correspondence on the records of the poor-law commissioners, on the necessity of the provisions of

act 2 and 3 Vict. c. 1, to amend the Irish poor-law of 1 and 2 Vict. c. 56, particularly respecting the 5th section.

The motion after a short discussion was agreed to.

Afterwards on the 3rd of July, the marquess of Westmeath moved for a select committee in the same terms as he had done previously on the 13th of April; but upon the recommendation of the duke of Wellington to withdraw his motion in consequence of the advanced period of the Session, he consented to do so. The noble duke in the course of his speech, said the intentions of parliament had not been carried into effect. The grossest abuse had certainly taken place at some of the elections of guardians--but then the poor-law commissioners had not done their duty in bringing the circumstances under their cognizance and recording them. In point of fact, therefore, their lordships could not take cognizance of them.

The motion of the noble marquess was then withdrawn.

GRANT TO MAYNOOTH COLLEGE.] On the 23rd of June, Mr. Plumptre brought forward a motion to the effect, that after the grant for the current year no further payment of public money be made to Maynooth college. His principal objection to this college of Maynooth was, that instead of its professors and members being the aiders and abettors of religion, good order, and submission to the laws of the land, they were ever found to be the leaders and promoters of disorder. Another objection was founded on the works that were introduced there, which were destructive of the best principles of morality. The grant in effect went to support a religion

that was at once idolatrous and unsocial.

Lord Morpeth in opposing the motion said, that the house had no more right to inquire into the nature of the books used at Maynooth than any Roman catholic member would have to come forward and object to the books which were used or to the education that was pursued at either of the universities of Oxford or Cambridge. No complaint had been made to the government of any neglect or abuse, or departure from the original intention of the institution. The only complaint that had reached the government was of the utter inadequacy of the funds allotted to the college. The hon. member (Mr. Plumptre) had brought forward the cases of the contests for poor-law guardians, and although he complained of the logic and casuistry of the doctrines at Maynooth, the hon. member himself exhibited rather loose logic and some casuistry, when he referred the proceedings at the election of poor-law guardians to the education at Maynooth, and the writings of Thomas Aquinas.

Sir Robert Inglis supported the motion and said, he conceived that the nation was not bound to hold itself to any christian obligations except such as called for the support of its church, and that church was at variance with the college of Maynooth.

Mr. Sheil made an eloquent speech against the motion, and in allusion to Mr. Plumptre said, "I will not follow him through the snares of his theology-I leave the member for Kent to rush in where angels fear to tread." While he preaches, I practise the precepts of christianity, and listen to his vi

tuperation with the forbearance and the patience which ought to be produced by the spirit of christian commiseration. He is accounted by his associates as sincere. I own, that in listening to him, I am inclined to exclaim with Bassanio

"Thou almost templ'st me to forswear my faith,

And hold opinion with Pythagoras,"

Sir Robert Peel briefly opposed the motion and said, that he did not think that sufficient grounds had been made out for violating an implied understanding upon which parliament had acted for thirty years. The college of Maynooth had been established by a parliament exclusively protestant, as an instrument to induce a disposition favourable to the established church, and to discourage the Jacobin doctrines which a foreign education was calculated to engender in those who were educated for the Roman catholic priesthood of Ireland. He did not mean to say that there had been any contract entered into, nor that there existed such a contract as ought to prevent the interference of the legislature, if the grant should be perverted to evil purposes. A misappropriation of the grant would form a very proper subject of enquiry, and if it were proved the question might be submitted to the house, whether on that ground the vote ought not to be discontinued. But nothing but full proof of abuse would render it wise in the house of commons to enter into a pledge as to the future with respect to this grant.

The house afterwards divided, when the motion was negatived by a majority of 79: Ayes 42; Noes 121.

Tan the

finances was brought before the house of commons by Mr. Herries, who has for many years enjoyed the reputation of being one of the most sound and able financial statesmen in the country. The discussion arose in consequence of his moving on the 13th of February for the production of the following papers, "Accounts of the income of the consolidated fund, including therewith the duties on sugar, and of the charges thereupon, in the year 1839; distinguished under the principal heads of receipt and expenditure; and also an estimate of the same for the year 1840; showing in each case the surplus applicable to the supplies voted by parliament. Account showing the amount of the deficiency of bills charged on the growing produce of the consolidated fund outstanding, unsatisfied

Ac

ruary, 1840, respectively. count of the total of the funded and unfunded debt extinguished, in each of the three years preceding the 5th of January, 1840, distinguishing the stock created in lieu of exchequer bills cancelled, being the produce of monies invested by savings' banks. Account of the total amount of the unfunded debt outstanding on the 5th day of January, the 5th day of April, 5th day of July, and the 10th day of October in each of the years, 1837, 1838, and 1839, stating the rate of interest on exchequer bills, issued at or about the same period, the current rates of premium or discount on the same in the public market, the prices of the three per cent consolidated annuities. Account of the total net income and expenditure of the United Kingdom in each of

the twelve years, between the 5th day of January, 1828, and the 5th day of January, 1840, in continuation of the account annexed to the fourth report of the committee on finance in 1828, wherein the same is exhibited from the year 1792. Of all the papers mentioned in his motion (said Mr. Herries) only one was contested, and indeed only a part of that one. He would merely at that moment notice the document which related to the unfunded debt, by which he thought he should be able to show to the house and country that there had been in that department of the public administration, a great degree of mismanagement. The paper to which an objection was to be made, was that relating to the income of the consolidated fund for 1840. The object of asking for that estimate was, to arrive at a knowledge of the pecuniary resources of the country for the present year.

Lord Althorp (continued Mr. Herries) had proposed to reduce a number of taxes, but still he retained a clear surplus revenue of 5,000,000l. a year. Whilst he was chancellor of the exchequer, a temporary deficiency of revenue had indeed occurred, occasioned by the hasty reduction of taxes; but that was made up in the following year, and was the only instance of a deficiency in the revenue antecedent to the time when the present ministry came into office.

The chancellor of the exchequer (Mr. Baring) said, the part of the motion to which he objected was, for a return" of the estimated income of the consolidated fund for the year 1840." The rest of the returns he was quite willing to give. There re

mained, therefore, no question as to any account whatever included in these returns, as there only existed on the part of the government an objection to that return which practically involved that section of the budget which comprised the income of the future year.

The information respecting the Post-office, would be laid before the house in the returns which he himself had moved for; and until those were produced, the calculations of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Herries) could have little weight.

With regard to the early introduction of the universal low rate of postage, he had felt it to be his duty as finance minister, to place the post-office question, at the earliest possible period, in such a position, that parliament might have some months experience before the financial statement of the year appeared.

The right hon. gentleman (Mr. Herries) had alluded to the course taken by government respecting the general debt of the country, and had made some observations concerning the course pursued by former administrations.

It was true, the right hon. gentleman had during his tenure of office, had it in his power to reduce the debt, and had availed himself of that power, and had effected much of the reduction by converting permanent debt into terminable annuities. In the administration which succeeded that of the right hon. gentleman (sir Robert Peel), the increase and diminution of the debt had been as follows:-on the 5th of January, 1831, the amount of funded capital was 757,486,9971.; on the 5th of January, 1839, the amount

was 761,347,6907., showing an increase of the funded debt of 3,860,6931.; on the 5th of January, 1831, the amount of capital unfunded was 27,271,6567.; on the 5th of January, 1839, 24 655,300, showing a decrease of 2,616,3507., and a total increase on capital debt of 1,244,3431. Thus, there had been an addition under the present government of not less than twenty millions to the public debt, and this effected not by any financial arrangements of the ministry; nor by any of the mismanagement of which so much had been said, but added for the purpose of freeing our fellow subjects from slavery.

In the last year before the Whigs came into office, he found (proceeded Mr. Baring) that the difference between the amount collected, and the amount paid into the exchequer was 4,875,000l. While in 1839, the last year of which the account could be got, the difference amounted to only 4,042,000, showing a reduction of 833,000! in a sum under five millions. The state of the customs and excise was the best criterion, and it appeared, that in 1830, they amounted together to 36,184,000%; and in 1839, to 35,919,000Z., showing little alteration, without taking into consideration the reduction made during that period. When he looked to the produce of the revenue, he found that it kept up in a remarkable manner; and when he remembered the reduction of taxation during that period, which was upwards of six millions, he could not but deem it as a conclusive proof that the resources of the country were uninjured.

Mr. Goulburn wished to understand from the chancellor of

the exchequer whether he really meant to ground his opposition to the motion upon the absence of precedent? For if so, he would state one or two instances, which seemed to him to be in point.

The finances of the country now presented such an aspect, and things had now arrived at such a pass, that it became the imperative duty of a faithful house of commons to look the affairs of the nation in the face. In the public mind there existed an extreme solici tude with regard to financial affairs. An alarming deficiency was apprehended; and it became, therefore, the duty of the house to consider the means which were to be proposed for making due provision for that deficiency.

In

Mr. Herries said, he intended merely to call attention to the occurrences of the last three years; and he would confine his observations to the period from January to January. On looking back to the returns of the statement for 1837, he found that there was a deficiency on the produce of the revenue to meet the expenditure to the amount of 726,000l. 1838, he discovered that there had been a further deficiency of the same kind, amounting to 440,000Z.; thus making together the sum of 1,166,000l., as the amount of the deficiency which existed at the close of 1838. In the year 1839, it appeared that there was a further deficiency of 1,512,000Z., making altogether 2,678,000l. at the end of 139. Under these circumstances, was he not justified in pressing for an account of the state of the finances for the year 1840?

A great increase had been made in some of the most important establishments of the country. In