said, he rose to present a petition from Mr. Benjamin Chance, who stated that he had devised a plan to render more difficult the forging of bank-notes, which he begged the House to take into its serious consideration. He knew nothing of this individual, neither was he competent to judge of the efficacy of the plan; but he thought it highly desirable that the Bank of England should endeavour at least to give the public a Bank-note more difficult to imitate than that at present in circulation. When he last called the attention of the House to this subject, his hon. friend opposite stated, that the Bank of England, in their endeavours to effect this object, had expended 80,000l. This statement did not, however, appear to be correct; for, at a recent court of Bank proprietors, at which he was present, the chairman denied the fact.

said, that this plan had already been submitted to the Bank, and found inefficient to the end proposed. The Bank directors were anxious to adopt any measure that could put an end to forgery; but no plan had been laid before them that could effect that object. He was sorry that the hon. gentleman had let fall an expression which seemed to imply that the directors had not done their duty. When he said that the directors ought at least to endeavour to provide a better note, the inference was, that they had not already used the best means in their power for that purpose. Now, he could assert that such was not the fact. No expense had been spared in endeavouring to effect that object; but, of course, when the directors found that the plans submitted to them had not the requisite merit, they were obliged to reject them. The hon. member must be aware that commissioners had been appointed to inquire, whether any efficient plan could be devised to prevent the evil of forgery, and that a report bad been made by those gentlemen, that they could not hit upon one. The Bank had made every effort in their power to attain that end; but they found that the notes of those who came forward with plans were as easily imitable as those at present in circulation. One of the projectors had actually mistaken an imitation of his own note for an impression from his original invention.

begged leave to claim the attention of the House to a petition of very considerable importance. The parties who were now petitioning the House, were the Board of Council and House of Assembly of Antigua, an island with which he had no connexion; but the petition had been put into his hands, and he thought, from the information it contained, and the facts stated in it, that it well deserved the attention of those who interested themselves on the subject of negro slavery. Though the petition was most respectfully worded, so far as regarded that House, yet, undoubtedly, it contained some strong expressions, indicative of the feelings of the petitioners towards the class of persons in this country, by whom they alleged their conduct and motives to have been very much misrepresented; and from whose proceedings they apprehend great danger to their property, and even to their lives. If gentlemen found that the expressions of the petitioners were stronger than might be desirable—and certainly they were much more so than he could wish— they should recollect that some indulgence ought to be shown to persons in their situation, who had no very nice measure of language meted out to them, in the remarks that were made in that House, and elsewhere, for the purpose of holding up their conduct to the country as extremely censurable. Under these circumstances, and imagining their lives and properties to have been endangered by the course adopted in this country, they assuredly bad some claim to indulgence, if they expressed themselves warmly. Ever since he had had a seat in parliament, he had been a zealous friend, first to the abolition of the trade, and next to the amelioration of the condition of the slaves; he therefore need hardly state to the House, that he was no party to those expressions to which he had adverted, respecting the individuals who were at present employed in producing hostile feelings throughout the country towards the system of the West-India planters. They were actuated, he believed, by the most conscientious motives; their feelings were most enthusiastic in carrying their object, into effect; and he could not but say, that, to the extent to which they had hitherto gone, the country was very much indebted to them. He must further observe, that the petitioners set forth, that they believed the negro population of Antigua to be in a better state, and in a more improved moral condition, than any other negro population in the West Indies. Now, when they stated this fact, he thought they must be sensible, that much of that improvement in the condition of the slaves had arisen from the attention paid to the subject in this country, and to the exertions of the persons whose conduct they arraigned. There were passages in this petition which seemed to him to be so perfectly true and just respecting the conduct of the planters, and which tended so clearly to relieve them from much of the obloquy that had been cast on them from time to time, that he could not avoid requesting the attention of the House to them. The petitioners pointed out, what was perfectly known to all those who had considered the subject, that the slave trade was originally promoted by this country, not with a view particularly to the settlements in those West India islands, but as a desirable and profitable branch of traffic. It was sustained and supported on its own exclusive merits, as a proper object of national traffic, without any reference to those islands. The petitioners pointed out what was very generally known, that when the Assiento treaty was concluded in 1713, it was avowed, in the face of Europe and the world, that one of the great objects to be obtained by this country under that treaty was, the right of carrying on an extensive trade in slaves; not for the purpose of supplying the islands in the West Indies with slaves, but for the gain and lucre of the trade itself—for the purpose of supplying with slaves places in which the British colonists had no interest whatever. The petitioners stated, that this was a traffic which did not originate in the views of the West-India planters, but was promoted by this country in every possible manner. It had been held up as honourable as well as profitable to the country; and it had been defended, in the face of Europe, without any reference whatever to the interests of those persons who were now pointed out to the world as the only sinners—as the individuals who alone had since reaped the benefits that flowed from it. The petitioners not only stated this fact for the consideration of parliament, but they called to the recollection of the House, this strong circumstance, not only that it was a trade thus originating and thus encouraged by this country, but that, for a considerable length of time, it was so encouraged, even in opposition to the wishes and the interference of some of the colonies, who were anxious to prevent it from being carried on to such an extent. After speaking of the treaty of 1713, by which this country stipulated to supply the Spanish colonies with 144,000 slaves in a certain number of years, the petitioners went on to state, that, from that time, almost to the present, the history of this country was full of provisions for the encouragement of this trade, while the colonies, during the whole period, took no active share in the transaction. They merely purchased what the British merchant brought them: they merely did what the British government desired them to do. The colonies first marked that trade with their disapprobation in 1760, when the legislature of South Carolina, then a British colony, passed an act to restrict it or put it down. That measure was, however, rejected with indignation by the governor, who declared that it was a beneficial trade for the mother country. The petitioners stated, that they had before them the instructions given by the government at home to sir George Thomas on that occasion. In 1765, the attempt was renewed ineffectually. The legislature of Jamaica made two efforts to restrict the trade in slaves; but the governor informed them, that he could not, consistently with his instructions, give his assent to those measures. The House ought to understand clearly what the conduct of the colonies had been. This trade had been forced on them by the mother country, as a fair trade, contrary to their wishes. In 1774 the colonies tried once more to get rid of it; and the House of assembly of Jamaica actually passed two bills to put down the trade. But Great Britain opposed those efforts. Liverpool and Bristol resisted the proposed alteration; and it was referred to the Board of Trade, by whom it was utterly rejected. The gentlemen who composed that board declared, in their report, that they could not think of disturbing or discouraging that trade. This was at so late a period as the year 1774. If there were any abomination or inhumanity, they must look upon it as their own work: it was the child of the British parliament, and of Great Britain; and it was a little hard, because parliament and the people found their moral sense improved, to throw the whole connexion of their sins upon the colonies. He would not trouble the House with any further observations on the petition. He only requested that the attention of the House should be given to it when printed; because, if properly considered, it did show that the parties were entitled to consideration. "You have altered your views,"—such was the argument of these colonists—"you are bound to give us an indemnity, whom you have constrained to adopt that slavery which you will now no longer tolerate." This he thought a very reasonable proposition on the part of the Antigua legislature. Knowing the wishes of the people of this country, though they protested against the idea of ever cultivating those islands by free labour, yet if the government of Great Britain chose to make the experiment, they would give up the island for the purpose on reasonable compensation. They offered the opportunity of purchasing their property on equitable conditions, and pointed out several advantages favourable to such an experiment. The advance of the negro mind was greater there than in any other island: so that the experiment could be made no where with greater advantage. He was decidedly of opinion, that the experiment, if made, should not be on any considerable scale, and that one of the smaller islands was for that purpose much to be preferred. From all he knew of Antigua, the negro population was highly improved. Their moral and religious information were higher than in any other European settlement in those seas, and very much higher than that of the free blacks of any settlement.

corroborated the statement of the hon. member for Taunton relative to the state of the negro slaves in the island of Antigua. Of all the colonies, this had proceeded most rapidly in the amelioration of the condition of the slave population. The petition was then read. It purported to be, the Memorial of the Board of Council and House of Assembly of the Island of Antigua, and set forth, "That year after year the memorialists have represented the distressed situation of that colony, produced by the continuation of the War duties on their staple commodities during a period of twelve years' peace, in utter disregard of the pledge given at the time of the augmentation of those duties by the ministers of the day, that such duties should cease on the return of peace and tranquillity; that, although no notice has been hitherto taken of the just claims of the memorialists to relief, they trusted the time would yet arrive when they should be allowed to participate in the prosperity enjoyed by all other classes of his majesty's empire; but so far from such expectations having been realized, the memorialists find that accumulated burthens, and measures tending still further to their oppression and ruin, have lately taken place; the sense of these grievances, however, is lost in the astonishment with which the memorialists view the malignant feelings excited against them by certain dangerous demagogues and interested persons, acting to suit their own immediate purposes, in coalition with the canting pretenders of the day to religion, who, not content with usurping the rights of the established church, seek also to invade the private property of his majesty's loyal West-Indian subjects, many of whose ancestors sought in those climates formerly a refuge from puritanical persecution, and having lost their all, supporting the royal cause against the disciples of hypocrisy in the time of the unfortunate Charles, were content to seek an asylum under the Tropics, and to leave their hard-earned acquisitions as a poor equivalent to their children; this inheritance, guaranteed by the Imperial Parliament for more than 150 years, the memorialists now see placed in jeopardy; they are weary of refuting the never-ending calumnies propagated by designing individuals against them, fully convinced that the ultimate object in view is not the welfare of the negro, but to tamper with his feelings, to rouse him to the destruction of the colonist; the memorialists have seen in a notorious Review such abominable intentions openly avowed, and the invitation actually given to the commission of innumerable murders; in this crisis the memorialists call upon the House to protect them from destruction; they need not remind the Imperial Parliament that Great Britain established the slave-trade in the reign of queen Elizabeth, who personally took a share in it; the colonies did not then exist; Great Britain encouraged it in the successive reigns of Charles 1st. Charles 2nd. and James 2nd., by every means that could be devised; but it was William 3rd. who outdid them all; with lord Somers for his minister, he declared the slave-trade to be highly beneficial to the nation; and that this was not meant merely as beneficial to the nation through the medium of the colonial prosperity, is demonstrated by the Assiento treaty in 1713, with which the colonies had nothing to do, and in which Great Britain binds herself to supply 144,000 slaves, at the rate of 4,800 per annum to the Spanish colonies; from that time, till within a few years of the present time, our history is full of the various measures and grants which passed for the encouragement and protection of the trade; the colonies all this time took no share in it themselves, merely purchasing what the British merchants brought them, and doing therein what the British government invited them to do by every means in their power; the memorialists take leave to remind the House that the colonies first marked this slave-trade with disapprobation, and sought to confine it within narrower bounds; in 1760, South Carolina, then a British colony, passed an act to prohibit further importation, but Great Britain rejected this act with indignation, and declared that the slave-trade was beneficial and necessary to the mother country; the governor who passed it was reprimanded, and a circular was sent to all other governors, warning them against a similar offence; the memorialists have now before them the copy of the royal instructions given to sir George Thomas to the same effect; the colonies, however, in 1765 repeated the offence, and a bill was twice read in the Assembly of Jamaica for the same purpose, of limiting the importation of slaves, when Great Britain stopped it, through the governor of that island, who sent for the assembly, and told them that, consistently with his instructions, he could not give his assent, upon which the bill was dropped; the colonies, in 1774, tried once more, and the assembly of Jamaica actually passed two bills to restrict the trade, but Great Britain again resisted the restriction; Bristol and Liverpool petitioned against it; the matter was referred to the Board of Trade, and that Board reported against it; the colonies, by the agent of Jamaica, remonstrated against that report, and pleaded against it on the grounds of justice and humanity; but Great Britain, by the mouth of the earl of Dartmouth, then President of the Board, answered by the following declaration: 'We cannot allow the colonies to check or discourage in any degree a traffic so beneficial to the nation;' and this was in 1774; the imposition of slavery therefore being the act and deed of the British nation, and as that nation has called on its legislature to adopt speedy and decisive measures for the abolition of slavery in our colonies, the memorialists pray the House will take care that the abolition is effected, not by depriving others of the property which the British nation has constituted such for its own benefit, but by paying the costs of the abolition, a measure which can alone entitle it to any credit in the eyes of the world for that high claim to humanity so advocated by a numerous portion of our fellow-subjects, whose sincerity can thus alone be established; in whatever manner this can be contrived, the risk of the experiment, in common justice, should fall on the nation at large; and, previous to a complete diminution of the value of their property by a course of progressive enactments, all tending to this injurious result, under the present system pursued, compensation should take place, and be the basis of any future propositions; it will be too late to make an estimation when a ruinous result has arrived, for the cause; may then be disputed; the memorialists cannot be expected to abide by such a condition; one mode of extrication from these difficulties, and that simple and apparent, remains to the British nation; let the nation at once assume to it self mil colonial property, and make moderate but just compensation to the proprietors for the whole: it then can do that on its own account which is now required of the proprietors; if there be risk, it will be incurred, as it ought, by the nation demanding the change; if there be loss, it will fall, as it ought, on the nation at large; and if there be gain, it will be, as it ought to be, the gain of those incurring the risk; if, however, such a plan be deemed of too great a magnitude to be at once adopted, the memorialists, willing to show their sincerity, and that they are prepared to do all in their power to terminate slavery, offer to the consideration of the House the purchase of all property in the island of Antigua, for a fair and equitable consideration of the interest of private property; that colony being, from its local advantages, and the advanced slate of the negro mind, in moral and religious instruction, peculiarly adapted for the trial of the cultivation of sugar by free labour, which theory, although the memorialists deny the possibility of, and cannot consent to be made the victims of, any such experiment, they are fully warranted in as- serting cannot be attempted under more favourable auspices in any other island in the West-Indian Archipelago."

rose to present a petition from the Catholics of Ireland, assembled at an aggregate meeting, praying for a grant of money for the Education of Catholics in Ireland in their own way. The petition was signed by several thousands of persons, and, he believed, expressed the sentiments of the great body of Irish Catholics. He requested the attention of the House while he stated the object of the petition. The petitioners complained that the education of the poor in Ireland had not been sufficiently attended to since the Reformation. Before that time they had been supplied with the means of education out of the funds of the Church; and since that time some of them had been educated by means of contributions from the Catholics themselves. They complained of the conduct of the Education Commission with respect to the Catholics, but in that complaint he could hardly agree with them. That Commission had recommended, that the Protestant and Catholic children should be educated together, and the petitioners claimed, that where the Catholic children were the majority, the master should be a Catholic; and where they were the minority, that a Catholic usher should be appointed. They insisted that no books should be read by the Catholic children, except such as were approved by the Catholic bishops of Ireland; and they complained, that the House had advanced money to certain Education societies, whose real object was, not the education of the Irish poor, but their conversion to Protestantism. The House ought to be thoroughly informed as to that fact, before they voted any more of the public money in this way. That there were some societies whose real object, under pretence of education, was proselytism, he fully believed; and he was not sure that even the Kildare-street Society was wholly exempt from that imputation. Although he himself was fully convinced of the importance of teaching children to read the Scriptures, yet nothing could be more illiberal and intolerable than to compel the Catholics to read books which they did not like. He requested the attention of the House to the manner in which these things were managed in foreign countries, especially in France, where, by an edict of Louis 18th, it was directed, that in all the primary schools, no Jewish child should be compelled to read any books, except such as had been approved of by the Jewish Consistory. Although he regretted the extent to which the Catholics carried their objections to the reading of the Scriptures, yet, on the principle of toleration, he was of opinion, that they should receive education in the manner they themselves liked. In pursuing that part of the subject, he begged leave to refer to it in support of his argument. There were, as hon. gentlemen well knew, persons employed by various societies in this country, to effect, as far as possible, the conversion of the unenlightened inhabitants of the East and West Indies, and other remote parts of the world, to our religion. What course did those missionaries pursue? They began, not by putting the Holy Scriptures into the hands of the ignorant people, but by endeavouring to civilize them, by teaching them to plant corn, to rear poultry, the use of domestic animals, &c. and having thus acquired their confidence by acts of kindness and beneficence, then did they attempt to direct their minds to the great subject of religion. He would, therefore, say, if we would convert the Irish nation, we must change our course altogether. What was the opinion which the Irish Catholic entertained of the Protestant clergy? Did he estimate them by the rates which he paid for their support, or by comparing their wealth with the poverty of the Catholic clergy? Every circumstance conspired, and none more than the conduct of those enthusiasts who roamed about the country, to convince the Catholics, that the destruction of their religion was the object which the supporters of the Established Church had in view. Among other circumstances referred to by the petitioners, in order to prove that part of the case, was the examination of a very active and worthy gentleman, captain Gordon, by the commissioners of Education. He was asked—"Is the object of your mission Proselytism? —No. What then is your object?—To teach veritable Christianity." And then the captain went on to state his opinion, that the Catholic religion was any thing but Christianity. The cause of religion was more injured than benefitted by the conduct of such individuals. He con- sidered it highly injudicious to vote one shilling of the public money to any society for the promotion of education, unless Proselytism were left entirely out of the question. Nothing of that nature could be effected by force, nor should any thing of that nature be attempted. The petitioners prayed, that the House would divide that portion of the supplies for the year awarded for the purposes of education among the several religious sects, in such manner and proportions as should appear meet. With respect to those proportions, a return on the table shewed that the number of children of all classes, in the various schools in Ireland, was 569,075; that of these 421,415 were Catholics, and of this latter number only 31,058 received any public assistance; the remaining 390,000 being educated at the expense of their own parents and other Catholics. And yet these were the people who, we were told, were hostile to education and to religious instruction. He should therefore call upon the House to assist in the education of the Irish poor, but at the same time to suffer Catholic parents to educate their children as they thought right. Reason told us, that he who had moral feeling—he who was embued with the principles of Christianity—he who was impressed with the belief of a future state —was protected against the approach of a crime. His argument thus came home to the feelings of every hon. gentleman, and he should conclude, by reference to facts, that, in addition to the considerations of policy and justice, we were called upon, on the score of gratitude, to attend to the prayers of the Irish Catholics. Those facts were—that in a very early period of our history, a great portion of the education which the people of this country received, was owing to Irish interference, and it was not too much to assert, that the light of the Gospel first shed its rays on England, reflected from the Irish shores. The hon. gentleman concluded, by strenuously recommending the petition to the attention of the House.

said, that, as friends of the government, of the state, and of the protestant religion, which was strictly interwoven with the constitution, they were bound to refuse the prayer of this petition. The people of Ireland were not disinclined to reject the Bible. The priests alone prevented its reception. But for them, education would go on well in that country. They prevented the spreading of truth and of morality: they encouraged disorder and opposition to the laws, and the disturbance of the public peace of Ireland. Why should they want the benevolence of parliament? If they earnestly desired the good of the people, according to their own account they were well able to effect it. They boasted that the Catholic Association could raise 1,000l. a week for projects of sedition and designs against the state. If they possessed proper feelings of benevolence, they would far more readily contribute that much for the education of their poor. The priests had had the control in that country for ages. What had they done? Compare Scotland and Ireland in point of education; what a contrast! The modes of education were different. In Scotland the Scriptures were the basis of education, and they inculcated the highest sense of morality, of justice, of obedience to the laws, and of respect for one another. It was not a fit thing for parliament to vote money to be laid out in educating the people in a system which put them in hostility to the religion of the state. He declared openly, and he wished others to do the same, his zeal for proselytism. What, then, were they to be frightened at the sound of a word? It was proselytism from ignorance and vice, to morality and knowledge. What should hinder a good man from being anxious for such a change? He repeated his conviction, that money ought not to be granted for educating people in a religion hostile to the state. The Reformation was glorious in this respect—that it gave back the Scriptures to the laity. He had great faith in it, because many great men suffered death for its sake, and he could not believe that they died in error. If they were friends to that Reformation, if they were foes to immorality, fraud, delusion, tyranny, and superstition, they would refuse the prayer of this petition.

said, there was not an hon. member in that House whose religious opinions differed more widely from those of the Roman Catholics, than his own. Still, he thought that the state ought to suffer every class of persons to educate their children as they thought proper. What be wanted was, to see education, of some sort or other, diffused all over Ireland; and he would infinitely prefer seeing the Irish poor educated in the principles of the Catholic religion, even though we could never hope for their conversion to Protestantism, than that they should remain in that state of ignorance, which, he feared, would be their fate, if the present system was persisted in. The situation of Ireland was a disgrace to this country, under whose mismanagements she has been for so many centuries. He had learned, from authorities that could not be doubted, that the Irish were naturally a kind, brave, loyal, generous, and humane people; but, when he read the newspapers of the present time, and found that they detailed burnings, murders, and other most horrible outrages, he asked himself, by what means that melancholy change had been brought about? He had made, from the newspapers, a small collection of such outrages that had happened within these few months in Ireland, as would wring every humane heart. The grief and sorrow were theirs, but the blame rested with us; for if we had done our duty towards that unhappy county, it would not have been possible that those disorders, which were of every day occurrence, should continue to be perpetrated there, and indeed here, by the lower classes of her people. He would much rather that education should go forward; for there was no evidence that the moral virtues belonged exclusively to the professors of Protestantism. The English government had been guilty of the greatest injustice in taking away the whole of the revenues of the Catholic church in Ireland, and not applying any portion of them to the education of the people. If they had been so applied, Ireland would now present a very different aspect, whether the religion taught was Protestant or Catholic. But those revenues were not applied to this most useful purpose. They were devoted to the maintenance of Protestant ascendancy; to the keeping up of one party, and the keeping down of another. He wished this country to pay proper attention to the means of educating the Irish poor, without troubling themselves about their religion; and, as a Protestant, he would say, that a system of liberality would much sooner subdue the prejudices, animosities, and jealousies, by which that country was agitated, than any attempt to keep the people down by a contrary mode. It had been said, that Catholicism was the mother of infidelity; now, infidelity had not been produced in Ireland by Catholicism, but by endea- vouring to force the people to become Protestants. The hon. member who spoke last had alluded to the French revolution, and had said, that France owed her ruin to the infidelity produced by popery; but what could the hon. member mean by the expression? That country had never been in such a flourishing condition as she now was. If a comparison was instituted between her and the other countries of Europe, he believed she would take the lead of most of them. The term ruin was as little applicable to her as to any country with which he was acquainted. He hoped the petition would be allowed to be brought up. He did not agree in all the sentiments which it expressed, but it deserved the serious attention of the House.

concurred in some respects with the sentiments of the hon mover, and differed in others. He was willing to allow that every possible means ought to be adopted for diffusing the blessings of education among the Irish poor, and that any education, whether Catholic or otherwise, was better than none. But with respect to the question, whether the Scriptures should or should not be introduced into those mixed schools, he felt himself bound to say, that any system of education, which had for its basis the exclusion of the holy Scriptures, should meet with his most decided opposition. The Scriptures were the birthright of every one, and he could not consent to their exclusion.

concurred in so much of what had fallen from the hon. member for Dover, that it was almost useless for him to say any thing upon the subject. There was no foundation for saying that there was no religion taught in the English schools. He had himself attended one for nearly eleven years, and he could not, on recollection, point out one of them in which the Scriptures did not form some part of the system of education. The masters of those schools were members of the established church, and distinguished for their piety. The system could not be presumed to have been altered since that time.

said, he felt the necessity of education to the Irish poor as much as any one. There was a strong appetite for it, he was happy to say, among them; but there were two great enemies which opposed its diffusion, the priests, and those enthusiasts, who, by their mistaken zeal, compelled them to pursue a course, of which they would otherwise have been ashamed. He knew this to be the fact from experience, and that those who went about endeavouring to make converts did more mischief, and retarded the improvement of the people and of the country; more than either priests or bishops, or foreign influence. The endeavour of government ought to be to do away with all distinctions, to heal animosities, and to remove the causes of discord. He believed, that if that mischievous society, which had agitated the people of Ireland by its intemperate zeal had not existed, the population of the country would long ere now have been firmly united, and have adopted those maxims of our holy religion, which all parties professed, as a common creed. At the present moment, such was the zeal with which the Bible was sought after, that the priests were unable to prevent it from circulating extensively among the people. He regarded the measure now suggested as the most injudicious that could possibly be proposed. It would afford him great pleasure to see the children of both persuasions educated together, instead of being brought up at enmity with each other. An endeavour should be made to establish a sort of neutral ground, in which both Catholics and Protestants might meet in harmony.

said, that the hon, member for Dover had favoured them with a sermon against popery, with which the petition had nothing to do. It only prayed for a portion of the public money for the purposes of educating the people. He could not therefore conceive why the hon. member should have travelled so far out of his way. The Catholic clergy required to be met by a spirit of conciliation, and if they had only the regular clergy to deal with, he had no doubt harmony would have prevailed; but a set of sectarians had crept in, and introduced such a spirit of rancour and animosity, as to prejudice the people against the Bible and those who taught its unrestricted perusal. They conceived that these persons were desirous of detaching them from their ancient faith. And was it not natural that the clergy should be roused by such attempts. The hon. member for Dover had contrasted the conduct of the Irish clergy with those of other countries, and particularly with that of Scotland? But what was the difference between the two? The Scottish clergy had been endowed with the means of imparting the blessings of religion, while the latter were left to their own unassisted efforts. Nay, that very clergy, be it remembered, who had been attacked with such unsparing severity, had had their property confiscated over and over again. It had even been a matter of penalty, and that at no very distant period, to practise their religion at all. Yet, notwithstanding their small means, they had done more for the cause of education than those who had profited by the liberality of parliament. They deserved none of the denunciations of the hon. member. They had done all that lay in their power, and more than most would have done in their situation. He must, however, allow the hon. member credit for candour. Though he did not belong to the proselytising societies which agitated Ireland, he had confessed his approval of, their exertions; and had stated, that if he lived in that country, he would aid their endeavours. To this part of his speech, he should merely reply by stating, that in saying so much, he was not only attacking the petition, but the report of the commissioners of Education. It was the opinion of almost every one, that no attempt at proselytising should be made; and he was quite sure that if such a course had been pursued, the utmost unanimity would have prevailed.

said, that all the petitioners asked for, was a right which every class of people ought to enjoy; namely, the right to put such books as they pleased into the hands of their children, for the purpose of educating them.

vindicated himself from the attack made upon him by the hon. member for Cambridge. He denied that the conduct of the societies to which the hon. and gallant member had alluded, were in any respect injudicious or mischievous. As long as the great mass of the people of Ireland were allowed to remain in ignorance, the Roman Catholics were quiet, for ignorance best suited their purposes; but the moment it was attempted to give education to them, the priests rose up to oppose it, and in their efforts to follow up that opposition, they were the cause of all the mischiefs that occurred ! in Ireland. They intruded themselves into Bible meetings to which they were not invited, and were the occasion of much disturbance, on some occasions; attended with no little danger to the pro- motors of such meetings. He could give one instance in which at a public Bible meeting at Carlow, the priests attended supported by an immense mob, from whose violence some of the friends of the Bible society were obliged to fly with their lives: some escaped by getting over walls. [Cries of no! no!]. He said, yes, yes. He was not at all surprised at the attack made on him by the right hon. member for Kerry. He was prepared for an acrimonious reply from that right hon. gentleman, as he had before experienced similar treatment from him. As to the insinuation of the right hon. gentleman respecting the hostility of the sectarians to episcopacy, he would leave the hon. member for Norwich to answer it, as he (Mr. Butterworth) was a member of the established church, and sincerely attached to it from conviction.

said, it was not his intention to have offered any observation on the petition before the House, but after what had fallen from the last speaker, he could not remain silent. The hon. member had alluded to a Bible meeting which was held in Carlow. Now, he would assert, that the circumstances mentioned by the hon. member connected with that meeting were wholly without foundation; and he was enabled to contradict them on most excellent authority— that of colonel Rochford, who presided at the meeting on the occasion. That most respectable gentleman, who was deservedly respected by all parties, had stated in his evidence before the committee on the state of Ireland, that the accounts given of the proceedings at that meeting, and which the hon. member had just repeated, were misrepresentations of the real facts. The whole originated in an alarm which was unaccountably raised in the room. A rush to the doors was the consequence, but there was not the least truth in the imputation made on the Catholics. Such was the testimony of a most respectable witness, who had been selected by both parties to act as chairman. It was false to say that the Catholic church absolutely refused the Bible to its members. Such was not one of its tenets. They merely objected to placing the Bible without note or comment in the hands of young persons and in that view they were borne out by some of the most dignified members of the church of England, who opposed the indiscriminate reading of the Bible, without the church catechism. He pro- tested against the constant practice adopted by some members, of imputing to persons doctrines, which they who knew best denied. If the House were to dictate to the Catholics the education which they were to receive, their proposition would not be attended to, and consequently their efforts would tend to no good. Even without the assistance of parliament, education had been extended to a great portion of the Catholic peasantry, through the exertion of the priests. Doctor Doyle, among others, had established several schools.

said, that at the commencement of the session they had been informed, that the banking system, now liable to, and productive of, very serious evils, should be placed on an improved and solid foundation. Towards the fulfilment of that promise, nothing had been done save the introduction of this unhappy bill, which had come to them from the Lords; under which, it was next to impossible, that any banking establishment could be set on foot; and, if such were the case, it would be a public nuisance. The bill was copied from the Irish bill; and the Irish bill only-worked by the contradiction of its clauses giving opportunity for evasion. The notes of the Irish banks were not to be payable in Dublin; and they were not to draw upon Dublin for sums under 50l. for so stipulated the bank of Ireland. But, under a clause introduced by the hon. member for Limerick, the Irish banks were allowed an agent in Dublin; and the agent in Dublin paid the notes, though not there made payable on the face of them. If a bill were wanted for 50l., the provincial banks could not draw it, but the baker next door could draw it for them. The whole was a proceeding which the Bank of England should have done any thing rather than have imitated. These joint-stock banks were to be eminent in their solidity; and the first announcement of the formation of these solid banks, he held in his hand, as issued by Messrs. Wilks and Verbeke, of Broad-street in the City. Their prospectus declares, that "towards carrying into effect the bill introduced by lord Liverpool, there is to be a provincial bank for England and Wales; the capital to be real and not nominal: the shares to be 2l. each. To issue their own notes payable only where the bank is established, and the depositors to be safe from losses arising from speculations in the trade of private bankers." The letter addressed with the prospectus, to ministers, members of parliament, and other men of weight, concludes in this inviting manner:—"To you we apply to become one of the vice-presidents of this national association. You will connect yourself only with some of the most respectable and influential individuals; and you need not at the same time, by your acquiescence in this request, take any shares. The company will have a patron, presidents, vice-presidents, governor, deputy governor, directors, and probably a committee of management." P. S. "The appointment being merely honorary, will not require the least sacrifice of your time or attention." So much for "solid banking!" It was possible, indeed, that the chancellor of the Exchequer might not accept the invitation, though he believed that right hon. gentleman had been one of the individuals to whom it had been addressed. These same Messrs. Wilks and Verbeke bad, amongst other joint-stock concerns, been solicitors for an Eastern rail road, subscriptions also two pounds each. The wise men of the East, however, were not enamoured of the project, and consequently lost nothing by it. But, unless he was very much misinformed, there had been great men of the West—honourables, and right honourables—who had not been so fortunate. The first knowledge he had of these gentlemen, was, that one of them, Mr. Wilks, had done him the honour to write him a letter, in 1822, which he also held in his hand— proposing the institution of a joint-stock Sunday Society, with a committee, half of clergymen of the Established Church and half of Dissenters, for the persecution of apple women who prophaned the Sabbath; for "remedying the deficiency of 'the laws" on the subject; for "soliciting bills in parliament;" but, above all, for "inviting general attention by means of parochial subscriptions."

said, it was possible the Bank directors might have come down to the House prepared to admit such alterations in the bill in the committee, as might render it operative; which, in its present state, it certainly was not. The clause preventing any bill being drawn on London for a less sum than fifty pounds, was equally absurd and inconvenient; and a greater evil than inundating the country with notes not payable in London he could not conceive. He was well aware the Bank of England, on this point, stood stiff on its charter; but there never was so petty a jealousy in the world as this.—Mr. G. said, that all the bankers notes from his part of the country were made payable in London, and he would appeal to any Bank director in the House, if any portion of them were ever known to be circulated in London, or even out of their own districts. The fact was, if a country bank issued more paper than was necessary for the commercial circulation of its districts, and the paper was made payable in London, it found its way to the bankers in London in remittances, and was immediately returned on the issuers. If the Bank persisted in refusing to consent to a more practicable bill than this, the safer way for the House to pursue, would be, not to attempt legislating on the subject, but to suffer it to remain over until the expiration of the Bank charter, when their hands would be unshackled. The House resolved itself into a committee. On the clause, which enacted the equal liability of all the partners,

addressed the committee, but in so low a tone as to be altogether inaudible.

said, that he could not enter into any of the views of the hon. member, with respect to the probability of the country being deluged with paper, or to that of the new banks being managed with improvidence. He could not believe that the country would be placed in any such jeopardy, because it might be the pleasure of parliament to modify the existing Bank charter, or hereafter to decline continuing the privileges of the Bank, by putting the law on a more extended scale than that on which it now stood. It was not necessary to argue either of those questions; for the passing of the bill through its former stages sufficiently-proved that the House was desirous that some facilities should be given to the formation of banks upon a more extended scale than that which the present state of the law allowed. He could not believe, that the only safe system of banking was identically that system which happened to exist in England at the present moment. Every person must see the utter incapability of the Bank to carry on all the banking concerns of the country. They had not the means to help the whole country, as they had done the county of Lancaster. The question, therefore, to be considered was, whether it was necessary to continue the law with respect to the number of partners? What peculiar magic there was in the number six, he could not conceive; nor could he possibly imagine, why that number should be held to be perfectly safe, and a greater number to be replete with danger. The hon. member for Newton had alluded to an extravagant project for establishing a bank with a capital of one million, to be subscribed in shares of two pounds each. That such a project had been entertained, and proposed to the public, was undoubtedly true; and he had himself received a circular letter, which invited him to become one of the honorary members. The proposal was, that if he would allow himself to be set down as an honorary member, he might, if he pleased, dispense with taking any shares, and he might have nothing to do with the concern. He must confess, that this latter part of the proposal was the only part which he approved of. It was completely applicable to his views, and he accordingly had had nothing to do with it. But surely, because there were persons wild enough to entertain most absurd and mischievous projects, it was not to be argued that such schemes should deter the legislature from endeavouring to give the wholesome and ordinary facilities of trade to the banking system. Absurd combinations were not impossible under any system. If the termination of the Bank charter and privileges had left the government the opportunity of doing as they thought fit, he certainly would not have proposed some of the limitations which clogged the present bill. The arrangement as to the limited amount for which parties were allowed to draw, was certainly a very great defect. But the government had been obliged to be content with what they could get. He should have been glad if the Bank had been prepared to waive their exclusive rights, to a greater extent than they had done; but that not being the case, he and his colleagues could only propose to parliament the utmost he could obtain from the Bank. He thought it right of the country to avail itself of the facilities as far as they went; for they were calculated to place the banking system upon a much better footing than that on which it had hitherto stood.

wished to direct the attention of the committee to the clause prohibiting co-partnerships "from borrowing, owing, or taking up any sum or sums upon their bills or notes within sixty-five miles from London, or at any place not exceeding the distance of sixty miles from London; and prohibiting such co-partnerships from having any house of business, or establishment as bankers in London, within the prescribed limits." He wished to ask the Attorney-general, whether these bankers, under this clause, could or could not discount and re-discount, bills through their agents in London?

said, that considering that the discounting of bills was a principal branch in the business of banking, and that the bill prohibited any company, consisting of more than six persons, from carrying on that business in London, or within the prescribed limits of sixty-five miles, it was his opinion that such co-partnerships were precluded the right of having an establishment in London for the purpose of discounting bills.

said, that that answer was final as to the bill. Any banker so circumstanced must necessarily stop payment. The Bank of England itself could not assist such establishment; and the bill must necessarily be given up altogether.

said, that nothing could be less satisfactory than the shape ilk which this measure came before the House. It had been promised, in the beginning of the session, that it would be the result of the wisdom of parliament; but, after it had passed through the Lords, and had been discussed, of course, in the cabinet, it contained provisions which it was impossible to understand or agree to. He thought, therefore, that the shortest way of disposing of it, as well as the most satisfactory, would be to throw it out at once.

thought, that the greater the number of partners in banks, the less security there would be for the respectability of their character, or the solvency of their circumstances. He considered the present bill objectionable in every point of view.

considered the bill, not as a benefit to the country, but as a positive nuisance. Under the present condition of the Bank restrictions it was impossible for the joint-stock companies to meet with success. It was not sufficient that a paper currency should be safe; it was essential that it should be issued in the most convenient manner to the public, and in every respect be made to represent all the qualities of a metallic currency. The mischief of the present bill was, that it destroyed all universality, and made the new notes to resemble the local tokens. It was impossible, under the present system, to assimilate the country notes to those of the London Bank. If they got out of their peculiar jurisdiction, the holders of them would be put to great inconvenience to get rid of them. The greatest inconvenience was now felt from these local notes. The poor who happened to hold one of them in a district in which it was not issued, were often put to the greatest inconvenience, and obliged to submit to a loss, in order to induce coachmen or travellers to convey it to where it was payable. He thought it would be much better to give up the present measure, until the expiration of the Bank charter.

was surprised to hear the hon. Bank director say, that private banks were preferable to the Bank of England. One great objection with him to the present measure was, that it gave a monopoly of local circulation to the Bank of England; as its branch banks would be established free from the difficulties which the joint-stock banks would have to contend with. He recommended that publicity should be given to the amount of local issues of paper.

contended, that, although government had probably made the best bargain they could with the Bank of England, yet they had not done enough for the permanent advantage of the country. There could not be, in his opinion, any danger of over-issues, which were apprehended on the part of the country banks; because, as long as they were compelled to pay their notes in notes of the Bank of England, and those were payable in gold, there must be an effectual check upon too great an extension of credit in that way. In remarking upon the clause which prohibited the chartered banks from discounting bills or issuing notes in London, he begged to ask, whether it was intended that they should not have any agent or correspondent in the metropolis? If they were allowed an agent, he might, in the ordinary performance of his duties, violate the law in that respect, without any intention of offending against the provisions of the act; and he therefore thought it highly necessary that the clause should be so worded as to leave no doubt upon the subject. He also objected to the clause which prevented chartered Banks from issuing notes payable in London, under the sum of 50l.; and to the clause by which these chartered banks of six persons were at once to be put in possession, without any act of the legislature, of a power enjoyed by no other corporation or company in the kingdom, unless under the authority of an act of parliament—he meant the right to sue and be sued, in the name of their manager or director. That right, thus conferred, seemed to be a little invidious towards other companies, to whom the same power had been refused. The hon. gentleman concluded, by expressing his conviction, that the bill, with all its imperfections, would be highly beneficial to the country; and declared, that while the with drawings of the exclusive privileges of the Bank of England could not be attended with any loss to that establishment itself, it would be the means of producing results the most important to the community.

said, that a similar clause was inserted in the Irish Banking act, and it was only on the insertion of such a clause that the Bank of England consented to waive the privileges of its charter. He could not undertake to answer for the exact legal effect of the words of the clause; but if there was any obscurity in the words, or if there was any thing contained in them which would practically prevent the formation of these co-partnerships, such was not the intention either of the Bank or the government; and these words might be so altered as to remove the objection entertained against the clause. As to the attack which the learned gentleman had made upon the bill, it was directed against the measure generally, and not against this clause. If the learned gentleman had read the correspondence between the Bank and government he would have seen that the substance of this clause had been insisted upon by the Bank.

said, there was not a word about discounting bills in the correspondence.

asked, whether the operation of this clause would be to prohibit any number of country bankers from applying capital which they had in the hands of their London agent in discounting bills.

said, that, as he understood, the principal business of a banker consisted in discounting bills, he certainly thought that the clause, as it now stood, went to prevent any number of bankers, exceeding six, from discounting bills in London.

said, that that being the case, this clause must have the effect of preventing the formation of large joint-Stock companies.

wished to know whether this clause would have the effect of preventing a country firm of less than six from discounting bills in London.

said, he did not think that a firm consisting of less than six was prohibited by this clause; but he thought that one consisting of more than six, was prohibited.

said, it had long been the practice in Scotland, where the banking firms consisted of more than six partners, to draw bills upon London, and to have them discounted as often as it might be necessary. Whether this was legal or not he did not know, but he was sure it could not be done in future under this clause.

said, it had never been the intention of government, or of the Bank, to prevent joint-stock companies from applying their capital in discounting bills in London. However, if the words were so obscure as not to give to those companies the privileges which, by this bill, were intended to be granted to them, there could not be, on his part, any objection to introduce, at a future stage, such words as would give legal efficiency to the concessions made by the Bank.

thought, that if the word "bills" were left out, and the prohibition limited to the promissory notes of the companies, there would be no objection.

said, that any alteration would require great care. In order to give time for properly considering it, he thought it would be better that the chairman should report progress.

thought it would be better for the committee to proceed to the other clauses, on which no difference of opinion was likely to prevail —reserving the present clause for future consideration.

said, he had never seen such a mass of absurdity as this bill presented. It was said to be an Irish act; and he could believe it from the number of absurdities it contained. He had been often charged with committing blunders in the House, and perhaps he might have done so; but if ever he could be justly accused of such absurdities as were contained in this bill, upon which the whole strength of the administration had been employed for a considerable period, he was content that the right hon. gentleman should set him down for a fool.

said, that unless gentlemen would take the trouble to read the clause, they could not understand it. The clause had been copied verbatim from an Irish act, which had been in force for some years.