ticipated a great improvement in the Roman
Catholic priesthood, and Lord John Russell, while he supported the
motion, expressed a hope that it was the commencement of a series of
measures which would unite the two countries in an enduring bond. On
a division, the motion for leave to bring in the bill was carried by
a large majority; but the measure, though destined to become law, was
subsequently most strenuously opposed, both in and out of parliament.
Those who were ardently attached to the vital principles of
Protestantism felt an apprehension that the endowment of the Roman
Catholic hierarchy in Ireland, and the rapid downfall of the established
church in that country, if not in England also, was involved in such a
measure; and their zeal being thus awakened, no exertions were spared
to frustrate the plans of government. On the second reading of the
bill being moved on the 11th of April, the measure was opposed by Mr.
Colquhoun. Mr. Colquhoun concluded by moving that the bill be read a
second time that day six months. Mr. Grogan followed on the same side;
and the Earl of Arundel and Mr. Gladstone supported the measure: the
latter stating that he did so in opposition to the prevailing opinion,
and to his own deeply cherished prepossessions. Mr. D'Israeli said that
Sir Robert Peel had declared there were three courses open to him. "In
a certain sense, and looking to his own position, he is right: there is
the course the right honourable gentleman has left; there is the course
that the right honourable gentleman is following; and there is usually
the course which the right honourable gentleman ought to pursue.
Perhaps, sir, I ought to say that there is a fourth course; because
it is possible for the house of commons to adopt one of those courses
indicated by the right honourable gentleman, and then having voted for
it, to rescind it." Mr. D'Israeli proceeded to complain of the course
pursued by Sir R. Peel towards his supporters, in which he indulged in
private personalities, which was strongly condemned by Mr. Roebuck, who
described his speech as being poor in execution as it was malicious in
motive. Mr. Roebuck proceeded to defend the measure; and he was followed
by Messrs. Fox Maule and Stafford O'Brien, both of whom opposed it. Mr.
Macauley considered it merely a matter of pounds, shillings, and pence:
it was not a question of principle, but purely a question between L9000
and L26,000. Mr. Shaw energetically opposed t