erious
and important change during the time over which these speeches range.
That change was produced gradually, and not without infinite trouble on
the part of his son whose inveterate zeal knew no bounds. In his
father's presence, and more particularly so in his absence, he denounced
the bill, and held up any Catholic who dared to support it to public
indignation. He called on the people of Waterford to demand Mr. Wyse's
resignation, not because he was an unfaithful representative, but
because he was unchristian. If he had not determined to divide the
Association on this question, he did all a man could do who had so
determined.

I shall only trouble the reader with two quotations more. They refer to
the question immediately under discussion, namely, that the Seceders
were as much opposed to the obnoxious clauses of the bill as those with
whom they differed. But while they are unequivocal and conclusive on
that branch of the subject, they go still further and attest the sincere
forbearance with which they treated language and conduct which appeared
to them in the utmost degree narrow and intolerant. Discussion among the
bishops naturally produced discussion among the chiefs of the
Association, and it was agreed that the Association should confine its
objections to those provisions of the bill upon which there could be no
disagreement. The first petition of the Association was confided to me.
I endeavoured to embody in the petition what appeared to me the true
basis of a comprehensive system of education. Some persons on the
Committee objected to certain phrases as susceptible of an inference
favourable to the principle of mixed education. Mr. O'Connell joined in
the objection and succeeded in reducing the petition to a single
paragraph, deprecatory of the Tenth Clause of the Bill. I refused to
have any more to do with the petition, and it was dropped. After the
lapse of a fortnight, Mr. Maurice O'Connell proposed another, simply
praying that the tenth clause, which vested the appointment of the
professors of the college in the Government, should be rejected.

Upon the occasion of this petition being submitted to the Association
(9th June, 1845), Mr. J. O'Connell delivered one of his usual invectives
against the bill and its abettors. Mr. O'Brien deprecated the
ill-feeling and discord such language was calculated to provoke. In the
course of his observations he said:--

"In seconding the motion of my hon. friend