The Express. — London, England, 1851-02-11 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LOADS.—MONDAY, F. 10. TY* Luau C C &LIAM took kis seat on the woolsack at 6 o'slosk. PETITIONS PILESENTED. f rom PAPAL AOCIILLSAIUS.—IIy Lord STANLEY, Bakltal and other places; the Bishop of ST. DAVID'S art the Bishop of NORWICH, from places in their dia toms ; Earl POWIS, from playa's iu the county of Salop; Ow Marquis of SALISBI:ItY, from a place not heard; and the Earl of EN N I SK I LEEN, from various place in Tyrone, align, awl Queyi,*s Vounty, complaining of the papal mg poMloll praying fur the enactment of a meaiure on the subj. Ct. AlelliCt*l.Tl" SAL DP4TRESS.-13y Lord STANLEY, from a place cot heard, complaining of agricultural distms. COURT OF BANKRUPTCY. Lord BROUGHAM moved for a return of the number of days during which the comini.ioners in bankruptcy had mt daring the lad year. A, some inisapprehrn.ion had ari.rn with rtfereme to his statement OD Friday night, he begged to say that nothing wan further from his mind than to expro... the slight , .t distrust with reference to the Bank - Unenniii.siiiniirs, fur better judicial officers never were plat. el in any important iseition in this country; and with ryspect to the right bon. and learned person who was at the head of the Court of Bankruptcy, no thing could he more sati•faetory in all re.peets than the manner in which be performed the duties of that important eahre. Ile might also sly that for upwatvls of three months the greater part of the equity jurisdiction of this court hail, in eons quint, of the death of Sir trisector Shewlevell and the illness of Vies-Fhaneellor Wiesmna, Gdle n upon Viet-Chancellor Knight Bruce, sad be hart mast industrienoly and admirably performed those duties. 1 he 1.0111) IMANCE.I.I.OR bore testimony to the great writ. of Viee.thaneellor Knight Brute, and the labour which had fallen upon him. TIIE EMIL OF SHAFTESBURY. The )tanqui , of LANSDOWNE. moved an addre s s to the crown, to the street that the house deeply mgr. tt. di the misfortune of the Ear: of Shaftesbury's inability. from in firmity, any lons. r to a secute the duties of hi, important office chairman of their leinbhip , ' commie.. ese, u poser which he hail filled for :lO y. an ; that hi, neres.dry ales. ore was a most set i.eu. hoe. 11.4 only to the house in portieular, bul to the pulite. at lane, ; and that the boom. I arm .tly begged burr to r romineeol hi , bereldlip's entineut service , to her Map et) • s 100.4 COII . IOUe eonsideration. taus( SI AN LEY eameled the umtinn ; and, after a few word. of pane gyric t Lord Erou.tham, on hi , own be half sod em that of Lord Lyndhurst, the address way agreed to. TORT-OFIICR CLF.ItK S. The E . . an or ST. (i EltliatNdi pftl.lllt.`.l 3 petition Men C. I'. Measor. late ty a clerk in the money-nreb r department of the Post-Ake, emeeplaiuing of hi, alleged, in 1:011 , 0 , 111 nee of aelelr'ssin4 a memorial to the Podimister- Omura'. The 'Martini, of C defended LANRICARI/E defend the course token be the Feed-oilier in the matte r; and, after some oh.ersatiou• (nun the Earl of MT. . , in reply, en "rhi.., hope that hi, noble friend would n'enneider the matter, *lhe 'notion was negatived without a ilividon; and their lordships adjourned at '.ill maim, post 6 o'clock. lif/USF. OF 11/NIMONS.—MOSDAT, FEB 10. Thu SPFA:111:14 took the chair at 4 o'clock. PETITIONS PIIESENTEI). ftrwrat., &r.—The Sha riffs of the City of brachia np pean.l at the bar, and lan-moted three petition. from the Um' Mayor and Corporati.m, on the subject of ',ewer., &e. PAPAL A.. 1: MEAAION.- Ily Sir It. IYIiLIS, from places YAM.* Yeark.hire, and Nuttinarhanohire ; Mr. CLIVE, bom pikes in Wale.; Mr. 11. 1/ILI`MMOND, from place, in Suers,; Lord C. II AMILTON, from Tyrone; Mr. GANKES from Na•therlec, Dor. . t ; Mr. 111% 1•Xf, from Barter; Si; W. J(tLI FIT, from l'eteratield ; Sir E. MAC GALTO lIT EN, from 1.h... in the county of Antrim; Col. CUATTEItTON, from sari tttt pari.he. in the county of Carla, and from the hall abitant. of Ow eity of Cork ; Mr. AIIAIR, from Lam te.t. r ; Col. It. TICEYOIL, from p,. abbe. in the county of I 'arita.l rt hen :AI r.C.IY. tilt N EI. 1., from constrecation of partieular lo.pti.l+l at Pre-ton ; Sir A. 11(01), (non titan' and pari.he. in StMer , l't : Sir W. VEILNEIL loam plal••••• in the county of Gal way and Arritctla ; Mr. .41. COCK (5), from plane in Bast Surrey—mman.t ;opal morreoion. By Mr. ('OILILY, from Anbana, Tyrone; and Mr. NAI'l lilt (11), from place* in Ireland, to the NMI' eared, and prn)img that the merman. of ra pre.sima na ay h. extended to Irvlanal. WINDOW T 7C-111 'tr. (GLENVILLE BEILKELEY, from (7hclta•nham ; Mr. WILCOX, from Southampton ; Mr. H M I'll It Y, from Southwark; Mr. CIIILISTO PGER. (nun Lincoln ; Mr. hIOWATT, from Falmouth ; Mr. PINNEY, from plan , in F.a.4 Somers 4 ; Lord It. ORCIEVENOIL. from St. Paul'. Camden-town, Harrow- K I ~il,Ol in (1,0)0 Ur...), Twickenham, Nowlrned, St. Jolku*,. K, loal•green, and Tealdington ; Mr. GLYN, from corporal' id Kendal ,• Sir J. EAST, from the inhal.:unt, of Winehe.ter ; Mr. J. BELL (tEI), from low.eholater• in I.lington ; Sir O. 1.. EVANS (II), from place,' in the metropoli.; Mr. IIIVP.TI', from parodies in larttr, and front Exmouth, for the total abolition of this arms i rAiLISMY.NT.—By 11Ir. CIIRTSTATBER, from Lincoln, agaitcd the 114111th4IM of Jew* to parliament. I . NOTF.CrIoM rullniri it INHUSTRT.—M7 Mr. F.WEST, from corporatiim of theihigh, praying for a moderate, but adrectual, protection to Ilritiih industry. A.,NICELTI*KIL 1,1,,T1110.5.—1ty Mr. BUCK. from Ilia. worthy, with I,ldo iignaturoi, complaining of the ticpn-ocilitate of the agrii tiltur.il inten-4, and praying to be n•li4•Tell from thou, Iturtheni which peculiarly aLach themw•la+ to land, to rnahh• them to compete with fo rtipticri who du not contribute to the tutation of the Minor, NEW WRITS. On the mot of 317. M.\l4.ENAir, a new writ was 0141..n.d tin t h e thvtion of a mentlwr for North Stafford- Ain., in tin. nsan of V iwuunt Ilrackley, who had :tempted . - the Chiltern Hundreds. Dit It, motion of Mr. It. TIKV.VOR, a new writ was ordered for the election of a member fur the county of We morgaii. in the room of Lord :tilare (now Earl of Dunrat en), who had accepted the Chiltern Hundreds. TRADE AND NAVIGATION RETCRNS. LABDUCH ERE, on laying Oil the table the usual Muni • of trade and not igation, said, in reference to an ob literation made by Mr. Denies on a former evening, that the returns had nut been delayed lietond the usual t • fur presienting them, but that, on tfie contrary, they were rather earlier than usual. EAST INDIA COMPANY'S CHARTER. Viscount JOCELYN wished to know from the President of the Board of Control whether it was the intention of the ognernment to move foe the committee on the East India ecmipany's Charter during the pn-synt SCPtilOll. Sir J. C. 11013110 USE said that his noble friend, in putting his question, had fallen into the common error of suppi.ing that the affairs of India were now administered under a charter. There was a charter of incorporation, but all the prit lieges which the old charter gave had been done away with by the act of Pt 33, and the affairs of India were now administered under the clause of an act of parliament. It was not the intention of the goretnm , -nt, therefore, to move for the awl:Oiling of any select committee on the affairs of India ; but if there item y material changes in the act of parliament under which the affair, of India were administered to he proposed, her Majesty's government would give early notice of thew changes, so that they could be fully discussed and examined by the house. SMITHFIELD MARKET. ...... Mr. MACKINNON wished to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it was intended to bring II a bill to remove Smithfield-market. in accordance with the report of the select committee of .this house and of the royal commi.siona on the subject. Sir U. lißEYwed that a bill had been prepared, under the direction of her Mapsty's government, founded on the reports of voinmittees ot that house, and confirmed by the report of the committee of List year. He hoped to be able to introduce the bill in a short time. (War, hear.) ECCLESIASTICAL RETURNS. Sir B. HALL gave notice that he would move an address tar return+ of the gross and net income of each archbishopric and bishopric in England and Woks, in each year (from I lie lot day of January, LAND ASSCRANCES. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL gave notice that he would postpone till Monday next the introduction of the bill for registering anuranees affecting lands in England. CENTRAL AMERICAN BLOCKADE,. T. BARING wished to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he could state, or lay any papers on the table of the house explanatory of the mese of the present blockade by a British force ',tithe coast taf the state of San Salvador, in Central America; and if the reason were the recovery from the government of tbat state of claims of British subject. • whether he would Mate the amount of the whole of the pealing claims. and whether there an any similar claim' on any of the other statist of Central America likely to be enforced in the same gunner ; and also whether he could give any opinion as to the probable duration of the present blockade ? Lord rAug HUSTON said he had not yet received any oestement that the blockade had been established ; there fore, of course, no notification could take Ow on the sub par. There were claims pending against the govern ment of San Salvador to the amount of 20,0001. on behalf of British merchants, the whole of which bad at different times been acknowledged by that government. But excuses having been made for not Making payment, I, the admiral on the station hid instructions to take seal steps so he might, on communication with the consul rectal, think expedient, in order to bring the government of Ban Salvador to a settlement of these claims. With re sent to the claims of other governments in this quarter, he woe afraid throe who were acquainted with the Intercourse mod communications of their merchants with the govern ments of the Spanish American republics. mart be aware Or a moment hardly pawed in which some claim or other was not pending between them and most of the South Ame rem states. Ile must except, however, the government of Buenos Ayres, which in the most handsome and liberal Asa ater pp r r o otected the commeree of all nations indis risainate . (Hoer, hear.) There were claims pending brweso Aril& subjects and served of the states of Omni* Americo. POLICE FORCE IN CONNEXION WITH THE NATIONAL EXHIBITION. Sir 0. GREY said, in reply to Mr. Stanford, that it had been thought nee/wary to require an increase in die metropolitan police force in consequence of the large number of foreigners and others who were ex pected to visit London in the ensuing session in con- !!!. THE EXPRESS, TUESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 11, 1851. ..---------e------ _ nexion with the National Ethibitirm. With regard to the expense the Royal Commissioners had agreed to pay for that portion of the expeele required tor the custody of the various articles sent to then xhibition ; and, also, for the expense of the increased poe . force in the neighbourhood of Hyde-park, and the avenues in the vicin i ty of the Exhibi tion. W ith regard to the expense of any addition of force which would be necessary for presersing order in the streets of the metropolis, that would be defrayed just as the expense of the ordinary police force WIL defrayed. No i n timation had been made to foreign powers with respect to fors igners wearing military uniforms and side arms,— (laeghter)—as so apprehensions were entertained on that account. No additional president had been thought neces sary for the custody of persons charged with police offences dazing the Exhibition. STAMP ACT. Kr. M. J. O'CONNELL wished to ask if it was the in tention of the government to brini, in • bill to amend the Stamp Act of last session (13 & 14 Vic., e. 97), or *to much of it cis counties the trial of all stamp appeals to her Ma jesty's Court of Esau:quer at Westminster, instead of al lowing those ari•mmgg in Ireland to be tried in that country - ? The t:H.SNCELLOIt of the EXCHEQUER said that the question to which his hon. friend alluded arose out of one particular clause of the act, and it in uo way applied to offencsc generally under it. Before the act of last session there was no mode of determining what the proper amount of stamps fur deeds was. If the question was raised in a court of law the judges alone could determine what should be the proper amount. 1 hat hid given rise to great incon venience, and in order to remedy it power was triSTU by the act of last session to enable parties to send any deed to the Commissioners of Stamps iu London, who were em powered to 44.4,4 the proper stamp upon that deed, and their decision was to toe binding on all the parties. To make the matter certain, an appeal was given to the Court of Excluquer at Westminster ; and it wit obviously more convenient that the court of appeal should be one and indivisible than that there should be three courts of appeal, introducing diversities tel practice. TILE PATENT LAWS. Sir D. L. EVANS wished to ask the :secretary of State for the Home Department whether the government in tended to bring in a bill to uncoil the law with regard to British invention. in the present session; also, whether it ISM their intention to introduce a measure for the protec tion of patents shown in the Great Exhibition of this year? Sir G. GREY said the subject of the law of patents had unite "mine much coosideratieen, and he and other members of the government had reecive el many representations from parties interested. 'the matter had been placed in the howls of his hon. and learned friend the Attorney-General, by whom he beeped a bill would be introduced at no distant period. With regard to the pate nts in the Exhibition, he believed a bill would shortly lit intreduced in the other house of parliament by his noble frioid the V ite-l'resident of the Baud of Tenth.. PAPAL AGGRESSION. On the order of the day for resuming the adjourned debate, Lord ASHLEY presented a petition from Halifax against papa aggression. Mr. REYNOLDS, in opposing the motion, attacked the the tempuralitieml the establisheilchureh, whiCh church, and not the- Pope, hr contended, had Is-en the ugressor in thiscase. The hon. member fir Norwich (Mr. feet') had observed, in secondeng the address, that this measure was intsincled to benefit, not merely the protestant., beat ale, the eatholies, of the United Kingdom. Asa catholic, he begged to de cline the document. lie protested against being bound by the art. of the Duke of Norfolk, or by the opinions of Lord Carney*: and if there were one catholic peer whose opinions in 'althea lie especially dissented from, that peer was Lord Ilemunont. But, then, he had another authority forces! upon him, namely, the hon. and learned member fur )(oughts' (Mr. Anstiey). IVlten that hon. member was delivering his speech he said triumphantly, and the statement was cheered to the echo, that there were two descriptions of cathielic-s— -edtholics of the church of HOMO, sled catholic.* of the court of Rome; met that he belonged to the former. Now, without pretending to lee very well read on matters tel orthodoxy, he thought he understood all the cardinal points connected with his creed; he WWI not • convert, but he must confess that until the hon. and learned member infiirmed him of the fact lie was not aware that there we-re two descriptions of catholic.. But, on refection, it occurred to him that if there were two sections of catholic', the hon. and learned member him.. If belonged tee both. He was a catholic of the court of Rome, fur the late Pope Gregory XVI. contierred upon hint the order of St. Gregory, and therefore he was the hon. and learned Sir Chi- holm Anetey member for Youghal. (Great laughter.) He would ask the hon. and learned member in • parenthesis, what services he heed rendered to the Pope in order to deserve that honour? If the hon. and learned gen tleman did nut explain the matter to the house, he (Mr. Reynolds) would take the earliest opportunity of cluing W. It was impossible to dismiss this question with out referring to the memorable letter of the noble lord to the Bishop of Durham; and he had a double right to refer to it—first, because it contained phrases not at all complimentary tee his creed ; and, accenting, because in consequence of its publication be had suffered a pecuniary loss. When he read that letter he thought that it could not be genuine—that it must lee a hoax. Happening to say to to a friend who was in the habit of betting, his friend re plied " I'll bet you a guinea it is genuine." Ile (Mr. Rey add.) said " Done," and he need not tell the house that he was done. Ile could not approve of an CJ post foe to law against the vicars-apostolic, founded on precedents drawn from the reign of Henry the Bth. As regarded thee' Lord Chamberlain and Bee catholic Archbishop of Dublin, lie thought lee could state what was material in considering the I question. When Lleorge the -tile visited Dublin iie 1821, Lord Liverpool being prime minister, he was MCOntlllinird , by the greater minion of his officers of state, amongst whim was Lord Sielmouth, then Secretary of State leer the Home Department. What did Lord Sielinouth do ? Ile wrote I a letter, under the authority of the King, n.veignising the titles of the catholic bishop. of Inland, who were. received at court in that capacity. lle addressed them as "My Lords," and gave them their prop erpoesition eight years before catholic . emancipation was curried, and an apology was now other:4 because a similar course was pursued in 1840. Why, within the last week he lied attended a ler,e ut Dublin, at which the Catholic Archbishop of Dublin was present, and the position assigned to that prelate was superior to that of some of the protestant bishops and that of the Duke of Leinster. lie had hoped, when coming over to attend parliament, that he should be called upon to .issist in the repeal of the window Ms, or the knowledge taxes, or the malt tax, and how much, then, was he amazed to behold on his arrival the House of Commons occupied during the first five nights with this miserable, absurd, and mischievous subject called papal aggression? (Hoer.) lie would give the bill every , opposition in his power, and in every stage, Lind he pro phesied that if ever it should become law it would be a per fevt and complete failure in esecution. The right hon. member fur Ripon had admitted that Ireland was essen tially a catholic country. Ile (Mr. Reynold/1) thanked him for the admission, and trusted that she would remain so. pier clergy were not clothed in purple and tine linen, but in sack cloth and ashes, and he hoped they would remain so (Laugh ter.) In that country seven millions of Itomancatholies support 2 ; 100 priests, while the clergy of u million had a state pro vision of 600,0001. a year. WAS this bill to be added as a ii ew source of discontent ? The noble lord had spoken of Arch bishop Cullen as of a man totally unacquainted with the state uf Ireland. lle could assure the noble lord that Dr. Cullen was a man bone and reared in Ireland, and extensively con nected with the wealthy middle classes in that conntry. The ATTORNEY-OENEItAL, perceiving that hon. members were inclined to debate a bill whose formal provisions were not before them, thought that he . might du service by giving them some information on the subject. lie held it to he a sound maxim in politics, that you ought nut attempt to introduce any remedy more extensive than the evil complained of, and that then-fore if in this case you passed a measure which should effectually prevent persons holding those sees being called archbishops and bishops of pretended dioesses,the real object of legislation would be obtained. He believed that the bill would effectually prevent the evil complained of,fur which object it had been framed with considerable care ; and it would be for the house to decide whether that cure had been successful. It was important to draw a distinction between the two branches of offence which had been committed by this bull. One branch, and a very large one, was the insult which was conceived, and justly conceived, to have been cast on the sovereign and people of this country. Another was the injury inflicted on certain classes inhabitants. The of its The insult offered to this country by the introduction of a bull professing to govern the whole country by the immediate dependents of the l'ope, had produced, he believed, an un due alarm as to the amount of injury likely to arise. The two things—the insult and the injury—had with difficulty been kept separate; and the great desire for legtslation had arisen, not merely from the injury feared, but from the insult which it was conceived had laeu offered to the Queen and country by the introduction of the bull. With respect to the insult which bed been offered to the country, it would be useless for him to say anything relative to the expression of public opinion throughout the country or in that house, further than that they were quite *ancient to repel any insult from a foreign potentate. With respect to the injury, it principally affected the Roman catholic portion of the community, and was of a two-fold character, the one-half spiritual, and the other temporal. He appre hended that that house had nothing to do with the spiritual effect to be produced by the introduction of the bull. It was said that the effect of the bull in temporal matters would be to give to certain persons assuming the titles of bishops power over religious endowments founded for the benefit of the Roman catholic religion—a power enabling 1 . them to deal with such trusts in a manner totally different from the intention of the founders. It was important to prevent any such assumption of power as should interfere with the rights of any British subject. (Hear, hear.) But there was this difficulty in deciding such questions in courts of law —that the courts, taking cognisance of a Roman catholic endowment, would treat the appointments of persons connected with it as mere facts to be ascertained, and would refer to the authorities of the Roman catholic church to know in what way these persons were to be appointed in future. Now the bill professed in the first instance to extend the . provisions of the Roman Catholic Relief Bill, the 10 of Geo.IN . which imposed a penalty of 1001. I everyfor offence, in cases where a Roman catholic prelate assumed the title of any existing see throughout the king- dam, such penalties to be only sued for by the Attorney General. The present hill, by its lint section, extends that clause to the assumption of any title whatever, refer stag to say city, place, or district whatever in the United :=. But they did not stop there, but had added a mulling every act done by persons holding anln st that description—done in the characters of areh lianga; bishops, or deans--absolutely null and void, as also talo done by other persons with reference to them, and ram those titles. If they could effectually meet I= l •lloseti—if they could effectually introduce clauses yesdasiag such results—he apprehended that the intention ot the house would be fulfilled, that intention being to put an end to a particular thing of which the people complained. It ap peared to him that the clause providing that any act or deed assuming such title or character should be null and void would have the effect Of completely paralysing, with respect to temporal matters, persons accepting such titles, and that it would not be possible for them to do anything, i effectual in courts of justice to w ard s ob tai nin g possession of charitable trusts or endowments. The act being declared null and void, it could nut be given as evidence, and there fore could not be employed for the purpose of enabling the so-called bishops, archbishops, and deans, to do things which in any other character would be a perfectly valid and legal act. In addition, they proposed to endeavour to prevent other persons giving them any such pave, and for that purpose they prnposed to enact that it, should not be legal for any person t o gi ve an y sum of money in support of any such pretended diocese or see, or to any persons fulfilling ecclesiastical functions in respect of such see, with worn, sufficiently large and precise to provide for any evasion of suck provision, In addi tion to that, they provided that every gift or bequest of real or personal property, or any preferment to any per son occupying any of these illegal titlesi, on account of and by name of such title of the see or deanery, should be for feited to the crown, and that the crown should be at liberty to dispose of it as it might thiuk tit. But while the effect of this proviso would be, that it would be impossible for any person to make any such gift or bequest for any purpose, charitable or otherwise, in which the parties in whom the administration of the funds would lie were designated by the titles of bishop or archbishop of any such illegal see, undoubtedly it would not prevent, nor was it ever intended to prevent, the making of any gift or bequest for charitable purposes, or for purposes personally beneficial to the party under the title ; but to make such gi ft or bequest effectual, the name of the party must be inserted in the deed. Thus the name of Dr. NViseman, if for Dr. Wiseman, or whoever the trust was to be invested in, if trust property, must be named by his name ; for if he were described by the title of Archbishop of Westminster, or by any other of these *m ealiest cathulis dioceses, the gift or bequest would be void, and the funds be disposed of as the crown might direct. (Hear, hear.) The house would see the distinction: if the object wale to confer a beneficial interest on the party, os to make him trustee for any charitable purpose, it would be properly given to him by his own name ; but if for the sup- port of any of these dioceses, it could not be effectually, given, except by sonic name which imported succession. lf charitabc purposes, the money might he given in trust to the vicar-apostolic for the time biing,—that would be , sufficient for all such purposes. and such a gilt or bequest the courts of law in this country would recognise and en force. They had also endeavoured to prevent any confusion which might arise from the money being given by the will or deed of gift to any person connected with or having reference to any person connected with any such see, that the crown shall have the power of disposing of it, it being considered more desirable then tomake the gift void; be cause the house could well conceive it possible that a case might arise when by accident, and without intention, the gift might be made to or in trust to the Roman catholic bishop fur the use of some relative to the party executing the deed, and so against the law. In such caws it was con tddered desirable that the crown should have the power of doing justice according to the intentions of the testator, and to prevent any barrier to this object it was provided that no evidence given by any person in any such ease should be available for the purpose of enforcing against them any penalties under this act, and that the circumstance of their being otherwise liable to penalties should in no ease protect them from suits of recovery in the courts of Equity. (Hear, bear.) Such was the general scope and object of the hill ; and if, as he believed, it would effectually prevent persons from assuming these titles, it would as e tbetuidly prevent the existence of any of these dioceses or sees. ((hear.) They (the dioceses) could not exist except in reference to sonic territorial limits or place in this country, they had been told by Dr. Wiseman. That was an essential condi tion, without which these bishops were merely bishops is parlibus. If they were exercising episcopel functions in any district in this country, the consequence which followed in the canon law to the bishop of a diocese did not apply, unless there was some reference to territory or place. The hon. and learned member for llath was not correct in imp ressing that the act might he evaded by stating the bishop or archbishop US " in Westminster," instead of "of West minster." If the words in the coutrxt of the instrument gave any reference to the title, the act would operate. It had been said by the honouruble member fur Bucks (Mr. Disraeli), that the bill would not inter fere with synodical action. Hes (the Attorney-General) differed with the honourable gentleman on that Pont. lie thought, on the contrary, that interference with synodical action was the necessary consequence, and that the hon. member himself would, nn mature consideration, see that it was so. It was undoubtedly desirable, if they could, to effect that object in the most quiet way; but if it were done effectually, that was all they ought to seek to do. (Hear, hear.) It had also been said that the bill would not deal with this ease—and it was true to some extent, that it did not deal with the case of a prelate, or any priest of the Itomieh church, by means of the terrors of eternal punish ment, inducing • person to take any step whatever he might not otherwise desire to take, or preventing him front per forming his civil duties, or enjoying his civil rights. For . instance, that it would be possible for a Roman catholic prelate to promulgate some bull, or for several prelates to meet in a synod like that of Thurles, and direct 1 the clergy within any diocese to threaten with the pains of eternal punishment, or deny the meta ment to any man of their eonimunem, who should enlist in the army, or serve on njury in any court of justice. It was possible, certainly, that such an occurrence might take place ; but, at the same time, ho did nett think it wouid be proper on that account to introduce into the present bill any measure to prevent it. (Hear, hear.) In the first place 110 such question had as yet arisen, nor was likely to arise. (Hour.) And, if it had arisen, he should still have no hesitation in saying, that according to the existing law of the country it would he an offence at common law, and one which, he had nu doubt, the courts of justice would he sufficiently strong to deal with. (Cheer.) lie submitted, therefore, that a bill like the present should not be enema ' beret with any prurisions intended to meet ease's of that description. The Roman eatholica of this country bad always professed, and as he believed with great sin cerity, their desire to obey the laws of the country; and that they were actuated by feelings of loyalty AS strong as those which reigned in all other claws of her elajesty's subjects. (Hear, hear.) Was it not tit and proper that they should be protected and tried by such it measure ? They would see, if they were disposed to obey, a measure which made it an offence by statute law to take OICSe titles, or to administer any promrtv under and by right of titles of this kind. lie believed it would lie found that none would offer to resist it. (liter.) He admitted the danger of venturing anything like a prophecy in such a case, but he thought it but fair to give the catholic clergy and the catholic body the opportunity of showing whether they were not willing and ready to obey the law; but he felt satisfied if they should not, and if, in conse quence, it should become necessary to adopt some further and more stringent measures, the power of parliament would be found ample and sufficient to meet any resistance that might be offered, and that the , power would nut be withheld. Ile admitted that he did not anticipate any such resistance, and he rejoiced that he did not. (Hear.) Lord ASHLEY, after adverting to the importance of the subject under discussion, observed that the question was whether they should allow the ceclesiaatice of the church of Itome to Felite and occupy within these realms a position they had never before occupied even in the most palmy days of Romish influence in this country—a position which they were not permitted to occupy, and would never be permitted to occupy in any continental nation that owned the authority of the Vatican. (Hear. hear.) Ile must say in the first place, that this was no question affecting merely the church of England—this was no bill to secure her esta blishment, protect her honour, or extend her influence. (Ilear, hear.) The question was whether they would or would not give that protection which the circumstances required to the civil and religious liberty of the country. (Hear, hear.) It was a question that affected as much the ealeyan, the independent, and dissenters of all denomina tions, as the members of the established church. (Hear, hear.) Ile believed it could be proved that it was a ques tion affecting as much the religious liberty of the Roman catholic laity themselves, and most undoubtedly the liberty of the inferior order of Roman catholic clergy. (Cheers, and a cry of " No.") When the hon. member for Manchester asserted that no movement had been made by the dissenters in the north of the metropolis, he was not correct. (Hear, hear.) The most remarkable document that had fallen into his hands of late was the declaration of the ministers of the congregational denominations of the county of Lancaster, written, he should think, by that great master of the English language, Dr. Vaughan, of Moorsides (Hear, hear.) So far as he (Lord Ashley) could understand the arguments which bad been advanced lutanist legislative interference they reduced themselves to two or three. The find was, the weakness of the power they were called on to resist. But was nut weakness to be con sidered a relative term ? Might nut the power which was deficient in material force be stronger in moral force than those it opened? (Hear, hear.) Was it not possible that that power (and did not history show it)--even while the Pope was so weak as to be driven from his capital, and even his existence to be threatened—wee able to stir up remote kingdoms and dethrone monarchs; and was it I not possible that, though he had not a single gun-boat or i a soldier of his own, he might, by his influence, he able to rouse half Christendom into hostilities? Was he not, after his recent abdication, able while In exile to bring the armies of France, of Austria, of Naples, and of Spain to his aid ? The movement now made in this , country was, not that there wet any fear of the political or spiritual power of the Pope; but it was to meet an open and intelligible insult which must be repressed. (Hear.) If that insult were confined to a manifesto or proclamation we I might Nimbly pass it over ; but it was not so, it was au s e . suit reduced to facts, and embodied in the persons of an I archbishop and twelve bishops, who, by their presence here, and by the daily parade of their titles, were to keep the Queen constantly informed that she was not the only foun tain of honour in these realms; and by the partitioning of t s thoha u h i ntrc. re i c wnm e :F M oonfrinio t t h him.hpo e ge se h.tl. d rut o to 7 .o pre, domini on, . ( Hear .) in ( t 1 ... 1 c H a ce r2 :htoi T uitl h cd e h n like p i e t ltoeu w e as e.,, sLi th d de the country into dioceses that she was not the sole governor Attorney -General t heli on eve tha an t y (Hear,P° m Ln an t. mig . httn . this e o rnim purpo try assume ( e any (Hear, bear.) he pleased and )uuthewouid inake it l pmtTu p.l t and go to the main objection. The great argument against the bill was, that it was a restriction of religious liberty— that it was a limitation of that liberty which had been con ceded to the Roman catholic' by the act of 1829. Now, he was prepared to say for himself, and he was quite sure he could say the same for vast bodies of persona outside of the house—of course he did not presume to answer for any member within the house—(" hear" and laughter)—but having received numerous communications, and taken part in various public meetings, he could speak for laree masses of the people out of doors, that they had no desire, as ho ised no desire, to trench in the least on the privileges con ferred by the Emancipation Act. (Cheers.) The question was not whether we should take anything from the Roman catholic', but whether we should allow them to take any thing from us. (Cheers.) The advocates of this papal measure contended that it was altogether in accordance with the spirit of the act of 1829 ; that it was necessary to the full development of the Roman Catholic Relief Act. On this statement two question arose. First, was this step necessary to the development of the Roman catholic Yell . gion, nod secondly, was it consistent with the rights of the Crown, and the civil and religious liberties of the people of England? (Cheers.) Now, as to the first, that it was necessary for the development of the Roman catholic religion, he would observe that, with 1 reference to the act of 1829, it was perfectly clear that tho I Boman catholic' had full right and ori•-.lege to develop ti 1r rel!ginn• to 4itrusin, extend. and promote it by any legitimate means —( hear, hear)—inel he would go fuither, and say that, though the church had been governed in this 'realm fur near 300 years by vicars apostolic, if the episcopal functions were so necessary to the government of their church, he would, as at present advised, go so far as to say that they would have full powers to convert those vicars apostolic into bishops. lie knew well the detriment he 1 should thereby . receive—he knew the detriment he should receive by the introduction of such a hierarchy , but never -1 thelo s it appeared to him that that would be in strict con formity with the spirit of the concession made in the year 1829. But no one had proved, or attempted to prove, and his belief was that no one would be able to prove, that ter ritorial titles were in any degree necessary . to the ellieient exercise of episcopal function. Territorial titles were a 1 worldly and material affair, while the office of bishop was a spiritual concert. (Hear, hear.) Would any one venture to say that Archbishop Wiesen= could not exercise his ' episcopal functions in the district assigned to him unless he was called Archbishop of Westminster? (Hear, hear.) If Dr. Wiseman called himself Archbishop of the Roman catholics in Westminster that would leave him full liberty , for the exercise of all his archiepiscopal functions, but it would assign the true distinction and impow on hint a just limitation. (Hear.) Many would say, " Why be so very pertieular—shy fight with a shadow—what dues it signify whether ho be called Catholic Archbishop of West minster or Archbishop of the Roman Catholics in Westminster—is it worth while for the sake of this monosyllable to throw the whole empire into confusion?" His answer was " yes." (Hear, hear.) In the first place, the Archbishop of Westminster claimed a universal juries diction in that diocese. but the title of Archbishop of the Roman catholics in Westminster would show clearly a re-1 stricted attire. (Hear, heer.) Dr. Wiseman, in his famous appeal, when defending himself against the charge of having wantonly and unnecessarily assumed the territorial title of Arelibiehop of Westminster, gives that which was the true reason, and so important was the reason then assigned, that one was almost tempted to think it a response to the prayer, "Oh that mine enemy would write a hook." (" Hear," and a laugh.) In that document Cardinal Wise man said, " We don't take the restricted titles, because the church of Rome does not and never will acknowledge any limitation of her jurisdiction." And why not ? For this reason, "That it is a well known tenet of the church of Rome, which none could Olney, that every baptised soul, whether baptised by ecclesiastical or lay hands, whether in the church of home or out of it, every fatalism' soul is the subject of the Pope of Rome." (Hear, hear.) To state that he was only archbishop of the Roman catholics in Westminster, therefore, would have been a restriction of his claims to that extent, while to declare that he was arch bishop of Westminster reserved to the church the absolute claim to the extensive sovereignty over all baptised Krone, whether protestant or catholic. (Hear, hear.) This very claim, he contended, did form a ground on which as pro testanta they were bound to make a firm and detenumed resistance to the step which had been taken. (Hear, hear.) For it was the well-known policy of Rome that everything which was not resisted she converted into a right— (hear, hear)—omit she then made it a starting point for !rah aggrandieement, and fresh exercise of her unwarrant able ambition. (Hear, hear.) Now, let him look at the second proposition —was this consistent with the rights of tho crown, and with the civil and religious liberties oh' the people of Englund ? Dr. Wiseman should again answer this question ; and, upon his own showing, it was not eom ;edible with the rights and liberties of this realm. Ile hail told us that the intneluction of the hierarchy was not simply and solely fur diocesan operations. lie had told us that it was fur the purpose of obtaining synodical action. (Hear, hear.) Now, he (Lord Ashley) would not pause to show what must be the effect of synodical action; and, indeed, this was done in so graphic and hireible a manner by his noble friend (Lord J. Russell) iu bringing forward the present measure, when he described the bearing and consequeneee of the synod of Thurles, that he should only , weaken its effect on the house and the country, if he were to ante - rcpt to enlarge upon the point. He would simply indicate this—that the synod of Thurles would be repeated iu the city of Westminster, and that we should base, unless it was now restricted, an ecclesiastical umpire sitting here unit issuing its decrees in the very heart of the metropolis of the British dominions. (Hear, hear.) But this was not all. The institution of the hierarchy was required fur synodical action, but synoilital action was re quired for the introduction of the cantos law. These were the words of Dr. Wiseman himself, that " it was for the introduction of the canon law that he sought for the intro duction of the hierarchy." Now, had the house considered the character and nature of that canon law ? Ihul they fully considered what they had heard from the lip. of members at' floc Ratans catholic I.,lly—tow this thing taut on theist burdens not easy to be home ? Did they not hear it front the lips of an hon. gentleman of that house (Mr. Austey) ? Had they not heard from the Duke of Nor folk that ultramontaae opinions were inconsistent with the liberties of the people of this realm ? (Iliac.) Had they not heard the name from Lord Beaumont in the following words :—" The Pope, by his ill-advised measures, has placed the Roman catholic. in this country in a position where they must either break with Rome, or violate their allegiance to the constitution of these realms :" 'flies was the position iu which many of the Romeo catholies were placed. This was the position in which the whole country would he placed by the introduction of the canon law, respecting whose despotic and intrinsic character the noble lord quoted Tarim,s authorities, and conteuded that eubjee non to the canon law was wholly incompatible with ob.:- theme to the civil law, or the enjoyment of civil liberty. These were citations from the canon law The laws of kings have not pre-eminence over ecclesiastical laws, but are eubordivate to them." (Hear, hear.) Let the house murk the next provision of the canon law, for nothing could be more precise than this :—" The statute law of lay men does not extend to churches, or to crelesiasticul macrons, or to their merle to their prejudice." (Hear, hear.) He then commented upon the encouragement that must have been given for the act of aggreseient by the division iu the Anglican church, and the ap proaches of a large section of its clergy and laity to the doctrines and practices of Rome ; and predicted that if those tendencies were unchecked, a collision wax inevitable between the ecclesiastics end the laity of this country. 'the noble lord concluded by urging the necessity of mom taining the church in its purity, and not in corruption, and with a view to obtaiuing that end, he was satisfied he was speaking the sentiments of the vast majority of the church of England, that they would encounter every risk to bring back the church that they loved still nearer every day to the standard of the glorious Reformation. Mr. 11. GItATTAN expressed his regret that the provi sions of the bill were extended to Ireland, and that the in- Idieidual who gave titles to:the bishops—which was very often done out of mere courtesy—was to suffer for that simple act. Did the house intend to have an army of spies throughout the country, in order to find out who gave the titles? He begged to remind honour able gentlemen that there never was a law prohibiting the introduction of bulls into the sister country, and therefore the present bill, if applicable to England, ought certainly not to be extended across the Channel. He contended that aggro ions were not now for the first time practised in England, because they had commenced when the four, and subsequently when the eight, vicars apostolic were ap pointed by the Pope. He denied that any insult was offered to the Queen, for it was impossible that a mere change of names c ould be meant as an insult to her Ma jesty. (Hear, hear.) lie agreed with the noble lord who had just sat down that the Puseyites had done much to occa sion the aggression, but the speeches of the noble lord at the head of the government, delivered in that house in 1845 and 1816, when he said that he saw no objection to the Roman catholic bishops taking the titles of protestant sees, had also done a great deal in superinducing it. If their le gislation on the subject were proceeded with, be be lieved the house would be laughed at, and that it would become the contempt of all mankind, A learned and an able man,—Sir Edward Sugden—a man of the highest re putation as a lawyer, and whose administration of justice while he was on the Irish bench would ever bo remem bered with pleasure and admiration—had expressed a very strung opposition in reference to the so-called papal aggression. Well he (Mr. Grattan) held in his hand a legal document, which was issued with the authority of Sir Edward Sugilen, while Lord Chancellor of Ireland, and which was signed by the officer of his court ; and this document referring to Dr. Croly, a Roman catholic pre late, among other persons, styled hint " Bishop of Armagh and Lord Primate of all Ireland." Would the Attorney- General bring in a bill to render invalid all documents sanc tioned by the Irish judges, wherein their titles were ac corded to Roman catholic prelates ? Such a hill would cer tainly be on a par with that which the noble lord was now se e king to bring in. In the case of Oliver Plun kett, an Irish Yeoman catholic prelate, tried in Eng land for high treason, the judge who tried him; Chief Justice Pemberton, made use of exceedingly offensive lan guage regarding the Roman catholic religion, and Lord' ' I Campbell, in his celebrated work, mentioning the circum stance, gives in full the titles of Plunkett. 'Well, would they bring in a bill to prevent Lord Campbell and his ' publisher getting out a third edition ? (A laugh.) Again, in 1825, in the committee which then sat on the catholic claims, it was a common question to put to the catholic bishops who were examined—it was put by the let* Sir Robert Peel among others—" arc you bishop" of such and such a place, mentioning their sees. Ile could not, there fore, conceive on what ground this measure was to he extended to Ireland. Let not hon. gentlemen ;pride themselves too much on their proetestantism. Ile (Mr. Grat tan) was a protestant, though he had twice been mistaken in that house for a Roman catholic—(a laugh)—but he did not on that account believe, as regarded the Roman catholic faith, that an immense number of human beings could have been created, and born Roman catholic', on purpose to be damned. lie did not come to this question either as a protestant or as a catholic, but simply as an Irishman; and as an Irishman he would resist the threatened injury to Ireland. It had been argued that, after all, it would only be a verbal injury. But a principle was sometimes la- volted in phrases ; and it was so in this case. In 1689 the !Me of the kingdom depended upon the debates of parlia ment, and those debates were about two words—" forfeited" and "abdicated." When a trifle was a symbol it became valuable. If the Duke of Devonshire had the "garter; taken from him he was not merely robbed of a bauble, he' was degraded. Why should the parliament interfere to take from a Roman catholic bishop the title which the people regarded with reverence? Ile called upon the Irish members to look to themselves in this matter, 1 and he would remind the noble lord (Lord John Russell) that there was something behind the Teem sury . bench stronger than the Treasury bench—viz., a majority. Let the house consider the circumstances with I which they had to deal in Ireland . For centuries pmtes- I tants and catholics had been divided: they were now `uniting and forgetting all their ancient dissensions and animosities. Were they now going to separate the people ? Are they willing to see the ancient dissensions re-created ? The hon. gentleman concluded by etpreasing his deep re gr.t at the discord and animosity which had been called forth; and his deep disapproval of the measure, at the weakness and imbecility of which mankind would be asto nished. . . _ After an explanation from Mr. 11. DLttIIWONTI, Mr. CONOLLY addressed the house, but was indistinctly heard. We understood him to say that all countries, Spain, Austria, Belgium, France, Holland, Prussia, bad one and all concurred in rendering the same response to the same great question—that the power of Rome must be restricted within certain hounds, uud had all proclaimed with one voice that that power, it' unrestricted, would he incompatible with the free government null the independence of the people ; and this country, with those which had the greatest amount of freedom, were those in which the power of Rome had been most limited. Mr. I'. WOOD appealed to his hon. and learned friend the Attorney-General whether great incmivenience had not arisen front having gone so great a length into the discus ' neon of this important subject on a motion for leave to bring in a bill. He would rather have teen the bill in the house first. Ile trusted he should he able to show that there had been no feeling of bigotry upon this question. dHear, hear," and "Oh , oh.") There bud been a great eal of earnestness displayed, mid if any bigotry had been shown by some the answer was, that they were not to be confined in their judgment of the feeling that prevailed by the speeches of individuals, or by examples and specimens of individual bigotry : But be woo prepared to say—looking to the tone and spirit of the general views adopted ut the large public meetings that had heeu held—looking to the resolutions that were passed at those meetings—that that spirit and those resolutions re dounded to the honour, good sense, and sound judgment of our countrymen. (Hear, hear.) At almost all those assem blies they nojected the notion of returning to any penal laws. (Hear, hear.) Ile believed one and all of them repudiated the idea; and no man that he had heard of had been bold enough to propound such a re solution at any of these meetings. To his mind it appeared more satisfactory that these meetings should for the most part have taken place in a re gular and constitutional manner. Resistance was not bigotry any more than indifference was mora lity. Bigotry consisted in narrowness of mind which could not always perceive that the same truth might presto , itself to different ntinela in various aspects. Again, it consisted in narrowness of heart in the want of being able to sympathise with the errors of others—if they wen errors—and in imputing motives to them for taking diffe rent principles of action to their own. Ile believed that bigotry prevailed in every division of religion and politics, yet still he believed that strong earnestness might eziat in perfect consistency with the most enlarged and liberal feel ings towards those who differed in o; . To this prin ciple he should adhere that all should be careful in the mode of expressing their opinions, and he hoped lie should say no word to wound the religious feeling of any one who heard him. (Hear, hear.) However that was the ground upon which the members of the bar rested, and upon which they originated the document they signed before they had heard of the, wade lord's letter at roll. They were told that this was nothing but a chatige of name, and that sentiment was echoed by the hon. member fur Sheffield, and it had been asked what was the difference between vicars apostolic and bishops ; and what the difference lietween the Bishop of Melipotamus and the Archbishop of Westminster in exercisiug the same ' functions. The difference was dais vicar apostolic, he had no jurisdiction whatever; he had spiritual influence and spiritual power of ordination, and every power that was exercised in foto ronarientity, but no power to be exercised in fort, &demo. 'ibis was perfectly well known to Roman otholies. Spiritual matters, moreover, were distinct from ceelesiasticial matters, send thus spiritual might be opposed to temporal, and also to ecclesiastical. But the bishop exercised jurisdiction, not over only 200 or 300 individual., like • vicar-general in a district, but he claimed and exercised a direct ecclesiastical jurisdiction over every individual residing in his diocese. (Hear, hear.) The distinctions Was tarfectly well known to Cardinal Wisentall and those oho acted with him. After further explaining this difference in detail the hon. and learned member pro ceeded to argue that the Pope had, in the institution ofeardi nal Wiseman in fact transferred the arehiepiscopal see to the archbishopric of Westminster, and coniaNuently since the promulgation of the hull there neither existed a see of Can terbury, or of York, or of London. C' ilea:, hear," and laughter.) And in all this there was nothing insulting. Ile maintained that the attempt on the part of the Pope to erect these dioceses was illegal at common law. (Hear ' hear.) Every legal gentleman would tell them that the asoomnption or claim of any title, dignity, or jurisdiction by a per-see :aging under the authority of o foreign power was a fault at ....minion law. The offence of Carlinal Wiseman was that he had acted under the Pope's assumed authority, and hail infringed the IGth of Richard 11. cad the lath of Elizabeth, and, therefore, to talk as some hon. gentlemen had done in regard to e.r post facto law Wit. , to talk of what had Ile/ limas ohateser. He did not think that the object they had in view that night was to consider how they hail to deal with persons assuming mere titles ; but they were there to consider a much graver and wider question,—(hear)—how far they would al low persons to set up in this country a power which had dis turbed all Europe, and for anything they saw might become the means of general confusion and disturbance. (Hear.) He maintained that with regard to all matters ecclesias tical the Queen was the sole source of jurisslietion in these dominions. Cardinal Wiseman and his legal friend said he had done nothing contrary to the law, and they had relied on the good sense of the govern ment that no prosecution would be instituted. They had not calculated, however, that there were other persons who might he willing to bring the cardinal and his vizier fairly to the test. ("!tear" and laughter.) They had asked the cardinal to put himself in a osition te enable them to try the legality of his conduct. T p hey had called on him tee admit the facts, and they would proceed in the matter. The cardinal, however, had thought twice lof it. (Hear, hear.) The assumptions which the present bill was intended to prevent were such as the people should I not submit to with impunity. (Loud cries of " hear, hear.") It was something else than the mere titles which Cardinal Wiseman and his suffragans desiderated. (Hear, hear.) Without a hierarchy they had no episodical action—they could not meet in synods • without it they could nut intro duce the. " canon law," and this was what they wished to do. (Loud tried of "Hear, hear.") He agreed en tirely with the noble lord the member for Bath in deprecating the scandalous conduct of those who, hold ing preferment , in the church of England, had thought it consistent with their duty, when their hearts had gone over to Rome, when they looked and lusted after her in their hearts, to officiate in our church, to take the emolu ments, and to use the influence of their position in order to pervert the hearts and feelings of the people. In one ease an unhappy roan officiated in his church and carried away with him the two children of his organist. lie knew him self another instance in which a young lad, 17 or 18 years of age, at college, and his father being abroad, was led away by one of these new bishops, who now affected to hold a new see in this country, and by the assistance, he was ashamed to say of a clergyman of the church of England. He knew a party who had had under that bishop's own hand a letter to that lad of 18, telling him to keep it a secret from his family. These things had excited the indignation of the people, and he went with the noble lord (Lord Ashley) so far. The noble lord told them that there were parties in the church who were prepared to go all lengths in order to, what he called, purify the church, Now, he (Mr. P. Wend) was prepared to go all lengths to prevent such abominations as those to which he had referred ' . hut, on the other hand, they should bo careful what they did. They knew that in all bodies there were parties who took different views, and a per son who was very warm in his advocacy of one party wax apt to think that a person who at all differed from him had gone to the other extreme. lie believed there were many in our church who were in that position, who knew its claims both WI a catholic church and as a protestant church, protestant against the corruptions of the church of Rome. He trusted, therefore, that there would be throughout England the same earnest zeal that had been already shown, taking a proper direction, declaring that we would not allow our sovereign s rights to be invaded, that we would not allow any foreign potentate or priest to exercise control over us ; that we would not allow his bishops to act under his assumed authority. Be trusted that we should exert ourselves not by violent agitation, hut by a calm discharge of all our own duties, by an earnest zeal which he hoped to see show itself in some other shape than mere resolutions at public meetings—by the erection of new churches where needed, and by the spread of education. Ile (Mr. Wood) had not seen the hill, but if the bill were framed with a simple solemn recital, declaring the rights of the Queen, with regard to these realms, and the illegality of assuming her functions without her consent, he thought they should have done what was expected of them by the country, and what was sufficient for the present emergency. He thought that what they had to do in parliament was this—to embody in the ' great corporate voice of the nation the voice of all those assemblies which had resounded from oar end of the king dom to the other to require that some stoop should be put to this insolent aggression—insolent he believed it to be, and aggressive it certainly was. And now they answered the people of England by putting on record their determination ; by preventing the Pope from saying that there was the least consent on the part of the people of England ; they should establish their consistency as protestants against in terference with their church or with the government of their country, and at the same time free themselves from the charge of bigotry, and show an example to the world of religious tolerance. The whole thread and tenor of our constitutional history was this—that no power on earth had jurisdiction, temporal or ecclesiastical, in these realms con trary to the Queen. (Cheers.) Mr. M'CULLAGH said while he listened with delight to the speech of his hon. and learned friend who had just sat down, ho was unable to detect in the greater part of that speech any logical attempt to reason in favour of the first reading of' this bill. The Attorney-General I had talked of this uffair of Cardinal Wiseman's as an offence. if it was an offence, it mist !faro been au offenca explicitly either against the crown or against wime subjecta of the crown. If tt WAR an offence against the crown, it was not fur the ministers of the crown to allow individuals to go in a sluthhy way for a shabby admission, but it was the duty of the ministers of the rown to institute proceedings, no matter what tho issue might be. Ile thought they lii;crighi, however, in abstaining from a pr2secut ion. fle thought that a prosecution would hai , e been a . disgraco tothe age, and he rc- Htoiced that no such step was taken. Hut then it seas too [ bad to come there, when the passions of the notion had • • - -* been roused—it was too bail to come there and use tho term "offence" again and again wino affecting to make a simple statement of the nature of a bill. it was a very unusual course to object when the first minister of the crown asked leave to bring in a bill. The convenience and the courtesy of the house concurred on almost every occa sion in granting bins that privilege. But this was no ordinary occasion, and he would venture to say, when the division was called men who had never before voted against the minister of the crown bringing in a bill would be found to vote against him doing it now. The question must mainly turn upon this—were they justified a., a parliament not exclusively protestant, not exclusively of any denomina tion ? «ere they justified on public policy, and the high responsibility they owed for the welfare of the nation ? Were they justified in opening the gate again to secta rian legislation. Ile listened to the speech of the noble lord at the head of the government in mov ing this motion with an aneinus attention which he was sure every one of them did, hut he must say the rouclueion be came to was this—nut that great ability haul not been displayed, not that arguments hiel wit teem resorted to, but the conclusion he came to 'A :Li that the noble lord hail made out no case for the intereosition of parliament in the internal discipline of the church of !tome ; fte nee to ignore by act of parliament the hierarchy of the catholic churele admitting as they did that the ilieveiline of that church consisteil of its subordination to the bishops was to ignore and to overthrow the discipline of that church. The noble lord (Lord J. Russell) had brought a len t ; I.iii of indictment against the Roman catholic him welly of Irelaad. He (Mr. 3PCullugh) mid it without hesitation(thwigh cer tainly not without diffidence.) that he had never list. nee to a statement with more pain than to that of the first mi nister of the crown. The first item in the accu sation brought by hint was against the catholic primate whom he charged with having been appointed in an unu sual way, and that being a man unacquainted with the ler eunestancess of the country to which he was sent, he had been appointed for improper purposes. Now, the feet was, that the parish priests having elected a person to, till the vacant arelthishopric of Ann telt, the bishop, of the pro vince., (which was a very unusual thing) had not recurred iu that election. Under these circumstances fer the Pope to have confirmed either appointment would have been to have given a triumph to the one party or the othear. The l'ope hail, therefore, adopted the wiser and more charitable course of choosing a third pers,m; and in selecting lir. Cullen, he had chowes one who from his poeition at Rome was fully acquainted with the state of In hind, am' elm ' was able, moreover, materially to serve the catholic church of that country. It hail been rn:nplained against the new primate that he haul suit put himself in commune. itimt with the government of Ireland; and no wonder, for it appeared that one of the first things which had taken place after his election, was that the government hail consulted whether or not a pro.. cution should not lie commenced against Dr. Cullen. Ile held in his hand a doeument which was a complete justification of the deter. They would remember that when the Queen was advisea to mitt her ancient realm of Ireland, and to spend there a few brief but, to them, hapay days, the Royal Moselle of Aug. 7, contained an account of the order in which her alajo sty's subject, were preeented to her. The third person was the protestant Art111)1411. of Dublin, and the fourth the 1t0111231 Catllolie primate. Now, let them tell him, would they prosecute Dr. Cullen for 1.18.101- ing a right which had been allowed to hold loceire the Queen. (Hear.) The next person invited to the royal presence, and who Ise supposed was also to be prosecuted, was that venerable man whose support had been rendered to the government of this country, with a heroism of which there could nut he two opinions, he meant Dr. Murray, the Roman catholic Archbishop of Dublin. The noble lord had complained of the synodical functions of the catholic church, and had charged the Synod of l'hurles pith in terfering between landlord and tenant, and w ith the question of the Queen's colleges. With respect to the latter, hu (Mr. M'Cullogh) would say nothing except this. namely, that if' any assembly of bishop. , were not warrinted in giv ing their opinion on the question of education, he could not for the life of hint imagine what subjeMe they were justified in discussing. (Hear.) With respect to the other topic, he would tell them this signal fact, that in the whole of the 26 closely-printed pages in the svitotlieal address to the people of Ireland, the whole that More any refl.:sync° at all to the relations of landlord and tenant w e re six teen lines, which had no reference to any political question, but which regretted the lamentable state of misery in which the western parts of Ireland had been reduced. by the wholesale system of eviction which hail been pursued. (Hear, hear.) He asked the noble lord in the preenee of this house, and of the country, to remember the words of the only one in that house who had ever been regarded as his equal, and who hail been removed from them, to say whe ther thy went a whit less fur than those of these bishops, whose strongest expression was, that the track of the ruth less destroyer might be traced in the hovels of the peasantry which they had reduced to ashes. Sir It. Peel, speaking of western Ireland, in 1848, said that the state of the country was more terrible than if it had been invaded by le foreign enemy. (Hear, hear.) Be proteettel, then, nguinst blaming these bishops where they were unrepresented and unpopular for saying no more than Sir Robert Peel had said. (Hear, hear.) The exposititm of the bill given by the Attorney-General had greatly increased his (Mr. M'Cul high's) apprehensions. Ile bad stated that every act of a catholic diocesan, done as such, would be null and void. lie asked them to consider what this meant, in a catholic country like Ireland? The iippiointment of every parish privet in Ireland would, by these nullifying clauses, be ren dered void. (Hear.) Was this to be tolerated in the year Deal ? Was this the equality of which they lio era so Much and enjoyed *o little? The hon. gentleman concliiil“l by claiming for all equal rights and equal means of enforcing their discipline; and by warning the house that every es trograde step that they took they would have to., retrace, and well would it be if their penitence did nut come too late. (Cheers.) Sir 0. OItES thought that the most ample grounds had been laid for the future cousioleratioon of the measure ; and that certain propositioss had been esta blished and demonstrated fur its basis by the most con clusive arguments and the most convineing evidence. (Ilea:, bear.) Some of these propositions were the follow ing : It had been demonstrated that the act which they now proposed to have recourse to was an act ou the defensive — that the step which they called on the house to take was in accordance with a demand made from one end of Great Britain to the other—(hear, bear)—and that it had been provoked by those who new complained of the course which they most reluctantly felt themselves compelled to adopt. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman the member for Dublin, who began the debate that night, und the honourable and learned member who spoke last, complained of the bigotry of the English people. The hon. member for Dublin drew a gratifying and pleasing picture of the har mony which prevailed amongst the different sects of this country, but it MILS not they who were responsible for rho bitterness and discord that had been evoked. (Hear, hear) It was caused by an illegal act. (Cheers.) The hon. and learned member for Oxford (Mr. Page Wood) had demon strated by his able speech that the act was contrary to the universal law of nations ; and not only that, Ind that it was controiry to the statute law of the realm. (Hear, hear) The hon. and learned member for Dunaulk controverted that view of the question, but he hail met the hon. and learned member for Oxford not by argument hut by bare assertion. (Cheers.) He said that Lord Lyndhurst intro duces:l a measure into the house for the repeal of the statute of Elizabeth, but he omitted to notice the fact that an amendment was afterwards introduced, when Lord Lynd hurst had charge of the hill, though he was not in office at the time, in which it was declared that nothing contained in the bill should render the act now done lawful. (Hear, hear.) But then, they were tusked, why they did not instruct the law officers of the crown to prose cute, if an illegal act had been committed ? (Hear, hear.) He begged to tell those gentlemen who cheered that there might be many acts done in violation of the statute law which the government did not feel themselves bound to notice by prosecution. Another point, which had been established beyond the power of argument to contradict, was, that the act complained of was not a spiritual act of a spiritual authority designed for the benefit of the commu nion to which it more particularly referred, but wee an act of ecclesiastical authonty—(hear, hear) —committed by a power which exercised a mixed ecclesiastical and spiritual authority, the act of a party claiming undivided sway and absolute dominion over the realm of England. (Hear, hear.) The best argument in proof of that was the language of the document itself, which had been so much referred to; for that document disre garded the existence of the Queen of the realm of England, it ignored not only the right hut the very existence of any ether church or denomination other than that preside over by the Pope of Rome and threw who were called on to exercise authority under him. (Cheers.) The language of the brief, and the pastoral which accompanied it, showed that the act was not a spiritual act confined to the mere ben of that body of which the Pope was the bead, but an assertion of absolute and undivided domi nion in matters ecclesiastical as well as spiritual, an act at variance with the supremacy of the Queen, and with rights and privileges which were dear to all the inhabitants of the kingdom. (Hear, hear.) Those points had been satisfactorily established in the course of the debate, and it only remained for the house to determine whether the pro visions of the bill were adequate to the occasion. (Hear, hear.) During the course of the debate censures had been cast on his noble friend the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, for the conduct he adopted in Ireland, which conduct, it was said, gave encouragement to this act of aggression, for as so it justlyw called. (Hear, hear.) A similar charge had also been made against other members of the government. These charges he was prepared to meet, and the conduct of his noble friend he was ready to explain and defend. These charges might be resolved into three heads. First, it was said that his noble friend encouraged the Roman catholic religion and hierarchy by giving titles, titles which were not prohibited by law but titles of respect to the Ro man catholic prelates of Ireland. The second charge was that made by the hon. and learned member for Sheffield, who said the government were in the habit of addressing Ro man catholic prelates by titles which were prohibited by law. The third charge was that one member of tbe e r e vernment, a member of the house, had a previous knowl of the in tention of the court of Rome to promulgate this document, and that he either gave an express or tacit acquiescence to the course pursued by the Pope of Rome. To that, how ever, bit noble friend now gave a distinct denial. (Hear,