The Sun. — London, England, 1825-05-07 00:00:00

the present day were very different from what they trilerl_y, and therefore might be safely , ,adm i tt ed to a / die. Constitution. This was a most mistaken pronssi 11*/).4atid-the more he inquired into their proceed , . *titer it was „ in Ireland, in France or in Spain, the .yiouithit truth became. If he looked •to thoue pagesthat of sdesice he caste to the same conclusion, althgh, vidence was given by men guarded in what they said, and booking most steadily to the main chance. Dr. Doyle stated in his.eyidence tha(the Pope's ordinances were held to be be yoad the cognizance of the Sovereign in this country since the extinction of the Stuarts. This way, elling them a pod Con deal, and perhaps if they were admitte d within the pale of the stitutioa, they would no doubt let out a little more. The lion. Baronet thin proCeeded to quote from the writings of Dr. Doyle, in which he exhorted the Roman Catholics of Ireland to endea vour to_ recover their lost power, and whatever might have es:aped:from the " Despoil. Was it likely, if this Catholic Bishop had power, that he would not act upon the sentiment that-he had here discovered. In Yorkshire he knew of a Ca tholic Gentleman, of great wealth and power in his neighbour hood, who, when his neighbours were getting up Anti-Catholic petitions, put forth a paper intended to operate as a dissuasive: • In thiapaper he set forth the wrongs of the Catholics, who; he aaida bad been despoiled of their richly-endowed churches and - cathedrals hy those who protested against their faith and these wrongs he declared to be enough to account for all the violence they had been guilty of, and a thousand times as much. Now if this Gentleman were to obtain a seat in that House, would he not be likely to come forward with a motion. for restoring this property to its'. rightful owners, according 'to this was of thinking ? .He had also another - anecdote of a similar complexion to relate. This was of a farmer who lived, he should not say where. The neighbour- ing clergyman, who had been in the habit of reading pray sed ers' to him and his family for many years, was suddenly refu °emission to continue that practice. Upon inquiring to: know the reason of this change, he was told that the farmer had_ lately taken the lease of some land from a " Catholic Este ' blishment," and there was a clause in his lease that no Protest ant "prayers should be put up under his roof, nor a Protestant Bible allowed to be there.—( Hear !)—These circumstances he related to,sheaa that the feeling of Catholics towards Protest ants was.just the same as it was fifty or one hundred Years back. If lie wanted a : ay additional proofs of this, he should find them in the notes to .the Catholic Bible. He took that which was published not longer ago than 18/6e under the au thority of the Archbishop of Dublin. These notes diStinctlylaid it down as a law that "the zeal of Catholics should be strong against all heretics, and he should anathematize them though they are. ever so dear to him." Again, " the Christian is bound to burn in: their face all Protestant books." Again, " all Protestants are heretics, and even in worldly conversation and secular affairs we ought to avoid them, as there is the taint or phison in their touch. The prayers of Protestants are no better than the howlings of wolves."--(Hear, hear !)—This he thought was enough to cut up the argument that the Papists of 1825 were not the same as the Papists of 1725 ; and he must confess that he was ashamed to see an Honourable Member then crossing the House (Sir John Sebright) who had de clared that he was ashamed to think that in the year 1825 that House should be discussing the Catholic Question.—(Cheers.) —He was surprised that any individual or-individuals, that any Minister in that House, should dare (he used the word in no of fensive sense) to propose the repeal of all those Acts winch had hitherto been the tests of the Constitution.—(Heat',hear !) For his part, he had never taken an oath, and never would, to violate which in one letter of it he could he persuaded. Upon this point he would put them in mind of the declaration of that great arid good King who had filled the throne of these king doms before the present Sovereign. Upon being pressed upon this subject, he said, " I will descend from my throne, and go into a cottage, 1 will lay my head upon the block if necessary, but I am' not prepared to violate the oaths I have taken.".....: (Hear, hear !)—So I say, continued the Hon. Baronet, 1 am not prepared, with my feelings upon this subject, to violate the oath of supremacy which I have taken before this House- and the country, and I defy you to enact one clause of this Bill without such a violation being the consequence.—(Cheers.) Sir JOHN SEBRIGHT said lie thanked the Hon. Bart. for having recalled so faithfully the words lie had uttered on a former night. Ile now rose for the purpose of repeating them ; and that was all he thought it necessary to say upon the Question. 'rile argument against this bill required no an swer—nothing had been urged to alter his mind upon the sub ject, and he must again say, that he was ashamed to see a British House of Commons 'discussing the Catholic Question at this time of day. Mr. C. PELIIA3i said a few words which were inaudible in the gallery. Mr. PEEL said that the general impression amongst Mem bers certainly was, that the sense of the House would not be taken on the measure in its present state.—(H ear !) —He had himself tended to create that impression by statidg that lie would take the sense of the House on the third reading; he was therefore unwilling that any thing should be done in con travention of what appeared to he the general understanding.— (Hear!)—He had heard with satisfaction that it was not the in tention of the Gallant tieneral (Gascoyne) or of the Hon. Mem ber for Somersetshire (Sir 'l'. Lethbridge) to divide the House a: this stage, because such a proceeding would be unfair to wards those Hon. Members who were. absent from the House, under the idea that the Bill would rase thou .11 the Committee as matter of course. It was hardly necessa y for him to state that he acquiesced in the proposition that the Speaker should leave the chair, only because he would have another opportu nity of taking the sense of the House on the question. On a future occasion, the measure would come before the House with all the alterations which it might be in the contemplation • of those who introduced it to make with regard to its very ob jectionable provisions. On the motion for the third reading of the Bill, when the measure would be before them in its perfect shape, he would take the opportunity of performing his pro mise—he *could not call it threat—of dividing the House. On that occasion he should have very little to add to what he had before stated on the subject. Ile should, however, feel it his duty to enter his decided protest against the measure. He was in a minority on the question ; but he could not carry his deference for the opinion of the majority of that House so far as to acquiesce in the measure. He should have further to state, that his objections to the Bill now under consideration,. so far from being weakened, were strengthened by the vote to which the House had come on a former night, and by which Cicy were pledged to make a provision for the Roman Catholic Church.—l Hear !)—At present he hoped that no Member would consider it necessary to take the sense of the House on the question of going into a Committee. Mr. B. CLARKE said it was impossible that Ireland could remain in its present state. Under present circumstances no body would invest capital in Ireland. nobody would live in it who could avoid it —(Hear !)—lf the Bill before the House w.re passed, he was convinced that Government might with , dravevery soldier from Ireland. Ireland would then be kept quiet, with the assistance of the Catholics themselves.—(Hear!) —His family hail always supported the question of Catholic Emancipation in Parliament, under the conviction that upon the success of it alone depended she happiness of Ireland. He had risen at that moment, thinking that what lie had to say might-not be altogether useless. Colonel TRENCH was of opinion, that the unhappy situa tion of Ireland had resulted from the system of misgovernment which has long prevailed in that country. That system had, however, been changed ; the good seed was sown; but it could not he expected that the crop should be reaped directly. If C}overnuient for two' years longer pursued the same course upon which they had entered, it would be im passible for. agitators to , excite disturbances in Irelsid.. 'lle Hon. Member who spoke last said, that nobody would carry-canit4to Ireland. Capital to a large amount had , he knew been_carried into that country, and more was about to proceed thither. That capital would produce industry, and industry would produce tranquillity. He opposedCathoiie eman cipation, because in Ireland the immense mass of the People. was in an ignorant and degraded state, and were entirely end er the influence of priesthood, whom lie believed to be directe, in their turn, by political persons and feelings.—( Hear !)—The present was the proper moment for the Government to make a stand against the Catholic Claims. The Catholics would not he content with what Parliamentwould give them ; they would never - "be .content until they obtained possession of supreme power. hear !)—lle had no objection to admit the Catholics to the privilege of a silk gown, about which so much had been said, but lie would exclude them from the sacred circle of the Protestant constitution. He dreaded foreign influence by Trtearlt of the priesthood acting on an ignorant population. He had attentively considered the evidence which had been given before . -the Parliamentary Committees, and. was compelled to come to a conclusion different from that to which the Hon. Member for Armagh had brought his mind. He hoped the IlouscwOuld give him credit for entertaining an honest opinion on the subjet.—( Hear !)—He could declare from his own obser vationS; that the mass of" the people of Ireland were perfectly indifferent_with regard to the .question of emancipation, until within the last year, when they were roused by the exertions of the priests. — (hl earb—The Gallant General had said, :that he was for carrying the main body, and abandoning the wings— alluding to the Catholic Relief Bill, and the two measures which were considered appendages to-it. He differed from the Gal lant-General. far he felt it necessary to resist the encroachments of the main body ; but would use every means in his power to promote the success of the wings. He believed that those two measures would do much to promote the tranquillity of Ireland. If Parliament, on the present occasion, were to make a firm stand:-;--to. say "thus far we will go, and no farther,"—the queatiotoveuld be set at rest for ever. It would be an insult to the English Catholics =to pass the bill before the House; it would;-iii fact, be an acknowledgment that Parliament had yielded' to the threats of the Irish Catholics, what they had never been disposed to grant to the t loyalty and good conduct of their English brethren. W3l. BANKES trusted that his acquiescence in the Motion for going,into the Committeerwould not be misunder stOod. He did so merely because{ he thought the resistance offered to the bill should be open and manly.—( Hear !)--The third reading was the stage:on which to take the sense of the House. _ _ _ The House then resolved itself into THE CO3I.IIITTEE. Mr. MACDONAT.D in the Chair. The Bill having been read a first and second time, The SPEAKER rose, he said, to occupy the attention of the Committee but for a very . short time. After the recent and very elaborate discussion which this subject had undergone, he very much doubted whether any person could say any thing now with regard to it, and he certainly was not prepared to arro gate to himself the capability of doing so. He was perfectly aware, - that according to the strict rules and forms of the House, the present stage of the Bill under consideration was neither the most convenient, nor the most regular occasion, for any Mem ber to state his opinion with regard to it ; but as his opinion on the question remained entirely unchanged, and as this was the first opportunity, and perhaps it might be the last, on which he should be enabled to address the House on the measure, he trulited„he might be permitted to say a few words.—(llear, hear !)=Ncithing, then, which he had heard or read had re lieved his mind from the serious apprehensions with which it was filled with regard to this great, and, as he thought, most dangerous measure.—(Hear, hear !)—Having said thus much, he could assure the Committee that he had no amendment to propose, nor did lie wish to press a division, particularly after the opinion of the House had been so decidedly expressed on that point. However painful it might be to him to differ from the majority of the House—howsver • painful it might be to his feelings to differ from the opinions of those whose opinions he ought to respect, and on whose opinions he . in almost every case placed the greatest reliance; and above all, notwithstanding he felt that the course ,he was now pursuing was a great evil, and to be justified only by the necessity of the case, still feeling that a question of this kind admitted of .no compromise, so long as he retained his conscientious ob j ections to the question of emancipation, lie should be ashamed of himself if he did not declare den.—(Hear, hear !) He hoped that the Committee would pardon him for having troubled them with these few words. Ile had, as he before stated, no amendment to propose. nor was he aware that it was intended to propose any, or to come to any division in the Com mittee. He had been anxiout not to remain silent with regard to the present Bill, the only public measure with which lie had _ interfered since he had had the honour to fill the Chair.— . -(Hear, hear !) Mr. PEEL observed, that in 1821, when a Bill similar to that now before the House was under discussion, various pro positions were submitted to the House—some for the purpose of restricting the offices to which Catholics should be admitted; and others for continuing their exclusion from Parliament, and the Government of the Colonies. He rose for the purpose of stating, that it was not his intention to submit any propositions of that kind to the Committee on the present occasion, the sense of Parliament having been fairly declared on those points in 1821. Sir H. PARNELL took that opportunity of stating that the Hon. Member for Somersetshire, in reading the oath taken by Roman Catholic Bishops, had omitted a very important pas sage, in which they stated that their relations with the Pope could in no way shake their obedience to the King and Royal Family. Mr. PEEL thought that the oath which the Catholic Rishopa at present took was highly objectionable. • The House ought to have had some assurance that it would be modified before they pledged themselves to grant a provision for the Roman Catholic Clergy. Sir H. PARNELL replied, that what appeared to be the objectionable parts of the oath. had been explained to he harm less by high Catholic authorities. The words salvo eneo ordine .were introduced into the oath to separate the spiritual obedience which the Catholics owed to the Pope, from- that which they owed to their Sovereign. On the motion of an Hon. Member, whose name we could not learn, that the form of the Catholic oath should be amend ed by substituting the words " present Protestant Church Establishment" for " present Church Establishment," Mr. PLUNK ETT,objected to the alteration, on the ground that casuists might call it an admission that there was some other Established t' hurch besides the Protestant, existing in yin g land. The Right Hon. Gentleman further observed, that the oath already was any thing rather than such as was called forbi the friends of the Catholic Bill. It called fbr a disvoval by :the Catholics of doctrines which no man in his senses could suspect them of entertaining. But the fact was, in the year 1/.121,. the Catholic advocates had been taunted by their adver saries for not employing the full and formal oath provided in the year 1793; and, in order to satisfy as far as possible all scruples; that oath of 1793 was now returned to. - Mr. PEEL concurred with his Right lion. Friend en+irely, in thinking the addition of the word " Protestant" strerfluo IF, and.still- further as to the needlessness of many of the disa vowals called for by the oath. lie could not think it nece'ssary to call upon the Catholic, at this time of day, to swear that he would not destroy or murder any person under the plea of that person's being a heretic. 31r. BROUGHAM gave the Right Hon. Secretary credit for his frank and manly declaration, and regretted that their differences upon the general question were such as were not capable of being reconciled. He thought•the amendment could operate in no other way (if it operated at all) than to produce future cavil ; and should certainly wish to see it withdrawn.— For the terms of the oath, he considered decidedly that they conveyed an insult upon the Catholics generally ; and he only refrained from objecting to them, because be wished to leave no excuse fur even the most scrupulous to be dissatisfied. Mr. BRANSBY COOPER professed himself at a loss to see how any good Catholic cou'd take the 'oaths proposed at all. He must, by so doing, renounce principles which his church—or the See of . Rome at least—had ever maintained, and still contended for. - Mr. VESEY FITZGERALD said that the oath which the Hon. Member thought no good Catholic could take was, in fact, the-oath already taken by all the Catholics in Ireland. Now, whether those Catholics took the oath with the consent of the see of Rome, or in defiance of its authority, the rion. Gentle man should take his choice, and assume the fact to be which way lie pleased. Sir J. NEWPORT had hoped that, the day of cavil was at an end ; hut, to avoid all dispute upon the subject, was content that the oath should remain as it stood. Mr. GOULBURN saw no necessity for adhering so strictly to the oath of 1793, if new evidence since that time showed any part of it to be unnecessary or prejudicial. Mr. HOLME SUMNER said a few words, which did not reach the gallery. Mr. PLUNKETT said he was glad of the liberal feeling with which the Bill was viewed in the House. lie would not object to some parts of the clauses being withdrawn, but he thought it better to leave them in their present state in that House. If in the progress of the Bill through the other House, ' (and be did not mean to anticipate what would be the issue of the discussion there), —but if in its progress, those illiberal parts of the oath should he struck out, lie for one would hail it with a satisfaction in which lie was sure the majority of the country would participate. . After a few words from a Member under the gallery, whose name we did not hear,: Mr. BROUGHAM said, that the oath was required to be ,tako only by those who were called to exercise some public funttion. If they should 'not undertake the, office, there would be no necessity of taking the oath. Some Hon. Members ob jected to the oath as an insufficient security, in consequence of what was supposed to be the absolving power of the Pope.— But he begged to ask what other security hail they at present but that-of an oath ?—(Hear, hear !)—What was there to hin der his Learned Friend, Mr. O'Connell, from coming into the House at the present day but an oath ? There were many parts of Ireland (he would not name them - lest he should give alarm to some of the Irish Members) where, if Mr. O'Con nell presented himself as a candidate, his' election would be `certain. There were also some places in England, in which, if he presented himself, his return would he secure. What was it that prevented him, but an oath ?—(Hear, bear !)—" Oh, but," said the opponents of this Bill, " the Pope may ab- . solve him from that oath."—" No," replied Mr. O'Connell, " I do not believe that he or any other authority has that power, and therefore I' will stay out of -Parliament, because I . cannot conscienti ous ly t a k e it.—(Cheers.) —Why , the th in g was quite 'plain, anti he did not despair of making it understood 'even by the lion.. Member for Bristol.—.(Cheers.) —The Hon. Member, however, and his consort the Me mber for Surre y " (Mr. 11:Sutimer), who sailed together on this question, fired whole broadsides at every kind of oaths, and yet turned round . and.-said thin was not sufficiently strong as a security. Why, in the name of Heaven, or he would say, as perhaps something of greater weight with those who were now so much alarmed •for the security of the Protestant establishment, in the name of Dr. Duigenan himself—(Cheers and laughter)—what security -,could they - have greater than that which they. already pos sessed ? What, he would repeat, prevented the Catholic from coming into Parliament without the intervention of any Bill, but his respect for the sanctity of an oath, and-his consequent .unwillingness to t a k e o n e from which lie knew be could not , be absolved ?—( Hear, hear !)—For his (Mr. Brougham's) own pa-t, be was not anxious for any -oath, because lie did not oelieve any such security necessary ; but he consented to an oath heft embodied in the Bill, because he knew dash he had to conciliate prejudices • and if, - by allowing the•t to , re main, he could m a ke even one convert"in this House or in the other, he would - consent to the oaths remaining as they now stood in the Bill ;- but he . did not admit they were in themselves necessary to the security of the country. He I concurred with what had fallen from the Right Hon. Secre tary of State for Foreign Affairs, that no force could be re quired to enter by the door - of the Constitution unless it were closed. tet the door be opened, and the force would spend itself.—(Hear, hear !) - Mr. PEEL was anxious. to know whether the lion. and Learned Gentlefnan intended to propose any amendment (as we understood) in that part of the oath to be taken by Protest. ants, as far as respected the actual authority of the Pope in this country. 111 r. BROUGHAM said, When the clase respecting the com mission came to be discussed, he would propose an amend inent, buf not in the point to which theßight Hon. Gentleman adverted. • 3lr. "PEEL, withotikrneaning to anticipate the discussion on the clause, said, that when they relieved: the Catholic from taking the oath of supremacy, they should also consider the situatfia in which they 'night leave the conscientintis'Protest— ant with respect to it. By the very fact of exonerating the Ca tholic from the oath, an admission was made that the Pope had Y ; and yet the Protestant would still that no foreign prince, prelate, state, some mznsepdir uponit spiritual su to p s r w e e n a l r ac " or potentate, hathor ought to have any power, pre-eminence, or authority, cceksiastical or temporal, in these realms." Now how, after an admission of the spiritual authority to , the Ro man-Catholics, could a Protestant be called upon to swear that it did not exist? . _ Air. PLUNKETT did not think the Plotestants would be in a worse .situatioa after.the passing of this Bill than they were bethre it, with respect to the oath of supremacy. Why, his Right Non. Friend knew —every body knew—that the Pope did at the present moment exercise an authority—a spiritual authority in this country . . But those who took the oath denying any such authority; did so with great satety, because they meant it, and the oath meant no more than that no such autho rity or controul ptistett over the person taking,it. If the oath was intended to convey that no such authority existed any where in this country, then all those who swore that, must swear to w h a t was f a l se . If, however, his Right Honourable Friend wished to have a Bill to relieve the tender consciences of any individuals with respect to the oath, he should have no objec tion whatever to such a course as a distinct measure. _ Mr. PEElolid not consider the explanation of his Right Hon. and 'Learned 'Friend satisfactory. It was true in one se ise the situation of the Protestant would not he worse. than at present if this Bill Should . pass • but in another it would, because by this Bill, the spiritual of the Pope would, to a - certain extent, be legalized, which it was not at.the pre sent manent. We were now about to grant salaries to Roman Catholic Archbishops and Bishops, which would be recog nising the Catholic Church as legally established, which it was not i t present. 31r. BROUGHAM observed, that after the able statement of his Right Hon. and Learned Friend (Mr. Plunkett), he should de4pair of convincing the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite ; but still he could not avoid saying a few words. If the oath of su preniacy was to be understood in the sense in which the Right Hon, Gentleman took it, no man could swear it without swear ing falsely, because uo man could deny that the Pope had a spiritual authority recognized in this country by a large portion of our tellow-subjects.. Ile had taken the oath, and he did it. safely. He swore, not that the Pope had not some authority over many of his (31r. Brougham's) fellow-subjects, but that be had not any over liim, or those who thought with hitn. But the Right Hon. Gentleman said,• that we had not hitherto re cognized the Roman Catholic Establishment ;. but was it re collected that the Government paid for the education of Roman Catholic priests, who were commissioned by the Pope ?—that was a recognition of the Catholic church as great as that now proposed, and yet he had not heard of any man who had vo mited forth the oath of supremacy in consequence. Mr. PEEL did not admit that the. Catholic Bishops were re cognized in their prelatical capacity. They were called most reverend, and right reverend; but their titles as, Archbishops and Bishops warnot admitted. Sir J. NEWPORT asked why were the titles " most reve rend" and " right reverend" given to the Catholic Archbi shops and Bishops, if not to distinguish their rank from that of the other orders of Catholic priesthood.. The time was, when Catholic priests were hunted down wherever they were found n this country. That time was now gone by forever. Was it intended to re-enact those penal laws, and reduce the Catholic priest to his former state ? If not, why deny the Catholic hierarchy that rank to which they were by ordination entitled? He thooght that when leis` present Majesty was advised by his Minste7s to receive the Catholic Bishops, and did receive them, at his levee in Ireland, that he fully recOgrfized them as 's,ch, and that it was not quite decent in a Minister of the Crown now to deny that which his - Sovereign publicly acknow ltd el. _ _ . Mr. PEEL said he was not recurring to the subj9cts which tl'e 11 T. Member had introduced, nor had he any wish to pro s ribe the Catholic clergy. All he contended for was, that they were n w about to make an alteration inconsistent with the „ex isting law, and that some' other - law would be required to re cc the oath of - supremacy. to the conscientious feelings of Many i•-cliv duals Mr. L. FOSTER paid, that when he took the oath of supre macy, he d'd so with the understanding that the Pope had not any legal authority iii these' countries ; • but now the case would be different, if this Bill were passed. Lord J. RUSSP,H,I4 said.; that a time was, when the exercise of the Catholic religion in this country subjected the party to p rsecu ion; but when once the religion was tolerated, the a irit_ual authority of the Pope was recognized to a certain ex tent, fir the recognition of that authority formed part of the re ligious tenets of the Roman Catholic. i%lr. PI,UNKETT said, that the Catholic religion and Ca- tholic Church were fully recognized in Ireland when the Ca tholics were released from the penalties of recusancy. They were now hound to attend the established form of worship, un less they attended at the Catholic chapels. That was, he con. tended, a direct legal acknowledgment of their religion. After a few words from Mr. BUTLER CLARKE, the clause was agreed to. The next clause provided that - no Catholic should be eligible to be Lord Lieutenant or Lord Depity in Ireland. Mr. ROBERTSON spoke at some length against the Bill (as we understood), but his remarks were for the most part in, audible in the gallery. He concluded by proposing that there be added, as an amendment to this clause, the following words : —" or of being returned as Member to serve in Parliament for any of the Universities in that part of Great Britain called Eng ' land and Scotland." Sir C. COLE said that he would make use of the proposal of this amendment to say a few words on the comparative situation of the English and the Irish Catholics. The English Catholics did not enjoy the same privileges as their brethren in Ireland. He was most anxious to put them both on the' same footing, and would willin g ly un d ergo any l a b our to accomplish such-a consummation. He deed not say that he could not con cur in the amendment which had been proposed by the Hon. Member below him. The gallery was then cleared, but the arnendment was after wards negatived without a division. The CHAIRMAN theri put the clause containing the regula tions which are deemed necessary touching the appointment of Bishops and Deans of the Roman Catholic Church in Ire land, and the commission which is to issue.to Roman Catholic Bishops. Mr. BROUGHAnsaid that he had an amendment to •pro pose upon this clause. After reading the following words of the clause,—" Arid whereas it is expedient that such precau tions should be taken, in respect of persons in holy orders pro fessing the Roman Catholic religion, who may at any time here after be elected, nominated, or appointed to the exercise or dis. charge of episcopal duties o r functions in the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland, or tothie duties or functions of a dean in the said.church, as that nrymicttpersons shall at any title hereafter . assume the exercise or discharge of any such duties or functions within the United Kingdom, or any part thereof, whose loyalty ' and peaceable conduct shall not have been previously ascer tained, as hereinafter Provided"--he said he wished to add to diem these words---" And whereas, it is fit and requisite to regulate the intercourse between the subjects of this realm and the see of Royne.; he it therefore enacted, that it shall and may be lawful for his Majesty, his heirs and suc cessors, by two several commissions, to be issued under the great seal of Ireland, to nominate and appoint such persons in . holy orders professing the Bon - lan Catholic religion, and exer cising episcopal duties or functions in Ireland, as his ,Majesty, his heirs, and successors shall think fit to be commissioners under the Act for two purposes before-mentioned, and that the person first named in the said commissions should be the pre sident thereof." The Learned Gentleman said, that as he had before stated the grounds on which he recommended these se curities, he should not now pretend to repeat them. The ob jection to this measure was, that by agreeing to it the (louse would legalize the spiritual authority of the Pope. lie asserted t tat the House would do no such thin it would merely regu late the exi s t ence o f t h at wh i c h had : existed for many years, in I spite of its enactments. That the Pope had spiritual authority in this country could not be contradicted. For instance, if the l'ope were to ordain him - a priest--(a lati g h)— an d the King were to app o i nt hi m to the bishopric of Durham—(another laugh) —on e of the most lucrative ao intments, by the by , in pp his gifts, an d t h e b est trade of all now going—(laughter) --he r w e o g u n l i t r l e b o e r e d n in ti n tl t e io d n to fr h om eco amny e a pe b r i s s o h n op per saltum, and would not English church. A p a proo idle assertion upon .this point, he would remind the House of a case of recent occurrence in Ireland. Dr. O'Beirne, the late s Protestant Bishop of Meath, was originally ordained a priest w u al a fineodi indulgingt o conferit in i nmte_hr mere farther orclination.-- . I becoming a Protestant, without any further argu ment in addition to those which be had already • t i a i n i t e , ar h made wotild a offerßis Bishop subject of securities. He saw no danger, and therefore could not admit the necessity of securities. He was, however, wil ling to grant them, in order to obtain the support of those who were not willing to accede to the bill without securities. He believed that the proposed securities were perfectly innocent, and he was nearly certain that they were utterly inefficacious.— He had therefore, upon principle, no objection to urge against them-; on the contrary, he was rather anxious to concede them, in the hope that the might be of some utility in allaying the rancour of religious animosity... The Learned Gentleman then placed his amendment in the hands of the Chairman. Mr. PEEL said, that as the authority of Bishop Horsley had been-referral to in the-course of the debate, he could wish that Hon. Gentlemen would refer to the Rev. Bishop's speech for the arguments contained in it. The Rev. Prelate drew a distinction between the different authorities exercised by the Pope of Rome, which well deserved the attention of the House. He admitted the Pope wits Bishop -.of Rome, and that he had liberty to confer degrees within his own jurisdic tion ; but he denied that the Pope had any liberty to do 50 in this country, and upon that principle refused to remove the disabilities under which the Roman Catholics laboured.— He would only say a few words on the previsions which this clause introduced into the Bill. He declared, with the utmost candour, that it would be a great satisfaction to his mind .if the llon. and -Learned Gentlemen would leave these provisions entirely out of the Bill. He made that declaration, not with any sinister intention of thereby defeating the Bill, but from a full conviction that such provisions were worse than nu . gatory: No objection which he felt to the removal of the Catho lic disabilities would be removed by the existence of such se curities. They were very different from those which had for merly been proposed by his Right Hon. Priend'ilic Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs ' • and such as they were, they . were disclaimed by' the Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite, who . said that they did not conic from him, but were framed out-of pure deference to the scruples of those gentleiben with whom he (Mr. Peel) had the honour of acting. It was remarlfed' by the fabulist, that . " The child, whom many fathers share, " But seldom boasts a father's care;" and his remark seemed verified in the pre4entinstance. This datum appeared to have no legitimate father. The Hon. and Learned Member disclaimed the securities it contained ; and he was obliged to follow his example. They were not required, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said, by the Catholics; and he would add, that they were not at all wanted by the Protest ants. if any Gentleman would get up and say that these secu rities would be effectual securities to the Protestant Church in Ireland, he would wave the objection which he now felt to 'them ; but if no person should be found anxious to support them, he hoped that the lion- and Learned Gentleman would consider whether the Bill would not be better calculated to con. ciliate the people of Ireland without these securities than it would be with them. lie objected to them on this ground— that they imposed on the Crown an obligation to appoint two permanent commissions, compo;ed - exclusivelY of ecclesiastics. Besides they provided that if the hull, dispensation, or other document received from Rome were of an innocent na ture, it should be sent to the parties to whom it was directed, but did not provide for what was to be done with it, in case it should appear to be of a dangerous description. There was likewise no penalty attached to any Bishop who should ex erciseepiscopal functions without having received such a certi ficate as was mentioned in the present clause. Add to this, that no commissioner would like to impeach otdisloyalty a man who had not been convicted of some disloyal 'act.' There was nothing more vague than the ideas attached to the words loyal anti disloyal ; and he would therefore wish to know what con struction the lion. and Learned Gentleman intended to put upon them ?—(11 ear !) Mr. PLUNKEI"I" said, that- he should have no objec tion to throwing these securities overboard, if, by so doing, he could ensure' the company of his Right Honourable Friend to the conclusion of his voyage • but as he could not flatter himself with the 'hope of suchl a contummation, and as he knew that the abandonment of these securities wou l d deprive him of the support of several of the crew with whom he Was then embarked, he felt bound to keep thein - at all ha zards. For his own part, be thought these securities to be inef fectual securities, and to be highly essential to - the success of the Bill. Still, if he deemed them as useless as he believed them to be serviceable, he would abide by them for two reasons— first, because they tended to make the Bill more likely to suc ceed ; and secondly, because they tended to conciliate towards it the Protestant feeling of the country. In spite of the taunts of his Hon. Friend that these securities had not the good for tune to possess a father,he would avow that he was the person on whom this bantling had a right for support. W heuhe recollect ed that all former securities had been similar in nature to the present, and especially those which considered oaths and corn. missions as admissable, he could have no reason to disown his connexion with it. Indeed, he saw a strong necessity for grant ing these securities in the fact that they recognized, for the first time, the admissibility of Catholics-to the privileges of the con stitution. It was also known that Catholics liVed under the spiritual controul of their, priests—were influenced by it to a cer tain degree in their political conduct, and were, by means of their priests, in constant connexion with the Court of Rome. lie held it to he no inconsiderable security, that when the people were so much under the influence of their priesthood, that priesthood should be brought into connexion with the State, and should give to it full assurance of its peaceful and loyal behaviour. As to the objection that loyalty was a vague texm, which meant every thing and nothing, he would merely reply that it was an objection which might have had some weight, supposing they had been framing an Act of Parliament to punish a want of loyalty. In that case it might have been necessary to define clearly the meaning of loyalty, in order to ascertain the extent of crime which was concealed under a want of it ; but in the present case, - no such niceness of language was required ; it was only necessary that the Commissioners should certify whether the candidate for preferment was what in corm - non parlance was called a loyal or a disloyal man. He admitted that the securi ties of the present bill were not the same with those of the bill which he had introduced in 1821. By the bill of 1821, the commission was to consist of certain prelates', certain - laymen, and certain Ministers of the Crown. By the present bill, no layman nor Minister of the Crown would be admitted into it, but it would consist exclusively of Roman Catholic prelates. — He considered the security of the present bill to be equally, good with the security of the bill of 1821. He should not have suggested any change in those securities, if it had not been for this reason.. He thought it his duty to furnish the Cominittee with such measures as would ' be thankfully received by the Catholic population ; and he was informed, on good authority, that to a commission of this nature no part of it would object. It was no slight recommendation of this Bill to say, that it was a measure which, in the present critical state of Ireland, was calculated to give immediate and universal satisfaction in that country. He did not propose this species of security to guard against the supposition that the Roman. Catholics were bad subjects. The Roman Catholics were like other subjects ; if they committed crimes against the State, they were liable to punishment by the Ordinary laws of the country. The dangers against which the House had to guard were those which arose from the Catholics being con tradistinguished in several respects from the - other subjects of the realm. Ile took it for granted that the Roman Catholic Prelates were good subjects—were honest men—were persons whose oaths - amid be relied on ; and if that were admitted, he would ask whether it was not a great security that the Crown should be allowed to select four individuals from their body, from time to tirsie, by whose certificate it could be assured that every person enrolled. into their number was - a - loyal subject, and not only that he was loyal subject, but that this nomina tion had been domestic and had not proceeded from the Pope, or from any foreign power. Domestic nomination had been Considered, from, the commencement of these discussions, as a security to a direct veto ou'the part of the Crown. The people of Ireland were ready to grant domestic nomination without a Cct 10ft.53.501/11-,Cpm:rrr .°l.ahilPtPßireisesitEioi lernaNun murmur, whereas the veto could not have been..given to the Crown without great difficulty, and perhaps not without enter ing into an express Concordat with the Pope— In conclusion, the ',earned Gentleman said, that even if the , question of Ca, tholic emancipation could not be carried, he should consider an arrangement of this nature to be highly essential to the security of the empire, and to the tranquillity of Ireland. Mr. BANKES thought the proposed securities were quite Severalpon that r other eaEpecceeltlai ents i g s m e ts s ht iewc so oath tw e hh t ot h o e w n be or were takeng r reallye agreed db by the without tohree oe dependanti d a e s h t iao Ecclesiastical inadequate they were, as compared -with the ones offered in 1321, merely the form contrasted with the substance. The original clause was then agreed to. complained that it had no reference to the Eng lishthe Irish. KETT was really at a lost to see what danger apprehended from the Catholic hierarchy in England. G ciAM concurred in this view of the absence of c o o u to tt an n t o i m t e t n o t e wh e i n c clause for regulating the reception of bulls franc the all danger from such a body. Church si r FRANCIS o fßoi con trary to to t t h h e e se se li c u o l o l d s ORM ANNE Y complained that the homage --(A laugh.) • encouraged--it uragel • Mr. BROUGHAM assured the Bon. Gentleman that he might retire to, or rather continue his 1 u h) night's. rest—(a a g without any fears upon that head—for these bulls were not the prohibited it w it a lo s la ( t ° 4.. animals with horns, that were sometimes calculated to scare e man, but quiet and inoffensive bulls upon paper—(a laugh)_:- which were merely received by the Catholics with some pious tokens of adoration and respect. This clause being agreed to, The CuAtitarkx announced that the clauses of the Bill had been agreed to, and the time had arrived for proposing any further ones, if such were intended. __ . _ Lord EN ISIII11)REhoped that this Bill would not he pressed to a third reading until the Clergy Provision Bill were passed. Several Members had agreed to the former, on the' condition of its being accompanied by the latter. SirJOHN NEW:PORT contended, that the House stood by its resolution sufficiently pledged to the Clergy Proyisitin Bill, without delaying the present measure unnecessarily. 111 r. 13 ROUGHAM would willingly have made a reasonable sacrifice to conciliate the Noble Lord.; , but he - entreated the Noble Lord to consider hoW cornpletely the clause he proposed would go to nullify some of the most gracious labours in which the House had ever been engag al. It went to make the passing of this Bill depend tiro the passing. of another - Bill, which was not yet in existence—which was not even in con templation at the time this measure was chalked out with the concurrence of A majority of the House. Lefllie - Noble Lord only consider what it Was.to make a Bill, which had pro gressed nearly through the Committee, depend upon the multi plied forms of passing another Bill, which might be checked and thrown out .in - any one: of its stays. Surely there vai sufficient s ecur ity f or , th os e measures of a provision for the clergy, and the 'qualification of the elective franchise, in the majority which had voted for the resolution of the Noble Lord (Levoson Gower), and the clause in the bill of the Hon. Mem ber for Stafford. which made the'passing of that bill to depend upon the fateof the bill now before the Committee. Mr. H. SUM NER said that they had heard nothing from his Majesty's Ministers as to what was likely to be' the recep-' tion of the measure which was to follow upon the resolution of the Noble Lord (Leveson Gower), when presented for the Royal Assent. He thought it was trifling with the "House to keep it in ignorance upon that point for a fortnight after the passing.of the resolution. - . . . ' Mr. It ROUG I IA'M said, that every man of them f tgreek that the measure for the provision for die Catholic clergy would be quite out of the question, unless they first gave emancipa... tion. The priests had over and over, again informed them by the evidence, ,that to accept A .provision for the clergy,. without emancipation, would' - 'be to betray their duty to their flocks. The resolution only pledged the House to make that provision Contingently upon passing this 13111. , ' Lord ENNISIORE consented to withdraw his proposition.' Some conversation' took place upon the arder of proceeding' with the several measures which were to accompany the Bill; • though not in strict connexion with it. The House resumed. The Report was brought up, received; and ordered to be taken into further consideration on Monday next. The Bill was ordered to be printed, anti read a third time on Tuesday next—a reservation being expressly made; that on either of those occasions the opponents of the Bill should be at liberty to take their ground against the same as if the question should be upon the bringing up the Report, • ' The. other Orders of the Day were disposed of, and the - House' adjourned at ONE tfetOCIC. UNIVERSITY INTELLIGENCE. OXFORD, MAY 6.—On Thursday last, in full Convocation, the University seal .was affixed to a letter .of thanks from •tlie Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars of Oxford, to the Very Rev.; the Dean of , Westminster, for his late. munificent foundation of four University Scholarships. • On the same day the following Degrees were conferied MASTERS OF ARTS. Rev. John Henry Harrison, 1 Rev. James Isaac Moneypenny, j Wadham • Richard Philip G. Tiddeman,...illagdalen Hall Frederic David Perkins, .Brasenose Edward Bouverie Pusey, Oriel BACHELORS OF ARTS. ... ' Edward York, Ch. Ch. Grand Compounder T. Lovell Beddoes, Pembroke, Grand Compounder Jeremiah Bowen, }All Souls' Colling, Lincoln F A l d et a c m he s r, L T e li ° o n m a rd a s George Barker, 1 Wadliam Charles Gregory, j Thomas Gilbert Griffith, Charles Gilpin, gc a H a il Mena 1 I . , Charles Augustus Samuel Morgan, .a. Ch. ThomiA Percy Meade, Brasenose John Lewis Capper, . } Pembroke William Hayward Cox, Samuel Arnot Fyler, 1 Trinity Edwin Ellis Coleridge, Samuel Iston Fell, 1 Queen's William Henry Gomonde, j ilevry Hayman Pod, Worcester George Edward Eyre, Oriel . George F. Hay, Ballio 1 John Daubrez, Exeter John Peter Benson, ..._ . . __. Hubert Kestell Cornish, Corpus On Thursday last, Mr. Jacobson of Edmund Hall, WA Messrs. Quarmby, Pyemont, Metcalfe, and J ac k son , Coma moners of Lincoln College, were elected Scholars of that So' ciety. An election of King's Scholars of Westminster . School 0 1C ' place on Thursday, April 23, when . the following young gentle men, men, after having been previously examined and declarcw — . qualified, were elected, by which they are entitled either t° . Studentships of Christ Church, Oxford, or Scholarships 0 Trinity College, Cambridge:—:Messrs. Woodfall, Heatlicote , Downes, Sutherland, Brodie, Gwilt, Simpson, and lIPLeaY ECCLESIASTICAL PREFERMENTS. The Very Rev. the Dean of Westminster has appointed the Rev. E. G. A. Beckwith, A.M. to a Minor Canonry in the Church of St. Peter. The Rev. Henry Morgan, LL. B. to the Perpetual Curae) l of \Vithington, Salop. The Rev. T. A. Melhuish, to the Rectory of St. Mary Step s, Exeter. The Rev. W. S. Carey, to the Vicarage of Ashburton, Devon' The Rev. W. Tanner, to the Rectories of Bolnliarst a nd • Coln worth, Bedfordshire. The Rev. M. J. Pattison 7 -to the Rectory of Hawkewell, Yorkshire. The Rev. Thomas Phillips, D.D. of Queen's College, Carn' . bridge, appointed Head Master of the Royal Grammar alv* . District Schools in Upper Canada. FEMALE PREACIIEII.--It having hpem :amour!" ced that a young lady, a native of Guernsey, intended.preacl id ing in the Caledonian Theatre on Sunday evening, at h ag ' past six o'clock, an immense concourse of people were at": tracted thither. So early as five o'clock the doors *tea be sieged by a crowd sufficient to have filled a house ten times the size. When the doors were opened the rush was great ; and i q; a few minutes every corner was crowded. Public worship corn . " menced with a hymn and prayer, but many of the congrega A " tion shewed no greater sense of decency than if they h' been witnessing a theatrical performance. Hisses, plaudits and vulgar witticisms were heard in all parts of the ho ueo and at length the young lady came forward and stated, t1,„3,. if the uproar did not cease she would stop the service• this time an idle report was 'industriously propagated, tr' d the gallery was . giving way ;—the audience were soi e with panic, and simultaneously pressed towards the door.:, Many peisons had their clothe; torn, several females 1 °",.. sho:s and shawls, and two 'men and a woman leapt fro m ,, window on the first story into the street. So soon as it W' s asc:Ttained that the alann was unfounded, the theatre Wa d. again filled;, but a smug party of police interfered, and clear e , the house. In justice tothe young lady, we toutt state th:ll3 she exerted herself to the utmost to preserve oruer, a:nd seem to suffer very keenly from the discreditable conduct °flier coo' gregation, When she found her efforts vain, she very Pr °l ' perly retired. We understand that, in consequence of this berni Sacrament week she has left town ; but with an intention 0, returning next week, when arrangements will he made to pre" vent a reccurrence of the scene of Sunday evening.—(Edin burgh Observer.) • EXTENSIVE FORGERY.- Thursday; -a• m st painful sensation was created through WWI J rl consequence of a forgery upon the Bank of Ir e " land, to a very large amount, having been di s ' covered, and traced to a merchant in this,citYl who had always borne a v e ry fair character, an t i was held in high esthnation. The distreSs an" concern which this occurrence has created to the friends of the unfortunate gentlemati,ls•consid er i ably increased by the misery that it will enW upon an amiable wif e a nd t we lve children. n e accused has, as yet; succeeded in evading the !lig" ; anco of the polic e ; a l t h oug h a rew ard of n e hundred pounds has been offered for his apPr e ' hension, Ilis escape was a most extraordinarft circumstance. Il e was s t an di n g in the office 0 , 1.; the gentleman who se name had been forg e d ' when the bill w as b roug ht by a Bank ask if the sign a t ure was genuine; upon - w hic j . the accused to o k up his hat, walked out, 111, % $ immediately 'absconded.-L4Dubfin FieC fl : l6ll-- • joyrnal.)