The Press.
London, England, 1853-08-20 00:00:00

RET.IGIOUS PERSECUTION IN MALTA.

Mr. KINNAIRD, on Monday, called attention to the
new criminal code lately promulgated in the island
of Malta, and of which he had only that morning
succeeded in obtaining a copy from the Colonial-
office. This code, he declared, embodied clauses
under which all Protestant dwellers in the island
would be subject to intolerable and disgraceful per
secutions. There were seven separate articles re-
lating to offences connected with religion, the punish •
meats awarded by which reminded him far more of
the intolerant enactments of despotic Governments
than of the enlightened legislation of a free
country, whose boast it was to have taken the lead
in the promotion of civil and religious liberty. By
the code of 87 penalties of hard labour and impri-
sonment were awarded to whosoever should disturb
the sacred functions or worship of the Roman Catho-
lic or the Anglican religion in the celebration thereof.
These enactments were evidently not intended to in-
terfere with the full right of discussion ; and it was
expressly stated that no English Oovernment would
grant protection to the Roman Catholic religion from
argument. In that there was the principle of equa-

thy; but on turning to the amended code he found
the roman Church was designated, for the first time,
the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church, while the An-
glican Church war entirely omitted by name, and
only included under the general term "disseneion,"
so that it was positively proposed that the religiop of
the Sovereign of this country was only henceforth to
be regarded iu Malta as dissension. Then he came
to the penalties which applied to insults to the Ro-
man Catholic worship, and to thefts in the private
houses of the priests. He found that the term
"blasphemy " was applied to persons who spoke
against the Virgin Mary or the saints. Then, from
four to sic weeks' imprisonment was awarded to
those who stole the Eucharist, to which might be
added eolltarz confinement for a period of sixty days.
A more iniquitous and monstrous law was never pro-
posed ; and seeing that they had hundreds of sol-
diers stud sailors in that island, any one of whom
might in a moment of inadvertence take some breed
and wine from a priest's house, ho thought they
ought to pause before they allowed such a punish-
ment to be indicted as was inflicted by this code. It
he were in Malta and a Boman Catholic prooesition
were to go by. he candidly confessed he should not
take off his hat, nor should he kneel ; but under this
law he should be liable to imprisonment though he
was a British subject. This was contrary to the
whole spirit of British law, and unprecedented in
Malta itself ; and he could not believe that the noble,
lord who led this house, and who wrote that ad-
mirable
despateli to the Duke of Tuscany, would
sanction such a law as this. The hon. member con-
cluded by moving a resolution setting forth that the
proposed code infringed tins constitutional rights and
liberties of the subject, and an address to the Crown
praying her Majesty to withhold her sanction from it
until the subject had received the mature
Lion of Parliament.
Mr. 'l'. 51 Pt: ns, who seconded the motion, sr.;
gued that the Roman Catholic laity, as well as the
Protestants, were tyrannised over by the eode as it
stood.
Mr. F. PEET. objected to the motion, as tending to
revive religious animosities ; and to the speech which
introduced it, because it contained many insecumeim.
The present code was iu reality milder than the laws
which it superseded. The chapter appropriated to
offences against religion had been passed with much
diflienlty through a local assembly, consisting of a
majority of Roman Catholics, because of its mildness
and impartiality :
" lu codifying the Law of Malta, every attempt had Ibern
made to assimilate it as far as possible with the mild spirit
which had of bite years pervaded the laws of England.
Originally the Church of Rome was styled the ' dominant
Church ; but the Oovemnient Objected to that on the
ground that they would not admit the domitintion d the
Church of Rome within these realms; and the Legialativa
t :outwit had therefore with great difficulty been induced to
alter the plinow of ' the Church of the country,' which was nor
torionsly Roman t ic. tinder tills sle religion's Attic.
t' and ceremonies were equally pro defied. There was in.
&idiot...chapter that might seem to co /II traillet thiN assertion)
—namely, that against the profanaton of o objects of worship
lint the contradiction watt only an apparent one, for it was
010 ious that Protestants could lime no such objects. lin
would admit that the code was serene. He should
have been glad. for instant*, if the provision against
blaspheming this saints bad been omitted; but the hue,
gentleman had very much exaggendtml the severity of the
proposed laws. it was it mistake, for example, to minims.
that a .114/ its could bepowishrd tier is. it taking of his hat
minks a procession WILA IMSNillg. Nothing WA/4 punishable
except acts of commission ; nor mould a penalty be its
flirted for acts committed without any if/With/II t 4/ insult ssr
pestane. ttn the whole he could not agree to the motions,
Des anse it would render it necessary to postpone the
cation of this go& till next laeaNlegr ; and the cotliticut ion of
the laws of Malta was a pressing and long-fiat neeessityll
Mr. I. Burr preferred the alternative of postponing
the code, and denounced the attempt now mule ty
entrap the Crown of England into an acknowletig •
ment and guarantee of the Boman Catholic religion.
Mr. I'ELLATT also disapproved of the ()ode, whose
enactments, he said, carried us back to the middle.
ages, and created a benefit of clergy in favour of the
ministers of a particular body of religionists.
Mr. NE.WpKoATE painted out that if the code were
adopted subjects of the English Crown would be
liable for penalties if they declined to recognise the
very doctrines and conclusions which all who took
the oaths of abjuration were called upon solemnly to

repudiate.
Mr. Hung discovered that when England took
possession of Malta there were pmmii.a% made to the
inhabitants which would be violated if the present
motion was carried. Hy the contract we had made
with the Maltese we had hound ourselves to give
them all their rights as a Roman Catholic country.
He disapproved of much that was in the code, but it
VIM the choice of the islanders themselves, and we
must respect it.
Mr..l. 11. FITZOEIIALD believed that the code estab-
lished nothing more than a fair equality, peeing that
it was framed for a community essentially Homan
Catholic, and the freedom of whose religion had been
guaranteed by the British Government.

Mr. Waswan thought that it contained matter so
objectionable as to involve the house in disgrace if
they passed it without a protest.
Lord J. Rum's. refused to decide the matter on
abstract principles, and reminded the house of the
historical circumstances which ought to be taken
into coulderation

"No ass would deny that when ire took possession of
Malts the peat majority of the inhabitants were Roman
wand that it was part of our profession and pub-
ise to the people of that island that we would
their religion. (Hear, hear.) This was avowed
lenstrWatious proclamations which were made at the tinie,
It should be recollected likewise that at that period the
question was not, se bomb as it Was now, hawed!' Heinen
esthetics and the rations denominations of Protestants,
but between the Christian religion and all those who for-
molt it ; for at the time the French had possession of
Malta the peat object wan to prevent the overthrow of
the Chliallstailleadaltogether. Vieth bring tile ease,
we were 111 to respect tile worship, the prac-
%kith hid the 611114 the ReaueiViitholics. In order to do
Ala it wee ossessety. initilled to the undertaking we had
114Tesi that same pumshnient should be awarded to those
she viol" insetted and reviled that religion. (Hear,
&sea) That was no more than we claimed here, as a
..wines dneseven from persons who did not belong. to a
pardenier feith—that they should not instil! or revile those
who were adveestes of that faith; dud nem carrying on
'their paella Wermitijr. The rake .Waii the RAP under
law whisk it was now proposed to supersede by Ow
'present criminal code. A law of the 14th of March, 1830,
' any writing, reviling, ridiculing, or otherwise
rinsittleigitageny doetrine of the Roman Catholic Church, or
the governeeint or discipline et the Roman Catholic
Chtwebi
(lira Iraqtillts'a religi observances of
-slams or deeertption:
. mesedleg to our original deelsration, and an-
to the law at present existing in Malta, the exercise
.1114 CffilKto religion was protected and main-
any open insult to that religion was punish-
A...
Vistme
penishinrut varling from ens to twelve months'
L.,
A popular eouncil, elected by the people of Mal*
had a bi, as the noble lord believed, to specify
if
tossed
they their own Church, and none other.
Nor did believe that any Roman Catholics held
doctrines which the oaths appointed for members of
Parliament required them to abjure. Some minor
objections urged against the details and expressions
Of Or mid *ere, he admitted, worth consuleratiom
WoMs were used in a sense liable to misinterpreta-
tion ; severe punishments were enacted where lighter
penalties would be more suitable; and the pro-
vision against insulting the Roman Catholic
religion by gestures was objectionable, since it pointed
out a wide and vague class of offences, even the
omission to remove a hat having been interpreted
into a penal crime with lamentable penults. He
promised accordingly that the subject should receive
deliberate attention from the Government, and espe •
chilly from the law officers of the Crown, whose pro-
ceedings and determinations would be laid before
Parliament next session. It would be their object
to give to the people of Malta the fullest security for
the exercise of their religion, consistent with the
principles of religious liberty and toleration as hold
in this country.
Mr. SPOONICIR accepted this assurance as perfectly
satisfactory, anti Mr. HADFIKLD observed that the
discussion had done much good.
Mr. Kinnaird then withdrew his motion by
consent.
_____ .

INDIA.

The India Government Bill came on on Monday
mace more, and for the last time, before the Com-
mons. the amendments effected in the measures by
the Upeer House being brought down for considera-
tion. The most important of these amendments was
that by which the forty-fourth clause in the bill as
it originally passed the Commons, and which referred
to the salt duty, was struck out.
Sir J. Firzontst.n called upon the house to reject
this amendment and seistore the clause. He con-
tended that the salt duty in India ought to be at
once abolished. as at led to injurious consequences,
such as no European could conceive except from
personal experience on the spot.
The motion to replace the clause was supported
by Mr. li weosos, who also spoke from personal ex-
perience when denouncing the baneful effects of the
salt monopoly now enjoyed by the East India Com-
pea r.
Sir C. WOOD objected to the clause on the techni-
cal ground that by passing it the house would be
attempting to legislate upon the details of Indian
government. He referred to past reductions of duty
on the article, and promised more when the Indian
revenue, just now an so ticklish a condition, should
be able to afford it.
Sir DE LACY EVANS and Mr. HADFIELD concurred
in approving the clause and condemning the mono-

PO4':
The motion was, however, withdrawn, and the
Lords' amendments agreed to as they stood, without
a division.
Sir J. PARING TON, who was absent at the time, re-
ferred to the subject on Tuesday, and elicited from
Sir C. Wood an announcement of the conclusion of

THE PRESS.

hostilities in Burmah, and a hope that that event
would enable the Governor-General of India to turn

his attention to the reduction of the expenditure, and
thus prepare the way for the reduction of the duty
on salt.
Another Indian topic was on the same evening
brought forward by Mr. Lue.s.s, who complained that,
while two Protestant bishoprics had been established
in Hindostan, under the act of 1s:1:1, the remon •
strances offered since by Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Shell,
and other members, respecting the lack of provision
for the religious instruction of Roman Catholics in
India, had prndnced no results. Ile inquired whether
Government or the Company intended to do anything
to provide for this deficiency?
Sir C. Woof) quite agreed that duo provision ought
tip Le wade for the religious instruction of the
Roman Catholic servants or the East India Coot-
Soy
"The government, however, did not profess to do more
than provide for the spiritual instruction of those in its
own employment. (hear.) It had never held itself bound
to find religious instructors fur the native community of
India, but it was always considered unjust to !wild perstins
from England to so distant a eountry without proViding
fbr their religious instruttion. *as Pieptiea to
Aalilit that the pro Visions at present made for the spliitual
assistak,e Rowan Catholic troops was far from
beilig adequate to its object ; and he would also add that
the Uoveniment of India was fully aware of that fact, and
were about to take measures to remedy the evil."

UNIVERSITIES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The committal of this hill in the House of Lords,
iin Monday, was prefaced by a long address from the
Earl Of AUERDEEN, designed to explain the practical
bearings of the measure and deprecate opposition.
Opponents had alleged that the bill would interfere
with the rights and privileges of the Church of Scot-
land ; but this allegation he utterly denied,. itx
effect would be Amity to itbOthili curtain twists, Whose
significaece had a piStiett iiVstS• Ito the change
of circumstances, or become so changed as to be bur-
densome and injurious to all
.parties. In the ab-
stract he confessed that he put but slight value upon
all tests of this description, experience having taught
him that they were almost invarial* either value-
less or mischievous. As to the particular test'
which the present bill was intended to abolish, he
shirked reASOlls for believing it to possess both of
those attributes :

" This test, osi 'AM it was proposed to legislate for the
future as thy lay professors of the Universities of
Scotland, any abstract principle, but it
caused a great practical evil, felt very much at the present
time, and which ',maid bat greatly increased hereafter un-
less some remedy was applied to it. For whenever the
test was re* altugether disregarded it was attended with
great hardship, and the truth was that it was only effectual
is ewes in which the flamers of the test themselves would
hove been anxious that it should not have been applied.
The Universities of Scotland were not ecclesiastical insti-
tutions, and the Church was entirely incompetent to im-
post any test on the professors ; and not only m, but stu-
dents were admitted of all sects and persuasions without
any question as to their religious opinions. The profete
sofa had no authority over the students outside of their
lecture-rooms ; they were independent of the university
authorities ; and these institutions were open to the whole
world, and were entirely different to- Oxford and Cam-
bridge. The Church of Scotland was certainly always ijn
connection with the universities; and the theological
chairs, where the necessity for a test was wore required,
would remain untouched by the bill, which only applied
to the professors who filled the chairs of literature and
science, from whom no such test was required as was re-
quired from the professors of theology. the test itself was
framed in 1707, Just before the discussion of the question
of the union of the two kingdoms ; and an act was passed
called the Seemity Act, the object of which was directed
against the admission of episcopaliun professors into the
universities, and the test was framed as against episco-
paey, and that alone. Some alarm, certainly a groundless
one, was felt at a Parliament of which bishops were mem-
bers legislating on mutters relating to the Presbyterian
Church, and the Scotch test was directed against Episco-
palians in the same manner as the test which existed in
this country was directed against all dissenters. It would
show that the test was only directed against Episcopalians,
when it was seen that by the test a declaration was made
of adherence, not only to the Westminster Confession of
Faith, but also au adherence to the worship and obedience
to the discipline of the Church of Scotland. The mem-
bers of the Free Church of Scotland who suffered by this
test were to take it so far as matters of doctrine and faith
were concerned ; hut now they could not conscientiously
adhere to the discipline of the Church, and so were ex-
' chided. As regarded the test, the theological professor-
ships would remain as they were ; but, as regarded the
lay pmfessorships, there was no reason why the professor
of Latin should be compelled not only to agree to the
Westminster Confession of Faith, but also to the disci-
pline of the Church of Scotland. By the proposed relaxa-
tion great benefit would arise to the ' .ersities by extend-
ing the admission to those choirs to all persons without
the necessity of a sectarian test."
Lord REDESPALE urged that a measure involving so
great a principle ought not to be pressed at so late a
period of the session, and invited the noble earl
to withdraw it. _ _

The Earl of HADDINGTON would agree to postpone
the bill for another year, if he thought it pro-

SATURDAY,

bable that he would get anything as good in the next
session. He. was by no means satisfied with the
bill, but he loOked upon it as a progressive measure)
which afforded some security for the establishment
of a more perfect religious test hereafter. He be-
lieved, if that result was not provided for by legisla-
tion, it was the intention of the clergy of tne Estab-
lished Church of Scotland to establish a college of
their own, which . slionld be presided over only by
members of that 'Church, and where the students
might be educated in its doctrines and discipline.
Tire ILAike of ARGYLL presented a petition from the
Genend Assembly against the bill) and then
ceeded to argue for it: onfesvect, indeed, that
he hardly liked the idea of abolishing the test, but
adduced reasons Tor Nllivitig, that it WWI almost im-
possit4e to 'avoid it, at ell events in the present tem-
per of the Roils° of Commons. The test, at present,
hh iitiliined was practically in abeyance in the Stioteit
Universities, and if revived would have the itnine
diato effect of vacating some or the Must important
chairs now oecttpiei by Most Able men, but who, un-
tortlltrately; Sere EiiiSeoptilians: As a last reason
for trasiiig the bill the noble duke stated that at a
"private parliament" of the Scotch members the
whole number, with one solitary exception, had ex-
pressed their approval of the measure.
The bill then passed through emninittee.
ANTEItItti itY ttEC t

Mr. CRAUFURD, on Monday, moved an addregs to
the Crown, praying for the production of certain
papers referred to in the minutes of evidence taken
by the commissioners appointed to inquire into the
existence of corrupt practices in the city of Canter-
bury, but not printed with their report. He argued
that this was a case in which the house ought to
interpose and rerittire the pfoduttion oY th*se papers,
which contained rioilitig Mali* td litiVate Main,
or any privileged 'corninttnicatiotith
Mr. Lows eltdd motion. Parliament, he
obserVett, ed the commissioners with very
exti*Ordihttry powers, the exercise of which was lett
to their discretion, and, as they had not thought it
fit to bring these papers before the public eye, it
would not be wise in that house to take this dis-
cretion out of their hands, and compel the publi-
cation of papers which could be of no public service.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS supported the motion, which
was opposed by Mr. I. BUTT.
Lord J. RUSSELL said the house would not be
justified in supposing that the commissioners bad
withheld 'information which it • was proper for the
house to know; it would not be wise, therefore, to
require the production of these papers, and, if other-
wise, the right course was, not to address the Crown,
which could exert constitutionally no control over
the commissioners, but to send for and examine the
parties themselves. He regretted that the commis-
sioners had not kept more closely to the general
rules of evidence.
Mr. CRAUSURD ultimately withdrew his motion.
CONSOLIDATION OF THE CODE.

The LORD CHANCELLOII on Thursday laid on the
table of the Peers the report of the commission for
consolidating the law, and made a statement as to the
progress of the commissioners in their laborious
inquiry.