The Express.
London, England, 1851-05-24 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 24, 1851.

had umed the title forbidden by the .to which he should draw the attention of the committee i
the Pare'fich
eaener :heed
1 that the
( teal:elect iiptheTchleaehieon.waoneld
dleacedtngepnitloehmibltn saanidd
iwic,rethleewstisiatuntuentorbutri.i.Tbihttb•y,
I catholic—no matter struck
reofpotheleiaegetsecouf Riofchleardo
from whence the title was derived, and the Ist of Elizabeth, cap. 6; and he had been _
abolish the assumption of the title of bishop by any Roman and 11318. Now, very much depended on the statute
withof
the hon. and learned gentleman referred to the title of some surprise that during the whole of this discussion the
exercising his functions as vicar apostolic would nutin ciiii c
Bishop of Melopotateua ; but the Bishop of Melopotab7 usi most iendpnerteaenbte,seectteiopnroohfibtithiaoet
oafetthoef
introduction, wohf ic
i i
re-
any way affected by the bill, because the clause onli-
or
to titles derived from places in these kingdoms. ear.) 118th, and it provided that no foreign prince, spiritualiireferred scripts, hail never been adverted to. That section was the
pthroevehdonh.isaineepole,aritinoed°,
A ttoM Mr. with-
Attorney-General Khardejo.inetedpletethlayt
that the clause was useless. (Hear, hear.) That was his !if any subject of the realm were to attempt to
.
i itenmP°thraisi, realm.should
Now, upon any pothiwser
pwrohhaibtsioetervyer
clweeseith:
that this clause hail nothing to do with the information 1 foreign prince, he wuuld be liable to be indicted f
proposition. The hon. and learned gentleman had said' maintain or support the jurisdiction or authority
. of
_or
ea
from the rescript. Would any one say that all the titles I meat ; and the legislature provided the punishment
charging the offence, but only with the civil rights derived misdemeanour, and would he subject to fine orimtporrisoteent-
within
this clause, might not be made so by the second clause ? ' These clauses provided that if any person dwelling
derived from the rescript, sail declared to be invalid by ' offence in the clauses running from the 27th to the 30th.
ask the Attorney-General ono of the civil consequences fol. authorities, powers, and jurisdictions . of any foreign prelate,
It was clear, therefore, the clause was useless. He would this realm should directly affirm, maintain, or defend. the
!
not follow from the second. Ile had said the clause was' for the second he should forfeit the penalties of pre
from the enactment of the first clause that would 1 he should for the first offence forfeit
. his goods and
. chattels,
7th and Bth
proving that it was mischievous. (Hear, hear.) He be- for high treason. The act of the
useless: he thought he should have very little trouble in I mustier, and for the third he should be indicted
h been described in the act of
the great principles of the Act of '29, about which they offence exactly as it ad
Victoria
tiered the government had fallen into a great trap, fatal to of Victoria repealed part of that act, but left the first
appeared long since to have been forgotten by the leader of I part of the Ist of Elizabeth,. and, fty . taking away the pit-
talked so much but did not understand, principle* which Elizabeth. The oth and 10th of . also repealed a
unlawful to de
that act of parliament provided that it was
the party, and his followers, which had beets their strongest I niahmena rendered the section entirely inefficacious ; still
advocates. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. WALPOLE thought it would be desirable to decide fend or maintain in this realm the authorities and powers I
whether they were to &scuts the merits of the clause itself of any such foreign prime, and, in all other respects,
It
it
or the proposition of the hon. member for Finsbury, fur continued the law exactly as it was before. The
anybody should
postponing it until the rescript should be produced. lie section contained a prohibition with reference to the
conceived the latter question was the only one now properly offence, for it provided, that if . _
under discussion. But when they came to consider the maintain within the realm the jurisdiction of any
clause he thought he should be able to show the hon. and foreign prince he would be liable to be indicted for
learned member for Sheffield that it was necessary. Ile a misdemeanour and punished accordingly. (hear.) Now,
thought, however, the government had placed themselves as regarded the procuring of bulls front Homey and
i the 'ien-
in considerable embarrassment by not adopting the cream- troductiou of them into this country, the act of Ite hra
at
tile he had suggested, and the provisions consequent thereon. enacted that, "if' any person should issue any bulls or I
Now, with regard to the question whether the rescript instruments which affected our lord the King, his crown,
ought to be produced before discussing the clause, the hon. and regality, he should he liable to the pains and riee 1i •
bishop of Rome any
member for lidsbury said there was no evidence that any of premunire, ' and the 13th of Elizabeth pros i that,
such brief or rescript hail been issued. But was •• if any person should obtain from the
that the way our ancestors dealt with such bull, writing, or instrument, &c., he should liedeemed
questions ? (Loud cheers and counter cheers.) What of high treason." The 9th mud 10th of Victoria repealed
guiltywas the great precedent on which they ought to proceed, a so much of the 13th of Elizabeth as imposed th •
precedent not derived from protestant, but catholic times ? pains and penalties therein mentioned, but then the legisla-
l'hat precedent was the statute of preniunire. What was tore provided that nothing in their recent enactment should
done then ? The Pope at that time, contrary to the rights render it lawful for any perret to put in force within the ,
of the English crown, attempted to translate certain bishops realm any rescript, writing, or instrument from a foreign ,
to other sees. The lion. member for Finsbury liked to see prince. Now, according to his understanding of the pro-
a good preamble; he would refer him to the recital of the visions of these acts of parliament, that statute of
act by which that aggression was met, and by which the Richard 11. was one under which 1,1121411111 era for the in-
national honour and tho national rights were vindicated. troduction of these bulls might be inflicted. The cum-
in that statute parliament proceeded noton legal proof, but mittee were aware that that statute of Richard 11. had
on public notoriety of the fact. Our ancestors rested tneir been introduced into Ireland by what was commonly termed
proceedings in that case on common clamour. (Loud cheers Poynings law. There was, then, a law actually existing,
from the Irish members.) Yes, they proceeded on what which law would have been sufficient to punish the act of,
was called in the genuine Saxon English of the time, introducing into England or Ireland any bull or rescript
"common clamour." (More cheering from the same like to that now the subject of consideration. But, it might
quarter.) But which, translated into the modern, diluted be asked—if you have this law existing why create a new
and Latinised English was called " public notoriety." one ? And to that question the noble lord at the head of
(Cheers, and laughter.) The consequence of passing that the government had already given a most satisfactory an-
statute was that the act was never infringed but twice, once serer. The noble lord gated, on the authority of the law
by Cardinal Weisel, and the second time by Richard Lalor; officers of the crown, that the exiating law had been
' and in both cases conviction ensued. (Hear, hear.) The infringed by the introduction of the Pope's brief,
preamble of that act was as follows: "It is said, and a but that, in consequence of that law having slum-
common clamour is made, that the said Bishop of Rome bared so long, it was considered by these law officers
has ordered and proposed to translate some prelates of this that, if' it were now called into action, it might be considered
same realm, and some out of this realm, and some front one a hardship, and that that might cause a prosecution insti-
bishopric to another within the same realm, without the tilted under the old statute to fail. lie (Sir F. Thesiger)
King's assent and knowledge. . . . So the crown of fully coincided in that view, and thought it would be ex-
England, which bath been so free at all times that it bath ceedingly unfortunate if the prosecution under such circum-
been subject to no one on earth, but immediately subject to stances should fail. But then it was perfectly clear that
God in all things touching the regality of the same crown, the law ought not to be left in that unsatisfactory state. To
and to none other, should be submitted to the Pow, and say that they had a law applicable to a particular occasion,
the law and the statutes of the realm by him defeated and and that it was necessarily inoperative, would never answer;
evaded at his will, in perpetual destruction to the sure- and therefore it otos absolutely estential in 1101/1C way or other to
reignty of the King our Lord, his crown, his regality, and revive the old act of parliament, and to show that it was
of all his realm, which God defend." Did the parliament not the intention of the legislature that the law abused
of that day hold their hands when they saw the iude- continue to be a dead letter. The noble lord bad no
pendence of the nation attacked by a foreign power? clause in the bill as it originally stood applicable to this
No. " And, moreover," continued the recital, " the Coin- particular point, and it was very early its these debates
moos aforesaid say that the said things so attempted be suggested to him that he wax leaving the law in
clearly against the King's crown and his regality used and a very unsatisfactory state by not touching that
approved of in the time of all his progenitors ; wherefore particular point. Mr. Gladstone, the other evening, hail
they, and all the liege Commons of this same realm, will instanced the Cade of the bishopric of floss, which was
stand with our said Lord the King and the said crown and created by a rescript issued posterior to the one in question,
his regality in the case aforesaid, and in all these cases at- and had asked if a prosecution for that offence could be
tempted against him, him crown and regality in all points to raised under the present bill ? Ilia (Sir F. Thesiger's)
live and to die." Were not the C 0111111,1114 of England opinion was, that the preaeut bill would not cover such ass
still prepared to stand by our Lady the (linen and her action, and if it be raised at all, it must be under the sta-
regality ? (Hear, hear.) I)'ere they not prepared to tote of Richard 11. This must create eiabarraagneut ;
stand by:the nation whose rights, freedom, and independence and the far better course would be to remove it now.
were placed in jeopardy, if they allowed any foreign power, In conclusion, the hon. and learned gentleman moved
of any sort or kind, to interfere with the laws, religion, or as an amendment, " Clause 1, line 21, instead of the words
internal affair. of the kingdom ? (Cheers.) the said brief, rescript," insert the words " all such briefs,
Mr. KEOGH observed that the honourable and rescripts."
learned gentleman, the Solicitor-General, talked of arro• The SOLICITOR-GENEILAL thought that his hon. and
gance ; but could a more arrogant remark have been learned friend had mistaken the whole scope and object of
made than that of the hon. and learned gentleman, when the clause. His hon. and learned friend had said, in ex-
he said that " he had heard no argument against the bill planation of the course taken by the government, that the 1
that hail made any impression on his mind ? (No, no.) original statute of Richard 11. was so entirely obsolete, so
The SOLICI full-GENERAL said it was unfortunate long a period had elapsed since it was acted upon, that it
that the hon. and leaned gentleman could !weer repeat ac- had been considered ads Ssable by the government not to ,
curately anything that he had heard. What he had said bring it forward now. No doubt that was one of the rea-
was, that nu argument had impressed itself on his mind as sons assigned by the noble lord (Lord J. ltuasell) for avoid.
being invincible. (h ear, hear, "Oh oh," and " No, no.") big that statute. But another reason was that the penalties 1
Mr. KEOGH must, of course, accept, with all humility, imposed under that statute, the penalty of pneinunire being
any reproof front the hon. and learned Solicitor-General. one of thou, were of a character not desirable to see en-
The hon. and learned gentleman had said that he (Mr. forced in the present day. The object was to re-
Keogh) could not accurately repeat anything he had heard. cord a solemn declaration in a particular case against an'
A lecture on accuracy front the Solicitor General, who had act of violence and aggression on the part of a foreign pa- I
told the house on the last night of the discussion, holding testate ; and the government, in proposing the former bill
the present bill in his hand, that not a word in it had been before the house, had thought it sufficient, as regarded
changed since it was first brought into the house. (Cries of the law, to do this by a recital in the preamble without
" Oh, oh," and "No, no.") any enactment whatever to that effect. The suggestion,
The SOLICITOIt-GENERAL : I said nothing of the however, of the hon. and learned member for Midhurat
kind. (Laughter and cheer.) (Mr. Walpole) was, that an enactment was desirable on the
Mr. K EOGII asked whit was the position of the law offi- simple ground that it would add to the solemnity of the
cern of the crown with respect to this measure ? They were declaration. Ile (the Solicitor-General) had already, on
at this moment advocating a bill that, in all its essential., other occasions, stated the objections which he had taken
emanated from their opponents. (Hear, hear.) They had to that course—that the recital would have all the force
lien told by the right hon. member fur Oxford that the and all the effect which could be derived from
' first clause would only apply to the bull mentioned in the a declaratory clause. The recital was enough
preamble. Afterwards the Solicitor General told them because there was not and never had been any mistake
that every bull and rescript would be included. If whatever as to the law of the matter. The object et the legie-
it was to have that extensive operation,what uas the mean- 'uteri: was manifest, and the object of this clause was maul-
ing of the hon. and learned Attorney-General when he said lest. 11u, clause was levelled against that particular bull
there was no alteration its the criminal direction ? lie had which had given the offence : audit would certainly be more
asked the govenunent over and over again, without being dignified in the legislature to legislate against the
able to get any answer, whether they intended to put the one bull in this way than to search fur all the
bill in force in Ireland. It was quite clear their object petty provocations which might be offered, and to hunt fur
was to deceive. They wanted the votes of the opposition every bull and rescript which might be issued from time to
side of the house to keep them in office, with a view after- time front Rome. The great utteuee, and the priecipal in-
ward. to deceive nut only these who gave them their votes, suit, was in that bull which pretended to aunihilate the old
but the people out of doors also. The hon. member for ecclesiastical dioceses of England. To his mind it appeared
Finsbury proposed that they should not proceed with the iudescribable bathos to sink the question below this, and to
clause until they had the rescript on the table. Now, urge the remiation against the bull erecting a Ronan ca.
what was the preamble of the bill ? It declared that, thulic bishopric of Itoss—which bull was, at least, subject
" whereas divers of her Mejesty's Roman catholic subjects to the genend law, and, like all other bulls emulating from
have assumed to themselves the titles of archbishops and Rome, illegal and void. The lion. and learned gentleman
bishups of a pretended province and of pretended suggested that his amendment would test the sincerity of
sees of dioceses within the I. nited Kingdom, under colour government. But the hon. and learned gentleman forgot
of an alleged authority given to them fur that purpose by that the first clause attached no new penalties, and that tho
a certain brief, rescript or letters apostolical from the see of second clause would affect every permits assuming particular
Rome, purporting to have been given at Rome, on the 29th titles wider the authority of the see of Rome.
of September, 1830." When the noble lord was asked— After a few words from the Earl of ALUNUEL and
"where was that brief, where that authority ?" the only SVItItET,
answer was, "it is perfectly notorious—(hear, hear)— Mr. DISRAELI thought that the whole difficulty in this
" public notoriety," which, accorillineto some philological case arose from the government having accepted the first
process in the mind of the hon. and learned member for clause from the hon. and leaned member for Midhurst,
Midhurst, was 'Animal diluted English for the pure Saxon without having at the same time adopted the preamble pro-
" common clamour." (Laughter.) Ile (Mr. Keogh) asserted posed by that hon. and learned gentleman. Hail the pre-
that no such hull, or rescnpt, had been published. Nur could amble proposed by that hon. and learned gentleman been
the noble lord now produce the copy of any newspaper now before the committee there would not have been any
or other public document in which it had appeared. lie necessity for the proposing of this amendment; and, as he
thought then there was fair ground fur calling on the go- (Mr. Disraeli) did nut despair of seeing the committee
vernmcnt to lay the rescript on the table befure they pro- adopt eventually the preamble of the honourable and
reeled further with the bill. (Hear, hear.) learned gentleman, the member for Midhurst, he would
Mr. REYNOLDS contended that the question was venture to suggest to the honourable and learned gen-
whether the l'ope, the archbishops and the bishops of ten tleman, the member for Abingdon (Sir I". Thesiger) to
' millions of the Queen's subjects should be convicted on pause before he divided the committee on an amendment
false testimony or not. (Laughter.) lie asserted that the which would be included in the general scope of that pre-
poorest man in the kingdom would not be convicted on such amble. (The hon. gentleman here read au extract from
flimsy testimony as that embodied in this bill. He thought the amended preamble with a view to showing that its
the clause ought to be postponed until the rescript was purport was the mine as that of the amendment of Sir F.
produced, because, although much had been said about the fhesiger.) What he (Mr. Disraeli) desired was, that this
restrict, what proof was there that it had ever been pub. bill should be made a retaliatory act. Because it was eon-
lished in this country. templated as a declaratory act, it was alleged in the face of
The committee divided— it that it was occasioned by a certain specified conduct on
For the amendment
Against it 221-172 of the measure would to a certain extent be diminished by
On our return to the gallery, we found the adoption of the amendment of the hon. and learned
Sir F. TIIESIGEIt addressing the committee. Ile said gentleman, the member fur Abingdon. The objection that
that as the words lie proposed to insert in the first clause the case of Ireland would not be included in the first clause
had escaped the observation of hon. members, he thought in as it now stood was also met by the consideration
all fairness he was bound to place the question before that an amendment had been placed against the second
the house in its true light. (Cries of " Hear, hear.") lie clause by the hon. and learned gentleman the member for
had not solicited any support for his amendment, Midhurst, which would give every aatisfactiun on this point.
because, after the observations made un Monday night on Therefore, though the first clause was inconsistent, and in-
the part of the government, when explaining their inten- congruous, still in reference to the proposals intended to be
Lions with regard to this bill, he was satisfied that he ought made by the hon. and learned member for Midhunt, which
to receive no opposition from them, and he was content to appeared to be both consistent and congruous, he was dis-
leave the determination of the question to the careful coml. inclined to adopt the suggestion of the hon. and learned
deration of those who had weighed it deliberately. Now, member for Abingdon, notwithstanding that that sugges-
the committee were aware that the clause proposed by the tion was per se judicious and correct. It was some pre-
government, coupled with the preamble, was a declaratory gumption in him (Mr. Disraeli) to give any opinion on the
enactment that a certain rescript alleged to hare been legal bearings of the bill. But he had from the first cuter-
issued on the 29th September, 18.)0,wu illegal and void, and tamed the opinion that the offence offered in the bill, erect-
the object of his (Sir F. Thesiger's) amendment was this to Mg a Roman catholic diocese of ltoss, would be met
make all similar rescripts which might have leen issued prior by the Emancipation Act. The Solicitor-General now
to the passing of this bill to be comprehended within the confirmed that opinion, and stated distinctly that
terms of that declaratory enactment. lie was satisfied that that particular act of the Pope was undoubtedly
those who believed that such a declaration as this was ne- illegal. But if this was so, he wanted to know, and he
cesoary, would perceive that his addition WAS essential, and hoped the law officers of the government would explain,why
ag;tougueihte, r
in
consequence of his
.)
that others wouhl admit that if they were to legislate at all, the Roman catholic bishop of Russ had nut been proceeded
reeitftuht th the
gee altervernmeaettiown he proos would
eetpbeecel. Now,
erepletein idaind rs ti?,o(LL:lurdceii (heersee mo.d as la
cotconsistenteee
ent without
order to make the subject intelligible, he would explain his dropping his voice, was only heard at intervals in the gal-
view of the existing law, which had not hitherto been lery) was understood to say that the argument of the hon.
brought plainly under the notice of the house; and, gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) was disposed of by'the statement
as they were on the threshhold of this species of that the preamble had nothing to do with the bill. The
legislation, and about to create a new law, it committee was called on to construct a bill • without refer-
was the more important to bear in mind what once to the preamble ; and if the law they passed were dis-
was 'the existing law. Indeed, his feeling of the im- puled, the judges would decide in
reference
to the clauses
portance of this aspect of the question must plead his ex- separately. He admitted that the view taken by the
ease for trespassing on the
_present occasion upon the atten- h in. and learned gentleman the
member for Ab,ngdon
tion of the committee. He agreed with the opinion the only consistent •
ex. was
but pos-
pressed the other night by the law officers of the crown, al- sible to take by the supporters of the bill -ho
though he had arrived at that opinion on grounds different (Mr. Roebuck) doubted altogether the • necessity of this
from these which swayed the minds of the law-officers; and proceeding. The Roman '
catholic" in England were
therefore he must request the attention of these learned merely dissenters. The declare ••
declaration of the Pops was /amply the
gentlemen while he stated the law upon the subject, in declaration of aprivate individual• I order that they might correct any unintentional errors into, _ _
But
he
which was not known to
the law. he would come to the details of this bill.
which he might fall. (Hear, hear.) The acts of parliament His first sharp against this first clause was that it was