The Express.
London, England, 1851-03-08 00:00:00

itiE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 8, 1851.

the Roman catholic religion had beeneserened of late years Mr. STUART mmtemled dist the bill this mutilated
to the freest and fullest extent without any hindrance or would not correspond to the wishes of the coautry, or eves
etwascle whatever. And in this country there was no per- to the object proposed by Lord J. Rumen when he brought
tics of this bill which could inflict the slightest hard- the subject before the house; and he arraigned the manner
ship on any portion of our Roman catholic fellow- in which the insult offered to the crown had been met, not
',abject& But as regarded Ireland he could not deny, looking by a proclamation, or any of the constitutional modes of
to the objections which had been made, that there were vindicating the dignity of the Sovereign, but by a letter
some grounds for objections, and that this bill, as it stood, addressed by the }inn Minister, as an iudividual, to another
did propose to interfere with usages and practices in coo- individual, and published in a newspaper.
semen with the Roman catholic population which had been Mr. id. GIBSON explained his views respecting this
long established, and that, to this extent, it would be a gentian, which Sir G. Grey, he said, had misapprehended.
hardship and an interference altogether unnecessary. He did not wish that there should be any inquiry; but if
(Cheers.) At the same time it should be understood that legislation was desired, be thought it was better to legislate
is his opinion many of the objections made to with information than without it. His plan was to do
this bill were utterly unfounded, either in law nothing in this matter, and he was glad to perceive that
Or in feet. The main objections were to the se- this bill was approximating to his plan,
gond and third clauses. With regard to the second Sir R. H. INGLIS admired the perverse ingenuity with
clause it had been stated that it would render even the which the government had extracted all the spirit out of
spiritual acts of the Roman catholic bishops null and void. their bill, leaving it a mere cep a mortuuni. Ihe country
Now, to meet this objection he would suggest that no one, would repudiate the ineffective measure.
with a legal education, could for one moment suppose that Mr. 0. BAN KES looked upon the bill as practically an
a clause of this kind could render any spiritual act void, aihilated by the mutilation it had undergone. It might be
unless that act was an act which could be enforced by a just as well abandoned altogether. lie appealed to the
court of law. (Hear.) All spiritual acts performed by public voice to enforce the demand for a really efficient
Roman catholic bishops, whether bishops in Ireland or measure.
vicars apostolic in England, were acts to which Roman Mr. GLADSTONE said the present question was one of
catboat.' rendered a willing obedience, which were of a vast importance, and one on which he entertained very de-
purely spiritual nature, and obedience to which the law of tided sentiments. Ile would not at present express those
the Lend could not enforce. (Hear, hear.) It had never sentiments, but, as he did nut wish to blink the question,
been in the contemplation of the government to set aside he would do so when the proper time arrived. The present
such spiritual acts, and with such acts this bill did not motion being for the postponement of the measure, he did
interfere at all. With regard to the third clause, it had not think it at all necessary to discuss its merits on that
been alleged that it proposed a direct interference with the night. He had not been present when the right hon.
provisions of the Bequests Act, which had been passed by member ((Sir G. Grey) had made some of his eeplaiiations,
the legislature a few years ago with a view to facilitate the but he (51r. Gladstone) understood that the right hon.
endowment of Roman catholic clergy in Ireland. He member (Sir G. Grey) had stated that words were to be
altogether denied that it would have any such effect. The added to distinguish and except the case of bishops of tho
15th section of the act in question, and which con- episcopal church in Scotland. Ile (Mr. Gladstone) re-
tained the provisions referred to, was not at all turned that the preamble would be altered with the same
affected by this bill. The 15th section in the Be- view, because it was so wide in its present shape
quests Act. authorised grants by deed or will, in trust that it could not stand.
to any Roman catholic archbishop, or bishop, or other per- Lord C. HAMILTON would ask any hon. member on
son in holy orders, officiating in any diocese, or having pas- either side of the house, after having heard the speech of
total superintendence of sty congregation of persons pro- the noble lord (Russell) in introducing the measure, whes
teasing the Roman catholic religion, and to those who, from ther they could have conceived it possible that any bill to
time to time, shall so officiate or so superintend. That which that speech had been the prelude could have been
I particular section of the act was most carefully worded, reduced to such a miserable ra such a shred as the bill in
land in no way, and in no degree, violated the clause in the its now altered shape. (Hear, hear.) lie (Lord C. llama-
,' act of 1829, which prohibited the assumption by Roman ca- ton) would ask the house to inquire what they were to do
tholic prelates of territorial titles, and with the permissive before going on at all with this bill. They were to prevent
power conferred by the Bequests Act the bill now before the the assumption of titles in respect to places in the United
house did not at all attempt to interfere. He was, never- Kingdom. lie proceeded to argue that the way in which
theta's, not prepared to deny that there were cases in the bill was to be mutilated would defeat the object in view.
which the operation of the third clause, as it now stood, After the strong constitutional remarks made by the noble
might prejudice some of the rights of the Roman catholic lord (Lord J. Russell) in his letter, which had tended to rouse
prelates in Ireland, rights admitted by long usage, sane- the protestant feeling of the country, and in his speech on
tioned by timo, and admitted in courts of law. Allusion first introducing the bill, he (Lott C. Hamilton) did not
had been made to the ordination and collation of priests. thick that the public would be at all satisfied with the
With purely spiritual acts they had nothing to do, and legislation now proposed. (Hear, bear.)
ordination or collation was a purely spiritual act. Lord J. RUSSELL—I have no objection to take the
But there was no doubt that in certain cases it was lames- course suggested by the right hon. memher for Oxford (Mr.
aury, in courts of law, to give evidence with respect to these Gladstone) to print any parts of the bill which are new.
matters, in reference to the rights of third parties, it being The proposition to omit certain clauses of the bill will, I
the practise to pat in, for the substantiation of facts, card- dare say, be considered as perfectly intelligible in itself, and
flcates of ordination, or instruments of collation • and inci- the house will understand the object we have in view. 1
dentally this bill might unfairly and improperly interfere have no desire unduly to occupy the time of the house at
with these necessary processes. These instruments, as re- present, but I think I ought to notice a remark made by the
garded Ireland, were always expressed in terms which on hon. member for Dorsceshire (Mr. Bankes), who has said that
the face of them described Roman catholic prelates as it is well known that the assumption of these titles is clearly
, archbishops or bishops of particular dioceses, and priests in contravention of the existing law, and that therefore the
las priests of particular congregations. lie had during the government had not done its duty when it did not prosecute
1 last few days seen one of these instruments, which was in persons guilty of assuming these titles. The statement
Latin, as was invariably the case, which styled the Roman which I made in my letter to a kids the honourable mem-
! catholic Archbishop of Dublin " Archbishop of Dublin" ber (Mr. Bankes) has alluded, was that the law officers of
simply, and evidence of that kind was receivable in courts the crown would be consulted as to the state of the existing
lof law. Bequests were made, under the Bequests Act, to law, and that if no law existed applicable to the present
Roman catholic priests and, in the case of the priest, it was ease, it should be carefully considered whether any new
also necessary, to substantiate the right of third parties, that law might be enacted. We did consult the law officers of
itsheuld be proved that such priest was an ordained priest of the crown, and the questions we asked were very formally
the court of Rome and that he was the priest of a and very regularly drawn up. To these questions we re-
particular parish. It was clear, therefore, that this bill ecived answers which I shall now state. I related the sub-
might present impediments to the procuring of evidence of stance of them on a former occasion, and may repeat
this description. In respect to prelates, the objection was them now. The questions were as to the assumption of
not so strong because the Bequests Act already secured to these new titles. There had been no assumption of any
them a certain protection. In courts of equity in Ireland, titles in Ireland. The assumptions complained of were in
since the act of 1829,thetitlin of Roman catholic archbishops this country.
and bishops had been repeatedly recognised. These being Mr. 13ANKES—Tha assumption of titles generally.
the facts, the bill would necessarily have an operation never (Cries of " Order, order.")
intended by the government; for, above all, the govern- Lord J. RUSSELL—The hon. and learned gentleman
1 ment had been anxious not to meddle with any civil or the member for Newark (Mr. J. Stuart) has complained
I religious right possessed at present by any class of her Ma- that after the law had been violated the government did
jesty's subjests. The government hail given the best con- not prosecute the parties. My answer to this is, that after
federation to this question, and, after that consideration, we had consulted the law officers of the crown they replied
' had thought it their duty to persevere with this bill, think- that they did not thinkthe assumption of titles in the present
ing it essential that there should be a declaration by paella- instance was contrary either to the common or statute law,
ment of the will of the nation, and of the feeling of the and accordingly the preamble of the present measure de-
country in respect to the act recently performed by dares that the "attempt to establish, under colour of
the court of Rome, and which had excited such general, authority from the see of Rome, or otherwise, such pretended
and he would say, just indignation; and that parliament secs, provinces, or dioceses, is illegal and void." It does
should not pass by carelessly an aggression of the not say that the assumption of these titles is
most unequivocal kind, indifference and inattention to legal, but goes on state that it is " inconsis-
which might but encourage further measures of a tent with ;the rights intended to be protected"
similar character and equally insulting. (Hear, hear.) by the enactment of 1829. (Hear, hear.) It is,
But while determining upon proffering this resist- I think, quite obvious that when we got a formal opinion
meta the government was also most anxious eve- that the assumption of these titles was not illegal, it would
cially with regard to Ireland, that nothing should be have been futile in the law-officers of the crown to enter
attempted unduly prejudicial to or unfairly restrictive into prosecutions on the subject. (Hear, hear.) The
of our Roman catholic fellow subjects. The effort opinion which we obtained went on to say that undoubtedly
of the government had throughout been to reconcile if it could be proved that bulls hail been introduced to
and overcome the difficulty in which they were this country, or that rescripts or writings hail been
placedby the necessary of defence against the court of Rome, introduced for the purpose of establishing those
as the one hand, and full protection of English and Irish sees, that such a proceeding was an offence, I think
Romancatholicsontheother.Nodoubtthegovernmentmight they said at common law, but certainly they stated
have omitted some words and inserted other words to meet it was against existing statutes. It is a totally diffe-
particular cases, but they had thought that by these modifi- rent question to proceed against a bull of the kind recently
cation s they would raise now points of discussion, suggest introduced, and to prosecute parties fur the introduction of
new objection+, and, in the end, not at all effect the object certain other bulls or nacripts from Rome. The bull in
which they had most sincerely and honestly in view ; and, question is only liable to prosecution inasmuch as any other
on mature deliberation, they had therefore come to the hull, rescript, or writing from the Pope, and it is quite eve
conclusion that it was most expedient to omit altogether the dent that we could not prevent the receipt of communica-
second and third clauses. (Cheers.) The fourth clause tens from the Pope, and would not be justified in prose.
(as we understood the right hon. gentleman to say) was curing the Roman catholics for the introduction of doeu-
merely ancillary to these clauses, and it would be proposed melds on such subjects as allowing first cousins to
also to be omitted; and he would now say a few words in marry, giving power to bishops to ordain, or in
anticipation of the objections which would probably be respect to any other matter necessary for the due and pro-
urged, after this announcement, that the bill, thus re. per carrying on of the Roman catholic religion. It would
dead and limited to the declaratory prohibition con- have been an undue exercise of legal power if we had pro-
tained in the first clause, would be a measure seeuted for the Resumption of titles which the law did not
unworthy of the occasion and not of a character to justify forbid. Nor could we have prosecuted for the introduction
the expectations which had been excited. (Cheers and of a bull. I think the law wisely gives the executive en-
counter cheers.) Ile must say that, in his opinion, it was -ferment an entire discretion with regard to certain bulls,
of the first importance that there should be placed on record and whether, en this point, further legislatiom may he neces-
a parliamentary declaration in the clearest and most sary, is aquestion which may be considered. I will only now
explicit language to the effect that the titles assumed by ny. that the enactments on this subject are very unsatisewtury.
Roman catholic prelates were not assumed upon the authority The introduction of bulls into this country is forbidden, but
of the legislature, or with the sanction of the nation. whether they are forbidden under the penalties of misde-
(Cheers.) The first thing now required was a national pro- meaner or of high treason is very doubtful. (Hear, hear.)
hibition of the assumption of all such titles. (Cheers.) This The prohibition is general. It is not a prohibition like that
might be merely a repetition of an existing prohibition, but which was in force in the early times. In early times there
he would contend that it was not the less necessary. Cer- waxen prohibition of the introduction of bulls inconsistent
tainly, he would not itdmit that the clause in the act of with the kings prerogative or the safety of the state. The
1829, which forbade the assumption of territorial titles by prohibition now is generally against the introiluction of
Roman cathotic prelates, was a dead letter. It was true writings from Rome. Having stated this much as to the
that undieguisedly, in ordinary transactions with the Ito- legal power which we had to prosecute, I may say that in
man catholic population, the Irish Roman catholic the speech I made to this house in introducing the bill, and
prelates did ignore and overlook that clause; but at the very commencement of that speech, I stated that we
suletantially and in effect, in all official communication' did not intend to legislate on the whole subject of the re-
with the government and in all official documents, those lotions of this country with the court of Rome. (Hear,
prelates did obey and respect the law.
And, if this bill passed, we should have the same result in
(Hear, hear.) hear.) It was too wide, too extensive a subject, and I
said that we were not prepared to legislate on it, We meant
England; for he believed that in England, as elsewhere, to confine ourselves, as I stated long ago, to prevent the
Her Majesty's Roman catholic subjects would feel it their
duty to respect and bow to the law. (Hear, hear.) For assumption of territorial titles, so that there might not be
that sway obtained over the realm of England which was
instance, the other day he had had the honour of present- inconsistent with the Queen's sovereignty, the rights
ing to her Majesty a petition from Roman catholic of bishops, and the independence of the country.
prelates in Ireland, in which, while styling them- The Queen's supremacy has been invaded, the
selves bishops and archbishops, they did not, either in rights of bishops and of the church have been touched,
the body of the petition, or by the form of their signatures,
assume any titles inconsistent with the existing law. and the spiritual independence of the kingdom,
a
(Hem, has been assailed. That is, in fact, the offence which
hear.) And that being so, he had had no hesitation of that
by a
what-
has
ever in presenting the address. Again, in the petition pro- been committed foreign power. The essence
offence is the insult which has been offend to our Queen
seated on a former occasion by the hon. member for Dun-
dalk (Mr. M'Cullagh), which was signed by every arch. and country ; the offence to which the hon. and learned
gentleman (Mr. J. Stuart) referred is of a totally different
bishop and bishop in Ireland, while they signed their
nature. In order to meet that insult the direct way is to
Christian names and surnames, thermentiuned neither
introduce a bill to forbid, and, if possible, prevent the as-
, their dioceses nor archdioceses. WEile, then, avoid- sumption of such titles. The noble turd who spoke last
ing all interference with long established usages in lee- (Lord C. Hamilton) has totally misapprehended the matter
land, or with any of the rights of our Roman
to which his remarks were mainly directed. The question
catholic fellow-countrymen, he did think that this prohibi-
of the law being inoperative because certain things are done
I tion with regard to the assumption of titles should be ex-
' tended both to England and Ireland. (Hear, hear.) As in Ireland and the question of the assumption of titles are
two totally different things. The assumption by bishops of
far as his own opinion went, hoeing that this bill would
pass, he was chiefly desirous that they should take up a po- the titles of sees in Ireland is forbidden by the law.
Although, however, the law may be to a certain
sition which should offer no encouragement to
an further similar agreesions—(loud cheers)—an- he extent inoperative in Ireland, yet persons so prohibited to
take tithe do not take them on any public document,
did conceive that such a prohibition as this pans or when addressing the Lord Lieutenant or his Under-Se-
ending from parliament would have all the desired °Mary. In any public document they do not in signing
effect. (Cheers.) At the same time he would repeat what their -.es put down these titles, but they sign themselves
he had said before—that he did not look to any act of par- for example as " Paul Cullen," or " Daniel Murray."
liaruent for the maintenance of the protestant religion of They use their own names and not any of these titles what-
these realms—(sheen)—but to that deep feeling of ever. So far, no doubt, the law is bad, but with respect to
attachment to their protestant faith which charac- the exercise of their episcopal jurisdiction, they have not
tensed alike the members of the established church changed the titles and the jurisdiction which they held
and the adherents of all the denominations de- before the law of 1829. If a person should come into a
seending front that church. (Loud cheers.) To such court of law to maintain a right founded on the assumption
feelings alone, he trusted, under God, for a defence of that of these titles, I'eonceive it would be a question for the court''
faith, accompanied as they would no doubt be by increased of law to decide whether any such proceedings were
activity and increased intelligence in their respective spheres not invalid on account of the assumption of such
on the part of every minister of every
protestant titles. But it is a totally different thing when
denomination—armed, as he believed, in the ass-
these titles are only incidentally used. In that case it may
sour of truth to resist any and every aggression. (('heers.) happen that the right may he perfectly good, although in
Before he sat down he was anxious to answer a question the mode of proving that right and in the instrument an
that had been put by the hon. member for Ayr Jere with offence may be committed against the law. I may use the
respect to the operation of this bill upon the bishops of the same illustration of this difference which I did on a former
protestant episcopal communion of Scotland, and he had to occasion. For instance, there are marriages performed by
state that their case had not been in contemplation by the Roman catholic prelate., but the circumstance that the
government at all when the proposal of the bill was under ceremony is performed by parties who assume a title to
consideration. There was nothing in the conduct of these which they have no right in law does not make the mar-
bishops, or in the course they had pursued, to render naps void. The marriage' are, on the contrary, good and
it necessary to place them under any prohibitions, disabilities, perfectly legal. Now, sir, our difficulties in framing these
or restriction which had not existed before. (Hear, hear.) clauses were many. We designed to prevent the receipt
taut episcopal communion, he had felt it right to state that
But after the presentation of the petition from the protes- of bequests of property to the bishops under these
assumed titleseand thus to prevent the assumption of the I
the bishops of that body, designated as they were by the titles altogether,- but it has been found that we could not
act of late, had no shadow of right to assume titles drawn use words to prevent the use of these titles fur the purposes
from the names of the places where their dioceses existed ; of bequests, without preventing and making void acts be-'
and in introducing a clause to exempt those bishops from
any penalties under the present bill, he should certainly longing to the spiritual character of the Roman catholic
preachers. On the occasion of a former debate, I said that
v.e.hr
it,ohthteheTasswumereptionnot onrownseentiotfiedanbyytithtlee
monde that such exemption should give them no right If any part of this bill interfered unduly with the exercise
orti
whatsoevert h tszefreoradtyhattoitewxp.unngoet inwasan
thcautshoolbi
icecrteiliontobnle in it, ,
law. In the remarks:he hid offered to the house,he hid en- ofwhathteeviWer
the intention of the government to interfere with religious
deavoured, as as he was able, to abstain from introducing liberty. The honourable member for Dorsetshire (Mr.
matter which must necessarily lead to debate; fur he llankes) has referred to the
proceedings of the
thought it desirable that the house should not now besynodof Th landasked I have
involved in a long and protracted discussion upon this on that subject. I very much agree in some
question. and he hoped he had succeeded. (Hear, hear.) of the remarks of the honourable member. I think the
The right hon. baronet concluded by moving that the order assumption of these titles is an insult offered to the crown,
of the day for the second reading of the bill be postponed and th
till Friday ant. e proceedings of the synod of Thurles have fore-