The Express.
London, England, 1847-12-09 00:00:00

Pz~ ~Gr v

was part of a genendsystem aggressive towards protestantism.
On a former occasion he hod asked, but without obtaining
an answer, whetber it was legal for a foreign authority to
Bisne blirothp of° papalail:tnalui
athhoaridt
suchu.urp
th
itio
divide this coun•ry into *en and constitute bishop,? Against
ymainde tahsetrosoncgthperro.o.
hemisphere
test. It was admitted that the episcopal succession tithe
Romanist, had hog ceased in England, if not in Ireland;
consequently the creation of new diereses and bishops by the
Pope was a daring act of schism. Even in this very city one
had been created. Instead of ministers entering into diplo-
matic relations with the Pope, through a secret
emblem, they ought to expel these newly-created
bishops from the country, in order that the authority
of the Queen in these realms might be upheld. The Pope
had even created one dignitary with a title superior to any
of the English hierarchy, save the two archbishops. These
Roman Catholic bishops, according to the highest Roue** au•
therity in this country, the Tablet, were entirely submi live to
the commands of the Pope, whose rescripts they must obey.
There were probably 3,000 bishops, priests, and members of
different order" in this country, who were subject to the
Pope's authority. At this moment there was a society
called the " Westminster Fraternity," whose object was to
influence the *We in that house, solely with reference to
religious questions. This society was under the protection
of " our blessed lady the help of Christians, and St. Thomas
of Canterbury," better known to Englishmen as Thomas-1:
Beckett. Had such a society existed in 1829, would it not
have been a strong reason for refusing further power to those
who proposed.° to use it ? It was an equally good argument
against the extension of powers now proposed. The subject
of Roman catholic marrhiges was one which had produced
much uneasiness in various countries on the continent. Should
a member of the church of England propose that the issue
of all marriages celebrated by a protestant clergyman should
be members of that church, the attempt would be denounced
as the grossest bigotry ; but precisely the same thing was
now attempted by the Roman esthetics. Another proof of
the aggressive character of the Romish church was the re-
storation to the breviary of the days of Pius V. and
Gregory Vll.—popes who bad been most active in
repressing the Reformation in this country. Them
days were formerly only noticed in the breviaries
printed at Rome ; now they w tae introduced into toe Eug-
lbh ones. Plus V., besides, was well known as the author
of the bull, "In erne Domini." He called on the house to
reject the present bill as a measure of prudence ; first, on the
ground that it was unnecessary ; and secondly, on account
, of the aggressiro character of the Romish church, to whom
it was proposed to give additional character and status. He
moved that the bill be reed a second time that 'lay six
moths.
Mr. H. DRUMMOND said be was desirous et giving to
the Roman catholic*, as to every other persuasion, the
tallest toleration ; but he warned the bongs to beware of in-
vesting them with supremacy. He did not disapprove of
the conduct of the Romish church in relation to mined mar-
-1 riages, or to the colonial bishoprics ; that church was only
faithful to its principles. The mischief of this bill was that
it did not simply remove disabilities. The Pope was
not only the head of that church, but claimed to be the spi-
ritual and temporal head of all the nations of the earth; and
the Roman catholic' acknowledged his right to interfere in
the politics of those countries. (" No, no.") In proof of
this he read an address to the Pope, which bad bees agreed
to by a body of Roman catholic In Ireland. Even Mr. Car-
roll, an Irish Roman catholic, before a committee of that
house, had declared that the Hamlett priesthood were insa-
tiable in their demsada Though the Jesuits might have
meaewhat gone beyond others in the extent to which the
had carried their principles, the same principles wire held
by all Romanist' ; and one of those WAS the doctrine of un-
limited obedience, by which every one was bound to obey
his spirituel superior, the same as he would Christ himself.
In support of this statement the bon. member read a pu-
rge from "Dens' Theology."
Mr. SHELL denied that this was the doctrine of the
whole Roman catholic church.
Mr. DRUMMOND asserted that it was. On these
(munch he prayed the house to reject the bill in its pre-
empt state.
The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY untied the hon.
member that it was almost ridiculous to compare the opi-
nions and obedience of the Jesuits with those of the members
of other orders. (Hear, bear.) The oath of every Roman
catholic masher denied that the Pope had any temporal
jurisdiction in this realm; and that was sufficient to say on
that subject. As to the interference of the Pope with the
Irish Colleges Act, as the law did not impose any obligation
on Raman catholic to attend those colleges, the injunction
of the Pope could not be said to be a contravention of the
law. With regard to the Roman church being aggressive,
all churches were aggressive ; and as to a division of the
dioceses, every sect of religionists—and he would take the
Wesleyan' as an example—divided the country into districts
for the purposes of their religion. He would rather see the
catholic', like the Jews, scattered throughout the world, and
the ploughshare passed over the site of St. Peter, than
that the catholic priests should render obedience to the civil
power rather than to the spiritual authority of the Pope.
Mr. WALPOLE thought the principle of the bill was the
only question with which they had to do at present. The
question whether the penalties contained in antiquated
statutes should be repealed, it was hardly necessary to dis-
cus. as the penalties were not enforced, and it was unne-
cessary to repeal obsolete laws. The remaining questions
were—first, whether they would allow the Roman catholica
to exercise the rites and ceremonies of their religion in pub-
lic pleas? He thought that should be answered in the
negative; he considered they ought not to endeavour to
conciliate them from whom they differed by satin; ;,„,7,11ca
to those with whom they agreed. (Hear, hear.) Tie second
question was, whether they would allow say pesos to wear
the insignia of oleos in any plate but a pima:Fr wee-
"hip ? He objected to such distinctions ,se in-
consistent with the humility inculcated by e Christian
religion, and he would rather take them away from all sects
than confer them on any. (Hear, hear.) As to the third
question—namely, that of legalising monastic orders in this
countiy, he considered each a course would be most die-
testate] to the people of this country: it would be productive
of much evil, and, be believed, no good. With
respect to the admiodon of the society f Jesus
into this country, it was a society governed by a
general of the order, whose come:uncle, whether in temporal
or spiritual matters, Romanist' were bound to obey. It
would he most improper, and highly dangeroes, to admit the
members of such a society into this country. They had
been banished from several catholic countries, and had at one
time beim suppressed by the Pope himself; he thought,
therefore, we might reasonably look upon them with alarm
and apprehension. (Hear, hear.) He objected mainly to
the bill. because it disturbed the settlement of 1829, which he
thought should be final. Two-thirds of the bill would be
utterly useless, because unnecessary, and the remaining third
was decidedly objectionable. (Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY would briefly state the reasons why he
gave hie support to the second reading of the bill. He at
niched no great importance to it, as he did not believe the
laws sought to be repealed bad the effect of imposing any
practical intemirenienes. The view which be took of the
bill, when it was proposed in the last paslismout, renudaed
unaltered. He thought there were parts of it which it *old
be wise to adopt, with the view of arr oat that spirit
which he wished to see animating Christians; he maid
not see any objection to secluding from the statute
book acts which were, either literally or virtually, repealed
already. (Heel hear.) The right hon. baronet, the author
of the bill of 129, had given his cordial meat is that pert
of the present bill, and the repeal of those obsolete statutes
would ben strict moordance with the opinion of the cri-
minal law commissioner. (Hear, hear.) The Roman ca-
tholic did maintain the spiritual jurisdiction of the Pops,
which was prohibited, and the distinct penalties attached to
the teaching by catholic priests were not entailed ; what,
therefore, could be the use of retaining such acts on the
statute-book ? He did not think, as he had before said,
that any practical inconvenience could result from the a*
in question, but if their repeal were asked for ass matter of
feeling, he did net see how such a request could be refund.
(Hear, hear.) With regard to the second part of the bak,
he was not prepared to assent to that portion of it which
proposed to repeal certain portions of the act at 1829 ; at the
same time, he did not see why they might not consider if
some of its enactments might not be ely dispensed with.
He did not, however think that they ought to give ap ail
security as to the religious orden• (Hear, hear.) Nei*,
did he consider that catholic ceremonies fa say public
place should be sanctioned. _ (Hear, bear.) A claws
had been inserted in the bill to meet the objet-
tion on that point, bat he thought it did not go fez
enough. Ho would not, however, rejeti the bill because
that clause required farther amendment, Ira then en= sat-
tent to be considered in committee. (Hear, hear.) Ha
&sold, for the resew' be had stated, sag eat the semi
reading of the bill, reserving to Moak the right of ep
posing any portions of it in ocuninittee. (Hest' latter.)
Mr. PLUMPTRE opposed the bill. Hs *Oct* to the
*gelation of the Pope's bulls ia this country, and to the
examise of any authentry by that potentate, civil or roll-
• in this land. (Cheers.) The noble led opposite
(Lard Arundel a* Surrey) had stated that nothing would
esti* ties Ramma eathnhes but the extinction of protest-
Intim (Hew, bear.) He (Mr. Plureptre) believed those
wee the leeynp et the church of Rome, who was urging
Oahe coons with that object in view—(hear, heer)—and
he thought these protestant* who valued their faith ought
eat to eseselca sub a bill the
that before the house, as it
would favour kw views of the Romani*. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. J. O'CONNELL said he, for one, utterly denied all
tentporal *mimes to the Pope, or any other foreign po-
lemist*. (Hee:, bear.) With regard to the obedience of
the atilsiona *inn, olio, that obedience did not extend to
Mbarna spiked
_matters. There was a carrying
IC"..:=1". ab:..dy w:ktrte,tons.;.,'ri'ed,clitien-
oh.' sue Ss albino aliasu by tha Roam awwwwe
eilltli ire alma. •d s *mei will the Item
kelninelk
ilk, 41LE,16
ketelln • .Ho • thiS glees
,test the 'MOM =be It
weisiss=lissis ithadleens la , ct:,.....`
wok AO k ties ail iaft.,.....kbet ,
ti "Ant,..."4"°-
wool& .sostia thee somire,
heard a *haggard be amen
to • lanetei
frsliai ar up
Wants allow the bill la ' Asemikes. The We.
inanier for Oxford had abaft INIIOIIIII
'la adduce any inseams AM_ oat billyanea In whisk
these penal stoker, had
O'Connell) ths abeam at -
Owed gonna ke empailleg an—
tis. 11111FDINIATI besought
k eiwAineei the raged ohne*,
IS k be illasd he an, bolo y
.whibbnibit seihn. Wei*, a.
on
=MINIM the hisetuati
eta slier *hale& t
!Omit that at
lama WM
seerabepat at *venal
kersien (*se bar.)
alibi ese. bum% Ihalthe 1
be WA wisdom at emerea
le INA* Win wassatiog

r sma beton, samba am alt,
airk skiestas.
suesta die bow t7iihs
naltetilissimAb, ' -",
lip petals% •••10-
deg seek want 4,
Amiss et Iliesjea
. Tamest the AIWA
&MP Oil the
at Ram, ,71
a*
ma law, theWe law s 4;
mg to se ammitlse, _ •

.

sanctioning in some degree the notion that the comma law
was to be altered. They were asked to legalim the ema-
hindmost of the religious orders; he most heartily echoed
the eloquent appeal of the hon. member for Oxford, that the
hones would refuse such a request.
Hr. GLADSTONE said there were several arguments of
• general nature which he could not but think ought to be
set aside in arriving at • decision on the question before the
house. Frequent allusion had been mode to the aggressive
activity of the church of Rome in this country. He was
among those who deplored the effects of that activity;
but it was not • jut consequence of suck regret
that they should be impelled by it to a precipitate conclusion
on • question like the present. (Hear, hear.) They must
look at the questien upon its merits, and not erideavour to
stop religious activity by political enactments. (Hear,
hear.) They ought, in justice and common sense, to look to
the "seal and fidelity of those who professed their own
religion for the defence and dissemination of their religious
principles. (Hear, hear.) It had been said, indeed, that
there was no practical grievance. Here, again, was a con
Mutation whirls ought not to weigh. Wounded feelings
were, at ell events, alleged ; and it appeared to him
undeniable that the woonded feelings of a perti n
of their fellow.eubjects, in default of positive ob
jections telling the other way, afforded a good
reason for interfering. It bad been urged that there
was danger of re-awakening clamour on this question by
fresh legislation. Although there might be such danger,
owing to a variety of circumstances, yet, on the whole, he
felt that they must look to the justice of the provisions con.
mined in the bill. If those provisions were unjust, it could
not be neceseary.to resort to fears and clamour in eider to
procure their rejection ; if those proviaions were just, they
must trust, as they had so often trusted, and seldom in vain,
te the good feeling of their fellow.countrymen. (Hear,
hear.) As regarded the first portion of the bill, which pur-
ported to repeal statutes, or portions of !statutes, antecedent
to the act of 1829, he should have been very glad to
have hoard, either from the iaw officers of the
mown, or from the Hoots Secretary, a more detailed state-
moot of the present condition of the law, a subject upon
which he felt himself very greatly in the dark. With re
vict to the first portion of the ball—touching the Act of
Supremacy—the lit of Elizabeth, he did not think that
afforded any sufficient ground for going into committee.
The first clause of the bill quoted verbatim et Menthe the
clause of the Act of Supremacy which the hon. and learned
gentleman proposed to repeal. Looking at the structure of
this clause, Le found that it might be thus abbreviated " If
any person maintain the jurisdiction of the Pope, and shall
be thereof lawfully convicted or *Minted according to the
common law of the realm, he @hen suff, r such and such
penalties." It was perfectly true that the repeal of the
act in words only went to destroy the penalties, and
not the rest of the clause. But how did the
matter then stead ? Why, they had half a sentence upon
the etatuto-hook with no meaning whatever ; and the words,
" If any person should maintain the jurisdiction of the
Pope," etc., would singularly enough apply to members of
the church of England equally with Roman catholics.
There was only one other of these acts on which he should
venture to hazard en observation, viz. the act against putting
into execution bulb, writings, instruments, and other super-
stitious things, proceeding from the me of Rome. The right
hon. gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Depart-
ment-load stated, in general terms, that the repeal of them
several sets had been recommended by the criminal law
coaninissionen. As regarded this particular act, he believed
the right honourable gentleman was in error. The law
as it stoed, however, simply applied to soak bulls
as were opposed to true obedience to the crown;
and although it might not strictly be necessary, yet,
as it was not is itself unreasonable, it afforded us ground
for farther legislation. If Hear.) He thought,:howorer, they
must all feel that the stabentntial question related to the act
of 1829. (Hear haw.) For his own part, he would say
that, although filly ssmilde of the force of those considera-
tions which went iodise that it was exceedingly unwise to
Wen with settlements of long-contested questions, yet,
jp*oisg himself la the position of his Roman catholic fellow-
satin* be hit that be could not, with jun*, and with a
I=MatholdraPrreplaesntiwrelyiel:O tre asertalremitetnoti
tiA .
(Mars.) No one could seriously propound the doo-
trine that the provisions of the act of 1829 were
emorities of great or vital moment to the established
beentims of the country. H. thought the hon.
awl homed geallemaa had shown ground enough
iks phis cesunittse ea the bill, in order that the house
WI& phis
sirs* the aft of 1829. He would now say a
few wood= the ermisions themelna, which were
AIM ill The bet was that which prohibited
Lama atitelb eseiriselist lom performing their rites and
estemaiden. and ham wear*, the habits of their order, ex.
nzet:empiness devoted to the H.oroan catholic religion. He
i that the law, as it than stood, woe too narrow, and
thel peewees& might give greeter liberty, without preju-
Mee to the psi&e, and without offending public feel-
tn. (Haw, bear.)peac The amend provision, Which was, in
sot me impertent, ibrhade the use of any insignia of
tempera to Baum catholic place of worship, or
r scald
pine sot attached to the established church. He
set mom* to the repeal of that provision. It
was a matter of no vital importance whether the insignia
essapond eta were or were sot carried into the
Mese of God—that was • question which seemed to him
ewe to diffaimee of °plaits; but if the practice continued
he merit say list it ma in Meow with the system of the
• estellehed eisenhond aa appmeriate and inoffensive mark
of that chime* He sow is the truth= which was,
=aultyi of the pesent importemee, vie., that of the nut-
' of sago* lAMB. In that need he was not
aim be the set of IND us it Mood. (Hear,
=.1141/fa isch...sa*mart leek eta MIND religious orders
as in a sad spies* ern, antagonistic to
. Om; be set make hie mind that it was just
mischieW be minds limo this all persons, whe-
el/ of her /testy cot not, who simply belonged to
a= mist. He meld mot help drawing abroad
be of all, between religions orders and
carer .uses of the rhumb of Rome, and secondly,
*ewes *e lam* and are religious orders of the
sum *ea. He would set weary the home by referring
be gelid domemestle ; het he must Pay, it emend to him
*et *me slieusi : = of megeration in the vows taken,
ain the bid down with nd eed to obedience
more the mat* whit*, under certain circumstances, and
be sends Sass of steite,.ssight render them dangerous
amebas of essiee Hs OS set believe that any practical
Clew added at meant sett they might more fitly
dime* ammittse the dote& of any new arrangement
wiY aseld be peepseed. He admitted, nay he eon-
=Eat the lain of the society of Jesuits were not, when
Is the ahead, tomistent with the safety and
= civil =bet be had never heard my sea
say edit religions order. Arm
*elope years, and at a period when diarist
• mesa ha a sew miser to this be
thee* the adveseim of animist might be ailed
eies Is thew same be its essMsessea. If he were told that
the membees of teleisse mem were, en amount of their
maim elkity, ems *weer *ea the swabs gimpy, be
sapid that be sunset a rem she* be a ems repreeeata.
lime, bat OM
ads bed UM se ight, you prod et their
swneeZleeasteLitaabiesthem the HAI
117E7 se Imre what debt *op amid ba d he
ss * sieuLigrhat
the umbers or Miele* wise, amid be vestetered er
=dr or any ores etlersidea or Wailed esperrhila.
* biscuit *, of ezoseleiss his *modes la
eismilles, with neoest Jacath, awl maids( she the
newisties tali be had dew with aespeet be the am&
elm, et the 1111, be eked& °Mainly vote far the sommil
maw aides NIL (Clam)
Mr. OHBIL aid be rem for the pupae of=
few• 2a_ennwm reemeetudiehidly is referee* to the
wed
swaged by the ha Ind =wheseherbilbasse "17—Mllidharet.
=with what tint boa. secalsers bed eeM as be the
bid dews by a grootmorat pidlosopher who wee the
eiseeplea civil rellsiees freekaa. wes eas
essehedea, et
hewever, in the eat et IMO which the There lea. sad
Lased gestieme bad everleeked. Hi 7 that ale Beam
Wham we esieded hue the ehaatilahip of Ireland.
Then wee, as dealt, the stresseet PINS= be en-
olsdisu wadi= free the elemelimeldp of Hai-
beilsestam witsat aseisehetteel
beloved At thus
amed the eat et irrees.were mad;
*5 hopreellek at Os thee when the act was introdseel
Oat the Cherceller et Irticiloyed patronage
* that seeraoi by the dumeener.
set re het Lard Cheasellsr of Tre-
bel hod ao eaciedeethed *beam whatyever ; sad if the
deoldse, he lid leld _ b hesearehis
and hanse
d geethmes Win_
leell dewflemileik b*ee (Mr. IMO)
wield a* Metes what gessel, sr rather se whet prelesee,
a diategehhed SWIM aft& belMlKar wee *at out been
• the MOM Irma* of lie pmelmies. (Meer, hear.) The
ether grimness we beridel sad isisharyi this wee a
yeedital ace, yeerpost col* evecee rieelle. They all se-
ammliseal a mot somedmla mamba of that house, the
Me Sir llblead pia be, who flied the Mee of Attar-
sopeameal de awled, idle la list hen obtained the sat-
Imps mil elatemeretusa of el was, who wee raised to
the aim of Mester et the Mk, eel whediellegabbed him-
oat es each ea Mist, *et every sr who knew him said,
" Mbat a it ie that be ass soma be the
Obssesiier of Ireland I" Mr. Weigh Ihtljh a catholic,
wee shed to the pert of OW Bares ; Mr. Pigott,
enter eadocile, sew bell the male position. The Chief
he*. et the Qum% lime* might also be a catholic, pre-
oelielamme miss Mat awl what was still more valuahle,
the safety et the while elate wee involved. Now he Asked
thistl=mair be liked the hon. member for MitUntrst, a
Maher if the bar, whether, if he were a
I. nth** ad Attormy.Gtmeral, and the Chancellor-
** of beim& became meant, he would not deem it a
susiskews wrest If ids tasks amid stand in the way ?
beer.) Me thereetabe bed aid enough in them few
wards to skew that the Mem ought to go into committee on
the bill. (Hear, bear.)
Kr. GOULBURN said that, having had an opportunity,
set many am*. sins, of expromiag ifs non a bill
peekely Sailer le the yam* ace, be not intended
te seeks ray ebewealleme: be weld aet help how-
ever, that be war Is Sr yeast of the digit hissersissua
(Mr. swam ism* possible peen&
tes_witic this biL Meer, hear.) aC:ITISS gadisimis
Mid *Si the phsessee now sought to be issoilsises
isbilki aid oaf
that there wee nether
est et 111 mei which yes reelsefi=
as the Memo eatheiles of Was& WM avid be
a be way as wile emedderal the sableet seem-
et temsseles_sith the bill wiY woo
ufitr ourilimedia-la ? Ira assime et the
who sesta as reit Xeleel intended kwltti
es hie be (Mr.
by ipm►
le be mu siseliesed thus loth
lama oilmen sesta to bit ea
et!" of the 161•1 vielesest reibleal of Ihe set
rt. he bed ewer beard eemeyhited d beim

within the walls of that house, it must be evident that by
going into committee they would mime a discussion which,
would tend to disarrange the whole of the settlement
which had been eff,eted—(hear, bear)—or, at least, bring
on a series of religious bickering. and contentions which
would have no end. He believed the more unimportant
clauses of this bill had been introduced as a handle by
which to attack the main provisions of the act of
:829. (Hear, hear.) His right lion. friend (Mr. Gladstone)
appeared to think that it might be desirable to make distinc-
tions between different religions orders. He did not doubt
his right bon. friend's ability to frame provisions for that
purpose. but he would be sorry to see the House of Com-
mons embarking in a discrimination of that kind. (Hear,
hear.) It we. impossible that they could be adequately in-
formed as to the details of each sectety : all they knew was,
that the members of such societies depended upon a
superior, who might be a foreigner. On that account
there had hitherto been retained in the hands of
the government the power of dealing by law with the
several religious orders in cases in which they might become
mischievous to the community. The enforcement of the
penalties provided was at present vested exclusively in the
attorney-General, and he advised the house to pause before
running the risk of creating applications to have the
power of proseention plated in the hands of the public.
Mr. HUME supported the motion, and observed, in allu-
sion to an observation of the right hon. gentleman who pre-
ceded him, that he had himself protested in parliament
against the exclusion of Roman catholic" from the Irish
chancellorship.
Mr. CARDWELL said he would state in a few words the
main ground upon which he should give his cordial concur.
rence in the second reading of the bill. For two or three
sessions parliament hod been engaged in discussions of a very
delicate nature, tending to promote feelings which they all
naturally desired to dismurage. He thought they might
fairly hope that this session would not close without the dis-
cuanon being brought to a practical termination. He trusted
that before the bill should go into committee the government
would carefully weigh the actual condition of their Ramat
catholic felloweubjects ; and if there were any presided
grievances requiring to be removed he believed that on both
tides of the Ileum there would be found almost a unani-
mous feeling in favour of their abrogation. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. PARKER said that the arguments used on the
other aide had not convinced him that any further centres-
lions should be made to the Roman catholic/. When they
were told that the clauses sought to be repealed were no
longer acted on, be would only say in reply that if they
wereinoperative the peace of the country ought not to be
disturbed by seeking their repeal.
Mr. STUART rose enfold loud cries of" divide," and
said he would state in a few words the reasons why he in-
tended to vote against the second reading of the bill. He
would, however, observe, is the first place, that the lan-
guage which had been addressed to the house by the right
hen: gentleman the member for Oxfori University was
uttered under circumstances calculated to excite great sur-
prise. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman the Se-
cretary of State for the Home Department, did not object to
the word eseledastical in the first part of the bill. His (Mr.
Stuart's) objection went to the first part of the bill, because it
seemed to him to trench on the supremacy of the crown in
matters ecclesiastical, and if it was shown that such would be
the effect of the measure, he was sum it would not obtain
any further encouragement from the House of Commons.
They were all agreed that the first part of the bill related to
that part of the statute of Elisabeth which imposed
penalties on persona who disputed the supremacy of the
crown in matters spiritual or emlesiestical. It was the
supremacy of the crown in matters eccleeiastical that was
protected by the statute of Elizabeth, and was sought to be
repealed by the bill before the house. The supremacy of
the crown was established by the common law of England
oefore the reformation, and the statute of Elizabeth was de
claratory of the common law. Now, if repealed the
statute of Elisabeth, they repealed anieli of the
5010131011 law on the subject of the in of the crown.
;Hear, hear.) With regard to what had fYlisa from the
noble lord the member for Arundel he begged to remark
:hat though they tolerated his opinions as to the power of
the Church of Rome, they did not permit them to interfere
with the legislative enactments of this country. The object
of the common law was to prevent the interference of the
gas of Rome in matter. relating to the supremacy of the
mown—an interference which that church always sought to
maintain. L bad been exercised in the reign of Edward 1.,
when the Archbishop of York, acting under the authority of
the Pope, refused to induct the person who bad been Rre-
stinted to an advowson by the crown, and at this very time
the Pope was exercising this interference by recommending
the Queen's subjects in Ireland to disobey the municipal
:awe of the country. For these reasons he would vote against
the emend reeding of the bill.
The house divided—For the second reading l6B
Against 136-32
The bill was then read a second time.