The Sun.
London, England, 1854-03-01 00:00:00

was a great desire to crush this inquiry. But he warned
the Government that a dozen years hence, if these insti-
tutions went on increasing in the same ratio, there would
be 1,000; in 25 years 2,000 or 3,000, with 40,000 or
50,000 or 60,000 nuns; and what did the house suppose
would be the amount of property. (Hear.) There was a
dispute, he saw between Cardinal Wiseman and Mr. H .
Seymour as to the sum to be paid for dower—whether it
should be 2001. or 4001. It was plain there was a very
large and constant flow of wealth into these establish-
ments, and no flow out ofthem. They knew that at the
suppression, at the time of the Reformation, one-fifth of
the whole property of the kingdom was in their hands.
They knew what their numbers were, and they knew
that both in numbers and property they had never in-
creased more rapidly than in the last five years. At
some point or other the Government must interfere, and
he would submit to the noble lord that it was as well to
begin with 220 as to wait until they were 880 or 3,500,
with thousands or millions of money. This, he con-
tended, was the right time to interfere, and not years
hence, when the arguments could not be stronger, and
when the difficulties to meet might be much greater. A
great deal was made of interfering with cloistered nuns
and sisters of charity. If they pleased, the nuns might
go on enjoying the same Catholic symbols, rituals, and
observances, and the sisters of charity might follow their
rounds of benevolence without being interfered with.
He would not say a word against either. No doubt they
were acting in what they believed to be their concientious
, line of duty. He did not wish the question to be met
with compliments to the sisters of charity, but to be met
on this ground—were these institutions safe religiously,
socially, and politically ? (Hear, hear.) If the noble
lord was of that opinion, let him get up and say so ; but
he (Mr. Chambers) felt most strongly that these institu-
tions were linked together and formed a part of the most
subtle, most profound, most sagacious, and most endur-
ing scheme of Government which had ever been founded
on the face of the world. He meant the Papacy.
(Cheers.) In proportion as they flourished did the poli-
tical schemes of that Government flourish, and in pro-
portion as they failed would that Government fail.
(Hear, hear.) When the noble lord saw the politico-
eceleSiasticsd progress of the Papacy, could he imagine
that there was no cause for it. It was not that they
gained a great accession of numbers from new converts ;
but these institutions multiplied in the face of a decreas-
ing number of real members of the Roman Catholic
Church, and they had a direct effect upon the power of
the Papacy. (Hear, hear.) Then, again, with regard
to education. He did not object to the youth of both
sexes learning Roman Catholic teaching, but he
objected to their learning it in nunneries and mona-
steries. They must look gravely at that question.
The time would come when those who had been-in-
structed in tenets destructive of the institutions of the
country would stand up and argue upon those opinions.
It was not a question of sectarianism ; it was a question
of the British constitution. (Hear.) It was a question
of a constitution every slope and angle of which had
been arranged to meet the flow and pressure of free
Christianity—he meant free Christianity as distinguished
from the most slavish Christianity ever known in this
country, which now prevailed amongst the Roman
Catholic body. (Loud cheers.) In Roman Catholic
times we had a free Christianity, but not a pure one.
(Renewed cheers.) It appeared to him that the slavish
system of education was propagated in religious houses,
that those institutions themselves were altogether opposed
to the constitution of this country, and that no constitu-
tion could be safe whilst surrounded by such insidious
and increasing perils. (Loud cheers.) The hon. member
concluded by moving for the appointment of the com-
mittee.

Mr. NAPIER said he found in every Roman Catho-
lic country a very jealous system of legislation with re-
ference to conventual establishments, and the question
was, whether our law in this respect was in a satisfac-
tory condition. It was the duty of the State to main-
tain its own independence and the supremacy of its law,
and to protect the freedom of its subjects against a foreign
Power ; and the effect of his argument was to show that
the law, unsatisfactory as it was, was violated by con-
nivance, and that the restraints which the vows taken in
monastic establishments imposed upon liberty, property,
and even the allegiance of the subject, gave this matter
claims to the serious consideration of Parliament. He
supported the motion.
Mr. M'CANN gave a direct contradiction to some
statements contained in a letter read by Mr. Chambers.
Mr. J. BALL, who had given notice of his intention
(which he relinguished) to move a resolution that it is not
just or expedient to subject to Parliamentary inquiry
associations of ladies devoting themselves exclusively to
charitable and religious objects, who do not possess, or
seek to possess, any peculiar legal privilege or immunity,
observed, with reference to the statistics quoted by Mr.
Chambers, that there was not one of these institutions
in Ireland, and only two in England, not devoted to
educational, charitable, or reformatory objects, and he
complained of the many gross mis-statements circulated
upon this head. He contended that Mr. Chambers had
shown neither reason nor precedent for an alteration of
the law, which would be exceptional and offensive, and
he protested against an inquiry into the mode of living
and intimate social existence of these ladies, without the
slightest ground being assigned for so degrading and irri-
tating a proceeding, which would rekindle the embers of
religious and political agitation in Ireland.
After a few remarks by Mr. POTTER, who com-
plained of the insult which the motion offered to Roman
Catholics.

Mr. R. PHILLIMORE said, if the object of the
motion was to drag before a committee of that house
ladies of high rank and delicate feelings, and to make
an inquisition into private concerns, he should offer his
strenuous opposition to so monstrous an object ; but the
terms of the motion placed it in a different aspect. It
could not be denied that the state of the law upon this
subject was most anomalous and inconvenient, and that
it might be altered in a manner not offensive to Roman
Catholics. He cited cases to show the defects and ano-
malies of the law; and although he did not approve of
the speech of Mr. Chambers, ho urged upon Roman
Catholic members that it was greatly for their interest
not to oppose the motion, since they had no reason to
dread any investigation into their conventual establish-
ments, and it would put a stop to a repetition of these
motions.

Mr. FAG-AN related some particulars of a case refer-
red to by Mr. Chambers, contending that the facts were
adverse to his argument. There might be, he observed,
discontented nuns, but there were rules in every con-
vent which allowed them to leave it. He opposed the
motion.

Mr. ROCHE objected to the motion on principle, and
because it had been introduced in a disingenious spirit
and in bad taste.

Mr. KENNEDY shortly opposed the motion.
Lord C. HAMILTON, disclaiming all persecuting
and sectarian views, thought there was sufficient evi-
dence to show that there was something very peculiar iu
the position of the inmates of convents in this country
which required investigation.
Mr. J. PHILLIMORE hoped the house would not
assent to the motion, which it was impossible to separate
from the speech by which it was introduced, and which
must be considered as insulting to every one professing
the Roman Catholic religion. The case of Mr. Cham-
bers he regarded as a very weak one, and he suggested
to him that the way to promote true religion was not to
employ the means used to enforce a false one.

Mr. MAGUIRE denounced in strong terms the mo•
tion and the mover, and eulogised the character of the
conventual ladies and their offices in the service of edu-
cation and charity. But for them, he said, the poor
female children in Ireland would be without moral
training. He insisted on the ill effect which these mo-
tions would produce in Ireland. He based his rejection
of this motion upon the assertion made by a preceding
speaker, that the speech which introduced it was a tissue
of frivolous and calumnious gossip.
Mr. F. W. RUSSELL, without entering into the
general question, pointed out the beneficial influence of
these conventual establishments upon industrial employ-
ment in the south of Ireland. He opposed the motion,
for which he thought no ground had been laid.
Mr. MIALL said, as a general rule, in questions as
to inquiries touching the religious convictions; and habits
and proceedings of any portion of her Majesty's subjects,
he had regard to tw o conditions —one, that there should
be a solid groundwork of facts, showing prima facie
reasons for an inquiry ; the other, that there was a
strong probability, supposing the facts were proved, that
legislation could provide a sufficient remedy for the evil.
H
He thought no facts had been produced which justified a
call for inquiry ; and that, supposing evils to be proved
to exist, arising, as they did, from spiritual influence, he
believed they were not to be remedied by legislation, and
it was most unwise at this moment to encourage a motion
the effect of which was to set one denomination against
another.

-IVl—r. COWAN said the question had excited great
interest in Scotland, and he should feel it neces-
sary to vote for the motion. He had no unkind
feeling towards the Roman Catholic community.
(Hear, hear.) The whole case was in a nutshell •
whether the kernel was likely to be worth getting at he
did not know. But if we would avoid the evil of such
motions as the present, the truth must be got at, and
the facts ascertained. (Hear.) He did not doubt that
the Sisters of Mercy or Charity were actuated by the
purest spirit, and often set a good example to Protestants.
It was, however, necessary to arrive at the truth upon
the subject. He was surprised at the ominous silence
of the Government on the question. (Hear and laughter.)
Lord J. RUSSELL—Sir, the only difficulty I feel is
that the arguments in favour of the motion have been
completely overthrown by several members who have
spoken, especially the hon. member for Carlow and the
hon. member for Rochdale. And besides, I took a part
in the debate on a similar questiOn last year, and I have
little tO add to the reasons I then gave for resisting the
motioti• It appears to me, sir, however, that those who
have brought forward and supported the motion to-night
have Nen a little ashamed—not to say afraid—of it ; for
they have destroyed the little ground there was for adopt-
ing it. Because they have said, the inquiry is to be
conducted with such delicacy ; there is no question to
be aitked of these ladies to which they can take any ex-
ception—thev need not be afraid of anything that would
be offensive to them. Why, sir, either the inquiry
must be one thing or the other. (Hear, hear.) If
it is to be an inquiry (as it is ',we proposed) into
the " number and rate of increase ; the conven-
tual establishments, and their relation -- law," it
can be of no use. And if it be an inquiry into the real
state of these institutions, it must be an inquiry in order
to examine whether there are any facts to sustain
the allegations of ill-usage and imprisonment that have
been brought forward ; and then, of course, the inquiry
becomes exposure, and there is an end to all that deli-
cacy to which hon. gentlemen pretend. But, sir, I con-
fess that if I believed that there were places where per-
sonal liberty was denied to those who wished to exer-
cise it, and if there were scenes of tyranny constantly
enacted„within their walls, I should say away with its