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

LAW OF BRIBERY.

Sir F. KELLY wished to ask the noble lord the
member . for the city of London when he intended
to proceed with his bill for the consolidation of the law
of bribery.

Lord J. RUSSELL would answer the question to-
morrow.

CONVENTUAL ESTABLISHMENTS.
Mr. T. CHAMBERS then rose to move for a select
committee to inquire into the number and rate of in-
crease of conventual and monastic institutions in the
United Kingdom, and the relation in which they stand
to existing law ; and to consider whether any, and, if
any, what further legislation is required on the subject.
He brought this subject forward in a civil, social, and po-
litical sense, and not as a religious question. He should
endeavour to avoid exciting any religious animosity by
confining his arguments to facts which he had obtained
from the Roman Catholic registry. According to that
authority there were 75 convents in England, and 128
in Ireland, making in all 203 convents. The
same authority told him that in 1843 there were only 53
of these institutions in Great Britain and Ireland, thus
showing the enormous increase of 400 per cent.
within ten years, and proving the absolute ne-
cessity for an immediate inquiry into their cha-
racter. (Hear.) In January, 1853, there were in
existence no less than 72 monasteries in Ireland, while
in 1843 there were not more than 60 ; in other worth,
there had been an increase upon the ten years of 20 per
cent. in monasteries. Now that was a very grave fact,
and one which ought to be inquired into and investigated
by a country professing the Protestant faith without
offending the followers of the Roman Catholic Church.
It was a mistake to suppose that the Roman Catholic
laity were opposed to such an inquiry, although some of
them might be, and he hoped there would be no objec-
tion to his motion on that ground. Many of these in-
stitutions were opposed to the spirit of the English law
as established by acts of Parliament, they had been esta-
blished, indeed, in open violation of the existing statute
law, and on that accounthe contended there ought to be
some inquiry into their numbers or character. Monas-
tic establishments were decidedly at variance with
the law, while as for convents they stood in the highly
inconvenient and inexpedient situation of having no re-
lations whatever to the law. They were neither ignored
nor recognised by the law, and as such a state of
things could not be permitted any longer to continue
he thought that was an additional reason why the
enquiry he asked for should be had. (Hear.) But,
besides their numbers, there was much danger in the
manner in which these convents were conducted ; for
many of the inmates were confined in them in
opposition to the wish of their parents or
their own will. (Hear.) He could say nothing
about the doctrines taught in these conventual estab-
lishments, though they were certainly none of the
soundest ; but he thought, upon political grounds
alone, the house was bound to institute the in-
quiry to ascertain the treatment the inmates were
subject to which history proved was both coercive and
severe. Convents were places of restraint or infliction,
where the most excruciating torments were practised
upon the nuns and novices, and it was an abuse of social
and political right to allow them to remain longer in
this country without investigation. It was argued that
any interference would be an evasion of the doctrine of
religious toleration, and that his bill of last session in-
fringed religious liberty. He defied any hon. member
to put together any collocation of words whatever which
showed that that bill infringed religious liberty. On the
contrary, he contended it was one of the strongest efforts
made in modern times to protect it. (Hear, hear.)
What he said was, let spiritual influence take full effect
on body, soul, and spirit, but not upon the conscience.
(Hear, hear.) The very instant the spiritual power
loosened its hold, the ecclesiastical power should be made
to relax. There should be no ecclesiastical, and,
above all, no physical, barriers in the way of a nun re-
turning to the world. (Cheers.) Let them keep her,
though in the agonies of religious terror, whilst under
the spiritual power ; but if she repented, if doubts as to
the truth of the Roman Catholic tenets or the usefulness,
admissibility, or lawfulness of monastic vows, or her
calling to live under them—if doubts sprung up and
germinated, and the spiritual power, which did hold and
bind her in fetters, was broken, in the name of liberty
he asked that she should be allowed to return to the
world. (Loud cheers.) It was time we should under-
stand what religious liberty was. When the noble lord
brought forwards bill about Papal aggression, he thought
that a direct and flagrant infringement of the religious
liberties of the Roman Catholics. (Hear.) If what was
then done had been upon spiritual and religious grounds
he should not have objected at all ; but the bill was not
spiritual, it was purely ecclesiastical. (Hear.) Another
argument was, that though it was quite true many nuns
repented and lived lives of great suffering in consequence
of taking vows rashly, their condition arose out of an
antecedent contract, and the State must not interfere.
The law recognised no such contract. The law knew
nothing of religious or monastic vows. No subject
could contract to surrender her liberty. It was not
within the moral competency of any one to do so;
and therefore, supposing the original contract ad-
mitted, which it was not, and the constraint to be
lawful under the non-natural consent of the party, the
moment that consent was withdrawn, the deten-
tion become a flagrant
infringement
(Hear.) Black-
of liberty, and an
infringemnt of the gravest ciaract
Black-
atone laid down the principle thatr every one was en-
titled to his liberty, and that no one could deprive him
of it, not even the highest power of the State, without
tint But that was done every day
being called to acco ho was
in nunneries. Every person w desirous to get
out and could not was a palpable instance of a gross in-
fringement on the liberty of the subject. Another and
more serious matter was the connection with other simi-
lar establishments in foreign countries. Dr. Wiseman
admitted that these associations in England were ea-
' liated with associations abroad. There was not only
a power to imprison and a power to torture, but a power
to transport. It was done. The house would recol-
lect the case of the Taunton convent. Miss Knight,
one of the inmates, was extremely ill. Her brother,
with the consent of the Roman Catholic bishop, wished
another physician to see her. Miss Jerningham, the
lady abbess, utterly refused, though the physician was
a Roman Catholic, and the consent of the bishop had
been obtained. The brother asked if she might go
to a nunnery at Bristol. The superior said, " No, there
could not be a worse place than Bristol, she was going to
Belgium." And if it had not been for the most earnest
remonstrances, to Belgium Miss Knight would have
gone and died there, for she did die soon afterwards.
Who mild say then that nunneries were not now NO*
they were in the middle ages ? He would like to know
what instance of tyranny in the middle ages exceeded
that? It was said if Parliament interferred they gave
an official sanction to these instructions. They could
not pass an act against any wrong without recognising
its existence ; but whatever sanction Parliament could
give, was given already. The executive clause of tl.Na
Catholic Relief Act distinctly gave that sanction. The%
had been an &dive !hip that night, and he knew Mir)

was a great desire to crush this inquiry. But he warn
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 40,0()0 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 200/. or 400/. It was plain there was a very
large and constant flow of wealth into these establish-
ments, and no flow out of them. 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 800 or 3,500,
with thousands or millions of money. Th;e, 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 oTeat,9r. 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, :,:nd
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 insOtu-
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-
ecaesiastical 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
b een 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 hich 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 Parliendntary 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. Xt
could not be denied that the state of the law upon thi3
subject was most anomalous and inconvenient, and that
it might be altered in a manner not offensive to Roman
Catholics. Ho cited cases to show the defects and ano-
malies of the law; and although he did not approve of
the speech of Mr. Chambers, he 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. FAGAN 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 in
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. Chao-
hers he regarded as a very weak one, and he suggested
to him that the way to promote true religion was not to 4
employ the means used to enforce a false one.

kr: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 precediog
speaker, that the speech which introduced it was a tissn'e
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. MIA.LL said, as a general rule, in questions es
to inquiries touching the religious convictions and habi.ts
and proceedings of any portion of her Majesty's subjects..
he had regard to two 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.
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.
Mr. 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
didt he
motions
fnaoct
t know.saas
stehe r
ascertained.
present,aßut
us
dt
.if
wtehewot
uruldthavmouidst tbhee
got
of
tl
at, such
a
(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
motion. It appears to ins, sir, however, that those who
have brought forward and supported the motion to-night
have been a little ashamed—not to say afraid—of it ; for
they have destroyed the little ground there was for adopts
ing it. Because they have said, the inquiry is to be
x-
conducted with such delicacy ; there is 110 question to
be asked of these ladies to which they can take any e
would,
ception—thev need not be afraid of anything that
be offensive to them. Why, sir, either the inquiry
must be one thing or the other. (Hear, hear.)
into
it is to be an inquiry (as it is Itete proposed)
tual establishments, and their relation to. .law,"
the " number_ and rate of increase
the convenes
can be of no use. And if it be an inquiry into tne real
state of these institutions, it must be an inquiry in or der
to examine whether there are any facts to sustain
of con the
rse, inquiry
been brought forward ; and then,.
the allegations of ill-usage and imprisonment that have
tend. But, sir, I
becomes exposure, and there is an end to all that deli-
cacy to which hon. gentlemen pre
__ con.
fess that if I believed that there were places where pet
was denied to those who wished to exer-
cisesonal liberty
there were scenes of tyranny constantly
enac it,
ea I should pay %way with
and if
their
walls,