The Sun.
London, England, 1847-04-15 00:00:00

aes not in any way to be forwarded by persecution.
.711.1) sar.isfieri that the Ne
Loel nail net ter:pi-eine f ex tette ,vi,at he meant to say.
and mat his rnearOtte• w o;:t nut h:'sr the iiii.erpretat,.
put upon it by his Hine Friend. Bu' the N,,elt-• L
had referred to the (lid Testameot, wed ita.i elluded
certain passages which tie consicerol ti be in sui.
port of nit, arg.tnient.—(tieer. hear.) Bat it 5h0,41.1
lie reco=llected, that, in the earlier days of the
Jewish Commonwealth, that people were devotee
to a jjec liar office. Their commission was to extermi-
nate idolatry, and he thought that the Hon. Baronet the
Member for Oxford hail hardly stated this case with
sufficient force. Far be it from him to underrate the
social excellence of the professors of the Roman Catholic
religion ; far be it from him to understate their charity,
or their often-exhibited benevolence. He believed that in
these respects they were outdone by nobody of Christians,
but just as the Jews had their commission to extirpate
idolatry,
Mr. B. ESCOTT—No, no. Nothing of the kind.
Mr. SPOONER--The Hon. Member for Winchester
might have his opinion, but he (Mr. Spooner) trusted that
he might be permitted to express his also, and although
what he might say might have a tendency to offend many
present, although it was uttered without the slightest
desire to give offence to any one ; yet though it might
offend, s ill he should never be deterred from saying
what be felt it to be his duty in that place from any
consideration whatever. The Hon. Baronet the s Memberde
for Oxford University had given the character to totf
thin
bate, and he had rightly said that thefatrtbid y
rrincEn
Bill was to put down the Protestant
If they passed this Bid they hcandt°'her al:ernstne—
Liles,and destroy the
they must repeal the Act
Bill of Rights. He had n.. of Ch
slightest desire to pre-
ventty an equality of eel gigue
any people from e
freedom, but he dieliobj:.,ftt to that part of the Bill which
bulls in this country. it
legalised the
would, according to his notions, net be of the
in giving any religion 4 facility
slightest advau eg
to the professors of the Roman Catholic faith, but it
would be bringing
anothertip and a new power to over-
awe the consciences an .ress the powers of many
individuals, and would in many instances compel them
to avow and act On principles is religious matters which
they in their inner heart denied. It would be sanction-
ing a custom and a principle which the House of
Commons bail no right dhatever to sanction, and would
in truth be rendering that lawful which was in itself
treasonable and Seditious. Teis Bill did not confine the
authority for introducing bulls—that simply referred to
spiritual jurisdiction, and was thus opening a way for
all sorts of immoral and unscriptural proceedings. A
few d yrs ago a young gentleman, the son of
a friend of his, had 13.e.t induced to leave the Pro-
testant Church, and give in It's adhesion to the Church
of Rome, and shortly afterwards his faVier found a book
- entitled, " Consolation and Encouragement for Souls."
It was trenslated from St. Alphonsius, and contained a •
passage to the effect that as soon as ever any man had
given up the control of his mind and heart to his spi-
ritual director he was tro longer responsible for his con-
duct
,to his Maker. He would ask whether this
was net at once loosiug alt the bonds of society, whether
it wag not seling at liberty every means for imposing
upon the hearts awl consciences of a people, whether
was not !:giving a range to all the chicane of prieeocra.t,
and allowing opportunity for evils of a most
mischievous character ? Was it not monstrous
that there should be such a declaration of all loss
of responsibility such as this ? With such a latitude
there was a tree commission to a young man any day to
commit rnurjer o treason, for by this assertien the
Bible was nothing, law was nothing, morality was
nothing, nor was th. re any rule whatever to bind the
spirit, the principles, or the conschatee of any
man who had once given himself up to the direcien
of his priest. His conscience would not be his own, and
there would be neither responsibility for the pt.eent or
fear for the future—not an aid to assist in the pathway
through life, but throughout the whole of his course
he %TAB.' be tied hand and foot by the dic-
tates of the pri.- st, and would in every
way be dive:led of all species of responsibility.
There was also another view to which the Noble Lord
had alluded, namely, that the discussion between
the two Churches was only a theological one ; but
could such a state of things as a system of free
inquiry on the:.objects exist where all free inquiry
was reprobated, and everything left entirely in
the hands of the priests ? Such were some of
his reasons fur opposing the motion for the House going
ine) Committee on the Bill. He would conclude by
saying that his firm opinion was that this Bill was looked
upon with intense anxiety by the Roman Catholics, who
hailed everything that removed the obstacles to the con •
summation oft ;at result which they had so much at heart.
He believed that the House had gone too far already by
the Act of 1829—(" Hear, hear, ' from Colonel Sibthorp.)
He had a vivid recollection of some of the arguments
used upon that oec•ision, both by Mr. Canning and other
supporters of the measure, and was particularly struck
by that which had been used on the subject of
the exclusive nature of the oath requir, d to be
taken by Members of the Legislature. He believed
that Mr. Canning was, however, too sanguine
in believing that the oath, as then amended,
would be as effici-nt in contrAling the interference of the
Catholic Members with the temporalities; of the Church
as it had been before effectual in keeping them out of
the House. The Hon. Member concluded by calling
upon the House to seppert the Protestantism of the
country, and refuse to go into Committee on the Bill.
Mr. SHEIL said that the Hon. Member for Birming-
ham heti eta, ed that he was acaueinted with several
Ca-hullo gentlemen tor whom he entertained a high
cheraeter, bet he thought th-t if he were to communi-
cate his iyinio-4s to any of those ntspeetaile gentle-
men ho would be assurA b, them ;halt neither by force
nor by fraud bees it to be attempted to destroy* the Pro-
testent re —(ilean) Ile coutd not help - hieking that
his Heil. Friend had dealt somewhet disiege.nuously
with his Nob', Friend, for, notwithst ending tee distinct
exolimatien f his Noble Friend of the statements im-
puted to him by his neighs cur of Kent, notwithstanding
his Sable Fr:en.l g,t up aad said that he was in favour
of ueiestrietecl ro of conseiNlve, the Honourahle
M -either who had just sat down had enileavraired
to easten upon him emerges ?shish his Noble e.riend had
eistitic:ly d &ed. He (Mr. Shot) was convineed
th it there w'ss not a sinale Roman Cathetic in that
House who wetild not eke son the doctrines imputed to
11;!n ny the Hen. Mem:4er for Birmingham. N.) such
toe.pose was eras-matted by thaw ai they wete charged
with. His Henoerable Friend was so much ex-
cited by hn argument as to call all his
Roman Catholic elltev-subjects " idolaters." He
(Mr. Shen) could as ore the lion. Member that he
had to ChrisTisii philosophy to allow himself in
the slightest degree to be induenced by idolaters.—
(Hear, hear.) But mane, Isf,er ail, the real question fOr
the House te decide was whether they would go into
Committee on this, Bill—a Bill which has already
passed the second reading;. There was one
portion of the Bill to which he attached
considerable value, he referred to that portion of it with
reference to the religious orders of the Catholic Church.
As the law now stood, no Jesuit or a ty member of
other religious orders, could come into this country with-
out being subject to transportation. Any native of Ire-
land who should enter into any religious order was liable
to banishment in the first instance, and transportation
after; and any person who initiated any individual into a
religtous order was 1 able to the same punishment. Now,
he tnought that it must strike the common sense and
the common justice of that House that these laws were,
if not impotent in their application, at least essen-
tially inefficacious. But these laws were also
wholly inoperative; they were utterly inefficaci-
ous, for the purposes contemplated by those who
introduced th .se laws, and he would show the House
that these laws were also totally inoperative. He
thought it quite sufficient for his argument to open a
book which he held in his hand, entitled " The Irish
Catholic Directory." The bock to which he would refer
contained the entire statistics of the Catholic Church, and
it specified all the archbishops, the bishops, the arch-
deacons, the deacon', and all the parish priests
in • connexion with that Church, and concluded
by the folowieg healing—" Society of Jesus." Then
followed the name of the Rev. Richard St. Ledger,
Clongowes Coll.ge, Clare. The lion. and Learned
Member also read a list of ether names in connexion
with the religious order of the Je,uits, and went on to
say that such a statement was in his opinion amply
sufficient to convince the House that the law as
it then stood had been and was utterly inellica •
ciousl; the laws were offensive, and answered
the purposes of contumely, but none other.
Father Me.hew was a regular, Dr. Doyle -was a
regular —an Aueustinien friar ; and if the one
might be called the Apostle of Temperance, the
other might—for the extraordinary exenions he made
in sappert of the poor of Ireland, and to place
the poverty of that country on the same footing
as the poverty of England—be called the Apostle of the
Peer, as he was the fiat great champion the poor of Ire-
land ever had. Sow, by the, law as it at present stood,
the former might be at the present moment propagating
the principles of temperance in Van Dituiett's Land and
Australia, and such great and pod men be subjected to
the most iniquitous oppression. The question then
arose. was that. law to stand ? and if so, for what pur•
pose He knew that, with reeserd to the Jesuita, :t feel-
ir of strong opporoteoe had been excited, and that
since
what wai evited
rsueegharilf:doiwnigth,the net, they had been
fie,r,hlt)ut he thought those wile enteraieed
afraid of their own fears.
He thentit that thse?yal"
charged wilt, ;heir virtue!aults the Jesuits might be
outwighed them,
awl that the talk of those chg,:e4tl)
nious and unite:tele& thele:
ievere whony celtine
he pointed the glorious example eit'lZ'Z').-
were the faults of the Jeseia, :net.- Bu,, whetsver
Glogierielli at the instarce of v, re
"M'Pr"'s''d by
IT;sh J, suits were eqtirely reel fro, wat"lth.ophy, the
their coniket in I. e; ? "4:hey had a adegaW was
gowes, sever:it eft I.l' vinous ""
charitstile wont,. W.ce these the terifo,,4 oir
committed ? F..r the last hrty yeara 3,TaisV
the d;ffereat :eat lens axed pothical tnovexia, nt4s
in Ireland. he deli .:1 i hem to smite, out e
single speech, testa, panp!)l,-t, ever made
or pehlislied by a Jesait. He had tiever
seen a Jesuit at aay of tie meetings of the Catholic
Association ; itnel he did not believe that any member
of that society was or ever had been a member of the
Repeal Association 'These were facts, anti they surely
ought to outweigh the unsupported assertions of the Hem
Member for Birmingham. Why then, he would ask,
should these men be persecuted, against whom there
was no just cause of blame? Would Mr. Spooner, Mr.
plamptre, or Sir R. Inglis persecute Father Ma-
thew, or any other of the learned or virtuous men
who were members of these societies ?—(Hear, hear.)
No, they would not.—(Hear, hear.) Why, then,
should this intolerance show its teeth when the
teeth were too loose to bite?—(Loud cheers.)
The Hon. Member for Birmingham said that a number
of petitions had been presented against the Bill. He
did not believe that there was any feeling of hostility