The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-25 00:00:00

faith. As a member of the English Protestant Church, he
could not c..nsent to extending further privileges to parties
who were acting in this manner. The Eight Hon. Baronet
concluded by moving as an amendment that Mr. Greene
do leave the chair, and that the G mmittee sit again on that
day six months.
Mr WATSON thought no one 'would dissent from the
principle of the Bill, which was intended to remove from
the statute book :how obsolete penal enactments to the
operation of which persons orofe-sing the R,man Catholic
faith were still liable. He did not see any serious abjection
Roman Catholic bishops assuming the titles of English

sho:‘s, but he did not think the clause was mat7CTial
o the Bill, and if the House wished, he should not object
to remove it. He should certainly persevere with the Bill.
Persons taking monastic vows were, by the law of 1829, in
England still liable to banishment. It was foolish to suppose
that thes9, persons could prove detrimental to the Protestant
Church in a tree country like England.

Sir J. GRAhIAM sail it appeared to him that, in dealing
with so important a matter as the present, the Hon. Gentle-
man
had not treated the clause with becoming gravity. He
did not asink that the titles ofreverenca which belonged to the
Protestant Cnurch should be awarded to the Roman Catholic
hierarchy. It was not necessary even to point out distinct
yesalities, that the same names of places should be selected
Ov the Roman Catholic hist tips for their distinctive titles.
Yo allow such a proceeding would throw a slur upon the
bishops and hierarchy of the Protestant faith which would
not be compatible with the respect which their exalted posi-
tion entitled them to. In the second place, with regard to
the clause for regulating Roman Catholic processions, the
Hon. Gentleman did not consider that the clause as it stood
was sufficient. He was decidedly of opinion that the law
as it at present stood was right both as regarded the second and
third clauses of the Bill. With respect to the fourth clause,
he would confess that he did not entertain any jealousy of
the loyalty or morality of the regular orders of the Roman
Catholic Church. He thought that in a country where there
were upwards of 8,000,000 Roman Catholics, it would be
neither wise nor just policy to say that the regular orders
shall not be maintained. It would not, however, be pro- '
dent to dell with these matters in the way that was at pre-
sent proposed. The monastic orders required revision, and to
be dealt with in a very delicate and most cautious manner.
The House was not at the present time in a position to consider
the subject in the necessary dispaesionete manner, and it
would be proper to postpone the further consideration of the
measure to a future day.
Mr. WYSE thought that the minds of the public were
made up for the reception of the principle of the Bill. The
Hon. Gentleman entered into au explanation of the titles
and discipline of the Rotn.in Catholic hierarchy, and insti-
tuted a comparison between the nominal titles of the digni-
taries of the two churches. As regarded the clause for re-
gulating the proce'siotis and dresses of the Roman Catholic
clergy, he saw no difference between it and the la.v
that already existed.—(Hear, hear.) There was a society
in Ireland called the Christian Brothers, which taught a
vast number of children, and educated them to hold offices
of a superior description in the mercautda entronunit_ •
operations of that society were exceedingly circumscribed in
consequ nee of existing statutes, which the present proposed
Bill sought to repeal. The objections against the Jesuits
arose entirely out of political hostility, and not from any re-
ligious belief. It was absurd to keep on the statute-book the
imposition of penalties which it was never intended to en-
force. He cheerfully gave his support to the clauses of his
Hon. Friend, and trusted that the Bill would pass unmu-
tilated.
Atter a few words from Lord CLIVE,
Mr. B. ESCOTT considered that they ought to do away
with the enactments which were a disgrace to the statute.
book, and he was of opinion that the changes which had
been made in the bill to meet the views of those who
were opposed to it, ought now, considering the
spirit which had been evinced, to be removed, and that
they shonld steed on the original principles of toleration.
The time was ripe for a decision on the question, and he
hoped the House would not consent that such arbitrary
and intolerant enactments should longer disgrace the
country. The principles on which the Bill was founded
were not those of the present day, and if they were then
defeated they would prevail, and that at no distant d ty.
Mr. ALBERT Fl I'ZGERALD adverted to the conduct of
a curate of the Established Church, at Youghal, who had
preached a sermon to the effect that no Protestant could be
saved unless he insisted on the conversion of his Catholic
servants, and that no Protestant should hold any communi-
cation whatsoever with Catholics. A relative of his, a colonel
in the army, was so disgusted that he walked out of the
church and several other military men did the same. The
Rev. Gentleman by means of his bigotry was noticed by his
bishop and made rector of Macroom.—(Cries of "Name.")
Mr. Swanston.--( Hear, hear.) Quakers and nuns were al-
lowed to wear their dresses and habits in the streets, anti he
did not see why friars should not be allowed to do the same.
Mr. COWPER said that if this was merely a question
of toleration he should be quite ready to support the
Bill, but he did not think that it was, and it proposed to
recognise a body—the Jesuits—instituted for political pur-
poses, having dangerous objects and using dangerous
means to effect them. He believed them also to be a
body inculcating a bad system of morality—that had been
officially denounced by every country in Europe; they bad
been banished from no less than thirty-nine countries, they
had been put down by a bull from the Pope himself; and be
was sure that such a jest Pontiff would never have
consented to such an act if the Jesuits were not,
a bad and dangerous body.
Mr. ESTCUURT stoutly supported the amendment.
The restrictions had endured without having ever been en.
forced, and they would have a wholesome effect in prevent-
ing any improper aggression on the part of the Roman Ca-
tholic clergy.
Lord SEYMOUR considered that it was most unchristian
to maintain these statutes; if the Church had no other iecu-
rity than these enactments it stood upon a very insecure
foundation indeed, but he hoped it was quite secure enough
without any of these paltry enactments. He would support
the Bill.
Mr. REDINGTON considered that a very unfair attack
had been made upon the Jesuits. The Jesuits had been sup-
pressed in Italy from purely political reasons, and not from
any improper principles which they advocated.
Mr. COLQUHOUN said he perfectly agreed with the Hon.
Baronet, that the law was at present not in a satisfactory
state. He had received a letter from a friend of his
vresidingin the city of Dublin, which infumec,l him th •
there a one there were twenty convents-- and ten mo-
nasteries. The law was inefficient, and he should not be
averse to see an efficient registry of all these orders; and a
friend of his had suggested to him a mode by which it could
be done, namely. by causing the inspectors of police to
make returns of those which existed in those districts.
Mr. WYSE explained that what he stated about the
Christian Brothers was from actual observation and rot
hearsay.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said the question was whether the law
should remain as it was, or be amended, and from its present
state he should be surprised if the Committee would
not proceed to consider the provisions of the Bill.
It had been admitted by those opposed to the Bill that the
law regarding monastic institutions was in a most unsatis
factory state. If so, then, why not at once l roceed to a re-
medy ? The provisions of the present law could Dot be car-
ried out—why, then, retain them in the statute-book? Those
provisions were opposed to the liberal spirit of the
age; and he, for one, should the Government attempt to
carry them out, which he must say they had never shown a
disposition to do, would certainly give them every
opposition in his power. The whole question required
to be considered, and he hoped it would be done dtspas •
sionately and calmly, so as to effect a remedy.
As a Member of the Church of England, he should
be ashamed of it, if he thought it . could not
maintain itself without persecuting the Roman Catholics,
and inflicting on them disabilities. There was a time when
the Jesuits exercised a dangerous control over despotic
states. But times had changed; they had a free
press, the benefits of public discussion, and a popular
representation now, before which it was impossible the Jesuits
could display the power and command men's 'consciences as
they did in former times. To reject the Bill from such fears at
the present day was most absurd. lie would give his vote in
support of the Bill, in order that the subject might be con-
sidered in Committee.
Lord JOHN MANNERS entirely differed with the Hon.
Mr. Colquhoun). He did not think
Member for Newcastle
the passing of the Bill uould endanger the Englisn Church in
the manner he had stated. With regard to the present law,
the clauses in it against Roman Catholics were inopera-
tive ; they could not be carried into effect. He be-
lieved, that since the present Government came into
office, an application had been made to put the
clauses into effect against a Dr. M'Hale, hut they wisely
refused.—(Hear, hear.) The main point of the Bill
before the House was the removal of the disabilities against
the Jesuits. The Bill proposed to do this, an hence it bad
his support. He for one apprehended nn danger in England
from that order interfering with political questions. He,
never recollected a single instance of any Jesuit in this coun-
try interfering in such a manner; but, on the other hand,
they bad always been notorious for confining themselves to
their religious duties.
Mr. NEWDEGATE could not agree with the Noble Lord
who had just sat down. The constitution of the Jesuits now
was the same that it had ever been, and as inimical to civil and
religious liberty. He hoped the Government_ would not,
without mature inquiry, proceed to interfere with the pro-
visions of the Act of 1829. It had been admitted religious
orders were increasing in this country, and therefore they
phila throphy. re..
ought not from a feeling of mistaken
moved the protection against their encroachment, which the
law as it now stood afforded.
Mr. WATSON briefly replied, when the gallery was
cleared for a division.
On our re-admissiou there appeared—
For the motion that the Chairman do now
leave the chair l2O
80
Against it
Majority against the Bill ... —4O
The Bill is consequently lost.
The House then resumeil.
BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLaInTdE
This Bill was read a second time, oNrCderredMtLoLbe com-
mitted to-mcrrow.
DEATH BY ACCIDENTS COMPENSATION BILL.
The second reading of this Bill was postponed.
POOR REMOVAL BILL.
Sir J. GRAHAM could not say, in the present state
.of
public business, when they could go ints'Cointnittee on this
Bill, but he would fix Monday next.
CORONERS' ( IRELAND) BILL.

The House re.olved itself into Committee on this Bill.
The several clauses of this Bill were agreed to, and the
report ordered to be brought up to-morrow.
The House then resumed.
NEW ZEALAND BILL.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER brought in
this Bill, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read
a second time on Monday next.
The other orders of thedny were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at Six o'clock.

HAND-IN-HAND BUILDING A ssoczATTote.--A public
meeting was hell at the Literary Institution, Leicester-
square, on Wednesday last, to explain the plan on which the
Hand-in-Hand Building Association is founded. The chair
was taken by J. E. D. Bethune, Esq.. one I f the trustees of
the society. The Chairman opened the proceedings by allud-
ing, in general terms, to the many fallacious schemes that
had been put forward, professing similar objects. He in-
formed the meeting, that before he became a trustee, he had
closely examined the plan of the association, and the calcu-
lations on which it is based, and had no hesitation in deAar-
ing the society could fulfil the promises it made to those who
joined it. Mr. Kruse, of Old Swan Wharf, Chelsea, in a
forcible speech, impressed on the'meeting their duty to pro-
vide a comfortable home for their families, and stated that
the greater part of a tradesman's life was spent in working
for rent and taxes, which lahour, through the aid of this
society, might be turned to his own benefit. Several other
speakers moved various resolutions, and in the course of their
observations, explained the details of the Hand-in-Hand
Association, which explanations appeared to give great satis-
faction. Mr. J. R. Macarthur, of the British Investment
Society, was present, and asked several questions, with the
answers to which, he professed himself sati,fial, and an-
nounced his intention of becomig a shareholder in the new
association.
Our correspondent at Winchester states that a violent
thunder storm passed over that city on Saturday afternoon, forte-
W 4.17 Tritatg at CaUlage.