The Sun.
London, England, 1848-02-18 00:00:00

OF ROME.

petitionn
The Duke of RICHMOND presented
from Glasgow against the Bill for establishingape d
iplo-
matic relations with the Court of Rome.
Lord lIARDWICK said it was very desirable
that the House should know whether it was the in-
tention of Government to resist the motion of which
he had given notice, and he begged to put that ques-
tion to the Noble Marquis the President of the
Council.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was not in a
position to answer the Noble Lord's question.
On the que=tionbeing put for going into Commit-

ton the S 1:, ve Bill,
Earl FITZWILLIAM said he
of highlytri,,e aptpjrnovoesdt
the of the measure. It was
mportanco. that this country should have an
accredited agent at the Court of Rome, and he for one
thought no man could look at, .. what was at present
going on in many parts of Europe without being
between
convinced of this. A struggle was going on
absolute Governments and free institutions, and when
he remembered that the Pope was favourable to
the party who -.supported the latter mode of
governrnent,l he could not help thinking that it was
their bounden duty to give him the support of
such a measure as this. But what could be
more important to this country than being placed
in a position to communicate officially with the
Pope of Rome on the subject of his relations with
her Majesty's Roman Cat.holic. subjects, particularly
with those who remded in this country, and being,
therefore, a supporter of the principle of this
Bill, and ready to vote fur going into
Committee to consider its provisions, he was anxious
to throw out a suggestion that the objections of some
of its opponents , might be obviated by changing the
phrugokgy which it will wr.cdel

Lord CAMPBELL, in answer to a call from the
Noble Earl who had just sat down, could assure the
House that there was no ing now on the statute
book, or in the comm law of the land, to
prevent her Majesty from establishing di , omatie
relations with the Court of Rome, and he trusted,
therefore, that there would be no objection to the
form of this Bill.

Their Lordships then went into Committee.
Lord STANLEY suggested that the existing pre-
amble should be struck out, and the words following
substituted :—" Whereas doubts having arisen as to
the power of her Majesty to establish diplomatic rela-
tions with the Court of Rome, without the sanction of an
Act of Parliament, be it therefore enacted," &c. This
would probably remove the objection alluded to by
the Noble Earl who had addressed their Lordships
before going into Committee.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE did not think
it advisable to make such an alteration.
The Bishop of WINCHESTER objected to the
words " Sovereign Pontiff," and wished that some
other title should be applied to the Pope.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said it might
perhaps remove the objection of the Right Rev.
Prelate if they inserted the words, the " Sovereign
Pontiff of Rome."

The Bishop of WINCHESTER said it would
not, because the term " Sovereign Pontiff "
implied that the Sovereign holding that had
a supremacy over the Sovereigns of other
countries than Rome. If the Noble Lord would
simply introduce the words " Sovereign of the Roman
States" it would meet his objection.—(Hear.)
After a few words from the Earl of SHREWS-
BURY,

The Bishop of ST. DAVIDS saw no objection to
the words as they stood in the Bill, for the term
Sovereign Pontiff did not imply any superiority over
the sovereigns of other nations. The term
"Sovereign Pontiff," was to be found in Hume's
" History of England," any many other works of
eminent Protestants, and he could see no just reason
why it should not be introduced into this Bill.
The Bishop of EXETER said notwithstanding
what had fallen from the Right Rev. Prelate, he
must still object to the words used in the Bill. Ac-
cording to the doctrine of the Protestant Church,
there was no Sovereign Pontiff in Christendom, and
it was no reason because some Protestant historian
had loosely used the term Sovereign Pontiff while
speaking of the reign of Henry the Second,
that it ought to be introduced into the Bill. Indeed
the great question In dispute between the Bishop of
Rome and the Reformed Church was, whether he
had a right to adopt the title of Sovereign Pontiff,
and although the term might have been used in his-
tory, he most decidedly objected to its being now
for the first time applied to legislative forms.
Lord COLCHESTER warned their Lordships that
it might lead to future difficulty, for it might so
happen that the Pope of Rome might not be the
sovereign of the Roman States.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said the term So-
vereign Pontiff had been applied to the Pope of Rome
as a title of courtesy for many centuries, and as it
was used in this Bill in the same sense he could not
see upon what ground their Lordships could object
to it. Still he had no objection to adopt the words
" Sovereign of the Roman States."
Earl of EGLiNTON considered that it was ad-
visable that diplomatic relations should be established
with the Court of Rome, but these diplomatic rela-
tions ought to be strictly of a political character.
He should, therefore, move as an amendment to that
part of the Bill empowering her Majesty to receive
an Ambassador from Rome, that the following words
be inserted in page 2, line 26, after the word what-
soever, " not being in holy orders in the Church of
Rome, nor a Jesuit, or member of any other reli-
gious order, community, or society of the Church of
Rome, bound by monastic or religious vows." .
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE did not think it
was expedient for their Lordships to dictate to the
Court of Rome as to whom they should send to this
country as ambassadors; and he must, therefore,
resist the introduction of the amendment.—(Hear,
hear.) This Bill would only place her Majesty.
on a footing at the Court of Rome with other Pro-
testant Sovereigns of Europe, but the Noble Earl
opposite wished that the Pope shuld be compelled to
concede more to her Majesty, and he, for one, could
not agree that this country had a right to make such
a demand.

The Duke of WELLINGTON said the Bill had
for its object the establishment of diplomatic relations
between the Roman States and this country upon
political matters, it appeared to him that the term or
title " Sovenign of the Roman States" was prefer-
able to Sovereign Pontiff.
The amendment was then agreed to.
(LEFT SITTING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the chair at Four o'clock.
Two new Members took the oaths and their seats.
GLASGOW WATERWORKS.

Mr. M•GREGOR presented a petition against this
Bill.

HEALTH OF TOWNS BILL.

Mr. THORNELY presented a petition in favour
of this Bill; as also did Mr. GRAINGER.
JEWISH DISABILITIES BILL.

-
Petitions in favour of this Bill were presented by
Mr. Thorneley, Mr. G. Thompson, Sergeant Tal-
fourd, and llon. Member from Essex, and Mr. Adair,
from Ipswich.
NAVIGATION LAWS.

Sir T. BIRCH presented a petition, signed by
7,500 of the merchants of Liverpool, in favour of
these laws.

THE PUNISHMENT OF DEATH.

Mr. GEORGE THOMPSON presented a petition
from the Tower Hamlets in favour of the repeal of
the punishment of death; as also from the Society of
Friends in Reading.
THE DEFENCES OF THE COUNTRY.

Petitions againstttt;y addition to the defences of
the country were presented by Mr. Cobden, Mr. G.
Thompson, and Mr. Williams.
REPEAL OF THE WINDOW-TAX.

WILLIAms and Mr. WAKLEY presented peti-
tions in favour of the repeal of this tax.
THE CHARTER.

Mr. ADAIR presented a petition from the working
classes of Ipswich in favour of the Charter.
THE TEA DUTIES.

Mr._ PILKINGION presented, a petition from the
Chamber of Commerce of Blackburn in favour of the
repeal of ,these duties.
EDUCATION. _ .

Mr. HAMILTON presented a petition against the
Government scheme of education
THE O:-)D FELLOWS.

Mr. C. LUSHINGTON" presented three petitions
from three societies of Odd Fellows, one of which called
themselves " Jt lly Buffers," an announcement which
excited much laughter, complaining that the 29th of
George 111. prevented them from investing their
funds, amounting to 600,0001. a year, which relieved
upwards of 1,000,000 males
_and females, under the
Friendly Societies Act, and praying for a remedy.
LONDON WORKHOUSES. _ _

Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition, complaining
of the way in which the casual poor wore treated in
the London workhouses.
JI_4.WIS II DISABILITIES.
Mr. S. BERKLEY presented a petition from
West Gloucester in favour of the removal of the
Jewish disabilities.

THE SUN, LONDON,