The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-25 00:00:00

Strut and thin lion. E. F. L. Gos4er, whose election ha
beta detweined to be void.

MAURITIUS.
Mr. IIAWD3, in answer n, Lord G. Bentinck, said
that the expe,:dlture of the Isle of Mauritius in the year
1846 was 27,870/, and in the year 1847, 289,1931.; that
the disbursement made for emigration in 1846 was
46.4984, and in 1847, 50,2074; that the reduction of
taxation effected in 1847, to the extent of 60,000/, was
an absolute reduction and not a mere commutation of
taxes; that the balance in the island treasury on the Ist
January, 1847, was 139,4911.; that the funds now in the
hands of Mr. the colonial agent in London,
amounted to 1,6711. cash, and 42,000/. ,Exchequer-bills;
that repeated instructions had been sent out to the
Governor of Mauritius for the further reduction of
expenditure; that Mr. Macaulay was the only geritie•
man receiving a salary connected with the Government
Bank of Mauritius, his salary being 1,000/. a year, and
that the bank was not yet in operation; and, finally, that
the late Auditor-3eneral of Accounts at Mauritius had
been allowed to retire on his full salary, after arduous
service, ever since 1815, his successor being Mr. Tier,
who, he believed, was, as the Noble Lard suggested,
brother-in.law to Sir William Gomm. Mr. Ker s salary
was 8001.

FINANCIAL STATEMENT.
Lord J. RUSSELL gave notice that to• morrow (this
day) his Right lion. Friend the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer would at five o'clock make his annual statement
of the income and expenditure of the country. He added
that it would be convenient if, at a subsequent period of
the evening, the House would allow the Government to
take a resolution respecting a loan of 500,000/. to the
West Indies, reserving the statement on the subject until
the second reading of the Bill for the purpose.
DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH ROME BILL.
The order ot the day for the House to go into Com-
mittee on this Bill being read,
Mr. MOORE said that the Hon. Baronet the Member
for Essex had grossly libelled the Irish Roman Catholic
priesthood, but the Hon. Member for Limerick had
still more grossly maligned them. That body had ever
been the strenuous advocates of order in Ireland, and it
was very unjust to speak ot them in other terms than
those of respect. He hoped the House would not con-
sent to protract the discussion on the present Bill, but
would affirm the decision already come to with respect
to it.
Sir J. TYRELL explained that he had only stated
facts respecting the Roman Catholic priests which had
come to his knowledge, and which he was ready to prove
at the bar.
Mr. MOORE rejoined that the language used by the
Hon. Baronet was that the " vagabond priests ought to
be exterminated," and if that was not libellous language
he did not know what words would be so considered.
Mr. URQUHART opposed the Bill, and maintained
that the Noble Lord (J. Russell) had given the House to
understand that the Bill would not be proceeded with
during the present session,' and upon that understanding
numbers of Members had left London.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Hon. Member for
Warwickshire had already denied having imputed to him
the conduct now brought forward as a► charge by the
Hon. Member.
Mr. SPOONER said the words he used were, that
the course taken by the Government led the House to
infer they did not mean to proceed with the Bill this
session.

Mr. URQUHART said that the objections which be
took to the Bill were so strong, as to determine him to
oppose and to retard its progress by every means in his
power. The Noble Lord opposite bad not condescended
to notice the arguments of the Hon. Member for
Youghal against the Bill, but had contented himself
with saying that he had heard the opinions of Lord
Campbell and the Lord Chancellor, and they had satis-
fied him with respect to the measure. That was not •
constitutional way of meeting the opposition offered in
that House to a Bill so important in principle as the pre-
sent. For the reasons he had stated he should oppose
the farther progress of the Bill.
Mr. P. HOWARD said that the Bill had been brought
forvVard long before the events in France :had shaken
Europe to the centre, and therefore any objection based
upon such arguments fell to the ground. The cardinal
Secretary of State at Rome, on receiving a copy of the
Bill from Dr. Wiseman, had written to that Right Rev.
Prelate stating the agreeable impression which its pe-
rusal had left on the Pope's mind. It was not right,
therefore, to state that the Bill was not acceptable to the
see of Rome. He regretted the introduction of the se-
cond clause in the Bill, which imposed on a not very
powerful state a condition not exacted from the most
powerful states of Europe. What would be thought of
a law forbidding the Emperor of Russia to send a ge-
neral officer as ambassador to this country, lest he
should attempt to tamper with the army ?—(Hear, hear.)
He (Mr. Howard) hoped that hostility to the old faith
had so much died away as to prevent any great hos-
tility being exhibited towards this Bill throughout the
country.
Dr. POWER supported the Bill. He had the honour
to represent a constituency of 800,000 persons, 700,000
of whom were Roman Catholics, and although the Bill
had been five months before the public, he had not re-
ceived a single communication expressive of hostility
to it.

Mr. H. DRUMMOND complained of the conduct of
the Hon. and Learned Member for Limerick in re•open-
ing a debate on a question, that of the principle of the
Bill, which had been already settled. As to the charge
of adding to ecclesiastical power, from some of its oppo-
nents, it should be remembered that from the days of
Constantine down to the present day, the constant habit
of the clergy of all denominations had been to cajole and
coerce the laity by every means in their power. The
Bill had also been otjected to as a means of governing
Ireland through a foreign power. No difficulty would
arise in that direction; the real difficulty in: governing
Ireland arose from the agitation which so long had pre-
vailed in that country. The Hon. Member here read
several extracts from speeches and letters of Irish eccle-
siastics and laymen, illustrative of his assertion, and con-
eluded by saying that the true way of curing these evils
was by taking every fair and constitutional mode of at-
taching the Roman Catholic portion of our fellow-sub-
jects, and more especially their clergy, to the State.
With these views he should support the Bill.
Sir R. INGLIS said, the Noble Lord at the head of
the Government bad had a pretty fair intimation of
what was the Protestant feeling of the country on the
subject. Not one petition had been presented in favour
of the Bill, while hostile petitions had been presented by
500 of the parochial clergy. The Noble Lord could
hardly hope to pass the Bill during the present session;
and even if be did, was he sure it would be acceptable
to the Sovereign Pontiff, for whose service it was in-
tended?—(Hear, hear.) Or had the Noble Lord any
hope that when the Bill became law Rome would have
a ruler in a condition to avail himself of its provisions?
Looking to the merits of the Bill itself, looking at the
state of Europe, and the period of the session at which
it was sought to force the Bill through Parliament, be
felt bound to give it every opposition in his power.
Lord H. VANE considered that it was highly expe-
dient that this country, looking at the number of the
Roman Catholics amongst its population, should have
an accredited agent at Rome. For this reason he should
give the Bill his cordial support.
Mr. NEWDEGATE believed that the object of the
measure was to obtain the influence of the Pope with
the Roman Catholic clergy of Ireland in favour of the
Government, an object which they had the best autho-
rity for saying it would not effect. The authority of
the Crown should be maintained in accordance with the
principles of the constitution, and not by the intervention
of any foreign power whether temporal or spiritual. He
should oppose the measure.
Sir 11. W. BARRON supported the Bill, and denied
that it would give any power to the Pope in temporal
matters in Ireland.

Mr. ROBINSON, as a merchant, denied that this
measure was necessary for commercial purposes, as had
been stated by the Noble Lord. As the law stood the
commerce of the Roman States was as muck open to
British merchants as it would be under this Bill.
Though it might be deemed factious to oppose the
principle of the measure after the second reading, the
fault lay with the Government, who had delayed a Bill
brought into Parliament in February till this late pe-
riod of the session. If Government could show any
practical inconvenience that would result from post-
poning the Bill till next session be would forego his
opposition; but in the absence of any such explanation,
and looking at the present state of the affairs in Rome,
he felt justified in appealing to the House to carry the
amendment.

Mr. NAPIER urged the propriety of postponing the
measure until another session. It was most unfair, when
other and more important measures, as far as Ireland
was concerned, had been deferred merely because they
might occasion some discussion, to insist upon a mea-
sure which he contended was useless for any good pur-
pose, and in favour of which the only argument ad-
vanced was, that it was necessary to give railroads to
Italy.—(Hear, hear.) Preferring/ as he did the inter-
ests of Ireland to those of Italy, he must protest against
Irish Members being kept in town to discuss such a
Bill as this, while and when measures in favour of
g
Gn
awa
abandoned
ncic noot
dhl
Lord
eoadmtnt hpeeadedAnr eti
4f
woo
marconfer
wasowid,,oar
ieranets:trmaTobtoori
esntotNai
eingeneral
theirco n couororae nt
rcye:
ha
as d bbeei ne
in view by standing cha.ied
objectthat t Hon.hheo
declaredand Learned
r nh
se
dd
in the way of going into Com-
mittee on this Bill, because if he succeeded in putting
it off till next session, there would be the less chance
thoseboefiaged.
paossther measures in which he was interested
—(Cheers.) Of all the extraordinary
dtheobaptreessehaet(wLaos the
(Lord Palmerston)
o ; fo
stsoe) ever
almosterheard ein vetryhat House,
member
who opposed the Bill did so upon grounds not only
different from, but absolutely conflicting with, the argil'
ments of the Hon. Gentleman who preceded him in op-
position to it.—(Hear, hear.) If there could be one
proof more strong than another that nothing could be
said against the Bill, it was to be found in the circum-
stance that Hon. Gentlemen had discussed almost every
imaginable question but the one involved in it—viz;
musty theology, feudal history, Irish distress, landlord
and tenant, grievances of the Irish clergy—everything,
in fact, but the poor Bill itself, which was really 3o
plain and simple that no one had ventured to say a word
against it.—(Cheers and laughter.) The Hon. Member
for Youghal said it would destroy the independemv 01`
the Pope. Another Honourable Member, that it would
destroy
Member
contended prerogative t
hat oi ft twheouCliriowben.
destructive One
o th
honourable
e
Protestant religion, that it would uproot the foundawnioth
those opinions lie adjured the House in the
n
of the Protestant institutions of the country, and
name of Protestant England not to pass such a meathat it would prove a fatal blow to ho-
!
sure, while another Honourable Gentletmhean alleged
e
Church, observing that if that were the object of the
Government they ought to re-enact the penal laws again
and effect the downtal of that church by open miens
acid an insidious measure as this. Lie would,s
and not by such
leave
stehnosseed t
thHatonu.
oGuesenttloemfiegnhtand theitrhebaptuaraties scta;htne. ye