The Sun.
London, England, 1851-05-31 00:00:00

S U N, LONDON, SA TO It f)A Y

sin-)much - ----- - - _.
stangercd at this propoititiont but the more i !
rare
Examined into the question, the more convinced
posr„e,they of the expediency of the course which he pro
sed. If their Lahr hip's thaw:die when this Bill got
to'n9olntnittee, the measure might be in some decree
tha"tinod. provided it could he satisfsetoriiy made out
niv Roman Cathelics reoteld he enabled to do what the
6h
u'lltherzei-1 them TO do. and to do it effectually, he
° Id hae. is no d'ffi^ulPv in seceding
cation:, , - v.
T
h
e
rteede was one oletervetiee in what he had just
lice Whirb. did Dot appear to him to be in exact
4 srdance with this greet acuteness of his Noble and
ebatned Fiend. lie, opt-eared to have been some-
ni' Burp. iced that such a statute as that of the
h,"
Nof Eh: sa.beth had ever been passed in Ireland. He
or J• Grt ham) was not at all surprised at it. The
sirde and I ,eareed Lord had stated the reason, viz , that
e ,e.fourt se of the inhabitants of Ireland were Roman
It+ctlelice In England it was quite possible to treat the
c,°t,,an Cat holies as a sect; but in Ireland
belthe Roman
ni;"°hes 1 sere a nation, and they must eated as a
en,°"•---(C ;beers.) But to return to the cleelarstory
ii,"„se, he "-enred it went infinitely further than the Go-
eiir'n's inn-ated when they introduced the Bill. He
ehie7s!d he. was alarmed at the doubt seed ambiguity in
to „Ce. "It el es shrouded. He knew not whether the At-
aif,"eYten oral for lrelaucl was in his place.—(lronical
QC' °I " L :ear, hear.") Ha should be sorry it it were
t:seht he intended any sneer at the Rieht ILin. and
niapetl Gt mtlemain who had raised himself to eminence
di, Is profs sssion amid snarly rivels. He had had the
di'lldvantag;e of coming into that House late in life, a
i:scivantag as Which he 'felt acutely for his sake; but still
~,,°eaupied An eminent situation, and he (Sir J. Graham)
ii'ski like t o hear hie opinion on the effect of this clause..
t' Haecl tell here entered the House.] He wets glad
Rtoe- thee. Right Hon. Gentleman in his place. He
l b urs: the Route would testify that he had said
toit:ig ralleind of 'the Bight Hon. Gentleman.—(Hear,
ki:.) Hr, (Sir James Graham) repeated that he was
siiiw'd titetlie ambiguity of the present clahse. He was
a zone() alarmed when he heard_ the Government de-
ere - • • . .
if the it intention to revive old and dormant statutes
thetii pr esent enactment should prove insufficient. It
id wen happily said by Curran that old statutes bung
e sw
,ty armour, -and were only endured becaute they
neilT ;let executed; and it was their inactivity alone which
g " r ed them tolerable in a free country.—(Hear, hear.)
it( t ;Sr J. Graham) deeply regretted, therefore, to have
iii.rd ; allusions made by her Majesty's Government to
4_P sssible revival of old statutes on this subject.—
;Int r, hear.) Nothing ever gratified him more than the
iiltt,ll, ictof the Government in withdrawing the second
kr air& clauses of their original Bill, looking, as he
li pan -that step as an indication of that spirit which
I;ss Is el th eir couccile on religious questions generally,
tr ed which he approved. He thought the afterthought
ii,ttdr4pting this clause most unfortunate, and he must
It)ttsi ; against it, as he could not satisfy himself us to
d!Pr( vise extent to which the House would be carried
1,3,0 of the dense blindfolded.—(Hear.)
16,,'4ata' ATTORNEY-GENERAL took the liberty of
rile with reference to the statement of the Right
.°l3- 'Gentleman, that the Master of the Rolls, on a pre-
nis•. , .
i ,Lis gittseuesiou, him said that the Pope had the power
‘,la' V :,(7. appoint ecclesiastical persons in this country
wta dioceses and sees, that the Right Hon. Gentleman
Val souring under a complete mistake.
h, '; I. GRAHAM here read the note he had taken at
'tht a of the words of the Master of the Rolls, to the
at t hat " he believed he was correct in saying, and he
e,"`4 si t Ice given an opinion, parcelling tere was nothing in the
r tof prevent the Pope from p out the.country
'to a. tehbishoprics and bishoprics."
ihtitaATTORNEY-GENERAL said, the Master of
Re ills had given no opinion on the subject to which
;., was not a party, bed be was therefore confident that
al , -
it e -,&ear orthe Rolls used the words quoted he must,
z° steed. them with some restriction and qualification.
1e bes t proof of that was the original Bill drawn up
? the Master of the Rolls, the preamble of which stated
eat the attempt to. establish under colour of au-
pority :from the, F,ee of Rome, or otherwise, such pre-
' ((iiide't zees ,and , doceses. &e., is illegal and void."—
ear hear.) Put passim., now to the general argu-
,,
nset of the Rig'at Hon. Gentleman, he must say that
tcansteellttlaes points raised by him had been previously
discus led and: arisasercd to the satisfaction, he believed,
of
the House generally—(Oh I)—though not, perhaps,
e
17 the satisfetction of every gentleman on the opposite
inehesi. Tete Right Hon. Gentleman contended that
he present esle use enacted and created a new law. That
:Stile Att or soy-General) denied, maintaining that it
the nothing raore then declare the law as expressed in
.110 recite' sof the preamble; and the reason, as he had
explained he ,fore, why the Government had thought
:right to yiel re to the suggestion of the Hon. and Learned
laernbar for I'siidburst, and consent to the insertion of the
Present clans te, was because they believed, while it carried
""smatter n o farther than the preamble, it amounted to a
~l hotree3 na bles a end emphatic declaration that this attempt
,part .of the Pope was contrary to the law and
' 'unit t*- * f this kingdom.H took the liberty of
1 4 asking` C. 1011 y:3l 8
~_ did f any Hon. Gentleman deny th© law as ex-
"ssed in tl lie recital of the Bill—that it was not cons-
Vent for nee' See of Rome to establish archbishops and
' d'hope with territorial titles within this kingdom; and
: that could not be denied to be the law, it followed as a
'"essery tenisequenee that the brief, rescript, or letters
3PstolicaV conferring such jurisdiction or title was void
0- TB a ' clause was simply declaratory, and, if issue
CC
join., ?d, With Mai au that point, he was prepared to
bad the right ton con feign territorial titles in thi e s kingdom
1 without the constant of the Crown.—(Hear, hear.). Con-
rqueatly the' ell'euse went no further than to declare the
tor as it exi seed. 'The Right Hon. Gentleman went on
to
say that s tee clause would be attended with mischiev-
"as consequ races, because it struck at the exercise of the
ecclesiastic si fanctions of the Roman Catholic Church
1 la Ireland, and would thereby invalidate the'ordination
°1 Romar, . Catholic priests, and marriages celebrated by
them. - ..1 kit, again he asked, were rescripts or bulls from
the Pope appointing to territorial sees in this kingdom
,OW, le gs I. Dud valid?—(Hear, hear.) Whatever might
have 'be en the ietention of Sir Robert Peel's Govera-
'lent, fete Act of Elizabeth certainly was only repealed
alO far es the penalty of treason attached to the intro-
amaetioa of bulls into this country, but their intro-
"%ion into E ngiand, at any rate, was continued as an
",f-fence hi the, most express terms. The Right Hon.
`-tentleman steered that it was now proposed, by the pre-
sent clause, to.-'affect in a great degree the Roman Ca-
irtic eeclesitnstical and spiritial authority in Ireland.
-,°W. the. Ac A of 10th George IV. rendered the tsstimp-
--
I°ll by .B4On- an Catholics of episcopal titles derived from
' tXisting see i illegal and void, and yet there was not a
' 'ingle priest. in Ireland with respect to whose ordination
a question bead been brought before a court of law. It
'raft therefoiee clear that those inconveniences which the
light Hone urable Gentleman apprehended had not fol-
ded from :the present law.--(Bear, hear.) What mar-
tiage, he, risked, had been annulled, what offspring,
Otherwise. 1 egitimatee had been bastardised in conse-
quence of at ay one asserting that the ordination of priests
1,4 Roman. ,Catholic bishops in Ireland was an illegal
l_rausaction 1! -The thing had never been heard of ;
'seause, with respect .to marriage and the consequence
44 Marriage , it was enough that there was a de facto
litiest exert being his functions in a chapel ; and the or-
gleationnif , the priest on . the validity of the marriage
°ever came into question. The present Bill placed the
assumption of new titles on the same footing as the as-
Neiption. ce! existing titles. Its object and scope was
bet to intereere with the full and perfect exercise of the
'Piritual functions of the Roman Catholic Church, but
solely to prevent a foreign power granting territorial
titles within this kingdom. The Right Honourable Gen-
tleman referred to the examination of Dr. Wiseman at
the
bar, of the „House of Lords. Dr. Wiseman was
tailed as an
,expert, to show what were the usages of the
Catholic Church., and questions put to him to test his
,°Ompeteficy did not involve a recognition of his jurisdic-
tion. But what if they had? Dr. Wiseman was at that
titne vicar-symbolic, and he declared that as such he ex-
trebled all the „turisdiction, ecclesiastical and spiritual, to
which the Rig,ht Hon. Gentleman had referred. If so,
could there b!,.a more satisfactory proof that this recent
tescript of tb o Pope, and the invasion of the sovereignty
Of the kingd.om by dividing it into dioceses, were utterly
uncalled for ?—(Hear, hear.) With regard to what the
Right Hot}. Gentleman said as to the probability of pro-
*students- under the present clause, he was perfectly
Convinced 0-that ;it created no fresh opportunity for
Such a tourse of proceeding. The clause was
declaratorY, and if any prosecution for misdemeanour,
for assuming these unlawful titles, could be instituted,
they coal d equally be instituted without the present
clause. •
Sir .1. ~GRAHAM, in' reference to what had fallen
from the Master of the Rolls, read from Hansard the
following , extract from a speech delivered by that
learned inilividual:on.the 21st of March last:-
4. On . tlic debate on the Bill for estaabliseabrmifneogn'rddmiPeint
e Hreosnis.te lid
e nrab
matic relations with Rome,
then
n
which was proposed by the t
Lam-
beth, and, said that as the law stood the Pope could
parcel out thicountry into bishoprics and archbishoprics;
that if the House introduced the amendment which pro-
hibited 'dealing with spiritual matters, the Pope would
still be ajsle so to divide the country, and there would be
, nothing ,to prevent him; and that the only mode of
preventing him was by establishing diplomatic_ relations
with hint That was to say, he deprecated such a mea-
sure, and 'Was desirous that the. House should pass a
Bill which would enable the Government to take such
steps as would prevent it. That was entirelyo_e
s.as.
accor-
dance with , what he•now said, and he believe h
h
correct in.saying-it, and had
since given an opinion, that
there was. nothing in the law to prevent the Pope from
parcelling neat the country into archbishoprics and
i
bishoprics- that there was a law to prevent the ntro•
duction oebulls; but no law to prevent him from parcel-
ling out the countrY."
The AttOrnep•General had - argued, that when Dr.
Wiseman was examined at the bar of the House' he was
bishop stpestolie; and yet possessed all the poWer of 'other
bishops with' respect to the ordination of priests;, but let
the House' recollect that the only 'difference between a
bishop-aptiatrilie With' a district and a Catholic bishop
with a dimes was, that the former held directly from
' and was thehmere creature of the Pope, who then pre-
tended to be Bishop of England, and that the latter was
One degree furthersewved from that potentate.
Mr. OtEgRALL; who was imperfectly heard, was
understood ,totil, . that with respect to the prohibitory
clause of, 1t29, it was distinctly stated at the time to a
deputation, of which be was one, that it was inserted to
meet thoyieWs:of the then King and other persons, but
that it was not the intention of the proposers of the
Bill to put thafprovision into effect. It was often made
a reproach in that House that the Catholic Members
were uniief the-entire iniitionce of their priests. He ut-
terly denied IA& inipbtation; tent, if true, would it not
expose them l the4uspicion, if the present Bill 'passed,
ib
that they .would always be ready to support the Govern,
went of the day, on the under6tEmding that the.l3:ll
should not be' enforced? lie never had anticipated;
after 20 years' association with the Members of the_ G.
Ternmentqu''llsiit Lli?use, that the moment could him

T I/ IF,

arrired when he would rause them his confidence. The
Government might have been in a position which ren-
dered it imperative on them to propose legiAation on the
subject; but he complained of the mode in which tint
le:giiltatton had been introduced, and it was painful to
hear the Noble Lord state that in 1845 he held opinions
with respect to the Timm Catholics which he no 1 anger
entertained. Such being the case, he felt bound to
withdraw, though it pained him to do so, the confidence,
both personA and political, he had rep.,ied in the Noble
Lord.

Mr. H A.TCHELL having referred to the hind manner '
in which the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham) had
addressed hies with reference to the operation of the Bill,
said he would now state) what he conceived to be the ex-
istieg law of Ireland on the subject, to see whether the
present law did more than re-enact its provisions. In
the 13th of Elizibeth an Act passed. which did not ex-
tend to Ireland; but in the 2d of Eliz ibeth a similar
law was pissed, which did extead ee Ireland. It had
Len admitted that the Act of Richard had now been
repealed. It must be admitted that in. the present day
the Act could not ho pat into operation. The 13th of
Elizeheela was 'still in .force.. No doubt bishops having
spiritual authority were addressed by their own people
by their respective titles. Ia 1809 it was judicially
decided by Lord Manners, with reference to the Bishop of
Cashel and the Bishop, of Watertord, who were made
trustees to a will, that they could not be described by their
territorial titles, which they held a3bishosie of the Church
of Rome. With refereuee to the Act of '29, it came with
some degree of alarm upon the Peorearatit portion of the
country; but up to that time .the law was established
against the Catholic bishops baying territorial title , and
the only addition' made in the. Bill was as to the creation
of new dioceses. Such, a bishop could not ordain a
priest; stud all wriarrieges, iZ performed by him, vrore
void. Ue vveuld come to the elett of '44, which, it was
said gave them a right to assume their titles. Now he
thoirght, if they_ looked at the statute, it provided the
very contrary. An indictment under this clause weald
not lie. If any indictment was preferred it should be on
the old law, for this law prohibited nothing. With re-
speCt to the penalty he would not then advert, but he
thought it his duty to present those few: observations
with regard to the law of the case.--(Lear.)
Mr. MOORE said, the Right Hon. and Learned Gen-
tlerean declared that the present Bill was a re-enacting
of the law, and that though it did exist at present, yet that
it was not put in force because the law was obsolete. But
this re-enactment would give efficiency to the law which
did not exist before, atuf TheFelore the Roman Catholics
would find themselves, if this Bill passed, in a worse
position than they were in at present.
Mr. WALPOLE said he wished to say a few words
on the clause which he had first 'proposed, and which
had been now introduced into the Bill. He was cer-
tainly taken by surprise by the observations. If the
Hon. Gentleman had applied his attention to it he would
have found that there was no ambiguity in the clause,
or any discrepancy betwcee the clauses. This clause
did not alter the law, bat left it as it was before. It did
not apply to Ireland beyond the antecedent law. What
the meaning of the brief _was under the statute of
ttichard 11. was brought to the test in the arise of Lalor.
Van Espin, who was considered a great authority; stated
that the Pope bad no authority to issue a bull for the
appointment of bishops vtithout.the plecet of the Crown.
Sehramn, who was only second to him in authority,
laid down the same principle, which was in unison with
the general law of nations and the law of England.
When such is the case, he would ask why should
England, because it was a Protestant country, be ,
prevented from doing the same thing when the
privileges of the Crown were endangered ? It
was also the unwritten law. The words which he had
emhodied in the clause were taken from the statute of
Richard the Second, which . course ho . adopted in
order to avoid introducing any new disability against the
Roman Catholics. The, lion. and Learned Member for
Athlone said, that when the statute of Richard the Se-
cond was passed, the Roman Catholic was the religion
of the country, which made a great distinction. That
did not apply to the case of. Lalor. This country was
then as much Protestant as it is now, The indictment
preferred in that case was., that actions under the bull
touched " the King's crown and royal dignity," and
.then went on to describe) his acts under the bull in ap-
pointing
bishops and priests to .parishes. Such, then, '
was.the state of the law they were now called upon to
deciere. The first clause in this - Bill did that and no
more. He would ask did this bull refer only to.spiri-
tuels? They appeared to have forgotten it. He would
therefore recall their attention to it. The Honourable
and Learned Gentleman then quoted the bull, and ar-
gued that by constituting districts as 'dioceses, and the
Pope reserving all power to himself, and ignoring the
existence of any other dioceses in the country, and disre- '
garding the authority -and pleasure of the Queen in this
assumption of authority, brought it within the sphere of
temporalities. He said he had reason to find fault with
his Right Honourable Friend in not referring to the
preamble, which recited the bull of September,
1829, appointing dioceses " in. England," which was
afttrwarda altered to " the United Kingdom," which
had the same effect. The Right Hon. Gentleman said
it had a larger scope, and that it Would apply beyond
England.. That Was not to deal fairly with the clause.
nod to mislead the Houss. It did not go farther than to
prohibit such briefs as were prohibited by the statute of
Richard the Second. If the other. amendments were
carried this would lay the foundation for a clause to
prevent the introduction of other bulls and briefs. He
put it to the Right Hon. Gentleman to say that the
clause would extend to all other briefs—to those issued
to vicars apostolic. Certainly, no lawyer would give an
opinion to that c Get. At all events, it was not his in-
tention that it should have that effect. It was said that
this 'law was revived in a persecuting spirit.. How was
that', made out ? When , they. faund statutes were in
force, instead of allowing them to continue dormant,
they ought to renew them as soon as they found persons
seeking to evade them. If the law had not been left in
that htate, and if the statute of Elizabeth had not been
repealed; this bull woujd not have' been brought into this
country, but by leavigh Mrs that state, it led people to
belies.° the introduction of these bulls was not con-
trary to law. When the Noble Lord stated that other
laws might be neetessery, that statement gave
great satisfaction when it was considered in what spirit
that declaration was made.—(Hear, hear.) Ile and all
others declared they had no intention to interfere with
the spiritual functions of the Roman Catholics, but Hon.
Gentlemen, in their speeches,' begged the question, and
assumed that such was the object of the Bill, but he had
heard nothing which showed that such would be the
effect of the Bill. He would State the reasons why the
declarations should be made. First, because Parliament
had a right to uphold what was lawful against what
was pulawful. Secondly, _because it was a national pro-
test against a usurpation. Thirdly, it was an assurance
to the Protestant people'that they intended to adhere to
the principles of the RefOrmation; and fourthly, it was
a protection to the Roman Catholics, who were placed
between the head of their Church and their Sovereign,
as had been declared by Lord Beaumont, Lord Camoys,
and the Duke of Ntrfolk. These were the reasons:why
the declaration should be made. -They ought, to stand
by them. If the brief was not condeinned, it would be
a test of want of foresight, or wantiof Oourage;and Want
of wisdom_ in not foreseeing the consequences, and not
providing against themi and by tolerating them to allow
them to gain the sanction of time. .
Sir J. GRAHAM said, his Hon. and Learned Friend
had given four reasons for this demo. As to the last,
he (Sir J. Graham) was not exactly aware of the ex-
pressions Lord Beaumont or Lord Camoys might; have
used, but ho remembered a saying of Mr. Burke's appli-
cable to this question—that members of a sect were the
least competent judges of _whet was, necessary for the
free exercise of the religion of another sect. Now, he
regarded this clause as little short of a declaration of
war against 8,000,000' of bent" fallow-countrymen.—
(Hear, hear.) He had endeavoured to make himself
master of this Bill, and had endeavoured to reconcile it
with the variances that occurred to him, but he found it
impossible to do so. The first parnofahe-preambie of his .
Hon. and Learned Friend was almost identical with that
of the Government, except that his Hon. and Learned
Friend used the plain unambiguous term "of the king-
dom of England," and the Gevernment used the , term,
" within the United kingdom." But then came words
which greatly extended, the scope Of. what his_Hon. and.
Learned Friend originally referred to; for the clause
said that all such reseripts should, be null and void, not.
confining the operaiioa of the Bill to this particular re-
script, but extending it to all others; and as the Right
Hon. Gentleman the Attorney-General for Ireland, who
had addresied the Committee so perspicuously and in a
manner so worthyof the office he filled—(Hear)--had said
all rascripts in Ireland would fall under the provisions of
this declaratory clause. His Hon. and Learned Friend .
had referred to the statute of Richard; but he (Sir J.
Graham) had also referred to that statute when he ad-
dressed the Committee,, and had drawn from it an infe-
rence oppoSite to that of his Hon. and LearnedrFriend.
That statute was passed-in Catholic times, when the Ca.!
tholic religion was the established religion of the- coun-
try; and the Pope of Rome, in the: exercise of the powers
which were allowed by the constitutional authorities of
England at that time, began to encroach on the.legality
of the Crown and purported-to assign teinporalitiesnndee
the authority ofhis temporal power.—(Hear, hear.) But
it never said that as to the appointment of bishops'to the
,Fespeotive sees there shthild be `an interference Nvat-
e:vcr, and theyall 'rested with' the Pbtoe of Rothe. He
.t
J. Graham) contended, that throughoet EUKOPe the
matters, and itathai only *Afore tfie‘Rotnan Catholic Tell-
, I°P° Wal.ille head' of the.; Catholic Chitral' in epirituat
svgteiaorteati,:itwahieno.res;_huFielwitirelAingdierithl at.Gthoconsent
hof. Sh"
n las the (own,. nheit y
ft e
with the sPiritttalianisdie°t* awot-'*-thhlatyhorrligityCot'l34llhettePre'
with regard to a religion rile
the vesti6iltieitys•vetoef.de,t he etot,lnoteentditettidttebdotf
it was begging:
Richard IL, and say that h
the regality of 'the CreAvl
Catholic religion'hehig
heendOeseeee;V:c.ontetlila°tl7
whole matter settforth :in go dr
was nceexeess whatever:of the, 'or.tet:
rfo?edcl'Ogiif 0,6 rope'.
Pope's jurisdiction. The le
simplicity, If so Theo Hon: and Learned
thus;_., Whereas'
}stts esearneet-GeateeManl
Gen-
tleman's ought to be frame&
it is expedient, . on- account of pablio 'clanionti---(Hear
hear)—to prevent the, spread of Popery= throughout this
sotlClSahani; wishes]ll
p r e
realm, and to chock the full and free exereitte of •
its
spiritual authority in' the 'tame, be it entieted.",ate,,,x
hear.) :As to the power of indietMent under the Bid
it was clear to him that its range would be very exten-
sive. The first :section eipressly
.deelared that not only
the brief, rescript,_or letters apoatolical, but "rill and
every the jurisdiction, authority, pre-eminence, or title
"
conferred, or pretended to be conferred thereby, are and
shall be, and be deemed, unlawful and void. It fel-
lowed, therefore, .that every attempt to exercise such
jurisdiction or authority, every act intended to promote
it rendered
positively declared a thing unlawful
or assist it, must be also unlawful, for when a statute
every-
thing which 'was done for its support or encouhege-
.. print unlawful also. " ctlia4do aliquidprohibitor, pro-
hibitur et ernuever quad devenitur ad illud," said Lord

Coke in his 3d Inet., 158. Every such act or attempt
must be a contempt of the statute; and it was laid down
by Hawkins, in his " Pleas of the Crown," vol. i, chap.
22, thet " every contempt of a statute is indictable, if no
other punishment i 3 limited." S 3 again, Lord Chief
Baron Come n, in his " Digest" (6t. " Indictment"), sei 4
" So for anything generally prohibited by statute, if it
be done, an indictment lies- for it;" that as "an attempt
to commit a misdemeanour (thud uncloulheily the viola-
tion of a statute which is prohibitory, as it is if it de-
clares a thing unl Levin!, is a misdemcanonr) bad been
decided in many cases to be itself 'a misdemeanour."
That the Bill in this case was prohibitory, and intended
by the Legielature so to be, there could be no doubt, for
the preamble, among other things, expressly said, " It is
expedient to prohibit 'the aSsumotiou of such titles in
respect of any places within the United Kingdom," Sec.;
"be it tberetore ebacted," Zee., and them came the first
chaise. The Attorney- General just now had suggested
'that in the opinion he had put forward in his previous
speech he had been instructed by some one; but such
was not the case as to that speech; but in what he now
cited he certeiely. had been advised by a gentleman most
competent to give advise) on the snbject. He would only
add ehst the more he considered this clauee the mere he
was convinced it was full, of clanger,—(lleateliear.)
Lord. J. RUSSELL-The Right Hun. Gentlemen, in
commencing his first speech that evening, had declared
his opinion that this clause was calculated to create
alarm; and at the close of his second speech he said that
the more he considered the cheese the more he was con-
vinced that it was so calculated to 'create' alarm. He
(L )rd J. Russell) must confess that he, on his part, felt
alarm, and very great three, at the lensniage which
had that erenine been held by the Right Hon. Gentle.
meet —(lear, hear.) In the fleet place, that lengusge
tended to reupw end to confirm-the tears and apprehen-
siona with reference to the exerciaceof the Roman Ca-
tholic religion in las coltitry which had been expresied
by persons of far 1 ss authority:than tb© Right Honour-
ablcaGentlemen, Whose arguments in support of those
appeehensiees hp thought had been Elllceoftilly enconn-
tered.ea(Hear, hear.) The Authority arid the, weight of
the Wight Hon. Gentleinen's opinion would, however, it
was to be feared, go near to revive those vain apprelZeue
sioni. There WaionOther'eattie of alarm which he.dee
rived from the Right Hon. Gentleman's. speech. The
Right
.Hon. Gentleman said, quoting Mr. Burke; that per-
sonal of one sect were very! bad' judges of what was requi-
site !for the cppseientions . exercise ef the religion of
another sect
,ftem ivhom they differed: Applying this
dictum to the question before the Committee, the Right
Hole. Gentleman ;aid, very truly, ehet here. was a
.ques-
don on which there was the greatest difference of
opinion betweisn Orties in the House,- as to whether' or
not it was a queetten affecting the regality of the Queen,
the rights of the Crown,, and. the independence of the
nation; and, on the other hand, whether or not it was
a qtiestion interfering with the'exercise of their reliesion
by the Roman Catholic subjects of her Majesty? - Now,
on this particular 4ubject, there had been, so far, a gene-
ral concurrence tea! the part of those who supported the
Bill,_ that while they desired es maintain the authority
of the Crown and the independence of the nation, they
had no wish to int irfere with the exercise of the Roman
Catholie,- religion.—(Hear, beer.) He believed that
this had been the unanimous pelaration -of the' aup-
porters of the Bille-e-(liear, hear.) Oa the other
side,' it was fair , to admit that those who opposed
the Bill had said, ' " We claim only
,:the full exercise
of the Roman Catholic religion, 'and the organisation
necessary to thheeerciett; ac de not claim any power
or jurisdiction to Overbear that which preperly. belongs
to the Sovereignty Of the realm." Well, then, the diffi-
culty and the difference upon this point %vete. in-the ques-
tion whether the rescript of the Pope in anyway inter-
fered with the exercise of. the sovereignty of this rehire),
or whether it vies deerelkinterided to promote the spiri-
tual welfare .of the,Roinan Catholics in this country?
Such being the poiat,.the' Right Hon. Gehtlemin told
them, that those alto did ,not belong to the, Roman Ca-
tholic religion—for this was the strict interpretation hero
of the dictum he had quoted—were unfit. Jules of the
question, and that;, therelore the question must be left
entirely to the Roman Catholiethemselvert— (Hear.) In
what manner were the Roman i.Catholics to . judge of it?
The country had had, in the 'course of the het six months,
pretty clear evidencb of the mode in which the Roman
Catholics, if left to !themselves, - would- decide the ques-
tion.--(Hear.) They wohltidecide the question by saying,
—" Here hes come la reicriPtlrone Rome; that rescript
from Rome declares this to be a matter of, spiritual in-
terest, of spiritual tneerre, • and,by that rescript we will
abide:"—(No, no!) He .must confess that such was the
distinct impression !of the . matter which he bad derived
from all the debate! upon it in that House --(Hear,
hear.) The Hou. Oentleinan who had jest exemimed
"Nor" probably mbant that it was not entirely. for the
Pope to decide the question, but that the Roman Catho-
lics themselves must have a good share in 'deciding it.
Why; if that were to be so, the rest of the community
would have no power
.whatever left to them in the matter.
—(Hear, hear.) Those who belonged to the Protestant
Church would be wholly ousted of 'the power to de-
fend *hat they considered' to be. the temporal rights of
the Grown, which even their Roman Catholic ancestors
thought inherent in the Crown; nothing would be left
them but to await the Reina,h Catholicl interpretation ,of
the - matter; and he was by no means confident that
this interpretatiOn .. would not `be as the organs of
the Pope were very fond of declaring it should be,
in a conformity not very agreeable to, contemplate
with ' the -unchanging and unchangeable policy
land pretensions of the Court, of Rome.—(Plear, hear.)
Was there, then, no ground of alarm in the propositions
of the, Right Hani. Gentleman?-h-(Hear, hear.) Were
the Protestants ofEngland to give up, at once and for
ever, ill power of judging for 'themselves 'whether the
independence of the neap. was concerned, whether the
rights; of the drown were invaded?—(Hear, hear.)
Werethey to leaps it to the RomanCatholies, or; it
might be, to the
decision upon this matter shauld be; and, that decision
pal: authorities, to declare what the
'decision
once so declared, 'owever humiliating it might be to thin
great realm of En land, thenceforward to submit to it?
—(llear, hear.) 4.1 e, for one, was not prepared to sub-
mit to any such ideciston.--s(Cheers.) He considered
that the House °Koran:ions as a bpdy was fully able'
and best suited to 4ecidO for thenaseaves this :great and
important question.—(Rear,' hear.)..:e Ne doubt it was a
queatibn for argument; no doubt they 'had been, bound
,1
to hear everything that could be urged to shew that this
rescript affected mietteeshnerely spirituel, and that the
Pope Was right is asserting that the Archbishop' of
Canteibury no longer- eatisted, and was' to be 'blotthd
out from the face Of ' the Spiritual a realm. . of,
England. Any [ such. - arguments that eetny one
, could 1 adduce Parliament was boned to hear;
but Parliament must not divest itself . of ,that other
bound :n duty, hiving ,hearde all : i.uqi arguments, to
decide; for. itself, acid upon its own judgment, what was
demanded in vindication Of-therights of theCreven and
the independeecee of the ,nation.-a-(ralettrehears) .This
was tl;s conviction iaehich he, for one, could not give up.
—(Hear.) What was the alternative before them? The
alternative, as sea* by the Right!?on. qrantlematibiitte
selfov a most alarpsainge - On the one hen& he 'Awed.
subser ient stilethis ion to that which had heretofore bees,
and
,w ich would in a4airi be; a tremenaletneeegifte of.
a tretnendeus pow r• to What'imight have' ham clesig--
nated a mere spirit ality" in the 15th oi 16th century, or
to whetever nary, or at: any future tienrehtbetrope might
'choose to call " mere epiritualtty,"e7(Hear, kar,) On
the other hand; said the Right Hon. Gentleman, if you
do:not onsent to tliis, you declare war against 8,000,000
of the laeople of this country.—(Heae, hear.) Surely
this '143 a most alarming declaration on the part of the
Right Hon. Gentlemen.--(Hoar, hear.):, It should be his
(Lord i J. Russell's), endeavour, - however, to steer. as
steadili as he could ;between these two dangers, and to
prohibit that which lij considered interference, usurpa-
tion, ' eggression, Without at all interfering with the
spirituhl exercise of' the Roman Catholic religion. He
believed this could be. done,, and ho belieeed that this
measure would do it.--(Heer, hear.) In, a great portion
of the ; United Kindom the measure, indeed, 'was con-
sidered not sufficiently stringenta--(llehr, hear)—while
in another. portion ofhhe,.United Kingdom, in,lreland, it
was thpughe to go Leh beyond the legitimate.exercise of
the powers of legielettion. His own conviction, however,
was, that it did not ilin on the one aide or on the other.
But, at; all events, he would. say, as he bad said before,
that Parliament was ound to exercise its own judgment
in the Matter; andi a could not Consent to surrender
tl
that judgment, as th Right Hon. Gentlematiauggesied.
l
—(Hear, hear.) They were not to be , satisfied . with
learning from any Roman Catholic doctor, or anyßoman
Catholic barrister, w at was their, duty in the case.a--
fEle
farting
r i couldn
t o tnhoet . c o n e
dealerl u
toiownhwithhicehhuicli4,
to
oads a y
heard,h
great, pain, fall fro his' 'Right Hon. Priebe-1 who had
lately pled the offs e of Governor of Malta.--(Hear,
hear.) And first let imeay—and he said it with plea-
ou
fritht . r e...
'sure—that the High Hon. Gentlernan had; in his api7
.nion, ully justified the appeintmetit which he had.ac-
eepted,iot goyernor.ofl that most important possession of
this no#ntrY,—(r-reari hear.)
.llefiad expressed,
at the
period
of that appoihtmeht, -that with the Right HOn.
Gentleamin'a abilities; his eieperienee of political life, his.
.conciliitory views, he would do much towards redress-
ing the grievances known to be felt by tbeinhabitante
of Malta, and would tint with perfect justiceetOwards all
her 'Meiesty's subjects in;, that islan....4—(Elear, hear.)
Thatianticipation had been justified; and i he believed
that the labours of the Right I:Leon:able Gentleman in
Malta had been 'meet beheficial to the Crown and most
• teeteadreble to himsel .—(Elear.).- Bat when the Right
i
ffam. Gentleman info mod him that ho had totalliiiith-
draUrg ihis confidepee front'. him arecoetisepeeqcutettatieye
aduiappitr it'edliAdthat goliey; • he dust'
beg leaVe to state, ttiaL in MI- he head said add, &Milli
'o6ff.:tthhte,
malinennheerhiand
which
inheihhis
the case, he had everi believed, ands still, believed, that
Invited said and don no More than would have been
said ti.nel, done, under similar circumstances, b a member
' athet House of Commons,, and :by, a member of the:
, Criiifn, in days when the whole of the,eornieunity was
Roman Catholic.—(Cheers.) Ho believed that what
would not be submitted to at this tier in Prussia, a Pro-
testant country—that what would not be submitted to in
" Saxony, a Protestant;country, though having a Rohm]
Catholic sovereigae Would'not -have 'been submitted to
'eanymore by our Roman Catholic ancestors. In the
course of these discussions reference had beau repeatedly
Mada to'what harlabeen done in ancient times-.' in
.E.nee.
latial (Arrive the Reformer-ion; but theke was Ono remark-
- able 'Act to which he would point attention, -as having
been passed after 9-se •Refortnetten, arid, under 'a Popish
Sovereign, havini for ita'object ''" to repeal 'all articles
hind estrovisions Medi against the; See Apostolic of
Romp since the 20th year of King Henry ;VIII., and
' for the establishment of all spiritual and ecclesiastical
PassessiOns and hateilitaments convoyed to' the laity."
Here, then,
was a measure which, seeking to-reconcile
the Pepe, might be supposed' to. go very far in the vray of
takes
documents t pr
fromovhl e
concession to the pretensions of Rome; ,but inthis very
' Act' and 2 rhilip,ond Mary, cep. 8, special care wit`
• Mental to the autiai7iuit4annosrl'hi'°gbi.intillidlity',c'a°dlll-3"dtPalp.enieaet
Crown of England, regal and • • i - (Bear, hear.) )
imi O ni
.anythingnSe n or
ere 'otherdo ef itrhie-
=perm .- efir, •

Such was the spirit in which our ancestors, even SS, ^n
belonging in matter eof religion to the Roman Catholic
faith, thought it necessary to fratne their Acts of Parlia-
ment; such was the -protection which they, these Roman
Catholic English—as free men—deeined it necessary to
give against the pretensiona of Rome to the rights, liber
ties, and privileges of this country, and to the authority,
dignity, and pre-eminence ot the Crowe, regal end imperiai;
and he desired no other and no greatea -spirit to be shown by
the House of Commons of the present time, when by this
rescript of the Pepe the rights:, liberties, and privileges.
of the country werenaenaced, end the authority, dignity,
and pre-eminence of the Crown, regal and imperial, in-
vaded.—(Cheers.) They - were now to decide either
that this rescript was unlawful, as every lawyer in th 6
house who had spoken had inaintalped or admitted it to
be; or else they were to declare that they not only
allowed the rescript to be :.laWful, but that- when any
Papal instrument:; came into this country, whether bulls;
roscripts, or letters-apostolic, however they might shock
the epirit of. the nation, or 'oppose the authority of the
Queen, Parliament bad no right to
.resent such a pro-
ceeding, but must -agile some aernan Catholie authority
whether, according to Roman Catholic views, the pro-
ceeding involved only a matter of spiritual jurisdiction.
-(Hear, bear.) They must look thrown the Papal
decrees to ascertain how far the definition of Spiritual
affairs extended, and when a Roman Catholic authority
declared a subject to be of a spiritual nature, the power
and jurisdiction of Parliament Would be at once at an
end.—(Rear, hear.) '
tiir J. GRAHAM said, the Noble Lord had steted
that the House ought not to be ruled by the opinions of
Roman Cstb.olic -doctors and lawyers upon the point at
issue. Now he (Sir dr: Graham) hoped there was no
Member of that House more sincerely and warmly Pro-,
testant than hinosilia He was not guided'by the opinions
either of Retrain Catholic doctersaor of-Roman Catholic
lawyers. Ho had expressed his own dispassionate judg-
ment on the quesiee. -The.- Noble-Lord had also unin-
tentionally misrepresented hire upon one.: point. The
Noble Lord said that, in qaoting.the doctrine of
13urke, that one sect was a very indiff?rent judge of what
was necessary fer the free exercise of the' religioneef
another sect, he (Sir J. Graham) hiadlapplied the re-
mark generally to the question before the Hedge. He
had done nothing of the kind. The point to which be
applied the doctrine was this:—an Hon. and-Learned
Friend of his had said that it was necessary to legislate,
in order to relieve the hardships under which -Lord
Camoys, LordApaumont,. and other members of the

Roman Cstholic faith, who were deemed recusants
by their Church, might suffer; and he (Sir J. Gra-
ham) observed, that he considered it unnecessary
for them, as Preteslants, to legislate, with a view to
relieve the religious scroplea of a certain number of
persons.
Mr. M. O'FERRALL said, the Noble Lord had as-
sumed that the act of the Pope was en intentional insult
to the great body of this nation, and the Noble Lord
also assumed that that net, with such intention, was
favourably regarded by the Roman Catholics of this
country. He (Mr. O'Ferrali) could only say that any
act °tithe Pope or of any other sovereign which tended
wantonly to insult her Majesty or this country would
meet the most loyal and determined,resiatence frsm
Roman Catholics.--(licar, hear.) He. (Mr. O'Ferrall)
believed, however, that the Pope had no such intention,
though he was willing to admit that the terms of the
reset ipt, and the manner in which it was made known
to the Ersglish people, might, by persons unaccuatomed.
to the form of such documents—( laugh)—be deemed
to some extent offensive; but the form used in this case
was the same as had been adopted for many years. He
considered it was an act of very great injustice to attach
blame on this ground to the whole Catholic public of
this kingdom, awl to make them responsible either for
the nets of the .Pope or of Cardinal Wiseman. Be
believed that if the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell),
instead of writing his letter, had ascertained
whether the supposed insult was intentional or inad-
vertent, he would not have thought it necessary to come
down to the House with the present Bill.--( Hear, hear.)
The Noble Lord considered thttt the regality of the
lo
Queen was affected by documents issued the Pope,
but it aepeared to him (Mr. O'Ferrall) to refer solely
to a spiritual jurisdiction. He could assure tbe Corn-
mitten that if the Noble Lord had proposed a declare-
Lion setting forth iu plain and distinct language that
neither Protestant nor Catholic in this country would
allow any power, spiritual or temporal, Popo or Ems
peror, to interfere with the rights and liberties of the
nation, such a declaration would have _been most readily
subscribed by every Catholic—(l.lear, hear)—and he
thought, even after all that had passed, it was not yet
too late to consider the question in that light. lie ob-
jected to this Bill on the ground that if it were adopted
religious liberty would depend not upon'the interpreta-
tion of the clauses,' but upon the will of the Minister
of the Crown—(Hear, hear)—because at any time
when a Minister chose to put the measure in force to
suit his purpose, he might commence prosecutions which
would interfere materially with the religious privileges
of Catholics.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HOBROUSE denied that the temporal authority
of the Sovereign had ,been interfered with by the act of
the Pepe, and it was his firm conviction that in the
course of six years this question would be looked upon
iu this country in a very different manner from that in
which it was then viewed. They should recollect that
the Roman Catholic religion was not endowed—that it
was in the sme position as the several bodies of dis-
senters in this country, therefore any interference with
the internal affairs of that religion was a hardship and
an injustice. 'He wished' to know *by this Bill should
be extended to Scotland, no Roman Cathelin,bishop
having been appellate(' in that country under tl-e re-
script of the Pope. He, therefore, wished to know
whether the Noble Lord would have any objection to
exclude Scotland from the Bill. Foreigners coming to
this country at this moment must be astonished at the
course of their legislation' on this matter. While the
Pope only did so innocent an act as that appointing an
archbishop 'of Westminster, he would not be lea aside by
popular clamour to vote for a measure which he consi-
dered was unjust in its operation.
Mr. IL 'GRATTAN hoped that the irriaistible speech
of the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Ripon, and
the style, the tone, the.temper, and forbearing remarks
of the ex-governor of Malta, would make their due im-
pression upon the Governmesntut.rbeTdhebyy
were
any
decide the peace and tranquillity of Ireland, and
such he bog-
po.
ged to tell them that the Irish would not submit to have
that peace and tranquillity di
tent Bill as that of the Noble Lord. Even at the eleventh
hour he ventured to enter his protest against these pro-
ceedings. The late Sir R. Peel had told them that Ire-
land was his difficulty. If this Bill passed Ireland would
be their impossibility. He bad no hesitation in saying
that if they wanted to make Repealers in Ireland they
could not have a better recruiting sergeant than the
Noble Lord. Jf they carried out this measure- in, all its
integrity they would" rue it- to the last*day of their pos
Well existence.

Mr. REYNOLDS said that notwithstanding four.
akoliebsi, consideration ,of this measure, the greatest dif-
fereneet of opinion exists respecting it between states-
men on the one hand and lawyers on the other. The
Attorney..Geneml now said. that this Bill would extend
to ll:eland, acid the Honourable and Learned Member
• •
for Midhurst said ducc,l) the reverie. An oxerienced
stniesnian—o:,e to whose judgme'nt and wisdom the
public :of all . eksses aPPolled with conlichinen—
be meant the Right Hun-Baronet the Member for Ri-
pon, had addressed a speech that evening to the House,
-
and, though no lawyer, he made the mutter so clear as
to have ended all controversy about it. And thelawyers,
opposite, in their hqrnipt to answer him, had merely re
pasted their alreadY-qtprOsed epinious. To him they'
afforded an apt ilhistrc.tion of the ebarticter,drala by
Goldimith of theyillage,sebolMn.ster--

The parson hiniseit W4S ioreeu to own his
For even though vauquish'd he would argue still."

The Noble .affecting to 170 ply to the
.e
Lord alsq,
Right Hon. Baronet,- had said nothing new, but had taken
(=to to steer clear- of all arguments, falling ,back upon
his menaorable,speech when he asked leave to introduce
this Bill, and quoted from the legislation of what he
termed his " Catholic, ancesters.". Why should the Ca-
tholics be placed in aWorsir position now than they were
before the publication of the Pope's rescript? The clause,
properly construed, was a 'drehaation of religious
qualification, if not of religious
'war, against ten, mil-
lions of, the Queens subjects.-(Oh, ob.), What had the
Retain CithOlic archbishops and bishops of Ireland done
to merit such a Bill? He w 0111.4, tell the Noble Lord.
They had, preseried the peacer-they had reconciled the
people to misgovernment op the ene hand, and to star-,
vation on the other.—(oll, oh.) Pass this Bill for Ire-!
land, and the Roman Catholic. Members for Ireland
would pot, he believed,- trouble • that House with their
presence (luring the remainder of the session.—(Alaugh.)
The Bill was made up of shreds
,and; patchea7-part of it.
belonging to Youghal, part Of it to Midhilreir; and Part .of
it to the Master of the Rolls. Let the aonse do'somn
business.--(0b, ands 106), L4,-ttke ,Noble :tard
withdraw his Bit'. 111 04,. .Reynolds)' would advise
t. r•
him to bespeak a aonipartmea P it in the!gry4o,l: pa.
lanc.--;-,(Lsughter, and cries. Of 04." and " Question.")
Yes,‘ ho advised him to place it under a glass .ease„and
exhibit it there awe, prime ePeeimen of Whig, legislation
in the year 1851,-far thopurpose.of insulting and ooero..
ing the Catholics of:the:United Jtingdom, • .
Mr: OSWALD, amid cries of "Divide," eaid he
thou_ght it would be well if the House werO informed by.
the Lord-Advocate, Und 'made: completely*/ understand
what was• the state. of the law in Scotland with regard to
the subject before it proceeded to a division.
The LORD.ADVOCATE replied 'that -that did'nat
.appear to be 'necessary; for, whatever might‘be• the ttup-
'posed force of the old atattite teferte4 to; by the Anti:
Oentlemnn'ths other night; it Weald' not in: the' slightest.
degree interfere with the proceeding in
,which the Uouse
was now engaged: Thellgifit" Gentleman stated tlin other
'night that an old ket, inti4e4 Au Act;
.tfor abolishing the Pdpe;'"-4.
'
A- 10100 in'force
in Scotland; - NOW. the'statior the law he.conceiied to
be this--an Act, passed in,1700; ratified and re=enacted,,
not that .statute directly, but cer-tarn other -,statutes .by,
name, und,,generAlly4.7all;Acts against the power:of the.
Pope. The Act 33. Geo;llLubolisihod penalties'
which were enacted against the Roman Cstbolice.by these-
statutes; :and,: 68111,:re.ad' the Act 9 and .10 of Victoria.
(1846), that,Act'ol,-1700, with.pli the Actii ratified. by it,
was, absolutely and completely repealed. ,
Mr. OSIVALV—The 4ct,Of 1567 .Was on the statute.
book, and the 33 Geo: W. „repealed, not• the Acts, but.
thu penalties mentioned in; certain
.Acts.,recited in the
statute of 1700. . All
_that , the.,Aet of 1846 did was to
repeal tbe statutes' mentioned in.the Act of 1700, the
penalties for which bid been repOled by the 331 Gee. 111.
He submitted, therefore, that. the- Lord-Advocate had
not laid any ground whatever from which the Committee
might conclude that:the statute old 567 hadbeen repealed.
Mi. OSWALD:made ;several subsequent attempts to
address the Committee„, but he was received with eon-
stant cries of" Ob," and Divide." Re was understood
to move tbe Chairman to report pregresd. - •
Load'. RUSSELL could not understand the motive
of the motion: The LOrd4ldvodate had declared the
law of Scotland, though he was not called upon to do