The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-19 00:00:00

tier
th egY. Much lees the laity, had been consulted on the
;a`ter• He considered it was, in some sort, an aggression
Ih°4 the rights vested in her Majesty's subjects.
e scheme for the division of the dioceses of Cloyne and
d 3 in Ireland had its origin in Ireland, and the Pope had
been nothing more than confirm the arrangement which had
submitted to him on the subject. In that case there
lees been no aggression ; and consequently there had not
I 17,„esnYthing to justify the monstrous attempt to include
-"" in.the provisions of that measure. He thought that
her ma.
kin testy Govenimentlad come to a nextrope.r dete.r-
es, ittton ashen they had resolved on not ending the
si,-tefiraents in the Bill beyond the requirements of the case;
the 'f they' had Carr ed that determination fully into effect,
till would' have confined the operation of the measure to
tinecitet of% foreign power conferring titles in this country,
retess",(4ll4 not have extended it to the conduct of British
111 C 14 assuming certain titles. He had further to say,
yo t any case
the Bill ought not to be extended be-
trl! the country in which the alleged aggression had
for Places The Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Member
stalee city of Oxford (Mr. P. Wood) had talked a good
the's,"( the canon law of the Roman Catholic 'Church ; but
st,W4°&-and Learned Gentleman had in his (Mr. Anstey's)
Thetr'evinced but a very imperfect knowledge of that law.
tri -"
was that the canon law varied in different coun-
YeetBh'e and for his part he trusted that some measure would
the taken, if not directly, at least indirectly, to prevent
es.ktenion to -this country of that jus canonicum from
ee the extracts of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had
IteL)taken, instead of the ancient canon leas of England.
the, ~ behaved there would be great difficulty in reconciling
Uard;s-"aanon law of England with that new canon law which
try Wiseman seemed anxious to extend to this coun-
tess ne fact wa s that the new canon law was not the
ts(t'h law of England, in which there was a distinction be-
lief), sPirituals and temporals, but the canon law of the
kit states. in which no such distinction was known. The
riev:;en under their consideration dealt not with a real
Stse-eee, but was framed in compliance with a popular pre-
'lt was, in fact, insufficient in one sense, and exces-
See,seother. It would give no protection to' the Roman
ts,eeue laity in England, while it was most improperly and
he eheseas.sarily to be extended to Ireland. On these grounds
tfth'e ual certainly give his vote against the second. reading
ine
this
, asure.
this fIASHLEY, notwithstanding all that had been said on
Pse-"lect, would 'revert to the first question—"should the
tsd tament, or should it not, legislate upon this subject?"
off, e asserted that they should. The rights and liberties
and tat,,ge class of her Majesty's subjects had been invaded,
eher;ilcae who opposed the aggression were denounced. as
fortis' They did not, however, anticipate—they did not
that,. British Peer would denaunce the proposed le::
4eittst°n against the Papal aggression, as " persecution,"
in th,.st did they foresee that British senators would denounce
Dist:, Rouse those who considered the aggression com-
4tal h; '3 as a lawful ground for the defence of the Queen
hsjr- Government in this country. Should they, then,
'`ohs.„,tend the step taken as an aggression and an insult,
If " they not come to the assistance of the Sovereign ?
t„ 'LI
,'.'aid be show that this movement of the Pope was an
res,Pe inroad on the prerogative of the Sovereign of this
11', he thought it would not be disputed that the Par-
te,'",'Tlerts called upon to legislate on the subject. One
!'ose"eotvever had said that everything done to oppose the
1,4i-s;'4'the step he had taken amounted to persecution,
atinterference with the free exercise of his spiritual
1%141,4'k 'New if that doctrine was admitted, it would im-
41iasi-Aks the Protestant subjects of this realm absolute sub-
eossLil to the decrees of the Pope. The Legislature of this
Act n, had made concessions to the Roman Catholics by the
the 43-29, and it was not, he must any, thought, when
eet:o.teetants of this country had consented to make those
sklie - cohcees'ons which had made their Roman Ca-
nted f'onve-subjects equal' with themselves—that they
tiest, 'el Placed by any act of the Pope in a subordinate pi?-
igoese*--(Rear, hear.) There was another party la. this
(lord bo wished:for legislation on this subject,. and. in his
41uh. Ashley's) opinion they were now deliberating„not on
aoAtitteJpeet hich woud hav a mer transient effect,
.bu
hOn w a
subject l
which e ,
if not e
checked by legislatioh,t
s.istm"tre a dominant influence on the institutions of this
tided
be :: He must say that, of all the measures which. had
Ndee," introduced into this country, this of the Pope had
Qed h"t°re than any other to disturb the privileges en-
Nee the Roman Catholics, than whom, he must say,
tah,biet'.:d not exist a' more loyal or more deserving class of
isesta"'-(llear, and cheers.) The' Protestants of England
orej'aed that this step of which the Pope of Rome—a
s'r)4 Priest and potentate—had been guilty was a viola-
S.:(tt,enly of the law of nations,- but of the law of this
(Hear, and cheers)—and a deliberate innovation on.
Sealk.`regative of, and offence offered to, the Queen of this
;',t tin (Renewed cries of " Hear.") He maintained that
s'qtt ae bad violated the law of nations, and he would prove
arils( reference to the Papal brief to restore the Roman
,ttig heirarchy. The Noble Lord here quoted the follow-
tine sage from the Papal brief: " We, of our own proper
dlestel! on certain knowledge and of the plenitude of our
(derN sr'ea.„l Power constitute 'and decree that in the king-
,-t, nglancl, according to the common rule of the
kloefitkittle)re be restored the hierarchy of ordinary bishops,
4, letter, e named from sees, which we constitute. in thwes..e.
I, is it • To begin with the London district, there
s the swe tees, that of Westminster, which we elevate
))eee degree of metropolitan or archiepiscopal dignity.
4tt-' oil be
in the most flourishing kingdom of England
t-ttise„"4l be established one ecclesiastical province, con-
tis.?:!one archbishop and twelve bishops, his suffragans.
Ps„°,r:ess we now reserve to ourselves and our successors,
"',.soda's of Rome, the power 'of again dividing the said
I,,,)raSe into others, and of increasing the number of tilo-
d'„,4nd general that, as it shall seem fitting in the
here'eri"e
,rll.Sy freely decree our limits to them." Was
Ytathg, be would ask, more imperious than the
der
of the Pope of Rome as expressed in that brief
ti:%r t'sui,ge in which he claimed to exercise a sovereignty
t.sel/ s realm ?—(Hear, and cheers.) He would now refer
0111434'e to the argument used by Dr. Twiss in reference
eatre,,,question. Dr. Twigs, a learned civilian, said—" Th.e
,7414;"nt could not have been externally more complete,
iths-sseen,, of England had planed her realm at the disposal
kL('kt,-;°l3' See for all ecclesiastical purposes, nor could the
s'os lst's" dealt with bis own territory in a more free and
s'lth Staanner But, if there be any one principle of law
has received the sanction of that high usage and
tre: which constitutes it a binding obligation on all the
Chr stendom, it is this, that the Pope cannot set
Ne see of a bishop within the territory of an independent
i.,te Without his consent. Common sense suggests that
,74,15thers than the sovereign power of the land can
kV, 4 see within the land. The Pope may give a bishop
e., may authorise him to go forth as the spiritual
"iti,-"'aslor of the Holy See; but that the Pope shoulda este-
4kti territorial seat for his bishop in the
treaualmarofan Saottvrei:
te &ea', er without its consent, would be
(t,tcsisTeal sovereignty, and to take posseossion opt* the land
s'le`;'laatical purposes;" and Lord Stowell, as cited by
sals.,se, says, that " a course of conduct to be legal must
eel"la to be conformable to the usage and position of ac-
°Nletfk great part of the law of nations stands on no other
,te-,°°•'' New he (Lord Ashley) maintained that that
that the Pope had been guilty of an interference with
"tiost;'egative of the Queen, and a violation of the law of
(Rear.) He would refer the House to an extract
°Pinion of D. r. wis! relating to the temporalities,
,a,c tees! kept in mind," said.'t.hat
.learned civilian, " that
tti trralities were a civil, accident of the sees into
th„,,Y were put in possession by an act of the Crow_n,
1-Akii;_r Consecration had taken place at the house of the
t're -an. It was not, therefore, in any way, by reason
lesteoralities being connected with the sees of
.the
js bishops ve whom the Pope exercised ecclesisis-
sl tt,-t;siction' before the Reformation. that the Pope was
irlikrael'ait° and use an usurped authority; it was not in
:Powitroatter, but in causes which he called spiritual, that
;st,hs • 0 dispense with the laws of the realm was disputed
Ctit,,tils, re pt of England, and ultimately. declared to be un-
sh'° much for the law of nations, and he (the Pope)
Act "P'n any more respect for the law af the land.
slts.,!l aii°,l' 1829 was framed to protect the priviliges of the
th ef the Established Church this country ; and
,stils the: conditions put forwird for passßing that Act was
t: should be no other ecclesiastical corporation
iat 11.4(1 Llitorial power in this country; and he held that
th en violated. He would go further, and say
aeldt.Postolic letter had violated the law of the
' tt -,11,_43 Was now quoting from the " authorised ver-
iii,ssetss the Latin Brief, printed and published by
sit)ttiee-" at the Metropolitan Catholic printing-office.' "
'se at
it appeared that the Pope had ap-
e't tetra bishop to the Protestant see of St. David's.
h:th Was this: "In the district of Wales there will
aai cs—that of Shrewsbury, and that of Menaira
stir "to id" a); united with Newport We
t.tesle, s.e Bishop of St. David's and Newport, as his
thes-sventintiei of Pembroke," &c. Now he must saßb~y
something very insiduous in this.—(Hear,
should they allow it to pass without notice, it
"Ss` its "
ins future time be said, should objection be raised
;Is ss ,„1). that the House, when
totlegislaing on the subject,
'114'le••-(4ice and made no objection it. The bishopric
4t tteaae was a case in point, and referred to by Cardinal
tst '414 in these words :—" But there has been a more re-
Nsti instance of the exercise of the Papal supremacy in
401141451' of bishoprics nearer home. Galway was not an
t,t,ttted 't'ee until a few years ago lt was
a. warden The Holy See changed
hhe Was
into a bishopric. . . . . Bishop
ss" 58 consecratedAn October, 1831. No r.emon-
Made, no outcry raised at this exercise of
'4Y, "ell' Now there was a case nearer home.
,t 'tip' within the last few years, had been made adhi-
tiNhle_ d Dr. Browne was appointed bishop of that ici•
Cear, hear.) Thus it was clear that the steps. taken
etN,ucpe were highly improper, as interfering with the
ge,'ve of the Crown, and an insult offered to the Queent6rten
_ (Hear, hear, and cheers.) He (Lord Ashley) _
1,,,),(e51N that it was an interference with the functions of
14.1','t *tin, and if not checked, who, he would ask, could
,(4,11e liss,t would be the consequence of the Apostolic brief
,7);eisf"`ess tent institution of this country ?.—(Hear, hear,
;(,,,It,i„,.eueers.) Was there, he would ask, ever any act of
'4,l'4Fiers Potentate or foreign state more insulting than
Ihethe""t britf?r-(Hear, hear.) If the Parliament would
iss,lueen and the country would not.—(Hear, hear.)
44'1'e t:)RMAN MAHON—The Queen ?
VaLEY- The Crown would not yield. Whom
eof ,e,pe sent to take possession of the kingdom? A
ki'4l toshrehe Church, a noble of his own Court. The
t), that person had used were remarkable,
iN:ktssr,wetild not forget the tones of that dulcet in-
It reminded him of the animal with "two
e
rapt tsl 9,sta ram which spake like a dragon.', s. By
Otell", 4 "‘ of September, his Holiness was pleased to ap-
EyE most unworthy, to the archiepiscopal.. see of
Oti, -41, established by letters apostolic, giving us, at
ey Nl* .'ne, the administration of the episcopal see of
OS gear an that at present, and until such time as the
t'elitinail think fit of • erwise to provide, we govern, and
oklt 1,1ek:141 to govern the counties of Middlesex, Hertford,
oerrcrditiary ereof, and those of Surrey, Sussex,
t Yle 4114 i lhire, and Hampshire, with the islands annexed,
ti thBttator with ordinary jurisdiction," Such is the
,t,etlatiret,letters missive of all the bishops taking jurisdic-
SSOtteaa authority. If they could mistake th,t, let
,tvii,;•' to an extract which he would read to them,
Irktp,:.lot 4'll4Partant. as bearing upon ,this question. There
(I'4l in the country who was ignorant of the
ii:tt":.teisiroeer of Thosnas A'Becket, who claimed for the
V White es ever all the estates of the kingdom, and whose
tieilNaasi_sthat the Church should ride roughshod over
toes
rit of The extracts he would read would show
Ltst tre these transactions. Here was one extract,
fai rn`nci o where and how I have been nourished
the jOi? y
ti Eroph sit likely that I shah be behind. any other,
istiltitti emSt Catholic of ancient stock, in defending
g~i1A,,,1141.114 y Lord and master ? The second altar at
"geteßs-11 in the Holy City, was that which marks the
csek -" St. Peter cemented the foundations of his un-
if!iqtt,a st?...tsvith his blood. The first was that of our o
f',(4tt Okra horuas (of Canterbury). For 22 years I dailya
tide test. ,''e body representation of his martyrdom
7% Partook even of the bread of life ; there, for. to
tar, teeopsrlebrated the divine mysteries; at it I received
Ira pot bay hseonsecration. He was my patron, he my fa-
°4l:l3el. And, withdrawn from the symbols of
.k:q.t the tr 3' the supreme will of the late Pontiff, I
0) 411414 ea-sury of his relics at Sees, and with fervent
artYr asked and obtained the mitre which had crowned
Nev 4 head."—e Words of Peace and Justice," by
laesatin, 1838. If they did not withstand