The Sun.
London, England, 1851-07-22 00:00:00

•
having rec 4 e to some fresh Act of legislation.-(Hear.)
t 0
The Pope himeelf is a man of mild character, he was a popular
l two
o v
individual, he sought popularity on all occasions, and he
states in the very rescript which he sent to this country
superiorthat
wasecc l
es
seinassitbie there were merodßeosmoan Catholics
f providi n
in
for
this country, and he discuSsed those two modes. One of
those modes was the appointment of vicars-apostolic, and the
other the appointment of Cardinal Wiseman to the arch-
diocess of a district in which the Queen's Palace and the
Houses of Parliament are located.-( Hear, hear.) The Pope
took the latter course, and relinquished the old mode of af-
fecting his object, which had been recognized and approved
by the Government of this country. Under these circum-
stances-the character of the Pope being such as I have de-
scribed-- I confess I was anxious to know what could have
been the motive for the preference given to the inew mode
of proceeding. The Noble Lord who addressed you just now,
with so much honour to himself, knowing the position
of the Roman Catholics-knowing the state of opi-
nion at Rome being sensible that a design is en-
tertained to stifle liberal opinions in this country, thought he
perceived the drift of the rescript in reading it. For my..
self, however, I confess I could not discover the drift
of the proceeding until I read the attack made by Cardinal
Wiseman on the Dean and Chapter of Westminster.--
( Laughter, and cheers.) Then it occurred to me what was
the of aimed at. It was the old object of antagonism,
and the course was taken by the advice of Cardinal Wiseman,
as he himself states.--( Hear.) At the same time at which
Cardinal Wiseman published the rescript which notified his
owe promotion he made an attack, entirely undeserved, on
the Dean and Chapter of Westminster.-(Hear.) I then
could doubt no longer as to the object of Rome, and I saw
clearly that something like this Bill which I now hold in my
hand must be brought under the consideration of your Lord-
ships, or that I must give my consent to certain alterations of
the terms of the Relief Act.--(gear, hear.) I cannot concur
in the proposition of my Noble Friend that the Bill shall be
read a second time this day Six months.-(Hear, hear.)
Circumstances have occurred which render it impossible for
you to return to the position in which you stood before this
act of the Pope was committed. The object of the passing
of the Relief Act was to repeal all the laws adopted against
the Roman Catholics first at the Reformation-next at the
time of what was called the Popish Plot; and, thirdly,
in consequence of the Popish reign of James 11., and the
war of succession in Ireland, out of which, and in conse-
quence, grew all the penal enactments against Catholics in
that country. It was, I say, the object of the Relief Act to
get rid of these altogether. But those who brought forward
that Act--those who urged your Lordships and the other
House te su PPort it,
repeatedly stated that nothing therein
touched the laws on which the Reformation was founded.
That was cautiously avoided. ,When we-the authors and
promWers of the elief Act, were charged with having
touched the Reformation, we distinctly proved the con-
trary, and showed that we had done nothing to affect
the laws by which the Reformation was established in
this country. In 1846, however-in the reign of the pre-
sent Queen-certain old statutes were repealed, and among
them one relating to the introduction of bulls into this
country. If that law bad net been repealed it would have
been impossible that the act of the Pope could have taken
effect, and, consequently, all fresh legislation would have
been unnecessary. Cardinal Wiseman would not have dared
to come to England and publish the Pope's bull or rescript,
establishing the new hierarchy.-(Cheers.) The thing was
impossible; it could not have happened. Under these cir-
cumstances, I say you cannot return to the position in which
you stood when the Roman Catholic Relief Act was passed,
or before the Act of 1846 passed, which repealed the penal-
ties attaching to all the Acts with which it dealt, but left the
acts themselves standing as misdemeanours. The legisla-
tion on the subject stands in this state, that misdemeanours
may be committed, but cannot be punished.-(Hear, hear.)
Under these circumstances, I say you cannot stand on the
Relief Act, but must pass a measure to meet the particular
act of the Pope complained of, and to prevent the repetition
of such acts in future. I have no desire to infringe the re-
ligious privileges of the Roman Catholics • on the contrary.
I wish them to enjoy every means of following their re-
ligion with perfect freedom.- (Hear, hear.) I confess I
view without apprehension the effect which this measure
may have in Ireland.-(Hear, hear.) We have had a good
deal of experience of the effect produced in Ireland by mea-
sures passed by the Legislature. There was the Relief Act.
A great deal was expected from that, and it was said that it
would put an end to agitation in Ireland for ever. But in
the very year-nay, I believe, almost in the very month in
which it became the law of the land. Irish agitation recom-
menced.- (Cheers and laughter.) How often, since then,
has the Crown, from time to time, had occasion to complain
of agitation in Ireland? How often has the Crown come to
Parliament to demand additional powers for the purpose of
putting down the agitation, or worse than agitation, existing
in that country-the Relief Act notwithstanding ?-( Hear,
hear.) My advice to your Lordships is to do that which is
just and necessary-to maintain the power and prerogatives
of the Crown, and to protect the subjects of this country and
no more; and you may rely on it you will have the support
and good wishes of the loyal people of Ireland as well as of
this country.-(Cheers.) Having the misfortune on this
occasion to differ from my Noble Friend the Noble Earl who
addressed your Lordships second in the debate, I felt it ne-
cessary to trouble you with these few words, to show on what
grounds I intend to support the motion for the second read-
ing of this Bill.-(Loud cheers.)
The Earl of MALMESBURY said that he looked upon
this bull as an insult to her Majesty and an invasion of the
Constituticsa. That was the view taken by millions. It gave
the Roman Catholics a synodical action which they had not
before. He believed that as far as this Bill went it would
meet the insult and aggression. The Noble Earl (the Earl
of Aberdeen) did not believe that the honour of England
had been attacked, and that the grant of territorial titles
was not an insult to her Majesty; but he differed with the
Noble Earl upon that point. England was free, and the
sovereign of a foreign state had granted territorial titles.
It was to prevent a repetition of this insult that this Bill
was intended. It could not be done in France or
Prussia.-(Hear, hear.) He spoke as to the manner
of these appointments. There was an utter absence, to
use a familiar expression, of even common civility. The
Noble Earl had said that instead of attacking our own
countrymen they should have attacked the man who com-
mitted the aggression. But would the Noble Earl, if at the
head of foreign affairs at the time, have sent a fleet to
Ancona against the Pope? Judging from his career of
peaceful policy, he doubted much whether he would ever
have consented to that step. Then what other course re-
mained open to them to repel this aggression but internal
legislation? He hoped the Bill before their Lordships
would answer its purpose so far as the Queen's prerogative
was concerned. He would gladly support this Bill. He
regretted the absence of the Noble Earl (the Earl of Derby),
as he would have fully stated the course he recommended.
He wished that Parliament should proceed first by resolu-
tion and then by legislation. He thought with the Noble
Earl that before legislating there should have been an in-
quiry into that spiritual power which the Pope arrogated, to
see whether his assumption stood in the same position as
before. There were various points that might be investi-
gated. He would not trouble their Lordships further than
by intimating his intention to support the Bill.
Lord BERNERS said he felt there was a principle at issue
in the question before the House, a principle of religious
liberty, which this Bill would jeopardise. The Pope had
constituted a hierarchy of his own Church. Had that in-
fringed upon the rights of the Queen? Ile entirely agrees
that an insult had been committed, but it was
not against the Crows or the people, but the Church.
The Duke of ARGYLL said he should go into the subject
before them without one word of preface. After alluding
generally to the arguments used by the Noble Lord at the
head of the Government, he referred to what had been
said by the Noble Earl (Aberdeen) during the late Ministerial
cri'is. The Noble Earl distinctly said that he would not
form a Government in England on the footing of passing
over the act of the Pope in silence. Now, there was the
rescript of the Pope, and the pastoral letter of Cardinal
Wiseman. The latter was as pompous and absurd a docu-
ment, proceeding from the pen of a foolish priest, as ever
was issued-(A laugh)-and he conceived it beneath the
notice of any individual in the country.-(Hear, hear.)
The protest of the Noble Earl was not against the letter of
Cardinal Wiseman, but against the rescript of the Pope.
Now the Noble Earl had that night told them that the lan-
guage used in the rescript was only in the usual terms
which were applied on such occasions. Therefore the act
against which his Noble Friend said he would protest was
the act of giving territorial titles and sees in England.
His Noble Friend could not but admit by his dis-
claimer that the act was one which deserved some pro-
test by the people of England.-- (Criei of "Hear, hear.")
The whole question was with regard to the titles.
The Noble Earl argued that if they tolerated the Catholic
Church they must tolerate it in its full development; but in
Catholic countries the Governments did prevent its full de-
velopement. It hat been argued that in these countries the
Governments posse4sed no right but which was founded on
agreement or endowment. He (the Duke of Argyll) as-
serted as a matter of historical fact, that the restrictions put
on the Catholic Church in the countries alluded to was, be-
cause it was thought that the full development of the Church
would expose the state to dangers.-(Hear.) The Noble
Duke then called the attention of their Lordships to a speech
of Mr. Canning in a debate upon the Catholic claims, in
which that eminent statesman said that the penal coda was
not intended to repress the Catholics as a sect, but to punish
them as traitors. So far as the penalties went, he thougjand,
the
h
Bill should be extended to the Episcopal Church inr-A)
but he protested most solemnly against the
doctrine that
as they
they were bound to treat dissenting Protestant
bodies
could
treated the hiearchy of the Church of Rom
a.
not compare the dissenting bodies with
the vast organised
arious periods
hierarchy of the Church of Rome, which at v
had compelled several countries of -Li put them.
s
Europe to
They were,
selves in a state of self-defence.-(Bear, bear.,
in the mouths
of to remember, that excommunication
thing
of Presbyterians and Protestants was a very different
of Rome. On that from what it was in the Church
of their Lordship sub-
ject he begged to call the attentionwhen a man wished 's to
a case that occurred in Ireland,
once
of his
manifesting
that
desire, he was taken up by
as the Douay yl, the north
of Ireland, although it
however, he wastranslationcalled
d he was
reading. One Sunday,actice and on the upon by the
give up the Pr . man refusing to do
priest to
uttered a curse against him,
BO the priest to One of which was of a
most frightful character hear. of the men kept a
mill, and the consequence was that no one would bring
grain to it, and no one would work with them. The men,
in consequence, were very properly advised to bring an action
t the priest. He begged Noble Lords to mark, that
against • ti n
emunicawas one of the; great . powers exer-
cised by the Roman Catholic Church; but he rejoiced to
find that a judge and jury had in this case taken a
different view from the lawyers, and said, though
they tolerated the Boman Catholic Church, they did
not allow it to ruin men, and they fined the priest
70/.:--(Cheers from the cross benches.) The Noble Earl es-
pecially adverted to the effect this Bill would have upon Ire-
land. WI,
• territorial titles were prohibited by the Catholic
Relief Bill, with the exception of one then in existence, and
one since created; so that in truth the present Act merely
extended and applied the principle and enactments of the
Roman Catholic Relief Act to these two additional bishops
in Ireland.-(Hear, hear.) Surely, if we had a right to pro.
hibit the old territorial titles which existed in Ireland pre-
vious to the pas= • g of the Catholic Relief Bill, we had a
much stronger right to prohibit the use of the new territorial
titles.-(Hear.) But besides the Relief Act, the Noble
Earl referred to the Charitable Bequests Act. Now he did
not understand how either the Noble Earl or any one
connected with the Government of the late Sir Robert Feel
could refer to that Act as an argument against the present
measure. In that Act, as at first introduced, the thene
use
Se-
cretary for the Home Department carefully avoided the
of the titles of Roman Catholic bishops, and called them
was
merely " persons in holy orders." A strong objection
taken to that course by the relative of alloble Duke whom
said that the fact
he did not now see in his place. It wa
agbt to be recog-
that the Roman Catholics had bishops
°great favour and
nised ; and then Sir James Graham,
°intimated that he
out of courtesy to the Roman Catholics,
the, Roman
catholic
was willing to insert the names er. Awl°
guarding himself
archbishops and bishops, though. carefully_o
The language of Sir
against giving them territorial ti
d at the-itutteniti- most
James was most explicit, and _ me
lie said he had no objection- toluktit.Roman
guarded.
Catholic archbishops and bishops, but, for the maintenance of
sound principles, they ought not to be detail* by territorial