The Sun.
London, England, 1851-05-10 00:00:00

--gATUTtDAY

-El' EN IN G,

been encouraged by the conduct and declarations of. her
Mejeety's Government?--(Cheers.) Is it a fact or not that
the First Minister of the Crown has himself; in this. House,
exitee:sed an opinioo that he saw no harm in Roman Ca-
Relic hi-Imps a,sihing territorial titles in the realm of
England?—(Cheers.) Is that a fact, or is it not, in the ex-
perience of every Hen. Nleinher of this House, and still in
the throbbing memory of the country?—(Cheers.) Is it a
fact or is it not, that a Secretary of State in another place
expressed his hope that the R,lnan Catholic bishops of the
Haired Kingdom would take-their seats as Peers of Parlia-
ment in the Rouse of Lords? Is that . a circumstance of
whice there is any doubt ? And is it not an opinion that
still echoes in the indignant ears of the people of England?
Is it a fact, or is it not, that a member of the Cabinet
was sent as plenipotentiary to Italy, and held frequent
and encouraging conversations wide his Holiness?—(Haar,
hear.) Is it a fact, or is it not, that, influenced by
his counsels, and animated by his presence, the Pope him-
self condescendingly intim& ed to him that he was about
to interfere with the domestic affairs of this country?
("No.") " There is something that affects England," was the
intimation, according to the statement of the Noble Lord
opposite, and I at the time expressed my surprise that the
plenipotentiary did nut deem it necessary to inquire what
it was.
Lord J. RUSSELL —I wish to state what I did say. I
ob-erved that it had been stated that the Pope used these
words, but that Lord Nlieto denied that he ever heard any-
thing of th sort.--(Cheers.)
Mr. DISRAELI—fit it a fact, or is it not, that the Vice-
royalty of Ireland was in indirect communication with the
Pope, and expressed affection for his person, and reverence
for his character ?—(Cheere. ) If these be facts, I ask,
whether, in the language of this resolution, the aggression of
the Pope may not fairly be de,cribed to have been encou-
raged by the conduct and declarations of her Majesty's Go-
vernment?—(Hear, hear.) I do not, now enter into the
que-tion of the policy of that c induct on the part of the
Government. I do not now ask whether it was proper, or
politic, or cmetitutional, or religioue. What I ask is, it these
statements be facts, how can we avoid giving our assent to
the amendment?—(Hear, hear.) What is the danger of this
amendment? According to the statement of the Hon. Gen-
tleman who introduced it, his object is not to destroy the
Government, but their Bill; but the highest authority in the
House -will inform us that it is not in the power Of any one
who moves such an amendment to injure the Bill one whit,
because it will be in the power of any Member of the House
to proceed with the measure.--jlear, hear) Is there any
one who actually believes that the existence of any legisla-
tive Act against Paeal aggression is in jeopardy by assenting
to the truth contained in this amendment?—(Hear.) It so,
then what is the peril if the House declares thrmuliy that to
be true the accuracy of which no one denies?—( Hear, hear.)
But is there any advantagb in it? The Hon. Member for
Warwickshire (Mr. Spoouer) says he looks to the whole
legislation of the Government for many years with respect
to the Church of Rome. I have opposed measures of former
Governments on these subjects myself, and I might with ad-
vantaee widen the issue, but I will not take refuge in such a
line of policy. No one has denied that the conduct of the exist-
ing Government in those notorious instances to which I have
referred has encouraged this ageressive conduct nn the part
of the Pope of Rome; and I believe that will be the opi-
nion of the country now, as it has been from the first.—
. .

(Hear.) Then, is there any great waste of time in this discus-
sion? The Noble Lord boasts of his large majority in favour
of legislation three months ago ; but the greatness of the ma-
pricy has not tended to accelerate the measure.—(Hear,
hear.) Surely, therefore, this night is not to be grudged if
it terminate in a profitable result, and if any advantage is to
be gained. There has been delay since the aggressive act
occurred ; and, though a vast majority of the House came to
the result that it was wise and necessary to legislate, still
nothing could be more salutary than by a resnution of this
kind to give now a great and dispassionate expression of
opinion with respect to the causes and events which we have
all so much lamented.—(Hear, hear.) That is the prac-
tical result of the amendment. We state calmly that, in our
opinion, the conduct of the Government has encouraged
this aggression, while we are prepared t support even that
Government in such a measure as will check and control
—( Hear, hear.) I see nothing in the position of the [louse
adopting this amendment but such as is calculated to raise
the House in pubic estimation; and in acceding to it, I, for
one, believe that we shall be performing a great public
duty.—(Cheers.)
Mr. ROEBUCK did not call the recent conduct of the
Roman Catholics in England aggression, because he consi-
dered that it had been directly encouraged by the conduct
towards the Roman Catholics of her Majesty's Government.
Now, up to the time of the Noble Lord's unfortunate letter,
did be at all consider that conduct of the Government objec-
tionable? On the contrary, he regarded it as most wise,
politic, and generous. Called upon as he was to vote as a
matter of fact, whether he thought the Government had en-
couraged the conduct of the Roman Catholics, he could not
do otherwise than say " aye
Mr. DEEDES had hitherto supported the Bill of her Ma-
jesty's Gove:nment, with the purpose, if possible, of rendering
it more efficacious in Committee, and he could not consent to
stop its progress. •
Sir T. ACLAND celled upon the House to allow no other
consideration to interfere with the progress of a measure ab-
solutely required to put down Papal aggression.
The House then divided, and the numbers were
For Mr. Urquhart's resolution 201
Against it
Majority for Ministers ... —79
The Committee on the Ecclesiastical Assumption Titles
Bill was then adjourned to Monday next, to be made the
first order of the day.

Oa the !ma, n of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, it waa agreed
that the House at t,n rising do adjourn to Monday next.
THE KAFIR CONINIITTEE.

Mr. KEOGH moved that the Committee on Kafir Tribes
consist of 17 Members, and that Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Sadleir,
and Colonel Dunne be added to tit At Committee.
Oa the first name,

Sir G. GREY proposed that the names should be postponed
till Monday, when the names his Noble Friend (Lord J. Rus-
sell; s‘oke of would appear on the votes.
Mr. HIN'JLEY said he thought some one connected with
the African Missionary Societies shuuld be placed on the
Committee.

Mr. KEOGH having persisted in his motion,
Sir B. HALL said he mu,t decidedly object to Mr. Rey-
nolds being placed on the Committee, because he had de-
clared, solemnly and openly, that he would oppose every
proposition of the Governmen•, right or wrong, and there-
fore could not bo regarded as an impartial per,on..—( Hear,
hear.) If the lion. Member spoke truth, he must go
into Committee pledged by that solemn avowal to be in-
differ.nt to the ends of just ice.--(Hear, hear.) But for that
statement he would have been a very proper member of the
Committee.

Mr. REYNOLDS rose to vindicate himself The Hon.
Baronet had had the boldness --he would not ray audacity,
for that would be unparliamentary—to say be (Mr. Rey-
nolds) would go into a Conimittxo where he was called on
to do jostled between party and party, iu the same way as be
would go into the lobby to recent a vote of want ot confi-
dence in Government. There was no analogy- between a
vote in Committee and a vote in the House. The Nestor ot
RArmers said once he would vote black was white fur his
party, but he bad nevertheless been placed on Committee
after Committee. Was he ( Mr. Reynolds) to be excluded
because he declared that, so long as Government had charge
of a certain Bil, he would look oa his votes as expressions of
want of confidence?
Mr. J. WILLIAMS must, as a Welchman, express the
deep indignation which he felt, and he was sure the whole
principality would feel, at there being no Hon. Member from
Wales on this Committee.—(Great laughter.) A. country-
man of his, who had lately returned from Katirlandi had told
hint there was a great similarity between the Kafir and the
Welch languages, and he therefore thought that if a Com-
mission on this subj:ct was appointel, Hoe. Members from
Wales should be upon it.—(Great laughter.)
After a conversation, in which several Hun. Members took
part,
Mr. KEOGH said he was willing to withdraw his motion,
but,
Lord NAAS Fuggesting that it would be better to adjourn
the debate, moved the adjournment accordingly.
The house then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion. ... ... 25
Against it ... 87
Majority
Sir J. Y. BULLER then moved that the House adjourn,
an.i it was agreed to without a division.
The adjournment took place at a Quarter before Two.

Mr. Hutchins paired, against the repeal of the malt•taa,
with Mr. Baldock.

The Marquis of Worcester paired, with Colonel D. Pen-
nant, for Mr. Cayley's motion for the repeal of the malt tax.
Mr. Sidney paired, with Mr. T. Smith, on Lord Naas's
motion.
Mr. Richards, who was in favour of Lord Naaa'a motion,
paind-with Mr. rd, who was apinst it.