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

tion, the agitation of interested men, and was not at all the
spontaneous feeling of the English nation. That was a state-
ment it was not worth while to refute.—(Hear, hear.)
Whatever might be his opinion on the merits of the Bill, or
on the necessity of doing anything, no man who knew what
had been passing in this country could entertain the slightest
doubt, or dare to deny, that that agitation was a movement
of the whole Protestant body of the country— ( Hear, hear)
—and ho said, that while he treated with respect and de-
ference the opinions of those who differed from him on reli-
gious questions, yet, as attached to the British Constitution,
and the liberty and freedom of thought and action which
belonged to that Constitution, be should be sorry indeed
that anything should. take place that should shake the
political Protestant establishment of the kingdom in
which he had the happiness to live.—( Hear, hear.)
Then he said, that the voice of the people of
England required that something should be done.—(Hear,
hear.) His Right Hon. Friend said that what the Govern-
ment had proposed was not the proper thing to do. If he
could understand at all the vague suggestions of his Right
Hon. Friend—(A laugh)—he should infer that what he
would have proposed would have been, to have entered into
some negotiation with the Court of Rome. His Right Iron.
Friend said, he thought it was absurd to legislate against
our own subjects. He (Lord Palmerston) presumed that his
Right Hon. Friend did not mean that they ere to legislate
against the Pope —(A laugh)—for if he thought our l
would not be obeyed by ourselves, surely he could notima-
gine they would have much force with the Pope—(A laugh)
his Right Hon. Friend very properly repudiated the idea
that had been thrown out by some that they ought to have
sent a hostile force to Civita Vecchia. He agreed with his
Hon. Friend that bulls were not properly met by cannon-
balls.— (A laugh.) lie sv,s quite of his Right Hon.'Fr.end's
opinion that that was not a course fitting for this conntry to
pursue, or likely to lead to any satisfactory result. 4 (Hear,
hear.) But then he said he thought it would be unbecoming
in this country to meet an act of unprovoked awgression by
sending an envoy to sue from the Bishop of Rome.-411ear.)
He thought the dignified and proper course for this country
to take was to legislate for itself and not to go to" the Pope
and say, " You have done that which has been a great affront.
You have done that which we look upon as a great violation of
our national independence, and an infringement, on the
sovereignty of the Queen, and therefore we come to you to
do something—either to retract what you haver,done or to
modify it in some degree." Of course our suit frould have
been rejected, and in what a humiliating position should we
have stood under such circumstances !;--( Hear, hear.) He
WAS quite ready to admit that it would have been'yery incon-
sistent with the course which either the members of the Go-
vernment or the majority of the Legislature hal pursued if
they had proposed to Parliament anything thaeivonld have
justified its being called a penal or persecuting enactment.
He must, in passing, say, however, that when; he saw the
letters and declarations emanating from Ronian Catholic
ecclesiastics setting up the cry of fanaticism, and persecu•
tion, and intolerance, and looked to the course of proceeding
in regard to toleration that prevailed in countries where the
Roinish priesthood were dominant, he felt tempted to ex-
claim, " Quis Merit Gracchos!" The words " persecution
and intolerance" were surely words that Catholic prelates
ought most studiously to eschew.—(Hear.) But he, for
one, never would consent to be a party to what was pro-
perly called a penal enactment; and he utterly denied that
the Bill now proposed deserved in any.senee whatever to
be so stigmatized. (Hear, hear.) In point
.ef fact, it was
merely a complement of the measure which 'removed from
the Catholic people of England the disabilitlei under which
they laboured. The Bill of 1829 prohibited Catholic pre-
lates from taking the titles of sees, or of jiny diocess or
province which belonged to the British estaMishinent. Whe-
ther by accident or not, it omitted to extenO, ,that prohibi-
tion to other places in the realm. Bnt wad Ole law consi-
dered as a mere protection for the English: 'Church ? He
would not accept it on so limited a groii4i as that. He
held that the law of 18:9 was to be a defence of the sove-
reign rights of the country ; and it was to M defended, and
justly, on the ground that they would not ' Ormit a foreign
authority. out of the United Kingdom to givb to any person
titles derived from any place within the Vriited Kingdom.
He contended, therefore, that the Bill now Eefore the House
was in principle precisely the same as the , set of 1829, and
that it made good the gap that was left in, Act ; and he
was extremely surprised that any persons 'AO were parties
to that Act, whether the proposers or supp'etters of it, should
on principle object to the measure the GoViroment had now
proposed.— (Hear, hear.) The Bill they; ,proposed was,
in its principle, exactly on the sepia ground as
the measure which formed part 'or ,the arrange-
ments of the Emancipation Act; and he co tended, further,
that being on the same ground as that met Ore, it could not
i
be justly deemed as partaking in any d., dire,
of a penal or
persecuting character.—(Hear, hear.) was said' the
Catholic Church required officers of the rif of bishops, but
for 250 years the Catholic Church in t 0 country had
gone on with vicars apostolic, and he , 'd heard in the
course of this debate no satisfactory reasOti,yelay, with vicars
apostolic, it might not still go on as Ilsretofore.—(Hear,
hear.) He contended upon these various trounds, that the
measure that was now proposed applied, ditestly to the evils
for which a remedy was demanded—(tear, hear)—he con-
tended that it imposed no restriction on the Catholic hierarchy
in this country which was inconsistent with thesperformance
of their sacred duty—(Hear, hear)—anass,o those who raid
they thought the measure, if passed, would be inoperative,
would be of no effect, would not be obeyer, he would reply
that he wholly differed from them in tjaat opinion—( Hear,
hear)—he considered that if, on the e` hand, it was a
Peculiar characteristic of the Church '6 Rome to be ag-
gressive and encroaching, on the othbk hand, it was also
characteristic of that Church to be obeilleiit to laws, to re-
spect enactments, and to make its; agtrthsions and its en-
croachments without openly violating the, laws of the land
in which it was operating.—(Hear, heat.) Judging from
past experience of the Irish Roman Catholics, he did not
contemplate that this measure, it' passed into a law, would
be disobeyed by the Roman Catholic bishops of this country.
(Hear, hear.) He believed, too, that the measure would
meet the general feeling of the British people; and it was not
to be forgotten that there was nothing in the measure to pre-
clude the Legislature from taking further steps, if furthe r
steps were required, which he earnestly hoped would never
be the case.—(Cheers.)
On the motion of Mr. H. BERKELEY, the debate was
then adjourned to Thursday.
The House adjourned at Twenty minutes past Twelve
o'clock.