The Sun.
London, England, 1851-05-24 00:00:00

THE SUN, LOND►ffN,

Mr. ROEBUCK said that the Hon. Member for
Buckinghamshire was under a alight mistake in sup-
posing that the preamble had anything to do with the
Bill, because, in point of fact, the julges would construe
the Bill without reference to the preamble. They would
consider the preamble as nothing, and look only to the
language of the claus=s.—(llea.r.) Ha confessed he
thought the Hon. and Learned Member fel. Abingdon
hail really taken the only congruous view of the sub-
ject; but he dissented from him in thinking that there
was any necessity for adopting the course which he
recommended, as well as differed from bim in his view
of the law. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had
referred to the statute of Richard 11. Now, what was
that statute? It was in reality a law to protect the
King's power, which was at that time really assailed.
Then the reason why the Act of the Ist of Elizabeth was
passed was because a previous Act had been parsed un-
der Pailip and Mary repealing those provisions against
the See of Rime, and thereby giving not only spiritual
but ecclesiastical and civil jurisdiction to the Pope in
this country. But was that the case now in this country?
No; they were here completely free from all such
domination; and a declaration by the Pope was merely
a declaration by an individual, and had no more force by
law tnan a declaration proceeding from the Wesleyan
Methodists. Therefore, the giving any pre-eminence to
the declaration of the Pope in these times was treating it
in a manner wholly impolitic. The power of the Pope
now in this cauntry was merely a moral and mental
power, and was not enforced by any legal authority.
He asserted that the present clause was either useless,
as being superseded by the second, or it went further
than it pretended.—(hear, hear.) If he recollected
aright, the present Master of the Rolls had on a former
occasion drawn a wide distinction between a person call-
ing himself bishop of a district and a person who
described himself as bishop, exercising functions within
a district. Now, he wanted to know whether, if the pre-
sent Bill passed with its preamble, any bishop appointed
by the Pope of Rome, and calling himself Bishop of
Melipotamus, or Bishop of Siga, or by any each title, and
exercising episcopal functions in any part of this king-
dom, would not be acting illegally? Was that the mean-
ing of the Noble Lord at the head of the Government?
If not, the present clause was useless; and he should like
the Attorney-General to explain the use of it, and the
meaning of the Government.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that while Le
was most anxious to offer any explanation it was in his
power to give on any point, he owned to some reluctance
to answer questions put by the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman; because, not having the slightest wish to give
offence, yet, if he questioned the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman's law, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was
angry with him, though the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
, man might be assured he could not produce the same
effect upon him (the Attorney-General). The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman was quite as wrong in respect to
the present clause as in respect to the question he put at
an early part of the evening. The first and second clause
had reference to the assumption of ecclesiastical titles
with respect to sees carved out within this kingdom; and
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman put a question re-
specting a Bishop of Melipotamus exercising jurisdiction
within a certain diocese in this country. That case
would neither come within the preamble nor the clause,
because it would not be an assumption of territorial title
in this kingdom, He was entirely of opinion, according
to the original view of the Government, that the present
clause did not carry the provisions of the Bill further
than the recital, and the reason the Government adopted
the clause was because, while it took nothing from the
efficiency of the Bill, it, in the judgment of the Hon. and
Learned Member for Midhurst and others, contained a
more solemn and emphatic declaration of the sense of
Parliament, and removed all doubt and ambiguity, if
any could exist, as to what was the law of the land, So
long as Roman Catholics exercised episcopal functions
among their own community, without assuming titles de-
rived from territory within this kingdom, neither the
present Bill nor the 10th of George IV. would at all affect
them.
Mr. ROEBUCK asked whether he was to understand
that the Pope might issue rescripts really and truly di-
viding out England, if he only called his bishops by the
titles of Melipotamus and Siga? He might thereby in
reality make them bishops of dioceses, and give them en-
tire synodical action, and yet the present Bill would not
touch them.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman had assumed that Roman Ca-
tholic bishops with such titles as he had alluded to, of
Melipotamus and Siga, &c., were capable of carrying
out synodical action. But the Hon. Gentleman should
bear in mind that the Archbishop of Westminster, as he
falsely called himself, expressly justified the recent act
of the Pope, on the ground that an episcopacy with ec-
clesiastical titles derived from sees within this realm was
necessary for synodical action.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. MONSELL wished to be informed how this recent
act of the Pope had interfered with the temporalities of
the State, and the regality of the Crown. The Roman
Catholics never claimed anything more than that they
should govern themselves in spiritual matters as they
thought best.—(Hear, hear.) How would they like
Cardinal Wiseman to judge for them? Then, if the
Roman Catholics stood upon the same footing with them,
was not the case precisely parallel?
Lord J. RUSSELL thought the Hon. Gentleman's
statement was more fitted for the second reading, of the
Bill than applicable to any amendment on the present
clause. With respect to the Wesleyan body, he bad
never heard that the Wesleyan Conference had pretended
to govern any other but the members belonging to their
own community, or had ever presumed to declare that
all Christians were bound to obey them, and that Ro-
man Catholics must submit to them.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. MONSELL called upon the Attorney-General to
answer the question he had put in reference to the ope-
ration of the present Bill on the law in Ireland.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the same
question had been asked and answered on the second
reading of the Bill. He apprehended that the Bill
would have the effect of stopping synodical action in
this way—
Mr. MONSELL wished the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman to reconcile the two statements, that this Bill
would have the effect of preventing synodical action in
England, and that it would in no degree alter the law
in Ireland as existing since the Emancipation Act.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the Eman-
cipation Act already prevented synodical action, because
it contained a provision specially relating to the assump-
tion of titles of existing sees. He might be told that
Roman Catholic Bishops in Ireland assumed those titles
notwithstanding; but it was upon that evasion of the law
that they grounded the possibility of having synodical
action. All he said was that the present Bill would
carry the law no further than as it existed at present in
Ireland in this respect, for the assumption on the part
of the Roman Catholics of titles of existing sees, and
synodical action as a consequence thereof, were already
illegal.
Mr. M'CULLAGII said that if this Bill did no more
than the Act of 1829, the Synod of Thurles was illegal.
Why then had the Government not done anything to
prohibit so flagrant a breach of the law as was committed
by the holding of the Synod of Thurles.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY urged the withdrawal of this
amendment.
Mr. NAPIER wished, by these discussions, to get at
the very spirit of the Constitution. He did not wish to
take from the Roman Catholics one iota of the rights
they at present possessed, but he would resist to the ut-
most any aggressions upon the rights and liberties of the
Crown and people of this country.
Mi. ROEBUCK thought that the Government was
to blame, and Lord John Russell above all, for leading
the people to believe that they might meet in synod in
Ireland without invading the law, and if not with the
sanction, at least with no opposition from the Govern-
ment.

nieel in legal clecumente, arid actually inserted in Acts
of Parliament ?
Sir G. GREY said that the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman had now changed the issue. He admitted that
toe Government iii Ireland had given precedence to the
Catholic hierarchy, but they were not the first to take
this course, for the Government before them had shown
them the example. Ile would ask what law existed
which prevented them addressing a Roman Catholic
bishop as " your Grace," and a Roman Catholic bishop
as " my Lord?"
Sir F. THESIGEft thought it might be convenient to
the Committee if he stated the precise course which he
intended to pursue. He bad been requested by the Hon.
Member for Buckinghamshire and toe Hon. Member for
Evesham to withdraw his amendment, but having well
deliberated on the course he ought to pursue, and not
having heard one real objection to his proposition, be
felt, in justice to himself, he was bound to persevere in
it. If hi, received any assurance that the Government
would adopt the whole of the preamble proposed by the
Hon. and Learned Member for Midhurst, be would not
have thought it necessary to bring forward his amend-
ment. Suppose he withdrew his amendment, and that
the Government clause was carried without any amend-
ment at all, his object would not only be defeated, but
the Government Bill would remain incomplete and in-
consistent. He felt that his own character required him
to do that which he thought was absolutely necessary
to make the Bill complete, and he therefore could not
consent to withdraw his amendment.
Lord J. RUSSELL said, as the Right Hon. Gentle-
man had declared it to be his intention to press his
amendment, he trusted that the Committee would pro-
ceed to discuss that amendment, and avoid going into
the general question of the Bill, or various other ques-
tion which did not properly come under discussion at
that stage of the measure. He was so far satisfied with
the arguments used by the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man the Solicitor-General immediately after the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman opposite had sat down, that he
was contented to abide by them. It was said that the
original Bill did not point as far as it was desirable it
should go; and considering that there was some force in
that argument they had altered the preamble to meet
that objection. If, however, they acceded to the amend-
ment of the Hon. and Learned Member for Abingdon,
he thought that they would take away the force and
strength it was intended that the Bill should have. It
was a Bill framed for the purpose of declaring a parti-
cular rescript of the Pope to be illegal, and of pro-
hibiting, under a certain penalty, the assumption of
certain titles which were founded upon such rescript.
Mr. ANSTEY declared, as a lawyer, that if the
amendment of the Hon. and Learned Member for Abing-
don were passed, it would be incompetent for the Roman
Catholic heirarchy in this kingdom to carry on any
ecclesiastical organisation whatever. Although he en-
tertained strong objections to the preamble of the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman the Member for Midhurst, he
thought that the Government would have done well if
they had borrowed a portion of that preamble and made
it a preface to their first clause. He was perfectly in-
different to the opinion of any one in that House or out
of that House—(Cries of " Hear.") But so far from
opposing the first clause, he was determined to vote
for it.—(lronical cheers from the Catholic Members.)
He denied that this was a step of retrogression on
the part of the Government, on the contrary, he con-
sidered it as a step in advance in the way of civil
and religious liberty.—(Hear, hear.) By such legisla-
tion as this, the Government defined and recognised the
lawful status of the Roman Catholic Church, and
showed what was legal and illegal in the Roman Catho-
lic question. The Government were acting in a
Catholic spirit by such legislation—they were acting in
the spirit of the enactment of Richard the Second, and
of the 30th of Edward the Third, and not on that of the
Act of Elizabeth. If the Legislature were prevented
from proceeding further in their present course, it would
be in consequence of the conduct of the Roman Catholic
Members, who had shown that they were too much go-
verned by their faith and too little by their impartiality
and their duties as loyal subjects of the Queen. In
speaking thus, he felt that he was representing the opi-
nions of hundreds of thousands of Roman Catholics in
that country, who, he regretted to say, had not the
courage to come forward in their own proper persons to
support those statements which be now made in their
name and as their deputy.—(lronical cheers from the
Catholic Members.) He would refer the Hon. Member
for Tipperary (Mr. Scully), who laughed at what he had
been saying, to the numerous petitions and memorials
that had been addressed to the Court of Rome from Ro-
man Catholics of this country, come of which had found
their way into the public newspapera. He would vote
against this Bill being extended to Ireland, and against
the Hon. and Learned Member for Abingdon's amend-
ment; but, as he said before, he would vote in favour of
the first clause.
Mr. WALPOLE thought that any one who considered
the amendments which he proposed in the clause would
see how carefully he bad worded them, so as to confine
himself to the specific offence with which they bad to
deal. The specific offence was the brief or rescript of
the Pope, which conferred not merely certain titles upon
the Roman Catholic bishops, but partitioned out this
kingdom and interfered with the jurisdiction of the
bishops of the Established Church. That was a grave
offence, and one which he thought should be declared so
in the preamble. He then proceeded in his preamble,
after reciting such offence, to declare that the confer-
ring of such titles was a usurpation and encroachment.
He took, then, the two recitals in his preamble as a key
to what be proposed to enact by his first clause. He had
avoided the introduction of any words which by possi-
bility migh t interfere with the purely religions or spiritual
functions of the Church. He was, therefore, opposed to
the amendment of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the
Member for Abingdon, as he thought it very unadvisable
to go beyond the mention of the specific offence which
had given rise to the Bill. In respect to Ireland being
included in the Bill there could be no mistake about the
matter, for either this was an Imperial or political ques-
tion or it was nothing. He could not consent to exclude
Ireland—at the same time he did not think it necessary
to drag it in unless the Pope did the same there that he
bad done in England. He would, therefore, suggest to
the Honourable and Learned Member for Abingdon to
withdraw his amendment, and to allow them to proceed
to the consideration of the first clause as it stood.
Mr. SADLEIR said that though it might be desirable
to hear the opinions of able lawyers upon the question it
was most important to restrain such persons as the Hon.
and Learned Member for Youghal, who, in his amiable
impetuosity, had the temerity to repeat a very stale and
hacknied allegation. It had been often said and pub-
lished in newspapers that this establishment of the hie-
rarchy in England was a needless ;and a wanton act on
the part of the Pope with a desire to disturb that peace
and order which had reigned in this kingdom. He put
it to the Committee whether the assertion of the Hon.
and Learned Member was entitled to more credence than
that of the declaration signed by Lord Shrewsbury and
a vast number of the laity? They declared that the new
penal law aimed at their bishops was an attack upon
themselves. He mentioned the names of several of the
Catholic aristocracy which were affixed to the address.
Mr. HENLEY considered the amendment proposed
by the Hon and Learned Member for Abingdon placed
the Committee in difficulty. Ho suggested that it should
be postponed until they knew what the decision of the
Committee might be on the amendment of the Hon. and
Learned Member for Midhurst.
Sir F. THESIGER was willing to take his amend-
ment in the way the most convenient for the Committee.
On the understanding that he might bring forward his
amendment afterwards, he was willing to withdraw it
for the present.
Mr. KEOGH said the discussion that had occurred
showed that his proposition of taking the preamble first
was not unreasonable. The Hon. Member for Ennis-
killen and the Honourable Member for the University
Sir GEORGE GREY said that the Government had of Dublin, who had voted against his proposition, had
that night admitted it would have been better to have
t
been charged with sending police to guard the Ro- the preamble first. As to the Hon. and Learned
man Catholic bishops assembled in synod at Thurles, Member
and by taking the preservation of order at that as- )1e was for Abingdon, he reminded him that when
Attorney-General in 1846 he gave his sanction
sembly upon themselves they had, if not directly, at o the repeal of the Act of Elizabeth, which he
least indirectly sanctioned that assembly. He was pow sought to enforce. However others might con-
happy to have that opportunity to say that he was sure the Government for their inconsistency, the Hon.
now in a situation to explain exactly what had been and Learhed Member for Abingdon was not in that po-
done by the authorities in Ireland in reference to the at-
sition.--(Laughter.)
tendance of police at the time.—(Hear, hear.) He had
The Earl
amendment of' which he i'
communicated with the authorities there, and he wished wive
n otice the admission of
now to explain that the police were not sent to guard the certain words which would declare
that the Act would
prelates or maintain order in that assembly. He was
not interfere with the bishops in the exercise of their
now in a situation to give that report a direct eontradic-
spiritual functions. They could not have a bishop
except under a Papal brief; and the present
Lion.--(Hear, hear.) The chief of the constabulary in
that locality reported that in consequence of the essem- Bill would render invalid all acts done by him—to
ordain priests—and it would moreover render all bly of the Roman Catholics to deliberate upon matters
mar-
connected with their religion, a large concourse of riages out of England illegal. A person could obtain
people was expected, and he applied for a greater force of orders anywhere, but the Roman Catholics could not
the constabulary to keep the peace, and in reply to that have bishops but by the appointment of the Pope, As
application, an additional force of fifty of the police were to vicars apostolic, they were abolished by the brief.
placed under his directions. That was done entirely In He called, then, on the Government to fulfil the asser-
the expectation of the meeting of a large concourse of tions they had made, that they did not interfere with the
people. There was nothing that could be construed into spiritual functions of the Roman Catholic bishops. He
anything like a sanction on the part of the Government quoted the opinion of the Prime Minister, and of the
of that synod.—(Hear, bear.) They certainly did not law officers of the Crown, pledging themselves not to in•
interfere to prevent the step which had then been taken, terfere with the spiritual functions of the Roman Catholic
but they did not agree in that step; and were they now
bishops.—(Hear, hear.)
to be told that because they did not anticipate that there The ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed that the
would not be a breach of the law, that they had sane-
clause declared that a certain rescript was illegal, and
tioned the presence of the police in approbation of the that all appointments under it were illegal and void, and
procession of the Roman Catholic clergy on the occasion the amendment of the Noble Lord would have them to
referred to? declare that, for certain purposes, these' appointments
Mr. WHITESIDE, in reference to what the Right were legal and valid. The Bill would not interfere with
Hon. Gentleman had said, would merely say that the had the spiritual authority of their. bishops as it had been
been informed, from the best authority, that the police heretofore exercised.
on the occasion referred to did line the road from the
Cathedral of Thurles to the College, and between the The Earl of ARUNDEL wanted to know in what
position
lines of the constabulary the Roman Catholic hierarchy they would stand who would declare they would
not interfere with the spiritual functions of their
walked. The Primate, who was clothed in the same bishops?—(Cheers.)
Roma,
to the Cathedral. His informante
, did cross the public road and Mr. MOORE said, as he understood the statement
proceed
of the Hon. and Learned Attorney-General, their arch-
further stated that it was generally supposed, from the bishops taking the titles they always had
circumstances of the
under their
being present, the po-
magistr t ' bishops and
could not exercise any spiritual authority in conformity,
authority, and the lice being assembled there
improbability of the slightest breach with the law. If that were so, then this Bill was a re-
f the peace occur--
an occasion of a religious -
ring on
Catholic bishops amongst a Roman Catholicpeople, that
procession of Roman vaersal of their just policy, a breach of a national treaty,
revocation of a solemn treaty, an act of atonement for
it was intended by the Government to lend thir sane- had ever before suffered
oar,hear.) If the the whole proceeding.—(gear, and another nation fhcted.
greater wrongs than any nation
lie warned the Govern-
tion to
addressed the went they were awaking an agitation of the ultimate
Right lion. Gentleman who had just
result
House were as intimately acquainted with Ireland of they
no argument
as Mr. KEOGH had heard against the
which did not yet dream.—(llear.)
he was, he would admit that this was not the only oc- tested the sincerity
sanction of the Government be'
casion of the nig
givenof the n Member for Midhurst and of the Noble
amendment of the Noble Lord. He tcst
o.
to the use of these titles by the Human Catholic,
bier- Lord by this amendment, when they declared they
archy.—(Hear, hear.)
would not interfere with the spiritual functions of the
Mr. ROEBUCK, in reference to what had fallen from Catholic bishops.
the Right Hon. Gentleman, asked whether that was the Lord J. RUSSELL observed that this clause declared
way the Government met this question? Was it really ,what was the law as it now stood, and he did not see
true that the Government had never sanctioned the use ' how they could, in making that declaration, be called
of these titles by the Roman Catholic hierarchy ? Had upon to say that another thing was legal which the law
the Government the face to say that the Lord-Lieute- i did not sanction.
taut of Ireland did not sanction the assumption of these Sir H. W. BARRON said if the clause declared that
titles—not merely out of courtesy; but he would ask to be law which was law, then why introduce it into an
whether precedence had not habitually been given to Act of Parliament?—(Cheers.) After the declarations
these archbkhope and bishops of the Roman Catholic made by the Government, he could not see how, in ho-
Church ?—(bear.) Had not these titles been recog- , nour, justice, or common honesty, they could refuse