The Sun.
London, England, 1851-07-30 00:00:00

up the protest of our forefathers. They would not sub-
mit to anything touching their Christian independence.
They were an independent member of the great Christian
commonwealth of nations. As such they were bound to
reject this act cf the Pope. They were doing what their
fathers did at the Reformation. They thee stated that
they adopted certain doctrines and rejected others. They
acknowledged the reformed Christian truth as set forth
in their formularies. They would not sanction any ultra-
montane doctrines. What was the ground of the Papal
rescript? Not merely that it had sent into this country new
bishops, but that it had abolished the existing epis-
copal institutions.—(Hear, hear.) There was a mixed
temporal and spiritual power in the act. By the act of
the Bishop of Rome, the very sees of the English
bishops were swept away. There was an attempt to re-
move them from the category of Christian people.
There was an abolishing of their rights of independence
as a Christian people.—(Hear.) He did not say that he
altogether approved of this Bill, but it was the best
under circumstances. The Bill had reached them at too
late a period in the session to amend it. He thought he
had now shown that something should be done, and that
this Bill, under the circumstances, was the best that
could be done; he, therefore, should take his share of
the responsibility of passing it. He did not believe that
it was taking from the Roman Catholics that which was
necessary for the exercise of their religion. Every-
thing that was necessary for the salvation of the souls of
Roman Catholics was provided by the ancient system.
The Pope had felt, in past times, that the appointment
of diocesan bishops would be so distasteful to the people
of England, that he had abstained from resorting to
that step. He had now appointed a local and territorial
Roman episcopate, and abolished, in so far as in him
lay, the existing episcopate. There was, therefore,
a ground for a national movement. This Bill did
not altogether satisfy him, because he was not sure
that they ought to have proceeded in this way at all;
but it was better to do something than let things remain
as they were. For the Legislature to do nothing, would
have led to dangerous results. They denounced the
special dogmas and claim to universal jurisdiction of the
Bishop of Rome. They wished to secure to this country
that which was its unalienable right as a Christian na-
tion. He thought that, to effect this, this Bill went too
far, and yet it did not go far enough.—(A laugh.) He
thought they could never enforco these money fines. The
Bill might have been made a self-executing measure.
The Ministers of State should never concede rank, or
right, or title to any man in virtue of a rank conferred
by the Pope. Supposing there was a Pretender to the
Crown, and that he was to appoint peerages. Why, that
would be a misdemeanor. Was it not the same with the
bishops of Rome? Why should her Majesty's Ministers
concede to these pretenders rank and title after the
bishops of this Crown? This Bill left the Roman bishops
of the colonies to take rank after the bishops of this
crown. It was too late in the session to rectify this; but
although he considered this Bill as passed, yet he trusted
their Lordships would not consider the question settled.
What, did their Lordships think of passing this Bill with
no intention of enforcing it? A penal Bill passed with the
professed intention of not enforcing, it was an encourage-
ment to further aggressions. That must be a weakening
of the Protestant cause in England. Ho believed that
the interests of humanity were at stake in maintaining
the reformed faith in England. He knew the subtlety
and power of the Roman pontiff. For generations they
had studied to obtain absolute power over the Christian
Church. He deprecated weakening the force of their
national protest by the pissing of this Bill, which was
not to be enforced. They had, not only a true creed
in England, but an apostolical Church, and that was the
Church which the Jesuits and It'ananists wished to
uproot. But he trusted their Lordships would uphold
the reformed faith. They had against them all that
the subtl-ty and power of the human intellect could
do, but they had the truth of God with thew, and he
trusted that they would hand down to their children
that pure and reformed faith which they had received
from their fathers.—(Cheers.) Is was on these grounds
that he called upon their Lordships to support the third
reading of this Bill.—(Cheers.)

Lord- STUART DE DECIES entered his protest
against this Bill, as uncalled for in this conntry,
and unjust towards Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) When
their Roman Catholic fellow-subjects wished episco-
pal institutions for the promotion of their spiritual
interests, why should they not be allowed to have
them ? Had they not bishops of their own, and
why should not the Roman Catholics have bishops?
They should remember the golden rule of doing to others
as they would be done by. For three hundred years the
Catholic Church in Ireland had been governed by arch-
bishops and bishops appointed by Papal reseripts, and
yet they are now called on to sanction a Bill which
would cut off that necessary intercourse between the
Catholics of Ireland and the see of Rome. The conse-
quence would be, that the people of Ireland would have
recourse to every species of political agitation to obtain
the repeal of this obnoxious Bill.—(Hear, hear.) Indeed
they had already established a Catholic Defence Asso-
ciation, and ere long that country would exhibit scenes
similar to what was witnessed before the passing df the
Catholic Relief Bill, in 1829. The Noble Lord then
alluded to the late outbreak in which Mr. Smith O'Brien
was involved, and said it was more owing to the exer-
tions of the defamed Catholic priesthood, than to the
presence of the military, that the people were restrained
from joining in that insurrection. Believing that this
Bill, if passed into a law, would be fatal to the welfare
and the peace of Ireland, he felt bound to vote against
the third reading.—(Hear, hear.)
The Duke of ARGYLL said he felt bound to defend
the Bill against one position which had been taken by
the Right Rev. Prelate (the Bishop of Oxford), namely,
that the Bill would be of no value if it were not carried
into effect, meaning, as he (the Duke of Argyll) inferred,
that it would be useless unless the penalties were en-
forced. To that view of the matter he must say he was
altogether opposed. He looked upon the passing of the
Bill as showing what law was established with respect
to the assumption of titles, and that knowledge he be-
lieved would prevent the Roman Catholics pursuing the
course which otherwise they might feel inclined to fol-
low. The Noble Duke then explained that in the re-
marks he had felt it his duty to make upon the protest
of the prelates of the Established Church, he by no
means meant to convey any personal offence. He ad-
mitted that at one period the Church of England had
been the great bulwark of Protestantism; but at present
it was the only Protestant Church which day by day and
week by week, was sending over converts to the Roman
Catholic Church.---(Hear.)
The Bishop of OXFORD having said a few words in
explanation,

Earl FORTESC UM next addressed their Lordships in
support of the Bill. One of the first votes the Noble
Lord said he had ever given in Parliamen wcs given
forty. six years ago, in support of Mr. Ponsonby's mo-
tion for considering the Catholic claims, and since that
period he had uniformly given his cordial support to
every measure in favour of civil and religious liberty.
He was of opinion that the present measure was called
for by the circumstances that had occurred. He hoped
the law would be obeyed without the necessity of en-
forcing the penalties to which the Right Rev. Prelate
had referred.—(Hear.) He had no doubt that Parlia-
ment would do its duty, and that if the necessity should
arise in another session, measures of a mere stringent
character would be passed.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of GLENGALL denied that the conduct of
the Catholic priests is the late insurrection deserved Unit
favourable rodeo which had been made by a Noble Earl
opposite. Ile considered that the proceedings of the
Synod of Thurles showed abundant reason why the Bill
should ba extended to Ireland.—(Hear, hear.)
Earl NELSON did not deny that an aggression had
been made in the step taken by the Pope, on the prero-
gative of the Crown; but was of opinion that the step
taken by the Government was not the course calculated
to arrest that aggression. He looked with suspicion on
the Bill now before the House. When the matter first
came forward, the Noble Lord at the head of the Govern-
ment did not take notice of it, and then, when the ag-
gression had gone to a certain length, the Noble Lord
put forward his letter, which proved a brand of discord
to the already too much divided Church of England.
The Bill, in his opinioa, would prove a deathblow to the
Present Ministry.
1 The Marquis of SLIGO felt it to be his duty to enter
his protest against the Bill, which ho complained of as
an unfair attack on the rights and privileges of the
Roman Catholics of Ireland, seeing that the alleged
offence was confined to England.
Lord REDESDALE adverted to the course taken by
Lord Stanley (now the Earl of Derby) on this question,
who said if the measure were one calculated to support
the prerogative of the Crown, that he would support it.
And looking at the whole question, be (Lord Bodes-
dale) felt it his duty to give his entire support to
the Bill, the object of which was to oppose the aggres-
sion, not merely as a spiritual one, but as a temporal
one also; and viewing it in that light, it completely, he
should say, cut the ground from under those who op-
posed the aggression merely as a spiritual one. Ile
looked upon the whole proceeding as an ultramontane
one, intended to entrap the most respectable portion of
the Roman Catholics into support of it. The Noble
Marquis who had just sat down complained that an at-
tack had been made by the measure on the religious
rights of the people of Ireland, seeing, as he said, that
the offence was confined to England; but, looking to
the conduct of the Roman Catholic priests in Ireland,
and the manner in which they viewed and spoke of the
Established Church of this country, he thought that
her Majesty's Government were perfectly justified in
applying the Bill to that country. He felt that the Bill
was called for, and hoped that it would become law this
session. He wished, whatever course might be taken,
that Roman Catholics and Protestants might continue to
live in peace.—(Hear.)
Viscount GAGE would endeavour to show to their
Lordships that since the Catholic Emancipation Act of
1829 the Roman Catholics had in every way proved
themselves worthy of their civil and religious rights ;
and that the step recently taken by the Pope was
taken on the recommendation of the English Roman.
Catholic hierarchy alone, for the purposes of the disci-
pline of the Roman Catholic Church in this country,:and
not by the Pope, as from himself; or with a view to any
assumption of power against the Crown of this country.
All the evidence, including that of Cardinal Wiseman,
proved that, and that the Popo had nothing whatever
to do with what was spoken of as Papal aggression. He
(Viscount Gage) was in a position to show that the
English Roman Catholic hierarchy had ground for the
step which they had thus recommended to the consi-
deration .of the Pope --a step solely intended for the
establishing of their own Church government, and
their Lordships might take his word for it that the
Roman Catholic hierarchy were no more frightened
about this proceeding than the kcenest politi-
cian in their Lordships' House.—(Cries of " Hear,
hear.") Ho thought that their Lordships ought
to legislate cautiously on this question.—(Hear, hear.)
The Noble Earl was almost innudihle in the gallery, but
he was uuderszoed to express en ov-nion to the effect that
a great fuss was being made about a shadow. They
were, he thought, breaking a butterfly upon a wheel.

The Roman Catholic Church would not cam ono lax-
pence about their Bill. They should prohibit the e,bsorp-
tion of wealth and property by that Church, but he ri)-
gretted that the Government appeared to be withd, rawirig
their attention from realities, from the establisl imen ta
for supportieg and propogating the Roman Catholi Le faith
in this country, to the ideal aggression which ha d been
made by the appointment of those bishops by- the see of
Rome.—(Hear )
Earl GHIA explained with regard to what had fallen
from the Bishop of Oxford, that in the cola dies the
Church of Rome was by law placed upon the same foot-
ing as the Protestant Church. In some of the cola niea
they shared equally in the Government grants, anal. in
others from having acquired them from Roman C athelic
countries they were the established church. Under these
circumstances it was utterly impossible to deny their
claim to any social distinctions they might: pO9 serm.
For himself, he regretted that these titles sh oulti
exist at all in the colonies, and if be had had the
power to make any alteration and go back, it wi mitt
be to deprive them all of titles, and place thew u, pon
an exact equality. It was an anomaly to encumber men.
with titles and dignities, whose incomes did not in a U.QI3,
instances enable them to sustain the rank of cam mon
clergymen. They did not recognise any district ti ties,
only the rank which any clergyman held in his nwn
church, as Bishop Wilson or Archbishop Poulden. If
this distinction was attended to, much misapprehens ion
would have been removed.

Tao Bill was then read a third time without opt to -
sition.
Lord MONTEAGLE then moved the addition of a
clause, with a view to remove certain doubts that neig it ;
arise from misconception of the meaning of the Legis'ef
tore. He proposed a clause, the effect of which w ;,
that if the Roman Catholic prelates would use the de -
sienations in the Catholic Bequests Act, they should fee 3
themselves from the penalties in this Bill. He sake( 1
their Lordships whether they could suppose that at thi
time Lord Cornwallis was Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland ,
and Lord Castlereagh and the Duke of Portland wers
Ministers of England, ho asked them to say if al
that time Papal bulls had been received in this countr s '
appointing Roman Catholic bishops, as had recent) a'
been done, whether the Ministers he had alluded i ;o
would have ventured to instruct the Lent 1-
Lieutenant to send a message to the Iris h
Parliament, recommending the Irish Lords and Con 1-
mons to pass such a measure for Ireland as the one no Pr
before their Lordships, on the ground that there he cl
been a Papal aggression in England? Why, if such al
absurd thing had been attempted, the Irish Parliamerd
would have laughed the Government to scorn.—(Hear
hear.) The Noble Lord repeated the objections to Um
Bill which he urged in the former debate, and concludei
by moving that the words he had proposed should he
brought up and added to the clause.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said he would n( ti
give a negative to the proposition of the Noble Lot .e
without briefly stating his reasons for doing so. TI
Noble Lord seemed to perceive the same dangers in th le
measure which had been alluded to by the Noble Ea ri
(the Earl of Aberdeen) who commenced the discussie 0•
The Noble Earl seemed to think that mischief wou Id
ensue—that indictments might be instituted, the effect . of
which would be to debar Roman Catholic prelates fro ra
the free exercise of the Roman Catholic religion, au t I
from that protection of the law which he asserted they
now enjoyed, and which the present Bill would not,,ire
point of fact,' deprive them of.—(Hear.) The Noble
Lord denied on a former night that such a Bill was:at
all necessary, and argued that it should not - has'
been proposed; but had such a course been pursued, an a •
had the Government been quiescent, there can be r it
doubt that the public excitement would have been great /
incteastd, and that a short time would have elapsed e; to
they would have witnessed still farther encroachmen to
on the part of the Pope, and have seen the Protests) it
Church considerably weakened in its influence. Whe le
they had seen in Catholic countries the difficulties whit
powerful eeveteigns had to encounter in meeting the et I'
crottchments of the Church, he felt perfectly sure th tt
the course which Government had pursued was the oal /
safe and proper course, under the circumstances in whit rtt
the country was placed. He admitted that there was
portion of this Bill which he would rather not have se( at
in it. He meant the clause that gave power to an i
former to prosecute for penalties; but notwithstandit tR
that objectionable portion, he tought the Bill, as
whole, was the best measure they could have adopted. It
had been said that the power claimed over the Rom. la
Catholics was spiritual, and that territorial power w 0
never contemplated; but to any one who looked calm .11
at the subject, it must appear that the step taken by t be
Pope was of a temporal as well as of a spiritual ch s-
meter. He did not think, therefore, that the propos,
amendment was necessary, and he trusted that tlic
Lordships would be of that opinion, and while the
would give the Roman Catholic the full and free exei
cise of his religion, they would, on the other hand, tal ;.4)
such a course as would secure the prerogative of
the Crown, and effectually check any undue inrot td
upon it.
The Earl ST. GERMANS was of opinion that tl to
speech of the Noble Marquis who had just sat dov 111
contained in itself arguments in support of the Nob le
Lord (Lord Monteagle's) amendment. The wor
adopted by his Noble Friend in his amendment, in
speaking of the Roman Catholic bishops of Irelar
were in the very words which were commonly made t 00
of by the Noble Marquis himself (the Marquis of Lai Ise
downe) in speaking of those bishops. And it was on
record that, whenever they were spoken of, either off foie
ally or by historians, they were designated as Rot in lin
Catholic bishops of so and so, as, for instance, tke Ro-
men Catholie Archbishop of Armagh, the Roman eta-
tholic Archbishop of Tuaw. There was not until come
paratively modern times any instance of Roman Catho
lie bishops being designated " Vicars Apostolic" ire -thes 0
kingdoms, and the first vicar apostolic of whom that
was any record was, he believed, appointed in thi s
country by Gregory XV. There could be no quern 'tint I
that the Roman Catholic archbishops and bishot
Ireland were the direct and lineal descendents of tb
original bishops appointed by the see of Rome in slant
country. Looking et all the circumstances, he sh De la
support the amendment of his Noble Friend.
Lord CRAN WORTH felt it necessary, in cootie'
quence of observations which had been made in allot lion
to him by the Noble Earl who had just sat down, to
'explain that what he would be understood as hav irig,
said was, not that if Dr. Wiseman should call him tell
the Archbishop of Westminster he would expose him sell
to penalties under the provisions of the Bill; but tha tf
be should call himself the Roman Catholic Archbish oP
officiating in the district of Westminster, which was
signed to him, or that of the Roman Catholic Archbish oP
of Dublin, or act in the same way in relation to the ail'
trict in which he presided, and that he was officiating el;
Roman Catholic archbishop within that district, he welsh'
not be liable to penalties.
The Bishop of OXFORD said the Noble Earl (Earl
St. Germans) had fallen into a great error ha stathig
that the Roman Catholic bishops in Ireland were lineally
descended from the ancient Roman Catholic bishops sr
pointed/ by the see of Rome. The fact was that a ceer
tury, or almost a century of a break had occurred: be'
tween them, and the schism which led to it was greater
than that which had occurred in this country.
Lord MONTEAGLE replied, arid consented to with'
draw the clause. _ _

_
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
CHARITABL 1.: TRUSTS BILL.
Oa the motion of the LOAD CHANCELLO.R their
L:•rdships went into Committee on the Charitable Trust)
Bill.

Clauses 1 and 2 were agreed to.
Clause 3, after some discussion, was agreed to.
Clauses up to 18 inclusive were agreed to.
On clause 19,
Earl PO WIS moved the omission of the clause.
After SOILIC discussion the clause was agreed to.
The Duke of CLEVELAND then moved that the
three London royal hospitals should be exempted from
the provisions of the Bill.
The Earl of WARWICK, as we understood, supportei
the motion.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said the Noble Del°
and the Noble Earl had altogether mistaken the o bjeci
of the Bill. No one would interfere with the man air
meat of Christ's Hospital, which had been particuLall
alluded to by the Noble Duke. It had been thou.kb.
right by Parliament to adopt a general system for ti".:
management of charities. There were a great mes.l3Y
other charities which it was proposed to exempt, bait'
unless they should exempt all, they could not fai
exempt any. The real question was, were their Lol re
ships prepared to exempt particular charities, or aOl
charities, from the operation of the Bill.
The arl of CHICHESTER said they found by (0'
perience that large charities were generally better Inv
Lined than small ones ; yet in all large charities it waa
occasionally necessary to take steps to guard aga.;l3l'
abuses. The effect of the proposed system would be i°
secure the charities now in existence.
The Marquis of SALISBURY supported the ameild.
mont.

The amendment was then put, and negatived with 0°
a division.

The Bill was then passed through Committee, and I 113°
House resumed.
Tho House then went into Committee on the Lea Or
hold Tenure (Ireland) Act Amendment Bill, which
passed through Committee.
Their Lordships adjourned at a Quarter past Elevela
o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 29,
:(Continued from our Fourt Edition of yesterday.)
On the SPEAKER resuming the chair at half-pass 01°'
o'clock,
Petitions against the removal of the Crystal Pahtcf;
and in favour of a winter garden, w ere presented by Pi'
J. Walmsley, from residents in and visitors to the tee'
tropolis, and from Kensington; by Mr. Heywood, f:49'"
Chelsea; by Mr. J. Bell, from Piccadilly and frell
Brompton; by Mr. Ewart, from Pimlico and the city °
London; by Mr. Geach, from Westminster, Horneastle'
and Skipton; by Mr. Hastie. from Paisley; by Mr. Pr
soy, from Newark; by Mr. Rumboid, from YarmoutN.
by Mr. Heald, from the mayor and other inhabitants ).:
Stockport; and by Colonel Sibthorp, from Chelsea, 1;
presenting which the Hon. and Gallant Member said 11
would do everything in his power to oppose it. Ash"
A petition was presented by Mr. DUNCAN, from .
curers in the district of Fraserburgh, in favour of conti-
nuing the Board of Fisheries for Scotland; and a petit%
from Mr. A. Gordon, praying for the abolition of t'
board, was presented by Mr. ANDEnsoN.
The Marquis of BLANDFORD gave notice that of
would, next session, call attention to the necessity v.
rendering more effectual the parochial system of the °I
tablished Chure b.

SIR T. TURTON'S CASE. Lora
Mr. ELLIO L, in answer to questions from —°r
Jocelyn,atated that a draught Act for the relief of C%;
tr,in sufferers by the insolvency of Sir T. Torte°
laid before the Council on the 27ila of Decerubur, u°a.
was ordered to be published for general informatioOf an
to be reconsidered in Council an the 27th of Februtir'•