The Sun.
London, England, 1851-05-31 00:00:00

SUN,

sion, much staggered at this preposition; but the more
they examieed Into the question, the alone convieeei
were they of the expo diency of the course which I,e aro•
posed. If their Lordship's thought, when this Bill got
into Committee, the meaeure might be in some degree
modified, provided it could be satisfactorily made out
that Roman Catholics would be enabled to do what the
law euthorized them to do, and to do it effectually, lie
should hare no difficulty in acceding to such a modifi-
cation."
There was one observation in what he had just
read which did not appear to him to be in exact
accordance with the great acuteness of his Noble and
Learned Friend. He appeared to have been some-
what surprised that such a statute as that of the
13th of Elizabeth had ever been passed in Ireland. He
(Sir J. Graham) was not at all surprised at it. The
Noble and Learned Lord had stated the reason, viz , that
there-fourths of the inhabitants of Ireland were Roman
Catholics. In England it was quite possible to treat the
Roman Catholics as a sect; but in Ireland the Roman
Catholics were a nation, and they must be treated as a
nation.—(Cheers.) But to return to the declaratory
clause, he feared it went infinitely further than the Go-
vernment intended when they introduced the Bill. He
confessed ho was alarmed at the doubt and ambiguity in
Which it was shrouded. He knew not whether the At-
torney-General for Ireland was in his place.—(lronical
cries of " Hear, hear.") He should be sorry if it were
thought he intended any sneer at the Right Hon. and
Learned Gentleman, who had raised himself to eminence
in his profession amid many rivals. He had had the
disadvantage of coming into that House late in life, a
disadvantage which he felt acutely for his sake; but still
he occupied an eminent situation, and he (Sir J. Graham)
would like to hear his opinion on the effect of this clause.
[Mr. Hatchell here entered the House.] He was glad
to see the Right Hon. Gentleman in his place. He
was sure the House would testify that ho had said
nothing unkind of the Right Hon. Gentleman.—(Hear,
hear.) He (Sir James Graham) repeated that he was
alarmed at the ambiguity of the present clause. Ho was
still more alarmed when he heard the Government de-
clare their intention to revive old and dormant statutes
if the present enactment should prove insufficient. It
had been happily said by Curran that old statutes hung
like rusty armour, and were only endured because they
were not executed; and it was their inactivity alone which
rendered them tolerable in a free country.—(Hear, hear.)
Ile (Sir J. Graham) deeply regretted, therefore, to have
heard allusions made by her Majesty's Government to
the possible revival of old statutes on this subject.—
(Hear, hear.) Nothing ever gratified him more than the
conduct of the Government in withdrawing the second
and third clauses of their original Bill, looking, as he
did, upon that step as an indication of that spirit which
actuated their councils on religious questions generally,
and of which he approved. He thought the afterthought
of adopting this clause most unfortunate, and he must
protest against it, as he could not satisfy himself as to
the precise extent to which the House would be carried
if it adopted the clause blindfolded.—(Hear.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL took the liberty of
Saying. with reference to the statement of the Right
Hon. Gentleman, that the Master of the Rolls, on a pre-
vious discussion, had said that the Pope had the power
by law to appoint ecclesiastical persons in this country
with dioceses and sees, that the Right Hon. Gentleman
was labouring under a complete mistake.
Sir J. GRAHAM here read the note he had taken at
the time of the words of the Master of the Rolls, to the
effect that " he believed he was correct in saying, and he
had since given an opinion, that there was nothing in the
law 'to prevent the Pope from parcelling out the country
into archbishoprics and bishoprics."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, the Master of
the Rolls had given no opinion on the subject to which
be was not a party, and he was therefore confident that
if the Master of the Rolls used the words quoted he must
have used them with some restriction and qualification.
The best proof of that was the original Bill drawn up
by the Master of the Rolls, the preamble of which stated
that .‘ the attempt to establish under colour of au-
thority from the See of Rome, or otherwise, such pre-
tended sees and dioceses, &c., is illegal and void."—
(Hear, hoar.) But passing now to the general argu-
ment of the Right Hon. Gentleman, he must say that
almost all the points raised by him had been previously
discussed and answered to the satisfaction, he believed,
of the House generally—(oh !)—though not, perhaps,
to the satisfaction of every gentleman on the opposite
benches. The Right Hon. Gentleman contended that
the present clause enacted and created a new law. That
he (the Attorney-General) denied, maintaining that it
did nothing more than declare the law as expressed in
the recital of the preamble; and the reason, as he had
explained before, why the Government had thought
right to yield to the suggestion of the Hon. and Learned
Member for Midhurst, and consent to the insertion of the
present clause, was because they believed, while it carried
thematter no further than the preamble, it amounted to a
more solemn and emphatic declaration that this attempt
on the part of the Pope was contrary to the law and
constitution of this kingdom. He took the liberty of
asking, did any Hon. Gentleman deny the law as ex-
pressed in the recital of the Bill—that it was not com-
petent for the See of Rome to establish archbishops and
bishops with territorial titles within this kingdom; and
if that could not be denied to be the law, it followed as a
necessary consequence that the brief, rescript, or letters
apostolical conferring such jurisdiction or title was void
also. The clause was simply declaratory, and, if issue
were joined with him on that point, he was prepared to
maintain that no foreign power, whoever he might be,
had the right to confer territorial titles in this kingdom
without tho consent of the Crown.—(Hear, hear.) Con-
sequently the clause went no further than to declare the
law as it existed. The Right Hon. Gentleman went on
to say that the clause would be attended with mischiev-
ous consequences, because it struck at the exercise of the
ecclesiastical functions of the Roman Catholic Chursh
in Ireland, and would thereby invalidate the ordination
of Roman Catholic priests, and marriages celebrated by
them. But, again he asked, were rescripts or bulls from
the Pope appointing to territorial sees in this kingdom
now legal and valid?—(Hear, hear.) Whatever might
have been the intention of Sir Robert Peel's Govern-
ment, the Act of Elizabeth certainly was only repealed
so far as the penalty of treason attached to the intro-
duction of bulls into this country, bat their intro-
duction into England, at any rate, was continued as an
offence in the most express terms. The Right Hon.
Gentleman stated that it was now proposed, by the pre-
sent clause, to affect in a great degree the Roman Ca-
tholic ecclesiastical and spiritual authority in Ireland.
Now, the Act of 10th George IV. rendered the assump-
tion by Roman Catholics of episcopal titles derived from
existing sees illegal and void, and yet there was not a
single priest in Ireland with respect to whose ordination
a question had been brought before a court of law. It
was therefore clear that those inconveniences which the
Right Honourable Gentleman apprehended had not fol-
lowed from he present law.—(Hear, hear.) What mar-
riage, he asked, had been annulled, what offspring,
otherwise legitimate, had been bastardised in conse-
quence of any one asserting that the ordination of priests
by Roman Catholic bishops in Ireland was an illegal
transaction The thing had never been heard of ;
because, with respect to marriage and the consequence
of marriage, it was enough that there was a de facto
priest exercising his functions in a chapel ; and the or-
dination of the priest on the validity of the marriage
never came into question. The present Bill placed the
assumption of new titles on the same footing as the as-
sumption of existing titles. Its object and scope wits
not to interfere with the full and perfect exercise of the
spiritual functions of the Roman Catholic Church, but
solely to prevent a foreign power granting territorial
titles within this kingdom. The Right Honourable Gen-
tleman referred to the examination of Dr. Wiseman at
the bar of the House of Lords. Dr. Wiseman was
called as an expert, to show what were the usages of the
Catholic Church, and questions put to him to test his
competency did not involve a recognition of his jurisdic-
tion. But what if they had? Dr. Wiseman was at thi t
time vicar-apostolic, and he declared that as such he ex-
ercised all the jurisdiction, ecclesiastical and spiritual, to
which the Right Hon. Gentleman bad referred. If so,
could there be a more satisfactory proof that this recent
rescript of the Pope, and the invasion of the sovereignty
of the kingdom by dividing it into dioceses, were utterly
uncalled for?—(Hear, hear.) With regard to what the
Right Hon. Gentleman said as to the probability of pro-
secutions under the present clause, he was perfeetly
convinced that it created no fresh opportunity for
such a course of proceeding. The clause was
declaratory, and if any prosecution for misdemeanour,
for assuming these unlawful titles, could be instituted,
they could equally be instituted without the present
clause.
in reference to what had fallen
froSmirthje. RMGaiteArTioAf Itihe Rolls, read from Hansard the
following extract from a speech delivered by that
learned individual on the 21st of March last:—
On the debate on the Bhoillrefsoiratztaabal i sping
ddmi pel
no -t
matic relations with Rome,
which was proposed by the then Hon. Member fore
could
Lam-
bath, and said that as the law stood the Pope
parcel out the country into bishoprics and archbishoprics;
that if the House introduced the amendment which pro-
hibited dealing with spiritual matters, the Pope would
still be able so to divide the country, and there would be
nothing to prevent him; and that the
diplomatic ions
with him. That was to say, he depreca e suchld a mea-
sure, and was desirous that the House shou
kpeasssucha
Bill which would enable the Government Wta
steps as would prevent it. That was entirely
intone accor-
dance
with what he now said, and he believe e was
correct in saying it, and had since given an oepirnoione,ftrboamt
there was nothing in the law to prevent th
parcelling out the country into archbishoprics and
.
bishoprics; that there was a law to prevent the
intro-
duction of bulls, but no law to prevent him from parce
ling out the country."
The Attorney-General bad argued, that when Dr.
Wiseman was examined at the bar of the House he was
bishop apostolic, and yet possessed all the power of other
bishops with respect to the ordination of priests; but let
the House recollect that the only difference between a
bishop-apostolic with a district and a Catholic bishop
with a dioces was, that the former held directly from
and was the mere creature of the rope, who then pre-
tended to be Bishop of England, and that the latter was
one degree further removed from that potentate.
Mr. O'FERRALL, who was imperfectly heard, was
understood to say that with respect to the prohibitory
clause of 1829, it was distinctly stated at the time to a
deputation, of which he was one, that it was inserted to
meet the views of the then King and other persons, but
that it was not the intention of the proposers of the
Bill to put that provision into effect. It was often made
a reproach in that House that the Catholic Members
were under the entire influence of their priests. He ut-
terly denied the imputation; but, if true, would it not
expose them to the suspicion, if the present Bill passed,
that they would always be ready to support the Govern-
ment of the day, on the understanding that the Bill
should not be enforced? He never had anticipated,
after 20 years' association with the Members of the Go-
vernment in that Rouse, that the moment could have

THE

arrived when he would refuse them his eonfidene. The
Governitint might hare been in a position which ren-
dered it imperative on them to propose legislation on the
subject; but ha complained of the mode in which that
legi,lation had been introduced, and it was painful to
hear the Noble Lord stae that in 1845 he held opinions
with respect to the 'lonian Catholics which he no longer
entertained. Such being the case, he felt bound to
withdraw, though it pained him to do so, the confidence,
both personal and puliqcal, ho had reposed in the Noble
Lord. _ _ _

Mr. HATCHELL having referred to the kind manner
in which the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham) had
addressed hint with reference to the operation of the Bill,
said he would now state what ho conceived to be the ex-
isting law of Irelaud on the subject, to see whether the
pressnt law did more than re-enact its provisions. In
the 13th of Elizabeth an Act passed, which did not ex-
tend to Ireland; but in the 2d of Elizabeth a similar
law was passed, which did extend to Ireland. It had
been admitted that the Act of Richard had now been
repealed. It must be admitted that in the present day
the Act could nut be pat into operation. The 13th of
Elizabeth was still in force. No doubt bishops having
spiritual authority were addressed by their own people
by their respective titles. In ISO 9 it was judicially
decided by Lord Manners, with reference to tlee Bishop of
Cashel end the Bishop of Waterford, who were made
trustees to a will, that they could not bo described by their
territorial titles, which they held as bishops of the Church
of Rome. With reference to the Act of '29, it came with
some degree of alarm upon the Protestant p wtion of the
country; but up to that time the law was. established
against the Catholic bishops having territorial titles, and
the only addition made in the Bill was as to the creation
of new dioceses. Such a bishop could not ordain a
priest; and all marriages, if performed by him, were
void. He would come to the Act of '44, which, it was
said give them a right to assume their titles. Now he
thought, if they looked at the statute, it provided the
very contrary. An indictment under this clause would
not lie. If any indictment was preferred it alhould be on
the old law, for this law prohibited nothing. With re-
spect to the penalty he would not then advert, but he
thought it his duty to present those few observations
with regard to the law of the case.—(gear.)
Mr. MOORE said, the Right Hon. and Lc-lamed Gen.
tleman declared that the present Bill was a re-enacting
of the law, and that though it did exist at present, yet that
it was not put in force because the law was obsolete. But
this re-enactment would give efficiency to tha law which
did not exist before, and therefore the Ronac;n Catholics
would find themselves, if this Bill passed, in a worse
position than they were in at present.
Mr. WALPOLE said he wished to say a few words
on the clause which he had first proposed, and which
had been now introduced into the Bill. lie was cer-
tainly taken by surprise by the observatiorss. If the
Hon. Gentleman had applied his attention to it ho would
have found that there was no ambiguity in the clause,
or any discrepancy between the clauses. This clause
did not alter the law, but left it as it was bef ere. It did
not apply to Ireland beyond the antecedent law. What
the meaning of the brief was under the statute of
diehard 11. was brought to the test in the case of Lalor.
Van Espin, who was considered a great authority, stated
that the Pope had ,no authority to issue a 'bull for the
appointment of bishops without the placet of the Crown.
Schramn, who was only second to him in authority,
laid down the same principle, which was in utnison with
the general law of nations and the law of England.
When such is the case, ho would ask wily should
England, because it was a Protestant ce,untry, be
prevented from doing the same thing when the
privileges of the Crown were endangered ? It
was also the unwritten law. The words wiadah he had
embodied in the clause were taken from the statute of
Richard the Second, which course he adopted in
order to avoid introducing any new disability sLgainst the
Roman Catholics. The Hon. and Learned :d.ember for
Athlone said, that when the statute of Riclaterd the Se-
cond was passed, the Roman Catholic was the religion
of the country, which made a great distinctil,on. That
did not apply to the case of Lalor. This country was
then as much Protestant as it is now. The indictment
preferred in that case was, that actions under the bull
touched " the King's crown and royal diwaity," and
then went on to describe his acts under the bell in ap-
pointing bishops and priests to parishes. Such, then,
was the state of the law they were now called upon to
declare. The first clause in this Bill did that and no
more. He would ask did this bull refer only to spiri-
tuals? They appeared to have forgotten it. He would
therefore recall their attention to it. The Honourable
and Learned Gentleman then quoted the biel I, and ar-
gued that by constituting districts as dioceme a and the
Pope reserving all power to himself, and ig a oring the
existence of any other dioceses in the country, a .nd disre-
garding the authority and pleasure of the Quo an in this
assumption of authority, brought it within the sphere of
temporalities. He said ho had reason to find f ault with
his Right Honourable Friend in not referri ag to the
preamble, which recited the bull of St ptember,
1829, appointing dioceses "in England," w hich was
afterwards altered to " the United Kingdoria," which
had the same effect. The Right Hon. Gentlei nan said
it had a larger scope, and that it would appl y beyond
England. That was not to deal fairly with the clause.
and to mislead the Houss. It did not go farthcr than to
prohibit such briefs as were prohibited by the statute of
Richard the Second. If the other amendme ate were
carried this would lay -the foundation for a clause to
prevent the introduction of other bulls and briefs. He
put it to the Right Hon. Gentleman to sal that the
clause would extend to all other briefs—to the ,se issued
to vicars apostolic. Certainly, no lawyer woub d give an
opinion to that effect. At all events, it was not his in•
tention that it should have that effect. It was said that
this law was revived in a persecuting spirit. :How was
that made out ? When they faund statutes were in
force, instead of allowing them to continue dormant,
they ought to renew them as soon as they found persons
seeking to evade them. If the law had not be( n left in
that state, and if the statute of Elizabeth had not been
repealed, this bull would not have been brought: into this
country, but by leaving it in that state, it led people to
believe the introduction of these bulls was not con-
trary to law. When the Noble Lord stated eniat other
laws might be necessary, that statement gave
great satisfaction when it was considered in wl sat spirit
that declaration was made.—(Hear, hear.) Ile and all
others declared they had no intention to interfere with
the spiritual functions of the Roman Catholics,. but Hon.
Gentlemen, in their speeches, begged the question, and
assumed that such was the object of the Bill, but he had
heard nothing which showed that such would be the
effect of the Bill. He would state the reasons why the
declarations should be made. First, because Perlis:meat
had a right to uphold what was lawful agaisnst what
was unlawful. Secondly, because it was a natbonal pro-
test against a usurpation. Thirdly, it was an :3 ssurance
to the Protestant people that they intended to adhere to
the principles of the Reformation • and fourthly, it was
a protection to the Roman Catholics, who were placed
between the head of their Church and their Sovereign,
as had been declared by Lord Beaumont, Lord Camoys,
and the Duke of Norfolk. These were the retie ons why
the declaration should be made. They ought to stand
by them. If the brief was not condemned, it -would be
a test of want of foresight, or want of courage, :and want
of wisdom in not foreseeing the consequences, and not
providing against them, and by tolerating there to allow
them to gain the sanction of time.
Sir J. GRAHAM said, his Hon. and Learned Friend
hart given four reasons for this clause. As to, the last,
he (Sir J. Graham) was not exactly aware or the ex-
pressions Lord Beaumont or Lord Camoys mi.s.s,ht' have
Burk used, but he remembered a saying of Mr. a's appli-
cable to this question—that members of a sect were the
least competent judges of what was necessa rjs for the
free exercise of the religion of another sect. Now, he
regarded this clause as little short of a declaration of
war against 8,000,000 of our fellow•countr ymen.—
(Hear, hear.) He had endeavoured to make: himself
master of this Bill, and had endeavoured to reconcile it
with the variances that occurred to him, but he found it
impossible to do so. The first part of the pream.ble of his
Hon. and Learned Friend was almost identical .with that
of the Government, except that his Hon. and Learned
Friend used the plain unambiguous term "of the king-
dom of England," and the Government used I.;he term,
" within the United kingdom." But then Caine words
which greatly extended the scope of what his Hon. and
Learned Friend originally referred to; for the clause
said that all such rescripts should be null and void, not
confining the operation of the Bill to this partdcular re-
script, but extending it to all others; and as the Right
Hon. Gentleman the Attorney-General for Ireland, who
had addressed the Committee so perspicuousle and in a
manner so worthy of the office he tilled—(Hear)---had said
all rescripts in Ireland would fall under the prce visions of
this declaratory clause. His Hon. and Learned Friend
had referred to the statute of Richard; but lb e (Sir J.
Graham) had also referred to that statute when ho ad-
dressed the Committee, and had drawn from an infe-
rence opposite to that of his Hon. and Learresel Friend.
That statute was passed in Catholic times, whets the Ca-
tholic religion was the established religion of the coun-
try; and the Pope of Rome, in the exercise of the powers
which were allowed by the constitutional authorities of
England at that time, began to encroach on the legality
of the Crown and purported to assign temporalities under
the authority of his temporal power.—(Hear, hisar.) But
it never said that as to the appointment of bishop to the
respective sees there should be any interference what-
ever, and they all rested with the Pope of lee,me. Ho
(Sir J. Graham) contended, that throughout Europe the
Pope was the head of the Catholic Church in spiritual
matters, and it was only where the Roman Catholic reli-
gion was the endowed religion that the consent of the So-
vereign was required. And as the Crown, neither by the
,had any right to interfere
jurisdiction common
with regard to of the authority of the Pope
religion unendoweci he contended that
it was begging the - '
quhestton to refer to the statute of
Richard IL, and say trout by this proceeding of the Pope
the regality of thecw,lavas affected. The) Roman
Catholic religion being
unendowed,e he contended there
th
was no excess whatever ofspiritual linr.t.t of the
Pope's jurisdiction. The Hon. and
L
said he wished the whole mattertoliieeasrented Gentleman
fero
i in
egood
thus:
old Saxon simplicity. If so the uet
Gen-
tleman's preamble ought to be framed.
t and Lett
it is expedient, on account of public clan% Learned
ur er
o Hee"
a
nod o i
t eventro
check th e t spread
full
and o
free exercise of its
l Popery throughout this
'
realm,ear)—"
spiritual authority in the same, bo it enacted.''—(Hear,
hear.) As to the power of indictment under the Bill
h
it was clear to him that its range would be very exten-
sive. The first section expressly declared that not only
the brief, rescript, or letters apostolical, but "all and
every the jurisdiction, authority, pro-eminence, or title
conferred, or pretended to be conferred thereby, ate and
shall be, and be deemed, unlawful and void." It fol-
lowed, therefore, that every attempt to exercise such
jurisdiction or authority, every act intended to promote
or assist it, must be also oat , evsfu 1 for when a statute
positively declared a thing unlawful it rendeeed every-
thing which was done for its support or
.e ncourage-
ment unlawful also. " Quanclo aliquid prolnio itur, pro-
hibitor et moo per. quod devenitur ad illad," said Lord

Coke in his 3d Inst., 153. Every such act or attempt
must be a contempt of the statute; and it was laid down
by Hawkins, in his "Pleas of the Co-vn," vol. i, chap.
22, that "every contempt of a statute is indictable, if no
other punishment is limited." SJ again, Lord Chief
Baron Cow, n, in his " Di;;est" (tit. " Indictment"), S9isl
" So for anything generally proaleited by statute, if it
be done, an indictment lies for it;" that as " an attempt
to commit a misdemeanour (aud undoubtedly the viola-
tion of a statute which is prohibitory, as it is if it de-
clares a thing unlawful, is a rnilerneanonr) had been
decided in many cases to be itself a misdemeanour."
That the Bill in this case was prohibitory, and intended
by the Legislature so to be, there could be no doubt. for
the preamble, among other things, expressly said, " It is
expedient to prohibit the assumption of such titles in
respect of any places within the United Kingdom," &c.;
" be it therefore enacted," &e., and them came the first
clause. The Attorney-General just now had suggested
that in the opinion he had put forward in his previous
speech he had been instructed by some one; but such
was not the case as to that speech; but in what he now
cited he certainly had been advised by a gentleman most
competent to give advice on the subject. Ho would only
add thet the more he considered this clause the more he
was convinced it was full of danger,—(Hear, hear.)
Lord. J. RUSSELL—The Right Hon. Gentleman, in
commencing his first speech that evening, had declared
his opinion that this clause was calculated to create
alarm; and at the close of his second speech he said that
the more he considered the clause the more he was con-
vinced that it was so calculated to create alarm. He
(Lard J. Russell) must confess that he, on his part, felt
alarm, and very great alarm, at the language which
had that evening been held by the Right Hon. Gentle-
man.—(Hear, hear.) In the first place, that language
tended to renew and to confirm the fears and apprehen-
sions with reference to the exercise of the Roman Ca-
tholic religion in this country which had been expressed
by persons of far less authority than the Right Honour-
able Gentlemen, whose arguments in support of those
apprehensions he thought had been successfully encoun-
tered.—(Bear, hear.), The authority and the weight of
the Right Hon. Gentleman's opinion would, however, it
was to be feared, go near to revive those vain apprehen-
sions. There was another cause of alarm which he de-
rived from the Right Hon. Gentleman's speech. The
Right Hon. Gentleman said, quoting Mr. Burke, that per-
sons of one sect were very bad judges of what was requi-
site for the conscientious exercise of the religion of
another sect from whom they differed. Applying this
dictum to the question before the Committee, the Right
Hon. Gentleman said, very truly, that here was a ques-
tion on which there was the greatest difference Of
opinion between parties in the House, as to whether or
not it was a question affecting the regality of the Queen,
the rights of the Crown, and the independence of the
nation; and, on the other hand, whether or not it was
a question interfering with the exercise of their religion
by the Roman Catholic subjects of her Majesty? Now,
on this particular subject, there had been, so far, a gene-
ral concurrence on the part of those who supported the
Bill, that while they desired to maintain the authority
of the Crown and the independence of the nation, they
had no wish to interfere with the exercise of the Roman
Catholic religion.—(Hear, bear.) He believed that
this had been the unanimous declaration of the sup-
porters of the Bill—(Hear, hear.) On the other
side, it was fair to admit that those who opposed
the Bill had said, "We claim only the full exercise
of the Roman Catholic religion, and the organization
necessary to that exercise; we do not claim any power
or jurisdiction to overbear that which properly belongs
to the Sovereignty of the realm." Well, then, the diffi-
culty and the difference upon this point were in the ques-
tion whether the rescript of the Pope in any way inter-
fered with the exercise of the sovereignty of this realm,
or whether it was merely intended to promote the spiri-
tual welfare of the Roman Catholics in this country?
Such being the point, the Right Hon. Gentleman told
them that those who did not belong to the Roman Ca-
tholic religion—for this was the strict interpretation here
of the dictum he had quoted—were unfit judges of the
question, and that therefore the question must be left
entirely to the Roman Catholics themselves.—(Hear.) In
what manner were the Roman Catholics to judge of it?
The country had had, in the course of the last six months,
pretty clear evidence of the mode in which the Roman
Catholics, if left to themselves, would decide the ques-
tion.—(Hear.) They would decide the question by saying,
—" Hero has come a rescript from Rome; that rescript
from Rome declares this to be a matter of spiritual in-
terest, of spiritual concern, and by that rescript we will
abide."—(No, no!) He must confess that such was the
distinct impression of the matter which he had derived
from all the debate upon it in that House.—(Hear,
hear.) The Hon. Gentleman who had just exclaimed
" No!" probably meant that it was not entirely for the
Pope to decide the question, but that the Roman Catho-
lics themselves must have a good share in deciding it.
Why, if that were to be so, the rest of the community
would have no power whatever left to them in the matter.
—(Hear, hear.) Those who belonged to the Protestant
Church would be wholly ousted of the power to de-
fend what they considered to be the temporal rights of
the Crown, which even their Roman Catholic ancestors
thought inherent in the Crown; nothing would be left
them but to await the Roman Catholic interpretation of
the matter; and he was by no means confident that
this interpretation would not be as the organs of
the Pope were very fond of declaring it should be,
in a conformity not very agreeable to contemplate
with the unchanging and unchangeable policy
and pretensions of the Court of Rome.—(Hear, hear.)
Was there, then, no ground of alarm in the propositions
of the Right Hon. Gentleman?—(Hear, hear.) Were
the Protestants of England to give up, at once and for
ever, all power of judging for themselves whether the
independence of the nation was concerned, whether the
rights of the Crown were invaded?—(Hear, hear.)
W ere they to leave it to the Roman Catholics, or, it
might be, to the Papal authorities, to declare what the
decision upon this matter should be; and, that decision
once so declared, however humiliating it might be to this
great realm of England, thenceforward to submit to it?
—(Hear, hear.) lie, for one, was not prepared to sub-
mit to any such decision.—(Cheers.) He considered
that the Home of Commons as a body was fully able
and best suited to decide for themselves this great and
d
imuepsotriotannftor argument; question.—(Hear,
no doubt they had been bound
to bear.) No doubt it was a
g
to hear everything that could be urged to show that this
rescript affected matters merely spiritual, and that the
Pope was right in asserting that the Archbishop of
Canterbury no longer existed, and was to be blotted
out from the face of the spiritual realm of
England. Any such arguments that any one
could adduce Parliament was bound to hear;
but Parliament must not divest itself of that other
bounden duty, having heard all such arguments, to
decide for itself, and upon its own judgment, what was
demanded in vindication of the rights of the Crown and
the independence of the nation.—(Hear, hear.)
was the conviction which he, for one, could not give up.
—(Hear.) What was the alternative before them? The
alternative, as stated by the Right Hon. Gentleman him-
self, was most alarming. On the one hand, he placed
subservient submission to that which had heretofore been,
and which would fain again be, a tremendous engine of
a tremendenis povver ;to what might have been desig-
nated" mere spirituality" in the 15th or 16th century, or
to whatever now, or at any future time, the Pope might
choose to call " mere spirituality."—(Hear, hear.) On
the other hand, said the Right lion. Gentleman, if you
do:not consent to this, you declare war against 8,000,000
of the people of this country.—(dear, hoar.) Surely
this was a most alarming declaration on the part of the
Right Hon. Gentleman.—(Elear, hear.) It should be his
(Lord J. Russell's) endeavour, however, to steer as
steadily tee he could between these two dangers, and to
prohibit that which ho considered interference, usurpa-
tion, aggression, without at all interfering with the
spiritual exercise of the Roman Catholic religion. lie
believed this could be done, and he believed that this
measure would do it.—(Hear, hear.) In a great portion
of the United Kingdom the measure, indeed, was con-
sidered not sufficiently stringent—(Hear, hear)—while
in another portion of the United Kingdom, in Ireland, it
was thought to go far beyond the legitimate exercise of
the powers of legislation. His own conviction, however,
was, that it did not sin on the one side or on the other.
But, at all events, he would say, as he had said before,
that Parliament was bound to exercise its own judgment
in the matter; and, he could not consent to surrender
that judgment, as the Right Hon. Gentleman suggested.
—(Hear, hear.) They were not to be satisfied with
learning from any Roman Catholic doctor, or anyßoman
Catholic barrister, what was their duty in the case.—
He could not conclude what he had to say without re-
ferring to the declaration which be had heard, with
great pain, fall from his Right Hon. Friend who had
lately filled the office of Governor of Malta.—(Hear,
hear.) And first let him say—and he said it with plea-
sure—that the Right Hon. Gentleman had, in his opi-
nion, fully justified the appointment which he bad ac-
cepted, of governor of that most important possession of
this country.—(Hear, hear.) lie had expressed, at the
period of that appointment, that with tho Right lion.
Gentleman's abilities, his experience of political life, his
conciliatory views, he would do much towards redress-
ing the grievances known to be felt by the inhabitants
of Malta, and
would act with perfect justice towards all
her Majesty's subjects in that isiand.—(Hear, hear.)
That anticipation had been justified; and he believed
that the labours of the Right Honourable Gentleman in
Malta had been most beneficial to the Crown and most
honourable to himself.—(Hear.) Bat when the Right
lion. Gentleman informed him that he had totally with-
drawn his confidence from him in consequence of the
line he had taken in this matter, and especially of the
manner in which he had
in pursued that policy, he must
beg leave to state, that all he had said and done in
the case, he had ever believed, and still believed, that
lie had said and done no more than would have been
said and done, under similar circumstances, by a member
of the House of Commons, and by a member of the
Crown, in days when the whole of the community was
Roman Catholic.—(Cheers.) He believed that what
would not be submitted to at this time in Prussia, a Pro-
te:tant country—that what would not be submitted to in
Saxony, a Protestant country, though having a Roman
Catholic sovereign, would not have been submitted to
any more by our Roman Catholic ancestors. In the
course of these discussions reference had been repeatedly
made to what had been done in ancient times in Eng-
land before the Reformation; but. there was one remark-
able Act to which he would point attention, as having
been paSsed after the Reformation, and under a Popish
Sovereign, having for its object " to repeal all articles
and provisions made against the See Apostolic of
Rome since the 20th year of king Henry VIII., and
for the establishment of all spiritual and ecclesiastical
possessions and hereditaments conveyed. to the laity."
Here, then, was a measure which, seeking
.to reconcile
the Pope, might be supposed to go very far in the way of
concession to the pretensions of Rome; but in this very
Act, 1 and 2 Philip and Mary, cap. 8, special care was
taken to provide that no bulls, dispensations, or other
documents from Rome should contain anything detri-
mental to the authority, dignity, and pre-eminence of the
Crown of England, regal and imperial.—(Hear, hear.)