The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-08 00:00:00

tion whatevor on the subjeet.—(Hear. hear.) He says
dc.e.s z, ;,.•. (he eircuinaLee ; ;7.A it )`.c,

which he es e:, t:oreaitten, eueposing it
taken place. Bug, even if the story be tine, it is eurely,
a most astonishing inference to draw from the circum-
stance that there happened to he a paper lying on a table,
which paper was never read by the Minister cf Englanti,
that he had given his consent to the aggression which
had been made upon this country.—(Cheers.) Be it ob-
served, suni,oFing the story had been told with cern-
plete accurac3 , it is not, alleged that the Secvetery of State
or the Pope, or eny other person, said, " Here is a paper
that we would wish you to take and peruse, and submit
to your Government." If anything was said at all, it was
only, " That is a project that concerns you."—(ilear.)
Now, having said this.. I must refer for a moment to
the conduct which has usually been observed by all
ecclesiastical bodies in the several states of Europe.
It has always been the nature of all ecclesiastical
bodies to press upon the temporal powers in every
state.—(Hear, hear, and repeated cheering.) I have
myself had frequently to repress the ageressive conduct
of the ecclesiastical body of the Church of England when
it has been partially or unitedly attempted to trespass on
the spiritual or temporal liberties of other ecclesiastical
subjscts in the realm.—(Hesr, hears) And if this be
toe else with ordinary ecclesiastical bodies, how much
more so is it with the Church of Rome, the members
of which are more than any others devoted to the ser-
vice of their ecclesiastical soperiors, and subject to a
power which claims for itself the quality of infallibi-
lity.—(Hear, hear.) But in the first place I must refer
to the peculiar practice of the church of Rome,
and if we may judge of the instances which
have come to our knowledge, the Church of Rome
has at all times been cpposed to the progress
of liberty and civilization, whether exercised over men
or states. I will et once show how this power was used
when applied to a state which was confensedly Roman
Catholic. Sir, this power was asserted in the most arro-
gant manner by Boniface VIII., when he told Philip the
Fair, of France, " It is fit you should know that you are
subject to us in temporal as well as in spiritual
things."—(Hear, hear.) Now, the country that has
had most to contest this power of the Roman Catholic
Church, the country which I should ray had most suc-
cessfully contested it, but at the same time amid repeated
danger, is that very country of France.—(Hear, hear.)
I have read with great pleasure and instruction the
work of Dupin, who is now President of the Legisla-
tive Assembly of France, but who before he attained to
ministerial office had turned his attention to the study of
the progress of ecclesiastical bodies. At the beginning
of bis work upon the liberties of the Gallican Church he
makes an observation to the effect, that though Rome
has for the present relaxed many of her pretensions,
she never entirely loses sight of them; that she is a
power which has forgotten nothing, and learned much—
that she is a power which is neither in infancy nor
widowhood; hence she can struggle with temporal
States at all times with means of which those tempo-
ral States are not often possessed ; that therefore it re-
quires the utmost vigilance and the utmost attention
to watch against the aggressions of the Church of
Rome, and to preserve the temporal liberties of
any country with which she is connected.—(Loud
cheering.) And here I find a word of admonition
for the Hon. Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck); M.
Dupin goes on to say that philosophers thought
that they would be able to stop her pro-
gress, but philosophers found that they were mistaken.
He held that the greater part of men, whether from re-
lieioue convictions, whether from habit, or whether from
a regard of the opinion of the world, are governed by
religious feeling, and do not attend to the opinions of
philosophy. Sir, M. Dupin then states in a very small
book, bat containing an immense quantity of learning
upon tl-,e subject, what are the rights:and liberties which
France has asserted iu its contest with Rome. Now
some of these—and so with regard to other
states—naturally enough relate to the appoint-
ment of bishops and other ecclesiastical officers,
who are dependent upon it in any way, receiving sala-
ries or emoluments from the state.—(Hear, hear.) Well,
Sir, but even supposing that those who conform to the
will of the Pope ought occasionally to bit tolerated,
there are maxims that have been establil%ed
by law, maxims established by the diets
of all the courts of justice in France, which
are well worthy of our attention.— (Hear, hear.)
One of these is, that no command of the Pope can
be received in France without the consent of the
Sovereign. This rule applies not only to appointments to
ecclesiastical benefices and bishoprics, but it applies gene-
rally to anything that may be ordered by the See of Rome.
There is another maxim which was laid down
by these judges which likewise is well worthy
of our attention. In order to preserve entire
the temporal independence of the King of France,
it was laid down, that if any person should
introduce any bull or instrument affecting the spiritual
excommunication or censure of any persons in the ser-
vice of the King of France, all his goods and property
should be forfeited to the Crown. Sir, that
was a very important and strong power, but one which
was rendered necessary by the assumptions of Rome
herself', for had the King been left without
this power, he would occasionally have been in a
state of extreme insecurity. Such, then, were the
general maxims, such were the laws of France, during
the time of Philip the Fair, and the power, too, was ex-
orcised by the Kings of France under the monarchy.
by Lewis the 11th, a saint of the Roman Catholics.

A VOICE —N. ; Lewis the eth.
Lord J. RUSSELL—Yes, and Lewis the 11th and
Henry the 4th. All these princes exercised the power as
fully as it had been exercised iu any subsequent
time; hut there is another circumstance which I think
well worthy of our attention, because it completely an-
swers the argument that with respect to what has once
been done by Rome cannot he undone. Now, according to
the concordat made by Napoleon at the commence-
ment of the present century, in connexion with the
Pope, the archbishops and bishops of the Roman
Catholic Church of France were entirely de-
prived of their rights. There is another circumstance
of that nature which occurred in 1817, when the King of
France, bowing to the wish of the Legislative Assembly
of that period, induced the Pope to annul a aecree
abolishing the concordat of Napoleon, and from that
time to this the concordat of Napoleon and the
law has remained the same.—(Hear, hear.) Now, do
not tell me after this that the Pope can never retrace
his steps.—(Cheers.) Do not tell me that
what
once is done by Rome must remain in
force for ever, and can never be altered.—
(Loud cheers.) Do not tell me that whatever re-
sistance may now be made by the nation to the edicts of
the Pope is useless, because Rome will not listen to our
remonstrances, or recall her decrees.—(Cheers.) Sir, I
pass now to what was once the law of Austria.—(Hear,
bear.) Austria is a great Roman Catholic power, but
the laws that she made were of the most stringent de-
scription respecting the introduction of Papal bulls, with
respect to Papal appointments, and with respect
to Papal offices. She declared that the civil power was
supreme, and that nothing should he admitted into
the empire without the sanction of the Emperor, that no
document should have force without the sanction of
the Emperor, and that no appointment could be
made that had not his confirmation.—(Hear, hear.)
No intercourse was to take place between the clergy he
Austria and the Pope without the knowledge and sanc-
tion of the civil power, and that every document which
proposed to inflict spiritual censure or excommueication
should be subjected to a mixed body of the clergy and
laity, and should not be v did without their concur-
rence. This shows, then, with regard to another great
Roman Catholic power how greet has been the jealousy
of the encroachments of the Church of Rome on the
temporal no e'er of Austria. Sir, having stated the prac-
tice of these two principal states of Europe, I will not go
into any of the others, but I will state generally that no
Roman Catholic power, which as far as we believe—but
before I complete the sentence, I will state that
the Emperor of Austria last year (1850) made a
new constitution with respect to the clergy,
and has permitted intercourse, by bulls, between his
ecclesiastical subjects and Rome without the knowledge
and sanction cf the temporal power, and therefore with-
out his sanction—(Hear, hear)—but I was going to say
that with regard to the Roman Catholic powers of
Europe there is no one, so far as I am aware, that
would permit any bull to be. brought into the
s
country without the previous sanction of some civil au
thorities of the country. Such is the case with regardto Portugal. Her Majesty's Minister at Lisbon has in-
formed us that no bull is permitted to be published and
inculcated in Portugal of which notice had not
been previously given, or which had not re-
ceived the concurrence of the reigning powers.
We have been told that in Prussia, one of the greatest
Protestant powers, that though the Icing, out of regard
to his Roman Catholic subjects, has given a power by
which the appointment ef bishops is regulated by the
Pope, yet that when it was proposed to create a
Bishop of Magdeburg and some others in the
Protestant territories of Prussia, the Government imme-
diately referred to the articles of the treaty of Westphalia
and refused totally and entirely to give their consent to
the introduction of these bishops.—(bear, hear.) Well,
Sir, at least one inference is to be drawn
from this narrative—that there is no country in Europe
in which the Pope would have endeavoured to pass the
insult whichis offered to the Queen of England.—(Loud
cheers.) I now come to the character of the bull
which has been introduced into this country. —(Hear.)
This document purports to be issued without
the smallest reference to the United Kingdom
being P:n independent state. There is not a
word in it from beginning to end acknowledging that
any authority exists whose consent ought to have been
asked. The archbishop who is mentioned in it is spoken
of as the archbishop of this great city, where the Queen
holds her court, and where she meets her Parlia-
ment. Other bishoprics and other sees are pretended
to be creeted in various parts of the country which are
now under the bishops of the Established Church. In
the document issued by Cardinal Wiseman, in pursuance
of the letter of the 'Pope, he declares—" We govern
and shall continue to govern the counties of Middlesex,
llertford, and Essex."—(Cheers.) Now, I cannot
see an; thing in these words but an assumption of terri-
torial authority. Some may say this is all a mater of
form in the custom of the Roman Catholic Church. I
do not deny the authority of those forms, but there is
another term which has not been mentioned, which
begins, " Victoria, by the grace of God," and
which is totally inconsistent with the ether.—(Loud
cheering.) I am ready to admit that this was only an
assumed authority; but I owe no gratitude and thanks
to those who do not attempt to enforce it, because I
know it is utterly impossible for them to
do so. But it is quite enough for me to
know that it is an assumption—(Cheer s)—and if any
person bad conic during the time that the Pretender
was residing at Real e, and said lie had been appointed
by him Lord Lieutenant of s Middlesex, the real Lord-
Lieuten tint would still exercise authority, but the person
who improperly assumed it would be subject to punishment.
Now, Six, I must refer for a few minutes to that which

has been done in former times in this country. in Bowan
Cettole: ',hales, nth ri ~,sera to the ; , e ' I t l'3
Pori;-. I find cur Cioshol:c. .hue, ore, °' ',. the
jealous as we could be of the encroachments 01 _
Pope. I find in the time of Williem the Co
that he would have no se es created by the au'
thoi ity of the Pope, but they were create°
by the aothority of the King. I find that in the tiro,
anothe,
of Edward I. a person wes excommunicated by
per-on, who pre-:pent: gl the person who exceahnunichtict;
him in the King's courts. He was 10113 d „gUtli
of high treason, and it was only on the suPPilua-cn.
of his counsellors that the King did not carry the se 0
telace into effect. In the time of Ed ward 111. retill
iz,,, being
were presented to prevent bulls, writings, see" I
allowed in this country. It had been found neeessi.
nqaeror
by our Catholic ancestors to resort to Means again
the power of the Pope, and the statute of Pr'of
munire had therefore been passed, the 16th he
Richard the Second. I will now proceed to state
stele
course which the Government took, on being 03
;be
aware of the publication of this hull, ancint)"°,
course they now propose to take. The first proc, u
r,
which the Government took was to ask the law offiee d
of the Crown whether the persons who had asVlat
these Liles came under any known law, and lieu
would be the effect of a prosecution; the opinifier
given was, that with regard to the assume'
Lion of the titles with reference to the e;I: was
statutes and the state of the common law ' L.-.
illegal, but it could not be prosecuted with effec
th•
(Hear, hear.) Furthermore, they said that was
introduction of letters apostolic into this country. ht
illegal, and was an offence for which a prosecution tate
be commenced, and the judge would declare that
parties had rendered themselves liable to a penalty'
e ill.
but they said that the statutes which prevented thrope
troduction of any bull or writing of
:ehe long,aBo
into this country, had not been for
time put in force, that if they were used for, the
purpose of a prosecution for assuming these titlesii °:r
the ground that it was by the authority of a toSI
00s
writing from Rome, such prosecution would feet
likely fail, as the statutes had been In with
in disuse. The House will be of opinion thatf„ouid
this opinion before them, the Government " Nor
not have done right to institute a prosecution•
any,
do I think that such a prosecution would lead eatcitaice
useful result. It would have been with great reP„nn-easoa
that, on the first occasion when we thought we had feoula
to complain of the introduction of such bull, s treed A
have ordered a prosecution without first having
practice which had so long been carried eneeeitly
which had been left unnoticed and apparentlYrote
consented to.• There is a further difficulty, and I Wish ''° No
to the House the whole difficulty upon that subject.
eases
doubt according to the statute of Richard 11. in certaioa mica
the introduction of bulls containing asill'Aject
of power would be a grave offence, and sbeett
the offender to the loss of his property. This hade ,5 1,
decided in the case of Lawler, in the reign of '',4lliess
There was likewise a statutory prohibition in the 13wizare.
beth, with respect to the introduction of writings fr°ll3 atich
In 1846, that part of the statute of Elizabeth "es of
fixed the punishment of treason on any such effeact the
that nature was taken away, and it was declared the was
repeal merely extended to the penalties, and that there spy
nothing in that repeal to render it lawful to introduce such
ceeded bulls or writings. Accordingly, we might haree such
ceeded on such grounds, and with such an issue into re'
t
probable result, under the statutes to which I ether, h
ferred. But then a further question arises, Wht ciao
no ao
these statutes have fallen into disuse, it would net 'tie in-
advisable to make a new enactment with respect to the
troduction of these writings or bulls from , alb'
This is an important part of the great 09
ject, and it appears to me that you a to
legislate in one of two ways, One is ell
enact a general prohibition against the introduction gas
bulls from Rome which may affect the peace of heru will
jesty's dominions. That is one course; but then tefouoi
leave the law exceedingly vague, and it will ,deemed
difficult to define in that enactment what shall vie„,inioes'
as disturbing the peace of her Majesty'e a'cioetioo
Then there is another course to prohibit the intr°,ooll"
of any bulls until they have undergone the
which is
sion of some officer or board. This is a course ens of
taken in several of the continental natAic'ed with
Europe. But the course would be also attenred that
this difficulty, that it might be occasionally conce'r" the
ore
the Catholics had been treated with harshness• ce el"
other side that bulls dangerous to the state had beeni. ea'
lowed to enter the kingdom which shoed have yet likeeluded. In a free country, and with a free Parlianl'discas-
ours, this would give rise to considerable ,ocert
sion, and I should be sorry to introduce that eh' dells
into debates.--(Hear, hear.) Therefore, after Ilinc. with
beration on this subject, after very anxious discussi°ll;;la be
a view to come to the best possible decision that °neither
formed on the subject, we have thought it best, 00r to
to propose to repeal the statutes I have mentionethi:lek I
propose such alteration or substitutes as those to th the
have alluded. In the present state of affairs, "the iir
great uncertainty that still prevails as to what water it is
tention of the measure which has been taken, whetTh Wes
to be the prelude to future measures, or whether will
merely a blunder committed on a sudden, and whici eel
be retracted or amended, in such a state of affairs'eetvisv
thought it far better, on the one side, not to re 'ler pot
any power which we possess by law, and on the otwnee of
to propose any substitute which might in itself be a ch,ioo of
permanent evil. I come now to the immediate clossehie 00
the assumption of titles, and I think it is useful, v,O for
this subject, to refer to that which was given as the reauAet.
the prohibitory clauses in the Roman Catholic Relief' polie
Sir Robert Peel, in introducing that great measure
to the following effect respecting the clauses al! ma
ecclesiastical titles :—" A practice has ,of late occasl° oa
prevailed in Ireland which is calculated to give deafrifc"
I may add just offence to Protestants. I allude to the raisin
tice, on the part of the Roman Catholic Prelates, of es'a of
ing the names and titles of the Bishops of the 03111'c -the
England. I propose that the titles which belong tr's bi,
bishcps of the Church of England shall not be asselasieo
the bishops of the Roman Catholic Church. BishoPs dips"
them, for bishops they are, having had their right of 9roeitr
tion acknowledged as valid by our own Church, but,- P-etyle
tarn that it is neither seemly nor decorous to use %stab'
and titles which properly belong to the prelates of the epos
lished Church, and such assumptions shall be altogetbecisioa
vented in future."—(A laugh.) Accordingly that prtuhat ia
was inserted in the Catholic Relief Act, sand I Bnr adereso,
the following year there wai published a Past°l-8; Irelse°
to the laity of that communion, and this
from the Roman Catholic archbishops and bishops t 9 alto ih
very warm terms of the kindness which the Legisia• k it it
r thin ee
shown in passing the Emancipation Act. ee hiaogee-
worth while also at the present time, when the ' 0810
which had been used by Archbishop Cullen is not
1161;rvi to,
respectful to the Crown and Legislature of this cecloof,t ot
recal a little to mind what was the universal seathh isso,
twenty-six Roman Catholic archbishops and bishops !leagth
After congratulating themselves that the storm bad:.'eci twit
subsided, and that peace and justice were about to 170ra they
blessings on the country, they said that the King,wearther "
were bound in loyalty to honour, was entitled t _ Lai!
all the honour and gratitude they can bestow; that tfnierelsodl
lature by its labours had raised them (the people 0. ate °as
address ptuere
bad
from a prostrate condition, giving them equal rigaiso 1,7
privileges with their fellow-subjects, and that it e A °ll-
entitled to their gratitude and love. They express e ia iltii;
fident hope that the feelings of the people would bee to the
son with their own, and that respect and adherenc got t°
constitution and laws of the country, and attach:: Soak
the person and government of their most gra,°i° e tiliao
reign, would be manifested by the entire peoPie'id be wets
that so far as these sentiments are concerned it wore
if Bishops Cullen and M`Hale would refer to the a' ill
hat I°Y 09
thus expressed by their predecessors, to see es' . , turn ae
the Crown and what attachment to the Legisia,eot iv _
felt in 18e0, and to consider whether such caw': thole
130' • ors
not well worthy of limitation. - (Hear, hear.) robitet La
bishops did not pass without noticing theee Frejoice ae
ustreligioar
clause. They mention it in this way —" ‘v e.' •ariell"'e
the result, regardless of those provisions which
affect ourselves, and not only us but those din 13ee
orders which the Catholic Church has nourisheses wend
bosom since the time of the apostles. These daunt. sole
we believe, sacrifices not required by reason even Dg
policy, but by prejudices holding ;captive, rejojek...
minds of honest men, and they do not prevent "eootria tO
at the good which has been effected for the c-ferrineore
(Hear, bear.) They did not, therefore, while eel ,113„,j-ici
those provisions ask for their repeal, or do OP at
sii- le
than express a passing regret that such claus if 00
that sion
have been introduced. It seems to me, then, rovl lie
were the provisions of the Relief Act, and if those Peethvo
were passed without objection from the Rernea%sionthet
body, but on the contrary were received with sulatid, 't, 0
obedience by the Roman Catholic bishops in 11'8 stir, o
Of
we should be perfectly justified in proposing proVi:;ptioeoe,
similar nature with regard to the recent assaer the
egtor
titles in this country. For I consider that wile"- of - se,
sumption had been that of the title of Archbislaiioceege
terbury, with jurisdiction as ordinary over that ar„`W, dic'echer
or, as in the present case, Westminster with a %ore sit
carved out, the difference is immaterial to the claiess'oereigr3",)
being equally an assumption of supremacy anTuad cheep?
which ought nut to be permitted by law.—(l-.° and It to
But there are other questions which are closely,,,,e„
ha,
diately connected with the assumption of thesehtal one qv)
believed, and I think not without foundation, the born
son for this change: from vicars apostolic,
Roman Catholics have enjoyed the free exercise ,°0 the !' to
under of tbeihea.
ligion, and been satisfied with for 200 years, lento
dioceses, is not only to make an assumption, c
also for
some degree to lower the state in England, hot
_'s_etrol help
purpose of exercising by such means a great
,c of
.estt'ar,
the large endowments which are in the
(hcarnine; of
thTt' ifoOf
Roman Catholic trusts in this country.—
fiitnA iKeit;
hear.") Now Ido not think it would be
should allow that control to be exercised n!,,rohlv iti
the holders of those titles which we are about it:nrbrieg4,
and therefore I shall, if the House
a Bill, introduce in it clauses providing that allot etlY 01
eons under these titles shall be null and void; ; e cell ,eets
done by the holders of such titles shall also,hoeva or gla‘ to
give me leav,e 'los toP;ot
void ; and that, further, that property bequeath at oticketts
to such persona and for their purposes, shall pas , the in'eto
the Crown, either to create trusts in harmony wit; vie tlio
tion of the donor, or to be otherwise disposed ore _ furse%
best to the crown. Ido not think that powers le"aor
eier of ail° 04
than these would satisfy the justice of the ease-
aware that in several cases there has been a trantberstrithlif
perty from those who have hitherto held it to carte._ too.
either directly from Rome, or persons assuming wean tit it
as bishops of the Roman Church I was told of aniane,, b, of
this nature the other day. I will not name the Pictepriv,f:jog
was near the sea coast, where a priest washeid "wee
the income which he had hitherto
__ it ,ore
informed that by ecclesiastical authoritYala 10'00
found that such property and such interestccire7we per4iet
usefully employed for other purposes. Nowe.° laity stold
to take power to defend the Roman Cathollc we e joo
such attacks as 'these. It is desirable that_h itaro4lo,
' t degr for
into the Bill, 'will in a grea easeree A the
do so, and the clause I propose "ee do tDie
Hit should be necet. sary to Introduce other In', Frien,,r, to
purpose in the Bill of my Hon. and Learnikeh, rega hid
Attorney-General which he will introduce ." tO ?Of
charitable trusts, further securities will be takentraosfeL cot
the Roman Catholic laity against the h asiseehioa
their property into hands for which
.I'ol3 eiu Shiod
re dile • a ree
originally intended. Sir, there is amo ae sot ter
which the Hon. Member for Youghal may rfTb
.l_ro )
to 'he means that have, been employed to obtaila tiratinsfo_arnoa,
some of this property, a means wai
et the
in the spiritual censure directed aara"., gear, u'rdiy
fessors of the Roman Catholic religion. . .
aeon lie_ to
That, Sir, is a far more difficult question, anct Bcot lasvo.,i,
be ieachel unless we adopt the spirit of the Stalc.`
preseottn,
which I have referred, and import it into 1110,_
_tatea. Dia„f
which at present Ido not propose to do. I ha% c_funiptiolL','t
in the first place, ais Bill is to prevent the ani3tieg,;vill'e
wberect tc
any title taken not only from any diocese no
from any territory or any place which is sus Hear, hearsti
authority or belongs to the United Kingdom.
_....i eslitchi.
That provision is in conformity with the proPv"af Letiow'
saw was made the other day by the Bishop "