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

tT /4,

LONDON,

71 tents because he-thought they would be the mhas; by dif-
ft ising education among the middle classes' in Ireland, of
g reatly benefiting that country; but had they never heard of
ny of the clergymen resident in this country interfering with
ocular affairs? Why, in 1845, when there was such a noise
; and commetion ;in the country respecting the removal of the
1 axes on human food, had they not Dissenting ministers from
t dl parts of the country Meeting in Manchester for the par-
niose of considering how each could in his own district best
:forward the repeal of the corn-laws.— (Hear, hear.) Cer-
itainly that was synodical action. Some Hon. Members, in
.eroot of the tyranny and intolerance of the Roman Catholic
Church, had alluded to the Sicardi lawS, but that was the
Church of Rome in Italy.. P. was monstrous to say that
thee-e could be any comparison between the system here,
anel what was carried en in Italy and Spain, and it was as
rid iculous to say that even if there was, they could get rid of
it .37 declaring that such a one, instead of being Archbishop
of ' Westminster, should be a Bishop of Melipotamus. But in
Ire hind no danger was dreaded on the part of the Roman
Gt .tholics who supported these colleges, notwithstanding that
th ey had been denounced by the bishops ; for he found Sir
Robert Kane, who was at the head of oneof them, instead Of
qu ailing before the manifesto of the bishops, coming forward
and boldly defending the rights troth of Roman Catholic and
Protestant, in utter oblivion of all religious differences of
opinion. From the speech of Professor Kane he had derived
much pleasure, and he would not conceal the spirit of satis-
faction with which he had witnessed the cff ct produced on
the intelligent portion of the Roman Catholic mind dri
land by the deliberations arid resolve of the Synod regard-
; the national colleges. So far from yielding slavish obe-
dience to the dictates of that body they had increase t their
sapport of the colleges. The Honourable Baronet, the
Member for the city of Oxford, had asked why th y did- not
aegotiate with Rome, and endeavour through diplomatic
agency to receive satisfactory apnlogies for the aggression
that had taken place. Now he, was not certain that in the
eyes of Europe they should be justified in. proceeding to those
extremities. If, as they had been advised by more than
one Hon. Member who took; part in the (1 scu-sion on the
Bill, they were to proceed in a hostile manner against the
Pope, might it not ba asked, had they not, to a certain ex-
tent. given an invitation to an aggression of the description
now loudly protested against? There was much truth in the
statement that a proclamation might have got them out of
a struggle which threatened:to be fatar to the tranquillity, of
the country, and was likely to result in ridicule on them-
selves. But when they went striking out clauses, now said
to be unnecessary, and leaving an insufficient preamble to
the Bill, a state of inextricable confusion would be sure to
follow. In puisuing ihe course recommended by her
Majesty's Government they were striking a blow,, not at
the Pope for as act of foreign aggression, but at the Roman
Catholics of England and Irelaud,and this was:not the consti-
tutional mode of grappl'ng with the difficulty. When the
Bill came to be properly understood it would be
regarded by the great bulk of the people as a
penal law, and' he believed that the spirit of the English
people was decidedly adverse to persecution. Without
having one of the advantages expected from the measure,
they would be deluged in all its discredit. It might fairly
be characterised as a sham piece of legislation. If, as the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Solicitor-General said, the
conduct of the Pope was an act of invasion of the Royal
Supremacy, why were not the previsions of the Bill of 1829
put in force to stop it? The assumption of the title of
Bishop of St. David's was clearly a direct violation of a
clause in the act of 1829. Well, that being the case, why
did not the Government put the law in force, if they
really meant that the Bill now under consideration should

not iemain a dead letter? But, in truth, the Bill was a Bill
to satisfy the feelings Of the people, and at the same time to
deceive them. The feelings of the people, however, were
mistaken. The recent demonstrations throughout the
country meant that the Roman Catholic religion was ad-
vancing, and that active, steps should be taken to prevent
it. - (Ilear, hear.) The people deprecated the enactment
of penal law. The question weighing upon their minds
was a religious question, and not a political question. Their
attachment to the reformed faith formed the groundwork of
objection to the progress of a religion which they regarded as
unscriptural. Public opinion could not be beaten down by
an Act of Parliament. For two hundred years that system
was tried with the Roman Catholic people of Ireland, but
ultimately the G Nernment had to yield to fear that which
should have been frankly given, to justice. Were they now
going to retrograde and to adopt a course of legislation
inconsistent with the character of this country ?
If they wished to repress acts of aggression by
foreign 1-'owers—if they wished to prevent the introduction
of bulls—why not legislate, not sgainst the Roman
Catholic community of this country, or against the Roman
Catholic Church, but against the foreign potentates who
committed those acts of aggression on the royal prerogative?
That was the practice pursued in other countries. He had
gone at greater length into the subject than he had intended,
but he would say this, that he did not think there was the
slightest fear to be ep tertained for the increase of the Roman
Catholic body. He must add his belief that the doctrines f
the Church of Rome were foreign to the genius of the people.
Thei right of privatelludgment, to which they had long been
accustomed, they could not enjoy under its institutions. Let
them only look at the Index ex Purgatories, for a list of the
most excellent books which were prohibited on political
economy, history, and religion. Amongst them were the
Scapulus Greek Lexicon," invaluable to a Greek student. If
he studied political economy, there was Jeremy Bentham ; if
history, there were Hume, Goldsmith, and Robertson; or if
science, then he must not look into Chambers's Philosophical
Dictionary, or Locke, and a number of others, down to a
small tract, called " The .Dairyman's Daughter." Such a
system, therefore, was, in hii opinion, unsuited to the habits
and spirit of Englishmen. Without intending any offence to
his Roman Catholic brethren, he must assert his confidence
in the truth of his own religious faith. A certain element of
persecution still remained, but until that spirit was extir-
pated the work of the Reformation would not be complete.
Those who thought themselves Protestants because they
acted in hostility to those who were not so were not true Pro-
testants, and he believed the time was drawing near for the
triumph of the old maxim " Magna est veritas et preva ebit,'
and when they would seek to meet Romish aggression in the
only way in which it could be met, by the spread of our
Gospel principles, letting in light where darkness existed,
and trusting with confidence to Almighty God for the result.
Lord PALMERSTON said he must crave the indulgence
of the House for a few moments; but would take care he did
not encroach too much on their 'attention. There was, in-
deed, a great part of the speech they had just heard from his
Right Hon. Friend which belonged more properly to the
Committee than to the present stage of the: discussion—
(Hear, hear)—and there were some parts which he thought
it would better to leave for the further consideration of his
Right Hon. Friend, who, perhaps, if time had permitted,
might have settled some questions which at present appeared
to be undetermined in his own mind.—(A laugh.) First,
what he would do, objecting, as he did, to what the Go-
vernment had proposed; and nest, perhaps, he might come
to a decision as to whether the Bill to which he objected
was a nullity or a persecution.—(A laugh.) For his part
he would freely confess that he never remembered, since he
had had the honour of a seat in that House, any dis-
cussion that had been so painful to the mind as that in
which they were then engaged.—(Hear, hear.) He
had hoped that when the disabilities were removed
in the first place from the Dissenters, and afterwards
from the Roman Catholics, that discussions and contro-
versies on religious questions would never again be heard
within the walls of Parliament.—(Hear, hear.) He had
hoped that when they had established, not what gentlemen
called toleration,—for he, like others repudiated that word
- (Hear, hear)—and said that the principle that was estab-
lished was not the principle of religious toleration, but the
greater principle of religious freedom.—(Hear.) He had
hoped, he said, that when that principle of religious freedom
had been faily established by the Legislature of the country,
those odious controversies with regard to religious doctrines
would never again be heard within the walls of Parliament.

—( Hear.) But whose fault was it?—(Hear.) Was it our
fault? (Hear.) It was not.—(Hear, hear.) We were
met by an act of aggression by a foreign authority—an ag-
gression of a political character - (Hear)—and in that re-
spect only would he address himself to it. It was an ag-
gression on the independent soveriegnty of the country
which he held it was our bounden duty to repel.—(Hear.)
He said the aggression was by a foreign authority. His Right
Hon. Friend had drawn a broad distinction between a foreign
sovereign and the Pope, and said that the measure might
have proceeded from the Pope, and when he might have been
driven from his throne and lodging in Brook-street ; but he
(Lord Palmerston) said that still the Pope would have been
a foreign authority, and it was because it was the act of a
foreign authority that he objected to the power the Pope
had attempted to exercise in the realm of England.— (Hear.
hear.) But it was said that this act was partly the fault of
the Government; that certain indulgences had been shown
to the Catholic episcopacy of Ireland ; that certain courtesies
had been shown to the priesthood of Ireland, and certain
opinions had been expressed in debates in Parliament; and
that all those things, and, moreover, the silence of his qoble
Friend three years ago at Rome, when a supposed paper was
shown to him, and he ws.s said to have been told that thi.t
regarded England; and that after those things they had no
right to be surprised at what the Pope bad done, because he
was sufficiently borne out and encouraged in his expectations
that they would meet it with indifference. He did not think
those grounds were sufficient to justify the act. Either the
Pope thought the measures he attempted to adopt would
be agreable, or not at least disagreeable, to the Government
and the people of this country, or he would not care whether
they were agreeable or disagreeable to the Government and
the people.—(Hear.) If he attached any value to the cir-
cumstance that his measures would be acquiesced in by this
country, why did he not, in the three years that elapsed
since the supposed conversation with his Noble Friend, and
the period anterior to the publication of this Bill and other
letters - why did he not take those steps that were in his
power, to ascertain what was the opinion of the Government
and of the people of England.—(Hear.) Where was Dr.
Wiseman? Was he not in England? Had he no opportu-
nity of seeking a personal interview with his Neble Friend at
the head of the Government, and ascertaining positively and
beyond doubt and dispute, whether the measure the Pope
contemplated, and of which he was conscious and aware,
would or would not give offence to the Government and the
people of this country ?—(Hear) - and, therefore, he (Lord
Palmerston) contended that as that course of proceeding had
been studiously omitted, it was impossible for either the
Papal authority or those who advocated his cause to shelter
themselves under the pretext that things had taken place to
justify the Papal Government in supposing that the step it
was taking would not be offensive to the people of this coun-
try.—(Hear, hear.) Well, then, this being an aggression of
into o nt
the
the
questionminds o f o f
melt.
the
a foreign authority, what was the authority by whicn that
aggression was made? It was an authority of an ecclesias-
tical nature, actionwhichhadenatedroeudblneot
s-im(Hple
eatheat.He
theological difference between the Prosestant and
Catholic Church. With that they had nothing at pre-
sent to do. He was sincerely attached to the Pro-
testant Church, and while he respected the difference of
opinion of his Catholic brethren,—and far be it from h m
to utter one syllable that would be painful to their reli-
gious feelings, —he must say that the Catholic Church had
another aspect,--it was not merely a theological body, but
was a political and temporal body also. - (Hear, hear.) The
chard stinage
uteirsh oedf thef Catholice
xCeheue
dr ch was
ed
all others
not
inmerelyits contraencroach-
ments on temporal power. Churches were corporate
bodies, and corporate bodies were naturally encroachinz ;
ibutn ithethere
was
Church
of
this d difference
:,fh betweene latterth eCatholicvisa
Church
British
t
Church, having its beginning and end in this realm. The
Church of Rome sprang from a foreign centre, and endea-
voured to spread its authority in every place over the whole
Christian w rld. --(Cheers.) But what was the action of
that Church? What was its temporal and political action?
Lo k at those countries in which the Catholic Church was
predominant. 'Look at Portugal—look at Spain—and look
at Italy. Look also, he was concerned to say, at Austria.—
(Hear.) They would find that wherever the Catholic Church
was allowed to seize hold, of temporal authority, that there
, its influence was painfully exercised over the temporal and
political interests of the nation.—(Hear, hear.) Then, he
said, that some measure was rendered necessary by the
course the Papal Government had adopted, that it was neces-
sary to satisfy the feelings of the country.—(Hear.) He
thought that no man who had had his eyes and ears open
during the last few months could for a momeat dispute. He
knew it had been said that they wished to keep up a de-
lusion, that the agitation of this country was a partial agita- ,