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

_- ._.

pre
"said that he thought that not only ought we to prohibit
L,3e
assumption of titles of existing sees, but we ought to
Pro hibit the assumption of titles derived from the
ie reat
of any place in the United Kingdom. What
Rif roeos.e, therefore, by the clauses of this Bill agrees
the la that suggestion ; and, perhaps, I may mention
Jt when I informed the Archbishop of Canterbury that it
un i not intended by the Government to institute a prosecu-
he said, " I did not expect the Government would do
but what I do expect is that some legislation should take
„Lzee upon the subject." Sir, I think, therefore, that in deal-
thii way with respect to what I consider an insult to the
ire‘va of this country, an interference with the rights of the
eseablished Church of this country, and an attack upon the
iqr elope Pe; n deeenocres
(thneears,tate we are pursuing a right and
I;ear.) By another clause, to
ae: itch I have alluded, I think we shall have a
tit ierie tY that persons will not obtain possession, under these
(I ef:ProPerty which has been given to other ohjects..—
ti!--"r' "ear.) I have now stated the effect of the Bill which
,e,olsose to introduce ; the House will perceive it is ens
.1Y different form the proposal of any new
sete_in with regard to our proceedings between.
• ItSee of Rome and this country.—( Hear, hear.) I think,
;eee.etever may be our ultimate legislation upon this great
itaa t, we are not in a condition at present to frame any
I us:" earrYing out that system. I think that much will
to depend upon the spirit injwhich legislation is received,
4,,,1ue obedience which is paid to it by the directions which
.10istbe given by him who has taken upon himself, no
stp quite naturally and fairly, the responsibility of
takgp tieretePting at Rome the opinions of the Roman Catholic
In this country, and of inducing the Pope to under-
.;_a review of his recent measures, a review of
jhei Powejitanewd
own power
(Hear, hear.) That individual
It la b•
power to remove a great part of the ob-
, iyon that has been felt to this assumption. If he will
isus,°°nfiele• himself to the title which the Pope ori-
era4re gave him.— (Cheers.) I should take it, if he
ter
;.e Peace and stability of the Catholic communion, the
the e-erse he can take is to retrace his steps, and to renounce
441;4 le which he has assumed in this country, and rather
eit se out that which I believe was his original intention—
seat a it at one time he assured me it was—namely, the in-
spiv $ I,,ef residing at Rome, and taking upon himself
• °the leernish title.- (Cheers and laughter.) But,.hi Sir,to
cohtt..
areeteleutinseielfsesehnoquuldespt,revail, and if he should bee e
of ambition, or of revenge, into theel
4oers toiflheme we may then, probably (though we can w
piel een..l), look for a long and arduous struggle.—
°h:
With respect to that struggle, the part which
ktbt hear)ltake will be guided by that principle which has
buts rto
ae's guided my conduct on this subject. I am
le fullest enjoyment of religious liberty—(Cheers)—_
sect ik% .alza entirely opposed to any interference on the part of
!--iselwasetdiesehevith the temporal supremacy of the realm.—
' I have seen in other bod
,* Znever I have seen inhenever my own Church a dispositionies—
to
tbreitarineoeraplowers which I thought were inconsistent with the
slowpremacy that belonged to the State, I have not
4,_te nun. in urging myself and inducing others to urge
and prevailing objections to any such measure.
ea a
the Proposal was made in the course of last year to giveh
1341101 es of the English Church a power which I thought
the e'ss give them control over the temporal well-being, and
bet es,PrsePeriY of the clergy, that proposal was rejected
his ea langerous in principle, and successfully rejected
reaemd„eagues in the place in which it was pro-
fof -put, Sir, if that was the case with regardtt et?.
enCeuts, who have expressed the utmost a athhe
to freedon-t; if that is the case with regard tee d
ilniurrech °f
s„. England, which is, I believe, of all Establish.eh
fr the most tolerant, and the most consonant with
rb set i" eesenn of our institutions • if that be the case, shall it
more strongly as an Objection to the effort of the
no se, i 1 of Rome to introduce the Pope's temporal. supre-
)t this country ?—(Cheers.) I cannot, Sir, forget. that
eittse"e in ancient times but also in the most recent times,
e bi• sse"e have been put but
on the part of Rome totally
t t Merit and opposed t our notions both moral and religious.
l was a
estig of recent Pope who said that it was from the feu!
er Indifferentism had sprungthe absurd, wild, and mad
g resell that freeuom of conscience could be permitted. or
rt vent
all persons in the state.—(Hear.) It is quite as
a sthat
to there has been kept up in the Court of Rome
atirdrultibition study such works as Guicciardini, De Thou,
ono study
and even among others I find that the Greek
(La e°fll,4 ter
Scapula is a book prohibited to be read.—
eat
gr''er.) When I see these things in these times, so
tppe„;,!1:1 averson to religious liberty, so determined. an
cloctir,ou to books which contain, not any question of
:rtim.eptitrt.lnation.bsut narratives which may be injurious to the
of certain popes, I own that I feel a stil
r dislike to the introduction of ultra-moutane religious
tfi 'roans into this count •--s Hear.) But then, as I. stated
14wutber ;
rl,ght, there ir3s .a
total difference and distinction
pray. een the faith of Roman Catholics, as it was practised
have men in the time of our forefathers, and as it was
Fret aged and believed by the eminent men who lived in
441 the 'nest distingu
ished ornaments of the Church
Derle7e uar, and that ultra-monmane doctrine, as it was pro-
. sew . called by the Duke of Norfolk, which has been re-
broughl over to us from the Court of Rome. (Hear,
ePin:) admitting, therefore, a total liberty of
keen to Roman Catholics, I propose to this House now,
the necessary shall do so on a future occasion, to resist
thttint i°roduction of those doctrines.— (Hear, hear.) I know
kid taking this course we are liable to be misrepresented,
ladatrhat having stood during a long contest exposed to poet.
the. Odium, exposed to exclusion from power on behalf o
lesss Privileges of Roman Catholics, it may now be said
es
sea
are changing our opinions and altering our views
,:reaPect to the Roman Catholics. But Ido not feel that
hat Peet at all changed the opinion that the Roman Catho-
or Were entitled to be admitted to all the privileges of the
My belief is, that those Acts of Tests and Ex-
' •E4elen which were passed in Charles H.'s time were only
• hiegit.sti,„,v judged, because there was a very just suspicion of
•tb k•harles 11. and James 11., that if the Sovereign had
11 Power to employ Roman Catholics, not only would loyal
ctlean catholics be employed, bat that loyal Protestants
_A°111(1 be eascluded. Such were I think, the grounds.of t e
then in force, and be it observed, that in the time
the
tbaroebeth, when you could trust the Sovereign oznealtnio
• .40._ 'le, at you can do now, as being animated with
ePee or the Protestant Faith—(Loud cheers)—no such
leoreeslative exclusion was neceseary, and I believe that our
span
Is at the present moment augmented because loyal
,sf „ Catholics attached to the Throne and Constitution
country can hold office and can be admitted to seats
ittslie Legislature.--(Hear, hear.) I feel that we are
more powerful in entering this contest, having
• that we made no exclusion on the grounds of religion,
(17 that if we do make any exclusion now, it is only in
isesenee of the law and authority of our Sovereign.—(Hear,
theer,;) I think that with these feelings we may say what_
ts arliament of old said, the Parliament of the Roman Ca
-
times times too. They refused to consent that " the Crown
• England, which bath been so free at all times, that it
1:1•,,o been. in no earthly subjection,. but immediately subject
seod, in all things touching to regality of the
_same
a,r,°Wa, and to none other, should be submitted to the Pope,
,-41 the laws and statutes of the realm by him defeated and
neuellea at his will, in perpetual distraction of the sove-
eeNtltY of the King, our lord, his crown, and his regality,
-en of an, which God forbid !"—(Cheers.) Sir,
• th a
mien rea
-e rarlit, the Roman Catholic Parliament of that
day'au declared "That they will stand with the same crown
• esegality, in those cases specially, and in all other cases
• shall be attempted against the said crown and regality
Wea" points with all their power." So say I; let us, too,
and against those attempts at all points, and with all our
against
cheers.)
On the question being put,
• Mr. ROEBUCK rose, but was for some moments inaudible
twin
ceedegd tot o the noise of Members leaving the House. He pro-
broad Say, the Noble Lord began by laying a foundation
„ enough for the large capital of legislation proposed by
14° liens Member for Buckingham. He not only went back
to the ,-.
.e
and
had gone
distant ages, but had searched Europe through,
gone through the history of Austria, of Russia, of
France,lf he cusandd of Holland for his Act, and, lastly, of England.
descri gathered its purpose rightly from the Noble Lord's
ptio n, the Bill to be introduced meant that bishops of
tof he Roman Catholic faith should not call themselves bishops
any place in the three kingdoms, or in any part
inof her
majesty's d • •
°111°11°118•—[Lord J. Russell—No; only
three
kingdoms]—and that anyproperty left to them as
such bishops should be forfeited the
apposed, it a Roman Catholic were to callhimself
tote Crown. Thus he
Archbishop
leVeNyestuninster he would be subject to the penalties ot the
"‘er , but if he were to call himself Archbishop in Westneire-
. oatfe.r,the law would be inoperative. That was the whole sum
N,,ee measure. With all the substructure laid down by the
a„yeer! Lord he entirely concurred. There was no strong
ssePren with respect to ecclesiastical power and ambition to
4sobeewnlehti the Noble Lord had given utterance in which he (Mr
e
_ne .n 11ek) did not
Lord ht
ague; but there was one broad fallacy
lei
argument he had used. The Noble
ragd hrough every
all along applied himself to countries in which the
Roman Catholic religion was established, but there was one
ssiael!rY Where the R.oman Catholic religion stood in such a
tenetoo to the State that the law did not lend its peculiar
eoesLailtiYonassislance. It was, like ourselves, governed by a
springing from which,ly feith and m 1
Zidfh all the Puritan spirit distinguished us in 1640,
did Yet that country looked on a Roman Catholic just as she
liR•0°,11411, EPiscopalian, or on the professor of any other re-
•dfilse-sse It Was not a country on which you could look with
-oar lap ;it was a country of 25,000,000 people speaking
• arid ii wgllage. It was not afraid of the Pope—(A laugh)—
• lo aueisela ss omission on te art of the Nob Lord
eeould he gro
only case which borhe anyle similarity to our own.
than thing be more widely distinguished from. another
• land s'l•alece from England, or than Catholic Eng-
in Austin Protestant England? The law of France,
rees—ustria, and of Prussia was right, for these
ssseetes—that the Catholic religion established by law
jaitipplated the power of the Pope and the Pope's
anebility as an essential element of their faith ;
seki eas to the quotations made by the Noble Lord from M.
lest°, any one who had read Pascal or Arnaud must have
ss,s_vin that in the struggle for Gallican liberty it was neces-
k3cf for them to protest against the assumptions of the Pope,
Ww,to
resist, because if they had not so protested his acts
tb d have become the law of the land. The reason for
ese
c.., Precautions ceased when the country ceased to be
ineeleol The Noble Lord had declared the Pope's proceed-
Ostee bee an insult to England, and an encroachment on the_
regatives of the Crown, and on the rights and liberties of th,liahraen. His Bill therefore had for its object to defend
so!,_(Setieen's prerogative, to wipe away the insult, and to
INientain the liberty and independence of the country. The
wintroit Lord complained that the Pope had not put himself
ith with the Government of Great Britain and
beethe Government of Ireland. If he (Mr. Roebuck) had
ern Lord-Lieutenant, and a Catholic Bishop had applied to
ZEt/. for advice, he would have said that he looked on him pre-
asY in the same light as a Wesleyan priest, that he might do
es, he liked, but that he, the Lord-Lieutenant, knew him not,
7euat be might be cardinal or archbishop, but he had no
/leer under the law, and was not recognized by it.—
sfeeo e,ar, hear.) Had Cardinal Wiseman been so treated, Lotisul England have been less free? When the Noble
that' talked of the conduct of our ancestors, he would say
when the Pope was indeed a power, and could
Was Erigland and the Monarch on the throne tremble, it
up neeessarY, and it was glorious, to see Parliament stand
p._angainst his power; but now that he was supported by
Fret eh bayonets, that he' was in such a state that England
08f Jgo far by negotiations to have that small army re-
ude, enardthttnahleauPgohp; would be a vagabond on the face
pectfully, -he did not use the word disre-
he meant merely a man wandering about the
eLoNr.ld--it was to him surprising that the Noble Lord should
at jlebought fit to introduce his Bill to meet a thing which
itsinto.imteheof day ought to be met with ridicule and by in-
tells
people , the —(Hear, hear.) Let them depend on
Act would only rivet the yoke they reeked to remove,
sectv.,w.ould tend to make men's minds more obedient to it. it
;M..."3 all very well to say that if a man pronounced an ex-
I nn i cat ion or published a bull he should be punishable
primly. but let them follow one step further. Suppose the
t(1.4_,0 dwei excommunicated cooomt moui
snoilcvaet,e,,d was
kr. Loehtick) would accept punished by law, and
quoted by the Noble Lord, as a what were von to do ? He
a Catholl
Priest wase the
v illustration,ery atshe hough it Sardiniai
was
deeuriiTtdry,cf the source whence the power of the
e Was it from the law ? Now but it xiss