The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-05 00:00:00

WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUA

agriculture, he was bound to say that there were more
agricultural labourers out of employment than ever there
had been ; and that the home market wos almost altogether
destroyed. The Noble Earl was not altogether audible in
many portions of hp observations.
Lord CAMOYS said he seldom rose to speak in that
House, and he should only address their Lordships on the
present occasion upon one point. That. point, however,
was a point of the most vital importance; and he hoped he
should, therefore, be excused in adverting to it. He was,
it was known to their Lordships, of a Roman Catholic
family, which had been so for many generations, and
which prided itself upon its unchanged faith ; but
he was, at the same time, an Englishman also; and
the rights, privileges, and integrity of this country were,
he believed, as dear to him as to any of their Lordships._.
(Hear.) He admitted the supremacy of the Queen over the
Established Church to as full an extent as the most orthodox
member of that Church could desire. He acknowledged also
the supremacy of the Pope in matters of faith over Roman
Catholics. But against the assertion of any temporal power
on the part of the Pope over this country he solemnly pro-
tested; and he was, he would add, likewise adverse to the
undue exercise of the spiritual power of that Pontiff in any
point which might be injurious to the constitution of the
country.—(Hear, hear.) He had watched the progress of the
Emancipation Act with great anxiety, and he should not
then stop to inquire, as sonic had done in very questionable
taste, whether that concession was extorted by tear or yielded
through kindness; but he would say that this measure had
been liberally passed by Parliament, and that it had more-
over been liberally acquiesced in by the nation. There was
it was true, no written or even expressed compact on the
subject as between the Roman Catholics and the Protestants
at the time of the passing of that Act; but he always held
that there was an implied and understood compact, to the
effect, that the rights, civil and religious, enjoyed by the
latter were conceded to the former on condition that there
should be no molestation on their part thereafter— a condi-
tion in which he considered that the Roman Catholics fully
acquiesced. That compact has not been violated as yet by
either party. The duty and policy of the Roman Catholics
since the Emancipation Act should, in his view, be to prove
by their conduct that those by whom they were emanci-
pated had not just cause of regret for the proceeding, and to
give, in the same manner, their opponents no justification
for their opposition. That moral compact, he maintained
had not been violated by the Roman Catholics as a body, and
their friends had no cause to repent of the course they had
taken, while their foes had hitherto had no ground for at-
tack. But the conduct of some members of that body had,
he was sorry to say, given rise to a charge against them on
the present nceasion.— (Hear.) He was anxious to take a
fair view of the establishment of the Catholic religion in this
country, praising where praise was merited, and condeming
where it was deserved, and he should therefore refer to the
introduction of the recent discord on that score into this
country. The Roman Catholics, he was free to confess, were
in full possession of the most perfect religious toleration ;
they had the benefit of equal laws and institutions with the
Protestants; they were increasing in numbers; they were
increasing likewise in wealth, though not so greatly; they
were building new churches and chapels—some of them
really beautiful—in various parts of the country; numbers
of the higher ranks of society were embracing their faith, and
many of the clergy of the Established Church had come over
to them from conviction and as a result of their own studies
This gave stability and importance to the Roman Catholic
body, both of which were increasing daily. While these
things were in progress, he (Lord C.) considered it to
to be bad policy—nay worse, he held it to be a culpable
error—to introduce into this country any such cause of dis-
sension as a Roman Catholic hierarchy _(Hear.) It was,
indeed, to the greatest ignorance of the actual condition of
England that this error was traceable. Any person who had
ever been at Rome of late days must have witnessed with
surprise the extravagant idea entertained there of the con-
dition of Roman Catholicism in England. It was believed
there that because a few Protestant clergymen had come
over to theßomanCatholic Church, the English people would
all follow them ; but those who entertained this idea
forgot that no flock whatever had followed its pastor on these
occasions. The Noble Lord was understood to say that the
Papal aggression was indirectly traceable to the Puseyites,
but that he should not dwell on that topic. He did not,
he continued, blame the Papal Government so much for its
ignorance of England in this matter, as he did those who,
knowing the country so well as they did, had advised it to
the course it had taken. The language they ought to have
held to the Papal Courrt was, that this was a Protestant
country—that the Constitution, though open to all, was
nevertheless Protestant—that the Crown was Protestant—
that the people, though divided into innumerable sects,
were, with the exception of the Roman Catholic body, uni-
versally Protestant.— ( Hear, hear.) He would not enter
into the question cf the difference between vicars-apostolic
and bishops, but kith regard to the often reiterated asser-
tion that they had violated the law in the establishment
of the Roman Catholic hierarchy, he must make an ob-
servation. The laws which were said to have been vio-
lated by that measure were the Ist of Elizabeth, the 13th
of Elizabeth, and the 24th section of the Emancipation
Act. Now, with respect to the Ist of Elizabeth, the
penalties enacted by it had been repealed by statute,
the rest of the Act remaining unrepealed. But when they
tolerated the Roman Catholic body, they tolerated that
which was essential to their religion; and they tolerated,
therefore, their holding the supremacy of the Pope. But in
tolerating that, they were tolerating what was forbidden by
the Act of Elizabeth. It was not, however, too much to say
that when the provisions of a subsequent Act were contrary
to the provisions of a prior Act, the latter was of necessity
repealed. In that respect the Catholics had not violated the
law. On that subject he wished to read the opinions of a
very high authority to their Lordships - namely, Lord Lynd-
hurst, who when he was Lord Chancellor stated that it was
no crime in a Roman Catholic to maintain and defend the
supremacy of the Pope ; but that if he did so for a mis-
chievous purpose—for circulating immoral doctrines or
opinions, he would be liable to punishment at common law;
but if he merely maintained and defended the supremacy of
the Pope, as he was bound to do, only as the spiritual autho-
rity of his superior, then he was guilty of no offence against
the laws of the country. That was the opinion of Lord
Lyndhurst; and the Bishop of Exeter having asked his
opinion and that of the judges as to whether it was
lawful in Roman Catholics to maintain the supremacy of the
Pope, he replied it was no offence at common law for them
to do so, but that if any person wantonly and maliciously
called in question the supremacy of the Crown (and that
comprised spiritual and temporal supremacy) for any im-
proper purpose, or in any manner questioned the supremacy
of the Crown, that such persons were liable to a prosecution
at common law. He (Lord Camoys) read that opinion with
very great satisfaction, because it was an answer to the con-
trary opinion of a very high authority which had been given
at a large public meeting in the country. —(Hear, hear,)
With respect to the second Act he had'referred to—namely,
the 13th of Elizabeth, which forebade communication with
Rome, it was comprised in the argument which he had ad-
dressed to the questions raised under the Ist of Elizabeth.
For if they tolerated the Roman Catholic religion
they must tolerate their communication with Rome,
which was necessary to the exercise of their re-
ligion. With regard to the 24th clause of the Emancipa-
tion Aet, that clause, after declaring that the Protestant
religion was established in England, and Scotland, and
Ireland, went on to say that any person assuming, as a
Roman Catholic bishop, the style or title of any archbishop,
or bishop, or dean belonging to the Protestant Church in
England, Ireland, or Scotland, was liable to the penalty of
1001. There was at that time, so far as the Roman Catho-
lics were concerned, no necessity for concluding England in
that clause. They had a Roman Catholic hirearchy in Ire-
land, and, therefore, it was proper to defend Protestant titles
there, but their defence of the titles in England was an evi-
dent paving of the way for a state of things in England si-
milar to that which existed in Ireland. It, then, that were
true—and he thought that he had correctly and accurately
stated the case—the conclusion was obvious, that they had
not offended against the law by taking'those titles which had
not been prohibited by Act of Parliament. He believed there
were one or two cases in Ireland where they had taken for-
bidden titles; but that did not apply to his argument.
He might say one word with regard to the preroga-
tive. If they regarded titles which flowed from
the fountain of honour in this country relatively
with titles which had their origin from the Pope, there
could be no true comparison between them,
the one giving legal rights, the other none whatever. Let
them take a case. The Crown had lately appointed a
Bishop of Manchester, and it might be deemed expedient to
make a similar appointment with respect to another large
town. and to nominate a Bishop of Birmingham. What
would then happen? Why, if the person appointed by the
Pope still continued to hold the title of Bishop of Birming-
ham he would he liable to the penalty of 100/. ; and that led
him to a declaration which had been made by his Noble
Friend, that the recent measure of the Pope placed Roman
Catholics in the alternative of either violating the constitu-
tion or breaking their oaths. He (Lord Camoys) denied
that the Roman Catholics were placed in that position. He
utterley denied that they violated the constitution because
they kept within the letter of the law. Taking, as he did,
a fair and impartial view of the subject, he could not avoid
noticing the celebrated letter of Lord John Russell. Like
all the Roman Catholics of the country, he had felt insulted
when he was told that his religion was mummery and super-
stition. He could not look upon that letter as the letter of
the head of the Cabinet. Their Lordships might think he
was drawing too fine a distinction, but he must say he
looked upon it as the letter of the individual and not of the
Prime Minister, He was confirmed in that opinion, when
he found the Prime 111;nister was not acting up to the spirit
of that letter. But he must ask, had Lord John Russell in-
tended to insult the Roman Catholics? and that question he
must answer in the negative. The Roman Catholics were

few in thiscountry, yet they were to be found in places of
public honour, trust, and emolument; in the House of Com-
mons, and in their Lordships' House, in the various grada-
tions of the Peerage; they were to be found even in frater-
nity with persons on the bench of bishops; they were to be
found in places near the person of the Sovereign • they were
in It minority in England, in Scotland, and in %Vales, but in
Ireland they constituted the great majority, and altogether
they constituted one-third of the population of the kingdom.
Could, then, Lord John J. Russell have intended to insult,
them, and not only them, but the Roman Catholics of France
Spain, Austria, Portugal, and the other countries which
were Roman Catholic iin religion? Were they not told in
the Royal Speech that those states were in amity with us?
And were not the sovereigns of those countries connected
by ties of relationship and friendship with the Royal family
of this country ? Was It possible then that Lord J. Russell
had intended to insult the Roman Catholic community?
Ile repeated lie must answer that question in the negative.
But while that did not amount to a justification of the letter,
he was bound to say that there were great annoyances to
which the Noble Lord had been exposed. Cardinal
Wiseman ought to have previously communicated to him
the proposed measure of the new hierarchical appointments,
and his not having done so was a breach of courtesy and a
want of duty at which Lord J. Russell had a right to feel
annoyed. It was no excuse to sap that the document relating
to the matter had been shown at Rome to a foreign ambas-
sador. Nothing of that sort would justify Cardinal Wise,.
man's not seeking an interview with the Noble Lord on the
subject before he took the important step of establishing the
hierarchy. Notwithstanding all the violence they had read
and heard at public meetings, he could not help noticing the
liberal feelings that pervaded all those meetings, at not one
of which had any resolution been come to except to take
such steps as the parties deemed necessary for the protection
of their national faith ; and beyond that no attack on reli-
gions liberty had been advocated. He had felt it due to him-

;elf and to their Lordshipsvto mike those few cblervatTons,
and he had only to thank Lordships for the attention with
which they had heard him.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE should have been sorry
if the debate had come to a conclusion without the Noble
Lord (Camovs) having had an opportunity of delivering his
sentiments, and which he must say the Noble Lord had done
in a manner which their Lordships must have felt indicated
a degree of candour and manliness on his part that reflected
infinite honour upon him; and he hoped that those senti-

ments, coming as they did from a person connected by here-
ditary ties for centuries with the Roman Catholic body of
England, and expressing them as the result of his own obser-
vation and knowledge of this country would, as they ought, out-
weigh a hundred-fold those sentiments and those proceed-
ing which he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) believed it to be
n9;9rinti—and he pm sure mild be poyed-1244 Wgiaated

in the most profound ignorance of the state, history, and
present condition of this country.—(Hear, hear.) With
regard to the topics whit i had been alluded to in the course
of the debate, he need not offer any justification to their
Lordships for not entering into any details; for although
the Noble Lord opposite had we h respect to particular
points, " hinted a fault, and hesitated dislike," yet, with
regard to the most important proposition in the Royal
Speech, and the outline of the policy it indicated, he had
expressed his entire concurrence and arprohation—a con-
currence also in the sentiments so boldly uttered by his
Noble Friends who had moved and seconded the Address—
sentiments in which he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) also felt
and expressed his entire concurrence and approbation. But
there were one or two points to which the Noble Lord had
more especially adverted; beginning first with the foreign
policy of the Government, to which the Noble Lord had ob-
jected, especially as regarded the differences in northern and
central Europe—more on the ground of indifference than of
active interference on the part of this country. lie could
assure the Noble Lord that in the transactions which had
lately taken place in those matters —that in the difficult
negotiations which had been entered into respecting the
complicated questions of the German Union, and others—
such which presented at one time every sort of difficulty—
the policy of this country had been neither indifferent nor
merely acquiescing in all :hat was going on ; on the contrary,
though not putting itself forward in contests in which it had
no share, yet with regard to the general interests of Europe,
not a week had passed during the whole of those transactions
in which the interference of this country had not been bene-
ficially employed—and acknowledged to have been so em-
ployed by every one of the States which had been brought
into a conflict of interests. With regard to the reference
made by the le oble Lord to the internal state of this country,
as influenced by the policy of free trade, he was not prepared
now to engage in the general question as respected the policy
of free trade, and he should wait for the time when the
Noble Lord would give him an opportunity of pronouncing
an opinion on the sulject. In the meantime he denied the
proposition of the Noble Lord, that, though they admitted
the existence of great distress in particular classes, there-
fore the whole population of the agricultural districts
was affected by that distress. Considering the share they
had in the general prosperity of the empire, if the distress
was universal amongst them, there could not be those un-
equivocal proofs of the prosperity of the masses which
were indicated by a perpetually growing consumption
—which nothing but the general welfare could produce.
The increase in the consumption of the country had been
going on from year to year—not by starts, not suddenly, but
extending by slow and measured paces, affording a ground
of security that it would go on steadily augmenting year
after year, justified the policy (which would not have been
otherwise justified) of Ministers recommending her Majesty
to take off, year after year, great productive taxes, the effect
of which had been only to show the soundness of the finan-
cial condition of the country. The revenue had risen buoy-
antly, notwithstanding the diminution of taxation, andshad
enabled her Majesty's Government to hold out a prospect of
still further reductions. The Noble Lord's allusion to France
had been most infelicitous. He had talked of the amount of
distress in that country being such at present as to bear
down the interests of that country much more than they had
been borne down before. The agricultural population of
France bore a much greater proportion to its commercial
population than did those of England to each other. Did
the Noble Lord then attribute the distress of so large a body
in France to the want of protection or to a free-trade
policy? The fact was, that from year to year all the different
Governments of France, whether monarchical or republican,
had persisted in a Protectionist policy. Yet the effect of
that persistence had been that agricultural produce was
falling off, and there was not a market in France to be com-
pared with the lowest market in this country. With respect
to another prominent topic in that night's discussion, he
must say that whatever variety of sentiments there had been
uttered on the Roman Catholic aggression, it did rejoice him
to see, on that occasion, that there had not been in that
House a sentiment uttered—he did not except the Noble Earl
(Winchelsea)—against true toleration, which had been
maintained throughout, and which, he trusted, would always
be extended to the Roman Catholics of Great Britain; for
he hoped that under no provocation, however unjust, should
they think of retracing their steps, and going back to a
system of religious persecution. He entirely differed from
the Noble Earl in considering that Roman Catholic Emanci-
pation was in any way connected with that usurpation of the
Pope which now occupied their Lordships' attention. His
(the Marquis of Lansdowne's) belief was, that if the Roman
Catholic emancipation had not happened, the Pope would
have had the same facility in that measure; indeed, in his
opinion, more facility, for he would have had the foundation
of injustice and inequality to work upon, and which might
have led lim to make the attempt. With respect to the
letters apostolic in which Cardinal Wiseman appeared to
assume the dominion of this country, if all that was intended
to be asserted in those documents was that he meant to as-
sume the spiritual dominion of the Roman Catholics, why
was not that intention expressed? Was there any difficulty
in chalking out that line—in finding words to define that
path in which he thought it his duty to assert the spiritual
jurisdiction and government over the people attached to the
Roman Catholic religion was there any difficulty in stating
that he meant to respect the rights of the Crown and the in-
stitutions of the realm ? Let them remember that those
proceedings had issued from a power remarkable for its
attention to formulas and words; and if he saw throughout
those documents the rights of the Crown, and the exist-
ence of the Protestant hierarchy depending upon the Crown,
studiously and carefully ignored, no person would persuade
him that it was by accident it had occurred, and that it had
not proceeded from intention, which intention they must
meet with signal defeat. A measure, therefore, would be
shortly laid before their Lordships, to which he invited their
Lordship? attentions That was all he would say in refer-
ence to it, because he did not wish to anticipate the discus-
sion of it. With respect to one point referred to by the
Noble Lord, he would answer it in the most satisfactory
manner by stating that at that moment notice had been
given in the other House of a Bill relating to that usurpation,
and which would affect the United Kingdom.—(Hear, hear.)
He concurred with the Noble Lord in thinking that in deal-
ing with the present state of things in reference to the
future, they could not regard the condition of Ireland as
otherwise than inseparable from that of Eugland. With re-
ference to other questions, a measure connected with the law
would be brought before Parliament, and he hoped it might
be found that it would effect a great diminution in the ex-
pense of law, while it would give to every gentleman in Eng-
land what was of infinite importance next to his existence--
viz., security for his property.
The Earl of RODEN could not help expressing the satis-
faction with which he had heard the speech of the Noble
Lord who had moved the Address, in every word of which he
completely concurred. But with respect to the Speech from
the Throne he felt very great disappointment. After so
much anxiety had been created, there was no reference
whatever in the Speech to the maintenance of the important
Protestant principles of this country. He trusted that the
intended measure, while it would maintain perfect toleration
to all parties, would gain and maintain that end in view.
If it was admitted that the Pope had the power of appoint-
ing bishops and archbishops in Ireland, the result would be
that persons so nominated by a foreign prince would take
precedence of Lords and Barons of the United Kingdom,
whose rank emanated from the Crown. He hoped that
something would be done to prevent so great an injury to
the dignity and the interests of the empire, and put an end
to the complaints they were now necessitated to make.
Nothing could be more,fair or more candid than the language
of the Noble Lord (Camoys), though he differed in his view
of the law as respected the appointment of Cardinal Wise-
man. The object of that measure was to have the canon
law introduced into this country, and he trusted that Noble
Lords would make themselves acquainted with that law,
which they could readily do, as it was lately published in a
small pamphlet. The Noble Earl concluded by saying he
would reserve whatever observations he had to offer on that
subject until the terms of the Bill to be proposed by Govern-
ment should be laid before the House.
The question, "That an humble Address should be pre-
sented to her Majesty, in accordance with the tenor of the
Royal Speech," was then put and agreed to.
THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF COMMITTEES.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE stated, but in a tone of
voice almost totally inaudible in the gallery, that he had re-
ceived a communication from the Earl of Shaftesbury, an-
nouncing that age and increasing infirmities obliged him to
resign the duties of his office as Chairman of Committees of
that House. After passing a high eulogium on the admirable
manner in which the Noble Earl had discharged the func-
tions of his office, the Noble Marquis proceeded to observe,
that with regard to the appointment of an individual to an
office, affecting as it did the general interests of that House,
as well as those of the public, he had been desirous rather of
taking the sense of that House, or a majority of it, than of
doing aught which might raise a discussion with respect to
the choice of the person intended to fill that situation. No
doubt, there were many Noble Lords in that House who were
qualified to discharge the duties of that office; but he hoped
the Noble Lord whom a majority of that House might select
would fulfil its duties in every way satisfactorily.—(Hear.)
Lord STANLEY said he was sure every member of their
Lordships' House should bear in grateful recollection:the long
and faithful services of the Noble Earl who had so long
filled that important post, and would regret that declining
years and increasing infirmities compelled him to resign the
office, the duties of which he had so long performed with
advantage to that House and the public.--(Hear, hear.)
He entirely concurred in what the Noble Marquis opposite
had said. He was sure that many Noble Lords possessed
qualifications which fitted them for that position, but it
could not be denied that for the long period during which
the Noble Earl held that office he had acted upon questions
of every description in the most impartial manner, and
had discharged in the most efficient mode duties essential
to the well-being of that House, and of the community,
at large.— (Hear, hear.) In that office there were oppor-
tunities of gratifying private friendships or private am-
bition without any sacrifice of personal interest; but he had
known the Noble Earl to have been immovable to con-
siderations of friendship or interest, and to have pursued a
straightforward unbending course; and upon private Bills
no matter what interests might have been involved, no
temptation whatsoever, no consideration whatsoever, could
have induced him to deviate one hair's breadth to the right
hand or to the left.—(Hear, hear.) He agreed with the
Noble Marquis that there were many Noble Lords compe-
tent to discharge the duties of that office; but it would not
be considered offensive to other members of that House if he
said there was one member who had paramount claims to be
appointed to that office.—(Hear, hear.) They should en-
courage as far as they could an attention to the private busi-
ness of the House, by placing that high office in the hands of
persons who had habituated themselves to the discharge of
the duties of that office.—(Hear, hear.) They should con-
sider whether the candidates for that office had applied them-
selves to look after its duties. The private business of that
House was most important, and was becoming more so
every day; and it should be understood that the important
functions of Chairman of the Committees of that House
should be conferred on no other members than those who had
applied themselves to the duties of the office.—(Hear, hear.)
If they were desirous of finding a member of that House who
would perform the duties of that high office with firmness,
impartiality, and good sense, with au experience of more
than 15 years, during which he had been the assistant of the
Noble Earl who had lately filled that office, they would select
his Noble Friend Lord Redesdale, whom he then had the
honour of proposing tor their notice, and by whose selection
they would confer considerable honour on their own judg-
ment.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord concluded by moving that
Lord Redesdale be appointed Chairman of the Committtees
of that House in the room of the Earl of Shaftesbury resigned.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said when it had become his
duty to consider the person whom it might be expedient to
recommend to the House to succeed his Noble Friend, who
was no longer able to perform its duties, at that time he had
earnestly recommended his Noble Friend, who had been just
then recommended to their Lordships, to make himself con-
versant with the business of that House, with the view of
qualifying himself for undertaking hereafter the duties of
Chairman of Committees.—(Hear.) He was happy to say that
his Noble Friend had accordingly qualified himself for the
performance of those duties ; and it seemed to him that he
was but acting in the performance of his own duties when he
recommended his Noble Friend to their Lordships.—(Hear.)
He thought their Lordships could not make choice of one
who would perform the duties of that office in a manner more
satisfactory for the honour and reputation of that House.
The Earl of lIARROWBY concurred in expressing his
strong sense of the fitness of the Noble Lord whose name