The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-15 00:00:00

prosperity, and be-whet unfortunately she was not-a
nation of freemen, enjoying the comforts and r ecessaries of
life, instead of what she was-a degraded community of
paupers.-( Hear, he:l..) He would not say that the present
race of Englishmen 114e1 reduced her to that state, but their
ancestors had by their legislation marred her advancement.
It was now their duty to retrace their steps, and to adopt a
wiser mad re ore humane course. Speaking as a Roman
Catholic, he looked upon the present Bill as an open and
wanton insult to his country.-(Hear.) At the same time,
he begged to be understood as not speaking in a sectarian
spirit. The population of the United Kingdom numbered
about 30,000,000. Of that number a third were Roman Ca-
tholics; another third were Episcopal Protestants, and the
remaining third was composed of all other sects. They were
therefore a mixed community of Christians, which name, if
they deserved, they ought at once to renounce this anti-
Christian Bill, which was far more calculated to make them
hate than love one another, and which, if persisted in, would
make them the laughing-stock of the world.-(Cheers.)
Sir B. HALL wished to offer a very few observations on
the subject, as it was his intention to give a decided vote in
favour of the second reading of the Bill.-(Cheers.) The
Honourable Member who bad just spoken had told the
House that he and those who usually acted with him were
a marketable commodity, and were ready ou the present
occasion to dispose of themselves to either the one party or
the other who should reject this measure.-(Hoar, hear.)
He thought it would be well if, before attempting to pur-
chase the Honourable Gentleman and his friends, any
party on that side or the other should first inquire the value
which the Honourable Gentleman and his friends put on
themselves, and then consider whether they were worth the
price. -(A laugh.) If they looked to the conduct of these
Hon. Gentleman, voting as they had done, first on one side
and then on the other-if they watched their proceedings,
he would say since 1832, about which time they first ap-
peared in the House, they would find that protesting against
the Government, and declaring against the coercion Acts of
that Government, they had, nevertheless, given that Go-
vernment their support.-(hear.) He believed that they
would again be ready to make an outcry, and be again found
supporting the Government against whom they raised it.
He had been much pleased with the admirable and tempe-
rate tone of the speech et. the Noble Lord who moved the
amendment, that the Bill be read a second time
that day six months. The Noble Lord bad stated that from
1598 down to the present time no demand had been made by
the Roman Catholics of this country for a hierarchy, and
that it had been considered unnecessary by the Pope.-
(Hear.) If that were so, where was the necessity now, in
1850, of the Pope coming forward and taking a step which
very properly had been called an aggression on the Crown of
Ors country ? - (Hear, hear.) He was unable to see any
necessity for the appointment of these bishops. The vicars
apostolic had sufficed for the wants of the Roman Catholic
inhabitants of this country, and there was no occasion for
the late proceedings, except for the purpose of giving power
to Roman Catholic bishops. Had he been a member of the
Romish Church he should have protested against the as=
suraption of any such powers.-(Hear, hear.) They all knew
that they had protested against the attempt of one of the
prelates of their own Church to introduce a Bill which would
have increased the powers of the episcopal body, and that
they had defeated that attempt.-(Hear.) It had been said
that the feeling of the country was not opposed to the late
aggression of the Pope. After the manifestation which had
taken place nothing could be more absurd or more fatal
than to indulge in such a supposition. He was surprised
that any one dared to tnake such an assertion after the re-
turns m ,ved for by the Ho‘ . Member for Warwickshire had
ben laid in the table. It appeared from those returns that
every county in England, with the extraordinary exception
of Kent - the seat of the archiepiscopate-had held meetings
on the subject-that hundreds of thousands had met together
for the purpose of testifying against the assumption of these
ecclesiastical titles, and that nu less than 1,604,000 persons
had signed the addresses presented to her Majesty on the
subject.-(Hear, hear.) It might be said that those ad-
dresses
had come from the clergy and from the rural districts,
w here no great liberality of sentiment existed.-( Hear, hear.)
That was not the case. He had the honour to represent a
portion of this metropolis remarkable for the liberal opinions
of its inhabitants-St. Pancras. In that parish there were
18,500 householders, and he had presented a petition signed
by 14,363 of those householders, praying the House to take
measures for the purpose of marking their indignation at
such aggression, and for effectually checking it.-(Hear.)
An appeal had been made in this question to religious liberty.
-(Hear, hear.) It was to prostitute the phrase so to use it.
- (Hear.) They were now endeavouring to legislate for re-
ligious liberty, and against religious donsination.-(Cheers.)
Roman Catholic Members had talked as if their religion
was so excessively tolerarrt. He believed it was the Hon.
Member for Mayo who said that if he wore asked why there
was greer er religious freedom in Grea Brit sin than Rome,
he 'would answer that it was because England was England.
But why did not the Hon. Gentleman reverse the proposition
and strengthen the argument by saying that it was because
Rome was Rome.-( Hear.) Because the Roman Church
bad ever been and still was intolerant. (No, no.) If the
Hon. Gentleman had ever been at Rome, he would have
known that Protestants were not allowed to worship God
within the walls. No one surely could:have the presumption
to deny that. Was the Hon. Gentleman aware that his
Protestant fellow-subjects who died at Rome were buried in
a remote corner of the city-that no prayer was allowed to
be said over their 1)er:1y-that no monument could be erected
to a father or child without the sanction of the Propagand
or if allowed, that no inscription c ui t be put on without the
sanction of that society ?
Sir W. BARRON-That is not true. I have erected one
myself to a friend.
Sir B. HALL The non. Baronet might contradict him,
but he must excuse him if he did not stand corrected by him.
-(A laugh.) He could tell the Hon. Baronet of en instance
with regard to a per son of hi. own country who had died at
R me. After a great deal of trouble permission was at last
granted for the erection of a tombstone, but no inscription
having any allusion to Scripture, or any extract from Scrip-
t re, was allowed. The person promised that he w uld not
put a Scriptural inscription on the stone, but would wree
some Latin verses, and lay them before the Propagaeda for
their sanction. They were as follows:-
" - quo claris fneram prolate puellis,
Illa eg, hoc brevi condita sum tumulo
Cui formam pulcherrimam charitis tribuere decoram
Quam Deus cunctis artibus erudiit."
These :verses containing more fa'se quantities than they did
lines, were allowed to be put on the tomb, and yet, not e
single allusion to Scripture was permitted.- (Hear, hear.)
The Hon. Gentleman said he would not refer to that portion
of the t<ill which had been withdrawn. Wi,ll regard to
synodical action, he, if he had been a Roman Ca holic, w uld
have opposed it. If any attempt had been made to give the
bishops of the Church of England that species of synodical
action which would have allowed them to interfere with tem-
poral affairs, in the same way as Roman Catholic bishops did,
he should have been ready to oppose that proposition. The
oble Lord who introduced the Bill had shown that the mo-
ment the Roman Catholic pre'ates met in synod, they did in-
terfere in temporal matters. - (Hear.) They were agents
of the Pope, and though they had every species of religious
freedom, he thought the moment they in'erfered in temporal
affairs the people of this country had a right to rise up and
denounce such inte ference. He wished to make one re-
mark as to the manner in which the present Bill would be
brought into operation. If he understood the massive, no
pr• ceedings could be taken under it without the sanction of
the Attorney-Gene al. Last session the solicitor-General
stated that if any person felt aggrieved on public gr unds,
such was the state of the law that he had only to lay the
case before the Attorney-General, who w uld endorse it
with the formula " let right be done." But in a case like
the present, he thought it ought to be open to anybody to
prosecute for the essumption of ecclesiastical titles. - (Hear,
hear.) The largest and broadest powers ought to be given
,n such a case, and the initiative ought not to be left to the
caprice of the Attorney-General for the time.-(Hear, bear.)
In making these observations he might be denounced as one
careless of religious liberty. It was hardly fair to put such
a eonstructien up ‘u his words, for his desire was to treat the
question as a temporal one, and as one relati .g to the pre-
rogative of the Crown. Whilst he wishe ito declare on the
one hand that the Pope should not have temporal power in
this country, he wished also to derriere to the S Nereign that
they would not al,ow a divided allegiance in matters depend-
ing n the authority of the Crown. It was on these grounds
alone that he had come to the determination to support the
second reading of the Bill.-(Cheers.)
Mr. R. PALMER wished to state the reasons which
would lead him to vote against the second reading of the
Bill--(Cheers from the Irish Members.) He was far from
being insensible to the deep and strong feelings which had
been manifested by the people of this country on this ques-
tion. If he could have believed that that expression of feel-
ing really conveyed the deliberate and well-considered
opinion of the country that legislation of this kind was re.
ditical danger, he should have hesitated
quired to protect the interests of the public and to deliver the
be'
choeufoerter e
trustingfrom a any pany
conclusions to which he might have
come in opposition to it. But from what he had seen he
lieved that the public did not view it as a political question,
but as a mixed political and religious question. In approach-
ing theseemed
tsou btjheicntkf from
rightthi s o pointne-o
o of
tthe
view, which eve ryspeaker
theological
but the
political view-he confessed he was much more alive to the
dangers which would follow from wrong legislation to the
great principle of civil and religious liberty than to any im-
maginary political danger from the aggressions of the Church
of Rome. It was necessary to start with a clear and distinct
view of what was meant by civil and religious liberty in this
country, for if they did that they would sweep away a large
portion of the arguments in favour of the Bill, arid of those
other arguments which drew a fine distinction between
spiritual and ecclesiastical things. He should not forget to
deal with the question as between the Church and Protestant
Dissenters. In this country, in which so much liberty was
given in ecclesiastical and spiritual matters to Churches and
religious bodies not connected with the State, Dissenters
were allowed to make ecclesiastical arrangements-to hold
synods and assemblies. The Free Church of Scotland, which
dated its origin as of yesterday, and which separated from
the Established Church because it (the Free Church) would
not recognise the principle of State interference in Church
government, immediately on its separation organised through-
out Scotland a vast parochial system, consisting of kirk ses-
sions, presbyteries, synods, and assembly.-( Hear.) Why,
therefore, should episcopocy be denied that which had been
allowed to presbytery? The Wesleyans in this country had
their meetings and conference-the Presbyterians of Ulster
had their synods--and the Episcopal Church in f'cotlandetas
allowed to make those ecclesiastical arrangements which the
conviction of its members thought right, and all without the
interference of the State. He was perfectly aware that it
was said that such liberty was inapplicable to a Church con-
nected with a head in a foreign country.-(Hear.) He should
have to consider that point in the course of his observa-
tions. It was impossible to understand it unless they first
got a notion of what was meant among themselves by
religious liberty. They would also have to consider the prin.•
ciple of finality in ecclesiastical arrangemesurtrsr,agnedm:natys
whether or not they should not be changed and developed.
an
If the principle of freedom in ecclesiastics
were to be allowed, how extravagant to say that because a
particular Church had tor centuries been conten
o twr becauseith
it
mis-
sionarieshad
no
not
t had synods
ot bed uallowed h
et os amvee
time bishops,it should not
possess them whorl it required them. - ( Hear, hear.) must
not the Church itself be the judge of what it requi-es in a
different state of things? -(Hear ) If what it did interfered
with the State then 1 t the State step in, but to make our-
selves the judges whether the things desired by the Church
were requisite or salutary for it or not, savoured iu the last
oegree of persecution.(Uear.) Before lie entered upon the
difficulties attached to the question he mutt remind them
' that the Roman Catholics held as a first principle the
supremacy of the Pope in ecclesiastical matters. - ( Hear,
hear,) To say that they tolerated Roman Catholics,
but excluded this principle, would be a practical
contradiction.- (Hear, hear.) He wished to consider
whether the principle which they recog rised is other
religious bodies was inapplicable to the case of the
Romee Catholics, Abstractedly viewed he acknowledged
there Wll RP illiflc4taPt betweeo them. He ad.
mated that the other religioue communities of British sub-
jects acknowledged no foreign interference. He did not
deey the difficulty, but wished to suggest that it did not lie
at the root of the Church question, but at the root of that
question which they had settled long ago when they disagreed
Nvbcthei they should grant toleration to the Roman Catholic
religion-rvilset4F they Should be allowed to live a peleet-
bMl —ctiear.) doulA aim were is east times