The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-25 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING,

/final suffrage of France had sent 10,000 bayonets
to support it—so powerful that Spain was making
voluntary restitution of Church property—so
PeWerful that Schwarzenberg, with one stroke of his
Pen. had swept away the bigotry of a hundred years—
what, but that day by day she was withdrawing herself
frc'es state connexion and Erastian dominion?—(Hear.)
This; it was which had enabled a pauper hierarchy to
4110 its place by the side of a largely salaried episcopal
establishment—a pauper hierarchy which was regarded
With sympathy throughout Christendom, while the sale-
"ed hierarchy had no sympathy out of the British em-
pire, A cardinal prince of the Church had been sent to
this country—a dignitary who in every court of Europe
Would take precedence of our own Prince Consort—
wile, under his Cardinal's robes, carried the wallet of a
Mendicant, and who depended for the support of his
di
...Pity only upon the voluntary contributions of those
Woo believed.—(Hear.) Rome had gone far beyond the
‘Severement of England in support of the principle that
IP one should pay but for the faith of his own church.
"e had plunged far down for the shadow of the coming
an hilth and here in England had first proclaimed the
of that union between modern liberty and ancient
"11th, which in his conscience he believed would yet re-
generate the world.—(Cheers from the opponents of
the Bill.)
Mr. M. MILNES said that knowing the difficulty in
Which the Government was placed, he was surprised that
licm. Members should come down, and with words of
friendship on their lips seek to embarrass a Govern-
tent whose place they professed themselves unable to
hid some to the conclusion that it was his duty to sup-
Port the Bill. He could not deny that there had been
e assumption of ecclesiastical titles. Though de-
'Shted with the logical speech of the Hon. and Learned
faeleber for Plymouth he could not help being reminded
`? it of a mode of arguing on political economical ques-
tnis in his young days, in which they were expected
1— era, erfect conclusions from some such assumption
"Suppose a man on an island."—(A laugh.) If the
Present were an abstract question—if it stood by itself
,_4lisesociated with historical recollections—then the ar-
guments of the Hon. and Learned Member would have
struggle
irrefragable. But when they recollected the long
itornSgle between Popery and Protestantism, and the vic-
thrl which at last remained with Protestantism only by
k_ chance of a change in the dynastic succession,
thought they would find au element in the ques-
not taken into account by the Honourable
;▪ itei Learned Member for Plymouth in his very able
ieeh. There was another element in that question
Worthy
of consideration, and it was this—that the
Pleeple of England were growing more suspicious than
thioul former period of their history of hierarchical au-
MiY altogether. The Hoese would recollect that
when last session it was proposed to add the least pos-
,;elY offensive number to the bishops in this country, it
v()
tals so repugnant to the notions of that House, that the
,
ernroent abandoned the project. He thought it was
1111_Pessible to deny the spontaneous character of the de-
iluilstration which had taken place in that matter.
treivitver opposed he might be to the letter of
ti Noble Lord—for he did not think a Minister had a
peat to make his private religious opinion a part of his
I,ttblio policy—(Hear)—he did not think that letter had
„ Much to do with the excitement and agitation which
Pre •
bp %lied in the country. The object and effect of the
ii;,,osed Act he took to be this—to assimilate the con-
kr,o and position of such Roman Catholic bishops as
hixfat be established in this country to that of the same
been
in Ireland. The clause in the Act of 1829 had
it'Ll found sufficient for all the purposes for which
th,"6B originally intended, with the single ex-
'Snr"°ll, he believed, of Joha Archbishop of
(1,-43, who was not considered the most mo-
otlilte amongst the prelates; none of the
sleets had ever attached their titles to any public decu-
totah The Bill on the table only proposed to do the
with regard to the new hierarchy. It was, indeed,
Corm question of form—and it was as a question of
te that he agreed to it. The establishment of a Ro •
tau Catholic hierarchy by the Pope was an act which
et had no power to prevent; but the publication of that
do' the manner in which it had been set forth, its mode
:xPression, were such as fully justified us, with all
h„ regard to the principles of toleration, in examining
for , tar the mode in which that act was passed called
legislation on the part of that House. Making every
for°ltance for the person to whom that set had been sent
j,,e„ePeration, he might have managed it in a less ob-
the"oable manner. There was no distinction between
Iter• T
48surciption of those titles and a certain territorial
t4he Hon. and Learned Member for Plymouth
h,,rl! Roundel' Palmer) had said that the Roman Ca-
j4 ic religion required that ecclesiastical development
thosthe manner proposed. Now he (Mr. M. Mimes)
tis!`ght that with the assumption of that power we as-
selted more than mere religious distinction. The
esiastical dominion of Rome remained a fact in his-
lwhich it was impossible to dispute. It was impos-
tils)°, to dissociate it entirely from political influence.
too
at the Court of Rome at this moment. Look at
tto Papal power as it was now. Yet see, how feeble
kiugh its political organization might be, what a power-
(4Pelitical influence it exercised all over the world.—
hs ear.) When the Pope was sent from his dominions,
had been brought back by the Roman Catholics of
Now, he (Mr. Milnes) did not think they were
;eltiug any princile of religious liberty he they
thr6 dealing with that question as they were. ludeed,
O Set of the Pope, or one with similar objects, might
tje been done in a manner which would have offended
Ledy, and if done in a quiet manner could have been
inaged in a way not calculated to provoke any ani-
esity or bat feeling in the public wind in England.
As
it was, what was the act now? Why it was not so
,I°ol an act of assumption as of re-assumption. The
Mien was that the Pope only resumed his old
th;Wer in England—that he only again returned to
1411° country as if there had never been a Reforms-
On' a civil war, a revolution in England.—(Hear.)
stte,,i'e not the titles assumed, too, most assumptuous,
pf'vsnloat likely to provoke the hostility of the people
a 415 country on account of their former connexion
ton the Roman Catholic religion? The facts, there-
RN? upon which the present Bill was brought in
well founded and the case of the Government
hi supported by, the public feeling ofthe country.
Cstlil,elattse in the Act of 1829 which prevented Roman
leis"(ilic bishops from maul:dog the titles of sees had
e,titit sufficient for all practical purposes, and therefore
esslsd Melte the introduction of that Bill into Ireland
l'lsb",3B. He did not therefore see what difficulty the
iel,lo.Lord at the hull of the Government could have
ttitpttiaz its operations to Great Britain, having al-
iS,'t? that clause in the Emancipation Act of. 1829, and
get rid of a good deal of the ill-will and oppo-
af the Irish Members towards that measure.
th:C„was a difference between the Irish and the En-
Pr -"omen Catholic hierarchy in this respect—that the
hr%rtion of the numbers of the people to these bishops
to h terY dissimilar; and it was often of some importance
:e the public opinion of the laity sufficiently strong
LhakuclifY the arrangements of tbe episcopacy. With
etit,iiet to the poseibility of preventing bishops or such
eilts;rc'rn meeting in synod, he could not see the possi-
!he; i but if the attempt were made to prevent them
he Would be driven to meet in secret, and that would
with ways worse than an open assemblage. But not-
Ifoq",`ancling all they had heard on the subject, he
reli' venture to say that it would be difficult in any
kv"“liis assembly in this country to find so many in
ifti?,,ll: of secular education as there had been in the
ent of Therles.—('fear, hear.) He could not
itittlg himself to neglect the opinions of his con-
Ntlii,ey on that subject ; and, indeed, he thought no
ateraber ought to differ from his constituents with-
that'm,,hela deliberation and full explanation. After all,
eiewwas a question of public opinion, and it was public
dtj °n which would finally settle it. The present Bill
tt„,.set satisfy the people of this country; but it was all
es(tleeulot do to satisfy them, and all they ought to do.
this elir, hear.) If they attempted more, it would be
to delusion upon the people of England. To attempt
butN with that matter was impossible in one respect;
tioll.theY could deal with the assumption of the ostenta-
tes,' titles. Titles were very much regarded in this
tttlei try, perhaps more than in any other land. So par-
to were we, that nur diplomatic or public servants
then places were not allowed to receive any rank or
hor:,,,fr,em a foreign Power. On that point there was
Itts `tuing peculiar in the presence of a person holding
s4,sirank of a cardinal residing in a Protestant country.
tp:',4 a person was esteemed a Prince in other countries,
‘l,' was styled brother and cousin by potentates
i)iti°s°d• Now, perhaps it might be that in prolai-
- fstrsig the open use of those titles they were con-
It a benefit upon those who held them ; for
Iti,steight continually expose them to disagree-
tir;ll circumstances and consequences in their rola-
Iti,4l,with the people of this country. Public opinion
21 go far to prevent all the good which the Act of
'''ttilight do. It had been formerly said by Sir R. Peel,
hat the Act of Catholic Emancipation did not rest
)tith
tep4tParliament, but with the public opinion of the
l t.,rY; and that they would be doing very little towards
Plki°oeiliation of Protestants with Roman Catholics by
4% (11% the latter in a position then for which they were
littimrened fit, or make them eligible for the highest
test t°,llll, to which, however, no Government dare ap-
,N 'ern." Such was the position also on which we
it now placed; and he feared that question would at
next
R 4 general election exclude many Hon. and dis-
INalshed Members from that House.—(Hear.) Ho
,itittliin Say to the people of England, it was not by ex-
'ett-t,t the Roman Catholic Members from that House
• ,sueY could hope to put an end to the struggle which
le,titrading between the Churches of Rome and
'nd. The contest which was going on could only
\tQrl
n by moral means—by the extension of education
°pleteariup of the minds of men. Such was the
o.•
e./11,4:7 in which hic h they could compete with Rome. The
etjt, 'l-snit:ter concluded by announcing his intention of
kg for the second reading of the Bill.
ktet''SADLEIR said the Hon. Member who had just
lelOwo fell into merciful hands, for he was disposed to
• with him in the spirit of the fullest charity. The
f,,,---onabQr, however, in proceeding to give his rue,
etts r voting in favour of that Bill, relieved any person
thestate trouble of reply for the Hon. Member imme-
'ee llq after fully answered himself. He granted that
lo
411 k Member's speech, with one or two exceptions,
spirt improrement upon that tone of bigotry and
adds
"f intolerance which pervaded so many speeches
ahle elist
d to the House on that subject. The Honour-
tiopCsr enaber admitted that there was a latent hatred of
,Y, io England. No doubt there was. And that was
practical difficulty which every statesman
so-so,,ihd here who had to legislate for a great mass of
o,ress:' Consisting of Protestant, Roman Catholic, and
ti,44t eJterian, and other forms of religion. In considering
},Se filriettion it should always be borne in mind that to
"tttrkreylevelopment of the Roman Catholic religion a
I,ites a y was indispensable. Dr. Murray had over and
I)th daltin in the discharge of his diocesan duties to
tatibli:,llrnents as " Daniel Murray, Archbishop of
the ~d But the Honourable Gentleman seemed
fault with the -form rather than with
substance of that pxoccedieg, The fact

was, however, that no offence had been meant or could
have been meant by the ainhors on the change. Cardinal
Wiseman had solemnly declared that he had not pub-
lished those documents, and he did not know how they
had reached the public press in this country. But the
documents had been eagerly caught up and made the
basis of a violent religious agitation. In his appeal to
the people of England, Dr. Wiseman had also expressed
the deep regret he should feel at having given offence to
any portion of his fellow-countrymen. What had been
the object of the change which had been so much com-
plained of? Its object had been to establish for the
Roman Catholics in this country a free national
hierarchy; and let him tell them that Roman Catholics
is England, with the spirit of independence which they
possessed in common with the rest of their fellow-coun-
trymen, wished to have for their religious liberty some
better security than the establishment of vicars-apostolic,
who were the mere creatures and nominees of that
individual whom the First Minister of the Crown would
designate as a foreign prince. That distinguished prelate,
the late Dr. Doyle, Roman Catholic Bishop of
Kildare and Leighlin, had laid down the proper view
to bo taken on that subject. Dr. Doyle had stated
in the course of his evidence before a Parliamentary
Committee that there was a material difference between
a vicar-apostolic and a bishop, because a vicar-apostolic
was dependent on the will of the See of Rome; he could
he removed at the pleasure of the Pope; the faculties
which he exercised could be restricted, limited, or modi-
fied; " but that," continued Dr. Doyle, " is not the case
with us bishops; we cannot be removed at pleasure; our
rights are defined from the Gospel and the canon law;
defined as well as those of the Pope himself; we cannot
be obliged to do anything at the mere good-will or plea-
sure of a Pope." Now, that was the independence
which he (Mr. Sadleir) trusted would never be surren-
dered either by the laity or clergy of the Roman Catholic
Church in these kingdoms. That independence had
lately been conferred by the liberality of Pope Pius IX
on the Roman Catholics of Eugland; and that independ-
ence they would never, ho earnestly hoped, surrender.
The Honourable Gentleman had spoken of the small
number of Roman Catholics in this country. But
it should not be forgotten that there was a large
and a daily increasing Irish Roman Ca-
tholic population in England ; and many of those
people employed as labourers in great public works
had hitherto been left lamentably destitute of religious
instruction. He had himself received letters from Irish
Roman Catholics employed on railways in this country,
earnestly supplicating him to use his influence with the
secretaries of companies, for the purpose of obtaining for
them a removal to some district where they could assist
at the rites and ceremonies of their religion, and ex-
pressing their readiness in that case to take half the
amount of wages they had previously obtained. But it
had been said that that measure had been called for by
public opinion. Now, he had reason to know that there
were multitudes of Protestant clergymen, both in this
conntry and in Ireland, who looked with the utmost scorn
and contempt at the hubbub which had convulsed this
country. He should, however, take that opportunity of
frankly acknowledging that he did not think the appoint-
ment of a cardinal in England had been at all called for.
He should also admit that the language used in those
Papal documents had displayed gross ignorance of the
feelings and prejudices of the English people; and he held
that every man ought as much as possible to shape his
conduct so as to defer to the religious feelings of his fel-
low-citizens. He should further say that so far as the
feeling of the people of this country upon the subject
evinced an opposition to foreign aggression and a deter-
mination to resist the interference of a foreign power in
their temporal concerns, he respected that feeling, and
he believed that it was natural and honourable to them.
But the majority of the speeches delivered in favour of
that Bill seemed to him to be better adapted for the audie
ences which usually attended conventicles, than for a
grave and deliberative assembly like the House of Com-
mons. The Roman Catholics had been accused by the
Noble Lord of a blind obedience to the Pope. But they
paid him no such obedience, and the calumny was one
which bad long ago been refuted. The Noble Lord had
further said that the establishment of a hierarchy had
not been called for by the Roman Catholic laity of this
country. lie should like, however, to kuowthe Noble Lord's
authority for that statement. He (Mr. S.) believed that
the Roman Catholics of this country, as freemen and as
Englishmen, desired the establishment of a hierarchy
among them. The Noble Lord had also stated that the
Roman Catholic laity were anxious for this Bill as a
protection against the intolerance of their own clergy.
The conciliatory Prime Minister seemed to think that
he had interfered to keep the peace between the Roman
Catholic clergy and laity. Now that appeared to him
(Mr. Sadleir) to be a most extraordinary assumption on
the part of the Noble Lord. Ho should add, that a
Minister of State could not possibly commit a greater
error than by saying or doing anything which could
lead to a diminution of those feelings of attachment,
fidelity, and confidence which happily bound together
the Roman Catholic clergy and laity in these kingdoms.
He felt convinced that as a body the Romsn Catholics
of England not only did not call for that Bill, but that
they abhorred the principle upon which it proceeded.
The Noble Lord had alluded to the conduct of the Pope
in selecting Dr. Cullen to fill the primatial chair in Ire-
land, and to the course taken by the Synod of Thurles.
lie (Mr. Sadleir) should, therefore, briefly refer to those
subjects. The appointment of Dr. Cullen—whom the
Hon. and Learned Member stigmatised as an Lalian
monk—had been made the subject of censure. But
what was the mode in which such appointments were
made? On the death of an archbishop iu Ireland, either
one or two months after, the Catholic parochial clergy
proceeded to select three names to be recommended to
the 11013 See. It was always the practice for the bishops
of the province to consider the three names, and express
their opinion with reference to the respective merits of
the individuals, and upon that the Holy See proceeded
to nominate to the vacancy. On the death of Dr.
Crolly, the predecessor of Dr. Cullen, as primate,
the parochial clergy of the archdiocese of Armagh
selected three names, and the bishops of the province
assembled to consult as to the relative merits of the
three individuals, but could not agree as to the recom-
mendation which they should make. In this unusual
state of things it was the manifest duty of the Holy See
to make such a selection as would not give to any party
an unseemly triumph; to make a selection in accordance
with the national feeling of the Irish Roman Catholics,
and consistent with the independence of the national
Church. He was not at liberty to state in Parliament
the pains taken by the Holy See to make such a selec-
tion, but he was at liberty to say that greater efforts
could not have been used to ascertain the feelings of the
Irish hierarchy, or these of the most eminent and influ-
ential members of the Catholic laity. And who was the
man selected ultimately; who was Dr. Callen? The
Hon. and Learned Member fur Southampton had called
him an Italian monk; but he was a native of Ireland,
and to his certain knowledge had a large and more in-
fluential circle of relations than any other member of
the Catholic hierarchy, having received his earliest
education in the county of Kildare, then proceeding to
college at Carlow, and afterwards to the Continent to
complete his theological studies. Then they found him
chosen to preside over the Irish ecclesiastical estab-
lishment at Rome—a position always held by some
distinguished Irishman, and one in which he acted as
the accredited agent at Rome of the Catholic hierarchy
in Ireland, and that hierarchy had always evinced a jus-
tifiable jealously of anything approximating to ecclesias-
tical aggression from Rome. Much had been said as to
the attitude assumed by the Synod of Thurles with re-
spect to the educational scheme of the Government. Ile
was most anxious to
'see the system
pre-
scribed for the Queens Colleges' flourish
education
flourish and expand in
Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) But in the same propor-
tion as his anxiety for their success was his regret that
the innocent blundering of the Government had failed
to compose those differences and allay those doubts which
had prevented those institutions from being
dsaiapsprousvefalon
useful 6s
they otherwise might have been.
the part of the Holy See was somewhat qualified; for
it was a disapproval of the Queens Colleges as at pre-
sent constituted. But the hierarchy were divided in
opinion, and how were their differences to be composed?
By an appeal to a superior authority,. and that authority
was the Holy Seed
eaTrphfeulrley,asons of the various bishops
were at Rome, and the ops
were patiently an
decision of the Holy See was pronounced at the Synod
of Thurles, and the question there was as to the mode
and discipline by
which that decision was to be carried
out. That synod was convened for very different ob-
jects from those which the Noble Lord would have led
the House to believe; and if the Noble Lord had read
the syllabus of the 29 or 30 leading subjects for discussion
at the synod, he would see that they did not relate to tem-
poral matters. With regard to the observations which had
been made on the allusion in the address of the synod
to the sufferings of the poor, he asked whither they
would not have been disgraced in the eyes of their fel-
low-countrymen if they had separated without any allu-
sion to the existence of such fearful wretchedness and
suffering? The Noble Lord at the head of the Govern-
ment had said that he never read a document more cal-
culated to excite hatred in the minds of the tenantry;
but there was nothing in it more forcible than the touch-
ing address of the Catholic bishops to Lord Clarendon,
in which they appealed to him us the representative of
the Government to take into his anxious consideration
the alarming sufferings of the poor. They were not
rebuked on that occasion, and Lord Clarendon said he
held it to bo the first duty of a Government to save the
lives of the people. It was in Ireland that the force and
Ireland,to the opinion
who
said
oi
df
efficacy of' this Bill would b o most severely tested, and
he begged to call the attention of the lion. and Learned
Member Member for Windsgorne(eMn,rs.
Counselliatehe in ll )
thiant,°alls hea
ganithe
understood the discipline of the Roman Ca-
tholic Church in Ireland, the provisions of this Bill
would be wholly inconsistent with the free action and
practical existence of the Roman Catholic hierarchy.
That opinion was corroborated by the opinions of other
distinguished men at the Irish bar. He protested against
the recitals of the preamble, which, incorporated with
the first, and now only section, would give that section
a potency and operation which it would not otherwise
have, and entitle the statute to be ranked with those
measures which had been described by Burke as the
ferocious acts of faction.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. H. BERKELEY regarded the Papal bull as an
aggressive insult on the supremacy of the Queen, whether
temporal or spiritual, and he considered an Act of Par-
liament necessary both to express the opinion of the
people of England and to prevent, if possible, the recur-
rence of the offence. The measure itself was certainly
one of very light construction, and contained not one jot
of religious persecution. The Noble Lord at the head
of the Government had taken a very judicious course,
steering clear of the bigotry of Exeter Hall, and equally
avoiding the dolce far niente course of the Right Hon.
Baronet opposite, the Member for Ripon.—(llear, hoar,
ane laughter.) The Church of Rome had been waiting
for the last ten years with open month hoping that the
Church of England would fall into it of her own accord,
and now the Pope had given the tree a shake, hoping to
bring down the unripe fruit.—(Renewed laughter.) No
, one could 'Ave listened to the grit speech of the Noble

Lord the Member for Bath without coming to the con- 11
elusion that the Papal aggression was owing to Puseyism.
There were two word, more met with throughout
England now than any otht-rs iu the English vocabu-
lary, and those were Paseyisna and Popery, and the
first was even less popular than the last. People, in fact,
looked upon Puseyiena as standing in the same
position to Popery as the grub did to the butterfly
to— (dLoain)agthttoerat
.)aslittawshasiatahicidcehxr)ptaszldisitwahwicihaghsaadadnottohritnhg.
with it became Popery itself. Looking at the quotation
made by the Noble Lord from the writings of CardCardinalWiseman, which might be called Wisemeu on Puseyism,
one could not come to any other conclusion than that in
1841 Dr. Wiseman contemplated an union of the Church
of England with the Church of Rome. If Dr. Wiseman
thought so in 1841, what conclusion must he not have
arrived at after seeing the effect far ten years of the en-
couraging symptoms of the disease?
.They now saw
Sisters of Mercy and Popish attire in their streets, and
wherever the Puseyite fungi had arisen the good old
Protestant terms of morning and evening service had
been changed to matins and vespers. These things
were common in London, and he had seen them in
Bristol—he knew also that they existed in Manchester
and Liverpool. Was it, then, to be wondered at if the
Pope entertained a strong opinion that the English
Church was about to forsake its errors? The Arch-
bishop of Canterbury himself could not have done more,
he hoped ho would not do less, under similar circum-
stances, than the Pope had done. Suppose an intimation
was conveyed to Lambeth Palace that in the Roman Ca-
tholic Cathedral of St. George the candlesticks had been re-
moved, the font for holy water overthrown, the mysterious
bell had ceased to ring, and the priests had put away
their splendid lace garments, and adopted surplices,
what conclusion could the Archbishop of Canterbury
come to but that Dr. Wiseman was fast approaching the
Church of England? and could they blame the Arch-
bishop if he put forth his holy crook, seized Dr. Wise-
man by the red leg, and endeavoured to lug him into
the Protestant sheep fold ?—(Hear and a laugh.) Thee
look at the manner in which the appointment of these
bishops was received. Dr. Ullathorne, using language
that would be considered almost blasphemous if used
by a Protestant, said, " it would seem as if Christ had
burst a second time from the tomb." But when the
whole country, of all sects and denominations, rose and
expressed its opinion unmistakeably, then the bishops
discovered their mistake and made a humble apology.
It appeared to him that there was much less danger
to the Church from open undisguised aggression, than
when they found holy men and women locked in
each other's embraces when they found the Bishop
of Exeter paying domiciliary visits to a fair devotee
in the west of England, and passing encomiums,
recommendations, and admiration on the lady
superioress—where ?—among beads and rosaries,
and relics, and crosses, and other symbols of
the Church of Rome. When they saw all that, he would
say that there was danger to the Church of England,
and he regretted to say from the apostacy of her sons.—
(Hear, hear.) The great distinction between the Pro-
testant and the Roman Catholic religion was, that the
Protestant religion interfered with and supervised the
affairs of the Church, while the Roman Catholic trusted
everything to the priests.—(Hear, hear.) The question
was, had enough been done? The people of England
said no.—(Hear, hear.) They called upon the Noble
Lord to act up to the spirit of his letter, and with one
voice they called for a reform of the Church of Eng-
land. He did not think this was the time to mince mat-
ters, and he charged the Bishops of London, of Glouces-
ter, and of Exeter, with having a tendency more or less
to the tenets and practices of the Church of Rome. He
saw, looking towards the Speaker's chair, a golden le-
gend emblazoned in the arms of England, "Dieu a mon
droit," and he was reminded by it that the present was
the moment for laying party feelings and differences
aside, and for calling on the Ministers of the Crown to
aid them in standing by the Queen in the name of God
and her rights.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir J. YOUNG said the measure proposed by the
Government was opposed by many intelligent and in-
fluential people in that country; and it was opposed by
millions of Roman Catholics in Ireland. Then, with
regard to the other great bodies, the Presbyterians and
the Protestants of Ireland, let the House consider for a
moment what their opinions were. The Hon. Gentle-
man near him, in a maiden speech a few evenings pre-
viously, said that the province of Ulster was unani-
mously in favour of the measure. That might be;
but nothing that had reached him could lead him to the
belief that that statement was well founded.—(Hear,
hear.) With regard to the organs of public opinion
in that province, he found that the representative
of the opinions of the Presbyterians—a paper of
high commercial character and respectability in Bel-
fast, and the representative of the Protestant Demo-
cracy of Ulster, had both declared against the
present legislation. There had been a large meeting
in the town of Belfast of noblemen and gentlemen who
had struggled against the Emancipation Bill of 1829,
who told the Protestants of Belfast that the same
ruin was pending over the people of England that
had for many years afflicted the Protestanti of Ireland.
But, notwithstanding there were 50,000 or 60,000 Pro-
testants in and about Belfast, the room in which the
meeting was held was not at any time half full. Then I
let it be observed that the petitions emanating from the
Presbyterians were always drawn up as from the minis-
ters, elders, and congregation ; but it so happened that
not a single petition had been presented in favour of
the measure from a Presbyterian congregation of the
province of Ulster. He believed the general opinion
among that class—and it was coincided in by many Pro-
testants—was this, they looked not with favour, but
with dislike and suspicion on the step that had been
taken by Cardinal Wiseman, or those by whom he was
instigated ; but they looked with apprehension at the
consequences of the present agitation, and were by no
means in favour of it. His opinion of the step was
Jactum valent ficri non dehet. With regard to the mea-
sure itself, as it came originally from the brain of its
author, it could scarcely be looked upon as any addi-
tion to those safeguards which the energies
of the people and the wisdom of Parliament
had raised around their liberties. Instead of
being a defence, he believed it would be a breach in
those liberties, to which a vast multitude of the people
were opposed. Any measure which did not extinguish
the spirit of opposition was sure to call forth further
opposition. It was impossible to expect that the pre-
sent measure would be effectual to extinguish opposition.
If the measure was right the fear of opposition should
not of course prevent them passing it ; bat if it were not
justified by necessity then the attempt to enforce it
would be found to lead to useless and exciting contests.
—(Hear, bear.) That was a greater danger than any
acb
heheaunardatohonl
were
de.
re thatlait l
the
dtahree
dd oatcaotilasiaany—e stt
that could be apprehended to their liberties. They had
e
hh
aoa
tft
if
nonetah any
y R
of
imf at
them
the
a t, Catholic
Protes-
tants of that country went to a Roman Catholic eccle-
siastic or a Roman Catholic layman, and said that the
spirit of that religion was altered and its doctrines mo-
dified, that they would take it as anything but a compli-
ment.— (" Hear, hear" from the Irish Members.)
What the Roman Catholic religion boasted of,
was the infallibility of her maxims, the machange-
ableness of her doctrines, and the inflexibleness of
her dogmas. What step then, he asked, ought they to
adopt to meet that ever inflexible opponent? It was not
by measures of restriction—it was not by penal laws.
It was by the cultivation of the arts and the intellect,
by which the consciences would be protected, and under
which that country had grown up to the maturity and
greatness at which she had arrived. What Protestant-
ism boasted of was that it was open, and that it appealed
to the intelligence and reason of the human race. Her
strength lay in free discussion, and where there was
free debate and the liberty of the press, religious li-
berty was safe. The danger which the Honourable and
Learned Member for the city of Oxford apprehended,
and which he foreshadowed, was the conversion of mul-
titudes of Protestants to the tenets of the Roman Ca-
tholic Church, and their alliance with some despotic
power in the State. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman
referred to a state of things that existed three centuries
ago, and which, he had no doubt, proved fatal to the
liberties of the people in many parts of Europe. The
Noble Lord in the course of his speech had pronounced a
high eulogium on a writer with whom he (Sir J. Young)
was personally unacquainted, but whose works ho had
perused with pleasure, and had quoted his opinions on
that point. He begged also to refer to the opinions
of Sir James Macintosh, who said that two religions,
it was believed, were no more reconcileable than two
governments in a country ; and that recent events
had demonstrated that men could not bo taught to throw
off the power of the priests without determining also the
limits of kingly authority. Surely that fallacy had long
been exploded.. It had been found that two religions
could flourish side by side, not only with advantage to
each other, but with perfect 'safety to the State. The
.danger was the union of despotic power, apprehensive of
its own safety, with ecclesiastical authority, alike alarmed
for its existences That was the danger when Alva put
to death heretics as well as rebels in the low countries.
The Hon. Member for Oxford said that ho had no fear
for the Protestant Church, meaning that those who were
attached to it were so from principle, conviction, and
education; but then, he asked, supposing there was no
fear, what became of the danger of which they had heard
so much? If the people did not waver, Papacy was
powerless—its power was only exercised over those who
submitted to it. Then again, with regard to the despotic
power of the State, foreign countries had been referred
to in favour of this legislation. But they should con-
sider what were the peculiar circumstances of those
countries. In Spain, before he could tread out the first
spark of nascent reformation, Philip 11. was obliged to
take away the charters and immunities of the corporate
towns, and even in the Italian states its principles pre-
vailed until they fell under the dominion of single indivi-
duals. In Holland, under free institutions, and complete
toleration, the reformation. triumphed. In England, under
free institutions, but witeout complete toleration, they
all knew what the result had been. What was the les-
son they ought to derive from this?—surely it was this,
that so long as they maintained free institutions the
rights of conscience would bo respected. On these
grounds, mainly, he rested his opposition to the measure.
lie believed that the measure was going beyond its pro-
per object. What appeared to him to be their duty was
to maintain the dignity arid respect of the Established
Church, and then to afford to all who dissented from its
doctrines complete toleration. He believed that tolera-
tion was as essential to the safety of the
.Established
Church as it was in accordance with its doctrines. The
Noble Lord told them that if they did not pass the pre-
sent measure they would find themselves at the com•
menceinent of an arduous struggle. Ho hoped the conces-
sions end alterations that had been made in the measure
ten days ago would be a sufficient salvo to the honour of
Dr. Wiseman to induce him to recede, and give the
country peace. He trusted that would be so, as he de-
precated the continuance of such a contest. If he thought
the measure was right or just, no fear of agitation or
opposition.l would prevent his giving it his support. But
he said, let those upon whom tho heat and burden of the

contest would fall weigh well the consequences before
they began it. He maintained that it would fall upon
the Protestants of Ireland. Let them count the cost.
Look at the struggle that had been maintained against
the Roman Catholics in that country for nearly
a century and a half. Every power of the
State had been put in motion, and ho ventured
to say that history did not record a more signal
defeat than that of trying to coerce the Catholics of Ire-
land into a similar belief with the Protestants of Eng-
land. The industrious classes in Ireland had been ruined
by that struggle, and the very name and spirit of the
Protestant religion was lost. Bishops were amassing
large fortunes, but no glebe houses were built, and the
sound of the Gospel was not heard in the churches.
Relatively, the number of Protestants was smaller at the
close than at the commencement of the struggle. The
Church was obliged to submit to the loss of half its pro-
perty under the tithe arrangement, while the people
were deprived of ten of their bishops. Such were the
results of the struggle, and he warned the Protestants of
Ireland not to enter upon another. Upon these grounds
he must withhold his support from the Noble Lord.
Although he had heard a great deal of ability in support
of the measure, the justice appeared to him very dubious.
Although he did not doubt that the measure was brought
forward in all honour and good faith, at the same time,
instead of adding strength to the cause it professed to
advocate, it would bring weakness, and be an infringe-
ment of that complete toleration which, in his con-
science, he believed, by being scrupulously acted upon,
and firmly maintained, would do more for the cause of
true religion and the spread of spiritual truth, than all
the defences that alarm could suggest, and all the safe-
guards which misguided but sincere enthusiasm could
surround it with.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. GRATTAN quite concurred in everything that
had fallen from the Hon. Member for Cavan; except in
one word. The lion. Gentleman called this a struggle.
He (Mr. G.) called it war in disguise—the worst sort of
war, by an unintellible Act of Parliament. Though this
measure was wholly unintelligible inside the House, it
was perfectly intelligible outside of doors. The
people of Ireland had expreseed their opinions
upon the subject, and, as far as words go, the contest
was ended. If any foreigner had come within their
walls a few nights ago, they would be at a loss to com-
prehend what we were discussing. They would ask
what were we discussing—was it larceny? No.
Was it science ? No. Was it morality ? No. Was
it religion ? Oh, far from it. Why Hon. Members
were merely opposing the religion of their forefathers.
The old antiquated attacks; supreme ignorance; affected
knowledge of the canon law; mistaken quotations ; mis-
applied law, and confusion of intellect such as had never
been heard of even in the worst days, in 1808 and 1818.
These were the characteristics of the present discussion,
The Hon. and Learned Member for Sheffield the other
night said that the Irish Members had the honour of re-
ducing the measure to its present imperfect condition;
and when he alluded to the Irish brigade he said that
they had destroyed the Noble Lord's Government, and
might now pronounce their epitaph. The Irish Members,
however, were not to be considered of so sanguinary a
character. It was the Noble Lord himself that had
committed an act of suicide. We resisted with indigna-
tion this aggression upon our liberties and the liberties
of our country, because we knew we did not deserve it.
What had Ireland done that she should be put in this
Bill? She had been silent and quiescent until she was
roused by this penal Bill. In the very first line of the
preamble of this Bill there was contained a monstrous
public falsehood, for it said, that " whereas many of her
Majesty's subjects in the United Kingdom have assumed
certain titles in consequence of a letter from the Pope."
Now, was that true?—(Hear.) Why it was a direct and
palpable falsehood. The Irish prelates had not assumed
these titles. Whatever might be said of the Catholic
prelates in. England assuming those titles that were ob-
jected to, it could not be said that the prelates of the
United Kingdom had done so, for those in Ireland could
not be charged with doing so. Was there common sense
or common justice in fining those prelates for an act of
which they had never been guilty? But the Hon.
Gentleman opposite said that this measure would be
evaded, because it would be found to bo wholly inopera-
tive. The Government, however, would endeavour to
enforce the Act, for the Noble Lord at the head
of it said it would form the groundwork of ulterior
measures. What would the Roman Catholics do un-
der the circumstances? Could they make them less
Catholic than they were before? No; they were Ca-
tholics, and would remain so, and they were right to be
Catholics.—(Laughter.) What right had the Govern-'
merit or Parliament to say that they were not to have
their own bishops? The Government were involving
themselves, not with the Pope, but in a serious contest
with the Irish people. The Bill would be prejudicial to
England, but pernicious to Ireland. Had they not com-
plete Protestant ascendancy? What more did they
want? They were seeking to prosecute and to trammel
the Roman Catholic Church. Mr. Curran, in speaking
of Protestant ascendancy in Ireland, said, " It was the
greasy emblem of stall-fed theology—it bad all the
graces of a lady's maid and the dignity of the larder.
Its loyalty was the dregs of the brandy-bottle, and its
religion the dregs of its patrons' understanding, brought
into power to devour, to defame, and to degrade." Great
apprehensions were entertained in respect to the tem-
poral authority oft the Pope. Now, what did the late
Right Rev. Dr. Doyle say when examined before a
Committee of that House upon the subject? He was
asked this question—" Are not the vicars-apostolic
bound to pay implicit obedience to the Pope?" Answer
—"This is a supposition which I cannot admit, be-
cause the Pope might by possibility, order a man
to do a thing that was immoral, or that was
contrary to the duties which he owed to the Sove-
reign. This ho was not bound to obey." The Hon.
W
and Learned Member for the city of Oxford (Mr. P.ood), and the Noble Lord subsequently, said that
the Pope might absolve the soldier or the police from
their allegiance to their Sovereign. The Pope could
not do any such thing. Even if they really thought
that the Pope could do so, they should have kept the
matter a secret and not proclaim it aloud; for in case
of
Duke
ew eorfe possible,the hint might be
taken.a ,
ifWellington, on the field of
Waterloo, when he uttered the command, " Up, Guards,
thtehe
and at them," was answered by the men laying down
their arms, considering themselves absolved from their
allegiance, what would have been the consequence?—
(Laughter.) He (Mr. Grattan) could not but admire
the calm resignation which always characterised the
Hon. Member for the University of Oxford. The Hon.
Baronet observed that there were two modes of repell-
ing this aggression—the one was by proclamation, and
the other by bombardment. As to the first we have
proclamations ad nauseam. What would be the object
of this proclamation? Why. mere names, not realities.
He then spoke of bombarding Civita Vecchia on the
one side, and Ancona on the other. He should not
wonder if the next caricature of HB. repre-
sented the Honourable Baronet, like the maid of Sara-
gossa, with one leg on Civita Vecchia and the other
leg on Ancona, making a frightful onslaught upon
those two places.—(Loud laughter.) That was the
peculiar legislation recommended by the lion.
Baronet the Member for the University of Oxford. It
could not be said that this question of alleged Papal
aggression could not be settled by communication with
the Pope, for whatever might be said to the contrary, it
was a matter of fact, and the Pope had had intercourse
bath with the Crown and the Government of this coun-
try in times when religious liberty was not so advanced
as at the present. Look at the letters that had passed
in 1792 between his Holiness and Lord Grenville and
George 111. on the subject of the Irish oaths. Yes, and
their admirals and generals held communication at the
same time with the Government of the Pope; witness
Admiral Hood's letters. The Right Hon. Baronet (Sir
J. Graham) had referred the other night to the letter of
Mr. Knox to Lord Castlereagh. He might, by the way,
observe that on reading through the work from which
the Right lion. Baronet bad quoted that letter, he was
struck with the fact that whatever might have been the
local prejudices of Lord Castlereagh, his correspondence
showed that on great occasions he rose above those pre-
judices, and was equal to any task, however great, that
might arise before him. In that book, however, there
was a letter from Lord Cornwallis to Lord Castlereagh,
dated February, 1800, in which he took credit, so sure
was he of the result, as for a fait accompli, for having
accomplished the union, Catholic emancipation, and the
restoration of perfect tranquillity in Ireland. Lord
Cornwallis, though thus sanguine, was, however, disap-
pointed—faith was broken with him, and the peace of
Ireland was not maintained. So it would be again if
they persevered in their present course; war—inevitable
war—would bo the consequence. The Hon. Member
then quoted Mr. Canning and Dean Swift, and said that
if it would take 40,000 men to put down tenant right in
the north of Ireland, it would take all her Majesty's
army to put down the religion of 6,000,000 of people in
Ireland. The lion. Member further stated that when in
1817 the Noble Lord at the head of the Government
voted against the war with Bonaparte, his father, the
late Mr. Grattan, though removed from the Privy Coun-
cil in Ireland, and with the full recollection of articles of
indictment for high treason having been prepared against
him, voted for that war which the victory of Waterloo
ratified. On that occasion an Englishman became a
Bonapartist, while an Irishman supported the honour of
England.
Mr. G. BERKELEY said the Protestants of England
would learn by the issue of the debate the measure that
had been placed before them by one section of free-
traders, and supported by another, as represented by the
Right Honourable Baronet the Member for Ripon. He
(Mr. G. Berkeley) did not rise for the purpose of en-
cumbering the discussion with any remarks on the sub-
ject immediately before the House—(Laughter)—but
to repudiate that most disgraceful accusation which had
been poured upon the heads of the Catholics—an accu-
sation which he held to be a disgrace to the character of
that House. Ho rose as an indignant Protestant—
(Laughter)—to repudiate any such aid as was offered to
the Protestant cause by the Honourable Member for
West Surrey.—(Hear, and laughter.) He held that
speech to be a disgrace to any cause that had ever been
brought before Parliament ; and he would venture to
inquire whether the pure vessel who made it, or rather
whether that bird of ill omen who had fouled the nest of
others, did not himself reside in a nest that would not
bear to be looked into ?—(Hear, laughter, and ques-
tion.) Before the Hon. Gentleman made such state-
ments as those against the Catholics ho should be sure
that he did not himself dwell in a glass house.—(Ques-
tion, and laughter.) The Hon. Member had accused
the Catholics of idolatry, bigotry, and a belief in ridicu-
lous, supernatural agency; but did the Hon. Member
himself disbelieve in such agency ? lied ho never heard
of the ghost that haunted Aldburough Park ?—(Laughter,
and cries of " Question.") Was his not an implicit
belief in that agency--whether from the mirrors in his
room that caused him to suppose his house haunted?—
(Cries of " Question.") Did the Hon. Member not pull
down a part of his old house?—(Cries of " Question.")
West Surrey was the last place to read the Catholics of
the United Kingdom such a lesson as that which had
) been read by the Hou. Member, when it was known,

that in one house there was always laid a golden knife
and fork for—(Cries of " Question" cut short the sen-
tence.) The attack made by the Hen. Member for
West Surrey was as false as anything coald bo against
the Catholics of this country.—(Cries of "Question.")
As to his (Mr. G. Berkeley's) vote on the question under
debate, he should give it in favour of the Bill—(Hear,
hear, and Laughter)—not because
,ho thought it an
efficient measure—(Laughter)—but simply on the prin-
ciple that some legislation was due to the Protestant
religion of the country.—(Hear, hear.)
Viscount CASTLEREAGH had no wish to put
himself forward in the debate, as he had nothing new
to suggest; but he felt himself bound to express his
opinions on the subject, that his constituents might
know what they were, and his reasons for entertaining
them. In any observation that he should make, how-
ever, ho deprecated the slightest feeling of asperity
or unkindness, and would not willingly say a word to
wound the feelings of any one. To his Roman Catho-
lic fellow-countrymen he would say, that, as far as re-
ligion was concerned, he could have no Sympathy with
them. There was a gulf between them which could
not be passed in that:respect. He had too firm an attach-
ment to the pure and apostolic branch of the Catholic
Church in which he had been reared to entertain any
such sympathy. But while be respected the convic-
tions of his fellow-countrymen, at the same time he
differed from them, he could hold out the right hand
of fellowship, and refer to the time when, within the
walls of that House, he had fought with them side by
side, in defence of religious liberty.—(Hear.) Look-
ing back, however, to the great name that he so un-
worthily bore—looking o❑ the legacy that the great
man who first bore it had left him, he felt proud to be
arrayed with his Roman Catholic fellow-subjects on the
same platform in support of the same principle—that
platform being the floor of the House of Commons, and
that principle civil and religious liberty.—(Hear.) The
Noble Lord would perhapsipermit him to say that it was
with peculiar pleasure he had heard, after long years had
expired, the name of that great statesman now no more,
but to whom he (Lord Castlereagh) was related, vindi-
cated, and vindicated too from such a source, and from
such authority; for differing as the vindicator did from
the policy of his noble relative on many points connected
with the history of Ireland, and in which he bore his
part, as Mr. Grattan had done before him, he attested,
and from his heart honestly and sincerely attested, that
the name of Castlereagh was ever associated with the
civil and religious liberties of his country. Turning to
the Bill under discussion, his Lordship then proceeded
to observe that the question which struck him with re-
ference to the measure was this: was it the fittest
that could be adopted under the circumstances of the
case? The Noble Lord the Foreign Secretary said that
it was but a small measure; that he could not conceive
of anybody voting against it; and that he was sure he
himself would not support it if he thought it were a per-
secuting measure. He (Lord Castlereagh) was quite free
to admit that the Noble Lord implicitly believed what
he said. But was he not aware that the voice of the
whole people of Ireland were opposed to the measure?—
(Hear, hear.) Surely the Noble Lord could not be blind
to what was taking place out of doors—to the feelings
with which the name of Russell was now received in
Ireland—to the demonstration of the bar of Ireland, and
the public meetings which had taken place in every
quarter in that country in reference to this measure.
In fact it appeared to him (Lord Castlereagh) that
the Bill was satisfactory to no one—and that " small"
as it might be it was not the less obnoxious, whilst
there was something in the mode of passing
it which was peculiarly obnoxious. As our neigh-
bours in France would term it, it was " the reactionary
policy of a transition Ministry."—(Hear.) The Noble
Lord next condemned the language which had been held
by the supporters of the Bill, the manner in which the
people of Ireland had been spoken of, and the whole
tone and temper of the debates upon the subject; all of
which he put forward as reasons against such rapid and
ill-digested legislation. Long ago they had been taught
the effects of penal legislation in Ireland. And if this
measure passed, so far as Ireland was concerned, he
did not see in what way the administration of justice, or
the government of that country, was to be conducted.
Convinced as he was, then, of the impolicy of such a
measure, that it would not satisfy the people of England,
and would certainly irritate the people of Ireland—he
would not consent to endorse with his humble name a
Bill which was likely to be fraught with much of evil.
Mr. B. HOPE (amidst constant interruptions) next
addressed the House, and twitted the advocates of the
Bill with their inconsistency, in first denouncing it as
inadequate to meet the circumstances of which they
complained, and then with the same breath uniting to
vote for it.—(Cries of " Divide," and " Adjourn.")
Further, the measure would be operative or inoperative.
—(Divide, divide.) If it were operative it would bo an
answer to the Pope.—(Great noise.) But it appeared
to him that they were directing their legislation against
the bishops, who were comparatively innocent parties,
whilst the insult had come from the Pope.—(Laughter,
" Oh," and cries of " Divide.") As a means of dealing
with the aggression of Rome the measure was ridicu-
lously absurd.—(Uproar.) Having been prepared to
oppose the Bill when it contained three elausee, he was
equally prepared to oppose the Bill now it contained but
oue clan: o, because he held it to be disgraceful to the
magnanimity of the nation, fertile in shame, and barren
of those great principles of policy which ought to regu-
late the affairs of a great nation.

Mr. HOIMOUSE moved the adjournment of the de-
bate.—(Cheers and shouts of " Go on!")
Lord J. RUSSELL said it was most desirable that
the House should come to a decisiou on this subject to-
night.—(Cheers.) Ho found that 26 Members had
spoken against the Bill, and 22 for it, and they had
heard, he thought, the ablest arguments that could be
advanced against further proceeding with the measure.—
(Hoar, hear.) He did not believe that if they debated
the question for six days more they could have any ad-
ditional argument, and he trusted that if any gentleman
wished to address the House they would be heard now.
—(Cheers and some cries of " Adjourn!")
Mr. MOORE, who was received with loud shouts of
" Spoke," said there were a great number of Members
who wished to address the House on the subject, and the
Noble Lord seemed to forget that the representatives of
Ireland had occupied but a very small portion of the
debate.—(lronical cheers, and cries of " Oh, oh !")
They had not occupied more than five or six hours of
the whole debate—(Hear and laughter)—and some 12
or 14 hours had been taken up by the speeches of Mem-
bers in support of the Bill.—(Hear.)
Mr. SCULLY begged to remind the House that
the measure was one effecting the interests of 7,000,000
of her Majesty's Roman catholic subjects in this king-
dom.—(Hear.) There were some 35 or 40 Catholic
Members in that House, only seven of whom had spoken
on the question; and he thought that was a sufficient
reason for a further adjournment of the debate.—(Cheers,
cries of Oh!" and laughter.) He thought it most de-
sirable for the interests of the; people of Ireland that the
measure should be fully discussed; and the Government
would be doing themselves a great deal of service if they
did nut now press the House to a division upon the Bill.—
(Shouts of " Go on," and some confusion.)
Sir GEORGE GREY said, it appeared from the re-
cords kept at the table that 14 Irish Members had ad-
dressed the House upon this subject; and the time they
had occupied, instead of being only five or six hours, had
been eleven and a half hours.—(Laughter and cheers.)
He must therefore appeal to the House whether the
question had not been fully discussed?—(Cheers.) Other
opportunities would present themselves, when Hon.
Members who had not yet had an opportunity of ad-
dressing the House would be able to state their
opinions fully upon the subject.—(Hear, hear.) A
strong and reasonable desire bad been expressed that
the House should proceed with other business—
(Cheers)—but it was impossible to do so while this de-
bate was hanging over—(Renewed cheers)—and there-
fore he trusted that the House would now come to a de-
cision upon the second reading.
Mr. OSWALD had no wish unnecessarily to prolong
the debate; but, as this Bill affected Scotland—(A
laugh)—and only one single Member for that part of the
United Kingdom had addressed the House during the
discussion, he was anxious to hear from some of the
Scotch representatives who sat behind the Treasury
bench their reasons for desiring that the measure should
be extended to Scotland, where there had been no Papal
aggression, and where the whole state of the case was
very different from what it was in England.—(Hear.)
Mr. M. O'CONNELL said they had been told by the
Right Hon. Baronet (Sir G. Grey) that those Hon.
Members who had not yet spoken would have opportu-
nities of doirg so on other stages of the measure. lie
had risen two or three times during the progress of the
debate, but he had not been fortunate enough to catch
the Speaker's eye, and he, as an Irish Roman Catholic
Member, claimed his right to be beard.—(Shouts of
"Go on," and laughter.) He would not--(Great
laughter.) He would not address such a jaded audience
—(Laughter)—at that hour of the night (half past 12),
for if he were to do so, he would neither do his duty to
himself nor to the Houso.—(" Go on," and laughter.)
He did not think the Irish Members, particularly the
Catholic Members and those: representing Catholics,
ought to bate one inch of any ground they could fight
upon this question.—(" Oh !" and some cheers.) He be-
lieved the Irish Members were with him upon that point,
and if the Noble Lord chose to try a division, or ten di-
visions, upon the question of adjournment, he would be
met upon every one of them.—(General cries of " Oh,
oh t" and confusion.)
After a few words from Mr. URQUHART, who was
understood to support the adjournment,
The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY said he
agreed with the Noble Lord at the head of the Govern-
ment that it was desirable the debate should be brought
to a close as soon as possible—(Cheers)—but he must
call upon the Noble Lord to remember the great excite-
ment which prevailed on this subject, and that while a
great number of Gentlemen were desirous of speaking
I only seven Catholic Members out of thirty-seven had yet
addressed tho House. This measure had caused great
excitement among the Catholic constituencies, and the
Noble Lord could not be surprised that they should be
anxious that their representatives should give expression
to their feelings. He hoped, therefore, that the Noble
Lord would not oppose the adjournment,
Lord J. RUSSELL observed, that the Noble Lord
gave the House very little hope of coming to any very
early conclusion on this subject.—(A laugh.) There
were several motions on the book for to-morrow, and
the Noble Lord said that out of 37 Catholic Members
only seven had spoken in six nights of debate, so that if
the other 30 Members were to speak—(Laughter)—it
was impossible to say when they might expect to con-
clude the debate.—(ltencwed laughter.)
Mr. REYNOLDS begged to remind the House that
the adjournment bad been moved by an English and not
by an Irish Member. Although the Noble Lurd (Lord
J. Russell) had said that 43 Members had addressed the
House on this measure, those who were oppose
to the
Bill could not be charged with offering it any factious op-
position—(Cries of " Oh, oh! " and ironical cheers)—
and the course that was to be pursued to-night would
decide whether it was to receive factious opposition for