The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-15 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 15, 1851.

held, and where public worship was carried on in the Fame
manner as that with which the Noble Lerd had been so well
acquainted, yet not an instance was known of a Presbyterian
in that country b eying been converted to those opinions.
The reasons which Lad been put forward for the present Bill
were, that there had been great public demonstrations
with reference to tie art of, the Pope, that the Archbishop
of Canterbury had stated that he desired such a measure, that
Archbishop Cullen had been selected.- instead of archbishop
somebody else, and that the, Synod of 'Mules had met and
cnesidered the quest•ort of the occupancy of land and the
system of education; but, in his (Mr. Wall's) judgment,
these reasons were not sufficient to justify, the Noble Lord
in changing the line of conduct which he had hitherto uni-
formly pursued, or in introducing a Bill which would prac-
tically have the effect of making every, man (Roman
Catholic) a Jesuit, and every priest a spy !—(Hear, hear.)
The Noble Lord had tried the experiment how far he could
goVern this country without any Bills of pains and penal-
ties, and in that course he had been eminently successful.
But now, to his (Mr. Wall's) deep regret, he was about to
swerve from the principles which had heretofore guided him,
and proceed in' an opposite direction. When the Noble
Lord came to put the measure into operation in Ireland, he
believed he would experience extreme difficulty in the at-
tempt to do so. The Irish Members were not at all inclined
to support the views which the Noble Lord had taken, and
unless a law of this sort were passed, not by a bare majority,
but with something of unanimity of feeling in this House, the
Noble Lord would find that he had embarked upon a. dan-
gerous experiment, which would redound neither to the
safety of the state nor the peace of the country.
Mr. G. A. HAMILTON said, before he entered on the
subject before the House, he had to refer to some animad-
versions which had been passed on the speech of his Hon.
and Learned Friend and colleague (Mr. Napier) by the Hon.
and Learned Member fur Athlone (111 r. Keogh). The Hon.
and Learned Gentleman had accused his Hon. Friend and
colleague of being secretary to the Brunswick Club in Ire-
land, which had for its object the opposing the Emancipa-
tion Act of 18:9. Now, his Hon. Friend lied no recollection
of being so.
Mr. KEOGH—Dees he deny it ? (Hear.)
Mr. HAMILTON—However that might be, it could not
be said that the club was instituted for the purpose of vio-
lating or resisting the law;and it was dissolved immediately
after the passing of the Act. His Hon. Friend, in 1832, was
secretary to a party, which had for its object the ameliora-
tion of the condition of the Irish people, but he had no re-
collection of being secretary to the one alluded to. The
lion. and Learned Gentleman also stated that hie lion.
Friend had said that Catholics were admissible to the ho-
nours of the University of Dublin, and that be (Mr. Keogh)
would show the hypocrisy which dictated that statement.
The Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Keogh) had adverted to a state-
ment made by his Hon. Friend (Mr. Napier) that in the
offices connected with the law courts of Ireland, a preference
had been shown by the present Government in favour of Ro-
man Catholics over their Prtsteatantiellow-eotanti, tutu. Now
he, On his own part, could fairly say that since the passing of
the Emancipation Act no difference should be made between
Roman Catholics and Protestants in their appointment to
offices in the gift of the State, and the only question was,
whether the best men should be appointed..-..(Hear, bear.)
But at the same time he would ask why, in the Irish ap-
pointments to judicial offices, such men as Mr. Henn and Mr.
Bennett had been overlooked in these appointments, except
that they were Protestants? The Hon. Gentleman the
Member for Meath•(Mr. Grattan), had made a statement
to the effect, that the late Chancellor of Ireland, Sir Edward
Sugden, had recognised Dr. Croly as Archbishop of Ar-
magh and Primate of all Ireland. Now, being anxious to
set the Hon. Gentleman right, he was able to state that
although hit% Croly was thus designated in a report in
Chancery, it had never received the sanction of the Chan.e
cellor, the report never having come under his cognisance.
However, the real question before the House was, whether
her Majesty's Government had shown sufficient grounds to
call on the House to grant them permission to introduce this
Bill. It appeared to him that the recent act of the Pope was'
a violation of the law of nations, and certainly of the laws of
Europe. that those who had carried out, the Pope's brief
had violated the spirit, if not the letter of the law, and
that an indignity had been cast on the Sovereign of these
realms.— (Hear, hear.) He, therefore, thought her Ma-
jesty's Government were quite justified • in introducing the
present Bill, which it was inconvenient to discuss until it was
brought before the House. He would, however, admit that
all legislation on this matter should be framed so as not to
be insulting, while, at the same time it was not inoperative,
and that it should in no wise trench on that settled principle
of the Constitution, that they should not infringe on the
free and religious exercise of the Roman Catholic religion.
If he, as a humble individual, might be permitted to make a
defence of the Noble Lord (Lore J. Russell), he would say
that when the Noble Lord admitted his confidence in Roman
Catholics' had been mistimed, it did not occur to him that no
such defence was necessary, and that he might be fully jus-
tified in resisting Papal aggression, while he advocated mea-
sures in favour of civil and religious liberty.—(Hear.)
Mr. SADLEIR challenged Mr. Napier to deny that he
had been either secretary to, or a member of, the Brunswick
Club in Ireland; and, in answer to Mr. Hamilton's state-
ment, said he had no hesitation in asserting that these clubs
were illegal associations, and that they were regarded by
every statesman as subjecting their members to the penalties
which the law justly assigned to illegal associations. With
respect to what the Noble Lord had said on the subject of
the proportion of Roman Catholics to Protestants employed
in public offices in Ireland, he (Mr. Sadleir) had always ab-
stained from noticing that painful and invidious topic; but
the Noble Lord attached great importance to what he had
done for Roman Catholics, and he hadno doubt, without intend-
ing it, lent his countenance to the fallacy which the Hon. and
Learned Member for the University of -Dublin ( Mr. Napier)
would have them believe, that Protestantism was a disqualifi-
cation for office in Ireland. In refutation of that statement
he ( Mr. Sadleir) boldly asserted, what must be well known
to the Noble Lord, that the heads of every public department
were all Protestants. The Hon. Gentleman here read a list
of' the law officers, judges, assistant barristers, masters in
Chancery, and others employed in the public service in
Ireland, together with the amount paid in public salaries,
for the purpose of showing that the proportion of Roman
Catholics to Protestants to whom Government patronage
was extended was exceedingly small, and that notwith-
standing the declaration of the present Viceroy, that in con •
felling the patronage of the Crown he would be guided
solely by professional merit. He would not dwell on
that painful and invidious subject. It was not the Roman
Catholics who had courted the introduction of it in connexion
with the unfortunate project of the Government; but, as it
had been introduced, he had been desirous of removing any
erroneous impressions on the matter. With respect to the
propose a Bill of the Noble Lord, and the cry of "No Popery,"
with which they had hounded on the scum of the people against
their countrymen, he reminded them of the opinion of one of
the greatest patriots of their country, as to the inutility of
such factitious ails to repress the free development and per-
feet organisation of a rival creed And to his Roman Ca-
tholic countrymen and fellow-subjects and believers he would
say, that at the present critical juncture they ought to be
vigilant and firm. He felt an honest and a national pride in
belonging to that body, so loyal and so faithful, not withstanding
the slanders that had been heaped upon their doctrines and
their religion. He felt an honest pride in belonging to that
body, always distinguished for its allegiance to their Sove-
reign and for its love of peace. To the denunciations from the
platform which had been directed against his religion, his
reply was, that one of the most distinguished of their own
divines had paid a just tribute to all that was admirable and
holy in the faith he professed, and showed how the mission-
aries of the Roman Catholic Church were to be found in

Cardinal Wiseman that did not suit Dr. Cumming, not the
temporal aggression which the Bill professed to deal with.
Again, Le iMr. M. Gibson) would take the letter of the
Noble Lord himself, dated Downing-street, November, 1850,
and printed for distribution at ss. per 1,000 on unstamped
paper—(Laughter)—contrary to the Act of Parliament in
that case made and provided —( Laughter)--whereby every
one selling or buying a copy was subjected to a penalty of
201. The Noble Lord said that the aggression of the Pope
was oti the Protestantism of England—on an ism, on an
opinion, it would be remarked, not on the temporal power or
authority of the Queen. That warranted him (Mr. M.
Gibson) in coming to the conclusion that the real
desire of the promoters of the measure was to keep the Ro-
man Catholic religion from spreading in the country by
means of penal laws. Another authority he should quote
was the Rev. Dr. M'Neile's speech at a meeting is St. Jar-
tin's Hall, the Duke of Manchester in the chair— an autho-
rity which the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford
would admit to be unimpeachable on his side of the question.
That Reverend Gentleman :had denounced domestic inter-
course as between British Christians and Roman Catholics,
and said that if their sons and daughters should touch the
unclean thing— (Laughter)—their parents would be alone to
blame. They should deny, therefore, all domestic inter-
course between them, otherwise they would go on with the
unclean thing - (Laughter) - and take it to their breasts,
until at length it turned round and stung them.— (Loud
laughter.) That was, however, a speech against Papal ag •
gression. The Noble Lord did not in the slightest degree
meet the objections of the Reverend Gentleman, who was a
member of that State Church whose rights were to be vin-
dicated, and a sort of attachment to it got up by villifying
the Roman Catholic religion—a mode of proceeding which
tallied exactly with the recommendation of a late Noble
Viscount, at the head of a certain party, to his friends,
"Don't praise us, but abuse our enemies—that's the way to
create an attachment to us."—(Laughter.) In the letter of
the Noble Lord, which began the movement, a movement
however which bad not reached the working classes, that
Noble Lord had himself committed an aggression on the
Protestantism of the country, by propounding a code of
Downing-street divinity.--( Hear, hear, and laughter.) The
Noble Lord, while contending for the invaluable privilege of
private judgment in mattere of conscience, took upon him-
self to point out what was superstition and what was not, in
the practice of the Established Church of the country, al-
though the competent tribunal only the other day had de-
clined deciding the question of infant baptism and prevenient
grace. But supposing the Noble Lord had a right to lay
down that doctrine, the policy of doing so could not be a ques-
tion. For it might so happen that a Roman Catholic Prime
Minister might do the same: and that a Unitarian Premier
would, with equal right, condemn the Trinity. Still, as-
suming it to he not alone right, but expedient, for the Noble
Lord to settle the differences that existed among many
conscientious members of the Church in this mat•
ter, was the existence of these differences any
reason why he should bring in a Bill to impose
pains and penalties upon the Rowan Catholics. who
had nothing whatever to do with them ?—(Hear.) Indeed.
he (Mr. Gibson) could not for the life of him conceive why
what was called Puseyism was pressed into the question of
Papal aggression at all. The House was called on, however,
to pass a law against Roman Catholics because the Pope ap-
pointed these bishops; but the Noble Lord had made an un-
worthy use of the word " govern," to be found in the pas-
toral of one of these bishops, seeing that it could obviously
mean nothing except the spiritual government of the Roman
Cathelics. It was agreed on all hands that the intercourse
of the Roman Catholics with Rome should be unrestricted,
and that the Pope had a right to appoint their bishops. The
Government, however, was going now to narrow and lessen
the religious liberty conceded by the Emancipation Act. It
was urged that the proceeding of the Pope was an act of
aggression on the rights of this country and the supremacy
of the Queen; but in his (Mr. Gibson's) opinion such an ar•
gnment was mere clap-trap. He regretted that the speech
of the Noble Lord was calculated to prejudice the House as
against the Roman Catholic hierarchy, and he maintained that
in respect to secular education no such tolerance was to be
found among the bishops of the Church of England as had been
manifested at the Synod of Thurles, when 13 bishops of the
Roman Catholic Church voted against it, and 12 for it. The
wt a
writer
tlreitorhet
eesaacti
aldhrn.ut;Gcathu.h
authority.
ofEarvinoitiut
heo
Churchat
needt u
erfanhr
ugirmsue
ofohotarese
Noble Lord had quoted M. Dupin as against the Church of
n
T(evilheaertar, hear.) The Hon. Member then proceeded to argue
a Rome.gr e
we
that the Church of England had committed aggress on in
other countries of a far more serious character than tha
imputed to the Church of Rome in this; and he instanced•
the case of some missionaries at Fow Choo Fow in China,
who, according to the Overland Mail of the 28th November,
1850, had forcibly taken possession of a temple, and held
it as against the townsfolk. He also instanced the case of
the Rev. Dr. Brittelheim, a Hungarian Jew by birth, but
a converted Christian, and a naturalised or adopted En-
glishman, in the island of Loo Choo, who had had a
steam-sloop dispatched specially to ascertain hew he was
getting on; and on whose account the Government at
Hong-Kong remonstrated with the local authorities when
he was assaulted by the police, in the same manner as
another European state demanded this country should in-
terfere in a recent riot in the vicinity of the river. Now
that was a description of oppression which the British Go-
vernment ought not to authorise; and he for one should be
prepared to advocate resistance to it, if it were attempted
in this co entry. He complimented the Noble Lord on his
as
corrupte-E.finGsghtl ja.z”nca—)dts:
statement that he did not like the interference of eccle-
siastics in secular and temporal matters. But he regretted
to find, notwithstanding that statement, that the Noble
Lord, in the course of the long speech with which
he had favoured the House had quoted but two au-
thorities that bore on the matter in hand, and those
two were ecclesiastics. The Noble Lord had told
them that the Bishop of London and the Archbishop of
Canterbury had expressed to him their belief that there
ought not to be any persecution in that case, but that
legislative measures ought to be passed for preventirg
the assumption of titles by Roman Catholic bishops. Now
he (Mr. M. Gibson) did not think that those two prelates
were the proper persons to consult in such a matter as that.
He certainly should not expect much impartiality from Dr.
Blomfield while surrounded by the pumps and vanities of
the world, and not altogether exempt from the infirmities of
our nature—he should not expect much. impartiality from
him, anxious, as he must naturally be, to " stand alone in
his glory " upon a point relating to the claims and preten-
sions of a rival churchman: He did not think that Dr.
Blomfield, or even Dr. Sumner, was the most fitting guide
on Such a subject. For his part, he would deal with that
matter; not on the advice of ecclesiastics of the Established
Church, but he would deat with it as a national question,
and he would base his legislation on purely secular considera-
tions, looking only to its fitness for promoting the peace,
happiness, and harmony of all classes of her Majesty's sub-
jects.—(Hear, hear.) If he understood rightly the tendency
of the measure as explained by the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman the Attorney-General, he hoped there would yet be
inserted in the Bill a clause to the following effect: a " And
be it enacted, that this Act may be broken with impunity
during the present session and all future sessions of Parlia-
ment."—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) He was persuaded that
the measure then before the House would be entirely nuga-
tory for any good purpose, and would only produce great ir-
ritation, for, as hal been well obserued by the Hon Member
for Buckinghamshire, it was but a piece of petty persecution.
To such a measure he, for one, should not give his support,
but would, on the contrary, use his utmost efforts to ensure
it rejection.— (Cheers.)
Mr. C. BRUCE said that, however opposed he might be

every clime, scaling the steepest rampart of infidelity, and
triumphantly planting upon its highest citadel the banner of
faith. As for the boasted efforts of the Noble Lord in favour

,o the general polioy of her Majesty's Government, he
should never have thought of offering any opposition to the
introduction of such a measure as that then under their

of Roman Catholic freedom, he had to say that it was not to consideration ; and neitherZZld—he—bare attempted for a
the isolated efforts of any individual—it was not to the Noble moment to have delayed the decision of the House upon the
Lord that they owed the legitimate advantages they pos• subject had it not been that he felt most anxious to notice
sessed ; no, they had overcome the spirit of religious intole- a statement which had fallen from his Hon. Friend the Mem-
rance by subduing and controlling their own passions, by ber for Ayrshire (Mr. Oswald) on Wednesday last, to the
their dignified resignation, by their firmness and fortitude effect that the opinion of the people of Scotland was op-
under years of persecution and oppression, guided by the posed to any interference with the recent acts of the Papal
energies and unrelaxing efforts, by the towering genius, by aggression. He (Mr. C. Bruce) believed thal his Hon.
the constitutional knowledge, by the legal acumen, by tbeun- Friend, in making that statement, had completely misrepre-
deviating allegiance and fidelity of their own O'Connell. seeded the feeling of the people of Scotland upon that
Thus it was that they had worked out their own emancipa- question; and he felt it his duty to protest against any
tion and the gradual resurrection of their country. He asked allegation so monstrous as that the people of that country—
Hon. Gentlemen to bear in mind before they gave their sup- the people perhaps the most opposed in all Christen-
port to the proposed measure, that the moment might be doin to the errors of the Church of Rome should
nearer at hand than they imagined when they might be be indifferent to the attempt of their brethren in this
called on to decide whether they would gradually sink into country to resist the assumptions of Romanism. But
an insignificance more obscure than any from which they it was said that the people of Scotland had taken no
bad emerged, or should be triumphantly conducted to na- active steps in that matter. The fact was that the people of
tional concord and peace. that country were not very apt to volunteer their services
Mr. M. GIBSON observed that he was in Parliament when they knew that those services were not wanted. They
since 1P37 with a short interval of absence, and the present had such reliance on the firmness, energy, love of truth, and
was the first occasion on which he had been invited to em- attachment to the principles of civil and religious liberty--
bark in a policy involving principles which lie considered principles to which the Church of Rome bad ever been
opposed—they had such reliance on those qualities of Eng-
were embodied in the propotition of the Noble L md, and he
was justified, therefore, in hesitating before he took the first lish character, that they felt assured the people of England
step in the matter, and in satisfying himself that the course would be able, without an extrinsic aid, successfully to resist
he took was founded on pure considerations. He had been that aggression. He would venture to say, on behalf of
frequently asked to oppose the removal of disabilities from the great majority of the people of Scotland, that if their
carious portions of his fellow-countrymen who had die.
brethren at this side of the Tweed required their assistance
a
abilities laid upon them in consequence of their religious ill timed, and most unwarrantable
tenets. But the present was the first time, lie repeated, to prevent that unjust, i
aggression; such assistance would at once be forthcoming.—
that he had been invited to impose disabilities upon men (Hear- ) His Hon. Friend the Member for Ayrshire had
on account of their religious opinions. The proposal before said that the Government had not interfered with the Free
the House was one calling on them to go out and impose Church Establishment ice Scotland But there was the
penalties n men for merely carrying out those religious
greatest difference between that establishment and the new
,
arrangements which they considered best adapted to theln the one Case they had the
ends they bad in view in the practice of their religion. Church for Bpi, itual objects, while
He (Mr. Gibson) could scarcely suppose the measure was a tect of a Church which, as the ex-
erience of all ages proved, mixed up temporal with its
serious one, such were the reports that had been circulated. P other
etsht ee
ynt had
hierarchy,aedletrhe
ne
spiritual pretensions. Another Hon. Member had stated
In the Times newspaper, which was supposed to shadow
that the prelates of the E
acti
Romantohfe ao
CatholicPthr eo
Episcopal Church of Scotland had
the views of Government, it was hinted that Ireland
was to be left out of the Bill. If that was to be the assumed the titles of ancient sees without any objection on
case, :t would be better for the Government to be open and the part of the Government. But between that case also
Lair in the matter, and not introduce Ireland at all unless and the one then under the consideration of the House
there was no real analogy. The Scottish Prelates assumed
they intended to include it bond fide. But it seemed to him
a thing most strange to place the Roman Catholics of Eng-
the titles of sees for which there were no other claimants,
land and Ireland in a worse osition than the Roman
and there was nothing in the proceeding that could be pcon-
Catholics of the other parts of her Majesty's dominions. sidered of an aggressive character. With respect to the
If it was the duty of the Legislature to prevent episcopal speech by which the Noble Lord bad introduced that mea-
organisation in England, it was equally their duty to prevent sure, he should observe that the people of Scotland would in
it in Australia and in the North American colonies.—(Hear, his belief consider that speech as worthy of the Protestant
hear.) The interference of foreign potentates was equally to Minister of a Protestant Sovereign—(Hear)—addressing a
be resisted in the colonies as in the United Kingdom. If it Parliament which the literal spirit of Protestantism had
had been a matter of local or municipal arrangement, thrown open to Christians of all denominations. But with
be admitted it might be left to any particular colony; and respect to the Bill itself, he confessed that he could not
that, perhaps, in such circumstances, it would not be wise for think it went far enough.—(Hear.l e He believed that the
Parliament to interfere; but if it were the fact, as stated by Noble Lord must not content himself with prohibiting titles;
the Noble Lord at the head of the Government, that the ap. he believed that the Noble Lord must render penal the in-
puintment of bishops by the Pope was an outrage on the troduction of bulls and rescripts.—(Hear.) He believed that
Queen's supremacy—a violation of the law of nations— he must put down bylaw all monkeries—gre7, white, or any
then it was the duty of the Government not to shrink from other colour. He believed that unless the Noble Lord went
defending her Majesty's rights in all her Majesty's posses- that length, he would not satisfy the justice of the case. But
sions as well as in the United Kingdom.—(Hear, hear.) he thoUght that the House of Commons would then be want-
This fact made him (Mr. M. Gibson) conclude, that ing in its duty if it refused to sanction the introduction of a
those who proposed this Bill were not sincere when they measure having for its object to give effect to the declared
stated that it was based upon secular and merely wishes of the Protestant people of this country.—(Divide.)
political considerations, and on those considerations alone Mr. F. MAULE said be was glad to perceive on the part
it was applied to this country. The House was invited of the House a disposition to, bring that debate to a close
to come to a decision on the insolent and indignant aggres- (Hear,theee) But lie wished to address a few words to them
sion. He (Mr. Gibson) did not see any insult; and he before they proceeded to a division. He should first draw
agreed with the Bishop of St. David's that there was no to- their attention to the speech of his Hon. Friend who bad
suit in the matter. They were constantly told that those just sat down; and ho wished to contrest with that speech
who supported the measure were the strongest advocates for the speeches of those Hon. Members who had advocated a
religious liberty ; and they were asked not to be alarmed, for decidedly opposite View of the question. He believed that
the statute was not a penal one beyond the face of it, as those there conflicting speeches would serve to show, at least,
gentlemen would never impose a penal law on the exercise of that her Majesty's Government had steered a middle course
religious liberty. Nothing, however, was more common in in that matter between two violent extremes. His Right
former periods than for men who opposed the removal of the Hon. Friend the Member for Manchester (Mr. M. Gibson)
disabilities from Catholics to designate themselves as the had said that they ought to legislate upon a national view
advocates of religious liberty, and even to assert that it was of that question • and be (Mr. F. Maule) said so too. But
because they were so that they opposed all concession to his Right Hon. Friend would not allow Parliament to in-
men whom they professed to believe held a divided allegiance. terfere in such a matter as the appointment of
Lord Eldon and other great authorities of that class might bishops. But it appeared to him (Mr. F. Maule)
be quoted as instances. He (Mt. Gibson) would not, there- i that that House ought not to confine its labours to matters
fore, be deterred from scrutinising the measure because its pro- connected with taxation and the material wants of the
motera said that they were not adverse to religious liberty, people; but that it Was their duty to maintain the Protestant
and because their friends insisted on it thitt they were its ad- constitution of this country—(Hear, hear)—as established by
vocates. They were told that the country had taken up the i the unwritten law and the customs handed down to them by
question in a similar spirit, and that the proceed- their forefathers, and entrusted to them as a sacred deposit,
ings that had taken place had nothing whatever to do with i which they were to deliver unimpaired to those who were to
the religion of the Roman Catholics. Looking, however, at follow them.—( Hear, bear.) It had been alleged by his
the proceedings at these meetings, he found that in the great ! Bight Hon. Friend that his Noble Friend had acted in that
majority of them religion was the only reason which was : matter upon the advice of the Bishop of London and of the
urged f, et the enactment of this penal law. Dr. Cumming, a Archbishop of Canterbury. But his -Noble Friend bad done
great authority, slid in his lecture on Papal aggression, that :no such thing. Ho had entertained the opinions of those
" the teaching of Cardinal Wiseman was the best reason for prelates, but had acted (maxis own views of public policy.
the protest against his intrusion." It Ras the teaching of Ministers had proposed this measure on their own respon-

sibility, and without consulting any ecclesiastical authorities.
—(Hear, hear.) But, then, his Right Lion.. Friend had
stated that the letter of his Noble Friend had stirred up all
this strife in the country. It was not so. The well-known fact
was, that the intelligence of the Papal aggression reached the
c,atntry three weeks before that letter appeared ; that in the
tucunwhile the spirit of the country had been aroused; the
bar of the country had assembled, and a very remarkable
petition had bmanated from them ; and all this had occurred
before the letter was published.— (Hoar, hear.) His Noble
Friend had, he considered, been most unfairly dealt with in
this matter—a fact that he believed would yet be acknow-
ledged when it was found that he had guided public
opinion to a fair and just conclusion. • (Hear.) He then re-
ferred to the statement of the Hon. Member for Ayrshire.
He agreed with the Hon. Gentleman that no persons were
more opposed to Popery than Scotchmen, and he lamented
that sometimes that feeling was carried to excess. They
were well aware, too, of this attack of the Pope on the pre-
rogative of the Crown and the Protestant liberties of the
country, and there was not a single yeoman in Scotland who
would not be fully prepared, if it were worth his while, to
go to a public meeting, and denounce what bad occurred. As
to theFreeChurch of Scotland, there was no similarity between
. .

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIDNS.

(From the Yctes and :.proceeLtios of the Howe of 0 )mmons )
FRIDAY, FEB. 14.
ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES.

Order read for resuming adjourned Debate on Question
(7th February), " That leave be given to bring in a Bill
to prevent the Assumpdon of certain Ecclesiastical Titles in
respect of places in the United Kingdom :"—Question again
proposed; Debate resumed :—Question put. The House
divided

MAJORITY—AYES, &95.
Abdy, Sir Thomas Einlyn, Viscount Nowise!, T. P.
Acland, Sir T. Enfield, Lord Maxwell, J. F.
Adair, Hugh E. Estcourt, J. B. B. 'deux, Sir Henry
Adair, It. Shaft° Easton, Earl Miles, P. W.
Adderley, C. Is. Evans, John Miles, William
Alcock, Thomas Evans, William .Milner, W. M.
Anderson, Arthur Evelyn, William J. Milnes, R. M.
Anson, Colonel Ewart, William Mitchell, T. A.
Archdall, Captain Farnham, E. B. afolesworth, Sir W.
Arkwright, George Ferrer, James Moody, 0.. A.
Ashley, Lord Fellowes, E. Morgan, 0.
Begot, William Fergus, John Morison, Sir W.
Bagsha sv, John Ferguson, Col. Morris, David
Bailey, Joseph Ferguson, Sir R. Mostyn, E.
Baines, M. T. Fitzpatrick, J. W. Mulgrave, Earl
Baldock, E. H. Fitzroy, Henry alullings, J. B.
Baldwin, Barry FitzwWiam, G. W. Muntz, G. F.
liankes, George Foley, John H. Napier Joseph
Baring, H.B. Forbes, William Weeld, John
Baring, Sire. Forester, G. C. Newdegate, N.
Baring, Thomas Forster, Matthew Noel, G. J.
Baring, Francis Fox, S. L. Ogle, S. C.
Barnard, E. G. Freestun, Colonel Ossulton, Lord
Barrington, Viscount Frewen, C. H. Owen, Sir John
Bass, M. T. Fuller,-.A. E. Paget, Lord A.
Bateson, Thomas Galway, Viscount • Paget, Lord C.
Psskett, William Gaskell, J. M. Palmer, Robert
Bell, Jacob Goddard, A. L. Palmerston, Via.
Bennet, Philip Gooch, E. S. Parker. John t
Berkeley, Admiral Gordon. Admiral Patten, J. W.
Berkeley, Henry F. Goulburn, Henry Peel, Colonel
Berkeley G. F. Granby, Marquis of Peel, Frederick
Berkeley, C. L. G. Greenall, Gilbert Pelham, D. A.
Bernal, Ralph Greaten, Charles W. Pennant, Colonel
Bernard, V iscount Grey, Sir G. Perfect, Robert
Best, John Grey, R. W. Peto, 'amuel
Birch, Sir T. Grogan, E. Pigott, Francis
Blackstone, W. Grosvenor, Lord R. lamington, Jame,
Blair, Stephen Gwyn, 1-towel Plowden, W. H.
Blandford, Marquis Hall, Sir B. Plumptre, J. P.
Booker, T. W. Hall, Colonel Powlett. Lord W.
Booth, Sir R. G. liallyburton, Lord Price, Sir Robert
Bowles, Admiral Halsey, T. P. prime, Richard
Boyd, John Hamilton, Geo. A. Pugh, David
Boyle, Coione. Hamilton, J. H. Reid, Colonel
Bramston, T. W. Hamilton, Lord C. Renton,-J. C.
Breatrtage, Richard Hanmer, Sir J. Reptbn, G. W.
Brisco M. Harris, Captain Ricardo, Osman
Broadley, H. Harris, Richard Rice, E R.
Broadwood, Henry Hastie, Alexander Rich, Henry
Broeklehurst, Johu Haste, Archibald Richards, Richard
Brockman, E. 1). Hatenell, John Robartes, T. J.
Brooke, Sir A. B. Hawes, Benjamin Romilly, Colonel
Brotherton, J. Hayes, Sir E. Romilly, Sir John
Brown, H. Headlam, T. E. Rumbold, C. E.
Brown, W. Heald, James Russell, Lord John
Bruce, Lord E. 1-1 eat 11co a t . John Russell, F. C.
Bruce, C. L. C. Heathcote, G. J. Sanders, George
Bruen, Colonel Heneage, G., H. Sanders, J.
Buck, L. W. Heneage, E. Scott, Francis
Buller, Sir J. Y. Henley, J. W. Scrape, G. P.
Banbury, William Herbert, Sydney Seaham, Viscount
Banbury, Edward Herries, J. C. Seymour, H. D.
Burghley, Lord Hervey, Lord A. Seymour, Lord
Burrell, Sir,C. Heywood, James Shot to, R. D.
Busfeild, W. Hildyard, R C. Shelburne, Earl of
Buxton , -sir E. Hill, Lord E. Sibthorp, Colonel
Calvert, Frederic Hindley, Charles Sidney, Alderman
Cardwell, Edward Hobhouss, Sir J. Blaney, Robert A.
Carew, W. H. P. Hodges,',T. L. Smith, J. A.
Carter, John B. Hodges, T. Twisden Smith, M. T.
Caulleild, J. M. Hodgson, W. N. Smyth, J. hn George
Cavendish, C. C. Hogg, Sir J. Somerset, Captain
Cavendish. G. H. Holiond, Robert Somerville, Sir W.
Chaplin, W. J. Hood, Sir A. Sotheron, T.
Chichester, Lord J. Homby John Spearman, 11. J
Childers, J. W. Hotham, Lord Spooner, Richard
Christopher. It. Howard, C. W. Stafford, Augustus
Christy, Samuel Howard, J. K. Stanford, J. F.
Clay, denies Howard, E. G. Stanley, Edward
Clerk Sir G. Hudson, G. Stanley, E. H.
Clifford, H. M. Humphery, Ald. Stanley, W. 0.
Clive, R. H. Hutt; William Stanfield, W. R. C.
Clive, H. B. Inglis, Sir it. Stanton, W. H.
Cobbold, J. C. Jackson, William Staunton, Sir G.
Cochrane, A. D. Jermyn, Earl Strickland, Sir G.
Cockburu, Sir A. Jocelyn, Viscount Stuart, Lord J.
Cocks, T. 6. Johnstone, Sir J. Stuart, Henry
Codrington, Sir W. Jolliffe, Sir W. G. Stuart, John
Cole, H. A. Jones, Captain Start, H. G.
Coles H. B. Ker, Richard Taylor, T. E.
Collins, William Kershaw, James Thicknesse, R. A.
Colvile, C. R. Kildare, Marquis of Thompson, Colonel
Compton, H. C. King, P. J. Thompson, Alderman
Conolly, Thomas Knox, Colonel Thornely, T.
Copeland, Alderman Labouchere, Henry Thornhill, George
Corry, H. Lacy, H. C. Tollemache, F. J.
Cowan, Charles Langston, J. H. Tollemache, John
Cowper, W. F. LascellesoE. Townley, R. G.
Craig, Sir W. G. Lascelles, W. S. Townshend, Capt.
Crowder, it. B. Legh, G. C. Trevor, G. R.
Cubitt, William Lemon, Sir C. Tufhell, Henry
Currie, Henry Lennard, T. B. Turner, G. J.
Dazymple, Captain Lennox, Lord A. Tyrell, Sir J.
Dashwood, Sir G. Lennox, Lord HG. Verner, Sir W.
Davies, D. A. Lewis, Sir T. Verney, Sir H.
Deedes, W. Lewis, G. C. Villiers, Charles
D'Eyncourt, C. T. Lindsay, Colonel Wakley, Thomas
Disraeli, B. Littleton, E. R. Walpole, Spencer
invett, E. Locke, Joseph Walter, John _
Dod, J. W. Lockhart, A. E. Watkins, Colonel
Dodd, G. Lockhart, W. Welby, G E.
Drax, J. S. W. Lopes, Sir Ralph Wellesley, Lord C.
Drumianrig, Viscount Lovcden, Pryse West, F. R.
Drummond, Henry Lowther, Henry Westhead, J. P.
Duckworth, Sir J. Lygon, Gen. Wlgram, L. T.
Duke, Sir James Mackenzie, W.F. Williams, John
Duncan, Viscount Mackie, John Williams, W.
Duncan, George M'Naghten, Sir E. Williamson, Sir H.
Duncombe, 0. M'Gregor, John Willoughby, Sir H.
Duncuft, John El'Taggart, Sir J. Wilson, James
Dundas, Admiral Mandeville, Viscount Wilson, Matthew
Dundas, George Mangles, R. D. Wood, Sir Charles
Dundas, Sir David Manners, Lord C. wood, W P.
Dunne, Colonel Mariners, Lord J. Worcester, Marquis
Du i're, C. G. Marshall, William Wyld, James
East, Sir J. B. Marshall, J. G. Wynn, H. W.
Ebringtou, Viscount Martin, C. W. Wy val. Marinadnke
Edwards, Henry Masterman, John Yorke, E. T.
Egerton, W. T. Matheson, A.
Ellice, Edward Matheson, James TELLERS.
Ellice, li., jun. Matheson. Colonel Hayter. W. O.
Elliot, J. E. Maule, Fox Hill, Lord M.

its proceedings and those that had occurred in this country.
He then observed that the penal laws had fallen into disuse
in this country, and the Roman Catholic Church was left in
the full enjoyment of every spiritual exercise. There was
no complaint of an impediment in the administration of the
sacraments, and of all other rites, as efficiently under the
vicariate system as it had been for two hundred years. With
the exception of an occasional growl from the " the Lion of
Judah," all was peace and harmony ; when, all of a sudden,
this state of things was disturbed by the decree from the
Court of Rome. He could say, that in his administration
of the office he held, the Catholic soldiers, who formed no
small number of their army, were in the full enjoyment of
the ordinances of their Church ; and he was sure they would
say whatever attacks were made on him, that in his office
he was no bigot. In the circumstances in which they were
placed he was determined to do his duty as became a sincere
Protestant, as became a fearless Alember of that House, and
as a servant to his Sovereign who had a paramount duty to
perform.—(Hear, hear.)
-:3lr. SCULLY opposed the motion. He regretted that
that subject of religious discussion should have found its
way into a British Parliament; and it was a subject which
was not wanting iu that House. Such was the nature of
that measure that no Irish Member ought to sit in that
House without protesting against a Bill which proposed the
re-enactment of the penal laws. If, as it had been said,
Scotland and England were in favour of that measure, he
could tell the Secretary at War that Ireland was opposed to
it. He could tell him also, that the Presbyterian Church in
Ireland, which was a free church, would not support it,
and had refused to meet to petition in its favour, for which
conduct, as a Roman Catholic, and on behalf of his Roman-
Catholic fellow-countrymen, he begged to tender that Church
his best thanks. He called upon the Noble Lord to pause
ere he
mighhot prraoi cs
raise
ead
Bent itt‘h
rcourse
wwhhi chhmhi eg
hcontemplatedneverx;ti
guished, except in confusion and blood. In conclusion, he
expressed a 'hope that when the hill was brought in, the
elapses relating to Ireland at least would be expunged from
it— (Loud cries of " Divide, divide.")
Colonel SIBTHORP said it was only his intention to tres-
pass for a very short time on the attention of the House, for
he would not wish to interpose between the expressed senti-
ments of the House and the division to which they seemed
desirous of coming.—( Hear.) He thought it, however, his
duty to say, that although he could not place much confi-
dence in the Government, or its capability to maintain, as
the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary at War had said,
the dignity and security of this country, he shoulsi vote for
them on that occasion. They had seen so much on the part
of the Noble Lord opposite and others since the passing of the
Act of 1829, that he (Colonel Sibthorp) would rather have
both arms cut off than vote for that Bill, and that he said
without having any unchristian or uncharitable feeling to-
wards any class of his countrymen. As it was a duty he
owed his Sovereign, however, on account of what was re-
commended in her Majesty's Speech, he should feel obliged
to register his name for the motion of the Noble Lord, how-
ever little ho might think the measure calculated for the se-
curity of the state, or satisfactory to either Protestant or Ca-
tholic.—( Hear, hear, and cries of " Divide ")
Mr. MUNTZ trusted the House would excuse him while
he briefly Stated the grounds upon which he rested his vote
in favour of the bringing in of that Bill. The present was
one of the most disagreeable questions which had ever
arisen since he had entered upon political life. He had
taken no part in the proceedings on that subject, in order
that he might hear everything which might be said on both
sides, and do justice to all. In Birmingham, the place which
he represented, the division on the question had been so close
that no resolution had been come to. (Hear, hear.) The
sodnt
haoi
yffiie cbur u,cuc,
hsat
eiyn3pae lofisaysge turoheef eloi qfn cu broughtbe; soht
both
heo nwyi
nolaatusoyr
necioonhtl tstrsihcorehnen4l:id and.gi
nifluucsheLnce
ahecueaodgruabbl cat
Nte,er rna.
).
no
yt,iiv, Two
sec-
tarian
i but
regard
him-
self t to
be to himself,
influencedfeelingauthority
he
theg pcvyroeeunr
sel
edtl
noi
religious
tia,
hy)
ue
shpbe h
occasion.
oaps
ie
n
nHs neveretthhh
eeadatprl appointment
allowedoonkisnaetedint
toeonn tthooeff
bp
irsahc
ot practice ose
without the
the
o caon n
senCatholictof the
h eC
sovereignhurch in
pootwh countries,(n ea r.)
er.—
even where that religion prevailed, and he bad found there was
He was ready to give the Roman Catholics everything which
they had, but not more than they had in other countries.—
(Hear, hear.) He had also searched the history of other
countries, and he found that where the Roman Catholic reli-
gien prevailed no true or real liberty existed.—(Hear, hear,
and cries of " Divide.") He would, therefore, vote for the
introduction of the present Bill, but would reserve to himself
the right of taking such steps on its future stages as to him
might seam fit.—(Hear, and cries of " Divide, divide.")
Mr. BROTHERTON said he had taken no part in the
proceedings relative to that question, nor did lie intend to
have mingled in that debate. He had endeavoured to see as
clearly as he could the part which he ought to take. The
lion. Member for Manchester (Mr. M. Gibson) had placed
him in rather a painful position, for most Hon. Members
knew that Manchester and Salford, the place which he re-
presented, were almost the same constituency. (Hear. )
Now he had reason to believe that the sentiments uttered by
the Hon. Member for Manchester were not those of a great
majority of his constituents —(Hear, hear.) He had never
given a vote agains`, the civil and religious liberty of any
class of his fellow-subjects, and he trusted he never would do
so ; but the grounds upon which he should give his vote in
favour of the introduction of that Bill were very different
from anything like such a motive. He had seen the opinions
of eminent lawyers, enlightened statesmen, and the senti-
ments of the most experienced men in the community; and
it did appear to them that the rights of the Sovereign were
infringed upon. and the independence of the subject invaded
—(Hear, hear)—by the act of which they complained.—
(Hear, hear.) That, then, was not a religious question.
(Hear.) In voting on that motion he was neither called
upon to defend the Established Church nor assail the Roman
Catholic Church.—(Hear.) In introducing that Bill the
Noble Lord had said it was not his intention to infringe on
the civil or religious liberties or rights of any class of her
Majesty's subjects; and for his own part he was anxious to
see what the Bill was before he came to any final judgment
upon it.—(Hear, hear.) He believed the Bill was in favour
of a great majority of his constituents, and was in accord-
ance with the wishes of many of the Roman Catholics
themselves.--(0h, oh.) He had received letters from most
respectable members of that persuasion in Manchester and
Salford, brief extracts from which he would read if the
House permitted.—(Cries of " Hear," " Read," and " Divide.")
One of the letters, after asking for a copy of the Bill, pro-
ceeded to say that they (the Roman Catholics) felt consider-
able interest in the measure, as one which would protect
their property invested for the benefit of churches and cha-
ritable institutions from the control and administration of a
foreign power, which as Englishmen they could not submit
to.—(Hear.) Such were their sentiments, and he would not
trespass longer on the time of the House than by stating his
intention to vote for the motion.—(Hear, and loud cries of
" Divide.")
Mr. F. O'CONNOR and other Hon. Members arose amid
the loudly expressed impatience of the House, when the for-
mer was left in possession. Ile said, although he intended
addressing the House on the measure, he would not then take
advantage of his having possession, but merely asked Hon.
Members to consent to go to a division at once. He hoped
as he had foregone his privilege of speaking, as there would
be other opportunities on future stages o f the Bill, that other
Hon. Members would follow,his example, and abstain from
adtressing the House on that occasion.—(Hear, and cries of

MINORITY-NOES. 63.
Anstey, Thomas Higgins, G. G. Power, Sicholas
Arundel, Earl of Hobhouse, T. B. Reynolds, John
Blake, M. J. Hope, A. Sadlair, John
Blewitt, Reginald Howard, P. H. Sell°Wield, W.
Brand, Thomas Hutchins, E. J. Scully,Francis
Butler. P. S. Keating, Robert sitneun, JOlll.l
Clements, C. S. Keogh, William Smith, John B.
Cobden. R. Lawless, Cecil Smythe, G.
Corbally, M. E. M'Cullagb, W. Somers, J. P.
Devereux, J. '. Megan, W . 11. Stuart, Lord D.
Fagan, William Meagher. Thomas Sullivan, Michael
Fagan, James Mahon, O'uorman Talbot, J. li.
r ortescue. Chichester Monsen, William Taucred, 11. W.
Fox, Richard M. O'Brien, Sir T. Tenison, E. K.
Fox, W. J. O'Connell, John Towneley, John
Gibson, T. M. O'Connell, Maurice Treiavrny, J. S.
Gould, Wyndham O'Connell, M.. 1 Wall, C. B.
Grace, 0. 1). O'Connor, Feargus Walmsley, Sir I.
Grattan, Henry O'Flaherty, Anthony Wegg•l'rosser, F.
Greene, Joh). Oswald, Alexander VELLUM.
Henry, Alexander Pechell, Sir G. Roche, E. B.
Heyworth, L. Power, Dr. Moore, G. H.

'Divide.")
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD said he would not detain the House
many moments, but as he unfortunately ditlered from his
Hon. Colleague and some of his constituents, he wished
briefly to state the grounds upon which he voted against
the present motion. He could not be supposed to possess any
sympathy with regard to Rome. But he regretted to say
that measure had raised feelings in this country which were
encouraged by the letter of the Noble Lord. They were told
that the discipline of the Charch of Rome could not be pro-
perly carried out unless in the manner which the Pope pro-
posed—namely, by the appointment of an hierarchy. But with
respect to the Bill of the Noble Lord, it was one ineffectual
to carry out those points which it professed to do. He con-
cluded by saying he would vote against the motion.— (Loud
cries of " Divide divide.")
Strangers. were then . ordered to withdraw at about a
quarter to .twelve o'clock.
The House then. divided, when the numbers were—
For the introduction of the Bill ... .. 895
Against it ... 63
Majority in favour of the Bill ... —332
Mr. ROCHE hoped the Noble Lord would fix the second
reading of' the Bill at such a time as would enable the people
of Ireland and the people of England to understand fully its
provisions.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he hoped the Bill would be deli-
vered on Monday, and he would fix the second reading for
Friday se'nnight.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. KEOGH moved for leave to bring in a Bill to extend
the jurisdiction sad improve the practice of her Majesty's
Prerogative Court in Ireland.
Mr. GROGA.N, objected to the Bill; and
The gallery was cleared for a division, but none took
place.
The Bill was then brought in and read a first time.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL brought in the Ecclesias-
tical Titles Bill, which was read a first time, and ordered to
be read a second time on Friday se'nnight.
Mr. KEOGH brought in the Prerogative Court (Ireland)
Bill, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read a
second time on Wednesday next.
The House then adjourned at Half-past Twelve.

INCREASE IN THE COAL TRADE. CARDIFF.
The coal trade in Monmouthshire is rapidly extending, and
so densely crowded have the Bute Docks at Cirdiff been,
that notwithstanding every facility for the rapid shipment of
coal, much delay has been experienced in meeting the de-
mand. In order properly to meet this great extension of the
staple trade of the port and the district, it has been pro-
posed to construct mother dock to the eastward of the pre-
sent docks, for the acco modation of large vessels, and a
project has been mooted to convert the sea-lock into a dock.
The merchants, and others interested in the trade, have taken
the matter up, and petitioned the trustees of the Bute Docks
on the subject. In the valley of Aberdare, Glamorganshire,
several very deep pits are being sunk, with every prospect of
success.