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

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBREJA

of life, the people were prosperous. This year they were
regarded as an important body. They were no longer
to be separated from other classes. And he concurred with
the seconder of the Address in the declaration that this, of all
classes in this country, of all manufacturers, was most deeply
and vitally connected with the country generally, as the
manufacturers of human food. They were obliged by
the sympathy which was expressed in the Speech for that
important, formerly wealthy. and still loyal, though deeply
suffering, portion of the country. But he should have re-
ceived that Speech with more satisfaction—he should have
concurred more in the language of the Address, if he had
seep held out either in the Speech itself, or by either of those
of the Noble Lords, who might be considered as authorised on
the part of the Government to do so, any expectation or hope,
however feeble, of a diminution of those difficulties. They
were told that there was a great and general prosperity in
the country—that the manufacturing districts and our com-
mercial interests, with the general bulk of the people, were
prosperous—that the most important interests were pros-
perous, and that, notwithstanding the reduction of taxa-
tion, the revenue was in a satisfactory condition, by
which he supposed that there was at the disposal of
her Majesty's Government a surplus applicable to
a reduction of taxation. If it were the fact that all other
interests were prosperous—if it were the fact that the most
important interest was suffering—if it were possible to do
something in the way of remission of taxes, he asked to
what was that to be extended? Was it to the relief of those
who were enjoying a large amount of prosperity, or those
who were suffering under the present state of things?
(Hear.) And yet throughout the speeches of the mover and
seconder he found no intimation on the part of the Govern-
ment whether there should be a relief
ot taxation or any
other mode by which to put forth a single finger to the
relief of this class. He would ask her Majesty's Government
—the Noble Lord shrunk from the inquiry—to what it was
they attributed this long-continued distress?—(Cheers.)
Could any man deny that the distress among owners and
occupiers of land was attributable to the system of legisla-
tion, be it right or be it wrong, or for the gnneral advantage
of the community, which had been introduced within the
last few years, and which had fallen so heavily upon the
agricultural body—he asked, could any one deny that that
distress was not temporary, but permanent, and was owing
to the coarse of legislation adopted within the last few.
years? But if it were owing to legislation, and the Govern-
ment could give relief, what excuse could they give for
obstinately refusing to give that relief? Men called theirs an
exceptional case—they were told that the circumstances
were exceptional. The year before last it was an excep-
tional case, because they had a large introduction of foreign
corn. Last year there was a very abundant harvest at
home, coincident with abundant harvests abroad. At the
time whan the corn-laws were repealed the price of wheat
was 455., last year 425. They were assured—and it was
proved y the supporters of that policy, by the prices of
foreign markets, and by everything which they could bring
to bear in favour of their argument—that prices would
rise to a point which would leave no profit to importers.
They were assured that there would be a great rise, and some
thought that there would be a reaction under the system of
free trade—that they would have high prices in March,
whereas the result proved that prices were extremely low.
They were, however, told by free-traders, who were the first
to demand cheap corn, to hope for the best, for prices which
had gone down very low were rising, and the agriculturists
might entertain hopes of the future. But what was the fact?
The average price was then 425., it went down to 415.,
to 40s. 395., 385., and at the moment he was addressing their
Lordships the average price was 375. 2d.—(Hear.) While
prices varied from 425. to 375. and some pence, they had had
poured into the country a continued stream of foreign wheat
and wheat flour, amounting to 4,503,000 quarters ; and' by
recent advices, so far from our finding foreign importers sick
of their bargain, " the cry was still they come," and our
native markets were swamped with the corn of foreign coun-
tries.—(Hear.) He was bound to say that, as far as the re-
cent measures were concerned, they had not answered ex-
pectations. He knew many persons who gave their support
to the free-trade measures in corn, in the confident expecta-
tion that no diminution of the price of wheat or the value of
land would occur, who were obliged to confess, from the di-
minution that had occurred, that the result was beyond or-
dinary calculation. He would remind the Noble Earl, the
Secretary for the Colonies, that even he anticipated a rise in
the value of land from free-trade measures—at least from the
speech of the 'Noble Earl at the time -it appeared to him
that the Noble Earl had reason to believe that the value of
land—at least agricultural land —would not be lowered
(we understood) by the operation of toe principles of tree
trade. The Noble Lord who seconded the Address spoke of
the benefits that had been derived by the passing of the
Encumbered Estates Bill in Ireland, and appeared to think a
similar measure might with equal advantage be extended
to England. The Noble Lord considered that benefits had
arisen from the transference of land from one person to
another—from the debtor to the creditor ; and speaking of
the prices that were 'obtained, he considered-the Act bad
worked under " existing circumstances" as well as could be
expected. But when the character of these "existing
circumstances" was inquired into, it turned out that the
lew price which the land fetched under the Bill was not to
be attributed to the quantity of land poured at once into
the market, but it was the depreciation of the value of
agricultural produce, through free-trade measures, which had
made the land of less value. The Encumbered Estates Act
was no doubt a convenience to the nominal proprietor of an
estate with heavy encumbrances upon it, for by its operation
he could get back the estate unencumbered at the price of
about five or six years' purchase. It might also be true that
an encumbered estate was purchased by a creditor, as a sort
of bad debt; but certainly for Noble Lords to congratulate
themselves on the operation of an Act that threw large por-
tions of land, at prices varying from five to nine years'
purchase of the net profits of the rent of the estate,
in the hands of new purchasers, was, in his opinion, a very
sorry mode of rejoicing indeed. He thought when the En-
cumbered Estates Bill was passed that Ireland was to be re-
generatel by the introduction of a new class of capitalists.
Bnt the fact as it appeared was, that hardly 1001. of Eng-
lish money had been expended in the purchase of Irish
estates. Consequently all the sacrifices that had taken place
had occurred without adding one shilling to the circulating
capital of that part of the United Kingdom. The Encum-
bered Estates Bill might have afforded means to some of
getting out of difficulties, might have worked satisfactorily
in some points, and might have performed an operation
which the Noble Lord had considered to be so beneficial
eamely, the substitution of new for ancient proprietors.
Now where a person was only the nominal proprietor of an
over-encumbered estate, it might be an advantage to have a
transfer of the property to solvent hands; but, as a general
rule, it was not desirable that landed properties should chage
bands in that way. It was not an object to be aimed at by
legislation—that of breaking up old connexions bete een
landlord and tenant, and substituting a new class of proprie-
ors over those who had occupied the land for years. He
wished to maintain, not to accelerate the fall of the ancient
landed proprietary. He firmly believed they formed the best
security and stability of the country, and that they best
promoted the general content and happiness of the people,
and it was therefore no satisfaction to him to be told that the
difficulties of the old owners and occupiers of land were so
insuperable as only to be overcome by the introduction of a
new set of proprietors. He could not view without commis-
seration those who had been driven from their paternal
kemes, and he should be sorry to see such a measure intro-
(weed into England. Although in the Royal Speech the
difficulties of landlords, owners, and occupiers of land were
only touched upon, he must be allowed to say all classes
were in a state of positive suflering. The owner and occu-
pier at the same time and from the same causes, found their
means curtailed and their capitals reduced to nothing. The
agricultural labourer was also suffering. He might be told
that great improvements were going on in agriculture, that
great works were being effected, and that great employment
was just now given. He did not believe, as a general case,
that employment was given by the occupiers of the land. He
believed it was given by the owners of the land, who, rather
than part with their property, were ruining themselves by
their efforts to keep up the cultivation of the land, and to pre-
vent the agricultural labouring class from throwing them-
selves on the poor-laws. This they did, even though they
thereby furnished to the Free-trader an argument in favour
of his principles - the Free-trader pointing out the diminu-
tion of agricultural pauperism as a proof of the benefits of
free trade. In one paragraph of the Royal Speech he could
not agree. It was that which expressed a confident hope
that the prosperous condition of other classes would have an
effect in diminishing the difficulties and promoting the inte-
rests of agriculture. While he received with respect the
expressions of her Majesty, he yet hoped the House would
not be called upon to share in those expressions of confi-
dent hope that the difficulties of the agricultural classes
would be materially diminished, or their interests materially
promoted by the prosperous condition of other classes of her
Majesty's subjects. He did not mean to deny that the pros-
perous condition of the agricultural was not connected with
the prosperous condition of the manufacturing interest. He
well knew that the prosperity of the one class bore on the
prosperity of the other class; and that particularly those
agricultural classes which were not expressly engaged in
growing corn crops obtained advantages by the increased
means of consumption possessed by the manufacturing
class. But with regard to the growers of corn, and other spe-
cial kinds of agricultural produce—though prior to 1846
they were directly affected by the prosperous condition of
manufacturers, yet it must be recollected that this commu-
nity of interests had been materially altered and weakened
since that period. Before 1846 the agriculturists had com-
mand of their markets, and they derived an advantage from
that cause, and from the prosperity of the manufacturing he-
r terest, and their greater power to consume agricultural pro-
duce might be exceedingly beneficial to the agriculture of
France—a country which exposed the opponents of free-trade
to ridicule from the Free-traders for saying that it could ever
become an exporting country—to the agriculture of Prussia
—to the agriculture of the United States and their boundless
continent, but certainly not to the agriculturists of the
United Kingdom, as it was quite certain that the foreign
grower now got a larger share than the British grower of
any prosperity the manufacturing interest might enjoy.—
(Hear, hear.) The free-trade in corn measure was a measare
which dissolved the close connexion of interests which
heretofore bound up the prosperity of the manufacturing
with the prosperity of the agricultural interest. He main-
tained his epinions as to the impolicy of the Act of 1846 un-
altered. He did not look for any important increase of pros
•
parity to the agricultal interests under the existing law;
and under the existing financial system he did not share the
hope that the prosperity of other classes would react on the
agricultural class. He believed that the present prices were
the permanent effects of recent legislation. He believed the
prosperity of a material portion of the country had been di-
minished, that with reduced capital there was no less ability
to bear the enormous taxation and debt which no other
country could bear, and which was only borne by this
country through the operation of that protection which was
formerly given by the country to the products of its own in-
dustry.—( Hear, hear.) There was a far more serious topic
to deal with—a topic which he felt it was hardly possible to
overrate its importance. It was impossible not to feel that
by recent measures—he would not say a recent measure—of
agthgrisessio ag-
gression had been rendered snore insolentn
the head of the Roman Catholic Church, there had been an
aggressive, dangerous, and unconstitutional, he would not say
andnsul t ing
that
oann inthsiediosunsp,rbomutachye
ofw t
would say
Cayrow an i,
sive by the manner in which the recent Papal proceedings
and offene
say
had been carried into effect.— (Hear, hear.) It was impos-
sible to condemn the recent Papal measures in stronger
terms than had been used by the Noble Lord who held the
responsible post of principal adviser of the Crown. The
Noble Lord, in a letter which had obtained much celebrity
ae a public document, and whirls had produced no inferior
effect on the public mind, described the aggression as e an
assumption of power, a pretension to supremacy over the
realm of England, and a claim to sole and undivided sway,
which is inconsistent with the Queen's supremacy, with the
d rightsepondoefo
cour o
f thebishops
lia t
onod,
as
clergy,
asserted r
gy,andevweinthintph,oemsapnircitautahloilnio-
Ben When
thermthe
forthN obl ea
sLtohrod deliberatepenned these n
opinion
toefntche
the
, headand
Protestantewt ifmhheeen Ile sr. Ala j eosot
oy
o' st
rGyo
ovfe rEn
nmgelna th, dwthhea nt itth we as
nannounced
etmo
at
ohye
had been insulted—the religious opinions of the country
threatened—the rights of the bishops and clergy of the
Established Church invaded, the Noble Lord could not have
written, much less published these sentences, without being
aware of the flame which would be kindled throughout
the nation. The generous, spontaneous, unlvereal Pro-
testant feeling that broke forth from one end of the country

to another—he regretted that in some instances unjustifiably
intemperate language was used—was not directed against
the persons or the religion of the Roman Catholics, but
against that insolent assumption of power in this country by
a foreign prelate, which had been denounced in the strongest
terms by the Prime Minister. But when the Noble Lord
made this appeal to the United Kingdom of Great Britain
—when he called forth this manifestation of Protestant
feeling from all parts of the country, the Noble Lord could
hardly have taken such 'a course without calculating on the
struggle on which he and the country were about to enter.—
(Hear, hear.) They were not about to enter into the ques-
tion of the expediency of the adaption of this or the other
system of religion (as we understood)—they were not deal-
ing with a single act, but with a succession of aggressive
acts on the part of the Court of Rome which the Noble Lord
had so suitably characterised. They were protesting
against the interference, the unauthorized interference,
of a foreign power in the domestic affairs of
this country. This was no question of religious
controversy.—(Hear.) He hoped neither in that or the
other House would the question be treated as a question of
the comparative purity of the doctrines of this or that
church.—(Hear.) God forbid, he said, that, on account of
their religious principles, any portion of their Roman Ca-
tholic fellow-subjects shonld be deprived of their religious
freedom—(Hear)—or be stripped of a single jot of those
civil rights which had been conferred on them. If it were
to be so, be for one could not
" Share the triumph and partake the gale."
These were not his views.—(Cheers.) But the question
was, shall Roman Catholic prelates—shall the heal of the
Roman Catholic Church—be permitted to exercise in this
country, unfettered and unchecked by law, a dangerous and
mischievous interference, not in mere name and title, but in
substantial reality, with the government of the country?
That was the question they asked with reference to the great
struggle on which they were about to enter. If the Noble
Lord's letter meant anything, it meant this, the vindication
of the rights of the clergy, the vindication of the undi-
vided supremacy of her Majesty, and the resolute
repression of the aggression of a foreign power by the agency
of Parliament.—(Hear, hear.) He did not object to the
privileges conferred on the Roman Catholics after the passing
of the Relief Act in 1829 ; but he had not shut his eyes to
the mischief that had since resulted, and he knew that many
regretted the evils had not been checked at the outset. It
had been found that every concession, every act of tolera-
tion, every non-infliction of penalty for violating the law,
had been looked upon by the Roman Catholics, not as so
many acts of liberal toleration, but as so many indications
of weakness.—(Hear, hear.) These encroachments, it was
perceived, were growing more formidable, until at last they
rose to such a pitch as to draw from the First Minister of
the Crown that declaration which he had referred to. Let
not the House therefore undervalue the magnitude of the
struggle upon which it was about to enter. If, however, the
Ministry meant nothing—if they only meant to put an Act
on the statute book which was to be overlooked or not en-
forced—if they really meant to enable Roman Catholic
bishops to complete their organization, and to exercise un-
bounded control over the consciences of the Roman Cathlics,
he would tell them they would have done nothing to satisfy
the country—he would tell them they would have made
their Roman Catholic fellow-subjects the victims of a
tyranny that their Roman Catholic ancestors, in Roman
Catholic times, under a Roman Catholic Sovereign, never
would have consented to.— (Hear.) He did not agree with
the conclusion of the Noble Lord opposite, but he did coin-
cide with his argument. He considered that which was
done with regard to England was done with regard to Ire-
land—that a violation of the supremacy of the Crown in
England was equally a violation of the supremacy of the
Crown in Ireland. They. could not separate that Church
which once for all was indissolubly united at the
period of the Union. If, however, Government meant
to palter with the question, after having roused the
strong religious feelings—he would not say preju-
dices—of England and Scotland—if they meant to bring
in some law which should only affect the shadow and yet
not touch the substance of the evil—if they did this, they
would rekindle an animosity which he should deplore—they
would rekindle a state of feeling that could only be allayed
by the final settlement of the question (we understood). He
had already said he would never consent that the Roman
Catholics should lose one jot or tittle of those civil rights
conferred on them by the Act of 1829. He knew not the na-
ture of the measure which they would shortly be invited to
consider; but whatever might be that measure, they would
approach it in the hope of finding that it realised the ex-
pectations which had been raised by the Prime Minister's
letter.—(Hear, hear.) To the Roman Catholics the free ex-
ercise of their form of worship and civil rights, he hoped, by
the proposed measure would be reconciled with the real re-
cognition of the supremacy of the Crown—a supremacy not
in words, but in fact—and a practical repudiation of such
foreign interference by either cardinal or Pope as that
which had occurred in the case of the Irish colleges, in-
stitutions which had been declared beneficial by a large
proportion of the Roman Catholice, by half the Roman
Catholics bishops, but which had been denounced by the
Pope. He trusted while the new measure would secure
the Roman Catholics their religious and civil rights, that at
the same time it would prevent such mischief in future—
would stop intermeddling by a foreign prelate, whose in-
fallibility had been deceived by false representations with
respect to matters in Ireland, and maintain for the Crown
the uncontrolled administration of affairs, temporal and civil.
He would warn the Government, if they fell short of the just
expectations of the people, and only in appearance and not
in substance gave security against wrong from the Pope and
his instruments in this country, on their heads would rest a
heavy responsibility, for they would be held to have trifled
with the feelings, and raised false hopes and expectations in
the minds of the Protestant people of England. If Govern-
ment did not speak out, he was certain a large portion of the
liberal and enlightened Roman Catholics would regret it,
and Government would have reduced this country to the po-
sition of a Roman Catholic province (we understood). He did
not hesitate to say that they must consider fully and dispas-
sionately, temperately but firmly, the whole question of the
relation in which Roman Catholics stood to the Crown. In
1E29 certain securities were introduced to protect the Estab-
lished Church against Roman Catholics. He considered it
was the duty of her Majesty's Government deliberately to
examine those securities. If found to be no real securities—
however offensive it .might be to Roman Catholics—if found
to give no real security to Protestants, but merely to em-
barrass the statute books, they must be swept off at once;
the odium must not be incurred of enacting measures that
could not be used for. the purposes for which they were passed.
If it were found that laws, however well intended, did not
reach the case—if encroachments not contemplated at the
time bad been made by the See of Rome or its instruments
em inch laws could not repress, let them make the laws
sufficiently strong. Their legislation must be equal to the
emergency.—(Hear, hear.) Government must look the
whole ease in the face—they must not be content with
trifling and delusive legislation. They must understand
the whole danger that exist, and to that danger they
must apply a sufficient remedy.—(Hear, hear.) If such
be the course of the Government, no political or party
differences should prevent Government from having his
assistance and the assistance of that party with whom he
had the honour of acting.— (Hear, hear.) On the other
hand, he warned the Government, if they did not determine
to look broadly-and amply at the case, it would be far better
not to attempt to deal with it at all—it would be far better to
submit to the last and greatest insult than to do that with
an appearance of s•rength which would only prove an exhi-
bition of weakness. Deal manfully and boldly with the
case, or not at all. Put on sufficient penalties against undue
aggression, and they would have the support of the country;
palter with the question, and they would incur the contempt
of the nation at large, because they would betray their in-
competency to deal with an evil of this magnitude which
they had not hesitated to denounce. He should not move
an amendment. He should wait to see what the measure
was which her Majesty's Ministers proposed to bring in. He
trusted the question would be dealt with in a manner suited
to the occasion.—(Loud cheering.)
The Duke of RICHMOND was anxious to
draw the attention of their Lordships to the
lamentable state of distress of the agricultural
interest. The heavily taxed and overburthened Bri-
tish farmer never could compete with the foreigner.
The farmers were loyal now, but he declared to heaven
he could not hope that they would much longer con-
tinue to be so. They would not wait until the mann-
facturing prosperity should react upon them. Many
of the small landowners had gone to live on
the continent, and many of the labourers had
emigrated, and it was to this that the decrease in the
number of paupers was owing. They ruined the pro-
prietors, they crushed the tenantry, and forced the la-
bourers to emigrate, in order to give way to the
cotton spinners of Manchester, who to get
money would violate every law, human and divine.
If they did not devote the sarplus to the relief of the
agriculturists, they would raise such a cry as they would
nut easily stop. If the agriculturists took his advice,
they never would rest satisfied until they got protection
for British industry. With respect to Papal aggre6-
sion, he had always opposed Catholic emancipation,
and now they were beginning to reap the fruits of it. He
was not at all surprised at what the Bishop of Rome bad
done. He had seen her bishops treated in Ireland as
nobles, and he had seen the House of Commons giving
way to Roman Catholics, and he, no doubt, considered
the House of Commons represented the people
of England, while everybody in England knew that it
did no such thing.—(Hear, hear.) He denied that the
House of Commons represented the British people.
With regard to Lord J. Russell's letter, as it had never
been repudiated by any member of the Cabinet, he
considered that it represented the sentiments of the
whole Cabinet. As far as the improvement of the land
went, he woald never, until protection were restored,
spend one shilling in improvements; it would be sending
good money after had.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA considered that the
dangers which this country run during war was as no-
thing compared with the perils in which we now stand.
At that time the King, the Legislature, and the people
wore Protestant, but since 1829 we have ceased to be a
Protestant country. It was true the great body of our
people was Protestant, as had been evinced by their
indignant protest against the recent aggression of the
Church of Rome. He wasl for true religious liberty, and
no man would go further to secure it; but he contended that
political power was not religious liberty, and he could not
therefore consent to any measure which secured it to the
enemies of Protestantism. He had predicted the evils that
now befel the country at the period of the Catholic Relief
Bill, and he was sorry to find his predictions had been ve-
rified. The Noble Lord read several extracts from a work
published in 1826, to the effect Chet the Pope would never
rest until Roman Catholicism had become the established
religion of the country. He knew not what measures were
intended by her Majesty's Government, but he hoped they
would be of such a character as to sustain the Protestant
faith in this country. All advands in civilization had been
made through Protestantism. The prineipleelebodef.ecnoenwxspdehgeeedpuniaeeernnvtceceeydr.
eftl Foedm, on n
principlesthen national
cnoa contrary, t ro af
reversesr the y n
ietve
feohr every instance
ato n
beenh
adftahi
yheGovernment might depart from those principles or
it might do nothing. But a great struggle between the '
principles of Protestantism and Catholicity would be the
result, of which no man could foresee the end, and by which
the country would be brought into a moat pitiable condition.
All liberality that did not rest upon sound religious opinions* was spurious, and that nation which honoured and upheld
God, God would uphold. The Protestant feeling of Eng-
land rested upon sound religious principles, and 'the people
of the country would rise as one man to resent the insolent
aggression upon their liberties by a foreign prelate. He
felt bound to redeem the pledge he made in 1829, that if
the anticipations he then made should be realised, and if
something efficient was not done by the Government he
would do so. If England abandoned the ground of
Protestantism, her fate was sealed as a country.
The Noble Earl referred to an instance of the in-
sidious character of the Church of Rome, in the case of a
governess who went into a family as a professing Protestant,
and remained there for five years, acting all Use while on
the minds of her young charge. He was convinced Rome
had
e now min
imarelinquiehed nothneeodfahyeiri
ofp pretenienesciouciz
ntflandivtlatr
respect
ecwt was
t

agriculture, he was bound to say that there were more
agricultural labourers out of employment than ever there
had been; and that the home market wos almost altogether
destroyed. The Noble Earl was not altogether audible in
many portions of his observations.
Lord CAMOYS said he seldom rose to speak in that
House, and he should only address their Lordships on the
present occasion upon one point. That point, however,
was a point of the most vital importance; and he hoped he
should, therefore, be excused in adverting to it. He was,
it was known to their Lordships, of a Roman Catholic
family, which had been so for many generations, and
which prided itself upon its unchanged faith; but
he was, at the same time, an Englishman also; and
the rights, privileges, and integrity of this country were,
he believed, as dear to him as to any of their Lordship 3.—
(Hear.) He admitted the supremacy of the Queen over the
Established Church to as full an extent as the most orthodox
member of that Church could desire. He acknowledged also
the supremacy of the Pope in matters of faith over Roman
Catholics. But against the assertion of any temporal power
on the part of the Pope over this country he solemnly pro-
tested; and he was, he would add, likewise adverse to the
undue exercise of the spiritual power of that Pontiff in any
point which might be injurious to the constitution of the
country.—(Rear, hea-.) He had watched the progress of the
Emancipation Act with great anxiety, and he should not
then stop to inquire, as some had done in very questionable
taste, whether that concession was extorted by fear or yielded
through kincness ; but he would say that this measure had
been liberally passed by Parliament, and that it had more-
over been liberally acquiesced in by the nation. There was
it was true, no written or even expressed compact on the
subject as between the Roman Catholics and the Protestants
at the time of the passing of that Act; but he always held
that there was an implied and understood compact, to the
effect, that the rights, civil and religious, enjoyed by the
latter were conceded to the former on condition that there
should be no molestation on their part thereafter—a condi-
tion in whim he considered that the Roman Catholics fully
acquiesced. That compact has not been violated as yet by
either party. The duty and policy of the Roman Catholics
since the Enancipation Act should, in his view, be to prove
by their ceoduct that those by whom they were emanci-
pated had not just cause of regret for the proceeding, and to
give, in the same manner, their opponents no justification
for their opposition. That moral compact, he maintained
had not been violated by the Roman Catholics as a body, and
their friends had no cause to repent of the course they had
taken, whi e their foes had hitherto had no ground for at-
tack. But the conduct of some members of that body had,
he was sou to say, given rise to a charge against them on
the present occasion.—(Hear.) He was anxious to take a
fair view of the establishment of the Catholic religion in this
country, praising where praise was merited, and condeming
where it was deserved, and he should therefore refer to the
introduction of the recent discord on that score into this
country. The Roman Catholics, he was free to confess, were
in full possession of the most perfect religious toleration ;
they had ;he benefit of equal laws and institutions with the
Protestan:s ; they were increasing in numbers; they were
increasing likewise in wealth, though not so greatly; they
were building new churches and chapels—some of them
really beautiful—in various parts of the country; numbers
of the higher ranks of society were embracing their faith, and
many of the clergy of the Established Church had come over
to them from conviction and as a result of their own studies
This gave stability and importance to the Roman Catholic
body, both of which were increasing daily. While these
things were in progress, he (Lord C.) considered it to
to be bad policy—nav worse, he held it to be a culpable
error—to introduce into this country any such cause of dis-
sension as a Roman Catholic hierarchy.—(Hear.) It was,
indeed, to tee greatest ignorance of the actual condition of
England that this error was traceable. Any person who had
ever been at Rome of late days must have witnessed with
surprise the extravagant idea entertained there of the con-
dition of Raman Catholicism in England. It was believed
there that because a few Protestant clergymen had come
over to the Roman Catholic Church, the English people would
all follow them ",• but those who entertained this idea
forgot that so flock whatever had followed its pastor on these
occasions. The Noble Lord was understood to say that the
Papal aggression was indirectly traceable to the Puseyites,
but that he should not dwell on that topic. He did not,
he continued, blame the Papal Government so much for its
ignorance of England in this matter, as he did those who,
knowing the country so well as they did, had advised it to
the course It had taken. The language they ought to have
held to the Papal Courrt was, that this was a Protestant
country—that the Constitution, though open to all, was
nevertheless Protestant—that the Crown was Protestant—
that the people, though divided into innumerable sects,
were, with the exception of the Roman Catholic body, uni-
versally Protestant.— ( Hear, hear.) He would not enter
into the question of the difference between vicars-apostolic
and bishops, but with regard to the often reiterated asser-
tion that they had violated the law in the establishment
of the Roman Catholic hierarchy, he must make an ob-
servation. - The laws which were said to have been vio-
lated by ttat measure were the Ist of Elizabeth, the 13th
of Elizabeth, and the 24th section of the Emancipation
Act. Now, with respect to the Ist of Elizabeth, the
penalties enacted by it had been repealed by statute,
the rest of the Act remaining unrepealed. But when they
tolerated the Roman Catholic body, they tolerated that
which was essential to their religion ; and they tolerated,
therefore, their holding the supremacy of the Pope. But in
tolerating that, they were tolerating what was forbidden by
the Act ofElizabeth. It was not, however, too much to say
that when the provisions of a subsequent Act were contrary
to the previsions of a prior Act, the latter was of necessity
repealed. In that respect the Catholics had not violated the
law. On that subject he wished to read the opinions of a
very high authority to their Lordships - namely, Lord Lynd-
hurst, whc when he was Lord Chancellor stated that it was
no crime is a Roman Catholic to maintain and defend the
suprernace of the Pope; but that if he did so for a mis-
chievous purpose—for circulating immoral doctrines or
opinions, he would be liable to punishment at common law;
but if he merely maintained and defended the supremacy of
the Pope, as he was bound to do, only as the spiritual autho-
rity of his superior, then he was guilty of no offence against
the laws of the country. That was the opinion of Lord
Lyndhurst; and the Bishop of Exeter having usked his
opinion and that of the judges as to whether it was
lawful in Roman Catholics to maintain the supremacy of the
Pope, he replied it was no offence at common law for them
to do so, but that if any person wantonly and maliciously
called in question the supremacy of the Crown (and that
comprised spiritual and temporal supremacy) for any im-
proper purpose, or in any manner questioned the supremacy
of the Crown, that such persons were liable to a prosecution
at common law. He (Lord Camoys) read that opinion with
very great satisfaction, because it was an answer to the con-
trary opinion of a very high authority which had been given
at a large public meeting in the country. —(Hear, hear.)
With respect to the second Act he had referred to—namely,
the 13th of Elizabeth, which forebade communication with
Rome, it was comprised in the argument which he had ad.
dressed to the questions raised under the Ist of Elizabeth.
For if they tolerated the Roman Catholic religion
they must tolerate their communication with Rome,
which was necessary to the exercise of their re-
ligion. With regard to the 24th clause of the Emancipa-
tion Aet, that clause, after declaring that the Protestant
religion was established in England, and Scotland, and
Ireland, went on to say that any person assuming, as a
Roman Catholic bishop, the style or title of any archbishop,
or bishop, or dean belonging to the Protestant Church in
England, Ireland, or Scotland, was liable to the penalty of
1001. There was at that time, so far as the Roman Catho-
lics were concerned, no necessity for concluding England in
that clause. They had a Roman Catholic hirearchy in Ire-
land, and, therefore, it was proper to defend Protestant titles
there, but their defence of the titles in England was an evi-
dent paving of the way fora state of things in England si-
milar to that which existed in Ireland. It, then, that were
true—and he thought that he had correctly and accurately
stated the case—the conclusion was obvious, that they had
not offended against the law by taking those titles which had
net been prohibited by Act of Parliament. He believed there
were one or two cases in Ireland where they had taken for-
bidden titles; but that did not apply to his argument.
He might say one word with regard to the preroga-
tive. If they regarded titles which flowed from
the fountain of honour in this country relatively
with titles which had their origin from the Pope, there
could be no true comparison between them,
the one giving legal rights, the other none whatever. Let
them take a case. The Crown had lately appointed a
Bishop of Manchester, and it might be deemed expedient to
make a similar appointment with respect to another large
town. and to nominate a Bishop of Birmingham. What
would then happen? Why, if the person appointed by the
Pope still continued to hold the title of Bishop of Birming-
ham he would be liable to the penalty of 100/. ; and that led
him to a declaration which had been made by his Noble
Friend, that the recent measure of the Pope placed Roman
Catholics in the alternative of either violating the constitu-
tion or breaking their oaths. He (Lord Camoys) denied
that the Roman Catholics were placed in that position. He
utterley denied that they violated the constitution because
they kept within the letter of the law. Taking, as he did,
a fair and impartial view of the subject, he could not avoid
noticing the celebrated letter of Lord John Russell. Like
all the Roman Catholics of the country, he had felt insulted
when he was told that his religion was mummery and super-
stition. He could not look upon that letter as the letter of
the head of the Cabinet. Their Lordships might think he
was drawing too fine a distinction, but he must say he
looked upon it as the letter of the individual and not of the
Prime Minister, He was confirmed in that opinion, when
he found the Prime Minister was not acting up to the spirit
of that letter. But he must ask, had Lord John Russell in-
tended to insult the Roman Catholics? and that question he
must answer in the negative. The Roman Catholics were
few in this country, yet they were to be found in places of
public honour, trust, and emolument; in the House of Com-
mons, and in their Lordships' House, in the various grada-
tions of the Peerage; they were to be found even in frater-
nity with persons on the bench of bishops; they were to be
found in places near the person of the Sovereign ; they were
in a minority in England, in Scotland, and in Vales, but in
Ireland they constituted the great majority, and altogether
they constituted one-third of the population of the kingdom.
Could, then, Lord John J. Russell have intended to insult,
them, and not only them, but the Roman Catholics of France
Spain, Austria, Portugal,' and the other countries which
were Roman Catholic tin religion? Were they not told in
the Royal Speech that those states were in amity with us?
And were not the sovereigns of those countries connected
by ties of relationship and friendship with the Royal family
of this country ?
Was It possible then that Lord J. Russell
had intended to insult the Roman Catholic community?
He repeated lie must answer that question in the negative.
But while that did not amount to a justification of the letter,
he was bound to say that there were great annoyances to
which the Noble Lord had been exposed. Cardinal
Wiseman ought to have previously communicated to him
the proposed measure of the new hierarchical appointments,
and his not having done so was a breach of courtesy and a
want of duty at which Lord J. Russell had a right to feel
annoyed. It was no excuse to sap that the document relating
to the matter bad been shown at Rome to a foreign ambas-
sador. Nothing of that sort would justify Cardinal Wise-
man's not seeking an interview with the Noble Lord on the
subject before he took the important step of establishing the
hierarchy. Notwithstanding all the violence they had read
and heard at public meetings, he could not help noticing the
liberal feelings that pervadd all those meetings, at not one
of which had any resolution been come to except to take
such steps as the parties deemed necessary for the protection
of their national faith ; and beyond that no attack on reli-
gious liberty had been advocated. He had felt it due to him-
self and to their Lordships to make those few 4 beervations,
and he had only to thank Lordships for the attention with
which they had heard him.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE should have been sorry
if the debate had come to a conclusion without the Noble
Lord (Camoys) having had an opportunity of delivering his
sentiments, and which he must say the Noble Lord had done
in a manner which their Lordships must have felt indicated
a degree of candour and manliness on his part that reflected
infinite honour upon him; and he hoped that those senti-
ments, coming as they did from a person connected by here-
ditary ties for centuries with the Roman Catholic body of
England, and expressing them as the result of his own obser-
vation and knowledge of this country would, as they ought, out-
weigh a hundred-fold those sentiments and those proceed-
ing which he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) believed it to be
notorious—and he was ouzo could be proved—had originated

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