The Sun.
London, England, 1851-06-21 00:00:00

SUN,

BANK OF ENGLAND.
(From last night's Gazette.),
An Account, pursuant to the Act 7th and Bth 01 Victoria,cap. 32 for
the Week ending on Saturday, the 14th day of June, 1851.
188IIR DEPARTMENT.

X.
Note 3 27,296,550

with that request? Certainly not; and as the Bill was
calculated to give rise to immense difficulties if passed
in its present sbape,he trusted the Government would re-
consider its decision. At all events, if they could not
adopt tho exact words of the proviso, let them
accede to its spirit, and frame some paragraph of their
own by which the spiritualities of the Roman Catholic
Church would be left untouched.
Colonel RAWDON said the simple object of the pro-
viso was to protect Roman Catholics against the opera-
tion of the Bill inmatters purely spiritual, and he had
failed in hearing anything from the Government show-
ing that its introduction would impair the efficiency of
the Bill. The Attorney-General had said the Bill
would not interfere with spiritual matters, and he (Col.
Rawdon) thought it was only right the Government
should give the Roman Catholics the benefit of a doubt
by agreeing to the yroviso. He should support the
motion of the Hon. Member.
Lord J. RUSSELL explained that what he said was
that the question involved in the motion had been
decided before in the House. (Loud cries of
" Hear, hear.") It was perfectly clear that the in-
troduction of the weds to the end of the clause would
lead to great dispus and litigation, and would in
fact take away from ?arliament the right to decide what
was spiritual and ',hat was temporal, and leave that
right so to decide tcthe courts of law. It was on those
grounds that he ()Nosed the motion.
The House then livided, when there appeared—
For the prods!) ... 42
Against it
160
Maio-its, against ... —.llB
M
Colonel SIBTIIP moved the addition of the fol-
lowing words:—"And shall further be imprisoned until
the said sum of ire hundred pounds shall have been
paid; and after tie payment of the aforesaid sum of
5001. shall be banished from the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Irelard during the period of his natural life."
Ho did not know Cardinal Wiseman, but be certainly
was a dangerousnsan, and it would be all the better if
they got rid of hm, for one black sheep was quite suffi-
cient to spoil be flock. Not having any hope, how-
ever, of passing the clause, he should not press it to a
division.
Mr. MOOREsaid he certainly thought that if the
crime of Cardbal Wiseman really was of that magni-
tude which the Noble Lord, in his opening speech at the
commencemeotof the session, had described, the penalty
suggested by tie Hon. !Led Gallant Member was certainly
more reasonable than Ibat provided by the Noble Lord
himself, and of the two, if he bad to choose between the
two, he certainly should divide with the Hon. and Gal-
lant Member.
The proviss was then withdrawn.
On the question that the clause stand part of the Bill,
Mr. RE I'NOLDS could not allow the clause to pass
without makitg one or two observations on the subject.
The Hon. Menber for the county of Limerick had asked
the House to declare that the Catholic Church should
be free in spiritual matters, but the Noble Lord, with a
majority of 110 to 42, bad declared that it should not
possess that lberty. He took this, the last opportunity
which would be offered to him with respect to this
clause, to declare that it was a repeal of the most valu-
able portion a the Emancipation Act. It was a clause
of pains and penalties against the Catholics of Ireland,
and was an insult which they would never forgive
either the present Whig Government or any of their suc-
cesors professiig similar politics. Since he last addressed
the Committee on the subject he had spent ten days in
Ireland, where the indignation of all parties, clergy and
laity, was so s rang against the Government for their
having introduced this Bill, that they declared that they
had ceased to have any confidence in the Government,
and that they lad lost all hope of obtaining justice from
the present House of Commons. He had been autho-
rised to make that declaration, and ho should not con-
fine it to Catiolics, but included in it Episcopalians,
Presbyterians, and the liberal men of every religious
sect in Ireland, all of whom were of opinion that the
present measure was a stop backward in the
cause of religious liberty. The majority of the House
was opposed Sc him, but he believed all the argument
was on his side, No answer had been attempted to the
memorable speech of the Right lion. Baronet the Mem-
ber for Ripon on this Bill. Tho feeling out of doors was,
that the Bill was uncalled for and calculated to create
discord and dissatisfaction among her Majesty's sub-
jects. That being also his own belief he, in the name
of his Catholic countrymen, and at the eleventh hour, re-
newed his protest against the whole of the measure.
Dr. POWER said that though four months had
elapsed since the introduction of the Bill they were as
much in the desk as to the effect which it would have as
they were on the day of its introduction. The discus-
sion had done little beyond drawing forth differences of
opinion with regard to its provisions. Surely, then, the
better course would be to refer it to a Select Committee,
in order that it might be licked into some shape, and be
made consistent in its clauses. If he could believe that
the issuing of the rescript by the Pope was, as had been
stated by the Noble Lord, but a part of a general scheme
for the suppression of the liberties of Europe, he should
have voted for the Bill. The Noble Lord had not, how-
bwyasanuynfafiarctisn otrnebNy
nabnlye
re
ev
ae
grn,
ns
iunpgp, oarnt edd
nhei s
thoughtr
o ni t
Lord to throw into the discussion an ingredient of that
kind in order to catch a few votes.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the clause ... •.. ... 150
Against it ... ••• ••• 35
Majority in favour of the clause ...--115
On clause 3,
Mr, S. CRAWFORD said he wished to call the at-
tention of the House to the action which the measure
would have on the voluntary churches within the king-
dom, and on the Scotch Church in particular. It ap-
peared to him that the Scotch Church should not be pre-
vented assuming titles for the purpose of its own inter-
nal government. The Bill as it stood, instead of its
being a Bill far resisting the Pope's aggression, was in
itself an aggression against every voluntary church.
The danger which the Noble Lord at the head of the
Government feared was not provided against by that
Bill. The real cause of the danger lay in the control
which the State exercised over the Established Church!,
and as long as that connexion between the Church and
State existed so long would the danger complained of
remain. The clergy of that Church were too indepen-
dent of their people, and many conscientious persona
were obliged to secede from that Church to establish a
church for themselves, and it was principally on that
account, and to secure for such persons perfect reli-
gious liberty, that he took the liberty of proposing the
amendment of which ho had given notice. He wished
to see every Christian community that might deem it
advisable to establish an episcopacy for themselves
protected in their rights. He maintained that true
religious liberty could not be held as long as the
ordinances, the doctrines, and the faith of the Church
were under the authority of the State. The Queen
was the nominal head of the Church, but she could do
nothing without the advice of her Ministers and Parlia-
ment. The true principle would be to allow every church
to regulate herself. He did not bring forward his motion
for the benefit of any particular church, but to secure
the right of freedom of opinion to every man in the com-
munity. The Honourable Member concluded by moving
his amendment, which was, to expunge all the words in
the third clause after the word " place," in line 2, page
3, and insert the following words:—" Used as the desig-
nation of office in such church, or to the assumption or
use of the title of archbishop, bishop, or dean, taken by
any person solely as the designation of his office, for the
government of any voluntary church according to its
rules and usages, and not claiming or assuming to have
-by law, in respect of such title, any jurisdiction, au-
thority, or pre-eminence in the United Kingdom."
Sir G. GREY said the proposed amendment would in
one sense be ambiguous, and in another objectionable.
The words would go to neutralise the Bill altogether,
if it was meant that any Roman Catholic bishop should
take the title of any place at present forbidden by
the Bill.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD said, in explanation, he wished
to give the Catholic or any other church the voluntary
power of assuming the titles of archbishop, bishop, or
dean, for their own regulation.
The Committee having divided on the amendment, the
numbers were—
Ayes
Noes
..• ••• •.•
Majority against the amendment

... 33
... 118
-85

country. They had abolished the bishoprics in Ireland;
they had put an end to the Church cess there; and they
had removed one-fourth the tithes; but they h;td
adopted none of those measures in England. They had,
not, therefore, maintained the principle of a united
Church in the two countries; and the reason why they
had not maintained it was that the Established Church
in England was a national Church, while the Estab-
lished Church in Ireland was the Church of a small
section only of the community. He would tell them
that the extension of the measure to Ireland would de-
stroy peace and harmony in that country; that it would
compel her Majesty's Government to maintain the union
by means solely of a large standing army; and then it
would be impossible to carry out that reduction in the
public expenditure which the people of England were
so anxious to see established. For these reasons he
earnestly called upon the Committee to accede to his
proposal.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said he thought that
the adoption of that clause would render the Bill liable
to the objection of proceeding upon the grossest incon-
sistency. The principle of the measure, as advocated
by the Government, was that it was inconsistent with the
prerogatives of the Crown that a foreign potentate should
assume a right to create dignities and jurisdictions in
these realms, such as the Pope had attempted to create
by the rescript establishing the new bishopric of West-
minster. That office was, in Ireland as well as in Eng-
land, an infraction of that arrangement which had been
come to in the Roman Catholic Emancipation Act with
the approbation of the whole Roman Catholic body. It
was true that that Act did not specifically prevent the
assumption by Roman Catholic prelates of episcopal
titles which did not belong to any bishop of the Estab-
lished Church; but he believed that its object and spirit
had been the prevention of any assumption by Roman
Catholics of titles of sees in the United Kingdom. Now
what would be the consequence of exempting Ireland
from the operation of tho Bill? The consequence would
be, that while it would be unlawful to receive in Eng-
land bulls from the Pope conferring such titles, the re-
ception of similar bulls would be perfectly
legal in Ireland. A great majority of the Legisla-
ture and of the people of these kingdoms regarded the
recent act of the Pope as an aggression, and, he might
even say, as an insult; and how could it be pretended
that that which was an aggression and an insult in
England could be regarded as perfectly harmless and
legal in Ireland? The plain meaning and the adoption
of the clause proposed by the Hon. Member for Rochdale
would be that the Queen's prerogative did not extend to
Ireland. It should be remembered that the Act of 1829
applied to Ireland as well as to England, or rather that
it had been framed with a special reference to Ireland.
The object of the present Bill was to carry out the Act
of 1829 in its spirit as well as in its letter, and to pre-
vent an evasion of the solemn compact into which the
Roman Catholic body had then entered. He could see
nothing in the condition of Ireland which would justify
her exemption from the Bill. It was said that the
Roman Catholics constituted the great mass of the popu-
lation in Ireland while they formed only a small
minority in this country. But if, as was pretended by
the opponents of this measure, the sacred principle of
toleration were violated in that instance, there could be
nothing to justify its violation in the case of a small
body of persons any more than in the case of a large
population. The only ground on which the exemption
of Ireland could be urged was the number of Roman
Catholics in that country; but he could not admit that
numbers had anything to do with the principle. There-
fore looking at the general principle of the Bill, and the
compact which had been entered into, he could see no
reason why Ireland should not be included. He did not
admit that they were dealing with the spiritual affairs of
the Roman Catholics, or infringing the sacred laws of
toleration, and for these reasons ho opposed the adoption
of the clause.
Mr. ROCHE believed the Bill to be as unjust to Eng-
land as it was to Ireland, and as regarded the latter
country it was certainly one of the most unjust measures
ever contemplated by any Government. The Hon. and
Learned Solicitor-General was too good a lawyer to say
that this Bill was a mere repetition of the Emancipation
Act, or that it did not extend the restrictive clauses of
that law. And since the understanding upon which the
Emancipation Act bad been passed had been so much
commented on, he begged to remind the Committee that
the Duke of Wellington, in his speech on that Act, ad-
mitted that the provision with respect to the assumption
of titles in Ireland was introduced merely to satisfy some
scruples of a few Right Reverend Prelates. Lord
Malmesbury, a great opponent of emancipation, said he
looked upon the restrictive clause as regarded titles in
Ireland as a farce, and worse than a farce. But as re-
ference had been so often made to the spirit in which
the Act was passed, might he not refer to the spirit
in which it had been carried out? Was it anything
like the spirit of this Bill ? Why, they had
passed Acts recognising these' very titles in Ireland.
They had carried out the Emancipation Act in a
spirit more liberal and generous than that in which it
was passed, and yet here they were introducing a Bill of
pains and penalties against the Roman Catholics of Ire-
land. He could not look on the extension of the Bill to
Ireland in the same philosophical spirit as the Hon. and
Learned Solicitor-General. The Hon. and Learned
Gentleman was playing a great game, and so was he;
but the difference was, that he had a stake in the result,
while the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had none. He
warned the Noble Lord at the head of the Government
and the country that they were engaging in a very seri-
ous struggle. He gave the Noble Lord credit for the
utmost sincerity, but he did not know the country, nor
did ho take the proper means of informing himself. If
he insisted so much upon principle, why did the Noble
Lord not extend the Bill to the colonies? He was afraid
to do so. The colonies were thousands of miles distant.
Ireland certainly was not far off, but he advised them to
count her numbers, and if they forced the Roman Catho-
lic clergy, who had always been the great peace pre-
, servers hitherto, to conspire against the authority of
England, Ireland would be more dangerous than all her
colonies. Judging from the meetings held in this coun-
try, he did not believe that any great desire existed to
extend the measure to Ireland, with respect to which
there had been no aggression. If they wished to pre-
serve tranquillity in that country, and enable her to de-
velope her resources, it would be utter and perfect mad-
ness to extend this Bill to Ireland; it would be worse
than a crime, it would be a great political blunder.
Mr. G. H.CASENDISH said the very reasons which
induced him to support the Bill as regarded England
compelled him to resist its extension to Ireland. In le-
gislating on a subject like this, they were bound to look
to the feelings of the great majority of the people.
Though, perhaps, the same loyalty and attachment to
the:Constitution which distinguished the English Roman
Catholics could not be extended to their Irish co-reli-
gionists, still he held that it would be impolitic to ex-
tend the Bill to Ireland, where, in truth, the trans-
planted Established Church had taken no root in the
affections of the people, and he would therefore sup-
port the clause exempting Ireland from the operation of
the Bill.
Mr. CLAY said, if the Government of the day had
refused to legislate on the question the people would
have found another Government to oir,y out their
wishes, and the Protestant and national spirit of the
people would have kept the quarrel alive. He believed
also, that to extend the Bill to Ireland would, on the
other hand, rouse a spirit in that country which would
equally tend to perpetuate the quarrel; and being ani-
mated with au anxious desire to see the discussion
brought to an early termination, he would support the
proposed clause.
Mr. LAWLESS vindicated the loyalty of the Irish
Roman Catholics, and contended that the conduct of the
Government with respect to this Bill was calculated to
destroy the kindly feeling which the relief measures had
engendered amongst the different religious bodies in
Ireland. The Bill of the Noble Lord had driven the
people of Ireland back a century—to those times of bi-
gotry and intolerance when a Roman Catholic was de-
nied the common rights of citiaenship—when upon the
ancient gates of Bandon was written the following in-
scription:—

Turk, Jew, or Atheist
May enter here, but not a Papist."
A wag chalked up—
Whoever wrote these lines, he wrote them well,
The same are written on the gates of hell."
Even if the voice of England demanded such legislation
for this country, he denied that that voice should be per-
mitted to crush the religion of the people of Ireland.
The Right Hon. Baronet the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer having stated his intention to offer the most
determined opposition to the Irish spirit question, had
shown the Irish Members an example that they were
likely to profit by in respect to this Bill. He warned
the Noble Lord against the danger of attempting to re-
press the religious feelings of the people. History af-
forded them many examples of the evil consequences
produced by such a course. He held in his hand a very
üble pamphlet, written by a Mr. Andrew Carew
O'Dwyer, an Irish barrister, and a gentlemen who was
formerly a Member of that House, and from this pam-
phlet he would read an extract describing the causes
and effects of the insurrection in Belgium in September,
1830. The Hon. Gentleman having quoted at conside-
rable length from the document in question, said he
thought the Noble Lord would do well to reflect upon
the dangerous course which he was pursuing—a course
that would most probably lead to the same serious con-
sequences as had happened in Belgium.
Mr. H. DRUMMOND said that the question before
them was simply whether this Bill shall be applied to
Ireland; and the important consideration with them was
not merely its temporal application to that country, but
as the Hon. Member for Hull observed, whether there
would be a subsidence of this agitation. Now, this
agitation never would subside—it never could subside—
because the aggression on the part of a Roman Catholic
Government, backed by all the members of that creed,
was still continued, and they had shown their determi-
nation to bring the people of that country back from
the state of heathenism in which they were sunk, to
complete submission to the See of Rome.—(Laughter.)
The Roman Catholic Members had chosen a hundred
and a hundred times to throw back in ourteaththe
term " aggression." That, however, w
sub-
ject at present before them; but when it was
not the
as,
be able to prove what he was now saying. Neither
y he would
would ho be tempted to enter upon n
disloyalty. He could quote rather coarse
It was said that
niti
expressionsquesonof
that had been used upon this subject.
they could not have a divid_on.
Members,e_dlolalty', f
it appeared,
for there was
no such thing. But certain II
had an undivided loyalty
to the Pope of Rome, and
were disposed to say,: perish all sc,vereig,nseawdh. or
eiandt e.
fered with his rights."—(Loud cries of ,R
~ No, no," said the Hon. Member —(Cries
were so many
of " Yes,
yes," from the Irish Members.) There
Pio Nonos that he did not like to i.ead.—(Laughter.)
These persons say that they respected the au-hority of
yAct of
the vicar of Christ infinitely mote than any rou,,
Parliament.
Mr. REYNOLDS—Hear, hear.
Mr. H. DRUMMOND then proceeded to read from
a paper he hold hie 13§111;!! We couttior our Alle-

21, IRSI.

giance to the Roman throne first of all. At an in-
finitely lower distance is our loyalty to any earthly sove-
reign compared with our &vote(' loyalty to the Holy Eee.
Perish a thonslnd icings and queens and parliament
rather than it should be in the slightest degree opposed.
As the spiritual exceeds the temporal in importance so
this loyalty to the Holy See transcends that which we
pay to the Queen of England."—(Loud cries of " Name,
name," from the Irish Members.) They had no right
to have any name.—(" Oh, oh," from the same
quarter.) As a matter of courtesy he would
give the name, but he would not be induced to do so from
compulsion.
It was a Roman Catholic who used this
language.—(" Oh, oh," from several Irish Members.)
Mr. O'FLAHERTY here rose to order. Ho said he
believed he had a right to call to order the Hon. Member
for Surrey, who, in his usual style and good feeling
towards the Roman Catholic Members of that House,
had quoted written paragraphs, which they were induced
to believe were written by some Catholic Member of
that House, or some great Catholic authority. He now
found that the Hon. Member was quoting from some
newspaper that was never before heard of. It was any-
thing but fair, just, and (if the rules of the House would
permit him to say so) it was anything but honourable, to
make these quotations.—(Laud cries of " Order, order,"
from the Chairman and several Hon. Members,) He
felt that he was not to bo put down.—(Chair, and order.)
The CHAIRMAN said an expression had dropped—
he hoped inadvertently—from the Hon. Member, that
he was not to be put dowc. He hoped that did not apply
to the Chairman.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir R. H. INGLIS said that when the Hon. Member
for Galway had called the Hon. Member for Surrey to
order, he should have been prepared to specify some in-
stance in which the Hon. Member for Surrey had de-
viated from the proper course of debate. He submitted
to the Hon. Chairman whether the Hon. Member for
Galway did specify a single instance in which the Hon.
Member' for Surrey had violated the rules of that House,
or the proper feeling that should actuate him. _(Hear.)
Mr. KEOGH said that the Hon. Member for Galway
had, he believed, been called to order by the Hon. Mem-
ber for the University of Oxford. He did not see how
he had violated the rules of that House. The Hon.
Member for Galway had said that if the rules of the
House permitted him, he would say that the:conduct or
observations of the Hon. Member for Surrey were any
thing but honourable. All Hon. Members who had been
in that House for the last twelve months must be aware
that evasive expressions were constantly used for the
purpose of avoiding the coming within the violation of
the rules of that House. He had seen much more flagrant
violations of the House declared not to be disorderly;
and he confessed ho was not disposed tamely to submit
to the Hon. Member for Galway being called to order
for what he had said, when he recollected the extraordi-
nary language that the Hon. Member for Surrey was
permitted to use some few weeks back.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Hon. Member for
Galway had used no argument to prove that the Hon.
Member for Surrey was out of order, It must be evi-
dent to the Committee that the Hon. Member for Sur-
rey had said nothing that was disorderly.
Mr. SADLEIR said that the Noble Lord must be
aware that the Hon. Member for Galway had been
called to order far using disorderly expressions.
Mr. O'FLAHERTY said that he had sat down in obe-
dience to the chair. He begged to inform the Noble
Lord and the Chairman that he bad not used any ex-
pressions he was not prepared to hold by. He believed
that ha had used an expression contravening the accu-
racy of the statement of the Hon. Member fur Surrey.
He was sure that he had not said anything that was a
violation of the rules of the House. If he did so he
would at once apologise. But he would not permit the
Hon. Member for Surrey or any other Hon. Member to
use expressions against his religion or loyalty without
standing up in his defence, and maintaining his rights.—
(Cheers from the Irish Members.)
The CHAIRMAN said that when the Hon. Member
for Galway rose he considered that he was about to
speak to a point of order. He did not immediately col-
lect from his speech as to what part of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Surrey's observations ho took exception.
Mr. O'FLAHERTY said he complained of the Hon.
Member fur Surrey quoting a statement which appeared
by what had fallen from him to have been made by cer-
tain Members of that House. As he (Mr. O'Flaherty)
objected to its going forth to the public that such a state-
ment was made by any Hon. Member of that House, he
interrupted the Hon. Member for Surrey in the course
he was taking, fur the purpose of letting the House and
the country know that the documents quoted were such
as ought not to be referred to without the name of the
author being mentioned with them.
Mr. DISRAELI apprehended that the simple case
was this—the Hon. Member for Galway, supposing that
the Honourable Member far Surrey had made certain
statements without sufficient authority, thought that he
had acted somewhat disorderly, It was a fair topic for
the Honourable Member for Galway to reply to in a fair
discussion with the Hon. Member for Surrey. The Hon:
Member for Surrey might have made an indiscreet state-
ment—he gave no opinion upon that point; but as far as
he could form an opinion upon the matter, he was not
disorderly.
Mr. REYNOLDS said, in speaking to the point of
order, as a Roman Catholic Member of that House,
he had no objection whatever to the reading of any
documents by the Honourable Member for Surrey, no
matter what the contents might be, even if they were
grossly insulting to his creed. But it was only fair
and reasonable that the gentleman who reads them
should state from what source they emanated. He
thought that the Honourable Member was quoting from
authentic documents, which were to bind him as a Ca-
tholic. —(Cries of " Order, order.")
The CHAIRMAN said it was competent for the Hon.
Member for Dublin to rise in his place to order, but be
must excuse him for saying that he could not see in what
point the speech of the lion. Member for Surrey was
disorderly.
Mr. DRUMMOND then resumed his speech. He
said he bad not the smallest intention of raising a dis-
cussion of that sort. The Hon. Member for Derby, in
his speech, had drawn a distinction between the loyalty
of the Roman Catholics in England and in Ireland.
There was not much in that, one way or the other; but
then the Hon. Member who answered him had made a
large demand upon the credit that ought to be given to
the loyalty of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, and he
(Mr. Drummond) having these documents in his pocket,
he could not resist the temptation of referring to them.
If the opinions he had quoted were anything like loose
assertions he would not have cared about them; but
they were the well-considered expressions of a Roman
Catholic newspaper. But that was not his only autho-
rity: he had also another document, written by a Roman
Catholic priest.—(" Read, read," from the Irish Mem-
bers.) He was not going to read it. It was published
in the Tablet by " my dear Lucas," the recognised autho-
rity of the Roman Catholic bishops. He would
speak no further upon this point—be was going
to speak upon the point immediately at issue—namely,
whether this Bill was to apply to Ireland or not.
He believed that the question would not rest there.
He thought it was important not to permit them-
selves to be irritated to do what was unjust. It was
foolish to suppose that there was any danger in Ireland
to arise from the Popish bulls. As it was said by Lord
Mansfield, " In times of danger weak men were induced
to go beyond the necessity of the case, in order to avert
it." This country had bean no doubt grossly insulted;
that insult had been continued and reiterated day by day
and from one end of the country to the other. What had
been done to the Protestant people of this country bad,
however, not been done to Ireland. When the Noble
Lord brought forward this measure, ho satisfied neither
himself (Mr. Drummond) nor those who were opposed
to all legislation on the subject. But the Noble Lord said
he would only chi what he thought was necessary.
Now the Papal aggression and the Papal insolence
were confined to England alone. No change whatever
was made by them with regard to Ireland. If the Govern-
ment had acted in accordance with his views they would
not have extended this Bill to Ireland, as the Catholics
of that country did not really deserve to be dealt with by
any measure of severity. Tho truth of the matter was
this—the Government would not grapple with the great
grievance,
and that was the Irish Church. He was not
going to help them out of it—he could not doit. Butet
there was the pinching place. Unless they o
fairly met
this difficulty they would still be pressedd w
Let not the Government, from any
wasprovocationeonn receivedcweirtne idtl
whichi nEngland,
w aiunjust
b o t e maps t efedr toee ctahrertyoienetnotrlyr eland a measure
Mr. AN S l'E Y atshkeedßin whyte thethe
propose to extend colonies 2,
swedlild a
sn
to
Government
the dominion of the British Crown as well as to
from
Ireland? Why not to the transmarine regions
h ts which they
the Roman Catholics in England those rig
country? The Pope had attempted to take away
ionthae undersisier
had enjoyed under the pre-existing canon laws of the
but e h had
Church, sanctioned by Acts of Parliament;
the rights of the
Irish Roman Catholics. Oa the same g
not committed a similar aggression on
ground on which
oottfalrned:
Bill. When a Papal
ht heeN oughto b l et
oL
haveiert exempted
exempted
Roman Episcopalianscath
Catholics
oSec
Ire-
land from the operation of this
in 1815, it was opposed
aggression was made in Irelandholie
laity,
from the attempt the
and priests of Ire-
land;by Mr. O'Connell, the Cat
not
tha en❑hd ttheeni
names
interfering with the independence of
r
Pope then
and Rmoemdeeot had. to withdraw
Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) He re-
ferred
the Catholic Church in
the reecri t
• laity adverse to p . It was ad-
the Catholic
to a document which had been circulated amongst
h Roman Catholicspersons
apd
uvreebrsl
signedsi
ce
.d
tt t
Coo,
a rhdaivneadl t.
dhei
Wisemans tri. mhtehenedt
pfabuirrlpoeuodgs
ehitnob.te hfeur
showing,ewtehree
dthhteehe
on Dsuesaewk eht
hooefhEado Norfolk,gsiinsc e
object; an
to documents
curede
se lee t o
not their approval of the rescript, but their dislike of
the scurrilous abuse that had be
clergy and faith. He denounced the been
ePi au
uggthreesir-
siou of the Court of Rome, and, therefore, h
of the first clause; but he at the same ti e d el approved
ec ared that
the Bill was totally inapplicable to Irmel
The consequence of this legislationand.—(Llear.)
would be that it
would give support in Ireland
to the Primate, Dr. Cul-
len, and his small majorit iy in the Synod of Thurles. As
the Bill deserved to be
the Noble Lord ro excl mdeade practicable he appealed to
Ireland from the Bill.
Mr. WEGG PRO z_lli,lt considered the Bill to be to-
tally unjuetitiable. Upon political
grounds was ob-
vious that Ireland ea
Mr. GOOLD t to be excluded from the Bill.
was oppos, d to the extension of the Bill
to Ireland.
Lord J. RUSSELL had to say a very few words on
this subject. He owned that it appeared to
him
to be
impossible, if they were to proceed with this Bill, fur the
(HRouse not to include Ireland within its provisions.—
ear, hear.) The prerogative of the Crown had been
infringed. They must presume that it had b •en so, if
they approved of this Bill. Then, if the prerogative of
the Crown had been infringed, they could not say that
they would prevent that being done in England which
they would permit to be done in Ireland. If the inde-
pendence of the nation had been assailed, then they
would not say they would prohibit it in England and

pet mit it to be done without punishincut in Ireland. I
was, in fact, impossible logically to defend this measure
1111:.23 Ireland was included in this Iliii.—(Hear.) It SP;
peared to him that the a hole of the arguments of tnel
who were opposed to the Bill went not sci much Pgair2:
his Bill, which merely extended, in a very trifling de'
green, the provisions of the present law, as they were
di-
rected against the existing law itself; because if it were
right to allow Reiman Catholics to call themselves Arch'
bishops of Dublin, or of Armagh, or of Cashel, or
Bishop of Limerick—if it were right to do that, then,
in order to accomplish such an object, it would be nec!„9,.:
sary to repeal the provisions of the Act of George i v
—(Hear.) That Bill prohibited Roman Catholics from
taking titles from places in which there were not now
existing bishops of the Established Church. The open'
ration of that part of the Bill was not a very greet
extension of that provision which was already to De
found in the statute book—namely the Act of 10 Geo.
IV. The whole of the argument, then, as regarde_d,
practice was not an argument against including Irolat
but it was an argument for the repeal of that
now the law.—(Clear, hear.) Hon. Gentlemen dief.n..o
prove their case at all by asserting that the Act °f 10
Gee. IV. was not put in force. He maintained ta
contrary. It was an Act the provisions of which bad._
always been respected. Now, he said that those wno
objected to the provisions of that Act—the 10th Gee..e_
IV.---should not insist upon the amendment, but cal
thet r
which was
a repeal of that statute; and if they did that, thenr
whole question would be before them. As the matte,
stood, it was more a qurstion to legislate upon
question of practice. The Bill went very little furt
than the law stood as to the prohibition of the assolig7
assumption
tion of titles. It was the prohibition of the
of the titles in Ireland the same as it was proposed t.,
do with regard to England. They could not say that
a person went to Ireland, bringing in a rescript, a
ing, for instance, to be a Bishop of Galway, a'
that
it
might do so without any notice being taken of it. e
thabuer
would be inconsistent to do that, the House could hardly
omit Ireland.—(Hear.)
Mr. REYNOLDS said, with every respect to
that
judgment of the Noble Lord, he was bound to say
for
including had not given even the shadow of an argument _
the
including Ireland in this Bill. The Noble Lord shottlt.
have imitated the conduct of William In, when he dot,
rected the authorities in Ireland before the surrender of
Limerick to resp the
the Catholic religion; that it should
enjoy all the rights and privileges that it had in li.o
reign of Charles II.; that it should have half the Church
revenues and that even the Catholic gentry should have
Noble
Lord would not take the character of the Roman C half their estates restored to them. He hoped the
litho..
, _
8,
lies from the Hon. and Learned Member for Youghal'
He had strong doubts that be had even in religiousi
esr,
matters any communion with him.—(Cries of "H PA"
hear," and " Oh, oh.") Considering the political mean"
.e_
derings of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman in th t
House, he certainly had no communion with him.
(Hear and laughter.) The Hon. and .Learned
mGentle-
men's meanderings had divorced him from all c0n!,13.
nion with them.—(Laughter, and cheers.) The ,110_v ,
and Learned Gentleman said that he was Member
.1!"',
Catholic constituency, He (Mr. Reynolds) dentedsent
the and now told the House that the Catholics who had
ur
the Hon. Gentleman here had passed a vote of censcut
upon him for his conduct in connexion with the present
Bill, Bill, and had not entrusted him with their Pet'll ,
against the Bill.—(0h, oh, and laughter.) Th
tants of Youghal disowned him also—(oh, oh, 5" ot,
newed laughter)—he would not say that the Potesta
,i
of Youghal despised him—(Oh, oh)— because that w0,c....1"
be unparliamentary—(Shouts of " Oh," and laughte_r4o,
and be now gave the Hon. and Learned Gentleman Trot . '
that when a general election occurred he w°lll Tho t I
again be seen in Youghal.— Oh, oh, and divide.). ,9
Hon. and Learned Gentleman had been weighed 111173, 4'
~
balance and found wanting. The handwriting was 'tll
upon the wall against him, and Youghal had disowned,ee_
him, as he (Mr. Reynolds) now disowned him.—(7
oh, and ironical cheering.) The Honourable Gentlemen
had also said that he was a Catholic, and a sincere, he
tholic. He (Mr. Reynolds) hoped he was; but it_..,, „.4. •
were, he certainly exhibited very little gratitude tovierf V.',
e Pro, tre:.
the head of that Church to whom he owed a double iced L:'
pliment, for the "Holy Father" had not only reed
him into the bosom of the Church, but bad conferred theo
honour of knighthood upon him, the Hon. Gentlelll3
being a" Knight of St. Gregory of the Brazen Su:
(Oh, oh, and roars of laughter.) The gratitude the Dend
Gentleman showed the Pope was to calumniate him, es
he
to call him a tyrant; and he exhibited his gratitude, i.;
the English Cstholics, to the zeal of some of whom bin
conversion was due—(Laughter)—by desiring that that
should be coerced for their ellegiance.—(oh, oh.) tics
were the Catholics of England to be blamed beciiii.s°
they would not take from their leader a religious Wu:.
of that kind? No; and they were wise in their genera'
6°n—they knew whom they could trust; and they knew.
they could not trust the Hon. and Learned Gentleman'
The Hon. Member for West Surrey (Mr. Drummond)
had spoken of the allegiance due to the Pope: u_11.,,
he had fortten to say what sort of allegisPl-
that was—that it was a spiritual and not a tempera. ca.
allegiance, and that he would be calumniating bo
al,
tholic fellow-subjects if he asserted that the spiritual j
legianco which they bore to the Holy Father interfere
eed"
directly or indirectly with their firm, unshaken, and
directly or indirectly with their firm, unsbaey did
affectionate loyalty towards their Sovereign. begd of
not acknowledge the Queen to be the spiritualect,
the Church—that they totally repudiated and dented.
(Cheers from the Irish Members.) But they did
_....,
castors
wardsmheanda
monarchs
se
wibno
that the Queen was the temporal head of this greesitreL:n.
pire, and they were prepared to do that which their to•
their blood and theird to sacri
nour.—(Hear, hear.) pa psr
:et) erpirssete ri cent ury.get eeiddn theirttahuegma
h vindication ehag tI a cif that even
llt
`o°0:
Pope himself, aided by any number of
dare to place a hostile foot upon any portion of herd and
jesty's dominions, the Catholics of England, Irelan
tittle.
Scotland, would be the first to meet him in the b bier./
field, and to repel him.--(Hear, hear, and loud laug
Ah. he well understood that Wonicali—he would not cal
hale--
it insolent—sneer of the Hon. Member for Irnug 1 ad
(Oh, oh, laughter, and cries of " Divide.") If Ire lot
were retained in the Bill, he predicted that the aid
would be a dead letter upon the statute-book. Ileeccioid
not say what the Catholic bishops might do; but i' kh)
troops' wer ga.
Mr. Reynolds) I were a Catholic bishop—(A lt‘,llg,,"'it;
and I wish I was—(Roars of laughter)—l now give
Lied
Noble Lord notice that, before 24 hours had ealroid
from this Bill becoming the law of the land, I vi°
incur its highest penalties.—(oh, oh, and divide.)
Mr. ANSTEY said he would not reply to the persbe00r
alities of the Member for Dublin—to that 11013. Mern,tod
ho left the exclusive privilege of indulging in tbera'a
of being in the unenviable position of having
more & od
any other Member contributed to lower the tone, Ile
character of the debates of that House.—(Cheers') e as
denied emphatically that he had described the PnP" to
a " tyrant," or that he had been guilty of the bad tsal
of speaking of himself as a " sincere Catholic."
Mr. J. O'CONNELL protested against any abseil;
tion which had fallen from Mr. Anstey being taken
1571,1
the expression of the opinion of the Irish people.
no
~,
regard to the clause under discussion, he would ~
condescend to vote for the exclusion of his country
from the operation of so miserable and contemptible "
measure.
Mr. CAMPBELL then rose to address the Coraniit,
mittee, but was met with constant interruptions by oriel
of " Divide," He at once avowed himself unable to au"
dress them.—(Cheers and laughter.) The question Jay
in a narrow compass—it emanated from the 24th sec'
tion of the Act of 1829, which established a compact
with the people of Ireland which they ought not to
break. The Hon. Gentleman continued to address the
House for some time amidst the mingled uproar and
laughter of the House, which was moat impatient for the
division.
The Committee dividedelsvhen there appeared—
For Mr. S. Crawford's clause .„
...
_5650
imperial
i Sir ll H. H. AgainstlNM
Crown, GiaitiLo..
tilniSt
tyo theni,l. : l
her subjects,
jt.
ehcot
sfi,o-lul
no2dweirnl gG9s—od ,
the
" And whereas the Queen's Majesty,
only lawful source and fountain as well
jurisdiction, and no foreign '
, .
ham in his own right any authority' to thie
sonfidherrealalimajeosrtyd'osinsuinbjjoenciss,,
oorrparulmnpenng
realm, or any other dominions of the Queen,
confer within
8...,
therein, any pre-eminence or
whereas it is notorious thatthe • ' fßclula
jurisdictionponornt
Qye n
over
oniotre lie rightht
rhneo other
rtrnhuo oeporrl ivoe:°Ferfinefir. as
resident
I sptebe::
n e,
existing Certain himself
ceses within this realm, and the domi
thereof:"
"And
bath of late years taken upon
by territorial limits to
also unto other sees a redaedy
longing; and further,
b itshheo
thereby pretended 8 as
only over members of nanitnooednwscrstoeohnceesosrtgei
ntauuinnst
dete
thereunto
lto appoint unto the said sees eta
law, certain person
to give to such persons authority, 11°S
over all the
and huh furthereea 8 Christian subjects therein resident;
PCsh Church ht the
ef
same, and
abdu t haal not
assumed to give •par'
sons
archiepiico al dignity
and metropolitical jurisdi°'
titer within her saidli Majesty's real and dominions:
"And whereas such assumptions have no foundatierl
in the law or
featly custom of this realm, but rather are magi"
against all law, yet b • sufferance
of late nelince and
years, such assumptions have' d ll saw)
and gained a ow
jesty's
countenance, to the great disparagement of her Ma'
imperial Crown and dignity, and to the weaken;
In, gand disheartening of the Protestant Reformed
Churches of this realm, and to the discouragement of the
I testant faith in the land, and in all her Majesty's do'
minions:
" And whereas certain rank and precedence ;hath in
divers manners by statute of the realm, by letters Pe'
tent, by warrant under the sign manual, or by ancient
prescription, been attached to different offices, ecclesias-
tical as well as civil, and to divers classes of persons
within this realm, and also to particular persons during
their natural lives, all such rank and precedence being
regulated by certain rules, whereof the Crown, as the
fountain of honour,
is the author, guardian, and keeper;
and whereas no subject of this realm can confer any
rank or preeminence upon any otter subject except
through the Queen's royal authority to him delegate"'
and no subject of the Queen is permitted by the custom
of this realm to bear, without the special l•l once of the
een ~...
Crown, any title or dignity ity tendered to
him by any lu reign prince, prelate, or potentate:i
"And whereas the rank and precedenceiv.
of the arc bishops and bishops of the United Church of Eog.bod
and Ireland, and also the Use of titles • aby
most ancient prescription to appropriate
1,
the same, are part tieof,,,,,
rights and privileges of
gee the saidiChurcb, which the "Cut! \
and Queens who shell f
come to the Croun imperial ,v,,
this realm are, Ott their accession,bound by h'-
maintain:
And
said
whereas, without • United Church , disparagement to the 0
by fundamentsl laws established, tb.,, like rank,
precedence, and titles clianot be imparted ,a
lhe bishops
ished: and clergy of any communion nut so estah'

" .And whereas all the ministers and servants of 111
Crowe are required by law and bound in duty to sox/