The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-22 00:00:00

of English gentlemen to be used, as appertaining to a
community of Christian ladies, dedicated to a life of reli-
gion and charity. He confidently appealed on such
a matter not only to the accomplished and cultivated
minds of English gentlemen, but to the intuitive percep-
tions of all Englishmen against the prurient fancy of
obscenity, senility, and dastardly insinuations—(the
SPEAKER called the Hon. Gentleman to order)—well, of
such unmanly insinuations against the Catholic ladies of
Engalnd.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he was not present
when the discussion arose, but it appeared to him that
nothing was more in accordance with the rules of the
House than the statement of the Speaker.—
(Cheers.) He (Lord John Russell) did not
wish the privileges of the House circumscribed,
but he must say that every one could not but regret
that anything falling from an Hon. Member should give
offence to Roman Catholic Members.—(Cheers.)
Mr. J. O'CONNELL hoped, for the sake of order and
decency in their proceedings, such language would not
be used for the future.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said that after the Hon. Member
for Surrey had last night expressed his sorrow if he had
given pain to any one, and after the statement which
the Noble Lord the First Lord of the Treasury had just
made, deprecating the introduction of language into the
debate which might give pain to any portion
of the House, he hoped that nothing further would take
place on the subject. Having the opportunity of ad-
dressing the House on another subject, he should say a
few words on the subject of a contradiction which had
been given by the lion. Member for Dublin
to a statement contained in a petition which
he (Sir R. Inglis) had presented a few nights ago; the
most important point of which was, that an individual
therein named was at that time a postulant in a con-
vent at Clifton, about to become a nun in that con-
vent. The Honourable Member for Dublin, he un-
derstood, had contradicted that statement most distinctly.
It was needless for him (the Hon. Baronet) to state that
he knew nothing of the subject from his own knowledge,
but he held in his hand a letter from the Hon. Craven Fitz-
hardinge Berkeley, in which that gentleman having seen
by the public prints that the Hon. Member for Dublin had
contradicted the statement contained in the petition, now
re-asserted his original statement, stating that he him-
self had visited Miss Talbot in the convent on the 14th
of last month, and had heard from her own lips
and from the superior of the convent that
in six months she would take the white veil, and at the
expiration of twelve months more take the black, and
become a professed nun. Upon hearing this from his
stepdaughter Mr. Berkeley stated that he had strongly
remonstrated with her, and called to her mind the
injunctions of her dying mother with such effect as to
draw from her an exclamation that she had yet six
months to consider on the subject, before she took the
first decided step. The Hon. Baronet, having made this
statement, then proceeded to put the question, of which
he had given notice, to the First Lord of the Admiralty,
as to the causes, if any, of the delay in sending out a
steamer to meet Captain Austin, R.N., in the Arctie
Seas, during the ensuing summer? This sudden transi-
tion to so entirely different a subject, caused considerable
amusement in the House.
Mr. REYNOLDS did not wish to say anything in
reply to the last question which had been put to him by
the Hon. Baronet for the University of Oxford. In-
deed, he could not say a word to it, but he would sim-
ply state the facts out of which this inquiry arose, and
he did rely upon the intelligence of the House
for adopting a fair view of the matter which
had been laid before them, and he sincerely hoped
that it would come to some definite decision in this matter
He did not intend to enter into the discussion of the whole
question, but ho would simply refer to a letter which he
had received from Mr. Verney, who bad been commis-
sOmed to inquire into the whole affair. The examination
had been instituted, and ho learned from Mr. Verney's
letter that Miss Talbot was not a eovice or even a postu-
lant in the convent in which she had taken refuge.—
(Hear, hear, and ironical cheers.) This letter said that
Miss Augusta Talbot had taken refuge in this monastery,
he believed, with the purpose of becoming a nun.—
(Hear, hear, and laughter.) Now, what did Mr. Berkeley
say; why, that he was refused all intercourse and com-
munication with his stepdaughter; but he (Mr. Reynolds)
had a letter from the Bishop of Clifton—(Loud cries of
" Hear, hear," and ironical cheers)—which was a suffi-
cient answer to the charge No. 2. From that letter it ap-
peared that Mr. Berkeley, so far from feeling all the ten-
derness and regard to Miss Talbot which he had professed,
had left it for five or six weeks without seeking any commu-
nication at all; and yet he said that she was immured in
a convent.—(Oh, oh, and hear.) The Hon. Member for
Marrybone.—(Loud laughter.) Well, Mary-le-bone.
But if the Hon. Member would have allowed him to read
the document out, he would not be ready to cry either
"Oh, oh," or " No, no."—(Laughter.) What was really the
state of the case? Why, that Miss Talbot was a ward in
Chancery—(Repeated laughter, and ironical cheers)—
and had been placed in a convent.—(Renewed laughter.)
Ho hoped this House was not going to be converted into
a second Exeter-hall, whore ranting was the order of the
day.—(Repeated laughter, and cries of " Hear, hear,"
and ironical cheers.) Miss Talbot was a ward in Chan-
cery, placed in this convent with the consent of the
Lord Chancellor, and enjoying, under proper protection,
all the security that she or her guardians could desire.
She was the heiress of 80,0001., and he had heard from
a gentleman high in the Church that she was duly taken
care of.—(Hear, hear,) He had heard of such things as
Protestant nunneries, and perhaps the less he said about
Livens the better.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," the
House being much excited, and ironical cheers
being frequent from all sides of the 'House.)
That gentleman unwarrantably intruded himself into the
convent at Taunton, and being admitted, ho hears from
the lady herself that she was not suffering under any re-
straint—that she was disposed to dedicate herself to the
service of God, and to employ her tune in prayer, and if
she thought proper to dispose of her money
in educating the poor or relieving distress, why should
she and her affairs be dragged before this House?—
(Hear, hear.) Why should this House be made a
channel for calumniating a spotless lady ?—(Hear,
hear.) He beard last night a second edition
of the under current now raging against the
establishment connected with the Church to which he
belonged. He had heard second hand what the Hon.
Member for Surrey had said, and yet no English Mem-
ber but the Hon. Member for Arundel had the honesty
to rise and rebuke the Hon. Member for Surrey. No
Member, however, was called to order unless he was per-
sonally offensive, but though the Hon. Member, in what
ha said was not personally offensive to one individual
alone, yet his language was highly offensive to fifty Mem-
bers of the House, who professed and believed in the
truth of the Catholic Church. It was an insult to him,
as well as to them, and he could not let this oppor-
tunity pass without expressing his indignation
at the conduct of the Honourable Member. The Hon.
Member said nunneries were brothels. Why he (Mr.
Reynolds) had visited many of these nunneries.—
(Roars of laughter.) He had relations in many of
them. In one of them he had two daughters re-
ceiving their education, and there was not a Catholic
Member in that House, he would venture to say,
who had not a blood relative in some one of them.
Why, then, should they be maligned—brutally, beastly
maligned? He knew of no convent where the ladies
were imprisoned, for they were permitted to walk about
the grounds attached to the convent under proper
superintendence.—(Hear, hear. and laughter.) In
spite of that ill-timed laugh, he repeated his state-
ment. lie hoped they were not about to have a
repetition of the scenes in Swiss countries, where the
inmates of convents were driven out without clothes in
the depth of winter, exposed to all the horrors of the
season and the inclemency of the weather. The Noble
Lord at the head of the Government 'WAS not present
when this gratuitous insult was offered to his creed, but
although during the hour and a quarter that the Noble
Lord was on his legs last night lie pointedly replied to
the speeches of the Hon. Members for Plymouth and
Ripon, the Noble Lord not only studiously abstained
from rebuking the Honourable Member for Surrey
for what he had said, but seconded the
insult by calumniating the ecclesiastics of the
Roman Catholic Church. The Noble Lord talked
about the clergy of that Church absolving soldiers and
police from their allegiance, and if his observations
were worth anything, they applied with as much
force to a Roman Catholic Member of Parliament
as to a Roman Catholic soldier, sailor, or
policeman. lie for one had taken an oath,
both in the capacity of a magistrate and a Mem-
ber of Parliament, in which ho swore that it was
no part of his creed that princes excommunicated or
deprived by the Pope might be murdered or de-
posed by the subjects; but according to the Noble
Lord that oath was worthless, because the clergy
could absolve or release him from keeping it.
He left a bitter feeling behind, under which he smarted,
and he hoped the expression would not be repeated.-
-(Hear.) Miss Talbot had been dragged through the
'Press, and that leviathan the Times devoted a column
to-day to her case. He had good authority for saying
that she had never become a postulant.—(Hear, hear.)
i ° hoped the House of Commons would not be made
thearena for the discussion of such subjects.
Lord
J. RUSSELL said he had thought it advisable
in his speech last evening not to allude to the subject, as
he Was not actually present when the discussion arose.
It was his desire to avoid saying anything which was
calculated to irritate or annoy the feelings of Roman
Catholic Member,..__Ku
,hear.)
Mr. BERKELEY said the Hon. Member for Dublin
had stated what Mr. Craven Berkeley had said was a
falsehood; but he dared him to make that assertion in the
presence of his Hon. Relative. What the Hon. Member
for Dublin stated was totally unfounded.—(Cheers.)
Mr. REYNOLDS, who rose amidst cries of " Order,"
and confusion, denied that he
used the word falsehood,
of Mr. Berkeley in going to the
or said that the object
convent was to obtain the young lady's money._(., Oh.")
Lord ARUNDEL and SURREY observed that as the
case of Miss Talbot was fixed for a hearing before the
Lord Chancellor to-morrow (Saturday) it was a great
pity to enter into a discussion of the whole circum-
stances on the present occasion.
Sir B. HALL considered that if the /lon. Member
for Dublin had examined the letter of a Ferson styling
himself the Bishop of Clifton with fairness and candour,he
would have informed the House that this young
a postulant.—(Hear, hear.) In that lettlady was
er Mrs.
Henderson stated that, as the convent did not
admit boarders, Miss Talbot had herself suggeeted
.'that she should apply to be admitted as a poste-
lint, or a person desirous of taking the veil, and that
she was accordingly admitted as a postulant into the
convent in the beginning of September last.—(Hear.)
In his petition Mr. Craven Berkeley had stated that his
step-daughter had become a postulant, and the Hon.
Member for Dublin had denied the truth of this state-
ment, and again subsequently reiterated this denial,
whereas the fact itself was deliberately admitted in the
letter from one of his own bishops.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. M. GIBSON said, that before the question was
put he wished to call the attention of the Noble Lord at
the head of the Government, and the Chancellor of the

THE SUN,

Exchequer, to the state of public business. It was now
the 21st of March, and he believed he might state with
truth that the House had only sat one night'
for the transaction of public business. He knew
that the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill was the cause of this
considerable delay, and ho wished to put this ques-
tion,
as there was only, practically speaking, a certain
limited duration of the session, and as there were many
other public interests which bad a right to be attended
to—whether it was fair to appropriate so large a portion
of the whole session to the discussion of this question
of Papal Aggression? He admitted that great numbers of
of respectable people took an interest in that question—
(Laughter)—but there were also numbers of people who
took an interest in other questions—the coffee duties for
instance. That important trade was now almost sus-
pended, and it became the duty of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer at once to come forward and propose the re-
solutions which would enable the Board of Customs to
make their regulations. The same was the
case with regard to the timber duties, and
ho thought that he was entitled to make some
complaint of this unfair appropriation of the public
time. He hoped that if the debate were not concluded,
the Noble Lord would give some intimation that the
question would not be resumed with undue haste.—
(No, no.)
Sir T. D. ACLAND reminded the First Lord of the
Admiralty that he had not answered the question
which the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford
had put to him.
Sir F. BARING said that the Admiralty had come to
the conclusion, after much consideration, that the time
had come when they were not justified in sending out
any more men to risk their lives in this service.
In the present instance there was no object to be gained,
because Captain Austin was provisioned for three years,
and further provisions had been left him at different
places.
Sir E. N. BUXTON hoped that the Admiralty would
reconsider this determination.
Admiral BERKELEY said that nothing could be
gained by this, as the whalers could bring back quite as
much information as any expedition which misght be
dispatched with orders not to be shut up in the ice.
LANDLORD AND TENANT RIGHT.
Mr. A STAFFORD wished to ask the Right Hon.
Baronet, the Secretary for Ireland, whether it was the
intention of the Government to introduce any measure
with a view to settle the question of tenant-right in
England and Ireland. Such Bills were generally intro-
duced without hesitation, and it was the custom of the
House to pass the first reading without discus-
sion, so that no obstacle whatever was
interposed to the introduction of this Bill. He asked the
question, because unless he received a definite answer
he should give notice that ho would shortly put this
question with a view to bring some measure in himself.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that it was certainly the
intention of the Government to bring in a Bill on the
subject as soon as possible, but that in the present state
of public business it was impossible to say on what day it
would be introduced.
THE BUDGET.
Mr. ROCHE said, that seeing the extent to which
the discussion on the penal Bill to be imposed
on Roman Catholics had extended, he, with other
Members, was; very desirous of as.:ertaining the mode
in which the public business was to be conducted. He
gave notice that if this discussion was to be continued
through much longer time, he, with his friends, would
offer every opposition to the Ecclesiastical Titles
Bill which the rules of the House allowed.
He saw that the Noble Lord had a Chancellor of the
Exchequer, and he supposed the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer had is budget, and if the great finan-
cial measure was to be postponed for the pur-
pose of passing the Bill to which be had
referred, he should resort to every means in his power to
postpone its settlement. He wished, therefore, that the
Ministry would give an answer to the question to the
Hon. Member for Manchester, Mr. Milner Gibson.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the:question of the Hon.
Member for Manchester, and that put by the Hon.
Gentleman wbo bad just sat down, were of
a totally different character. The Honourable
Member complained of the delay of public
business in consequence of the discussion of the Eccle-
siastical Titles Bill. All he had to say was,
that he wished most heartily that the debate on
that Bill had been closed on Monday last,
for ho thought that the subject had been
pretty well exhausted.—(Hear, hear.) With re-
spect to the future, after the second reading of the Bill
bad been passed, it was the intention of the Government
to proceed with the army and other estimates before
bringing the Government financial arrangements before
,he House.

TINIBER DUTIES.
Mr. MACGREGOR gave notice that on Monday he
should put a question to the Government, with a view
to ascertain whether it was their intention to remit the
timber duties, with a view to relieve ship-owners.
THE CASE OF MR. LENIN.

In reply to Mr. O'CONNOR,
Sir GEORGE GREY repeated that the young man
Lewin was seen in company with Thomas, the person
who had baen convicted of picking pockets near the Ex-
hibition in Hyde-park. No bail was offered for the ap-
pearance of either, but on the hearing of the case the evi•
dence against Lewi❑ was not sufficient to justify his con-

Mr. F. O'CONNOR said the Right Hon. Baronet had
been misinformed.
FRENCH POST.
Mr. WILLIAM BROWN wished to ask the Under-
Secretary of State what steps had been taken with re-
gard to the English mails from Paris arriving in London
in time to go by the morning mail into the provinces, or
whether any negotiation was now pending on the subject,
as it was under.tood last year, when the Postal Com-
mittee was sitting, that there was reasonable expectations
that the French Government would expedite these mails
in time?
Mr. C. LEWIS said negotiations were still pending on
the subject.
The motion that the House at its rising should ad-

journ till Monday- was then agreed to.
ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES ASSUMPTION
BILL.—ADJOURNED DEBATE.
The order of the day for the second reading of the Ecele
siastical Titles Bill having been read,
Mr. B. OSBORNE congratulated the House upon havinx
substituted a more moderate atmosphere for the tropical
auspices under which the debate was conducted last night.
At the risk of forfeiting the confidence of a large portion of
his constituents, he should honestly speak his opinion. He
had not presented a single petition from Middlesex in favour
of this Bill. No county meeting had been held in that great
county to express distrust or abhorrence of Papal aggression.
Still, a great deal of feeling had been evoked, and he believed
the Noble Lord lagged behind in the opinion of many. But
because a Romish ecclesiastic had issued his mandate in the
language of the middle ages, was the isle to be frighted from
its propriety? Was Parliament to resort to legislation, and
were our Roman Catholic fellow-subjects to be stigmatized
as bigots or branded as disloyal, because Cardinal Wiseman
had announced a comparatively harmless act in an inflsted
and bombastic manner? It was said the measure was mild
and harmless. But he said it was the first step to a revival
of the penal laws, and it was not the less so because it did
not propose to hang or disembowel a priest.
" Narcissa's nature's tolerably mild,
To make a wash she'd hardly stew a child."
It was mild because the spirit of the age would not admit
any other form of persecution. The Government had taken
credit for expunging the most obnoxious clauses of the Bill.
Not that he objected to the withdrawal of those two clauses,
for he held, with Locke, that all religious creeds ought to
have their free course, provided they did not interfere with
the well-being of sobriety.—(lronical cheers from the Oppo-
sition benches.) He would implore the Noble Lord to go one
step further. and withdraw the preamble of the Bill alto-
gether.—(Hear, hear.) What had been the sum total of the
arguments in favour of this Bill? Unmitigated vitupera-
tion, with one or two exceptions, of the Reiman Catholic re-
ligion.—(Hear, hear.) Take the arguments of all the lawyers,
both of the Chancery and common law bar, who had
spoken in the debate. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman
the Member for the University of Cambridge had drawn a
picture of comparison between the States of Belgium, Italy,
and others where the Roman Catholic religion prevailed,
and those where the faith was Protestant, and adduced ar-
guments that might have been more applicable in 1829
than now ; and, curious enough, one whole passage
of the speech of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman
was word for word the same as a passage in the speech of
the Hon. Gentleman who was at that time Member for the
University ( Hear, and a laugh)—stereotyped and ready
made arguments handed down from generation to genera.
tion upon this unfortunate subject of Roman Catholics.—
(Hear, hear.) But he would ask the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman what those arguments had to do with the provi-
sions of this Bill ? How was a penalty of 100/. to hinder the
efforts attributed to the Roman Catholics? Another lion.
and Learned Gentleman, the Member for Aylesbury, had
also spoken. Oh ! if his lamented friend Lord Nugent, who
formerly represented that borough, had been there, they
would not have heard such a speech from him—(Hear,
hear)—and glad was he (Mr. Osborne) to have the oppor-
tunity of paying his tribute of respect to the memory of that
excellent nobleman.— (Hear, hear.) And what did the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman say? He paid a compliment to the
Catholics who were engaged in repelling the Spanish Ar-
ma la, and referred to former times, when there was a con-
cordat from the Pope, and the consent of the Sovereign to
the nomination of bishops; but what analogy was there be-
tween those times and the present? He took it there was
no analogy between England as it was and as it is. But
what said the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Solicitor-
General? The Hon. and Learned Gentleman made one of
those slashing appeals which did well in Westminster Hall,
but had not much weight in that House. The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman professed to be greatly alarmed at the
introduction of the canon law. He (Mr. Osborne) saw
many Hon. Gentlemen shrug up their shoulders, and heard
them say, " How horrible. Only think of the canon law
being introduced here."—(A laugh.) But what was:the canon
law at which they seemed so much alarmed? It had ex-
isted in Ireland from the days of St. Patrick ; and he was
astonished to hear the observations of his Hon. Friend the
Member for the University of Oxford as to the bull In camel
Domini, which, in fact, never was introduced into that
country. But how did this Bill affect the canon law? Was
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Solicitor-General
aware that over vicars-apostolic all that was most arbitrary
and vexatious of the canon law existed at that moment?
Was he aware that under the canon law as it existed now
priests might be suspended and degraded from their office by
the vicars-apostolie without giving any reason ? The act of
the Pope that we now complained of was called for by the
Roman Catholic laity, by the Roman Catholic priests - not
as an insult to this country, but because they considered it
necessary for their Church, and the lion. and Learned Geu-
' tlesnan ought to know that vicars-apostolic were snore under
the power of a foreign :sovereign than the bishops would be.
In reading a very remarkable pamphlet, written by a late
BMemberstatement,
of that House, he had met with an extraordinary
Ls.kinee the
ntthpartop brfier.tyPeitft,deiihg in 1799,
9,asusvgigthestveideartio.aCpaersdteinhael,
ana
writerappoi didntingnßotrigte, it
British bishops ; and that, for some reason
the
then, Mr. Pitt, in 1799, was refus d.—(Bear, hear.) It;
Hon. Gentlemen who professed Prop osed such a
to
b th
et heiencge,essurely
otfh °hies
policy ought not to dissent from that
proposition. Now, he
system of the Roman Catholic Church
without the appointment '
of bishops?
come
en
could
properly the
downt
o later times. The Noble Lord at the
Government, in a discussion on the of Ire-
land in 1844, said he thought they ought to do away with
everything derogatory to the character of Catholic bishops,
headß'lbire utu carriediti
o to
f ask,
the state
and that it was a most foolish prohibition to prevent them

taking the titles of their sees. Mow, then, could the Noble
Lord now propose the present Bill ? He regretted much
that the "No Popery " cry had been again raised in this
country; but, while their attention was turned to Rome, a
most serious inroad was being made on religious liberty, and,
when he looked at the language that was heard in that
House and elsewhere from persons who called themselves
stanch Protestants, he was puzzled to discover what the de-
finition of a stanch Protestant might be. He confessed that
when he heard the speech of the Honourable Member for
Warwickshire, who was then in conversation with his Ho-
nourable Colleage—Arcades ambo—(Laughter)—and that
of the Hon. Member for West Surrey, in which they
called themselves stanch Protestants, he was forcibly re-
minded of the intoxicated soldier in Goldsmith's " Citizen of
the World," who, while struggling against the walls of a
church, exclaimed, "I am the only true friend of the Pro-
testant Church, and I will stand by you, old gal."—
(A laugh.) Such was the feeling of the stanch Protestants,
and the country would render to them what they were
worth. But if they were to hear these vituperative state-
ments, and such a deseceation of all that Roman Catholics
held solemn, he would recall to the Hon. Gentleman who
made them the words of Mr. Burke, who said that if mere
dissent from Rome was a merit, he that dissented from it most
was the most meritorious ; but on many points the Protes-
tant agreed with the Roman Catholic. That man, there-
fore, was the best Protestant who protested against the
whole Christian religion.— (Hear.) And when he read the
speeches that were made at public meetings—the speech of
the Lord High Chancellor at the Guildhall, a speech of post-
prandial excitement—(A laugh )—and the speeches that were
made in the Court of Aldermen—he could not help recalling
to his mind the old story of the oysterwomen who locked up
their fish baskets and called out "No Popery." When he
read the speeches of the Sir Peter Laurie of the present day
he could not help recalling to his mind the days of 1688,
when a Sir Peter Laurie of that time, the Chamberlain of the
city of London, declared that precautions ought to be taken for
fear the citizens should rise some morning with their throatecut.
When, too, he heard the speech of the descendant of a man
who was so violent against the Popish plot of 1678, he was
reminded of a short speech made by that great ancestor of
the Noble Lord the Member for Bath on that subject; be-
cause, disguise it how they would, and in spite of the sanc-
timonious air of the Noble Lord, his speech really was the
' same in effect. That great ancestor of the Noble Lord said,
"he would not have so much as a Popish man or Popish
woman allowed to remain here ; not so much as a Popish
dog—no, nor so much as a Popish bitch—(Laughter) —nor a
Popish cat, to purr and mew about the Queen ;" and the his-
torian added that the speech met with great prai-e and ap-
probation.—(Hear, and laughter.) And on the platform and
in the pulpit there had been a revival of cries which he
thought were obsolete in this country. He grieved to see
the walls chalked with the words "No Popery," and to
hear men who knew better revive the accusation made
years ago against the Catholic doctrine in the service
of ordination, founded on the words contained in it—
" Hcereticos ego persequar et expugnabo." Did not the
Hon. Member for Nest Surrey recollect that the ward "per-
sequar" meant to proselytize, and not to exterminate? But,
even if it were not so, those words were not in the Catholic
oath ; they were struck out in 1791 ; and when Hon. Gentle.
men were so sensitive on the subject of an oath, let them look
at the oath taken by King William and Mary. King Wil-
liam swore that "he would root out"— rather a strong
phrase—" all heretics and enemies to the true worship of
God who should be condemned by the true word of God of
the aforesaid crimes from the land and empire of Scotland."
And the writer, Stewart, of Perth, said that those who
followed the Popish religion ought to be put to death.
What did the lion. and Learned Member for the city of
Oxford say to that? Was a persecuting Church confined
to Roman Catholics? It was the genius of all religions esta-
blished by law, and he called to mind the saying of a great
writer on the question, who said that persecution was not an
original feature of all religions, but it was a marked feature
of all religions established by law —(Hear, hear.) There
was, however, a very grave question remaining behind. The
Noble Lord at the head of the Government in his letter
alluded to the state and teaching of the Church of
England. and how far did our Universities conduce to the
purity of that teaching?--(Hear, hear.) Was it not no-
torious that the doctrines of the Church of England
were almost as diverse as the parishes of England—that in
one parish you might have ecclesiastical infallibility insisted
on ; in another the all-sufficiency of the Scriptures ; in one
dioceses the articles were taken in a natural sense, and in
another diocess in an unnatural sense; the one bishop re-
lied on tradition, another en the Bible? Go to Pimlico, and
there auricular confession was practised ; but at Liverpool it
had been said that he who practised it ought to be punished
with death. But, he asked, whom were the laity and clergy
of the Established Church to look to.?—(Hear.) The Bishop
of Oxford, in answer to an address to him, denied that
there was any Tractarianiem among the clergy of his diocese ;
and what did he do? He appointed Dr. Pusey, who was the
greatest fisher of men for Rome, preacher at the University
church. And if they came to this metropolis, they found
that the bishop of the diocese was ready to allow candles
on the altar, provided they were not snuffed on Sunday.—
(A laugh.) He wished to know what was to be the guide
to whom the laity were to turn on this question ? They
would be more obliged if, instead of this Bill, the princi-
ples of the Reformation had been recurred to, and their
own Church had been reformed; and they would be still
more obliged if the Honourable Baronet the Member for
Oxford, instead of raising the cry of " Stop thief " against
the cardinal, would overhaul the whole ecclesiastical sys-
tem. What was the University system? It was notorious
that the greater portion of the students were drugged
with the many-evil-influence it was notorious that the
great body of them were mock-turtle Romans.—(A laugh.)
What was Dr. Hampden opposed for in 1838? Because he
denied the authority of tradition. What decided the last ap-
pointment to the Professorship of Poetry? Not the merits
of poetry, but the principles of Tractarianism. He very
much feared that while our eyes were turned to the Vatican,
Oxford was taking us in the rear—(A laugh)—and that it
was not these pastorals from the Flaminian Gate—which
might be insolent, but at least were open—but the writings
that proceeded from Oriel and Christ Church that were to be
dreaded ; for the latter were not only insinuating, but insi-
dious. It was from within, not from without, that the ene-
miles of the Church were to be feared; and if protection had
been the bane of agriculture, he was strongly of opinion that
protection had been the bane of Protestantism.—(llear,
hear.) The Protestant Church, like Cwsar, had great power
and dominion ; but she might be fated to be laid prostrate,
like him, by the hands of false friends and disguised assassins.
Ile said that the country looked for a thorough reformation of
the Church of England—not a commission, such as had been
i<sued to inquire into the system of the Universities, but
something that should throw the Universities open to Dis-
senters. The Church of England wanted strength from that
quarter; and he could not but call to mind the almost re-
markable prophecy of Hallam on the subject of ecclesiastical
power. He said that ecclesiastical, and not Papal, aggres-
sion was what the laity had to dread ; and, though it might
suit some zealots of Rome to try in that quarter, yet the true
enemies of the Church were high church principles. Sooner
or later that question of the Church of England must be
taken up, and the Universities,of the land must be reformed.
But if he assumed, for the sake of argument, that some mea-
sure against Pepal aggression for the defence of the country,
and essentially a Protestant country, was necessary, he
wanted to know what pretence there could be for including
Ireland in this measure—how the Hon. Gentleman the At-
torney-General for Ireland recommended it. Up to the pre-
sent time Ireland had been exhausted by misfortunes. Her
sectarian differences were dying away.— (Hear, hear.) The
only aggression in that country was the aggression of the
paid Church of the minority. But even that was tolerated
and the people e ere engaged about the payment of rates
rather than in theology, they were speculating more about
petatoes than the Pope. But this measure bad excited the
old odium of a theological question again—(Hear)—and it
had done more, it had given to the priests their additional
power.—(Hear.) Had it been recommended at any county
meeting in England that Ireland should be included in this
Bill? It might be said that the Protestant bishops of Ireland
wanted it, but, from the time of Primate Moulton, who ever
thought of ruling Ireland on the suggestion of the bishops?
Had any Protestant meeting in Ireland called for the inclu-
sion of that country in this Bill? There was one; and he
would tell the House what else that meeting was called for. It
was held at the Rotunda, the Exeter Hall of Dublin, on the 29th
of January, 1851. The account in the newspapers stated that
the room was much crowded, and that there were present
the Earl of Roden, Lord Clancarty, Lord Naas, and others.—
[Lord NAAS—" I was not there."]— (A laugh.) He gave
the Noble Lord great credit that he was not there, for if be
had been he never would have remained in that room, the
representative of the Roman Catholic county of Kildare, and
heard the statements that were made. Well, prayers were
said, and the Doxology was sung, and wherever that was the
case the House might be sure that some most uncharitable
opinions were expressed.—(A laugh.) It was moved that,
Mr. E. Grogan take the chair, on which there was the
" Kentish fire," and " More power to you. Grogan" ; and
what die that meeting ask for? Mr. Grogan said that all
this had come about in consequence of the Government
putting Roman Catholics into office. Mr. T. Wallis made a
speech abusing Lord Clarendon, and the Earl of Clancarty
condemned the present system of national education and the
grant to Maynootb, and thought that Roman Catholic
bishops should not be allowed to take their titles, and the
Rev. Mortimer O'Sullivan, a gentleman who went starring
it in the provinces—(A laugh)—called for the reenactment
of the old penal laws, saying that while they had those
laws Ireland was quiet and without disturbance.—(A laugh.)l
That was a sample in Ireland of the allies of the Noble Lord
at the head of the Government on this question. Was the
Noble Lord ready to do away with the National Board of
Education, with the grant to Maynooth, and to re-enact the
old penal laws? But the Noble Lord on the previous night
said that other measures might be necessary in case Roman
Catholic ecclesiastics excommunicated persons supporting the
civil powers, and the old question of the Synod of Thurles
was revived. But he was not surprised to see Roman Catho-
lic ecclesiastics opposing education except of a particular
sort. Professor Sewel, fellow and tutor of Exeter College,
had published a book called "Christian Morals," in which
he developed the s line theory ; and his orthodox Friend the
Hon. Baronet the Member for the University of Oxford,
speaking of the colleges in Ireland, said that the whole pro-
posal seemed to be that the instruction should be based on
this world; that it was a gigantic scheme of godless educa-
tion, and that they ought to carry out the same principles
of education which the Roman Catholic prelates advocated,
making religion the base of all education whatever; and
that he did not blame the Roman Catholic bishops for adopt-
ing that doctrine on that part of the subject in its fullest
extent. He also held in his hand a protest signed by nine
bishops of the Established Church of Ireland, pretesting
against the National Board and that system of education.
There were the Protestant bishops of Ireland, so inveterate
against the national systems, that any unfortunate clergyman
who favoured that system was certain to get no preferment
from them. One of the Right Rev. Prelates, he of Cashel,
had one so far as; to call the national schools "Devil's
schools ;" yet this was a prelate pocketing 5,000/. per annum
from the Ration, with large patronage besides, and particu-
larly small congregations to look after.—(Hear, hear, and a
laugh.) The same nice, mild, benevolent gentleman, on the
same occasion, denounced the Noble Lord, by reason of the
national schools, as the blind head of a mock-liberal Go-
vernment.—(Hear, hear.) Well had it been la'd down by
Mr. Burke that until men were in a frame of mind to re-
spect that which was respected by others, they were not in
a fit condition to make laws for them. Who, after all, were
the real bishops of Ireland? Not the Bishop of Cashel and
such as he, but the AP ft ales and the Cullers, call them by
what name you please; call them Italian monks, if you will,
though this was by no means a judicious designation to come
from the Treasury bench, the law officials upon which had
much better be turning their attention to what was doing by
the Italian monks who lived at Oxford.—(Hear, hear.)
The religion of the people of Ireland should, as had been
counselled by Mr Burke, than whom no man better knew
that country, be cherished as a great good, net tolerated as
an unavoidable evil. He opposed the Bill as unnecessary
and mischievious in itself, and, above all, as a violation of
that principle which he as a Protestant venerated—the right,
namely, of private judgment.—(Hear.)
Mr. 13. COCIIRANE said it was impossible for him not
to perceive that the whole of this agitation was created by the
Noble Lord on the Treasury bench.—(Hear, hear.) He had
raised the "No Popery" cry, and when defeated in Devon-
shire, he attributed that defeat to the raising of the "No
Popery" cry by others. He would ask the Noble Lord one
question—had he not had a conversation with the Bishop of
London, and when the latter expressed himself strongly

_l,

upon the act of the Pope, had not the. Noble Lord said it
was of no con. le quence whatever, and did not his views
wonderfully cb Inge in a very short time? lie had reason
to believe that this conversation did take place. He disap-
proved of the c a lumnious language used against the Roman
Catholic Chun.: h. The Standard, that admirably con-
ducted paper, tf'eclared that the standard of the *Popish
plot was revive( I in London, and its excellent mother,
the Morning Here ld, complained that the servant maids could
not walk out for ft 3ar of meeting Jesuits at every corner.—
(Laughter.) The Rev. Dr. M'Neile had said that Popery
was the Devil's corn pound. and that its worship was the wor-
ship of the DeviL That excellent and amiable gentleman
said that all Roman Catholics should be executed, and even
the Hon. Member for West Surrey (Mr. Drummond) had
not scrupled to talk of that distinguished scholar, Mr. Faber,
as a scoundrel. They talked of having pursued a concilia-
tory course of policy towards Rome. But had the Noble
Lord attended the lectures of Gavazzi, when his language
was tolerated and himself patronised by many influential per-
sons. There was not nutsch manifestation of friendship to
Rome. He thought, how ever, that these prelates should not
take up titles without the consent of the Queen ; and he
should, therefore, support .the Bill. He bore testimony to the
admirable conduct of the Roman Catholics under circum-
stances of great irritation, and while advocating his own
views he fully expressed his sympathy with them.— (llear.)
Mr. C. FORTF.SCUE had voted against the introduction
of the bill, and wished in a row words to explain the ground
upon which he opposed it. He thought the lamentable
scene of last night ought to lie a warning to all politicians
to avoid the dangerous and hot y ground on which they now
trod. He believed that no party pretended that the present
measure would add to the efficiency of the Church either in
England or in Ireland. He regarded the continuance of
the Established Church in Ireland to be indefensible, except
perhaps on the principle of pieta non movere. They had
been told that they were bound to defend by legislation the
rights of the Crown and the independence of the nation. if
a Spanish Armada were on our shores, or a Roman Catholic
insurrection in Ireland, he could. understand people talking
about rights and independence ; but used as those words had
been in the present case they appeared to him to be totally
without meaning. The spiritual power of the Pope depended
entirely on the acknowledgment of it by Roman Catholics,
and how it could interfere with our independence. until the
consciences of men were first sethjugated to that belief, no
one had pointed out. No proof from precedents had been
adduced to show that the Crown possessed the right of
appointing bishops to a church not in connexion with the
state. In former days when the Monarch exercised that
right England was a Roman Catholic nation; but now the
Romish Church stood in a different position in this country.
The true successor of the Romish Church in this country
was the Church of England, which had inherited the
rights and the duties of the ancient Church, and towards
which the Sovereign stood in a relation analogous to that in
which former. Sovereigns stood towards the Roman Catholic
Church in this country before the Reformation. To say
that the episcopal act of the spiritual superior of a certain
religious body within this country, not in connexion with
the State, was an aggression on the prerogative of the
Crown, appeared to him to be purely an anachronism. It
was the radical defect of the Elizabethan system of Church
government that has made no distinction between things
spiritual and things temporal. He did not deny that in
the minds of many an aggression had been committed
against the Church of England, but he believed it was of
such a character that the House had nothing to do with it—
that it was spiritual, and rested upon theological grounds,
of which the Rouse could take no cognizance
whateve% They all knew that the Roman Church univer-
sally held—and so did many of the clergy of the Church
of England—that there could only be one bishop in one see,
deriving his power by a certain mysterious succession in
the apostolical chain. It was, therefore, in his opinion
beyond the power of the State to say whether Lord J. Beres-
ford or Paul Cullen was the spiritual Archbishop of Armagh.
The aggression on the Crown was imaginary, and the ag-
gression on the Church was beyond their power to meet.
He admitted that there was an individual as well as a na-
tional independence, and that some day the House might:be
called on to consider that question. Ile had great hopes
that the public opinion in this Protestant country, and the
public opinion of the Roman Catholic laity, would keep
priestly power—of which no one had a greater dread than
he within proper bounds ; and that it would throw its pro-
tecting shield over such helpless classes as dying persons
and young women. With regard to the present Bill he
should vote against it, believing it was founded on false prin-
ciples of church government; and that it would inflict the
deepest injustice on the country with which he was more
immediately connected.— (Hear, hear.) He should vote
against it because he did not think it represented the true
Protestant feeling of the country, or provided any security
for the Protestant Chruch. Entertaining such a belief, he
could not consent to do anything which might revive the
dying thunders of religious intolerance.
Mr. CHILD asked the indulgence of the House while be
said a few words on this momentous question. He ap-
proached the questios with considerable anxiety, because
while he could not consent to refuse Roman Catholics the
full profession of their faith, he felt he had a duty to perform,
not only to himself, but towards his Protestant fellow-coun-
trymen. Ile believed the House was now called upon to say
whether they would vote for the Queen or for the Pope.—
(Hear, hear.) The apple of discord in the present instance
had not been t- rown by the Queen, or by the Noble Lord at
the head of the Government, but by a foreign power—an
alien to this country—(Hear)—and on his head rested the
blame of all the unhappy difference and disunion which had
arisen amongst us.— (Hear) ow, when they were called
persecutors, he could not but think that the evidence on that
r
jeywle, Vnillecvani
I:pachatdeoswaihrii
Nrcdv,ahetehfpiir3noi
,iocittuh:auohsi
rtwalrsa. eted—lwhli
might
distinct
ust:thHdectlithini
hleet
tontuaarocaaorehtnb,tscdpdhetoocoipehuEueerdwal
tstradri
easily
felt.
moyyr)hf their.
,eha dadhrei
Icadrrlhoetceell
lucaoyeedowaenut
nhipcdnnanaspsgtsgpithoughte:dledabtiewtpirhrehreierbtrdrcmt:
lteeoi
considerable
r nusuhuetr
sdhntelhl
themselves
eaßgmerdeet
osrorref
that
Roman
eehttepnpahhaaroiynee-ilf
didspctpnni
per-
secuted
iaareorelCatholic
subjecttnrthltaiaete:eoenctdsdlriadN,
n.
circumstances of the case. But he believed when the pre-
sent agitation subsided, and had passed away, the Roman
Catholics would see the inutility of the step taken, and would
again show that the noble and chivalrous devotion to the in-
terests of the country which had always distinguished them.
—(hear) There was A second party which strangely mixed
up traffic and corn and Catholics together ; who thought that
to repeal the aggression of the Pope was to repeal the corn-
laws, and who considered Protestantism and a dear loaf as
synonymous terms.—(Hear.) The third party was that
which considered hat nothing ought to be done in the mat-
ter, and that things should be left to themselves. And the
fourth party was the general public, composed as it was of
men of all persuasions and opinions. In conclusion, he
would call upon them to unite in one common bond in sup.
port of the Throne and the Constitution, by voting in favour
of the second reading of that Bill.—(llear. )
Mr. W. GOOLD said, if the words of the Pope and the
Pope's supporters were to be taken against them, they were
bound to take their disclaimers also. Her Majesty's Soli-
citor-General had said, if no insults were intended by the
Church of Rome, how was it that it had made no explana-
tion ? But the Learned Solicitor-General ought to know that
he who seeks equity must practice equity, and if upon that
principle the Government had taken the course it had done,
they could hardly expect the disc'aimer which the Learned
Solicitor-General demanded. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr.
Gould) was of opinion that this country ought to have di-
plomatic relations with the Pope, and it' they had, this mat-
ter would not have occurred. If the Pope had attempted to
organize a hierarchy in any other country, he (Mr
Gould) believed it would have been a breach of
the naticnal compact He believed the Church of
England was not likely to suffer. He believed
there were many men in the Church of great learning and
great eloquence especially that visible eloquence
—the daily records of a good man's life.—(llear, hear.) It
was to be regretted that there had been so much of theology-
introduced into the debate, and after the scenes of last night
he might be permitted to express a hope that they would
never witness such scenes again.—(llean )
He could
help eaying that the letter of the Noble Lord (L
Russell) had been productive of much evil, and that it had
erdnot
John
greatly increased the excitement on the present question.
The Noble Lord should have looked before he leaped ; but he
had done the contrary—he had leaped first, and the result
was that he had been looking ever since how to extricate
himself from the humiliating position in which he was placed.
Considering, as he did, that an insult was neither intended
nor perpetrated in this aggression, and at least if it had, it
was an aggression such as that House could not deal with
believing also, that this Bill was dangerous to the principles
of civil and religious liberty, and that though some portions
of it might be inoperative, as a whole it was fraught with
mischief; for these reasons he would vote against the Bill,
and he trusted its rejection would relieve the Ministry from
its present undignified and humiliating position.—(Hear-)
Mr. W. J. FOX said, at that stage of the debate he had
no intention to enter at large into the general question, but
merely to state his views on one or two leading points sug-
gested by it, and to expose a few of the fallacies he had
listened to. The principle on which he had come to the
conclusion to vote against the Bill, was not merely that it
was an abrogation of the liberties at present enjoyed by the
sect of Roman Catholics—that it was an abrogation of the
spirit and tendencies of the whole of our legislation with
respect to religious questions for the last 150 years.—( Hear,
hear.) That principle could not be expunged, upon any
provocation with reference to any sect or church, without
damaging the position and invading, either directly or indi-
rectly, the rights of all other sects and churches in the same
position. This Bill was an interference with the rights of
all non-established churches. With established churches
they had a right to interfere, because they bartered, at
least, some portion of their independent action in return for
the power, emoluments, and influence grante by the State.
—(Hear, hear.) With a non-established church they had no
such right, and as he believed this measure tended to invade
the existing rights of every body of Protestant Noncom-
tfohramt iNsvtasealskaaert'eldlyasdeßnoe opposedthe it.they
were In fact,teid
that at a subsequent stage a clause was to be brought in by
which the objection would be obviated—a fact which showed
the fatal nature of the objection itself. It was found that the
Bill affected the Scottish Episcopalian Church, and a clause
minaltheisatßilillc,s'thheough
was to be introduced by which it was to be specially ex-
empted.— (Hear, hear.) Now he thought the case of the
Scottish Episcopalian Church wag not similar as respected
the titles of its dignitaries, but it had also, in other respects,
a strong resemblance to the case of the Roman placed Catholinics.
(Hear, hear.) They were an episcopal church,
position of a dissenting body; their bishops held territorial
titles, and justified them on the ground that there was a ne-
cessity for these titles, in order to describe the limits within
which they exercised jurisdiction.--(Cheers from the Irish
W Members.)
• e.., but in taking that title they were not pe-
culiar; a bishop was simply an overseer—(Cheers)—and an
overseer must of course be set over e somee
one someaim.where,
(Hear, hear.) A document had been issued by the
Le that all
Scottish Episcopalians, setting forth the reasons why
they should be exempted from the operation of the
churches might erg
thl—
measure ; every one of which could be urged by Roman
Catholics. They stated that they held episcopal superin-
tendence to be an apostolic institution—that it was neces •
sary for the due government of the Church that territorial
titles were necessary to describe the episcopal office; but
that these titles did not imply the assumption of temporal
jurisdiction, anything beyond the spiritual government of
their own community.—(hear, hear.) When it was said
that the Roman Catholic Church went beyond this, and
claimed a right over those who were without its own pale,
he must ask if the Church, which repudiated and denied
its claim', did not claim such rights for itself?—(Hear,
hear.) Because, if it did, he could tell them that there were
hundreds of thousands who would repudiate and deny any
such right over them in this country.— (Cheers.)
He asked what they were to do with the im-
mense masses of Dissenters—Methodists, Independents,
Congregationalists, and others, to be found in Lancashire
and the manufacturing districts? The title of bishop was
not a monopoly of any church. There might arise in this
country a Free Episcopal Church, as there had arisen in
Scotland a Free Presbyterian Church.—(Hear.) In order
to its full development, bishops would be necessary, and of
course titles must be taken by them. In that case such a
Church would have a ban put upon it from the beginning.
—( Hear, hear.) By such legislation they would deprive
Christian churches of their rights, not merely rights which
now exist, but they anticipated those which might come
into existence. The Moravians in this country do use such

titles now. The Methodists in America also use them. In

the United States there is a sect of Episcopal Methodists,
and all other churches, no matter how small or how poor,
had the power, as it appeared to him, of calling their minis-
ters bishops, if they pleased. They enjoyed that power by
a higher law than any that House could enact—by a law
which it was not fitting that House should enact any law
to co ,travene.—(Cheers.) But, in answer to the argument
that bishops were necessary for the due government and de
velopment of the Roman Catholic Church, it had been denied
there was any such necessity. It was affirmed that they
already enjoyed all the privileges and rights they could pos-
sibly require.—(Hear, hear.) Now he would like to know
n what grounds those who were not Roman Catholics set
themselves up as judges in this case ?—(Hear, hear.) He
believed the statement that bishops were necessary to the
development of the Roman Catholic Church to be correct,
but he would not enter into that question or into the
question of divided jurisdiction; he held that all
these questions belonged to, and were settled by, the discus-
sions and legislation twenty-two years ago.—(Cheers.)
Say what they might do, no legislation of theirs could touch
the spiritual jurisdiction of the head of that Church.
(Hear, hear.) The Pope would be Pope still, if he were de-
posed to-morrow, and deprived of all temporal power what-
ever—(Renewed cheering from the Irish Members)—this
power depended on other than material influences. It was
akin to that by which men gained great honour and in-
fluence in countries with which they had nothing to do di-
rectly. In this way John Wesley gained power in America.
In this way Swedenborg—a foreigner—exercised power in
this country. Christianity overrode all nationalities.
Even at its very commencement one Jew was sent to or-
ganize a Christian Church at Rome, and another Jew to
organize a Christian Church at Athens.—(Cheers.) They
could not stop with this measure. If they once began they
must go back to the ancient law of persecution. But what-
ever might be the general ground for non-interference with
the rights of other churches, there was the special reason
in the case of the Roman Catholic Church—Catholics take

the rule, doctrine, and precepts from their sacerdotal au-
thority.—( Hear, hear.) Pr.testants profess to take them
from the Bible.—(Hear, hear.) The hierarchy was to the
Catholic a living Bible, and essential to his religion. - (Hear,
hear.) As to what had been said about the sufficiency of
vicars-apostolic, he would repeat that we were not the pro-
per judges in such questions. But if they took the authority
~f Roman Catholics, it would be found that from the very
beginning there had been much dissatisfaction, and that from
time to time the number and powsrs of vicars-apostolic had
been increased. The Honourable Gentleman here quoted

from a learned work by Charles Butler, to show the
essential necessity of bishops to the Roman Catholic
Church-and proceeded to say that we had the testimony
besides of that eminent man, Dr. Vowler Short, who after-
wards became Bishop of St. Asaph, to the same effect. The
work, though published previously to his elevation to the
bench, had again been published so late as 1847. Since
that, and in it, the Rev. Prelate stated that the Engli-h
Roman Catholics had often and justly remonstrated against
being deprived of the benefits of episcopalian superinten-
dence. There was no analogy, though the parallel did
not hold good throughout, between the present position of
the Roman Catholics and the American Episcopalians,
when some time after the declarati- n of independence they
felt a craving for and were determined to have an Episco-
pacy. They communicated with the heads of the church
in this country, through Mr. John Adams, who expressed
his opinion that the movement was a bold and a dan-
gerous one. Yet in consequence of their application in
the year 1787, the Archbishops of Canterbury and York or-
dained in Lambeth a Bishop of New York, and a Bishop of
Pennsylvania.--(Hear, hear.) So strong must have been
the opinion of these prelates as to the necessity of episcopal
superintennence to the American Church, that they con-
tented to omit important portions of the liturgy, the Coro-
nation oath, and even 19 of the 39 Articles of the Church.-
(Hear, and a laugh.) By that act they laid the foundation
of the Episcopal Church in America, which since that time
had mapped out that continent from sea to sea, and given
its bishops territorial jurisdiction over it. - (Loud cheers.)
Another sophism has prevailed throughout the debate,
which was commenced by the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell).
The Noble Lord began by bringing together all the crimes
and persecutions committed by the priests, and ended by at-
tributing them all to Roman Catholics. The fallacy in this
was that the Noble Lord had attributed to a priesthood in
particular that which belonged to the priesthood in general.
In all ages they had found priests of all religions grasping,
ambitious, arrogant, and intolerant, when in power; an i in
all times they had seen them exhibiting benevolence, charity,
and forbearance, when in poverty, as he believed had been
very much the case with the Roman Catholics in Ireland.-
(Hear.) The Noble Lord complained of the interference of
the Synod of Thurles with education. Why, the greatest
opponents of the mixed system of education in Ireland were
the clergy of the Established Church ; and he believed that
three-fourths of the children that attended the national
schools were Roman Catholics.-(Hear.) In the report
for 1849, Mr. T. W. Marshall stated some very gratifying
facts as to the harmony which prevailed in the schools in the
midland and northern counties with respect to religious tui-
tion, and the total absence of all interference by either party.
If the same support was shown in this country, he believed
that most of the difficulties which now beset the question
would vanish.-(Hear, hear.) As to the assertion that the
voice of this country had declared in favour of this measure,
while he did not deny that there had been a deep and exten-
sive movement- (Hear, hear)--he could not help thinking
at the same time that it had been considerably exaggerated.
-(Counter cheers.) He had found, on examining the peti-
tions, that whenever there was any great public agitation
the number of petitions sent in was great, and the number
of signatures small, they might always expect that the fac-
tory had been at work.-(Hear, hear, and laughter.) Ap-
plying that to the present case, and including the petitions
from Ireland, what was the result? Why, that the average
signatures to the petitions in favour of legislation was 100,
while the number of signatures against it were 500. But
even the petitions with the smaller number of signatures
were not to be taken in favour of the Bill.-( Hear.) Of all
the speakers who had spoken during that debate, how many
had spoken in its favour? (Hear, and a laugh.) The peti-
tions were for them to legislate -to put a stop to Popery in
this country.-( Hear, hear.) How could that be done ?-
(Hear. ) Certainly not by legislation in that House. The
most effectual way, as it appeared to him, to counteract the
influence and prevent the extension of Popery in this coun-
try, was first of all to Protestantise the Established Church
of England.-(Cheers.) He did not mean that they should
give either of the parties who now divided that Church a
triumph over the other; but he did say, that they should
enlarge its portals, so as to admit many excellent and emi-
nent men, who were now precluded from entering it. They
ought not to insist upon subscription to the articles, and a
course of policy which in later times had driven from it a
man like Robert Southey, as in former times it had ex-
cluded John Milton-(Hear, hear)-which yet kept out
many of our great men, and which had induced a late
bishop, who was an ornament to the bench, to declare that in
the course of his life he never knew a single clergyman who
entirely believed the articles he had subscribed.-(Hear,
hear.) They could have neither strength, uniformity,
nor energy, while such a system lasted. It was not for him
to say how far the people would be satisfied with that Bill,
but be did say that the only effectual way of meeting their
demands would be to make the Church of England more
Protestant. Instead of that the Noble Lord commenced a
system of destruction and delusion which he much feared was
beyond all repair.-(Hear, hear.) And for what purpose bad
a powerful party been shattered, the public business paralysed,
the time of the Legislature wasted-(Hear, hear)-and the
tone of its debates lowered.-(Hear, hear.) Why had a false
and dangerous agitation been raised in this country, which
threatened to make havoc on the social interests and welfare
of the people? For what purpose had all this been done,
but merely to placate the wounded pride of a few titled ec-
clesiastics.- ( Loud cheers.)
Mr. WALPOLE was extremely anxious,l and yet unwill-
ing to address the House on this question, anxious because
he entertained a deep feeling in it, and unwilling, lest he
might utter anything that could wound in any way the feel-
ings of any portion of his fellow-subjects. He was led to
discuss this question fairly, fully, and candidly, and in ap-
proaching it, there were two question to which he wished to
call attention. First, whether the Pope of Rome, in assum-
ing the power of conferring territorial titles in this country,
was guilty of an act of aggression ; and, secondly, assuming
that question to be answered in the affirmative, in what way
ought that aggression to be dealt with, and whether the mea-
sure submitted to the House was suitable to the occasion ?
With regard to the first question, it clearly related to the
rights of the Sovereign of this kingdom and the great prin-
ciples of civil and religious freedom, and on those points his
Honourable and Learned Friend the Member for Plymouth
(Mr. Roundell Palmer), and the Right Honourable Baronet
the Member for Ripon (Sir James Graham), admitted the
whole of the case for his argument, in stating that they con-
sidered, although they did not approve of the proposed
Bill, that the step taken by the Pope in this matter was
arrogant.-(Cries of " Hear, hear.") Now, if that was
the character of the Papal brief, the Government had met it
on two grounds-they said it was an insult and an injury.
The Noble Lord (the Earl of Arundel) denied that it was
intended as an insult, and if that be proved to be so, he (Mr.
Walpole) would say that they ought riot longer to show any
opposition to the step. That, however, was a question which
was not to be determined unless by reference to the document
itself. Now, no one who had read the Papal brief and Car-
dinal Wiseman's pastoral, but must agree with Sir Edward
Sugden's words-the words, be it observed, of a man who
was not likely to be led away by any undue feeling - namely,
that he " felt as if a blow had been aimed against the prero-
gative of the Sovereign, and at the institutions of this coun-
try." Now that he (Mr. Walpole) believed was the feeling
of the whole people of this country? And why did they feel
it? They felt it because they heard the language of "sove-
reignty" was used as affected them, not by the Queen (whom
they were delighted to obey), but by a foreign prelate, whose
encroachments were remarkable; and if not checked from
turning into absolute action, would place their liberties
in danger.- ( Hear, hear.) But not only that, they were
further told in that brief, that the Roman Pontiff, having
again divided this country into dioceses and sees, no person
under any authority, was, in any manner, to set aside the
authority which he bad thus thought proper to exercise.-
(" Hear'," from Sir George Grey.) That was the language
etnßhiroroe.i
st)ceitsuhdaloilQc:uumeeenn-tss utboj e
which
th
jocnhl y
hteo
hhaedr
rleafewrsr
e-ds:lcbomull,ti?b"e-m(
which was used by Rome; and to that language, it had been
it
tshaei dy t hweeyacouldt
anhol
its
hs uabrtm
itmo
pi
et
r-tu(mH ehai r )hn-paenrdi
asked by eminent statesmen, "would the subjects of the
ma"-(
in this kingdom, making out the words of Lord Bacon, that
" the Pope had become, by his late challenge, a competitor
and rival of the Queen." But three things had been said in
relation to this question. First, that the language of those
documents had been misunderstood ; sec ,ndly, that the power
set up was spiritual ; and thirdly, that the change which was
made from vicars apostolic to bishops in ordinary, was a change
merely for the better management of the spiritual concerns of
the Roman Catholics only.-(Hear.) N ow, what did the Ca-
tholic newspaper press say upon the subject. The documents
had been for some time put forward, and instead of their being
corrected, if misunderstood, what said the Univers of
France, and the Tablet of England, on the subject, both
Roman Catholic organs ? The Univers, in speaking of the
matter said, that, " as St. Gregory had transferred the
ipri-
macy from London to Canterbury, so Pius the Ninth would
transfer the primacy from Canterbury to Westminster, (1,
that, henceforth, there was neither a see of York nor a se:a?!
Canterbury ;" and the Tablet, speaking of the matter,
id
that, " unless every baptized person should submit to the
directions of the Papal brief, he would be subject to th Pau!
Itome had
of damnation." - ( Hear, hear, and No, no.)
land into
spoken and acted. The Pope had divided the
dioceses, and placed in each a pastor, and
interfering
upon to submit under pain of damnation, thusn.
Ile could
with the prerogative of the Queen of this
at the head of her
not help saying then that the Noble Lord
that this was an
Majesty's Government had said correctliy;
a It offered to the
encroachment on the rights of, and an
tiestant people of this
Sovereign of this realm, and to the Pro )
Then, as to the
country.- (Hear, hear, and No,
no.taken was merely
second question, that the
stepa two-fold character, the
spiritual, and that it was not of
Secretary had, he thought,
alewere called
Right Hon. Baronet, the Home
should not interfere with it ;
it was merely spiritual they lads well. as spiritual. If
Walpole)
but if it touched temporalscaleidartlyhesyhobwadndeal with, it.-(Hear, hear.) That
then he (fir.
was of a twofold character, was clearly
every act of the Pope'aook, which showed clearly that it
proved by Mr. 'beim
as spiritual considerations,
Rhea
partook of temporal as we
at that itit tow was
matt temporalers