The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-19 00:00:00

LONDON,

WEDNESDAY EVENING,

tion, the agitation of interested men, and was not at all the
spontaneous feeling of the English nation. That was a state-
ment it was not worth while to refute.—(Hear, bear.)
Whatever might be his opinion on the merits of the Bill, or
on the necessity of doing anything, no man who knew what
had been passing in this country could entertain the slightest
doubt, or dare to deny, that that agitation was a movement
of the whole Protestant body of the country—( Hear, hear)
--and he said, that while he treated with respect and de-
ference the opinions of those who differed from him on reli-
gious questions, yet, as attached to the British Constitution,
and the liberty and freedom of thought and action which
belonged to that Constitution, be should be sorry indeed
that anything should take place that should shake the
political Protestant establishment of the kingdom in
which he had the happiness to live.—( Hear, hear.)
Then he said, that the voice of the people of
Ergland required that something should be done.—(Hear,
hear.) His Right lion. Friend said that what the Govern-
ment bad proposed was not the proper thing to do. If ho
could understand at all the vague suggestions of his Right
lion. Friend—(A. laugh)—he should infer teat what he
would have proposed would have been, to have entered into
some negotiation with the Court of Rome. llii Right Hon.
Friend said, he thought it was absurd to legislate against
our own subjects. He (Lord Palmerston) presumed that his
Right Hon. Friend did net mean that they were to legislate
as,-einst the Pope— (A laugh)—for if he thought our laws
would not be obeyed by ourselves, surely he could not ima-
gine they would have much force with the Pepe—(A laugh)
- his Right Hon. Friend very properly repadiated the idea
that had been thrown out by some that they ought to have
sent a hostile force to Civita Vecchia. He agreed with his
Aim. Friend that bulls were not properly met by cannon-
balls.— (A laugh.) He w ,s quite of his Right Hon. Fr end's
opinion that that was not a course fitting for this country to
pnrsue, or likely to lead to any satisfactory result.—(Hear,
hear.) But then he said he thought it would be unbecoming
in this country to meet an act of unprovoked aggression by
sending an envoy to sue from the Bishop of Rome.—(Hear.)
He thought the dignified and proper course for this country
to take was to legislate for itself and not to go to the Pope
and say, " You have done the t which has been a great affront.
You have none that which we look upon as a great violation of
our national independence, and an infringement on the
sovereignty of the Queen, and therefore ye come to you to
do something—either to retract what you have done or to
modify it in some degree." Of course otr suit would have
been rejected, and in what a humiliating position should we
have stood under such circumstances !—(Sear, hear.) He
was quite ready to admit that it would have been very incon-
sistent with the course which either the members of the Go-
vernment or the majority of the Legislature had pursued if
they had proposed to Parliament anything that would have
justified its being called a penal or persecuting enactment.
He must, in passing, say, however, that when he saw the
letters and declarations emanating frcrn Roman Catholic
ecclesiastics setting up the cry of fanaticism, and persecu •
tion, and intolerance, and looked to the course of proceeding
in regard to toleration that prevailed in countries where the
Romish priesthood were dominant, ht felt tempted to ex-
claim, " Quis tulerit Gracchos!" The words "persecution
and intolerance" were surely words flat Catholic prelates
ought most studiously to eschew.—(aear.) But he, for
one, never would consent to be a party to what was pro-
perly called a penal enactment; and IO utterly denied that
the Bill now proposed deserved in aay sense whatever to
be so stigmatized. —(Hear, hear.) In point of fact, it was
merely a complement of the measure which removed from
the Catholic people of England the dieibilities under which
they laboured. The Bill of 1829 prohibited Catholic pre-
lates from taking the titles of sees, or of any diocess or
province which belonged to the British establishment. Whe-
ther by accident or not, it omitted to extend that prohibi-
tion to other places in the realm. Bnt was the law consi-
dered as a mere protection for the English Church ? He
would not accept it on so limited a ground as that. He
held that the law of 1829 was to be a defence of the sove-
reign rights of the country ; and it was to be defended, and
justly, on the ground that they woulduot permit a foreign
authority out of the United Kingdom to give to any person
titles derived from any place within the United Kingdom.
He contended, therefore, that the Bill now before the House
was in principle precisely the same as the Act of 1829, and
that it made good the gap that was left in that Act; and he
was extremely surprised that any persons who were parties
to that Act, whether the proposers or !Importers of it, should
on principle object to the measure the Government had now
proposed.— (Hear, hear.) The Bill they proposed was,
in its principle, exactly on the same ground as
the measure which formed part of the arrange-
ments of the Emancipation Act; and he contended, further,
that being on the same ground as that measure, it could not
be justly deemed as partaking in any degree of a penal or
persecuting character.—(Hear, hear.) It was said the
Catholic Church required officers of the rank of bishops, but
for 250 years the Catholic Church in this country bad
gone on with vicars apostolic, and he had heard in the
course of this debate no satisfactory reason why, with vicars
apostolic, it might not still go on as heretofore.—(Hear,
hear.) He contended upon these various grounds, that tae
measure that was now proposed applied directly to the evils
for which a remedy was demanded—(Hear, hear)—he con-
tended that it imposed no restriction on the Catholic hierarchy
in this country which was inconsistent with thelperformance
of their sacred duty—(Hear, hear)—,and to those who said
they thought the measure, if passed, would be inoperative,
would be of no effect, would not be obeyed, he would reply
that he wholly differed from tbem is that opinion—( Hear,
hear) —he considered that if, on the one hand, it was a
peculiar characteristic of the Church of Rome to be ag-
gressive and encroaching, on the other hand, it was also
characteristic of that Church to be obedient to laws, to re-
spect enactments, and to make its aggressions and its en-
croachments wiihout openly violating the laws of the land
in which it was operating.—(Hear, hear.) Judging from
past experience of the Irish Roman Catholics, he did not
contemplate that this measure, if passed into a law, would
be disobeyed by the Roman Catholic bishops of this country.
- (Hear, hear.) He believed, too, that the measure would
meet the general feeling of the British people ; and it was not
to be forgotten that there was nothing in the measure to pre-
clude the Legislature from taking further steps, if further
steps were required, which he earnestly hoped would never
be the case.--(Cheers.)
On the motion of Mr. H. BEIMELE-Y., the debate was
then adjourned to Thursday.
The House adjourned at Twenty minutes past Twelve
o'clock.