The Sun.
London, England, 1867-05-30 00:00:00

country, we must say that such an offspring of
semi-pauperism and low speculation seemed hardly
adapted for the high function assigned him. It was
an odd quarter to go to for the salvation of the
country. What if no such practice had been in-
vented ? Then, as composition is by no means an
unmitigated evil, but, on the contrary, in many
cases a convenient accommodation to facts, why
should it entail disfranchisement? Well, the very
question bad been already asked, and it had been
admitted that there might be a percentage of
righteous men fit for the suffrage even among com-
pound householders. So our merciful rulers pro-
posed a way of escape for them which would at least
leave compound householders answerable for their
own doom. But then, not to repeat all the hard
words about " fines" and impossible labour, and so
forth, there was the moral certainty, in which we all
agreed, that these poor people would not qualify of
triair own accord, and the moral support of these
masses would be lost to the new constitution. So,
after much trouble had been spent in the vain en-
deavour to make this man, half ratepayer, half pau-
per, wholly a citizen, Government accepted, as if
hailing a lifeboat from a wreck, the mild suggestion
to abolish the compound householder whenever he
stood in the way of Parliamentary Reform. In-
stead of his fulfilling his mission by eating up the
worst end of the new constituency, the new consti-
tuency has
_done this for him. But here h slight
attempt was made, or seemed to be made, to arrest
the downward progress of the bill. A hand was
stretched out, and it grasped a twig, or a straw, or
a little sand. Could not composition still be adjusted
to the franchise by the amicable co-operation of
landlord, tenants, and all parties ? As composition
for rates is not itself the simplest thing in the world,
and electoral registration still less so, all sides finally
recoiled from the effort to make them work together
harmoniously, easily, and without the certainty of
corrupt abuses. SO down went the compound house-
holder again, this time for good, and he is now his-
torical. Then came the enfranchised householder's
last peril. If everybody is to have a vote who pays
rates, then rates will be paid for everybody, and it
will cost less to pay rates for a small tenement than
for a larger. "So don't let's have the very little
people ; draw a line somewhere," say Mr. Powlett
Scrope and not a few Liberals--even Mr. Bright
hiniself, but for congruities and proprieties,• would
gladly say the same, and do it too. But there was
no receding. The pace was too good to stop. The
bill went over this little hitch as easily as an express
train over a nutshell. The principle of household
suffrage is to be carried out, and there are to be no
sharp lines between a man paying ls. 6d. a week
for his cottage and his neighbour who pays fifteen-
pence. Meanwhile, quits by the way, and with a
sort of Paul Pry expression of " I hope I don't in-
trude," came in the lodger, who is now one of the
great British family. Bat then came the real down-
fall, the crash, the smashing, the dislodged rubbish,
the broken branches— everythingtoming down with
a run. Down came all the educational franchises,
orders, degrees, certificates, congregational "calls,"
and every mode by which learning or doc-
trine,. or spiritual vocation, loves to authenticate
itself. Down came the money franchises, funds,
shares, and savings-banks. Whether they were
ever intended to stand, and whether anybody ever
thought them worth a straw in a bill which
gives the suffrage to every man who pays a
rate, is a mystery, into which we will not in-
trude. But when all this stage property had
been swept away, then came what some people
used to think a vastly more serious question than
any scheme of Borough Reform. The County
Franchise had to be settled. We have had bills and
debates about it every year, we think, for thirty
years. Sometimes these debates were animated,
and even important. They were always amusing,
and we used to hail the pleasant anniversary. It
will come no more. Mr. Locke King's day will dis-
appear from the Calendar. It has been settled at
a private meeting of county members, and in a
debate which, short as it was, was superfluous, that
£5 copyhold and £l2 occupation franchises will
meet the views of all parties, and we are not at all
sure Mr. Bright is not beginning to thank Heaven
that there is a county constituency. How long is
this pace to last, and shall we dash through the re-
distribution in three or four morning sittings? It
would take very rough driving to do that, for there
are ups and downs, and sharp turnings, and big
boulders on the road ; and every borough is a sepa-
rate question, which it is easier to get into than get
out of. However, we shall see. Where there is a
will there is a way, and there certainly is a will to
pass a Reform Bill.
THE " WESTMINSTER GAZETTE" ON THE REPEAL
OF OBSOLETE LAWS IN IRELAND.—SiIICR no time is
more favourable than the present for putting an
end to the injustice still perpetrated in Ireland by
the enforcement against Catholics of religiOus dis-
tinctions, no effort ought to be omitted to press
upon Parliament the wisdom of removing from the
statutes of England every penal law, obsolete or
Still In lOree, ibbwi== v 1.-.. Vitto/IVIV.; SUD-
jects. We are glad that even a partial effort is
being made in thiS direction • that certain oaths,
insulting to Catholics, are likely to be soon abo-
lished by the bill introduced by Sir C. O'Loghlin,
Member for the County of Clare, and also that
Mr. M'Evoy, Member for the County of Meath, is
about to assail another of those penal enactments,
namely, the Ecclesiastical Titles' Act, to the gross
injustice of which we have already directed public
attention. But, instead of having private members
nibbling at the penal laws in this manner, we
would 'call on the Government of the country to
deal with the whole subject of them as wise states-
men ought to do, and bring in a general measure
repealing every penal law affecting our Catholic
fellow-subjects. This would be the manly and
generous mode of acting in the matter. If the pre-
sent Government undertake the passing of such a
measure, there is no doubt of their possessing the
power necessary for carrying it into law ; and by
this one simple act of justice they will do more
to disarm rebellion, and conciliate the masses of
the people of Ireland, than they can ever accom-
plish by the suspending of the Constitution, the
passing of Arms' Bills, the issuing of Special
Commissions, and the punishment of unfortunate
rebels. We do not blame the Government for
dealing firmly with those who disturb the public
peace ; but, whilst they punish on the one hand,
we call upon them, at the same time, to remove
all just causes of irritation—and there are many
such—still existing in that long-misgoverned coun-
try. In our article of last week, on the subject
of British rule in Ireland, we showed by the words
of the Act of Parliament, 10th George -IV., c. 7,
section 25, the wanton insults offered to the
Catholic judges, to the Catholic sheriffs, and,
in their persons, to the Catholic people of that
kingdom. This same penal law equally applies
to every Catholic chief magistrate and corporate-
officer, and there are few things productive of
greater mischief in Ireland at the present day—
for it keeps up a perpetual ill-feeling in the minds
of the people, and prevents the possibility of their
forgetting the old penal code of bygone times.
The Catholics of Dublin, for instance, form the
overwhelming majority of that, the second city
in •her Majesty's dominions. Catholics also com-
pose the great majority of the Dublin Corporation,
and have the power, if they choose to exercise it,
of selecting a Catholic Lord Mayor every year.
But such is their generosity that they have elected
a Protestant to that high and honourable office
every alternate year since the passing of the Muni-
cipal Reform Act, although the Protestants kept
them totally excluded from the Corporations for
centuries before O'Connell flung open their doors,
as he had' previously opened the portals of the
British Parliament to the Catholics of these king-
doms. The fact here stated proves the kindly
feeling of the Irish Catholics, and surely it is not
creditable to the Imperial Legislature to maintain
a law at the present day which would deprive
the Catholic Lord Mayor of his office if he were
to enter his own church in his robes any, Sunday
or Holy-day in the year. The Protestant Lord.
Mayor attends his house of worship in Dublin
in his official robes. The Catholic Lord Mayor
invariably attends the Cathedral Church in Marl-
borough-street, on the first Sunday after entering
on his official duties, but is obliged by the existing.
penal law, to attend without his robes, or any of
the insignia of his office. This distinction is so
hurtful to the minds of the people of Dublin, that
many thousands of them, after the church becomes
filled, remain in the adjoining streets until the
service is ended, and during all that time are
engaged in condemning the law which subjects
their magisterial representative to this indignity,
and which, in his person, insults and wounds the
feelings of every Catholic in the kingdom. This
open insult to their religion causes them to dwell
on the penal laws of former times, and keeps up
the tradition of the wrongs their fathers had en-
is this wise on the part of
dured. • Now, we ask,
our Legislature ? Would it not be better to allow
the Irish people to forget the past, than to have
their minds constantly embittered by such recollec-
tions ? We ask our Protestant countrymen to make
it their own case, and say if they would like to be
stamped as the inferiors of Catholics, or of the
people of any other religion ? We know they would
not submit quietly to any such degradation, and
we would, therefore, call upon them to act towards
Irish Catholics just as they would have others act
tower& themselves. It is evident, indeed, that
this remnant of Irish persecution, for conscience'
sake, cannot last much longer; for we know that
our leading Statesmen, on both sides of the House,
are in favour of the immediate repeal of all such
enactments as are in force at the present day in
Ireland. These enactments, affecting laymen, which
WO hay° here pointed out, are bad enough ; but

the penal laws now in force against the ecclesias'
tics of the Catholic Church are still worse. 131
the 24th section of the 4th George IV., c.
enacted that, "if any person" (other than
Yro
testants and Presbyterians) " ' shall assume or use
the name, style, or title of archbishop of any pro-*
vince, bishop of any bishopric, or clean of all
E deanery, in ngland or Ireland, he shall, for everi
such offence, forfeit and pay the sum.of one ininci
red pounds." Such is the law passed in 1829, an t
which is still in force. But this law I°
anotheri
deemed sufficiently stringent, and hence
Act, the 15th and 16th Victoria, C. 60, commoll
called the Ecclesiastical Titles' Act, Was passees
some two-and-twenty years after, which imrce
cativo',
the same enormous penalty upon any
ecclesiastic who shall assume or use the title o'
any town or place whatsoever within this realili
Let us now see what the effect would be
this law were actually enforced. All ecclesiasticat
jurisdiction in the Catholic Church, throng
the entire world, emanates from the Pope of Boni;
and is by him bestowed on the several arc
and bishops, within the provinces or dioceses re-
and
spectively assigned to them. It is by virtue of too
jurisdiction that the archbishops and bishops der
enabled to govern and control those placedli„nr.ty
them. For example, it is not by any aun;"„18,1
possessed by him, as Paul Cullen, that the Carure- t
Archbishop of Dublin can condemn all but -it
society, or any member of any sach society;
is by virtue of the ecclesiastical jurisdiction c°1:0
ferred on him as Archbishop of Dublin that
exercises his authority. Let us suppose, tilen/I'
that any priest in Dublin, or any part of the Pr„'''.
vince committed to his Grace's spiritual a' that
were to favour Fenianism to-morrow, and
the archbishop deemed it his duty, as he decihe
edly would, to punish him for such conduct' re
could properly do so only by signing the seniors,
" Paul, Archbishop of Dublin." And it folocs,
therefore, that in order to discharge his soleinn,o,
Go-
duty to the Queen, and render a service to the 61the
vernment, by preserving the public peace, 11,1
Catholic Archbishop of Dublin would be coeloci'
to violate this most needless and absurd pen 31,10311%
and be obliged to subject himself to a fine °'
hundred pounds. Could any Government, We
enforce such a=law at the present time ? Certain
t'„s
not. And if the law cannot be enforced—but iai
the contrary, the Government must feel than der
to the Catholic bishops for violating it, in or in
to preserve the public peace--wherc is the usi.eie
keeping such a law on the statute-book ? Whavap
have said of his Eminence Cardinal Cullenu;gii4;
plies equally to every other archbishop and unties
in these kingdoms. In the discharge of the u-00
of their sacred office, they are compelled t° re,
the name and style of their See ;this'„naitot
therefore, daily compelled to violate
and oppressive law. It is the duty of all
Catho-
-1 ecclesiastics, but more escially of those to
vated to high position, tot each subnissi°ll„ of
the constituted authorities ; but the cffee,`; be
their teaching on this head are likely .11'01'
weakened by the very fact that they 'orb° 14,ear
cate the doctrine of obedience to the laws are " act-
selves obliged to violate some of their °lot
ments every day. We are certain, however! to
the nature and folly of these laws only reelul%
be generally understood by the people of f%noit is $
in order to have them immediately repealed.
repeal
mistake to suppose that it would suffices t° rfteirforti
the Ecclesiastical Titles' Act, in order to Loose
liberty to the Catholic hierarchy. For this
the portions of the 10th George IV., C. 7, There
we have referred, must also be repealed. „fittire,
another enactment still more penal in eta„'; anti
than any of those we have above adverten,-;:t'holic
that is the law regarding 'the regular the
clergy of these kingdoms. We believe that the
W
existence of such a law is not known the ;ere,
bulk of our fellow-countrymen, and that, lf it ajoiis
they would soon insist on the repeal of 5°4.;)00 ci
a statute. It is enacted by the 29th sec "or
the 4th George IV., .c. 7, that if any ftfter
of any society of the regular clergy shall, to this
the commencement of this Act, come in (Atilt/
realm, he shall be deemed and taken to b,e_
of a misdemeanour, and, being thereof ',no be
convicted, shall be' sentenced and oedereu,‘e tern'
banished from the United Kingdom for ts Fob;
o. f his natural life." -In a former article on ti" peas'
)ed, we told our readers that there Was ~,reseli,
law in force in these kingdoms at the fi to bA"
day which sentenced regular clergymen, .1, "'A
transported for being alive in this rotuill'oeulc'
although we are sure such a thing must haveho,o 0,0
almost incredible to many, they canlnow ivor°
doubt of the fact, as we have quoted the..ii pert
of the Act of Parliament. The reader eo
ceive, by the wording of the Act, that ni rforto'
for committing any crime nor even for Peo
ins any clerical duties, but, literally, for 4 elk
alive" within any part of these kingcl°lll;port'l;
these Catholicpriests are liable tO
don Hence, it follows, that if the her
or.
.Empress of the French were to cone Over
again, on a visit to our Queen, and briligof tll,l
a chaplain of any of the regular orders of
Catholic clergy, the imperial chaplain to 1'
be liable, according to the letter of the lalv'toso
seized, incarcerated, tried, and sentenced tte 00 1
portation for the period of his natural life,: oa beir
long is England, we repeat,
statute-book, despite her. boasted Christiali,l)liv_Ae'
to preseriv.,l ter
the enlightenment of the age in which ,"e goo"
such obsolete laws? We are sure that ti`to the
sense of the country will soon put an end
erii
last remains of the barba' rous code f°llll,lolo.
force against the Catholics of these king-
-