The Sun.
London, England, 1850-11-20 00:00:00

LON DON,

jut quoted, of the preceding session, in the following
terms:—

Allusion having been made to him (by Sir R.
Inglis), he wished to say a few words as to his firmer
declaration, that he was not ready at once to repent
these laws without consideration.' Last session he had
voted for the Committee, but had reserved to himself the
right of weighing the details. It appeared to him that
there was one part of the question that had not been
sufficiently attended to: the measure* of Government, as
far as it was stated last year, did not effect that relief to
the Roman Catholic from a law by which they were
punished, both for assuming episcopal titles in Ireland,
and for belonging to certain religious orders. That part
of the subject required interference by the Legislature.
As to preventing persons assuming particular titles,
nothing could be more absurd and puerile than to keep
up such a distinction. He had also the strongest ob-
jection to the law which made Jesuits in certain cases
subject to transportation; the enactment was intolerant
as it was inefficacious, and it was necessary that the
law should be put ou an intelligible and rational foot-
ing-1.2
would appear, therefore, that whatever hesitation
Lord John Russell had about repealing other clauses in
the Emancipation Act, his mind was made up about the
restriction from Catholics assuming the very titles of
sees held by Anglican bishops. Had he obtained his
wishes in 1846, the law would now have permitted us to
call ourselves Bishops of London or Chester, and Arch-
bishop of Canterbury. I quote these passages, not for
the purpose of charging Lord John Russell with incon-
sistency, but merely to justify ourselves, and to show
how little reason we could have had for believing that
our acting strictly within the law respecting episcopal
titles would have been described as it has. Fur if it
was peurile in 1846, to continue to prevent Catholics
even taking the prohibited titles, and no good reason
existed for the continuance of even that restriction, is it
manly in 1850 to denounce as insolent and insidious'
the assumptisn of titles different from these accorded to
us by the authority which Lord John acknowledges can
alone bestow episcopacy upon us.
" I have already alluded to Lord Minto's being shown
the brief for the hierarchy, printed, about two years
ago. The circumstance may have escaped his memory;
or he may not at the time have attended to it, having
more important matters in his mind, But as to the fact
that his attention was called to it, and he made no reply,
I can have no doubt.

" I trust, therefore, that I have said enough to prove
that Catholics have not acted in an unbecoming manner,
in claiming for themselves the same right of possessing
a hierarchy, as had been allowed to the colonies, and
clearly acknowledged, as no less applicable to them.
One more topic remains.

" SEC: VL-THE TITLE OF WESTMINSTER.

" The selection of this title for the metropolitan see
of the new hierarchy has, I understand, given great
offence. lam sorry for it.l It was little less
than necessity which led to its adoption. I must
observe that, according to the discipline of the
Catholic Church, a bishop's title must be from a town
or city. Originally almost every village or small town
had its bishop, as appears from the history of the Afri-
can Church. But from a town or city a bishopric must
still be; a 'territorial' title is never given. Thus, in Van
Diemen's Land, while the Anglican bishop takes his
title of Tasmania from the territory, the Catholic derives
his of Hobart Town from the town. In re-establishing
a Catholic hierarchy in England, it was natural and de-
corous that its metropolitan should have his see at the
capital. This has been the rule at all times; though of
course those capitals may decay into provincial towns
without losing their privilege. The very term metropo-
litan signifies the bishop of the metropolis. This being
the principle or basis of every hierarchy, how was it to
be acted on here? London was a title inhibited by law:
Southwark was to form a separate see. To have taken
the title of a subordinate portion of what forms the
great conglomerate of London, as Finsbury or Islington,
would have been to cast ridicule, and open the door for
jeers upon the new Episcopate. Besides, none of
these are towns or cities. Westminster naturally sug-
gested itself, as a city unoccupied by auy Anglican see,
and giving an honourable and well-known metropolitan
title. It was consequently selected, and I can sincerely
say, that I bad no part whatever in the selection. But
I rejoice that it was chosen, not because it was the seat
of the courts of law, or of Parliament, or for any such
parpose, but because it brings the real point mere clearly
and strikingly before our opponents; Have we in any-
thing acted contrary to law? And if not, why are we
to be blamed?'

" But I am glad also for another reason. The Chap:er
of Westminster has been the first to protest against the
new archiepiscopal title, as though some practical attempt
at jurisdiction within the Abbey was intended. Then
lot me give them assurance on that point, and let us
come to a fair division and a good understanding.
" The diocese, indeed, of Westminster, embraces a
large district, but Westminster proper consists of two
very different parts. One comprises the stately Abbey,
with its adjacent palaces and royal parks. To this por-
tion the duties and occupation of the Dean and Chapter
are mainly confined; and they shall range there undis-
turbed. To the venerable old church I may repair, as
I have been wont to do. But perhaps the Dean arid
Chapter are not aware that were I disposed to claim
more than the right to tread the Catholic pavement of
that noble building, and breathe its air of ancient conse•
cration, another might step in with a prior claim. For
successive generations there has existed ever, in the
Benedictine order, an Abbot of Westminster, the repre-
sentative, in religious dignity, of those who erected, and
beautified, and governed that church and cloister. Have
they ever Ipen disturbed by this ' titular?' Have they
heard of any claim or protest on his part, touching their
temporalities? Then let them fear no greater aggres-
sion now. Like him, I may visit, as I have said, the old
Abbey, and say my prayer by the shrine of good St.
Edward; and meditate on the olden times, when the
Church filled without a coronation, and multitudes hourly
worshipped without a service.

" But their temporal rights, or their quiet posses-
sion of any dignity and title, they will not suffer.
Whenever I go in, I will pay my entrance fee, like other
liege subjects, and resign myself meekly to the guidance
of the beadle, and listen, without rebuke, when he points
out to my admiration detestable monuments, or shows
me a hole in the wall for a coafessional.

" Yet this splendid monument, its treasures of art and
its fitting endowments, form not the part of Westminster
which will concern me. For there is another part which
stands in frightful contrast, though in immediate con-
tact, with this magnificence. In ancient times, the ex-
istence of an abbey on any spot, with a large staff of
clergy and ample revenues, would have sufficed to create
around it a little paradise of comfort, cheerfulness, and
ease. This, however, is not now the case. Close under
the Abbey of Westminster there lie concealed labyrinths
of lanes and courts, and alleys and slums, nests of igno-
rance, vice, depravity, and crime, as well as of squalor,
wretchedness, and disiise; whose atmosphere is typhus,
whose ventilation is cholera; in which swarms a huge
and almost countless population, in great measure, no-
minally at least, Catholic; haunts of filth, which no
emrtge committee can reach—dark corners, which
no lighting-board can brighten. This is the part
of Westminster which alone I covet, and which
I shall be glad to claim and t i visit, as a blessed pas-
ture in which sheep of Holy Church are to be tended,
in which a bishop's godly work has to be done, of con-
soling, converting, and preserving. And if, as I hum-
bly trust in God, it shall be seen that this special culture,
arising from the establishment of our hierarchy, bears
fruits of order, peacefulness, decency, religion, and
virtue, it may be that the Holy See shall not be thought
to have acted unwisely when it bound up the very soul
and salvation of a chief pastor with those of a city
where, the name indeed is glorious, but the purlieus in-
famous—i❑ which the very grandeur of its public edifices
is as a shadow, to screen from the public eye sin and
misery the most appalling. If the wealth of the abbey
be stagnant and not diffusive, if it in no way rescue the
neighbouring population from the depths in which it is
sunk, let there be no jealousy of any one who, by what-
ever name, is ready to make the latter his care, without
interfering with the former.

"I cannot conclude without one word, on the part
which the clergy of the Anglican Church have acted in
the late excitement. Catholics have been their principal
theological opponents, and we have carried on our
controversies with them temperately, and with
every personal consideration. We have had no re-
course to popular arta to debase them; we have never
attempted, even when the current of public feeling
has set against them, to turn it to advantage, by join-
ing in any outcry.: They are not our members who
yearly call for returns of sinecures, or episcopal in-
comes; they are not our people who form Anti-Church
and State Associations; it is not our press which seeds
forth caricatures of ecclesiastical dignitaries, or throws
ridicule on clerical avocations. With us the cause of
truth and of faith has been held too sacred to be advo-
cated in any but honourable and religious modes. We
have avoided the tumult of public assemblies, and far-
thing appeals to the ignorance of the multitude. But
no sooner has an opportunity been given fur awaken-
ing every lurking passion against us, than it has been
erezerly seized by the ministers of that establishment.
The pulpit and the platform, the church and the
town-hall, have been equally their field of labour ;
and speeches have been made, and untruths uttered,
and calumnies repeated, and flashing; words of dis-
dain, and anger, and hate, and contempt, and of every
unpriestly, and unchristian, and unholy sentiment
have been spoken, that could be said against those
who almost alone have treated them with respect.
And little care was taken at what time, or in
what circumstances, these things were done. If the
i
spade had fallen' upon theinflammable materials of a
gunpowder treason mob and made it explode. or, what
was worse, had ignited it, what cared they? It blood
had been inflamed, and arms uplifted,. and the torch in
their grasp, and flames had been enkindled, what heeded
they? If the persons of those whom consecration makes
holy, even according to their own belief, had been seized,
like the Austrian general's, and ill-treated, and perhaps
maimed or worse, what reeked thee? Thew. very thine:

The.ReligiuusOpinionsßill, which the Government
had promised.

" 21- Hansard, vol. lxxxiii. p. 502.
" ' I havo been told that great offence has been-taken
at the use of the word to govern,' found in my Pas-
toral, as though implying some temporal authority. I
find, however, that in this appeal I have again and again
used the word, because it is the usual, and almost only
word, applied amongst us to episcopal rule. It must be
remembered that the Pastoral was addressed, in the usual
form of such documents, to the clergy, secular and re-
gular, and to the faithful,' which showed it to be meant
for Catholics &one, who could understand the word. I
have been in the habit of addressing several Pastorals a
veer to the Catholics confined to my charge, which have
always been read in our churches and chapels. But
this i;, I believe, the first which the press has done me
the honour of transferring to its columns. It thus came
to be represented as addressed to all the inhabitants of
certain counties, a sort of edict or manifesto, instead of a
Pastoral, usually confined to Catholic hearing or perusal.

wore, one and all, pointed at as glorious signs, should
they take place, of high and noble Pfotestant feeling in
the land, as proofs of the prevalence of an unpersecuting,
a free inquiring, a tolerant gospel creed!
" Thanks to you, brave, and generous, and noble-
hearted people of England! who would not be stirred
up by those whose duty it is to teach you gentleness,
meekness, and forbearance, to support what they call a
religious cause, by irreligious means; and would not
hunt down, when bidden, your unoffending fellow-citi-
zens, to the hollow cry of 'No Popery,' and on the
pretence of a fabled aggression.
" Thanks to you, docile and oholient children of the
Catholic faith, many of you I know by nature fervid, but
by religion mildened, who have felt indeed—who could
help it ?—the indignities teat have been cast upon your
religion, your pastors, and your highest chief, but have
borne them in the spirit of the great Head of your
Church, in silence and unretorting forbearance. But
whatever has been said in ignorance, or in malice,
against us, or against what is most dear to us, commend
with me to the forgiveness of a merciful God ; to the
retribution of His kiednesi, not to the award of His jus-
tice. May lie not r ender to others as they would have
d !ne to us; but maylle shower down His kindness upon
them, in proportion as they would have dealt unkindly
in our regard. The storm is fast passing away; an hon-
est and upright people will soon see through the arts
that have been employed to deceive it, and the reaction
of generosity will soon set in. Inquiry is awakened, the
respective merits of Churches will be tried by fair teats
and not by worldly considerations; and Truth, for
which wo contend, will calmly triumph. Let your
loyalty be unimpeachable, and your faithfulness to so-
cial duties above reproach. Shut thus the mouths of
adversaries, and gain the higher good-will of your fel-
low-countrymen, who will defend in you, as for them-
selves, your constitutional rights, including full religious
liberty."

MUSGROVE-MAYOR,

THE FIRST COURT of Mayor and Aldermen
held in the inner Chamber of the Guildhall of the City of
Loudon, on Tuesday, the 19th day of November, 1850, and in the 14th
year of the reign of Victoria, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland Queen, &c.

Resolved unanimously—That the best thanks of this Court be
given to the Right Honourable Thomas Farncomb, Alderman, late
Lord Mayor of this City, for his kindness, attention, and impar-
tiality when presiding over this Court, and in sustaining the high
office of chief magistrate ; for his generous support of the various
charitable institutions connected with this City ; and for his
splendid hospitality during a year when its exercise was not only
such as to conduce to the social enjoyment of his fellow-citizens,
but was made available for acknowledging the eminent services
rendered by our countrymen in India, and for gathering together the
chief municipal authorities of the kingdom to meet his Royal
Highness Prince Albert on an occasion of high national interest.

MEREWETHER.