The Sun.
London, England, 1844-08-05 00:00:00

MERTON'S ESTATE.

Merton's Este:Cellli wa., read a third time and passed.
SWANSEA IMI=2OVEMENT.

The Lords' amendments to the S;vansea Improvement
Bill were agreed to.
LONDON AND CROYDON RAILWAY.

The Lords' amendments to the London and Croydon
R tills ay Bill, No. 2, were agreed to.
LEEDS VICARAGE BILL.

Mr. BECKETT moved the third reading of the Leads
Vicarage Bill.
Mr. HARDY expressed his high approval of the Bill
and passed a high eulogium on the Rev. Dr, Hook.
Sir R. PEEL expressed his concurrence in the eulogium
which had ben passed upon Dr. Hook. He thought the
members of the Church of England in Leeds were de-
serving of great credit for the manner in which they
had co-operated with Dr. Hook, and he hoped the
example of Leeds would be followed in other large towns.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
PETITIONS.

Mr. DARBY presented a petition from some place in
Sussex in favour of the corn-laws.
Mr. SPOONER presented a petition from certain Pro-
testants against the Roman Catholic Penal Laws Repeal
Bill. Also a petition from the Bristol Chamber of
Commerce against the Insolvent Debtors' Bill.
Mr. DILLON BROWNE presented a petition from
the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Tuam, and from
four Roman Catholic Bishops, against the Charitable
Donations and Bequests (Ireland) Bill. The Hon. Gen-
tleman moved that the petition should be read by the
clerk at the table, and it was read accordingly.
ROMAN CATHOLIC PENAL ACTS REPEAL
BILL.

Sir R. PEEL, in moving the second reading of this
Bill, trusted that the House would throw no impediment
in the way of the passing of it, notwithstanding
the late period of the session at which it had come down
from the Lords. A petition had been presented by the
Hon. Member for iiirmingham against the Bill ; and
from the wording of thz;!" petition he feared that many
persons were labouring
der a misunderstanding
as to the meaning of the measure. He wished it to be
distinctly understood that no security that bad been
taken by the Act of 1829 for the Established Church was
touched by this Bill. The effect of the measure was to
place all Roman Catholics taking the Roman Catholic
oath on the same footing with respect to franchise and
civil rights as her Majesty's Protestant subjects. This
Bill did not touch any of the securities of the measure of
1829 —it merely went to repeal certain laws which had
long been a dead letter, and a discredit to the statute-
book, and from the penalties of which any Roman Ca-
tholic might escape by taking an oath which any Roman
Catholic might take. The House of Lords had thought
it advisable to repeal some of these laws. One of them
made it a high crime to maintain the spiritual supre-
macy of the Pope, and this statute had been given a very
wide interpretation in " Hawkins's Pleas of the Crown."
Another punished Catholics for not attending Divine
service on the sth of November ; another punished a
Catholic for sending his child abroad for education ;
another punished any man not born a Roman Catholic
for educating his child in the Catholic faith. These
were at variance with the Relief Act. There were ether
Acts still more absurd—one was a law banishing PopisL
recusants from London, or from any district within ten
miles thereof; another forbade him from being more than
five miles from his home ; another prohibited him from
having a horse of above the value of 5/. It was true a
Catholic might escape from these penalties by taking an
oath, but if he refused to do so, would it he possible
to execute such laws ? He did not consider they were
conferring any favour on the Catholics, but they were
clearing their own statute-book of laws which
were a disgrace to it.—(Hear.) The measure
had been long before the House of Lords,
and it had been stated that if it could be shown that the
Bill would repeal any law which ought to remain, that
law would be suffered to remain. None such had been
shown. Some he knew considered these laws as the
bulwarks of the Church—but so far from being outworks
of the Church, he thought they were outworks to be
seized by reason and ridicule, to be used by reason and
ridicule against the Church. They were adapted to
other times, and the Establishment must now be de-
fended by others means—namely, by reason and the
affectionate attachment of the people.—(Cheers.)
Mr. HAWES wished to know if the obsolete laws re-
lating to Protestant Dissenters would be also repealed?
Sir R. PEEL could not pledge himself to any mea-
sure. This Bill had come down from the House of
Lords, and he hailed it as a satisfactory proof of the
spirit by which that House was actuated. He did not
propose it as a complete measure ; but if there were
any laws imposing, for instance, heavy penalties on con-
scientious Dissenters who absented themselves from
Divine service, he should support the repeal of such
a law.

Mr. M. MILNES said that if the Ecclesiastical Courts
Bill had passed. it would have repealed many of those
laws.

Mr. HAWES—Which of the Bills ?
Mr. M. MILNES—Botb.
Mr. SPOONER thought the fears of the petitioners
would be removed by the statement of the Right lion.
Gentleman ' • but when they saw the way in which former
concessions had been received by the Catholics, Protes-
tants might hare just cause to fear the fruits of further
concessions.
After a few words from Mr. D. BROWNE,
Mr. CHRISTIE suggested the insertion of words in
the Bill exempting Dissenters from Penalties for non-
attendance at church.
Sir It PEEL hoped the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man would not press his amendment, as it might en-
danger the passing of the Bill.
The Bill was then read a second time and ordered to
be committed.
CHARITABLE DONATIONS AND BEQUESTS
(IRELAND) BILL.

On the order of the day for the third reading of this
Bill being read,
Mr. DILLON BROWNE expressed a hoped that the
Bill would be postponed. It was opposed by the
Catholic hierarchy of Ireland, and one of the grounds of
his opposition to the Bill was that it continued the out-
lawry inflicted by the Relief Bill on the Jesuits. All
the regular clergy of Ireland were excluded from the
operation of the law, and the fact of the Hon. Member
for Waterford expressing his approval of it was no
reason why it should pass. That Hon. Gentleman did
not possess the confidence of the Catholic clergy of
Ireland. He did not conceive that the Irish Members
in that House had given this Bill either a manly support
or a manly opposition. Some Irish Members would
' have to account to their constituents for not giving this
Bill a more efficient opposition. He believed that the
Bill was proposed in a spirit of conciliation; but that
was not a sufficient inducement for him to support it.
The Hon. Member concluded by moving that the Bill be
read a third time that day six months.
The amendment was not a conded.
On the question that the Bill be read a third time,
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL said it had been his intention,
if there had been a larger attendance of Irish Members,
to move an amendment to the Bill. But while he ad-
mitted that the Bill contained great defects, he had felt
it his duty to abstain from joining the opposition, after
the best consideration which he had been able to give to
the subject.—(Hear.) He liked the spirit which this
Bill displayed, and this he thought of more importance
than the words. The Bill was after all not compulsory ;
property left for Catholic purposes in future would not
necessarily come under the operation of the Commission,
and he believed that, in voting for the measure, he would
be doing no harm either to the religious or the political
interests of Inland. It conferred a substantial benefit by
raising the worldly condition of Catholic ministers,
whilst at the same time it did not diminish their influence
over their flocks.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
The Transfer of Property Bill was read a third time
and passed.