The Sun.
London, England, 1845-01-18 00:00:00

IRELAND.

CONCORDAT WITH THE POPE.
LETTER FROM THE LORD-LIEUTENANT 01
IRELAND TO ARCHBISHOP MURRAY.
DUBLIN, JAN. 15.—The Dublin Evening Post con•
tains a most important communication from the Lord-
Lieutenant to Archbishop Murray, completely contradict-
ing the rumours as to a negotiation between the British
Government and the Court of Rome for a concordat :
" Mountjoy-square, Jan. 15, 1845.
"My dear Sir,—l have just had the honour of re-
ceiving from his Excellency the Lord-Lieutenant an fin-
portant communication, of which I beg to inclose a
in the hope that you will have the goodness to give It j►
place in your next publication.
`• I have the honour to be, my dear Sir,
" Very faithfully yours,
" F. W. Conway, Esq." " Pi D. MURRAY.
(Copes)
" Vice-regal Lodge, Jan .15, 1845.
" Lord Heytesbury presents his compliments to Arch-
bishop Murray, and begs to inform him that he has been
instructed to give to him and to Archbishop Crolly the
strongest assurances, on the part of the Government,
that there has never existed the slightest intention of
entering into any negotiation with the Papal See vpon
the subject of a concordat."

THE BEQUESTS ACT—THE ROMAN
CATHOLIC CLERGY.
The Roman Catholic clergy of the diocese of Dublin
held their annual conference yesterday. We have
learned that no petition was brought forward respecting
the repeal of the penal clauses in the Relief Bill against
the regular clergy, nor was there any document sub-
mitted at the conference on the subject of the Charitable
Bequests Acts, probably because differences of opinion
prevailed regarding that measure.
But, after the conference, a considerable number of the
clergy held a separate meeting, at which a petition to"
Parliament was unanimously adopted, urging the total
repeal of the Charitable Bequests Act, and the substi-
tution of. Mr. O'Connell's Bill in its stead ; also praying
that the clauses in the Emancipation Act affecting the
regular clergy might be expunged. The petition was
signed by upwards of fifty of the clergy of Archbishop.
Murray's diocese, including most of the parish priests
of the city of Dublin. The petition is to be signed
throughout the diocese.
ARCHBISHOP MURRAY—LAY DECLARATION.
A declaration of the laity of the diocese of Dublin,
similar to that of a portion of the clergy, addressed to
Archbishop Murray, is in the course of signature.
RESCRIPT FROM ROME.
The Pilot of this evening contains the following letter
from Dr.. Cantwell, Roman Catholic Bishop of Meath,
to Mr. O'Connell :
" Illustrious and beloved Liberator,—Your powerful
and unanswerable expose of the anti-Catholic provisions
of the insidious Bequests Act, published in the Pilot of
Friday evening, increases immeasurably your claim to
the confidence and gratitude of the Catholics of Ireland.
Never did you pen a more useful or more necessary
document. Among the many blessings which it cannot
fail to accomplish, I indulge the strongest hope that it
will determine those venerated prelates who, from the
purest motives, accepted the commission, promptly to
resign an office which connects them with the enemies
of our faith in carrying into effect a law obviously levelled
at the independence of that Church which triumphed
over persecutions the most atrocious, and of which those
very prelates have been the steady pillars and brightest
ornaments. The virtues, the talents, and the abundant
fruits of their .seal in the cause of religion, entitled
those prelates to the respectful consideration of their
countrymen; no prelates in the church of God were more
justly endeared to their respective flocks ; none possessed
in a higher degree the confidence and the affections of
their brethren in the episcopacy. Would to God
they may promptly adopt that course which, I am firmly
persuaded, can alone secure the continuance of those
great blessings ! The resignation of an office, the ac-
ceptance of which already produced fruits of bitterness
which every friend to religion must deeply deplore, can
alone restore public confidence, heal the dissensions
which have arisen among the clergy and laity, and re.
establish that unity of feeling and action among the pro-
laths which rendered the persecuted Church of Ireland
the terror of the enemies of our holy faith, and the pride
and admiration of the Catholic world.
" On the public documents, having reference to the
Catholic prelates, and to some of which you more than
once alluded, I deem it right to offer a few remarks.
The letter of his Eminence Cardinal Fransoni, addressed
to his Grace the Primate, and published in the Evtniesp
Post of Saturday, was received at our last meeting with
the sentiments so fully expressed in the resolution which
was unanimously adopted. That all the prelates con-
curred in the resolution is quite certain ; that there
existed a very material difference of opinion on the inter-
pretatien of the letter is equally undeniable. Some
Bishops (they were only few in number) understood the
letter as implying a prohibition to take any part in a
public meeting, or to be present at a public dinner. The
other prelates felt that they would not carry out the
wishes of the Holy See by adopting or acting en any
such interpretation. The prelates who interpreted the
document in the latter sense, and, I think, they consti-
tute the majority, ground their interpretation on the
terms expressly used in the communication itself. They
ate—" nimium adicti...minus prudenter..." Even these
were applied only hypothetically—" Si relate subsiste-
rent...si ita esset," &c.
" The Cardinal evidently censures only violent and in-
temperate language in either priest or bishop, whether
they address their flocks in the temples, or mix with
their fellow-countrymen in banquets or public meetings.
We inferred, and I think we were justified in the infer-
' ence, that conduct and language at all times unbecoming
our sacred characters, and not our presence ott such le-
gitimate occasions, were the objects of this' wise and
'military caution. We conceive that out-duty of loyalty
to our beloved Sovereign, priestly decorum, and a due
regard to the best interests of religion, are not incom-
patible with the clergy taking a moderate and prudent
part in meetings convened for the purpose of promoting
the temporal and spiritual welfare of their flocks, or
being present at banquets intended to mark the nation's
gratitude to her best religious and civil benefactor. We
conceive that by our presence on such occasions, and •
exhibiting in our persons the practice of that prudenns
and moderation so earnestly recommended, we will most
effectually prevent the evils otherwise justly to be appre;
hended; while a becoming sympathy with their floUits.
under the overwhelming load of sufferings and grievances
which oppress them, is calculated to win their confidence..
to secure a willing observance of that patient forbear-
ance which it is the duty of their ministry to inculcate,
and thereby promote the peace of the country and the
salvation of those committed to their pastoral superin-
tendence. God forbid we should ever mingle in such
scenes influenced by the unworthy motive of ministering
to public discontent, or of seeking to obtain a vain and
fleeting popularity.
"In the present state of Ireland, with her people
naked, houseless, and starving in the midst of plenty--
where,the very profession of Catholicity is an apology
to justify exclusion from public offices of einolument,
however humble, or from private employment, however
laborious—where the laws are administered by men re-
markable for their hatred of the Catholic religion—were
the Catholic clergy in such circumstances to withdraw
the consolations of their sympathy, and to refuse 00.
operating constitutionally in seeking a redress of 'such
grievances, a suspicion of their integrity, a want of re-
spect and affection, and a total loss of influence, would
be the deplorable but inevitable consequences. It is
painful even for a moment to imagine the results, alike
fatal to religion and the public tranquillity, which would
soon follow. In the year 1839, when British •ealunang
and misrepresentation extorted from the Propaganda the
document referred to, I heard the ever-beloved Gregory
bear rapturous testimony to the zeal of the Irish clergy,
and to the religious fidelity of the Irish people. Ile will
never recommend or sanction a course which would lead
to a calamity so disastrous. A Pontiff more attached to
the Irish Church never sat in the chair of St. Peter.
" The next document on which some reliance has been
placed by the advocates of the Bequests Act, is the .mi-
morial of the bishops in 1840. I was a party to that
memorial, but it was not the act of the episcopal body.
It was'never formally submitted to the meeting—it never:
received the formal approval of the assembled prelates. ;
and hence it was never inserted in the registry of 'our
proceedings. The object of the memorial was to &Ate&
the attention of the Government, through Lord Al.,Jrpeth.
to the wicked enactment which disgraced the 'Statute-
book, and was forwarded at a period when public opinion
had not acquired sufficient influence to secure the fa-
vourable dacisions which hare lately been obtained in.
our courts of justice t Besides, we then relied that in any
measure submitted to Parliament on the subject, Ireland
would not be deprived of the Parliamentary influence of
her talented and ever faithful representative. We con.
fided in your knowledge of the faith and discipline of the
Catholic Church, and felt convinced of your persevering
and uncompromising opposition to any and every attempt
to undermine the one, or to encroach upon the other
We certainly never dreamt of asking or giving our
tion to the present measure, on which we were never e,ou.
sulted, and which was hurried through Parliament r4t the
dome of the last session.
Tb• other document which has beitiheluanrepfoeatirretadwifildyi:nrtedat.h:
—I mean the resolution ad.opted_
eneedwstopawpherics,httohwe haidcvhocyaotueshoafvetmheorte
at the late
meeting of the prelates—is the last which I shall notice.
ous voice of the
of triumph
It is exhibited as expressing the unanup*
Irish bishops, and is boasted of as a nintorpretative ap-
proval of the acceptance of the office of Commissioner
by any prelate who might chance to be the object of
Castle favour, and whose
the
ee
aupnpenrolaalbloefdinsillinthcetiohn.Ple. rhootehsne,snir'ties did. not recoil from,
eeltohleurticoonulddiditnot meta
O
to any one of the Episcopal
Commissioners the mo notion that in accepting the office he did not.
oppose the views and wishes of many of his episcopal,
brethren. When the resolution was moved there were.
six of the protesting bishops absent, and a moment weak
not allowed to pass after it was seconded when it 1,1118
denounced in the strongest manner by two of the,
bishops present. They solemnly declared before the
assembled prelates, that in the event of any prelate an.
cepting the odious office, they would never willingly hold
any communication with him in his capacity of Com-
missioner. The prelates were urged to this declaration
from the conviction that the exercise of their functions
as Commissioners implied the invasion of canonic,).
rights which it is unlawful for a bishop to cede, and
which, it is to be hoped, no Catholic prelate will be,
found to usurp. In the hope of putting an end to whel
promised to be a warm and lengthened discussion, tiro
following explanation was charitably suggested. It,
my pleasing duty to announce that all the prel.,atet,
favourable to the Act (including those who have W 204
accepted office) promptly expressed their full an cordial
concurrence. The explanation which is to be flound ap-
pended to the resolution in the public records oeoue pro.
ceedings was to this effect :—‘ That the r,...solution didt
not imply any approval of the Act, or directly or in•
direvor restrict, ill the slightest "greet any prolate