Star.
London, England, 1830-05-05 00:00:00

komur cimigoLic
_CMARITIIII.

mt. o'coNN111;46TW.;;;;&i;;;;;;Ining in a bill to
place the charitable bequests and &mations of Roman Catholics in
Ormt Bdudn on the IMMO footing as those of Protestant Dissenters.
The necessity of sash aNR stonek his as being obvious. In Ire.
land the 'churches of Resnais Caddies were as secure as those of
Protestants, and as well by the law. It was quite dif.
fermi here. Relief was outmoded to Catholics by repealing
oaths. The AMON spinet soporddess uses were, however, in
force still in Engird. Tbe mumgosome was, that though all te
Charities were under the peetesties of the Court of Oanowy, those
of Roman Catholics were not. He did not want to alter, in their
favour, any law of mortmain, but merely to place them nods: the
protection of a Court of Equity.
Sir C. WETHERELL said he did not rise to oppose the bring-
ing in of the bill. There might be certain objects of charitable do-
nation of which be would approve, and others in the establishment
of which he could not concur. For Instance, if the measure went to
sanction the introduction, or the making provision for monastic in.
stitutions in England, he should oppose it. Of this be would
be better able to form a judgment when the bill was before the
house.

The SOLICITOR-GENRRAL said he understood that by the
Relief Bill the Catholic religion wu to remain as it stood when
that measure passed. If the object of this Bin was in any way to'
extend the establishment of it, the subject would then became one of
very great importance. Though Roman Catholics were dismays,
they were not considered by the Relief Bill as Protestant Dle.
seaters. Until the measure was brought in, he could not be able to
form a judgment as to its minutiae temleney.
The A TTperstitionsOßNEY-OZNICypIIedSAL said he did not think the BM.
tate of Su was i to °Adam eadneively. It might
apply to donations ham as well es others.
%tr. O'CONNELL said the iniesdneelea embank institution
was eratively int:vented by the provision of the idiot bilL If the
ipturisions of the bill were found objectionable, be:shield set press
h this session.
Leave was givat to being la the bill.

MARRIAGE/ Ilf IRELAND. •
Mr. O'CONNELL rose to move for leave to bring in a bill to
render valid, in certain cases, the marriages of Roman Catholics in
England by a Catholic Clergyman, and to abolbth in Ireland certain
penalties imposed on Catholic priest for celebrating marriages be-
tween Catholics and Protestants. The honourable member,
after stating shortly the state of the law in Ireland, as affecting
the marriages of Roman Catholics with Protestants, and also
of Dissenters, said that by the law as it now stood, a Roman
Catholic priest, by celebrating marriage between a Protestant
and a Catholic, was guilty of a capital felony, and incurred
the penalty of death. There was another statute which, for the
same offence, subj-eted hint to a penalty of 5001. It was supposed
by some that the effect of one of these statutes was to do away with
the other, but the contrary had been decided by Lord Kilwarden
and the Court of King's Bench in Ireland. So that by the law as it
now stood, a Roman Catholic Priest might be first hanged, and call.
ed upon after to pay a fine of 5001. He proposed in this bill to do away
with the penalty of death, to reduce the fine, to prevent the infliction
of it except in cases where the Roman Catholic Clergyman knew that
either of the parties was a Protestant, and to do away with the pe-
nalty altogether when both parties, at the time of marriage, declared
themselves to be Catholics. Catholic clergymen were often betrayed
into a marriage by the parties stating themselves to be Catholics—
He knew one case in which a clergyman was so betrayed, and was,
in consequence, obliged to fly the country for three years. Their
object was to prosecute him ; they were bribed to do so, and they
maintained themselves fir three years upon the success of their
scheme. Their misconduct having been made manifest, the priest
was permitted to return to his parish. There was another provision
which lie wished to introduce into the bill. His poor countrymen
who came over to England, from early habit preferred being mar-
ried by a Catholic priest. Now, such a marriage here, even between
two Catholics, was invalid. Taft consequence weft that the husband
might desert his wife when he pleased, that his children were bas-
tards, and might be thus thrown upon the parish. He proposed
to introduce a clause to reader valid such a marriage, but if lie
fout•.d that it was objected to in connection with the other parts of
the Bill, he would not press it at present, but reserve it for future
consideration.
SOLICITOR-GENERAL said if he understood the hen.
and learned gentleman, It was not his intention to alter the Relief
Bill, to which he was desirous to give its full effect, and to extend
the application of it as far as it could be extended consistently with
the principle. He must, however, object to the last provision sug-
gestcd by him relative to the marriage of Rowan Catholics in Eng.
l..nd. It might lead to very important consequences. So far as the
measure related to Ireland he could not at present see any objection
to it. ltappeared to him that the act of 1793 had the effect of doing
away with the capital felony.
Lord F. L. GOWER said he did not intend to oppose the mea.
sure, or throw any impediment in the way of it, particularly as he
did not understand that it was proposed to render valid the marriage
of a catholic and protestant by a roman catholic priest.
Sir JOHN BRIDGES said he feared that when these obsolete
laws were done away with, the next step would be to introduce laws
totally different.
Mr. NORTH said the hon. member had no occasion for any such
apprehension. By the law as it stood in Ireland, the marriage of a
Protestant and Catholic was ipso facto null, and for celebrating
such a marriage the penalty was death. No person would say that
such a penalty was not much too heavy. It was his opinion that
this law was 111 fact repealed by the Act of 1793. As the law stood,
the presumption was that the Catholic priest knew what the religion
of the parties was It was certainly right that the onus of proof
should be thrown on the prosecution. He differed however with
the lion. member in one point. The mere declaration of the parties
at the time of marriage that they were Protestants ought not to be
deemed sufficient.

Mr. CROKEK expressed his approbation generally of the
measure. The law of marriage ought not to be left in its present
anomalous state. He trusted some person of competent know.
ledge would being the whole subject under the consideration of
the House.

After a few words from Mr. TRANT, who expressed his
approbation generally of the measure, leave was given to bring
in the BilL

EMIGRATION.

On the motion of Mr. W. lloarow, leave was given to bring in
a bill to enable parishes to mortgage their rates for a limited period
for the purpose of permanently providing for their unemployed poor
at home or abroad, and to regulate the mode of keeping parish ac-
counts, so far as regards the sums collected under the poor rate.

CHANCERY.

Sir C. WET HERELL postponed to this day week his motion
relative to an additional Judge in the Court of Chancery.

CANADA

81r G. MURRAY obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the
Slat of his late Majesty, and to make more effectual provision for
the Government of Canada.

BUM DILL.
Mr. CALCRAFT moved the second reading of the beer bill.—
(Hear.) Until very lately he expected the second reading would
have passed without opposition. Few, he believed, were opposed
to the principle, but the member for Dorset (Mr. Portman)
was opposed to parts of it. The object of the bill was to make
the trade in beer completely free on the taking out of a license..—
Whether any qualification should be required he would not now
stop to discuss; that would be better considered in the committee.
The publicans objected to the bill as likely to be injurious to their
interests. Nothing could be more natural or fair than this. When,
however, vested interests were spoken of in such a case, as was done
lon that night by an hon. alderman, the publicans, by such objec-
deas, only injured their own claims. There was nothing of a
vested right here, for even the publicans themselves complained
that their licenses were at the mercy of the magistrates. There
was, no doubt, a large capital embarked in the trade, and not less
than 60,000 employed in it; but the interests of the public were
not to be neglected. The only object of the Government was to
open that sort of competition which was likely to introduce a better
article. He did not mean to reflect on the great brewers. There
would be no cause of complaint if the publicans furnished the arti.
cle they got from the brewers. The regular practice of publicans
was to reduce it 25 or 30 per cent. It was also well known that
brewers took advantage of houses which were their own to send an
article which they could not dispose of if the houses were not their
. The objection to this bill was, that it would have the ef.
Firm:Portflestablishiag a great number of tippling houses. The house
should recollect, that the power of controul over these houses would
be very strong. The requiring of some qualification would
in a great measure prevent any inconvenience. The publicans would
still remain as they were, and they could not be injured if they took
care to sell a good article. It was In a great measure by the eon-
duct of the publicans of the metropol s this measure was rendered
necessary, and also by the country brewers. If they were to attend
to applications for indemnification in cases of this kind they could
never legislate. He recollected when he was member for Rochester
he was applied to to oppose the use of steam-vessels, as likely to in.
jure the interests of innkeepers, but he assured them it would be
petfectly useless, and they did not Ind their trade eventually injured.
Mr. PORTMAN opposed the bill. The effect of it would not
be to make the trade In beer completely free. The magistrates
should be invested with sufficient powers to control Wander. The
bill appeared to him wholly objectionable. What security had
the public by this bill spinet the use of deleterious drugs ? Com.
petition was the only principle relied upon. It was essential that
magistrates should have control over beer houses. for the purposes
of the police of the country. If the bill was an experimental one,,
they might retrace their steps, but that could not be done when
once the trade was epees& It would not have the effect of
increasing the supply. In fact, no additional supply was called for.
He felt arrebeed that it would neither reduce the plies se beer, nor
be of any um to ihe fames by raisin:
et" pries Though
be did set he& spew palm= as having a semi still where
so large a was enierked, it net le be hampered with,
unless sew advamege was math* to odes hem it. He
hand the mweseell:mweeinemes wield attend the meson as were
hum se have tabs plow he the elder counties. Oa these pounds
Masai we as so emmisset that the Bill be seed a emend
time that day six moths.
Mr. DI SON ceded the amendment. Be did not
trade in Msk it weld& mho on, Imsedt en the public to open the

Mr. BENNET supported the bill. The takindoon.if 3,500,0001. of
taxes on beer most greatly Increase the column If the public
'brewer would befbre compete with the private ' wer who paid no
duty, his power of competition must thus be greatly Increased, and
be would gain In this way what be might lose by a reduction in the
value of public houses. To talk of vested rights in the case of
publican was quite abeurd.Now with respect to the public—lt would
be a gnat benefit to the labouring classes that they could go to a
beer house and take their needs in place of visiting the kitchen of a
public house, than which nothing could be more injurious to
morale. The bill would, In hie tides, be productive of the best
consequence both as es Ingethement in the quality of the article
and in the habits of the pis" by leading them to the more ge.
nerd see of a wholesome hewn. In plate of gin. He should pre.
far, however, the seinsties of the welt duty to that on beer.
They meet reduce the taus en priestly' industry, and he trusted
this the Mgt undo &gnat dad more would be done by ministers.
Mr. lIIATIIOO, said he preferred a reduction of the tax on
base to that es emit. The beer tax amounted to a penny a pet, and
the ask ten so seeneddeg sheet a farthing. The poor would not
brew sift ft the is IS nth were 'spaded. Am erg ether chum.
stenos whith "MY wpm than was the and es.
ran 1101. ft O& The Pliwelpel reuse why he ap.
rend of the gen gasohol it would de awes with the pre.
sent thenspely. It was ridknlens se lath of in to morals.—
How mild it Injure ma i mere to get beer at houses in
a viler than at one ; but these eal, bow wee it more injurious to