The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1851-02-18 00:00:00

HOUSE OR COMMONS.-FRIDAY

The adjourned debate.on the Papal aggression was :resumed
by

Mr. FAGA.N. who defended-at great length the conduct of the
Roman Catholics as a body, .and condemned the bill proposed,
to be introduced by the noble lord at the head of the govern-
ment, who might rely, upon it that he was mistaken itusuppos,
ing that the Catholics of .Ireland would ever give up their
hierarchy, which they had maintained through centuries of
persecution. The bill ,he was then bringing in might :yet be
the means of overturning the Established Church of Ireland,
with all its revenues.
Mr. F. Pest thought the discussion might have' been, taken
with much more advantage on this question had the.house
allowed the bill to be brought in, so as to enable them to be-
come acquainted with its-particular provisions. At matters
now stood, it was clear the noble lord at the head of the go-
vernment was unlucky enough to tender a bill which satisfied
neither side of the house. That bill could not be considered as
a permanent settlement of the question ; indeed, it did not
profess to lay claim to support on any such ground. Ile, how-

be .governed in the course he should pursue upon
measure by two considerations—the one the position of
Roman Catholics in this country, the other the constitution Qf
the Roman Catholic Church in Italy. The hon. gentleman
then proceeded to show. that the measure of the noble lord
would be an interference with the discipline of the Roman
Catholic Church, by preventing them from having the ,usual
gradations which constitute a hierarchy. He enlarged upon
the difficulty of legislating at all upon such a subject, upon
which, if they went not a .little way, they did nothing—their
bill would be a nullity ; and if they passed a stringent measure,
they went too far; for they, would thereby make subservient to
temporal-
power the voluntary submission of the mind. It.w is,
in his opinion, a matter not for legislation, but Inc discussion
-"^ r,,_ - • • the Church ^f

ever, shout(
t

h .:ontroversial writings, and to the activity of _a Q.
England, which was making such praiseworthy exertions in the
establishment of schools and the spread of education. That
church, he was convinced, had nothing to fear from the assaults
of the Church of Rome, or from any other church ; for, in the
face of all their efforts, she had been, and still was, constantly
extending the circle of her influence, and he had no doubt
would continue to do so without any assistance in the shape of
parliamentary enactments.

Sir JAMES DUKE contended that the meetirgs held through
out the country, on the subject of Papal aggression, were the
result of the spontaneous feelings of the people, and were not
to be attributed to the ietter of Lord John Russell to the Bishop
of Durham.

Mr. C. BRUCE said the measure must go further than it did
to satisfy the people either of Scotland or England.
Mr. F. MAULE contended the government had taken the
right course, viz., the middle one, and had been forced into
action to defend the Protestant constitution.
Mr. EcuLoy treated it as an attempt to re-enact the penal
laws.

Colonel Sinrnonp had no confidence in ministers, but his
duty to his sovereign would not allow him to oppose the bring;
ing in of the bill.

Mr. MUNTZ supported the bill, as lie knew no country where
the Pope had power to nominate bishops, or any Roman
Catholic country that enjoyed real liberty.
Mr. BROTHERTON, considering that the rights of the sove-
reign had been infringed, and the independence of the people
invaded, supported the bill as a question of civil rights rather
than religious liberty.
After a few words from Mr. O'CONNOR and Mr. SCHOLE-
FIELD, who opposed the motion, the house divided, when the
numbers were—For the motion, 395; against it, G 3: majority
for the bill, 332. The second reading was fixed for Friday
se'nnight, and the house adjourned.
The following is a summary of the House of Commons the
night of the division on Mr. Disraeli's motion :—Majority
(tellers included), 283; minority (ditto), 269; paired, 28; absent
Liberals, 35; absent Conservatives, 31; seats vacant (Notting-
hamshire, North Staffiardshire, Bedfordshire, Glamorganshire,
Falkirk, Pontefract, Dungannon, Dungarvan, London), 9;
speaker, 1; Sudbury, 2-658.

The foliowing are the pairs:--Against: R. B. Armstrong,
Sir 11. F. Davie, James Duff, T. S. Buncombe, J. E. Denison,
T. C, Granger, C. P. Grenfell, Lord E. Howard, Grogan Morgan,
Hon. E. Russell, J. L. Ricardo, R. B. Sheridan, C. K. Tynte.—
For : Marquis of Chandos, Sir P. Egerton. Mathew Bell,
Ormsby Gore, N. Sutton, Hon. T. Vesey, Sir J. Hope, Lord
Brooke, C. St. George, Lord Villiers, Sir E, Filmer, Lord
Castlereagh, Colonel Chatterton.