The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1851-05-20 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-MONDAY,

(CONTINUATION FROM FIRST EDITION OF TUESDAY LAST.)
Mr. ROEBUCK supported the amendment, referring to the
Emancipation Bill of 1829 as a parallel case.—Ttie SPEAKER
was decidedly of opinion that the present bill came under that
class of measures which did not require to be considered in
committee before their introduction.—Mr. M. GIBSON moved
that the point should he referred to a select committee to search
for precedents.—Mr. GRATTAN seconded the motion.—Mr.
REYNOLDS moved the adjournment of the debate.—The Sou-
CITOR-GENERAL contended that the standing order in ques-
tion referred to matters of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and not
to anything treated of in the present bill.—Mr. GLADSTONE
said if Mr. M. Gibson's motion for the appointment of a select
committee were allowed to be put to the vote, he should cer-
tainly vote for it, as it was evident that the precedents which
bad been adduced were most unsatisfactory.—LordJ. RUSSELL
saw no reason for referring the point to a select committee, as
the house was already in possession of every necessary infor-
mation.—Mr. BRIGHT thought if any doubt existed upon this
point, it was only fair to give the Roman Catholics the benefit
of that doubt.—The house divided: for adjourning the debate,
53; against it, 179; majority against, 126.—Mr. LAWLESS
moved the adjournment of the house, which was rejected by
145 to 36.—Mr. O'CONNEL and Mr. URQUHART opposed the
bill.—Mr. KEOGH adduced eminent legal authority in proof
that the first clause of the bill would include the second and
third, and would interfere with the spiritual rights of the
Catholics. He called upon Lord John Russell to give a plain
answer to the question, whether he intended to put the provi-
sions of the act in force in Ireland or not, and warned him of
the disastrous consequences which would inevitably ensue
if he should attempt to do so.—Lord JOHN RUSSELL said
be did not know what would be the consequence of passing the
bill, but he should not wish to exchangethe liberty which would
then be possessed by British subjects for that which was en-
joyed by the citizens of Rome. (Cheers.) He must still main-
tain that the present was a political measure, directed against
a political encroachment, and lie would not suffer that the
-name of religious liberty should be prostituted for the purpose
of covering foreign aggression. A cheers.)—Mr. " —RIGHT
said that no one seemed to know what harm had been
done by, or was to be apprehended from, the so-called aggres-
sion, or in what manner the evil might be remedied. He denied
that the creation of a Catholic bishop would be an encroachment
on the prerogative of the Queen ; and considered it to be per-
fectly ludicrous to talk of the independence of the kingdom being
imperilled by the act of the Pope. Thepresent bill was an insult to
the Catholics of this country, and he was fully satisfied, and
earnestly recommended that it should be withdrawn.—Mr.
SCULLY moved the adjournment of the debate.—Upon a di-
vision, the numbers were, for an adjournment 54, against it
265.—The motion being persisted in, Lord J. Russell withdrew
his opposition, and the debate was adjourned until Thursday
next. —The Property Tax Bill was read a third time.—The
other orders of the day were disposed of, and the House ad-
journed at 2 o'clock.