St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-02-05
The Bill to Remove Religious
Disability Voted Down
in Commons.
Eloquent Plea for It's Passage
by the Ex-Premiep Of rsi
England. w
Resignation Of the Austrian
Minister Of Finance
Accepted.
Portuguese Insurgents in
League With Spanish Rev
OlutioniStS.

LONDON, rep. 4.-ln the mouse Ot
commons to-day Mr.. Gladstone moved
the second reading of the bill to remove
religious disability, and during the
course of his remarks he said: "When
we undertook by this bill to remove
from the statutes an injustice and an
anomaly which are discredit to US, we
hoped that it would be necessary to
spend only few minutes on new
bill. Now that we needed to trespass
at greater length upon parliament
there were mutterings and murmurS.
AS chancellor of the exchequer in 1868,
| pleaded for the opening of the most
difficult offices, to which the most OBJ
lection wa S made. 1t is seriously doubt
full now whether Roman Catholics are
legally disabled from holding the offices
of yiceroy of ireland and lord chancellor
of England. The Catholic relief act did
not impose in so many words disability
to hold these offices. 1t provided that
no Catholic should be entitled to hold
them otherwise than as now legally entl-
Ied.' what" Mr.. Gladstone asked,
''is the Catholics legal position? Be-
fore the act of 1929 every subject was
entitled presumably to hold any crown
Office. but Catholics were debarred by
he test act" Mr.. Gladstone added that
he and number of good lawyers, in
Guiding the chief justice, were not
aware that there was any disability, eX-
cept the test act, which was re-
pealed in 1866. 1t was contested
whether that repeal effectually quail
fed Catholics. Parliament, when it re.
pealed the test act, had no specific in
tention TO open these offices, and 1t was,
therefore, his duty not to be deferred
from prosecuting this bill, the object
of which was simply to remove an an
omaly which was supposed to exclude,
and perhaps did exclude, certain of the
queens subjects from holding certain
Offices. If the bill was read
a second time, he proposed TO
move that it be passed through
committee, pro forma reserving that the
substantial committee be taken after
the report of the bill from that commit,
tee. The bill. Mr.. Gladstone said
further, did not affect the succession OF
the crown, because the crown was not
open to competition. The home Secre
tary, he added, is himself Catholic,
and he stood as near the sovereign as the
chancellor of the eXchequer, and nearer
than the viceroy of Ireland. Yet no
body disputed his right to hold his Of
fee and he, Mr.. Gladstone, knew of no
obstacle against Jew, Mohammedan,
Hindoo or non-religiouS person being
chancellor of the eXchequer. Will
lam Henry Smith, first lord of the
treasury. asked why Mr.. Gladstone's
speech was made now instead of
during the many years he had
held Office. Mr.. Gladstone retorted
that he had delivered similar speeches
in 1867. Mr.. Smith replied that Mr..
Gladstone then was in opposition, and
that moreover, in 1881, Mr.. Gladstone,
in answering question on the same
subject, said that the government did
not intend to advocate the abolition OF
all the remaining religious checks,
such as prevented the chan
cellor or sovereign being Catholics.
Catholics did not demand the bill. Mr..
Smith opposed the bill because it APP
piled to two persons only, and moved
that it be read. after the second time,
six months hence. After further de-
bate, Mr.. GladStOne'S motion for the
second reading of the bill now was re-
ferred the vote being 223 in the affirm
alive and 256 in the negative.
On the religious disabilities bill Home
Secretary Matthews and Sir William
Vernon HarcOurt abStained from vOt-
ing. Three Conservatives and nine
Unionists, including Mr.. Chamberlain
and Sir Henry James, supported the bill.
The Irish members, including Mr..
Parnell, voted solidly in support of Mr..
Gladst0ne's motion for the second read
ing of the bill to remove religious dis
ability.