« ForrigeFortsett »
Queen. In that way the sanction see the day when the law was invaof the three branches of the Legis- riably enforced.
The country lature would have been given to could not live under such a state the determined protest previously of things. A man might be a tresmade by the country at large. passer on a common every time he
The Marquis of Clanricarde ob- crossed it, but would you punish served that the Government was him for every such act? Penal not responsible for the amend- laws were to be executed only when ments. In past times, the honour the benefit of the State called for of the Crown had been vindicated such serious. consequences. Reby the Roman Catholics of this ferring to the argument of the country, when their privileges were Duke of Argyll, that religious liless; now when liberty had in- berty did not imply the right of creased, and in spite of efforts to every church to develop itself at prevent it education had spread, its own discretion, he carried it the Pope would not be able to en- out by saying, if that were so, force rescripts giving unlawful the Inquisition might be revived titles in derogation of the rights in this country. It was said that of the Crown of England. the Bill would be disregarded : if
Lord Monteagle characterized the Catholic clergy should attempt the Bill as a complication of blun- to raise an agitation, a rebellion, or ders and injustice. The Pope's any outbreak of violence against conduct was unjustifiable ; but the law, it would be for Parliawhat could be more arrant quackery ment to pass measures to cause it than to offer this Bill as a vindi- to be respected. cation? or what more unjust than The Earl of St. Germans still to answer the act of the Pope with demanded the explanation of the a penal measure upon our own fel- Bill which had been required from low-subjects?
the legal authorities who supported The Lord Chancellor admitted, it. In reply, they had received and was ready to accept, the respon
from the Chancellor a No-Popery sibility of Government for the Bill. speech, better fitted for the meriHe held that Lord John Russell's dian of the Mansion House than spirited letter to the Bishop of for the House of Lords. If Lord Durham had “disabused the pub- John Russell's letter was a soothlic mind:” “but for that letter, ing letter, it might be said that Her Majesty's throne would have the proposition to trample under been shaken.” He argued legally, foot the Cardinal's hat would be that the Queen was supreme over calculated to sooth irritation. Still all courts in this country in rela- stronger measures were hinted at tion to ecclesiastical matters. One if the law should be resisted: what of the counts in the indictment of was that but a returning to penal O'Connell arraigned him for estab- legislation ?
legislation ? Lord St. Germans lishing courts of arbitration; but concluded with a most earnest rethis rescript established a regular ference to Ireland. I know hierarchy in explicit terms, “ with something of Ireland. I am sure all the jurisdiction incident to such I take a great interest in all that a hierarchy.” With reference to relates to the people of that counlaws still in force but not put in try, and I can unfeignedly declare action, he said he hoped never to that I never felt so strongly and deeply on any political ques- Gazette announcing that a subscription affecting them as I do upon tion was opened to build a church this. I cannot contemplate the in London, and that among the adoption of this Bill without dis- persons appointed to receive submay. You may put down rebellion scriptions was Cardinal Wiseman, with the sword, but, my Lords, how "Archbishop of Westminster." He will you contend with
(Lord Minto) never saw that para
graph until he entered the House “« The unconquerable will And study of revenge, immortal hate,
that evening, when a copy of the And courage never to submit or yield?” paper was placed in his hands.
On a former occasion he had acThe Earl of Minto gave the knowledged he was aware that an latest explanation respecting his intention existed of creating Carmission to Rome.
dinal Wiseman Archbishop of When there, he had had a con- Westminster. Everyone knew versation with the Pope on the it. (Laughter.) It was spoken of question of resuming diplomatic on all hands. At the time that relations between the two coun- appeared, he understood that sometries. He told the Pope openly, thing had occurred, and that the that we should not be willing to elevation of Cardinal Wiseman receive in this country an ecclesi- would not take place. He thought astic as his representative. The he could perceive in the paragraph Pope said, he could not undertake evidence that Cardinal Wiseman to send a Minister who was not an was not the person referred to. ecclesiastic; but added, that this The Cardinal was not named in need not occasion any difficulty in the paragraph, and he believed the transaction of business between that it referred to Dr. Gregory. the two Courts, because we might Lord Aberdeen.—“What differadopt the course suggested by the ence does that make? The paranoble Earl who had moved the graph speaks of an Archbishop amendment—the course taken by of Westminster.'” the Governments of Prussia and Lord Minto. - It certainly Russia, and accredit a Minister to showed an intention to create him. On that understanding mat- somebody "Archbishop of Westters stood at that time; but when minster. Of course he was aware a clause, supported by the noble of the intention, as he stated beEarl (Aberdeen), was introduced fore, long before he visited Rome. into the Diplomatic Relations Bill ("Hear," and laughter.) in their Lordships' House, the Pope Lord Fitzwilliam said, that he said that that circumstance had en- did not quite understand the effect tirely altered the state of the case, of the Bill. He would have preand that after that parliamentary ferred a declaration condemning refusal to entertain such a Minister the assumption of titles, and he from him as could alone represent would not have interfered with the him, nothing on earth should in- peculiar circumstances of Ireduce him to receive a Minister land. accredited from this country to The Earl of Hardwicke observed, Rome. Lord Aberdeen had said, that the Bill was not thoroughly that while Lord Minto was at Rome supported by any party: he should a paragraph appeared in the Roman vote for it reluctantly, to maintain
the honour and dignity of the opponents being the Earl of AberCrown.
deen and the Earl of EllenboAfter a brief reply from the Mar- rough, supported by other Peers. quis of Lansdowne, the House di- Lord Aberdeen pointed out, that vided, with the following result:- the word “otherwise" prohibited
the appointment of any bishops, Contents. For second reading- and yet they exempted the bishops Present.
of the Scottish Episcopal Church. Proxies.
The Duke of Argyll strongly ob
265 jected to the provision which enNon-contents
abled any informer to sue for the Present
penalty, and he moved to omit it. Proxies
The Lord Chancellor ascribed the 38 insertion of that clause to the ab
sence of the Irish Members in the Majority for the second
House of Commons.
That was reading
227 no reason, said the Duke of New
castle, why the Peers should neg
lect their duty. But in fact, he The Bill, thus sanctioned by the added, Ministers were afraid to let votes of a great majority of the a word of the Bill be altered, lest Peers, passed through Committee the other House should have an in a single night. A good deal of opportunity of revising it. The questioning and explanation, how- amendment was negatived by 61 ever, took place at this stage be- to 26. tween the opponents and sup- The first clause was carried by porters of the measure. Lord 77 to 26, and the other sections Monteagle addressed a string of and the preamble without a diviquestions to the Lord Chancellor sion. respecting the operation of the On the 29th of July Parliament various clauses, but professed him- was at length relieved of the meaself unsatisfied with the explana- sure with which it had so long and nations of the learned Lord. Lord painfully travailed, by the Bill beMonteagle then moved an amend- ing read a third time in the House ment, supported by Lord Camoys, of Lords. The final stage was to exempt Ireland from the ope- not suffered to pass sub silentio. ration of the Bill. Viscount Can- The Earl of Aberdeen repeated ning, and the Earls of Wicklow some of his general arguments and St. Germans condemned the against the policy of legislaapplication of the measure to that tion on the subject ; announcing country, but could not vote for the his intention of recording his proamendment, because it drew a dis- test against it. He argued that tinction between the supremacy of this Bill would prove most injuthe Crown in the two parts of the rious to the public interests; he anUnited Kingdom.
ticipated from it greater evil than On a division, Lord Monteagle's he could contemplate
without proposition was negatived by 82 feelings of the deepest horror." to 17.
The Bishop of Oxford made a More opposition arose on spe- speech of some length to explain cific clauses of the Bill, the leading the reasons which induced him to give his assent to the Bill. His ment to regulate the admission of main argument in favour of the Papal bulls : such a regulation Bill was, that the appointment of would have prevented all this unRoman Catholic bishops consti- happy dissension.
He regretted tuted an aggression in this coun- various amendments that have been try; and he supported that con- lost in the Commons; and, inter clusion by distinguishing the act of alia, the want of a provision for the Bishop of Rome from certain controlling religious houses by a acts of the central Christian visitation. authority at Jerusalem in olden The Duke of Argyll defended times, appointing bishops in cer- the Bill against the support of Dr. tain foreign countries still under Wilberforce, and himself against heathen control.
some allusions which the Bishop “England,” he said, " is a Chris- had made to him. He remarked, tian country, and the new bishops that though he was willing to deare appointed to supersede the Pro- fend the Church of England, this testant bishops; so that if there was not the time to be singing Io were a revolutiou in favour of the Pæans upon the state of that Roman Catholic faith,
— which Church, which was the only Church may God avert, — the Bishop of day by day and week by week Rome would have swept away all giving forth converts to the Church our ancient sees, would have no of Rome. necessity to try the existing bi- The Bill was supported by Earl shops for heresy, but find his work Fortescue-who looked for a more ready done to his hands, with his stringent measure from Parlianew bishops in full power. Thus ment if the provisions of this one the Bishop of Rome has interfered should be evaded; by the Earl of with our institutions, and parti- Glengall, Lord Redesdale, and Earl cularly with those religious insti- Grey—the last mainly in defence tutions which England has esta- of his own consistency. It was blished for the instruction of her opposed by Lord Stuart de Decies; people.” It was on these grounds by Earl Nelson-who objected to that he supported the Bill, -first, the aggression, but also to penal because the Bishop of Rome had legislation ; by the Marquis of endeavoured to remove us from Sligo; and Lord Gage. the category of Christian people; The Bill having been read a and, secondly, because he had been third time, Lord Monteagle moved assailing the Church of England, an amendment, providing that the by attempting to abolish, and, as Bill "should not apply to, or in far as his rescript went, actually any way affect, any act done by abolishing, its separate bishoprics. any Archbishop, Bishop, or Dean, Such aggressions he held that, as a by virtue of his appointment by nation, we were bound to repel. the See of Rome, or create any The Bishop accepted the Bill penalty, disability, or offence, by for that purpose; but avowed he reason of an instrument of apwas quite discontented with it. pointment, or the assumption or He totally objected to persecution. use of an ecclesiastical title conHe objected to a concordat accord- ferred or purporting to be coning to the general idea, but re- ferred by the authority of the See gretted that there was no arrange of Rome; provided that the ecclesiastical name, style, desiguation, or if he had informed the Governtitle assumed, or used by any such ment that such was his intention Archbishop, Bishop, or Dean, in -and if he had confined himself, the holy orders of the Roman both in his brief and in the manCatholic Church, shall be the style date announcing the brief, to the or title of Roman Catholic Arch- designations which were contained bishop, Roman Catholic Bishop, in the proposed amendment—there or Roman Catholic Dean, as the would not have been the least obcase may be, officiating or having jection to his so doing. Lord episcopal functions within the dio- Lansdowne would go further, and cese or district in which he is au
say that even now, although the thorized to officiate, in respect to Pope had not taken that course, all persons and congregations of there was not one of the spiritual persons professing the Roman Ca- functions of the Roman Catholic tholic religion within the said dio- Church which, stripped of all concese or district."
nection with the assumption of terThe Marquis of Lansdowne op- ritorial titles, could not be suffiposed the addition, maintaining ciently exercised under the Bill that it was needless. He would as it now stood, without the addisay at once and without hesitation, tion proposed by his noble Friend. that if the Pope had desired to After a short debate the amendsecure, as it was a lawful object for ment was withdrawn, and so the him to secure, the benefit of epis- Bill passed, and shortly afterwards copal administration to the Roman received the royal assent. Catholic subjects of the Queen