POSTSCRIPT.
SATURDAY.
In the House of Commons, last night, Lord JOHN RUSSELL stated the course of proceeding with public business which the Government now pro- poses to follow.
The Home Secretary would state the alterations and modifications which it was intended to make in the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill ; and would then propose to postpone the order for the second reading till Friday. Lord John trusted that, after such postponement, there would be no opposition to going into Committee at an early day—supposing the second reading to be agreed to. With respect to general business, there having been a considerable in- terval during which no public business has been done in the House, he hoped to consider the Navy Estimates in Committee on Monday ; and to take some votes for the Army and Ordnance, especially the vote for the number of men, as the Mutiny Act expires on the 21st of April. "It is not my intention to ask the House to come to any vote upon the Income-tax until Monday the 24th instant ; and on the preceding Friday, the 21st, my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will state any alterations and modi- fications he may mean to propose in the financial measures of the Govern- ment."
Sir GEORGE GREY then stated the modifications and alterations which he proposed to make in the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, if the House should consent to the second reading of it.
He first disposed of the suggestion strongly urged on the Government by Mr. Milner Gibson and others, with a view to the despatch of business, and to prevent the interposition before other important business of protracted -discussion on this bill, that the course suggested by Lord Stanley should be adopted. That course has been misapprehended : it was not suggested that the subject should be passed over with indifference by either House, but that both Houses should simultaneously pass resolutions expressing their strong -condemnation of the course taken by the Court of Rome, and then appoint Committees of the nature referred to. "That course would not give the go- by to the subject and enable the Government to proceed forthwith to the consideration of the other matters requiring attention; because Parliament would be involved in discussions probably as long, as discursive, and occupy- ing as much time, with reference to the resolution, as they would be with regard to the bill which is now before the House. And with what result ? I confess that in all my Parliamentary experience I do not remember a reso- lution passed simultaneously by both Houses of Parliament, except with the view of immediately adopting a bill founded upon it." The resolutions would be waste paper, and the titles might be assumed as ostentatiously as before in defiance of them. The Committees would receive statements and counter-statements calculated to exacerbate discussion, and to heighten ani- mosities, and they would maintain an indefinite expectation of large and comprehensive future legislation. Such a course would by no means be likely to enable Parliament to get through with the business at an earlier period than it is likely to get through the different stages of the present bill."
"It has been earnestly pressed on Government that Ireland should be exempted from the operation of the bill. This point was deeply considered ; the Government has reconsidered it, and has resolved that such an omission would be inconsistent with its duty, and an attempt to purchase an advan- tage which would be "tantamount to a betrayal of our trust." "I admit," -said Sir George "that there is a wide practical difference between the circumstances of Ireland and the circumstances of England and Scotland. It is impossible to overlook the fact which I have had frequent cause to advert to when addressing the House on former occasions, that the great majority of the population of Ireland are Roman Catholics, with a church not endowed by the State, which has existed since the time of the Reforms- lion to the present day in unbroken succession—a church which was at one time prohibited, at another time tolerated, and another time protected—a church with Bishops side by side with the Bishops of the Established Church; and that usages and practices have grown up, and have been sanctioned there, which have never been known and sanctioned in England, because there was not the same necessity for them, the circumstances of the two countries being wholly and essentially different. And this, in fact, consti- tutes—there is no use in concealing the fact—I have felt it all along my- self, and I am sure all whom I now address have felt it,—it is this which "constitutes the main difficulty in dealing as efficiently as we could wish to do with the case to which we now ask the assent of Parliament." But there doe a seem some ground for believing that the bill might interfere to a certain extent with practices and usages with which it is not the intention or desire of Government to interfere; "usages and practices which have been sanctioned for a length of time in Ireland, and to interfere with which now, would be, to a certain extent, a:hardship and injustice." The second clause can interfere with no spiritual functions or powers of the Roman Ca- tholic Bishops, as all spiritual acts are not enforced by the law courts, but receive the willing and free obedience of Roman Catholics so far as they bind the conscience ; and it is impossible that the third clause should con- flict with the provisions of the Bequests Act, inasmuch as the words of that act refer to prelates of the Church of Rome "officiating in any district," while the clauses of the bill apply only to the persons using the titles or dis- tinctions prohibited by the first clause. But in the ordination and collation of priests, the usage has been to describe the Roman Catholic prelate by the title of the see which he holds. "I have seen one of these instruments; it is in Latin; I don't remember the date, but it is of no consequence, for the practice, I am told, is invariably the same; and in that instru- ment the Archbishop is described as Archbishop of Dublin. Although it may be alleged that the production of such evidence renders the party as- suming such a title liable to be proceeded against by the Attorney-General, it appears that the courts of law have never regarded such an instrument as void." KM it is sometimes necessary in suits respecting the rights of parties to be- quests to give these documents in evidence ; this bill would render them invalid, and the appointments made by them void. Bequests have also been made to prelates by the titles which the bill would prohibit ; and the Irish emits have enforced those bequests, without reference to the prohibitory clause of the act of 1829. -On the 3d July 1833, a decree was made by the Irish Court of Chancery, in reference to a sum of 13,000/. dire in the creation and endowment of a convent of the PrmMdjo ,Itk•Loy Sisters of Mercy in the archdiocese of Tuam ; and Sir George has lidetil.Mr.4 A,, sashed with this account of Sir Edward Sugden's decree- " The sums left to Roman Catholic charities in this ease exceed 30,0001. The be- quest in the will of the testator was to the Most Reverend Dr. Murray, 111,111111 C l- tholle Archbishop of Dublin, and the Most Reverend Dr. Kelly, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Tuam, and their successors in the said respceti,c sees for the time Swing. The bill was tiled after the death of Dr. Kelly, and Dr. M•liale a as made a co-plaintiff with Dr. Murray, ns the successor of Dr. Kelly in the see of Tuam ; and the fund was administered in that state of the record."
The case is only in accordance with the general practice of the Irish Court of Chancery, to regard these as good trusts. Now the bill would in this re- spect have an effect certainly not in the centemplation of the Goveinment, because while they have been anxious to maintain the dignitv of the Crown, to assert its supremacy within these realms, and to uphold the independence of the country, they had no desire to deprive any part of their fellow sub- jects of any civil or religious rights of which they are in possesssion. The Government has anxiously considered whether, while perseverim. with the bill, they can in practice place new impediments, not before 'known to the law, in the way of applying property to the use of the Church which is not endowed by the State but supported by the voluntary contributions of our Roman Catholic fellow subjects. " we might, no doubt, have omitted certain words, and inserted others, to meet the particular cases to which I have referred ; but after giving the subject all possible consideration, we have come to the conclusion, that by attempting amendments of that kind we might only be raising mien' points of discussion, and giving occasion for new objections not vet started, and might after all not completely effect the objects we sincerely and honestly have in view. Under these circumstances we have come to the conclusion, that if the House, after hearing my statement, shall agree to the second reading of the bill, we shall, when the House shall go into Committee upon it, propose to omit alto- gether the second and third clauses. ("Hear, hear!" and a laugh.) With regard to the fourth clause, that is wholly ancillary, and a corollary to the second and third clauses ; and therefore we shall also propose to mint "— (The remainder of the sentence was drowned in the shouts of ironical laughter which rang through the House.) The ease of the Scottish Bishops of the English Church Sir George dis- posed of in a parenthetical manner. Ile stated his belief that those Bishops have no shadow of right whatever to assume or use titles drawn from Scotch dioceses. " There are those who think it is against positive law—the Act of Union embodying the Act of Settlement that may involve a nice question, but at all events they are without law, I believe, in this. The usage has grown up only within the last twenty years, and it is not now universal among them ; and in introducing words exempting Bishops of the Protestant Episcopal communion in Scotland from any penalties to which they might be subject under the bill, I should feel it my duty to provide that the ex- emption shall not be held to give them any right to the use or assumption of titles to which they are not already by law entitled." In the instance when recently an address was presented to her Majesty signed by some of the Scottish Prelates with the addition of dioaesan titles' he did not with- hold the address because it was also the address of a large body of other per- sons besides those Bishops; but ha wrote an official letter intimating that in laying that address before her Majesty no sanction was given to the unrecog- nized assumption. Sir George met "an objection which it is impossible not to anticipate, namely, that the bill, reduced as it will then be, to the prohibition contained in the first clause, will not be worthy of the occasion, and not justify the expectation of the country." "To this extent it ought to justify that expect- ation, that it will be a Parliamentary declaration that the titles assumed, they are ostentatiously under the authority of the Pope, are not to be borne by persons claiming authority in this country. It will be a national protest against that act—a national declaration that the authority assumed is one which Parliament will not allow to be exercised." The existing law has not been a dead letter : the Roman Catholic Bishops "in their communications with Government, in approachino-' the Throne or the Legislature, have paid an obedience and respect to the law by abstaining from the use of any titles pro- hibited to them." Instmices'of this have recently occurred, both in petitions to her Majesty and to that house.
While personally of opinion that the bill will be a national protest and declaration against the act of the Pope which has raised so much indigna- tion, yet it is not to any act of Parliament that Ministers look for the maintenance of the Protestant religion in these realms, but to that deep feeling of attachment to the Protestant faith which the members of every Protestant denomination possess, "and to which they have given utterance in language clear, unambiguous, and unmistakable." "It is to their _just appreciation of the blessings connected with the maintenance of the Pro- testant faith in this country that I look for the maintenance of that faith, coupled, as it no doubt will be, with the increased diligence and activity of Protestant ministers in their respective spheres, mined, as I believe, with the armour of truth, to resist that spiritual aggression with which they have been threatened."
In conclusion, Sir George moved that the order of the day for the second reading of the bill be postponed to Friday next.
Mr. Jonx STUART declared that the modified measure would in no respect answer to the measure for which the House was prepared by the speech of Lord John Russell : a greater farce, or anything more deplo- rably absurd, there never was. Mr. MILNER GIRSON stated that he had not advocated inquiry instead of legislation : he advised to do nothing, and to do that needed no preliminary inquiry. But if they resolved to legislate, it was better to legislate with information than without it. The evils of inquiry might be great, but those of ignorant legislation would be greater; the greatest evil of all would be to bring in a bill to do one thing and find that it was going to do something else. Sir ROBERT INGLis feared they were really going to do nothing. If the measure -was only milk-and-water before the milk was now taken out of it ; it is the play of Hamlet with Ilandet omitted. If Lord John hoped to compound with his creditors by payment of such a dividend of pence for pounds, it would be impossible to wish him a good deliverance. Mr- BANKES suggested, that Ministers had better complete the discharge of their promises to the Throne and the people by adjourning the consi- deration of the amended bill for six months. Mr. GLAnsToNE reserved the expression of his decided sentiments" till he could enter on the subject in detail.
and rescripta, with which it is not desired to interfere. In reference to synodical action, the Law-officers have found it impossible, from the "im- perfection of language," to frame such an enactment "as shall prohibit only what we wish to prohibit, without touching upon what we wish to avoisi."
The stream of Protestant comment on the miserable shortcoming of the bill was again swelled by Mr. NEWDEOATE—who exclaimed, in the old (potation "Quantum mutatus ab illo Hectare"; by Mr. STANFORD—who thought the metaphorical pleasantries of Sir Robert Inglis a very ill omen for the bill ; by Mr. PLuaneraa ; and by Colonel SIBTRORP—who would never be deceived, caught, and misled again.
The order of the day for the second reading was postponed till Friday.
Mr. LOCKE KING, amidst cheering from the lower benches, brought in his bill extending the right of voters for counties to all occupiers of tene- ments of the annual value of ten pounds. It was read a first time, and ordered to be printed ; and Mr. King fixed the second reading for the 2d of April. (Cries of The first of April!" and laughter.) In reply to questions by Sir Da LACY EVANS, on the conditions as to payment of cost under which the Caffre war is to be conducted, Lord Joins RUSSELL stated, that Earl Grey has certainly written in the strong- est manner to Sir Harry Smith, "enjoining him to take care that in any future Caffic war no expenditure should take place of which this country could be called upon to defray the cost : in short, his noble friend gave it to be understood that the colony must bear the expense of future wars." The Government will not incur any expense without laying a statement of it before the House to enable the House to judge of its propriety. One regiment has been sent on the responsibility of the Government ; and the Duke of Wellington is of opinion that it may be necessary to send another.
In the House of Peers, a discussion was raised by Lord Beoucasass on introducing a bill for extending the jurisdiction of the County Courts. Among the matters chiefly touched on, was the establishment of courts of reconcilement, after the manner of those existing with great advantage in Switzerland and Hamburg. Of thirty thousand cases in Hamburg, more than two-thirds were settled by the parties acting on the advice of the Judge of the Court of Reconcilement. Lord CruarWORTH stated, that more than 150,0001. a year is drawn from Chancery suitors in fees, or 10/. a head on each suitor. Lord L&NG.DALE expressed a strong opinion that the costs of administering justice should be borne by the public. The bill called forth general expressions of approval ; but objections were hinted, which will be urged at subsequent stages.
Previous page
