House nevertheless found abundance of ferent but on perfectly conflicting grounds; time to discuss a Bill for establishing di-and the arguments of the opponents of the plomatic relations with Rome, and for pro- measure, if let alone, would be found to moting railways in Italy, which many per- destroy one another, and leave a perfect sons, too, thought affected the Act of Set- blank; and he also thought that a greater tlement and the foundation of the mon- proof that nothing could be said against archy ? He preferred the interests of the Bill, could not be afforded than the fact Ireland to the interests of Italy. What- that everything but the Bill had been disever might be the merits or demerits of cussed. They had had musty theology, the present measure, a large proportion of feudal history, Irish distress, and the relathe Protestants of this country did feel tions between landlord and tenant-in fact, that it was of most vital importance, and everything but the Bill itself. One hon. required full and fair consideration; and a Member (the hon. Member for Youghal) large proportion of the Roman Catholics also said that this was a most outrageous Bill, felt that it was insulting to their religion. | because it tended to destroy the indepenThis was always the effect of half-and-half dence of the Pope; and another hon. Memmeasures; and he should be failing in his ber argued that it was a most dangerous duty if he did not protest against the measure being hurried forward at the present time. He should therefore, to the utmost of his power, resist it at each stage, and on every legitimate occasion. In consequence of this Bill being allowed to lie dormant for so long a time, many hon. Members had left London, supposing that it would be dropped; and he complained of the stealthy way in which it was now pro-animal spirits and health, that they were posed to carry it through the House. VISCOUNT PALMERSTON claimed the vote of the hon. and learned Member (Mr. Napier) in favour of the Bill, for the very reasons which he had given for opposing it. The hon. and learned Member had referred to a number of Bills connected with Ireland, intimating that they ought to be passed, if not in the present, at least in the next Session; and yet in the same breath, with respect to the present Bill, which the hon. Member contended was one of great importance, and required full discussion, the hon. and learned Member, instead of allowing the House to enter into the discussion of it during the existing Session, proposed that its discussion should be put off until next Session, in order that it might then stand in the way of the consideration of those other measures which he had intimated he would support. The hon. and learned Member said that the Bill was being stealthily proceeded with at the end of the Session; but his noble Friend (Lord J. Russell) had already explained that no deception had been practised on the House with respect to the intention of the Government to go on with the Bill. The present debate appeared to him to be the most singular in character that he had ever heard in that House; because almost every Member who had opposed the Bill had done so not only on dif measure, because its effect was to destroy the independence of the Crown. How it could have both of these effects was not explained. He should, therefore, leave these parties to fight the matter out among themselves; but it gave him great and sincere pleasure to see so many hon. Gentlemen who had outlived the fatigues of this laborious Session in the enjoyment of such determined to show that, whatever time they had spent in that House, they were still vigorous, active, and alive; and he only hoped that during the recess and the ensuing Session they would continue to possess the same faculty to devote their energies to the public service. He had been told that he had made a speech of great brevity; and this reproach was cast on him by the hon. Members for Youghal and Stafford. All he could say was, that short as his speeches might be in general, yet, adding them to the speeches made in the course of the Session by those two hon. Members, they would be found-if the average were taken, and of course he only meant the average-to have occupied more time than those of any other hon. Member. The Bill before the House was a plain measure for remedying what he considered to be a gross absurdity-for removing a practical, political, and commercial inconvenience; and as to those deep schemes and that mysterious mischief which the Government were supposed to contemplate, they had existence only in the imagination of those who accused the Government, but not in the intentions of the promoters of the Bill. Some merriment had been occasioned by the mention of railways in Italy; but all he had said on that subject, by way of illustration, was, not that the British Government without expressing his wish that diplomatic relations should be established. Really some hon. Members would be "more Popish than the Pope." It was only the other day that the Italian States entered into a commercial league; if we were to have commercial relations with this league, we must have them with the members of it, and the Pope was one. MR. GORING believed it was important that the House should now proceed to the Spirits Bill and the Copper Duties Bill; he begged to move that the debate be adjourned. CAPTAIN HARRIS said, if the Bill was strictly confined to carrying into effect the principle of allowing diplomatic intercourse with a temporal prince, he (Captain Harris) was not disposed to vote against it. wanted to make railways in that country, but that if railway communications were created there, the arrangements connected with which might be of importance to the intercourse of England with her possessions in other portions of the globe, and to her commercial interests in other respects, England required the authority of an Act of Parliament, in order to enter into those diplomatic relations with Rome which she maintained with every other State in the world. Some hon. Gentlemen, who had a horror of any connexion with the head of the Catholic Church, had asked whom the British Government proposed to treat with; MR. BRIGHT said, the Opposition were and they urged it as a reason for post- pursuing a course which would make it poning the Bill that, perhaps, the Pope impossible for any Government to carry on was no longer the sovereign of Rome. the business of the country; they would Thus they took both sides of the question, neither let the Government measures pass, just as it suited them. At one time they nor take the reins of Government themobjected to entering into diplomatic rela-selves. As for the present Bill, there tions with Rome because the Pope was the might not be much good in it, but there Sovereign Pontiff, and at another because could not be much harm. "The British somebody else might be the sovereign. lion" seemed to be frightened at a mere The hon. Member for Youghal (Mr. An- ghost. stey) represented that this measure was not necessary, and that diplomatic communications were lawful already; then surely he need not object to the Bill, if others thought it necessary, and considered the law doubtful. The Bill, in his view, would be but surplusage. Either he or the hon. Member for Stafford (Mr. Anstey or Mr. Urquhart) had quoted cases in which there had been, as he said, diplomatic intercourse. Why, that was the case for this Bill-that from the very necessity of things it was totally impossible that a State like England could separate itself fully, and disconnect itself entirely, from any other State in Europe; that if the law prevented formal intercourse, communication must take place through unacknowledged channels; and that a great country should do openly what it did at all. Then it was urged that the measure would be degrading to the Pope; that it would tend to put him under constraint; that what he did after these relations should be established would be done under duress, and be protested against, like the acts he did under the constraint imposed upon him by Napoleon. Why, not only the present Pope, but also the late, had frequently expressed a great desire that there should be diplomatic relations between this country and Rome the late Pope never allowed an opportunity to pass which was offered by the visit of any distinguished Englishman at Rome, The House divided on the question that the debate be adjourned: - Ayes 32; Noes 103: Majority 71. Question again put, that the Speaker do now leave the chair. CAPTAIN VYSE moved that the House should adjourn. LORD J. RUSSELL said, he perceived that the hon. Member for the University of Dublin had just left the House, at which he was not surprised; for, being a Gentleman of the highest respectability, he doubtless had too much regard for his own character to vote for the Motion now made. MR. FORBES protested against the inferential imputation conveyed by the noble Lord's language. The hon. Member for Manchester, too, had ventured to charge the Members on the opposition side of the House with having obstructed the course of the Government during the Session; but he (Mr. Forbes) appealed to the noble Lord himself whether any Opposition had ever acted towards a Government with greater forbearance. The country would not fail to contrast the conduct of the Opposition towards the Government, with that of a section of the House of which the Member for Manchester was one of the leaders, when Ministers de manded additional powers to enable them | Barron, Sir H. W. to preserve the public peace. MR. SPOONER assured the noble Lord and the House that he was not going to repeat what he had said upon the subject in the morning. All he wished to say was, that he thought the remarks of the noble Lord upon a Gentleman of the high character of the hon. and learned Member for the University of Dublin LORD J. RUSSELL: All he had said was, that although the hon. and learned Gentleman was strenuously opposed to the Bill, and would give it his opposition in every stage, still he would not lend himself to any plan of obstruction to the Bill by repeated Motions for adjournment; and he did not wonder that, acting upon that declaration and in accordance with his high character, when we saw that plan adopted, he had left the House. MR. SPOONER: That explanation then very certainly threw a slur upon all those Gentlemen who had joined in the late division. If that was to be the way in which the conscientious conduct of hon. Gentlemen was to be attacked in that House, they might be sure there would be no flinching on his side. If faction could fairly be attributed to any one, it was to the noble Lord and Her Majesty's Government. Did the noble Lord mean to pass the Bill with, or without, the concurrence of the House of Commons? Did he mean to say that one hundred Members supporting him was really and unequivocally an expression of opinion on the part of the House of Commons ? He had never been in the habit of setting himself up against the opinion of the House; but he must repudiate the unjustifiable charge of the noble Lord, both for himself and those hon. Gentlemen who had joined with him in the late division. He felt bound to resent that charge, and he was not to be bullied out of the line of conduct which he had laid down for himself, namely, that of an hon. and independent Member of that House. He would still oppose the Bill in every way which the constitutional Parliamentary privileges would allow. The House subsequently divided upon the question, that the House will now resolve itself into a Committee:-Ayes 111; Noes 34: Majority 77. Bellew, R. M. Bernal, R. Dodd, G. Hobhouse, rt. hon. Sir J. Wellesley, Lord C. Lewis, G. C. Wood, rt. hon. Sir C. TELLERS. Tufnell, H. List of the NOES. Blackstone. W. S. Forester, hon. G. C. W. Plowden, W. H. C. Arundel and Surrey, Goring, C. Earl of Bagshaw, J. Frewen, C. H. Grogan, E. Hamilton, G. A. Baring, rt.hon, Sir F. T. Hildyard, T. B. T. Reid, Col. Renton, J. C. Robinson, G. R. Spooner, R. Tyrell, Sir J. T. {COMMONS} MR. ANSTEY proposed in the 1st Clause the striking out of the words "notwithstanding anything to the contrary now in force, is to be," in line nine, and the insertion of the words "it is" in line ten. The effect of this Amendment would be, to leave the law as it at present is according to the authority of Lord Campbell. [The hon. and learned Member here quoted from Hansard of 1847, a part of Lord Campbell's speech.] It was no doubt in consequence of these opinions of Lord Campbell that this Bill had been introduced; and the Roman Catholics of this country learned to their consternation that their favourite Ministers of State had determined that the Pope should have less authority henceforward in England and Scotland than was granted to him by the Act of Toleration in 1791. It was therefore because he would rescue the religious freedom at once of the Roman Catholics and Protestants, that he proposed this Amendment. LORD J. RUSSELL said, both Lord Campbell and Lord Cottenham had no doubts as to the law; but they said there might be doubts, though they had none; and whilst the matter was not entirely clear it would not be safe to act, and it was to remove those doubts that the words were introduced which the hon. and learned Member proposed to omit. Amendment negatived. " MR. C. PEARSON moved the addition of which he had given notice, to the effect, that the diplomatic intercourse with Rome should be touching and concerning international, civil, commercial, and political relations." If it was really the intention of the Government to confine the powers of its representative to such diplomatic business as would be conducted with any other State, there could be no objection to his Amendment; but if the exposition of the hon. Member for Oxford was right, and it was intended to qualify the British representative to communicate with the See of Rome regarding our domestic affairs in Ireland, through the instrumentality of the Catholic priesthood, it would be necessary so to qualify the Bill. In either case an Amendment was necessary to remove doubts. The noble Lord would find it more expedient to limit the powers of the with the Court of Rome. 512 ambassador within distinct boundaries as to the spiritual and temporal jurisdiction of the Sovereign of the Roman States, than to leave them open to a misconstruction on his part. Obscure hints had been heard of an intention on the part of the Pope to portion out this country into bishoprics; and if this Bill was to be used for the purpose described by the hon. Baronet, of tranquillising Ireland by exercising an influence over the Roman Catholic clergy, he had serious apprehensions that this state of things would be hereafter made an excuse for adding another link to the chain which bound our Church and State together. He should take the sense of the Committee upon this proposal. The SOLICITOR GENERAL hoped the House would not accede to the proposal of the hon. Gentleman, for if it produced any effect at all, it would be an injurious effect. It was proposed to establish diplomatic relations with the Court of Rome, in the same manner as with the Court of Russia, Prussia, or any other Court; but if these words were inserted in the Bill, in cases where there was the least ingredient of a spiritual character, it would be injurious. Questions of a mixed character might arise, though in the result they were of a temporal nature, and in such no interference could take place. Suppose the Pope introduced any regulation as to the Roman Catholics of Canada, this qualification would prevent any interference. At present the Pope might divide this country into bishoprics and archbishoprics; and if the Amendment were agreed to, he might do so still; but if we had free diplomatic relations with him, the British Government might interfere to prevent such a division. MR. ANSTEY thought, that the real object and tendency of the Bill had now been indicated. For "Canada" read "Ireland," and a good key to the Ministerial intentions was supplied. He could see no reason why the Government should refuse compliance with the proposal of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Lambeth. If the noble Lord at the head of the Government really meant to deal fairly with the House and the country, and not conceal anything, he would rise and express his willingness to agree to the Amendment of his hon. Friend. He would move that the Chairman report progress, order that the subject might be more fully discussed. in SIR R. H. INGLIS wished to ask the The Committee divided on the question that the words be added: Noes 93: Majority 63. Ayes 30; noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) whether, | pose the Pope were sent to Avignon, as if the Bill provided for diplomatic inter- had happened before, would it be lawful course with the head of any other State or not under this Bill to communicate with than Rome, the Amendment now under him there? If the Bill had any meaning, consideration would be objected to? The it was to settle this question; and it ought Pope had two distinct characters, his tem- not to be evaded under an obscurity of poral authority as a prince, and his spiri- terms. tual authority as a Pontiff, and the Bill was intended to authorise the Government to enter into engagements with him in his double capacity. That was the reason why they opposed the Amendment of the hon. Member (Mr. Pearson). The real object of the Bill was clearly to enable the Government to ask the Pope to use certain influence with respect to his Catholic subjects in Ireland, which the Government did not feel themselves at liberty at present to do. List of the AYES. Anstey, T. C. Bruen, Col. Mandeville, Visct. Maxwell, hon. J. P. Napier, J. Newdegate, C. N. Pigott, F. Reid, Col. Plowden, W. H. C. Renton, J. C. Robinson, G. R. Talfourd, Serj. Thompson, G. Urquhart, D. Vyse, R. H. R. H. TELLERS. Pearson, C. VISCOUNT PALMERSTON begged, in reply, to ask a question of his hon. Friend who had often applied to him to make representations to the Government of Sardinia in favour of the Protestants of the Vaudois, and who had also urged him to use his influence with the Government of Switzerland on the subject of certain reliMR. J. O'CONNELL moved, that at gions which interfered with some religious the end of the clause, after the words persons in the cantons of Switzerland." Sovereign of the Roman States," the Now, would his hon. Friend call that an in- words "and Sovereign Pontiff" be added. terference either in "political, commercial, The Committee again divided:-Ayes 8; civil, or international" affairs? Noes 104: Majority 96. questions would give rise to very disagreeable refinements, and it was not desirable to preclude the Government of this country from making similar representations, if it were thought desirable, to the Court of Rome. Such COLONEL THOMPSON wished to be informed what the effect of the exclusion of the words "Court of Rome" would be on the operation of the Bill, if the week after it passed, it was found that the Emperor of Austria had declared himself Sovereign of the Roman States, or the people of Rome had established a republic, one and indivisible, the Pope contenting himself with the title of Bishop of Rome? VISCOUNT PALMERSTON said, if the Pope ceased to be a sovereign, there was no law to prevent this country from entering into diplomatic or other relations with the Government which might succeed him. It was only so long as he was Pope that the present Bill applied. COLONEL THOMPSON did not want to know whether it would be lawful to communicate with the Emperor of Austria; but whether it would be lawful under this Bill to communicate with the Pope. VOL. CI. Third Sup MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS.-1a Fever (Ireland); Local 50 and passed:-Parochial Debt and Audit; Farmers' Estate Society (Ireland); Fisheries (Ireland). PETITIONS PRESENTED. From the Inhabitants of Heywood, for the Adoption of a System of Secular Education in the County of Lancaster.-From the Parishes of St. Andrew, Holborn, and St. Matthew, Bethnal Green, for the Prevention of Sunday Trading. CASE OF COLONEL BRISTOWE. LORD BEAUMONT, in compliance with a notice, rose to present a petition from Colonel Bristowe, with regard to his im S |