LORD JOHN RUSSELL moved that the debate be adjourned to Six o'clock the same evening. SIR R. H. INGLIS moved asan amendment that it be adjourned to Wednesday next. List of the NOES. Blackstone, W. S. Lacy, H. C. mercial relations with Rome, and to assist in making railroads in the Roman States. Why, then, if this Bill was not intended to establish unconstitutional relations with the Court of Rome, where was the necessity for this indecent haste in pressing it forward? He was certain some purpose was The House divided on the question that to be effected. There was a packed ma- the debate be adjourned to the evening: jority in that House. He knew the oppo--Ayes 73: Noes 28; Majority 45. nents of the measure were in a minority, because the Government had chosen to take them by surprise; and as he was sat-Anstey, T. C. isfied that the attempt was made to force this measure on the country in an unconstitutional manner, he would raise all the opposition in his power to it. He put the noble Lord to the test of his political integrity on this question, namely, to make a call of the House. If the noble Lord would do that, and if he (Mr. Spooner) were still in a minority, he would offer no further opposition. He called on all hon. Members who valued the Protestant constitution, and who respected their pledges at the hustings, to join him in opposing a measure which it was understood was not to be carried this Session. He asked the noble Lord either to withdraw the measure, or to consent to a call of the House. MR. J. O'CONNELL, after condemning the attack made by the hon. Member for Essex on the Catholic clergymen of Kenmare, whose conduct during the season of distress had been exemplary, proceeded to say, that there was no reason to think that the opposition opposed to this Bill was of a factious character; on the contrary, the manner in which the measure was pushed forward by the Government was a factious proceeding. The opposition to the Bill was based on principle; and he, and Catholics generally, objected to it on principle. The policy of the Government, in connexion with this measure, was paltry, unworthy, and unwise. The main object of the Bill was to give the Government an illegitimate influence over the Catholic clergy in Ireland. The empire owed a debt of gratitude to the Catholic clergy for their exertions to preserve the peace of Ireland, more particularly on a recent occasion. The Government and Parliament might obtain a legitimate influence over the Catholic clergy by doing justice to the people of that country. The Government, however, preferred attempting to bribe the ruling power at Rome, in the hope that by his means they might corrupt the Irish clergy; but the Sovereign Pontiff would throw back their Bill with contempt. Broadley, H. Newdegate, C. N. Pearson, C. TELLERS. Inglis, Sir R. H. SIR J. TYRELL called upon the Government to make inquiry into the case the House, and on the accuracy of which which he had brought under the notice of he would stand. If the noble Lord did not give a satisfactory assurance upon the subject, he would move that the House should adjourn. the hon. Baronet would furnish the Lord LORD JOHN RUSSELL replied, that if Lieutenant of Ireland with information which would show that an offence at law had been committed, the Lord Lieutenant would take the opinion of the legal advisers of the Government on the subject. If, however, it should appear that there could be calculated on, he would not adwas not evidence on which a conviction vise the Lord Lieutenant to direct a prose cution. SIR J. TYRELL was satisfied with the noble Lord's statement. Debate adjourned. THE MAURITIUS. LORD G. BENTINCK said, he wished to put the following questions to the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for the Colonies:-"1. The expenditure of the island of Mauritius for each of the years 1846 and 1847, and the disbursement made in each of those for emigration? 2. The amount of reduction of taxes in the island, distinguishing the taxes levied for general purposes from those levied for 497 Diplomatic Relations {AUG. 24} with the Court of Rome. 498 special purposes, such as immigration | 131,4391.; and on the 1st of January, taxes, quay and tonnage dues? 3. In 1847, of 139,4911.; though he doubted what consist the reduction of 65,000l. a- whether that was an available balance, year, stated by Her Majesty's Government to have been effected in 1847, and whether those reductions do not partake of the nature of commutations of taxation rather than of reductions? 4. The balance in the Island Treasury on the 31st day of December, 1846 and 1847, respectively? 5. The amount of funds now in the hands of the colonial agents in London belonging to the island, separating the amount invested in the public funds from those which are not? 6. Whether any instructions have been sent out to the Governor with a view to the reduction of expenditure, as suggested at various times by the Mauritius Association? 7. Whether the Government bank has been established, of which it was intended Mr. Macaulay should be the manager; and whether any salaries have been paid, or are appointed to be paid to Mr. Macaulay, or to any other directors, and the amount of those salaries, if any? 8. The grounds upon which the late Auditor General of Accounts has been permitted to retire upon a pension, the amount of that pension, the name of his successor, and, if that successor be Mr. Ker, whether he be or be not Sir W. Gomm's brother-in-law?" MR. HAWES said, he would endeavour to give a distinct answer to each question of the noble Lord, in the same order in which they were put. As to the first, he found from a despatch of the Governor of Mauritius, which had been recently laid on the table of the other House of Parliament, that the revenue of 1846 was 278,0701., and of 1847, 289,1937., and that the disbursement for emigration was, in 1846, 41,0987., and in 1847, 50,2071. With respect to the questions Nos. 2 and 3, the noble Lord would find in the papers laid before the House on the 9th of March, 1848, a very minute and elaborate account of the taxes which had been retained, and of the new ones which had been imposed. From those papers it appeared that the total decrease of taxation was 35,700.; and in a despatch from the Governor, dated the 4th of February, 1848, he stated that an ordinance would be issued for the total suspension of the stamp duties, by which there would be a further reduction of taxation to the amount of 30,000l., making in all 65,000l. In answer to No. 4, he believed that on the 31st of December, 1846, there was an available balance of assets of because considerable sums of money were sometimes placed in the colonial chest as trust moneys on bond, and they had amounted to as much as 50,000l. The amount of those moneys, therefore, whatever it might be, must be deducted from the sum he had mentioned. As to No. 5, he believed the funds in the hands of the colonial agent consisted of 1,6717. cash, and 42,000l. in Exchequer bills. With reference to No. 6, he could say that his noble Friend had, on more than one occasion, made very strong recommendations to the Governor to reduce the expenditure of the island. As to question No. 7, the only person receiving a salary was Mr. Macaulay, whose salary was fixed at 1,000l. a year. The only other directors were the Colonial Treasurer and the Auditor General, and they would not receive any salary. No issue of Government paper had taken place, because the conditions proposed by the Government had not been accepted, and the bank was consequently not in practical operation. With regard to the last question put to him by the noble Lord, the late Auditor General had served since 1815, and had been superannuated on the ground of ill health; and taking into consideration his long services and high character, the Treasury had awarded him the full amount of his salary as a pension. The noble Lord was aware that the question of what amount a pension should be was entirely decided by the Treasury. His successor was Mr. Ker, and he (Mr. Hawes) had every reason to believe that Mr. Ker was the brother-in-law of Sir W. Gomm. The pension awarded to the late Auditor General was 8001. a year. DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH THE MR. MOORE denied that the Irish priesthood had ever been aught else than the friends of loyalty and order, or that the illustrious Pontiff would ever exert his influence for any purpose which would not tend to the honour and credit of religion. The hon. Member for North Essex had been guilty of a gross libel on the Irish priesthood. MR. URQUHART complained that many Members had been obliged to return from the north at great personal inconvenience, in consequence of this Bill, con trary to all expectation, having been again brought forward. The Government had not acceded to the proposition either to make a call of the House, or to postpone the Bill till next Session; and he should therefore oppose it by every means in his power. One ground of his opposition to this Bill was, that it would bring another country within the range of our diplomatic influence, and thus augment the irresponsible authority of the Foreign Office. The Bill had not been pushed so long as the Pope was in a condition not to accept it; but now that he was humbled, broken, ruined, it was pressed forward in the hope that he would be unable to resist the influences brought to bear upon him. The object of the Bill, indeed, was to obtain what Austria had so long held-influence over the councils of the Pope. MR. PHILIP HOWARD believed that the Bill was brought forward, not to obtain any undue influence over the Pope, but on general principles. As a proof of the feelings entertained by the Pope towards this measure previous to the events to which the hon. Gentleman had just referred, he would read part of a letter from a small publication written by Bishop Wiseman, entitled, Words of Peace and Justice. Bishop Wiseman said "As soon as the Diplomatic Bill was proposed, I not only diligently studied its bearings, but for warded a copy of it to the Cardinal Secretary of State, from whom I received an answer, dated Rome, February 22, 1848." That answer was as follows: "In accordance with the desire expressed by your Lordship to the Under Secretary of this department, I immediately placed before his Holiness the Bill enclosed in the letter, and how agreeable an impression it has produced on the mind of his Holiness you may easily imagine." This was written before the French revolution, and before the occurrence of other important events on the Continent; and it showed with what feelings the Pope then regarded this measure. He would give the Bill his cordial support, though he regretted the introduction of the second clause, and would vote against it when the proper time came. MR. M. POWER would, in Committee, vote with the noble Lord (the Earl of Arundel and Surrey) against the second clause; but, as a whole, he gave the Bill his cordial support. He supported it on the ground that it was better to have open and undisguised rather than indirect and clandestine intercourse with the See of Rome. He represented a population of 800,000, of whom 700,000 were Roman Catholics; and he had not received a single communication adverse to the Bill; so that he came to the conclusion that it was approved of by the Roman Catholic people of this country. He deprecated the notion that the influence of the Pope could be used politically in Ireland. From what he knew of the people of Ireland, he was sure that if the Pope were to attempt to interfere so as to make them subservient to any Government, his interference would be rejected. He was himself a Roman Catholic, and he would not hesitate to tell the Pope, that though he owed him obedience in spiritual matters, he would exercise independently the rights of conscience on all civil questions. MR. DRUMMOND complained that the House was now compelled to re-enact what it had already finished, to re-discuss on going into Committee a question which they had reason to think had been settled long ago. The hon. Member for Limerick had told them, that they were indebted solely to the priesthood for the tranquillity of Ireland; and so raised a question as to what were the real causes of disturbance there, and what effect this Bill was likely to have upon it. He (Mr. Drummond) did not believe that this Bill would enable Her Majesty's Government to do more than they could without the Bill. He had already stated that it would be most mischievous in its operation, and most insulting both to the Crown and to the Roman Catholics in Ireland, if it were to be used for the purpose of bringing any influence to bear on the Government of that country; nor would he believe that Her Majesty's Government had any such intention. But there might be some fancy that it was possible, directly or indirectly, to rule the Pope, and chain the spirit of the priesthood. Those who thought so could not have read history aright if they did not know that from the days of Constantine to this hour there had been one uniform constant endeavour on the part of the priests, in every country in Europe, to cajole the laity, and take all temporal power into their hands. He spoke not of one bishop or another, but of a class; and, lest it should be said he was calumniating persons behind their backs, he should take the liberty of showing how it was that the poor people in Ireland were shamefully treated. A Roman Catholic bishop wrote a letter to an hon. Gentleman, which letter that hon. priests receive their due. If they were bad in one respect, that was no reason for punishing them in another; but while they were to be punished as instigators of rebellion, they ought also to receive the as and the same liberality would be extended to them as towards others of Her Majesty's subjects. SIR R. H. INGLIS could not accept the compliment which had been offered to him in the course of the discussion, at the expense of those who concurred with him in opinion; for he had no right to suppose that his vote was influenced by purer or higher motives than theirs. There might be incidental questions with respect to railways and commerce, on which negotiation might be requisite; but what he objected to was, the formal recognition and practical reconciliation which this measure involved with the See of Rome. Even in Roman Catholic times, an ambassador from the Pope was required to take an oath that he meditated nothing against the interests of the Crown of England. Then, who was at this moment the real practical Sovereign of the Roman States? Considering the opposition of Protestants and Roman Catholics alike to the measure, and the probability that it would produce neither permanent nor temporary good, he could not think the hon. Member for Warwickshire had pursued an unwarrantable course in opposing the Bill in all its stages. Gentleman read at that place which he called, it must be supposed in mockery, Conciliation Hall, putting it to those who were described as having to encounter famine, pestilence, and division in Ireland, whether there was not evidence of a deep-surance that the same paternal protection laid and widespread conspiracy in England, and of efforts being made to exterminate the priests and annihilate the people. The hon. Membur for Cork might say that was all Tallagh-hill. But this was the letter of a Roman Catholic bishop, who taught his people that his voice was to them the voice of God. The was the language of a man to a people who, he knew, believed they were to have no private judgment in the matter. Rightly instructed Roman Catholics might tell the priests they exercised a judgment in politics; but the great majority of Roman Catholics neither did, nor dared to do, any such thing. The Young Irelanders, who were accused by those bishops of being infidels, vindicated themselves in a protest, declaring that they did not deny the ecclesiastical authority of the priesthood, but only their political authority. On that ground alone was the Young Ireland party excommunicated. In a letter to Lord Shrewsbury from Dr. M'Hale, on a subject entirely political, the Roman Catholic peers of England were accused of lending themselves to a foul conspiracy against the Catholic people and priesthood. It was to a population steeped in poverty that such language was addressed. A gentleman, who was under a cloud, and whose name, therefore, he would not mention, asked the men of Tipperary whether they would be content to lie down another year and see the produce of their fields transported to other lands; adding, that if they allowed it to leave their shores without a struggle they deserved to continue slaves for ever. But in that House an hon. Gentleman said to them tauntingly, Yes, you are going to bring to this country the crops we have raised to feed yourselves, and then bring from America damaged meal for Ireland." Could a country where such language was used be content? The priests would say, "Monster meetings if you like, but no pikes." What was the meaning of a monster meeting but to intimidate the Government? It was the duty of Parliament to act as fairly towards the Roman Catholics of Ireland as towards the priesthood of Canada or Scotland; before Ireland could be tranquillised justice must be dealt out, and the Roman Catholic 66 LORD H. VANE cordially supported the Bill; it was for the public convenience that diplomatic relations should be established with the See of Rome. MR. NEWDEGATE said, that throughout the discussion on this Bill, there had been frequent allusion to “ the higher pur Now, poses it was calculated to serve. authorities and the Roman Catholics would, as in previous instances, have recourse to the plea that the Pope was acting under restraint, if anything inconsistent with the ulterior purposes of the Roman Church with respect to this country resulted from the contemplated negotiations. The hon. Member then referred to the universal supremacy, temporal as well as spiritual, claimed by the Pope, and warned the House of the danger of recognising that claim by the adoption of the present Bill. The plea upon which this Bill had been introduced was too futile to blind any one to its real purpose; the flimsy pretext of commercial purposes had been dissipated by the right hon. Member for the University of Oxford. The intention of its framers, the Government, was the same as before the Bill was altered by the House of Lords; and as they were to have the administration of the powers it conferred, its operation would be perverted to the objects against which the Lords' Amendments were intended to guard, namely, the introduction of the spiritual authority of the Pope, and its legalisation in the united kingdom; and under the wide interpretation of the term "spiritual power," which Rome enforced, would the Pope's temporal authority likewise be active, in contravention of that supremacy, both spiritual and temporal, which the constitution vested in Her Majesty. In deference to the opinions of those who had framed the Lords' Amendments, he had doubted whether he should not abstain from voting against this stage of the Bill; but the discussion had removed his doubts, and he should most cordially vote against it. SIR H. W. BARRON denied that the Pope either claimed or exercised any temporal authority in this country. At the present time the temporal power of the Pope was a mere nullity; and, although a Roman Catholic, he rejoiced that it was so, because he held that the mixing up of religion with politics always injured religion. He admitted the Pope's authority over him in religious matters, but he abjured as strongly as words would allow him any right on the part of the Pope to sway his political feelings, or to interfere with his allegiance to his Sovereign; and such was the opinion of all enlightened Catholics. The question before the House was not a question of religion at all, but of pure politics. Because the Pope differed from them in religion, would they hold no diplo matic relations with him as a temporal prince? If that was sufficient to justify them in declining to enter into diplomatic relations with the Pope, it would equally justify them in sending back the Minister of the Sultan, and almost every other ambassador at present in England. Some Irish Members who set themselves up as the representatives of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, had opposed this Bill. He was as intimately acquainted with the feelings of the Roman Catholics of Ireland as those hon. Members could be, and he declared that they were not unfavourable to the Bill; that on the contrary they hoped it would pass; not because they expected much benefit from it to themselves, but because they thought it was a disgrace to the British empire that diplomatic relations with Rome should have been so long suspended, and because they looked upon this Bill as the removal of a slur upon them and their religion. MR. ROBINSON had not heard throughout the whole of this discussion a single argument brought forward to show the pressing necessity for a measure of this description. The hon. Baronet who had just spoken had referred to the case of the Sultan; but there was no analogy between the cases of the Sultan and the Pope, because the former did not, like the latter, seek to exercise any spiritual authority. He admitted that it was an unusual course, after the second reading of a Bill had been carried by a majority, to interpose obstacles to it at this stage; but considering the character of this measure, he agreed with the hon. Member for Warwick and others in the propriety of offering every opposition to it in his power. MR. NAPIER supported the Amendment, and begged to submit whether it were fair, after so many useful Bills had been already postponed on the ground that it was too late to discuss them, that the House should be called upon to give a preference to a Bill relating to railroads in Italy? and whether the hands of Parliament were not full enough with regard to the affairs of this country to justify them at this moment avoiding idle discussions on controversial topics? Many very useful and important Bills in reference to Ireland had been postponed until next year in consequence of the lateness of the Session; but how could he excuse himself to his constituents, if they should be able to say, that while those Bills were postponed, the |