"foreign prince." As a prince, he was nothing he was without power; he had not an acre of land that he could call his own; and his power was altogether a moral influence, which by an Act of Parliament could not be overborne. Abstaining from any discussion on religious liberty, and confining himself to the political bearings of the question, Mr. Roebuck at last came to the effect of the measure on the "Irish difficulty." It was not the loyal, humble, and every way docile body of English Catholics who gained Emancipation, but the Roman Catholics of Ireland. Will they be quiet with this law upon the statute-book. Govern Ireland! Why, how could the noble Lord govern at all? He depended in that House on the support of his Irish friends, and the withdrawal of their support had rendered his Administration powerless. The noble Lord had some time since discovered the great mistake he had made, and at this moment he felt acutely how unwise he was in departing from the course prescribed to a leader of a party, to say nothing of the head of a Government, by entering into a discussion in a newspaper upon such a subject. He would soon experience the truth of the remark, that whoever attempted to arrest the advance of a great principle would be destroyed. The noble Lord had made such an attempt, and already it was clear that his destruction was inevitable. The First Minister of the Crown! He was not. His an Administration! It was not. The Government was without power; it could do nothing. The moment the discussion on the Bill should be brought to a close, there would be an end of the noble Lord's Ad

ministration. This was the consequence of the noble Lord's abandonment of the principles by which he made his political fortune. In a few days after the present discussion had terminated, some question affecting the policy of the country would be brought forward, and what must be the result? The noble Lord had disgusted the Irish Members-he had offended all the Members of the English Liberal party, who had believed that the motto of "civil and religious liberty" was inscribed on his banner. To whom did the noble Lord now look for support? By whom was he cheered? Of whom would his majority be composed? Never was there exhibited in that House a more marked contrast than was shown last night in the reception accorded to the speech of Sir James Graham, and that of the noble Lord. The cheers which greeted the right hon. Baronet were hearty and enthusiastic, but they came from that (the Ministerial) side of the House. The noble Lord attempted to answer the right hon. Baronet's speech, and the cheers, such as they were, came from this (the Opposition) side. The contrast damped the noble Lord's courage, and from the time of his rising until he resumed his seat his spirit was annihilated. Recent proceedings had taught the Irish Members a lesson they would not readily forget, and which they would apply to coerce any Ministry which might hereafter be formed. They would take advantage of their position, and, in spite of all official prestige, any Ministry must quail before them. He advised the Irish Members to close the discussion. The people were tired of this quetsion.

They believed that the interests of the country were not involved in it. They believed it to be a mere party dispute, for which this Bill was made an excuse. He believed that the noble Lord was sincerely anxious to get out of his difficulty. He could not get out of it but by one means, and that was by retiring from office. At present nothing but this Bill stood between him and destruction.

The Attorney-General elucidated the legal bearings of the question; showing how far the Bill was intended to operate, and would most probably operate, and meeting the difficulties which had been foreseen by its opponents.

The Bill, he believed, would in nowise affect the sacred principle of full liberty of conscience, or interfere with the fullest possible spiritual action on the part of every Roman Catholic in the country. He would explain how the canon law would be put in operation in this country by means of the Pope's rescript. That law could only be introduced by bishops of territorial dioceses in synod assembled. The canon law was not the law of England, but the English law would take cognizance of that portion of it which concerns the matter in hand, as a fact to be proved by witnesses of competent character; and when the fact was once proved, the law would not inquire whether it was right or reasonable, but adopt the fact and act on it. A considerable number of Roman Catholics in this country were very wealthy, and they were, as a body, richly endowed with respect to ecclesiastical benefices. There were claims of lay patronage on behalf of Roman Catholic proprietors. The bishops of the Roman Catholic Church, as he believed, had always

claimed the right of appointing the priests to those benefices. That claim had been hitherto successfully resisted by the laity. The prelates of the Roman Catholic Church being simply bishops, and not having any territorial dioceses, could not enforce that claim. But the moment they were made territorial, and had dioceses, by the force of the canon law the bishops would have the right to appoint, under certain circumstances and under certain condiditions, the priests to those benefices. They would then come to the Court of Chancery, and the Court would enforce every one of these trusts; upon proof of the fact of that being the canon law of the Church of Rome, the Court of Chancery would enforce the canon law, would remove the priest, and give the income of the benefice to the person so appointed by the bishop of the diocese. In that manner therefore would the canon law in relation to temporalities be introduced by the Papal brief, if it were not met by this measure. The analogies suggested in the cases of the Wesleyans, and other bodies establishing purely spiritual hierarchies, and not superinducing a foreign law in reference to temporalities, did not hold good. He spoke with diffidence, but he had formerly paid much attention to the civil and canon law, and he had now again endeavoured to make himself master of the subject: he believed he should state exactly the truth when he said there were no spiritual functions whatever which could not be performed to the same extent, and in all respects as effectively, by a person exercising the spiritual functions of a bishop, as by the same person being the territorial

bishop of the diocese. He invited any gentleman who might speak after him in this debate, to say what episcopal function there was that could be administered by a bishop having a territorial diocese, which could not be equally performed by a bishop not having a territorial character. If that were so, it was idle to talk of persecution and of tyrannizing over the Roman Catholics. In the legal opinion given by eminent gentlemen, that the first clause of the Bill in effect contained the clauses to be omitted, he did not agree, to its full extent. Contracts deliberately entered into with any person calling himself "Archbishop of Westminster" would, without a shadow of doubt, be enforced by the courts of law; and if bequests were made to "the Archbishop of Westminster for the time being," the only thing which the Court of Chancery would look to would be to ascertain whom the testator meant, and it would do the same in reference to trusts to be declared by "the Archbishop of Westminster for the time being" to this extent the second clause, and the second clause only, was included in the first. But if there were any act which could only be operative by reason of any person being bishop of a territorial see, and holding a territorial title, then that act would be void; it could not be sustained in any court of law, and its temporal consequences would not follow. The measure, as a whole, might check the first step towards giving the Romish Church in England a predominance over that in Ireland; but it would not injure religious liberty, and ought not to injure the friendly relations with Ireland which all Englishmen desired to maintain.

Mr. Fagan reiterated the argu

ment, that under the re-established hierarchy the bishops would be released from their slavery to the Pope, and the clergy be secured from arbitrary injury by the bishops. He declared that no Roman Ĉatholic priest or layman held himself bound by any canon law that was opposed to the municipal law of the land, otherwise than as it related to faith and doctrine: all that was inflexible and unchangeable about Roman Catholicism was its faith-the truth it derived from God; its discipline was ever varying with the variation of times and circumstances. The abominable canons of the olden times had nothing whatever to do with the Roman Catholic religion of the present day. Without question, there had been periods when the Roman Pontiffs exercised a temporal authority over sovereigns of this country wholly unwarranted by their office; but those things had passed away, never to return. The Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster had been anxious not to give offence to the Government and people of England by calling together the clergy in synod for the purpose of framing rules and regulations establishing the rights and immunities of the clergy; but Mr. Fagan hoped that the day was not far distant when a canon law suitable to the laws and institutions of this country would be established here. As to synodical action, neither this Bill nor any other could prevent its being carried out: it worked through all the period of persecution and penal laws, and it would continue to work. Lord J. Russell could not be aware of the ferment the measure had produced in Ireland. Even Mr. Fagan's own constituents in Cork, who were as calm as a summer sea when compared with the excited in

habitants of other parts, had passed a resolution calling on him to vote against the Government on every occasion, no matter what the principle that was involved. Of course, a regard for his own character had not allowed him to adopt such a resolution; but the resolution afforded evidence of the great excitement that prevailed in the least excited places. But Ireland had formed the right hand of Lord John Russell's political power, and how could he get on without her? The Irish Members had supported him as the strenuous advocate of civil and religious liberty, and he knew that without them he could not be sustained; why then had he adopted this course? Mr. Fagan opposed the measure as a retrograde movement; as an infringement of the Act of Emancipation and the principle of religious liberty; as an abrogation of the Charitable Bequests Act; and as an instalment of a stronger measure, a precursor of another and more severe blow against Ireland.

Sir John Young spoke as an Irish Protestant Member to the Irish Protestants, in grave warning against raising a new religious warfare in their country by this Bill. Let them weigh well the consequences of such legislation; for upon them, and upon the Protestant Church in their country, the heat and burden of the contest would fall. Recall the experience of the past, and count well the cost. A long struggle had been waged against the Roman Catholics in Ireland, which had lasted for a century and a half. A few great families, and their sycophants and adherents, had divided the plunder of the land; and what had become of the Protestant middle and lower classes? Their industry had been neglected, their

manufactures annihilated. How fared it with the Protestant Church? While bishops were occupied in amassing large fortunes

while wealthy rectors were passing their time at English wateringplaces, and glebe-houses were untenanted, the sound of the Gospel was unheard. Then came a period during which the Protestant Church passed through a season of great tribulation. The Church of Ireland would have had now a very different story to tell if she had always been as spirituallyminded as she was at present. The issue of this long struggle was, that the Protestants of Ireland were fewer in number than when it commenced; and the Church was obliged to submit to the spoliation of half its property, the abrogation of the church-cess, and the demolition of ten bishoprics. He warned the Protestants of Ireland who supported this measure, that its results would be disastrous to Protestantism and to the Protestant Church in Ireland. The justice of this measure seemed to him extremely dubious; the struggle would lead to bitter and protracted animosity; and it would, he feared, long retard the recovery of that unhappy country. Instead of adding strength to the cause of Protestantism, it only brought weakness. It was an infringement upon that complete toleration which, if scrupulously acted upon, would do more for the cause of real religion and the spread of spiritual truth than all the defences that alarm could suggest, and all the safeguards that a sincere but mistaken enthusiasm could surround itself with.

Mr. Grattan uttered a vehement declamation against the Bill. Lord Castlereagh declared that, while

between him and his Roman Catholic countrymen there was a religious gulf that could not be bridged, he respected their conscientious feelings: the measure had been brought forward in a manner peculiarly objectionable to them, and was now pushed on by a Government kept in office solely and entirely to carry it. The Bill, taken in connection with the position of the Ministry, was what the French would call the reactionary policy of a transition Ministry. It was feeble, ill-considered, should never have been proposed, and should not have the support of his humble vote. Mr. A. B. Hope denounced the measure as petty and disgraceful to the magnanimity of this country, and discreditable to the civilization of the AngloSaxon race.

Mr. Hume considered this one of the most unfortunate occurrences during his long Parliamentary life. It revived recollections of discussions thirty years back. It was degrading to see the House engaged upon such a subject, which was likely to derange the whole proceedings of the session. It was painful to find that Lord J. Russell should, by an unhappy blunder, be the person to commence this retrogressive policy. Civil liberty, Mr. Hume contended, in opposition to Mr. Muntz, depended not upon a particular form of Christianity, but upon public institutions. What, he asked, had been the aggression in this case? Vicars apostolic had been permitted to regulate the religious affairs of the English Roman Catholics; at their suggestion, and for their benefit, bishops were substituted, since without them their religion would not be complete. Where was the insult or

aggression in this? The Queen's supremacy, which was said to be invaded, was not recognised in Scotland; the Free Church there had synods, and divided the country into districts, without restriction. There was, therefore, neither justice, principle, nor reason in this Bill, which was an oppressive measure; it would not be confined to Roman Catholics; Dissenters would ultimately come in for their share. He opposed the Bill because it interfered with the exercise of private judgment, and was a retrogressive step in our legislation.

Sir F. Thesiger observed that in this discussion Protestants, on the one hand, thought there had been an unjustifiable aggression on the part of the Pope; Roman Catholics, on the other, considered that the measure introduced for the repression of that aggression was an invasion of civil and religious liberty. It was out of this collision of opinions that the reasons for legislation must be deduced. He had been anxious for some explanation as to the mode in which the proposed measure would either repress the present or raise a barrier against future aggressions. If there was an inconvenience from the existing state of the law, the obvious remedy was to change it; but it was not enough to ward off a blow, the assailant must be disabled from further mischief. What, then, should be the object in legislating here? What had led to the aggression? No Roman Catholic had explained that there was any religious necessity for the change made by the Papal bull. Dr. Wiseman had alleged that it was to introduce the complete code of the Church; but he believed there were other motives, and that the