POSTSCRIPT. SATURDAY.

Some progress was made with the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, or rather with an Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, last night. The "Irish Brigade" stood at ease, and allowed the bill to get into Committee : Lord John Russell stated somewhat more of Ministerial intentions, and next week the bill will reappear in a new and fixed shape, for fresh discussion.

The order of the day having been read for resuming the adjourned de- bate on the question that the Speaker do leave the chair, Mr. Rzirsonns moved the usual formal motion for the adjournment of the House to Monday at its rising : but the SPEAKER said the motion already before the House must be disposed of. Mr. REYNOLDS made another effort, by moving that the debate be adjourned : but the SPEAKER observed that Mr. Reynolds had already spoken in that debate. No other Member rising, the House divided— For going into Committee 116

Against 35 Majority for entering Committee —81 Amidst cheers, the Speaker now left the Chair.

On the usual question that the preamble be postponed, for final treat- ment, Mr. KEOGH put it to Lord John Russell, that the House ought to be enabled to see the bill as Ministers ultimately intend it to be passed, The bill before the House is already a bill withdrawn and indeed there is hardly a line in it which Ministers are prepared to stand by : it would be only just to reprint it in the form in which it is to be discussed. He proposed also to depart from the ordinary course of postponing the preamble. Lord /0IIN RUSSELL would not accede. Sir George Grey had six weeks ago made the House fully aware of the alterations proposed. He had been asked to state if there was any agreement or understanding with Mr. Walpole. Certainly, the Attorney-General had, at Lord John's request, stated his views to Mr. Walpole of the amendments that gentleman proposes —had explained his objections to them. That is a usual and a beneficial course, where there is a common object in view, and the only difference re- ts the details of carrying it into effect. Lord John would have been glad if any understanding had been the result ; but he could not say it was so. He cannot consent to take the preamble out of the usual order. The views of Mr. Walpole would be best explained by himself in Committee. Mr. DISRAELI rose to make a few remarks that might facilitate business in Committee. "I cannot but feel that the position of the House in respect to the propo- sition of the Government is very much chaued by certain declarations made by her Majesty's Ministers at a recent period. Very recently, the noble Lord

at the head of the Government told us he had no hesitation in saying that the rescript of the Pope and the appointment of Cardinal Wiseman were part and parcel of a great conspiracy against the civil and religious liberties of this country—'

Lord JOHN RUSSELL-6' Of Europe." Mr. DISRAELI—" That is a still larger description of the evil. I am bound to say, that without making any special reference to the amendments which we are now called upon to consider, I take that statement of the Govern- ment as an authentic statement. Sir, I cannot believe that her Majesty's Ministers would make such a declaration without well weighing the conse- quences." Lord JOHN RrssELL--" What I stated was, I think, this : I said that it was a part of a general conspiracy entered into with the view to prevent the extension of civil and religious liberty in Europe, and that the influence of this country might be impeded in promoting the cause of civil and religious liberty generally. I did not mean to state that it was a conspiracy against the civil and religious liberties of this country." Mr. DISRAELI—" I have not taken a note of what the noble Lord said, and I am willing to suppose that his memory on the subject is more accu- rate than mine. But I do not think that there is any material alteration in what I supposed was his original statement. Believing, then, he would not use an exaggerated phrase, I have no doubt that he knows more than he feels himself authorized to introduce to the notice of this House. But even upon his own statement, I doubt very much whether any English Minister during the last half century has made a more important communication. Well them I am bound to ask whether the bill as it appears before us—for I understand two clauses to be virtually withdrawn—will meet such dangerous circumstances." The bill has this remarkable charac- teristic, that it bears no reference to the circumstances which have occasioned it • it does not allude to the grievance which it proposes to remedy. The bill to crush the conspiracy does not deal with the arch-conspirator himself ; nor does it apply a political remedy for the declared political evil. "If Parliament, lay the advice of the Minister, had secured the removal of that Cardinal or Popish Prince whose pre- sence in this country has been declared by a high authority to be a spark of the great conspiracy. against civil and religious liberty, and if Parliament had laid down a principle of legislation which would have brought under the constitutional control of the Sovereign all those who assumed titles, civil or ecclesiastical, at the bidding of a foreign prince, we should, without having recourse to this petty penal legislation, have vindicated the honour of the country ; we should have baffled the conspiracy, and laid down a prin- ciple of legislation that would not have encouraged its recurrence. But, in- stead of that, her Majesty's Government have, I think unfortunately, adopted a course quite the reverse. In the first place, they have called upon us to legislate without the slightest reference to the circumstances and causes which called for that legislation ; and still more unfortunately, the only legislation that they recommend assumes at last the unhappy semblance of something like a petty religious persecution." The numerous amendments before the House divide themselves into two heads,—those which take the right course, and seek to connect legislation with the causes that have really produced it, and that in the Government scheme are studiously concealed ; and those which attempt to make efficient that legislation which is essentially ineffective. The former class improve the bill; the latter neither do nor can improve it. Of the latter class is the in- former's clause—a clause extremely popular with those who advocate the non-application of this bill to Ireland. ' They say, ' it is impossible that it can work in Ireland ; and therefore we are in favour of this clause for England, and that is our argument for not applying the pro- posed legislation to Ireland.' I do not presume to answer for any person but myself, but I say this for myself—that under no cir- cumstances will I consent to apply legislation to England on this subject that is not applied to Ireland. The question before us is, how can we main- tain the supremacy of our Sovereign ? That is the only and the real ques- tion before us; • and to say that we will maintain the supremacy of our Sove- reignin England and that we will evade the assertion of that authority in the sister kingdom, is to take a course the most impolitic and injurious that could be taken. I shall feel it to be my duty to support any amend- ment, from whatever side it comes—whether from the Government or from gentlemen at this side of the House — which will frankly and truly attempt to cope with the difficulties and with the circumstances which have really occasioned our legislation. I shall support all those amendments which, in a manner becoming a great nation, de- clare the reason why we take the step we are now about to consum- mate. I shall support all those amendments which will make this bill a re- taliatory act—an act passed to vindicate our honour—to baffle a conspiracy —to assert and maintain really the cause of civil and religious liberty. But I shall not feel it expedient to support amendments the only object of which is to render that efficient which is essentially ineffective, namely, a scheme of legislation which shrinks from avowing the causes for the proposed law ; which dares not to tell the reasons why the Government of this great coun- try assumes the position it now occupies in this respect, and, as it were, compensates for such want of frankness and manly dealing by a scheme of penal legislation, vexatious, insufficient, and calculated to produce general id ust, not to vindicate the honour of this country—not to baffie the con- spiracy, in which I believe, and which has been denounced by the Minister not tending to vindicate the honour of England."

Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought there were some points on which he could agree with Mr. Disraeli.

The Government does propose to place in the bill an account of the cause why the bill is introduced, and what is the nature of the offence it proposes to meet. Already the preamble of the bill recited that there had been "an attempt to establish, under colour of authority from the See of Rome," cer- tain titular ecclesiastical dignities, and it declared that attempt illegal and void : but to make it more definite, Sir George Grey proposed to include these words—

That "divers of her Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects have assumed to them- selves the titles of Archbishops and Bishops of a pretended province, and of pre- tended see or dioceses, within the United Kingdom, under colour of an alleged authority given to them for that purpose by a rescript or letter from the See of Rome."

Nothing could more clearly describe what has taken place, but if better words be proposed he will consider them. He agrees with the objection to the informer's clause. In ease of an offence against the Crown, the power to prosecute should be in some public authority; and it would be the duty of the Crown, exercising a wise discretion, to put the law in operation. Mr. KEOGH repeated urgently his request that the bill be reprinted. Lord Joss; RUSSELL yielded— He would reprint the bill in this form : he would leave out the clauses which Government has already proposed to expunge—[the second, third, and fourth] ; he would introduce into the preamble the words proposed by Sir George Grey, already quoted ; and he would take the declaration which Mr. Walpole proposes to put in the preamble and enact it [the substance of it] as his first clause : the present first clause will then stand second. After some explanatory conversation, Mr. WALPOLE stated that he thought the proposal perfectly fair: it was, practically, that the House

should consider itself in Committee pro forma, for the purpose of reprint- ing the bill in the form the Government intend it to be passed in.

The first clause will not declare, as he proposes to recite in the preamble- " That this kingdom is and has been at all times so free and independent, that no foreign prince, prelate, or potentate, bath, or ought to have, anyjurisdiction or authority within the same or any part thereof "; and. that " the Bishop of Rome, by a certain brief, rescript, or letters apostolical, purporting to have been given at Rome on the 29th day of September 1550, hath recently pretended to constitute with- in the kingdom of England, according to the common rules of the Church of Rome, a hierarchy of Bishops, named from sees and with titles derived from places belong- ing to the Crown of England," &c. . . . But it will consist of this simple enactment- ., The said brief, rescript, or letters apostolical, and all and every the jurisdiction, authority, preEminence, or title conferred, or pretended to be conferred thereby, as aforesaid, are and shall be and be deemed unlawful and void."

In that improved shape it will still be defective, and he reserves to him- self the power to amend it, especially in the preamble, as he may think advisable.

Mr. KEOGH also reserved to himself the power to propose that the pre.- amble be taken first.

Mr. NEWDEGATE protested against the omission of any notice of the intrusion of a cardinal priest and legate on this country.; But Sir FREDERICK THESIGER deprecated further discussion at this stage. So the House resumed, and gave leave to the Committee to sit again on Monday.

Earlier in the evening, Mr. HAWES stated, in reply to Mr. DUNDAS, that the Governor of Vancouver's Island has resigned : recommendation to the office is with the Hudson's Bay Company, though the appointment rests with the Secretary of State. After the despatch of the Papal Aggression Bill for the night, Sir Beas- :AMIN HALL criticized at some length, and with much severity, the loose proceedings of the Metropolitan Commissioners of Sewers. Lord ERRING. Tos explained and defended the proceedings impugned ; and added, that he would be ready to go into the matter at large whenever it is brought forward in a straightforward manner at a convenient time.

The House rose early—at a quarter to eight.

The proceedings of the Lords were uninteresting.