COMMITTEE. RESOLUTION. FIRST READING. (Hansard, 7 February 1867)

§ SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN
rose to move— That the Chairman be directed to move the House, that leave be given to bring in a Bill to abolish a certain Declaration, commonly called the Declaration against Transubstantiation, Invocation of Saints, and the Sacrifice of the Mass as practised in the Church of Rome; and to render it unnecessary to take, make, or subscribe the same as a qualification for the exercise or enjoyment of any Civil Office, Franchise, or Right. The hon. and learned Baronet said, that this Bill was almost identical with the one introduced by him last Session, and which the present Home Secretary intimated his desire to support. The Bill passed through all its stages in that 110 House; but it was, unfortunately, thrown out in the other House in the month of July, as the noble Lord at the head of the Government objected to proceeding with it at the late period of the Session at which it came before the House, especially as it was expected that the Royal Commission appointed on the general subject would shortly make their Report, when a more comprehensive measure might be introduced Ibis Session. He believed, however, that the Report had not yet appeared; and he was certainly unwilling that a Declaration, which was: so objectionable to a vast number of his fellow-countrymen, should remain on the statute book, and he therefore now moved for leave to introduce the Bill. An additional reason for introducing it at this time was to be found in the reply which I the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department had given to the hon. Member for Sheffield, intimating that the Government had no intention of introducing a Bill on the subject of Oaths this Session.

§ MR. WALPOLE
said, that the hon. I and learned Baronet was perfectly right in stating that when he moved his Bill of last Session he offered to give him his humble support in passing it; for he had no hesitation in saying that, in his opinion, declarations with regard to solemn ceremonies of religion ought not to be made the test upon which offices should be allowed to be accepted or not. He was not prepared to retract a single word now that the further prosecution of the measure was proposed. With reference to the intentions of the Government, what he had stated, in answer to a question put by the hon. Member for Sheffield, was that the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the subject had not yet made their Report, and that until they had done so the Government could make no declaration as to what it would do on the subject. It was certainly not the intention of the Government to continue the unnecessary number of oaths now on the statute book, but they desired 111 to wait for the Report of the Commissioners before they proposed any definite legislative measure on the subject.

§ MR. NEWDEGATE
was understood to express his regret at the intimation given by the Government that they were not prepared to offer any opposition to the Bill.

§ MR. HADFIELD
said, he should be glad to learn whether the Report of the Commissioners would be soon in the hands of Members of the House. He hoped that after it had been presented prompt action would be taken by the Government in relieving persons who had felt scruples of a religious or moral nature against taking oaths and declarations. He would be glad to know when the Report would be ready?

§ MR. WALPOLE
said, he and his noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Lord Stanley) were Members of the Oaths Commission; but upon taking Office in the Government they resigned, as they found they would not have time to attend to the duties of the Commission. Under these circumstances, he could not positively answer the question of the hon. Member as to when the Report would be presented, but he would cause inquiries to be made. He might say that before Christmas the Commissioners had made great progress, and he fully expected that the Report would be drawn up at no very distant period.