§ On the Motion to postpone the Order of the Day on this Bill to Friday,
The Bishop of Exeterrequested permission to state his objections to the measure now, as he should not be able to be present on the day proposed. He objected to the 11th Clause, because it violated a great constitutional principle, for it provided that property bequeathed for Roman 449 Catholic purposes might be held by trustees according to the laws and constitution of the Roman Catholic Church. To this he objected, because it gave the Pope a power of deciding on the legality of such trust. The 17th (the interpretation) Clause was worded thus, "that the word 'Roman' Catholic shall include all persons in Holy Orders, of whatever rank or degree, according to the laws, discipline, and constitution of the Roman Catholic Church," &c. Now, such language as this really established the jurisdiction of the Pope within this realm, contrary to the Oath of Supremacy—that bulwark, that most essential part of our Constitution; founded as it was in this respect not merely upon principles and doctrines, the origin of the Reformation, but on prior legislation, as established in the "Statute of Appeals." He begged to repeat, he objected not to the enabling provisions of the Bill provided they were not coupled with language of this character.
§ Lord Wharncliffewould not now enter into a discussion of the question, but would merely say that so far as the noble Lord had alluded to the constitution of the Catholic Church as necessarily recognising the Pope's authority in such matters, the noble Lord was correct. And undoubtedly this point should not escape consideration in further deliberations on the Bill the proceeding with which should be postponed till Tuesday, the 16th.