HL Deb 04 March 1844 vol 73 cc487-91
The Marquess of Westmeath

wished to direct the attention of their Lordships to a statement which he made during the debate on the Motion of the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Normanby). He stated on that occasion, that in a certain parish in the county of Westmeath, in Ireland, a Roman Catholic clergyman, who had since died, was suspended from the exercise of his clerical functions in consequence of his having refused to assist in the collection of the Repeal Rent, and the Agitation of the Question of a Repeal of the Union. From the statement which had been made to him (the Marquess of Westmeath) on that subject, he assumed its truth; but when the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Normanby), on a former occasion in that House, read a letter in contradiction to that statement, he appeared to hesitate in reiterating the statement, for, with the courtesy that was due from one Member of their Lordships House to another, he felt that it would be well to write to Ireland after that contradiction, in order that he might ascertain if the statement which had been made to him would be still maintained. He had, since that period, referred to parties in Ireland on the subject, and he found, by that reference, that what he had stated on a former occasion was substantially the fact. He had stated that the clergyman was suspended, but if he had used the word superseded he would have been more correct in what he said. That clergyman had exercised his influence in preventing the collection of money amongst his parishioners for the purpose of being applied to the furtherance of the Repeal Agitation. He had also refused to assist in that Repeal Agitation, or to aid in one of the monster meetings which had taken place in Westmeath last year; and the consequence of his adopting that line of conduct was, that the Roman Catholic bishop of the diocese sent word to the clergyman (the Rev. Mr. Murray) to the effect that he would send a curate to officiate in the clergyman's chapel for three subsequent Sundays. The curate did, according to that intimation, attend and officiate at the chapel for three subsequent Sundays, and immediately preceding the monster meeting in Westmeath he preached in that chapel; so that the clergyman (Mr. Murray) had been superseded in his own parish. The noble Marquess opposite might ask on what authority he made that statement, but the noble Marquess must be aware that political addresses from the Altar became publicly known in Ireland throughout the surrounding districts, and were very freely talked over whilst they possessed novelty. In order that their Lordships might understand what the nature of the meeting was, at which Mr. Murray refused to assist, he (the Marquess of Westmeath) would describe to them the language which two Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church used on that occasion. The meeting took place on the 14th of May last, and it was stated by the papers which advocated a repeal of the Union, that fifty-one priests attended, and that the Roman Catholic Bishop was in the chair. At the dinner which took place after the meeting, Dr. Cantwell, the Roman Catholic Bishop, said that the Irish deserved and should have self-government, and he congratulated the meeting on the glorious demonstration which they had on that day made, and which showed that Westmeath was fully alive to the hopelessness of England rendering justice to Ireland, and it also showed that they were determined to cooperate with their countrymen, under the peaceful guidance of their wise leader, removing the degrading stigma of inferiority, and raising Ireland again to the dignity of a nation. That was the language of Dr. Cantwell, and he was followed by another Roman Catholic Bishop, who used language of a similar nature and import. He felt it his duty as a Magistrate to bring this subject before their Lordships, and he trusted that he had done so with sincerity, perhaps with earnestness, hut with a perfect freedom from party feeling.

The Marquess of Normanby

said, that the substantial portion of the case be best met by reading to their Lord ships a denial with which he had been entrusted on the part of the Right Rev. Dr. Cantwell of any interference with the Rev. Mr. Murray in the discharge of his clerical functions. The noble Marquess seemed to have a strange mode of making out his case. The noble Marquess had made a specific charge, which was met by a specific denial, upon which the noble Marquess retorted, by reading not only a speech of the Right Rev. Dr. Cantwell, but the speech of another titular Bishop also. Certainly that was carrying the doctrine of conspiracy rather farther than it had been carried even of late years. He had received by this day's post a letter from the Right Rev. person, Dr. Cantwell, who assured him that he had never either spoken or written a word to the late Dr. Murray, parish priest of Clonmellon (four miles from the residence of the Marquess of Westmeath), and that for the fourteen years that he had been Bishop of that diocese, in which Dr. Murray had been forty-five years the incumbent of a parish, he had lived with the Rev. Gentleman on terms of the closest friendship, and had always regarded him with respect, esteem, and affection. He stated that he had never written a word to the Rev. Gentleman on the subject of Repeal, and he concluded his letter by stating that though the season when the Rev. Gentleman died was one of great severity, he (the Right Rev. Dr. Cantwell) travelled thirty miles to attend the solemn offices of the Church at his funeral, at which a large number of clergymen and 1,500 laymen attended, and on that occasion he expressed the greatest regret for the loss of so exemplary a pastor, and one characterized by such zeal in the discharge of his duty. That would show that the Rev. Mr. Murray had not incurred the displeasure of the writer. Now, after that letter, what grounds remained for the charge of interference with the Rev. Mr. Murray? The only ground on which the charge rested was, that a curate had attended the chapel of Clonmellon for three Sundays. Why the aged and Rev. Gentleman after having performed the duties of parish-priest upwards of' forty years, left his duty to be performed by his curate for three successive Sundays, shortly before his death. The letter further stated that the Right Rev. Prelate perceived that the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Westmeath) said the statement was generally believed in the neighbourhood of Clonmellon, but he (Dr. Cantwell) believed that, so far from its being generally accredited, no man of respectability in that part of the country entertained the opinion that such was the fact. Having acquainted their Lordships with the contents of that letter he would not make a single remark on the subject in addition, as he thought the letter itself was a sufficient answer.

The Marquess of Westmeath

said, that their Lordships would be able to decide between the two statements. He believed that it would not be safe as regarded the person who gave him the information if he mentioned his name; and therefore he would sooner have himself exposed to the suspicion of having exaggerated the circumstances than to state the person's name. He had heard the matter at the time, and he still firmly believed it notwithstanding the contradiction which had been read to their Lordships, who would give it its full value when they recollected the language which he had just read as having been used by the Right Rev. person. Their Lordships would judge whether he (the Marquess of Westmeath) would be inclined, without what he considered sufficient ground, to make an attack on an individual with whom he had no acquaintance whatever. There was another thing which he had to state, The noble Marquess opposite alluded to what had taken place as having occurred, in the living of Clonmellon, whereas it was in another chapel, under the jurisdiction of the Rev. Mr. Murray, that the Curate officiated, namely, Kilallen.

The Marquess of Normanby

said the denial had no reference to any particular chapel, for it was a distinct and positive denial, on the part of Dr. Cantwell, that he either spoke or wrote to Mr. Murray On the subject of Repeal.

Subject dropped.

Back to