§ MR. WHALLEYasked the First Lord of the Treasury, with reference to the recent pilgrimage of Roman Catholics to the tomb of Saint Thomas à Becket, Whether he is aware that the Reverend A. J. Christie, a Jesuit Priest, was permitted to have the exclusive use of Canterbury Cathedral while lecturing, for above an hour to a large concourse of pilgrims in eulogy of the abbots, monks, and priests of old who built and were connected with that Cathedral, and in disparagement of the Protestant Reformation; and, whether he deems it expedient that any and what steps should be taken to prevent the recurrence of such proceedings?
MR. GLADSTONEI need hardly observe, Sir, that I have no authority which enables me to give to my hon. Friend any account of the proceedings which occurred in Canterbury Cathedral on the occasion in question; but as an old College friend of mine has been canon of that Cathedral for some 30 years, I wrote to him, and mentioned this Question, and said if he gave me any information I should be happy to communicate it to my hon. Friend. Well, Sir, after a careful perusal of my friend's letter in reply I have arrived at the conclusion that, as far as I can see, there are only two suspicious circumstances connected with the case. One is, that a body of Roman Catholics did visit the Cathedral of Canterbury upon a day which seems to be in some manner connected with the memory of St. Thomas a Becket; and the other is, Sir, the colour of the paper which they issued, containing the announcement of the projected visit, and which seems to have some mysterious connection with his martyrdom. [Laughter.] In all other respects I think my hon. Friend will consider my answer satisfactory. The facts are these:—In the first place, there was no "pilgrimage." A local paper referred to this visit as a "pilgrimage," but the Roman Catholic priest of the congregation which exists at Canterbury put a letter into that paper stating that it was simply a visit of pleasure and not a religious ceremonial. Then as regards the conduct of the Dean 604 and Chapter, I am not aware, and I have not been informed, that there was any exclusive use of Canterbury Cathedral. The gentlemen to whom my hon. Friend refers very judiciously paid their visit during the hours when the Cathedral is open to the public, and. they, of course, were not excluded. There is no limitation as to the particular number of persons, and I hope there never will be, who may enter our cathedrals; and they went—and I cannot blame them for it, under the guidance of a gentleman, who it appears is a Priest, and has made himself thoroughly conversant with the history of a great deal of the extremely interesting matter that is connected with that great metropolitan church. But I am told they behaved themselves in a most unexceptionable manner; they made no assumptions whatever. They endeavoured apparently to get what they could from the lecture of Mr. Christie, and I am sure the hon. Gentleman would think them quite right, as he himself shows great interest in obtaining information in this House. I am told there was nothing whatever in the conduct of the visitors, nor, as far as my informant knows, in their language which could give offence to anyone. I hope that, upon the whole, is a pretty satisfactory account of the matter. My hon. Friend asks me whether any steps will be taken hereafter to prevent the recurrence of such proceedings. I can only understand two modes of preventing the recurrence of such proceedings, one is to shut the cathedrals against the public. But as one of the great triumphs, as I may call it, in a small way that has been achieved in recent times is, that whereas the cathedrals used to be shut against the public, they are now thrown open free of fee or cost of any kind, except where much inspection of valuable monuments-may be required, for whose safety it may be requisite to levy a small fee, I think it would be a very great pity to reverse that practice. The other mode would be to administer a religious test, which I do not think would be satisfactory, and I doubt whether it would be effectual. Moreover, there is very great reason for doubting it; for although many Roman Catholics belonged to this party, yet I believe it is a fact that a considerable number of Protestants also were so injudicious as to be anxious to be present and themselves 605 take advantage of the lecture. I wish, at all events, to appear not disinclined to give my hon. Friend the information he asks for.
§ MR. WHALLEYI am extremely obliged to the right hon. Gentleman, and perhaps he will allow me to ask him this Question—Do I understand that I, who take a great interest in St. Thomas á Becket, might be allowed to address a number of persons in Canterbury Cathedral?
MR. GLADSTONEI have no authority in Canterbury Cathedral; but I have no doubt, if my hon. Friend likes to issue an advertisement of this character—to have a party come down and give them the same kind of useful information as that which appears to have been given on this occasion—that he would receive the same courtesy and kindness which they received, and which I believe is afforded to all who visit that Cathedral.