HC Deb 24 March 1887 vol 312 cc1351-2
MR. JOHNSTON (Belfast, W.)

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, If his attention has been called to a statement in The Weekly Register of 19th March, concerning a Roman Catholic Mission at Poplar— The Mission was opened on the last Sunday of February with a procession through the principal streets of the parish. The Guards of the League of the Cross and the members of the different confraternities left the church preceded by a large Mission Cross and accompanied by the parochial clergy. Father Lawless, M. R., clothed in cassock, cloak, and biretta, intoned the Rosary, in which all joined. In due course the East India Bock was reached. Here Father Lawless recited the Litany of our Blessed Mother, delivered an address, and exacted the following promise, which was made with one voice by the kneeling crowd:—'I promise, by the grace of God. to attend regularly this Holy Mission even to the end, and to go to my Confession and Communion.' Father Lawless then gave the blessing with the Mission Cross, and the procession moved on by way of Robin Hood Lane, increasing in numbers, until it reached High Street, Poplar; whether these proceedings constitute a distinct violation of the Roman Catholic Relief Act, 10 Geo. 4, c. 7, s. 26; and, what course the Government propose to takes in this case and similar ones?

MR. M'CARTAN (Down, S.)

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers the Question, I wish to ask him whether the Statute referred to provides that any person who becomes a Jesuit, or a member of any Religious Order, in these countries shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanour and subject to the penalty of being ordered to be banished from the Kingdom for his natural life; and, whether the penalty provided under the 26th section of the Act can be given to the person who informed on those guilty of thus exercising religious liberty?

THE FIRST LORD (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)

In answer to the Question last addressed to me, I am sorry to say I have no personal knowledge of the provision of the Statute in question, and therefore I am unable to give the information which the hon. Gentleman asks for. In answer to the Question of my hon. Friend (Mr. John- ston), I have to state that my attention has been called to the statement by the Question of the hon. Member. I have not soon the paper in question; but, assuming the statement is correct, I am advised that there is a strong reason to doubt whether there has been any violation of the penal provisions of the Act. I am not aware that proceedings have ever been taken under that particular section.