HC Deb 18 February 1901 vol 89 cc320-2
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND (Clare, E.)

had on the Paper the following question: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether His Majesty's Government intend to take any steps to eliminate from His Majesty's Coronation Oath that portion which describes the religion of His Majesty's Catholic subjects as idolatrous and superstitious. In putting the question the hon. Member said the Oath referred to was not the Coronation Oath, but the Oath taken by His Majesty in opening Parliament.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Yes, Sir, the hon. Gentleman is quite right. It is not an oath, but a statement, and the statement was made on the opening of Parliament, and will, of course, not have to be repeated at the coronation.

MR. WILLIAM REDMOND

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the statement to which he refers was not, as a matter of fact, in the nature of an oath?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I thought it was more properly described as a statement —a statutory declaration.* * By the Statute I William & Mary, Session 2, cap. 2 ("For declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and settling the Succession of the Crown") it was in section 10 enacted that the Monarch should "on the first day of the meeting of the first Parliament next after his or her coming to the Throne…make subscribe and audibly repeat the: Declaration mentioned in the Statute made in the thirtieth year of the reign of Charles II., intituled 'An Act for the more effectual preserving the King's person and Government, by disabling papists from sitting in either House of Parliament.'" The last mentioned Act clearly distinguishes "Oath" and "Declaration." By Section 2, Peers and Members of the House of Commons are to "take the several Oaths of Allegiance and

MR. WILLIAM REDMOND

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is not true that in making this statement His Majesty kissed the Bible and actually took an oath; and, further, I would ask him whether any steps are to be taken to secure that in future this Oath shall not be taken by His Majesty?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I am no particular admirer of the form of words used in the Declaration. But the hon. Gentleman will see that the practical question is passed, and it will not arise again, we hope, for many long years to come.

MR. WILLIAM REDMOND

The question is not whether it is a practical question. Is it not true that millions of His Majesty's subjects in every part of the Empire regard this Oath as wantonly insulting?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I hope that is not the case.

MR. WILLIAM REDMOND

Arising out of the answer of the right hon. Gentleman, I beg respectfully to point out that as long as this Oath is in existence and His Majesty swears that Catholics are idolatrous, I for one will oppose His Majesty's salary.

MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN

Is it proposed to continue to pay out of public Supremacy," "and make subscribe and audibly repeat this Declaration following: ' I do solemnly and sincerely in the presence of God profess testify and declare that I do believe that in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper there is not any transubstantiation of the elements of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ at or after the consecration thereof by any person whatsoever; and that the invocation or adoration of the Virgin Mary or any other saint and the sacrifice of the mass as they are now used in the Church of Rome are superstitious and idolatrous, and I do solemnly in the presence of God profess testify and declare that I do make this declaration and every part thereof in the plain and ordinary sense of the words read unto me, as they are commonly understood by English Protestants, without any evasion, equivocation or mental reservation whatsoever, and without any dispensation already granted me for this purpose by the Pope or any other authority or person whatsoever, or without any hope of any such dispensation from any person or authority whatsoever, or without thinking that I am or can be acquitted before God or man or absolved of this declaration or any part thereof although the Pope or any other person or persons or power whatsoever should dispense with or annul the same, or declare that it was null or void from the beginning.'"—ED.] funds the ministers of the Catholic Church to act as chaplains—

* MR. SPEAKER

Order, order! That has nothing to do with the question.

MR. FLAVIN

Does the Declaration mean that the Catholics of the United Kingdom—

* MR. SPEAKER

Order, order! The hon. Gentleman is absolutely irregular. He is asking what a Declaration means. That is a question of law or opinion.

MR. FLAVIN

I was asking a question arising out of the answer of the right hon. Gentleman.

* MR. SPEAKER

I have endeavoured to explain to the hon. Gentleman that it is out of order.

MR. FLAVIN

As a matter of fact, I did not ask any question at all.