§ Sir A. SPROTI beg to move, in page 1, line 7, to leave out from the word "Act" to the word "are" in line 8.
The words that I desire to omit are these:(being enactments affecting the civil and religious liberties of His Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects)".My contention is that the Acts of Parliament mentioned in the Schedule do not do what is described by these words, and that the words are inaccurate and misleading, and should not appear in an Act of Parliament. Let me explain to the House by mentioning quite briefly the various Acts which the Schedule proposes to repeal. The first is the Act of Edward VI which regulates certain matters in the Church of England with regard to images and with regard to the Book of Common Prayer. Those are the subjects that are dealt with in that Act and there is nothing about Roman Catholics at all. Therefore, supposing that is the only one that answered to that description, I am 1582 justified in saying the words in brackets here are inaccurate when applied to that Act.
Mr. HERBERTWe must retain our own opinions but I have not the least objection to leaving out the words.
§ Sir A. SPROTI should like to have an opportunity of explaining exactly what my hon. Friend has done. He has brought forward a Bill which he designates by the name of the Roman Catholic Relief Bill and he has put a Schedule into it tabling certain ancient Acts of Parliament which he desires to repeal. If he now admits that he has been inaccurate all through—
Mr. HERBERTNo; I admit nothing of the kind. I said we must retain our own opinions, but I have not the least objection to leaving out the words.
§ Sir A. SPROTI should still like to have an opportunity of explaining the great inaccuracy of the hon. Member who has proposed the Bill. I have dealt with the first Act. The second is the Act of Elizabeth. It deals with certain specified abbeys. It does not deal with abbeys generally. It does not impose any law generally with regard to abbeys at all. It deals with the property in certain abbeys and transfers it to the Crown. That has nothing whatever to do with Roman Catholics, so here also I say the words in brackets are inaccurate. The Act of George I is an Act for appointing Commissioners to deal with the estates of certain traitors in 1715. Some people call them traitors and some do not, but that is the expression that is used in the Act of Parliament.
§ Major Sir RICHARD BARNETTOn a point of Order. If the hon. Member discusses these things, will he be allowed to discuss them again?
§ Mr. SPEAKERI shall certainly have to be guided in my selection of later Amendments by what occurs on the earlier one.
§ Sir A. SPROTI am not discussing the matter at all. I am merely naming the Acts of Parliament proposed to be re, pealed and giving a proper description of them. The Act of 1715 dealing with traitors has nothing to do especially with Roman Catholics. Some of them probably 1583 were Roman Catholics, but others were not. So in three cases I have shown that the words in brackets are inapplicable. The next is the Act of George II, which refers to advowsons. We have been talking a good deal about that up till now, but it refers to advowsons in the Church of England, and has nothing to do with the rights or privileges or liberties of Roman Catholics. The other two may be said to deal with that matter, and the last two are negligible. They deal only with matters regarding charities. So out of the eight Acts which my hon. Friend desires to repeal, four have no relation to the object with which he has brought forward the Bill, and they do not come under the description of being enactments affecting the civil and religious liberties of His Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects.
§ Sir ROBERT LYNNI beg to second the Amendment.
I should like to join with my hon. and gallant Friend in pointing out that not one of us wants to prevent relief to any member of a religious denomination who is suffering from a disability. It strikes me the Clauses of this Bill aim at giving greater freedom to people who are called Anglo-Catholics rather than to remove disabilities from Roman Catholics, and it is because of that that the Bill has been brought in. My hon. and gallant Friend assures us that these disabilities did not refer in the slightest degree to the Roman Catholic Church.
Brigadier-General BROWNI should like to support what my hon. Friends have said. All we want is that this shall not be a Bill for the benefit of Anglo-Catholics but one for proper relief for Roman Catholics, and this Clause has no right to be in at all. The Statute of Edward VI had nothing whatever to do with the Roman Catholic Church.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI may point out that hon. Members are prejudicing their claim to move Amendments to the Schedule if they make their speeches in advance.
§ Amendment agreed to.