On this page
- Text (2)
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Intelligence * —Parliamentary ,: Petition of Mr . Blunt . 70 J
against her , whilst , notwithstanding the state of oppression of seven millions of Catb 0 li England : passes in fiee eyes crf the multitude fbr the classical country of toleration , aud the generous protector of civil and religious liberty .
PARLIAMENTARY . Petition of Mr * Blunt , complaining of Calumnies against Roman Catholics , in a Pamphlet circqlated by the " Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge "
HOUSE OF COMMONS . May 28 , 1824 . Lord Althorp presented a petition from Mr . Blunt , a Rom ^ tn-Catholic gentleman , complaining of the conduct of a clergyman , in circulating among his ( Mx . Bhint ' s ) tenants , a , pamphlet containing
false and scandalous imputations on Roman Catholics . This pamphlet was printed some years ago for the Protestant Chartered Schools in Ireland , but had fceen subsequently withdrawn , and was now again brought into circulation by the Society calling itself the Society for promoting ( Ghristi ^ n Knowledge . It contained all those * false arid scandalous
imp » tatio « s on the Roman Ca-tfeoko religion , which hacfr been solemn !^ disclaimed ^ by ttie six Catholic Universi ^ Si ~ Mr . Blunt had taken the oath of allegiance , and solemnly disclaimed all the tenets which were imputed to him in this pamphlet . In presenting this petition he ( jLord A . )
could not but observe , that he thought the House would do right in expressing its disapprobation of this attempt to impute base and . disloyal principles to the Catholics , whose loyalty and exemplary conduct had been recognized by the legislature . Neither Mr . Blunt nor any other Catholic had a right to complain of
a Protestant minister , who endeavoured to convince others of the truth of the doctrines of the Church of England ; but he hud a right to complain of a clergyman of the Church of England who disseminated a scandalous pamphlet iij his
neighbourhood , for the purpose of making him odious in the eyes of his fellowsubjects . The conduct of the Society for tfie propagation of Christian Knowledge was still ^ jiiore culpable ; for tjlfey ought
to have known tftat this pamphlet had been withdraw ^ by the Chartered Sc ^ ols io Ireland ^ s containing inj u rious imputations oi ^ ifee Catholics ^ which had been solemnly disclaimed .
Mr . Secretary PJS | iL said , that as he was not aware tfyat lie had ev $ r seen this pamphlet , and as lie knew nothing of the clergyman alluded to , he could siiy little on this subject . If this clergyman , or any other individual or society had circu-
lated a pamphlet , the object of which was to sow religious animosities , he could only say , that snch an aet metJfljflf ' fcis decided disapprobation . Hfe did recollect that the Protestant Chartered Schools in
Ireland , formerly used a catechism which was liable to objection , and which had been subsequently withdrawn . He shotald be sorry to findthntiinypublic institution had again circulated a publication , which had been withdrawn in consequence of
its objectionable ob&x&e&& ?( hy the Protestant Society in Ireland . From the fife * quent experience , however , which he had had in matters of this kind , he thought it would be ? right for the House to sus * pend its judgment , until the fact were
ascertained . He repeated , that if any clergyman of the Ghureh [ of ; England had taken the course of which tbe petitioner complained , it was impossible for him ( B | r . P *} to give his approbation , to such fe proceeding .
Mr . Phillips bore testimony to the highly respectable and amiable character of the petitioner . He thought the . eon * duct of the Society ,. calling itself aSociety for promoting Christian Knowledge ,. co > ttld not be too strongly reproliated . It ap * .
peared that they had printed and circu * lated a scandalous pamphlet , imputing to the great body ? of the Roman Catholics tenets and principles which they had dis * claimed upon oath , for the express purpose of exciting hatred and persecution against a large portion of their fellow *
countrymen , Mr . Curwjen , as a member of the Society , expressed htis unwillingness to believe the accuracy of the statement which had been just made . He trusted the charge would turn out , upon inquiry ^ to be unfounded .
Sir John Newport said , he would take upon himself to say that the pamphlet in question w ^ s printed by the Society ' s printer , circiilated by their booksellers , and appeared upon the face of it to be circulated by their authority aud sanction . He could conceive nothing more disgraceful , than that a public In ^
8 titution , the professed object of which was to promote Christian Knowledge , of which they ought to consider Christian charity a main ingredient , should give fresh circulation to a publication , con- * tainiixg slanderous imputations on the Roman Catholics , which hswl been disclaimed upon oath—a publication which had been withdrawn from the Chartered
SchooJs of Ireland by the Protestants themaelyea . Sir F . Burdett said a few words in so low a tone , as to be inaudible in the gallery . The petition was ordered to lie on the table .
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Nov. 2, 1824, page 701, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2530/page/61/