As this Bill involves the interest of a large Community, of which we are the spiritual guides, we cannot understand, why it was not brought under our notice before being sent home; for it is well known that any Bill sanctioned by the Home Government is almost sure to be received without opposition here or elsewhere: no Official Member can withhold his vote, and the non-Official Members do not generally wish to oppose a matter already approved of at home. The general rule in like matter is, if we mistake mot, first to discuss the question in the Legislative Council, afterwards to have it sent Home for approval. We are satisfied that you, Right Houble. Sir, will give a patient hearing to us, on this question of such moment and delicacy.
It is stated in the notes by the Attorney General that there is not presently any official record of Marriages, the Registers of the Catholic Church being the private property of the Ecclesiastical Authorities, but an article of the Marriage Ordinance orders every one holding a register, to deliver up same to the Registrar within three months after the promulgation of said Ordinance.
How then do the Government elaita our private property. In the next place we are ordered to make an affidavit, should we prefer giving a copy of our register instead of the original, declaring same to be a true copy. Now, had the Attorney General consulted us on the subject, we would have informed him that our register contains certain particulars more than Protestant registers, and these particulars are solely for the benefit of the Roman Catholic Community. No doubt you, Right Hon. Sir, de not expect us to betray the confidence of our community. With regard to fees, three fourths of our Catholics shall not be able to pay them even when reduced. It may not be out of place to remark hore that the Catholic priests do not receive a single farthing for the administration of the Sacraments.
All these objectionable points are of little worth when compared with the principle that pervades the Bill, it being at variance with Catholic principles. We believe Marringe To be a Sacrament, and must be treated as such. Its Minister therefore must be free in tho exercise of it; now it is impossible to combine it with the regulations of the New Ordinance, for they interfere with the Minister in the discharge of his duties. The Government has no power to prescribe a form for the administration of the Sacrament of Matrimony, as it has no power to prescribe a form for the administration of the other Sacraments. Neither has it the right to forbid, or to command the Sacrament to be administered in such or such a particular case. It does not belong to lay authority to establish rules for the administration of holy things: let a man so look upon us as Ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God (St. Paul, c. 4. v. 1)-Gouseet,
The form of Marriage according to the XXIII Section of the new Bill, is entirely out of keeping with the doctrine of our Church, and might deter indirectly Ca- tholics from receiving the Sacrament of Marriage in their own Church, to which fact still more strength is added by the reduction of fees for Civil Marriages, whilst the high focs for liccase remain untouched; thus Catholies are induced to make choice of Marriage by civil law, rather than that of their own Charch.
The principles of our Church are such that we cannot admit the Bill. Profest.-We, on the 18th of March, seeing that the regulations of the Ordinance could not be complied with, forwarded to the Members of the Legislative Council, our solen protest, wherein was stated that we submitted to penalties rather than comply with. the Bill, and that we were protesting, not for opposition, but for conscience's sake. The Home Chief Justice in Council stated that objections made on principles, should receive the greatest attention.
Select Commitce.-A Select Committee is formed. Unfortunately all the Members of the legislative Council are Protestauts, and out of them, five gentlemen were selected. The Vicar Apostolic was then invited to meet these Gentlemen. He knowing that the question was on principle, thought it convenient to state his objections on paper (which have been already mentioned when speaking of the principles pervading the Bill,) and then objections were sent to the Chairman of the Select Commitico. The question was: bas the Bill to be altered en principle or not? Principles are not to be discussed, and we Catholics deem
Catholics deem our religious principles unchangeable, beyond the sphero of discussion ; and this is the reason we cannot admit of anything tampering with Catholic principles. It was, therefice, useless to discuss other points before the matter of principle was settled. Objections raised and answered.--The Select Committee resolved not to alter the Bill on principle, it passed as it originally stood, (save some few unimportant changes). on the ground that the principle of the new Bill had been recognized in the so called Catholic countries--France and Belgium, and that in Coylon, where an Ovlinance similar to this had been in force since 1863, no publie complaint has been made against it as far as they have heard. We emphatically deny that the principle of the new Bill has been recognized by the Bishops of France, Belgium and Ceylon, on the contrary the Roman Catholic Church has never ceased protesting against the so called Organic Articles, in which the principics of the new Bill are expressed: no Roman Catholic Bishop in any part of the world, comprising Ceylon, could or ever had done anything at variance with Homan Catholic principles; there is, however, this difference that as France, Belgium, and Ceylon are large places, the contrast between civil law and Roman Catholic principles, can pass unnoticed, whilst Hongkong being small, it cannot take effect without exriting a great and painful sensation amongst the Community. Now, let us take one point out of many, Civil Marriage is condemned by the Roman Catholic Church, hence we consider Marriage, performed in accordance with Section XXIII of this now Hill, a concubinage. Civil Marriagos could be performed heretofore in Hongkong at the Registrar's Office; the proela- mation, however, was not so unseasonable as in the new Bill, in which the Registrar is constituted High Priest, who warns the couple that there is no need of religious ceremony. Till now we never spoke to our flock about the Civil Marriage, indeed there was ne necessity, but as soon as the new Bill is enforced, it will be our duty openly to condemn Civil Marriage, and the Catholic Community will look upon the English Government as promoter of concubinage. In the past, both ourselves and our flock have lived and worked most amicably with the Government, do nor cow, we entreat you, put us in such a disaggreu- able position. At the Meeting of the Legislative Council, previous to the passing of the Bill, the Honorable Chief Justice was making some substantial objections to it, but H. E. the President warned him that if any substantial change were made in the Bill, it should go home a second time, the Acting Colonial Secretary added that the Bill had come from home approved of by the Right Honorable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, with instructions to have it passed. The Bill then passed.
We feel confident that if a fair discussion had been allowed, the matter would have gone in a different way.
The Preas of Hongkong. The Pross being Protestant in Ilongkong, it is very difficult to have a true idea at Home of Catholic matters here, and this proves the necessity of a Catholic newspaper. They did not let the happy occasion pass without crying victory against the Roman Catholies. The sectarian, anti-Catholic spirit of one of them is very well-known here. Though the other two are Protestant, still one of them regrets that the Catholic Community should have been so much aggrieved; although it adds the Legislature could not have done otherwise, as in the Colony is must follow Imperial Proceedings.
We do not think that you would enforce a law in longkong, because it is good in England, on the contrary, we know that you desire Legislation to be adapted to the circumstances of a people, climate, ant place.
Another newspaper acknowledges plainly that the principles of the new Bill are at variance with Roman Catholic doctrine, and that it is not surprising we object to it! however, it adds, we could not blame the Council for not adapting the Ordinance to Catholic principles. But the Bill being framed for a large Catholic community, you, Right Honorable Sir, will agree that, that fact should have been taken into consideration; and the end of the Bill being registration, it could be observed without interfering with Roman Catholic principles, or offending Protestaut feeling and religions liberty. Even supposing the case, that Legislation could not content hoth Protestant and Catholic. would it be just to inconvenience the bulk of the Christian community (which is Catholic) to favour the few? Government respects the religious feelings of the few Mahomedaas living in Hongkong, and of the Pagan Chinese, who live disorderly, in bigamy, by not applying to
482