Mr. FINCK. I rise to oppose the amendment. I regret, Mr. Chairman, that this proposition should again be Pressed this morning, in the absence, as has been stated by the chair man of the ComForAffrs, of all official information on the subject. It strikes me that the Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. DoDGE,) who has had read at the desk a letter and an extract from a newspaper, is exceedingly anxious to become a champion on this particular question. Now, the letter which he o had read at the desk is a letter refer ring entirely to English Protestant citizens residing at Rome; and I think the Government of GreatBritain will be fully competent to take care of its own interests at that Court without the assistance of the able Gentfrom NewYork, [Mr. DoDGE] We, so far as we are concerned, have received no official intelligence whatever from our minister at Rome in relation to this question. And it does seem to me this committee is showing a disposition to be rather swift to find some difficulties and objection to the action of our minister at Rome and the conduct of the Papal Government. I submit that the course most consistent with the dignity of this Government and of the American people is to wait until we receive official information as to the action of the Government at Rome and of our own minister. That information has been asked for, but has not yet come to hand. We do not know, as a matter of fact, whether there has been an order issued to the American minister requesting that Protestant churches be removed outside the limits of the city of Rome. We have no reliable information on the subject. Although while I should regret that there should exist any cause in the minds of the authorities of Rome deemed by them sufficient to induce such an order, yet we all know and must admit that we have no right to regulate the internal concerns of the Government at Rome. It is true, we have the right to withdraw our minister from that Court or from any other Court when, in the opinion of our Government, it should be done; but this attempt to do it, in this indirect manner, by cutting off the appropriation to pay the salary of the minister, without a single word of official information, seems to me to be going a great distance in order to attack the Papal Government, and to do an act, to say the least, distasteful to the great body of Catholics in this country. This Government is not a Protestant Government, neither is it a Catholic Government. No particular religion is recognized or established y the Constitution; all are free before the law and the Constitution. But it is not so in every Government. It is not so in GreatBritain. It is not so in Russia. It is not so in many other Governments. We desire that every person should be left free to worship the Almighty according to the dictates of his own conscience. And the 1st great example of this religious toleration in this country was set by the Catho lics of Maryland as early as 1649, when they declared this great principle by statute. But this is a question with which this House today has nothing to do. Most fortunate for the people of this country. Congress has no control over the question of religious belief. But as to this proposed amendment, I repeat we have no reliable information as to the existence of the order complained of or of the reasons which induced it, if really it has been made as reported by the newspapers.