Star. — London, England, 1828-03-07 00:00:00

I _l tw..e) e-Ae#4ll IMAY72 (rs,-- fir 4 Ike Club r 4. fa Lt. Sin k _ atm*. lei`g.4t'he gifidh• wir' Vreteeg k hting v k eal% ; the day bilk % vitae good ot Real ISVlternigigsk 7ulait..i that hh ib r. And 'loon/ •shoulil Nurs N UMBER 12,805.] FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 7, 1828. he now moved for Returns connected with the expenses of printing the Appendix to the Journals and Reports on Public Charities, the Burning of Hindno Widows, and many others, for the last five years. When these Returns were laid on the table, he would feel it his duty to hring the subject before the notice of the House. The Returns were then ordered. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, Matteis 6. The Luau Cumicau.os took his seat upon the Woolsack at half pa•t four o'clock. 3lr. PZNDA oats, and other Members of the House of Commons, brought up the Truro Read Bill, which was read a first time. (hi the motion of Lord SHAFTESBURY, the Tettinsall Road Dill was read a second time. Lord SHAFTESBURY presented a Petition against the Repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, from the Clergy of the Arch- deaconry of Sarum. Lord SHAFTRSBURY presented a Petition against any further concessions to the Roman Catholics, from the Clergy of the Arch• deaconry of Sarum. The Earl of MACCLESFIELD presented Petitions for the Repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, from the Protestant Dissenters of Orford, and of Chipping Norton. Lord MAYNARD presented similar Petitions from the Pro testant Dissenters of Malden, Essex ; of Langham, and of Witham. Lord CA LTIIORPE presented Petitions to the same effect, from the Mombers of the Scotch Church, in Wells-street, Mary- . . la-honnr, and frotn the Independent Congregation of Ebenezer Chapel, Birmingham. These Petitions were, fly ordered to lie upon the table. The House then adjourned until to-morrow (this day), HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. JoHNsoN, from the Office of the, Chief Secretary of Ireland presented Returns relative to the Court of Admiralty in that Country. Mr. Alderman WOOD brought up the Whitechapel Road Bill, which was read a Gm time. Won't TRENCH resented a Petition front a certain Parish in the county of Cambridge, in favour of the Ayr and Calder Na vigation Bill.—Referred to the Committee. Mr. EGERTON presented a Petition from the Maltsters of Nauttuiels, praying the Repeal of the Malt Tu.—Ordered to be bid olutlie table. Mr. PEN DA.RVES presented a Petition from the Inhabitants of Redruth, county of Cornwall, praying the Repeal of Duties on Coals carried coastways.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. FAZAKERLEY presented a Petition from the Inhabitants of the City of Lincoln, praying to relieve the Owners of Freehold Property from the disability under which they labour—namely, that of not bring able to vote for County Members, as they were allowed to do in all times before.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. J. MARTIN presented a Petition from the Maltsters is 4 Ttwkesbury, praying for the Repeal of the Malt Tu.—Ordered to be printed. • The Cities and Towns in Ireland Lighting Bill was read a second time. A Petition was presented from the Rector, Curate, and Church wardens of the Parish of St. Mary's, Leicester, praying that the Test and Corporation Acts may not be repealed.—Ordered to be printed. A Message from the Lords requested a Copy of the Second Re port of the Emigration Committee, and also of the Report on Cri. Min a I Commitments and Convictions. The Reports were ordered to be communicated to their Lord- Mr. BERNAL obtained leave to bring in a Bill for Improving abeTo'wn of Gravesend. • INCREASE OF CRIME. Mr. DUGDALE presented a Petition from the Ma gistrates assembled at Quarter Sessions, in the county of W.twick, playing that some measures might be -taken to check the increase of crime. The Petitioners did not point out any precise means by which this de sirable end might be effected, but they left it endirely to the serious consideration of the House. Mr. LAWLEY said, it was high time that the in crease of crime should be checked, and it was not a little lamentable to think that one half of the criminals in the county of Warwick were boys, some of them not older than seven or nine years. He strongly reprobated she present practice of committing boys indiscriminately to prison, for he was satisfied it made them worse than they were before they entered it. He was happy the Committee had been appointed, and he trusted the best effects would follow front their labours. Mr. 'ATTU:TON said, that having a Petition simi tar to the present to offer to the House, he could not do better than state its contents now. In the last three years, from 1825, the inctease of juvenile offenders bad been tenfold, a circumstance which of itself deserved the most serious inquiry. He congratulated the country upon the revival of the Committee upon Criminal Commitments and Convictions, and trusted that much good would result from its efforts. Sir T. LETHBRIDGE regretted that juvenile of fenders had very greatly increased in the county of Somerset, and, in common with the preceding speakers, he expressed great hopes from the labours of the Com• mittee which was yesterday appointed on this all im portant subject. Sir JOHN WIIOTTESLEY admitted the great in crease of crime throughout the country, but denied that it was to be attributed to the circumstance of labourers being paid a portion of their wages out of the poet's rate. That could not at all apply to the county of Stafford, whatever it might do elsewhere. He thought that commitments were too lightly made. and patticu lady so since the Bill passed which allowed prosecu tors their expenses. The result of this was, that per sons were thrown into prison for very trivial offences, and the contamination of such places could never alter be got rid of. The subject deserved the most serious attention of the Committee. Mr. POItTMAN did not think that boys were new much worse than they used to be; but formerly, when boys were detected in committing trifling offences, they were punished on the spot, whereas the persons doing lie now were brought before a Magistrate, and in de fault of bail were committed to prison. Ordered to be printed. MALT TAX. Mr. DUGDALE presented a Petition from the Malitters of the County of Warwick, praying the repeal of the Malt Tax.— Ordered to be printed. Mr. LITTLETON presented a Petition from the Magistrates of the County of Stafford relative to the increase of Crime...-Or dered to be referred to the Committee on Criminal Laws. N A Til A N Ixol-EAST TILT FORD* Mr. LUMLEY presented a Petition from Jonathan Fas, committed to Newgate a few evenings since by the Committee en the East ltetfurd Disfranchisement bill for prevarication; the Petitioner prayed that his case might be considered, and he solemnly declared that he was unacquainted with the rules of the House; that he had ne intention to suppress the truth, but to disclose all he knew ; but that from indisposition and a serious bilious attack he was unfit to give evidence before the House, He regretted the judgment passed uponhim by the House, while he did not deny its jus tice; and, in conclusion, he entreated the compassion ar.d indulgence of the House.--The Petition was then ordered to be laid on the table. Mr. LUMLEY moved, that Jonathan Fox be dis charged. M. DAWSON said, he knew nothing of the Pea- Cotter, but several representations had been made to him by ptrsons of very great consideration, stating that he (14)x) was a person of great respectability, and was now "feting most severely in consequence of the disgrace which had been brought upon him. He (Mr. Dawson) thought that the petitioner was entitled to some indul ge..cr. He was in a confidential situation, and looking at the difficulty in which he was placed, particularly when asked questions spreading over a period of many years ; taking also into account the great suffering of the petitioner, and his repentance, he appeared here as his advocate. The SPEAKER said, there was no motion before the House, when Mr. LUMLEY then moved, that Jonathan Fox be called to the Bar of this House to-morrow, and then discharged. Sir JOHN NEWPORT did not wish to oppose the discharge, but it was solely on the ground of his re pentance, and not for the reasons stated by the Hon. Member (Mr. Dawson). Mr. SPRING RICE admitted there should be great hesitation in committing persons from this House to Newgate, but there should be also great hesitation in discharging them without notice. If the Honourable Member consented to give a notice, in place of making a motion for to-morrow, he would not object to it. It should not be forgotten, that this case was still pend ing, and others of a similar nature, and if witnesses were not strictly looked after, all inquiry into election bribery would be useless. Mr. LUMLEY said, that all the other witnesses were cautioned but the petitioner; he (Mr. Lumley) gave no tice for to-morrow. Mr. GRATTAN presented a Petition from the Governors and Directors of the Hibernian Joint Stock Company, praying that the Bill in progress for their dissolution may not pan into a Law.— Ordered to be laid on the table. Sir. GB ATTA N presented several Petitions from various places in Ireland (fifteen in number), praying for Catholic Emancipation. —Ordered io be printed. A new writ was moved for a Member for the Port of Sandwich, in the place of Sir E. °weal, who was appointed one of the Coun cil to the Lord High AdmiraL CATHOLIC QUESTION. Sir FRANCIS BURDETT said he rose to present a most important Petition to the consideration of the House—it was the Petition of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, praying for the repeal of those odious and op pressive laws whiclisstill fettered them in the exercise of those rights and enjoyments to which, as British sub jects, they were entitled. He did not mean on the pre sent occasion to enter into those considerations which the presentation of such a Petition would well justify"; and the more so, because the cause of liberality was every day making rapid strides; and he hoped that this House and the country would very shortly be relieved ; from the consideration of the just claims of the Korean Catholics of the two countries. The Catholics of Ire land and England suffered the most unmerited hard ships—though some persons were not disposed to lay any great stress upon them as practical grievances.— For his own part, he thought nothing could be more galling to the mind of an honourable man than in his own country to be considered as proscribed—and have as it were a mark set upon him on account of his te• !igloos belief; to treat him as unoorthy of trust, anti incapacitated from securing any marks of honour. The Catholic was now, and had for years been arrested in the career of honourable ambition; and nothing could be more irksome than to have the finger of scorn pointed at one, while he was obliged to look up to others not more deserving, as of the privileged classes. The pre tences on which these disabilities continue, seemed to weaken every day ; and, when they considered that millions of people, nearly one halt of the popu lation of the kingdom, were Petitioners at their Bar, praying for the restoration of their rights, they could not pay too great attention to their Petition. Their cause was now aided by all the liberal Protestants in both countries, and the manife,tation of good feelings which he had seen the other night, gave him ground for hope that the Catholics would not much longer be disappointed. Public opinion was setting in strongly in their favour, and it was high time that justice should at length be done them. In behalf of the Catholics of England and Ireland, he totally denied any charge made against them. He denied that they held a divided allegiance; he denied that they had not a community of interests with other men; and he denied that they were less desirous than others of upholding all the insti tutions of the country. He appealed in their favour from their professed calumniators and monopolizers of all power—such persons could not be judges between the Catholics and the country. From such persons, and such opinions, he appealed to the equity of Parliament —and on reason, justice, and policy, he should found his claim for consideration when he brought the merits of the Petition under discussion. On the broad principle of religious liberty—on that principle on which the Church of England itself was founded, he called for concession to the Catholics—for Protestants could not, with any degree of consistency, deny them their rights, without inflicting a great injustice on themselves. This Petition was entitled to the best attention of the House— it was very numerously and respectably signed—it was couched in temperate, but forcible and energetic lan guage; and again he repeated his hope, that the time was fast approaching when it would no longer occupy the consideration of the House—(Hear, hear). The Petition was ordered to be printed. Sir F. BURDETT gave notice that on Tuesday, the 29th of April next, he should bring the general subject before the notice of the House. On the motion of Mr. COURTENAY, the Friendly Societies' Bill was ordered to he read a second time on Friday week. Mr. Secretary I'EEL presented a Petition from the University 'of Oxford, against a Bill now in progress through this House, for the purpose of a Commutation of Tithes. The University com plained of the principle contained in the Bill. by which the value to be now fixed was to be held as the value of the land for ever.— Ordered to be printed. Mr. F. LEWIS brought up Returns connected with the price of Corn. The Hon. Member then moved for Returns of Foreign Silk imported 'into this country for the last five years, and the Amount of Duties paid thereon.—Ordered. The Smuts's called upon Mr. Wilmot-Horton. Mr. WILMOT-HORTON said, he was in the hands of the Speaker and the House with respect to his motion which stood for this evening. ' He had consented to delay it, to suit the convenience of the Hon: Member ( Mr. Brougham) whom be did not now see in his place. If it was the pleasure of the House, he would not bring it on—or if they felt otherwise, be was quite ready to proceed. The House intimated a wish for delay, and the Hon. Member sat down. writ& were "it fnibghtvnier flu Ir. es er aravire dale-Twine, St, agnomen a( lip CARIVARVOIT4 Pedro. is nog whet/2 he An • rolll)3Ttlav UT I tashienatik il►dkpositicn tine for the Taphinr: 'and het Lady, in applanSees, 31so for the to these per. he Air. Alm the (hence se duet with i.. A young the exquisite cc• ptifin was !I a rptasulled, 3U% ere.* ht po;. filar ak ~on••ets wire ti:d song tb of the Lords f e, ion of Pim 1- she names of :he Prelates, Lainolic Peers !*Shei, seats, if D eke. met; li•M tithes 14t Ifiscosiutai PIO : or 1441 71. iis.lo4iNC i titles. vihose f Par lia ment lodnio to this Select Coen. of their satgr u ,, whole House ni.e, or upon variably with present ill tha: 1.L4T11 ZET. Is. 11 K • 3 11 .. is Thertiblue 5 U jeweller— sU. bet .- 31 i ... 12 poweer 910 • ." it 11 .breker . .. 911 I loordiant 1 10 .40 . 1 • .. 911 11 It a▪ k seller 1 1 1 11 wt ... 1 11 • —. 1 11 ..» 18 ... 11 ... 411 ... ... 10 ... 11 ... 1 0 4 the Psistereas to the Court) are Portugal-street kf March, at TO . rep sawyer. pier. is clerk. slcbres Widmer, beesernonger. 1113.,1314. Sarrer, ark bucker agad ietsktrastOce. er) Coattail, eta! rth Cray, Kaac, ue, and Wrigln't cr at tie !u• Dr. ise Roo. Franca was daughter n on the 10di 44 770, to the law Se ridow, on the IPA Jolla Wrotsersials longest brollifff Mot. birt Baker s BLS. ARIL POS. , e a 4 A • 4 is • • 4 1 • • W MOM WOW. Mr' anal at. • Atilt' r. tie ibtgaismiir rfamills4kr II RT. PRINTING EXPENSES. Sir M. W. RIDLEY said he did not intend, by his motion on the subject of Printing Expenses, to preveatt Petitions from being given to the world ; but it was evi dent that so many Papers and Returns of all sorts were now ordered to be printed, that the expenses attending their being so printed amounted to a very large sum. He did not mean to say that any blame attached to the Officers of the House, nor did he object to the charges made; but when the annual charge was from eighty to one hundred thousand pounds, it must be evident that inquiry became absolutely necessary. His meat object was to prevent useless expenditure, and with that view TAKING POLLS AT ELECTIONS. Lurd ALTHORP said, that a Committee had been appointed to regulate the taking the Polls, and thereby diminish the expense of County Elections. His object was to take the poll at different places in the county at the same time; but it was found that that would be at tended with considerable difficulty, inasmuch as all the machinery of clerks and lawyers would be necessary at each of these different places. It is well known that the enormous expense of county elections often prevented the people from having a free choice; and in now call ing the attention of the /Rinse to the subject, he was only fulfilling his duty. He thought that a proper re gi.ter of the freeholders would do much to meet the difficulty which existed at present. The Noble Lord then moved for leave to bring in a Bill for the Regis tration of Freeholders in the different Counties of Eng land and Wales. After a few words from Lord Lowsnaz, leave was given. TREATY OR LIIERRICIE. Sir H. PARNELL rose, pursuant to notice, to move for the production of a copy of the Treaty of Limerick. Many of the Catholic Petitions alluded to this docu• ment, and frequently complained of its violation. His object then in moving for its production, was to induce Hon. Members to look at it with attention, and put such a construction upon it as it deserved. It should be remembered that up to the period Of the Union Le land was quite independent of England, exercising every jurisdiction independently of her, and only obey ing the common Sovereign of the two countries'. The Hon. Baronet described the events which preceded the capture of Limerick by King William, and contended that the Irish conceded their cause while in possession of strong means for maintaining it, and that by obtain ing that concession, William gained great advantages, and was able to turn his arms against Louis the Twelfth. The 'article of the Treaty upon which the Catholics principally depended was the first, and without going into argument he would read the article to the House. It ran thus—" That the Roman Catholics of this king dom shall enjoy such privileges as are consistent with the law of Ireland, or as they did enjoy in the time of Charles t e Second ; and that their Majesties, so soon as their affairs will allow them to assemble a Parliament in this kingdom, shall secure for the Roman Catholics such measures as shall preserve them from any disturbance on account of their religion. ° The other article upon which they rested their claims was the ninth, which said—" That the oath to be taken by those Roman Catholics who submit to their Majesties shall be the oath aforesaid, and no other oath what soever." According to their construction of the Treaty, the oath they were bound to take was the Oath of Alle giance, and not the Oath of Supremacy. The Catholics never lost sight of their claims under the Treaty, but from time to time had maintained them by a continued reference to its articles, whenever occasion presented itself. Their construction of the Treaty had been.sup ported by niany high author ities, and, amongst the rest, Dr. Lawrehce, Lord Plunket, and Mr. Burke. He re ferred to a passage in Mr. Burke's works relating to the Treaty, and recommended the House to examine tile arguments there advanced before it again decided upon the Catholic Question, as well as the arguments used by the different writers on the other side. The Hon. Baronet concluded by moving, " That an homble Ad dress be presented to his Majesty, praying that he will be graciously pleased to order to be laid on the table copies of the Letters Elicit, wherein are contained the civil Articles rot the surrender of Limerick in the year 1691, as ratified and exemplified by King William and Queen Mary." Mr. H. GRATTAN seconded the motion. He said that his Right Hon. Friend would not properly accom plish his object without obtaining the Ratification as well as the Treaty. There were two copies of the Treaty in existence, the one being an ex. mplification sent to Ireland a year after the capture in 1692, which letter patent had been found amongst some works left by Sir Toby Bader, and having the ratification with it. But in England another copy was published, containing the articles only, and omitting that part which contained the ratification of the Treaty by William the Third.— Now, it was very easy for the King upon the Throne at that time to disavow to his English subjects the acts of his officers in Ireland. The same thing was done in the time of Elizabeth ; it was done under Lord Staf ford's Government, and it, was done in the time of Charles ti e First. The Graces granted to Ireland, which were in the nature of a Petition of Right, were obtained from the Government there, and cost the Irish nation three hundred thousand pounds. Yet after they had !Kep so granted, the King refused to give his assent, and Ireland did not obtain the Petition of Right. The first article of the Treaty, as had been shown Ly his Right Honourable Friend, stated that the Roman Catholics should be placed in the same state that they were in at the time of Charles. He contended that there were no laws in existence which excluded them from Parliament at that time. The only statute which then existed for disqualifying the Roman Catholics for holding offices was the 7th of Elizabeth, chap. 1, which gave the Queen the power of appointing Commissioners to administer the Oath of Supremacy to all persons holding offices—naming several, lay and temporal— or to every person having her Majesty's fees and wages. Would it be said that this law extended to Members of Parliament? Bow could that be. unless such persons ' were proved to have received her Majesty's fees and wages ? In the time of Charles the Second, Roman Catholics were only excluded firam the House of Com mons by a Resolution of the House. He referred to a Resolution of the House of Lords, to prove that Ro. man Catholics sat in that House at a later period than the time alluded to by the Treaty. He appealed to the authotity of Bishop Burnet, who said, that " those of Limerick did not treat for themselves alone, but for all the Roman Catholics of Ireland." The same authority also declared that the Roman Catholics were accord ingly all admitted to the privilege of subjects upon taking the Oath of Allegiance, without the Oath of Supremacy. Another cotemporary authority upon the subject was Lord Orrery, in whose works he found a postage, stating, that upon a particular debate only one Roman Catholic attended, bat that several others were coming up. In another place it was stated, that the Catholics could only command ten rote Honourable Member then referred to another containing a list of sixteen Catholic Peers &- Parliament in 1681, two of whom were the taken for the performance of the Treaty of He should say no more, because no more was to prove that they had a right to all the under the faith of a solemn tierty. The H. Member then deprecated every thing calculate , fluence the passions in the discussion of such and concluded by a wish to see Catholic and meet together at one common altar, where, strifes and differences, t"ey would unite in ot. the incense of their sincere svisiaes for the good common country—(Hear). The Motion having been put from the Chair ' Mr. Secretary PEEL rose—Sir, whatever Honourable Member who has just sat down to himself for hit desire to avoid all appeal passions or the feelings of the House, with ref the motion which he has seconded, I do he can claim that credit as arising out of the have just heard. He appeared extremely di obtain it—and I believe I quote air own wor state his declaration to be, 44 it is not my i appeal to men's feelings or to men's passions. leave the House to decide. whether or not. parted from the determination to which he himself anxious to adhere, and whether or n , nervations have not been in direct opposit avowed is ish and object. I shall not, hostevc yoked by any thing he has said, to travel ou , course. I shall•not attempt to follow him in • angry sentiments; but I shall follow the Hon. who introduced to the (louse the motion whit? considering, and who stated that a better or would be afforded of fully discussing its meri with the Hon. Baronet that a better opport' occur, and I think that, on the whole, his wi would have been to have simply moved that of the Treaty of Limerick be laid on the tab( have deferred his speech, as well as that of Seconder, until a more fitting occasion had c; forth. Str, in the motion of the lion. Baron/ acquiesce. To the production of the which he moves, I can have no objection ; Hon. Member had been satisfied with viler for it, it would have been granted without a : f comment, much less of opposition, fi I am perfectly ready to grant him the for which he asks ; but while 1 thus a , the motion he has made, I must beg ti be clearly understood as saying, that have ..0 considered this . document, and having all the best authorities which refer to it, it is conviction of my niinclahat no privilege irno , from the Roman Catholics, to which they c. any claim grounded upon that Treaty. Si question which I shall be prepared to discuss, 1 may be called upon so to do. I repeat resorted to, 1 believe, all the authors who h, upon the Treaty of Limerick—that I have, delit erately consulted the important docui and that the strong and decided impression ,mind is, that no privilege has been withhel Roman Catholics, which can be claimed 'Treaty. That, Sir, is my firm conviction, conviction I shall be at all times ready to d. Hon. Baronet has described a cia:a c.f poi consider this Treaty as out of date, and wt contended that whatever were the stiptilati contained, the Roman Catholics had no rigl their fulfilment because of their age. Sir, 1 of those who so argue; my view of the different. I will not say that reference sh told to institutions which have since grown up, or I stances that may now have, but then had not. —or that such changes might not have mad, for not carrying those stii-ulations into effect argument 1 have now nothing to do—but that my opinion of the claims of the IL tholics would be much altered if I were that one hundred and forty years since conferred advantages on an opposing party, of advantages to be received by them. 1 state my interpretation of that Treaty, as articles of it to which the H.,nourable B, especially referred, to be very different to th; tation which he, and those who think with given it; 1, of course, stand free from any , this ground. lam ready to acquiesce in thi the Honourable Baronet, but not upon tie which he has laid down. He has made pr ference to two Articles of the Treaty of Li. the first and to the ninth, which, he conten , the Roman Catholics every privilege to • could become entitled by merely taking allegiance. Now, how the Honourable deduce such arguments horn such grr:und loss to say ; or how he could conceive that ' of King William, in ratifying this Treaty, to :he Roman Catholics all those advantag , the Honourable Baronet describes them as is impossible for me to say. A copy of those now hold in my hand—they have been pv various ways, and are of easy access to an us aow see then what this first Article of the It begins by stating that " The Roman Catholics of this Kingdom shall enjoy leges in the exercise of their religion, as are conslster— of Ireland ; or as they did enjoy in the reign of Kin, And it then goes on to say, that " Their Majesties, as soon as their affairs will perm) summon a Parliament in this Kingdom, will endeave the said Roman Catholics such further security in as may preserve them from any disturbance upon their said religion." Such, then, are the words of the first A. Treaty; those of the 9th Article are as foil " The Oath to be administered to such Roman Cat*. mit to their Majesties' Government, shall be the Oath and no other." This clearly means the oath of allegiance what class of the Roman Catholics does refer? Certainly not to the whole of the tholic populdtion, but to such of them as to in Articles 2 and 3. The second Anil sets torch that such " as shall return any their Majesties' obedience," shall be entitled such privileges; buu the term " oath of which follows this sentence in that Artici. and distinctly refers to those, and to those shall " return and submit." They shall Or " All the rights, titles, interests, privileges, and inn they, and every or any of them held, enjoyed, or and lawfully entitled to, in the reign of King Charles Then follows the portion of the Article • -.. ''' 't..• .• ._ . ~- •• . '., t + P •-• .1k 4 , • • I I), 1 . , i . , • • :,..s. • • .., , , ~... '' . - • 4 .. • 4 1 4 2.0406 •• A k ! . . [PRICE SEVENPENCE. 1 . t only command ten rotes. The then referred to another work,' i ' xteen Catholic Peers who sat iii t i wo of whom were the hostages r ' I once of the Treaty of Limerick. J .e, because no more was necessary ' f ad a right to all they claimed, olemn t•eaty. The Honourable 1 s ted every thing calculated to in- the discussion of such subjects, ish to see Catholic and Protestant ll :ommon altar, where, forgetting ti•ey would unite in offering up , ,s. Icere w i s he s for the good of their fear). . •A put from the Chair, , 1' ' L rose—Sir, whatever credit the I who has just sat down may take l ii. '- sire to avoid all appeals to the . , t sof the House, with reference to , s e has seconded, I do not think is lit as arising out of the speech we e appeared extremely desirous to we I quote ibis own words when I , to be, "it is not my intention to f- 1 gs or to men's passions." Yet, I lecide. whether or not. he has de- I •mination to which he expressed 'il - i t here, and whether or ryst his 4 ob- been in direct opposition to his • • w ,c, 1 shall not, however, be pro- . le has said, to travel out of my ttempt to follow him in any of his • • it I shall follow the Hon. Baronet I . • , liouse the motion which it is now is.. ,1• - i stated that a better opportunity fully discussing its merits. I agree 4 ii' net that a better opportunity will - ! i ;at, on the whole, his wiser course ~ s . have simply moved that " a copy 4. !rick be laid on the table," and to . ', ecli, as well as that of his Hon. .e fitting occasion had called them 14' I )(ion of the lion. r Baronet I readily Y , • •! , production of the Treaty for ~-. . • , i v? 1 in have no objection ; and if the Vs ‘, een satisfied with merely moving , i 1 . ! seen granted without a single word a • i less of opposition, f• can me.— fl 1 4 is y to grant him the document 1 4 . ; but while I thus acquiesce in 11 . • 0 s• , a i • made, I must beg to say, and t' • 14 d as saying, that having deeply scument, and having consulted . t s which refer to it, it is the strong d,ihat no privilege issiow withheld t , , holies, to which they caw advance upon that Treaty. Sir, this is a / '.', I be prepared to discuss, whenever k ' • i so to do. I repeat that I have 1 4 ,. • ' , • , all the authors who have written • r : .irnerick—that I have, of course. r A 4 ' I the important document itself, . , i , , . rod decided impression upon my f 1 i • vilege has been withheld from the f lo•si • • filch can be claimed upon that s,l • l is my firm conviction, and such tti ) at all times ready to defend. The ;fi r described a class of persons who 1, 1 ,,,' • as out of date, and who therefore ir- e ' , '• l la ever were the stipulations therein , e 1 w in Catholics had no right to claim :lii. ± , ice of their age. Sir, I am not one ; ;ue; my view of the case is very - r.• . " . • ay that reference sh sold not be had • it s• have since grown up, or to circa m- - • 4, • r have, but then had not, existence , ~ l 1 es might not have made out a case t a' e stii•ulations into effect. With this _ 1 r nothing to do—but 1- will say, f the claims of the Roman Ca- • II r` ; ... uch altered if I were convinced i I '. and forty years since they had 4; 4 ' s on an opposing party, on the faith V e received by them. But when I - , ion of that Treaty, and to those • 14 ich the I-Lnourable Baronet has obe very different to that interpre- If ' ) f" I those who think with him, have ; t i we, stand free from any pledge upon • ready to acquiesce in the motion of • so .onet, but not upon the principle )w n . He has made particular re- 't . 1 l , ' les of the Treaty of Limerick—to 4 .. , ninth, which, he contends, open to . 111 . . _ • ics every privilege to which they led by merely taking the oath of w i , • • low the Honourable Baronet can f '; rents hom such grounds, I am at a be could conceive that the intentioa ratifying this Treaty, was to give i i sties all those advantages to which . , 11 . onet describes them as entitled, it • i to ray. A copy of those Articles I , 1 • .nd—they have been published in ; ire of easy access to any one. Let • at this first Article of the Treaty is. . that .. tics of this Kingdom shall enjoy such privi- .- heir religion, as are consistent with the laws , id enjoy in the reign of King Charles II." •, on to say, that ~ .Ii ~ I soon as their affairs will permit them to •/.. n this Kingdom, will endeavour to procure i ' . cc such further security in that particular . I , 1f..1 t: front any disturbance upon the account of 1 •' he words of the first Article of the s I 1 e 9th Article are as follow : '; P • ' 1, i nioistered to such Roman Catholics as sub- fl . : Government, shall be the Oath abovesaid, :lc k 1 i Ins the oath of allegiance ; but to Irl : Roman Catholics does that Article i t t to the whole of the Roman Ca- IF .' ' .• ut to such of them as are related .., . • . 13. The second Article expressly w o , ) " as shall return and submit to k , lience," shall be entitled to such and l• a. • ust the term " oath of allegiance," s, s sentence in that Article, expressly rs to those, and to those only, who t,. o ' .l ' ' • .-:'t übmit." They shall then enjoy • „. s,interests,privileges, and humunities,which .• of them held, enjoyed, or were rightfully , in the reign of King Charles the Second.' w portion of the Article which state., i s I • li I I i ; , 1 .. ,_