Star. — London, England, 1825-04-20 00:00:00

/ , . ii, 1111MIWPw'mw -- miEhleihe persoeutions of the Protestants in the Soothe/ France, in 1444, and there they would discerner the true essence of this re r Ilgioa. He was anxious to avoid stirring up religious strife ; .be- ' it was his duty to declare that the Popish religion was not changedt sad that it behoved a Protestant King and a Protestant Parlia ment to be on their guard against it.—After a few weeds from Led Nonni Mr. H. DAVIS said, that many of the Gentlemen vela signed the Petitions which be had presentelL were as enlightened as the limemehluilliember (Mr. Leycester), or a ny other in that House. Me. IL COOPER presented a similar Petition from Gloucester. Mr. CRAW LEY presented a similar Petition from Monition. Mr. FLEMING presented similar PittitiOTl4 from the Clergy of the Arcbdeacoury of Winchester, and from the tuhabitants bE Portsmouth and Porter*. Mr. CARTER, as one of the Representatives for that place, from which this last Petition purported to come, must say bow it was got up. A requisition was numerously signed for a meeting, but the Mayor wished for an open, discussion, and the requi sitionists then refused to call a meeting. The Mayor, however, persisted in holding the meeting, and a counter resolution was peed to, that as the matter was now under the consideration of•Pasliament. it was inexpedient to move any Petition whatever respecting Catholic Emancipation. Mr. FLEMING bore testimony to the high character of the Gentlemen who bad signed the Petition. Mr. ASHETON SMITH presented a similar Petition front Bangor. Sir 3. NICHOL presented a similar Pedtion from Tiverton. Mr. R. HILL presented two similar Petitions from Whitchurch and another place in the county of Salop. Mr. CHAPLIN presented four similar Petitions from the county of Lincoln. Sir 0. CHETWY ND presented three similar Petitions from Litchfield, Stafford, and Burton upon Trent. Lord 'NUGENT made some obsavations upon the manner in which one of the Petition' had been got up. Mr. Secretary Pia. and Mr. 'Arneson bore testimony to the respectability of the signatures. Mr. CU.RTEIS presented two similar Petitions from Lewes. Sir J. ASHLEY presented a similar Petition frets Wootton Basset. Mr. DICKINSON presented three similar Petitions from differ ent parts of the county of Somerset. Similar Petitions were presented from four Patishes In the .1 I county of Somerset, and from fi ve hundred persons, inhabants of Devises, by Mr. Emotive ; and from Fairley , by Sir K Leoen. Mr. JO II NsTo E presented a Petition from Mr. John Newtou, of Lincolnshire, stating, that the Petitioner considered the Oa the th rest in the now before the House as a degradation to hint d ef his Majesty's Roman Cath olic sub j ects, inasmuch as they did not profess any of the opinions denounced in the said oath. Ur. Alderman THOMPSON presented Petitions from the Pe- - tithes of St. Mary's, Somerset, St. Margaret, Dissen tern of Walworth. ageism the Catholic Similar Petitions were presented from the Archdeacon, &e. at Bedford, by the Marquis of Teetsvoce • from Darlingtun, by Sir 11. ilasereee; from the Wesleyan 111:thoibts of Brighton and Lewes, and the Protestants of ditto, by Sir..lons Sett rYt K; and front a parish in Dorset, by Lord BRUDEM.II.I. Sir It. II EliON presented two Petitions in favour of the Cathn. lie Claims; one from the city of Peterborough, the other from the town of Newark. In moving t hat the Petitions be brought up, th lon. Baronet enlarged upon the respectability of the P e titioners, and anintadverted upini the manner in which some other Petitions or an opposite nature were prepared and seen to that house, • Mr. BROUGHAM wished, for the sake of Christian charity, to call the attenti )n of the House to a statement which he held in his hand relative to the Petition pre sented on Friday last, to which the Host. Member, who had just cat down, had so properly alluded. (a; anthaar and the Soke, from which the Petition purpor , ed to come, contained a population, be understood, of 10,000 i.babitonts, and the meeting which adopted the Petition c Insisted of 29 .'f those 10,000. Tire number of si g tures to it when presented am ounted to 439, donsn - these he would beg to give son:e account. The fist IS, it Was fat fair to state, were Clergymen, hut the neat 196 were of ass opposi c character, for tl ey weie inca pable of -reading or w:iting their own names. Tr.ese learneffstatesioeu of lenge, however, wishing to be concise as well as zealous in .theirhoollity to the Catholics, expressed their accord eirct•to the 'Petition by a set of very emphatical crosses—(Hear). Of the next .four signatures two were convicts, awl two kept brothele—(lle-ar, and laughter)--the latter, probably, being appre hensive of a rivalry in their trade..if the Scarlet Lady of Babylon grit-any' further footing in the country—(Laughter)—and ten of the subscrilltes were in the consteut receipt of parochial relief. Sir .7tl. I:IItILMELEY here ruse, and made some objections to 'Brottehant's statement. Mr. BROUGHAM could assure the Honourable is/ember he had his infwmation from a source in ,wnich ire could place: the most pet feet reliance, and that he eras satisfied with the testimony on which he made , his ssertions. The fact was, that two hundred and forty towo,.out - of the four hundred and thirty-nine naqies . .to the Petitions from Grantham and the Soke,,were•of.the description he had suentinnedvand nevertheless the -Petitioners did awstinall sake more then a per centage of four or five of the whole population. Sir.M. GHOLM ELEY observed, in reply, that out 'of the -four hundred and thirty-nine names to the Yetition he presented there was. but one signed with la:cross. Upon. that point, therefore, be was convinced the Hon. and Learned Member must be in •error. As to the two persons who were said •to keep houses of bad repute, it was not in his power either to verify or refute the statement, for in his whole life he had never set foot in any place of the kind—( Loud laugliter)- -but of this he could assure both the Honourable and Learned !timber for Winchtisea, and the Hunotinable• Member for Peterboreugh, that the Petition which he presented on rriday last was couched in the beat and most respectful language; and 'that on no occasion would he (Col. C.) present - any Petition un worthy of that house—(Hear, bear). Lord NUGENT should remark, that he believed the. statement of his Honourable and Learned Friend only sent to say, that a hundred and, ninety-eight of the Petitioners could not have written their names, andnot that a hundred and ninety-eight crosses were affixed to the Petition. Mr. Secretary PEEL certainly thought, when it was l so positively stated that so many crosses were signed to"the Petition that the Hon. and Learned Member I Mr. Brougham) had at least ascertained the fact by looking to the Petition itself. He (Mr.'Peel), however, felt it his duty from what had passed to send for the Iletition,-and he found there was but one cross instead el t9R as represented. (The Tighe 'Honourable Secretary here handed the Petition across the 1 table to Mr. reeughate).—Sir RORER T. 11E11.0N explained. ' Mr. - CUST believed the Honourable and' Learned Member (Mr.. B.) was now satisfied he had overate* himself. 31r: M A BP:RLY presented i Petitions front Abingdon against the Catholic., Claims ; and one front the parish of St. Matthew, Bethnal Green, was presented by Mr. Cetus Wit.sow. Similar Pe *lune front Ashford, Sandhurst, and two other places in Kent,were ?resented by Sir.E..KneettouLt.. . 1 L: FOSTER presented a Petition from seventy of the prin cipal Protestant inhabitants.of fhmdalk, in favour of the Catho lic Cleims,-The Petitions were ordered to lie on the table. Ati-LITILETOW presented Petition from Weet Bromwich against the Catholic Claims. Laid on the table. Also from Staf (actin favour.ofehe Bill now before the House for their relief. Sir • HENRY PARN ELI. presented a' etition theßite' dered to be printed. Dlreeecretary PEEL , presewted several Petitions against the Bill. ate *of tbe Petitions came front the Synod of Glasgow and the Ministers and Elders of that City. He. said that he should watch over:the interests'of the Scotch' Church, its he would over the Knee IttlaCharch of thircountry ; hus-he had some doubts upo n the being received as that of the .Corporation or ot Pe • tiesereonly. Dm Moderator, Dr. Wade:law inserted the right to a Petitieseas that of the Corporation • and io .1813 there ono something like a similar Petition received b y ' this Ilonse trawl a the Genial Assembly of the Church of Scotland. He wished tbe practiee on this subject to be stated, although , far his own part, be *lid no doubt as to what the law of Parliament actually was. Mr. SPEAKER said, that the Petition of a Corpo ration was known by h aving • embed to it, which was tberasserramOCccee Corpora te u se se al lta a rl t7 oat Lt was so ; bat If a Corpotatbut bad tio *tilt and yet the House knew the Corporation to exist, then ft would be too m ucb to expect that mode W authenticity ususky recognited by the House. The safer aunt would be, retfive tie Petition ; lit-that of the indrilduals of thi s Corporatism' eiho signed k. Mr. J: P. GRANT said, that niaby 'Corporations in S co tland bad no Seal, and tint many Corporate acts were known 'by the signature of the Moderator. . Mr. Secretary PEEL, under such circumstances, hoped the Petition would be received as the Petition of the Cor poratton. The Honourable M ember then presented Petitions against the Bill, from the Protestant Dissenters of Fore-street Chapel; from the Congregation of the Rev. J. Chamberlain ; from the Dissenters of Shouldham ; from the Inhabitants of Trowbridge ; from the Baptist Congregation of Snow's-fickle, Southwark leirin the' Dissenting Congregation of Crown•street, Soho • from that of Blaudford-surer, Manchester -square; from the Dis senters i of Grantham • front a Parish in Leicestershire ; from the Borough of 'hotness ; irom the Congregation of the Adeiphi Chapel, pari-h of St. Martin-in-the-Fields; front certain Inhabitants of Reading; from thp Parish of St. John, Hampstead ; from Watford; from' the Dissenters of Clerkenwell ; and from those of Union-street' Chapel, Surrey ; which were all ordered to be bid on the table. Mr. WILLIAM SMITH said he had no objection to the light exercised by the petitioners, but up to yes terday there were certainly no mote than nine or ten petitions from the Protestant Dissenters against what is called Catholic Emancipation. He had this morning lead over a list of 2,000 Congregations, awl of those not more than six had shewn any hostility to Catholic Emancipation. He held in his 'mod at this moment a list of 97 different regularly Dissenting . Congregations, and of those only five had petitioned. Many Others— Wesleyans,W icklitites, and others, did not belong to the Dissenting Congregations, of whose meetings he bad been the Chairman for above five-and -twenty years. In fact, not one in a hundred of these Congregations had expressed any opinion in the one way or the other upon the subject; they left the matter altngether to the wisdom of the Le gislature. He should have been sorry if she Dissenters eame for ward as a body to oppose civil libe rt y in its widest extent. Tbel'ro testant Dissenters held various opinions, and they wished that every religious and political society should do unto others as they would be done by. Such was their universal motto. To prevent any im pression going forth on this subject he felt it his duty to make these few. observations. Sir G. SHIFFNER begged to assure the House that the Petitions he presenteil upon the question of Emancipation had come from a very respectable body of men, residing near tend at Brighton. Mr. SPRING RICE said, that he rose to present a Petition Irom several Elders and others of the Piepby teri in Dissenters of the County of Dawn, in the North of Ireland. He had the more pleasure in discharging this duty, after what had passed just now, as well as what was said in the course of the last evening. The 'Petitioners stated, that they were not only not unfriendly to Catholic Emancipation, but that they willingly came forward to promote the cause of Christian liberality.— I This Petition was signed by 139 individuals, Members of the Synod of Ulver, resolved to call for the abolition of Catholic disabilities, and they further desired him to say, that if any person signed any Petition against the Catholic, except in his character as an individual, that such a person had passed beyond the limits prerctibed by the regulations of the Synod. The Petitioners trusted that the great cause of Catholic Emancipation would now be carried, that it had gained and was still gaining ground, and these opinions they se ished to be recorded. Ilad the Petitioners thought a public decla ration necessary, they would have made one; and they further state, that they never felt more chagrin or regret than when they s tw, by the mint.tes of evidence taken before the Committee on the-state of Ireland, that dif ferent principles and feelings were attributed to them. The first name attached to the petition was that of The' High Sheriff of the County of Down—he being a Pres byterian and Elder, and coming manfully forward to . state his opinions, net like others who wished to keep. up a monopoly, because they had alreAdy obtained all that they wanted Hear). The Petition was ordered to be printed. SirF. BURDETT presented ten Petitions in favour of the Catholic liill. ,One front Falmouth, and the other from levees. Mr. •WILD'ALIN presented a Petition koinst the Catholics, fsom several parishes in Essex.--. Laid on. the table. Mr. WI LD :11 .1 N presented a Petition front the Thorough of Colchester, against theliomanCathalicilill.r-Ordered to be printed. Mr. SCARLET" rose to present a Position from the Serjeants at Law, at the English Bar, in favour of the Catholic,Claims. Though . it was not ,so numerously signed as man.y.of.those which had been* offered to. the House, yet it contained a greater mass of intelligence than nine times their number. He could not name 169 individuals, either in or out d the House, who were more competent, judges of the suhject of the Petition by their learning, knowledge, and experience of public coocerns, or who ,were better fitted to give an opinion on the subject, uninfluenced by any of those motives which attached to r ther petitioners, than the subscribers to the' Petition. 'The House must not conclude that the n umber of persons at the ,English Bar who favoured the oteasure„were comprised in the Pe Won. Froth hit individual knowledge he could say. that.barristers of the highest character and judgment concurred in the same sentimeots, al hough they refused their names to it on the idea s that the bar ought not to Petition the Legislatme. Other circumstances called the considera 7 tion of the House to the Petition. If there.was any body of men to excluee as personal competitors to the honours. emoluments, and dignities, to which the passing of the Bill would open the way, it,would be the Catholics of Ire. land. Independent of this, sit was notorious that the peti._ tioners who declared favourable sentiments towards the Catholics, didoot pursue the path .which led to eminence in their profession—(Cheera). The best mode by.whicb a batristerof intelligence and eminence in his profession could hope.to arrive:at high honour was to,become ant an apostate -.of these principles—(Hear,. hear). Ti:e persons who had the courage to present the petition, and who were distinguished by , intellect and knowledge, were deserving of the attention and respect of. Parliament. le sensibly ftit tin: lionpur beingintrustfd,watis the petition of such a body of persons. M . no.period of the history of thellar of Great Britain did it. contain a greater (!umber of Gentienien of talent, zeal, awl integrity, although, it had Art bet4rlnsinuated„inbigh q uarters that it was deficient in intelligence, and s that lice tintei were,not fruitful in talent. He lead, unfurtunstlly, groin old 'in the profession, but when be eorintienead hip eareer, there 'were only individuals who possessed knowiedge out of the Bar. Mr. 131t0U.GHAM bole testimony to the.truth of t the statements of his.Learneci Friend,with regard to the character of the members who composed the English l bar. He knew that the feeling was strongly hs favour ' of Catholic Emancipation, On the Northern Circuit.% which contained a floating body of 90 or 100 individuals, 50 at least had signed the petition, and from his personal knowledge he asserted, that SO more expressed their entire concurrence in the prayer of the petition. He had. no reason to believe that tuck opinions, were more prevalent its that Circuit - than in others. The Petition was laid on the table and ordered to be printed. Led BECTlVF.preeented a Petition from the county of Cavan, in favour of the Catholic eWms.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. DOM I NICK BROW NE presented a similar- Petition from Mayo. After a few words from Mr. Damns Benwam the Petition was ordered to be printed. Lord NU GENT presented a similar Petition from the,Roman catholic: of Great Britain. The Noble Lord observed that this Petition was deserving of every attention from the House, on lietadni a r arechardCt and nurebers the Petitibners, who weld art'in t Station and conduct. - They apprelachesl the on thepresent occasion with renewed hopes, &aided on the justice of their claims. The fact was. Nit theareley of I them was reduced to a matter of mere calculation on the part of the opponents of the measure, as to whether it should be protracted for one, two, or . three years longer. The number of Petitioners was upwards of 52,000, a number by no means inconsiderable. He was surprised at the delay in granting the Catholic Claims. Id doing so, we stood before Ireland as unprincipl ral ed' and faithless debtors, still deferring with as little mo justice as p ilitical wisdom claims which *ere trusted to our good faith and honesti; The Catholics Of England, he was proud to say, har never separated aireir cause 'from that of the Catholics of I reland. They now sought [ to . be relieved hem the necessity of taking oaths which I were obnoxious to their Conscientious scruples. He 'contended that there was no solid ground for fearing the influence of the Pope, over the, minds of the Catholics of this country. Had the Duke of Norfolk, did they think, nothing else to do but become the treasonable agent of a foreign Potentate?, They could never hope to be reconciled with Ireland short of Catholic Emanci pation. Whether there were danger in that measure or not, there certainly was no safety without it. It was absurd to elyeet . the question would ever die a natural death. Mr. JOHN SMITH observed, that it was not gene rally known of what 'materials those Roman Catholics were composed whorls we proscribed. by our laws. He spoke from a knowledge of them, when be said, that a more exemplify, industrious, moral, and peaceable body there was not in the kingdom. They were never found as panes in Old Bailey proceedings, wither - did they swell the catalogni of bankrupts, and iezople of a more ex cellent character and demeanour he knew not. ' Mr. ROBERTSON said,' that . his sentiments were already known with regard to the Catholics of Ireland. He thought that what they meant to do for Ireland should he done speed.ly. He had no batted for Catho lic lrelaod, but he felt much favour for Pro extant England, and thought the case of alitse English . and Scotch Roman Catholics very different from that of the Irish. Whea the Bill was brought forward for discus sion, he meant to inOie that no Roman Catholic should be allowed to sit in Parliament for any English borough or county. The Honourable Gentleman was inter. ropted by the impatience of the House more than once in the 1 c our** of his speech—The Petition was then brought up, read, and ordered to be primed. Mr. COKE then presented a Petition from the Arch deacon and several of the Clergy of the County of Nor folk, in favour of the Catholic Claims. This he took 1 to be the result of having a Ackx! Bishop ; and he hoped 'he should live to congratulate that great and good man, the Bishop of Norwich, upon the success of the question. Tie petitioners ° had rather not have sent this Petition, thinking it better' for the Clergy to remain silent upon the subject; but they telt themselves called upon to do so in consequence of seeing Petitions sent up by Clergy. men on the other side of the question. Mr. WODEHOUSE bore testimony to the respecta bility of the petitioners, and praised the temperate and liberal toes in which their petition *as drawn up contended that those who drew up the counter-petition were equally respectable and more numerous, and had therefore an equal, If not a better claim to represent the sentiments of the Clergy of NohviCh. • • Lord MILTON contorted. most heartily in what had fallen from his Honourable Friend, the Member for Norfolk (Mr. Coke). The language of the • Peti tion was highly creditable to those from whom it ema nated, and must be highly gratifying to all the true friends of the Established Church. The Petitions hi therto presented by the members of that body were by no means calculatedto raise thkir chirracter.sor to pro mote the true interests of the Establishment. .Prtifesting himself as he (Lord Milton) did, a staunch friend to the Protestairt religion, and' art *mint to the topersti tions.of the notiio Church, he could net help' saying, that there Were other weapons by_ which :the Igrtiier could be defended, and the latter put down, thanan in tolerant appeal td the sticing . arm of the law to deprive our fellow-subjects of their civil rights. It was not by persecution (kW h was ii:ohing, else tract persecution to deprive the Roman CAW:Pica of political power, which was the right of every citizen 'of • the country), that the Protestant religion _could . be advanced—that religion was founded upon higher grounds. Reaion and argument were the true weapons by which it ought to 4ctilefended, and any either course Would wad to retard, instead of promoting its progress. .The petition was then ordered to be printed. ROMAN CATHOLIC RITLIEt Sir F. BURDETT then moved the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Roman Catheilic Relief Bill • • Mr. BROWNLO%V" 'begged* the patience pf the House whilst he offered one single Sentence' to describe, the sentiments with which he viewed , the autiject--o namely, that circumstanced as Ireland was, it could not go on longer. The situation of that country was dis graceful —the parties in it were but little removed from a state of actual contest—no encouragement was held out for improvement in that ill-fated country, and it, was evident that something must be done for it. The question was. what that something ought to be? Were I we to go back and re-enact the Penal Code? No; there was one answer to that, which was as good as a thou Isand—namely, it was impossible. If we could ant go back then, he knew of but one alternative, namely, going instantly forward, and proceeding upon principles of concession. He was anxious to Obtain some great na-, tional settlement , for that country (Ireland), Rod if he were asked whether he raw bore that distinguished feeling of opposition wh:ch he once felt, whether good or. badoowards six. millions,of hisiellow subjects, he was constrained to. aniwera by no Means . ; quite the contrary. Manrof the grounds on which he formerly stood, were now gone; many of those arguments which he was in the-10 Bit of 'using hitnsalf, and which he was still more la the habit of hearing used,were totally removed, while those that remained were weakened; and i 4 far as concerned himself, he knew of no other course that remained for him, in common sense, com mon fairness, and even in common consistency, than when he found himself in error, at once to say so, to acknowledge his fault, and to make such atone ment as was possible 'for hini to' Make under all the circumstances-446nd arid repeated cheers). — Of the form of the Roman Catholic Religion he should say nothing. 44 Judge nit, lest ye be judged," was, he apprehends, a Sound Maxim on a subject like this, and strictly applicable between religititis disputants: But to suppose that the . Rbman Catholic - religion affected the discharge of social duties, detracted from allegiance or weakened the authOrity*Which : Grieernore should-ex ercise over those beneath them, or that.C.itholita %% 4 = in all respects under the cube direction of the rope,was a mere spiritual fallacy. His opinion was so.-entirely ,changed upon this subject, that he could hardly tees* cile these notions with the identity of thcise nbeiods , .. which lie formerly entertained. *lila had 'sew hete) of *metope vrbO laid trowris _under his feet,Anhidu nations by his mandate, lad etcbetintitacated Prince!. The power and Sensual df the age hid overcoat e . bilit= the David had destroyed him ; k hid Mien with its mini weight, or had retired td its Own kountry. if it b* true that the Ronian Catholiccs. Still posse:, a stroll* . ground which they formerly heldi-- 1 1 it be not true that the King possesses the full; petfektolnd entire allegiance of his Catholic subjects; then; sit, the Romitl Catholics ti4f)thbee eexvicillEedstiwiflreofimhtta:CejectstkeensciltionilluthsPicitehists.egubaljsiiecid4ttrildbreiPertritsani!.:44 ifit appear that high-born, high-minded, and intellect- tual men have come over here to guide uS with the light of knowledge and truth, and' not, as 'I have head it hinted, to lie, with a devilish 'IAA, in in' unjust axing= then, I say,' that upoit'this part of the rubjett, thefe tad be no argunient to 'Maintain, raid any roan taking I; an argument With tits pert of the 'qttestiori mist find himself sUrreendeid ' A wiestiod is pat to *Dr. Doyle; oe If thri - PopeirFre'its irsterilsed'dlsi with the rightillf the King, or . With 'the altegiinee; . what would' be the ionsequence;so 'foe as the Cathelie Clergy are concerned r ''The 'answer wii; ll the' OW sequence would be that we shbOld oppose him by eVert nteans in our povier; even by 'the etteicise of our spi ritual authotity"—lHeir, hear, hear).—'" In whit mitts- . r net could you exercise that spirituil antliorityr The answer was, " By preiching to 'the people, that their duty to GoD, 'as Catholics, required of them to oppose every person who would interfere in-any 'way with that right which the law _a nature, and the positive hey of Goa established' in their Prince—a Prince, whom we, as subjects, were' bound to support; we would theft fore ex!reise our spiritual authority, by preaching the Gospel to the peopl., and by' teaching them to opptise the Pope, if he interfered with the temporal rights ofour KIT." Further, in 1)r. Mu, ray's evidence, it was said, that the Pope's kingdom ii nin a kingdom of this world. Dr. Doyle was then iSiceit, 44 What authority 'has, the Catholic writer Gother • :anon,' 'the Cittkolies ?".Isid he answered, tiother is estierded by us revery trederahe writer, and pertictly orthodox in all that he has writ ten." Now what did he say 'upon the subject. Cursed is he that commit! idolatry; that prays to images, or relics, or worships them 'for Goo." Dr. D. says, " fbat is our proper doctrine, and I and every other Boman Catholic in the world *mild say with Gott et, • Accursed be suCh'a person.' " 'Bot though he was prepared, in this stage of the proceeihns,:ta'vote for the Right Hon. ironet s Bill, it did not occur to him that that Bib Was the Most' petfect - meisuie which the circumstorice. of the country, in-the evidence otPred, would warrant the adoption of. There 'Wete-measures -which the evide,,g.e. of every 'witness would warrant, 'viz. a provision for the Boman Catholic Clergy,' int the exercise of the ele6. tive franchise. lie by no means looked upon a - provision for thePriestbood as a de.4 of gratitude due fromtheState to that class of person; for their met& rious exertions in preserving peace, or mitigating the . suffaings of lielaud. On the contrary, bethought that, considering the habits of intimacy on which the Clergy lived with their flocks. and the undoubted influence s hick they were allowed toelercise' over them; they could'hot well have done less than they had done for the tranquillity of the coun try. Ile would, therefore, incorporate the Roman Catholic Clergy close withthe State, ar.d he hoped that, like the Presbyterian Clergymeu, finding there was no interference with their independence, they would be come good allies. As to the other part of this measure, namely, with respect to the exercise of the elecive franchise, in every view in which it could be considered, whether in a political or moral point of view, whetter as connected with the subdivision of Ireland, 'or what was synonymous with. the multiplication of beggars in this country, it was an object which - was in every re spect desirable to obtain. With regard to the Pro testants, though it sins so strongly urged that they were decidedly against the measure, yet ib his apprehension they were the very persons who should call .tor it as their best seturify—(lUier,Vrear). His wish was CO pass such a Bill . as should lie satisfactory to all parties— (Hear)= -so that no faction should be able to boast over another, but whatever triumph there might be should be the nations triumph; or if a measure couldnot, be adopted which would satisfy every one , l et them at least fix upon one that would give an impulse to industry, and enable man to stand by man without the terror of penal laws berme his eyes--(Hear, Atar). ' • Mr. BANKES considered the proposed provision for the Roman Catholic Clergy as a most objectionable measure -It appeared that there wete 2;,sop Parish Priests in Ireland ; the payment of. those Arne' Would occasion a heavy charge on the Consolidated Fund.— He trusted that Parliament' would not enter blind l y upon such an expensive ',project. It was Stipa:table that the people of this country would long isear the burden which 'the payment of' the Catholic Clergy wield impoie upon them, aid then it would be found necessary to lave recourse to the tittles a die Protestant Church in Ireland. The Hos. Gent. mmeladed by moving as an meta went, that the IBM be read a second time this day six mouths. Mr. W. PEEL rose to second the amendment; and said, that jedging of popular feeling from the senti intents of the place he represented, he should decidedly hold that the people of England were ovene to granting hay further concessions to the Catholics. For himself, after great attention to the subject, he prOfessedihat he remained unconverted. If the opinions which be bad held formerly were those of bigotry, it was his misfortune to be a bigot still. But, even if be had generally been friendly to the cause of Catholic EMU ciliation, he should consider the prt4ent time a most unfit one for carrying it.. It would really be putting too high a pre am upon faction and violence, to let it be supposed that the late proceedings of the Ca tholic Association had tended to promote anythiog'is the way of concession from Parliam ent or the country. Honourable Gentlemen said it was hard to make a large bddy of people suffer for the violence or deuce of a few; but the Catholics of Ireland, lei it be remembered, had in every sense identified *catfishes with the Catholic Association ; they had adopted the leaders of that body as their chiefs, and made them selves party alike to their opinions and proceedings. —He believed it was an exaggeration to . say, that the cause of Catholic Emancipation was the cause of six millions of people in Ireland; but the fact mattered lit. tie, for the greater their number the greater was the danger of granting what they desired. He was not one who thought that the political consequences would be of carrying the present measure. TE Parlia ment was oriceAhrown open to the Catholics, a decided ':hange would not fOil to take place in the Irish reit& ,entation ; a large body_ of. Catholics would soon be found sitting in that House, to legislate upon matters connected with Protestant interests and Protestant su premacy. If these were good Catholics , they' woOld _ a - • • `••• w.A.h...L.1. / ... apprel of the that It eligibi an lit of Ma pretty ,nand Qranl that tl '~.. J we thi ft f it a d .1