Star. — London, England, 1805-05-11 00:00:00

CAS, however, the neceffion of Catlin/its to power is foreclofed ; and certainly thefe are not times to abro g:.te the laws in their favour. This was done by the 'Whigs, who, however, could not have effected that revolution but for the zeal of the Church, that had, on fo 'many occafions, aided the State. For if the Church has been upheld by ilke State, the State has been upheld by the Church ; hence innovation of the Constitution of the Church ought to be received with jealoufy, and promptly repelled. By the Act of Settle ment the Catholics cannot be admitted to unlimited, nocontfrained, ceders:laical, and politioal power,*-' With refpee again •to the value the Catholics put noon thole immunities for which they now petition; I' am far from thinking with the-Noble Baron, that in riving them we linuild be giving nothing, yet they ...wild be receiving mach. Now, I think, that you -oil Ire giving them little, whilli you•wentlithe xi,- irt; op mueb•—• What, not enriching them, made tqr poor indeed.' We ought to defend the Church. When in 1660, ele,fdensarehy was restored, the Church was-a grand loirument towards the Reitoration ; and in 1681, the Church .powerfully contributed to the Revolution.— , .With there fentiments, thinking, that if we do grant ! .the Catholics more indulgence, thinking, that the speech of the Noble Baron goes to the abrogation, not only of the Catholic, but of the Corporation, Set tlemeot, and all the :Felt Laws ; not thinking that the Noble Lnrd has cltablithed any one political in his 1 fpeech, believing, that in the circumitances of Eu rope, and the world, at this time, it would - be pecu liarly unfortunate and unpropitious, if the demands of the Catholics were yielded, I, my Lords, cannot but be molt decidedly inimical to the preknt motion. Some Noble Lords may differ from me as to the ge neral policy of the meafure, applied to other times; to inch I will only fay, that whilst I mutt think it a meafure bad for any times, yet in thefe times it would, I am Pure, prove moll ruinous to our internal re pole and esternal tranquillity. As the laws ells. bli:hed bj our Constitutions, as the inflitutions in Church and Stale, as a Proteflant King, Proteltant Connciliora,Protellant Parliament,Protettant Judges, and rroteflant Corporations, have hitherto ben up held our State, been the piops and bulwarks of our Conftitution and our liberties, and promife us the hi hell fecurity to be derived for human conventions, eflabliftsments, and laws, from human fyilem. ;—as our dflem of government is, as now trifling, acknow ledge(' the firft in the world, I cannot only not help oppofino the motion of the Noble Baron, but I call upon your Lordfltips to cling to that Altera which has limed our fafety, the permanency of ourintlitu tions, the purity of our laws,the prosperity of our na tion, the liberties of the people, and the prerogatives of the Sovereign. My Lords ~I do not fear the refult of your vote; I feel allured jiat your Lorailhips will this night Peal the triumph, not of chlfaffeetion and difcontent. but the folid afcendency of the principles of the moll glorious Conflitutiun of Go-vernment that has ever appeared among mankind.—With thefe imprellions, my Lords, I need not add, that I-will heartily oppofe the petition now before you." Hi, Royal Highnefs the Duke of CUMBERLAND Mt it in a peculiar degree his duty to give the molt decided oppofition to the prop fit ion before theHoufe, the objects of which were direaly fubverflve of all thole principles which placed the Houfc of Brunf wick on the throne of this realm. He entreated their Lordfhips - to confider maturely the nature of the qaeltiorr before them. Was it not tolive the Roman Catholics admiffron to all the offices of power and ern olunrent in the Stale ? Was it not direaly to fubvert the principles of stir Con (Motion as efialdifised at the Revolution? Was it not to do away thole fundamental . lows uhich constituted the very life and foul of that Itzvolittion ? and could it he pollible their Lord foips would, for one moment, entertain a meetfore fo far, as to go into a Committee in order to delibe rate upon the propriety of its adoption, which mea• titre had for its objea the attainment of purpofes lit fubverfive to the ellabliflied Conflitution in Clarrch and State ? Let the Home recollect the very principles which eaufed the Revolution, namely, the impolfibility of agreement betweeit Catholics and Protzliants, in a mutual participation of political power, a fa& proved by experience in every country when inch power was fo divided. The objea of the Catholics was now avowed' to be nothing lets than filch a participation which !Minty would woods had In long Rained this lond with blood, and which, though confider ably abridged at the Refiwmation,and under gheer, Elizabeth, was aill endeavonred to be revived until the time of Junes, whole attempts to give effe& to thole endeavours had driven him from the throne, and led to the eflablithment of thole pr in ciples, the violation of which, bothe grant of that which we's now demanded, would render it impolllhle for tie cratilitutional connection between King and Cub. jetts any longer to Built. Betides, the temper of the times, and a very great portion of the fentiments of the country were vgainft it, as appeared from the pe titions on their Lordfhips' table from a number of• counties and highly refpeaable corporate communi nines throughout the nation. Did the .petitioners acknowledge the fupremacy of the-King in Ecclefi affical as well as Civil affairs ?* No o would their Lordfhips then difpenfe the Catholics claiming a full participation in all the powers of the State, from an acknowledgment to which every Proteriant fubjeil was indifpenfably bound. Would they nocv.conlent to deßroy; by any rath meafure, thole land marks inttituted by the wifdom of their- anrettors ? Every ih-;vilege confident with the fafety of the Cynftitutiou kis Royal Highnels was readily dilpofed to concede to the Catholics. But to any meature which could unhinge the principles, or rifle in any degree the faCity 'of that Conaltution, lie could not, he dared not, he woos') not confent. He was bound to main. tain, to the lag monwnt of hbesillence, the princi ples of that Constitution in Chinch and State which placed his Royal Hisbnefs's ratnlly an' the throne' of - there reams ; 'antterithnut finger trepaffing-tini Lordatips" ataintany berthouldvseteatgaialt. the motion. • Earl SPENCER fupported the motion of his Noble Friend, after whore molt able and zar osentatire fpeech, his Lot cithip did not Ecl k nec aryl* trou hk the Houle at sou& length. libireoutithinlviither the motion brought forward by his Noble Friend, or the fpeech with which be fo eloquently lupported that motion, could have, in the molt diftant degree. the tendency attributed by the Nuble Secretary, of injur ing the Church an& State aveflablithed by law in the r•rthil. .or &Akin At throne of the Houle of Brunt.- wick, he could afrure their Lorelfliips he iiiiinld hue i been one of the foremoft to refill it. He certainly I agreed with th e N o bl e Secretary, that this , was a qiiedion which ought to be di/cuffed with calmeefs, candour, and moderation, but was lorry to obfeeve the Noble Secretary himfelf the very fiat to depart from that temper and moderation which had fo uni formly charaderized the whole fpeech of his Noble Friend. With refped to the perfons who figned that petition, he thought the Noble Lord had gone much farther than the.known refpedability of their charac tersicould warrant, or than the Noble Secretary him fell - could on reflektion approve ; and as to the after tions of the Noble Secretary, that the Catholics of Ireland acknowledged any allegiance to a Foreign Power, he was at a lots to know where he found I the argument, for it was quite new to him. They ; acknowledged, indeed, the Supremacy of the Pope as a Spiritual Director ; but, by the molt folemn oaths that could bind the veracity of man, they had repeatedly difavowed all tempoial or peliti• tical allegiance to any Foreign Power whatever; and pledged themfelves, by every tell required of them, to the firmed allegiance to his Majelly, and the eta. ! blifhed conftitution of there realms; and unlef's their loaths were to he believed, thete could be no fecurity for tire or property in any Rate where they cliff. If it were true, that the objed•of the Catholics was die attainment of political power for purports inimical [to the State, why then not allow the motion of his i Noble Friend for going into a Committee, not merely for the purpofe of enquiring into the expediency of granting new privileges to the Catholics, but to en quire bow far chore already granted-hod been wifely given, or properly exercifed ; or how far.lt might he right evert to repeal all the laws of conceffion and in ' dulgence pared in their favour during his Majetly's reign. With refped to any danger of fubverting the Protedant Religion, to let up their own in its place, the Noble Secretary himfelfacknowledged and proved, that the confpirators in the late unfortunate rebellion, Catholics as well as Proteflant, totally denied any fuch ohjed. There was, however, obvious caufe, , from recent experience, to apprehend, that fo long as the fyltem of reltraints and difqualifications was , kept up asainft fo great a majority of the people of Ireland, jealoulies and difgutts mull rankle in their , bofoms, and conitantly expofe the lower orders efpe &ally to liften to the machinations of any defigning confpirators, who would convert their grievances into a Ilinsulus of infurredion. To have granted already , to the lower orders of the Catholics the dative fran- i chile, and every immunity appropriate to their rank, and to refute to the higher and wealthier orders the privileges of their rank, was to cad a (lignite 'rpm them wholly unwarranted by their conduit. The 1 Noble Secretary had Paid the time was improper un der eliding circumstances. But fnrely if, in the pre terit date of Europe, any additional danger threatens theft count, ies, the prefent is the moll proper of all times to grant what is now requested, as it will not only come more gracioufly than at any future period, when the Catholics may become more wealthy and more powerful, and when the grant would look more like the refult of fear than of liberality, but have the , effeft of uniting all lefts of his Majelly's fuhjeds, with heart and hand, againd the common enemy. Lord SIDMOUTH profefred his inclination to fol. , low the example of the Noble Baron, and to difcufs , the important queltion which was before their Lord {hips, with that temper and moderation that was 'neeettary in confidering it. Whatever fentiments lie , entertained retpefting it, he would avow them plainly and frankly, and he would begin by laying, that kliough he would go as far in whatever regarded to ration as any of their Lordihips, he was net pre pared to go to the extreme extent pie:poled by the Noble Baron. He liftened to what fell from the Noble Baron with all the attention and refpeet that ' was due to whatever came from him; he heard him with that pleafure that he always did, but it was a pleafure mingled with altonithment and furprile.— When he recollefted how greatly that Noble Lord diftinguithed himfelt in combating dodrints which led to all the calamities under which a great portion of the people was aaually fuffcring, and he feared would long coffer, it was not without excedivc alto siilhment that he heard him on this night maintain doctrines, the dire& tendency of which was the intro cluethm of allthcfe innovating principles againd which he had to manfully and foccefsfutly struggled. Before he entered upon the quellion, he would take the op. port unity of declaring, that he bntirely concurred with his Noble Friend, the Secretary of State, in giving full credit to the Catholics for their loyalty and at tachment both to the Contlitutien and the beneficent Sovereign at the head of it. Their conduft, he would acknowledge, for a reties of years, had been highly meritorious. He was not inclined to withhold from them the rewards dire to that loyalty and attachment, but thofe rewards he underftood had been granted to• them as fully as they could poffibly require. Tolera tion they enjoyed in as ample a degree as it could be accorded to them ; but toleration was not what they now preired for ; it was fotnething of a more cornpre henfive range ; it was for undefined privileges inrdi- , onfly fuggelled under the phrafe of Catholic Eman cipation ; a very convenient term, he would tendril, for thole who had other views to anfwer, but cer tainly one not calculated to promote the object of the petitioners. The Noble Briton who commenced the I debate had adopted, for him at lead, rather a novel line of argument. He began by arraigning the policy adopted by our ancedur s, and which, with little vari ation, had been followed until the lad twenty years. What, he would ask any Noble Lord, was the plain object of the petition? Was it not to get rid• of the oath of fopremacy and the declaration ? Meaferes which the wisdom of thofe who went bcfure us thought indif pentablo for the maintenance of the Conditutiost.— *There was not one of thofe meatures which could not •be juflified by reference to the hiftory of the country. He would admit, however, that thofe laws were -forced upon Ireland. In making that declaration, he (poke from his confcience, and with the regret cf an. honed Englithman ; it could not he denied that they. were forced upon that country by a cruel and over bearing neceflity. (His Loran', here . wentinto an hillorical narrative of the different plots and infurrec. lions which led to the reftridions upon the Catholics of Ireland.) He contended, that our ancellors were juftified by thole various efts of treafon and rebellion to impofe the fevere laws they had done upon Inch, of the pOpulation of that country. as profeffed the Roman Catholic perfuation. Some of the molt revere of theft Statutes were palled 4 in. the (cis* of Williami) r than wham no Prince or man ever entertained a truer notion, or more fincere attachment to genuine and rational liberty. (The Noble Vifcount went through the hiftory of the political rellraints upon the Catholics down to the commencement of them fent reign). Under the Contlitation, as it Rood at prefent, he would ark what were the inconveniencids felt by the Catholics ? Where they not as fully protected in their properties, their charadets, their liberty, as any other defcription of his Majelty's fuhjeds? He called upon any friend of Oat Ca tholics to point out a fingle sStatute in our Legisla tive code which bore hard upon the Catholics. He was perfutaded, if any fuels did,exift, that it was only nece&ry to point it out, to induce its repeal. He acknowledged that many of the argnmenq which had been formerly urged apitat extending any indul gence to the Catholics, were no longer applicable.-- He was free to confels, that the exillence of a Pre tender to the Throne could no Longer be -urged as an argument againll their claims; and if he thought that the effcil of, conceding the Cuba ance of thr Peti tion would be to unite the mars of the popalation of Ireland, perhaps he might have not been difpofed to oppofe it fo decidedly as he found himfelf under the necelity of doing; but when he law the Catholics Alitlott undifguifedly endeavouring not to make them- !elves apart of the date, but.the (late arch*, that was an object which he could never be induced to grant them. It was not merely a civil right, but political power in the moll comprehenfive fignification of the term which they fought to attain. One confequence of acceding to what they demanded in their Petition would be, that their clergy would acquire an autho rity which they, with the peculiar tenets of their le ' legion, and the facilities it afforded, it was much to be feared, would convert to a dangerous ufe. He , called upon the Houfe to think of two fuch dange rous powers as thole of excommunication and auri. cular confAlion, and then to fay whether they would not open a door to all the dangers that might accrue to ihe national church from the empbytre It of fuch engtnts ? The Catholic Clergy, there was too much reafon to apprehend, had never relinquifhed the hope of becoming the hierarchy of the country. He had the authority of Lord Clare fur declaring that there extfied confidorial courts in every diocefe in Ireland, and that there had been a perlon refiding at Rome charged to watch over the intereas of the It ith Ca tholic Church. Nay more, there was not a dignity in the Eltablifhed Church which had not its counterpart in the Catholic Church. The oftenfible ohje&, and perhaps the teal objed of the petitioners was plain enough; but was that objed the objedof the great body of Catholics in Ireland? Would not that body be in clined to extend thrir views a little farther? Would they not naturally look to the exaltation of their clergy, and to divers other privileges, which could not be granted to them without imminent danger to the prefent Con flitution in Church and State? If the Houle fhould manifell a dirpofition to concede to them even the limited object they demanded, it could not be done without the certain facrifice of the Ad of Settle ment. What, he would Mk, would be the confe quences at an eledion in Ireland, if the Catholics ()mold be allowed to become Members of the Legif lative Body ? In this country we had Peen the tumult and inconveniences produced by the attachment of a certain defcriptmn of the people to an individual.— Whatever they were,they would be infinitely aggra vated in that country, where numbers would be found contending with property.. He could not bring him fell to concede what was required by the petition. It feeined to him a monftrous and (hocking propofition to be called to place the Catholics in a different (late from the re( of his Majetty's fubjeds, owing only a limited allegiance. He called on the Houle to pre ferve their Protellant King and their Protaant Par liament, and to recalled that it was a Proteftant Par liament which refcued the nation from the dangers of a Popifh King. He exhorted their Lordfhips to t,llnw the example of their Proteflant deliverer, and to refolve to die in the lad dike of the Conflitution, both in Church and State, tither than abandon one principle of either. There were two roads before their Lordthips : One of them was that old, vene rable, and well known way, which had been Bruck out for them by their aneellors ; in purfuing that they could encounter no - dangers. The other was a way untrodden and dangerous, leading to innovations, the confequences of which no hum an forefight could reach. He was not prepared to ruth heedlefsly into a path leading to fuch defperate refults, and would confequently oppofe the motion tor referring the pe tition to a Committee. Lord MULGRAVE did not agree with the Noble Vifcount (Lord Sidmouth) that this queftion affeard the fundamental laws, the Afts, that were his Ma jelly's title to the Crown ; and he was compelled to difrent from his Noble Friend (Lord Hawkefbury) when he attributed bad tfl'efts to the circumftance of the relaxation of the laws in behalf of the Catho lics being gradually introduced. Thit gradual mode of meliorating laws was natural to the Conti. tution, and beneficial in its operation. He had no objeCtion to loch a relaxation, when it could be ef , fated with a general concurrence. But the prelim attempt would not meet with general approbation, either in that Houfe or out of doors ; and, therefore, only he oppofed the motion. He could not forbear blaming tilde by whom it was brought forward. His confidence in their proferfions was Ihaken by their feizing upon this moment, and certainly it would in duce him to obferve well their meafures and proceed. ings. Religious animofities and very fatal evils may' redid. He would refit here, and go no Rep fat ther at preent. The Roman Catholics of Ireland were in a better date than thole of England. When the time thould be fafe and the difpofitions of men fit, he &mild not objet to the reducing redraints that might be no longer neaffary. Lord HOLLAND—" My Lords, I confers I thought. that the Noble Baron who opened the de bate, had fo completely forellalled all the objections, that could potlibly be urged again!( his motion, as to leaee.me nothing new to add. I find, however, that there is fomething for me to anfwer, aos4 that other arguments have (prong up inthe debate, which he could not potfibly have forefeen. The arguments of two Noble Lords and a Noble Vircount have fill ed me with furprize ; for if they could be made outs they would be produCtive of .the remelt calamity to. Ireland. With one of there Noble Lords, though' this is the fird time I ever had the honour of fitting' in this .Honfe with him (Lord Hawke(bury ),.I never / agreed, and Ife.w.lsmu.sot likettto.aree now, bat, 1 I hope it •never will 'make any difference in our hiendlhip. I trult I (bail not fo completely roil . - take the objeel of the motion, as he and Airco-her Noble Lord (Mulgrave) have done. It appears to Fie, from the arguments of the Noble Lord, that the !inure ought to go into a Committee, for the put pole of refcinding all thole horrible measures of con ceiGon which have been granted to the Catholics ; but when I heard the Noble Vileount (Sidmouth ) on the time fide, talk of the tranquillity of Ireiarvf, the effeet of thefe concellions, I did expeet he would elvife going into a Committee for the porpofe of ex tending them. The arguments divithd theinfelves into two kinds; al, whether it were proper to g-ant any thing to the Roman Catholics? and, 2dly, whetht r the preterit was a proper time ? Upon thefe two fpe cies of argument I (hall not occupy the Houle at any great length. It is a ftrange ohjeftion to my Noble Friend's motion to fay that he propofes an entire rt peal of dll fecurities of our C ,, illitution. The Noble Lord ( Hawkelbnry) thinks that my Noble Fr ler,el withes to repeal the Bill of Rrghtr, and the Al of Settlement. Why. if a granger, unapprifed of the nature oldie proceeding, were to comeinto this Horde, he would conclude, from the fpeeches of the Noble Lords, that the objeft of the Petition was to make the Rornan Catholics the Kings of the Country. The Noble Viscount lays, it is impcflible that thofe who ohjeaed to the minor claim of the tell aft, coald pre their anent to one of In much greater extent as the prefent ; this is a flrange argument. The motion is for a Committee, in which one man may vote frr one indulgence, and another man may be for grain ing an indulgence of a different kind ; but to refute the motion, you mull be prepared to fay, that the laws refpeaing the Roman Catholics are complete, and no farther concellion whatever mull be granted, or that this is not the proper time for the application, The Noble Secretary (Hawkefbury) has drawn a diflinftion between civil rights and political power, and he contends that no country would admit a fubjeft to the enjoyment of the latter without a tell. This argument, I think, cannot be continently urged. —A Noble Lord rays, toleration to the Roman Ca. tholics is now complete. Does he mean to fay, that for the enjoyment of civil rights, perfons of that perfuafion fhould be admitted to fit in both Houfes of Parliament, but that they ought to be excluded, left the indulgence fhould bring them into polref. lion of political power? I fancy, however, that with out political power civil liberties are not very fecure. I have bad lately an opportunity of knowing the Rate of Ireland, and I do know that the (late of the Roman Catholics, in their prefent exclulion, is hard and galling. We boas of the Conllitution of Eng land. We call upon the people to fubmit to priva tions, to fecure to them the enjoyment of that Con ftitution. Now, does the Noble Lord think that it mutt not diminilh the love of that Conititution, and the temptation to fubmit to privations for its tupport, if the full enjoyment be withheld ? If, at the time cf the Union, you agreed to that mea fore, meaning, however, to refute thc full benefit of the Conititution to the Catholics, I fay it was a &lotion, and the Ira Catholics have not the ad _ _ vantage, which .they expetted from it. There is another grievance which in the pretent (Late of the • Irith Catholics is felt, particularly in the army, which is deprived of the fervice of men of courage and talents, who, but for the difabilities that now exift, would fill its ranks. This grievance (hikes me the more forcibly, as I have had lately an oppor. tunity of feeing 'Tamen zealous in the fervice of another country (hi: Lordfiiip it juji retnined front Spain), who had left their own on account of the obfiacles thrown in their way by their religion.-- The army is remarkable for a high fence of ho nour, and, as the grievance to which I allude comes in con . = with it, the effect is the greater. A Re cruiling Serjeant may go into a country town in Ireland to beat up for recruit!, and he may promife them the free ezercife of their religion thould .they enlitt with him. No inconvenience will be felt upon that fubjea, while they remain in Ireland ; but fup. pole the regiment thould be fent to Englan, what is the cafe then? The Roman Catholic Soldier is or- dered to go to church, and he has no opportunity of going to mats to perform worthip according to the form of his own perfnalion. Is not this a great grievance ? and, as 4 Noble Friend fuggefts to me, Catholic officers, when they come here, are fubjea to the fame Inconvenience. The Noble Secretary of State far, the Catholics do not careAbaut the queflion, and for this he quotes the authority of Arthur O'Connor and Dr. M'Neven; but I think, that however compe tent thefe twomen may be to fpeak for themfelves, they are not competent to anfwer for the whole of the Ca tholic body. It is Orange that the Noble Lords fficarld boat to much of the Revolution of i 688, holding the arguments which they do. Does the Noble Secre tary mean to fay, that if James the Second had not been a Papift, Englithmen would have fuhmitted to his arbitrary ails ? If religion were any. thing but a fecondary ohjea, if it had been merely the cafe, it would greatly tarnith in my eyes the great and glo rious ara of t6BB. If Popery only WAS the ogneflion, and King William had converted a Popilh to a Pro teftant Government, he would have deferved great praife ; but 1 think that the revolution_of 1688 was of a higher nature, and upon a broader hafts. I think it was more againft arbitrary principles than the cafual influence of the Catholics at that time. The Noble Lords fay, that the Catholics do not care about the indulgence which is fought, and yet the Noble Vifcount adds, that the refult of the queftion, if granted, would be to grant the hate itfelf. Now, I think, my Noble Friend has proved irrefragably that the Catholics, flippofing their claims to be allowed, could never arrive at any great influence in this Houle. The argument was a plaufible one, which urged their probable afceodancy in the Parliament of Ire land; but the Union has completely taken away all foundation for it. At the time of the Union wi.h Set:island, the oppofers of that meafure foretold the fame confequences which are now infifted upon by thole who refill the Catholic Claims; but I do not find that the event has juflified their Apprehenfioni. Why, then, may not Iriffi Catholics conduit them. felves with the fame fafety to the Conflitution, as the Scots Members? We are Aced. wken we grant this, how do we know what they will afk next, and where their demands will flop ? This argument goes to all . former conceffions. If we are not to grant any t;:ing„' left fomething more may be demanded, it would 1-e better to !hut the doors againll all Petitions. We arc , told that the Catholics are not fatitfied with the tell. A