Star. — London, England, 1829-03-17 00:00:00

lialembeihad oa tf farmer occasion toted in a Contrary spirit. He found'he was not mistaken, for in 1824 did Hon. Maliber voted'for a Motion of the Hon. M em be r . f or Montrose, which went to reduce the Church Establish ment of Ireland. He found that the Hon. Member for Li merick bad made an eloquent speech in support of the motioa,vliich was declared byLord Plut:kett and Mr. L. Foster to be a question merely as to the amount of church property in [rapid that was to be confiscat-d. He did - not quote this with a design to attack the Honourable Member for Limerick (Mr. Spring Rite), but with a view merely to defend himself from the unjustifiable observations of the Honourable Member, when he, the other night, declared he would rather forego the advan tages to be derived from the measore•of Emancipation, than consent to any thing that would in the slightest degree go to attack the property of the Protestant Church in Ireland. He was ,prepared to defend him self from any attacks, come from whom they might. He felt that the subject was one of great importance, Sind it was not his intention to enter on it thence but he trusted he would have an opportunity, when the Bill came to be discussed. of showing that, nowevee tzcellent the motion of the Right Honourable Gentle. man was, still it would fail to accomplish the pacifica tion of Ireland ; and, leaving the point 'to which he had tamed uniedsessed, it would be only changing the topic of discussion. They would then have the Catho lic Association in the HOUse—(hear) " —and th ugh the measure might satisfy the Catholic aristocracy, it would leave the people entitely unbenefitted—(tear)—the priesthood unprotected, and would controul and disci. pate their own expectations. Mr. SPRING RICE felt that an apology was due to the House for calling their attention to an individual so humble as himself; but after the observations of the Member for Colchester, be tru.ted that he would be heard in reply. He could assure Honourable Gen tlemen that en other circumstances but such as could not be resisted c , uld induce him to bring himself into collision with any Honourable Member. He would repel the charge that had been made against him, and he would take the liberty of saying, not that the conduct of the Honourable Gentleman was insincere, but it had the greatest appearance of in sincerity of any be bad ever witnessed in that House, or in any other place. He would advert to the speech just made, and would ask the Hon. Member for Caches.' ter how he could reconcile two propositionothe first.' his readiness to vote for the Bill; and the second, his readiness to take.the line of conduct with reference to, that measure most calc u l a t e d to i n j ure i t ? D id the Hoes' Gentleman not know that every word V what he bad .now stated was calculated to injure the progress of that question? On that-point he would join issue with him, and let him contradict Rim if he could, and show that if he c id not advocate the measure, he would riot take a course which had a tendency to defeat it. The Has, Gentleman bad heard to-night, and on a former night, by oboe he was cheered when saying what had a ten dency to injure the Catholic question. He did not speak this lightly, nor solely on his own authority, but would refer to what bad fallen from the Hondurable Member. for Norwich, who bad thanked the Member for Cooe . Chester for honestly saying that b e a pp rove d of • the mess sore, because it went to pull clOwn the Church in Ire land. He would also refer to what had been stated by the Hon. Member for Oxford, and to the monster in which the declaration had been hailed in the various publicatioas opposed to the measure. That declaration amounted to this; chat the King recommended the mod. •isure so far as was consistent with the safety of the Irish Church,_ and it was s° introduced by the Right Ho n .' Secretary for the HomirDfrpartment ; and he (Mr. S. Rice) as a Wand to it, wished to see it carried in con sistency with the•saftty of the church to which he be. longed, when the Won. Gentleman came as is professed friend to it as a new convert. and then spoke of mica. culous cmorersions. He never wished to see such mio l raculoos conversions as those of the Hon. Member. Is war there •ere some who came over from one party to' another, and, perhaps, could be received with the least safety by the •party they assisted. The Honourable Gentleman bad virtually skid he disbelieved the Mes sage from the Throne, the .authority of the late Mr. Grattan, and of the Member of - Waterford, and he had been cheered by Hon. Members- below the gangway; and the opinion had been taken out of doors on the an thority of the Member for Colchester, and he wished them joy of• it. Had be thought the Honourable Gentleman's words were lightly spoken he would not have animadverted upon them ; but that•was not the case, although be bad changed his position 'from the wounds oa which he rested the last time the measure was discussed. If the observations he had made were so unfair, there had been opportunity for reply.. ing to them on Friday; and he would have beer, better pleased had the earliest opportunity been taken, and it was no fault of his if the matter was suf fered to rest. As to the charge of inconsistency brought againq him, none had been proved; and he would not go farther in vindication than to expose the fallacy which had appeased thtoughuat the arbola state. • ment of the (lon. Gentleman: When be first entered Parliament. be found two opinions with respect to auras property :—the first was that of a class of per. sons who maintained tbst the Churhh property was in all rospects sacred and inviolable, and not to be touched by the legislature:and the second, 'which his Hon. Friend the Member fir Montrose supp orte d, was that t h e Cr uich property was public property, and liable to be applied' to the purposes of the State, saving the existing rights of individuals. He to k a different slew from both. He thought the ecclesiastical property in Ireland and England was protected by la*, as well as privive property ; but he differed in this, that he consi• dered it held by the conditionof the fulfilment of a great • public trust ; and, while he denied that it could be con fiscated to public purposes, he deniedalso the refusal o • the right of inquiry into the manner in which that public vest was discharged. When the proposition was brought forward that the property of the Church mishit be con fiscated, saving the resting rights of individuals, he bad always said I 1 0" to it; and when made again he should leave it to the sbpport Of the Hon. Meinber for Colches ter, tor it shoold' not bilis his. When, however, it was proposed to make the Church property in Ireland more eScieht fur the purposes of its foundation, he had certainly voted fur that . proposition. He did not say that a moti.n to promote inquiry could affect the Ca tholic Question; but a project of confiscation; and for ioqu ry he had voted, but for confiscation never. In 1 b 24 21 the Honourable Member for Montrose . brought ptisposition, a n d h e did not assent to . it; but drew op an amen d ment. 101823, the same Hosicura ble Member istrodoced a mine specik molidlts that the OraPettr . r f the Chard was publie peOperti. To this hetbutsr slut giie his consent, and took ao part io the discussion. I; 1824, the, Honourable Neap' her foe Montro.e• (Mr. Haim) moved; silt ftit cola. liscation, but inquiry.. and see out de übjectir intestlgetioh the plurality" tat. Aba der ce of the,Clirgy, • its feteits..ae. and. he (Mr. 11; . rest Riot ) thought thea; wet{ ftsatifitiiiO4. .110 Hotiout4tiU. tithibietie Cai n had refetrid • Si • Lord Plunketes opinion, but he would not iikeive the. characteristics of a question from an opponent Upon it; and., f the opinion of that Noble Load had ap - peered good to the Honourable Gentleman, the au-. thority of the Member for Montrose must appear better, and he had closed by saying th.t all he wanted was inquiry, and that he was averse to any measote that savoured of robbery . or spoliation. If the Hon. Member for Colchester advocated robbery or spolia don, he should receive no countenance from him.— Fortunately he bad also voted on another occasion (in the year 1824) on the question concerning the. first fruits, and he had then stated that he was as sincere a friend to the Church as the Attorney General, and that the best friend to it would advocate that species of reform which advocated the duties of the Clergy. The Honourable Gentleman bad employed himself in raking up ten 'years of a public life, but he had not the candour to refer to that speech which would have shown that there was not a tittle .of evidence to substantiate his charge. In 1825, also, the Honourable Member for Montrose made that attack on the Church, which drew forth the magnificent speech of Mr. Canning in its defence. He then maintained that the property of the Church belonged to the public, but he (Mr. Spring Rice) did not vote for that proposi tion. nor did any individual in that House assent to it, and it was negatived without a division. He felt something warmly on the present occasion. He was able to deal with open and generous enemies—arid he had such—and he was sure they would not approve of an indirect and tortuous opposition. He child cope with those who said the measure was dangerous to the Church, but be complained of him who approved of use questioe,yet would let it go forth to the would that these is that connected with it which will make it fail. He had not the advantase of belonging to a profession which quickened the intellect, and made min more acute; but there were such Gentlemen in that H use; and be would put it to the M em b ers of a learned profession if a Bill was introduced with a preamble that it was ne cessary to preserve inviolate the Winnur and dignity and character of the Bar in England and Ireland, and when the Bill was in progress, if an Hon. Member got up and said be was in favour of the Bill, and thought it nicht useful, but that he supported it with a view of defeating its object, he would ask the Gentlemen attached to the dignity, of the Bar if they would accept hi. assistance ? For his part he supported the Catholic question, and be did so because he thought the measure was not calcu lated to injure the Protestant Church. He had not spoken with reference to himself, but the cause; and he put it to the judgment of the House to decide between him and the Member for Colchester, a hether he had been guilty of the inconsistency which had been im puted to him. Mr. D. W.HA RVEY did not perceive that the speed of the Honourable Member lot Limerick contained any reply to his.obiservatiens. .He had chose'', for the pur pose of display, to put himself on his defence; but he (Mr. Harvey) had put no man on his defence; all he. had done was to defend himself. The Honourable Gen tleman had stated, that.tets years of his public life had been raked up by him, and that he had no right to do so without making himself acquainted with what he bad said in different speeches; to which he would reply that he had imposed on him no slight task, and he would add, punishment, in asking him to travel through all the speeches made by the Honourable Gentleman for The sp ice of ten years—(A laugh). He renounced ers titely having made a charge—whai he had said Was that he would undertake to .how that what was anti holed to him was groundtes-, but applicable to the Hon. Member himself. It had been advanced by him that no individual could be sincere in advocating a measure unless ha adopted it in all its bearings as the best possible measure; an opinion with which be could not coincide. He might be as friendly to the measure as the Hon. Gentleman himself; but he still thought it was not calculated to pacify Ireland. The Hon. Member bad spoken of, miraculous conversions, as if he had been opposed to the question.. He had never impeached others to defend himself; and it, as the Hon. Member had spoken of ten years, he made a motion of inquiry for double that number, he was ready to meet hien, though not fond of following his footsteps. Hr (Mr. Harvey)'had never before voted for the question; because until it was sanctioned and brought forward by the clown it appeared to him to be a mrre patty, he would add, a factious measure—(Hear). And he be lieved if the Hon. Gentleman and his party came into power they would not have proposed so perfect a mea sure as the present. Ilecouldaot Issr,zet the time when that party Went over in a stream Mr. Canning to oppo.e the Noble Duke at tho headid the Government, and the illusuious- individual opposite, upon whom they were now exhausting very terns - of tisizorne panegeric —(Hear). He believed in his conscious::: that before many months the N ble Dike and tire Right Hon. Gentleman would find in the Hon. Member for Lime. rick and his friends their most formidaiile competitors for place—(Hear, and a laugh). These might not be very palatable sentiments to Hainaut able Gentlemen. but be did not fear censuie, and he was not anzinus to court applause. When the measure came regularly before the. House he hoped to be able to show that it was possible to be in favour of the Bill, and yet not think it all that might be desirable. Mr. P. THOMPSON repelled the ch urge that had been made by the Member for .Colchester against his , Hon. Friend, and disclaimed the dictatorial tone im puted to him. Lord AIORPETH denied that the opposition had been influenced by personal motives in joining the Ad. enidistration of Mr. Canning. They had opposed the Noble Duke !Wellington) send the Right Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Peel), because the Noble Duke and the Right Hon. Gentleman were opposed to the question of Entancipatirii. Mr. W. HARVEY then presented another Peition from the-Dis.enters of Colchester, in favour of Conces. lion; and a third petition lions two persons of Waltham abbey, complaining of the undue means used through the country to influence the people againi.t the measures recommended by the Government, and praying that the House would pay no attention to the petitions got up in consequence of such inflammatory means. Mr. G. DAWSON presented two Petitions ageism Concession from the Lord Risher and Clergy of the diocese o f A rmag h, sa d Lord %M_and Clergy of the Masse of Ossory. General GASCOYNIR a Petition respectably signed, against Omission to the from the district of Radcliffe, to the county of Middlesex. . Alderman WAITHMAN stated, that the Petition, though comlig.froin a Pads! containing 45,000 persons, was signed by oak 1,400 . names. Several of the'names bad been wtitten in the sante hand General GASCOTNE admitted that six or seven names were Written in the maw hand ; but then they were the names of per mits of the wine family. It was, no uncommon thing for several rmo= resent at the place where the Petition lay to request a Wsmd who was signing his own name to sign their names at the aim dime. These petty cavils raised against Petitions would re coil on those who made them.—The Honourable Member shen proceeded to present three ot►er reddens against Emancipation from tbo Parishes of Bk. Peter's, &. Nolan, and St. Mary, abandon. tkereoirr NULL presented Petitions In favour of Con. tesilew free mode Protect mts et the town of Belts*; of Mo. *bug ; and b. Andrea's, parish of Dublin. . . ' After a. few words from Mr. VAN TIO3IRIG II in support or the Nikko**. they wets.itiSon the talsk. . Mr. MABlERLYPresenteda Petkiou from Abingdon in favour of Concession. Mr. Secretary PEEL gave notice, for Thursday next, of a Bill to Pea provide for the b ettu r execat i on of the Once of Justice at the ce. Mr. PYLER gave notice for some day in the present month of a motion of inquiry into the present eats of the Silk Trade in this country. Mr. G. DAWSON, in answer to a queatioh by Mr. IL Colborn, said, that he would give notice, in due time, whether or not the Government would propose to renew the Act for the Composition of Assessed Taxes, which was about to expire on the nth of ApriL The sum of Z 422,9211 les. was voted in the Committee of Supply for the expresso of the Commissariat. On the meths of Mr. & WORTLEY, the Game Bill was read a Second Time. Mr. VAN HO 1l RIG H expressed a wish that the provisions of the EMI should be extended to Ireland. Mr S. WORTLEY declared his readiaeu to comply with the Hon. Member's typist. if it were the expressed desire of the Irish Members generally. MIDUCTIMI OF MILITIA STAFF. Mr. Secretary PEEL said that in the speech of hi, Majesty, at the close of the last Sessi.in of Parliament. an assurance had been giv n that a :eduction should take place in the civil and military ebtablisenei is of the United Kingdom. It being in compliance with this as surance that it was the inteution of his Majest)'• (Govern ment to reduce the militia.and the reduction of the militia Staff which he proposed could be made without in any way impairing the efficiency of that body. The object of the Bill which he should introduce was twitold. In the first place, to snip nd the making out of the list and balloting for one year, and in the next to make a per manent reduction in the staff. The practice of ballot ing for men to serve in the militia had etown np and extended to an . expense wh - ch was not at all available or necessary to Supply the vacancies which occurred. This could be beat deshonstra ed by instancing one counti—that of Staff. Id, where the militia consisted of 1,130 men.- Whatever vacancies occutted were to be made up by ballot. In 1828, the number of va cancies was 21. It was necessary to have recourse to a general ballot, as there was discretionary power to fill those up. The expense of this ballet was 5001., thice hundred of which was at the expense of the public, and two hundred at that of the county. In order to fulfil the law it was necessary that all those who should have any grounds for bei tg di , pensed with should make their appeals in person. The number of those a:peals last year was lions three to five hundred; so that, in order to supply twenty-one vacancies, at legit four hundred person* were obliged to appeal to urge the cause of their exemption, thereby losing a day's labour, and, if sickness was the ground on which they rested their right of exemption. paying .fs.6d. to a surgeon for a certificate. The tAM expense of this ballot, as he before mentioned, was five hundred pounds ; and while they wet e raising able bodied men toserve in the line at three guineas bounty it coat them t wen. y-five pounds each to fill the vacancies which occuited in a militia regiment. It was to save this unnecessary expense that he proposed that the ballot should be suspended; but this suspension was only to last till the next Session of Parliament, and if in the meantime the exigencies of the State should requite it, Ilse Crown was to have the power of having recourse to that system. By adopting this plan there would be a saving in the present year of 24.0001. The other part of the Bill proposed a permanent reJuction in the Staff of the Militia. It was found that three Offic.rs could be reduced in each corps without in the smallest degree' injaiing its efficiency, and this reduction would cot be an innovation, bu t would merely restore the *Nip to its original formation. There had been. lot instance, originally 'no particular office of paymas er, and he saw Ito reason why the duties of that office c'ulJ not be pi:dimmed by the, adjutant of the regiment while the .i.alitia remained in its piesent disembodied state. The office of surgeon was aiso to be oi.pemed with, as he considered that whatever medical advice should be requited for the staff could be aff-irdeci in the pre sent state of the militia, without -kerpi.ig up the office of permanent surge.m. The s' ff of the militia on permanent pay in each corps wou•J then be,--one adjutatit,one 4erjeala major.and in regiments comprising two battalions,. a chum major. Ti.e .otal expense of this reduction of the Staff would tr 65.0001, a year ; hut as the pay of the pi e, ent o ffi cer s was to be cootii.ued up to June nest. the saving f die pies nt year w. uhf be only 40,0001. on the ieJuct ~,,,, and 24,0001. on the suspension of the ballot, making -in the . hole sum for this year a reducono of 64 0001. Tile Right Honourable Gentlemen concluded by moving fur leave to bring in a Bill, the object of which was to su.pend the balloting for the militia far a linked period, and to :educe the Staff to a certain numb r of officers. Co,cinel SIBTHORPE. coincided per'ectly with the Sight Honourable tientlinian in that part of the Bid which referred to the suyenonn of the ballotting system; but with regard to the latter part, the reduc tion of the Staff, lie hoped the Right fin. Genii, man would take a more satisfactory, and he would add, a juster tuethod, and wait u:it I vacancies should occur, either by cleath‘or other wi e. His object was that those who were not q ialified to claim a subsistence in any other way, and whetted ret ivied their situations, rest ing on the faith of the Government, should not be re jected. Mr. S. RICE thought the Government•had com pletely redeemed their pledge, which was given last year, in proposing the-present Bill. H:. : did not know of a reduction which was more nee.* ary, or less inju. nous to the force of the State than the pi e,ent. 'He ' wished, however, to be informed, whether the reduc don was likewise to apply to the Irish Staff? Mr. PEEL thought, speaking of the application 'of the Bill, he used the tern, •• United Kingd m." The reduction was certainly to extend to lielaud. With re gard to presaing hard tyros any, he must say, that it there was to be • saving, it must necessarily press on individuals. The question was, whether the allowance 'of supetaunuation was a just one? Of 325 officers who should be reduced by the present Bill, 237 were to re. ceive the allowance; and if the remaining 88 were not to receive it, it was because they were not considered to be entitled to it. Ile (Mr. Peel; thought, however, that it would be better to postpone the discussion of these matters until the Secretary at War should bring the details before the House. Captain MABERLY thought that a mote efficient saving, without any injury to the military strength of the country, could not be proposed. As a Member of the Finance Committtee he had an opportunity of know• ing that a reduction of expense in this partKular was desired by all, but no one had proposed a remedy until Isis Right Hon. Friend took the business into his hands. Colonel SIBTH ORPE wished to know at whit rime the details of the matter should be brought before the House, as he would then take an opportunity of expressing his opinion on than. Ilr. Secretary PEEL replied, that it was seemeary this Bill should pass before any time could be appointed foe sewing on the details of the reduction. Lord PA LbIERSTON tboasht the present erase most desirable reduction. and, at the same time, one which would not he at an injurious to the efficiency of the militia corps Leave was then given to , bring in the BUL It was read a first time, and ordered to be read a secon d d ose so Thursday nut The other Orden of the Day were disposed of, and nth Horns adjourned at a Qualms' To Times °Twat. • PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS. •a. • • ABSTRACT. - • The number of persons committed for trial to the varies. gaols of Ragland and Wales, during the seven years ending 1822-86,530' males and 16,758 females. total• 103.1 W were comiskted. It. 1822, 10;69 maks and 1,872 females were committed. In 18231 10,542 males and 1,921 females In 1824, 11.475 emirs, and 2,223 females. In 1825, 11.889 males and 4548 females. In 1826, 13,672 males and 2,692 lemelvs. In 1827, 55.151 males and 2,770 females; and in 1828, 13.832 males and 2 732 ternales. Also, in 1822, 8.209 persons were convicted. In 18-3. 8 204 persons. Its 1824 9,425. In 1825, 9.966. lii 1826, 11,107. la 1847, 12,564; and in 1828, MM. Tutal number of conv.ctions in the sines jean. 74196. Of these, 7,980 received sentence of death, 1,139 were trot.nced to transportation for life. 1,386 for fourteen years. 11.776 for sow years. 2.860 to two years and eighteen months imprisonment,* 366 (tom six to twelve months imprisonment. 36,269 frontons to de months Imprisonment. In the year 1822, 97 p• nuns were gee cuted ;In 1823.54 ;in 1824,49; in 1825, 501 in 1 8 26 1 37 illgt TO; and in 1828, 79--total number of executions, 456. Of these, 93 were for murder. 104 for burglary and lbou.elsre.iktng, 7i for highway.robbery, 37 for burse•steaiing, 31 for attempt■ to murder, 27 foe rape, Arc. 23 for forgery, 12 fiat coMing ; the tefehtiUder tor ether offences. The number of extortions for uflences c. tttttt duck% in the city of London and county of Niddsesca wa, 115. PUBLIC MEETING AT EDINBURGH. IN SUPPORT OF THE CATHOLIC CLAIMS. EDINBURGH, Masco 14. , This forenoon there was a Meeting held in the A•sembly Rooms, Gecrge•stie t, Sr WILLIAM ARBUTHNOT B the Chair, tor the purpose of petitioning both Houses of Parliament in favm.r of the measure, now in ',fogless for the removal of all civil disabiiities from our Catholic fellow subjects. In paint of numbers, rank, respec'a.ility, and talent, no Meeting of equal weight and tenpin ance was ever pet haps convened in this city. To the honutio of our great Metropolitan Universi - y, no less than ten of her Professors, secluding the most distingui•heti names a which she can boast, a tended the Meetiag ; for, besides by,. Chalmers. we observed— • Professors Leslie, Wallace, J a m eson , Bell, Napier, Pin ar% Alison, Undid!, and Sir William Hamilton. Among the other die.. tingoisbed persons present were—Sir James W . Alontriefr, Hari. Dean of Faculty, Sir William Vette., Bar•met, Sir William Ar buthnot, Bart. Sir Robert Lista!, lint. the Solicitor General, French Jeffrey, Eq. Thomas Thoinson, Eq. J. A. Murray. gaq James Ferguson, RI Hobert Janileson, H.q. Thomas Maitland Esq. Archibald Alison, Esq. A.D. Alexander Wood, Esq A. E. lgoiiteith, E.q. Anse. Fletcher, Esq. the lion. Charles Hope, J. J. Hope Johnstone, Esq.' It. Clem Itattray, 14 Ile Carnegie, El. of Craig°, Francis Walker Drummond, Esq. if Howtboroden, Mr. James Mackay. jeweller, Mr. Adam thick. bookseller the Rev. Dr. M ore h ea d, t h e R ev . D r. Ritchie, Putter. row the gee. Dr. Hunter, the R ev . J o h n B rown, Ruse.street, tbi Rev. Henry Grey, St. Mary's, ice. The principal speakers on this occasion were Sir Wm. Arbuthnot, the De in of Faculty, Dr. Madigan. Sir Alexander Maitland Graham, Mr. Jeffrey. Mr. Cock ' bum. the Solicilor Ge , er al, and Dr. Chalmers, whose , speech formed one r f the most strikilig feetu•es of this Meeting, and is briefly as follows: Mr. CHALMERS.-1 understand that the present meet. ing would not have been called, had it not been for ter. tam anterior efforts male in this city, and the object of which was to obtain signatute. for a Petition against the Catholic Emancipatioe. We should have remained quiet, and this perhaps would live been as significant en expression.as we could have given of our cot.tidente ia the 'measures oposed by his Maj. st)'s Government. Had there been no public exhibition oh their past. I understand that there would have been no public exhi bition 1,11011 ours. And I advert to this simply foe the . purpose of remarking, how delusive the isidira inn often is of the state of public sentiment, in as far as it is grounded either on the majority of petitions or in the ' , Amity of signature . The trues is, that they are the non. contents, the alarmists, who are in motion. Ald contents scarcely ever think if moving but in the ca pacity r f counter-alarmists. Meanwhile, it at iihnietical deduction were to be made of all the prittimser s on bath sides of the questi •n, it would be found that the great body of the public, the great body of the rim: arm, were in a state of rest—(Cheers)—and they count with us, tint with our opponents—([,nod cheers). We have • read r f expressive silence; and this is what their merle* espresse.—(Cheers). Th. to may have been a it rI etiv. vesce ce here lad there, but mai ly and tlfrouJh , uX • the land, there is a general attitud oqi s e —per. haps the strongest demonstration that cowl be given itf the reliance which the people cf Scotl.nd have on the • 'adorn and the safety of the me &sures now in aAitation. But I would scarcely have adverted to the exi•tence of another petition, and of other petit o ;era, had it not been for the designation which they have assumed of Anti. Catholic, kitting tons, t' en, it m•,.ht appe,r, the goodly designation c f Pro Catholic. Never was a grosser impu.ition practised on the public, and the po pular mind, than by means of these two words. We . , are rent Pro Catholic. We are no. hosite, neither are we indifferent to the holy cease of Protestan•istn. I cannot answer for outsets,: but in vindication of myself can at least say, it is in the genic of devoteJne s to that cause that I come here, and b cause in this eman cipation of Papists I see for Prot( scants a still gie.ter and More glorious emancipation—(l , nm' the che:ting). The truth is, that the,e ditabili les have hung 411 a dead weight around th • Protestant cause for mote .han a century. They have enlisted in opposition to it some of ti e most unconquerali:e principle. of nature— resert mem because of injuf y, and the psi e of adlierei t 6 lo .suff.sing cause. They have transtnimed tie whole nature c.f the contest, and by to doing, they have rooted acid given tenfold obstinacy to ertm— hood chetrs.) They have given to our ' ja r the hateful a 'pct. of tyro ny, while on theirs we behold a generous and high-minded resist .nee to what they deem to be oppression—(Tremendous cheering.) They hate trash. formed a nation of heretics into a nation of heroes. We could have refuted and shamed the heretic cut of his errors, but war cannot britsg down the hero from his alctude; and thus it is, that lions the first introduction' of this heterogeneous element into the qu'stion, the cause of troth has gone backward—(Lord cheers.) It has ever since been met by the unyielding defiance of a people irritated but not crushed, under a sense of in• dignity. and this notable expedient fOr keeping down the Popery of Ireland, has only compressed. it into a firmness, and closed it into a phalanx, which, till opened up by emancipation, we shall find to be ins penetrable.—(Prolonged. cheering.) Gentlemen would draw arguments from history against us, but there is one passage in history which they never can dispose of. How comes it that Protestantism made such triumphant progress in these realms when it had pains and penalties to struggle with, and how came this progress to be arrested hods the moment it laid on these pains and penalties in turn?—(Enthusiastic cheering). Mutt have all the enactments of the statute book done for the cause of Protestantism in Ireland ? (Cheers) and how is it that, when single-handed wash • walked through our Island with the might and prowesra of a conqueror, so soon as propped by the authority of • the State, and the armour of intolerance was given to . her, the brilliant career of her victories was een:ed t-- (Enthusiastic cheering for several seconds).' It was WI en she Wok op the carnal and laid down the spitituat .wea., pon ; it was then that strength went out of her.. S e was struck with impotency—(Chser.)....ois the instant, . That from a warljre of principle it became a wa.lare of .? Jai.; 1