Star. — London, England, 1821-04-17 00:00:00

1 1T 7 i r -11 11 i~ , ( 4. • •at • • 6e •• . . k : • - • .- 4 CA:: IC--1 ; -- 4, 10 654 IMMULTYLOPPICE, April 14, Islll. INFORMATION has this day bees received at this *Afros his ihjoity's Commit et 117siotoer," That the Light upesi Nor:tram, &sib sill es satinonsfaid on the IGill Wand, and , or ga n vein have bons completed, it :Mu be timdled on the la 1 imps mac" .if. CROIER. EAST-INDIA HOUSE, April 4, 1821. pHE COURT Q( DIRECTORS of the UNITED COMPAAY gf ;MECUM'S 41 ENGLAND, Priding She EAST-INDISS, de hardy give Nstice, That a GENERAL COURT of the said Cootputy, win be hdd at their HOMO in Leadenhall-street, on WEDNESDAY, the lath instant, from Eleven o'clock in the Forenoon until an In the E•cning, to Ballot on the following Question, •iz. " That Sir Hadar Vnascse Mutt, Bart. late of the BengaL Estabiiihnunt,be permitted toucturn to the Service under the prolisloos d the Act of the 33d Geo. 111. Cap. 5.2., Sect. 70, with the rank which he held whin he quitted Bengal, agreeably gh the Act of the 53d Oeo. 111. Cep. ldi, 5c1.85;" In order to determine, by sash %Sot, whether three parts in Ow of the Proprietors present at such General Court, comteLt that Sir HAsiar Veamot Monu be permitted to return with the said rank to India. JOSXPH DART, Secretary. NEW CHURCHES. ST. MARY-LA-BONNE. UTANTED to BORROW the sum of £90,000, Y- towards building FOUR NEW CHURCHES in this Paris's', on Bonds of £lOO each, bearing Interest at Four per Cent. 1 -v able 11 ,If-yearly, secured by Act of Parliament, and reeitived lq a Sinking F,pod provided under the said Act. The Bond: ate granted at the expersit ur the Vestry.—For further gardenias apply at the Court-house, in Oxford-street. JAMES HUGO GREENWELL, Vests) , Clerk. CHOICE FINE-FLAVOURED OLD PORT. NEARLY ONE HUNDRED DOZEN. TO BE SOLD BY AUCTION, By Mr. ROBINS, (Of Warwick-street, Golden-square), . At Na 19, King-street, St. Jannel's-square, TO-MORROW, A2ril 18, at One o'Qock, Two PIPES of Capital OLD PORT (nearly ONE HUNDEF.D DOZEN), Ten and Twelve Years in Battle The Property of a Gentleman. Lying In his Cellars, Quem•Anne-street East, and to be dell send from thence. To be tasted on the Morning of Sale; and Catalogues had at Cssraway's; and of Mr. Robins. Warwick-street, (Olden -square. WE CREDITORS OF MESSRS. BOY D, BENFIELD, AND DRUMMOND. THE Commissioners in a renewed Commission of Bankrupt. bearing date the Sth day of April, 1821, awarded and issued froth against Walter Boyd, Paul Benfield, and James Drissmond, of the City of London, Merchants and Copartners, legend to nret on the 3d day of May next, at Ten o'Clock in the Forenoon, at Guildhall, Loaded, to make a Dividend of the SEPARATE ESTATE and Effects of WALTER BOYD, me /Me said Bankrupts; when and where the Creditors who lave net already proved their Debts, are to come prepared to mete same, or they will be excluded the Benefit of the said ; and all claims not then proved will be disallowed. AND, Th Commissioners in a renewed Commission of Bankrupt, bsalug date the sth day of April, Inn, awarded and issued forth against Walter Boyd, Paul Ben&ld, and James Drum mond, of the City of London, Merchants and Copartner, intend to meet on the 3d day of May next, at Ten o'aock in the Fore men, at Guildhall, London, in order to make a Dividend of the SEPARATE ESTATE and Effects of PAUL BEN FIELD, me of the said Bankrupts; when and where the Creditors who hum not already proved their Debts. are to come prepared to =e l same, or they win be excluded the benefit of the said ; and all claims not then proved will be disallowed. The Ceinsuisdaners will meet as the Guildhall, London, on the ROth inseam for the purpose of receiving the Proof of Debts, led substantiating the Mai already made, and the Solicitors 'Mar the Commission will attend 'at the George and Vulture Tants, Cambia, en the Yethsand 27th instant, from Ten till Three eClock each day, to reecho Instructions for Depositions. BOARD OF AGRICULTUBE. TO THE EDITOR OF THE SThL Sra, 1 4 April, 1821. It is a maxim of law that I there l nn-wrong with out a remedy, but sometimes the remedy can only be got at by means of the Press, and it is in such an emergency that I presume to request you to make public a few remarks relative to the conduct of the Board of Agriculture on a'recent occasion. They proposed an exhibition of stock, with a view to encourage improvement in the breed of different animals, offering various premiums for the best ex hibited. The first head of their proposal was as follows, viz. . 8 To the several breeders of the six best bulls, of any sort or " kind, kept in the United Kingdom, the merits whereof are to " be considered on a comparison with other bulls of the same " breed, a piece of plate of the value of thirty pounds each." Now, Mr. Editor, is there any reservation here to sanction the Board giving but two premiums and withholding four? thereby disappointing many can didates, who, with much trouble and expense, had brought animals from great distances to the compe lion. When the principle of the intended award was made known, a protest was delivered in by the parties who were affected by it, complaining that it did not keep faith with them : it was contended, in reply, that the terms of the proposal justified the in tention then declared, of giving only one premium to one particular breed, so that as all the animals exhibited could be classed as of two breeds, only two premiums could be demanded. It is a fair presumption that the Board of Agri culture consists of members acquainted with the na ture and interests of Agriculture; but really their knowledge of the Engli,h language will be called in slosinion, if they offer such an interpretation as this, of the beforernentioned proposal. The best redress for the rejected candidates is per aps to be afforded, by your publishing the grounds of their disappointment, which will spew that the rePusation of -their stock ought not to suffer by it; and giving this matter publicity will no doubt in duce the Board of Agriculture to attend in future to the terms of their proposals, so that on another occa— sion candidates may not be misled by their inaccu- Slcy- I am, Sir, your humble servant, JOHN -DULL TUESDAY, APRIL 17, 1821. . • PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS. HOUSE OF LORDS. APRIL is. THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS. I.ong before the doors were opened, all the passages leading to the House were crowded with strangers eager to obtain ad mittance; and it was not until half-past five o'clock that the ad mittance was obtained. Every part below the bar was then filled. The Bishop of OXFORD presented a Petition from the Archdeaconry of Oxford, against the Roman Catholic Bill. Petitions to the like effect were presented from the Parish of St. Peter's in the East, in the City of Oxford; from the-Parishes of St. George, in the Borough of Southwark, and from St. Olave ; from the Parish of St. bumph, Aldgate ; from the Eastern part of the County of Sussex, and also from the Inha bitants of Lewes • from Six Thousand Residents in the Town and Neighbourbotl of Liverpool; from the Archdeacoory of Bath, and the Deanery of &owe; from the City of Bristol; from Great Torrington; from the City of Leicester, signed by 2000 persons; and from the Congregatit it 'assembling in Gale street Chapel, near Lincoln's Inn-fields. The Bishop of NORWICH felt it his duty to present to their Lordships, in favour of the Roman Catholic Bill, a Petition signed by fifty-four Clergymen belonging to the Establidied Church, who yielded to none of their Reverend Brethren in at tachment to that Church, but hoped they were as warmly at tached as any others. In tendering this Petition, he trusted that their Lordships would finally be induced to consider and concede the prayer of it, as nothing but what endangers the safety of the Constitution could justify those restrictive laws, which the Petitioners now referred to, one moment longer than the occasion might require. After the Petition had been read, purporting to proceed from certain of the Clergy of the Arehdeaconrr of Norwich, it was ordered to be laid upon the table. A Counttr-Petition was presented from Liverpool, by Earl Garr, in favour of the present Bill. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented Petitions against the Catholic Bill, from Newarkmpon-Trent, in the County of Nottingham • the Parish of East Deerham , in the County of Norfolk; th e Inhabitants of Hammersmith, in the County of Middlesex; and the Mayor and Corporation of the Borough of Woodstock, in the County of Oxford.—Laid on the table. Earl GREY said he had to present two Petitions in favour of the Bill then before their Lordships. They came from some of the most respectable Ca tholics in England. The Petitioners stated that they were most grateful for those laws that had already been passed fur the removal of certain disabilities un der which they had laboured ; but they submitted to Parliament whether there was any necessity for con tinuing those incapacities under which they still la boured ; and they appealed to that House, and asked whether any part of their conduct, in the public or private walks of life, was such as could clash with any of the moral or political duties which they were hound to observe as British subjects; and whether they were inferior to any other set of men in alle giance to their S wereign? They made the most un equivocal declaration of allegiance; they solemnly protested against the imputation that they acknow ledged the power of any foreign Prince; and humbly prayed that the House would pass the present Bill. This was the prayer of the first Petition. The second Petition was signed by the Duke of Norfolk, the Earl of Shrewsbury, and other Roman Catholic Peers. They stated that they had minutely consi dered the form of the oath of supremacy requited to be taken by the present Bill, as well as the several other provisions in the Bill; ,they declared that this oath was perfectly consistent with their religion: and that they would most readily take it if the Bill passed into a law. His Lordship said he conceived it most important to state this fact, on account of the high character of the Petitioners, the justice of their claims, and the spirit of moderation in which these claims were set forth, He would assert that there did not exist in the Kingdom any set of men more distinguished for the exemplary discharge of all their duties in publ:c and private, than the present Peti tioners. This fact must be well known to the Noble Earl at the head of the Treasury, who had already declared his intention to oppose the present claims. He (Earl Grey) was most anxious to avoid taking any part in the discussion of that night, as he felt that he could do no more than urge the same argu ments which he had repeatedly submitted to their Lordships ; particularly so, as there were other Noble Lords then present on whom the trust of supporting the measure more immediately fell. He was there fore contented at present with resting on those general grounds upon which the measure had for merly received his support, and with putting for ward the claims of the Petitioners on the princi ples of justice.—The two Petitions were then re ceived, and briefly read by the Clerk. The Order of the Day being then moved for the second reading of the Bill for the removal of certain Disabilities under which the Roman Catholics at pre sent laboured, _ _ The Earl of DONOUGHMORE rose to support it. He began by calling their Lordships' attention to those Penal Laws of extreme severity which had been enacted against Roman Catholics, and which existed for upwards of a century ; and then adverted to the happier prospects which had been opened to them during the reign of his late Majesty. The first departure from the old system of severity began in the year 1778, when some of the severe restrictions were removed from the Roman Catholics of Ireland. A Statute passed by Elie Irish Parliament in that year, made the first breach in the old system of Roman Ca enlic exclusion. The Irish Parliament seemed to be more alive than that of Great Britain to this spirit of liberality and just feeling; for in the year 1782, a still further progress was made towards granting re lief to the Roman Catholics. The same disposition ma nifested itself still more in 1792: and at last, in 1793, the Parliament of Ireland passed an Act for restoring the elective franchise to the Roman Catholic subjects of Ireland. By this Act they were raised to a situa tion in the State, which could not be justified on any of those principles of reasoning by which the present Claims were opposed; for if it were just at present to resist those Claims, the concessions of 1793 .ought never to have been granted: but from those conces sions no mischief had ever arisen. In this way stood the affairs of the Roman Catholics after the year 1793 and they would have still continued so, were it not for an Act introduced by a fiend of his, then at the head of the Admiralty, which Nc•-i' placed the Roman Catholics of Greattit:tin on the same footing with those of Ireland, in regard to holding Commissions in the Army and Navy.— The concessions of 1793 had been confined to the , Catholics of Ireland ; and the attention of the British Parliament was called over and over again to the situ ation of the Roman Catholics of Great Britain. At length a Bill of the greatest importance was passed by the other House of Parliament, and before it passed the threshold of their Lordships House, it met with a promised and premature opposition on the part of the Noble Lord at the head of the Trea sury, and the Noble and Learned Lord on the Wool. sack. Such was the announcement, and such the decision which these two Noble Lords had thought proper to give. But in the course of the present debate, he trusted that their Lordships would have stated to them the reasons why so unusual a course of proceeding had been adopted. The present stage was the proper Parliatnentarr . reading of the Bill ; and before they came to a decision upon it, he hoped their Lordships would condescend to hear every ar gument that could be urged far or against it. This • Bill had passed the other House, not in a moment of hurry or enthusiasm, for it had undergone an ordeal there of five weeks; and after all the laboz ious atten tion which had been given to it in the other House, and after the deliberate sense of that House had been taken upon it, he would ask their Lordships if they could be justified in rejecting it? He was, iodeed, much surprised at the early opposition which had been announced by the two Noble Lords to whom he had already alluded ; for it was unusual to make an opposition to the principle of any Bill until the second reading of it ; and he was still more surprised that the opposition should be made in such a manner as if the measure was so bad in all its parts as to be incapable of amendment. The Bill consisted of two I parts; the first went to restore the Roman Catholics to all their privileges; and the second part went to fix tile price which they were to pay for these privi leges. How, he asked, could any one object to the first part, who was satisfied with the present situ ation in which the Roman Catholics stood ? And why should the Noble Earl, and the Learned Lord, who objected to the securities, say that they would not grant the privileges ? It was impossible to con ceive on what principle those Noble Lords founded their opposition. It might, indeed, be said that their authority was very great, and therefore that he him self had to contend against a great power ; but there was anotheiauthority which he respected as much, and that was the authority of the other House of Par liament, therefore he begged of their Lordships to consider this Bill of Relief in a Parliamentary man ner. He (Lord Donoughmore) did not desire their Lordships to pledge themselves to the whole of the Bill, but to give it the fullest possible consideration. —Let them consider who the parties were who now called for relief; and whether they were not worthy of consideration. They composed one-fourth of the population of the United Kingdom, and four-fifths of the population of Ireland, there being four millions of Catholics in that country. Among these were numbers of the most respectable inhabitants of that country ; and he asked if their Claims and Petitions were to be rejected without due consideration ? But had their Lordships never heard of these people be fore? Had they not received many privileges before, ami were not those privileges given under the sanc tion of oaths the same as were administered in Courts of Justice? And no imputation had ever been thrown out against them that they did not consider these oaths as binding. They took the oaths, and they were found trust-worthy. He did not know, then, what was left for Roman Catholics to disavow.— When the Act of 1798 was passed in the other coun try, with the full approbation of his Majesty's Minis ters, that Act gave them the elective franchise ; and when that was granted, it was a full admission that the Roman Catholics were worthy of political power. They had had this elective franchise twenty-eight years; and let their Lordships see what had been the conduct of the Roman. Catholics with that franchise, and if it appeared they had not abused that privilege, was there any reason why the doors should not be opened to them further? It was true that our's was a Protestant Constitution ; he loved that Constitution, and would support it; but if all causes of jealousy were removed from all the subjects, the Constitution would be strengthened; and these were his motives in calling on their Lordships to grant the privileges now called fors He should now, advert to the other party, from whom it had been alleged that injury might arise, were this Bill to pass. He asked, if it would be wise to say that no subjects of this country should ever correspond with the Pope on mere mat ters of religion ? The Pope was not the sort of per son who could be held up in that light, much less a man from whose influence any danger might be ap prehended. On the contrary, he bad gone every pos sible length to reconcile the Roman Catholic subjects of this country to their Government, and had done everything in his power to bring about measures of conciliation- between the Roman Catholics and the Protestants.—{Here the Noble Earl read extracts from Edicts voluntarily issued by his Holiness, in order to shew what were his disposition and his prin- 1 ciples in this respect.j--Such was the man whom their Lordships had thought fit to describe as a man conspiring against the safety of every State—a man who had proved himself unworthy of trust, and as one who consulted nothing but the security of his own religion. This Bill had not passed through the other House of Parliament without great considera tion ; 'and there it was discussed hi the greatest tone of moderation. This Bill went to bring the Roman Catholics within the Protestant Constitution, which, if the Bill passed, would not be less a Protestant Con stitution than it was before. It was not a Bill for granting privileges to the Roman Catholics, but for restoring them to the rights they bad formerly en joyed. They had been tried for twenty-eight years, and they were not found wanting in any part of I their duty.' The Bill provided every necessary pro- ..~! ~ ~_ • - "• • •: 11 ;- . ni.11:151: • _ _ ___ PItI E SE\ FN-PENCg. tection for the Protestant Constitution. We were still to have a Protestant Ring, who, although he might appoint Roman Catholic Minister , , still had the power of defending himself and t.ie Constitution. To suspect any man on the ground that he was dis. affected would be the way to make him disaffected; and could anything be more afflicting to a Roman Catholic of talent and enlightened mind, than to be told, that lie never should arrive at any of those ho flours or distinctions which were accessible to Pro- testants ? Such evils it was the object of this Act to remove. He conceived that, without any additional oath the Roman Catholics were trust-worthy, and with that idea he conceived the second part of the Bill altogethei unnecessary, particularly after the Ro man Catholics had been in the possession of political power for twenty-eig't years. Therefore, he should have .no objection to tie second measure being ex punged from the 13i11; for no fresh security was wanted. The Roman Catholics must feel themselves hurt by such an enactment. But it might be said, that they had a disaffected Clergy. The very reverse 'was the case; no men could be more correct in their moral conduct, or more distinguished for their loy alty than the Roman Catholic Clergy of that part of the country from which he came. He felt the highest respect for the feelings and opinions of those who proposed the securities•which were contained in the second part of this Bill. He would not, however do the very enlightened Gentlemen who brought for ward this Bill in the other House, or the Noble Lords who were prepared to support it in its present shape in this House, the injustice to suppose that they thought those securities indispensably necessary. He was persuaded they concurred with, him in thinking that there was no body of men in this empire more respectable in their characters than the Roman Ca tholic Clergy, and that they felt these securities were not wanted as securities at all, but were merely thrown out as a tub to the whale; as a screen between themselves and certain intolerant persons. For his part, he would go a great way towards conciliating the minds of those persons, but he could not sacri fice the characters of the Roman Catholic Clergy to idle clamour and unfounded imputation. He was persuaded that those who proposed these securities were urged to do so by the argument that the Legis lature ought not to give anything to the Roman Ca tholics, without getting something from them in re turn. With respect to the details of the Bill, he had a few observations to offer, which he would have de ferred for the Committee, if he had received any in timation from the Noble Earl opposife, or the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, that it was likely a Committee would he granted. But, as he had re ceived no intimation of that nature, he would now proceed with his objections. Though he was a zea lous advocate for the removal of Roman Catholic disqualification, he could not support this Bill in the shape in which it had come up from the other House. Indeed, he believed he could say for many of his Noble Friends, and for the friends of this measure in this House, that, in their opinion, modifications might, and ought to be introduced into the Bill, so as to do away with the most obnoxious clauses in it. The second part of the Bill began with enacting a compulsory oath for the Roman Catholic Clergy. He must confess he did not like the principle of compul sory oaths. He did not remember any recent in. stance of a compulsory oath, except that which was imposed on the Clergy of France, at the beginning of the Revolution. They were obliged to take an oath to the Constitution, wider the pain of deportation; but he had the satisfaction of remembering that that oath did not emanate from an established Government. The oath imposed by this Bill every Clergyman would be compelled to take, under the penalty of being punished as for a misdemeanour. He objected to it, not only because it was a compulsory oath, but also because, in his opinion, it was unnecessary. , It was rendered unnecessary by the reference which was made to another tribunal, in order to ascertain the loyalty of the Dean or Bishop elect. If they be lieved the Clergyman on his taking the compulsory oath, there was no necessity for the tribunal ; or if they preserved the tribunal, where was the necessity of the oath? He trusted, therefore, that their Lord ships would have no objection to leave out this oath altogether. With respect to the two Commissions which the Bill erected in Ireland, and here, at the seat of Government, he would propose that they should be incorporated into one ; that there might be only one Commission, which should be attached to the Government here. Indeed he was convinced that this Commission, whose business was to inspect all Rescripts and other documents from Rome, would have very little to do. He was persuaded that no improper recommendation would ever come in any Rescript from the Pope, or his Council, to these coun tries, and that, in truth, it would seldom have occa sion to exercise its powers. The present Secretary for Ireland was a Gentleman, than whom a more upright individual did not exist—(Hear, hear).—No man could be placed in such a situation who was less liable to be carried away by improper motives. But a Gentleman might succeed him who would be acted upon by feelings quite of a different nature, and who would make his connexion with the affairs of the Roman Catholic Clergy a means of patronage. For this reason he objected to the two Commissions. There was also another part of the Bill to which he objected, he meant the enrolment on the Records of the Court of Chancery of the name of any Dean or Bishop elect, whose nomination might be rejected by. the King. The mere rejection was disagreeable enough, one would imagine, without the addition of an insult, proclaimed from age to age, by its being recorded iu the Court of Chancery. This was making out the rejected individual as a black sheep, or as a person placed in the pillory—there to remain from generation to generation, as one known to be disaf. fected to the Government. Instead of this, he would propose that the names should be inserted in the Minutes of the Board to he established. At present, it was proposed that all documents should pass fro.* .-