Star. — London, England, 1821-03-24 00:00:00

p a d been destroyed : they were menaced by n o f orei g n r over , the sovereign Pontiff of the Catholic Church imo w aling to assent to the " Veto :" and those who oppo sed the Catholic Claims were now driven to state th a t the Catholics paid no regard to papal authority. Was it because at some time in the sixteenth century the professors of the Roman Catholic faith had, as w ell as their Protestant cotemporaries, acted mis :ehiesousll towards the State, that the descendants of t hose Roman Catholics were to be made answerable th the Protestants of the present day? This would, j o ined, be to introduce into human life and political eaninct the apologue of the lamb and the wolf: this would, indeed, be to exclaim with the wolf—"- If 'you have not done it, it was done by your father— or, it not by him, by your grandfather!" But it was 'contended, that the passing of this Bill would be to 'open a new sphere of political ambition to four mil lions of men. Was this an object, then, to be - con- uraplated with jealousy or alarm by a British Leeis lour? What would Great Britain have been, had wit t he road of political ambition been kept open ge aridly to its subjects? He, for one, should scarcely, if the Protestants were not anxious on this point, deem them worthy of the enfranchisement which they sou ght. What was the actual difference between the situation of the Catholics and that of the Protestant Dissenter? Tice latter was admissible to office, and was safe in accepting it, by means of the Indemnity Acts. Parliament thus retaitred in its own hands the m e a ns of suspending the privileges and enjoymenv of the Dissenters; but one of the consequences was, to admit into power those who professed no religion but that of liberty and nature, whilst we excluded the professors of the same faith with ourselves. Those, “ True to no King, to no Religion true," were thus favoured by the practice of the Constitution above the sincere believers in Christianity, which had been declared putt of the law of the land. The con duct of the Catholics, so far from affording the Go vernment nb securities, gave them a double touch gone, both by the oaths which they took, and those which they refused to take—(Hear, hear).—The in consistency, therefore, was on the pa: t of those who refused their oath, and wished matters to go on in their present state of real inconsistency. For what, was that state? " You refused to take this oath as a test of their allegiance, and yet you have been for a long period of time taking their oaths as witnesses, as Jurors sitting in cases of the life and death of Pro testants, and also in cases of their property."—(Hear, hear).—The Elective Franchise had already been thrown open to the lower part of the Catholic popu lation—to that part more likely to act udder the in fluence of ignorance and bigotry ; and yet, from their feelings and opinions, no danger was apprehended the danger, forsooth, was from the higher orders of the Catholics ; it was they who were to be the arch enemies of the Constitution—they who were the fol lowers of a monarchical creed—the hereditary aris tocracy of the land—(Cheers).—To look in another manner at this subject : would any man of this day tolerate for a moment the re-enactment of the Penal Code which yet, they were to be told, formed a part of the Constitution ? Suppose, for instance, any Le gislator were now to propose an Act in these terms— Whereas, it is expedient to exclude all persons from trust or office who are not of the Established Church; end whereas, this bill of exclusion shall be under• stood to apply specially to Catholics. And whereas Catholics are not bound by the security of oaths ; be it therefore enacted, that the only security we do pro vide against their admissibility to power shall be an oath"--(Hewn, hear).—And yet this, which appeared so absurd, was precisely the form in which the law of the case now stood. To persevere in this course was, he thought, more than Catholic superstition—it *al a heresy against common sense..-(Hear, hear). The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to state, that the form of oath now tendered was not meant by the proposers of it as a real security against any pro bable danger, but to •ilence the scruples of those Who apprehended danger. If a man gave a bond, together with his word, he did not, by giving the bond, mean to stamp his word as worthless ; he merely wished to satisfy any contingent apprehension 15f the party with whom he was dealing—(Hear).— So with the advocates of the present Bill ; they ap prehended no danger : but to those who did, as they 'thought unreally, they tendered the present form of Bath—(Hear).—The security was given, not against danger from the Catholic, but against the possible fear of the Protestant—(Hear)—lest by chance, in the Midland District, about which the House had been uonlglst alarmed, in a spot too central for any light to have reached, in the valley of the shadow of Dr. Milner—(Hear, hear, hear)—there he found, among the weaker brethren of the Protestant com munion, any one whose appetite or whose slumber may be disturbed by the terrors of one against seven of the Vicars-Apostolic ; of that one whose authority is cited to prove that the Catholics will not be satis fied with this concession. He did not wait to inquire whether they would be satisfied or not—(Hear). — Was Parliament about to make a treaty, or to make k law ?—(Hear, hear.)—lf the latter (as he believed), then they ought to satisfy their minds, in the first in ttance, that they were acting with wisdom and jus tice, and leave it to others to form whatever opinion they pleased. If satisfactory to the Pope and the Clergy, so much the better; but, if right, they need not apprehend any danger from contrariety of opi nions —(Hear).—He would conclude in the words of the great historian of Bt itish legislation—" Never is a good Bill preferred, nor a good motion made in trains Though it has sometimes paused, yet it never ties; for at one time or other it has its good effect"—(Repeated cheers). Sr J. NICHOL observed, that all must admit the Proposed alteration to be very great. He could. not admit that the opposers of the measure were bound to prove the dangbr ; that had been amply proved by the practice and enactments of our ancestors. The penal enactment had been long ago repealed, and the !existing Acts had been merely defensive. These laws lad not been made in the infancy of the Reforma tion, but the most important had been paced after the Restoration, such as the Corporation and Test Acts. and also the Bill of Rights in the time of King William.. 'That Bill had been anxious to exclude Catholics from places of trust and power; and in the lath of William, all. these Statutes had been re 11'.)acteds That was the Constitution under the gip tictuc King WiLiant, and the last Speech from the s taune h.rd been drawn up by the great Lord Somers, ttaavilt not ;ilea ikeflice. Tate same spirit bad pie-, veiled in the reigns of George I. and 11. Bat nob, with very few exceptions, all offices were to be laid open to the Catholics. It had been said, that•not withstanding the positive enactments," there was something paramount to all those in the spirit of the Constitution, as it a?peated in Magill Charts, and in the Statutes that had been enacted in the same spirit. By the present Bill there could be no alliance be tween Church and State.. Mr. C. GRAN(' stated, the same alarm had been rung when the former concessions had been made to the Catholics. If there were any weight in the argu ments of the Right Honourable Gentleman they would go to condemn all the concessions made to the Catholics. It gave him pain to hear the Revolu tion identified with the laws against the Catholics, and what was merely accidental, regarded as perma nent and. lasting. But in Ireland, the Revolution that gave freedom to Great Britain, had introduced the government of the sword, and had been followed by the capitulation of Limerick. Were those conse ' quences of the Revolution to be held up to imitation? But could the time of the Revolution be one of calm discussion? The laws- now declared to be perpe tual, had been passed by a burst of tumultuous ac clama.ion in a period of political enthusiasm. Our most enlightened Prelates, the Jeweils, the Taylors, and Stillingfleets, sat side by side with Catholics in the House of Lords, and never deemed the exclusion of the Catholics from the House of Commons.to be the palladium of the Constitution. When a Noble Lord presented a Petition from the only four survi vors of the noble families that had signed Magna Charta, claiming seats in the Parliament of that country whose freedom their. ancestors had secured, could it have been supposed that the shade of King John would have been so avenged ?—(Loud cheers); With great deference to the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir W. Scott), the present Oath of Supremacy was exactly of the same nature with the former, with an additional explanation. The present Oath could not refer to the pure spiritual authority of the Pope, for it•was obvious that the Pope had, and must exercise a certain degree of spiritual dominion, and that had been recognized in the establishment of the College of Maynooth ; but it referred to that mixed authority, civil and spiritual, which it was the object of the Oath to prevent being exercised on the part of the Pope. The Ist of Elizabeth had enacted the laws of Henry VIII. which had been repealed by Philip and ;Mary; but these Acts never referred to the purely spiritual power of the Pope, but to that species of l authority that referred to a temporal process. The Right Hon. Gentleman then went on to prove, from the Reformatio Legurn, that in the time of Edward VI. the Acts had no reference except to the ancient juris diction of the Crown, which had no connexion with a power merely spiritual. To that effect Lord Coke had stated, that the Act of Elizabeth had been whay declaratory, and gave the Crown no new authority. To the same purpose, Sir M. Hale had stated the Oath of Supremacy to be a part of the Oath of Alle giance, and a part of the ancient power of the Crown. It was not by an exercise of acumen and ingenuity that the peace of the country was to be secured. The question was, on what terms the connexion of Great Britain and Ireland was in future to be maintained— whether it was to be that concordia discordo, which had hitherto obtained ; or whether the two countries were to be united indissolubly in the bends of amity and friendship? The cause of the present state of Ireland was to be ascribed to a system of exclusion in commerce, agriculture, and religion. In the two former, the restrictions had been in a great measure removed ; And, he trusted, that in the most important of all they could not be retained. He spoke for the empire at large...4or Protestant as well as Catholic. What would be said of a distant State that should act in the manner that Britain had done to Ireland? It would be said, that they had not the advantages of the British Constitution. He hoped that in the course of a single Session the obstructions that had cr i continued for a series of centuries would be remove —(Loud and continued applause). Mr. BROWNLOW opposed the Bill in ;do, and deemed the proposed securities wholly inadequate. The Bill would not become law, after having received the assent of the three branches of the Legislature ; but the consent of a fourth Power.-the Catholics— must be obtained, else the Act would become a dead letter. He believed that the Roman Catholics were desirous of regaining their ancient Church Establish ment ; and to have seats in that House, would be a step towards the attainment of their object. Mr. WETHERELL said, he was sorry that he was obliged to follow the same line of opposition to this measure which he hod felt it his duty to take on a former occasion when it was proposed. The same difficulties which he then felt, still existed.— With respect to the Bill then before them, it asserted in the preamble that which, in his humble under standing, was unfounded in fact, and an outrage upon historical truth. It stated that there was a time in the history of this country, when the. Catholics Were able to take the Oath of Supremacy according to the interpretation annexed to it by Queen Eliza beth, by which meaning to demonstrate that it was the object of the Bill to restore a part of the Consti tution, and not to add anything new to it. He how ever denied that there ever was a time when the Catholics could take this oath, and he challenged any of the supporters of the Bill to prove the truth of their assertion in the preamble.—Dir J. MACKIN TOSH—I challenge the . Hon. and Learned Gentle man, in return, to point out in the preamble of the Bill the allegation he speaks of]—(Cries of "Order!") fie did not mean to ovei state the question ; if he should do so, be was open to the castigation of any l i Hon. Member in the House. He understOod the pre amble of the Bill to declare what he had said it did. On the Accession of Queen Elisabeth, some persons gave out certain idle tales, that she claimed the Su. premacy in a different manner than was intended by law, or was ever claimed before, in consequence of which a pamphlet was put forth, which the Honour able and Lein ned Member for Knareshorough (Sir J. Mackintosh) must surely have seen. It was styled, ""In Admonition to Simple Men"—(A laugh).—ln this production, it was stated she only claimed the same Supremacy as her Royal Father exerted, and Edward the Sixth. There was, therefore, no new interpretation given on that occasion to this oath by which the Catholic could more easily take it ; and he hoped lionoui able Members would not- allow them selves to be duped by this false representation— (lleer, hear, Itear).—lle objected tv the me:4u: e, on recount of its political and general consequences. ' pass; or, if it did not, that they who could prevent Supposing a Catholic Premier to be put in office, its success would tell the House by what process, they must put to him a new oath of office, if he should short of changing the religion and sentiments of a be appointed to any Catholic livings. It was neces- ; whole community, they hoped to obtain that concord sary to establish a new oath of office before they and settlement which this Bill was calculated to could get rid of this obnoxious esclusioe of the Ca- • effects and when the poriad would arrive, at which tholic. Some said that the Catholic Officers were the long and hitter probation, the protracted and un very hardly dealt with when they dio not give them, I merited suffei ings of the Irish nation, were to be ter after they had lost an arm or a leg in the service, minated—(Henr, hear). some command of the Leeward or Windward Islands; Mt. PEEL said he should wholly confine himself but if he had this command imposed upon him, he to observations on the clause now under consider must take oaths which were contrary to his faith. The atiou. lie would fl o w leave cut objections to the object of this Bill was, not to admit Catholics to ex- principle of the Bill, and oppose the clause only, isting offices ; but they were creating new offices, which might he rejected without at all affecting the which the Catholics might hold. Ile had no doubt principle of the Bill. The great doubt he had was that the present Movers of this Bill only wished to not as to how this clause would act with regard to •bind the present race of men—but who was to bind the Catholic ; but whether it might not, at some posterity? He was afraid that, in after times, the opi- future period, operate as an oath of exclusion to the nions and the sentiments of the Gentlemen who now conscientious Protestant. The Protestant now took supported Catholic Emancipation would not be an oath denying the influence of any foreign Power l looked at in the same way by future Catholics. Mr. Now this oath recognized a direct authority on the Siuney, Mr. Hobbes, and even Mr. Locke, have all part of the Pope. For if the Protestant should nos written on Government, yet all of them have ex- pass a Bill acknowledging the power of the Pope to eluded Catholics from the situation of Members of interfere in the appointment of Biahope, and to send Parliament, and from responsible situations in the his Bull into,this country, could a conscientious Pro- Government. If they could not perceive the dif testant afterwards take an oath atating that the Pope ference between those who could see the various spe- had no jurisdiction in th s ? He contended cies of beasts, birds, and fishes, and define them well, that, up to this time, we had always been careful to he could. But he could not see that a Papist should prevent the Pope having any power in this country, be admitted to the first Offices of the State, because except spiritual ; and iivsthe Act passed in 1774, to he was a man of genius and general knowledge. In permit the free exercise of the Catholic Religion, in 1768 or 1772 the Parliament of Paris made it High Canada, especial care was taken to preserve the Treason to communicate with the See of Rome. But supreme authority of the King, and he contended, stow we were about to throw away the very first if the present oath was adopted, an alteration would principle of the British Constitution. This Bill was be necessary in the Oath of Supremacy taken by • only an elementary principle, which was to be fol- the Protestant. lowed up by a great many others which would trench Lord CASTLEREAG II defended the proposed al upon the Constitution of the land. teration in the Oath of Supremacy. He contended, Sir J. MACKINTOSH said, that the clause now there could be no mental evasion or reservation on the before the House, did not admit Catholics exclusively part of the Catholics, in taking the proposed oath ; to the benefits of the Constitution. But the rejection but the possibility of his doing so might be entirely of this clause would bar the door to all conciliation; done away, by moving to insert these words in the because it would prevent all Catholics from anything Oath. With respect to the course adopted in Canada, - like a participation in the civil immunities of the he would say, that the British Government had made State. Mr. Hobbes had been quoted by his Hon. a provision there which they knew full well would be and Learned Friend, as an enemy to Catholic Eman- evaded; but they had done this, because they could cipation ; but-did not his Hon. and Learned Friend not depart from their own bad practice. He be know that Mr. Hobbes was a. most systematic phi- lieved he should not be guilty of improperly dis losopher in supporting the King's Supremacy in all closing secrets, if he said that the provisions then matters connected with the affairs of the Church ? made had been evaded; that lately there had been The whole of the Bills, as to Catholics in Ireland negotiations with the Pope for the institution of ano and in England, were a monstrous jumble of incon- ther Bishoprick in Canada, and even an Archbishop. sistencies ; for, in England, the Catholics could hold Government knew of this, but had shut their eyes certain offices, while in Ireland they could hold none.- to it. And the only question now was, whether The only question was, whether the Oath proposed these things should be legalized, and done openly to be administered to Catholics was such as would be and fairly, or whether irshould be done in future as sufficient security to a Protestant King and a Protest- it always had been, and always would be done, il ant Establidiment.. The laws of the land could not legally; the Authorities of the country knowing the be affected by the Catholici, for they gave every se- law was evaded, but shutting their eyes against it? curity to all the inhabitants of the land, be their opi- Now, he could see the advantage which would re nions what they may. suit from putting an end to this practice, and allow. Mr. GOULBURN did not think it necessary to ing the Pope's open interference on this subject. At enter into the reasons at length, which • made him present, the See of Rome supposed its briefs were not consider this a very dangerous and improper Bill to known by, or submitted to the view of Government; be passed. Upon a former occasion, an iron. and and, therefore, less caution was used as to the indivi- Learned Gentleman had thought fit, in moving this duals to whom those briefs were sent. But if the case question, to require from the Catholic and Protestant, was regulated bylaw, and all these things came under the same oath of allegiance and supremacy. But, by the view of Government, the Pope would be more cau the present Bill, they did not call on the Catholic but tious to whom these indulgences were sent. As to the on the Protestant for (laths of supremacy, at the time Oath of Supremacy, as it now stood, he thought the when they had no doubt as to his affection for the Catholics might conscientiously take it; but if they present Constitution, and the laws of the land. had conscientious scruples, he thought they should Dr. PHILLIMORE observedoothe Honourable be attended to. The Noble Lord concluded by de- Member opposite had said the oath proposed was not daring his conviction that to pass this Bill would be so obligatory as the original oath. He was at issue p ro d uct i ve °kite greatest benefit to the St ate —(H e with th e Honourable Member on this point. He sat down amidst loud cheers from the Opposition). contended that the obligation in the proposed oath Sir JOHN NEWPORT rose to reply, amidst loud was to the full as binding as the present oath of cries of « Question!" and the gallery was cleared for supremacy was. The Honourable Member pro- a division s ceeded to compare the two oaths, and from that corn- For the Clause - - - - patison to argue in support of his assertion. The • Against it •- - - - Yl6 oath of allegiance the Catholic was always ready to majority in favourof the Catholics —t4 During the exclusion of strangers, Mr. BA NKES gave notice, that in a future stage cf the Bill he .Lcould move the I take, but they had doubts of the effect of the oath of in supremacy as now worded; and, therefore, they now troduction of a Clause, excluding Catholics from Seats hi liament.—Adjourned at Two &Clock, till to-morrow. Par desired to have it somewhat altetedlh form, though not in substance. The Honourable Member then quoted the opinion of Bishop. Burnett as to the oath established by Queen Elizabeth ; namely, that Eliza beth allowed the Catholics to explain the ser,se in which they swore; and this indulgence the Bishop ,said had the most beneficial effect in reconciling the Catholics to her reign and authority. Ile concluded by giving his firm support to the Bill. 11r. BEECHER believed that there needed not the aid of any observation from him to. strew the policy and expediency of the measure before the House. It might appear strange, looking to the arguments which had been addressed to the House, and to the authority by whom those arguments had been em ployed, that any doubt should remain upon the ques tion; but he (Mr. Beecher) had not now to learn, that men brought up in a particular system—the advan tages of that system, by experience, being known to them—were slow to exchange it for some novel theory, the merits of which must at all events be pro blematical. England, however, did not now stand alone; and she was not therefore entitled to consult exclusively her own convenience. England was con nected with a country in which Catholicism certainly was not upon the decline; and in which as certainly the existing system could not be called a beneficial one. That system could scarcely be held beyond im provement, under which a vast community laboured under - the most galling privations—under which an individual might almost be left in doubt whether his exclusion arose from his being a Catholic or an Irish man. It was but justice in England to promote the advantage of Ireland, and to assimilate the state of that country as much as possible to her own.— It was hard to withhold from that suffering country the Constitution which had made England what she was. In addressing a Committee of the house of Commons, he (Mr. Beecher) should not be called upon to detail the monstrous, the aggravated hard-1 ships which the operation of the existing laws imposed upon the subjects of Ireland. If necessary, he could do so; but he was addressing those who knew and' valued the British Constitution, and who would hold the privation of a blessing as tantamount to the fiction of a punishment. He hoped the house wi old recollect, that since tile last time this great question underwent a discussion, the conduct of the Roman Catholics had been most exemplary ; :toad th.it they had thus made good all the predictions which the advocates of their cause had advanced in their sup port. He trusted most sincerely that this 13i11 would Beare or F,..wot.asin.—At a Meeting of a General Court of Pro. prietors on Thursday, to declare a dividend, severs! Proprietors rose at the same time, to enquire respecting the proceedings of the Commission fur the better prevention of Bank-note Forgeries ? The Crasintatt begged pardon for speaking while the Gentle men were addressing him • but said, that fi e was about to ma k e a communication to the dkurt which had some relation to the interrogatories then putting. lie begged to state, that a Bill was now before Parliament to alter the 59th of the late King. The principal object of the alteration was this:—The Bank, in consequence chiefly of the unforeseen diffliulties and consequent delays which had arisen in the proceedings under the Commis.. sion for the better prevention of Forgery, had thought it right ro apply to Government to bring in a Bill which would enable them, on the Ist of May, in the present year, to exchange any amount of their 41 notes which they thought proper, for. the gold coin of the realm. This, as the Act of the 59th of the late King stood, they were only, empowered•to do on the Ist of May, 1822. But it was their wish, principally for the reason he had osentioned, to have this optional power on the Ist of May next. Mr. STUCKEY wished to know whether it was probable the new plan of Bank-note which the Commissioners were engaged In considering, would be completed by the time the new Act was likely to come into operation? If it were then completed, he should think the issue of Sovereigns on the Ist of May next rather more unadvisable than otherwise— ( i d cry e No): The Costamati said, the Court of Directors were as anxious as any body of men could possibly be to have the great object in which the Commissioners were engaged consummated—(;Trait) —and they earnestly hoped that, through the labours of the Commissioners, some plan of note would ultimately be di v'sed which might render imitation erseniely difficult. The Coroi miuiontirs had to encounter great difficulties in the progress of their labours; and they were busily ettgazd in endeavourin g te surmount them. Ile wished to avoid speakirg too strongly' ; but he hoped a plan would be devised which would render the forgery of Bank-notes generally through the country a task a great difficulty. In consequence of the unforeseen difficulties which at present arose, the Directors thought We alteration is the former Act would be perhaps the best nears of acting in the present emergency. Mr. Svreece said, that the country bankcts (or many of them) were engaged in adopting Mr W. Congreve's r,att , which be thought would be productive vi very salutary advantages to the Public. It the improvt mem were mid:: on the Ist of May in the new Bank-note by the Commicioners, in b:s cpiniva, an issue of sovereigns would be very inexpedient—(Cry if No, AO). Mr. Faitaiam--" *Ve arc nut, I presume, to uuderstand from you, Mr. Chairman, that the Directors have relinquished the idea, that the Commissior.era may yet succeed is, a plan for a , considerable improvement of the Bank-notes?" The CHAIRMAN replied, " Most certainly not"—(Neer, hear) • —and in the meantime they hoped to dinnaith the evil of for geries, by the course he had already explained—(i ar, hear). Mr. Pave, (of Bath) wished to know whether it was regular for him to ask what expense lutd been already incurred by the Commissioners in proceeding with their plaza? lie had heat ii such a sum as t 660,000 stained: of course he could only sperm from rumour. The CHAIRMAN said, that was not the place to enter into the particulars of the expense ; but he could assure the Honourable Proprietor the whole amount incurred was nothing like the nun near it in any shape--( 1 / a ar, hear). be gad \