Star. — London, England, 1821-03-01 00:00:00

`'V ~~ ~L ~ • I k. 1 • Nor eabi he *ter, cevlude his observations upon the topic, than by reading the preamble to the 19th of George 111. which was to this effect:—" Whereas it must tend greatly to the happiness and prosperity of the country, that the subjects of all denomina tions should be placed upon an equal footing," &c. The Noble Lord concluded, by moving " fhat the Petition be brought up." Lord GLENORCHY, in seconding the Motion, said it would not be necessary for him to enter into a detail of the hardships which the Petitioners were undergoing: he should merely state, that they la boured under a more severe series of enactments than the Irish Roman Catholics, and that the refusal of their prayer would amount to a declaration that the House was determined to refuse the common right of every man—of following the dictates of his judg ment in his worship of the CREATOR—(Hear, hear). When the Petition was about to be read, Lord NUGENT requested that the Clerk would take the trouble to read this Petition in a distinct and audible voice. _ •' The Petition was then read, and that part of it ia, which the Petitioners disclaimed the acknowledg ment.of any in any foreign Potentate— civil, spiritual, or ecclesiastical—was received with cheers.—The Petition being read, and ordered to be printed, Lord NUGENT said, it might not be inappropri ate to state, that of the Barons who signed Magna Charta at Runnymede, only four representatives-now survived—and these,four representatives signed this very Petition—(Cheers). CLAIMS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLICS or IRELAND. Mr. PLUNKETT said, he held in his hand a Pe tition, whtth, from the number of signatures, their respectability, wealth, and talent, and from the means they had of being acquainted with the sentiments of their countrymen at late, he thought himself enti tled to consider as the Petition of the great body of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, so far as it sought redress. A similar Petition was, about a year and a half ago, laid before the House. It was presented by his lamented friend Mr. Grattan, and came before the House supported not only by the authority of his great name, but by the resistless force of his elo . quence. It was not his design at this moment to at tempt to express those feelings with which his heart was filled by the name of that excellent man, or to trouble the House with the declaration of his senti ments of the friend by whose confidence he had been honoured—by whose wisdom he had been enlight ened, and by whose example he had been guided. His eulogy was already pronounced, by lips whose eloquence he would not disparage by attempting to rival. These honours, which his services to his native country had deserved, were amply rendered to his tomb by the high and liberal of this country ; and his death, like his life, was a bond of convention between the two counts ies. He would not weaken these eulogiums, or disturb the solemnity of his obsequies, by any feeble praise and unavailing sorrow of his. The subject to which he was immediately about to call the atten';on of the House, was one in which that good man felt earnestly. It took early posses sion of his heart and feelings, and kept itself in them to the last moment of his existence. Even at his latest hour, he would have willingly laid down his life in asserting the rights' and liberties of his native land. But deeply as he felt this question, as a friend to his native country, he had always considered it in a more extended point of view : he felt that it was an imperial question—one in which the liberties and happiness of all the subjects of the British Empire were involved. Mr. Grattan was alive to fame—to that fame which attended upon virtuous conduct. It clung to him whilst on earth ; yet, if he felt " that last infirmity of noble minds," no man ever more deeply despised that hollow and heartless popularity T hiclr was won by subserviency, and retained by a des eliction of principle—(Hear, hear).—He would scountenarce no underhand means for obtaining suc cess, and he felt that the question could never be carried unless the Protestant mind was thoroughly reconciled to its justice and policy—(Hear, —ln following the steps of that great man, at a humble and measureless distance, he (Mr. Plunkett) could only say, that he was actuated by the same conviction. He concluded by moving " That the Petition be brought up." Mr. J A NIES BROWNE seconded the motion. The Petition was then read, laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. Similar Petitions were presented by Mr. PLAN KETTfrom the Roman Catholics of the parishes of St. Andrew, St. Mark, St. Anne, and St. Peter's, Dublin; and another from the .Roman Catholics of _ the County and City of Waterford, which were read, and ordered to be printed. Mr. PLUNKETT then rose, in pursuance of his •notice, to submit a proposition to the House upon the claims of the Roman Catholics of Ireland. He said that, having fulfilled his duty as a Representative on the part of native country, and, in some measure, those of a friend, it remained for him to discharge those of a Member of that House. He desired that he might be considered as bringing forwaid, upon this occasion, not the grievances of a particular body, but as standing there, as a Member of the Legisla ture, in behalf of the Roman Catholics and the Pro testants of the Empire, calling on the House to take into consideration the relative situation in which they stood—a situation which justified the imputation of persecution and oppression on one side, and the com plaint of injustice and injury on the other; and which, if lett much longer without the application of a remedy, might be found to produce dangers and disadvantages incalculable to both. His object then • was, to attain an end which was just and politic, by what was just and politic. If, then, however, it was one of justice, its attainment would be attended with concord, because concord was the effect of justice., He believed also that it would be attended with sa tisfaction and warm feelings of gratitude. The lat-i ter was an object of impend, consequence. If it were supposed that he brought the question forward as a palliative, to divert the public attention, and to get rid of the bad humours which were floating in the country, this would be, not only to undervalue the importance of the question itself, but totally to mis conceive his object. He begged leave to say, too, Qat& itoinan Catholics did not want to agitate or distittir nlitietiiiiatily the feelings of this *country. On their part, he mould take the liberty to say, that - ._- Y '. .~'.~•i .._.. Jf ~.y. ► _.. however determined they were not to abandon their jugclaims, jet they were also determined to wait, with confidence in the wisdom - and justice of Parlia ment, the effects of that wisdom and justice, which would ultimately afford them a full and cordial re dress of all their grievances. That there did not exist an anxious desire upon this cfuestion amongst the Roman Catholics, he should be ashamed to deny ; that they felt much diWtment, impatience, ank " the sickness of hope d," which required to be administered to, he would not deny, and that time gounded discontents and uneasinesses might at last become dangerous, he would not attempt to disguise. But independently of this, he would not be so vain and foolish as to assert that any measure he could pro pose would have the effect of allaying discontent and Agitation. Neither this measure, nor any one that the House could propose would have the effect of a charm upon the public mind. It was not tb be sup posed that the waves would cease to roll immediately ) after the tempest had subsided; but such agitation could not be of long continuance if it was not founded upon injustice. But abstracted from all these circum stances, it was the duty of the House to consider broadly if injustice had been done to any portion of the Empire, and if so, to apply a remedy ; to con sider if grievances existed, and if so, to remove them; and to consider if a state of law was in operation ad verse to the happiness and improvement of a great' and a deserving body of the Empire, and if so, to obliterate it. If this state of things excited no un easiness and discontent, the more their shame for al lowing it to exist. They ought to look upon this , question narrowly and fully, and if any institution of legislative birth was found to press heavily on a par ticular portion of the Empire, the more deeply were they called upon to seek out a remedy. But if, how ever, they found that the pressure of this institution was not confined to particular bodies, but that its in jurious effects were dispersed throughout the coinmu munity, poisoning their happiness, and retarding their prosperity, then the necessity of a remedy became so imperative, that no time should be lost in applying it. Before he proceeded to the main argument upon which he rested the proposition, he would draw the attention of that House to one or two preliminary points. It had been asserted from time to time, that the plans proposed to carry into effect propositions for the relief of Roman Catholics were imperfect : that the advocates of the measure were divided as to the measures that should be adopted—that some, for instance, would not open certain offices to the Roman Catholics, which others asserted to be chiefly neces sary to their substantial relief. That some were for retaining certain oaths which others would aboli,lr ; that some would assume conditions wholly objection able in the opinion of others ; that some were at va riance about the nature of the securities to be required from Roman Catholics, and that others did not deem securities of any consequence at all. He would take leave to say, that this was not a very manly, can did, or decorous way of meeting the question. The point was this: was the measure fit to be entertained or not, which justice and feeling required at their hands, and which the Constitution called for? If it was not so—if it was not a just, a politic, a Con stitutional question, he would yield it at once.— But if he were to be answered by such objections as these, aimed only at the details of the measure, he did not think it a fair, or candid, or manly way of meeting the question. This was a most important question, and could not be an indifferent one as to its consequences; if it was not attended with public mischief it must be by great good. Therefore, to whomsoever opposed this measure because its friends were not agreed upon the details, he would say, Whereis your ground for maintaining this neutrality? Why do you abstract yourself from engaging in an interesting duty—come and assist me—give me the benefit of your experience and wisdom in settling these differences, in rounding the arrangements, and supplying this, or removing that, which you think ought to be supplied or removed? do you , wra f or syurself up in neutrality ? What privilege have ' you standing aloof from the concerns of the Em pire? This question demanded something more than meeting it merely in the details. He came forward with no theoretic speculation—no innovation on the Constitution—no untried experiment—no practical embodying of a new and hitherto undiscovered ex cellence in the science of politics. Ile came forward under the protection of the Constitution itself. 'He stood forward in the behalf of millions of faithful and attached subjects of the King, asking for the enjoyment of those rights and privileges which were possessed by their ancestors, and that they and their posterity might be allowed to unite their energies with the rest of their fellow-citizens in securing the blessings of their unrivalled Constitution. This was the application—let it be met fairly and candidly, and let it not be evaded by an attack upon its details. He had now to propose that the House should go into a Committee to consider the best means of meeting these difficulties, which presented themselves in the adjustment of the detail. He did not suppose that it would be maintained that night that no plan could be proposed to surmount these difficulties—no man, he was sure, would wish that they were insurmount able. If there was a man in that House who har boured such an unworthy sentiment, he would not condescend to argue with him. He had a confident expectation that there were not many, if any, in that House, who believed that the difficulties were insur mountable ; and this opinion was principally derivea from the recollection that a majority of them had, on a former occasion, been so persuaded that the difficulties might be surmounted, that they agreed to go into a Committee to adjust these difficulties ; and nearly a majority of the House had settled upon a 13111 in which they were so adjusted ; and had it not been for the gross indiscretion of some individuals that Bill would have been completely successful. It had been brought about at a time when the country was reeling to the centre under the heaviest storm that' ever was weathered. He was sure that no man who voted for measures of relief upon that occasion, would refuse to vote on the same side at this period of peace. He was sure it could not be forgotten, that proud as he was of the part whieh the British People took in that dreadful struggle, none was morel distinguished in it than the Irish ; hey fought the battles of England, and shed their blood in defence of its liberties and Constitution, with a prodigality of self-dcvotion which made them at least worthy to en joy those blessings. He was sure, therefore, he coidd have no difficulty to encounter that night. Certainly _... -he wouldlutva no rancour arrayed against him : he did, indeed, anticipate some little prejudices ; and in speaking of prejudices, he begged not to be un- derstood as using the word in an offensive sense ; bat ththeeyessst•aebrelisphrmejeuiclaicoefs our thatgre liberties, was sure could not be so inveterate as to resist the s ol : w out and o f o! therefore for influence of argument and reason. It was impossi ble,Commons upon this question ; even those who would indeed, to mistake the feelings of the House of Lions to suffer it to pass, and he could only anticipate oppose it, he was persuaded, felt strong disincline such objections—reasonable objections, as were founded upon the necessity of guarding strictly the rights of the Protestant part of the community. He would now proceed to state the grounds upon which he asked the assent of the House to his proposition. The subject divided itself into three questions, viz. of Religion, of the Constitution, and of policy.— On the religious branch of the subject, he was of opi nion he should meet with no opposition. This had been admitted by a Right Rev. Prelate in another place, and was not objected to by the rest of that Rightßeverend Beach. To say that any pledge should be required on the score of a faithful adherence of a person to a particular religious belief, was intolerant. All religions were, in the eyes of the professors of them, orthodox. If the religious bond were strictly attended to, a man should be required to declare his belief in GOD, in our SAVIOUR, and that he had an immortal soul. But no such thing was required before a Protestant was let into the State. Why select the Roman Catholic, who only believed a little more than we did ? Why let in the Jew, the Mahometan, the Pagan into the State ; the adorer of Jupiter, of Osiris, of an ape, or a crocodile ? the believers in the creeping things of the earth, or of the Host of Hea ven? The Catholics said that they did not believe in the actual presence in the bread and wine; they ought to be the hest expounders of their own faith. It it was a belief, lie did not understand it; but he had no right to say it was superstitious, be cause he could not understand it. Queen Elizabeth, who was a sincere Piote,tant, and the foundress of that religion,ulteted the Liturgy so as to let in Ca tholics to the Commons with Protestants. It was an outrage on Christianity to say that we should inter fere with another.sect, because we could not under stand the doctrines of it. In Ireland the Catholics were to sit as Grand Jurors and Magistrates; and before they could do so they were required to take an oath that they were attenders of Mass; that was —idolaters ; as those who took the oath as Members of Parliament, declared the horrible superstition of the Mass to be. He held that a participation in the offices of the State was the right of every liege sub ject. This was not altered at the Reformation or at the Revolution'. The only answer then to this could be, that Catholics were not liege subjects ; but if that was true, those who got its our freedom were out laws, because they admitted the supremacy of the Pope. The Catholic admitted the power of the Laws and Statutes of the Realm; and he never in terfered with the opinion of others. The Catholic disclaimed all interference of the Pope in other than spiritual matters, and not at all in matters of the internal government of any State whatever. 'psis belief excluded all who conscientiously believed in this spiritual supremacy, and let all that was base and unworthy into this Constitution, while it kept out all that was honest and conscientious among the Catholics. Our Constitution was not calcukted for anything so mean and base. He s pok e i n th e pre sence of sound Constitutional Lawyers; and lie feared no contradiction, when he said that the British Con stitution was one that allowed all its subjects a per fect and entire participation in the rights of the State. Our Constitution was a Monarchy ; but it could not be so, if the King had not the power to call for the services of every subject; and it could not be a free Monarchy if the subject had not every right to a par ticipation in the privileges of the Constitution. lie denied that the Reformatioalliad any view of ex cluding Catholics from the advantages of the State. The Act of Supremacy, in the reign of Elizabeth, was only meant to distinguish those Catholics who would abjure the supremacy of a foreign Power from those who would not do so. It was solely intended as a test of loyalty. I ler Secretary (Walsingliam) declared, in his letter to M. I'etoit, that it was not the object of the Queen to meddle with conscience, but only to put down faction. For the first eleven years of her reign, her Catholic subjects attended the Sacrament at Church as regularly as her Protestant subjects. Down to the year 1677, Papists were not prevented from sitting in Parliament. Sir J. Swaine was expelled the House, not because he was a Ca tholic, but because he was a Popish Recusant Con vict. At the Revolution, there was not a hint for continuing the law to prevent Catholics from sitting in either House of Parliament; but the great states , man of that period. only said, that the King should be a Protestant; and if he was not, he should lose his Throne. If it had been a law, it was not an unalter able law ; for the Test Act, ancLthe Act of Unifor mity, were not made unalterable at the time of either the Revolution or the Scotch or Irish Unions. On the contrary, at all those periods these were mat ters to be left to the United Parliaments to alter as they should find necessary ; and he now called on the United Parliament to alter this unjust part of the Constitution. He felt anything hut triumph when he regretted the loss of Mr. SC hitbread, Mr. Horner,' Sir Samuel Romilly, Sir Arthur Piggott, Mr. Elliott, and Mr. Grattan ; but he spoke now to a new Parlia ment, and he hoped it would not be satisfied until the historical facts he had stated were met by opposite historical facts. If he could think there was any dan ger in admitting Catholics into the Constitution, he would be the first to join in the ranks of opposition to this measure, dearly as he had the interest of his country at heart. He called on the Member for Orford (Mr. Peel) to say,.what was the danger to the Established Church which lie apprehended ? If any danger could be apprehended, it existed now, in the dispioportion b e t ween t h e popu l at i on of Ireland of the Catholic persuasion, and that of the Established Church. The Catholics were admitted to command our fleets, and armies, to which they were admitted on oaths, which, according to the Right Hon. Gen tleman, were not binding on them ; and yet they were only admitted into power, on the sanction - and authority of such oaths. Was this a situation of things which should be allowed to exist? The Right Hon. Gentleman admitted, that all jealciusies Were buried oblivion, by the Union of bctit.lantf:uid Engla n d, . _ ' ,betweeh the Presbyterian Chnrch'of Scotland and t t s . Established-Church of England; and yet he unpin. ,{ the like oblivion of all jealousy bet ween the c:t.o;i'4 ts and the Protestants. if the religion of t h e c ati , was so dangerous to the Const i t u ti on, i t was an ' . 4 of suicide not to put it down entirely. He was 6 , 1 , 44 to say, that no well-informed Catholic had a ct hostile at our Constitution. He fou n d i n it pre.e..„' for both his life and property. H e a s k ed the 11.71 Hdn. Gentleman how he could brand and l eani 4 Catholics with imputations which they h a d tot served, either by their actions o r opinions, a '4 Revolution ? It was not to be believed that in nature men should overthrow the Constitutio n ne i; which they enjoy so many beaefits, merely to their Priests lawn sleeves and a mitre. B, : find it in human nature that some men would s; i l, Overturn that Constittnion, from the benefit s of ttf t l they were excluded. It was under such circoanstar.ci that men; " Et nati nator::?n, et (!ra nascent:J r would, in their nature, to the end of time, revue —(Hear, I lear.)—The remedy of the Righ t H ot Gentleman wits to leave things as they were—tht meant, to leave the Catholic a marked and brandy outcast and sectary. But he implored the Ho use not to leave him longer in that degraded situation._ He (Mi. Plunkett) would say, " Conitect the A. Catholic with the Establishment of the St ate. take away the brand horn his forehead, and the dual s from his legs, and leave him in a situatio n d r proudest on the earth—that of a loyal ject intreated them not To Catholics from their Dar, and 1 ., 211 them th at I N, ought iv.,t to be relieved. Their demand wa s j„ tice, and the cry of the mea:asst individ ua l for jai. tice, he was persuaded, would find a hearer inne r , man within those walls, and eve. y honest man wrj, out them—( Cheers).—He would say one Word a rT if the patience of the House was not exhauste,i (Loud and continued` cheers).—lt might be urgtl that there was danger in admitting the princi r l e concession, hat what did that argument mean? Bid the Right Hon.. Gentleman suppose that lielni; was to be a jungle, a deposit for wild and snap beasts ? He surely could not ; for he admitted r. striction to be an evil. The Right Hon. Genu enize admitted also that there was a point at which mark tion should stop, and concession should begin. Wh et then was that point ? The Right Hon. Gentleman would contend that that point vas fixed in ther m 1793. But if the medium had been so critically hit at that period, where was the necessity for the sequent alterations? Why allow them, to be Grand Jurors, and to fill other offices of honour? Why not allow the same privileges to the English Cando. lice, whn, from their .situation, their dignity, ad their patience, were equally entitled to them? New, hear, hear).—The House ought not to object tea Committee far the relief the 'English Cubist Under the English Laws, a . Catholic spay It a holder of land, which, under some circtimitaita, would enable him in effect to return Members b that House, although he could .not sit In it hiravd( Indeed, if he Were Logo throngli_all the diStincticia of absurdity in the ptesent system,he shouldetbaut the patience of the House. The laws permitteJ tire Irish Catholic to be coileci•to the Bar. The con..try witnessed his talents and their hoilouraVe xp ; flea is in" practice.. Tliey.enceuraged him; and when Airy found him advancing towards tbeuelt - -earned tetttut of his labours they stopped him checkedbis honourable' ambition, and left him in the utmnt despondency. Was thivjust—was it honourable?.... He had the- honour to beacqUainted with many the Catholic Gentle Men ill . the Irish Bar, and he knew them to be as loyal and as zealously attached to the, Oonstitusi4.4is any of his Majesty's subjects. Bat it wasjsaLon t,beit behalf he spoke- He spoke in behalf of the Protestant Bar, for its Mears were an=ions -this invidious partiality fluid he removed•o-Cheers). • The question vas, where cos cession should begin ? for if it 'were clear daub present restrictions Were proper, the gown Cada lies had certainly no.right to complain. Thetis cipal object he had in view, was the removalclthe oath denying 'transubstantiation, and the maw tion of the Oath of Supremacy.--[The Right H. Gentleman was here so exhausted that he sat don for a few seconds to recover himself before rag his motion.] The universal cheers of the Ham continued until he rose again, when he moved— " That the House do resolve itself into a Committee sib whole Muse, for considering the state of the Laws samet to the falling of Offices, so far as those laws affect Ina s& tholics ; and for considering the expediency of altxnn . Wolk fying the same." Mr. DENIS BROWNE seconded the motioo: Mr. PEEL said, nothing but the direct asiel , usual appeal to him personally would have iodsal him to have replied to the speech of the !Light Ike Gentleman. Under any circumstances he nuthan every disadvantage; but much more so Idea da Right Hon. Gentleman had torn in pieces a Va. made by him four years ago, when the Right Gentleman was present, but when he did not dotk proper to reply to him. Ile highly eulogized tic , late Mr. Grattan, and eve the desperate fidelity ta b which he adhered to this unfortunate questioa. Ike the Right Hon. Gentleman was his most able law cellent successor. He denied that he rose to taken!_ advantage of the confirmed prejudices, or flamed passions of men, on this important (1 06 . 11 !" He never thought the exclusion of the Catholess_ good; but he had before, and he now consirksel . as an evil arising out o f the p resen t s tated &API_ He was not satisfied with his own opinion CO . subject; and he did not dis cuss it with a . aatv* triumph, but for the sake of truth and justice. SO' denied that it was a right of every subjeangfr joy every privilege- under a ,G over nment: and . l i a t thought he could proye it upon g ood auhord_Le it were right to admit th e C a th o li cs to held 0 0 4 ' there must be granted the same privileges totberr." , testant Dissenters. This was denied by Mr. and Mr. Rothe, on the motion 'for repealing Test and Corporation Acts, in 1791, The law exclusiou, both of . Catholic and l'rotestaue senters had existed .since the lieformatios: wif 4th and .sthot . Elizabeth required that 1/ICatliclo.' in o ffi ce should allow that she was the head o f 8/1. State, no; only in civil, but also in religious ga!!iit Would.the.Catholics of this day take th is oa th ? IP . relied on the authority of the greatest na . 7tes . ai sir RevolutioP, that there w as a clear &smuts, O' tWeen tolerating .a man's opinions, alut.adnall°ll Inns to power; He did not' mean to.assert that/ irrevocable psiuciple was sanctioned at the Iter ~~~