The National Register. — London, England, 1812-04-26 00:00:00

77 I THE NATIONAL REGISTER. 56 thc m, that it they did not sign ti.e Catholic peicion th y would lose all their c ustoiners, ai.d this to the lower order of people was a very serious thing. The petition of the Protestants of Dublin lay in a coffee house, where, if a person went in, he was asked if he would sign the petition Z And the mode of signing was by writing his name on a piece of paper, but to see the petition be was not allowed. He understood that the names, so collected, were afterwards transcribed to the peti tion • this was a circuttistance which was most extraord inar y and on precedentel. He condemned the urging the great power of Euo iaparte as a reason for granting the liberties desired by Ireland; and he would ask, were thirteen millions of the Protestants of England to sacrifice their Constitution for the gratification of the ambition of 2,500,000 of the lowest order of the community of another country P He hoped that these arguments would have their full effect on the House of Af ter r ecapitulating a few of his argumen ts briefl y , for the purpose ing 'he grounds of his opposition, he citicluded by opposing the motion. The motion was afterwards opposed by Mr. W. J. Bankes ' Mr. Owen, and Mr. C . Adam ; and supported by Sir J. C. Hippisley, Lord Binning, Mr. Vernon, Mr. Ma: ryatt, and Lord Milton.—At half-past two o'clock the debate was adjourned till Friday. FRIDAY, APRIL 24. CATHOLIC QUESTION. The Order of the Day fur i esuming the Adjourned Debate on the Ca tholic Question b ing read, Sir Was SCOTT rose.—He bad heard, in the discussion of this sub ject, a great variety of topics incidentally introduced, and among the rest an abusion to the illustrious Seminary - which he had the honour of represen . The Hon. Gelitleritan who had made such allusion not evince that affection and respect far the place where he had received les edi.catioo, weis-li might v. lure such recollections eXisted, have been noturaliv enoit,.ll expected. Fur .11 a University, he would say, that no common ty of men in the country had at all times manifested a more shaken attachment to the Coos i - ution, or a more zealous support of ev-ry thing that was valuable in the civil or ecc.esiastical relaticos of the co:.ntry. Was it just then, when talkie; of such per: ors, and of their petition, to say. that they were hut pour judge s upon a sul•ject . of this kiitd, and that in place of being heard. when they expressed theirsenti rnents. they should be sent back to the privacy of their cortege. He fool• 1 not but lament • that the occasion for speaking of it occurred so frequently. He was sorry to perceive, that it seemed to be kept up, merely as an object fur cootention. It: was by no means to be considered as é subject of such a nature as the Slave Trade ; it was a matter affect ing rn 're powerfully than any thing els • could do, both domestic pas sloos and domestic' iota rests, .tad which in its frequent agitation , r an very much the hazard of se•ting tire to the country., If there existed any . probability of coming to au agreement upou it, if any disposition appeared on the part of this country to consent to the claims of the Ca thobcs, titers indeed those claimi might be discussed with some proba• billy of success, and with less danger of oisturbance. But when he per- Calved that year after year the sa•n_ demands had been refused, when be recollected that but a few weeks had elapsed since this question had been at least virtually disposed of, lie would ask, what •probability there was now of success?—(Hear/) —every year • the danger of refusal was re•eated, every year it was asserted that ruin would tollow, without the co• !1:1;. , measure eois rt presented as capable of prat uc - t t'.ese eireful con:tope:noes did not toilow. It was ti ne that the eeti ti.:;e• a ,ainst ii. had not been very numerous, but this did not at he tr-oit want of feeling upon the subject. Strong sensations were felt upon it, though they were not expressed; snd toe country was not loud upon the subject, because they a. ;cipa:ed • that it would be decided in the same way 41 which it had hi en often before decided. It could not, he was convinced, be gronted, without producing a convulsion which would lead to very disastrous consequences. It was ome time ago looker upon as • tundaniental principle, that the Civil and Eccl. siostical parts of the Co' stitotion were united; but they were now given to understand, that thi • d •et ine was not right, aild doe religious estabAshments stood upon nu better ground than others, which must give way when the necessity of sire emstances required it; and that even the protection of such esta blioirn.oits may he derived from eI:A-solos whose prineiples were hostile to their exist en• e. 41. ch F yr•ons svnold petsuade them, that a I)!utestant Chancellor nd Protestant Prioy Couosellors, may be the faithful guar dian; aod o.l.visers of a Protestant Kiog. When he looked at the eenius of he Roman C:: [hoist religion, when he looked at its principles, lie was I convinced r. at the professors of that religion must have at heart the extinction of the erotestatit worship. . When he considered, that they admitted no sahrati• it out of tio: pale adieu . Church, he c, uld not con sider them as fit eeioutis tc have any share iu the protection of another Church. His opinioti was, and all history fortified him in it, that ill. re must be a ro..6iott in every State vested with superiority, and if-that su per:o:ity were not supported, they may talk as they pleased of the bene volence of mankind: hut religious parties would become political ones, and lose nc opportanity of seizing on that superiority. He had fre quentay a ooed tt aisertsd front the other side, that if those concetsions were rot niado, Ireland waa lost—that separation would inevitably be the coosequooce. But wa.:, he to understaA, that, in consequence of such refusai, the gentlemen of that country would desert their. duty ? their all.:3ii.oce upon theni ? This supposition.. he be lieved, was tiDjUott • The Geutletueu opposite had trot brought this APRIL 26 question forward while in power, and he hoped their chants; of eituation would produce no change in their sentiments. Mr. ISeetoe supported the motion. . Mr. YORKE rose. He would mute to the House some of the gr melt on which he ventured to maintain that the tenets ot ail true t mitotic, now were what they had been for ages. Soon aft, r he tnteree! Parlia ment he was led to applaud the Bat brought in by l .urd Rael‘edsle, tor extending the privileges of . the Constitution to the Ensiish Roman Catholics; but he altered his opinion of the measure, from what sulee quently occurred. By that Bill an oath was prescribed, and it was . g to on the part of those who were to take it. So seem, however, as the oath came to the knowledge of the Vicar Apostolic, he condemned it, and enjoined all those for whom it was me ant, not to take it. T. i s Apostolic vicar denounced the oath, setting forth that it could not be taken by the " faithful" either of the clergy or of the laity—that the " faithful" could take no oath whatever. Now what wa the oath proposed, and which was condemned by this Vicar Aperonsic ? Wit\ it stated that it was thereby sworn that the Pope conte not ObiU/re their allegiance from his Majesty." Such was the tetiour of the oa h yet such an oath could not be tsks n, said the see of Rome. To show that the tenets of the Catholics still continued what they: formerly were, he (Mr. Yorke) did not consult ancient lore; he quoted the works of moderns—of enlightened men.—ln passing, •be meld net but rematk, that the Popish Church of Ireland had been more devoted to its [iced— to the Pope, than that of any other country, aye, much more then the Church of either France or Italy Danger there could not hut be ap. .prehended from the Catholics it ail the privileges of the Coo- elution were extended to them. If proof fur.her were wanting of toe com plete devotion of the Roman Catholic: laity to their C lergy—to the See of Route, than what the Vicar Apostolic afforded, subsaquent events had brought to his mind thorough eenviction cu the subject. The veto arrangement afforded the ground of that conviction. Si he Cathel.c laity consented to give the vsto—they never objeetsd to it ; but their Bishops did not approve ot it, and Ito soener did trey specor against the. veto, than it totally disappeared.--( Hear ! ) Why, could there be a more decisive proof of the complete domnioit that the Clergy still le,ld over their Catholic laity ? The laity were stia the same, they still remained completely devoted to their Priests and - Popes Here was a pretty good proof, too, that the oaths were of some consequence in the estimation of the Pope. The Pope was now a prisoners but no one bad ever heard the opinion of the Irish Catholic Clergy. in the event of Budnaparteoppointing a successor. In the event of there being another Poe ninated b our invetrate enemy Buonapatte, would the Roman p Cathol om y ic Clergy still deem their allegiance due to that Pope ? If such a nomination were to take place, would not the Pope be com pletely at the will of Buonaparte ? When such might be the case, he (Mr. N'orke) had a right to guard against approaching danger. He should not choose that Buonaparte s should be the keeper of the con gaieties, of three-feeirtbs of the people of Ireland.—(Loud cries (11licar ! hear ) Locke and Blackstone both thought that the Roman Catholics could not be with any Government except that of leoine ; that by hair oaths they were " lifted up against other Governments," and could not give full and uncontrolable allegiance to any Sovereigns. After all that had passed—after the experience of the ages that Lad gone by, the Catholics of Ireland still set forth a claim •to -all the privileges* of our Constitution. They wished to be made eligible in the eyes of the law, to be Commanders in Chief, or Menthe's of Pm bans( nt ; 'to caeit, as they now are, we arc told, they coreader theet selves in a tale of slavery—in a state of degrada•ion.e—(Hear, hairlj—But the advocates of the Catholics said nothing about their slavery and degradation to their Priests.—( Hear / f —The fact, however, could not Le hidden—so far as the Priesthood was concerned, the Catholic Laity was in a state of the most abject slavery and degradation. They might petition but to the greater part of the petitioners the restrictions were merely ideal. There hid always been danger from Irish Catholics, but the present state of the Roman Catholie religion made that danger greater than ever. But it seems that a new argument was now resorted to, welch was nothioa less than an . argument of pure imimidation.—(Hrar, hear, hear N-s-If emancipation were given the Catholics, could ail perst , believe that they would be conciliated; no, the Priests must he satisfied, or it was iu vain to do any thing. Let them have a Po; e of their own, if they pleased—let them keep hie' in great splendour, i: they please el—and let them station him at Ballyshnnann, or arty vaere else they l leased.—(Laughter.)--But some proof they mu, t give, trot therare entirely free from all foreign influence, before he cotud consent to take into consideratien the claims ot the Irish Roman Catholics. Mr. BROUGHMAN supported the motion. Mr. LESLIE FOSTER supported the motion, as did Mr. SHAW, of Dublin. • Sir SAMUEL ROMILLY said, from the time that he had become pas 'cased of a teat in the Parliament, he had always Silently voted in favour of the Catholic claims, because he reverenced the minds of the persons who maintained the propriety of conced in g to our countryn's i; claims, and refrained from speaking. because h had neteine rerear tos able to enforce. But he had nuw . come fully preparso t o dis p lay opinions, and the motives which actuated him in the vote w hich be was prepared to aive. lie did this, because he was conscious th at no pets.!! could bestow a vote favourable to the pre• tilt nttiest, but who would have his conduct traduced in a most uncandid manner. He was ja" hed in asserting this ) from the scrutiny in the Morning Parrs) ilk l'