The Statesman. — London, England, 1819-06-11 00:00:00

TUE STATESMAN. oily reference to civil rights, so that the Oath of Isometry, which the Gentlemen who voted the Ile. solutions tboeght insellicieut, was the only remain. log guard. In roadie% the history of the prelim es well as former times, •n reason presented itself for supposing filet 111.04111er Supremacy was not an ef• fermi her against do admission of Roman Cohn. lice into any 'Usages where it wee required as • gualifleatiou. The contrary Infrreocr mused to be drawn fr om the Act of Geo. 1., bet it could not be rattly drawn from the wordlog of the preamble, that the Oath of Supremacy was then considered inef. fermi. By the let sod 'sth of Quern Elizabeth, to he gratified for a seat in the Meese of Parliament, in the Privy Council, or for 011ey, the Oath of Se. preeney was ropsired to be taken ' het still many Catholics were oppoloted to office In her reign, .sod dowewarde In the time a Charles 11. In the trip of James I. after the Marra created by the Gunpowder Plot, soother oath was required, called the Oath of Obedieoce, for the express par. Pete ef•ii•tinitoishieg between loch %resin Catholics is could give satisfactory proof of their ellegiance and dose who could not. It was very possible, though be bed no miss of proving the feet from se !herby, that stony Catholics were admitted to office ruder this oath. Is Quota Elizabeth's time there was no doubt that malty of them served with fidelity in theerry sod navy, as wells, in the time of Charles 11. bet it meat have been by the dispensiog power of the Crows. The non.execusion of the law ha this respect was the motive that led to the introduction of the others •for their 'scission. Wish respect to Om two Houses of Perliament, he wet not driven to this supposition of the disputes power of the Crown. With the exception of the Peers, in the time of Queen Plies. bob, who were exempted from the operation of the Act of Supremacy, from the sth of her reign down to the period of the Restoration. no Catholic Mem ber gut • stet I. the Howse of Commons. The es clesien, thereof), was 'efficiently mainteined by Abe Act of Supremacy. There appeared. at legal, in the history of the times. or in the inertia's, no ground for sapomilm that Roman Catholics had seats. 1e.1640, a law wee passed tlret ell Members should receive the Saereimmit standing to the rights of the Church of Englaod. No emotion woe made in the Animals of any Member excluded in consegeence of tide Act, which must have been the case if there were Renton Catholic, in Parliament. 1V hen the Act of the 30th of Chicle, 11. passed, for reelecting Stafford sod other Popish Peers, no mention VIP made of the Homo of Commons getting old of any of its Members is consequence. Evelyn, indeed, said, the. ell Romeo Catholics were excluded for ever from both flosses, but Bernet mode no mention of any Catholic that lint his lest. Coming now to tf•trir own times, he world ask, whether it was Net found to be an ellesteal hauler, end whether tome alteration in the Act of Abjuration wet not Necessary to enable them felly to enjoy the herm it, steely extended to them by the Legislature— Whet retied. d Etglish Catholics frrm voting at elections, but the simple Oath of Supremacy ? There might hove been iestencet of their voting when the oath was net tendered, or whey in the heat of en elortiotrcontest, It was not reflected upon. Sots Things wer•fregeently dew in eases where there was no lIPICOW from warmth of feeling or want of mash, Itcreilea; at the Castors-boon for instance, sod upon other *erosions. This, however, was no moon (or coecloding against the efficacy of the Oath of Sumo , wary. There was an - instance et the Devonshire ' election of a respectable Gentleman, a Catholic, re fusing In take t boOath of Supremacy when tendered as the corretith.n upon which he was to give his vote. The eighth Herniation alluded to some mete which were, it wen tail, held by the Church of Rome, and which ! mord to infringe on the mild &chines of Chrirti. soil. it was tree Shot if the Canons of the Church of Home. and if the writings of some of the polemics of that Church were starched, some passam might Ire blood in corroborate shot allusion. But Se de- Invested such • practice. Would the Bench of Re verend Prelates opposite feel satisfied if their religions belief was to be decided upon from the violence of some of the (Mule's which were upheld at the cowl. nsesicentent of mad soon after the Reformation ? Ile called upon their Lordships to set in the spirit of Chrietion charity, accordiog to its brautifol mains, " Do es Toe world be done by." lie would refer es a proof of the practice of ibis doctrine by Ca tholic Christians to the course of evaded pur sued by ell the nations of that religion on the Cootittort of Europe for several years past. In France, thee. was no obstacle to the admission of Protesettots to the Legislator', and to the sitostions of the Army sod of the State. In the Netherlands, by the Treaty, which was retitled ender the sandier Otitis country, it arse dictated that there thoold• be no opposition, on account °Petition, to any penes, attaining situations under that Go. vernmeet. Its Aortas, in Bavaria, in Ilertgary, end particularly In &imy, Mislays toleration was practised. Eremite Rome itself, there was mach liberty elbowed to perms differiorg ;rout the religion practised; sod for • proof of this observation, Ile‘ appealed to the Noble Lords who find lately visited that country ; thin was a place of worship in lilt city at which Protestauts assembled, and before she door of which their carriages were publicly even to slop for that purpose. Such was the Christhys spirit of the present Role, of the Roman Church, sod such the benevolent practice of his Minister, Cardinal tionaalvi, that there wee full liberty given for the public celebration of the worship of the Deity, ac. cording to the forms sf the Protestant religion. Boar s long was England to coolinee behind in promoting Christion toleration ? The last Resolution effected to charge the Roman Church with the obsolete charge of releasing 'objects ft.,. their oaths; but how was this invention proved ? Ile would call the atm. lion of their Lordships to a mere stutemeot of It.a ftci., which would elucidate the entire train of charges on that heed. When Bonaparte was de. •irous of ideas% this country is much as poieibte, he applied in conjunction with the &vertigo of Italy in she Pope, requesting him to join in a weir firkin Great Britain, and spare the refusal of the latter, his Staten were seised, and himself made a prisoner,. At that time the Pope tent infractions to hie Psi/Wei how to act respecting en wath of allegissnee which o mild be reclaim' from his subjects, and 4nilken gave them pevoirsion to takc 'north of passiviellegiotre, het •i'host i;')ertyof tek in; n oath of active allegiance, which by releasing his subjects front their allegiancet• himself. wergild preset been hereafter from paying it to him slier her shies see recovered his throne.-- The Oath of Sepreensiy was one which censcieetines Ronson Catholics would hesitate to take, for the sh. jufotioll of the spiritual supremacy of the head of their Chinch was considered by them as a sin, and which, by it consequ-nres, would deprive them of communion with their Church, and of the benefit of its Sacraments, if it was not effaced by sincere can t titian. The charges therefore of the last Resolution were no MOM than a revival of the old unfounded and l ezpleded accusation, that no faith was to be kept with heretics. The oath which the Pope permitted his subjects to take on the occasion usentioned, wits one of ;smite allegiance, by which they were required to take no part in a conspiracy or in a sedition, nor to act against the riling power consistently with the laws of God, and of the Church.— If any solijscts of this country had been reduced under the dominion of a foreign Power, world the Learned Laid on the Alinolsack base them to suffer punishment, beeline they might hare taken loch en oath. The Catholics, it could not be con. tea/limed, kept their oaths scrupulously: either then they could attain the offices of the State, and the sitootions of Members of both Homes with safe cenacienrie, after the removal of the necessity of subscribing to the Declaration. and doring'llte can. titioanre of the Oath of Supremacy, or tfory could not ; if they could accept these situations after they bad taken an oath of allegiance to the country and to its Sovereign, woald they not prey it es sacredly us they now objected to sob. Krill' the Declaration, and to take the Oath of Se premacy ; if they could not accept these situations daring the continuance of the Oath of Supremacy, what was the necessity of the other oaths, while that continued an impossible bar against soy admission to la sanative ? The remove! of the Declension was necessary; first, on the ground of sound polity; and secondly, be this Declerstion regarded trade which were purely religious. The present Bill would tend to remove the cause of discontent and disunion from among persons professing the Christ ian religion, as well as to introduce sentiments of peace and con. cord among the inhabitants of this country, and thus lead to establiab the welfare of the kingdom. Ile concluded, therefore, by moving the second read ing of the Bill. The Bishop of NORWICH rose, and in a low tone of voice, which rendered a great part of his ob servations inaudible below the bar, stated, mat he felt the meet unfeigned est:diction in seconding the motion of the Noble Esrl. Why was the spirit of pest ages which slept amid the shades of ignorance to be awakened, in order to rust a gloom over the sun. shine of knowledge? Would their Lordships ob. innately persist in charging the Romeo Catholics with doctrines which they denied, and which they did not believe. Ile had frequently been obliged to make the declaration contained in the oath, and he would declare, that he Dever made it without the most unpleasant of all sensations, something border. ing en self-reproach. Had it not been for the glen. ow, unewriainty of the law, for the ambiguity which was obvious in the expressions, I e believed that of thove who surrounded him, few could approach the table and there make the Declaration without feeling withia themselves some unpleasant misgirings. II was not now to be considered, for it ought not to be contitlered,how old the law au which reqeiredthat the Declaration should be subscribed, but how wise end how just it was. Another strong objection which he eniertaieed to Ike oath was, that it was • religious test for a civil perpose, and particularly list it was a sacramental test, which of all tests was the most exceptionable. It was a bar to the advance. merit of conscientious men. bet not to infidels, or to men who little value the laws of conscience. It was probable he should be fold that these Goths were re. gash' ; but be held that an oath and a sacramental test were not penile!, and such was the opinion of as learned a Pedaloes any who heel ever sate in that Houle, who expressed his npinioos on that subject, in a work which he treated of the common rights of all subjects of the kingdom. Ile implored their Lord. ships to consider the member, the respectability, the loyally, and gond conduct of the inhabitants of this country, who were affected by the Declaration.— Were the 'anti which nitre necessary in the reign of Charles 11. inpatient to be continued at present ? 'rbe Test Act had bean called a pillar of the Consti tution, bat was it such at present ? Were the Rn. man Catholics at present so disloyal as to eerier the continuance necessary ? No—these precautions were no longer necessary sgelnst a most loyal, peaceable, honest, and indeesteinui class of Britons. Such was sot only his opinion, but that of men of learning anti wisdom, whose sentiments he would always esteem. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY raid, that alihoouh it bad been stated that the view of the sob. jest which woold be taken by the Lords who wets near him, would be • timiterl one, he W was not eon. Stines of his being actuated by any pr.judice ' when i he fon to state th e reasons which indoesteed him to dissent from the motion of the Noble FAIL Their Lordships would egrets that the Protestant religioe in Church and State ought to be supportni, bat had the 1 motion of the Noble Earl that object In view? The motion of the Noble Earl was for • similar object to that which he had lately made; different only how. ever In the mode of attaining the same impose—the former was for proceeding by, circuitous rout, while the latter was to prove successful by one evert. The Noble Earl had said, t h at there would • candid arise from speculative opinions on this subject, which ' was the removal of an insansoonteble obstacle placed in * err or advancement of Roman Catholic. In the sotto of Clarks 11. This, however, was not his qpiesion Respecting Catholics, havin4 continued in possession of the privilege of being Members of Par. Aatasent until the last Act war passed at that time. Earl Gots rows to eaplain. Ile had said that the Roman Catholic Peer, bad continued to poss.,' the priststup of sitting in the floss* of Lords, and that he had discovered no mars of proving that Roman Catholics had not also continued to sit io the other Ilnose until the Test Art was passed. . The Archhishdp of CANTERBURY proceeded. IThe Noble Earl bad certainly stated on a former I occasion, or Ms recollection of whet had passed in I the nous was incorrect, that Roman Catholics had i continued to sit in Parliament eatecedeut to the pen. fag of that Act in the reign of Chades 11. That Roes* Catholics had been in_ the flosses f Parli• meet during the interval (root the reign of Elia.beth In thus of Charles 11., notwithstanding the obstacles which the Oath of supremacy opposed to them. ha was not prepared to say. lie believed the Nebte Earl felt as sinews desire far the preservation .f the Pro- Sealant Iteligigion and Constitution of the country as the Noble Earl near him (Lord Liverpool), or any other of their Lordships. The only parallel which he could find to the present occasion was in the reign of James 11., when it was attempted to govern the country by a Catholic King, united to • Protestant Parliament, while now the endeavour was to have a Catholic Parliament, together with a Protestant King. Ile hoped that their Lordship. would pause before they would introduce new systems into this country, systems similar to which the history of yesterday had showed the effects in neighbouring countries, where the laws of God and man were trampled upon, and lbe morality of Christianity de spised, because new systems were pl.asing. It was not necessary to enter into a detail of arguments to prove the dangers with which the present motion ass (might. Ile therefore, requestaol 'Mk Lordships to hesitate bolero they would impose this toiletry to such imminent peril. The Eta of LIVERPOOL was desirous of say. log a few words respecting the religious Test Oaths. lie was not averse to the asetinuance of religious Test Oaths, and fie thought the Corpoestiee and Test Acts of this country, which it was eapadiest, according to the Right Rev. Prelate, le repeal. IMO productive of benefit to il. The promo modes he regarded as not so highly interesting ow its own as. count as on account of these matters to which it would be a preliminary. Ile alluded to lbe practical admission to offices in the State, in consequence of the passing of the Act of Indemnity. Ile was old enough to remember three Sesslons, when a long man. flict had taken place respecting the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. Whet was the spirit which induced ibe Acts to condom in their operation ? Bermes, they were a weapon which could be wisely used when danger threatened the Chords or the State. It was not the feet of danger from the Items Catholics, but because those Acts would prove ser sievede in cases of peril that they were condoned. !le wished to observe, is relation to the obeervalloss of the Noble Earl sad of the Reverend Prelate, et spectirg the doctrine of Transubstastiation bolos called idolatroes and superstitious, that it was not this &tiring which was so denominated, bet OP dee. trines respecting the Virgin Mary, the invocation of qsints i and the sacrifice of the Mass. lie now came to tie future consequence of the question, whether it would tend to admit Roma. Catholics isle sitestions,• and from his enquiries Itt varioes direcriees, he had no 'reasons to think that the Roman Catholics could, conscientiously, take the Oath of Supremacy, which Ilea, therefore, a sufficient obstacle spinet their ad ' mission. The Noble Earl had said, that Rolm Catholic Peers had continued to sit is the Upper liner, until the pastiug of the Test Act, and be could find nothing contrary to that statement. TM preamble of that Act also gave some masons for sup posing that persons professing that religion had been Members of the other Home until that time. He would ask, what benefit could the ream measure prodece to the Roman Catholics? It might emir'• bete to remove prejudices, and if he felt satisfied that it would not leadto further subjects of agitation, he should have no objection to coincide with the motion. list had the Noble Earl said that this so lion, if corisenreal to, wooll be sefficient ? Was it not an imperious duty on the House to comities that it world lead to fresh demands rather then tend to satisfy the present ? What benefit was it to the Re- MOO Catholics Apparently none. Why, there. fore, were they introduced ? Ile wished their Lord ships would seriously cnesit'er, tint when on one side nn good result was expected to f .Ilow hew the removal of those teats, and mien ell the other much danger was to be dreaded, it would be beneficial not to adopt sech • measure. If tranquillity unsaid be caused by the motion, it would have his assent ; but as it would het lead to future demands. and future connive, without end beneficial cootegnence, he felt it hie dote to resist it. _ _ _ Lord dit EN VI LLE sal.l; that he took a view of the subject, altogether different from that which bad been taken by (he Noble Earl, or by the Most Rev. Prelate. There was soother reason besides that which was stated in the 6th of Elisabeth for Roman Catholic Peers continuing to sit In the Hoes. of Lords until the reign of Charles 11. which was, that they were entitled by their birth to the possession of this prioilege, and cosid not, therefore, with propriety be excluded from it. It was not problesatiail to sup pose that persona might take the Oath of Supremacy, although they believe in the Mass, the lamellae of Saints, and the doctrine of Transabstaatiation—yet, al though they ausecientioesly believed in all these thinp, still might they take the Oath of Supremacy. eves as It was understood and worded by Henry VIII. himself. The Roman Catholics were denied the power of list. lug their religious 'pitiless, or if they tendered them, they ware disbolinted ; while the opisiess of their adversaries were received as positive proofs of the Im. piety of their belief. There was not one of their Lordships who would own be was so hilleeneed, though ea s serience had most lamentably proved too malty of them were se. It was said that the Catho lics bold a divided allegiance. There might be foetid some bigoted writers who held sock an opinion, but none of ail the Catholics he ever knew, none of all l ike books of authority be ever read, no liberal sad educated Catholic bat would feel an Welt to his chg. racier, to bothered - with holding a divided allegia ace. The sophistical distinction between Allegiance and Supremacy was too absurd to require much ootko c l but the Oath of Allegiance, he would say, had been imposed and taken by the Catholics before the Oath of Supremacy hid ever become a question with the Every one of their Lordshipa was bound to take the Oath of Allegiance previously to I taking the Oath of Supremacy, on such terms they held place end office, and tests in Parliament. I The Catholics swore that whkh their Lordships swore, In bear their Sovereign true allegiance, and was any farther test of loyally desired, or if there could be, what was it Ile knew it nore, l for neat *silted: biteable none was necessary.— ; There wit no law, he thanked Coil, so 1.1.42:e a Ice. cilia, religious belief on any our; Gue CAS U. t• *l' k . otillpe r it le by s hich 1114111 *l4 tz:•11 Ito • he‘ th e K *pat (gall sillier f notisciet.t.• in re!ivona a , nil if MP,. i..ald ne • ac r. a • or settee isopjt: you'd be the 'rat re. 1•4.• from p ki r obertrg They acre coded upon to grinner a d...l.are 'root . *hely Statute boat. If parr the go. 'lion ~s, so tended to be set st rest, *hat so long ditid. d q t . Cstholics from the Protestants ewer there seen disposition )mproinnte peace, and harmony. and union, amongst the gihjrcts of the came K;l 4 { citizens of tho same State, and aeit.g undo the same laws—then should their Lordships begin by removing the opprobrium, by retracting the calumnies, sod pa. nisbing the atrocious libets which were psi licked against their Catholic fillow•setjects.—pear!j— If there were no other inducement to their Lord.hipe to cosmetic* so desirable a course, even a regard foe themselves end their posterity, should prompt them to avoid the disgrace their Statile; cast spun t• es ; a disgrace which but a mere distinction was held tat justify ; bet which were still as degrading as they were profligate end calsoinines.—(llcor, Iscar!)—• Ile asked their Lordships, if any Noble Lord amongst them could pet his head upon his heart and say. thri religion of Fowles wee idolatrous? Not of Fowles alone, but of may enlightened Catholic of the present day,whe would be famed to ray, "Idolatry is your retie glen?" They coosklered the Masses on act of devotion polders the greet object of worship; they meant a rile, letended to do him homage, and when the intention ' wet so pore, the eilscootrections of their adversaries should mot betaken in proof of the act by whir h they expressed it being idolatress. The Oath and Hecht ' ratios sworn to by the Members of both Houses et Parliament, declared the Mass to be idolatrous, but of above 800 individeils who had so sworn, how many could any on their own knowledge its objects, •r its ceremonies. or If any diffetence ex. isted in its sae from Its institution to the hoer le which he addressed their Lordships ?—it was a creel mockery on legislation to *western the People to mitoses each prejudices existing is the Wads of Legislators, and especially ea matters where religiose beliefs wen se eminently aiscereed. The evils of such oaths weld net be tee speedily remit ' died, 00f the loud° and the calemesies they genesis• ed too speedily abolished sod effaced. The sacrifice of the Mass was nen by Pretestant Prelates held not to be idolatrous, although considered by them as im. proper to be used ; the Bishops Perry and t4lden, bad so given it as their oplaiees. Bishop Perry was a man of few, who at all times and at all hazards kept op the pore lamp of the light of the Chord: of England, and daring the worst • Mictiers that were felt en Protestants, had still maintitred seek en opinion as to the bless. Selden, perhaps Prelate of still higher estherity, coiecided with him. Could their Lordships be ssecere in what they told the Catholics, that they were not raeleded h cease. spaeace of their religious belief from sharing In the privileges of the Stale; while they refused to cascade the boon which they ones acd so humbly prayed for ? They told the Cath.iics wed. cot seclude you for year belief is matters revealed by Diviett - meths. rity, bet we exclude yes batman yes hold opinions ceetrery to the religion of the State. Bet what did such a declarations amount to? Ti nothing %eraser hem then this : we eselede yes solely for your "Ai. gloss opinion. Bet was thet bit evelltirt—was that manly—was It beneseable ? Let these who (height so mossier II ; bet he thought it the 'reverse of all it should be. The Catholic, on the contrary, acted in a more open manner. If their Lordships thought it orcessary to ceded, the Ca- Shelia for his religious opinions, why sot openly my se ? Why trot boldly proclaim it : bet if not, if according to their own opinions and decimator's, he should sot be estleded on that accosted; open what other mend or rational principle did he continee to be escleded ? Was it because be believe in the he. articulacy of the Virgin Mary, or the intercession of Saints, the purifying ire of Purgatory, or thedece tries of Transubstantiation ? Hit wenn, why net state it, and pet an end to ell his hopes sad all his wishes? Why did they gnat the Catholics of !m -ilted that which they denied the Whelks et England? Were their priaciples se different, that toleration was safe whoa greeted to the Irish eethe. tic, aid dangerous when aesght for by the British? 'the ceedition of the Catholics, was a shame to lbw laws, a Mimeo to the esestry, sad a reproach throegh story part of Europa to the Legislators of Great Britain.—(//ear?)—The gaselier, of Septa onsey began et last to be 'settee soderstood than for. surly both by Catholic BM Promoted, sod within and without the walls of Parliament. Tests and prohibitions sboold not be se leog cootiesed, as that the Catholics might be made to feel that they could wet discharge the ditties mad obligetiess of good sob. jams. He thought the Noble Earl opposite shaeid I agree to the preposition of his Noble Friend (Lord Grey) although it had sot Wee sifted sod examime by a Committee. When the subject was formerly di.cessed, the Catholics prayed for a Committee, bet that 01111 refitted, because modeles special 001 re. (pared ; sod sew that somethieg was required, she adversaries of the Catholics tern resod and said, we can grist yes nothing that does not originate la she recommendation of • Committee. Se that whaterne worse they look, discomfits's end defeat attired ill their claims. The Noble Lord concluded a most elite sad brilliant speech by giving bird's:Wed approbso , ties to the 11111 introduced so ably by his Noble I Friend (Eve Grey). The I.OltD CIIANCELLOR obherved, his duty take House and the coantry obliged bias to state, that all that Ito baud front the Noble Earl she intro• dared it, end the last Noble Lord who spoke, did nob alter the opinions he hid loss entertained apes its merits. It was many years since the first Peddinur from the Catholics had been presented for relief; bet nn no form., accedes was any relief espected, Woo with the offer of the mast templet* security. The present propositivo, het/ewer, was quite differently' made, as if it could be acceded to withost any sees. rut,; soil cosh, it he so deny: It was mid that the Mends*, the Protestant relights wished for sec a change; but these what equally professed theseelein its friends were decidedly hostile to its being mai& Some Resolutions hod been sent hiss in an esvalepe t which he kadoot read, nor was i.e at all swan eg lbeir contests, until he hoard them 'glided to be 6 8 Nob!, Lary' (Goa)); and at thaw contents Me maid scarc.lV say be Rti rarpristd ; Inc if the Noble Eu ill i I.s. ll} or VI '•5 • p. D,ll f , e•" , Mom 111/1, Mi. 181.1 the r dre• that salter Lord the I supp, Weill Su Ilosi TIN !nisi Comic Edl. Aid real, visa dal el die el ties II is Tim bel;i _air. lee Ch Mr. mimeo law e obeli settee The the p bees d Item a ewer Peel Milky from d (*haft I Mr. Ascii@ Mi The The & mai&