The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1825-05-18 00:00:00

toy/ ; # 'n •; 1. , ~;lS . ~...~+a !~_~ "%47- . AR P*.l, ! r ' t beta amomplisbed, in order to settle this great and important glieSti oll -4 question which never could be settled unless their Lordships felt towards the Catholics of Ireland as towards fellow- Bikinis, entitled to share and enjoy the privileges of the Constitu tion equally with themselves. There were but two ways ooiy by whick'thie question could be set at rest. The one which he should recommend to their Lordships to adopt was conciliation, which meld only 110 effected by their aerating to the measure now before :he House. wh:ch came supported by the Representatives of the people and the prayers of their coinitiniente. By doing this act , which reason, policy, and justice alike demandud, they would be seeurirg to themselves a tower of strength in the undivided affec tions of Irishmen. He would appeal to the Noble Lord opposite Olarquis Camden) who knew well the value and impor tance of that country, and entreet him to secure the gra titude of a people whose hearts were warm and susceptible of the best feelings, by acceding to the present Bill. This country, powerful as it now was in its wealth, its strength, and its intellec tual greatness, would by the passing of this Bill derive an acees sson or moral and physical influence that would raise it still higher in the estimation of surrounding nations. Their Lordships must to aware that Ireland was not in that situation in which she ought to stand ; they knew that her power was rendered useless, if not dangerous to this country, by the continual excitements that were .operating upon her people ; they could not be insensible that, in the words of Burke. they had created a bank of discontent in that eountry, which waa constantly accuunula.ine, and from which their enemies would draw materials subversive of their dearest interest,. The Bill now before their Lonlehips would remove that discoetent ; hut whilerhey continued these galling and degrading disabilities, and kept.up thinfevetish irritation, this perpetual blister, it would be impossible to restore tranquillity to Ireland, and hopeless ever Cl conciliate her people It was perhaps possible, by the powerful id of a hundred thouilind armed men, to suppress for a time any temvuleion in that country, anal prevent it from separating itself horn England ; but lookiog at the spirit of the age. and comm. pkiting the common course of events, which their lordehips had a eight.reecalcu7ate apon, a time might come when such a power wruld not avail, and the evil which was at present too remote to cache alarm would at length arrive, when it would be fruitless to legislate. Let us then look forward to that period o: danger when we should want the warm hearts and faithful adherence of the Irish people, and by a judicious act, no less demanded by policy than by yistice, secure to ourselves their as yet unalienated affections. If their ordships were &Arms to effect this—if they really valued Ireland and sought to win her, and reader her a component part of this country, they would seize the moment now offered to them to accoiiplish their object, The present was a glorious opportunity for binding that country to us in the indissoluble bonds of a ff ection and interest, which if they did not secure might never offer again. Circumstances had occurred to which he would not more particu larly allude, but Circumstances had recently occurred which node this the best and most peculiar time for consummating this mea sure; for circumstaocea might again occur alien they would. not have the power, however strong they mig:it possess the will, to effect it. The Earl of LONGFORD felt somewhat embarrassed in ad dressing their Lordships upon the very important immure now un der discupion, owing to the reculiar situation in which he was placed with regard to the Catholics of Ireland. Living as he did in the midst of them, observing their conduct, and regarding them as neighbours and friends, he was induced to speak of them with feelings of high regard, their demeanour being such as reflected credit on them ; but considering the peculiar tenets of their faith, Red the influence exercised over them by their priests, he was ap prehensive that the present measure might be attended with many evils to this country ; and for this reason he should, as he had uni formly done, oppose it. The Bill .now proposed to be adopted came in a less unexceptionable shape than any former one. It nail been the nature of the former measures to be an some respects par tial, and his objections to them were consequently so too • but now the objections which he entertained were general, and he believed' of a much more formidable description. In giving his opposition to the measure he was actuated by no hostility to the Roman Catholics ; on the contrary, he had endeavoured to lifter his present opinion, and to entertain one favourable to their views, but the re wilt of his endeavours had been a firmer conviction of the inexpe dience and dangerous tendency of emancipation. Ile would once fur all mention those reasons which had operated to produce this conviction on his mind ; and he would do so very briefly, inns ouch as their Lordships had often heard them repeated. Ile dial not oppose the measure on account of the religion of the Catholics ; he had no wish to interfere with their theological tenets, nee to canvass their opinion upon that subject, no more than their Lordships were 'd,eposed to allow them to interfere with the faith of the Protestants. But his reasons for opposing the Bill were on the ground of the political circetnstances connected with the Roman Catholic and which he conceived were inseparable from that religion, which was not purely of a spiritual nature, but mixed up with matters entirely political. It was his opinion, that this complex charac ter which it assumed, was in consequence of the influence which the 'Catholic priesthood exercised over the laity, not merely in spiritual concerns, (hear, hear,) for of such an influence he was far from making any complaint, but the priests swayed a power over the minds of the people in matters egclusively temporal. (Hear, hear.) Ard this was almost inevitable from the extraordinary command - which their religion gave them over the moral feelings of their con gregation. For how could the demarcation be ascertained where 'the spiritnal teacher should cease, and the temporal power begin? How could the moral influences be restricted to a certain limit ? It was important then to consider what was the nature of this priest 'hood. They were, it was known, a regular body of men, well di. racted, well organised. and well disciplined. They were men sub 'Sated to the superintendence and control of the superior orders of their persuasion, and a due and strict subordination was maintained throughout their body, till the whole power concentrated in the Pope: When lie considered this fact, he could not but think that the preamble of the Bill did not express the whole truth. It might be correct so far as it went, but it did not state die full extent to ..wh!eh its p rovisions would inevitably lend if carried into a law. Although his principal objection to this Bill was on account of the eetraottlinary and dangerous power exercised by the priesthood over the minds of the Catholics in political matters, yet he was aware there were many honourable exceptions belonging to their body. H. knew there were Catholics of high and generous feeling, of I b cal and enlightened ntieds, who would reject all such interference iir,th the political opinions of the people, and consider it neither worthy of their religion, nor becoming the allegiance they owed the 'tete, to irritate the passions, and excite the dissatisfaction of their laity towards the Government or the Protestant establishment. 'But we werenot here topass eulogiums on any particular persons; we were here to legislate respecting the Catholic body in general. The arguments which had been urged in support of the Bill were , in his judgment, vet inconclusive and unsattsfactory• it had bean asked why the Catholics should be excluded from the privi leges of the Constitution any more than any other dais of Dia. %enters, who were said to form as distinct • church as die Catho iies themselves, and to be as opposed to the established religion of the country. But this was contrary to the fact. Among all the ear ova classes of Dissenters none appear to biro to bear that teeter except the Roman Catholics. They bore that character first in regard of their connection with the Pope, and next with* regard to their connection with us. flow could they stand by us ? What , had we done to them ? Were we other than Dissentere from th eir creed ? Usurpers of their property ? It was asked why were the Ca - holica to be dreaded more than other Dissenters ? Ile would -answer, it was because other Dissenters were voluntary Dissenters from our creed ; we did not dissent from them, but they from us ; not so, however, with respect to the Roman Catholics, who sought to suppress us and the Dissenters too, as heretics front their faith. When therefore he found the Dissetitets joining with us to oppose the Catholics, he could perfectly understand it both upon principle and expediency , . There had been much said about a prejudice existing in regard to this question. It was most true that such did exist, and was it not natural ? Upon a point like this, where everyman must feel from his very infancy, it would be futile to deny that the mind was biassed. Were there nut close connections by blood, by alliance, by friendship, and were these not sufficient to bias the mind, and influence the judgment? Bat right not there motives equally operate on the minds of the friends as well. as of the opponents to Catholic Emancipation ? lie thought there might, and that these causes prejudice did not lie altogether on one side. But It wag said upon this allegation of prtjudice, that we might succeed In extinguishing the principles of religicn, but we could not those of human nature. Ile thought the argument applied equally well on the part of the opponents of the Catholics. Their Lordships had heard much insisted on the in. justice of withholding from a portion of the people their rights ; tint he would reply that it had ever been an acknowledged tuaxim, •' That the interests of the many should be always preferred before that of the few ;" and upon this ground, whatever might be the j abalract right of the Boman Catholics, yet if it was fur the interests of The people at large that 9iat right should be restrained, he ron ceived there was no injustice in restraining it. Their Lordships tiad been further appealed to on the ground of the expedleatcy.of the measure. There had been threats held out, and a menacing tone assumed towards them ; but if he were under the impression I that those threats were real, it would be the first reason with him I tO refuse the least concession ; lie, however, was not under that impression. H e begged their Lordships to look back to the period when the restrictions complaibcd of were imposed; and he would .a, had we not been going on under those restrictions in a pro gressive Advance towards wealth and glory? Power and talent had gradually developed themselves, until the country bid attained a point of greatness that made it the ad ma/Rion of the world. There was one reason why it was manifestly inexpedient that the Hill should now be passed. Ac cording ter the constitutional process of this country, the time would soon approach when the sense of the people would be taken, and then their Lordships would have an opportunity of seeing whether the adtoeitee of this measure were justified in stating that it was the sense of the people. In his opinion they were not. It was impossible to pitserve linearity to the Protestant religion unless the Protestant ascendancy were secured. His conviction on the Case c that to." _ paxs.because lie thought justice •I of it, expediency demand it, reasons he should vote against the Bill, but in a speech and was for some time in_ :nee of the low tone in which Prelate's turning his face from acted sentences throughout the first words we heard from ring on the cruel injuries nt loyal subjects, by with- . ~e onetiantion ; and which, bring imminent danger on the 'et was decidedly in Le- I.ordships, and if be trove asking whether there Was 411 - te. country againselt ? elf their botelshapiewoulel examine the history of their own times the cenlel not Mid a single Christian State so. disgraced by pereecutlien as England. He weekt ask of Noble Look, wife were Motile to this Bill, to point out to him a single country that was tree cal with so great persecution cosy portion of its ' iniesiMente, as the Catholics of Ireland were treated by the Con- I sti•utien of this country. .1 very able book had lately appeared, the authert of which wash member of the other House of rarlia , ment, upon this subject, in es hich he shewed the e nt comity of it politically; hut he would deal with it in another point of view, avid I appeal to the commandment of his Melee Master, which staid— •• do unto miler+ , as we would that others should do unto us ;" and he would ask their Lordships if, aceordwg to that divine injune• lion, this concession would be refused? For himself he would say, let the Chutch of England fall if it (veld not be maintained in unison with that heavenly precept. It might perhaps be inquires: of bum whether he was prepared to abide by the conditions of the result that his opinion might lead to ; for that result might he the sloes of all those worldly honours, and the seat that he had the privilege to be entitled to in that (louse. To this ques tion he would give a very short anti a very sincere answer. . II worldly bulletin could only he shared by the oppression of so I many millions of Ida fellow-subjects , lie would not wish to hold 1 therm These were Lis sincere opinions, and had been so for hell s a ' century, and he was now no old to change them ; he would not say that lie never should change them ; that would be too rash an resumption ler one operated silem by the ever-changing scene of human life. (Hear, hear.) But he did not beliele that he should ever alter his opinion upon this point. As to the political part of the question, it was not within the limits of his functions tn ad vert to it ; and if it were, It had been too ably fuel too often argued by some eh' the wisest men who ever live I, for hint to presume to obtrude Its °pinnies upon their Lordships, es to the policy of the measure; but thus much he weuld take the liberty to urge upon thee Lordships, that if concessions did not take place, events might occur at no distant period, that they could neither control nor prevent. Lied CA RBERY, as we understood, mimeo's] the Bill ; but not one complete sentence of his LorelshioN speech reached below the bar. The Bishop of CHESTER rase—A great sensation was excited in the Mouse as soon as their Lortlehip+ perceived the Right Per. Prelate on his legs, and the contusion that followed pee ye:4cl us from hearing the first seittcecee of his address. The first words we caught, his Lordship was centre-ming the House in these words--My Lords, I have risen ender embarrassments of a very peculiar nature, to oppose the measure under your Lordships' consideration, whichoinder whatever point of view I look at it, only gives me a choice of evils. I most sincerely lament that I am compelled to differ from persons for whom I entertain the highest respect and affection, and for whose political experience I have the most decided deference ; but teere are acts of duty that must be performed. and s man is compensated only in the performance of them by knowing . that they arc acts of duty. I have. howerer, the satisfaction of reflecting, that on the most mature deliberation, I am come to the opinion I now hold on this delicate and distress ing subject ; and I have taken up this deliberate opinion in con tradiction to one that I had previously formed, and which, upon the most mature conviction. I have been compelled to give up. When my tided first opened, its impressions were strongly in favour of religious freedom; my heart beat high in favour of it, and I was . struck with the necessity that the Catholics should be admitted to the privileges of the Constitution ; 1 would not brook the idea that so many millions of my fellow.subjecta should be debarred from those tale wings that I enjoyed, and I acted up to this impres. lion; but when I regarded with more care and experience the doctrines of the Catholies,and reflected on the necessity of a religious I establishment which must be pre-eminent to be effective; when I re fleet also upon the miseries brought into Europe by the Catholics; 1 when I berseite convinced that the Catholic religion was unchanged, I felt that it was my duty to recant opinians prematurely termed, 1 in favour of those diet experience had taught me were sound. But it may be said that I do not conic to the discussion of this important question wills impartiality. It has been asserted that we have opposed this measure from prejudiced motives ; but I will ask, what right have the Protestant Bishops of Eng land to be tints traduced ? And is there any thing in their con duct, as connected with this Bill, or apart from it, that should subject them to each calumny. Protestant Bishops of England have in former times set a noble example of bold endurance. When the seven Protestant Bishops arrayed themselves against a Popish King, could their motives be misunderstood ? Nothing but the tweet flame of holy zeal for what they believed to be the true faith could have caused them to act with the firmness they did, under the most trying circumstances. To hesitate as to their motives was out of the question; and I have no doubt a similar ambition would actuate their less illustrious suc cessors, should a similar occasion require it. We have heard, my lolds—not, indeed, on this evening, thought it was even now alluded to, but in the course of the discussion of this momentous oneetion—we have repeatedly been told of the injustice and cruelty of depriving four or five millions of our fellow-subjects of their indefeasible and inalienable rights, on account of their reli gious opinions. But why, my Lords, has the supposed number of these agerievol parties been thus dock upon and paraded so often before us ? Whether they be four hundred or four millions, there can be no difference in the justice of the principle which is applied to them. If the roposed concessions be just and politic, they elionlil be made to f our hundred ;if unjust and impolitic, it is our duty to refuse Ahem to four million+. (Heer, hear, hear.) The calculation of number* should be laid our of view, as an element that does not properly enter into the consideration of the quell non. If' these concessions be demanded on the ground of inde feasible and natural right, I will ask you, my Lorene whether there is any civil immunity which indiriduals may not be called upon to forego, when the public safety requires it ? Yet we have Wen told of the injustice of excluding a large part of our fellows. subjects from the exercise of political power; as if their exclusion, under circumstances that jnetify ir, is not a principle recognised by the Constitution. Many of our fellow-subjects are denied all share in the enactment of the laws by which they are governed, because they do not possess a certain amount of property ; but this surely is net a more justifiable reason than the nature of their opinions. The excluded Individuals in each case suffer the same kind of injustice, ' if I must so call it. The only difference is, that in one (wee the criterion is certain—ln the other it is uncertain. But tliii difference is not applicable to the case of the Boman Catholics, whose prin- , ciples are fixed and notorious. There can be no doubt then, my Lords, that men's; civil rights may be foreclosed when the public safety or welfare requires the 'sacrifice. Is not the right to a voice in the election of Members of the Legislature' more sacred than the mere right of admissibility to the Legislature itself? Yet, my Lords, this greater violation of natural justice is committed against the individual not possessing a certain amount of property, while the Roman Catholic can complain only of being excluded trom forming part of the Legislature. This is the only injustice, as it is called, which we propose still to inflict upon a portion of our fellow. subjects. flaying thus, 1 trust, disposed of the principal argument is favour of the Roman Catholics, I throw back with disdain the minor solecisms of the debate. The ablest advocates of the doctrine of natural right are obliged to submit that the civil rights of men in society may be limited by political expediency, and restricted by public authority, when the safety of the State is concerned. This is an important feature in this question, according to the view I take of it, and it is also the very view which the friends of the measure themselves take of it. The principle for which I contend is recognised and embodied in the Bill now on your Lordships' table. That Bill gives the Roman Catholics some eights. but withholds others, to which they are, however, equally an well entitled, on the grounds assumed by their advocates. By this Bill the Roman Catholics are forbidden to aspire to certain offices, particularly that of Lord Chancellor, which assuredly would be the noblest object of ambition to a Roman Ca tholic barrister, as his exclusion from it must be. according to the reasoning used on the other side, the bitterest degradation. Vet ' from this very office the Roman Catholics were to be excluded with their own cement. One of the priests of that religion, Michael Collison, in his examination befbre your Lordships, said that they would consent to be excluded from die office of Lord Chancellor, front a sense of the necessity of the exclusion • and when questioned as to the meaning of the necessity of the exclusion. he replied that he alluded to the general impression among the Protestants that Ro man Catholics ought not to be appointed to that office. On i the soundest principles of constitutional justice, on the grounds of universal usage, on the admission of the framers of this Bill, it is then clear that there is no civil right dust may not he limited by I political expediency. The absolute capacity to hold offices of great trust and power, inherent in all subjects of the State, is a capacity , not known to any Constitution, and in its nature inconsistent with I the principles of every Government in the world. (Hear, hear.) I ; think, my Lords, I have now disposed of the question of natural right. The next consideration is, whether there is any opinion that can justly disqualify the individual who holds it from exercising the civil rights generally enjoyed by . all other subjects. It has been : remarked, my Lords, in the discussion of this question, with what I justice I a - ill suet now stay to inquire. that an individual is no more I answerable for his opinions that he is for the colour of his hair or the structure of his body. For the sate of argument, admitting the fitness of the comparison, I would ask, my Lords, whether there : ore not constitutional peculiarities and personal defects that would lastly disqualify any inellvielitel front the enjoyment of office? ; This disqualification is his misfortune—not his fault. lie is not responsible for what he is to any one, but it is his duty to I subunit with patience to the disqualification which nature has im ; posed upon loin. The real question is, then, whether the opinions of the Roman Catholics are such as should disqualify them efrom holding officer of mist and power, and especially from sitting lin the Legislature in a Protestant country. There is en ! other quest on—whether the dangers of the present crisis arc , so serious and. imminent ns to induce yourberdeltips, in or. ! der to avert them, to consent to a great violation of the principles of the Constitution. There is yet another question— whether the measure before us would answer its intended purpose of pacification? Ido confess, try Lords, that this last appears to me a most important consideration. sly berth, it there is one point more clearly established than another in the evidence taken before your heed:ships' Committee it is this--that up to a recent date, I Joey say up to the present moment, the disturbed state of Irelard has had little or nothing to do with the disabilities of the Roman Catbellier. That unhappy country is the prey of a much greater evil ; it is blighted by a more malignant in Mortice ; it suffers from a more deeply-seated awl inveterate, but I trust in God not an tecurahle, disease. All the witnesses concurred in stating that the proximate causes of the distresseof Ireland are a miserable pea santry, and a radically vicious state of society. of which I will venture to say. if your Lordships will cotelescend to take the opie pion of one so young and inexperienced in political questions, that it requires the prompt application of the specific remedy of statistic legislation. In that country the landowner's place is sup. plied by ;helloes of inferior station arid education. There exists an uitnatural and mischievous system of sub- tenancy, which, by an unaccouotakde climax of citation, squeals hoax tbs wretched cul . • 1 soot that this nieasureought not to pass,ly si.l rot exact it, the Constitution admit of necessity require it, arid for those cease J., motion. The Bishop of LA NDA FF opposed t wi.;ch was quite inaudible. The Bishop cf NORWICIJ rose and audible below the liar. Idconsequenee a t 1 he spoke, and from the Right Rev. Prela I the HAL we could only catch unconnected of his Lordship's address. 'Etc fit the Right Rev. Prelate, he Was olyservin, you after year heaped upon five millions bolditti; from them the pr+vleres of the I_ in his comielar.ce, he believed would bring suited church of Ungl , td aced Ireland. 'flue of the •seasnre then before their I. waked why t Ise would answer, by 'skit. BRITISH P ESS. tivntor of the sell mete than ateactil itself ` produce's. (Hear, hear.) This state of things cannot be remedied by the removal of the dia abilitica of the Roman Catholics. Other measures, of a wiser, more comprehensive, and efficacious nature, are requisite. The ' etinedies that seen to nee to suggest themselves consist chiefly in an equitable system of landholding, the pure administration of justiae, a revision of the revenue laws, a general system of education. art • last, but not least, that which is alone calculated to lead to ell the rest, the ha arn and residence of the proprietors of the soil. (Hear, hear.) Thin is thesemantipation of which Ireland stands in need— an emancipation that would relieve her front an incalculable mass of moat and political evil—that would raise the peasantry from sloth and reckless poverty, and deliver them from their ignorance, their sepias:item, and their habits of insubordination. W hen these remedies shall have been administered, 1 have no doubt that your Lordships will witness the efiecta produced to be those of great moral, religious, and civil improvement. (Hear, hear.) — My Lords, it appears b the evidence respecting this question, that until 111::3 the gnat hotly of the Roman Catholics of Ireland did not care about what is called emancipation, end that even now the notion they have of it is that it comprises a restoration of the supremacy of their church, and, according to some of the wit nesses, the recovery of the forkited lands. Whichever notion they may entertain, ninth I believe both are widely spread amongst them, what will be their feelings of disappointment, sha,uld this Bill on. Wrtunately pates, when they find that it confers neither of those boons ? '1 n what lengths their feeling* of disappointment I may drive them, if the Bill should not be passed, it ir. eel.. I tainly impossible to conjecture. I confess 1 have considerable apprehensions as to the result; but whatever it may he, it will owe its origin to a knot of political agitators--I use the term advisedly and deliberately, for one either' has publicly thanted God that he is an agitator_a knot of political agitators, I therefore repeat, who have cart this leaven into the lump, which was previously disposed from other causes to ferment, in order that while it heaves and swells they may rise to the surface. Till the Catholic Association existed, the population generally cared nothing about the exclusions, shicii affected only a few of their leaders. While they had been permitted tranquilly to enjoy the produce of their honest labours, they were indifferent as La their inadmissibility to Parliament. Their feelings on this subject were also clearly shown by the fact that their disposition to insubordination has not been diminished by the relaxation of the Penal Code. Indeed it is in evidence that they . hardly know that any such relaxation has taken place, though the concessions already made to them incomparably exceed in number •and importance what retrains to be granted. Yet all this has produced no effect in conciliating them. They are even ignorant, , we are told, that any change has been mete for .their benefit. But, my Lords, I draw another inference from that' statement. I regard it as a lamentable proof that those to whom the Roman Catholics particularly look' Ids for guidance and in struction are purposely withheld from them the knowledge, which, if commusicated, might have been a powerful nsotisith to loyalty and good behaviour. With what views I 'suspect those leaden to have .witltheld this knowledge, which they netertheles% describe an of vital importance to the tranquiffity al the country. I will not say ; but this I will say, that it was preciaely the line of conduct of those who having a greater and niers perilous object of enterprise, mimed as trifling and insignificant all their minor sue eases; it witts the coarse of men, who leaving demolished the barriers and outworks, were preparing Wean assault on the citadel. (hear, heat, heir), aud • who were now seeking to gain the ad missibility of their lay .brethren to office, only to facilitate their grand object of re-establialting the Roman Cwho is teligion on the ruins of the Protestant Church. (Hear, hear:) Mt was mid of the Roman Catholics in the reign of James I. . rigidly time at this day : " If they once gein a connivance they will we st-n:ly 'aim at a toleration ; if they succeed in that, they will next insist upon equality; that gained, they will aspire to superiority , and never rest till they, achieve the destruction of the Protestant religion." My lairds, there can he no doubt that this is the ultimate object of the Roman Catholic hierarchy. It is said that the Irish people will be satisfied with no measure short of this before your Lorelei/lime. I bore, however, to live to see the time when measures of a different and more efficacious character will be brought forward—measures which will render the lower 'orders of that country a weld educated, contented, industrious, and happy people, and wrest a formidable engine of mischief from hands that wield it only to the public danger and detriment. 31y Lords, depend upon it if the lower orders of the Irish people have any religious feeling on this question, it goes much further than the narrow limits of the present Bill, and therefore that Bill can not act as a measure of pacification. If some plan could be devised to give them means of employment, they mi 't be quiet, but Mr. 31• Carty in his evidence adds, that even theft " the question of f i emancipation would still be made a handle ;" and is there any indi vidual, my Lords, who believe* that if this Bilf be passed unal tered, there will he no handle left while there remdins a single point. of exclusion ? The inferiority of the Roman Catholic church. would still be a subject of complaint, and additional facilities would at the same time be,given for gaining the ulterior object& I main tain, therefore, that in applying this measure to Ireland, as a re medy for the convulsive spasms which agitate that unhappy coun try, your Lordships would commit a great practical error in the diagnosis of the disease. You wonld administer a remedy suitable to one disease, while all the symptoms indicate another, I ask, therefore, may Lords—being persuaded as I ant that the ulterior ob. ject of the Roman Catholic hierarchy (for which, be it understood, I impute no blame to them) be, the subversion ofthe Protestant Establishment, and the erection of their own on its ruins,--can your lordships blame me, as a minister of the Protestant Church, if I oppose a measure which would give unspeakable facilities for the attainment of that object ? Aly Lords, we all know what novel speculations are afloat as to church property. We all know the proceedings of the Irish !louse of Commons with respect to the tithe of egintment. (Hear, hear.) I sin naturally apprehensive of still more daring attempts when there shall be in Parliament a set of Roman Catholic Members, moving in a com pact body, and bound, by the most powerful ties of duty, to oppose the tithe system ; knowing too, as they will, that if they should be lukewarm or inactive, they would certainly be cashiered at the next election by the influence of the priests. This Bill, my Lords, resembles one of those portentous comets, which, • " From - its horrid hair, '-• -• Shake; pestilence and war." If on these grounds alone I dissented front this Bill, I think I should be fully justified. I am of opinion, that viewing It simply as a political measure, areart 611111 all religious considerations, it is in superably objectionable. I now come to a part of the question on which I will endeavour to be brief, particularly as Imay be sapposed to be more competent to form a judgment upon it-I allude to the opinions of the Roman Catholic Church. Before I enter upon the examination of their dogmas, it may beaulvfsable to consider the views and sentiments they profess to have, towards the Protestant 1 Church. A gentleman who gave evidence before your Lordships, and who belongs to the Romish persuasion, said that unless he was convinced that emancipation would go to streagthen the Pro. testant interest, tic, for one, would not be in its favour. I rather think, my Lords, that this testimony must be understood with reference to that latitude of expression which is usual to speaker, from the other aide of St. George's Channel. This gentleman, like many a witness, in his eagerhesa to support his cause, proved too much. .1 do not, my Lords, call into cpteation the sin cerity of his feelings ; but I must say, that if hie evidence was to be the criterion of the feelings of the Irish Catholics towards the Protestant Eatablishment, nothing more fallacious can be imagined. l I beg for one moment to call your attention, my Lords, to the na ture of the evidence before your Lordships' Committee; As far as facts are stated, or the opinions of tie individuals examined are concerned, the evidence may be taken withnutdanht or qualification. But I hope that I may be allowed to object to its being received altogether as the "truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." The eliciting of truth depends as much on those who question as on those who answer. This fact was never more re markably exemplified than by this evidence. The Roman Catholic witnesses took great care, in their very cautious answers, never to go beyond the questions put to them. Though armed at all points, they were not authorised to declare the views of the Roman Catholic body. All they could state was their own indivi dual opinions. But if your Lordships wish to know the full truth, you should attend their public meetings ; you should hear their public orators detailing their grievances and suggesting their remedies ; you ahonld hear them denounce the Protestant church as an intolerable nuisance, a gorgeous pest, an incubus on the prosperity of the country ; you should listen to the applause with which these declamations are received, and then judge what are the views and feelings of the Irish Catholics. (Hear, hear.) In a remarkable speech of Dr. Dromgoole, which was re ceived by a crowded assembly of Roman Catholics with ac clamations, and has been since declared to be purely and pre cisely Catholic, the downfall of the Protestant Church Wag thus announced : " She shall fall, mid nothing but the memory of the mischiefs she has committed shall survive. 9he has had her time on earth, and the day of her dissolution is approaching." This very speech was carried in triumph to the feet of the papal throne, and received the unqualified approbation of the Pope, who declared it worthy to be encased in cedar and gold. [1 he Right Reverend Prelate then read another extract, in which the Church of England was described as the eldest of the heretical sisters, and especially worthy of the haired of the Roman Cathodes.] Leda lucebis in ills, Qui stunts ardent, qui tixo gutture fumant. These, my Lords, are the prevailing sentiments of the great body of the Roman Catholics of Ireland. I certainly did once think they had an eve on our tithes, but from their evidence there can be no question that they have no wish to appropriate the tithes to themselves ; they only wish to strip the Established Church of theni. ( Hear, hear.) Their desire to injure the Establishment goes no further than to deprive it of all means of subsistence. For this fact I have not only the authority of the Roman Assts . elation Ass. elation and Dr. Doyle, but I have it in the shape of an authentic document, a petition which was presented to the House of Commons on the last day nis May 1824, and in the prayer of which they state thy nothing will satisfy them, but, in the first place, the repeal of the Union; secondly, the abolition of tithes; and, thirdly, the dissolution oral! corporations. I will not dwell at length on thin petition, but 1 will produce. as an authentic rancher of the same diet position, the well known letters of J. K. L. This, my Lamb, was a very different person from that Dr. Doyle who was examined before your Lordships. (Ileac.) In his evidence he stated, that the Roman Catholics, as Roman Catholics, entertained no designs hostile to the church, but as a great body employed in agricultu ral pursuits, they would do all in their power to procure the abo lition ot' tithes. This distinction, my Lords, Is much the same as it a disappointed suitor in the Court of Chancery should wait en the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, and say to him " May it please you, my lard Chancellor, 1, as Robert Gourley, do not entertain a feeling in the least degree hostile to you as the Earl of Eldon. but as a disappointed suitor in the Court of Chan. eery, I will administer to you, as lion! High Chancellor,• a knock on the head." (Hear, hear, hear.) This same Dr. Doyle, my Lords—no, I beg his pardon, the writer J. R.l..—stated in his pamphlets that all the ela4 of the Legislature were marred by the Protestant Pliestlicad— g at the murders mud other atrocities that stained the annals of Ireland, and hardened the heart and brutalised' the feelings of her population—all resulted from the oppression of the Protestant Priesthood—that Protestant Priesthood, my Lords,. to ahe tinbearance and moderation the concurrent testimony o f all impartial witnesses ascribed whatever benefit Ireland now pos. sessee—that Protestant Priesthood. my Lords, who in the greet moral desolation of their country, remain as the oases in the desert, to whom the pa:mantra. in spite of the difference of faith, look up with reverence and affection, and who, in the midst of nocturnal conflagration and murder, remained at home unprotected but by their virtues. (Hear, hear, hear.) I trust, my lands, I have no feeling of animosity towards any individual; I hope I am not moved by the calumnies that have been published respecting the Protestant Clergy. I would not willingly speak with harsh ness of one in the same spiritual order as myself; but there are emergencies when the truth must be spoken. What degree of truth then, my Lords, 1 ask, ought to be attached to the evi dence of that man, who having, from his anonymous covert; hurled firebrands into the sanctuary of the Protestant church, and sent forth the levelling doctrines of .lacobinisin, comes before your Lordships with ;;losing words, to soften down his calumnies, and hint his dislike of die doctrines which rand blazoned in every document issued by the Church to which he he. longs ? I pass from Dr. Doyle, by a natural transition, to the l'ope An attempt has been made to draw a distinction between the Pope's authority in things temporal and in things spiritual. But before this distinction can be madeof practical effect, each individual mat have two distinct sets of principles and tedious; one relating to the thugs of the other world, and one to the things of this world. Is it not an acknowledged fact that one Pope nominates to all the Ilishorrias of Ireland, with incomes from 4 or 11001. to 2 or 3,000!. a year? Has lie not absolute power over the priesthood; the runt total of whose income is between 2 and 300,000!. a year ? This is a body of well-disciplined troops. At one time it is admitted the Hatt titular Bishops were the nominees of the Popish Pretender. But it is said they still retained their allegiance to the reigning 310. narch. What would have been their conduct if the Pretender had appeared in Ireland with an imposing military force ? In that case, my lands, the ultimo radio pa pa runt would hare been ap plied as the specific for the emergency, and the Irish Catholic would have been relensed from their allegiance to King George by a bull, as the French were from their allegiance to the Bourbons by Pius VII. on the accession of Bonaparte. I now come, my Lords, to the Pope's deposing power. Dr. Doyle says it in obsolete ; not abrogated, not annulled, not disavowed, but obsolete. Truly a well chosen ten; but have we forgotten that in 1643 Charles I. will deposed by a bulf, that in 1729 the sante power was exercised against George 11. by Benedict XIiI., and by Pius VII in 1304. against Louis XVIII ? I acknowledge, my Lords, that these are .but empty displays, (bear, hear, from the Opposition,) but though the:. were empty, as far as regards the actual power of the Pape, 1 contend they were not without effect on the minds of the Roman Catholics, to whom they were addressed. (Cheers.) Dr. Do) le says the power is obsolete. But, my Lords, in a rescript sent to the Nuncio at Vienna in 1809. the Pope assorted him that he bed the power to depose heretical Princes, though lie did not judge it expedient to exercise it. I say, then, my Lords , it does not be- come the Roman Catholics to advance their pretensions to political power while their offensive doctrines continue to be cherished by the Court of Rome. My Lords, neither Dr. Doyle, nor any Roman Catholic in the universe, will pretend to maintain that a single ca non of the Council of Trent has ever been disavowed, and while the decrees of that Council remain the profession of faith and rule. of discipline of the Roman Catholics, they will continue, in my judgment; disqualified to take any part' in the Government of a Protestant country. 1 am aware that I shall be charged with re viving antiquated prejudices ; but, my Lords, these are still the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. They are obsolete only as the power and strength of a tiger is obsolete, when his claws are pared and his limbs paralysed. (Hear, hear.) I hope, my Lords, I am not understood to impute blame to the in dividuala professing the Roman Catholic faith, but the conscien tious members of that Church must believe every tittle of these doctrines, and they only are worthy of our notice or consideration. 1 had intended, my Lords, to say more respecting these doctrines. I will only add that the most offensive of them arc taught, not merely at the Court of 'Home, but in the divinity claes books of the College of Maynooth. 1 must advert to the inviolability of oaths. In a book of education written by Dr. James Butler, for Roman Catholic children, they arc taught that an unjust oath is not binding, and an unjust oath is believed to be an oath in-' injurious to God, our neighbours, or ourselves. How dif ferent is this doctrine from that which teaches us that " the righteous titan sweareth to his neighbour, and disappointeth him not, though to his own hindrance !" My Lords, again I say, this' measure is no specific for the disease of Ireland. I contemplate it only as comprising abundant materials of civil commotion—as an inroad on the principles of the Constitutions-Rs a stepping-stone to the enemies of the Establishment to scale the walls of the church. I am in duty bound to admit that in the acquaintance I have with Roman Catholics of education,-1 confess it is very limited,but I have seen nothing that has led me to be lieve that they entertain the offensive doctrines of their Church. I bear willing testimony to their liberality, honour, and can dour. One Roman Catholic Gentleman in particular, in pos sessing vast property, has had the liberality, worthy of a better faith 1 hope I may any without offence, to support a huge national school. If this Bill should pass, I hope, my Lords. that when carried into effect, its operation will not be such such as I expect. We live at an era when we cannot cal. ciliate with confidence the effect of any political measure. If ' it should pass, I shall still confide in the procection of that Provi. dente who has hitherto shielded the Protestant Church of these kingdoms, and as long as that Church shad do its duty, I have no dread that lie will withdraw his protection. But I cannot therefore consent, on account of contingent and problematical dangers, to sacrifice a single security of the Established Church. These con siderations will indnce me to give far from a satisfactory, but assuredly a conscientious, vote, on the question before you. The Earl of LIMERICK then rose to support the Bill.— The Right Rev. l'relate bad endeavoured to attribute the miseries of Ireland to other causes than the disabilities affecting the Roman Catholics of Inland ; he seemed to think they were owing to too many derivative interests,' and to the non-residence of !monorail. Perhaps, he (the Earl of L.) might come under the imputation, as thus thrown out against the landlords. (Hear, and a laugh.) Perham; he was included in the charge of not doing his duty in this respect. But the Right Rev. Prelate should remember that we were a United Kingdom ; or at least in his desire to heap impu. onions on others , he should not have omitted an carefully the absence of the Clergy. (Cheers.) And on the part of landlords he would say, that some difference should be made between these who enjoyed hereditary mutes and those who were paid by the State for time performance of a fixed duty. (Hear, hear.) The charge, however, of the Right Rev. Prelate was; directed ra ther against the P rotestants than die Roman Catholics, as the landed property was chiefly in the hands of Protestants. The Ca_ tholics, he (Loral L.) sincerely believed, approached this House in the spirit of sincerity and conciliation—but the Right Rev. Prelate would not credit them • they tendered their midis in testimony of the doctrines they professed—but them Right Reverend Prelate re fused to receive ; he turned upon them and said, " 1 don't believe you ;" and he in conjured up a teat whereby to try them—some rescript or antiquated dogma of Pope Boniface or Urban, not ae. cordant with the present doctrine of Catholics, nor suited to the spi. rit of the age. The Right Reverend Prelate refused to credit any. thing they said : he would exclude them from the Constitution for doctrines which they themselves disclaimed This was waging an interminable war on one third of the population of the Empire. (Hear, hear.) The Right Reverend Prelate might have looked upon a Right Reverend Brother on his own bench (the Bishop of Norwich), in whose eloquent and enlightened sentiments I he would discover principles more congenial to the true spirit of Christianity. In the contrast of the sentiments of the two Right Reverend Prelates, he would say to the House, " Look on this picture, and on that." (Hear, hear.) The Right Rev. Prelate had greatly exaggerated the incomes of the Roman Catholic Prelates, by saying that they were in the receipt of three or four thousand a year. The Bishop of CHESTER intimated, that what he had said was, from 5001. to 20001 or 3000!. a year. The Earl of LIMERICK could assure the Right Rev. Prelate that he had formed an exaggerated estimate of the incomes of die Roman Cathodic bishops . and clergy : some of them had certainly what may be called goon parishes; but, generally speaking, their incomes were collected in small pittances of sixpences, and shil lings, anti lialf.crowns, from the poorer classes of the people, a nude of payment ill which the Right Rev. Prelates opposite would not like io receive their revenues. They had not, nor did they re quire establishments in London. Cheltenham, and in other places of fashionable resort, but remained at home In exemplary attention to the spiritual welfare of their flocks. He was induced to say thus much in vindication (tithe clergy, and of the landlords of Ireland, after what had fallen from the Right Rev. Prelate. The Bishop of CH ESTER was desirous of assuring the Noble Earl that he intended to convey no imputation on the landed pro perty of Ireland. What he intended to convey to the House was, that there would be as much reason at least for imputing impro priety to the non-resident landlords as there was far imputing mo tives of interest to the clergy for the part that they took on this question. As to the incomes of the Roman Catholic Titular Bish ops of Ireland he had taken theiestimate he h.ul made front the evidence oh' those Catholic Bishops themselves, one of whom stated the Income of a certain Roman Catholic Bishopric to be 9001. a year, and that he knew that others were considerably move. Lord HARROWBIT here rose, amid much confusion in the House, to propose an adjournment of the debate. (Loud cries of " No I no !" • Go on t go on !" from all parts of the House.) The Marquis of LaNsnowat and the Earl of LIVERPOOL rose at the same time ; the latter Noble Lord gave way, and The 3larquis of LANSDOWN said that after the very able and impressive, though not to his mind very convincing, speech of the Right Reverend Prelate opposite (th e Bi s h o p o f Chester) he was desirous of tittering a few observation s u p o n some o f t h e top i cs to which lie had adverted, before he went into the consideration of the general question, to which he had at all times given his support, and which imperatively called, on this occasion more than any other, for the best support that he could give it. The ['iglu Reverend Prelate hued maintained that expediency might justify a forfeiture of sights. He (the Marquis of L.) would maintain however that expediency should not stand in the way of an act of justice, the more particularly when the performance of that act was safe and necessary. But upon the ground of expe diency he would assert that the passing of this measure, end the immediate passing of it was rendered requisite, not less by reason and justice than by expediency. The Right Reverend Prelate. in the inquiries which induced him to form a new opinion on the die. abilities affecting the Roman Catholics, seemed to have discovered that the present condition of Ireland was owing to other causes. diatinet altogether from those disabilities. lic would apply to the relief of that country what he called " statistical legislation," a term which he presumed he found in the writings of Sir John Sinclair. (Hear, and a laugh.) But in this plait of statistical legislation the Right Rev. Prelate °refloat:l the importance of encouraging and rafting up a Roman Catholic gentry, so d a Roman Catholic yeomanry. which was so much wanting in that country—that efficiem instrument for the promotion and welfare of Ireland, which had been eloquently termed &conductor between the Government and die people. The Right Rev. Prelate, who had gone so largely into learned inquiries upon this subjt CI-60 largely as to alter the impre.csion which he had at fi rs t f orme d from an actual contemplation of the particular condition of Ice:laid ( !fear, hear, hear)—had overlooked this important point of con. sideration also, that the people of Ireland were of a different reli. gion from the Established Church there by law. This was an anomaly which he could not remedy it was a great evil certainl i , but it could not be remedied. They ought to see, th ere f ore, h ow thee could alleviate that evil—only by conciliating the affectio n , and the confidence of the people of the country. (Bear, heir.) The Right Rev. Prelate had dealt out imputations on the ROOl2ll Catholic population of Ireland, on the Roman Catholic clergy rill Ireland, and on the Roman Catholic priesthood generally. Il e (Lord L.) would with confidence assert that he was tot ilh101:11 in these imputations. He w, la not have found it In the evidence to which he had adverted. lie could not have - read the evidence act have made these charges. Where would he find evidence to sup. port the charge of an intention on the part of tile Roman C at n o ;i i i s to overturn the Protestant Church, and to establish the Roman Ca. tholic Church in its stead ? Ile (Lord L.) would be bold to say that there was not one tittle in the whole of the evidence, either of the Roman Catholic Prelates or gentlemen examined w eft the Committee, or of a single Protestant of intelligence, to substan tiate the charge. lie would repeat, that the Right Rev. Prelate could not have read the evidence and made the charge. (Hear.) Their evidence also with respect to the forfeited estates of Roman Catholics was no less satisfactory. Front the evidence it appeared that forfeited estates, in cases of the sale of property, were pre. ferred. as the title was more easily made out, and deemed more secure. The Right Rev. Gentleman had expressed it as his opinion that the people of Ireland would feel themselves disappointed if they did not take away the whole of their property that had b een f or . fated. The Right Rev. Prelate had said that they were led to en tertain the opinions they did upon the subject from a regard to their property, when, according to him, all properly was to betaken awn!. lie (Lord Lanadowat) thought that upon more mature consideration, the Right Rev. Prelate would banish from his mind the apprehensions he entertained. lie for his own part could not separate the security of property from the security of the Church, as had been done by the Right Rev. Prelate. He had always con. sidcrcd this question as involving all establishments, and that upon the same principle, and that was, that it involved the security of all. The security of all would be obtained, as it would secure the affections of the whole population. The Right Rev. Prelate had appealed to the conduct of the Catholic Association, and in that reference had stated that there was no unanimous or loud expression of feeling upon that subject. But he (Lord Lanadown) would ask whether the very formation of such an Association did not show the state of public feeling which had been perpetually breaking out in new forms, new shapes, and new phantasm's, all tending to establish the thet of the existence of a great mass of discontent. This dis content did exist and must be allayed. The Right Revere! d Prelate had made extracts front a speech made many years ago, and from which he, gathered the particulars of the (h. tholic Faith. But he would ask, were the Catholics answer. able for all that had been written 011 the subject of their religion ? Would the Church of England like to be judged by the sank method ? With regard to the expediency of the measure, be would now offer his opinion. The question was not whether tran substantiation or consubstantiation were reasonable doctrines, nor whether the calling won saints was or was not idolatry, but how far the spiritual power of the Pope extended, and where the tern. pond power begau, and how far this obedience to the commands oh a foreign spiritual Potentate affected the allegiance of the subject. (Hein, hear.) In this argument he had the advantage of an ad mission made early in the evening, of the present favourable stare of the limes for Protestantiene lie would pass by the claims to the Catholics upon the gratitude of England for the public services they had rendered in time of need, aid merely urge upon them the expediency of it. He would hest ask what the Protestant religion had to fear front the concessions, and next, what they had to gain by them ? When the Right Reverend l'relate had last spoken, he had expected that he would have brought forward some facts in support of his opinions : one fact he certainly did men tion, and that was, that of the Pope having cent bulls and deposed the King. (A laugh.) It was true that it had been acknowledged that these bulls had been without visible effect, but thenthe Right Reverend Prelate was. still of opinion that it had some effect upon the minds of ibis Majesty's subjects. (A. laugh.) This, however, confirmed what had been given in evidence by Dr. Doyle and others uupon the power of the Pope- There was a bouneaty to his tem poral power, which he had in this distance passed,and had efore been unattended to. The Right Reverend Prelate first tool the right to select any particular tenet he might demonstrate Catholic, and then to put what construction lie pleased spun it, and tioaily ow attribute . the whole to the profemors of the Catholic relieion. (Hear.) Ile, fur his own pat, thought that the Catholic had a right to say what was and what was not Ills erred. He called .upon them to look upon circumstances as they were in the world at present. The Catholic religion was not to be considered by the eye of an antiquary, looking to what it was, but by that of the stalestrian, looking to whet it is. If they were studying any science under a master who was teaching them the laws of nature, what would they think of hint if, instead of bidding therelook to the heavens the earth, and ehe whole pheno mena of the creation, he wax to bid them look to the doctrines laid down by the Royal Acedetny e aud guide his judgment by then works ? This would be just as reasonable. as the present proceed ings. They must not look to the Bodleian library or to Cardinal Rellarmine for the present state of the Catholic fauh. Let them look round in Europe and America, and they would find whit were the dispositions of the Catholics. The United States generally had been alludedto as a good illustration, but when they came to ex amine the Constitution of each particular State, they would find even more striking illustudions. In Maryland the population was, when called upon to frame a Constlfutrote composed of by far the greater ,part Catholics, on account of persecutions in England, which bad, at the colonization of the State, driven a great number to that quarter s who at that occemion--he meant the framing of a Constitution—bad shown more liberal iews with regard to toleration than any of the other States of the Union. The co n sequence of this had beer, that the Catholic, religion had dereased in that country. Rae then was an example of a majority of Catholic population. without having exerciela that intolerance which had been de scribed as their constant attribute. Let them look to the ge neral state of Europe- , .t0 Prussia, Ilenover, and indeed all the States north of the Alps. In those States it was acknewkdged that the Roman Catholics of the present age, whatever might have been their conduct heretofore, were capable of discharging the duties of loyal subjects. He called upon the Noble Peer on the NVoolsack, who had many_ opportunities of knowing what had been the course of afikirs in Europe--he called upon him to say, whether there bad ever been an instance of a Roman Catholic General, or oilier publie character, swerving from his duty to hie Sovereign ? The fidelity of many had been tried, but had been found to he unavail able. It had been said, that Roman Catholics might ary . well have all these privileges in a despotic country, but not in a free Suite. (Hear, hear.) Truly it was an advantage in a despotic country that so large a portion of the people could act as their fellow-citizens, whilst in free England they could noe—er. England, where the very principle of the Constitution was that sit opinions should be represented ; and yet unless this measure were passed a third of the opinions of the whole popnlatind would be excluded. Such a derogation front the free character of the Cor.- stitution he never had heard of. If they were legislating upon ar ticles of religious observance, no man would listen with more vene ration to that venerable Bench than lie would, but whoa the ques tion went to deprive a large portion of the community of theft hopes of evil and political sights ; when it became a question as to the effect of duties upon human conduct and human affair., he thought the Clergy were not to be attended to, and that tidy were from their situation even more fallible than other wee. (Hear.) There was a remarkable similarity between the arguments stud upon the question of admitting Catholics to the privileges of the Catholics to the privileges of the Constitution, and those used upon the queetiou of admitting the sixteen Peers of Scotland to seats in that House. Upon that accession it was said by the Right Rai Prelates of that day that if they admitted so many violent Ptesby tenant of the Church of Scotland to have seats in that House (men so distinguished by their hatred of the rules of the Church of Eng land) it would prove destructive of Protestant ascendancy ; and one Right Rev. Prelate had even gone so far as to assert that it these sixteen Peers got into what lie called the cauldron of that House, they would, from their Presbyterian principles, cause it to boil over and burst. (Hear and laughter.) Now lie appealed to the House for the result of that prophetic declaration., and lie thought he might venture to state, without contradiction, that so far from hostility being shown by those sixteen Presbetc terians to the venerable Bench of Bishops, there had always been a remarkable coincidence, a singular sympathy between those bodies since they had been placed together. So much fur the anticipated hostility of the dreaded Presbyterianism. A great deal had been said at different times about the feelings displayed m the Letters signed .1. K. It. but lie would venture to say, that there was nothing in these letters, nor in any of the documents, public or private, connected with the question betweea the Catholia and Protestants, which could be put in competition with the declara tions contained in the solemn deliberate acts of the Church of Scot land at that period, with the strong denunciations twitched against the Church of England, which die Presbytery had even compared to the devilish Grecian horse, that being once let in, would set the State on fire. lie only alluded to these things, to show. whether, in arguing upon legislative acts, it was right to continue referring to solemn declaration' in a period of controversy. far less Le such warm expressions uttered in the heat of argument , as the Right Reverend Prelate (the Bishop of Chester) had referr to for an exwmplitication of the feelings of the Catholic body. (Hear, hear.) 1 or, strong as the language that had been used on those occasions, and violent as the denunciations had been against the Church of England and its supporters, some of those who had been the chief instigators of those ptoceedinp had actually after. wards become Bishops themselves. (Ilea, hear.) With regard to the predictions of the clergy upon these subjects, there was a cask with which he would trouble their lemiships, and which he thought was completely in point. About one hundred yiars ago an attempt was made in Ireland to repeal %list was allot the Sacramental Teat, and upon that occasion a man, emitted to as much attention as any Prelate upon that bench—he did not dis parage.their abilities when he said Dean Swift--was so tar led away as to say, unfortunately for his fame, that if that Act passed. the whole Protestant religion would be changed into Presbyterian:sm. and that ouch an effect would take place the more readily, because 3 . a 4 4 • 1 I 1 1 I I 4 i 4 1 . • 4 • 1 1 • 1 i i 1 I 1