The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1808-05-28 00:00:00

4i* , ;;*q • • • She time of the Union.% lien it was iidendeal to ftring forward the discussion o< *these restraints, and to prescribe to persons of that ;Inscription, differing from you in religious faith, such a form of words in the oath to be used by them, as might be deemed necessary to secure temporal government mid temporal obedience to a temporal 'Prince. Ou • this subject I not only speak of what the Catho lics are likely to do, but I also say that their decla rations, and the oaths of allegiance which they here been in the practice of taking to the Government, are such as ought not to leave any dubiety iu the mind of any wan, that they are ready to conic for ward and pay the most complete and unqualified temporal obedience to the State. Whilst I say this, it is not for the purpose of adding secu rity where there is no delimit, or doubting tali giance already demonstrated; but for the purs pose of removing all jealousy, doubt, mid ap prehension, iu the minds of others. It is upon these grounds that I ant anxious such a form of words should. be devised, as to go fitirly and distinctly to such objects only as relate to ten *NO obedience to temporal Princes. The advau tap, that would result from your Lordships going into a Committee, would be, that you oould have .• a full opportunity of considering, not merely the propriety of removing those restraints which at present exist, but alas of discussing all those pre cautionary measures that ought to be adopted, in order to secure the good Government of the Ca tholic Church, and in order that the Catholics should not, in any possible case,be apprehended to be in hostility against your Government, or to en danger, in the slightest degree, the security of the State. These arc measures, which, if they cam be adopted, ought to be put in execution. Every man knows how much the present system of tythes in Ireland proves au oisstaele to the peace and happiness of the people of that country. There is no ose who is particularly acquainted with Ire land, and with this subject, whq does not know that it would be a matter of. difficulty to propose any satisfactory regulation on that subject. to ptirson would look to it, but with that respect due at all times to the private property and profit of the subject ; for rashly to interfere with that, would be to shake the pillars of your own security, the peace and hap piness of the people, and l i ke welfare of the stete.— That measure also eannot undoubtedly' be exclud ed from the consideration of those who mean to provide for the happiness of so large a mass of the population of these kingdoms; and it was a matter which was uot excluded from the consideration of those who originally planned the relaxation of the restrictive laws regarding Ireland. I have, my Lords, stated every thing that can accom pony the consideration of the first measure ; I know of no other restriction or qualification that can be deemed requisite for me at present to touch upon ; and I am persuaded none existed in the minds of other*, as I am convinced they would not have concealed them from me. If, hOwever, any such have been communicated to others, all I beg of them is, that they also would state them with the same opeimess and fairness which I hare done; for I am confident, that every fact well deserves the consideration of Parliaineat, when directed to the peace and halipiness of the country. I have not made any particular reference to the memory of any individual, hut merely in so far as his opinions come ided with my own, and because they thereby come more 'strongly recommended for the public interest. These are the grounds,nly Lords on which it is my intention to li:o t iose rather your going into a Committee, than to do that which I have no hesi tation in confessing 1 would wish you to do, T mean, the declaring at once, that these restraints upon tbeCatholies of Ireland ought not to exist. In de daring this opinion, however, I at the same time think I would not be doing justice to a subject of such importance, if, after laying down the princi , pal grounds for its adoption, I did not trouble your Lordships once more with a review and exa mination of some of the principal objections raised against the possibility of such events taking place, consistently with the safety mid security of the country. The great object, my Lords which I have at present in view is, that you should not be led into the belief that the state of Ireland is etch, that it cannot safely be left in its pre; sent predicament. It is in order to vii. r urce that truth upon your minds, and to obtain your own authority regarding it, that I am anxious to induce your Lordships to go into a Committee. Undoubtedly I feel much less anxiety as to the particular measure in question being all at once or suddenly adopted, than that your Lordships should shew to that large body of His Majesty's subjects, practical hopes and expectations that you are occupied in the consideration of what will really at some period or other trod to afford them relief, and remove from their minds any such ideas or fatal notions as those that have formerly been entertained ; that you were, on the contrary, to draw lines of perpetual exclusion between them soul the other subjects of the realm. If you should even come to the resolution of relaxing, at some time or other, any or all of those restraints, touch, I confess, would be done towards the great oh.. ject of reconciling them to their present fate, and promoting harmony in that distracted part of the country. These mid many other beneficial conse quences, would, I say, result, if they were only practically confirmed, that your Lordships are occupied in concerting measures for their future relief, or considering what you can possibly do for their present advantage, and how far vo • can practically go, without exciting animosities in the minds of others. ‘Vhat I chiefly wish is, to ascertain how far it is practicable to arrive at puttiug theirs in that state in which all the subjects of His Majesty's realm have but. one feeling, one determined wish to reset any attempt of a foreign power to shake those rights which they ought all equally to enjoy from our glorious con stitution. It it should he the jud...,tnecit and deter mination of your Lordships, rather to apply your selves in such a Committee to a partial consider ation of the objects I have stated, that' to a gene ral °De, all that 1 desire is, that in it the same spirit of moderation. the same temper and tOrhear mice. the same wish to conceal it, should-be adhered to on all sides of this Howse, ea formerly disti ugaish ad discussions Of a light nature, and which, I hope, will, and I think is likely to mark it upon the pre went occasion. Undoubtedly, my Lords, I should not be doing justice to tny own opinions, (what ever may he my wishes upon the subject) if, upon any occasion, where I had an opportunity of re pasting them, 1 did nut state that my owl' jiidg,- anent, confirmed by repeated reflection up6ii the subject, my clear and coufirmed opinion, vs, that you cannot immediutidy, with propriety, remove all at once the whole constraints or civil disabili ties, under which the Catholics at present labour, and place them in the same situation, iu regard to the enjoyment and exercise of civil rights, and ca pability of civil appointments, with their Protestant brethren. The grounds of that opinion are really so obvious, that I feel some hesitation and difficulty iu tiring your Lordships with a repetition of mat ters so often repeated here and elsewhere. The various events which more than a year has em braced, are yet fresh in your Lordship,' recol lection. SVe are placed, my Lords, in a state. is which, perhaps, no country was ever placed be fore; since the commetweinent of utilized society, no instance has ever occurred of such an awful combination of powers, eudangeiing the existence of our country, notwithstaiming our immense means of defence. A people who have so much to lose, must undoubtedly have dangers equally great to encounter. There never has been a period, since the lint establishment of the monarchy, when, what ever hostility existed from a foreign quarter, it was not counterbalanced by the amity and friendship of another power qr powers ; but now the whole pow • er, means, and strength, are all got into one hand ; all that immense mass of force is collected toge ther into one central point, and directed against the vital interests of this country. There never was, I say, a moment in which any combination of seve ral powers together was able to bring against you a force to such an extent as that single power, which is at present formed upon the Conti tient. Wbatthen, my Lords, will lie theconsequence of jarring interests mina difference of opinions, if that power, which is now sent oat under the contralti of one man, be directing itself to the subversion doer empire ? 1 inn sure, my Lords, that the whole course of my life will sufficiently vindicate me from the imputation of wishing to excite any desponding idea, or of desiring to promote any other than that of the increased necessity of avail ing yourselves ef all the wieslous, courage, and re sources of your country. That—that I call upon you sod.. What I ask of you is, when you are so dreadfully threatened without, to endeavour to be in union and harmony within. When you are called upon to avoid dangers so great, do not add to those dangers, perils that can have no existence but by your own promptitude or negligence in the adoption of conciliating measures. The policy of such a re solution is so obvious, uniting in a moment the dan cmrs to be apprehended from the enemy without, .ind the mode of resisting that enemy; by conden sing your power within, when threatened with fs. reign invasion, that it would be wasting your Lord ships' time to enlarge upon a point which it is im possible to deny. .Wbeo you confess that the dan ger exists, you must at the same time sicknowledge. that the most proper means of counteracting it are those of uniting and consolidating your own people as one man, so as to bring every thing that the eountry can produce to repel such a danger; the mere especially when it is doubt ful whether even all that you can collect will be sufficient. Must it then be said, even while we confess the necessity of this union, that there is in the measures we propose any obstacle of suffi cient magnitude to interfere with that necessity? It can be nothing more than merely a departure from some ancient theories, a derilectiou of some old he bits, to which we have been long accustomed, and a false and erroneous supposition that the dangers within would tend to counteract the dan gers without. These alone ran be the reasons that will not allow you to unite all your force against the strength of France. In for mer times, when these exclusive systems were first established. 1 am ready to own that there was a danger that might induce you to think such a mode of reasoning was right; but you must remem ber, my Lords, that there existed, at that time, a body of men whose inclination disposed them to eouneet themselves with the cause of your enemy ; berate's., from the very events that had ,thee taken place iii the country, it was natural to suppose, that every main, who had professed the Catholic religion, deemed another Sovereign the lawful heir to the throne. Does any mail believe that this is the CRAW now ? 13 it possible that your Lordihips can think, that there can arise any individual who will be bold enough to say, that that family. which now inherits the throne, can be set aside, in order to give way to the rights of a Pretender? Does any titan believe, that there can arise an individual, throughout the whole kingdom, who dare to raise his voice or arm in favour of the cease of another Sovereign P No, my Lords ; no such thing ; no man entertains any idea hostile to that security which your ancestors formerly judged it convenient to provide for. They presumed the imagined partisans of the House of Stuart are now given up to you by something more than the security of human laws. You have only to relax in those lines of distinction that you thought it necessary to draw between one portion of Did Majesty's subjects and another ; you hate only to withdraw those measures of restriction, which were then thought necessary to provide against real, but can now only be continued against imaginary dangers.— If these laws passed solely upon the ground of real necessity ; that necessity being done away, they now cannot he justified upon any other -round whatever. If those laws ran now no longer be entertained upon former grounds and dangers, which thry 'a ere calculated to guard against, does there exist any danger of another de le:notion ? In what is thin danger to be found ? We here heard upou former occasions some general prineiples Getiles!, it was said, upon eternal truth ; principles to he allowed in regard to every Covernment, and upon no occasion to be departed from. You have been told that the Sovereign of the cotietrs should be of the same religion with his subjects, and that the act of settlement was passed ill order to effect that object. It mast be recol lected, however, that at the time that Act was pass ed, the religion of the Sovereign was not exactly that of the Church of Eugland.— The provision in that Act is not positive, but negative ; as it is only provided that he shall not be a member of that particular Church, which was at that time hostile to the state. Perhaps it would be-deemed right that that provinou should continue, as no udvatitage could arise from its re laxation. No grieviugs. no coinplaiuts, have origi nated from it, but, on the contrary. great helmets have been derived. But if the law can tic maiutaiu ed in its strict letter, let it be earned no fur ther. Ou what position is the ink-ream drawn from it to be maintained ? I thick it right that the Sovereign should be of the religion of the state; but how does it thence follow, that it is necessary to exclude from Parliament all persons that are not of that religion ? Ou what principle is it, that j every individual that is called upou to vote in Pai -1 liatuent, or to support a trust under Government, who entertain religious opinions different from those of the lawful Sovereign, must necessarily be thought desirous of contributing to the overthrow of this country ? I know of no such doctrine hay ring prevai.ed in practice, however much it may have been iiiculcuted in theory. On the contrary, the principles delivered in that bock, which is the law and doctrine of charity, will lead to persuade every man to act in such situations u hiscouscieuce dictates. If this position be sot t rue in principle, how is it to be maintained iu practice ? Has it ever re gulated the conduct of any state or country ? My Lords, you till know that those mum with which history is most familiar, will at once prove dm falsehood of such doctrines. It was said that France was not the worst Government. bechme, although a Catholic country, it was governed by a Protestant Minister. You know that our own revolution was, in fact, produced iu the presence of an army, and of that very army, with which your great deliverer landed in this country, to free the people from the tyranny of the Popish establishment.• in opposition to the then prevailing opinions. the ma jonty was composed of Catholic soldiers. These were entrusted with a duty which they faithfully discharged. Such was Ate effect produced by placing confidence in men of the Catholic persua sion, who had discharged the duty they had to perform. I have already reminded you, that you have not (me religious establishment but two in this island. You do admit into the Parliament of the country many representatives, both io this Hume and the other, coming from a part of the country where the establiihed religion is not that of the melts ; and yet I asked you formerly, as I now ask you again,. at what time any danger has existed to the establishment of the church et Engl ar.d,from the admission of those of the Church of Scotland, not only into Parliament, but into every civil and mili tary office in the country? Many amongst you must still remember how soon all the most considerable offices in the country were tilled with individuals from the northern part of the kingdom; even the Woolsack, the Courts of Justice, every branch of the army and navy ; greatly to the honour of that part of the country, inhabited by those not pro fessing the religion of the Church of England, but a religion which in former periods waged the/lust destructive contest against it. Look at the history of the Church of Scotland, and you will recognize the hatred of the Presbyterians against the Church of England, and that it was at one time attempted to be introduced instead of the other. There was more rancour and animosity existing between the people of the Church of Scotland and that of Eng land, than ever existed between any two countries. Hew is the case now changed ? You have now very • largely admitted those of the Scotch Church into both Houses of Parliament, and you admit them to the enjoyment of every civilaud military office; and have you not seen that there is a disposition warmly to support each other ? Now, my Lords, I say, therefore, that your principle, if it could at all be applied in say case, might be applied in re gard to Scotland ; but you find it has not been so. This being the case, how can you apply or follow up your own principles, in regard to the Ca tholics• of Ireland? Accordiug to your own doctrine, we ought not to admit them into any situation in which they could be 'apposed likely to do injury to the Established Religion of the country, or to the Government of it. If this be true, then why have you thought it proper .te admit them into a share of the attain of Suite.? Why have yon permitted them to be the constituent body of the Legislature ? Why have you permitted them to send Repre sentatives to Parliament ? If it be true, that it is improper to put them into situatious where they could lend assistance to any hostility against the State, why have you a cted o n a con t rar y prin ciple ? Your own conduct ['hews; that your prin ciple never /MS, and pever can be true. The only sound principle thet can be stated upon the subject is this : the ohjekt of society is to provide for the happiness of All, and in so doing, you are to restrain none, but act in a manner that is consistent with the general welfare. If you think it necessary to restrain one religious sea from the tiovemnient, then, upon the same priiivip!e, ought yon to restrain every other one, so as to impose the same restraints upon all. I ask you, upon whet principle you think the professors of the Catholic religion in Ireland are fit subjects of such restraints ? or if they were mice so, what now can induce tie legislature to continue them ? You are now nu more jiistitied in continuing these re straints, after the necessity does not exist, than you would hove been in withholding them when it did. I do not believe that it can any longer be necessary to think, that the Catholics do not believe in the obligation of an oath, yet that is one of the grounds upon which, it is said, it would be daseterous to ad mit them to power. ho that view it would not wily be dangerous in the executive or constituent power, but it would even be dangerous to admit them into the society of wankied. Would it mot be dangerous to live in a country, where three millions of men could be found, so perverted, as that they will not believe in oaths ? Nlhat ground is there for this gross imputation upon the Catholics ? In the first place, to prove that the imputation is ill-founded, I will not yippeel to their advocates, or those who wish to plead their cause, hut to those only who asperse them, e ho. placed them under those restraints, and elm still think it necessary to continue theta, assinnine an imaginary danger which the laws amply provide against. If in one single instance they could trifle with the solemn obligation of an oath, what pre vents them, et this hour, from despising; our rept la tionsso nil walking into this 'loose and claim:lit a seat. They are excluded from either House only bt tli. it conscientious regard to solemnthese thanby r a ut L pt l it ; nijtt i ih ,, i.lo: It is impossible to vise any better menus Ci g uar d against esolarsttulhaeunytre.hsl7tgoproffitodtbidlieigiullgteriforon' from such an oath. 1 arg t tl which cannot with justice exist any of y ou Lordships' minds , as to call upon you tc ulpt. what grounds you base already dismissed such - . prehension. If the Catholics do believe in 4 a oath, the law is unjust; if they do not lieve in it, then the law is nugatory, or ane w . than nugatory, as it is ineffectual. If the din, ger be visionary, then the law provides no se.' wady, as there is then no necessity for any bea r provided. My Lords, the next polut is, that it s alleged the Catholics hold such t enets as alie peculiar to themselves, and incompatible with t safety of the state. These tenets are allege t . d be, that it is lawful for the Pope to depose s oj -, ) . reigns,and that, actuated by motives different hea then interests, any portico of Catholics cisnld drawn from their allegiance, and think it no to murder the Sovereign of the country. not be aerial( an insult to your undentei.e.;, wefe ve the op t 4" argue, of n this dispro t who sited ote any such conduct or belief to the Catholic*? The very confession of faith of persons pc! : ,. licly professing any religion ; and much more, persons who, by professing their religion, su ject them to incouveniencies, lead us to supp. that they act justly, so lung as they pro! • to he religious. It s impossisolt to hear a Rea professing himself to be a Catholic, without 'Li' posing that he is what he professes himself to ter, • the Catholics, who have lieu so grossly therx e d, in pdblications, have done all that was possible ' order to disclaim such doctrines and such print'. plea. They are desirous of vindicating tbemseir t . from such infamous charges, which they deem consistent with any religion whatever. Thes e s Ireland have had recourse Not only to the doctrii and opinions of those of their own Church, hut al to thooe of other countries; and your Looishijs know, that the unanimous confessions of every 04 of them have been disclaiming those charges arit4 iudignatiop e and expressing their astoaiehment the any person could entertain such opinions. Not only this, but if your Lordships dwell upon the authority of the Church of Rome, you hest the dtelsnaiou of the Papal See itself. hi 1791 yue bad the declaration of the Papal See, dieclaisniii, in terms of equal indignation, any opinions of that description. If these difficulties be-then removed, what remains to be contended or argued agoitist them? These remains the Oath of Suprema( 1 have already stated to you sense observations iipos that autos-et, and it is therefore unnecessary to go into a • to investigation of it. They have Lets uniform in declaring, that they understood the St. premacy of the Pope to consist purely in a sp. ritual sense, and are desirous that it should ex clude every thing that can interfere with the civil government of the country. Is it a matter that interferes with the civil and temporal Co vernment of the realm, because something 100 been said in order. to connect it with a soit 4 jurisdiction exercised by the Pastors and Bishops of that Church ? if you mean to tolerate the Epie copal Church, that Church must have Bishops, and upon the same ground must the Catholic Chuck here E:shops also. Yet there have not biro wanting persons who have had a disposition to to. lerate the 'Catholic religion, provided it was pis. Bible not to tole-rate Bishops. It is certain that that Church, as welt as every other established Church,must havebishops; they are admitted inEs;• land, and wherever an episcopal jurisdiction exists it must lee limited. within the pale of the Church self. It must tee confined to matters nserely spiritist, without any interference with the temporal Come mead of the country. Much has been said as is the power of excommunication in those Bishops of the Catholic persuasion, yet what does it imply? It merely implies thir, that there cannot exist eves an Episcopal Church, or any body of men, cot. greAattil together for religious purposes, uuless tney have the power of excommunicating pence* whose opinions are inconsistent with the views of the eovntousiity of that particular persuasion.-• This must exist in regard to every Church, and eves if you were to tolerate Mahometanisni ; they tuna have all the power of seeing that each of the Members have opinions consistent with their persuasion; otherwise they trust exclude them ; but it amounts to nothing more than an exclusion or excomminte cation of that particular church. It is therefore no assumption of a power peculiar to the Roniun Ca tholics of Ireland, but is one that must exist lu any body of men assembled together for religious Ivor ship. lint it is said that tins practice in 'relate] ex tends even to temporal cipusequences.—The poo , :r of excommunication must in sonic shape exist, even Lees and shut would be the wish of any sober con stivtitions advocate of the Catholic religion ; List if it be true that that privilege may be abused, re strain it by law.-11 it be necessary to suspect die slispositiou to steel, under the name of religious ax conininuicetien, any thiaglike temporal junstlietia or authority of any description, then I say, apply to that evil a reinedy, not of a spirituel, but of a tem poral to the atethat character p o part . t 1, 34: subject fellow-subjects, I sin sure there ar e very tor instances to be found where it has extended beyoal a spiritual jurisdiction. I have seen a stets lately 'published to the world, which avers, that I,• more than two excommunications have o cc s.r.a within a series of years. No man can des ire t.. more toleration to religion than 1 do, but • I should wish to limit it strictly as reason Imo i ie • cessity may require. Vs'e are all agreed upon n u : part of the subject ; and if it introduced h e opto" . object than that winch the Catholics hats view, I am confident it will not be attended elin any inconveniener. lam not, my Lords, awary there are uny (Alter o!,jections stated asno.t tr. 4. Catln.rs.; of inland, li4 *61;1 jig cut o f prune. prote,,eti by them, our any thing to their , iiiconbi.tent n ith their allexianee to the reigl:ol7 verck:it of this uulltitry ; tlot tl.!.'e is not, 1 I • 7, appeal pot to %our LorJ,litp. ex•w!icr.t . . 7 1 Ull i! tOtlie e 01 ::11 eountrieg, there i• 4 hardly u •tate hi Europe It h. r ( have not e.ti •ta..ti for loez period of ilarpzer brio upprrllt.ii i to 11,•-• ( lon will 6,1.1. tliAt in Ho 1' iloiiauJ and S .itaerla!ld, ...i..azotti ttw,, 7•*;