The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1825-04-22 00:00:00

... . 10 L hb—tbet puma Se abeam webby Gentlemen on the other side isooßes veturned ter the snwoet of this question. That Rev. per i ma dose not. he says in his bp* object so much to the Protestant I Chants faselfas tint it isopposed to every other state in the kingdom Alte ; that It redo= a state of things which should not be al. ixelto eziet any eiviliaeLlosintry (hear. bar); that it is de. ocrisclive to the intaests of any nation, and the more especially one whose populaden is lagged in the tillage of lend. ((Beer, hear.) The Reverend Gentleman, after deploring the wretched condition etthe peasantry antler its control, then arldreeees the Archbishops, and mho from what heaven have you fallen show me the apostle hem whom you derive your right to exercise the functions of your meted oldee—and, after deelaiitungayon the hypocrisy , the tricks, sad the lies by which that church barn been promoted and supported, gees before the Committee with the ink scarcely dry upon his book, is give that evidence upon which Gentlemen had founded their ar. eze l ra. Whet. , however, had been the evidence of that person the Committee ? God forbid the Roman Catholics should en. Satan any intention to take away the tithes of the Ptotestsnt chinch. They disclaimed any such intention, but, when pressed a little farther, he admitted that the extent of those tithes were very injuriosa to the country, and that it would be advantageous to the Catholic if they were removed. Can we then say that the Catholics, while they disclaim any intention to meddle with the Protestant Cher* do not look with a very jealous and anxious eye upon the eandensents and power enjoyed by it, and that when they are brought fairly into competitisn, they will not yield to the eminent impulses of nature in advancing that church whose interests the ate moot materially bound to sustain: ? In the former Bill which Tasted through that House, the Right Honourable Secretary for Ireland had thought proper to introduce certain oaths as securities for Protestant ascendancy, which were not only to be administered to one class, but to all the Roman Catholic Priest hood. The most important past of this security that Bill now leaves out. In the former Bill, as far as an oath can be binding, they bound the Roman Catholic Clergy not to make any attempt to subvert the Church of England. But now, in deference he sup posed is Catholic prejudice, and sacrificing Protestant security, they exempted a certain claw:, the most powerful in the priesthood, and the best calculated from their situation to wield the mass of the people in any project which might be contemplated for the destruc tion of either Church or Government. Yet this Bill, thus leaving such a body in that situation, was said to provide securities ; it was inhered in, too, with an assertion, that they might take precautions to ascertain the purity . of the Catholic Bishops—that they had the means to ascertain their loyalty, and their attachment to!the laws and constitution of their country. And what would Gentlemen of this House believe these precautions to be—he meant theme who might not have read the Bill? Wh the appointment of a Com mission of four Roman Catholic Bis hops, bound by an oath, to sate whether they consider the candidate a fit end props person to be apnointed a Bishop of the Catholic Church, and for the pur posts of advising a Magistrate of the State who shall be appointed to wield, for good or for evil, the power with which they are en trusted. Ile did not know what might be the constitutional feeling, but he MUM. say Oint a stemnd Cabinet, thus sitting. and thus ad wiaing the Crown, was hostile to constitutional principles. And what is it they are called upon to say? Why, that A.B. is, In their belief, s loyal subject. They are not compelled to make inquiry—not bound to enemies—to take no steps of inquiry—the individual may be a Ingot—although loyal, he may profess certain feelings upon parti cular subjects , which., upon inqu iry, would exclude him from any church; but no—there is to be no inquiry ; the simple affirmation of the commiesion—a declaration of loyalty which we all know would dot be refused any where, or by any one who had a slight know. tolge of a candidate for office, the sim_p le assertion that they know A. B. to be loyal is considered sufficient to warrant his ap pointment to the important situation of a Catholic Bishop. But even if the Commission had it in their . power to ascertain, he t Mr. Oeulburr) did not think they stood in a situation to refuse their consent to the appointment. The individual selected comes ttom the Pope to be elected by those who hold their power from the Isere authon,y—and„ is it possible to suppose that, knowing the caedidate to be confirmed by their superior, they will have the ocu.:age to disobey his mandates, and reject that person he has m inted for the office? But the Commission has another and more important duty to perform : it has to guard against communica tion oith the Pope for receiving dispensations or other articles. The clause which provides, be it observed, for our safeguard, states that they are to examine all bulls and papers from the Holy See, and, if they are not found injurions or treasonable, they . are to re port immediately to the Lord Lieutenant; but, if injurious, what then ? Why, the House will suppose they are to report Instantly too ; no such thing. The only penalty to the party is that the pa per is to be returned to the owner without indorsement ; but not a word to his Majesty—no communication then. In fact, if he (31r. Gouthurn) was to invent a Bill for carrying on a treasonable cor respondence in war, or a dangerous one in pesce, he did not know he could produce, by any ingenuity, one more fitting for the pur pose than the Bill now before the House. The laws had been be fore of undistinguishing severity to the Catholic, but now they were called upon to make that to the Catholic a misdemeanour which to the Protestant would be hie!' treason or death. God forbid lie should impute any bad motives to it zee who drew the Bill, but he must say the:re was something cal , „hie negligent in making a commission ore Catholic Prelates die euerdiane of British anthority. This Bill calls upon us to confer tit_ same privileges upon the English as the Irish Catholic. Now there was rot one objection he had made to the Bishop winch did not apply with tenfold force to the Vicar A postelic. a•he Irish Mello! , held his situation for life when ap petite., but the Vicar Apostolic is removable at the pleasure of the Pope. He had looked io vain for any security against the in. tluence which might be exercised by a Foreign Power over him : but whatever might be devised, he limn at all events congratulate England in having escaped from the kind and considerate protec tion of a Catholic Committee. So much for the securities contained in the Bill. But although art and policy had been retorted to by the supporters of this question, so that the House might not be let into all the secrets of its accompanying provisions ; yet he thought lie might, without any violation of Parliamentary decorum, advert a little to what had been nunoured, as the accompaniment of I..Mtltolic Emancipation. First, then, for that Irish bonus, the dis franchisement of 40s. fmeliclders. He would ask, did the Hun. Gentlemen mean to disfranchise all the 40s. freeholders at once, no roarer how created? or does he mean only to the system of ,eeatibg them ? If he means to do the tint, lie would, in his teut.ioti, be guilty of a gross injustice. If lie does not, he Would ask the Member for Armagh ( Mr. Brownlow) ar d for Down (Col. Forbes). where is the security? Nothing short of a i .'aigue could then guard them against di r evils of CatholicEnienci. piebon; and their posterity could only hope to receive beeed tfrom this p:eeau denary measure when they had perhaps nothing left to retain. its to the pruposed arrangement for the clergy, he thought it calm:- I ste.d only to render the measure more objectionable titan it WAS be. tore. ([hear, hear.) What would the Mime think of a Roman Catholic Church establishment vying with a Protestant one---of Roman Catholic bishops having an authorized jurisdiction in the same diocese with a Protestant prelate ? Such an establish ment, he, for one, would never sanction. It was simply the propo sal for theienaintensnce of a church, the principle' of which were hostile to those of the cst.abliahed relie,ion of the coontry. It had been said that the principles of the Roman Catholic religion were ciianged, and that they had more approximated to thoni of use Protestant faith titan formerly. If such a change had r:tilly taken placc—if both religions were so closely assimilated Met art arraegene nt could he satisfactorily made, he would be moat desi eoue to effect that arrangement, and to do away with the °dime the- astoricom alluded to by a Noble Lord (Lord Olilior.) by which the members of both religions became more violent as they approached wearer to each other. It was impossihie not to suppose that the non and object of it Roman Callialic sierarchy in Ireland would be to extend the sphere. of the lhanino Catholic religion in Ireland, and it was therefore that he was hostile to a regular establishment (mops provided for it, conscientiously atteclied ss he was to the princ:oleo of the Protestant faith. (Hear, heal.) It was an admitted roctice tied principle of the Roman Cathohcs, that tile Pope was infallible ; and when the gitestion was put in the Corn:Mime on the state of Ireland, to what dal this infallibility relate, it was answer id by Dr. Doyle—to the explanation of articles of faith and the morality of the Gospel. 'l'his was an important admission, and showed the extent to which the supremacy of the Pope was enter taincl by Roman Catholics. It wits the more so, when it was con stirred that the circulation of the Scriptures was prohibited by the Roman Catholic Church, and that the exercise cf private judgment upon them was also forbidden, which seated the privilege of expo- sabon in the Chitych. Ouy thing he hoped the Houle would hear in mind, that Pro estantior was the religion of the legislature; that its stitomity was in hissing the members of the legislature pro of that retie:inn—to i.n hierarchy and clergy being provided for by the state, and in the property which they possessed : but that security wnold, in his opinion, be dissolved by admitting the Boots.' Catholic% to Puri...moo, who would raturaliy find nn intercs: s hatever in pies:tailor the Pro :wart religion, and wouht be found suptionisig this moiion of the Honour ride Itlentbi r. for the alto rionni it church property. (Hear, hear, hear.) It had beta said. that concilintion was On .! of the principal ()Watts of this ; for his p•ot anticipated no such satisractory /1414.. from :u, thinieit it wvic osssed it:to a law. It was not, io hit opinion. tee ineltgil,iiiiy of idlicc, or the non-enjoyment of office. by which do: Itnimen were sffeci.eti, and of which. in the result of passing this Hill, they would complain. How plausible world it nut IV• far the Roman Catholic itenisigogite then to say— " V•re arc c: c ihle to offices, bit tlioe who have the disposal rd them, constitute the predominant power. and they, are dotemiined that we shell not have th...c places to which we are eligible by law." This would still remain A cause of cirriph:ht, although the Bill were to pass ; and the popular elemagngoc in Ireland would not be flood wanting to irritate and exasperate the mind: eta remarkably susceptille perple on this topic. Olear, hear.) It was true that the Homan Cs:holies were in die proportioh of six millions to two 'ma , Ireland: but that ester showed the grester necessity duct ex. nted for protecting the Protestant Religion w Ireland. Looking at 'Sr. question in every point of view than it hail lo en presented to impartially regarding the constitution cf his country—valuing and desirous of upholding its present security, and not only at tached to the laws and liberties of his country, but also attached moscientiously to its religion—anxious to preserve i•s gown's and outwork., and to resist every crafty device, calculated to diminish its 'security ; and deeming the granting rat this measure to have a trodency to enliven the establishments of this country, and to unno the principles recognised Ea die Reformatino, and at wouki oppose the Bill, and he hoped he would h- %h i ported by the House In doing so, and it: thereby watching Jrtt , s important interests, which it was their heat and bounden 4 it a to tlosud codex of " Hear, hoar.") lit O.P. NG ',aid that tic had been IV' attentive observer of tl e e' dente Oven before the Committee on the state of Ireland, -^d he cane. to A , ion trim it not at ail corresponding to that v. !•i'• P-i"lit Hen. Friend. ( I tear, oir.) His opations, after its:it:erste vonsidiratirM of that ey:tkr.ce, inure nearlf coincided ot. t..hee of the lion. Alembtr for Armagh (Mr. Brownlow), the whole House had listestilso with thinl'httioni and than which be new beard one that Ailed him with gnat &lights l not only for the eloquence which that Honodwbk Gentlemen brought to the diet:onion every subject, but for the candour, the in- I genuousness, the courage, and the tone of manly end liberal senti ments by which it was distinguished. (Loud cries of "Hear, I hear.") To that Hon. Member be bad also to add another Hon. and Gallant Member (Colonel Ford), who, abandoning the early prejudices in which he had been educated, came forward and gave the promise of his support to a measure vitally important to the in- , tereets and welfare of his country. His Right Hon. Friend had given an alarming description of the state of Ireland. That descrip tion he believed to be as true as it was alarming. He (Lord Bin ning) adopted the description, but he differed from him in the con clown to which that description induced him to arrive. (Hear.) That the people of Ireland were dined:ailed, that they were irritated and divided into parties he admitted, and what did his Right lion. Friend recommend to remedy this admitted evil ? " That things should remain as they were." (Cheers.) From such a remedy there was, in his opinion, little prospect of available relief. The misfortunes of Ireland were, in his opinion. mainly attributable to the present system of exclusion. His Right Hon. Friend had re gar that system of exclusion as the security. He (Lord Binning) regarded it as the weakness of the Protestant religion, Ile agreed with the Hon. Member for Yorkshire (Lad Milton) that the Pm tenant religion (to which he was warmly attached) should be upheld, not by restrictive laws, but by the purity of its doctrines and the respectability of its Ministers. (Hear, hear.) In the discussion of this important question, and in the progress which it had made throughout the country nothing more excites! his surprise than the very great change which had taken place in the grounds on which the opponents of this measure mainly relied. The good old cry of " No Popery," which was once so familiar to their ears, was no longer heard. The period was fresh in his recollection, when an Hon. Member (Dr. Duigenan), now no more, was wont to come down to that House, armed with authorities and books of reference, and denounce and anathematize the doctrine of the Roman Catholic religion. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) lie was usually followed by an Hon. Baronet (we believe Sir T. Leah bridge), who impugned whatever doctrines had not been impugned by the lion. Member who preceded him. In that way did the debate on this question usually commence and often continue. But these authorities were no longer referred to; all the rubbish had been fortunately cleared sway—(hear, hear, hear--all the arguments as to the Roman Catholics not keeping faith with he retics were now removed. They were removed by the evidence of Roman Catholic Bishops—of the Roman Catholic clergy, and the Roman Catholic laity. Hie Right Hon. Friend had referred to the letters of J. K. L., and argued against the present Bill on ac count of these letters. In doing so he did not, in his (Lord Bin ning's) opinion, act quite fairly. When the doctrines which had been imputed to the Roman Catholics were denied by their advo cates in that Bonet, the reply usually was, " Can you get a Roman Catholic who will concur in opinion with you ? Is there a Roman Catholic Bishop who will be found to adopt your semi. menta?" We bring forward Bishops and Clergymen, and Catholic laymen of that persuasion, who confirm what is asserted here in their defence, and then the subterfuge resorted to is not to believe them—(hear, hear, hear to affect not to do so. This was not fair and candid dealing. The suseessinn to the Croon had been adverted to, and the principles which the Roman Catholics entertained on this point bad been objected to. It had been stated that they wished to limit the right of succession. The evidetice of Mr. O'Connell upon that point chewed, that there was no such sentiment generally entertained by the Roman Catholics • and the answer to that iuquiry before the Committee was to the et: . feet, that they extended the right of succession to all the heirs of Sophia of Hanover, to all the branches of her family, the members of the House. of Brandenburgh. of the Court of Prussia, and to • number so great, extensive, and ulneost unlimited, as to constitute a whole regiment of royal personages. (A laugh.) The Roman Catholic Church already exists in Ireland, and the only question is, whether we should make the Government of Ireland safe and recurs, or leave the country exposed to all known dangers, and numberless unknown danger.. But it is said that the Catho lics refuse to deny the power of the Pope In spiritual matters. (low can the Catholics be asked to abjure the spiritual authority of the Pope? They are willing, bona /,de, to abjure the temporal power, and this is fully sufficient for the safety of the State. If the Catho lics frankly avow their independence of the Pope's temporal power, we ought not to ask for more. The Pope has the spiritual power, but if we take from him the temporal power, all is done that is ne cessary for the security of the State. Much had been said about oaths, but lie (Lord Binning) should be glad to see the Protestant oaths reconsidered. It was not civil to tell men they were idolaters, and it was particularly impolite to. because it was untrue. How ever the question before the House should be disposed of, he hoped to see the oaths reconsidered in the course of the present Session of Parliament. (Hear.) lie now carne to the polemical writings of Dr. Doyle, which were the object of much disapprobation. He (Lord Binning) did not come forward as an apologist for the writ ings of J. K. L. They were marked with the talent, intelligence, and strength of mind, which distinguished the right Reverend Prelate to whom they were universally attributed ; but he regretted that an individual of Dr. Doyle's acknowledged influence and abi lity, should have been so much provoked as to have written those letter . Many sez.timenta contained in these writings, he did not mean to defend. He did not attempt to defend the attacks on the Protestant Church Establishment, but yet in candour he would contend that the letters of J. K. L. and t h e evidence of Dr. Doyle may be placed tegether ; and though the same person may be the teeter in one case and the witness in the other, he did not think that this person should be fairly charged with gross inconsistency. Take the third of the series of twelve letters, and the work entitled "A Vindication of the Roman Catholics of Ireland," and contrast these with the evidence of Dr. Doyle. It is true, J. K. L. states that the Church Establishment in Ireland, with the temporalities it now possesses, is a monstrous evil. He states the tithe system to be a monstrous evil. This he does in common with many others ac quainted with the state cf Ireland. In justice to himseif, he (Lord B.) would state that he was no enemy to tithes, and that Parliament was bound to protect the owners of tithes as well as the proprietors of any other kind of property. But although these were his (Lord B.'a) opinions, lie was aware that a spirit of opposition to tithes was abroad, and he thought it no wonder that the Roman Catholic Pre lates should partake in the hostile feeling which prevailed. Besides stating his objection to tithes, J. K. 1.. had also asserted, that the Church, as by law established, was maintained by force. Now this was not far from the truth. (Hear.) He could not state that it was untrue; and this, amongst other reasons, induced hint to vote for the Pill. But what said Dr. Doyle, in his evidence before the Com mittee ? Ile states that he prizes the Church of England infinitely more than any other church outside the pale of his own. (Hear, hem.) This was Dr. Doyle's evidence. It was true that when he was asked whether he agreed with the sentiments expressed in the letters of J. K. L. ? he replied. '• I dare say I do." This was little to be wondered at. It was well known that Dr. Dnyle was the writer of these letters: every one knew this, for he was publicly thanked fir them by the Catholic Association. If the letters of J. K. L. and the evidence of Dr. Doyle were full of contradictions and contrarieties, the House was bound to give credit to the evi deqce of the Rev. Prelate rather than to the letters of J. K. L. This was only candid and fair, and in accordance with common sense. The sentiments of any writer, however manly, should not be preferred to the oath of a Christian Bishop. The Hon. Member for Derry (Mr. Dawson) thought that Pope Gregory or Bonifece could act have fonutt a more fit instrument than J. K. L. Dr. Doyle must have been not a little surprised to have found himself in such company. (A laugh.) But what (observed the Hon. Den tient:rut were the avowed sentiments of this fit instrument of I'ope Gregory ? He distinctly states that " the pnwrr of the State is independent of the church, that the Roman Catholics don't recog. nise the power of the Pope in temporal affairs, and that if he pre- stoned to interfere with their allegiance to their King, the reply of a enesetentioes Rninen Catholic must be, " Your kingdom is nut of this world." These were the avowed opinions of Dr. Doyle. and these abjurations did net rest upon his respectable authority solely. They were corroborated and supported by other metnhers of the Catholic Hierarchy. The titular Bishops of Dublin, Tuani, Ar magh, in short every Roman Catholic priest, who had been ex amined, agreed in these sentiments. Mr. Blake, who was in no way answerable for the speeches of Mr. O'Connell, or the writings of Dr. Doyle. stated this to be the prevailing sentiment of Roman Catholics. lie (Lord Binning) beliered the evidence before the Home.. He could never bring himself to believe that such men came forward and told falsehoods. lie was ready to join with the Honourable rember for Armagh (Mr. Brownlow) in attaching im plicit confidence t 3 the esitience before the Committee, and he thought the (louse was justified in teeing upon the information derived front ouch witnesses,. He did not think it nccessnry to enter into any farther details at this period, but he should take the liberty of stiering a few remarks cei the two collateral questions. which had been mentioned in connexion with that now before the House. As to the disqualification of certain classes of electors, he was not willing to deprive any man of the right of voting, but the situation of freeholders in Ireland should be considered, when they corn, forward not to support any popular pri+ ciple. but to act im plicitly upon the dictation of others. This should be considered; card it stenild alto be considered what moire there should be in giving tip the elective franchise. lie did not think it could ever be quoted as a precedent, because to have it a precedent, the country must be similarly circumstanced, and there twist be an equal motive. Considering these cir otiosteecest, considering what was to be given up and what was to he gained, he should rot hesitate, in order to secure the peace and halipiness of Ireland, to allies! that security which the Catholics of freleptl were willing to enter into, and the Protestants of Ire , Lind would he satisfied if they received. A. to the expedicecy of a provision for the Catholic Clergy. the lion. Member for Corfe Castle (Mr. Bankes) had observed upon the expense which such 3 Ifl , ll.llte would entail. lie (Lord Binrine) did not conceive the expense to be worthy of mulch considtration. lie did not care a .farthing whether the expense should be one, or two, or three hundred thousand pint nds, it the object in view was attained. But it was asked, how can you in sole upon members of the Bs . tablishol Church. and upon Presbytt ritties and Dissenters, to sup port the Roman Catholic religion v Ile should reply by usking, Don't you impose upon the Catholics to support the Protestant Esta'Jltsltnivie ? (Hear.) The Cathnlic Church was firmly este- Wished in Ireland. Ile was sorry for this, hut so it was; and the only question remaining is, whether the Otivernment of that t country cannot be placed oil a mere secure footing, and the peace I and prosperity of Ireland hr better secured? In conchiaion, he would cinteoatulate the House on the great progress which this I goes:ion teed made. lie considered this measure the best remedy for the evils which afflicted !mime'. It was a sedative which r could he properly applied, for the misery of Ireland is. that , every that g which collies is as poison. The fountain of justice is I embittered, because the people tied themselves degraded. lie I hoped the If ause and the country would long continue to persevere io the liberal course of policy latterly pursued ; he Impel! this Bill would he sent to the other House, and if it should be rejected row, Le :rutted it would be again seat, until die necessity was ■ J . II • 1~ THE BRITISH PRESS. raTilupon Government of carrying into execution that which l iament in its wisdom and justice should think necessary. (Cheers.) Ale. WALLACE rose, but wasfor some minutes inaudible. He thought that the question before the House was of so touch im portance, that it called for something more than a silent vote. No man was more desirous to put an end to the dissensions whirl& afflicted Ireland, and to promote a union of hearts between his Me-- jesty's subjects, than he was. If he was certain that passing the proposed Bill would secure these objects, he should feel more grati ecation in giving it his full support, even at the expense of a great constitution id sacrifice, than he now did in giving his reluctant op. position. Which ver way the question should he decided, he con. reseed he could not look upon that decision as very gratifying. If the Bill should pass, he doubted very mach whether the anticipated advantages would be obtained, and if it did not pass he was aware that its rejection would create an infinite deal ofdissatisfaction. He considered, however, that it would be productive of much danger, and looking at either decision as an evil, he thought the rejection of the Bill might be considered as the least. lie was willing to admit that the language of the Roman Catholics was temperate. and in common with eves) , Member of that House he was ready to offer his tribute to the Honourable Baronet (Sir Francis Bur. dett) for the temper and manner in which he had brought the question before the House; but yet the House should not forget that the Petition on which this Bill was founded came from the Catholic Association, from • body which the House deemed it necessary to put down. At another period therefore this measure may have been conceded without sacrificing the dignity of the House, but if the Bill now passed it would be looked upon as a peace-offering to the Catholic Association, and as a victory gained hy its Intemperance. When such a measure as that of Catholic Emancipation was proposed, he thought it necessary to prove that them was a full, fair, and rational hope that it would remedy the evils which now afflicted Ireland. No doubt it was a measure which would afford much satisfaction to the Catholics of Ireland, but the question was, whether it would remove, to any extent, the evils which now afflicted Ireland. He thought it was • measure which would be productive of considerable danger. There certainly was nothing to apprehend at present from Catholic Ministers sacrificing the best interests of their country at the shrine of that religion.• There was nothing now to apprehend from a Catholic King who would be wild enough to destroy the lib:Mies and religion of his country ; hut what he apprehended was that these dangers might take place at some future period. [Consider able noise prevailed in the House for several minutes, so much so as to prevent our hearing a single word that the Right lion. Gen tleman uttered.) Until he could see that spirit by which Catho licism had always been d.• anguished, put down, he could not vote in favour of this measure. But to hear some Gentlemen talk upon the treatment of the Roman Catholics, one would ima gnne that they were speaking of African slaves. [Continued con fusion.] The Member for Armagh had stated that one of the principal reasons for his conversion was the evidence that had been adduced upon the subject before that house. Now he con fessed that be could not find that the religion of the Catholics had in any respect changed, so as to make it safer for concessions to be granted to them now than formerly. Ile found every thing so un defined both with regard to the establishment and the discipline of that religion • taken even front the professors of it themselves, that he coul d nothing to fasten upon, that enabled him con scientiously to say it would not be dangerous to give power to Ca tholics. [The Right Honourable Member, in the course of these remarks, read various extracts front several papers that he held in his hand ; but the impatience of the House was so audible that we could not lean to what the documents referred.) The only security for the Established Church in any measure of this kir.d, was a substantial interference in the appointment of the 1 Catholic bishops, but they would not accept of those terms. [Time coughing and noise in the House here became incessant during the remainder of the Right lion. Gentleman's speech.) After Mr. Wallace hail sat down, Mr. Canning was loudly called for from Loth sides of the House. A short pause ensued, when Mr. PORTMAN rose from under the Gallery. The first words that we heard of the lion. Member's speech were, as we under stood, that although liberty and Catholicism had never existed to gether ; yet he was prepared to vote ft the present Bill, upon the broad ground of its necessity. Seven millions of persons were is a state of extreme degradation under the present system, and it be. came the legislature to make some amelioration of it. The Hon. Gentleman then made an allusion to the speech of an Hon. Member on a former night, (Mr. W. N. Peel,) in which he had adverted to the adage Noscitur a Sociis, and observed (as far as we could col lect from the uninterrupted noise that prevailed,) that it was de sirable for Catholics and Protestants to be united together in the common bonds of fellowship as far as a removal of restrictions could unite them, and concluded by supporting the Bill. Mr. Secretary CANNING (after a loud and repeated call from all parts of the House), rose and said—As it has fallen to my lot to address the house on this occasion, I beg to assure you. that in new trespassing upon your attention, I do it with peculiar diffi culty, because if I sin naturally anxious to treat the subject at some length. the lateness of the hour will prevent my doing it justice. In travelling over the ground of this grand question at the present crisis, it is impossible not to perceive something far different, but far more cheering, than any thing that we have heretofore known. Whether or not, the opinion of the country is so satisfactorily pro nounced against any farther concessions to the Catholics as it was at one time pronounced—and whether or not it may be inferred that opinion is still the same—l will not undertake to say ; but this much is certain, that among the petitions on the subject that have been presented to this House (I desire to speak without disparagement of any), there has been manifested no incon siderable degree of ignorance as to the question, and a still greater degree of ignorance as to the state of the country to which rhat question refers. I feel, in stating what I do state, the full weight of the undoubted right of every man in this realm to come before this House, and to state fairly his opinions. And I know that every petition should be received by the House—and be not only received, but be considered with most respectful deliberation. But I know that, after all, you ought to judge according to your own judgments. If, out of the general mass of the country, I were to select any particular class of men whose interests are more im mediately concerned in this measure, and who are most nearly con. sleeted withit, that clots of men would be the Clergy of the Estab lished Church ; anti I give them not only toleration, but praise, for the manner in which they have come forward to express fairly, and honestly, and boldly, their sentiments upon it. But even in their petitions, I have found something of that ignorance of the state of the laws, and of the tame of the country, of which I complain—ignorance not affecting them in their sa cred character, but ignorance of which so many other persons partake. 1 shall allude in particular to one petition I have selected out of the many similar petitions that have been presented; and it is immaterial to state from whence this petition has proceed. ed ; bit: I think the contents of this petition will sufficiently show that the opposition to the measure has been founded upon that mistrust to which our natures are so liable. Timis petition prays that the House would not grant to the Catholics those concessions and those immunities which were denied to every other class of Dis senters, and it stated that it would be in the highest degree impoli tic and unjust to allow the Catholics, who were competitively under the dominion of a foreign court, a voice in the enactment of laws and in the administration of the laws, while the Protestant Dissenters. who were under no such dominion, but who were mere liberal and better educated, were excluded ront those privileges. In answer to this petition, and to this declaration, I say that if it be declared that the objects of the Bill is to place, and merely to place, the excluded Dissenters, the Roman Catholic Dissenters. on a fooling with other Dissenters, the objections against supporting this Bill must at once fall to the ground. I will not so far as to say that it would be right to remove all disabilities on account of • religion. I will pledge myself to no such doctrine. But I will not yield to it unless it can be shown that practical grievances will re sult front those disabilities, and with respect to the Catholics, will these practical grievances exist or will they not ? I( I can prove the fact that we discuss subjects in this House—that we sit in , company with, and share our counsels with those who have still greater religious disabilities than those Catholics, the nrgunient of , which the petition is built is not only weak but groundless. It , has surprised me much that as a great portion of the debate min this subject hes more than usually touched upon theology, this Fobject has not been alluded to. But the petitioners sympathise with the , Dissenters, while to me it is quite clear that the syinpathy ought to be the other way. What, shall we object to sit round that table—shall we object to take counsel with those who lie under the pignut of a belief ! in transubstantiation ? God forbid that Were this Assembly and , within these walls I should go into such a subject with any other m view than that of placing the matter in a tele light ; but I ask, while we reject as unworthy to he our associates those who believe in the doctrine of transubstantiation, shall we admit and accept those who do not believe in consubs antiation to be our associates in this House? Let any man read wbst Luther has said on this sub , je;:. and perceive the line he has drawn between the two classes. He mines not merely say that there is no difference between them. . but he says, that the one may be a good subject, and that the other must be a traitor to the State. But it is charged against the Catho -1 lira that their church is an exclusive church. Now I will only take the evidence which was given before the Cotnteittee, to show that all churches are exclusive. All who read the Athanasian Creed, or hear it read upon certain holidays throughout the year, may sec what a construction is there put upon the sublime doctrines m of Christianity. I say then that it is absurd to assert that the Catholic is the only exclusive church. Again, Sir, much stress has been laid, during the course of this debate, upon the docrine of . absolution, which, if taken in its literal sense, is undoubtedly grossly ridiculous ; but it has been prove.' by evidence before the Committee that this absolution is only a moons that follows reparation of injuries, and good fellowship with all men. If such be the case, then. I ask where is the great evil that accompanies this docmrine? and i beg of those who look upon it with so much horror, to compare it with a passage in our ritual service f,w the visitation of the sick (Hear, bent), and to place this passage in comparison with that doctrine. What, then, is this doctrine of absolution sufficient to warrant the grievances of which the Reiman Catholic have to complain ? I will not say that there 'are not shades of difference between the Protestant and the Catholic Church sufficient to make me rejoice, and i do heartily rejoice, that we have separated from the Church of Rome; but I say, that those shades of difference are not powerful enough to permit the Church of England to impute to others that which she herself is not without., or to make the breach so wide as that it never can be closed. Another question is, as to the doctrine which gives merit to good works, and attaches to them a vital importance. Now I know of no doctrine more damn:emus to the State, or one that is more pregnant with mischief than the doctrine that good works are nothing, but that every thing depends upon faith alone. We care not here to debate points of theology, or even higher principles; we are here talking of good subjects to a state, and I would tar prefer the man who be lieved that he must answer in another world for his works in this, and be judged according to them, to him who believed that each man was fated to his lot. I say I would either have such a man as, a subject, and would unquestionably consider him the safer thin panion of the two. These theological objections then are notionF. No man doubts that we have had, not only in this Moist, but in the highest Milos% of the State, men who have been Unitarians. or Socinians. I could prove such to be thr fact by mane (maniples, if it were at all necessary to bring them forward ; kut it' it he admitted that any one such person has been in those offices, it follows that 1 the theological objection is not valid. Then came the political ob. jections. The Paphos, it is said, ought not to he admitted to ery tain privil -,ms, because they cannot own allegiance to any Inn a Papist King. Why not? Has the case been at all made nut ? Who was it brought a Monarch of England to the block? Who was it stript the Prelates of England of their goons of their power ? Such acts were not committed by the Papists. No. I will not now say by whom they were committed. I am far from advocating the doctrines of the Catholic Church, but when it is broadly asserted that the Catholics are under the rule and dominion of a Foreign Potentate, 1 feel called upon to assert my belief, that such is not the case. The only and the whole question for the Legislature is this:—Has a doctrine:been ever held and acted upon, or if it have, is it held and acted upon now by the Berman Catho lics, that can bring into jeopardy the Church and the Constitution of this State ? Dr. i)oyle. an Irish Boman Catholic Bishop. has been examined touching this point before a Commitwe of the House. Yet it is asserted by 301110 Honourable Members, that lie has held one language before this House and another in his own country. Now, I ask. is it possible that any man who has a elm- • raster at stake, and a goal name mime, could have so done—that he could have pledged his word, putting his oath out of the ques tion, for this might have been regarded by some persons as no thing—to that which WU utterly untrue? Is it likely that a man, standing before this Douse, knowing that every word he uttered would be read, not only by his adversaries, but by his own flock. and aware that many of his brethren were remaining in the next room, ready to be examined on the sante topics, and ready to con. found him if his answers were incorrect, could have stated that which he knew to be untrue ? Is it likely that Doctor Doyle would have given a false explanation of the doctrines he held ? It is utterly impossible that he could so have done. But whether or not we credit the assertions of Dr. Doyle, there is another than who believed as he did—anti who held the same opinions as that Rev. Gentleman professed to hold, when speaking of the spiel. tual effect of obedience to the Pope. It is the doctrine rot held by Dr. Doyle alone--for all enlightened and educated Catholics in all ages have been the same. I happened to fall on a passage in one of the letters of Mr. Pope, the poet, who, as it is well known, was a Catholic ; this letter was written soon after, by the death of his parents, he became his own master, and was written to his friend Bishop Atterbury, who had vainly endeavoured to convert him to Protestantism. In this letter Pope said—" I hope all Churches ate liberal. as far as liberality can be rightly orderstcod, but I leave those points for others to dispute upon. I tint not a Papist, for I renounce the Papal Power. but I am a Catholic, a firm Catholic in every sense of the word." Thus the observation of Pope conflmed the truth of the testimony of Dr. Doyle, and Pope was a man of a most enlightened mind, and of supe rior talents, who expressed this sentences in confidence to his friend. a Prelate of the Established Church. without having any other object in view than that of declaring his real belief. I say this opinion. that was delivered by a man of education one hundred Years ago, tallies with that which of late days was given by in Irish Prelate. Another charge that has been made ageinst the Catholics is of a kind partly religious and partly political, and asserts, that they have given themselves up to the guidance of their Priests and their leaders, instead of depending upon the Constitu tion for protecticn. I will partially admit the charge, but I will lay the blame elsewhere. They may he idolaters in religion, but if they be idolaters in politieswe have made them so. by keeping from them those privileges which they haven right to enjoy. But I say admit them to an equal share in the Coestiieti on show that Con stitution as we have it, call upon them to fall down and worship at our common shrine, and this crime of idolatry with which they are charged will be limed of no more. I am perfectly ready to admit that I ant not so fond of change as to wial for it. unless it can be proved lobe of unquestionable advantage, unexceptionaLle in every respect, and sufficiently recommended by the results that arc like's to follow it. Is not this change to which I allude necessary as well as politic ? Is it or is it not a grievous circumstance that the State should be deprived of the full use of many millions of its subjects ? Is it or is it not a grievous circumstance that the crown should be limited in the choice of its subjects ? Is it or is it not a grievous circumstance that so many men should bear about them the badge of degradation, which poisons the enjoyment of societyi and casts a damp upon their hopes and their aspirations cf the rewards of industry and of ho nour ? I ask, is there any man who will not call these real grievances ? I will not say they are such grievances as the COll - must die before; I will not even say they am such grievance's as may not be overruled ; but I will say, nevertheless, that they are grievances of which the country should take notice, and which the Legislature of that country should endeavour to remove. The lion. alember the Derry (Mr. Dawson) has said that there is but a choice of difficulties, and that whatever conclu sion the House might come to he could not feel satisfied. I do rot think we are placed in this painthl situation ; or if we are it is of our own making. At all events, we have this advantage; we in herit the difficulties, but the cure is in our own possession. I do not know how far those persons were justified who first framed the system of degradation. But we have not row to legislate on the same matter; we have not row to legislate under the same circum stances, nor do we come to the consideration of the sulject with the same feelings when we come to revise the laws which they enacted. The difficulties which they had to contend with were not difficulties that were confined to the closet or the cloister. No; they atlectid them politically, because the Constitution was disturbed, and there was no other way of putting down those disturbances but by putting clown the religion that created them. They mica be pardoned, because what they did was in the heat of the moment; they might be pardoned because they endeavoured to • sustain a new establishment ; they might be hardened because they were smarting under the remembrances of recent suffering ; they might be pardoned because they were elevated by recent victory—a victory that hail been long and well contested for ; and they might be pardoned because they retaliated on those who, when they lied the power, exercised hover them. There is another way, also, to do our ancestors justice; they looked at the problem they had to solve, anti they went the way to solve it. They saw no manner of rooting out the enmity between them and the Popish Jacobite, and ' determined that those they could not convert—for they did scruple a little as to extermination—they would deprive of every means of increase and of power. I will do them the justice to say that a more admirable system could rot have been devised than the one they adopted : the rack is a horrid instrument, but it is a fire piece of mechanism—and the penal code, though exquisitely ingenimew wits a code of horrors, fur it set the father against the ton, and the son against the father; it steipt the industry of some, and the energies of all; it prevented the poor from looking protection from the rich ; it prevented the rich from being safe from the poor, and it speedily reduced a population of about a million ton few isolated individuals. But you have since cliatiged your police, or the en actments of 1798 were mischievous in the extreme. You repaired, , you relaxed, and you then changed them; you changed this long cata• I )ague of penal enactments, which 1 often read with so much horror. The question then conies to this, are we to go back to the eventful I scenes of our ancestors, or are we to go forward, and make legisla. tion progress with the intelligence of the age? This is the (sues tinn before you. I will admit that this question is satisfactorily acsweted, when any man tells ire how it is possible we are to avoid the alternative; but 1 'owe heard from no man how this was to be. We have an instance deciding how much the minds of then are be ' coming unprejudiced on this question. The truth is makino, its way in prejtiiiecil, although honestly prejudiced minds. h is im possible to have listened to this debate, and not to have seen this triumphant achievement over error: the horest and conscientious mind throwing off its farmer unsound opinions, and acknowledging its conviction of the truth. It was impossible not to feel delighted 1 j at the open and manly declaration of the Richt Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Brownlow) upon this question, and of his conviction of the essential importance of it to the peace of Ireland. Considering the , Istation in which he stands, and the situation which he holds in that country, his conduct is most expressive of the force of truth over , Iprejudice. It was not his 'peed) but his individual presence in that state that spoke thunder-tougued. It was impossihic not to reel the operation of this power in the speech of the Gallant Colonel ( Bagwell), who was not heard perhaps so fully as his sentiments were strong ; it was impossible to have heard that speech and not to have mmked the candour and manly sentiments which it deli vered. These are the living illUSttAtiOilS of the truth, that the time is now come when this munition trust brought to a triumphant conclusinn. There is also the Honourable Gentleman who is so closely connected with the Northern parts of Ireland (Mr. Brown. low). and whose name I had always heard coupled with measures wholly opposed to those liberal views which he now came forward to advocate; it was impossible to have heard his honest and candid avowal ()Ibis sentiments, without fettling that he was become a convert to Catholic Emancipation. nor without feeling that there is a sentiment excited which is bringing men of every denomina tion, and of every party, to a fair and unbiassed contemplation of the question. Thin, Sin if these are intlicatjoas of the state of opinion which now premil among many who have hitherto been opposed to all concession, are there not otter indications which affect this question '• Are there not proofs that the measure will be I met with a different temper from what it has hitherto been. What f then is the conrequeece of the exclusion of the Catholics ? Why 1 the first is, that it turns to evil every blessing of the country. You speak of the greatness of wealth, all increased population, a grow ing intelligence, an increasing prosperity, as the sign of the times and the blessings of Ireland, but is it possible that either our grow. inn; wealth, increasml intelligence, or increase I population. can avail those whoa* feelings csinnot be satisfied whale you %atilt:Ml from then) a fair perticipation of these blessings. Do you tint feel that you lead them to war if you do not grant them. now that they are ripe fur it, the enjoyment of those privileges from which they have been so long excluded, and which both policy and right deride they oliould enjoy? If you deny them this, they will feel that you have lifted them up to an entincece from which to view those bright objects they would thin mtain, if permitted, only to disappoint their expectations, and coder more de s . mate their hopes. Better perhaps would it have been thr them if they !hut retweired in their puiniitire state of bon. doge and of ignorance, than that you should simulate in them eve's( principle of action, and then deny then) the capacity of en joyirm the fruits of it. eiir, what are the consequences which will How from nor graittirm the Roman Catholics emancipation ? Ste Honourable Friend (Mr. Dawson) has said that one of then would be the overthrow of the Constitutioo. A very wide chain this be tween tiny Honourable Friend's premises anti his conclusion, and I should like to see or be informed what are the links which form it ? (Laughter.) Of course one of them most consist in their physgm. force. Physical form I conceive is much more likely to, be em ployed when tit,: dour is shut than wL:u the dolt is opeeeM lLaugh ter.) What is proposed to be given to the Catholics by this Bill is not power, but a possibility of possessing power ;—not fruition, but rapacity to enjoy it. And while this country, guarded as it is by its Pro:est:lnt prejudices, in the hest use of the word, retains those prejudice*, they are noire sore to present at all times a barrier to any orerweening ambition which the Honmimbleelembtr for Derry seems to cttribute to the Catholics, whenever they should in sist upon an undue portion of power with the Protestants. If you persist in excluding the descendants el the great men who helped to learn that corstitution of whi:h you arc so jealous, the consequence will ultimately be that the hand that toil-, the uncul tivated 11:nil, the urlAtered initividul, will assert and assume • power mach more fearful than any you are called upon to confer. It i*, therefote, an irrational, impolitic, and dangerous policy, to pursue this course, arid I most fearfully look forward to the conse quences. Smelt - Ore Sir, the: the present Bill were to pass, what would ensue? Why, in tic next, perhaps, we should have a new corner or two, wles would at first be an object of curiosity.— (laughter) but sorer that our feelings would subside, and we should sit down by his side as unconsciously as we row do by the side of it Protestant. We never ask whether any of the Ilorour. able Gentlemen around us are good Protestants. We all seem to think, with Mr. Bloke, " 'het be was the best Protestant who protested Realest every thing in the world." I any we should soon become as iiiiettiowinos of the presence of a Catholic as of a Pro. teetent ; and I would risk toy life on this proposition, that no Ca tholic woulti ever venture to couch a speech, in this House, in such strong and dangerous terms es what I have myself beard front • Protestant, and that the Constitution would tot be so much in danger fawn Catholic Members am from some Prioestant ones whom I have heard within these walls. I ask, then, tire person who now opposes this measure, to carry his imagination a little further be. yond the present time, to a period when he is not eery likely to have much personal interest in the country, and !et hint answer me, on his honour, if he believes (if this Bill should not pass) that is ten years from this time, the Catholics will' not be admitted to a seat in this House ? It must be so ; nothing can resist this inevi table result ; the nature of things, and the progress of mind, make it irresistible. Then, if the boon is to be given, and in an short a time, shall we not have the grace of giving it now Or. to put it in another way—since this must be effected at all I events, and perhaps st niuch trouble in the interim, shall we take upon ourselves the responsibility of refusing it now, at a titre alien every thing conspires to make it an act Loth of grace and of the best and wisest policy ? Shall we venture to withhold from the Catholics a participation in the blessings of the Constitution,—a Constitution, mind, which we are holding up to the Catholics as that fora Melo they are to bleed,--a Constitution which, when de scribed in this House, is the beauty and the boast of us al!, not only ler the protection it extends over our property aced our lives, but for the ptivilegea it bcs:owa. But is it such to the Catholic ? No ; to hint it is rather the Constitution of exclusion, and yet you call the Catholic to how down and prostrate himself before it. I say it would be most absurd and preposterous to suppose that you you could reason with sentient beings with such logic es that ? In proportion, then, as you arc prosperous—in proportion as this country is great—in proportion as the country is rich and powerful, unfolding its wealth s u es capabilities of which it its every day more and more displaying—in proportion as we want not the aid and tear not tire frown of any other ration, so in proportion are we ails to grant that boon, and to realise that bright dawn of hope, which has been so long sought for, sod entertained by thee*. tholics of Ireland. Ily the concurreece of the moat extraordina - y circumstances, which chance seems to have conspired to Meg about, we stand now in a situation in which we never stood before, when the Catholic Question has been discussed. We have dis cussed it either in the meridian of a foreign war or in the midst of &nestle dtftbrences, ard many who then rtracd it.oeen did so on the grotitel that the times were unsuited for such a question. and that they would writ for a calmer season before so great an act of legislation should obtain their concurrence. The time is now come beyond our hopes or let st sanguine expectations. Who ever looked forward to see this country in the high and ealrey and pros perous sintion in which she at present stands, and stall we not seek them and melee it our own by some signal act of grace and ct justice ? If so. then ore greatness may fade, our wealth diminish, our prosperity pass away—bat we shall still have made this time our own— _ _ . " Qui non moderabitur free, Infectum vela esse dolor clotted suascrit et menu num penis olio per rim testinat inulto." This is not the occasion when I should wish to offer any observa tions on the particulars of the Bill ; but an Hon. Member has alluded to the oath and the securities. W ith regard to the oath it is unfortunately framed. I agree in the opinion that it is more like a Bill of Indictment than a protestation. But it should be remem bered that there is another place for the Bill to go up to, where ouch scruple and many surmises (a laugh) were likely to arise. To make the Bill palatable, thereficre, to the other House, we have restored the long tail to the oath. Thee co net my Hon. Friend, and objects to this, and treats it as if it were a contrivance of the Catholics ; and desires me to omit this part of the oath; bat I would much rather this omission should be his than mine. But it should be borne in inlaid that this obnoximis clause is as old as any Act of the Ifott:e relating to the Roman Catholics. He always considered that it was to be measured by what would eatiely Protestants—not what might come up to the idea of his lloneurable Friend. The object was not so much to cure tie mischief of which he was apprehensive, but to afford an ade quire re reedy for that which then existed, and pressed upon the Cannily. 3ly Right Honourable Friend (3lr. Goulburn) had argued as if the communication with the Court of Rome was then, for the first time, to be guarded against; but I can inform my Right Hon. Friend of what certainly is a matter of very general notoriety, that this communication goes on every day—that irecripts are con. finnan); passing—that every trivial event is made known--that marriegee. and every other occurrence of private life, is communi cated. This unquestionably its contrary to law; hat it is, never theless, indoleed in, without reference to that limitation. It is, as created by law, an offence on which the severest penalties might be visited ; but the penaltiete from their extreme severity. are not in flicted. No one thought of carrying the provisions of such laws into effect. I would say to my Right Hon. Friend, that as the fact was unquestionable, that such communication did exist, he, thinking it so thinereaus„ ought to inttoduce a law that would reach it, for the existing enactinems. as the fact proved, were totally insufficient for such a purpose. The severity of those laws which affected inter course with the Court of Rome, came most particularly under my own coreicieration. A short time after I came into office the King bad received a very kind letter from the Pope, and I thought it not prudent to advise his Majesty to answer that letter until 1 had taken the opinion of the law officers of the Crown upon the sub. ject. These learned persons agreed in thinking that the Minister who shoule advise such a communication would be guilty of a preeneittire; accordingly the letter from that time to the present loci ren,ained unanswered. These are no; the defects of the Bill; they arise out of the present system. a system which it is now in. tended to alter. These arc the three objects to which I have though; it necessary to direct the attention of the House. The suggestions which may he made on the subject I am ready to adopt, though i ant unwilling to attach to the measure the limi tation spoken of. I would now address myself more particularly to the two Bills which are understood to be auxiliary to the pre sent measure. For my own part lam perfectly contented to sup port the present Bill, 'tithing regard to both or either of those auxiliary measures. lam willing to vote for it as it now stands, independently of any such extraneous support, and in doing so I am not to he considered as pledged to the support of any other Bill on a different subject, for I have much to learn before I can make up my mind to the conviction that these tnealitireii are in themselves unobjectionable ; but if by consenting to their enactment, I could conciliate those who have scruples to overcome—if I could du " a great right" by consenting to " a little wrong" much might be yitl.hd to expediency, that in a stricter spirit might be refused. I whit to have it distinctly borne in mind that freeholds in Irel..ttd are very diffigent trout freeholds in England. ( Hear, hear.) Those. therefore, who might hesitate—those wno might have difficulties with regard to the elective franchise, should remember that in this respect Ireland anti England most widely differ. To such it might be clearly explaitied, that in thus striking at the symbol, we do not violate the essence of freedom. Of the blame which may ittriell to this measure—of the censure which may hereafter fall on it, I, for one, ant %Oiling to take my share, if, at the expense of a trifling evil, we accomplish a great goal. I. this view of the subject, I confess that I look upon this aux iliary enactment with great and increasing favour; nor have I begird any argument which has shak-a toy opinions on this subject. As regaris the second of these auxiliary measures, namely, that which would go to make a provision ter the Roman Catholic Clergy, it is tamed that there would be a gross and maul. rest itijas:ice in taxing tile whole population of the empire at large, for the support of a clergy whose nimietry was confined to only a portion of that population ; but, in the warmth of urging this ar gument, do they thrget the h gine: ilounua Do they not all eon. tribute to the pnymetit of this provision for the Clergy of a part of the population much fewer in number than the Rumen Catholics? Is it not a grievance deeply affecting the Roman Cetholiee, t h e that they ate obliged to pay for the maintenance of the Clergy of the Established Chore!), ned is it prof-awed to remove that griev ance ? Quite the contrary. He I intimates willimmese to agree to any measure havi. g tor it objere a diminution of the reverhies of that Church, or an emenseiteneet is any respect upon its rights and property? The integrity of chit Churelt I feel bound to maintain inviolate, us the comiectieg link he. seen Great Britain and Ireland. The Catholic is taxed for the mainteeance of that Church, and the ffeitlVl loam: of the Presbyterian* is in principle a tax perfectly analogous, and consenting to the one is decidedly inconsistent with objecting to the other. I shall now trouble the Boone with hot a be further observittionie—(Loud cheering.)-1 would rent attention to site internal situation of the country, and at the sate time to the condition in which :lie( ettholics are placed. In the 1 romerity of the country at large it has outgrown all its for mer greatness ; and as it is in lIUMAII nature hi look invidiously on the success of rivals—nations following the same ride an individuals —it is to be presumed that the other countries of Europe regard with no eh-mutable eye the increasing power and strength of the British Eillpir4. In the painful feelitiga which this may be ex pected to excite, w here do they look for consolatien ? To Irclatitl, and there do they fasten, as if by instinct, mum the unfortunate eircutietencee of that couture. They cherish the pc rsunsion that she is as a eankling %%mild in the bosom of the Stioe, which will work the destruction of its vital powers. het us then disappoint the hteges of those who look to this as the means of accomplishing their v,ewe against the interest of l'ireat Itritaiti. Let us, by heal ing this wound, annihilate douse hostile with:mations, and let the cure be so complete, and the !IC:111114 so tffiretual, that not even the cicatrix shall remain.— (1, , ,,a cheering and appleuse.) Mr. Secretary PEEL : I amt sure the House will do me the jus tice to believe that it would have been infinitely more grateful to coy reclihes to have beet spared the necessity of addressing the House on a soh cu already s t exhausted. My Right Honourable sf Fite:A will, I :rust, gave me credit when I say that it would