The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1805-05-14 00:00:00

11. Ed[ Te. et. all ty, CTII it/g nd, '11.13 t h e y i es would have g iven any such description of Their real principles have long been t hemsel e ves i and verified upon oath The oath pre .,.;:h-leAdimbey the Aft of Parliament had been taken —an.d. recommended in Ireland by the four titular Archbishop-, the Bishops, and All the principal cl erg y of the countg. I remember having had n a conversation ofi this subject with a Catholic once of high c harai9et, and whose having a eat in the other House of Parliament would have been lard rom being a dii;race to it, mean the in which 1 asked him why he and late Lor?etre, other, of his persuasion were so anxious to have this oath prescribed to them ? The answer that Noble ran g ave was worthy of his . charafter tl eir anxiety arose from a solicitude to refute the foul ohunnies that had so long been propagated against tl em ," Another argument made sue of upon this sn bjeft is not unworthy of notice. It has been said, that, because so much bad already been granted to t he Catholics, it was rather unreasonable that they s hould ask any more, instead of being satisfied with what they have already obtained. To this I an iswer, that the history of mankind, and of the world, is a geinst such an argtunont. The true and uni versal principle is, that, with rights, men should always acqu ire a great similarity and equality with the rest ot their felloW subjeas. When they cease they should consider themselves as t o be slaves, Alen; and in all such eases, the invariable opinion will eternally be, that till they gain all, they, in some respeas, gain nothing. Ciet we so shut our eyes to the history u and the nature of mankind, as vainly to suppose can impose pfmil lions of people, by granting them only a part of what they are entitled to, that they will be con tented with it, or that from the moment you panted them one point , they , did not naturally ',pile to the attainment of all ? Fortunately. in deed, for us, and for the country, you have already l iven so much, that very little now remains for you inrant them. Let me /51C, you, Sir, are we se c i s trusting whole tribes of the lowest and most ig. rant Irishmen. wild and illiterate as many of elm Are, with the defence of the country against the r Prey, to whom they are supposed to be so partial, e:!i4e we are afraid to trust any person of the same c.nonanion, however great may be his talents, loth ore office of Secretary of State ; or men of fie highest rank and consideration, such as Lord Tinged orhis brother, with the duties of a general ? If I were asked whether I should be most afraid to toot the higher or the lower ordee of the Irish ? my lamer would be, that I was afraid of neither ; but certainly, most unaccountable does it appear to me, that these very persons who deny to the Irish the benefit of the Constitution. from a dread of the tamper and charaaer of the lower order, should t—s , . that lower order at the same time that they ci-trast and disqualify the higher. The lowest cows in that community have, by law, all the meals th-y can desire. of tumult and disor der. sad, by some perversity of principle, the very highest classes of their own persuasion are totally deprived of any power or authority to restrain erquell them. Is not such a conclua, Sir, contrary to all the common laws of common sense ? All that the Rirnan Cath slice now wish for, is indeed im mense !or them io gain. a' the same time that it is nothing far you to give. Nothing can possibly he more reasona' le than their desires. They asked for an equality with their fellow sul)jeds ; they humbly clime* !lassos 'pal rights, and be governed by equal laws. This, as I, said hifare, is an im mense thing fo• them to receive, and it cer tainly is not'ang for you to give then:. Their claim was pertelly consistent with the laws of England, which, more than any others, have ever recognised that equality of laws, which reconcile men to the several stations allotte in them, as has been well :old beautifully said by the poet (Gold smith) in hn ouservatioas on Switzerland : " Thrtugh for the peasant's c,t t:i.• be smart. " fir sees, in his own Lt, the I.t of all." Unfortunately, however, this consolation has bees hithenciatenied to Ireland, which the present system Las condemned to eternal misery and lowness. I have heard, and heard certainly with great concerti, that this Petition and its objed have not been fa vourably received by many of those who hold the highest rank in the ecclesiastical concerns of this Connery. I certainly should have the highest respect fir the opinion of the very respedable and venerable persons alluded to in questions even of policy 1 but upon questions of mixed policy and religion, I have vier been led very much to doubt their competency of decision. 'There is always on such occasions, somethine bordering upon party. which blendsit self with the judgment, and cannot fan to interfere with the integrity of opinion. But it happens even upon this subjed, that I am satisfied with the autho rity of a gentleman, who, though not highly exalt ed in ecclesiastical dignity and preferments, pos seses a reputation not the des high in this country's Sir the soundness. liheralit y, and orthodox y of his sen timents; I believe I need scarcely name Dr. Bayley, who says that, " he sees no reason why Men of differ ent religious persuasions should not consult and de- Iraerate together on state affairs, or any other, quite ZS well as if they were of the same religion ;" and corning more immediately upon the present point. he adds that, •' the connection between popery anti jacnbinion might have been a justification for the restridions on the professors of the former ; but as that connedion was accidental in its origin, it must naturally cease, as soon as that accident could no longer operate." (In quoting these and some other passages, Mr. Fox took occasion to pay many high ciimpliments to the talents and liberality of the wrecr.) The next objedion which now occurs to Mr, and which I think it right to notice, is that which has been wade to the time of bringing tins petition forward: Now, Sir, as • to that, I certainly should think that any time was a proper one for the performance of an aft of policy and justice; bat I am also ready to admit, that the time when there existed the greatest neces my for doing so, was that which was selefted by the Gentleman opposite me, immediately after die completion of the At of Union. With regard to that measure itself, I need not now repeat that I was hostile to it, and I certainly have seen nothing since which could induce me to repent of that opi won. I will not assert, in contredietion to what some persons have been pleased to say, that any liked pledge or promise of emancipation was then held out to the Roman Catholic, of Ireland ; but, as it is evident that something was said or dune which gave them reason to erpel it, the duty of at least malting the attempt was incumbent upon those who held out the expeetation. But now, Sir, I must not pass by a most insidious and invi dious argument drawn from what is called a point of pi aaice. It has been alleged, that, while re.itriaive laws were in full severity, in the years 1711 and 1743, the Boman Catholics in Ire land had no share in the rebellions which broke nut at these two periods; but after the principal indolg encies were granted them in 1793, they readily joined in the conspiracy; which ensued in the year 179f1. It required a considerable degree of patience to give any thing like a temperate answer to such an argument. If it goes to any thing, it most obvi ously goes to the revival of wretchedness, slavery, and despotism in its fullest extent; and deplorable, In• deed, must be your situation, if ,you have no other remedy left but to return again to restraints, cruelty, and the severest tyranny. Will it he contended, after 41 we have seen, that the circumstance of the French Revolution made no difference in the minds of men, as well in Ireland as in other coun tries? The effeds it produced on the minds of the Irish was, not as Roman Catholics, but in their capacity of subjeds, for it did not appear that the Revolutionists of France bad a preference for any one religion over another.— Ihere are also some other circumstances which can not be overlooked in reference to this argument. It is pretty well known that the Protestants, or ra ther Dissenters, in the North of Ireland, were not very well affelled towards the principles of the English Government, and the hierarchy in particu lar ; at the same time, that they were no less hos tile than the High Churchmen to the Catholics of that country. This state of things continued till the French revolution gave the two parties of Dissenters and Roman Catholics an opportunity of corl.sring or concurring in endeavours to extort 1 1 from the Government the Lull toleration they looked for. Would Gentlemen also forget the intervening circumstance of exasperation to the Roman Catho lics of the Administration of Earl. Fitzwilliarn? That Noble Lord. of whom it mast not be supposed that I can speak without some degree of par tiality, certainly held out to them the most decided and unequivocal boon of a total eman cipation. Whether he was authorised to do . so, or not, I will not now argue ; but I con tend, that the Roman Catholics of Ireland had at right to look op to the Lord Lieutenant, as the proper organ of the British Govetnrnent. In con sequence of that promise, on which the people re lied, by some intrigue in the British Cabinet, Earl Fitzwilliam was recalled, the Roman Catholics were deceived, and bitterly saw that the cup of con solation was suddenly dashed from their lips. Will Gentlemen, then, have no fellow-feeling, no sym pathy whatever, for the resentment of men placed in so galling a situation, however tranquil and qui escent their condud might have been before ? We do not find, that before the period of Lord Fits william's recall, there was any co, respondeace or connection between any disaffeded in Ireland and the Government of France. It is not, therefore, un reasonable to inter, that the Rebellion which took , place in Ireland in 1795, was in consequence of the recall of Lord Fitxwilliarn in 1795, — Emmet, M'Neven, and the other coripiratots who were examined in Ireland, fairly declared that the pretences of Carbolic Ifonesseipetion and I'ariiamentary return were n ,t worth a pen-full of ink, or the paper on which they were written; but they were expressions so alluring . to the multi tude, that without the use of them, at was evident the conspirators " could do nothing. The aril which would necessarily be produced by the remov al of the restriCtions now complained of, was still more strongly evinced in the alarm, which ap peared to be a crime amongst the parsons who were anxious for the separation of Ireland from this country; but the restraints upon the Catholics should be removed in consequence of the comple tion of the union. At that memorable period, though it may be fair for Ministers to state that they could not have pledged themselves to the Catholics as to what may be the sense of Parliament upon the subject of their emancipation, yet it is certain they held out such hopes as induced the Ro man Catholics to give great support to the measure of union. As a proof of the pains taken to inculcate the opinion of their emancipation in the minds of the Catholics, he read an extred from a pamphlet, addressed by a Learned Member of that House (Dr. Duigenan) to an Hon. Friend of his (Mr. Grattan), wkom. he was happy to see then in his place amongst them, in which the writer said, that if the countries were united, there would no longer exist any necessity for curbing the Roinanists with any restridive laws whatever. This statement, continued Mr. Fox, coming from a Learned Gen tleman, mato has ever been forward and violent in opposition to any indulgence. must have made a considerable impression, as he was supposed to have spoken the sentiments of the British Minister. To this I have tnrther to add, a publication from a No ble Lord (Sidmouth). formerly your pry lecessor in that chair, and now holding a very important situa tion in the ministry. in which sentiments of a similar tendency are stated, though the Noble Lnrd was and is a professed enemy to the claims of the Ca tholics. If, therefore, the persons I just alluded to drew such inferences from what they thought would be the effeßs of the Union, are we to be surprised if the Roman Catholics should draw the same inferences. The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, with several of his colleagues, also re signed their situations in the Ministry, at a critical period, on the ground that they were unable to carry this measure, which they deemed essential to the real interests and well-being of the empire. If such was their opinion at the time, I cannot but think that, even if no petition had been presented, it would have been dangerous for the Right Hon. Gentleman to defer beyond the year 1805, a mea sure which he thought essential 'to the well-being of the empire in 1801. Fortunately, however, fur the Minister, and the country, the principal Roman Catholics of Ireland met together, and ckew up this loyal and humble petition, in wh i ch they did not set forth their numbers, or the justice and po licy of their demands, but expressed their hopes of redress, from the liberality of Parliament The hopes which they have formed of the success of this application, I trust, will not be disappointed, and that, even if they should tail in the present instance, they may have the consolatory satisfelion of being able to state to their countrymen, on their re turn, that their cause had , beets taken up and adopted up by those mer., whose talents, viaose vir tues, and whose elevation. are in the highest estimation amongst us. There is, Sir, another sobjat, on which I know not, till it he expressly avowed. how I can well exgress niy opinio n. I mean the dark and mysterious oblation of this pe tition having no chance of success, even though it should be adapted by two branches of the Le gislature. Whet 1 have heard some Gentlemen, when conversing with me on this subjed, say—" I like the Petition and its ebjeets as well as you do, but where is the use of my voting for it, when I am confidently informed, it can have no chance of suc cess?" My answer is, constantly,--P We will have a much better chance of success if you will vote for it " 'this mysterious and unavowed oblation is whispered to me as springing from some construe tiou of the Coronation Oath. Now, Sir, if 1 was to propose any thing, which I thought contrary to His Majesty's Coronation Oath, I should consider myself as a disloyal chara.fter, and a dishonest man. When the Parliament prescribed this oath to be taken by King William, it would be absurd to suppose that they prohibited him from passing any Bills which had received their own sanaion, and were presented to him by their own authority. If King William was himself alive now, he would find the meaning, upon which this AEI was acted on, different fts,m what he understood it; but even supposing that it was intended to have bound the King in his legis lative capacity—a most preposterous- doerine ! it could only relate to such Mis nr Bills as might be contrary to the fundamental laws of the king dom. That it should bind the Sovereign not to pass wholesome laws, sannioned by the two Houses of Parliament, is too ridiculous for argument. Be cause it be maintained that His Majesty's saation to any Al passed in consequence of this petition would be a breach of his coronation oath it must inevitably follow that be has already broken it in passing the Adt of Union, the Aa of 1799, and all those other Aes either of indulgence in Ireland, or of regulation with regard to other places. These rumours, I percoiv.-, have been industriously buzzed. about, in order to deter members from voting in fa vour of the Petition ; but I contend, and shall ever contend, that nothing of this kind i; impossible to be done which the Parliament shall think proper to do. I neither can nor will believe, that any branch of the Ittitish Constitution can so far forget its duty as to suffer the circulation of reports so injurious to its unity. Nothing is more clear or more distindly de fined, than that the power which has a negative in the last resort has not, aml ought not to have, any right or power of interfering with the free discussions or eit her House of Parliament. The fair and just prerogative of the Crown is the corner-stone of our constitution, but can never be pushed to an unconstitutional extent. To the prerogative branch, I allow that some sacrifices may be made, but unconstitutionai sacrifices can never proceed nor be recommended by those who really love the King, but by those persons Woo would flat ter him, in order to betray him. Haring said thus much, I think proper now to explain, that my mo iron will be to have this petition referred to a Com mittee, to consider and report upon it, meaning to follow it tip with a report either of all or some of the restrictions which now press upon the &Annan Cativo lies; tbls pcdnt of view, the gist objea to which I should wish to point the attention of the House would be the army. As the law now stands, an Irish Roman Catholic may be is officer of any rank up to a General, and a General also, but not upon the StalL or ever to be again employed. ant no sooner does this Roman Catholic officer come to England, than he is subjected to severe pains and penalties if he does not conform to the Prote,tant rules here enforced. The Catholic common sol diers of Ireland are also promised the free ant's un restrained exercise of their religion, bet as soon as they come to England, not only are they prevented from going to a mass house to pray, but are fre quently compelled to go to assist at a protestant church, contrary to the stipulations made with them. It has been said that this is capable of being reme died by their o ffi cers, but I am much Misinformed if I could not prove that, so" far from this remedy being praaically applied, the reasons given by officers for not doing so frequently were the fear of offeuding their superiors in command. The nest subjeft - I should propose wonid be the state of their marriages, hot this I shall not take up the time of the House by arguing at present. The third subjet I think should be one which di vides itself into two branches : first the restraints on the prerogatives of the Crown; and secondly, the restraints on the rights of the people. I know that there are some who think that there would be no oblation to the admission of Catholics Into the Executive offices of Administration, though they are of opinion that they ought not to be allowed seats in Parliament, and others who would have no objection to their sitting in Parliament, though they would wish to exclude them from executive offices. Either of these opinions in my mind would be a sufficient and strong argument for going into a Committee, when all the reasons, pro and eau, would be impartially and dispassionately considered. I hope, now, Sir, that I may be allowed to state some of the advantages which 1 think would result from the adoption of - my motion. It is in the recollection of Gentlemen, that, in the last and present Session of Parliament, much time has been consumed in en deavouring to devise the best means of recruiting the army. It cannot be expeited, that I should ap plaud any of the feeble and inefficient schemes that have hitherto been adopted ; but were they even of a far different charades-, they must be powerless and paltry, when compared with the certain and efficacious resource, which this measure would in fallibly afford us. In the beat and honourable wsnith of the Catholics, after this triumphant vic tory over long-standing bigotry, we should have the heart, the zeal, the ardent spirit, of this grate ful and warrn•hearted race of men, to fight the bat tles of the Empire. The most glorious eff 'las of the most illustrious conqueror could not possibly atchieve so much as that which I now pnopose of ad din to your strength—one-fourth of the population of His Majesty's European sttbjeds. That which is now youtiveakness, would then conseaute your strength—ai the Protestants of Ireland have been heretofore deemed scarcely sufficient to repress the disaffedion cf the Catholics. Ido not propose to you to augment the strength of your garrison-4ut . M a much better thing, in converting the be iegers. into a Tart of that garrison. You mill then find valiant officers in. men whir, heretofere. seldem could itink7to he even serjesnts ; you will find =here!' entree/ler:al; in those who could not be fore have even hoped to be subalterns. Whatever former differences might have existed, they Will, , henceforire)q, have only one heart anti mind for the safety and -eery of the British empire. I confi- • dently believe in the loyalty and fidelity hf the Irish, but I woulclnot wish them to be pressed ton bard is their present situation, and set there to fight for a • constitution, in the advantages of which they Are am permitted to share. Is shall not detain the Hoes, any longer at present, as I expeaehe usaal indulge ence of a reply to any objeaions which may be of feted to what I purpose, and shall therefore' cos dude, "that the petition of theßoman Catholics of Ireland be referred to the consideration Com mittee." Dr. DUIGENAN began by referring to the transaCtions which took place in the Irish Parlian • ment at the time of the Union. and declared him self *to have been a decided advocate for that mea sure; but that it was strentiougly opposed bei the Roman Catholics, who met in Dublin by delegates. and published violent declamatory resolutions upon that occasion. The oaths of allegiance and supre macy were such as he never wished to prevent the Irish Roman Catholics from taking; indeed he did not hold it necessary to form exclusive laws for that body, as exclusive laws were only mane :ix traitors; but he would at the same time boldly declare his sentiments ; and these were, that every man was a traitor to his country who should main tain that his country was held under any foreign jut risdietion whatever. In looking over the Petition from the Irish Roman Cittliolics, which bad heed • read that evening by the Clerk, he could not avolkl making a tew observations—The first epos the list of signatures was the Eta of Shrewsbury, a respet'lable English Nobleman, but who had little or no conneetion with Iceland; nest to him was Earl of Kenmrare, who derived his creation from his present Majesty, neverhay tie been, strictly speaking. a peer before, his ancestorhaving been created a peer by King James, after his abdication; next to hine was Lord Oxmentown, whose ancestor had beets attainted for high treason; but who, by the clemency of His present Majesty, had been restored to the title and possessions of his foretetheis. In short. though the names of several NOMETYI23 were af fixed, with a view, doubtless; to give a kind el son tine and weight to the prayer of the petition, he must remark that it was signed by none of the Roman Catholic Nobility of Ireland. who had been such at the accession of His present Majesty. There were besides the signatures of three Irish Baronets, two of whom had also been created such by Hit present Majesty. lie had also to observe to the House, that out of no less than nineteen counties rf Ireland, not one petitioner was to be found in the fist; and from the four counties of Cork, Weefm-d, Down, and Lowth, there was only one subscriber to each of these counties ; so that, in point of fed, this oue,ht not to be considered, as wan al leged, to be a petition coming from the general body of the Roman Catholics of Ireland. There was also the name of one Gentleman signed be this petition (Counsellor Scully. toeallg ualifeneei to- him perettelaltry and who came over here upon this occasion as one of the delegates from thy Irish Catholic.. He was, indeed, surprised to find, that the anther of a pamphlet. which he heist in his hand, should be singled out, and placed amongst such respeetable company as the other de legates certainly were. Thar pamphlet was entitled, " The Advice of a Roman Catholic to his Brethren." in which the author evidently meant to excite them to a spirit of rebellion. Speaking of the siege ot. Limerick, he stiles it " a noble defence Made Against the Dutch invader (King William) and his myrmi dons." Such was the language of this mus--and that only a year before he came over here ae or.a of the delegates to present this petition. ;inch then was the spirit indulged by some of the rtitionertt. In the said pamphlet he also quoted Mr. Barka (who. if he had been alive, would net hare been much obliged to him for so doing), under the pre tence of making a friendly apology for His Ma jeny, and his infatuation," as he is modettly pleesed to term iti " liable." he observes, " to many fits of humour and caprice, and to many mistakes, He goes on to explain away " the quibbling evasion of an oath," whilst, with no small effrentery,hesriles the Parliament Houseof Ireland, "the Club-House." How such a man should have been able to gain the confidence of the Irish Roman Catholics, so as to bet sent over to this country as one of their delegates. was to him matter both of surprise aad regret I Arid he would leave it to the Henze to guess with what sincerity, and with what disposition for peace this petition was sent over, under the patronage of such a delegate, and aetuelly signed by so small a number of Irish Roman Catholics ! The Petition went on to say, " we have sol-mnly taken the oathp prescribed, and which are expressly inculcated by the religion we profess " But he must remark, that the oath prescribed by the Parliament of 1793, none of these Roman Catholics were ob liged to take, except by such of them as were called to vote for members of Parliament. He had also to remark, that not one of the Romish Clergy of Ireland had signed this Petition. The oath prescribed by the Parliament of Ireland of 1793. was neatly the same with the declaration of the tour Apostolical Vicars, and yet they chose to disapprove of this oath. and even sent circular let ters to those of their communion, desiring them by nu means to take that oath. This it was which oc casioned a great difference between them and the Roman Catholic Gentlemen of the Laity. Such, however, was the influence possessed by the Ro man Catholic Clergy, that in 1793 those parts of the oath (chiefly what respeaed the power and ju risdiaion of the See of Rome) were expunged, as disapproved of by these Apostolic Vicars, and this was done, as it was stated, by the approbation of the Apostolic See. Now, if the Clergy of the Ro mish Church in Ireland have, as has been stated, aCtually taken this oath, this must have been done contrary to the judgment of the Apostolic VicarS, and of the Apostolic See. In the Irish and Romish College of Manaoth, established in some sense by the Parliament of Ireland), by a particular clause - in the Alf GI Parliament, the Prefeiscirs. Ste. of that College arc expressly excluded from taking this oath. The priaciples dawn by the 440. • • —ad