The Sun. — London, England, 1829-04-04 00:00:00

* Gold With him defend - every attack on the chUreh.— The Noble and Learned Lord had strived hard historically to explain the duties of allegiance and supremacy, and to zn a... 11 .e as acquainted that they were passed in the time of •Jilabeth, for the purpose of guarding against the danger Popery. No doubt, my Lords, the events of those times fallYjustified the passing of those Acts. It was not wondetful tliftt-they should wish to have some test and security for The Protestant Religion. But, my Lords, it sheuld be recol lected that the oath of supremacy was not levelled at the P aPists. It would, be a reflection on Noble Lords to remind them that this Act was not intended exclusively le censure those professing the Roman Catholic religion ; that could not be the case, for in tho , e times it was ge nerally supposed that the Roman Catholics had liberty:from The Pope to upset any oath imposed upon them by persons differieg from them in religion. The Noble and Learned Lord had talked much of the danger of Roman Catholics being admitted into offices of the state. I thought these antiquated notiens had long ago been excluded.— (Flear, hear, hear.)—Th e late Lord Liverpool himself, in all his opposition to the Roman Catholic claims, never itnauted to them disloyalty. Now, my Lords, can there be any better security than - the security of the oath pro- Posed for the Roman Catholics to take—that oath was a sufficient safeguard to the Protestant religion ; and, my Lords, we all know the regard the Catholics entertain for the obligation of an oath ; it was because they would not take the testing bath that excluded them from offices of this nature ; that 'oath imposed sa crificee which they never would submit to. Could it then be said that they ought not to be trusted' In the time of Queen Elizabeth, to which allusion had so often been made in the course of the debate, it should be recollected that the Catholics were trusted and appointed to high offices, and;thatiMonarch possessed their confidence. Who was it that destroyed the Spanish Armada ? Who was the Admiral who commanded the fleets of England against that powerful force which was directed against ottr country, and if success failed, would have destroyed our liberty. It was a Roman Catholic, Lord Howard of P effingham,whoee statue now adorned a neighbouring edifice. Perh a p e he might have obtained a license from the Pope - -(great laughter) to fight the battles of a sovereign who had been excommunisated by the See of Rome, and which Power had absolved his subjects from their allegiance. Yee, my Lords, under these circumstances, was a Roman Catholic appointed by a Protestant Queen, to oppose the roost powerful foree ever directed against this country— and that too acting under the banners of Popery.—( Hear, h ear.)—Why, ray Lords, what more is necessary to show the confidence that can be reposed in Roman Catho• hes. Perhaps, my Lords, it is unnecessary for me to go into the legal arguments of the Learned Lord who has just sat down. It was acknowledged that this was a question of political expediency, and whether granting the Roman Catholics their civil rights would or would not endanger the safety of the Established Church.— (Hear, hear.)—My Lords, the Acts imposing these disabilities, were passed under a strong sense of necessity, and I am therefore free to admit that they are entitled to the greatest regard and attention, but I; never can agree with those Noble Lords who wish to make an ilnpreesion that these laws were intended to be per manent, and that it was not in our power to alter them. This fallacy has been again and again ex- P a led, and never more satisfactorily than by the Noble Lord who spoke from the Woolsack last evening. That noble Lord clearly proved that it was competent for Par liament to enquire into the nature of those restrictions. Ih a`re advocated the suns cause—l have before combatted t at subject with the Noble and Learned Lord sitting at th e table before me, and who, I perceive, is very busy t aking notes.—(Great laughter.)—l may have been Wron g in the views I have taken; of the subject; but if Wrong, I have no doubt we shall soon hear it from the noble and Learned Lord, to whom I shall listen with that attention and respect to which his great talents en title hi m . I say, my Lords, we are called upon to make an alteration—it never was intended when those laws Were passed but that when circumstances changed they should be repealed, and in doing this we are d oing no more than what it is our duty to do, and I may a dd, as a matter of reproach, that it was not done earlier. These law, were passed at the time of the Revolution, attd I fearlessly 'say, that it was the intention of the Legislature,..they left it to their successors to make those c hanges which circumstances might in after ages require, ma if they could new legislate no doubt they would bring term i ni the same measure as we are now doing. There /* nothing that can be construed into permanent exclusion. The Catholics had asserted their rights, and it was time They had them granted. Noble Lords had heard that the But of Rights made it illegal to collect rent in the shape of a tax without the authority of Parliament. That it was also illegal for them to carry arms. But would they for a moment contend that Parliament had not the power to llter think enactments? In the Act of Settlement, it was directed that all Privy Counsellors, on entering office, %Quid sign, . and subscribe to, certain declarations, 'ad that no subordidate officer of the Crown should have seat in the House of Commons. But those parts were t 'lleoled. If it was sound policy to make that change, I * l illltay, that it w ou ld b e equa ll y so to make a further t :aage• My Lords, y ou w ill a l so recollect that there 4 an Act passed, making it imperative on all per 4°at previous to entering the army or navy to take the th at if supr emacy . Thi s A c t h a d a l so been repealed, and (tl et duri ng t h e a d m i n i strat i on o f t h e Noble and Learned Card nea r me. (ldon) almost without opposition. My ` l : r cilr, it will be recollected in 1807 I held the office of one 1/ ' hielstajesty's Secretaries of State. At that period a Bill WO brought in to give a partial relief to his Majesty's Iteinaa Catholic subjects. It gave them the right to hold t onsmissisress in the army and navy, and I stn sure many noble Lords who now hear me will remember the agitation at causoi, Mad thaimeans that were made use of, (something 'inailar to what -they had been on the present occa °ion) an endeavour to impress upon the public t hat if that Bill passed into a law, all the liberty of the Nect was gone, and the safety of the Crown itself in d anger. It was said, what, will you put the sword into t he hands of the Catholics? If yon - do, revolution must tow. It was argued that his Majesty could not consistently W ith hi 4 Nronation oath, give his assent to such a measure. If I.- • e aesereedly destruction to liberty and religion must l t w otediately such was the agit a ti on th a t thi s mea 24.Produeed from one end of the country to the other, and "eh the circumstances of the times, before it could be passed, 4a Ministry of which he formed a part were out of office, 14d another administration was formed determined to op -114%e such a measure, and it was said the country might f. : 1 1 remain safe as the Popi s h Ad m i n i s t rat i on was dis -ared,—(Hear.)-13ut my Lords, what did this new ad "iltistration of which the Noble and Learned Lord formed okt ‘• 3' d almost immediately after getting into office? 1 9a a • wear came aesva to Parliament with exactly such ano lher Ali t • ; •4, epernng ceg Army and Navy to the koa la a o gAlwiici,,(Hear, hear, - t,ear,)--and this, TPT rd (;t1 ill r iteet was proposed by the very Minis alarm of danger. Wh y o shortly w e :e ° 2 : o .tth rehad 50M7 4e(1 the . , 4 Bin was then carried almost without e a dissenting t ()14, and my Lords, it is not Pale curious to witness the , 'Nit • -nd none --no danger ensued, . that T i t° to much dreaded were realised.—(Hear, hear)- a t saat - 1: 4 'gain, my Lords, ire eeference to the Act of Union, which your Lordships have heard sip nlUch, I state Z tin etlY that I do not think that that Act i 3 eng w, hick I lad e' n(4 be changed.—(Hear, hear.)—This doctrine was rj a wn in so clear a manner by the Noble and Learned te cs a ' tne Woolsack last night, who, not satisfied his own knowledge, h,es quoted my Lord Hard bte sentiments on that 40; both pf 441:/ hays NI " corrob orat i ve o f m y Ora, that I am really 4 to say ou e word more on the subject ; thus much, if ft ;" e r, I must say, upon what subject can we legislate Ci h.s lils° U the Act of Union ? We could not havg taken oa a ' • - ‘ 4 step in the Corn Laws without infringing upon i o • w f the_ arti c l es o f th a t ac t ; a p ro hibit or y l aw was en 142"ttt reference to the importation of corn, and yet your Lordships legiKlated • on that question ; there Were other points also in d , dell changes had taken place; the strongest article of all in the A t of Union is that which refers to the limitation of the land-tax in Scotlan.l. Now what has happened in relation to this? A new law was enacted, changing the old tax into property-tax, in which no doubt in some degree a land -tax %las conceined, but in spirit there was an alteration; a power is also undoubtedly given to Parliament in the 18th Article, to make what eTer alterations it might think proper. Then, my Lords, again as regards the Coronation Oath, it can be shewn from the most incontrovertable evidence, that no infringe- ment can possibly be made upon it by tbs adoption of conciliatory measures ; it would indeed be strange and unaccountable if the framers of that oath trusted to the Sovereign's power alone. It cannot be believed, my Lords, that they by that oath intended to trust for safety to the Crown alone ; a proviso is introduced in that article, the spirit of which is universally admitted ; that proviso was withdrawn, showing clearly that it was not the intention of the Legislature to place exclusive reliance on the Crown. I cannot suffi ciently deprecate a practice that has been adopted and from which the greatest possible evil is:to be apprehended ; I mean of giving circulation in the country to the idea that by the introduction of these measures the Coronation Oath will be infringed upon most wickedly ; in some cases has this opinion been circulated. Now, my Lords, I would allude to the position of the Roman Catholics by the Treaty of Limerick. That Treaty was made with respect to Ireland, and it expressly provided that Roman Catholic subjects should enjoy all the privileges. This was in the time of Charles the Second ; and it was stipu lated that they were Cu enjoy these privileges merely if they took the oath of allegiance.—(Cries of " Hear.").—That treaty, my Lords was subsequently ratified by King William, under the great seal of the Kingdom. I will read to your Lordship an extract of a letter from Sir John Tweedale, in which he declares that the laws affecting the Raman-. Catholics were not intended to be permanent, but suited to the exigency of the times ; and subject always to what might be found necessary here after. My Lords, I should like to say one word regarding the political power alleged to be the aim of the Roman Ca tholics in this measure. We have been told in phrases about which there can be but little or no mistake that the Ca tholics wished to establish political power at the expence of another. I do not, my Lords, deny that the Catholics wish to obtain political power, but it is a legitimate power which the subjects of every free nation ought to desire and possess ; that political power is the natural offspring of every free Government.—(Great cheers.)-- It has been objected by the opponents of this measure that concessions would be dangerous, in consequence of the physical power of the Roman Catholics. That, in my apprehension, is one argument why those concessions should be made. The very ardour they display is sufficient reason for not refusing their claims. Let us look, my Lords, to the power which they at present possess, and let us then see how that power has been employed.— Eligibility to office, and to seats in Parliament, is, I admit, political power, but I admit that they are also civil rights, and the Roman Catholics aim at nothing more.— I trust my Lords that I have vindicated the Roman Catholics from the imputation emit on them by Noble Lords, that they were undeserving of confidence. I have said, let us look at the way in which they employ their present power. They possess the eligibility to certain offices—the Army and the Navy are open to them. They enjoy the elective franchise, and since the abrogation of the penal laws they have the power to purchase and acquire property, and are conse quently in the possession of that power which is derivable from wealth.—( Hear, hear.)—But there is no proof that they have abused that power, unless it be contended that the assertion of what they conceive to be right can be construed into such abuse. Possessing all those privileges they still consider themselves unjustly treated, and still labouring under a grievance which they feel ought not to be imposed upon them, they naturally exert the power that they possess in the assertion of rights too long withheld, and this is the only way in which it can be said that the Ca tholics exert the power they posseis against the Government. I do not mean to say that that power is not great, that the priesthood have an extraordinary influence over the minds of the people, end, if mis-directed, that influence would be dangerous. But by this measure you will unite all parties in a powerful union for the maintenance of social inte rests, and the security of the State. What, I ask, are the evils we anticipate from this men sure. It would have the effect of introducing five or six Peers into this House, and a large number of Members would be returned to the other House. Catholics would also become eligille to civil offices, with few exceptions, and under this law the fewer the better. What then is to be the consequence ? It is then argued that all at once the King is to be influenced by some Catholic charm—some Ilohenlohe spell, which would work on his mind a miracle of con version, and that he was to abandon the prin ciples of the House of Brunswick. It was also argued that the people who had been so alarmed at the very prospect of this law would become so ena moured of the Catholic faith, that their opposition to it would cease. To believe this would be something equal to a belief even of hansubstantion What, any Lords, are the arguments on the other side? We find the Catholic population united by a sense of com mon injury for advancement of a common interest. You have heard the Noble Duke give a clear illustration of the state of .Ireland.--(Hear, bear.)—He told you that the present system contronled the magistracy in their duty, that it affected materially the administration of justice, that it deteriorated the value of property, and threatened the credit of the country. These are evils, my Lords, the correction of which devolves upon you this night.—(lleer, hear.)—They are evils from the contemplation of which you will not shrink in the performance of your duty. We have had a long detail from the Noble Viscount opposite of the measures he had in contemplation to improve Irelani. But I would ask how this law could impede the progress of those measures ? Nay, more, I will ask your Lordships, can you attempt these measures unless thisjaw be passed. Until you depart from the system you have so long pursued, and with such unhappy consequences, until you tranquillize Ireland, until that great and paramount difficulty be removed, all your at tempts at improvement will be vain. If I were asked would this measure tranquillize Ireland, I certainly could net look into the womb of time, and:state what its effects would be, but I should say that it is our duty to provide such means as the urgent necessity of the times dictates. I do not mean to say that it will have an immediate effect, but I think it more likely than any other mode that can be adopted; tol effect that change in the condition of Ireland, which I am sensible your Lordships are anxious to achieve. It was stated last night, by the Noble and Learned Lord on the woolsack, that the condition of Ireland was every year growing worse and worse, and that assertion has been fully demonstrated by circumstances which have recently conic under your Lordship's cognizance. That alone is in my mind a sufficient reason for the adoption of a different system. The Noble Marquis who has recently had such abundant CPpOrtunity of forming a correct opinion on the state of that country, has truly told you, that although the present sirs em .. - Te;it be endured in peace, it could not in time of war. Let us La at the situation c.f iuland exposed as she is to th e i ee is o America Upon die one li‘tind, and to Cie beets of Prance upon the et rev. Such a situation was full of f ieri k e i end more particularly so since a mistaken policy had allowed Span+ to he sacrificed to France.—(Hear. ) Another opportunity might not occur when these dangers could be obviated with le7s difficulty. Looking at the question fairly, their Lordships should consider that it youl4 l t e !better cc 8o to Ortiiu losses in time of peace, than hazard the conscquencee of leayiog frelapd 41 4 etate of dissatisfaction and disaffection in the event of a war. What reprobation would not a Statesman deserve if he did nor e4empt in a time of tranquillity lik e th e p resen t t o I bring forward gene teeesere like the present for the pur pose of conciliating the Finale of Ireland, and avoidinii that danger which they had for vso long a 'tline failed in averting by means of force.--(Che , :•rs.)—My Lords, the Noble Lord says, " why not enforce the laws which are at present in existence." My Lords, it is very easy to say this, but though the Catholic Association was in existence for such a length of time, and with the danger hourly encreas ing upon them, still it:was found impossible to relieve Ire land from the danger which attended it.—(Hear.)--But I say, my Lord•, if this be charged against the Government, those who are disposed to bring forward such a charge should take especial care :that the arguments they use will not apply with double force against the Noble and Learned Leader. Lord ELDON made an observation in an under tone to the Noble Earl which was inaudible. Lord GREY, in continuation—Well, my Lords, they shall take care that their arguments will not fall upon the bead of the Noble and Learned and highly gifted Lord, to whose efforts and assistance they look for ward with such sac guine expectations. The Noble Earl, who spoke early in the debate, said that the Government of Ireland was disposed to exert the whole of the force it possessed to avert the danger, but that the Government at home, and particularly the lawyers connected with that Government, were opposed to it. The Noble Lord, had opened a pretty large indictment, and he began with the Noble Lords on this side the House, charging them with being the exciters of this charge by continually urging this measure. My Lords, I, for one, plead guilty to this charge.—(Cheers.) I always urged this measure to the utmost of my ability. But he brings the charge that we have advocated this topic for party purposes. Now, my Lords, considering that a great portion of his Majesty'a Government, and those nut the least distinguished by their transcendent talent, and their influence in the country, have always advocated this measure, it is too much to charge us that we have urged it merely for party purposes.---(Hear, hear.)—My Lords, on this occasion I will support this Bill, for I will sever shrink from the performance of my duty, because it may be charged against methat I urn actuated by factious mo tives. My Lords, if I were disposed to retort upon those who have charged us with having used public laws as instruments of private ambition, I might find ample matter to enable me to do so. The Noble Earl himself was one of those who in 1807 raised an outcry against the very measure which they themselves carried through Parliament. The next persons in the indiettnent were his Majesty's Ministers, and even the highest authority, his Majesty himself, has not escaped the general censure,—as if it were not sufficient that the Ministry were not responsible for his acts. But I contend, my Lords, that giving political power to the Catholics ought not to be viewed as dangerous to the Established Church, and I am sure the possession of such power as this Bill will give them would be infinitely less dangerous than the phy sical power which they now posaess.—(Hear, hear. )—As to the effects of this measure, I confess that I am sanguine that it will produce all the beneficial consequences predicted of it. It has been said that it will have the effect of de stroying the Established Church, but in reply to that I will refer your Lordships to the speech of a Right Rev. Prelate, who spoke last night upon this subject. My Lords, I felt highly gratified with his declaration, that even after the passing of this measure the Church of of England had nothing to spare. I agree with him, my Lords, that the church of England has nothing to fear ex cept indeed from those impolitic laws which this mea sure is intended to repeal. I say, my Lords, the Established Church has nothing to fear unless it abandons that ground on which it is unas sailable to avail itself of forbidden arms.—(Cheers.) — In the Church of Ireland what fears can be entertained. It is already in such a situation that do what you will you cannot exempt it from its present difficulty. It was the Church of a small minority, a minority small to a degree that could only be the result of those very laws which this Bill would repeal. My Lords, I say it would take away those laws. That church would increase in magnitude and prosperity. Ido not mean, my Lords, by means of conversion, fur I think any injudicious attempts at con version would only create injury ; but I mean by means of it , .uperior truth and reason, it will prevail to a greater extent as soon as you have relieved it from the invidious situation in which it now stands, by avoiding all means of provocation—( Hear, hear, hear, hear) —as soon as you have taken away those pretended supports, which however only encumber its efforts.—(Cheers.) But this prospect also may fail, and Catholic Association may again be established, but I believe if any thing could prevent such a recurrence, it is the measure which is now before your Lordships. That is the only chance.— (Hear, hear.)—l will suppose that this might happen and even then I contend that Ireland might remain united to this country. 1 say, my Lords, that such might be the case, the experience of all Europe proves. I say that such an occurrence might take place without destruction to the Established Church. This might be illustrated by referring to all the different Governments of Europe. I will sup pose, my Lords, for a moment, that you were to go as heretofore, embodying the discontents of the people, and continuing the pressure of all the old evils which distracted Ireland.--(Hear, hear, hear, hear.)—l will suppose that you were to do this, and then that you were to be found embarked in another war. In the course of this debate, my Lords, allusion has been made to Mr. Tone, I would strongly recommend to your Lordships to read his memoirs. I would refer your Lordships to the ex pected invasion of Ireland by General Hoche, which had it taken place, notwithstanding the superiority of the British navy must have caused a separation between the two countries. Such would have been the result had he effected a landing,—and that this country escaped on that occasion was almost miraculous. It was, indeed, like a merciful interposition of Providence; and surely, my Lords, common sense would dictate that we should do our utmost to avert the recurrence of such consequences. My Lords, I will put to you the case of Ireland invaded by a foreign force—of her people joining with a foreign enemy —I will suppose the Irish people united with the intru ders, and departed from our Government, what then will be the'extent of their wishes? will it be merely the eman cipation from their civil disabilities, no, assuredly not, but that of having their own church established as the church of the State ? The difficulty then is, not whether yon will have the probable danger of a Catholic church and Catholic ascendancy —which you may avert while it is in your power, but whether you will have those with a foreign power, and subject to foreign dominions—united with, and in close alliance with it. I would ask you, what security there was for the Church of England and Ireland? For, my Lords, if the establishment of the Roman Catholic Church, and of Roman Catholic ascendancy in Ireland, under the same sovereign with ourselves, be an evil, how much greater will it be, when achieved by a people separated from us, and under the influence of another and a strange Government. And, my Lords, what consola tion would yon have in saying to yourselves—" Oh, we have been at least conmistent—we have done our utmost tq maintain the fOth and 30th of Charles have clung by those statutes which prescribe the oaths of supre macy and proscribe the doctrine of transubstantiation, and the invocation of saints; we have laboured and succeeded in excluding from seats in the Legislature, and from all high and influential offices, the Catholics of Ireland, and in so doing, have lost the most precious jewel of the Croura, and lopped off the right a - , in the country. We have at least sqmsoldtion, tnat ice have persevered, against all the warnings which have been given by the most sensible men, against all time voices of the greatest men who have adorned e most,t,..theens e w n h a t o e, b a a g y a ?, i n , s d t o t r h ;e c d on; ti noa uoofutshees of Parliament, and against the advice of the greatest generals thol,lave.tidorned sill arms; we have done all this, and we can at least con- . sole ourselves that we have done tanc dally - fiat jotitii k , moat caelara; This have we done, and we therefore set d own , sedate, and satisfied with having dOti6 our duty, though in the discharge of it we have hazarded our country, and abridged its honour. (Cheers. a (C 4. l; a ee 4y rs. ii ) ,(l lll :l;et t z4o7o4 . 4 i.sual)l,oen non nearly done indulgence ; one topic more only, will I advert to. Your Lordships have been told, that in the hands of inefficient administrations, the powers of the law were suffered to 4 slumber. (Hear, hear, hear.) — The vigour of the common law had been paralyzed. They ask, why was not the law (for Pufficient it was for the pur pose) put in force to suppress the spirit Of disaffection which was said to reign in Ireland ? My Lords, my an swer to that is this. In the fir,t place I should say that it is no easy matter to apply a coercive and highly penal law, when the parties against whom it is directed do not furnish any thing in their conduct tangible to its operation.— (Hear.)—But somebody has suggested that there was a possibility—a supposition, that a series of provocations might be adopted in Ireland, which would have the effect of throwing that irascible people off their guard, and of outraging their powers of patience beyond further en durance.—( Hoar, hear.)—By this means it was hoped that an opoottunity wou'd be afforded of applying some in the quelling of the disturbances with effect and cer tainty. But further, my Lords, it is imputed to the Noble Duke at the head of the Government, that he has been guilty of neglect in not applying those measures of coercion which were within his reach for the suppression of these dis turbances. My Lords, lam not disposed to quote here the splendid passage in the speech of the:Noble Duke, which de scribed the horrors of civil war, and the sacrifices which he would make to arrest•it ; I should only weaken by re peating it. He of all men could pronounce such a determination with peculiar grace and effect.—But of that speech, and the sentiments expressed in it, I shall say, that that which is imputed to the Noble Duke as a weakness, I consider as the strongest proof of his magnanimity—the best proof of that moderation and coolness upon which all real wisdom is based. Instead of reproaching I would applaud that Noble Duke for this conduct—l revere hint the more— and when I see this great soldier who has shared in the shock of a hundred battles, shrinking from the horrors of exposing his country to a civil war—when I see him depre eating domestic contests, and protesting against that blood which had covered him with immortal glory, shed in internal broils—l say, that he is an authority beyond which we ought not to go, and that he has contributed one step more in securing the honour, prosperity, and happiness of this country.—(Cheers.)—But, suppose it should resolve on civil war, and that a standard is wanted by which to judge of the probable success of the experiment, where shall we find so good a criterion as the year 1793 ? Did the civil war of that period produce beneficial conse quences to Ireland—were the fires which were then lighted, yet extinguished, or would their desolating influence cease to be felt, till the whole frame of Irish society shall have an amendment? My Lords, I admit that you may by the sword suppress riots, extinguish open resistance, anti restore apparent quiet ; but can you get rid of secret discontent—of that spirit, which, though it shews not itself, is working secretly and dangerously under the surface?—(Hear, hear.)—Here my Lords is the mode of accomplishing that most desirable result, and of achieving that much to be wished-for con clusion. This Bill offers you thei surest means of restor ing tranquillity in Ireland, without: using means of coercion. it is not allowed to us to look into the womb of time, but judging of this evil by fair probabilities, I think I may say, that from the passing of this Bill, you may date not the re-establishment, but as had been more happily expressed, the regeneration of Ireland.—(Cheers.) —My Lords, I have now to apologize for having tres passed so long upon 'your time. It only remains for me to express my hearty concurrence in the measures of his Majesty's Ministers, and to say, that by this measure alone they have deserved my confidence, and that I shall in future give them my support, consistent with my duty in udging of the effect of their measures._(Cheers.)—Tl...t I have little reason to com plain of the course which the cause has taken, and the delay which has been given to its progress, perhaps some of your Lordships may feel. But, my Lords, I am thankful that justice has been at length done to tie principles which I have advocated, to the view which I took of this question—views which I learned from Fox, and which I utter ed by the side of Lord Grenvile._ Their views . were single and simple. I always contended that the Catholics had an unanswerable claim to a full participation in: the rights of the Constitution_-and from these sentiments I never swerved, and I hope, never shall depart. It is, my Lords, therefore, no small gratification to me now to see justice done to those prin ciples and to those views which I so long entertained, — The Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack has de scribed, in eloquent terms, the difficulties of a divided Ca binet. Against these evils I long ago protested; these were the objections which interposed themselves to my taking place, or making part in the Councils of my Sovereign. I have not however, now, may Lord, any un pleasing recollections of these transactions. lam thank ful for the boon which is about to be given to my fellow subjects in Ireland ; it is a source of unmixed gratifica tion to me, that proof is thus given of the purity of those principles, and of the propriety of that conduct which I have pursued ; and that that confirmation is thus made of the soundness of principle which actuated that great and immortal man, who, on the 18th of March, in the year 1779, (the same day on which this Bill was read a second time in the House of Commons) stated in his place there, in terms which will ever be remembered by pos terity, the necessity, the imperious necessity, of giving to the Catholics of Ireland that justice to which they were en titled. I, on behalf then, my Lords, of all those grew men, whose names are associated with tlsis measure, I re turn thanks for the justice which has been dune to their memories. Ino longer regret the loss of time which has taken place in its progrees, and I am, as I said before, blind to the circumstances which attended the delay, though of a personal nature to myself when I look, as I do now with confidence to its final accomplishment.— I receive with unqualified gratification the measure which the Noble Duke has proposed, and I shall sit down with stating my conviction, that the country will fed towards that noble individual the same gratitude for this boon of peace, which they confess to have received at his hands as the triumph of war, and be as little churlish to admit the one, as they have been prodigal in testifying to the other. Lord TENTERDEN explained. Lord REDESDALE now rose to address the House, but the cries of " Question" were so loud, and the confu sion so great, that he was obliged to sit down. The Earl of ELDON (amid much noise) then came to the table. My Lords, he said, I was strongly disposed to abstain altogether from offering myself to your notice, conscious that to those who concur in opiniot) . me, I could have but little new to advance, and that to those Woo differed from me, this was a question upon which I could but little hope, by any reasoning of mind, to make any impressio4l, My Lords, I am willing to give full credit to the N9,ble Earl (Grey) who has addressed you, for the compliment which lie was pleased to pay me, by erecting me into the situation of a leader of a party, but I can assure your Lordships that there is no one who more sensibly feels his incompetence to discharge the responsible office to which that Noble Lord has appointed me, than I do.—(Hear. !Isar ; hear.) _My first remark upon this 1341, and ti,e discussions to which it ha, lei, i,s, m Lords, that of unmixed sa tistactiou, that in these debater, as far as they have gone, there has been almost a total absence of personal allusions amongst your Lordships. The proposition which the ble Duke has made to your Lordp':,: : pa i. assuredly one which he would hi., b,,uiul to make one time or other, but that it is made now, is to me a matter:of great sur- . priaa,—(lTear, hear, hear.) A 'say, my Lords,, that the bringing it forward at thil cri t tical tn9ment tins t7 O . me matter of great 15,‘tpiise, and believe, to, the couiitry wilielt by some weans or (At4q tinc!or impression Lo r dships have been toll, a b ba t tid i n that it had been ut t ,..i. • T Li • ster of the Crown not to di sc l ose hi s i nten ti on; with re, that iesd the. spect to any public meat,ure, till he shall have obtained the appro,batmn of bit , Sovereign to that particular measure. froul that doctrine I do not dissent. I3ut 1 say this, my Lords; that if uninttlationally, and by mistake, it tray intimated abroad that no such proposition as this was to be made,—then, I insist that the people of the country have been taken by surprise, and that upon t. measure, too, which is dearer co them than their livets--- opon a measure which is their property, for, in the words of Lied S'ormere, " the Church was the property of the subject.—(Cheers.)—This is the measure in which they were taken by surprise,—this the property which was attacked, the most valuable inheritance which they could leave to their children. I say, my Lords, that at the close of the last Session the Noble Duke placed the people of this country in a situation to believe that this question was, for a time at least, to he left in a state of oblivion. I say that the Noble Duke, by a mis hap, if it was nothing else, furnished a Roman Catholic Bishop with the means of relating to the world, in the month of December last, that it Wes not his intention to forward a measure of this nature this Session, and that therefore the country was warranted in believing that no such measure was in contemplation ; and, I must say, that it has been to the people of this country a great mis fortune, that a general apathy was generated by the assur ance that no such thing was intended.—(Cheers.) To this effect contributed also not a little the couduct and de clarations of a Right Honourable Gentleman in the other :House (Mr. Peel), of rwhom, as it occurs to ine, to mention his name; I wish it to be under stood that lam not under the influence of any feeling of irritation towards him, I solemnly declare, and I wish to state it here in my vindication, that I have no unfriendly feeling towards that Right Hon. Gent, we have long acted together, we have always acted, I believe, in the strictest concert, and I have thought that the idem ;dent relic, was as safe a cowrie as I could take with any colleague in politics.—(Hear, hear.)—For fifteen years we have acted together ; I have always had the most perfect confidence in his couucils, and now that we have parted company, and differed in opinion, it would be as un generous as unjust, in me to in sinuate, that the:advice which he has given to his Sovereign, was not given with the sincerest wish of do ng his duty.—(Cheers.)—Passing then from the Right Hon. Gentleman, I come to answer for myself. The late Lord Privy Seal (Lord Westmor land), whom I am sorry not to see in his place, has been pleased to arraign me at the bar of this House for my con duct while we were fellow servants of our ,Sovereign, I can only say that if the charge be made upon just grounds that Noble Lord is not free from impeachment for so long suffering me to sit with him in the King's Councils. I heard the proposition laid down last night, that it was the duty of any man who fonnd himself a member of a divided Cabinet to withdraw from it. 1 must say that I have heard a different opirion from Mr. Pitt and Lord Liverpool, I might quote other great names in support of this opinion, but I think I have covered myself with au thority enough, and therefore, I say, that I could not feel it my duty to retire from a Cabinet which was divided unless an opportunity presented itself of forming a united Cabinet. The Noble Lord on the Woolsack will excuse me for stating that if he considered it his duty not to remain a member of a divided Cabinet, he must, I think have extreniely good luck to go through the Cabinet up to a certain period of his friend his Grace the Duke of Wellington—the Cabinet of his esteemed friend Viscount Goderich—and the Cabinet of his Hon. Friend Mr. Canning.—(Hear, and laughter.)—The Noble Lord on the Woolsack was pleased to say last night that he would not address me as his friend, in consequence of an observation which I made on a former occasion. What I then stated was, that I would not call him my friend who insinuated that I acted insidiously, or that I looked to expedients and mystification, and mentioned soy opinions with respect to the Union with Scotland, in a manner which I could not but feel most disrespectful to my feelings.—( Hear, hear.)—He would tell the Noble Lord on the Woolsack, that those who had known him for many years, would, he hoped and trusted, say of him, that they knew not a man of a more kind heart in the world.—(Hear, hear, hear,)--- Upon the subject of the remarks which the Noble Lord on the Woolsack has thought proper to make with refer ence to me, all I shall say in reply is this—that there is 'a sort of indecorum in these personal allusions between a Chancellor on the Woolsack and an ex-Charceller—(a laud.:)—and that disputes of such a nature had Letter be settled by quiet words elsewhere, and not by intrudin them on the public business of this idouse.—( Hear, hear.) —lndeed, when the Noble and Learned Lord under'- took what lie called a defence of his own consistency, i thought it but natural to expect he would keep his word, and prove what he It id stated to be his intention. What however was the result ? Not a vindication of his consis tency, but a long and deliberate attack upon mine. 1 shouhi have preferred, I confess, to have been allowed to defend myself, and I should have then readily admitted what seemed to take the Noble Lord a good deal of time to establish, namely, that consistency in the business of a statesman is most certainly to be governed by the pressure of events and circumstances ; all this I lona freely and readily admit. Now as the Noble and Learned Lord has challenged me to investigate his consistencies, I shall venture upon the task, for I have in nay hand the speech of an Attorney-General, upon which I must take the liberty to comment. I do not mean his Majesty's late Attorney-General, Sir Charles Wetheroll,—(laughter)— who is, by the bye, one of the most learned, and what is far better, one of the most honest and independent members of the profession to which I have myself the honor to belong.—(Hear,)—l do not, I say, mean him, but I mean the Attorney-General who preceded 14:1-1 mean in fact the Noble and Learned Lard on the Wool sack ; and I am alluding to a speech in this House 113 late as last June. He must excuse me if I feel a little diffidence in reconciling that speech end his late conduct. That very speech, I say it exactly defines my view of what was done in the settlement of the Constitution, as established in 1688.—1 n fact, my doctrines upon this point I learned from him. I stn too old, abruptly to change opiniena which I have long cherished.—l am now at that stage of life when I have the most indisputable authority #ys know ing, that what remains to me of must probably be spent in infirmity and sorrow. lam in fact now vergiog nearly on four-score, and I would fondly trust s tha>r siiels has been my conduct through a long yid AT:lnoue hi 3. ' that can look back upon it wit'nontheieg strnek bes' . cl "'".er.—('Clieers.)-11 I die taint ofany mark or stain effectiog have gone on so long hieing compromised, I will not now expose ,e myseii to the agony of a change. Imp:1- . 416 '7:s have been cast upon me, however, which I feel I do not deserve, and I am enaboldened to repel them in the presence of the parties who gave them.—(Hear, The first of these attacks upon me seems to be that I was a willing party to the Act of Relief of 1791. Now, I was I T i e n I. l ° was officially no party to this Act; it was introduced I know aon a s l t e t si • o ra yr, t ,: i : o stt n !:t)halet f into the other House of Parliament by Lord Redesdel,e, ' and had that sort of support, I Admit, ,e,, :em me, which my affection and respect for ;ilea dictated, and which has been maintained betweee i :es fere half a century. In t rea t eol l s i su a orsi Id de :: a ah a mde ve yAn tl ocL i shiers t o,o f.: ; l n : d ta,a s I,o e d‘,ovv n .h o l i s me r the policy ef. our Constitution as cemented in 1688. lam entified with , could have Act passed by the Parliament of Ireland, which 1, of Scotch Act of 1 foe which I am also to be rendered though I was about that time a good d e al ceniroyeei a. your Lordships' bar as Ceetrascal S:eotteli cawns, found myself so Br a ts peoficient in Scottish law s and felt steci t t a dtqcntty iii beireg master tj it wit hout an trite:lse, aetd, to. Me. are iseopyeyl~At i!,eplicetion, that I left all mat,l tors A h with that law to th o se who troz..-e i • _onapetent to undertake them. Ne,f4a, Leeksheolll recole lest that there was then stets.. , iNrkon, in Po t tliament, the father of a Noble. F od esehom I mew see opposite. 4 , 944 14.X.VILLE, (across the table,) you mistake my father was not thee Lord Advocate for Scotland. Lord ELDON—So far, then, I am wrong; but I reccP,(4.l that the Noble Lord's father was thee, cl‘.4...rAber of his Majesty's Government ; im . rA th4t be always assisted the 0 Pei' Ce T.oril Advocate of Scotland velth his able and amp advice upon matter, connected with Scottish law, I nad therefore little or no concern at that time with such mat ters ; but I am quite ready to say that I was an assenting and assisting p irty to that law. My mind at that tithe was not so much taken up with politics as serge Noble Lords appear to think ; my ambition was then directed to the Chief Justiceship of the Common Pleas to which my revered and dear sovereign prevented toe. I was afterwards by the gracious condescension of my sovereign made Lord Chancellor in 1804-5, where I remained, with the exce p- tion of a short interval, for 25 years. I know well that during that period few persons Were more exposed to obloquy :han I was. I met that obloquy, however, by as careful and attentive devotion of my time to the duties of my office as it was possible for me to give it, and though know it is possible that it may be a pleasant thing in the [louse of Peers to catch an old Chancellor, it behoves him to have a share in the joke if be ein.—(Laughter.)---And indeed if one could compare a serious case of public legis_ latio❑ with a private and personal transaction, I could sate an anecdote, I think almost quite in polat upon thi business. I was many years ago at Buxton, with a vene- a rable and deceased friend of mine, Lord Thurlow, who had gone there for the benefit of the waters. Whilst sit ting with him one evening in a room at one of the inns, we were informed that there were six or eight persons who meant on the next morning to have at the bath what they called a splash at the Ex-Chancellor.—(Much Lughter.)—Well, Sir, said Lord Thurlow, let them have a splash at me if they like, but what is there to prevent me from having a splash in return.— (Renewed laughter.)—Well then, that is all I want on the present occasion. Now, with reference to what I have done at the times referred to, I always acted under the ful. responsibility of whatever station I happened to hold, and gave my best and honestest advice to my Sovereign of that day, always bearing in mind that he was not to be consi dered the only man in his Majesty's dominions, who was not to be considered at liberty to express his own opinions upon a great public question.—(Hear, hear, hear.)—When Noble Lords allude to what I have done when a member of his Majesty's Government, they will surely allow me to state what I know of their opinions when acting with me. In 1817, when my Noble Friend opposite, if he will allow me to call him so, when he was a Member of his Majesty's Government— The Duke of WELLINGTON—I was not. The Earl of ELDON—WeII, then, what I am about to explain is simply this—l was then influenced by what I now know to have been an erroneous opinion, that persons qualified to serve in the army in Ireland, being as all military men are under the orders of the Crown, could have been brought here without the specific intervention of any new Act of Parliament ? There were those, however, who thought that it was not safe to trust to the common law in the re moval of these soldiers from Ireland to England, and that it was safer to have a specific Bill for the purpose, I ask, what was there in that Act to confer a new political power upon the Catholic interests? My objection always has been upon this question to the admission of Catholics to political power to either House of Parliament, which would lead to their having that power, or to any of the gn op re e a n t t o o ffi t c h e e s m o f ? It a ( tHe ear, e h a a r. r ) e_n , In none . 8 eee of t t h o be.ee t Acts hwro i which participations is ascribed to me, is there any inroad upon our Protestant Constitution. And here when we are arguing this question, let me at once say that I do not at all rely upon the construction which some persons have put upon his Majesty's Coronation Oath : the sole intent and meaning of which is—that his Alajesty is bound to execute the law as the Legislature impeses upon him. I do not at all, I say, rely upon any dependence on the con struction of that oath—l rather prefer going at once into the spirit and principle of the Constitution as cemented in 1688.—(Hear, hear.)—The full and fair purpose of the settlement of the law as then constituted, was this and this only—that the Cunstitutiou should be cesentially Pro. , testant : the Throne Protestant: the Parliament 7.l ) roteatant and the great officers pf State Protestant. Mind, Ido not , mean to contend that however essentially necessary at the time were these precautions, that they were never under any change of circumstances to be liable to modification or alteration. All 1 mean to show is, that such was the na,„ ture of the Act of 13th Chas. 11. aid 25th and :loth, w hm,,.. were all directed to maintain an exclusively Protestant asceudaney. Exactly in the same spirit was the Act of Queen Anne for the Union of Seotlaiol. There bgaio was alike recognised the strong n,:ceatilty that our Cons 6 tution should be fundamentally Protestant. That was the. clear end plain governing principle. I know enough of his tory to know, however, that laws so planied must abide the eventual modification of circumstances. But it must be upon a clear and palpable gresund of necessity. The feelings of the people are identified with the ee lawr. These feelings will nereaseeily be affected by any alteration of them. Where, then, is this necessity ? Show it to we. and I will endeavour to deal with it. At present I deny its existence. I see it net. I can there Pore neither shape my comae by it, nor grapple witlt.it.—(Hear.) My Lords, I think I may venture to say, that duty ;6 fel t both by him and you, as one V. the most promieent tciee, you have to execute tO preserve in this Protestant king dom the Protestant religion invialate. or tend, that if the safety of this Protestant kingdom is not ts, to be preserved, that it is to be preserved by a Protestant kiugdoio, a Protestant House of Peers, end Protestant douse of Commons. I have 'contended that you may make alterations which may subvert the system on milt e l, matte slr .rations, ich rd ities mind f ot l f r et e agtr l i ; o r a o lti t eD e Protestant pt% ) % • 1e11 ; 30. u , o r a : ol4 i i t nyi e ic s )et t , oev ii t n ito t iaineffosi Government uubleeorfisnet. e ihod x uee i r a . ttolil Ascendancy of the country. That it was the to the t po d soeiation should be put down s , meet readily believ t a, tc that dote% say it has,—but if it },ass by its provisions he uesy way affected the rem•:i * ies at common ti la u " al ' ila tl i t t h ei; r a7b i e t realle.:l; eithi efe A) . s.*° B e il l l7 . b .w u ß t it or e c e o •i l l n l n n 'o o l t i ainntir its in3"441 elects. There is likewise another measure to Iv~law t hi ", I mean tl:e Disfranchisement Bill. My l ' .°4 ‘ ll " Idu wish Noble Linda to consid, r the provisions • , of that Bill, as it may operate in other places, and affect. the Constitution. My Lords, if that Bill is built upon. speculation of what has been, or has not been, it will not . answer the purposes intended. Your Lordships alse like wise to consider, that if you are to exercise the power now proposed, you may have inconvenience in electing: Members for Parliament. You will twee many se•thane, the power of electing, and may helve the Legisieaure witb out the return of those very Meenbees whiel i the measure is intended to secure. I confess, my Lords, the oily dif ficulty I have, looking at the Bill, is that 1 cannot agree to, :.11.0tber measure, to which, if it stood by itself, I should most gladly give my asseatt. My Lords, that other Bill is the one which I :lee not recollect the Ne; o k Duke mentioned on the eig-lit on which he introdefeed this question. Now YeSlee respect to that Bill, my humbl e opinion ie., ;beet it is a measure by which I. y ea b y no tneane ,asele 10, My Lords, I shall not eittea into the construe ' tion of the Acts of the Union of 7inegliand and Scotland, and that of the Revelation, 1.4, been gone into, by my Noble Friend, the Z,,ord CbiefJustice. My Lortfs, the Noble Eart vel e a leas just sat down, whew talersta4ild consistency must entitle him to great respect, seeesied to take some of- Fence at the terms the Learnee\ heel Noble Lord made use of, that he was a frientt so, civil and rcligi-tut lilt.-rty. I am sure, my Lpgd s , the. Noble and Lattutd Lord meant e t a such cwAtrurtion,tq,be Ott newt% the term , he made ale tleet, which, the /s;nlile bird pat urn it. it WP4i vaiuful duty to oppose last year the. iti:peal of the 'feet and Corporation Acts.—(lfee:a, lean )—I did se teas mTT ef l s e a ao y ups c i ) : ; ; o E ln n ft :Ar hltat (l s it Y u i o '} t s"ua- "Church that the t e l ° )e f'' ' L g . e l; b :.' o duo f Ireland, :ea in danger without tie E-te - tellshed Church of flugland being in danger alse—;t nos ever been my opi nion that it was the duty Government to form the best and purest system of, relizion that the mind• of man'