The Sun. — London, England, 1812-02-04 00:00:00

a rgl support of it. Sir gorete NtcHoet. observed, that the speech of the Noble Lord related chiefly to the state of the Catholic clergy. It was a question that had been frequently discassed. He trusted he should stand excused for catering into an examination of the merits of the question; from the particular situation which he 'had the honour to hold, if he did rot, it might be deeMed in him a dereliction of duty. -Irk stating his opinions on the merits of the question, he desired chose. opinions to- be-taken as of an individual member, not at all connected with, or even knowing, the sentiments of Minis ters. To come at a right 'conclusion, it would be necessary to separate it from general topics. Much had been said in former debates, as to the natural rights and constitutional privileges of the Catholics— of their emancipation ; as if they were in a state of slavery;—as if they were iroa state of persecution. Much had been said too on the blesaings of Civil and Religious" Liberty. He trusted, howeyer, that there was hardly an intelligent person who did not abhor and detest intolerance—who did not hold the blessings of Civil 'and Religious Liberty in the greatest respect. It was not necessary to cease to be a Christian in order to become a bigot ; but if those who valued civil and religious liberty were to be liable to the imputation of having raised the cry of" the Church is in danger," and of " no Popery," as an artful attempt to run away with the natural rights of one class of his Majesty's subje&s, and for the purposes of persecution and intolerance, then, the grounds for this motion were laid. The guess. . tion ought to be stated faitly and openly. ' If the concessions demanded were granted, what security to the Constitution would ensue ? But it had been stated, that they merely asked their natural rights. It was too late in the day to drag back the discus sion to- natural rights, because those rights were best estimated in the preservation of social order • and it would not be contended by the most zealous for these alleged rights, that the Cotistitution had been abridged more than was necessary for the order of civil society. If the advocates for the Catholics wished to extend their rights, the question ought to be so stated ; the Constitution must be ale tered to satisfy them, for they had their share of it. The preservation of the Constitution, as settled at the Revoletion, was to be looked to, and it had been deemed expedient- to exclude Catholics, as a measpre of security to the State. The Legislature had then found it necessary, for. 411. 'the essential of the Constitution was the preser vation of the Established Church. Indeed, Gentle " men who "were now most eager for those natural rights, called that epoch iu our 'history, " the glori ous Revolution," and that Revolution provided those safeguards for our Civil and Religious Liberties. Ex perience had taught our ancestors that two sorts of Religion in the State were not congenial to its safety. It remained with the advocates of the Catholics to shew the necessity therefore for altering this state of things. What was now asked ?—A full partici pation of political power, because the Catholic had full enjoyment o'f his religious opinions and protec tion of property. The Right Honourable and Learn ed Gentleman then commented on the degree of in fluence which the Priests of the Catholic persuasion exercise over their fl. ck—the blind submission of that flock to their pastors—the influence, dangerous as it was, of a &reign poWer over their spiritual con cerns, especially when that power is at present un der the dominion of France. This was the opinion, he observed, of the best friends ot the'Catholics, and he instanced the opinion of the ChanCellor of Ox ford in his letter to Lord Fingal, to shevv that the ins fltience was dangerous; an opinion which was pro mulgated by the " bigotted champions of intoler ance and persecution," but by the leader of the Ca tholic advocates. He deprecated the idea, that tak ing the sense of Parliament was the way to allay the irritation, or that keeping alive the expectancy of concessions which the public interests would not al low, was the best mode of securing the tranquility of the Sate. The concessions, if granted, wouldein• - stead of producing the effed desired, engender dis content and disunion in the two Governtrients, on account of the difference in religious opinions. It was the very swore of man, and so would remain until that uature was altered. The subjed of these . political differences was, as the Noble Lord had try emphatically said, " the stepping stone to am- Lition." The Catholics, he believed, did not want a Catholic Secretary of State or a Catholic Chancel lor ; the main body were firmly attached to the united empire. The number thatwould be benefit ed by the removal of the disabilities would be few ,in comparison with the great. body. Concessions had been , made and still demanded. The average of the Protestant subjects was, he observed, as 5 to 1, and they were not disposed to part with their rights and privileges. In examining the question, it wouid be necessary to look to future consequences, if the removal of the restrictions was to be granted. In tee House•ot Commons one hundred Members were returned, and it was probable, that if Catho lics were admitted to seats in Parliament, every 2vleMber 'hoar Ireland would be a - Cetholic. The silence of the British nation was not to be taken as a silent acquiescence in the justice of the claims, but as a conviction that they would not attend-to them ; for if the people entertained a different opinion, the table of the House would be crowded with petitions. The Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman at great length enforced the necessity for, refusing to accede to the motion, in the ap prehension which he entertained of the danger aris ing from concession, in the view which be had pre piously taken. The first change to be wrought was eu,alteration in the turbulence of tae Catholics.-- 'fire physical force of the people of that persuasion in Ireland was under the centroul of the Priesthood, a circumstance _which might be taken advantage of for the worst of purposes. Besides, it was the na ture of those who professed different religions, to • eye one another with jealousy ; they might as well exped that two stars would keep their course in the same sphere. Alter some complimentary remarks upon the conduse which.the Legislature had hither to adopted towards the Catholics, and the attention with wnleh they had always considered their claims, he expressed a hope, that neither they nor their ad vocates would suppose that Parbement was to be in , titnidased Into compliance by repeated and.frequent applications, but would look to a cool and deliberate exercise of judgment as their best dependence, and most efiedual advance to success. 'lf .they adopted, conduct of this sort, .their claims, art far as was consistent with tile safety of the State, WOuld be granted almost by acclamation. But let them strew what securities they would give,_ let thetti sate when they would stop in their demands, and al low for those points on which the Protestants would insist-a Protestant Throne, the security-of their civil establishments and religious liberties. Mr. CANNING said, that having the misfortune to be one of those persons, whom.the Noble Lord who opened the debate marked out to the peculiar disapprobation of the House and of the Country ; :having the misfortune to be one of those who could not go the entire length of granting the claims of unlimited concession, being, determined against, voting for such c l a i m , b u t b e i ng deter m i n ed muc h more against sanctioning by his vole th 4 principle recommended by his Right lion, and Learned Friend; a prin c ipl e w hi c h wou ld go t o shutthe door against the hopes of the Catholics, and though not expressly contended 'for, yet consequentially and necessarily to leadto the re-enactment of those pe- nal statutes which had once disgraced our legisla tion,--being unfortunately one of those persons, thus circumstanced,•he wished to trespass for some time on the attention of the House, while-he stated his candid sentiments upon this great question. He could not avoid regretting deeply that it was brought forward now ; he regretted it from an opi nion, which the speech of his Right Hon. Friend was not calculated to diminish, that it must now be discussed with a degree of passion and animosity un becoming the occasion; but at the same time he lamented its introduction, he was somewhat con- soled by the reflection, that it, had fallen into the he hands of his Noble Friend, who;ie principles and :alerts so well befitted him for the task, and who had discharged' that task in a manner so agieeable to the opinions of his friends, so flattering to himself, and so deserving of the favour, the approbation, and the admiration of the House of Commons.— Agreeing with his Noble Friend in some points, and differing from him in others, he should state his agreement with all the warmth - H hich naturally proceeded from respect and esteem ; and lie hoped that he should state the topics in which he dif fered from him, with that tempei and modera tion which should mark his regret, while it main tained his principles. His. Noble Friend bad set out with stating, that some transactions which occurred in the coarse of the last summer, had influenced him to bring forward the motion then under their consideration ; but if that motion was intended to embrace the condua of the. Government, and to pro nounce upon its interference as an interference con trary to law, he (Mr. C.) was prepared to give it a complete negative. At the same time he was not . prepared to state, a, priori, that the Aet to which reference had been so often made, was intended to operate against such meetings as those of the Cathol lic Committee; but being advised that it was so by the Law Officers of the Crown, he thought that Go vernment would have taken upcin. themvelves a most grievous responsibility, if, in defiance:of such adv ice, they stood aloof from the proceedings, and shut their ears against the representations of those who watched over the law, and who complained of its infringement and violation. With regard to the transaalions that followed this intimation to. the vernment ; so far from calling for (tie motion, they rendered it inexpedient, for the amount of all was that the matter was in a - state of legal process.—, He could not think that any thing had happened from the beginning of those difference , : up to the present moment which called upon the House to set to Ireland the fearful example of an interference . upon the part of the Legislative Authority with the natural and proper course of the judicial law. He should oppose the - proposition for going into a Corn mittee when that was the object, or when it could be mistaken for the object of the Legislature. He would allow that the bare fact of having acted ac cording to law, dial not go to prove a proper purpose in the minds of the persons so conducting them selves; on the contrary, he saw many cases in which the bore letter of the law was lamentably deficient as a moral rule or a political precept ; but would they call for a Committee- to examine in to the motives .of Government ? or, if they did call, for such a Committee, would it be possi ble to avoid introducing another party, as well as the Government, the paity of the Catho lics themselves, whose conduct could not be contemplated without some reprehension . ? (Hear!) —He was aware that in coming to the dis cussion of this question, in which the feelings and passions of men were so warmly interested, without adopting in some measures the violence of a par- tizan, was appearing to great disadvantage, and embarking in a cause without tiny great likelihood of pleasing either party ; but such a disadvantage he was not afraid to meet. If he knew his own heart, , - he came to the present questicin uninfluenced - by such motives as either power or popularity could sug gest ; he 'sought not the triumph of either party, bat the tranquility, the security, and the happiness of the whole. Much had been Said of the under.. standing entered into at the time of the Union. An understanding there certainly was, though not ex pressed by the Legislature; that - whenever the CAI- - tholic claiMs were bruught forward in that House, tliey should be candidly, distinctly, and dispassion ately discussed. 'The Catholics were given to un derstand, that though under their own separate and resident Legislalion, surrounded with the local pas sions and prejudices that unfortunately existed in their own country, the subject of their requests could not be coolly deliberated : yet here, where local feelings did not aet, and where the preju dices against ,them were comparatively temperate, they might reasonably e - xpea that sort of discus sion IA hick alone could lead to a rational and en. lightened decision ; but now that that time was ar rived, that the union was accomplished, and the question was open to a cool.and impartial considera tion, his Right Hon. Friend had insinuated princi ples which must shut the door against their expec tations. He agreed with his Noble Friend, as to the great importance of the subjeQ, but lie thought his Noble Friend did not agree w i t h him as to the , magnitude of the difficultirs that encompassedit - ; but whatever difficulties might be entertained ai to the view which his Noble Friend had taken of it, bis Right Honourable Friend had done much to sim plify the question, and to remove the difficulties that surrounded it. If, according to him, the only consideration was, whether they should return to former disabilities, or whether they should go on, he could have no doubt as to the side upon which he should vote, Indeed, when he !oohed to the state In Which Ireland nOw stodgily Wild a great poi pulation, grouting daily in wealth atid intelligence, aspiting from what they had , already tasted of free dorri; tb wish for more ; and - proceeding in a nato ral gradation, from the accomplishment of much, to the desire and the ambitidn of greater. When he looked to this situation, a situation to Which they were raised from a condition in which no, class of Teeple had. ever .before been _placed e in e k Christian._ cottony, he could not agree that it was wise to ex clude them from the rile of the Constitution. Since the period.of their humiliation, they had dis claimed many tenets once imputed to them ; or per haps lie should not have reprobated so strongly as he was inclined to do, the esotalic doctrine of his Right Hon. Friend. ' His Right Hon. Frieed had said, the more the Catholic was restricted, the more quiet he became. This probably was true, but it was a truth which might 'lead them too far. It seemed to ap proach the old adage, that "dead men tell no tales," for it must be granted, that the man in w h om the social . paisiOns were extinguished, was likely to be quiet enough. But did his Right Honourable Friend really think that such a course was poll. ic ?. Did he think that, having removed the chain from the Catholic, we should leave a link behind to re mind him that he once was fettered ? that hat ing broken off the bonds with which we was once sty rounded, we should leave a brand behind, ao de note that. he was not always free Was this to le gislate in the spirit of wisdom, or was it not rather to adopt a headlong and precipitate. siolence, dis graceful to the charader, as it must be injurious to the interests of the country ? But were they to suppose that circumstances had changed the nature of the disabilities under which the • Catholics for merly laboured,'and that that which was once so es sentially necessary to, the security of the Stage, should now be cancelled as being useless ? For • his part, be could not admit such an apology for the past. He could not conceive any state of society in which such restrietions could be justified. He could not approve of such means of producing quiet. He could not give his voice for propping up a state by dissociating htimati nature se com pletely, and violating all the principles of Government, both in a political and moral view. Excuses might, certainly, have existed then, which did not exist now, for those who would defend, not the system, but the fragments of the system, not the machine, but the remnants of a machine broken and scattered in those latter times by the - growing liberalities of the human -mind. The onus lay on those who recommended such perverse industry, to shew upon what principle it was necessary to shew to future ages what that system was. His Right Hon.. Friend had argued the question as if it was solely a religious one, but he should argue it, he it his duty to argue it, in that House upon a political ground alone. His Right Hon. Friend bad said. that lie would not go into the dotitine of Transubstantiation, or the ads,ration of Saints, or other mysteriops points, But why did he not go into them ? Because he took them for granted; and argued on them without submitting to the inconvenience of proving them.— When the Legislature seleeled -those dotyines, it was only as a means of marking a particular seat against whom they thought proper to dire& their provisions. The Parliament of Great Britain could never adopt the idea of becoming Controversionists; they never could haVe intended to argue with Priests and Bishops upon the doEtrines of their faith. He kneW that some Gentlemen were fond of .talking of ' the sufferings of Ireland in remote and almost unre membered periods; of its being treated as a conquer ed country from time immemorial, and injured and oppressed in centuries long past ; but he would not go so far back to count its wrongs, any more than he woold look back to the Norman Conquest , with respect to this country,_ for the purpose of COM- • plaining of the Curfew. But part.of the way he must go back, to find the beginning of the restrictions now under consideration. What then was the state of Europe after the Reformation had taken . place There arose at that time two sects more influenced by the zeal of sectarism than by the love of. coun try. The Catholics and the Protestants were at tached each to , their own persuasion, without re- , gard to those sacred ties which bind us to bur na tive clitnates, and the Catholics of this nation were more allied to the Catholics of any other nation. than to their Protestant fellow subjects who were children of the same soil. Under those circum stances, regulations might be necessary which should exist in no at her case. In what country of Europe were there not religious struggles, though such struggles should not be considered common to all other times, as had been stated, nor arising out of any cause inseparable from our nature. Of those who contended that they were, he would ask, did history bear them out ? Was it true that the 14 Cantons of Switzerland, consisting of Catholics, and Protestants, and other D.ssenters, had come to a generous resolution to bury all religious ani mosities ? arid; was it true that front that time they went on with perfect political agreement ? His Right Pon. Friend might say, that though this might have been the case with stnall.States, there was a difficulty when they came to make the appli cation of it to great ones. The discussion of that principle would lead into minute inquiry, and the instance he had already quoted must go against the generality of the argument. But la hat it the same agreement had existed in another country ? What if it 'had existed in France from the period of. the edict of Nantz, down to its subsequent tevocation ? Let them look to the wor.~ of that fathous edict, they would find it declaring, that for the purposd of stifling all coinplaintS, all subjects, of whatever re ligion, should be capable or holding offices without taking any other oath than to be faithful to the King. —They would "find that Henry IV. proceeded (for he was speak ieg of no less a man) to provide for the filling of all offices in the state without regard to the distillations of seat, or to the pre judices of religious jealousy. He did not say that they were bound to follow the example of France. That admission would, come rather oddly after the new philosophy. But when they had "be fore them the opinion of the greatest monarch of . that nation, in times when he had not barely to cal culate typal possible resistance, but to encounter open opposition when they had-his opinion in such circumstances, that the best c ourse , O r 'mode of . proceeding, was conciliation : it was impossible to despise such an authority ; and. looking trot:lt - his judgment to the praCtical consequences of his plaa,. it was still more impossible to despise that measure,' which placed Sully at the head bl i the Council, and abiit &laotriiierk, etc& ne, a A ,take, io share tit t - ' - i` ' "ti ' ' • 'l' gidri'et of the field. It was itroarsible not to ap= prove of such condnee in din Monarch;. whi:6 splendid Court wag the envy and the terror of all turope, at a moment *hen the world seemed td labour under a religious dotage, and when he him self aVas under the influenCe of an intriguing miss:. tress. , Who, if he was asked whether he would e svieh a re a live in that greted,epoCh; of in arty subse quent epoch of that cetuntry, would not teadily art eagerly, and without he tatioreplabe his finger : on the former ? Our government had !odor:tits Policy at alt . times in lendingassiStance to the Reformation; that a..; sistance led to the interference of the Catholics id .- our affairs, and. every thing which was done against ' the Protestants on the Continent, e aS visited in penal statutes upon the Catholics of Ireland at beirne. , Fie. did not recommend this system ; he did not approki of it ; from the period of the revocation of the edid of Nantz, and when the Revolution in this country had raised her . freedom on its perfeetion, her re: straints were doubled 'upon Ireland, and every: sOe.. - ceeding Legislature seemed to vie with the whet' id , ,a contest to [peke the situation ofireland more slavisti and &graded; and, begging pardon to Iris Right - Honoureble Friend, tranquilizing too.—Looking to .• the year iiiiie, when the edict of Nantz was revolt- - ed, we saw our shores covered with a flying Clergy ; .—flying from persecution. Wh a t ,Cl ergy ? P ro , • testant—flying from what persecution ? Frotai, the persecution of Catholic France'! And. this we saw visited upon Ireland. In a cede wry after, we again beheld our shows co vered with a flying Clergy, flying froth persectitiorr. .' What Clergy ? Catholic. Flying from what peise- ' cdtion ? From the persecution of Atheistical France!. And this we were again called upon to avenge upon the Catholic population of Ireland. But were they I so blind as to confound the cases? Were they sq. -1 blind as to suppose that the same remedy was appli cable . r to each, if indeed it was-justifiable in either ? 1 The mitigation of the Popery laws which afterwards .' took place was a warning of A change, though his Right Hon. Friend was not in a situation to lift his warning voice against it. He line v that there were .! some who represented the Irish Catholics as hav ing obtained all the privileges hitherto granted to them under circumstances not highly ho nourable -: co the liberality of this country, and in times when they were rather exaeled from our . weakness than from our justice. It might be true to a certain degree, that in 1782 dee situation its which we stood facilitated the concessions then , I made to Ireland; but he believed it was equally tlu * : that those were not concessions to the Irish Catho- i lic. The Protestant, upon his own part, came a,k- 'Mg boons from England, of which he did not deal an equal portion to his Catholic brethren. It was . t true that free trade and other privile ges were grant - ed to the Irish cornmunity, but it was not lair to , .1 . infer from thence, that the concessions to the este , I tholics were not granted voluntarily and freely.— Since 1f94, nothing material had been granted to a them up to the present period; but could any one - !' maintain that what remained to be granted should .he withheld, *unless' he was possessed of the same -..' . skill in thescience of-numbers with his Right Hon. t Friend, who had said, that if the Catholics were' few, it was not worth while to grant their claims, and if many, it waslbot safe. Jt was the opinion of many, that a temperate discussion could not be lead till the - Onion had taken place. That tinic,wes now aerived, 'but as if obstacles were to be thrown in the way of the argument, the Catholics, in a late instance, had been ill adfaised enough to put forward, among the nuThifier &their clairoS, the repeal of the - Uniori-e. a repeal, of the union (ekclaimed Mr Canning)--a • dissolution of the'-4-ave kingdoms —a dissolution of the keptarchies. -But if the proposition was not et ficient to the purposes of good, it was efficient to the purposes of evil. In defeteace to the Honourable, Gentleman who had given. notice of the motien for that repeal, that if Parliaturset were.eyen to enter tain it, and if he by his eloquence was to prevail in. • carrying it, the situation of the Catholics with re speel to the objeets of their ambition would be ma-, terially worse. It would be injurious to the Catho- !: tic interests, and it would be hi g h creaser) ag a inst 1 spareate Ireland. If a man were to set about devis.. l ing an impediment to the Catholic cause, lie could not succeed better than by knitting those two de- - mends together. But with respeet to the wishes of the Catholics for an enlargement of the priVileges they at present possessed,- he had always considered - them rational. Would any man who had the right to vote, not wish in time for the right to sit ? Was it to be believed that Parliament had granted hie, the one without a view to the ultimate granting of the other ? Was it to be believed that they would ' have opened to them the Bar, if they intended eter nally -7 to shut up from them the avenues to the Bench ? Was it to be believed e hat they would have - permitted them to acquire property, and to ad in all the subordinate parts of the political system, if they , intended, with .his -Right Hunourable and Learned ' Uriend, eternally to exclude than from office ? They , werereferted to the Revolution in France, and no man was more inclined to refer to it than he, lot examples that ought to be avoided- and- detested.—. I Let them not shut their eyes to the state of the body politic of France, which had tendered it susceptible to the poison of revolution. Let them not forget that the existence of unpop u l ar an d unjust distindie ons, which without the .policy of the Popery Code to extinguish-the rising spirit from. that energy a' , at - lion - to - which it must have tended, exhibited prin. ciples eqtially objectionable, If :he was te divide the right-of voting from _the right of silting, with- - out any view to their ueitnate ,connection, he did - 'not know Whether he would not rather - give the ' higher privilege than refuse the lower; whether he r would not rather give to peepie of such a high ' spie tit, of such great powers of thirking, of such re. sourees, of such energies and determinations, the . right to sit in Parliament, tha n a r igh t t o return t h e ir Membaes, with,an intention of shutting them out on the-topmost round of their,ambition. But it, bed been said that the great body,of the -people were not interested ill - this. Qh ! . prOfound knowledge of - , humati nature, rifit tO t know that the bare possibility ' of greatness called forth all the faculties of the mind, and all the greatn e ss of the charaCter ! To take the Bar as an instance.--Was. it proper that fill e d with Catholic lawyers of great abilities and influence over the public mind, they should not be-admissible to , ' the Bench ? No man'admired more than he did the profession of the law. -It hod given the cowry , its greatest legislators, and many of its proudest ar ,, . [laments i but supposing that profession to b e dr