The Sun. — London, England, 1819-05-18 00:00:00

is viz, PARLIA MENT. TiOUSE OF IiO.RDS, NIAY 17. The Dike of KENT, the Earl Of HARBOROUGH. Lord FORBES, and the Bishop of PETERBOROUGH took the oaths and their seats. Lord KENYON presented a petition from Man chester against the Catholic Claims. Several -other petitions for and against the Catholics were laid on the table, but in consequence of the great crowd below the bar, it was impossible to hear from what places they came,' or to see the Peers by tvliorn they were presented. AFFAIRS OF THE BANK. The Earl of tiAattowilty laid ( in the table the resolutions' be intends to move on the - Bank Re port.- As far as the et-Allusion of the bar per mitted us to hear them, they aPpeaf.to be, with the necessary alteration, of form, a copy of - the recommendation in the Repot t of the Committee. They &dare the expediency of renewing the Bank Restriction Act for a time to be limited ; of ryments by the Bank in gold bullion, at tile prow essive prices of 41, Is., 31. 19s. 6t1., and 3!. 17s. 141.; and of the repeal of all the laws agaiost the exportation'of gold.—They were or dered to be printed. ' . . CATHOLIC QUESTION. The Order of the Day, on which their Lord sb:ps were summoned. being read, The Earl of DoNotionmoatt rose to bring for ward the motion of•which be had given not ice on important subject. The Noble Earl oared Isis inteodecl motion intim outset of his address, which was nearly the connterpara of that sub mitted to the other . House of Parliament, name ly Th a t ;be House do resolve itself into a Committee, to consider of the -state of the laws respecting the oaths and qualifications required for the appointmen,t to Civil Offices and others, as far as applies to his Majesty's Boman Catholic subjects, and to consider whether it be expedient, and in what manner, to alter or amend the same," • Ste. The Noble Earl proceeded to observe, that I more imporant question than the present could. not cause under the consideration of the Legisla-. lure. The numerous ,petitions; which he and other Noble Lords, on his side of the question, had the,houour to present, spoke most unequivo cally the sense of , a very large portion of their fel low-subjects of every denomination.On the sub ' jeer. A very large class of his Majesty's sub jects .remain disqualified, and .incapable of par ticipating in the advantages of the Constitu tion under which they all lived.' Nearly four - fifths of the pppulation of Ireland, and above one-fourth of the whole• 'population of the - United Kingdom, were still in this , predica ment. This, seeded :to be now. continued on the ground of their holding:Communications,with the Church of, Koine ; and this excluded'elass of their fellow-subjects weir still subjected 'to the . most illiberal and unfounded i m p u t a tions. Every Principle, either of justice or Sound pokey, called upon the Legislattire to relieve them from that state of thraldom or disability, in which they bad so lung been plaCed. The *injurious tenets and doctrines so strenuously urged against them, they had long and repeatedly, as welt as Most so lemnly, disclaimed: In ,the course of repeated discussions, however, the ppsition of the Catholic Qaestion bad greatly changed, and of late it had become still more narrowed. He contended that no tenable_ objection could exist to expunging feons the Statute Book thoSe injurious laws which still remained in force: At present they were productive of insult to one set of Men, while they goaded the feelings of others ; and ,some parts of the oaths which,they were'called upon to abrogate,, were, in his mind, an injurious potation upon the whole Christian religion. He argued that no one sound or solid objeetion re mained to . justify the destituting so numerous anti deserving a portion of their fellow-subjects of their strict right to an equal share in the benefits of that free Constitution undee which they allhad'the hap piness to live. The Noble Earl, after apislogiiiog for Isis inability, from continued ititlisposition, to go more in detail into the subject, moved to the t• effect stated in the outset of his address. The •BishOp of Wm:nisi - TR rose, and argued at some length against the propnsiiimi before'the Honse. Their Roman Catholic fellow-sohjets, he conceived,had no just ground ofeomplaint." All that remained imposed upon them were whrilesOine'and necessary resttictious, continue with a reference: to the safety n 1 the established Constitution of these -Kingdoms in. Church and . State. Thcliwere in the full and free enjoyment of all their reli giotts rights, and participated to no small extent • in the political advantages of the' Constitution.-- ~ Whet they now father called for, he, for one, .would readily assent to, if he thought it could be done without eudangering the established Consti tution of the country. Io support of his argu . ment, the Rev. Prelate referred to the able work. (as could be collected) of Dr. Hoadley upon the . subject, and particularly in What he advanced in refutation of the doctrines of Mr. Locke upon the Film'. The principle that the Protestant religion was a part of the established Constitution • of the country be regarded as a sound and firm one, and .be deprecated the natural probability that the claims of the Roman Catholics would increase with the concessions made to them, its a way widen tott , t eventually endanger the whole fabric of the Protestant Constitution of these Kingdoms. • . . The Bishop of Nottwicit professed himself not behind hand with 'any of his brethren in'attach ment to the security and well-being of the \ Church of England, though, - unfortunately; he widely ' differed from many with respect to the m'ost' • likely means of effectuating that desirable ob- . : ject. He was particulady oppoied to the practice of endeavouring to disunite 'and' . divine " their fellow-sUbjects by unfounded 'claniours that the Church was in 'danger, if about th' remaining fourth part of the population were allowed to participate its the benefits of Our free • Constitution. It wcitild be'better did inen regu late their - conduct by the' leading principles' of Christianity ;'and he thOttelft the' adoption of a more la t eral, and equitable 'line tot' conthict best tend to the real security and well-being of their Church Establishments. The conduct of the Catholics he considered as such, and particu- lady with teiereoce to the present question, Rs to entitle them to the concession of what they re spectfully required. A part of what was argued in the way of objecting 'to Catholic participation, would equally apply to some of the Protestant dis senting classes, and yet individuals could not be found in the kingdom more Zealously attached to their King or the established Constitution. ToWerds the close of his speech, the Venerable 'relate praised the conduct of the Moravian Sect, as One which had displayeti an. exemplary share of piety, zeal, and usefulness. The Bishop of PETERstonoubn showed, from the general tenor of the petitions before the /loose, that it would appear that a portion Ot their fellow ,subjects were made to suffer for their religioo, than which any "thing could not be more unfound ed or reprehensible. It was not on account of .any 'abstract opinions that Roman Catholics might entertain, that the remaining' exclusions .were continued, but because principles, abstract in themselves, were coupled, with others which were not so., and were connected with serious political cousiderations. These combined, tended to render it impossible that such men could bear the same allegiance to his Majesty King George,, as those whose allegiance centered in that, SOvereign tiltte. It tolloWed of necessity, that the mem hers Of the Church of Rome ought not to be lid !flitted t o a n equal o a rticipartion'.of power with those of fhe Established Church, as the former evidently bore a divided allegianoe. Coosislering this great question with reference to the Esta blished Church, the Petitioners now only a - ked for political' power. Yet, tt concession of their claims must ultimately place it in 'a stare 'of great danger; and the more so, when it was remem bered, that the -desires of human nature increased with the facility of obtaining them. In this view, the attainment of- Eeclesiastical power ikhotild be regarded as eventually a ,part of their object. The Jesnits were always active instruments in the ex tension of the Papal authority; and it should he borne in mind, that their order was restored the present Pope. The ambilious views of the Roman Church were well - koowo, and the Coun cil of Trent had declared, that Church to be mistress of all foreign countries ; of course, Eng land must be included in the contemplation. The ascendancy or security of the Protestant Church muss. be of short duration, whenever means were allowed to RoMan Catholics for undermining or shaking its foundation, •or rattier, deeming a Protestant Church secure with a Papal Esta blishment. Earl ofttOSEBERRY '(in a maiden speeCh) rose, but spoke in a very inaudible tone ofVoice. He manifeated his satisfaction at having an oppor tunity of expressing his sentiments in favour of his Roman Catholic fellow-subjects. The ques tion was, whether Ireland should take that sta tion which totthre and cite Constitotion assigned . to her, or whether she should still be retarded in her progress. to wealth and happiness. He ob 7 ierveti that the question was of- less interest in the time of peace than in the event of being again engaged in hostilities„ and no better prepliration could be made to meet the ininettilingelaager titan this one of concession, which would convert dis affection- to loyalty, and draw - even from the sources of discontent the means of strength'.• in such a - case our armies might be led abroad. to meet the foreign enemy-, instead of being confined at home, in the disgraceful duty of watching our own population. Lord Die' DUNSTANVILLR also spoke in a tone of voice so extremely low, 'as to he, for the most part quite inaudible below .the bar.. The Noble Lord wooed the opinion of the Rev Dr. Milner, the Vicar ApoStolic 'of the Catholic 'Church:in this country, on the Bill which was in the year 181,3 brought into the Lower Bouve t and declared himself under the necessity, of thinking, that the measure now [nopo3ed would pot have, the effect of satisfying the views of the petitioners, for whose benefit it was intended; He was fully of opinion- that the English Catholics ought to be pot upon the same footing' as the Irish. But be did not think this oration eat 1 ...._stor.sitee to produce the d'esited effect ; and lie felt himself, therefore, with great regret, under the necessity of giving his vote against it, The LORR CHANCELLOR quitteoi the Woolsack, and in, a tipeech'orsonie length, displayed ac customed energy and powers of arguinenottion against the motion. In the outset, he glanced at Ttlie;difficUlty in,franiiiig an oath which, at the 'Same time, could duly quiet the mind of the Pro testant, aunt reconcile the Minds of the Catho lics, were what thelatter dethanded about to be conceded. Mitch of the question seemed to turn upon the real prim:lf:des of the English Constitu tion, as established and fortified by English law; and in this view the difficulty of 'framing an oath which could give security to the' Protestantointe rest, and at the 'same tilue keep in view, the doctrine of the Pope's suremacy, 'principally' struck hit+ In viewing this part of his subject, the Noble and Vely Leat'ned Lord took an histo• ilea' review of the , relative situation of the Pro testants and Catholics in this country, when the latter were eligible - to 'sit in Parliament, from 1660, till the Revolution in 1688,- when a solemn compact was entered into, between the people and King for the support- of the Protestant religion, with a -Protestant King and Parliament in this country. The present was not merely a question. religions opiniou, but deeply connected itself with wilitical considerations.. It was a Node ,mental principle in the Constitution that no man professing' the Roman Catholic religion could sit Upon theiltrone,. and it was a part of the sys tem, or rather: 'the machinery, that the King should not be surrounded by Rliman,Catholic Ad visers, or by a Parliament, or that the laws should he administered by them. This principle was laid down and asserted at 'the Revoltitiou. and also at the time of the Scots Union, and even in that with Ireland. And it may be cess:sidered whether such a system was more consistent with civil and religious liberty, than to restore things to that state they were itt in the 301 h of Charles the 'Second. It 'was a leading Hu ciple in the 'Constitution, that the was, the Supreme Head both in Church and State.— Tlijswas also recognised more ancient statutei. Ipillustration of . the principles which he laid down, his Lordship referred rather largely ,to the legal and constitutional maxims of tbo tecitn, ns hid &Aid ntiti aktserteii by Lord; Halo ; ' Coke, and other great writers on the subject, chiefly with reference to theisnprentacy of the King, in spiritual 'as well as rempinal nttters• mind, toleration should be treely:.given to any set of men, not detrimental to these great principles, or to the authorities founded upon theni and it was the opinion of the veatest . an-• thorities upon the subject, that political power should not be extended to Roman Catholics as long as they denied the King's Supremacy. From the acquisition of political power, the progress to ecclesiastical usurpation, which those persons ge nerally aimed 'at, was' n , :tural, and to be appre hended, and in such usurpation, front-former ex perience, they knew it generally terminated ;- and he must contend that not only' Eeclesiatical tt6nr pation, but Civil tyl'anoy of the grossest nature, would -have ensued, if the Revolution-"of - I688 had • not intervened. . The established Churches in England' and Ireland were now united, and the consetrences of allowing xn extension'of po litical power to lonian Catholics, especially in the latter country, should seriously considr ed; ,ind how tar it might endanger the I);•Otestant Establishment generalfv. Their seotitheots were entertained by the first into in the c.intitry; and with some of theAe he I,llllSeil thought the lat terly-suggested exprdieuts iu th e way of security were no,atistactory and inSdecpra:e. In Viewing the 'remaining .points ot the'sonjeet, to Which he directed the attention of the HOuse,.his Lordship considered them on sifittlar principles, geed against the «xperliency and policy of agreeing (0 the ,Noble Lord's motion, which,, upon the whole, he regarded as Itkely to tend to 00 b e n e ficial result ; bat , on the contrary, that. its tendency was rather injurious :pot ,impolitic. The old maxint. " what is got with difficulty, was to he twontained even is ithdifficulty," should never he forgotten: Our libtriies and ma constittition were not the work of a day, neither were the fences which the wisdom of 'our ances tors deemed necessary to throw around their li • berties the result of pasiiion, hot the conse quence of inatnre consideration. It ssas true that constitution .was one at- freedom, from which no one was contemplated to be excluded ; -it acknow ledged all- except those who, refused to acknow ledge it, as Catholics virtually do :by the tenets of their religion, which make it imperative on them to divide their ,allegiance with the Pope. Upon this principle of exclusion, in the Constitti ,tion,„ there was considerahle difference of opinion ; whatever some peonlemay think to the contrary, he was convinced, from the nature of the Con stittitio'n'Ttself, from the Act of Parliament, and frOm the 'conneliOri s of both Houses with each other, and , :vith'the•Throne, that: it 'was the great 'security . of the "Church of - England: He loid known many Catliolis,' for wheat be ha the • • greatest respect, but the iloctritte. professed by them were still too exceptionable.- Our ancestors never could separate civil from religioos: liberty, and always loiiked upon 'Popery:as ,an.ehemy to both. :.:His Lordship concluded by saying, that a single vote was of no great consequence in a question of this magnitude, but he should con sider himself as wanting in his duty, if -be forbore to give utterance to his opinions . ; and until the Church had reponocedthejost fears it, had of the danger of Popish influence, and until he should be convinced that tliSe fetes 'Were groundless, he saiv nothing- to Make him giVe tray to. the .claiins of the Roman Catholics . ; nntler the pr e sent cu nwauccs of the state of the.Church,—(Mar, hear !) had GREY began by protesting . that be had I .never used so s.weeping",.so general...awl so unjust an expression, as that all lawyers were bad poli ticians. He had Only . said that'the technical ha bits of their profession tended to giVe'tlient views—. :so narrow of political questionr. as to render their judgment partial, and their authority unsonnd.— One of the greatest,'best, and most amiable men. he had ever known was . a lawyr of the first eminence, who made his legai.acqUirements sul) • s ervient to his love of liberty, who directed ,and tegolated his talents'and skit by his love of titinkiud, and who devoted his politicat know ledge to the st•rvice of his coontrY„—(lt is believed' 'the Noble Lord alluded to Sir Sa mnel Ondoubtedli GI : not feel himself qualified to contend on legal ques tions. with those Wl.o frevoted their lives to the study of law, ..and least of all with the Noble and L'ear'ned Lord who had, last spoken ; b u t h e conceived it to he his duty, 'as a Member of that House, ..where judicial as well as legisla tive Meastires came under their consideration, to discuss jtolicial questions. • He would accordingly now proceed, with all . due respect', to dispute some of the - points which the Noble and Learned Lord had endeavoured to establish. The Nohle. and Learned Lord , had now, as on former occa sions, made use of an argument,rwhie s h, ,if true, put an - end at onee' to the: question. The argu ment was this Constitution, Sts csiablish- ed in 1688, is essentially and .fundaMentally-Pro testant ; the concession of the claims of the Ro man Catholics is inconsistent with this . Constitu tion ; therefore Stich a 'concession would be not only inexpedient, bot injurious.. Upon this. point he differed, with all due respect, from the Noble and . Learned Lord, and he would attempt to prove that the principles of the ConstitntiOn admitted not of this 'construction. What laws were fundamental, or were not, was a' qu-s -tion upon which he . would, not now enter bo when any alteration of a law was proposed, lit was right to enquire how far such en ;theta:- tion would militate, against the principles of the: Constitutioil ; and if it had any tendency to de stroy the securities which .guarded-the'Constitn tint), it became a doty to resist it. The Consti tution, as established at the Revolution,. was es sentially and. fundamentally Protestant. No man could, go farther thou he would go in making the sacrifices necessary for maintaining this principle. What were the essential and fundamental principleS,otthaf _Constitution At the Revolu (too, when a ,overeigniof the .Roman Catholic had been dethroned, it was provided that Monarch a4tould be of the communion of the orEn4land, which Chinch was establish ed by Isw, lids was Speeially provided for in the Bill of Rights and the Act of Settlement.- It was necessary to distinguish between laws that were essential antauudatuental, and those that were col- .4 lateral et hd sarsidiat f4orie of t h e di,,i j iiities ,44 proposed to be removed were to he found a n" l the securities taken for the Protestant Religio n % the Revolution. The Nobl e a nd Learned I .l ° - ; r '; had strongly stated that nothi n g Could WV' s ": him ; but it was with the most unaffected - sdra hrise that he had heard a Lawyer of high " enl : ence say, that this Law of Charles 1 1 • ws "" an act of deliberative wisdom andprospecli ve Catt d tion to guard the Cr.ustitution. It was notorn3" that the origin , of the law. was the plots of °3l ,r and Bedloe, which no human being now beli eved' Oo such a foundation rested this act of delibe l rr live wisdom and prospective caution !--(a These laws had passed before the Reeolution , ' l ,, had had their origin. in plots, which a L'Ord the first bench (the Bishop of Norwicb).had jnst; ly characterized as diabolical artifices to imp upon their Lordsltips. These laws were etn'r e -1)4,0, and additions were made to them atter Revolution; There was a law to disqualify Cs' tholics from . voting at the elect ion- Me mb r er l of Parliament, and the Ist of G e o. I . di s qua; a cc them,from holding any offiee or place of I°sf' civil or reil:tury. 'The . reasons for such inea ; sores were, that a Prince expelled from • Throne was attached to the Catholic that that attachment ' had been the ca" se re - c his invasion of the rights of the people i "' a l ( he wassopp . orted byt rearonmbeN ar home , • Only 'of the Catholic but of the Pr..testa9 l ;ion, and that he %vas received and s'iipport e ' l It the greatest Catholic Power on the Copt remPiioed that 'he Should reply to the a"Oae ll '', l t that it was into-ssihle for the King to disti tt r' " r' 'h i s between spiritual and temporal obedienee• tv y common law of the country, prvinusly of Ilktary VIII , required obedience to to 4 King this common law Wa a the grOwli ofC ati A lu. to times —{Hear !)—But i n the oat h prescrib e ' . 01 Roman Ca:llOlics, by ,t be Act of 1793, th e ' .e ;i w al the. distinction cleat ly Made bete; een 51" r . 11 6 and temporal - obedience. But thi s a rgon - ten' 7 1 ; plied, as bad 'been Shown on a former occaoto to an eloquent and able speech by a 1\1 :•,• 0 1, 'Lord, whoiti ''he now' saw opposite t° wish equal 'force to' a C a tholi c G,sverurnety-14, Allusion had been made by the Noble Lord "'. t o •j, conduct of the Catholics at' a subservient P er' i t , during the attempts of the Pretender. it ° "i l a r however, to be borne in mind, that the partie" oe • .circumstances of the times, which had beet' Ap d. cause of that misconduct, no. loner eldslea' ermseqoently the danger was nu longer to b e prehended. The Noble Lord bad .next allud e c , the Articles ofAlie Union, in support of Ih e Ala trine of exclusion'i; and eertainly when the L'").,. Lord cited the Union with Ireland 4or tiq. t pose, he (Lord GreY) ionhi not help expr e , ° A ct, his,surprise. Waa 'there ape' word in tha t 'be 'which sanctioned the permanent exclusion 'ROman Catholic.'s•?—(llear, hear !)-1•10""lift t rpOti film to say, that it did noecOotain one to ittitify such - Itn• a exclusiotr.--7(lF?ar. j tld'ered, - if he read the Pact, rightly, it ' t o nisbeil groands for a contrary inference.• some remarks' on the impotiey'of the restrictiosi3O and on the object of the fireet,t m i:ptio"r Noble" Lord, attudin, 'We befleve, to . -I"' i g Dunstanyille, said, that w - henever this 'l' ; `, s `, 3 C had been discussed, he had aiway s evitic ed r t moderation and liberality, and had not ill'Patti, 4: 1 . the CathOlies any doctrines of an immoral ° ty po tfe'remerabered well that on a' fotmer the :NobleLord stated, that althooell tbe •o'o• erotica believed its traisubstantintiori„in 1 tb e.! bc se `,articles - of of saints,' and in the sacrifice' of otas l '„o 7 . artiles"of belief could constitute no, o'hi'ell ° l ",,.i,i• t s heir ej (I° r tr oyi.:g the same civil rights as-thri wet •iestatit'fellOW-subFets.' If, then'these C sit' were no proof of , allegiance to a forei 4 " A ct? Prernac y ; why continue the Declaration che° 'When a Catholic came forward, to I° , l ;, e •be:' oath, he was made to swear that lieied these doctrines to be sopetsriti ° ` rs t ,ii {,► idolatrous ; but whystiould he he called a° ? when it could au' no purpose o° l ' in ach Th e qoeStion as to the Catholies was Ilo sT e lie 4 narrower!, and their Lordships ought (" r themselves from the impropriety of the P e ` i 1 tion Oath. It bad been stated to their ,15 and Doctor Milner latl been, referrea l° Ca' proof of the statement, that the Itotni' ll dir° thotiCs were actuated by a ' l c oe which would never be • sa tis.fi e d wi b •1nY,.....,0ac cessions that could be made to 00 1 '7 o ftd il what' Would their Lord Ships say; when they o h?' told that this was the spirit of Dr. Milner and that he had excited that tnrbolen t ', which was called the diabolical spirit of tirii pot tholics 1 The Statement of Dr. Miloer e°" roeo do any good to the 'notion, and he mus t P ot against' its being considered as any arg"""0:01, legislating on the question. He eirged tb e i; ; c o", f and jusiice of ptoceeding, immediately!" 1 , t be'i sideration of the subject ; and. contur•er ot. Lordships to look to the increasing • America, brought forward at least a eentooree the impolitic conduct of this country, a° (l e s r ancl dangering our' trade and commerce; to xr desirous to avenge the insults offered to b e . c i, 0 6( to, the . load of debt and taxes under w hi l e 0 0C O;tor .country was at present groaning, to l °. erculation was acknowledged by Parliaul e ' a depreCiated. Ireland was undoubtedly in 000: bid state, owing to a long series of till oa►lid be went. • nich perseverance and p a tience 0 1 ; re fOr; necessary to effect a radical cure ; and.. t ei tiato r i, it:w4l;. l lAat - as a: centraiineiniiitt of O n and ret»edral measure's, he cordially agr'''e‘• y 1 " g the proposition this night brought:M oterd Noble Friend. • vb 5V at '• The 'arl of LiVERPOOL contended, 115 p r eythe ever colour 'vas attempted to be give" -a t it `• sent question, or under whatever tispee` o f Co; brought forward, still the free admission o e t tholics to all places . of power or emol" ti r ne ol e°' ‘, le ,hAt WAS sought by the ~‘f vas advocates t l ao sure., This, and not any minor p0i11' , 4.35 0 0 j principle upon which the question tot b roug ht for,vard, and it ,now PPe ‘ ,ll.C4' (► P lat o; in^.in Substance of the propUsition tds oto Catholics upon an equality with , Plater foirP,l every respect. If there were oil , e er" ; t cs then why were they not Melo ?h ut there were not, and it was t ecause tba t .C''' o r er excluded ;root Parliament' , the Vri:Y e . s t o%, 61, and certain important offices ju Ut d oer 6 ' their chiiinO were Dow brong,ht like, on Itivj it w del /c.;