The Sun. — London, England, 1828-05-10 00:00:00

as t° a. (Hal, of -things 'whether us in Ire' reduced to m of life? press, 110 she is en' le has been ig the chs vilized spa t eloquent., It a parallel zed natioro ,hat histori rat the 00 Holm maY n e Montelit ver the re' the li,ght of r the Ear alluding 0 eknowledge countrymen I deny that ;hurch. I ph that w one in thei t Church us. Sir, fined when rh they el ndeservea Igment w►t le Churc sir right .ban a par the distiri hurch.--a Sir, I pi Hotv 'creme tt d goodne power c !ct on whE I and von ecussion lanation in apini ion. iy establi F Domiti :as pure the flame re archie tch chum I—and s 'king of le, that Ile was lergy. r took re le preacl paid the in Engl to say, rather do not pinion, ; but sil Churcl :hurch lissemir But tl :!.rtainly .porteel. y quest Sir, sion up an acu 3 a cha If the 1 )sed to an as li Why, vil—it Teot ar 's then a grew' e; for, 1 one t ways 1 a, in c again equen. always Con Ilackst ►lwarl , hap, any f its qu' ey or lion ition. tut be rehen mean hat i a tr nsion esta Revs aped ight muds rpora of t uliar s pla CCOm is te, c s fc his it as 'tea d o is n mo! rty 1. tub hel4 aly aled agsl >art r to ate: re ty c Le 1 et slit oli tb, 0 sti els ri 1 iff ref ri i th io ix ft l/ a 4121 N y .c 3 1 t, as t° n. (Hal , of - thing' 'whether us in Ire reduced t° )n of life? press, 110 she is en le has beer , ig the chs vilized spa t eloquent , it a parallel zed natior o ,hat historl ]at the case House noY n e moment ver the re' the 14ht of r the Ear alluding 0 eknowledge ration is the meet absurd: t eon undaeetand theiee °n the one side, who have the boldness to speak out openly and say, let us revive that code of blood and rapine called the penal laws;-1 can under stand those who say, let us spend all the money we can by any means extract from England in maintainiug armies in Ireland —I can understand those on the other side who its vommentl peace anti conciliation, hut I have nn conception of the meanin g of those who say concession ought to come, but it must be at a future period. Ile implored the House not, IT an ill-timed perseverance in the tardy recognition of these treat claims upon their equity and justice, to render th a t matter of compulsion or necessity, which, if conceded new, , would he a concession of grace and favour. —Let there re member the fatal blindness which we had shown GO "r ‘ , 7o - years ago to the demands of America upon our liberality, The remonstrances of her legislative assemblies voice of her people—the complaints of her patriots , a te nd ratestnen—were answered by the zealots of this king ••'`'n't in that day, with all those terms of reproach and in eteent invective in which the complaints of the petitions of Ireland Were here met by similar zealots in our own times. Let the British Parliament then, take into its consideration 11 '„ i ! tw ° eases, and the events which had followed, in one "", upon as obstinate adherence to the narrow y , - : nr ;'' of an unjust and bigotted policy. All such las ge e ea he all u d e d to provoked a foolish Government, and - , - Ii mril ettel a wi se one.—(Hear.) —fly c o n ti nu i ng to deny e t Prayer of the Irish people upon the subject of emanei- b otit ° ° , the Governments of our day seemed to have been °Pon reviving that system of terror and disaffection i„•,",ell reigned in Ireland during the greater part of the I;4' century. But could any thiug more forcibly illus „rate the dangerous influence which the c herishing, of the 134 anti-Catholic feeling, common to those Governments, '-' sa et4erl of necessity to e•enerate, than the circumstance of 1/ 0 - 1 1° of go amiable and so upright a character as his t riend, the Member for It (Sir Robert Inglis) been this night betrayed into expressions which it °eeasioned hint (Sir fames Mackintosh) unfeigned N ., 1 : 1 ; °1 • to bear, and which were to this effect :—" I jz , ri gt yield these points ; let the people of Ireland 'gem fro m us by force."—(Hear, hear hear.)—He t h 4t ° °t pretend to have caught the precise words, but h o wall their import. Now when he heard such language t e h r ' l 4 man like his Hon. Friend, whose intelligence, Os e benevolence, and kindly feeling, were so univer no",Y, acknowl e d ge d in that House—(Hear, hear)---he could but call upon that House to consider of what intensity , - ",, tr 't be the mischievous principle which glowed under the of such a political profession. (Hear, hear.) There te -Pr e too m an y w h o , lik e hi s res p ec t e d an d H on . F r i en d, '9 Rain to talk of the " vigour and determination" ne ras4fY to b e manifested by a Government in respect to Ire -01:1• For hie own p ar t, b e never h ear d th ese wor d s with 7lea;:t heard how eloquently and how powerfully lie l e h i 2ard them dilated upon iu that assembly, by a voice ' °ever w as h ear d w ithi n th e se walls without delight '"To, at least ; and which, not more unfortunately for , v r e ti than for the country, had now ceased to be beard—for tai n ' t (Hear, hear.) What, however, must he (Sir J. M.) tl,l ° of the principles of this opposition to the Catholic ' a pa rns ' when he found that it could induce a Member, of t 4 l ei ,'rjrtment so mild, of manners sei gentlemanly, and of a ta, Z ge rateness and equanimity so usually unruffled, as to t Which were peculiar to the Hon. Member for Ripon -Athek're in place that he would rather that the Irish 01 . his li on . 'es should extort by force the objects of their peti- Sie, r t hen yield them to their entreaties. (Hear, hear.) in ta` ti 4 year 1812, no man had been so bold as to propose 41 Hoes the formation of an administration founded " th e • e • ' • exclusion. For 16 y e , r, principle of Roman Catholic for s i,P 4s t no Ministry had dared to present themselves be -4,414 Wien:lent as the avowed champions of that system, itlg t he permanency of which they were now deliberat hight Whe n Parliament had heard, about four years ago,the !Too. Cent. (Mr. Secretary Peel) avowing in his lo s that th e condition of his remaining in the councils of I. r . ot e° ontry was, the greater antl lesser degree and shade of e s i t " t aratiarn in the Cabinet, was not that declaration made t) t ere, in the very confession that he stood almost alon e e l. sieve of the Catholic Question among the other Mi 'u- - ' his M a jesty ? Was not that declaration of itself lc dent to encourage Ireland to hope that her claims would granted. (Hear, hear.) When they heard the Right Hon. At t i la ! n to, shortly after the formation of the present aoi n 4 ,_"" r Y, which had, so happily for the country, disap ae7ed the hopes and expectations of the exclusives and the cheers.)—When they had heard him de 114re that the majority of four of the list years in that f„ °l4 e had sufficed to show him that it was impossible to P t ..‘ any future Government on purely exclusive prim-l e:7'a_ ; was not that enough eause them to entertain the sort o f hope and expectation ?—(llear. )—l..et any l y look round that House and tell him why the Right si : l ° . Gentleman, whom, he admitted, indeed, to he a t e in t lid exception, was the only man of commanding th at t, Who, f or th e l as t 12 y ears , h a d r i sen to v i n di cate t a le nts ra e of the question ? The reason was this—that case t 1 . hire the Right Hon. Gentleman's which must, in a the i e ' s l e ° lle, be exerted against the spread, and to check fr eed: 'nence of, liberal principles, and the dissemination of fl e m° l . opinion, were operated on by the repulsive in aftst e e the spirit and intelligence and feeling of the es --, upon such an appropriator of such talents. Wea hOPee and the. good wishes, of the intelligent, as t ry , a 1 the nobly horn, among the youth of the coun ere enlisted in the success of this great question ; t hat Oee youth was not the age of fear, he did i trust 6xllknee might reckon upon their support, who, n be- Pit i , m ° : Ruch a cause, had virtue enough to reject and des- Cv`i F. the allurements of ambition, and all the enjoyments ° tdoru., which were usually proffered to young men, in lit; to win them to that side, 'from whence civil anti nii -4104 ,7mPloynnents, for some time past, had been found taa,,‘o emanate. Shame, and the nobler principle of cp t i 7, justice, prevented them from abandoning principles ae )w. '' question which they had always been forward to The youth, then, of this country, superior to all N t '.• at ions of emolument or power, wer e in favour of this lia r! " ; and he, for one, hailed their support with gra slit; arid exultation. The Right Hon. G en tl eman h ere silk in general terms to what he termed a splendid sa aetee of all the prospects of power and influence which tt4 ° Petting upon him, as the reward of his talents, his Ai ta ° °, and his influence, which a distinguished young tl4 her o f t h at House had recent l y made to his notions of Alit lt iee and expediency of the concessions demanded at oa t „ rm ,,ds of the British Parliament. When it was asked pd Da n iell side the conversions had been, let this disintereet le .."4,version (we apprehend Mr. Perceval was alluded to) tiD::_roetnhered as sacrifice to his patriotic and his tr-6,41it feelings, worthy to be remembered in assecia• tit s w ith the patriotic devotion of the late Mr. v?o k iTn• (Hear, hear.) From such examples, Ireland v4 ll ' learn that not only talent, but honesty and public N a l , Were arrayed upon her side ; and that the enligh to ' I ., Youth of Britain had the courage, in her good cause, 14 41; lect Place, patronage, and power. A great deal 'iv 'en said about the Treaty of Limerick. He had no • a ra et th 4t were the construction of that treaty submitted . Judgment of any number of equitable arbitrators, vei t i.‘v o uld come, notwithstanding the many difficulties tlitt s urrounded the question, to the seine notion of it tre a-a th e universally received understanding of the great °f th e Irish people---to the same conclusion, in short, 4 44 )a i'4lop Burnett, who considered that it restored the td ° things in Ireland to the sam e con diti on in which '44 Were in the time of Charles the Second. That such by t'e r ° Ireland, the understanding, might be evidenced btr fr r emarkable fact, that Dr. Browne, then the Mem e the Dublin University, who published a pamphlet in , under set e strongest -holic feelin out P i a tie - -g that though, up to anti Cat his time, it had s, en bethe +t it g feeling in Ireland, that the provisions of the lie was ab ou t to Peie Y of Lim er i c k h a d b een violated, t`iG, ti eu idea which had, till his time never been enter ' i 4 4, 1 1, t amely, that these stipulations bad been observed. Lee t „'oweve r , was just 100 years after the signing of the 1 7,°Y . a f I le (Sir James Mackintosh) could conceive no n 4,•, °ten more deeply interested in the concession of seta t°olie Question, than the Protestant Clergy of Ire bear.)--As to them, the whole question e • . " 'taelf j ute this--were they prepared to make ealtlioi°l3efessions, an d to rue th e r i s k o f sex i ng 50 Roman fi `oe so Memb ers seated in Parliament, o r s till to deny 4 , f ,It h i r 'WM'S so asked of them, and face the certainty 9 4 i'ist a : r 7r 1 extinction ? Concerning th e respons ibility of the t (the most valuable and integral p r i nc i p l e per h a p s e v i'6l l .l„r 4 ,tjah Constitution, and beyond all doubt the of t'ist r oeturate union between the views t r it kiti; ' : °4 'arch - y and to many one 'io kt • ( frunniunicated health, vigour, and efficiency to is Pri a ion. of Great Britain) he had that evening heard I.l sl/ o ' P l e advanced, on the high and venerable authority ti a %eei e9 rr ourabl e and Learned Friend opposite, which i rue Ciorly startled him. The practice of . modern i I ) , tic kin g (l ePrieed the Crown of its brightest jen el— )y. hr'etseeb from it the power of enercieing Its brightest attn.- Y withdrawing from the fountein of mercy the roost r`lerce°,r‘i beneficent of its virtues. The exercise of that late ,„1" Poeseseion of those qualitiee, h a d n ev e r been until !rl the a'n's deni e d t o i t ; an d yet t h e one an d t h e ot h er , t. i roin ''l4.4 e of the more mo d ern administration of our ! t Jodica its • - Regh t ture, had been, effect, withdrawn from it. tha t thi, `e ~ ,on. and L earne d G ent l eman went on to argue s i r, \ areh at ," t eration was very inconsistent with the ex , see.- arlia elen ' t ° which w as s h ewn by so power f u l a party i n " r ded t o , t ° modify th e corona ti on oath. He then prc ! ncioire into the reasonablene ss and force of the arguments addnvd to justify that reluctance. There could he no doubt that this was very delicate groand to tread, and he who should propose to the Crown, on any subject, in public, especially, to listen to its own particular opinion in opposition to that of its constitutional advisers, or of the public, as expressed in Parliament, would undoubtedly be guilty of a very high offence, and of a degree of presump tion which would render him liable to an impeachment. Ile should content himself, therefore, upon the subject of oaths, to avail himself of Lord Kenyon's maxim, as laid down in his correspondence with the late King in 1795—" that the supreme power never can bind its successors ; and that that which cannot he done directly, cannot he done indirectly," The Right Hon. and Learned Gent., (after arguing in support of these propositions, on the grounds that the first of them amounted to no more than to ray—that the supreme. power was always the same—seeing that if its predecessors or their engagements would bind it, it must be less poten tial than that which so bound it—and that the second would lie defeated, if it could be su ppo s ed that an oath taken by one party for himself, could indirectly bi n d th e conscience or free will of another party, claiming to exer cise equal volition and power with such other party)—then contended, that no oath of a former King would necessarily bind his successor, in respect of acts done by him out of Parliament, though it might is respect of acts done in it. • The interpretation of an oath, and the measure of obliga tion it imposed, might be a matter solely for the comcienee of the individual taking it ; but the effect of a political measure as to the security of the Church, it more properly belonged to those accustomed to judge of such matters to determine, and no wise Monarch would refuse to be guided in such a case by the advice of his Ministers. He begged pardon for having so long trespassed on the indulgence of the House, and would conclude by expressing a hope that the measure for the relief of the Protestant Dissenters would be followed by a similar measure of relief for the long suf fering Roman Catholics of Ireland. Then might it be said with the Roman of old—" maximum illud pulcheri mumque jusjurandum se conserrasse rempublicam."— (Cheers.) Mr. Secretary PEEL.—I labour under many difficulties in rising at the present moment, and not the least are those under which the Right Hon. Gentleman who has just sat down has placed me. Ile has told us, Sir, that we who advocate the maintenance of those laws which we think are for the security of the Protestant Religion, have such a mass of authority and such a combination of living talent arrayed against us, as almost to overpower our reason. Ile has presented to us a weight of authority so great, that he thinks we ought to refer to it at once without venturing to exercise our own judgment. He has told us, moreover, Sir, that the cause to which we have attached ourselves is hope less—lie has enumerated the rising talent enlisted against it—he tells us that we can boast of no conversions, whilst on the other side, there are many, and 1 believe sincere conversions, to swell the ranks of our opponents, already sufficiently formidable. But, Sir, be that as it may— be the prospect of ultimate success as dismal as he paints it—be, oar cause as hopeless as he says it is—be the amount of conversions against us as he represents— still, Sir, I think he will admit to me, that having ma turely and anxiously deliberated upon this subject, how ever small my expectation of converting others to my opinions, I may, as I am in duty bound, rise in this house to declare my fixed sentiments.—(Hear, hear.)—Sir, not withstanding all that the Right Hon. Gentleman has said of the hopelessness of the case, I think we owe it to our selves, to the country, and to the Crown—such of us as happen to be Ministers of the Crown—temperately, man fully, and firmly to state our opinions.—(l-oud cheers.) — That, however, which operates more forcibly than any thing the Right Hon. Gentleman has said, to deter me from advocating that side of this question to which my mind has hitherto been pledged, is, after having fre quently declared my opinions, and the grounds upon which they are founded, the painfulness of repeating, I fear to a reluctant audience, a statement of those grounds. If my ability to give expression to my own sentiments were ten• fold what I. can lay claim to, 1 should sensibly feel this difficulty. But I have no alternative—l have no desire. to obtrude—but I have been so repeatedly and so personally alluded to, particularly by the Hon. Baronet rho introduced the subject to the House, that I have no al ternative but to state my opinions fully and broadly to the Howe. Sir, the Hon. Baronet (Sir F. Burdett) his made a personal appeal to me upon a point which it is impossi ble not to perceive is most distasteful to the House. But, the lion. Baronet hae disclaimed, in the first instance, rest ing his proposition upon the broad ground of justice. He has declared it not to he a question of an ordinary kind, not founded even upon considerations of abstract principles ' of right; but he has claimed the assent of this House to his proposition, in the first instance, apart from coneiderae tins of policy, distinctly upon the ground of a solemn contract entered into with the Representatives of the Irish Nation, and whish, for a valuable considera tion then given, we are now called upon to per form. Ile has claimed, Sir, my conditional assent ou the ground of a declaration made by me, that whatever the lapse of time since the date of the Treaty entered into between King William and an Irish garrison in 1694, and which the Hon. Baronet has called the Magna Charts of the Catholics, still, if it could be made apparent_ to me that any privileges were guaranteed by that treaty, which are now withholden from the Irish Catholics, it would mate rially alter my view of the question. Sir, Ido not mean to go back from that pledge. The Hon. Baronet is too manly to give a false colouring to any quotation ; and I admit the terms which he has imputed to me, and I will abide by them. Other Gentlemen, I know, think that the lapse of time is enough to set aside the provisions of the Treaty of Limerick ; but, with respect to it, I cannot but say that, to justify the withholding of privileges stipulated by the treaty, it would require a case of a very different nature to that which is put forward upon the present oc casion, founded upon threatened dangers, or abstract po licy. But, Sir, after having again referred to the treaty upon which the Hon. Baronet rests his position, and hav ing also referred to what is much more material, the con temporaneous acts and declarations of parties ; and having done this over and over again, I am now prepared to say, that if I were in the situation of that tribunal to which the Hon. Baronet desired to see this question referred— with as solemn an obligation as would then be imposed upon me, to decide according to the justice of the case be tween the parties to that treaty—l should feel myself bound to say, that of all the points upon which my mind is free from doubt, the one in question is that upon which I have the most clear conviction.—(Cheers.) I do not think it possible for any one who has read the treaty, and at all at tended to its contents, and the state of surrounding con temporaneous circumstances, and the part taken by both parties, not to believe that there is not the shadow of a foundation for saying that either party ever contemplated that the privileges of unrestricted admission to offices under the Crown, and to seats in Parliament, were conceded to the Roman Catholics of Ireland by virtue of the first article of that treaty.--( Hear.) I never denied that the first article had reference to the whole Catholic population. The dif ference that I have with the Hon. Baronet is upon this Point—what is the nature of the security which the first article was meant to confer upon the Roman Catholics of Ireland ? . This is the question between the Hon. Baronet and myself, and I must say, Sir, that the decision of this question involves considerations of the highest importance. Sir, I rise upon this occasion to vindicate not only my own view of the subject, but to rescue from the severest censure names which have been hitherto, held in honour. 1 allude to the names of King William 111., Lord Somers, and the Whig Ministers of that day, i\lr. Pitt, Lord Corn wallis, and Lord Castlereagh. These, Sir, are honoured names, to which infamy must attach if the Treaty of Li merick will hear the construction contended for by the Hon. Baronet.--(lieu, hear.) I say, Sir, that if the Hon. Baronet can prove that King William and the Whig itlinisters of that day, contemplated by that Treaty confer ring on the Catholics of Ireland all political privileges, sub ject only to the Oath of Allegiance, the charge of infamy for their subsequent conduct will be indelibly fixed upon them ; and so far from King William meriting the epithet of " glorious," so often coupled with his memory, he will deserve no title but what may be derived from the evidence of his had faith. tut depend upon it, Sir , that William and the Whig Alini st , rs Neith er Ki ng William nor the Roman Catholics even contemplated of that day, are not oh noaious to such a charge. lated at . that time the pri vileges now claimed by the virtu e of the treaty entered into between them. The proposition of the 11on. Bart. is this, that the Roman Catholics of Ireland were guaranteed by the Treaty of Limerick to have every office under the C row n, and parliament, open to them only upon taking the oath of alleg ia n ce. To assent to this rr o p os i t i on, as 'a have already said, is to credit that William, having just rescued Ireland from the dominion of a Roman Catholic Parliament, in which were only two Protestants, an d hay _ ing secured that coun tr y from the undue influence o f t h e pr o f ess i ons o f that faith, proposed to crown his triumph by a measure which tended to restore the is too absurd to the Catholics to un qualified power.—(Cheers.) --This, S require any further confutation.—(Hear.) --The Hon. Ba ronet say s , th a t th e R o man Catholic Catholic's in all their conduct at that crisis were only acting upon religious and loyal feelings of the most warrantable description. But, Sir, he passes over all th e transactions of that Parliament for two years, which are FCI very material to the formation of a correct judgment of the character of Catholic proceedings at that period. 1 agree with the Hon. Baronet in the po licy of merging the memory of such tranaactions now; but if they are to be referred to it, it is not fair to put a false construction upon the most naorious historical facts. I think, Sir, the Roman Catholic advocates would do better at once to give up those transactions to in famv, of which even Roman Catholic historians have, wi►h honour to themselves, been the most severe in condemnation. This course, Sir, would be much better than arousing the jealousy and alarm of the country by the ingenuity with which it is endeavoured to distort what it is impossible to conceal.—(Hear, hear.)--When we see men of eminence of the present day glossing over unpalatable facts, and when we compare the account of the same occurrence with the honest, manly, and honourable avowal made by the historians of the time, it is impossible to avoid making reflections by no means favourable to the parties now struggling for power. I beg pardon of the House for allowing myself to be drawn aside upon this topic from the main question. I entreat the House now ; then, for the last time I will ever upon any occssion refer to the Treaty of Limerick, to attend to a short argument upon the subject of that Treaty in answer to the Hon. Baronet. The Mon. Baronet has argued, that the Ist Article of that Treaty provides for the admission of the Roman Catholics of Ireland to unrestricted political power. The Article runs thus— same thing, an intimation, which, coming rata prung who had authority to answer for the Government and their Sovereign, induced them (the Catholics) to support the Union: The Hon. Baronet would have the House be lieve that there was an understanding that after the Union the Catholic Question would be carried. But, Sir, upon an examination of the evidence on the one side and on the other, I contend that it will be impossible to deny that at the time of the Union the Catholic Question was left un • touched.—(Cheers.) A provision was indeed attempted to be introduced which would have had the effect of for warding the cause of the Catholics, but it was found im practicable; the intention was abandoned, and the ques tion left open. I have not the slightest doubt but that many Catholics thought at the time that the Union would facilitate the carrying of the question. I think, also, that Mr. Pitt then considered that the subject would be dis cussed with less difficulty in a joint Parliament than in a separate one; but I do deny that either Mr. Pitt, Lord Castlereagh, or Lord Cornwallis, gave any pledge or en gagement, either express or implied. I speak not of writ ten promises, nor would I seek to defend the high cha racters of those high men by such unworthy evasion. But I do insist that they gave no pledges which could be considered binding on them as men of honour. I rely for the proof of this on documents not yet • alluded to in this debate. From these documents I shall satisfactorily chew that they made no engage ment binding on them, or which could fetter us._ (Cheers.) It must be unnecessary for me, Sir, in this House, to stand up to vindicate the conduct of such distin guished persons, nor would I have said one word on the subject if I did not think that we owed it to ourselves to show that the blot of had faith cannot rest on them.— (Chews.) Yes, Sir, I did feel that we were bound to prove, and could prove, that they had not held out any ex pectations to the Catholics which could enable them now to call on us to fulfil their solemn promisee. It has been said, that the best proof of these engagements having been given, is to be found in the resignations of Mr. Pitt and Lord Cornwallis. And the Hon. Member says, that I am now to answer for them. But, Sir, they shall answer for themselves.—(Cheers.) Indeed, I do not see how the Right Hon. Gentleman who spoke last night could derive ' any additional argument from these resignations; for if the Right Hon. Gentleman thought that they were occa sioned by any pledge made to the Catholics, and which could not afterwards be fulfilled, I don't see why the Right Eon. Gentleman himself should not also have retired.— However, if I mistake not, the Right lion. Gentleman himself continued in office ; yet I cannot conceive how he, being, as he stated last night, the organ of c,ommuaication between the Government and the Catholics, could not have felt the same obligation to retire, if he thought that good faith had been violated. They themselves negative that supposition ; they state that th e y t en d ere d their re signation, because his Majesty was unwilling to accept their advice.—(Hear, hear, from Mr. Alderman Wood, we believe.) The worthy Alderman appears to mistake the matter altogether ; he does not see the difference be tween tendering their resignation because they could not carry into effect promises which they bad made to others, and tendering their resignations because they could not in duce his Majesty to accept their advice. In 1801, imme diately after his resignation of his office, when Mr. Pitt was questioned on the subject, he denied that he had stated that the carrying the Union would facilitate the settlement of the Catholic claims; he admitted that, knowing the feeling of the Irish Parliament, lie entertained hopes that the question would he more favourably discussed in an United Parliament. In 1805, when Mr. Grattan brought forward the same subject, Mr. Pitt repeated that declaration, and in a speech, which 1 well remember, although it is now twenty-three years back, lie used these words—l have " 1. The Roman Catholics of this Kingdom shall enjoy such privileges in the exercise of their religion as are con sistent with the laws of Ireland, or as they did enjoy in the reign of Charles the Second ; and their Majesties, as their affairs will permit theta to summon a Parliament in this kingdom, will endeavour to procure the said Roman Catholics such further security, in that particular as may preserve them from any disturbances upon the account of their said religion." • Now, Sir, I contend that neither party contemplated, by this article, any extension of political power to the Catholics. In the first place 1 will speak to the Catho lics, and ask, whether it is possible to believe that the Roman Catholics of the city of Limerick, aided by the most able legal assistance, would have rested their claim to such important privileges upon such vague language?— But then the Right Hon. Gentleman, who has just sat down (Sir James Mackintosh) quotes Lord Somers with reference to the meaning attached to the expression " dis turbance on account of religion," and he shows that, ac cording to that Noble Lord, the incapacity to serve the Sovereign, in political offices, on account of religion, is the highest punishment next to death. Sir, I have heard this argument before, and it only requires a reference to the document, from which the Right Hon. Gentleman has taken this passage, to see that Lord Somers' opinion was very different from that which it is now endeavoured to represent it. At the conference between the Lords and Commons, referred. to by the Right Hon. Gentleman, the sentiments quoted were uttered by the Whig Peers. But does the Right Hon. Gent. mean to say that toleration im plies full political privilege? I ant surprised the Right Hon. Gent. should give rue the means of quoting his own au thority, Lord Somers, against him. But, in the document to which he has referred will be found the following state ment made by Lord Somers :—" The Lords look upon places of trust as so entirely under the controul of tha Legislature, that every Government, without any reason given, may put such ruled, restraints, and conditions, on all who serve in places of trust, as they shall choose. But penalties and punishments are of a difierent nature." He then goes on to say, " Popery has ever been looked upon as that which we ought to apprehend and guard against, as a most inveterate, restless, and formidable enemy. There was always a great difference betwixt Papists and Protestant Dissenters."—(Cheers.)—This, Sir, I take, is sufficient to chew, upon the authority of Lord Somers, that admission to places of trust was not intended by language such as that used in the Treaty of Limerick. In 1648 the Roman Catholics had occasion to conclude a treaty with the Mar quis of Ormond, and I will read to the House the first Arti cle of that Treaty, first observing that it must be construed by the state of the law at that time; and it will be found that, especially in the time of Elizabeth, when - the Act of uniformity of prayer was pissed, every one was obliged to attend a place of worship according to the Established Church, and on the third offence against that Act the party forfeited his lands. All stipulations, therefore, at that time had reference to this state of things and a free exercise of religious worship, and emancipation from these penalties would be provided for before political privileges were thought of. The Ist Article of the Treaty in question was as follows " That all and every the professors of the Roman Ca tholic religion within the said Kingdom shall be free and exempt from all mulcts, penalties, restraints, and inhi bitions, that are, or may be, imposed upon them by any law, statute, usage, or custom whatsoever, for or concern ing the free exercise of the Roman Catholic religion. And that it shall be likewise enacted, that the said Roman Catholics, or any of them, shall not be questioned or mo lested in their persons, goods, or estates, for any matter or cause whatsoever, for, concerning, or by reason of the free exercise of their t eligion, by virtue of any power, authority, statute, law, or usage whatsoever. Now this was more comprehensive than the Treaty of Limerick ; yet the parties were not satisfied, for they went on farther most distinctly to specify as follows " It is likewise concluded, accorded, and agreed, and his Majesty , is graciously pleased, that as soon as possible may he, al' impediments which may hinder the said Roman Catholics to sit and vote in the next intended Parliament, or to choose, or to be chosen, Knights and Burgessts to sit or vote there, shall be removed, and that before the said Parliament." "That places of command, honour, profit, and trust, in the Civil Government in this Kingdom, shall be, upon passing of the Bills in these Articles mentioned, in the next Parliament, actually and by particular instances conferred upon his Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects of this King dom ; and that in the distribution, conferring, and dis posal of the places of command, honour, profit, and trust, in the Civil Government, for the future, no difference shall he made between the said Roman Catholics and other his Majesty's subjects ; but that such distribution shall be made with equal indifference, according to their respective merits and abilities ; and that in the distribution of Minis terial offices or places which now are, or hereafter shall be, void its this Kingdom, equally shall be used to the Roman Catholic natives of this King, as to others, his AN es ty'm subjects." Thjs chews, Sir, that the Roman Catholics at that time were well aware of what words were necessary to give political power,eabd no such language as this is found in the Treaty of Limerick. It is most important, with re ference to that Treaty, to observe that one of the terms de manded by Sir Toby Butler at Limerick was, that " the Irish Papists should be held capable of employments civil and military under the Crown." To this article De Ginckle refused to accede, because it was contrary to the Laws of England—(Cheers)—and that very day he erected a new battery, and sent in the twelve articles in question, which were acceded to. Can it then he said, Sir, that he meant, by the terms of that Treaty, that every political office should be open to the Roman Catho fics the course taken by King William, on the 22d of October, on the 3d of which month (1691) the capitulation was signed, it is impossible to impute to hint such an understanding of the Treaty, with out, at the same time, imputing to him the grossest per fidy. Yet, Sir, three weeks after the ratification of the Treaty of Limerick, a Bill was introduced into she Bri tish House of Parliament, and which, if the construction now put upon the articles of the Treaty were correct, would he in open violation of it. And yet, Sir, though it was thus openly violated, no one roae up to say that the Roman Catholics were entitled to seats in Parliament, and that a gross breach of good faith es - as about to be Coal rnitted. The matter did not then pass off lightly—the question had bees discussed and well considered—provisions had been introduced into the Bill for the preservation of the Treaty of Limerick, and a conference took place between the two Houses of Parliament on the subject. (The Right Honourable Gentleman here read an extract from the speech of the Earl of Rochester, who was Chairman of the Deputation from the House of Peers me that occasion.) It was well known (continued the Right Hon. Gentleman) that the Tory party did insist the articles of the Treaty of Limerick atiould be preserved. Provisions for that purpose are introduced' i n t o th e Bill, an d no except i on whatever is. made as tothe tiout i exclusionght to he o f iNl C e a n t t h l i t o er li s es o seats in Parliament.—(Hear, hear.)—No o ne th en ra i se d hi s voice in support of their f the Legislature. Whether, then, the Catholics sat in Parlia ment or not in the time of Charles the Second, I do %ay, that by the Article of that Treaty, the question of policy is now left open to us.—(Cheers.)—l do maintain, Sir, de spite of all that has been urged to the contrary, that we are now free to enter into the discussion of that great question, that we are perfectly unfettered, and that this House can now come to a determination upon it apart front any con siderations of good faith.—(Cheers.)—That Treaty had, I solemnly b e li e v e , n o reference to civil advantages. It merely guarante e d t o th e Catholics the enjoyment of religious free. dom.—{H ear , hear. )—lt is, I repeat it, my deliberate con viction, that neither party contemplates admission to Par liament. This is my conscientious feeling., and I shall, now that I have stated it, unless I am called on to con sider particular parts of it, from this moment forward religiously keep my peace an the subject of this treaty. —(Cheers.)—One w or d, Sir, as to a more r ece nt period of our history, to which much allusion has been made—l mean the time of the Union between this country and Ireland. The Hon. Member says that the Ca tholics received not a solemn promise, but what I admit would amonnt, in the minds of honourable men, to the do I know that our freedom has not mitigated the fe•city of the Catholic, and if we place him on the same footing ' with the Protestant, lie will continue as he now is? An Hon. Member has eulogised the Catholic religion as pee nessing an elasticity which could accommodate itself to any circumstances ; and how are we to be certain if this he a true picture of it, that it might not be presented to us Li a different form from what we now find it, if we alter the Constitution which has given it its present character? We have been called upon to follow the example of other States ; hut the question is, are we in a condition to follow the example of those States which we ate on to imitate ? The Honourabl e Baronet says the: - I have disclaimed any apprehension either from the Pope or the Pretender ; but he should recollect that these to whom allusion has been made, have taken securities ; and I ask that Honourable Baronet, if he is prepared to gi ve equal securities to us? He seemed anxious to prepare our appetite for them. He told us that he placed no value on them ; that they were as useless no an amulet hung round the neck of a child, or as a horse-shoe nailed on a door. I confess, F,ir, that I listen with surprise and distrust to the language which calls upon us to open wide the doors of political power to the Catholic., and I confess I feel still greater surprise, when, after taking a sober and consi derate view of the relation in which the Roman Catholic religion stands towards the State, I hear those who profess to have, and no doubt really have, its beet interests et heart, declarieg their conviction, that the securities offered are such as ought to satisfy those whose duty it is to watch over the safety and integrity of our Protestant Constitu tion. For my part, in the course of all I have ever heard or read upon this subject, I never• once was made acquainted with any security that could far a moment he put in com petition with that which we at present enjoy by the pox session of a Protestant Constitution. In other countries where the Catholics are in possession of political power, their religion is found to he incorporated with the State, as, for example, in the case of Prussia, and it would be perfectly superfluous to insist upon the wide dietinc•• tior. subsisting between that country and this in re speet both of religious and political institutions. We are told that we may legislate for the Roman Catho lics without asking their consent ; and yet again we are told that the object of concession for them i., to pro mote peace, concord, and conciliation. Now I cannot un derstand how it is possible to proceed on the one principle with a due regard to the other. Once more to recur to the case of Prussia : the civil disabilities under which the Roman Catholics laboured in that country have been re moved ; but, as I have already said, the Roman Catholic religion in that country has been so far incorporated with the political constitution as to alter the applicability of the case to our peculiar circumstances.' Ia fact, the Roman Catholic religion there is as intimately Mende(' with the Constitution as the Protestant religion is here. All the Bishoprics are in the gift of the Crown—all the endow ments of education are in the hands of the State—the nomination to ant' ecclesiastical office is in the hands of the King of Prussia. In this country there does not exist— nor does it appear at all desirable in my opinion that there should exist—any such intimate union between the Roman Catholic and the State as prevails in Prussia, which our attention is so often directed to as the model by which we should govern our legislative proceedings on this subject. I say there does not exist in this country any such bond of connection, and I think the advantages to be derived from making concessions, remote and contingent as those advan tages confessedly are, would be dearly purchased by este blishingbetween the Roman Catholic Church and the British Constitution any such intimate link of connexion as that subsisting in Prussia. My full persuasion is, that such a connection would lead to a degree of anxiety, of irritation— would so agitate the public mind—as to make it one of the the most perfect recollection of them, having that night most unwise measures that could, under any circont oat under the gallery:—" I approach the discussion (said stances, be resorted to; its necessary consequence toculd he) on this question free and unfettered." (Cheers.) If be, to maintain a continual struggle, that would for ever then, Sir, Mr. Pitt, in MO, was free and unfettered, it preclude the possibility of preserving harmony and good is not impossible to imagine that we are prevented, by any feeling amongst the members of the community. I enter considerations of good faith, from looking at the question tain not the slightest doubt that its effect would be to now as one of policy, or that he has left us fettered at the create more religious animosity than has perhaps ever ex present day. (Loud cheers.) I have, Sir, the means of isted in this country. Then the case of the Netherlands is proving, beyond the possibility of doubt, that Lord Corn- instanced in support of this argument. Why, there the wallis never pledged himself to the Irish Catholics, case is, if possible, still stronger the other way ; for though and I shall entreat the House to listen with attention, while the King of the Netherlands does not possess the actual I read to them a communication from Lord Cornwallis power of nomination, yet, by arrangements made with to Lord Castlereagh on that subject. (Here the Right Hon. the Pope, and with the Roman Catholics in the Nether- Secretary read the communication alluded to, which dis- l a nds, h e poss e sses the most perfect veto that can possibly tinetly stated that Lord Cornwallis, so far from holding any be enjoyed, for be has the power of rejecting the names expectations to the Catholics, had studiously avoided any on the list submitted to him to any extent, that will language which could by possibility lead them to suppose leave the Chapter a sufficient number to choose from. In that fhe settlement of their question would be facilitated by Hanover, the same power is possessed ; the King of Ha the Union.) The Right Hen. Gentleman continued—l noYer has the power of making a similar selection, and it is appeal to the House whether it is possible, after such a de- therefore that I deny, that any one of the countries whose claration, that Lord Cornwallis shonld have raised any example has been presented to us, and which we have been hopes in the Catholice. (The Right Hon. Gentleman called on to follow, is at all placed in the same situation as then read an extract from a speech of Lord Castlereagh's, England--or has, or ever had, to contend with either in 1810—from which it appeared that, in consequence of Pope or Pretender. I trust the people of this land will not the studious reserve which Lord Cornwallis adopted, much disregard the lesson that lies been read to them in times of the influence of the Catholics was exerted against the passed, but are not forgotten, and that they will now Union ; and so little did the Catholics expect that Mr. uphold those Protestant institutions under which the coun- Pitt would take so decided a course i n th e ir favour, that try for centuries has prospered and grown great, and that his conduct was actually a ma tt e r of surprise to them.)— they will not permit the predominance and ascendancy of a With all respect, Sir, (continued Mr. Peel), for the Right form of faith, which has ever shown itself to hold te ne ts lion. G en tl ema n who last ni g ht detail e d to us the sub- adverse to civil society, re established in these realms. It stance of conversations which he had had with Lord Corn- is, therefore, I say, that to adopt the propositio n o :t th e wallis, I feel myself bound to place implicit reliance upon Hon. Baronet, will be to destroy all that was accomplished the solemn declarations o f M r . Pitt, L or d Cornwalli s , and fur this country by the Revolution, and to dep r i ve th a t R e . Lord Castlereagh, as to transactions in which they them- volution altogether of its Protestant character, and, what selves were concerned, and upon w hi c h r es t e d th e i r Ilia- is more, to deprive the Constitution of its Protestant cha racters as statesmen and their honour as gentlemen. Allu- rioter—to break off the sole connecting link which binds sion has been made to his Majesty's Message in 1800, in the religion of the country to the State. Further, let the which he expressed his hopes, that all the advantages of House just reflect upon the painful and distressing eituas the British Constitution would be extended to Ireland.— tints in which it would in many instances place the :',Io- In considering that Message, w e must recollect, narch: he sees in Parliament a Member of the Catholic that it was addressed to a country suffering tinder all Communion exerting himself successfully to acquire w e ight the horrors of martial law, and nothing was more likely and influence in the councils of the country—he raises than that such soothing language might then he ad- himself, perhaps, from the humblest station in soci e ty, dressed to a people so circumstanced, although it never ' while he, in common with many more, are eligible for the could be supposed that, by thes e wor d s , hi s M a jesty meant highest offices in the State, yet the Monarch fears to place that they should be relieved f ro m a ll civil disabilities. him in one of them, influenced, as the King of these After some more observations on t hi s part of t h e question, realms might naturally be, by apprehensions for the safety Mr. P. went ou thus :—Sir, I h ave on many former occa- of the Church. Then is the Monarch called on to decide sinus had an opportunity of stating my deliberate opinion the question, whether or not such a person should be on this subject, and 1 have only to ref e r t o thos e opinions, excluded n:i the ground of his religious opinions, and and to announce that I still adhere to them. I shall, how- thus would the Catholic people and the Head of the Go. ever, shortly state the grounds why I so adhere. Die- vernment be placed at issue. We are accused of resisting charging from my view all considerations, as I hope I have the demands of the Roman Catholics solely from the =did proved myself warranted in d o i ng , o f ju s ti ce and good view of preserving to the Established Church its ten-Tore faith, I shall look at the question in two aspects—of pa- lities. It would, indeed, be a low and vulgar object to Aim licy, on the one hand, as it affects the Constitution of the at nothing higher than preserving the mere secular advan• country generally, and of expediency on the other, as it re- t ag - es of th e Established Church, and an object which, I Bards present or future tranquillity. With respect to its persuade myself, the opponents of the Roman Catholics are bearing on the Constitution, 1 think that if it be laid down far superior to. Our object is to give to the Protestant that there is to be no distinction of civil privileges, on ac- Establishment that which all men will admit roost be c o u n t of religions opinions, that will be giving an advan- given to the one Church or the other—l mean a moderate tags to the Catholic's. To say that there is to be no dis- preponderance—a fair and limited ascendancy. In seeking tinetion between persons professing that faith—that, I say, to give, or rather to preserve that preponderance, lam far would be a ruateeial change in the Constitution of this from meaning that it should be productive of any thing in country. 'There are, of course, limits to the degrees of vidious, but I cannot help feeling an increased anxiety that. change ; hut Ido contend, that if you give such advantage nothing should arise to endanger that preponderance.-- to the Catholics, you will make a most important change in When I hear it said that there is little or no di erence be wliat was settled, and intended to be settled, at the Ilevo• tweet: the Roman Catholic and what I should esteem the 1 lution as the Constitution of this country. (Loud cheers.) purer and the better faith—when I hear it said that I did not hear the whole speech of the Hon. and Learned th e R oman Catholic religion is pretty neatly as good as Gentleman w h o last addressed t h e House; b u t as I en- ours._ that we have our Athanastian creed, and that they tered the House, if I understood him rightly, he appealed have their exclusive salvation—that our fo rm o f s „„., to those who supported the repeal of the Corporation and nouncing absolution is n: rowed from theirs ; 4,,,a that, Test Acts, and founded on that repeal an argument in in point of fact, there is little to choose between them— support of the present measure, and this, too, on the very Sir, if that he the impression that prevails, my appre first day in which the Bill far that pups, became a law. }tensions are confirmed, and zrot fears are increased; This, I must say, is most unfair, and in direct con- they are increased in peopos'tion to the frequent recur tradiction to w h at f e il f ro m the Noble Lord who in- rence of those occasions on which we hear it argued that troduced that Bill, who declared that there existed no there is no tangible or intelligible difference between the and that no inferenee doctrines and discipline of the two Churchea.,--(Criee of ftrhoism";ohe cases,n in favour of the mites'. No, no.)—l say 1 have heard it so aegoed by the Right cl r; oa i or ie laslil c e a s lbe e b , ed S t:va ir w 7 nn of the Protestant Dissenters has always lion. Gentleman opposite.—(CheerStig.)—l heard it from been different fr om that of the Catholics'. (Mr. Peel here his lips this very night, ar i d, last night I heard the same went into a history of the Protestant disabilities in proof of principles contended foe by the Hon. Baronet by Wit?na th e this asser tio ns )—Sir, he conti nue d, if you remove t h e present debate has been opene d , I ant the:eft - 4n not to be di sa bilities under which the Catholict, now lie, and admit prechotled from arguing for an opposite ennolusion. I eon them to an equal r i g ht wit h the Protestants, you destroy tend that there is the widest, 4itYpwcAce between th e t wo th e Protestant charac t e r of our Constitution, and the only Churches ; and, as out rev name impli es , we protest link which will remain to connect the Church with the against the erroee, a4d, as we consider them, the false State will be the obligation in the King to be in commit- doctrinettof the Roman Catholic Church, I contend that „i on with the Church of England.—(Cheers.)--Our theoe ic, and ever has been, au essential (Fe/Terence, and one Bishops nosy still Sit in the House of Lords ; but tatha which n e v er can be reconciled Without the most extensive away those you take away the ieeeo , et- abandonment of p r i nc i p l e age t h e one side or the other. antcliaratedrisaobfiliourand C a onstitotion. The policy co' the So much, Sir, for the aosesseral argument upon this question Revolution o‘tnvila-iiitst'ats to their intention. °ln as)n, be vague and indistinct, but t, sake thi s a P ro t es t an t State. ,T sire —so much re.. t:;-le probable e ff ec t s o f concess i ons upon v 1 7.:44ie and chara c t er o f our Coustitution.—llere We n ) be n I .say, then, now proceed t o cons id er th e h ear i ng o f t h e qu estion that a if you pursu e th e course to w hi c h I h a ve alluded, the on I re l an d , and that lam Perfectly ready to acknowle d g e is i t r 'e , I the i,ay i ns titution will loee that distinctive character, except in so the m os t i mportant po i nt o f view in which it can b e con fer as the inf luence and property of Protestants tnay secure sidered, 1G never denied that the state of Ireland is one which t o them ascendancy. These must I know be large ; but so desuand s th e app li cat i on o f every measure a t all calculated to to r as regards her Co ns tit u tion, an essential change must be p romote i ts a d vantage w hi c h can b e ap pli e d with reasonable ma d e , if you r emove every d i et i nct i on b e t ween th ose w h o pro- prospect of saf e ty to th e genera l well-being of the empire; lc.(r, s,lo d a.d fess the Protestant and those whoprofess the Catholic faith. but I confeas myself amongst the number of those who We were told last night, that the doctrines of the Catholic doubt the efficacy of any such remedy as the concession of re ligion had, inde e d, undergone no change, although in th ose d eman d s . I am t h e f u rthest of any man from de their operation they were greatly modified; and the Hon. n yi ng th e ev il s un d er w hich Ireland labours , but , if I eta Member who told us so, with a warmth and stren g th o f t o c h oose b etween t h e en durance of these on the one hand, language hardly ever used by the opponent s of this mea- or the dissolution of the Protestant principle in the Briti s h sure, described the religion as a tiger driven to its den by Constitution the illuminating influence a p ro t„tanti sm _b ut bow do I in making nay e lection. I cannot but consider, that the disproportion between thD numbers of the Ca- Ma the other, I can have but little hesitation know that one cause of that modification is not to be found immense • in the freedom of our principles ; and how do I know but tholies and the Protestants, so far from affording an ar - that the Constitution of this country, which it is new at, ausnen t i n f a vour of concession, that I think it makes tempted to alter, h as produced that beneficial change" HOY quite the other way. We are told these are fiv e or ~i x ma, g .i hii it.j, spirit "0, af s disaffectionm at,tlncere, font of Catholics in Ireland—the exact number; are not very material, and for the sake of argument I will admit that there is a vast disproportion. Now, I con unable to un derstand upon what principles it is proposed to secure the ! safety and independence of the minority, if the whole, or almost the whole, of the power, political and Parliamentary, be plated in the hands of an opposite, and, in some eases, an ads: party. the lf m a o n s y t s h a o u p z e ui c 7n ou e, h i l t be w, , , T , ; ( e i r i t i a e in c e a d m o p n let t e h l i; subject, even by destroyed by the declarations ef th e parties tstnittlt.es— by their demonstrations of physical force, acted upon by spiritual influence. Fairer notice never his been given than that supplied from tie lips of the Catholics themselves of what we hare to expect should we ever consent to admit them to a full participation of political power. Look tri the effects of the Bills that have hen benefit—look to the manner in which those Bills hay' been received, and to their effects upon the temper and feelings pessed solely for their of the Catholic population.—look to the manner in which they have accepted the Vestries Act—the Sub-letting Act, and the Arts relating to Burials, introduced by my Right Honourable Friend (Lord Phinkett)—stetntes in which no one object was considered hut the means of their advan tage and conciliation. If, with the power and the advane rages they at present possess, they have proved themselves able —and have manifested themselves well disoonid as to resist and render nugatoey enactments and provisions in tended solely for their advantage, how :rtell more power. ful would they become for the purposes of faction, when i p aia, n els o: p l t i e lth t ih s e i d e t t a:l l : rth'oh'a.,e:i power.: ' hr,ee r ,...yiii h lro T de o n i )iporsmoitit.eciislitlie,ahgsgirebostifhl actuali t et h ,p n i : s o d a,s it n, Port dp r r tptos possessed appointment m e ' p l e a c,e s: increased nin o f ntt n t, i ,itn n ziod g o , ifiht i h t c is t, e or not ae it saw fit, that all possible injury from their eli- Great, however, as are the discontent.; which at present prevail, I entertain not the slightest doubt that they would he augmented incalculably, if the only bar to the admih sion of Roman Catholics to the higher offices of the State, were to be found in the objections of the Cruwn alone. The jealousy in -itch a case would be excessive, llnt he it remembered, that it was not alone eligibility to the higher offices the Catholics; demand, they seek to be admitted to seats in Parliament ; and here it would not he a ooteetion with the appointment of the Crown—neither would it be so in corporate offices. Most, if not all, of th e counties of Ireland, !send Members, who, though they do not deserve the character elven of them ! in one quarter, namely, that they are the blind instruments of their constituents, yet the course and character of their parliamentary life has been such as Sr, leave little doubt respecting the influence and power of those by wlinm they were elected.—This is the case while we have Protestest Members. I leave the Itouse to judge what would he the probable state of things were Catholic representetivea to ha sent hither by the choice of Catholic eleetnee—r ee , ra mie : the elective franchise how von will, the Catholic populating of Ireland will ever have a preponderating influenee. Let us now consider what the effects ere likely to he, as regards corporate offices!. There are, I understand, in Ireland, 115 corporations, containing no less than '2,500 officers ; to every one of these a repeal of the penal laws would render the Catholics eligible, and With the growing in fluence of the laity, and the onceasing activity of the priesthood, and the vast nornerical superiority which they possess, the result could not long remain problematical t and here, the Crown having no power to appoint, nor no privilege to prohibit appointment, the argument founded on the Roman Catholics demanding nothing more than eligibility falls! quite to the ground ; for, prac tically speaking, the repeal of the penal laws woniti give them, not eligibility alone, hot actual appointment„ and it is self-evident that the consequences of those ap pointments would make a most material change in the re. ettive position of the Protestants and Cethci - ics in Roland r! and I must frankly declare, I do fear the eonsequence.s. when I see the manner in which they have used the power already possessed by them. Not only here thee received with every species of resistance and hostility, the measures directly introduced and enacted for their relief, but they have scouted every proceeding of a secondary nature cal culated to place them upon a better footing then before—l allude more particularly to education, and to marriages, It is well known that when marriages take place between , Catholics and Protestants, the Catholic Clergy refuse their , ' sanction unless upon the express stipulation that Om children shall be bred up in the Roman Catholic faith... when I look at the preponderance which such a system is calculated to impart, I cannot hut regard it rie one of the most evil symptoms of the present timed. When, again I look at the demonstration of physical force, effected by assembling in one day, at different meetings, the whole Catholic population of the country, for the declared pur pose of petitioning us, but with the real purpose of making such a display of physical force as was calculated for the purposes of intimidation ; when I Fee these. meetings kept within the letter of the statute, by the advice of eta -. tote lawyers, I cannot but regard it as a monstrous alms, of the power which they do possess, and an unequivocat pledge of the purposes to which they would connect any additional privileges that Parliament might, in an evil hour, invest them with. I have heard much of the pet - pecettious of which the Catholics complain, but I feel not the slightest hesitation in affirming, that the real pereecut tion would he found to have proceeded from thorn and no: from us. We are told, too, that we must adopt, one of two courses, either admit Catholics to a full participatien in power, without securities and without restrictions, or that we must proceed to reenact the old penal code,— From this I beg to express my most unequivocal distent ; I think that a middle course is upen tea us, and that it is that alone which wisdom directs 11A to pursue. 1 conceive from this, Sir, that to persevere in the steady opposition to the demands of the Roman Catholics, is the only centric open to nae in the preseet balanced state of Pee liamenta.ry opinion, and the necessarily belanced state of the Govero inent ; and that I shall have best perfeerned my dury he having thus expressed my honest cenvietion, and by o o p es . ing the motion of the Hon. Earonet, for reinmeteg rite political disabilities under which Cetholics labour, and for placing them and Protestants on the same footing. Lord WILLIAM PAGET was determined to vote ie. f.vour of a cause, the suceees of which he honestly and con scientiously felt to he intimately connected with the pease of Ireland, and the well being of the Empire at large. Mr. M. FITZGERALD rose to explain, amid ihivierie6 of " Question, question, and spoke, spoke." The Rig',,; Hon. Member, after repeated edhrte to gain the atten.‘;er, of f hearing; the I 1! o z u hr s u e tt , h ea‘lt,farse lengthisu,frequent interruptions obligedsti c te e d ed t ain sito( e c : a .ad i a tioi ot i :3 : In g e t a l i ,:b r i:c r , t ; :it ; sequence impatience of Honoureble Meenhets. After u ehort reuse t h e Speaker named the Right Ron. Member " to ex- plain," e nd he again rose, and oleserved,—th a t lie was ex tremely sorry to be obliged to treepass on the time end patience of the House, while he entered into a brief exele nation of one or two points in re:l4ton to which he hitch been misunderstood bythe o i Ilan. Home Department. The Rt. Hon. Gent. appeared to thin': he had stated his belief of the existence of a combinative among the Roman Catholic population of Ireland, excited by the influence of the priesthood, What he said wals that the spiriteal influence of the Catho ti i ; i si c .)it t Priests ,groz ia l. under the political dominion a the Catholic leaders, and . that tie' entire population was organized to a mad is a point of a personal nature, uhich, as it afilte td . h t i t' honour as an individual, he felt most anxious to exphon .e the satithetten of the House. The Right lion. Serret r a t is.otantseetintheids d t i o sh r e e li t e a f in t o h ffi at ee he z ( b it e lr e . on F si i d ta i g re e d ra on which Mr. Pitt resigned o ffi ce was he had t - rejection of the Catholic Question. I\ CT Y L ' ord Cas l eader 4 his resignation to Lord Cornwallis ( thea, f n d t objecti v Intent to impute any blame c ts a tl u d s c e h by t I iey this e onolty' Catholics it n lr d . n :1 . 11 ; 0 1 a s:e l and his een :: i fi : l ; B l ' o " " t b : ; : il l :it_ t i t tl e e titl -a l ll resignation,il '3 i ler ti ) I I .eseatnintdr. might be e froth be attained, than by -h never rt, p g t e - h, o , 1 1 , jeal ; : it t‘.t ocl . !ell reloation R f et li E e ( l bi , c :ti er u s i tr eiW ei tt ) s is ae' le r ot . e i n i n° a k PEE ni n . \ I t ai iirC: : r ''ro l e t ° : , in tiai:'}titeeelll' reflected orlon,l !tin:ill time Isa l i i.l i fu l i(n" , e :- i nit t llot' r o ( fn .o r l if)3(ll‘tr , t' l 'i l t .'llot t n s • . ii rtiac. c rli a s °e r vs'(l e s:iii t i d ne r, nitc . rrgitie‘c3l t . the na i l l wrt'. rge e se%!daQ.h r n mO i t' theh: i ta a ‘l , 'a , e n i ii u f::t n 're e .s tl°i.' t ti e ‘ e''ta i n i bt - n'i'l i stred i i tr oi c o w ere renewed Gentlemen on the way in which it la , . been conductef! throughout its sobsequent progress, up to the present moment, he could not but entertain a hope o f its ultimate success. He should not say one word 474. more im r.l a , WhO T s r e °44 aite o n f ti L on ime l r t i a c t", " diately directed to the subject, was, no doubt, justified in discussing it in the copious manner he had that night don e . At all events he (Mr. R.) could readily conceive how muclt present case and :ee ied. more agreeable it was to do so, than, as a British Mitiietee, to deal with the necessities of the With respect to the Union it was not his intention to ield any thing to what had been already said. It might ; e desirable to know what were the views of Mr. Pitt and the Cabinet of the day in regard to the connection between that measure end Catholic Emancipation ; but it was still more important to learn what the Right lio n . Gentleman be T ei h , e Right Hoe, opposite and the present Cabinet were dispeeed to do with respect to the latter question. It afforded hint sincere formerly brought against the Roman Catholics, had net • ••ti pleasure to observe, that the charge of divided allegiance tide occasiou been repeated, Such a charge was made by iapon,if,ediittd,o,a,l;etuil.isi, and this a( 1, unfounded apprehension ""~