The Sun. — London, England, 1825-03-02 00:00:00

thought formerly necessary to inteodree. Because he did rot iseauree that there was any man in that H ouse at the pt (toy who required it to be proved that a man' s religious oponds ought not to subject him to politicaldisabil ities. But it was said that some contingent danger was anticipated from the course Be recommended to the House. Until h e was, told _ ed what that daffier was, he could not oppose the argumenth t fo c u o n r d the up r o a r' it. He should, therefore, now sit clow n, and ow opportunity of meeting them.—(ilea,,—'. The Paronet then moved the usual resolution, That the House should resolve itself into a Committee to consider the state of the laws relating to the Roma n Catholics, with a view to their amelioration." kir. CROKER seconded the m otion ; and obsterved that it referred entirely to the civil state of Catholics, whereas in his opinion it ought to embrace the condition of the Catholic Church, as well as of the Laity. He was confident there must objects before they could hope to see be a anion of thes e two e to Ireland. He therefore took that ass . permanent advantage rtun ity of stating that i f no one more competent than him -lel should undertake it, he pledged himself to bring under the oaosineration of the House the question of whether a provision snoold not be made for the Catholic Clergy. Mr. LESLIE FOSTER said that there was a very large poition of the Protestants of Ireland most anxious to find what toe Hon. garonet (Sir Francis Burdett) had stated, to be true, arel he,himself was one of them ; but they found it impossible to separate from this question their alarm at the danger which attended it. Ile remarked a great change of tone in those who ndoicated the measure. Formerly they admitted that the church of !retaind was to be held inviolate; but row—not certainly the 13art that night ; but there were Hon. Members of that House who had boldly declared contrary intentions, and there was now a notice to that effect pending. This doctrine had like wise appeared in more important quarters. They found the Roman Catholic Bishops in more than one of their charges de claring that there could be no settlement in Ireland as long as the Protestant Clergy remained, and calling die Church Establish ment a " gorgeous nuisance." The Hon. Member then alluded to a paper which had been disttibuted to Members, and which he described to be from the Edinburgh Review, stating that the Irish Protestant Church must be got rid of before the superstructure of the peace of Ireland could be raised. This subject would be avoided by those who differed with him in that House, but elsewhere they spoke out as plainly as the Catholic Association, or as plainly as the inhabitants of any parish in Ireland. On all sides he found that every means were being taken to disparage the Protestant Irish Church, and some of the charges used for that purpose he would not deny were true. But there was no Member in that House more candy than he was to take vigorous measures, if necessary, ot.o enforce the discharge of every duty to which the Protestant Clergy were liable. In the same manner the whole Protestant community of Ireland were traduced. As politicians they were called factions and Orangemen—as capitalists they were said to be without funds—as landlords, their estates were represented not to be of any consideration—and as a popula tion, they were entirely insignificant. He then expressed his disbelief of the statements which had been made in the douse and elsewhere, relative to the comparative amount of the Catholic and Protestant populations, and proceeded to azf tie, that - the disproportion was not great. As the House had heard soohnch argument.upon this point, pe•.hope it would have no objection to , hear a few - facts :—ln -the year '1672 the _first calculationowere made upon thiosubject, by Sir William Petty. ‘. it. appeared in his political -anatomy of Ireland, that the population consisted 31t0,000 Protestants ' and 400,000 Catholics. The next period at which they had any inforena. tion as to the amount of population, was upon the solemn oc casion of Lord Charlemont's answer to the Volunteers, when lie said " Never tell me 'that one million of Protestants can continue to hold two millions of Catholics in subjection." Lord Lharlemont was undoubtedly wring in his estimate, but this showed what was the common belief at the time. In 1788, the ist authoritative census was taken in Ireland by Mr. Bush, and he believed that a more accurate calculation had never been made. From this it appeared that the whole population amounted to 4,040,000 instead of 3,090,000, as stated by Lord Clawlernont. In 1821, thirty-seven years after this the last census was taken, and the population was found to have in creased 2,890,000. But this whole increase was immediately assumed to be on the part of the Catholics; and hence the assertion that they amounted to seven millions. The lion. _Member then proceeded to argue that the population had not increased since 1821. hut on the contrary, had been restricted within the amount of that period. There had been many asser tions on the other side of the House upon this point. Indeed, -for thelast four or five years they had all the assertion to them selves. The fact was, that his mouth was stopped by the want of documents, an obstacle which had no weight with Gentlemen on the other side. He was now, from his official occupations, enabled to speak from documents, and he should proceed to state to the house his views of Ow state of the population of Ireland, eountied upon them. Before he did so, he wished to .set himself right upon one point. Notwithstanding the fidelity with which the proceedings of that House were generally given to the public, there often happened to be cu - rious mistakes in the names of places. Upon a former occa eon he made a statement relative to the town of Aughnacloy, which was mistaken for Cloy-ne ; and the consequence had been that the inhabitants of the latter town had petitioned the House against him by name, and denied the statement he made, which was certainly not true of Cloyne, though perfectly so of Aughnacloy. He then proceeded with the statement of his calculations. In the county of Clare, which was the most Catholic County in Ireland, he estimated the propor tion of Roman Catholics to Protestants at something less , than thirty to one. The next Catholic County was that of Kerry, in one large barony of which, named Inveragh, there were 14,000 Catholics, and the proportion there was twenty seven Catholics to one Protestant. But there were some _ places in Kerry, where the Protestant population were e condensed—and particularly at Torbert, which rendered average upon the whole county about 18 or 19 to 1. In the most Protestant counties, such as Antrim and Down, the proportion was very different. In Antrim it was as three and two-thirds to one in favour of the Protestants; in Down, two arid a small fraction to one; and in Armagh, one and a half to one. The conclusion to which he came upon the state of the whole population was—that in the pro vince of Ulster there were 1,998,000 inhabitants, of whom 70,400 were Protestants. In Leinster the whole population was 1,767,000, of which 370,000 were Protestants. In Munster thellopuiation was 1,935,000, the Protestants about 200,000. --lo Connaught the population 1,104,000, the Protestants - 129,000. In the fOur provinces there were 1,860,000 Pro tesuints, and 4,900,000 Catholics; being as nearly as possible in the same proportion as the calculation of Sir William Petty. The number of Presbyterians was said to be 569,000; he believed they amounted to 620,000. He took the Protestant Seceders of all other persuasions at 45,000.—These he knew were truths which, in certain quarters, would be consi dered the most unpalateable truths that had been uttered for the last twenty years. lie must dctain the House while he said one word upon the politics of Europe. Ten years ago the sunporters of this question told them that there was no danger, because the Pope was a prisoner, and the Jesuits were put dawn. .But now the chair of St. ?eter was filled by a worthy successor of the Innocents and the Gregory s. Ile believed the ,• -pent Pope to be a greater zealot than had ever filled the papal chair for many years. Ile was told that the King of Fr.snce had an eye to Ireland. He believed it to be as much an.eye of relioion as of politics. The present reigning family of France had three objects, the third of which was the indem nification of the emigrants, the second the establishment of le gitimacy, but thenfirst , reas one in which their religious zeal, rose superior to their political ambition. Their grand object was to restore the Catholic Church to its former power. In support of this proposition the lion. Member alluded to the csench law of sacrilege, the encouragement of the Jesuits, *MI their being employed in the education of' youth ; and con tended that not hing could be more dangerous than the alliazice of politics and religion. This was an epoch, too, when the religious enthusiasm of all nations and all peo ple was excited• beyond all their other proceedings. The question before the House was, -whether under these circumstances they should abandon the -principles which had so long Leen their protection—for it must not be forgotten that the present. system was one of acentury'ogrowth. They had a choice of difficul ties, but that which they were now in lie believed to be the minor one. They had at present a principle to rest upon, and eye was the alliance of Church and State. If that were taken away he should have no principle upon which to stand. He might have in its place, treaties or compacts, but in them he „w e n no faith when they should come to new men and new li ens . For -these reasons he shot :d vote against the motion. Mr. Secretary CANNING then-rose, and, in a tone of voice so ni o n evinced considerable feehlenens and indisposition, spoke to the following effect :—Sir, my reason for witting at this early stage- of the debate, is my fear that were I longer to delay addressing, you, the state of mys health would preclude me from doing so at all ; and I am- anxious not to give a silent vote on the present occasion. Under these. circumstances, will imitate the moderation of the Hon. Baronet, who .has brought the subject tinder- the considerationsef the House. I will not enter into any c ontroversial points, or into any topics which might lead into an irritating discussion, at the close of ua ls e e v a e t r e e d i l r y e am which I may be unable to b e p resent; but I will confine in y self to the expression of the opini on which 1 n d h e a r y we h r ex pressed, and which I will again express, Vasco; this wa° subject may be submitte d to the considera tion of ' "diarnent or from whatever quarter the p ro p osition for t aking it' • consideration may proceed. I beg the Hon. Baronet will.ant • entertainr„Tfiselerstand my last observation, or su l ppose e tha e t e v e t h e in o w ee ords ee hi% thin slightest disrespect.certaitrliTyv in n ortJ i n e yeee j oe ts y e es' v li ett T T on % w c e o-v a e v r e ag e , re aj..tho L u n undoubtedly, Sir, if o any Q0 )1°11 ' 4111 advice had been asked on this subject (and I by no means complain that they were not se), I might not have thought the present the most favourable opportunity for the agitation of the subject. Ilaving said so much. I will not pur sue that topic further, lest I should be supposed to urge it as a kind of doubt of the propriety of the motion. The question is before us ; and being before us, it is for me to consider in what way to deal with it. Sir, I have no hesitation in saying that I am ready to deal with it as I have always dealt with it -1 ant ready to give my most cordial and conscientious support to the Hon. Baronet's proposition. Although, as I have already • observed, there are circumstances which make me consider the present as rather an unfavourable moment for the discussion of this question ; yet, personally, I am far from being sorry that it has been brought forward. Having so recently stood up in this House to lend my aid in suppressing the irregular at tempts which have been made to carry into effect, what I nevertheless consider a most desirable object, I am not sorry that an early opportunity is thus afforded me of showing that it was only to that which was superinduced on this important question the I objected ; and that the feeling which I ever entertained orl the main subject, is altogether un altered and unalterable.—( Hear, hear, hear !)—The principle on which, as it appears to me, the present proposition is worthy of the consideration of the House, is so plain and simple, that I can hardly imagine on what grounds it is possible to oppose it. I can easily understand, that any persons who are called upon to decide in favour of the Catholic question, may naturally enough require certain qualifications, look for the removal of certain inconveniences ; expect security against certain dangers (many of them, in my opinion, imaginary, some of them, perhaps, real.) But I cannot understand how the simple proposition, to inquire why human beings, all subjects of the same Sovereign, all inhabitants of the same soil, all living to gether in the same community, all mingling in the various kindly offices of life, all professing the common creed of Christianity, should be excluded from the enjoyment of equal rights and privileges—(Hear, hen!) The ones probandi lies on the other side ; on the side of those who contend that they ought to be so excluded. Sir, it appears to me that the state in which we stand was justly described by my lion. Friend, the Member for Louth (for whom I entertain the greatest re spect), when he declared that the present system was a century old. At least that was a fact, not an argument. But, good God—Sir, what is a century in religion ? If the system he only a century old, then what we propose to do is not a change, but a restoration. What I contend is this, that in the present, beyond all other questions, to remain where we are, is to alter ; to make a change, is to return to what we were. fly this sim ple statement, I exclude from .opposition to me all the enemies of innovation ; I press into my service all the topics which are familiar to them, unless they can chew that the change, however originally necessary .(ant that original necessity 1 do not deny), has become so inveterate—that the continuation of its original necessity had fixed it so irrevocably that we can not go back without the abdication of every principle which it is our duty to maintain. Sir, I feel myself niuch too weak to follow my Hon. Friend, but there were one or two things in it which I cannot quite pass over. illy Hon. Friend said that there was nothing so hostile to the peace of mankind as the alliance of re ligion and politics. This was the subject which occupied the first half of my Honourable Friend's Speech ; but how did he conclude ? By a laboured eulogium on Church and State.— (Hear, hear ! )—1 cannot imagine how it is that it never occurs to my Honourable Friend, on the many occasions on which he is called to utter those mystic words at more convivial moments than the present, to ask himself if Church and State is not a re ligious and political alliance ?—(Hear, hear ! and laughter.) In one of my Honourable Friend's opinions I certainly do agree with hint. Ido think that all such alliances of religion and politics as may lead to a divergence of sentiment, and a doubt fulness of allegiance eminently objectionable. And here again 1 will look for an illustration of that opinion in my Honourable Friend's own statement. My Honourable Friend tells us, and tells us truly, that there never was a period of the world in which the feelings of religious zeal were so paramount over feelings of political ambition, especielly among the Governments of the Continent. In the accuracy of that statement I perfectly agree. But what is my in ference front it? Mankind, sir, are at present divided into two classes, by distinct lines of demarcation :—the line between the Protestant Church anti the Catholic Church, and the line between British and Foreign influence. Let us efface the line which, in this Empire, separates the Protestant from the Ca tholic Church ; and by so doing let us strengthen the other line of division between British and Foreign influence—( Loud cries of Hear, hear to —These, Sir, are the principles on which I have always advocated the Catholic cause ; these are the principles ou which I will always continue to advocate it. It must be quite unnecessary for me to say any thing to my lion. Friend and to those lion. Members who think with him on the subject of their fears for the security of the Protestant establish ment, I lately took occasion inmy place in this House to declare anti to give a solemn pledge, that I. would go as far as any man in support of that establishment. That declaration and pledge I now repeat. Nay, more ; I am ready to declare, that, Willy reason were convinced that we must stand as we are, for that, 'by proceeding we should risk that Establishment, hich is so interwoven with our happy Constitution, I would, at the hazard of being charged with inconsistency, contend against the Ho nourable Baronet's proposition. But it is because my reason is convinced of the contrary, that the Honourable Baronet's proposition receives my most cordial concurrence I would have this country open its breast, and receive into its bosom those who not only live in its allegiance, but support its go vernment. To conclude, I give my cordial support to the mo tion, conceiving myself in -no degree pledged to the details of any measure that may be founded on it, but conceiving myself pledged not to sacrifice to that object any point which in my conscience i may believe not only hostile, hut dangerous to the Protestant Constitution.—[The Right Hon. Gentleman was much applauded at the conclusion of his speech ; shortly after which he left the House, apparently overcome by indispoeition.l The SOLICITOR-GENERAL thought, that if consistency of opinion was entitled to the attention of the House he had some claim on their indulgence, and if there was any subject on which he could give an impartial opinion it was the present. lie should therefore state briefly his reasons for giving a de. cided negative to the motion of the Hon. Baronet, which were chiefly founded Constitutional principles. His Hon. Friend (i'dr. Foster), said that the present time was inconvenient to dis cuss the subject, but be thought it was still more—it was impro per. If the House adopted the proposition of the lion. Baronet, it would appear to yield to menace.—( Ilear!)—lt would be said that through fear on the very Tuesday after suppressing the Catholic Association, Catholic Emancipation was granted. On that ground, as an independent Member of Parliament, lie should oppose the Motion. An lion. Gentleman on the other side of House, (Mr. C. Hutchinson) had expressly declared, that in a Parliamentary sense, he should terrify the House into these concessions. Atter suck arguments openly avowed, lie put it to Hon. Gentlemen whether, if Emancipation were car ried, it would nut be considered die result of menace and inti midation. lie should now state more particularly why be would not agree to the motion of the lion. Baronet. lie was told if these claims were granted, the Catholics would be satis fied ; but, on the contrary, lie believed if one privilege were granted, it would only be made a stepping stone to the acquire ment of further. His Right Hon. Friend the Attorney-General for Ireland, had for some years laid it down that, the Elective Franchise was political power, and that only an extension of the principle was then required. This to him was the difficulty. He saw no certain limits when concession was to stop, and therefore there was no chance of obtaining that peace anti har mony which seemed to be the objects of those who supported the measure. Now seats in that House, in the other House, and en the'Bench were sought, but bye and bye when those Privi leges were granted to the laity, the Church would put in Its claim and seek similar advancement in the State. The Catholic Association had voted that a Petition respecting Tittles should be entrusted to the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, and why ? Because, to use the words of that Body, the Hon. Gentleman had taken the Church under his especial care. But how had he taken it into his holy keeping ? By moving twenty or thirty —no, six or seven.—(A laugh.)—Resolutions the object of which was to slice and slash and share the pro perty of the Church as if it were one of the new floating companies. He should next advert to the power of the Priesthood in Ireland. Among the last accounts from that country, it appeared that in Kilkenny, a Priest, of the name of Magee, told the people that if Parliament.put down the Association, he should still collect the rent ; tht his congre gation Should advance the rent on the altar as the price of their redemption. Another reason why he should object to go into a Committee was, that on all former occasions it was found im possible, even by tile friends of Emancipation, to propose it on terms acceptable to the Catholic Clergy. The lion. Mem ber here referred to the opposition which was given to the Veto, and other similar provisions at different times. The Priests, in short, exercised not a spiritual, but a citll power over the people. With the Catholic Laity he (the Solidi tor.General) could agree, because they ha , : no interest se_ parate from that of the State {Hear, had an ,opposite interest. .In this country, Parliament, in bear !)—but the Priests the reign of Charles the First abolished the power even of the Protestant Clergy to coerce the people, and confirmed the,prix ciole afterwards in the reign of,,Cha;les the Second. But the Catholic Clergy still retained that power, and that was a main objection to the granting of Einanciation. The present mea sure, in short, would not place the Catholics on an equality with the Protestants, but on a superior foo Hon. Friend, who lie regretted to-say had been ged His R to leave ight' bpd the House (Mr. Secretary Canning), objected that any refe rence should be made to the reign of William 111. But they were obliged to go back to that period, to form a. correct judg ment on e xperience. Upon flise grounds he. should give his firm opposition to the motion. had never delivered his sentiments on the M s r u . 4e . subject of tiltleTtjatic question. since the year 1812, when he submitted his proposition to Parliament on the death of Mr. Perceval. lie, therefore, did not thing that as the Representative of a large county, he ought to be longer silent. Ile felt it to be his duty to proclaim his opinion, that there never would be peace in the empire, until the question on which they were then debating was conceded.—(Cheers.)---Th e Learned Solicitor- General had argued, that if the Parliament were to continue making concessions, it would not know where to stop--it ought not to stop until it had done justice. It was the business of Par liament to frame laws, and obedience to them was the duty of the Catholic in common with the rest of the King's subjects : he considered the present as the fittest time for concession, and that no better opportunity could occur ; he was inclined to grant every thing to the Catholics, with the exception of seats in Parliament. As to the fears that the Learned Member for Oxford (the Solicitor-General) had expressed relative to the designs of the Catholic Clergy, he thought they were vain and idle. It was an indisputable tact, that since the death of Mr. Perceval no Government had ever been formed, no Govern ment could be formed, in which all the Members of it could concur in their views with regard to that question. From that moment he looked upon the Catholic Question as carried—for carried it must be, although it might be postponed for one or two years.—( Hear, head)--The Honourable Member for Lowth (Mr. L. Foster) had talked of the danger of granting the prayer of the Catholics ; but he (Mr. S. IVortley) would beg of the House to consider the danger of withholding it. Ile would ask, whether the delay was not partly the cause of the danger to which the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. L. Foster) alluded. At the same time that he would concede this to the Catholics he would take care that the Protestant Church should he as firmly established as ever. If they persisted in refusal they would endanger the Church much more than they could by concession. Ile would not detain the House much longer; but he thought it right, upon this occasion, to express the opinion he felt ; and more particularly as there were many of those who sent him there that differed with hint in opinion on this subject. It could not escaobservation that a gr ea t c hange had taken e place in the public mind, and a change, as it appeared to him, favourable to this question. If a hostile feeling existed gene rally against it, how were they to account for the apparent apathy that prevailed. No attempt was made to get up petitions against the Claims of the Catholics as had been the case upon former occasions. This was a sufficient proof of the change to which he before adverted, and he hailed it as a great blessing. What he wished was to frame a law that would be equally binding to Protestants and Catholics.—(Cheers.) Mr. I3ANKES differed with the Hon. Member who had just sat down with respect to the change of public opinion. The learned body which he represented had not changed their opinion. —( Hear, hear, and a laugh.)—A petition was signed by that learned body, which was convened by the Vice-Chan cellor (himself a layman), and unanimously agreed to. This petition against the claims of the Catholics was on its way to the House. Ile did not know by what charm the change in public opinion, adverted to by the last speaker, could have been achieved, unless it was by a sly miracle of Piince Hohen lohe. With regard to the danger which is likely to arise from granting these claims, he confessed his fears were confined to the Irish Church Establishment. Systematic attacks had been made in that House, and cheered in a manner which he could not approve. The Catholics distinctly said, that the concession of this question would not satisfy them. Mr. O'Connell had distinctly stated that the Catholics had ulterior objects. Mr. PLUNKETT said, he should not trespass at any length on the indulgence of the House. He was strongly disposed to give a silent vote, and but for the peculiar circum stances in which he was placed, should have adopted that course. When last he had the honour of addressing the House on this subject, he had also the honour of performing a similar duty to that which now devolved on the Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir F. Burdett). He trusted, however, that neither the lion. Baronet, nor any one who heard him would suppose that his feelings would he warped by the accidental circumstance al ludeeto. He was anxious, indeed, to bear testimony to the temperate and discreet, as well as able manner in which the Honourable Baronet had introduced the question that evening, and he should in the few words he had to offer endeavour to follow his example. With respect to the time at which the measure was proposed, altliqugh he felt that on this irig himself', but others. point there would always be difficultiell to ceratend against. yet they did not arise from feelings ritektd With a deep and intense sense of the importance of the subject to his own country and to Europe, he should not consider any time too early, nor any time suc h as not to call forth his most anxious support. Ilis lion. and Learned Friend had however ' objected to the time, but he s hould be glad to know at what time he would be disposed to vote for the Catholic concessions. ([Tear !) When the water was s mooth—when the surface of af fairs waa unrudied—non pieta vioveri — or when turbulence anti rocking winds prevailed,- h e a pprehended would seem equally unpropitious to his Hon. and Learned Friend for admitting the Catholics to the Constitution. Ile must concur however with his Hon. and eloquent Friend, the Member for Yorkshire -UM r. Stuart Wortley), who had delivered such a sincere and affecting' speech—one more calculated than any he had ever heard to reach the heart and understanding of the public, that he thought there was a peculiar grace and fitness in bringing forward. the motion at the preaent time. After having adopted a mea sure calculated to irritate the feelings of the Catholics, their friends who joined iu that proceeding were naturally glad of an opportunity to shew that their opinions on the general question had notwithstanding undergone no change. He also felt a degree of confidence on this occasion which he had not be fore experienced—for during the last three or tour years he wae never able to meet any person in England who could say that lie believed Emancipation would not one day he carried.— There were also those who had opposed the measure, and who front the temper, talent, and liberality which distinguished their oppfaition, were its most alarming enemies, but who had more than once declared, that it' they believed it would impart tranquillity to Ireland, they should support it. Now, he did not think that persons who spoke so felt in their hearts that Catholic Emancipation was inconsistent with the Constitution-. —(lleer !)—To his own heart the measure was as dear as it could be to any one's. But, added he, "so help me God, I • would resist it with all the energy I posses, if I thought it por tended danger to the Protestant Establishments of the United Kingdom." The Hon . and Learned Gentleman then proceeded to shew that in the ltill introduced by him in 1821, as well as in those prepared by Mr. Grattan, the • permanent inviolability of the Protestant Church of Ireland was made a fundamental basis of legislation. Ills Hon. and Learned Friend (the Solicitor-Ge neral), had set out by declaring that he would discuss the con stitutional principles, but for the most part argued it on acci dental circumstances arising out of the Catholic Association. This claim on the part of the Roman Catholics of Ireland was a claim to be members of a free representative Government : to be admitted to those institutions -which belonged to every member of it. Ile considered them entitled to those natural rights, but admitted the granting of those rights might be con trollied. Necessi y however ought to be clearly proved for such controuL It appeared to the Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman, that individuals in a free State had the same degree of right to the priviliges of the constitution that they had to per ,sonal liberty. Both rights were liable to be defeated by the necessity or expediency of affording protection to the State. The Right Honourable and Learned Gentlamen adverted to the dangers which threatened Church and State at the Refor mation. The Church of Rome had shewn a disposition to in terfere with, and controul the religion of the State. They laid I claim to benefices, the right of deposing time Monarch himself, and of releasing his subjects from their allegiance. The ! Legislature by the Act of Uniformity secured the religion of 1 the State. All the dangers of that (lay were at an end. The fears of the Rethrmation were set at rest. When James the' Second came to the Throne, he set the laws at defiance ; the Parliament and the people then throve him from the throne I and made the Church Government -inviolably Protestant. The last danger was the claim of the Pretender, but that was sur mounted. 1793 they found the people of Ireland so sunk and restricted, in consequence of their attachment to their religious faith, that it was necessary to resort to lenient mea sures, which made the reign of his late Majesty the brightest' part _ lsytem to of a le s n i i t t t y la t t l i u o r n in i g n forty w ci t: years had raised the u t o he r ß ho oisutiary. l n Catholic s they ought to look up to a ll t h e pr i v i leges o f t h e C onst i tut i on . —they were good and loyal subjects, entitled to participate' in the benefits of the Constitution. Six, or four millions of his Majesty's subjectse-he would take either number, came year Lifter year to chim the privilege of sharing in the' benefits of the Constitution, and year after year they were re fused that be-on. They had been thus •dieappointed, and this - country had to contend with the danger which might arisefeam their dissatisfaction. The Honourable Member for Louth had said they should not .look at present danger, but consider the danger - which led to the -restrictive laws. Ile (Mn Plunkett) was of opinion present danger only ought to be regarded. Ti me goes forward said time Right Honourab le and Learned G ent l eman. Ile never sleeps—he never s peaks bat is goin g o n c h ang i ng human affairs, and it is wisd om to watch imis progress.; all to ar res t his course, but to adapt the institutions of the s t ate - to his chanees.--( Hear !) eo as to make varied forms meet the var i e d f orms w hi c h time hand of time has made. we do.this, history to us is nothing more than an old alma ' What is this notion of danger of the present time , t pass CUrra.lt.-- 'lf we do not do this we fall into danger. Without neck, and experience base coin, which cannot dm not prevent this desired change ? He did: not say there mit, meet t the legislate to • be serious dangersif the House did not • clamour wishes of the petitioners. If they came tonhat house c with ous, lie should .despise their clamours. If force, he would meet their force, but if they which is to anmoearmour to put of right, to share in the Constitution, he had only call tare his 'on against them.---(Hear, hear !)—lle could? y they with a claim h re was something in —He was told they could not do this. '-rn e ‘ lmissiOn to high office, friends and co-supporters of the Constitution in p . eace war. the (onatitutiou which forbade thP of any but members of the Church of England. Was the fact so ? Did not Dissenters sit in Parliament ? I,Vas it not known that the scale were held by a Dissenter ? Prejudice only sanctioned these objections. Dean Swift spoke of the repeal of the Test Laws in Ireland with horror. He was persuaded such a measure would overthrow the Protestant Establish ment; yet the Test Laws were repealed forty years ago, and since that time the Dissenters in Ireland had been decreas ing. It was said they might admit the Roman Catholics to civil rights, but it was another thing to admit them to po litical power. Was the elective franchise political power ? Was the station of Magistrate political power' These might be civil rights; and lie might ask what part of the Con stitution laid down a line between civil rights and political power ? Ile knew of no such thing. It was a mockery to say men had Constitutional rights whilst they were shut out from the must valuable privileges of the Constitution. The right of holding offices was considered by an lion. Friend a mere ba gatelle, and he would like to hear from that lion. Friend how he would like to be in the situation of the Roman Catholics. The House would have to decide whether any class of men ought to be repreeented without their walls. If shut out of Parliament the Roman Catholics must go to some illegal and unconstitutional remedy. The only legitimate way to proceed was to take the Roman Catholics into the pale of the Con stitution. The cure for the evil complained of was, to leave things as they are ' and depend upon making proselytes. The Ministers of the Church of England, by Christian charity, had done meta to gain proselytes, and he did not say that time might not unite the two Churches, but the present danger was urgent. So long as these persons were denied the privilege, of the Constitution, much was to be feared. lie should take the liberty of stating what he thought ought to be done. First, to take away all grounds of complaint, he would put all parties Clergy and Laity, on the same footing. Secondly, he would make provision for the Roman Catholic Clergy. He was inclined to think the Hierarchy of Ireland was in danger of being pulled down, but not superseded. He hoped that would never happen ; but if the Protestant Hierarchy were pulled down, and the Church property was offered to the Ca tholic Clergy they would not accept it.—(Expressions of doubt and dissent.)— The people of Ireland would never consent to have the property of the country given to Priests. The Right Honourable and Learned Gentleman expressed a hope that the Church of Ireland might be held inviolate, and that the House would say to the Roman Catholics, we will not deal with your complaints unless the Church is secured. His be lief was, that the alarms of this country was not serious. The Roman Catholics were tranquil and loyal. They remained firm to the Constitution ; and if the Government of France were to speculate upon invading Ireland an receiving aid from the Roman Catholics, they would deceive themselves. If the time should ever come for meeting the invasion, they would rally round the State, and spew their loyalty and affection for the House of Brunswick. Mr. Secretary PEEL said, notwithstanding the House had been occupied so long with this question, he felt he had spe, cial claims on its indulgence for a short time, which, lie would ask to elicit truth from the free expression of opinion.— The House would, doubtless, enable him to state the ground on which he differed from the honourable Baronet. He should attempt to follow the very able, temperate, and con stitutional speech of the Honourable Baronet. The Right Honourable Secretary conceived that the lion, Baronet had placed the question on three grounds—first, the Treaty of Limerick; secondly, Natural Right ; and thirdly, Prudence and Policy. On the first point he should say, if the Ilemourable Baronet, the Member for Westminster, had placed his reliance on any claim the Romen Catholics of Ireland had upon the face of a treaty between them and the Crown, he should have been disposed to pay the greatest attention to that treaty. The Honourable Baronet had elluded to the treaty of Lime rick, and he ( Mr. Secretary Peel) was prepared to deny that any claim of the Roman Catholics could rest on the treaty of Limerick. It was for the House to dechte whether in with holding the claims of the Roman Catholics, they denied any rights which the makers of that treaty had promised to grant. Be might ask .the Honourable Baronet whether there had been any infringement of the Treaty to which the Honour able Baronet alluded. With respect to the restrictive tette, he thought several Honourable Members bad formed a very harsh opinion. These laws ought to be considered acts of :re taliation. The proceedings of the Reman Catholics ought to he considered. 'The Roman Catholics were secured by the Treaty of Limerick ,from any disturbance on account of their religion. .A Bill in the reign of Queen Anne was brought in, to debar persons from holding .property . :unless they took the oeth of allegiance. Sir Toby Butler, In his argument against the clauses of that 11111, did not say it was unfair to deprive the RomionCetholics of property unless they took the oath of alle giance. 'Chic whole of his argument went to shew that the 11W was unjust -to "Dissenters.. Be had been Secretary to James the Second, and he did not claim finethe Roman Catholics any rightio hold offices. the did not consider them entitled to hold offices. elf so, there was.an *fewer to he claim of right under the Treaty of ,Limeriek. 'With respect to th e secon d question., namely, natural eight, sit involved a constitutional question. Ilis Right Honourable and Learned Friend said they had no more right to exclude a min from holding civil offices than from holding his property. At the same time his Right lion. Friend admitted that in cases of danger to the State a deviation .from that doctrine enighebe good.' lie never could think a man had the same-right to hold eivil . office that he had to hold property. lie did not think that right had ever been urged in - that House .until very lately. It could not have existed in early thrice. Before the Reformation there was unanimity in religion. .Since the Reformation the Oath of Supremacy 'had been taken, and as Roman Catholics had refused to take that oath there was an answer to all claims for office. It was said the lexcluding laws were of late date. He denied that position. They had existed since the Reformation. The right on .the part of the Roman Catholics to hold civil offices had never been admitted under any laws. It was held upon the discussion of the Bill to disqualify . persons from holding places of profit, that the question relating to holding places of trust, rested with the Legislature. A conference on points in the Bill was managed by Bishop Burnet, Lord Somers, and others who were men of high character. If the right to hold office had been consi dered equal to the right to hold .property, would the Lords have introduced a clause in the Scotch Act of Union, which excluded the Roman Catholics from office ? If they looked into debates on the subject of the Oath of Supremacy, it would appear that Lord Camden and Lord Chatham held the law on that subject to be sacred. In 17a0, when the repeal of the Test laws was agitated, Mr. Burke dissented on the occasion, on the ground of danger from the Unitarians ; but all the doctrines in sup lort of the test and corporation acts must be wrong if his Right ion. Friend was right, when he held that the Roman Catho lics had a right to hold offices. He (Mr. Secretary Peel) denied they had a right to fill offices. The argument of Mr. Pitt against the Test Laws was, that they had a tendency to abridge the Royal Prerogative. If all the disqualifying laws were to give way for Roman Catholics, what right could they have to deny a person a seat in that House because he had not 3001. a-year ? He should always hold that the State had a .right to exclude Roman Catholics from places of trust, if necessity required it. He did not wish, as his Right lie. nourable and Learned Friend said, to make history an old almaneek, and experience base coin, He wished to look back on history and profit by it. His wish was not to exclude them from those benefits which the Constitution affiarded.— -the length of saying all the laws on the Statute Bo ok ought Thetil e I;granting Burke, Roman a C I Claims et w i a o s m th e n s u e b j i e t c i ( t i , : leo t lege oe to be retained for ever ; but if laws were passed three hundred yeers since to guard the Constitution against danger, they ought not to he repealed unless they were satisfied all danger had ceased. The Right lion. Secretary then discussed the question of prudence and policy. What was the object of the Motion? It was to give power to those who had been long ex cluded from the enjoyment of power. The Hon. Baronet could ' not deny that there was danger in conceding that proposition. Every subject ought to be eligible to office, but the law called for proper qualification. It was better ie t e o ( r : ii e on f u u b s i e rtee a dla t n i sa c v. k h e e t tli t ite o rw tl a l a e s constitution, than suffer the bearer, when he arrived at the por hsn:whould do any great good. He por tal of the consti7ttiiioen,ntaotiloinay. e t l li f e b t y lo a o n r y sh n u le t a a n g l ai l n i st him by the ! supreme head o _ .. e could quiet Ireland, he should be ready even to give up some of the b p u re t va ll i i outworks doubted whether the removal of civil disabilities would destroy .0 0 f f t t h il esi e de CO isdoi n rst s al t be i r t i u sli t t if e animosities and . rather remarkable that in Ulster, where a large number of' removal. Protestants and Roman Catholics were to be found, they agr eed better than in other parts of Ireland. I n t h e county to which he alluded, the Insurrection Act had never been in f o rce. If the disabilities were removed, and t h e Roman Ca tholics were allowed to hold offices, the Right Honourable Secretary, doubted much whether they would be td._ There would be a greater dissatisfaction arising from sa '3e having offices withheld. When Roman Catholics were in that House who could say they were not at liberty to pursue any objects they might consider beneficial to the .country. The removal of Roman Catholic property might be conside r ed unjust ; and what security would the ouse have against the return of all the dangers arising from Roman Catholic Government. — If sincere in their faith, , they would wish to give ' • power ahem to their Church. When a man came into Parliament with out restriction, eloquent, and the leader of a party, who could say he had not the right 7 to follo w his own object . (Hear, hear, hear :!)--whether it be to repeal the wisest laws , or restore the supremacy o f t h e Church of Rome. When the question was an admission to power he had a right in the exercise of a fair constitutional ealousy to look at the tenets of a man's religion. It was curious j that up to the pre sent moment they had heard ' • .. securities nothing about those Which were formerly deemed so essential a part of this mea sure. Were they content to take them ulthout securities, contrary to the practice of every State in Europe ? Let them look at the state of the Catholic Priesthood of Ireland, and they would see the same prelates, deacons, and titles claiming apostolic descent, and ordination as they had ever seen. And could it be supposed, that after the decree of this measure this equality would cease ? He was not afraid of the Pope, hut of that internal party in the State to whom power would be given, and who were sure to be adverse to the existing religion. Ile thought the Irish church would bet. ter have consulted its dignity had it abstained from some of those publications which it had latterly put forth. He alluded to those which had reference to Prince Hohenlohe especially. Those Gentlemen, who had been ready to burst with laughter when the name of this individual had been men tioned before in the debate, ought to know the estimation its which he was held in Ireland. The Right Hon. Gentleman then animadverted upon a paper put forth by Dr. Doyle, cons. mending and detailing the miracles of Prince Hohenlohe. One of these was the case of the Princes Schwartzenberg who had been confined to her bed from her eighth to her 17th year, and spent 80,000 florins in medical advice, who was made to walk by Hohenlohe. At Hanaburgh he had made two sisters quit their bed under similar circumstances, and caused a Counsellor who had long kept his bed to see his benefactor to the door from a third floor. A Gentleman also was cured of the gout whilst sitting in his carriage.—(Laughter.)—All this was detailed in the Address of Dr. Doyle to the Irish. The argument founded upon these statements was, that the Roman Catholic was the. only true Church, and would alone stand. But this was not all. In 1824 they had a letter from the Pope levelled agaius& Bible Societies, and desiring the Catholics to expect relief from some temporal Prince. He was of opinion with Dr. , Doyle, that Catholic Emancipation would not allay religious fervour, and that a struggle for preference would be the con• sequence of such a measure. Dr. Doyle said it would opea a passage to ulterior measures, and he should like to know what those measures were. " Still to new heights their restless wishes tow'r, Claim leads to claim, and power advances power." His (Mr. Secretary Peel's) opposition to this question had always been uniform. He wished to give the Catholics every assistance towards the possession of liberty and property. He, wished also to see all sources of irritation between them and the Protestants subside. But he thought it advisable on their own accounts that they should be excluded from Par'bunco, and the judicial bench. On this point he could not defer to authority, unless he was convinced by argument. He had listened, however, but his mind was not convinced, his hostility, to this measure was not directed to the form or time it, bat to the principle of it.---(Hear, hear, hear !) Mr. BROUGHAM said, he would not long trespass on the' House, because of the arguments brought forward that night' . in support of his Hon. Friend's motion, arguments that were, unanswered, because unanswerable. He alluded to the speech of the Attorney-General for Ireland, and that of the Secretary' for Foreign Affairs, and he would say of the speech of that Right lion. Gentleman the more readily, because lie was ab sent, that in so short a speech he never saw so many unan swerable arguments —never saw more force or power of con densation than was exhibited in that short address. In conse quence therefore of these speeches, and the effect that could not fail to be produced by them, as well because he had - a, partial petition to present in a few days, praying for admission into Parliament but he confidently expected that the result of that night, proceedings would preclude the necessity of bringing forward the Petition at all. He would, therefore, come at once to the treaty of Limerick, and to that part ofthe Right lion. Gents.. speech that related to it ; and though an allusion to at treaty had been made by his Hon. Friend, and though it was relevant' to the question, still he was ready to give it up and argue the, question without it ; but let no man doubt its relevancy when it contained these words, that " the Catholics of Ireland should enjoy the same privileges and liberty of conscience as during the reign of Charles the Second." The Honourable Gen tleman proceeded to read an extract from the posthumous works of Mr. Edmund Burke, showing the opinion of that gentleman as to the injustice of the penal laws. He then replied to the distinction drawn by the Secretary for the Home Department between natural rights and the civil rights of property. Ile contended that the distinction was not founded on fact, and that the deprivation of natural right and right of property differed only in a degree ; that one was merely a greater 'hardship than the other. The Hon. Gentleman went on to say that the granting to Catholics the elective franchise, anti not allowing them to be elected, was a gross inconsistency, it gave them the liberty to choose, but allowed them not to elect the man of their choice. Suppose the Tories, who now were in power, after being out of it for 60 years before, said to the Whigs, you have the elective franchise, but must not elect a liThig to represent you ; these Whigs maintain some damnable here sies : they say that 't power is held by the Monarch in trust foe the people'—a doctrine that must lead to revolution and anar chy."—(A laugh.)—Suppose they should say that s in their horror of seeing those benches filled with persons whose creed was so teborninably unconstitutional (great laughter); or he would put a case to the Hon. Members for Cambridge and Oxford ; sup pose the power to elect two Members was given to these Uni versities, but that it was said to them, you must elect no one of your own body, they are a set of narrow-minded bigots, to whom experience is swindling and knowledge is pedantry— (Cheers.)—lf you choose you may go to St. Andrew's for a re presentative, or you may go to Aberdeen ; you may there find a useful and clever man—(Cheers.)—The Hon. and Learned Gentleman defended the Catholics from the charge made against them, of never being satisfied with what they received, and re futed the argument of the Honourable Member fur Lowth (Vt. Leslie Foster), namely, that the Catholics were so numerous as to threaten the safety of the Protestants. Now, that argue ment cut both ways ; for, if there be danger, and he did nos deny it, why not provide a remedy for it ? (Cheers.) Were they to do nothing but submit; were they to grope their way in the dark ; were they to shut their eyes and fold their hands to sleep ? Although that House had been open for years to Dis senters, yet he believed there were not more than five or ei% altogether returned ; and they had no examples of any propo• sition favourable to that body having ever been Submitted g° their notice by any one of those Members. He ridiculed the Right Hon. Secretary's allusions to Prince Hohenlohe, and as serted, that if lie had wished to find an antidote to the dangers that Hon. Gentlemen sought to deduce from the pamphlet, he would have found them in the pamphlet itself. He described the denunciation of Leo XII. against Bible Societies as more nearly approaching the sentiments of some College. The HOU- Secretary represented that he was himself aware, `and - elk pressed it to be his opinion, that the Rt. Hon. Secretary woad not find the praise of any Bible unaccompanied by proper come ments of the church, a very acceptable theme, even from h . lips, in these colleges. Ile denied that any danger cou l d accrue from the appointment of Catholics to high offices in the State. They had a Lord Chancellor a Presbyterian, yet no one complained of his method of bestowing church patronage they had a Prime Minister a Socinian, and many others pre' feeling heresies equally damnable in the eyes of the Church ; yet he defied any one, from the days of the Duke of Grafton to the present hour to say, that the Established Church had ever been in danger from their holding such situations. He admitted the great power of' the Heads of the Association, but lie contended that the way to render that power constitutional ly effective, would be to give those whose opinions clothed them with the power, the satisfaction of seeing their just claims allowed, by giving them seats in that House.—(Hear, hear I) The Attorney-General had said he might give his consent si) their prayer, but he would not be menaced; this was puerile. A legislator was not to talk of personal feeling ; he was a nose tee for the benefit of the public, and must be governed in his actions by just and reasonable apprehensions of alarm and dan ger from a perseverance in oppressive or obnoxious courses or . policy. The Honourable Gentleman concluded a speech of great argument and eloquence, which our limits preclude al from even generally compressing, by imploring the House to assent to the motion before it; as the only way to make tlue measures they had adopted either safe or prudent. After a few words from Mr. C. FORBES, Sir F. BURDETT replied. He would not trespass on the attention of the House after every thing had been said that the weight of argument could supply to enforce the measure he brought before the House. The only evils which had been apprehended from granting the question were unreal, whereas the benefits were certain and substantial. Ile would xecal to the attention of the House that Ireland at present was fiat' rounded with danger—it was a burthen to us in peace as well as war. The admission of a few Roman Catholics would at the utmost be the inconvenience of some few Gentlemen finding their way into Parliament ; perhaps a few Peers procuring seats in Parliament, and the exercise of the Royal Prero- Oative of appointing Members of that persuasion to the High ffices of State, should he think proper. Whilst the House was sensible that this was the only danger, it' he might so term it, to be apprehended front acquiescence to this measures whereas they conld not shut their eyes to the dangers that den,' and hourly arose and thickened upon them for an adherence t° to the present bad system of policy adopted and so unnecessarily" protracted towards Ireland. The gallery was then cleared 4 )t a division, and cries of " Question, question." The House then divided. The numbers were— For the Motion - - 247 Against it . 234 Majority in favour of th e - Motion - —I3 . The announcement of the Majority was receiVed , wieh loud cheers. On our return to the gallery we found the House in Cow' mittee.—The followin Resolutions were read and agreed W 9 and the Bill ordered tote brought in. " 1. That it appears to this Committee, that by ecrtain,Act e; passed in the Parliaments of Great Britain and Ireland sespg" tively, certain Declarations and Affinnatips are required to bit i