The Sun. — London, England, 1827-03-07 00:00:00

Catholic Question vindicate the right of the Priests to the exercise of their spiritual authority now and forbid it afterwards ? My Right Hon. Friend says, that they have only acted within the legi timate bounds of tbeir province, in exciting their' flocks to what he calls deeds of patriotism. He is the judge at present, and he styles it patriotism, beca he Prieats have required the voters to support those candidates vl'ho are friendly to the measuresof which he is the advocate.—(Cheers.)—But the Priest on another occa sion would claim to judge for himself what is patriotism, and he would retort upon my Right Hon. Friend, that he was acting upon the same spiritual authority as before, and which he, therefore, could not deny. Can any Hon. Member for a moment pretend that there is any analogy between the exercise of the spi ritual authority of the Roman Catholic Priests and any influence which the Protestants may have exercised—(Cheers ?)—I have no wish to encourage the interference of Clergymen in electioneer ing scene", but I am satisfied that no instance can he found among the Protestant Clergy, in any county in Ireland or England, com parable to the excesses of the Roman Catholic Priests. If any Protestant Clergyman had advised the tenantry in his neighbour hood to fly in the face of their landlord, and on the ground of re ligious opinions, had appealed to them as a matter of duty to vote against him, I ask, would there have been any end to the just denunciations that we should have heard in this House? Yet this practice has prevailed in Ireland to an ex tent utterly unjustifiable—(Cheers.)—But let us look at the whole question with openness and fairness. Let us see whether the Roman Catholic Prelates have deserved the high eulogium be stowed upon them by my Right Hon. Friend. I have a great respect for their office. I do not wish to enter too minutely into their conduct and professions. But when my Right Honourable Friend invited the House to read their petition at length, on ac count of the influence which, he says, it ought to exercise upon us, and after the lavish eulogies he has pronounced upon them. it becomes us to ascertain whether they are entitled to all the confidence he claims for them. He has said, not only that the Roman Catholic: Prelates have exerted themselves to maintain the public pace, but he states positively, that the peace and tranquil lity of Ireland depend on their good conduct. After this extraor dinary praise, let me ask this simple question,--has he not de nounced, in the severest terms, the conduct of those agitators and demagogues, who, if their object be not to excite the people to actual rebellion, at least tim to exasperate them, in order to intimi date us into a toe:cession of t . . claims ? If the Legislature should decide, as I trust it will • n. 'e, on this momentous ques tion, I feel persuaded that the people of Ireland will slim a proper deference to the seat of the Legislature, and an acquiescence in the acts of az, Administration acting upon such principles as those which: t have avowed. I have now stated the grounds on which I feel it to be my painful duty to pursue the same course which I have hitherto pursued, and to dissent in this respect from some of my colleagues, with whom, I believe, on every other subject I most cordially concur. Within a short period the influence of great names has been lost to the cause which I espouse, but I have never adopted my opinions out of deference either to great names, or even to superior intelligence. I lament ] most bitterly lament, the loss which the country, as well as the cause, has maintained, and I do not the less lament it, because it affords me an opportu nity of declaring that I retain the opinions which I formerly espoused, and have since adhered to, and of making that declara tion without the possibility of being suspected of any views of per sonal advantage.—(Hear, hear.) i‘e'lr. BROUGHAM rose to address the House, but the noise which prevailed in the body of the House rendered his obeervatiors for a few moments inaudible. I am aware, said the Hon. and Learned Member, that the hour is late, and that the climate of this House is inconvenient. I can readily fancy that there are cooler places of resort in the neighbourhood of this House, and I should strongly recommend such places to Hon. Gentlemen, whose frame of mind and temperature of body are sufficiently indicated by the manner in which alone they are ca pable of exercising their voices in this House.—(A laugh.)— After the brilliant display on the part of my Honourable and Noble Friends, not only of matured talent, but of that rising abi lity, which must have been witnessed with heartfelt satisfaction by those tried champions of the cause, whom it must have con vinced that their places would he supplied by others more than worthy to succeed them—after the speech of my Right Hon. and Learned Friend (Sir W. Plunkett), in which he almost exceeded himself in the service of his country—a speech leaving nothing to desiderate—a speech, in which eloquence and wit, and argument, seemed to strive for the mastery, till conci liatory wisdom bore off the palm from all. After all these services, in what I trust is nearly the last stage of this long and anxious controversy, I should, indeed, not only ill discharge my duty, but rather weaken than strengthen the impressions which those effects must have made upon the House, if I did not confine within as narrow a compass as possible, there marks which I have to offer. To come at once then to the ques tion. I will make one or two remarks upon the gloss of the Right Honourable Secretary, on the articles of the Treaty of Limerick. I confess that I cannot bring myself to concur with, or even to comprehend the reading of the Right Honourable Gentleman. It is not possible to regard this merely as a treaty between the be eieging General and the persons locked up in Limerick. Not only the besieging General, but the Government, was a party to this treaty ; the treaty was not entered into merely in behalf of the in habitants of Limerick, but in behalf of themselves and their brethren in arms in five of the most important counties in Ireland. The words of the treaty applied generally to the Roman Catholics of this kir.g.latn, and not merely to the individuals locked up in Limerick. It guaranteed to them not only freedom from disturbance in the exercise of their religion , but all such privileges as they had enjoyed in the time of Charles the Second. As to the interpretation which King William put upon the Treaty, though I entertain the greatest possible respect for that Monarch, whose services to this country, and to the cause of liberty all over the world, I should ill deserve the place which I occupy in this House if I did not most cheerfully acknowledge, yet it is too much to be called upon to adopt the construction which King William put upon the articles of the Treaty, when in the very act of violat ing those articles. The violation of the Treaty of Limerick is the charge which has been constantly fixed on the memory of King William, and on this particular subject the authority of that Mo narch is the last which I should be inclined to adopt. But I wish to get rid of the Treaty of Limerick, for I think it entirely beside the question, and I am inclined rather to betake myself to a later Treaty—a Treaty entered into, not at the end of the 17th cen tury, but at the beginning of the 19th ; I am disposed to rely, not on the authority of King William, but of his late Majesty George 111. ; not otr the authority of Lord Somers, but on the au thority of Mr. Pitt ; not recorded by the historian Burnet, highly as I deem him for his accuracy and good sense, but in the Jour nals of the House of Commons. The Right Hon. Gentleman has ventured to insinuate that Mr. Pitt indiscreetly committed himself on this subject, by holding out terms to the Catholics without mature deliberation. But I will put it to the official experience of the Right Hon. Gentleman, whether he can believe that Mr. Pitt and his eminent coadjutors, many of whom are still preserved to us, and others, I allude particularly to Lord Cornwallis, are not now living—whether, I say, he can believe that it was consistent with the gravity of character which distin guished these men, or with a sense of the mighty interests com mitted to their charge, to fling out a hope or promise to the people of Ireland, as it might be casually held out in a debate in this House, or by an orator at the Catholic er Aggregate Meet ings in Ireland Was it not, in effect, a promise held out to the people of Ireland, to induce them to agree to the Union of the two islands ? If it had been a promise half given, it could not have been forfeited without diegrace—if it had been a promise half held out. it could not have been violated without shame ; but the pro mise was deliberately poised and weighed here before it was com municated. It was given in instructions to the Lord Lieutenant, and by him, after mature deliberation, communicated to persons of great weight and influence in the country. I dissent from the Right Hon. Gentleman in the gloss which he has put on the con duct of Mr. Pitt, as much as in the gloss which he has put upon the Treaty of Limerick. I believe this to have been a sincere pledge on the part of Mr. Pitt. I regard is as a solemn, though a secret pledge, given by the Government of England to the people of Ireland. I care not how you read the Treaty of Lime rick—l care not what construction you put on the conduct of King William. If I can show you that, within the last twenty-five years, a promise w Anenly made by the English Minister to the people of Ireleie:, and distinctly recognized by Commissioners on the part of the King, in a speech addressed to the Parliament, into which, by means of that promise, his Minis ter had succeeded in importing the Parliament of Ireland. If any man can refer the language of the speech to which I allude to any thing but the promise made to Ireland, he must have a method of reading the vulgar tongue, which, in the course of my education, I have not attained. The speech was delivered at the close of the first Session after the Union, and the words to which I refer are these :—" The great measure in which my wishes have been long earnestly centred, I shall ever consider as the happiest event of my reign, being persuaded, that nothing can so effectually con tribute to confer upon my Irish subjects a full participation in the blessings derived from the British Constitution, and to establish on the firmest foundation the strength, prosperity, and power of the whole empire." Can any man figure to his imagination that Mr. Pitt could mean anything by this except Catholic Emancipation ? If it (lid not mean this,, what did it mean? A full participation in the blessings of the English Constitution could not, I presume, mean the Gagging Bill ; neither could it, I should apprehend, mean an interchange of commercial advantages, a reciprocal trade In linen, hardwire, silks, and satins. It is not my intention to Ldvert particularly to various ancient arguments which have been _his night revived by the grave authority of my Right Hon. and Learned Friend (the Master of the Rolls). He has told us that E Roman Catholics are admitted into Parliament without any re ,,ard to tests or other securities, we shall instantly have a body of 70 or 80 Members, with some person of great weight at the head 4' them, who will not act or vote as Oppositionists or Ministerialists, !nit as Catholics against Protestants. Now how does the faCt stand it this moment : The Catholics now possess the elective franchise, they have the power of sending Members to this House, of whose teal in their cause every day furnishes us ample experience. There has even been no indisposition on the part of some Mem ;iers to acknowledge the means by which they have obtained their seats in this House, and to proclaim their thankfulness to the persons who sent them here—(A laugh—hear, from Mr. R. Martin, who was seated in the side Gallery.)—l am re minded by a voice I hear of the secret history of the election for the county of Galway, with which we were last night favoured by the Hon. Member who now superintends the course of this discus sion. My Hon. Friend, with his usual frankness, and with not less than his usual discretion, and undeniable verity, avowed that he was indebted for his seat in this House to Catholic influence. I need not be under any alarm of denial, for my Hon. Friend was himself forward to acknowledge that he owed his seat to the agency of the Catholic Association. It is not every Member who would speak out so plainly as my Hon. Friend, but there can be no doubt that many other Members from different parts of Ireland are equally indebted to Catholic influence. Catholics may choose whom they please, provided only they be not of the Catholic religion. I pass over the long historical dissertation with which my Right Hon. and Learned Friend (the Master of the Rolls) entertained the House. He brought it down from before the Reformation till after the Reformation ; but there was one historical passage, which was so strictly in keeping with the rest of my Right Hon. and Learned Friend's instructive narrative, that I am surprised he overlooked it. Of a truth, I marvel at its omission; I was ex pecting it would come every moment ; and, for the of the younger Members of the Sister Kingdom, who may not be over fraught with English history, I will just advert to it. My Right Hon. and Learned Friend did not forget the Irish Massacre.— We had Gunpowder Plot a we had Queen Elizabeth ; we had Bloody Mary ; but, after all, I am afraid my Right Hon. and Learned Friend has an imperfect edition of Hume's His tory, or he would scarcely have failed, when he refreshed his memory this morning with all this historical lore, to add the Popish Plot to his catalogue.—(A laugh.)—This chapter my Right Hon. and Learned Friend omitted, not very consistently perhaps, as he thought the horrors of Bloody Mary a fit subjeet to scare us withal in the discussion of this question.—(Laughter.) The subject on which my Right Hon. and Learned Friend dwelt is proverbially tiresome, proverbially inapposite, and, if I may apply such an expression to the historical deductions of so grave an authority, perfectly puerile. I remember the late Mr. Fox used to mention, that he had been in the habit of calling upon a person of high rank, who occasionally entered upon the subject of the Catholic Claims ; the last three times, however, said that distinguished Statesman, that I called upon my Friend, he talked so much of Bloody Mary, that I can't encounter him again.— (A laugh.) Now, unless my Right Hon. and Learned Friend enters into some sort of engagement to abstain from Bloody Mary during this particular period of his legislative labours, I should be very much dispord to follow the example of the late Mr. Fox._ (A laugh.) My right Hon. and Learned Friend himself admitted that all he said on this subject was inapplicable and worthless, ex cept for the purpose of raising a languid cheer from persons who were perfectly ready to roar out at any thing to which the words blood and Papist were anrcxed.—(Loud cheers.) Mc Right Hon. and Learned Friend had no sooner luxuriated in the store of his torical information which he poured out upon us, than, with usual candour, ne proceeded to tell us that what he had said, was not in the least to the purpose, and that his glowing and san guinary descriptions of the Catholics of former times, were not in any degree applicable to the Catholics of the present day.— Why, then, introduce them at all ? We were not legislating for Catholics in the time of bloody Mary, but for Catholics in the time of George the Fourth. I was surprised that the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel) could think it worth his while to dwell so much upon the Bulls and Indulgences, and Ordinances, and other rights of the Church of Rome. Can any man doubt that there is much of absurdity, and a vast deal of error and folly in these ordinances and regulations, else, why are we Protestants.— (Hear, hear.)—But is it because there may be something ex tremely ridiculous in the tenets of the Church of Rome, that we are to treat those who profess it in a manner at variance with justice ? I'll venture to say, respecting the Church of Eng land, as much as any Member of this House, that if I had been engaged in argument with a Catholic, and had rated that Catholic upon the subject of the errors of his religion, as the Right Hon. Gentleman has to-night rated the Catholics gene rally ; I say, if I had rated him so, I suspect, strongly, that he would have taken occasion to pluck out some few passages from the Athanasian Creed, which would have effectually grovelled me in the contest, for at least some space. I wish now to come to the point upon the questions of clerical interference in the temporal affairs of Ireland. I do not mean to justify the right of the priests in such cases, but I say that what is good for the parson must be good for the priest ; and that we are in strict justice bound to apply the same right of interference to both. If parsons are to be ad mitted to interfere in political matters, I cannot see why the priests are to be deprived of the same privilege, or that we could eall that irregular in the one which we pronounce regular in the other. Is there any one, indeed,. who has not witnessed these things over and over again in England? Is thereany one who has not seen Protestant and Dissenting Clergy men interfering in all part., end in the most effective manner, to support each side at an election ? I ought rather to say, one side, for it has been my lot to see them much more on one side—indeed, I have seldom known them to labour except on one side—(Hear, hear, and laughter).— But, it may be said, perhaps, that they do not interfere spiritually, but secularly; I, however, call it spiritual exertion, when a man who has been praying, the night before, with the wife (a laugh), goes, on the morrow, to the husband, and tenders him a bribe (perhaps the most innocent method of seduction), or uses the influence his clerical _ s it u ation has given him, to threaten or to cajole the vote r to comply with his desires.— The/4e things have been done in England, every day, by Protes tant Rectors ; I cannot, for the life of me, see on what principle, therefore, we are to condemn them in Catholic Priests.— I now proceed to the question which the Master of the Rolls has most carefully abstained from raising, but which I cannot pass over, which it is my duty, indeed, to press most strongly upon the attention of the house. I mean, what alternative it is pro posed to adopt in case you refuse the prayer of the Roman Catho lics ?—(Hear !)—lt is very well for you to say that the Catholic Priests of Ireland are too political. It is very well for you to say that Ireland is under the controul of demagogues who preach se dition. It is passing well for you to say that the country is in a 'state of dissatisfaction to the Government. All this may be very well, if you only wanted an excuse to avoid any concessions to 1 those whom you thus describe. But that assumes, that you are to rest where you are, and that there is no change to be produced by your decisions, which may increase the danger. Upon this subject I would require you to go no further than the speech of the Honourable Member for Derry (Mr. Dawson), and I would ask, if it was possible to conjure up any more frightful pictures of personal or national affliction than are to be found in the speech of that Gentleman, whom the experience of a life enables to speak so accurately upon the subject ? I would ask, if there is any one element of national disorder, or of individual misery or calamity, not summed up in that description? I would ask, if Ireland be torn asunder by domestic dissensions—if landlords be placed against tenants—if Priests be placed in oppo sition to their flocks—if demagogues be sent from Dublin to preach sedition ; and that, although it be necessary to give the Govern ment a power unknown to the Constitution to repress them, yet these demagogues go on defying this extraordinary extension of law, and the whole power of the Government.—ls this, I say, without a cause. —(Hear, hear.)--Oh ! it is very easy to cry out against demagogues. Oh ! it is very agreeable to stand up in:this House and blame the Catholic Clergy. It is a mighty pleasant thing, when the question which we are agitating involves the fate of an empire, to laugh, and to sneer, and to make merry, at Rules, and Bulls, and Ordinances—(Loud Cheers) ; follies which you yourselves have for centuries abjured. But the task is not ended there; a something still remains to be done; there is a something con nected with your duties as regards the good government of the people you are called upon to rule; and the question I will ask, is, how do you mean to proceed if you refuse the boon which is asked? I do not mean to escape that question with the same nimbleness of evolution which distinguished the Learned Judge who preceded me (the Master of the Rolls)—a nimbleness which I could not help considering to be very inconsistent with the judi cial gravity of his situation.—(Great laughter.) I do not mean to overleap the barrier with the same nimbleness as that exhi bited by the Learned Judge.—(Laughter.) I say, that with Ireland in this state, a something remains to be done ; that there is a something at the root of the evil ; and that after all the jest anal triumphs of this House, the task is half done. The Learned Judge was aware of this; but, when .it became necessary for him to point out a remedy, he says " No, I am not a Cabinet Minister.—(Laughter.) Let them answer whose duty it is--to point out a remedy is not in my department. I come here to speak the opinions and represent the feelings of my constituents, all those persons of learning and knowledge who are possessed of property in the Church, as well as of rights in the State ;" and, for a like reason, and by a parity of reasoning, his Noble Colleagt s ie—(loud cheers)—is sent by the same Learned Body to' support and enforce the propriety of .further concessions to the Roman Catholics. This opposite course . . which that Learned University has given us to find out its opi nions, is strangely contrasted with that of the other University which takes care to be represented to the full extent of its feeling, and which seems, in its address, to be determined to keep alive, as much as possible, the times of the good Queen Mary. Cambridge, however, has sent us no address, and when I came to reflect—for there is some necessity to have something to direct me in forming my opinions—l think that this omission turns the balance in favour of liberty, and Cambridge is willing to.grant Catholic Emancipation.—( Hear, hear.)—But to come back to the subject which the Learned Judge evaded, he has left it to the Right Hon. the Secretary for the Home Department, and the Under Secretary, and they, with more gravity and less nimbleness, have, after all their arguments, allowed it to remain where it was.— They have, however, admitted, that the situation of Ireland was dangerous to the peace of the Empire; and if you admit the danger, and despise the remedy which is proposed to you, not now for the first, but for the 'twentieth time, it is your task to declare what remedy you propose fur the evil. It is easy. to cast the balance of injuries against those who now claim redress. The injured are always wrong—the oppressed always err. I never knew an in stance where hurting did not produce hating—l never remem ber a case in which those injuries were not visited upon the victim which we should atone for ourselves. You may say, therefore, that they have committed errors, but there is one ac cident connected with your situation, which calls upon you for justice. They have rights which you have withheld—they have claims which you have neglected. Year after year you have continued to neglect the prayers of six millions of Catholics, and after rejecting every warning—after slighting every omen— after all advice and remonstrance had been given to the winds, you have still continued to treat as enemies those who appear at your feet as suppliants. Last year you told them to wait yet another year, and circumstances would be different. The Election came, and with it a " No Popery" yell, which, I am happy to say, was discountenanced wherever it was raised. That Election is now over—the time is arrived when you promised to hear them—they come' before you claim ing their rights ; and although I do not wish to use strong lan guage, I do not hesitate, to declare, that it is the very last time when you will have an opportunity of expressing your opinion upon these Claims, in their present shape. If you refuse them, I believe most strongly that they will never more ask this House to take their case into consideration. I would here take leave to say, that I cannot see the propriety of the objections taken by the Secretary for the Home Department, to that observation of the Attorney-General for Ireland, in which he declared, that if the people of England were treated as the people . of Ireland now are, they would rise like one man in resistance. In the sense in which that observation was made, I am ready to go along with the Attorney-General to its fullest extent.—(Hear !) I have now discharged a most painful duty ; and I implore the House, for the last time, to reflect that it is impossible for any man to say that it must not affect the prosperity of the Empire to al low things to remain as they now are: No man who addressed the House has ventured to say that we can remain as we are. We are now called upon to adopt the remedy which has been pointed out to us, and which I, from my conscience, believe to be the best calculated to ensure the peace and prosperity of the country. It is for you to say whether you will despise all warning, and all the motives of a sound and liberal feeling, by applying to this motion a barren negative.—(Loud cheers.) Mr. GOULBURN rose amid cries of " Question." He would not further detain the House than to express his con currence in all that bad fallen from his Right Honourable Friend beside him (Mr. Peel), and to declare, that in the official situation which he had the honour to hold, he had always discharged his official duty towards the Roman Catholic*, not only with impar tiality, but, perhaps, with greater indulgence than towards others, from the very circumstance of his being opposed to the political privileges for which they sought.—(Hear, hear.)—On the Honourable Member's resuming his seat, a confusion of cries for " adjourn, adjourn !" and " question, question !" arose, which, however, gave way to a call for Mr. Canning. Mr. Secretary CANNING rose at half-past two o'clock this morning, and spoke to the following effect :—The Hon. Baronet (Sir F. Burdett), who brought the question for ward, introduced it with a generosity and prodigality of argu ment and remark, which prevented him from confining him self merely to the motion itself—to the accurate statement of what the substance of the proposition is. Of that omission on the part of the Honourable Baronet, I must say very unfair advantage has been taken in the course of this discussion.— Because the Honourable Baronet did not distinctly state that the present proposition was one that merely asked of you, the present House of Commons, whether you do, or do not, enter tain the same opinion as your predecessors of the importance of considering this important question, I did not expect that, therefore, objection would have been made to him for having onaitted to fill up the details of a measure in a preliminary resolution of principle—(Hear, hear.)—l should not have ex pected this misconstruction of argument from a Member who had only sat in this House for the first time ; but I confess I was little prepared to have an example of such 'a confusion, set by a judicial accuracy—(Cheers and laughter.)— The speech of the Right Honourable Gentleman (the Master of the Rolls) has been partly historical and partly critical. The historical part, on the admission of the Right Hon.' Gent. him self, was inapplicable to the present question ; and I shall presently show that his critical part was not less inapposite—(hear!).—The Right Hon. Gent. began, continued, and ended his speech, by complaining that no securities were offered on the part of the Ca tholics. If the Right Hon. Gent. required securities, how were they to be propounded? In what? In a Resolution calling upon you to declare whether you will affirm or abjure the inherited opi nion of Your predecessors. When the House declares its opinion in affirmation or negation of the necessity and importance of conside ring and entertaining this measure, then will be the time for de liberating on the measure in its letails—then will be the time for considering what Bill an.', what provisions it will be proper to in troduce ; but until that time arrives, Hon. Gentlemen might without impropriety, restrain the expression of their surprise that the Hon. Baronet, had not, in the first instance, introduced a measure in all its details to the House. The Hon. Baronet had done right in omitting to do so. He would have only perplexed and defeated his object if he had encumbered it at this stage of the discussion, with all the topics, et cetera which might have been gleaned and collected from the Deluge to the Revolution. — (Hear, and a laugh.) What Right has the Right Hon. Gent. to require that the motion should be encumbered with such topics now—a motion which only embraces a simple proposition, to take into consideration the laws affecting Roman Catholics, with a view of relieving them from the civil disabilities under which they labour? Is this a proposition submitted merely for the purpose of idle and otiose curiosity ? No ; but because, since this question was last discussed, and a decision come to upon it, a dis solution has taken place, a new Parliament has been returned, and a general impression has gone abroad, that a change of opinion has taken place—a change, however, in which I utterly disbe lieve.—(Hear, hear.)—The course pursued by the Hon. Baronet was the correct one ; for by admitting the principle of the mea sure, the House would come to a fairer consideration of it after wards ; as the Hon. Baronet, by obtaining an admission of the principle, laid the foundation of its being more favourably enter tained in its future stages ; and as, without such admission, he would have been altogether without the hope of a fortunate re sult. Because a detailed scheme of securities has not been brought forward, the Right Hon. Gentleman has thought proper to accuse me of abandoning the idea of securities, which I at one time regarded as a necessary accompaniment of any measure of relief to the Roman Catholics ; and upon this be has founded a charge of inconsistency against me. Sir, I have not altered or abandoned any sentiment or opinion I have entertained respecting this important measure. Why does the Right Hon. Gentleman say I have abandoned the notion of the necessity of securities ; What proof has he that I have done so ?—(Cheers.)—Where is the evidence of my dereliction ?--(Renewed cheers.)—l do not know whether or not the Right Honourable Gentleman was in Parliament in 1812, when I first voted for this measure.--.[lt was intimated across the table to Mr. Canning that the Master of the Rolls was not then in Parliament.]—Well ! as the Right Hon. Gentleman was not then in Parliament, 1 will fiwnish him with a short abridgement of the history of this ques tion since that time. I will be his historian of these later times. —(Hear, hear.)—ln 1812, towards the close of the Session, I took the liberty of moving a resolution, the object of which was to take into consideration in the ensuing Session of Parliament, the l a ws affecting our Roman Catholic fellow -sub j ec ts. The Parlia ment meanwhile, as occur red last year, was dissolved. On the opening of the NeW Parliament the Bill was introduced by Mr. Grattan—it was given to him by me as I thought it was due to his fame, his station, and his venerable age, that the Bill should be brought forward by him, On my unexpected victory, the greatest that ever was achieved on this question, constituting, I think, a ma jority in its favour of 159, the Bill was introduced, and into it were incorporated the securities which I deemed necessary to the required concession. The Right Hen. Gentleman lies under a fallacy as to the object and proposed effect of these securities. The securities were of a political nature—they were not, as the Right Hon. Gen tleman supposes, securities of Church and State. The objects which these securities were intended to attain were these two-- first, to give to the Crown a certain authority in the nomination of Catholic Bishops ; and secondly, to subject the correspondence of the See of Rome with the Roman Catholic subjects in this country, to the inspection of Government. A correspondence had gone on before without the inspection of Government, and it goes on still. This was what we proposed to remedy, and if that Bill in 1813 had passed, it would have been remedied. It had been truly stated by an Hon. Gentleman that the King of Prussia had obtained securities from the Catholics in his dominions; it was perfectly true that the King of the Netherlands was negociating for similar securities; it was perfectly true that in Austria and Saxony, and other States such securities existed. But how had they been obtained ? They had been procured at the first hand, of the Pope of Rome himself. The various states in question had had an intercourse and means of negociation with the Pope, which we did not possess. In the existing state of the law we could not enter into any such negociation. The year after he had come into the office which be then held be had had opportunity of ascertain ing the fact. In 'those popular works which were resorted to by the unlearned, he had read that it was high treason to correspond with the Pope of Rome. Soon after he entered on the Foreign Office,tkere came a letter from the Pope addressed to our most gracious Sovereign, announcing the Pope's accession to the Pontificate, which letter was accompanied by a very handsome letter from the Roman Se cretary of State to him (Mr. Canning). Although he had always thought that the only way in which the question of the securities to be required from the Catholics could be settled, was by a nego ciation with the Pope, yet he knew that it might be as much as his reputation was worth to be detected in a correspondence with his Holiness.—(A laugh.)—At length he bethought himself of consulting the Law Officers of the• Crown on the subject, and he would now read to the House the answer which he received. [The Right Hon. Gentleman here read the answer, which was in substance that in the opinion of the persons consulted, the let of Elizabeth, c. 12, would subject any parties corresponding with the Pope of Rome (who claimed a jurisdiction over this realm) to the penalties of a premunire ; which opinion was signed R. Gifford," and " J. S. Copley." Finding that such an Act would subject him to the penalties of prernunire, he had looked into that profound work, Burn's Justice of the Peace.—(A laugh) to ascertain what those penalties were ; and found that the delinquent was to he out of the King's protection, to forfeit his lands and tenements, goods and chattels, to be imprisoned at the King's pleasure, and to be rendered incapable of bringing an action for any private injury, how atrocious soever. Upon dis covering this he became exceedingly alarmed—(a laugh)—and not only abstained from writing a single line to the Cardinal Secre tary, who had addressed to him so polite a letter, but advised his Majesty to take no notice of the Pope's communication. He was exceedingly glad to avail himself of the present opportunity, in a way which would probably reach Rome, and that without sub jecting himself to the penalties of a premunire—(a laugh)—of as suring the venerable person in question that his silence on the oc casion which he had described ;was not to be attributed to any want of respect on his part.—(A laugh.)—Having ascertained, Sir, the. Hon. Secretary added, that to correspond with the Pope would put me in jeopardy, it was not likely that fact could induce me, with all my admiration for the laws which yet remained un repealed, to attempt to convey any communication to the Pope of Rome. No doubt a similar feeling pervades the bosom of my Right Hon. and Learned Friend on the subject, and yet, Sir, to the Pope of Rome it is that my friend must come at last, if he really desires to effect that security which might be expected to arise out of the nomination of the Roman Catholic Bishops.— Hear and laughter.)—With respect to that other branch, when I called on my Right Hon. Friend for his opinion, and be answered by informing me, I would be putting my life and fortune both alike in jeopardy, if I corresponded with— The MASTER of the ROLLS.—I consider that the opinion referred to was contained in a private letter-- (Cries of " Order, order; Chair, chair")—and I doubt if the Right Hon. Secretary has more than a copy, the original (so we understood the Right Hon. and Learned Member to say) being in my own possession. (Great confusion was created in the House by this inter ruption.' Mr. Secretary CANNING—Sir, I do not exactly understand this interruption.—(lncreased disorder.)—lt is, in my opinion, most extraordinary.—(Cries of " Hear, hear ! Or der, order ! Chair, chair !")—I assert, this is a public document, on the production of which depends the judgment to be pro nounced as to whether or not I have properly executed my pub lic duty, as a Minister of the Crown.—(Hear, hear !)—With this view I called for the opinion of his Majesty's Law Officers, and received it, not in a non-official, but in an official way ; and that being the case, have a right to refer to it.—(Cheers.) —As to the opinion which he had just quoted, it would have lain in the obscurity from which he had drawn it had it not been for the extraordinary language which had been held elsewhere, and which had been repeated in that House, impeaching his honour and honesty.—(Hear, hear, hear !)—The Right Honourable and Learned Gentleman was not even original in his remarks. He (Mr. Canning) had read them in print, so that he was pre pared for the attack which had been made upon it, although he vowed to God, that if he had been required to predierthe quar ter in that House from which the attack would proceed, the quarter from which it had proceeded would have been the last which would have entered into his conjecture.—(Hear, hear, hear.)—The other branch required securities related to correspondence with the See of Rome, touching marriages, indulgences, and other matters connected with ecclesiastical po lity. It was certainly true that the securities of that descrip tion which he had proposed were not received. He undertook to introduce those securities as part of his Bill. When the Bill failed, his duty respecting the securities was of course at an end. - If there were those who thought that there was any danger in communications to the See of Rome, respecting the marriages of second cousins and other such matters, it was for them to bring in a Bill to avert those dangers. Some learned persons had declared, that if any person obtained a Bull from the See of Rome, - he would he guilty of high treason. Every day, therefore, some Roman Catholic or other in this country was guilty of high treason. And yet there were persons found to say that there would be no safety in concession to the Catho lics unless these Bulls from Rome were taken by the horns.—(A l aug h. )__Persons who had slumbered for ages over these trans actions, only thought of them when such a question as the present was ninowitha a l g ln it t : i t n in g g )_t ; he a u n ß d wtasi t i b is e i y mnpof th as e ß n inbml c e h ef a o r tro ge h d rimu h nt imow fiil n(dAdlawrn. n d r Ca ds un n tn - - pt which he f e lt for such imputations.— chained.--(A hHaeiia expressi r e do. the ( A A n co l et a nh u etgerhi n Hon. Gentleman who had spoken late in the . debate on the preceding night, had thrown out another impu tation against him. He believed that that Honourable Member must be very new to the House, or he would have known, that the day of reliance on the Coronation Oath was gone by. To satisfy that Hon. Member, however, and to set his mind at ease, he would, by way of answer, read a passage from a speech of a Noble Friend of his, now unhappily attacked by severe indis position, who was the leader of the party that had formerly placed great reliance on the Coronation Oath, as an obstacle to the grant ing of the Catholic Claims. The Right Honourable Gentleman here read an extract from a speech made by the Earl of Liver pool in 1825 ; in which the Noble Earl allowed, that he could no longer consider the Coronation Oath as any legitimate diffi culty in the way of granting concession to the Catholics. He (Mr. C.) trusted, therefore, that they should hear no more of the Coro nation Oath. Now, what were the other apprehe nded dan g ers? He was at a loss to conjecture. This particular quest ion seemed to have a very singular fate. In the first place, the opponents of Catholic concession were asked if they would do what was pro posed to them ; and, if not, what they would propose to do ? In the second place, they were asked what were the dangers which they apprehended? . To neither question did they return a satis factory answer. They would neither agree to what was proposed, nor propose any thing of their own ; and, with reference to dan gers, from 1813 down to the present time he could never dis tinctly understand what they were. At one time great danger was apprehended from admitting a large proportion of what was de scribed as a disaffected population into the Military service of the country. By the Act of 1818, however, every Catholic in the Army or Navy might rise to the highest rank. [Some Honourable Gentleman observed that a Catholic could not rise to the rank of Commander-in-Chief.] The Honourable Gentleman said that a Catholic could not rise to the rank of Commander-in -Chief. By law he might. And what was whimsical enough, was, that at the moment when this great change was effected, when our fleets and armies were opened to the Catholics, when the truncheon of command at sea or in the field was entrusted to their exercise, the opening of a letter from Rome enabling a sick patient to eat meat on a fast day was considered dangerous--(Hear, hear.)—Why now, and all of a sudden, were dangers dwelt on with so much emphasis? In 1'793 the elective franchise and the Over to hold landed pro perty was granted to the Roman Catholics. They were admit ted to the bar; but they were prevented from wearing silk gowns, however well they might deserve the distinction. By the same Act of 1793 an officer might rise to any rank but the Staff and the office of Commander-in-Chief, yet no security was required. But securities were not the real objects at the present moment. It was an old story trumped up for the pur pose of introducing into the debate, and for the purpose of set ting the country against the supporters of the Catholic claims, and exciting the most base and unworthy prejudices against them.•-(Hear, hear.)—Having spoken of what took place in 1793, that led him to a topic on which he would make a few brief remarks. He perfectly agreed with an Hon. and Learned Gent. that nothing was said or done by Mr. Pitt at - the time of the Union which could be construed into a pledge to the Catholics. But it would be disingenuous not to say that there was that in the trans actions of the period alluded to, calculated to inspire the Catholics with a lope, which unfortunately had been deferred until it sick ened.—(Hear. )—He was also of opinion, that a, the period of the Union we ought to have been particularly careful not to allow any expectations to be cherished, which it was not intended to gratify.. He could not, however, shut his eyes to the fact, that directly or indirectly, the Roman Catholics of Ireland were induced to believe that in the United Parliament their question would be more favourably received. Some people entertained a doubt whether Mr. Pitt was warm on the subject of Catholic Emancipation. He (Mr. Canning) remembered as well as if it bad happened yesterday, Mr. Pitt's showing him a letter from Lord Corn wallis, stating that he thought he might carry the Union, but not Catholic Emancipation. He (Mr. Canning) in the pre sumption of youth exclaimed, " then abandon the Union !" Mr. Pitt rebuked him, - as be deserved to be rebuked. He car ried the Union ; but although he failed in carrying the question of Catholic Emancipation, there was no tribunal, however so lemn, before which he (Mr. Canning) was not quite prepared to depose to his firm belief in the sincerity of Mr. Pitt's wishes and intentions—(hear, hear!).—He would further say, that he had himself no knowledge, nor did he believe that any other per son had any knowledge of any change in Mr. Pitt's opidicm on the subject; with the exception of his determination not to stir it during the life of the late King. In that, but in no other respect, was Mr. Pitt's mind altered ; and he was confirmed in that opi nion by the declaration of a person who had known Mr. Pitt well, the late Marquess of Londonderry, and who, in his place in the House of Commons, voluntarily contradicted Mr. Rose on the sub ject, and added to the testimony the fact, that Mr. Pitt had main tained his opinions respecting the Catholics to his dying day.-- He had been drawn aside from the subject in consequence of having mentioned the name of Mr. Pitt. He repeated that he did not think that any promise had been made to the Catholics at the Union, but that a kind of intimation..had bean .thrown out which was very .operative. The Catholics had, in his opinion, lent themselves to the Union, in the confident expec tation that the Union would be beneficial to their cause. No man could doubt that if Ireland had continued a separate kingdoni, in stead of Catholic Emancipation being discussed for the twentieth time in that House, it would have been many years ago completely settled. The pictures of Ireland which bad been drawn by Gentle men who espoused different sides of the present question were SG melancholy, that he trusted the English part of the House of Com mons would consider well before they threw away any chance of improving the state of that unhappy wuntry. Some worcirwhich had fallen from his Right Hon. Friend near him (Mr. Peel), with respect to the course that it would be expedient to pursue in Ire land, were rather of an alarming nature. He hoped h e h a d mis interpreted them; but if not, he did not envy the hands to whom would devolve the task of carrying such a system into effect.— He hoped, however, that the opposition to the Honourable Baro net's Motion was opposition rather than substitution ; and that what was suggested as advisable was something that would tran q uilliz- the feelings of the Irish nation, rather than any thing '- that might assume a more unseemly character. God grant that it might be so. Ciod grant that the time might arrive when perfect conciliation would be accomplished. Although he was aware that the diAaste of the country towards the Catholic cause was stronger than it had been, yet he was convinced, as he could be with reference to any event in the womb of futurity, that to the arguments urged in that House, to the repeated dicussion of the subject the opposition to it would at length yield; and that a right, equitable, and humane policy ° towards the Catholics of Irtl.ind, would be eventually adopted.—(bl ear , hear, hear.)—As it was, it was impossible to hear the speeches of Hon. Members from Ireland, and conceive the practicability of that country going on in the way in which it had lately done. As many affidavits and documents of every description had been read to support var i ous opinions, he would beg leave to detain the House, by reading one as a specimen of the absurdities which had bcenputforward on the subject. The affidavit to which he referred was as follows :—" And this deponent saith, that he (the saidA.B ) swore that he would kick the damned soul of the said deponent, so that it should fly round Hell like a blue bottle round a treacle barrel, and which the said deponent verily believes the said A. B. would have done had he not been prevented.---(Laughter.)” ...But the present system against the Catholics might be sustained a. little longer, and a little longer, from year to year ; but speaking of the ages of a country, the time of its duration must be short indeed. He should despise the character of the Catholic Priesthood as much as his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Peel), if he thought them guilty of all that was imputed to thetn ; but he (Mr. Canning) had learnt, even from the de. bates upon the subject in that House, not to trust to extravagant accu sations. The Priests had been accused of garbling the Catechism of the Church of England, on a point (the second Command. ment) which went to convict them of idolatry ; but he bad in his hand a work of great circulation in the Catholic Schools of Ireland, where the second Commandment was fully set forth.— He conjured the House to reflect, that the motion of the Hon. Baronet only related to the state of Ireland. It did not Fledge the House to any scheme of Catholic relief. All such measures were left for future con sideration. If, therefore, the House met the Hon. Baronet's Motion by a direct negative, it was tantamount to a declaration tha;.. they did not think the State of Ireland a subject worthy of their consideration.—(Hear hear.) The Motion went no further, than that the House should merely adopt the measure which two preceding Houses had sent up to the House of Lords. In voting for the Motion, he reserved to himself as a matter of expediency, all further considerations relative to the claims of the Cltholics. He entreated the House to pause before they rejected the motion ; for it was more easy to imagine than it would be safe to ezpress, the consequences that might ensue in Ireland if the motion were lost. The Right Hon. Gentleman sat down amidst loud cheers. Mr. MOORE explained. Sir CHARLES FORBES rose amidst the most anxious cries of " question." He suggested that the Hon. Baronet should alter the word necessity, now standing in the Motion, to that of expediency—rthe expediency of taking into consideration the present laws, was in his opinion, preferable to the Motion, ae it at present stood. Sir F. BURDETT had no objection to make the proposed alteration ; and he further wished to omit the term " imme diate," as many Gentlemen did not wish to pledge themselves to an opinion of the necessity of immediately revising the Laws. The amended Motion was then put, and the House divided— Noes 2'76 Ayes 272 Majority against Sir F. Burdett's motion FOUR. At Twenty Minutes to Five o'Clock the House adjourned. When the Bill for Catholic Emancipation was carried in the House of Commons in 1821 and 1825, the numbers were 1821—For it-254—Against it-243—Majority-11- 1825—For it-268—Against it-241—Majority-27. ' • t lan ( ) t LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 7, 1827. The importance of last night's debate induces us to ex clude almost all other matter, for the purpose of giving at length the eloquent speeches by which it was distinguished. The result we sincerely regret; but at the same time we see no reason for the Catholics to despond, or for their friends to discontinue their exertions. The minority, on this occasion will be at least clear of any reproaches of conscience which others may possibly feel, should those fearful consequences result from the issue of this debate, which some Hon. Members have predicted. They will have also the consolation of erring (if they do err) with the illustrious persons forming that galaxy of talent, by the enumeration of whose names Sir F. BURDETT commenced his eloquent and impressive speech. But whilst we offer our sincere condolence to our fellow subjects in Ireland, we would remind them of the utter absurdity of breaking out into acts of open violence, and we would again and again implore them to evince temper, prudence, and submission to the laws. If they do so, their cause grounded on proper securities, must ulti mately succeed. THE FUNDS-(THIS DAY). CITY, Twelve o' Clock. Consols opened this morning at 82k I, and receded to 82,a ; they are now 821 a ; India Bonds, 53 4 ; and Exchequer Bills, 34, 5 pm. Two o' Clock. Consols have been 821 I, and are now 821 i• THREE 0' CL 0 GK. Consols, 824, alternately buyers and sellers. FOUR o'CLOCK—CLOS ING PRICE. Consols 824. Danish Bonds Do. for Ac., 828 Greek Do. 1825 Brazilian Bonds 65+ Mexican Do. 1825, 68i Buenos Ayres D®. 5 2 Peruvian Do. 34 Chilian Do. Russian Do. 87 Columbian, 1824, 40k Spanish Do. 12k Printed and Published by M. YOUNG, at the •tit-Ot.iAar, No. 112, Strand.