The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1805-05-15 00:00:00

Sir JOHN NEWPORT (in the midst of a load
cry of qa,i,on! qurqr.a, !) said he would point out a
new spot edger:ALl on which the Ilonse had not yet
touched (a cry cl hear! hear!). Ile then assimi-
lat d the present question to that of Hiingary, which
h.td for centtu ies been disturbed by intestine divi-
sions, in cor,eqiience of which a Diet was called,
and seven Mhions of people cf different setts, half
of them Protestants, were im;tc..l; and soon after,
whe:-. the French e-zu-e i!hin t' "days march (tom
Vienna, they m-t them in a body, for tie defence
of their King and ccuntry. This was an example
he considered as hearing in every poll and h. attire
upon the present question.
Mr. M. FITZGERALD (Knight r f Kerry)
protested, that the conviction ni.on Ili, mind upon
the present question was, that it the decision was
not certain, he would anticipate the nom fatal and
dangerous consequences arising from it. One point
only he wiNhed to direct the attention of the House
to. Ile had unifornalysupported this measure,while
lie had the honour to sit in the Irish House of
Commons, and g-ive his vote fur the union of the
by() countries, with the conviction on his mind,
that the present n.easure would immediately fol-
low. His only hope at present was, and he im-
plored the House most earnestly, that if they
should refuse to go a committee upon the peti-
tion, the gentlei.ien of Cos country particularly
would obliterate from their minds the gross and
scandalous calumnies which had been thrown not
against the Catholics of Ireland, and which would
only be cast back with increased disgrace n;•cn
the fabricators. He spoke as a man of cai.duur,
and he again hoped the gentlemen of England
would not be led away by such foul calumny and
virulent abuse.

Mr. RICHARD ARCHDALL spoke against
the motion, and Mr. DILLON in a very animated
speech in its snpp.lrt.
Mr. SHAW (Member for Dublin) said, that he
had been instruded by his constituents to vote
against the measure, in which iasuuaions he con-
curred.

Mr. HILEY ADDINGTON opposed the
motion.

Mr. JOHN LATOUCHE (Member for Dub-
lin) said, that he would not, by any means, follow
the instructions oT the Corporation of the City of
Dublin. He was well aware of the general senti-
ments of the people of Ireland. He considered the
measure as a most salutary one, and, he felt he'
should be doing his duty to his constituents, and to
his country, in supporting the measure, to which he
gave his hearty concurrence.
Sir J. C. HIPPISI.EY supported the motion.
Lord DE BLAQUIERE said, he had been two
Jays endeavouring to offer himself to the notice of
the chair, but all in vain (a loud laugh : he con-
sidered the prayer of the Catholic petition could
not be granted without the most manifest danger
both to church and state. His Lordship then went
into a general view of the question, which he
strenuously opposed.
The question was now renestedly called for from
all sides of the House, when HL HIN-
SON, in a speech of upwards of an hour,s.4Torted
the measure.

The A rTORNET-GENER AL, Sir N. SCOTT, and
Mr. FiTZOLR Alt) (Knight of .Kerry), severally ex-
plained.
Mr. HAWTHORN supported the motion; Sir G.
Hut.. and Sir W. DOLBEN opposed it.
Mr. FOX made a most eloquent and able reply.
He denied that the time was unseasonable—and
contended, that when the petition was drawn up,
every hope was entertained of its sncceu ; it being
understood that the Union had removtl every ob-
stacle to slue measure. The Right Hon. Gentle- '
man had been in some sort pledged to the Catho-
lics ; but, having gone out of office in 1801, they
did not think it prudent to bring the question forward
until 180.5, when they again saw him at the head of
affairs. The Right Hon. Gentleman not being in
the same mind then as he had been before, they
came to him (Mr. Fox), and %cause they d:d • so,
they are said to be allied to, a party. 'ls every per-
son who ventures to differ from the present admi-
nistration to be interdifted and excommunicated
as it were from the rest of the country, and be de-
nied the liberty of petitioning Parliament ? Sup-
pose he had refused to present the Petition, would it
be thought right to :Bow the delegates to go bait
to Ireland, and say we can get no person to assist
us, none to support us in the British House of Com-
mons ? He then took a review of the privileges
which the Catholics had 'ax ly acquired, which,
he said, were granted to them more, perhaps,
enough fear, than any wish to reconcile them.
He nest tool• a review of the Dissenters from the
Established Much, who, he said, differed from it
as much as Catholics, yet they had seats in the
House. He concluded by saying, that liberties su-
perior to other men were not demanded of them ;
hot the question was, whether, at this moment, it
were necessary to consolidate the force of the coun-
try, by granting the enjoyment of equal rights to a
great part of the people ?
The question was then put, when there appeared—
For the motion, 121—Against it, 3136—Nlajo-
rity, 212.

Adjourned at HALF•PAST FOUR O'CLOCK,
until Thursday.