The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1805-05-14 00:00:00

of Ireland will exense me ; T must speak what his
been advanced on this subjeft, without having ever
been refuted, that this minks% and treatment had
so far debased and degraded the great mass of the
Catholic people, that Mr. Burke himself admits,
in his letter to Sir Hercules Langrishe, "that the
system of slavery, persecution, and degradation of
the Irish Catholics was carried so far, and continued
so long, as to make it doubtful whether they could
be restored to that state which would make them
capable of enjoying of benefits of the British Con-
stitution."—bit, the change which took place in he-
land in the reign of King William produced the
effeft of throwing almost the whole property of the
country into the hands of the Protestants; whilst the
population was in the Catholics ; a clear and evident
proof that property and power go hand in hand. This
state of things was deemed to be anomalous in our
Constitution ; and therefore it was that the Govern-
ment began to give the Roman Catholics the power
of acquiring property. The consequence of this
had been most conspicuous, for they had not only
acquired a very great share of mercantile riches, but
had also possessed themselves of a very considerable
portion of the landed property in the country. This
had been the ground work of one very great im-
provement and advantage to the Catholics, for it
had very much softened their minds and inspired
them with habits of i dustry and useful speculation,
which had been attended with the best consequences
to the general inferests of the whole country of Ire-
land. There is one argument, Sir, which I have
heard used against the Catholics, which I think is
fraught with the grossest absurdity, which is, that
they have kept in their memories the landed estates
which had belonged to their ancestors, before the rime
of Cromwell, and that if they even were allowed to
possess political power, the first use they would make
of it v. (mid be to claim these estates from those
who at present possess them. Nothing can more
clearly, prove the folly and falsity of this mode of rea-
sneing than this plain and simple feel, that if they
were to make this attempt, many of the Catho-
lics themselves would be as great or greater suffer-
ers than the Protestants—and what Catholics are
those ? Why, Sir, the Catholics who petition this
[louse, and it is therefore clear you can't do any
harm by allowing them a participation and share
of political power. I never cot.' i conceive, sir,
any reason why these restriftioos should continue
after what has been already done in fawn.. of the
Catholics. The general restriftions now rein:tilling
may be brought under two heads, viz. incapacity
from enjoying certain offices Civil and Military ; die
other, that of sitting in either Houses of Parliament.
These restriaions are useless and odious. In the his-
tory of incapacitation, the first points which peseta
themselves are the two following one to restrain the
prerogative of the Crown ; the other the privileges
of the people. We are said to have rear hit J the
prerogative of the Crown by restraining the. Catho-
lics. Let us see, Sir, how that point nearly stands.
The Test Atll was originally fr anted and passed for
the express purpose of excluding the Catholics from
the service of Charles 11. and -here is a very whim-
sical, though a very strong observation, that it was
done in order to make the Constitution age t able to
analogy, that it should be all of a piece; and when
you insist on making your King a Protestant, all his
Council and advisers must be so likewise; but,
Sir, this beautiful and harmonious theory is quite
modern. Our ancestors argued directly the con-
trary; they did not restrain Charles the Second from
employing Catholics because he was a Protestant,
but because they doubted whether he was one or not.
It might, therefore, be proper and rational to restrain
him of whom they entertained doubts; but to say
you will do so, because the King is a:Juan)! a Pro-
testant, and there can be no doubt about it, is the dr-
red reverse of our ancestors' arguments, and I think
their's is infinitely the best. This Aft, Sir, was
therefore passed in the reign of Charles 2d, and even
Mr. Locke, in a pamphlet which he published some'
little time afte:, acknowledged " that the 'rest Aft
might be necessary." Well. Sir, we then come to
the reign of James ed, who was an open and profes-
sed Catholic, and to have allowed him to employ
Catholics in his service, would have been absurd and
idle in the extreme. Since that period, however, cir-
cumstances are almost entirely changed,and theques-
lion very naturally and appositely occurs, How came
these laws to be continued now ? Why we are told
forsooth because the Dissenters are included in the
Test Aft; that the greater objeft was, to continue
to hold the Dissenters under the authority and do-
minion of the High Church Party—conceiving it a
point they had not conceded to that party which
had been most instrumental in effelling and bring-
ing about the revolution. This Aft does not, how-
ever, absolutely preclude the Dissenters of any per-
suasion from offices, but only provides, that after a
stated time, they must take certain oaths in order to
qualify them for holding an office. In Ireland these
restrietions have been us many instances given up,
such as in all subordinate offices of the Navy,
the Army, and the Law; yet you refuse them ad-
mission to the highest offices, and then, in an insult.
ing way, you say to them, " Why, you can't ell
ex-
peft to be Admirals, Generals, and Chancellors, and
therefore there can be no harm in refusing to let sty
of you have a chance of being se." You say to the
Roman Catholics —" Yon may have talents, you may
have industry. You may remise fortunes, but you
shall never arrive at any of the honours of the liberal
and superior professions. Thus far shall you go,
and no farther." Let us look at trade for instance.
Supposing you take a personage in the lowest trade,
one who makes, perhaps, his 201. a-year only, with
which he contents himself, after gaining a support
for his fsmily—say to him," You may go on. make
money as rapidly as you please; but you shall not,
on any account whatever, gain a sixpence more than
one million." This is a scope so extensive, that in
all likelihood he will be satisfied with it. But the
human mind is so framed, that the very idea of
limit destroys its best propensities, and puts an end
to that useful arid laudable spirit, energy, specula-
tion and industry, which have been so conspicuous,
and which have added so much to the wealth, ho-
nour, greatness, and splendour of this country. Do
we not proudly and exultingly hear them boast and
say, " Thank God, 1 live in a country where, bs in-
duvry and perseverance, I may make a fortune
equal to that of the first Duke of the land."? What
should we, on the contrary, say if this %%ere only par.
Bally so Why men in such a situation would' stand
marked by their fellow-subjects, as being in a most
unfortunate and melancholy predicament. Apply

the eigament, Sir, to the profession of the law :
would ask any one conversant with that profession,
if they were to say to a young man who was about
to embrace and enter into it, or to his parents who
generally form the pleasing hope that their son will
be a great man, and rise to the top of his profes-
sion—if they were to say to him or them," You are
going into a profession by which you may gain a
great deal of money ; but you cannot possibly rise
to the highest and most honourable offices in it,"
would not this, I ask, be a very bar to those incen-
tives which aspiring ambition breathes into the
minds of men in general? would not the parents
feel mortified and dejected at the idea that their son
could never arrive at the high honour of being
Chancellor? Does any one go into the army without
feeling an ambition to rise to the highest honours
and most splendid rank which that gallant profession
holds out to them? What must be the situation of
the Lieutenant or Captain, who, after paying every
attention to the duties of his profession, after mak-
ing himself master of those ditties, and after
bravely fighting the battles of his country, he comes
and says, at the end of a well fought day, after
seeing what has been done, " Alas! I can ne-
ver command an army; I may, perhaps, be a Colonel
or a General on the Staff, I may expose my life in
the service of my country, but the vast and brightest
reward is, and ever must remain out of my reach."
Does not such a melancholy and degrading refec-
tion lay an extinguisher on military ardour ? an ex-
tinguisher, which, I will be bold to say. dors not
exist to deaden and defeat the hopes of the sub-
jeds of any other government in the world. I
will put it, Sir, in another, and a lower way
of' stating the case: to gain a charades, is, in
many instances, with certain descriptions of men,
one of the strongest incentives to ad with moral
tectitude and propriety. If you tell such a man
he cannot rise to office, he nal be led to say, " If I
cannot, why should I endeavour to obtain a cha-
racter ; where will be its use, if I am to be treated
in a more degrading way than others of my
fellow-subjects, who, without my pur:ion of me-
rit, may enjoy the benefit of every office to which
ambition, interest, ar connedion may lead him."
What is then the situation of the general mass
of the Catholic people in Leland, who are dis-
abled by these laws? Sir, they are marked as
objects of restrictions and disqualifications, not for
religious motives, but those which are mixed with
political motives; and who is it that is thus marked ?
Strange to tell, it is above 3-fourths of the people of
Ireland, and inure than one-fourth of His Majesty's
ELM •pean subjects. The exclusion from being sheriffs
is perhaps one of the greatest hardships of which the
Cathol.cs have reason to complain, and it is an exclu-
sion for which these is less cause than any other. Can
any one suppose, even for a moment, that the Go-
s+rnment of Great Britain can ever appoint sheriffs
for bad purposes ? That they would appoint men to
that office who would raise disturbances, or promote
insurrections ? In ?ham-Sir, this is one of the cases
in which there is the least. chance of injuring the
King's pretogative, for Sheriffs are appointed by
the Government itself. I now come. Sir, to the
right of Catholic Peers to vote in Parliament,
which was continued till 16;t3, and I appeal to
the whole history of the country, whether there
ever was a single instance of harm accruing from
such allowance ? Mr. Locke, in the sense pamphlet
to which I before alluded as to the Test Ad, ap-
proves of this as a good regulation. When did it
cease? In 1678, at the time of the Popish plot,
when the whole country was thrown into a paroxysm
of terror and dismay; when it was thought that
the handful of Catholics in England were going to
massacre and destroy the whole Govetnmeet and
people. In that period of terror, rage, and fury,
this Bill was passed; and why ? because there was
nothing else to be done; every thing besides was
already done to their hands. Now' Sir, as to
their having votes in the House of Commons :
if the Roman Catholics have really any bad
designs against the Government, you do not
prevent them by not letting them sit in Parlia-
ment. What is your objedion ? Because they are
the same as Dissenters, and those do not aparove
the church establishment of the country. Does
any rational man believe that if these laws were re-
pealed, there would be twenty Catholic, returned
to the House of Commons—suppose fortp—or ever:
four•fifths, if you please. If you will take the cri-
terion of population, they would be nearly eighty.
Does any man in his senses imagine, that if eighty Ca-
tholics sat in this Hous there would be any danger
to this Government ? The idea is preposterous. If
the dudrine of virtual representation be true, and
it is unquestionably to a certain extent, would it not
add to its strength, to have the Catholics sit in this
House ? Youlleve trade, land, soldiers, sailors,
merchants, represented; but there is no represen-
tation for the interests or property of the Rumen
Catholics; therefore, according to the argument of
virtual administration, you must assuredly want a
very material branch of it. You say to the people
of Manchester, Sheffield, &c. "You return no Mem-
bers to Parliament ; but it is the same thing to you :
you can do as well without them, because you
are virtually represented by the votes which
many of you have for counties, or other places,
than whose in which you severally reside." You
cannot say so to the. Catholics; they are defi-
cient in, and want, that sympathy of interest that
every one else has. You have also deprived the
Catholics of Ireland of all corporate rights. If they
serve the King In the army, why debar them of cor-
porate rights. Though these rights in that country
are but few, and, therefore, of no great consequence
to the Catholics, you still, by depriving them of their
enjoyment, keep up an unnecessary stigma, which,
of all modes of punishment is the moat 'grating to
a people, and destrudive of that unanimity of ac-
tion which is so necessary to the welfare of a coun-
try. Now, Sir, a very few words on the subject of
the advisers of' the King. being at all events to be
Protestants, becauie the King himself is so : I
can scarcely conceive that if two men were
sitting in council, the one a Protestant, and
the other a Catholic, would quit the
subject of directing the force and operation
of a fleet or army, and one should say to the other,
" You believe io the Virgin, or believe in Saints, but
I don't," or that the ether should, begin a speiCh in
praise of trassubstasqiation. It is really ridiculous
to mention such a thing. I want to know why two
persons of different tenets may not agree en political
measures, though they der in a religious creed ?

.
is there a country in Europe, except this, ohm this
is not done? In tlie reign of Henry IV. Of Fromm. did
it enter into the head of any man that the Duke
de Sully was not a good Minister, and did every
thing within the scope of his splendid talents y„,,
the real interests and welfare of France, because h;
was a Protestant ? Did arty ma*io,FrAnee "et, oh.
jed to the administration of M.Weeker on that ac-
count? Does not the Emperor of Austria, who i„
rigid Catholic, trust to Protestants who are high
his councils and confidence ? If I am not misin-
formed, Sir, the Governmentpmrolf7lVoteienrci;;:cri:skitti:ryias
very time entrusts el to Priiice Frederick of ;Nur.
temberg, who is a Protestant. In Prussia, at pre.
sent, there is no Protestant employed under the Go.
vlteronmmane net a; but
t c,ini s ParuP‘rsit
where the Greek is the established religion of the
country. In Venice there are a Grecian Patriarch
and a Romidi Patriarch. In the Swiss Cantons
they were pretty nearly divided, about half and hall'*
and those which were called the Democratic:ll Go-
vernment of Switzerland, vii. Zurich, unaerw,d j_
&c. were the most bigotted Roman ca.:„,iic:
A singular argument, I understand, has
vanced, in some quarters, respeeing the. 'nil
which the Pope might. by the admission of those:.:.
be entitled to exercise in Ireland, or, in ether woLl.,
that the Pope, who, du:i:tg the Rebellions of t7t
and 1745, for the Restoration of a Romish Pretender,
was not able to raise or excite the cc-operation
of a single Roman Catholic in his favour, is to
be in lull and dangerous- power, when he has
no Pretender to offer to them. At the time of the
Rebellion breaking rut in 1793, to far was the tei.
fortunate Pope from having any share in it. that he
was himself in a state of the most wretched sets:-
rude, and look-A to this Protestant conntri, as I
best and surest friend—neither was helbpro,
nor ever accused, of having taken any part is •:
projects aad intrigues of Mr. O'Connor an :
associates. Such apprehensions as these or ,
indeed, have had some foundation in former ; ,
when tae Popes were accustomed to send to
ith extraordinary powers, into this country—b ~.;
present. nothing cettainly can he mote-inapplicaiee.
Some others there Ire, pet hips who display -.
greater share of iagenuity in devising objedions.—
f hey will tell you, Sir, that Bonaparte, whose great
(shied is said to be an attack upon Ireland, ha;
tamed a great ascendancy over the Pope--that the
Pope can exercise sepreme authority over the Priests
—and that the iuflitence of those last is uncontrculed
over the minds of the Roman Catholics of Ireland.
I admit, indeed, the probability that Bona; ante
would not fail to make all the use in hi: power of
such an engine, and would represent to toe Roman
Catholics ot that country, that the French come
for the per pose of restoring them to those esturs
that had been liken from their ancestors, to restore
their religion, and give them, in future, the same
civil and religious ascendancy which their Protest-
ant masters have so long exercised over them. By
rejeding this Petition, you would certainly open a
fair ground for such representations ; but, by libe-
rally-granting all that the Roman Catholics desired.
the door would be closed against the enemy ;
the most that, in all human possibility, the 1 oait
seoulei ever gain by ir, would he, perhaps, an un-
certain or pi ecarious influeni•e over one or two mem.
bers of his religion. in this /louse. The Roma*
Catholics, at this time, form an anomaly in the
British Constitution. If it bi conteneted, that the
country will not he safe, unless all the Ambit%
of the Legislaoure be rf the Church of Englaed,
why do we retain die [Trion with Scotland? Stota
land possesses an erclesiastical system. independent
of the hierarchy of Englaest ; and act the Scotch
arc known to he as g..1(1. And faid,tul sithkest es art'
of our Protestant Brethren When Gentlemen
talk of the power of the Pape, let them heir,
' with temper, whatever the Roman Catholic;
themselves. say upon the subjeft. They tell you, on
their oaths, that they da not allow the Pope to have
any temporal power whatever within these realets.
They tell this solemnly; and then comes that
strange, unaccountable, and iecomprelvensible argu-
ment of some gentlemen, s' Why, it is true, they
say so ; but we do not believe them." I have esti-
been of opinion, that SO foal an argument as that, :f
it was worthy 'of the name of argument, must al-
ways betray the greatest malignity of heart, o: the
greatest weak. t.-s and pet versity of understanshag.
Let me ask, Sir, why did the Ad of Parliament pie-
scribe the oath to them, if it was determined, after-
wards, not to believe them ? After a man gives all
the proof you require of hie allegiance and loyalty,
is he then to be cowitiered as aaworthy of trust, if at
any time he should be f iund going to say his prayers
at mass ? Good God 5i r, ran there be any thing
so preposteroas, aa,first to give them an oath, and,
when they take it, to add the .seeurity of prescribing
another oath; after taking which, if they shottl.i br
desired to do so, they were at liberty to do us all the
mischief they ever could have meditated ? I have
no disposition whatever to enter into this religions
controversy. I have neither the talents nor learning
necessary for such an undertaking s but had las ma-
ny qualifications for it as could be possessed, even
by the present laird Chancellor of Ireland, I think I
can see reasons which would deter me from doing
so. When I refled that not only four-fifths of the
people of behind, and one-fourth oiNieMejserel
proper subjeas,but also that three-fourths of civilised
Europe are at this moment Roman Catholics, I
should hold it monstrous, barbarous, ignorr-', and
bigotted, to try that all this mass of peop e is ir,7l-
- of the relations of amity, and of keepil,t
with heretics. Such an assertion appears to be
the legitimate offspring of abominable bigots,
determined wickedness. If I were asked whether I
thought it right that these oaths should have been
proposed and prescribed by Aft of Parliament lobe
nottak on taken by thsealiWoe
groulicsndh
t !ear I
originallyainly ppo
should
nanswieedri
them, not that I deem them sufficient, but because
I thought them degrading and unnecessary. To
say the truth, I looked upon them as insincere pro'
posals. and thought that, in the spirit in which they
were drawn up. the fairest way would have been to
say to the Catholics, s. You maytake them oaths if
you think proper, but even after you have done so
we are determined not to believe you." I could sot
help remarking, Sir. that when first this Petition
was read at your table, it evidently made a great.
impression on the {louse, many of tbe Mauled or
which might perhaps, from the ,Meteor
made to them, have scarcely espeted that all Ca-

r--=--