The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-04-04 00:00:00

THE BRITISH PRESS.

IRELAND.

EXTR•CTII EDON THE EVIDENCE GIVEN BEFOUL Tit
SELECT COMMITTEE Or THE HOUSE or commows,
ON THE /TOTE or salLawn.

• Richard Shel, Esq, examined.
Whst is your opinion of oinking a Government Peleelltion foe the
Catholic Clergy?—l tun convinced that the &anon Catholic
Clergy would accept of 'itch a provision if Roman Catholic Eman-
cipation were to precede it.
Would they accept of it without Emancipation 1-1 am sure
that they would not.
Do you think that it 'twirl cause any jealousy on the part of the
Roman Catholic Laity ?—I think that if the provision to be
granted by Government were to he subject to the control of oo-
vernment, in individual cases there would be much jeslousy,
because the appointment would be referred to unworthy modem;
I think the provision fr r the Roman Catholic Clergy must be made
in its allocation to individuals, independent of the -Government.
You think that it roost be allocated to the ditties, and not
to the persons ?—1 think !here must be an allocation made to the
duties, and the persons to be paid for their perfomtemees, must be
selected by the hierarchy and not by the Government; I think it
would be very iojurioun that a Parish Priest, receiving three or
four or five hundred a-, tear of the Treasury, should be awned by
Government.
Do you think Catholic Emancipation would be a perfect mea-
sure without the payment of the Priesthood, and without raising
the qualification fur the exercise of the Elective Franchise ?—With
respect to the railing the qualification of freeholders, _I am not.
perhaps, very competent to judge, for I have not resided much In
the country parts of Ireland, nor am I much acquainted with the
lower orders, but I ain well acquainted with the Rowan Ca-
tholic Clergy, and, in my opinion, it a provisioa were granted
to them, provided alw:tys it was made independent of the
Government (that is indispensable) the result would be, that the
lower orders would not b alienated from the Priestheo4,„bat that
the influence of the litter would continue to be usefully Ind legi-
timately exercised, that tine y would be perfectly reconciled with the
Government. and that the Roman Catholic gentry world be in.
duced to send rh. -"- - • " their broth,* boo the
editation "

'veneer nicotinic' of h..
_....4411441e1071utth, 4 better system of educe.- Mould bt
established, and the intellectual habits of the Priesthood would
become more refined.
You mean, that the provision should be inalienable, after ilet
once granted ?—I mean that, when a vacancy occurs by the
of a Parish Priest (I take the case of a Parish Priest as an ex-
ample) the person who is to succeed is not to be selected by the
Government ; that is all I mean to ear. If the appointment went
to be made by the Government, two evils would result; in the
first place, the lower orders would be quite alienated from their
Clergy (which would be a most serious evil); and hi the second
place, I conceive that unworthy persons would be appointed.
How is thin appointment made at present ?—The appointment of
the Parish Priest at present is made by the Bishop.
The Roman Catholic Bishop of the Diocese has the absolute ale
pointintost to all the parishes within his diocese?—Yes,
Do you think any Interference whatever, direct or indirect, on the
part of Government is the appointment of the Bishop, would be
equally objected to ?—I myself, at one time, supported what is
commonly called the veto, My opinion was, that Roman Catholic
Emancipation, or in other words, the liberty of my country, ought
to be purchased, even at some hazard ; but I think the measure of
a veto would (I will not say whether on just or unjust grounds) be
extremely unpopular.
Do you mean by veto, the giving the Crown an absolute veto?-
1 do ; bagel think any interference in the appointment of Bishops
objectiotiable; I am not sure, however, whether in the course of
two or three years, when the people had become habituated to the
exotic of this restrictive power, the public feeling would not be-
come, if not reconciled to it, at least apathetic on the subject ; but I
certainly sin apprehensive, that if the Government possessed, with-
out ever directly exercising this power, some suspicions as to the
rectitude of the motives of men in office interfering in the appoint-
ment of Bishops would exist, and that suspicion would in itself be
an evil which ought to be avoided.
When you express that the Roman Catholics would consent to
the freeholder's qualification being considerably raised, you con-
ceive it would be a general measure. extending to Protestants as
well as Catholics ?—Certainly ; if a distinction was taken, our elec-
tions would be scenes of religious agitation.
But that the qualifications for Presbyterians, Dissenters, Church-
men, and Roman Catholics, should be the same ?—Yes ; and I
think that when the election law is about to be modified, It would
not be injudicious, if persons baying beneficial chattels real, should
be entitled to vote; a man with a lease for 999 years, which yields
him forty or fifty pounds a year, should have a vote.
Do you think an arrangement of that kind, which would din.
qualify persons actually in possession of that franchise, and which,
they had exercised, and never abused, would give satisfaction to
them ?-1 think the great body of the people of Ireland, particu-
larly the freeholders, are greatly swayed by the higher chum lam
sore that Mr. O'Connell's influence is so great, that if Catholic
Emancipation were passed, he would reconcile them to the surren-
der of that, which is to a great extent but an imaginary right.
Do you think he would reconcile the Presbyterian Dissenters to
it ?-1 here his influence would be without effect ; I am not at
all acquainted with the North of Ireland, and I cannot say how the
Presbyterians would feel—but with respect to the South of Ireland,
I believe the •,?nant who has, by virtue of forty-shillings. a qualifi-
cation to vote, would yield what is bat a wretched appendage to
his few acres of land without much regret-
Supposing another gentl,nnan should arise, who took another
view of this from Mr. O'Cotwell, and should protest against the
opinion of Mr. O'Connell, and sftould hold that they were in pos-
session of this right ; that it was a rigi.' they had always exercised ;
that they had never abused it, some per like Dr. Doyle, for in-
stance, do not you think he might create a considerable party in
the South of Ireland, in favour of retaining the elective franchise ?
--I think not ; I think indeed, that the lower orders in Ireland
can be easily influenced by an appeal to their re;:gicrus feeling;
they feel greatly irritated at seeing every Protestant anti passes
them, their superior; there is the point on which they are sore;
with respect to the elective franchise, I do not think any individual
would be able to excite any permanent feeling; the subject is not
naturally connected with religion.
Being easily excited on subjects connected with religion, sup-
posing those to whom they looked up in religion were to consider
this • diminution of their influence, and were to protest against it,
do not you think the influence of persons who took that view of the
subject, might antes considerable impression ?-1 think that the
Roman Catholic of the lower orders, could not be induced to think
that his religion was endangered by a general modification of the
elective franchise. On the subject of- the Veto, the Clergy have
naturally exercised a very considerable influence ; but there is no
such connection between the elective franchise and religion, which
would give any man the means of exciting the religious passions on
that ground.
Have not cases occurred recently, in elections for counties, in
which the influence of the Priest has been very greatly exerted ?
No doubt about it ; but the influence of the Priest in elections
arises from the question of Roman Catholic Emancipation, and
none other. It is in reference to that question that it is exclusively
exercised. If a Priest came forward at an election, and directed
the people not to vote for any man who would not support Parlia-
mentary reform, the people would not listen to him ; but when he
tells them not to vote for any man who will not support the Catho-
lic Claims, he makes an appeal, which, in my opinion, is justified
by reason and sound sense. lie could not, I think, produce any
impression on the lower orders, except on some subject immediately
involving a religious question, and not collaterally connected
with it.

If he said, " do not vote for any man who will vote for the dies.
qualifying of the freeholders," would not he make an impression ?
—I
am sure he would not ; and I am sure the priests would feel no
interest in the subject, and would not interfere. In the county of
Dublin the clergy exercised influence at the last election, but it was
on a subject in which the clergy and people had x common concern
—besides the passions of the people are at present extremely in.
flammable. It is only necessary to apply a spark to set them on
fire t but even now it would be impossible to excite the people on a
subject not involving their religion, and if emancipation were
passed, a different feeling would speedily prevail, and the power of
excitation would be diminished, because the popular passions would
be allayed.
Supposing the civil disabilities of die Roman Catholics were re-
moved, and that in a county election there .vere two candidates, a
Protestant and a Roman Catholic, do not you think it would be
possible for the priest to make a very strong appeal to his flock is
favour of the Roman Catholie candidate ?-11e might make an
appeal, but I think it would be unavailing ; there would be an end
to their political resentments. Even now the Catholic priests are
in the most cordial intimacy with Protestants ; they perpetually
dine with them ; habits of close friendship exist between the
Roman Catholic priesthood and the Protestants ; there is no indi-
vidual distaste towards the Protestant existing in the mind of the
Catholic Priest ; he feels no antipathy only to the system by which
he and his countrymen are kept in what he considers a state of
degradation.
Then the existence of civil disabilities has created no disgust be-
tween the Roman Catholics and the Protestants ?—1 think where
the Protestant Gentry do not oppose Catholic Emancipation, the
Priests and they are upon a good tooting; but that where a Pro-
testant Gentleman opposes Catholic Emancipation he at once be-
comes an object of antipathy to the priesthood, in common with the
rest of the Catholic community.
You do not mean your last answer then to apply. generally, as
describing the state of feelirg ?—No ; I confine it of course to
what we call liberal Protestant,, to whom the Priests entertain a
partiality.
That are the others called P—They are classed under the com-
prehensive name of Orangemen ; some, of course, are more con.
spicuous for their hostility than others, and incur a corresponding
aversion. . . _

You make a distinction between a man who is an Orangeman and
a man who is tinctured with Orangeism ?—There are some pro-
fessed Orangemen, men who make Orangeism a m►tter of bout ;
they are extremely obnoxious. Othcts, who merely oppose Catholic
Emancipation, are looked upon with feelings of more mitigated
aversion.

As the admission to Parliament, in cue of the question of Ca-
tholic Emancipation being carried, could be granted merely to
Catholics of the higher orders of society, are you of opinion such
a boon granted to them would be a reasonable ground, or a
probable ground of satisfaction to the lower order of freeholders,
for the loss of the elective franchise, if the amount of the quslifica-
tion be raised, and the forty-shilling freeholder bedone away with ?
—I am convinced of it.
Would not the circumstance of granting Emancipation rvmove
all prejudices that might exist in respect of the alteration of the
quulification of fmholders ?—I am coot herd it would.

~`

-.-,- ....

Have you read the statement of Mr. Make on the subject of the
elective trsnchise, where he describes the value of it to a poor man ;
do you recollect the arguments urged in 1703, that there was
actually idlutinetion made in the letting of land betwcto Roman
• Catholics and Protestants: that the Roman Catholic setts never
courted by a rich man who was his neighbour, but that the Pro..
testant received civility from him in return for his vote; lend that
a great practical distinction arose in conse9uenee of the disability
: under which the Roman Catholic labouted 2-3 recollect that ar-
. gument Wu used, and I think if there were only I few frediolders
that argument would hold good; but where an immense number
t of freeholders C2O be made by a single person (I think the Eatl
of (Mengel has made 2,000 freeholders in the county of Tipperary),
there is thin an end of thelprerogativir which •freeholder is sapposed
to possess. The peasantry are driven in droves of freeholder, to
the hustings--they must obey the command of their landlord ; it
is only in enema peculiar emergency, and where their passions
are powerfully excited, that a revolt against the power of the land-
lord can. take place. In the county of Dublin there are two strong
reasons ashy. at the last election, the tenant did not obey the land-
lord. The first was, the intense interest which was felt in Catholic
Emancipation: and in the second place, the peasantry were put,
by their utter misery, arising from the fall of prices, beyond the
landlord's payer; the landlord could not injure them, for they
had nothing to lose; they had no interest in their lands, and the
argument put to them by Mr. O'Connell was this—lf you disobey
your landlords what will be the result ? They must seek for other
tenants; where will they get them? At the lilendicity Associa-
tion in the city of Dublin.
Do you think a powerful appeal might be made to the people on
this'ground, supposing the arrangement which you think on the
wink a desirable arrangement, were to be carried into effect ; here
is an arrangement made by Parliament, the effect of which is to
open•Parltament and .Office to the upper classes of the Roman Ca-
tholics, but the compromise required on your side is, that you, the
great mass of the people, who never can sit In Parliament: and to
*hem office is no object, are to be deprived of the only privilege
that, practically, you are likely to enjoy ?—I do not thia:c any
efficient appeal could be made among the lower order of the Ro-
man Catholics (independent) of some paints in which I think their
interests are deeply concerned); a feeling of wounded pride is ex-
cgikr Lb, *ft fitLikalwitA they think that they belong to a de-
ed nine ; 'this mentimenterates strongly upon them, and a
alert imagination on their part will prOducE practical results, just
as pernicious as if the grievance were admitted to be as substantial
as lam disposed to think it. To return to the question put to me,
I conceive that the Roman Catholic freeholders would be recon-
ciled, by the ascent they would make in the political scale, to the
deprivation of what is in reality no substantial enjoyment. They
would purchase equality with the Protestant servant and mechanic,
at the expense of a URtien vote.
If they argue so sensitively on points of this nature, cannot they
argue equally sensitively on this point ; or may not a person make
use of that argument to dissatisfy their minds with this arrange-
ment, by which they are the only losers ?—I do not think that any
person who engaged in such an enterprise would succeed. When
the qualification of a freeholder Is raised, there is an incentive to
honourable exertion given to the peasant. You do not tell him
that he shall never vote; but you tell him that, in order to ex-
ercise this privilege, he muss require an interest of five or ten
pounds a.year ; he has always hope before him. The Roman
Catholic peasant would not consider himself as deprived of any
valuable possession ; most of the peasantry would expect to be able,
by industry, to raise themselves at last to the necessaryttualiffea-
don • a freehold would then become an object of ambition, and i
would be a zeal and honourable privilege.
not the Catholics, in case Emancipation is carried, consider
that measure as merely conferring advantages upon the upper
orders ?—Certainly not.
Will it be to them and by theta considered as a measure confer- I
ring advantages upon themselves ?—They think it will confer great
advantages upon themselves, and it will, in my opinion, confer
those advantages.
Do they talk much about the question. or take much interest in
it ?—lt i., I understand from those who know them best, the sub-
ject which chiefly occupies their attention.
Do you mean among the lower orders 11—Yes, among the Ic'wer 4
orders.

Why are they to be considered as disqualified from exercising
the elective franchise, if they are in the constant habit of talking on
elective matters?—They all know the power of their landlords. The
landlord requires a very high rent, which, generally speaking, the
tenant is not able to pay, and if the tenant disobeys the landlord
at the election, he will not of course take into account the in-
ability of the tenant to discharge his rent, but will immediately
distrain him. The peasantry, therefore, have no discretion on the
subject.
Deducting that influence from the landlord, you think that from
their general intelligence they are capable of making a proper dis-
tinction between the individuals who are candidates for the county,
and thus exercising their elective franchise ?—They may be quali-
fied to form a judgment upon the Catholic question, which is a
subject that touches them neatly ; they have perpetual opportu-
nities of observing and feeling the practical evils that result from
the penal code and they are therefore qnalilied to judge upon the
fitness of an Individual to sit in Parliament. so far as that question
is concerned. It is upon that question only that they now exer-
cise any opinion.
What do you think would be the effect of a law, which would
raise the qualifications of s twenty pound freehold ? would it be to
throw more power into the hands of the Protestant voter than he at
present posaussaal—l am not esersteit qualified to give an opinion
on the subject; I have heard among Catholics themselves, a great
dissent of opinion with respect to ft. I believe that in some coun.
ties it would operate in one way, and in other counties in a differ-
ent way ; but I am sure of this, that freeholders, whose qualifica-
tion was raised, would be quite ree from religious prejudice, and
would be disposed to consult their own individual interests in giving
their votes, without any sort of reference to the particular form of
Christianity professed by any candidate.
You think there would be no partiality on the part of a Roman
Catholic voter, in favour of a Roman Catholic candidate ?—1 think
that after a year, or some such short period, after the Question had
been carried, no such partiality would be manifested. I know that
at first there might be some ebullition of popular sentiment ; even
now, a Protestant, entertaining opinions favourable to the Roman
Catholic claims, is rather preferred to a Roman Catholic by the
people, than regarded with any evil eye.—l am quite convinced
that elections would, in Ireland, be decided by higher personal
azd political qualifications, and by the ascendancy of wealth and
rank.

Hugh O'Connor, Esq.
What is your situation in life, and where do you reside ?—I re-
side in Illeuntjoy-square, Dublin ; I was in trade, a merchant, but
I have retired now from trade ; I retired last year.
In what breach of trade have you been concerned ?—ln the West
Indian trade; as a merchant, at the head of a house in the West
Indian trade.

Did you carry on business to any considerable extent ?-1 be-
lieve more so than any house in the %Vest Indian trade ; I believe
it was so considered, and I believe the fact was so.

Are you acquainted with the state of trade, and commercial pro-
perty, in the city of Dublin 7-1 havea pretty general acquaintance
with the state of trade.

Is a considerable portion of the trade of Dublin carried on by
Roman Cathalics P—Vm.

You yourself are of that persnavion P—l am a Roman Catholic.
Can you inform the Committee whether any Roman Catholics
are members of the Bank direction in the city of Dublin ?—None ;
nor have not been.

Have any efforts been made by the Proprietors of the Bank to
obtain the nomination of Roman Catholics to the Bank direction ?
—I have complained myself very much about the exclusion of
Catholic Proprietors front the Bank direction ; the Bank Directors
have made it a pretence (for I considered it nothing but a pretence)
that the law interposed the qualification, which I know is not the
fact. •

What is the qualification in point of stork ?—Two thousand
pounds stock for a Director; three thousand to be a Deputy Go.
vernor ; and four 1. ouund to be the Governor.
In whom is the choice of the Bank Directors vested ?—lt lies
with the Proprietors; but the Bank Directors make a house list,
and there is a combining and confederating amongst them, to keep
up constantly amongst themselves, when once named, monopoly
of direction, with party feeling, and to exclude Catholics from
the direction. _ _ _

An there many other Catholics in the city of Dablin, wit:
whom you are acquainted, who arc Proprietors of Bark stock ?
I know some that are considerable Profrietors, some of the
largest.
. . . . .

Are there any other public bodies in the city of Dublin. con.
nected with the commerce of Dublin, from which Roman Catholics
are excluded ?—There is ; the Ballast Board, I believe. The
expenditure of that Board, in the last or the preceding year, was
fifty or sixty thousand pounds • and I never heard of a Catholic
being in the direction of that Board. I recollect that a gentleman
some rears ago was mentioning to me, that he wished I was in the
direction; " but," says he, no Catholic is in the direction, or
has been in the direction." I said, 1 was quite ir.different about
it.

Do you consider there is a disposition at present in English capi-
talists to adventure in speculation in Ireland ?—I see there is a
very considerable disposition.
Do you consider that the political state or Ireland has any ten-
dency to retard such investment of English capital in that part of
the United Kingdom ?—A very material instance of that nature
came within my knowledge th, day before yesterday ; a gentleman,
a landed proprietor, a Member of Parliament, hail nearly com-
pleted a treaty to borrow 50,0001. in London ; I do not know ex-
actly upon what terms, but, however, the treaty was nearly com-
pleted, and in consequence of the Bill suppressing the Catholic
Association, and the impression in the lender's mind that the se.
curity for his money in Ireland, under the aspect of affairs, was not
such as he would wish, he declined lending his money ; this came
to my knowledge the day before yesterday.
M as the lender a Catholic or a Protestant ?—I do not know ; he
is an English capitalist.
And the security was to be upon landed property in Ireland ?--
Upon landed prupertv in Ireland.
Do you understand in what way the Bill to which vou allude in.
creased the unwillingness of the lender to advante his money ?
He thought the security for property tar an English capitalist
would be likely to become more endangered in consequence, as he
conceived, of the discontent being increased through the means of
that Bill.

Did he express that opinion P—Ves, I understood so ; the bor.
rower is a Noble Lord.
In what part of the country. was his estate situated; in the
north, south. east, or west ?—lit is about the south-west, I chink.
Then you consider the treaty to be broken of in coosequenos of
the apprehension of dtaconttnt that tr!ebt be produced is Viand P
—I hare urdentood so.

4,Agimm