The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1810-05-19 00:00:00

CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION

Mr. Osman commenced a must brilliant
speech. by regretting. that he should have to enter
On the subject at so late an hour of the night. He
lamented that there should have been manifested a
disposition to get the start of him. Whatever
others might think, it was a subject, which. to him.
appeared to be of vital consequence to the cotton-ye
it went, in his opinion. to the entirety of the empire.
It was a subject imporant to him in another point
of view—it was one which involved the question of
the enfranchisement of • considerable portion of
hie own countrymen. If he should live to sec the
object of the petition fully oompleteil. he should
consider himself a mast fortunate man. He should
%lieu have to contemplate two advantages, both of
which vieredear to his heart : the advantage of saw
MA his fellow-subjects. his Catholic brethren. in
Ireland. put upon an equality with their fellow-
citizens; and the aileasitsee of Ira. ing the conso-
lodation of the empire founded on liberty and law.
He had taken an opportunity. when he had given
notice of r.is motion, of stating the ground upon
which he meant to rest that he meant to rest it
upon the eztension of British prisilege, and the en-
clusien of foreign nomination ; then he stated
his ground as broad as po•stble. He wished to
state a principle. isiseparable from the considera-
tion of rhis *abject. and to induce the House
to keep in their 'Muds the probability of an
arraisgeine.it with the Catholics. He held that
proposst.oo to tie one which it wit siecessary
to the *ern-seem strength of the Empire to in-
dulge; and louvre ver persons might differ with
respect to the questiou of the relo, he held it to
be absolutely necessary that the Catholics of Ire-
land and the Protestants of England should ever
entertain us their minds the probAblisty of an ar-
rangement. There were two grand principles
upou which thus might lw scceservbeds the
one was the eselusiou of Foreign urainatiest,
and the other was the commuisicatitea of Consti-
tutional Privileges. With respect to the brat. there
were different mode% of mussing the object—
One was by a real--the other by so shoelace law of
ezelusion. He appealed to the casideotr of the
House unlit, this subject; but he hod to state. that
as ter as he was able to collect the strength of the
Catholics, they were adverse to a real.-1119 own
opinion was in favour of a own °piston
was, that it would be better for the Protestants,
and of nu injury to the Catholics, to have the We.
He did not consider et as likely to produce soy un-
due or sanister interest among Csthote body. If

he had, hehhoehl have opposed it. Ile did
°1
ender it as' likely to produce any thine hutn.c4.l‘4.
on foreign nomination. His ides CR*. It ;7.1
it should influence the Catholic Cler f,t
hilt
Cent the Bret/ 'Magistrate of the country shouldg
h
a cheek on foreigeasominetion and influence;
thetefure, that as the Pope was the best 'odee
of
the fitness of the Catholic, the first Magistrate
of
the country was the best judge of the all sauce
the subject. But be should deceive the Hsu* o
iff
he oas to say. that the Catholics were likely to ac-
cede to the principle of a tern. It followed, thth;
as a matter of course, that some other mode should
he adopted, in order to exclude.foreign ioflaence;
mid that Mode was domestic nomination. By do.
elastic nomination,. effectsog foreign influence, he
did est mean to say, fur he knew the Catholic reit.
;ion too well to attempt to say it, that the first ?do
gertnite should have all the powers which essentially
!belonged to the ambler Church. He did not thiat
Imne'ireeellffia:;l7itviuoalipod bewerf.nelmieideuoli:l:7lohrtheelet:;:eb"sllllB.
:IRri4l power; .but if the Pope should hecouie a oci.
ject France, and if the time should come when
the Pope should be a Frenchman. Or rather ii btu a
Freon-Moats should be made Pipe, then the pot er
nomination would be in the person at the head of
the Freticoi Government; and, conseeptentle, the
power of notain.dion would be in oar natural
enemy. tie would suppose that a French ante
should be iu Ireland, and that the Catholic Rooters
had here named by the French. What might le
expected, if such were the case? Would it be any
check against the diairger. that the laity were doe
qualified, if the bishons were appoiteed by he
enemy ? The disqueliticatitin of the laity, in "
coo., so far front being a tiled( 'malted the duner;
would be :in aggravation of it ; for there wool 4
two hostile principle* operating against the ens
Aire—those to whom the privilege was extruded,
and those from whom the ptivelege was le itlahe
It was his wish to establish o ronstitutiothel u.i
neetion between the Protestants and Catholics of
this eloper.., and to prevent eu ecclesiastical now
nection between the Catholic.% and the enemies of
the country. He wished the House to consider
what would •be the relative aituatioo of the too
countries, if France appointed, throegh the Pope,
the Catholic Bishops, and the laws of this cool try
excluded the Catholics from any Office ia the star.
There would be a political separation between the
Catholics as leased sad tbe Protestants in Eup
laud, and an eceletieetical cwolitetios litweta
the Catholics in [relied end the Government cf
Frame. • With a view to the liberty 5...1 the sift
of the empire. it ems a wise of extreme dee,..ser.— 1
Ile wished the per* of England to say to the to
timbre of Ireland--foilem you, faith—we do art
itudepshind yore rebgiou. lint there is ROC creed
winch we both tenderstand, and *Loch neither slut
ought to dispense with: It is that creed since*
teaahrs an eternal seporition mf both from French
politics.—ctieeel dear! /tem !is...That oar the
common religion the country ought to prote,•—
tlatt was the teligiott sod faith the Catholics and
Prote.taests ought to miners too—oithest it n., pro-
test would mite the Empires. safe. fis obbericd.
that the lffielVeittenuitai had answered the propoo-
tome whiclefflid4sees pot to them. io.ests ef t• ••If
p.sweirlro. lend of tire eilbele of 'b.., be.og 84471:tt d
to a participetioa in the roileges eej.syed
by theProttotentl::ot be(:Owlet:sin geserathsd
ao-
awered slip pnitpositiou—the Catholics of Temperer),
Kildere. and Derry. had con.itred—They had d 6.
dared that they should consider any act of depose-
, Lion by the Pope RS a there nullity—they had dee
dared that Pope, who was hot duly elected by
the Cordiusls was a Pope. whom they world mot air
knowledge. The principles which they recoijoi-ed
went to the full extent of domestic itominatioo.—
Tbigiid declared the Pope. whom they considered
to be the only. lee they ought to acknooledge, to
berm been oppressed, degraded. and plundered.
by wets which they deemed ,equal to sacrilege ;they
bad declared, thee the Emperor of France, by
his conduct to the . Pope. had been euilty of
sacrilege. If steel; was the case, the Collo.
lies of Ireland could never hesitate one moturat
to refuse. as the Heed of the Church, the man oho
was nominated by the natural enemy of their men
King, and whom they considered as having been
guilty of sacrilege. Here then was not only a pobti-
rdheiChauttliaolircesligoifoulsreldaioffideufriotin, wachqiciiilieseiv"u'uglidinttneYr
antninatioo. &redly or indirectly, made by Frato..e.
The Catholics well knew. that the principle of do.
mestic nomination did not go to affect the iiiter..t
of the mother church ; that it did ;sot in any
degree affect the Catholic religion ; and they knew
it the more, because they bad agreed to it. • It sits
Principle which, in 1799. they had agreed to. and
if
Ves:l
antainly they Dever would have done so.
thought it had been one which less l.kely to be tn.
jorioies to their religion. Au lion. Baronet, •1 n
isdeueled to aecoud iii% motion, ass well apprised ,o
that fact, and would doubtless speak to
Reason Gotholies knew eetreseely lied that they
bed within thrinselyaa the nomination of the Ca-
thelt
oh
so
nominationi ;s •
i.th si
rop s
o—,
b:hthec.tyn
remain
ly nuloi
tht,
elei.aitihr
el
al i
use
was
et
the sontimente of the. Cathoho, was p
Only by their answers to the propo-ioon. +ollll'
to there'. as teats of these wincipi.e. but
it era
proved
ttlhba u
the s of
the'the :bear 17.19. 1'
re
that Predate who was at the h,
religion, the Catholics of lyric

that no reliiiion ought to ma!
enemy of hue counts ; for if it
would be 0.11 menn.;steamy—the
land would be subject to to
would be aohject to their
subject to their Dotard enemy.
luau which was unnatural the
the ogle Name destroy the alter*,
He had no manner of don thni

was folliconsillered, the Cathie
have no hesitation iu est iblisliin

*anon; and he entreated the It
the happy consequences whorls
oath a conduct pn the part of thee
In the tirstylies, the good eon•ef

arise would he a- cnnerilerable stil

happiness sad provenly of
laud. Seensully.The advain.se

franchiiiee to tae Imlay ;
pug at large, the entirety of da

lir weanl
be appal
fonts lon'
but, whe
wpoiste
coasider

as era

Ifni. at

the -•I

bveu u

11116•Irl

line
(4'

rotrin a. I. ,••
heat of the (*nth(' ••• t 4c
land wrte tar"u'l' t.a
she a matt obt.7 tar
were other% we there a
ha .Catiolics ire- iie
two otuotero; th:%.
t.
natural Rag.
r. This was a 1,4
u o he uht r t
~t, when the gtttstt. t 4 two
of ,
G
,„
Cathg,iics of Ire
1.4
41tion to the n' e,
,
at,
1114
111

meant was, that 00 spiritual Magistrate should
appointed by any foreign nomination whatever;
as
t was the case, there must be danger ;
orig a a t"...."
but, when that ceasoedine.tjolieber,tohnel
1737 i ,luihtei I es" lrde
appointed by a d
consider the Catholics as isolated with regard to
the pope, and he should consider that every civil
right which the Protestauts_.enjored. ought to be
a tested to the Catholics. He objected to
113 ;mato, she, because the Catholic Bishops
bed not stated such a iphritiriple,
House had no right to that, therefore,
The
they were averse to it.
expect that the Roman Catholics should offer a de-
!oration of the lemma to which they were ready to
c the ; when the House should say it was ready
the Catholics the privileges they asked, and
„itled to, then the Mouse would nave a right
expect, and it would become the Catholics to
,4, by a corresponding espreseion of their semi-
wants, that they were willing to subscribe to a dow
weedy mniostiou. With respect to the communi.
canna of the privileges of the Protestants to the
c.thslics, be thought there could be 110 difficulty.
woni
1t
1 I be as easy for the House to give the Ca.
Mohr, their Privileges, as for the Catholics to Coo.
cede the enact* of domestic nomination. He coo.,
tended, that the Parbetneut, in point of justice,
had no right to mike partiel laws—it had no right
to make arbitrary laws, or laws imposing disabili-
ties for 'accidental circumetanct.s. " Parlianseut,"
he sail, "has tio right to punish religion, because
&Lion is a relationship is which man staude, with
5t5,...,:t to his Maker, independent of any political
emii•ieration whatever." He said he shoed not
go into an abstract consideration of this question.
It as• said in shooter to their claims, that the Ro-
m,' Danaher, in fact, did not come within the de-
- 'ea given of them, because the Catholic re-
eiisswas so constituted, that it could out be consi-
dered otatisectod with disaffection or treason. He
'odd ‘uppeeett Roman Catholic ind.cted for trea-
we,scd that a Catholic Lawyer attended the matter
of the oath, namely, that the ptrsos iselieved in trans
sabstitatiation, setoreid the Virgin Mary, and receNed
from the Pope certain explanations of the Scrip-
tire. He would suppose that he tendered these
w evidence of treason. Suds a lawyer would be a
lashhinpotoek. If a Judge suffered such a goes-
nor to go to a Jury, lie would be punished by ion-
paichinent; sod yet epos the very evidence, for
auto% which mud suffering to go
.go a Jury, a
Lawyer would be laughed at. and a ledge removed.;
se that same evidence, sea as no of ground,
Parliament had disqualified one-fourth et tie peo-
ple of the empire. Tim charges against the Catho-
lically would brit!! state; they were,that tbeCatho-
lies b, tweed in the deposive power of the Pope.
is his sofallibility, awl unqualified power of obligati.
sine. and, lastly, that the Catholic was an enemy to
the —tehlishmeats in this couiitry, bola of Chts-ch
an ' St are; to tnese charges innumerable answers had
been wad.. He should eadeabour to reduce those
movers within a narrow compass. These were, the
ausweris of the Ltuiver.ities. to certain qeenes—the
Arts of the In.h Parliament in the 18th and 28th
Feats of the present reign-r-and the improbability
.of the charges being true. With respect to the
ens•ers of the 63;re-sines. it had heemthwuebt
proper to reduce them, with reference fut the an-
swers given to ghesticess proposed bg Aix 'Unktrsi-
tie., the names of which he entsamiewated. Tiny de.
and that the Pope had a temporal .99wer in this
roestry—they denied that the Pope, er a Car.
diaal, hails deposing power—they disclaimed
the doctrine of no faith with heroics—the in-
loy of the Pope.--end the doctrine of un-
absolatisni. The were the principles
adopted by the (se
who, as so addl.
hose' test, were ready to swear that they would
support the Prstestayit Church, . and the Pro-
teitaat Etahlishasent Of Chore* sad Government.
This oath had been taken by' mrCetliolle4 go-
nersily--the test had' been ProPosea to them by
the Protestants, and they had answered the Test.
He then proceeded to argue on the utter bonus.
ability of the charges against the Catholics being
nee. It was observable that the charges amounted
to a species of criminality, which would render
the Catholics incapable of holding any rank hat.*
ern rs 61/II society-the charges amounted to no
legs than a general imputation that they were
tr.lh..g to transfee %heir allegience front their natural
S •v-reign to their waters! enemy ; and, in fact,
thalthey acted ape* a principle which was sub•
rersire of civil society..:ln viewer to these charges
be 'Null te• the treaties by which the Goa
ternment thisrti
country had subsidized every
Cathuric errantry sus the Continent, with the ex-
..eption of Fumes. In answer to these cheer es
he would appeal to Government itself. The
t'targes were incomputble with the true disc-
t•aaes of. the Christsau religion—they auppee.ed the
ttito icy to be worse than Idolattsra. It was mani-
:esi, however, that the Roman Catholics were 11
-1 the slid:mit,' of Christians. It resulted, there.
tare, that she fellower• of Christ were siippmed to
le worse than the foliowers of Jove, or the fol.
..1.-rs of Mohammed; and it should seem that
a:, •t we called Redemption. had been the duninu.
t' 'n Si sur hopes of salvation. The Gentlemen
sou lad made rise of this argument, he thought
tr
ust either
poselort op their ramie or the argiiment—
Ile is, he should be an.wered, that the ob-
)Thoti was not to the Catholic religion, het that it
its tie bish Catholics. With re.P -ct to that ob-
art the danger did Imo' .0 iouch consiet in
vac t ns is religion as in the Irish Catholics ; he
• : be glad to know how the t:lbarge was made
; • lie .as sure no•lrishatan world make such
"mate. and he shout' noibehere hem if he did.
Ile *geld cot believe an Irishman on his oath, if
‘t wive evidence against his csontry. As the
`'""'", stood. the desert from the Catholic re.
I, • •
he. Ireland must arise either from ph iii.
eel morel causes—from Ph causes they
uld Iris. for physte• easisescoold not create
sad depravity, there coal., nut be a moral plague,
Im sectarians that sectaran plague that paved the deer
or a Pew
t; 4
atop
steps at the door of a Catholic.
would r uo one bile of a neer. to order
ue
1
argument t., a sectarian on the- orbs.
(..,Irfurai
ea! that sdoposed the donor of the
religion s, Ireland to arise f h • l
cicuosop_ld
rhr caben4ej
"rrrah-eaniseemtvatuo uthli-teybesilacairsa
awl to the Government. It
"" reline of the Irish .wvg stated as set of
%it's."is the Catholics that they Wm* an
lawe sad Goverment is Great

Britain—Whenre did that imputation arise? It
anise from our Penal Code—Could it he imagined
that it was the sir, the western breeze, the soil,
the verdure, of England, to which they had an
aver-ion ? No; it was the laws which took away
their property, their liberty, and their mous. He did
uot think it necessary to go minutely into the ar-
gument, to thew that the charges which were made
against the Catholics of Ireland, were. supposiug
they were true, only to he attributed to the system
which had been adopted with regard to therm It
was, in fact, a charge against England. It amount-
ed to a declaration that we had been in possession
of their country for upwards of five hundred years,
and that the result of the connection was the snatch-
less depravity of the people. He observed, that
our penal laws inflicted punishments upon the Irish
Catholics, not for their acts, but for the character
we chose to entertain of them. That character was
not true—there was no probability of its being true,
except 'as the probability might arise from the op-
pression of the people.. He asserted, that there
was mottling in the Catholic religion, or in the
composition of an Irish Catholic, that was hostile to
the Constitution of this country, and if he was to
leek for the grounds of the objection against the
Catholics of Ireland, he should find them in the
fundamental laws of the laud. But he observed,
that the Irish Catholics should have been told, what
would have been the operation of those laws, before
the utilises took place—they should have been told
so when they were promised that the result of the
union would be a coininuoication of British rights
—lt never could have been meaut to desire the
Irish to give up their own Parliament, and then to
tell them, that they were to be excluded by our Par-
!Monist frosts the full benefit of the fundamental
laws of the land. lie was sure that the late Mr.
Pitt was not ap aiithority for that system. He
never thought that the fundamental laws of Eng-
land were against a fair participation of those law-
with the people of Ireland. He then took a tea
view of the laws themselves, upon which the disabi-
lities affecting the Catholics of Ireland were prioci-
pally roweled; and, first, he adverted to the decla-
ration of rights. He admitted, that the declara-
tion of rights 'merited to be considered as an eternal
monument of wisdom and liberality, and that it
constituted a grand model of intelligible freedom-+
but upon what was it founded ? Upon two great
prepositions ; first, it asserted civil and religious
liberty was the inheritance of the subjects of these
realms. Secondly, that a violation of that inheri.
tance, was a forfeiture of the Crown. Neither of
these principles, he contended, militated against the
Catholics. He then referred to the Act of Settle-
ment, obaarving, that it was a limitation of the
Crown, to a certain descriptions of persons, being
Protestants, in consequence of the former family.
who had enjoyed the Crown. ha►ing violated the
civil and religious rights of the country. The
words, being Protestants, were supposed to import,
that no Cathi. lie should he King ; but they never
could be seal bairn*, that uo Catholic should be
a free subject. The exclusion of the Cathotics
from the inheritance of the Crown, was supposed,
ez ei teratini,,..o be an exclusion from their civil
I rights. This was in every respects lawless priuciple;
it supposed that because a man was not qualified
to take the oath pres ribed, he therefore could uric
be a good subject. That because the King was not
of the same religion as hie people, else people
could not be good subjects to the King. It con-
founded two powers that were distinct. A power
in Parliament to limit the Crown, and a power in
Parliament to take away the inheritance of the
people. lie maintained that there was nothing
fundamentally objectionable in the declaration
of rights against the claims of the Catholics
of Ireland. He admitted that the qualifying
oath was ■n objectiort. but he denied it to
be a fundamental one. He argued, that a de-
elaratioa of those rights which had been obtained
by Catholic ancestors, could not be considered
as a fuodausentalobjectiou spinet the rights of the
present Catholics of Irelorirl. The Rights of the
people were not the gift of the King and Parlia.
meat, but the people were toe foundation of both ;
for Parliament did not make the people, or their
own privileges, but it was the people made the
Parliament and their acts. He insisted there neither
was nor could he any thing fundamental in the de-
claration of rights against the Catholics of Ireland.
He contended, that the foundation of the disqualify.
tog oath, was the madnew of the moment; it had
been introduced about the time of the Catholic Plot;
the plot itself was a fabrication ; the executions that
followed were so many murders ; and the disquali-
fying oath was the accomapauying act, dictated by
the same principle of intolerance and bigotry...-.
Therefor«. the disqualitying oath was no proof
that the fundamental laws of the land were adverse
to the rights of the Catholics of Ireland. He then
referred to the terms of the King's coronation oath,
by which the King swore to meintein the religion
.r the land, as by law estelaished. He could not
concede, that the assent of the King to a law, for
the plarpoiie of improving the condition of the
Irish Catholics, could he deemed any violation
of his coronation oath. lie observed. that the die.
abilities which affected the Irish Catholics, supposed
the Protestant church to rest on patios and penal-
ties, and the word of God to bo founded on ty-
ranny. By the effect of them the tint filiirstrate
of the country an. reduced to the nett-may of
takiug an oath agaiiwt toe franchises of his peo-
ple, mod of calling npon God to witnes► so unna-
tend an olili;stMn. It was unnecessary for him
to ask how often His Majesty had been thanked
for that whieh could not be considered as a viola-
tion of las oath. He proceeded to contend that
the altequalif)inig oath. ■oil those parts of the co-
reristiou oath which effected the rights of the Co.
tholata, boll preemie' from the madness of the
manelit, sad that. by the ioterpretation of them,
tile first Magia'rate of the country was swore to
act ye:Ml..oy to the interests of his Footsie.—
lie insisted. that the Catholics of Ireland did out
deserve, by their conduct. the seventies that ski cos
ad them. The English Parliament seemed to say
to them. 5' We have broke* your hearts amid roar
fortunes, . slid all we desire is, that yes will lay
down your lives in our service." He remarked,
that the Govenuseut had not prevented the Cathos
lice from acquiring wealth. Oa the contrary, many
of the Catholics had attaiued a comodesabk degree
of opulence—they had purchased land to a great
exteat. Could it then be imagined that they dad

not sensibly feel their exclitsiou from offices of
trust of every triad their eeciesion from sees in
Perhinneit an'l corporation. of every description
Was it to be imireineil vest the, comatiOnalty did not
sympathise iu the disaletitha. of their more opulent
bretiiren .? He betieree, that it a Usti look labourer
say to he asked who Ita.r %• opted for emancipa-
tion, he would not usiderNtaod the term : but it be
Was asked whether he le-heveri there was any day.
tinction between the Cat:dies and the Protestaies,
he would at once underoaisd the quest:me and
detail the history of the suffering+ of Ids country-,
mere A Catholh: peasant, though he *eight not
be flt fur a Chancellor, was corn! eteut to feet I k. a
man. lie exhorted the House to repeal the laws
by which the rights of the Catholics were re-
strained. Hy doing so they would restore the Ca-
tholic to the protection of the British Constitution,
and would be doing what was no less important
and valuable, adding to the strength of the empire.
At present, there were distinctions which deprived
the. empire of a cousiderable portion of its popula-
tion. He trusted the disabilities would be rentrived,
amid the country thereby acquire that strength a loch
such an act of justice would give it. It appeared
to him as if the English Protestants reproached the
Catholics of Ireland, by saying, n We are a wealthy
people, but as to you, poor fellows, you are not ca-
pable of being free." When this kind of language
was held forth-to the Catholics of Ireland, it tended
to lower and debase their minds, and to prepare
them for a foreign invader.—( Hear ! *ear !)—He
should be told, that if civil franchises were grant.
ed to the Irish Catholics, they would employ
them to destroy the property of the Protestants.
This waster objection he would not enlarge open.
He was of opinion. that the danger which aright
result from the conduct, on the part of the Catho-
lics, in order to justify the system of exclusion.
against them, ought to be proximate, tied not ima-
weary. The legislature that took away their
rights, on the ground of imaginary danger, was
guilty of oppression. lie contended against the
probability of the Catholics acting aga:ost the inte-
rests of the Protestants, from the circumstance,
that the lauded property of Irelaud depended upon
Protestant title. The bulk of the rights of the
Irish Catholics depended upon Protestam title. He
insisted that there war no argument founded upon
present danger, that could justify the Parliament
in taking away the franchises of the Catholics of
Ireland, and by that memo, perhaps, eventually
endangering their own. He supposed the enjoy-
meat of civil liberty by the Catholics of Ireland to
be incompatible with the security of the Protest-
ants, dad that it was necessary to declare so by
Act of Parliament. The Act of Parliament. he
supposed, must run thus:e•-•• Where's the French
nation has prevailed against all the posers of the
Continent ; and whereas we have uo reliance for
support but in our own fellow-subjects; therefore
be at enacted, that orie-fourth part of our fellow.
subjects shall be disqualified.'--(A /aryls.)—Ur,
t m illustrate it further : he would suppose that a
man of war had met with a ship of the enemy.
and was just spier the point of engaging her;
but that, before the eugagetneut began, some
learned geetleinau should require to speak with
the Captain; arid upon being introduced to him,
he should say, that the people of Ireland had at
various periods done certain things adverse to the
intasests of England—that his ship had a number
of Irishmen on board, and, therefore, fee the secu-
rity of the vessel, he would advise him to throw
them overboard—The British Empire was that ves-
sel—the British Empire was the ark in the French
deluge. Whatever remained of living creatures,
not subjected by France, was under the British
dominion; and yet the proposition was, that they
should be drowned. He then made a few general
observations upon the nature of the argument
against the Catholics, and those by which the
Church had been defended. These arguments,
he said, might be reduced to six propositions :
First, That the majority of Christians were the
worst of the himati species. Secondly, That
the result of the connexion of Ireland with
Great Britain had been to render the peo-
ple of Ireland more depraved. Thirdly. That
the laws of the British empire were incoinpatible
with British freedom. Fourthly, That the King
was a sworn Magistrate, against the rights of a
fourth part of his people. Fifth, That the Irish
had got possession of the Laud of the Protestants,
and therefore ought to be disqualified. Anil lastly,
that the Protestant Church was paid by the Irish
Catholics, and therefore the Irish Catholics ought
to be disfranchised. Upon these repo:winos there
was founded the disabilities which endangered the
' safety of the empire. He considered, at some
length. the circumstances which occurred at the
• period when the chealsilities were first imposed on
the Catholics of Ireland, and those which die-
. tinguished the era of their relaxation. He con-
trasted the state of Ireland. at the per.od when
it was suck anti oppressed. with its condition
at a subsequent Unit-, when its freedom was, in
11 some degree, insured, ishea its army was oddered
secure by a Mutiny Bill, *deo it enjoyed a free
• trade, and possessed other advantage., which an
enbghteued system of police had imparted to it.
He observed that, at this petiod, the prosperity of
Ireland burst upon us like the morn. Young Ire-
land came on us like a giant, rejoicing in its
strength—trade tiowished-..agricultuie increased
—the powers of nature seemed to stand at the right
hand side of her Parliament. Religious harmony
shut the gates of Discord, when Perlianteut opened
the gates of Commerce. Haviug proceeded in ties
splendid stile of eloquence, to which the lateness of
the hour prevents our doing justice, he concluded
by remarking, that it had cent us slim years of expe-
rience to conquer our unjust prejudices with regard
to the Carle-dim He rejoiced to see the infatuation
and madness which had so long prevailed, at length
subsided. To the honour of the country. there was
Dot a single petteou on the table Egoism the Ca-
tholics of Ireland. The city of Loodon had scorned
to present a petition. The city of Dublin, it yes
true, had prepared one, but it bad been rejected.
The Ilaieersity of Oxford had, be the judicious
choice of its Chancellor, signified 'their approba-
tion of the principle upon which the present claims
of the Catholics were founded. In 1793. we esta-
blished Popery is North America, and we had re-
cently aria two armies to non.staei the Catholics
of Spain and Portugal in all the.r reihts. France

out of the way, and there was not one papist we
had not embraced, except our owl, cougar) men l
Sir 'Joel's Cox Hirers:. EY, in a %prech ;vest
length, seconded the motion. From the muses of
Moult he produced and referred to, it appealed
that he entered into an elaborate statement of the
MIMI/ proceedings a,,d aims of C About. Council',
hut from the low tone of voce in which he se. k, •
et was impossible to catch a *lngle retitettet iu
the gallery. Hr laiter:y defended the Catluoie
t. nets of confession awl absolution, and calico en
the Home to come to a decision which or aid save
the countri from.ruin.
Mr. O'HAN,A, on account of the lateness or,; e
hour, and the aheence of mine necessary docu-
ments, moved an adjournment of the debate till
Thursday, which wassgreell to.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed
of, and the House adjourned at Half-past UN);
O'CLOCK. till Monday.

'toe he meant was, the
.elt be appointed by au
'list for as long as that vs
hut but, when that cee
'ire ainted ba d
coppoosider they Cat
eof the Pope, and he
eof right which the 1'
eof communicated to
if the argument, the
or. had not stated su
hell, they were averse tr
mid expect that the Ro
ee ; elaration of the tet
do, subocribe ; when tf
he to give the Catholi
were entitled to, th
to expect, and it
ally state, by a cores?:
lust niente, that they w
tae MtitiC UOUJIDatIOII.
111. ration of the pri
us- Catholics. v
be thou!
hen 1t wonlil be as eas3
a tholics their Pried I
r cede the yriacipte c
of tended, that the I
liie had no ritslit to nis
Ind to make arbitrary I.
my ties for accidental
nee he sail, "has uo
Gs et ILlnn is a relatioi
tM revi..,:t to his Mat
to. ghat
the p into an obstrac
' et It we said an atisi
:sr; non Cadsdies,ill
lan. meiotic° given of
is lieliowas so consul
et 4 diced es connected
would slippage* a
ills ow, scd that a Cat}
of the oath, 134
ge. subskanilatioes,uleu
from the Pope cei
fes tire. He would b
.41 at evidence of tree
pG Imghing-otocke
toy 1:04 to go to a Inc
te. peachinent; and yi
stating which awl
Lawycr would beta
ea as that same evils!
tf Parliament had ohs
itv pie of the emirre.
—Gee hl wisuld bristle