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

e t )not pretend to foresee. The Gentleman uho
opened the debate this night (Mr. W. Smith), has
alluded to the opinion expressed in another place as
in no way affecting its discussion here. I know very
well, that the opinion of the House alluded to (the
Lords) is not a reason against its adoption here.—
I know there have been many instances where
public sentiment, operating in cnucert with the
opinion of this !Mese, has prevailed over the drter-
minatien of the other branch of the Legislature, and
at length crowned the measure, thus inauspicious in
its outset, with complete success. 'these. howevte,
were case where the public required information,
and time enabled it to c-dleet strength and f•rce ;
hilt what advantage of this sort can be expeete.i up-
on the present occasion, particularly in the case of
a question, which calls for dispatch, and otigle
not to be kept on toot at the manifest risque of re-
. viving animosities and dissentions ? I think, then,
that under these ciicumstances the present question
is of that particular class in which the vote of the
Howe of Lords ought to be taken into account as
a reason against its !further discussion. It is the
,luty of every man, even though he could effeet the
ueasure by his single wish, to look to the conse-
qacnces and the feelings which it may produce.
Now, looking at it in this light, what is the course
which we are advised to purs,le ? It is contended
by the get:demi-non the other side, th.it we should
go inta a Committee, and they press as one argu-
ment a particular circumstance of hardship,; which
Catholic recruits coming from Ireland are liable
in this country, and the minute inconvenience re-
oohing from a Catholic soldier here not having an
opportunity to go to mass. Now, surely, if these
ate grievances that require redress; the Gentlemen
must think them too trivial to justify going into a
Committee, that may shake the whole foundation
of our constitution and Government. A till might
be brought in to regulate any grievance of this sort.
—I lament, for the sake of the Catholics, that
-they should have thought this the proper time
to urge their claim. I may be allowed to lament
it, though I do not presume to blame them fur it.
The extent of the motion alsa furnishes in my
mind a strong reason against it. If you go into
a Committer upon the Catholic thm, or, more
preperiy, requests, it must involve a great di-
versity of opinion.—The petition embraces the
whole, and one member may be for granting
this part, and another that pe:t, and a few may
be for granting all, and the Catholics must thus
experience, at all events, a partial refusal. Now
let me ask thse Honoul able Gentleman who sup-
ported the motion with so much eloquence, what
might be the consequence of thus disappoint.
ing the hopes of the Catholics ? That Hon. Gentle-
man stated, that among the causes of the rebellion
of 170, the hope hold out to the Irish Catholics
in the administration of Earl FitzwiLiani, and not
realised, might have had a great share. I repeat
then. if Gentlemen have a thought upon their minds.
what may not be the consequence of going into a
committee, where refusal of the whole, but cer-
tainly of some part. appeals the inevitable conse-
quence? It does rest Ascot necessary for me to enter
more into detail, or to dwell longer upon the subjeet.
With an earnest wish that the question could be car-
ried, with those checks and restrictions to which I
have alluded as essential to its efficacy and the safety
of the stet* ; wish a deep regret that circumstances
render it impo.sible, that the sense of duty, which de-
terred me from urging it, still maintains its influence,
and that what prevented it then, prevents it now;
dreading also the consequences of a refusal, and
seeing what are the opinions if the Protestants
of Ireland, of the Protestants t f this country. and
of another branch of the Lep,islattue ; observing
farther what appeeeeto be the prevailing opinion of-
this I louse, and the public sentiment, as far as it has
been expressed ; I should a& in contradieion with
my own conduct, if I continued to encourage those
claims, and had rot refused to present the Petition."
Mr. WINDHANI, considering the importance of
the toe don, thought it that measure, by which
alone the great union of the Protestant and the Ca-
tholic viould be brought about. The Right Hon.
Gentleman, he said, had adverted to past times, in
support of his argument ; but how they applied to
the present time, he had not stated. All his reason.,
all his arguments, were insufficient. It was said,
that many persons were adverse to the measure ;
and that it should not be discussed without general
unanimity; he could see nothing in that argument,
but that one or two individuals lead said they would
not support it. ; as long as a Catholic remain-
ed in the country those objettiens must remain
also ; they were founded upon the very essence of
an opinion from which they cannot be removed.
He asked what public question had ever such tuna.
r. city that there would not be some obje.ltions to
it ; while they were obliged to encounter prejudice
and oppose confederacy, how was it possible that
truth and reason could be viCtorious with unani-
mity? He knew of no reason why that which the
Government of the country acknowledged should
be done, ought not to be done now. As to bringing
the question forward without a prospect of success,
and the mischief which it was said might ensue from
the discussion, that mischief which might be done by
the refusal, he returned upon themselves (the Minis-
try) as the cause of it. With respell to the general
terms of expediency, and the futility of the claim
of Tighe, that claim was not set up upon what was
termed a fantastical tight, but it was a claim set up
upon common right, to an equal share and parlici.
pation of the benefits of the constitution under
which they lived. A danger from such refusal was.,
said to be apprehended, but he denied the existence
of any such danger ; and, AO far from being able
to strew a danger, they could not bring furwassi
one reason tc warrant such restrictions ' • but, on the
contrary, the danger to be dreaded was their
own. The way in which right was denied should
be to shew the expediency of such refusal, and the
sear lay upon those who made such restrictions. It
had been argued, that these restrictions were sought
to be abolished,. for the purposes of subverting the
Constitution, aadooverturning the Protestant Esta-
blishment. He would do no more at present than
eater his sclemn protest against the reasons urged in
opposition to this measure, and declaring his firm
resolution to persevere in that object, which he con-
sidered would be for the safety of that very Protest-
ant {establishment to which it was said to be inimi-
. eel. He expressed his most sincere hope and anxiety.
• that in the end, the Raise would establish this most
cilium,, wise, end beneficent measure.

. ,