The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1821-04-17 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS, MONDAY, Amur, 16.
Their Lordships met at four o'clock, and adjourned during
pleasure.
At a few leallartall after bee o'rliselt the LORD CHAN-
CELLOR remenvad his mot en the Woolwich.
CATHOLICS.
Several Petitions were presented for and against the Claims
of the Roman Ceiliolies, but from the oppressive number of
persons that were admitted below the bar, we were only
able to hear the following.
The Bishop of CIIF.STER presented a Petition from cer-
tain Inhabitant' of the Towle of Liverpool (against the
Claims of the Roman Catlodies.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN presented a Petitiolt from
the same place in favour of the Claim,.
The Bishop of CHESTER presented a Petition from
certain Inhabitants of the City of Bath sgainst the
The Bishop of BATH prevented a similar Petition from
the Clergy of Bath and Wells, and the Deanery of Stowe,
and a similar Petition from the Clergy of RI il.lOl.
'flue Earl of SRA FTE•.BURY a similar Petition from the
Protestaut Dissenters of the 'fowl' of Newark-opon -Trent ;
end a similar nue from the Parish of East Dereham is the
County of Norfolk.
The Bishop of OXFORD presented a similar Petition from
the Clergy of the •relsdraconry of Oxford, and similar Pe-
litioos from the Parishes of St. John, Soittliwirk, and St.
Botolph's, Aldgale.
The Bishop of NORWICH presented a Petition in favour
of the Catholic Claim..
The Earl of DONOUGH MORE. as we understood him,
lamented a Petit' from the Boman Catholics of the City
and County of Galway, prestoe that the Bill might be
passed into a law; and a Resolution from She Catholic
Clergy of the County of Kerry against the second part of
the Bull —They were severally read and 'mid on the table.
TILE PETI fION OF THE CATHOLICS OF
ENGLAND.
Earl GREY said he ruse for the purpose of presenting the
Petition of the It u Catholics of Euglatid to their Lord-
ships, which was signed by the Catholic Peers, the Clergy,&e.
He had great satisfaction in presenting the Petition, from the
high characters stud the loyal disposition* of the Petitioners.
From his own observations he could seseill that there was
no class of men who were more distinguished fur all that
was regohrett of them in th. it star of life. It was unne-
cessary for him to 1111 SA ibis encomium on theist, as it was
admitted by those %%les opposed their relief, he would say,
who roll.Cleatinasly typos. d it. Ile wool.' undertake la
say that there were no class of people that were more at.
ached to the Constitution, and more loyal to the Crows.—
Thus WaSa.l.nittill by the Noble Earl ( Liverpool), who Ctillari-
eativas:y opposed the grant of She broit to its, Petitioner*.
The N•ible Carl had gone Natter on a former discussion,
and said that the echelon itself of the Petitioners wrs not
au objecti iiii to their beteg pot its mania of their rights;
but the Noble Earl look up his objeclion on another ground
which be (Earl o.) would have an opportunity of discussing
in the proceediugs of the night, which was to be brought
lwfure their I rordships by much inure able hands than his;
but t.s the Pelitlou mime recommended by the good conduct
of the Petili 0000 err, and the time of its bring presented bring,
is his opinion, most propitious to their attaining eheir ob.
jeet, it would be °newer...Ars to enter inure fully into the
subject further thin to f Clll.ll k, thee the Herd of the Roman
Crilsolic Church Cal b., placed as not to he longer dan.
[emus to the Established Church of this country. 1 he Bill
had passed the other House of Parliament, after a most fair
and tntlrarti.s diworesion, which did honour to those who
opposrd She Pitt; it was Slot met with iter•ntimy, but fairly
and bouoorably disc owed. and 1.3,,ed the Iluww. This
was all be shed Cur the measure, which load been justly de-
scribed by his Noble Friend as a measure of justice and
mercy to the Runim Catholics; he therefore trated that
their Lordships wool.' pass the Bill, which would he adding
strength to the country; and &Oath we were at peace
with all the INMI.I, ul was impossible for the wt,.aS of them
to say how loeg •c should remain so, as the roles UlOlOllll
*hurl. had taken ph-ce might reach us—sod if they did, and
all his Majesty's subjects had 'goal rights, it would be such
a barrier of dcfruce as to defy all the world from intrrfetiog.
If this was strength that could he vatted, why emits& the
Petitioners from silo:slims* in the State, which their claims
called loudly fur? Ile hail also to lay before their Lordships
the Resolutions of the English Catholic Perri, See. after the
11111 bad palsied the other House of Parliament, that they
were ready to lake the oaths as proposed I.y that Bull ; and
at the same time expressed their 'halide+, and also their
hopes that they would I.e enabled to tale their seats in that
House, as their forefathers did. ho cuntiolcoce iliat their

liament of Ireland in the sine year, iiermrd to
have made the first material breach in the injurious
disabilities and penalties mailer which Roman
Catholics suffered, which breach was still more
widrued, and that almost to the whole extent of
rights soil civil privileges at present enjoyed by
British Catholics, by the British statute of 1791.
The spirit of liberality seemed about this period to
have pervaded the upper ranks, especially of the
Irish gentry and imbility. Very great and import-
ant concession* were made by the Irish Act of 1783,
and still greater and more important were those
made by the Act of 179 i. But the British Sta-
tute of 1793, which enacted the resolutions of the
elective tisuchisie, and several other very important
privileges, had ',laced the Irish Holguin Catholics
so far above their Catholic fellow-subjects of this
country, as could nor be justified by any principles
of fairness and right redsou. In this strange and
anomalous state had the Catholics of all ranks
stood at the passing of the Act of 1793. And
to that stair they would have stood until now, had
it riot been for the generous exertoun of the autho-
rity then held by a Noble Freiad of his, who was
then at the head of the naval department, who, at
the iliarigation of a Noble Viscount, caused an Act
to be passed, which ought to be styled an Act of
peculiar grace and favour, by which 111011 e English
Catholics who were serving an the navy sou army
were put upon the same hunting as those of Ireland.
Few of the latter had, however, derived any advau-
urges front the concessions thus previously made to
Since the Act of 1793 coucessieu seemed
to have been dead ; there were no subsequent
records of its influence und operations. The case
of the Nuivau Catholics bud cut altogether
escaped the notice of the Gower iiiii rot and le-
gislature. lu 11-cloud. while they had a Par.
lisment, and in the Parliament of this country,
the wretched spliditioo. of the Rainau Catholic
population had been urged, and coos:detect over
and over again ; but with the exception of two in-
stances which occurred in the other House of Par-
lieineist, never, since 1793, had the consideration of
the grierunces of the Catholics beet' treated in
what could be fairly called a parliamentary way.
Under these circumstances it was that the present
Bill, winch again might be called a Ball of grace and
mercy, had passed in the other House, and had now
arrived at its due stage of discussion before their Lord-
ships. The Bill had beers met uhnost before it
passed the threshold of their Lordships' I louse by
a threat—lie would rather say a prutuire olopposi-
tiois from two Noble Preis. Ile alluded to the re-
marks made upon the Bill lei soon :is it entered the
House by the First Lord of the Treasury mid the
Noble and Learned Lord who sat in the 11'ool-
sack. They hail promised to the Bill their must
firm opposition, seemingly without a moment's time
fur delay or deliberation as to the question whether
or not the Bill was of a character to require it. He
trusted that in the course of the debate their Lord-
ships 'would hear the reasons assigned which could
have induced those noble persons thus to treat the
introduction of this Bill with such indifference as
to its intros, sod such determitistiou as to their
treatment of it. Was not there some loran of deli-
beratiois at least due to a communication made to
them by the other HOIIIIt I Were they prepared upon
any proposition 'stitch might be made by the Lower
House to declare that they would hear notlmig—
that they had already determined nut to grunt one
iota of any thing which nr.ight be asked ? He had
always understoud, that, in a parliamentary- sense,
the limit reading of a Bill wes a matter of' mere
form. This was the substantial reading of the
Bill —that stage whereto the practice of Parlia-
meet had always been to take foil deliberation
upon ir. %Vete they then prepared—did those
Noble Lords to whom he had alluded, mean to in-
timate:et by their prompt opposition to the Bill,
that they would tallow it no reading at all ? Ile
wished them to consider the eircuinotances under
whirb at had come to them. It was not a measure
which hall been rashly adopted by the other I looses
It had been tried in the furnace of debate; it had
passed the fiery ordeal of tire weeks of Parliamen-
tsry discussion. Scarcely was there a paragraph in
it which Mud not undergone examitineion, and upon
which a division had not taken place ; and after
the dehisce/dim) and prolonged attention paid to the
subject by the other House, were their Lordships
prepared to say that it deserved neither its soy de-
gi ee from them? They were justifiable in ex-
ainiiiilig, and oat the convietiois derived from thence,
either to applitove air ele•appsove of the proposition
t4ulltilittrd to them. He particularly regretted
the eiturse taken by the Noble Lords to whom
he had alluded, because it was too much the
ease for the majority to be influenced not more
by the merits of the gorstiuli, than by such decla-
rations coming front quarters of so high an autho-
rity. Atuoflaer reason lie had to iiiduce his sur-
prise at the early opposition of those noble per-
sons wane that, in a Parliamentary sense, the OR.
11061 tint to the second reading of a Buil was always
supposed to be au opposii of principle to the
Bill, and of course it was quite competent to any
•Peer to say that he objected to any Bill, either
ill the whole or in its parts. They might declare that
the priociplL• wns or that the tivtailr

the first part of the Bill, who was not per-
fectly satisfied with the condition of Rumais
Catholic subjects, as it stood then—and thought
that their condition could not be made better, mid
that the subject was not fit to be inquired into.
But if the Nuble Earl really thought the condition
of Roman Catholics not satisfactory to themselves:
and at the same time deemed them not worthy of
civil trust, why did he object to the securities which
were offered by the second part of the Bill ? He
could not comprehend on what such objections
could be founded. Yet the Noble Earl, after
dividing the Bill into two parts, had declared
that he objected equally to both. Ile (Earl
Uou►oughrnorr) had nut only the antholity of the
Peers and Prelates who bud signed the Petition
which had been prevented by his Noble Friend, to
thew that the Bill likis*ble and conciliatory
measure, but lie had also the sißhority of the other
!louse of Perlianteist in its favour. All that he had to
request of their Lordships was this, that they would
deign to consider that Bill whit h had been mulct
so many favourable circumstances sent up to them
let it have full and due deliberation. If this
were to he refused, he would hove them consider
who those persons were whose case they would not
deign to consider. They were full one-fourth of
the populatioto of Gnat Brita►n—they were four-
fifths of the whole population of Ireland. lie the
letter country there were four millions of Roman
Catholic►, comprieing all classes of subjects, and
-among them some of the most respected urines
knew') to the couutry. Were these ',toper persons
to be treated with► indifference) Had they never
heard of their case before? Did their Lordships
never inquire at any time how far these very
pasties were in • civil Belem trust-worthy ? They
had made that inquiry as they ought to have
doe, ; they had given the Catholics nothing wail
they had first moored themselves of the loyalty of
the Ronnie Cethulic hotly. They (the Catholics)
hail proved their loyalty in every practicable way ;
they had offered themselves to ell sorts of tests ;
there were oaths of all kind, prepared for them to
take, from 1718 to 1778. They bad taken a:I the
oaths so prepared, acid proved themselves to be
completely trust-worthy. He did not know what
more could be required of them ; he did not know
what they had left to concede—what it was now in
their power to disown. He wished any Noble Lord
would get up in his plaCe and describe any thing
maintained by Catholics of ■ religious knot which
was tea owned, which was in any way disowned by
any other religious sects. The Act of 1793. which
restored the elective franchise to the Catholics of
Ireland, was a full soil complete admission that the
Catholics were worthy of trust, aid of the p►otees-
lion of political power. They had stow been in the
possession and exercise of the elective franchise
for twenty-eight years. Perhaps it would be said
that this wits not sufficient time for probation ;
perhaps it would be said that tuuch had been douse,
but that it was necessary first to see the ultimate
effect of that which had been already granted—that
the door of the Constitution was 'already half open,
and if there should be no abuse of the privileges
sires& conceded, that would be a good argument
for admitting the Catholics into the full and un-
qualified possession of constitutional right roil pri-
vilege ; or he ought to be tub' that the Constitu-
tion was a Protestant Constitution, and that it was
dangerous to attempt silty alteration of that pflitcl•
ple in it. He was also ready to declare that it was
• Protestant Constitution. He venerated the Protes-
tant parts cr the Constitution. But he considered
that there was a necessity fur securing ummitnisus
nceordatice among all classes of his Majesty's sub-
jects—that all causes of jealousy and heart-burning
should be done away from between them, and that
no invidious comparisons should in future be allow-
ed to be maintained between them. These were the
reasons which lie had to offer to their Lordship. in
calling on them to give the seciesil reading to the
Bill. Ile wished next to consider for a while the pot.-
ties who were to he chiefly benefited by the Bill. One
of these parties had appeared in the eyes of some of
their Lordships as very formidable. Ile alluded to
the Pope. His Holiness was not a little dreaded,
though lie had done no harm, at any rate for the
last 100 years. Having done nothing argumenta-
tively wrong for such a period, and the British
Roman Catholic Clergy under him having clone
nothing to the annoyance of the State, was this
u favourable time to prohibit the freedom of
intercourse which hail existed between these
patties (luring so long a time ? Ile could not think,
with such facts before him, that the Pope
could be that dangerous sort of person which the
fears of some described. He did not think that
the conduct of that Potentate was calculated to
keep awake any suspicion of his motive.. There
was nothing which he could do which he had not
done—there wits no length proposed in Parliament
in which he had not gone more than half way to
meet the concessions proposed to him. He would
read part of a document containing important
alterations made by the College of the Propa-
ganda Fide at Rome, in the oath appointed to
be taken by the Viesrs Apostolic in England, and
the litsh Roman Catholic Bishops, according to
which the full .tre.ng words are entirely omitted,