The National Register.
London, England, 1821-04-08 00:00:00

tnt NA'T'IONAL lIEGI3TEIt.

during a great part of his professional life. The petition
was read mid laid on the table.
Petitions were also prevented from the Royal Borough of
Queen's Ferry—the cleigy of the Diocese of Gluiteeoter—
and the Rector and Churchwardens of the parish of S .
George, Exeter, against the Romeo Catholic claims, and
praying the bill may not pass into a law. Read and Lid on
the table.
On the motion of the Earl of CARNARYON. several
witnesses upon the Grami nil election question were ordered
to attend the house.—Adjourned.
FRIDAY, APRIL 6.
The royal assent was given by commission to the Com-
mercial Intercourse bill, the Husbandry Horses bill, the
Irish Attorneys' Fees Regulation bill, the Irish Witchcraft
Act Repeal bill, and the Grampound Witnesses Indem-
nity bill. The commissioners were, the Lord Chancellor,
the Earl of Shafteshery, and Viscount Melville.
An order was made that a message be sent to the House
of Commons, reqnesting the attendance of Sir M. Lopez,
to be examined at their lordships' bar as a witness, touch-
ing the Grampound Disfranchisement bill.
Lord SIDMOUTH presented a petition from the Dean
and Chapter of Westminster, and one from Stirling,
against the Roman Catholic Claims.
The Bishop of LONDON presented a petition from
the clergy of Sion College, having a similar effect.
The Earl of MACCLESFIELD and the Earl of
SHAFTESBURY also presented petitions from the
clergy, praying that no alteration may be made in the
existing laws which apply to Roman Catholics. The pe-
titions were read, and laid on the table.
The Earl of DONOUGHMORE said, he held in his
hand a petition from the Roman Catholic Bishop of
Limerick, and several members of that church, praying
the house to remit the restrictive part of the bill now
before parliament, for giving relief to the Roman Catholic
body. The noble earl observed, that the petition was
numerously signed, by persons of highly respectable cha-
racter, and it was entitled to the consideration of the
house.
The LORD CHANCELLOR intimated that he did not
wish to oppose the reading of the petition, but he enter-
tained a doubt whether the honae could receive the peti-
tion of a Roman Catholic Bishop, described as the Bishop
of Limerick. The Bishop of Limerick known to their
lordships was a Protestant Bishop, and the question might
arise whether the house could recognise more than one
Bishop of Limerick.
The Earl of DONOUGHMORE expressed his surprise
that any donbt should exist 011 the subject, as it was
known to the house that the Catholic Bishop of Limerick
was ordained, and in the regular exercise of ecclesiastical
functions. He believed there was a law in Ireland which
allowed a Roman Catholic priest to become a Protestant
minister, without any new ordination.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, in reply, observed, that
he did not doubt the functions of the petitioner, but can-
dour induced him to express an objection whirl, might
operate not only on his own mind, but upon others.
The petition was then read,aud laid on the table.
The house adjourned to Monday.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
MONDAY. APPAL 2.
Mr. WHITBREAD presented a petition from the Cler-
kenwell road trust, ugeiust the metropolis consolidation
trusts' bill.
Mr. K. DOUGLAS presented a petition from the corn
merchants of Leith, against the corn averages' bill, praying
that it might not be hurried into a law.
Cartroxsc Bt IL SU M N Elt presented a petition
from St. Saviour's, signed by 600 persons, against the Cu
tholic bill—which be hoped would not pass. lie observed,
that the gallant general had said that his vote was supported
by the majorities of Southwark; this petition, sigaed by SOO
persons, came from one parish only.
Sir R. WILSON replied, that in such parish there were
few electors; and that doubtless the petitioner spoke the
language of their rector, who said, last Sunday, that Sundays
would soon cease to be observed as days of religions worship,
and that a power was rising up which would soon sweep
away all leasehold and freehold property.—(A
doubted not the respectability of the petitioners—hue, he
added, he acted according to what lie deemed the wishes of
his constituents ; if, however, they felt otherwise—grateful
as be was for their support, helwould rather resign his seat
than give it vete against his conscience and against this bill.
Petition ordered to be printed.
Similar petit' were presented, during the evening, from
St. Paul, Bristol—Christchurch, Canterhury—Dutufries--
and Clifton, Gloucester. Severally ordered to be printed.
Mr. HUME presented a 'petition from a person named
Chidley, committed to the county jail of Somerset, com-
plaining of vexatious severities, of having beet. chained, &c.
Ordered to be printed.
Mr. BUTT ER %V ()KT'', having proposed the discharge
of the forever order, moved for retains of weekly Sunday
papers, and Monday editions, with an account of their pro-
duce to the revenue. &e.—Ordered.
CATHOLIC DISABILITY BILL.-Sir J. NEWPORT
moved the third reading of the Catholic Disability Re-
moval bill.

'I he order of the day for the third reading was then
read.
Sir W. SCOTT rose. He contended that such a mea-
sure could only be likely to be productive of advantage
where large parties approved of what was to be done ;
but here, unless lie was much misinformed, the party who
were to be conciliated by the bill were as much divided
about it as those who were avowedly against the bill.
There was so much difference of opinion on the subject,
that by passing the bill he anticipated any other result
than conciliation. He then went on to anbmit, that, much
as the petit' of the Catholic Peers was relied on, they
were not to be received as the expositois and expounders
of the Catholic faith ; they were rather to go to the clergy
and assemblies of the Catholic church. Looking to such
authority as not altogether without weight, lie could not
forget their celebrated explanation on the oath of supre-
macy ; and, remembering that, bow could lie say that- the
Catholic clergy were likely to be satisfied with what was
passing (Hear.) He then wilverted, in illustration of
this point, to the Catholic historians of the reformation;
and to the replies of Air. Charles Butler, which lie admit-
ted to lie as candid as they were learned. The proposed
oath he viewed as the most important part of the bill.—
lie would give them more important opinions than ihs
I own. Mr. selden said, that the Catholics could not enjoy
privileges sncli us were enjoyed by the other subjects,
who were Protestants. Mr. Locke held that such was
their religion, that they gave themselves up to a foreign
prince and foreign iutlueuce. Lord Clartntlun and Mr.

‘'

Justice Blackstone expressed like opinions—namely,tha
so long as they acknowledged foreign inthrence, even in
spiritual matters, they could not complain of exclusion.
Such were the opinions of most eminent men; and by
acting on such opinions, the constitution had stood from
the reformation down to the present time. It was now
proposed to alter the securities which had been deemed
essential from the time of the reformation. As to the pro-
posed oath, he maintained that it was quite impossible fur
the Catholics of Ireland to take it; it acknowledged the
King, nut only as head of the temporalities, but of the spi-
ritualitien. Could they sincerely take such an oath as this?
He thought not—that it was quite impossible. The Ca-
tholic's conscience was, or it was not, in the keeping of
the Pope, as head of the Romish church. If it were not
in such keeping, the Net had not been truly represented ;
but if it were in such keeping, how could the proposed
oath be taken ? The laws declared that such foreign in-
fluence was noxious—it was calculated to be must mis-
chievous, and therefore had it been forbidden and guarded
against by language es sweeping as language could he.
Yet now such guard was to be done away—but the Ro-
man Catholic's conscience remained. As to the influence
of this oath, we neidei stood hint to state, that on toleration,
accompanied with such fetters, he had no relianee. But
they talked of the Irish Roinish church as well as the Irish
Protestant church, so that we had two churches there—
Ireland had the double-headed mousier.—(A langh.)—By
agreeing to thin bill, he maintained that by it was endan-
gered by two centuries of blood and suffering. He con-
cluded with moving an amendment, that the bill be read
a third time this day six months.
Sir J. HILL seconded the amendment, contending that
he viewed the measure as being of a decided revolutionary
character. It went on to authorise an intercourse with
the see of Rome. He had heard with astonishment the
assertion that our constitution was not essentially Proles-
taut; he maintained that it was such, if there were any
meaning in the bill of rights, and the calling of the Prince
of Orange to the tlwone, and the terms on which every
monarch thereafter was to hold the crown. This change
made I view the bill as a revolutionary measure ; and
lie also considered the change of the oath of a revolution-
ary character. Every Protestant was bound, contrary to
the provisions of this bill, that no foreign power, pope, or
potentate, ought to have influence in this country. If this
bill passed, he did not see how Protestants could take the
present oaths. He also maintained that the bill was ab-
surd. He had received ample proof that the Catholic
clergy and laity of Ireland were against the bill. They
called it the slavery, the insult bill, and both parties ap-
plied to it every opprobrious epithet that they ersald.tlsiesk
of. Where then was the prospect of conciliation ?
Capt. O'GRADY stated, that as fat as IA could learn,
there was not that opposition to the Catholic which had
been described to exist.
Mr. C. HUTCHIBSON again spoke of the bill as not
calculated to produce the concord anticipated by some.
He would not vote for the amendment, because that
would get rid of the bill altogether; nor could he vote for
the bill in its present forms: lie was sorry that the bill
could not be re-committed, that there might still be the
opportunity of getting rid of the obnoxious portions of it.
Mr. RICE observed, that when the resolutions of some
Catholics were adverted to, the protest of other Catholics
was not named.
Mr. ELLIS spoke against the bill, maintahring that it
was not calculated to give satisfaction to Protestants or
Catholics.

denied that the opinion of Mr.

•
Mr. ROBINSON
O'Cnnnel was the opinion of the Catholic body; be had
no hopes of satisfying that individual by the present or
any other measure, but he was fully persuaded that,
if
adopted, it would give satisfaction to the great body of
the Catholics.
Mr. GOULBURN repeated his former arguments
against the bill.
Mr. CANNING thought, that the house was to look at
this present proceeding not as an act commencing a new
series of acts, hut as a crowning set of mercy following
and in pursuance a variety of others. The great question
was, whether, upon passing thelpresent bill, there would
not be a more wholesome state of law than formerly.--
He next touched upon the number of Catholic members
that were likely to be introduced by it into parliament,
contending in contradiction to the opponents of the mea-
sure, that instead of To from Ireland and 30 from En-
gland, the utmost that would probably be returned would
be a dozen in the whole. Admitting, however that more
might obtain entrance, allowing even that the vision of
the hundred knights was to be realized, still lie would ask
in what way they would be able to set about the destruc-
tion of the constitution? The other side who talked so
much of danger was bound to show Irma whence it would
proceed, and how it woidd operate—in what way the Ca-
tholic representatives would succeed in corrupting the
rest of the SW members, or at least the whole of the
1 minorities on the late divisions on this subject, and the
greater part of the supporting majorities. (Hear.) He
contended that the measure was eminently calculated in
conciliate the Irish, and to cement the Union; the re-
centness of which was to be considered an advantage
instead of an ebject.on, inasmuch as expectations in-
dulged since that event were now to be realized ; pro-
mises and pledges were to be fulfilled before Mope were
so delayed as to make sick the heart. To this considera-
tion must the house come at last, whatever fate might
attend the bill elsewhere—viz. whether it was not neces-
sary to incorporate the hearts and feelings of four millions
of Catholics in the same manlier we had incorporated
their laws, ;heir commerce, and their institutions.? whe-
ther they should be united to Great Britain firmly and
effectually, or leave them in an island of their own, and
by a mistaken policy coerce theta in proportion to our
clanger whether they should he continued under the
(Meat of repression and subservience, or raised to a level
with ourselves. Regardless of internal squabbles and
party cavils, let the house now consummate that great.
work which, when once convumated by it, sootier or
later must be accomplishi.l. (Continued cheering.)
The cries for the question and for clearing the gallery
were now universal, and strangers withdrew accordiegly.
The house then divided—For the third reading, 216—
Against it, 197—Majority for it, 19.
On our cutout, in the gallery we found
Mr. YELL stating that though he would not admit the
Roman Catholics ought not to be called on to take the oath
of supremacy as well as the Protestants yet he cousidrred
the same argument by a kieh the Catholic was exempted,
would ulm go to exempt the Protestant. He would there-
fore, with the view of having his opinions recorded on the
journal., move that tile ,econd page (Putt containing the
oath) he omitted. This, alter a few words from Sir J. Mac-

.*PP. • ..., 41r,