The Sun.
London, England, 1825-04-06 00:00:00

~`: ~'

.~.yT...
.__?

#l,‘
,

'

PhICE SEVEN PPNCir.

• - dates, 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 in favour of the Roman Catholic candidate ?---Ile
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 Pro-
testants ; they perpetually dine with ..them ; habits of 'close
friendship exist between the Roman Catholic priesthood and the
Protestants ; there is no individual distaste towards the Pro-
testant existing in the mind of the Catholic Priest ; he feels 'no
antipathy only_to the system by which lie anti his countrymen
are kept in what he considers a state of degradation. ,
Then the existence of civil disabilities has created no disgust
between the Roman Catholics and the ProteStants •thinkr
•L where the Protestant Gentry do nit oppOee, 011)1'014c Itniano --
path :0k the Priests and they are upon a good footing ; but that?
*here a Protestant Gentleman opposes Catholic EmanciPation
he at once becomes 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 reeling ?—No; I confine it of course to
what we call liberal PtoteStants, to whom the Priests entertain
a partiality.
What are the others called ? -They are classed under thet
comprehensive name of Orangemen ; some, of course, are'rnere
conspicuous for their hostility than others, and incur a corre.
spending aversion.
You make a distinction between a than who is an Orangeman
and a man who is tinctured with Orangeism ?—There are some
•professed Orangemen, men who make Orangeism a matter of
boast ; they are extremely obnoxious. Others, who merely op-
pose Catholic Emancipation, are looked upon with feelings of
more mitigated aversion.
As the admission to Parliament, in case of the question Of (.7a.
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 qua-
lification be raised, and 40s. freeholder be done away with P—l
am convinced of it.
Would not the circumstance of granting Emancipation re-
move all prejudices that might exist in respect of the alteration
of the qualification of freeholders ?—I am convinced it would. •
Have you read the statement of Mr. Burke on the subject of
the elective franchise, where he describes the value of it to a.
poor man ; do you recollect the argument urged in 1793, that
there was actually a distinction made in the letting of land be-
tween Roman (3atholics and Protestants : that the Roman
Catholic was never courted by a rich man who was his neigh-
bour, but that the Protestant received civility from him in re--
turn for his vote; and that a great practical distinction arose in
consequence of the disability under which the Roman Catholic
laboured recollect the argument was used, and I think.
if there were only a few freeholders that iirgunient would hold
good ; but where an immense number of freeholders can be
made by a single person (I think the Earl of Glengal has
made 2,000 freeholders in. the county of Tipperary), there is
then an end of the prerogative which a freeholder is supposed
to possess. The peasantry are driven in droves of freeholdere
to the hustings--they must obey the command of their land,-
lord ; it is only in cases of peculiar emergency; and where their:
passions are powerfully excited, that a revolt against the power,
of the landlord can take place. In the county of Dublin there
are two strong reasons why, at the last election the tenant did
not obey the landlord. The first was, the intense interest
which was telt in Catholic Emancipation; and in the second
place, die peasantry were put, by their utter misery, arising from the fall of prices, beyond the landlord's power; the land-
lord 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--It' you disobey your landlords,
what will be the result ? They must seek for other tenants ;
where will they get them ? At the i%lendicity Association 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 whole a desirable arrangement, were to be carried into effect;
here is an arrangement made by Parliament, the effect of which
.is to open Parliament arid :.Office to the upper classes of the
Roman Catholics, but the compromise required on your side
is, that you, the great mass of the people, who never sit in Par.
liament, and to whom office is no object, are to be deprived of
the only privileges that, practically, you are likely to enjoy ?-I do not think any efficient appeal could be made among the
lower order of the Roman Catholics (independently of some
points in which I think their interests arc deeply concerned)
a feeling of wounded pride is excited by the state of the law;
they think that they belong to a degraded caste; this semi-
ment operates strongly upon them, and a mere imagination on
their part will produce practical results, just as perniciqus as if
the grievance were admitted to be as substantial as I am dis.
' posed to think it. To return to the question put to me, I con.:
ceive that the Roman Catholic freeholders-would be reconciled,
by the ascent they would make in the political scale, to the de.
privation of what is in reality no substantial enjoyment. They
would purchase equality with the Protestant servant and me-
chanic, at the expence ore useless vote.
If they argue so sensitively on points of this nature cannot
they argue equally sensitive on this point; or may not a person
make 'use of that argument to dissatisfy their minds with this
arrangement, 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 exercise this privilege, he must require an in,
terest 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 necessary qualification ; a freehold would then
become an object of ambition, and would be a real and honour.
able privilege.
•
Will not the Catholics, in case emancipation is carried, consi-
der that measure as merely conferring advantages upon the
upper orders P.—Certainly not.
Will it be to them and by them considered as a measure con-
ferring advantages upon themselves P—They think it will con-
fer great advantages upon themselves-, and it will, in my opi-
nion, confer those advantages.
Do they talk much about tbe question, or take much interest
in it ?—lt is, I understand from those who know them best,
the subject which chiefly occupies their attention.
Do you mean among the lower orders ?—Yes, among the
lower orders.
Why are they to be considered as disqualified from exercising
the elective franchise, if they are in the constant habit of talk-
ing 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 inability 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 distinction between the individuals who are candidates
for the county, and thus exercising their elective franchise ?
,etihecattons
in
They may be qualified to form a judgment upon the Catholic
Question, which is a subject that touches them nearly; they
have perpetual opportunities of observing and feeling the prac-
tical evils that result from the penal code ; and they are there.
fore qualified to judge upon the fitness of an individual to sit in
Parliament, so far as that question in concerned. It is upon
that question only that they now exercise any opinion.
What do you think would be the effect of a law, which would
raise the qualifications of a twenty-pound freehold ? would it
be to throw more power into the hands of the Protestant voter
than he at present possesses ?—I am not very well qualified to
give an opinion on the subject ; I have heard among Cathclice
themselves, a great dissent of opinion with respect to it. I he,
lieve that in sonic counties it would operate in one way, and in
other counties in a different way ; but I am sure of this, that
freeholders, whose qualification was raised, would be quite free
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 he no partiality on the part of a Ro-
man Catholic voter, in favour 'of a Roman Catholic candidate
—I think that after a year, or some such short period, after the
question had been carried, no such partiality would be mapifest,
td. I know that at first there might be some ebullition of
popular sentiment ; even now, a Protestant, entertaining opi,
riesgarardt
es rather
with
ronyrne
italoveoayueßrLobmlleaant
toncthagetuhßiatieOicaLlaivitecaedthpocol
that
lc:
al Claims,et
Ireland, be decided by higher personal and political qualifica,
tionetied by the „eeetidatece of wealth and rank. •