The Sun.
London, England, 1825-02-19 00:00:00

ceives the Secretary of the Society of Antiquaries, another clay
the Secretary of the Bible Society, another day the SecrOta.efy,
of the Society of Arcs, and several others, no one ofwhi n
sits the exception of the Society of Arts, is charteredto any
wish follow
than the Catholic Associatian ; and you
his example. Now, Sir, I cannot help thinkingfor my own
you com-
part, that this will be the greatest mistake that ever
same
mitted. rdo nct mean to say you corn
take in 1766. You did not then know het
you hired a
whom
macter of Dr.
Franklin, a great and illustrious name now' it
wechii
• the highest price for
man to abuse in the Privy Council, giving..
oso not then know that
a sarcastic speech against him.
Vof his countrymen. The
tie enjoyed the affections and regardmen
are unanimously cho-
p:Si:Opal charge now is, that thesehe ssoci at i on. We know they
een as the Representatives of
the
Association virtually repre-
sents the Association,
busitthat, you say, is the reason why
cents the Catholic Body ; but I say, when these men are known
they aiuet be put down ;
of the Catholic Association.you ought to
to possess the confidence
of making a treaty with Ireland through
be glad ofanopportunoy
these men. This may be done easily and
the mediuM f
you° hear their statement. If you examine evi-
'PeeallY' ifof two things of necessity will happen ; either
aence, I say one
you will.orent the prayer of the petition, or you will reject it ;
kindand
taut you will reject it, after a consolatory process.
Sow, Sir, I am met with one objection here on the subject;
and' lam told there is no precedent. For myself I fairly say,
ths.o circumstance would not abate the fervour of my resist-
ance, because, in my opinion, it is an unprecedented case.
PecaOse it is a new case, that makes the necessity greater to.
resist it. I dare say we lost America by following a prece-
dent. -lii 1776, what took place with respect to the Stamp''
Act ? That was a case of petitions against the Stamp Act,
which was a general law. Those petitions came from Ameri-
cans abroad and in London, and were referred to a Committee
of the whole House. An examination took place in 1766,
when the memorable testimony of Dr. Franklin was given,
which was pasied into a literary document. That examina-
tion ended in the repeal of the odious law. So that the
Horse not only 'examined witnesses, but that was followed up
by the repeal of the obnoxious measure. Afterwards various
petitions and remonstrances were presented against the Bos-
ton Port Bill. The Learned and Honourable Gentleman
here ,read an extract from the Journals of the House of
Lords, the substance of which, as far as we could collect,
was expressive of the motives which induced the House not
to accede to the prayer of the petition. He also read the
protest of Lorde Fitzwilliam, the Duke of Portland, and Lord
Rockingham, on that occasion, and proceeded to the follow-
ing-effect : —Dr. Franklin, who was here at that time, says, in
one of Ills letters home to his friends, " My object is to save the
,elorious fabric of the British Empire from being destroyed
by these calumniators," &c. ; and those who preached up in
those days, governing men by their affections, were held as
fanatics, and wholly unworthy of attention. The consequence
was, the prayer of the petition was rejected, and an eminent
man was maltreated here. . This, with other causes, had led to
the great struggle of that country with this, and it was not
-until 7 or 8 years afterwards, and after thousands of lives had
been lost in the question, that the Government of this country
awoke to its right senses, and that America, as my Honour.
able Friend, the Member for Westminster (Sir F. Burdett), had
said, obtained its brightest jewel. For my part, I cannot but
rejoice that so magnanimous a spirit was then shewn to the
world on the other side of the Atlantic, that millions of free-
men were found to be unanimously struggling for the glories
of liberty, and that so noble an instance was then put forth
of a great community governing themselves freely and econo-
mically without tyranny either in Church or State—a people
uniting a degree of magnanimity with their acts of legislation, to
be paralleled by nothing that was to be met with in modern times,
and which went near to wipe ofFthe stains that had blemished the
name of a republic. I consider these arguments, Sir, as suffi-
dent for the support of my motion, but before sitting down
may perhaps be allowed to say, that it must be in the re-
collection of even the youngest Members of the House,
that petitions similar to the present have been received with
Counsel, and witnesses; and I myself remember, that my first
introduction to this House was in the year 1808, when I came
betbre its Bar as Counsel for a petition ; and I the more warm-
ly press this motion on the House, because lam convinced,
that, if even the Bill for the Suppression of Societies in Ireland
is not successfully proposedoyet, at least, the plan I propose
will give such a light to the affairs of Ireland, and create such
a glorious feeling between you, as the Representatives of
England, and them, as the Representatives of the dis-
contented of Ireland, as must eventually, I am persuaded,
lead to much better and much kinder feelings between the
two countries. Surely the house should not oppose this
hearing, that is demanded on behalf of six out of seven mil-
lions of the population of a distressed country—in behalf of
a religion that was once your own. It is a favour that once
was conceded to the hawkers and pedlers of this country, and all
that I ask is, that the same favour should be bestowed on six
millions of Roman Catholics that was granted to the pedlars
of England. Let them as the pedlcrs have been, be heard by
their counsel and witnesses : the cases are not altogether op-
posed to eack other : each party came before the House com-
plaining of seievances, and I find in the petition of the hawkers
a sentence that might have been, with much propriety, copied
into the present petition :—" Your petitioners have heard,
with the utmost astonishment and affliction, that there is a Bill
before your House for their utter extermination, untried,
unheard, anti uncondenned ; we claim, therefore, as our birth-
right, and as free citizens of the State, to be heard by
counsel and witnesses." The prayer of this petition was
granted to the hawkers, and this is exactly what is
asked by the Roman Catholics of Ireland : they only ask now
what was granted to another body in the year 1785. lam
afraid that I have trespassed too long on the patience of the
House, but before I conclude I have one request to prefer to
both sides of the House. Let us, I intreat them, on this oc-
casion, to forget all the animosity of faction and party ; let us
with one accord seize upon this golden opportunity, remember.
log that it is an opportunity sent to us as a God-send, and,
whether we receive the Bill or reject it, at least the safest way
will be to hear such things as the Catholics may think proper to
offer, the only way for understanding the ground-work on which
:we are proceeding, being an attention to such grounds as may
be offered on eithr side ; and at present I do not speak so much
'of the Counsel, whom for a moment I will set aside; but I do
call attention to the witnesses that are offered to our considera.
tion, and whethenthis Bill he passed or rejected, I now give it
as my settled and earnest opinion, that on this may be founded
a basis of lasting esteem, and of a conciliation, in every respect
unexceptionable, with the Roman Catholics of Ireland. I
therefore move, Sir, that the petitioners may be beard by them-
selves, Counsel, agents and witnesses, at tl:e Bar of this House.
Sir F. BURDETT seconded the motion.
Mr. C. WYNN should object to the motion on general
:Parliamentary principles. If a Bill affected any body of in-
s dividuals by name, or if any body of individuals could state
{that they suffered a grievance from the provisions of a Bill,
the usual course was to hear them at the bar, although the
rule was not general. The lion. and Learned Gentleman
had iiomplainetl of the haste with which the present question
• was pressed.; but after a debate of four days, and when the
second reading was put off for a week, he thought the charge
was not well founded. At the suggestion of the Honourable
and Learned Alember himself, the next stage of the Bill was
deferred from this day to Monday. that it might be in the
hands of Members, and under a minute examination. The Bill
had been called a condemnation of the Catholic Body, but, if it
west: so, he should not support it.---(H ear, hear!)-It was a ge-
neral measure to put down all Associations and. Societies.—
(Cheers.)—lf Societies assuming one garb were not suppressed,
rival Societies, assuming a 'different garb, would start, and
the contentions between them be acrimonious and intermi-
nable. The Boston Port and Stamp Act were local measures.
The Catholics, on the contrary, were constituents of many of
the Members of that House, and might thus prefer their com-
plaints to Parliament. If this Bill affected Catholics only,
and not Protestants likewise, he should never give it his sanc-
tion. Ile did not like to quote precedents, but he might advert
to the Poll Election Act of 1785, and also, to what most sur-
prised him, the remark of his Hon. and Learned Friend (Mr.
Brougham), in favour of a Petition from individuals for a
whole Body. He recollected when a Petition was presented on
behalf of some slaves who,could not themselves petition against
being removed from an island where they bad been born, the
Hon. Member for Winchelsea objected to any one coming for--
ward as the next of kin of any set of men, and observed that if
• allowed, persons would appear as the next of kin of the people
-of England.—( Hear!)—He had no objection that Negroes,r if
permitted by their masters, should themselves petition Par !a-
nent but appearing by their next of kin was fraught with
danger. No Bill of general operation was ever opposed by
'
or evidence at the *bar, but Bills affecting particular
counsel
bodies or individuals. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had
referred to the facts in the Hon. Seeretary for Ireland's speech,
invalidated. but in these there .was no i His Hon. Friend
whether
did not/ state the soldier Hanley was a
(Mr. Gottlburn)
Catholic or Protestant. Even whether he was guilty or Irmo-
.show that the Ass
cent did not affect that which went ton
of ju He knew
.prejudging Association
persons
interfered in the administratioe knew What the-Hon.
before they werearied.—(Cheers
opinion of justice was.; but it
Baronet's (Sir Francis Burtletes ).roon
to
come to trial unpre-
, was the undoubted. right of every
1
judiced. ' The Bill might rest simply on the declarations of the
ts stated in which was to
Catholic Association, one of the ohj
ecjustice. No statement of
- interfere in the administration of
on as to the expediency
- facts could alter his (Mr. Mrynn's.2.oPin!-- concluded
aad justice of the present Bill. The Hon.- Member
b 7
benefits which would accrue to Irelan4
f m‘ n Tvt g to the
in that country.
Sir J. pTeiuting Societies of all descriptionsVOßx speaking on Irish,
was the habit of
not in
affairs, althoa h The Catholic
' e gave
Association; he them much attention.
down. ,For
wever, he thought ought to be put

111 n'f