The Sun.
London, England, 1825-05-27 00:00:00

[MORNING CHRONICLE.]

A" warm discussion took place last night on
Mr. Spring Rice's Motion, for the production
the dispatches of the Marquis of Wellesley, in
which he communicated his opinion with regard
to the measures necessary for the tranquilliza-
tion of Ireland. Mr. Spring Rice introduced, his
motion by a speech calculated to produce a power-
ful impression on all but the most prejudiced
minds. He was evidently deeply impressed
with the danger of the position in which the
Empire has been placed by the recent decision
of the House of Lords. As he very justly Ob.
. .

served, the expectation which the Catholics had
been taught to entertain, were calculated to add
greatly to the irritation they must feel on account
of the result. Without charging the Administra-
tion with downright fraud, he alluded pointedly to
the very suspicious contrast between the tone of
the opponents of the claims in the outset, and
afterwards when the matter was brought to a
close—a contrast which it seems difficult to ac-

count for on any other principle than an intention
to deceive the Catholics "There was not (he
said) an individual connected' with the Catholic
Party—there was not a Protestant who wished
well to Ireland, that did not entertain what ap-
peared to be a reasonable expectation, that
the condition of the Catholics would be better
at the close of the Session than it had been
at its commencement. Nor were these hopes
dithinished by the tone which had been taken by
the opponents of the Bill in that House. For,
although they contended against the measure on
principle, yet their tone was so mild and concili-
atory, as to disarm the Catholics of resentment,
and to excite in their breasts a feeling of regret
that talents were not exerted on their side of the
question, which, had they been successful in de-
feating the Bill, would not have accompanied that
defeat with insult, but would have given a grace
and a dignity even to the refusal ofjustice." AII the
Jesuits are not on the side of the Pope. The Hon.
Member stated a circumstance which shews, in a
striking manner, the meanness of the arts to which
the No Popery Gentlemen do not disdain to have
recourse. " He would mention, he said, one fact
which he conceived to evince a more than ordi-
nary degree of depravity. An individual, for-
merly tried for sedition—a man named Benbow,
had published the Speech delivered by an Illus-
trious Person in another place. To this Speech,
this man Benbow had subjoined matter of the
most inflammatory description,'Calculated to pro-
duce the most violent irritation throughout Ire-
land. lie knew Positively, that a person in
office, a Member of the House, of Peers, had
taken care to' dissemiate all over Ireland, this
Speech of the Duke of York, with the com-
ment of Mr. Beribow." The Honourable Mem-
ber gave an amusing history of the immi-
nent perils to which the country was ex-
posed in the course of the last century from
the plague, and the Jews, as well as from Po-
pery. Some Parliamentary sages, who succeeded
in exciting so formidable a clamour, as to frighten
the Legislature into *a repeal of the Jew Bill,
conceived' that we should be stripped of our li-
berties by standing army of Jew's. The Church
never was in such danger. The Jews were coming
" for the keys of the Church doors." It affords
us some consolation to. think that though the•dis-
position of the interested parties is base enough

to take advantage of rny prejudice, yet, except
in the towns of the agricultural districts, those
Beotias of Britain, the clamour, o► the attempt to
excite a clamour, has been a complete failure.

[MORNING POST.]
Although we do not intend to again agitate the

Catholic Question till occasion de►nands us so to
do, we cannot avoid observing what has tran-
spired in Ireland, since the rejection of the Ca-
tholic Bill dissolved the hypocritical seal which
the " Deputation" and the " Prelates" placed

on the mouths of the Irish Papists. It thus
appears that the " wings" of Emancipation, or
as Mr. Hunt calls them, the " clogs," were

highly disapproved of by the " Six Millions ;"
and that in keeping silence while the Catho-
lic Bill was pending relative to its appen-
dages, nothing more was meant than to play
off a piece of Popish deceit and Jesuitry
upon the Legislature. Now we certainly
do not wonder that, as 'Catholics, the mass
of the Irish Population should be averse
to the Disfranchisement of Forty-shilling Free-
holders ; for that measure, we are convinced,
would weaken the Catholic and strengthen the
Protestant power in Ireland'. We shall not,
however, enlarge upoir this view of the subject
now. .What we wish to call attention to is the
conduct of the " Deputation," and the " Pre-
lates," and the " Radicals" of the House of Com,
mons, with respect to this particular Bill. No
matter how Mr. O'Connell, as the great or-
gan of the Popish Clergy and Laity, may at
present attempt to explain, or contradict his
assent to the political disqualification of five hun-
dred thousand Popish Electors, he, and the De pu-
tion, .and the Prelates did actually agree to such
a proceeding as a condition of" Emancipation."
A bargain was, on their part voluntarily, we might
say spontaneously struck, that half a million of the
poorest of their Constituents should be deprived
of the only political right which they possess, or
could possess, for and in consideration of eligibility
to the higher offices and rights in the State being
granted to the said Deputation, and the other'
handful of rich and ambitious Papists whom they
represented. We declare then explicitly and em-
phatically, that in the history of political jobbing
and baseness, a viler or more villanous attempt to-
sell and sacrifice the many for the gain of the
few is not on record. Will the Deputation, or
any member of it, ever again dare to talk of the
venality of the Irish Parliament in passing the
Act of Union, when the brand of the most llagi7
tious and unprincipled venality is still glowing on
his own forehead ? " But," says Mr. O'Connell,

" the measure was only conceded to please
the Protestants." And is not this pleading
guilty to the whole charge ? Why was it
sought to please the Protestants by such
means, but to obtain their assent to 44 Emancipa-
tion,"—that is, to the granting of eligibility
to the few to attain to political honours and
power ? We can assure the Catholics that the
conduct we allude to has given unmixed disgust
to the people of England, and, if any thing could,
has added to the horror before so prevalent, of
letting the lenders of a Sect capable of thus wan•
tonly selling the right of their countrymen, take
a share either in the framing or the administering
of British Laws, on which British liberty and
rights, and happiness are dependant. Upon the
support which the proposition received froM the
Whigs, we have only to observe, that except to
those who are profetsed Reformers and Advocates
for extending the Elective Franaise, there is
nothing to object. But what can be thought
now of the principles or the consistency of Sir
Francis Burdett, Mr. llobhouse; et hog genus
omne What is the public opinion at pre-
sent of these " men of the people"—these
devoted friends of " Reform" of " Annual
Parliaments and Universal Suffrage ?" Can the
Radicals of Westminster any longer deny,
that " all is vanity and vexation ?"—that they
have been duped—that all they have heard
of " principle" has not been cant hypocrisy,
deception—in a word, expediency—that if poli-
tic in the eyes of their Representatives, the very
right of " scot and lot" voting, which the said
Radicals possess, and by which they have return:
ed those Representatives, would by the latter be
abrogated without scruple or compunction.—
Verily, they are almost—though not quite equal
o the " Deputation" and the " Doctors."