The Sun.
London, England, 1812-04-24 00:00:00

• .
Ho denied drat The periple di? England *ere sgalnsf
Catholic Emancipation, and was satisfied no s dirt
objection stood in the way, but those which rested
with the preset)! Crown Ministers. It was said that
we tog rated the Catholic religion. He denied this
to be the faCt. They did not tolerate it ; on the
contrary, they punished it. Was he in an English
assembly, and would it be said that civil disqualifi-
cations were not a punishment ? Whet was tolera-
tion but the extension of power to protect the pro-
petty and lives of subjeas—to guard against the ex-s
ertions of arbitrary power, and to prevent taxation
without representation, together with a security for
a fair and free trial by jury ? The Catholics had
none of these. They wee; not tried, by their Peers,
but by Protestant partisans, and he particularly.wish-
ed this to be inquired into. How many instances
were there in which no Catholic could .be admitted
on 'a jury ? In which the High Sheriff was a Protes-
tant partisan ? The Catholic, in marry instances, had
not the same advantages as a foreigner. He bad not
a jury half of his own persuasion, but on -a question
of disqualification, he was tried by a jury of- these
who disqualified him. It might be said that it was
ambition in the Catholic which made him wish to
be relieved from evils like these. Why so it was,
but it was merely an ambition to possess the common
rights of nature. It was the -ambition of a woman
not to be ravished ; it was the ambition of a man
not to be murdered : and was such a feeling to be
censured as ambitious? if this, in the opinion of
the British Parliament, was ambition? what must be
their ideas of liberty ? He denied that the AO of the
year 1793 gave the Catholics civil power, and it was
another reason for taking the subject into considera-
tion, that Gentlemen were so unapprised of the na-
ture of the law with respe6l to Catholics. The Ca-.
tholics merely called for some security against that
policy which rendered the -English name odious in
Ireland, which made British faith equivocal in Ire-
land, and which went to disinherit and •disqualify
one-fourth of the population.of the British Empire.
Where was the danger of doing this ? Was it in .
the Eucharist ? Was it in the adoration paid to the
Virgin Mary,. or did it arise from the apprehension
entertained of the family of the Pretender ? Lei those
who-contended there was danger in giving what the
Catholics claimed answer these questions. Let them
set forth their trains of hobgobiinsand witches at once.
Let them give some reason—some apology for ba-
oishing the CAholics from the enjoyment of civil
rights to all eternity. To' the objections nrged
against the Pope, he would answer, Ist, that be
had at preset); no power ; 2dly, that France had no
power over his disposition ; and idly, that the Ro-
man Celiac- have now no coinaiunication with
him. The danger' apprehended' then was not im-
mediate, and could only be prospettive, It• was
now said the Catholics would not concede the veto,
but it was to be remembered that Government
'might have had it before. They might have had
the veto in 1795, in 1800, in 1805, and in ma.
If inert they had not got the veto, the fault was
theirs. They bad no right to ask where was now
the veto ? If they asked him that question, his
answer would be, that it was where they had put it.
What remained to be shine ? Would they send
persons to make proselytes of the Irish 'S Would
they take away their arms ? Wohld they drive.
them from the army ? They were too wise to do
this. What then ? Would they continue the dis-
qualifications to throw odium, on the English name,
and to alienate Ireland ? Would they seek secu-
rity in a virtual separation ? He would say, it was
necessary to the connection -between the two coun-
tries, to tell the Irish people that England was not
an enemy to their Privileges, and to tell the Eng-
lish people that Ireland was not adverse- to- them.
But when each country was told the contrary, the
seeds of discontent were sown ; the wife was in-
duced to divorce from the husband, and each .was
instigated to-hate, and to annul that marriage tie in
which they had been heretofore bound. Ir for the.
purpose of securing amity, of blending and unAing
all classes and descriptions of subjects, they would
found their empire upon the•strong groom( of mu-
tual privileges ; they would establish a strength
which nothing could subdue, and attack a popula-
lion which never would desert them, not even in
the last extremity. He considered this a cause
which might appeal to every quarter of the globe
from circumference to centre, and he was certain it
would live when dull declamation was silent and
forgotten. lie could as soon befiere that the navy
of England would be borne away by witches—that •
its army would be annihilated by au equally ridieu-
lons disaster, as that that House, upon any ground
less alarm, could forget its prudence; its window,
and its justice. He found by the call of the HOU3q
that there were many Gentlemen present who were
nut accustomed to attendi and to • them he would
beg to address a few words. They would bo told
that the people of Ireland were too barbarous to
exercise such funCliona as the acceding to their
claims would extend to them. But what was this?
In other words it was saying thatathe English Go-
vet' iment in Ireland was•a nuisance. They world
be told that the Catholic religion rendered the ex-
ercise-of those functions still more dangerous. Arid
what was thisi In -other words it was saying
that religion contributed to their barbat ism ; and
the inference •to be drawn from both was, that.
both should be got rid of. They would be told
in addition to this, that the art of settlement pre-
cluded such a grant ; but lie would ask where was
the clause in which such a prohibition was cow allied,
or 'where slsas the spirit from which it sv as appa-
rent ? No clause to such an etre& could be shown,
and the spirit was altogether on the opposite side.
To such dodrines as those, the Catholic would
answer,. that it was utterly impossible to make
religion the measure of empire ; be would an-
swer, that in the act of Union the oath was provi-
sional, and intended to last only till Parliament
should alter it to the contrary. Those were the
Ministers who, if they (lid not introduce, at least •
voted' for the Ael drawn up in this provisionary
manner, which they were now so anxious to rep-se-
sent as fundamental and immutable. It was a de-
ception on the people of Ireland. He would ask,
-why were Catholic foreigners employed in high mi-
litary situations ? If all that wasaidvanced against.
the profess Ors of that religion were well founded,
was it that they reserved exclusion for their own
countrymen and fellow-subjetis ? He. would deny
that, according to the Constitution, this was a Pica._
testant Parliament ; by the Ad of 1793, the Com-
mons represented Catlmlics, for the Catholics were
possessed of the elective franchise. In answer to all

itat wAs said rigainit at tiLkinikSion '6(
tholics into the Senate, lie would beg leave to appeSl
to the prod-ice of Ministers ;he would 'ask then)
why the Irish Catholic was admitted into the army
and into the navy ? He would then appeal to the
Admirals of the navy, and the Generals of ihr at my,
to know how they. behaved ? He
.wotahl ask the
pbblic papers how many of them had died in the
service ? He would ask- them how malty Catholic
Officers had been• Wounded, and whether they'could
become Generals? He would ask the public opi-
niou what- characters they had maintained io,all the
relations of life ; he would ask the Protest int houses
of Lriosier, of Ormond, and of Latouclte, who re-
sided amongst them, and who were, therekre, riot
only the most competent judges of their charaeter,
but-the most immediately ioterested in any question,
in which they were concerned; he would appeal to.
the hospitals which were filed with their wounded,
and to the fields of Portugal which were streved
with their dead. He would appeal to the princielas
of the Constitution against that policy, which would
set men to cut eaah others throats in a metaphysieed,
ecdesiasticaleand tale war; he would appeal
to every standard bt which human condu(t could
_be
tried against n►ischievous, such malicious, and
such disgusting d, gradation. The whole case lay in
one sentence—the two counties were ruined unle-s
they were united, and the_. language of -leeland'wes,
.o. we will have our liberties; ac then our-lives are
at your service." He concluded with moving " for
a Committee to consider the state of the Laws im-
posing Civil Disabilities on his ralajeoy's subjeds pro-
fessing the liontan,Catholic Rd gion."
Doctor nowt:oats said, that the claims for which '
the Right Hon. Gentleman contended ceui.d only
be efieded in one way, and that was by ihe,rrpeal
of all those laws referred to in the oaths of et yre-
macy, by. i lie repeat of all tests anti corporation acts,'
and an alteration.of the whole Constitution from
the first establishment of the Protestant religion in
England down to . the present time. The-Roman
Catholics insisted upon full empancipation.; not satis-
fied to wait for any •gra,-lual course, they demanded
the instantarreous, sudden, and total, repeal of all
the acts with -which they were dissatisfied. In
the reigns of Elizabeth and Charles the First, the
acts of uniformity were intended to
.be perpetual,
and io the Act of Union with Scotland, these Acts
were again tecited, and declared as operative in Eng.
land, Ireland, and Wales, and the town of Berwick
upon Tweed. But Lot only were those declared
londamental aitides in the .Union with Scot-
laud, it was an article in the Union tail!) Ireland,
that the English and Irish Church should be the
same for ever.- Our modern philosophers and ora-
tors, it was true, declared that these oeght to be re-
pealed; but he should look- rather to the A6ts
selves, and the grounds on which they were formed,
than to their opinions. Another circumstance was,
that the King was bound to support the Church, as
by law established, yet this pledge he was called
upon to sa6ifice, to what was delosively called Ca-
tholic Emancipation.. The Catholics had full reli- •
gious liberty—they had the same security for their
lives and properties that all other stobjeas of this
country possessed; and tfiey were only reqnired to
take the same...test and oaths—it they agreed to take
them, they could have as much liberty,
,and as
much political power. They 'had as much security
for their liberties, as any -subjects of any nation on
the face of the earth. Could it be s,id deaf the
suhjeds of France and Germany possessed such li-
berty of action, and such security of property ?
They claimed complete equality through the Em-
pire; in the army, in die navy, and in the State,
and that at the expence end in defiance of the
two ads be had mentioned. The House must see
that the King was obliged to swear that he would
inviolably maintain the Protestant Religion. Now,
if all the securities were demolished, how could that
oath be maintained ? The meaorre would not only
go against the cotonation otth, but against the prin-,
ciples of rho union with Scotland and Ireland, and
tiro for the purpose of - giantying the ambition of
`those persons who wt re hostile to the State. -Hee
should presently read a proof, to spew that no per-
son could be a true Rum in C who did not
tel such ltosti i,v. It was contended that they had
right to -religious liberty, yet who were those in
‘,4 hose right this favour was illSiVed on most
intolerant religi .us body that Jostle, erappeared on the
face (el the earth. They were more intolerant titan
the Mahometans thetnselves. What was it that esta-
blished the Inquisition ? What• was it' that didat-
ed the very last Constitution established by the
Cortes ii Spain ? was then determined that the
Catholic religion shotild be the only religion of the
State, and the only one toleraird. The Decrees of
the Cooticils were almost matters of :aid) with the fol-
lowers of this religion ; and in one of those Decrees„
it was set down that, when they were weak, motives
of policy should restrain !ahem, but when they were
powerful, it, was at their own dascietien to oppress
those who differedJiom them in faith. In Ire-
land, they did not meet with any disturbance to
their religious liberty—% lett right then had they
to petition for what they enjoyed ? He was so
far a friend to religious liberty, when it was not
hostile to the state, that he thought all the people
were entitled to possess it—but in Ireland it ivas
never dented to them. The second ground upon
which the advocates of the itteasure•went, was that
of the numbers, wealth, and power of the Catholics
of Ireland. On assertion it was-stated, and twitting
but assertion was adduced in support of it, that there
were four millions of Catholics in Ireland, and that
the Protestants didnot amount to one in ten of this
population. There was now a Bill iti Parliament to
which he was a great friend, which would go to as- •
certain the real state'tif the population, But taking
it at present !roe) the best source, that of the calcu-
lation made by the collectors of Hearth-money, it
.would %mourn to a number much inferior. In the
parishes of Lisburn and Ghtnetie, the most manu-
laduring and populous patts of the whole country,
they would lint, takingan children and all, that the
calculation at ea ab ut five and a quarter. What
must be the state-of it in Miserable huts ? Upon the
whole they would find reason to conclude, that the
population of the whole kingdom did net exceed
three millions five hundred thousand. On a calcu-
lation taken by a Roman Catholic Bishop in the year
1652, the population was estimated at two millions,
one million three hundred and fifty thousand. of
,which' wete Roman Catholics. It was supposed
that since that pea iod they could not have; increased
to-so great a number, especially when they considered
the constant wigrat:ons froth that country were iji-

.erienb e b4l. 'they
ri 1- ,tilt added more thaele
6 milliOnste the Popyiation iitt the came space of time..
Tor all tins mighty sliew of numbers there was no;--
thing but asset Into on the other side, and he hoped ',.
th.tt one assertion was ait itood as another. With,re-
speel to their eietlth, it was stated at 3 prodigieus
rate. The Gentlemen who alluded to it, confined
their observations to personal i•roperty alone, and for -
a very good reason—ne,ause they were aware., that
they bad no real pmpert v.. lie would venture to
sty, that of the real property of the kingdom, they
did not posses (me our of for y-nine parts ; and a 4
to: the ceinmercial propetty, they had not a tenth
pale The Rigto ily iuur.ibir Gentleman (tad said; .
that this measure arried wi b it the sense of the
• Protestants of Ireiznal. It was true there are mar-f.
'petitions on the table.; but he was aware, that Op.-
t'icat lens hid been- made to several Grand Juries fo`i •••
the purpose; and sceived as soon as they were'pro., -
po-ed. Other steps were then adopted, and pead
lions eeve surreptitiously sent about. Those pert-
tions received some eomeett wee, particularly froai
he Gentlemen of t lie Opositioo. One person was
threatened', if he did aim sign ihe petition, that Itis
Ito se and goods would o- set fire to; am! every -
poor Proteseen, in a retail b sinesS in Dublin, was
instantly threatened w ills the loss of his .business, if
tie did not sign the petition.. This petition was v.
kept in' a private tool') in the Commercial Coffee'
1-1.-use of Dublin, and it airy person demanded to see.
he was asked it he would sip it, and if he answered
in I lie negative, it was not shewn to him. Besides Oa
Gentleman who had re' esented the Petition had
stated, that the sigtuture ~vere not the original
11,10 writing, but 311 copied out. , He knew there
was one most respect,ble family in favour of it, but •
one voice was of little consequence, and lie would
con end that not one in a hundied of the Protestants
of Ireland would sign sticha Petition. There were
some Dissenting Ministers belonging to the North
of Ireland, who were turned out of their Meeting -
Houses, and locked out for having done so. To
attempt to impose such things on the sense of the
people of Ireland was a 'gruss deception, which he
was confident the Right Hon. Gentleman would not
have praelised, it. he had .kndwrii the quarters frorut
whence they came. The Roman Catholics were not 1:
above three to two,: taking in the lower classes and
rill ;so much for their wealth and numbers, and .
their number was the strzngest point. insisted on;
Let the House reflect upon this; let them see if.
in any other country the lower ordefs were called
the nation. The Protestants themselves, he
maintained, were able to -keep down rebellion,
as they had done in the year 1798. The Pro-,
testants Were in some measure surPitised at that,
period—they knew that something was prep. 4-!
ing, but were n,,t aware that it would break
out so. soon. Many thousands of Protestants,
were murdered on that occasion, in cold blood..
—The defeat of Vinegar Hill, which 101:ow^
lowed shortly after, was. accomplished as end pene -
dently of the Marquis Cornwallis„ as of any °the(
General :exmmining in this country.. Such was the
slate of the nation, and so the English Minisuf
seemed to think; for the first course they adopted oil,
to send the MarquiS of Buckingham and his Lady It''
that part of the United Kingdom. The actions ,
the Catholics in the army and navy were ovuel,
dwelt upon in pamphlets, 'but the fact was, that otte
half, ormore, connected with eacieservice from
jre-
land were Protestants. A common soldier could
live better than a labourer, and this was a great it" 1"
ducemeut to dr.iw them from their homes. Tild
Roman Catholics, he would again repeat, had a et.'
ter security for their liberties than the people of 011
other country, not excepting. France, Germany,
Italy. They were not dragged by the conscriptioD
to the chains of a depot, but entered voluntarily
-to the service. As to the navy, nothing but sh'll6
ping could breed sailors. .They called Etuaticipoticii
what Ile would 01 revolution : for never, not ever/
excepting the revolution Of France, was there a rued'
sure which woold go so completely to revolutipaiZe
country. Their ambers too, might be eo°'
sidered in another point of view. There wo.e
thirteen millions of Protestants in Great -
tam, and ceu d they be called upon to sacrifice 'o4'
c:institution of then country to the u idles of I#4l
millions five hundred the :send of the lowest ordi
of society, ? Even, if the theoretical opinions
Di. P ;ley Were adopted, and-the-majority allo,""
to the, religion of the State, the 011116.11-
could oot succeed. Ile alluded io„tne sentiments
Di. Twy, and Dr. Milner, and the Letter of. PL--
Copinger. to the Dublin Society,. which lie charsc;
tensedexcluding
tg the i
ca
idia,s anosti
hitlt tan
intolerant
alllprtit buttut Catholicaio---tlie schfeloll'olli,
and the lacier prohibiting CathyliCser %anis _(r00) c•"
tending Protestant prayers in tlitir masters._ finesc6'
Hu theta ,:cnt on and quoted the cat h of die COO'
he Bishops, by which they were sworn to be 13ide
ful to St.. Peter, the Holy Church of Rome, and dot
Pope, to defend the reyaity of St. Peter against el
seen, and to centr'bine gl-1 in their power to 3"4; .
meet and promote his domiuien: The temparB(i' -
Mill:keit:nem of the Pope afforded no reie,ou 11)r)
neglveting those &I-elm:platters. He (Dr. 13)
represented as an tonhe litnean Czoltollc.i-
-but he pryer was an enemy to therm in any tblil;
except -the poSsession of -political power, which -‘l,l
should al way s oppose. He next adverted •
the oath a,:ministered to Palish Priests, by %Oiled
they swore ohedieoce to the Pope, its the Vicar
Jesus Christ. Such, he maintained, were the 01f
prescribed by their general council, end yet tit`
,r
called for emaecipation, or, in other words, (or (0
equal share of political an hority. On lookite;
the (Irene's el the Lateran C-,uticil, which Doet
Troy- acknowledged, they would find, that subje','J
weld permitte4 to dethrone their ~ prince, it 101.
not expel her ties freM dotteniewe tbe
three t. flowing- Councils they. would find, that
sime principles went incukared, and that oaths j.
Protestants, as heretics, are nt.t considered as hi'o
Mg. It was observed, that Protestants were ne`oo
disaffected in Catholic countries, awd the re. 50
was, that Protestants were liberal to all. As t°,,ait
loyalty of the Catholics, he mot say, that
.011101,,
bound in:allegiance to a foreign prince, he o.e e!`
only call them peaceable, put loyal.: Such Eliot!
lousy did Buuneparte feel towards the Clergy, t reel/
he nominated every parish priest in France ; 300
what reason could be given Why the King of t.of,
country should not feel ao equal jealousy, sod i`PO
'On a similar nomination ? Persons of the descript.;)
of which he was speak ing were more dangerous 101,;.
popular Gpvernment like .0.4 than tuidei a dcsf \Ut
Monarchy. , The Pope, after all that could be fee
. . •