The Sun.
London, England, 1828-05-13 00:00:00

Itittg ea--a
, were given by the Government—would the great
%minds on Which Catholic Emancipation rested be taken
reoen under us ?—(Cheers.)--Would the great arguments
for that Measure be in the slightest degree impaired ? The
Hon. gember seems, is the whole course of his argument,
to have labotered under a fallacy so gross that I should not
be disposed to notice it, were it not as universal as gross.
h it that of looking upon Catholic Emancipation as a
od7tferring of power upon the Catholics.—(Hear, hear.)
Graciod" God
Dot lanotc." Sir, let us not so dive ourselves, let
us, under so great a delusion If we narrow
"ale of the Constitution, a power will
and contract the a
see(He.ar, hear)—which will not
roW up beyond that pale'
nowledge community with
°we its existence to us, or all'
°"-(Cheers.) It is a power •the sCath?lies derive from
their industry, their numbers, their wealth, ,their passions,
their unanimity.—(Cheers.) This, Sir, is the pc, `e'er
tale to deal with, a power which our wisdom may direct
and regulate, but which we have neither strength nor force
destroy.—(Cheere.) At what lithe Hon. and Learned
niereber alarmed ? He is alarmed at our admitting some
tW, "Ay highly-horn, highly-educated, and highly.prin-
c'Pled Catholic Gentlemen into this Assembly; but he is
°,'4l alarmed at seeing a Catholic Parliament open to
Ine lowest of the low, to unprincipled Carbonari, which
16 Executive can neither influence nor dissolve._
- LlQleers.) He fears not the power I have described
"*iag cor.trolled by such an Assembly; but he fears to
eke it our friend. It is the might of that body he ought
ai dread—it is that he ought to seek to destroy. But let
tut not mistake the mean of destroying it. I' is, alas ! the
aYinptom not the disease itself. The symptom shelve itself; but
the disease is deeper in the habit. Let the disease be at-
lacked, and the symptom will disappear. We have tarn-
Pared with it year after year, and if we take not good care
Will noon be out of our ability to cure it. Our diecus-
,afts, Seeeion after Session, strengthen the power we
"°ltar beyond the pale of the Constitution. We can
141 trace the history of that power, work its epochs
and the steps of its progress. There is not, I am eer-
14in, an Irish Gentleman in this House who cannot re-
collect when the Roman Catholle Aristocracy of Ireland
Proudly held themselves aloof from cennection with that
Power; but where are they now? (Loud cheery.) Where
are they now, I say ? They are the most prominent, the
host active, the most faithful members of that powerful
%federation to which I have alluded. (Cheers.) It is
but the other day, but yesterday, when the Catholic Clergy
iaterfered not in the slightest degree with the political
rights of their flocks ; they were perfectly passive and con-
cerned themselves with nothing but their spiritual welfare.
"--What, Sir, is the case now ? The Catholic agitatora
d. id not themselves know the use of their clergy. It lay
their arsenal a rusted and neglected engine, which some
thought it possible to work. When all arms were sought
this was drawn from its hiding-place, and put for-
Ward in the combat. What were its achievements even
in its first trial, which was, as I may say, merely an ex-
ia
"'riment to try its force? It scattered down the standard
the Protestant proprietor in his own counties, (re his
"a estates, almost in his own house. It levelled him
ith the dust, and enabled his own slaves—the 40s. free-
nolders to triumph over him.-..(Loud and continued cheer-
t.)—But, Sir, this was the effect of the first trial of
I°4 mighty engine. Can we, from what we have seen,
how far its powers may not be extended ? The Ca-
olies themselves cannot estimate it ; they cannot measure
the
- power they possess, nor is there a man in this House
sharp-sighted as to be able to see its limits. Yet it is
Aar, with this power we are to deal ; we know in some
"tree its force, and yet are doing all we can to increase
Without conciliating it. We give it in some degree the
unction of time; we are habituating the people to its ex-
'teise.—(Cheers.)—They look up to it, and obey it.—
lint, Sir, the evils of Ireland would he comparatively
'fling, scarcely, I may say, worth the interposition of
44 Rouse, if they rested here; but the refusal of these
neessione have an effect of a much worse kind with the
IP'est body of the people. In every country, Sir, I hope
1° this, but certainly in every country where there is
Well-regulated Government, political discussions, as
as their heat and violence are concerned, are
:rineipally confined to the powerful and the rich, not
„-14oding to the lowly and vulgar. But in Ireland poll.
-cs follow the husbandman to the plough—the merchant
'° his oilice---and the tradesman to his counter ; all grades
434 Classes of society think of nothing else but this one
l,4atien.—(Hear, hear.)—There are political attornies,
ritieal farmers, political shop-keepers ; every mau's first
ioiess is politics, his second business is his trade.—
"C beers.)—No No man of sense can say that this is a whole-
-1,.°14ae state of things or that it ought to be suffered to last.
Lt does not of itself involve any principle of danger and
tatifueion, but by it the people are agitated, and it seems
ro them that we are practising an experiment on their feel-
ib!to, lion after Session, in order to see how far they
"eill bear with us. On a great practical question of this
, Sir, I should disdain to descend into mere abstract
ittntetions; and I shall therefore not dream of replying to
51.14 t upon whirls au Hon. Gentleman, who has soken
ite this debate, has thought proper so lunch to enlarge.
I.lr, the question is not—as I take it—it is not, as that
°n• Gentleman has put it—what rights the Roman
ilttholic Clergy, what rights the Roman Catholic Laity of
4eteud possess : it is rather what rights the Protestant
illle'eeses—(Cheers)—what rights I possess in common with
Y Protestant fellow-subjects; and what the King himself.
ss'(Cheer I conceive that his Majesty has a claim upon
concurrent willing loyalty of all his subjects without dis-
etion of religion or party. I consider that we have a
'll4 to expect the common co-operation of our Roman
Ve 11elm • •
brethren in all these efforts to maintain the peace
.11 t 4
improve the condition of our country, which are so es-
4intial to the maintenance of her prosperity.— ( Hear. )—lt is
~,01 time that we should feel ourselves ice a situation to re-
'ye their willing, earnest, and active co-operation in these
good works. It is high time that we should overthrow
tat barrier which has too long interposed between the
otestant and the Catholic of Ireland, to prevent the one
:In extending the hand of friendship and cordial assistance
,the other. I am quite aware, Sir, that I Lave already
tled any limits which I could reasonably claim for the
'iltl'ervations that I have been induced to submit to the
and that it would be presumption, indeed, in me,
Were to propose to myself to trespass much longer on
indulgence of this House.—( Hear. ) In truth, Sir, had
Lat the commencement of this discussion, been actuated
any such ambition, it must have been extinguished by
k! speech which has been this evening delivered by the
4tht lion. the President of the Board of Trade—a speech
"01 I will take leave to say, was in eloquence, in
trig
tlm. ent and in feeline unsui passed by any ever herd
~,ttleue these walls. I 'have, however, thought it toa be
duty, as an humble individual who have for many
„,,4re resided in Ireland, and under circumstances that have
t74led me to acquire a tolerably accurate knowledge of
lly wishes and their feelings upon flee momentous
klect—to submit to you, Sir, and to the House, a few
tk/ticulars in relation to those matters, fairly and frankly,
614 without being influenced in the slightest degree by
.',onal feelings] of any kind. Before I sit down, Sir, let
tet_ observe upon one expression which fell from the Hen.
\,7leiber for Waterford (Mr. Villiers Stuart), and to
}„,,lltich I find it impossible to subscrilme. The Hon. Mem_
A said, that the time had passed, and wee long gone by, at
4"'eh the concession of this measure would be considered
jthe Roman Catholics of Ireland as a measure of grace
~ favour.—(Hear.)--Sir, I hope he is mistaken—l be •
,411 e that he is mistaken—and I would go the length of
tiding, for my own part, that if ever there was a time at
more than at auother, this boon could beso consi-
teled as a measure of grace and favour—it is at the pre-
nit moment. There is something in the character of,:re-
h4lll ii=inolitical events—something in the present tone of
t~ sal parties, which would make the concession of
kn" claims, at this moment, in a most peculiar degree, a
It 'lre of grace and of favour; something that would render
II tget the mere momentary triumph of one party over ano-
4, but a permanent triumph of truth and justice over pre.
liet re and error. Indeed this incest be so, from the eternal
est!'ro of truth itself, and from the grateful acceptance
to eh such a concession would assuredly find with those
ee,Whour it has been so long denied, and by whom it has
heett so earnestly desired. In conclusion, 1 have only
1,4 triers to entreat the pardon of the House for the tres-
I have commttted, and for the kind indulgence which
et, been pleased to extend to use.
adtniral EVANS—It has been said many times, pend-
t/sli4l 4;e:cireeion of this question—" Will you concede
ktillestion to the cathelics—to the Catholic Aristocracy?"
(A Good God, were there no Protestants in Ireland ?
te heaiagh, and cries of bear. )--Were there no Protestants
their considered? If those Hon. Gentlemen so zealous in
Arai support of the Roman Catholic claims, and their
theme of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy, were sincere in
Professions, let them embrace the Roman Catholic
neat' at once—(A laugh.)—But, after all, what, in the
claims Of iataey pf the staunchest advocates for tiles!.
Why did
the term ca Catholic Emancipation" amount te ?
fromt:',4'Y meant neither more nor less than 'c exemption
1
that if (A laugh.)—For his own part, he believed
Irei,44 'arliament were to exempt all the Protestants of
trotestafr"lti tithes, half the Roman Catholics would turn
laughter.)—The public and that
Prina re told that Catholic Emancipation would be a
Was o,re, for all the existing evils of Ireland. Now, as Le
die affil nr those who suffered from the evils which really
br. „wet that country, he should be exceedingly happy to
1, if he could have any faith in the panacea pro-

pod ; but he had it nat. A word or tsro aimut incon-
sistency. When he first had the honour of taking his seat
in that House, he took at the table a most solemn oath ;
and before he made any observations on this subject, he
would beg to premise that, as far as his own feeling was
concerned, he considered that an oath was rather binding
on his conscieuce.—(Hear.)—ln this country, in moral
England, he had heard the Hon. Baronet who opened the de-
bate declare, in effect, that the tenour of certain political oaths,
which were required to be taken upon particular occasions
was perfectly childish. The grey hairs which he (Admiral
Evans) at that moment exhibited, would not allow him
to he a very good judge of what was childish—(Cheers)—
but be thought himself entitled to say, that the conduct of
some Hon. Gentlemen was at least inconsistent. Many of
them he understood to have pledged themselves to their
constituents, to support the question of Catholic Emanci-
pation; yet they had sworn with him, holding the same
bo:k, and standing at the same table, that the Catholic re-
ligion ite'4l was infamous and idolatrous (for that was the
first thing th ee swore), and that no foreign Prince or
e,
pPotentatetem-
poral,
within these ;e
had a rigt to have any power, spiritual or tem-
aling.'"f he Hon. and Gallant Mem-
ber, after some other observations on the inconsistency of
the oaths so taken, concluded by asking how such Members
could reconcile those oaths with that course of conduct in
respect of such a question.
Me. CAREW made some observations, the precise
purport of which were inaudible in the gallery.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL now rose, rather to
discharge what he felt to be a public duty imposed upon
him by the office which he had the honour to fill, than in
the hope of offering any argument which should recom-
mend itself to the House, by its novelty. His opinions
upon this question had been undoubtedly, very often
declared. When Mr. Canning's Government was formed,
and he found that the Prime Minister was disposed to give
to these claims his powerful support, he (Sir C. Wetherell)
anticipating that he might one day be called upon to sup-
port the same views, had thought proper, rather than do so,
to resign office. It was unnecessary that he should say
more to illustrate the opinions which he entertained upon
the question. It might he expected from the professional
capacity which he filled, that he should, on this occasion,
enter into the whole legal history of a question so inter-
esting, in a constitutional point of view, as that which they
were now called on to consider. He should not, however,
commit any such trespass on the time of the House. He
had undoubtedly been for many years decidedly opposed to
what was called Catholic Emancipation; but he was opposed
to it, he begged leave to say, on a plain and a broad prin-
ciple. He had no objection, at all, to concede the
principle, that the Roman Catholic, tinder certain circum-
stances, might be admitted to come into Parliament, and
to hold offices under the King ; but this must be under
certain conditions. If this concession on our part was to
he made, it must be a mutual concession, as regarded the
ether—danzus, felisnusque vacisszna. The Right Hon.
and Learned Gentleman went on to show, that the Hon.
Baronet and those who, on the same side of the question,
had succeeded him, had completely thrown overboard the
long important questions of the Treaty of Limerick and the
Union. He would now enter upon the Treaty of Limerick.
—(Loud cries of, Oh, no.) Well, then, the Treaty ought
not to be alluded to at all, if it was not to be tried by the
test of Parliamentary investigation. He then remarked on
total the silence of Pitt, Fox, G rattan, Lord Cornwallis, Mr.
Dundas, and Lord Castlereagh—all advocates for Catholic
Emancipation—upon any questions arising out of this
Treaty, such as those upon which the advocates of Eman-
cipation were now attempting to depend ; although it was
difficult to suppose, that if that Treaty could really have
supplied such grounds for their case, those great and en-
lightened seers would have neglected to avail themselves of
them. He had been at the labour of reading all the de-
bates on this question for many years, and he could under-
take to say, that, since 1800, till within a year or two ago,
the Treaty of Limerick had never been adverted to, with
any view to an argument, except incidentally. Lord Gren-
ville, Mr. Grattan, and all the persons whO formerly intro-
duced this measure to the attention of the House, said that
the Catholics assented to the nomination of their
Prelates in Ireland. On this basis the arguments
proceeded.—(cries of, Hear, hear.) Gentlemen might
cry " Hear," but he repeated that it was stated by Lord
Grey and others elsewhere, that the Government was to
have the controul over the Catholic Prelacy of Ireland.
Even with this assurance, however, the Bill was lost in
both Houses of Parliament. The next attempt was in
the year 1813, when the House not only went into a
Committee, but a bill was brought in. Some of those
young gentlemen who were complimented the other night
night un their experience—gentlemen who had in theta
the germs of talent and the buds of genius—(Hear and
laughter)—rising genius should have its merit, but poor
experience should not be discarded ; aid those young gen-
tlemen who were not then in the House, and who pro-
bably had not taken the trouble of reading the Journals,
might be benefitted by knowing that in 1813, a Bill was
introduced with a profusion of stipulations and oaths.
This Bill contained :two clauses, which, like all its pro-
visions, were drawn up by a most eminent draftsman.
The first of those clauses gave to the Crown the right
of affirming or rejecting any person appointed to till
the office of Bishop in the Roman Catholic Church of
Ireland; and another clause was introduced by which
the communication was regulated between the See
of Rome and the Roman Catholic Church. This was
the principle of Mr. Grattan's Bill. It secured the
power of a direct affirmative or a virtual negative on
persons filling the office of Bishop. This Bill was brought
in by Mr. Grattan, but the Catholics, whilst it was pend-
ing, rejected it. Whilst the Bill was going forward under
peculiarly favourable auspices, the Roman Catholics de-
clared their dissent to its provisions. This he asserted, and
he remembered that Mr. Grattan in that Mouse seemed to
feel very seriously discomfitted at the manner in which the
Roman Catholics received his Bill. He did not sited tears,
perhaps, but he seemed much afflicted. The Catholics
rejected the Bill, and resolUtions were agreed to by the
Prelates in Dublin, one of whom (Dr. Milner) stated
" that the Roman Catholics would shed their blood out
of their veies rather than submit to the nomination of
of their Bishops by a Protestant King."----(Hear, hear. )
Such were the sentiments of Dr. :Milner and the Catholic
Prelates in 1613 ; but in 1799, the Irish Prelates came
to a resolution that it was proper that the King should
have a controul over the Bishops. In 1822 Mr. Plunkett's
Bill was introduced. In that Bill the intercqprse
with the See of Rome was restricted, and the
negative on the nomination of Bishops was given to
the Crown. It was stated in the House that the Ro-
man Catholics would reject the Bill, and Mr. Plunkett
said, that he did not care whether they rejected it or
not ; if the House agreed to it he did not care whether the
Roman Catholics rejected it or not.—(Hear.)—There had
been three Committees on this subject, a circumstance
which it was necessary that those Gentlemen of precocious
experience, on whom so much eulogy was poured, should
know. In the present Bill it eves material to observe that
none of the securities were to be found which were intro-
duced into the former Bills. The country was not satisfied
with those Bills ; nor was that House satisfied with the
securities in Mr. Grattan's Bill nor in Mr. Plunkett's ;
but the House was now called upon to be satisfied without
any security at all. The Hon. Member for Knaresbocough
(Sir James Meekintosli) stated, that all the young men,
and all the eminent nausea were at his side on this question ;
but lie (the Attorney General) thought they were all against
it unleee there were securities. He admitted that there
Was a galaxy of talent, but it was against those who sup-
ported the Hon. Baronet's motion. Mutual concessions
and securities were the basis of all former Bills, but the
present Bill had no such bases. He should wish to
know what "as to be done when the Bill went into
a Committee. Was it meant to renew the securities.,
or to introduce the measure without any securities at all?
If securities were given to the Protestants, those securities
would not satisfy the Roman Catholics, and therefore it was
proposed that the House should go into a Committee to do
that which could not be done. It would be better to pass
a resolution that it Wa.s expedient that absolute and unqua-
lified emancipation should be
granted. According to the
resolution proposed by the Hon. Baronet, the object of this
measure was to effect concord and secure the Protestant
established religion. The earn
e promise was held out in
former Bills; but the expression was, " that the hearts of
the Catholics should be knit and united :" but the Catho-
lics said they would riot have their hearts knit and united.
He would now advert to a point Which he thought h
had
by
been passed over lightly gentlemen
opposite. The
question was, whether P roteetantism was not an e said theirrevo-
cable'n the Constitution. H
principle Constitu-
tion was settled at the Revolution in a permanent and irre-
vocable manner, and without any consideration as to the
death of the Pretender. There was no change in the Con-
stitution with respect to Catholics. The principle of perpe-
tual Protestantism was established as eseeutial and irre-
vocable. It was secured in different ways. It was secured
by a Protestant ling—by a Protestant Parliament—
by the exclusion from civil office of all but Protestants,
and by the establishment of the Protestant Church. By as-
senting to this Bill two of these securities would be taken
away, and Protestantism, as established at the Revolution,
would depend on the circumstance that the King was a
Protestant. If the King married a Papist, or held com-
munion with the see of Rome, he was pro facto dethroned,
and this was the only security left to Protestants if this
Bill should pass. lie (the Attorney-General) did not con-
eider this provision a sufficient security, and, therefore, he