The Sun.
London, England, 1821-03-17 00:00:00

The Protestant religion was firmly established ;
and those restrictions ought in justice to cease.
Now, if he was told that' the danger had not
passed over, he must meet those who asserted it
fairly upon the question, and that he•was always
ready to do. But if any one should say that
there was a spirit _of exclusion in the Act of
Charles 11. extending in its operation beyond the
circumstances which he had aescribed,, then he,.
would challenge them to the best records of our
Constitution for the proof. lie denied that this
measure would involve the question of the Pro-
testant Dissenters. The two questions must al-
Ways stand separately and upon their own merits.
If the Roman Catholic clainas were strong, and
he could spew that there was no danger in ad-
mitting them, then they ought to be granted, and
it was upon these grounds that he argued for
their admission. But what had that to do with'
the claims of the Dissenters ? If they had the
same claims, and they could prove the same ab-
sence of danger in granting them, then let that
question be brought forward. He had his opinion
upon it, and when necessary he should be ready
to declare it. But he was not to be seduced into
any expression of that opinion upon the present
occasion. Perhaps the House would permit him
to explain the state of the Dissenters in Ireland.
The Irish Dissenter was not at this moment sub-
ject to any Corporation or Test Act. In 17-1.3
an Act • was passed releasing him from their ope-
ration, and from that hour he had been admissi-
ble to all offices and situations ; whilst at the
same time the roman Catholic was excluded. So
that if the admissibility of the Dissenter in Ire,
land did not affect the admissibility of the Roman
Catholic, neither would they by admitting the
Roman Catholic in England, open the door to the
Dissenter. In 1780 an Act was passed by which
the Protestant Dissenter in Ireland was freed from
taking the Sacramental Test. The words of that Act
were as precise and explicit as they could. possibly
be. It stated, "The Protestant Dissenter shall not
.be subject to the Sacramental Test." In 1793,
an Act was passed by which the Roman Catholic
was declared subject to no other qualification
than the Dissenter was liable to. The conse:
quence, as. one would naturally suppose, then
was, that•both• were relieved from the Sacramen-
tal Test. But then it was assumed that the
Act of 1748 applied to the Protestant Dissenter,
butnot to the Dissenter of the Established Church.
An._ Act was then introduced into the Irish
Parliament explaining the Act of 1780, and
making the former Act embrace both classesof
DisSenters. The Bill, however,
.was finally re-
jected. lie should now proceed to the imme-,
diate objects of the Bill.' •It comprised two dis-
tinct objects. That of the 'cirelf!Psta,”c which
went against the doctrine of Transubstantiation,
and that of the question of the Oath of Supre-
macy. Respecting the former, he need not take
up much of the time of the House upon that
subject. -Tie never yet heard of any person
• who contended for the necessity of that de-
claration ; and he believed it was neither re-
quired for the purposes of Religion nor of
Christianity. lie contended' also, that it was.
latterly imperfect as a security. It was compe-
tent fors person to-morrow to truce the oaths
which .sere intended to exclude him from Par-
liament, then enter the House, and declare that
he was a Papist. He would then pass to that
part of tht, Bill. Which related to the Oath of Su-
premacy. And he must own that lie had been
struck with some surprise when a Right Re-v.
Gentleman had taken upon himself. to say, that
the oath, .as given in the Bill, was inconsistent
with tho Roman Catholic Religion. lie was jus-
tified-in saying', that the laws excluding the See
of Rome .from interference with English affairs,
were previous to the Reformation ; and it there-
fore was absurd to imagine there was any thing
in the catholic Religion incompatible, with the
best security of the State. In support of this po-
sition, the Right lion. 'Member referred to the
words of exception in the Statute of Philip andl
Mary. The Act of Elizabeth followed', which ex-
pounded the oath required by the preceding Acts,
and declared that " it meant nothing but what
was of right due to her Majesty's Noble Father,
King Henry the Eighth, and to King Edward
the Sixth, her brother." This explanation was
as obvious as possible. He had also the autho ill
-
rity of Bishop Burnet on this who, in
speaking of this explanatory Act, had observed,
" that the moderation of Government in this re-
spect was evident, for the object of these oaths
was not to entrap men, but to make that which
was required of. them" apparent to every under-
standing."• This authority of Burnet explained
the policy of Elizabeth with respect to the
oath in question. In further support of his
position, the Right lion. Member referred to the
37th of the• Articles of the Established Church,
' which declared that the King's Majesty had the
chief power, ecclesiastical as well as civil, within.
the realm, and was not and ought not to be sub-
ject to any Foreign Power. These, the Right
Hon. Member observed, were the terms of the
Articles of our own Established Church, and it
surely was too much at the present • day to put
an interpretation upon thein-unraiourable to the
Roman Catholics.. Having thus, as he trusted,

satisfied the House of the propriety of the relaxa-
tion of the present laws, be would state the mode
in which the explanation of the oath was pro-
posed. He had upob reflection thought it better
to alter the form of the Bill as it originally stood,
and to substitute words which should recite the
present oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and
that the Roman Catholics were ready to take
those. oaths, but that they felt scruples as to
whether it might not be understood that those
words denied the spiritual authority of the Pope.
The clause should then go on't'o state the expla-
natory words. At present he proposed to go
into the Committee, and if it it should be found
that any better mode of expression could be
adopted, he would be happy to support it ; but
he entreated the House not to look at this ques-
tion with the eyes of metaphysicians; of casuists,
or of critics ; but to apply to it their good con-
stitutional comlnon sense.—(Hear!)----fn the hope
that they would do so, lie should go into the
Committee with a confidence that the object,
which be trusted was desired by all, would be
accomplished. He now came to the enacting