The Sun.
London, England, 1828-05-10 00:00:00

Roman Catholics. He trusted that the House of Com-
mons would never forget the right of the Sovereign to ex=
anise his judgment upon every topic equally with either
if the other branches of the Legislature. The Hou. Mem-.
ber proceeded to contrast the lnguage held by. the Roman
Catholics in 1782, with that held by the present peti-
tioners. At the former . period they declared themselves
satisfied with the concessions that had been made to them,
yet, notwithstanding the further privileges granted to them
in 179 k; what waa now their language? 'They prayed
indeed, that they might be admitted.to a participation in
all the benefits of the Constitutione--e(Hear, hear. )—Much
of the intemperate lanirage of **see-petitioners might be
a body which offered
traced to the CatholicA.lothsti°n*
against themselves, that he
such an armoury .of weap on*
was surprised the Catholicsiolerated its existence. -But
not only were. the pretensions of the Catholics humble at
the former period of which he spoke, (1782), but their
advocates also, were ...extremely circumscribed in -their
views. When, Mr., Gardiner (the late Lard Mountjoy)
first introduced his measure for their relief; ha confined it
to five riots, namely, right of property, right of religion,
eight.of marriage, right of education, andfight. to carry
anne, On this latter point, even Mr. -Grattan, himself had
doubts, confining his desire to " granting every thing. to.
the Catholics consistent with the Protestant ascendant.'
These were Mr. Grattan's own words,- and .were to be,
found in the second edition of a work published in 11831,',
Now, he (Sir R. Inglis) would contend, that with a die-
contented people like the Catholics of the present day, it.
would be most impolitic to grant to them-political power,
the only effect of which veluld he to enable those to pro-
ceed to outrage who were already fully, disposed to do so.
(Coughing,)"---H this motion should be agreed to, and
that: all they now demanded were conceded, what assurance
had Parliament that they. would rest satisfied ? If the
concessions which- satisfied them in 1793, were not suffi-
cient to satisfy .them in 1793, .what security had the Par-
liament and the country (should all that they demanded in
1828 be conceded), that the Catholics would not ten years
hence--that was, in 1638, come forward with new and
interminable demands. To their claims and importunities
we might ascribe the words of the Poet :
Mobilitate viget, viresque acquirit eundo;
Parvo metu primo ; niox xese attolit in auras,
Jngrediturque solo, et eapet inter nubile comfit.
If ail they now asked were granted,- he was quite con-
vinced that the Catholics would never rest satisfied until
their Church were declared the Established Church of Ire-
land. (Hear, and coughing.) The Hon. Baronet (Sir
F. Burdett) had alluded in his speech to the state of mixed
religions in foreign ctnantriee--contending from that which
obtained in them—Prussia for example--that no danger
could result from the admieei.on of the Catholics to political
power in this country. But the Hon. Bart. had cited no,
case at all analogous to our OWII situation, even admitting
the facts as stated in the work he referred to. Most cer—
tainly, the Catholics were not admitted to power (although
he confessed they enjoyed toleration) in Sweden, Denmark,
and other countries to which he could refer ; nod farther
he would contend, that concessions might be made with
safety in Prussia, which in England would be imminently
dangerous. He should not further trespaae on the time of
the House, than to declare, that he, for one, would never
lend his assistance to break down those seamarks which
had enabled us hitherto to avoid and triumph over the dan-
gers by which we were surrounded.
Sir J. NEWPORT rose, and after mine preliminary
°leen-ration:a only partially- heard in the Gallery, the pur-
port of which was, that he could not suffer the speech of
the .1-fon. Baronet who had just sat down to remain a mo-
ment unanswered, proceeded to speak to the following effect.
1 will not enter upon a discussion of the terms of the
'Treaty of Limerick, which the Hon. Member has brought
forward before the House—leaving it to rest upon the state-
ments of the Hon. Baronet himself, lamenting at the same
time he has not followed the example of a Right Rev. Pre-
late, who preached at Limerick upon the subject, that no
faith was to be kept with hereties.—(Hear.)—l will not
dwell upon the Treaty of Limerick, but will come at once
to a later treaty—that for the Legislative Onion of England
and Ireland ; and, speaking of it, I shall refer to a state-
ment I made in this Home at a period when a very large
number of those who constitute it at present were not
members of it. In a debate which took place on this ants- ,
ject at the time to which I refer, I charged the Noble Lord
who urged that treaty for the legislative union—l mean
the We Lord Castlereagh—with having broken faith with
the great body of the Irish people—the Irish Catholics.
'jheNoble Lord instantly rose with that indignation whi,zh
'great and honourable, minds feel when charged with any .
seeing so infamous as breaking faith, and solemnly disclaimed
the imputed crime, declaring that no pledges were given
ghat Catholic Emancipation would be conceded, adding,
I appeal for the truth of this disclaimer and of this decla-
ration, to my Right Hon. Friend" (the Right Hon, w.
Elliott) who now, (continued Sir J. Newport) sits et
the right hand of the Hon. Bart: (Sir R. Inglis.) Mr.
Elliott immediately rose and said, "undoubtedly no pledges
were given." Lord Castlereagh cried " Hear, hear" upon
which Mr. Elliott said to him, " Hear me .out. Certainly
no pledges were given—no positiVe promises were held out,.
but if the Noble Lord says that no hopes were excited by
suggestions' and ether intimations' of what might follow,
and that the Catholics did not, in consequence, concur is
that measure—the Legislative Union—which, without
their consent, could not have been carried, the Noble Lord
states that which widely differs from the fact."—(Loud
cheering.)—" My Nuble Friend," continued Mr. Elliott,,
6, cannot make such an !insertion, because he is a man o
honour. He knows I was p; ivy to the whole transaction,
and must concur with me in sap.;, that without the eon-
:,.ent of the Catholics the Union never could have been car-
ried;"—(Hear, bear, hear.)—Now (cant:lt-tiled Sir J. New-
i port), I say that terms were held out, and expectations
created in the minds of the Catholics—and for this asser-
tion I have the authority of the Noble Lord, in his refrain-
ing from denying that which was stated by my Right +it.
Friend (Me; Elliott), and in addition I had the
authority of another -Right honourable Friend, who
was cognizant of the facie (th.e late Mr. Pon-
sonby (as we understood), than whom no more ho-
nourable man ever lived in any country. / say, there were
hopes held out to the Catholics, and When the Hon. Ba-
ronet says there were no pledges given to which the 'rape,
fist Parliament were parties, I say, that without sach an
understanding the Catholics would not have consented, and
that, without their 'consent, the Union never could have
heen effeetod.—(Clieers.)--And, further, in -my con..
s,ience, I firinly believe, that if that Union had not been
carried, that Ireland had possessed an independent Parlia-
ment, and that the Catholics had remained unemancipated
after the rupture of the peace of Ainiens—it is, I say, my,
firm belief that Ireland Would not now he in the possession
of this country.—(Load and continued-cheering.)
DUNCOMBE (of York) could not rest satisfied
with giving a silent vote upon this occasion. The. apparent
apathy of the country on this subject had been relied on as
an argument.; to sheer that the people Were friendly to the
Catholic Claims; as had been stated by the Solicitor-Cie-
-4 ,
nei.s./, in his unanswerable speech last night, although the
spirit of opposition was not in active operation, it only
slumbered, and would burst forth with the 'occasion with
redoubled vigour. Ile begged leave here to allude to a pi-
tition
which he had presented on this subject from the
Corporation of Leeds, in which the petitioners asserted,
that the Catholic religion had undergone no change;
and without change (continued the lion. Member) no
further concessions ought to be made. In the statements
place; but if any had occurred in
,contained in that petition he fully concerted.
He:thought
no change had taLwn
their sloctrine or their worsh.ipf,oirtalb.e_ho(vieideadte.
\Catholics
themselves; to publish aad set it wasr.'—u "i 3 own
conviction eves, that the catholic
religion'let as well neheaged
attempt to
and unchangeabis—and that we Aug
change one particle of, the
take abeam from the Sun as t
Catholic religion, Worship, or dn. cipline.—(Tlearelaear.)—
/sir Bnrdett), he
Of the speech of the Hon. Baronet k
mint say, that it did not appear to him to coutaia much
11 had relied
of novelty, either in argument or facts.
f the Ti tir of
much on the interpretation of the articles --e " ,
Limeriele--but that oubject hail already heen di:rusan. in
the present Session, and all the arguments in feeour of the
Catholics founded on it most satisfactorily answered, Jie
(Mr. Duncombe) never could concur in the assertion that
it was a violation of the Treats- of Limeriele to withhold.
political power from the Catholics. Mr. Pitt's opinion
1111 this question had been frequently referred to ; halt if his
3t, the period of the Union were decidedly io
favour of the Catholic, claims, why did he not state at
thought they ought to
what time, and in what manner,
be conceded--(Hear)—moreover, Mr. Pitt never argued
the question in the manner in which its advocates put it
forward at the present day. , (The Hon. Member here pro-
eeeded to contend, that, accordieg to the spirit of the
British Constitution, it was impossible to grant political
power to the Catholics—that even if both Hoaxes of Par-
liament coirred in passing a Bill to grant to the Catholics
the utmost extent pf their demands, the obligations of the
King's Coronation oath must prevent its passing into a
law. The Hon. Member gilded the well known reply of
his late Majesty King George the Third to Lord Grenville,
in which that revered Monarch deelVed, that he was ready
to lay his head upon the block, if the inte.rests of his sob.
sects required it; lint- that he never could bring himself,
by conceding those Chime, to violate his Coronation e oa(Mr.th.)
Xn his opposition to the motion before the House, h
D.), desired to be understood as actuated solely by a sense
of public duty. He hoped the House would reject that
motion, and thus prove that they were the representa-

fives of the opinions of the large majority of the people
of this country. This measure was not a panacea for
the evils of Ireland; therefore he declined giving to it his
support. He trusted Honourable Members from the Sister
Kingdom would give him credit for sincerity when he ex-
pressed his hope that some measure of real utility would be
brought forward by the Government for the alleviation of

Ireland's miseries. .
Mr. V. STUART stated his readiness to argue the
question on the ground assumed by the Hon. Bart., namely, of
expediency; but of expediency in relation to another great
national compact than the Treaty of Limerick—he meant the
Act of Union, in the passing of which, none were snore
interested than the Catholics of Ireland. If the subject
under discussion were a great international question effect-
ing the rights and interests of all classes of the Empire,
then, indeed, he would bow with submission and confi.
dente to the decision of a majority of the Representatives
of the people in that House; hat when he considered that
it was a question in which the, wishes 'of the.lrish people
were expressed .by the Representatives of Ireland in that
House, and when he saw that those wishes were. opposed
by the English Representatives,.. he would never cease to
raise his voice against. the manner. in which the,Union.was
made to defeat the just hopes of the Cathplics of Ireland in
that House. Since that great compact had been entered
' into, it. had.heen .held a sort of political profanation to
doubt its utility.
.1f the effect of it would be to give equal
laws to the people of Ireland, then,. indeed, would it be
productive of the greatest blessings; but if it were not
made productive of those ,blessings, then, indeed, was it
calculated to inflict the severest evils. If the principle of
that measure were to be judged, by the, consequences of its
operation, was there not reason for thinking. that that
principle had beta long since abandoned. . 'ln the preamble
of the Act of Union it was set forth, that the object of the
measure was to strengthen the connection between England
and Ireland, and to consolidate the power, strength,' and
resources of the British Empire. Now, be would ask
the English Representatives. in that House, was the re-
fusal of the Catholic Claims the best way to consolidate the
strength of the empire?—(Cheering.)—Or was .the only
object of the Union the transfer, of one hundred votes from
the Irish House of cotnmons to the British ? Did Mr.
Pitt intend, in the year .1801, that the purpose of his great
measure was to bring the Representatives of the two
countries into collision in that House? Would it
strengthen the connection between the two countries,
to bring their respective inhabitants into a ,conflict of
political hoatility? Was this, an union of affections? The
House should remember that the time was when the peo-
ple of Ireland possessed the power of enforcing their claims
on the attention of England, end .in every such instance
the national demands of the Irish were met by England
with conceasions,,however reluctant. Zuch was the case
in the beginning of the last century—such in 1758
such when the Irish Parliament declared their legislative
indePendence of England. Was not the principle on.whieh
the English Gavernmentacted in granting these successive
concesssons a desire to, prevent the separation of • the two
countries ? So long as Ireland had a Legislature of her
own, concession by England followed in the wake of the
national demands of- Ireland. Such was invariably the
case before.the Vision. Since that event the conduct of
England had been of a different nature; and if it should
appear that this difference of treatment was the consequence
of the Union, was not such a circumstance calculated to
disgust the people of Ireland with the Union, as the source
of their misfortunes, and to make them wish for a termi-
nation of it? Of the many questions which, in a long
course of time, harrassed and distracted the attention of
the people of the two countries, that of Catholic emanci-
pation was the question which of all others, excited and
concentrated the national feeling of Irishmen. Could that
feeling subside among them, when they recollected that if
they still had a national Legislature, the question would
have been ere now set at rest; and when they saw that,
after 28 years of petitioning, it was still discussed as
a question of expediency? , Yet lie could tell the ops
posers of ,the measure that they must yield in the end, and
without obtaining those securities they sought, and without
exciting that feeling of gratitude and affection, which would
follow the concession of it at preeent. The time had gone
by when the concession of. thew claims would he taken as a
favour. They ~were now looked on by the Catholics as
their right ; . and in his opinion they had an abstract right
. to theta, on the ground of that pledge which was implied,
if not expressed, in the solemn centred of the lipion,
and which was the hosis of that contract. Emancipation,
he would repeat, was the basis on which the. completion
id .the Union was contemplated by Mr. Pitte-ethe basis
of that noble structure which that illastrieue Statesman
founded, het had not the happiness to see finished—a
structure that woe now tottering to its fall, shaken by the
hands of those persona who v.-ould persuade the House that
they were the exclusive admirers of that Statmaii's policy.
The popular feeling of the Irish peaple on this question was
like the working of the elements, seething, And boiling, and
gurgling, to find a level, but whose agitations would sub-
side into tranquillity when it should have found that level.
While the people of England claimed a superiority over.the
Irish, that claim of geePdancy would create jealousies and
heart,burnings ; they would see that the end of English
PP romises and English honour, ani English justice, held
forth at the Union, was. to•obtain possession of power for
their own.advantage and the injury of the Irish. Was this
the spirit in which the Union was passed—were these the
conditions on syhieb Lisa aid of the Irish Catholics was ask-
ed and given ? " If you (said )Ir. Pitt) co-operate with me
in effecting the Union, I'll undertake to effect your eman-
cipation." Such was the spirit in which the Irish Catho-
' lies helped to bring about the Union—for could it be be-
lieved, that with their eyes open, they would part with the
advantage of a. oatinnal Legislature, without bargaining for
some other advantage equivalent to it. Then what advan-
tage could they expect imam the Union, but admission to
equal rights .and privileges with their Peotestant fellow-sub-
jects. But the English Government act haring per-
formed their part of the contract, I shall prove that the
jriah are in consequence in a worse condition than be-
fore that ,contract was made. What were the hopes held
out to induce the Irish to consent to the Union ? Why,
that they would goy rich on English capital and English
resources. Was it so ? Ale—lreland was poorer in the
affair of capital and manufactures now than before the
Jpion. Why was this? Because the representations.
held pea to her were not realized. English capital would
hare amric,iial Ireland, but their security and trangnile
lity must have preceded its entrance into Ireland. But
security cold not saint where there was national discon-
tent, and discontent thereannet be, while the claims of the
Catholics continued to be with:U.4d from them. Before
the Union, Ireland had a resident nobility, and that wealth
and security, and moral improvement, that resalteil from a
resident aristocracy. Now, :he had none of these—anal if
the Parliament' held out Ireland to Irishmen, and asked
them whether they would have her with those her former
advantages, or in her prevent condition, stripped of them,
what would they say ? Give us our country as she was
before the Union; - or as you promised she should be in can-
seeuence of the Union.: -But, no, the opponents of the
C.asholie Claims would grant neither one nor the other,--
They fancied they could goad, and harms's, and persecute
Ireland into loving glean, after they had disappointed her
hopes and blighted her prosipeett.r. They c9urted her into
the Union, like the wooer of Ake termagant lady in the
Prial—

" Thy beauty that loth make me like OW WO,
Thou must be married to no man but ins,
For I am he am born to tame thee."
And then turning round ,on her with a
gi Sweet love, shan't we marry."
These lion. 'Gentlemen dec..lare they will not be talked
down by Catholic demagogues, and boast that they never
will be induced to do that which they know in heir hearts
OW must do in the end. The advocates of the Catholic
may he c,;:lpable in their too vehement proclamation of their
rights and wrong; but the House should act on the re-
gw.kigpislate4,ontire
con mt mendation of Mr. Burke, and decide this great cause,
.o
oown the ground of the conduct of its advocates, but on
g..,r's ...n_ merits or demerits ; au this ground the House
tohni;,iptinestinonfe,wthseelfirseilteemtinwpoon of.listwsh,icohr
whirl:
furious part,ans cr riamorous demagogues, or designing
rebels, but whose sneer= :-,.Nid be I we come to even'honest
map ;hat had the interest 'tit the 14' •r 1 -' •
then to ~ditinctions. Let Englishmen'lllr at heart--a tura
Placed nn the ps,Vir footin.., an equality "4.
Ir.tisbmen be
of rights ar4 rr ivi-
wottld a/I Ce bound
bod t
Jeri, and they . ' to the Constitution'hy an
equality
equality of affections and uy,eints.
The divisions between
the .two gonntries would then he 07:;ly geographical, and
he bound together hy
the people wOOl a trio ;-el union ; and
they may throw down the
thus united, 1 ;amitlet of defiance
to all Europe, 1
wi_h that sentence as their watch-word that
formed the motto of the Order of St. Patrick. 4uis
scparabit? (Cheering.)
Mr. L. FOSTER denied that there existed a rponopa.
of liberality on one side of the question. He wa,
.4
Orangeman—lie was tivpprted by no party, nor had he
ever attended a bhetituTonnccted With the subject, but he
apprehended a speeificrdanger from the concession of these
claims. It was now twenty years ago since he suggeftted
that the prospect of the concession of titan would bring
forward the Catholic Clergy of irelz=l 29 claimants for
political power; he bad said that they would be .voite.d
with the laymen, and that they would bring in theirs piri,d-
tual authority to effect an influence over political pee
ings—tn -separate- the connection between tenants and
landlord!. Ilia suggestion 3vas then considered improba
ble.:—impassible--yet hiidltAUlilli'been accomplisher) ; lint'