The Sun.
London, England, 1821-04-18 00:00:00

intoleranse as serf& -of his sudden admirers
ascribed, was obvious, from a
,paper addressed
Oil the part of his Majesty to the Congress at
Ryswick, which paper was drawn up by Lord
Somers. in this paper King William stated, that
he saw no groutd why Catholics should not en-
joy complete toleration, or why they should not
haadmitted -to ()Laces .of State, under a Pro-
testant Sovereign. But for the purpose of re-
pelling the idea that the laws to which the
Bill referred were radical propositions; connect-
ed with the principles of the Revolution, as
.the
Learned Lord on. the Woolsack and others had
maintained, he quoted the Journals of that
House to shew that those laws were not deemed.
essential•to the security of either the Crown or
the, Chu'rch. When, indeed, upon •the discus-
sion of the Union with Scotland, it was propos
by some Ecclesiastics to declare unalterable the
laws, against, the Catholics in Charles the Second's
reign, with respect to Popish Recusants., and the
exclusion of Popish Lords from Parliament, the
proposition was resisted by Lord Somers and
other distinguiShed • leaders of the revolution,
and :finally repealed. This then 'was surely
sufficient proof that those laws ,were not
.deemed fundamental parts of the revolution.—
It was to •.he recollected too, that this deci-
sion was pronounced at• a ,time when there was
a Popish pretender to the Throne, .and when
the country was by no means free from commo-
tion. The Noble Marquess animadverted upon
the .emphatic language of the Noble Lord on
the Woolsack, with respect to his ..quotation
from-Lord Bard wicke, who said merely that the
constitution vas essentially but' not exclusively
Protestant. How then could the Learned Lord
infer from this dictum,.all that he had asserted
as to his own views of the Protestant Establish-
ment. The Noble Lord remarked upon the vote
of 516 Protestant Bishops against the Bill
,of exclu-
sion, which; was meant to guard against the intro-
duction of a Catholic to the throne of England, in
order to shew that Protestants were not generally
so alarmed about the grant of power to Catholics.
As to the alarm which some Noble Lords
had expressed with respect to the insecurity
of the forfeited -estates in Ireland, if the
Catholics, should obtain power, he could in-
form the House, as a large landed proprietor in
.freland, that
.such alarm and apprehension by
no means existed in Ireland, where there was not
one year's, nay, one day's difference of value
between forfeited land and any other description
of land in ,tae country. But the fact was, that
the greater part of the property purchased and
possessed by the Catholics themselves consisted
of what was called forfeited; and was 'founded
upon .no other title. The Noble Marquess pm.-
nounced an eloquent eulogium upon the Catholic
soldiers and sailors.antong whom, throughout tits
war, no instance of treason, cowardice, or infi-
delity had been found. He illustrated the faci-
lity with which Catholics and Protestants could be
bound to act together in legislation from the ex-
amples of Holland, Bavaria, and other Conti-
nental nations., and after ridiculing the idea that
there was among the Catholics any invincible
leaning towards arbitrary power, as some men
asserted, he in a very humorous strain comment-
ed upon the assertion made by the same • man,
that there was in Presbyterianism an invincible
leaning towards Republicanism, this assertion
being sufficiently contradicted by the Presbyte-
rian Peers and. Commoners from Scotland, who
had surely never evinced any disposition to pro-
mote Republican innovation.—(Hear; hear! and
a laugh.)
Lord SIDMOUTH said, that it was with the most
painful feelings he felt himself called upon to
oppose the measure before the House. Nothing
was more revolting to his mind than to declare it
necessary to. withhold from so large a portion
of his fellow-subjects, as the body of Roman
Catholics, the privileges enjoyed by the other
classes of the community. The measure came
before their Lordships now under different cir-
cumstances than on former occasions; for it had
already. obtained the sanction of one branch of the
Legislature. Could he believe that all the-benefi-
cial consequences would result from the measure
which the Noble Marquis who spoke last and
other Noble Lords anticipated, he should consider
it the greatest blessing ever conferred on the
Country by the -wisdom of Parliament. L
had been said that the Bill would put an end to
all religious differences and cement the union o

all classes of his Majesty's subjects : but he was
sorry to say that he thought no such effects would
result from the passing of the Bill. He objected
to the first part of the Bill on grounds which
would be offensive to many of the most ardent
supporters of the measure : he objected to it, not
on the ground of individual distrust of the Roman

Catholics, but because of the nature of the tenets

and principles inherent to their religion. lie ob-
jected to it for the reasons assigned by a Noble
Earl—namely, that the Catholic religion was hos-
tile to civil and religious liberty. lie was
ready to ad.mit that many of the obnoxious
tenets of the Catholic religion had been aban-
doned by its professors; but many also still
remained, and particularly the doctrines of
2xclusive salvation and infallibility. The Catho-
lic Archbishop of Dublin, in a letter which he
had addressed to the individuals under his im-
mediate influence, had stated that the Church•of
Rome was infallible in its decisions, not only in
points of faith, but also of morality. These doc-
trines were also embodied in the resolutions of
the Roman Catholic Clergy of Droghedr-, and
the Professors of the College of Maynooth. It
had been represented that a very inconsider-
able number of Catholic Members would be re-

turned to the House of Commons ; but he %cgs at
a loss-to conceive upon what grounds this argu-
ment was founded. The Constitution had de-
clared that no foreign influence should exist in

this country,. hut the effect of the Bill would be to
give spiritual authority to the head of the Roman
Catholic Church. In referring to the second
part of the Bill, the Noble Viscount was 'of opi-
nion that the securities therein proposed were
V'ith respect to the oath intended

to be substituted for that which now legally
existed, which if the Bill passed would be taken
by all Members of Parliament and persons hold-
ing offices wider the Go%ernment, being Catho-

onang.

lies; Le maintained that it could not be 'sub-
scribed consistently with • the principles of the
Catholic Religion. lie knew that this opinion
was entertained by many most respectable
individuals of, that persuasion. There had
been numerous meetings of the Roman Ca-
tholic ecclesiastics of Ireland at all of which
there: had. been but ono unanimous feeling
of hostility towards the clauses contained in
the_secowl part of the Bill. Besides the meet-
ings to which he alluded in different districts of
-Ireland, there had been a general meeting of\the
Roman Catholic Clergy in the City of Dublin, at
which resolutions were unanimously passed against
the ..clauses 'in .the second part of the Bill. He
understood that a petition, founded on these. re-
solutions, had been sent to the metropolis in order
to be presented to that House, and he
did • not understand why thaC• presentation
had. not taken, place. No measure had ever
been brought under the consideration of. Par-
liament which was calculated to produce more
disunion among different classes of the commu-
nity than the present Bill. It had not only ef-
fected ,a division between the Catholics and the
Protstalits, but had introduced disunion among
the Catholics themselves His Lordship con-
tended that the great body of the Protestants in
this country, as well.as in Ireland, were decided-
ly averse to the ineasure, and concluded by call-
ing upontheir Lordships to reject it if they wish-
ed to preserve the:existing Constitution. •
Lord MELVILLE, under the very partieidar circumstances
in which he was;placed, felt it to be his duty to state to their
Lordships -the reaaons which induced him to give his vote for
the second re•ttitrg.of .this Bill. That vote he intended to give
from a strong conviction of the utility and necessity of the mea-
sure. In giving ,his decided Opinion that the Bill should she
read a second time; he had to regret that it was his misfortune
to differ from many Noble Friends with whom he was usually
in the habit of agreeing. Notwithstanding the ability with
which the debate had been conducted, and the number of Lords
who had delivered their sentiments, he had notbeeo so fortu-
nate as to hear one main point sufficiently touched upon to
which, above all others,
,he thotight their Lordships' attention
ought to be directed..-he -meant the consequences of rejeethig
the Bill. 'They had head a great deal of the danger, , which
he thought magnified—he would not say entirely visionary—.
of carrying this rid intoeeffeitt,' but little or nothing had been
said of the danger- which Was to be expected it it should
not be carried.. Under any Government, particularly under
one like oar own, the exclusion 'of a considerable propor-
tion of the population from rights and privileges enjoyed by
others must be attended with risk. Inen he spoke of popu-
lotion, he tuoint a population like the rest of which the
country was composed. The population of the Colonies 'and
India, though under the sense government, was placed in cir-
cumstances which rendered it necessary that a different rule
should be applied. The 'population he referred to was one like
that of whi. irtheir Lordships were a part, Lasing the same
kind of education and the sane feelings as theinselwes,. and en.
gaged, as far as they would allow them to he engaged, in the
service and the. defence of the country. It had been said that
the paSsing of this Biti would not make the population
,to which
he had referred-either better of worse. But if any 'people were
told that such as they were theYmust remain—that whatever ta-
-lents, whatever industry thev might exert, it was all in vain, for
a boundary was put to their rank in society—surely it was not
in huMan net us but' ahat such language must produce irrita-
tion in a high .degree. Surely their Lordships must see that
such a state of things could not be: suffered much longer to exist
without incurring considerable risk: They had been told that
danger was to be apprehended from the inefficiency of the secu-
rities, should .the bill pass. Perhaps there might be some ground
for this -obs rvittion ; but the whole question resolved itself into
a balance of dangers.' Their Lordships ought to be satisfied
that the. danger of passing the bill was paramount to every
other before they refused to give it a second reading. He was
convinced that the danger on the other side was infinitely more
formidable ; 'that existed and would exist until some remedy of
the kind now under consideration should be applied. There the
real danger was to be ihund ; and he was of opinion that their
Lordships ose at to remove the disabilities under which the Catho-
liC3 laboured as speedily as possible. It had been argued that the
admission of a few Catholic Peers to that Ilduse,andsome Catholic
members is the Housed Commons,would have the effect of mak-
ing Parliament act as if all the members were no longer Pro.
teseints. It was also argued that the admission of one oe two
Catholics to the Privy Council would have the effect of changing
the whet' e institutions of the country. The whole of this rea-
soning he thought founded in fallacy, and was convinced that
after the passing of this Bill the two Houses of Parliament and
the executive Government would remain as before, essentially
Protestant. With regard to the provisions of the Bill, he was
not one of those who thought that they might not be advan-
tageously altered, if their Lordships agreed to go into a Com-
mittee. Ile approved of most of the alterations suggested by
the Noble Earl who mooed the second reading. But there
were other alterations he should propose, if the Bill were com-
mitted, for the purpose of rendering it more applicable to Scot-
land, where the laws respecting Roman Catholics were not the
same as in England. The opinions of that part of the united
kingdom he was certain would form no obstacle to the execution
of the present measure. Of the spirit of liberality' which pre-
vailed on this subject, he could speak not only from-particular
informat 03, but from facts which were public and equally acces-
sible to all their Lordships. About 7 years ago the general Assent-
bly of the Church of Scotland had addressed a Petition to that
House on the subject of toleration, from which, though the Ca-
tholic disabilities were not expressly mentioned, it was evi-
dent that the assembly had no objection to their removal. On
the contrary, the words of the Petition implied the desire
of that object; for the Petitioners recommended to their Lord-
ships, in a by measure they might adopt, to proceed with caution,
and to take care to secure the ,constitutional establishments of
both countries, and at the same time extend the privileges of
Vie Constitution to all the subjects of the United Kingdom. Ills
Lordship also referred to the Petition lately presented from the
synod of Ayr, which, though against the Bill, had been carried
by a very small majority, 14 to 12; and in the minority were
a Clergyman who had beeh Moderator of the General Assembly,
and the eloquent Dr. Chalmers. The Noble Lors' oafter
explaining the nature of the laws respecting Roman Ca O:olies
in Scotland, the reference to the subject in the Scotch clhim of
rights, and the articles of the Union, again strongly urged the
reading of the Bill. He observed, that rapid improvement in
olutation in Ireland increased the danger of withholding this
conciliatory muse -et. ; for the snore a people advanced in civili-
sation, the more strongly they must feel the injustice of deprivs
ing them of their civil rights.
Lord ASHBURTON also supported the Bill. The Catho-
lics asked for .nothing that was not already possessed by other
dissenting sects, any description of which might sit in"Parlia-
meet, as there was no law to exclude their'. Yet the Catholic
relieeion came in many things ilearCe ours than that of ninny
cf the existing sects did. As to the dread of foreign influence,
as well might it.be applied in the department of the Arts and
Science, as in religion. If it were admitted in the one, it must
be allowed in the other, and Sir Humphrey Davy must be con-
sidered.a din.gercres-reen, -because he belongs to several .learned .
Foreign Societies, Whilst the Noble Duke opposite must be
deemed tiebly's-o, on account of the Foreign Orders and dig.
nities showered upon him for his distinguished services in the
cause of European. freedom.
Lord SOMERS•had no difficulty in voting for the second
reading of the Bill. Had his ancestor; to whom allusion had
been mat'e, been living in the present times, he would leave
been friendly to this measure. The circumstances of the coup.
try Were changed, and What the greatest patriot might in a for.
mer age have thought necessary, was now no lonoeiso. He
did not apprehend any danger from the admission a a few Ca-
thclice into the House of Commons. The House was intended
to represent all the interests of the country • but as things now
stood, that intention was not 'carried into effect. The admis-
sion ofnt few Catholics would repair the deficiency, and cause
another interest, which had hitherto enjoyed no representation,
to be duly represented. -
The Bishop of PETERBOROUGH then rose • but the
cries of " Question!" became so universal, that tile House pro-
ceeded to an immediate division :

Contents :—Present -
Proxies -
Non-Contents :—Present

48-120

G9-,-159

Proxies - -
Majority against the ----39
.:Vjourne.d at HALF-PAST' THREE O'CLOCK this
M •nv:

"[The e§sentie.l importance of the Debate in the House of
Lard:: last night, on subject which involved the very eNist-
ence of our Establishment in Church and State, has induced us

to give a very copious_ report of the Proceedings this day..—We
:lavetiter:fore deemed it neer...tary to postpone our Report of
tt passed- last night in the House of Commons on the great
q.testion of PARLIAMENTARY. REFORM,: that, as it was an
a journal Debate, we may give a comprehensive detail of thc
whole Proceedings to-Morrow.]