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

CROWN SOLICITORS BILL.

Mr. DAWSON brought up the Report on this Bill,
which was ordered to be read a third time on Monday next.

STAMP ALLOWANCES BILL.

Or. the motion of Mr. Dawson, the House resolved
itself into a Committee on this Bill.

The Bill went through the Committee, and the House
having resumed, the Report was ordered to be read on
Monday next.

ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.

It was ordered that the House at its rising do adjourn
till Monday.
CATLIOLIC CLAIMS.—PETITIONS.

OTWAY CAVE presented a petition from the
Roman Catholics of Leicester, in favour of the Roman Ca-
tholic Claims.
Ur. M'DONNELL presented a petition from the Ro-
nal° Catholics of Macclesfield and Congleton, Cheshire,
ant Rathmore, in Ireland, in favour of the Roman Catholic
Chirps.
Lord MILTON presented a petition from the Protestant
Dissenters of Great Ripon, Yorkshire, in favour of Catho-
lic Maims.—Ordered to be printed.
lad STANLEY presented a similar petition from
Wigan.--Ordered to be printed.
ROMAN CATHOLIC QUESTION.
The Order of the Day for the Adjourned Debate on the
state
Subjects
s
Roman Catholic Claims having been read,
cc That The SPEAKER'.
Houseutbeof d o
Laws put the question as follows :
resolve
ff.ee
aitself i
ng h
into ai s i
Committee,jest3,
,sßo-
man
Catholic to
theconsider the
in Great Britain and Ireland, with
a view to such a final and conciliatory adjustment as may he
conducive to the peace and strength of the United Kingdom,
to the stability of the Protestant Establishment, and to the
general satisfaction and concord of all, classes of his Mal,,sty's
subjects.'
Sir ROBERT INGLIS then rose and observed, that
he felt a strong inclination to rise last night for the purpose
of addressing the House, immediately after the Hon. Bart.
(the Member for Westminster), had concluded the speech,
with which he introduced the present question. Ile wish-
ed to have done so not because he reposed an undue confi-
dence in his own ability to answer the Hon. Baronet, but
because he felt perfectly satisfied of the strength and justice
of the cause which he was then about to advocate. It was
no disparagement to the acknowledged powers of the Hon.
Baronet to g•ly, that on such a subject even his ingenuity
could accomplish nothing. The Hon. Baronet's argu-
ment, on this occasion, was founded on the same grounds
as had already been made use of in similar discussions
by the Honourable Baronet himself and many others.
The Honourable Baronet, (after a slight allusion to the na-
tural rights and general claims of the Roman Catholics) pro-
ceeded to argue in favour of their demands on the grounds
of specific conventions. Now he (Sir R. Inglis) had
never thought that the Con,titution of England rereEnized

the abstract right of any persons to the enjoyment of poli-
tical power and privileges, or even to the eligibility for
such power. And, until the Constitution was so changed,
that there remained no distinction between the owner of
an estate by copyhold, and him who possessed his property
by freehold—till there was no difference with respect to
the right of voting between the freeholder to the amount
of 395. and the freeholder of 40s.—till the individual pos-
sessed of an estate of 290/. could claim to sit in that House,
as well as he who had one of 300 I.—and until the alien-
born inhabitants of this country were placed on an equal
footing with the native-born inhabitants (both paying the
same taxes and obeying the same law), he could not admit
that the inhabitants of England, as such, had any abstract
right to eligibility for political power and privileges. Di-
-
missing, with this sentence, the general and abstract claims
of the Roman Catholics (which he must do the Honour-
able Baronet the credit to allow he had himself very slightly
insisted on) he should proceed to a part of the subject
which, in the opinion of the Right Hon. Baronet, was of
greater importance—he meant the considerations involved
in the Treaty of Limerick. He was satisfied that no
claims were now withheld from the Roman Catholics
which they were entitled to claim under the provisions of
the Treaty of Limerick. Whatever rights might have
been taken from them, their continuance was not guaran.
teed by that Treaty. There was an old maxim of the law,
—"nullum tempus occurrat reei," which suggested an-
other maxim equally applicable to public affairs, viz.—
`• nullum tempus occurrat repuhlicas." lle could conceive
that the mere desuetude of a claim, as it regarded the con-
duct of the parties interested in preferring it, was in itself
a presumption against the claimants. In reference to this
point be contended that, up to 1792 (comprehending a
period of 100 years from the date of the Treaty of Lime-
rick), no claim similar to that now urged by the Roman
Catholics had been preferred upon the faith of that com-
pact. Besides, it was only the sense which the parties to
the treaty had at the time of its stipulations, that could
satisfactorily explain the nature of these stipulations. The
sense of the meaning of the treaty entertained by third
parties, living in another age, and in a different country
(however honest and intelligent these persons might be—
and he by no means agreed to the censure passed upon
the character of Bishop Burnet) could never he considered
half such good evidence of its true meaning as was to be
found in the opinion of the parties who had made the
stipula-
tions, who were upon the spot at the time when they were
agreed on, and who were deeply interested in rightly under-
standing and interpreting the contract. He contended that
no such claims were set up under this treaty by the imme-
diate parties, as had now been attempted to be established
by their descendants. Further, let it be recollected what
was the general aspect of affairs in Ireland in the beginning
of 1691, in the course of which year this treaty was agreed
on. It would be found on examination, that though the
circumstances of the English army at that period were nut
very favourable, yet those of the Irish army were, to say
the least, quite as unfavourable. In the beginning of 1691,
Lord Tyrconnel wrote to James 11. desiring succour, or
else to be allowed to make such terms for himself as he
could obtain; and on the 14th of August, in the same
year, when he was dying in the city of Limerick, his ad-
vice to the garrison AVM to capitulate on the beet condi-
tions they could procure. He (Sir R. Inglis) used this
argument in reply to those who now state that it was a
great object with William to obtain possession of Limerick,
and that the Irish army being strong, and the English
army weak and dispirited at the time, that object could
not have been readily accomplished by force. Now, the
contrary of all this was the fact, and it was deafly de-
monstrable, that when the English army appeared before
Limerick, the Irish were not in a condition to insist upon
terms, beyond all measure so favourable, as it had since
been contended were then granted. Looking at this cir-
cumstance, the presumption, " a priori," was, that the
terms obtained by the garrison of Limerick were by no
means so good as was now pretended by the advocates of
the Roman Catholics, who grounded the claims of their
clients upon the faith of the provisions of the treaty in
question. The Government of Ireland published a pro-
clamation on the 7th of July in the year referred to, in
which they gave notice to all persons then in arms, who
should speedily submit themselves, that they should not be
troubled by penal statutes, and that their Majesties would
take measures to obtain them such further securities as
might be necessary for their safety. This was done in order
to remove some doubts that were at that time entertained
on the subject of the punishment to be apprehended by
those who should lay down their arms. Here, then, a pro-
vision was made, not for privileges, but for pardon. But
he had still stronger grounds to rely on—look not merely
to this particular treaty, but consider what was the nature
of the terms afforded to other cities in the progress of the
campaign. First, however, he should observe, they
were sometimes told by the orators of the Roman
Catholics, with equal decency and discretion, that it
never could be supposed that the terms granted to
_ .

the garrison of Lin;erick were meant only to apply
to the free exercise of religion, and the undisturbed en-
joyment of private property. But if so, it was a some-
what singular fact, that on the 21st of July, in the same
year, Waterford demanded a guarantee for the private ex-
ercise of religion, as the condition of its submission, and
the demand was refused. A similar demand was made by
the town of Dungannon, and the result was the same. At
a different period, it must be admitted, the Lord Justices
granted all those in arms who should submit themselves,
the free exercise of their religion, but they who resisted lost
the benefit of these very limited terms. Having refused
the private exercise of religion to the city of Waterford,
the English army appeared before Galway—an important
fortress—which possessed the means of resistance, and
therefore obtained better term.. To the Clergy and Laity
of this town, the free exercise of religion in private was
conceded—lawyers were allowed to follow their profession
—and estated gentlemen received permission to carry a
gun ! These were considered to be favourable conditions.
Thus it appeared that the Irish army was not in a condi-
tion to extort terms similar to those now said to have been
secured, not merely to the garrison of the city in question,
but to all the inhabitants of Ireland by the Treaty of Lime-
rick. In Cromwell's wars, the garrisons of the conquered
towns to Ireland were only permitted to stipulate for their
own numbers—and it was never meant to he inferred that
the capitulations thus agreed on comprehended other par-
ties within their provisions. When the English army ap-
proached Limerick, De Ginckle having received orders
from King William to bring the war to a close, upon al-
most any terms, granted this Treaty. Towards ascertain-
ing the meaning of the provisions, which were agreed on,
it maw he no bad way to examine the nature of those which
were rejected. What terms did the garrison demand, and
what were refused ? On the 28th of December the garri-
son of Limerick, being dispirited by the eve at of an unsuc-
cessful sally, and the continued neglect and absence of their
expected French Allies, asked a suspension of hostilities..
having obtained it, they sent on the following day to de-
mand terms of capitulation from the General of the English
army, One of the articles then proposed, he was willing
to admit, would, if granted, have at once placed the llo-
man Catholic inhabitants of Ireland on the same footing as
the Protestants. By this article they would have been
eligible to places in Corporations—might have become
Grand Jurors—in fact (and he was ready to admit it
freely, for it strengthened his case), every thing which
the Roman Catholics could desire was conceded—they
were rendered capable of the enjoyment cf equal civil rights
and privileges with the rest of their fellow subjects—no-
thiug was withheld. Such would. have been the conse-
quences of the ratification of this article. Was it conceded ?
De Ginck/e returned for answer that he was a stre.naer
to the Constitution of England, hut he knew enough cf
it to be able to perceive that the terms imposed were equally
hostile to that Constitution and his own honour. Ilia re-
ply was beeked by the erection of a new battery against the
place the same day. On the evening of the clay, the garrr
son sent a message to inquire what terms Dc fiinckhrs
would grant? This was laying tlwmadves entirely
feet. The circumstances referred to were
best authority, that of an eye-witness (Stove),
who trade
a journal of the transactions every day they;oco
He (Sir R. Inglis), therefore, conjectured the
ancurrio,
of,
•
It was idle
what was granted by what had been re
ftised. I
he Roman
to say the Treaty el Limerick admittedt
Catho-
lics to all the privileges of the state, the,d• When the Hon
the su
couldr not ha Limerick
concession
ofwhich
was thus directly and positively refu
errender of
Baronet told them that it was to derived frO'inmtrwthdec
in-
tended his words to be taken in their a sense and ap-
plication, for that
revolution had been previously consoli-
dated. And when the actors of the Roman Catholic As-
hie
Great Britain owed the revolution, e
:tei
As-
sociation were in the habit of saying, that but for the
beaepenituti
alaperty opf Limerick
cee:reitghne present
ingin.King
the
enorttuld
hVoofGpoarniw hauya,viet
became pectiFYY tg ?lei; tt'tt atithtr tS gle; sttrreaoe: nor