The Sun.
London, England, 1829-04-03 00:00:00

pin itans, infuriated to madness by the violent assertion of
those high church principles which were ":oleo eeeen in
the time of Ch isles. the First. Whether those principles
are true or false, I Will riot 'row discuss; but they are
principles Which I iievele :rave and never will advecateee-
(eheers)-;—aft t have observed that in their it'rg;ttiliat ope-
ration they tend to nothing but to 'tkasperate. If the re-
ection of this measnext ;ought such principles into full
operation t ehould fear a re-action, whieh
'over,Yeow the Church of Enelande rot slowly and
gradually, as it may be i3vettifi•own by the inscrutable
decrees of an ellereise 'Providence, but immediately and
irrecoveraltly. And for what shall we hazard all thia ?
roe the delay of a few years pregnant pith danger to the
ecclesiastical and civil interests of the kingdom. Lhivin?e,
my Lords, soon after the Npecch from' he 'throne, made up
my mind as to the rourse I shunld take on the grounds I
have mentioned, I soon found myself alarmed by papetS
and pamphlets, not written merely for parry purposes 1;:e
interested men, but by great and iritellitent persons re,
markahle for their moral. worth. I declare, in the pre-
sence of your Lordship., that I never felt ar xiety so in-
tense as that with which my mind was filled by the pe-
ruutl of these papers.—( Here the Rev. Prelate rend an
extract from the letters of the Rev, Mn Eibeia in which
that gentleman urges that it would he an insult to God for
Members of either Howie erf Parliament, who had sworn
that the doctrine of the mass was irkhi.trnoi, rt; i4p,,rt the
measure of t: wumeipatiorr.)—:••The tne of argument, my
Lords, here pursued is, that all who vote in favour of this
measrre vote fOr a political union with idolatry, which God
has denottnced ; and that, therefore, all who vote in sup:.
port of this measure are doing theft titmtn.t to hfing npon
the nation the eteire end indgment of :Almi6hty tlod. Sad
sod fearful indeed would be Cohtiequence here creed if
the pretniseS foiend±d in reason. It is the publicity,
my Lotk!s, *bleb these letters have received (and I know
that their publicity has been great, for I myself received no
less than eleven copies)—( Hear, hear, hear)—that hat been
the cause why the minds of many of tilu clergy have
been influenced against thin measure ; and it is that pub-
licity and its eltectS Which have induced me to mention
these lettere in this place. I looked with great anxiety at
tl4 effect which this argument of the Rev. Gentleman's
might have, and a few days afterwards I wrote t'a him, and
told him that, although a theological Union was forbidden,
a political one was not: The proof was this :—the Al-
mighty-, in the earlier ages of the world, had a chosen
I)n:cttle, to whom all the practices of idolatry were pro•
hihited, and who were not even allowed to enter into con-
tract., or to have any intercourse rith idolatrous nations,
and upon this ground it is contended at the present day
that no union ought to take place between the followers of
the Established Church of England and the Church of
.urine. But the parties setting forth such an argument
may be beaten upon their own grounds, for, by the authoe
r:ty to which they refer, it appears that the curse of God
was pronounced not only upon political unions, but also
upon all unions of commerce. If, therefore, we are to be
intted by this law, we must have incurred the curse of
the Almighty, for our trade and commerce with China,
Turkey, and other idolatrous nations, as also for our inter-
course with France, Italy, and Spain, who differ with us in
some parts of our creed, and who are willing to acknowledge
the infallibility of a man. But, as much has been said upon
this subject, I have looked to the text of the New Testa-
ment, and that, I can assure the Noble Lords now present,
with no inconsiderable elegree of anxiety. It is to be
found in the Apocalypse; but I beg to say that it has as little
to do with political union as any thing that can be ima-
gined. It is contended that the Roman Catholics are to
be considered as an idolatrous people, because they have
sworn their belief in the invocation of saints; but I beg
to say, that I do not believe that the professors of the Ca-
tholic religion do actually believe in such invocations. I

have passed the early part of my days in close connection
with many of tile Catholic clergy, and I must beg to say
that I have always found them to he men of ge at inte-
grity and worth—men who, upon the point of idolatry,
might be considered to be just as great idolators as myself
—men, many of whose spirits have by this time passed
into those eternal kingdoms where idolatry may never
- enter. The opinions that I entertained upon this subject
I pot into print some time ago, upon an occasion when
imputations were raised against the Established Church—
when an attempt was endeavoured to be made to prove
that the principles of that Church were the same as the
Church of Rome. I then stated publicly, and with a
view to make my opinions upon the subject known, that I
did not believe the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church
to be the same now that it was in former centuries.
When I say, however, that I do not believe the doctrine
of that Church to be the same that it formerly was—l do
not mean to say that the tenets of their faith are changed or
altered—they no doubt are the same they were at the time of
the Reformation—but I mean to say that I du nut believe
that the Catholic Church now vests in itself the power of
deposing Kings. As this declaration was made by me
some years ago, I at least hold myself acquitted of having
adopted, for the first time, the opinions I have now
stated, now that the present measure is brought forward
by his Majesty's Government. It has been said that every
dignitary of the church of Eogland, and in fact that every
clergyman who supports this measure, has been guilty of a
defection from scriptural truth. Such has been the as-
sertion of an individual with whose natne I sin acquainted,
hut which, for obvious reasons, I shall now forbear to
mention. But when that individual made a charge, at-
tacking alike the rich and the poor who_ were attached to
that church for which he prefessed so strong an attach-
ment, I do think that lie ought at least to have brought
forward some shadow of truth, some sort of ground upon
which to support it. I do think that he who has charged
all the clergy of England would have done much better if
he had tried to follow- the example of the Eternal Son of
God.—(Hear. )—Having so far stated my opinions upon
this great question, I leave it to vou, my Lords, to pass
upon them such a sentence as sisall appear just in your
minds, but at the same time you must believe that they have
been formed, upon reflection, and have been uttered with
sincerity. The next objection made to this measure is,
that this question is not to be argued on the ground of
expediency. There was certain'y some questions which
could only be argued on the ground of morality and the
will of God, and much evil had been done in the seven-
teenth century on the Elea of expediency. But when an
act is not unjust or evil in itself I think it may
be fairly argued whether it be expedient. If there
he sin committed in agreeing to the present question, it is
a sin that has long been going on. The Act that allowed
the Catholic Clergy to settle in the country, to say mass—
to buy land, I need not repeat them all, but they all
ettahlish the principle entertained in this measure. I
am told there is a great difference between those Acts
and the present, but in the principle of establishing that
the profession of a religion which you believe to be untrue
may be consistent with safety to the state, they both
agree. It is said, the oaths appointed to he taken
by the Act may place the consciences of Protestants
iu a state of danger, as the Catholics are not re-
quired to denounce the spiritual authority of the Pope,
whilst the Protestants are required to declare they have
no spiritual authority in this kingdom ; and it has been
argued that not requiring a similar annunciation from the
Catholics, may be considered by Protestants in recognition
of that spiritual authority. In a memorial of the
Clergy it is stated that the oaths in the Bill are
calcnlated to lay a snare for the consciences of those
Universities, which take an oath denying the spiritual au-
thority of the Pope. This, however, is not a charge,
but an objection, which no more applies to the oath
in this Bill but in former Bills.—(Hear, hear. )
In the Acts of 1778 and 1791 the Roman Catholics
are only required to renounce the temporal power of the
Pope. The objection to the oath is as old as the oath
itself, for when the Act of 1778 was passed, a petition
was presented by Protestants, who were very much
alarmed lest, after the passing of that Act, they should
be involved in the guilt of perjury, by taking the
oath of supremacy which was required of them; so that
to remove this objection it would now he necessary to re-
peal the Acts of 1778 and 1791. The House of Com-
mons of that day took this object into their consideration,
and resolved that the 18th of the King did not allow spiritual
authority of the Pope of Rome in this kingdom.—(Hear,
hear.)—The present Bill contained no mere recognition of
the Pope's authority than that Bill.—(Hear, hear.)—
The spiritual authority formerly exercised by the Pope
in this country was exercised through the
,Spiritual
Courts, which were completely abolished at the time of the
Reformation, and which certainly the present Bill had no
tendency to restore.—(Hear, hear.)—lt was net his
intentien to enter into the argument with the Noble
and. Learned Lord, whether the Constitution, as es-
tablished at the Revolution, was made exclusively
Protestant, as the only question now was, whether it
were to continue in that state. The men by whom the
Constitution was established at the Revolution were as
wise and as able men as ever governed a country; they
did not establish a Protestant Constitution and leave it
unprotected, they did not allow either Popish Pries!,
or Jesuits to establish settlements in England
to buy land, and only prevent their coming to Westmin-
ster Hall. We are not now to be told that the citadel is
in the same state as when surrounded by the fortifications
which they had erected fur its defence, but which 4
been since overthrown. When the Legislature repealed
those laws, and allowed Catholics to teach schools, they burst
(Town the bulwarks with which our ancestors had sur-
rounded the Protestant Constitution, and protected it

from danger by new penal statutes, down to George the
Second. I come now to the bearing this question will
I have nn the Church.of England, and from the best consider-
tion l have bets able to give that most important part of
• the subject, I have come to the conclusion that it will
not he productive of danger. The great in the
numbery of theePapirts th?. 1.-rorestants of this country,
and the .etrMog feeling of the people against the supersti-
tions of Popery, convince me that there is no danger
of its establishment in this kingdom.....(Hear.)—l hope
I may now advert for one moinctt to the reflection's 441
have been Veseri brow the Clerg:e for tb oliposliion to
inealdre. The elerry h'eve Shown theMselves what I
belieVid them to be, a body of fear'ess, independent,
;6ilest men. It is true the Clergy haven-rote petitions against
the measures, and encouraged their pocks to sign
theca; in this I think thy have done wisely. The right
sf petit'_ce. as well been called the safety-valve of the
State. An Englishman, when he petitions the Legis-
lature in any measure feels that he has done
his duty, and remains perfectly quiet t.ftt.sr the event, and
I am persuaded thet the present peace and tranquillity of
this tsant.try owing in a great degree to the conduCt of
the Clergy who uniformly advised the people; after they
had petitioned; to leave she Consideration of the sub•
ect ttl th 4 Ugislaturc. By the present state of
th-e iaw, the Church of is exposed to
very serious danger ; our ministers are vilified, and
our revenues magnified, though there never was a church
on earth which contained a clergy of more leatnitig and •
worth.—more acti4•se arid tealriiia in the discharge of their
tlutlts. She is brought into collisiop with the church, not
indeed established, but possessing great influence over the
people, governed by 22 Bishops. having under their
eontroul 3,000 clergy, not responsible to any authority in
this country, having flocks deeply imbued with supersti.--
tion. The question now it not whether there he danger in
the present State of that church, but whether the present
Iheatire increases or diminishes that danger. I think
the danger will be diminished. I see in the provisions of
the present Bill the dawn of a brighter day for the
Church of Ireland.—( Hear, hear, hear.),---e-Aftee the
passing of this Act tranquility will be restored, property
witl he ,eeenred, English capital and the r. tutns of the
landed proprietors of that country will give employ-
ment, content, and comfort to the people of Ireland.
To the Aristocracy of England, I do not hesitate to en-
trust the care of the rights of the Church. Let the united
Church of England and Ireland rest securely_ under your
protection. I am bound to speak on this subject with
great caution, but having attentively considered the measures
now before your Lordships, I have no hesitation in ex-
pressing my humbles but confident hope that it will even-
tually benefit the country without endangering the bul-
warks of the Protestant Church or existing establishments.
Upon these grounds I cannot withhold my support from
the measure.
The Duke of RICHMOND—I am at all times unwil-
ling to trespass en your Lordships' attention, but after
what has fallen from the Right Rev. Frei ite, I feel bound
to say a few words upon the subject new before your Lord-
ship.. The Right Rev. Prelate has spoken of the accession of
talent which appeared on that side the question. He recol-
lected that bat year he had the benefit not only of his Right
Rev. Friend's eloquence, hut what was of much more
importance, of his vote. However, it appeared that the
" march of intellect" was making rapid strides indeed ;
for in the short space, the shot t period of one year, that
talent, that eloquence, and that vote were opposed to them.
In that short time he had changed his sentiment., and he
(the Duke of Richmond) could not attribute it to any
thing but an extraordinary enlightenment on reading the
King's Speech. He confessed that his sentiments were
unchanged. He had always thought that concessions
granted would only lead to further demands, and until he
was satisfied that there was no longer any danger to be
apprehended, he would not consent.

The Bishop of SALISBURY opposed the measure.
The Earl of WINCHILSRA was unwilling to trouble
their Lordships with a repetition of the sentiments which
he had so frequently dechired upon this important ques—
tion, but he would go at once into the principles of the
Bill which had for its ohjezt, as he conceived, the over-
throw of the Constitution. Thu House was called on to
abandon principles which it had long sustained, and
lie would ask upon what grounds, upon what securities?
He (the Earl of Winchilsea) must now advert to the pledge
given by the Noble Duke that that Bill would have the
effect of strengthening the Church Establishment. The Bill
was now before their Lordships, and he would ask had that
pledge been borne out? They were told that whilst it
would quiet the complaints of the Catholics, it would
also satisfy the Protestants. What proof was there
that it gave satisfaction to the Protestants of Eng-
land? He would take the answer from the numerous
petitions against the measure pouring in from the most
distant parts of the kingdom. He thought that this was
the best answer to the solemn assurance of satis-
faction. Ile thought this a sufficient reason why this
most base experimental measure should not be enter-

tained—a measure which he conceived Would act as a
check to the growth of liberty and the best interests of
rel,giun. He boldly affirmed that the Protestants of
this realm slid not consider the Bill upon the table afforded
that protection which they were bound to require. It was
for this reason that they had come to such conclusion.
It was true that before the period of 1668, there
had been a dawn of liberty which had ebbed or flowed in
proportion to the increase or decrease of Popery. But he
believed it would be found that whatever had been good or
pure in the Government of any country, had emanated
from Protestantism. He would ask their Lordships, weie
they now, for the first time, to permit daring Irish reels
to say that they were afraid to vindicate their rights, and
protect that Constitution which they so much venerated.
He would ask their Lordships, what would be the effect of
granting- concessions to them who were openly and se-
cretly enemies to Protestantism ? Was it possible that it
could tend to strengthen that establishment? If that
were so, why was it necessary to ask for any securities at
all 7—(Hear, hear.)—For his own part he had as yet not
heard any thing of securities, and would therefore conjure
his Right Rev. Brethren to weigh well the deep
responsibility of their sacred character in their
consideration of this measure, and lie trusted that
their Lordships would still prove to the country
that they were neither to he intimidated nor seduced into
giving their sanction to a measure which involved the
best interests of the country. The Noble Earl concluded
by seconding the amendment.
Lord SOMERS had long made up his mind on this mea-
sure. He was satisfied itehould have been granted long since.
Two of the greatest Statesmen of their day who differed
on most other questions agreed on this. He was confirmed
in that opinion by the majority which the measure had so
frequently obtained in the other House. He had heard
with regret the interference of Clergymen in the promo.
tion of petitions en this subject, and whether for or against,
he thought it most improper. It was not suitable to their
sacred calling, who if they had followed the dictates of the
Bible,would have been promoters of peace rather than strife.
He was decidedly in favour of the Bill ; but if he could he
persuaded that it would have the effect which some con-
tended would be the result, if its tendency were to change
the country from being a Protestant to a Roman Catholic
country, he should then as stoutly resist it as he was
now prepared to support it. In such else, he could as-
sure their Lordships that he should wholly give up the
measure. But on what ground was so extraordinary
charge preferred ? On what ground was it contended,
that such would be, or was likely to be, the operation of
the Bill ? What, it might he asked, could the minority beat
the majority.—(Hear, hear.)—Almost all in this country
were Protestants; the Roman Catholics were here very
few in number, they were as an atom compared with the
Protestants; then where was the chance, the rational
ground for saying that the Protestants so outnum-
bered the Roman Catholics, that this Bill would hay e
the effect of changing the country from Protes-
tant to Roman Catholic. But there was not only
the security in the number of the Protestants, but also in
the state and character of the representation. Out of six
hundred and fifty-eight Members, Ireland had the oppartu-
nity of sending one hundred, and could that small number
out-vote those Members, who would all, or nearly all, be
Protestants, sent by the other portion of the empire.
How, on any principles, under any circumstances, could
they have such weight as to overturn the Consti-
tution, and to secure the ascendancy to the Roman Ca-
tholics ? Besides, they all knew that the Protestant
religion was that of the State, and secured by the laws.
There was avowedly no danger except the country became
Roman Catholic ; and how could the country become
Roman Catholic all at once?—(Hear, hear, hear.)—At
present they were all Protestants iu that House; • and
when this Bill passed there would be an addition to
their numbers of six or seven Peers, who being Roman
Catholics had not now seats.—(Hear, hear.)—How was
it possible that they could have so alarming an influence
on the 300 or 400 Members of that House: and
was it not very unlikely that any Sovereign ever
should or could create such a number of Roman Catho-
lics as to give a preponderance to the votes of members
of that religion ? lie had been striving to find out some
reasons for the alarm of some persons, but he had been
utterly unable to discover any. He could not find any
groands for the alarm as to the Protestant religion or
establishment being in danger. After all the irritation
that bad been excited, and after the daily agitations
that had milted, the question would now pot °sly be cet