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

sure thinks he can bring Catholics to support the Protestant
Constitution, he may be a Minister that will succeed, but
I am net one who can agree in the expectation that he will
and I think it not unfair to suppose the Lord Chancellor,
who supports the measure, may be in the part he
takes, supposed to be a little under the influence
of that Prime Minister.—(Hear.)—My Lords, you have
heard a great deal about the enactments relative to the Ca-
tholics—you have heard of the laws made in the reign of
Elizabeth—nay, you may carry it back to a century before ;
your Lordships hare heard of Magna Charta ; but I say
that Magna Charta was a recognition only of those liber-
ties established long anterior to the time at whieh Magna
tienrta was signed ; and it should be remembered that
statute is neither more nor less than what was enacted at
the Revolution on behalf of the Crown. If your Lot d-
ships will look at Lord Hale's Pleas of the Crown,
you will find that he speaks of the old oath, and I
think no man will deny that the Oath of Allegiance
is taken by the Protestants alone, including the Oath
of Supremacy. My Lords, Hale says, that the Pope,
wishing to construe the Oath in his-own way, had made
such encroachments on the powers of his Majesty in this
kingdom, it became necessary, to use his own expression,
unricet those errors, and to let them know that they must
take an additional oath of supremacy. In speaking of the
Act of Mary, he states that those Acts were neither more
nor less than revolutionary Acts. Well, then, my Lords,
such being the nature of things, I find it not easy to recon-
cile insc.mincl readily to accede to the proposition of admit-
ting persons into power, under an Act in which there is an
repress clause, deelaring that they do not admit the supre-
macy of his Majesty. My Lords, we are told that this
tneaaure is in truth e new bulwark in defence
of the established Protestant Constitution, and in Ruppert
of that fabric which I suppose in a measure rests upon the
Act of Parliament which was passed in the course of last
year. All Inn say, is, that if I thought so, would be
the first man who should vote for this measure. But the
first question is, whether the persons whose wishes it is
intended to meet will be inclined to support the established
Church? (Hear, hear, hear,) Have they not by the
abominable proceedings of the Association defied the civil
powers, and represented the Established Church as the
most offensive nuisance that ever existed. They don't
scruple to tell your Lordships that, if some Noble Lords
will read the Ist statute of Henry VIII. they will learn
what supremacy is, and what is the supremacy of the
Pope in the ecclesiastical establintenents. I don't go
back to ancient times—for there is really no abange now
in the doctrines of the Church of Rome from what there
wee in ancient times. Those doctrines Ido not enter into
but I think they will in a great degree destroy the purity
as d morality of the doctrines of the Protestant Church.
Let those doctrines be what they may, it shall never be
said that I have been the man who would sacrifice the su-
premacy of the Crown to them. My Lords, I certainly
have no hesitation in telling you that 1 deferred speaking
endioutly, for I was teld I should not speak before Lord
Grey, because, after 1 beard what be said, I should learn
all that was to be said on the measure:now proposed. It was
therefore I deferred speaking at an earlier perid of the day
and with these observatiars I leave it by saying,
.it is much
better to risk the Constitution as it now stands, than to risk
it on the remotest ground of security which this measure
proposes. But the Lord Chancellor stated yesterday, that
if we knew all, we shauld not temple to Assent to the
Eill. My Lords, I have always stated that I was an ene-
my to a Bill of this nature going into a Conaw,,itfre, for I
did not t::ink that Parliament knew the course of hear-
ing such a me:aure concluded through a Committee. My
Lords, I have ;,f‘l'd it said by Noble Lords more
than once there is no cie.:rter to be apprehended, you are
perfectly safe, if you have onty a protestant King. Now
that it is to take place rhich is state: here, you may readily
conceive that when these persons are admitted into office
they will not consent to point the finger of disaffection to
the Throne on which the King sits rather than to the
established law of the land.—(Hear.)—One mote word,
pnd I have done. I have always said that the pelf,.
Coro! ;eresenteil were such as were entitled to the serious
attention o: the House, if they were got up in a manner
that was not diseespectful. With respect to Mr. Pitt,
whatever circumstances existed at the time the Union with
Ireland took place. I know he has repeated again and again
in the hearing of the individual who now addresses your
Lordships that he would give his consent to no change un-
less he had :efficient securities. As far as I am able to
collect the securities now proposed, they are not satis-
factory. —(Hear. )

reasonable to suppose that they should always
quietly submit to such a degradation.—(Hear, hear.)—
I have heard several Noble Lords say, that they are inti-
mately acquainted with many Catholics who they think
are very pod and very amiable men, but yet they are con-
vinced that there would be no safety in granting them
their civil rights. What a paradox!—(Hear, hear.)—
All those who think with me that concessions ought no
longer to be withheld, are charged directly with being
either apostates or favourers of idolatry, and that we have
no regard to the Protestant Constitution, but that we are
raising up enemies. It is no such thing. It re-
quires no act to influence parties to unite together)
their common grievance is sufficient. It had been stated
by a Noble and Learned Lord that the people cared nothing
about emancipation, but I can assure him that they do
care. They feel that an indignity is offered to some of
their body, and if offered to one it affected the whole. The
present system of exclusion is certainly an insult to the
feelings of a loyal and a brave people, and the wrongs
that they have so long suffered had made them too power-
ful for this country any longer to resist their just claims.—
(Hear, hear.)—Are we, my Lords, to he frightened at a
monster of our own creation ? Intolerance is that mon-
ster, and let us by passing this measure, annihilate it.
Many persons trust to time and lenient measures for the
removal of complaints. For the evils of Ireland time can
bring no cure. Complaints must go on from day to day,
until every unnatural distinction is removed. Until that
removal every unjust distinction will be the root of danger.
(Hear.)—The vices of our system have led to these evils.
remedies may be proposed, and if by those remedies you
make Ireland three times as powerful as she is, still she
she will be three times more dangerous, unless you change
your position. You are now founding your Go-
mernment neither on the basis of power
or public expediency. Your principles are abandoned by
every civilized nation in the world. I declare I cannot
understand the Noble and Learned Lord, when he says
that the common law provides a remedy for these well-
known evils. Whilst the temples of the people of Ireland
are burning, and the human frame wasting in the hectic
of discontent and disappointment, it is futile to talk of ap-
plying the common law of the land as a remedy. The
Government have adapted the only line of policy
which alone can subdue all the folly and vice in the present
system of Government. The Noble Duke has wisely said,
there is no danger of a sudden explosion. The people did
not wish to fight it out with the Government
but there was inuch to be aprehended from the present
state of that unfortunate country. Whether Government
t,ave complied with the wishes of the Catholics I can not
say, but I will say they have followed the recommenda-
tion of the speech frem the throne in doing the best
that circumstances will allow for Ireland. Let me ask
the Right Rev. Bench, who entertain sentiments different
from me an the question, what are the dangers they appre-
hend.—(Hear, hear, hear.)—They assume that the wish
of the Roman Catholics is to gain the Protestant
ascendancy. They say hostility must exist towards the
Eatablished aoreh, but let us see what are the grounds
of this danger. It appears that the highest character
is given of the Roman Catholics. (Hear, hear.)—The
Right Rev. Prelate says they are not idolatrous, yet they
say, you are a worthy respectable man, but I cannot be-
lieve yea on your oath.—( A laugh.)--Can you say
that the Roman Catholics have done any thing against
the Protestant Church ?—I admit at public meet-
ings, there have beau violent any), apeeetes made
by angry Priests and angry Demagogues; but that
wae not ground to charge the whole Catholic Body
with icapeo;er feelings. I lo not think it wise to lecture
on this sub yet, the Rey? Bench say the Catholics entertain
hostile feelings to the protatq.nt establishment. Why is
it so? There must be an establishment ; religion cannot
r without it. Jf the Roman Catholic laity admit, as
they do admit, that there must be a religious esta-
blishment, they will not decide against it.—(Hear.)—
It is impossible to ovei wrn the Protestant establishment
without subverting the State itself: If yon give Catholics
their rights, they will respect the Protesteeytssteblishment.
It is an ahuae of good sense to talk of hostility against the
Protestant EetalAahment ; I believe from my heart that the
Roman Catholic Priests and Laiety of Ireland, have
no intention to make an ,ittaelg on the Protestant FA-
tabliehment —(Hear, hear.)—Do they forget, in the
first piece that the corner-stone of the Constitotion.
That the Constitution is essentially Protestant. That
the King is hound by his Coronation Oath to
exclude Rumen Cetholies from the State, I will
admit but I will weintain, with all that

not
the Constitution is unalterably Pro4easant. As to the ad-
Cathoties to this House there can Le no danger

mission on
of a Popish representative. If they look to the other tiouix
tiNy suppose the Catholics would send Members to Par-
•t'e purpose of overturning• the Constitution.—
' "us con piracy be carried Oil in the
I say no! and if such an at -
—rdy enough, and
--,,pot off