The Sun.
London, England, 1827-03-17 00:00:00

CATHOLICS.

FROM LAST NIGHT'S LONDON GAZETTE.

At the Court of St. James's, the 14th day of March, 1827,
Present, the King's Most Excellent Majesty in Council.
llis Majesty in Council was this 7day pleased to appoint Owen
John Augustus Fuller Meyrick, of Bodorgan, Esq. to be Sheriff
of the county of Anglesey, in the room of Richard Bulkeley Wil-
liams Bulkeley, of Baronhill, Esq.
And his Majesty was pleased to make the following amendments
upon the roll :
Hertfordshire—Joseph Lautoar, of Hexton, Esq. made Joseph
Andrew Latour, of Hexton House, Esq.
Carmarthenshire—Josh. Gulstone. Esq. made Josh. Gulston, Esq.
Pembrokeshire—Anthony Innys Stokes, of Scoveston, Esq. made
Anthony Innys Stokes, of St. Botolphs, Esq.

DECLARATIONS OF INSOLVENCY.
J. Bennett, Warwick-square, bookseller.
J. Barnes, Clement-lane, tailor.
BANKRUPTCY SUPERSEDED.
P. Smith, Liverpool, hatter.
BANKRUPTS.

J. L. Shepherd and H. Fricker, Southampton, linen-drapers,
to surrender March 23, 30, and April 27, at eleven, at the Court
of Commissioners. Green and Ashurst, Sambrook-court, Ba-
singhall-street.
S. B. Masters, Hastings, Sussex, cabinet-maker, March 23,
30, and April 27, at eleven, at the Court of Commissioners.—
Smith, Basinghall-street.

J. Barker, Bath, woollen-draper, March 27, 28, and April 27,
at twelve, at the Swan Hotel, Bridge-street, Bristol. Poole,
Greenfield, and Gamlen, Gray's Inn-square; and Cary, Bridge-
street, Bristol.

W. Waller and G. Lowe, Sheffield, carpet-manufacturers,
March 23, 24, at one, and April 27, at three, at the Tontine
Inn, Sheffield. Preston, Tokenlionse-yard ; and Brookfield,
Sheffield.

S. Watkins, Portland Town, Regent's Park, brick-maker,
March 20, 27, and April 27, at eleven, at the Court of Commis-
sioners. Carlon, High-street, Marylebone.
W. Dixon, Horncastle, Lincolnshire, maltster, April 5, at five,
6, at ten, and 27, at eleven, at the Bull Inn, Horncastle. Norris,
Bedford-row ; and Parker, Horncastle.
A. Loder, Orange-Grove, Bath, music-seller, March 19, 31,
and April 27, at eleven, at the White Lion Inn, Bath. Turner,
Bath ; and Price, New-square, Lincoln's-Inn.
J. Gough, Nottingham, lace-manufacturer, April 4,5, and 27,
at eleven, at the Flying Horse, Nottingham. Brewster, Notting-
ham; and Adlington and Co., Bedford-row. _ .

The Earl of LIMERICK presented a petition
from the Roman Catholic Inhabitants and Protestant Dissenters
of the Town of Preston, praying that the Roman Catholics might
be relieved from the disabilities under which they labour.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, in the absence of
a Noble Lord, who was confined by indisposition in Ireland, had
been requested to present to their Lordships a petition from the
Protestant Noblemen and Landed Proprietors resident in Ireland,
praying their Lordships not to grant any further concessions to
the Catholics. The petition was numerously signed, but it was
signed by no persons who were not Noblemen and Landed Pro.
prietors residing in Ireland. In the petition, the places where
they resided were mentioned with each signature. He himself
made it a rule, which he did not then mean to depart from, on
presenting petitions, to do neither more or less than to desire that
the sentiments of the petitioners might be known ; he, therefore,
begged that the petition might be read at Icngth. The petition
was accordingly read and laid on the table.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY rose to pre-
sent a petition in favour of the Catholics, from the Inhabitants of
the County and Town of Derry, in Ireland, which was numer-
ously and respectably signed. It was not his intention, in pre-
senting that and some other petitions which he had, to trespass
on their Lordships' attention, particularly as he had, in a former
Session, stated humbly, but honestly, what was his sincere con-
viction on this great and important question. With this question,
the best interests of Ireland, her prosperity, and even the existence
of social order, were intimately connected. He thought it need-
less, and even in bad taste, to add anything to what he had for-
merly stated, more especially, since the enlightened Statesman, in

whose hands the Catholics of Ireland had, this year, principally
intrusted their cause, had thought proper to withdraw the motion
of which he had given notice. •He was not present to hear the in-
comparable speech which was made when the motion was with-
drawn, but he had read it, and he agreed with every word it contained.
There were various circumstances which ought to preclude any
person from bringing forward the question now ; but princi•
. .

J. B. Bellamy, Sbipston-upon-Stour, Worcestershire, scrivener,
April 3,4, at the George Inn, Shipston-upon-Stour, and 27, at
eleven, at the Bell Inn, Halford, Warwickshire. Fiudon and
Wood, Shipston-upon-Stour ; and Eyre`and Coverdale, Gray's-Inn.
DIVIDENDS.
J. Dickinson, Church-passage, Guildhall, warehouseman, April
6, at eleven, at the Court of Commissioners—T. Coleman and E.
Wellings, Ludlow, bankers, April 1 1 , at nine, at the Crown Inn,
Ludlow—J. Curbin, Holloway, under-writer, April 6, at eleven,
at the Court of Conunissioners—J. Crosthwaite, Fenchurch-street,
wine-merchant, April 6, at eleven, at the Court of Commissioners
—W. R. Mott, Brighton, wine-merchant, April 6, at twelve, at
the New Inn, Brighton—J. Clarage, Great Bell-alley, Coleman-
street, warehouseman, April 6, at nine, at the Court of Commis-
, sioners--S. King, All Saints, Poplar, boat-builder, April 6, at
one, at the Court of Commissioners—J. Wilkinson, Castle-street,
Holborn, working-jeweller, April 6, at eleven, at the Court of
Commissioners—C. Spurden, Friday-street, Cheapside, dealer,
April 6, at ten, at the Court of Commissioners—W. Fuller' Bos-
ton, Lincolnshire, linen-draper, April 6, at twelve, at the Court
of Commissioners:—G. Osborn, sen., R. Hewes, C. Smith, and
G. Osborn, jun., Northampton, bankers, April 12, at eleven,
at the Guildhall, Northampton—C. Hunt, Mark-lane, wine-
merchant, April 6, at ten, at the Court of Commissioners—J.
Bayley, Ipswich, ship-builder, April 11, at eleven, at the Su-
Horse Inn, Ipswich—R. Pearse and Alex. Marack, Penzance,
merchants, April 9, at eleven, at the Union Hotel, Penzance—
P. and I. Blackburn, Plymouth, and Bloomsbury-square,
merchants, April 20, at twelve, at the Court of Commissioners—
A. Francis, High Holborn, linen-draper, April 10, at eleven, at
the Court of Commissioners—A. Mackenzie, Hammond-court,
Mincing-lane, wine-merchant, April 6, at twelve, at the Court of
Commissioners—P. F. Batterbee, Norton, Suffolk, brandy-mer.'
chant, April 6, at eleven, at the Court of Commissioners—G.

pally the situatimn of the Government. It was impossible not
to see that there was no union among the Members of the Go-
vernment on this important question ; and, until there was, it
Must be allowed to rest. He hoped, however, that his Catholic

countrymen would' bear their disappointment with patience and
resignation ; and, as their sincere friend, he would urge the peti-
tioners to do so. He had no conception that any attempt would
be made by rebellion, or any kind of force, to rescue those privi,

leges which the Parliament withheld ; but, if there were, he, as
au honest and humble soldier of Ireland, would be found in the
van to oppose any such attempt. He was persuaded that the
measure the petitioners prayed for was the only one which could
give permanent tranquillity to Ireland ; and he hoped those of
their Lordships who opposed that measure would be prepared
with some measure to still the agitation which now prevailed.
He, however, would still recommend the petitioners to have pa-
tience and resignation, relying on their ultimately obtaining their
wishes from the justice and magnanimity of a British King and a
British Senate.
The NOBLE MARQUIS then presented petitions from the

Roman Catholic Inhabitants of the County and Town of Lon-
donderry, of the County of Monaghan, from several parishes in
the County of Monaghan, and from the Parish of St. James,
Dublin.
The Earl of' WINCHELSEA conceived, in op-
position to several Noble Lords, the more the question was dis-
cussed, the more their Lordships would concur in the opinion, that
it was impossible to throw open the British Constitution to the
Roman Catholics, without endangering the existence of that Con-
stitution, both in Church and State. If the question were dis-
cussed in that House, he did not suppose it would be embittered
by those angry feelings which had 'attended the discussion in ano-
ther place—he did not suppose that any of their Lordships would
so far forget what was due to their high public and private cha-
racter, as to deal in invective against those with whom they were
united in politics—he did not suppose that any such words would
ever be used within their Lordships' House ; nor, if such words
were used, did he suppose that they would have any other effect
than to leave a more hostile impression against the Catholics, and
to unite more firmly and resolutely all those who fought under
the banners under which he was enlisted. He was convinced, how-
ever strongly their Lordships might feel on this subject, such
terms would never be heard in any discussion within those walls.
He begged to state to their Lordships the reasons of his opposition
to the Catholics, and why he found it impossihle to concede to
them the privileges of the British Constitution. He had yet
heard no argument, nothing but mere asse, tions, brought
forward to justify the concessions it was proposed to make.—
He most conscientiously wished that this question should
be set at rest ; it was a question of general policy, and not
limited to a party. He meant to draw their Lordships' attention
—first, to the principles professed by the Papists in former times,
when they possessed political power ; and afterwards he should
endeavour to prove that those principles Lad not changed, and

_
Brown, Bath, haberdasher, April 6, at twelve, at the Court of that the of arbitrary power and encroachment, which first
Commissioners—S. Sotheby,Wellington-street, Strand,auctioneer,
April 20, at twelve, at the Court of Commissioners—G. Johnson, caused the Catholics to be excluded, was still the predominant
spirit of their religion. If lie referred to the history of past times,
King-Stanley, Gloucestershire, wool-broker, April 6, at ten, at it was not his wish to remind their Lordships of any of those
the Court of Commissioners—J. Guth, jun., Shad-Thames, painful events, which marked distinctly the character of Popery.
Southwark, corn-factor, April 6, at eleven, at the Court of Com-
missioners—R. Corry, Henstridge, Somersetshire, innkeeper, May For this P urP ose it was only necessary to remind their Lordships of
5, at eleven, at Virginia Inn, Henstridge—R. Lankester, Cheap- what occurred in England during the short reign of James 11.,
when the Catholics were in possession of power, and for a short
side, warehouseman, April 6, at ten, at the Court of Commission-.
swayed the sceptre of these realms. At the same period
ers—W. Penn, Kidderminster, carpet manufacturer, April, 9, at
perioden the Continent, Louis XIV. was pursuing the same career, and
twelve, at the Hop Pole Inn, Worcester—W. Owen, Carnarvon •
druggist, April 11, at one, at the Goat Inn, Carnarvon—J. Dun-
kin, Aldersgate-street, tallow-chandler, April 6, at eleven, at the testants, which had secured his family on the Throne, and under
, by revoking the Edict of Nantes, broke his faith with the Pro-
Court of Conamissioners--G. Poore, Pavement, Moorkelds, the influence' of the Jesuits he had banished all the Protestants
from his dominions. At the same time, other Sovereigns on the
breeches-maker, April 6, at ten, at the Court of Commissioners_
T. Warrington, sen., Hart-street, Mark-lane, wine-broker, April Continent, as the King of Sardinia, were persecuting their Pro-
testant subjects. Such was the character of Popery at that pe-
-10, at eleven, at the Court of Commissioners.
riod ; and if their Lordships should suppose that these statements
CERTIFICATES, APRIL 6. were coloured by Protestant authors, he would support them by
J. and J. Lamb, Liverpool, saddlers—W. Yewens, Sherborne- what had been stated by the Bishop of Meaux. Bossuet was
lane, Lombard-street, mine agent—T. Bentley, Blackburn, miller himself a persecutor, and justified persecution. His Lordship
—C. Underwood, Cheltenham, builder—C. T. Rimer, South- then quoted a short passage from the writings of Bossuet, pur-
ampton, cheesemonger—P. Gent, Congleton, Cheshire, silk-ma- porting that the Catholic Church was the most intolerant of all
nufheturer—E. Leigh,Chiddingstorle, Kent, victualler—J. Serrell, Christian churches—that her very intolerance rendered her
Camberwell, builder—R. Powys, Grosvenor-mews, New Bond-
street, farrier-4. Williams, Half Moon-street, Piccadilly, board- secure--and that her principles were so severe, that she forbade
any indulgence or forgiveness. The Noble Peer then went on
ing-house-keeper. say, that Bossuet had also justified the use of the sword against
PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED, those who were not of the same religion, and he said its tenets
S. Crossland and J. Stonehouse, Camden-town, builders—B. were not to be called in question. Such doctrines were main-
and T. Burdekin, J. Hobson, and A. Hawley, Sheffield, mer- tained by the fathers of the Rinnish Church. He then came to
chants, as far as regards S. Hobson—T. Skelton and A. Bennoch, the question, had the Catholics since that period altered their
Richmond, Yorkshire,-linen-draPers-11. Congreve and R. Hill; sentiments, or did they still adhere to such doctrines ? For
jun. Wood-street, Cheapside, riband-manufacturers_—S. Hender- his part he believed that they were unchanged and unchange-
son and J. Newton, Cheapside, calico-printers--IL Bayly and M. able. The declarations that had been made by those who had
Dodshon, Sloane-street, Chelsea, school-mistresses--M. G. evidently a strong motive for making them, did not carry con-
Mitchell and J. Brumfield, Regent's-quadrant, St. James's—C. viction to his mind, and he believed them to hold the arbitrary
and R. Lloyd, Bedwas House, Moumouthshire, maltsters—S. principles now which formerly made them obnoxious to both

tip ti.
civil and • religious liberty. win: tite—Sli_i)e. icidefrOlllll
tenets as formerly, believed iitt/1 in initulgehees; purgatorr.
oiunethe of "
their old ooe
tf
rtihnie
sHwead which `was
rieving.Antustect,
onA_wasy tre..
Roman Catholics. He did not require any further proof of thie
than the 'declaration of Pope Leo XII. himself, who, in hie Bull
for the Jubilee. of 1825, displayed all the ancient characteristics of
the Roman Catholic religion. When modern writers stated that
this religion was altered, he begged to ask them when and by
what authority, and at what period was it affected, and by what
public decree declared and known to all the members of a Church
which denied to individuals the right of private judgment ? In
what public document was it embodied, and by what Council de-
creed? Their Lordships must know that no principle was acted
on in the Church, unless it was sanctioned by.a General Council,
and no such• Council had been held since the 16th century. By
their decrees alone could their Lordships ascertain whether
there had been any change in the Roman Catholic religion ; and
since the period to which he had before referred to prove ita
character, no such Council had been held. They were told by
individuals that its character was changed ; but those indi-
viduals had interested motives for making the assertion, and he
believed that the doctrines of the Romish- Church were as into-
lerant as at any former period. How little they had
°changed,
he would shew their Lordships by the opinion of an impartial
Judge, an eloquent writer of the Protestant Church, who- had,
observed on the evidence of Dr. Doyle,- given before their Lord-
ships in a previous Session, that the object and aim -of the Roman
Catholic priesthood was still, as formerly, to obtain and preserve
power. He agreed with those who thought that a change in Ire-,
land was most desirable ; but it was a change that should Latin-
guii,ll the party spirit, and release the poor, ignorant and deluded
people from the power of the Roman Clergy. He did not deny,
that among the Catholics there were r:any high-minded Gentle-
men; but he believed they deceived themselves when they stated,
that their religion was changed. Such was the character and
nature of Popery, that he thought it could not change, and the in-
dividuals who professed it could not be trusted to legislate for a
Protestant Church and State. They were themselves deceived

Ivhe treacherous policy of the Clergy of the Roman Catholic
Murch. If these statements could not he denied, where
could their Lordships look for security, if the Roman Catholics
were admitted into power; or what security could they offer to
the Protestants ? He saw none till they had released themselves
from the thraldom in which they were held by the Priests; and
as the first step to remove the fears of the Protestants, let the
Catholics renounce their servile obedience—let them declare, in
the words of the writer he had before referred to, it was not the
Throne, it was not the House of Lords—it was the Church of
Rome which barred their entrance into all the privileges of the
British Constitution, and which, as it had first caused their exclusion,
still keeps them out.—(Hear.)—lf this concession were granted,
he (lid not think it would have the effect of tranquillizing Ireland. Ad-
'flitting the Roman Catholics into political power, would no
more tranquillize Ireland than their Lordships' breath could still
the ocean. He did not mean to propose any measure for this
purpose, but there was one measure which he thought would
more than any other tend to render .the people happy, and that
was, that the Protestants should, by every just and consistent
method, endeavour to rescue the people from the state of degra-
dation and religious thraldom in which they were held. Let
them try to unite all the Irish in the bonds of the same religion.
He would only add, in conclusion, that whenever the question
came before their Lordships, he trusted they would remember it
was their duty to transmit unimpaired to posterity that Constitu-
tion which had made this country the envy and admiration of
surrounding nations. If, whenever that time came, their Lord-
ships preserved the British Constitution unaltered, he did not
doubt but we should remain, as we hail long been, the most ex-
alted nation on the face of the earth.—(Hear, hear.)—His Lord-
ship concluded, by presenting a petition from the inhabitants of
Northampton, praying their Lordships not to grant any further
concession to the Catholics. He observed that a petition of a con-
trary tendency had a few evenings before been presented from the
same place, by another Noble Lord. That petition, he was autho-
rised to say, did not express the sentiments of the majority of the
respectable inhabitants of the town.
Earl SPENCER had presented the petition from
Northampton, to which the Noble Earl had alluded, and, there-
fore thought it right to state, that the petition was signed by six
hundred persons, some of whom, he happened to know, were re-
spectable persons. He meant, however, to institute no compari-
sons, between the persons who signed the two petitions. He had
stated, that in the town of Northampton, as well as in other parte
of the kingdom, opinion was greatly divided on this question.—
On presenting it, he had stated, and he still thought, that 20 years
ago, six hundred persons could net be found in the whole town,
who would not join in the cry of "No Popery." He did not
wish to disparage other persons, nor did he doubt the sincerity of
what the Noble Earl had stated ; but he must be allowed to say,
and those who, like him, were favourable to the Catholics, were
as good friends to the British Constitution—(hear, hear,)—both
in Church and State—(hear, hear,)—as any Noble Lords who
opposed the admission of the Catholics to political power.
The Earl of WINCH ELSE A then presented pe-
titions against the Catholics, from Canterbury, Bayham, Goud-
hurst, Hollingbourn, and other places in Kent.
The Bishop of NORWICH had several petitions
to present to their Lordships, which came from different persons,
and contained very different prayers. To avoid confusion, he
would divide them into three classes. The first class should con-
sist of petitions which came from Roman Catholics in Ireland—
and of these lie had five petitions. One of these was extremely
respectably signed, and was from the Roman Catholic Prelate
and Clergy of Waterford. The other petitions were from dif-
ferent parishes of Ireland, all numerously signed by Roman Ca-
tholics, and they all prayed to be relieved from those penal laws
which still remained in force against them. These laws appeared
to him to be the disgrace of the country, and would be, he firmly
believed, its ruin, at no distant period, if the just claims of as
loyal a body of subjects as his Majesty possessed, were not granted,
and something were not done to remedy their grievances. The
second class of petitions was from the Archdeacons and Clergy of
his diocese. There were three of them, one from the Archdeacon
and Clergy of Norfolk, one the Clergy of the Archdeaconry
of Sudbury, and the third from the Archdeacon and Clergy of Suf-
folk. These petitions were signed by very learned and excellent
men, and they all prayed their Lordships would grant no further
concessions to the Catholics. It gave him much concern to differ
from such Gentlemen, but his opinion was widely different from
theirs. It gave him still more concern to find that such men
could bring themselves to believe that any necessity existed to
maintain a Christian Church by acting on other than Christian
principles ; or that the safety of the State can he hazarded by
uniting the hands and hearts of its subjects of every denomination
for its support, by giving to them all equal laws, instead of
alienating a part of them by laws which appeared to him unjust,
cruel, and persecuting.—(Hear, hear.)—ln the third class there
was only one petition, but which gave him very great pleasure to
present. It was from the Archdeacons of Norwich and Sudbury,
and other Learned Clergymen in the Diocese of Norwich. It was
signed by many learned and excellent men sincerely attached to the
British Constitution, both in Church and State. With the
prayer of their petition he cordially agreed. They state that they
thought the Constitution would not be so effectually secured by
any other means, as by giving equal privileges and laws to all
classes; and they prayed that their Lordships would re-
move the civil disabilities which still affect their Roman Catholic
Brethren. Their sentiments were, he thought, more in unison
es i
all juu just which
no-
tionstimhwith the mild
.eai
livetlo of s fit
net
dhother
ipgipiroei
utt istoi
lofi within)oseurtry oantnh,
um:bpi
oornov—vee
adlw
l
d.
and tolerant spirit of Christianity. The petition was drawn up
with so much temper and moderation, that he should beg that it
might be read at length.
After it had been read,
Lord ROLLE said he hoped the Right Rev,
Prelate would have no objection to the other petitions being read,
The LORD CHANCELLOR saiq, one of these
Petitions appeared to be the Petition of the Roman Catholic Bishop
of Waterford. He hoped, that what he found himself bound to
do in the discharge of his duty, would not be misunderstood ; but
there was no Bishop of Waterford acknowledged by that House,
except the Protestant Bishop. He thought, therefore, their Lord-
ships could not receive the Petition.
Lord CLIFDEN said the Roman Catholic Bishops
had been received by the King when he was in Ireland.
The.LORD CHANCELLOR said his Majesty
might do as he pleased, but he held it to be his duty, in the
situation in which he was placed, to protest against their Lord-
ships receiving any Petition, except from the Protestant Bishop
of Waterford.
Lord CLIFDEN—The Roman Catholic Bishop 4
were all presented in their full Canonicals to his Majesty.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN felt himself called
on to state, from what had happened on a former occasion, when
he had presented a Petition from the Catholic Clergy of Ireland,
that there was no indisposition on the part of the Noble and
Learned Lord to oppose the receiving Petitions. He recollected
that when he presented that Petition, that, after an informality
was corrected, it was received. He felt an objection to the Peti-
tion like that of the Noble and Learned Lord. There was in the

. . -
-. 74.-#144 . °•.(-::,4Z-1).
g'-
\tilmff,it,
Tior,
' 1....:.,,,:- :....;\ .;•f\4' 1.,,, .' 8j
--"t. "tr-7 - `-‘l.' i 5 '-",:-,_-_,-,--/-4, ,„,,-,
_,
-,, .-.!.. Ski'
.irgi i,„: Lob 57.,i..i.„ ~ \
....,
,„q„,,„„„,, „4.4!),N7.tiorilim-
.„.
1 .itiik_,o.l • . s -0 -, tom..