The Sun.
London, England, 1829-03-17 00:00:00

il'
.~ - - ~
;'
~►

o represent was not se much oppoeed to Roman Catholic
e encesmion as had been supposed.
An Hon. MEMBER. stated, that out of 37,000 inhabi-
tants of Exeter, only 400 had signed this petition.
Ordered to be printed.
Mr. ROI3ARTS presented petitions from Protestant
Dissenters of Craubrook, and from Maidstone, in the
county of Kent (the latter signed by 400 inhabitants) in
favour of the Catholic claims. With reference to the last
mentioned petition, the Hon. Member said he felt justified
in assuming, from the respectability of the signatures, that
the great question of Catholic emancipation was advancing
in Maidstone.
Mr. WELLS denied that the petition represented the
sense of the great majority of the freeholders and inhabit-
ants of Maidstone. The question was one which involved
the fate of the Constitution and the country, and the po-
pulation of Kent had given the best evidence of their dis-
approbation of any attempt to deal with it in the manner
proposed by his Majesty's Ministers. The excitement
produced in the county of Kent by the agitation of this
question had not subsided. It was only on Saturday he
visited his own place, and he found that, on the preceding
Friday, the people had assembled to burn in effigy an ad-
vocate of the Roman Catholic Claiins.—(Hear.)—He
thought it unbecoming in the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man, the Solicitor-General for Ireland, to taunt his Hon.
and Learned Friend the Member for Dublin, as he did on
a preceding evening, with his reiterated appeals and anti-
'ions to the principles of the Revolution of 1688. Too
frequent appeals could not be made of those principles and
that event. He would like to have a starling taught to
repeat the words " Constitution of 1688,"—(a laugh),—
for the edification of some Gentlemen in that House, and
'if we understood the Hon. Member, who was but in-
distinctly beard in the gallery, aright), it might be as well
if the bird also repeated his lesson at Windsor Castle.—
(Laughter.)--The Hon. Member concluded by expressing
his firm conviction, that it would be impossible to pre-
serve the Constitution if Roman Catholics were admitted
to the privilege of having seats in Parliament.
Mr. J. MARTIN thought we need not wonder at the
excitement that had been produced in the minds of the
people upon this eubject, when we observed Noble Peers
calling upon them to give " one cheer more for Protestant
.Ameendancy,"—when we saw Clergymen interposing in a
manner not the most seemly, or in accordance with their
sacred character, to inflame the populace—and when a
Magistrate and Member of Parliament, at a period when
no excitement existed, declared his readiness to " fight up
to his knees in blood"—(Hear)—in a cause to which it
sues unnecessary more particularly to allude. When such
inflammatory language had been made use of, and on such
questions, be did not wonder at the excitement of the
people,—(Hear, hear,)—Much might b.: said on behalf of
the Ruction Catholic agitators of Ireland—much in ex-
tenuation if not in defence of their conduct. They had
suffered lung and severely—the cup of hope had been often
dashed from their lips, and under such circumstances their
intemperance was not to be wondered at; but the agitators
this country, who endeavour to influence the feelings of
the peoiile hy seta] and language like those in quebtion,
had no excuse.
Mr. WELLS—I rise to explain—
The SPEAKER—If the Hon. Member will allow me,
I AO first put the question on the petitions.
The petitions having been ordered to be brought up, on
the question that they be read,
Mr. WELLS rose and said, apparently under the influ-
ence of strong feeling,—the Hon. Member has alluded to
wie—of that I shall speak presently. With respect to
what he has said of a Noble Lord and other individuals, it
would be extremely improper for me to enter upon that. I
have only to say of that Noble Lord, that I entertain feel-
ings of respect towards him which few people cin appre-
ciate, and .wbich I am wholly unabie to express ; but I
shall not Wee into the Hon. Member's observations upon
that subject. With respect to myself, the manner in
which he has chosen to allude to me is such, that I can
only say I treat his remarks with the utmost degree of
contempt.
The SPEAKER.—Order, order.
Mr. Weets 'resumed his seat, amidst cries of " Chair,
chair ; order, order."
After a short pause— •
The SPEAKER—Mr. Wells.
Mr. WELLS, in a tone of voice almost inarticulate,
said, that nothing was farther from his intentions than to
tootinit any breach of the order or regulations of the
House; and that if he had done so inadvertently, he re-
gretted it extremely. (Hear.) He acknowledged he felt
hurt, when he, of all persons in the world, was accused of
an endeavour to excite ill-will and bad feeling among any
cities of his fellow-subjects. His conduct on the occasion
in question teas, he thought, capable of the most satisfactory
explanation. A meeting was got up in the place which
he hod the honour to represent, the object of which was,
first, merely to express the attachment of the individuals
there awe:tabled to our Protestant Constitution ; and in the
next place to ascertain the fe4ings of the people of the
county at large no the subject of coneecions to the Roman
Catholics. He repeated, the meeting was not intended for
any thing further than to accomplish the first named object,
to take the opinion of the county of Kent on the queetion
alluded to, and consider the best means for doing that. At
that meeting an opposition was made to the object for
&rich it bad been convened. Allusion was made to the
agitators of Ireland, and one individual in favour of con•
cession went so far as to menace us with the dangers that
might arise found irritating the "millions" of' frith Catho-
lics by delaying to grant what they requirad. No man
could lament more than he did that such a tone was
adopted ; anti it was under these circumstances, and in
reply to such menaces, that he said what he did,
After a few words from Sir E. KNATCHEULC, Sir J.
Emmons, Mr. B. CLARKE, and Mr. TRANT, the petitioti
was read and ordered to he printed.
Admiral EVANS presented two petitions from baronies
in county Cork, against further concession to the Catholics.
A similar petition, from the inhabitant)) of Romney, in
Kent, was presented by Mr. D. PENNANT.
Mr. G. PHILLIPS presented a petition from certain
Unitarian Dissenters of .Hyde Worlam, in Cheshire, in
favour of concession.--Ordered to be printed.
Similar petitions from Chelmsford, Bamford, Bradwell,
Manuingtree, and six other placei, were presented by Sir
E. HARVEY.-Ordered to be printed.
Mr. WESTEN tr; A. presented six petitions, from parishes
in the King's county, is favour of concession ; and
one against the Select ysntiy-Act....-Ordered to be printed.
Mr. R. TREVOR presented S. oetitioo from Merthyr
Tidvil, Glamorganshire, and from a paiLSlt in Carenarthen-
shire, against concession. Ordered to be priii:S'L
A similar petition followed, from the Archdeacrin 4,"
Clergy of Armagh, presented by Sir A. CHICHESTER;
one from a parish of Roxburghshire, by Mr. Scorn.
Mr. - PROTHEROE presented two petitions—from
Evesham in Worcestershire, arid a parish of Gloucester-
shire, in favour of concession.—Ordered to be printed.
Sir 0. MURRAY presented a similar petition from cer-
tain persoos in Perthshire, exercising the profession of
procurators.--Ordered Lis be printed.
Sir G. HILL presented a peation from the Clergy, Ma-
gistrates, and Freeholders of the county of Londonderry
against any further concession to the Rornais Catholics.—
The petition had upwards of 20,000 signatures.
Sir J. ISRYDGES was desired by the Mayor of Cole-
raine, Which borough' lie bad the honour of representing,
and whir:' was one of the principal towns in the county of
Londonderry': to support the measure just presented by
the Right Hon. ,Ilaronet. This he did with great satis-
faction, as his own ocsisions agreed with those of the peti-
tioners, who constituted the majority of the wealth and
respectability of the county.
• Mr. G. DAWSON said the psstition just presented by
his Right Hon. Friend had been ustsSillv intrusted to his
care. Its respectability he did not mean S's deny; nor
would be take up the time of the House in stating the va-
rious artifices, with a view to obtaining numerous signa-
tures, which letters that he had received from Laotian-
derry infornsed hint, had been had recourse to. Ife was
quite satisfied to allow that the petition was that of up-
wards of 20,000 respectable Protestant inhabitants of the
county which be had the honour of representing, against
the Catholic claims. It contained signatures of magistrates
and clergymen of whose respectability he was a willing wit-
neso. But while he admitted this respectability, he must
distinctly deny that the petition expressed the unanimous
sentiments of the county on the Catholic question. On the
oontrary, lie must say that the far larger portion of the re-
speeteshility, intelligence, and wealth of the county had not •
signed It Nay more, that more th in a moiety of the landed
property of Landontleery had signed a petition in favour of
concession to time Catholics. It was true that that petition
had but 170 signatures, but thcee included, he repeated,
the proprietoso of'ettore than half the landed property of
the county; and if eZef don bad been made, be had no
doubt that it would have bean at least as ,numereitsly
signed as that just presented iq.ltis Right Hon. Friend.
He felt justified in stating that the people: of the north of
Iceland were beginning to see the necessity of settling the
Catholic Question, and be was contident that in 3 few
anotiths longer, they would he unanirossiw in favour of it. I
Was there not a proof of his statement before the House?
Vor, thooe,h his Right Hon. Friend (Sir G. Hill) had
.:hanged his opinions on the Catholic Question, lie was
Intrusted with a petition by gentlemen, many of whom tie
was convinced would in a short time imitate his Right
Hon. Friewl's conduct, and change their opinions.
sonow ART concurred with what had fallen from

his Right 1-Ton. Colleague, and was sore tisat the peti-
tioners would in a short time be friendly to the measure
they were then opposing.
Mr. TUITE also agreed with the Right Hon. Member
for Londonderry (Mr. G. Dawson), that the intended
measures of the Government would be hailed with unqua-
lified gratitude by the Catholics, and with satisfaction by
the Protestants of Ireland. The Hon. Member read ex-
tracts from private letters to him from some of his consti-
tuents in Westmeath, in which the writers state, that the
Bill for raising the elective franchise to 10/. would be
hailed as a benefit by the freeholders themselves, while it
would do away with the mischievous inducement of sub-
dividing small farms.
Mr. TRANT was sure that the petition presented by
the Right Hon. Baronet wag entrusted to him before the
petitioners were aware of the change in his sentiments.
Hon. Members ought honestly to confess the cause of
their tergiversation, and say at once, " the Government
has changed its opinions, therefore I shall change mine."
(Hear, and a laugh.)
Mr. ROBINSON wished to know from the Hon.
Member for Coleraine what mode of settlement of the
state of Ireland he had to propose, instead of that pro-
posed by illiiiisters, to which he had objected ?
Sir J. BRYDGES replied, that though he could not
say what should be done, he could say what ought not to
be done.
Sir G. HILL presented petitions against any further
concession to the Catholics from the Corporation of Lon-
donderry, Kilray, Portadown, and three other places in the
county of Armagh.
Similar petitions were presented from Conna, Ballo-
menagh, and Antrim, by General O'NEILL.
CROWN AND ANCHOR PETITION.
Mr. C. PALLMER gave notice, that lie would on
Thursday next present a petition, signed by 100,000
householders of Loudon and Middlesex, against the Ca-
tholic claims.
Lord STANLEY presented a petition from Ashton-
under-Line in favour of the Catholics. The petition was
signed by the large majority of the respectable inhabitants
of that town, from which a petition of an opposite ten-
dency, which he was instructed to say was signed indis-
criminately by men, women, and children, and by persons
'miler other names, over and over, had been a few nights
since presented by a Noble Marquis. It would have had
many more signatures, but that the inhabitants thought it
almost unnecessary to sign it, feeling confidence in the wis-
dom and policy of Ministers. Ile had only to add, that
the Right Hon. Gentleman's (Mr. Peel's) speech had made
many who were opposed to the Catholic claims converts to
the opinions of the Government.
The Noble Lord also presented two petitions from the
Licensed Victuallers of Oldham for a reduction of the As-
sessed Taxes, and against unlicensed victuallers; and a pe-
tion from the corporals and strummers of the Lancashire
Militia, against the proposed reduction of the Military Staff.
Lord MORPETH presented a petition from the inha-
bitants of the parish of St. Audeon's, in the city of Dublin,
praying for unqualified emancipation ; and another petition
from a parish in Yorkshire, in favour of Catholic claims.
Sir J. WROTTESLEY presented petition, in favour of
emancipation from the Protestant Dissenters of Burton-
upon- ['rent, and from two other places in the county of
Staffoi d ; and another aetition against emancipation, from
a parish in the same county.
The same Hon. Member presented a petition from the
Magistrates assembled at the General Quarter Sessions of
the Peace for the county of St Jou], in favour of the hir-
e ing of Servants' Bill.
Mr. TRANT presented petitions against Catholic
emancipation from the Protestant Dissenters of Grantham
and its neighbourhood ; from the congregation of Particu-
lar Baptists ip Shouldham-street, parish of Merylebone;
ansl front the inhabitants of the parish of Littleport, in
the Isle of Ely.
Lord MILTON presented petitions in favour of the Ca-
tholic elaitns from the Roman Catholics of the parish of
Hackelstown, and of another parish in the county of Car-
low ; from the Protestant Dissenting Students of Arid
Independent College, in the county of York; from the un-
dersigned clergy of the Archdeaconry of Cleveland, in the
same county; from Doncaster, signed by almost all the
landed zentry in the neighbourhood; from the inhabi-
tants of seeds. To the last petition his Lordship said
Le wished to call the particular attention of the House.
It had ,attached to it the signatures of no less than 16,000
of the inhabitrinta of that wealthy, poptalone, and en-
terprising town, and these signatures were obtained in
the short alpaca of two days. It might be in the
recollection of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite,
that in the course of last winter a public meeting was
held in the town of Leeds, at which from 15,000 to
20,000 persons attended. The question of einaaci-
pation was there warmly debated, and the meeting decided
in favour of en Address; to his Majesty, praying him graci-
ously to take into his consideration the f ittlaolit.: Claims,
with a view to recommend to Parliament their final and
satisfactory adjustment. Since that meeting bad tajecu
place, it was not, lie believed, the intention of that portion
of the inhabitants of Leeds who were favourable to eman-
cipation to agitate the questieo forther,uow that it was in
a fair way of being settled ; but the conduct of those per-
sons there who were averse to the Catholic claims had left
then; no alternative, but to conic forward and express their
sentiments in a decided manner upon this important suese
tion. 'Co this petition were attached the signatures of
three Aldermen, and of seine of the most wealthy inhabi-
tants of that wealthy town, and he conceived that it was
one which well deserved the attentive consideration of the
House.
Sir U. NOM, presented petitions against the Catholic
claims from the inhabitants of the hundred of Uppingliam,
in the county of Rutland, and from the freeholders and in-
habitants of the county of Rutland.
Air. S. RICE presented petitions in favour of eman-
cipation from the parishes or Tralee, Kilgobbin, Bally,
house, and three other places in the county Kerry, and
from Killenaute an nine other places in the counties
'Tipperary and Limeriek ; and a petition from Rathmore,
in the county Tipperary, against the Vestry and Sub-
letting Azts.
Mr, EASTHQPE presented a petition from the pr,o-
testarit Baptists sad Dissenters of a parish in Dorsetehire,
in favour of Catholic emancipation.
Colonel WOOD presented a petition from a place in the
county of Brecon, against the Catholic claims, He wished
to take this opportunity to state that a meeting of the inha-
bitants of that county had been held, at which a petition
against the Bill now before Parliament had been almost
unanimously adopted :: 110 was also desirous to explain the
position in which he was now placed in consequence of the
adoption of that petition. The Rosters was probably not
awes that he (Colonel Wood) had never Wore given a
,Ite upon this question, anti he wished to explain the tea,
sons avlich had ioeloced him to refrain from voting OP 4.
He had had the happi&xa of having been connected for
many years with A deceased aati,nimter, whose whole poli-
tical life was honestly and zealously doyoted to the advo-
cacy of the Catholic cause. At the same ti rag hp (3olonel
Wood) was aware that the great body of the coostitoenta
whom he represented were adverse to the Catholic claims ; '
and under these circumstances he hald himself neutral on
the question, on tide express understanding, that whenever
the county should at a public meeting declare its epioison in
ti decided manner, his vote would be regulated accord-
ingly. A meeting of the county had been held within the
last few days, and he understood from a gentleman who was
present, that the great majority were in favour of the pee
tition which was adopted against the Catholic claims, and
that only 10 or 12 hands ware held up against it. He
(Colonel Wood) should therefore voae,ageiast the measure.
Some Ilea, Members might consider such a asao!let of pro-
ceeding unconstitotional, but be (Colonel Wood) deemed
it the only course which he could adopt in justice to his
coastituetits.
Mr. V AN HOMRIGH would take that opportunity to
deelare his opinion,—an opinion which he had always
mainteined from his first entrance into public life,-.-that
the penal dieoualifications affecting the Roman Catholics
were unjust, inapelitic, and degrading, and that their re •
aeoval would be highly beneficial to the Constitution and
the vomit e at large.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY rose to pa:afoot a petition in
favour of the great principle of religious liberty ood equal
rights, front Colchester, The petition, the Hon. Menihee
stated, was signed by Members of the Established Church,
and by persons connected with various dissenting congre-
gations. He was aware that on a former evening a pee
tition p4mer ously signed had been presented by his lion.
Colleague ageioet the Catholic Claims, and he had now to
state that these petitioners 44 no wish to detract from the
respectability of that petition, or to 1445,ti the motives
of those who signed it. They felt, that' an giving es, eiree• 1
sion to their own feelings, they had no right 'to dc6tract
from the honest conscientioos feelings of those who differed
front theft in opinion. He could trot; however, omit to
;mention a circumstance as illustrative of the. industry of,
those seho had prepared and got up the petition peeeented:
by his tlon. Colteague—namely, that the signatures of 1501
children, who attended a reehool belonging to the Established
church in that neighbourhood, #ere affixed to it. The Dis-
sentere who had signed the present children,inha also a
36001 there, zootaining full ds many eqaaliy as
.competent to judge en such an abstract question as the
athildren in the school connected with the Established
Church, but they very properly absaaiaed from having
their signatures affixed to a public document of this na-
fture.—(litar)---as he was 04 his legs, Ile would avail

hireelf dais opportunity of saying a revs, words in re-
ference to the language which had been employed, and the
spirit which had been manifested, by the Hon. Member
for Limerick, on a former evening, in consequence of
some observations which he (Mr. Harvey) hasl made upon
that occasion. On that occasion, be (Mr. Harvey) ven-
tured for the first time to express his sentiments to the
House on the subject of the measure at present before them
—he said then, and be still thought, that such a measure
either went too far, or did not go far enough he said
then, and he would still maintain, that the measure which
had been so ably introduced by the Right Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. Peel), founded upon the recommendation in his Ma-
jesty's speech to take the whole state of Ireland into con-
sideration, with a view to its pacification, was not cal.
ciliated completely to attain that object ; and he then de-
clared, as he still felt, that they would never perma-
nently pacify Ireland, unless some arrangement were
made for a provision for the Catholic Clergy.—(Hear,
hear.)—He (Mr. Harvey) suggested at the time, and he
still entertained the opinion, that an ample fund for that
purpose should be appropriated out of the revenues of the
Established Church in Ireland. As long as the Catholics
of Ireland continued, like the Catholics in other countries,
sincerely devoted to their religion, it was impossible that
they could sincerely or tamely submit to a system under
which the immense majority of the people were deprived
of the ecclesiastical revenues, while those revenues were
enjoyed by a church to which but a small proportion of
the inhabitants of the country belonged. He therefore
declared, that the present measure would not accomplish
any permanent result in the way of pacifying the country,
while such a matter as that was left undressed. For offer-
ing such a suggestion, he was attacked by the Hon. Mem-
ber for Limerick, and his sentiments were animadverted
upon in a dictatorial, and, he would add, in that House an
unprecedented tone by that Hon. Member. When upon a
succeeding evening he (Mr. Harvey) taxed that lion.
Member with supporting himself a motion which directly
tended to diminish the revenues of the Established Church
' in Ireland, that Hon. Member replied, that in the whole
course of his public life he had never supported a motion
that had such a tendency. Now the impression upon
his (Mr. Harvey's) mind was, that the Hon. Member
had upon some former occasion supported a motion
which had a direct tendency to interfere win the Ec-
clesiastical Revenues of the Established Church in
Le 1 init. Now what was the fact ? He found that
in 1824, on the occasion of a motion brought forward by
the lion. Member for Montrose, which motion consisted
of the following words—" That it is expedient to inquire
whether the present Church Establishment of Ireland be
not more than commensurate to the services to be per-
formed, both as regards the number of persons employed
and the incomes they receive," the Hon. Member for
Limerick was amonget the minority. In the spirit of
that resolution, he (Mr. Harvey) perfectly concurred ; and
if he had a seat than in that House, he would have been
in company with the Hon. Member for Limerick in the
minority. But what were the terms in which that motion
was characterised by a then eloquent Member of that
House, who had since been promoted to the House of
Peers—he meant Lord Plunkett. Mr. Plunkett said—
" Really, when the Hon. Gentleman coupled the expres •
sion of his approbation of that priesthood, with the expo-
sition of his p'an for pulling down the revenue of the Pro-
testant Church in that country—of transferring and de-
livering it into the hands of the Roman Catholic hierarchy
(for such was the scope of his proposition), the
House would give him (Mr. Plunkett) leave to say,
that he deprecated the Honourable Gentleman's advo-
cacy of their cause more than he should lament his
hostility to it." Such was the motion, so characterized
by Lord Plunkett, which had been supported by the
Hon. Member for Limerick. Lord Plunkett on that occa-
sion further sal I—" The Hon. Member (Mr. Hume) was
for no Church Establishment." Such was the description
given of the preposition in favour of which the Hon. Mem-
ber for Limerick voted. " Speaking of it (continued
Lord Plunkett on that occasion) in a political point of
view, he had no hesitation to state, that the existence of
the Protestant establishment was the great bond of union
between the two countries ; and if that unfortunate mo-
ment should arrive when they would rashly lay their hands
on the property of the church, to rob it of its rights, that
moment they would seal the doom and terminate the con-
nexion between the two countries." Such were the ob-
jects attributed to this motion, and the character given of
it by Lord Plunkett. He (Mr. Harvey) had referred to
this subject in consequence of the uncalled-for and unjus-
tifiable course which the Hon. Member for Limerick had
adopted towards him, and he thought he had already ad-
duced sufficient evidence to prove that at least on one occa-
sion the Hon. Member had voted for a motion which tended
to diminish the,revenues of the Established Church in Ire-
land. The lion. Member for Louth, one of the miraculous
converts of the present day-e--(a laugh)—in speaking of this
motion, introduced by the Hon. Member for Montrose,
on that occasion said, that " the question appeared to be,
how mush or how little of the property of the church of
Ireland was now to be confiscated Here was a motion
supported by the Hon. Member for Limerick, and involving
the question—" How much or how little of the Protestant
Church in Ireland was to be confiscated ;" and yet that
Hoe. Member now declared, that if lie thought the
present measere of Catholic emancipation would have
the slightest tendency to injure the interests of the Esta-
blished Church, it would not have his support.—(Hear,
hear.)—He wished it to be understood that he did not rise
to attack any Hon. Member for the course which he might
think fit to pursue in that House, but he would always
rise when he conceived it necessary to defend himself; and
he would endeavour, on all occasions, strenuously to defend
himself, let the attack be directed from whatsoever quarter
it might. He felt that this was a subject which ought to
be seriously discussed in that House. It was not, however,
his purpose to enter further on it at present ; but he
trusted that an opportunity would be afforded to him in
the course of the discussion on the Bill to show that how-
ever the measure of the Right Hon, Gentleman opposite
was calculated, pro tauto, to effect much good, it would
not effect that which his Majesty and his Ministers directed
—namely, the permanent pacificatioe of Ireland. It could
not do this, it was evident, whilst it left so large a subject
for future debate and division.—(Hear hear.)—They
would have the Catholic Association in Parliament, backed
by the feelings of millions of discontented people of Ire-
land.—(Heir, heer.)—He trusted thee an opportunity
would hereafter occur that would enable him to state his
opinions more fully than he could now do.
Mr. S. RICE could assure the Hon. and Learned Gene
tleman, that no other feeling but a sense of duty could have
indaced him, either on former eecasioes, or on the present,
to bring himself in collision with the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman declared,
with apparent sincerity, his readiness to support the Bill,
end yet he took a course which no individual in that Uouse
or out of that Hoece could doubt was, of all others, the
most decidedly calculated to injure the cause which he de-
clared he would espouse.—( Hear, hear. )—He demanded,
with what other object could the Hon. and Learned Qen-
tleman have made those observations to which he (Me.
Rice) alluded' Did not the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man know, that eueli observations evidently tended to en-
danger the success of the incesere ? lie begged of the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman to contradict him, if ha
peuld, when lie averted, that every word which the lion.
end Learned Gentleman had uttered was calculated to
injure the Catholic cause. He would willingly go in
iseoe with the Honourable and le.,eereed Gentleman on
that point, If the Honourable and Learned Gentieman
could riot coutractice him—apd he was sure that 6e could
not,—with what face, ire asked, could the Honourable and
Learned Gentleman come into that House, 444 says that
he would support a measure which appeared beneficial to
the ped;lie interest, and at the same time take a course that
had an immediate tendereey to defeat that very object
(Hear, hear.)--The Hon: and ii.eaeneel Gentleman must
have heard and marked to-night, as lie muse iaae.s heard
and pinked before, by whom his obsrvatiorie were
cheered. When be said that the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman's remarks were cafe:elated toe injure the Catholic
question, he did not speak lightly, pr from any peesorial
feeling. He had not forgotten the two geutlemien who
followed the lion. and Learned Member on a former night,
nor the language which had been used by them. The
plllant Officer, the Member for Norwich (Colonel Peel),
exclaimed en that occasion, " I thank the honourable,
end honest, and frank ember for Colchester, for the
manly declaration which he has male. 11,7 has stated
hide, filet the effect of Ilalissirtijiasialiiiteribwulltle b,,astoptipiudl
l tHhoetat:rantedstreart geler Csll4l"tkrian by Hon. Ftiend of his
(Mr. Rice's), the Merril-a fire the Pniyerisity of Oxford
(Sir R. Inglis), and tie sentiinunt was echoed in vsiion,4
to the
IftiOcations which are under the controul of those opposer'
to the e....aeieelic question. What did the course adopted by
the thie. and Learned centleman amount to? Why, it
might be described thus:L—lt wee peeciaimed, " Whereas,
the graCioui message of the King reCommereie iris pea.-
'sure Lc, your consideration ; but it only recommends 'it
so far as it ease lrs eTected' consistently- with the 'safety
and security of the Vtote6tani : and whereas, a
Secretary of State, in the true spirit of sincerity, Lied teeith
an anxious desire that the Bill shall pass, has declared, 'JP
a freeed ea the measure, wish it only to proceed; if it interfere
not with the Cliurcai, app every man see that if it be not
consistent with the interests of the rieloreele there is na
l chance that the measure will be carried,'' 'After this came
the lion, and Learned Gentleman—"the supporter of the

measure—the new convert=and he spoke of miraculous
conversions—(Laughter,)--Aut such a conversion he hail
never sun before, and certainly never wished to see again—
it looked so much like one of the stratagems of war, where
an individual went over from one party to another, but in-
stead of assisting, injured those by whom he was received;
and what line did he pursue? Why, he said, " You must
put no confidence in the declarations of Mr. Grattan, of
Mr. Plunkett, of the Right Hon. Member for the city of
Waterford, or of any of those great men who have so ably
and zealously supported the Cutholic claims--you must dis-
believe them, for the real effect of this measure will be, to
overturn the Established Church." This statement of the
Hon. and Learned Member for Colchester was cheered by
Uon. Members under the gallery, and it was also received
with cheers out of doors. He gave those who cheered it
joy of their newly-discovered authority. For his own part,
he was perfectly satisfied with the authorities which he had
on his side, and he left those gentlemen to take full posse,-
sion of their's.—(Hear.)—lf lie thought the observations
made by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman were lightly
or inadvertently spoken, be would not have made a remark
on the subject ; but it was evident to him that they were
not lightly or inadvertently spoken. If the observation
which he (Mr. Rice) made on a former occasion was so
erroneous as the lion. and Learned Member seemed to

think it, a full opportunity was given to him for replying
to it on the Friday night, when that observation was
thrown out; but the Hon. and Learned Gentleman did
not think proper to come forward till the Tuesday follow-
ing. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had stated, that it
was owing to him (Mr. Rice), and for his convenience,
that the postponement of the matter took place. Now,
he wished that the Hon. and Learned Member had fa-
voured him with his remarks on the evening when the
occurrence happened. He (Mr. Rice) however, came
down when the House again met, and stayed till its rising,
but the 'Hon. and Learned Member did not appear. Ile
also came down on the day after, but, as he could not
wait till a late period in the evening, he left a note for
the lion. and Learned Gentleman. Therefore, he con-
ceived there was no fault on his part. With respect to
the charge of inconsistency which the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman had brought against him, he should be able to
show to the House, if they w, u'd follow him for a few
minutes, that he had been guilty of no inconsistency;
and he stood on grounds which he should be able
fully to vindicate, whenever a proper occasion arrived ;
but he would not vindicate his conduct now, except
to expose the fallacy that lurked throughout the
speech of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman.
When he entered Parliament there were two opinions
on the subject of church property. He stated this
plainly, and he called on the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
to contradict him, if he could. The first of those opinions
was the opinion of that class of persons who maintained
that the church property was, in all respects, sacred, in-
violable, and not to be touched by the nation. Thesecond
was the opinion maintained by an Hon. Friend of his (Mr.
Hume) who, by some miracle, was not then in his piece.
(Hear, and laughter.) The opinion of the Hon. Member
for Montrose was, that church property was liable to be
confiscated by the State, and was liable to be applied to any
other purpose, caving the existing rights of individuals.—
Now, from the first to the last, since he had been in Par-
liament, he had differed from both those opinions. He
thought that they were extremes, far removed from the
truth. He considered the church property of England
and Ireland as created and protected by the law, like
other property, but differed from it in this respect--that
it was not held absolutely, but on a certain condition.—
Therefore, while he denied the right assumed by one
class to confiscate or appropriate the property of the
church, he equally denied the right of the other class
to refuse inquiry into the way in which those public
trusts were discharged, or in which the stipulated condi-
tions were fulfilled. Acting on this principle, whenever in
Parliament a proposition was made for laying hold of the
rights of the church, and for confiscating that property,
to such a proposition lie had always and ever said
" No." In no one instance had he ever supported such a
proposition ; and, leaving it to the Lion. and Learned
Member for Colchester, whenever such a proposition was
made, to give his assent to it, he certainly should take an
opposite course, and refuse his. But, on the other hand,
whenever a proposition was made for inquiry into the state
of Irish church property, fur the purpose of eyeing that it
was properly applied, he would give that motion his cor-
dial assent. He had voted uniformly against confiscation,
but he had as uniformly voted for inquiry. Thu, stood
the case between him and the Hon. and Learned Member.
In 1522 (and this was the reply,which he had made on
a former occasion)—in 1822, when the Hon. Member for
Montrose brnught forward a motion relative to Irish
church property, to that motion he could not give his as-
sent, and lie drew up an amendment himself, which his
Hon. Friend, the Member for Waterford, seconded.
Ore that occasion, however, the House came to no resolu-
tion oo the subject. That was in 1822. In 1823 a
more specific proposition was submitted to the House by
the lion. Member for Montrose. He moved, " that the
property of the church was public property," and he fol-
lowed this up with several other propositions. This was
in 1823. He could, not, however, give his assent to any
one of these propositions, and he was not present at their
discussion. He now came to 1824. In that year the Hon.
Member for Montrose moved, not a proposition for the
confiscation of church property, as was asserted by the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman, but a proposition for in-
quiry. His motion for confiscation leaving been negatived
in 1823, he moved for inquiry in 1824. His motion
embraced the question of plurality of livings—the question
of the residence of the clergy—the question of tithes—and
the qoestion of first-fruits. Now he (Mr. Rice) did, in '1
182+, think that those matters should be fairly inquired
into. Still, said
_the Hon. and Learned Member for Col-
chester, it was a measure of confiscation, and was so
stated by hie (Mr. Rice's) Hon. Friend (Lord filunkett),
who was then a Member of this House. He, however,
would not take the explanation of his lion. Friend as to
the nature of the measure proposed by the Hon. Member
for Montrone. But, if the opinion of Lord Plunkett were
good on this subject, with respect to the object of the
motion of 1824, he conceived that the authority of the
Hon. Member fee Montrose was still better ; and what
did he say ? Ile said, all he wanted was an inquiry into
the state of church property in Ireland, and he was op-
posed to any ilea of robbery or spoliation. . Therefore
the statement and opinion of the Honourable Member far
Montrose were with hini, and against the Honourable
and Learned Gentleman ; and if any proposition were
brought forward for the spoliation or robbery of the
church property, unquestionably the Honourable and
Learned Geetlemen . would pot find it to this instance,_
He did not speak qn that occasion, but fortunately for
him he did speak on , another occasion, in the course
of that year, and he took at that time precisely the
same distinction to winch he now referred. He made
use of these words in the cotirse of his observations on
a proposition relative to the first fruits-e-"He was as sin-
eclat a friend to the Church establishment of Ireland as the
Right lira,. apd Learned geetlenien (the Attorney-General,
to whom be was then replying), and he thought he best
proved his attachment to it, by advorating that species of
reform which would extend the duties.. of the Clergy,
Mocit bed ilceq said on whet was called the spoliation
the Church ; but Oat efiensive word could not he justly
applied to the motion before the Hearse, It was one thing
for the Crown to seize the property of the Church, and epe
ply it to the purposes of the state, and another to apply the
flitO4F tif the c4orcit to its maintenance, and to the ad,
oancement of religion and morality. 'flip 01.0 might be
termed spoliation ; but the latter wes rather to be looked
erpoo as the preservation of the Church property. For the
selie pf the peace of 11-elate!, it was absolutely necessary
that the whole of this inapertent subject should be 'nest
thoroughly investigated." (Heer, hear.) Now, he would
leave it to the House whether the Hon . and Learned Gen-
tleman had dealt fairly with him. He had gone through
all hie'i:gr. liee's) speeches, for the purpose of bringing
a clierge against him, yet he had {neither the candopr per
the fair-dealing to bring forward that peesege whieh he
had just read, and which gage 'a complete contradiction to
Otioil p4Ft 9t tile flottp.urable aqd Learned Gentlemap's
charge. The Honourable and t.eartted gentleineo had
clui of
uen.
life,
Itti
andant c
he a had
not
gene over ten years of his public life, but he boldly defied
s
him to adduce a particle of evidence in support of his
accusation. In like manner, in 1825, the lion. Member
for Montrose brought forward his final attack on the
Church—an attack which called forth that magnificent
pf Mr. canning in its defence. The motion on
that occasion vas that the prpperty rtow in the posses;
sion orOle Establiehed ptiurei in ireland is public pro-
perty, under the controul of the Legislature, end. aPP.li-
c4ldO to spell purposes ee in its wisdom it may deem bc-
.flefieia, to rile hest 4itereqs of religion Ind of the commoe
pity at large, due regard being had to the eights o; every
person in the actual enjoyment of any part of that pro-
perty. Did be vote for that motion? Certainly not.
It he bad, on either of the two occasions to which he had
ailtegedr cer such a proposition, then the Hon. and
Learned Gentiertian might 'go orb sad 11',17;
He bad gOne over ten years' of lips
political
he voted ;Or bp:3*.,n a ow Hon.
Member for Montrose.
thoWn. that neither in 1823 or 184.11 ail
Ile Leg was, t'aa;; noGive yote .1,
for them ; for h tut i
instances the propositions so brought
forward were negatived withbut a division. lie felt, he
odOi:iw.le4ge4r somewhat warmly on this subject, because
he was ready to 4(.6 veipi an open enemy--an oven, manly,