The Sun.
London, England, 1827-05-08 00:00:00

TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 8, 1827.

course intended to be pursued on one side with regard to
the Catholics ; but he did understand that their claims
were to be met with a more decided opposition than before.
Now wishing, as he did, that every thing which took place
with regard to them might promote their ultimate success,
he did desire to know what was the object of this mo-
tion ; and he should also wish, if it was convenient for the
Noble Earl to afford the information, to be made acquainted
with the manner in which it was framed?
The Earl of MANSFIELD was ready to give every ex-
planation in his power, but he must be excused if at that
moment he was unable to detail very precisely the form
and object of the motion. However, he was able to say,
that it was his wish and intention to lay before their
Lordships a Resolution, declaring that the country was
now in a fit state to require them to express their decided
opinions with regard to the exclusion of the Catholics
from power, and to say whether that exclusion ought
to he abolished, or limited, or maintained in its pre=
sent state. He should also propose to them to declare
that they approved of the principle .of exclusion, and
that they considered it to be founded on and immutably
connected with the principles of the British Constitution ;
and further, it would be his wish to obtain, by means of
this motion, a declaration from the Crown that would
allay the alarms of his Majesty's Protestant subjects, by
making it known that it was his Majesty's intention to
prevent aey encroachment on the ecclesiastical establish-
ments of the country. This was the purport of his mo-
tion, although these_ would not be the precise words of it.
Whether he proceeded or not in this motion would depend
in a great measure on the opinions of those with whom he
acted. His own opinions with regard to the policy and
propriety of exclusion were (he was obstinate enough to
say) likely to remain unchanged, but he should not act upon
them alone. The motion he intended to submit was one
which, if it succeeded, he thought would be attended with
general benefit—if it failed, he knew that ridicule would be
attempted 'to be attached to it. All that ridicule he was
himself prepared to submit to, but he should not press tie
motion if those for whose opinions he entertained the
highest respect should think he ought to defer it; but he
should not be prevented from persisting in his motion by
any apprehension that by withdrawing it he should be
blamed for weakness or indecision.
The Order for summoning their Lordships on the 7th of
June was then fixed.

to that office, he would only sit there to assist the House,
and he would be bound to give the House such opi-
nions as the House might exact from him. That
there had been a change in the Constitution of that
House, with regard to the hearing of Appeals, he was
ready to acknowledge ; but it was a change effected
by no other power than a majority of that House, and
not only so, but at the express recommendation of the
Noble Baron (Lauderdale.) When that alteration was first
introduced to the House, he (Lord Holland) had warn-
ed them of the inconvenience of it, as it seemed to him it
would introduce the practice of deciding appeals by sonic
individual members, and not by the whole House. The
Lord Keeper, the Speaker, and the Deputy Speaker of that
House might be Commoners, and they would then only
give their assistance to the House, not to decide the ap-
peals brought before them. Even the Lord Chancellor
himself, though aPeer, did not possess any additional power as
Lord Chancellor, in the decision of appeals ; and when he
spoke upon any subject under discussion, be was obliged to
quit his seat, and to speak only as a Peer, though he took,
at the head of the Dukes' Bench, that high rank to which
he was entitled by the dignity of his office. If the Deputy
Speaker was sitting, and the Lord Chancellor came in, he
must also take that seat as the first Peer in rank. These
were the rules of the House, and he was sorry that in the
expressions used by Noble Lords they seemed to have been
forgotten. It was nut because they had the satisfaction of
havir some Learned Law Lords among them, that ex-
piessions were to be used calculated to mislead the people,
and to make them imagine that these Learned Lords, and
not the whole House, sat to decide appeals.
Lord LAUDERDALE explained ; and
Lords ROSSLYN and WINCHELSEA said a few
words, which were inaudible.
The Commission appointing the Lord Chief Baron of
the Exchequer to sit at the hearing of Scotch Appeals was
then read.