Star.
London, England, 1805-05-14 00:00:00

!
' Commons it is, to far as it goes, a limitation of the
eleaive franchife. The right of elelling has been al-
ready granted to Catholic*, but they mull not chute a
C..tholic. Can there be danger in allowing Catholics
to fit among us? The Tea wet applies to Diffenters
in regard to offices, but not to their affifting in this
Houfe, of which many of them have been, and are
the ornaments. Why then fhould there be more dan-
ger to the Church from the Catholics than from the
Diffenters, who are fuppofed to be at leaft equally
averfe to the ecciefiaflical eilabliiiimmt ? But fhould
the right of fitting in this Houfe be g-anted to the
Catholics, does any man believe that there could
ever be to many as 8o Catholic Members ? I believe
it to be next to impollible that any thing like half that
number fhould ever have feats in this Houk. How
then could they be dangerous ? On the other hand,
if the doarine of virtual reprefentation, fo often main-
tained, and I admit juftly maintained, in oppofition
to fchemes of Parliamentary Reform, be well foun-
ded, would it not pear& the principle of virtual re-
prefentation, that to the reprefentation of land-hol-
ders, merchants, ftatefmen, lawyers, &c. &c. there
fir:old be the reprefentative of the Catholics, who,
as a body, have not even a virtual reprefentation in
this Houfe ? In order, therefore, to attain what is
wanting to the public, the Catholic body fhould have
their virtual reprefentation in this affembly. When
it has been urged.that Manchefter, Sheffield, &c. &c.
were not reprefented, it has been Paid, and truly to
a certain extent, that they were reprefented by the
various intereßs in this town connelled with them
and their profperity. The very idea of reprefenta-
tion, even virtual reprefentation, is, that there exifts
Inch a fympathy between the reprefentative and the
bodies or perf,,ns reprefented, that he mull ptirfire
their interelts. But if I Catholic has not an oppor-
tunity to fend to Parliament thofe who are likely to
fympathize with him, it cannot with any truth or
fairnefs be laid that he is even virtually reprefented
in the Hoare of Commons. With refpell to the Ca-
tholics being inadmiflible to Corporations, perhaps
the injury arifes chiefly from the Ramp of degrada
lion it carries with it, becaufe tittle corporations being
compofed entirely of Protellants, there could be little
chance of a Catholic ever gaining admittance. The
fligma only is retained, and only in fuch a way as to
be injurious to the feelings of the Catholic body.
I !hall now briefly take notice of a few objellinns
to the meafirre. Jacobitilm is given up—l take that
for granted. But it is Paid that there mull be an in•
congruity and incompatibility of two Ferfons of fuch
oppofite religions ailing together in public affairs for
the public good. I Ihould like to hear this them y
explained, for theory it appears folely to be. What
neceffity would there be for a Proteßant and Catholic
Statcfman quarrelling about dolliines of religion,
when it was to be confidered whether a fleet Ihould be
fent to the Weft Indies or the Mediterranean i Mull
it infallibly happen that one will attack the other at
the Council Board, faying, " Oh ! but you worfhip
the Virgin Mary, and believe in tranfubflantiation—
but I don't ?" Are fuch puerilities to be expelled in
the prefent day ? Nay, is fuch a thing to be expelled
on a Bench of Judges, to which the Catholics have
adrniffion ? Such a thing might happen in Turkey,
where the religion and law of Mahomet are fo inter-
woven ; but fuch incompatibilities are quite foreign
from the nature of our laws and adminiftration.—
But while fome are fo fearful that men of different
religions could never ferve together cordially, we
find thefe maxims are contrary to the praltice of all
Europe. Nay, at a time when religious bigotry com-
pelled Henry IV. to change his religion, was Sully,
a Proteflant, confidered a bad Minilter of a Catholic
King ? Was Neckar, whatever faults might be im-
puted to him, a worfe Minifler of Finance, becaufe
a Proteflant ? Nay, does the Emperor of Ger-
many, whnfe houfe has never been remarkable for
religious toleration, fcrtrple to entruß a Proteflant
Prince, Ferdinand of Wirtcmberg, with the guard
of his perfon ? Does the King of Pi ullia refute to
employ a Catholic? Would Frederic the Great have
rejeaed an able man on that account ? In Ruflia,
where the Gri ,:k Church is ellablifhed, Prince
Czarftorinflci, a Catholic, is Secretary of State.—
In Venice, formerly, a Greek Patriarch, and a
Catholic Apoflolic Vicar would have been found
aging in perfelt harmony. Was there ever any
incompatibility between the Proteflant and Catho-
lic Cantons of Switzerland, when the molt demo-
erotical of the Cantons, and the moll bigotted Catho-
lics, becaufe probably the moll ignorant in Europe,
are to be found in the fmaller Cantons of theHelvetic
Union ? Now indeed, though the Pretender be gone,
the Pope remains, and from him danger is appre-
hended, becaufe forfooth he has been to Paris to
crown the new Emperor of France. But for what
reafon could the Pope ever have been an objelt of
alarm to England ? Surely, for no other reafbn than
the influence he might be fuppofed to have over the
Catholics, in flirting them up to rebellion. But did
the Pope ever do fo when he might have ferved both
the French King and the Houfe of &nazi ? But in
17 is, and 1745, the Pope could not flit. the Catho-
lics. In the late rebellion it is very curious to re-
mark, that the Catholics, who at loall were only in
proportion to the Protellants engaged in that affair,
were not infligated by the Pope. Were they incited
by :he Pope to follow Mr. O'Connor, Dr. Mac Ne-
vin, &c. ? By no means. It is worthy of remark,
that at the very time the Pope was in hoftility with
France ; that he was on good terms with this coun-
try and looked to it for protelition ; he neither
had the power to influence the Catholics of Ireland,
and, if he had poffeffed the power, would have ufed
it to diffuade the Catholics from fuch proceedings.—
Surely after this, it is ridiculous to reprefent the Pope
as a formidable inftrument in the hands of Bonaparte.
Befides, if Bonaparte wifhed to employ the Pope's
influence to Rir up the MA, would it not rather be
to fend emiffaries among them fecretly, to rem dent
to them their degraded Rate, to tell them how vain
it was to look to England for redrefs ? Would not
this be an influence far more dangerous than any
which the Pope could obtain over Catholic Gentle-
men or Noblemen in Parliament ? for could it be
credited, that of all the Catholic Repre(entatives fo
many as three could ever be found weak and wick-
ed enough to lend their efforts to a foreign coun-
try, to betray the Government that protests them ?
—I need not, Sir, take up any time in reminding the
Houfe that though the form of religion in Scotland
differs effentially from what is eftabliffied in thiscoun-
try, no inconveniencies have arifen, no danger has
been experienced to our national ttlabliflunent. The

Prefbyterians of Scotland (wear that they confine
their differences ((defy to matters of do trine and dif-
ciplire, aad with that affeveration we are completely
fatistied. In the cafe of the Roman Catholics, you
call on them to (wear to particular points, and v. hen'
they have taken the oath you will not believe their
teltimony. To call on men for a declaration on oath,
and after the declaration is given, to affect to clifbe- '
lieve it is, Sir, at all times a proof of the greaten ma-
lignity of difpofition and the moll contemptible weak-
nefs of undernandiog. In the Government of the
prefent day, however, it would appear in colours fill
more actions, and fill more unjuitifiable. It is no
thing Short of calling on men to conform to the par-
ticular terms of an aft, and this folely with the view
of making thole who accede to its conditions lot (wear
themfelves. You firft hold out inducements to them
to (wear to the renunciation of certain opinions, and
when that is done your former bad opinion remains
unchanged. If they have the (lighten connection with
the Roman Catholic religion, it ever they venture to
attend mafs, it is no longer in their power to preferve
any fort of regard for the fandity of an oath, and
therefore you may fafely confider all they have fo-
lemnly declared as abfolutely amounting to nothing.
No iron can be placed in their teltimony, becaufe fuch
is the nature of their religion that they cannot be
trolled. Having then made this fort of general difinc•
tion againft the Roman Catholics, what is it, Sir,
that is done to remedy this evil ? What is reforted to
to make the eath of men of fuch a charafter at all
refponfible to any law of human tenimony ? You be-
gin by laying, that thefe perfons are unworthy of be-
ing believed, and you get rid of the dieiculty by im-
poling another oath. You think your enablilhment in
danger, if the Catholics of Ireland are admitted to a
fair participation of the privileges of the Conftitution
and you remedy this evil by calling on them to take
a particular oath, admitting that, in conformity to
their own principles, they can take that oath without
hefitatic: , acaufe with them it has no force. I ap-
peal then to the Houfe whether there is not, in this
fort of proceeding, fomething that has very much
the appearance of folly ? If it is not founded in folly,
it is molt certainly highly infulting to every ingenu-
ous mind among the refpeetable Catholic body. It is
reprefenting them as a fet of men equally incapable
of obferving the mon (acted ties among men, and the
molt relpefted rights in fociety. I have no with, Sir,
to engage in controverfial dilcuflions, for they are
contrary to all my feelings, inconfident with all the
habits of my life. They are feldom introduced into
this Houle with much profit, and in many cafes they
are produflive of material inconvenience. Without,
however, at all introducing Inch difcuffions, I mull
be permitted to fay, that fuch a reprefentation of
the Catholics as that to which I have referred, is one
of a very extraordinary nature. At this moment
three-fourths of Europe conlill of Chrinians pro-,
feting the Roman Catholic Religion ; are we then
to be told that this huge proportion of civilized in-
habitants of this part of the world, are men who
are utterly undcferving of all belief, even when their
teltimony is ratified by an oath—that they ate inca-
pable, not merely of the relations of peace and arri•
ty, but that they are unfit for fupporting any of the
common relations of life ? I am lure loch a propoti-
tion as that will not be attempted to be introduced
into this Houle. No man will dare to come forward
and affert that, becaufe three-fourths of the Chi ifians
of Europe are Roman Catholics, we are to confider
them as incapable of the relations of peace and amity
—incapable of the connexions of commerce—incapa-
ble of any of thofe obligations by which the faith of
one State is guaranteed to another. Such a doftrine
as would, on account of differences of religious opi-
nions, fuppofe nations incapable of all the relations
of civilized life, would he a doctrine fit only t 3 have
been entertained in dark and fuperlthious ages. 1t is
a dcarine which can only be traced to the wilden and
molt abominable bigotry. Witco the oaths in quer- I
tion were &It propoled, at the time when a number
of conceffions were to be made to the Catholics, I,
among others, objected to them as altogether unnc-
celfary. The Houk was then of a contrary opinion.
and the oaths were made a condition of the concef-
lions to be granted by the Legiflature. What then
has bean the confequence? Why, Sir, the Catholic
have taken the oaths, their Archbifhopc, Bifhops, and
inferior Clergy have taken them, and fill it is contend-
ed that all this will not fatisfy our anxiety for the ec-
clefiaftical eftablithment. The Catholics cannot be
believed, and therefore their teltimony is quite nuga-
tory. When the Petition was firlt read at the table,
I did flatter myfelf that the explicit declaration of
the Petitioners, that the oaths had been taken, would
have made a Itrong impreflion on the Houle. Why
then are we now to hear that this declaration is far
from affording fatisfy Rion ? I recolleft, Sir, when
talking on this fubjed with a much valued friend of
mine, the late Lord Petre, whole pretence would
have done honour to any affembly, I gave my opi-
nion fairly, that to me the oaths feemed altogether
fuperfluons. He, on the other hand, was anxious
that the oaths Should be taken, as the belt means of
doing away thofe calumnies which have been heaped
on the Catholic Body. My reply WAS fimple, that
it certainly might be
.very jullifiable, nay, perhaps,
very proper for the Catholic Body to take this mode
of placing their principles in a fair point of view, hut
that it was unworthy of the dignity of the Legifla-
tote to demand filch a declaration from fo numerous
and refpeftable a body. Being on this part of the
lubjeft, I think it proper to add, that the oaths on
which fo much ltrefs is laid, have been pofitively taken
by four Catholic Archbilhops, by all the Bilhops, and
by the greater part of the inferior Clergy. Though my
own opinion remains unaltered, that the oaths were
unnecelfary, Qill the Statement I now make mull be
considered as fufticient to refute the accufations of
thofe who would with to defcribe the Catholics as,
men who have not in good carnet' renounced th:ii
opinions, on which the refinance to their claims is
principally founded. We are told, however, that
the hills Catholics have already had fo much conce-
ded to them, that it is quite extraordinary to hear
them calling for (till greater indulgences. With this
idea I cannot poll ably concur, and on the contrary,
think that their prefent demands ate ftrietly continent
with every principle of reafon, and every view of hu.
man nature. When you have conceded to men cer-
tain privileges, it is to be expefted that their defires
of a Rill more perfeft fate o olitical Situation will
be increafed. When you have to a certain degree al-
fimilated one body of the fobjefts of an Empire to
the other, there will necegarily be created an anxiety;

' to enjoy a more petit& funilar it;• o reft of t,o
community. It the Catholics of were railed
from a hate of debating oppoo:i 1., an i ttilmo4
to the charafter of men, it was it : lo!•!ly extraordi.
nary that with this nobler charaEto which they had
obtained, they &mid feel an arde:n with that
Amid be accompanied by every cola-, Inonding privi.
lege. Nothing (bort of this could poflioiy f I
.a!lb.ythe
expellations which had been excited, and that mar.
mutt !hut his eyes to the nature of noon and the ge-
nius of the !moan mild, who cold no t perceive
th tt the people of Ireland, though in the litft in.
(lance they might view the concellions afforded them
with feelings of gratitude, Rill rcleCted that they
were lubjefts of indifputable right, and that if what
they now claimed was not granted them, a very im-
portant part of thefe rights was withheld. They
could eafily too dittinguith betwixt a fat o,tr granted
to an individual, or to a number of in.liviJnals, ant
a right unjultly denied, and at length conceded to
the demands of four millions of the general popula-
tion of the country. From the moment that the ccar-
ceffions were firft granted to the Catholics, it was
eafy to fee that much more was to be requircd.—
When the Catholics had gained much, they were
fenfible that they had yet a great deal to receive.—
Will it be argued, Sir, that after all you have con-
ceded, what remains is not lately to be given up to
the Catholic Body of Ireland ? Shall we hear that
the Catholics arc difaffened, or in danger of dial.
feCtion, and at the fame time than we Ilsut our eyes
againft the &c?, that in our army and in our navy,
there very Catholics are empLyed, that stall bodiesof
the Catholic population are now employed in arms
to defend Ireland againti any attempt whic't the
French may meditate againtl that part of the Em.
pipe? Will any Gentleman be bold enough to fay,
that we are pet-fatly fare in miffing to the rude un-
cultivated tribes of Ireland, and ih it there is any
danger in admitting to a teat in the Legiflature, the
higher and more refpeCtable gentlemen in the com-
munity ? Do you consent to tr ull the lower ranks of
the Irith people, and can you have any apprehen-
lions of the defigns of Lord Fiogall and the other
Noblemen and Gentlemen whole names are Mier&
ed to the petiti, n which furors the I;11>jlEt of the mo-
tion with which 1 (hail have honour to conclude ?
I alk, Sir, of tlf,fe Gentlemen, who opp,fe the
claims of the Petitioners, what defcrtption of the
frith people they think unworthy of being united ?
I have already laid that you are in the contlant ha-
, bit of trolling the lower orders, whole nt tn.•era and
connexions render them the molt riihj a t• • infpicion,
while to the higher orders, against whom none of
thefe caufes of fufpicion apply, you ar Tear to enter-
tain the utmoll degree of jealoufy. You admit the
lower orders into limo ions which are ..eitainly not
very well adapted to a fufpicion of their .ot); while
the higher orders, whole I,,yalty WAN sindoubteda
were refufed the enjoyment of the tiglas of the high'.
eft of the citizens of a free country. To thole from
whom we h ,ve every thing to fear we give nothing,
while from thole who have every thing to claim
our confidence, we withhold what their approved
attachment powerfully demands. Surely, Sir, this is
a fort of proceeding, equally contrary to the princi-
ples of common jtotice and common fenfe. Ir can•
not for a moment he admitted that what we refute is
withheld from a fehte of danger—lot if danger really
vatted, what is already conceded a ill produce all
the dangers which can be anticipated. They have
had conceded to them (hi., fundamental ptineiple of
our free conaitution, that all orders in the (late are
to be equal ; that they are to enjoy equal rights and
equal acceliThility to all political privileges. We have
therefore, Sir, rc illy waked nothing which it is of
the leatt importance for us to keep, but what it is of
immenfe confequence (hr them to receive. We have
only retained that equality of rights which is a pri-
vilege the deare:l to the human mind. It is this, Sir.
that gives to our laws their grand diainClion, and
renders the comtittninn rd this country fuperior to
any other on the race of the globe. This is a privi-
lege which atones for the inlet iority of fortune, and
makes even nation, comparatively poor, elated with
their political condition. One of our Poets illuf-
trates this idea in the moll beautiful and interefling
tetras, svl:en defcribing the manners of the peafantry
of Swit zerl ind— •
Tho' poor the peafant's feafts tho'fmall,
He feel% his little lot the lot of all :
Sees no contiguous palace rear its bead,
To (harm. the me:inners of his hun.ble filed.

This equality of rights is what the Catholics re-
quire, and until it is granted they mutt continue in
a Itate of the utmoll degradation. But lam told,
Sir, that the moll eminent of the clergy in this min-
try, that the great majority of the Bench of Billups
are hoflile to the meafure of emancipation. Nothing
would be more remote ft ism my withes than to agi-
tate a quefliun in which the runt:lions of that refpeoft-
able body could be at ail infringed on ; but I con-
fider this a quellion in which their authority has not
all that degree of weight which on other fuhjefts I
thould he the fiat man in the world to allow it. Po-
litical and religious queltions have been too often cons
founded when they ought to have ben kept perfectly
dillina ; and it appears to me that the quellion before
the Houfe is jolt one of tho:e to which this ohlerta-
thm will particularly apply. The wifett philidophers
have been desirous to have great political enquiries
feperated, and it is to be lamented that this defire
has in In few inftances been gratified. As however
the autho:i v of the veneral :e body to 1 have
alluded has been introduced, I am happy ,o have this
opportunity of ravi ring to tine aut:t•rrity.uf a writer,
who, not poffetring a feat en !he llet7cli I ll]lh,,ps, is
one I.sliofe opinion tli.l have v,ry gte. t "eight not
only in this Houle, hut with all rnza in the
country. The authority to wi.ich I alltidc, Sir, is
that of Dr. Paley, in one of his works whsle he has
oceafion t i difcufs the 10bj.:41 of religioto.
ties. With the per million of the Houle I !hall take
the liberty of reading a thou p.tlfage to thew in what
light this intelligent and refilalable writer views the
Coble& of dilabilities foun:!ed on religious co-stlizza-
lions. (Here the Hou' arable Member read a pal-
fage from 1)r. Paley, the okje,fl of which was to thew
that all difahilities of this delcription mu;t be of a
temporary nature, and as fuon as the eircomitances
which had occationed them ceafed, they fh.u.id
out delay he abolifhed). Here then, faiA Mr. F 5
refuming, is the authority of one cf use able.l writers
in this country, and you find that he ha, no concep-
tion of perpetual ditabilities, he has no that
though reittitlions might at at cm: time be txpecli-