Star.
London, England, 1813-05-14 00:00:00

%mid be difficult for any non to ender:Wel whit
might be the opinion of annther upon a question in•
caring, as appeared from the Noble Lord's speeds,
such a great variety of topics, without the most tna.
cure deliberation, and, consequently, nothing could
be more presumptuous than to make any alteratioft
in the Bill now before the House, as if authorised br
the Noble Lord, where not only an approval, but
complete understanding of the Noble Lord was as.
eessary,—( Hear, hsar.)lt was fit that each mats
should express his opinion, and, when the House re.
solved into a Committee, propose such alteration in
the Bill as was agreeable to himself. But he would
submit to the candour of the Noble Lord; whether it
was-fair or proper to require of them (Mr. Ponsonby
and his friends) to meet his Lordship's proposition
completely in the spirit to accomplish all he had in
view ? They had formed an opinion upon which
they had acted—if the Noble Lord had any altera-
tion to propose, they were ready to listen to it, and
to give it every fair consideration ; to undertake more
would be undertaking a great deal too much. (Hear,
hear.)—The Noble Lord had agreed to the principle
of the Bill, and had declared he would vote for the
second reading—after this, for all further discussion,
he apprehended the Committee would be the proper
place.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir J. C. HIPPISLEY rose under a loud cry of
" Question," and a tremendous coughing, and was
obliged, after waiting some time, to sit down.
Mr. RYDER then rose, but after waiting some
time, was also obliged to sit down.
Mr. BATHURST then rose, and moved That the
House do noir adjourn.
The SPEAKER, having with difficulty obtained
a hearing, stated the question.
Lord CASTLEREAGH said, that his Right
Hon. Friend had, he was confident, only moved the
adjournment in order to obtain a hearing for such
Gentlemen as wished to deliver their sentiments ; and
having obtained that object, he had no doubt he
would immediately withdraw it.
Mr. BA'I'HURST stated that such was his inten-
tion, and with the leave of the House withdrew his
motion.

Mr. RYDER said, if the friends of the Bill were
really anxious that it should pass in such manner as
would give satisfaction to the country, he thought
they did not adopt the proper means in not giving a
patient hearing to Gentlemen who were of a different
opinion. He begged that he shnuld not be considered
as one of those who did not think that the restrictions,
on the Catholics was an evil—he thought it a great
evil ; and the difference between him and the suppor-
ters of the Bill was, that he thought no securities
could be devised ; and every other individual, except
the author of the Bill, thought that securities were
necessary. (No, no, from the Oilltositiox ride.) lie un-
derstood Gentlemen to say, that securities were ne-
cessary, and that a 13111 should be introduced to dis-
cover what securities could be devised. If such were
the case, he begged the House to consider what secu-
rities the Bill contained. It contained no additional
security. In voting for, the Bill, Gentlemen voted on
the ground that the clauses of the Rigbt Honourable
Gentleman (Mr. Canning) would mike part of the
Bill ; but for his part ho would prefer running the
risk of the foreign interference, rather than erect a
domestic Commission independent of the Crown,
holdirg on the same tenure as the Judges of the
land. The House would do, well to reflect on the
consequences of repealing the Test Acts as relating
to the Catholics. No securities had been proposed ;
and when it was considered who %ere the framers of
the Bill, it was not to be hoped that any other person
could devise them.

Mr. PEEL could not allow the Bill to pass through
that stage, in which its principle was understood to
be discussed, without entering his protest against it
and he protested particularly against the Bill, as not
being in conformity to the Resolution the House had
come to in the last Session of the last Parliament;
which Resolution pledged the House to a measure
which was to provide securities, but this Act pro.
vided none. The House ought not to abolish the
bulwarks of the Constitution, without the Act should
contain adequate securities. But the great principle
on which he opposed the Bill was, as it regarded the
connection of England with Ireland. If the Roman
Catholic population had been amalgamated with a
Protestant population, he should not have feared it
so much. Bin if the Roman Catholic Church were
to have a separate maintenance, he could not con-
ceive how the Protestant religion would be the esta-
blished religion of Ireland. He conceived an esta-
blished Church to consist either in exclusive privileges
or exclusive maintenance. The Roman Catholic
population being four millions, to 800,000 Prates.
tants, it was in vain to hope to maintain the Protes-
tant ascendancy. He had been charged with incon-
sistency in voting for the motion of the Honourable
Baronet (Sir J. C. Hippisley), after having opposed
the principle; but there was surely no impropriety
in trying to render the Bill as little obnoxious as pos.
sible, although he might fail in preventing its adoption.
Mr. WILBERFORCE thought the obscurity in
which the Noble Lord had enveloped his opinions re-
specting some alterations or amendments, was placing
those who concurred in the general principle of the
Bill in a very distressing situation ; and he hoped the
Noble Lord would, if not in that House, yet in some
other way, intimate what his view of the amendment
was, that the House might understand what he wished.
In voting for the second reading, he had no doubt
the House would do so, with a pointed view of the
Bill, as brought in by the Right Hon. Gentleman,
and in connection with the clauses proposed by his
Right Hon. Friend.
Lord CASTLEREAGH explained, that in what
fell from him, he by no means intended to complain
that he was not consulted on the formation of the
Bill. It was natural to expect that those would be
anxious to frame, who had been more forward in pro-
moting the general object.
Sir J. HIPPISLEY rose, but stood for several mi.
nutes intreating a hearing, before he was audible ; he
very shortly adverted to some unparliamentary and
unjust expression of Mr. Wilberforce, who had charged
him with endeavouring to fritter away the Bill, and
to compromise the rights of the Catholics. The Ho.
nourable Baronet was entering upon other topics,
when he was interrupted by an almost universal cry
of question !
Mr. WILBERFORCE explained, but was inaudible.
General MATTHEW admitted that the language
used by the late Member for Yorkshire might be es.