Star.
London, England, 1825-10-21 00:00:00

by such a rnew.nre. Allow tte to ask, •when vnn a'e
told that to admit a Catholic into the H use of Lords,

or the House of Commons, would be to enianger the
Ccnititution, are you liss are that, in 1817, the law was
repealed which would have prevented any Catholic
firm► obtaining the supreme command of an army in
the service of his country? Are you aware that, in
point of fact, no law operates, ht the present moment, to
prevent his Majesty from appointing a Catholic (fficer, ,
to command his Fleets and Armies, sore than' it does,
should it he his pleasure, to appoint any other Dissenter
from the E.tablished Church? And can you reconcile
to yourselves the belief; that it is safe for the Constitu-
ition to entrust such extreme power in she hands of a

Catholic, on whose conduct, in a single engagement,
the destinies of his country may rest ; and yet, at the
same time, that it would be so dangerous to allow him
to take a single position among many in the houses of
Parliament, or that he would be disposed there more,
than in the field, to act with disloyalty to his King, and
to bleak faith with the Constitution of his country ?
—Allow me further to ask, are you aware, when this
measure of " Catholic Emancipation" is discussed, as it
it wete some gerwtal measure, involving much material
change and complication of circumstances—that the
sole reason which isrevents the Catholic from taki:tg
seat in Parliament, is his utiwillinp,nesl to make a cer-
ta'n declaration, and to t.,ke a particular foinr of oath,
which, as a Catholic, with reference to the spiritual part
of his teliqion, it is impossible for him conscientiously
to take? If. therefore, you have ever he,/rd it asserted,
that Catholics do not consider therntelves bound by

their oath, you will find the utter absurdity of such a
pr.ipositii n iu the indisputable fact that teere it not for
the conscientious dread of rio?ating an oath, the ron,tita •
lion now presents »o impefliment to the entry of a Catholic
into either House of I'r:tilt:meta, or into any (Iffice what-
ever. It a Cathuli:, at ti-is time, were to ptesent hi rustlf
at the table of the Ilouse of Commons, he would be re-
quired to subscribe to a delaration against transubqan-
tra.ion, which declaration was directA to be subscribed
at a period when it was a material object, on po-
ll ical grounds, to ascertain the fact of the religion of
the patty. But that declaration tile; ely relates to a
mystical principle of his religion, having no relation to,
or cennection with, the civil conduct of the party pro-
fessing it. You have to-day heard the Mayor read the
oath of abjuration. A Catholic has not the slightest
objection to take that oath. He is perfectly piepared,
also, to take the oath of Supremacy, if you will
only except the denial of the authority of the Pope in
nratttrs purely spiritual, and limited to. his own Church.
1 beg bot to be unders'ood a', in the slightest degree,
arguing in favour of the Catholic Relioion or as placing
'
it on a par with that pure system of faith which it is
our good fortune to pro'ess. But if it be a part of a
Catholic's faith to allow the supremacy of the Pope,
in spiritual matters, whilst at the same time he disclaims
that supremacy. by every form cl words that ingenuity
caninvent, with respect to temporal matters, 1 do not
see any reason why the professors of that faith should
be for ever disqualifi-d from partaking of the privileges
of the Constitution. Do not suppose. however, for one
moment, tat I am prepared to support any general
system of E riancipa,i ni, which does not call upon
every individual partaking of its benefits to give the
most unequivocal assurance that he is prepared to ex-
ercise every duty of loyalty and fidelity to his country,
that can or ought to be imposed upon a subject. I
would permit no man to escape from the impedi-
incurs which the existing tests offet to his admis-
im i slnt., -Parliament, or into the exercise of Civil
Office, who would not be prepared to satisfy my
mind, under the sanction of an oath (of the solemil
nity of which sanction, in his case, I have, for tlae,
reasons ialready assigned, no possible justification to
doubt) that he objected to subscribe the declaration
against transubstantiation on account of his religious,
faith, and of his religious faith alone, and that he had
no objection to take the oaths of abjuration and alle-
giance;—who did not satisfy me that his objections to
the oath of supremacy only existed on account of the
word "spiritual;'—who did rot profess Lis loyalty by
every term that could assure tie of the reality of his
feelings ;—who . would not be prepared to swear that
he would maintain the Protestant succession to the
Crown ;—who would not swear that he abjured the
opinion, that Princes excommunicated by the Pope and
Council, or any authority of the See of Rome, or by any
other authority whatsoever, may be depose) or murdered
by their subjects ;—who would not swear that he denied
to the Pope any temporal or civil jurisdiction, power,
superiority, or pre-eminence, wit) in these realms ;
who would nr.t swear that he disclaimed, disavowed,
and solemnly abjured, any attempt to subvert the
Protestant Church Est abhshment ;—who would not
equally swear, never to exercise any privilege to which
he might become entitled, to the disturbance of the
Protestant Religion or Protestant Government in this
kingdom ;—or who would hesitate to swear, that he
made all these declarations in the plain and ordinary
sense of the words which conveyed them, without
any evasion, equivocation, or mental reservation what-
' evert—or who would not deny on oath, the power of
any dispensation from any quarter to annul the same. As I have
already said, if s Catholic be prepared to swear to this effect, I can
have no right to suspect his oath, when I know that it is only from
his unwillangttesa to violate the sanctity of an oath, that he is at this
moment prevented from obtaining all the objects which any Inca-
sure of emancipation can by possibility confer upon him. But,
above all, understand me when I repeat, that if any Catholic
be not prepared to go this length, I am not prepared to extend
any emancipation to that Catholic, be he who he may. I thus
have nut hesitated, fearlessly hut respectfully, to inform you of the
ltature of my sentiments. lam well aware that I should in some
sewn appear to consult my interest, were Ito sacrifice my opinion
impost this subject, in deference to the indisposition which
some of you avow towards any future remission of Catholic
disabilities; and this being the only point on which I feel
that I am in the least at issue with any of my Consti-
tuents, it might be a temptation to me to make that sacri-
fice, were 1 not satisfied that you ought to have a better
opinion of me, for maintaining and acting upon my real opinion,
although that opinion may not be in Liaison with yours. At pre-
sent, you are aware that, in the House of Commons, there is a ma-
jority in favour of the measure of Catholic Emancipation. But if
every Member who thinks as I do, is to be rejected as a Candidate,
because he ventures to think that concessions may be extended
to his Catholic fellow subjects, under the precautions which I have
described, do not disguise from yourselves that evils may ensue,
of the tendency and extent of which you are, perhaps, but little
aware. The loss of our trade with Ireland, in which there are
those among you who are engaged, might possibly not he the
greatest evil we should have to deplore, if anything were to oc-
cur which should seriously interrupt the peace and growing
prosperity of that country. I have requested you most ear
newly to think for yourselves on this subject; I have pledged
myself that you shall have the means of adequate informa-
tion upon it, You are aware that men of oppo-ire parties,
agreeing on no other point whatever, have been found to concur
absolutely and entirely as to the policy and propriety of Catholic
Emancipation, as it is calla ti ; and 1 ask you, if, among yourselves,
where patty spirit c lists, any one (pillion could be stated, in which
men at opposite parties agree,l, though abirering in all other respects,
whether that circumstance would not incline you to think that there
must be something reasonable in that opinion, requiring youropen
tive examination, and Hum your hasty and contemptuous rejection?