Star.
London, England, 1825-03-01 00:00:00

CATHOLIC PETITIONS.

Earl DARNLEY, in rising to present a Petition, numerously
signed by the Catholic Inhabitants of the Parish of St. Catharine.
hi the City of Dublin, seized the fist opportunity afforded him, of
coming his protest against the Bill which had just been introduced.
The Pt titionrrs prayed that it alight not be passed without their
below heard in their defence, or to its being lounded on some Par-
liamentary grounds. kle (Lord Darnley) also entreated their Lord-
ships to consider what consequences might result from the measure
now brought before them, and to pause ere thej gave it their as-
sent.--,The Petition was then read, and laid on the table.
'Me Nobl• Earl then presented another to the same effect from
the Catholics of the County of Monaghan, but wished it should be
understood that whilst lie advocated the prayer of the Petition, lie
did not stand up as the Jpologist of every act lone by the Cathclic
Association.—Head and laid on the table.

Toe Earl of CARNA RYON held a similar Petition from the
Catholic Inhabitants of a certain Parish in the County of Cork, hut
as instead of the word " humbly," the words " most respectfully"
had been introduced. be feared that the forms of the House would
not allow .1 its bAtig received.
Alter some conversation ou the sulaject, the word " humbly" was
written in at the suggestion of the Earl of Ltv carom., and the Pe-
tition was laid on the table. -
Lord HOLLAND had several Petitions to present against the
Bill now before the House. Their language was proper and consti-
tutional, and they appeared to him to contain strong arguments
against the passing of the measure. .The Noble Lords opposite
might be of a different opinion, for if their objection to the Catholic
Association was, that it spoke the sense of the Irish people, and
sought for relief from what all considered as a grievance, the
more the Petitions should prove the universality of that feeling,
the more objectionable they must also become. He hoped, how-
ever, that they did not mean to trench on the right of petition, and
'that they would take time for consideration and inquiry before
they adopted the present Bill. The Noble Baion then presented
Petitions, breathing the sante spirit, ibough not wotded in the same
manner, from the Catholics of Drogheda, Kinsale; Ross, Carbery,
and Ballinasloe.—Read, and laid on the table.
Earl W ILLIA M presented Similar Petitioni from the
Catholic inhabitants of Skibbereen, in the'Coutity of Coat, and
from ihe Catholics of the County of Wexford.—Read; and laid on
the table.
Earl GROSVENOR also presented a Petition from the Catholics!
Of the Parish of St. Andrew, in the City of Dublin, against a 841
tAida& be thought as Unconstitutional ai injuflicloul, 'and towliich
he could not give his assent.—Laid on the table: '
r. Lord .1i LNG presented a similar Petition front-the Catholic's or
the Parish of St:. Michael, Dublio.-Laid on the tattle.
'.,the Marquis of LA NSDOWN bad also seVeral,Petitions to
iresent against 'the Bill, but before be did' so, 'he trusted the
illedalesy of the Ovum would allow him to state, that since he lad
hail the honour of presenting the Pattltion of Protestant -Peers and.
Gentlemen in favour of Catholic Emancipation, be had received
letters front two Noble Peers, the hiorquis of Sligo and Lord Ash-,
town, expressing their desire that before the Petition should *,
presented, they should have an idpportlmity of adding tteir naineV
to those which it contained. Those kttets, however, had strived
too tete for that purpose. With respect lathe Bill itself, he thought
It not only ineibcarious, ,but most unconstitutional. He welsh!'
not, however, enter into a premature discussion. Front the num-
ber and the respectability of the individual who had Signed the
Petitions which he was abtivk 'lying before the House, he hoped
that they would be treated, with dua'atiantion. The first was sob.
scribed by 3,000 names, and came from the Roman Catholics of
Great Britain.—Read,and laid oft the tabfe.
The Noble Marquis then ' presented Petitions of a. similar
ligature front the. Catholics of 'Maryborough, of Cove, of several
parishes in the- county of Dublin,-sotehe parishes of St. Nicholas,
Sc. Luke's, and St. Peter's, in the Bithop:s Liberties, of Killarney,
of Cloughnara, of Tralee, and of the city and county of Limerick.
The latter, however, having had the seal and part of the words
turn off, was understood not to be received. It was signed by
6,000 individuals. The others were laid on the table.
Viscount CLIFDEN held a Petition against the Bill, signed by
a great number, of the Protestants as well as the Catholic inhabi-
tants of Kilkenny. He did not anticipate that the measure would
produce the effect which its authors expected. Two years ago a
Bill had been passed to put down Orange Secietlea, and they were
now more flourishing and numerous than before. .He believed
that a Vast majority of Protestants in the three provinces of Mun-
ster, Connaught, and Lelnster, wished Catholic Emancipation to
be carried, provided it should be attended with an alteration in the
mode of voting at elections, and that the qualification fog the do&
dye franchise should be raised.
The Petition having been read, aed laid on the table, •
The Noble Viscount presented similar ones front the Cathi;
lie inhabitants of New Ross, Mallow, Newry, several parighet•lii
the county and city of Dublin, the towns of Galway, Team, hies
ntingham, and its neighbourhood, Dingle, and Clownea.—Laid
on the table. ' • .
. g
A.XtI-CATIIOI.IC PETITIONS. •
The .BistboiV:4lolt4 end WELLS presented 'a Petition front'
the inhaititiattliverd hodselittitlets-oCthe city of Bath anat. neigh-1
bourhoosl, i 4 isitisic ;of the • Unlawful Sociptias' on
the table. ; • 4.•
The Right Rem' tin tin presented4' tition of;it 44i
11pr
nature float the eh and Clergy the AechallicohrT
of Bath, in the DigateigebS /bah Net Welts.'" "
The Petition was Teat. it:aisted-attsonget' other thing's that the
Catholics had au own Alf- 01411104 qbd novicopmdy axowedi
inteation of estahliablug the atirtaq4y of the Pope, and deatroyiqg
.
the Protestant religiue. • t. • .
!And -FITZ W 11.t1A.Phiip'arIone of Voice which was
scarcely a whirl. -beichisrele`Bair; sAid thilllagAtions pus
j c., a: 40‹:-; :Lsa ..1:.
• •
, .1-I!'t •

~L'a _

.►
~'.

.

It. .
speakers

r

~.. •.

forward in that Petition he consider ed to be unfoupded.'
They were offensive in the greatest degree. The Peti-
tioners described themselves as the Clergy of the Arch-
deaconry- of Bath, as if they' had been a Corporate
Body, which they were note and they assumed a dicta-
torial tone towards the House. The precedent was
dangerous, for why Might not other bodies do the
same? It their Lordships admitted dictation froth the
Church, why should not the Army also propose measures to then'?
It was to flrin the face of Goo ALMr6Htr► to call upon the Muse
to continue grievances upon a part of our fellow-countrythen.
- The Bishop of BATH and WELLS wished that thb
Noble Earl would say to what parts of the Petition he
objected, and he would endeavour to answer his objec-
tions; but to general observations he could only given
general reply. It was the privilege of all British sub-
jects to speak their stntiments to Parliament upon all question: ;
why should the Petitioners alone be prevented from usill that right ?
Earl FITZWILLIAM read some passages of the Pe-
tition, as those which he deemed objectionable, as they
attributed motives and Objects to the Catholics which
were not true, and which the Petitioners could not prove.
The Bishop of BATH and WELLS observed, that
such Petitions came from every other B 'dy or Corpo-
ration, why object to that now before their Lordships?
This objection did not come very well after a Petition
which he had not opposed, because he respected the
right of Petition, though the whole body of Catholics
said in it, that they were denied the privilege of free religious wor-
ship, Which was a notoriously unfounded assertion.

Lord HOLLAND stated, that if the question were
whether the Petition should be received or no, he should
have no hesitation in giving his vote for receiving it.
But if the Right Reverend Prelate thought th.it it was
a regular one which he had presented; he was completely
in error. It came from a body which was not a regular
body, and coming without a Corporation seal, it must
be considered as the Petition of the individuals signing
it, and not of the body itself. As such he was willing
to receive it, notwithstanding the false:ll.43d of its alle-
gations. It contained the ward " humbly, but dis.i
played little humility. It contained the word " charity,*
but evinced little of the spirit of charity. His Noble
Friend had read the passages to IA hick he ohj-cted, but
the Right Rev. Prelate had passed them over altogether.
The Petition said that the whole Catholic Body openly .
avowed the intention of establi-hing the supremacy of
the Pope in this country. • It was possible that such an
intention should be suspected; but no just man, no
Alan impressed with the spirit of Christianity, would impute More
motives, when not only they were not avowed by the Cattiolies,
but were distinctly disclaimed in every Petition which they had
presented to that House. The general Petition peesented some
days before by a Noble Friend of his, (the Earl of Donoughmore)
from the great body of the Catholics of Ireland, not only disclaimed
each an intention, but avowed and proclaimed the principle of Civil
and Religious Liberty.
The Bishop of CHESTER could not sit quietly and
hear the Noble Lord declare that the assertion that the
superiority of the Pope was aimed at by ti,e Catholics
was false. He admitted that they mere too wise
to make the assertion in any documents before that •
House, because it would be illegal ; but it was
avowed in all their publications. There was a Ca-
tholic Journal circulated- through the kingdom, and •
most extensively througt his own diocese, the Editor
of which, an individual who had received the thanks of
every Catholic Association, had stated in December
last', that he could not approve the regulations intro.
diced by the King of France into the Gallivan Crouch,
because they seemed to infringe on the authority of the'
Pope; and he deprecated any interference of the civil
povi er in the supremacy of the Pope. The same doe•
trine was maintained by the Catholics everywhere. It
was asserted in the county of Lancaster 'by almost all
the Catholic Priests; and many of the latter in his Dein
diocese made no scruple of telling the people, that the
Churches of the Kingdom once were theirs, and would
soon be again. It was hard to impute the etpressiou
-of such a well-founded conviction to a want ot: charity.
Heconfessed that there were expressions in (he Petiti-lt
.._. . . _
before
- - •

Ailed by pt_ of
%Veils. Stich a mass of bigotry and
hate proceetled from no place except
feared the Petitioners. had wit 're.n,
lissued on the P3th ar.cembett by
Hanover, whosaid that hemenl
ligion in that kihgelom. Let 4
tokwthet rruclamation and stick .1111Ses
Chapter. Bet tiacy would say, Allerd
reit'? Great good had come froM Nab
taSo'cOmes'onn Hinovir. It wasipTt
the pessent Petition aboeldierish.
Arg-teitking.wakstill- known. 'Me .t*i
was,drawn up might thep be tolled ewe
Marion, and then tbobe robes and lawn
mdeb charity to Matt wog ltl be present
doh was then laid en the table.
The Bishop of LONDClMpreeektikilk
demo aid the Clergy of the Archaises

a

,
•

ie a►;

I.74'AM

~I

_

' •

-- -y

r• •

S7l.
e 4

.I

. •

..
before tbeHouse, which be wished might be ohlieerated,
:aa they went taring that line which he would draw. But it might
eatn then be ;Oily answered, that the Protestant;Clergy threw no
weapottet their adversaries, bot-in the way oferetilliation. The
. Oast or the Chords of lingiand. were denounced's* kingly Pratte
tant Paristau—Aungry the were, hit he knew in-hisnwodltoceseoltie
and meritorious, Mtn;ni .. psitlainting theitL duties for I Midler
~2e
pittance than is given by sr berdehips to their. menial scripts.
• lie Winged pardon: for travails*, ea theist-Lordship' attention%
but he could not, as an Folglish Preis* siesta and hest hripatatika
thitrwmapon it body wellastfdal Such, respect Mid Isdinitaarat et
the House and country at large.' ": . : nie '
_ Lord HOLLAND had not • said • that the Catholics
might not aim at establishing the.suprensacy of eb. Pope, hal ilk&
they had not avowed but disclaimed such au intention in 01(tbeir
. Petitions. Was It just, disrefore, in the present•Pctitiosiershnoce
that the overthrow of the Protestant &titan-W*4a objectveLk-ts
..
the Catholics had in viewr•
• ute...
The Bishop of BATH and WbL Eoil istdotteodetdt, tan
the Petitioners had as great a right to address the House, aldsvalk-'
they had no Corporation seal, as any meeting or parish. ARIA"
same time he did not consider himself answerable for every owed
in the Petition. He had tooked•it over to tee that it wat trynnet.
fblly worded; and finning it so, had, thought kids illity to peesipe
it. As to imputing motives,. that was unpitlianiatanary, chime iil
speakers or Petitioners, especially as the latter wersetat prevalent
defend themselves. •
L•ird HOLLAND hai.
ltot imputed motives tO any
one ; he had complained, on she eastrary, of motives h.virs
been imputed.
The Eat! of CARNARVON haitnti doubt that the
individuals who had signed their Agnes tothn •Petidnkatl. sighed .
them with a full belief that what it anted was enrrect. ft showed
what prejudices and false reports Woad do. 'Fhb PetitiontivtireVed
forprotection for their religion from spiritual violence, tyrstrolkand
oppression, with which they were threatened. Who thatAail okiis6-4
knew anything of what W 2! pas•ing *roam ',bass, c•Juld where ea
Protestants were threatened with spiritual Siolence ? • 7 sz •' . ..
.....,..„,
Lord KING thought chit the House muA hhalebarA
. i
much edified by this ptoductiort of t wjlirikiket: of