Star.
London, England, 1817-05-17 00:00:00

110
.e and the... Commons might contince to all IT-
pea :.nce the same Houses, with the substitution of a
few Catholic Members in the Conarrtos, asd the re.
so ration or a few Catholic to that rank to which
troy "ha,! ao hereditary right in that Ttoise —hut
st.ll this,would: not be a Prott,stant Pm-limn-iv, al•
though. thc.majarity should consist of Protestants.—
This Ntiaksbe first J.ight such a distincti .n had been
taken: in that House. What 1 atter the concessions
made to this part of the community in 1777, MS.
and 1793, 'were their 'Lordships to expect • that this
brckad.gritimd of objection should. have been taken up
by the Noble Earl ?. No; first let him defend the
gtotind of those concessions.. For his.part, he was
satisfied the established religion .was the best system
'tif religion in the world—as such, he v:ished it should
be supported by the most efficacious. means. This,
in his idea, was liberality to the professors of other
relikiettrofer, ets— (Near, hear.)-= A departure from
this principle was the more inexctoable, when. as in
the insulator of Ireland, the majority of the inhahi-
tints were not of the established religion. If there
had-been any ground of exclusion ten Ale, it would
have been that maintained befine the p conces-
sions of 1777 and 1775. But marl—the Govern-
ment
had- then opened some of those offices so eagerly
sought, to the-Catholics—as it it were more strongly
to escite,.their discontent and resentment at withhold-
ing the remainder. For instance, in the army, what
could be more absurd than admitting a Catholic to
the rank of ColOnel, but restricting him from ever
becoming a General ? Ile might even command a
garrison—What then ? Was this not throwing in his
way a temptation to abuse the rank lie thus must
hold ? Would he n,t be emboldened to act as
-a General, perhaps, under such circumstances ?
If at Waterloo*, where the Catholic, (he felt in com-
mon with most of his grateful countrymen) had amply
contributed his talents and his blood t.) our triumph
in the he:y trial,•all the superior Officers had been
killed off, and a Catholic Colonel, highest on the list,
had assumed the command, would it have been con-
sidered a breach of duty, either by his Royal High.
ness the Commander of the Forces, or by their Lord-
ships, or by the nation at large ? (Hear, hear.) This
was one of the many absurdities connected with the
system against which he must protest. Nothing was
more dangerous than discontent. It was giving the
Catholic a retaining-fee to continue in perpetual op-
position to the wishes and operations of Government
—besides, what was worse, it was so far giving the
Catholic means to render his opposition much more ,
formidable than it could have been prior to the re-
moval of the restriction in 1777. Upon such a system
it was impossible to rest the hand or arm was thus
furnished with effective vigour, whilst the body was
palsied. Thus the words of that accurate judge of
human nature were fulfilled—
" Nuul comes•ezeo.".

This made the limitations and restrictions imposed
upon that patient and woolly class of his Majesty's
subjecti the mote distressing. The object of this mo.
non was to secure to the English Catholics the same
enlargement of privileges enjoyed by the Catholics
ofliZ•land, and still further extend the general effect
of a.system of toleration to all classes of the Catho-
lics. Would it be impolitic to repeal the test laws.
when the• Dissenters of all classes have so nobly sus-
tained the cause of the British Empire at the most
critical and trying moment of her fate ? if the expe-
diency of the restriction applied to England, it also
did to the oase• of the French Government and the
French Clergy ; fur it was a Clergy owing allegiance
and homage to the Pope. • Yet had it ever appeared
in history, that the French people anci the French
church had not supported the cause of its own inde-
pendence, and of the authority of its Kings, against
all external or spiritual' rule or dominion whatever?
It Would be necessary to be proved, that there existed
some extraordinary difference between these professors
I of the same 'religion' in two neighbouring countries.
With respect to the declaration published by the
Aahhishup of Mechlin, at Brussels, it was worthy
of observation, that by treaty' concluded in this
country, and Signed by the British Minister, our con-
.sent was 'leen to the union of the Netherlands to the
Government of Holland. If then, as he hoped none
of the Learntd Prelates would object, we did at we
world be thee by, and we felt it our duty to add to the
Protestant Government of 'Holland, which may
~.strictly be termed the strong Protestant bulwark of
this country upon the Continent, a population of Pa.
Oats, as the. Netherlands: confessedly were, and had
consented to grant them the guarantee contained iu
the declaration of the Archbishop, that no alters •
tion should be made in thi Church Establishment
in the country of the Netherlands, and that all parties
in the State should be equally eligible to all places
of trust, honour, or emolument—if, he observed, all
this had been .one with a view to strengthen our
natural Atly on the Continent, should we' be told of
1 the policy, nay, necessity, of excluding Catholics in
this country from those situations and privileges
which were the subject of this Petition ? If the prac-
tice weretood in Holland, why not unite the Irish
,and English Catholic more firmly to the State by
granting to them the long-earned weed of their pa-
tience and their desert? Many other observations he
'might have felt it his duty to have made, but for the
lateness of the hour at which he had risen. He was
happy, however, in having once more the satisfaction
of raising his voice in that House against the ennti.
nuance of a aystem of restrictions discreditable to the
nature of our Government, to the character of our
country, and to our religion—impolitic in principle,
.unjustifiable in practice, and pregnant with dangers,
aggravated by the appalling circumstances of the CA-.
lAMILOUS period in which the boon was solicited.—
( Continued a/ore/mum arid Awing.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR considered the
grand objection to granting the prayer of the Petition,
svas.in the nature of our Government, which required
the King should be Supreme Head of the Church.
Whilst .the Court of Rome challenged to itself the
right of excommueication, it arrogated to itself the
bright of deposing Kings—(llear, hear).—As to the
authority,of Mr. Lock, quoted-by a Right Re' erend
Prelate,- whom ix &mild eta honour (bishop of
Norwich) be must say, he should be sorry to enter-
tain the same opinions of the Catholics. of our day,
as Mr. Locke did of the Catbolicsot.his day—(Here.
the Lord Chancellor read tome passages from
Locke.)--fit the very- dist-aet of King William re-
quired every man who: came
.into Parliament, to
declare aiaiost TcaoastiP&P!iatice-- Wulf, Ac4")i—r
The next act to ivhiab he 'Wa' advert was that