Star.
London, England, 1821-03-20 00:00:00

THE CURRENCY.

Mr. BARING said, he held in his hand a Petition
respecting the Currency, signed by a number of very
respectable merchants of Liverpool. Though not
entirely concurring himself in the views they enter-
tained on the subject, yet-he thought that the Peti-
tion was worthy the attention of the House. It ex-
pressed a wish that a currency should be established,
which should to a certain degree correspond in value
with that upon which they had formed engagements
previously to the period when an alteration took
place, in order that they might be enabled to meet
those engagements. It also prayed that payments in
bullion should be made, upon whatever standard the
House in its wisdom should consider most expedient.
Mr. ELLICE "said, he had never yet seen any Pe-
tition in which all the evils arising from the Paper
System were more clearly shewn, than in that now
before the House.
Mr. BIRCH. did not agree in the opinions ad-
vanced by the Petitioners, but he thought that the
House ought to pay every attention to the Petition,
as the pasties were highly respectable.—The Petition
was read, and ordered to lie on the table.

• CATHOLIC DILL.

Mr. PLUNKETT, in calling the attention of the
House to the relief of the Roman Catholics, did not
rise upon the present occasion to create any discus-
sion with respect to the proposition which he had to
submit. Since the Bill had been read a second time,
he had adopted various suggestions, and he felt it
his duty to pay the greatest possible attention to any
alterations which might be deemed either necessary
or advantageous. Certain new clauses had been sug-
gested, and he should now propose that the House
resolve itself into a Committee, with the view to these
clauses being formally inserted. He wished that the
discussion should be postponed till after the Report
was placed in the hands of Members, and the Bill
-recommitted. The clauses did not make the slightest
alteration either in the principle of the Bill or in its
details ; nor would any great time be necessary to
give them due consideration. It had been stated to
him by a Right Honourable Gentleman opposite, that
it would be better to have the explanation with re-
spect to the supremacy of the Pope incorporated in the
oath which the Roman Catholic was to tale, rather
than it should remain distinct from it; and he (Mr.
Plunkett) was willing to acquiesce in the suggestion.
The Right Hon. Gentleman then moved, 16 That the

House do now resolve itself into a Committee on the
Roman Catholic Disabilities Removal Bill."
Sir JOHN NICHOL had no objection to agree
to the proposition of .the Right Hein. Gentleman, if
it was intended to go no further than the length he
had represented. He certainly thought that it would
be much better to see the Bill -in a detailed shape;
but he wished to know from the Right Honourable
Gentleman; at what time he intended it should be re.
committed ? The subject was one of peculiar
itn-
portance, and ample time ought to be allowed for
considering it maturely. As the House had divided
on the principle of the Bill, no interruption ought to
be thrown in tits way of the Committee ; but as the.
question involved matters of more importance to
the Constitution than any which had been brought
forward since the Restoration, or at least since the
Revolution, ample time ought to be given for look-
ing at it in all its bearings. It was extremely im-
portant, as it went to alter the character of the Con-
stitution; he would say of the Constitution as esta-
blished by law, for he knew of no other; he had no
conception of a Constitution in the abstract—a Con-
stitution founded on the Rights of Man or onlJni-
versa' Suffrage—( Hear, hear).—The British Con-
stitution excluded Roman Catholics from political
power, but the present Bill placed every political
office within their reach, making only two excep-
tions. There was another consideration which was
to be duly regarded. A change of so much moment
ought to be made with satisfaction to all parties, and
a large portion of the Protestant communion ought
to be reconciled to it. These were two very essen-
tial points. He did not see that the Bill ought to be
hurried into a Committee before the Easter recess—
(Hear, hear from the Opposition Benches).--It was
by no means his wish to excite angry feelings with
respect to the question, nor did he feel anything
like asperity towards those who supported it ; but
he thought that the House ought to see its way
clearly before it went into the Committee. In his
opinion, if it stood over for another Session, it
would be better—( LoAd cries of Wear, hear, filial
the Opposition) ; at all events, a convenient time
ought to be allowed.
Air. PLUNKETT felt assured that the House
would indulge him while he said a few words in
reply to what had fallen from the lion. and Learned
Gentleman opposite. The only question that now
remained to be considered was, as to the time when
the Committee should take-place ? He silts not, on
the present occasion, to be drawn into the discussion
of au important question which had nothing what-
ever to do with the Bill—a question as to the nature.
of our Constitution, whether it was one of mere law,
or whether it involved principles not sanctioned by
legal enactments. He might possibly differ with the
lion. and Learned Member upon this subject, for he
held that the Constitution was not one of mere law,
but involved in it principles quite distinct from written
authority. If we had only a paper Constitution, lie
'did not know that it would be so valuable as that
which we now possessed, nor would Roman Catho-
lics be so anxious as they now were to participate in
all its advantages—(lkar, hear).—The Hon. and
Learned Member first had said, that no interruption
ought to be thrown in the way of the Committee,
yet he first proposed a delay till after the Ester
recess, 'and then till the next Session—(Laughtei).—
Now, this was very singular, considering the decisions
which the House had already come to. An amend-
' ment for reading the Bill that day six months had
been negatived by the House, yet the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman would now suggest an amend-
ment for reading the Bill this day twelve months—
( Hear, and a laugh).—He would not follow the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman in the extensive field
of argument which he had opened ; it would be un-
seemly in him to do so on the present occasion.—
Nothing was farther from his wish than to take the
country by surprise; but surely he could not be ac-
cused of any such intention, when the period was
considered since the question was first brought for-
ward—(Hear).—No point could possibly arise that
bad not already been amply discussed. He should
propose Wednesday as the most convenient day for
the Bill to be recommitted. The only question now
was, as to whether the explanation of supremacy
should be independent of, or incorporated with the
oath ? This was the chief point to be discussed. He
was better pleased to go into the discussion at once,
than to lose any more time. There was no period
of personal accommodation which he would not wil-
lingly grant to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman,
but it would be recollected that there were others
whose time was not to be trifled with. Many iVlem.
hers had remained in town at great inconvenience to
themselves, for no other reason than to give their
votes upon this most important question.
Sir WILLIAM SCOTT could not agree to Wed-
nesday. The time was much too short to allow of
sufficient delibetation upon a question so momentous.
The Right Honourable Gentleman talked of Mem-
bers teluititting in town at great inconvenience; but
would the Right Honourable Gentleman consider
that there were, in that House, Members who had
professional and judicial engagements to attend to,
and that the difference of a day or two to these was
of considerable importance ? He hoped he should
not be considered as going too far, if he named Mon-
day next, or perhaps Weduesdarsennight—(Hear).
Sir JOHN NEWPORT said, that the alterations
which his Right. Honourable Friend had proposed
did not affect the principle of the Bill; they merely.
concerned its detail, and had grown out of the de-
bate of a former night. They introduced no new
matter, and the House was as well prepared to die!
cuss them now as it would be at any future period.
.He hoped, therefore, that his Right Honourable
Friend would not postpone the Bill beyond Wednes-
'day—(Hear,hear).
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE said, he was aware that
there was already very great agitaticin in the coun-
try upon this question--(Lau Titer)—and that he was
satisfied that in a short time it would be still greater
(Continued laughter). Since it was a matter of cour-
tesylhat they should consent now to the Speaker's
leaving the Chair, he thought he was entitled, as a
matter of courtesy also, to ask the Right Honoilr-
able and Learned Gentleman for a little further de-
lay ; that courtesy was, he thought, due from the
Right Honourable Gentleman: The questiop was
one of the greatest. importance. The division of the
other night 'hewed that at least the opinions of this
great Assembly were nearly equally divided upon it,
and this reason alone would, he hoped, operate upon.

thellight Honourable Gentleman to allow a delay at
least to Monday.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER con-'
ceived the time beiwitu this and Wednesday too
short, and he hoped the Right Honourable Gentle-
man would concur in the suggestion of ;his Right
Honourable and Lealeed Friend near him., and fix
Monday for the recommitment of the Bill—(l No,
no, Friday,' front several Members).
Mr. HUTCHINSON considered the delay to Wed-
nesday as quite sufficient. The Honourable Mem-
ber for Somersetshire had talked of difference of opi-
nion and agitation existing in the public mind on this
subject. He knew of no such agitation, and he was
far from wishing to insinuate that the Honourable
'Member had any wish to create any such agitation.,
Delay, however, could have no other effect than to
produce it. Ile (Mr. Hutchinson) thought no delay
should take place in the discussion of this question.
. Mr. PEEL hoped the Honourable Gentleman who
spoke last would see that there was no wish, in the
discussion of this question, on the part of its 0pp0...
nents, to take advantage f any weapon except fair
discussion. He, for one, disclaimed any wish to take
advantage of any opinion out of, doors; but he was
persuaded the delay now asked would serve the cause
of the Bill itself. The Right Honourable Baronet
.(Sir John Newport) had said this proposition was only
for delay ; but he would put it to the Right Honour-
able Baronet, whether the delay asked was too much,
when it was considered that the object of the new
clauses was to decide how far the Pope was to have
a share in the allegiance of the Roman Catholics?
And would any one say that was not a question de-,
serving the utmost consideration? He asked for no
unnecessary delay ; but lie would ask, whether a de-
lay of four days, after the reprinting a Bill, going
to alter the oath of allegiance, was too great a delay?
Dr. PHILLIMOIIIfwas against the delay beyond
Wednesday.. If any agitation existed in the country
on this subject, as Legislators, it was their duty not
to delay the progress of the measure, but to dispose
of it as soon as possible. He denied that any mate-
rial alteration was contemplikted by the new clauses
on the contrary, their substance had been discussed
over and over again. Ile was desirous not to delay
beyond Thursday.
Mr. PEEL said, some mistake seemed to exist as
to the operation of this Bill. The Ilon. MemlAt
.ippeaxed to think this Bill was to put the Catholic
iit the same situation as the Dissenter, and make him

liable to the operation of the Annual lndemriaty Bill;
buk,. in fact, as he understood it, .the Bill was to re-
lease the Catholic from the operation of that Act,
arid place him in the same situation as a Member of
"the Church of England.
Mr. M'ETHERELL was in favour of delay be-

yond Thursday.
Mr. TIERNEY thought delay heyopd Wednes-
day unnecessary. If delay was granted to Friday, as
the discussion' would probably occupy two nights,
that wouhi carry it over to Monday. Ile could not
consent to any unnecessary delay; he gave the Gen-
tlemen opposite credit for their assertions that they
did not desireto excite agitation, but the'delaj of the
Bill could only have that effect, as they had seen, on.
more than one occasion, that parties out of the House
might be found who had the power to agitate the
public mind at, any, time. He considered delay be-
yond Wednesday as uncalled for. ,
Lord CASTLEREAGH was perfectly of opi-
nion that there was nothing to call for delay beyond
Wednesday ; but as he would be sorry to excite ani-
mosity against the measure, he would not press for
that day; Thursday had been mentioned, but if it
would not be unparliamentary, he would allude to
there being a Drawing-room on that day—(t fear,
hear).—Perhaps it would be more regular to say that
Something would occur on that day in another place,
which might render it difficult to make a 'House.—
Monday was out of the question; but, under all the
circumstances, he' -would say Friday should be the
day(liear, hear).
PHILLIMORE, in explanation, said he con-'
sidered this *Bill would only place the Catholics in
the same state us the Dissenters.
Mr. C. WYNN thought there would be no danger
of making a House on Thursday, and therefore was
in favour of that day.
Mr. CROKEIt said, he. had on a former evening
given notice of his ir.tention, on the Bill going into a
Committee, to pmpose a provision for the Catholic
Clergy ; but as the Bill was now only to be commit-
ted, pro, forma,. he should delay bringing forward his
proposition till the Bill was recommitted. He eon=
sideied the subject to which he had alluded, how-
ever, as one of the most paramount importance, and
he would now, with the permission of the House,
propose his Resolution, and have it printed, that it
might be in the hands of Members.
Mr. COURTENAY was sorry to hear the decla-
ration of his Hon. Friend's intention to propose so
important a question as that to which he had alluded,
as it might endanger the Bill.
Mr. CROKER had no intention to propose any
thing to the House, except that they'should recognize
a certain principle. He was persuaded, that, with-
out some such measure, the Bill would not be satis-
factory eitber to Protestants or Catholics. He
thought they should not legislate to give privileges
to the Catholic Laity, without making some provi-
sion for the Clergy.—The Bill was then committed.
The House having resumed,
Mr. PLUNKETT said, that he had every wish to
accommodate his Right Hon. Friend the Member for
Oxford ; but Is the sense of the House seemed to lean
the other way, he must name Thursday.
Mr. GOULBURN had entertained no doubt that
Friday would have been fixed; if it should not, he
must take the sense of the House.
-Mr. PLUNKETT then named Friday for the re-
committal of the Bill.
Mr. CROYER fixed the same day for his motion.
PETITION OF THE REV. RICHARD HAYES.

Sir GEORGE HILL said, that the Hon. Member

for Aberdeen had; a few nights since, presented a
Petition signed by a Roman Catholis Clergyihan' of
the name of Richard Hayes, against the Bill now be-
fore the House for the Emancipation of the Roman
Catholics.- He wished to know why it was that the
Hon. Gentleman did not at the same time move that
the Petition should Ix printed ?
. Sir JOHN NEWPORT said thattheßouse would ,
recollect, certainly many of them Were aware, that
the person who signed the Petitioti id question,
Raman Catholic Clergyman himself, had yet acted

so improper and so reprehensible a part, as to havi
provoked the reprobation of his Holiness the Pope__
(Hear, bear).—when, therefore, he came lorwmd to
throw an impediment in the way of this salutary
measure, the House would consider who he w.
the# would not forget that he was a person repro,
bated by the Head of his Church. Was it.to the oh.
jections of such a person that the R,ght Honourame
Baronet (Sir George Hill) attached any value? if
so, the House, he (Sir John Newpott) was al%
would not follow his example. Considering the ex_
alted station of the Pope—considering his age—tbe
mild virtues of his character, one would have sup.
posed that Pius VIL would have been protectedfroic
insult, at least from a Clergyman of the Church it
Rome. To such an extent, however, did the cAduet
of Mi. Hayes go, that he called down upon his heal
Lie heaviest marks of the Pope's reprobation, with
those marks upon him, he modestly came home the
Legislature to state his objections against a closure
which had for its object the tranquillity and the free;
dom of Ireland—the strength, and union, and glory
of the whole Empire.
Mr. HUME said, that he had presented the pci,,
.tion, though he declared that he differed in opinion
with the Petitioner, and would not support the pray
of his Petition.—The motion, that the Petition bt
printed, was then agreed to.