Star.
London, England, 1821-04-17 00:00:00

-"•••:11;-.

ni.11:151: • _____

PItI E SE\ FN-PENCg.

tection for the Protestant Constitution. We were
still to have a Protestant Ring, who, although he
might appoint Roman Catholic Minister,, still had
the power of defending himself and t.ie Constitution.
To suspect any man on the ground that he was dis.
affected would be the way to make him disaffected;
and could anything be more afflicting to a Roman
Catholic of talent and enlightened mind, than to be
told, that lie never should arrive at any of those ho-
flours or distinctions which were accessible to Pro-

testants ? Such evils it was the object of this Act to
remove. He conceived that, without any additional
oath the Roman Catholics were trust-worthy, and
with that idea he conceived the second part of the
Bill altogethei unnecessary, particularly after the Ro-
man Catholics had been in the possession of political
power for twenty-eig't years. Therefore, he should
have .no objection to tie second measure being ex-
punged from the 13i11; for no fresh security was
wanted. The Roman Catholics must feel themselves
hurt by such an enactment. But it might be said,
that they had a disaffected Clergy. The very reverse
'was the case; no men could be more correct in their
moral conduct, or more distinguished for their loy-
alty than the Roman Catholic Clergy of that part of
the country from which he came. He felt the highest
respect for the feelings and opinions of those who
proposed the securities•which were contained in the
second part of this Bill. He would not, however
do the very enlightened Gentlemen who brought for-
ward this Bill in the other House, or the Noble Lords
who were prepared to support it in its present shape
in this House, the injustice to suppose that they
thought those securities indispensably necessary. He
was persuaded they concurred with, him in thinking
that there was no body of men in this empire more
respectable in their characters than the Roman Ca-
tholic Clergy, and that they felt these securities were
not wanted as securities at all, but were merely
thrown out as a tub to the whale; as a screen between
themselves and certain intolerant persons. For his
part, he would go a great way towards conciliating
the minds of those persons, but he could not sacri-
fice the characters of the Roman Catholic Clergy to
idle clamour and unfounded imputation. He was
persuaded that those who proposed these securities
were urged to do so by the argument that the Legis-
lature ought not to give anything to the Roman Ca-
tholics, without getting something from them in re-
turn. With respect to the details of the Bill, he had
a few observations to offer, which he would have de-
ferred for the Committee, if he had received any in-
timation from the Noble Earl opposife, or the Noble
and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, that it was likely
a Committee would he granted. But, as he had re-
ceived no intimation of that nature, he would now
proceed with his objections. Though he was a zea-
lous advocate for the removal of Roman Catholic
disqualification, he could not support this Bill in the
shape in which it had come up from the other House.
Indeed, he believed he could say for many of his
Noble Friends, and for the friends of this measure in
this House, that, in their opinion, modifications
might, and ought to be introduced into the Bill, so
as to do away with the most obnoxious clauses in it.
The second part of the Bill began with enacting a
compulsory oath for the Roman Catholic Clergy. He
must confess he did not like the principle of compul-
sory oaths. He did not remember any recent in.
stance of a compulsory oath, except that which was
imposed on the Clergy of France, at the beginning
of the Revolution. They were obliged to take an oath
to the Constitution, wider the pain of deportation;
but he had the satisfaction of remembering that that
oath did not emanate from an established Government.
The oath imposed by this Bill every Clergyman
would be compelled to take, under the penalty of
being punished as for a misdemeanour. He objected
to it, not only because it was a compulsory oath,
but also because, in his opinion, it was unnecessary. ,
It was rendered unnecessary by the reference which
was made to another tribunal, in order to ascertain
the loyalty of the Dean or Bishop elect. If they be-
lieved the Clergyman on his taking the compulsory
oath, there was no necessity for the tribunal ; or if
they preserved the tribunal, where was the necessity
of the oath? He trusted, therefore, that their Lord-
ships would have no objection to leave out this oath
altogether. With respect to the two Commissions
which the Bill erected in Ireland, and here, at the
seat of Government, he would propose that they
should be incorporated into one ; that there might
be only one Commission, which should be attached
to the Government here. Indeed he was convinced
that this Commission, whose business was to inspect
all Rescripts and other documents from Rome, would
have very little to do. He was persuaded that no
improper recommendation would ever come in any
Rescript from the Pope, or his Council, to these coun-
tries, and that, in truth, it would seldom have occa-
sion to exercise its powers. The present Secretary
for Ireland was a Gentleman, than whom a more
upright individual did not exist—(Hear, hear).—No
man could be placed in such a situation who was
less liable to be carried away by improper motives.
But a Gentleman might succeed him who would be
acted upon by feelings quite of a different nature,
and who would make his connexion with the affairs
of the Roman Catholic Clergy a means of patronage.
For this reason he objected to the two Commissions.
There was also another part of the Bill to which he
objected, he meant the enrolment on the Records of
the Court of Chancery of the name of any Dean or
Bishop elect, whose nomination might be rejected by.
the King. The mere rejection was disagreeable
enough, one would imagine, without the addition of
an insult, proclaimed from age to age, by its being
recorded iu the Court of Chancery. This was making
out the rejected individual as a black sheep, or as a
person placed in the pillory—there to remain from
generation to generation, as one known to be disaf.
fected to the Government. Instead of this, he would
propose that the names should be inserted in the
Minutes of the Board to he established. At present,
it was proposed that all documents should pass fro.*