Star.
London, England, 1821-03-24 00:00:00

veiled in the reigns of George I. and 11. Bat nob,
with very few exceptions, all offices were to be laid
open to the Catholics. It had been said, that•not-
withstanding the positive enactments," there was
something paramount to all those in the spirit of the
Constitution, as it a?peated in Magill Charts, and in
the Statutes that had been enacted in the same spirit.
By the present Bill there could be no alliance be-
tween Church and State..

Mr. C. GRAN(' stated, the same alarm had been
rung when the former concessions had been made to
the Catholics. If there were any weight in the argu-
ments of the Right Honourable Gentleman they
would go to condemn all the concessions made to
the Catholics. It gave him pain to hear the Revolu-
tion identified with the laws against the Catholics,
and what was merely accidental, regarded as perma-
nent and. lasting. But in Ireland, the Revolution
that gave freedom to Great Britain, had introduced
the government of the sword, and had been followed
by the capitulation of Limerick. Were those conse-
' quences of the Revolution to be held up to imitation?
But could the time of the Revolution be one of calm
discussion? The laws- now declared to be perpe-
tual, had been passed by a burst of tumultuous ac-
clama.ion in a period of political enthusiasm. Our
most enlightened Prelates, the Jeweils, the Taylors,
and Stillingfleets, sat side by side with Catholics in
the House of Lords, and never deemed the exclusion
of the Catholics from the House of Commons.to be
the palladium of the Constitution. When a Noble
Lord presented a Petition from the only four survi-
vors of the noble families that had signed Magna
Charta, claiming seats in the Parliament of that
country whose freedom their. ancestors had secured,
could it have been supposed that the shade of King
John would have been so avenged ?—(Loud cheers);
With great deference to the Right Hon. Gentleman
(Sir W. Scott), the present Oath of Supremacy was
exactly of the same nature with the former, with an
additional explanation. The present Oath could not
refer to the pure spiritual authority of the Pope, for
it•was obvious that the Pope had, and must exercise
a certain degree of spiritual dominion, and that had
been recognized in the establishment of the College
of Maynooth ; but it referred to that mixed authority,
civil and spiritual, which it was the object of the
Oath to prevent being exercised on the part of the
Pope. The Ist of Elizabeth had enacted the laws
of Henry VIII. which had been repealed by Philip
and ;Mary; but these Acts never referred to the purely
spiritual power of the Pope, but to that species of
lauthority that referred to a temporal process. The
Right Hon. Gentleman then went on to prove, from
the Reformatio Legurn, that in the time of Edward VI.
the Acts had no reference except to the ancient juris-
diction of the Crown, which had no connexion with a
power merely spiritual. To that effect Lord Coke
had stated, that the Act of Elizabeth had been whay
declaratory, and gave the Crown no new authority.
To the same purpose, Sir M. Hale had stated the
Oath of Supremacy to be a part of the Oath of Alle-
giance, and a part of the ancient power of the Crown.
It was not by an exercise of acumen and ingenuity
that the peace of the country was to be secured. The
question was, on what terms the connexion of Great
Britain and Ireland was in future to be maintained—
whether it was to be that concordia discordo, which
had hitherto obtained ; or whether the two countries
were to be united indissolubly in the bends of amity
and friendship? The cause of the present state of
Ireland was to be ascribed to a system of exclusion
in commerce, agriculture, and religion. In the two
former, the restrictions had been in a great measure
removed ; And, he trusted, that in the most important
of all they could not be retained. He spoke for the
empire at large...4or Protestant as well as Catholic.
What would be said of a distant State that should
act in the manner that Britain had done to Ireland?

It would be said, that they had not the advantages
of the British Constitution. He hoped that in the
course of a single Session the obstructions that had
cri
continued for a series of centuries would be remove
—(Loud and continued applause).
Mr. BROWNLOW opposed the Bill in ;do, and
deemed the proposed securities wholly inadequate.
The Bill would not become law, after having received
the assent of the three branches of the Legislature ;
but the consent of a fourth Power.-the Catholics—
must be obtained, else the Act would become a dead
letter. He believed that the Roman Catholics were
desirous of regaining their ancient Church Establish-
ment ; and to have seats in that House, would be a
step towards the attainment of their object.
Mr. WETHERELL said, he was sorry that he
was obliged to follow the same line of opposition to
this measure which he hod felt it his duty to take
on a former occasion when it was proposed. The
same difficulties which he then felt, still existed.—
With respect to the Bill then before them, it asserted
in the preamble that which, in his humble under-
standing, was unfounded in fact, and an outrage
upon historical truth. It stated that there was a time
in the history of this country, when the. Catholics
Were able to take the Oath of Supremacy according
to the interpretation annexed to it by Queen Eliza-
beth, by which meaning to demonstrate that it was
the object of the Bill to restore a part of the Consti-
tution, and not to add anything new to it. He how-
ever denied that there ever was a time when the
Catholics could take this oath, and he challenged
any of the supporters of the Bill to prove the truth
of their assertion in the preamble.—Dir J. MACKIN-
TOSH—I challenge the. Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man, in return, to point out in the preamble of the
Bill the allegation he speaks of]—(Cries of "Order!")
fie did not mean to ovei state the question ; if he
should do so, be was open to the castigation of any li
Hon. Member in the House. He understOod the pre-
amble of the Bill to declare what he had said it did.
On the Accession of Queen Elisabeth, some persons
gave out certain idle tales, that she claimed the Su.
premacy in a different manner than was intended by
law, or was ever claimed before, in consequence of
which a pamphlet was put forth, which the Honour-
able and Lein ned Member for Knareshorough (Sir J.
Mackintosh) must surely have seen. It was styled,
""In Admonition to Simple Men"—(A laugh).—ln
this production, it was stated she only claimed the
same Supremacy as her Royal Father exerted, and
Edward the Sixth. There was, therefore, no new
interpretation given on that occasion to this oath by
which the Catholic could more easily take it ; and he
hoped lionoui able Members would not- allow them-
selves to be duped by this false representation—
(lleer, hear, Itear).—lle objected tv the me:4u: e, on

recount of its political and general consequences.' pass; or, if it did not, that they who could prevent
Supposing a Catholic Premier to be put in office, its success would tell the House by what process,
they must put to him a new oath of office, if he should short of changing the religion and sentiments of a
be appointed to any Catholic livings. It was neces- ; whole community, they hoped to obtain that concord
sary to establish a new oath of office before they and settlement which this Bill was calculated to
could get rid of this obnoxious esclusioe of the Ca- • effects and when the poriad would arrive, at which
tholic. Some said that the Catholic Officers were the long and hitter probation, the protracted and un-
very hardly dealt with when they dio not give them, I merited suffei ings of the Irish nation, were to be ter-
after they had lost an arm or a leg in the service, minated—(Henr, hear).
some command of the Leeward or Windward Islands; Mt. PEEL said he should wholly confine himself
but if he had this command imposed upon him, he to observations on the clause now under consider-
must take oaths which were contrary to his faith. The atiou. lie would flow leave cut objections to the
object of this Bill was, not to admit Catholics to ex- principle of the Bill, and oppose the clause only,
isting offices ; but they were creating new offices, which might he rejected without at all affecting the
which the Catholics might hold. Ile had no doubt principle of the Bill. The great doubt he had was
that the present Movers of this Bill only wished to not as to how this clause would act with regard to
•bind the present race of men—but who was to bind the Catholic ; but whether it might not, at some
posterity? He was afraid that, in after times, the opi- future period, operate as an oath of exclusion to the
nions and the sentiments of the Gentlemen who now conscientious Protestant. The Protestant now took
supported Catholic Emancipation would not be an oath denying the influence of any foreign Powerl
looked at in the same way by future Catholics. Mr. Now this oath recognized a direct authority on the
Siuney, Mr. Hobbes, and even Mr. Locke, have all part of the Pope. For if the Protestant should nos
written on Government, yet all of them have ex- pass a Bill acknowledging the power of the Pope to
eluded Catholics from the situation of Members of interfere in the appointment of Biahope, and to send
Parliament, and from responsible situations in the his Bull into,this country, could a conscientious Pro-
Government. If they could not perceive the dif testant afterwards take an oath atating that the Pope
ference between those who could see the various spe- had no jurisdiction in th s ? He contended
cies of beasts, birds, and fishes, and define them well, that, up to this time, we had always been careful to
he could. But he could not see that a Papist should prevent the Pope having any power in this country,
be admitted to the first Offices of the State, because except spiritual ; and iivsthe Act passed in 1774, to
he was a man of genius and general knowledge. In permit the free exercise of the Catholic Religion, in
1768 or 1772 the Parliament of Paris made it High Canada, especial care was taken to preserve the
Treason to communicate with the See of Rome. But supreme authority of the King, and he contended,
stow we were about to throw away the very first if the present oath was adopted, an alteration would
principle of the British Constitution. This Bill was be necessary in the Oath of Supremacy taken by •
only an elementary principle, which was to be fol- the Protestant.
lowed up by a great many others which would trench Lord CASTLEREAG II defended the proposed al-
upon the Constitution of the land. teration in the Oath of Supremacy. He contended,
Sir J. MACKINTOSH said, that the clause now there could be no mental evasion or reservation on the
before the House, did not admit Catholics exclusively part of the Catholics, in taking the proposed oath ;
to the benefits of the Constitution. But the rejection but the possibility of his doing so might be entirely
of this clause would bar the door to all conciliation; done away, by moving to insert these words in the
because it would prevent all Catholics from anything Oath. With respect to the course adopted in Canada,-
like a participation in the civil immunities of the he would say, that the British Government had made
State. Mr. Hobbes had been quoted by his Hon. a provision there which they knew full well would be
and Learned Friend, as an enemy to Catholic Eman- evaded; but they had done this, because they could
cipation ; but-did not his Hon. and Learned Friend not depart from their own bad practice. He be-
know that Mr. Hobbes was a. most systematic phi- lieved he should not be guilty of improperly dis-
losopher in supporting the King's Supremacy in all closing secrets, if he said that the provisions then
matters connected with the affairs of the Church ? made had been evaded; that lately there had been
The whole of the Bills, as to Catholics in Ireland negotiations with the Pope for the institution of ano-
and in England, were a monstrous jumble of incon- ther Bishoprick in Canada, and even an Archbishop.
sistencies ; for, in England, the Catholics could hold Government knew of this, but had shut their eyes
certain offices, while in Ireland they could hold none.- to it. And the only question now was, whether
The only question was, whether the Oath proposed these things should be legalized, and done openly
to be administered to Catholics was such as would be and fairly, or whether irshould be done in future as
sufficient security to a Protestant King and a Protest- it always had been, and always would be done, il-
ant Establidiment.. The laws of the land could not legally; the Authorities of the country knowing the
be affected by the Catholici, for they gave every se- law was evaded, but shutting their eyes against it?
curity to all the inhabitants of the land, be their opi- Now, he could see the advantage which would re-
nions what they may. suit from putting an end to this practice, and allow.
Mr. GOULBURN did not think it necessary to ing the Pope's open interference on this subject. At
enter into the reasons at length, which • made him present, the See of Rome supposed its briefs were not
consider this a very dangerous and improper Bill to known by, or submitted to the view of Government;
be passed. Upon a former occasion, an iron. and and, therefore, less caution was used as to the indivi-
Learned Gentleman had thought fit, in moving this duals to whom those briefs were sent. But if the case
question, to require from the Catholic and Protestant, was regulated bylaw, and all these things came under
the same oath of allegiance and supremacy. But, by the view of Government, the Pope would be more cau-
the present Bill, they did not call on the Catholic but tious to whom these indulgences were sent. As to the
on the Protestant for (laths of supremacy, at the time Oath of Supremacy, as it now stood, he thought the
when they had no doubt as to his affection for the Catholics might conscientiously take it; but if they
present Constitution, and the laws of the land. had conscientious scruples, he thought they should
Dr. PHILLIMORE observedoothe Honourable be attended to. The Noble Lord concluded by de-
Member opposite had said the oath proposed was not daring his conviction that to pass this Bill would be
so obligatory as the original oath. He was at issue productive °kite greatest benefit to the State—(He
with the Honourable Member on this point. He sat down amidst loud cheers from the Opposition).
contended that the obligation in the proposed oath Sir JOHN NEWPORT rose to reply, amidst loud
was to the full as binding as the present oath of cries of « Question!" and the gallery was cleared for
supremacy was. The Honourable Member pro- a division s
ceeded to compare the two oaths, and from that corn- For the Clause - - - -
patison to argue in support of his assertion. The • Against it •- - - - Yl6
oath of allegiance the Catholic was always ready to majority in favourof the Catholics —t4
During the exclusion of strangers, Mr. BA NKES gave
notice, that in a future stage cf the Bill he .Lcould move the I take, but they had doubts of the effect of the oath of
in-
supremacy as now worded; and, therefore, they now troduction of a Clause, excluding Catholics from Seats hi
liament.—Adjourned at Two &Clock, till to-morrow.
Par-
desired to have it somewhat altetedlh form, though
not in substance. The Honourable Member then
quoted the opinion of Bishop. Burnett as to the oath
established by Queen Elizabeth ; namely, that Eliza-
beth allowed the Catholics to explain the ser,se in
which they swore; and this indulgence the Bishop
,said had the most beneficial effect in reconciling the
Catholics to her reign and authority. Ile concluded
by giving his firm support to the Bill.
11r. BEECHER believed that there needed not the
aid of any observation from him to. strew the policy
and expediency of the measure before the House. It
might appear strange, looking to the arguments
which had been addressed to the House, and to the
authority by whom those arguments had been em-
ployed, that any doubt should remain upon the ques-
tion; but he (Mr. Beecher) had not now to learn, that
men brought up in a particular system—the advan-
tages of that system, by experience, being known to
them—were slow to exchange it for some novel
theory, the merits of which must at all events be pro-
blematical. England, however, did not now stand
alone; and she was not therefore entitled to consult
exclusively her own convenience. England was con-
nected with a country in which Catholicism certainly
was not upon the decline; and in which as certainly
the existing system could not be called a beneficial
one. That system could scarcely be held beyond im-
provement, under which a vast community laboured
under -the most galling privations—under which an
individual might almost be left in doubt whether his
exclusion arose from his being a Catholic or an Irish-
man. It was but justice in England to promote the
advantage of Ireland, and to assimilate the state of
that country as much as possible to her own.—
It was hard to withhold from that suffering country
the Constitution which had made England what she
was. In addressing a Committee of the house of
Commons, he (Mr. Beecher) should not be called
upon to detail the monstrous, the aggravated hard-1
ships which the operation of the existing laws imposed
upon the subjects of Ireland. If necessary, he could
do so; but he was addressing those who knew and'
valued the British Constitution, and who would hold
the privation of a blessing as tantamount to the
fiction of a punishment. He hoped the house wi old
recollect, that since tile last time this great question
underwent a discussion, the conduct of the Roman
Catholics had been most exemplary ; :toad th.it they
had thus made good all the predictions which the
advocates of their cause had advanced in their sup-
port. He trusted most sincerely that this 13i11 would

Beare or F,..wot.asin.—At a Meeting of a General Court of Pro.
prietors on Thursday, to declare a dividend, severs! Proprietors
rose at the same time, to enquire respecting the proceedings of the
Commission fur the better prevention of Bank-note Forgeries ?
The Crasintatt begged pardon for speaking while the Gentle-
men were addressing him • but said, that fie was about to make
a communication to the dkurt which had some relation to the
interrogatories then putting. lie begged to state, that a Bill
was now before Parliament to alter the 59th of the late King.
The principal object of the alteration was this:—The Bank, in
consequence chiefly of the unforeseen diffliulties and consequent
delays which had arisen in the proceedings under the Commis..
sion for the better prevention of Forgery, had thought it right
ro apply to Government to bring in a Bill which would enable
them, on the Ist of May, in the present year, to exchange any
amount of their 41 notes which they thought proper, for. the
gold coin of the realm. This, as the Act of the 59th of the late
King stood, they were only, empowered•to do on the Ist of May,
1822. But it was their wish, principally for the reason he had
osentioned, to have this optional power on the Ist of May next.
Mr. STUCKEY wished to know whether it was probable the
new plan of Bank-note which the Commissioners were engaged
In considering, would be completed by the time the new Act
was likely to come into operation? If it were then completed,
he should think the issue of Sovereigns on the Ist of May next
rather more unadvisable than otherwise—(id cry e No):
The Costamati said, the Court of Directors were as anxious
as any body of men could possibly be to have the great object in
which the Commissioners were engaged consummated—(;Trait)
—and they earnestly hoped that, through the labours of the
Commissioners, some plan of note would ultimately be di v'sed
which might render imitation erseniely difficult. The Coroi-
miuiontirs had to encounter great difficulties in the progress of
their labours; and they were busily ettgazd in endeavouring te
surmount them. Ile wished to avoid speakirg too strongly';
but he hoped a plan would be devised which would render the
forgery of Bank-notes generally through the country a task a
great difficulty. In consequence of the unforeseen difficulties
which at present arose, the Directors thought We alteration is
the former Act would be perhaps the best nears of acting in
the present emergency.
Mr. Svreece said, that the country bankcts (or many of them)
were engaged in adopting Mr W. Congreve's r,att, which be
thought would be productive vi very salutary advantages to the
Public. It the improvt mem were mid:: on the Ist of May in
the new Bank-note by the Commicioners, in b:s cpiniva, an
issue of sovereigns would be very inexpedient—(Cry if No, AO).
Mr. Faitaiam--" *Ve arc nut, I presume, to uuderstand from
you, Mr. Chairman, that the Directors have relinquished the
idea, that the Commissior.era may yet succeed is, a plan for a ,
considerable improvement of the Bank-notes?"
The CHAIRMAN replied, " Most certainly not"—(Neer, hear) •
—and in the meantime they hoped to dinnaith the evil of for-
geries, by the course he had already explained—(i ar, hear).
Mr. Pave, (of Bath) wished to know whether it was regular
for him to ask what expense lutd been already incurred by the
Commissioners in proceeding with their plaza? lie had heat ii
such a sum as t 660,000 stained: of course he could only sperm
from rumour.

The CHAIRMAN said, that was not the place to enter into the
particulars of the expense ; but he could assure the Honourable
Proprietor the whole amount incurred was nothing like the nun
near it in any shape--(1/aar, hear).

be gad