Star.
London, England, 1811-06-01 00:00:00

gereau, Soult, and even Bonaparte himself, and drive
the whole world, before' them. But at present the
Irish were kept in a state of bondage by an odious
system of bigotry and intolerance : and if that was
ct nenued, the country Would be lost to us.
Lord JOCELYN expressed his apprehension that
Catholic Emancipation would not produce the effects
expecte,' by the Gentlemen opposite. He attributed
the calamities of Ireland principally to the number of
its ebsent• es, which,. he contended, was not effected
:newly by Lie Union ; as previous to that period the
enestion of a tax upon absentees was discussed in the
fir.v.! of Commons of Ireland, a circumstance which
rreved that the evil had long been felt. As to. the
propriety of granting the measure at present, he felt
it se absolutely necessary that a Veto should be ad-
mitted, that until he. saw a petition founded on that
admission, he should feel it his duty to resist any mo-
tion to such an effect.
Mr. BANK.ES reminded the Noble Lord of the
place .n which he stood, when he denied that the
Uilion was the cause of the absentees. Whatever the
Lumber ef the Catholics were, whether great °email,
if their claims were just they should be acceded to ;
if unfust, no consideration of numbers should influence
the House to grant them. He affirmed that the Ca-
tholics of Ireland enjoyed complete toleration, and
dwelt upon the necessity that existed of observing the
distinction between full toleration and political power.
Though favourable to their claims, he was fearful of
remote consequences, unless such securities were given
as the country would look to with confidence.
Mr. TIGHE maietaMed, that unless the State
could Thew that the disabilities were necessary when
first proposed, it was unjust to continue them. He
dwelt for vane time on the violation of the capitula-
tion of Limerick, and warned the House bow they
would check the recruitieg in Ireland by a perseve-
rance in the present system.
Mr. CHARLES ADAMS said, the question was,
whether we should have a Protestant Established
Religion or not ? He would wish to tolerate the Ca-
tholics, as well as every other sect ; but he would
only tolerate them-e-he would not give them political
power.
Mr. PONSONBY mid, the Right Honourable
Doctor opposite had alluded to the mention which
was made in a pamphlet of Lord Grenville and
himself (Mr. Ponsonby). He-should only say with
respect to himself, thaf if the whole vof the
Catholics were to rise up against him, stilg he should
support their claims, and that because he saw those
c' lens were necessary, not only to the tranquillity and
happiness of Ireland, but of England too. It bad been
objected that the Established Church would be sub-
vetted ; but he thought that those who advanced this
argument should slaw in what manner that purpose
was likely to be accomplished, supposing it to exist.
It was slot by force, for that could as well be applied
before, as after the measure ; nor was it by secret inn
fluence, for the Minister himself, if he harboured !uch
an intention, would not be able to accomplish
With.respeet to that assertion of the Learned Doctor,l
that the Catholics would Weak their oaths, be (Mr. '
Ponsonby) would be ashamed to briug the charge
against any body of men—and be would answer it in
tin; instance by saying, that the Catholics of Ireland
would be as far from adopting such a principle as the
Protestants of England— (Hear, gene.)
Mr. W. SMYTH spoke in favour of the motion,
and contended, that every man had a right to worship
GOD in his own way. There was no danger from the
toleration of religions, but from the ccntrary there
was every danger.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said, it was not upon the ground that the Catholics
of Ireland were more rebellious subjects than any
other that he would resist the motion, but upon the
yround that the Church Establishment should be
maintained in the whole kingdom, and not endan-
gered in any part of it. It had been asked how this
evil could happen, whether by force or by influence ?
he would say that it might happen in consequence of
the course in which the Hon. Gentlemen, on the other
side, were proceeding .when they sat in the situation
which he and his colleagues at present tilled, by gran-
ting gradually until all was given away. But it had
been said, that it was a matter of right, and, therefore,
should be subject to no conditiens. Yet it be rightly
understood she Right Hon. Gentleman who made
lise of such an argument, he had admitted once that
it should only he granted upon condition, and that
condition was the Veto. •
Mr.WHITBREAD made along speech in favour
of the claim of the Catholics. The Hon. Gentleman
enforced the arguments which had been so ably and
elegantly brought forward by the Right lion. Mover,
and took occasion to comment on the. conduct of the
Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer. •
This called up Mr. STEPHEN amidst a very
loud and general call fnr Question, which prevented
the Honourable Gentleman from being heard. He
proceeded to defend his Right Hon. Friend from the
observations of the Honourable Gentleman ; In 1
the course of Khich he said that there was nothing
which :a 'naparte could say or do that the Honoura-
ble Gentleman would not be the advocate and apo-
logist for—
Mr. WHITBREAD rose to order, anciedeeired,
that the weeds of the Hon. Member. might be taken ;
down, as on these words he charged him (Mr. W.).
with being an enemy to his country. (Hear. hear.)
The Clerk accordingly by desire of the House took
the svords down.
The SPEAKER called upon the lion. Member to
state whether he admitted or justified the words ?
Mr. STEPHEN said, he did not mean to impute
to the Honntirable Gentleman that he was an enemy
to his country. Far from it. He was in the judg-
ment of the House when he asserted that wishing to
&feed his Right Hon. Friend, who had been repre-
sented as insincere and artful, he might lave used
seeds, which Wit not been for the painful interrup-
tion of the .House, he should, have abstained horn
''''og---(Heare hear.)
Mr. WHITBREAD ited no wish to persevere in
the complaint ; but the Hon. Gentleman haven;
dta-
racteriaed him as a decided enemy to his country, lie!
thought it doe to the House to notice the words. At
a
• the same time, he was coviaced, on coed reflection,
that the wards fell from the Hon. Gentleman in the
warmth of debate. He must, in explanation, state,
that when the Hon. Gentleinan charged him with
advocating French principles, he wad not delending-
-the toleration of those principles he was merely sta.
6ng how matters stood in France, and contrastifig.