Star.
London, England, 1829-03-31 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

lane conversation UPS is consequence of Sir Rawson Knew
sou. presenting a Petition frees the Proprietors of the Odiat.
Canal Navigation, praying to be beard by Omni viliotie
Warwick and Knapton Canal BM The Beessraili lbreaut
suggested the withdrawal of the Bill In question ; bat Mr. Lawutv
said be wu not authorised to withdraw the BM; and after a few
obsereitioet from Mr. Ihraaass Booms, the redden was laid on

the tibk.

The farther consideration of the Report of eke Liverpool Church
Sill was postponed till Thursday next.
A Petition was presented from Hackney in favour of the lode-
peedettt Gas Company's Bill. which was laid on the 'Alt.—The,
BM was tbenrasecond time and ordered to be committed.
Several Petitions were presented from towns in the line of the
Osford Canal on the subject of certain toils, which are affected by
the Warwick sad Knapton Canal Bill.
The Staines Bridge Amended Bill was read a third time and
passed. •
Petitions were presented against Roman Catholic
from the following places: The Wesleyan Methodists oßgargeellisilmos
borough ; the Curate and Parishioner.of Dwell, in Leloseno.
shin; from Mr. Thomas Jones, Vestry Clerk of St. Seeping..
Coleman-street; several parishes in Yorkshire; Episcopal Chapel
of St. Giles's. Loaders ; Birseall, Cleveland ; fleydoo, Orsett, and
setae other places in Hears; Belfast; Presbyteryy of Forfar; Kir
baldy ; Tottenham Court Chapel, Finedon; several parishes in
Lanarkshire; Beatings; the Clugy of Worcester; the Clergy and
lalmilitants of Saint Andrew Auckland, in Durham ; several pa-
lhhlPS In Southampton ; Denbigh ; Somerford, is Wiltshire ; Su.
thoebodskire ; Broseley, in Salop.
Sir H. SM YTH presented a Petition from the Physicians and
Surgeons of the Eastern pan of Eastit,praying for some Legislative
measure for supplying subjects fur anatomical purposes.
On presenting a Petitim from Bandbach, in Cheshire, against any
further concessions to the Roman Catholics, by Mr. Eantavon.
several observations were made by Mr. Davaumae. to the effect
that great pains had been taken to procure signatures; that even
the boatsmen and whipper-in of a pack of hounds near Knutsford,
had been induced to alga it.
Petitions were pretested in favour of Roman Catholic Eman-
cipation from. several residents at Bath; Ballyegant in Queen's
County; several parishes in Galway, Tipperary ; Roman Catholic
Clergymen of Ireland; Ailaborough; Rely, in Tyrone; Stirling;
Leith, near Edinburgh; Banff, in Fifeshire; Perth; Unitarian
Chapel in Stamford street, &niftier., Surrey; Market Raisin;
several Parishes in Galway. Kildare, and King's County.
Sir R. H. IN G LIS, on presenting a Petition from Forfar against
Roman Catholic Rataocipatlon; took occasion to observe that •
Petition bad been received from the General Assembly of the
Church of Scotland, and bad been presented on the ad of May. 1770,
therefore there could be no objection to the receiving this. Tbe
Petitioners quailed the prayer of the Petition by requesting that
Roman Catholics might not be admitted to certain sates in the
State, and that the number might be restricted to one third of the
persons bolding offices, and in Parliament. ,
Mr. A BERCROMBY said the Petition was, in fact,in favour
of Emancipation; and ought to be received as such.
Sir R. H. INGLIS presented other' Petitions from the Synod of
Kirkaldy, and other places, to the same effect, which produced
some conversation—in which Sir R. Fasauses Captain Weems,
Mr. Rom, and an Honourable Member took part—in which it
was Contended that the feelings of the people of Scotland bad not
been netted upon the question of Emancipatioa.
Mr. HUME denied that the majority of the people of Scotland
were opposed to Emancipation, as the Hon. Baronet (Sir R Inglis)
had asserted. On the contrary, only a few paltry places had shown
*any
opposition to the question.
Sir IL INGLIS said the paltry places referred to were Edin-
burgh, Stirling, Aberdeen, and several other plum.
The SPEAKER, with reference to the Petition from the Synod-
of Kirkaldy, said he bad to take the sense of,the House upon it.
The Honour.•ble Baronet had alieduailmn the. A' ,alett from the
General Assembly in 1770. now he (Sir K. Inglis seemed to infer
that the Petition just preset) ed from the Presbytery, and only
signed by one person, must be taken in the same manner as the one
from the General As-entbly in 1770. He wished, therefore, to
take the opinion of the House as to the manner in which it ought
to be received, and bow inserted in the Jouruals.
The LORD ADVOCATE of SCOTLAND thought the Peti-
tion ought to be received as that of the higher Court, the Synod.
Mr. Secretary PEEL said the question was, whether it ought to
'he received as the Petition of the individual or the Synod ? Now,
itremived as the latter, there would be no check to attempts at
Iwo* upon the House. For instance, supposing 16 had been
against the Petition, and 17 in favour, and the Moderator had
signed it, it would pass as the act of the whole body. when in truth
k was only the Petition of a very small majority. He thought pre-
sidents should be followed.
Sir R. H. I NGLiS had referred to the Petition of 1770 as a
Imre in point, and thought the Petition ought to be received as the
Petition of the body or Synod.
Mr. C. WYNN did not see why Petitions in all cases signed by
one person should be received as the Petitions of the body. it
signed by one person only. It was desirable that in all cases Pe-
titions should only be received and have weight attached to them
according to the number of signatures. To avoid precedints was
to strike at the privileges of the House, which he was most anxious
to sut•
Mrp. DporOUGLAS thought the case referred to by the Right
Honourable Gentkman (Mr. Wynn) had no bearing upon the
present.
Sir J. MACINTOSH thought the question was one of usage,
which the House ought to adhere to in the present case.
The SPEAK ER wishes] to take the pleasure of the House,
whether the Petition should be entered on the Joutekli, leaving
the question open for further consideration.—Tbe Petitions were
then laid on the table.
A Message from the Lord. announced that their Lordships had
agreed to certain Road Bills.
Sir J. MACINTOSH presented a Petition from certain Ro.
man Catholic Clergymen in Ireland, complaining of the Clauses in
the Bill for the Relief of the Roman Catholics, which relates to
Monastic Order. of Sesults.
Lord F. L. GOWER presented a Petition from the Physicians
and Surgeons in Down, in Ireland, praying fur some Legi.lative
enactments in f of procuring Subjects for Anatomical purposes.
Sit 9. U RRA Y presented a Petition from certain hilts&
tants of Nova Scotia, in favour of_ Roman Catholic Emaocipa.
hon. The Hon: Baronet hoped that the feelings which had been
shown in the old country upon the subject of religious toleration,
would never reach the Colonies, to light up the torch of bigotry,
which had created so much ill will, and destroyed unanimity.
Mr. LA BOUCHERE agreed in the sentiments expressed by
the lioa. Baronet.
Mr. TEN N YSON postpaid his motion respecting the Borough
of Rut Retford, which stood for to morrow, until Tuesday, the
7th of April. The Honourable Member took the opportunity. in
presenting the Petition from Market Raisin in favour at Roman
Catholic Emancipation, to declare (in contradiction to the assertion
of -an Hon. Member) that the majority of the inhabitants of Lin-
colnshire were favourable to Emancipation.
Colonel SIBTHORPE, in answer to this declaration, said, that
an attorney's clerk had been using undue means to obtain signa-
tures to Petitions in favour of Emancipation. A Roman Catholic
Clergyman, named Simpkls, had also been indefatigable in pro-
curing similar signatures.
Sir W. ING LUDY denied 'bat the people of Lincohubire veers
unfriendly to Emancipation. For himself, Sir W. Ingkby said,
he had abstained from using his influence, either one way or the
other, in the parishes in which be had any emersion.
Colonel SI BTHORPE assured the House that he also had not
used any undue leluence to procure Petitions against Ensameiguis=
Mr. HENRY GRATTAN, in presenting a Petition Soma the
Roman Catholic Bishop and Clergy of the Diocese of Deseme,
in favour of Roman Catholic Claims, observed that Cadman Pea
lates could not renounce/the titles of Bishops, for Mimi they
were to all intents and purposes, and the &II before the Mime
could sot deprive them of those titles. The Ham More= Shen
alluded to seditious placards that were circulated throughout
London. purporting to proceed fro= the Lord Mayne and km*
of the City of Dublin; he bad received a letter frees die Lod
Mayer, denying any knowledge of these placards. The lien.
Member Funned• several other Pedalo= to the same elm MS
different parts of Ireland.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL presented a Pell*, SO ll=. WSW
effect Irani Huntingdon • as did Alderman Weimar= kola M
Perish of St.. Stephen, Huntingdon;
street.
• hlr. HENRY MAX WiCLL predeitted Mims from,
sad Dowspatriek, In the county of Down; teem Kildare, Rath-

souilagls. a Parish to the county of Salop ; Inch. in the county of
Dublin. and several other parts of Irela■d, against further Con-
cessions to the Roman Catholics.
A similar !ethics was presented from Holdbridge. by 111r.Cmte.
011111111111118 or soma.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
the House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply.
On the motion of Mr. BANKER the soot of £19,18S was
granted for tile BM* Museum. far the year 1829.
The Report was brought up, and ordered to be received to.morrow.

IVIIIAN CATHOLIC RELIEF BILL.

Mr. Secretary PEEL moved the (Weep( the Day fur the third
reading of the Roman Catholic Relief BM

The bran Laea put,
The Matquisof CHANDOSreas and said—ln rising
to object to the motion just put to the House I hope I
shall be permitted to trespass upon its attention for a
few moment., inasmuch soli may. perhaps, be the lag
tint • I Jodi ever be enabled to ripest my sentiments
relative to a measure undoubtedly of so much impor-
tance to the best interests of the cow t• y. Sr, I confess
that, after all the areuwents I have heard from the
Right Honourable Gentleman opi °site, and frau: the
many Honourable Gentlemen by whom he has been
supported, I have not yet heard a dill, argument ad-
vanced that has induced me in the slightest degree to
alter my opinion, that this measure, which we are now
• ailed upon to pass, does not only break in upon the
Constitution as established in 1688, or that by passing
it we shit.' commit a grievous ant serious inroad uoon
the Protestas.t Constitcion as it now riots in these
'calms. Sir, it is not for me to combat with the ptivate
minions of any Honourable Member; but 1 trust the
House will give me credit for being actuated by fair
and honourable motives in having, humble indigo fuel
as I am. stood before them as the defender of the Pao-
testant cause. and in having declarei that I can see no
reason why this cau e should be weakened in this coon.
,try. Sir, in common with many Honourable Friends,
have deeply deplored the loss we have sustained by .
the defection of our once great leader upon this ques•
tints, and of the many Honourable Members who have
heretofore invariably vi ted with us. It is for him and
for them still to tell us their reasons byshich they have
been governed. I have listened to their opinions de-
clared again and again in this House, yet tiros- reasons
I have not yet been able to ascertain. I cannot vie".
without serious alarm, the change dist will take place
with sericite to the situation of the Roman CAthol.ca
if this Bill should pass into a law ; but I hope, it it Jo
pass, that the Roman Catholics, its gaining all they de-
si•e, all for which they have been so long seeking, will
receive the boon with gratitude, and will act in such a
way as to lead the Protestants to place confidence in
them. and that they will hereafter maintain and obey
the laws of the country. They cannot be ignorant, n r
can we be ignorant, of the teasons why they have ricer%
reduced to the situation in which they have been snag
placed ; and I oust in Got: we shall not fled it aPaht•
necessary to teplaie them there. I hope the Catholics
will receive tars measure, if. it become a 10,114.2:
dutiful subjects; bet I also hope 'het, it they do not
so ieceive it, the Pentestifit popolatien will cis a
man, and demand its repeal. I must alsa hope that,
after this law Shas poised, all angry and acrimonious
feelimrs a ill at once end. F-ir my ow n part I will say.
that I never entered upon the discussion of th•s subject
frosts personal motives. I entered upon it honestly and
conscientiously—(hear)—and I earnestly de ire to look
for ward to this country enjoying peace and ercisper ty ;
but I much doubt if this rew Constitution will be agt re-
able to the people of England, and I theiefore prof st
Against it—against th..t change in the Britissi Constitu-
tion which we re now about to make. Sir, I have
now discharged my duty to my constituents who sent
rn,- here, and I beg to move that this Bill be read a
thi d time this day sir months.
Mr. G. 0. NIOORE was desirous, in seconding the
motion, to offer a few observations to the House. and
felt assured that, upon a subject of such vital impos-
tanci, which they stete..pethaps debating fin the last
time, he was entitled to demand the attention ct the
House. In the year 1774., when a Bit for the segula•
don of Q the; was carried from the House of Commons
to the House o f Peers, the great Lord Chatham sic.
scribed that Bill as desti uctive of the safeguards placed
against the inroads of P :pert', and declared Iris opinion
that the Government had no mote right to teeeal such
laws w ishout ap,realirg to the people, than they hod to
repeal the wed chant of the Bill of Rights. W. en he
Mouie) recollected those sentiments of that Mos-
tsious Statesman, he .considered them now worthy of
the d.epest attention, because they ref eried to an Ate-
ram it of the great. the fundamental princi,rle, of the
British constitution; and because I.e then alluded to a
Bill in progress through Parliament, which Bill he de-
clared to be subversive of British liberty. What was
it. then, on which Lord Chatham relied as that funds.:
mental winciply ? What but the whole series ..t laws
that had been enacted against Popish influence fr-m the
constabl.- to Members of both Hou-es, and ere S rye-
reign himself. Those, he said, ought not to he altered
with, ut the consent of the British people. The argu-
nient he (Mr. Moore) would urge in opposition to this
Bill was. that the per pie of this country had act b en
iven tin eto consider it. They ought to have had a
far longer peri,rd fur this purpose. for the subject was
one which, of all others, req.rired calm and eeiiberate
tonsideration. The course, therefore, that ought to have
been pursued was the course u u 11y Fui sued under such
eiecumstances, via. to submit the Bill to the House
during one Session. then to print and circulate it. and
to take it into consideration during another ,Session --
This was the course which the British people bad a tight
•
to expect. It had been said that the question had beers be-
fore the British people for the last thi:ty years. This
was true. But the question during that petiod was
only this—did there exist any danger in aclipitiing.the
Roman Catholics to politica,' power? That question
bad now materially changed its character. II the ques-
Lion simply what it had been, he believed the an.
laver would be a nearly unanimous 818 mauve.- But
such was not the case. Those who brought the mea-
sure forward coupled it with the admissiou that there
was great danger in concession, but contended that
there was grea er danger lobe apprehended if conces-
sion were withheld. Such was the question that had
been recently submitted to the Protestants. Now he
(Mr. Moore) contended that we were not in a condition
to institute the inquiry which that question involved,
vie. as to the comparison of danger to be spotlit nded
on the one hand and to be averted on the other. We
bad not
.yet—we could not yet—have obtained se&
Lcient information upon this subject, nor were we in
grate ot mind, to topsider it. .He would call the atten.
tion of the House to the pledge given by the H use in

Oa

reply to his Majesty's Speech, with reference to the state'
of Ireland. and he thought that pledge called, upon us
to pause before we committed the country to a mea-
sure the enactment of which would be irrevocable. Fe.

could foible the contemplated law through all its va-
rious effects; to do so would require a far wider haves.
tigatioo than had yet been given it. To'show that such
was the was only necessary to recur to the dis.
cassia' that had taken place upon the Bill on Friday
last..-.He contended then that abundant time ought to
be.allowed, in justice to the people, nay, in justice to
the inearate itself, for he believed there was no Mem-
ber in the House, no matter what his opinions might
be, who would not admit that there was an intense
feeling throughout the country decidedly adverse to the
measure. It was contended that this feeling had been
produced by excitement; if so, there ought to be time
Rivets in order that such excitement might be allayed.
%Yhea he looked to the admission of Catholics to his
Majesty's Councils be could not but see that, although
they were forbidden from advising the Crown on eccim
simtical appointments, they bad still a more efficient
power vested in them in the direct influence which they
were capable of exercising with respect to these ap-
pointments. When he looked to the corporate bodies
which held direction over Protestant bodies and insti-

tuti•ns spread over the country, and which long the-
tished customs had brought home to the feelings of the
people, be could not but regard the introduction of
Roman Catholics into them with apprehension.. The
present Dill gave Catholics not only the power of in-
fluencing ecclesiastical appointments, but it also gave
them power over the funds by which those appoint-
ments were maintained. When be looked to our cola
nies abroad, though Catholic Governors were there de-
nied the power of directing ecclesiastical appointments,
still it was perfectly obvious that Governors of distant
colonies had a strong controulling influence, while they
themselves were removed from influence, and he was,
that by the Bill Roman Catholic Governors
of our colonies were gifted with a transcendent power
over the Protestant Church. From what he had seen'
f Dill, be pet ceived that it was to destroy the nu.
testant Church, and the security of all the Protestant
estahltshmetsts in Church and State. He could not help'

taming the Bill altogether a dangerous and desperate
expetiment, which, it passed, would leave them practi•
sally without the power of repealing it, and he would
conclude by supporting the amendment of his Honour.
able Friend.
On the &sew potting the motion,

Mr. H. VILLIERS rose to express his dissent from
• the view of the question taken by a Noble Lord (the
• Marquis of Chandos) and the Hon. Member who had
just sat down. He believed there never was a time at
which the country had better reason to be sal fled with
its House of Commons, or at which the House of Com,
mons had better reason to be satisfied with its own de-
liberations. The Hon. Member (Mr. Moore) had ad-
verted t., the pledge given in his MAjesty's Speech, as
to the state of Ireland, and bad attached considerable

importance to it. He (Mr. 11. V.) also attached impor.
tance to that pledge. He had ever been of opinion that
the Catholic Claims had bran withheld on insufßcient
grounds, fp. cause it was an established principle that all
Governments were intended for the good of the cons-
niuniry ; and he could never see the propriety of main•
taining a system of laws which amounted to a conti•
nuance of strife and dissension in Ireland. Inquiry into
the state of that country had been hitherto evaded, and
the brst nioile for breaking through that system of eva-
sion was. in his (spinal*, the mode adopted this year by
his M.jesey's Government. It placed the anti-Catholic
pony in a position entirely new. It forced them either
to reject entirely the recommendation of the Crown. to
adopt the measure submitted by Ministers, or to bring
forward r•me measure of ther own. As to the disap-
pointment which had been expressed respecting the
course pursued by Ministers, the terms of the Address
did certainly pleJge them to take the whole state of
Ireland e nisides al ion. But the anti-Catholic party
had gone over the question with scarcely an allusion to
Leland; it bad been only slightly refereed to in the
speeches. of the Hon. Members for Cork Castle, Dor-

set shire, and Newark; and he therefore thought that
they had no right to lay such particular emphasis upon
that point.
General GASCOYNE said he was one of those who
had opposed the first introduction of the measure; and
he would now say that nothing which bad since fallen
from the Right Honourable Secretary—nothing which
had fallen from any Honourable Member—nothing
contained in the provisions of the Bill itself, bad suc-
ceeded in removing his fears or calming his appre•
pensions. They had been called upon to make great
sactifices—to alter the frame of that Protestant Consti-
lotion under which they had lived so long and so hap-
pily—to past with principles and opinions advocated
by able lawyers, and subsequesitly adopted by emi-
neat politicians, and afterwards received by the nation.
Now. if they were called upon to make these sacrifices
for the permanent settlement of the question, there
might be a reasonable plea for doinig so. If it were
• demand fir religious toleration, no man would be
snore disposed to concede it than himself; but what
wire they about to give? Were they about to give a
measure of teal relief to the mass of the population of
Deland, or to sacrifice the feelings of the majority of
the people of England to carry a measure fiom which
no substantial relief would be derived? The object of
this Bill was no other but to advance the wishes of the
Roman Catholics, in preference to the sentiments of the
great body of the Protestant inhabitants of this country.
The contest had not been if Catholics should be ad-
misted to other offices, but whether they should be
eligible to seats in Parliament? In order to prove the]
necessity If such a measure, and the relief Likely to be
obtained by its adoption, be would only ask it lieland.
is sending a representative body to that House, could
send men more enlightened, more capable of discharging
the duties minuted to them, or more aretitive to the
interests of their countrymen (fur if they had a fault he
believed they were rather too national), than those who
already represented it # If it was proposed to give ad.
vantage to the Catholics by this conces•ioo, be *mild
appeal to those *be kaew their course of education,
and she mars* of education received by Protestant
Members of that House, whether, so far from being
au advantage. it would not rather prove a disadvan-
tage to them ? The very prejudices of the Catholics
had been attentively considered in that House. and the
-present Bill was a proof of the fact. He could not help
regarding the measure as an illasioo. brought about by
the arts of ambitious demagogues, exciting that pat of
the empire for the purpose of obtaining i temporary
popular *T. If it were said that it was for the relief or
amelioration of Ireland, be would ask if the admission
of a few Catholics into Parliament could afford th-m
any advantages which they did nut already possess ?
'VI is there an individual present who would declare that
be advocated the measure upon that ground? No one
would &ay that, when the Bill should be passed, some
tato,' professing the Roman Catholic religion would
beams candidates for beats in that Home • Thee iould

be thirty or forty Catholic Members. He did not pre-
tend to as that they would all be from Imbed; but
he would put it to any one of the Hon. Gentleness who
had advocated the measure to say if individuals would
be fond to declare dolt they had merely retained theiri
seats .for the e.tholics until they had procured thole;
concestimas for them, or if they would not rather soap
test the privilege. In his opinion the opportunity would
be taken by the Catholics of gratifying their bigotry
and their prejudices, by electiag where et was possrldien,
member of their own religion sa preference to umber
more experienced and equally alive to their real into-
rests. what would be the situation of Ireland
when a dissolution of Parliament should take place ?
and a dissolution must soon take place; for those Hon.
Members who thought that all points of difference
would be set at rest with the settlement of the question
there were greatly deceived—(Hear, hear). The par-
ties of Whig; and Tories bad agitated the country for
years, and those who believed in the repose that was
to follow the present measure would be disappointed.
—Let them bat suppose the feeling of the lower
classes in Ireland sUa a Catholic came to offer
himself as their Representative in that House. Let
them take, for example, the city of Limerick—(Hear)
Suppose a Catholic should say, is I am come to offer
my vett for one who professes the same religion," what
would be his feelings when he came to be informed that
the liberty to vote far a Roman Catholic candidate and
the privilege of voting at all were taken away togs.
then? He would say and maintain that this measure
alone, or the two measures united, unaccompanied by
any other of a more effective character, in place of pro.
clueing conciliation in Ireland, would be entirely abor-
tive, and would only be ground of Einem disorder.—
Before changing old established laws—laws which had
been reverenced, and which would continue to be re•
verenced—it would have been proper to have inquired
whether the measure of relief was really calculated to
prove ell that it was intended to be? Is would have
been proper to have considered the real wants of Ire-
land, one of which was a resident gentry, instead of
whom there were middlemen, and high rents, and
low wages, and the want of poor laws, and the want
of education, with all the evils produced by such a
want. He did not see any additional inducement
held out in the Bill for quieting the Catholics, or to
cause the investment of capital to increase in Ireland;
nor did he think that the gratified ambition of a few
would tend to ameliorate that country. It bad often
been asked what remedy would they propose in lieu of
the measure before the House? He would reply b
referring to the Speech from the Throne, and to h
Majesty's suggestion to that House, that they should
inquire into the whole state of Ireland; and he would
ask the Right Hon. Secretory for the Home Depart.
meat if that recommendation was intended to mesa
nothing? Had they acted upon that recommendation,
and had the settlement of Ireland appeared the real ob.
ject of Ministers, be for one shoulJ have gone coolly
into inquiry, and with less opposition than be hod show,
to the measure, the mode of bringing which forward
adopted by the Right Honourable Secretary had ag
gravated the evil tenfold—(Hear). It had been no.
communiceted to any body so long as secrecy was
practicable—.it had been kept even from the knowledge
f mlividuals with whom the Right Honourable Gentle.
mm was in official intercourse—and it would appear
as if he had acted mauler the impression that the less
there was known the more probable was the chance of
success—( Hear). The expression of public opinion upon
tars triestiou had been outgunned; and, numerically
speaking, it could not be denied that the people of Eng•
land were adverse to concession. An Hon. Member
bad said that the people were satisfied with their repro.
sentatives. He (General Gascoyne) &Hewed quite the
contrary ; but, it any doubt were entertained upon the
subject, and it there was an anxiety for main airing the
Constitution instead of breaking in upon it, why did
nut his Majesty's Ministers advise the disuilution of
Parliament ?—(Hear)—and clear up these doubts to the
satisfaction of the country. He believed the feeling of
the people against the measure prevented them from
adopting that course, and, in his opinion, there could be
.no stronger criterion that there was a decided numerical
majority opposed to it. In his mind, the farther in-
vestigation should be extended, the greater that majority
would prove to be, and, from his means of forming an
estimate upon the matter, he was fully convinced that
nine-tenths of the populatiln of England were hostile to
the measure. He could not but complain that a fair
opportunity had not been afforded them of becoming
acquainted with the extent of its provisions. Suppose
resson,ble time bad been given—had the Bill been
read a first time and printed, and an interval al-
lowed for consideration, say until after the holidays
—be believed the opposition to it should have been
less determined in its character. The Right Honour.
able Secretary bad talked of the incumbrance of
securities in bringing in the Bill; but the phrase
was misapplied, for there were no securities, and, of
course. there could be no incumbrance from them.—
The only real security that could be afforded in the
case would be that which was to be derived from
excluding Roman Catholics from the office of Prime
Minister. The Right Hon. Secretary opposite bad,
indeed, said that the circumstances ender which, if at
all, a Roman Catholic could fill the tituation of Prime
Minister would be such as to render it extremely im-
probable that any Roman Catholic should wish to be
placed in that office. He (General Gauls's.) should.
however, prefer a direct and express prohibition ; and,
indeed, the reasoning of the Right Hon. Secretary upon
this point, if at ail admissible, would go to prove chart
e Roman Casbol.c could scarcely be more likely to
become a Secretary of State than First Lord of the
Treasury. There might be more than met the eye in the
security which was said to be cotitaiurwl in this indirect
prohibition; but as the Bill now stood, and as he (Gem° )
understood it, it afforded no security at all. There was
a t me when the Right Honourable Secretary slid that
he never should in any event consent to a manure for
the emancipation of the Roman Catholics unless it
should be accompanied by another for the payment of
the Roman Catholic Clergy. A late Foreign Secretary
bad, ha believed, a plan of this nature in his mind; but
be did not venture to propose it to Parliament, as that
species of new taxation at the people of ibis country
would be, if possible, more unpopular than even the
present measure. One of the 'cost effects which the
Bill note befoae the Nape would produce was the de-
struc.isa of the confidence •luch had been hitherto
placed in the principles and conduct of public men. The
alterations and t. rgiversadons iliac bed taken place in that
H. use, and the hotter tergiversations which were likely
to happen elsewhere, would have the effect of destroying
all confidence in that and the other House of Parlia.
meat. It had been often said, in the course of the dis•
cussions upon tbis subject, that, as soon pa this tonsure
09104 have been citified, matters would Saturn into
their former condition, and all the egad ace which had
been so violently shaken would be restored again. fie
believed that the very ,cnotrary of this would hoppers,
and 'hat, instead of cons lean in public awn being in.
stored, the pubic would kola total indiffereaco toward

them. He much tegtetted this consequ nee, because he
believed that a generous coadeace in pub* wee h4d
produced great national advaotagps in some Waren
amongst which he *mold mention the cue ()Nelms
French war. He was ceofident that before the present
&Wow was gone by, certaiply before the coeclusion
of the nest Session—the Right Hon Gentlemen op-
posite would find himself in a Tay different positron
from that which he had formerly occupied. The sup-
port which the .Right Hon. Gentleman was now se-
ceivinefrom a quarter in which these could be no con-
fidence, and from parties who had a particular object to
attain, could scantly be a sufficient recompense for the
confidence which he had lost amongst the public.—
Would all the cordiality which DOW appeared to subsist
between the Right Hon. Gentleman and his new allies
continue after the present conjuncture had passed by?
There was no man in that House or out of it that es-
teemed more than he did the goodness of the Right Hon.
Gentleman's heart and the kindness of his disposition ;
but his public conduct was another matter, end the time
would come when the sins which he bad lately corn-
miued would be visited upon him—(laughter. and
bear)—snd when he would experience the effects of
having lost that private zeal, arising from cersooal re-
' gad, which had induced individuals so make sacrifices
for the advancement of his interest. And if Ireland
should not become quiet—(and he believed in his con-
science that it would not be any quieter next S ssion
than it was aow)—if a considerable tinkled n should pot
take place in the n.ilitary establishments of the country
—they the people would look for tesponsibility (tom
those persons who had originated the present measutes,
and who maintained that the consequences of them
would be nothing but hominy and peace. The Right
Hon. Gent. might be assured that the opp• r• unity of
calling him andhis colleagues to an account would not
be lost. There was one measure which he regretted not
to have seen introduced—he meant a system of poor laws
for Ireland, the only motive for opposing which was to
evade the tax which would in that way fall upon the
absentees. He (General Gascoyne) hoped that, what-
ever divisions existed amongst the Members of that
House upon these subjects. they would be all united
upon the point of introducing the poor laws into Ire-
land, a measure which would alone confer upon that
country those benefits which the Right Hon. Gentle-
man was anxious to procure for it. The Hon. and
gallant Member said the: the last clause in the Bill was
the only one of which he approved.

Mr. CAMPBELL supported the Bill, oa the ground of expe-
diency—be felt confident that It would be the means of tailoring
tranquillity to Ireland.
Mr. PIERCE had been to the minority on this question, and
[regretted to hear the foul epithets of bigotry, ignorance, dtc. wh.ch
were heaped on those who were opposed to this BAIL He felt con-
fident that the majority of the meet hilluential part of the cumniu-
nity were opposed to it. He bad the highest confidence its the pre.
seat bead of the Administration, but on a question of such vast
importance as this he would take leave to judge for himself, because.
if once passed, the evil could not be retrieved. He would consent
to all other pans of the Will, except that which gave the Catholics
admissibility into the Legislature.
Mr .1. E. DRNISON did nut mean to disparage those who
opposed the pteseut measure. It was certain that the numerical
march), of the country were opposed to h—but he was UM that
it those who had ;limed the Petitions which had been presented
against it, were told that the erect of it would be to restore peace
'and tranquillity to Ireland, they would petition in favour of it.—
The settlement of this great domestic di&ulty would, be was sure,
give general satisfaction, and be bad not the lean fear but that it
would *relivable, Ave millions of his Majesty's subjects—(Hear).
Mr. HART ifiAVIS would heartily give his vote in favour of
the swamp if he thought that it would have the effect of tran-
quillising ireland ; but, before GOD, he believed it would be
attended with a different result.

CUST was willing to believe that the Hight Honourable
the Secretary for the Home Department had acted couscientioudy,
but the Right Hon. Secretary had not given any satisfactory reason
for the change which took place in his oeotintecos. No doubt the
Right Hon. Secretary bad made great sacrifices, which he would
not have made if be had not adequate reasons; be ( Mr. Cost)
could not coosclentiously vote for the mea.ure, for he looked on it
in a religious light l the Catholic religion was so disposed to en-
croach and to Awls every thing into itself, that this could not be
looked on otherwise than in a religious view.

Sr C. BURRELL opposed the Bill. because he thought the
Cathode religion unchanged in its persecuting spirit; but if the
present Bill should do good, be should be the first to rejoice in it.

Mr. W. BANKES—Sir, after so many years debate,
then, this is the Bill we are called upon to pass. Is is a
matter of regret to me, Sir, that it has not been compe-
tent for me to give my sentiments opzin this measure
earlier in the debate, and that I have been obliged to
delay doing so until the Bill has arrived at its two last
stages. I regret it, Sir, because I must give my most
uncompromising dissent to the Bill in all its clauses,
and every principle contained in those clauses. 1 care
not from whose hands it may have come—l case not
by whom it may have b.en advilca teal it
equally my duty to give it my most decided opposi-
tion. I freely confess, Sir, that it is with great feelings
of pain that I come thus forward to cppose, and, as fin
as as me lays, obstruct a measure that originates from,
and Is recommended to us by, that sled min now at
the head of his 1111je•ty's Councils. I call him great,
Sir—and why ? It is not in respect of his office or of
his power, but in respect of his achieveusents and cha-
racter ; and surely if ever there was a man who, on
those considerations, deserved that epithet, it is he.
I have, Sir, in common with every Englislim in. I may
say in comseon with the whole civilized world, earn red
the splendid progress of success that has marked his
career. 1 yield to no min, either in this or in other
countries, in admiration and gratitude, inspired by sari.'
veying the security and glory with which he has sur-
rounded us. Sir, as a private individual I have known
that illustrious person In his retirement. and have been,
to a certain degree, honoured with some small share of
his kindness and attention. Of that, Sir, I am not for-
getful; but here I have a great public duty to perform,
and if that duty rue counter to the private connections
of my life, I regret, but cannot change it. I feel c.lled
upon by my country, by my religion, fearlessly, un-
compromisingly, unhesiiatiegly, to oppose this Bill—
(Hear). I fee Sir, that we have some ground to com-
plain-1 am sorry that truth compels we to say it—of
having been worse treated by our friends than by our
enemies—(Leughter and cheers). Ay, Sir, it is so, in-
deed. Upon no former occasion might we not have bad
better terms. Upon every former proposition of this
kind there was a talk, some show, some slight shadow,
at least, of a real, substantial, and tangible security.
There has been always some plan for, or talk of,
interfering in the appointment of the Catholic Hier.
al dry, that was to calm those great and reason.
able apprehensions that I and others entertain for
the Protestant establishment. But what plan was there
here of this sort? There was nothing of the kind.
—The Bill was a plain unconditional surrender. Sir,
we have heard it argued that this Bill is not the offi!
spring of intimidation. Why, Sir, if I had not seen any
thing of what was passing mound me—if I bad never
heard one word of the Catholic Association, of its
members, of their acts, of their speeches, of:their/gbh-
cations, of their menaces..if the name of Mr. OtOrl•
nen had never sounded in my ears, I should have seen
Panic !Rijeka Ppm) the viry has of dm Bill., Why,
Sir, 'elpt are the signs and symbols of panic in
ordinary eases? Do we not yield every thing that is
,waited, ill *at is asks; 91 us? De'rt obi tstow every

thing aide in order to get forward, and mid ah
we tear, without looking to the tight or the lef. Do
Steenvterßyiloi ?
rte
Is
it
not a
.17
we not hussy forward? Do not we precipitate ft
thtitg? i
n D
the ll
face rear these 42
ing up. an abandonment and unconditional auraes.the ,
p see%e
of our liberties ? Has not this sorrender been hur,je
iiee not,o ir,
has it not been precipitated beyond what any sarnsit:
not produced by fear would have been? So hotried ji
it been that time has not been given to appoint, a...
law officer of the Crown—!Cheer:). No, air,ia:
has ni t been given even to find a tetonspent ha
the framer of the Bill, for recomprnsed he dant.
less will be; but time has not been given to
that reward for his labours which would seed &II
back to his coostituents with his honours fresh about
Sir. it is the linguini, y of this case that tf.is,the
grepw
legislative act that has been proposed these twat%
sired years, is introduced to this /insist to be pot bye
law with the protest against it of the highest lead
thrni.y in this House.—(L-sud cheers, which wenn
doubled on Sir C Wettier• II boaing his ackn whim.
areas.) But, Sir. 'here was tin neeJ of any legal 4friz
in th • framing of this Bil.. Any man, So, (biotin,
done what is here dose. No legal adviser was sorra
to do that which terusited no law. atil archlect,
is competent to pull down an edifice. Any man 44
has sufficient boldneis can direct t'se
of what others hold sacred. Toe a
present wad, fir
is one of destruction, of annihilation, of fibroma:.
of overthrow to the old laws, without an attempt
at the substitution of others.—(Cheers.) n'hat
stitution is tlice?—What is dive wr ught but de-
strucion? The poor Protestant freeholder is a j
emblem of ve policy of this measure. He surrenders
his rights and franchises, but is told that it must be
dome for conciliation sake, that something better will
be given for it, some great advantage. But is it to
him that it is given? N., Sir; it is given to a Chard
opposed to his own; the advantage is given to thine
who are hungering and thirsting for the benefices a
lsold—(Hear, hear). That, Sr, is a picture of .ar
state it this Bill be passed—(Hear, heat). And all
this is to be done for I eland. Sir, Gentlemen who
have argued the question on the same side with loy.of
have been told that they took Ireland too little intotheir
consideration. Dot, Si., I 2.k whether we havens
enabled to take it into our consideration ? What interne.
'ion or documents have we had la.d before us foram
pnrpo•e? I know very well that at the opening fine
Session his Majesty from the Throne did recomm ndsko
we should take the whole state of Ireland into our caea.
deration. But I should like to know a hat past of them
commendation Ministers have a.sisted u. to comply aiii?
We must take from garbled extracts, lions whit he,*
Right lion. Gentleman has thought fit to produce, ila
in tires of those proposed change. ; for hack of better of
must even refer to these. What will then he the result?
Mat the situation of Ireland has been unsettled—noose
car, or will venture to deny it. But within my memory,
and within that of the Right Hon. Gentleman hinuelt•
Ireland has not been in any other—(Cheeri I am gia
to hear these chic's, because/ it looks as if Hon. Geode
men were about to concede to me the object of an ari
gument which I was just upon the point of briogiq
forward. I will ask any man who has attended toga
subject, whether any new case has arisen—whether sia
gross aggravation of the evils of Ireland has occurred?—
His answer will be yes—and I will ask the Right Ho.
Gentlemen opposite when those arose? We base
been told by the first Law Officers of the Crown tbati

the law of the land was sufficient to put down
agitators and the agitation that prevailed in being.
Was that not sufficient? Were not Ministers and Oa
Irish Government armed with new and estraordiawy

powers for the purpose of meeting and suppressing suss'
Associations as those to which allusion has been made?
And yet with that two-edged sword of the law they
suffered the evil to increase; they suffered to sleep a
the scabbard that weapon with which the law hadl
armed them to crush and to chastise ; and they sufferei
unresistingly and unopposed the increase of the evil 04
according to their own confession, it bad outstays
their power to Compete with. And now they:come
down to Parliament to use the consequence of dui
own neglect of duty as an argument in support d
their measures thus extorted from them, or rather se
a cloak for their own apostacy—(Cheers). Lai
us look at the Bill, and discover, it we can, those culla
of comfort which its framers and supportett tell share
to be found in it. We shall then find that
Prime Minister of the King may be a Roman
tholic ;* but then (say the Right Honourable and He
1
nuurable advocates of the measure), he is prohibitd
horn advising his Majesty upon any subject co
with the Church, its establipliment, or the interests
the Right Reverend bench. This is all very well, al
very plausible; but suppose the Popish Premier nes
not to refrain from offering to his Majesty his advice
upon those matters ; suppose, on the contrary, that k.
were to use the opportunities for access to the Sovereipl
which his place of Prime Minister would afford him air
the purpose of advising the King to act injuriously to, if
not totally subversive of, the Protestant Church awl
Establishment, how is his treachery to become knows te,
chat he shall be impeached and punished ? By whoa I.
it to be revealed ? By the King ? No. By his Cooled'
Cm tally not—no such denunciation can be anticipated.
Where, their, will be our security ? When, therefore, 1.
find a clause of this nature put forward to facilitate tree
passing of such a measure as that now befule the House,
I can only look at it as a delusion, as a mockery—lot's,'
such words only can such an attempt be characterise;
We are told, (us ther, that the increase of the Jesuits iir
be prevented. How stands the case? We know that ris
.
order has, in this country and " 'cereal -
blishnsents ; that order, be
been hunted out of every Stati
as well as Protestant, one tis
by this Bill, the provisions of

■

calculated to Ore equal satisfaction
and the Catholic, that the order - -

To be suppressed? No such
—suffered to remain in a country
sence is admitted to be somewhat

security is to consist in the registry
the Right Honourable Gentleman,
tart' of State for the Home

powa of sending over to the
Jesuit with whom to bold a -

(Loud cheers.) A very full
certainly ; but I hope the
such impostatios will be required.
present but of future times,
Jesuits in the government of
Church—Jesuits, not of the

supporters of it. and thorough
sera of its principles. Such
wanting to come down to this W.
have-not altered my opinions, yet I will act directly •
trary to them. Ido not deny that there is daogv;
that which I recommend, but still I will run upon to.
admit that this measure is fraught with evil, but it
necessary, and I will do evil that good may MP.
(Lettl latttettiri 411401fatio8)—•

louse, and

al in Ireland, several sok
it remembered, which lei
lie in Christendom, Cat
ime or other. Yet we
f which we were told
est 3 atisfaction to the Prot
order of Jesuits is—wltst•
thing—but to be tolaat
ountry in which their pi
aewbat dangerous, and
'egistry of their names; ii.
lemon, or any future Seal,
Department, is to have the
the Continent for some •
six months' consultatioao.,,
A and adequate tare/ t,
day will come what •
quired. I speak Net of de
4 when there may be toast
E the State as well as is tle
order perhaps, yet bola°
igh proselytes to, and obelP
Is a Jesuit will not thee bl, ,
this House, and sail 11, •

Who woulJ net hash If no& a man there be!
Who wield ant weep If Anima were her
I admit that this is our position, but I have said in,
the outset that it was with pain that I differed from
many of the Bight Hon. and Hon. Gentlemen, who
compose his Majesty's Government, and I now say
with equal sincerity, that it grieves me thus to be
obliged to condemn their conduct. But how can I re-
(rein trona apprehension when I view their measures and
contemplate the consequences that may result from
*ern? Am It 9 suppress the expression of my indig-
woo, and my honest resentment. v hen I find that the
incessliAry has stolen upon us in the night and put a
firebrand into the body of oar Church ?._(Cheers).
The confl %ration is, I admit, confined. and hardly
visible at present ; 4nt soon it will rear its head. extend,
594 spread itself from the walls to the roof and rafters
ogal thewhole labs is shall become a preyto its devouring
avidity, and sink beneath its fury a black and utter ruin.

Yens has b-en done, not openl7 and candidly, but cnn.
vingly and craftily, and, I lament to add, effectually.
may be a.ked, du I Dot think that these consequences
snag be avoided ?—that the evil may yet be remedied ?
.—ethat the now mouldering flame may be kept down
an 4 eventually extinguished? I answer no; it it impos•
sibte. The fist blow has already been struck at the

church, through the church of Ireland, and in this House
—the point of the wedge has already been inserted—
tHear, and a laugh). Honourable Gentlemen may think
this a subject for laughter—l deem it a subject for
lamentation ; for I view the event to which I allude
res the deepest of calamities—(Hear, hear) There may
be some difference between the churches of England
and of Ireland; but with re.pect to the property
of the Church there is no difference whatever. He
who would assault the one would assault the other,
and so completely are their interests identified and in-
terwoven, that the Church of Erglatid cannot, would
not, survive the Church of Ireland. I have to ask pardon
of the Rouse. The subject has so entirely interested and
absorbed my feelings and my powers that I am ex.
blunted while the subj-ct itself remains almost nue
ecoacbed; I feel, in consequence, unable further to des-
fess on the attention of the House than to express my
thanks fir its indulgence.—(The lion. Member sat down
amid loud and long-continued cheering).
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—Sir, the Hon. Mem-
ber who has just sat doom has given me an opportunity
1 have lung sought tor, of explaining the safety this
ICI. provides for the Protestant Church, and I hope be-
fore I conclude to make that safety 'Appear plain to all
intelligent minds; but I must here lament that I have
not the assistance of my late Learned Colleague—l
must lament that his conscientious scruples should have
been the means of his leaving office; he appeared to
think that the oath he bad taken had something in it
that compelled him to reject this measure. Now, Sir,
what are the words of that oath ? they are these-4, To
duly serve the King, and give him good council in all
his Courts of Record—and to advise his Majesty in all
matters when called upon." Now he would put it to
the House if, as Attorney General of England, he, in
common with others, saw the necessity of the measure,
would he not, by recommending it, be giving good
council to his Majesty ? I, Sir, feel this course to be
the only one that can give security and peace to Ire-
land, and therefore conscientiously recommend it—
(Hear and cheers). la 1791 an Act passed which, in
part, emancipated the Catholics; in 1793 another Act,
of a similar nature, passed -she Legislatures and those
beat acquainted w.tb Ireland knew the good effects of
those mess-ees. And it should be recollected, when
the Act of 1791 was passed, Sir John Scott (now Lord
Eldon) was Attorney-General; he had taken the same
oath ss his are. Friend, but it did not strike him that
be was bound t r leave office ; and in 1795 Sir John
Milford, now Lord Redesdale, was Attorney• General,
and he. too, thsught ha could retain oace consistently.
81r, what is the real st +teal the question ? Could
any outer measure have been adopted with safety ?
• say no. Honourable Members have been challenged
to propose other remedies; but on this point they are
always silent. I will now come at once to the provi-
sions of the Bill, for the Hon. Gentleman who spoke
last has alms to most unwarrantable conclusions re-
specting their safety. I say. Br, the Bill is so contrived
that it must protect the Protestant Church. It has been
our anxiety that no man should be able to lay his
finger upon any of its clauses mid say here is danger.—
It d yes n rt admix of a veto. because that would imply
the approval of any person nominated by the See of
Rome to the office if a Bishop. S.tcondly.,lt does not
giant any stipend to the Catholic Clergy, for that would
make Catholic Clergymen recognise Ministers. Thirdly,
it does not restrict any corresymideoce with Rome, for
any such restriction eon's) only tend to increase
Tlretet9re, no one looking at Ibis Bill can say that the'
t:4l-halit Cbu;ch has AP estehlitiment in this kingdom.
I have not, Sir, herd a single solid obi. etaon t
the proposed oath. 1 have not heard a single argu-
ment that at all induces me to think it does not
aff rd sufiicseet protection to the Protestant Church.—
Has not the Calsolic Association been put down? Is
there not a 13,11 to disfranchise the forty shilling fief-
holders? Ate not these measures striking at the rot of
their stionghold•? But 1 woul4 esk, could thew Acts
ever have been catried, of it was not in anticipation of
the present? I wit tearlessly say they could not—and
for the truth of ibis assertion, appeal to oe last ten years
experience of any lion. Menthe,. In the year 1678 the
King on the throne was a disguised Papist. and his suc-
cessor a Taal one. Ile %vivid therefore ask, what com-
parison was there now with that tins ? Our King and
all his family were decidedly Protestant; there was no
fear of their becoming Papists. But Hint. Members
seemed to think that admitting a few Roman Catholics
Into the 'louse stouts' make us all Papists, and their
influence such as to elessroy all our churches. But I
think, alkaline)) of England rests on a better foun-
Chntonn—it is safe in die purity of its doctrines. When
the Roman Catholic retision wes the established relig•on
of ti e country—when every obstacle was in its *my—
th* Prot *taut Choech advanced 010,1 Y a but saraband
in spite of all oppotition--and are nut our Clergy as
zealous pow as then ? If they are (and I de wet doubt
it), there is little danger. No Roman Catholiscould be
leather of st public *ho' ; and with the *Moil* 01
knowledge and the spread of the Scriptures there was
no fear ut Popery. Groot the Catholics their rights,
that was the best foundation for security, and I have no
doubt they will unke in any cause for their country's
gaol Una forbid that it should be thoogbt I would
sanetiots any eisamue that would weaken the foundation
tithe Protestant Church. In the Protestant faith I was
Ascien...,44l the Protestant faith I have lived, and in the
Protestant faith I shall die. I 4 conclusion I can only
say, the Bill has my coecurrencet and I shall toolbar*
to Si,. it of silpport.
Sir CHARLES WETHERELL said. that the other
nosing s Noble Ln;.d bad called upon bias to speaks
because be was the Attorney General; and now his late
illosotwable and tArareeil Collgagug had called upon
him to do so because be was no Attorney fienen4 He
had attempted on the previous occasion to justify blscoz-.
diet, su;td be wasid at t now *rusk from a similar effort.

The Noble Lord called upon him to prdve that Catbo
cisos was ntcessarilyezchaded from the logislatoreand
the great offices of the &ate by the constitution. He bad
accepted the challenge, and with what degree of success
he had acquitted himself it was not for him to say. His
late H ,nourable and Learned Colleague now challenged
him to break a lance on the ground that he had taken
too nice and sickly a view of his late official oath. He
would undertake the new tilt, and endeavour to main-
tain the propriety. the consistency—nay, the necessity
of his conduct with respect to that oath. whai be was.,
called upon to frame. the Bill befoie the Ham, be did
think it necessary to look to the conditions of his oath.
His late Honourable Colleague—indeed be might say
his llouourable Colleague, for he (Sir C. Wetherell)
was de jar. still the first law authority in dist,
House. At pre.ent, however, he was not to speak
as the Colleague of his Honourable and Learned
Friend. In the construction of an oath, different men
might entertain different views. When his Honourable
Friend stated the substance of the oath, it certainly did
not appear to him that an Attorney General was bound
to do more than give his Royal Master counsel in his
Courts of Record ; that .was, to do his babt to see the Re-

venue and other Lars affecting bis Sovereign's interests
efficiently and propel!, enforced; but on a little further
investigation, however, that substance was found to be
only a branch of the oath. The oath taken by anAttorney
General was as comprehensive as the oath taken by a
Privy Councillor, although not so pungently worded.
That being the case, could he forget the nature of his
oath when he was called to frame such a Bill as that
before the House? When he looked upon the principles
of the Bill, and mil cted upon the oath he had taken,
he could not advise his Royal Master to adopt such a
measure without putting that Royal Master in jeopardy
and breaking bis own oath—(Cheers, followed by cheers
from the Opposition). He would remind those Hon.
Gentlemen who cheered him from the other side, that
he had risen in conseqtxence of a direct cballen;e. He
had oo wish to address the House; he was indisposed,
and if he had sought his own gratification he should
have remained silent; but he had been called upon to
defend his conduct, and that was a piece of dot,
from which he would never shrink—(Hear). Those
who regarded the Bill as a measure calculated to be-
nefit the Established Church, and to perpetuate
and uphold the Constitution, might, salve amscientia,
give it their support • but those who held as he did,
most sincerely, that the measure was calculated to de-
stroy the Constitution, and to uproot the Established
Church, could not as Attorney-General draw the Bill,
or advise their S wereign to entertain it, without a
breach of their solemn covenant. Such was his opinion
of the oath be had taken, and respecting which hiscon-
duct appeared to be considered by bis late Hon. and
Learned Colleague as sickly and too nice. Upon this
subject he would only further say, that no consideration,
no emolument, no honours man could bestow upon him,
should have induced him to act otherwise than he had
done. He would not enter into the dispute between his
Hon. Friend (Mr.W. Bankes) and the Solicitor-General,
because it might be considered personal,but if the cause
of the Roman Catholics was so sure of being Woos-
phant at the University of Cambridge, it was something
like a reflection on Ministers that they had not availed
themselves of so favourable an opportunity of adding the
suffrages of that learned body to those of their present
supporters. He wished to impute motives to no man, and,
lie had never intended to do any thing of the sort. His
lion. and Learned Colleague had imputed to him
too nice, too sickly, t 4 squeamish a conscience, and
he lied alluded, in confirmation of his charge, to the
conduct of Lord Eldon and Lord Redesdale. His Hoe.
and Learned Friend had not mentioned those N 'Me
Lords by name, or expressly called his (Sir Charles
Wetherell's) conscience sickly and squeamish. He was
far too polite to do any thing of the sort, but he had
' hinted at it. He respected the high character and rare
abilities of Lord Eldon and Lord Redesdale, but he was
not prepared to adopt the conduct and opinions of any
man as the standard by which he was to regulate his
own conduct. In his plicate lucubratians he should
consult only his own mind, and the view which he
himself placed upon the meaning of the oath he
bad taken. But what did Lords Eldon and Redes-
dale really do? Did they give the elective franchise
to the Roman Catholics? No; Lord Eldon did no

such thing—(Hear) Did Lord Eldon open every
office, with one or two futile exceptions, to the Ito.
man Catholics? No; he did no such thing—(Hear).
Nor did Lord Redesdale concede any political power to
the Roman Catholics. He merely repealed the offensive
parts of the code made immediately after the Revolution.
Well than, it his Hon. and Learned Friend meant to as-
sent that Lord Eldon and Lord Redesdale were acting
Inconsistently in the yeas 1829 because they opposed such
a Bill as that before the House, he mno confront him
with the facts, and deny his po.ition. With that point
then he bad done. Then with respect to the Bill itself—
his late Hon. and Learned Colleague bad prefaced his
speech by saying he intended to explain the Bill, but un-
for t onto ely he had sat down without doing airy such thi.r.i
Indeed nobody bad as yet performed that task. The;
Right Hon. Secretary'. in his opening speech, had done'
nothing of the sort. His Hon. and Learned Friend had
certainly alluded to the clause respecting theassumption
of the title of Bishop by Roman Catholics, but to nothing
else. He (Sir C. Wetherell) was therefore placed in a
very awkward predicament; for, although out of office,
he was called upon to explain the Bill, his Honourable
and Learned Colleague in (Ace having failed to Jo so.
They had been told, before the introduction of the
Bill, that it would give perfect satisfactioo to all
partici; but what was the tact? To the Protestants it
gave uo satisfaction, and certainly no security, however
agreeable it might be to the Roman Catholics. The
question of 'amides had long and often been most ably
argued, both in that House and out of it—both by lay-
men and divines. But after all the light which bad been
thrown upon that branch of the subject, what did the
present Bill propose? It actually gave no seen' ity at
all. It opened all the offices of the State excepting two,
and the Right Hon. Secretary said that all coatroul
over the Roman Catholic Church, and all superintend.
ence of correspondence with thi See of Rome was
missed, as such restrictions would tend to irritate the
Boman Catholics, and reader them discontented. Those
securities therefore were abandoned—absolutely given
up without any other reason than that he had stated.
But it was said that the oath contained in the Bill was'
to be a panacea against all ills, and to protect the
Established Church. He hismelf, however, did not
see how it could produce any such effect. Suppose,
for jamas., the Honourable Member for Aberdeen
should propose a motion for the distribution of the
Church yroperty, and such a motion was to be seconded
by the Honourable Meinber for Colchester, and on a
division some sixty or' seventy Protestant. Members
supported the proposition, he wished to put this clues.
iron, and he called upon, be challenged some Honour.
able Member to answer it—be wished to ask whether,
in such a case, a Roman Catholic voting in favour of
..Itch a motion would break his oath. and incapacitate
Moss* from holding office? Me bad been challenged

in two instances, and therefore he tbonglit be might
without presumption, throw out a challenge bimseb. II
itcoald be shown to him that a Roman Catholic did
not enter that House as wlegislator free and uoshack!edi
it could be shown to him that a Roman C th he
could not take b part in &Ay such case as that which he,
had supposed, then iodeed much of the sting sf the
measure would be extracted,-(Hear). He was sorer,
'to be obliged to trouble the House, but u his Hoa.
aid Learned Colleague had not explained the provi-
sions of the Bill he was obliged to do so—(A laugh).
His first objection to the oath was that it did not show
whether the petsoq taking it was of any religion or
wet.' But supposinithat a Roman Catholic was Prime
Minister, how did the Bill, with all its foolish garrulity
about prohibitions, provide for his detection if he went
contrary to the enactment ? Oh said the Right Hon-
Secretary, if the Prime Magner should be a Ronne
Catholic, still the document must be countersigned by
the Home Secretary. But who was to pass between the
Home Secretary and the Prime Minister? But would
the Right Honburable Secretary say no nun could Ise
a champion of a cause one day, and a traitor to that,
cause the next? Might no one write on* day on the
one side and the next day on tbe other ? There cool*
be no danger of a traitor being appointed to preferment,
in the Church, because (said' the Right Honourable,
Secretary) the document must be simied by a Protestant I
Minister. With that reason, however, he (Sir C. W 4
was not satisfied. The Prime Minister might be el
Roman Catholic, and when persons were engage*
together in the pursuit of certain general principles, it
*Was impossible to say to what extent a Home Secretary
might be induced to sympathise with the P. emier. The
Bill was only fit for waste paper, and to be put at the
disposal of the cheesemonger or the grocer. The Ho.,
namable Member censured the departure from a Pro-
testant Committee, and the investment of Chu'cb pa.,
tronage in the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Arch-
bishop would not only have the power of confer' ing
church patronage in England, but might be sent down'
to Scotland to dispose of all the preferments in the
Scottish Church. This he considered a power fatal to
the Bill—(Hear, hear, hear).—His Honourable Friend
might say " Hear, hear !" He should say Heal"
too—.(A laugh) —This was a farce too bad for Sad-
ler's Wells. They had proposed to appoint a Pro.
testant Committee to watch over ti.e intere.ts of the
Church, and they began by the ossiog all into the hands
of the Archbishop. Anxious as he was to maintain the,
privileges of the Church, and the spirit of Protestant
ascendancy, he could not consider it Convitotional to
place all the power of the Church in the hauls of the
Archbishop. Was it not unconstitutional to take from
the Crown the power which belonged to it, for the pup-
pose of vesting it in the Archbishop ? The Hon. Gen-
tleman might have pungent arguments, no doubt ; but
if the Hon. Gentleman would allow him to be cut up
after he had concluded his s,.eech be should be obliged.
It was a monstrous power to be given to theArchbiahop.
The Bill was fallacious in another point of view. It said
the Piime Minister had a right to nominate, and that
such nomination should be in the hands of the Arch-
bishop. They all knew that the Prime Minister c.;uld
only nominate persons to the King for Bishoprics, and
be would assert as a lawyer, whether in or out of office,
that this Bill would not prevent any Prime Minister,
being a Roman Carbolic, from nominating any terms
to the King for Church preferment. The substance
of the whole Bill was this : Any K man Catholic
might be presented to the Crown for a 8,,h0; tic.—
He had said on a finmer occasion that the Bill,
in the fullness of giving and the penury of re-
taining, had given up all sch”lastic institutions
to Roman Catholics. Ile would ask any lawyer what
ecclisiastical establishments meant? He would not
ask the composer of the Bill that question, hut appeal
to the anonymous penman who drew it. The Bi'l ad-
minted that no school was to be shut against Romeo
Catholics but ecclesiastical establishments, and how d d
it happen that three fine seminaries, Eton Winchester.
and Westminstet , were only excepted ? Why we, e the
Charter.house, Harrow, Merchant Tailors, and Rugby
Schools, left out? Why could not Roman Catholics
enter those Schools, and undermine the Piwestant Ms.
gion by teaching? The Protestant leigion would de.
pond tor its preservation upon the education of youth.
There was one part of the Bill so extraordinary, that it
was a wonder how it could ever receive the sanction at
the House. They had introduced penalties in case any
person accepted office without taking the oath ratined
by the Bill. The Attorney General was to me for those
penalties. It was well enough to give him the contioul
over a Silk Bill or any conimeicial measure, but to give
him the keys of the Protestant religion was too much. If
the Attorneytien. should be a RomanCatholic,he would
never sue for those penalties ; if a Pratt -taut, and
the Prime Minister sinned be a Roman Caul lie,
he would under stand that be could not su, for penalties
under this Bill. Ile would feel a little touch of para-
lysis in his hand when he attempted to sue a Catholic
for these penalties, because he must know that he would
be no longer Attorney General. The Catholic Prime
Minister w. uld say, How have you the impudence to
sue for penalties against Catholic. contrary to the will
of the Prime Minister, the Home Secretary, or some
other? You ale no longer Attorney Gen ral; you
have offended the Roman Catholics in office. In the
mean time, the person elected to office without taking
the oath could not be deprived of it, without the c-a-
vicrion upon information, and recovery of 2001. penalty.
The fact then was, that the miserable clauses of this
piece of waste paper (the Bill) were founded in rotten-
ness, duplicity, treachery, and fiction. No Attorney-
General could sue for penalties. It had been said that
be did not look at the case of Ireland. and that, if he
objected to the proposed Bill, lie was bound bulanter to
propose some utter remedial measure. Mit dapper
conclusion was rather too trite—(A laugh). He ought
call upon the Cambridge Attorney. General to prove
that any other Attorney-General was bound to sub-
stitute a measure at twenty-four hours notice. Much
had been said upon the petitions arinst this measure.
He had heard of Scotch metaphysicians and logic.—
An Honourable Member introducing a Petition said
he had the signatures of Sir W. Scott, andmen of WO
attainments. The argument drawn from the signatures
of first class men was, that the question—the religions
question—which agitated the public mind, was not is
be decided by the Protestant population, but the few—
by Sir W. Scott the novelist, and Dr. Chalmers. If such
was to be the decision, he should say it was contrary to
the Bill of Rights. A body of Protestant tradesmen
were as able to decide whether their religion should be
maintained as Sir W. Scott, or any other first class men
—(Cry of " no I") Those who said " No, not' would
perhaps tell him why. He knew that the Senior and
Junior Wranglers, with many others, said it depended
clothe scale of ;welled, and it it were to be decided ise
that test, why not try the scale of Cambridge as well as
Oxford ? He should always say the Protestant religion
Was the religion of the many, not the few. The people
d England acquired a knowledge of their religion fres
their Pastors, and they understood It as well as the great
Mean writer,and others whO exercised Bights of fancy.

Then torso:oh they were to bare Remeacethelic Judge,.
The lad Cathol c !lodge in this coestry was dodge Al-
l:than. The eecottie of that learned .person in a case
of libel proved .134 Catholic justice WAS )11, ookosed
to Protestant feeling. It would
.be tecollected that
the Bishops refused to read in the Fdtosches King J.me.'s
Declaration of Liberty of Conscienee. A %voicing ;splint
that Declaration we, called a. libel, aa I the cpie.tiort
way whether it was a libel or not? The Catholic Joie,
said in the fiat plate. "That no man can take MI him
to write oa the actual pease:es oaf Government, and
unless he has leave given him by Governmesit. if is a it..
bel whethertr se or false. Wow comfit° impeschGoverna
Mitt by written argument, that is libel. If I take pen
and orrice better than another, this is libel." So
much let Catholic law; bin he should read another
part of the judgineot:—.o I lay down this law: no
' /solvate man can write against the Government, be-
cause a private man has ambit g to do pi:h
Gosernatent.". He might be told that our law
el libel at the present day was bad, but ler the House
look to the law summed op by theCeoltolic Judge *him
hediad quoted, and soli whether the same feeling b:-
treeeo Catholic and Pow:swot might not spring u.s
again? Tune doctrines of passive nbediesace and non-
resistance had &Wayi been the rob of the Catholic
sebool. It was part of the Ecclesiastical law of the
Clough of Rome. The Cali loc Clergy said t 1 their
4 4ks—you shall read nothing. write within,, but that
which is IglbjeCt an the right of imp- imghtr If you do,
yoe most suffer outlet excommunication. They had been
taunted with the opinions of firot class meoo— he silk
gowns of the pampa day wear made se; viol to the stuff
gowns, but he deeded that the Petition from the Bar
rwpre.ented more than a p'rtiou ot the Bar. With
tesPoot to modern opinions. if names were mentioned,
be e ml,l also produce names. Lord Somers, kW-
ton, and Locke, were at least equal to two, of the
Scutti.b meteplaysiciaos of the present day. fie cool I
name Sidney, Haddington, and Sir W. B ackaotoe.atid
might contend that t! ow illustrious characters were to
be placed against any names they could bring. I. they
!awe to 1110 ifAlie the question by the tree unbiassed
judgment of Pinto:ant subjects, the Bill would be re-
j-cted. Having beto called on twice to deliver his
opinion, be should say. ii called on the third time. he
would answer again. If the NI should go bother he
would oppose it, and even challenge those who were its
advocates to sup koi t it—(The Honourable and Learned
Geatlensan took his seat amidst loud cheering).
Mr. Secretary PEEL said, the Hon. Washer for
Plymptoo had become a sort of challenger, and be
must answer the chalks:et, and say that he was still
prepa.ed to defend the Bid. Ba: after all the attacks
hat had been made on the Bill. none bad left him so
satisfied with it as those ache H .nourable Member ter
Ply mptots. When that lion. Member's arguments
failed, -be thought these was mason for increased
satisfaction with the Bill. For what had the Riga.
ments amounted to—oith the quotation bunted out
about Justice Anibal P—(Hear). What bad any one
to do with the absurd and unconstitutional witticisms
of Justice Allibon, any more thin Protestants
were to be answerable for a Jefferies T— (Hear.
hear)—or the Protestant advisers of ship money ?
But he must strip the Hon. and Learned Member of
some of his borrowed plumage. He had sat with him
(Mr. P.) in confidential communication up to the night
of the 2411, when he made his sp ech expiessing his ab-
horrence of this Ball, but which abhorrence had not been
before expressed. Seven days beime the weetirg of
Pail...mein he made a communication to roe lion.
Member, not as a confidentill and respoossible adviser
of the Crown, but as 'the legal adviser. His legal as-
sistance was 'squired to prepare the Aosociations Su; -
pression Bill ; and at the sometime an o Otoe re tf.e ge-
neral chasaCier if the other Bill was ioripatted to him.
He said n. Moog then to lead to the suppo loon that he
was against the, Bill, or that he approved of t; but lie
certainly expressed no abbot-owlet-of it. He assists d
zo prepare the Sup; ressioni 13dt ; and they 100 rto con-
sult him At out the laws of endowments, Etc.—blot &mu
to the 2Si, though. the Parlionent met on the' 5 h ol
February. be bad oo reason to dcubt about the Hon.
and Learned Gentleintn's opinions. There was much
confidential communication with him—but neerr any
doubt rscapeJ him as to the general policy of the mea-
sure. On the 22J the Noble Duke had ocrarion to
consult the Honourable Member—but till the debate ot
the SSI, nothing was heard about tepugnance to pre.
pare the Bill, or of abh 'trance of the measure—Meal).
All that he said was—he could not give till indisidual
suppw 1 to Catholic Emancipation—that he certainly
did say —( Hear). He did not think the Honourable
Member was warranted in his charges agdi:ist the Gni.
vernmeot. As to his law arguments against she Bill,
they were easily answered or r medied.. Tim Bill did
not repeal the Acts prohibiting intercourse with Rome ;
they were still its moat .% As to the ecclesiastical folooda-
tion, the exceptions applied to some few by (ism-,
coeld ili extend-4: to alt; and as to the pena'tes, that
provision could be made compulsion, s . a. not to be
dependant on any Prime Minister or Ann/ rey.tireeral.
Die amendmen a might be m.sde without r -com-
mitting the Bill; an re conowi mein he cou of out
agree. He c-uld add, to (poet the alarms ot all--
that the meat we had airmail been of the most t.e..e-
ficial tendency io Ireland—(Hw, hear). A roan who
may condemn the abstract measure, may still sup-
port the measure in it. present stage, from the ceit .inty
that it would be impossible to retrace waste; s, and riot
the reject on of the measure w uld be very different is:-
deeJ nom not having brought it forward. He hoped
the discussion of the question was now drawing too a
close, and that instead of spendi..g thirty or forty days
every Sesion on this questitr, re should be able to
devote that time to the general good of the country.—
Fur himself, however painful the duty lie had to perform.
he must still contend it was a duty, that he was bound
as a Minister of the Crown to Rite the best aJvice of
which be was capable, without reference to the speeches
he had formerly made, or the opinions he had held ; and
though his conduct was to be visited, as was thieoteted,
with the, loss of connections which be lighly valued,
yet he could not agree to preseove the most valued con-
nections by a violation of his duty to his S oreieign and
the Country. It was not necessary to bosrow the simile
of an Honourable Admiral—that the pilot should
always steer the same course; it might be necessary
foe the safety of the vessel that he should change to.
course, and it was equally access. ry that a Minister of
the Crown should act according to the exigencies of the
country. He bad endeavoured at eve. y sacrifice of pri-
vate feeling to act in the manner the exigencies of the
country demanded, from a person in his responsible
situation, and he felt, confident in the support of the
House and the counts y...(The Right Honourable Gent.
sat down amidst the loudest cheering.)
Sit R. INGLIS rose amid loud cries of "Q oration"
from some posits of the House, and of " Go on" from
others. The Hon. Member absolved that the question
of Catholic Emancipa inn had been brought toterard
during the present Session under ciicum lances the
most extraordinary and inexplicable; had been brought
. forward and supported by the Minoaers of a g4viltt.