Star.
London, England, 1829-02-20 00:00:00

she-Told ly, justice, . ___ any m.—
tuation may fairly lay claim. For what remains to be
done I will, at hitherto, not relit for a single hoer;
but the Constitution once gone, I care not whether 1
ever come here again.- If the Bill which is said to be
in contemplation should be introduced) and shoold
form part of the law Of the land, we shall sooner bi
later exchange Protestant Lords for Popish, Ptotestapst
Commons for Popish, and the Revolution of 1668 will
be utterly and totally undone. I shall, any Lords, fol..
low the example of previous speakers in not pressing
this discussion farther at present. We shall have ea
opportunity very shortly of discussing it at the utmost
length. But my honest opinion is, that the slighte,t in-'
troduction of Popery will lead to its spreld through
every part of the system. These are my sincere and
independent sentiments, and I am indifferent as to hoar
they may be received either in the House or out of it.
I have expressed them thus, considering itt to be a dolt
which I owed to my fellow subjects, to our common
King, and to myself. I feel it to be my duty, as long
as I have a seat in this House, to raise my voice against
Popish principles, and to maintain the Constitution as
settled at the Revolution of 1688.

Lord PLUNKETT, although this was not the proper
time to argue the question, most be permitted to advert.
to one of the arguments of the Noble Eatl, who, follow,
ing the example of the Illustrious Duke, had taken for
granted that the subversion of the Protestant Constitu-
tion was a necessary consequence of repealing the dis-
qualifying statutes. He trusted he was as good a friend
to the Protestant Constitution as any of their Lnrdships,
apd without doubting the sincerity of any Noble Lord,
he would say that they were the greatest enemies of
the Protestant Constitution who placed it upon grounds
inconsistent with the rights of a large proportion of the
subjects of the State. The principle of exclusion was
held to be one of the glorious principles of the Revo.
lotion, and althoogh the argument had been a thousand
times refuted both in this and the other House of Par-
battiest, the advocates of exclusion perseveringly se.
turned to it. He pledged himself to show that there
was.no such principle recognized at the Revolution,—
The only principle the; established wits that of a Pro-
testant King. The lam:. which excluded the. Roman
'Catholics were not. ea" entitled at the period of the
Revolution. The ota!pew. yeas that of the ISth of
Charles 11. which haii,tte origin in the plot of Titus
Oates, which was the. offspring of falsehood. To say
that this law was a part of the Revolution was to dis-
grace tie Revolution. The Clubs established to per.
palpate this law should not profane the name of Bruns.
wicklY adopting It 4 they ought m call themselves Titus
:Qatees Clubs. This being the origin of the law °featly..
sloe, what was its object? It *as to guard against the
danger oft Popish successor; and if Parliament could
have passed a law exclodingJames the Second from
the.throoe. they. would not. have. excluded the Roman
Catholic subjects of the Crown from their civil rights.
So far from being, identified with a Protestant succes-
'sion,lt Was adopted as a substitution for a Protestant
iuccession. at the perod of the Revolution, did
they say that this low was to be considered as immit
table and eternal? They did no such thing. They
declared that. a Protestant succession was to be a fun.
damental lair of the. &Ate, and he thought hanged not
ask the. Noble Duke if there was any thing in his pro:
posed measure to affect the Protestant succession? The
'silence of the Constitution was a Representative Go-
vernment ; but the Noble Earl took up the exemption
to the Constitution. and confounded it with the Consti-
tution itself. The time was not then ripe for repealing
the disqualifying Statutes, but there was a studious and
ar.xioth desire to avoid recognising exclusions and dis-
qualifications as part of the Constitution. Where were
they to be found in the. Bill of Rights, which included
whatever was to he deemed essential? The NobleL'rd
here referred to the Acts of Union with Scotland and
Ireland, bath of which negatived the assumption that
the disqualifying Statutes were fundamental and un-
alterable laws 4 the inooarcl.y. The Ministers were
about to intim:as a great act of justice and polity, the
anticip stion of which had already done more to trio.
guiltiest Ireland than could have been accomplished by
anz other means; and he hoped to see the day whip
this Act would be admitted, even by those who now'
opposed it, to bare exalted the glory, extended the re-
sources, and increased the power of the State.
The Earl of ELDON begged to be allowed to make
one observation. He could assure the Honourable and
Learned Lord who bad jos; sat down, that the ergo.
menu he. had seed bad 'been answered over and over
again in that House; andhe would only.add that, when
the question came regularly before their Lordship, and
that the proposed measure was open to discussion; he
(Lord Eldon) would be ready' to with the Noble
and Learned Lord, and with the Noble Lord who sat
behiad him (Lord Holland).
Lord REDESDALB addressed the Hotise.lo reference
to what had lallen froa. the Noble anJ Learned Lord
(Plunkett), with regard to the security afforded by the
circumstance that the possessor of the Crown was a
Protestani; be begged to be allowed to observe that, if
the King was surrounded by, advisers who were not
Protestants, it would be impossible for him to.protect
the Protestant constitution. What has passed t.ithin
few years. was sufficient to convince any rational swan
that it was even more ins; or tent that the principal Mi-
nisters
of the Crown should he Protestant than that the
King himself .hould be a P.oteront. There were cer-
tain fundamental principles agreed to and embodied in
laws which had hitherto been the security of the Pro-
testant Churches of Eggland, Ireland, and sarmiland.—
The laws enacted that the Throne should be altad by
a Protestant, and that the two Houses. of Parliament
shOuld he exclusively Protestant. This was the end
and principle of the law, because it had resolved that this
should be a Protestant Kingdom.. It was now soposed
o, admit:Catholics into.the Legislature. which was, in
effect, saying that it was no longer expedient tn.preserve
the..Po..testant Constitution of those realms, tor the ob.,
jest of the laws ex:lading the Catholics was to pee.
seism the Protestant Constitution. It might be said
that, as the King was to remain Protestant, the Protes-
tant Constitution was not altered. But he contended that
it was impa red by the admission of Roman Catholics,
to the two Houses of Parliameut, and that it was now
become a Roman Catholic Constitution, less the King,
who was to remain a Protestant. This was the only
difference between a Constitution entirely Catholic sod
that which was now psopo4d, and which he copula's'
was a direct subversion of. tbe Constitution. established'
at the Revolution, which bad so long been approved of
by the inhabitants ot those,l444ents. In,conelesion, the
Noble Lord intireatodhii impatiensof opposing any fare
ther coraessious to the Rerillan Catholics, whenever,
the proposiiirio tq th#t effect came regularly.before.the
Haire.' • ' •
Smi'MATHURST.rese tb fiesied th•lrlawdthdyi get they.

this swoop,. ea, lek !eke 4, hers
. *ea. . - • %
and tile Leas Cearollehqk 'Pe
'
ANC=at.. 4
.._ ► said fekli. jo‘
,:t• the Heise, est to gen . theJ
had wited.en the stun.
before the House w en .a Hoeg
Duke (Cumberland) rose to address them. Incidence
to the Royal Doke he did not interfere. ' A Noble E srt
(Grey) had fallen into she sameonist.lee, .end Meer
the Royal Dube In reply, as 0 doubt he thought be
was justified itt 'doing. 'He (the Lord, Chinteollor) •did
not leer Mittel( justified in interpoling.wbile the Noble
Earl was addressing the Hon e ; but he had' nor to
apologise for allowing.the rules of their Lordships to be
deviated from so far. He thought he was also celled
on, from what had fallen from the Noble and Le+ned
Lords who had addressed theme to ;state distinctly:the
grounds upon which be was prepaled to vi to `tor Vie
repeal of these laws, which he -did tint hesitate to state
he had long considered essential to the security of the
best interests of the counts y. After a careful perusal of
the
m, he confessed be did entertain an opinion different
from the Noble and Learned Lords. He stated that
opinion with great deference, yet with great firmness,
and aker the best. attention he had teen able to give to
the subject; and he could assure their Lordshi pshe-vroted
take no-part in advocating any measure which was in-
consistent with the Constitution of these kingdoms. He
would but ill deserve to be placed in the situation he
held if he recommended any measure destructive to the
•Constitution, or injurious to the interest ef the country.
lit bad been said that, in re, Ealing the laws affecting his
Maj sty'sltomanCatholic subjects,thoy actedat variance
with the principles of those individuals who had est s-
wished the .Constitution of 1688. .When •a calm and
deliberate view was taken of the state of behold espe-
cially. and of the whole sondition of the kingdom
as affected by those laws, be was satisfied that the
Illustrious individuals to whom rename had been
side, were they now living, and aware of the present
-state of the country, would pursue the very same course
tallith wasporsued by the adasinistratina. Another topic
had been glanced at, and many doubts, inspici pns, and
surmises, had been thrown out with respect to the pro-
Med measures, as if they could in any degree affect the
Slecceseion to the Crown. When the question came regu-
larly before the House he would beready totonabat with
Noble and Learned Lords, and he made bold to say that
there would be nothing its the proposed measuirs that
bore in the-slightest degree on that point. He had the
greatest possible respect for the talents of his Noble and
Learned Frieark(the Earl of Eldon). but when the q•ses•
bon came tally before the House, be thought be should
be able to expi,se the fallacy of the Noble Earl's argu-
waif. aud to prove that there wasnothing inconsistent
,with.the principles established at the Revolutino in the
proposed measure for admitting Catholics to Parlia-
ment. He would not trespass longer on theit.J...ord•
ships' attend= in. respect to the doctrine that bad teen
held on this bead, but he thought that the course of
proceeding adopted was only calculated to agitate
the public mind, and to lead to no good result.—
In his Majestes.hlessage, which the House had heard
on the first. night of the Session, an allusion was
Amide to the necessity. that existed of discussing this
question with temper and moderation; but since that
night every attempt.had been made to agitate the public
mind, and to prevent the temperate consideration of the
question. Was this decent os proper, he would ask,
when the contents of his Majesty's gracious Speech were
considered ? His Majesty recommended that this great
and important object should be treated. when it came
to be discussed, in a manner worthy of its imoortance.
Noble Lords w.te to consider whether the disabilities
sander which his Majesty's Catholic subjects lab oared
I could be removed, so far as this could be done consis-
[tently with the Protestant Constitution, and with the
'rights and privileges of the Established Church? This
being the recommendation of his Majesty, the Adminis-
tration were pledged not to introduce soy mea.us e incon-
sistent with that recommendation; and such being the
pledge given by Ministers, he conceived it would have
been more proper that tholi. Lordships should w,ait until
they saw the proposed measure, and if, when it was
submitted to Parliament, it did not come up tohis Ma.
jesty's recommendation, then it would be their Lord•
ships' duty not do adopt it. For his min part he was
of opinion, nay, he was satisfied. that the measures
which would be proposed to Parliament by his Noble
Friend at the head of the Government might be assented
to in perfect conformity with the recommendation of
his Majesty. and without danger. and even with satis-
faction. He had thought it his duty to make.these few
observations, though he felt that by so doing he wale:-
tending that irregular discussion which had, perhaps,
already proceeded too far. •
The Duke of RICHMOND begged to set the Noble
and Learned Lord right. The Noble and Learned Lord
seemed to et:olefin that it was his duty to set the House
right on points of order, but he could inform the Noble
and Learned Lord, that in that House no such right
was recognised, though I e believed it was admitted in
the other House of Parliament. Forluis own part, he
had not seen any attempt to inilame the passions of
the people on the great question which was now
the Wont of discussion; but as they were now upon
it, he begged to know when the new light in re-
gard of it when the new light bad arisen tin the
Noble and Learned Lord? The Noble and Learned
Lord had no doubt altered his opinions from conscien-
tious motives, but he (the Duke of Richmond) claimed
for himself, and for those who acted with him, and thus
adhered to their former opinions, the same honesty of
rnotive—(Hear, heat). For his own part he was averse
from any further concessions to the Catholics; he was
satisfied with the hews as they at present stood. If be
thought any alteration would be advantageous he would
have watched at bat the nature of. the proposed securi-
des were before he came to any cleciaion; but he re-
peated that he was averse from any sketationi and
when the question came before the House Jae, for one,
should be prepared to vote against any further cower°
sion—(Hear, hear). The Noble Doke concluded by
moving an adjournment.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN begged to speak die;
word to order. The discussion had proceeded, not on,
any incidental motion, but in fact, no motion at all. He:
did not believe that the motion for adjournment, which'
had just been made by the Noble Duke, was at 4110
cessary ; and, though he admitted that thaNuble and
Learned Lord was not obliged is eficio, unless parti-
cularly called on. to expound the orders of the House,*
yet it often became. necessary to appeal to the Noble
and Learned Lord. A question sometimes arose,whether,
there was or was not a motion before the House? and.,
in that case, to whom was the House-to appeal if the
Noble and Leernect.Lord did not suggest what the l
orders of the Howe were?—(Hear I) lie regretted the'
irregular discuations.that bad, taken place,,ancl would'
nit odd to ithl loeger:trespessing on their Lottishiro
the More especially either. mauls! be ample °pruning
foi. atoll discussion of the props* amours is thet
House. lie *add's* dcusia, tpeitilogisbips,ittOse
'Pressing his isors.tissi that. discussiewirool4bbo46*

my part, I pot no faith in any of them. son qtt4lireit-Satof ell Is
fled in the posit:slag ibis, the proposed snowily.
*aims ow, but t vazoritvim—mr,
guiltr,..
,w. 049 op have the Witt of-tagebaoging a Prate"' at rust
' fors* Popish aovernaneattpudoostitution. In stating - Tue LOKD C ANC
thijopirsion, pad in sopponing it as I best may, I ask so offer some apolog to
040 Isfasysedf tbardestm titindolgeoce, or rather, I motives on which he ha.
should say, of justice, to which any man in such a si. Mete was no question t
.._