Star.
London, England, 1829-04-03 00:00:00

FRIDAY EVENING, APRIL 3, 1829.

larger portion of your Lordships time and attention-on
the present occasion than I have hitherto been in the
habit of doing ; but I do assure your Lordships that
it is not my intention to occupy one minute of your
Lordships time in making any statement relative to
myself or to my conduct in this transaction, any fur-
ther than to 'iciness the sincere regret which I feel in
being compelled to differ on this subject from many
f whose opinions I entertain the highest respect, and
fir whom, personally. I feel the most sincere regard. I
must. however, ad f, that, having considered the part I
have thought proper to take on this que tion to be no.
thing less than the performance of a duty incumbent
nn me, I mu t state that no feeling of private regards
no respect that I may entertain for the opinions of others,
can make me depart from the course of what I con-
ceive to be my duty on this question. And here allow
ins to say, my Lords, that, in comparing my own opi-
nion on the subject with that of others who, halls ex-
perience and other causes, have had the best opportunity
of forming a judgment upon it, I may claim your
Lordships confidence that I would not have adopted
my present opinion if I had not believed it to be a
sound and a jest one. My Lords, I shell, in the fist
place. call year Lordships attention to the state of Ire-
land. MrLtirds. I know that some persons consider
that the state of Ireland has nothing to do with this
snea.nre—that it ou.ht to be left out nf the question
altogether. Others have said that Ireland has been in
a disturbed state for these last twenty years—that we
are accustomed to the fact—and that it should make
no alteration in the circumstances requiring your Lord
ships consideration. Ttue. Ireland has been disturbed
all that time, and long before it. But, my Lords. al-
low me to state that circumstances of considerable
aggravation have occurre i within the last year or two,
and that peculiar circumstances have added consider.
ably to that aggravation; for, my Lords, I must de-
clare, though the Government possesses no legal proof
of die fact, that there existed a general organization of
the people for purposes of mischief. This organi-
sation, my Lords, has been proved, not only by the
open declarations of those who sought and managed
the organization, but by the effects produced by it.
The organization was proved by the elections that have
taken place same time back; it was proved by the
election for the county of Clare last year, and by the
events which followed the election. It appeared in the
proceedings of a Gentleman who went, accompanied
lby a body of men, to the north of Ireland—in the pro-
ceedings of a Gentleman in Templemore, in Killinaule,
and other parts of that district—in the proceedings of
another Gentleman in the south, for instance, in Clan-
mel, in simultaneous meetings—and in the acts of other
Gentlemen sent from the Catholic Association. In all
these transactions there appeared an organisation pro-
ceeding from a superior source of authority. My Lords,
that organisation produced a state of society in Ire-
land that aggravated the previously existing evils of
that unfortunate country. Let me take, for example,
the attack made on the town of Ard at midnight, by
a body of people from a mountainous district, andF
their repulse by the armed inhabitants of the town.
That was an occurrence, my Lords, which could not
'have taken place in any other state of society than
that with a hich Ireland was at that time 'Acted.
Let us take a similar attack on the town of Charleville.
Let us take the conduct of the Catholic Association in
deliberating that treasure of inducing the Catholics
to cease dealing with the Protestants. Can it be be-
lieved, my Lords, supposing the Catholic Association
to have approved and recommended that proj-ct of
Catholics ceasing to deal with Protestants—can it be
believed for a mnment that they would not have been
able to carry the measure into execution? And, fur-
cur, is it ssible to believe that the same authority
would not have been able to dissuade the people from
discharging the contracts into which they may have en..
tered with Protestants? My Lords, l say that these cit.
cumstauces prove that the people of Ireland were fast
verging towards that state of society ins hich it would
have been impossible that the system of trial by Jury
could be used for the administration of the law, the
oistribution of justice, or the protection of life and pro.
pens,. This, my buds, is the state of society to which
I have desired to draw your Lordships attention, and
for whose evils I have to entreat your Lordships to pro-
vide a remedy. Before, however, I bring the question
iof the remedy under your Lordship,' consideration, 1
an. anxious to show the effect of the state of the law on
the King's Frelogatise. My Lords. his Majery was
unable to create any new Peers; and the reason was
this, that the Ministers west not able to recommend
his Majesty to mate ary, for the cleating% of a Peer
would nave caused the election of another Member of
Parliament; and an election was that sort of occurrence
which, in the then excite) condition of the parties on
both Q.; might have given list to the shedding of
blood, and have terminated in a civil war. Another
objecti.,n against a new election was, that it would
have tended to give an additional triumph to the Ca-
tholic A sociation. But I may be told by Noble Lords'
that this state of affairs arose from the non execution of '
the laws. My Lords, there was no tangible violation
of the laws; there was no resistance. In those places
where the military were not at hand the Magistrates
were terrified. Nu troops were employed except on
the occasion of processi .ns in the north of Ireland, be.
cause no opposition was offered to the King's troops,
and no instance occurred in which the laws could not
be enforced in the usual manner. When, therefore, I
bear Noble Lords reproach his Majesty's Government
with not having carried the laws into execution in Ire.
land, as had been done in England, it proves to me
that those who say so do not understand what has been
the state of things in Ireland. When. in the year 1819,
it was deemed necessary to carry the laws into execs-
lion in this country, the measures taken for that put-
.pose were directed against a body of people assembled
for an illegal purpose, who, when called upon by the
Magistrates to disperse, refused, in consequence of
witch the Magistrates were obliged to order the troops
to disperse them by force. But in the case of Ireland
no such orders could be given. because the Magistrates
had no troops capable of enrorcing them. In a case
which extended over the whole country, it would be
seen that it would be quite impossible to have Magir
trates at every spot, and seedy at every boor to put an
end to proceedings so outrageous and so disgraceful to
the country. It appeared clearly that neither the form
of the power nor the means possessed by GO•01111111ftt
would enable them to put an end to such a state of

things. It was necessity. thenifore, to come to Parlia-
ment to ask its authority for other =awes capable of

effecting that object. We all know perfectly well that
the opinion of the majority in another place is, that in
order to put an end to the state of things which I have
been describing, it is necessary to concede what are
called the Catholic Claims—(Loud and repeated cheer-
ing). We might, to be sure, have come down and
have asked of Parliament to enable us to put down the
Catholic Association; but what chance had we of pre-
vailing on Parliament to pass such a Bill as that which
has lately become a law, without swing, at the same
time, that we were ready to enter on the whole clues-
tinn of the condition of Ireland? Suppose Parliament
had given us a Bill to put down the Catholic Associa-
tion, would even such a law as that which has la-ely
passed be a remedy for the state of things I have de.
scribed to your Lordships s' Would it do any one thing
towards putting an end to that organization which
have stated to have existence? Would it do any one
tbing towards putting dotib the meetings of that very
body against which it was direct .d ? Would it. in fine,
do any thing towards ameliorating the state of Ireland
alone, and unaccompanied bs any other measure ? It
may be said, well, if that won't do, let us proceed to
blows! We all know what is -meant by coming to
blows—civil war--(Cheers). Now, I believe that every
Government must and swot to be prepared to carry
into execution the laws of the country by the force placed
at their disposal, if necessity shall so require. I do not
mean military force, but the ordinary force at the dispo-
sal of Government. And, ab ive all, they should be ready
to oppose any resistance that may be offered to the laws
by the disaffected, ill-inclined, and ill-disposed. 1104 in
the present case, as 1 More already stated, there was no
resistance to the laws. Nay, farther, I am positively
certain that this state of things bordering upon civil
war, attended by all the evils of civil war (and which
have endured for the last year and a half). might
have continued much longer to disgrace the country
and the Government, and that those who were at the
head of, and who directed those proceedings, would
have taken good care not to I ffer such resistance as
would have given to the Government such force as
might be necessary to put an end to them. Those per-
sons knelt/ too well that they could not offer effective
resistance to the King's Government; that they them
selves would be the first victims of any collision; and,
being able, and sagacious, and well-informed men. they
were perfectly aware of what mischief might have :c-
-oaked to themselves, and therefore would have taken
very good care to avoid it. Consequently, this state of
things might have continued for several years, without
his Majesty's Government having an opportunity offered
them of effectually putting it down. But, even if such
an opportunity had been presented to us, I should have
thought it my duty to correct it by other means than
force—(Cheers). I am one of those who have been
engaged in war beyond most men, and, unfortunately,
Iprincipally in civil war; and I must say this, that, at
any sacrifice whatever. I would avoid every one ap-
proach to civil war. I would do all I could, even sa-
crifice my life, to prevent such a catastrophe. Nothing
could be so disastrous to the cranny, nothing so de-
structive uf its prosperity, as civil war; nothing could
take place that tended so comPletely to oemoialize and
degrade as such a conflict, in which the hand of n• igh
boor is -raised against neighbour—that of the foists
against the son, and of the son against the Lather—of
the brother against the brother—of the servant against
his master—a conflict, I repeat, which 'trust end In
confusion and destruction. These are the consequences
to which men must look who engage in or encourage
civil war. The measure, therefore, behne your Lord-
ships was the best that we could plan to prevent such a
calamity, and fur bringing it for ward I will hold my-
self responsible. Let u. look a little faith-s. If civil
war be so bad when occasioned by resistance to Go-
vernment—if such a collision is to be avoided by all
means possible—how much more necessaty is it to avoid
a civil war, in which, in orris:• to put down one portion.
it a oulif be necessary to arm and to mite the mites ?
I am quite sure there is no maa that now hears me
that would not shudder were such a proposition made
to him ; yet such must have been the result had we
attempted to terminate the state of things to which
have referred otherwise than by a measure of concilia-
tion. lii this view, then, merely I think we are joisti
fie.' in the measure we have proposed to Parliament.
But let us in addition look to what has passed at oilier
per inds. I am old enough to remember the rebellion
01 1798. I was not then in Ireland, being on service
at a considerable distance from it; but, if 1 ant not
much mistaken. it will be found that the Parliament cf
that day went (walked, I believe,) up to the Lord Lieu.
tenant, a resolution which passed unanimuu ly. be-
seeching his Etcellency to use every means in his
power to put down that rebellion. The Lord Lieut--
leant did so, did take the 1111•111101 VS recommended, and
did succeed in putting it down. %Shot happened after-
wards? In the very next Session Government pro.
posed to put au end to that very Parliament, and to
unite it to the Legislature of Great Britain, principally
tor the purpose of proposing and carrying that measure
now before your Lordships; and, in point ..1 fact, it
was the very first measure proposed after that legisla-
tive union. Is it possible, therefo e, that Noble Lords
can believe, supposing there were such a state of things
as that which I have anticipated, that it could be car-
ried on or concluded without recourse being had to this
very measure? I am certain that when we look to the
division of opinion that prevails in both Houses of Par-
liament un this subject—that when we look on the d 6
vision of opinion that equally prevails in every family
of this kingdom and of Ireland—in every family, I .ay,
from the most eminent to the most humble—that par.
titularly when we look to the disunion of opinion which
prevails amongst the Protestants of Ireland on this same
subject, your Lordships will see a vast difference in the'
manner in which such a contest as that to which I have
alluded would be now carried on, and that in which
the former was conducted—(Hear, hear, bear).—
Your Lordships would recollect that a Petition has been
recently presented to you which proves that diversity
of opinion amongst the Protestants of Ireland to which
have referred. In 1798 the contrary *as the fact.
The House of Commas and the House of Peers in Ire-
land were then unanimous. How stands the case at
pineal ? The petition I have just mentioned in favour
of the Catholic Claims was signed by seven Marquise.,
!minty-seven Earls, a vast number of Peers of other
ranks, many Baronets, and not less than 2,000 other
persons, all possessing considerable property in Ireland.
Will it be emended, then, this was not an altered state
of things? It may be necessary to observe. that the
contest now must be carried on under circennuuwes

totally different. My Lords, is it possibly to benese
that Patoliameat, at such a period as the present —that
Parliament, aware of these changes—that this Hon e,
seeing the opinion expressed upon the subject by the
(abet House of Parliament—seeing the opinion expressed
by many of the Protestants ► f beim+. and the mho r
expressions of public opinion fevinuable to this mea-
sure—that this House will continue to oppose the con-
cession? It is impossible that this House could coo-
tinue to go on long with au •11 an oppaoitron, without
increasing the difficuties of the country. h been re
Decease, y to see what benefit can arise to ally one class
of the State, by continuing a pertin •cious moon e • tit
of which so many evils may arise. lam told that that
resistance is to preserve the Constitution of 16S8—that
the Acts of 1688 permanently excluded Rom en -Catho-
lics from power—and that they being so excluded, it .s
necessary to incur all the evils to which 1 have refe red
for the purpose perpetuating that exclusion. If Noble
Lords will take the trouble of looking for themselsea,
they will see how that matter stands. I meant, e omen
sent exclusion of Catholics from Pediment. lit the Bill
of Rights many things ate petusenently enacted, awl
properly so; and these ate, that liberty shall be ponsa-
'sem, that the security of the Protestantism of the Fermin
who sits on the throne shall be pet martini—that i., that
the King shall be a Protestant, and that he shall sat
marry a Papist. Teen there is an oa•h of allegiance.
which is also permanent; but there was.no permanency
given to the oath cf supremacy, nor to the declarati.ss
against transubstantiation, for the Oath of Supremacy
was altered before the end of the reign. With respect
to the out,' to be taken by Members of Parliament, a d
the declera•ion to be made agaiust tt it ulotaatiatiou,
against the invocation of Saints spoil the somber f the
mass, these were not imposed by Acts of Wilh.m 111.
but by Asti of Charles 11. Diving that reign cell in
oaths were prescribed to be taken by persons of the
Church of England, namely, those of the vile teentb and
fourteenth years of his reign, and in the tweeity-fifth
and thirtieth years oaths were framed to exclude Ca-
tholics born Parliament. At the Revolution. King
William thought it would be proper to extend the basis
eat his Government by the admission of Pr. testant Diso
smite's, and therefore recommended that th it pal, of
the Oath of Supremacy prescribed by the IS+ and lb It
Charles 11. which the Dissenteis could ion take. should
be r. peeled. This. then. I say, is the !nom yof 'hose
oaths froM Charles H. to Witham HI The temea..J.4
of the Oath of Supremacy which the Di s •niers could
take, could net be taken by the Catholics. D tiger hid
arisen in the reign of Chat les 11. and continu d to exist
in the time of William Pl. but the oath was altered,
although not as respected the Catholics, because the
great principle of the Revolution was to narrow as much
as possible the excitatory laws, and that principle was
embodied in the Bill of Rights. YetjNotsle Lord-, its
stating what they cell the camciple • 1688. et elated
that the laws excluding C tholics sere eqoally peter as
Dent with that pail of the Bail of Rights,which secured
the Prot smote* of the Ceownl Why, .sny Lord.. if
you refer to the words of the Act, you well see dust this
is just the diffeseihe between that which is pet nostorl4
and chat which is not per moment —that the Prot -giantism
of the Crowns it to last for ever. tlie iibeitr's of the
pecyle to last tor ever, but not these oaths. Neat, we
have the Act of Union with Scotian.% %%het does that
say ? a• That the (oohs to be telt n by Measlier.. f
Parliament shall be those laiJ down in the Act of Va A.
loam and Mary. until Parliament shall Macro sae ditece
—end this is all that is now • ailed the permit, ent each'.
*ion of Catholicsl That wa, the oath to be taken hy
Members of Parliament as laid den by she .1c of
William and Mary. " until Pailiament s all toilet a lid
direct'—(Cheers)—and that is all that can be said per-
manently to exclude the Cathol cs. N .w. I beg to ob.
%nee that, if the Act that excludes Catholics from se is
in Pediment is to be permanent. these i• an •ihrt. the
Bth of William and Mary. cap 8. sec.lo. which requires
officers of the army and navy to take tin e very oaths
previous to the assumption of ciattnissions. N -oi
ask your Lordships why an Act mode in the 1.1
William and Mary. excluding Catholics from Perlis.
merit, should be deemed MOM permanent than an Act
made seven years sifter by the same Monetcty, ex-
cluding Catholics from the army and navy, Which hest
has been several yeats ago eel cited ? 1 ans sure the
Noble and Learned L rd will give an an-wee to this
questi• n. and show the House upon what groom'', he
considers one of these Acts to be a' pet manent meestate
and the other not ; sod that be will show your Lore-
ships how he was sight in consenting, in 1817. to tie
feral of the Act of Bth William I. chap. 8. s et.
Rut, my Lord, the troth is, that ',either of these A. is
was permanent ; that the Par liemesst of this coontr!. in
the reign of Queen Anne. by the Act of U.►ann with
Scotland, recognised cut the Act of William, so tar 411
it relates to seats in Pailiament, was not peimanent,
and that the Noble and Learned Lord was pet tectly
right in consenting to the repeal r f the Bv. N mot an, I.
ch. 8, sec. 10. Now, my Lords, if this esclusire clause
ill the Act of 1688 be not permanent—if it has been re-
cognised as not being permanent by the Acts sit Union
of England with Scotland, and oh Gre t Boutin with
Ireland—l would ask your Lordshi,is whether yru
are not at liberty to consider tlx expediency of now
erpealing it altogether, for the plop. se of relieving
this country from the evils under which she is tabour-
ing—whether you are noi called u 0.. to r view the
whole state of the representation in Ireland ? I would
even ask your Lordships whether. even if the Act of
which 1 am speaking had been I.eraianent. you would
not feel it your duty to take this subject into you: con-
sideration under the present circumstances of she coon-
try ? I would ask your Lordships whether it is not
desirable to repeal this law for the relief • f the Perlia-
ascot itself, geoaning under the weight of the P apish
infbience, which is in Ireland eaercised and brought to
bear upon elections? I would ask year Loodshaps (if
there were no ether motive for the rep, a ► okether is
would not be desirable lot the purpose of relieving the
country from the influence which 1 have joo turn-
tioard ? My Lords, I have no*, I ho, e. aulfisiri de
shown bow the present state of t e law operate. upon
the other great interests of the country, but I now wilt
to call your Lordsbips attention more particularly t
the manner in which it weeks upon the Church stse f.
That part of the united Church of England and Lucia d
which is situated in Ireland is placed in this peculiar
situation—it is the church of the atom ity of the p• ogle.
must. at the same time, say that there does not exist
a more exemplary, a more pious, or a more awned
body of men than the clergy of iliac Church. That
•part of the Church does certainly enjoy the Jimmie

?•

will P_ 1. I&• Al?,-44't
Iz> . 11 ~..i.,AN.
. - ... ~ • ,
,
.1.. ‘ ~..:4,..
%-
Pales Sly , cit.