Star.
London, England, 1829-02-17 00:00:00

The Duke of WELLINGTON would beg to remind ,
Iris Noble Friend. that upon the occasion alluded to, he
(the Duke of Wellington) had expressly iodic it'd tie '
COWS* which his Majesty's Ministers had determined
to pursue. He then stated, in answer to a ques ion from
a Noble Lord, that it was their intention to introduce in
the course of the present Session, a measu e CI the ad-
justment of what was called the Catholic Question. '
which would include the general removal of all dis-
abilities, with certain eacepsions founded upon special
reasons; and that that measure would be attended by
other measures, rendered necessary by the removal of
those disabilities. These were the words, or words to
the same effect, which he made use of on that occasion,
and he then declined, as he still begged to decline, to
give for the present any further information upon the
subject.
The Earl of ELDON said the Noble Duke had cer-
tainly set him right. What he now understood him to
mean was, the removal of all disabilities a ith some ex-
cept ions.
Lord HOLLAND—The Noble Dake had given a
most satisfactory answer to t!.e exviit to which i.e
chose to go, and the most satisfactory reasons for not
choosing to go further. The recommendation of the
Noble Lord ou the cross bench, of a penal dissolutiou
of Parliament was the most unconstitutional idea he
had ever heard suggested in that House. Then the ex-
pression tliat the proposed measure v.ot:ld subvert the
Constitution as established at the Revolution, was the
most violent and unreasonable that tad ever been em-
ployed since the days of Lord George Gordon. Was
there any body wild or mad enough to think of touch-
ing the Protestant succession ? The disqualifications
now proposed to be repealed were not enacted at the
period of the Revolution. So far from Icing established
at the Revolution—so far from being connected with
the Protestant succession, they were at the time of
their enactment substituted iii lieu of a Protestant suc-
cession. He called upon them to look at the Acts of
Crniois with Scotland and Ireland. The.e spoke of the dit
qualifying Statutes as being to remain in force so long
as Parliament should not determine otherwise; but
they did not speak of the Protestant succession as if it
were to remain in force only so long as Parliament
should not determine otherwise. A Parliamentary Go-
treenment was insisted on at the time of the Revolution
as a fundamental and eerpettial principle of the Con-
stitution, and so was a Protestant succession to the
Crown. Yet the first cf these principles. Fermis in
their zeal for ihe Constitution would now endeavour to
overthrow. But he would not now enter into so wide
a field of discussion. He begged, box ever, their Lord-
ships and the people of this country to consider, that
there was no intention to shake the Protestant succes-
sion. A Parliamentary Government and a Protestant
succession were principles of the Constitution, but they
were not its. only principles. Another principle was,
that the King had a right to the services of all his sub-
j-cts, and that the people had a right to the services of
all their fellow subjects. He desired to know by what
right the Duke of Norfolk could enter that House. and
by what right the people of Clare had elected Mr.O'Con-
glen ? It was not by a right founded upon any statute,but
, by the common law. disqualifying Statutes were
only temporary regulations, wise and necessary,,
perhaps, at the time of their enactment; but so far