Star.
London, England, 1828-05-09 00:00:00

there had been no reason to dread the power of the Pope?
why. Sir, even Doctor Doyle himself, one of the titular
Batson! the Roman Catholics, has acknowledged that
the rope enjoys not only spiritual and ecclesiastical,
poM ei these kingdoms, but real authority ; and that
these formed part of that faith which every Catholic,
liras bound to b lieve. All persons know that testamenl.
toy causes of Catholics were sent to Rome for decision
__but what • have testamentary causes to do with the
spiritual supremacy of thePupe ? Besides, the Pope gave
decisions on questions of the legitimacy of :the chil-
dren of Catholics, and on doing so made appropria•
eons of the hereditary property connected with the ques-
tion, anJ so exercised a domination that was not merely
• atm!, but really temporal. The question then for
our consideration is, whether that change of opinion has
taken place in the opinions of the Roman Catholics
which could warrant us in throwing open the doors of
efice to them, without exacting of them any test for the
protection or security of the Established Church ? I
prove that no such alteration has taken place,
but that their religious opinions are still the same as
veer, and productive of the same mischief—nay more,
I say that the Catholics ask now of us more than ever
they enjoyed when theirs was the religion of the land
--for there was no time, I contend, no period in our
history, when the Bishops were not appointed by the
Crown ; but they object to the interference of the Cs own
in the appointment of their bishops, as appears from the
conduct and declarations of those among them most
interested in the question—these Bishops,for I find them,
after the Legislature-had intimated a wish to grant their
claims on receiving certain securities. I find that,- on.
the 27th of May, 1813, the Catholic Bishops- declared
is assembly, that the security demanded was inconsis-
tent e ith the interests'of the Catholic religion. Now,
what was that security ? That no person disallowed by
the Crown should be appointed Bishop. Nor were the
Bishops the only authorities against the concession of
that security : they were followed by the parish priests
of the diocese of Dublin, who resolved, that togrant the
power of appointing Catholic Bishops to persons not
Ca holies, was not 'only inexpedient, but injurious to
the cause of Catholicy. Now, Sir, I contend that they
a k more than they ever did before, unless they place
in hoist of their petition the security which was required
• ii 11323. But, Sir, I shall prove that they ask more than
ailoeed to Catholics in any state in Europe. And
first, it appears from the Report of a Committee,
in 1816, that in Austria the Catholic Bishops are ap-
p•inted by th - Emperor ; in Naples, on the very threshold
tithe It man dominions, no Bull ofthe Pope s valid until
it I•as teen confirmed by the royal exequatur ; in France,
the King a, points to all vacancies, and even in Spain, the
strong ho d of Pottery, no Bull of the Pope is valid until
it has received the consent of the King, who appoints to
ail ecclesiastical vacancies. Even in Russia, where the
Greek religon is the established faith, as different from
the Ca holic as the Protestant is, and where the Ca-
tholic Religion is only tolerated, the Cathol c Bishops
are appointed by the Emperor, and no Bull or Rescript
.of the Pope's is by law allowed to be published unt 1
it his been referred to the Senate, and sanctioned by
the Emperor. In Prussia, where the greater portion of
the population is Lutheran, and the Jester Catholic, we
hive the authority of a liberal and acute-minded man,
M. Adams, now chief Magistrate of the United States,
tie, Plenie otentiary to the Court of Berlin, who says
that the appointment of the Catholic Bishops in Prussia
rests with the King of Pi ussia ; that he has declared him-
self head or all the Churches s ithin his dominions, and
the P..pe Vicar-General ender him (a laugh); and that
the only appeal from his decision lies (not to the
but to a Provincial Synod. Some opposi-
tion to these (his Majesty of Prussia's) claims to
ecclesiastical pester, were at first made by a Chapter,
but the Chapter was ultimately obliged to submit. So,
Isar, it we should impose securities on the Catholics•
that is, in case concession of their claims shall ever be
*Aden) thern....we shall find that the Catholics, though
they say resist at first, will submit at last—(Cheering).
,Ott is ground. then, I must declare my oppositiouto
*elates, of the Catholics: that no alteration has taken
'place in the-Catholic belief; that they have notadvanced
• one step in renouncing their opinions. Have they been
reaminced by the Church of Rome? If they had been,
the Catholics of these kingdoms would bate been
glad to publish the fact to us.. Then I say, that up to
this time ne ecclesiastical power whatever that exercises
h authority over the Catholics, whether Pope,. Bishops,
ET Council, has renounced the mischievous opinions
. that gave rise to the restrictive laws against them. Sir,
I do not allude now to mere theological opinions.. GOD
JAW that I should'ever advocate restrictions on my
fellow subjects on the ground of those high and mys-
ill loins points of belief that form the foundation of
pre Purely theological opinions. No, I object to them on
• •account of their•political opinions—opinions injurious to
the union of the Church and State. Our ancestors held
• 'the union of the Church and State indispensable tuthe•
• sational good,. or as Andres* Martin 'strongly put if in
lei, bole, that the Chinch and State were indissolubly
•aaited;Xnd that one of them could not stand after the
• *hes bad fallen. Now, the Catholics hold that their
Church is exclusive; that it is the only Church ; the
x Catholic Bishop of K Vila has declared that he con-
b liders no Bishop out of the pale of the Catholic
i • Church as a Bishop. Have the Catholic authori
1, (es renounced this opinion? Have they altered their
opinions on the infallibility and dispensing power of
t the Pope? This is the way to examine their opinions, as
nu these points we have positiie testimony. I say they
07 have made no change in their opinions. I regret they
14'4 not ;I wish they bad made alterations in them,
su loch at least as would allow me to vote for the conces-
rc son of their claims, bat they have net. Doctor D'An--
d t Professor of Moral Philosophy in the Catholic
he College „f•
I aynooth, says, that it the Pope and a
io !•'.neseil should jointly declare the Pope to be infallible,
' 11''')eld be the duty of the Catholics then to.believe in
?to the infallibility of the Pope. Now, though the Catho.
h hex pto.,
ess not to believe that the Pope is infallible,
ih• 1 they not, in case we should concede their claims,
e 'lleteon a Council the next day and declare the in-
' t ~.ibiiy of the Pope an article of their faith? When
la same person is asked by any one of the Commis-
he losers, whether, if a Catholic Council should declare a
s ettain opinion to be an article of the Catholic Faith,
s b would believe that article, how does he answer?—
es. le candidly—not directly—but thus, that he does'
g think it necessary to answer the question, as it
not likely the case nut could ever be realised.
Now,
t.bit the answer of an honest man ? Sir, I say it is not
!lb a Jesuitical evasion. Further, this witness, on
tut b interrogated on the power of the Pope to dispense
tes the obligatiOns of an oath, denies that the Pope
the dispensing .power, except in cases where the
of superiors are concerned. Does not this ac-
- '.'aiedgment intimate, that the power of the Pope (be
a supet for to everyCetholic), is one of the excepted
? Can you then with safety admit to office in the
't Persons holding that opinion ? But when this suns
if 'bees is asked, whether there is not, in the class book
Vo • by the Maynooth Students,an opinion different from
Oh lag doctrine laid down by him, he answers that there

is in the class book an exception, to the effect that-the I
Pope has not the power of allowing a man to dispense
with his oath where the common good is concerned; but
in v. hat part of the book does the House think this excep-
tion stands? Why, twenty pages before the place where
the general rule is laid down—thus, by this precedence,
giving to the exception the prominent appear ance of a
general rule in the eyes. of the Student!. Is this mode
of proceeding, I ask the House, candid or honest ? I
hold, then, that this proves the Catholic religion of the
present day to be the same as in times past, or, as one
of their Poets said of it, or immortal (by the way. this
was rather too strong a stretch of fancy) and un-
changed." Unchanged it certainly is. Then look at
their aversion to the diffusion of the Scriptures. Even
so lately as the year 1824, the reading of the Scrip-
tares was denounced by one of their Bishops. I wish,
too, to observe, that from The moment at which the
Jesuits were suppressed, the Catholics were allowed the
enjoyment of greater powers, and we may therefore take
the time at which the dissolution of that order took
place, as the era from which good feeling towards Catho-
lics had its commencement in this country. The' House
will remember, too, that it is only three or four years
since the Pope thought proper to re•establish the order
of Jesus, stating, in a Bull he published upon the occa-
sion, that he had been induced to do so in consequence
of the daily representations he had received from the
Bishops and Dignitaries of the Catholic Church, offering
abundant proof of the utility and excellence of the order.
It appears accordingly, from various proofs, that the
spirit of the Catholic Church is unchanged, and I think
that without following the subject further, I have shown
enough to convince the most sceptical of this. But before
I sit down I wish to remark, that the circumstance
of'the securities offered by the Roman Catholics.being
diminished from 1818 is not an auspicious sign, and that
the tone assumed by the Roman Catholics upon the
present occasion, is not of that respectful nature it was
wont to be—(Hear, her Their addresses and Peti-
tions are all written in much,stronger language than
they have ever been before.—(Hear). And I do entreat
the House to pause on the last general election in Ire-
13nd ; and I will ask those Hon. Members who were
present at it, whether the extreme dominion exercised
over the lower order of Roman Catholics, by their
Priests, in opposition to the duties they owed to those
who had invariably treated them with kindness and
consideration, and whOm they had been always in the
habit of regarding with the utmost respect and deference,
does not show that if the power of these Priests was
more unlimited, it would produce a strong effezt in Ibis
House? For myself, too, I must say that I do not at-
tribute the distress in Ireland to the causes so often al-
leged, and that are now under consideration. I believe,
that if we give the Irish peasantry education—if we
encourage the diffusion of the light of the Scriptures
among them—if we-promote habits of industry, and so
succeed in opening their understanding, we shall teach
theirs how to deserve the benefits for which they ask,
and at last render them capable and worthy of rece v-
ing, with proper guards, the gift they so anxiously
desire. I have now delivered my opinions fearlessly
and openly, but I trust in a manner becoming an indi-
vidual so humble as myself. 1 shall be alsiays open to
conviction, but so long as I conceive I have reason to
retain my present opinions, so long shall I consider
myself bound to oppose this.petion.
Mr. PERCEVAL said, in 4101 y. life he had imbibed
opinions conformable to the if stem under which he was
educated, and he opposed concession to the Catholics ;
but upon reflection he wavered in his opposition. When
first he bad the honour -of a seat in that House, and
when be was a younger MAN he began to think that
she fears and alarms which were apprehended from
concession to the Catholics were not founded in good
sense.' In consequence of that let ling, he did that
which he would never forget, and while he paid the
proper deference to the memory of a respected pa-
rent, he felt it his duty to give a silent vote upon
this important question. He mistrusted his own judg-
ment, as he well might do, and he now felt more
anxious to state the grounds on which he did not,
rather than those on which he supported the motion.
He felt anxious that his adirocacy of this question should
not be considered as derived from any the slightest in-
difference to Protestantism; quite the reverse. He be-
lieved in his conscience, and he had rather lose the power
of speech than not utter it as his firm opinion, that the
Catholic religion was a foul pollution of the word of
Goo; and_that that which was intended to guide us to
Heaven had been profaned while in. the custody of the
Catholic Church. He believed that neither in theory
nor practice had the Catholic Church undergone any
change; but although that was his conscientious belief,
he was still bound to admit that she was now controlled,
mitigated, and subdued by what was every where to be
found around her. if the public mind, if the Protestant
mind in thiscountry believed her principles wet e changed.
their vigilance would soon4ease to operate upon her.
But as long as they believed that her principles and
practice continued unaltered, so long would they be,
controlled by Protestant principles. The increase of
'Protestant light would diffuse:note knowledge—a pre.
testaot atmosphere would, as it were, keep its pressure
upon -them, and in doing so would keep those princi..
pies harmless. lf, however, that pressure could be re-,
moved—and Protestant-light and knowledge were re
moved ; if the darkness of the black ages could be-
restored, then he was satisfied that the Catholic Church
would again put forth her huge bulk to the world ; bur
now-a-days, there could not be the slightest chance of
any such dismal events occurring. He held that the
prosperity of this nation was bound up with her
Christianity—and that, again, 'he held to be her Pro-
testantism—(Hear, hear.)—But if that Protestantism
were now worth five years' purchase—if it were not
rotten at the core, be called upon the House to support
the motion of the Honourable Baronet (Sir F. Burdett).
.If there was danger from being with the Catholics, there
was greater danger from being without them. If the
Protestant Religion was, what he believed it to be,
founded on the word of GOD, its existence, for all time
to come, could net be endangered—and if they were
staunch and true to its principles, they would safely and
unhesitatingly grant Emancipation. It should be re-
membered that a period existed in this country when
every Peer and Commoner were Catholics; and even
then. truth—the force of truth—dislodged the power of
Papacy in this land—and if the same principle was now
net at work, its effects would be beneficial in the highest
degree. Ile would not go the length of saying that danger
was inspossible,but looking at the increasedind increasing
mitigation which circumstances threw around Catholic-
ism, be saw nothing to justify them in withholding the
concession which was prayed for. There was no proba-
bility that any other means would improve or abate the
miseries of Ireland, if concession were not previously
granted.—(Hear from the Opposition Benches.)—lre-
land was now completely under a set of demagrigues.
inflaming the passions of a disappointed people, and
making their misery more miserable. He would rescue
Ireland from the ruffian eloquence of her present lead-
ers—and bow could she-be solescued, if, year after year,
, the claims of the people were unheeded ? He had only

one further observation to. make. He had spoken in
terms of plainness of the-Catholic Religion—bin at the
same time he begged to stile, that for Many of its pro-.
feisois he felt every respect, and he trusted that justice
would be done to them. He had • spoken what he be-
ttered to be the truth. 'and if it gave pain in any guar-
ter, he could not but regret it.
Mr. M. FITZGERALD said, that his Honourable
Friend (Sir F. Burdett) had taken so copious a view of
the subject, that he would not weaken any portion 'of
it by a repetition, but he (Mr. Fitzgerald) wai so in-
timately connected with one transaction, that he might
be allowed to speak to it—he alluded to the motives
which led to the measure of Union between the two
countries. The Honourable and Learned Member had.
Made some observations with a view to weaken the
impression made upon the House by the Honour-
able Baronet, on the subject of the Treaty of Lime.
rick; but he was surprised to find that the Hon. and
Learned Member had merely confined himself to a
rigid construction of a highly penal Act of Parliament.
The second article of the Treaty was said to be con-
fined in its operation to the garrison and inhabitants of
Limerick; but, if that was so, it was giving to those
who were in arms against the . Sovereign a greater ad-
vantage than to others, who took no part whatever in
the contest. And yet, if the construction were such u
the Honourable and Learned Member contended for,'
such would be its singular operation. The Hon. and.
Learned Member had traced the history of the penal
statute down to the Act imposing a certain oath upon
the Sovereign ; but, when the necessity for that oath
ceased, so should the penal laws cease with it. The dan-
gers then stated to exist, no longer existed ; and even
in Elizabeth's time, when that noble and magnanimous
Princess was excommunicated together with her subjects,
she did not withhold her confidence from the Catholics.
She observed that she always distinguished Papists in
religion from. Papists in faction ; and he now called upon
the House to act in the same manner. In the year 1789
Mr. Pitt took the opinion of the different Catholic Uni ea-
skies, as to the doctrines which might affect this Pro-
testant State; to the question proposed he received the
most satisfactory and conclusive answers, and in 1791
he became the advocate of an extension Of civil rights
to the Catholics. He (Mr. F.) was now desirous to ad-1
dress himself to the other topic he had proposed. When
the legislative union was first suggested, he coincided
with the project, believing it to be in the result for the
benefit of Ireland. At that time he had to stand the brun
of much obloquy ; but he disregarded it, acting as he did
with a view to secure the freedom of his country.lt would
not now be necessary to consider the motives which led
to the legislative union, but it was likely that Mr
Pitt's first intention to carry that measure originated in
the collision which took place upon the Regency Bill.
The mere pressing motives, however, were the conspi-
racy of the United Irishmen—a body composed of
500.000 men, and who intended nothing less than the
overthrow of the British Government, and to unite- Ire-
land with France. This society was origiaally exclusively
Protestant—the Catholics could not be trusted in it. It
was feared that confession would bring their secrets to
the Priests,Ond as the Priests were loyal, that they
would not escape. The next mctive was the threat-
ened invasion in 1796, when fifteen thousand men,
commanded by one of the greatest Generals of his
time, made their appearance in Bantry Bay, and could
have marched to Dublin almost unrpposed. However,
they did not land, and the cause of such a proceeding
was not then well known. The next and the most awful
consideration was the rebellion of 1798, which was con-
sidered by the United Irishmen as expedient, after the
failure at Bantry Bay. That rebellion took a Catholic
turn, and the Protestants of the North of Leland with-
drew from the Union. There were conflicting dissensions
in the North and South of Ireland ; and such was its con-
dition when the attention of Mr. Pitt was directed to a
legislative union. Out of these dangers it arose, and it was
intended to remedy those exclusions under which the
Catholics particularly laboured. Towards the close of
the rebellion Lord Cornwallis was sent to extinguish it
altogether, and also to put down a violent faction which
for years had ruled in Ireland uncontrolled. Against
that system Lord Cornwallis made war, and used every
exertion to put down the corrupt faction. The project of
the Union was first announced in,a pamphlet written by
Mr. Cooke, the Under Secretary for Ireland, a Gentleman
who was much inclined to the -Protestant monopoly.
However, he stated that it was necessary to hold out
advantages to the Sectarians, in order to win them over
to the measure of Union. Nothing specific was said,
but it was strongly held out that out of the Union an
extension of civil privileges would ensue. Mr. Cooke
divided his pamphlet into different heads; he classed the
advantages to be del ived from it in different paragraphs,
in the seventh 'of *Which he stated that an opening would
be left for the future admission of Catholics to additional
privileges, they then enjoying the elective franchise.
Mr. Cooke added, and it was matter worthy of atten-
tion, that the Catholics then stated, they could not
be satisfied as they were. This official pamphlet was
circulated throughout Ireland, and particularly in the
Catholic districts. The speeches of Mr. Pitt, Mr.
Dundas, Lord Grenville, and Lord Minto, all agreed in
the principle, that while Ireland had a separate Parlia-
ment, the Catholics coutd obtain no additional privi-
lege', and they also agreed that without their support
the siseasure of Union could not be carried. They fur-
ther declared, that in a United Parliament concession
could more easily be granted, inasmuch as they would
not be encumbered by those resentments and animosities
which Lord Castlereagh, in the Irish Parliament, con-
sidered as precluding the Catholics from further privi-
leges. But Mr. Pitt and they all declared; that the..
incorporation of the Churches of England and Ireland
would soften and abate animosities, and that the claims
of the Catholics could then be decided by an impartial
Parliament. Lord Castlereagh knew perfectly well,
that if more had been said the Protestants might not
support the Union, while Dr. Duigenan called it a
treacherous project for the admission of the Catholics
to the full enjoyment of civil rights. Mr. Dundas was
more explicit—his speech, together with those of Mr.
Pitt, Lords Grenville and Minto, were confided to him
for the purpose of being circulated amongst the Catho-
lics of Ireland—(Hear, from the Opposition benches.)
Lord Mono particularly wished that one of the articles
of the Union should mention it specifically; but it was
thought that that might hazard the Union, and it was
coniequently omitted. The opinions to which he had
alluded received the sanction of the English Parliament
—they were printed by the Government at the public
erpense=they were circulated from the Castle. Mr.
Pitts speech was sent to the different Generals and
, Commanding Officers in Ireland—and if this was not
• authority to show stint concessions were to be granted
to the Catholics, he knew not what was—(Loud cries
of ,1 Hear, hear," from the Opposition benches). He
had so far taken the liberty of making himself a wit-
cgs:, and he would have been wanting to himself if
he did not say, beyond the power of contradiction,
that when the Union was carried it was to be followed
up by concessions to the Catholics—(Hear, hear, hear).
When be -spoke of a pledge having been given to that

.....mr:..m.