The Statesman.
London, England, 1821-03-24 00:00:00

•• True to no King; to no Religion true."

But it was also urged, that so long as papal dispensa- '
don existed we were unsafe in granting the concessions
of the present Bill. This he never could admit : for
it was obvious that, at the present moment, the refusal
to swear was the strongest proof of Catholic good
faith.—(Cheers.) He must once more be allowed to
refer to the inconsistency of our present law. We
trusted the Catholics as witnesses and as jurors upon
questions affecting the property, the liberty, nay, the
life of the Protestant subject.—(llear, hear, hear.)—
We were at pains to educate the lower class:is ; but the
higher. the polished, those who were placed above
temptation, the hereditary aristoeracy of the coon..
try ; all these, among Catholics, we excluded. Sop-
pose a Bill acre brouelit in for embodying in one
Act, time substance of all those inconsistent Laws. It
rest declare, that Where is a Catholic is regardless
of the obligation of an oath ; therefore lie shall be re-
quire:l to take an oath in the following terms."—
(Continned cheers.) In this way mud the inconsist-
ency run thronghout the Act in question. There
could not, in his opinion, be any !lon. Member a bit
would gravely say, that this was a code which odo::lot tee
continue ; for it really was an heresy against e'
sense.—(llear, hear, bear.) Before sitting down, be
woold iiineli very shortly upon the question as to what
would satisfy the Catholics.—'This he considered im-
material to the dis.inssion. lie should as little think
of what would • %misty the Catholic as he should of what
would satisfy his Holiness the Pope; thootzld this he
said without eneatoitoz any disrespect. It W 4,4 lint to
be considered wiiat woold please his Holiness, but what
would he just. Ile conclude by repeating the
words of en able and respected! historian—" That if a
good Bill were lirmight into Parliament, however it
might be opposed in its coniudencetnent, it wind I sooner
or later, he successful."—( Hon. Mensher sat down
amid loud and very general cheering.)
Sir J. NICHOL', denied tlrit those aho opposed the
Bill were hound to shim', that it woodol be attended with
danger to the Protestant establishment to emancipate
the Catholics. The law, as it st I, proved the exists
ence of that danger. The law at least was enacted to
coaril against danger, and those who sought to repeal
the law were bound to prove that no danger would fol-
low that repeal. The Right Honourable Member then
enumerated a variety of Arts, and observed, that almost
up to the present time, on the creation of any office, the
State had been protected from the admission of Oahu-
lies into it. When it was said that the Constitution was
not Anti-Catbolie, he knew not what was meant; bet
certainly all the great others were shut against Catho-
lics, and Catholics only. The Acts which imposed dis-
abiiities upon the Catliolics, formed a part of the Con-
stitntion—not of a Titus Oates' Constitution, hut of a
Constitution estal,lislee nl Icy the glorious King IVilliam,
and by the great Lord Somers. They were now called
upon to alter this Constitution ; they were throwing
open to Catholics all offices eseept that of Lord Chan-
cellor, and of the King's immediate Representative in
Ireland. It was said, that there nas something popes
ricer to these Statutes in thee spirit of the Constitution.—
Ile knew not where the spirit of the Constitution was to
he found, hot in the Statutes which established! our
Ilene I ..liarta. the Petition of Rights, the 11,1,,0a,
l'orpus Act, the Hill of Vigils, would surely he stud to
contain something of the spirit of the l'oeis• itution. it
was a main principle of our Constitution, as exemplified
in our Statutes, that there should be no admission to
office without qualification% of religion and property. In
sonic cases a religions qualification was respired, when
a qualification in property was not. He know not what
the alliance between (touch and State could mean, if it
was not that religion should be wade necessary for ad-
mission into Civil (*yea—Wear Yet, on the alli-
ance between Chords and State, it was said, that the
safety of our Civil liberties mainly ilepended—(Hear).
Would the Hauge, therefore, proceed to enact oaths
which left an opening to mental reservatitin or prevari-
cation, soil to admit, a ithout further caution, Catholics
into all offices of the State Ile hoped they would see
that these oaths were quite insufficient secotri:y, and on
that ground he should vote against the Clause.
Mr. C. GRANT began by observing, that he did
not, of course, recollect of those former periods of
Irish history which had been referred to, in whicli the
penal code had been made the subject of discussion ;
but from what be hail read, it appeared to him that
the same arguments had been used on those life:lltitif)
although with less success, as were made use of at
present. l'he same alarm was rung plume the demoli-
tion of the antient bulwarks of the nation in die ;:itlpli
of Popery. With reference to the treuae ka of the
Hon. Gentleman who spoke last. on the spi..it of the
Constitution, lee hail only to remark, that he (lid not
think the Hon. Gentleman had exhibited that spirit in
its most favourable point of view ; for after ream-tang
various points of the past history of the country, car-
rying down Ireland from one point of degailition to
another, he told them that his was the spirit of the
ConStiintion. At the-sateoe time that the lion: Gen-
tleman spoke of the Revolution, iie fegretleo to hear