The Statesman.
London, England, 1821-03-17 00:00:00

TITE STATtqMAN.

stand where ettramwesere. All who approved the they were tbeeefote disinclined to ,eequiesce in the
Catholic Claims, were eitherstireetly..or by inference, communication fur the Pope.-13uftlie House would
accused of bigotry. He would however say, that there bear in mind, that two important documents had since
was little reason to suppose, that the Catholics, if been received fees liewistv to which the Roman Cativo-
their prayer were granted, would not return to their lie prelates had given their unqualified assent.
1815, di e
former oppressive and intolerant doctrines. Let the rescript of Cardinal Litta, dated April 25,
Protestant Dissenter be first raised to his proper rank not meet with the slightest opposition ; and that west
Th d
in the State; and then it would be time enough to to sanction such an arrangement as the present ; and
consider what ought to be done for the Catholic the letter addressed by Pius VII. to the Roman Catho-
Dissenter. If the Protestant Dissenter was not be at- lies of Ireland, was received with the sate spirit.
tended to, why was the Catholic to he relieved front Hut the Right Hon. Gentleman in hit arguments re-
the test laws ? It was necessary that the House should ferred to a period before either of these communica-
consider this before they went further. The Bill passed, Lions reached Ireland. If the Right lion. Gentleman
they could not then pause—that on u Web they de- admitted the latter proposition, what became of his
sided, must remain fur ever. former argument, wherein lie said that the Roman
Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH contended, that the Catholics of Ireland disobeyed the injunctions of a
Petition did not speak the sentiments of the great body foreign Patriarch ? It was very true that the Roman
•of the Catholics of Staffordshire. It was described as Catholics were not content with the ipsrc di.rit of
coining from the Catholic Clergy and Laity of that Qitarantotti ; but when they hail received insmtructi itted,ons
county. But who were the great names comprehended in front higher authority, they immedi sub
that body? Ile would ask, whether no consideration and bad not said a word in opposition for the last
was to he made the absence oft he name the Earl ACCell vears.—(llear,felt it but justice to
of Shrewslotry for ?
Was Lord Turtim's statue worthy of the Roman Catholic' el
-id state these facts to the
nu consideration? Where were the Clifforils—llse der- I loose.
nynglsatio—the Blunts—the Fitzherberts ?He would .I r. PEEL explained.
ask whether they were out to eionsipler th, it exception Sir J. NEW PO Wl' said, that the Pope had dis-
as decisive against unanimity ? These were the natitral owingl the rescript of Qstarantsitti.
leaders of thol'atholies, and they slid not join the objec- A3l EMBER, whose name we could not learn, 53111
tions made by the petitioners. Ile understood that, that the Ronson Catholics of Ireland might have felt
besides the Clergy there was not the name sit' any one a soreness in agreeing to the rescript sit Quoratitutti,
Vatlsolic of distinction affixed to the petition. It hail after the Rill hail been rejected.
only been the work of Dr. Inkier, the irreeoncileahle 'I he petition was ordered to be printed.
enemy to all union. No wonder, being an enemy to 3lr. COKE presented a petition signed by fifty
oft
union and concord, that his present exertions should the Clergy of Norwich, its support of the Catholic
be hailed by Protestants who were influenced by the claints.—(llear,liear.)—lle concurred must cordially
same !noires and dispositions. It Was intiloSsitth. to in the prayer of the petition, yet he felt that any
expert that any arrangement could he made to :;ire tiling he could say would be supeilluous after the
satisfactitM to Dr. 31ilner, or to the Honourable 31eits- manner :n which the question had been brought for-
her for Somerset, who stated his regret that the penal ward by this Right Ilip:sourable 31eitilter for the I 'lli-
laws against the Catholics should have been repealed. verity of Dublin. The splendid talents of that
Sir T. I. ETH BR IVG E said, that if he had used Right Ili:moo able 31eitilter were wordsily eolith's ell
the expressions attributed to him by the Hon. 31enther, upon the occasion. Ile felt proud and delighted at
he had done sip unintentionally, but to the best of his the retlectiou, that in presenting this petition, lie
recollection he did not use them.—(Hear.) was doing an art which woold atheil the higlici-t
Mr. ELLIS (of Dublin) after what had been said pleasure to that excellent 'prelate, the Bishop of Nor-
respecting Dr. Milner, wished to call the attention of wick, whose life lia.l hero devoted to the cans.. of civil
the Ilouse to some liesolut• agreed to by the Irish and religious liberty, and alto had mode every exer-
Catholic Bishops at Dublin, in the year Itslo. The thin in support of the present useasttre.--(Cheers.)
Itesolntions expressed their thanks to the Rev. Doctor 3lr. WIMP:II4ft SE was anxious to say a few
fit his exertions iu the Catholic cause as their avowed words, as he hail had the honour of presenting. to the
agent. !loose a petition, signed by .220 clergymen, against
31r. WYNNE said that the Roman Catholics of Ire- the Catholic claims. llt• regretted that the word
land were not to be held responsible for the altered bigotry had heel' used on either side, and he wishes!
opinions of Dr. 31ilner. that the ilisetis.ion should he carried on in the salve
31r. ELLIS said that the ResoLitions had been spirit of liberality with is Iti: Ip it had commenced.
repeated in effect, twice since the year I a 10, particu- The petition was laid on Ilie table and ordered to
lady in the year ItSl3. be printed.
Mr. WARNE wished that whets the lion. Member Lord P.II.3IERSTON presented a Petition frosts the
told of what had been done and said by Dr. Milner in Unit ersiie of Canibripless aeain•t any further conces-
I t.lO and 1!..113, that he would also state what he shoos to the Roman C:illpulics. The Petition start
Lad said in 11.440. At that period 3lr. Ponsonby that the opinions of the Roman Catholics were still
read a letter in that House from Dr. Sinner, consent- unaltered, and that their admission to political power
ing to similar arrangements which were then proposed. mould he attended with the most dangerous consequen-
-31 r. WI1.11EI1FOR(•E explained its so low a tune CeS. 76e Noble Lord expressed Isis entire dissent frosts
of voice as to be inaudible its the rallerv. the prayer 01 the Petition. He dial not feel the saute
Sir. PEEL was anxious that the House %boob] under- alarm as the vetitiotter•, at emit etlint; the claims of
stand the real facts of the case. They would immeili- Isis Catholic f,.llow.buhieet, ; amid he t.l
ately see that the object of his lion. Friend (11r. Ellis), • , 1.
at
the day
tot tile final •111) 11 sl Ille I to 0104 e elili Ills, ley having the
was not to involve the Roman Catholics :is a body in the
Dr. Milner; but to .hew that antra Royal assent given to the present Bills, would be one
same opinions with
•intilar Hill to the present had been introdur,4l, and a of the most atispicimis that had everilawned Nom Egg-
smsilor ecclesiastical arrangement proposed, the. Roman laud.---(tbeers.)—lle regretted to be obliged to differ
4 athoite Bishops of Ireland deprecated it in positive from those to whops he owed the !tontine of his seat in
as tending to injure the interests of their reli- that House, vet his dissent would at least be consider-
,.ion.—(Hear, hear I)—The Bight Hon. Aligning- here ,
et a proof of his sineeri.y. He was bound, however,
rea.i a Resolution Dossed by the Irish Catholic Bishops
~n the ow', May. 1-13,g their decided w 'w., to say, that the opinion from which he differed was cu-
.:film to the securities provilled by the Bill „ isis in
tertainrd by the majority of those who had attende.l
that year had been introduced, and stating: that they the meeting.
•cottla not agree to those securities oithont incurring the Mr. 5A11"111 said, that a great proportion of the
guilt of sehism. i meeting objected to the petition. Those who hail sup-
Sir J 1.".• RIDLEY said. that unit of every "Vent" mated it formed a distinct class, and there were litany
t'.ve u.smes that appeared to the petition. at 'lea,' 11%.
who were decidedly ',loused to it. Ile repeated that
seemed to have been written by the s. •It
Sir It. PA RS F.LL observed, that the Roman Catholic the l'etitinn was far from bring nlianininn%lY agreed
Vishops of Ireland, thought they would have • to, at this- same time he looped *hat no discussion
guilty of schism, hall they agreed to the Bill of P. 13. might take place on this or any other Petitions, which
ohmic first having tommunication with the Pope. Ile' would trod to alter that tone of forbearance and good
understood that the woribs introduced into the Rill,
,: temper with a Well this great question bad been hi-
would go to alter and street the disciplinesif the Church:: then.) treated in this House, and with which be hoped
and tilts they het.' to he schism, unless it Was saurtiunetl
I'v the it ttttt 411 Pontiff. But as the Court of Rome had !it would he carried on to its cistielnaiiiii.--(Hear.)—
i.,rsred ii„. Bill, there could lie no ii„.,„4.4".„cy in The petition was then read, and ordered to he printed.
t! e Prelates of Ireland acquiescing in one of a Attsilar Lord E. SOil F.RSET presented a Petition from the
estore.—(llear. hear')—lre deprecated the dissensions Clergy of Stow, in Gloucestershire, against the Ilia
wbirh lusd Owes place in 1,413, and lie hoped they would for reiniivin., Catholic disabilities.—Ordered to be
rover igain occur. A great change had manifested it-
self all over I relauil with respect to this question, in
p: col of it Rich he would beg leave to read to the House
:A letter which he hail reet•ived from a most respectable
gentleman in that country, who had ronaideroble
iu-
lpoeuic with the Roman Catholic body, and had the best
'opportunities of forming, a correct estimate of their
LTlte Hon. Baronet here read the letter, which
stated that a lively sensation hail been excited among
t: e Roman Catholics of Ireland, in ronsequence of the
rwasure proposed by 3lr. which gave general
"tatisfaction.] '!'his letter was entitled to iwenliar at-
`tention treat the character of the iudividual by whom it
becti written.
Mr. PEEL explained, and referred to the opinion of
Co, Itons.in Catholic Prelates as hostile to the measure
nett after they had received rescript front Rome sigited
-is the Vice l'refect of the Propaganda. 'I hey hail in
any, I $l4, after they had been put in possession tot
. it* document in question, requested Lord Doming! re
sad Mr. Ur.ettan to nine that the clauses respecting
tl.e securities should be expunged irons the Bill, as ad-
.
Ism to the principles of their religion.
. Dr. PIIILLI3IOHE made some observations against
tt s principle of the petition, and said the signature.
did not include any one name of distinction among
the respectable Roman Catholic families of Stafford-
-10.
Sir 11. PARN ELL explained, and the petition was
ti.en ordered to lie on Ilse table.
Lord PALM ERS moved that Ilse petition be
:printed.
-Sir. DAWSON wished to ask an lion. Baronet (Sir
"11.-Psthell.) it' the House was to consider that the
I.•r he had read, expressed the coneurreoce of the
,man Catholics of Ireland its the present measure ?
Sir li. PARNELL sail, he had read the letter as
coming- from a private individual...slit-value; Isis opinion
'se a•pnblic question, without itsaisitq any pledge ii ith
r. spect• to It.
Sir J. MACKINTOSH was anxious to state a fart
with Aida the • Right Hots. (gutless an opposite (Sir.
Peel) seemed on:milli:tinted. The Right lists. Gentle-
l` aft supposed, that beranse the l'adsolies !111.
a:cCde to the diere ..st of Si. Quaratitotti in Is i I

printed.
Mr. CB ANT presented a petition from the Bo-
man Catholic merchants in the town of Iktheay in fa-
rain of the Bill for removing Roman I '.itholic disabi-
lities.--Ordered to hr printed.
Sir r. pre.,ented a prtition against
the Bill, but the Clerk read it in so low a tone, that
we could not hear the name of the place from whence

it came.
31r. 31. PI : 7.(iE1t.11.1) presented a petition in fa-
vour of the Bill from the Roman l'atholies of Traler.
—Ordered to lu• printed.
ROM t 1.ATI101.11:8 RILL.

Alt. intended to trespass upon the time
if the House, but a very short time indeed. Ile had but
lull lately rcperienred a very ample portion of the kind-
less of the House. to ent!age notch of its attention upon
'he present occasion. His object was merely to put the
House in possession of the outline, and not the detail of
the Bill, which be had the honour to introduce.
When he first took the liberty of declaring his opinions
to the House, hr stated that he brought forward the

•-- -
measure with one primary object, that of doing a great
piddle good. And although he then disavowed the in-
fluence of any motives regarding the irritation which
prevailed in the country. yet he did express a hope, that
if the measure was a just one, as he believed it to be.
that imiaediate satisfaction to the toiletry would he to
effect produced. He had the errairst pleasnre in
stating, that since the resolution which the Honee had
come to :.n that nee-lesion. the expeetAtions in which he
then ventured to indulge, had been more than realized.
The effect of thAt resolution upon the rountry haul far
exceeded Isis most smignine hope. lint those would dill
him the greatest injustice who thought that he bar-
! 1.....re.1 the cl • -viral idea of giving satisfaction to all
t•Jrtivg. Thrre were indeed some persons with
f.e would not attempt studs a thing. inasmuch as lie
{Mete that 10 he wa‘ Ole ate %test stikery
law:l3.)—To thow lie shut nut wish 'to :0-
sire• 4 itiza•rif, as lie 1%;;,4 aware that ttr::ll.netli wool I
111•1 er convince them. tt.l it the 111e:841W I. prs/11.6!,•11
acre 41Iried to hiury u'nti'l ell isk,ised
47 it it tire rejck•!ett t.er. (.1 1ati.411.1 tie-

. ' .

Hos. Member,

preeated what bad been said by an
ing him with having applied the charge of bigotry to
those who opposed the present measure. Ile never could
have used the epithet,for, than such aline of condect or
of argument, nothing was more foreign from his
heart. The party who opposed lam, he considered
to have an undoubted right to his utmost re-
spect and deference. The opinions which he
himself cherished must be his errors ; and
no man in the universe was more ready to yield them,
if he could be convinced of their fallacy. For him-
self, and in behalf of his Friends, it was necessary to
declare that they had proceeded in all transactions
connected with the measure, with the greatest defer-
ence to all Protestant communications, giving free ac-
cess to all argument which might be offered upon the
subject. They had recurred to the sufferings of the
Roman Catholic—they had recurred to the feelings of
the Protestants ; always keeping in mind that nothing
Should he yielded which would .continue the one, and
nothing asked that might he inconsistent with the
other. The state of the public mind in Iceland spelt
the prncress solar!, the measure had made was must
gratifying. The pulolic mind in England, according
to the Honourable Menolter for Somerset, was in a state
of apathy. But that which he so called apathy, was
%dist he (Mr. Plunkett) called a disposition to lease'
the ease in the bands of Parliament as its most natural
anal its !lest jutlges,and not disturb its deliberations by
unnecessary clamour. He should now proceed to one
of the exact provisions of the Bill. Before doing see
however, he wished to see himself right in the opinion
of die House upon what fell from him upon a previous
swrasion. Ile dial assert that the franchises and offi-
cers of the State the free right of every Roman
Catholic liege subject of the realm. Ile now re-
asserted, that in the same sense as a Protestant
claimed that eligiloilitv, so alto did the Roman Ca-
tholic. Ent he said nothing was so alosturd as that
these rights were not liable to be r;.strirtiel or rote
t relied i fatly I•!Ciirilirory or necessity of the State sl 1.1
call for it. I any just cause COllll.l-
- why they
'meta not to etajoy those rights, then the Roman Ca-
tLolir yield. lint he did say, and hr wii s •
peat, that the natural rich' vetoed as 15,01 Is in th.
.111 C as in the other. He bregeil tat ask. wit re the
Pro.estant fouuded his claim to the right of
for a 31entioec of l'arliament, or of sitting in p arlia
a.t.to t himself c %V here was it written Ile I: ii.•
not %Ottee hr would find it, male in the saute sour',
which also gave it to the Roman l mitotic : It smelt .
the essence. the elements, the stamin t of the Como
tution. All the difference between the !men ',.stli.
was this :—the Roman Catholic, by the Art
Charles li. had been excloaleal from the enjavnient of
those rights. Anal did lie deny the authority
he said that temporary eiremitstances of danger ren-
dered it necessary. ;floe Monarch upon the Throne
was suspected of Catholicism, and the acts were lie.
cessary as a defence. Ent these dangers were now
passed away. 'There was nn %everted Monarch upon
the Throne. The Protestant religion was firmly es-
tablished ; and those restrictions ought in justice to
cease. Now, if he was told that the dancer had not
passed over, lie must meet those who asserted it fairly
upon the tittesti.et. nod that hr was always reedy
to do. But if any one should say that there
was a spirit of exclusion in the Act of Charles
PKtentlitsz in its operation beyond the cirenuistances
which he had described, then he would challenge them
to the best records of our Cowatitution for the proof Ile
deniealthat this measure would itivoolve the quest• of
the Protestant Dissenters. The two questions must
always stand separately and of their own merits.
If time Roman Catholic claims were strong, and he
cotti,l show that there was no danger iu adon;tting
them, the:, they ought to be granted; and it was upon
these grounds that he argued fur their admission. But
what load that to do with the claims of the dissenters
If they had the same claims, and they could prove tile
saute absence sada:wee in granting them, then let that
question he brought forward. Ile had Isis opinion
upon it, and when necessary be should be ready to
declare it. lint be was not to be seduced into any
expression of that opinion upon the present occasion.
Perhaps the House would permit him to explain the
state of the Dissenters in Ireland. The Irish Dissenter
was not at this moment subject to any Corporation
or est Act, nor had he been so fir the tam. 4th years.
In 17.50 an Art was passed by which the Protestant Dis-
%Niter in Ireland was freed from taking the Sacramental
Test. The words of that Art were as precise anal expli-
tit as they could possibly be. It stated, " The Protes-
tant Dissenter shall not he subject to the Sacramental
Test." In 1;93, an Act was passes{ by u bids the Roman
t'aoholie ass declared subject to no other qualification
than the Dissenter was liable to. The consequence, as
one would naturally suppose, then was, that both IMO
relieved fr the Sacramental Test. But then it was
assunstal that the Act of I;3U applied to the Protestant
IN..rifler, and not to t tie Dissenter of any other descrip-
thin. An Art was then introduced into the Irish Par-
liament explaining the Act of 1710, and making the for•
met. Art embrare both classes of Dissenters. l'herolelielell
isowever. name finally rejected. He should now proceed
to the i 000000 eoliate injects of the Rill. It comprised two
aliesinso ohjeetsr- That of the circumstances which went'
against the doctrine of transubstantiation, and ilea of
the question of the Oath of Supremacy. Respecting
the former, he need not take np much of the time of the
Howie upon that subject. Ile never yet beard of any
perste% who emote:a:led for the necessity of that declara-
to. : and he believed it was. neither required for the
purposes of religion, nor of christianity. HS e matted-
col, also, that it was utterly imperfect as a security. It
was competent for a lIIITSOII tll-11101TOW to take the oaths
whiels were intended to exelnole him from Parliament,
!lien enter the Howe., awl declare that he was a Papist.
He wonlol then pass to that part of the Rill which re-
listed to the oath of supremacy. And he must own that
hr hail Isere struck with soave surprise when a Right
Reverend Hewlett's') had taken upon himself to say.
that the oath, us given its the Bill, was inconsistent with '
the humus Catholic relieion.—:le was justified in ssy
jug., that the laws exact ding the See of Rome from in-
terference with English affairs, were previous to the Re-
formation : anal it thereto re was absurd to imagine there
was any thine its the Catholic Religion incompatible
with the heat security of the. State. 'ln support of
this pretilitei the Right lion. Member referred to the
wonts of exreption in Ilse Statute of Philip 11011
Mary. Th- Art of Elizabeth followed, which
eel:minded the nails reistired by the preceding acts,
and sled:L 1:d that " It meant nothing but what was
of right due to her Majesty's :Coble Father, Bing
Henry th and to King Edward the Si stlo,
her lonelier." This explanation was as obvious as
tss-able. 11e load also the authority of Bishop llor.
n.l on this subject. who, in speaking of this explana-
lei v art hot observed •• Th it the moderation of the