The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-07-10 00:00:00

The Royal Anent was given by Commission to the
Lotteries Bill, the Barilla Duties Bill, the Irish Insurrec-
tion Bill, and the Disembodied Militia Bill. The Commis-
sioaers were the Lord Chancellor, tie Earl of Shaftes-

. _
. The lblse efaiIIiBERLAND took the Oaths and his
seat.
' MT. Ilitonmeihrenglit up from the House of Commons
• the •DistillerY BBL
Mi. Ttgastr, from the litx-othce, preeetited, certain
Accounts relative tti the Sational Debt.
Mr. Juntectplitieuted certain accounts relstiri . en
heti Idi ne` of Chtilnkii,
. • • The Bisboirof NORWICH' premnited a petition . Anil
his Diocese In benne of the Catholic Qeslitleation" Bill.
The Martittens of LANSDOWN presented a petition
from the ntelisaibus of hello* stalest the Unlewliil
Oaths Bill;
Lord VERULAM ed &petition froth the Arch-
deiced/ rte ht. I igaiiset the Catholic Qualifita-
. don Ifitl. • ' :r!' '
Thki Stbteb ClSlMldesnr (butts Bill was committed.
The Olsten» Dates it II went through a Committee
of the Horne ; ebb the East Indiallalf-pay BID.
' The Martinelli of LANSDOWN presented a petition
from certain inhabitants of Middlesex and Suerey, pray-
log for the introduttitni of a system of Poor Laws in Ire.
- bad.
Bile LBW CATHOLICS.
The filaretiesi df LANSDOWN moved the second
reading of the Rnglish Catholic Qualification Bill.—
His Lordship evicted into a defeeee of the measure,
against which be did net conceive that any opposition
could be made, as its object merely was to put English
• Cathblies on the same footing with lib Majesty's Catho.
.. ,•. lie subjects in Ireland. In the year 1793, the Parlia-
ment of Ireland thought fit to extend to the Catholic
subjects of that country the right of elective frahchise ;
sod he saw no reason why a similar right should not be
enjoyed by a mach smaller number of Catholics in Eng-
land. He wished their Lordahips to consider the uniform
bayalty and good conduct of the English Catholics, and
•
asked if it was just to exclude them from the enjoyment
ea privilege which was essential to the support of the
British Constitution. If there was any thing dangerous
iu the enjoyment of such a privilege, let the Noble
Lords who opposed this Bill point them out. If there
was any dilTeregre, it omit be in favour of the Ca-
tholics of England, because numbers of indigent per-
ions enjoyed the prieilege in Ireland, who bad no
will of their own, but the case was different in this
awry. The privilege therefore of voting in this i
• ountry could not be detrimental, as it was in Ireland. If
' the Bill then bad for its object merely to place.the Cattle-
. ~rj,.. 7 lies of England oil the same footing with those of Ire.
Ir,-A land,
.111. hoped this would not be ruttsidered'as a new
_7 protioqtion, and that it wadi() nor he considered as a
,- - _ .'hasty s•cp, which their Lordshira might be afraid to
attach. It should-birconsldered that this privilege was
' to be conferred for the benefit of the conhounity, and
nut for the benefit of the Catholic exclusively, and, there-
fore, it would be no argument against this Bill to say
that the English Catholics had not petitioned in favour
9f this measure. He knew that no accb petition would
be eresented, and bad he been applied to, be would have
advised them not to petition for any measure of a nature
so limited as this. lie saw no reason for denying to the
loyal Roman Catholics •of this country the same privi-
leges which.Catbolics In the sister country enjoyed,- he
• • rbeNfore hoped that when the connection bet Ween Eng-
land and Ireland was becoming stronger everyday, this
valnahle Constitutional privilege would not be denied
lit the Catholic subjects of England. He should not
• lave tronbled their Lordships with these observations,
if it had not been said that the Roman Catholics would
be placed on a better footing than Protestant Dissent-
ers; but that was not the fact, because they were still
rtihjetst to the operation of the Test Act, and no Test
Art existed in Ireland. Under those circumstances he
• snored for the second reading of the Bill.
Lord REDESDALE said he should oppose the second
reading of this Bill. To the Government of 1793, he's
Vtributed the grossest error that ever was committed, in
idmitting Homan Catholics tb the elective franchise in
lt,land. Nothing was ever productive of greater agita-
tion and corruption in Ireland than that law. The effect
. rf it was to create two interests io Ireland, constantly
eiilitating against each other, and even the parties, elect-,
mil under that system were not free men. The Act of
li;rg William had for its object to support the eats.
ltlished Constitution of the country; and he who did
. not support the Protestant Establishment was not loyal
to the Constitution of the country. If the law in fro-
land was not repealed, it did not rollow that, as it was an
error, a similar error should be committed in this toas-
t:T. He never would go farther than relieve the Catho-
hes from restrictions from which they could consistently
be relieved. He must say that this they
was introduced
,under a false pretence. His Lordship concluded with
sowing, that the Bill be read a second time this day
three mouths.
The Evrt of WESTMORELAND referred to the proceed'
logs that took place in Ireland in 1793, and said that it had
fatten to his lot twice to recommend, by his Majesty's oe•
ders, V. e granting of the privileges allowed to the Catbolles
of that country, and he now saw no reason why they should
not be granted to the Catholics of England. Ile maintained,
that the privileges granted in 1793, so far from giving rise
to disturbances, tended to the tranquility of the country.
lie did not believe that the passing of this Bill would in the
tVgliest degree add to the disturbances of Ireland ; and he
*as convinced it would have a beneficial effect in giving an
11,F.tence to a body of men Who ought to possess a portion
of latitience to a certain extent in this country. ' He had
been It-stile to those Bills that went generally to remove all
restrictions from Roman Catholics ; he wanted to leave the
Catholics of Ireland where they were; t.nd that was the
reason why he supported the present Hill ; because it went
ts give certain privileges to men who could be fairly trusted
with them, who ought to enjoy them in common with Irish
subj.-eta ; and because it would go to limit the extent of the
privileges that ought to be given to Catholics.
Tile dishop of NORWICH said the present was not a re-
Ihrious but a political question, and he would take this op-
portunity of protesting strongly in his own name against
some of the clerical petitions that had been presented walk
the extersiou of privileges to the Catholics ; for he was per-
t-qatted that no danger could ever arise to the Church of
'Ergland from acting oo the Christian principle of granting
atone ,-ricileges. The language used by the enemies of re-
tqlous toleration was very 11l suited to the state of know-
idles and improvement that now existed In the world, and
1,111C4 be hoped that no Holy Allienee—(hear, hear)—would
ever be obit to arrest. However eapedient or necessary It
iiiVit hue been 104 veers ago to pass restrictive laws against
the Csthelies, those laws he uow considered wholly linnet-es-
ssry, and contended that they should no longer be continued
in brim. After the reasons for passime those laws had
ceased to exist, the operation of them would be most an. I
just. Every human insiitutioa meet yield to the law et
change. and particularly so when the circumstances whisk
had called. for the lostitutions became haimless. Naar
persons entertain- I a great drevi of innovation; hut it
was to innovation we were indebted for every veritable
thing We enjoyed, and Christianity itself was an inners.
tilt). Here the Hight Iles. Prelate spoke of the 'anon-
itrance which bad been made to the !Liman elppiror
Valintinian by a licathen.high priest, who reinonstrated
grealast the introduction of Clinsienity 'lmo the aniline;
to the e‘vclusion of a religion that had etie:ed for sok
mane years. The priest complained of it ityan inetivan
this, and his visioning sees lost as ronclaslee &slim are
4*.glbents now assail la apOtitlo/1 to any deprovereeraC
proposed to be bade tit Church or SW!. Persons Wag

•• ~ "-

• - were It
granting of claims to the Cm
irstngirpetifinnt- freer the s
against the aimissiosof Prptestante toshe possession o,
humble offices in that' teuntty: aod'the-esfaldishe.l cler;l
TrolEngisstatit Intend- weir the only parties •
now; in the 18th century, were hostile to the extoosioa
Igsivil and religious liberty. His Lordship quoted a
Osage from the work Of liisbop Burnett, in support
if the eittettsiod of religiSols. liberty. He meat sty that
bbirien'trete so firmly attethed to their King as his
teltyli Catholic subjects; and he etiiiihtkided that the
'tate half no concerh in their private* sendinents: He
bad now in his hands two. petitions, true froth' the inhas
bitents of Norfolk, and cine (rout tile Clergy
.of the
some county, against the .siting of any concessions to
the Catholics, and he trusted that their Lordships would
torn a deaf ear to those petitions.--(lAughtlir)
The Bishop of St. DAVI D'S said he could not con-
sent to a Bill that was merely calculated to • indulge
24'd who acknowledged foreign authority.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that no consider-
ation whatever would induce him to give Iris commit
to this Bill. The idea was utterly unfounded that the
clergy of this country were the only persons hostile,
to the Catholics: his opinion was quite different. The
opposition to the Catholics had not dirsinialied in this
, country; and it was due to the country to make the
object of the Bill sufficiently known before any at-
tempt was made to p ass it into a law. It was not
cousistent with the dignity of
.the Muss to entertain
Inch a Bill at the end of a Session. it was a wawa
which, by taking sway the oath of suprensecy; went to
weaken the seprenticy of the throne; and for these rea-
sons Ile should. vote for potting off the Bill for. three
months. He denied thut the Revolution was an ititio-
ration ; it was only a restoration of the liberties of the
country. The Acts then pissed were intended for the
support of those libesties; and it thuie Acts were doiie
away, there would be no religious toleiitiuu in, the
kingdom. One of the • greatest blessings of the Reve-
-1 lution was, that it estililiihed the Constitution of the
Church and State, that it united thein, and setied
the supremacy of the King.
The Earl of HARIiOWBY, in answer to the objection
of his Noble and Learned Friendthat this Bill had nut
been brought sooner before that•liouse said that it had
been introduced into the other House oeParliament three
months ago, and had beau delayed by the pressure of
other public business, therefore it could Out be sell that
their Lordships came unprepared for the discussion of a
measure of this kind. As to the merits of the measure

;

itself, he would say, that-
alien a large portion of the
most intelligent and respectable individua6 of the com-
munity were to favour of Any measure, it was the duty of
Parliament to adopt, in me arid this was one
reason why be should' suppor, the present Bill; for lie
felt that the Roman Catholics of this country had the
fairest claims to the privileges now proposed to be grant-
ed to them. If the Bill passed in -Ireland in 1793 had
fixed a higher qualification for the right of voting, he
believed a real blessing wound bare been conferred on
that country, by granting the electite franchise to Ca-
tho cs ; that it would have made the Catholics much
more respectable, and prevented that state of vassalage
and mischievous subdivision of land which now existed
in Ireland. The law then ought to lie objected town the
ground of giving privileges to Catholics, but ou account
of its destroying the independence of Catholic freeholders.
Ile maintained that Roman Catholics were as capable of
being good and loyal subjects as soy other class of peo-
ple in the count:), ; and 1114 the utmost reliance tu gilt
be placed under all Circumstances of damrer upon the
Roman Catholics of England. He believed they Wight be
as safely trusted in all cases of emergency as any of the
Noble Lords in that House. His Lordship coucluded by
giving his support to the Bill.
The LORD CHANCELLOR explained
The Earl• of LIVERPOOL said he was anxious to
state his reasons for the vote lie intended to give ; and in
doing so, he should abstain from the general Catholic
question. The Noble Al arquess said that this measure
had been extended to Ireland, and asked why it should
not be extended to England. To this he would say that
the privilege hiving been,once granted to the Irish, it
ought not to be taken away from them without a breach
of faith and of the articles of the Union. They could not
then undo what had been done in Ireland ; but it did
not follow that the same thing should be done in Eng-
land, unless a pressing necessity called for it. There was
no a isdom in to ing to make institutious consistent in all
parts of the Empire, because what was good for one part
might be otherwise for soother. The history of granting
the elective franchise in Ireland was a most curious one.
In 1792 the Catholics of Ireland presented a petition to
Parliament praying to be admitted to the elective frau.
dim., on a higher qualification than was afterwards esta-
blished; the petition was rejected, and neithiog was ever
more unfortunate than that opposition ; because iu the
following year it led to the grant of the elective franchise
on a very small qualification, which bad ever since been
produitive of the greatest mischiefs. As to the Bill now
before the House he load no objection to it ; because he
considered the Roman Catholics of England, as a most
loyal set of people, and he could see no objection to
granting them the privileges now proposed. There was
another Bill for allowing Catholics to hold certain
mikes, and this Bill he would object to, because it did
not cistinctly say what offices they were to fill, Ile con-
eluded with voting for the second reading of the Bill.
Lord CLIFDEN supported the motion, as did also the
Earl of LIMERICK.

Lord MELVILLE said he approved of the principle of
bathlls..but though be should vote fur the passing of
the first through all its stages, and for the second reading
of the second Bill, be should still propose a clause in the
Committee against extending its provisions to Scotland.
lt was with great regret be felt himself obliged to do so ;
and nothing could compe: him to adopt adch a coarse
but the conviction that the measure tended to violate the
solemn compact entered into with Scotland by the Act ot
Union.
The LORD CHANCELLOR explained.
The Marquess ot LANSLOII N replied. Ile under-
stood that the Noble Earl (Liverpool)agreed to the first,
sad assented so far to the second Bill as that the Catho-
lies should be eligible in England to situations corre-
sponding with those to which they were eligible in Ire-
land. However, be (the Marquess of Lsnidown) would
consent to deter the second 01.1 for the present, in order
that it might be more maturely considered next Session.
The sentiments delivered this night by the Noble and
Learned Lord on the Woolsack, were at variance with the
opinion lie expressed in the other House of t'arliament,
when he filled en inferior office to that whirl' he now
held. Upon that occasion, when the Affirmation Bill
relating to Scotland eas introduced, the Noh.e and
Learned Lord said that it was sufficient that it person
took the oath of allegiance to prove himself a true and
loyal subject, without at all tatting the oaths ot sop: e-
meg. how, then, could the Noba and L.:trued Lied
witu that opinion upon record. say this night that no man
could be true and loyal who refitted to take the oath of
snyrerniey ?—(Hear; bear.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR explained. lie said
that there was no analogy whatever betweio the two,
castes referred to by the Noble ihropess. The Bill now
before the Noose imiicised no terms oe conditions on the
Rattles Itivolviti)e s principle similar to that contained bs
the AlErinvt?ovi HSU.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL, in explanstion, cheered
that Noble L6rds the otbei eilii-preposed the story

. ~,

certain ex.

Ira Si 01.
s cer-

the whole

grate,.
.sesrastriprthan-diyitted oft toe
ouest! • • • , ! 4 • • •
• • 'Calderas 49 Itemeotifenti 41
*4-sotes 90 Premleevirec ea
• •
79 90
• Majority against the /11'.1 7
IRISH TITHES.
On .or re-almissioo below the bar, we found
herd. CLI FDEN on hie legs; speaking on the motion
for going into a Conirnittee on the Irish TitheaCompekle
tioe 11111. His Lordship ciiitaindallty nieving tliat it be:
elf instruction to the Conitultittie tbintrolduce a clause for
gjiring to the Lord. Lientrinaht
.a power of appOinting a
"Ciniadiiseioil fur settling thedoinunt of the composition
:with respect to the sum to be Pitid for tithes within saw
heir) 'soother of years.
.
The Earlasf oPinlon that a corn.
clawai of IMO sbrt of other might ullitnatel, be
necessary, bat lie thealeht It better that the measone
should be tried as a l:dilatory title at first:
Lord KING said that the Bill would be of no use what-1
emir without the compelsoey clause. The people of Ire-
land had numberless causes of discontent, and no man
could be :trprieed at the picture of carmaltous misery
which that country now preeentell. This Hierarchy of
Ireland pressed it down with a burden not to be endured.
The proplb of Scotland were Content, beminee they heti
an independent church, founded upon grelitand etptitebre
inciples, with respect to every thing relating to its tem-
poral concerns. But how very different was the cam with
Ireland, where the Established Church was intolerable
to the people? The money-changers hail once bead tarn.
ed oat of the temple, but they had absolutely got iota it
in li•eland, where the clerked profeseion was tnedea trade
of dime lucre, in which the most idle apprentice was too
ofted the best pabl.—(Hear, hear.) The Irish farmer
was likes poor jaded hart, who had to carry WO priests
on his back, one of wlium continually spitted him oil the
shoulder, sad the other on the fiatik.—(A letegb.) The
one ma le a hell to him in this world, and the other
threatened him with hell in the ti-at.—(Latieliter.) But
It was said that divine service Iseult! not be performed with
grace, unless there was a nuaieroue Hierarchy. lie would
appeal to thuse who had attended Divine Service at !tattoo
Cisedeu Chapel last Sinialey, whether Mime Service was
not performed with grace upon that occasion, though there I
was not a numerous Hierarchy I Ile believed that even the
First Lord of the Treasury had attended. end WM. preacher
heard that the great mitre-giver was present, he might pro-
bab'y bays said that be ought not to promote priests with
priestly hearts. it appeared to he resolved, that the suffer-
ings of Ireland should never cease. Al human grieva-ces, ,
however, were liabie to end, except thOse perhaps of the
Court of Chancery—(a lungli)—and Ireland might one day'
er• other assert her rights. It was very ease for the clergy ;
to come to some amicable arrangement, if they were dot
so entirely prepossessed in favour of the divine right of
Ohio.
Lord EteLENBOROCCIII said he should oppose the l
Dill, whether with or without the rlinpulsory clause. ‘Vtiat
tan people of Ireland wanted, and want he desired, was a
Commutation. and not a compositiou Tithe Bei. .2
Tsui &Wet DARNLEY supported the motion.
Lord ,14(1eLANI), gfter eulogizing the speech of
itight [ter. Prelate, tie Bishop of Norwich, prostrate
to observe; that as Bishop Headley hall said Hole flee
Revolotioa would have proved no blessing nithoot
Devolution, so 6114E11 la oniti have proved no bled- ag to
Ireland without the compulsory chute. lie would vote
for it, however, cossidering that it was the only miserable
pittance that was offered as a boon to Ireland since the
Union— a period of more than twenty years. The great
object with Noble Lords on his side (if the (louse wee to
emir Ministets to a conitmoation of tithes, and fur this
g
.
ore reason, became. t'ee salter populi required it. The
Notle Earl (Liverpool) seemed to have • great predilec-
tion for tithes in the abstract. Time Noble Earl desired
to approach the subject as cautiously and as delicately as
possible, and while he "thought that it knight be
mately expedient to resort to a compulsory clau.e, he
preferred trying the effect of the Bill as a voluntary utee-
sure in the first instance. His Lordship had hoped that
au offspring would have arisen from the principles which
had been so often advocated—that a Hercules would have
sprung from a Jupiter—that would have destroyed the
hydra which opposed him. Without compulsion, the
measure before the House woell never be carried lilt()
effect. If it was to be done, it must be done by necessity.
The liable and Learned Lord on the Wool.atk, in Hp
course of that evening's debate, had declared that the
people of England were latterly more averse to the mea-
sure tibial had been before their Lordships than they
were formerly. Ile (Lord Holland) had always const-
demi the House of Commons an speaking the sentiments
of the people of England; but it would seem that the
Lord High Chancellor of this kingdom ea+ to speak the
public voice. It wan the opinion of Mr. Pitt th tithes
were the occasion of the most serious complaint on the
part of Ireland. Let those who admired that great man,
who formed themselves in Pitt-chrbs, follow his doctrines.
Let not his sreehes he shut up in hooks unattended to ;
bat let those who were devoted to him cead his speeches,
and they would finu a remedy against the evils under
which that unhappy country groaned. His Lordship cur.-
eluded by agreeing to the compulsory clause.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL had no hesitation in saying
that a compulsory measure was necessary ; hat it was
also necessary first to know what wateexactly meant by
compulsion. To fair and equitable compulsion lac had
no objection : it had formed a part of the former bill, and
had only been struck out, because differences of opinion
arose with respect to the sort of compulsion. He coutt :etc!
for the equity and legality of the principle of treating with
tithes by Act of Parliament. The right of ownership in
the land was a right subject to the charge of the tithes,
and the tithes could nut belong to the owner of the land
under any circumstances : in support of which positiou
lie instanced the fact of land tithe-free selling for more
than one-tenth above the mere value of the land. He was
not prepared to advocate every law which stood upon the
statute-hooks, and among those which be admitted to be
unjust he should not hesitate to reckon that of agistment
passed by the Irish Parliament. He defended from the
attack of the Noble Baron (Lord Holland) the clergy of
Ireland, than whom be believed a more respectable body.
did not exist in any country; and as to their conduct with
respect to tithe., lie believed no persons behaved. more
Eberally. het this tried by the fairest test—let the
tithe-pryers be asked to whom they would prefer paying
tithes, to churchmen or to laymen—and it would be
feline, that in every instance they would rather pay
to the parsons. He did not mean to say that the mea-
sure before the. House was a perfect one, but it wa • mai
by the operation of Vile Bill that the real difficulties of
the ease could be understood. For these reasons, lie
felt obliged to oppose the motion.
The Home the.. divided, when it appeared the numbers
were—For the motion I (—Against it, 34.
• The Bill then went through the Committee, was re-
ported withont amendments, and ordered to Ise re-cons.
milted on Friday next. -

'fhe Irish Exchequer Courts 13111 went through a Com-
mitte; after wlai.Vibe House adjourned at half past
Twelve o'clock.

HOUSE OP COMMONS.--Wansabba v.
The, noires bat by commission, sad iti• • epsaket having
Dees sesiumlied hi Vbs. 11• ope of Plitbri, es Ids'sitets biters-
ed *be Heinle lint ibis Royal MOM had bail giSes to per.
Uhl Ma, Yee me" its Larenu w 44,110 - • •

------- - - :••• . , =
: ..,,.
• . •
• • ~ ,
• .
•
. • ' T- E , Slit ACAS .‘o"
4.0041
IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. inch arguments seemed to forget that a blind atliserence thlig shotild be given
_, 911 es with i
...—......-- to old establishments was as ilani-geiis- IFIU code--ei.,:freini; but he calla" - iem ratter to
qua:lces as any of those menisres they neti.pedito &Nati liswitidie, Muth they were pieparitd to give.
HOUSE OF LbRDS.-AVILDNESDAT. lig macb. Timm were no petitions- nbw!hg4inat the Wulf wit not 'dispopekto grEnt elicibitity to
The Royal Assent was given by Commission to the granting of claims to the tatliolies ; nor did Eat lira( of cilia Mat it: been granted 10 refund..
- - - - - - -- - - • -• .