The Statesman.
London, England, 1812-02-04 00:00:00

THE STATESMAN._

their consideration ,• but if that motion was intended
to embrace the conduct of the Government, and to
pronounce upon its interference as an interference
contrary to law, he (Mr. C.) was prepared to give it
a complete negative. At the same time,
,he was not
ipcepared to state,. a priori, that the Act to which
reference had been so often made, was intended to
operate against such meetings as those of .the Catho-
lic Committee; but being advised that it was so by
the Law Officers of the Crown, he thought that Go-
vernment would have taken upon themselves a most
grievous responsibility, if, in defiance of such ad-
vice, they stood aloof from the proceedings, and
shut their ears against the representations of those
who watched over • the law, and who complabled of
its infriegetnent and violation. With regard to the
transaeitoos that followed this intimation to the God
vernmont ; so far from calling for the motion, they
rendered it inexpedient, for the mom* of all was,
tnat the matter was in a state of legal
process [Hear,
hear!]. He could not think that any thing had
II happened, from the beginning of those differences up
to the present moment, which called upon the House
to set to Ireland the fearful example of an interfer-
ence upon the part of the Legislative Authority with
the natural and proper course of the judicial law.
[Hear, hear!] He should oppose the proposition
• for going into a Committee when that was the ob-
i •
yet, or when it could be mistaken for the object of
t the Legislature—[hear!] , He would allow that the
bare fact of having acted according to law, did
not go to prove a proper purpose in the minds of the
, persons so conducting themselves ; on the contrary,
he saw many cases in which the bare letter of the
law was lamentably deficient as a moral rule or
a political precept but would they call for a
Committee to examine into the motives of Go-
vernment ? or if they did call for such a Com-
mittee, would it be possible to avoid introducing
another party, as well as the Government, the
party of the Catholics themselves, whose 'conduct
could not be contemplated without some reprehension?
[Hear !].--Ife was aware that in coming tOthe dis-
cussion of this question, in which the feelings and
passions of men were so warmly interested, without
adopting, in some measure, the violence of a par-
tizan, was appearing to great disadvantage, and
embarking in a cause without any great likelihood of
pleasing either party ; but such a clisadvautage he was
not afraid to meet. if he knew his own heart, de ;
came to the present question uninfluenced by such
motives as either power or popularity could suggest •
he sought not the triumph of either party, but the
trauguillitv, the security, and the happiness of the
whole. Much had ban said of the understand-
ing entered into at the time of the Union. An un-
derstauding there certainly was, though not ex-
pressed by the Legislature, that whenever the Ca-
tholic
Claims were brought forward in that House,
they should be candidly, distinctly, and dispas-
sionately discussed. The Catholics were given to
understand, that though under their own separate,
and resident Legislation, surrounded with the.
local passions and prejudices that unfortunately ex-
islet" in their own country, the subject of their re- !
quests could not be coolly deliberated ; yet here,
where local feelings • did not act, and where the
prejudices against them were comparatively tempe-
rate, they might reasonably expect that sort of di 3.
cussion which alone could lead to a rational and
enlightened decision ; but now that that time was
arrived, that the Union .was accomplished, and the
question was opeb to a cool and impartial considera-
tion, his Right Honourable Friend had insinuated
priuciples which must shut the door against their ex-
pectations. He agreed with his Noble Friend, as to
the great importance of the subject, but he thought his
Noble Friend did not agree with him, as to the mag-.
ititude of the difficulties that encompassed it ; but
whatever difficulties might be entertained as to the I
view which his Noble Friend had taken of it, his
Right Hon. Friend had done much to simplify the
question, and to remove the difficulties that sur-j
rounded it. If, according to him, the only conside-
ration was, whether they should return to former
disabilities, or whether they should go on, he could
have no doubt as to the side upon which he should
vote. Indeed, when he looked to the state in which
Ireland now stood, with a great population, growing
daily in wealth and intelligence, aspiring from what I
they had already tasted of freedom, to wish for
more, and proceeding in a natural gradation, from
the accomplishment of much, to the desire and the
ambition of greater. When he looked to this situa- I
tiou—a situation to which they were raised from a
condition in which no class of people had ever be-
fore been placed in a Christian country, he could
not agree that it was wise to exclude them from the
pale of the Constitution. Since the period of their
humiliation, they had disclaimed many tenets :
once imputed to them, or perhaps he should
not have reprobated so strongly as he "was inclined
to do, the isotolic doctrine of his Right llonourable
Friend. His Right- Honourable Friend had said, the'
more the Catholic was restricted, the more genet he
became. This probably was true, but it was a truth
which might lead them too far. It seemed to approach
the old adage, that " dead men tell no tales," for it
must be granted, that the man in whom the social
passions were extinguished, was likely to be quiet I
enough. [Hear, hear, hear .f] But did his Right
Hon. Friend really think that such a course was
politic? Did he think' that, having removed the
chain from the Catholic, we should leave a link be-
hind to remind him that he once was fettered! that
having broken off the bonds with which he was once
surrounded, we should leave a brand behind, to de-
uotethat he was not always free? Was this to legit-
late Sn the spirit of wisdom, or was it not rather to'
adopt a headlong and precipitate violence, disgrace-
fill to the character, as it must be injurious to the
interests of the country ? But were they to sup-
pose that circumstances had, changed the nature
of the disabilities under which the Catholics formerly
laboured, and that that which was once so essentially
necessary to the security of the State, should now be
cancelled, as being useless? For his part; he could
not admit such an apology for the past. He could
net conceive any state of society in Which such re-
strictions could be justified., ' He could not approve
of such means of producing quiet. He could not give
his voice for propping.up a state by dissociating human
nature so completely, and violating all the principles of
Government, both, in a political and moral view.a.
Excuses might, certainly, have existed then, which

aid not exist now, for those Who would defend, not
the system, but the fragments of the system ; nut the
machine, but the remnants of a machine, broken and
scattered in those latter times by the growing liberal-
ities of the. human mind. The onto lay on those
who recommended such perverse .littlustry, to show
upon what principle it was necessary to show to fu-
ture ages what that system was.—{hear, hear!)—
His Right Hon. Friend heel argued the question as
if It was solely a religious one, but he should argue
It, he felt it his duty to argue it in that House upon
a political ground alone. His Right lion. Friend
had said that he would not go into the doctrine of
Transubstantiation, or the adoration of Saints, or
other mysterious points But why did he not go into
them ? Because he took them for granted, and ar-
gued on them without sunnitting to the inconveni-
ence of proving them. When the Legislature select-
ed those doctrines, it was only as a means of marking
I the particular sect against whom they thought proper
to direct their provisions. The Parliament of Great
IBritain could never adopt the idea of becoming Con-
' troversionists ; they never could have intended to
argue with Priests and Bishops upon the doctrines of
their faith. He knew that some
,Gentlemen were
fond of talking of the sufferings of Ireland in remote
I and almost unremembered periods ; of its being
treated as a cottqured country from time immemorial,
and injured and oppressed in centuries long past ; but
he would not go so far back to count its wrongs, any
more than he would look back to the Norman
Conquest with respect to this country, for the pur-
pose of complaining of the Curfew—{A laugh.]—
But part of the way he must go back, to find the be-
ginning of the restrictions now under consideration.
NV at then was the state of Europe after the reforma-
I lion had taken place ? There arose at that time two
teas more influenced by the zeal of sectarism than by
, the love of country. The Catholics and the Protes-
tants were attached each to their own persuasion,
without regard to those sacred ties which bind us to
our native climates, and the Catholics of this nation
were more allied to the Catholics of any other nation
'than to their Protestant fellow subjects who were
children of the same soil. Under those circum-
stances, regulations might be necessary which should
exist in no other case. In what country of Europe
were there not religious struggles, though such strug-
gles should not be considered common to all other
times, as had been stated, nor arising out of any
cause inseparable fiesta our nature. Of those who
contended that they were, he would ask, did history
bear them out ? Was it true that the fourteen Can-
Itons of Switzerland, tousisting of Catholics, and
other Dissenters, had come to a generous resAution
to bury all religious animosities 'and, was it true,
I that from that time they went on with perfect politi-
cal agreement ?—[ilear !] His Right Hon. Friend
Imight say, that though this might have been the ease
, with small States, there was a difficulty when they
• came to make the application of it to great ones.—
' The discussion of that principle would lead into mi-
nute enquiry, and the instance he had already quoted
must go against the generality of the argument. But
! what if the same agreement had existed in another
Icountry ? What it' it had existed in France from
the period of the edict of Nantz, down to its sabse-
, quent revocation ?—Let them look to the words
of Peat famous edict, they would find it declar-
ing. that for the purpose of stilliug all complaints,
all subjects, of whatever religion, should be capable
lof holding offices without taking any other oath
than to be faithful to the King. They would find
that Henry IV. proceeded (for he was speaking of
no less a man) to provide for the filling of all of-
fices in the state, without regard to the distinction of
sect, or to the prejudices of religious jealousy. He
did not say that they were bound to follow. the ex-
ample of France. That admission would come ra-
ther oddly after the new philosophy. But when
they had before them the opinion of the greatest Mo-
narch
of that nation, in times when he had not barely
to calculate upon possible resistance, but to encoun-
ter open opposition; when they had his opinion in
such circumstances, that the best course, or mode of
proceeding, was conciliation; it was impossible to !
despise such an authority ; and looking from his
judgment to the practical consequences of his plan,
it was still more impossible to despise that measure, !
which placed Sully at the head of the Council, and
sent Schomberg, Turenne, •and Saxe, to share the I
glories of the field. [Hear, hear!] It was im- ;
possible not to approve of such conduct in that Mo. I
starch, whese splendid Court was the envy and the
terror of all -Europe, at a moment when the world '
seemed to labour under a religious dotage, and when
he himself was under the influence of an intriguing
mistress. Who, it' he was asked whether he would
wish to live in that grand epoch, or in any subse-
quent epoch of that country, would not readily and
eagerly, and without hesitation, place his finger on
the former ? Our Government had found its policy
at all times in lending assistance to the Reformation ;
that assistance led to the interference of the Catho-
lics in one affairs, and every thing which was done
against the Protestants on the Continent, was visited
in penal statutes upon the Catholics of Ireland at
home. He did not recommend this system ; he did
not approve of it ; from the period of the revocation •
of the edict of Nantz, and when the Revolution in
this country had raised her freedom to its perfection,
her restraints were doubled upon Ireland, and every
succeeding Legislature seemed to vie with the other
in a contest to make the situation of Ireland more
slavish and degraded ; and begging pardon of his
Right Ilonourable Friend, tranquillizing too—(A
laugh.)—Looking to the yew' 1685, when the edict
of Nantz was revoked, we saw our shores covered
with a flying Clergy—tying from persecution.
What Clergy? Protestant—flying from what perse-
cution ? From the,persecution of Catholic France !
And this we saw visited upon Ireland. In a century
after we again beheld our shores covered with a flying
Clergy, flying from persecution. What Clergy?
Catholic. Flying from what persecution ? From the
persecution of' Atheistical France ! And this we
were again called upon to avenge upon tha-Catholic
population of Ireland.—[Hear, hear fl—But 'were
they so blind as to confound the cases ? Were they
so Nadas to suppose that the same remedy was ap-
plicable to each, if indeed it was justifiable in either?
The mitigation of the Popery laws which after-
wards took place was- a warning of a change,
though his Right Honourable Friend was not in a
situation to lilt 'his warniug voice agiinst it.—

.~

theHe knewirish thatcat h
0;11
ieerse
as wereh a
~sionieesheti
obtained
c,eip re
ais-ic-5a5:,:,,,,d,..
sprivileges
()
th ihtihgehrltyo
honourablegranted
to them
the udderiit.lhaelittb.ity7Bi.;3-
Country, and in times when they were raticiycotarisi.ceeex,,ia.uitii.ilds
circa.;,.
from our
might
tr
bew etarketei etses fromatlemeiritaoibetadienterrdee t
.11 ic h
Ireland; we
be t
hf facilitated rbl our justice..
'e(tid l'fil
then situation
m a
believed it lite
vlleintow
~.
dattirselukeaelliiiciatgl.iiiat those were not concessions to the Irish i'
Protestant,pf9reret o nEltlog lah,u3idisi o, 'Clear':
ii:srollitiiic.ewhn
Brethren,i part,
,d..
boons from , rams
t
was trueff:eldirctsoft
wererl
theoo mtfi
thence,rrte ose Irish
tegroamda
tiemihtate;titiiidttyh
,e tbhceeort
voluntarilyaepi concessions
privileges
svniia_ol: rt:sligtsi
nut
rotvev
fairoetl
hrvee
gtcoraatiniiiti
Silica 179 I,nothing material had)e 17,re,ilid ;ranted
one n
tetltot,laie,
j,:.
up to the present period; it ,7
tam that what
zis,illiii.ineiu,,srl dki
ei
illivifeli,vv,
in the
scienceheld u on fl etsnumbers he
.
had said, that if the Catholics were few, it was wit
worth while to grant their claims, and if inaaw is
was not safe. [A laugh.] It was the opinion
of many, that a temperate discussion could not
he had till the Union had taken place. That time
• was now arrived, but as if obstacles were ever to
be thrown in the way of the argument, the Cathy,.
lies in a late iustaace had been ill-advised enough tA,
• put forward among the nunila,e of their claims the
repeal of the Union—a repeal of the Union (es.
claimed Mr. Canning)—a dissolution of the two
kingdoms—a dissolution of the heptarchies ! But if
the proposition was not efficient to the purposes of
good, it was efficient to the purposes of evil. hi de.
ference to the Honourable Gentleman who had given
notice of the motion for that repeal, that if Parlia.
meat were even to entertain it, and if he by his do.
quence was to prevail hi carrying it, the situation of
the Catholics with respect to the objects of their am-
bition, would be materially worse. It would be in.
jurioui to the Catholic interests, and it would be
high treason against separate Ireland. If a man
were to set about devising an impediment to the Cu.
tholic Cause, he could not succeed better than by
knitting those two demands together ; but with re-
spect to the wishes of the Catholics for an ciliate.
meat of the privileges they at present possessed, he
had always cousidered them rational. Would aay
man who had a right to vote, not wish in time for
the right to ft? Was it to•be believed, that Pasha.
meat had granted him the one without a view to the
ultirnategranting of the other? Was it to lie believed
that they would have opened. to them the bar, if thee
intended eternally to shut up from them the avenues
to the bench ? Was it to be believed that they would
have permitted them to acquire property, and to act
in all the subordinate parts of the political system, if
they intended, with his Right Hon. and Learned
Friend, eternally to exclude them from office? They
were referred to the Revolution in France, and no
man was more inclined to refer to it than he, for es.
' amples that ought to be ai•oided and detested. Lei
! them not shut their eyes to the body politic of France,
which had rendered it susceptible to the poison of
Revolution. Let them not forget that the existenco
! of unpopular and unjust'distinctions, which, without
ii the policy of the Popery Code to extinguish the cis.
! ing spirit from that energy of action to which it mot
' have tended, exhibited plinciples equally objectiona.
ble. If he was to divide the right of voting from
right of sitting, without any view to their ultimate
I connection, he did not know whether he would not
I rather give the higher privilege, than refuse the lower;
whether he would not rather give to a people of such
high spirit, of such great powers of thinking, of such
' resources, of such energies and determinations, tho
right to sit in Parliament, than a right to return their
Members, with an iateotion of shutting them out lint
; the topmost round of their ambition. But it
had been said that the great body of the people were
not interested in this. Oh profound ignorance of
human nature, not to know that the bare possibility
' of greatness called forth all the faculties of tire mind,
: and all the greatness of the character!! To take the
bar as an instance. Was it proper that, filled with
Catholic lawyers, of great abilities, and great ta-
" fluence over the public mind, they should not be ad-
missible to the bench ? No man admired more than
Ihe did the profession of the law. It nad giva tho
country its greatest Legislators, and many of its
Iproudest ornaments ; but supposing that profes4on
• to be degraded to a mere pecuniary pursuit, would not
tthe profession be changed ? would not every maiil,J-
-: longing to it be changed ? They now must lookto war
I not merely as a contingent evil,but as a perinanentatilir-
tion,as the very element in which we were 44 tO liVeltld
die and have our being." Many Catholics were tit
our army—but while we hoped for the 'best effects
from their valour, should we say, that in no state,
and under no circumstances would we recognize a
'"native Catholic General ?—[Hear!] lie hoped
that they would not come to such a tranquillizing
vote. It would seem as lif they were afraid, ill
case of a Catholic Chancellor or a Catholic Ge-
neral, that the Pope and Bonaparte putting their
heads together, would influence them on behalf of
the Catholic Church, against the Constitution. liiis
might have been the case in times when the geogit-
pher might have taken the colours of the two reli-
gions for the description of all Europe; but Bona-
parte had preferred national spirit above the lord of
sect, and looking to the map of Europe now, the!
would find the same Bonaparte to be the eldestion of
the Church, with Protestant Saxony his Ally, with
Protestant Prussia at his foot-stool, and Anti-Cattle"
Russia trembling its his toils. But there was still one
spot in which his tyranny was resisted, on the sai":l.
ii hold of the Inquisition.—lii Spain arid Portugal, 11!
power o
the coufntßrieeismopfa :thee
humbled,m ost i)igosstehdilePlat,peis‘tts,e,
bling for the cause of Protestantism at home. SurerlY
twheetoteugahl
itietso, feet
th
a twthheeurefi fighting n gs
ebelyet sidelieeee fid
eoeft: our
e t0C0.33
we should be
sufficientlypl c d i n e urpossessedCatholic
071
ourlow sepses
subjects s n
where it existed, and not to fancy it
to be found. We should not appear in the situail
of men, who, amidst a mighty • seek
eisellats,rattoav
0,
Tor baubles; we should not, under the pressure
.1
• us of iwe
present danger, cry " fire".to the transactions .
,e..
centuries ago ;- we should not stared upon the lta h'
dap,
of ancient errors, when the channels wee! th, •4
re" '"the
to calculate, in stupid amazement, the dialer '
where
was
n ~...toe^.11;1