The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-07-23

caia the Catholics by charging Tie natural current
OF property by Interesting to Catholics the acq,i-
tion of many binds Of it, while by civil wars and
revolutions, the Catholics bad been aln,clt entirely
deprived Of al property. uch an extraordinary fate
of things had arcn as would defy the application III
common political principles. would not be though,
compare the reflective cialses of iocety, hoie who
had. and thoSer who had no, property, to the ne
eroes and whites in the Nett-,ndia Hands but
certainly properly anoit entirely IN IN. bands
of what called the Pro,cttart Aicendancy, and
the Catholics remained not merely dcttute OF pro
pcTtT. but in circumtances OF degradation, that mott
peculiarly marked that hrsnge and Unnatural fate
| Of human focie.y Nevertheless, in government
like this, 70 complicated in its nature, and aiming
by 10 mary Concurrent cperationsat the uTPort OF
liberty and good administration, it is 70 material that
properly and power fhould 20 hand in hand, and
thar -hcre should in the OF property he cir
euni';nce beyond the Of it, to give peculiar
ny Of feature 70 the individual ~asneceGary be-
gin with laying foundation, which the farther
eAtehlon OF the rights of the Catholics houd be built
The trtt objecs, then was enable the Catholics
! 70 acquire property, from doing which they were
prohibited. This law Was attended BY tie n,oii be-
| netieial confequenees. Not only new inpulfc was
given to indutry, and new ox,enGon to the pro-
duaive powers of wealth which already rxifed bur
vaa additional MATS of wealth was created in the
hands q thofe who had poii.Ged little none be-
| fore. The Catholic Body then began to afinme a
new character The line of den,arcation between
| thofe who had property and thof. who had no, was
thus gradually rendered lfs Marked and the Ca;ho-
lies have only advanced in wealth, but have re-
covered much OF that property OF which, by adverfe
| circumstances, they had long before been deprived
This latter point aude particularly, in order to
obviate apprehension, that conceion of the Ca
thoI;c claims would lead reiumpton of ali that
property which is fetured by the act of frttlenrert
This appears to be Of the wdeit alarms that can
H.
all Pait forieitures were made, what would he the
| cenfequence. Would it not be TO "Trip Of t,eir pro-
perty thofe Catholics who have now acquired it ?
Would IL not be TO "TRIP hofe Catholics who are now
rich and opuleut, in favor OF thote who are not ;
Surely there is little reafon to appreed that the Ca
tholes would exert the power Wit, which they mis- hit
be INDUCED, produce efecss b. which they tneu
| teves mutt be The immediate and principal iuserers
The disabilities under which the Catholics labor.
are OF two forts. lncapacity TO hold certain Offices
civil ard military, and 20 lit IL paraneilt.-Ihnie
VINO have been in the habit of eon!u5ns that oios
chapter OF our tatute lazy, which, i'll the eyes of I'll
enlightened men ~ home and abroad luf ever Rand
rs the mo objectionable parts of political lytlera 70
much admired on the whole know well that the REF
traints to thor points of very different kinds
In Tome OF them the ucapac tation luferedby the III
divdual operates limitation the prercr;.ive of
the crown The crown is reiirained in It's gen,rn!
ROVER ofaproiutirg Offices by the law, which flaws
,ha, the Catholic fial! not b. appointed-Ihs object
OF the te act prevent Charles the Second from
employing Catholics. Ard kere let me Gate an ob-
iervaron on this point, which rather whmiicai, but
at the IA ne time is very nrong and eonyinciny 1t
will thew very itrikingy the different views which
ancelors entertained from Us n the nature OF ,h;
ipecies Of retricion. 1t is commended that one
great reaon for excluding Catholics from the fervice
OF Froel' ant King is anaogy and that as the king
is Protenan, 70 his iersants fall be of the fame re
gion. But when the difference of fleets exits as il
does among US this aalogic.l beauty and perfe ion
o. the contribution IS quite Ion. The realop however
why our anceaors would rLi!tr Charles H. to en-
Hioy Catholics was, becauie they had doubts whether
he hi'nelf was not Catholic. This was far more
'"nabie than view of rhe cafe. Had they bea,
ui,a fatis6ed Of Charles H. being ,incere prot.r.
tant, they might have been 10 averis to his en-
ployug Catholics But if the king was fippofed N
have a fecret leaning to the Catholic religion he
! might be fdpe2ed had motives in wiihine to en-
ploy perfons Of the fame religion. But r1ely il is
itrange, that at time when ,here be no iupei-
on Il fpeak now generally OF the reignng fovereign,
| that the king the throne being a Roman Catho.
lie, his prerogative ihoud BE- reitrained rs 70 the
| Ployment of Catholics 6eeagf he is Proteiant III.
tell act however, which introduced in the reign OF
| Charles II. has received the appreciation of many
great men, and even of Mr.. Locke hmieli though il
perhaps may be thought that his enn,ents publilbed
il apolitical pamphlet, probably with fon1e view to
i
equal to his general doctrine In the fucceedn,,
reign, however, James H. wiihed TO procure the re-
peal of the tett act. But as James II. was Catholic
it was the prevailing opinion, that in all the ercun,-
RANGES OF the cafe, to have repealed that act would
have committed to that prince means which he was
but tco likely employ againi the liberties of the
country. IL was afterwards continued, even in RI,
reign ofking William, who was no friendto reAr;ef;-
Of that fort, tecaufe the high church party VIM
had coneurred with the ietteIent a; the revolution
thought they had obtained ccurity for the church
againtt body of men, by whom they were or a5e9
ed to be- afraid while the other party By a fort of
compromise acquefeed, being afraid Of the confequcn
c-s fthe camor which might have been RATED. lad
the aG been repealed. Thus the law continued nor
only 10 operate againff the Roman Catholics bu, a.
gainh other Difcrters from the church. The ten ad
requires thofe who undertake Offices tn 10 certar
thinGs-hut how has it been enforced IN Ireland
There it has with refpeet Proteans been in MANY
poiuts repealed How has it applied to the Catholics
Il las been given up to many fubordinae Offices. as
TO the military protection below certain rank as IN
the bar wholly, with the exception OF few fperor
| Natious. hter Ibis review Of the fituaiions from
which the Catholics are excluded the enemies of ,i,
claims then eor1e and iay, why iurely you don't ali
expect TO be elanceors ard ftaf off :grs and there
fore YOU have no reafon 70 complain that any one oil
you injured by the ezcluGon.' This cold and I'm.
feeling argument to e0noie the Catholics under de.