Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1827-04-24

| v;.w who had so often argued the question
with amazing brilliancy, and who had out very
recently displayed in the cause an astonishing
power of cloouence, sarcasm and ingenuity, but
even he the right honorable Attorney General
for Ireland had always held that the Roman
Catholics must afford security against foreign
influence before they ought TO be admitted to
the station they now required. Loud cheers
Were all these gre at authorities, so much relied
upon by the other side, against him! lie should
maintain that they were not, and he anticipated
that the House would agree with MN IN tha'
opinion, the more especially II ne shonia prove
that the Roman Catholics Rad always refused
10 give the security those great men naa heia
10 be necessary. Hear, hear, hear. Having
sla'ed thus much, he would cali the attention
OF the House 10 the nature oil the security re-
qusite; and also he would ask the question,
are the Roman Catholics inclined to give US Sc
curity? Let that question be answered ny an
examination of their conduct since 1908 In
that year a proposition respecting security was
offered by the & a,holics, and a bill founded up
/ en- that proposition was introduced by Mr..
Grat,an. That Bill, moreover, was introduced
bv Mr. Gratlan in consequence oil an under
standing he had with some OF the heads OF the
| Roman Catholic Church In short time, how.
ever, Mr. Gra,tan was obliged to come down
TO the House, and declare that he could pro-
| coed no furthep with the Bill. Mr.. Grattan
stated, that when last he came down 10 that
! House, he had said he was authorized to pro-
pose as security that the King should have,
not an absolute Veto in the election OF the 10
man Catholic Bishops, but that the election
| should be under his influence To Certain eX-
tent He added that he was sorry TO say ne
could not longer affirm that the Catholics were
willing to offer that security. Whether he had
been mistaken, Or whether the bishops had re-
| tracted, Mr.. Gral,an did not state; Tor II was
the rule with that great man never 10 defend
| his own Conduct or reputation at the expense oil
any portion Of his countrymen. Hear In
1918, Mr. Grattan, together with the right hon
orable Secretary for Foreign Affairs, brought
in another bill which II was hoped would prove
successful, as it was founded on the principle
OF adequate security Again the leading point
was, that the election OF tine Bishops should be
under the influence Of The Grown, aud Mr.. Graf
tan pledged himself that he had authority to
make the proposition. Before, however, that
Bill mad passed the House, the Roman Catholic
Bishops had meeting, in which they strongly
reprobated its principles, and declared that 1t
placed them in worse condition than they
should be If the Penal Laws were revived
That then was a second relrac ton on the part
of the Roman Catholics, and We; the Protes-
tants were to be charged with being ogots
and intolerants, because they refused to
fer the most important privilege on class
Of men who refused 10 give any adequate
security in return. Loud cheering The
bill Of 1918 was lost in consequence of the
conduct OF the Roman Catholic Bishops, and
he would pass over the intermediate time which
elapsed between thai period and 1925, when the
last bill was introduced. He repeated that it
was monstrously an just TO charge the Protest
ants with bigotrY and intolerance, when they
r,,r
declared they were bound o demand If such
demand, however, was necessary al the outset.
ii had become more SO now than ever for the
Catholics had shown themselves adverse to
comply with it, and he was firmly Of opinion
that they never would do SO. He thought, too.
that the house would be Of the same opinion
(Hear, hear) tie would then notice the Bill of
1925 That Bill was not hastily prepared /,
was well considered, il was well weighed by
Catholics, DIS wella by the Proteslants who in :
troducrd il, and therefore il showed at once
what Kind OF seclrity the Catholics were in
clined 10 give. The OATH Of 1898, bound every
Catholic holding place 10 do nothing to alter
the stale of propsty in Ireland. Was il no.
thing that in the iii Of 1925, that most impor-
tant and vital pal of the oath was omitted? In
the oatn Of 1895, we're these remarkable words,
and every one VIII, had attended to the evidence
given before tie lords Committee on the state
Of Ireland must V deeply impressed with
sense Of their i'm ortance; the words to which
he alluded werc,-HI do swear TO maintain to I
the utmos, Of my oower the provisions of the {
Act Of Seulemen" Was The House aware c
that in the bill ofls25, this part of the oath r
was entirely omittd! Was this done advised +
ly? He feared il vss, and that it arose from i
an indisposi,ion l. give them the securities
they were fairly entitled to require: Another v
remarkable circumlance was that connected a
with that par, OF III oath of 1893, which bound a
the Catholics, whelin possession of Office, not Ii
TO employ the inhunee they thus obtained to j.
disturb or weakenh he Protestant Church Of o
Ireland. Presently, commentary e.
upon This oath apparel, explaining its mean Il
ing to be, that theywere not both 10 disturb s.
and weaken or ratht not to disturb in order to ir
weaken, and stating rat in any other sense the n
oath was one whol;o not be admitted e,
Taking the hin, pro.bly from this commenta- oil
ry, in the bill Of 1872 and he particularly beg VI
ged the attention of le-iIouse to the circum- III
cIa ha a LapD orpitrpb l,b