The Sun. — 1827-03-08 (London, England)

CANNING. We will not, however, deny that caution is a virtue, though not one of the most attractive or amiable. The whole argument on one side rests on the presumption that Catholics will not keep faith with Protestants, notwithstanding the absurdity of the idea that Catholics disregard oaths, wheiz an oath is the only obstacle to their sitting in Parliament. But we do not know what answer could be given to the charge that might be made by Catholics against the good faith and veracity of Protestants. In the first place Catholics were subjected to their present disabilities on the atrocious perjury of TITUS OATES; (not to talk of the legal murder of Lord STAFFORD and many others on the testimony of the same veracious Protestant.) Then "tries the Treaty of Limerick, most basely quibbled "'ay by a Royal Protestant of "immortal memory," and lastly the Irish Union,obtained under the encouraged expectation, if not positive promise, of Catholic Emancipati°ll.--but for which Union, from the known sentiments of the Irish Representatives, Catholics would now be Sitting in the Irish House of Commons, and enjoying the rights of citizenship. There is one part of Mr. CANNING'S speech which deserves particular attention ; it is that in which he says, that " concessions to be made to persons situated as the Catholics were, should never be made the subject of bargain and sale," that " Parliament should 'quire, deliberate, and determine, as to the course which it was wise and upright and expedient 10 pursue, and haVing done that, should not in'ite the Catholics to accept or reject, but call on them to obey,' With this sentiment we cordially 4gree : for are not the self-termed representatives of the Catholics, the Bishops, or their Association, the very persons most likely to throw obstacles in the way of amicable arrangement ? Would not such an event Put an end to their importance ; and can they be desirous, of promoting it ? To bring this principle into operation—why could not emancipation be , granted, and rational securities enforced by pains. and penalties ? For instance, al,,ong with that, boon, why not insist on the KING'S veto in the nomination of Bishops ? It is practised in other Catholic countries, and is perfectly reasonable. Enforce obedience if you please by what may be now called the amusing penalties of a premunire, °ir by expatriation, or by fine and imprisonment. ~t Is surely better that the Catholic Bishops that have an unreasonable cause of complaint than on_ the great body of the Irish nation should have nethich is too well founded. Nave We regret that the MASTER of the ROLLS should Nire!rgued so unfairly with regard to the authority of the., rITT's opinion. Because in a preliminary stage of hem'3llsiness, no mention was made of the seclurities, onour argued that the Bill must necessarily want pin and as Mr. PITT wished for securities, ergo, Mr. hnw'r's authority was against the motion. Nothing, tenor of We that great Minister's life. • brz e rejoice to see that the Knight of KERRY is to 410 i urivi'vard the Question in another shape on the Witte' t3e ri 'V- One would rather have lost a friend at oatotchhan in a skirmish—and this sort of consofight to the late defeat. It was a glorious Vezoci and more splendid eloquence has seldom been eatho,,within the walls of St.