not be surprised, if this bill were passed, soon to hear of propositions in that country for the alteration of the dignities and emoluments at present enjoyed by the established church between the ecclesiastics of that church and those of the Catholic communion."

Mr. GEO. BANKES. 17th April, 1823 *.

"THE body of Protestant clergy was deeply interested in the question. If Roman Catholics were once admitted to a share in the legislature, they would contend that their church was the only right church, and would endeavour to overthrow the Protestant establishment."

Mr. W. J. BANKES. 28th February, 1825 †.

"He had no doubt that, in the opinion of the gentlemen. opposite, the pope, with a Roman Catholic hierarchy, would do quite as well as the Protestant establishment. He did not mean to say that such a consequence would immediately follow, but there was every reason to apprehend it from the principle of ambition that prevailed in the Roman Catholic Church."

The Same. 29th April, 1825 ‡.

"The Protestant church might remain the established one in England, because the majority of the nation was Protestant; but, in Ireland, the fact was otherwise, and the This bill was said to proconsequence would be different. vide securities for the safety of the church establishment. But what were those securities? he could see none. Many who objected to the annual grant of 250,000l. for this use would say, why not give away the church establishment in

** Parl. Deb. N. S. Vol. xii. p. 1128. Parl. Deb. Vol. xii. p. 801. Id. N. S. Vol. xiii. p. 319, 320.

Ireland to the Catholics, rather than put the state to the expense of supporting two churches in that country? And how could that be answered? Yet, if it took place, it would have the effect of destroying the Protestant religion in Ireland.

66

He sat down by declaring, that he should look upon the success of the present measure as an incident, after which the Established Church of England could hope nó longer tu exist."

The Same, 25th April, 1826.

"He could not see either the reason or the policy, still less the justice, of committing the care of a Protestant established church to Catholic Members of Parliament. Indeed, human nature must make Catholics, who were sincere believers of the principles of their religion, decidedly hostile to a church which they must feel was an innovation upon their own system, which they deemed to be infallible. As to the Church of Ireland, he was quite satisfied it would not stand for two sessions in an unchanged state, if Catholics were admitted to seats in Parliament."

Mr. HART DAVIS. 6th March, 1827.

"He believed that, so far from any concessions having the effect of restoring peace to Ireland, they would be, as they had hitherto been, only the cause of producing new claims. If that which was now asked for should be granted, the next thing they would want would be equality of power; and, if they obtained that, they would next ask for an equal share in the temporalities of the church.”

Extract from a Charge of the BISHOP of PETERBOROUGH, delivered in July, 1827.

"I REVERT, therefore, to the question above proposed. When all religious parties in this country are placed on a footing of equality with respect to civil power, will they be satisfied to see the emoluments of the church remain in the exclusive possession of one party, a party which will then have lost its ascendency, and have become a sect among sects; a party which, if more numerous than any single sect, is less so than the others united? In other words, will they be satisfied that the present establishment should remain ? It is idle to suppose that honours and emoluments are not objects of envy and desire to one party as well as to another. Nor is it credible, that men should relinquish their desires, when they are enabled, by the acquisition of political power, to enforce them. The making and the administering of the laws will then be indiscriminately trusted to men of all religious persuasions in this country; and, however they may differ from each other, they will be all ready to join in despoiling the present establishment."

APPENDIX B.

THE following Extracts from the Fourth Volume of Hatsell's Precedents, will illustrate the subject of the exclusion of the Bishops from voting in cases of blood. It would appear that the retirement of the Bishops on these occasions has been treated by themselves, not as a disqualification to which the law of Parliament had subjected them, but as a privilege which the Canon Law had made it their duty to claim. It will be observed, however, that, in the case of the Earl of Danby, the House of Commons attached so much importance to the exclusion of the Bishops, as to contend that the proceedings of the House of Lords were rendered invalid by the mere circumstance of the Bishops having concurred in them. Whether the Commons were right or not in this view is immaterial to my present purpose. All that is necessary is, to show that a practical defeasance of the power of voting in special cases is not inconsistent with the principles of the constitution.

(HATSELL'S Precedents, Vol. IV., p. 76, par. 3.)

IN 1388, there are several proceedings before the Lords against the Archbishop of York, and other great officers, and against several of the Judges, for having given extrajudicial opinions, and misinterpreting the law. Upon which, after a very long and accurate examination, judg