III. At that period the oath against transubstantiation was necessary to be taken as a qualification of admission to parliament. In the declaration of rights, a provision was introduced, whereby it was declared that no foreign prince or potentate hath, or ought to have, any spiritual jurisdiction, &c. within this realm. On the 13th of February, the convention ceased to exist, and was converted into a parliament. Much stress has been laid upon the omission in the act of settlement of the oath of qualification for members of parliament not being made a permanent part of the constitution, together with the limitation of the crown to protestants, but the reason of that omission was obvious. The act of settlement was an act for providing for the protestant succession to the crown; and if, in the oath of coronation of king William, he was called upon to subscribe to the protestant religion, and his successors were bound to be protestants, such a provision was not more essentially a part of the constitution than was the act enacting the oaths to be taken by all future members of parliament. If it were asked why these oaths to be taken by members of parliament were not declared to be an essential part of the constitution, as well as the oath for the regal office, he would say, it was because a provision had been already made for that purpose. He would now refer to the union of Scotland, and an act since passed, both excluding papists from the representation of that country. It was true their lordships, with the concurrence of the other branches of the constitution, had the power of abrogating those laws, if they thought proper so to do, but at the same time it was desirable that they should proceed to the consideration of any proposed change with an accurate knowledge of the state of the law. The noble and learned lord concluded by expressing the pain with which he differed from the noble duke (Wellington,) and from his majesty's government; he had felt it his duty to express the opinions he had done, as he conscientiously apprehended that the concession of political power to the catholics would only enable them to aim at ulterior objects.

Earl Grey then rose. "It would be presumptuous in me, my lords," said the noble lord, " to follow the chief justice of England in the statement which he has made upon the various laws affecting Roman catholics. In the reign of Elizabeth, to which the learned lord so often referred, so much confidence did Elizabeth repose in her catholic subjects, that, although an act was passed which, in its operation would have excluded the catholics from parliament, it was not attempted to be enforced. When Elizabeth was threatened with an attack from the Armada, she called around her her Roman catholic subjects; she

trusted to their loyalty and courage, and she had the proud satisfaction of reaping the rich harvest which was the result of their devotion. At that period lord Howard of Effingham, whose visage is placed among the first of those portraits which adorn the tapestry of your lordships' house,-lord Howard of Effingham, a catholic, was appointed to command the fleets of the protestant Elizabeth, of that queen who had been formally excommunicated by the pope, and whose subjects, and all who served under her, had been absolved from their allegiance. I admit, that by the 25th of Charles II. and by the test act, steps were afterwards taken to exclude the Roman catholics from political power, and that these laws continued in force at the time of the revolution, and after the new settlement of the government; but I think it will be unnecessary for me to go through all the arguments founded upon these enactments; for, after all, the noble and learned lord seemed to resolve all his doubts into the conclusion that this was a question of pure political expediency, and that as the catholics were excluded under particular circumstances, so, with a view to these circumstances and to the times in which they come under consideration, whenever the reasons of exclusion ceased to operate, we might and were bound to take away the laws which supported them. Now, my lords, I know that parliament has such a power, and I am contending for its exercise. I have always contended, that the settlement of the revolution was founded on the principle of attending to the circumstances under which the laws were enacted, and to the motives which influenced those who were called upon to prepare them. What I have always admired in the conduct of the framers of the acts of the revolution is, that they provided for the dangers which existed at the time they were called upon to legislate, and that they did no more, and although it was held to be a great reproach to lord Somers, and the other great lawyers and statesmen of that day, that they did not, at the time they possessed such absolute power, frame a system of policy which was likely to endure through all ages, that is the very point upon which they possess my unqualified admiration. Supposing, however, that the bill of rights had contained an express exclusion of catholics from the enjoyment of all its enactments, surely there is no noble lord prepared to argue that the bill of rights itself has not undergone numerous alterations since its first enactment. In short, my lords, I know not for what reason the bill of rights can be brought into this argument, except for the purpose of shewing that no parliament can do any thing to limit their own powers, or that of their successors, and that we must come to the conclusion-not denied by the noble and learned lord— that we are at all times to consider what course of legislation our

situation, the reason of things, and policy or expediency, may render necessary. The noble and learned lord, when he rests his argument on the bill of rights, says, however, that it is to be taken in connexion with the act of William III. which prescribes that oath under which catholics must be excluded from parliament. But is that oath, I say, sacred from all innovation? The noble and learned lord on the woolsack triumphantly proved that the principles of that act had been violated by the admission of catholics into the army and navy, and that a common oath, of equal validity, had been substituted by a separate act."

Earl Grey then combated the argument that the present measure was an infringement of the union of Scotland, in which the legislature, by the 18th section, were empowered to make such alterations as they might think fit; and also cited numerous instances in which its provisions had been departed from. The noble earl proceeded :—“ I cannot too strongly express my abhorrence at the attempt that has been made to circulate through the country the idea that this bill cannot be passed without a direct violation of the king's coronation oath; it is one of the arguments of the day, I know; but I do not see how it is possible for a moment to support such an assertion. Among lord Somers' Tracts will be found one which contains the answer of king William to a memorial which was presented by James II. when at Lisbon; in that memorial the king's opinion was asked frankly, and in a straight-forward manner, as to the repeal of those laws which related to the Roman catholic religion. King William, in reply to this, certainly stated that he did not think it advisable, under the existing circumstances, to repeal those laws which prevented the admission of the Roman catholics into parliament; but even then, it did not appear that he thought such a measure adverse to, or in contradiction of the oath which he had taken; for, in the expression of those sentiments, king William went on to state, that if the catholics behaved themselves so well as to obtain the confidence of the remainder of the nation, those laws might be repealed at some future time. From this observation, it is clear that the king did not perceive any thing in his oath to prevent his sanctioning such a measure, and that his view of the subject was, that the catholics being deprived of their seats in parliament was only a temporary measure." The noble earl then recapitulated the well known arguments drawn from the treaty of Limerick, and read an extract from a letter of the second marquis of Tweedale, the purport of which was, that the king (William) had declared himself in council as to the oath which he had taken; and the sense in which he understood it with respect to his executive capacity was, that it

66

was

bound him to maintain the church as by law established, at the same time reserving liberty to the legislature to make what alterations they might hereafter think fit. This, then," said the noble carl, evidently the direct understanding of king William on the subject: and, after this manifestation of the way in which he viewed the question, I think that it will be unnecessary for me to insist further upon this part of the subject.

us,

Having, my lords, thus asserted the right which this house and the other house of parliament possess to discuss the subject now before without any violation of the constitution, I come to that ground of objection which has been so much relied upon by those who are opposed to the measure. I admit that this measure will give a power to the Roman catholics, but then it is a power which is an essential ingredient of the British constitution. I admit that by conferring on them eligibility to office, and the right of having seats in parliament, we are giving them political power, but that political power is also a civil right. It is the civil right that produces the political power; and the Roman catholics in aiming at this, therefore, have only been aiming at the very justifiable privilege of placing themselves on an equal footing with the rest of his majesty's subjects. But allow me, my lords, to ask what is the political power that the Roman catholics now possess ? They possess the power of being eligible for certain offices-they possess the power of admission into the army and navy of the country; a power which, as has been well observed, is one that may extend itself enormously, and which, even as it stands, is a great and important power. In addition to this, they possess the power of the elective franchise. All these things are already possessed by the Roman catholics; but I beg your lordships to remember, that they possess them with the feeling that they are still unjustly treated, and that they have still further claims on the justice of the country. This being the case, their political power stands apart from the genuine political power of the country: it is not, as it ought to be, a pledge to the government, that it will be used for the purpose of strengthening the state. But what is this addition that is proposed? The Roman catholics are to be privileged to hold seats in the two houses of parliament; they are likewise to become eligible to serve the King in any office to which his majesty may be pleased to call them. All this is true: but the way in which those who are opposed to this bill look at all this is very curious; they talk as if the whole of these offices was to be surrendered at once; and the council, the bench, and the parliament, to be in a moment overwhelmed by the incursions of the catholics. I am sure, my lords, that if we have