reparation to the individuals thus exempted from the application of the censure; but what reparation would it be to the thousands who were friendly to these measures, and whose conduct had gained for them the esteem and friendship of those amongst whom they lived, but who found that, at the termination of this meeting, their neighbours and friends must look upon them with distrust and jealousy, if not with hostility? To all such persons the wrong was irreparable, and was utterly inconsistent with the great Christian precept, "thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." if it had been fairly put, that they would have come forward against it, so numerously or so extensively as they had done. He should like to know why, looking at the question as a matter of justice to Ireland, it had not been put to the people of England to say, how they had the power of interfering to prevent the concession of this boon to Ireland? He said, that they never would have had that power but for the Union with Ireland. And, under what circumstances was that Union brought about? It was a matter naturally painful and repugnant to the people of Ireland, as it was calculated to He said this, because, when he viewed subvert their national independence, and the petitions which had been presented to extinguish their national feelings of to both Houses of Parliament, he thought pride and dignity; and all which conit right to place under their lordships' stituted national strength. It was, thereconsideration the circumstances which at- fore, as he said, naturally and necessarily tended many of them. He alluded to repugnant to the people of that country. those circumstances to show that, when The first time it was proposed, if he was he withheld his acquiescence in the peti- rightly informed, it was rejected, and the tions, it was not to be inferred, that he parliament was then dissolved. What, despised or treated them with contempt; he would ask, led to the subsequent sucbut he wished that the grounds of the cess of the measure? He would venture petitions should be considered. He to state it as an undeniable historical fact, thought he had a right to advert to any that it never could have been carried, circumstance which occurred at the meet-unless the Roman Catholics of Ireland ings where they were prepared, and to show that not merely a misrepresentation of individual motives was resorted to, but that there was a general blinking of the question observable, a leaving out of sight the main principle upon which it was founded, evidently with an intention to delude the people into the belief, that these measures were calculated to do that evil, which he contended could in no way arise from them. One thing, he must say, astonished him beyond measure, with regard to the vast number of petitions which had been presented, and the proceedings which had been taken and the arguments used in many places against this question. It astonished him, beyond all other things, to find that, in these petitions and arguments, Ireland was left out of consideration altogether. Bleeding, as she was, at every pore-torn by internal dissensions-when she presented herself, praying for the removal of her great grievance, she had a claim on the benevolence-he would say, the charity of their lordships ;-yet poor Ireland was left out of the question altogether. Therefore, he said, it was reasonable to conclude, that the question had not been fairly put to the people of England; and he believed it impossible, had given it their unqualified support. And what induced them to support the measure? He said, it was the expectations created by those who were in a situation to create them; and who, he was confident, intended to give effect to them. What, then, induced the Roman Catholics to become favourable to the question of the Union? The prospects held out by Mr. Pitt, lord Castlereagh, and lord Cornwallis, that, if that measure were carried, their question would have a chance of being more favourably considered than, under the circumstances of the times, and in the situation of the Irish parliament, it could have been. He did not say that the assurances of those ministers imposed any positive obligation; because, of course, individuals could not impose an obligation which should be binding on parliament; but their encouragement excited the hopes of the Catholics, and influenced their conduct; and he would take upon him to say, that the Union would never have passed, if the expectations had not been raised, that their disabilities would be removed. He would also say further, that if the Union had not been passed, this measure would have been carried long ago: for the same circumstances which gave to the Roman Catholics the influence and preponderance which they possessed in sending members to the British parliament, would, if the Union had never passed, have enabled them to send their friends into parliament, who would have pressed upon the attention of the legislature the prayers of the whole Roman Catholic body, being a large majority of the people. Therefore, as a matter of justice, it appeared to him unaccountable, why Ireland should have been omitted, in the petitions of those who called upon their lordships to reject these claims. With regard to a part of the subject under discussion, which had led to the expression of very positive opinions on both sides namely, the inherent and indefeasible right of the subjects of our Protestant constitution, he was content to rest his argument upon the basis of the speech made by his noble and learned friend on the woolsack. That speech was the most satisfactory statement upon that part of the subject which he had had the good fortune to hear, and he would abide entirely by it. He had taken some pains to make himself acquainted with this subject, as every man was bound to do who undertook to express an opinion upon it; and he could not see how it was possible to overturn the arguments of his noble and learned friend. But in the view which the opponents of this question took they were fond of advancing an argument which appeared to have considerable weight with the people. They were in the habit of referring to transactions which took place at former periods of our history, and of exciting horror by the narration of cruelties perpetrated upon the Protestants, especially in the reign of queen Mary; and they would have the people to conclude, that the state of things would now be the same. But in referring to these events, they forgot to call to mind that the Roman Catholics were not the only persecutors in those days-that, in fact, queen Mary herself had been the victim of a most cruel persecution; that every effort of the most violent and outrageous kind was made to induce her, before she came to the throne, to renounce her religion; that before the death of her brother, Edward the 6th, he and others took a step for the specific purpose of excluding her from her right; and that soon after she ascended the throne a rebellion broke out, which had the same object, and the cause of which was her adherence to the religion which she professed. Did he seek to justify or palliate the cruelties which were perpetrated on either side? By no means. But he said, that the true policy and the best principle, in looking at questions of this kind, was, not to see how much one party might have transcended another in cruelty, but to cast a veil over such hideous scenes, and to ask themselves honestly whether, in the present state of the world, there was any thing which could, by possibility, lead to similar horrors? And if there were not, they should reject any apprehensions which could be derived from such a source. A reference was also made to another transaction, which appeared to have a great effect in its operation on the public mind. He meant the events which occurred in the heart of England, in connection with the duke of Monmouth's rebellion. Those transactions had been referred to, as furnishing a justification of the hostility felt to the concession of this question. This appeared to him to be a most uncandid line of argument, and a material misrepresentation of the facts of the case. Those who held this line of argument would have it believed, that the duke of Monmouth was a glorious champion, who had attached himself to the Protestant standard, and advanced to defend the rights of liberty and religion against popish intolerance; but they omitted to tell the people, that this duke of Monmouth, although he had some plausible personal qualities, which made men who were accustomed to his society attached to that society, was, after all, nothing more than an unprincipled profligate, whose claim to the throne was founded upon a lie, and who sought to place himself upon it by fraud and artifice. Although he admitted that the consequences which followed the suppression of that rebellion, and the cruelties which were perpetrated, were disgraceful to the country, yet, he said, if persons referred to the atrocities committed by Jefferies, they should recollect that Jefferies was a bigoted Protestant, and that colonel Kirk, whatever else he was, was not, at any rate, a Catholic;-for, when he was asked, why he did not become a Catholic, he said, he should be very happy to comply, in order to oblige his majesty, but that unfortunately he was previously engaged, as he happened to have promised his majesty the emperor of in some degree similar to the effects to be Morocco, that, whenever he changed his produced by this bill-the suppression of religion, he would turn Mahometan the monasteries, and the control of the [a laugh.] The petitioners might be in-power of the pope within his dominions. formed, that this very man was subse- Yet the emperor Joseph thought it necesquently employed by the Protestant king sary to treat his holiness with great respect. William as a Major-general. These are He invited him to Vienna, bent himself all facts, my lords, worthy of considera- before him, and styled himself, I think tion. Such means as I have alluded to, officially, the dutiful son of the see of are the means used to lead the people of Rome. It is but fair to suppose that the England to believe that the Roman Ca- pope made strong representations against. tholics, one and all, are not to be trusted; the acts of the emperor, on account of and that, if they had the power, they their tendency to cripple his power; but would renew all those disgusting scenes they had no effect. Joseph answered which makes one's blood run cold in one's with the utmost civility; but he did not at veins, that were transacted a hundred and all acquiesce in the views of his holiness. fifty years ago. But, as I said before, I Remonstrances failing, what did the pope say again, the enemies of the measure are do? Nothing at all--he submitted. The not to go back a hundred and fifty years people of Austria are as bigotted Catholics -they cannot fairly refer to these events, (I do not use the word in an offensive sense) unless it can be shown that the state of as the inhabitants of any part of Europe. things, as regards the impression of re- Did they rise in rebellion because the ligious fanaticism upon the mind of the emperor had reduced the power of the world, are the same as they were at that pope? Not a bit-not a word did they period. I confidently affirm, that no man say; and the emperor Joseph, without the who reads the history of Europe from that slightest opposition, carried his reforms in day to the present can maintain the argu- the Austrian dominions into execution. ment, or rather the fact, that there does In his dominions in the Netherlands he exist now the same power of enforcing pursued the same course; he dealt as he the obnoxious doctrines of the Roman pleased with the monasteries and with the Catholics which did exist then. Nothing church property in spite of the remoncan be more notorious than that, for a strances of the pope. There was, it was long series of years, particularly before the true, a great ferment-in fact, an insurReformation, the pope assumed to him-rection-on the part of the people of self not only spiritual but temporal power -at least, temporal power so immediately connected with spiritual power, that it had a tendency, if carried into operation, to affect the tranquillity of states and the stability of thrones. But I should like to know this:-supposing these obnoxious doctrines have not been formally recanted by the Church of Rome through the medium of a council, by which alone they could be recanted, are they not disavowed in the most solemn and satisfactory manner by those who profess the Roman Catholic faith? I undertake to say, that no instance will be found, subsequent to that period, of any attempt on the part of the pope to carry into effect these offensive and objectionable principles. Give me leave to recal your lordships' recollection to what passed about the year 1791, under the administration of the emperor Joseph 2nd. He was a man of considerable talent in his way, and inclined to reform indeed, he was too great a reformer for the pope he undertook an operation Flanders; but from what did it arise? Not because the emperor Joseph endeavoured to curtail the power of the pope, but because he endeavoured to abolish the free constitution, the Magna Charta, as it were, of that country. The people rose because Joseph 2nd endeavoured to deprive them of the Charter of their liberties. I maintain, that these two instances, prove that the notion that the pope will array on his side the whole Catholic mind is entirely without foundation. What happened, my lords, at the Congress of Vienna? That memorable Act was passed which did honour to all concerned in it; a new constitution was given to Germany; it was raised on the ruins of the old system, which fell and crumbled from its own weakness. One of the fundamental articles of that constitution was, that all the Protestants of Germany were to be placed upon a footing of equality-that there was to be no distinction in civil rights, on account of differences in religion. It is not to be supposed that the pope acquiesced, without remonstrance, in the I am ready to allow that when that question reduction of his power and in the spolia- is put to an individual he is not called tion of his dominions. He directed his upon to answer, yet I will venture to say ambassador, cardinal Gonsalvi, to protest that no man, capable of forming a sound against these encroachments, and for the opinion-that is to say,, an opinion to same reasons which had actuated his which I am bound to yield subservience, predecessor at the peace of Westphalia. on this subject, unless he have put the What was the result? I have not been question to himself-how will you deal able to find, in any collection of papers with Ireland if this bill be not passed? regarding the proceedings of the Congress, Sometimes it has been answered by an ar that the slightest notice was taken of his gumentum ad hominem, which was repeated remonstrance. Whether it was honoured by the noble earl who preceded me. All with any notice or not I cannot positively I can say is, that an argumentum ad ho declare; but certain it is, that it produced minem is a very poor reason for not passing no effect, and his holiness was obliged to this bill. At least, as far as that argusit down with the loss and the degradation. ment went, it was not satisfactory to me Taking these facts as indications of the when it was advanced originally; and · state of the public mind in Europe, and when it was given second-hand by the coupling them with all the improvements noble earl it was not a whit more conthat have taken place during the lapse of vincing. Undoubtedly, there are others one hundred and twenty years, I do assert, not so disposed to give a reply. Some my lords, not that the power of the pope say, "Give the people of Ireland educais a shadow, but that it is the shadow tion." So say I; I am for education in of a shade, as far as relates to the internal its widest extent; and I must say, that I condition of countries, and the destinies of am strongly inclined to think that many nations. I will undertake to say, that who are most adverse to the passing of whatever at former periods were the this bill, are among the most inveterate power, influence, and pretensions of the enemies of the progress of education./ I pope, there exists a counteracting power confess, therefore, that the recommendamore formidable-the power of time-of tion, if it proceeded from them, would not time aided by education, and, although have any great weight with me. It by no I may incur the derision of the noble earl means follows that education will produce who spoke last, I must say-" the march a tranquillizing effect on the minds of the of intellect." The progress of the human people of Ireland. If I could be persuaded mind seems destined by Providence to that education by itself would convert shake off ancient errors-to remove obstinate Catholics into Protestants, I should deem prejudices-to expose undoubted fallacies, it a most happy result; but I do not feel and the vitality of that inextinguishable that it will necessarily extirpate the reliprinciple enables us to survive and to gion of the Church of Rome. If we do overcome. When Europe was benighted not pass this bill, the effect of education in the darkness of ignorance, such a dan- will only be to make the people of Ireland ger might have existed; but the advance feel their chains more galling and weighty, of knowledge is a security against it; and and to enable them to complain of their those who have dwelt upon it as an argu- grievances with greater force and effect. ment against the present bill have only The desire of elevation is at least as preput it as a possible and an extreme case, valent in Ireland as elsewhere, and educawhich, in considering questions of this tion will increase those natural aspirations description, ought not to be entirely in the minds of youth. While receiving, perhaps, the common rudiments of knowledge, the young Catholic will not fail to ask himself, what is likely to be his situation in the world, as compared with the Protestant class-fellow who sits beside him? The young Protestant may say-"The wide, the unbounded prospect lies before me," gilded by the rays of hope, and intersected by the path to future distinction. The same extent of view is open, indeed, to the young Roman Catholic, omitted. There is another question which has been put to those who have been active in preparing petitions. I know that it is an unpleasant question, but, nevertheless, I will take the liberty of repeating it. "What will you do with Ireland, if you do not pass this bill?" That question is one which his majesty's government had no option but to put to themselves; and they have answered it as their consciences dictated. I B "But shadows, clouds, and darkness, rest upon it!" He has not the same choice of pursuit: almost the only profession open to him, with the hope of gratifying his ambition, is that of the much-dreaded priesthood; and to this you drive him, with feelings strongly excited by wrongs unjustly inflicted. All his better feelings are quenched, and all his bad passions are kindled./Let me ask, then, is it justice to vent reproaches upon the priesthood, and to endeavour to represent them, one and all, as men without honour and conscience, and devoid of all those qualities necessary to constitute them good subjects? This seems to me a severe judgment to pass upon them; and, depend upon it, the passing that judgment will not tend to make them better subjects, and to reconcile them more to the rejection of this measure, to which all classes are looking with such intense interest, and which I pray God your lordships may sanction. We are told also to pacify the people of Ireland by the introduction among them of greater comforts-by ameliorating their domestic condition. This has long been the cry; but how is the object to be accomplished? It seems to be about as chimerical without the aid of this measure, as the project entertained, by a great philosopher of the renowned Island of Laputa, who wished to extract sun-beams from cucumbers. To hope that such an effect will flow from such a cause, and that to improve the habits of the people will be a panacea for all the evils of the country, seems to me about as absurd an imagination as ever entered the mind of man. We may, indeed, administer something to the comforts of the body, but who can "Minister to a mind diseased ?" I cannot recollect the rest of the quotation, but I may leave it safely to your lordships, who are all well acquainted with the passage. You may clothe the body, you may feed the mind, but can you with "Some sweet oblivious antidote, Cleanse the foul bosom of that perilous stuff Which weighs upon the heart?” Never; and therefore I think this proposal as absurd as that to which I have before alluded. But, then, it is said, we are to administer the laws. What laws are we to administer in Ireland? Is it to be contended, that we are to administer the ordinary law, such as it is in this country? How often in England have we been called upon, from temporary causes, to adopt measures inconsistent with the spirit of the constitution, and trenching on the rights of the people; and when, as is well known, there exists in Ireland, not a temporary discontent, or a local disturbance, but a general and eternal rankling in the whole Catholic mind, is it to be supposed for a moment, that you can rely upon the ordinary law, usually adequate for the preservation of the peace in this country? And if you cannot rely upon that, see the course to which you must be driven. You must repress discontent by coercion, and that, coupled with the black and dreary prospect after this bill shall have been rejected, will generate new animosities. Those must be met by new measures; and thus dissatisfaction and coercive law will alternately produce and follow each other, until at last, and at no distant period, we arrive at that ultima ratio denominated "brute force" [hear, hear!]. Brute force! what an ill-omened phrase--comprising in two words the abstract idea of unrelenting tyranny, and the very antipodes of the mild and beneficent constitution under which we live. Brute force is only another expression, as was well said by the noble duke, when he introduced this bill, for civil war; and it will be a civil war, not producing, as in some other parts of the world, the regenerating effects, and strengthening the hold of liberty in the soil, but a civil war, aggravated by all the horrors attendant upon religious fanaticism. "Bella per Emathios plusquam civilia campos." It is impossible not to feel one's blood run cold at the very anticipation of such scenes of misery and bloodshed; and yet it would be difficult indeed for any man to show, by any deduction of reasoning, that such would not be the inevitable effect of the system to which some noble lords advise us to adhere. There is, I believe, only one other point but I feel myself very much in the situato which it is necessary for me to advert; tion in which the noble earl stated he found himself that of having so many points crowding upon me: he had, however, the advantage of being able to recur to his notes to assist his memory. A notion has been propagated out of doors, and we have had some gentle indication of it even within these walls, that if your lordships pass this bill, and the king, yielding to the advice of his responsible ministers, should be graciously pleased to give his royal assent to it, it would invalidate his title to the crown, and call into discussion |