The cathothe population; but in Ireland lics were the nation. The government in Ireland was representative; and if the veto were adopted, the care of the catholie church might devolve upon some one better acquainted with making speeches in parliament than with the catholicecelesiastical polity. The care of the catholic church, he was very apprehensive, would then devolve upon some second or third clerk in the castle-yard in Dublin. He knew from experience that they were the best magistrates the best conservators of the peace the best instruments for ensure ing the due administration of justice. He was far from being desirous that their minds should be turned away from the discharge of their most valuable and impore tant duties, by the introduction of intrigues: and cabals among them. He objected, then, to the veto, as adverse to the opi dions of the catholic body, and also as a great obloquy had unquestionably been thrown upon this cause of the catholics; but he hoped that, in spite of that obloquy, the cause would stand fair before their lordships, and meet with an impartial and candid consideration. With respect to the objections against going into a committee, he would first notice one which was constantly repeated that their lordships ought not even to go into a committee on these petitions, until some securities should be stated and settled for the safety of the protestant church. That mode of arguing was not unparliamentary, although the proper place for considering the securities was the committee; and calling for a statement of them beforehand, was something like an anticipation of what must be considered at a subsequent stage of the proceeding. The securities which had been mentioned with reference to this subject were threefold; 1st, the veto; 2d, domestic nomination; third, the payment of the catholic priest-member of the legislature and in this late hood by government a security which he ter capacity he would object to it, although had not heard of until the present session, the catholics had been willing to coneede and which he had lately seen mentioned in that point. Then, with regard to the se the public papers. The catholics objected curity of paying the catholic clergy, it was to the veto, and they had been condemned a security for which he saw no occasion. The catholic clergy wanted no other remuand maligned because they had objected to it with warmth. As to domestic nomina- neration than the voluntary allowance made to them, as their reward for the distion, that was said to be an illusory security; and why? The argument was ex- charge of their most important and laborious duties. He did not, therefore, mean to traordinary: domestic domination was illusory, because it was no new security; propose in the committee that the catholic the appointment of the catholic bishops clergy should be paid by the government, What then, it might be asked, did he mean having, with one or two exceptions, been made in this manner for a long time past; to propose? In the first place, he meant hut was it not an answer to those who were to propose that the nomination of the ca terrified at the bugbear called foreign in- tholic bishops should be purely national Auence? It at least went to the root of and domestic; and his next step would be to connect the catholics with the protest, that objection: and it was not illusory in another view; for though it might be no ant state, by admitting them to every sta tion under a protestant sovereign, except new security, yet it would establish the mode of domestic nomination in future, by such situations as were connected with the means of a concordat with the pope for administration, government, or patronage that purpose. No individual, nor body of of the established church. The protestant men, public or private, however respecta- church being thus left to the sole manageble, ought to insist on making a bargain|ment of protestants, he did not see why with the legislature; but the catholics had protestants should refuse to leave to the shewn by this offer, that they wished to catholics the sole management of the ca A great many objections conciliate, and do away the fears of those tholic church. who were alarmed at the bugbear. Now bad been made to the entering into the conhe thought it fitting to state to their lord-sideration of the catholic claims at this ships the course he intended to pursue in period, of which he had made extracts. the committee, in case their lordships The first of these objections was one of a should agree to his motion, and go into a very singular nature. The petitions ought not to be considered, it was argued, be committee on these petitions. He certainly had no intention to propose to the com- cause they were the petitions of four milmittee the adoption of the security or re- lions of people. The legislature had been gulation of the veto. The catholics them- called upon to consider the present state of selves were adverse to it, and he would ob- Ireland, and the condition of its population. ject to it as a member of the legislature, The protestants constituted one million of though they had been willing to concede it. that population; the members of other The catholics in this country were a small reformed persuasions about half a million; body of men compared with the mass of and all the rest were catholics. The ca tholics then formed about 8-10ths of the population of Ireland; and, therefore, it was contended that their petitions ought not to be attended. Now the great object of policy ought to be to render a country as productive as possible, and to secure the attachment of the subjects to the government. He should rather have conceived, therefore, that the numbers and importance of the petitioners were reasons for, and not against, taking their petitions into cousideration. Then their lordships were told, that the catholic clergy managed the affairs of the college of Maynooth openly, and then applied themselves to other duties secretly. This was made a serious ground of charge against the catholics-that their clergy were remarkable for their attention to their duties. It was also made a ground of charge against them, that the clergy had an uncontrolled influence over the minds and opinions of the catholic people. He most sincerely wished that this charge had been trae. It was not true, however, and he was sorry for it. The clergy, ashe had before observed, were the best magistrates, and the best support of the public peace. Whatever influence they had, was employed for that purpose; and no duties were performed in a better manner than t heirs. Another ground of objection was, that the minds of the catholic clergy were so estranged from the people and government, that they must feel in the nature of things a hatred against a protestant state. they had been as bad as their laws had been calculated to make them, Ireland would at this time have been no part of the united kingdom; bat, in point of fact, no accusation ever was more completely unfounded. It was a foncalumny against one of the most respectable bodies of men in the community, which the Irish catholic clergy certainly were: and though the charge were as true as it was utterly unfounded, ought the great body of the catholics to suffer for the faults of their clergy? There was another argument used against the consideration of the catholic claims, which one could hardly listen to with patience; it was founded on the outrages of the orangemen against the catholics; and this argument, he understood, bad been well received, and the statement made the matter worse than it was in reality. The catholics attempted to seize the arms of the orangeman; the orangeman fired and the catholic was wounded. There were cross-indictments, and the orangeman, as the charge against him is capital, is of course acquitted by the jury, his brother orangemen. This argument rested on a justification of treason and murder, and perjury, in the jury. With reference to this, he could not help stating what had been said by the Irish solicitor If general,who sometime ago sat as a judge on the occasion of an acquittal of the abovementioned descripton. Addressing himself to the jury, he said, "I thank God, gentlemen, it is your verdict, and not mine." The present state of Ireland was, in reality, one of the strongest arguments for entering upon the consideration of this subject, and setting the matter at rest. Another argument against the catholics was a very curious one. The pope had restored the order of the jesuits, and therefore the Irish catholics ought not to have their franchises. The jesuits had certainly been at one time proscribed; and yet he could not help saying, that as far as learning was concerned, especially catholic learning, there was no body of men to whom learning had been more indebted. And though formerly they might have been inconvenient to the continental sovereigns, he was not aware that any great danger was apprehended from them now at any rate, he could not see how the restoration of the jesuits was of any consequence with reference to the catholics of the united kingdom. Then it had been argued, that the claims of the catholics ought not to be allowed, because the pope had opposed the circulation of the scriptures without comment. No one could reverence the objects of the societies for distributing the scriptures more than he did, as far as he understood them: but it was well known that there was a great difference of opinion, even in our own church, whether the scriptures ought or ought not to be circulated without comment. The argument would, therefore, cut too deep, and would reach some members of our own church, and even some members of their lordships' house; especially of that right reverend body which he saw in such force on the present occasion. He gave no opinion on the subject one way or the other: but if authority were urged against him, he would meet it with authority. There were two of the right reverend prelates opposite who agreed with the pope, that the bible ought not to be circulated without a com ment. One of these right reverend prelates he saw in the house; one, to the great honour of the prince regent, and the government, had been lately raised to that bench. He would take the liberty of reading an extract from a pamphlet published by the right reverend prelate. It was an odd way of defending the catholics, but as they had been assailed with the pope, he wished to protect them with the shield of a right reverend prelate of our own church. The right reverend prelate had said, in his pamphlet, that the best of books might be perverted; that St. Peter had said, that St. Paul himself had said, many things hard to be understood, and which the unlearned might wrest to their destruction; and that if St. Peter had lived at the present time, he would hardly have thought that admonition less necessary now than in the time of the apostles; that if the common priver book were neglected in the system of education, the bible might be made the means of seducing people from the established church: such was the opinion of a most respectable prelate of our own church; and therefore he hoped that the catholics and the pope would stand ac quitted from any blame on account of their Dotions that the bible ought not to be circulated without a comment. It was known that the catholics formed the great mass of the population of Ireland; and yet they were according to the doctrines held, regarded as a class of persons in whose most sober de larations no faith was to be placed. They were called upon to take | @aths; and when they offered to comply and take any oath which was capable of giving satisfaction, or could reasonably be required of them, then they were told that their oaths were of no value, and were not to be credited. A most extraordinary attempt had been made in another place to give an erroneous application of the opinion of a person who had always been distinguished for his support of the catholic claims. An extract read from that emiDent person's works had been received with applause, as if it had afforded an argument against that liberality of sentiment which he had on all occasions advocated. What the meaning of this proceeding could be, except that of making it appear that Mr. Burke had spoken against the cathoLics, he was at a loss to understand; but if the whole book had been gone over, it would have been found that the opinion of that great statesman was completely hostile to the principles of those who opposed catholic emancipation. It would have been found, that, speaking with reference to that great body of his majesty's subjects, he had observed, that our constitution was not made for exclusion, and that either we should destroy them or they would destroy the constitution. He would not trouble their lordships farther on a subject to which he felt it impossible to add any thing to the powerful reasons that had already been advanced in that and in another place. If he had failed in producing an impression favourable to the claims of their ca. tholic brethren, it was not for want of anxiety to argue their cause more strongly. He should now conclude, with moving their Lordships to resolve into a committee, to consider of the petitions from the Roman catholics of Ireland The bishop of LANDAFF said, unaecustomed to address their lordships, and conscious of his inability to do justice to This so momentous a question, he should not have ventured to rise upon the present occasion; but as the same subject which they were now discussing had been repeatedly examined in that house, he conceived it was not necessary that he should enter fully and minutely into it. He should not therefore detain their lordships by following the noble mover through all the variety of matter introduced by him into the question, but briefly state to their lordships the reasons and arguments on which the opinion which he entertained was founded. If the question before their lordships was the concession of religious liberty to his majesty's Roman catholic subjects, he should have rejoiced to co-operate with the noble earl for the attainment of such an end. But this impediment had long been already temoved, and they could no longer speak of pains and penalties with reference to the Roman catholics, when they were enabled by the law of the land to exercise their religion with the very same freedom as the members of the established church. question had not, therefore, a reference to religious liberty, for of that the catholics were already in possession; but related solely to the extension of political power; and therefore he surely might oppose the extension of political power in this case, without incurrring the charge either of intolerance or inhumanity. If the question was entirely political, why then, it might be asked, mix up subjects of a religious nature with it? Let the doctrines condemned in the 39 articles be true or false-let transubstantiation be true or false-let the efficacy of the invocation of saints be true or false let the errors of the church of Rome be acknowledged-let it be accused of enforcing a discipline such as no protestants can approve of-let the pope be blamed, as he deserves, for refusing to the laity the use of the bible: however erroneous the doctrines, and however injudicious the discipline, yet if that doctrine or discipline is not dangerous to the state, why exclude the professors from office, why refuse to them the enjoyment of that which the professors of any other religion enjoy? Such an exclusion can be justified alone by civil delinquency; but if no civil delinquency can be laid to their charge-if, notwithstanding their er rors, they are still willing and able to serve state-let civil employment be determined by the only true criterion, civil capacity and civil conduct-Here he was stating, as strongly as it was possible to state, the the arguments in favour of the present question; and, therefore, if these arguments met with a satisfactory answer, he trusted the question would be sufficiently answered, and that their lordships would not think it necessary to go into a committee. He was claims of the catholics were branded in the present day as illiberal and narrow-minded, and as holding doctrines at variance with this enlightened age, and inconsistent with true policy. The late example of France had been held up to us for imitation, where all classes of subjects, protestants as well as catholics were equally eligible to all councils, and all offices, civil and military. But there was a great difference between the admissibility of protestants to the councils of a government where the established religion was that of the church of Rome, and the admissibility of Roman catholics to the councils of a government where the protestant religion was established. In France the protestants, though not professing the established religion, acknowledged no other superior than the lawful government, no other authority than that of the lawful king, into whose councils they were called. It was not so with the catholic under a protestant establishment-he was subject to a foreign sovereign, who wielded the powerful sceptre of religion, and whose views must often be adverse to the views of the domestic prince. But it was said, if both acknowledged the same king, as their lawful sovereign, why then were not both alike admitted into the councils of the nation: and why might not all the privileges of the constitution, and admissibility to councils, be granted with the same safety to the one as to the other? But it was impossible there could he the same civil capacity, allowing an attachment to enter in the one case, by which the affections were divided and distracted. It followed, therefore, that they could not be considered alike admissi ble to offices of trust and power; and, there fore, the claims now advanced to such admissibility, were such as ought not to be listened to. He did not mean to say that the catholics were not useful subjects, but they were not such useful subjects as the members of the established religion ready to meet the argument most favour-clared themselves against concession to the able to the petitioners,-that the admissibility to civil employment should be regulated by civil capacity and civil worth. But before hand it might be well to make themselves acquainted with all that constituted civil capacity and civil worth. There might be some ingredients which entered into them, not of a civil but of a religious nature; and the religion of one man, therefore might make him better qualified for office, and consequently better entitled to office, than another. It still, therefore, remained to inquire what were the religious ingredients which entered into the composition of civil capacity and civil worth. Let them apply these ingredients to the case of the church of England, the protestant dissenters, and the members of the church of Rome. The protestant establishment acknowledged the king as superior in civil and ecclesiastical matters. The dissenters acknowledged the king only as supreme in civil matters; but the obedience of the dissenter, though not like that of the churchman, was subject to no drawback from ecclesiastical authority. But the case was very different, when, as in the case of the Roman catholics, the church not only did not allow the supremacy of the king, but was subject to, or rather was dependent on, a foreign dominion, which had not the same interests with the sovereign of this country. But it was said they had nothing to do with this anomaly of government, they had nothing to do with this confusion of foreign and domestic authority. They were told that the civil and ecclesiastical authorities were quite distinct-that the authority of the pope was not acknowledged in matters of state. But when subjects were so blended together as they were in the present case, it became important to inquire into what was religious and what was civil authority. It was important to examine into this part of the question without taking religion into account. Supposing the temporal and the spiritual power were at variance, and that they were not such useful subjects as the Roman catholic subject entertained a they would be themselves if they would but doubt whether he should obey the temporal break the fetters which bound them to a or spiritual power-where, he would ask, foreign prince. He acknowledged the would such member of the church of Rome honour and integrity of the Roman cathoapply for a solution of his doubts? Helic subjects, but still he would maintain would apply to that very power which was at issue with the temporal. It was said indeed that the allegiance to the pope did not interfere with the allegiance 10 the king. that their allegiance to a foreign prince distracted them, even when they were inclined to be obedient to their lawful king. After this general view, it was unnecessary But he would answer, that the for him to enter into minute topics; but so power which commanded the conscience much stress had been laid on domestic nocommanded the allegiance of men; and mination, that he could not well avoid he might be easily diverted by foreign in- going somewhat into it. It was well caltrigne from the temporal government, and culated to remove the apprehension of fohis efforts turned not only against it, but to reign influence. If the prelates, were the very subversion of the constitution it-elected at home, whether by the chapter self. He was aware that all those who de- or by a commission of papal bishops, such ORTHOD. JOUR. VOL. V. 2 I nomination was ascribed to that body. | The bishop of NORWICH was aware of the weight which was due to the opinions of the reverend prelate who had just sat down. He must however contend, that the Roman catholics had given the most unequivocal proofs of their civil capacity. Their claims, he thought, could only now be rejected because of their attachment to the innocent religious opinions of their ancestors. He called them innocent, though with protestants they must be regarded as erroneous. These opinions had been held by our ancestors, who laid the foundation of that political liberty we now enjoyed: they were the opinions of most of the powers of Europe, with whom we were happily in a state of alliance; and they were the opinions of many respectable noblemen and gentlemen with whom he and many who heard him were in the habits of intimacy or friendship. They all knew that Roman catholics, in all the relations of life, proved themselves as worthy members of society, and as good subjects as protestants. With regard to their civil capacity, the different acts of parliament passed during the present reign saved him from the necessity of arguing in support of the affirmative of that proposition. Certain offices had already been laid open to them: and thus they had been, by parliament, declared good and loyal subjects, and th question of their admissibility irrevocably decided. It was no slight recommendation to the question before the house, that the most able and distinguished persons of all parties had supported the catholic claims. It had been ably said, that on their emancipation depended the question whether the union between Great Britain and Ireland should prove a benefit or an injury to the former; and whether a loyal and ge nerous people should henceforth be rendered a bulwark for the empire. With regard to the question of domestic nomination, the catholics of Ireland had always been de sirous to adopt some mode of election which might be unobjectionable to the government, and at the same time be consistent with their own religious opinions. In his opinion, what had been proposed to be done with this view, ought to be regarded as perfectly satisfactory. As to the catholic clergy, he agreed to what had been so eloquently and justly said in their praise by the noble earl. Ireland was much in. debted to them for the tranquillity it enjoyed, and they were unwearied in the performance of their religious duties; ever ready to administer consolation to their flocks by night, or by day, they encoun tered the greatest difficulties. Of these pious and indefatigable men it might be justly said, that "With frames of adamant, and souls of fire, "No dangers daunt them, and no labours tire." Religious liberty formed one of the most important principles of the British consti. tution; and the exclusion of the catholics could not be maintained on any just ground. On this great question the writings of Mr. Locke, one of the greatest reasoners any country ever produced, bad induced him to change his early sentiments. It was as impolitic as it was uncharitable to foster a spirit of jealousy with respect to the reli gious opinions of others. A very eloquent speech, he understood, had been delivered in another place, on the supposed danger to be apprehended from farther concessions to the Roman catholics, but the opinion said to have been given was not that of a statesman. Those who talked of danger from popery in these times would cry out fire in the midst of a deluge. The Ronan catholics of Ireland had manifested, amidst great sufferings, a patience and forbear ance that would have done honour to the primitive christians. They had endured a degree of oppression which might even bave justified resistance as a means of es caping from servile degradation.—After all they had suffered, it appeared to him that there was very little christian charity or moderation in the reproaches which were |
