dual to whom it was to be given; but the necessary provision ought to have been made by a bill which would contemplate such cases, and the provision ought to be made for the situation, without reference to the individual who might happen to fill it. Considering that the sum proposed was not larger than had been given to the duke of York many years ago, when he did not stand in the same degree of proximity to the throne as that in which the duke of Clarence was now placed, he thought it was not too much. It was not taking a fair view of the question, to spread the sum over the distresses of the country, and to inquire how much of that distress might be covered by it. It would not be any additional burthen on the people; it would come out of a considerable saving made by the death of the duke of York.

The motion for going into a committee was carried by 99 against 15, and the bill passed without any farther serious opposition; Mr. Hume having contented himself, on the bringing up of the report, with denouncing the grant as "most profligate and unnecessary," but not again dividing the House upon it.

From the commencement of the session, public expectation had been fixed upon the question of the Catholic claims more eagerly than on any other subject which promised to occupy the attention of parliament, with the exception of the Corn-laws. The triumph of the Catholics in the House of Commons in 1826, although not the first triumph of the same kind in that branch of the legislature which had subsequently proved futile, had quickened their hopes, and in

vigorated their exertions. At the general election which had intervened in the mean time, they flattered themselves that they had been gainers; and, in fact, in so far as Ireland was concerned, the spiritual influence of the priesthood, applying the promises of religion and the dark denunciations of superstition to purposes of secular licy, had secured an unprecedented success to the party which favoured emancipation. The Catholic association, too, had continued to act; the law which had been made for its suppression was not put into execution.* Its orators

po

The marquis of Chandos put the two following questions to ministers in the House of Commons (6th of April): First, Why has not the law for putting down the Catholic association been carried into effect? Secondly, Whether any, and what, measures were in contemplation for the purpose of altering the law, so as to meet the present state of things, and effectually put the association down? Mr. Peel answered, "that the institution of a criminal prosecution against a body like the Catholic Association, involved not only questions of law, but also questions of discretion: the former were decided by the law officers of the crown, but the latter were decided by the administration generally. If, therefore, a responsibility were to attach to any one for the nonenforcement of the law against the Catholic Association, it attached quite as much to himself as Home Secretary as to the Attorney-general for Ireland. Between that officer and himself there had hitherto been a constant concurrence of opinion on all measures relative to the internal administration of Ireland. They had both of them thought it right not to enforce the law against the Catholic Association. With regard to other prosecutions which the Attorney-general had been called upon to institute, he would merely say this, that he had never known his friend, the Attorneygeneral, shrink from his duty on account of party motives, where the law had been violated, or urge the prosecution of it where it had not." This might be

had continued to affront all good taste by their furious and bom bastic rhetoric; to injure all good feeling by unmeasured and personal abuse of their political opponents, and, most imprudently, to excite additional jealousy of their designs by senseless vituperation of the established church. The general tone of sentiment which characterized the language of these men at the elections, as well as their harangues in the ordinary business of the Association, was distinctly that of menace-menace not only of civil commotion in times of peace, but of fatal commotion, and inevitable separation, if England should be involved in war. Thus a priest, in a letter printed and circulated during the Roscommon election, asked, "Why should not Ireland assert her rights? Blood has been shed in Spain and in France:" and the leader of the Association, as if indulging a patriot hope that the state of Portugal would involve us in war, and that we should be found unequal to the contest, had boasted, that timid England was afraid to draw the sword, having by her side discontented Ireland. Mr. Shiel, another brother of the same band, sailed so near the wind in lauding the prospect of a foreign invasion to redeem Ireland from the tyranny of England, that the Attorney-general presented a bill of indictment against him for sedition-a prosecution, however, which was not carried through.* England is not a country

all very true; but still it was only an acknowledgement of the notorious fact, that the law had not been enforced; it was no answer to the question why it had not been enforced?

• These men expatiated with open satisfaction on the ease, with which, according to them, a foreign enemy could invade Ireland, and lead the Irish Ca

the public opinion of which can be silenced, or the public spirit crushed by menaces: men, who opposed the claims of the Catholics as being inconsistent with the essence and the security of the constitution; and pregnant with danger to li berty both in church and state, were not likely to be conciliated in their favour by a threat that they would be carried through at the point of the sword; others, more indifferent to the question itself, but forced to consider it, regarded it with dislike, when it besought their attention by holding out, as a prospective triumph, the degradation of England before menaces of foreign interference; and all were convinced, that, when the Catholic priesthood laboured so boldly, and called into requisition so strenuously all the flatteries and terrors of their faith to give political

tholics in array against the power and constitution of Britain. They boasted that the words, which they uttered in Dublin, would, within eight days, be known in Paris-as if they addressed themselves, not to British sense of rights, but to French ambition; and they revelled in the patriotic idea, that theirs might soon be the glorious task of combatting by the side of foreign despotism for the destruction of English liberty. They called themselves the representatives of seven millions of Catholics, and proclaimed, that, by means of their emissaries and their priests, they could move the mass as they pleased; and that, if only a few foreign regiments were to land in Ireland, these seven millions would rise in rebellion. Having thus exhibited all the vices of treason-encouraging insurrection at home, and tempting invasion from abroad-they failed to display its only and redeeming virtue-courage; and they evaded the vengeance of the law by devices of words, affecting to deplore, in a few formal phrases, the results which they laboured to bring about, and which formed their prospects of future liberty and national prosperity.

power to the Catholic laity, it must be because they saw, in the possession of that power, the instrument which, wielded by their own hands, was to raise up the broken pillars of the Catholic hierarchy. These feels ings had shown themselves in the English elections; and they again manifested themselves, now that the discussion was approaching, in the crowds of petitions against the concession of the claims which nightly covered the tables of both Houses, from the meeting of parliament till the decision of the question. In Ireland, the Catholics were equally active; while the Protestants of that country, so far as their opinions were expressed, were divided in sentiment.

Sir Francis Burdett had been intrusted with the general petition of the Catholics, and undertook to bring the question before the notice of the House of Commons. Accordingly, on the 5th of March, he moved the following resolution: "That this House is deeply impressed with the necessity of taking into immediate consideration, the laws inflicting penalties on his majesty's Roman Catholic subjects, with the view of removing them." In the speech with which he introduced the resolution, and opened a debate that lasted, by adjournment, two days, in a House in which five hundred and forty-eight members voted-after adverting to the advantages which the Catholic cause had gained even by delay, inasmuch as by that delay it had been enabled to rank, among its departed supporters, all the great statesmen of Britain, men who differed in almost every other public question, and had come to take its stand on plain considerations of sound sense, and good policy "dis

entangled from that cumbrous weight of learned lore in which it had formerly been enveloped-he entreated the House to enter on the discussion with impartiality. Referring to the language, almost of exultation, on the illness and death of the duke of York, which had been allowed and applauded at some of the Catholic meetings, he implored the members to dismiss those unpleasant recollections from their minds, to abstain from such animosities, to lay aside all odious personalities, and to come to the consideration of the broad principles of the question itself, without shaping their arguments against the conduct of individuals, however liable to reproach that conduct might be. Where the passions were roused, it could not be expected that propriety would always be strictly observed, or that, where men's interests were deeply involved, they would be very abstinent in their mode of reasoning upon them. Some allowance should be made by the liberal opponent for the heat of debate in every society; and all ought the rather to agree in an oblivion of irritating recollections, because each party must, from the nature of the conflict of opinions, admit, that much had been done on both sides which could not, and ought not, to be defended, and much had occurred which they were bound equally to deplore. If the question were entered upon in this temper, he hoped to shew, that, on every ground of good faith in regard to treaties, as well as of reason, justice, policy, and good sense, the claims of the Catholics were irresistible, and that no possible mischief could arise from their concession.

"First of all," said the honourable baronet, "the history of the British

Catholics, both what they had said, and what they had done, proved how unworthily they had been subjected to the yoke of political proscription, and how impossible it was that they should not feel aggrieved and indignant under its degrading weight. Whoever would call to mind the names of their Catholic forefathers, would be struck with their reason as well as their renown. Theirs were names, which, in fact, had rendered illustrious every page of England's history, though their descendants at this day stood tarnished with unworthy imputations, a proscribed and excluded race. While Englishmen boasted justly of their liberties, and of the energy with which they had been wrested from tyrants, how could they consent to calumniate their Catholic forefathers, by whose achievements those liberties had been gloriously won? How could they call upon the descendants of such men to resign their hereditary glory, the general recollection of which made Englishmen proud, and had rendered the nation the admiration of the world? Neither could the House shut its eyes to the fact that, under all the galling disabilities which pressed upon the Catholics, they had, down to the present day, so far as they were permitted to afford their services, sustained the heroism, loyalty, and devotion, of their ancestors. The names which were prodigal of blood" to uphold the English standard at Cressy and Agincourt, were to be found on the roll of heroes in every subsequent battle for the maintenance of England's rule, down to the day of Waterloo. All the imputations of holding slavish and obnoxious tenets had never shaken the fidelity of the VOLA LXIX.

Catholic families, or made them shrink from affording their best assistance in the hour of peril. These obnoxious tenets had been disavowed by them; and, indeed, it was astonishing that such an imputation should ever have been applied to them, considering what history proved of their conduct, that very history which was thought to furnish evidence of the accusation. When the pope endeavoured to interfere with the policy of Edward 1st, and commanded him to send his proctors and messengers to the court of Rome, to shew by what right he claimed the realm of Scotland, what was the king's answer-" That he did not think fit to say any thing to it himself, but that the whole barons of England would write to his holiness, that their king could not act in that manner, nor refer a right, which was so clear and open, to the doubtful judgment of another court?" And what did the barons write? "The kings of England, in their said kingdom, have never submitted their rights, in temporals, to any ecclesiastical or secular court; have never answered to them, nor ought to answer, but have inviolably observed to keep up the free pre-eminence, state, and dignity, of the said kingdom at all times. Whence, upon a due deliberation, and treating of the contents of your memorable letter, the common and unanimous consent of all and singular was, is, and will be, God willing, for ever, that our said lord the king ought not to answer judicially before you, nor submit his rights over the realm of Scotland, nor any other of his temporal rights whatever, to your doubtful judgment. Neither has he any reason to send his messengers or proctors to plead [C]

for him in your presence; particularly when the premises will most manifestly tend to disinherit the right of the English crown, and its royal dignity, and be a prejudice to our liberties, customs, and paternal laws; neither shall we in any wise permit such unaccustomed things, nor shall we suffer our said lord the king in any manner to attempt to do, if he would, such undue, prejudicial, and heretofore unheard-of actions. Therefore we humbly and reverently beseech your holiness, that you would kindly permit our sovereign lord the king to possess quietly all his rights, liberties, customs, and laws, with out diminution or disturbance." Such was the language held by our Catholic ancestors, even in times of ignorance and superstition, to that very power, to which, it was said, their Catholic descendants were willing, amid all the illumination and mental independence of modern days, to surrender their understandings, their allegiance, and the liberties of their country.

It was further right to call to mind the times and circumstances that gave rise to the disabilities under which the Catholics still laboured. They had their origin in the heat, the animosity, and contention, which sprung out of what was called the Popish Plot. Given up as that plot now was, he did not mean to say that the patriots of that day had no reason to be suspicious, even very and justly suspicious of the king who then filled the throne, known to be a traitor to the country, and the mean and subservient pensioner of France. Moreover, the religion and the liberty of the country were then, from a variety of causes, inseparably connected; the meditated attack upon the one was intended

to be used as the means of subvert

ing the other. In such circumstances, it was not surprising that even good men should hurry each other into excesses, which, when looked at in different and cooller times, were of a questionable aspect, and were fraught with consequences of very doubtful justice. So highly had party spirit been inflamed, that even the great, and good, and virtuous, lord Russell, had permitted himself to be misled to unseemly violence. Then were invented the disqualifications of the Catholics, born in violence, and, as it were, baptized at their very birth by the shedding of innocent blood. The atrocity and injustice then perpetrated had since been solemnly revoked by the legislature; and why should the other consequences of the same heated and violent passions remain? The original causes of the disqualifications, preposterous as some of them were, had yet a feasible motive as well as a prospective purpose; but it was now obvious to every man conversant with the history of the country, that these causes, whether real or pretended, had long since ceased to exist. Parliament had but lately reversed the attainder of the innocent lord Stafford: by that act of posthumous justice parliament had passed sentence on the iniquity of the times which gave birth to Catholic disqualification; and the full benefit of this redeeming principle ought to be conferred. Some recompence was due to the descendants of men, who, like lord Stafford, had been most unjustly condemned, to relieve the country from the stigma of an admitted act of baseness and cruelty. The legislature, having avowed the injustice of the fact, ought to give the surviving sufferers the full benefit of the