der the resolutions to which they had come as the sentiments of the county. He held in his hand a protest against the proceedings of that meeting, signed by 39 most respectable Roman Catholics, who declared, that they approved of the bill, and were satisfied with such restrictions as would conciliate their Protestant fellowsubjects, without doing violence to their own consciences. This protest was signed by the only four Catholic magistrates in the county.

Mr. Fitzgibbon supported the opinions and the statements of his hon. colleague. He considered the resolutions read by the right hon. baronet to have been partially selected, and did not regard them as giving a correct idea of the sentiments of the Catholics of Ireland.

laity were united against it. They called it "the slavery bill,"—" the bill of insults;" and there was no epithet too insulting to be applied to those whom they sneeringly called "their advocates."-In Dublin, last week, the titular archbishop, Dr. Troy, had assembled the clergy; and they had come to certain resolutions, declaring that they could not assent to the provisions of the bill for regulating the intercourse of the see of Rome, or to that which sanctioned the intermeddling of the government with the appointment of their bishops. In Limerick, the Roman Catholic bishop had called the clergy together, and they had come to certain resolutions, disapproving of the bill, which were stronger than those come to at Dublin. Similar meetings were announced to be held at Cork, Galway, Tuam, and Kerry. The sentiments of Dr. Coppinger, the titular bishop of Cloyne, were also strongly opposed to the bill. He had distinctly declared, that the oath amounted to an abjuration of the Catholic faith, and ought to be indignantly rejected by every Catholic. The right hon. baronet insisted that there was an identity of interest between the Catholic clergy and laity; that their faith was held by then to be immutable, infallible, and the only road to salvation, and that the fixed purpose of both classes was the aggrandisement of their church. This was the leading object of all the Catholics of Ireland, and it had been so for the last fifteen years. Another purpose, with a large body of them, was to procure a dissolution of the Union. He called the attention of the House to the sentiments of another eminent Catholic, who considered such a restriction as that proposed inadmissible, inasmuch as its obvious tendency was to prevent proselytism. The distinguished individual to whom he alluded was Dr. Dromgoole. He must object to the measure both in its principle and detail, as one which, by sanctioning the interference of the see of Rome, went directly to subvert the essential Protestantism of the British constitution.

Mr. O'Grady supported the bill. Alluding to the aggregate meeting which had been held on the subject of the bills in Limerick, he observed, that the resolutions there carried in opposition to them were not of native growth; they had been introduced by individuals who were not residents of the county, and originated in factious opposition. He could not consi

Mr. Spring Rice said, that however unpalatable it might be to the House to hear the merits of one class of gentlemen or another canvassed in that place, yet he was driven into the present discussion by the want of candour which had been evinced by the right hon. baronet. Why did he not, when he produced the resolutions to the House, go also into the protest which accompanied them. He had merely adverted to the number of signatures, without acknowledging one fact as to the respectability and character of those who affixed them. The meeting at Limerick was not a meeting of the clergy of the diocese, but of those Roman Catholic clergymen who happened to be assembled in that town. With the permission of the House he would read a letter which he had received from one of the very persons who signed the violent resolutions, to show that the sentiments spoken by them were not generally entertained. The writer of the letter owned that many of his Catholic brethren were willing to receive emancipation upon the terms provided by Mr. Plunkett's bill. This was not the opinion of one who supported that measure, but who had signed those violent resolutions which had been quoted to the House. In another letter which he had received from Ireland, it was stated, that if the measure were passed into a law, those troublesome spirits and tools of faction who now agitated the country, would be at once put down. He begged to remind the House, that the dissatisfaction of the Roman Catholic clergy of Ireland had arisen, in a great measure, from a clause in the original bill, by which they were subjected, in certain cases, to the

penalty of transportation. That clause was, in fact, a blunder in the bill as it originally stood, and it was now removed. He did not mean to say that the present bill would satisfy all the Roman Catholics. To expect it, would be to expect the occurrence of a moral and political miracle. If the Roman Catholics of Limerick had shown any irritation on this subject. it was very natural. They recollected the treaty of Limerick, which guarantied the free exercise of their religion. If that treaty had been strictly observed, there would be no occasion for the House being now occupied with the present measure. He considered it his duty to vote for going on with the measure. The House should legislate for, and not treat with, the Roman Catholics. His own opinion was, that no security was necessary; but he looked upon the present measure as a compromise between the demands of the Catholic and the extravagant fears of the Protestant. Between both he would do his duty; and he had no doubt that in the result they would be all satisfied.

Mr. Hutchinson said, that standing there as the unworthy representative of a family who had always stood up in support of the Catholic claims-advocating that great and righteous cause upon the principles of entire and unqualified emancipation he wished to offer a few observations to the House, in explanation of the line of conduct which he meant to pursue. It was impossible but that a measure carry ing with it heavy penal enactments, should meet with some who objected to it; and he could not, while he had a seat in that House, submit that such persons should be charged, as tools of faction, as riotous spirits, and public agitators. Be cause, if they were to be so denominated, he also must be a tool of faction and an agitator; for he had joined in the objections which had called down upon them those reproachful epithets. Could it be said, that Mr. Roche, the gentleman who presided at the Limerick meeting, was one of this description of persons? The hon. member here eulogised the character of that gentleman. He thought it very likely that all the Irish clergy might eventually object to take the required oaths; therefore, he could not suffer that those gentlemen should by anticipation be aspersed, because they opposed what he apprehended was a highly penal enactment. He believed that it was quite in the power of the noble lord and the

right hon. member for Liverpool, still to modify the aggrieving clauses, so as to make the measure in every way unexceptionable. It was not his intention to submit any motion, or any regular propo sition to the House, but he did hope that the bill would yet be re-committed, so as to go through the modifications which he had pointed out. He should not vote for the amendment, because that would go, if carried, to throw out the whole measure; and there was no man who would be less willing to do that than himself. But he did wish that the bill could be recommitted. If it was not, though he should not vote against the measure, yet he would not vote for it. He was ready to acknowledge, that the Protestants had given up a great deal; and he thanked them for it. They had given up what was most difficult for man to resign,they had given up their prejudices. But all was rendered almost valueless by oaths required of the clergy. Supposing, as he had a right to suppose, the Catholic clergy should refuse to take the oathssuch refusal was declared to be a misdemeanor. To those who should hereafter receive orders, this penalty would not be so great; because they would have the choice of taking them upon such terms, or of choosing some other profession. But then there were many who had been in possession of their livings and cures for years, who had not the choice, and must either take the oaths, or if they had conscientious scruples, be dragged to a gaol. Supposing all the Catholic clergy throughout Ireland should refuse to take the oath,-was the noble lord and his colleagues, and even his friends around him, prepared to say that if they did so refuse, the whole body of the clergy were to be sent to gaol? What would be the consequence of such a proceeding? If, besides the 20,000 soldiers now in Ireland, they should send all the troops in England and Scotland thither, they would not be able to quell the indignant spirit of the people, if such an enactment were carried into effect. The hon. member then argued, that if the oath should be generally taken, there was no need of a Protestant board for deciding upon clerical appointments. It was first making them take the oath, and then saying, we did not believe them and would not trust them. He held in his hand an extract of a letter from a Catholic, who was favourable to the general measure. Although

thousand persons were concerned in it, it was impossible to believe that it was any thing but a popish insurrection; and he put it to the House, whether they would place still more dependence on those who had betrayed former confidence? Looking at the provisions of the bill, the powers which it proposed to give, and the powers which, under its operation, would be still withheld, he could view it only as a solemn humbug. What could be said of a measure which gave to the Catholic the right of voting in the election of members of parliament, and denied him that franchise in the choice of a churchwarden-which refused him a hand in the repairs of the parish church, and yet committed to his care the whole fabric of the constitution? He might preside in a court of common law, but not in an ecclesiastical court, where the same questions were tried. He was not to be allowed to be lord lieutenant of Ireland, but he might be the premier of the cabinet by which the lord lieutenant was appointed. The whole was one great mockery. He expected to be accused of prejudice. If he was prejudiced, however, his prejudice was one of somewhat extraordinary growth. He had himself been nursed in all the bosom of popery; he had at one time cherished the warmest desire to give liberty and equality to creeds of every class; and nothing less than a firm conviction of the dangers to be apprehended from the unrestrained freedom of the Catholic faith, had compelled him at length to adopt a different opinion.

Mr. Robinson said, he had no intention of vindicating the right hon. gentleman who introduced this measure, from what he conceived a most unreasonable attack which the hon. and learned gentleman had made upon him in his absence. He declared himself to be no more disposed to take the feelings of the Protestants of Ireland from the hon. and learned gentleman, than he was to take the feelings of the Catholics from that nameless barrister, that mushroom orator, as the hon. and learned gentleman had called him-who, eloquent as he might be-active as they all knew he was -he was persuaded did not, in the ravings of his eloquence, speak the true and honest feelings of the Irish Catholics. It was on that account that, although he knew Mr. O'Connell was dissatisfiedalthough he knew that Mr. O'Connell

had always been dissatisfied-although he believed that Mr. O'Connell would always be dissatisfied-he had no doubt that, if the present measure were passed, it would be highly satisfactory to the great body of the Catholics of Ireland. He confessed that he had heard the hon. and learned gentleman with much regret, departing, as he had done, from the wise and digni fied course of his right hon. friend, the member for the University of Oxford-a course which, if any thing could add to the respect which he felt for his right hon. friend, would certainly have had that effect. Indeed, the only misfortune which had attended these discussions was, that the hon. and learned gentleman who had last spoken, had endeavoured to rake up the ashes of what he had hoped was a for-ever-extinguished fire. It was with deep regret that he had heard from the hon. and learned gentleman a speech which was in direct opposition to the feeling which had prevailed on every side of the House, and which, if pronounced in an earlier stage, might have done infinite mischief to the discussion of the measure; and although he might not express himself with quite so much zeal as that hon. and learned gentleman, yet he might also claim attention as a convert; for he, too, had formerly held opinions hostile to those which he was at present supporting. The House had been referred to, the history of the country, for internal quarrels and for foreign wars arising out of the dissention between Catholic and Protestant. True, this might have been the case at a remote period of our history; but let members look at our domestic disturbances and our foreign contests for the last hundred and thirty years, and they would find their character entirely changed. Under William the 3rd, and Anne, England was leagued with the Catholic house of Austria, and fought to establish upon the throne of Spain descendant of that very Phillip the 2nd, who was so implacable a foe to the Protestant faith. Let the House look at the continental wars in which England had been engaged during the last fifty years; at the war which arose out of the French revolution. Which of these contests had been produced as effected by the influ ence of the pope? In which of them had the thunders of the Vatican animated or disheartened the contending parties? Had those thunders been heard at all? They might perhaps have been heard, like