ultimately accord to them what they had prayed for session after session. endangering the Protestant principles of that country; and he did so in order that he might hear those arguments which might be brought forward to combat his opinion, and which he sincerely assured their lordships he should take home with him from that House and give them the attention they deserved. He wished most sincerely to come to a just conclusion upon this great question. In the first place he would draw their lordships' attention to the grounds upon which the Papists, at the time of the Revolution, were, by the wisdom of our ancestors, effectually excluded from political power; and he should then endeavour to show that the same grounds existed at present for the continuation of that exclusion, as a security against the intolerant principles of popery. He did not wish to draw their lordships attention to any of those melancholy events which occurred before the period he alluded to. He would direct their lordships attention to the character of popery exemplified in the conduct of James 2nd and that of his advisers. He would draw their attention to the state of the continent at the same time; and they would see Louis 14th revoking the edict of Nantes, and banishing every Protestant from his dominions. Let noble lords look to the opinions of the Roman Catholic clergy of that period, as collected from The Earl of Winchilsea said, he had purposely refrained from making any observations on the sentiments contained in the numerous petitions which he had presented to their lordships against Roman Catholic emancipation; because he thought that a more desirable opportunity would be afforded him for such observations, when the noble marquis had redeemed the pledge he had given to the House, of bringing this great political question of the Catholic claims under the consideration of the House. Finding, however, that that intention had been abandoned, he could not, in justice to his own feelings, or to those persons who had signed the petitions which he had presented, allow the question to be withdrawn from the House, only to be brought forward on a more favourable opportunity, without stating his own views upon the subject. He must own, however, that he regretted that that motion had been abandoned; because he was convinced, that the oftener the subject was discussed, the more it would be found that it was impossible to open the constitution to individuals professing the tenets of the Catholic church, without endangering the principles upon which that constitution was founded. If, however, such discussion would have been attended with the same bitterness of feel-authorized statements. He would read a ing which had characterized the debate passage written by the bishop of Meaux, upon the subject in another place-if any indicating the spirit of persecution of the noble lord had been prompted to follow church of Rome against all those who that example, and forgetting what was were opposed to it. Let their lordships due to his own private and public charac-judge from his own words. He said, ter, should deal in bitter invectives against those who were united with him in poJitical power-he felt, if such should be the conduct that would be pursued, that it would leave, as it had done, in the breast of every friend of uncompromising principles, an impression which would never be effaced, and would tend, as it had tended, to unite that party more firmly than any thing that could be said. It was a matter of sincere regret to him, therefore, that the noble marquis had thought proper to withdraw his motion; and on that occasion he should freely have stated the grounds upon which he objected to granting the claims of the Catholics. He now begged leave, therefore, to state the grounds upon which he thought that it was impossible to admit the Catholics to legislate for a Protestant country, without that "the church of Rome, is the most intolerant of all churches: it is our inflexibility which renders us unconciliating and odious." In another passage he says, "that the exercise of the power of the sword was not to be called in question." He should avoid entering into a detail of the melancholy events that happened before that period. Having endeavoured to show that the principles of popery were dangerous to a Protestant constitution at the time he had mentioned, he should now examine the declaration of those who stated, that the doctrines of popery were no longer composed of those intolerant and obnoxious principles: that no sale of indulgences were allowed, or the doctrine of purgatory believed. He would refer to a bull of pope Leo, as giving him a ground of coming to a more correct conclusion on But it was now said, that the Roman Catholic gentry did not give their assent to the intolerant doctrines of the Romish church. When the Roman Catholics said so, they were deceived-deceived by the influence of those treacherous principles, which always had been, and still were, the characteristics of the Roman Catholic religion. If those principles were not opposed, no adequate security would be had against the vigorous and domineering spirit of popery. If these were not the principles which the Roman Catholics now entertain, let them, then, open their eyes to that religion; or let them state candidly that it is not the Throne, it is not the laws, it is not the parliament, but it is the church of Rome, which bars the entrance to the British parliament. It was said that Ireland could not remain as she was, and he assented to that observation. But it was also stated, that conceding the Catholic claims would make that country tranquil. He no more believed that conceding those claims would have that effect, than that the breath of man could calm the ocean. He had not abilities or talents sufficient to enable him to propose any measure for the the subject. The bull in question, which | Protestant country? was issued in 1825, and was published in all the newspapers, bore unqualified testimony to the statement, that the doctrines of popery had not changed in those two particulars. But perhaps some noble lords would maintain, that an essential alteration in the fundamental doctrines of popery had taken place. He begged leave to ask by what authority and at what period had such alteration been effected?-to what authority were those differences in the Catholic religion to be ascribed, and in what writings were they allowed? Their lordships were all aware, that the principles of the Catholic religion could not be altered without the concurrence of a general council, and they must know also that there had been no general council held since that of Trent, in the sixteenth century. To that council their lordships must refer, if they wished to come to a just conclusion on the true and real doctrines of the popish church. Were their lordships, then, to be told by individuals who had interested motives-for he contended, that they had interested motives, to conceal the real character of that religion that in their opinion the Roman church no longer held doctrines so ob-improvement of Ireland; but there was a noxious and intolerant? How little such a statement was worth, would appear when put to the test of a writer of our own church, who wrote in answer to Dr.ded state of religion in which they stood, Doyle. He would now draw the attention of their lordships to the unconstitutional conduct of the Catholic priests in their interference at elections in Ireland. Availing themselves of the ignorance of the poor people, they did not exercise that sort of influence which was derived from wealth, as was done in this country; but availed themselves of a power purely spiritual to excite the minds of the superstitious people. Had not their lordships heard of their opposition to every measure proposed for the instruction of that country; for they well knew how short lived their power would be, if the people were left to their private judgment, and to the exercise of a better religion? He thought he needed not to add one word more as to the intolerance of the Roman Catholic religion. High minded and honourable men, he admitted, there were professing that religion; but he would ask this simple question whether those individuals, if such was their character, could be safely trusted with a power to legislate for a measure which would tend to render that country happy; namely, the effort now made to rescue the people from the degra and an endeavour to unite them in bonds stronger than any other-the bonds of religion, which would make Ireland both happy and tranquil. All that he wished was, that when this great question should be again brought forward, every endeavour would be made to transmit to posterity that constitution which had made this country the envy of surrounding nations, and not to fritter away the principles upon which that constitution was founded, or abandon that system of government which rendered us the most exalted upon earth. The noble lord then presented a petition from Northampton, against granting any further concessions to the Roman Catholics, and adverted to a petition from the same place, presented by earl Spencer, and stated that the one he now presented was very numerously signed. Earl Spencer did not rise to enter into a discussion with the noble lord who had just sat down, on all the various topics upon which he had touched. The noble lord had finished his speech by presenting It was a petition from the town of Northampton. I prayed that no further concessions may He also had presented a petition from the be made to the Roman Catholics. same town, signed by six hundred persons. with much concern that he was obliged He knew very well that two petitions might to differ widely in opinion from persons of be signed in the same place; and he would that denomination; and it gave him much not make a comparison of the judgment pain to find that such men could have or pretensions of the petitioners. He was brought themselves sincerely to believe, aware that in that town, as throughout that the security of any Christian Church the whole country, the opinions of the could be endangered by acting on Christian people were much divided. The petition principles; or that the safety of any civil he presented was sent to him by post, and state could be hazarded, by uniting the he knew some of the names to be very hearts and minds of all the subjects of respectable. He made the observation, every denomination in the state, by giving at the time of presenting it, that twenty them equal rights, instead of alienating a years ago, it would have been extremely very large portion of those subjects, by an difficult to find six hundred persons, who unprovoked, and, as it appeared to him, would have put a petition into his hands unjust and cruel persecution. He felt in favour of the Catholics. He really be- perfect satisfaction in presenting a petition lieved, notwithstanding the assertions of from the archdeacons of Norwich and the noble lord to the contrary, that the Sudbury, and other clergymen of the country, though it was still divided, was Church of England. This petition was beginning to open its eyes upon this ques- also signed by many learned and excellent tion. He gave that noble lord, and other persons who had a regard for the constitunoble lords full credit for their opinions tion; but they thought, and he perfectly being grounded on the notion, that they agreed with them in opinion, that the conwere doing their duty to the constitution stitution could never be more effectually of the country; and with respect to him- secured than by promoting peace and self and his friends, he must be allowed to good-will among all classes of the king's say, that they were as good and as steady subjects. They, therefore, prayed for the friends to the constitution, in church and removal of those severe laws that affected state, as any of those noble lords who were the Roman Catholics. These sentiments opposed to granting the claims of the were much more in unison with the imCatholics. provement of the times in which we lived, and with a just notion of civil and religious liberty, and the mild and tolerant spirit of Christianity. The petition was drawn up with so much moderation and temper, that he wished it to be read at length. The Bishop of Norwich said, he had several petitions to present to their lordships, coming from different quarters, and containing different opinions. He had divided these petitions into three classes. The first class contained petitions from the Roman Catholics of Ireland; they consisted of five, and deserved attention on account of the respectability of the petitioners. The first petition came from the Roman Catholic bishop and clergy of the united dioceses of Waterford and Lismore. The others were from Tuam and other places in Ireland. These petitions were signed by immense numbers of Roman Catholics, and they all united in praying most earnestly for the repeal of those penal statutes which still remained laws, which were, as it appeared to him, the misfortune and disgrace, and would be the ruin of this empire at no distant period, if the wrongs of millions remained much longer unredressed. The second class of petitions came from clergymen of the Church of England. These petitions were signed by many very learned and excellent men, who The Lord Chancellor said, he must object to the petition, which was stated to come from the bishop of Waterford. In the discharge of his duty, he could not receive any petition coming from the bishop of Waterford, unless it was the Protestant bishop. Lord Clifden stated, that his majesty, when he was in Ireland, had received all the Irish bishops in full robes. The Lord Chancellor said, that made no difference. He had a positive duty to perform, and he must object to any petition being received coming from the Catholic bishop of Waterford. Lord Clifden stated, that there had been an especial presentation of Catholic bishops to his majesty while in Ireland. The Marquis of Lansdown felt persuaded, that the noble and learned lord on the woolsack would have no objection to re The Lord Chancellor said, he never would oppose the reception of petitions written in a style which the House could recognise. There could be no doubt that the parties in question were bishops, nor did he doubt their respectability. But what he could not allow was, that the person from whom this petition came, should be recognised a Catholic bishop of Waterford. He might be designated as Catholic bishop in Ireland, but not as Catholic bishop of Waterford, for the law knew nothing of such a designation. ceive the petitions of persons who, from in the light of an enemy than a friend. the station they filled, were highly respect- He trusted that this consummation would able, provided they were properly worded.not take place; he trusted that better He understood the objection of the noble feelings-feelings more in unison with the and learned lord to be only to the assertion Christian charity so eloquently recomof a supremacy which did not, and ought mended that night by the venerable prelate not to exist. There could be no doubt would prevail in that country. He did that those persons were entitled to the de- not absolutely despair; though he confessed signation of Catholic bishops in Ireland. he was not very sanguine in his expectaHe was sure that if this petition was with- tions of hearing his noble friend opposite drawn, and signed with the name of the argue, at some future period, for the exindividual as Catholic bishop in Ireland, pediency of Catholic emancipation, with the noble and learned lord would not ob- as much zeal as he now opposed it. As ject to its being received. to the number of petitions against the measure from the county of Kent, he was not at all surprised that so many had been presented; for nothing could be easier than the way in which they were got up. It was as easy as lying. A paper was drawn up, containing the usual commonplace expressions, about Church, State, and Constitution, with a few allusions, perhaps, to the Pope, the Pretender, Bloody Mary, and Guy Fawkes, and this document was carried about by the clergyman of the parish, who prevailed upon every body who could write to sign it. In one instance, the clergyman of a parish, charged with a petition of this description, happened to take it, in the first instance, to an honest tenant of his, who occupied four or five hundred acres of land. The farmer said it might be all very right; but he never signed any thing he did not understand. "Not sign it!" exclaimed the clergyman, "why surely you won't suffer the bloody Papists to get power into their hands, and burn Protestants at the stake again?" The farmer persisted in his refusal; and was equally impracticable, when the clergyman wished him to get his wife and children to sign it. The clergyman was at last obliged to go into some neighbouring brick-yards, and get the The Bishop of Norwich said, there was no difficulty on his part to withdraw his petition. The petition was accordingly withdrawn. The Earl of Darnley said, he could not help lamenting that his noble friend (the earl of Winchilsea) should, on his first political appearance, have shown so much zeal and energy in what he could not but consider a bad cause. He called it a bad cause, because he was perfectly convinced, that if his noble friend, and those who thought with him, continued to oppose successfully the just claims of the Catholics, they would succeed in convulsing this great empire to its centre. He could not but regret the strong language which had been used with respect to a man of tran-petition signed by as many labourers as scendant genius, who had long advocated this great cause with distinguished ability, and who, he trusted, would continue to advocate it until it should be finally successful. But he would not refer to living authorities; it should be recollected, that Fox, Pitt, Burke, and Grattan, who had never agreed upon any other question, concurred in supporting the measure which his noble friend opposite so warmly deprecated. The ill-omened rejection of this measure was undoubtedly calculated to induce the people of Ireland to consider the country to which she was united, rather could write. It was absolutely absurd to attach any importance to petitions got up in this manner. It had been inquired of those who had succeeded in putting an extinguisher on this question, what they meant to do for Ireland? His noble friend opposite answered, that they meant to convert the Catholics to the Protestant religion. If such a scheme were practicable to any extent, no man could be more desirous than he was, to see it accomplished; for he had a bad opinion of the tenets of the Roman Catholic Church, though he did not think that the Catholics ought to be excluded from an equal parti- | was sorry to be obliged to call it-this terrific question. He perfectly agreed with his noble friend (the marquis of Lansdown) as to the propriety of postponing the motion of which he had given notice; for that notice could not have been brought forward with any advantage under the circumstances which had recently occurred. He should not enter into any part of the discussion, except to notice an observation which had fallen from the noble lord who opened it, and who had brought it forward as a charge against the Roman Catholic clergy, that they exercised a purely spiritual influence over their flocks. If the exercise of a purely spiritual influence over their flocks was a crime, he wished to God, that the same complaint could be made of our own clergy! He should be happy to believe that no influence was ever used by the Protestant clergy in questions of a political nature; but that their influence over their flocks was purely spiritual. He trusted that the earliest opportunity would be taken of affording their lordships the means of coming to a decision on the great question of Catholic Emancipation. He said this, not because he wished for a debate on this question; but because, in his opinion, nothing could be more mischievous than that the people of Ireland should believe that their friends despaired of the cause, and that parliament had shut its ears against their claims. He could not, at the present moment, look forward with hope to the success of the question, after what had occurred in the other house of parliament; but the time was near at hand, when this question must be carried, and it would depend upon their lordships to decide in what spirit it should be carried. The arts of man might, for a time, raise barriers against it; attempts might be made to check the progress of The Duke of Buckingham said, he held reason through the land; but the current in his hand several petitions praying for of knowledge and intelligence could not Catholic Emancipation. The first was be arrested by the work of human hands. from the Roman Catholic inhabitants of The tide of human reason could not be the county of Roscommon. He did not kept back; but it depended upon man mean, in introducing this petition, to fol- whether the current should take such a low the example of the noble lord (Win- course as to fertilize the land, or spread chilsea) by discussing the whole question ruin and desolation around. Many reof the Catholic claims. There were many joiced at the decision of the other house reasons why a collateral debate of this kind of parliament; but he believed that few was not one in which the great question of persons of sound statesman-like opinions Catholic Emancipation could be convenient-participated in their triumph. The decily discussed. It was utterly impossible, in a debate like this, to settle this great-he sion was a subject of triumph to those who did not wish Ireland to look to the |
