which once circulated, but had long since ceased. Prudence and experience would be no better for protection than dotage and error.' Lord Eldon was persuaded that these words, everlastingly true, were aimed at a speech of his about the Catholics of the time of Henry VIII., 'thinking it proper to treat this as a sort of speech which an almanacmaker, reciting past events, might make; and which, therefore, might deserve no answer.' But the sentiment of Mr. Plunket's words made its way. 'Never,' says the chancellor, was anything like the sensation the Duke of York's speech has made. I hear that "the Duke of York and No Popery" is to be seen in various parts. The Bishop of London declared that he believed-speaking when he delivered a petition yesterday-"that he was satisfied nine people in ten in the city were determinedly adverse to the claims of the Roman Catholics." Yet the sentiment of Mr. Plunket's words made its way. 'I forgot to mention,' writes the chancellor, in my last, that the Commons stared me very impudently in the face, when they delivered to me the Catholic bill at the bar of the House. This bill, however, I think those gentlemen will never see again.' The Lords threw out the bill at a little before six in the morning of the 18th of May, by a majority of 48 in a House of 308. 'Lady Warwick and Lady Braybrooke,' writes the chancellor, 'would not let their husbands go to the House to vote for the Catholics; so we Protestants drink daily, as our favourite toast: "The ladies who locked up their husbands." The glorious forty-eight' were toasted in bumpers, and the victors were becoming composed after their triumphs;' and still the sentiment of Mr. Plunket's words was making its way. The temporary defeat took place on Wednesday, May 18th. On the Thursday, 'Mr. O'Connell,' writes the chancellor, 'pleaded as a barrister before me in the House of Lords. His demeanour was very proper, but he did not strike me as shining so much in argument as might be expected from a man who has made so much noise in his harangues in a seditious association.' The chancellor forgot that a cause in the House of Lords could hardly be so inspiring to a barrister as the cause of his country to its champion; and that Mr. O'Connell might easily hold himself calm and

commonplace in another sphere, while in his own sentiment of Mr. Plunket's words was making its way.

During the next session, that of 1826, nothing was d in parliament on the Catholic question beyond the p sentation of petitions. The Lords had declared th opinion decisively enough, for the present; and in Commons, it was understood that the session would short, in view of the approaching dissolution, and that great questions of the time had better stand over for consideration of the new parliament. The Catho petitions were chiefly directed to meet the objection of supposed divided allegiance of the Catholics. It was vain attempting to meet this objection by the declarati however extensively confirmed, that Catholics held undivided allegiance to their king in civil affairs: no o doubted this. The objection was, that their spiritu allegiance to the pope might at any time interfere wi their civil allegiance to their king. The true way meeting this objection was to render them easy satisfied. If the pope really wished to make misch between the Catholics and the British government, could do it very effectually already; and with the mo excuse the more they were wronged. To keep them in state of exasperation by political exclusion was not t way to render them loyal, but rather to make the po their partisan against their sovereign. The petitions this session were therefore of little use. They did not tru meet the objection of one party, and were not needed the other.

a

A new enmity became manifest this year. The Catholi and the Dissenters drew off from each other. T Dissenters were themselves suffering under disabiliti which might naturally dispose them to sympathise wi the Catholics, and to work in their behalf. But the were, generally speaking, lukewarm in the cause. It not difficult to understand this, though the fact is not a agreeable one to contemplate. Like too large a majorit of mankind, the English Dissenters could feel deeply an argue clearly about the rights of conscience, when the own consciences were interfered with, but be too muc affected by fear to see the full force of their abstrac

reasonings when their own experience was not concerned. They were Protestants; they feared the pope and the ravages of superstition as much as their Protestant brethren within the Church pale; and the annual Indemnity Bill, which gave them practical freedom, saved them from sharing the exasperation of the Catholics under their legal disabilities. And they were not united with the Catholics in any hope from the influence of Mr. Canning; for Mr. Canning was as openly and fixedly their adversary as he was the advocate of the Catholics. Mr. Canning's opposition to the repeal of the Test Act remains a rebuke to the pride of human reason and to the confidence of heroworship. Those who exulted in his clear view of the case of the Catholics, and his soundly principled advocacy of their claims, were perplexed and abashed by his indefensible and unaccountable refusal to apply the same sagacity and the same principles to the case of the disqualified Dissenters. And it was not for Mr. Canning to complain of the judgment which his inconsistency was sure to bring upon him; nor for his friends to wonder and lament if, after his death, such speculations as that of Lord Rossmore, in his Letter on Catholic Emancipation, dishonoured his memory, as far as the matter went. 'Is there no satisfactory reason,' says Lord Rossmore, why a mind like that of Mr. Canning should depart from his own general principles in the case of the Dissenters alone? May he not have reasoned thus? If I concede the wishes of the Dissenters separately, may I not weaken the -the Dissenters not having much sympathy with the claims of the Catholics? But if I carry emancipation, I secure the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts; for, if the former succeeds, the latter follows.' This is not like Canning-such a method of coercing one set of people, under false pretences, to further the emancipation of another. But, if this was not his reason, there is no saying what was. It remains a painful mystery. There is much that is painful in the survey of the time persons under our present notice. The Catholics were putting forth all their powers in preparation for the elections; and the full force of the influence of the priesthood was brought to bear upon the forty-shilling

common cause

and

VOL. II.

F

freeholders, in a manner which made as complete mockery of the representative system as was ever made the Irish landlords, who had covered their domains wi small freeholds for their political convenience. Some this class of Irish landlords were ejecting their tenan by wholesale, for their obedience to the priests in t elections; and the new Catholic Association was voti funds for the relief of the people thus left homeless. T Dissenters were holding off from aiding the Catholics; a the Catholic leaders were reviling the Dissenters. M Canning was doing wrong by the one body, by the ve act of doing right by the other. The Duke of York w endeavouring, by a proceeding of extraordinary audacit to achieve the dismissal of Mr. Canning from the cabin He was naturally animated by the effect his speech h produced; and he saw, as every one else did, what operation was in stimulating the friends of the Catholi to obtain their emancipation during the life of the kin He took upon him now, in the autumn of 1826, to addre the king on the subject of obtaining unity of opinion the cabinet on the Catholic question. In this he was n likely to succeed, after his attempt on the royal feelin in his late speech. The king had observed on that speec in a good-humoured way, that the duke might have le out his reference to his possible accession to the throne, its present occupant did not mean to quit it. Preservi his good-humour he still would hardly relish the duk interference with the opinions and constitution of cabinet. But it was unnecessary to do more than ke quiet, in relation to the duke; for it was becoming cle that he would never more influence the politics England, or any other human affairs. To complete t circle of wrong-doers, Mr. O'Connell was treating t illness of the Duke of York in the following style: 'I wi no physical ill to the royal duke; but if he has thrown b oath in the way of our liberties, and that as long as lives justice shall not be done to the people of Ireland, is mockery to tell me that the people of Ireland have n an interest in his ceasing to live. Death is the correct of human errors; it is said to be man's hour for repentanc and God's opportunity. If the royal duke should no

become converted from his political errors, I am perfectly resigned to the will of God, and shall abide the result with the most Christian resignation.' This declaration was received with 'laughter and cheers.' To this pass were men brought to such a state of principle and temper as this, all round, by the protraction of injury to one class of fellow-subjects. The consolation was in the moral certainty that an effectual change could not be far off. On the whole, the anti-Catholic interest seemed to have gained most in the elections; but some great single victories had been obtained on the side of emancipation; and the power of the Catholic Association had been so effectually proved, by the expulsion of the Beresfords from the representation of their own tenantry, and in some other instances, that it was clear that the struggle could not now end by any other means than being brought to an issue. It was becoming clear that the Duke of York would never reach the throne; and a general belief was arising that the cabinet was in process of conversion to the views of Mr. Canning. There was a persuasion, on the whole, prevalent in the country, that this new parliament was the last which would be occupied with the discussion of the Catholic question.

CHAPTER XI.

Chancery Reform-Government moves for Inquiry-Report of Commissioners Lord Eldon-Bill proposed-Jurors in India-FinanceClose of Session and Dissolution-The Elections.

In the course of the last three sessions of this parliament, a reform was begun which the nation had for some time been peremptorily demanding; by its discontents, yet more than by its express petitions. The delay of justice in the Court of Chancery had become insufferable; and the time was come for proof whether the grievance could not be amended. Perhaps no narrative of a process of reform is more instructive than this, in showing how that