a beam from the sun, as attempt to touch a fibre of the spiritual authority of the pope; that the attempt to divide the Catholics from the pope is a monstrous experiment; that it is giving them the shell, and refusing them the kernel." Now if such are the Catholic doctrines of Ireland, what hope is there that the present proposition can be realized? Would it not be asking these people to surrender their consciences, and declare themselves not Catholics? When you attempt, without a real conversion, to strip a Catholic of the opinions which he holds amongst the most sacred tenets of his church, how much do you propose to leave in that person either of a real Catholic or of an honest man? plishing the same work. Their notions give a very different representation of things; they consider us as the corrupters of the true faith. With the prejudice which such an opinion inspires, supported by the influence which the governors of their church possess, I am by no means prepared to say that this domestic nomination could be accepted as a sufficient security, even if all foreign influence, with its attendant dangers, was out of the case. It might, even in that state of things, be a grave question, looking to the natural hostility of that system of religion to that which has supplanted it in civil establishment, and to the spiritual power over conscience which that system maintains, by the use of all the means by which the minds of men can be forcibly affected. We are to remember, that the pastors of that church are not like the obscure teachers of petty obscure conventicles, with little influence, and dependent on the fancies of temporary congregations: they compose a numerous and embodied hierarchy, acting by a regular and permanent system, tending to a common purpose by an application of the most powerful means. Something more might be requisite, under such circumstances, for the safety of the Protestant establishment, than this domestic nomination. But when you combine with this the apprehensions arising out of foreign influence directly hostile to every interest which the state is bound to protect from danger, and the impossibility of excluding that influence by any barrier which this measure proposes to erect, I cannot for a moment hesitate to give this motion a decided negative. It calls for a committee to consider a proposal which appears to be unattainable in itself, and which if it could be at tained, would not give that security to the state and to its establishments which they have a right to demand, and a duty to maintain, against the dangers of probable aggression. Suppose, however, all these original and fundamental difficulties surmounted, how is the intercourse that is absolutely necessary for the purposes of confirmation and investiture to be maintained? Certainly not without the permission of the person in whose custody he is; and the permission that may be granted, may likewise be refused. Is it at all likely that that person will concur in executing a plan, the avowed purpose of which is the total exclusion and interference of his? In fact, the whole of the proposed arrangement seems to me to project little less than the transfer to Buonaparté of that power of the Veto which the Catholics upon conscientious principles have refused to allow to their own lawful sovereign. In every view in which I can contemplate the project, it is impracticable and hopeless, as far as the Catholics are concerned. Whether if it were practicable, it is that in which Protestants should acquiesce with entire satisfaction, is a question which I do not think necessary to discuss at present. The right hon. gent. admits that it is not the most eligible security; he would prefer another, but this is something better than nothing as he represents it. Whether we ought to consider it as a sufficient security against that overbearing influence which the hierarchy of that church exercises over its members, and is surely not unlikely to exercise against the interests and safety of the Protestant, or, as they call it, the non-catholic church. According to our notions, we have cleared our religious system from the impurities which it had contracted during the darkness of the barbarous ages: according to our notions, they unhappily lost the favourable opportunity of accom Sir John Newport. I rise, Sir, immediately after the learned gentleman, with a view of shewing that the charge he has thrown out against gentlemen on this side the House, of changing our mode of argument, is not imputable to us, however applicable it may be to those who now resist the claims of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, and that it is those only who have always opposed these claims, that now seek new grounds for their resistance, as all their former arguments have been you will first state to us what part of your principles you are willing and ready to surrender, we will not even go into a committee, to enquire what we may think it expedient to ask from you, or to grant of what you claim." Why, Sir, I beg leave to say that I do not think it is incumbent on the Catholics to make such a completely and repeatedly refuted. Muchgious faith is obnoxious to us ;-and unless of their former scruples were founded upon his Majesty's coronation oath, but this ground they have now completely abandoned, and they change their resistance into merely refusing a committee. It must be obvious, indeed, to any gentleman who will only look back to the circumstances under which that oath was framed, that no such construction is ap-statement on their parts. It is, on the plicable as would warrant those scruples founded upon it. It was the opinion of lord Sommers, sir Edward Lyttleton, and all the first authorities, at the time when the bill under which this oath was framed, -passed, that no such intention was thereby expressed, as the taking away any right of persons professing the Catholic religion, or the imposing any obligation upon his Majesty to repress the Catholic worship, or to exclude any Catholic from civil employments under a certain degree;— and so said Mr. Finch, so said sir Robert Cotton, and all the leading authorities of that party who framed the oath. That ground, however, has been laid aside by the opposers of the Catholics, as being found no longer tenable. The motion of my right hon. friend, at present, is merely for the purpose of enquiring what mode of redress can be devised for relieving the oppressions and calming the discontents of four millions of his Majesty's loyal 'subjects; and it is refused, not upon any ground of justice or policy;-not upon any pretence of impeaching the loyalty of the Catholics, but upon the evasive manœuvre of going into imputed dogmas of the Catholic religion. I would appeal to the sound policy and common sense of the House, whether this be a ground upon which it ought to refuse the motion, and thereby to risk losing the attachment of four millions of subjects, whose zeal and valour are so indispensable at all times, and more especially at this awful crisis, for the common defence of the empire? I ask, is it consistent with the justice, the liberality, or the character of this House, when so many millions of your fellow subjects submit to you, as the ground of their claims, the consideration of their long tried loyalty and attachment to the state, illustrated by their conduct for more than a century, and on numberless occasions sealed with their blood in your cause, through every region in the world; to tell them" we cannot redress you, we cannot grant you the restoration of those civil rights you claim, because your reli contrary, for those who resist their claims, adorned the camps and councils of those cluded from the exercise of their relihostile states into whose service they have gion; many of them have been flogged been driven by your narrow prejudices for practising its worship. Their clergy and unnatural policy,-to follow the bent have been refused all admittance or inof their genius, and receive those rewards tercourse with them-and where they and distinctions for their talents, which have ventured to appear in British quarthey were indignantly refused at home. ters, they have been ordered to quit within You extol the valour of those O'Neills twenty-four hours, on pain of incurring and O'Donnels in the service of Spain, military punishment. I understand it is whom you have rejected from your own. alledged, that this order was not made You are lavish in the praises of Irish Ca- for any particular preclusion to the Catholics in foreign services, fighting in the tholic soldiers, but upon general princicause of your allies, but you refuse ples. But, Sir, if upon any pretence faith them reception and rank at home, in is thus broken with the Catholic soldier, the country they wish to defend. But and notwithstanding the pledge of law upon what ground, Sir,' are the Catholics under which he devotes his life to your of Ireland to be distrusted? or why sus service, he is thus debarred the exercise pected of attachment to France? I ask, of his religion, what can you expect from into what country of Europe have you him, at best, but a languid and passive gone, in which you have not found Irish obedience to the orders of his leader, inCatholics in the armies of yourselves or stead of that gallant ardour and patriotic your allies fighting with distinguished va- zeal which a liberal confidence, and above lour against France? I come to another all, a faithful adherence to the condition of point: the bar. Why have you cut the his services, would not fail to promote. Catholic off there from rising by his talents Give the Catholic but the same encourageto that rank and honour, which are the ment and he will embark in his country's most forcible stimulants to ability, and the cause with as much ardour and energy as just meed of merit :-for while the honours the Protestant can :-and why not, when and rewards of that profession are open to of the same society, formed of the same all other sects, the Catholic alone is pre- materials, and animated by the same cluded from receiving the honorary ap- manly and natural feelings? I do not pointments of a King's counsel or a King's mean to depreciate the courage or patriosergeant. Would he be more dangerous in tism of his Protestant fellow soldiers; a silk gown, than in one of serge? What but sink them to the same level of degra peculiar formidability to the state can dation and injustice with their Catholic there exist in a Catholic barrister, when comrades, and I ask you, could you exput into the shape of a King's counsel or pect from them the same zeal and attachsergeant and yet even from these ho- ment they now feel for the cause in which norary distinctions they are precluded. they fight? Sir, it is not human nature; With respect to the army in Ireland, you and if promotion and honourable distincadmit, while the regiments remain in that tion be the grand stimulus to the display country, Catholic officers to a certain li- of great valour, and the acquirement of mited degree of rank-but the moment great military skill, they are as necessary, they are transferred to this country, or and will be as effectual with one sect as any other, they forfeit this privilege un- they can be with the other. But, Sir, less they renounce their religion: of what even under all the discouragements that use, then, to the state, is the admission I have stated, the Catholics of Ireland of Catholic officers or Catholic soldiers have embarked heartily in our cause : under so limited a principle? Sir, it is we have been obliged to acknowledge it not only in this country that the Irish Ca- over and over again-and we cannot deny tholic officers and soldiers forfeit the pri- that they have deserved well of their vilege of the Irish statute for allowing country: but really, the system purthem the free exercise of their religion. sued towards them would seem to emanate To my certain knowledge, complaints of from a desire to prevent their doing the most serious kind have reached this better.-Sir, this is not all-nor does the country from Sicily, that although in the principle of preclusion stop at the point up midst of a Catholic country, and that in to which I have already stated-for it has the country of an ally whom those troops been even carried to the invidious length, are sent to defend with their blood, yet not only of excluding them from the the Irish Catholic soldiers are strictly pre-office of bank directors in Ireland, but even to the pitiful extreme of precluding them from becoming sheriffs or sub-sheriffs, not to mention all the municipal honours of cities and corporation towns. What, then, must the Catholic of Ireland have felt under a system of oppressive and degrading preclusions in his native land, founded on imputations not to be traced to any part of his conduct or principles ? It is true, Sir, that under the increased experience and growing liberality of the Irish legislature, many of the penal statutes have been repealed, and many of the prejudices done away, through the liberality of their Protestant brethren; but the legislature ought no longer to tell the Catholic that any portion of his liberty or toleration is to depend upon the discretion of others, but to give him at once a legal security for the whole. Believe me, Sir, that on the conditions of the Union, you have a sacred pledge to redeem. You promised them, in every thing short of a bond, to give them full emancipation so soon as that measure was accomplished; and it was upon this pledge you obtained from them that support to the measure, without which you could not have effected it, and which they would never have been induced to support upon any other condition. Mr. Pitt said at the time: "We are a divided people, distracted, weakened and torn by religious dissensions, which, under existing circumstances, must be interminable. So long as England and Ireland were under separate governments, it would be impossible to concede those claims, which justice and generosity might grant under a different order of things.' Such were the words of the great author of the Union, and the principle upon which alone he objected to this measure. The justice of the Catholic claims were therefore fully admitted by that great statesman, whose objections are now quoted in support of refusing them; and however dangerous the discussion might be thought before the Union, that he thought it no longer so, after that measure was accomplished, I shall shew by the most indubitable testimony; for, in two years after the Union, Mr. Pitt declared his opinion that an extension of the rights of the Protestant to the Catholic was then innocent and safe. He illustrated the sincerity of his opinion by the resignation of his office, on feeling himself unable to accomplish a measure to which his administration stood solemnly pledged. Yet, Sir, this is the tenth year which has elapsed since the Union; and when the Catholics at this day come forward to claim the promised redress, those very persons who profess to admire the wisdom, the policy, and the principles of Mr. Pitt, refuse even to enquire into the justice of those claims, or the policy on which they are rested. It is said, Sir, that the Catholics have not chalked out any concessions which they are ready to make, in order to justify us in conceding to their claims. Why, Sir, they never had reason to conceive it was necessary to urge any other ground. than their tried loyalty and attachment to the state and constitution, which nobody presumes to question, but all profess to admit. It is for those, them, who oppose them, to state the terms upon which they are willing to concede. It is the right and duty of the legislature to state the terms, and leave it for the option of the party petitioning to accept the concession under such restraints as may be proposed to them. And every man must see the policy of granting those rights, at a time when they would secure to us the grateful attachment of the Catholics, and not defer the boon until the cause which would render it valuable should no longer exist. It is no time, when their aid can be no longer useful to resist your enemy, to grant the terms which would now bind them to your cause. Nor is the moment that you want their support, the time at which you should begin to conciliate their confidence and affection. It is not by broken faith that you can secure the loyalty which the Catholics profess. You cannot expect to unite in your cause equal zeal from men between whom there exists such disparity of interests. You are not to hope that men are to be conciliated, by cajoling them out of the expectations they formed on your promises. Such ideas are not founded in the principles of human nature. The same man cannot make the same exertions, if he is not animated by the same hopes :-but give men a common feeling in the same common cause, which the Catholics claim from you-and you will have every ground of reliance upon their gratitude and their zeal. Sir, I shall not trespass longer upon the patience of the House, than by noticing an observation which has been made by the opponents of the Catholics; namely, that emancipation is not desired by the great body of the people, as its beneficial effects could not extend to the lower orders, beyond what they at present enjoy. Why, Sir, how many men have we seen even in these countries, who have attained the highest characters and dignities, in the law, for instance, who have derived their origin from the very lowest ranks of society? It is natural talents, which neither rank nor education can bestow, that are thus cut off from all advantages derivable from the right of nature and the privilege of genius. I cannot better state the opinions of the Catholics, than in the words of their own petition, in which they state: "that of which they have cause to complain, as the source of daily humiliation, namely, the impassable line of separation drawn between them and their Protestant fellow subjects, which constantly divides the nation, and keeps animosity alive; while they regard the emancipation for which they ask, as a boon above all price, and for the absence of which there can be no compensation." Sir, if I am not mistaken, my right hon. friend has urged this argument in the splendid speech in which he introduced this motion,—and I trust he will make it, as he ought to do, the basis for his future proceedings. Mr. Knox apologized to the right hon. mover for troubling him with a question, but, circumstanced as he was, and bound up by the instructions of his constituents, it was absolutely necessary that he should have some intimation as to his future intentions. The right hon. gent. in his opening speech had declared himself decidedly in favour of the Veto; concurring most cordially with him in this sentiment, he desired to know, whether in the event of his succeeding in his motion, it was the right hon. gent.'s intention to propose that measure, and make it the basis on which to proceed. Should the answer be in the affirmative, which he sincerely hoped it would, he (Mr. Knox) would vote with him for going into the Committee; If otherwise, he should be under the necessity, in conformity with the letter and spirit of his instructions, of opposing him. He would not, at the present, press the right hon. gent. for an answer, but hoped, in the course of the debate, he would be so good as to give him satisfaction on the point, as according to the answer he should receive, his vote would be regulated. Lord Castlereagh said that he could not reconcile it to his sense of duty to give a silent vote on the present important question; he was the more desirous of delivering his sentiments, as circumstances had occurred since the subject was last under consideration, which deserved the most serious notice; he regretted to find that increased obstacles to the measure of extending further political indulgences to the Catholics had arisen out of their own conduct and declarations; obstacles, which from his former intercourse with the body were matter to him of equal surprise and regret. Considerations, which it was unnecesary for him now to detain the House with repeating, had precluded him from giving his support to any of the various motions which had been submitted to parliament since the Union, for extending constitutional privileges to the Catholics; his sentiments, however, in favour of the principle of the measure, coupled with adequate arrangements for the security of the constitution in church and state, had always been unequivocally declared. It was an opinion formed upon much reflection, and nothing had occurred to shake his conviction on that subject: he had supported the Union from a persuasion that it was calculated not only to put an end to the various political dangers and anomalies of distinct legislatures, in the same empire, but, as opening the only means of adopting, with safety to our establishments, a more comprehensive and liberal system of government. He had never considered that the claims of the Catholics to further indulgences rested upon a claim of a right, as had been urged by the right hon. baronet (sir John Newport. He had always protested against such a principle, had considered that their claims could only be constitutionally argued on grounds of expediency, and so far as they might be consistent with the stability of the constitution, more espe cially the ecclesiastical branch of it; he had always resisted political concessions to the Roman Catholics in the parliament of Ireland (having voted in 1793 against the grant of the elective franchise), from a persuasion that, so long as Ireland was governed by a distinct legislature, a participation in political power, with a sect, composing, as it did, the majority of the whole population, was utterly inconsistent with the security of the established church, and with the tranquil administration of our affairs. It was the measure of union to which be had looked, as alone calculated, by placing the whole fabric of the government, civil and ecclesiastical, upon the basis of a cor ? |