hold those principles were no true reformers. Protestants they might call themselves, but they were only Papists in Protestant clothing,-men desirous of setting up small Poperies in the Protestant church, in lieu of that greater Popery which had covered all Europe with its shadow. The principles of civil and religious liberty, established at that glorious Revolution,-revealed first to the world, in the Reformation, by men who neither understood nor sought to practise them, but since appreciated, acted upon, and fought for, by men whose hearts were purer, or whose intellects were more enlightened, those principles formed his creed; in them he had lived, and in them he hoped he should die; and in support of those principles it wasnever on any occasion pressing on his mind more strongly-that he now rose in defence of the Catholic cause, (cheers.) It was now thirty years or more since two systems had uniformly prevailed with regard to Irish affairs. One set of gentlemen ascribed all evils to the conduct of the Catholic priesthood and laity. Another party, he must say, of higher bearing in the world, had adopted a more comprehensive theory; they believed that the miseries which preyed upon Ireland arose from the hatred which burned between two factions, the conquerors and the conquered; and that the successful plan for restoring health, would be, to negotiate a reconciliation between the parties, on the basis of equal rights and privileges, (hear, hear, hear.) Their remedy, however, was not proposed as a nostrum-not as any thing which would effect a sudden cure, but as something absolutely necessary to apply in the beginning, in order to render the body politic capable of enduring and profiting by all those circumstances which slowly contribute to the advantage of communities, (hear, hear.) Now, if there were

any truth in what the author of the Irish Union (Mr Pitt) had uttered during his life, or in what his friends had declared for him after his death, this remedy-in fact, Catholic emancipation, had been the only real ground for that Union. Accordingly, Lord Grenville, a distinguished follower of Mr Pitt, observed, in presenting a Catholic petition to the House of Lords in 1805 :-" We are now called upon to perform the duty imposed upon us by the Union." He meant to speak disparagingly of no man on account of his political opinions; but he would say, that ever since the Union, all the talent and genius of the British nation, with one distinguished exception, had ranged itself on the side of emancipation. The House of Commons had passed a bill for this purpose; and the House of Lords, in 1812, had rejected, by a majority of only one, a resolution proposed by the Marquis Wellesley, pledging itself favourably to entertain the question. The same feeling prevailed throughout the kingdom, not merely among the educated, but amongst those who were most likely to be swayed by habit and prejudice. Were he a Catholic, he should feel much disappointed, if, in the 25th year of a union formed expressly for the sake of emancipation, he found the Government practising the old tricks, and repeating the old measures of coercion, and engaging in an inglorious scuffle with Boards and Committees, in which there was no honour in victory, and great danger in defeat, (great cheering.). The first argument set up for the bill was its necessity. No man was more disposed to hold necessity to be "the plea of tyrants and the creed of slaves" than he was; still it might sometimes form the justification of vigour; where it existed, it was, truly enough, not only suprema, but sola lex. In the first place, it was of great importance that he should dis

plied any thing like hatred to the individuals who composed that party? Suppose he should say, he hated Tories he should only use a natural language (laughter and cheering)-because he disliked their opinions. But, if these words were taken in their strictest sense, he should receive great injustice, inasmuch as many individuals, for whom he had the highest respect and love, had chosen to take the name of an enemy to the house of Ha

nover.

Mr North, as a friend to the Catholics, supported the measure. Every man who paid the rent was pledged to every object of the Association; but the evil was their rent-meetings, which were minor associations in the country, and were pregnant with incalculable mischief. The people were harangued from their altars by men as devoid of caution as of education, not controlled by the censorship of the press, or the force of public opinion, like the leaders of the Association in Dublin. If the Catholic Association had been instituted when the Orange Societies were in their pride and strength, though he might have questioned its policy, he would have admired its courage and if those societies had been again rallying, it might have been produced by their re-action; but it was instituted at the very time when a command of the government had gone forth to discountenance those societies, and when the arm of government was lifted up to crush them. If, therefore, the Association had been in any way produced by the Orange Societies, it had been produced by their fall.

Dr Lushington thought that the unceasing condemnation which had been passed upon the Catholics of Ireland was a libel upon the Catholic religion, and had given publicity to sentiments which, if generally prevalent, would annihilate all respect for the Catholic priesthood, even among those whom

they were called upon to instruct. He then urged the necessity of conceding the Catholic claims, and described the Bible Societies as being among the number of those who disturbed the peace of Ireland.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer complained of the severity with which he and such others of his colleagues as were friendly to the Emancipation of the Catholics were treated by certain members of the Opposition. After the death of the late Mr Perceval, an attempt had been made by negotiation among parties, to form a government, by which that measure might be carried. This had failed, as he thought, through a blunder on the part of those who were friendly to the measure; and the result was, that a government was organized, in which it was agreed that the question should not be carried; and at the present moment it was admitted, that the administration was doing well, and he thought he might add that the country was satisfied with it; but to persist in attempting to carry the Catholic question in the cabinet, would be to break up this government, a step which he could not think would be justified either to parliament or to the country. So far as his observation went, the feeling in the country generally was not very strong against this measure; and what there was of it arose, he thought, in a great measure, from the acts of the Catholic Association In consequence of the feeling of the country generally, the measure might pass in the Commons, as it had already passed, by a large majority. In the other House there was a strong feeling against it, among the middling classes, a feeling still stronger, and a highly powerful one in that very influential body the clergy. Strong as these feelings were, he did not despair of a great ultimate and beneficial change. All his own early impressions, he might almost say all his hereditary

prejudices, had been against Catholic Emancipation. He had been taught to believe that the Papal faith was always connected with arbitrary power; and he was as strongly disposed against any measure of concession, as any of those gentlemen who still oppose it. He had changed his opinion, upon sufficient grounds, he thought; he was not ashamed of the change of it; and from what had happened in his own case, he had great hopes in that of others. He considered the interferences of the Catholic Association in the administration of justice, as directly contrary to the spirit of the constitution, and fraught with the greatest practical evils; he felt convinced that the language of the Association's address, where it alluded to the hatred borne to Orangemen, could not be mistaken; that the alarm on the part of the Protestant population of Ireland was not only wellfounded, but necessary and unavoidable; that, if the Catholics found themselves in possession of political power, it would be quite natural in them to attempt, or at least wish, to possess themselves of the Church property; that if the claims of the Catholics were granted while such an Association was in existence, the condition of the Protestants would become far worse than it would easily be imagined; that under present circumstances it would be impossible to carry the Catholic question; and that the Association ought to be put down as the bane and curse of Ireland.

One o'clock having arrived, and the question—at least the number of those anxious to express their opinion upon it, not yet being exhausted, a third adjournment took place, on the under standing that it was to take precedence of every other subject.

About this time, the news arrived that the Catholic Association had adopted the resolution of sending to London a

deputation, and petitioning both Houses to be heard by two of its members as counsel at their respective bars. The deputation was to consist of Earl Fingal as head, of the four Catholic Archbishops, and all the Catholic peers

the last of whom joined the Associ ation at that meeting, of as many of the Bishops as could conveniently attend, of Messrs O'Connell and Shiel, barristers, and an unlimited number of the members of the Association. At the same meeting which passed resolutions appointing this deputation, a statement of the amount of the Catholic rent, by which it appeared that there had been nearly £9000 collected, and about oneeighth of that sum expended, was brought forward; and it was announced that some Protestant noblemen and gentlemen had sent their donations to the rent. Thus, even after the knowledge of what was recommended in the King's speech, and while the bill was in progress, the Association showed a determination to act in all things as a legally constituted body. Those circumstances, no doubt, gave animation to both parties in the debate, which was extended to a fourth evening, upon the mere motion for leave to bring in the bill, and before the details of that bill were made known, at least officially, to most of the members.

Tuesday, February 15.-Upon the fourth night of the debate, the opinions delivered were so much a repetition of what had been formerly stated, that a full account of the speeches does not appear to be necessary. Sir Robert Wilson thought that in opposing the measure he was fighting the battles of civil and religious liberty. Mr Lockhart said, that to levy money without authority of Parliament, was clearly unlawful; and the Association had done that. Mr Grenfell was of the same opinion. Mr Robertson thought it would be better to repeal the penal statutes already in

force; Sir John Newport defended the Catholics; Lord Althorp thought that if the Catholic claims were granted, the Association would dissolve; and Mr W. Lamb thought that a society causing persons to be brought to trial before juries, many of whom must be its own members, ought to be put down.

Sir Francis Burdett addressed the House, upon all points of the case, and at very considerable length. It was worth while, he said, to look at the condition in which this society, so ill spoken of by all parties, stood. It had so conducted itself as now to be the organ of six millions of people in Ireland, including the nobility, the gentry, the clergy, and the merchants, as well as the peasantry; and forming, in fact, six-sevenths of the population of the country. Was the Association confined to Catholics? On the contrary, among the names of Protestants connected with it, appeared that of Earl Fitzwilliam-a name which no man could pronounce without sentiments of veneration-which implied unceasing generosity of character, courage which shrunk not in the hour of danger, and benevolence such as exceeded, and such as alone, perhaps, could exceed, even the powers of that ample fortune, the blessings of which it so nobly dispensed. Then, should he be told, after this, that the Catholic Association deserved any one of the imputations which had been cast upon it that it meditated mischief against the country, when he saw such a name in the list of it as this? Men might differ upon some points; they might disagree as to what might probably be the result of the proceedings of such a society; but while he saw such names as Lord Fingal upon the Irish side of it, and Earl Fitzwilliam on the English-while he saw the Catholics of England aiding and sustaining it, those persons who had ever been ranked among the most respectable portion of

the British community, and who, if ever they were held in disesteem, had only fallen into it because they bore with too much patience those wrongs and grievances which some thought they should have stirred more actively to redress-was it possible to see the Catholic Association of Ireland supported by such names, and assisted and adhered to by such characters, without feeling that it stood cleared of those aspersions which the honourable advocates of the present bill thought fit to cast upon it? And for the charge that the Catholic Association prejudged cases, that, from the nature of the spirit which it assumed to be in action, called for some reply. The Catholic Association had prejudged nothing; it desired to prejudge nothing. It existed in a country the population of which was impoverished, and in which the lower classes, for the profession of those religious tenets which itself maintained, were exposed every hour to abuse and to persecution. The Catholic Association sought only to obtain justice for their poorer fellow-subjects, who had not the power of obtaining it themselves. They were not likely to expend the funds intrusted to them needlessly or fruitlessly-what cause, what interest, could they have for doing so The course adopted in detail by the Association was this-they received a complaint; heard the evidence as to it; referred it to a committee; that committee took legal opinion on the question; and, according to the result of that opinion, proceedings were or were not instituted. Now what was there in all this, or any of it, like prejudging? To examine certainly was necessary, or how could they decide if assistance should be given? Could an association like this be called an association which prejudged matters which were afterwards to be decided at law? He should rather have called it a committee of justice, which only

?