country that is well governed, would any body say that our military force was strong, because it consisted of foreigners, or that it was weak, because it was composed of En The much the more would be expected from expectation than that of comparative exertion. I ask you, whether that is not the true state of the case with regard to the Roman catholics of Ireland? I will not urge further than I did, when I opened this sub-glishmen? Would you not argue, that so ject, the argument, that the privileges bestowed upon the higher orders of people are, in point of fact, enjoyed by the lower. No answer has been given to the argument, and therefore I must take it as a principle admitted. No one has attempted to contradict the opinion that the lower orders are influenced by the advantages and the privileges bestowed on their superiors. Those who recollect the debates two years ago, may furnish their minds with as strong an illustration on this subject as any argument can possibly produce. It was two years since an hon. member, then secretary at war, brought in a bill for raising an army en masse. After having explained the details of the bill, as it applied to Great Britain, he did conclude with a short sentence, which every body well understood, and with regard to which no one thought any comment was necessary. The sentence was to the effect, that it was not thought expedient to apply the bill to Ireland. It would certainly have been indiscretion, in the true sense of the word, either to have applied it to Ireland, or to have commented on the reason for not applying it. Why? Because it was well known that the mass of the people of Ireland were not like the mass of the people of En-three-fourths of the population. It is said, gland; because they consisted of two divided parties, in the lower of which you could not have the same confidence as in the higher; and therefore it was that in England the levy en masse, which constituted the best security of the country, was in Ireland looked to as its greatest source of danger. I will refer gentlemen to the bill for promoting our military force and national defence. I remember, in the course of one day's discussion, relative to the force in Ireland at the time of the debate, compared with the period of the treaty of Amiens, that a statement was made of so much cavalry, so much infantry, so much artillery, I come now to the objection as to the parand so many fencibles. It was then ad- ticular form. It is objected to giving hopes mitted on both sides, that with regard to to the catholics, because it is said, how can such and such regiments, there was a cir- I desire the house to go into a committee, cumstance that made them more particularly if I do not know that the committee will useful to the country; that circumstance support me in all the points in favour of the was, that there were no Irish among them. catholics? Has not this objection been ansIt was stated and admitted, that for the rea-wered, even by what has been said on less son I have mentioned, there were two or important points? Supposing two distinct three regiments as available as four or five. questions, standing on different grounds; Apply this to England, or to any other surely no one will say, that we ought not to are not those noblemen and gentlemen, who compose the higher class of the people of Ireland, loyal? If they are, why would you give them any thing to make them more so? I would give them the same interest in the constitution of the country which others have, and then I may reasonably expect similar exertions from them. We say it is little for them to gain, and much for us to give. They say it is much for them to gain, and little for us to give. What is it we give? All we give away is political power! To whom do we give that power? To the catholics. Who are the catholics? Our fellow subjects. He go into a committee to see whether we can- | principle flower of his eloquence consisted not give either, because we cannot give both. in the repetition of the word "must." There are two very different points in this seemed to think, that the fundamental laws question. Gentlemen speak as if they thought of the church of England "must" be renone but members of the church of Eng- pealed by granting the prayer of the catholand were capable of sitting in parliament. lics. The exclusion of the catholics from But do not dissenters sit in this house? seats in parliament, and the existence of the However, in point of doctrine, the church test acts, are the props, according to the of England differs from the catholics, yet it right hon. and learned gent., which support does not differ more than from the dissenters. the church of England. What, then, was With regard to the maintenance and esta- the state of the church of England in the blishment of the church of England, there reigns of Elizabeth, of James the first, and cannot be more difference between the ca- Charles the first? Were these princes not tholics, than there is between the dissenters the heads of the church as effectually as his and the churchmen. We have forty-five present majesty; nay, would it not be members in this house, who are of a pro- deemed the grossest abomination to doubt, fessed establishment different from our own, even, that Charles the first fell a martyr to and they are not members of the most tole- the church of England? Yet, throughout rant sect. It is true, that from the bias of the reigns of these princes, Roman catholics their education, from their intellectual at- sat in parliament, and the test act had no tainments, from the improvement of their existence. Granting the thirty-nine articles minds, and from their enlightened under- of the church of England to be not repugstanding, they are above narrow religious nant to the free principles of the constituprejudices; yet from the profession of their tion as established in the reign of king Wilfaith, they are not more liberal or tolerant liam; yet the homilies which follow are by than the Roman catholics. The Roman ca- many stated to be an absolute condemnation tholics are charged with saying, there is no of the very thing which took place at the salvation for heretics, and the Scots kirk time of the revolution. Nay, did not Sasays, it is blasphemy to assert that any can cheverel openly attack, and upon the authobe saved who are not of their faith. Out of rity of these homilies, stigmatise that great these forty-five members, not more than proceeding as impious, and utterly destructhree or four could be persuaded to decide tive of the church of England? - Now, with us in favour of the repeal of the test with regard to those learned places which act. It is said, how can we employ per- form a repository for the essential doctrines sons in office who are not of the established of religion, I mean the universities, in one religion. In Ireland they are acceptable, of which (the university of Oxford) I had because there is no test act. If it is said that the honour to receive part of my early eduwe want to put the catholics in a better si- cation, if I was to produce the decree of tuation than the dissenters, let it be recol- that university of 1688, against limited golected that we are talking of Ireland. But vernment, describing it as one of those is it supposed that the test act is the means things which lead to atheism, what would of assuring that every man shall be a mem- be said of it? Some of the best of men ber of the church of England? Do we not have come from that university. None more know, that in the reign of queen Anne, so than the right hon. and learned gent.; bills of occasional conformity were passed; but I do beg, to use a plain homely phrase, and that in the reign of George I. many of that they will not throw stones whose winthe dissenters only took the sacrament to dows are made of glass. I do not advise the shew their disposition in favour of the esta-high church party to look so narrowly into blished church, however they might not the history of the catholics, and into all the agree as to parts of the liturgy? Will any violence of their decrees, in order to disbody say that taking the sacrament proves a qualify them from being amalgamated and man to be a supporter of the church of reconciled to the constitution of this counEngland? May not a dissenter take the sa-try. It has been said by an hon. and learned crament, and yet consider the liturgy of the church of England as the most consummate bigotry? This leads me to another part of subject, which was stated by a right hon. and learned gent. (Sir W. Scott), who, I flatter myself, I may call my friend. The VOL. IV. gent., that the Roman catholics wish to overturn the established religion of the country. To this I answer, that there are good subjects of all sects and persuasions, in all countries, who dissenting from the established religion, yet pay obedience to the opin 3 Y England have not petitioned. I have no doubt as to the propriety of putting the catholics of England on the same footing. I have no doubt they would finally obtain the same privileges. Those who know the ca tholics of England, who know the character of the lower ranks of the people, are sensible how little danger would result from the catholic peers sitting in the house of lords, or catholic members in the house of commons. Every man must perceive that it would be beneficial to the country, particularly at a time when every man is called upon to shew his zeal in the service, and in the general cause of the empire. I have only to add, in answer to an hon. gent. opposite, that I was in Ireland a great while ago; but it did not appear to me that the condition of the country was calculated to reconcile gentlemen who visited it, to its general laws. The gentlemen of Ireland ought to be listened to with very considerable attention. From what I have seen in the course of this debate, I think I shall find, on the division, that I shall have the honour of dividing with more of the gentlemen of that country, than ever I had on any former occasion. I believe it will be long before the speeches we have heard from them will be forgotten. The question is important in the highest degree. The only way of putting an end to the hopes of the people of Ireland will be by creating despair, and if ever I hear that they are de prived of those hopes they ought to entertain, I shall despair of those blessings, of that mutual good-will and reciprocal sympa thy, without which England can never rely on the effectual and sincere co-operation and assistance of Ireland against the common enemy. ion of the majority. I am surprised it | land? In the first place, the catholics of should have been said by an hon and learned gent., (the attorney general) that if he was a catholic in a country where the protestant church was established, and he had the power, he would exercise it to weaken the established religious government. I have too good an opinion to think so of him. If every man was to conceive himself at liberty, because he differed from the established religion of a country, to attempt to overturn it, the general tendency of such a principle would be to destroy all peace in the world. I do not believe any good catholic would so act; I am sure no good subject, who loves his country, ought so to act. The question is this. Here are persons who apply to you, not for exclusive privileges, but simply to be placed on a footing with all the other of his majesty's subjects. It is a claim of justice. If you refuse it, the burthen of proof lies on you, to shew the inconvenience or danger of granting their claim. Nothing of the sort has been proved; you have argued it only by referring to old times, differing from the present. The question comes to this, whether, in the state in which we are, it can be the conduct of a wise and prudent government to separate from itself so large a proportion of the population of the country as the people of Ireland? No statesman, no man who can judge of the affairs of the world, will think so. I should hope that those who wish well to the country, will support my motion. If it should however unfortunately fail, we shall all have done our duty in arguing the question, with a view to induce those to adopt our opinion, who are at present under a fatal delusion with regard to this momentous subject. I should notice one thing; it is, that you have raised this question, and not the petition. The petition has nothing of the seeds of turbulence in it. You will, I trust, draw the hopes of Ireland to this country, make the people of Ireland look to us as their best reliance, and prevent their recurring to any criminal measures.-I should now sit down, but for the observation of an hon. baronet (sir W. Dolben). He says, why should you give all this to the catholics of Ireland, and not grant the same to the catholics of Eng-morning. The house then divided, when there ap peared For Mr. Fox's motion 124 336 Majority against the motion 212 Adjourned at five o'clock on Wednesday Since our Report of the Speeches of Lord REDESDALE and the Earl of SUFFOLK in the House of Lords, on the 10th and 13th of May, upon Lord Grenville's Motion for a Committee on the ROMAN CATHOLIC PETITION (see pp. 711 and 742) was put to press, we have been favoured with the following correct Copies of their Lordships Speeches. Lord Redesdale observed that the motion | land thought fit to reform what it deemed to before the house was in point of form, "that be corruption and abuse in the christian the house should resolve itself into a com- church; to abolish the usurped authority of mittee to consider of the petition on the ta- the court of Rome, from which it conceived ble;" and the noble baron who had made the corruption and abuse had sprung; and to the motion had intimated, that in the com- require the clergy of Ireland, claiming the mittee it would be open to any lord to sug- benefits of the ecclesiastical establishment of gest any partial measure: but it was evident the country, to yield obedience to the sovethat the noble lord himself conceived that reign power of the state, and to abandon the nothing short of the entire object of the pe- powers assumed contrary to the ancient tition could be suggested; and the petition- laws, and paramount that sovereignty; and ers had themselves clearly stated that object when, to inforce obedience to its laws, it reto be "an equal participation, upon equal quired all its subjects to withdraw from comterms with their fellow subjects, of the full munion with the see of Rome, as inconsisbenefits of the British laws and constitution." tett with the reformation thus attempted: Of that constitution the maintenance of the such of the people of Ireland as thought fit, protestant religion, as the established reli- notwithstanding, to persist in holding comgion of the government, and the exclusion of munion with that see, also thought fit, not the Roman catholic religion from the admi- only to refuse obedience to the legislature in nistration of that government, had become a point for which they might allege religious fundamental principles, long deemed essen- scruples, but likewise to refuse, and those tial to the preservation of the liberty, both who now profess to hold communion with religious and political, of the country: and the see of Rome still refuse, to acknowledge by those laws, of the benefit of which the the validity of those laws by which the powpetitioners sought an equal participation, the ers and revenues of the church-establishment strongest provisions were made for the sup- were transferred to such of the clergy as subport of the protestant religion, and the ex-mitted to the change, and by which all eccleclusion of the Roman catholic from impor- siastical jurisdiction was made subject (as by tant political power. When, therefore, the the ancient law it had been subject) to the petitioners called upon their lordships to give control and coercion of the sovereign power them an equal participation of the British of the state; denying therefore one essential laws and constitution, they either proposed principle of the constitution, the subjection to the house to be guilty of a gross fallacy, or of the ecclesiastical to the civil power. Acthey called upon their lordships to alter those cordingly, the Roman catholics of Ireland laws, and to change that constitution; for, have ever since maintained, and still mainconsistently with the existing laws and con- tain, a complete hierarchy, in direct and mastitution, the equal participation sought by nifest opposition, not merely to the positive the petition could not be had. The equal law, but to this essential and fundamental participation claimed by the petition was principle of the constitution; representing clearly an equal participation in all powers, that hierarchy as the only lawful successors as well as in all benefits: an equal participa- of the ancient clergy of Ireland, assuming all tion in whatever might form the constitu- the powers, and claiming all the revenues, tion of the country in church and state. That of that clergy, treating the clergy of the resuch was their object was manifest; not formed religion, placed in the various offices only from the language of the petition, but of the church by the laws and in conformity from the state in which the Roman catholic to the principles of the constitution, as church was zealously maintained in Ireland, usurpers; and refusing obedience to all laws importantly different from the condition of framed to curb the encroachments of the pathe Roman catholic church in England, or pacy on the sovereign power before as well in any other country in Europe, where the as since the reformation. Denying, thereprotestant was the established religion of the fore, to the legislature of the country all country. For when the legislature of Ire-power over the ranks, dignities, and authori ties, and even the revenues of the church; | laity. It was absurd, therefore, to suppose and thus denying one of the most important that Ireland could be at rest until the Roman principles of the constitution, as asserted at catholic clergy had attained those objects of all times, even in the darkest ages. To yield their desires, unless all hopes of attaining to the claims of the petitioners, the house those objects were utterly extinguished, and must not only submit to abandon this im- the desire to attain had fallen with the hope portant principle, which their ancestors had by which it had been nourished. It was at all times zealously maintained, but must true that the Roman catholic clergy of Irealso consent to break the solemn compact so land could scarcely hope fully to attain those recently entered into by the independent le- objects, or, having done so, permanently to gislatures of Great Britain and Ireland; the retain their acquisition, whilst Ireland recompact by virtue of which their lordships mained united to Great Britain. Separation were enabled, in that house, to consider the from Great Britain must therefore be in petition before them; they must repeal the their view, at least as a probable event, so fifth article of the union of Great Britain and long as they should flatter themselves with Ireland, by which the protestant churches of the hope of accomplishing their wishes. If England and Ireland were united, and made the Roman catholic religion had remained for ever the established church of England the established religion of Ireland; or if it and Ireland; and by which the maintenance could be now made the established religion and preservation of that church, as the esta- of Ireland, consistently with a just observ. blished church of England and Ireland was ance of the solemn pledge given by the comsolemnly stipulated as a fundamental article pact of union; or consistently with an obof the union itself. They must therefore servance of the faith so frequently, at vahazard the continuance of that union, by a rious times, and in various ways, pledged to direct breach of what has been thus solemn- the protestants of Ireland; or consistently ly declared a fundamental article of the com- with the principles on which the British conpact by which it was made. But they must stitution as it now stands, connected with the do more. The claim by the petition, and title of the family on the throne, can alone the arguments founded upon it, extended in be supported; perhaps (though this may principle, to the whole empire; and their well be doubted) Ireland as a Roman catholordships must also repeal that article of the lic country might remain united with Great treaty of union with Scotland by which a si-Britain. But it is too late to consider what milar provision was made for the maintenance and preservation of the presbyterian form of church government in Scotland. Even if the petitioners had not so broadly and openly stated their claims, it must be evident that their pretensions went to this extent and it would be absurd to suppose that the Roman catholic clergy in Ireland, claiming to be the lawful successors of the ancient clergy, and considering those now in possession as usurpers, would ever be content with less than the possession of the powers and revenues which they thus claimed as their right, and the ejection of those whom they deemed to be usurpers of that right. To suppose otherwise were to sup-fore never be made the established religion pose that the nature of man is not what the experience of all ages has demonstrated it to be; and it was absurd to suppose that whilst the powers and revenues of the church were claimed by the Roman catholic clergy, those powers and revenues were not objects of their desires; and that whilst those desires were nourished by hope, and the gratification of those desires was denied, they would never be content themselves, or ever cease to excite discontent in the minds of the might have been done under such circumstances; it is too late to conjecture whether Ireland, as a country wholly Roman catholic, could probably remain united with the protestant government of Great Britain. By solemn stipulation, which their lordships could not be persuaded to violate, the protestant must ever be the established religion of Ireland, whilst Ireland should remain a part of the united empire: and the Roman catholic could by law become the established religion, only by the most daring breach of faith, and by a shameful abandonment of the principles on which the British constitution stands. The Roman catholic can there of Ireland by a law of the united empire, sanctioned by a prince of the family now on the throne. It can therefore only become the established religion of Ireland by a separation of Ireland from Great Britain, and the extirpation or expulsion of the protestants of Ireland. Considering, therefore, the claims of the petitioners as utterly inconsistent with the established laws and constitution of the empire; as requiring a complete change, cr rather subversion of that constitution in a |