and somei n another. Was this the sort | hear the hon. and learned Judge say of example they should set to the people this-recollecting the man who had preof England? Was this the way to gain ceded him in office within the last fiverespect to the solemnities and sanctity of and twenty years,-to hear this from the an oath? Nothing tended more to dese- hon. and learned Judge, knowing what he crate the sanctity of an oath, and to ren- was, and knowing he would allow him to der it almost contemptible, than the man- say, without any compliment, how deeply, ner in which a sort of systematic swearing sincerely, and conscientiously his hon. pervaded the whole of their institutions. and learned friend felt on all occasions in It contributed much to endanger both life this House, had been matter of greater and property. A man's fitness for place surprise to him even than the observations should rest upon his known honour, in- of the hon. and learned member for tegrity, and character, and not to be made Dublin. The hon. and learned Gentledependent upon oaths. More had been man expressed a contemptuous disregard done during the last five years for the im- for all who had gone before him. It was provement of the state of society and to- not by a contemptuous disregard (on the wards the removal of erroneous opinions part of his predecessors) of those who than for the previous twenty-five years. went before them, that the character of The sooner, then, they got rid of such that very Court, or of the profession to oaths as were now enforced in many cases which the hon. and learned Gentleman the better, and by such a course the more belonged, attained its present eminence; likely would they be to retain the good nor had it been by any such disregard of opinion of the people. From the increased practice, principles, or precedents, that influence of the people of England, from the House of Cominons had attained its their great intelligence and extended know- present position with the nation :-it had ledge, he had no hesitation in saying, that become great by consistently following at the present time he was the wisest states- principles; it was in practice, by changman who was the most bold and courage-ing only gradually, and of necessity-beous in his course. He was the wisest statesman who feared not the progress of kuowledge or the improvement that was daily taking place around him-he who, influenced by the undeviating principles of truth and justice, made inquiries into those subjects which he considered for the benefit of society, and who made up his mind to bring forward remedial measures, that would sweep away the folly and ignorance that they saw around them. The statesman that commenced as he ought, and considered that nothing had been done whilst anything remained to be done, would obtain the confidence and support of the people of England. These were his honest opinions, and he trusted that ere long they would generally prevail in the reformed House of Commons. With respect to the proposition before the House, he must say with his noble friend, that the best plan was to agitate it in the House itself. Sir Robert Inglis felt surprised at what had fallen from the hon. and learned member for Dublin, but he was still more surprised at the speech that had been delivered by the hon. and learned Judge who had just sat down. His hon. and learned friend had talked of sweeping away the folly and ignorance of past ages. To He cause change in itself was not beneficial liberty to interfere with any measure | agreed with him in religious opinions, took touching the temporalities of the Church. By that opinion he was prepared to stand or fall. The hon. and learned member for Dublin might interfere where he had the power, but in that House he at once and distinctly told the hon. and learned Member, that he was bound by the oath he had taken not to interfere with the Church. He was a Member of that House when the measure was passed under which the Roman Catholics were enabled to sit in Parliament; and he would tell the hon. and learned Member, -he was bound to tell him,-if the animus imponentis of the Parliament which passed the Relief Bill were to be regarded, that the hon. and learned Member was entirely precluded from interfering with the temporalities of the Church, after the oath he had taken. The words were:I do solemnly swear, that I will preserve, to the utmost of my power the settle 'ment of property within this realm, as 'established by law:-And I do hereby disclaim, disavow, and solemnly abjure, 'any intention to subvert the present 'Church Establishment, as settled by law 'within this realm:—And I do solemnly swear, that I never will exercise any privilege which I am, or may become, entitled to, to disturb or weaken the Protestant re'ligion, or Protestant Government, in the United Kingdom.' [Mr. O'Connell Hear! hear!] If the hon. and learned Member who was cheering him said, that the meaning of that oath was, that he would support, or rather would not subvert, anything which might be by law hereafter established, (he, himself, not concurring in such measure so as to change anything which now is) he did not, so far, deny that the hon. and learned Member was right. He did not require him to do more than support what he found established by law; but he did hold the hon. and learned Member bound, by the terms of his oath, not to concur in any measure which had for its object the effecting of any change in property which was established by law when he took that oath. The hon. and learned Gentleman asked, what was meant by a Protestant Government? Grieving, as he should never cease to grieve, at the measure which had placed the hon. and learned Member in that House, he felt, that so long as the hon. and learned Member and those who -as they were bound to take-that oath, he regarded it, pro tanto, as a security for his Church. So long as the hon. and learned Member did that, and so long as such a protection as the Coronation Oath was afforded to the Protestant Establishment of the country,-so long as the House claimed that oath to guard the National Church,-his answer would be, that the present was a Protestant Government-that the King was essentially Protestant. He would not confine himself to the Executive; but the King had stated, that he would maintain the Protestant religion, and upon that he would rely, and enter his strongest protest upon what had been advanced to the contrary in the House that evening. It had been said, that, after so much had been conceded, and after Catholics had been allowed to take their seats in that House, that it was unnecessary to retain the present oaths. He, however, would reply, that, granting that one security had been removed, that was no reason why another should be removed. The hon. and learned Gentleman asked, why abjure any princes of the House of Stuart? The answer was so obvious, that it could not have escaped the hon. and learned Gentleman. It was this: they did not abjure allegiance to any living prince of that House (since there was no prince living to claim it), but they denied the right of the Stuarts, at any time since the Revolution, to have reigned in England. If they did not so renounce the legal rights of the descendants of James 2nd, they should virtually give their sanction to their claims respectively, and might allow a question to be raised in respect to their acts in the intermediate time. By the oath they declared, not merely that those princes had no right to the Throne of England, but they refused to recognise any transfer of property, any grant of any rights by them, and, generally, any of the acts of those who claimed this Throne since the Revolution. With respect to the reference which the hon. and learned Gentleman made to the House of Lords in the first Parliament of Queen Eliza. beth, he was rather surprised that the hon. and learned Gentleman could have asserted that the majority were Roman Catholics; for there were not more than twenty lay Peers sitting in the House of Dr. Lushington explained: He never intended to recommend the abolition of oaths of all descriptions. He merely meant to protest against the unnecessary administration of oaths in that House, and in the country, the practice of which tended to destroy their effect when administered in Courts of Justice. Lords at that time, above the number of careless expression. In conclusion, he Bishops. There was one part of the must state, that he should vote with the speech of the hon. and learned Gentle- noble Lord, and give his strenuous oppoman which he would venture to say, sur-sition to the Motion of the hon. and prised every individual in the House, learned member for Dublin. whether he were Roman Catholic or Protestant. The hon. and learned Gentleman asked what was the privilege of sitting in Parliament? Was it for that which the hon. and learned Gentleman now regarded as no privilege, which he repudiated and trampled under his feet in scorn, was it for that, that those who felt deeply upon the subject in opposition to the hon. and learned Gentleman, acceded to his claims, and the claims of those who thought with him? and was the hon. and learned Gentleman now to turn round upon the House and say, that, in so doing, they only conceded that which was a proper subject for his scorn, and fit matter for his contempt? Was that the return which the hon. and learned Gentleman made to those who, at the sacrifice of their own feelings, consented to admit him into the House? The argument of the hon. and learned Gentleman was virtually directed against all oaths. To that arguiment he gave a more decided negative than was given to it by the noble Lord; believing, as he did, that, without oathswithout a solemn appeal to God-as the history of past times fully proved, there could be no stability or security for any system of society. He could not refrain from saying here, that he felt considerable surprise at one of the statements of the learned Judge. The hon. and learned Judge opposite said, that he regretted that the practice of oath-taking prevailed to an iniquitous extent in England; and that, in many instances, oaths were but mere matters of form; and the persons who took them had no regard to the truth of what they swore. Coming, as these observations did, from his hon. and learned friend, they might almost be considered as coming from the judgment seat. These remarks had given him great pain. Was his hon. and learned friend prepared to get rid of all oaths in the country? Was he prepared to look forward to a state of society in which the sanction of an oath was not considered binding? The declaration that had been made by his hon. and learned friend had nothing directly to do with the subject before the House. He, therefore, hoped that it was merely a Mr. Secretary Stanley concurred entirely in the opinion just laid down by his hon. and learned friend (Dr. Lushington); and was glad that his hon. and learned friend had risen to give an explanation. He agreed that, in the multitude and unnecessary multiplication of oaths, there was the greatest danger that a strict observance of those oaths would not be regarded, by which means the strong and general impression as to the security of the obligation of an oath would be diminished. He felt bound to say, however, that he certainly thought that one observation of his hon. and learned friend justified the impression, that he was against the administration of oaths altogether. His hon. and learned friend said, that the doctrines which he had that night advanced would not have been tolerated in an unreformed House of Commons. He wished that some of the doctrines which had been laid down by his hon. and learned friend might never be tolerated or supported in any House of Commons. He (Mr. Stanley) had ever given his cordial and earnest assent to the measures of relief to the Catholics and the Dissenters, which he considered of the greatest importance. He had supported two measures, to which, ever since he had taken part in political transactions, he had considered himself bound and pledged, not by previously-declared opinions; but he felt himself bound by the dictates of his own feelings, and by the convictions of his mind, to get rid of all impositions and checks on the civil rights of those who dissented from the doctrines of the Church of England. Another great measure, to which he considered himself pledged, was one by which the people of England would have the power of checking and influencing the proceedings of the House of Commons. He rejoiced that measures for the attainment of these great objects had received the sanction of the Legislature and by supporting them he did not consider that he was bound to give up any security to the Established Church of England. Nor did he believe for one moment that, by doing so, the Members of that House were abjuring the bond to support the Protestant Government of the country, on the one hand, or binding themselves to be the slaves of popular caprice on the other. His hon. and learned friend behind him said, that the last five years had seen a wonderful advance in popular feeling upon this subject; and, indeed, it might be his (Mr. Stanley's) misfortune to be left behind by the popular feeling, in consequence of entertaining such opinions as he had then expressed; but he would only observe that, from the first time he had supported the claims of the Roman Catholics to sit in Parliament, he had not changed his political creed, nor his political principles. His views ever were to support the established religion of the Church of England-but at the same time to remove all those restrictions which might be deemed offensive to the feelings or consciences of those dissenting from the Church, and, still more, all restrictions which had been imposed on the civil rights of every class of his Majesty's subjects. Those opinions he had hitherto held, and those opinions he should continue to hold notwithstanding he might be passed, by bolder statesmen and left far behind by his hon. and learned friend, who laid it down as a maxim that he was the wisest statesman who was the boldest statesman; and by the latter expression his hon. and learned friend did not mean he who faithfully and cautiously watched over the best interests of the country and relied upon the sound and strong sense of the people of England; but he was the bold statesman, and therefore, the wiser statesman, who put himself at the head of every show of political agitation and excitement, and taking the lead in every clamour, with a view to quiet public opinion, and, above all, to consider that nothing had been done whilst anything remained to be gained. Such was the bold and therefore wise statesman of his hon. and learned friend. He admitted that a statesman pursuing such a course would be a bold statesman, but he must take the liberty of doubting his wisdom. His hon. and learned friend said, he would run before the popular voice. He would like to know how long his hon. and learned friend would be able to keep a head of it with anything like reason, and with satisfaction to him. Until some wiser politician arose-until some one entertaining more extreme opinions was found-until some man arose who was able to keep himself at the head of the political excitement of the day. Thus, then, the wisest statesman would continue his influence, and would endeavour to lead the public with him. His hon. and learned friend said, that he who went the farthest in yielding to the popular voice pursued the safest course. He (Mr. Stanley) had perfect reliance on the good sense of the people of England; he had confidence in the intelligence and integrity of the country; and it was his firm conviction, that as much public confidence was to be obtained and maintained by opposing steadily and consistently the political clamour of the day, as by following or yielding to public excitement and agitation. He therefore said, that he was the wisest statesman who followed, not the bold course, as it had been called, but who looked to the reflecting reason and the sound sense of the country, not to be influenced by idle clamour, but prepared to meet plausible objections on the one hand and disaffection on the other, but prepared to abide by and defend those opinions and doctrines he sincerely entertained. And not only would such a man be the wisest statesman, but also the most popular statesman in the only sense that popularity was worth obtaining. His hon. friend opposite (Sir R. Inglis) went too far on the other side of the question. His hon. friend was for supporting quiet and mild measures, and he objected to yielding at all to popular or political feelings. There was no one who could entertain a higher regard than he did for his hon. friend, from whom he so often differed on political questions. He was well aware of the mildness and quietness of his hon. friend's disposition, both in public and private, and he knew no one for whom he entertained greater respect; but if there was any point in his character with which he found fault, it was that of his toleration of error for the sake of quiet. It was his firm conviction that a statesman, when satisfied of the truth and justice of a political course, should follow it out firmly, sincerely, and conscientiously-that he should follow out those principles of the truth of which he was convinced, without | ings, the opinions, and the affections of regard to conflicting circumstances, which the great body of the people of England. might for a time debar his progress in the It could not now be supposed that the course he was pursuing, and without re- people of England were indifferent to the gard to the misrepresentations to which question, aye or no; but still he must say he might be exposed. With respect to he regretted exceedingly that such a the importance of upholding the sanctity question had been introduced, believing of an oath, no one could entertain stronger as he did, that it was calculated to raise a opinions than himself. He did not al- cry which once raised, must convulse the lude to taking an oath without having any country from one end to the other. He regard to words, or to the obligation im- did not know why the hon. Members opposed, and when the terms of the oath were posite should object to his stating his demere sound without sense, but to a sacred liberate opinion, that if any sound reason and solemn obligation. He had had some were furnished for such a cry the whole experience as to the manner in which country would rise up en masse upon the oaths were occasionally administered. subject. It was the bounden duty of a Indeed no man could have been present wise and prudent Government to suppress at a contested election without having the agitation of all questions that might seen many instances of the gross violation lead to raise up religious differences of oaths. On that point he would men- among the people, that could in any way tion to the House a circumstance that oc- excite Protestant jealousy, or that was at curred to himself some years ago. He was all calculated to cause disunion between appointed one of the Commissioners to Protestants and Roman Catholics, whom see that the oath on registering Roman he desired to see placed upon an equal Catholic freeholders was properly ad- and proper footing. He himself had the ministered, and that perjury was not com- honour of representing a large county in mitted. At that time twelve men came this country, and he believed that at least up to be registered; they were all ready one-half the landed property of that counto swear that they had all the same home, try was at the present moment in the posthat they were of the same profession, session of persons of the Roman Catholic resided in the same house, in the same persuasion. He knew that every Roman street, and claimed the right of voting on Catholic in that county supported him at the same ground. He need not say, that the last election; and he was not the least he saw such a proceeding with horror and afraid of losing the support of that large, surprise; and it had, more than anything opulent, and respectable body of voters on else, confirmed him in the opinion that it any future occasion by strenuously upholdwas the duty of the Legislature to get riding the Protestant religion and the Proof all unnecessary oaths. With respect testant Government of this country. He to the oaths which it had been proposed stated, without the least desire to give that night to abolish, he would in the first offence to any party, without being inplace observe, that he did take the same fluenced by religious feelings for he did view of them as his hon. and learned not consider this to be a religious question friend, who said, that he sacrificed his but rather a question of political prudence, conscientious opinions and feelings when that it was his fixed and unalterable dehe assented to their being introduced into termination to support the Protestant Estathe Catholic Relief Bill. Now he regarded blishment both in Church and State, and those oaths as concessions made to those to resist any attempt that might be made who felt more strongly than he did on the to endanger it, no matter whether by subject. He recollected that his right Roman Catholics, or by any other class hon. friend the present Governor of Ceylon, or denomination of persons. As far as the proposed in the Committee on the Roman Roman Catholics residing in the county Catholic Relief Bill, that Catholics should he had the honour to represent were conbe prevented voting in any matters con- cerned, he could assure the House that no nected with the established religion of the intention or desire had ever been manicountry. That proposition was rejected fested on their part that could lead to an by the House; and it was not considered inference that they were hostile to the that there was any danger in allowing Protestant religion being the religion of Roman Catholics to vote in any matters, the State. On the contrary, they had supported as the Church was by the feel- I never shown the least disposition to shrink |