Page images

offered. The clergy of Ireland had already | fit for the catholics to receive. The question stated, that they could not, without incur was now, whether they were to adopt in ring the heavy guilt of schism, accede to Ireland a perfectly new system, and abanany proposition to diminish the influence of don the system on which it had been the church. But the diminution of foreign | governed since 1793, and to substitute in its influence in the appointment of prelates, place an equality of political privileges was pro tanto, a dimunition of the pope's | between the catholics and protestants. It authority, and must be viewed by the was impossible to come to a proper decicatholics in the light of schism. Was any sion of this question, without reference to one then ready to affirm that the pope was the situation of the country to which their willing to accede to domestic Domination : .ebactments were to apply. It had been It was stated that Mr. Hayes had ad- said the measure must be productive of good dressed a letter from Rome to this coun. io Ireland, because it had been productive of try, on the 26th of September, 1816, on good in Hungary-because they had estahthe subject of domestic nomination; and, lished 'this equality themselves in Canada. As that letter was the only document on And he heard his right honourable friend the subject with which he was acquaint. (Mr. Canning) state, that in a department ed, he wished to call the attention of the of France the most perfect equality subhouse to it. That gentlemall stated, that sisted between the catholics and protestants among other questions he asked cardinal with respect to political privileges. If Litta, whether domestic nomination would | Ireland was in the same situation with be acceded to by the pope ? The answer these states, or if it was like the Gironde, of cardinal Litta was very fair. “Finally, ) a small department under a catholic estaas to what is next stated touching domestic blishment, and where the protestant popunomination, I do not uuderstand what that lation was small, the case would be differ term is meant to signify." In the document ent; but he denied tbat because political which had come to his knowledge, it did not equality had succeeded there it would appear that that definition was ever given, necessarily succeed in Ireland. They and consequently whether or not, the point must consider the circumstances of the was conceded by the pope. Hitherto he country to which the measure applied. - In had been addressing himself to those who Ireland a vast majority of the population thought there was now a prospect of set professed a religion which was not the tling this question. It was with the deepest favoured religion of the state the religion regret, be confessed that he was not in had once been establihed which was not cluded in that number. : He might have | the favoured religion, and the temporalities adopted bis opinions on the subject at first, were now attached to another religion, without much'examigation, and in case of which was that of the small minority-withdoubt, he might think the presumption was 1 in the last 20 years it had had a separate in favour of the existing order of things; but legislature, and it was still separated by a from the situation which he had for some | difference in its judicial institutions--it was time held in the Irish government, he should separated too, from this island by nature. have considered himself culpable in no slight | The- religion of the minority was estadegree, had he not bestowed much atten blished by the inviolable contract which tion to the examination of a question in held the two countries together with a which Ireland was so deeply concerned: country so situated they might adopt four and had he seeo reason to change his opi- different systems. They might proscribe nions, he hoped he should have had madli. the religion of the majority, and pass laws dess enough to avow that change. But he for the purpose of destroying that religion. avowed that he had not changed them. He That was the penal system which they had did not wish to revive animosities--neither abandoned. They might establish the did he wish to impute any doctrines to the catholic religion, and equality of political catholics which they were willing to disa privileges--but that they could not do, be claim ; but he would ask, what would be cause, by an inviolable contract, the estathe operation of the catholic doctrines, in a blishmeot of the protestant religion was to country situated like Ireland, and sapposing be upheld. They might tolerate the ca the catholics actuated by the same motives tholic religion, but exclude them from as other men, and by the principles of their political power, as was the case at present religion? He recollected, that, in the case or they might open to them every politiof the bill formerly brought in, when a cal and military situation, but exclude clause for excluding catholics from parlia thein from the government, and from the ment was carried, a right honourable gentle office of lord chancellor. · It had been mao opposite abandoned the bill altogether, said, having already admitted the catholics stating, that without allowing catholics to to the elective franchise, it was in the sit in that house, the boon was one which nature of things that they could not be con: it was unwortby for them to grant, and un: tented witbout obtaining still more. But


that argoment applied with greater force only a few Catholics would have seats against the new system, than the system at in parliainent; and that their efforts on present established. He admitted the that account need not be dreaded. Let Trierous nature of any exclusion, but the them be limited if it were just and politic. question was whether such exclusion was but not because their influence would be justified by an adequate secessity. When trifting or insignificaot. It was comended it was proposed to concede thé franchise on the other side that the measure was to the catholics, there was not the slightest necessary for the purpose of removing anointimation of this argument, that it was malies; but if a bill like that of 1813 were fax possible the catholics could rest satisfied |

e inconsistencies and anomalies without being also admitted into the re, would be rendered inore quinerous, instead preseotation; but Mr. Burke drew a well. of being diminished. He denied ihe asserfounded distinction between the one and tion contained in the bill of 1818, that it the other; he said, that, according to the was possible to cominunicite to catholics British Constitution, a franchise belonged the same interest in maintaining the constito a mao as a subject; but that an office tution: nature forbade it: they must al* like that of a representative appertained ways have a distinct interest, directly oppo. to him as a member of the state. It was site to the protestant religion, inviolably also to be observed, that the elective fran- established at the revolution. The oath chise in Ireland was taken away by what wbich catholics were to take on entering is called a penal law, and not by the the house, denying the interference of the fevolution of 1688, and though it might be pope, it had been truly observed, was politic to allow the elective franchise, it more like a bill of indictment against them might be most impolitie do concede the for their previous conduct, or a sort of teprescotative privilege. Supposing, how- confession of early crimes ; if it were fit over, that the system recommended were that they should be admitted at all withia girca to Ireland, it was acting unfairly by the walls, how could it be shown that such the executive braneta of the legislature, to an oath ought to be administered? The trust so much to the caprice or mistakes of principle of the bill was religious and the lord lieutenant. in Ireland there were political equality : yet in carrying this two hierarchies, castrolic and protestant; } principle into effect, it excluded catbolics and it was known that the clergy of the from the offices of lord lieutenant and lord former exercised uucontrolled inttuence chancellor; so that the measure directly over the great ipass of the people. By the contradicted the principle on which it was bill of 1813, (and it was fair to argue that founded. Thas the principle being abana the new measure would be very different, doned, it came merely to a question of it would be seen that while nothiøg was degree, whether catholics should he done fur the benefit of the clergy, most excluded froin two or from twenty important political privileges were to be offices ? The advocates for the meagiven to the aristocraeyx what then would sure supported it, because they said be the inevitable consequences. Would that this montifying exclusion from office not the house, if it agreed to this measure, was a chain round the necks of the cathobe imperiously required to impose some lies, and while a link of it remained, that ecstrictions upon those who dictated the it would still be galling. But what did opinions of the great propostion of the they do in their bill? listead of remov population of Ireland. This seemed to ing this chain entirely, they only took provc decisively that the proposed innova- away a Quinber of its links ; still leaving a tion would not tead at all to better the part of it, the two offices he bad nained, toadition of the lower orders, or to render as a remnant and token of their subjection. them less discontented. He did not for a It might even be argued, that this exclu. moment impute to the aristocraey of kre- sion from two of the highest situations of lagd either disloyalty or disaffection; buttbe state, was even more invidious thao if they were sincere professurs of the the exclusion from all; and where then Roman catholic faith; if they possessed the would be the barinony and eonfidence so feelings and passions that actuated other anxiously desired by all parties? The men, they must be paturally desirous to same objection of anomaly applied to the see that religion re-established in the end provision, that the servants of the crown pire, It would be recollected also, that might be catholics, but that the throne the reformation in Ireland was not produc- itself could only be filled by a protestant ed as in England, by the growing hatred sovereigns. It seemed even more rational of the people to the artifices and machina to reader the throne tepable by a catholic, tions of the priests; and this circumstance than to place them in situations of such formed an additional reason for refusing | high, trust, to misuse the indvence they the boon DÓW demanded. It was no must unavoidably enjoy. One argumenty. doswer to these objections to reply, that apt hitherto adverted to, appeared cu

treinely strong, England, a protestant state, called for. He could not, however, give was firinly united to 'Scotland, where the a silent vote on this important question, presbyterian persnasion was the religion of without declaring what he had uniformly The cuuntry, Could it be shown that hap: thought of it; and he was more anxious to, pines, had not been promoted by the union, do this after the speech of most consum notwithstanding this discordance; and male ability, of the right honourable gen. what was to interfere with the harmony tleman, which appeared to comprise every between protestants and catholics? He argument on that side of the question, in apologized to the house for detaining it at the strongest light, and in the most luminous so inuch length, but before be resumed his point of view, in which the sabject was seal, he enirealed those who were disposed capable of being treated. The result, in favour the motion to pause before they | however, of his reasonings appeared to took the first step towards such an altera- be only this, that we were in a state of tivo so radical and important. It was re- | extreme delicacy. The practical question marked by tlume, that when the spirit of for the house to decide was this whether, religion united with the spirit of party, it by going as far as we could consistently go, produced effects less correspondent to their we could purchase tbe removal of those known causes thao were to be noticed inconveniences which now existed, without under any other circuinstances. This, hazard to our establishment? If he which was so observable in the reigns of Thought that any danger were introduced, Jaines and bis successor, while it consti forwhich actual securities were not provid. ruted an apology for such statesmen as had ed, he should agree with the right honontadopted a particular live of conduct, from able gentleman, that we ought to pause which the bappy consequences they had where we are ; but, being in his conscience reasonably expected did not result, at the satisfied, that to the extent now proposed same time cast a grievous responsibility we mignt go safely, he should certainly upon those who, presiding over a long seto give his support to this proceeding. ** tled 'forin of government, under which, by The bill of 1913 was rejected on the first the blessing of God, internal happiness point-namely, the admission of catholics aud external glory were enjoyed, were to parliament: but he believed that the disposed to interfere and to make innova members of that body might be safely ad tions in inatters of such difficulty and deli mitted, and he hoped as soon as opportunity cacy as those where religion and policy offered, that they should see among them. were involved. The presuinption was, professors of the roman çatbolic religioa. therefore, against every projected altera Of those who must come among them as re: tion, and in favour of the established order presentatives of the people there would be of things, which he earnestly hoped the persons of property; and what evil could house would preserve unwarped by the result from the admission into that house of visionary schemes of theoretical politicians. such persons, who were only excluded by

Lord Castlereagh rose to explain, but the that faith which none of us called on them cheers which followed the speech of the to forego ? There might be persons of anoright hovourable gentleman who had just sat ther character, who now seek to inflame dowo, rendered it impossible for us(says the the passions of the people merely for the reporter of the Courier) to recollect what mişchief they could do; but to open the door the noble lord said,

of the house of commons would be to meSir Henry Parnell then rose, but the lify those mischiefs. If there be among continuance of the cheers, and cries of ques the catholica talents and abilities, why tion, prevented us froin hearing him. should we deprive ourselves of such splendid

General Mathew rose, and, as soon as advantages? The true cxtination of the order was restored, he observed, that he mischiefs which the exercise of such acfelt himself more particularly called quirements was now calculated to produce, upon to present himself to the house in would be found in their admission to that consequence of the cheers which had ful house: there they would be met by equal Jowed the question of the right honourable ability, and the friends of the constitution gentleman, whether any person there was would be able to cope with them. If the authorized by the pope io say, that bis fact really was (from what causes arising boliness would consent to domestic noini. | he would not discuss that we had a perpepation? He (General M.) did not inean to tual spring of contention in Ireland, there state, that he was directly authorized by was every probability that the discontent the pope to say this; but he had every reas would be allayed, by consenting to do son to believe that there was a document whatever he could to satify their reasongin this country to that effect. :

ble claims. He was not deterred by the Mr. CANXING said, it wa. not his inten. apprehension that we could not do all we tion to detain the house many minutes from must do what we could, pot with a view to that vote wbicb was so loudly and generally theoretical perfection, but to practical im

provement. He knew not how we were domestic nomination. I positively deny before band to obtain the assarance, that tbat the sense of the catholics is such as to whatever we might do would be satisfacto: prevent them from submitting. What is tily' received; and as to expecting com for the good of the catholic, is for the good plete satisfaction, tell not him what the of the whole. It is your duty to save the Catholics would accept; for whether it were country, and not to accommodate any pare with more or less of gratitude, parliament ticular set of men. Au honourable genwould grant the boon with its own condi tleman, who, I regret, was not more at tions, and it was not for any isolated per tended to, observed in the course of his sons to object to it. We ought not to be speech, that this was a protestant constie deterred, from a feeling of what might be tution.--He may baptise the constitution approved by a part of the people, which, if he will, but originally it was catholic if it were good at all, was good for the that is, it was founded by catholics,- All whole. Whether the roman catholic pre- the great laws to which the people owe lates of Ireland would be nominated in one their liberty were the work of catholics, way or other, could not be a matter of At tbe time of the revolution our ancesprevious negociation. He confessed, that tors contented themselves with making if he thought the great point of conciliation a declaration of right, because they could ought to be accomplished, he cared not on not go farther than the catholics naa gone, which side the advance began; whether it The bill of rights was a declaratory law; were the submission of the catholics to it was declaratory of the privileges obtain parliament in the first instance, or, the

ed by our catholic ancestors. Those who benevolence of parliament which excited deny that the catholics have a rigbt to de. the gratitude of the catholics: he cared not mand emancipation, found their arguments from what point the circle began to be on inference. But you cannot take away drawn. 'Satisfied he was that, by adopting prerogative by inference-you cannot take the present proposition, much would be away privilege by juference. But there done to quiet the irritation of the people is this great error in their argument~they of Ireland, and to take away from those found their inference on a misstatement of who wished to do mischief, the means of façts. First, they say, that the catholics doing it. It was in this view, therefore, are liable to pains and penalties, which do that he was anxious they should go intó pot existand from this they draw their this committee. He was pot, he repeated, | inference. An honourable member, on the deterred by the objection that there might second bench, was pleased to say, toal, a be differences of opinion. True it was, the tiine of the revolution, the exclusion that in 1813, when the matter failed, it! of the catholics was a fundamental princiwas received with much discontent: but ple of the constitution. At the time a it was only lost by a majority of 4, in danger threatened the religion of the coun. one of the fullest houses ever remembered. | try- but still you will obserye, that the Ne had then given way on a single point ; disabilities which the caibolics complained but he was not quite sure, after the expe of, and which were now increased, did not rience of that failure, that if he could not take place till after the revolution. Some obtain all, it would be wise on another of them were enacted in the latter part of occasion, to throw away all. But if this William's reign, and others took place in failure had produced diseontent, it had

the reigo of Anne. Now, what sort of an been also received with approbation; and

experiment was this? It was an experiwhere was it received with discontent, and ment to uphold one religion by inflicting where with approbation With appro paius and penalties on the professors of bation at Rome, and discontent in Ireland.

another. But, if you look a little farther, At Rome it was conceived as having pass

you will find that the oath afterwards ad ed; io Treland i: was thought to have

ministered, was not a penal oath against the failed. The continuance of his belief was, religion of the catholics-but an oath im. that, in spite of the impossibility of arrive posed on such persoas as were then suping at perfection, it was their duty to go as | posed to obey the leinporal power of the far as they could ; and, therefore, he hope pope. And. In order to shew that I do ed the house would go into a committee, not mistate the fact, I will read to you the without being deterred by the apprehension

preamble of the act of parliament, in of not being able to devise any thing more

which the principle is laid down (The

right honourable gentleman here read the Mr. Grattan then rose to reply-- preamble of an act of queen Anne, which, “Sir, with respect to the difficulty that is aster reciting an act of William III, set supposed to arise froid going unprepared

forth, that the aforesaid act was too severe into the committee, I shall only observe, against persons professing the catholic rethat you can commaud your own securi: ligion; and then went on to state, that, to ties--you can command the security of admit the temporal superiority or power of


the pope, or see of Rome, in Great Bri- | serve, that it was not the desire of parliatain, Scotland, and Ireland, was contrary ment' to aonex fundamental principles to to the law of the lạod, be it therefore an oath connected even with the religion enacted, that a certain oath be taken by of the state. There is a motion to be persons of the catholic persuasion.) The found on the journals of the lords, which parliament (continued the right honourable proves this. It was moved, that the house gentleman) gave its opinion on the nature should resolve itself into a comınittee, in of this oath, They said, that this oath was order to declare a certain oath fundamental, not intended to militate against the catho which disqualified every person who did Įic religion, but against the temporal power | not take the sacrament, according to the of the pope. They declared that it was church of England, from sitting in parliaan abstract act, and they substituted in its ment. On this motion, the question was place the path of allegiance. Here is the put, and it was rejected by a great majoopinion of your own parliament in 1793, rity. Here you have the opinion of the ou the nature of the oath-and their ex- lords, as you before had the declaration of press declaration, that the oath of the ca your own house of parliament, which tholics was not intended as a fundamental | shews us, that these laws, with respect to path, but was only meant to operate against | religion, are not fundamental, but are subthose who paid obedience to the temporal ject to revision. From all that had beeg power of the pope that it was, in fact, a urged, I must infer and conclude that dogma--and that the oath of allegiance | the protestants have no exclusive right had been inserted in its place. This is the laid down that they have ao exclu. opinion of your own parliament against | siye title to the constitution. Theo the fundamentality of your oath-which | comes another question what right gentlemen call an unalterable law, and an have the protestants to exclude the catho, essential part of our revolution. I bave lics ! 'I agree, that, with respect to the the authority of the parliainent of Ireland right of sitting in parliament, circumstances - I have the authority of the parliament of may disqualify them ; but I say they have England-to re-affirm the verity of what I la right, not to this or ihat office, but a right have said. The 4th article of the union | to equality of law. A law that is limited witb ireland recognised the same principle. must be limited for some reasons. It is for It says, And that every one of the lords the legislature to discover those reasons ; of parliament of the united kingdom, and and, if they are vicious or arbitrary, the that every member of the house of com- legislature are guilty of an act of injustice mops in succeeding parliaments of the if they proceed on them. Because, let us united kingdom, shall use and take, and observe, it is not parliament that gives ca.. make and subscribe the said oath.' There pacity ; it is the common law that gives was, first, a declaration of the fundamen- capacity--and it is the province of parlia'tality of the oath-and here is a provisionment, when vecessary, to limit it. That made by the parliament of Great Britaia necessity can only be founded on a good aod Ireland for doing it away. What, reason. Now I say religion is not a good then, do those persons do, who contend for reason for limiting capacity. Religion is a the fundamentality of this oath ? Here, moral right. As far as it is a sentiment of say they, is an opening for you to come to | the mind -as far as it is the feeling of the the British parliament, to provide for an individual-the parliament cannot interferc alteration of the exclusive oath-and now, with it. It is a human legislature inter. baving annulled the Irish parliament, we fering between God and his creatures ! tell you, that the exclusion still remains, Religion, therefore, is not a political right, and that you must 'not interpret it accord though it may be connected with some coon ing to tbe act of union-the exclusion is siderations of a political nature. If we a final law of the land. Parliament said look to the catholic religion, as connected the same thing with respect to the Scotch with the pope, it will at once be conceded, upion—and those who voted for the funda that that circumstance will not justify the mentality of this oath, declare; that, if you obedience of a subject to a foreign power hold out a hope to a set of men, and tell | and therefore, the Veto was devised to thein, persons of your religion shall be meet that evil, and to prevent it. Here, permitted to political power, you may, at then, that danger ceases. Again, we prof. á future period, when you have gained fer you domestic nomination. Both the what you wanted, turn round and say, Veto and domestic nomination are laid at

We find exclusion to be a fundamental | your feet-so that the argument founded law of the land, and, therefore, you shall on the necessity of checking foreign inbe deprived of certain privileges.' This fluence is put an end to. For, if you have was not the intention of the legislature. not that check now, it is your own faultParliament was incapable of breaking a and you reject ad ample security for your provision solcmnly made. You may ob- establishment io church and state, in order

« PreviousContinue »