your opinion of the conduct of government, in this instance?— No; but when I find that my Lord O'Neill is at the head of the Post-office, and is also notoriously at the head of the Orange party, I presume that his opinions have not only been communicated to those who act in inferior departments, but if he has any patronage, of course he exercises it in favour of persons who sympathize in politics with himself.

If you found that the majority of persons employed in the Post-office were Roman Catholics, what would be your inference ?-My inference certainly would not be, that they had been appointed in consequence of being Roman Catholics; and I should not be able to account for the circumstances, unless they were persons eminently well qualified, who had been recommended, on the ground of that qualification, by an excellent officer, Sir Edward Lees.

In the case of Protestants, you would conceive they had been appointed in consequence of their religion?-I think it would assist their appointment. If I were opposed to the Catholic claims, and anxious to support the system of Ascendency, I should consider the most efficient mode of supporting that system would be, to exclude Catholics from even inferior situations, and thus deprive them of the influence which those situations would confer. By holding such employments, Roman Catholics would obtain another step on the ladder. The greater the influence of the Catholic body, the more difficult it must be to resist their claims to emancipation. It is with a view to ulterior objects, that they are excluded from minor offices. It is in order to diminish the weight and consequence of the whole body of Catholics, and sustain the general system of Ascendency, that they are denied their due participation in the places of emolument, to which they are admissible by law. This is the result of the general spirit of the penal code, which, independantly of its evils upon society, works much individual wrong.

If it should appear that the majority were Roman Catholics, why would not you attribute that circumstance to favour to the Roman Catholics, as you state, that if the majority were Protestants, you would attribute it to favour and partiality to them? -Because there is reason for the one, and not for the other.

You stated, that you conceive appointments ought to be made according to the proportion of the population?—I do.

Do you think that principle has application to the bar?-I think government ought to take it into consideration. I know that the appointment of Mr. Farrell has been a most popular measure; I know that it gave great satisfaction to the people, and I am sure it would be conducive to the purposes of tran

quillity, if the lower orders saw persons of their own religion intrusted with office and authority.

Do you mean to say, that founding the principle of selection on the proportion of numbers, a less qualified person ought to be appointed to any situation, merely on account of that supposed proportion between the numbers?—I do not; but I know, and it is the opinion of the persons highest at the bar, that Roman Catholics are fully as well qualified as Protestants.

Then you mean to infer, that, cæteris paribus, the claims of merit, regard ought to be paid to numbers?-Certainly; with a view to the conciliation of the people, it is more important to conciliate the majority of the people who are Catholic, than to gratify the cupidity of the majority of the bar, who are at present Protestant. Besides, Roman Catholics being excluded from the higher offices, the government ought, in justice, to make up for that exclusion by appointing them to the inferior.

You state, that the proportion of Protestants to Catholics, at the bar, is about five to one?-It was recently so; but that proportion is becoming essentially different. The Roman Catholic bar are rapidly increasing, and they will, in my opinion, increase in a greater proportion than the comparative property of Protestants and Catholics would lead one to suppose. A Roman Catholic who acquires money in trade, makes his son a barrister. It is a feather in his cap to have a counsellor in the family. The bar in Ireland enjoys more station than in this country; and to enrol his son in this class, who, from the absence of persons of real rank, enjoy an artificial importance, has become an object of ambition. There are more Roman Catholics in trade than Protestants, and, in consequence, the number of Roman Catholics sent to the bar from this motive, must exceed the number of Protestants. Besides, the Protestant church enables its members to provide for their families, by making parsons of their sons. The Catholic is deprived of this source of provision, and sends his sons to the bar. I recollect, that about two years ago, eight gentlemen were called, in the same term, to the bar: four of them were Protestants, and four were Catholics.

Previous to four years ago, the proportion of Protestants to Roman Catholics was considerably greater?-Yes.

The proportion of Roman Catholic barristers you think is augmenting?-Yes, rapidly; and in the course of a few years, the number of Catholics and Protestants, I think, will be nearly the same.

At present they are five to one, and before a late period, the proportion of Protestants was greater?-Yes: I shall mention a reason why the number of Protestant barristers should, as yet, so

much exceed that of Catholics; Protestants come to the bar, not only with a view to rise in their profession by the exercise of their talents, but because the expectation of patronage allures them to a profession to which so many places are annexed.

Do you think it possible that any previous government, finding the proportion of Protestant barristers to Roman Catholics, supposing their acquirements to be equal, could have gone upon the principle of appointing Catholic barristers in the proportion of the Roman Catholic population to the Protestant ?—Not, certainly, in the same proportion; but I think that Catholic barristers ought not to have been excluded, and regard ought to have been had to the feelings of the great body of the people, which would have been conciliated by their nomination of Roman Catholics.

You stated, that the Roman Catholics bear a great disproportion to those of the Reformed Church, in the Police in Ireland? -I believe that appears from the Parliamentary return.

Did you ever hear that the Roman Catholics had a disinclination to serve in the police in Ireland ?—I never did; on the contrary, I am sure they have no objection.

Did you never hear that they looked upon the police as the realization of some old prophecy about a black militia which was to arise, at this period, and to kill all the Roman Catholics ?—I never heard any such thing.

Have you turned in your mind the question of the qualification at present required for a Roman Catholic freeholder ?—I have not given it a great deal of attention; but this I will say, that if it was put to the Roman Catholic body whether they would accept of Roman Catholic emancipation upon the indispensable terms of raising the qualification of the freeholders, Catholic emancipation is a matter of such paramount moment, that the people would be ready, and more than ready, that they would be most anxious, to accept of emancipation even upon such conditions; and I further think, that so far from its being an injury, it would be a benefit to the lower orders, that the quali fication should be raised, and that the mass of the peasantry should not be invested every five or six years with a mere resemblance of political authority, which does not naturally belong to them, and which is quite unreal.

Do you think it would be in any respect practicable to effect an alteration in the qualification of the freeholder, unless accompanied with the measure to which you have already alluded?I think Catholic emancipation should be made the precursor of such a measure; I am convinced that if such a measure was attempted without Catholic emancipation, it would only tend to produce deeper bitterness of feeling than now exists.

t

Are you aware of the proportion of Roman Catholics and Protestants in the Excise?—I am not.

Are you not aware that the gaugers in the excise are generally Roman Catholics?-I am not.

What is your opinion respecting making a government Provision for the Catholic clergy?—I am convinced that the Roman Catholic clergy would accept of such a provision, if Roman Catholic emancipation were to precede it.

Would they accept of it without emancipation?—I am sure that they would not.

Do you think that it would cause any jealousy on the part of the Roman Catholic laity ?—I think that if the provision to be granted by government were to be subject to the control of government, in individual cases there would be much jealousy, because the appointment would be referred to unworthy motives; I think the provision for the Roman Catholic clergy must be made in its allocation to individuals, independent of the govern

ment.

You think it must be allocated to the duties, and not to the persons?-I think that there must be an allocation made to the duties, and that the individuals who are to fulfil those duties, and to be paid for their performances, must be selected by the hierarchy and not by the government; I think it would be very injurious that a parish priest, receiving three or four hundred a year of the treasury, should by named by the government.

Do you think Catholic emancipation would be a perfect measure without the payment of the priesthood, and without raising the qualification for the exercise of the elective franchise?-With respect to the raising the qualification of freeholders, I am not perhaps very well competent to judge, for I have not resided much in the country parts of Ireland, nor am I much acquainted with the lower orders; but I am well acquainted with the Roman Catholic clergy, and in my opinion, if a provision were granted to them, provided always it was made independent of the government (that is indispensable) the result would be, that the lower orders would not be alienated from the priesthood, but that the influence of the latter would continue to be usefully and legitimately exercised, that they would be perfectly reconciled with the government, and that the Roman Catholic gentry would be induced to send the younger members of their families into the Roman Catholic church, a better system of education would be established, and the intellectual habits of the priesthood would become more refined.

You mean, that the provision should be inalienable, after it was once granted?-I mean, that when a vacancy occurs by the death of a parish priest (I take the case of a parish priest as an

example) the person who is to succeed is not to be selected by the government; that is all I mean to say. If the appointment were to be made by the government, two evils would result; in the first place, the lower orders would be quite alienated from their clergy (which would be a most serious evil); and in the second place, I conceive that unworthy persons would be appointed.

How is the appointment made at present?-The appointment of the parish priest at present is made by the bishop.

The Roman Catholic bishop of the diocese has the absolute appointment to all the parishes within his diocese?-Yes; but the Roman Catholic hierarchy, though absolute in name, are greatly under the influence of public opinion; they generally select the individual whom the parishioners wish to nominate. They consult the wish of the parishioners in the appointment? Yes.

Do you think any interference whatever, direct or indirect, on the part of government, in the appointment of the bishop, would be equally objected to ?-I myself, at one time, supported what is commonly called the veto. My opinion was, that Roman Catholic emancipation, or in other words, the liberty of my country, ought to be purchased, even at some hazard; but I think the measure of a veto would (I will not say whether on just or unjust grounds) be extremely unpopular. The public mind has been heated upon the subject; the passions have been highly raised, and will not subside with rapidity; and I think that if the govern ment were to insist on a veto, it would impede, for some time at least, the beneficial results of Catholic emancipation.

Do you mean by veto, the giving the crown an absolute vote? -I do; but I think any interference in the appointment of bishops objectionable; I am not sure, however, whether in the course of two or three years, when the people had become habituated to the exercise of this restrictive power, the public feeling would not become, if not reconciled to it, at least apathetic on the subject; but I certainly am apprehensive that if the government possessed, without ever directly exercising this power, some suspicions as to the rectitude of the motives of men in office in interfering in the appointment of bishops would exist, and that suspicion would in itself be an evil which ought to be avoided.

Do not you think, after the measure of general emancipation has been carried, supposing it to be carried, and the administration of the government with respect to the highest offices remained in the hands of government, their motives with respect to the appointment to subordinate offices would be very narrowly inquired into by the Roman Catholic body?-I am sure they would not; I think that Roman Catholics would obtain, if not places of high authority, at least places proximate to authority. Roman Catho