lies would obtain seats in Parliament, some would support and others oppose the government, all sectarian sentiment would be merged in political interest; such Roman Catholics as displayed talents would, I presume, be advanced by government for their services, and if a few only of the Catholic body were promoted, all suspicion of partiality would be at an end.

That is on the assumption that the removal of disability by law is perfectly and fairly acted upon by the executive govern ment, and that individuals, according to their merit, being Roman Catholics, are promoted to the higher offices of the state ?—I have assumed that the government would act with impartiality to a certain extent, but although the government should show some leaning in the distribution of its favours towards Protestants, and as they are seised of the greater part of the landed property of Ireland, for a considerable time the principal places would be given to the members of the established church, I still think the Roman Catholic body would not be sore upon the subject, if they saw Roman Catholics raising themselves to real distinction, and obtaining the power of protecting the community to which they belonged; they would not murmur at some preference being still manifested towards Protestants; a single individual of talent in the House of Commons, professing the Roman Catholic religion, and representing the feelings of the Roman Catholics, would to a great degree allay the spirit of hostility which prevails among the great body of the people of Ireland; because they would then feel that their rights were asserted, and that they had a voice in the legislature.

In the profession of the law, where the possession of property cannot be expected to have great weight, some reference would be made to the respective numbers at the bar, of Roman Catholics and Protestants?-Î think the Roman Catholics would not be so unreasonable as not to take into account, in the first place, that the Protestants at the bar are more numerous, and in the second, that they have more patronage and more influence; but I think they would justly resent the omission to raise qualified persons to the rank of King's counsel.

Or to the judicial bench, if they have talent?—I doubt that; there are but twelve judges, and no individual can complain that he is not appointed to the judgment seat, as matter of personal injustice; it is, indeed, unjust that a whole class should be incapacitated by law. The exclusion from the bench is a political grievance which affects the whole body of Catholics, and carries a stigma with it; the ineligibility of the body is quite distinct from the non-election of the man. The omission to raise a Roman Catholic of high merit to the right of King's counsel is an individual wrong, it throws him back in his profession, touches his pecu

niary interests, places his inferiors in acquirement above his head, and wounds his honourable pride.

There is a power of granting a patent of precedency to a Roman Catholic?—Yes; but it has never been exercised.

When you express that the Roman Catholics would consent to the freeholders qualification being considerably raised, you conceive it would be a general measure, extending to Protestants as well as Catholies?-Certainly; if a distinction was taken, our elections would be scenes of religious agitation.

But that the qualification for Presbyterians, Dissenters, Churchmen, and Roman Catholics should be the same?-Yes; and I think, that when the election law is about to be modified, it would not be injudicious, if persons having beneficial chattels real, should be entitled to vote; a man, with a lease for 999 years, which yields him forty or fifty pounds a year, should have a vote.

Do you think an arrangement of that kind, which would disqualify persons actually in possession of that franchise, and which they had exercised, and never abused, would give satisfaction to them?--I think the great body of the people of Ireland, particularly the freeholders, are greatly swayed by the higher class. I am sure that Mr. O'Connell's influence is so great, that if Catholic emancipation were passed, he would reconcile them to the surrender of that, which is to a great extent, but an imaginary right.

Do you think he would reconcile the Presbyterian dissenters to it ?-There his influence would be without effect; I am not at all acquainted with the north of Ireland, and I cannot say how the Presbyterians would feel; but with respect to the south of Ireland, I believe the tenant, who has by virtue of forty shillings, a qualification to vote, would yield what is but a wretched appendage to his few acres of land, without much regret.

Supposing another gentleman should arise, who took another view of this from Mr. O'Connell, and should protest against the opinion of Mr. O'Connell, and should hold, that they were in possession of this right; that it was a right they had always exercised; that they had never abused it; some person like Doctor Doyle for instance: do not you think he might create a considerable party in the south of Ireland, in favour of retaining the elective franchise? I think not; I think, indeed, that the lower orders in Ireland, can be easily influenced by an appeal to their religious feelings they feel greatly irritated at seeing 'every Protestant that passes them, their superior; there is the point on which they are sore; with respect to the elective franchise, I do not think any individual would be able to excite any permanent feeling; the subject is not naturally connected with religion.

Being easily excited on subjects connected with religion, supposing those to whom they looked up in religion were to consider

this a diminution of their influence, and were to protest against it, do not you think the influence of persons, who took that view of the subject, might create a considerable impression?—I think that the Roman Catholic, of the lower orders, could not be induced to think, that his religion was endangered by a general modification of the elective franchise. On the subject of the veto, the clergy have naturally exercised a very considerable influence; but there is no such connexion between the elective franchise and religion, which would give any man the means of exciting the religious passions on that ground.

Have not cases occurred recently, in elections for counties, in which the influence of the priest has been very greatly exerted?No doubt about it; but the influence of the priest in elections, arises from the question of Roman Catholic emancipation, and none other. It is in reference to that question, that it is exclusively exercised. If a priest came forward at an election, and directed the people not to vote for any man who would not support Parliamentary reform, the people would not listen to him; but when he tells them, not to vote for any man but who will not support the Catholic claims, he makes an appeal, which in my opinion is justified by reason and sound sense; he could not, I think, produce any impression on the lower orders, except on some subject immediately involving a religious question, and not collaterally connected with it.

If he said, "do not vote for any man who will vote for the disqualifying of the freeholders," would not he make an impression? I am sure he would not; and I am sure the priests would feel no interest in the subject, and would not interfere. In the county of Dublin, the clergy exercised influence at the last election, but it was on a subject in which the clergy and people had a common concern; besides the passions of the people are at present extremely inflammable. It is only necessary to apply a spark to set them on fire; but even now it would be impossible to excite the people on a subject not involving their religion, and if emancipation were passed, a different feeling would speedily prevail, and the power of excitation would be diminished, because the popular passions would be allayed. It is the law which now creates the materials of public excitement.

Supposing the civil disabilities of the Roman Catholics were removed, and that in a county election there were two candidates, a Protestant and a Roman Catholic, do not you think it would be possible for the priest to make a very strong appeal to his flock, in favour of the Roman Catholic candidate?-He might make an appeal, but I think it would be unavailing; there would be an end to their political resentments. Even now, the Catholic priests are in the most cordial intimacy with Protestants; they

perpetually dine with them; habits of close friendship exist between the Roman Catholic priesthood and the Protestants; there is no individual distaste towards the Protestant existing in the mind of the Catholic priest; he feels an antipathy only to the system by which he and his countrymen are kept in what he considers a state of degradation.

Then the existence of civil disabilities has created no disgust between the Roman Catholics and the Protestants?—I think where the Protestant gentry do not oppose Catholic emancipation, the priests and they are upon a good footing; but that where a Protestant gentleman opposes Catholic emancipation, he at once becomes an object of antipathy to the priesthood, in common with the rest of the Catholic community.

You do not mean your last answer then to apply generally, as describing the state of feeling ?-No; I confine it of course to what we call liberal Protestants, to whom the priests entertain a partiality.

What are the others called?-They are classed under the comprehensive name of Orangemen; some, of course, are more conspicuous for their hostility than others, and incur a corresponding aversion.

You make a distinction between a man who is an Orangeman and a man who is tinctured with Orangeism?-There are some professed Orangemen, men who make Orangeism a matter of boast; they are extremely obnoxious. Others, who merely oppose Catholic emancipation, are looked upon with feelings of more mitigated aversion.

As the admission to Parliament, in case of the question of Catholic emancipation being carried, could be granted merely to Catholics of the higher orders of society, are you of opinion that such a boon granted to them would be a reasonable ground, or a probable ground of satisfaction to the lower orders of freeholders, for the loss of the elective franchise, if the amount of the qualification be raised, and the forty-shilling freeholder done away with? -I am convinced of it.

Would not the circumstance of granting emancipation remove all prejudices that might exist in respect of the alteration of the qualification of freeholders ?-I am convinced it would.

Have you read the statement of Mr. Burke on the subject of the elective franchise, where he describes the value of it to a poor man; do you recollect the arguments urged in 1793, that there was actually a distinction made in the letting of land between Roman Catholics and Protestants, that the Roman Catholic was never courted by a rich man who was his neighbour; but that the Protestant received civility from him in return for his vote, and that a great practical distinction arose in consequence of the

R

disability under which the Roman Catholic laboured ?-I recollect that argument was used, and I think if there were only a few freeholders, that argument would hold good; but where an immense number of freeholders can be made by a single person, (I think the Earl of Glengal has made 2,000 freeholders in the county of Tipperary,) there is then an end of the prerogative which a freeholder is supposed to possess. The peasantry are driven in droves of freeholders to the hustings: they must obey the command of their landlord; it is only in cases of peculiar emergency, and where their passions are powerfully excited, that a revolt against the power of the landlord can take place. In the county of Dublin there were two strong reasons why, at the last election, the tenant did not obey the landlord. The first was, the intense interest which was felt in Catholic emancipation, and upon no other subject could so intense an interest be felt: and in the second place, the peasantry were put, by their utter misery, arising from their fall of prices, beyond the landlord's power; the landlord could not injure them, for they had nothing to lose; they had no interest in their lands, and the argument put to them by Mr. O'Connell was this, if you disobey your landlords what will be the result? they must seek for other tenants; where will they get them? at the mendicity association in the city of Dublin. The county of Dublin election affords no illustration of the rest of Ireland; it stands on its peculiar grounds.

Do you think a powerful appeal might be made to the people on this ground, supposing the arrangement which you think on the whole a desirable arrangement, were to be carried into effect, here is an arrangement made by Parliament, the effect of which is to open Parliament and Office to the upper classes of the Roman Catholics, but the compromise required on your side is, that you, the great mass of the people, who never can sit in Parliament, and to whom Office is no object, are to be deprived of the only privilege that, practically, you are likely to enjoy ?—I do not think any efficient appeal could be made among the lower order of the Roman Catholics (independently of some points in which I think their interests are deeply concerned); a feeling of wounded pride is excited by the state of the law; they think that they belong to a degraded caste; this sentiment operates strongly upon them, and a mere imagination on their part will produce practical results, just as pernicious as if the grievance were admitted to be as substantial as I am disposed to think it. The people conceive that they are degraded by the law; that Protestants are placed above their head, and that the Protestant in authority will have a leaning towards the members of his own class. This feeling produces deep concern. Let me add, that this feeling is justified and provoked by the perpetual occurrence of irritating circum