armed in defence of her rights, and a high spirited people demanded a free trade, did the Roman Catholics desert their countrymen? No; they were found amongst the foremost. When it was afterwards thought necessary to assert a free constitution, the Roman Catholics displayed their public virtue; they did not endeavour to take advantage of your situation-they did not endeavour to make terms for themselves-but they entered frankly and heartily into the cause of their country; judging, by their own virtue, that they might depend upon your generosity for their reward. But now, after you have obtained a free trade, after the voice of the nation has asserted her independence, they approach this House as humble suppliants, and beg to be admitted to the common rights of men. Upon the occasions I have mentioned, I did carefully observe their actions, and did theu determine to support their cause whenever it came before this House; and to bear a strong testimony of the constitutional principles of the Catholic body. Nor should it be mentioned as a reproach to them, that they fought under the banner of king James, when we recollect, that before they entered the field, they extorted from him a Magna Charta, a British constitution.

In the reign of Charles II. a committee, consisting of Papists, Protestants and Presbyterians, were sent from this country, to prosecute lord Stafford, we find them perfectly agreeing in the object of their mission; and, indeed, when men begin to differ upon principles of religion, it is

{

because they have no other great object to engage their attention; we cannot give the people of Ireland a common faith, but we can give them a common interest.

In 1799, when the fleets of Bourbon hovered on our coasts, and the nation roused herself to arms, did the Roman Catholics stand aloof? or did they, as might be expected from their oppressed situation, offer assistance to the enemy? No-they poured in subscriptions for the service of their country, or they pressed into the ranks of her glorious Volunteers.

It has been shewn, that this clause grants the Roman Catholics no new power in the state; every argument, therefore, which goes against this clause, goes against their having leases for 999 years every argument, which goes against their having leases of 999 years, goes against their having leases at all-and every argument, which goes against their having property, goes against their having existence in this land.

The question is now, whether we shall grant Roman Catholics a power of enjoying estates, or whether we shall be a Protestant settlement, or an Irish nation? Whether we will throw open the gates of the temple of Liberty to all our countrymen, or whether we will confine them in bondage by penal laws? So long as the penal code remains, we never can be a great nation; the penal code is the shell in which the Protestant power has been hatched, and now it is become bird, it must burst the shell asunder, or perish in it.

In Holland, where the number of Roman Catholics is comparatively small, the toleration of their religion is an act of mercy to them; but, in this country, where they form the great bulk of the inhabitants, it is an act of policy—an act of Recessity an act of incorporation. The ques tion is not, whether we shall shew mercy to the Roman Catholics, but whether we shall mould the inhabitants of Ireland into a people; for so long as we exclude Catholics from natural liberty and the common rights of men, we are not a people; we may triumph over them, but other nations will triumph over us. If you love the Roman Catholic, you may be sure of a return from him; but if you treat him with cruelty, you must always live in fear, conscious that you merit his just resentment; will you then go down the stream of time, the Roman Catholic sitting by your side unblessing and unblessed, blasting and blasted? Or will you take off his chain, that he may take off yours? Will you give him freedom, that he may guard your liberty?

In Ireland, as connected with England, the indulgence we wish to give to Catholics can never be injurious to the Protestant religion; that religion is the religion of the state, and will become the religion of Catholics, if severity does not prevent them. Bigotry may survive persecu tion, but it never can survive toleration. But gentlemen, who speak of the enormities committed by Catholics groaning under a system of penal laws, do not take into account the enlightening and the softening of mens' minds by toler

ation, nor do they consider, that, as they increase in wealth, they will increase in learning and politeness.

I give my consent to the clause in its principle, extent, and boldness; I give my consent to it, as the most likely means of obtaining a victory over the prejudices of Catholics, and over our own-I give my consent to it, because I would not keep two millions of my fellow-subjects in a state of slavery; and because, as the mover of the Declaration of Rights, I should be ashamed of giving freedom to but six hundred thousand of my countrymen, when I could extend it to two millions more.

Sir Hercules Langrishe supported the clause, because he observed, it was plain, simple, and easily understood. We have shewn how readily Roman catholics, possessed of leases for 999 years, may, by collusion, acquire the fee; the question, therefore, ceases to be a question of policy, whether you will make them a liberal grant of property, and allow them to possess legally and openly what they may acquire in a clandestine manner. Gentlemen will also consider, that, by allowing catholics to possess the fee of lands, they for ever bar the claim of old proprietors, and interest every catholic who enjoys such possession in the support of the established go vernment. A gentleman says, he wishes to give catholics property, but would restrain them from having power, lest they should influence elections for my part, I entertain little apprehension from their having any power in elections, the in

fluence arising from landed property is the only influence that can ever be injurious to the country. But the same person says, that few Roman catholics set their lands to protestant tenants, if so, then they can have no freeholders on their estates-I leave, therefore, the inconsistency of those two arguments to answer each other.

Mr. Forbes. I will not impute to gentlemen who urge the adjournment, an intention to destroy the bill; yet it is somewhat strange they should persist in it, when every man of profession knows. that the clause may be guarded by a proviso as far as may be necessary. I was at first alarmed at what was said, till I considered more attentively. I find, upon reflection, that were we to alter the clause in the manner desired, it would allow catholics to acquire estates, but would convey destruction to them-it would say, we give you power to acquire the fee of lands, but we cannot trust you with the rights appertaining to the fee, because in time to come you may destroy our constitution. If this be our opinion, let us not grant them any thing at all. By all the acts, which the tyranny of the last age devised, a Protestant was not prohibited from settling on the estate of a Catholic-the scheme of the hon. gentleman who spoke last but one, would effectually prohibit them-it would not only be oppressive to catholics, but a punishment to such protestants as should settle on their lands. The great object of the penal laws was to break the power of papists in Ireland; that object they accomplished, but they also ruined and destroyed