there should be a general board, and a standing committee of the board; that all the vicars-apostolic of Great Britain, should be members of the board; that every British layman and private clergyman, subscribing a specified sum, should be members of it; and that the committee should be formed from the members of the general board, and consist of the vicars-apostolic and catholic peers Great Britain, and thirty-one other individuals.

of

It is needless to enter into any further detail:both the board and the committee have discharged their duties with assiduity and moderation: no act of either appears to have given offence to the public; and the general tenor and spirit of their conduct have been often mentioned with commendation. A list of the actual members of the board has been published: it is difficult to mention any board, in which there is more of noble or gentle lineage, or a larger proportion of ancient family

inheritance.

CHAP. LXXXVIII.

ATTEMPTS OF THE ENGLISH CATHOLICS TO OBTAIN RELIEF ON THE ACCESSION OF MR. FOX'S MINISTRY IN 1806-ALLEGED OBJECTION FROM HIS MAJESTY'S CORONATION OATH.

IT is greatly to the honour of the catholics, and no slight proof of the justice of their claims, and the expediency of granting them, that they have always

reckoned among their friends, the wisest and best men of the nation. At the time, to which the subject of these pages now leads us, Mr. Pitt, Mr. Fox and Mr. Burke were, confessedly, the most distinguished political characters in the country. Agreeing in little else, these great men united in the catholic cause, and in their wishes to afford the catholics every relief, which the temper of the times would admit. Through the whole progress of the bill of 1791, Mr. Pitt's conduct towards them was most open and friendly; he watched the bill, in all its different stages, with kind and unwearied attention. Sometimes by energy, sometimes by conciliation, he removed the obstacles, which opposed it; and, when the differences in the catholic body afforded too good an excuse for postponing the measure indefinitely, he did all in his power to compose the feud, and prevent its injuring the general cause. On every occasion, Mr. Burke advocated the catholic claims, and Mr. Fox proclaimed himself their patron. On one occasion, the writer called on Mr. Wyndham to solicit his attendance at the discussion of the bill for the relief of the catholics, then in the house of commons: "Give yourself no trouble," said that amiable and informed statesman, "to call upon me on "these occasions; I shall always be sure to be at

my post."-From him the writer went to Mr. Whitbread, with the same request:-" You may "always," he said, "depend on me: if parliament "should give you a limited relief, I shall rejoice "that they give you something; if they should

grant it without limitation, I shall rejoice that they give you all."

We shall shortly mention, in this chapter,I. The general hopes of relief, which the catholics entertained, upon Mr. Fox's accession to the ministry in 1806-II. The objections to catholic emancipation, which were supposed to arise from the oath, taken by the monarch, at his coronation:III. The conduct of lord Grenville's administration towards the catholics :-IV. Their attempts to obtain relief in 1810, 1811, and 1812.

LXXXVIII. 1.

General hopes of Relief, entertained by the Catholics, at the time of Mr. Fox's Accession to the Ministry, in 1806..

MR. Fox's principles of civil and religious liberty are known to have been of the most enlarged kind. On one occasion, he desired the writer of these pages to attend him, to confer with him, as he condescended to say, on catholic emancipation. He asked the writer, "what he thought was the best "ground on which it could be advocated?" The writer suggested it to be-that, "it is both unjust, "and detrimental to the state, to deprive any por"tion of its subjects of their civil rights, on ac"count of their religious principles, if these are "not inconsistent with moral or civil duty." "No, "sir!" Mr. Fox said, with great animation: "that "is not the best ground.-The best ground,-and "the only ground, to be defended in all parts,—

is, that action, not principle, is the object of law

46

66

"and legislation. With a person's principles no government has a right to interfere."-" Am I "then to understand," said the writer, wishing to bring the matter at once to issue, by supposing an extreme case," that, in 1713,-when the houses "of Brunswick and Stuart were equally balanced, "if a person published a book, in which he attempted to prove that the house of Hanover unlawfully possessed the British throne, and that "all, who obeyed the prince on it, were morally "criminal,--he ought not to be punished by law?" "-"Government," said Mr. Fox, should answer "the book, but should not set its officers upon its "author." "No," he said, with great energy, "and rising from his seat, "the more I think of "the subject, the more I am convinced of the truth "of my position:-action, not principle, is the true object of government.' In his excellent speech for the repeal of the test, Mr. Fox adopted this principle, in its fullest extent; and enforced and illustrated it with an admirable union of argument and eloquence.

LXXXVIII. 2.

The objection to catholic Emancipation from the
Coronation Oath.

IT is not, therefore, to be wondered, that the hopes of the catholics, for substantial relief, rose very high on the formation of Mr. Fox's administ tration. They were soon checked by a report,

advised, by the late earl Rosslyn, that it was inconsistent with his coronation oath, to repeal the laws remaining in force against the catholics.

That, for this difficulty, there is no real ground, has been fully proved by two able publications: Dr. Milner's Case of Conscience solved; or, Catholic Emancipation proved to be compatible with the Coronation Oath, in a Letter from a Casuist in the Country to his Friend in Town, 8vo. 1806; and Mr. John Joseph Dillon's Essay on the History and Effects of the Coronation Oath, including Observations on a Bill, recently submitted to the consideration of the Commons, 8vo. 1807.

--

In fact, all discussion of the subject may be brought, at once, to a very simple and decisive. issue. The coronation oath was fixed in Ireland, by the first of William and Mary. At this time, catholic peers had their seats, and voted in the Irish house of lords; catholic commoners were eligible to the Irish house of commons; and all civil and ecclesiastical offices in Ireland were open to catholics. Of these rights, they were deprived by the subsequent acts of the third and fourth of William and Mary, and the first and second of queen Anne. Now, the coronation oath can only refer to the system of law, which was in force, when the act, prescribing that oath, was passed: but, the Irish laws, the repeal of which was prayed for, were subsequent to that act; therefore,-to those, or to any similar laws, the coronation oath cannot be referred.

The prejudice, however, of the royal mind,