Lords Sitting of 22 February 1813

PETITIONS RESPECTING THE CLAIMS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLICS.
The bishop of Chesterpresented a Petition from the in habitants of Chester against the Catholic Claims.—Lord Kenyon presented a Petition to the same effect from the gentry, clergy, freeholders, and other inhabitants of the county of Denbigh, which his lord ship staled was agreed to at a county meeting, with only one dissentient voice, that of a person who read a letter from an hon. baronet, the member for the county, whose opinions were hostile to the object of the Petition. His lordship also presented a similar Petition from the county of Merioneth.—Viscount Bulkeley presented a similar Petition from the county of Carnarvon. Ordered to lie on the table; as were also a Petition from Worcester, presented by the earl of Coventry, and a Petition from the inhabitants of Exeter, also against the Catholic Claims, presented by lord Rolle.—The earl of Radnor presented two Petitions to the same effect, one from the corporation and the other from the inhabitants of Salisbury.—The noble earl then presented another Petition to the same effect, from Wallingford, which his lordship stated to be signed by four out of six aldermen, 13 out of 18 assistants, the clergy of the three parishes, the ministers of three dissenting congregations, all the traders of the town, and a majority of the voters.—Lord Holland presented a Petition from Wallingford in favour of the Catholic Claims, which his lordship stated to be signed by the mayor, the recorder, and several respectable persons.
Lord Sheffieldpresented a Petition from the inhabitants of Lewes and its neighbourhood, which his lordship stated to be signed by upwards of 4,000 persons, including many dissenters.
The Duke of Norfolkwished to know what means had been employed to obtain the signatures, no public meeting having been held?
Lord Sheffieldsaid, he had the Petition from lord Chichester, who was unable to attend, and who had stated to him, the facts which he had now mentioned.
The Marquis of Headfortpresented a Petition from the Protestants of the county of Meath against the Catholic Claims, stating, that he dissented from the prayer of the Petition.
The Marquis of Lansdownestated, that a Petition would, he understood, shortly arrive, signed by a majority of the property and respectability of the county of Meath, in favour of the Catholic Claims.
The Earl of Kingstonpresented a Petition from the Protestants of the county of Sligo against the Catholic Claims. His lordship took the opportunity of stating, that he had previously voted for going into a committee on the Catholic Claims, but the recent conduct of the Catholics, in openly avowing that they would consent to no securities, had rendered him hostile to their Claims. His lordship then read part of one of the Resolutions of the Catholic meeting at Kilkenny, in order to prove the determination they had expressed, not to consent to any arrangement for securities to the Protestant establishment.
The Marquis of Lansdownedeprecated the idea of treating with the Catholics as with an independent power. It was for the legislature to consider their claims, and make such enactments as to its wisdom should seem meet, and it was for the Catholics as subjects to obey. He could not, therefore, see any reason why the noble earl should have altered his opinion on the policy of the measure, merely because certain resolutions had been passed by some Catholics in some part of a county in Ireland.
The Earl of Kingstonalso presented a Petition to the same effect from the Protestants of the county of Tipperary, which was read.
Lord Hollanddid not mean to object to its lying on the table; but he thought these Petitions making allegations against the Catholics were scarcely regular, when
658
no Petition from any part of that body had yet been presented for the purpose of urging any claims.
Lord Redesdaleobserved, that the proceedings of the Catholics for the purpose of urging their claims were notorious; that they had been published in all the newspapers of Ireland; and productions, avowedly by their authority, had been published, in which their claims had been set forth.
The Duke of Norfolklamented the tone of these Petitions, which he thought would only lead to corresponding acrimony on the part of the Catholics.
The Earl of Charlevillepresented a Petition from the gentlemen, clergy, &c. of the county and town of Carlow. His lordship stated, that although the prayer of the Petition was inimical to the unrestricted claims of the Catholics, yet its tenor breathed a spirit of toleration and conciliation suitable to the subject; at the same time submitting to their lordships the necessity of guarding against such concessions as might endanger our Protestant constitution.—Ordered to lie on the table.