Lords Sitting of 16 March 1827

ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.
The Marquis of Londonderryrose to present two petitions from the counties of Londonderry and Monaghan, in favour of the Roman Catholic claims. He said, he should not detain their lordships at present, as he had before endeavoured humbly, but honestly, to state the conviction on his mind, that the great and important question of the Roman Catholic claims was intimately connected with the happiness, welfare, and he might add, the social order of Ireland. He thought it would be bad taste to press the question forward, not only from what he had already said upon the subject, but more especially because an enlightened statesman had thought it most wise to withdraw the motion of which he had given notice. He was not in his place when that incomparable speech was delivered; in every part of which he most cordially and sincerely concurred. He thought he had acted most wisely in not pressing forward a discussion, which could only excite irritation. The question would, of necessity be resumed; and he must hope that the Roman Catholics would bear their present disappointment with patience and resignation; and if he could conceive that they would have recourse to force or rebellion in order to obtain from parliament their claims, and not to persuasion or argument, he hoped, as an honest Irish soldier, he should be in the van-guard of those who opposed such proceedings. He had hoped that those noble lords who did not join with him and his friends in their opinions upon the question, would come forward with some measure calculated to reconcile the country to the disappointment, and to allay the feelings of irritation which now prevailed. That was his wish; and when he found that no measure was coming forward, he felt deeply grieved. Nevertheless, he would advise the Roman Catholics to hope that by patience and resignation they would arrive at the great object of their wishes; and that the justice and magnanimity of a British king and a British senate would

1219
ultimately accord to them what they had prayed for session after session.
The Earl of Winchilseasaid, he had purposely refrained from making any observations on the sentiments contained in the numerous petitions which he had presented to their lordships against Roman Catholic emancipation; because he thought that a more desirable opportunity would be afforded him for such observations, when the noble marquis had redeemed the pledge he had given to the House, of bringing this great political question of the Catholic claims under the consideration of the House. Finding, however, that that intention had been abandoned, he could not, in justice to his own feelings, or to those persons who had signed the petitions which he had presented, allow the question to be withdrawn from the House, only to be brought forward on a more favourable opportunity, without stating his own views upon the subject. He must own, however, that he regretted that that motion had been abandoned; because he was convinced, that the oftener the subject was discussed, the more it would be found that it was impossible to open the constitution to individuals professing the tenets of the Catholic church, without endangering the principles upon which that constitution was founded. If, however, such discussion would have been attended with the same bitterness of feeling which had characterized the debate upon the subject in another place—if any noble lord had been prompted to follow that example, and forgetting what was due to his own private and public character, should deal in bitter invectives against those who were united with him in political power—he felt, if such should be the conduct that would be pursued, that it would leave, as it had done, in the breast of every friend of uncompromising principles, an impression which would never be effaced, and would tend, as it had tended, to unite that party more firmly than any thing that could be said. It was a matter of sincere regret to him, therefore, that the noble marquis had thought proper to withdraw his motion; and on that occasion he should freely have stated the grounds upon which he objected to granting the claims of the Catholics. He now begged leave, therefore, to state the grounds upon which he thought that it was impossible to admit the Catholics to legislate for a Protestant country, without
1220
endangering the Protestant principles of that country; and he did so in order that he might hear those arguments which might be brought forward to combat his opinion, and which he sincerely assured their lordships he should take home with him from that House and give them the attention they deserved. He wished most sincerely to come to a just conclusion upon this great question. In the first place he would draw their lordships' attention to the grounds upon which the Papists, at the time of the Revolution, were, by the wisdom of our ancestors, effectually excluded from political power; and he should then endeavour to show that the same grounds existed at present for the continuation of that exclusion, as a security against the intolerant principles of popery. He did not wish to draw their lordships attention to any of those melancholy events which occurred before the period he alluded to. He would direct their lordships attention to the character of popery exemplified in the conduct of James 2nd and that of his advisers. He would draw their attention to the state of the continent at the same time; and they would see Louis 14th revoking the edict of Nantes, and banishing every Protestant from his dominions. Let noble lords look to the opinions of the Roman Catholic clergy of that period, as collected from authorized statements. He would read a passage written by the bishop of Meaux, indicating the spirit of persecution of the church of Rome against all those who were opposed to it. Let their lordships judge from his own words. He said, that "the church of Rome, is the most intolerant of all churches: it is our inflexibility which renders us unconciliating and odious." In another passage he says, "that the exercise of the power of the sword was not to be called in question." He should avoid entering into a detail of the melancholy events that happened before that period. Having endeavoured to show that the principles of popery were dangerous to a Protestant constitution at the time he had mentioned, he should now examine the declaration of those who stated, that the doctrines of popery were no longer composed of those intolerant and obnoxious principles: that no sale of indulgences were allowed, or the doctrine of purgatory believed. He would refer to a bull of pope Leo, as giving him a ground of coming to a more correct conclusion on

1221
the subject. The bull in question, which was issued in 1825, and was published in all the newspapers, bore unqualified testimony to the statement, that the doctrines of popery had not changed in those two particulars. But perhaps some noble lords would maintain, that an essential alteration in the fundamental doctrines of popery had taken place. He begged leave to ask by what authority and at what period had such alteration been effected?—to what authority were those differences in the Catholic religion to be ascribed, and in what writings were they allowed? Their lordships were all aware, that the principles of the Catholic religion could not be altered without the concurrence of a general council, and they must know also that there had been no general council held since that of Trent, in the sixteenth century. To that council their lordships must refer, if they wished to come to a just conclusion on the true and real doctrines of the popish church. Were their lordships, then, to be told by individuals who had interested motives—for he contended, that they had interested motives, to conceal the real character of that religion—that in their opinion the Roman church no longer held doctrines so obnoxious and intolerant? How little such a statement was worth, would appear when put to the test of a writer of our own church, who wrote in answer to Dr. Doyle. He would now draw the attention of their lordships to the unconstitutional conduct of the Catholic priests in their interference at elections in Ireland. Availing themselves of the ignorance of the poor people, they did not exercise that sort of influence which was derived from wealth, as was done in this country; but availed themselves of a power purely spiritual to excite the minds of the superstitious people. Had not their lordships heard of their opposition to every measure proposed for the instruction of that country; for they well knew how short lived their power would be, if the people were left to their private judgment, and to the exercise of a better religion? He thought he needed not to add one word more as to the intolerance of the Roman Catholic religion. High minded and honourable men, he admitted, there were professing that religion; but he would ask this simple question—whether those individuals, if such was their character, could be safely trusted with a power to legislate for a
1222
Protestant country? But it was now said, that the Roman Catholic gentry did not give their assent to the intolerant doctrines of the Romish church. When the Roman Catholics said so, they were deceived—deceived by the influence of those treacherous principles, which always had been, and still were, the characteristics of the Roman Catholic religion. If those principles were not opposed, no adequate security would be had against the vigorous and domineering spirit of popery. If these were not the principles which the Roman Catholics now entertain, let them, then, open their eyes to that religion; or let them state candidly that it is not the Throne, it is not the laws, it is not the parliament, but it is the church of Rome, which bars the entrance to the British parliament. It was said that Ireland could not remain as she was, and he assented to that observation. But it was also stated, that conceding the Catholic claims would make that country tranquil. He no more believed that conceding those claims would have that effect, than that the breath of man could calm the ocean. He had not abilities or talents sufficient to enable him to propose any measure for the improvement of Ireland; but there was a measure which would tend to render that country happy; namely, the effort now made to rescue the people from the degraded state of religion in which they stood, and an endeavour to unite them in bonds stronger than any other—the bonds of religion, which would make Ireland both happy and tranquil. All that he wished was, that when this great question should be again brought forward, every endeavour would be made to transmit to posterity that constitution which had made this country the envy of surrounding nations, and not to fritter away the principles upon which that constitution was founded, or abandon that system of government which rendered us the most exalted upon earth. The noble lord then presented a petition from Northampton, against granting any further concessions to the Roman Catholics, and adverted to a petition from the same place, presented by earl Spencer, and stated that the one he now presented was very numerously signed.
Earl Spencerdid not rise to enter into a discussion with the noble lord who had just sat down, on all the various topics upon which he had touched. The noble lord had finished his speech by presenting

1223
a petition from the town of Northampton. He also had presented a petition from the same town, signed by six hundred persons. He knew very well that two petitions might be signed in the same place; and he would not make a comparison of the judgment or pretensions of the petitioners. He was aware that in that town, as throughout the whole country, the opinions of the people were much divided. The petition he presented was sent to him by post, and he knew some of the names to be very respectable. He made the observation, at the time of presenting it, that twenty years ago, it would have been extremely difficult to find six hundred persons, who would have put a petition into his hands in favour of the Catholics. He really believed, notwithstanding the assertions of the noble lord to the contrary, that the country, though it was still divided, was beginning to open its eyes upon this question. He gave that noble lord, and other noble lords full credit for their opinions being grounded on the notion, that they were doing their duty to the constitution of the country; and with respect to himself and his friends, he must be allowed to say, that they were as good and as steady friends to the constitution, in church and state, as any of those noble lords who were opposed to granting the claims of the Catholics.
The Bishop of Norwichsaid, he had several petitions to present to their lordships, coming from different quarters, and containing different opinions. He had divided these petitions into three classes. The first class contained petitions from the Roman Catholics of Ireland; they consisted of five, and deserved attention on account of the respectability of the petitioners. The first petition came from the Roman Catholic bishop and clergy of the united dioceses of Waterford and Lismore. The others were from Tuam and other places in Ireland. These petitions were signed by immense numbers of Roman Catholics, and they all united in praying most earnestly for the repeal of those penal statutes which still remained laws, which were, as it appeared to him, the misfortune and disgrace, and would be the ruin of this empire at no distant period, if the wrongs of millions remained much longer unredressed. The second class of petitions came from clergymen of the Church of England. These petitions were signed by many very learned and excellent men, who
1224
prayed that no further concessions may be made to the Roman Catholics. It was with much concern that he was obliged to differ widely in opinion from persons of that denomination; and it gave him much pain to find that such men could have brought themselves sincerely to believe, that the security of any Christian Church could be endangered by acting on Christian principles; or that the safety of any civil state could be hazarded, by uniting the hearts and minds of all the subjects of every denomination in the state, by giving them equal rights, instead of alienating a very large portion of those subjects, by an unprovoked, and, as it appeared to him, unjust and cruel persecution. He felt perfect satisfaction in presenting a petition from the archdeacons of Norwich and Sudbury, and other clergymen of the Church of England. This petition was also signed by many learned and excellent persons who had a regard for the constitution; but they thought, and he perfectly agreed with them in opinion, that the constitution could never be more effectually secured than by promoting peace and good-will among all classes of the king's subjects. They, therefore, prayed for the removal of those severe laws that affected the Roman Catholics. These sentiments were much more in unison with the improvement of the times in which we lived, and with a just notion of civil and religious liberty, and the mild and tolerant spirit of Christianity. The petition was drawn up with so much moderation and temper, that he wished it to be read at length.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, he must object to the petition, which was stated to come from the bishop of Waterford. In the discharge of his duty, he could not receive any petition coming from the bishop of Waterford, unless it was the Protestant bishop.
Lord Clifdenstated, that his majesty, when he was in Ireland, had received all the Irish bishops in full robes.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that made no difference. He had a positive duty to perform, and he must object to any petition being received coming from the Catholic bishop of Waterford.
Lord Clifdenstated, that there had been an especial presentation of Catholic bishops to his majesty while in Ireland.
The Marquis of Lansdownfelt persuaded, that the noble and learned lord on the woolsack would have no objection to re-

1225
ceive the petitions of persons who, from the station they filled, were highly respectable, provided they were properly worded. He understood the objection of the noble and learned lord to be only to the assertion of a supremacy which did not, and ought not to exist. There could be no doubt that those persons were entitled to the designation of Catholic bishops in Ireland. He was sure that if this petition was withdrawn, and signed with the name of the individual as Catholic bishop in Ireland, the noble and learned lord would not object, to its being received.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, he never would oppose the reception of petitions written in a style which the House could recognise. There could be no doubt that the parties in question were bishops, nor did he doubt their respectability. But what he could not allow was, that the person from whom this petition came, should be recognised a Catholic bishop of Waterford. He might be designated as Catholic bishop in Ireland, but not as Catholic bishop of Waterford, for the law knew nothing of such a designation.
The Bishop of Norwichsaid, there was no difficulty on his part to withdraw his petition.—The petition was accordingly withdrawn.
The Earl of Darnleysaid, he could not help lamenting that his noble friend (the earl of Winchilsea) should, on his first political appearance, have shown so much zeal and energy in what he could not but consider a bad cause. He called it a bad cause, because he was perfectly convinced, that if his noble friend, and those who thought with him, continued to oppose successfully the just claims of the Catholics, they would succeed in convulsing this great empire to its centre. He could not but regret the strong language which had been used with respect to a man of transcendant genius, who had long advocated this great cause with distinguished ability, and who, he trusted, would continue to advocate it until it should be finally successful. But he would not refer to living authorities; it should be recollected, that Fox, Pitt, Burke, and Grattan, who had never agreed upon any other question, concurred in supporting the measure which his noble friend opposite so warmly deprecated. The ill-omened rejection of this measure was undoubtedly calculated to induce the people of Ireland to consider the country to which she was united, rather
1226
in the light of an enemy than a friend. He trusted that this consummation would not take place; he trusted that better feelings—feelings more in unison with the Christian charity so eloquently recommended that night by the venerable prelate —would prevail in that, country. He did not absolutely despair; though he confessed he was not very sanguine in his expectations of hearing his noble friend opposite argue, at some future period, for the expediency of Catholic emancipation, with as much zeal as he now opposed it. As to the number of petitions against the measure from the county of Kent, he was not at all surprised that so many had been presented; for nothing could be easier than the way in which they were got up. It was as easy as lying. A paper was drawn up, containing the usual commonplace expressions, about Church, State, and Constitution, with a few allusions, perhaps, to the Pope, the Pretender, Bloody Mary, and Guy Fawkes, and this document was carried about by the clergyman of the parish, who prevailed upon every body who could write to sign it. In one instance, the clergyman of a parish, charged with a petition of this description, happened to take it, in the first instance, to an honest tenant of his, who occupied four or five hundred acres of land. The farmer said it might be all very right; but he never signed any thing he did not understand. "Not sign it!" exclaimed the clergyman, "why surely you won't suffer the bloody Papists to get power into their hands, and burn Protestants at the stake again?" The farmer persisted in his refusal; and was equally impracticable, when the clergyman wished him to get his wife and children to sign it. The clergyman was at last obliged to go into some neighbouring brick-yards, and get the petition signed by as many labourers as could write. It was absolutely absurd to attach any importance to petitions got up in this manner. It had been inquired of those who had succeeded in putting an extinguisher on this question, what they meant to do for Ireland? His noble friend opposite answered, that they meant to convert the Catholics to the Protestant religion. If such a scheme were practicable to any extent, no man could be more desirous than he was, to see it accomplished; for he had a bad opinion of the tenets of the Roman Catholic Church, though he did not think that the Catholics

1227
ought to be excluded from an equal participation in civil privileges, on account of erroneous religious opinions. But to suppose that five or six millions of Catholics were likely to be converted to Protestants was really a most extravagant notion. And, if there were really a prospect, of effecting their conversion, then he should contend, that this was an additional argument for granting Catholic emancipation; for no one could pretend to say, that a persecuted sect was more likely to embrace Protestantism, than one which was admitted to the common benefits of the Constitution. The noble lord adverted to the language of the Resolutions recently adopted by the Catholics at Dublin, which was characterized by great moderation and discretion. They expressed a feeling of regret at the vote which rejected the just claims of seven millions of his majesty's subjects: they recommended peace and forbearance, confidence in God, and in the justice of their cause: they recommended their Catholic brethren not to give way to despair, but to await the course of events. The influence of the Catholic clergy in the late elections had bean complained of; but there had been no proof of any unconstitutional interference on the part of the Roman Catholic priests. They had, undoubtedly, a powerful moral influence over their flocks; they felt their increased moral strength; they knew the justice of their cause; they saw how they were supported in this country, by numbers, by intellect, and by every thing that could make a cause respectable. The ultimate success of that cause was as certain as cause and effect— as sure as that summer followed spring. Sooner or later Catholic emancipation must be granted; and the only question was, whether parliament would grant it as a boon, or be compelled to concede it under the pressure of national calamity.
The Duke of Buckinghamsaid, he held in his hand several petitions praying for Catholic Emancipation. The first was from the Roman Catholic inhabitants of the county of Roscommon. He did not mean, in introducing this petition, to follow the example of the noble lord (Winchilsea) by discussing the whole question of the Catholic claims. There were many reasons why a collateral debate of this kind was not one in which the great question of Catholic Emancipation could be conveniently discussed. It was utterly impossible, in a debate like this, to settle this great—he
1228
was sorry to be obliged to call it—this terrific question. He perfectly agreed with his noble friend (the marquis of Lansdown) as to the propriety of postponing the motion of which he had given notice; for that notice could not nave been brought forward with any advantage under the circumstances which had recently occurred. He should not enter into any part of the discussion, except to notice an observation which had fallen from the noble lord who opened it, and who had brought it forward as a charge against the Roman Catholic clergy, that they exercised a purely spiritual influence over their flocks. If the exercise of a purely spiritual influence over their flocks was a crime, he wished to God, that the same complaint could be made of our own clergy! He should be happy to believe that no influence was ever used by the Protestant clergy in questions of a political nature; but that their influence over their flocks was purely spiritual. He trusted that the earliest opportunity would be taken of affording their lordships the means of coming to a decision on the great question of Catholic Emancipation. He said this, not because he wished for a debate on this question; but because, in his opinion, nothing could be more mischievous than that the people of Ireland should believe that their friends despaired of the cause, and that parliament had shut its ears against their claims. He could not, at the present moment, look forward with hope to the success of the question, after what had occurred in the other house of parliament; but the time was near at hand, when this question must be carried, and it would depend upon their lordships to decide in what spirit it should be carried. The arts of man might, for a time, raise barriers against it; attempts might be made to check the progress of reason through the land; but the current of knowledge and intelligence could not be arrested by the work of human hands. The tide of human reason could not be kept back; but it depended upon man whether the current should take such a course as to fertilize the land, or spread ruin and desolation around. Many rejoiced at the decision of the other house of parliament; but he believed that few persons of sound statesman-like opinions participated in their triumph. The decision was a subject of triumph to those who did not wish Ireland to look to the

1229
imperial parliament for protection and support. The triumph was felt by those who wished Ireland to believe that the parliament of England was deaf to their claims, and that they could look only to the ravings of seditious demagogues for the redress of their grievances. By rejecting the claims of the Catholics, parliament was delivering Ireland into the hands of those demagogues. A question involving the liberties of seven millions of people could not be put by, according to their wishes or caprice. It was utterly impossible that the present state of things could last. In the name of God, then, as the danger was thus imminent, as it pressed so immediately upon them, why not settle this question in the only way in which it could be settled, by embracing the offers of Ireland, and admitting her to a participation in the benefits of the constitution? Ireland offered us every thing we could require; she offered us allegiance, she offered us affection, she offered us attachment. If we rejected her offers, there were many on the alert to tell her, that our professions were false and hollow, and that they were the only friends, by whose efforts she would be saved. By a seasonable concession to the just claims of Ireland, we might save her from those who were luring her to destruction—we might restore the tranquillity of the country, and secure the allegiance and attachment of seven millions of people.
The Bishop of Chestersaid, he could not forbear noticing an expression of the noble duke who had just sat down, which seemed to call for some animadversion from the representatives of the Protestant Church. The noble duke had stated, that the noble earl who presented the petition from the county of Kent, had imputed to the Roman Catholic priests as a crime, the exercise of their spiritual functions. The noble duke had entirely mistaken the meaning of the noble earl. The noble earl had not imputed to the Roman Catholic priests the exercise of their spiritual functions as a crime; but he had argued, that the tremendous influence of the Catholic priesthood was a very powerful reason why the legislature should not intrust power to so many millions who were subjected to it. The noble earl did not say that they were not at liberty to use the legitimate influence which would follow the faithful discharge of their high and sacred functions; but he argued against
1230
the abuse of their sacred trust, and the misapplication of their influence to political purposes. He had no hesitation in expressing his belief, that, in the late elections, the Roman Catholic priesthood had taken down polished weapons from the armoury of heaven, and employed them in carnal warfare. Such conduct had never, he believed, been imputed to the Protestant clergy, except in a single instance, where a Protestant clergyman had invited his congregation from the pulpit to sign a petition; and this single instance of misconduct had met with a merited rebuke from that House. The influence of the priesthood in Ireland was a very powerful reason why the Catholics ought not to be intrusted with political power. Ireland was the most unenlightened country in Europe; and political power in the hands of a body of artful and designing men— though he did not mean to include the whole Catholic priesthood in that description—might be employed to the worst of purposes. This brought to his recollection a remark of the noble earl who preceded the noble duke—a remark which called equally for animadversion. That noble earl had thought fit to speak in discouraging, if not contemptuous, terms of the efforts to diffuse the light of the gospel among the unenlightened population of Ireland. He thought he saw the finger of God in the recent conversion of so many of the Catholics of Ireland; and woe be to those who should presume to lift up their hands and voices in vain and impotent attempts to stem the flood of light that was bursting over the country! If these efforts were continued in a spirit of gentleness, wisdom, and zeal, they would bring down the blessing of the Almighty; and the good work would go on to its consummation. He could not sit with patience, and hear a member of the Protestant Church speak contemptuously of these efforts. Day by day, the tide of reformation seemed to be rolling on—gradually, indeed, as was to be at first expected—with sure and certain progress. He could not avoid expressing his indignation, or rather his pity, at the language which had been used in the other house of parliament. He could not but lift up the voice of expostulation, if not of reprobation, at those who designated the attempt to convert the Catholics of Ireland as a crusade. A crusade, indeed, in its true sense, was not in itself reprehensible;

1231
its object was to plant the Standard of the Cross in regions of darkness. But the term had been applied in a disparaging and reproachful sense. Was it a crusade which Luther undertook? Were those who embarked with him in that glorious enterprise crusaders, in the sense in which it was meant to stigmatize the humane and charitable attempts which were now making by a man not less distinguished by his piety than conspicuous for his rank? He begged their lordships' pardon for having thus trespassed upon their attention, but the observations which had been made that night seemed to him to call for some animadversion.
The Earl of Darnleysaid, the learned prelate bad noticed an observation of his, for the purpose of misrepresenting it. He put it to the House, whether he had said any thing of which a good Protestant need be ashamed. He had stated, that he should be extremely glad to see the whole population of Ireland converted to the Protestant faith, but he was not so sanguine as some others were on this subject; and he maintained, that if there were a prospect of their conversion, it would furnish an additional argument for Catholic: Emancipation, inasmuch as a persecuted sect was less likely to be converted, than one admitted to equal civil rights and privileges.
The Bishop of Chestermaintained that the noble earl had treated the attempt to convert the Catholics of Ireland as a visionary scheme.
Viscount Clifdenwas of opinion, that the Protestant religion had never had fair play in Ireland He had no doubt that if there had been no penal laws, the whole population would have been Protestants before now. The gentry, to prevent the loss of their property, had been compelled to abjure the Catholic faith; but the people at large were, by the cruelty of those laws, bound to the Catholic priesthood.
The Earl of Rodenpresented petitions against any further concessions to the Roman Catholics, from 22,000 Protestants of the county of Londonderry, and the county of Tyrone. The noble lord said: —When I consider the importance of the subject on which these petitions are addressed to your lordships, I feel myself compelled to declare, in a few words, my opinion on the present condition of that country from which they proceed; but first, I must express my regret, that on this
1232
great and important subject, the members of his majesty's government are still divided in opinion; that they do not yet consider it a subject fit to be decided by them; but that they still reserve the decision of it as an apple of discord, to be thrown between the two parties in Ireland, who ground their own division upon the division that exists on this question among his majesty's ministers. To this division in the cabinet we must also trace the present system of policy pursued by the Irish government— a system which its supporters term conciliatory, but which I consider weak and puerile—a policy, whose only result has been to draw down on it the disgust of the Irish Protestants, and the contempt of the Roman Catholics. But I firmly believe that the time is not far distant, that the day is close at hand, when this division among the members of the government must cease to exist—when the government must take an influential part in the decision of the question—when the government, as one united body, must come forward and declare their determination to support the Protestant church and constitution in Ireland, or to support the Popish ascendancy that now domineers over that country. It has been said, here and elsewhere, that the present condition of Ireland cannot continue; that things cannot remain as they are. With this opinion I entirely concur, as I think it impossible that Roman Catholics should be allowed to legislate for a Protestant church. For that I contend is the ultimate object of the Roman Catholics of Ireland; and this opinion I pronounce, not only on the authority of history, but on the acknowledgment of the Roman Catholics themselves, who declare that they look on their admission into this and the other house of parliament, merely as a step to the intended overthrow of the Protestant establishment. The speeches and measures of the Roman Catholic Association, and the concurrence of the Catholic gentry and the general population in those measures, will show, that the object of them all is one and the same; namely, the subversion of the Protestant religion. Can then these things remain as they are? Shall we ever allow the Roman Catholics to prescribe laws for the Protestant church of Ireland? I have heard noble lords assert, that the treatment of Roman Catholics of Ireland is as bad as that suffered by the Greeks from the Turks—that one sect of Irishmen is persecuted by ano-

1233
ther; and that they are subject to a system of tyranny on account of their religious opinions. Is it so? Yes; if there be religious persecution in Ireland, it is the persecution inflicted by the Catholics on the converts from Popery; if tyranny is exercised over men in Ireland, it is the tyranny employed by the Roman Catholic priests over their congregations, to prevent them from shaking off the slavish yoke of Popery, and becoming converts to that glorious Reformation which is now working its rapid way through every part of the country. That great work has been censured by persons in other places, and in high authority, as a mere chimera. I think differently, my lords. My sincere conviction is, that its success is the work of Heaven—the pure result of the preaching of the Word of God, and the operation of his Divine Spirit. It has been urged as an argument in favour of concession to the Roman Catholics, that the refusal of it will drive them into rebellion. I do not believe that assertion; but even though I did believe that rebellion would be the result of our refusal, still I would encounter the risk of rebellion, immense an evil as I consider it, than allow the Protestant constitution to be ruled by the legislations of men, who, by the very essence of their religion, hold a divided allegiance to a Protestant establishment. My lords, I must declare, that I am not satisfied with the present system of Irish government, or rather of no-government, which, instead of allaying the evils of the country, increases them a hundred fold. For proof of this, look to your lordships' own legislative measures. Two years ago, your lordships passed a bill, which has since been called the Algerine act, which some of your lordships opposed, as infringing on popular liberties; but which I then supported, through a certainly, that it was calculated to attain the object for which it was designed—I mean the suppression of party associations in Ireland, which have so long been the bane of that country—but what has been the effect of that, act? It put down the associations of Protestants, which had originally been formed for the protection of the laws and the constitution. I do not complain that these Protestant associations were put down. They were no longer wanted; they had degenerated into signs and badges of party: but what I complain of is this, that though the Protestant associations yielded to the law, yet
1234
still, at this day, the Roman Catholic Association is in existence, spreading its destructive poison to the remotest extremities of the land. I have heard it asserted, that the Irish government has made attempts to put down this Catholic Association. I say no attempt has been made to put it down; and, as a proof, it stands, my lords, before parliament and government at full work, unchecked in its operations, uninjured in its power. I may be told, indeed, of a prosecution that has been brought by the Attorney-general for Ireland against Mr. Shiel, for a certain inflammatory speech delivered by him before the Association; but when your lordships remember the violent opinions and language used elsewhere by that same Attorney-general, will you not agree with me, that it is a great hardship that Mr. Shiel should be prosecuted for his seditious speech, while the Attorney-general for Ireland is allowed to diffuse, with impunity, opinions productive of the greatest mischief, in the present state of Ireland. That condition of the country, combined with the existence of the Roman Catholic Associasion, is an indelible stain upon the character of the government.
The Bishop of Norwich,in explanation, justified his applying the word persecution to the conduct observed towards the Roman Catholics. He was taught in early life, by abler men than now lived, that every penalty, every restriction, every disadvantage, every inconvenience imposed upon an individual on account of his religious opinion, was persecution. That being the case, he thought that the noble earl need not complain, if he said the Irish were the most persecuted men on the face of the earth [hear].
The Earl of Carnarvon,in allusion to what had fallen from a noble earl, with reference to a comparison between the state of the Irish Catholics, and that of the Greeks under the Turks, observed, that when the present state of the Roman Catholic population of Ireland was referred to as an argument against conceding to them their claims, he did say that noble lords might as well apply that argument to the Greeks as to them; namely, that because a long system of oppression had reduced them to a state of degradation, therefore they were not entitled to be relieved from that oppression. He was satisfied, that the Roman Catholics, under the rule of Protestant ascendancy,

1235
were not much better off than the Greeks under their Turkish rulers. The noble lords of the Protestant ascendancy were not only for disqualifying the Roman Catholics from being heard in parliament, but all the British peers also; and now the noble earl was for disqualifying the House of Commons too; for he had told their lordships, that Mr. Shiel was under prosecution for having used certain expressions, but that the language of a right hon. and learned gentleman, in another place (evidently alluding to the House of Commons), was infinitely more culpable. The Protestant ascendancy lords were at once parties, accusers, and judges; and every day brought forward charges against the Roman Catholics, while the voice of the latter could not be heard. Irritation had been imputed to the Roman Catholics; but, if it existed on the part of the Catholics, their lordships had ocular demonstration, that great irritation existed on the part of the noble lords. The noble earl had even gone so far as to say, that sooner than see the Roman Catholics emancipated, he would encounter all the dangers of rebellion. Now, he appealed to the House, if ever any language had proceeded from the Roman Catholics of a more dangerous tendency than that? If their lordships wished to save the country, they must not await the tardy progress of reformation, but at once take measures to put down, not only the Catholic Association, but the Protestant ascendancy party also. Their lordships must not leave this subject to their irritability, but take it under their own dispassionate judgment. If they did not do so, the time would soon come when they would repent it, but when repentance would be too late.
Viscount Clifdensaid, that if he were to go into the question, he could show that great changes had taken place in the Roman Catholic religion. It had been said, that, if emancipation was granted, the Roman Catholics would not be satisfied. He was quite certain that they would be satisfied—they must be satisfied.
Lord Mountcashelregretted that noble lords treated the question as a matter rather of policy than religion; and expressed his conviction, that the spirit of the Roman Catholic religion remained unchanged to this day. In support of this opinion, he quoted passages from the decrees of several Roman Catholic councils. The doctrines inculcated by these councils
1236
were taught, at this day, in Roman Catholic seminaries, which were supported by parliamentary grants, and diffused, by the priests, among their several congregations. The persecutions suffered by the Vaudois, in Piedmont, were a proof of the bigotry of the Roman Catholic religion. He was astonished how noble lords who had taken the oath of Supremacy, could support the claims of the Catholics. He considered himself justified in accusing them of a violation of that oath, as he felt that, if he acted in the same manner, he should be guilty of perjury. For these reasons, he should, at all times, oppose further concessions to the Catholics.
Ordered to lie on the table.