Lords Sitting of 27 March 1827

ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS—SELECT VESTRIES IN IRELAND.
Lord Hollandsaid, he held in his hand two Petitions, which had been sent to him to be presented to their lordships, one of which came from the Roman Catholic Inhabitants of the parish of St. Peter, in the county of Drogheda, and the other from the parish of Naas, in the county of Kildare. The prayer of both the Petitions was to the same purport; namely, that their lordships should repeal an act of the present king, which had been passed in the last session, respecting Select Vestries in Ireland. With respect to the allegations contained in the petitions regarding that particular act, he was not able to say any thing; as he had no local knowledge of the circumstances. He believed that act was passed with a view to lessen the evils which were complained of; but it had, as the petitioners stated, greatly aggravated those evils; and, if only half of the statement of the petitioners were true, concerning which he begged to be understood as not saying any thing, he had no hesitation in declaring, that the act ought to be immediately repealed. He wished to be understood as delivering no opinion of his own on the subject; as he was not very well acquainted with the circumstances of the cases

83
from not having had the advantage of attending the discussion which had taken place last session on the subject. All he had to state was, that the petitions were, in point of form, unexceptionable, and in language highly respectful. He therefore conceived that there could be no objection to receiving the petitions, but for one circumstance. One of the petitions, in urging arguments for the repeal of the act he had mentioned, stated, what, although it might be very true (which he did not, however, take upon himself to say) was certainly extremely unpleasant for their lordships to hear, and what he thought was doubtful whether part of their lordships would admit. The petition stated, that the church of Ireland was the richest church in all the world, where so few persons professed the faith of that church. The petition stated, that a very large proportion of the people of Ireland did not profess the faith of the Established Church. The petitioners also stated, that by the ancient laws of the country, and by the common law, which, for all they knew, was still in existence, a part of the revenues of the church ought to be appropriated for the relief of the poor, and the building and repairing of churches. The petitioners also stated, as he was informed by the letters of the persons who had sent the petitions to him, for he had not read them thoroughly, that at the time when the church and its revenues were transferred from the control of their Catholic progenitors to that of the Protestant establishment, the churches were in complete repair, and that no additional churches were required to be built; but that by neglect or abuse, or by evasion of the law, the churches had been allowed to get into total decay; and the petitioners complained, that the act of parliament laid on the Roman Catholics the burthen of repairing those churches which had been incurred by some of the ministers of the churches themselves. That was what had been stated to him. He had no intention of moving any thing at present on the subject. He was aware that some persons might say, "You see that the intention of the Roman Catholics is, to subvert the Irish Protestant church: you see in that petition a proof of that which we have repeatedly stated to parliament, namely, that the Roman Catholics are actuated by a hostility to the Protestant establishment." All he could say in
84
answer was, that if such were the views of the Roman Catholics, and if such hostility did exist in their minds against the Protestant church, it was created by those very persons who made that objection. The people of Ireland might submit to the payment for the support of that church, the faith of which they did not profess: they might submit to that payment without feelings of irritation, when they considered that that church was preferred by the opulent part of the country, and cherished and protected by a large proportion of the empire to which they belonged. But when they were told, and told repeatedly in the most emphatic manner, that that church was the great bar to the enjoyment of their rights, it was a little too much to expect that they should not be actuated by feelings of hostility; or to suppose, that when parliament chose to thwart the only mode which could lead to peace and good government, that they should not wish to destroy that edifice which had divided, for a long period of time, the Roman Catholics from their privileges. But it was the rejection of the claims of the Roman Catholics by persons who were opposed to the measure, which alone had raised that hostility, and given effect to those feelings of irritation. Before he answered the objection of those persons who thought the constitution would be endangered by granting those claims, he wished them to point out, in what manner the admission of a few Roman Catholics into parliament would add one jot to their power, while at the same time it might diminish some of the hostility which existed. Upon those persons must the responsibility fall; and they must be answerable for all the effects which the frequent rejection of the Catholic claims might produce. He beheld with some degree of concern the natural effect which the rejection of the claims of the Catholics of Ireland had produced in that part of the empire.
The Earl of Longfordsaid, he had not intended to offer a word on the subject, knowing how inconvenient to the House such conversations were; but when their lordships heard such remarks as the noble lord had just made, brought forward from day to day, he could not let them go forth to the country without some observations, and in doing so he should confine himself to the last remark of the noble lord. The arguments for granting

85
the Roman Catholic claims might he regarded in two points of view. The first was one of general policy, resulting from motives of expediency or justice; and the second was, with respect to the effect which the granting of the Catholic claims would have on the tranquillization and amelioration of the condition of Ireland. He doubted the justness of those opinions. It was now a hundred and fifty years since those restrictions had been imposed which excluded the Roman Catholics from political power. Repeated opportunities had occurred for considering, re-considering, and discussing, the object of those restrictions; and every time parliament had decided, that those restrictions were necessary and politic, and every time had objected to repeal the laws which enacted them; and he was surprised how any person could declare that those restrictions were unjust, which the law proclaimed to be just. He was quite sure that every time this subject should be discussed, their lordships would be more and more convinced, that the continuance of these restrictions were both just, and necessary to preserve the Protestant constitution. When equal privileges were demanded, equal securities ought to be given. It was principally on account of the political results, that parliament was induced to give a constant and uncompromising denial to the claims of the Catholics.
Lord Hollandsaid, the noble lord was mistaken, if he supposed the petitions referred to the repeal of the Roman Catholic restrictions.
The Earl of Longfordsaid, he had not intended to advert to the petitions, but to the observations of the noble lord; and when the noble lord stated, that the responsibility was upon those who rejected the claims of the Catholics, he must say, that the responsibility was upon these who would do away with restrictions, which were so necessary to the security of the country, and who would tear away the bulwarks of the constitution.
The Earl of Belmorepresented two petitions from the Roman Catholic inhabitants of parishes in the counties of Fermanagh and Tyrone. He would not enter into the general merits of the question at present, but would take the liberty of remarking, that not only the noble lords who were of the same opinion as himself on the subject of the Catholic claims, but also those noble lords who were of a dif-
86
ferent opinion, were relieved from all responsibility, by the acts of the members. who composed his majesty's government, who had gone to the full extent of concession to the Roman Catholics, without giving them political power. The only question now was, whether they should stop short without completing that plan. He expressed deep regret—not at the fate which had attended the Catholic question in the other House of parliament, for that circumstance only went the length of showing that opinions were very nearly balanced there, on a subject on which parliament was not only divided in their opinion, but also his majesty's government, but what he felt regret for was, because he could not perceive from the declarations of the opponents in the measure for granting relief to the Catholics, that they limited their objection to time or circumstances. It would be a great satisfaction to him, if he could look forward to a period, however remote, when their opinion would be altered. It appeared that the argument chiefly relied on for the exclusion of the Catholics from power, was, that it was inexpedient to free the Roman Catholics from the disabilities under which they laboured, on account of the principles of the Roman Catholic church. That argument went to the extent of declaring, that the constitution of this country was not calculated for the comfort of one third of the people of the British empire. He, for one, could never accede to such a proposition; nor could he comprehend how those persons who had allowed relief to the Roman Catholics to a great, extent, could be satisfied to suffer the laws to remain as they were, and stop short in a system, which had been so well begun, and say that, admitting the Catholics to political power was incompatible with the principles of the British constitution.
Ordered to lie on the table.

GRANT TO THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF CLARENCE.
On the order of the day, for the second reading of the Duke and Duchess of Clarence's Annuity bill, being moved by earl Bathurst,
Lord Kingsaid, that the noble earl, who had just moved the second reading of the bill, had thought proper not to say a word to their lordships on the subject. He should have thought that, in such a case as the present, the noble lord would have stated some reason for the additional grant. From

87
the circumstance of this bill having been left a long time elsewere, without any notice being taken of it, there seemed to be a desire to get it smuggled through their lordships' House, without saying a word upon the matter. Perhaps the noble lord thought that, as he was going to make corn dear, it was necessary to raise every thing in proportion. Or perhaps it was because he thought the time favourable for proposing such a grant. He had chosen a favourable opportunity for it while great distress existed among the manufacturers; as next year, probably, there would be great distress among the agriculturists. The noble lord had timed his shot well; he had sent it between wind and water. He did not know the reason why the government had been so long without a head. He certainly wished for an efficient minister, to take charge of such things as the present. He thought the noble lord looked like an efficient minister yesterday. It was high time for their lordships that there should be an efficient minister, for they looked like a flock of sheep without a shepherd, and they were bleating in every note of the gamut, from L sharp to R flat. This was certainly the golden age for princes, for palaces, and for Ireland. He had had a petition to present against the present bill; but he had not known when it was to be read a second time.
Earl Bathurststated, that his noble friend, the earl of Liverpool, in moving an address in answer to the message of his majesty, proposing an increase to the provision of the duke and duchess of Clarence, in consequence of their present situation, had stated what would be proposed as the amount of that additional increase. His noble friend had stated, that an income of 3,000 l. devolved on the duke of Clarence in consequence of the death of the duke of York, and that an addition of 9,000 l. was proposed to be made for the maintenance of the duke and duchess of Clarence. He had also stated, that 3,000 l. was to go to the duke of Clarence, and 6,000 l. to the duchess. Such was the statement which had been made by his noble friend when he moved the address. Their lordships had unanimously consented to it, and he therefore had a right to conclude, that they had consented not only to the increase itself, but to the particular manner in which that increase was to be made. ,Such being the
88
case, he did not think it necessary to trouble their lordships with any observations in moving the second reading of the bill; because that bill only enacted that which his noble friend had stated to their lordships. And what was this increase? It was an increase, by which the duke and duchess of Clarence would be entitled to receive upon the whole, an income of 35,500 l. He could not conceive that there could be any objection to such income for the heir presumptive of the crown of Great Britain and Ireland. His noble friend had devoted a great deal of attention to the financial distress of the country; but their lordships would recollect, that they had unanimously granted 60,000 l. per annum as a provision to her royal highness, the princess Charlotte of Wales. At that time she was standing in the same relation to his majesty, as the duke of Clarence HOW stood namely, the presumptive heiress of the crown of Great Britain, the duke of Clarence being now the presumptive heir. But the princess Charlotte was one degree further removed than the duke of Clarence, being presumptive heiress to the heir apparent. He was convinced their lordships could not object to such a grant; and he was satisfied that the public would approve of the manner in which a considerable portion of the grant would be expended; nor could a grant be made in a manner more acceptable to the feelings of his royal highness, since the greatest part was left at the disposal of her royal highness.
The bill was read a second time.