might formerly appear a plausible objection to the discussion, has no longer any foundation. Every thing conspires now to make the time favourable for carrying this question. The temper and conduct of the Catholics is entitled to your confidence and respect. We see them at this moment submitting themselves with the utmost humility to the existing law of the land. And notwithstanding the character given of them to the contrary, yielding their opinions to the decisions of courts of justice: and with all their passions and prejudices roused by the apprehension of some new attack upon their privileges and liberties, yet, submitting, all humility, to that which was stated to tuto and unless his friends are mistaken[The Speaker here intimated that this was out of order.] We have it not now stated as on former occasions, that great scruples are entertained in the highest quarter on this subject, which are wholly unfavourable to the hopes of its success:-upon this question, then, we have the concurrence of all persons and individuals of every description in the country-except only those I have mentioned; and I do not despair even of the concurrence of many hon. gentlemen opposite, at least until we have the pleasure of hearing some of them speak. The noble lord opposite (Castle, eagh) wl has always stated, that his reason for opposing be the law of the land; and yielding to the westion was the unaptness of the parits consequences with deference and obe-ticular occasion, will, I make no doubt, dience, under the conviction of its reason and justice. We have now those very Catholics who have thus submitted themselves calmly to the administration of the law, at the present time petitioning to be admitted to the rights and privileges of British citizens, with humble submission to your wisdom and your sense of justice. We have not alone the Catholics, coming as humble suitors to your bar, but we have the Protestants of Ireland themselves, whose apprehensions of danger have always been represented to us to be the great obstacle in the way of the Catholic concessions, now seconding the Petition of their Catholic brethren, and beseeching you to admit them to the benefits of the constitution, as the only way you can give them that security which you profess to promise them. In opposition to these Petitions, you have on the other hand-who? All the United Kingdom remains in silence. There is not a single dissentient voice to the justice of these claims, save only the Petitions of the universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and the corporation of Dublin. Notwithstanding the inflammatory pamphlets and hand bills distributed to excite opposition, and to produce resistance to those claims, no opposition has followed, no dissentient voice has been raised except those I have mentioned, and the voices of the honourable gentlemen on the other side of the House. They in short are the only obstacles to these concessions. We have the former opinions and promises of the illustrious person now at the head of the government in favour of those concessions, but his present ministers are against him; (VOL, XXII.) support us now upon this question. When we recollect all these circumstances when we consider that the alarms formerly excited upon the subject of foreign influence, no longer have any foundation: when we see Dissenters of all descriptions, and even Protestants themselves, joining in one common voice on this great question; and when we know the fatal consequences of a refusal, I would ask whether it is politic in the House of Commons, under circumstances so favourable to the question as they are at the present moment, to tell the Roman Catholics that "we will not only not grant your claim, but we will not even hear any thing on this subject. We will not enquire whether your claims are wrong or rightly founded: we will not even so much as listen to you." Depend upon it that these people must be heard. If you do not hear them now they will come again and again: and every time they appear at your bar, they will come with increased acquisitions of strength; and that which you might give them with grace and condescension now-will appear to come hereafter from far other motives than a sense of justice, reason and good sense. If the right hon. gentleman thinks that holding such language is holding the language of intimidation, he is very much mistaken in the feelings of human nature. If the repetition of complaints brought again and again, after having been rejected with contempt, is to be called the language of force, I know not upon what principles the right hon. gentleman's sense of political justice is founded. 1 Sir, I think I should not discharge my (3P) duty as an honest man, if, reflecting on the tremendous dangers by which the country is surrounded, I did not give my vote for this question. Mr. Fuller.- Mr. Speaker, the speech of the hon. member was the most extraordinary I ever heard in the course of my life. I was astonished to hear him, who is at the head of the Dissenters of this country, and who I have been informed is retained for them, speak in the way he has done. I should like to know, however, from the hon. member how he came to swallow the test oath before he came arongst us?-(Cries of Order! Order! from the Chair, and from the House.) test, or taken any oath repugnant to my conscience. I am, Sir, one of the few Dissenters not precluded by scruples to certain oaths from entering within these walls; but, Sir, although there are no impediments thrown in my way from entering here such as preclude the Roman Catholics, yet I am equally precluded with them under my religious sentiments, from holding any office of trust or emolument under the state. For although those sentiments do not render me ineligible to a seat in parliament, yet I cannot avoid thinking that a strange anomaly in the law, which while it renders a man eligible to a seat Ca this House, and to aid in the making laws for the government of the realm, yet declare him unfit to sit as a magistrate in administering those laws even in the case of a turnpike road, or acting as an exciseman. Such, however, Sir Samuel Romilly. - Mr. Speaker; whatever that hon. member can say, shall not rouse me to the use of any unparliamentary language. Where the hon. | Sir, is my case and that of all those who member got his information respecting me, I cannot possible imagine; but who ever told him that I come here retained for the Dissenters, told him a gross falshood. As to my being at the head of the dissenting body, and my having smallowed the test which he mentions, the hon. gentleman, as he takes so much interest respecting me, will be glad, perhaps, to hear, that I was educated in the Established Church; that I have always attended places of religious worship according to the rites of the Established Church; and that I do not recollect that I have ever been even out of curiosity in a Dissenting meeting house. Mr. Fuller. I am much obliged to the hon. and learned baronet for his explanation; and I cannot but compliment him on the extraordinary feeling which he has shewn on this occasion. Mr. William Smith. - Sir; at this late hour I shall detain the House but for ■ very few minutes, for not being myself a member of the Established Church, I can scarcely expect to be heard on this question without some distrust. think religiously with me; and therefore in pleading the cause of the Roman Catholics I am contending also for my own. "Nam tua res agitur paries cum proximus ardet." Sir, I believe there is no man in this House whose religious opinions differ more widely from those of the Roman Catholics than mine: but I feel that no just reason why they should on that account be precluded from enjoying the same civil rights and privileges under the same government with myself, to the support of which they as equally and as loyally contributed, and in the maintenance and security of which they must be equally interested. Sir, the vexatious and injurious nature of these incapacities have been justly, and I think not too forcibly stated by my hon. and learned friend. They are precisely of the same nature with those inflicted for certain crimes to which the law has affixed the character of infamy. They are privations of civil rights enjoyed by other subjects: obstacles to advancement in every honourable profession, and their natural tendency is to depress those on whom they operate below the rank which their talents and characters would, otherwise, entitle them to enjoy. I ask, Sir, is this not an evil, and a most serious one? And if inflicted by the will of others, on account merely of differing in religious opinions from themselves, is it not a punishment for professing those opinions? Now, Sir, it is well known that the law does not consider non-conformity a crime. My hon. and learned friend whohas just sat down, has told the House that he never to his knowledge attended public worship nor even entered the doors of a Dissenters' meeting house. Now, Sir, I am not ashamed to say that I am in the constant habit of attending divine service in a house of that description, and I must inform the hon. gentleman over the way, (Mr. Fuller) for his comfort, that I stand here without having "swallowed" any | It has been expressly so laid down by my lord Mansfield, in his memorable Argu- | who are determined to grant no more than ment on the Sheriffs' Case in the House of Lords; and I ask then, is it not absurd and unjust in the extreme to inflict punish ment where no crime is even alleged ? Is it possible for men so treated to banish from their minds the sense of oppression? But to be gravely told by persons under none of those inconveniencies, and enjoying all their own civil rights in their fullest extent, that these exclusions and this stigma are not punishments in reality because they are not so called in law, I cannot but consider as adding a bitter insult to a most severe injury. And, Sir, with this feeling in myself, I am naturally led to suppose that the Catholics are equally alive to the injustice. As to the immediate question, I think that the true and even the safest line of argument is to take it up on the high ground of right, nor am I afraid at any time so to defend it; but I will for the present decline that course, both because in this debate it has been argued on political expediency alone, and because I fear that even should I be successful in convincing the understand ings of gentlemen on the abstract right, I should fail of gaining their votes. It seems to me that the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Yorke) has stated a good logical argument. It is true, that in theory, some danger might be apprehended from a foreign spiritual head, acting through the medium of priests attached exclusively to its interests, on a population possessed of a large share of political power. And it may be said, that the duty and obligation of obedience to this spiritual chief is indissoluble, and in many cases, paramount to all others. -But surely the reply is obvious and easy; such dangers are all comparative; they were compounded of the force acting, and the subject or material on which it operated: and therefore, though the Papal connection should continue to exist after the concession of every civil and political right, it does not at all follow that the danger would by those concessions be increased: because, if by such just and liberal treatment, discontents were allayed, and men's affections gained, the whole mass would be less susceptible of any undue influence; and though possessed of greater power, would be far less the just object of suspicion or alarm. But though, for these reasons, I am extremely desirous of going into the committee, I will not disguise my opinion, nor advise those to enter on the enquiry merely the removal of the remaining disabilities. I, for one, am convinced that the Catholics had a strict right to much more, and never can be, perhaps never ought to be satisfied till they obtain it: If, when our eyes are opened to the perception of what is just, we are afraid of acting up to our convictions, it would be better not to permit the light to enter. One hon. gentleman has referred much to history, from which in my opinion, he would have done more wisely to have abstained, because that reciprocation of injuries which for centuries formed almost the only connection between England and Ireland was an invidious topic, more calculated to irritate than to allay animosity,-nor would I myself have touched on it, only with a view to rebut the false inferences which have been drawn from a partial view of the subject. In our Union with Scotland we treated with her as an equal; finding the people in possession of an established form of worship and attached to it, we enquired not into its truth or its conformity to our own; but, satisfied that it was the religion of the majority, we solemnly confirmed it in possession. Ireland on the other hand, after long and bitter contentions, we had by force subdued; and her treatment was that of a conquered province. The vast majority of her population we found Catholics; and contrary to all right and justice-contrary to all sound policy, since England had become Protestant, we not only subverted the establishment of the Irish majority, but erected our own on its ruins, using it and its revenues, not for the only legitimate purpose of any establishment, the promotion of morality and virtue, the instruction of the people, and the support of religious worship, according to that form which best satisfies the majority, on which ground alone a whole nation can justly be called on to contribute; but compelling all to pay for the convenience of a few, applying the contributions to the maintenance of an hierarchy repugnant to the feelings of the country, and whose chief use is, that of a political engine to uphold and strengthen the civil power of the conquerors. Is this the way to appease discontents-to eradicate old prejudices-to reconcile differences to extirpate foreign attachments? The Church of England worship indeed has now been so long established there, and is so interwoven with the rights of property and the of the measure. I could have wished our efforts had been confined to shewing the fallacy of their appréhensions of danger, and that fears of the subversion of the constitution in either Church or State, were in the highest degree groundless, idle, and even ridiculous. To such fears, however, do I alone believe we owe the opposition at this moment shewn to the measure. When I look round and see the numbers unfortu nately opposed to us; when I consider how frame of the government, that its subversion, in favour of any other, cannot now for a moment be contemplated: but surely the liberal, the just, the obvious policy would be to attach the Catholic clergy, and through them their people, to the Protestant government, by taking thein openly and directly under its protection, and applying part of the Church revenues to their decent and comfortable maintenance. Thus would the laity feel that a portion at least of those revenues was equitably directed, and the clergy having at home a natural object of their respect and affection, would speedily lose those regards towards any foreign head which could reasonably excite apprehension or jealousy in their civil superiors. On these principles we acted in Canada, not then surmising that even Frenchmen might not be indulged in a partial establishment of their religion, without endangering their allegiance; but conceiving on the other hand, that to free them from all irksome and unnecessary restraints was the best mode to secure it; and when have we heard of any disturbances occasioned by the Pope in Canada? Why then should we not extend measures equally kind and paternal to Ireland, or why fear that there only, generosity and justice would fail to produce their uniforin effects on the human | share of the shining abilities evinced in heart? There are many other points on which I could with pleasure have enlarged, but the subject has been so amply and ably discussed on the present as well as on for mer occasions, by the highest talents in this assembly, that I will occupy no more of your time, but conclude by expressing my firm conviction, that the question is now no longer, whether the thing should be done, but when? Whether you should immediately secure the affections of our fellow subjects and guarantee the public safety, by yielding to the call of policy and justice; or, by indecision and delay, prolong the season of disunion and danger, with the certainty of, a perhaps too late, repentance. Mr. Herbert of Kerry. - Though as an advocate for the equalization of the Catholics in every political right with their fellow subjects, I must feel highly gratified in general by the turn this debate has taken, there have been expressions in the warmth of discussion I could have wished omitted. Much censure and some hard terms have been bestowed on the opposers the character of numbers of them stand in every one's estimation, it is in vain to charge the opposition we meet with to the spirit of bigotry, persecution, or party. Many hard words have been bestowed on my right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I owe it to candour and justice to say, that from the time he became minister, he has risen in the estimation of the public. For one, however, deeply I lament his too powerful opposition to what I think a most advantageous measure. I believe that opposition to arise from the purest and fairest motives; I will add, I believe in common with most, if not all our opposers, if we could convince them their fears were groundless, they would cease their opposition. To remove these fears should then be our main object; and I could have wished that even a still larger this debate, had been bestowed on this point, instead of abusing, however justly, laws now obsolete and abolished, and those, who still support the remnant of that wretched code once law. The penal code being at one time law, I allow the onus probandi of advantage of a repeal lay on those who proposed that repeal. They did succeed in obtaining a repeal of much the greater part. We can, I think, shew no dangers are likely to accrue from the repeal of the whole. To this should the real well-wishers of the measure bend their force. The benefits arising from such a measure, as tending to promote the peace and harmony of the empire, no one denies. The dangers real or imaginary are urged by its opposers as so great, as to occasion a probable preponderance of evil. It is fair to ask, what are these dangers; are they serious dangers, or are they insurmountable: and are the two religions at complete variance? I, for one, believe in truth, the difference not great: that during the progress of the Reformation, and for some time after, whilst the Catholics might hope to regain the immense property their Church had lost, and the perhaps an equal majority of the talents acquired by learning, and of personal and real property Protestant, was one main reason with me for wishing an union between the two islands. I look on the Union as even the palladium of Ireland, because I conceive whilst in their own parliament the boroughs remained in the hands they were, an equality of rights would never have been carried, nor would a king of England ever have given consent to the equalization of the Catholics, before an union, had it even been consented to in Ireland; and the worst of civil and religious wars would probably have taken place. I think it the palladium of Ireland, because an union having taken place, every solid, nay even plausible argument, against giving their share of power to the Catholics, has fallen to the ground, and sooner or later, (and now I think soon, if they mar not the prospect) they will obtain their proportion. I will not enlarge, Sir; this was in effect promised them : it is a debt of honour, and should be paid. I know, now, this promise is often denied, and we are called on to produce it: I must admit our opposers may with Shylock plead, " it is not in the bond." I do not see the clause in the bond. If, Sir, persons high in power were silent, their derivitives were not so; and gentlemen in general deceived themselves, or deceived others. It was by myself, in common with numbers, held out to our tenantry, to our neighbours and friends, that as all plausible arguments against giving their share of power to the Catholics, would be taken away by an union, the first opportunity would be taken of discussing the matter in the imperial parliament; and of uniting all hands and hearts in the safety of the empire. We have lately, and but lately, united hands, in some degree, by the measure of the interchange of the militias. We want but the present measure, I trust, to interchange hearts; and whatever may be the fate of this question for the moment, if other side feared for their acquisitions: that the differences between the old and new Churches should be held to be irreconcilable is natural, but now when the fears of the resumption of the abbey lands, and the temporal power of the Pope are mere bugbears, that it should not be seen (one or two dogmas excepted) that the Established Church differs but little from its parent, is to me surprizing. I believe, should the distinctions made by law between them, be taken away, we should shortly wonder how we could so warmly differ on such, in fact, slight religious differences. In fact, it is my firm opinion, but for the disabilities imposed on the Catholics, there would be no more fear from Catholicism to the Established Church than from any other sect: I will add, if the Church lay aside old prejudices they | might perceive other dangers, and perhaps less remote than from the parent religion. For one convert made from the Church by the Catholics twenty are lost by the assiduity of others: and I am convinced were the Established Church even now attacked and seriously in danger, the Catholics would, as heretofore, be found rather amongst its allies and defenders, than amongst its enemies. So strongly do I believe this to be fact, that I always regret the opportunity lost not long since, when, by the impious madness of the democratical rulers of France, revealed religion itself was attacked through the Catholics, and whilst we were literally guard. ing from danger the head of their Church, it was not tried whether it was not practicable by the means of a general council, to have closed a schism which has given cause of triumph to the enemies of Christianity; and which might once more have ended in the harmony and union of the whole Christian Church, now so unfortunately split and divided. But supposing an union of the parent and reformed religions at present, to be impracticable; as an union of governments has taken place between the two islands, I urge there is now no one solid argument or reasonable ap-the measure is pursued with calmness, and prehension of danger, that can be fairly urged against giving their share of political power to the Catholics. Scotland is an example that on an union's taking place -Sir, I perceive the impatience of the House for the question, and I will detain them but a very short time, omitting going into any detail. To extricate Ireland from the peculiar situation in which she stood, four-fifths of her population Catholics, and without marring it or mixing it with party business, it will ultimately, and that I think at no remote period, prevail. As a real friend to the measure, I deprecate the involving this great question in disputes on subordinate and collateral points. I much fear we have lost ground in the opinion of many persons, by being. unfortunately engaged in disputes with the government of the country on modes of |