Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

the balm of hope to the dying penitent, alleviates his anguish with the sweetest and most benevolent assiduity, and piously assists in the precious office of rendering his last moments acceptable in the eyes of his Creator.

These are amongst the many services of the Catholic Clergy, and their claims upon the respect of their flocks. Yet such are the men, against whom the jealousy of the Legislature is in full vigor, and who are only noticed by the Laws, for the purposes of reprehension and of Penalty. I. If a Catholic Clergyman happens, though inadvertently, to ⚫ celebrate Marriage between two Protestants, or between a Protestant and a Catholic (unless 6 already married by a Protestant Minister) he is hable by law to suffer Death.

[ocr errors]

The first Statute upon this subject was enacted in the year 1708. It directs, that If any Popish Priest shall celebrate Matrimony between any two persons, knowing that they are, or either of them is, of the • Protestant Religion, he shall suffer the punishment of a Popish Regu lar. (that is, to be transported, and to remain in Gaol until transported, and punished as if for High Treason, if he returns to Ireland. 9 Will. 3. c. I.)

The next Statute, enacted in 1710, adopts a singular rule of evidence, not very comformable to the dictates of ordinary justice

[ocr errors]

It directs, that Upon every prosecution of a Popish Priest for the above-mentioned offence, it shall be presumed, allowed, and concluded, to all intents and purposes, that the • Priest so accused, did celebrate such Marriage, knowing that one or both of the parties was, or were, of the • Protestant Religion.

[ocr errors]

Unless he shall produce a Certifi cate under the hand and seal of the

Minister of the Parish where the

parties resided, certifying that such

[ocr errors]

person was not a Protestant at the time of the marriage'

The third Statute, enacted in 1750, renders this offence punishable as a felony without benefit of clergy, and consequently, the Catholic Priest. upon conviction, is to suffer Death.

And this too, although such mar riages had been already pronounced to be null and void, by a statute enacted in 1746.

Such is the punishment, and suct the facility of convicting a Catholic Priest in Ireland, at this day, for as offence which the most cautions may commit (if an offence) through indvertency or misinformation.

To expect that the Protestant Minister, perhaps a non-resident, shall certify that a party is not a Protestant, or any such negative fact, seems absurd enough. Besides, no obligation is imposed upon him, by penalty, for refusal or otherwise, to grant any cer tificate whatsoever.

But this Anti-Catholic code present a tissue of absurdities. For instance, suppose a Protestant dissenter and i Catholic about to be married, the ce remony must be performed by three clergymen, as matters now stand. 1. The Dissenting minister. 2. The Protestant minister of the parish, (without whose previous cele bration the Catholic priest is forbidden to officiate.)

[ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]

'celebrate marriage between Protes-
taut and Protestant, or between any
Protestant (or one professed within
twelve months to be so) and a Papist,
unless such Protestant and Popist
⚫ shall have been first married by a
clergyman of the Protestant religion.
And that every Popish priest, or
reputed Popish priest, who shall
celebrate any marriage between two
Protestants, or between any such
Protestant and Papist, unless such
Protestant and Papist shall have
"been first married by a cle gyman
of
the Protestant religion, shall forfeit
the sum of 500 to his Majesty,
S upon conviction thereof."

It was, at one time, supposed that the former punishment of death for this offence was virtually mitigated to the penalty of 5001, by the fair construction of the last-mentioned act, and had become merged in the new prohi bition. However, the contrary duc trine has been adopted by the highest law authority, and in, several cases; particularly in the case of the King at the prosecution of Surgeon Boyton, against the Reverend Mr. G——————, John Mac Dermot, and others, where Lord Kilwarden, Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench, declared publicly from his seat, that this offence continues at this day to be punishable with Death, under the Popery laws. In this case the Reverend Mr. G.

one of the Clergymen officiating in Denmark-street Chapel, had been called upon by the family of a respectable Catholic tradesman, resident in his vicinity, to celebrate marriage between a young man, a member of the family, and a Miss Boyton, who had resided for some time in the House of the tradesman, The Clergyman, having no reason to doubt that both parties were Catholics, performed the ceremony in the usual manneṛ. turned out that she was the Daughter of a Protestant, then confined in Prison for Debt, who immediately instituted this Prosecution against all the parties to the transaction.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

по

In cases of Trials in Courts of Jus
tice,
distinction is permitted,
between the examinations of Catholic,
Priests and those of other persons.
The same extent of Testimony is
exacted from them, without any ex--
ception in favor of such evidence as,
may have come to their knowledge,
solely thro' the medium of private.
Confession. : If a Catholic Priest
declines to yield such evidence, when
required, he is treated as contumacious,
and as if actuated by no other motive,
than a contempt of the Judicial authori
ties: whilst in reality, he is governed
by a virtuous principle-that of pre-
serving a sacred trust, and guarding
inviolate the secrecy of a confession,
made to him upon the very faith of
that secrecy.

The late Lord Kilwarden, Chief
Justice, committed to gaol a Catholic
Priest, the Reverend Mr. Gahan, for
a contumacy of this nature.
It

This

occurred at the Summer Assizes of

1801, for the County of Meath, held at Trim, in the case of Mrs. O'Brien, v. the Trustees of Maynooth College.

(To be Continued.)

02

The

THE CORPORATION AND THE

PAMPHLET.

We are neither so vain or presuming as to enter into a general defence of this book, did it need any defence; the head which dictated, and the hand that traced, its contents are the most competent to such a task, and to their possessor alone should its justification be committed.

Without entering diffusely into the question of My Lord Mayor's or Mr. Montgomery's attainments, or enquir ing by what means they became gifted with discrimination sufficient to decide upon the libellous tendency of the pamphlet without soliciting extraneous aid to direct us in the exposition of those moral principles which confer the science of Jurisprudence on a swordcutler, and the property of legal disquisition on a pedlar in wine: without wasting our time by the exhibition of their resolutions, (with a suitable commentary,) more than by saying, that their barbarous phraseology, and grammatical incorrectness bespeak their legitimate descent from the Corporation of Dublin: without occupying the attention of our readers in this sort, we shall proceed to facts, as facts have been called for the mind nurtured in prejudice and darkened by ignorance, cannot comprehend the force of logical deduction, but it may, haply, be convinced of its error by cases in point, technically speaking.

:

One of these barbarous resolutions, has the following passage: though the author of such false and unfounded calumny has not produced a single instance of such corruption in any ma gistrate of any corporation in this king. dǝm.' It is to be observed, that the passage in the pamphlet, to which the foregoing alludes, runs thus:" That the Catholic more than doubts of obtaining the same measure of justice, of favor, or respect from the Mayor, Recorder, Aldermen, &c." Now; under the head, et cetera, are compre

hended all the minor and subordinate departments of the municipal body; but, as cunning and ignorance are essentially allied, the corporate resolution invites the production of a single instance, only so far as it may involve the reputation of an individual magistrate; thereby carefully avoiding the comprehensive import of the whole passage. After publishing the entire passage in the first resolution, they challenge refutation, upon a garbled inference, in the second.

This omission is evidently wilful: its object is misrepresentation, if, indeed, stultified ignorance can impose, even upon ideotism. Proceed even now to the fact, first promising that we have not read the whole of the pam phlet in question. In the year 1795, three years after the repeal of the penal laws, as it is called, a Mr. Bell of Mary's-abbey was candidate for the mastership of the Corporation of Tay. lors: he was a man of liberal and philanthropic mind, and, consequently, a friend to Catholic emancipation. Some time previous to the election, several Catholics had been, by grace especial, admitted freemen of the Corporation. When the day of election arrived, and the forms had been gone through, it was found, that, Mr. Bell had the majority of votes; his oppo nent, who was a man differing from him in every sense, demanded a scru tiny, and the consequence of that scrutiny was, the quashing of all the Catholic votes which made the majo rity for Mr. Bell's election, and by which means his rival was declared elected. Two of the Catholic voters, thus aggrieved, a Mr. Sweeny and a Mr. Boyle, petitioned or memorialed the Corporation according to form, and obtained no redress: they then appealed to the Corporation of the City; no redress. It was a sufficient answer, to all their allegations, to prove, before these enlightened assemblies that they were Papists; no other argument was offered, or required to

justify

justify their disfranchisement! What will the pointed aliusions of cu: eloquent Lord Mayor, and the fermenting loyalty of Mr. Montgomery, avail against this single fact? Did Catholics in this instance obtain the same measure of justice as Protestants?" Men who had been freely admitted into the Corporation; yet, when called upon to exercise the only right which can be deemed of value in a

Corporate body, they are disfrauchised without cause! Was this a pure administration of public justice? Who disfranchised these Catholics? Not themselves to be sure. There was general and cordial co operation in their disfranchisement. The retiring master of the Corporation, the Lord Mayor, the Aldermen, the Sheriffs Peers, the Common Council Men, all concurred in it; and if Protestants, has been circumstanced as the Catholics were, would they experience similar treatment ? Let the Lord Mayor and Mr. Montgomery, put their hanes on their gizzards, and answer this question. And if they cannot answer it, m the affirmative, as we are quite satisfied they cannot, is it a false and unfounded calumny to assert that the Catholics more than dou ts of obtaining the same measure of justice that the Protestant does? Or is it a gross and unfounded misre presentation of the conduct of the magistracy, for Catholic with this before his eyes, to express his apprehensions that magistrates, and corporate bodies may act towards him both partial and unjust. Bot. the matter did not rest here; the Catholics applied for a mandamus, to the Court of King's Bench, in which, at that time, presided the celebrated Lord Cloneil, whose fame. as Mr. Erskine said of Jeffries," will stink in the nostrils of posterity." Their motion or conditional rule as it is called, was quashed by the aforesaid upright Judge. Was Lord Clonmell a magistrate? and would an applica

a

[ocr errors]

If he was a

tion from Protestants in a similar case,
be equally unsuccessful?
magistrate and would have acted dif-
ferently towards Protestants, just
barely, supposing, that such a thing
might happen,) was he an impartial
magistrate? And did Catholics obtain
the same measure of justice in that
instance, that Protestants might ex-
pect? Well, the affair did not even
terminate in the King's Bench. The
principal Catholics in Dublin applied
to Mr. Grattan, that he might bring
a bill into the house of Commons, to
have the powers of corporate bodies,
defined so far as they regarded the
admission or exclusion of Catholics.
Mr. Grattan acceded to their wishes :
he applied to Parliament and sought
to have the Corporations thrown open
to the Catholics, but his proposal
was every thing but laughed at by the
Minister of the Day, (we believe Mr.
Hobart,) and he was told truly, that
the high court of Parliament, would
not interfere with the character of an
ignorant and petty Corporation. If
Mr. Grattan's application had been
made on the behalf of Protestants,
would it have been thus treated? And
if it would not, is it a false and un-
founded calumny to assert that, the
Catholic in Ireland is almost a suppli-
We have
cant for common justice.
been thus plain and methodical in the
adduction of this fact, for the purpose
of convincing many well meaning,
though not deeply read members of
the Corporation, of the dangerous
errors of their leaders: and we would
inflict a chastisement on the agitators
of this question, ample as the advoca-
tion they have given, were it not
that the grossness of their igno-
rance, extenuates the enormity of their
aseurance. Knowledge is diffident and
unobtruding, but ignorance is assuming.
and confident; of the justness of this
opinion, the conduct of my Lord
Mayor, Giffard, and Mr. Montgo
mery, is a sufficient exemplification.

Hottentot

HOTTENTOT VENUS..

In every situation of life, and on every occasion, our country displays a very remarkable superiority of character, which can never be vitiated by the arrogant and beastly manners of Bri

tain! and un no occasion more than in

the abhorrence which our fair and virtuous country women, lately evinced by disdaining to sanction with their patronage, an English brute, who deals in human misery, to obtain a subsist ance, by a mercantile traffic in human degradation.

The deformed female monster, which this English ruffian designates "A Hottenton Venus," he recom. mends to our curiosity, as a creature that has been visited by the most accomplished ladies in Britain. The difference of manners between English and Irish females could not be remov ed by this fellow's puffing. Though thousands and tens of thousands of the "British Fair" followed this excrescence in all directions, yet, not one Irish woman of character could be prevailed upon to imitate them.

We are not of the same character with those people-Nature has written the distinction by a separation of sea, and our notions of manuers, independence, and laudable prejudices have decreed us a distinct people. The cruelty of a conqueror, the pride of a despot, or the cupidity of avarice, may in vain attempt to gratify pride, and enlarge dominion, but, unerring Providence says, in legible and indelible characters, We are, and must be a distinct people.

Lord Ffrench.

This Lord, by some very happy combination of address and conduct, has been fortunate enough to have se cured the friendship and good opinion of Mr. Pole, and other enemies to Catholic emancipation. The Catholic cause has contributed to ag

and

grandise and enrich many members of the Catholic body. Lord Ffrench is the second person of his family aistin. guished in the peerage-his mother was made a Lord a few years ago. It surprises many persons in the coun try what service could an old, ignorant woman do, to so highly recommend her to the sovereign, that she should be raised to the peerage; proper adequate services must have been done by some person, when the prejudices entertained in a certain quarter against the doctrines of the Catholic faith, could be so far abated, that a Po pish woman should be found worthy of being raised to a rank usually, and heretofore invariably, designed for the most distinguished of the established religion.

Mr. Pole, in the last sessions, al luded to some adviser of his in the Ca tholic body, and, on the late discussion, the 2d of February, in the House of Commons, he deprecated the Ca tholics, by comparing their conduct with that of one of their own body. Lord Ffrench, to whose character,loy. alty and prudence, the Secretary bore most honourable testimony, a nobleman who was so disgusted at the cabal, intrigue and suspicious character of the se paratists, that his Lordship told them "Ireland is tired of you," and in con sequence seceded from their body.

[ocr errors]

The Catholics have lost many years by incautious and credulous depend ence on leaders-they forgot the ad. vice of the illustrious 7one, “You never can be a people until you dis miss your respect for great names." Guided by the folly of the fifteenth century, they imagined the borrowed worth of a Lord would give dignity to their cause, and wisdom to their councils. They gave to the title what they would refuse to the man; the event has proved, that no artificial character, can bestow either intelli gence or honesty-they are attributes of nature, and she refuses them to the knave and the ideot. A man at this

day,

« ПредишнаНапред »