counsellors; and a parliament that might be filled with dissenters could admit, without inconsistency, a catholic. But did the exclusion of the catholics from the privileges they claimed, produce peace or any corresponding advantages? No. If there was danger to our establishments, as alleged from the admission of the catholics, there was greater danger from their exclusion. There were two lines of demarkation on which the house might take its stand. First, it might have repealed the penal laws, and, after repealing them, might have stood on the existing disabilities, or might repeal both. But parliament had not stood on either. It had repealed all the penal statutes, and some of the disabilities, retaining others. It was contended that, if the catholics obtained the abolition of the existing disabilities, they would become formidable to our establishments by becoming more powerful. This, he contended, would not be the case. As individuals, those who attained office or distinction would become more powerful; but the body would be less so, because less united. Besides, a government ought not to found its security on the weakness of its subjects, but on their confidence. There was no part of the constitution which ought to depend on the powerlessness of any portion of the subjects. It was impossible to tell the countless and nameless ties by which the constitution attracted to itself the affections of subjects, and therefore it was madness to persist in any measure, the inevitable tendency of which was to alienate those affections. He implored the house to consider that the fate of Ireland was at stake-tō look at the state of the population of that country-to reflect on its present misery-and on what the parliament of Great Britain had already done for that country under the auspices of our late sovereign. Let it no longer be said of Ireland, that, having performed the duties which the constitution exacted, she was still excluded from the privileges to which she had a constitutional right. He called on the house to ratify this night the solemn contract of the union, and to make that great measure in reality what it was in name. What did Mr. Pitt, who had projected that measure, conceive to be its nature? He asked the house what meaning that great statesman attached to the following lines, which he had applied to the union of the two countries: -- Non ego, nec Teucris Italos parere jubebo, What, he asked, did Mr. Pitt understand by the eternal laws of confederacy, which were in future to bind those nations, not in the relations of conqueror and conquered, but in equality of laws? We profess to follow the policy of that enlightened statesman in our intercourse and relations with foreign countries; but on his system of domestic policy we have not yet acted, nor will the maxims on which that system was founded be reduced to practice till the inscription on his tomb records the liberation of Ireland. Look at the state of education in that country, and view its natives pur suing every means of acquiring knowledge. These are securities springing up where they were least expected, as if sent by providence to remove a base and illiberal pretext. Let us not take advantage of them to continue the present system of injustice, but let us rather avail ourselves of them, as raised up by that providence which I believe to be the peculiar protection of national faith and national justice." When the right honourable gentleman had concluded, calls of "question, question," were loudly vociferated from all parts of the house. Mr. Luke White rose chiefly to make his acknowledgments to the right honourable gentleman for the able support he had given to the motion, and he hoped the right honourable gentleman's arguments, from his opportunities of acquaintance with the state of Ireland, would have due weight with the house. Mr. Bankes, sen. rose amidst the most deafening cries of "question, question," and spoke at some length against the motion. The coughing of the members, and other expressions of impatience, rendered it impossible to hear any one entire sentence of the honourable gentleman's speech. Mr. Hart Davis rose to order. If the impatience of the house on so material a question as the present was so great as to prevent his honourable friend from obtaining a hearing, he should feel it his duty to move an adjourn ment. Mr. Bankes said he was not inclined to persevere. Mr. W. Fitzgerald rose merely to state a fact connected with the present question. The circumstance to which he wished to draw the attention of the house was the insertion in the Gazette of an address purporting to come from. an association of orangemen in Ireland. He understood that from among the addresses presented to his majesty a selection was made for publication in the Gazette by the minister whose duty it was; and he was bound to say, in justice to ministers, that the individual who selected that address must have done so without the sanction of his colleagues, as it was nothing less than an insult to the sovereign. It was not perhaps generally known that this class of individuals had been pronounced by the judges of the land to be an illegal association, inasmuch as they bound themselves to a conditional allegiance, and to principles unknown to the great body of the public. The address in question had been brought over to this country by the lord mayor of Dublin, and had been presented to his majesty, surrounded and emblazoned with those symbols of the association which were understood only by its own members. The lord mayor of Dublin, who had been employed to carry over this address by a body of persons busied in exasperating one part of the community against the other, was his majesty's stationer in Ireland, and, he understood, had expected to receive the honour of knighthood on presenting it. A noble lord, remarkable for his suavity of manners, and his powers of enlivening even aldermen, had gone so far as to furnish the knight-expectant with the motto "pro "pro patria," which he conceived peculiarly appropriate to a stationer. Having failed, however, to obtain the honour which he had been led to expect, the lord mayor was condoled with by his friends, and an honourable alderman (sir William Curtis) whom he now saw at the bar, and who was remarkable for his festive urbanity, had resolved "to cheer him up" with a dinner. He should only add his hope that the presentation of party addresses would always be reprobated by that house, as it could never be desired that the sovereign of this kingdom should become the sovereign of a party or faction. Lord Castlereagh and Sir G. Hill rose at the same moment amidst loud calls for the question. The noble lord was called for by both sides of the house, but he gave place to Sir G. Hill, who complained that the honourable gentleman who spoke last had introduced a subject wholly irrelevant. The honourable baronet said, he had had the honour of accompanying the lord mayor of Dublin. He should oppose the present motion, because the former concessions to the catholics had failed to produce that conciliation among the several classes in Ireland, which he and other protestant gentlemen had endeavoured to promote. The right honourable secretary for Ireland had not favoured the house with an opinion, founded on his experience of three years, whether the restrictions on the catholics were not as necessary now as formerly. Lord Castlereagh could not suffer the question to go to a vote, without troubling the house with a few observations. The present was a subject which had been often discussed, and on which he had frequently expressed his own sentiments on former occasions; but it was one which he never approached without great pain, because it compelled him to differ from those friends with whom he usually agreed on other political and national questions. Another circumstance that gave him great pain was, that from what had passed he saw no great prospect of a more favourable issue to the question at the present moment than had formerly attended it; but still he conceived it to be his duty to express himself candidly and without reserve. He had often wondered that the extent of the question now remaining for discussion had so much importance attached to it. He could indeed conceive why the catholics should consider it of great importance, because, as the right honourable gentleman had observed, it was natural for them to feel great interest in being excluded from those offices and honours which were open to the attainment of others, and in being considered, under the circumstances of the constitution, not as dissenters, but as catholics. Still, however, the question at issue certainly did not appear to him to involve that degree of advantage on the one side, and of danger on the other, which ought to provoke the warmth that at present existed. He could not conceive how that mind was constructed which convinced itself of danger arising from the equality of protestants and catholics, or which could have any other objections to the establishment of that that equality than a repugnance to change of every kind. He could not persuade himself, if this concession were made to-morrow, that it could bring the catholics any accession of power, and he thought that the right honourable gentle man had stated this point more strongly than was borne out by the truth. Stress might be laid on the numbers of the Roman catholics, and the danger which might be apprehended from that circumstance, if ever they should attain any considerable increase of political power; but if we looked to other parts of the empire, and see their numbers greater out of all proportion, we could not for a moment entertain any idea of danger to the constitution from the numerical strength of the Roman catholics, if they had the means or the inclination neither of which he admitted-to turn their acquired strength against the interests of their country. He would now put it to the house, whether, considering the nice balance of opinion in that and the other house of parliament upon this question, it was a subject which ought to be suffered to hang about them in an unsettled state? Looking at the present, and what might be the future state of Europe, he would ask whether such a question, calculated as it was to create considerable embarrassment, ought to remain permanently unsettled? Giving every credit to his right honourable friend (Mr. Peel) for the candid and honourable manner in which he had discussed this question, yet he could not agree with him, that in the fear of a future possible embarrassment or danger to the country, or even in the fear of a danger of our having a catholic king, we ought to allow a question of the magnitude and importance of the present to hang about the government in an unsettled state. He had not understood as his right honourable friend (Mr. Peel) seemed to have done, that the right honourable gentleman (Mr. Plunkett) had looked upon the question as one of right; if he had so done, he (lord Castlereagh) must differ from him, for he looked upon the question of admissibility as one which must be decided by the necessity of the case. He was fully prepared to maintain the right of the state to abridge the liberty of the subject, where that was found to be necessary for the general benefit, and this he held to be particularly applicable to the support of the ecclesiastical part of the state; but he did not think that necessity now existed for the exclusion of the Roman catholics; the Roman catholic was not placed on the footing of dissenters from the church of England in general; this was a marked and particular exclusion, and for which he could see no reasonable ground in the present state of the country. The noble lord then proceeded to show, that there was nothing in the state of this country or of Europe which would justify the continued exclusion of the Roman catholics from taking that station in society which their growing prosperity had entitled them to, and that the apprehension of a future danger from their increased power was not a sufficient justification for their exclusion. He could not admit that the cases of Hamburgh or Swe. den, which his right honourable friend had cited, were of sufficient force force to support his argument; it, (which he could not anticipate for he believed that we were the as a result of the present meaonly power in Europe at present sure,) force must be opposed to which acted upon this principle of force, and such attempts would exclusion from office on religious be put down, but he conceived grounds. France did not act that that church might be suffiupon such a principle, and he be- ciently protected, not indeed by lieved that the only one question making the catholic religion the upon which the Congress of Vien- established religion of Ireland, na were unanimous was that of but by affording the same protecdoing away with distinctions and tion as to every other class of preferences on account of religion. dissenters. With respect to the He therefore thought we ought making a provision for the cathonot to be the power which should lic clergy of Ireland, he would say, continue such distinctions, parti- that if that had been done before cularly as, thank God, our religion now, the internal situation of that was not one which in any degree country would be very different sanctioned intolerance to those who from what it was at the present differed from it. When he ap- day. He had submitted proplied this principle to Ireland, he position of this kind to the heads saw the strongest reason for sup- of the catholic clergy, under the porting it. He would not have administration of lord Sidmouth, it understood that the question (then Mr. Addington,) and he was of catholic emancipation was informed, that however liberal the ever held out to Ireland as a offers which were made, might pledge for the union of that coun- be, the measure could not be try with England. It was dis- carried; the lay part of that relitinctly understood that that ques- gion remained excluded from the tion was to be left entirely to privileges which they so earnestly the discretion of the legislature. hoped for. He thought they Looking, however, to the situation acted wisely on that occasion. of Ireland, he maintained the Nothing, he conceived, would only practical mode of effectually contribute more to improve the putting an end to the embarrass- state of Ireland than such an arments which were met in the go- rangement; he did not mean that vernment of Ireland, would be by the clergy should be placed in a removing the discontents arising state of subserviency to the gofrom the present situation of the Ro- vernment, but no measure could man catholics. He would declare, be more calculated to improve that they could never expect to the internal state of the country settle the differences which exist--to advance the progress of ed in Ireland, and to apply to it the education, than the connexion of remedies which its internal con- the catholic clergy with the godition required, until this ques- vernment of the country; but it tion was finally and amicably ad- was impossible that it should be justed. He felt that the esta- effected whilst the great body of blished church in Ireland should the catholics remained in their be supported at all risks; for if present state of exclusion. What ever attempts were made against they wanted was, to make the law |