N the meeting of parliament

thrown open, all those, on the

the tables were immediately crowded with petitions relative to the two great subjects which were expected to receive their final discussion in this session; the renewal of the East India charter, and the claimsofthe Roman Catholics. With respect to the first, it was merely a contest between different local or particular interests; and whilst all those places and bodies which were at present excluded from the benefits of East Indian commerce joined in requesting that the monopoly might be abolished, and the trade VOL. LV.

profits, either directly or remotely, from the existing state of things, equally concurred in opposing the principle of alteration. Nothing could be more simple than the motives, or more uniform than the strain of argument, on each side.

The Roman Catholic question, though agitated upon the whole with great uniformity of language and reasoning, was more varied in its objects and principles. To the obvious interests of the individuals of that communion in freeing themselves from degrading re[B]

strictions, and obtaining access to power and emolument, was added a zeal in supporting the fundamental maxims of equality of rights among all citizens, and of the entire separation of religious from political concerns, which operated upon many, independently of personal motives. On the other hand, to the natural reluctance of the members of an establishment to resign any of their prerogatives, was subjoined that feeling of suspicion and aversion towards the Roman Catholic religion, which will perhaps never be eradicated from the British public; and which has on various occasions united in opposition to it those who have differed the most widely from one another. As a part of parliamentary history, it will suffice at present to have noticed the period at which petitioning on these important national topics, especially the latter, became general. The results will form the matter of future chapters.

On the 3rd of February, lord Castlereagh presented to the House of Commons the papers relative to the discussions with America on the subject of the French decrees, and the orders of council, together with a declaration from the Prince Regent relative to the causes and origin of the war with America. This state paper, which was of considerable length, began with a retrospective view of the successive steps taken by the ruler of France in his project of ruining the power of Great Britain, as the great obstacle to his ambitious designs. It proceeded to review the mea sures taken by the American government with respect to both belligerents, and to show how partial

its conduct had been in favour of France. The causes which produced the revocation of the orders in council were next noticed, with the precipitate declaration of war on the part of the United States, and their refusal to consent to a cessation of hostilities. The preliminary condition proposed by them for an armistice, was then adverted to, namely, the abandonment by Great Britain of her right of search for the purpose of taking British seamen from American merchant vessels; and reasons were given why it could not be acquiesced in. In fine, after an exposition of the circumstances which preceded and have followed the declaration of war by the United States, his Royal Highness explicitly declares, that he can never acknowledge any blockade to be illegal, which has been duly notified, and is supported by an adequate force, merely upon the ground of its extent, or because the ports or coasts blockaded are not at the same time invested by land: that he can never admit, that neutral trade with Great Britain can be constituted a public crime, the commission of which can expose the ships of any power to be denationalized: that he can never admit that Great Britain can be debarred of just and necessary retaliation, through the fear of eventually affecting the interest of a neutral: that he can never admit that in the exercise of the undoubted and hitherto undisputed right of searching neutral merchant vessels in time of war, the impressment of British seamen, when found therein, can be deem ed any violation of a neutral flag: nor that taking such seamen from