whether they be ecclesiastical or temporal, and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil doer. 6. That it is the opinion of this committee, that such act of repeal and explanation should be accompanied with such exceptions and regulations as may be found necessary for preserving unalterably the Protestant succession to the Crown, according to the act for the further limitation of the Crown, and better securing the rights and liberties of the subject, and for maintaining inviolate the Protestant episcopal church of England and Ireland, and the doctrine, government, and discipline thereof; and the church of Scotland, and the doctrine, worship, government, and discipline thereof; as the same are by law respectively established. These resolutions were adopted, and a bill founded upon them was ordered to be brought in by sir F. Burdett, Mr. Plunkett, Mr. Tierney, Mr. C. Grant, sir. J. Mackintosh, Mr. secretary Canning, viscount Palmerston, Mr. Wynn, sir J. Newport, sir H. Parnell, Mr. Abercromby, and Mr. Spring Rice. On the 23rd of March the bill was introduced by sir Francis Burdett, and was read a first time. This bill, after declaring that the Protestant succession, and the Protestant episcopal church of England and Ireland, and the Presbyterian church of Scotland, are established permanently and inviolably, and setting forth the declarations against transubstantiation, the invocation of saints, and the mass, stated, that these declarations related only to matters of spiritual and religious belief, and do not in any manner affect the allegiance of his majesty's subjects, and therefore enacted that they should no longer be taken as qualifications for office or franchise by any of his majesty's subjects, save as therein after provided. The bill then recited, that, with respect to the oaths of allegiance, supremacy, and abjuration, the Catholics had never objected to any of them except the oath of supremacy, and to that merely as apprehending that it might be construed to import a disclaimer of the spiritual authority of the pope or church of Rome in matters of religious belief: and it therefore enacted that the following oath might be taken, in lieu of the oath of supremacy : or "I, A. B. do sincerely promise and swear, that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to his present majesty, and will defend him to the utmost of my power against all conspiracies and attempts whatever that shall be made against his person, crown dignity; and I will do my utmost endeavour to disclose and make known to his majesty, his heirs, and successors, all treasons and traitorous conspiracies which may be formed against him or them: and I do faithfully promise to maintain, support, and defend, to the utmost of my power, the suc cession to the crown, which succession, by an act intituled An Act for the further limitation of the Crown, and better securing the rights and liberties of the subject,' is and stands limited to the princess Sophia, electress and duchessdowager of Hanover, and the heirs of her body, being Protestants, hereby utterly renouncing and abjuring any obedience or allegiance unto any other person claiming or pretending a right to the crown of these realms and I do : swear that I do reject and detest, as unchristian and impious, the position that it is lawful to murder or destroy any person or persons whatsoever, for or under the pretence of their being heretics or infidels; and also that unchristian and impious principle, that faith is not to be kept with heretics or infidels: and I do further declare, that it is not an article of my faith, and that I do renounce, reject, and abjure the opinion, that princes excommunicated, by the pope and council, or any other authority of the see of Rome, or by any other authorities whatsoever, may be deposed or murdered by their subjects, or by any person whatsoever; and I do promise that I will not hold, maintain, or abet any such opinion, or any other opinion contrary to what is expressed in this declaration and I do declare, that I do not believe that the pope of Rome, or any other foreign prince, prelate, state, or potentate, hath, or ought to have, any temporal or civil jurisdiction, power, superiority, or preeminence, directly, or indirectly, within this realm: And I do hereby disclaim, disavow, and solemnly abjure, any intention to subvert the present church establishment, for the purpose of substituting a Roman Catholic establishment in its stead: And I do solemnly swear, that I will never exercise any privilege to which I am or may become entitled, to disturb the Protestant religion or Protestant government in this kingdom: And I do solemnly, in the presence of God, profess, testify, and declare, that I do make this declaration and every part thereof, in the plain and ordinary sense of the words of this oath, without any evasion, equivocation, or men tal reservation whatever, and without any dispensation already granted by the pope, or any authority of the see of Rome, or any person whatever, and without thinking that I am or can be acquitted before God or man, or absolved of this declaration, or any part thereof, although the pope, or any other person or authority whatsoever, shall dispense with or annul the same, and declare that it was null or void. "So help me God." All persons taking this oath, were to be capable of taking, holding, and enjoying any right, office, and franchise, as fully and effectually, to all intents and purposes, as if they had taken and subscribed the oath of supremacy, save as thereinafter provided. Another clause provided that the act should not extend to alter the laws respecting the Protestant succession, the marriages of the royal family, or the acts of uniformity, or to enable any person to hold any office belonging to the church, or any ecclesiastical court or court of appeal from such court; or any office in any cathedral collegiate or ecclesiastical establishment, or in either of the universities, or in colleges or halls, or schools of ecclesiastical foundation; or to enable Roman Catholics to take orders; or to enable Roman Catholics to present to any ecclesiastical benefice; or to hold the office of lord lieutenant of Ireland, or chancellor of Great Britain or Ireland. By subsequent clauses the king was to appoint, by a commission under the great seal of Ireland, such Catholic bishops as he pleased, to form a board for the execution of certain duties. The commission was to be revocable, but was to be re-issued within a limited time. The commissioners appointed by it were to take an oath, by which they swore that they would faithfully and impartially perform the duties vested in them by the act; that they would honestly advise his majesty in all matters which should come before them under the act; and that they would not directly or indirectly disclose, except to his majesty, or by his majesty's command, any matter or thing which should come to their knowledge by reason or in consequence of their being commissioners. They were to certify to his majesty or the lord lieutenant, appointments of bishops and deans, and the loyalty of the personsappointed; bishops and deans were not to act, until a certificate had been transmitted to them by the commissioners. The other duties of this board related to the examination of bulls and dispensations proceeding from the see of Rome. ** * Mr. O'Connell, in a letter which was published in the newspapers, 'stated, that the preparation of the draught of this bill had been committed to him. This circumstance being alluded to by Mr. Peel in the House of Commons, Mr. Tierney stated, that," as one of the committee which prepared the bill, be would say, that he did not know, and did not believe, that Mr. O'Connell had drawn it up. Some gentlemen of the committee might have consulted Mr. O'Connell on the subject of this bill, and he, in return, might have communicated to them his sentiments in writing. Those sentiments Mr. O'Connell might have considered as the foundation of the bill; and so it might have got abroad that he had drawn it up. If it were meant to be insinuated, that the committee had delegated to Mr. O'Connell the duty which the House had delegated to them, he must be permitted to give a most peremptory denial to such an insinuation, and to say that no others but the committee had been engaged in preparing it for the consideration of parliament." On the 23rd of March the bill was read a first time. The second reading was moved on the 19th of April. The debate on the measure occupied the whole of that evening, and was adjourned to the 21st; when it was carried by a majority of 268 to 241. The argument was maintained on the one side, principally by Mr. Canning; and on the other, by Mr. Peel. Mr. Canning relied chiefly on the general principles on which the cause of Catholic equalization is defended: but went, in one part of his speech, further than the advocates of the question usually venture; for, by a criticism on the peculiar doctrines of the Roman Catholic religion, he tried to prove that the professors of that faith were not, in respect of their principles, more proper objects of suspicion than any other dissenters. The whole of his harangue, though more laboured and more artificially ornate than his discourses in general subtle sophistry, better fitted to are, was wordy, and full of a puzzle than to convince. Mr. Peel, without again entering into the general question, directed his attention principally to the particular frame of the measure before the House. He confessed, that he was surprised at the two first clauses in the preamble of the present bill:- "Whereas the Protestant succession to the imperial Crown of this united kingdom and its dependencies, is, by the act for the further limitation of the Crown and the better securing the liberties of the subject, established permanently and inviolably and whereas the Protestant Episcopal church of England and Ireland, and the doctrine, discipline, and government thereof, and likewise the Protestant Presbyterian church of Scotland, and the doctrine, discipline, and government thereof, are, by the respective acts of union between England and Scotland, and between Great Britain and Ireland, therein severally established permanently and inviolably." Now, why were these two clauses introduced into the preamble? There was no clause in the bill, which provided for the permanent and inviolable security of the Protestant establishment. These clauses had some connexion with the first bill that was introduced by the late Mr. Grattan; for they were there followed by a third clause to this effect"And whereas it would tend to promote the interest of the same, and strengthen our free constitution, of which they are an essential part, if the civil and military disqualifications under which his majesty's Roman Catholic subjects now laboured were removed." anxiety for the welfare of the church of England exhibited in the preamble, and not followed up in any of the enactments of the bill, was one of those touches of nature which showed a consciousness of danger in the bosoms of the framers of the bill; and which ought to excite a lurking suspicion that all was not so correct in it as at first sight it might appear to be. The constitution, he contended, was virtually altered by this bill. The bill of Rights was repealed by it. That bill provided, by a most solemn enactment, that the oath taken by every person, on his admission to office, should be the oath of supremacy, which asserts, "that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate, hath or ought to have any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm." This oath was now to be repealed. He did not deny the right of the That clause was omitted in the House of Commons to alter this present bill; for to say that the oath, but, when they told him privileges, which it conferred upon that they wished to secure to the the Catholics, were intended to church of England permanency promote the interest of the church and inviolability, and when they of England, and to strengthen our altered that act which provided free constitution, would be an for it most effectually, he had a absurdity too great for any man to right to ask what security they had think of believing. In the feast in to give him for the fulfilment of Macbeth, that tyrant, before he their promises? He would not went round the table to pay his deny, that the maintenance of the respects to his guests, expressed an succession to the Crown in the Proanxiety for the presence of Banquo, testant line, together with the neceswhom he had doomed to die: and sity of two or three of its principal one of the commentators had re- officers still remaining Protestants, marked, that this single touch of was an important security. Still nature showed a greater conscious- it amounted only to this-that the ness of guilt in Macbeth's mind, individual who came to the throne and excited a stronger suspicion should make the declaration against that he intended mischief to transubstantiation, and should be Banquo, than a thousand laboured in communion with the church of speeches would have done. So he England. All the security derived (Mr. Peel) thought, that the from surrounding him with Pro testant councillors was taken away. How was it that James 2nd endeavoured to effect his purposes? "By the assistance of divers evil councillors, judges, and ministers employed by him"-(such was the language of the bill of Rights)"did he endeavour to subvert and extirpate the Protestant religion, and the laws and liberties of this kingdom." The House would therefore see, that, though the king was obliged to be in communion with the church of England at his accession to the throne, he was left at liberty, by this bill, to make his selection of councillors amongst his Roman Catholic subjects. What might be the consequence of such an event? He would suppose that the individual who filled the throne, after he had taken the oath against transubstantiation, found the grounds of his creed to be erroneous, and considered the ancient religion of the country to be the wisest and the best. He would suppose that he took advantage of the liberal doctrine which had been that night advanced, that a man's religious opinions were not matter of his own choice, and that it would be the height of intolerance to subject him to any disqualification on that account. Now, if a king or queen of this country, with a mind liable to the influence of designing persons, were, after his accession, to become a convert to the Catholic faith, and were to declare his or her adherence to it, the peace and tranquillity of the country would rest on the will of a single mind. An attempt to dismiss that individual from the throne, because he had, upon conscientious principles, changed his religious faith, might be productive of very serious convulsions in the country. In the reign of James 2nd it had produced them; and in that of Charles 2nd, the suspicion of such an event had given rise to the precautions which it was the object of the present bill to get rid of for ever. He knew that such an event might occur under the present system; but, if the ancient barriers of the constitution were broken down, and the sovereign was enabled to surround himself with Catholic advisers, facilities for it would be created which at present had no existence. He allowed that the danger he was now describing was merely speculative; but, when the fundamental laws of the country were going to be repealed, it was right to look even at speculative danger. It had been said, that they were not to look at the clouds with a telescope, and disregard the immediate danger at their feet. Agreed; but still they were bound to be cautious; and, if they saw a cloud in the sky, which at present was not larger than a man's hand, they ought to recollect that it might, ere long, overcast the firmament, and involve the whole face of nature in gloom and desolation. Against this they were bound to provide. They ought to act towards those who were to succeed them, with the same caution and prospective regard with which their ancestors acted towards them, and were not, for any temporary convenience, to diminish the strength and security of their institutions. They were not now deciding on the formation of new institutions. The question was not, whether the form of government was to be republican, where all religions were admitted equally to the participation of political power, but whether, being a monarchy, with the Protestant religion |