signed by 5,000 names, which were all ordered to be laid on the table. to protest against any objections to his present motion, which had for their foundation exceptions against that line of proceeding, according to which he had not thought it expedient to regulate, in any respect, his Parliamentary conduct. Having thus sufficiently protected himself against any misapprehension as to the course which he had thought it proper for him to take, he should next proceed to observe, that for nothing, but for inquiry only, was he then contending on the part of the Petitioners. To take into their immediate consideration the present state of his Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects in Great Britain and Ireland, was the whole amount of the pledge which he would obtain from their Lordships, however entirely successful-(if, indeed, any success should at length attend his humble endeavours)-in the motion, with which it was his intention to conclude. For a satisfactory consideration, under its present circumstances, the question would, as it appeared to him, be best and most conveniently discussed under the following heads : The Earl of Donoughmore then said, that at the outset, and for the purpose of guarding against any possible misconception, before he entered into the subject and stated to their Lordships what the question for their consideration was, he felt it to be indispensably necessary for him explicitly to premise what the question was not, to which it would be his duty to call their Lordships' attention. Quite unfettered by any discussions out of Parliament-not acknowledging the necessity of any direction respecting the course which it would be fitting for him to pursue, in seeking to obtain for the Petitioners the relief which they solicit a party to the formation of no specific arrangements, within which to circumscribe the deliberative functions of either House-he had not ventured to embody in the form of distinct substantive resolutions, what he may have wished to anticipate as the probable result of their Lordship's judgment on the different parts of that important subject; much less to embody such propositions in the shape of legislative enactments. If such proposed resolutions, such a projective legislative measure, had any existence, 2dly, The claims of the Catholics he must desire to be completely freed to the removal of the existing disabilifrom any participation or responsibilities, under those proofs, which have ty either in the one case or in the other. In what he had said, however, he must desire not to be misunderstood as presuming to express any opinion respecting the course of proceeding adopted, or intended so to have been, in another place. The Resolutions and the Bill, which had been printed and circulated previous to the late discussion, may have possibly furnished instructions the most necessary; they were perhaps not unhappi y devised as a wise precaution for the protection of Parliament, against the errors into which it might have otherwise fallen. But as he desired to take no advantage from this new mode of bringing the subject forward, so had he an undoubted right 1st, The causes which press its consideration forward, on every principle of justice and sound policy. been accepted from them for the last 20 years, as entirely satisfactory, of their allegiance to the State, and what proposition it would accordingly be proper for him to make to their Lordships on their behalf. 3dly, Those additional securities, which had been contended for as indispensable, by some very respectable Members of both Houses, and the consequent securities devised by the measure of 1813, respecting the Roman Catholic Church. And, lastly, The argument, so often and so triumphantly relied upon, against any consideration of the subject whatsoever, from the dissatisfied, and, as it had been alledged to be, irritated state of the Catholic mind. From this formal division of the subject, he would not, as he trusted, be misconceived, as intending to enter, at length, into any of its details. Professing, as he did, to desire consideration only, such a course would be quite unjustifiable on his part. He did not feel, however, that he was entitled to call the House to a discussion of such importance and extent, without putting their Lordships into possession-by however compressed a statement-of what his own views of the question were, and of those details, which it would be his wish and endeavour to effectuate, by the proposed inquiry. Upon the first head, then, a great class of the constituency of the State had complained, by their petitions to both Houses of Parliament, that they had been deprived of their just participation in the benefits of the British Constitution. They complained of exclusion from political privileges of the first importance.Their Lordships knew that these exclusions did actually exist; but they were sought to be justified, on the principle of necessity. The Petitioners denied the necessity-challenged investigation-and demanded to be permitted to produce, through their Parliamentary advocates-vouchers unimpeachable of their allegiance to the constitution, under which they live. These alleged grievances--and which the Petitioners were ready to prove had, besides, an operation so very extensive, as to have united in the pursuit of the same redress, a very respectable portion of their fellowsubjects of Great Britain, and, in the other part of the United Kingdom, four-fifths of the entire population. What are the principles of justice and sound government, upon which Parliament is to turn its back to such petioners as these-and to refuse the consolation, even of a decent consideration, to alleged grievances of such magnitude and extent? But, again, if this system (supposing it to be deserving of such a name) SUPP. ORTHOD. JOUR. VOL. III. is indeed capable of justification, on the plea of necessity, it ought surely to be at least uniform in its operation against the proscribed class-wheresoever found within the precincts of the State. Is such, however, the state of the case? or is it not, on the contrary, directly the reverse of this? In Scotland, the Catholic has the capacity to hold every office, civil or military, without any toleration of his religion. In England, a very limited admission into the State, under the statute of 1791. In Ireland, the elective franchise, and all the important acquisitions of 1793. Is not this existing anomaly alone a sufficient reason for prompt consideration? And ought it not to be considered, almost as an axiom, in every well regulated Government, that the civil and military capacities of all the subjects of the same class and description, should be similar and uniform within the same state? Look at this part of the question still in another point of view, and are not a mass of inabilities and exclusions -as affecting a certain class of the community-sufferings in every sense of the term-and do they not inflict upon the proscribed cast, as compared with the other members of the same State, galling marks of inferiority, and daily degradations? And will their Lordships not agree with him, that it is a fit subject for inquiry, whether their Catholic fellow-subjects, of whatever rank or degree, from the peasant to the peer, are justly subjected, in this exclusion from office, to the legal penalty of convicted offence? The Noble Earl then called the attention of the House to the question of the Union between Great Britain and Ireland, and claimed for the Catholics a prompt discussion and conciliatory adjustment, as the fulfilment of the pledge under which their assent was obtained to that measure-which the Noble Earl had himself advocated. with them on that ground-with the full knowledge and approbation of his Majesty's Irish Government-and without the strong support of whom | full, a perfect equality, in And lastly, on that part of the subject, the Noble Earl called to the recollection of Noble Lords, the strong and sanguine expectations which were justly created in the Catholic mind, by all the circumstances so favourable to the prospect of ultimate success→→→ which marked the last discussion in that House on the motion of the Noble Marquis in the blue ribbon (Lord Wellesley) the object of which was precisely the same with that with which the Noble Earl intended to conclude. Could they forget the circumstances of that day, so truly cheering to the friends of religious liberty, when in support of the motion of the Noble Marquis for consideration, with a declared view to conciliatory adjustment, there was every thing but a majority of that House obtained by the eloquence and energy of the Noble Marquis-and the cooperation and support of four of the Cabinet Ministers of the Prince Regent-and of two illustrious Dukes of the reigning family. These flattering prospects, the Noble Earl called upon the House to realize, and to effectuate those hopes which had been so justly raised in the Catholic mind. every con stitutional privilege and capacity, with every other subject of these realms, inasmuch as they are alike inheritors of all the blessings of a British Con stitution. In arguing this question, the policy of the last 40 years, had greatly reduced the extent of the ground on which he had to tread.That noble example of liberal legisla tion, the Irish statute of 1793, the second Magna Charta of the Irish Catholic, gave him a commanding position, from which he could maintain with irresistible force, his undoubted claim to the restitution of every privi lege, which has been as yet withheld. The time is long gone by since it has ceased to be matter of argument, whether to the Catholic could be safely confided constitutional privileges. Look at the Statute of 1793. They are restored by that Act. It is too late to argue whether he is fitted to receive political power. If Noble Lords look again at that signal effort of liberal policy, and they will see in its enactments the elective franchise, the great source of political power. The Act of 1793 at once admits the title of the Catholic to all those acqui sitions which have made him a freeman, and his country a nation. It presents itself to us also in another and less gratifying relation, for it contains the catalogue of the still existing disabilities. But upon the subject of those disabilities, how is it possible for him to argue differences without distinction? A Catholic is competent by that Act to the command of a regi ment; but, when the force is magni. fied to a brigade, he is trust-worthy no more. The Catholics of Ireland are the actual Electors of the majo Under the second head of inquiry, I can have no hesitation in avowing, that my decided conviction has long and unequivocally been, that the Catholic is entitled to a complete removal of the existing disabilities, preserving always inviolate the Protestantism of the Crown, and whatever immediately relates to the exercise of the Royal functions, to the disposal of Ecclesiastical benefices, and the adminis-rity of the Irish County Members tration of the affairs of the established Churches in the different parts of the United Kingdom. But what are the grounds on which I have satisfied my mind, that, with the obviously necessary exceptions, which I have already adverted to his Majesty's Catholic subjects have an undoubted right to a and on what principle is it that their Premier English Earl is not to be trusted with the possession of his he reditary seat in that House? For his faculties, the Noble Earl said, that these distinctions were quite too nice. Those by whom they are maintained must certainly prove their case-they But did the Noble Earl complain of what that act had left undone? God forbid! It was an act of signal wisdom, and grace, and mercy. The gift to Ireland (and she never received one so valuable before or since) of a great Statesman-now no more-whose son, one of the Prince Regent's Ministers, treads in the same track of liberal policy which his father had chalked out for him. The Noble Earl said, that he was prepared at that time to give the Catholic all-upon the same security and he had the satisfaction of having this opinion of his sanctioned by the opinion and the vote of a Noble relative of his, since called to the Upper House, and by that of a Right Hon. Gentleman, who had been repeatedly a great depositary with him of the petitions of their Catholic countrymen-and of whom he could never speak but with the greatest regard, and of his talents or his energies with the greatest respect. The Noble Earl then adverted to the gradual repeal of that obnoxious code, which probably marked the discretion and the wisdom of the Government, in order that the Catholic mind might have time to expand, to grow out to its increasing constitutional capacities. He dwelt on the state of Ireland during the eighty years of proscription, and contrasted it with the more happy and prosperous period of the last forty years of conciliation; and shewed how the strength and prosperity of the country had grown and increased pari passu, with those of its Catholic millions-because they constituted in fact and in truth the nation. Since the acquisitions of 1793, the Catholic has undergone his full probation of 21 years. He has now arrived at a full age, for receiving the privileges of his birth-right-already too long withheld. And where are the dangers of which Noble Lords are apprehensive? The Noble Earl would defy them to point out to him where they are, and in what they consist. He will, however, tell them where to search, and where they would be sure to find them. They would find them in the exclusions. Remove that ground of hostility against our esta blishments, and even all argueable danger was at an end. Upon the question of additional securities, the Noble Earl said, that from what he had already so fully stated as his opinions upon that subject, the House must be already aware that he looked for none, because he was convinced in his conscience that none were wanting. It was, therefore, scarcely necessary for him to say that he had disapproved altogether of the additional clauses which had been added in the Committee to the Bill which was so much debated in 1813, in another place. In addition to the Pope, they had now two new personages brought forward upon the stage as objects of great apprehension, and against whom, for the protection of the Protestant establishment, these additional barriers had been raised. These objects of alarm were no other than the Catholic Bishops and the Catholic Deans. Will any Noble Lord conscientiously declare that he has himself known, or has heard repeated to him, by any other person whatever, one solitary circumstance, on which the slightest suspicion could attach of disloyal conduct towards the State, against any of these calumniated ministers of Religion. Rummage the dark and dismal records of the 80 years of proscription-pursue the enquiry through the more auspicious pe riod of the last 40 years-and will there be found a single instance of criminality, nay, even of suspicion ? He, therefore, objected to these clauses, to all that measure of security, because it was in the first place unnecessary, and in the next place, because it tend ed to throw on the character of blameless and meritorious individuals, an unjust and cruel aspersion. perhaps some irritation. But had he not equal reason to retort the same charge against his Protestant antagonists? God knows there was enough of inflammable matter in Ireland; but had the Irish Government done nothing to increase the irritation? Was it not known that Dublin newspapers in the pay of Government had introduced into their columns violent abuse of the Catholics, which would not have been the case if it had been supposed to be displeasing to the higher powers. Hence mutual irritation was produced; but put an end to the grievance, and you would put an end to the quarrels. But to what but disparagement to the individuals on both sides, and discredit and injury to the cause, can these angry ebullitions tend? He must repeat it, however, again, that for this the Catholic is not alone to blame. On both sides, something was to be forgiven-and much to be for got. Is it, however, a reasonable ground of charge against the Catholic on the part of the Parliament, that he was not willing to accept as a boon, what he considered to be an imputation against the sincerity of those ob It was repugnant to his feelings in another point of view, inasmuch as it offered privileges to the Catholic laity, at the price of the degradation of the character of their church. But these securities had been rejected una voce by the whole Catholic community, lay and ecclesiastical. Whether they were or were not inconsistent with the religious feelings of that persuasion, the Noble Earl said, that it was not his province to argue. Those whose province it was to consider and to decide, had determined that question in the negative, and had set it at rest. His own objections were derived from another source. He rejected them, because they affected to improve the constitution of an important class of individuals, which, in his opinion, did not stand in need of any amendment. The Noble Lord said, that he knew the Catholic Clergy well; that a more meritorious and valuable body of men existed not in the Protestant Statethey passed their exemplary lives in the faithful discharge of a laborious duty. The Magistrates themselves were not more effectual in the preser-ligations, by which he has been faithvation of the peace; they desired no rewards but the voluntary offerings of their own flocks-to them-to their Ecclesiastical superiors-and to the fellow-labourers in the same vineyard, and to no other quarter, they looked for approbation, countenance, and support. I will never consent to an arrangement, the tendency of which would be to give these thoughts another direction, and to turn their eyes to some inferior agent of a Provincial Government in the Irish Castle-yard. In short these security clauses are á piece of cumbrous machinery, as little necessary, as they would be likely to be effectual to any beneficial purpose. The Noble Earl said, that he had now arrived at the last division of his subject in arguing which, he was ready to acknowledge, on the part of the Catholic, much dissatisfaction, fully bound to the State for the last twenty years, and an attempted vio lation of their religious duties-and might not feeling of the cup having been so suddenly wrested from their hand, when they fancied themselves just about to partake of the banquet to which they had been invited, justly create some natural and not unjustifiable disappointment and disgust? Let Parliament not conceal from themselves, at the same time, that in that so zealously decried Catholic Board there is combined much of legal and constitutional acquirement-much of eloquence-much of energy of mind--and also much of knowledge in the details of this their own pecu. liar question, and to which, conse quently, their best merit have been so anxiously applied-any endeavour, however, at dictation to any class of |