| be expected, that one million of persons could depress and exclude from power six millions of their fellow-subjects on their own native soil, and yet remain themselves in a situation of comfort and happiness? For the sake, therefore, of free and liberal Protestantism, and for the sake of all those Protestants who professed an attachment to liberal and enlightened principles, he implored the House to repeal these laws, and leave both Catholics and Protestants to exert their energies for the protection of common rights and common privileges. Let them give up their time and energies for the improvement of their own interests, and the interests of the

now existed between the Protestant and the Catholic was an odious, an unjust, an impolitic distinction: it was a distinction which exposed us to much envy, hatred, and danger: it was a distinction which was calculated to throw us down from that high station which we occupied among the nations of the world. He implored the House, therefore, to adopt a measure which would conciliate Ireland, and place the empire in a state of security.

Mr. Cust said, that the present was the seventh or eighth session in which he had given his opinion on this important sub

The constitution was tumbling to pieces; society was in a state of dissolution, and all the moral relations between man and man threatened with extinction. Such was the true picture of the present state of Ireland. He would put it to the House, then, what were the inducements for them to remain where they were as to this question? It was said, that the Catholics, to a man, were discontented. Yes! nothing was more true shan such a statement. The Catholics were, one and all, deeply discontented. The spirit of liberty, like an electric flame, ran through every link, from the highest to the meanest of the social chain. The Catholics were determined to be emanci-country at large. The distinction which pated, or never to cease urging and agitating their claims. This was the fearful state of things which the legislature had now to contemplate, and which they were called on to redress. With respect to the Catholic Association, let them be called agitators, or what they would, still it could not be denied, that they had the heart and affections of the Catholics of Ireland. The people were alienated from the government, and the Catholic Association possessed the confidence, and wielded the opinions, and the moral and physical force of the country. If he had any share of the responsibility attached to the govern-ject, and that opinion, he must say, rement of Ireland, he would not deem it safe to slumber until he had thrown the shield of justice over the people of Ireland, and by removing all disabilities, had combined all classes in one harmonious feeling of reverence and affection for the laws and government of their country. What would they propose to do with a people so circumstanced as the Catholics of Ireland? What was the condition of the Protestants under the present system? The hon. member for Derry had described them as, of all men, the most forlorn and oppressed; and as being held up to hatred from the pulpits of the Catholics, as a band of persecutors. He greatly regretted it, but so it was that the titles of Protestant and persecutor were in Ireland identical. The hon. member for Derry had represented that those who remained there would be murdered, such was the exasperation of the Catholics against them; and that even now systematized attempts were making to rob them of their estates, This statement might be somewhat exaggerated; but he believed it to be true in effect. Indeed, how could it

mained unaltered by any thing which he had seen or heard since he voted on its first discussion. One of the great grounds on which the question had been brought forward was, that it would bring about a change for the better in the condition of Ireland. No man was more anxious for such a change than he was. A change was necessary; for in fact it was almost impossible that Ireland could remain as she was; but then emancipation was not the means by which so desirable a change could be effected. The only hope for Ireland was the success of the reformation in that country. It was asked, could they control six millions of people? He did not mean to say that they could; but he thought the argument founded on numbers was not conclusive. Those who rested the expediency of conceding emancipation on numbers, reminded him of the general who, being surrounded by enemies, collected round him a quantity of combustible materials, and threatened that, if hard pressed, he would set fire to the train, and he and his opponents should all go to the devil together. He was of

opinion, that the constitution was involved | the House consent to lend its aid to such in this question; and in that view he a design? If this measure did not pacify would persevere in refusing concession at Ireland, which he was sure it would not, the risk of the separation of the two on what other ground was it that they countries. He would admit that the union were called on to make so violent an inof Ireland with England was a necessary road on the constitution? He begged of measure. He would not then go into its hon. members to bring to their recollection merits; but he would prefer the separation the dangers from which the country had of Ireland to that state of things which he heretofore escaped from the practices of believed would result from the concession that sect, and to act upon the homely of emancipation. It had been asked, proverb, that "a burnt child dreads the could that system be justified by which the fire.' duke of Norfolk was excluded from a seat in the House of Peers, to which he had a claim by birth? He admitted that this was exclusion; but then it was not more severe in his case, than the principle of exclusion was in that of many Protestants. The whole system of qualification was a system of exclusion. What was the duke of Norfolk more than the more humble man who might wish to represent his native town; but who was excluded, because he did not possess 300l. a-year in landed property? But there were other principles recognized by, and making part of, our laws and customs, which were, virtually, principles of exclusion. Let the House look at the younger brothers of the nobility. They were of the same blood, nursed in the same luxuries, educated at the same schools, trained up in nearly the same habits, as the elder brothers; but, thus equal in all other respects, in came the law of primogeniture, and prevented their inheritance of the title and estate, and they had to make their fortunes as they could. Was not this a principle of exclusion? There was, besides, the whole body of the clergy. They were excluded from a seat in that House, or from having any share in levying the taxes which they were called upon to pay. This principle was in its origin, he would admit, founded in good sense; but then at the present moment the exclusion was a hardship, as it was now founded on a gross fallacy; namely, that they had a seat in the Convocation, an assembly which practically did not exist. It was said, that this measure would pacify Ireland. He did not believe it would have any such effect. Even if it were carried, it was impossible to suppose that the Catholics would be satisfied, unless it were followed up by other measures; and certain parties in that country were at no pains to conceal that the Protestant church establishment of Ireland was the object aimed at. Would

Mr. George Moore, member for Dublin, said, it was impossible that a new member of that House should not feel great difficulty in rising to oppose claims, which had been advanced and supported with so much ability and eloquence. It was impossible that such a member, when he was called upon to redress a nation's wrongs, to vindicate a nation's honour, and restore a nation's rights, should not have great difficulty to encounter in opposing such an appeal, from the enthusiasm which such topics were naturally calculated to excite. He was satisfied, however, that the view which he took of this question, and which those who concurred with him in opinion took of it, was not only consistent with civil and religious liberty, but indispensably necessary, with a view to the integrity and stability of the constitution. This was not a question of national injury or oppression, but a question of relative constitutional rights. It was a question to be considered not with reference to the feelings of any particular class of his majesty's subjects, but with reference to the security of the whole kingdom. The question was now brought forward under circumstances materially different from those under which it had been submitted to the House on all former occasions. In all former discussions, the most moderate and the most zealous advocates of the claims of the Catholics had concurred in accompanying their propositions with some security or other, which they deemed sufficient to guard the Protestant church and the Protestant establishments. From the total silence of the hon. baronet, and of the noble lord who seconded the motion, he was induced to think that the idea of security was altogether abandoned; and he was confirmed in that opinion, when he referred to the language of the petition which the hon. baronet had himself introduced to the House. In that petition, the Roman Catholic petitioners emphati

cally claimed admission to political power | fairly state the question. They were not -admission unqualified, unconditional, and unrestrained. He would ask the House whether they were prepared thus precipitately to throw away those safeguards which the wisdom and firmness of their ancestors had raised for the protection of the Protestant establishment? He did not blame the petitioners for taking no notice of any scheme of security; for he declared that he had never seen, heard of, or read of, any thing which, in his mind, amounted to a rational or effectual scheme of security. It was objected, to those who opposed this measure, that they opposed the rights of the people; but there was no foundation for this objection. He, for one, did not resist the concession of political power to the Roman Catholics on account of their faith alone, or on account of their adherence to that faith, with reference merely to religious considerations, but because they held tenets which went to the recognition of a system of ecclesiastical domination—which went to the recognition of the supremacy of a foreign power, exercising a jurisdiction theoretically ecclesiastical, but directed practically to political objects, and too often executed by political means. This was the reason why Roman Catholics were excluded from political power; and, unless they disengaged themselves from that thraldom, they could never be safely admitted to a participation in it. It had also been objected to those who opposed concession, that they opposed natural and indefeasible rights; but, as this argument had not been insisted on that night, it was not his intention to dwell upon it. The notion of abstract right had been abandoned in argument, both by Mr. O'Connell and Dr. Doyle. Dr. Doyle had admitted, that restrictions upon British Catholics during the time of the Pretender were not only justifiable, but necessary. After the admissions which had been made by both these authorities, the arguments derived from abstract right, independent of political expediency, might be considered as abandoned. By the way, these admissions were an answer to the arguments founded on the treaty of Limerick; for if parliament were at liberty to enact penal statutes against the Roman Catholics, what became of that treaty of which so much was said ?-Let the question, then, be considered on the ground of expediency. The advocates of it, on that ground, did not, in his opinion,

then called upon to discuss the elements of a new constitution, to state what share the Roman Catholics should take in it. They were not called upon to model a new one, but to change that which, in part, had been established for three centuries, and which had existed, in its present state, for nearly a century and a half. But he would not confine himself to three centuries, he would go to Cressy and Agincourt; he would go to Runnymede, and beyond that to the Norman conquest, and would contend, that the principle of our government was a principle of independence of foreign power. He maintained, that, before and up to the time of the Norman conquest, independence of the See of Rome was a governing principle in the constitution of this country. The guards which had been established by our ancestors for the safety of the Protestant establishment had been wisely, deliberately, and cautiously,adopted; they had been adopted by men who had experience of the fatal effects resulting from Papal domination. Such were the men by whom the constitution was settled. And by whom was concession sought to be obtained? It was sought to be obtained by those who had no experience of the evils against which our ancestors erected these constitutional safeguards, and who had every experience of the blessings which had resulted from these salutary restrictions. It was the constitution which had secured the Protestant religion—a religion which was the source of that independence of character, that spirit of enterprise, that moral force, which had raised the British empire to the height of prosperity, and carried British resources into every quarter of the globe. This was the constitution which they were called upon to change; this was the constitution upon which they were called upon to achieve an experiment which, if once made, could never be recalled. Some advocates of this measure were disposed to rest its expediency on what they termed the present unhappy state of Ireland; and they argued as if this were the only measure by which Ireland could be relieved. He took a very different view of the state of Ireland from that which seemed to impress hon. members opposite. For his part, he did not consider the present state of Ireland as melancholy or desponding. He saw, it was true, the surface of society in that country a good deal agitated: but he thought that

that church boasted of their unbroken succession. The hold which they had on the minds of the people of that country was as extensive in its sway, as it was dangerous in its consequences. Would there be no danger, then, in admitting into that House, men who would be influenced by the control of such a body? The friends of emancipation answered this objection by saying, that Catholic members of parliament would be bound by an oath to uphold the constitution in church and state; but he denied that such a pledge would be a sufficient security against the machinations and intrigues of designing men. He would not, at that late hour, enter more fully into the details which the question of Catholic emancipation presented, for he knew that there were many gentlemen who wished for an opportunity of entering their protest against the measure, and who were much more capable than he was of urging their objections. He implored the House, however, before they adopted any measures favourable to the important question which was now before them, to pause and weigh well the consequences which their decision might involve. In what a situation, he would ask, would an illustrious character be placed, if called upon to violate his coronation oath-an oath, the spirit and terms of which went directly to the maintenance of Protestant ascendancy?

it might be calmed by prudent and temperate means, wholly distinct from emancipation. In his opinion, the agitation was exaggerated and misrepresented, by those who had raised it for their own purposes [hear]. He did not mean to impute any blame to hon. members opposite for the view which they took of it; but, in giving his own view, he wished to correct what seemed to him to be an error on their side, and to remove the impression which was sought to be made on the public mind in this country, that the state of Ireland was one bordering on despair. He could not desire better testimony in support of the view which he took of this part of the question, than that of some of the leaders of the Catholics, who endeavoured to justify the use of seditious language, because, as they alleged, it was necessary to scatter firebrands, not for the purpose of exciting the peasantry to sedition, but to rouse them from that torpid indifference in which they existed, with respect to the constitutional exercise of their rights. In this attempt they were no doubt successful; but, though they did produce that state of society in which no man felt comfortable, it was by no means that state in which no man felt safe. He could refer to numerous other pieces of evidence, on the table of the House, to show that Ireland was not in the state in which she was described, and to prove that, whatever her state might be, the measure now proposed was the Mr. R. Martin rose amidst loud and relast which could tend to her pacification.peated cries to adjourn. He denied that He alluded particularly to the petitions the Catholic priesthood had exerted their from all parts and from all classes in Ire- influence improperly in the late elections land; from peers, wealthy landed proprie- in Ireland. It was true that the Catholic tors, clergy, merchants, yeoman, and clergy and the Catholic leaders used their mechanics, men who were interested, to a influence to secure the return of those large extent, in the pacification and pros- who were friendly to their cause; but such perity of Ireland, and who must be pre- influence, he contended, was perfectly sumed to understand what would have that natural. He confessed, for his own part, tendency. They were all deeply interested that he was indebted for his return to the to the extent of their whole properties in influence of the Catholic clergy, and to any measure which could tend to benefit Mr. O'Connell's assistance he was also Ireland; and yet to a man, they all con- deeply indebted [a laugh.] He would recurred in the inexpediency of any further peat that he was proud of such aid, and concession to the Roman Catholics, and to his dying day he should raise his grateof course, in thinking that such concession ful voice in defence of that gentleman and would not have the effect of restoring tran- the Catholic clergy; for it was to them he quillity to that country.-The hon. mem- was indebted for the privilege which he ber, after some other remarks, proceeded now enjoyed, of raising his voice in their to advert to the state of the Catholic church behalf. Aye, the Catholic interest sent in Ireland. The Catholic church in Ire-him to parliament in opposition to the land, it was well known, assumed a power influence of that government in whose and pre-eminence equal if not superior to service he had grown grey, and to whom the established religion. The members of he had given his vote for forty years. VOL. XVI.

2 G