a century-those members had taken a part in various discussions on important questions, in which the interests of the Church of England were concerned--they had acted throughout these discussions like other members of parliament― and there was a still stronger argument to prove their impartiality, derived from the fact, that they were frequently to be found amongst the majority on the side of the Church of England, on many questions involving her interests and rights. At no time had those representatives from Scotland allowed their prejudices or partialities in favour of their own church, to interfere with their public duties, or to enter into their character as representatives; nor could there be an instance, he believed, pointed out, in which they had displayed such a feeling in the course of the discharge of their parliamentary functions.

The marquis of Anglesey, who, three months before, had been recalled from his government as viceroy of Ireland, because he held out hopes of emancipation to the Catholics, insisted principally on the military points of view in which the question ought to be considered. Every man acquainted with the state of Ireland would agree with him, that in a time of profound peace, under the exclusive laws, 25,000 men was but a scanty garrison for Ireland. In the event of war, or even of the rumour of war, that would be an improvident government which did not immediately add a force of 15,000 men to the previous military force: 40,000 men would be barely sufficient, under such circumstances. It could not be questioned that both France and Âmerica wished to do us injury; and,

in case of any collision with either of those powers, the first object of both would be, to throw arms to a great extent into the hands of the discontented Irish. "Iam arguing, be it observed, upon the supposi tion that the exclusive laws are in existence; for if they were not, the arms would not be received, or, if received, would be turned against the donors. But suppose that we are absolutely at war, and that there is a combination of the powers of Europe-no very unlikely contingency-against us. then say that it would be madness in any administration not to throw 70,000 men immediately into Ireland. I should be sorry, with all the power of steam to convey troops from the Continent, and all the advantages which modern science has recently introduced into the art of war, to see Ireland with so scanty a garrison in time of war, under the exclusive laws. But, on the other hand, suppose this bill to be passed into law by this day month: declare war if you like the next day; and I assert that you will have no difficulty, within six weeks, to raise in that country 50,000 able-bodied, and, what is better, willing-hearted men, who will traverse the Continent, or find their way to any quarter of the globe to which you may choose to direct their arms. The passing of this bill is worth to the British empire more, far more, and I do not wish to exaggerate, than 100,000 bayonets."

The duke of Richmond, the earls of Winchilsea, Harewood, Mansfield, Falmouth, and Enniskillen, all spoke against the bill. The Protestants they said, had derived some consolation from the declaration of the duke of Wellington, at the opening of the

session, that the measure he had to propose would be found to be one which would satisfy the Protestants, give greater security to the Protestant institutions, and check the growth of popery. Such had been his grace's description of the measure which he intended to propose; but now, when the measure itself was known, it was found to be in every thing the reverse of what had been promised, and justified the worst apprehensions of the lovers of the constitution. Instead of being fitted to satisfy the Protestants, the Protestant opinion of the country had already been unequivocally expressed against it. The number of petitions, which had been presented against it in both Houses of parliament, and the number of addresses which had been laid at the foot of the throne, bespoke the powerful and strong feeling which existed against the measure amongst the Protestants of this country. The expression of that opinion had been still louder and more general since the details of the measure had become known, and the rallying sound throughout the country now was, "Protestant Ascendancy." For the first time, the Protestants of Great Britain were called on to bend before Irish rebels and seditious demagogues; and that, too, on mere conjectural views of imagined expediency. It was said, you are to examine two dangers, and the danger of disturbance was greater than any that could flow from concession; but when the latter danger was the sacrifice of the Protestant constitution, the parliament which incurred it was inexcuseable, whether their conduct proceeded from dread of foreign attack, or of domestic dissension. It was easy to under

stand why men, who did not believe that Protestantism formed any part of the constitution, should pay for tranquillity, what must appear to them so low a price. But his majesty's ministers had always been of a different opinion. They had maintained and avowed, again and again, that a measure like this was pregnant with danger to the constitution: though their views of the expediency or inexpediency of incurring that danger might have changed, the danger itself must be the same; none of them had attempted to shew that his former convictions on that point had been erroneous-for if so, there would have been no occasion to take refuge in expediency. Now no danger had yet arrived, or threatened, which could be put in the balance against the violation of the constitution. Was the British Protestant constitution a thing, for which it was not worth while to encounter danger? Would we defend it with our lives against invaders abroad, and yet sacrifice it at once to demagogues at home? The horrors of civil war were threatened. Suppose it were so; was the constitution to be sacrificed, whenever a number of unprincipled men threatened rebellion, if it was maintained? But the apprehension was groundless. The noble mover of this very measure had himself admitted, that resistance was no where offered ; that the Catholics were too wary and cautious to offer it; that his troops found no occupation, because they met with no enemy. Wise and good men would do much to tranquillize Ireland, but they wouldnot give up, even for that object, the Protestant constitution of Britain. At all events, if such a price were to be paid, the return

must be certain, not conjectural; yet the anticipated tranquillity of Ireland was merely hypothetical, and in the face of all general experience, as well as of our special experience of what Catholics were, and what they wanted. Much

still remained for them to accomplish; and the great lesson taught them by this bill was, that whatever they should demand they would obtain, if they only demanded it with threats of exciting public disturbance in the event of its being refused.

The Marquis of Salisbury, who had moved the address, at the opening of the session, said that he had done so, because he was prepared to change the condition of the Catholics; but he had never imagined that valid and adequate securities would not be provided and these securities he thought were to be found only in connecting the Catholic priesthood with the state. He was aware that this proposal was not popular in the House; but the fact was, that the priests were to have the exercise of great political power, with every motive to hostility to the church establishment. A few years ago seventy-nine members of the lower House had voted for a direct tax on the property of the church, and the resolution declared that that property belonged to the public.

Was not the addition of a formidable band of members, prepared to join in this vote of attack on the church, a sufficient ground to apprehend danger? Would their lordships look at the declaration of a Roman Catholic bishop, that he wished to decrease the property of the church? Or would they take the candid declaration of an hon. member of the House of Commons, that he supported this VOL. LXXI.

measure as the first step to the subversion of the church? By abandoning securities, their lordships would be signing the death-warrant of the Protestant establishment of Ireland; if the Protestant establishment of Ireland fell, that of England would shortly follow; and with the downfal of the church, a revolution would ensue. The evil was not without a remedy: but unless his majesty's government contemplated some ulterior measure, he considered that the present would affect the property of the church.

The Earl of Westmoreland had always been opposed to the changes now proposed, because he thought they were unnecessary, and would lead to consequences which no man could foresce. The latter part of this opinion he still entertained, but he now felt that their lordships had to weigh between distant and speculative dangers, and urgent and pressing mischiefs. This was the dilemma to which Parliament had been brought, and it wa worth while to inquire how it had been so. The first cause of it was to be found in the conduct of many of their lordships in the opposition, who had made this a party question in England and Ireland, and had worked much, by their statements, on the minds of the great mass of the Irish population. The next class, to whom he attached blame, consisted of the Irish landed gentry, who had sacrificed their estates for electioneering purposes, and thus surrendered their power to the Catholics. But there was a third party, in which he must class himself, to whose conduct the present state of things was, in a great degree, owing he meant every member of lord Liverpool's government for the last ten years. First, [G]

they had appointed to the Secretaryship of Ireland a gentleman (Mr. C. Grant) whose opinions and feelings were strong in favour of the Catholic claims; and for the consequences of that appointment the Home Secretary of that day was, in a great degree, responsible. The next step was the appointment of a gentleman (Mr. now lord Plunkett), whose opinions ran still more strongly in the same direction, to the office of Attorney-general for Ireland. Then came his majesty's visit to Ireland. Were not those to blame, who, on that occasion, allowed the Catholic bishops, wearing all the paraphernalia of their religion, to present an address to his majesty? What was not to be expected by the Catholics after this, and after the letter written subsequently to his majesty's departure? It was clear that, in men's minds, hopes and expectations must have been raised, which led to the situation in which Parliament now found itself. Then came the appointment of Mr. Canning to the office of prime minister; and in consequence of that appointment, both England and Ireland were reduced to such a situation, that we must, at length, settle the question. "We have passed a bill for suppressing the Association; but does any man suppose that it will be possible to execute that law in case of the rejection of this measure? I had the honour of trying very strong measures in Ireland. I succeeded in putting down the Volunteers by a simple proclamation. I put down a stronger association than the Catholic by an Act of Parliament. Then our situation was different; we then had the support of Protestant Ireland and of United England. But what would be the case now, if any thing wrong

happened? Two-thirds of the people of Ireland would be against us; the greater part of the landed proprietors would be against us; and I need not add, a great majority of the House of Commons. It has been said, that the measure is at variance with the opinions of the people, and that the opinion of his late respected majesty was against the question. No man ever came to wiser conclusions; but, like the late lord Kenyon, he sometimes came to them by extraordinary means. When king George the Third was told that Mr. Fox and Mr. Pitt were of the same opinion, he said, that when Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox differed in opinion, one of them might be right and the other wrong; but when they agreed, they were both sure to be wrong. Now, my lords, I hope the people of England do not argue on that principle; and when they know that every member of the cabinet was friendly to the measure, with the exception of three, I hope it will not diminish the weight of their authority."

Lord Tenterden, the Chief Justice of England, said, that he did not often trespass upon their lordships' attention, but he knew it was expected from a person filling the situation which he had the honour to hold, that he should not give n silent vote on a question of so much importance. He must set himself against ministers and their present proposal; because he knew it to be a violation of the constitution-because he believed it to threaten ruin to the Protestant church, which he valued, both on account of the purity of its doctrines, and as being, of all churches that existed, or ever had existed, the most favourable to civil and religious liberty-and because he saw no counterbalancing benefit even

likely to be gained by so fatal a sacrifice. The various acts for the exclusion of Roman Catholics had been frequently adverted to in these debates. It had been assumed that the exclusions in the reign of Charles the Second were introduced in consequence of the wilful misrepresentations of Titus Oates. Though this might be true as far as related to the exclusion of Roman Catholics from Parliament, it was not correct as related to their exclusion from all other offices. By the act of the 1st Elizabeth, he was ready to admit that Roman Catholics were not excluded from the upper House of Parliament, for the queen stated that she had such confidence in the members of their lordships' House, that she did not think it necessary to make any provision for their exclusion. Subsequently even to this act, he was ready to admit, that means were devised of reconciling to Roman Catholics the taking of the Oath of Supremacy, so that many of them sat in the lower House of Parliament. What were the means by which Roman Catholics had been reconciled to the taking of this oath, consistently with the preservation of their religious faith, he could not undertake to state: but he supposed that the Pope, ever fertile in expedients of every kind, had devised means whereby Roman Catholics were reconciled to the taking of this oath. At the accession of William 3rd, the oath against Transubstantiation was necessary to be taken as a qualification of admission to Parliament. On the 22nd day of January, a day memorable in the history of this country, it would be found that, in the Declaration of Rights, which was presented by that Convention to the Prince and Princess of Orange, at the Ban

quetting-house at Whitehall, a provision was introduced, whereby it was declared that no foreign prince or potentate hath, or ought to have, any spiritual jurisdiction, &c. within this realm. Much stress had been laid upon the omission in the Act of Settlement to make the oath of qualification for members of Parliament a permanent part of the constitution, together with the limitation of the Crown to Protestants; but the reason of that omission was obvious. The Act of Settlement was an act providing for the Protestant succession to the Crown; and if, in the oath of coronation of king William, he was called upon to subscribe to the Protestant religion, and his successors were bound to be Protestants, such a provision was not more essentially a part of the constitution than was the act enacting the oaths to be taken by all future members of Parliament. These oaths, to be taken by members of Parliament, were not declared to be an essential part of the constitution, as well as the oath for the regal office, because a provision had been already made for that purpose. As to the prin cipal ground on which the present bill rested, that it would give tranquillity to Ireland, he anticipated no such result. It would only give increased power to those who were disposed to exercise it for no good purposes. He blamed not his majesty's ministers for the course upon which they had resolved. He believed they adopted it upon information which they deemed to warrant it, although the information laid before Parliament did not support the necessity of the meditated change. Their lordships could not have failed to observe the proceedings of a body of men