acts which have been made in their behalf-and I fhould be glad to know who can be fo good judges of the loyalty of the governed as the governors.: fhould prefer fuch teftimony even to that of the learred member.

The learned member had animadverted on his fpeech, and accused him of having misapplied the quotation from Swift, in ufing that feriously which the author had applied ironically. Sir, faid major Doyle, if the dean has lent me his words, I am to make use of them as I think beft for my argument. But that the committee may fee that I have not abused the loan, I will ftate again his words :"Perfecution, merely for confcience fake, is against the genius of the gofpel; fo likewife is any law for depriving men of their natural and civil rights which they claim as men. The smalleft negative difcouragements for uniformity's fake, are fo many perfecutions. In like manner, an incapacity for any man to be made a judge, a colonel, or a juftice of the peace,, merely on a point of confcience, is a negative difcouragement, and confequently a real perfecution.-The belief of tranfubftantiation is a matter purely of religion and confcience, which doth not effect the political intereft of fociety as fuch. Therefore, why fhould the right of confcience, whereof God is the fole lord, be fubject to human jurifdiction."

1

How the dean might have applied this in his day, faid major Doyle, is immaterial; but I am fure it is a truth as applied by me in the prefent inftance to the catholic body. I affure the learned member, I am not quite, ignorant of the use, of irony, Suppofe, Mr. chairman, I were to fay of the learned judge's fpeeches on this fubject, or rather his fpeech-twice repeated, that it was unequalled for its hiftoric fidelity, for its feasonable conciliation, and its polifhed fuavity of manners;

that

that it was highly honourable to the proteftant religion, from the liberal toleration it breathed, and that it was ufeful in the extreme to the eftablished church, by the profelytes it must bring into its bofom from the mild and chriftian charity, it inculcates.-Does the learned member now perceive I understand any thing of irony? There is a figure in rhetoric, which I am not fo well acquainted with the figure hyperbole—but the learned member is a better rhetorician.

So that, fir, there does not appear to be any blunder in the application of Swift's words; but if there had, the learned member fet me the example, when he fays, "as the greek painter Apelles expreffed himself-ne futor ultra crepidam." But ftrange as the inftance of the greek language may be, I fhould rather follow the learned member in that than in the English language, which he has ufed upon the prefent fubject. It may be eloquence, but it is of that vituperative species which has lately distinguished a certain clafs of female politicians in Paris, and was formerly in high repute amongst the orators of Billingsgate. But it is not well applied at this day, on this fubject, and to this house.

A right hon. gentleman, whofe abilities juftly entitle him to attention [the Speaker], has argued much upon the dangerous power of the pope, the oath propoffe of the bishops, and the influence of the clergy upon their flock. With refpect to the pope, I am afhamed to attempt to prove what is notorious to all chriftendom, viz. that the papal power has decreased, and is moft rapidly decreafing, and the fact which I before afferted confirms it, that while we have been debating this question -the power of Rome has applied to the proteftant king and proteftant people of England, to protect him against his popifh enemies.-His power was infinitely

Y y

infinitely greater in 1778, but it was not an objection then urged againft granting privileges to catholics lefs enlightened than the prefent.

As to the bishops' oath propoffe, what has been its effects for the last twenty years? Has it ftrengthened the papal influence? On the contrary, has not the fupremacy of Rome been fhaken off within that period by a large portion of those who formerly acknowledged it? The right hon. member fays, the celibacy of the clergy leaves them no paflion but ambition ;-whether that effect naturally follows from the caufe, I will not now argue. I am fure it were better for the ftate they did mar ry. But has this ambition been dormant for thel aft 50 years? and what has it effected, when the poverty of their flocks might have made them inftruments? and are they likely to become inftruments. now, when they are acquiring riches and independence ?-Befide, it is the laity only acquire influence by this bill, or even by total emancipation. The clergy, at pretent, have fcarcely common fub-. fiftence and is it to be fuppofed they are all at once to acquire influence to induce the laity to rifque their properties, the quiet of the country, the refiftance of the proteftant king, of proteftant. England, and of the proteftants of Ireland, to enrich men to whofe neceffities they fo fparingly. contribute?

7

An extraordinary affertion has been made, that the catholics feem inclined to democracy, It is, a new charge: I have often heard the oppofite urged against them, of being monarchial. But,, Sir, the clergy are faid to have dangerous influence: now, if they have, can any man fuppofe, they will direct it in favour of republicanism, by which their whole order has been ruined in a neighbouring country? There is, fir, another expreffion turned against the catholic body, which

I cannot

I cannot confider as fair in argument ;-that is, when he fays, "the three millions with which we are threatened." It is peculiarly mischievous from the high fpirit of the gentleman to whom it is addreffed, who properly would fpurn at a threat; but fo far is it from a threat, that it is an humble petition and fupplication, which furely is not lefs worthy of attention from the number of fupplicants, unless the hon. member proceeds upon the plan of the old lady in the play (mentioned by an ingenious friend of mine), "who would not give charity because there were fo many beggars."

MONDAY, March, 4th.

The House in Committe.

Dr. Duignan, after a fhort preface, propofed an oath formed precifely on the declaration publifhed by the catholic committee in March laft.

a

Major Hobart faid, that when he propofed the oath which the hon. gent. difapproved he did fo under conviction that he adopted in that oath fubftantially, every thing which that hon. gentleman had proposed, because, if the catholics fwore that they did not believe the pope could abfolve them from their oaths, the fting of infallibility in the pope was really done away. The hon. gentleman, now was willing to take the declaration of the catholics fimply as the matter of his oath, and as the object of the bill was conciliation, and ás he believed the catholics would have no objection whatever to fwear that declaration, he would affent to the propofition. He had not the least fear that the catholics would object to this oath because he found them extremely ready to fwear whatever that declaration contained, and because Dr. Troy in his recent publication, declared that

the

the doctrines contained in that publication, had nothing in them contrary to the catholic faiththe only objection that had occurred to him against the oath, was its extreme length, which he had thought might confiderably embarrass elections, but as the hon. gent. had fuggefted that the oath might be taken at the time of registering the freehold, his objection was removed, and he most readily adopted the hon. gentleman's propofition.

Mr. Rowley declared himself adverfe to the whole of the bill.

Mr. Annesley objected to that part of the oath by which the catholic fhould fwear that he would not attempt to fubvert the proteftant establishment for the purpose of fubftituting a catholic one in its ftead. This, he faid, he had no fear of, but that they would endeavour to deprive the protestant clergy of tithes to confer them on their own clergy, and that fome leading men among them had fuch an idea he was ready to prove; he would therefore with that a claufe difclaiming any attempt to disturb the rights of the church in this kingdom" fhould be fubftituted. He alfo object. ed to that claufe by which they were to difavow any defign of disturbing the prefent arrangement of property in this country: he thought it could have no other effect than to lead men's minds to the nature of those tenures by which a great deal of property was held in this country, and which but for this clause they would never think of.

He therefore moved an amendment by expunging this claufe, and fubftituting another, guarding the rights of the clergy.

Dr. Duignan fupported the oath he had propofed. The rights of the clergy were fufficiently protected by it, as the church were the clergy and the clergy the church; they were convertible terms. As to the clause respecting the forfeited

eftates,