rior to the low suspicions of bigotry, and scorned to hold that any man's religious opinions should lead him to violate an high, sacred and honourable - trust. Are there not in the empire of Germany many independent states, wherein no difference is made with respect to religion in conferring places or employments? nay, are there not many towns and cities, where the Catholics and Protestants occupy the same churches, to celebrate their public worship, the Catholics one half of the day, the Protestants the other? Is it not the case throughout the United States of America, that every man is left to the religion he chuses to profess, and no idea of preference, or incapacity for employments in the State attached to one religion more than another? And with respect to the apprehensions expressed, that if this measure passes, the Protestants of Ireland will be ousted from the Parliament, and all the seats filled by Catholics, I ask, has it not been alledged even by the enemies of this measure, that nineteen twentieths of the landed property of Ireland is in the hands of Protestants, and must always command a proportionate share of electioneering influence? How is this property to get out of their hands? But so long as things remain in this state, I have no apprehension of violation to the Constitution of Ireland from the admission of Catholics to seats in either House of Parliament. There were some allusions made to the causes of the late Rebellion in Ireland; and it was attempted to be shewn that it was a Catholic Rebellion. Now I do fully agree with the Noble Baron near me, (Lord HOLLAND) that religion had nothing to do in the causes of rebellion; that its leaders were many of them Protestants, and men of all sects were engaged in it, though the majority were necessarily Catholics, as that is the religion five to one of the whole population of Ireland. It has been objected, that by placing Catholics in the offices of Sheriffs and Under Sheriffs, you would give them an inordinate power power and influence, which they would use to the subversion of Protestant interest. To this opinion I cannot agree. I have been at some pains to obtain information upon the subject, and had some conversation with a respectable gentlemen, a Mr. Gregory, who possesses a considerable estate in the Catholic county of Galway; and he told me that county was of late very quiet, much quieter than usual, and the cause to which he attributed this repose was, that many Catholic Gentlemen had of late been appointed Magistrates, and exerted their influence to quiet the county, a proof that Catho-lics are not disposed to use the power placed in their hands to promote insurrection or excite commotion. In a word, my Lords, I am convinced the prayer of that Petition ought to be complied with. We owe it to the people of Ireland-we owe it to those to whom it was held out as a condition of acquiescence to the Union, and to whom, as I said before, no boon has been given since the establishment of that measure, but an increase of taxes. If I were an Irishman, I would say to the Legislature of this country, I am not that abject slave you take me for; I'm man, obstinate man, and will not be controll'd. The Earl of BUCKINGHAMSHIRE.—“ My Lords, observing a Noble Friend of mine near me, (Lord CARLETON) anxious to deliver his sentiments upon this subject, I am extremely unwilling to interrupt him, by obtruding my own upon the House. But after so many years residence in Ireland, having been for a considerable part of that time in a high official capacity (Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant) and having been the person who actually brought forward in 1793 the last principal measure of relaxation to the penal laws, in favour of the Catholics, I hope to be excused if I cannot sit quite silent on this occasion. My Lords, I disclaim every sentiment of prejudice or intolerance towards the Catholics, and profess myself for going as far in relaxation and indulgence towards them, them, as I can feel it my duty to do; and if any Noble Lord is disposed to question my sincerity on this head, I desire that the Bill of 1793 may be read, as my justification. That Bill has given to the Catholics civil rights in as great an extent as to any other class of his Majesty's subjects. It It goes farther, for it exempts them from tests to which all other of his Majesty's subjects are liable. The Noble Baron who brought forward the Petition, has disclaimed and deprecated inflammatory language; but he seems to have lost sight of this precaution, when he tells us, that if we refuse this boon, the consequences will be alarming and calamitous, as the Roman Catholics will consider they are set down as traitors, that faith has been broken with them, and no farther relaxation towards them were intended. But this is indeed most extraordinary language, and so inflammatory, as I should not expect to hear from any Lord in this House, and especially from the Noble Lord who had so emphatically deprecated every thing inflammatory. My Lords, is it decent to assert, that because the Roman Catholics are refused exemption from the same tests that bind their fellow-subjects amongst every description of Dissenters, that they must therefore consider themselves as men deemed traitors? I may, possibly, have misunderstood the Noble Lord; but, I think that was his assertion, and the Noble Baron added, if we did so estimate them, it was our duty to go into a Committee, for the purpose of re-enacting the penal laws. How far those whose cause the Noble Lord has undertaken to advocate, may approve his recommendation, I know not, but I do not conceive the alternative very congenial to their wishes. what has already been stated by Noble Lords, who have preceded me in this debate, it is unnecessary for me to trespass on your Lordships' attention, with respect to the sentiments of Catholics as to foreign jurisdiction: but I, my Lords, can never accede to the idea of raising men to the highest After highest offices in the State, professing principles which I can prove, or what I suppose will be admitted as of high authority, namely, the Pastoral Letter of Doctor Troy, the Catholic Bishop of Dublin, published in 1792, which tells his flock they are obliged to believe the Pope of Rome is the Supreme Head of the Church, and holds his primacy by Divine right; and he goes on and says, this supremacy is to be an immutable article of their faith. They cannot, of course, depart from this principle; and so long as they hold it, it is impossible to admit them to seats in Parliament, to offices of high power in the State, and to his Majesty's Councils, as men holding principles so utterly subversive to the leading principle of our Constitution in Church and State, by which his Majesty is declared head of the Church. Something has been said, as to the disposition for loyalty amongst the Catholics of Ireland. When I held an official situation in Ireland, I had frequent opportunities of forming an opinion on this subject. } My Lords, on this point I should wish to be silent; but as the subject has been mentioned, I will speak from what I had the constant opportunities of observing in my official situation; and I will say, that I believe his Majesty has not in his dominions a set of persons more sincerely attached to his Person and Government than the Noblemen and Gentlemen who represent the Catholic body in Ireland; and whatever use may be made of this candid declaration, I cannot in justice and truth withhold it from their meritorious conduct. But I must add, that those Noblemen and Gentlemen have long ceased to have any influence over their community at large, of whom, though I do not wish to say a single word or expression that may be construed to charge them with disloyalty, yet when I see them get into the hands of men, quite of an opposite description to the Noblemen and Gentlemen to whom I have alluded; when I have seen those men employing as their principal and confidential agent, one of the most dangerous men in the State, the founder of the society of United Irishmen, and the propounder and negociator of their union with France, for the separation of Ireland from this country; when I find them placing themselves under the auspices of such a man as Mr. Theobald Wolfe Tone, though I will not go so far as to charge them with direct disloyalty, I will say their conduct was at least extremely suspicious. This man was the accredited agent of the Irish Catholic Convention, whose last vote assigned him a sum of 1,5001. for his eminent services in their cause, besides a gold medal, value 301. as an honorary memorial of their confidence and gratitude. My Lords, the Noble Baron has said, that the grant of what the Catholics now ask was a pledge to them at the time of accomplishing the Union, solemnly given by the Government of this country. My Lords, I do positively deny that any such pledge in terms was ever given to them. It might have been mentioned to them that as a consequence of the Union, their claims might have a fairer chance of being examined impartially in an Imperial Parliament, and of being discussed more freely from local or partyprejudice, than in the Parliament of Ireland, where they had lost all hopes of success; but there never was or could have been any such pledge given. I have heard this matter mentioned more than once; but I have as repeatedly denied it, and never admitted any such thing. I certainly conceived the Union to be a most salutary measure, and thought the Roman Catholics might be better satisfied with a change which would open to their hopes a more probable prospect of gratification through the United Parliament, as I was convinced nothing would satisfy them until they should obtain a share in the Legislature, and that you could not admit them to that share in the Parliament of Ireland, without surrendering to them that power and influence which a decided majority in the Parliament of their O Own |