Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

exercised by the courts of justice in Ireland, and by some of the individual judges, to increase the fees of the courts, from which, in some instances, the judges them selves derived advantage. That by a recent act of parliament all fees of that nature have been abolished. And that under the circumstances of the case the House does not think it expedient to adopt any further proceeding with respect to chief baron O'Grady.

Mr. Daly was of opinion, that the hon. member for Limerick could not justly complain of being taken by surprise.

Mr. W. Courtenay never understood that the delay in passing a resolution of opinion, grounded on resolutions of fact, was to be the delay of a session. It might, however, be expedient to adjourn the discussion.

Mr. S. Rice said, it had been distinctly understood, that the object of confining his resolutions to mere matters of fact, was to give the chief baron fair parliamentary notice of what was going on, that he might be prepared to explain, and defend his conduct. Now, however, it was suddenly proposed to agree to an exculpatory resolution.

Mr. Secretary Peel said, that the question on which he was called upon to decide was not, whether the chief baron was guilty or innocent, but whether he should be put on his trial or not. He was for not putting him on his trial.

tion, if there were added to it the following sentence from the ninth report of the commissioners: "If the amount of the increase of the judicial fees in the court of Exchequer be greater than in the other two courts, the more extensive jurisdiction of that court ought to be recollected."

The nine resolutions of the committee were agreed to, and the debate on the resolution proposed by Mr. Scarlett was adjourned till to-morrow.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Wednesday, July 9.

ENGLISH CATHOLICS ELECTIVE FRAN~ CHISE BILL.] The Marquis of Lansdown observed, that there were two bills. before the House for the relief of the Catholics of England, by placing them nearly on the same footing as the Catholics of Ireland. It was for the purpose of moving for the second reading of the first of those bills, namely, "a bill to repeal so much of the statute of William 3rd, as related to the administration of the oath of supremacy to persons voting at elections of members of parliament," that he now addressed their lordships. The greatest difficulty he expe. rienced was in anticipating on what possible ground this measure could be opposed. It was necessary that their opponents should establish, either that Mr. Pitt and the Protestant government and parliament of 1793 were in error, when they admitted the Irish Roman Catholics to the enjoyment of the elective franchise, Mr. Scarlett consented to do so, and and to the eventual enjoyment of certain observed, that the early part of his reso- civil offices, or that circumstances atlution would then be to the following tached to the Catholics of England which effect, "That it is stated in the fifth re- did not attach to the Catholics of Ireport of the commissioners, that it is not land, and which rendered the former intheir province to discuss how far, or capable and unfit to enjoy those constiwithin what limits, the judges of the supe-tutional privileges which had been with rior courts of law, are authorized to establish new or increased fees for their own services; but that it will be seen, from the table subjoined (to their report), that a discretion of this nature has, in fact, been exercised to a considerable extent at some period or periods within the last one hundred years; and that, during the time of the present chief justice of the Common Pleas, such an exercise of judicial authority appears to have occurred in three in

Colonel Barry wished the hon. and learned member for Peterborough would adopt the precise words of the report of the commissioners.

stances.

Captain O'Grady said, he should be perfectly satisfied with that resolu

propriety and safety communicated to the latter.-In reply to the latter objection, if it were made, he would ask whether, on the most deliberate view that could be taken of the condition and history of the Catholics of England, and of their uniform good conduct and peaceable demeanour, any thing appeared which could justify parliament in withholding the invaluable privilege of being represented in parliament, so necessary to the secu rity of the British subject, and without which the British constitution.could scarcely be called a blessing? He really

It had been somewhere insinuated, that this bill would place the Catholics of England in a better situation than the Protestant Dissenters. If it were so, he would decidedly oppose it. But directly the contrary was the case. Even if the present bill were passed, the Protestant Dissenter might still be eligible to certain offices from which the Catholic would be excluded. The bill would not even place the Catholics of England on precisely as good a footing as the Catholics of Ireland, for the former would still remain exposed to the operation of the Test act, from which they could be relieved only by an annual indemnity bill.

did not know how to argue the subject. It was for those who thought there was something in the character of the English Catholics which rendered it dangerous to grant them what the Irish Catholics had so long enjoyed, to point out the danger. For himself, he was persuaded, that if there was any difference in the two classes of persons, it was (without meaning to cast any slur on the Irish Catholics) in favour of the Catholics of England. He knew it might be said, that the elective franchise had been, in many instances abused in Ireland, that votes had been manufactured, and 40-shilling freeholders driven up in herds to the hustings. But not a small portion of the blame of those proceedings attached to the successive governments of that country; for, whenever a commodity was found to be marketable, it was not surprising that human infirmity should avail itself of the possession of that commodity for purposes of personal interest. He trusted their lordships would not be told that the subject was new, and one to which they were unaccustomed; and that the proposition to place the English Catholic where the Irish Catholic was placed twenty or thirty years ago, was consequently one which it was difficult and hazardous to deal with. Nor, he hoped, would it be said, that the Catholics of England had not petitioned for this concession, and therefore that it was not necessary to communicate to them advantages which they had not sought. He had always understood that when the privileges of the constitution were conferred on any class of his majesty's subjects, it was not for the exclusive benefit of that class, but for the benefit of the whole community. Therefore, although no petition had been presented from the English Catholics (and indeed, had he been consulted, he would not have advised them to present a petition for a measure so limited as the present), yet, if their lordships thought the measure right, he did not conceive that that was a ground on which it ought to be rejected. Their lordships ought especially to hesitate before they refused to place the Catholics of England on the same footing as the Catholics of Ireland, at a time when the intercourse between the two countries was every day increasing, and when the inhabitants of both were more closely assimilated in every respect, even down to the clothes they wore, and the produce they consumed.

[ocr errors]

Lord Redesdale opposed the motion. To give the elective franchise was, he said, to give political power. The consequence of granting the Irish Catholics the elective franchise had been the creation of two interests at every election, Protestant and Catholic, in violent hostility to each other. He could never consent to any measure which had a tendency to overturn that Protestant establishment which every loyal subject was bound to maintain. Nothing should induce him to risk the sacrifice of a single point which he thought went to the conservation of that establishment. Let their lordships look at the preamble of the statute of William, which it was sought by this bill to repeal. The necessity of that statute, as a security to the Protestant establishment, was there unequivocally declared. In his opinion, the necessity was as great in the present day as in the time of king William. As to the oath of supremacy, he denied that, by any existing law, it was distinctly enacted that that oath should be remitted to the Catholics of Ireland. The noble lord concluded by moving, that the bill be read a second time that day three months.

The Earl of Westmorland said, it was with great satisfaction that he saw the claims of the Roman Catholics of England brought before parliament, divested of all considerations connected with Irish politics and Irish party. The excellent conduct of that body, during so long a period, entitled them to every concession which could be extended to them, consistently with the safety of the constitution. There was no argument which could be urged in favour of granting those privileges which had already been conceded to the Catholics of Ireland, which did not apply with double force to

the propriety of conceding them to the Catholics of England. He was so far from thinking that the agitation of the Catholic question was calculated to do mischief, that he was persuaded it rather tended to tranquillize the public mind in Ireland. If the whole of the Catholic question, however, were granted to-morrow, he did not believe that it would have the slightest effect upon the peace of that country. He believed that the Catholics were in general a loyal body. It was said, that if this measure were carried, it would give the Catholics an influence in the deliberations of parliament; but such an influence was no more than so large a body of his majesty's subjects were entitled to. He had not altered his opinions as to the impolicy of granting further concessions to the Roman Catholics of Ireland; and it was for that reason that he supported the present measure, which went only to place the Catholics of England upon the same footing.

The Bishop of Norwich said, that the general question involved in the bills now before the House had been so frequently discussed, that it would require little short of inspiration to suggest any new arguments in support of the propriety of concession, or even to give a new colouring to the arguments which had been already employed. Much as this question had been discussed, the result had not been such as might have been reasonably hoped for, from the liberal and enlightened spirit of the age; from the progress of intelligence in every part of the united kingdom; and from the more extensive diffusion of the mild and tolerant principles of Christianity, by means of various religious institutions, and especially the bible societies. It could not but be highly gratifying to every generous mind, to observe that those prejudices which once existed with regard to the unwise and unjust restrictions on our Catholic brethren had been thrown off in every quarter, except in that quarter alone where they ought least to exist because this was not a religious but a political question, and as such came rather within the province of statesmen than of divines. He should not, indeed, have presumed to trespass upon their lordships attention, if he had not felt himself called upon to embrace the present opportunity-the last, probably, which at his age he could expect to have-of protesting most strongly, in his own name,

and in the names of many learned and excellent clergymen of his diocess, against the assertions contained in some of the petitions which had been recently laid upon the table. He protested against such assertions, because he was firmly persuaded that the security of the church of England, or of any Christian church, could never be endangered by acting upon Christian principles; and that the security of our civil institutions could never be endangered, by uniting the hearts and hands of all subjects of every denomination in the ties of gratitude and affection, which were the firmest bond of peace. He should probably be told, that these remarks had been made a hundred times before. Be it so. They were, nevertheless, extremely important, and could not be too often or too forcibly circulated, as long as men were to be found who, in defiance of reason and experience, of policy and justice, obstinately persisted in opposing all innovation, as they termed it, in church or state, who resisted all reform however moderate, or however much called for by public opinion, and who resolved to live and die under the old establishments. Such language, from whatever quarter it might come, was ill-suited to the present state of knowledge in the world, and in direct opposition to that active and progressive spirit of improve. ment, which had excited our own as well as other nations, and which he trusted no holy alliance would ever be able to arrest. Old establishments, however venerable from their antiquity-a quality of which he was far from wishing to speak with flippant disrespect-must bend to public opinion, for public opinion most assuredly would not bend to them; and laws, which might have appeared expedient and necessary 150 years ago, should not continue in force, when the reasons on which they were enacted, had ceased to exist, and their operation had become injurious and unjust. When every other art and science was so much advanced, was legislation, the most important science of all, to remain stationary, instead of keeping pace with the general improvement? That could never be; for every thing human must yield to the great law of change, the most powerful and uncontrollable of the laws of nature. The senseless cry of innovation had succeeded to the more noisy and wicked cry of " No Popery!" Happily for the peace of society, both these cries had become harmless and ineffectual;

[ocr errors]

for there were very few in the middle ranks of life, and not many even in the lowest, who did not perfectly understand, that to these most dreaded innovations we were indebted for many of the greatest blessings which we enjoyed. The Revolution was an innovation; Christianity itself was a glorious innovation. The historian of the Roman empire informed us that in the reign of Valentinian, a heathen high priest pronounced an oration before that emperor, in which he warned hion of the danger of innovation, and entreated him not to suffer the Gospel to be preached in Rome. "Reverend sire," (said the sacerdotal petitioner), "I beseech you in my old age to reverence our old institutions; these rites drove Hannibal from our walls; disturb not the repose of my declining years by the introduction of any innovation; suffer us to retain the undisturbed possession of a religion, which has flourished for so many years. The reasoning of this high priest was fully as conclusive as that of the christian high churchmen of the present day, who were alarmed at the bare mention of any innovation in church or state, however necessary or advisable it might be. Both the high priest and the high churchman seemed to have forgotten that a blind, doting, obstinate adherence to old establishments, resolutely opposed to all reform, was as weak and dangerous as a wild and irrational desire of change. Within a short period of time, a remarkable change of public opinion had taken place, both at home and abroad, on the subject of religious as well as civil liberty; and he might now venture to assert, without fear of contradiction, that a very large majority of the members of the established church were decidedly in favour of Catholic emancipation. No petitions had recently been presented against the measure from London, Westminster, Southwark, or any of the populous and commercial districts. The great and well-informed body of the Protestant Dissenters had, highly to their honour, declared, in the most unequivocal terms, their desire of seeing all the penalties to which their Roman Catholic brethren were subjected abolished. If we turned to foreign countries, we should find that in Russia, Prussia, and he believed in Austria, the Protestants had been lately admitted to those civil privileges, from which our Catholic brethren were excluded. In France, he had never heard of a single petition having been pre

sented from the Catholic clergy against the admission of Protestants to any civil situation of honour, trust, or emolument. The established clergy of England were the only body, the great majority of which, in the 19th century, openly avowed their intolerance. Against such a spirit of persecution and intolerance, said the right reverend prelate, I will never cease to raise my voice, " dum spiritus hos regit artus." It was the duty of every individual in a free state unequivocally to declare his sentiments; though he was aware, for he had himself known, by sad experience, how little the discharge of that duty would contribute to the ease of any clergyman of the established church, whose opinions might differ from those of the great body to which he belonged. That he might not incur the imputation of censuring men whose opinions were entitled to much more weight than his own, he would conclude the few observations which he had ventured to make, with a passage from one of the most learned and practically wise men who had ever sat on the bench of bishops-a prelate, who enjoyed the distinguished honour of being the personal friend of that enlightened, liberal, and magnanimous prince, William 3rd. He alluded to bishop Burnet, the great object of whose long and useful life, as well as that of king William, was to unite, in one great social and civil bond, all loyal subjects, on the sole ground of their tried allegiance and fidelity, without reference to their religious opinions. "We have lost many opportunities," said bishop Burnet, "since the Revolution, of healing our breaches; but, let us not suffer the present opportu nity to slip from us, on account of the fears which are harboured by a few sour and narrow-minded men, who would close the door on conciliation, and make those breaches perpetual." He would only add, that two petitions had just been put into his hands, one from Norfolk, and another from some of the clergy of the diocess of Norwich, against granting any further concession to the Catholics. It was needless for him to say, that he hoped their lordships would turn a deaf ear to the prayer of these petitions.

The Bishop of St. David's said:-My lords, on the subject of the bills now be fore the House, it is my misfortune to differ so widely from my right reverend brother who spoke last; and I am so far from thinking it illiberal and uncharitable

to oppose any further encroachments of the Church of Rome upon the Church of England; or to think and speak of that foreign Church in the language of our own Church Articles and Homilies; that I cannot suppress my reasons for the vote that I shall give this night against admitting Roman Catholics to offices of trust and profit, and to the elective franchise. My lords, the oath and declaration, which it is the object of these bills to repeal, were intended to exclude Roman Catholics from offices of trust and profit, because the principles of their Church were held to be inconsistent with the safety and tranquillity of the state. My lords, those principles are precisely the same now, as they were at the enactment of the oath and declaration; it is the boast of that Church that they are so. Persons, therefore, professing those principles are as inadmissible to offices of trust and profit now, as they were formerly. They are inadmissible to those offices, because they are incapable of the allegiance which is due from subjects to their Sovereign. My lords, they are incapable of that allegiance, because they are bound by a contrary allegiance to a foreign Sovereign.

their property. My lords, the most effectual way to tranquillize Ireland is, not to encourage popery, but to strengthen the hands of Protestantism, and at the same time to afford that protection to converted priests, which was granted to them formerly, which is absolutely necessary to the free exercise of their will; and without which they are in danger of assassination in one country, or of destitution in the other. It is indeed to be hoped, that another session of parliament will not be suffered to pass without reviving that humane and beneficial act, which expired on the 24th of June, 1800, by which a provision was made for the subsistence of destitute clergymen, who had renounced the errors of the Church of Rome, and were conformed to the Church of England.

I object, then, my lords, to the admission of Roman Catholics to offices of trust and profit, because the principles of their Church are contrary to the allegiance which is due from subjects to their sovereign, and inconsistent with the safety and tranquillity of the state. The grant of the elective franchise would be attended with still greater inconsistencies and mischiefs. I need not remind your My lords, the oath which one of these lordships that parliament is convened by bills proposes, as a security for a Roman the writ of summons expressly for the Catholic's allegiance, is perfectly nuga- defence of the kingdom and of the tory, because it is superseded and nullified Church; not of the kingdom only, but of by the solemn déclaration of true obe- the kingdom and the Church. A repredience to the Pope, which he has already sentative of a Roman Catholic district, if made, or which is implied in his submis- true to his constituents, must, instead of sion to the Pope's supremacy-that su- defending the Church of England, be the premacy, which they hold to be superior advocate of measures most adverse to the to the sovereignty of the realm. My king's prerogative, and most hostile to the lords, "the Romish Clergy," says Black- Protestant religion. The elective franstone, in his chapter of Treasons, "when chise has been very injurious to the peace they take orders, renounce their allegiance of Ireland, and productive of many ill to their temporal sovereign, that being consequences, especially by the sub-diviinconsistent with their engagements of sion of property, which it has led to. canonical obedience to the Pope." By It could not, indeed, do so much misthose engagements they are bound to op- chief at present in England, on account pose, to execrate, and, as far as in them of the comparative paucity of Roman lies, to extirpate every thing heretical, Catholics here. But the grant of this that is, every thing which is contrary to important privilege would add greatly to the religion of the Church of Rome. their numbers, activity, and influence. And why should we, in defiance of the constitution, and of experience, put the tranquillity of England to such a hazard, and expose it, in any degree, to the degrading and demoralizing consequences which have resulted from this fatal boon in Ireland? For these several reasons, I shall give my vote against both the bills now before the House.

My lords, this principle of extirpation is not a dormant and obsolete principle. It is at this moment, in Ireland, in full and active operation. We have been told very lately on the best authority, that the leaders of the sanguinary bands, which infest that country, declare boldly and candidly, that their object is, to drive the heretics out of the country, and to take

« VorigeDoorgaan »