the facts that from that country there was not one solitary petition; that there was not any military or naval office or command from which Scotchmen were shut out; that, so far from being excluded from the higher offices of government, out of the fourteen members who composed the cabinet, three-lord Aberdeen, lord Melville, and Mr. Grant were Scotchmen, and good presbyterians. Even in England the shutting out, he said, was merely nominal. A protestant dissenter had been lord mayor of London the year before. The acts had practically gone into desuetude, and the existing law gave merely a nominal preponderance to the established church, which it was admitted on all hands it should possess.

The restrictions, however, if not to any great extent a practical grievance, were felt to be a stigma utterly undeserved, and the necessity for an annual indemnity act continually reminded a large, influential, intelligent, energetic portion of the nation of their inferiority to the rest of the king's subjects. The government felt that public opinion was against them. They therefore allowed the bill to go into committee without opposition, and there they adopted it as their own by carrying certain amendments. It passed the commons by a majority of 44, the numbers being 237 to 193. From the tone of the debate in the commons, it was evident that the government was not sorry to be left in a minority. In the house of lords the measure encountered more opposition. Lord Eldon, exasperated with the treatment he had received from the ministers, denounced it with the utmost vehemence. When he heard of its success in the lower house, he was in a state of consternation and despair. When it was about to be introduced to the lords, he wrote: "We who oppose shall be in but a wretched minority. The administration have, to their shame be it said, got the archbishops and most of the bishops to support this revolutionary bill. I voted as long ago as in the years, I think, 1787, 1789, and 1790 against a similar measure, lords North and Pitt opposing it as destructive of the church establishment; Dr. Priestley, a dissenting minister, then asserting that he had laid a train of gunpowder under the church which would blow it up; and Dr. Price, another dissenting minister, blessing God that he could depart in peace, as the revolution in France would lead here to the destruction of all union between church and state. The young men and lads in the house of commons are too young to remember these things. From 1790 to 1827 many and various have been the attempts to relieve the catholics. But through those thirty-seven years, nobody has thought of proposing such a bill as this in parliament as necessary or fit."

The prejudiced old man fought with desperation against the measure in the lords. He was tremendously severe on the government. He said, much as he had heard of the march of mind, he did not believe that the march could have been so rapid as to induce some of the changes of opinion which he had witnessed within the last year. His opinions are now among the curiosities of a bygone age. His idea of religious liberty may be seen from the following:-"The sacramental act, though often assailed, had remained ever since the reign of Charles II., and the annual indemnity took away all its harshness. The obnoxious act did not

111

interfere with the rights of conscience, as it did not compel any man to take the sacrament according to the rites of the church of England, and only deprived him of office if he did not." He concluded by solemnly saying, "From his heart and soul, not content." He was effectually answered by the duke of Wellington, and the bill was read a second time, without a division, on the 17th of April. On the 21st, he proposed an amendment to exclude Roman catholics from the benefit of the measure by inserting in the declaration the words, "I am a protestant." The amendment was negatived by 117 to 55; but so eager was he to have it adopted, that he renewed it on the third reading of the bill, when the contents were 52, not contents 154. Still he entered on the journals a violent protest against the bill, in which he was joined by the duke of Cumberland and nine other peers. As soon as the measure was carried, all the world acknowledged the duke of Wellington's sagacity in declining the offer of lord Eldon to return to office; for if that sturdy adherent to ancient prejudices had been lord chancellor or president of the council, the government must either have been speedily dissolved by internal dissensions, or overthrown by a vain resistance to the popular voice.

This act, which repeals the Test Act, provides another security in lieu of the tests repealed:-"And whereas the protestant episcopal church of England and Ireland, and the protestant presbyterian church of Scotland, and the doctrine, discipline, and government thereof respectively are by the laws of this realm severally established permanently and inviolably, I., A. B., do solemnly and sincerely, in the presence of God, profess, testify, and declare, upon the true faith of a Christian, that I will never exercise any power, authority, or influence which I may possess by virtue of the office of to injure or weaken the protestant church, as is by law established in England, or to disturb the said church, or the bishops and clergy of the said church, in the possession of any rights and privileges to which such church, or the said bishops and clergy, are or may be by law entitled."

it

Great interest was excited by the discussion. "The Test Act Reporter" contained a special report of the proceedings, including parliamentary debates and public documents, which made a volume of more than five hundred pages. The reports of the debates in the Times newspaper were also reprinted in a volume, with a preface by the Rev. John Burder. On the 18th of June a public dinner, to commemorate the abolition of the sacramental test, was given at Freemasons' Hall, when his royal highness the duke of Sussex occupied the chair. The friends of the cause felt that to secure an aggregate meeting of the most opulent, talented, and influential dissenters from all parts of the empire was a measure of no common policy, and it was evident that the illustrious and noble guests felt at once surprised and gratified to witness the high respectability and generous enthusiasm of that great company. William Smith, as deputy chairman, proposed, in an interesting and appropriate speech," the health of the duke of Sussex, and the universal prevalence of those principles which placed his family upon the throne." The health of the archbishops, bishops, and other members of the esta

Mr.

A.D. 1828.]

association had assumed over the lower priesthood. Besides, many of the most respectable of the catholic landlords were irritated at their tenantry for continuing to pay the catholic rent, contrary to their injunctions; and sooner or later he believed the poorer contributors must consider the impost as onerous, arbitrary, and oppressive. These matters he regarded as seeds of dissolution, which would be more than neutralised by any coercive attempt to put down the association. He felt confident that no material mischief could result from allowing the act quietly to expire, supported as the government was by "the powerful aid of that excellent establishment, the constabulary force, already working the greatest benefit, and capable of still further improvement, and protected as this force was by an efficient army, ably commanded."

In answer to some queries submitted to the attorneygeneral, Mr. Joy, he stated that when the old association was suppressed, the balance of catholic rent in the treasury was £14,000. He showed how the existing act had been evaded, and how useless it was to attempt to prevent the agitation by any coercive measure. They held "fourteen days' meetings," and it was amusing to read the notices convening those meetings, which always ran thus:-"A fourteen days' meeting will be held, pursuant to act of parliament "-as if the act had enjoined and required such meetings. Then there were aggregate meetings, and other "separate meetings," which were manifestly a continuation of the association. The same members attended, and the same routine was adopted. They also held simultaneous parochial meetings, by which the people were gathered into a solid and perilous confederacy.

Referring to the debate on the motion of Sir Francis Burdett, Mr. Peel noticed the progress that public opinion had made in parliament, and the weight of authority against him, which led the house of commons, for the first time since the general election, to decide in favour of emancipation. Among the speakers for the motion were Sir Francis Burdett, Mr. Doherty, solicitor-general for Ireland, lord Francis Egerton, Sir John Newport, Mr. Wilmot Horton, Sir James Macintosh, Mr. Brownlow, Mr. William Lamb, chief secretary for Ireland, Mr. Charles Grant, president of the board of trade, Mr. North, Mr. Huskisson, and Mr. Brougham. The speakers against the motion were Sir Charles Wetherall, Sir N. Tyndal, Sir Robert Inglis, Mr. William Duncomb, Mr. G. Bankes, Mr. G. Moore, Mr. Leslie Foster, and Mr. Peel. The latter gentleman observes that any one acquainted with the house of commons would readily admit that the great preponderance of talent and of influence on future decisions was ranged on the side of emancipation. Mr. Brownlow, who had been a distinguished leader of the Orange party in Ireland, had changed his opinion on the subject, though representing an Orange constituency; many of the younger members followed his example, and Mr. Peel remarked "that it very rarely if ever happened that the list of speakers against concession was reinforced by a young member of even ordinary ability."

Mr. Lamb retired with Mr. Huskisson, sending in his resignation to the duke of Wellington, indignant at "a

113

most cruel and audacious outrage" which he had received, declaring to Mr. Peel that as the changes effected by the duke entirely altered the aspect of affairs, and subverted the principle upon which he understood the government had been formed in January, he felt it impossible to continue in office with any regard to consistency; but he could not retire without expressing his high esteem for the character of the home secretary, and the perfect reliance he had always felt, and should always feel, upon that gentleman's honour and integrity. Mr. Lamb was succeeded as chief secretary by lord Francis Gower, afterwards lord Ellesmere. Among the offices vacated in consequence of the recent schism in the government, was that of president of the board of trade, which was accepted by Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald, one of the members for the County Clare. He was consequently obliged to offer himself for re-election to his constituents, and this led to the memorable contest which decided the question of catholic emancipation.

This contest excited universal interest. Mr. O'Connell, the Roman catholic candidate, was not unknown in England. He had come to London as the leading member of a deputation to urge the concession of catholic emancipation upon the government and the legislature, when he met a number of the leading statesmen of the day at the house of the duke of Norfolk. He had been examined by a committee of the lords, together with the right Rev. Dr. Doyle, in 1825, on which occasion the ability he displayed, his extensive and accurate knowledge, his quickness in answering, and the clearness with which he conveyed information, excited the admiration of all parties. In the appeal case of Scully versus Scully he pleaded before lord Eldon. It was the first time he had appeared in his forensic character in this country. No sooner had he risen to address their lordships, than it was buzzed about the precincts of Westminster, and persons of all descriptions crowded in with anxious curiosity to witness the display, including several peers and members of parliament. He addressed their lordships for nearly two hours, during which the lord chancellor paid him great attention, though he had only thirty-three hours before carried the house of lords with him in rejecting the bill by which the great advocate would have been admitted to the full privileges of citizenship. Referring to this subject, lord Eldon wrote in his diary, "Mr. O'Connell pleaded as a barrister before me in the house of lords on Thursday. His demeanour was very proper, but he did not strike me as shining so much in argument as might be expected from a man who has made so much noise in his harangues in a seditious association." Lord Eldon's opinion was evidently tinged by the recollection of the "seditious harangues." It is a curious fact that the leading counsel on that occasion on the same side was Sir Charles Wetherall, then solicitor-general. The English admired the rich tones of O'Connell's voice, his clear and distinct articulation, his legal ingenuity, and the readiness with which he adapted himself to the tribunal before which he pleaded. One of the best speeches he ever made was delivered at the great meeting of the British Catholic Association, the duke of Norfolk presiding. He astonished his auditory on that occasion. In fact, he was

regarded as a lion in London. He won golden opinions wherever he went, by his blandness, vivacity, and wit in private, and his lofty bearing in public. His commanding figure, his massive chest, and his broad, good-humoured face, with thought and determination distinctly marked in his physiognomy, showed that he had the physique of a great leader of the masses, while he proved himself amongst his colleagues not more powerful in body than in mind and will. The confidence reposed in him in Ireland was unbounded. He was indeed the most remarkable of all the men who had ever advocated the catholic claims; the only one of their great champions fit to be a popular leader. Curran and Grattan were feeble and attenuated in body, and laboured under physical deficiencies, if the impulsive genius of the one or the fastidious pride of the other would have permitted them to be demagogues; O'Connell had all the qualities necessary for that character in perfection" unflinching boldness, audacious assertion, restless motion, soaring ambition, untiring energy, exquisite tact, instinctive sagacity, a calculating, methodising mind, and a despotic will." He was by no means scrupulous in matters of veracity, and he was famous for his powers of vituperation; but, as he was accustomed to say himself, he was the best abused man in Ireland." It was very seldom that his name was missed from the leaders of conservative journals, and he was the great object of attack at the meetings of the Brunswick clubs, which were called into existence to resist the Catholic Association. But of all his assailants, none dealt him more terrible blows than the venerable Henry Grattan, the hero of 1782. "Examine their leader," he exclaimed, "Mr. O'Connell. He assumes a right to direct the catholics of Ireland. He advises, he harangues, and he excites; he does not attempt to allay the passions of a warm and jealous people. Full of inflammatory matter, his declamations breathe everything but harmony; venting against Great Britain the most disgusting calumny, falsehood, and treachery, equalled only by his impudence, describing her as the most stupid, the most dishonest nation that ever existed. A man that could make the speeches he has made, utter the sentiments he has uttered, abuse the characters he has abused, praise the characters he has praised, violate the promises he has violated, propose such votes and such censures as he has proposed, can have little regard for private honour or for public character; he cannot comprehend the spirit of liberty, and he is unfitted to receive it. He betrays such a scattered understanding and barbarous mind, that if he got liberty, he would immediately lose it. His speaking is extravagant diction, a vulgar boast, a swaggering sentence, affected bombast, and ludicrous composition; his liberty is not liberal, his politics are not reason, his reading is not learning, his learning is not knowledge; his rhetoric is gaudy hyperbole, garnished with faded flowers-such as a drabbled girl would pick up in Covent Garden-stuck in with the taste of a kitchen maid. This man can bring forth nothing good. The womb of his mind is of such sinful mould that it can never produce anything that is not deformed. He barks, and barks, and even when the filthy slaverer has exhausted his poison and returns to

There is in all this much of the splenetic jealousy of an aged invalid towards a vigorous competitor, who has outstripped him in the race. O'Connell excited much hostility amongst the friends of emancipation by his opposition to the veto which they were willing to give to the British crown on the appointment of Roman catholic bishops by the court of Rome, as a security against the abuse of their power. But the more antagonists he had, and the more battles he fought, the greater was his hold on the Roman catholic priests and people. His power had arrived at its greatest height when the Canningites left the ministry, and Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald came to Ireland to seek the suffrages of the Clare electors as an influential member of the government. At first, no one had the least doubt of his triumphant return. He had been popular as chancellor of the exchequer in Ireland; he was a steady friend of catholic emancipation, for which he had always voted; he was personally popular; the gentry of the county were almost to a man devoted to him. It appears that Mr. O'Connell had at first no idea of starting against him. The proposal is said to have originated with Sir David Roose, who, having accidentally met Mr. P. V. Fitzpatrick on the 22nd of June, remarked that O'Connell ought to offer himself for Clare. Mr. Fitzpatrick then recollected having often heard Mr. John Keogh, of Mount Jerome, who had been the catholic leader for many years, express his conviction that emancipation would never be granted till a catholic was elected a member of parliament. If, when returned by a constituency, he was not permitted to take his seat, because he would not violate his conscience by swearing what he did not believe, John Bull, who is jealous of constitutional rights, would resent this wrong, and would require the oath to be altered for the sake of the constituency. The moment this thought occurred to Mr. Fitzpatrick, he ran to O'Connell, and begged of him to stand for Clare. They went to the office of the Dublia Evening Post, and there, in presence of Mr. F. W. Conway, the address to the electors was written. Still O'Connell shrank from the contest on account of the enormous cost. "You know," he said, "that, so far froin being in circumstances to meet that outlay from my own resources, I am encumbered with heavy liabilities beyond my power of discharging. You are the only person with whom I am acquainted who knows intimately the catholic aristocracy and men of wealth. Would you undertake to sound them as to funds for the contest?" Fitzpatrick answered, "I will undertake it, and I am confident of success. Within an hour he got three men of wealth to put down their names for £100 each. The four then went round to the principal catholics of Dublin, and during the day they got £1,600 from sixteen persons. The country followed the example of the metropolis so liberally that £14,000 was raised within a week, and money continued to flow in during the contest. supplies, however, were not sufficient for the enormous demand, and in the heat of the contest a messenger was sent post haste to Cork, and in an incredibly short

*"An Address to the Catholics of Ireland."

The