Majesty's subjects professing the Roman Catholic Religion, to hold, exercise, and enjoy all civil and military offices and places of trust or profit under his Majesty, his heirs and successors, and to exercise, any other franchise or civil right, except as hereinafter excepted, upon taking and subscribing, at the times and in the manner hereinafter mentioned, the oath hereinbefore appointed and set forth, instead of the oaths of Allegiance, Supremacy, and Abjuration, and instead of such other oath or oaths, as are or may be now by law required to be taken for the purpose aforesaid by any of his Majesty's subjects professing the Roman Catholic Religion."

It was undoubtedly the intention of the Legislature, by this section, to enable Roman Catholics to sit in Parliament; but the whole must be taken together, and the first section of the Act ran thus:-"Whereas by various Acts of Parliament, certain restraints and disabilities are imposed on the Roman Catholic subjects of his Majesty, to which other subjects of his Majesty are not liable: and whereas it is expedient that such restraints and disabilities shall be from henceforth discontinued: and whereas by various Acts, certain Oaths and certain Declarations, commonly called the Declaration against Transubstantiation, and the Declaration against Transubstantiation and the Invocation of Saints, and the Sacrifice of the Mass as practised in the Church of Rome, are or may be required to be taken, made, and subscribed, by the subjects of his Majesty, as qualifications for sitting and voting in Parliament, and for the enjoyment of certain offices, franchises, and civil rights: Be it enacted, by the King's Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, that from and after the commencement of this Act, all such parts of the said Acts as require the said Declaration, or either of them to be made or subscribed by any of his Majesty's subjects as a qualification for sitting and voting in Paruament, or for the exercise or enjoyment of an office, franchise, or civil right, be. and the same are (save as hereinafter provided and excepted)

hereby repealed." He contended that the words civil rights, used in conjunction with the words sitting and voting between them, were intended to draw a distinction between them, and sufficient to entitle him to say, that by the omission of the words sitting in Parliament, in the 10th sec., that Section did not give to Mr. O'Connell the rights he claimed. The 10th Section did not confer the right of sitting and voting in Parliament. If Parliament had not meant to exclude Mr. O'Connell from Parliament, which it did, his case would have been provided for as the case of Catholic Peers was provided for by the 4th Section of the Act-" Provided always, and be it further enacted, that no Peer, professing the Roman Catholic religion, and no person professing the Roman Catholic religion, who shall be returned as Member of the House of Commons, after the commencement of this Act, shall be capable of sitting or voting in either House of Parliament respectively, unless he shall first take and subscribe the Oath hereinbefore appointed and set forth, before the same persons, at the same time and places, and in the same manner, as the Oaths and Declarations now required by law are respectively directed to be taken, made, and subscribed." Why, he would ask, were any distinction made between Peers and Members of the House of Commons? and why did the Clause provide for Members of the House of Commons, elected after the commencement of the Act, but to impose on them the obligation of the new Oaths, without releasing those who were elected before the Act from the obligation of the former Oaths? By the second Section of the law, no provision was made for Roman Catholics taking the Oaths according to the 10th section. It was proved by the 20th section of the Act, that it was wholly prospective, and not retrospective. The Act applied to persons who "shall, after the commencement of this Act, be appointed to any office," &c., and of course did not apply to Mr. O'Connell, who was elected before the Act. On the whole, looking at the construction of the Act-looking at all its enactments -considering it in its various provisions, he was bound to say that this Act was intended to exclude Mr. O'Connell; and

under that impression he was prepared to act, and must vote for the Resolution.

The House then divided on the original motion, when the numbers-Ayes 190: Noes 116:-Majority 74.

The Solicitor-General then proposed-"That Mr. O'Connell should now be called to the Bar and informed of the decision of the House, and should then have the oaths tendered to him.

Mr. Brougham thought such a course would be inconvenient and after some conversation on the subject,

Mr. Peel said, that the object of his Hon. and Learned Friend was to give the Hon. Member for Clare the opportunity of taking the oaths required, if he should so think fit, be fore any ulterior measure was resorted to. He proceeded on the belief that the Honourable Member might have refused to take certain oaths only while he supposed there was a chance of his being admitted on taking other oaths. It was in that view, therefore, that it was now proposed to communicate the Resolution of the House to Mr. O'Connell, although his refusal already existed on the Records of the House. Perhaps that object would be best attained by altering the time for communicating the Resolution; and he should, therefore, move, as an Amendment-"That Mr. O'Connell be ordered to attend at the Bar, at twelve o'clock to-morrow, that the Resolution of the House should be then communicated to him, and that the oaths should be again tendered to him to take." This Amendment was put and agreed to.

On the 19th the case of Mr. O'Connell took precedence of all others in the House of Commons, and the interest which it excited both in and out of the House, appeared to increase as the proceedings were drawing to a termination, the intention of excluding him was manifest, by every step which the Ministers took, it was indeed the point which they kept in view from the beginning, as the whole of the proceedings will testify. It was obvious to all persons of any discernment, that Ministers were not indifferent to the issue, but they nevertheless presented themselves before the public, with the

most imposing gravity, as if all they had at heart was to see justice done to Mr. O'Connell and no little pains had been taken to influence the oaths.

The question was however nearly brought to a conclusion on the 19th when the Solicitor-General moved that the Order for the further attendance of Mr. O'Connell at the Bar be read.

The Order having been read.

The Solicitor-General moved that Mr. O'Connell be now called in.

Mr. S. Rice said, that before that Motion was carried he wished to ask the Honourable and Learned Gentleman opposite, a question, which, if not altogether improper, he hoped he would perceive the convenience of answering at the present stage of the proceedings. He wished to ask the Honourable and Learned Gentleman the nature of the ulterior proceedings to which he alluded on a former evening, in the event of Mr. O'Connell's refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy? He was anxious to know this, as it would, in some measure, guide him in the course which he meant to pursue.

The Solicitor-General felt no difficulty in answering the Honourable Member. His intention was, in the event of Mr. O'Connell's refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy, to move, that a New Writ be issued for the Election of a Knight of the Shire to Represent the County of Clare, who had vacated his seat by such refusal.

Mr. S. Rice wished to take that opportunity of giving notice that upon that Motion being put, he would move, as an Amendment, for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Law as related to the Oaths contained in the Roman Catholic Relief Bill.

Lord John Russell, not having been able to attend the House last night, was not able to state exactly what was the course of their proceedings; but he understood that Mr. O'Connell had been called in and asked if he would take the Oath of Supremacy. Now it appeared to his Lordship, that this was departing from the usual course adopted on the

swearing in of Members; it was going back to form a precedent, and that too in a very inconvenient manner, as a Member should only be asked questions at the Table.

The Solicitor-General said, that pursuant to the Resolution of the House, Mr. O'Connell was called to the Bar and asked if he would take the Oath of Supremacy; and if he refused to do so at the Bar, it would be an idle and useless ceremony to ask him the same question again at the Table. He therefore felt it his duty to move the new Writ.

Lord John Russell repeated, that an answer given by a Member at the Bar could not be considered as a refusal to take the Oaths. He should be questioned at the Table.

The Solicitor-General said, the Hon. and Learned Member for Clare had already refused to take the Oath, and the present course was only for the purpose of rendering the proceeding more satisfactory.

The Speaker directed the Serjeant at Arms to inquire whether Mr. O'Connell was in attendance.

The Serjeant at Arms replied in the affirmative.

The Speaker directed that he be called in.

Mr. O'Connell entered the House, and immediately placed himself at the bar.

Mr. Speaker then said: Mr. O'Connell, I am directed by this House to communicate to you two resolutions to which the House came last night. The first is, "That it is the opinion of this House that Mr. O'Connell having been returned a Member of that House before the commencement of the Act passed in this Session of Parliament, for the Relief of his Majesty's Roman Catholic Subjects,' is not entitled to sit or vote in this House, unless he first take the oath of Supremacy." The next Resolution is "That Mr. O'Connell do attend the House this day, and that Mr. Speaker do then communicate to him the said Resolution, and ask him whether he will take the Oath of Supremacy ?" In obedience to those Resolutions, I now ask you if you are willing to take that oath ? Mr. O'Connell I wish to see that oath (after a short pause.) I wish to see that oath.

: