838] MAY 24, 1824. pairing the constitution, civil or ecclesiastical, of our country. I consider the subordination of mind, and (may it not be feared sometimes) of principles to the dictum of a foreign potentate, and even to his domestic emissaries-I consider the necessary enmity to our Protestant establishment, and the habitual desire to effect its overthrow, and the consequent readiness to adopt any measure for the accomplishment of that object-I consider these essential qualities of a sincere Roman Catholic, ample ground for my perseverance in resisting any attempt to promote their eligibility to parliament. English Catholics Relief Bill. circumvallation about the Protestant | church, which it would be impossible for hostility to pass, he would be most willing to grant every thing. But, as he could not do that, and was anxious to defeat every insidious approach, he could not consent to this bill. To that part of it which respected the exercise of the office of earl marshal by the Duke of Norfolk, he could have no possible objection. Buthe thought it invidious to introduce this in the general bill, and wished it to be made the subject of a separate measure. Against the bill before their lordships he must vote; for he must vote against any measure But surely, the right to the elective francalculated to add to the political power of the Catholics in Ireland. Whoever chise stands upon a wholly independent had observed the recent conduct of those foundation. It seems to be the very esCatholics, must see that they were pre-sence of a free representative constitution pared by force to seize the establishment itself. Indeed, such a disposition had been openly avowed. The Bishop of Litchfield [Dr. Henry Ryder] said: that, subject to the indispensable qualifications of adequate property, subject to exclusion on account of crime, such as perjury and corruption, or on account of voluntary official disqualifications, deemed My Lords; Unaccustomed as I am to necessary by the just vigilance of parliatake any active part in the debates of this ment-subject to these restrictions, each House, and ill-qualified as I feel myself member of the community should be alto give due force and impression to the ar-lowed, in fair right, to vote for a repregument in favour of the views which I en- sentative. If that right be denied to him, tertain, I still cannot help requesting per- he appears to me to have a grievance from mission to trouble your lordships with a which he ought to be relieved. few words, in explanation of the vote which I am about to give upon the bill now before us. It will be a vote at variance, I fear, with the sentiments of the chief and of a large majority of the body with which I have the honour to be professionally connected, and should ever wish, from perBut sonal regard and esteem, to concur. they would, I am sure, be the last men to desire the suppression of a conscientious difference of opinion, and still less to expect parliamentary support in opposition to its dictates. It will be a vote also, inconsistent, as may probably be argued, with former conduct, and symptomatic of a change of sentiment upon what is called, the Roman Catholic question. Such is the relief proposed by this bill; and connecting it with the single understood limitation to a Protestant candidate, it seems exactly to supply all that justice and attention to individual benefit, and satisfaction can absolutely require, with all that political prudence can properly concede. The Roman Catholic elector will be represented in his views of general policy, and of domestic administration-in his interests-in his feelings-in individual attachments-in his party prejudices, if you please, but not in his religion-not in that portion of his sentiments which alone is incompatible with the peaceable main. tenance of one of our chief and most im portant establishments, and which will ever lead the possessor of an actual share in the legislature to exercise it on every suitable occasion, with a view to the aggrandisement of his own church, and to the destruction of all its rivals. From any charge of inconsistency, I hope to vindicate myself successfully on the present occasion; and any change of sentiment upon the general question I utterly Such is my general view of the case of disavow. I continue, as firmly as ever, persuaded that the profession of the Ro- the elective franchise. Upon this princiman Catholic faith is a just and sufficient ple I should have justified the grant to the bar to the occupation of a seat in either Irish Roman Catholics in 1793, and should House of Parliament, to the attainment of a have urged, at the time, its necessary and share in legislative power, the power of immediate extension to the English memconfirming or altering, improving or im-bers of the same communion. VOL. XI. 3 H hand, when the now swift and growing pro But, if the measure be thus, in my opinion, clearly defensible, and even im-gress of religious light shall remove that peratively incumbent upon us for reasons barrier within yourselves which alone obof a general nature, its propriety under structs your full admission to all our civil the particular circumstances of the present advantages-which alone prevents your case, is tenfold enhanced. What would country from receiving the full benefit of have been the arguments of expediency your moral and social qualities, and your against it?-their number and their turbu- intellectual endowments and attainments." lence and yet it was granted to them- Upon these grounds and with these hopes, while from the comparatively few, peace-I shall cordially vote for the motion of the able, loyal English of the same persuasion noble marquis. it has now for 30 subsequent years been perseveringly withheld. What even is the special argument against it? arising it is said, from experience :the multiplication of Roman Catholic freeholders by the splitting of freeholds. But this practice is little known, is not habitual, if even pursued in this country, and the immense superiority of Protestant proprietors would prevent the practice, if generally adopted, from becoming in any way advantageous to the Roman Catholic cause. Whether then we look to the arguments of general rights, or particular wrongs, or to the objections of expediency from a view of comparative dangers, I cannot but regard the measure as justified-as called for-as pressed upon your lordships, by every motive that can sway the man, the citizen, and the legislator. In conclusion, if I might be permitted, I would venture to urge those who with myself support what we deem the general cause of Protestant security, to hasten to deliver a cause so valuable, so dear to us, from the charge of anomaly or inconsistency, and from the stain of injustice which must ever attach to it, until the English Roman Catholics be placed, especially as to the elective franchise, upon the same level with his Irish brethren. The more, my lords, we prize this cause, the more solicitous should we be to present it to our own minds, to the world, and to those upon whom it necessarily inflicts a privation, in a fair, equal, and equitable state. Thus let us be enabled to say to each of our Roman Catholic brethren: "We respect you as men-we regard you as fellow citizens and friends-we gladly seize the opportunity now afforded of restoring to you privileges, which perhaps you should have never forfeited, to the utmost extent which our view of the guards necessary for the support of the Constitution will permit: and we wait, with friendly impatience for the time, surely near at The Bishop of Bath and Wells said, that the main and only question before their lordships was, whether they could grant the Catholics the privileges to which the bill would entitle them, without danger to our establishments? In entering on this question, he was free to acknowledge, that exclusion of every sort was an evil. The exclusion, for instance of the noble duke from the exercise of his rights of earl marshal of England was an evil. The question then came to this -was the evil necessary, or not? He thought it was a necessary evil and he would state his reasons. Toleration was of two kinds; religious and political. Religious toleration, or the power of worshipping the Deity, as the reason and conscience of every man prescribed to him was a privilege which unquestionably ought never to be denied. But, the other kind of toleration was of a very different description. Government was for the general good of those who lived under it. If, therefore any sect entertained opinions subversive of the foundations of the social compact of any country, and were prepared to act upon such opinions, the legislature was bound to withhold from such a sect that degree of political power, which would enable them to carry their principles into successful operation. If any sect, for instance, held the tenet, that property should be equally divided, was government called upon to give that sect privileges which might enable it to realize its doctrine, or powers which might be turned against itself? Holding this as undeniable, let the House consider the doctrine of the Roman Catholics with respect to the Pope's supremacy. They believed that his holiness was the head of the church, and that kings only exercised with him a divided authority" Divisum imperium cum Jove Cæsar habet." The Roman Catholics also maintained the doctrine of indulgences, of exclusive salvation, and many others. The plain question was, whether they not only professed such doctrines, but were prepared to actuance. But let it continue as long as the upon them? If that question were put dangerous tenets held by the Catholic to him, he must answer, that they were church-tenets subversive of every Proevidently prepared to do so. Such was testant government-remain unrepealed; the uniform testimony of history; such and above all, let it continue as long as was the concurrent testimony of his own the English Catholic pays to the Pope experience and observation. On the first of Rome any part of that obedience which he would not trouble their lordships. The ought to be wholly confined to the king pages of history were open to all; and the of his own country." facts which they exhibited were sufficiently The Lord Chancellor said, he was sorry strong. With respect to the second, he to differ from some of his noble friends on thought he should be wanting to the this occasion, but he felt that he could cause of truth if he were to abstain from not yield to their views in a measure stating what had fallen within his own which he conceived threatened danger to knowledge, and under his own observa- the Protestant establishment. The bill tion on the subject. In one of the large for allowing Catholics to enjoy the elective manufacturing towns in his diocess, there franchise, he could not agree to. It was were a great many poor, for whose relief said to be introduced to remove an anoa work-house had been established, in maly; but it made no provision for the which every proper attention was paid to Catholic of this country taking the same their comfort. Among these were some oaths as were required of the Catholic of Roman Catholics, and these persons refu- Ireland. The right rev. prelate who sed to work on the saints' days and holi- had spoken last but one had argued, that days of their church. The magistrates a right to vote in a Catholic elector appealed to the priest; the priest referred could have no influence on the minds of them to the vicar-general of the district; the persons sent to parliament. This did and the vicar-general stated, that he could not appear to be very evident. But, not interfere without authority from the upon what ground could the right rev. Pope. Such a power of dispensation ap- prelate grant the right of electing without peared to him incompatible with the just that of being elected? From the Revoobedience due to the civil authority. To lution downwardno man had ever thought show the growing influence and zeal of of giving in England the right of the electhe Roman Catholics in that quarter, he tive franchise to Roman Catholics; nor might mention, that the order of Jesuits had the anomaly been complained of since had been established at Stoneyhurst, and the Union of Ireland, till very lately. The had been both zealous and successful in right of calling on the elector to take the making converts. It could not be preten- oath of supremacy was not limited to the ded that the Catholic religion was altered. Roman Catholic; and if the Irish Roman It might be said to be semper eadem, and Catholic did not take it in the same form the words "Nil actum reputans, dum quid as Protestants, he was not exempted from superesset agendum," might fitly be an oath as binding. If the English Cathoapplied to the spirit of its professors. lic, therefore, was to be admitted to the Having such things constantly before his elective franchise to remove an anomaly, eyes, could any one blame him if he felt he should be required to give the same the strongest apprehensions on the sub-security as the Irish. By the bill of 1793, ject? Without the slightest spark of which conferred on the Irish Catholics hostility towards the Catholics; on the that privilege, they were bound to take contrary, with the utmost good-will to- the oath of the 13th and 14th of the king wards them, he felt that he should not be and to bring a certificate that they had doing his duty to the Protestant commu- done so. The same right rev. prelate had nity, if he did not vote against the bill. contended, that the Roman Catholic had Concession was a good thing, but security a right to vote at elections. If such a should precede concession. "What, then," right existed, his principles ought to he might be asked, " is the Roman Catho- carry him a great deal further. The lic never to be emancipated? Is he ever Irish Catholics, it should be observed, had, to remain deprived of a participation in by various acts, obtained a right to various the civil rights and privileges of his coun- privileges which the bills on the table did trymen?" His answer would be" No; not grant to English Catholics. The let not the exclusion continue one moment measure, therefore, before their lordships longer than necessity demands its contin- could not be supported on the principle The he held a very sincere opinion the other way; and, with all proper deference to the sentiments of others, he must act on an opinion long formed, and which he should maintain so long as he possessed the power of utterance. He had been charged with bigotry. Now, he had never heard such a charge brought against the Catholics, though they had displayed equal firmness in adhering to their opinions; and he could not see that such a charge ought to be made merely because the lord high chancellor did what all the king's ministers had done; namely, declare in his individual and ministerial capacity, that he could not consent to a measure from which he apprehended the greatest danger to that supremacy of the Crown, which he felt it to be his duty to maintain. of consistency; as it did not place the Catholic religion in the two countries on the same footing. With respect to the noble duke whose name was mentioned in one of the bills, he had no hesitation in giving it as his opinion, that he could not exercise his office without taking the oath of supremacy. His only objection to the admission of the noble duke was, that by going step by step-by taking here a little and there a little-their lordships would be doing that which they could not do at once, and might be creating danger without exciting a salutary alarm. They must grant the English Catholics the same privileges with the Irish, if they granted them any at all; and he saw no reason why their lordships should do wrong again, because wrong had been once done. truth was, that they had been going on from step to step, till it was now difficult to stop. The Earl of Liverpool said, that he had He, however, held it to be his bounden resisted, on former occasions the general duty, in the particular situation in which claims of the Catholics, and their recent he was placed, to take care of the supre- conduct, together with productions of macy of his sovereign. Let their lord- theirs which he had observed within the ships look back at the struggle which had last week, confirmed him more and more been maintained, not only in the time of in the wisdom of that resistance. But, Henry 8th, of queen Elizabeth, and the question before the House had no reof James, but at the Revolution, to ference to those claims. The noble marsupport the supremacy of the sove-quis had introduced limited bills, which reign, and they would see what impor- had no reference to Ireland, but granted tance had always been attached to it. Let certain privileges to the Catholics of Engthem read the first of William and Mary, land. He did not yield to his learned and he was sure that they would be con- friend on the wool-sack, in his zeal to vinced of its vast importance. No person maintain the Protestant establishment, or could be a subject of this country, and the principle of the supremacy of the enjoy the privileges of the bill, without Crown; but, the bills now before their taking the oath of supremacy; but, in the lordships involved only questions of demeasure of the noble marquis, no such gree. His learned friend hinted indefinite provision was made, nor was any such dangers. He (lord L.) required somequalification required. It was extremely thing intelligible and tangible. He thought difficult, if not impossible, to separate the that, in order to maintain the Protestant spiritual and ecclesiastical authority of the ascendancy, it was necessary to have a Pope from temporal power. In Ireland, Protestant parliament, a Protestant counthe elective franchise had been given on cil, and Protestant judges. He was aware taking an oath equivalent to the oath of that some of the noble lords opposite supremacy. At the Union the Protestant did not exactly agree with him in this; religion was the care of both countries. but they must admit, that the distinction There was no necessity, therefore, to re- was broad and intelligible between such move any anomalies to answer the purpose high securities and those privileges grantof the Union. At the Union with Scotland ed by the present bills. Looking the it was stipulated, that both electors and question fairly in the face, most of their elected should be Protestants. The lordships would own, that there would be church of England had, for the last twenty danger to the Protestant establishment, if years; been attempted to be taken by a legislature, if judges and a council hosstorm. It had withstood all these shocks. tile to it, were permitted to be created. Let it not now be destroyed by sapping How, for instance, could the Protestant and mining. Some noble lords seemed to succession be maintained without a Proimagine, that these measures could be ef-testant parliament? Such were his reafected without injury to the church. Now sons for resisting the higher claims of the as and of the boards of Customs and Excise, officers were liable to be transferred from one country to another, by order of the board sitting in London. A Catholic, therefore, who might be a very good excise officer at Limerick, would be a very bad one at Liverpool. Thus, by crossing the channel, in obedience to the command of the board that he served, he entirely changed his quality. Was it possible for their lordships to allow this anomaly to remain? Surely such inconsistencies might be removed without granting the highest rights to the Catholics, or endangering the Protestant establishment. He was not afraid of meeting the Catholic question. He knew the opinion of the public; and he was certain they would not be taken by surprise. If he was afraid of any thing, it was of prolonging uselessc ontests on immaterial points, which made the conduct of the government appear odious, without producing a counterbalancing advantage. His best ground of defence, when called on to cede what he considered material and essential, would be, that when a proper claim had been made out, he had met it fairly and fearlessly; and he thought that principle of conduct would be the most safe and honourable for the House. Catholics; but, with the same sentiments he would give his concurrence to the present measure. He apprehended from it none of the dangers which he had alluded to in the former case. Nay, he even believed, that the granting of such privileges to the Catholics of England, would strengthen the Protestant establishment, as a cause of discontent would thus be removed a reproach perpetually thrown in their teeth would be taken away-and as, by conceding these little things, they acquired strength to resist greater encroachments. Not only pro tanto, therefore, did they remove dissatisfaction, but they actually acquired power. Now, as he had said with respect to the marriage bill, although a different system existing in Scotland, was no reason why it should be established in England, so he would say, that the enjoyment of certain privileges by the Irish Catholics, was no reason why they should be granted to the English; but, the notorious fact was useful in both cases, as it gave experience in favour of some change. If it had been adopted without danger in Ireland-if the Catholics there enjoyed the elective franchise-it was at least a reason why the concession should not excite alarm in England. In Ireland the proportion of the Catholics was infinitely greater, and therefore, if any danger existed, that danger must be proportionably augmented. If he had been asked in 1793, whether this privilege should be extended to the Catholics of Ireland, he would have certainly recommended a modification of the measure, and required that the qualification should be raised. Could their lordships, then, refuse to pass a measure where the danger was comparatively nothing, which had been in existence in another part of the empire where the number was infinitely greater. What they gave to the strong and the powerful, it would be ungenerous to refuse to the weak and the helpless. His learned friend had spoken of oaths to be taken at elections, and of the security which the Protestant establishment enjoyed from the acknowledgment of the king's supremacy on such occasions; but he must be aware that these oaths were never tendered but for the purpose of delay. With respect to the justice of peace part of the bill, there might be some difficulty, but there could be none about the admissibility of Roman Catholics to be officers of revenue. By the union of the treasuries, The House then divided, in favour of the first bill:-Present 63; Proxies 38; Total 101.-Against it, present 74; Proxies 65; Total 139.-Majority against it 38. In favour of the second bill; present 67; Proxies 42; Total 109.Against, it present 76; Proxies 67; Total 143. Majority against it 34. HOUSE OF COMMONS, ALLIANCE ASSURANCE COMPANY BILL.] On the report of this bill being brought up, Mr. Grenfell begged to know what security the public had with respect to these companies? If, for instance, a Secretary or other public officer of such company were to be proceeded against, and a verdict obtained, he wished to know how far the company, individually or collectively, were liable? Mr. Huskisson said, that as he understood it, under these bills of incorporation, in case of judgments obtained against the treasurer, and their not being made good, the individuals who might obtain the verdicts would be at liberty to select |