tions of the people of this country; and he had no doubt that they would shed the last drop of their blood in defence of the doctrines and disciplines of their church. But violence, he apprehended, was likely to affect the interests of that church; and he would put it to the House, whether that church cou.d be better protected from violence by a Government united in itself, united with Parliament, and united in sentiment with the great body of the people, or by a Government disunited in opinion, disunited from Parliament, and by the two Houses of Parliament disunited. He was certain that no man could look to the situation of Ireland, without seeing that the interest of the church, as well as the interest of every class of persons under Government, was involved in such a settlement of this question as would bring with it strength to the Government, and strength to every department of the state.

Having now gone through the general principles which had induced him to consider it desirable to bring forward this measure, he would trouble their lordships for a short time longer, whilst he explained generally the provisions of the bill before the House. The bill was in itself very simple. It conceded to Roman Catholics the power of holding every office in the state, excepting a few connected with the administration of the affairs of the church; and it also conceded to them the power of becoming members of Parliament. He believed it went further, with respect to the concession of offices, than any former measure which had been introduced into the other House of Parliament. He confessed that the reasons which had induced him to consider it his duty to make such large concessions now, arose out of the effects which he had seen following the acts passed in the year 1782 and 1793. He had seen that any restriction upon concession had only had the effect of increasing the demands of the Roman Catholics, and at the same time giving them fresh power to enforce those demands. He had therefore considered it his duty, in making this act of concession, to make it as large as any reasonable man could expect it to be, seeing clearly that any thing which should remain behind would only give ground for fresh

demands, and being convinced that the settlement of this question tended to the security of the State and to the peace and prosperity of the country.

He had already stated to their lordships his opinion respecting the expediency of granting seats in Parliament to Roman Catholics, and he did not conceive that the concession of seats in Parliament could in any manner affect any question relative to the church of England. In the first place, he begged their lordships to recollect that at the time those acts, to which he had before alluded,-the one passed in the 30th of Chs. II., and the other at the period of the revolution,-were enacted, it was not the church that was in danger, it was the state. It was the state that was in danger, and from what? It was not because the safety of the church was threatened. No! but it was because the sovereign on the throne was suspected of Popery, and because the successor to the throne was actually a Papist. Those laws were adopted, because of the existence of a danger which threatened the state, and not of one which threatened the church. On the contrary, at that period, danger to the church was apprehen led, not from the Roman Catholics, but from Dissenters from the Church of England. He would ask of their lordships, all of whom had read the history of those times, whether any danger to the church was apprehended from the Roman Catholics? No! Danger to the church was apprehended from the Dissenters, who had become powerful by the privileges granted to them under the act of Parliament passed at the period of the revolution. He thought, therefore, that it was not necessary for him to enter into any justification of himself for having adopted this measure, on account of any danger which might be apprehended from it to the church. Roman Catholics would come into Parliament by this bill, as they went into Parliament previous to the act of the 30th of Charles II. They sat in Parliament up to that period, and were not obliged to take the oath of supremacy. By this bill they would be required to take the oath of allegiance, in which a great part of the oath of supremacy was included, namely, that part which referred to the jurisdiction

of foreign potentates; and he must say, that if the church was in danger, it was better secured by this bill than by the 30th of Charles II., which had continued in force up to the present moment; though the object for which that act was recognised at the period of the revolution-namely, to keep out the house of Stuart from the Throne-had long since ceased to exist, by the extinction of that family.

It was the opinion of nearly every considerable man in the country, that the time was now arrived for repealing those laws. Circumstances had been gradually moving to their repeal since the extinction of the house of Stuart, and at last the period was come, when it was quite clear that repeal could be no longer delayed. But he knew that there were many in their lordship's house, and many in this country, who thought --and he admitted that he had formerly been of the same opinion himself-that the state ought to have some security for the church against the proceedings of the Roman Catholic clergy, besides the oaths imposed by the act of Parliament he had already alluded to. But he confessed that on examining into the question, and upon looking more minutely than he had before an opportunity of doing, at the various acts of Parliament by which the Church of England was constituted, and which formed the foundation on which it rested, he could think of no sort of arrangement capable of being called into execution in this country which could add to the security of the established church.

He begged their lordships to attend for a moment, whilst he explained the situation of the kingdom of Prussia with respect to the Roman Catholic religion. The King of Prussia exercised the power which he did over the Roman Catholic church, in his various dominions, under different concordats made with the Pope in Silesia, under a concordat made with the Sovereigns of the House of Austria and the Pope; in the territory on the left bank of the Rhine, under a corcordat made with Bounaparte and the Pope; and in the territories on the right bank of the Rhine, under a concordat made with the former

29.

4 T

sovereigns of those countries and the Pope. Each of those concordats supposed that the Pope possessed some power in the country, which he was enabled to concede to the sovereign with whom the concordat was made. That was a point which we could never yield to any sovereign whatever. There was no sovereign, be he who he might, who had any power in this country to yield up to His Majesty. We must keep our sovereign clear from such transactions. We could have no security of that description,—not even a veto, on the appointment of a Roman Catholic bishop,-without detracting, in some degree, from the authority and dignity of the sovereign, and without admitting that the Pope had something to concede to His Majesty.

Now let their lordships suppose another security. Suppose it were arranged that His Majesty should have the nomination of the Catholic Bishops. If he nominated them, he must also give them a jurisdiction, he must give them a diocese. He should like to know in what part of Ireland or England the King could fix upon a spot where he could, consistently with the oath he had taken, nominate a Catholic bishop or give a diocese? The King was sworn to maintain the rights and privileges of the bishops, and of the clergy of this realm, and of the churches committed to their charge. Now, consistently with that oath, how could the King appoint a bishop of the Roman Catholic religion; and would not the established church lose more than it gained by the assumption of such a power on the part of His Majesty? Then, there was another security, which some noble lords thought it desirable to have,—namely, the obtaining by Government of copies of all correspondence between the Catholic clergy and the Court of Rome; and the supervising of that correspondence, in order to prevent any danger resulting to the established church. Upon that point he must say that he felt the greatest objection to involve the Government of this country in such matters. That correspondence, their lordships were told, turned on spiritual affairs.

But he would suppose that it turned on

questions of excommunication. Was it, then, to be suffered, that the Pope and His Majesty or his Majesty's Secretary of State acting for Him, should make law for this country? for that would be the result of communications between the Catholic clergy of this realm and the Pope being submitted to His Majesty's inspection, or to the inspection of His Majesty's Secretary of State. Such a security amounted to a breach of the constitution, and it was quite impossible that it could be made available. It would do more injury to the constitution and to the church than any thing which could be done by the Roman Catholics themselves, being placed by this Bill in the same situation as Dissenters.

With respect to communications with the Court of Rome, that has already been provided against and prevented by laws still in existence. Their lordships were aware that those laws, like many others regarding the Roman Catholic religion, were not strictly enforced; but if they should be abused, -if the conduct of those persons whose actions those laws were intended to regulate, should be such as to render necessary the interference of Government, the very measure which was now before their lordships would enable Government to interfere in such a manner as not only to answer the object of its interference, but also to give satisfaction to their lordships and to the country.

Another part of the bill had for its object the putting an end to the order of the Jesuits and other monastic orders in this country. If their lordships would look at the act passed in the year 1791, they would probably see that at that time it was possible to make laws through which a coach-and-four might be driven. His noble and learned friend (Eldon) would excuse him, he hoped, for saying, that notwithstanding all the pains which he had taken to draw up the act of 1791, yet the fact was, of which there could not be the smallest doubt,that large monastic establishments had been regularly formed, not only in Ireland, but also in this country. The measure which he now proposed for their lordships' adoption would prevent the increase of such establishments, and, without