watch his progress, and accommodate their motions to his flight. Arrest his course they could not; but they might vary the forms and aspects of their institutions, so as to reflect his varying aspects and forms. If this were not the spirit which animated them, philosophy would be impertinent, and history no better than an old almanack. The riches of knowledge would serve them no better than the false money of a swindler, put upon them at a value which once circulated, but had long since ceased. Prudence and experience would be no better for protection than dotage and error.

But, it was said that the Roman Catholics, though they might have civil rights, were not to expect political power. Was there then nothing of political power in what they possessed? They had the right of electing members to serve in parliament: they acted as magistrates: they served as jurors: was not that exercising political power? This country had liberally imparted education to them. Did not that put the means of political power within their reach? Once admit men to enjoy property, personal rights, and their usual consequences, and on what pretence could they be excluded from the institutions by which the whole of those possessions must be guarded?

It was asked, what have the Roman Catholics to complain of? they are only excluded from the parliament, the bench, and the high offices of state; which meant that they were only excluded from the making and administering of the laws, from all posts of honour and dignity in the state. These were bagatelles, for which, according to the argument, it was not VOL. LXVII.

worth while for the Catholics to contend: Were not these the very nothings for which Englishmen would cheerfully lay down their lives?

The motion was opposed by Mr. Leslie Foster, the Solicitor General, Mr. Bankes, and Mr. Peel. The latter, after commenting on the arguments of sir Francis Burdett and Mr. Plunkett, and contending that the Catholics could not assert any claim of right to the concessions for which they now called, stated with great force and clearness the leading principle, on which he would oppose the measure in every stage. The hou. baronet tells us, said Mr. Peel, that he has never heard what the danger is; and he calls upon the opponents of his motion to point it out. Before I answer this call, I wish to inquire of the hon. baronet what is the object of his present proposition? I presume that the object is, to communicate power to those who are at present excluded from it-to devolve upon them a fair share in the framing, administering, and executing of the laws. Does the hon. baronet mean to give a mere barren capacity, never hereafter to be available? If the two Houses of Parliament mean to pass a measure of this kind, surely there can be nothing more unfair than to throw the odium of refusal of office elsewhere, and to create an unjust impression against the highest personage in the realm. Parliament ought not to give the claimants a ticket of admission, and when it is presented at the door of the constitution, trust to the Crown to shut that door in the face of the party claiming a right to be allowed to enter.

If I were perfectly satisfied that [E]

Concession would lead to the restoration of peace and harmony, and put an end to animosities, the existence of which all lament, I for one, would not oppose the measure on a mere theory of the constitution, when consent would secure such immense practical advantages. But, because I doubt whether the removal of disabilities on the conditions proposed, will promote tranquillity in Ireland, or lessen religious animosities; and because I think you cannot safely remove the disabilities, I am disposed to continue the exclusion. Are these disabilities the cause of the disorders which have so long prevailed in Ireland? As far as actual commotion is concerned, the disorders have no such origin. In the province of Ulster, where the numbers of Catholics and Protestants are nearly balanced, the Insurrection act has not been in a single instance enforced. In 1792, the Roman Catholics came for ward, and asked to be rendered capable of holding the office of magistrates, and of enjoying the elective franchise. They wanted, they said, nothing more, and those persons calumniated them grossly, who said that their wishes went further. The elective franchise was conceded even more fully than they requested it; and Roman Catholics were permitted to serve as well on grand as on petty juries. Since these concessions, has there been any diminution of party feeling and factious animosities? I think not. But the answer of the supporters of this proposition will be "While you retain any thing, while you refuse to put both parties upon an entire equality-the evil will continue; but, as soon as they are equal, it will cease.' Admitting this for a moment, will

the concession now claimed put them on an entire equality? What is claimed is a mere capacity or eligibility to office; and after you have granted that, will you be able to concede what the Roman Catholics would consider a just distribution of office? Would not the distinction thus necessarily drawn, be infinitely more galling and mortifying, since it would be reduced to a mere personal exclusion? When vacancies occurred, if a Protestant were preferred to a Catholic, would it not constantly expose the government to jealousy and reproach? The respective numbers of the Catholics and the Protestants in Ireland may be 4,200,000 to 1,800,000; but, notwithstanding this disproportion, the property in the hands of the Protestants is at least as twenty to one. Now, after equal capacity of office shall have been given to all, the religion of the great minority is to remain the religion of the state. Is it then perfectly safe in Ireland to admit the professors of all religions to the enjoyment of the same privileges? and after this has been accomplished, the Protestant church is still to be retained. I know several hon. members, and among them the member for Montrose (Mr. Hume), who contend, that it is impossible. On this point he agrees with me: for, over and over again, he has argued, that it is a mere mockery to suppose that the Roman Catholics will be satisfied with a Protestant church establishment. They will constantly endeavour to recover the power they have lost, by overturning a system which they view with other eyes than ours. The Catholic is to be admitted without restriction into parliament, and into office,

provided the king approves of him. He is to be as perfectly free as we are ourselves, unfettered by any restrictions; and at liberty to pursue what he conceives to be the interests of his country, and the justice of his cause, with perfect freedom. He comes into this House sincerely attached to the religion in which he has been educated; he has all the influence which his personal character gives him; he is placed at the head of a party. Is the Crown to say, "although you are a man of powerful abilities, yet I must shut you out?" After you have capacitated him to become secretary of state, or first lord of the treasury, is the Crown to turn round and say, "I cannot admit you?" Is that the way to conciliate such a man as this? But, suppose the Crown employs him in its service-in what a situation do you place him? Can he exercise a sound discretion, in regard to those measures which relate to the safety of the church of England? It appears to me, he cannot give a safe judgment; and therefore I am for excluding him; and not trusting to the Crown to refuse the ticket of admission you have given him." Sir Francis Burdett's motion was carried by a majority of 247 to 234.

The House then resolved itself into a committee; when sir Francis Burdett moved the following resolutions :

1. That it appears to this committee, that by certain acts passed in the parliaments of Great Britain and Ireland respectively, certain declarations and affirmations are required to be made, as qualifica tions for the enjoyment of certain offices, franchises and civil rights therein mentioned.

2. That such parts of the said oaths as require a declaration to be made against the belief of transubstantiation, or that the invocation or adoration of the Virgin Mary, or any other saint, and the sacrifice of the mass as used in the church of Rome, are superstitious and idolatrous, appear to this committee to relate to opinions merely speculative and dogmatical, not affecting the allegiance or civil duty of the subject, and that the same may therefore safely be repealed.

3. That it appears to this committee, that in several acts passed in the parliaments of Great Britain and Ireland respectively, a certain oath, commonly called the oath of supremacy, is required to be taken as a qualification for the enjoyment of certain offices, franchises, and civil rights, therein mentioned.

4. That in the said oath and declaration is contained, that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate, ought to have any jurisdiction, power, pre-eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within these realms.

5. That it appears to this committee, that scruples are entertained by his majesty's Roman Catholic subjects, with respect to taking the said oath, merely on account of the word "spiritual" being inserted therein; and that for the purpose of removing such scruples, it would be expedient to declare the sense in which the said word is used, according to the injunction issued by queen Elizabeth, in the first year of her reign, and recognized in the act of the fifth of her reign, and which, as explained by the 37th of the articles of the church of England, imports merely that the kings of this realm should govern all estates and degrees com. mitted to their charge by God,

6. That it is the opinion of this committee, that such act of repeal and explanation should be accompanied with such exceptions and regulations as may be found necessary for preserving unalterably the Protestant succession to the Crown, according to the act for the further limitation of the Crown, and better securing the rights and liberties of the subject, and for maintaining inviolate the Protestant episcopal church of England and Ireland, and the doctrine, government, and discipline thereof; and the church of Scotland, and the doctrine, worship, government, and discipline thereof; as the same are by law respectively established.

These resolutions were adopted, and a bill founded upon them was ordered to be brought in by sir F. Burdett, Mr. Plunkett, Mr. Tierney, Mr. C. Grant, sir J. Mackintosh, Mr. secretary Canning, viscount Palmerston, Mr. Wynn, sir J. Newport, sir H. Parnell, Mr. Abercromby, and Mr. Spring Rice.

On the 23rd of March the bill was introduced by sir Francis Burdett, and was read a first time. This bill, after declaring that the Protestant succession, and the Protestant episcopal church of England and Ireland, and the Presbyterian church of Scotland, are established permanently and inviolably, and setting forth the declarations against transubstantiation, the invocation of saints, and the mass, stated, that these declarations related only to matters of spiritual and religious belief, and do not in any manner affect the allegiance of his majesty's subjects,

as

and therefore enacted that they should no longer be taken qualifications for office or franchise by any of his majesty's subjects, save as therein after provided. The bill then recited, that, with respect to the oaths of allegiance, supremacy, and abjuration, the Catholics had never objected to any of them except the oath of supremacy, and to that merely as apprehending that it might be construed to import a disclaimer of the spiritual authority of the pope or church of Rome in matters of religious belief: and it therefore enacted that the following oath might be taken, in lieu of the oath of supremacy :

"I, A. B. do sincerely promise and swear, that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to his present majesty, and will defend him to the utmost of my power against all conspiracies and attempts whatever that shall be made against his person, crown or dignity; and I will do my utmost endeavour to disclose and make known to his majesty, his heirs, and successors, all treasons and traitorous conspiracies which may be formed against him or them: and I do faithfully promise to maintain, support, and defend, to the utmost of my power, the succession

to the crown, which succession, by an act intituled An Act for the further limitation of the Crown, and better securing the rights and liberties of the subject,' is and stands limited to the princess Sophia, electress and duchessdowager of Hanover, and the heirs of her body, being Protestants, hereby utterly renouncing and abjuring any obedience or allegiance unto any other person claiming or pretending a right to the crown of these realms: and I do

:

swear that I do reject and detest, as unchristian and impious, the position that it is lawful to murder or destroy any person or persons whatsoever, for or under the pretence of their being heretics or infidels; and also that unchristian and impious principle, that faith is not to be kept with heretics or infidels: and I do further declare, that it is not an article of my faith, and that I do renounce, reject, and abjure the opinion, that princes excommunicated by the pope and council, or any other authority of the see of Rome, or by any other authorities whatsoever, may be deposed or murdered by their subjects, or by any person whatsoever; and I do promise that I will not hold, maintain, or abet any such opinion, or any other opinion contrary to what is expressed in this declaration and I do declare, that I do not believe that the pope of Rome, or any other foreign prince, prelate, state, or potentate, hath, or ought to have, any temporal or civil jurisdiction, power, superiority, or preeminence, directly, or indirectly, within this realm: And I do hereby disclaim, disavow, and solemnly abjure, any intention to subvert the present church establishment, for the purpose of substituting a Roman Catholic establishment in its stead: And I do solemnly swear, that I will never exercise any privilege to which I am or may become entitled, to disturb the Protestant religion or Protestant government in this kingdom: And I do solemnly, in the presence of God, profess, testify, and declare, that I do make this declaration and every part thereof, in the plain and ordinary sense of the words of this oath, without any evasion, equivocation, or men

tal reservation whatever, and without any dispensation already granted by the pope, or any authority of the see of Rome, or any person whatever, and without thinking that I am or can be acquitted before God or man, or absolved of this declaration, or any part thereof, although the pope, or any other person or authority whatsoever, shall dispense with or annul the same, and declare that it was null or void.

"So help me God."

All persons taking this oath, were to be capable of taking, holding, and enjoying any right, office, and franchise, as fully and effectually, to all intents and purposes, as if they had taken and subscribed the oath of supremacy, save as thereinafter provided. Another clause provided that the act should not extend to alter the laws respecting the Protestant succession, the marriages of the royal family, or the acts of uniformity, or to enable any person to hold any office belonging to the church, or any ecclesiastical court or court of appeal from such court; or any office in any cathedral collegiate or ecclesiastical establishment, or in either of the universities, or in colleges or halls, or schools of ecclesiastical foundation; or to enable Roman Catholics to take orders; or to enable Roman Catholics to present to any ecclesiastical benefice; or to hold the office of lord lieutenant of Ireland, or chancellor of Great Britain or Ireland.

By subsequent clauses the king was to appoint, by a commission under the great seal of Ireland, such Catholic bishops as he pleased, to form a board for the execution of certain duties. The commission was to be revocable, but was to be re-issued within a limited time. The