military offices; but if this were not the case, he could claim no such exemption. He then moved that the bill be read a second time on this day six months.

The Lord Chancellor believed the bill to be well intended, and capable of doing good, but thought it not advisable in the present circumstances to press it on the house.

Lord Holland, in a speech of some length, began with observing that the assertion which had been made, that the majority of the petitioners probably did not understand the measure against which they petitioned, was singularly of fensive and unbecoming. He then proceeded to maintain the broad principle of religious toleration which he had before advanced; and he made various remarks upon the reasons alleged in favour of the bill, and upon the oppressive nature of its provisions.

After some other lords had spoken in reprobation of the bill, and not one in its support, Lord Sidmouth made a brief reply; and the question being then put on the motion for deferring the second reading, it passed without a division.

Thus terminated, at least for the present, this business, of which the most remarkable circumstance seems to have been, the great surprise manifested by the mover at the violent opposition he encountered from the body of dissenters. Yet it required no uncommon share of sagacity to foresee, that tampering with an. act considered by the dissenters' as their grand palladium, could not

fail of exciting jealousy and alarm, however slight were the alterations proposed; and as his lordship must necessarily have been conscious to a design of rendering at least more difficult the assumption of the ministerial office by the separatists, and eventually subjecting it in some measure to the approbation of the magistracy, he must have been extremely uninformed of the sentiments of dissenters upon that point, to suppose that they would not regard such an interference as subversive of their religious rights. Though they would admit the right of government to identify in any manner it chose, the persons to whom it was to grant civil privileges and immunities, they could not, consistently with their principles, acquiesce in a similar inquest with respect to the persons invited to ascend their pulpits. Another effect of this measure, which his lordship certainly did not contemplate, was that of shewing them how, notwithstanding their great diversities of doctrine and discipline, they may be brought to unite upon one common object; and also the strength they possess when thus acting in union; a species of knowledge which, if they were already formidable to the established church, must tend to render them much more so. We are disposed, however, to believe that no dangers really threaten the church from that quarter, which the clergy themselves may not obviate, by a regular discharge of their duties in the spirit of mildness and moderation.

CHAPTER

attend his proper place of worship on coming into England; but it was rejected on a division.

When the bill, on June 17th, was brought before a committee of the house of lords, Lord Stanhope moved the insertion of the words which he had proposed for introduction into the Mutiny Bill, importing that no officer should have power to compel any soldier not of the church of England to attend its service, and that he should have the right of attending on the worship to which he was attached; and though he was warmly supported by some other lords, who argued that such a matter should not be left to discretion, it was negatived. The Earl of Radnor then proposed as an a mendment, that the interchange should be limited to the cases of invasion and rebellion; which was also negatived, and the bill finally passed without further debate.

The purpose of this interchange, which has since been extensively carried into effect, is obvious, though, probably from motives of delicacy, it was not touched upon in the debates. By its means a military force will be quartered in Ireland, not influenced by the local interests or prejudices of that country, which will be at hand to assist in the suppression of the disturbances that may arise from the disappointed hopes of the majority of the people respecting their civil or religious privileges. The policy of the measure will not be questioned, provided that of subjecting them to such disappointments be established.

The Irish catholics having agreed upon a petition to be presented to parliament, the same was

presented by Mr. Grattan to the house of commons on May 20th. On the 31st, that gentleman moved that the petition above mentioned, and also the votes of the house conveying their thanks to the armies under Lord Wellington and General Graham, should be read. This having been done, he rose, and said that he had desired that the petition and the votes should be read, in order that the house should be reminded of the grievances which they were called upon to redress, and that the petitioners might have the benefit of the recorded opinion of the house in favour of their allegiance. He then proceeded to shew that there was nothing in the roman catholie religion itself which encouraged disaffection, but that the manner in which the catholics had been treated by the government was the cause of their discontents. If, said he, the government should keep any class of its subjects in a state of imperfect privilege, it must occasionally find that class in a state of imperfect allegiance. In order to take away all subjects of griev ance, they should take away the penal laws which formed the dic tum of discontent, and the repeal of which would ensure the allegis ance of the subject, and establish the tranquillity of the people. After dwelling some time upon these ideas, he proceeded to make some observations upon the principle adopted by government, that of disqualification, and he contended that, when applied to a population like that of the Irish catholics, it was wholly and absolutely inadmissible. He assumed as undeniable maxims, that no government has a right to make partial laws,

or

arbitrary laws, that is, without reason; that no government has a right to establish an inquisition into the thoughts of men, or to punish a man purely on account of his religion. The existing penal laws did not in fact impose any religious creed. An atheist or a deist might take the oath or sub scribe the declaration; it was sufficient that he was not a catholic. Did the House then mean to say that an atheist was fitter to make laws than a catholic? No-the catholics had been excluded only on account of a supposed connec tion with a foreign power; but did such a connection now exist? The government itself had made a league with two catholic sovereigns, and this country more than any other was now exerting itself to support catholic establishments. His inference from these observations was, that there was nothing in the catholic religion to disqualify a nation for making laws, for the proof of which he appealed to our ancestors-nothing to create a connection with our enemies, for which he would ap. peal to our allies; and upon these two propositions he would found a third-that the Irish catholics had the same right as any other dissenting subjects to any privileges possessed by any other body of subjects. With respect to the objection, that to repeal the penal laws would be to endanger the religious establishment in Ireland, he said it was a bad way to support the establishment by disqualification, and the law of conquest. The benefices of Ireland did not exceed twelve hundred, and were four millions of people to be disqualified through consideration

for them? Not for the preser vation of their property, for that was secured; but for bigotry, for intolerance, for avarice, for an a bominable, illegitimate and atro cious usurpation. If the question were, whether the church were to be established by the ruin of the civil liberties of Ireland, they had no right to make the attempt. The church establishment was not meant for the king, because the people were not to be of his reli gion, but he of the religion of the people: it was not for the court, or for persons of fashion, but for the people. On this principle the kirk had been established in Scotland. If they were to attempt to fix a church establishment upon any other ground, it could not possibly succeed: they could not call it christianity; it would be a church of ambition, of avarice, of bigotry, of intolerance. Many (said Mr. G.) there are who imagine that the Irish catholic is indifferent to the fate of these demands. That, however, is not the question you have no right to ask them whether they desire, but ask yourselves whether it is justice to grant. If you really think them careless on the subject, all you can establish by your argument is this-" We, by our bad government have so debilitated you, so broken your hearts and debased your spirits, that even liberty is become of no account with you." Will this be a matter of boast to England? You need not gloss over your injustice by the idea that what you refuse is trifling. The catholics have wisely refrained from stating their grievances in this petition; but what they are excluded from is not a bauble.'

:

They

They are excluded from a seat in this house, from offices in the bank, from the situation of sheriff, from the best places at the bar, from the highest stations in the army, from any participation in the state: they are deprived of their civil liberties, they are galled by tythes, they are oppressed by their landlords; and what remedy do you offer them? Nothing.

Mr. Gratian then noticed the objection drawn from the coronation oath, and argued that the Jaws against the catholics were by no means fundamental, but provisional, and were so declared by the acts of union with Scotland and Ireland. Both these declared such penal laws not permanent, but capable of repeal provisional, as circumstances might occur. He next entered into the consideration of the security that wou'd be derived from the repeal, by uniting the force of the country against the dangers that now threaten it. "I tell you (said he), unless you tolerate each other, you must tolerate a conqueror. I know you are a very grave, a very wise people; but on this one point, the very point of your vitality, you are stupid, stripped by bigotry of every sense, and you must certainly at one stroke be crushed." He then made an animated reference to the late services of the Irish catholic soldiers in Spain; and concluded a long speech with moving that the petition be referred to a committee of the whole house.

After Sir J. Coxe Hippesley and General Matthew had spoken in favour of the motion, Dr. Duigenan rose, and made a speech of great severity against the principles and claims of the catholics.

He stated the oath of fidelity to the pope and the church of Rome taken by every catholic bishop and priest, and affirmed that intole rance was an essential part of their religion. He ridiculed the exaggerated terms in which their num→ bers were represented, and asserted that the whole population of Ireland did not exceed three millions and a half, of which one million and a half were not catholies; and he disparaged their consequence with respect to landed and personal property. He maintained that it was still a doctrine of their belief that oaths taken to heretics were absolutely null and void, He spoke with contempt of the origin of the present petition; and concluded with reading long extracts from the pamphlets and speeches of the catholics, in order to shew that they were hostile to the established government of this country.

Lord Jocelyn declared himself unfriendly to the catholic claims, and imputed the principal griev ances of the poor in Ireland to the non-residence of landlords.

Mr. Banks apprehended that the catholics would still be going on with demands, and thought that the present petition was urged on by ambitious men, rather than by the voice of the country.

Mr. Ponsonby said he was called up, though reluctantly, by the remarks of the last speaker. He maintained that there was in the restrictions themselves, without other motives, cause enough for complaint on the part of the catholics, and that even the peasantry must feel the degradation under which those of their communion laboured. He argued upon

the