lic, on refufing to difcover their arms, are liable to be whipped. That law is yet in force, and finally it ftates, the great and radical grievance, that the catholics are excluded from the franchifes of the conftitution; and about that complaint, there is no doubt; the petition therefore cannot justify a refusal to adminifter redress, even if their redress depended on the manner of formng their petition. But the second objection goes on broader and bolder grounds, and infifts on the demerits of the catholics; it ftates, that the catholics abhor all proteftants, and never were, nor are, nor ever will be, loyal fubjects to a proteftant king; and it afferts in particular, that in every war and in two rebellions, fince the revolution, the catholics have exerted themselves to the best of their power, againft their king and country, and have befides, been guilty of various domeftic infurrections. The laft part of the objection fcarcely deferves notice; it propofes that the catholic inhabitants of 32 counties fhould be punifhed for the difturbances of fix; it propofes that the offences of a local mob fhould be vifited on the community at large, and that the finite offences of that local mob fhould be punished by the eternal disfranchifement of the community; it makes the crimes of the man the pretext for the profecution of the fect; it proceeds on a principle that would disfranchise every part of his majefty's dominions, where riots have exifted, and almoft every great city, the city of London in particular-it proceeds on a principle which argues from the particular to the univerfal, and which in logic is falfe reafoning, and in politics is a departure from the principles, not of reafon only, but of juftice, of humanity, and of charity.

This laft part of the objection, I fay fcarcely requires an anfwer; the firft does-it ftates, that

after

after the articles of Limerick, the catholic troops rejected general Ginkle's offer, and almost to a man went to the enemy. This is not hiftory; the fact is otherwife; it has been made to appear already by my hon. friend from undoubted authority, that 19 regiments of the catholic army at that time joined king William. The objection proceeds to another mifreprefentation, and ftates that the Irish brigade is conftantly recruited and officered from Ireland. The fact is not fo. Here again the objection, in matter of fact, totally and notorioufly fails. The Irish brigade is not conftantly recruited and officered from Ireland, but on the contrary, few of its officers, and very few of its men are recruited from Ireland. Gentlemen will diftinguifh between officers of Irifh families and of Irifh birth, and they will diftinguish alfo between a regiment bearing an Irish name, and a regiment filled with Irifhmen. The firft is the cafe of the Irish brigade, and the latter is not; and for the refutation of this part of the objection, I appeal to the knowledge and the candour of gentlemen who have feen fervice, and who muft know the charge, that the Irish brigade is conftantly officered and recruited from Ireland, to be abfolutely deftitute of foundation. The objection proceeds, and ftates that 16,000 Irifh catholics fought against great Britain in the American war. I believe the number of thofe Irish to be greatly magnified; and fure I am that this defcription is not juft; thofe Irish were in great numbers-Prefbyterians of the North, not catholics of the South; they emigrated in great bodies, and they continue now to emigrate to America from the North of Ireland, not for rebellion, but for land, or a better condition. Your fellow fubjects have emigrated from poverty at home, and fometimes have met war; and if you wish never Hh 2

to

to meet them in arms in other countries, your method fhould be to give them a better condition at home. The objection proceeds, and fiates, thaṭ great bodies of Irifh fought against England at St. Euftatia and St. Lucia; here again the objection fails in point of fact ;-great bodies of Irishmen did not fight againft England at St. Euftatia and St. Lucia. There was indeed a regiment of 1800, commanded by general Dillon, the Irish brigade, and this, I fuppofe, the objector conceives to be thofe great bodies of Irifhmen; but that regiment was chiefly compofed of Dutch, and of the recruits of various nations, and of very few Irifh; and here again I appeal to the gentlemen on the fervice, whether this part of the objection is not, like the other parts, entirely unfounded. The objection proceeds and ftates, that the Irifh catholics fupply the fleets and armies of the ene-mies in a much greater proportion than those of great Britain; this I muft pofitively deny; they fupply the fleets and armies of the enemy in a very trifling proportion, and they fupply the fleets and armies of great Britain in a very great and abundant proportion. In the laft war, of 80,000 feamen, 50,000 were Irish names; in Chelsea, near one-third of the penfioners were Irifh names; in fome of the men of war almoft the whole complement of men were Irifh. With refpect to the recruiting fervice, it is a fact known to the gentlemen of the army, that fince they have recruited for the foot in Ireland, the regiments have been filled in a great proportion with Irish catholics. I do not mean to fay, that the Irish catholics have fupplied his majesty's flects and armies abundantly; but fo abundantly, and in fo great a proportion, that the recruiting fervice could not well go on without them. I appeal again to gentlemen who have feen fervice, to their knowledge in this particular,

particular, and their candour; and I affirm that this part of the objection, like the other parts, has no foundation whatsoever. The objection proceeds and ftates, that fome of the proteftants are nearly as criminal as the papifts; these proteftants are the perfons who took a part for the emancipation of Ireland, and the objection complains that fome of their measures were paffed into laws ;those measures were the emancipation of the country in 1782, and those ill-affected men were the parliament, that is the king, lords, and commons that paffed thofe acts of emancipation ;the objection compares the perfons concerned therein to the catholic rebels before the revolution; and at the fame time it represents the catholics fince the revolution, as well as before, as difaffected here is the divifion under which this objection describes his majesty's fubjects; all the catholics difloyal, and all the proteftants, who lately took part for the emancipation of Ireland, viz. the king, lords, and commons, difloyal likewife, more difloyal than the catholics fince the revolution, and very like those catholics who before the revolution were executed for rebellion. Thus the objection ends in general defamation, and feeble infatuation—a proof how bigotry will extinguifh the force of the mind, impair its principles, Banifh the virtues of the citizen, and the charity of the chriftian.

The next objection is, that the roman catholics now have every thing fhort of political power, to which I muft obferve, that the objection proves two things, an ignorance of the nature of liberty, and the fituation of the catholic-civil and political liberty, depend on political power, that community that has no fhare whatsoever, directly, or indirectly, in political power, has no fecurity for its political or civil liberty;-the example of the catholic

catholic is a proof; what deprived the roman of his civil rights for this century, but the want of political rights, the want of right of reprefentation; what deprived him of the rights of education, of felf defence? a parliament in which he had no effectual, though for a time, he had a nominal reprefentation. Such a parliament may take away his wife, it did fo-fuch a parliament may bastardise his iffue, it did fo-fuch a parliament may enter into his domeftic oeconomy, and fet on his children to defy the father, it did fo -where then is the utility of attempting to convince the catholic that he may have in fecurity civil liberty, without any fhare of political powers, when his prefent fituation is an experimental refutation of that fallacious fophiftry, and a proof that no community can long enjoy civil liberty under laws that have excluded them from all thare of political power; or, in other words, that no community have a fecurity for civil liberty when that liberty may be taken away, by any body where they have no authority; but it is fuppofed, the catholics have civil liberty, certainly they have not; they have not free and unfettered, the rights of education; they have not the full benefit of trial by jury, for they are excluded from petty juries, in fome cafes, and from grand juries in almost all, and they have not the rights, of felf defence, for they cannot carry arms; no man means to fay that a licenfe to an individual at the arbitrary will of a privy council, to carry arms, is a fubftitute for a right of felf defence; under the law, he is ever liable to be questioned on fufpicion of having arms, and fubject to an inquifition inftituted againft the principles of felf defence; he is liable to be whipped if he refufes to make difcovery, for the law has not expired, and though his difcovery is no evidence against