time for the reduction of the grant: he accordingly moved that the report be recommitted. This was opposed by Sir Arthur Wellesley, Mr. Wilberforce, Mr. Stephens, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Dr. Duigenan. It was supported by Mr. Ponsonby, Mr. Barham, Mr. C. Wynne, Colonel Montague Mathew, Lord Milton, Lord Henry Petty, Mr. Tierney, and Mr. Grattan. As an instance of the good conduct of the Roman Catholics, it was stated, that Buonaparte had made an offer to induce Irish students to go for their education, from the institution at Lisbon and from Ireland, to France; this invitation was signified to the Catholic ecclesiastics of Ireland, who, in consequence, expressed their determination to denounce suspension against, and to exclude from the priesthood any student who should transfer himself to Paris. Colonel Mathew stated, that it was moured that ministers were disposed to agree to the grant till they went to St. James's, and were closeted with a royal duke, (the Chancellor of the Dublin University,) and through this influence, the reduction of the grant was sought for. To a question from Mr. Tierney, whether the order for the appointment of Dr. Duigenan to the privy council had gone over? Sir Arthur Wellesley (Irish Secretary), replied, that the Lord-lieutenant had recommended the learned gentleman to be made a member of the privy council.

ru

Mr. GRATTAN was sorry to see gentlemen enter so largely into an attack on the religion of one-fifth of the subjects of these kingdoms. He believed they spoke in the sincerity of their hearts, and from the purest motives; but these would produce consequences deadly to the interests of this country, and advantageous to France. To discourage the education of the Catholic clergy in Ireland, and thereby to drive them to the Continent; in other words, to receive the precepts and charity of Buonaparte, was to throw them at his feet, and of course to teach them to detest England.

The House then divided on the question, "that the Report be recommitted:" Ayes 106, Noes 87; Majority 19.

Tellers for the Ayes, Lord Milton and Mr. C. W. Wynne. Noes, Sir Arthur Wellesley and Mr. Huskisson. On the question, that the resolution be finally agreed to, Mr. Tierney moved, "that the further consideration be postponed to a future day."

The numbers on this motion were, Ayes 82, Noes 112; Majority 30. Tellers the same.

ROMAN CATHOLIC QUESTION.

May 25. 1808.

ON ON the 23d, Mr. Grattan presented the Roman Catholic petition, which had been withdrawn on the 12th of April, for the purpose of obviating the objections then made to its reception, several signatures having been affixed by authority. It was received and read; and Mr. Grattan then gave notice, that, on the 25th, he would move for a committee to take the petition into consideration: and on this day Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Butler, Mr. M. Fitzgerald, and Sir John Newport, presented petitions from the Roman Catholics of the counties of Wexford, Kilkenny, Kerry, and Waterford, praying to be admitted to the privileges of the constitution; and Mr. Shaw presented a petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council of Dublin against the Roman Catholic claims.

Mr. Grattan then moved, that the petition which he had presented on the 23d be again read; which being done, he spoke as follows:

The petition which the House has just heard read, contains the sentiments of the Catholics of Ireland: not only that petition, but the other petitions presented this day speak the sense of that body. I may therefore fairly assume, that they speak the sentiments of four-fifths of the Irish population. The petitions come from a considerable portion of your electors, having political power, forming a part of the United Kingdom, and applying to the constitutional organ for a legitimate object. In discussing the merits of the petitioner's claims, I should recommend to gentlemen to avoid any intemperate language, and to adopt a spirit of concord, that nothing may pass in debate which shall sharpen the public mind. Whatever decision the House may come to, upon the motion which I shall have the honour to propose, I should hope that the temper with which it will be met, and the manner in which it will be argued, will rather approximate than remove to a farther distance, the great objects of justice and policy; with such hope, therefore, I wish gentlemen to apply the balm of oblivion, and not revive topics, which can only serve to irritate and inflame; that they will not go back to the battle of the Boyne, nor to the scenes of 1641, nor to any of those afflicting periods, in which both parties contended against each other. If you go back, so will the Catholics; if you make out a law against them, they will make out a case against you; we

shall have historian against historian! man of blood against man of blood! the parties will remain unreconciled, and irreconcilable; each the victim of their own prejudices; and the result will convince you, that the victory remains only for the enemies of both.

In the course of so many years of contest and prejudice, evils must have been engendered, national calamities must have multiplied, and much violence must have passed, In the tempests to which Ireland was reduced, by the two contending parties; the one fired by bigotry, and intoxicated with victory; the other overpowered by misfortunes, and wrung by oppres-. sion: I say, it is impossible but that great political evils must have arisen. However we may lament those times, we must all agree that in settling their accompts, there is much to admire in both parties; but there is something to forget: events have happened since these periods, which make it necessary to do away those religious distinctions. When gentlemen call to mind the war, and the consequent dangers which menace our empire, they must be convinced that unanimity is necessary for our existence.

A cordiality in co-operation, is what I strenuously recommend; and I most sincerely hope, that the good sense of both nations, will supply the want of national concord. We are now arrived at that period, when the cessation of all party rancour, and religious animosity, is not only desirable, but indispensable: it is a sentiment which not only the Irish Catholic and the Irish Protestant should feel, but which should be the guide of both nations in their intercourse with each other.

With great concern, therefore, I saw scribbled on the walls of this country, these idle words "No popery." What could be the object, or the hope of those who encouraged so wicked and abominable a cry, I cannot pretend or divine. It could not be for the purpose of promoting unanimity, nor of adding to the national strength: on the contrary, it had this effect, that it held out to the people of Ireland, and to the world, this country as a people devoted to civil commotion, as a nation of fanatics, incompetent to any other purpose but fanaticism, and incapable of acting with energy against the enemy of the British empire. The counter petitions which were presented upon a former occasion, were the sentiments of well-meaning men, who, when they fled from the shadow of the Pope, were precipitated into that gulf, into which so many nations had fallen and continue to fall. It gives me great pleasure to see, that the sense of public danger has recalled men's minds from those narrow principles, which a ridiculous fear of popery had so long encouraged; those fears are now removed, and there

fore it is, that you do not find upon the table of this House any petition against the Roman Catholics, (save one presented this day.) Such symptoms augur well for the security of the ́empire, and I congratulate the public upon it; it is an example of liberality worthy of the wisdom of a great nation, of that wisdom which prompted you to form an alliance with Austria: you restored the Pope; you took Catholics into your pay; you afforded protection to the family of Portugal; you lent aid and assistance to transplant that family to South America; you planted popery there. In so doing, you acted wisely. You have shown the innocence of the Catholic religion; that there is nothing in it dangerous to the state; and you have thereby falsified all those idle notions of the vices, which some persons attributed to that mode of faith. I then ask of you this night, on behalf of your fellow-subjects, that, in the same spirit of wisdom and of liberality, you would extend to one-fifth of your countrymen, those beneficial principles, which you so wisely and liberally extended to your foreign connections. It now remains for you to exert that wisdom, on behalf of your countrymen; to show them that you are not less anxious for them, than you were for your foreign allies; to convince them that an alliance, (a natural one!) with them, is not only your anxious wish, but that it is also your indispensable interest. It is on these grounds, that I shall move for the House to go into a committee on the petition. It prays that the Roman Catholics may have admissibility into the state and legislature in common with the rest of their fellow-subjects. The law has already admitted them to political power, has given them the right of suffrage, and has made them a part of the constituency of the House of Commons, and has rendered them capable of all offices, civil and military, save only certain exceptions, or enumerated offices, amounting to fifty, and seats in either House of Parliament; against these exceptions they pray, and in support of those exceptions it is argued as follows:- That those who profess the Roman Catholic faith cannot be bound by the obligation of an oath; that they are ready, if required, to depose their princes, and do not, with regard to those of another religion, hold themselves bound by the obligation of faith, or pact; that is to say, that those persons so admitted by the law into the constitution, forming a part of your army and navy, are destitute of the principles which hold together the social order, and which form the foundation of government, and that they are thus depraved by their religion. Now, as it is the religion of the greater part of the Christian world, it would follow,

that Christianity was a special interference for a few nations only, but, in general, that it had destroyed the morals of Christians. It follows, that the argument must be false, or that the Christian religion is not divine; and thence it follows, that the objection is reduced to a theological impossibility.

To throw a light on this subject, the charges above-mentioned have been reduced to three propositions, and put to the six faculties in Europe, the best authority on this subject, Paris, Louvain, Alcala, Douay, Valladolid, and Salamanca; to those queries they answer, 1st, That the Pope has no temporal power in this country whatsoever; 2d, That he cannot absolve from the oath of allegiance; 3d, That the doctrine that no faith should be kept with heretics is no part of the Catholic religion. They answer the questions with great promptitude, and much moral indignation, at the monstrous surmises contained in such questions; and they argue the points with much erudition, and they show that such doctrine did not belong to their religion, and that the council of Constance did not warrant the doctrine of breach of faith with heretics, and that whatever Popes might have practised, or some authors taught, yet such practices and doctrines were not warranted by the Catholic faith, but were condemned and reprobated. This authority goes to establish the present tenets of the Catholic body; and, in addition to this authority, I beg leave to mention the acts of the 13th and 14th of the King, the declaration of 1793, in which they disclaim, among other things, the position that princes excommunicated by the Pope can be deposed; and also the other charge, that no faith is to be kept with heretics; and they further renounce all claims to forfeited property. And, in addition to this, I am to add another declaration contained in the oath of the 33d of this reign, in which, among other things, they abjure the infallibility of the Pope, and swear to preserve the present act of settlement, and uphold the present state of property in Ireland, and are sworn to such an exercise of power as shall not weaken the Protestant church or Protestant state. This oath was proposed by the Protestants, made part of an act of Parliament, and thus, by the Protestants themselves, made the test of their principles.

To this I beg to add their catechism.

I submit, that these instruments are good authority to ascertain, on the disputed points, the tenets of the Catholics in general, and of the Irish Catholics in particular. Thus it follows, that there is no moral incompatibility; but it is further objected, that there is a political incompatibility, because the Popish religion, the doctrine of transubstantiation, the