ancestors. would otherwise rest tranquil and contented | course of the remarks he was compelled by with the many important privileges they enjoyed that were not partaken by their These ambitious individuals wished to become the counsellors of the King; and the Catholic Board, as the superiors, were first, it was to be presumed, to be accommodated with places near the throne. (Disapprobation and applause). They were to overturn that glorious Constitution for which Russel (a name he could scarcely mention without tears), had died to maintain. The Honourable Baronet pledged himself to follow that splendid example; and as long as resistance to Catholic ascendency could be made, he would give it his strenuous opposition. Admiring the noble principle of toleration, he would go a great length to produce unanimity; but imminent dangers were to be contemplated, and it was the duty of all not only to provide against present, but against future mischief. What was there to prevent a Catholic Sovereign from ascending the throne, or to prevent him from choosing Catholic Ministers at some distant period? (Hear, hear.) We might be reduced to the shocking predicament of having a Catholic Ministry and a Catholic King. The country had once witnessed the misery of a Catholic King, and such an event might again occur. Jesuits might insinuate themselves into the bosom of the Monarch, and block up all the avenues to the throne. The imprisonment of the Pope by Buonaparté had been referred to. Did not this shew how completely the Pontiff was under the control of the bitter enemy of England? And what use might not be made of him to influence the uninformed minds of the Irish people? Buonaparte knew how valuable was such a sanction to his tyrannical usurpations, and had employed him at his own coronation. LORD DARNLEY explained as to a misrepresentation by the Honourable Baronet, of what he said regarding the impossibility of the nation being governed by a Catholic King. He reminded him that the greater portion of the Popery code was not adopted until long after the Revolution, in the reign of Queen Anne. SIR WM. GEARY, in addition, called the attention of the Noble Earl to the reign of James the 2d., who had been governed by a Jesuit, and asked him if he could possibly secure the nation against a similar occur. rence? SIR EDWD. KNATCHBULL solicited the pardon of the Noble Earl, lest, in the personal allusions to make, any thing disrespectful fell from him. The Noble Earl appeared to know very little of the duty of a Member of Parliament; he had commenced by expressing his surprise that neither of the Representatives for the county had spoken; he required that they should first give their opinion; but the Noble Lord ought to be informed, that it became the Member for such a county as Kent, first to learn the wishes and opinions of his constituents, before he obtruded his own. When the Representatives were acquainted with the general sentiment, they were to draw their conclusions: the Member was not to dictate, but as far as he could, with a due regard to his conscience, to obey. The question of Catholic Claims had often been debated in Parliament, and he (Sir Edward Knatchbull) had always voted to the best of his honest judgment, and what had been his conduct in the past, should be his conduct in the future (applauses). Holding the situation he had so long filled, and with the connexions he had made, he should be happy to grant any favour or boon that could in reason be demanded, and which was consistent with the safety of the Constitution, but hitherto he had foreseen dangers, which had induced him to give his vote in opposition to those who sought to remove their disabilities: if at the present moment any adequate security could be afforded for the grant, he would pledge himself to maintain the claim of the Catholics; but if such security was not given, his vote should continue on the same side that it had hitherto been given, when the question was debated in a higher tribunal. The petition met with his entire approbation, and he should, he said, be happy to do his utmost in support of it, when it was presented to Parliament. Mr. CALCRAFT advanced to the front of the Hustings, and addressed the High Sheriff. He said that he was as warm an admirer as the Honourable Baronet (Geary) of the Revolution of 1688; and although the conclusion he should come to would be different, he thought he could shew that he has fully acted up to its spirit. He was as anxious as any man for the preservation of the Protestant Establishment; but he believed that ample security could be given, by which all dangers would be removed. He begged to read to the Meeting the Resolution passed by the House of Commons, in June last, declaring that the Roman Catholic claims should be considered; and ence. The Noble Earl (Thanet) had read to the meeting one Oath which the Catholics took to the Sovereign to secure their allegiance, but many others might be adduced in the wording equally strong, imposed by the Legislature for various purposes. Those prescribed by the 13th, 14th, and 28th of the King were always subscribed, and no man could say that they were not inviolably observed. Of the faith and loyalty of the natives of Ireland, no man entertained a doubt; if great and brilliant achievements were performed by our troops, or by any particular regiment, it would almost invariably be found that Roman Catholics formed no inconsiderable proportion of the force that so distinguished itself. It could not be said that they did not respect their oaths, because oaths only kept them out of all the offices of the state; if they would condescend to subscribe the oaths of Supremacy and Transubstantiation, no ob having voted in its favour, he could not approve of a Petition, the object of which went to render it nugatory. The proposal made by Col. Stratford unfairly prejudged the question: It told Parliament, you have acted imprudently, and without examination decided that which ought not to be determined without the most minute inquiry. The Revolution, it was true, was a Protestant Revolution; but how different were the circumstances of the times. Besides a Popish Sovereign, there was soon afterwards a Popish Pretender; and the Sovereign Pontiff was almost in the zenith of his power. Now the Protestant succession had been long settled; there was no Pretender, and the Pope was a prisoner, an incumbrance to Buonaparté, who could not employ him to advantage in any country of Europe. In Canada we had a splendid instance of Catholic loyalty: Catholic establishments were there countenanced, and the Catholics had resisted the Pope, Buo-jection could be made to their eligibility to naparte, and the Americans, his allies. Parliament, or to any of the dignities of the One Hon. Baronet trembled at the name of State; but their adherence to their faith, a Jesuit. Where they were now to be the respect they shewed to the sacred oblifound Mr. Calcraft was ignorant; but if he gation, kept in the hands of the Protestants should want one, would apply to his wor- all temporal power, and the Catholic, who thy Friend, who probably had a few in for gain would sacrifice his conscientious petto, that he kept and exhibited like wild scruples, was below contempt. Allusions beasts. A Pope King was also much had been made to the Catholic Board of dreaded by him; but until the Act of Set-Dublin, but the Legislature was not to attlement were repealed, he could not sit tend to the inconsiderate nonsense of a few upon the British Throne. As to a Popish individuals; and if the Catholics did not Parliament, it was ridiculous to entertain chuse to accept the boon offered, on the such an idea. The elective franchise had terms Parliament should fix, it must be already been granted, and all the influence rejected; but Parliament, and not the Cathey could have they exercised through tholics, nor the Board at Dublin, were to Protestants. Was it possible that five dictate what should or should not be the semillions of Catholics should destroy and curities to be given. The apprehensions, annihilate twenty millions of Protestants? therefore, expressed respecting the proWhat would ten Catholic Members do ceedings or the threats of a noisy set of baragainst 650 Protestant Representatives, risters, were wholly groundless. even were the former aided by a Popish King and a Jesuit adviser? The great authorities of Pitt, Fox, and Burke had been quoted; but Mr. Calcraft could add the names of five succeeding Lords Lieutenant of Ireland, who all concurred in the necessity of concession to the Catholics: they were, Earl Fitzwilliam, Earl Camden, Marquis Cornwallis, Earl Hardwicke, and the Duke of Bedford. Earls Camden and Hardwicke became proselytes in favour of the Papists, although they were sent out by Administrations who were founded upon opposition to their claims. He was as firmly persuaded that the concession to the Catholics would give additional security in Church and State, as he was of his exist SIR W. GEARY in explanation observed, that he did not intend to be understood as asserting that Jesuits were now to be found in Europe; the only remnant, he believed, was in South America. Of the ascendency and power of the Priests in Ireland, he could adduce a melancholy instance, of the 68 respectable persons, taken prisoners at Wexford during the rebellion. Mr. CALCRAFT objected to the Hon. Baronet going into new matter in explanation. SIR W. GEARY dropt that point, and proceeded to advert to the Catholic Board, which he insisted was composed of Delegates from the general body. Mr. CALCRAFT said that they were not delegates. SIR W. GEARY added, that it was difficult to know what to call them but ambitious Catholics. Sometimes they went by one name, and sometimes by another, as if they were afraid to call themselves by their real character. They were appointed by one great mass of the Catholics of Ireland, and he considered them as the greatest enemies to their country and to their religion. If concessions were made to the Papists, by abrogating the test acts, it would be the most grievous injustice, if the act of settlement were not also repealed, so as to allow the Sovereign, if he chose it, to become a Catholic without danger of being deposed. Mr. LARKIN, of Rochester, after a considerable struggle, during which he insisted vehemently upon his right to speak, obtained a hearing. He was a man of Kent, and would not be intimidated by Kentish men. His principal object, he said, was to call the attention of the Meeting to the real question, not whether emancipation should or should not be granted, but merely whether the propriety of making any concessions should or should not be examined. It was inconsistent with the liberality of the inhabitants of the County, by adopting the Petition proposed to-day, to put a stop to inquiry The Meetings against the claims of the Catholics were generally convened by the Clergy of the Establishment.-(Cries of no, no, and applause.) He repeated the assertion, and added, that when they could find none to sign it but themselves, they were compelled to put down their own signatures alone, as was the case of the Chapter noticed the other day in the House of Lords, by the Duke of Norfolk, where seven names only could be procured. He recommended that the Established Clergy should attend to their duty, and not interfere in politics: they should endeavour to heal, instead of exciting animosities; they should practise as well as preach the word of peace. (Loud applause.) SIR EDWARD KNATCHBULL interposed to speak to order, but was not successful. Mr. LARKIN proceeded: he knew many excellent Members of the Church of England, but he should respect the general body more, if they were content to labour in their vocation. He went on to notice the singular scrupulousness of Sir Edward Knatchbull, who to-day, for a wonder, had talked of obeying the instructions of his constituents; when had he not acted in opposition to the wishes of five-sixths of the Electors? THE HIGH SHERIFF spoke to order. MR. LARKIN complained that he was the only person called to order. Sir Edward Knatchbull had been allowed to proceed at length without saying one syllable to the. question. He concluded by calling upon the Meeting to recollect, that in voting for the Petition they shut the door upon all inquiry, and that in supporting the Amendment they pledged themselves to grant nothing if such grant were found upon investigation to be inexpedient. After some slight altercation between Lord Thanet, Sir W. Geary, and Lord Darnley, the Petition and Amendment were severally read. The question was. put upon the Amendment, which, on the shew of hands, was negatived. The question was then put upon the Petition. THE SHERIFF on the shew of hands said, that the majority was decidedly in favour of the Petition. THE EARL OF THANET interrupted him, and objected to the word decidedly. He called on the Sheriff to look around him, and before the question was finally decided, to correct his expression. The Sheriff did so, and with great candour declared that the numbers were more nearly equal than he had supposed; but upon the whole, he must say, that the majority was in favour of the original Petition. COLONEL STRATFORD moved, that the Petition be left at the Bell Inn for signatures, and that it be presented to the Lords by the Marquis Camden, and to the Commons by the Members for the county.— The motions were severally put and carried. SIR W. GEARY moved the thanks of the Meeting to the High Sheriff, but from some neglect the question was not put. THE EARL OF THANET observed, that another opportunity should be afforded, al- ́ though perhaps not this year, of ascertaining the real sense of the county, when the clouds of prejudice which had been purposely spread had been cleared away. The notice of the present Meeting had been too short. MR. WELLS stated that the Meeting had been twice advertised at a week's distance, and as much time as possible had been allowed. 1 THE EARL OF THANET explained. LORD DARNLEY said, that several of his friends had never heard of the meeting until he wrote to them. He pledged himself to give the County an opportunity of fairly deciding upon this important subject, SIR EDWARD KNATCHBULL combated the insinuation that the real sense of the CATHOLIC CLAIMS. Irish Petition against them. PETITION of the Protestant Freeholders and Inhabitants of the COUNTY of SLIGO. To the Honourable the Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled.-The Humble Petition of the Inhabitants and Freeholders of the County of Sligo, in the Kingdom of Ireland, professing the Protestant Religion, therefore feel authorized to protest against both. Against the Name as misapplied and delusive. Against the Statement as containing the most dangerous species of actual and argumentative falsehood. That in which falsehood stands in some places, boldly glaring and alone. In others, so artfully intermixed with truth, as in effect to make it only its instrument and support. It over-rates the population of the Country, and their proportion of it, in an excessive degree, as far as can be collected from any Census hitherto taken. In a greater degree it over-rates the comparative property of that sect, real and personal. It exaggerates consequential disadvantages; and alleges injuries, which we have never known to exist, and never before heard complained of. The Name we are led to notice, not only as misapplied but delusive; to suit the clamour of grievance, it is adopted and applied, indiscriminately to those laws, Sheweth, That we your Petitioners constitutional and fundamental, which exhave observed with anxious alarm, the re- clude Catholics from the Throne, the Gonewed Claims of the Roman Catholics of vernment, and the Legislature; as well as this Kingdom, for the unqualified repeal of to those, which affected their persons, prothose Laws, which are the securities of our perties, and religious worship. These civil and religious liberties. These Claims, latter Statutes (not enacted until after the made under the name and pretext of religi- Revolution, and which were entitled Acts ous freedom and toleration, have been ad- to prevent the further growth of Popery;} vanced in a tone of requisition and menace. were those alone distinguished by the name To the wisdom and dignity of Parliament, of Penal Code, all of which have been long we confidently submit the consequences of since repealed. We cordially concur in yielding to menace, and suffering (as hereto- the repeal. We owe it, however, to the fore has happened) the concessions of good- memory of those who enacted them to say, will or justice, to be attributed to so un- That if they were severe and cruel, they worthy and degrading a motive.-The were but retaliatory of still greater cruelty, complaint of want of religious freedom and not enacted merely, but unrelentingly intoleration, we solemnly assert to be as un-flicted, with and without law, during the founded in fact, as in law. The laws sup- entire Reign of James II. We wish to port those sacred principles to all,-and if consign both cause and effect to eternal obthey did not-we trust we possess too much livion: But deem it as unjust, as unnatural of the genuine principles of Christianity, as in us, to suffer the odium and regret, which taught in the Established Church, to be in are due to both, to fall on one side only. any way instrumental in infringing on Let us be suffered to forget them altogether; either. We are conscious, and the Roman and let not their memory be revived by Catholics are so too, that they possess both partial statement, still less by re-introducing not only in a degree never yet permitted to the cause from whence they arose-Religi Protestants in a Roman Catholic State, but ous Party struggling for Political Power. in the fullest manner in which they are It was that contention, and the crimes and capable of being enjoyed. Those Laws, so miseries which grew out of it, which caussought to be repealed, are termed a Penaled the enactment of those laws that remain, Code. A Statement of them, and their immediate and consequential operation, has been adopted at the Aggregate and County Meetings of the Roman Catholics as their Case. Under that adoption it assumes importance. Much argument and inference in the late Parliament has been founded both on the Name and the Statement. We and are now complained of, as a Roman Catholic grievance. By those laws, which are not penal, but constitutional and fundamental, it has been provided; That the Government, the Legislature, the King, shall be Protestant-Protestantism is the essence of the Constitution. Its first and most vital principles are interwoven with it; and when our civil rights, founded on trious House of Brunswick acquired, and those principles, were fixed at the Revolu- holds its title to the throne of these realms. tion; Protestantism was the sacred bond We can see no reason for departing from within which they were enveloped and it. Every principle which caused its enshrined. The whole was secured and adoption remains in full force, and experisanctified by oaths and religious tests.- ence has established the necessity for its The great and wise men whose work this permanence. But the public safety and was, left to their posterity the trial of its the public peace are said to demand the effects. They have had above a century of concession of it. We deprecate the disproof, and the result has been,-to Great cussion of such questions; for we know the Britain it has proved a period of the great- mischiefs and dangers attendant on it.est external glory and internal prosperity, But suggested, and advanced, and argued that any empire was ever known to possess. on, as they are; we deny that the first is To Ireland it was the only period of internal in danger, or that the latter can be propeace to be found in the annals of her moted by such concession. The proud history. With this double proof before state of prosperity, which the case adopted our eyes, of what these nations were with- by the Roman Catholics boasts of, gives out the system, and what they have been sufficient security in their good sense, if we under it; we are called on to destroy and could suppose it wanting in their loyalty. reverse it. We humbly hope and pray, To apprehend the danger, we must deny that the destructive delusion of theory, confidence in the oaths which they have so may not be suffered to destroy the solid repeatedly taken, and must believe them foundations of experience. If, as now only capable of committing treason as well as is sought, exclusion only is to be removed perjury, in resistance of a settlement; from the Legislature and Government, and which, within twenty years, was accepted to continue annexed to the Crown, we know by them as final, and satisfactory of their not on what theoretical principles of the wishes as well as claims.-That it would Constitution it can be supported; that re- conduce permanently to public peace we ligious fetters shall be imposed upon the still more confidently deny. We conceive conscience of the Sovereign, and not on it would have the opposite effect. It would those of the Members of the Legislature, or give increased incitement, and energy, and of the great officers of State. The converse interest, to party spirit. We had hoped would be more consistent-for the consti-party spirit would subside; but the events tutional principle which removes the responsibility of Government from the Sovereign to his Ministers, gives the greater importance to the political character of their faith. In consistency then, it must be removed from all, if from any, and if the Sovereign should become Roman Catholic, with Popish Ministers, and a mixed Parliament, (too likely under such circumstances to assimilate) under no pretence, still less principle, could the Church establishment continue Protestant. It would not, or could not be permitted to do so. This would be Revolution, and the struggle it would probably cause, would be convulsive Revolution, and after all the miseries and desolations of such a State, the best result would be, to begin again where our ancestors took up the question. Practical theory then, as well as experience, pronounces against it. We acknowledge a zealous and conscientious attachment to Protestantism. We are attached to it religiously as a faith. We are attached to it politically as the safeguard and deposit of our civil and religious liberties; and as the principle and condition by which the illus - of the last two years, all we see and hear about us, and above all, the insatiable claims, and inextinguishable party-spirit, manifested in the adopted case we have mentioned, have torn from us that flattering expectation.-In every view we take of this subject and its consequences, the more we reflect upon it; the more we see cause to deprecate any fundamental change. We firmly believe, that if any such shall be effected, it will in its certain consequences, prove subversive of the English settlement of this country; and not remotely, of the connexion between the two kingdoms.— We therefore humbly Pray, that no alteration shall be suffered to take place, in the fundamental laws of our happy constitution, as established at the enlightened period of the Revolution. We further Pray, that that constitution so established, may be secured against all future assaults or encroachments; aud that a period may be put to the continual and injurious agitations of this subject, by giving such additional force to the oaths and tests which secure it, as may finally close the question against all future danger, doubt, or discussion. |