We

ence, than by excellence: therefore, they My lords, we do not contend that reliwill not build upon foundations already gious opinions are a reasonable disqualifilaid, or draw from sources already opened; cation for political power; but we do but corrupt the judgment on which they contend, that when any combination, hope to found their celebrity, and thus de- whether of a religious, political, or philoteriorate the intellectual state which they sophical character, assumes a jurisdiction profess to amend. How far this remark within the state-intolerant, adverse to may be applicable to the present genera- civil government, grounding its authority tion I will not presume to determine. upon more than human means;-that But let us judge the tree by the fruit. It combination, being destructive of liberty, is to that period we owe all the liberty, should, if possible, be deprived of its the happiness, the toleration we possess. influence. Otherwise, religion-all reliWe can ascribe it to no other. Magna gion that has not this inherent principle Charta contains the venerable Saxon ma- stands in perfect harmony with liberty; terials of our constitution. But they for liberty is only another name for justice, never rose to any structure of form and and as far as religions protect justice, so symmetry, until, after a complete esta- far they protect liberty. I do not, thereblishment of a Protestant church, kings fore, see how the total and unqualified and parliaments were subjected to funda- liberty of Mr. Locke is to be realized by mental constitutions and customs, clergy the removal of these restrictions. and laity to the municipal law of the must not legislate upon unproved theories, land. The prelates instrumental to Magna loose and general propositions. Theories Charta have been mentioned as examples are very good direction-posts on the highof liberality under the Roman Catholic way; but they will not guide men through religion. They pursued the temporal ob- the intricate paths of government. When jects of Magna Charta, which they shared I see total and unqualified liberty conboth as prelates and barons, to the sacri- ducting me to total and unqualified fice of their spiritual duty; and were de- slavery, my mind is not so sublimated servedly suspended or banished in the and enlightened as to be insensible to the commencement of the succeeding reign practical error of pursuing it. My lords, by the earl of Pembroke, a nobleman of books will make theorists; they will also great liberality, but who was unable to teach men how to pervert history; and in oppose the papal power. The contest at conjunction with a bias operating upon that time was, whether king, barons, or human frailty, will furnish glasses to make clergy, should oppress the people. The the wily politician seem to see the things reigns of king Edward 1st and king he doth not; but they will not make Edward 3rd have been mentioned. They statesmen. I admit the general proposiwere able to subdue the spiritual power tion, that obstructions in a river are unfabecause they were tyrants; and no civil vourable to free navigation; but I do not liberty existed in their reigns. King admit, as a consequence, that locks are Edward 3rd was a great man, and a therefore to be removed:-because, I conqueror, but he trampled upon the know that they serve to deepen the stream, liberties of the people. This was neces- and enable all barks, not only the boat sary at that period, and so it will be again, that can swim in shallow waters, but all under the Roman Catholic religious in- of every size and description, to navigate fluence. It was necessary that kings it with safety. Thus do these restrictions should be able to govern their subjects afford a copious flow of liberty for the by arbitrary power, or they became, exercise of all religions. Nor do I know themselves, the slaves of the superstition after what model, noble lords have framed of men nominally their subjects, but a system of government adverse to a really the instruments of the priesthood. fixed national religion. I know that some The flame of virtue and liberty often hold, in the highest veneration, the ancient scintillated from its subterraneous recess; models of Greece and Rome. But in but at the period of the Revolution the these the household god, the temple, great burst of mental emancipation took and the oracle, were the chief care of the place, which fertilized the field of liberty patriot and the philosopher. Under the with the ashes of tyranny and supersti- laws of Solon, the strictest oaths and tests tion; a field, that nothing but impatience of religious qualification were administerof our own good could tempt us to desert. Ied for admission into the Senate, Thus

in the infancy of the civilization of Eu- | plained of? Now, when he considered rope, more than two thousand years ago, that the civil power was impeded in Irewas this principle perceived. The same land, nay, that it was nullified-when he thing will be found in the Roman republic, saw the law powerless and impossible to various qualifications-age, property, the be enforced, by the existence of a political having served high offices, and certainly influence, which was against all law-then religion-were required. For then the priests he felt satisfied that the necessity was possessed considerable civil power; and Ci- proved. When he saw that no effective cero, in his "Oratio pro Domo," speaking of government could be formed on a princithe beneficial influence of religion in the ple of neutrality as to this question, then state, and of the sacerdotal power, says he felt satisfied, that the necessity was to them, "Hæc profectò tanta est, ut omnis proved for a change in our system with reipublicæ dignitas, omnium civium salus, respect to the Roman Catholics. If he vita, libertas, aræ, foci, Dii penates, bona, were asked, what that change should be, he fortunæ, domicilia-vestræ sapientiæ, fidei, would point to what had already been the potestatique commissa creditaque videan- consequences of the refusal of concessiontur." In this republic, the love of a man's that there had been in the country bloodcountry was defined to be his readiness shed and triumph. But of what nature to defend his religion and his home: when was that triumph? It was not a triumph banished, he was said to be driven from which united men in the bonds of civil his "penates:" and I have often won- concord, but which, on the contrary, dered that the youthful traveller, from formed the elements of a fresh triumph. whom we derive many of these theoretical He would studiously avoid the elements evils, should visit those seats of ancient of such a triumph. The question, then, liberty and learning-view their monu- for the consideration of their lordships ments of past glory, intermixed as they was, what was to be done? Were they to stand with splendid relies of religious disregard the opinions and advice of those institutions and return to his country, ministerially, locally, and judicially ac under a conviction that liberty and fixed quainted with the situation and affairs of religion cannot co-exist. Ireland? Were they to disregard the public and private information which they received, as to the necessity of that measure? He had received private informa¬ tion which assured him, that concessions must be granted, or else military law must be established in Ireland. He was as anxious as any one of their lordships to support the Protestant constitution: he had been bred up in its principles, and to those principles he most strictly and conscientiously adhered; and it was from a conviction that he was securing not endangering, that constitution, both in church and state, that he gave his support to the bill before their lordships. No imputation or obloquy which might be cast upon him-no charge of inconsistency, which, if made, he should repel-could induce him to withhold his support from a measure which he deemed calculated to give tranquillity to Ireland, and, at the same time, to consolidate and strengthen the empire at large. This, he conceived, might be looked upon as a second union, which would give efficacy and permanency to that which preceded it. Their lord ships had been asked, what securities had been obtained, or offered, to warrant their adoption of this measure? He, in his

My lords, I have occupied too much of your lordships' time; and will only add my belief, that Englishmen are also ready to defend their religion and their homes; that their love of their country is not a mere brutish attachment to the soil they feed upon, but to those venerable maxims and ancient institutions of their forefathers, in which their characters have been moulded, and which seem to hallow all their enjoyments. Tear up these, and you stagnate the best feelings of their hearts. There is a point to which their loyal affections will ever be immoveably affixed; and that point is the Protestant principle of our Revolution, that gave to them civil and religious liberty, and seated the illustrious house of Brunswick upon the British throne.

Lord Lilford began by denying, that the question before their lordships was a religious one. It was, he contended, one of expediency and state necessity, and the support or opposition which should be given to it, ought to depend on the answer to these two questions-had the expediency or state necessity been proved? And, would the measure proposed afford the remedy for the evils com

turn, would ask-did the measure itself
present no securities? His firm conviction
was, that the best, the most effective
security of all, they had in the value, the
purity, the super-excellence of the Pro-
testant religion. That, he believed, was
the best security; and possessing which
they needed not any other. By passing
the proposed bill, they would bind the
Roman Catholics to the constitution by
stronger ties than they possibly could do
by coercive measures, or by demanding
any security whatever: they would bind
them by their interests, their affections,
and their gratitude; and by so doing, they
would seal the bond of union of the em-
pire, and enable this country to defy the
world in arms. He repeated, that by plaint.
He repeated, that by
adopting this measure, they would best
secure the interests and safety of the Pro-
testant constitution, in church and state.
He begged pardon for having trespassed
upon the attention of their lordships, but
he could not abstain from expressing his
opinions indeed, he felt it his duty to
express them, upon a question of such
vital importance to the best interests of
the country.

The Earl of Westmoreland said :My lords; having already given a deliberate opinion on the measure, I hope I shall be excused in stating, as shortly as I can, my sentiments on a threadbare and worn-out subject. My lords, great complaints were made the other night, that the measure was hurried through the House. In the first place, I think the proceedings of the House were in such a case justified by the circumstances; and, in the next place, if I may be excused saying so, I think the noble lords opposed to the measure have taken the wrong point of opposition, whatever may be the ultimate plan with regard to the subject; because I hold, that every member of this House is bound to agree to the second reading of the bill, and to withhold his opposition, if opposition he contemplates, until it has gone through that stage. I beg leave, my lords, to state the situation in which the House is placed with reference to this point. At the opening of the session his majesty sends down to the House his gracious Speech, directing it to consider means for the pacification of Ireland, with a view to the settlement of the Catholic question; and to this speech the House offers no opposition, but answers unanimously, that it will take the subject

recommended by his majesty into consideration. Now, my lords, what situation do we stand in, if, the first moment the subject is proposed, we refuse to take it into consideration? But I think that this point rests upon still stronger grounds. My lords, a bill has been passed, and an extraordinary one, for the purpose of abolishing the Catholic Association, and it was recommended by his majesty and proposed to parliament, under the assurance that this very question would be taken into consideration. My lords, under that impression many members of the House assented to the bill, and with the same conviction the people of Ireland suffered it to pass almost without complaint. Now, what situation shall we stand in, both as regards the sovereign and the people of Ireland, if, on the very first step, instead of considering the question, instead of going into committee upon it, we turn short on his majesty and on those persons who withheld their opposition to the bill for suppressing the Association, and virtually say to the latter, "We did what we could to entrap you into silence, and, having effected our purpose, we shall not consider the question after all?" My lords, whatever opinion I may entertain upon the subject, I think we are bound to go into committee upon the bill; and if we find that it does not furnish sufficient securities, why then the time will have arrived for rejecting the

measure.

My lords, in this bill it is proposed to make serious alterations in the laws. I repeat alterations in the laws, and not in the constitution. I have been always opposed to these alterations. I was opposed to them because I thought them unnecessary and uncalled-for, and because I believed they would lead to consequences such as no man could foresee. I continue of the latter opinion yet; but with the impression, that the time has arrived when we must weigh between distant and speculative danger and pressing and urgent mischief. Between these two we are bound to strike a balance, and take that which is likely to be least productive of evil. My lords, after what has fallen from the throne, and after what has passed in this House, there can be no question that we are called upon to consider well this measure. I, for one, have been on this point very unlucky, for I have agreed with few. By one side I have been accused of