rose, pursuant to notice to move for the appointment of a select committee to inquire into the state of the Education of the Lower Orders of the people in London, Westminster, and Southwark. As he understood that it was not intended to make any opposition to his motion, he did not think it was necessary long to occupy the attention of the House, notwithstanding the great importance of the subject. But yet there were two or three cases which he could not forbear to mention, because they so forcibly illustrated the necessity of some general measure for the education of the poor. It was known that certain benevolent individuals had for some time associated with a view to promote the education of the poor, and in the course of their meritorious inquiries such scenes of ignorance, accompanied by misery and vice, had been discovered, as it was shocking to contemplate. Those gentlemen had collected much information with regard to the state of ignorance in the metropolis. Taking three districts of different descriptions in different parts of the town, one might form a fair average estimate of the condition of the people with regard to education. For instance, taking St. Giles, which perhaps was the worse, next a district which might be deemed of a middling description, namely, from Covent-garden to the Strand, and thirdly, a quarter which might be regarded of somewhat a higher order, namely, the Strand itself, extending to Northumberland-house. In the first district the gentlemen alluded to, by inquiring from house to house, found that about 3,000 adults were totally uneducated. But the lowest and most abandoned expressed the utmost anxiety to have their children educated. Yet, in St. Giles there were no less than 4,865 who had no education, or the means of obtaining it. After stating the number of children found uneducated, because their parents were incapable of affording to pay for their education in the several districts referred to, the hon. and learned gentleman adverted to the state of the population of Shadwell, Limehouse, and other places to the east of London. In that quarter there were about 14,000 Irish Catholics, who were employed principally about the river, and it was found upon examination, that only 89 out of the whole number had received the common elements of education. The children of those poor people, who amounted to about 4,000 were also without the means of education. But combining all the facts which had come to his knowledge, including those which related to Southwark, and upon which he could rely, from the respectability of the several gentlemen from whom he had derived his information, he felt himself justified in stating, that out of the 1,050,000 which, according to the last census, composed the population of London, no less than 90 or 100,000 children were destitute of the means of education. Indeed he rather apprehended from some circumstances that he underrated it, and that the poor children in this deplorable state of ignorance were nearer 200,000. As to the means adopted by certain associations to promote the diffusion of learning among the poor, the members of those associations were, no doubt, entitled to the utmost credit. It was impossible to mention the name of Mr. Joseph Fox, who was now unfortunately no more, without applauding his truly liberal conduct. For this worthy man advanced from his own comparatively limited means no less than 3,600l. to protect the Lancasterian system of education from sinking under its pecuniary embarrassments. The gentlemen who co-operated with Mr. Fox, and who really were as diligent as clerks in a public office, were also entitled to praise. High also was the claim of the National Establishment, of which the right hon. gentleman in the Chair was such an active member, to the gratitude of the country, especially since it had got rid of its jealousy of any other institution. But however meritorious the national establishment and the British and Foreign school societies, supported as they were solely by voluntary contributions and spontaneous zeal, they were not likely to accomplish much towards the removal of the ignorance which existed in London. It was known that only about 3,000 children were educated by the former, and not quite 2,000 by the latter. But what proportion did this bear to the 90 or 100,000 children conceived to be in want of education in London. After observing upon the grounds which he had laid for his motion, the hon. and learned gentleman adverted to the several charitable institutions in London intended by their founders for the education of the poor, but in which he feared many persons had not done what they ought. But the state and management of those schools would naturally become a fit subject for the examination of the proposed committee in considering what funds were applicable to the education of the poor. He trusted, however, that parliament would not allow any practicable measure for the education of the poor to want adequate funds. His proposition was, that a measure for the education of the poor under parliamentary sanction and on parliamentary aid should be tried in London, for without a previous experiment he should not deem it proper to bring forward any general measure. But if the experiment should be found to succeed in London, he would then recommend the extension of the plan to some other great towns, for instance to Manchester and Salford. The necessity, indeed, that called for some plan to educate the lower orders in those towns, the House would have some idea of from this fact, that within a certain time 9,756 marriages had taken place, in every one of which neither of the parties could enter their names in the parish books. The hon. and learned gentleman urged the propriety of establishing a school, in the first instance, for the preparation of school masters, in order that benevolent individuals about to establish schools might know where to apply for duly qualified teachers. Throughout the arrangement which he hoped to see established for the removal of ignorance and vice, he trusted that nothing would be admitted offensive to any religious opinions, while care should by all means be taken that nothing be allowed to interfere with the just privileges of our national establishment. He would, indeed, be willing to take a model from the plan of public education established in Ireland with the support of the government; that plan was calculated to do much good, but it was quite as necessary that a plan should be established in this country with the liberal aid of the government. The hon. and learned gentleman concluded with moving, "That a select committee be appointed to inquire into the education of the lower orders in the metropolis; and to report their observations thereupon, together with the minutes of the evidence taken before them, from time to time, to the House."

complimented the hon. and learned gentleman on the interest he had taken in so important a subject, and was sure that the best effects would result from it. He alluded to a bill which he himself was about to bring forward relative to the charitable institutions in this country, and observed, that the House would be astonished on learning what large sums of money had already been expended by individuals to promote the object of general education.

After a few words from general Thornton and alderman Atkins, on the success which had already attended the National Establishment, the motion was agreed to, and the committee appointed.

rose, in pursuanee of his notice, to direct the attention of the House to a consideration vitally affecting the interest of a people at present not numerous, but who, he fondly hoped, would, at no very distant period, become a great and considerable nation. He had spent some happy days amongst that people, and in his intercourse with them had discerned many excellent and shining qualities in their character that justly entitled them to respect and protection. Previous, however, to his submitting any motion to the House, it would be necessary for him to give a brief outline of their political history, for the purpose of placing the circumstances of the case fairly before their contemplation. The Ionian islands had long been dependant on Venice, and continued in that state until the Venetian states were subdued by the arms of France in the year 1796. The destruction of the Austrian army at that period was followed by the treaty of Campo Formio, in which France ceded to Austria all the ci-devant Venetian states, reserving to herself the ci-devant Venetian islands, situated south of the Adriatic; and thus the French got possession of the Ionian islands. The Porte saw, with jealousy, the French endeavouring to establish themselves on the coast of Albania, and in 1799 invited the Russians to co-operate with her in ejecting the French from those islands; which being effected, they formed them into an independent state, under the name of "The Republic of the Seven Islands." He would not deny that they were placed in vassalage to Turkey; but that word, which, in our ears conveyed an idea far removed from freedom, had a very different meaning in the Ionian islands, for it implied nothing more than an acknowledgment of the superiority of Turkey, for which in return they received protection. In this state they continued until the peace of Amiens, when their political independence was acknowledged both by France and this country. The forts still continued occupied by Russian troops for their protection, but the independence of the islands was guaranteed by all the powers of Europe. They accredited their own ministers to foreign states, received those accredited by others, and regulated their internal legislation free from all foreign interference. In 1807, Russia being defeated in the north of Europe by France, concluded a treaty with her conqueror at Tilsit, and by one of the secret articles surrendered these islands to the French emperor. This event naturally excited our jealousies, and such was our discontent, that lord Collingwood, our commander in chief in the Mediterranean, prepared, in 1809, an expedition from Sicily to deliver the islands, from the power of France. The orders given by lord Collingwood on that occasion, to the officers commanding the expedition, had been laid on the table. By them it was desired, that whenever a fort was reduced, the Septinsular flag should be hoisted, and not the British, as evidence to the inhabitants that our troops came not to conquer but to liberate. Proclamations were ordered to be issued to the same effect, promising the people liberty and independence. With these circumstances before him, he could not conceive how the noble lord who conducted the negociations for this country, at the congress of Vienna, could prove that the independence of those islands had not been betrayed by Russia, and that the hopes subsequently held out by Great Britain had not been equally disappointed. The noble lord could not plead ignorance of their claims to independence, and he hoped that he would not represent them as of little importance. An equal interest was attached to them, as if their power was greater. For when the principle of independence was agitated, the extent of territory, or the possession of power, made no distinction. Instead of obtaining the promised independence, those people were mocked with hopes never to be realized, or insulted with the name of freedom, while the reality was carefully withheld. They were told that they enjoyed an independence; but it was at the boon of foreign powers, who could possess no rights to grant it. They were told that they enjoyed independence; but it was at the will of a power who was appointed their protector. Their legislature was declared free; but there was a British commissioner, who was empowered to regulate its proceedings. This was a state in which no legislature, even of a West India island, was placed; for in none of them could the king's vicegerent influence or direct the proceedings of its legislature. In England, if the king directed the proceedings of parliament, could the legislature be deemed free; or in such case, "would you, Sir," said the hon. baronet, "sit one hour in that chair?" He hoped that the House would not neglect this question, or treat lightly, with respect to the Ionian islands, that principle of national rights and independence for which they had already made throughout Europe such transcendant and signal sacrifices. He lamented to add, that a considerable degree of tyranny had been exercised in those islands by British officers, from the period of their conquest to the year 1814, which was so great, that he had heard that the noble lord himself was much affected on learning it. The provisional government then established had levied taxes at their own discretion, had exercised the most arbitrary power, and had even prevented by force the inhabitants from sending deputies to the congress of Vienna to solicit the noble lord to exert his influence in vindicating their promised independence. He thought that these circumstances established a sufficiently strong ground for inquiry, and he would, therefore conclude, by moving, "That a committee be appointed to inquire into the present political condition of the Ionian islands, and to report their opinion thereupon to the House.''

was fully convinced, that in all we had done respecting these islands, we had consulted the real interests of the inhabitants. What we understood by national independence was not really desirable for them. They had had an opportunity, from the early times of the French revolution, of ascertaining the nature of the protection of different powers, and were able to appreciate its value. The inhabitants of the Seven Islands were a peculiar people, distinct from the rest of Europe, being the only real descendants of the ancient Greeks. About a century and a half prior to the conquest of Constantinople by the Turks, the Venetians wrested these islands from the Turks, and the latter afterwards succeeded in possessing all the territories of the ancient Greeks, except these Seven Islands, which remained in possession of the Venetians as masters of them, till the French revolution, when the French bent their course towards these islands, and distributed over them missionaries of Jacobinism. The inhabitants being people of heated imaginations and lively tempers, adopted all the absurdities of the rights of man with as much enthusiasm as the fanatics of France, and a most horrible civil war arose in the islands between the democratic and aristocratic parties. At length the inhabitants were so fatigued with the contest, together with that of the struggle between Cephalonia and Corfu, for the seat of power, that in the year preceding the treaty of Amiens the inhabitants of Zante had come to the resolution of sending a deputation to this country, to invite us to take possession of their island that they might be under our protection. By a singular coincidence, before the answer could be received, an English officer, travelling in the Morea, probably for his pleasure, heard of this circumstance, and conceiving he could turn it to his advantage, landed on the island, and said the British government had sent him to take possession of it. He was accordingly received as governor, and it was but right to Say of him, that he administered justice with mercy, and performed every function with propriety, except that of communicating with the British government. He continued in this situation for eleven months, and it was the opinion of every body on the island, that this was the happiest year they had ever known. When the combined Russian and Turkish fleets arrived to take possession of the islands, they occasioned the first doubt the British consul ever had that this person was not a recognized officer. He perhaps would have been put to death by the Turks, but he had the good fortune to escape in a boat. This was before the treaty of Amiens, at which time the greater powers of Europe could not come to any agreement as to who should possess those fine countries. He was there at the time in question, and the inhabitants generally expressed their astonishment at finding they were declared independent. Russia afterwards took military possession of the islands, and held them till the war between Russia and France compelled her to give them up to the French emperor. In this condition they remained till they were freed by our army; and now the question was, how far their complete independence would contribute to their happiness. At the time of the first peace they had no taste for freedom; for they had never been accustomed to any thing but oligarchy under the Venetian government, and it was an oligarchy of the severest kind. How, then, did the hon. baronet know that they wished for the complete independence he described? They would not desire such a patent gift from us, for a patent gift he must call it, because they were not able to protect themselves. They ever were apprehensive of that desolation from the Turks, which filled them with terror. The narrow arms of the sea, or rather rivers, which separated these islands from the Turkish shore, put them entirely at the mercy of the Turks; but now, while there was nothing but desolation and misery on one side, there was nothing, thanks to British protection, but peace and happiness on the other. He could say that no part of Europe presented such a delightful scene of cultivation, happiness, and civilization, as these islands; but it was clear that if they were left to their own protection, they could not preserve themselves twelve months from falling under the Turkish yoke. The only question he had ever heard amongst them was, whether it was better to belong to Russia, France, or England? They had tried Russia and had tried France, and it was not to be wondered at that they should prefer us; for they disliked Russia extremely, and detested France. They regarded Mahomet and the Pope as the two great deceivers of mankind, and they therefore had an idea that the church of England might easily assimilate itself to their own. He should offer only a few more observations. The inhabitants of those countries were, as he had said, of a very peculiar and ardent temper; it was impossible to pay too high a tribute to their general character. If any false view of economy should make this government consider the islands merely as a military station, it would be a matter of serious regret. But far from proposing that there should not be military forces in the islands, he should wish them to be fortified, but that it should be evident to the people that they should all be governed by their own forms. With such a liberal arrangement there could be no doubt that they would be found amongst the most valuable acquisitions of Great Britain. Our possession of the islands prevented the possibility of any other power erecting the standard of rebellion in the Morea; and on the whole, he thought that no possible arrangement which the British minister could have advised would have proved more beneficial to the people of those islands.

shortly replied. He said, that if, as the hon. gentleman contended, we had obtained the command of the Levant by the possession of the Seven Islands, it must at the same time be admitted that we had acquired the jealousy of the Turks. He had heard that the Porte had protested against the act of congress, by which the great powers there assembled had transferred them to our dominion. Turkey had a right to have been consulted in such an arrangement, as without her exertions, they could not have come into the situation of being so disposed of. The hon. gentleman thought that these islands would congratulate themselves on their good fortune in being placed under the protection of this empire. He was not prepared to allow the correctness of this statement: they had their own taste in legislation and government; they would be proud of their independence, and of the power of managing their own concerns. He inferred this, not upon vague and general surmise, but from a document which he had seen since the decree of congress was declared to them. The Ionian gazette, which contained a part of the convention by which the independence of the Ionian government was annihilated, had withheld the most obnoxious articles of it. It appeared from it, that a communication of some of the provisions of the act was made to the senate (thus acknowledging the existence of its authority), and that the senate was very guarded in its reply, as if afraid to compromise its rights, and unwilling to surrender them. It thanked the British government for what it professed to have done for the welfare of the islands, and expressed its hopes in British liberality for favours that were not yet bestowed, but said nothing of the acquiescence of the people in the arrangement of congress, or of their wish to enjoy the benefit of British rule. In short, it offered us no thanks for depriving this state of its independence, in the face of our own solemn declarations guaranteeing it. All those declarations were now forgotten, all our professions renounced, and our promises violated. The independence which we had conquered for the Septinsular government was the most complete subjection—a subjection even more marked than that of the colonies over which our dominion extended.

The motion was negatived without a division.

rose, pursuant to notice, to make his promised motion respecting the necessity of an inquiry into the income and expenditure of the Trinity-house Corporation. His attention, he said, had been drawn to this subject during the last session of parliament. The more he reflected upon it, and the more information he acquired, the more the necessity and the importance of a parliamentary inquiry appeared. The taxes that the Trinity establishment levied upon the shipping trade of the country did not seem to be justified either by necessity or expediency, and the manner in which they were expended was sufficient to excite suspicion. To show how extravagant was the tax which this society levied upon trade, compared with the expense at which the great object it professed to have in view could be accomplished by another establishment, he would state a decisive fact. When it was lately contemplated to erect a light house on the coast of the Isle of Man, the Trinity-house proposed an estimate to the towns of Liverpool, Bristol &c. for accomplishing that object, by which a penny a ton was to have been imposed on all ships passing to the ports on the west coast within certain limits. This tax was to have been perpetual. Happily the proposal of the Trinity-house was not acceded to; and the commissioners for the northern lights being applied to, performed the same work for the estimate of a farthing a ton, with an agreement to remit the duty at a certain time. All circumstances considered, the Trinity corporation demanded eight times the sum accepted by the northern commissioners, and would have derived a revenue of 16 or 17,000l. a year from the transaction. The whole income of this establishment he did not accurately know, but he could approximate the amount by calculation with sufficient accuracy to show its great and unnecessary magnitude. To do this only required the application of a simple rule of arithmetic to data which might easily be admitted. The commissioners for the northern lights had under their management 9 light-houses from which they derived a revenue of 25,000l., at the rate of a farthing a ton for the shipping subject to their regulations. The Trinity house had 28 light-houses, seven of which were farmed, to which dues were paid of from one half-penny to three halfpence per ton. Here the duty was higher; and if we made allowance for the excess of the English over the Scotch trade, the proportional income of the two establishments would be still farther altered. If, then, nine light-houses gave 25,000l. on the northern parts of the island, where the dues were only a farthing a ton, it would not be too great an estimate to calculate the produce of 28 light-houses, at the medium of the rates specified at 174,000l. This income was enormous, and the means by which it was obtained were oppressive to trade. But this was not the only source of revenue to the Trinity-house. Besides the dues of the light-houses, they derived an income from ballast, from pilotage &c. The surplus pilotage alone last year amounted to the sum of 36,400l. The services which this corporation performed to the commerce of the country would by every one be allowed to be important; but still it could not but be evident that the powers by which they raised such a revenue, and the manner in which they expended it were proper subjects of parliamentary superintendance and inquiry [Hear, hear!]. He would direct the attention of the House to the rights and the powers of this corporation as acquired by their charter, that it might be seen how far they had exceeded them. In doing so he would not alarm members by threatening them with long investigation, or entering into legal subtleties; he would depend upon the authority of lord chancellor Northington, as embodied in a decree which he pronounced in 1764, in a case that brought the powers and rights of the corporation into question. Here the hon. gentleman read a part of a decision of the noble and learned lord, which declared that the company of the Trinity-house should only be supervisors of the funds they managed, and not themselves interested. Their charter gave them the power of examining pilots, of erecting light-houses, &c. and allowed them to raise a tax in certain ways for defraying the expenses attendant upon the performance of those objects, accompanied with an order to dispose of their surplus income for charitable, ends. With this last injunction they were not only expected, but forced to comply. The hon. gentleman next read an article of the charter made by James 2nd, to the corporation, which like wise stated the destination of their funds, and their power of holding courts in London and Middlesex. Not with standing the spirit of this decision, and the provisions of this charter, the income of the corporation had been improvidently wasted on objects quite foreign to its origin and the laws enacted for its regulation. The money which had been raised on the trade of the country, for the benefit of that trade, and the promotion of charitable ends, had been uselessly and reprehensibly squandered for the gratification of a taste for show, or purchase of articles of luxury; he alluded to the splendid establishment of the Trinity-house, the Trinity-yacht, and the entertainments given by the brethren. He called upon the right hon. gentleman, opposite (Mr. Rose), who appeared to smile at what he was saying, to declare upon what authority the revenues subjected to the management of this corporation were so expended. He would ask, moreover, if they were merely " supervisors and not interested," upon what grounds they were allowed to subscribe to the public loans of the minister It appeared that they had received, in the course of five years past, from their funds, the surplus sum of 36,000l. This he learned from the accounts laid on the table of the House. In 1811 there was a surplus of 9,000l; in 1812 there was a surplus of 5,400l.; and during the last five years an aggregate of 36,000l. Had this sum, as it successively accumulated, been laid out at interest, it would have produced a sum to the establishment of 3,200l. Was it so laid out? and if so, how was the disposal of the interest accounted for? The circumstance alone, that there appeared no document to show how this sum was managed, appeared to him sufficient to excite jealousy, and call for inquiry. It thus was evident, that more money was collected than could be properly expended, and that there remained a large surplus, for which no object could be found. Should not some of the duties in these circumstances be remitted? To demand more than was necessary was surely very impolitic, as it was certainly detrimental to trade. By imposing heavy duties on foreign shipping, we both supplied the motive, and furnished the justification to foreigners to tax us heavily in their ports in return; thus really injuring ourselves, while we appeared to derive a profit from others. It was clear that the Trinity-house had more money than it could properly spend, and like individuals in the same situation, were obliged to resort to extravagance and follies to squander it: he alluded to the splendour of the Trinity-house building, and the expenses of Trinity-house entertainments. But it might be said, that if the income of this corporation was great, its expenditure was likewise great. This he allowed. Some of the expenses were extravagant. For collecting the revenue of the light-houses 10 and even 25 per cent. were paid, which was a rate far above the charge of collection in the establishment subject to the northern commissioners. Our shipping had doubled itself in the last thirty years, and as the income of this corporation increased in proportion, it was alarming to contemplate to what extent this income might grow, should our commerce as promised by the right hon. gentleman opposite, advance in future at the same rate of progression. The management of this corporation, like that of almost every other, was intrusted to a few individuals, whose conduct the rest sanctioned without suspicion or examination. The dukes, and marquises, and right honourables, who were members, left the efficient direction to those more interested or more active, and contented themselves with the turtle-feasts to which they were invited, or the patronage which they enjoyed from this connexion. In such a body it would be too much to suppose a complete absence of interested motives or political bias. There was, in fact, great patronage—receiverships to be given away, surveyors appointed, and friends to be gratified. No wonder, then, that his motion should be threatened with opposition—that extensive alarm should be excited by the very agitation of the question in the House or aversion expressed at every hint of inquiry. The House should, however, disregard those feelings, and as it had undoubtedly the power of examination it should manifest the resolution to make a deliberate scrutiny and an effective interference. He hoped support from the right hon. gentleman opposite who seemed so much amused with some parts of his speech. He concluded by moving, "That a select committee be appointed to inquire into the income and expenditure of the Trinity-house and ordered to report their opinion to the House."

said, that even if he had not been the only member who belonged to the Trinity company, he could not have resisted the personal appeals so frequently made to him in the course of the hon. gentleman's speech. The hon. gentleman spoke of the anxiety manifested by the members of the corporation on the subject of his motion. He did not know from what symptoms this anxiety was drawn. He himself had shown none, and felt none. So far from entertaining any feeling of this kind, he had never even been induced from curiosity to inquire into the hon. gentleman's object. He anticipated no serious charge, and be was convinced that none had even been brought. The House would agree with him, after a short explanation, that there was not the slighest ground for inquiry, or for those suspicions which the hon. gentleman expressed as the motives for instituting it. The first circumstance he mentioned reflected no suspicion on the Trinity-house. The facts were simply these: application was made to the Trinity-house by the merchants of Liverpool to erect a light-house on the coast of the Isle of Man. They in consequence directed a survey. The survey was made—the estimate for the work was stated. It was not proceeded in by the Trinity corporation, owing to the expense calculated. In the mean time the commissioners for the northern lights were applied to, and under their management the work was accomplished, as they agreed to do it at a smaller expense than the Trinity-house estimate. This last corporation had the exclusive right of erecting lighthouses over the coast of England and Wales; so that without their consent the northern commissioners could not have been employed. The Trinity-house, however, did not exercise its rights on the occasion: it did not interfere. It said to the parties, the company have given an estimate—you think that estimate too high—we think the work cannot properly be executed on cheaper terms; but if you think otherwise we do not hinder the experiment; take the lowest estimate. Was there any thing blameable in this conduct? was there any thing inconsistent with the greatest liberality, or any thing that laid the ground for legislative inquiry? The hon gentleman had spoken of the revenue of the Trinity-house, and had, from fallacious principles, very much overstated it. A multiplication table was not here sufficient. Because the light-houses in Scotland produced so much at a certain rate of duty, it did not follow that a mere arithmetical operation, founded upon that produce, could give the amount of English duties. The fact was, that there was a great exaggeration in the statement of the hon. gentleman. In 1805 the revenue of the Trinity-house was only 29,000l,instead of 174,000l.; and in 1815 it did not exceed 60,000l. At this sum the revenue at present stood [Here the right hon. gentleman was asked across the table, if he referred to the gross or the nett revenue?]. He referred to the net revenue, after deducting all the charges of the lights, &c. The surplus pilotage, of which the hon. gentleman spoke, had been laid before the House, and no attempt was made to conceal its existence or amount. Was there here any reason for suspicion or inquiry Then the hon. gentleman discussed the powers vested in the corporation by their charter, and applied to lord chancellor Northington's interpretation of them. That noble and learned judge was a good lawyer, but he did not know much about light-houses. He might quote, in opposition to his authority, the authority of my lord Coke, as good a lawyer, and much nearer the time when the charter was granted. The hon. gentleman complained of the splendor of the building of the Trinity-house. This took place twenty years ago; the expenses had been paid, and no suspicion was excited till now. Was this transaction a sufficient ground for inquiry into the present management of the society's funds? The building might be justified on other grounds, as not much exceeding in splendor edifices for similar purposes, as having little more than accommodations for the necessary performance of business, and as not having cost much more than the estimated expenses of the least house that could be suitably recommended. The yacht of the Trinity-house which had called forth the" jealousy of the hon. gentleman, deserved it still less. There could not have been one found, the price of which could have been diminished by 500l., although the attempt had been made. It was a mistake to suppose that this yacht was an article of show or luxury. It was necessary to the establishment, as in it the officers visited the different parts of the coast, going as far as the Scilly Isles, Eddystone lighthouse, &c. The hon. gentleman surely would not send them on such expeditions in a coal-lighter. The complaint against the luxuries in which the members of the society indulged was equally unfounded. It was not true, then, as had been represented by the hon. gentleman, that the lights were more expensive than was necessary. It was needless to dwell on their importance, and the Lizard lights alone had cost 12,000l. That foreigners should not be too well instructed in the nature of our coast had been always considered advisable; and the House should recollect, that the expense of the lights had been trebled by the new improvements. In addition to this, the corporation supported 108 alms-houses, and 6,000 widows and orphans. Many of the new sea-marks were erected without levying any tolls towards defraying the cost of them. He was satisfied that the elder brethren had not put one shilling into their own pockets; but, on the contrary, had on various occasions, signalized themselves at the hazard of their lives in the service of their country. Such men ought not to have their reputation blasted by a declaration that there existed a jealousy of them in that House. The highest salary paid to them was 1,090l. for the performance of sometimes very arduous duties. Upon the whole, he considered that the hon. gentleman had made out no case for the interference of parliament, although it was certainly competent to him to move for the production of the accounts.

said, that no character could be considered as blasted when an inquiry was proposed. No man had a higher opinion than himself of the merits of the corporation, and he certainly thought the brethren deserving of praise. Yet he rather wished to have had an explanation founded on the authority of a committee, than on that of the last speaker. For him he felt the highest possible esteem, but he would prefer the security afforded by the authority of a committee.

could see no reason for refusing a committee, when it was stated by his hon. friend that the gross sum paid by the shipping of the country to the Trinity-house, amounted to 174,000l. He thought it was right that the House should examine, whether a greater burthen was not laid on the shipping of the country than was necessary for the purposes to which the produce of the impost was said to be appropriated.

said, that a number of letters sent to the Trinity board, by persons who had a right to ask for relief, had, to his knowledge, remained unanswered for years. He thought, therefore, that some examination should take place, in order that the individuals who preferred such claims might have a reason assigned them for their prayers not being attended to, while those of other persons were successful.

disclaimed any idea of injuring the characters of the gentlemen at the head of the Trinity-house. He was actuated by the purest motives in bringing the question under the consideration of parliament. In consequence of the representation which had been made to him by some hon. friends near him, he would, with the permission of the House, withdraw his motion.

The motion was accordingly withdrawn.

rose with the petition of the English Catholics in his hands, and spoke to the following effect:—Mr. Speaker; although it is not my intention to make any other motion than merely that this petition should lie on the table, yet as the subject of it is immediately connected with the motion which is about to be made by my right hon friend near me (Mr. Grattan), and as the interests of the petitioners are, as I think, comprehended in my right hon. friend's intended proposition, I should not feel that I had faithfully discharged the trust reposed in me by the petitioners, if I were not once more to call the attention of the House to their circumstances and situation. The petition, Sir, which I am about to have the honour of presenting, is from that numerous and most respectable class of his majesty's subjects, the Roman Catholics of Great Britain: among whom are to be found the names of some of the most ancient landed proprietors in this island—the names of some of the most illustrious of our families—of families signalized by their memorable achievements in the most splendid periods of our "military history, as well as of those who have been distinguished by their spirited and persevering assertion of the rights and liberties of their countrymen—the names of persons residing on the estates which have devolved to them through a long succession of virtuous progenitors, and who dispense around them that beneficence which becomes the descendants of such ancestors—the names also of many of your most valuable manufacturers, who have largely contributed by their skill and industry to the wealth and prosperity, and by contributing to the wealth and prosperity, have contributed to the power and resources of the state. That this is a true description of the character and condition of the petitioners, the signatures to the petition sufficiently testify. For proof of the uniform loyalty of their demeanour, and of the patience which they have exhibited under the pressure of the most galling grievances, I appeal to the observation of every one who listens to me [Hear, hear!]. There is no class of the community which has evinced a stronger attachment to the monarchy, and to the hereditary succession—no class which has evinced a stronger attachment to the laws and constitution of the realm. This attachment, Sir, has been manifested in the hour of peril—in the hour when our very coasts were menaced with attack. If a foreigner were to come to this country. acquainted with the efforts made by us during the last twenty years, but imperfectly versed in our code of legislation, the first reflexion that must occur to him would be, that if any religious distinctions were observed at all; the petitioners must be the objects of preference and favour; and great would be his astonishment to discover that, on the contrary, they were subjected to severe restrictions and multiplied disabilities [Hear, hear]. Nor can it be a pleasing reflexion to the petitioners, that the principle of restraint has not remained unmodified, as it affected the Catholics of other parts of the empire. When Corsica formed a portion of his majesty's dominions, the profession of the. Catholic religion was no obstacle in that island to the enjoyment of equal rights and privileges. In the only Catholic colony which we now possess—Canada—the profession of the Catholic religion imposes no restriction on the professor. Even in that country, to the petition from which, my right hon. friend will this evening claim your attention, much has been done for the Catholic population—so much, that although what remains to do is important for the Catholic to receive, it is not important for you to withhold [Hear, hear!]. For instance, you have given to the Catholic of Ireland the elective franchise. By the English Catholic it is not enjoyed. A Catholic in Ireland may graduate in the university of that country. A Catholic in England may not graduate in the English universities. A Catholic in Ireland may become a justice of peace. From that office an English Catholic is interdicted. And why is this? Why, I ask, are such men as sir Harry Englefield, or sir George Jerningham, or sir John Throckmorton, or others of the numerous body of respectable English Catholics—men indisputably attached to the king and constitution—to be debarred from filling situations of trust and honour; and why is the country to be debarred from enjoying the benefit of their exertions? Why is a duke of Norfolk, or an earl of Shrewsbury, or an earl of Surrey, or a lord Clifford, or a lord Arundel, or a lord Petre to be disqualified for holding the office, not of a justice of peace merely, but of a lord lieutenant of a county? [Hear, hear!]. Sir, the laws by which such men are excluded from serving their country are a disgrace to our statute book. Again, Sir, as in Ireland there are many civil offices open to the Catholics of that part of the empire, from which in England the English Catholic is shut out, so also the military profession there is open to the Catholics to a certain extent, while here, if a Catholic wishes to enter the army, he must first cross St. George's channel, he must obtain a commission on the Irish establishment, and then he becomes entitled to rise to the rank of colonel. "What sense is there in such an anomaly And what sense is there in the restriction which prevents even an Irish Catholic or an English Catholic obtaining a commission on the Irish establishment, from rising above the rank of colonel The whole army is under the control of a Protestant parliament and a Protestant monarch. In Ireland, where the army is entirely Catholic, several regiments may be combined at the discretion of the Crown, and the officer commanding them being only a colonel, may be a Catholic. A colonel on the staff may also be a Catholic. And yet there are persons who continue to think that if this colonel were advanced a step, if he were made a general, the whole state and safety of the country would be hazarded. Sir, these are disgraceful and dangerous blemishes in our constitution. Their only tendency is materially to diminish our national strength. We have now terminated the severe struggle in which we were so long engaged; we are at leisure to adjust and regulate our domestic interests; and I trust we shall revise and erase this code of weak and injurious policy. I hold in my hand a petition, the nature of which I have described, from persons whose characters are as well known as they are irreproachable. There lies on your table a petition presented by my right hon. friend from the great body of Catholics in Ireland, from men eminent for their loyalty, from men of large property and extensive influence, who have couched their application to this House in terms that cannot fail to make a favourable impression—who have urged their claims with a temper calculated to insure their attainment [Hear, hear!]. Sir, I trust that parliament will not be turned aside from the consideration of the wishes of these petitioners by that irritation which has been here and there manifested on the subject in Ireland—that they will not be deterred from doing justice by any seditious passages in pamphlets or false statements in newspapers, or intemperate expressions in speeches made under the influence of warm feelings, or in some cases, perhaps, by persons actuated by a wish to obstruct, for their own purposes the attainment of the object for which they professed to be solicitous [Hear, hear!].—This at least I hope will be considered—that in our present position we cannot remain. Backward or forward we must go. There are but three courses of policy which it is possible for any one to recommend with respect to this subject. The first, which I presume no person here is disposed to advise, is to retread our steps, to re-enact the penal laws which we have abrogated, to deprive the Irish Catholic of his property, of his education, of his religion, to grind him with the full weight of tyrannical power. The second, which appears to me quite as impracticable and visionary, is to stay where we are, and to close the question. To close the question! Sir, you may as well talk of stopping the tides, or resisting the laws of gravitation, or interfering with effect in any other of the great operations of nature. Is it possible that any one can imagine that when you have raised a man in the rank and estimation of society—when you have given him property—when you have conferred upon him rights—when you have opened to him (to a certain extent at least) prospects which he never before enjoyed—is it possible to imagine that that man, feeling the spirit of emulation which Providence has wisely implanted in the breast of every human being for the benefit of the community—is it possible to imagine that he could be induced tamely to relinquish the advantages which he has obtained? [Hear, hear!]. If so unnatural an apathy were to be exhibited, it would indicate a most disordered state of the human faculties. There is yet to be considered a third course of policy to go on. The two great objections to further concessions no longer exist. The one was the temporal power of the Pope. Of that who now entertains any apprehension? The other was the danger of a disputed succession. That died with the Pretender. And as to guards, have we not guards in abundance? Have we not a Protestant crown and a Protestant succession? Have we not a Protestant House of Lords and a Protestant House of Commons, secure from all risk of Catholic influence? Are not the great bulwarks of our establishment unassailable? Is not our venerable church defended by a clergy powerful in their talents, powerful in their education, powerful in those family connexions by which they are attached to all that is respectable in the empire? Weigh the remote and contingent danger which some persons apprehend from concession to the Catholics, with the positive and immediate danger which must result from rejecting their claims—with that ferment which will be at work in the very heart of the country—with that fever which will prey upon your very vitals, disturbing and destroying all the functions of the state; and when you have done this, can you hesitate or balance between the two courses of proceeding? [Hear, hear!] Sir, in saying this, I beg leave again to guard myself from being supposed to imply that if the measure of Catholic emancipation were adopted, sudden and complete tranquillity would be the consequence. But this we know—that the refusal of the Catholic claims, is at present a great source of agitation. It is not, therefore, irrational to expect, that if we remove a great part of the cause of the existing evil, a great part of that evil will cease to exist. Much, Sir, in human affairs and in human policy, depends on the choice of the moment in which any step of consequence is taken. We have already lost many precious opportunities of setting at rest this important question. We lost the opportunity (which I shall ever regret) of doing so at the Union. Another opportunity now presents itself. We have arrived at the termination of a long and arduous contest—a contest which I have ever considered, and which I shall ever consider, to have been wise and necessary. During its continuance great sacrifices have been made by every class of the community, Sir, it is not my own opinion only—it has been the opinion of a great majority of this, and of former Houses of Parliament, it has been the opinion of a great majority of the public, it has been the opinion of the great body of the ecclesiastical establishment of the country, that in the late severe and protracted contest, a contest not for renown, but for independence and security, a contest for the preservation of our establishments generally, and particularly for the preservation of those ecclesiastical establishments, of which no man is a more warm and sincere friend than myself, although all descriptions of persons have contributed to the success of the awful struggle, yet that no persons have made greater efforts, or have shed their blood with more prodigality, than the Roman Catholic subjects of his majesty [Hear, hear!]. Sir, the conjuncture has now arrived when we ought to regard with the utmost attention the state of the internal policy of the empire. We have peace abroad—we must have peace at home. What we now give will be given as a matter of favour as the result of a wise policy—as proceeding (if you please) from our magnanimity, not as wrung from us by necessity of apprehension. The petitioners, give me leave to repeat it, having shared our burthens, having partaken of our danger, having contributed to our glory, are entitled to the enjoyment of our constitution. They do not attempt to dictate to parliament the course which ought to be pursued. All they do is to request—to supplicate—this House to legislate for them; trusting, that in according to them their wishes, parliament will impose no conditions incompatible with their religious, honest, and conscientious scruples [Loud cheers from all parts of the House].

The petition was then read, setting forth, "That the petitioners humbly beg leave to represent to the House, that, at the time of his majesty's accession to the throne, the British Roman Catholics were subject to many penal and sanguinary laws; that, by the acts of the 18th and 3lst years of his present majesty's reign, many of these laws have been repealed, but that many are still in force, and have the most distressing operation on the petitioners; that the petitioners remain subject to them merely on account of their refusal of certain religious tests, oaths, and declarations; that their refusal of these is solely owing to their conscientious adherence to principles merely of a religious nature, and not conflicting in the slightest degree with any moral, civil, or political duty; that the petitioners have at different times presented petitions to the House for relief from the laws remaining in force against them, and they are truly grateful for the full and benign discussions which their petitions have received; they now again approach the House, and, with the most perfect reliance on its wisdom and humanity, most humbly pray that the House will again take their case into consideration, and grant them such relief as the House shall deem proper for extending to them the enjoyment, in common with their fellow-subjects, of the blessings of the constitution."

Ordered to lie upon the table.

observed, that his right hon. friend who had just addressed the House had argued this question so justly, so wisely, and with so much honour to himself and his country, that he had really left him (Mr. Grattan) very little to say on the subject. He begged to return his best thanks to the House for the extreme patience with which, on various occasions, they had listened to the repetition of his opinions ou the claims of the Catholics. Again he had to intreat their candour, which would again be followed by his gratitude. It had been repeatedly urged in hostility to the claims of the Catholics, that those claims ought to be advanced with more temper, and that a greater attachment ought to be exhibited to the existing institutions of the country. It must be most satisfactory to the House to observe, that the Catholics now grounded their hope of obtaining their liberties, or their rights, or their claims, or by whatever name the concessions to them were to be called, on evincing a disposition not merely to acquiesce, but heartily to concur, not in form only but in act, in such terms as that House might think necessary for the preservation of the Church establishment, and of the Protestant succession to the throne. The Known wishes of that House could not, indeed, fail to make a due impression on their minds; and having considered the whole subject, and the absolute necessity of expressing their attachment, not to the Crown only, but to the Protestant succession, the Catholics of Ireland had presented a petition, from which he begged leave to read some extracts. [The right hon. gentleman here read several passages of the Catholic petition, the tendency of which was to express the anxious wish of the Catholics, that the great measure of emancipation should take place, under such circumstances as might render it satisfactory and unobjectionable to all classes of his majesty's subjects; inasmuch as, in their opinion, the public benefit to be derived from it would be the union, in the bonds of concord, of the various religious persuasions of the empire; and the removal of those jealousies and apprehensions which at present prevented a cordial co-operation for the public good. They also declared it to be their duty to state, that they were ready to submit and conform to any regulations not incompatible with the principles of their religion, or threatening with danger its pure and permanent exercise; and that while they fully relied on the liberality and justice of the legislature, not to impose any conditions inconsistent with their religious persuasions, they were convinced that an adjustment might take place conciliatory to the Protestant mind, and at the same time compatible with the principles of their faith and discipline. This petition was signed by above nine hundred persons, many of them of the highest rank [Here the clerk, by the desire of Mr. Grattan, read a number of the names, comprehending a large portion of the Irish nobility.] The House had desired to have certain declarations on the part of the Catholics, and the Catholics had given him a petition to present to the House, in which those declarations were explicitly made. The House had exacted certain terms, and with those terms the Catholics had complied. He held in his hand a letter, for the authenticity of which he could vouch, directed by the pope to be written by cardinal Litta to Dr. Poynter, touching the conditions with which the legislature of this country wished to accompany any concession to the Catholics. The letter set forth the forms of these oaths, which were very little different from those at present taken by the Catholics of Ireland, and though the oath which was to be taken by the bishop was thought in itself a sufficient security, yet his holiness did not hesitate to permit those to whom it appertained to make out a list of the candidates for a bishoprick, which list was to be presented to the King's ministers, in order that if any one of such candidates were disliked or suspected, his name might be expunged from it. The letter went further and said, that as soon as the British government shall promulgate emancipation to the Catholics, his holiness will send a brief to the Roman Catholic bishops to the above effect, and publish to the universe his grateful sense of the generosity and clemency of the British government, and finally permit the bishops to observe what was before stated with regard to the oaths and to the mode of elections. Here then (continued Mr. Grattan), upon the granting of emancipation, was that power given to the Crown, which had been so frequently demanded as its condition. He had been often, on former occasions, asked what plan did he bring, in order that emancipation should be granted? What plan could he propose for the security of the Protestant religion, as by law established? In order to be able to answer such question on the present occasion, he had, with a great deal of pains, possessed himself of good information on the subject. He was acquainted, through a most authentic channel, with the sentiments of the pope on this great question, and the pope had expressed himself, that if emancipation was now withheld, the fault was not his. The pope had very fairly said—Why will the parliament not legislate for the Catholics? I am not indisposed to withhold my assistance" [Hear, hear!]. If, then, he (Mr. Grattan) was asked on the present occasion, where are your securities He would say—" Here are my terms, they are the terms on which you wished heretofore to grant emancipation, and if you now refuse them you refuse what you so anxiously sought for, and considered as securities" [Hear, hear!]. He would ask the House how many petitions had been presented to them this session against the claims of the Catholics? He wished to have all or any of such petitions read. None could be read. None had been presented. What, then, was the inference? That the great body of the Protestants were not inimical to the claims of their Catholic brethren. He would not go so far as to say that there were not many Protestants who still opposed Catholic emancipation; but it would not be presuming too much in him to suppose, that where so many petitions had been presented on a former occasion, all or most of which were against emancipation conditionally, and none on the present, there did not exist any general opposition to it in the minds of the Protestants. There, then, was no general prejudice to contend against on the part of the Protestants, and there was sufficient authority to show that they could legislate in respect of concessions for the Catholics. The Catholic bishops had, in 1799, agreed to certain resolutions, which declared that the concessions which were then, and have been since demanded, were not hostile to the discipline of the church. The pope himself not only declares that such concessions may be granted, but has actually granted them, provided the Catholics be emancipated. This then, would be one good effect of the committee for which he intended to move—it would show to some of the Catholics, that those concessions to which they objected were not Only not against the discipline of the church, but accordant with its practice.—He would not take up the time of the House by mentioning in detail the grievances which at present afflicted Ireland. They might be classed under a very few heads. She had commercial and financial difficulties; but a great deal of her present misfortunes might be traced to religious animosities. The causes of the other evils of Ireland might be removed with perhaps little difficulty. But it would not be easy to remove many of the evils which arose from religious distinctions, and the effect of the penal code, without a particular investigation. To this inquiry he called the House; by it they would reduce those who made religious differences a pretext for disturbance to a mere banditti, because the removal of that pretext would be the result of the inquiry; and having no foreign power to aid them in their wish for disturbance, they would die from jejunity. If the result of the inquiry which the House might enter into, did not satisfy some of the Catholics, it should be recollected that the duty of the House was to serve, not to satisfy them: and if they succeeded in the former, he trusted they would have firmness and spirit sufficient to act upon that conduct which justice and duty should point out. Most of the evils which at present afflicted Ireland were not to be attributed to the system pursued by one or another chief governor. He by no means wished to attribute them to such cause. The fault lay in the law, which obliged the government of Ireland, to act with a marked partiality to one sect. Until this defect in the law was remedied, it would be impossible for any chief governor of Ireland to act impartially. The fault, then, of the misgovernment of Ireland, as far as its government was affected by the operation of the penal code, rested with parliament, who had it in their power to repeal that code. Almost all the evils which afflicted Ireland, whether they originated in this code or not, were fostered and fomented by it. The united Irishmen had not originated in religious animosities, but their disturbances had at length turned into that disordered channel. Thus it ever would be. There was something radically bad in the laws, and as long as it was not remedied, so long would it continue to be the nurse of every evil which arose in the state, whether originating with itself or not. A sore on the finger might, though in itself not very dangerous, be turned to mortality. It was the same with the body politic; small evils might thus become the channels through which great miseries might flow on the state[Hear, hear!].—The right hon. gentleman then contended, that it was essential to the security of the empire, that the evils which existed in any part of it should be traced to their source, in order to prevent their spreading, or being the cause of others as pernicious as themselves. He observed, that the societies of Orangemen which caused so much disaffection between Protestant and Catholic in Ireland, had arisen from the effects of the penal code. Another evil which arose from it was, that the people of Ireland, he meant the Catholic population, were not identified with the law. The advantage of that identification would be to unite all in defence and support of privileges which all equally enjoyed; but this advantage, which was contemplated by the union, was lost by the continued existence of partial laws, which, while they obliged the Catholic to defend the constitution, gave him little or no share in the privileges of that constitution. It was in vain, then, to expect that while such partiality existed, the great body of the Catholics could be identified with the laws. So long as this code of laws remained unrepealed, so long would there exist in the state a large body of men of whom the government must necessarily be afraid, and to overawe whom it would be necessary to support a large standing army [Hear, hear!]. This was a necessary consequence of the penal code, and not its least obnoxious one, as it tended to draw on a military government. It was true the soldiers so employed might not be badly disposed, but as long as the soldiers in any country exceeded a fair proportion of the population, so long was the liberty of the inhabitants held, not by the law, but by the clemency of the army. He had every respect for the army, he applauded them for their unparalleled victories and for their strict discipline; but still he could never consent that British subjects should hold their liberties at their pleasure [Hear, hear!]. He did not mean to say that the support of a large standing army was the intention of the continuance of the penal code, but such was its effect. It was necessary that this army should be kept up in order to keep down a proscribed people. It was also necessary that this army should be paid at a vast expense to the country. And for what was all this expense and this risk of a military government incurred? To keep such men as the duke of Norfolk and the earl of Fingal out of parliament, lest, if they got a seat there, they should seek by treasonable conspiracies, to overturn the constitution [Hear, hear!]. But why should these, or any other Catholic noblemen seek to overturn the constitution, when they were admitted to a participation of its privileges? Or, if they were so disposed, how could they effect it? Would it be by applying to France? No. To Spain? No. We were in peace and amity with those powers. Was it, then, to the pope they would apply? Such an idea was ridiculous. The pope had not the power, nor if he had, was he disposed to exert it. Yet it was for this we were obliged to keep up a large standing army, to prevent a few noblemen from doing that which they would not do if they could, and could not if they would. Yet these were the idle fears for which we were called upon to make such sacrifices. He begged leave to add, that the empire, according to the admission of all parties, was at present in a state of great splendour. We had made great additions to it by conquest, and it required large standing armies to keep those conquests. Why, then, should we add to the number of our troops, in order to keep a part of our fellow-subjects as aliens in their native country Such conduct was most absurd and impolitic, and tended greatly to reduce the strength of the empire. Here, then, was the danger which was to be incurred—and for what? For refusing emancipation on those very terms on which it had been opposed some time back. The opponents of emancipation feared some time since, that by granting that measure, they would be granting an influence to a foreign power; that fear was now done away, by the terms which he (Mr. Grattan) proposed. The terms would place the Catholic prelates out of the danger of any foreign influence, and sufficiently under the power of the Crown, for any security which it could demand. He begged the House to be on their guard against any thing like recrimination on the Catholics. It would not be politic to refer back to ancient dates of history to see what had been done on former occasions by them. It would be sufficient to know, that in 1782, we had made most important concessions to Ireland, which we should not now retract in part, by refusing the benefits of our law to three-fourths of its inhabitants. It had been once said that Ireland would not receive the English law when it was pressed upon her. The House should not now act upon a contrary principle, and refuse those benefits to so large a portion of the Irish population, who would receive them with joy and gratitude. The right hon. gentleman then moved " That this House will, early in the next session of parliament, take I into its most serious consideration the state of the laws affecting his majesty's Roman Catholic subjects in Great Britain and Ireland, with a view to such a final and conciliatory adjustment as may be conducive to the peace and strength of the United Kingdom, to the stability of the Protestant establishment, and to the general satisfaction and concord of all classes of his majesty's subjects " [Loud! cries of Hear, hear!]. This resolution, he observed, was precisely similar to that proposed by a right hon. gentleman not now present (Mr. Canning), at a former period, and which he adopted as being more likely to meet the general sense of parliament. All he wished was, to put the question upon its legs, so that the petitioners might not be sent away with a refusal. With that view he wished to leave the House and the country free to form their own conclusion, at the same time suggesting, that if they wished to seek concord, their first object should be to repeal those laws which at present? placed the Catholics without the pale of the constitution.

having presented the petition of the Catholics of Ireland to the House wished to take the earliest opportunity of offering himself to its notice. When he first was informed of the intended motion, which his right hon. friend had just now made, he felt disposed to disapprove of it, as not being that motion which the circumstances of the case required. He thought the motion ought to have been one, "for the House to resolve itself into a committee of the whole House to take the petitions of the Catholics into consideration, with a view to proceed in case it was carried, to a legislative measure this session." But, upon consulting several members on the subject; and also upon consulting the late period of the session at which we had arrived, it appeared to him impracticable to attain a measure of relief at present; and therefore he had abandoned his first opinion and willingly seconded the motion of his right hon. friend, as being that which was best calculated to secure a majority in favour of the petitioners. In respect to the sentiments of the Catholic body at large, whose petitions he had presented, he felt, viewing the political relations of the question, that they would not throw any unfair and unreasonable impediment in the way to obstruct any course of proceeding, or any view of the subject which parliament might think proper to adopt. As to the question of ecclesiastical securities, they had already proved their intention to abstain from expressing, by resolutions or otherwise, any further opinion, in addition to those already known, by the line of conduct they had pursued concerning the letter of cardinal Litta. The House would not, however, lay down a rule for their government, different from that which was allowed to all other members of the community, and which admitted the free discussion and declaration of public opinion on all matters of great public interest. The petitioners had further evinced their readiness to meet the reasonable expectation of the House, by endeavouring to remove a supposition, that they were hostile to the head of the executive government, and to the ministers of the Crown. They had presented an address to the prince regent, and, if ministers had acted in respect to it, with the usual courtesey on such occasions, by publishing it in the Gazette, the House would have learnt from that document, a most accurate, but most respectful description of the numerous grievances which still oppressed the Catholic body. On the subject of ecclesiastical arrangements, the hon. member said, he would not at present make any observations. These would be more applicable to a motion, which an hon. baronet (sir J. Hippisley) had given notice of for next Tuesday. He would confine himself to the general question of the policy of the repeal of the penal code; and he hoped that course would be followed in the debate, as the best calculated to bring the House to a clear and satisfactory decision. In considering this great question, that of the present state of Ireland was necessarily involved in it. What this was, had been already in a great measure developed by the chief secretary for Ireland. But that right hon. gentleman in all his speeches on the subject, had committed one general error, that of leaving out of sight the bearing of the penal code upon those disturbances and those difficulties which had baffled all the efforts of the Irish government. So long as the right hon. gentleman and the House shut their eyes to this great feature of the case of Ireland, their opinions and their measures would continue to be, as as they ever had been, one regular succession of errors and failures. The right hon. gentleman had stated, that the leading characteristics of the evils which prevailed in Ireland were the general disobedience to the laws, and the difficulty of administering them. It could not be denied that these evils existed. But when the right hon. gentleman and others, in another place, attributed them to the moral depravity of the people, they endeavoured to defend the faults of the government by unjustly aspersing the character of the people. The cause of these evils was not this moral depravity of the people, but the Catholic penal code, as would clearly appear on a candid examination of the question. To understand the real state of society in Ireland, and to account for its several ranks being in a situation with so little connexion to each other; and without those several gradations, which in all other countries were to be found preserving it in its proper proportions, it was necessary to look back to those great political events which had most distinguished the page of Irish history. The derangement in the ranks of society, which at this day existed, was to be accounted for only by that century of conquest and confiscation, by which all the natural proprietors of the soil were dispossessed, and their lands placed in the hands of the English followers of James 1st, Cromwell, and William the 3rd. Under this system, at the time of the Revolution, the whole of Ireland, with the exception of a very few estates, had been confiscated; and the necessary result was, the total separation of feelings and interests between the poor Irish occupiers of the soil, and their new English masters, who had become the proprietors. To secure their possession, those persons who had no other title but that of confiscation, invented the expedient of keeping the mass of the people in ignorance and poverty, and in a state of weakness and submission, by passing acts of parliament, having for their ostensible object to prevent the growth of popery; which was a mere pretext, their real object being to deprive the old proprietors of all political power and all chance of ever being able to recover their properties. Under such circumstances, it was not to be wondered at, that the people hated and opposed the laws, and that they considered them as their bitterest enemy. When, therefore, it was taken into consideration, that these laws still existed, could it be a matter of surprise, that strong prejudices should even now prevail against them? more particularly as the same principle of administering them, the principle of the Protestant ascendency, was still in full force and vigour. It was to this universal confiscation of all the estates in Ireland, supported by the Catholic penal code, administered by a small colony of strangers, that every thing that existed, even at this day, to be regretted and to be reformed in Ireland, was to be traced, and not to any inherent depravity in the people, or to any aversion on their part, to become peaceable citizens under a liberal and protecting system of government. While the people in the early part of the last century continued, in consequence of the active operation of the penal code, in a state of ignorance, poverty and subjection, the system of the Protestant-ascendency government was able to preserve internal tranquillity. But in proportion as the people had greatly increased in numbers, and had become intelligent, enlightened, and independent, as they certainly had in the course of latter years, their discontents have broken forth, and have led to their successful efforts to carry on plans of extensive disturbance of the public peace, and to defeat the civil power in its exertions to suppress them. In point of fact, the system of governing Ireland on the principle of the Protestant ascendancy, was wholly unequal to the object. The whole force of Protestant sheriffs, Protestant magistrates, Protestant constables, could now no longer uphold and administer a system of law founded, and therefore disliked, on this principle of religious ascendency. Nevertheless, it was under these circumstances, that the British government came forward and asked for an army of 25,000 men, to support the exhausted efforts of their mistaken rule of government. If, instead, however, of assuming false causes to account for the evils which prevail in Ireland, the House would take a wiser course, and acknowledge that the true cause of them all was the existence of the penal code, they would be led to adopt the true remedy, by admitting the people into the constitution, and by giving a just political weight to those Catholics, who were most worthy of possessing it. This was all that was necessary to be done. The House had only to accede to the prayer of the petitioners (to admit them into the full and unrestricted enjoyment of the constitution), to secure every thing that could be desired, for correcting all the evils which existed in Ireland, and for preserving a permanent state of internal tranquillity. On the other hand if the system of the right hon. gentleman was adopted, it was only necessary to look back to the measures of the last fifteen years, to be satisfied that it would completely fail, In the course of that period, the government had had their own uncontrolled sway, in making use of every practical measure of force, for subduing the discontents of the people of Ireland. The history of it was a history of a succession of acts for martial law; the suspension of the Habeas Corpus; Insurrection Acts; Arms Acts, and Peace Preservation Acts. Yet the result of the whole was the statement of the right hon. gentleman; that they had all failed that nothing now remained to be tried, but a force of 25,000 men to assist the civil power What would be the consequence of relying on this expedient, and refusing to repeal the penal code? Every one, acquainted with Ireland, must foresee, that the system of secret association, and resistance to the laws, would rapidly extend itself; and, if if it did, what more would be wanting, than some enterprising and able leaders, to connect together the masses of willing confederates to produce some general and sudden explosion? It was not with a view, the hon. baronet said to use an argument to intimidate the House, that he made this statement, but to give it the most accurate insight he was capable of giving it, from his knowledge of the state of Ireland, of the great and eminent danger that would be incurred, by an obstinate and headstrong refusal to concede to the just claims of the Irish people. The hon. baronet proceeded to observe, that, as it was now evident, that the generel feeling of the public was clearly in favour of these claims, in consequence of no petition having been presented against them, he hoped the noble lord would not confine the efforts which he had so ably and sincerely made on this subject, to his speeches in that House; but that he would extend them to the councils of the prince regent, where, under all the existing circumstances of the case, they could not now fail of making such an impression as would lead to the success of a legislative measure of relief in the next session.

said, that this question had been so often, so ably, and so eloquently debated by the most eminent characters, that he should only trespass for a very few moments on the attention of the House. He could not, indeed, feel satisfied with giving a silent vote, more particularly as the subject had taken a different character from that in which it appeared on all former occasions; and he was fully convinced, that on the speedy decision of this question depended, not only the peace and prosperity of his native land, but the tranquillity and welfare of the united kingdom. Many honourable members had seemed to think that it would be impossible to procure the concurrence of his majesty's ministers, unless the Catholics would consent to certain securities. For his own part, he did not agree in opinion that any securities were necessary; but he begged to inform the House that he had arrived from Ireland that day, and he would tell the right hon. secretary for Ireland, what had been done in the county of Tipperary. It was now as tranquil in every part as the counties of Middlesex and Surrey, and this return to good order had been effected entirely by conciliatory measures. From the conduct of his majesty's ministers, he might justly say, that securities were required and demanded on the part of the Crown; and five millions of Irish Catholics were ready to grant security. They had themselves declared, only a few weeks ago, the 21st of last month, in the city of Kilkenny, that they would give securities to the Crown, and bind themselves by a solemn oath not to elect any bishop who was not of the most irreproachable character, both in a political and moral point of view. Those securities, then, having been offered, where remained the obstacles to granting the emancipation? Was it to be opposed on the ground of any foreign interference Was it to be refused on account of the sentiments of the pope? The noble lord opposite knew the contrary: the noble lord had taken infinite pains to make himself master of the real opinion of the pope on that subject, and he had heard the sentiments of his holiness in different conversations with cardinal Gonsalvo at the congress of Vienna, It was curious that so humble an individual as the person who had then the honour to address them should be also fully acquainted with the real opinions of the pope. The noble lord went one way to work, and he had gone another. He would state to the House, that in order to make himself perfectly acquainted with the sentiments of the pope, he went to Rome, and procured an audience through the means of a person whose name was well known to the noble lord. The pope then told him, that he was ready to acquiesce in all necessary measures with respect to security, and was fully prepared to go every possible length towards this country. He pledged his honour to the House, that what he had stated to them was the truth: the noble lord knew it to be the truth, and nothing but the truth. He had communicated these facts to the noble lord in Paris, and he now called upon his lordship to corroborate this statement. The question now before the House merely called upon them to pledge themselves that they would take the situation of the Catholics into their most serious consideration in the next session of parliament. If any opposition should be made to this motion, it could arise only from the perverse and bigoted minds of the worthless members of the cabinet, who, as the noble lord had often stated, would not listen to reason. The House knew who those intolerant gentlemen were; and he would take upon himself to say, that they were altogether ignorant, not only of the state of Ireland, but also of the Roman Catholic religion: they knew no more of one or the other than the common man who swept the streets knew of North America. He trusted, however, that as nothing on earth remained to be done, the House would next year go into a committee. The Crown had desired securities; the Catholics were ready to grant them; and the pope had given his sanction to them. He would repeat, that he thought no securities ought to be demanded, except the simple oath of allegiance; but as the Catholics must be better judges than himself on this subject, he would resign his opinion to them, and give his vote in favour of Catholic emancipation in any way that they might deem most advisable.

supported the motion, as it did not interfere with any view he had taken of the subject; but he contended that his opinion had been invariably in favour of those securities to which he had often adverted, and which the wisdom and policy of almost every state in Europe had adopted. He lamented that the grossest and most mischievous perversion of his opinions on this subject had been inculcated and pressed upon the uninformed part of the great Catholic population of Ireland especially. After particularizing the distinctions which he mentioned in reference to those securities, the hon. baronet adverted to the only measure which, in his opinion, could be efficacious in disabusing the public mind upon this important question, which was the institution of a select committee to investigate the subject in all its bearings, and particularly to those regulations which in ancient times had been adopted, in support of the indispensable jurisdiction of the sovereign in the external government of all ecclesiastical matters, as a perpetual barrier in the exercise of any foreign jurisdiction.

said, the question had been so often agitated, and he had so often delivered his own sentiments on it, that he did not consider himself called on to state at any length the grounds of his concurrence with the motion. He had always been of opinion that the Catholics would ultimately be successful in their object; for he never could conceive that any thing but an apprehension of danger to the constitution, could justify an exclusion of any body of men from a full participation in the benefits of that constitution Nothing could ever have given countenance to the principle of exclusion, but the conviction that our liberty and security would have been endangered by acting on a different principle. No feeling of unkindness or illiberality—no feeling of monopolizing power in their own hands could ever occupy the minds of the people of this country—nothing could delay what it would be grateful to themselves to confer, a participation in the privileges of the constitution, but the conviction that the fabric would be endangered by such participation. There were some circumstances in the late state of the world which opposed a formidable barrier to the progress of this question. So long as a power in Europe existed, which threatened the liberties and securities of other countries, and so long as that power had in its possession the head of the Catholic church, it was natural that many should be apprehensive of danger from placing any power in the hands of the Catholics; but now the head of the Catholic church, thank God, ceased to be a prisoner, and the formidable power he had alluded to, ceased to exist. But there had been no greater obstacle than the unfortunate temper with which the Catholics had chosen to prosecute their own interests. The greatest mischief which this did was to lead to a belief that such a feeling did not prevail among the Catholics as was likely to make the measure salutary. But at last the House had had the satisfaction of hearing the petition presented by the right hon. gentleman, read, which displayed sentiments of attachment to the constitution, and of conciliation towards their Protestant brethren; which if displayed when the subject was last before the House, would have gone far to have induced the House to come to a different result. There could be no doubt that a more liberal and less controversial view respecting religion was now generally taken throughout Europe, than had been taken in former times. So far as he could observe the state of feeling on this subject in the public councils where he had been present, he saw nothing but the utmost liberality. In Germany, that part of the continent of Europe where a political public mind existed in the greatest perfection though it was not so far advanced as our own country in the institutions for securing the expression of it, the utmost liberality existed with respect to religious opinions. In none of the Protestant states of Germany, certainly not in Hanover, the state with which we were most closely connected, was it considered necessary for the public security to act on a system of exclusion. He was glad that the hon. baronet (sir J. C. Hippisley), had given notice of a motion on a subject connected with the present. He did not see the same objection to the motion now as formerly—he conceived, that the effect of it would be to read a lesson of useful wisdom to those intemperate spirits of Ireland, who assumed that we were calling on them to agree to their own degradation. He trusted, that the hon. baronet would not go into any thing calculated to lead parliament into religious controversy. What parliament ought to confine themselves to, was the great and broad features of the question: they ought not to go into useless lore, but to show that they wished to confine themselves to what was necessary for them to adopt for the security of the state, and the Protestant church. If the Catholics in Ireland were among the most bigoted, and least enlightened Catholics of Europe, this was no reproach to them, but to the state which had so long neglected them. We could look forward to no satisfactory government in Ireland, which was not founded on a principle of inclusion, and not of exclusion. Until this question should be set at rest by parliament, it was in the power of any man to make use of it as a firebrand to inflame the minds of the people of Ireland, and they could not be said to have established in that country, the government which was the result of the constitution in which we lived. He looked on the settlement of the question as important to Ireland, but still more important to Great Britain—till it was settled, government could not assume an attitude of impartiality towards all religious sects. But there was another view—till their emancipation was accomplished, government would never possess within the country all the means of governing it presented by the constitution; for though the loyalty of the Catholic gentry could not be doubted, were the exclusion to be considered as permanent, that cordial support could not be expected from them, which they would give, if they formed part of the same system with ourselves. His right hon. friend, the secretary for Ireland, had complained of the want of a resident gentry in Ireland, and wished that it could be possible to devise some means to enforce residence. It was impossible without a violation of the constitution, to prevent a man from residing in any part of the empire he might think proper. But he would tell his right hon. friend how he might find means of using a great mass of the Catholic gentry, and the Catholic clergy, a body which was ramified throughout every part of the Island, and which he might thus bring into most salutary operation in aid of government. The non-resident gentry were comparatively few in number to those whom we made absentees in their own country. The Catholics might rest convinced, that if by some folly on their own part their cause was not injured, they might safely confide in the wisdom of the state. With this well-founded conviction, they should rest patiently in the assurance of final success; and, if he had not a very wrong conception of the state of the public mind, and of the merits of the question, the subject would soon be satisfactorily adjusted, and a powerful instrument would be thereby taken from the hands of designing persons. Many persons; who viewed the question in a liberal light, were deterred from acceding to the claims of the Catholics by the idea that the Catholics would not be satisfied unless they had an established church. He should like to see the question put upon that issue, and he should know how to oppose it; but, at present, the privileges which were withheld from the Catholics were not of sufficient consequence to form a ground of contention, and, at the same time, were a formidable weapon to the enemies of the state. As the question stood on different and more favourable grounds from those on which it was placed last year, he should support the motion of the right hon. gentleman.

said, he was very sorry to be compelled to differ from those with whom he was in the habit of acting; but, lest his silence might he construed into acquiescence in the arguments of his noble friend, he felt it due to himself to declare, that he continued to feel the same objections which he had felt to similar motions on former occasions. The House had formerly been told that the subject was of vast magnitude, and that it was due at least to the great body of Catholics to take their claims into consideration, to try at least whether some amicable arrangement might not be effected. The subject, however, had been taken into consideration, and after that fair and full experiment, he appealed to the House whether the Protestants or the Catholics were satisfied with the bill then proposed. Besides his objections to grant the Catholic claims in general, he could not consent to give a precipitate pledge to take the subject into consideration at a future time, which might be most unfit for that consideration. Neither the arguments of the right hon. mover, nor of his noble friend had applied to this point. There were many considerations extrinsic and collateral to the claims themselves, which determined the propriety of discussing them at any particular time. It had been admitted on all hands, that some times were peculiarly unfavourable to the discussion of these claims. If not, why had not the considesideration been brought forward at an earlier period of the session? or why did not the right hon. mover now ask for leave to bring in a bill? If, then the present session was not favourable for the consideration of the claims, what security was there that the next session would be more favourable, or why should the House be shackled as to its future proceedings If next session was vourable for the consideration of the question, the right hon. gentleman might then move for a committee, or for leave to bring in a bill, without any such previous pledge. Though he did not intend to say any thing as to the general merits of the question, he would rectify some misconceptions of what had fallen from him in the debate on the state of Ireland. He had never said that twenty-five thousand men were necessary to keep down the discontented Catholics. It was to be recollected that 40,000 men had been kept up in Ireland during the war, and he had said that he did not think it would be expedient, with a view to general tranquillity, to reduce more than 15,000 in the first year of peace. The disturbed state of Ireland did not arise from the direct or indirect operation of the political disabilities, but from the system of past impolicy, and to the commercial restriction to which that country had been subjected, and which had increaed her population without increasing her wealth. Some part of the evil might be attributable to the penal laws, which were repealed, but which were not to be confounded with the political disabilities which were still in force. It was to be recollected, that the present disturbances in Ireland did not exist in those places in which religious party spirit was most prevalent. Most of the Protestant and Catholic countries were tranquil. The disturbances were grounded on combinations to reduce the price of land, and other subjects not even remotely connected with the political disabilities of the Catholics. If to accede to the Catholic claims would put an end to the tumult, it would be fair to conclude that past concessions would have been accompanied with a diminution of these disturbances. But he would appeal to the Housewhether since 1792, when the great concessions had been made to the Catholics, the state of Ireland had not been infinitely worse than before. The argument which would be opposed to this fact was, that something still remained to be conceded, and that therefore the Catholics were still discontented. But even the bill of 1813 did not profess to put Catholics on an equality with Protestants. The two highest offices in the law and the state remained shut to them. There would be still something to concede, some-thing on which to ground new demands and new discontents. The lord lieutenant would still have a discretion of excluding Catholics from office. If the lord lieutenant in consequence of that discretion, excluded them from offices, the exclusion would be more invidious than a legal exclusion, and more likely to create discontent; if they were admitted it would be to try a dangerous experiment. He was convinced that the Catholics would not then be satisfied to see a church established for the minority of the nation, or to support Protestant pastors by their tithes. The same ground for irritation would exist which now existed—the same weapon would remain in the hands of the factious. He should, therefore, oppose the motion, which would pledge the House to the consideration of a question from which he anticipated no good effect.

thought it a little inconsistent that the right hon. gentleman should charge his right hon. friend with having argued on the general measure, when four-fifths of his own speech was directed to the policy or impolicy of removing the disabilities. He had declared himself unwilling to grant the Catholics any more, because the former grants were not followed by conciliation. If the right hon. gentleman had known or considered the circumstances under which these grants were made, he would see that they were more calculated to produce disgust than gratitude. This question was always taken up on the necessity of the moment pressing on the administration of the day, and not as a great political measure, which, being once undertaken, should be finally concluded. If the right hon. gentleman had inquired of many of those with whom he was acquainted in Ireland, he would have found that every thing that had happened since the year 1793, was foretold in the Irish parliament. As to the distinction he had drawn, with regard to the penal code, he must say, with all respect for his talents, that it was formed on a short-sighted view of the question. The penal code was not instituted for purposes of persecution, but as a necessary means of carrying the disabilities into execution. There was no medium in this question. The Catholics of Ireland must either be their equals or their slaves. The right hon. gentleman had said, that if the repeal of those disabilities would be followed by tranquillity, he would support the repeal. It would be rash in any man to presume to say, that by a force like that of magic, such a measure would allay the disturbances; but he believed that such a measure would have the greatest effect, and that without it nothing could be done. He would ask, if a gentleman of this country was placed in the same situation as that in which a Catholic gentleman stood in Ireland, would he assist upon all occasions the government by which he was oppressed? It was not in human nature. It was absurd to suppose that the condition of the Catholics had no share in producing the disturbances. The right hon. gentleman had asked, what were the circumstances that rendered a pledge advisable now? He would state them. The House had repeatedly expressed a desire that the Catholics would show a disposition to comply with the wishes of the Protestants, by giving what were called securities. Now the Catholics had complied with this desire. One of the objections last year was, that the petition was not presented by the member for Dublin. It was now in his hands, and it was moulded in the very way that had been recommended. Would the House be now as unwilling to enter into the subject as when the petition came from a body of men whom they had stigmatised as factious? He was glad that the Catholics had manifested such a disposition, because it would advance their cause. He had always thought that their cause was in their own hands, and that its success would depend on the conduct they pursued. As for himself, he considered the things called securities only as so many cobwebs. The best security, both for the church and state, would be found in the measure proposed.

after the cries of question had subsided, referred to the efforts of the right hon. member for Liverpool (Mr. Canning) in favour of the Roman Catholics, which, successful in the first instance, had afterwards been defeated by a majority of only four votes. Before that result, however, it had produced no beneficial effects; on the contrary, petitions had been presented against them: and the Catholic board had been encouraged in its injudicious measures of violence with regard to the Veto. The right hon: mover of the present question had undertaken to answer for the Catholic laity; but would he be responsible for the clergy, who had invariably resisted the concession of the Veto? Three years since the Roman Catholics had refused the boon proposed to be given to them; and until he saw them come forward to hail with joy the proposition of this night, he could not believe that it would produce among them contentment and tranquillity.

with difficulty obtained a hearing, while he avowed his opinion distinctly in favour of the motion. He said he was extremely anxious that a mild and conciliating system should be pursued towards Ireland.

The question being called for on all sides, the House divided.