it."I deny the fact-I deny that the country is opposed to it. Even were it inert upon the subject it might suit the right hon. gentleman's purpose as well; but I maintain that it is not inert-that liberal opinions and education have superseded bigotry and ignorance, and the voices of those who most loudly shouted "No Popery" in 1807, are daily and hourly growing weaker. Have we not a decided proof of the truth of this statement in the very subject before us? I take to myself the high satisfaction, that though one of the feeblest, yet one of the most zealous and consistent supporters of Catholic rights, I have contributed on this occasion, by my advice and exertions, to interpose such a delay, by the protraction of the debates on this great question, as to enable the House to ascertain with certainty, the real state of the public mind. An opportunity has also thus been afforded for the display of splendid specimens of reasoning, learn ing, and eloquence, by which immense service has been rendered to the cause of civil and religious liberty; but, above all, I am rejoiced that, as far as in me lay, I have thus contributed to give a last blow to a pernicious and scandalous delusion. But I will suppose, for the sake of argument, that the country was opposed to emancipation, and I will say, that even that ought not to have deterred the right hon. gentleman and the government from bringing forward the question and carrying it triumphantly. If they felt that they were right-if they knew that it was of paramount importance to the safety and integrity of the empire-why did they not oppose themselves firmly to the tide of vulgar prejudice? Were they always so tender-always so nice-always so willing to run counter to public opinion? The chancellor of the Exchequer formed part of the government in 1820; and I ask him, what was the state of public opinion on that most infamous, detestable, and disgusting measure, to which I marvel that any man on the other side can hear an allusion without the crimson starting to his cheeks-I mean the prosecution of the late Queen [hear, hear!]. What did the country feel on that occasion? Yet, did the government then shew any such delicate reluctance to confront public opinion? They had then no disinclination to meet the cry of the mob, or to combat the discontents of the army: they were then not prepared

un

to resist the wishes of meetings in all parts of the kingdom, and the avowed sentiments of many of their most steady supporters. The Church, for some time, at least, was passive, or even with the Queen; until the ministers and their adherents gave it the tone of reprobation. All these great interests were embattled against them-all felt with one heart, and spoke with one voice, yet nothing could induce the persecutors of the Queen to pause for one instant in their disgraceful and disgusting course. Was that course rendered necessary by any state expediency? No. Was one half of the empire about to be torn away if the ministry did not confront public opinion? No; but there was one person in the kingdom who held in his hand the issues of official life, who required that the proceeding should be commenced, and to him the cabinet yielded their private prepossessions, and made themselves his blind and willing slaves; to him they yielded the most abject subserviency-I will not mince the matterwith an unhesitating baseness, unequalled in any European court-which the cabinet of Russia, or even of Ferdinand the Seventh, might have equalled, but could never have surpassed. Like the base, crouching, hesitating, flinching slaves of the divan of Algiers, with the bow-string twanging in their ears, and the scymitar glancing before their eyes, they consented to gratify groundless, but in that high quarter, excusable caprices; though they were without all excuse, beyond what might be found in the most anxious desire to retain their places [hear, hear!].

Before I sit down, Sir, I must address a few words to the right hon. the Attorneygeneral for Ireland; for though the House has already patiently suffered under my infliction, my duty requires that I should trouble it a short time longer on the most important question I have ever known discussed in parliament. If I found myself in want of reasons for conceding the demands of the Catholics, good God! what an ample supply the Attorney-general for Ireland has given me. The great friend and patron of emancipation the appointed guardian of the peace and tranquillity of Ireland, with knowledge of many facts with which he alone could be acquainted, has declared that the bill under discussion is necessary, because emancipation is to be refused. How ominous are these words to the people of Ireland! To my ears they mean neither more nor less than

"I will begin at the other end-I will stifle complaint, because I do not choose to redress the wrong." Sir, I advise the Roman Catholics to persist, not to be discouraged

this: "Prepare for the coming storm; set your house in order, while you may; the tempest is brooding, and will quickly burst; that is about to be done, which, when completed, may produce, nay, must produce, convulsion, unless preventive measures are taken."

Mr. Plunkett here interrupted the hon. and learned member.-I stated, in my speech, that the argument from the other side was this: "Why do you pass this bill when you can avoid it by granting emancipation?" I replied, that the first question was, whether emancipation could be obtained; but I did not say that that was the only question; I did not state, that emancipation would dispense with the putting down of the Catholic Association. Neither did I assert, that emancipation was never to be granted. On the contrary, I observed, that my apprehensions of a long postponement were not so great as others had expressed.

Mr. Brougham.-The correction given by the right hon. and learned gentleman makes little or no difference. I thought he said, that if Catholic emancipation were granted, this bill would not be necessary; and he does not now take upon himself to state, that if the claims were conceded, it would be required. His argument is this; "My reason for voting for this bill is, because I feel its paramount importance: because Catholic emancipation being, for the present, out of the question, it is necessary to provide against the consequences of refusing it." This, I repeat, is most ominous for the future tranquillity of Ireland. Had lord Londonderry been alive, feeling that concession could not be made, and that convulsion must be the result of refusal, he would at once have recommended the adoption of military measures to meet the threatened danger; and I know not whether I would not rather see precautions of that kind adopted, which at all events must be temporary, than witness the passing of a bill like the present, which makes so violent an inroad on the constitution. Ministers say this, "Because we do not chuse to do what is right -because we choose to withhold the real cure-because the grievances of the Irish are not now, and therefore never, to be remedied, we will put down the Association -we will choke the language of complaint, and, instead of redressing the wrong, we will stifle the language of resentment." say redress the wrong, and the complaint will cease. The Attorney-general says,

I

to be peaceable and obedient to the law

-to take all constitutional means of resisting the passing of the bill; but if it be passed, to submit with patience to its provisions-to adopt all due measures of selfdefence, not by unlawful associations, but by such combinations as the law, even after the enactments of this bill, must necessarily leave them, and, in the end, they need not despair of success. Do not let them think, listening to false friends—that going too far with moderation and conciliation will be of any avail. Above all, do not let them suppose that saying nothing, doing nothing, trusting to those who have abandoned them, or looking out for others, whom they have never tried, will ever accomplish the object on which they have so long set their hearts. Let them confide in their old friends, in their faithful and distinguished leaders, those enlightened men who have always ably advocated their cause, in such men as my venerable friend (sir J. Newport), now far advanced in a life spent in their service, the worthy successor of their revered Grattan [hear, hear!]. Let them proceed firmly in the course they have honourably commenced, and let them not forget to look to the Catholics of England, let them reflect on the admirable conduct of their brethren and fellow-sufferers here, who, having long tried what moderation, what passive obedience, what calm submission would do, and finding it would accomplish nothing; or, rather, as in Ireland, aggravated the evils of which they complained, have at length come forward-and I glory that they have done so-to join hand and heart with the Irish Catholics for the attainment of one common object. A noble duke, whom I am proud to call my friend, who would be at the head of any society, but who is especially at the head of the Catholic Society of England, down to the lowest parish priest performing a weekly duty with his flock, have made common cause for a common end, and from this union I anticipate the happiest results [hear, hear!]. Iam told by the right hon. secretary, that I know little of Englishmen, if I think that a formidable attitude assumed by the Irish is likely to be attended with beneficial effects. This may be true. It may be true, that the English have never granted any thing under the compulsion of fear; but if it

be true I do not know it, for history proves | directly the reverse, I assert, on the contrary, and I defy him to contradict me, that the Roman Catholics have never obtained any concession, but when the government of the day was influenced by apprehension. Times of peace, and peace only, added new sufferings and augmented privations. In 1778, the first step was gained by the Catholics, because the government was under difficulties. In 1782, it had to deliberate with armed men, who extorted, by force, the independence of Ireland. In 1793, new fears prevailed, and new concessions were made, and it was then that the last boon was given, of the elective franchise. Is it true, then, that the Catholics have never obtained any thing by assuming a formidable attitude? I call, then, upon the British House of Commons, not by any bad passions-not by the hatred you bear to oppressors not by long-stifled enmity for the deepest injuries, but every principle most sacred to Christians-not by hatred, but by charity-not by revenge, but by conciliation as you are statesmen, and have, in fact, the government of the empire in your hands, I claim of you by policy and by prudence to look at this question fairly, and to consider the dreadful consequences which may result from passing this measure. Adopt it, and you alienate the Catholics for ever-you convert discontent into rage-you arm rage with new weapons; and upon your heads will be the consequences of this misguided and deluded policy. You, and you only, must be responsible if the present Ireland be torn from the mother country [continued cheers].

:

Mr. Butterworth rose, notwithstanding the reiterated cries of "Question!" and persisted in attempting to obtain a hearing. We could only collect, that he accused Mr. Brougham of having fallen into a great mistake, respecting the Methodist conference money. The committee he had mentioned had been appointed with a specific object. The money was devoted to a different purpose; and no collection had been made since 1811. The hon. member, produced a letter, which he held up to the House for some time, amid cries of" question, question," and "read, read." The hon. member commenced the reading of the letter; but he had not proceeded far before a laugh was excited by some member exclaiming " Amen." Mr. B. persevered, and read part of the

letter, to shew that the Catholic rent was not a voluntary contribution [cries of "name, name." and "place, place"]. It was in the county of Kilkenny; but he objected to give the name of the party who wrote the communication. He had intended to have said a few words about Bible societies, but as the House was so impatient he would reserve them to a future occasion.

Mr. Goulburn rose to reply. He had, he said, been charged with having made a false statement respecting two transactions to which he had alluded in his speech. He had mentioned them, to show the ground upon which he disapproved of the principle of the Catholic Association, which, contrary to the old maxim of English jurisprudence, presumed people to be guilty before they were tried. He was, however, charged with having misrepresented one of these, because he had not stated, that Mr. Blackburn, the judge before whom that trial was had, had complimented Mr. O'Gorman for his conduct in the prosecution. Now, he had said nothing against Mr. O'Gorman ; and his conduct, whatever it had been, did not alter the proceeding against which he had objected.

Sir J. Mackintosh said, he complained only of the right hon. gentleman's having concealed that fact.

Mr. Goulburn resumed. The hon. and learned gentleman, then, thought it was a fact necessary to be stated, that the counsel for the prosecution had conducted himself well. The House should, however, hear Mr. Blackburn's report of that trial. He said, "A trial of unusual interest has been held before me, in which a soldier was charged with having administered illegal oaths. It lasted seven hours, and at the conclusion of it the man was acquitted by the unanimous verdict of forty-three magistrates. Iregret to say that the evidence for the prosecution appeared to be a foul conspiracy, to accuse and criminate the soldier, and that the most abominable means were resorted to for effecting the object of the conspiracy" cheers]. If any gentleman had before this, supposed that he (Mr. Goulburn) had given any colour to this case, he asked them now to acquit him, on the evidence of Mr. Blackburn's report. With respect to the other case alluded to by the learned member for Winchelsea, he did not know from what source it was the learned gentleman obtained his information. He as