warfare in the narrow seas would be very different from what it was at present. It would be much better to cease from building ships for the next five years, and to keep up in good repair the 500 we already possessed. The whole of Europe had not that number of ships. Why not let the timber remain in the forests until impe

He saw a considerable sum charged for the improvements in dock-yards and wharfs: 795,000l. was to be voted for works now in progress at Sheerness. When they had such a dock-yard as that of Chatham, and when ships might be carried up and down without delay, by means of steam-boats, he could not but view this establishment at Sheerness as useless. There was also a charge of 300,000l. for works at Plymouth. When sums of this magnitude were called for, parliament ought to have more detailed information than could be contained in a speech delivered at the table. He also observed a charge for the dock-yard establishment at Halifax. Why could not Halifax defray its own expenses? He wished to see the navy, which was, and deserved to be, the favourite service of the country, kept in the most efficient state; but he could not suffer a useless expenditure which would go on increasing if it were not checked, to pass unnoticed.

thought, it was better for the House to look at the aggregate amount of the estimates, than to consider the details. They ought to say, distinctly, "so much is sufficient for the service of the country; the remainder must be reduced." He considered the naval force at present entirely too large. Here was an estimate of 5,983,000l. for the navy. Was it pos-rious necessity called for it to be felled. sible, that in time of peace a sum so enormous could be wanted? The South American states were so firmly established that they had been deemed fit objects for commercial treaties. In that quarter, then, no fleet was necessary; and he should be glad to know where any extensive naval force was required. The salaries now paid in many of the public offices were quintuple those which had been paid in any former peace; and unquestionably there was no necessity for such an increase of emolument. The amount of money expended at this moment for building ships was enormous. They were throwing away a million annually on the building of ships, which were rapidly falling into decay. We had already no less than 500 ships of war, a greater naval force than all the states of the world could command. Why, there fore, should they go on building? They ought to cease from building new ships, and apply themselves to keeping in perfect repair the old ones. The newly-built vessels were destroyed by the dry-rot. The hon. comptroller of the navy (sir B. Martin) smiled at the idea of the dry-rot. It was the fact, nevertheless, that it was doing a great deal of mischief. The hon. comptroller, and others on the opposite side of the House, had stated that this evil did not exist to any great extent. But their statements were by no means borne out. He would not say that half the navy was useless; but he believed that more damage had been done to our ships since the use of unseasoned timber came into fashion, than was ever before known. Those who had the management of the naval department tried all manner of experiments to check the evil. They changed their course of proceeding every four or five years; and he submitted to the House, that the expenditure of upwards of a million a-year for the building of ships deserved more consideration than had been given to the subject. The discovery of steam navigation had altered the nature of maritime warfare altogether. Come war when it might, the mode of

Mr. Robertson said, that when their commerce was increasing in every quarter of the globe, it was proper that a very large naval force should be kept up, for the purpose of protecting it. He contended, that they ought not to cease from building ships, since they were necessary to the welfare and security of the country. The hon. member had, in his opinion, recommended the most mischievous policy that could possibly be devised. Formerly, our commerce was confined to Europe, the Mediterranean, and the West-Indies; but there was not a country on the face of the earth where our ships were not at anchor. If a new rupture occurred, was it not necessary that a great naval force should be ready to protect them? He trusted that ministers would not shrink from their duty, but would extend the navy as much as possible.

Mr. Hume said, he was as anxious as any man to have the navy in such a state that it might cope with the world; but the mischievous policy of which he complained was, the system of building ships merely to rot.

The resolution was agreed to. On a reso-1 very valuable interests, and been injurious lution, "That 157,176l. 3s. 5d. be granted to the workmen themselves. Many perto defray the salaries of the Officers, and sons were now ready to give the workmen the Contingent expenses of His Majesty's employment, and the statements of those Yards at home, for the year 1825," persons placed the conduct of the workmen in such a light as made him feel more indignation than he thought proper to express. If they had in any instances become burthensome to the parishes, it must have been through their own misconduct.

directed. No case has been made out even against what the hon. members opposite looked upon as the great evil of the Association-the interference with courts of justice. He objected to the bill in the third place, because it was to be taken, if not as an indication that the part of the cabinet which had hitherto supported the Catholic question had at length deserted it, at least as being intended as a peaceoffering to their less pliant Anti-Catholic associates. On the mere declaration of ministers that the measure was necessary, without any evidence being given in support of it, the House was called upon to pass a highly penal bill, which was certain to fail in its operation. The House was called upon to pass the bill, in the hope that those against whom it was directed would feel so much deference and respect for the declared will of parliament, that they would not attempt to evade it. In the name of common sense, what ground was there for expecting such deference on the part of the Catholic Association? Was it because ministers had been kind and considerate enough to introduce a penal law against a body, comprising amongst its members the first men of rank and talent in the country; or because they had been wise enough to frame the law, so that it would be utterly impossible that it should have any effect, without the consent and acquiescence of those against whom it was directed? The Attorneygeneral for Ireland had consoled himself with the idea, that the individuals who stood at the head of the Association, and whose names would confer distinction on any deliberative body-even on those two from which they were so unjustly excluded

the opinion which they entertained of the | the minds of those against whom it was extensive influence exercised by the Catholic Association over the Catholic popu lation, then the right hon. Secretary for foreign affairs must be wrong in the opinion which he expressed on the first day of the session, and which he had never since retracted or qualified. If, on the contrary, that right hon. gentleman was Tight in supposing that the Association represented neither the feelings nor the wishes of the Catholics, then, on the other hand, the two right hon. gentlemen first mentioned must be wrong in their view of the case; and yet, if they deferred to the opinion of their right hon. colleague, they must abandon their prime argument in support of the bill. The opinions of the right hon. gentlemen were directly opposed to each other. One objected to the Association because it did not represent the feeling and wishes of the Catholics, and the others because it did. Either might be right; but it was impossible that both could be so. The right hon. Secretary for the home department objected to the Association, because it kept Ireland in a state of disturbance, and the hon. member for Lowth (Mr. L. Foster) disliked it, because it had placed Ireland in that state which he considered most dangerous of all; namely, perfect repose. When the supporters of the measure differed thus as to the grounds on which they considered it necessary, what result could be anticipated from it in common? If, after the passing of the bill, Ireland should continue tranquil, and exhibit no signs of dissatisfaction or disaffection, the right hon. Secretary for foreign affairs would conceive his opinion of the small influence of the Association to have been substantiated. If, on the contrary, disaffection and an-would endeavour to seek out, and conalienation of feeling on the part of the Catholic population should be the consequence of the measure, the right hon. Secretary and Attorney-general for Ireland, would then assert, that they had taken a correct view of the influence of the Association. For his own part, he would most strenuously oppose the bill; first, because not only had no case been made out in support of it, but that an offer to prove a case against it, by evidence, oral and documentary given at the bar, had been rejected. In the second place, he objected to the bill, because, even if a case had been made out for it, it was extremely bad, inasmuch as it was incapable of producing any other effect than irritation in

form themselves to, the intentions of parliament. He must say, that for his own part he did not understand the intention of the bill. What a situation was parliament placed in, when it recommended a body of men not to invade an act passed expressly against themselves. This, too, after all the vapouring which he had heard about the dignity of parliament, and not being bullied into granting the Catholic claims! The language which had been made use of was neither more nor less than this "We, the parliament, have passed an act to send you, the Catholics, all to prison; but we know that if you have common shrewdness, you may evade the penalty, and we therefore beg that you

will be good enough, both for your own sakes and for ours, to conform to our wishes." He had never before known, except in one instance, where a public decree of such a nature depended for its efficacy upon the indirect recommendation of its framers. The instance to which he alluded was this; when the late king of France was in exile in this country, a French emigrant nobleman, who had re-security of the Protestant church estasided with his majesty, was charged with some supposed offence against the laws of France. The nobleman was cited to appear at the house of the exiled sovereign to answer the charge before a bed of justice. He refused to attend. He was found guilty in his absence, and the sen--why did they now, when the malady tence of the court was communicated to him, ordering him just to consider himself as being confined for a given interval within the walls of the Conciergerie at Paris. So that, whilst the convicted nobleman was enjoying his liberty about the streets of the British metropolis, he was, in contemplation of French law, as well as in the opinion of every loyal subject of the exiled monarch, undergoing the rigorous sentence of imprisonment in a prison in Paris. However, he was at last released from his imaginary imprisonment by the hand of death. The supporters of the present measure told the House, that it was not likely that any attempt would be made to invade the provision of the bill. That the gentlemen against whom it provided, and who were of the highest and most respectable station in Ireland, would conduct themselves discreetly and advis-sociation and the Catholic body in Ireland, edly, he had no doubt; but it could not be denied, that the persons over whom the act was to extend, were persons over whom they had no control but such as affection afforded; and that being destroyed, little could be expected from them. The alternate course of advising and threatening, put him in mind of the West Indian, story of, "If you flog, flog; if you preach, preach; but no flogging and preaching both at the same time!" So he would say; if you advise them, advise them as friends; if you proscribe them, proscribe them as enemies, but for Heaven's sake do not act both parts at the same time. As to the mere question of whether the Catholic Association was to be destroyed or not, he thought it one of no further importance-for it would be sure to make its appearance again in another shape except that it would tend to exasperate the Irish population. There

were two ways of pacifying Ireland; one was by concession, the other by proscription. The former was the easiest, and the most complete mode. Why, he asked for the ninety-ninth time, should not emancipation be granted to the Catholics? The right hon. Secretary for the home department opposed emancipation, because he considered it to be incompatible with the

blishment in Ireland. He believed the right hon. gentleman to be sincere in that opinion. But, why did those who had united themselves to the administration, and who always recommended emancipation as a panacea for all the ills of Ireland

was raging, apply a blister which could only irritate? He would never consent to the passing of the bill until parliament was informed of the conditions which lord Wellesley had coupled with his recommendation of the measure. He could not believe that that distinguished individual could, at this time of day, be weak enough to change his opinions, or base enough to sacrifice them. Could it be, that one half of lord Wellesley's recommendation had been attended to, and the other half re[jected-that the cabinet had been accessory to withholding half of the noble lord's despatch, in order to give an undisputed victory to the other part? It was the duty, not alone of the friends of the Catholics, but of every friend of liberty, to oppose the bill. He believed that the closest sympathy existed between the As

and he knew that it was the case with respect to the Catholics of England. There had been very little communication of feeling between the English Catholics and the Irish Association, until this attack upon that body; but now every Catholic in England, from the carl-marshal, the Howards, the Talbots, and the Arundels, down to the meanest peasant, was pledged to link his fate with that of the Association. The right of free discussion was the only plank which was left to the despairing Catholics; and to that they would cling to the last moment.

Sir E. Knatchbull gave his hearty support to the bill. He thought that a body which possessed such power as the Catholic Association ought to be put down; for although, as it was said, they had only hitherto exercised it for good, they might exercise it for harm. He had always, from conscientious motives, opposed the

Catholic question, and he would always
continue to oppose it. He felt it due to
his constituents to say
thus much.

|isters had declared that the country was in a state of positive progressive prosperity. No doubt it was. But, in the preMr. Maurice Fitzgerald, the knight of sent state of things, increasing prosperity Kerry, said, he would endeavour to avoid was not a source of security; the growing those topics which had already been strength of Ireland must be considered touched upon in the course of the discus- as a curse, and not a blessing to the emsion which had taken place on the subject, pire. On that very circumstance a foreign and confine himself to suggesting some enemy would ground his expectation of practical considerations which bore upon a successful invasion. Did ministers mean the question, and were, he thought, wor- to say that they were themselves satisfied thy of the attention of ministers. The with the growing prosperity of Ireland? ground on which it was proposed to pass He would ask the House to consider what the bill was, the danger of suffering such had been the history of Ireland since the a body as the Catholic Association to exist. Union. At the period of the Union, the He had already acknowledged the danger Catholic aristocracy, and that most respectof the existence of a body which had it able body, the hierarchy, reposed boundin its power to wield the mass of the peo- less confidence in the government, and ple. If he were to attempt to contradict the mass of the people followed the examthat position, he should only be abusing ple which they set them of zeal in supthe patience of the House. But, the port of the laws. That was a period question was, were ministers taking a when the ministry might have carried the proper course to correct such a state of Catholic question without a murmur, and things? It appeared to him, that minis- without producing any effect, except that ters had taken the effect for the cause. of placing Ireland in a state of permanent The Association was not the cause of the tranquillity and happiness. That would have present danger, but the state of things healed the wound which former rebellions which threw the population into the hands and that treacherous measure, the Union, of such a body; and that was the effect of had made. If since that period the Cathe postponement of that justice to the tholic body had undergone a complete people of Ireland which they had been change-if, instead of a nobility, and a Looking to parliament for during twenty-hierarchy wielding the minds of the peofive years. He attributed the present state of things in Ireland to Mr. Pitt's administration. That minister told the people of Ireland, that by consenting to a Union with England, they would open a door to a fair discussion of their claims. The hopes of the Catholics were raised, and they looked forward with confidence to the justice and wisdom of the United Parliament. They were disappointed; and from that period did he date the commencement of that unhappy state of things which at present prevailed in Ireland. What had gentlemen on his side of the House been telling ministers for the last twenty years, but that dissatisfaction would increase in Ireland every year, until it would arrive at a pitch which would be fearful to contemplate? There was nothing in the character of the measure before the House to allay the danger of the state of Ireland. The danger was not the Association in Dublin, but that But, was there ever such an the Catholics were united. The bill would argument set up to justify a course of not remove the danger, though it might violence and coercion? "We do not drive it to other modes of expression. imagine that we can make you obey us," Was this bill to be the only measure of said the advocates of the measure to the state policy with regard to Ireland? Min-leaders of the Catholics, "but we rely on

ple-if, instead of the general subordination of ranks which then prevailed, the Catholic body had been drawn into a chaos, and thrown into the hands of men who would not, at any other time, have directed them, to what was it to be attributed but to their disappointed hopes; If a people were insulted, and degraded, and rendered desperate, it was not surprising that their direction should fall into the hands of the boldest and ablest men amongst them. The present measure indeed, as regarded even the views of its promoters, was a most extraordinary one? for it professed to rely less upon its own internal power, than upon the peacefulness, and reasonableness, and honour, and good feeling, of those against whom it was directed. Some honourable members went so far as actually to declare, not their belief that it might not be evaded, but their trust that it would be scrupulously acqui esced in.