"That a provision, through government, for the "roman-catholic clergy of this kingdom, competent "and secured, ought to be thankfully accepted.

"That, in the appointment of the prelates of the "roman-catholic religion to vacant sees, within the "kingdom, such interference of government, as may "enable it to be satisfied of the loyalty of the person appointed, is just, and ought to be agreed to. "That, to give this principle its operation with"out infringing the discipline of the roman-catho"lic church, or diminishing the religious influence, "which prelates of that church ought justly to possess over their respective flocks, the following "regulations seem nécessary :

"1st. In the vacancy of a see, the clergy of the "diocese to recommend, as usual, a candidate to "the prelates of the ecclesiastical province, who "elect him, or any other they may think more "worthy, by a majority of suffrages:-in the case "of equality of suffrages, the presiding metropo"litan to have a casting vote.

"2d. In the election of a metropolitan, if the "provincial prelates do not agree, within two "months after the vacancy, the senior prelate shall "forthwith invite the surviving metropolitans to "the election, in which each will have a vote: in "the equality of suffrages, the presiding metropo"litan to have a casting vote.

"3d. In these elections, the majority of suffrages "must be ultra-medietatem, as the canons require, or must consist of the suffrages of more than half "the electors.

"4th. The candidates so selected, to be presented

by the president of the election to government; "which, within one month after such presentation, "will transmit the name of the said candidate, if no objection be made against him, for appointment to "the holy see, or return the said name to the presi"dent of the election, for such transmission as may "be agreed on.

66

5th. If government have any proper objection against such candidates, the president of the elec"tion will be informed thereof within one month after presentation, who, in that case, will convene "the electors to the election of another candidate.

Agreeably to the discipline of the roman-catho"lic church, these regulations can have no effect, "without the sanction of the holy see; which sanc"tion, the roman-catholic prelates of this kingdom “shall, as soon as may be, use their endeavours "to procure.

"The prelates are satisfied, that the nomination "of the parish priests, with a certificate of their "having taken the oath of allegiance, be certified "to government.

"Richard O'Reilly, R. C. A. B. Armagh.

"J. J. Troy, R. C. A. B. Dublin.

"Edward Dillon, R. C. A. B. Tuam.

Thomas Bray, R. C. A. B. Cashel.
“P, J. Plunkett, R. C. B. Meath.
"F. Moylan, R. C. B. Cork.

"Daniel Delancy, R. C. B. Kildare.
"Edmund French, R. C. B. Elphin.
"James Caufield, R. C. B. Ferns.
"John Cruise, R. C. B. Ardagh."

"Dublin, January 28th 1799.

"The prelates, assembled to deliberate on a pro"posal from government, of a provision for the clergy, have agreed, that m. r. Dr. O'Reilly, m. r. "Dr. Troy, r. r. Dr. Plunkett, and such other of "the prelates, who may be in town, be commis"sioned to transact all business with government, "relative to the said proposal, under the substance "of the regulations agreed on and subscribed by "them."

From these papers it appears, that the resolutions of the Irish roman-catholic prelates in favour of the veto, were the subject of their deliberations for three successive days; and that, on the ninth day after their last deliberation upon it, the prelates again met, and appointed a committee to complete the business, according to the substance of the resolution.

The prelates assembled were ten in number: they consisted of the four metropolitan archbishops, and the six senior bishops.

LXXXVI. 3.

Allegation that the Irish catholic Prelates were intimidated into the Resolutions of 1799.

It will be seen that, at a future period, the Irish prelates objected to the expediency of these resolutions. Their raising this objection, exposed them to the charge of inconsistency. To defend them against it, a strange apology was made for them

by some of their advocates. Dr. Milner, then their London agent, in his Elucidation of the Veto, says, "the prelates were beset and plied;" and Mr. Clinch, their Dublin advocate, writes, in his Inquiry, Dublin, 1808, that the resolutions passed, "when the reign of terror was still breathing; by "practising upon fear and solitude, and by little "less than a menace."

This apology criminates, equally, the prelates and government. It imputes, to the former, a total deficiency of religious firmness, and even a want of common manly fortitude: to the latter, practices of a very ungenerous nature. The conduct of neither stands in need of any such apology; as nothing like terror or artifice was used to obtain the resolutions.

That any such means were used has never been asserted by the prelates themselves, and the use of them has been explicitly denied by lord Castlereagh. In the speech, to which we have already referred, his lordship said, "the house would judge "of the surprise, with which he must have learnt, "after receiving from the hands of that church, "the resolutions in question, not only that such "regulations as were therein expressed, could not "be acceded to by the catholics; but that it was "also alleged, that the roman-catholic bishops, "who signed those resolutions, had been terrified by the Irish government of that day, into an "acquiescence in measures, which they afterwards, upon reflection, disapproved."

"a statement, so ridiculous upon the face of it, and

so utterly destitute of truth, never could have been "countenanced by any one of the respectable individuals, who signed those resolutions. The fact "was, that he never perceived the slightest repugnance, on their part to the measure; or a doubt "of its being consistent with the principles of their religion, to give to the crown a negative upon "the appointment of their bishops. As little did they doubt of the arrangements being acceptable "to the pope, whose consent they undertook to use their endeavour, as soon as possible, to procure."

Nothing can be more explicit than these declarations of lord Castlereagh; and it must be admitted that a subsequent declaration of. Dr. Milner, is equally explicit. In his "Letter to a Parish Priest," he tells the prelates in express terms, that "they "made the resolutions voluntarily."

In fact the single circumstance, mentioned in the preceding article, that the Irish prelates were three days in deliberation, and that nine days afterwards they met and appointed a committee upon the business, shows that the charge of intimidation is, to use lord Castlereagh's expression, wholly destitute of truth.