"

ought to prevail in any country; and it ought "to be the wish of the roman-catholic body, as "much as of the protestant, that its operations "should be undisguised, and be submitted openly "to the inspection of the temporal power.

"Lord Castlereagh proceeded to argue on the "compatibility of such a modified endowment of "the clergy of a dissenting sect, with the preser"vation of the established church, in all its rights "and privileges. He instanced the advantages, "which had been derived from a similar provision, "which had long been enjoyed by the presbyte"rian clergy; but especially from the regulations, "under which that endowment had been lately "extended. He adverted to a similar extension "of royal benevolence to the roman-catholic clergy "in Scotland, which took place, with the grate"ful acknowledgments of the late pope Pius the

sixth, in the year 1798. He pointed out, that "the adoption of such a measure of indulgence to "the two ancient sects, whose numbers and weight "in the empire made them objects of permanent "regulation, did not countenance any claim in the "various and fluctuating sectaries of the present

66

66

day to similar favour and protection, which could "not fail to be productive of the greatest evils, as tending to encourage religious separation. He "instanced the case of Scotland, where the episcopal church was endowed by the state, without prejudice to the established presbyterian religion; and contended that, so far from endan'gering, such a system was calculated to strengthen

66

66

66

"the established church, by tranquillizing Ireland, "and by placing the clergy of the most numerous "sect in a more friendly relation to the state.

"In this view, he farther argued against the idea, "that any additional evil or difficulty arose from "the existence of the roman-catholic religion in "an episcopal form in Ireland. On the contrary, "he was of opinion, that the power and authority "incident to bishops was, in itself, pro tanto, a salutary reduction of the external authority of "the see of Rome; and, on this ground, however "the assumption of the titular character might "excite some degree of uneasiness, he much pre"ferred the ministry of bishops to that of apostolic "vicars, who were mere missionaries, removable "at pleasure, and obliged explicitly to obey all "orders from Rome."

LXXXVI. 6.

May 1805.

First mention of the Veto in the House of Commons in Sir John Cox Hippisley's Speech.-Division on that Debate.

THE negotiation between the roman-catholic prelates and lord Castlereagh was known to few. The first public mention of a Veto appears to have been made by sir John Cox Hippisley, in his speech in the house of commons, in the debate, on the 13th of May 1805, on the petition of the roman-catholics of Ireland.

On that day, Mr. Grattan moved, in the house of commons, that the house should resolve itself

into a committee of the whole house, to take into its consideration, the petition of the roman-catholics of Ireland. In the debate on this petition, Dr. Duigenan spoke, at considerable length, against the motion. Mr. Grattan and sir John Cox Hippisley rose, at the same time, to reply. The latter gave way; and it was not till late in the debate, that sir John had an opportunity of addressing the chair. He confined himself to the statement of a few important facts, and afterwards printed the substance of what he said, and also of what he intended to say, if an opportunity had occurred of delivering, at length, his sentiments on the subject*.

His publication contains the following passage:"Much as I am disposed to favour the objects of the "petition before the house, and much as my feelings "are abhorrent from the penalties of the act to "which I have just now adverted, (13 Eliz. c. 2), "I am by no means adverse to the principle that

66

gave birth to them. I would wish to be con"sidered as not less jealous of a foreign inter

The title of the publication is, "The substance of addi❝tional Observations intended to be delivered in the House of "Commons, in the debate on the petition of the roman-catho"lics of Ireland, on the 13th of May 1805, with Notes, and an Appendix, containing letters from Dr. Troy, titular roman"catholic archbishop of Dublin; Dr. Moylan, titular roman"catholic bishop of Cork; and Dr. Milner, F.S.A. V.A. and "other documents connected with the objects of that Petition. "By Sir J. C. Hippisley, LL.D. F.R.S. Recorder of Sudbury, "and a Bencher of the Honourable Society of the Inner Temple."

46

"ference and abuses, than our ancestors were in "the days of Edward the third and Richard the "second, from which period the statutes of provi

sors and præmunire take their date: and, though 66 my view of the subject, with respect to the mis"chief to be apprehended from the admission of a foreign primacy in spirituals, is very different "from those in general who oppose the present

question, I will meet them in a wish to institute "a solid and rational barrier against any possible "encroachment of the see of Rome, in the place of "those visionary guards, which counteract their own purposes, from their sanguinary tendency.

66

By instituting regulations to this end, we shall "be countenanced by the practice of, I believe, every European state, catholic or protestant; " and the noble viscount, who conducted the arrangements at the Union, will do me the justice "to recollect, that I urged the adoption of such "regulations, as I would now propose, when the "catholic subject was known to have occupied "much of the attention of the king's ministers, "and the exemption of the Irish roman-catholics "from the remaining disabilities, (as avowed by my honourable friend, then in the cabinet), was "the principal object of those, who concurred with "the measure of the Union*.

"The repeal of the 13th of Eliz. c. 2, I then " stated, as necessarily enjoined by the purview of "the act of the 31st of his present majesty, c. 32; "and in lieu thereof, I proposed the enacting, that • "Vide Mr. Windham's Speech."

"no bull, nor other papal rescript, containing any "ordinances of the see of Rome, should be circu“lated or published, till after it had been trans"mitted to one of his majesty's secretaries of state,

66

or some other appointed officer; and, in certain "cases also, be laid before his majesty's privy council, if thought expedient; to which such prelates, as were of the council, should be specially sum"moned. If, on due examination, those instru"ments contained only the ordinary faculties or

regulations of internal discipline, they should be "certified, without delay, by the officer appointed, "as containing nothing contrary to the establish"ment in church or state. A regulation of this

description might, with facility, be so modified, "as to give perfect satisfaction to his majesty's "roman-catholic subjects, by avoiding all unnecessary and vexatious interference or delay, and, "at the same time, to afford complete security to "the establishment.

.66

"Another regulation, suggested at the same period, was, that any roman-catholic priest or schoolmaster, applying to be licensed under the act of "the 31st of the king, should, in addition to the "oath of allegiance therein prescribed, produce a "certificate from the immediate superior, if a priest, "or from some known respectable person, if a lay

man, attesting his good moral character, and at"tachment to the civil constitution of the state; "which certificate should be authenticated by the "nearest resident magistrate; and, in consequence