calculated to counteract the effects of the misrepresentations and calumnies of their enemies.

On the same day, Sir Hercules Langrishe,* in a short speech, introduced his bill for the relief of the Roman Catholics: it was read for the first time. Sir Hercules said, it was a matter of so much importance, that lest its object should be misconceived, he thought it necessary that it should be printed, and that a sufficient time should be given to have it fully understood; he trusted, when understood, it would be approved of by every man in the nation. Sir Hercules then moved, that the bill should be read on that day se'nnight. Mr. Staples objected to the shortness of the time, and called upon the secretary, who had seconded the motion for the bill, to inform the house, whether the concessions, which the bill contained, were sufficient to satisfy the Catholics; or whether these concessions were all that he intended to grant them. He wished to know the ne plus ultra.

Hon. Denis Browne said, the right honourable gentleman would find it difficult to answer for the future expectations of three millions of people. The Catholics offered, as a security for their attachment to the constitution, the approved loyalty of long and disturbed times. He knew it would be impossible at any time to combat bigotry, prejudice, and love of power, by argument; but that it would be impossible for any exertion of human ingenuity or sophistry, to support the absurd principle of keeping a numerous and deserving description of our fellow-subjects, in the degraded situation they then stood.

Sir Hercules Langrishe said, it would have been impossible for him to answer the gentleman, had not the declaration of an host of Roman Catholics already answered him in the public papers. That "grateful for what had already been granted, they "would with joy and humility receive whatever the wisdom and "liberality of parliament thought proper to bestow." As to the obscure and contemptible persons, whose names filled the columns of newspapers, declaring a contrary sentiment, he had no regard to them, while his opinion was supported by the wise, the good, and the respectable. Hereupon Mr. Secretary Hobart observed, he would not have the presumption to answer for so great a body

"Resolved, That we refer to the known disposition of the Roman Catholics "of this kingdom, to our dutiful behaviour, during a long series of years, and "particularly to the whole tenor of our late proceedings for the full refutation of every charge of sedition and disloyalty.

"Resolved, That for the more ample and detailed exposure of all the evil "reports and calumnies circulated against us, an address to our Protestant "fellow subjects and to the public in general, be printed by the order, and in the name of the general committee.

12 Par. Debates, p. 58.

VOL. IV.

66

Signed by order,⚫

D

"RICHARD M'CORMICK, Secretary."

as the Roman Catholics; their good conduct for a series of years past, was at once the best proof of their wishes and their deserts. As to the question, whether this were to be the ne plus ultra, he would only say, that the house would never find him disposed to take any part without their full concurrence. The bill was ordered to be printed, and to be read a second time on that day se'nnight.

On the 8th of the month, Mr. John O'Neil presented a petition, which he said had been put into his hands by a very respectable body of men at Belfast; it was signed by more than six hundred, many of whom he knew personally to be persons of great reputation: the object of the petition was, that the legisla ture would please to repeal all penal and restrictive laws against Catholics, and put them on the same footing with their Protestant fellow subjects.

Sir Henry Cavendish requested the right honourable gentleman to read the petition throughout. He trusted it was not in any wise similar to a petition brought into the house a few nights ago by Mr. O'Hara, if it were, he was sure it must be unknown to the right honourable gentleman who moved for its being received; as the right honourable gentleman valued too highly his own dignity, and the dignity of parliament to present such a petition.

Mr. O'Neil read the petition throughout; it began with lamenting the degraded state of the Catholics, and requested that they might have redress as above stated.

The hon. Denis Browne seconded the motion for receiving the petition.

Sir Hercules Langrishe very strongly and at large expressed his astonishment at the singularity of the union of the Dissenters with the Catholics. He would not object against the reception of a petition from so respectable a member of that house: but he had seen some treasonable productions from gentleman of that town. Sir Boyle Roche bitterly inveighed against the Dissenters, and actually opposed his single negative against the reception of the petition.*

The 11th of February was the day to which the Catholic bill stood committed: but before the order of the day was called on, Mr. Stewart, (of Tyrone) after an able and appropriate speech, moved that "an humble address should be presented to "his majesty, beseeching his majesty to take into his considera"tion the situation of the Presbyterian ministers of the province "of Ulster, and to make such further provision for them, as in "his wisdom and bounty he shall think fit; and that this house will make good the same."

12 Par. Debates, p. 85.

Mr. George Ponsonby seconded the motion.

Sir Edward Newenham expressed his warm regard for, and bore testimony to the loyalty and virtues of the Protestant Dis. senters; that they had always been steady friends to the House of Hanover: that as parliament was going to grant favours to the Roman Catholics, they could not refuse justice to the Pres byterian clergy: their principles and conduct merited every favour from a Protestant government; and he rose to give his most hearty concurrence to the measure. There certainly were no subjects more loyal or more dutiful than those in whose favour the honourable gentleman had spoken, and he therefore most heartily coincided in his intention.

The great body of the Catholics was little satisfied with the concessions contained in the bill of sir H. Langrishe: whether the form of it lately circulated were or were not according to the original ideas of the framer of it, was not so certain, as the conviction of most of the Catholics, who took an active share in the business, that this bill had been substituted for another, which probably would have been obtained, but for the arts of some designing and the credulity of some honest men. Whilst however the bill was in progress through the house, the great body of the Catholics acting through their committee, prepared a petition to parliament immediately calculated to meet the objections made against their proceeding, on a principle of indecent menace and intimidation, and wishing to abet their cause by reasoning and conduct of a most unconstitutional tendency. Accordingly on the 18th of February, Mr. Egan presented a petition signed by fifty of the most respectable Catholic commercial characters in Dublin, on behalf of themselves and their brethren throughout the kingdom. In presenting the petition he considered himself

On the same day Mr. John O'Neil said, he held in his hand a petition, which he received by the post of that morning, and was instructed to present to the house; it was signed by the names of 350 Protestant inhabitants, the gentlemen, clergy, and freeholders of the four lower baronies of the county of Antrim; and would, he was assured, have been signed by a thousand, had it not been for the shortness of time, since they understood the Roman Cath olic bill was to have been debated on that day.

In the petition they stated, they would feel themselves happy, that the Ro man Catholics should receive every liberal immunity consistent with the spirit of our glorious constitution, and with the safety and interest of the protestant religion. The petition was received, and ordered to lie on the table.

† 12 Par. Deb. p. 125.

"To the right hon. the Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, in Par liament assembled.

"The Petition of the undersigned Roman Catholics, on behalf of themselves and the Roman Catholics of Ireland.

"HUMBLY SHEWETH,

"THAT as the house has thought it expedient to direct their attention to the situation of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, and to a further relaxation

merely complying with his duty. He did not consider himself bounden to support its principle, nor to give any particular vote on the subject, which was to come forward that night, considering it criminal to come predetermined on a question of so much import. He then read the petition and the names of those who had signed it, (which were those of the Catholic committee) and he trusted the house would receive the petition and decide upon it with liberality. After some harsh observations of Mr. Ogle, and resented by Mr. Browne, the petition was ordered to lie on the table. On the order of the day for the house resolving itself into a committee on the Catholic bill, the general question was warmly debated. All cautiously restrained their ideas of indulgence to the points of the bill: and many of them took that opportunity of pledging themselves never to grant the elective franchise as a concession incompatible with the Protestant ascendancy. Mr. Ogle almost alone opposed the bill's going to a committee. Mr. Grattan had been instructed so to do by a

" of the penal statutes still subsisting against them, they beg leave, with all "humility, to come before the house with the most heartfelt assurance of the "wisdom and justice of parliament, which is at all times desirous most gra"ciously to attend to the petitions of the people; they therefore humbly "presume to submit to the house their entreaty, that they should take into "their consideration whether the removal of some of the civil incapacities, "under which they labour, and the restoration of the petitioners to some share " in the elective franchise, which they enjoyed long after the revolution, will not tend to strengthen the Protestant state, add new vigour to industry, and "afford protection and happiness to the Catholics of Ireland; that the peti❝tioners refer with confidence to their conduct for a century past, to prove "their uniform loyalty and submission to the laws, and to corroborate their "solemn declaration, that if they obtain from the justice and benignity of "parliament, such relaxation from certain incapacities, and a participation in "that franchise, which will raise them to the rank of freemen, their gratitude "must be proportioned to the benefit, and that enjoying some share in the "happy constitution of Ireland, they will exert themselves with additional " zeal in its conservation."

12 Par. Deb. Mr. Grattan on this occasion thus alluded to a federal union of the two kingdoms.

There is another danger, to which or to the fear of which your divisions may expose the Protestant ascendancy, I mean an union; let me suppose the minister, as he has often proposed corrupt terms to the Protestant, should propose crafty ones to the Catholic, and should say, you are three-fourths of the people, excluded from the blessings of an Irish constitution; accept the advantages of an English union. Here is a proposal probably supported by the people of England, and rendered plausible to at least three-fourths of the people of Ireland: I mention an union, because I have heard it has been darkly suggested as the resort of Protestant desperation against Catholic pretensions; never think of it, the Protestant would be the first victim. There would be Catholic equality and parliamentary extinction. It would be fatal to the Catholic also; he would not be raised, but you would be depressed, and his chance of liberty blasted for ever; it would be fatal to England, be. ginning with a false compromise, which they might call an union, to end in eternal separation, through the progress of two civil wars. Mr. Sheridan referred the following words to the subject of union, "he should see in per

part of his constituents, the corporation of Dublin, but could not sacrifice the rights and interests of three millions to the caprice or prejudice of some individuals. The house resolved itself into a committee on the bill after midnight, and at the suggestion of Mr. Ogle, Mr. Secretary Hobart declared he wished not to pres cipitate matters, and had no objection to the chairman's reporting progress, which was accordingly done, and leave was given to sit again on the Monday following, which was the 20th of February. On that day Mr. David La Touche moved, that the petition of the Roman Catholic committee, presented to the house on the preceding Saturday, should be read by the clerk: it was read, and he then moved, that it should be rejected. The motion was seconded by Mr. Ogle. The greater part of the house was very violent for the rejection of the petition. Some few, who were against the prayer of the petition, objected to the harsh measure of rejection. Several of the opposition members supported Mr. La Touche's motion. Even Mr. G. Ponsonby, on this occasion voted against his friend Mr. Grattan. The solicitor general attempted to soften the refusal to the Catholics by moving, that the prayer of the petition, as far as it related to a participation of the elective franchise should not then be complied with. The attor ney general and some other staunch supporters of government had spoken similar language, that they hoped quickly to see all religious distinctions and restrictions done away, but that the fulness of time was not yet come. Mr. Forbes, the hon. F. Hutchinson, col. (now lord) Hutchinson, Mr. Smith, Mr. Hardy, and Mr. Grattan spoke strongly against the motion and in favour of admitting the Catholics to a share in the elective franchise. Much virulent abuse was heaped upon that part of the body of Roman Catholics which was supposed to be represented by the Catholic committee. At a very late hour the house divided, 208 for rejecting the petition, and 23 only against it. Then Mr. La Touche moved, that the petition from the society of the United Irishmen of Belfast, should be also rejected: and the question being put was carried with two or three negatives..

The bill went rather quietly through the committee: and on the third reading sir H. Langrishe congratulated the country on the spirit of liberality that had attended the bill in its progress, and finally brought it to so desirable a conclusion.

It was a new covenant, a new charter of amity and intercourse amongst them; and he felt a pride in observing, that what they

"spective (a parodox in expression but a certainty in event) an union produced "by dissention." Sir John Parnel warned his countrymen not to suppose, that the refusal of the Catholic claims would hand over to them an union or a civil war: either of which must end in blood and bring destruction upon the country. Ibid, p. 180 Such then were the general ideas of union with this country.