Page images

tion us

with the tenets of the Catholic hatred of the religion of other Church: it is in union with the people, and, of course, with a truths of Divine Revelation; it is hatred of their persons; and so, therefore highly deserving the by a very natural progression, serious attention of your corres- they have led men to the destrucpondent, who professes to ques- tion of their goods and houses,

“ with a truly honest and and to attempts upon their lives. sinceré mind, and with a sincere “ This delusion furnishes no wish to come at the real truth."

reason for suffering that abomina

X. ble spirit to be kept alive by inJan. 8, 1813.

flammatory libels, or seditious assemblies, or for government's yielding to it, in the smallest de

gree, any point of justice, equity, For the Catholic Magazine. or sound policy. The King cer

tainly ought not to give up any SIR,

part of his subjects to the prejuOpening by chance, some let- dices of another; so far from it, ters of Mr. Burke, written at the I am clearly of opinion, that, on time of the riots in 1780, urging the late occasion, tire Catholics the necessity and humanity of ought to have been taken, more punishing the least possible num- avowedly than they were, under ber of offenders, I found the fol- the protection of government, as lowing remarks, which are so ap- the dissenters had been on a simiplicable to the present time, and lar occasion. just, that I am induced to trouble But, though we ought to proyou with an extract, if you think test against the violence and bigoit worthy of insertion.

try of others, and to correct our own " But the reason, which ought too, if we have any left, we ought to make these proper objects of to reflect, that an offence, which selection for punishment, confines in its cause is national, ought not, the selection to very few. For in its effects, to be vindicated on we must consider, that the whole individuals, but with a very welldation has been for a long time tempered lenity. guilty of this crime. Toleration

Your's, &c. is a new virtue in any country:

J. J. it is a late ripe fruit in the best Bartholomew Close. climates. We ought to recollect the poison, which, under the name of antidote against Popery, and such like mountebank titles, has For the Catholic Magazine. been circulated from our pulpits and from our presses, from the To the Right Hon. Lord Kenyon. heads of the Church of England, MY LORD, and the heads of the Dissenters. It is the privilege of every memThese publications, by degrees, ber of the august assembly in have tended to drive all religion" which you sit, to harangue on from our own minds, and to fill any subject, whether he underthem with nothing but a violent stands it or not, and to cessure VOL. I.


every individual, whether guilty ciples in my person, with a most or not, without contradiction from whimsical assumption. You say, strangers, as the community at that it belongs “to the character large is called: but when an Hon. of a gentleman not to doubt, but or even a Righ: Hon. Member of that Dr. MILNER authorised an Parliament, takes up his pen to offer of the Veto in each House of publish nonsense, or defaniation, Parliament.” Different persons, he becomes liable to be arraigned form different notions of the chabefore the public, like the mean- racter of a gentleman. Some est of mankind, and to undergo say him to be a man dressed in such sentence from it, as lie may good clothes-others, a man who be proved to merit.

keeps a carriage; others again, a I have been led to make these man whose mind is superior to observations, by accidentally falsehood and meanness of any meeting with a paragraph ex- kind--but Lord KENYON, it aptracted from your Lordship’s pears, is persuaded, that, to make Observations on the Roman Ca- a gentleman, it is necessary he tholic Claims, in a pamphlet should believe that Dr. MILNER called the Protestant Advocate, authorised an order of the Veto No. 1, p. 23, the author of which, in the House of Parliament ! very naturally, extols your work Without deciding, then, this to the skies; and, in ihe exube- doubtful point, as to the constirance of bigotry and a perse- tuents of a gentleman, I will take cuting spirit, proclaims that it is upon myself to assert, that no his ardent wish to renew LORD one of common understanding and GEORGE GORDON'S CRY of No candour, who has paid attention POPERY; without doubt, for the to what has passed before the same ardent purposes. In the pa- public concerning the transaction ragraph alluded to, your Lordship in question, will believe that Dr. takes occasion, from my alledged M. did authorise an order of the conduct in a particular transac- Veto in either of those houses, tion, to vilify the principles of for, first, my Lord, no Member of the whole religious community to Parliament, or other public man, which I belong, and you reproach has said, and I openly defy any me, without apologizing to Parlia- man of honour to say, that up to ment and the public for it. Now, the evening of the 25th May, as your Lordship will find upon 1808, when this subject was for enquiry that I have publicly met the first time introduced in Parthis charge in all the different liament, namely, into the Lower forms which it has worn on for- House, it was never signified to mer occasions; and, as it is a fact, me from any quarter whatever, that I never saw it in the shape that there was an intention of which you have given it; until making this offer to the Legislawithin these few days, I hope you ture. How, then, could I authowill not again accuse me of at rise a measure of which I had no least making light of it.

previous conception. In the next Your Lordsbip commences your place, no member of Parliament attack upon the Catholic prin- has ever once, in his place, averred, that I did give him authority to quote his words, as revised by make the 'offer. I remember well, himself, in Keating and Co.'s pubthat, on the above-mentioned lished Report p. 135) “ the Right evening, the Right Hon. mover of Hon. Gentleman (Mr. RYDER, has the question, Mr. GRATTAN, said, stated to the House that used this phrase : I have Al- the accredited agents of the Camost authority to say, that the tholic Bishops in Ireland had Catholic Bishops of Ireland will authorised me to make a proposal grant a negative power in the to the House in their names.” Now, Crown,” which phrase, hyperbo- the Right Hon. Gentleman is perlical as it was, proves that he had fectly incorrect in that statement. no positive authority. The Right I never stated any such thing; I Hon. Mr. PONSONBY, on the stated, that I had every reason to same occasion, being called upon BELIEVE, &c. and, when I was by Mr. YORK E, to explain the asked for my authority, I answermatter, referred not to my autho- ed, my authority was Dr. Milner, rity, but to my opinion. “ Dr. &c. Here your Lordship sees that M. believes,” &c. Faulder's Re- I am appealed to in the face of port of the Debate of the Catholic Parliament, not as authorizing any Question in 1808, p. 134, where, offer that was or might be made by-the-by, the Right Hon. Gen- to it, but merely as affording to tleman's opinion is mixed up with the Gentleman with whom I had mine in an unwarrantable manner. the honor to converse, reason to True it is, that, in answer to the believe, as he did believe. Lastly, questions which had been pro- I maintain that the very note proposed to me four days before the duced on the last mentioned day debate took place, I said that I to the House of Commons, so far fully believed the Irish prelates from proving that I authorised any would concede the negative pow- offer to the Legislature or the er; but I was far, very far God, Crown, on the part of the Irish knows, from intimating that they Prelates, a claim to interfere in the were content to make the King appointment of their future colvirtually head of the Catholic leagues, proves directly the conChurch; and equally far from trary; since I expressly stated, authorising any offer or proposal that " I had not had an opportuwhatsoever, relating to this nega, nity of consulting with the Cathotive power in Parliament: so farlic Prelates of Ireland on the imfrom this, I again and again re- portant subject of Catholic Prepeated that I had no instructions sentations." I appeal to your on the subject, and therefore Lordship, whether the bare opicould give no pledge whatsoever, nion of an agent relative to the that such were the dispositions of disposition of his principals, who the Irish Brethren. In another declared, at the same time, that explanation of this business, which he had no instructions from them, Mr. PONSONBY made to Parlia

considered ment, at the requisition of Mr. offer of terms on their part? I am Ryder, on May 25, 1810, the sure it was not so considered on Right Hon. Gentleman said (I the occasion alluded to, and ac





[ocr errors]

cordingly I was directed to apply lege; and if I had sought for a to the Prelates for positive in. member to speak for me, to which structions, which I did by letters, party was I to apply in this busito five of them by the post of the ness, since they were both equally very day, May 21, 1808."

bostile to me the one from reliWith respect to the Upper gious, the other from political House, the Duke of NORFOLK, prejudice--and since they were whom your Lordship mentions as both equally ardent to make his offering the Veto on my authority, Majesty the Head of our Church. was so far from doing this, that, I am sure that to every one of a in the formes debate of May 27, true " candid mind,” I shall ap1808,'his Grace expressly stated, pear to have done the utmost that that he had not seen me for two could be done in this case, to preyears; and, in the second debate, vent misrepresentation, when he on June 6, 1810, he generously learns that I hastened from the and warmly vindicated me from House of Commons, on the very the party clamour' which had morning on which the debate been raised against me elsewhere, closed there, May 26, 1808, to my and proved that I was a much- printer, and that I caused several injured man.

copies of a protest against the Your Lordship's second charge mistakes which had taken place against me is not less absurd than in the said House to be struck off your former charge, though it is from the press, some of wbich, evidently borrowed from that ere the ensuing morning, May Nippant ministerial writer, who, 27, I delivered to Mr. PONSONBY, under the directions of Mr. PER- Mr. GRATTAN, Sir J. HIPPESLEY, CEVAL, published, first in the LORD Grenville, &c. It is

posMorning Post, and then in a pam- sible that none of these copies phlet, sjx letters against me; might fall into your hands, but I letters which I abstained from can hardly conceive that you answering out of respect for Mr. should not have seen a republiPONSON BY and his friends, as I cation of the paper in question, saw very clearly, that the Minis- at the close of Sir John Hippester wished to make a tool of me ley's appendix to his latest speech against them. The charge against on our affairs. me stands thus in your Lordship's Your Lordship's third accusa, observations : “ No one of a can- tion contains more falsehood than did mind can suppose that a Rev. either of the former, because it person, present during the de- consists of an accumulation of bates, could permit a statement false facts, false dates, and false to be made, to which he did not. quotations, some of which I shall assent." True, my Lord, I was here mention.

It is false, then, present during the debates of that I ever described the kind of 1808 ; but is your Lordship never negative power in the Crow, present in Parliament at state. which, for a short time, I pria ments to which you do not give vately advocated (though I never your assent) You, indeed, may offered it to Parliament, either object to them after they are from myself or any one else) as made; but I had no such privi. being itself nugatory, For I

[ocr errors]

maintained that it would afford quired, and rendered palatable to an additional civil security for ex- the truly loyal Prelates of Ireland; cluding disloyal and seditious can- namely, to prevent disloyal or ser didates from our episcopacy; at ditious persons from filling our the same time that, restricted as Sees; as such, during about four it was, I asserted it could not months, I defended the plan. The operate for any other purpose. Irish Prelates, however, at their It is false that, after the meeting General Meeting, found it inada of the Catholic Prelates, Sept. missible, and resolved that it was 14, 1808, (which meeting you “ inexpedient to admit of any term a meeting of the whole Ca- alteration at all in the existing tholic Body of Ireland,) I would discipline;” soon after which, rather give the last drop of my on further communication with blood, than consent to the King's our poitical friends, I found that having any influence, either di- they were equally hostile to my rect or indirect, in the appoint- restricted plan, and that they ment of Bishops ; the publica. required us to yield an unlimited tion here alluded to, was made at negative power in this business, the very time that I advocated equal to a positive power, and this the above-mentioned plan, as it for the avowed purpose of our appeared in the Dublin Herald, maintaining the establishment in as early as June, 1808. It did not Church as well as in the State ; only at that time reprobate allin- which, if we could conscientiously fluence of the King in the appoint- do, we should be idiots not to ment of Bishops, but all power conform They even offered or influence of any Uncatholic

a Formule to this effect, for our Government over any portion of signature, which myself and Irish the Catholic Church: for, in ad- Prelates firmly rejected. Thus, mitting the former, I conceived my Lord, the very basis of my that my plan would have guarded negociation with statesmen have against the latter. It is false that ing been altered, consistency no the appointment, institutions, or

less than conscience required that missions, as it is called, of Catho. I should break it off; since which lic Prelates, and other Clergy. occurrence, the public is witness men, after they have been validly that I have spoken to the point consecrated or ordained, is no es.

as loudly and as plainly as I could sential part of our religion ; for it speak, so false is your Lordship's is as essential to it as orders thenı- charge against me of deceit and selves are.

To be as brief as pos- prevarication in this business. sible, after the fatal precipitate

To conclude, my Lord, the proposal of a negative power, or Emancipation will be granted; Veto, had been made hy our

but let' not your Lordship or friends in Parliament, being de- your fellow-labourers of the

New sirous on my part of going along Popery warehouse in Piccadilly with them, as far as possible, i be alarmed; it will be granted, devised four different checks, by not from a regard to our Church, means of which I conceived it but to yours. Those able statésmight be restrained to the only men, who, like Lord Grenville, purpose

for which it was then rea are the chief ornament and super


« PreviousContinue »