On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
£ ' ioub disputes Mpbu earth , it would be impossible to convey them in bis present bark . ? the Evil One described the earth to be deluged with blood upon religious questions : father was opposed to son , brother to brother , landlord to tenantin a word , human nature was at war upon points of religion . If Erasmus were , alive n&w , he could not more accurately describe the existing state of things .
Father wad opposed to son , brother to brother , landlord to tenant—ereu the fair sex took part in the quarrel ( laughter , in which the ladies seated near the Throne joinedj ; anil every body was crying out on behalf of humanity and the poor suffering ; Irish , although tfee Irtish , as a body , had no more to do with it than tire people of the Mogul empire . '' Lord- Sidmouth had other remedies
than concession : he would have the Irish emancipated from poverty , ignorance , and bkgoiry ; he would give them an officer similar to an English Lord Lieutenant , to control the magistracy ; and be would abolish absenteeism . - Lord Liverpool saw little danger to the Church of Ireland , and none at all to the Church of England , from passing the Bill ,
: - Lord Tenterdsn , the Lord Chief Justice of England , gave his opinion on the constitutional law of the case : be admitted that . Parliament had the power to -alter the law ; nevertheless he opposed the Bill , as insufficient to any good . : Earl Grey supported the measure ; ^ nd , in the course of a long speech , con * sidered the whole of the objections which had been urged against it , ou the ground of the irrevocable nature of the Bill of
Rights , the Act of Settlement , and the various measures which constituted the Revolution of 1688 . He contended warmly for the indefeasible right of Parliament to alter and amend those statutes . He shewed that they had been frequently altered—nay , that some of their most important provisions had been actually repealed . He then adverted to the period of 1807—the time when , as Secretary Of State , he introduced a measure
for allowiug Roman Catholics to lill the ranks of officers in the army . Declining to notice the ait ? by which the Ministry of which he formed a part had been driven from power , —ou the pretence that the throne and altar , and the couutry itself , were endangered by thi « measure , —he called the attention of the House to . the fact , that the very Ministry that succeeded them introduced a bill foe the admission of Catholics into the army ; and at the present day a Roman
Untitled Article
Catholic might be commauder-in chie& So much for the feara which their admission to power ought to be allowed to produce . He next proceeded to examine the alleged irrevocability of the . articles of Uuion - between England and Scotland ; and shewed that in a variety of cases respecting the church government and church patronage of that country ,
repeated instances had oeenrpea in which those articles were directly contravened . He likewise shewed that the Legislature paid no respect to them in a variety of other cases . From the whole of which he inferred , that there was nothing either in the principles of the Rerolutiou , the articles of the Union , or auy acts sub * sequent or anterior to those , which tied
up . the lianas of the , > . Legislature from dealing with th ? subject Holder consideration . . He then proceeded to an examinatton of the Coronation Oath ; and endeavoured to shew , by a variety of documents , the sense in which King fVViiliam took 4 t , and the sense in which it had been proposed to that Monarch . The gist of his argument on . this topic was ,
tbat the Coronation Oath was taken , and administered to the King , for the purpose of liinitiug his power in his execuiive capacity , and not at all for the purpose of disabling the Crown from giving its sanction to any measures which the two Houses of Parliament might agree to for the relief of his Majesty ' s llomau Catholic subjects . He adverted
to the Treaty of Limerick , and to the undertaking therein ratified by King William , that Catholics should be admitted to Parliament , and that he would consent to any act of the Legislature requisite for accomplishing that object . He then entered at considerable leiig ^ U iuto the argument of expediency . It bad bceu doubted whether this measure would
give tranquillity to Ireland . No man could look into the womb of time and say what fruit would come from the seed they were now sowing . All they could do , as feeble mortals , was to come to the best decision their judgment dictated . But let what would be the result of this
measure , he was sure that without it our . position would be very dangerous . What could our ablest generals do iu case of a foreign war , with the eutiie population of Ireland iu favour of the enemy ? With the fleets of America on oue side and those , of France on the
other , our chance of preventing ft « jmvajuou oi Ireland , particularly after the facilities our pusillanimous policy had giveu Fia . uce by the abandonment of Spain , would be exceedingly small in-
Untitled Article
4 &H Intelligence . — Cuthotie QutstiotC
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), May 2, 1829, page 366, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2572/page/70/
-