the penalties of the law which varied according to the offence, from a small fine to imprisonment for life. The The act of the fifth of Elizabeth added retrospective force to its provisions; so that all persons in holy orders, or holding a college degree, or concerned in the practice or execution of the laws, was to take the oath of Supremacy under pain of high treason after three months' refusal. The difficulty of tracing home the offence of privately celebrating the services of the Church of Rome led, in the twenty-third of Elizabeth, to a provision that all persons who did not come to the service of the Church of England, unless they heard that service at home, should forfeit twenty pounds per month, or be imprisoned till they conformed. This Act continued the provisions of former Acts, which made it high treason for persons to become reconciled, or to reconcile others, to the Church of Rome. Three years after, all popish priests were ordered to quit the kingdom, on pain of being adjudged traitors; and in the thirtythird year of the queen, popish recusants were confined to particular places of residence, and no subject of her majesty was allowed to harbour any person of whose conformity he was not assured. It would be most unjust to Queen Elizabeth, and her ministers and parliament, to view these statutes and penalties abstractedly; for at that peried Popery was essentially treason, and to guard against its encroachments was as necessary for the stability of the state as of the church. To acknowledge the pope's supremacy was to maintain that he had a right to dethrone the lawful queen; and there were not wanting a large body of persons well disposed to carry this abominable doctrine into effect. Self-preservation, therefore, independently of all other motives, would of necessity require a considerable degree of coercion, to prevent a recurrence of those fearful evils, civil as well as spiritual, from which the kingdom had just escaped. It is not our intention, or compa tible with our limits, to trace the legislative proceedings of the following reigns relative to Popery up to our own times. The four succeeding Stuarts were all averse to the infliction of the existing laws against the Papists, and some of them were Papists themselves. In the reign of Charles the Second, the Papists became involved in the statutes which also opposed the Protestant Dissenters. In particular, they were affected by the Test Act of 1673, which rendered the reception of the sacrament in the Church of England, and the declaration against transubstantiation, preliminary conditions for the enjoyment of temporal offices of trust. Five years after, the last link was riveted by the application of the exclusionary principle to both houses of parliament. No very material changes took place during the reigns of William and Mary, Anne, or George the First and Second. The Toleration Act was not allowed to shelter Roman Catholics; who still continued proscribed, excluded from offices, subject to severe penalties for exercising the rites of their religion, and to the charge of treason for making converts to their faith. These severe laws were not indeed enforced, but they continued to disgrace the statute book. In Ireland, the laws were much the same, or rather more severe; a natural consequence of the hazard in which Protestantism had been placed by the formidable machinations of the Papists. No Papist could keep a school, or go abroad for education, or marry with a Protestant holding an estate, or be a guardian to a child, or purchase land, or retain arms, or hold an estate. In case of parents being of different religions, the children might be taken from the Catholic parent to be educated a Protestant; and the eldest son of a Papist, by calling himself a Protestant, might secure all his father's estate to himself, to the exclusion of his brothers and sisters. Religion could not require, justice could not sanction, policy itself could not ask for enactments like these. And so at length began to think some wise and good men, who succeeded in procuring a remission of some of these rigours, till at length not only was the statute-book cleared of its heavier penalties, but, reverting to what many among us consider an extreme on the other side, the Roman Catholic has been restored to equal privileges with his Protestant neighbour, and is amenable to the laws only so DATE. OBSERVATIONS. far as he offends against the peace of society. We copy the following tabular digest, which appears to have been drawn up with care, of all the proceedings that have taken place in Parliament on the subject of the general laws affecting the RomanCatholics of Great Britain and Ireland, from the period of the first act passed in 1778 to the present time; concluding with a view of the progress of the late Relief Bill through both houses of the legis lature. 1778. Irish Act.-18th Geo. III. cap. 60, repealed so much of the 11th and 12th William III. c. 4, as affected the inheritance or purchase of property by Roman Catholics; as also the clauses authorising the prosecution of priests and Jesuits, and the imprisonment for life of Papists keeping schools. [In 1779, exactly half a century from the final success of the Catholic Question, Mr. Fox brought the subject forward in the English House of Commons, and it was negatived by a large majority.] 1791. 31st Geo. III. c. 32, prescribed a new declaration and oath in lieu of the oath of supremacy contained in the 1st William and Mary, sec. 1, cap. 8, and 1st Geo. I. sec. 2, cap. 13, and for refusing to take which oath of supremacy, persons had been subject to certain penalties. The same act (31st Geo. III.) also tolerated, under certain regulations, the religious worship of Roman Catholics, and their schools for education. Upon taking the oath prescribed in the new act, Papists were exempted from the penalties of the 1st William and Mary, sec. 1, c. 9, for approaching within ten miles of London; peers were no longer liable to be prosecuted under the 30th Charles II. sec. 2, c. 1, for entering his Majesty's house or presence; Catholics were permitted to practise the law, upon taking the oath; and the double land-tax (in Ireland) imposed on Catholics was removed; and they were relieved from other penalties and disabilities. [The benefit of this act was extended to the Scotch 1793. 33d Geo. III. conferred the elective franchise in Ireland, Motions since the Union. 1805. May 10.-Lord Grenville: motion for committee on Irish petition ... May 13.-Mr. Fox: a similar motion ... 1807. March 5.-Bill brought in by Lord Grenville, to extend so much of the act of 1793 to England, as threw open the army and navy to Roman Catholics. The king opposed to it requires a pledge from Lords Grenville and Grey Parliament dissolved: Lord Grenville's 512 125...126 264...221 June 22.-Mr. Canning: to consider next session ... ... 1813. Feb. 25.-Mr. Grattan: resolution for committee. May 11.-Sir J. C. Hippisley moved for a committee: May 24-In committee on the bill, the Speaker (having ... 187...235 Division on Mr. Duigenan's motion, that the bill be read 203...245 251...247 147...228 141...172 [Bill then given up by Mr. Ponsonby.] 1815. May 31.-Sir H. Parnell: motion for committee 1816. May 21.-Mr. Grattan: ditto 1817. May 9.-Ditto ... [In this session a bill was introduced by the Liver- [New Parliament,] 1819. May 4.-Mr. Grattan: motion for committee [New Parliament.] 1821. Feb. 28.-Mr. Plunkett: ditto Bill brought in division on third reading April 16.-Bill moved in Upper House by Lord Do- 221...245 241...243 227...221 216...197 120...159 ... 249...244 Bill brought in: division on third reading 248...227 June 22.-Moved in Upper House by Duke of Portland 129...271 1823. April 28.-Mr. Plunkett's motion for a committee; Sir ... ... ... 1822. April 30.-Mr. Canning: for leave to bring in a bill enabling Roman-Catholic peers to sit in Parliament 1824. Divisions on bills to enable Catholics to vote at elections and to act as magistrates ... [An act passed this session, to permit the Duke of Norfolk to execute his office of Earl Marshal.] 1825. April 19.-Second reading of Sir F. Burdett's Relief Bill, with the disfranchising and elergy pensioning wings... [No division on the third reading] May 18.-Second reading in Upper House 1827. March 5.-Sir F. Burdett: motion for committee 1828. May 8.-Ditto (three days' debate) ... May 16.-Conference with Lords agreed to. June 9.-Marquis of Lansdowne's motion on Commons ... [A bill was introduced this session by Mr. G. 137...182 1829. Feb. 5.-Recommendation from the throne at the open- March 5.-A bill suppressing the Irish-Catholic Associ- Bill of Relief then introduced. It abolished all the civil ... ... ... March 17.-Division on second reading of Catholic 112...217 The mi The Disfranchisement Bill was also read a third April 13.-Royal Assent given by commission to the It is not our purpose to relate the various proceedings in parliament during this long and arduous struggle of half a century. To do so with adequate illustrations from the speeches on both sides would occupy a large volume. We shall hasten on, therefore, to the debates of the present memorable year; only premising a brief notice of the origin of the contest. The partial relief granted in 1778 sprung from a petition from the English Roman-Catholics to the king, couched in a spirit of loyalty and moderation, which forms a strong contrast to some of the subsequent proceedings of their brethren of Ireland. "Our exclusion," said they, "from many of the benefits of the constitution has not diminished our reverence for it. We behold with satisfaction the felicity of our fellow-subjects; and we partake of the general prosperity which results from an institution so full of wisdom. We have patiently We have patiently submitted to such restrictions and discouragements as the legislature thought expedient. We have thankfully received such relaxations of the rigour of the laws as the mildness of an enlightened age, and the benignity of the British government have gradually produced; and we submissively wait, without presum. ing to suggest either time or measure, for such other indulgence as those happy causes cannot fail in their own season to effect." It was in consequence of the interest excited by this address that Sir George Saville brought forward his motion. Its success, and the intention of next year extending to the Catholics of Scotland the relief thus granted to their English brethren, gave rise to the lamentable riots in 1780. But the machine had been set in motion, and nothing could stop it till it had worked out the objects of its construction. His Majesty's late message at the opening of parliament, Feb. 5, embraced, as related to Ireland and the Roman Catholics, two particulars; the suppression of the Catholic Association, and the introduction of a bill for Catholic relief. In the course of the debates, each of these measures was often alluded to in the discussions upon the other; but our present object being with the latter, we shall confine our extracts from the speeches to that question exclusively. The Catholic Association had become an instrument of seditious agitation, and might probably have proved a cause of rebellion. Its legal suppression was a most indispensable measure; but was anticipated by its own voluntary self-extinction as soon as the promise of the relief bill was announced. The following was the passage in his Majesty's speech. "His Majesty confidently relies on the wisdom and on the support of his Parliament; and his Majesty feels assured that you will commit to him such powers as may enable his Majesty to maintain his just authority. this essential object shall have been accom"His Majesty recommends, that when plished, you should take into your deliberate consideration the whole condition of Ireland; and that you should review his Roman-Catholic subjects. the laws which impose civil disabilities on "You will consider whether the removal of those disabilities can be effected consistently with the full and permanent security of our Establishments in Church and State, with the maintenance of the Reformed religion established by law, and of the rights and privileges of the bishops and of the clergy of this realm, and of the churches committed to their charge. "These are institutions which must ever be held sacred in this Protestant kingdom, and which it is the duty and the determi nation of his Majesty to preserve inviolate. mends to you to enter upon the consider"His Majesty most earnestly recomation of a subject of such paramount importance, deeply interesting to the best feelings of his people and involving the tranquillity and concord of the United Kingdom, with the temper and the moderation which will best insure the successful issue of your deliberations.” On moving the address some preliminary discussion arose in both houses. |