52 



ANNUAL RE 



what was required in the peti- 

 tion. 



LordMulgrave expressed himself 

 friendly to the object of the petition, 

 founded, as it was, upon an en- 

 lightened policy, which would heal 

 all discontents, and leare tlie whole 

 strength and resources of the em- 

 pire disposable against the common 

 enemy. 



Lord Camden was decidedly of 

 opinion that, in the present state of 

 the feelings of the country, there 

 would be great danger in granting 

 those privileges required by the peti- 

 tion ; as that could not be done 

 without creating great discontent 

 amongst other classes of dissenters, 

 as well as the members of the es- 

 tablished church ; he therefore de- 

 precated the discussion, but if it must 

 proceed, he had made up his miiul 

 to oppose going into the committee. 



The Bishop of Durham said, that, 

 in attcntiTcly considering this peti- 

 tion, he had ondeuToured to dis- 

 cover what extention of personal 

 toleration was asked, that would be 

 consistent with our civil and reli- 

 gious establishment. Not what the 

 catholics would have given to us ; 

 but what we, with safety, would 

 give to them : — not what we might 

 with justice refuse : but what could, 

 in kindness, be granted, as the otter- 

 ing of affection and good will. He 

 Avished to improve and ameliorate 

 the condition of the mass of the peo- 

 ple of Ireland; but, in the object 

 of this petition, ht. saw notliingbut 

 what was calculated to give power, 

 privileges, and influence to a very 

 few opulent individuals amongst 

 them. In adverting to the superior 

 numbers of papists in Ireland ; 

 to the peculiar powers which the 

 clergy exercised over them ; to the 

 general connection of thtir clergy 



GISTER, 1805. 



with a foreign power ; and to the 1 

 degraded and servile dependance of 

 the head of their diurch, upon a 

 state so very hostile to this country; 

 he did not think that the prayer of 

 the petition could be granted to 

 those civil and religious establish- 

 ments. 



Lord Redesdale saw a great dif- 

 ference between the presbytcrians 

 of Scotland and the catholics of 

 Ireland ; as the former were ineligi- 

 ble to the higiiest oflices of thesta; ■, 

 until they took those tests, which 

 the latter, claiming the same oliices, 

 refused to do : in the one case, th^ ro 

 was no dania;er. but, in the other, 

 every thing was to be apprehended. 

 In Ireland, the catholic hierarchy 

 retained extraordinary powers, as 

 the reformation was never compieie 

 in that country ; and in a petition, 

 once presenteil to tiic house ol com- 

 mons of Irclaiul, tJie catholic 

 clergy put their signature:, as secu- 

 lar bishops, and assumed to them- 

 selves ail the titles and dignities of 

 the church. Upon the whole, until 

 their priests allowed them to take 

 the oaths prescribed, he considered 

 the catholics, of Ireland as un- 

 worthy of what was now asked in 

 their behalf. A conversation then 

 ensued, the result of wiiich was, 

 that the debate was adjourned till 

 Monday. 



When the subject was resuii;iil, 

 on the 13th, the e;arls of Suholk 

 and Oxford spoke in support of 

 the petition, and the earl of Buck' 

 inghamshire against it. Lord Carl- 

 ton observed, that the main object 

 of the petition m as power, and as he 

 thought the Ivoman catholics of 

 Ireland had already as much aS 

 they ought to possess, under a pro* 

 testant government, he should op- 

 pose the petition. To bestow snch 

 3 power 



