116] ANNUAL REGISTER, 1S14. 



Speaker by expressing his displea- 

 sure at " the momentous changes 

 proposed for our constitution," it 

 would have been a high breach of 

 their privileges; and he held it 

 incontrovertible, that what it was 

 not lawful for the king to notice, 

 it was not lawful for the Speaker 

 to express. The hon. member 

 then adverted to precedents, and 

 asked, had a single instance of a 

 Speaker been adduced, so incau- 

 tious, so subservient to the crown, 

 or so regardless of the privileges of 

 parliament, as to communicate 

 to the throne that a dangerous 

 proposition had been made in 

 that House, but which had not 

 been assented to. He concluded 

 with saying, that not wishing to 

 pass a vote of censure, but desiring 

 that some motion should pass 

 which should express disapproba- 

 tion unmingled with severity, he 

 would vote for the motion. 



Mr, Plunkett highly compli- 

 mented Mr. Grant for his eloquent 

 and excellent speech , and em ployed 

 the same strain of argument with 

 great forceand copiousness. Among 

 other strong censures of theSpeaker, 

 he said, " Sir, in taking the liberty 

 to report the opinions of that Com- 

 mittee, did you truly report them ? 

 On the contrary, you totally mis- 

 represented them. The opposition 

 to the proposition rejected was 

 grounded on a variety of reasons. 

 Some opposed it in consequence of 

 the intemperate conduct of certain 

 public bodies in Ireland ; others, 

 because of the writings which had 

 been diffused in that country ; some 

 wished the change to be deferred 

 uptil a time of peace ; others were 

 desirous that the see of Rome should 

 be first consulted. With all this 

 variety of sentiment, how. Sir, 

 were vou competent to^ say what 



was the opinion by which a ma:- 

 jority of this House on that occa- 

 sion was swayed ?" ♦* Will any 

 man (said the hon. member) de- 

 clare upon his honour that he 

 thinks you were authorized, on a 

 decision by a majority of four, to 

 represent to the crown that the 

 question was put finally at rest ? 

 Was it not evident that the subject 

 must return to be considered by 

 parliament ; and if so brought 

 back, with what impartiality could 

 parliament proceed upon it, if by 

 any indirect means the artillery of 

 royal influence was brought to 

 bear on its march ?" He further 

 dwelt upon the injustice done to 

 the members who supported the 

 bills, by the implication, in the 

 Speaker's speech, of an intention in 

 some persons to introduce changes 

 destructive " of the laws by which 

 the throne, the parliament, and 

 the government of this country are 

 made fundamentally Protestant ;" 

 an intention which, for himself, he 

 loudly disclaimed. He concluded 

 with observing, that the s^jeech 

 complained of v/as wholly uncalled 

 for, and that there was nothing in 

 the bill which he presented, or in 

 any other bills which had passed in 

 the session, to give occasion to it. 



Mr. Canning, though one of the 

 minority who had been friendly to 

 the Catholic claims, and hoping 

 again to join in promoting their 

 cause, could not concur in either 

 the direct or implied censure of the 

 speech, as he conceived that the 

 Speaker was only exercising a dis- 

 cretion vested in him. He pursued 

 this idea at some length ; and 

 though he wished the speech de- 

 livered had not been such as it 

 was, he argued that the Speaker 

 ought not to be called to account 

 for practising what was authorized 



