32] ANNUAL REGISTER, 1S12. 



A number of other lords after- 

 wards spoke both for and against 

 the motion ; but as their speeches 

 chiefly consisted in recapitulations 

 of the arguments already advanced, 

 it does not seem necessary to no- 

 tice them individually. After a 

 very late sitting, the House divided 

 on the motion ; when the numbers 

 •were, contents, 42 ; proxies, 37 ; 

 total, 79 : non-contents, 86 ; prox- 

 ies, 76; total, 162. Majority 

 against the motion, 83. 



In the House of Commons, on 

 Feb. 3, a similar motion for ap- 

 pointing a committee on the state 

 of Ireland, was made by lord 

 Morpeth. Of the debate which 

 ensued, and which was still longer 

 and more copious than that in the 

 House of Lords, being continued 

 by adjournment to the following 

 day, it would be impossible to give 

 even a summary view without oc- 

 cupying more of our pages than 

 we can spare from other purposes. 

 In general, it embraced all the to- 

 pics discussed in the other House, 

 relative to abstract right and poli- 

 tical expediency, to the hazards 

 attending the granting or the re- 

 . fusing of the catholic claims, and 

 to the conduct of the Irish govern- 

 ment in its interference respecting 

 the delegation of the catholics. 

 One of the most admired speeches 

 ^•was that of Mr. Canning, who, 

 .taking the ground opened by mar- 

 quis Wellesley in the Lords, main- 

 tained with great force, and with 

 much historical illustration, the 

 political wisdom of granting the 

 catholics an eligibility to all the 

 .offices in the state from which 

 they were still excluded, but at the 

 same time deprecated the agita- 

 tion of the question in parliament 

 till men's minds were suffered to 



cool. The other speakers, however, 

 comprehending almost the whole 

 debating force of the House, took a 

 decided part either for, or against, 

 the object of the motion ; and on 

 a division at a very late hour there 

 appeared, for lord Morpeth's mo- 

 tion, 135 ; against it, 229 ; majo- 

 rity, 94 — a proportion considera- 

 bly less than that in the other 

 House. 



It is observable, that although 

 the terms of these motions includ- 

 ed a consideration of the general 

 state of Ireland, yet the subject of 

 the catholics was alone the matter 

 of discussion ; whence these de- 

 bates may be considered as only a 

 renewal of those which had before 

 occurred on direct questions rela- 

 tive to the same topics. 



On Jan. 28, Mr, Bankes gave 

 notice in the House of Commons, 

 that the bill to prohibit the grant- 

 ing of offices in reversion being to 

 expire on the 5th of February, it 

 was his intention to render it a 

 permanent measure, and he there- 

 fore moved for leave to bring in a 

 new one for that purpose; which 

 was accordingly given. 



Mr. Bankes, on Feb. 7th, having 

 moved the second reading of his 

 bill, Mr. Dundas rose, and said 

 that he should expect more sub- 

 stantial reasons than any he had 

 yet heard from the honourable 

 gentleman before he could give 

 his vote for making that pernja- 

 iient, which had liitherto been only 

 temporary. He understood it to 

 have originated in a wis-h of the 

 finance committee, that those sine- 

 cure places might not be granted 

 in reversion, which they might 

 think it expedient to abolish, and 

 therefore a suspension of the power 

 of the crown had been asked. Whs 



it 



