STATE PAPERS. 



'A^il 



regard to present practice) is re- 

 quired from me, by the strong 

 protest which you have made 

 against any inference to be drawn 

 from any declaration of your's 

 " that it is, or ever has been your 

 opinion,that tmderno circumstances 

 it would be possible to make any 

 alteration in the laws respecting 

 the Roman Catholics." To this 

 protest, you have added an assur- 

 ance, " That upon the last occa- 

 sion, on which the subject was dis- 

 cussed in parliament, you expressly 

 stated that circumstances might 

 arise in which, in your judgment, 

 some alteration in those laws 

 would be advisable." 



I confess freely to you, that I had 

 always understood your recorded 

 opinion on this subject in a very 

 different sense : I had supposed, 

 that you considered the disabilities 

 imposed by statute upon the Roman 

 Catholics, not as temporary and oc- 

 casional securities, against a tempo- 

 rary and occasional danger,butasan 

 integral and permanent part of the 

 constitution in church and state, 

 established at the revolution. 



In this opinion, I had always un- 

 derstood, that several of the prin- 

 cipal members of the present cabi- 

 net concurred with you ; and that 

 you felt, in common, an apprehen- 

 sion, that the removal of any im- 

 portant part of this system of re- 

 straint would endanger thefounda- 

 tions of the establishment of our 

 laws, liberties, and religion. 



Viewing in this light your sen- 

 timents, and those of the respecta- 

 ble persons to whom I refer, I am 

 persuaded that I shall not be sus- 

 pected of intending to cast any re- 

 flection upon the honour or ho- 

 nesty of those principles, or of the 

 persons who maintain them. 



I have ever considered those 

 principles to be pure and honest in 

 the minds in which 1 supposed 

 them to reside ; and, while I gave 

 full credit to their sincerity, I la- 

 mented their erroneous foundation 

 and dangerous tendency. 



I must further declare, that from 

 some accident, I did not hear the 

 statement in parliament to which 

 you refer, as having been made by 

 you, on the last occasion in the 

 House of Lords. 



I now, however, understand your 

 opinion to be, that circumstances 

 may arise, in which, in your judg- 

 ment, some alteration would be ad- 

 visable in the laws affecting the 

 Roman Catholics. 



I should be desirous of urging 

 the same inquiry respecting cir- 

 cumstances, which you have made 

 respecting securities ; and 1 should 

 be anxious to hear the specific 

 statement of all, or any of those 

 circumstances, under which you 

 would advise any alteration in the 

 laws respecting the Roman Ca- 

 tholics. 



The explanation which you re- 

 quire respecting securities, is at- 

 tainable only by a full consideration 

 and discussion of the whole sub- 

 ject ; and I therefore view the de- 

 clared intention of resisting the 

 first step towards such a discussion, 

 as an effectual barrier against that 

 explanation, which you consider to 

 be the necessary preliminary to 

 any alteration of the existing sta- 

 tutes. 



The details of your reasoning on 

 this part of the question render the 

 prospect of any settlement utterly 

 hopeless. You require a change 

 in the state of the opinions, feel- 

 ings, conduct, and temper of the 

 Roman Catholics, as a preliminary 



even 



