signed, as he conceived there was no opportunity for deliberation amidst the confusion of public meetings.

The Duke of PORTLAND then moved the Second Reading of the Catholic Peers' Bill, in a short speech, in which he argued that it was incumbent on those who opposed the Bill to shew that some danger was to be apprehended from Roman Catholic Peers sitting in that House: if this was not done, their Lordships were bound to agree to a measure which only restored those Peers to their rights.

Lord COLCHESTER opposed the Bill. He pleaded, that the exclusion of Catholics from Parliament was a principle of the Revolution, which was again recognized in the articles of the Scottish Union, He declared himself in favour of the most perfect toleration, but expressed his fears of Roman Catholic principles, and his alarm at the revival of the Jesuits and the monastic institutions, and his disapprobation of any other than Protestant worship in our fleets and armies. When a door was once opened to innovations by his Bill, he did not know what demands might be made. He concluded by moving that the Bill be read a second time this day six months.

Lord ERSKINE said he would rather perish than give his consent to any measure which could violate or weaken the constitution, and he supported the present Bill because it was calculated to strengthen the constitution, by extending its benefits. There had been no idea of excluding Catholic Peers till the 30th of Charles II., and the whole foundation of that was the Popish Plot, which had no other foundation than the testimony of Titus Oates, whose discoveries were not, as had been said, the act of God, but the instigation of the Devil. Circumstances and cases no longer existed to justify, or even afford a pretence for, the exclusion that was then thought neces sary.

The LORD CHANCELLOR was of opinion that this Bill demanded nothing more or less than unlimited concession to the Roman Catholics. He wanted securities for the Protestant Church of England. He had never seen such nonsense as the Bill of last year contained; the House had never such trash submitted to it before. If the constitution were violated by passing such a Bill as this, he could not tell what might happen in a month. With respect to that gentleman Titus Oates, he had no doubt he was a scoundrel, yet he had been most scurvily used. He and his judge Jeffries, were both unworthy of credit; he knew not which was worse. The acts now proposed to be disturbed were fundamental, essen

tial, and for ever: a Protestant Church, a Protestant Legislature, and a Protestant King. If Roman Catholics were admitted into the House of Peers, they must of necessity sit in the House of Commons. His Lordship appealed to the popular feeling on this subject. In a short time, he said, it would be of very little consequence to what he did and what he did not consent, but he would not consent to the adoption of such a measure as this; and if these were the last words he should ever speak, he would say, that were this measure carried, the laws and liberties of the country were gone.

Earl GREY animadverted upon the legal learning, indistinctly applied, and the high and astounding words of the last speaker. He contended that the exclusion of which so much had been said, was not a principle of the Revolution, but an exception to all its principles, an exception springing from over-anxiety. He argued that the present Bill was to be considered on its own merits. He called for proof of the necessity of continuing the odious restriction. By a large review of the history of this country and of Europe, he shewed that the Catholic religion was not considered to contain principles dangerous to the state. He entered into the discussion of the Corporation and Test Acts, and the Popish Plot, and examined the principles of the Revolution and the articles of the Union with Scotland. He then expatiated upon the Act of 1817, which opened every rank in the army and navy to Roman Catholics: for proposing less than this in 1807, he and his colleagues were resisted by the learned Lord and others, who raised an outcry of the danger of giving the power of the sword to Roman Catholics; yet in a few short years, this very power was given by those that had been so clamorous against it, and without the exaction of a single security. In conclusion, he delivered his opinion, that whether this Bill were or were not passed, the discussion of the general question must take place, and he hoped at no distant period.

The Earl of Liverpool was willing to discuss this Bill on its own merits. If nothing else were to be done, then he admitted that this Bill ought to pass; but no measure could be more mischievous to the Roman Catholics than passing this Bill, if it were not intended to go further. The Roman Catholic Peer had no right to complain of not being allowed to sit and vote, when, supposing the King, from couscientious motives, were to change his religion, he must descend from the throne of his ancestors.

Lord GRENVILLE said, that his noble

friend (Lord Liverpool) had called upon those Lords who on former occasions had been the friends of the general measure, to consider whether any advantage could be derived to it from the success of this; now he, as one of those who had always been favourable to the concession of the Catholic claims, believed that from passing this Bill, the greatest of all benefits would accrue to the country-the benefit of doing justice. In comparison with this, he set at nought all which they had heard in the way of precedent and authority; all the statements and documents which had been quoted; all the penal enactments for which the Statute-Book had been referred to, whether these enactments were contained in this or that form of words. His answer to all this was, "Be just, and fear not." His noble and learned friend (Lord Chancellor) had asked, how they could ever infringe upon the law so much as to admit these Catholic Peers into their House? But where was the law which excluded them? No such law every passed. It never could have entered into the mind of man to pass one of the kind. Admitted they might still be; but their admission would be accompanied by certain tests which perjury and iniquity had caused to be imposed upon them-tests which were required to be taken in those times when various other restraints, disabilities, and penalties operated on the Roman Catholic community, and tests so repugnant to the spirit of their faith, that no one would dare to propose them to a Roman Catholic. His Lordship concluded an able and impressive speech by declaring, that this was a question of right to he done, which their Lordships had too long delayed to do; and that it was because the question had been treated as one of mere expediency instead of one of distributive justice, that he had stated the grounds of his supporting the Bill so much at length.

Lord REDESDALE contended that the legislature had the same right to exclude Peers from the House of Lords, as to exclude private persons (being Catholics) from the House of Commons. One of the first duties of the legislature was to protect the state-religion. With the question, neither right nor justice had any thing to do. If the present measure was

453

upon a King or upon a placeman, was intended for the good of the people. The people had said that they could not with any security or confidence intrust their interests to a Catholic. When, therefore, a monarch became a Catholic, they said, he shall no longer be our King; he shall forfeit by his conversion his right to the throne, and another shall take his place. But the people who said this in the case of the King, had not so decided in respect to the excluded Peers, for whose admission into Parliament the Bill was introduced. They had not destroyed, they had only suspended their rights. They did not pass a bill of attainder against them, and deprive them of their property and rank; they only said in certain circumstances it was not expedient that they should exercise their legislative functions. The nation, therefore, which passed the Act excluding the Peers, without attainting their blood or transferring their privileges to others for being Catholics, and which deprived the King of his throne for being so, intended to treat differently the religious opinions of the Sovereign and the Peer, and meant to suspend, not to annul, the privileges of the latter."

On a Division, the numbers were on the motion for the second reading, Contents,

Ireland must fall.

Lord HOLLAND concluded the debate with an admirable speech, in which he tore in pieces the sophistry by which the Bill had been opposed, and ridiculed most successfully the fears of its enemies. He ended with the following observation, which he thought very material to the question: "All power, whether conferred

the Church.

IN the debate on the "Influence of the Crown," when Mr. BROUGHAM'S Resolution (introduced by a splendid speech) was lost by a majority of 216 to 101, Mr. H. G. BENNETT made the following, amongst other striking observations:"Another point of view in which it was not possible to avoid putting the question

of the influence, of the Crown, was its influence through the Church. That reverend body always, perhaps from good motives, went with the Crown, even in matters to which it should seem difficult for any persons, having religious feelings, to follow it. Not speaking of the establishment of Ireland, where the nobility parcelled out the lands of the kingdom among the younger branches of their families, under the names of bishops and archbishops-where there was a church of 500,000 Protestauts with a body of ecclesiastics richer even than those of Spain had been-a body of ecclesiastics having less to do and more to receive than any in the world. There were in England alone in the gift of the Crown, 2 archbishopricks, 24 bishopricks, 38 deaneries, 46 prebends and 1020 livings. He would ask whether the gift of this enormous patronage had not necessarily an immense effect on the country?"

JULY 24.

Ancient British Histories. THE CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER proposed an address to His Majesty, representing the defective state of the ancient history of the kingdom, and suggesting that an edition, published under royal authority, would be most honourable to his reign and most useful in furthering the general dissemination of knowledge; further praying directions for the publication of such an edition, and assuring His Majesty that Parliament would provide for the expense. Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH applauded the motion, and recommended Dr. Petrie, Keeper of the Records at the Tower, as an individual well qualified, by a life of study, to perform the work in question. The Resolution was unanimously agreed to.

Same day, on the third reading of the LOTTERY BILL, the House divided, when the numbers were, For it, 32. Against it, 11. Majority, 21.

FOREIGN.

FRANCE.

THE Clerical Almanack of France, for 1822, states the number of priests in actual employment to be 35,286, of whom 14,870 are above 60 years of age: 4,156 have been ordained during the last year.

CARNOT is living in a very retired manner near Magdeburg. He is engaged, it is said, in composing a work, entitled "Historical Memoirs of the French Revolution, and the Events of the last Thirty Years."

The Abbé TESSIER has published a retractation, addressed to the Bishop of Mans, in which he declares, that after thirty years of errors he renounces the oaths he has taken, and he regrets having been ordained by the constitutional Bishop of Sarthe. He further deplores two marriages he successively contracted; he detests the faults which followed this forgetfulness of his state, and begs the Bishop to receive his repentance, and to give this representation all the publicity possible.

GERMANY.

A circumstance which has lately occurred in Brunswick gives the people of that state additional reason to regret their

temporary subjection to the King of Hanover. M. de WETTE, a celebrated theologian of Germany, held a professorship in a Prussian University at the time Kotzebue was assassinated by Sandt, and having written a letter of condolence to the mother of Sandt, (who, we believe, had been his pupil,) he was forced in Consequence to resign his situation. The people of the town of Brunswick having the right to elect their own clergy, and entertaining, in common with the rest of their countrymen, the greatest regard and esteem for M. de Wette, on the occasion of a late vacancy in one of their churches, chose M. de Wette to fill it. Knowing the state of destitution in which he was, and his inability to provide himself with what his establishment would demand, with a spirit and feeling which reflects the highest honour on them, they determined to furnish his house and supply him with whatever else might be necessary to enable him to appear among them in such a manner as his station rendered necessary, and a general contribution was immediately begun, in which some gave money, others such articles as they could spare, and in which all, from the highest to the lowest, eagerly participated. To their great astonishment, however, when all this was done, an interdict was issued by the Government which refused to ratify the election of M. de Wette. Fortunately for him, he received immediately afterwards, a call to one of the churches of Bern, in Switzerland. The mean and vindictive spirit displayed on this occasion has, however, excited a very indignant feeling throughout the north of Germany-Times, July 20.

A law has been passed in the Duchy of BADEN, granting to the Catholic clergy the same allowance for their maintenance heretofore enjoyed by the Protestant.