صور الصفحة
النشر الإلكتروني

evil is tolerable ; without it, no advantage is desirable. In this, as in all things, we submit ourselves to the paramount authority of Parliament; and we shall acquiesce in what is given, as we do in what is taken away. But this is the boon we ask. We hunger and we thirst for the Constitution of our country. If it shall be deemed otherwise, and shall be determined that we are qualified perhaps for the base and lucrative tenures of professional occupation, but unworthy to perform the free and noble services of the Constitution, we submit, indeed, but we solemnly protest against that distinction for ourselves and for our children.

It is no act of ours. Whatever judgment may await our merits or our failings, we cannot conclude ourselves, by recognising, for a consideration, the principle of servility and perpetual degradation.

These are the sentiments which we feel to the bottom of our hearts, and we disclose them to the free Parliament of a Monarch whose glory it is to reign over a free people.—To you we commit our supplications and our cause. We have, indeed, little to apprehend, in this benigner age, from the malignant aspersions of former times, and not more from the obsolete calumnies of former strife ; although we see them endeavouring again to collect the remnant of their exhausted venom, before they die for ever, in a last and feeble effort to traduce our religion and our principles. But as oppression is ever fertile in pretexts, we find the objections started against us more dangerous because they are new, or new at least in the novelty of a shameless avowal. They are principally threeFirst, it is contended that we are a people originally and fundamentally different from yourselves, and that our interests are for ever irreconcileable, because some hundred years ago our ancestors were conquered by yours. We deny the conclusion: we deny the fact. It is false. - In addressing ourselves to you, we speak to the children of our ancestors, as we also are the children of your forefathers. Nature has triumphed over law; we are intermixed in blood; we are blended in connexion ; we are one race; we all are Irishmen ; subjects of the Imperial Crown of Ireland. The honor of Parliament is concerned, to repress the audacity of those who tell us that you are a foreign colony; and, consequently, ought to govern according to the principles of invaders, and the policy of recent usurpation. At least we confide that you will not suffer the walls of Parliament to be contaminated with that libel upon

the Government of Ireland. The shaft which was aimed at us has struck yourselves; a memorable, but, at the same time, we trust, a most auspicious example, to teach both you and us, and our common posterity, that our interests are one, and that whatever affects the well-being and honor of the Roman Catholics, is also injurious to the Protestant interest. Of the same complexion

and tendency are the two objections, one that our advancement in property and privilege would lead to a repeal of the act of settlement; the other, that our participation in the liberties and franchises of our country, would endanger the existence of the Constitution into which we are admitted.

A resumption of the lands forfeited by our and your ancestors, (for they are the same) after the lapse of so many years, (near three returns of the longest period of legal limitation) after the dispersion and extinction of so many families ; after so many transitions and divisions, repartitions and reconsolidations of property ; so many sales, judgments, mortgages, and settlements, and after all the various process of voluntary and legal operation, to conceive the revival of titles dormant for 150 years, is an idea so perfectly chimerical, so contrary to the experience of all ages and all countries, so repugnant to the principles of jurisprudence, and so utterly impossible in point of fact; that the Roman Catholics of Ireland, once for all, make it their earnest request to have that question thoroughly investigated, in the assured hope, that so idle, vain, and absurd an object of public apprehension, being exposed and laid open to the eye of reason, may sleep in oblivion for ever.

As to the other subject of apprehension, we have but one answer to make. We desire to partake in the Constitution; and therefore we do not desire to destroy it. Parliament is now in possession of our case; our grievances, our sorrows, our obstructions, our solicitudes, our hopes. We have told you the desire of our hearts. We do not ask to be relieved from this or that incapacity ; not the abolition of this or that odious distinction; not even perhaps to be in the fulness of time, and in the accomplishment of the great comprehensive scheme of legislation, finally incorporated with you in the enjoyment of the same constitution. Even beyond that mark, we have an ultimate and if possible an object of more interior desire. We look for an union of affections; a gradual, and therefore a total obliteration of all the animosities, (on our part they are long extinct) and all the prejudices which have kept us disjoined. We come to you a great accession to the Protestant interest, with hearts and minds suitable to such an end. We do not come as jealous and suspicious rivals, to gavel the Constitution, but, with fraternal minds, to participate in the great incorporeal inheritance of freedom, to be held according to the laws and customs of the realm, and by our immediate fealty and allegiance to the King. And so may you receive us.

And we shall ever pray.

Objections having been made to this petition, upon Mr. O'Hara's presenting it, as being informal, he withdrew it, and the general committee finding that so bold and explicit a statement of their case had given offence, prepared another petition, merely praying that the House would take into consideration, whether the removal of some of the grievances of the petitioners might not be compatible with Protestant security. This petition was presented by Mr. Egan, on the 18th of February; and on the 20th, was afterwards rejected, on a division of 200 to 23.

On the same day was also rejected a petition from the Protestant inhabitants of Belfast, which went much farther than the petition of the Catholics, as it required that they should be placed on the same footing with their Protestant fellow-subjects.

It was on the 3d January of this year, that Mr. Burke published his letter to Sir Hercules Langrishe, in which he gave that learned and liberal opinion upon the subject of the elective franchise, which, it is said, obtained the royal assent to the measure that afterwards was adopted for conceding it. This letter was admirably well adapted to meet every species of objection, moral, local, and constitutional. It was calculated to remove the prejudices of the Church of England and every sect of Protestant dissenters; and, above all, it was quite conclusive, as a demonstration of the compatibility of Catholic emancipation with the coronation oath.

At a meeting of the general committee, on the 4th February, the following resolutions were agreed to, and afterwards published, with an address to the Protestants, written by Mr. R. Burke, and corrected by his father. To this address were added the answers of the foreign Catholic universities to questions that had been put to them in 1789, at the desire of Mr. Pitt, concerning the existence and extent of the Popish dispensing power.

Resolved, That this committee has been informed that reports have been circulated, that the application of the Catholics for relief, extends to unlimited and total emancipation; and that attempts have been made, wickedly and falsely, to instil into the minds of the Protestants of this kingdom an opinion, that our applications were preferred in a tone of menace.

Resolved, That several Protestant gentlemen have expressed great satisfaction on being individually informed of the real extent and respectful manner of the applications for relief, have assured us, that nothing could have excited jealousy, or apparent opposition to us, from our Protestant countrymen, but the abovementioned misapprehensions.

Resolved, That we therefore deem it necessary to declare, that the whole of our late applications, whether to his Majesty's Ministers, to men in power, or to private members of the legislature, as well as our intended petition, neither did, nor does contain any thing, or extend further, either in substance or in principle, than the four following objects.

1st. Admission to the profession and practice of the law.

2d. Capacity to serve as county magistracies. . 3d. A right to be summoned, and to serve on grand and petty juries.

4th. The right of voting in counties only for Protestant members of Parliament; in such a manner, however, as that a Roman Catholic freeholder should not vote, unless he either rented, and cultivated a farm of twenty pounds per annum, in addition to his forty shillings freehold ; or else possessed a freehold to the amount of twenty pounds a-year.

Resolved, That, in our opinion, these applications, not extending to any other objects than the above, are moderate, and absolutely necessary for our general alleviation, and more particularly for the protection of the Catholic farmers and the peasantry of Ireland ; and that they do not, in any degree, endanger either church or state, or endanger the security of the Protestant interest.

Resolved, That we never had an idea or thought so extravagant, as that of menacing or intimidating our Protestant brethren, much less the legislature ; and that we disclaim the violent and turbulent intentions imputed to us in some of the public prints, and circulated in private conversation.

Resolved, That we refer to the known disposition of the Roman Catholics of this kingdom, to our dutiful behaviour, during a long series of years, and particularly to the whole tenor of our late proceedings, for the full refutation of every charge of sedition and disloyalty.

Resolved, That for the more ample and detailed exposure of all the evil reports and calumnies circulated against us, an address to our Protestant fellow-subjects, and to the public in general, be printed by the order and in the name of the general committee.

The queries and answers concerning the Popish dispensing power, are as follow:

1st. Has the Pope or Cardinals, or any body of men, or any individual of the Church of Rome, any civil authority, power, jurisdiction, or pre-eminence whatsoever, within the realm of England ?

2d. Can the Pope or Cardinals, or any body of men, or any individual of the Church of Rome, absolve or dispense with his Majesty's subjects from their oath of allegiance, upon any pretext whatsoever ?

3d. - Is there any principle in the tenets of the Catholic faith,

by which Catholics are justified in not keeping faith with heretics, or other persons differing from them in religious opinions, in any transaction, either of a public or a private nature ?

Abstract from the Answer of the Sacred Faculty of Divinity of

Paris to the above Queries.

After an introduction according to the usual forms of the university, they answer the first query by declaring :

Neither the Pope, nor the Cardinals, nor any body of men, nor any

other person of the Church of Rome hath any civil authority, civil power, civil jurisdiction, or civil pre-eminence whatsoever, in any kingdom ; and consequently, none in the kingdom of England, by reason or virtue of any authority, power, jurisdiction, or pre-eminence by divine institution inherent in, or granted, or by any other means belonging to the Pope, or the Church of Rome. This doctrine the Sacred Faculty of Divinity of Paris has always held, and upon every occasion maintained, and upon every occasion has rigidly proscribed the contrary doctrines from her schools.

Answer to the second query.–Neither the Pope, nor the Cardinals, nor any body of men, nor any person of the Church of Rome, can, by virtue of the keys, absolve or release the subjects of the King of England from their oath of allegiance.

This and the first query are so intimately connected that the answer of the first immediately and naturally applies to the second, &c.

Answer to the third query. There is no tenet in the Catholic church, by which Catholics are justified in not keeping faith with heretics, or those who differ from them in matters of religion. The tenet, that it is lawful to break faith with heretics, is so repugnant to common honesty and the opinions of Catholics, that there is nothing of which those who have defended the Catholic faith against Protestants have complained more heavily than the malice and calumny of their adversaries in imputing this tenet. to them, &c. &c. &c.

Given at Paris, in the General Assembly of the Sorbonne, held on Thursday the 11th day before the calends of March, 1789.

Signed in due form.

University of Louvain. The Faculty of Divinity at Louvain having been requested to give her opinion upon the questions above stated, does it with readiness-but struck with astonishment that such questions should,

« السابقةمتابعة »