(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Catholic question. : substance of the speech"





SPEECH 



OF 



SIR J. C. HIPPISLEV, BARI. 



BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY 



PUBLIC FUNDS 



Catfjottc ®uestton\ 



SUBSTANCE 

OF THE 

SPEECH 

OF 

Sir J. C. HlPPISLEY, Bart. 

ON THE MOTION OF 

THE RIGHT HONORABLE HENRY GRATTAN, 

IN THE 

J&ouse of Commons, 

On the 14th April, 1812; 

^ FOR A 

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE, ON THE STATE OF THF 

PENAL LAWS NOW IN FORCE AGAINST THE ROMAN 

CATHOLICS OF IRELAND. 



Whenever this great measure shall be adopted, let it uot be one of 
' hasty and inconsiderate concession, on which the pressure of the 

' times shall stamp the character of weakness." " Consider with 

1 *hat measures it ought to be accompanied : what course of policy 
' is necessary to render its benefits effectual : — what safeguards 
' its adoption may require." — Lord Grenville's Speech, Qllh May 1808. 



WITH SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES, EXTRACTS, &c. 



LONDON: 

PRINTED FOR JAMES RIDGWAY, 170, PICCADILLY; 
OPPOSITE BOND-STREET. 

1812. 






\7, Flint, Printer, Old "Bailey, Lon.Iojj, 



ADVERTISEMENT. 



It. was originally proposed to have annexed, 
to the following pages, a few short notes, in 
reference merely to some facts which had been 
inadvertently c(Jmitted j n the course of the 
debate. Circumstances have since occurred, 
which may justify an extension of the notes, 
and particularly, in adverting to a recent pub- 
lication, entitled " the History of Ireland, from 
" its unioji with Great Britain, to October 
" 1810, by Francis Plowden, Esq. Printed in 
;: Dublin" Mr. Plowden has dedicated a 
large portion of his tliird volume, to what he 
stiles, " the Veto Controversy" and has made 
very considerable extracts from Sir J. H/s 
Speeches and Publications on this question, 
deducing inferences, unsupported by the facts. 



VI ADVERTISEMENT. 

with Strong animadversion on the conduct of 
some elevated characters, which cannot fail to 
be generative of. great distrust in the minds of 
many of his readers, 



KRRATUM. 
JV:rl. Line 1 . LTMMAR1 FANCE. 



SUMMARY 



OF 

SIR JOHN COX HIPPISLEY's SPEECH, 



SIR J. C. Hippisley followed Dr. Duigenan, 
and observed that the sentiments expressed by 
the Right Honourable Gentleman (Dr. Dui- 
genan,) were so much in opposition to his 
own, thathe felthimself called upontogive some 
reply to them. He could assure the House 
that he was disposed to trespass upon their 
patience as little as possible, considering the 
extent and importance of the subject, and that 
it was not fik intention to produce, as hereto- 
fore, voluminous documents in support of his" 
own opinions. — His wish was principally to 
lead the attention of the house to that kind of 
investigation, which, in his apprehension, was 
best suited to repel those prejudices which 
might be considered in no small degree, as 
hereditary, and were probably aggravated by the 

.statements of the Right Honourable Geutle- 

a 



man; and toendcavour to set the minds of others, 
as his own was, at rest, as to any dangerous 
consequences to be apprehended from further 
concessions to the petitioners, even to the full 
extent to which the argument of his Right 
Honourable friend who moved the question 
was disposed to carry them : provided such 
measures of concomitant legislation were adopt- 
ed, as do, in fact, constitute a material fea- 
ture of the state policy of every other nation, 
and have not been less in the view of our Catho- 
lic ancestors, than they ought to be. in our own, 
at the present hour. 

The Right Honourable and Learned Gentle- 
man had again recurred to the pontifical oath, 
taken by bishops at their consecration, as preg- 
nant, in his opinion, with every mischief, on 
account of the unqualified obedience sworn to 
the pope ;-— and he emphatically dwells on the 
w 7 ords " hereticos persequar et impugnabo" as the 
pledge of ceaseless persecution. ---He ^quotes 
Dr. Troy's pastoral letter of 1793, to substantiate 
his charge ; but at length acknowledges, that 
the see of Rome did actually admit a qualification 
of those hostile words, at the instance of the 
impress or Russia. —In this respect he has 
told the truth, but not the whole truth; for he 



has omitted the most material fact, namely^ 
that the very words he objects to, are also 
omitted, in the pontifical oath taken by the 
Roman Catholic bishops of Ireland^ by the 
express authority of the see of Rome, and that 
the official notification, authorizing such omis- 
sion, is given at length in the same pastoral let- 
ter of Dr. Troy, on which the Right Honourable 
Gentleman has grounded his charge. He ought 
in candour, to have told us, that, in 1791, the 
Roman Catholic bishops of Ireland addres- 
sed the see of Rome, representing the preju- 
dices excited by a reference to the oath in 
question, at the same time expressing their own 
conviction, that the obedience sworn to by them 
was merely an abstract canonical obedience and 
perfectly consistent with the oath of allegiance 
to their sovereign. Concerning this oath never- 
theless, and particularly as to the words "hcreti* 
" cos persequar et impugnabo" they requested an 
authoritative explanation from the see of Rome, 
which might tend to remove the prejudices 
which had been so industriously excited in the 
public mind, and they stated that this was the 

more important as they were then on the eve 

r 
of an application to parliament to be re- 

lieved from the pressure of the penal laws. 



9 

Tlie Right Honourable Gentleman might afetf 
have read in the same work, that on this appli- 
cation being made, the Pope directed the 
congregation de Propaganda Fide to be con- 
vened—a tribunal then consisting of a Cardinal, 
prefect, and twenty-two other Cardinals — and 
the result of their determination, sanctioned bv 
the Pope, was immediately transmitted to the 
archbishops of Ireland. Much surprise ap- 
pears to have been expressed by that tribu- 
nal, at the objections taken to the oath. The 
titular archbishops were reminded of the ex- 
planation formerly given of the same oath, by 
the late titular Archbishop Butler to similar 
objections raised by the bishop of Cloyne ; and 
the strained persecuting construction- of the 
words " hereticos persequar" tec. was therein 
pointedly disavowed by Rome. The official 
document contains also the memorable words 
to which Sir J. H. had more than once ad- 
verted in the House, namely, that " the See of 
" Rome never taught that faith is not to be 
" kept with the heterodox ; that an oath to kings 
" separated from Catholic communion , can be 
u violated, or that it is lawful for the bishop of 
"Rome to invade tlieir temporal rights a?iddo~ 
" ?ninwns. We too (it adds) consider an attempt 
K against the, life of kings and princes, even 



ft 



under the pretext of religion, as an horrid 

" and detestable crime/' It then proceeds 

to state the legitimate construction of the 
pontifical oath ; but adds, that as that oath 
has been so grossly misrepresented, the Roman 
Catholic prelates in Ireland, are allowed in 
future to make use of the same form of oath as 
was directed to be taken by the Archbishop of 
Mohillow, in Russia, in which the words " hcre- 
*' ticos perscquar et impugnabo" are wholly omit-* 

ted by express authority of the Pope. The 

oath thus substituted, concludes with this 
pointed declaration " / will observe all these 
" things the more inviolably, as I am firmly 
" convinced that there is nothing contained in 
" them, which can be contrary to the Jidelity I 
" owe to the most serene king of Great Brifaiyn 
" and Ireland, and to his successors to the 
\\ throne."' Such is the; oath as modified by of dee 
of the Pope himself in 1791 ; which the learn- 
ed Doctor, in candour, ought to have stated to 
the House; the whole being contained in the 
pastoral letter of Dr. Troy, which has fallen 
so much under his animadversion. 

Sir J. H. trusted that the House would per- 
mit him, on such an occasion, ta be somewhat 
pointed in referring to a, document of so much 



e 

importance to the question. He conceived it to 
be the duty of every n ember to afford the 
House such information as he could give on 
so weighty a subject, and he himself had not 
confined his opinions to the walls of the 
House. Upon a question involving great 
doubts, at least, in the minds .of a considerable 
mass of the public, as proposing a departure 
from the state policy of our ancestors, he con- 
sidered the public also to be intitled to the 
fullest information. 

It had been stated of the petitioners that 
they amount to a population of four millions : 
granted; — such an enumeration leaves however 
a vast majority of the people opposed to them 
in religious communion, and deeply impressed, 
for the most part, with strong prejudices, not 
merely against the religious tenets of Catholics, 
but also questioning the integrity of their civil 
principles. To disabuse and counteract those 
prejudices, should be the object of every good 
subject who had the means in his power — act- 
ing in the letter and spirit of those wise admo- 
nitions of the legislature, which prescribe the 
important duty and advantage of connecting 
ourselves with our Catholic fellow- subjects 
by the, ties of u mutual interest and affection. iy 



.i 



In this view also he had, on a former occasion, 
endeavoured to impress the House with a 
sense of the propriety, and, in his appre- 
hension, even of the necessity of an examina- 
tion of this subject, in a more satisfactory 
manner than could be effected by a committee 
of the whole House. — The standing orders of 
the Mouse, on a question affecting " religion, 33 
enjoined indeed such a committee as the first 
step, but the next he would wish to adopt, and 
it would.be in the recollection of the House^ 
that he had repeatedly urged it, was the ap- 
pointment of a select c&itimittee with the 
usual powers, wherein all the bearings of the 
existing laws upon the question might be ade- 
quately considered : those of our Catholic 
ancestors, not less than those subsequent to 
the reformation. In suck a committee also the 
mo^tianportant documents might be authenti- 
cated : — such as the reference to and answers of 
the six universities in ; ; 59, and at former pe- 
riods; the public declarations, addresses, re-, 
monstrances, &c. of the Catholics, avowing, 
their tenets, on various occasions subsequent 
to the reformation ; the acts likewise ; of gene- 
ral councils, as constructively bearing upon 
civil and social duties and temporal rights ; 
and the interpretation .of those acts, given in 



a* 



the various class^bboks of their professors atitl 
fers, as' taught in the several Catholic semi- 
naries of education, and particularly in those 
istina* in the united kingdom. Not least iri 
view of such a committee should "Be that-impor- 
tant document which the Right Honourable 
and Learned Gentleman has so surprisingly orer- 
looked, and which comprehends in itself almost 
satisfactory answer to the calumnies heaped 
upon the see of Rome, on reference to the disv 
pensing and deposing doctrines or tenets so con- 
tinually imputed to her as injuriously affecting 
other states; keeping in mind, however, the es- 
sential distinction between the acts of individual 
popes, and those of the seeof Rome,actingon the 
legitimate basis of her spiritual authority. In a 
committee of the whole House, assertion could 
only be repelled by assertion, with but little 
advantage to the question ; but, in a selecfc com- 
mittee, documents, such as had been noticed, 
might be deliberately examined, and those which 
tended to" throw most light on the subject, 
would necessarily be noticed in the report :— 
The constitution of the ecclesiastical govern- 
ment of the Catholics, with the relation it 
bears to a foreign jurisdiction, would necessa- 
rily form a material feature of such a report; 
and a reference to sikrh •authorities' and ill'us- 



9- 

nations .as the committee, with its usual powers, 
could readily command, would enable them to 
collect a mass of evidence of the most material 
import, in forming an adequate judgment on 
such a question. Such a committee, as Sir J. 
H. had, in a former debate, observed, would 
necessarily obtain the aid of the most eminent 
municipal lawyers and civilians, not excepting 
the learned and Right Honorable Gentleman 
himself, and in another place, it might be aided 
also by all the information of the most enlight- 
ened prelates of the establishment. It seemed 
scarcely necessary to anticipate the advantages 
to be derived from the extensive circulation of 
the report of such a committee throughout the 
united kingdom — preparatory to the ultimate 
measure of IcgisiatioA. 

Sir J. II. observed, that he had omitted to 
notice an expression in the pontifical oath, which 
the Right Honorable Gentleman laid much stress 
upon, namely, the obligation of supporting 
" the royalties of Saint Peter/' as compre- 
hended in the unqualified subjection sworn 
to the sovereign pontiff. Here also he would 
beg to refer the Right Honorable Gentleman to 
the same pastoral letter of Dr. Troy. He ex- 
pressly avers the obligation to be purely a 

c < 



to 

canonical obedience, qualified with the saving 
cause of" salvomeo or dine [ — which, in the con- 
struction of all those who take the oath, com- 
pletely shields their civil allegiance ; and if 
such be their own construction, as in fact it is, 
we have no right to interpose another. " The 
" royalties of St. Peter" they consider merely 
with reference to the local patrimony of 
the see of Rome, and so all their schoolmen 
define it ; but at any rate, the concluding clause 
of the substituted oath of 1791 which has been 
noticed, carries with it the solemn guarantee 
of Rome itself, for the allegiance due from the 
subject to his temporal sovereign, and parti- 
cularly to the King of Great Britain. 

Sir J. H. apologised for treacling too closely 
on the steps of the Right Honorable Gentleman 
himself, in a tedious discussion of antiquated 
documents ; but as the learned gentleman had 
thrown down the polemical gauntlet, and as it 
was essential to the question that it should be 
taken up by some one, he accepted the chal- 
lenge. He would not, however, annoy the 
House with a .detailed refutation of those alle- 
gations which had been made that night, re- 
specting the councils of Later an, of Constance, or 
oiTrent. Fully aware, however, that those alle- 



11 

gations would be made, he had provided such 
documents as were best qualified to confute 
them ; and although he determined to enter the 
House himself, unarmed with them, he had 
deposited them however at no greater dis- 
tance than the Vote Office : and if the curio- 
sity. of any member should be excited to refer 
it) them, he should regard it as a pleasing dut}^ 
to assist him in the research. Some observa- 
tions he would, nevertheless, venture to offer 
upon what had fallen from the Right Honorable 
Gentleman, although he was but too sensible 
that he must only repeat what he had stated on 
former occasions, on this subject. The 4th 
Lateran council was convened by one of the 
most ambitious popes that ever sat upon the 
pontifical throne, Innocent III. The Right 
Honorable Gentleman has truly stated that 
it was most numerously attended by the am- 
bassadors or representatives of nearly all the 
sovereigns in Christendom, as well as by the 
ecclesiastical members of the council. From 
this country, in particular, a representative was 
sent to it. The deposing doctrine, so often and 
so justly reprobated, is inferred from the 3d 
Canon of that council; authorizing, as it is 
contended, the deposition of all heretical 



princes, and the transfer of their dominions to 
others. It must be observed, nevertheless, 
that the two first canons only are of general 
obligation ; beinc: canons of doctrinal decision of 
faith, and as such enjoining the obedience of 
the whole church : — the rest are merely of dis- 
cipline or regulation, and as such, requiring 
the canonical acceptation of churches and 
states, to give them validity. This is a principle 
universally acknowledged, and expressly taught 
by all the ecclesiastical jurists and schoolmen. 
In France the discipline of the council of Trent, 
was never canonicallv received : some of its 
detached regulations, as of useful adoption, 
have been sanctioned by the state at different 
periods, acting purely on its own authority ; 
whilst others were w T holly rejected, as incom- 
patible with the independency of temporal 
dominion and of the rights of the Galliean 
church. These distinctions may perhaps appear 
of little interest ; but thev should be carried in 
memory, because they bear most materially upon 
this question. It is a matter of curiosity, at 
least, to observe how some catholic writers speak 

of this fourth Lateran council— Matthew of 
< 

Paris, our countryman, a Benedictine monk, 
and a contemporary writer, speaks of its deci- 
sions not a little tauntingly : he considers the 



13 

eouncil .convened, principally to get money* 
and observes that the Pope having accomplished 
his, purpose, dissolved this " gainful council, 
ffi and the clergy departed mournfully from it : 
di is words are " papa jam acceptd pecunia, 
" quastuosum hoc. concilium dissolvit, gratis'', 
^ totmque cterus abiit tristis."- — Platina, another 
catholic writer, also states of this council, 
." that- though much was proposed, nothing 
f was decreed — " Verier e multa quidemincon- 
13 sultationeni nee decerni quid qudm potuit." 
Infact theauthority of some of the canons of this 
council are much questioned by catholic writers 
send others, as Dupin, and the late catholic 
Bishop Hay^ of Scotland, have observed ; and 
this offensive one is rejected as spurious by fa- 
ther O'Leary. Innocent III, is represented by 
other writers, as well as Platina, as having pro- 
duced those decrees in the council, but that 
they were never formally ratified by the coun- 
cil ; and the nephew of Innocent, Gregory IX. 
always spoke of them as his uncle's canons. 
It is farther particularly stated of this third 
canon, that it never made its appearance till 
an hundred years after the date of the coun- 

■ 

cil. Be that as it may, it. never was received, 
buton the contrary it has been rejected by every 
state in Europe* even when Rome, was in the 



H 

zenith of her power, though individual' pontiffs- 
have often acted in the spirit of it, even ante- 
rior to the date of that council. — Of the other 
councils cited by the Right Honorable Gentle- 
man, Sir J. H. said that having so often ob- 
served upon them, he would make no comment 
further than by saying, that the most satisfac- 
tory explanations might be found in all the class 
books of theology or ecclesiastical jurispru- 
dence which are current in every seminary of 
Roman education. 

In the speech of the Right Honorable Gen- 
tleman this night, though in some respects, 
more moderate than those anterior to it, he 
perseveres in rejecting the religion of Catholics, 
in itself, as a disqualification from exercising 
the civil offices of the state. He has not con- 
fined his sentiments to the walls of this House, 
but has repeatedly submitted them to the tri- 
bunal of the public. Sir J. H. observed that 
he was the less disposed to leave those publi- 
cations unnoticed, as they had run through 
repeated editions, and at the present hour are 
of continual reference by writers of exalted 
name and character. In one of those works 
entituled " an Examination of the Claims of the 
" Roman Catholics" he asserts that M the 



15 

" whole Romanists of Ireland had entered into 
" a conspiracy with the French Directory to 
" overturn the government. " 

In his speech of 1S0S, which is also before 
the public, and which Sir J. H. had on a former 
occasion noticed, he observes that every Catho- 
lic reasons thus " we are from conscience trai- 
tors, &c. — [Here Sir J. H. was interrupted by 
Dr. l)uigenan who complained of being mis- 
represented and partially quoted]— Sir J. H. 

replied that he had not misquoted the publi- 
cations of the Right Honorable Gentleman, nor 
were the passages quoted at all weakened by 
the context :— he had taken some pains to as- 
certain their authenticity by the avowal of the 
publishers, and he could answer for the cor- 
rectness of what he had stated from the Right 
Honorable Gentleman's tracts and published 
speeches : he was nevertheless disposed to 
believe that the Right Honorable Gentleman, 
however mistaken in his opinions, was actuated 

by a sincere attachment to his country, and he 

• 

knew that he enjoyed the esteem and friendsu.p 
of many individual Catholics ; but if these be his 
real sentiments, how much are they at varia 
with the declarations of our recent statutes, 1 
which Catholics are recognized " as' good and 



16 

f* loyal subjects" — He however maintains this 
night, as well as in his publications, the im- 
possibility of Catholics amalgamating with 
their Protestant fellow-subjects, and that the 
excess of their religious intolerance is theCause*, 
that they regard every person who differs from 
them in religious communion, as" doomed tr> 
" eternal damnation" — In one of his tract* 
the Right Honorable Gentleman indeed ex- 
pressly states that the Irish Romanists look 
upon Irish Protestants, as only " estraysftom 
M Hell during their continuance on earth" and 
" believe them to be the living agents of Sa- 
" tdiHT — and that this is the doctrine propa- 
gated by the Roman Irish Clergy. Such is his 
commentary on the doctrine of exclusive salva- 
tion as taught in the church of Rome; and 
such- a construction is, but too generally, 
thrown in the teeth of our Catholic fellow sub- 
jfccts. Candour however should direct us to 
turn to our own articles. Is not the 18th article 
of the church of England apparently no less 
'exclusive of the Jew or the Quaker-*- and indeed 
o£every sect not received into the church by 
baptism, than any creed of the Roman Catholics 
is; and can we forget that we hold the Athanasian 
as weli as the Apostles' and Niccne creeds in 
common with .the Catholic? But the Right 
Hono rable Gentleman^vill say,- -look at the com" 



17 

ftientaty tipon our 18th article. The CathoiicVill 
reply, look to ours ; and both should, no doubt, 
be regarded with scrupulous attention by the 
'advocate of Christian charity. To enter into 
f he detailed reasoning of schoolmen on this 
delicate question, was little suited to the time 
of the House; yet there is no imputation that 
presses more heavily upon the Catholic than 
this very cbarge of his uncharitableness towards 
all others who differ from him in religious tenets. 
It is in vain, says his opponent, to talk of being 
united in the " bonds of affection 9 with those 
holding such opposed opinions :— opinions 
which must ever be considered as having a 
practical and sinister operation in social life c 
in this view, therefore, our time would not 
be ill bestowed in referring to the constructioa 
of those whose authority is most respected ia 
their schools and universities. To this end, he 
would name the treatises of Hooke, of Bailli/, and 
of- De la ffogue y -~-M of them. great theologians 
and professors heretofore of the i universities^ 
of Paris, and the latter now professor of 
divinity at Maynooth. He would name also 
the works of professor Schrame, a learned 
Benedictine" Monk, compiled expressly for the 
universities of Germany, and sanctioned by the 
highest 'ecclesiastical authorities; The works 



18 



of those theologians have been long received r<<- 
accredited class books in the public semina- 
ries of Catholic education, in France and 
Germany, and also in Great Britain and Ire- 
land. Having merely named these authors 
for the reference of such as were disposed to 
resort to their authority, Sir J. H. said he 
would more particularly notice a work repub- 
lished about two years since in Ireland, under 
the countenance of the principal Roman Catho- 
lic clergy, the names of seven w of their arch- 
bishops and bishops standing in the list of sub- 
scribers to it. The title icas " Charity and Truth, 
c; or Catholics not uncharitable in saying that 
Ci none are saved out of the Catholic church. 



j> 



The author, Dr. Hawarden, wrote about se- 
rentv years ago ; he cites the first authorities of 
his church in confirmation of his ownexposition. 
It is the perversely wilful opposer of the faith, 
as received by the Roman Catholic church, 
who in the judgment of that church is pro- 
nounced guilty of heresy : it is not the oppo- 
ser of their communion from ignorance, that is 
so denounced. If the conviction of the mind 
sincerely resists the exposition of the principles 
of Roman communion, after a candid search 
for truth, where that resistance is involuntary, 
no well informed Catholic will pronounce 






19 

against him the formidable sentence of eternal 
exclusion from salvation. This tract cites the 
high testimony of Saint Augustine in support 
of this charitable construction. "If they" (says 
Saint Augustine) " who hold an opinion in itself 
c: false and perverse, maintain it withno/?<?r- 
tinacious obstinacy ; if they have not been 
misled by their own presumptuous. audacity, 
" but have received their error from seduced or 
66 lapsed parents ; if they be serious and diligent 
" enquirers after truth, and manifest a dis- 
" position to yield to it, when found by 
44 them, such persons are on no account to be 
" set down as heretics." Sir J. H. said he 
would add nothing further on this point, as the 
high authority which St. Augustine holds with 
Catholic schoolmen, indeed little short of 
apostolical, is decisive upon the erroneous judg- 
ment formed by protestants as to the Roman 
Catholic construction of exclusive salvation. 
Herein,therefore,thereisnoratibnal bar opposed 
to the unity of the Catholic with the Protestant, 
in " affection, as well as interest." Interest 
may bind the unworthy to each other, but 
affection is the healthful shoot of worthy minds. 
It is our duty to clear away every obnoxi- 
ous weed that can impede its growth, and none 
can be more obnoxious, in the present view, 
than the misconception now noticed : in a word, 



20" 

tTife"R6man Catholic church holds & at every 
person is received within its pale by baptism, by 
whomsoever administered : " that involuntary 
6< error is not exclusive: and that the church 
" has its concealed children in the sects separate 
4C front its \ unity ." 

IBll 

Sir J. H. proceeded to notice some recent 
publications, particularly a series of letters in 
the Morning Post in the course of this last week 
under the signatures of a " Beat Whig" and "3/e- 
lancthon" arraigning the civil integrity of Ca- 
tholics, as holding the doctrine of disjjensing with 
oaths, and deposing sovereigns : it was not just to 
the petitioners to pass by these revived though 
antiquated charges without notice. That many 
individual popes have held and have acted upon 
such principles is but too well substantiated ; 
but it is contended by the Catholics that no 
general council, nor the see of Rome, properly 
recognized as such, in cathedra, ever declared 
such doctrines to be the doctrines of her church. 
When individual pontiffs originally acted in 
the spirit of such principles, they relied upon 
their temporal strength, chiefly derived from 
the aid of powerful states supporting them for 
their own purposes ; but'ih latter times, when 
Pius V. fulminated his excommunication and 
deposition of Elizabeth, who among her subjects. 



31 

were found obedient to his mandates ?— A soli* 
tary individual, who affixed the impotent bull, 
on the ga4££of the bishop of London's palace ;— 
and, in consequence, paid the just forfeit of the. 
law, while Elizabeth found herself surrounded, 
with her Catholic subjects with arms in their 
hands, repelling the menaced invasion of the 
Catholic Philip. Gregory XIII. was indeed 
ashamed of the impotent rage of his predecessor, 
and declared his bull, as the subjects of Elizabeth 
had before interpreted it, a nugatory act. 
But assuredly the repeated declarations and 
renunciations upon oath, founded as they are on 
unquestionable Catholic principles, and most 
pre-eminently, the solemn official declaration of 
the See of Borne itself, in the late pontificate, 
in 1791, as has been already adverted to, sup- 
ply the best answers to such imputations. 






The dangerous assumption and encroachment 
of sovereign pontiffs are admitted then to have 
existed ? ^-doubtless they have existed : and 
every state has, in its wisdom, thought it advisa- 
ble to provide effectual barriers against them, 
t — none more so than this kingdom in the 
days of our Catholic ancestors. The Catholic 
stiil.seeks that security, in every foreign state 
of Europe ; not less for the independence of 
his church than for the safety of his civil es« 



32 

tablishment. Those wise provisions of our 
Catholic ancestors still exist on our statute 
books; sleeping indeed when the times call not 
for theirapplication,— whileourlater provisions, 
enacted subsequent to the reformation, are 
virtually impracticable from their exaggerated 
and sanguinary penalties. Of the latter de- 
scription is the statute of \3 Elizabeth 
still unrepealed, but defeating itself. In de- 
ference to this provident wisdom of our Ca- 
tholic ancestors let us look back to the consti- 
tutions of Clarendon, the statutes of Provisors, 
of Prcemunire, of Mortmain, and to Magna 
Charta itself. Let us act in the spirit of their wise 
policy, adapted to the circumstances ofthe times, 
and authorized by the corresponding vigilance of 
every state of Europe, whetherCatholic or Pro- 
testant. Of this description also were the guards 
in contemplation concurrently with the mea- 
sures projected at the period ofthe union with 
Ireland. Some of these measures had been very 
ill understood and industriously and wilfully 

misrepresented, particularly that noticed in the 

- 

debate in 180S, on a question similar to that 
now before the House. 

The House having manifested so much in- 
dulgence, Sir J. 1L said he was disposed to pro- 



2S 

fit by it, by adverting to some circumstances,—* 
much blended indeed with his own conductasan 
individual, yet so materially connected with the 
general policy of the present question, that he 
would trust to astill further extension of that in- 
dulgence by adverting tothem. His opinions pos- 
sibly might differ from those of some of hisparlia^- 
mentary friends, as to the importance of the reser- 
vations of which he had been uniformly the advo- 
cate ; they were nevertheless endeavouring to at- 
tain the same salutary ends, though by different 
means. Some of the petitioners perhaps, under 
the influence of misrepresentation, which was so 
predominant, might, in reference to those reser- 
vations, consider his view of the subject as 
prejudiced and even intolerant. But it was 
neither: he was only consciousof pursuing their 
best interests ; and if he had not their praise, 

he was determined to deserve it. Invidious 

j 

names had been assigned to measures which duly 
stated and understood, were, even on Catholic 
principles, unexceptionable. The " veto" was a 
name given to one, and was the repelling deno- 
mination of an "inquisition" to another; yet 
both thoseguards are considered as practical and 
healthful institutions by all Catholic, as well as 
Protestant Europe. " Give a dog a bad name and 
" hang him /'was a vulgar, but strictly applicable 
adage.That the proposed ratification of the Crown, 



9± 



in the appointment of Roman Catholic Bishops, 
or, to give it the name of the day, the Veto* 
was M forced upon the Catholic prelacy of Ire- 
" land in the reign of terror," is a popular asser- 
tion. Nothing however was less true ; and of its 
fallacy the Noble Viscount on the Treasury 
bench [Lord Castlereagh] would doubtlessspeak. 

Sir J. H. said that he was not only in corre- 
spondence upon the subject of the Catholic ar- 
rangements respecting Ireland, at that period* 
with the Noble Viscount himself, and with 
many of the King's Ministers, but with some 
of the most considerable prelates of the Catholic 
church at home and abroad. The contem- 
plation of those arrangements was to be traced 
much further back than the year 1799. For in 
the year 1794 it formed the subject of cor* 
respondence from Rome, between himself, 
at that time residing there, and a Right 
Honorable Friend, then of his majesty's coun- 
cils, one of the brightest ornaments of that 
House, but now unfortunately no more. [Mr. 
Windham.] Rv a peculiar combination of 
circumstances Sir J. H. had possessed the con- 
fidence of the principal ministers of the Pon- 
tifical state, and rrad in consequence been indu- 
ced to undertake many public negotiations of 



25 

considerable importance, under the sanction 
of his Majesty's Government. His name indeed 

had never been honoured with a place on the civil 

• 

list : he trusted, however, that the results of his 
efforts had not been less useful to his country. 

He would further request the patience 
of the House to state the nature of a trans- 
action, which though not one of those officially 
authorized, must yet be considered of great 
importance as applying to the scope and prin- 
ciple of this question, and evincing also great 
liberality on the part of the ministers of the 
Papal Government. It is well known that a 
number of young persons were educated in the 
three national colleges at Rome, for the pur- 
pose of exercising the mission of priests in this 
kingdom. The superiors of these colleges 
having the entire direction of their education, 
being Italians, the national clergy were naturally 
anxious to procure a reform in favor of them- 
selves, and applied to Sir J. H. to exert his 
influence in their behalf. The national prelates, 
of the Roman communion had, in vain, solicited 
this reform for a period of more than twenty 
years : the interest of the several cardinals, 
protectors, (for each, nation has one, .J who- had 
the nomination of the superior of each college, 



$6 

being obviously opposed to the wishes of the 
national elenrv. Sir J. H. ur?ed the reform 
on this principle, namely, that it was reasonable 
that the see of Rome should have every secu- 
rity in favor of the ecclesiastical education ob- 
taining i.ord* 086 seminaries, while the state, 
in which the students were ultimately to .ex- 
ercise their spiritual functions, should be equal- 
ly secured of their attachment to its civil insti- 
tutions. Pius VI. admitted the solidity of this 
principle, and ultimately decreed that the natio- 
nal institutions should be surrendered to the 
direction of the national clergy. The succeeding 
troubles resulting from the incursion of the 
French, dispersed the members of those foun- 
dations altogether, and the reform was com- 
pletely carried into effect in favor only of one of. 
the national foundations before that] dispersion. 

It appeared desirable also that the precarious 
tenure of the apostolic vicars resident in Great . 
Britain should give place to a class of prelates , 
independent of foreign controuL The apostolic 
vicars were merely appointed ■" ad sedis apos- 
" tolicce bene placitum" while bishops ordinaries 
could be removed only for canonical offences, 
canonically proved. As he had heretofore 
entered more fully into the reasons.for support-, 
ing such a change in "the internal discipline of 



*7 

tfye. ecclesiastical government of the Roman 
Catholics, in this part of the United Kingdom, 
he would now content himself by observing 
that this reform appeared, equally agreeable to 
the' Catholic clergy and laity, and in a state 
view, was highly beneficial in its principle. 
Sir J. II. obtained a declaration from the late 
Pop.*, as well as his principal ministers, that 
such a reform should be granted whenever it 
should be desired by our government ; but it 
was observed, that if such alteration appeared 
merely as the spontaneous act of Rome, it would 
be exposed to misrepresentation. Such was the 
according disposition of Rome at that period ; 
and for many other proofs, he had only to re- 
fer to facts which he had often stated in the 
House. It is the principle of these minor ar- 
rangements that should be kept steadily in view, 
in legislate ngon the more important question now 
before the House, and in which the Catholic and 
Protestant have a common and a deep interest. 
•' Without justice to the Catholic," as an eminent 
prelate of the church of England, (Bishop Law) 
asserts, "' there could be no security for the Pro- 
" testant establishment :* nor is it less an act of 
justice to the Catholic, to secure his church 
from foreign encroachment, than to concede 
those civil privileges, for which he petitions the 
legislature, with security to the establishment 



2S 

Sir J. H. thought the present a fit occa- 
sion to advert to the extraordinary change 
which hrd taken place in the opinions of the 
vicar apostolic of the middle district, (Dr. 

ilner,) who had not spared the press in dis- 
seminating these opinions, with but little ad- 
vantage to the cause of the petitioners before 
the House. The principle of an intercourse 
with the Crown, as an additional security for 
the civil integrity of those appointed to vacant 
sees of the Roman communion, — and the insti- 
tution of practicable guards against the pos- 
sible encroachment of the see of Rome, such 
as the provident wisdom of other stn: ^ had in- 
stituted, — had been urged- in a tract, sju »>ple- 
mentary to a speech on the motion of Mr. 
Fox, in 1S(X*, V and which, soon after that de- 
bate, had been pretty ^^ i iely circulated. To 
the republication of that tract Dr. Milner 
had 2*i\ most marked approbation, 

e | siei ig it, in a series of letters^ 

from the criticism of one of the periodical re- 
views of that day. From the opinions maintain - 
ed in r '. II. had never swerved. 

TJw . list the encroach- 

meat oi ;ig \: urisdkrtion were therein dis- 

authorities which sanc- 
tiouv;J th-mi. Jn^ of the most prominent of those 
securitie in a ; vu raj address of Dr. Mil- 

ner to the Rouian Catholics of his district, been 



29 

qualified with the opprobrious epithets of"a new 
<c inquisition, or a Star Chamber ." This inquisi- 
tion, nevertheless, as he terms it, constitutes a 
marked regulation in the municipal code of al- 
most evervCatholic, as well as Protestant state ; 
and even in Spain, so late as in the year 1761, 
was strengthened, by extended powers, operating 
against that literally formidable Inquisition 
which has been justly held in terror and detes- 
tation throughout the world. 

Sir J. H. then stated particularly the nature 
of those restraints from the encroachments of 
fofeign jurisdictions, by referring to the rescripts 
of the Empress of Russia, of the Emperor of 
Germany, of the kings of Spain and Naples, 
and the ordinances of the governments of Tus- 
cany, Venice, Milan, and other states. He 
also referred to the proceedings of the new 
government of France, which had, almost 
verbatim, adopted the institutions of the old 
regime : — although the Pope was prostrated to 
France, yet had it provided the same barriers 
against the possible encroachment of Rome, as 
if she had been in the plenitude ofher power. 

The principle of all these regulations w T as 
domestic security from foreign encroachment. 



30 

In Russia, soon after the imperial edict which 
created the episcopal see of Mohilow into an 
archbishoprick, and the Empress Catherine 
had appointed that archbishop, and a coad- 
jutor bishop, with annual stipends, the late 
Pope, Pius VI. commissioned Cardinal 
Archetti expressly to invest the new arch- 
bishop with the Pallmm, (the badge of his 
archiepiscopal dignity,) and also to consecrate 
the new Catholic church, which was done 
with great solemnity. Nevertheless, in that 
very edict, the reception of all bills and writ- 
ings, from the Pope or in his name, was 
interdicted, except such as were on exami- 
nation, permitted to be published within the 
empire, and no ecclesiastics of foreign appoint- 
ment were permitted to enter the state. But 
these restrictions Sir J. H. observed, whether 
of protestant, schismatic, or Catholic States, 
that he had repeatedly noticed, and had adduced 
unquestionable documents in support of them. 
He now adverted to them merely to demon- 
strate that Dr. Milner's change of opinion was 
not authorized by any change of his own. For 
such w r ere the institutions recorded in the tract 
of which Dr. Milner was once so warm an 
eulogist, — of which he had written a detailed 
defence, — of which, in the year 1806, a large 



31 

number of. copies w.ere transmitted to a metro- 
politan Roman Catholic prelate of Ireland, at 
his own request for distribution, — and of which 
the republication has been repeatedly called for, 
at the instance of some of the most eminent 
characters of the Irish Catholic prelacy, as well 
as by others, who, in that part of the united 
kingdom, are now the most forward in im- 
pugning the principles it inculcated. 

It was then considered as " a voto ragionato 
ft of the most reconciling nature, delivered by a 
* c character of trust and weight, by one who 
" possessed alone the confidence entirely of 
i; the highest orders of the (Catholic) teach- 
" ing body, and of all those who are competent 
" to judge of Catholic affairs/' — Such was the 
opinio^ pronounced upon it by one who 
solicited its republication, on the authority 
and in the name of a distinguished prelate. 

There were many facts and circumstances, Sir 
J. H. observed, which ought to be very de- 
liberately weighed, in order to enable parlia* 
ment to form adequate provisions upon a ques- 
tion of this description, otherwise they 
would involve themselves in anomalies similar 
to those of the English act of 1791, which went 
through the House with a rapidity little suited 



32 

to permanent and salutary legislation. The 
unanimity which then prevailed in Parliament* 
was in fact injurious to its provisions; he had, 
in the tract just alluded to, spoken of some 
of those anomalies, and he should avail him- 
self of a future occasion to speak of them more 
in detail. 

Of the Irish act, which followed, in 1793, 
he should make a few remarks, as a Right 
Honorable Gentleman, who took a conspicu- 
ous part in that proceeding, was now in his 
place, and its history was not a little remark- 
able. — The oath which constitutes the test, in 
that act, was framed by that Learned Gentleman 
himself, in place of one of a more simple con- 
struction. The Learned Gentleman anticipated 
that his oath was calculated to meet general 
approbation, and the government assented to 
the change. A member of the Irish parliament 
(the late Mr. Forbes) objected to it " as ridi- 
%\ culous ;" the Right Honorable Gentleman 
nevertheless maintained his ground. " The 
" Catholics/' said he, " have published a 
" declaration as the ground of Protesfant 
V confidence ; they have been charged with 
" holding tenets injurious to the social com- 
" pact by which states exist : the belief 



33 

* that this charge was true, has been one 
" great reason for not entrusting them with 
" power; in their declaration, they deny the 
" charge; I am glad they do. I believe them 
" to be honest men, and therefore I desire they 
" will swear to the words of their own decla- 
" ration." Such was the opinion of the Right 
Honorable and Learned Gentleman, in 1793, 
of the estimation in which Catholics held the 
sacred obligation of an oath. Those who look 
back to this recorded declaration of the Right 
Honorable Gentleman, and to his memorable 
letter to the Right Hon. Mover of the present 
question, in 1797, whom he anticipated, " that 
" in the event of our union all rivalships and 
ct jealousies between Protestantsand Romanists 
" would cease for ever, and that it would not be 
u necessary to curb Romanists by any exclu- 
" sive laws whatever," must necessarily ex- 
claim " quantum mutatus ab ilio /" 

With respect to the negative of the crown 
in the nomination of Roman Catholic prelates 
exercising their functions within the realm, 
Sir J. H. observed that he felt great reluctance in 
sofrequently adverting to it ; but the almost daily 
publications and the sinister influence of the 
misrepresentations on that subject, necessarily 

F 



34 

pressed it forward. Of the temper of the times 
in which it was originally introduced, and of the 
correspondence he himself had held upon it 
at home and abroad, he had repeatedly spoken: 
He had been very desirous to verify the accuracy 
of those documents of which he was in posses- 
sion, and particularly the resolutions of the 
Roman Catholic prelates in 179!) ; and to this 
end within a few days past had requested ae- 
s to the original papers in the possession 
of the Noble Viscount, at that period the 
chief secretary of Ireland. From these he had 
the satisfaction to find that his former state- 
ments were in strict conformity to the cir- 
cumstances w r hich existed durinsr the ne^ocia- 
tions which preceded the union. On the same 
basis of proposed arrangement, was the com- 
munication made to parliament in 1S0S. Unau- 
thorized, certainly, it appears to have been, on 
the part of the Roman Catholic prelacy of 
Ireland ; but so far supported on the authority 
of their a sent Dr. Milner, that the Risfht 
Honourable Gentlemen who stated it to the 
House, considered themselves fully justified in 
holding out a measure to which they justly 



attached great weight. But though the com- 
munication of Dr. Milner was unauthorized, — 
was his conduct disavowed or even censured by 



9 



3.5 

his constituents? Certainly not. On the contrary 
he had every reason to believe, for a considcr- 
able time posterior to the debate, that the full 
assent of the Catholic prelacy of Ireland, to 
that proposal, would be obtained in a general 
synod; and letters of thanks, < though not 
specifically adverting to that proposition, were 
transmitted from Ireland to a Noble Lord and 
the Right Honourable Gentleman who were 
the movers of the question in either House of 
Parliament. The question was moved on the 
2;>th and 27th of May 1308, nor was a mur- 
mur heard, from Ireland, against the proposi- 
tion of the negative of the crown, till more 
than two months afterwards, when writers 
assuming the signatures of Sarsfield, Laicus, 
Inimicus Veto, &c. denounced the measure as 
pregnant with every evil that could befal the 
Catholic cause ; and Mr. Clinch, a barrister, 
and deeply versed in scholastic divinity, entered 
the lists also,deprecating the adoption of such a 
concession on the part of the Catholic prelacy. 

Sir J. H. said that it was with no small degree 
of surprize that he heard of the opposition of that 
gentleman, as he had been so recent and so warm 
an eulogist of a tract, printed in 1806, which' 
pointedly recognized the utility of tnosc 
Pleasures now so much reprobated; ana whicfi 



36 

recited the authorities by which they were 
supported in other states. 

Was it possible to suppose that the four 
Catholic metropolitan prelates, and six ancient 
bishops of Ireland, could be so little interested 
in the security and integrity of their churchy 
as to have themselves proposed a measure of so 
fatal a tendency as these writers contend? — But 
let us follow the dates of these sy nodical pro- 
ceedings. In January 1799, the resolutions of 
the bishops, comprehending this arrangement, 
were presented to his Majesty's Government : 
in May 1808 the proposal was revived, though 
now admitted to be unauthorized, by their 
agent, also a Roman Catholic prelate : and in 
September 1808, a synod of the Roman Catholic 
prelacy washeld in Dublin, when they declared 
that " it was inexpedient to introduce any alter- 
*' ation in the canonical mode hitherto observed 
cc in the nomination of Irish Roman Catholic 
" Bishops," It is a known fact that that synod 
was held principally to deliberate on the spe- 
cific measure proposed by Dr. Milner, their 
agent, conformably to their resolutions of 1799 : 
no condemnation of the measure itself nor ofthe 
act of Dr. Milner was expressed. Dr. Milnerwas 
continued in his agency, and the synod resolved 
that any alteration wa3 then " inexpedient,, fyc* 



1.4 



(4 



*' 6fc" To ascertain, more distinctly, the senti- 
ments of the prelates on that vote, a letter was 
addressed to the Roman Catholic Primate of Ire- 
land, Dr. O'Reilly, by Lord Southwell and Sir 
Edward Bellew, in reply to which the primate de- 
clared that "he was certain that in forming their 
" resolution the prelates did not mean to decide 
" that the admission of a veto, or negative on the 
" part of the crown, with the consent of the hoi v 
.•" see, would be contrary to the doctrine of the 
church, or to any practice or usage essentially 
connected with the Roman Catholic religion ; 
but that the concession might eventually be 
" attended with consequences dangorous to the 
" Roman Catholic religion; but that suck dan- 
" ger was of a temporary nuture, resulting from 
" existing circumstances." 

These " existing circumstances" were stated, in 
a variety of letters of the first authority, and in 
many addressed to himself (Sir J. H.), to be 
grounded on an apprehension formed in the 
minds of the prelates of the sinister influence 
of a hostile government ; but that the subject 
being open to be taken into consideration at a 
more favorable moment, no change of opinion 
whatever was expressed in disfavor of the prin- 
cipkoi tpe negative of the crown. 



38 

In February 1810 the Roman Catholic prelates 
^unassembled at Dublin, and published tev&tf 
teen resolutions : not one of them negatived the 
principle of the resolutions of 1799, though 
the\- strongly object to another measure, which 
was a very popular one with the majority of 
the second order of the clergy and of the 
laity, and was recommended for adoption by 
the Right Honorable mover of the question 
now before the House, in a similar motion in 
Parliament, in 1811, namely, that of domes- 
tic nomination in an election by chapters. 
The Bishops profess that " they seek nothing 
" beyond the mere integrity and safety of their 
" religion ;" but unfortunately, under the 
influence of erroneous statements, they repro- 
bate the fifth resolution of the English Catho- 
lics of the first of the same month ; though 
conceived in the full spirit of their own 
resolutions, and they record their thanks to 
Dr. Milner for his apostolical Jinnncss m 
opposing it ! 






It is a painful but a necessary duty for those, 
who are ultimately to legislate on the question 
of Catholic claims, to follow the steps of these 
proceedings, — injurious in the highest degree.to 
die cause of the petitisueis: because engendering . 



39 

distrust in the minds of many of their Friends, 
and affording a latitude of triumph to their 
opponents. But how are we to reconcile this 
applauding vote with the fact? A Noble Lord 
of great consideration at this meeting of the 
English Catholics on the 2d Feb. 1810, put the 
question to Dr. Milner, whether he should sign 
the resolution, and was answered in the affir- 
mative. It is a known fact also that the same 
prelate declared he should not oppose the 
signatures of any of the clergy of his district, 
he himself objecting in his character of agent 
of the Roman Catholic prelates of Ireland ! 
What is therein his conduct that demands 
the exalted qualification of " apostolical 
firmness." 

That the Catholic prelates founded this 
concluding resolution on representations ex- 
traneous of the fact is too evident, and can- 
not be sufficiently lamented. In the spirit of 
those misrepresentations, most of the later 
works of Dr. Milner are written, in which the 
old parliamentary supporters of the Catholics are 
accused of machinations to subvert the Roman 
Catholic religion, by requiring security for the 
religion of the establishment; and these charge^ 
have been reiterated* with so much industry of 



4b 

misrepresentation and perversion of facts, "as to 
have excited the most serious distrust and 
discontent in the minds of some of the best 
disposed Catholics, even to the leugth of pro- 
ducing public meetings to guard against 
visionary dangers. He would confidently, 
look forward, with anxious expectation, to the 
period when all those misconstructions would 
give way to the force of truth and to the revival 
of that reciprocal confidence which alone can. 
insure the successful termination of a cause 
in which the interests and indeed the honour 
of so many millions of our fellow subjects are 
so deeply involved. 

■ 

It was well known, Sir J. H. observed, that 
himself had recently stood in a situation most 
flattering to his own feelings ; — accredited as he 
had been by the whole Catholic Nobility, of 
England, and a most respectable body of others 
professing the Roman communion, to urge 
their cause in parliament. No man could 
doubt of the successful termination of their 
cause, and he could not be insensible of the 
distinction of having his name coupled with 
the fame of an act which was to restore so 
meritorious a class of his fellow subjects to the 
full benefits of the constitution : yet as his 
conduct and "opinions were not wholly in 






41 

unison with some of those honourable persons, 
as to the precise means of attaining the object, 
— and especially as his proposed measures had 
been so actively discredited by the misrepresen- 
tations to which he had alluded, — he had de- 
clined altogether the honorable trust which 
had so long been confided to him;' and he wished 
rather that it should devolve upon one whose 
opinions had not been questioned as to the 
provisions of enactment most suitable to the 
cause, more especially with relation to the 
Catholics of Ireland, to whom his own opinions 
had been represented in a light very ill calcu- 
lated to conciliate their confidence. Such was 
the answer he had given to a Noble Lord at the 
head of a deputation of Catholics, who had 
done him the honour to request him to revive ' 
their petition to parliament. He had the satis- 
faction to find that his motives for declining it, 
were approved ; and that a Right Honorable 
Friend (Mr. Elliot) competent in every degree 
to acquit the trust with advantage, had since 
accepted it, and who, with himself, must feel 
no common interest in the cause, but would be 
impressed with equal reverence and emulation, 
when treading in the footsteps of the great cha- 
racter now unfortunately no more, (Mr. \7ind- 
ham,) who had been originally charged by the 
Roman Catholics of England as the advocate of 
theirclaims. It was indeed true that the whole of 

G 



42 



the obloquy to which he had alluded had not fal- 
len on himself. The most eminent characters, in 
either House of Parliament, had not escaped it ; 
and the most unworthy motives had been at- 
tributed to the support they had so strenuously 
and unintermittingly given to the cause of the 
petitioners ; till at length, distrust took place of 
confidence, and every step of their friends, on 
this side of the water, was from time to time 
marked with some inculpating declaration or 
resolution of the associated committees on the 
other side. Himself, however, was fully pre- 
pared to breast the full surge of popular oblo- 
quy, founded, as'it was, on misrepresentation,— 
and to console himself with the conscientious 
discharge of his duty, not less to his fellow sub- 
jects of the Catholic communion, than of the 
establishment. 

But though, in speaking of the misappre- 
hensions of the committees of Irish Catholics, 
he had something to complain of, he felt it 
.equally his duty to speak in their defence when 
the occasion offered. In a paper of that morn- 
ing (the Morning Post) under the signature 
of Russel, " the Catholic committee and its 
* satellites," as they are contumeliously denomi- 
nated, are accused of the publication and exten- 
sive circulation of Ward's errata, " the most in- 



43 ■ 



" famous wcajt^" as is stated, " ever print-. 
" ed :" " and that its reappearance had given 
"just cause of offence to protestants of all 
" denominations/' — Here Sir J. H. observed 
that he could in the most decided" manner 
acquit the Catholic committee of the charge. 
The work in question was of a very antiquated 
date, and a bookseller considering, some time 
ago, that the question of Catholic claims 
might excite an active currency, naturally 
sought his own profit in the extended sale. The 
names indeed of many of the Roman Catholic 
clergy stand as subscribers, but not a single 
prelate of their church is of the number; and 
in a letter which he had himself received from 
the titular Archbishop of Dublin, Dr. Troy, 
he considers it a very ill-tim ed publication, 
and regretted much that it had appeared :— ^ 
least of all was the Catholic committee to be 
accused of that publication. 

Thus much ofthis charge ; but in the same 
article, under the same signature, stands another 
charge,as little supported, but notless mischievi- 
ously directed against the Chancellors of the 
two universities, " whose principles are so loose, 
*1 (itstates),that forthe furtherance ofpartyviews, 
ft the utmost indifference is shewn by them to 
ft the fundamental principles of the eonstitu- 
" tion, and a total disregard to the feelings of 

KfolKH - 



£44 

" the individuals they represent/ 1 Of the 
purity of Lord Grenville's .conduct, in this 
respect, he should say nothing:, in thepxe^ence 
of the Noble Lord on the bench near him, who 
was so nearly related to the high character thus 
traduced, nor was it necessary indeed that any 
tiling should be said to repel a .charge, so un- 
founded. But of the Chancellor of the Uni- 
versity of Cambridge he thought jt incurnbent 
upon -him to say a few words. It was .his. good 
fortune, for many years, to be honoured with 
the friendship of that illustrious personage, 
and to be frequently in his society ; but he 
could take upon himself to say that, to the 
present hour, he could form no opinion of his 
sentiments on this question, which had. been so 
often agitated, and of which the implied sup- 
port constitutes the offence in the appre- 
hension of the writer of this article. It is 
possible that the illustrious personage may not 
have made up his mind fully upon the ques- 
tion, but least of all was he open to a charge 
of " disregard of the feelings of the individuals 
" he represented, or indifference to the funda- 
" mental principles of the constitution /*— 
The constitution in church and state had not a 
warmer friend, and this assertion he was per- 
suaded would be assented to by the applaud- 
' ing voice of the House. 



45 

With respect, to * the universities them- 
selves. Sir J. H. regretted that their pro- 
ceedings with relation to the present question 

-had hot originated at an earlier period, and con- 
sequently' been more decorously adopted. 
Disapproving the object and conceiving it 
to be, as they profess, of an injurious ten- 
dency, they might naturally be expected to 
manifest that disapprobation in the constitu- 
tional mode they had adopted; but surely the 
universities would have consulted their own 
dignity if they had proceeded with less precipi- 
tation. In both universities that precipitation 
has been but too evident, though not equally so 
in each. It is a known fact that the Right Rev, 

'Master df the most considerable College in the 
University of Cambridge, though resident on 
the spot, was not apprised of the proposed 

' act of the senate, until the day immediately pre- 
ceding that upon which the address was voted. 



That the apprehensions of many members of 

it <M1V 

those learned bodies had been greatly excited 
In disfavor of the object of the petitioners w r as 
but too evident, and the effects also of those 
apprehensions had extended very widely. 
Diocesan charges of some prelates of the estab- 
lishment, discourses from the pulpit, and 
9 



46 



the daily emanations from the press, adverse to 
their cause, have all contributed to keep alive 
the influence of antiquated prejudices, though 
resisted by other prelates and divines of ths 
most eminent talents and learning, whose 
attachment to the national church was above 
suspicion. Much however as that influence, 
in the extent of its operation, was to be lament- 
ed, it certainly ought so far to be respected as 
to pjompt us to direct every effort to inform 
the judgment of those who have viewed the 
question through the prejudices of so many 
.centuries, — and, at any rate, to avoid preci- 
pitation in a measure which involves so con- 
siderable a departure from the policy of our 
ancestors. No man could look forward more 
confidently than himself did, to those con- 
stitutional benefits the state would derive from 
ultimate concessions ; but no man could de- 
precate those concessions, more than himself, if 
unaccompanied with such securities as might 
satisfy the minds of the most timid, in a rational 
view of their nature and extent. 

When the question is roundly and concisely 
put, and the answer given, that a repeal of every 
act of restriction, with unlimited concession, 



47 

is that which is demanded ; alarm is naturally ex- 
cited, and we are disposed to ask — whether the 
petitioners really mean that no barriers should 
be opposed to the possible encroachment of a 
foreign jurisdiction? From the period of the 
conquest, at least, our Catholic ancestors did 
think it incumbent upon them to provide such 
guards ; and such has invariably been the course 
adopted by every other state. No rational ob- 
jection could, in a dispassionate view, be made 
against placing the Catholic subject on the 
same footing as he stood, anterior to the re- 
formation, with respect to every essential civil 
privilege, and reserving to the state that un- 
questionable security for its establishment, 
which it never can consistently relinquish. 

It is a matter of interesting and even enter- 
taining research to look back to the pages of 
our own history as connected with this subject ; 
when our Catholic ancestors, animated with the 
jealous spirit of enlightened patriotism, secu- 
red their freedom, by raising at once a barrier 
against the encroachments of the crown and of 
the tiara. Nor indeed, were the sovereigns of 
those days (with very few exceptions) more dis- 
posed to submit themselves to the papal yoke, 
than their descendants of the present hour. 

The historian of William the Conqueror 



4S 

records his resistance against the assumption 
of Gregory .VI {.—the most enterprising of the 
ancient pontiffs, in extending the temporal in- 
fluence of the see of Rome,— who, with the 
demand of what is termed Peter- Pence, insisted 
also upon homage for the crown ©f England. 
The answer of William is on record. " Of these 
demands, y says he ; " one I have granted » 
the other refused : homage I would not, nor 
will I do; fori did not promise it myself, nor 
can I learn that it was ever done by my 
predecessors." 



A requisition was also made of Edward the 
first by I ope Boniface VIII. that he should 
desist from his expedition against Scotland, as 
the Pope claimed it as a fief of the church ; 
the king submitted the papal demands to the 
English Barons, who resisted the interference 
of the Pope with the stout independence of the 
true English character. " Our Lord the King 
" (say they to the Pope) shall not plead before 
" you, nor submit to any trial ^r enquiry, or 
send messengers to your court ; especially 
as such proceedings would be in manifest 
disinherison of the rights of the crown of Eng- 
land and the royal dignity ; the evident 
subversion of the sovereignty of the kingdom, 
and the prejudice of the liberties, customs 
and laws, which we have inherited from our 



49 



u fathers ; to the observance and defence of 
tl which we are bound by our oaths, and, with 
Jf the assistance of God, will defend, with all 
."our strength/' — Such was the language held 
by English Catholics to a Pope, when papal 
-influence was in its zenith. 

- We find also that William of Gainsborough, 
Bishop of Worcester, in 1302, was fined a thou- 
sand marks by the king for receiving a bulle of 
institution from the Pope, which committed 
to him the charge of the temporalities as well as 
the spiritualities of his bishopric, and was 
compelled publicly to renounce the obnoxious 
clause, alid to declare that he held the tempo- 
ralities of none but the king. 

The memorable circumstances, attendant 
on the promotion of Cardinal Adrian, by 
Henry VII. to the bishopric of Bath and 
Wells, are not to be passed over in this part of 
the inquiry. The cardinal was then at Rome, 
and the King named the Bishop of Worcester, 
the Dean of St. Paul's, and Hugh Young, pro- 
fessor of divinity v , to receive from the cardinal 
an abjuration of every pretension of the Pope 
that could constructively militate against the 
.prerogatives of the crown, or the independence 

H 



,50 

of the state. — ei I renounce (says he) all and 
" every word, clause and sentence in the 
" apostolic bulles directed to me concerning 
" my aforesaid bishopric, which are prejudicial 
" to my sovereign lord the king, or his heirs, 
" or the rights, customs and prerogatives of 
" the kingdom." This oath was administered 
to the Cardinal at the very toot, as it may be 
said, of the pontifical throne.* 

* The preceding instances will be found, with many 
others, in a valuable collection of documents by the Rev. 
J. Lingard. Mr. Lingard concludes his head of collections 

anterior to the reformation, with this pertinent remark. . 

«' But, if even then, such were the sentiments of our Catholic 
*- ancestors, it must betray an excess of caution to fear, lest 
" at the present day, when the papal power in temporals, is 
" annihilated, and when the nature of civil and religious 
«* authority is so well understood, Catholics of the united 

kingdom should renounce the opinions of their ancestors, 
' and conspire to lay the liberties of their country at the feet 

of a fo-eign, and, in all probability, a dependant prelate." 
The Catholics of the present day are not suspected to be 
wanting of the best feelings of their ancestors ; but if our 
present constitution be countenanced by the practice of 
almost everj^modern state, in retaining and even strengthen- 
ing the barriers against papal usurpation, Mr. Lingard'* 
patriotic mind will readily admit that the casual dependant 
condition of the present pontiff will not supply a justifiable 
security for neglecting precautions against the possibility of 

usurpation. 

The nuthorities supporting these recited facts are to be 

found in the works of Selden, Burnet, and Colliers. 



5\ 

Sir J. II. then adverted to various docu- 
ments recognizing the antiquity of Catholic 
allegiance subsequent to the reformation, refer-r 
ring to Dodd's History of the Church and oth<T 
authors. He also noticed the adverse opinions 
of prelates of the establishment ; those of 
Bishop Barrington, of Bishop Sparke, and of 
Bishop Huntingiord, and opposed to them 
the contrasted sentiments of Bishop Watson, of 
Bishop Horsley, of Bishop Law, and of 
Bishop Bat hurst, who in their speeches in Par- 
liament, or in charges to their clergy, had borne, 
the most honorable testimony to Catholic 
loyalty, and most of them contended in favour 
of their admission to the full benefits of the 
constitution. The speeches of Bishop Bathurst 
in 180S and 1811 were of particular interest: 
in the latter speech that liberal prelate had 
referred to the interesting correspondence 
between Archbishop Wake, and the Ecclesias- 
tical historian Dupin The attachment of. 
the Archbishop to the church of England, had 
been never questioned, (as Bishop Bathurst 
observed,) yet he shrinks not from the qandid 
exposition of his correspondent in stating the 
doctrines and discipline of the church of Rome, 
still less does he arraign her doctrines as preg- 
nant with " idolatry, and blasphemy, and 
> 



52 

>' sacrilege ;" nor the Catholics themselves 
" who hold the confession of the council of 
" Trent, as enemies of all laws, divine and 
" human, and such as should be excluded 
u or driven from our courts and our armies!" 

While modern publications are industrious 
in propagating opinions so injurious to such a 
vast mass of our fellow subjects, comprehend- 
ing not less than a fourth of the population 
of the United Kingdom, Sir J.H. said he felt it 
his duty on the present, as he had also on a for- 
mer occasion, to oppose to them the opinions 
of other prelates, not less eminent for their 
talents and devotion to the interests of the 
establishment. Indeed, so little influenced by- 
such prejudices was Archbishop Wake, that 
he scruples not to avow in that correspondence 
with Monsieur Dupin, that " in the doctqne 
" of the church of Rome, as explained by him. 
,k there was no great difference of opinion be- 
* tween them; — still less as to ecclesiastical 

*'" discipline, and \\\ fundamental princi/j{es } \xhe- 
••■-thjei of doctrine or discipline, they scarcely 

. $1 differed at all," or, in his own words— fci In 
" floginatibus. prouta te candide proponuntur, 
".nau.adraodura dissentimus; in regimine 



6*3 



** ecclesiastica, minus ; in fundamenlalibus 
" seu doetrinam, seu disciplinam spectes, vix 






omnmo. 









Such was the opinion, gravely and delibe- 
rately expressed, by one of the soundest of our 
theologians, and one of the brightest orna- 
ments of our church; but what is of more 
importance for parliament and the public to 
ascertain, in the present view of the question, 
is the real state of Catholic principles, as ap- 
plicable to tire integrity of their allegiance, — ■ 
and whether the declarations so repeatedly made 
by Catholics, be, in fact, strictly conformable 
to the tenets of the doctrine, and essential 
discipline of their church. 



But, says the Catholic—we abjure, on oath, 

- 

all those obnoxious tenets which are imputed 
to us ? — The answer will probably be given 
as it has been but too often given — i(r Yes, vou 
*' swear indee d, but the dispensing power, in the 
" estimation of your church will relieve you 
" from the moral responsibility of your oath 1* 

* Such, however, he was persuaded, would not, 
nor could be the answer ; if that body of evidence 
were to be laid before thepublic, which would un- 

; questionably appear on the report of such a com- 



64 

mittee, as he had so often pressed upon the 
consideration of the house, namely, a select 
committee, constituted with the usual powers 
of investigation. Such a report would shew 
the basis on which parliament proposed to 
legislate. How often and how beneficially are 
such elucidatory reports circulated for the like 
purpose, even upon ordinary occasions ? And 
where can there be found an object so seriously 
demanding such an exposition, under all the cir- 
cumstances, as that great object, at present, be- 
fore the House. It involves, he repeated, a strik- 
ing and material departure fromapoiic\ T which 
has been the received policy for ages, and the 
negative sideofthe question, it must be admitted, 
is in unison with our earliest prejudices — pre- 
judices sincerely adm tted, and with difficulty 
to be eradicated. The mere act of legislation, 
however great the parliamentary majorities with 
which it might be carried, would still be 
comparatively unsubstantial, till hailed by 
the according public voice, enfranchised from 
its prejudices. The human mind is not so 
readily liberalized as civil franchises can be ex- 
tended by the mere act of legislation. The 
Catholic would soon see and impressively 
feel the justice and prudence attached to such 
an intervening course as that proposed. At 



55 

every step, his political character would brighten, 
and every hour would give new strength to his 
cause. In a word, he would become convinced 
thatthegreat object in view was cordially to bind 
the Catholic to the member of the establishment, 
by the reciprocal " ties of affection" as well as 
" of interest," — Ties, such as the legislature 
had recognized to be the paramount principle in 
the laws hitherto modified or abrogated on this 
subject : — And in the full spirit of that principle 
Sir J. H. said it was that he should give his most 
cordial assent tothe preliminary and necessary 
step, comprehended in the motion of his Right 
Honorable Friend. 



THE END 






" 






W. Fiint, Printer, Old Bailey, Lundoft, 



p 



DA 9 6^. 3- *£ 7 



SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 



TO THS 



Speech of Sir J. C. Hippisley, Bart 

On the 24th of April, 1813. 



m i « 



rF 



BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY 



PUBLIC FUNDS 



t 



In consequence of the length to which 
the following Notes have, almost unavoidably, 
extended ; — and in view to the object of their 
'publication previous to the Debate on Mr. Can- 
ning's Motion, which stands for Thursday the 
\%th inst. many facts are left unnoticed, which it 
would have been desirable to have stated, with 
some observations : — the whole has been put to- 
gether in a degree of haste, but ill suited to the 
importance of the subject. 



ERRATA. 

Advertisement line 4, for admitted, read omitted. 

Substance of Speech, Page 2, 20, Hereticos, Haretico& 

5, 9, Mohillow, Mohilow. 

23, 23, and a«. 

50, note, 1. last, Colliers, Collier* 

53, line 18, dele ? 



London, Id June, 1812. 



NOTES. 

(P. 2.) (C Hisreticos persequar et impugnabo." 

AN vain do Catholics protest against the interpretation 
which their opponents insist upon giving to this passa&e 
of the Pontifical Oath. — We have seen that Rome, 
yielding to the prejudice, has withdrawn it altogether, 
both with respect to the Catholic Bishops in the Russian 
dominions, as well as to those of Ireland : — but, in can- 
dour, let us see, also, how far the original Pontifical Oath 
is countenanced, in this respect, by the words of the Coro- 
nation Oath of the Kings of Scotland, as taken by King 
William and Queen Mary. 

" We, William and Alary, King and Queen of Scot- 
" land, faithfully promise and swear, &c. &c. to main- 
" tain the true Religion of Christ Jesus, now received 
u and preached within the realm of Scotland, and shall 
" abolish and gain-stand all false religion contrary to 
" the same, &c."- " We shall be careful to root 

" OUT ALL HERETICS AND ENEMIES TO THE TRUE 

" worship of God, that shall be convicted by the true 
u Kirk of God of the aforesaid crimes, out of our lands 

" and empire of Scotland, &c." Such is the Oath 

On a reference to Steuarfs of Furdovans Collections, 
1802, we find (Book iii. Table 2. of Papists, &c.) " that 
our Sovereigns, by their Coronation Oath, are to root 
out all Heretics" (as in the recited Oath) " which 
only binds them, at least, chiefly, to execute the laws 
C{ against Papists, who are declared common enemies to 
" all Protestant States." (Jas. vi. Part 16 and 18.) 

a 



it 

u 



i< 



2 

Again, "The severity of our laws against Papists will 
be further justified, if we consider, that by the law of 
" God idolaters were put to death, (Deut. xvii.) and 
" agreeable thereto Popish idolaters are to be punished 
" with deaths (By the 104 Act, Par. vii. Ja. 6, &c.) 
We Mud, however, that King William recoiled at the 
letter of his Oath, when he came to the clause, tc to root 

" out all Heretics:' The commissioners quieted his 

conscience, by leaving it to his own construction; and the 
.King took the Oath in his own sense of it, however op- 
posed to the letter of the law which enjoined it : Catho- 
lics have claimed the same indulgence for their Pontifical 
Oath, and with more reason (if we take Purdovan's con- 
struction of the Scotch Oath), but they have not been 
allowed it. 

So were King William and Qieen Mary constrained to 
take Oaths recognizing the Established Religions of both 
England and Scotland to be each, distinctively, the true 
Protestant Religion, though opposed to each other in doc- 
trine and discipline. To those who wish to examine fur- 
ther into the subject, we recommend JSteuart's of Purdo- 

ans Collections, 1802, and the admirable History of 
Scotland by Malcolm Laing, Esq. M- P. 

fu turning over the pages of the latter work, the 
horrid perfidy manifested in the massacre of the 
clan of Glencue, and the deliberate murder of the 
fanatical preacher Mitchell, at the instance of Arch- 
bishop Sharp, with the prostitution of all the forms 
of justice, and in violation of every principle of ho- 
nour and public faith, — will leave the Protestant, of that 
day, but little ground of triumph over the bigoted fury 
of Catherine of Medicis and her misled son! The massaove 
of St. Bartholomew is nevertheless, at this hour, held up 
as an awful yarning, and inscribed to the memory of Mr, 



Perceval, whose fate is assimilated to that of Coligmj ! — 
Such is the object of a pamphlet under this title of " The 
Awful Warning" now presented to the public to revive 
the yell against our Catholic fellow-subjects ; and still 
Vmore to inflame the mind, the pamphlet is interspersed 
'with prints, heightening the horrors of the scene ! 

In this race of calumny, the Catholic is naturally 
prompted to revive imputations and charges against the 
Protestant, to counterbalance the weight of obloquy ! 
— Mr. Plowden, in his History of the Reign of George I. 
published in 1809, asserts, Hint in the Viceroyalty of the 
Duke of Grafton in 17 ?3, at a period when Ireland was 
in that state of tranquillity as to justify the withdrawing 
of six regiments for the purpose of giving additional se- 
curity to England, his Grace thought it advisable, " for 
11 the further strengthening the Prelates' interest, as it 
* was assigned, to give his warm support to a bill with a 
* 6 clause for castrating every Catholic Clergyman that 
11 should be found within the realm. The bill, thus sur- 
" charged with gothic barbarism (Mr. Plowden observes) 
" was presented on the 1.5th of November, 1723, to the 
a Lord Lieutenant, by the Commons, at the Castle, and 
u they most earnestly requested his Grace u to recommend 
u the same in the most effectual manner to his Majesty." — 
u It was transmitted to England, and, for the honour of 
" humanity, there suppressed with becoming indigna- 
" tion. The Lord Lieutenant, however, in proroguing 
u the Parliament, consoled them for the loss of their 
" favourite bill, by attributing its failure to their having 
cc brought it in at so advanced a period of the sessions."-^ 
Mr. Plowden, in a note, says, that " some historians attri- 
*• bute the failure of the bill to the humane interposition 
(t of Cardinal Fleury with Mr. Walpole ; yet surely 
a there needed," he adds * no Gallic interference to ths 
u damnation of a law of such savage turpitude." 



This occurrence is given on the authority of Mr. Plow- 
tlen (vol. ii. p. 78.) If verified, it may serve as a cau- 
tion to the modern rivals of Oates and Bedloe in anti- 
catholic persecution, and prompt us to discipline our 
minds to the cultivation of the salutary injunctions of 
modern legislation, which in recognising " the uniform 
" peaceable behaviour (of the Roman Catholics of Ire- 
a land) for a long series of years " declares, in the spi- 
rit of a wise and liberal policy, that "to promote the 
" prosperity and strength of his Majesty's dominions^ 
<c subjects of all denominations should be bound to each 
if other by mutual interest and affection" 



(P. 7.) te The most important documents might 
' be authenticated— such as the reference to and 
cc answers of the Six Universities in 1789, 8$c." 

In the course of the Debate on Mr. G rattan's Motion in 
the last session, Sir J. H. observed that, in a recent publi- 
cation of Dr. Duigenan, he had rested the authenticity 
of these answers " c?i the authority of Dr. Hussey." Sir 
J. H. in the course of his speech, produced, in the house, 
the originals of the answers of all the Universities, authen- 
ticated by the signatures of the proper officers, and those 
of the Universities of Spain, sanctioned by the immediate 
authority of the King of Spain. They were also verified 
by the signatures of two of the lioman Catholic Prelates 
now in England, who procured the answers of the College 
of Douny ; and the whole proceedings are also attested by 
the surviving Members of the Committee, who attended 
the conferences with Mr. Pitt ; and authorised the questions 



to be transmitted to the Universities at his instance: Dr. 
Hussey was not employed in procuring those answers. 

The answer of the Faculty of Divinity at Paris, m the 
year 1775, to the consultation proposed to them on the 
subject of the Oath, is not less important, and should be 
verified in the proceedings of such a Committee, as well 
as many other similar documents. 



(P. 17.) cc To this end he would name the Trea- 
tises of Hooke,, of Bailly, and of De la Hogue; 
also the Works of Professor Schame." 

The object, in enumerating these authors, was to sug- 
gest the best means to ascertain Catholic principles by those 
works of the most accredited Theological and Ecclesias- 
tical Jurists, which were received, as class books, in their 
Universities and other public seminaries of education. 
Those above named are pre-eminent among their class 
books. The valuable Institutes of Hooke are now scarce, 
being out of print. He wrote and taught as a professor 
of the Sorbonne. Bailly was also a professor of the Sor- 
bonne. His " Tractatus de Ecclesid, ad usum Seminario* 
rwm," printed at Dijon in 1783, is one of great authority. 
Since that period he has published a new edition, and has 
been constrained to insert some articles adapted to the 
present constitution of the Church of France. The edi- 
tion of 1783 is likewise published under the official appro- 
bation of Professor De la Hogue, of the Sorbonne, at 
that time Censor. The " Tractatus de Ecclesid, 1 ' of Pro- 
fessor De la Hogue himself, is such as was taught by him 
in the University of Paris, and is now the class book, in 
Theology, of the College of Mai/nooth, where M. De la 



6 

Hogue is Professor. Mr. Foster *, in his late interest- 
ing speech in Parliament, complains, " that though the 
College of Maj/nooth has subsisted for seventeen years, he 
had never met with any person who could ever inform 
him of the course of studies actually punned; that the 
lectures are read from manuscript courses," &c. Mr. 
Foster seems not aware that Professor De la Hogue, in 
1809, published three volumes, comprehending the course 
of theological studies ', which embrace also the whole eccle- 
siastical polity of the Church of Rome, as applicable to 
foreign states. His works are, " De Religione" " De 
Sacramentis" and " De Eccksid Christi ;" the latter, 
comprehending a Treatise on General Councils, which 
was referred to, with the book in his hand, by the late 
Chancellor of the Exchequer, on the debate on Mr. 
Grattan's motion. And here it may be necessary to mention 
the circumstance under which Mr. Perceval introduced 
his observations, which was, by reading the title of Sec- 
tion p. 166, viz. u Concilia, convocatione et celebratione 
generality sunt infallibilia." Sir J. H. thereupon, calling 
across the House to Mr. Perceval, " infallibility in doctrine 
only — Mr. Perceval, with some air of triumph, turned 
to the last page of Professor De la Hogue s Tract, and 
quoted, speaking of the Council of Trent, " ltaquemaxi- 
mo in pretio illud consilium habere debent omnes Clerici, 
cum ratione dogmatum sit veluti omnium precedentium 
Synodorum compendium, el ratione discipline merito 

* Mr. Foster is also mistaken in calling William Allien the founder 
of the College of Douay. He supposes him to be the founder of 
an Irish College. The Roman Catholic Clergy of Ireland were not 
educated in that College, nor in any other seminaries that sprang 
from it : also, he is mistaken, in contending that the banished 
Jesuits of England resorted, in the first instance, to the College of 
Douay; at that time no Jesuits hud been in England. A reference 
to Dodd's History and Particulars of the Seminary Guests, will cor- 
rect these mistakes in a most able and interesting speech. 



did possit manuale sacerdotium, vel eorum qui sacerdotfo 
sunt initiandi" 

After Mr. Perceval bad sat down, Sir J. H. stated to 
him the error of his inference, as he took it, which ex- 
tended to the whole discipline of every General Council, 
and pointed out to him the chapter, " De decretis conci- 
liorum, quee adversus independentem Regum poieslatem 
objieiuntur." In that chapter the Councils of Laterati, 
Constance, and Trent, are particularly discussed, and the 
same conclusion drawr, as in the answers of the six Uni- 
versities, on every point affecting the independence of civil 
government. And in a prior chapter, " circa deer eta 
concilioram" M. De la Hogue quotes the great authority 
ofBossuet: (i Non docent Catholici, qucecunque gesta sunt 
in conciliis, ea ad Ecclesicc fidem pertinere:" and also, 
" Malta etiam sunt dtcrela qucenon pertinent ad invaria- 
bilemfidei regulam, sed sunt accommodata temporibus at- 
que negotiis" 

Such is the authority of Bossuel, Bishop of Manx. 
Mr. Perceval, on this exposition, very candidly confessed 
the error of his hasty reference. It is well known that 
the discipline of the Council of Trent was never received 
in France, nor in several other States, except partially r , 
by the express authority of the civil power, rejecting all 
such decrees as were considered as trenching, in the least, 
on the civil authority. But this question has been suf- 
ficiently discussed elsewhere, to satisfy the most jealous 
mind disposed to take the trouble of inquiry. England 
has adopted the provisions of the Marriage-Act from 
the Council of Trent ; and in Ireland six dioceses reject 
the decree concerning Clandestine Marriages, while all the 
other dioceses adopt it, with such other parts of the 
discipline of the Council of Trent as is conformable to 
the obligations ef the Oath of Allegiance, and no other. 
M. De la Hogue. in holding out the Decrees of discipline 



8 

of (he Council of Trent, has reserved only such as are in 
perfect unison with that oath, as may be satisfactorily 
collected from the perusal of his zcko/e Tract ; and can- 
dour protests against conclusions drawn from partial 
references. 

The " Institutions Juris Ecclesiastici" of Professor 
Schrame, were published at Augsbourg, in three volumes, 
in 1774, for the use of the Catholic Universities of Ger- 
many, under the approbation of the Electoral Archbishop 
of Dreces. No Tract is of more useful reference in the 
discussion of this question, and none can be more success- 
fully opposed to all the over-strained inferences in oppo- 
sition to the due interference of the civil power. 

A reference also to the German Publicists who have 
written on the stipulations of the " Transaction of 
Passau" the " Peace of Religion ," and lastly, the 
u Treaty of Osnabrug," (forming part of the Treaty of 
Westphalia), will confirm the soundness of the principle 
contended for by those who are the advocates for regula- 
tions on the basis, though not precisely in the words, of 
the resolutions of the Irish Prelates in 1799- We know 
that Innocent X. in 1649, protested, by a Pontifical Bull, 
against the ecclesiastical stipulations of the Treaty of 
Osnabru?. We also know that none of the States of 
Germany paid any attention to that Bull, and that the 
Catholic States, nevertheless, remained in perfect com- 
munion with Rome. 



(P. 21.) cc The solemn, official declaration of 
(e the See of Home itself, in the last Pontificate 
cc in 1791, which has been already adverted to, 
ec supplies the best answer to such imputations" 

This declaration was made, as we have seen, in answer 
to the application of the Irish Bishops ou the subject of 



the Pontifical Oath . Mr. Perceval was of opinion that the 
saving clause, " salvo meo ordine" did not sufficiently 
cover the allegiance of the subject. The Catholic Bishops 
think otherwise ; and we may here refer to the construc- 
tion of Father O'Leary ; a character deservedly respected 
for his loyalty as well as his learning, and whose merits 
had been repeatedly recognised in the Irish Parliament. 
In the defence of his conduct and writings, in answer to 
the Bishop of Cloyne's objections drawn from the Conse- 
cration Oath, he says : " In the midst of it is inserted, 
in express words, a saving clause, which speaks the dig- 
nity of Catholic Bishops, and reconciles their allegiance 
to their respective Sovereigns with the canonical obe- 
dience due to their Head Pastor. 6 Salvo meo ordine? 
This clause does away every difficulty, and leaves the 
sceptre in the Prince's hands, whilst it leaves the censor in 
the hands of the Pontiff. 6 Salvo meo ordine,' as a sub- 
ject, bound to give Caesar his due, and to pay allegiance 
to the reigning powers in whose states I reside. c Salvo 
meo ordine, 9 as a Minister of the Gospel, who is to preach 
the word, and who takes the oath in no other sense than 
to prosecute by arguments and impugn by persuasion, 
reason, and good example, those Who are of a different 
persuasion. Any other prosecution or persecution, let 
the term be what it may, is inconsistent with humanity, 
much more with the order of a Christian Prelate, who 
takes not, who cannot take the oath in any other sense. 
Bishops never take that oath in any sense injurious to 
Sovereigns, or to civil society. The Sovereign Pontiff 
knows they do not. Before they are consecrated, they are 
bound to swear allegiance to their respective Sovereigns (in 
Catholic States), who are as jealous of their privileges as 
any Protestant Monarch can be." — Were any more jea- 
lous of the rights and prerogatives of their Crowns than 
the Kings of France were ? And yet did they apprehend 

b 



10 

any danger from tli is very Consecration Oath which is 
objected to? 

In the English ordinal, the Archbishop asks the Bishop 
elect, u Are you ready to banish and drive aicay all erro- 
neous and all strange doctrines, contrary to God's word, 
and both privately and openly to call upon and encourage 
others to do the same f — Answer, u I am ready, 1 " &c. 
But the Coronation Oath taken by the Kings of Scotland, 
and particularly as taken by King William and Queen 
jWary, is the best commentary, and of that we shall speak 
in another place. 

It will be recollected, that in the last debate on Mr. 
Grattan's motion, Mr. Yorke produced in the House 
what is termed the " Blue Books " or the controversy 
on the interpretation of the oath originally introduced in 
the Act of 1791. That controversy would long since 
have been buried in oblivion, did not Dr. Milner from 
time to time take pains to revive it : and it may now be 
proper to say a few words in relation to it, which Sir 
J. [I. also stated to Mr. Perceval, and other Members on 
the Treasury Bench, while Mr. Yorke was speaking to 
the point. — Three of the Apostolic Vicars, and many of 
the Clergy dissented from the precise terms of the proposed 
oath — they contended, that some of the propositions were 
inaccurately qualified, though they made no opposition 
to any declaration of the duties of civil allegiance in the 
most extended moral sense. Without going into details, 
it is sufficient to observe that the scruples of the Bishops 
were attended to in the House o; Lords, and Bishop Hors- 
ley became their advocate. The Bishop of London and 
Mr. Pitt were also of opinion that their scruples were 
fairly to be maintained ; and the oath, as it stands at pre- 
sent, in the Act ot 1791, was substituted in the place of 
that originally introduced. 



11 



{P. 26.) cf It appeared desirable that the precise 
"tenure of the Apostolic Vicars resident in 
" Great- Britain should give place to a class of 
cc Prelates independent of foreign contrail/' 

The distinction between Vicars Apostolic and Bishops 
Ordinaries has been often stated, and the proposed change 
has ever been deemed acceptable to the Roman Catholic 
Prelates ; yet Dr. Milner, in his tC Instructions to the 
Catholics of the Midland Counties of England, in IS 11," 
introduces, at least, an indirect charge against Sir J. H. 
qualified indeed with the compliment, that i( the learn- 
ed Baronet knows more of our tenets, discipline, and eco- 
nomy, than any other Protestant ;" yet " he wishes 
to turn the English Vicars Apostolic into ordinary 
Bishops ." 

In a printed letter, circulated within a few weeks past, 
which is termed u An Explanation with the R. R. Dr. 
Pointer, #c." Dr. Milner distinctly contrasts the com- 
paratively dependent state of the English Apostolic 
Vicars with that of the Irish Hierarchy. — " The parties 
at issue," he says, " consist of three Vicars Apostolic of 
unconnected districts, and immediately dependent on the 
Pope, who are supported by their two coadjutors; and 
on the other hand, of twenty-nine Prelates, forming the 
whole Prelacy of a canomcally constituted National 
Church, 8?c.' y Dr. Milner thus admits the whole princi- 
ple of Sir J. H.'s view of the relative state of the two 
Church Governments, that of England and Ireland ; 
though qualified by Dr. Milner with an inference not 
very complimentary to his colleagues, nor to the See of 
Rome. 



J2 

(P. 3ht) " It was with no small surprise that he 
<c heard of the opposition of that Gentleman 
<c (Mr. Clinch), as he had been so recent and so 
ce warm an eulogist of a tract printed in 1806, 
cc and pointedly recognized the utility of those 
cc measures now so much reprobated^ and 
cc which recited the authorities by which they 
(C were supported in other states J* 

The following note was introduced in page 22 of the 
2d Edition of Sir J. H.'s Speech on the Catholic Ques- 
tion on the 18th May, ISiO. 

" After the debates in 1S05, when Mr. Fox moved to 
go into a committee on the Catholic Petition, Sir J, H. 
circulated a large impression of what was intitled, " The 
Substance of Additional Observations, fyc" and copies 
were transmitted to Dr. Troy for distribution to the 
Roman Catholic Prelates of Ireland, in order that they 
might be fully apprised of the measures that Sir J. H. 
had conceived it to be his duty to recommend to the 
consideration of the King's Ministers, antecedent to the 
Union. Sir J. H. received many applications* particu- 
larly from two distinguished Roman Catholic Prelates in 
Ireland, as well as from others in England, to re-print a 
large edition of the pamphlet for circulation in Ireland ; 
and a gentleman, who has since that period parti- 
cularly distinguished himself by his opposition to the 
negative of the Crown, then united with the Roman Catho- 
lic Bishops in urging the re-publication of the pamphlet, as 
the u wish of all those who had read it." This pam- 
phlet adverted to the mode of appointing Roman Catholic 
Bishops in Ireland ; stated the practice obtaining in the 
United Provinces, upon the authority of the Cardinal 5e- 
cretnry of the Propaganda, — namely, that all Catholic 
Priests, or Cures, were presented, by the arch-priest ? to the 



13 

civil magistrate, pour etre acoitis, (as, in the United Pro- 
vinces, there -were no Roman Catholic Bishops). Sir 
J. H. proceeded to object to the nomination of the Irish 
Catholic Bishops by the Crozm, which had been suggest- 
ed by an Irish county member in the course of the debate 
of 1805, and quoted the letter of Mr. Burke to Lord 
Kenmare in support of his objection to all power of no- 
urination, adding, " that the Wholesome end which the 
learned gentleman had in view, might easily be attained 
by another regulation." He then stated, u that, among 
the various regulations suggested to government at that 
period, was one, providing that, in future, all lists of 
persons recommended to fill vacant sees, or deaneries, 
previous to their transmission to Rome, should be com- 
municated to his Majesty's Ministers." — He then advert- 
ed to various other regulations, concluding, " that such 
regulations could not be considered, even at Rome, as in- 
compatible with the acknowledgment of a spiritual su- 
premacy." In fact, that suggestion was in conformity to 
the practice in nearly all the states of Europe, Catholic, 
Greek, or Protestant ; but the authority cited fyy Dr. 
Milneronthis head, in reference to the opinion of the 
See of Rome, is decisive." 

Vide SirJ.H.'s "Substance of Additional Observa- 
tions." Faulder^ 1806\ 

As Mr. Clinch's u Inquiry into the Consequences of 
giving a Negative to the Crown, $*<:." was considered as 
having materially influenced the opinion of the public, 
on the measure proposed by the four Archbishops and six 
senior Roman Catholic Bishops in 1799, and was cur- 
rently styled " A Brief for the Bishops," and published 
on the eve of their deliberations in 1S08, Sir J. H. ad- 
dressed the Author, at some length, recalling to his me- 
mory the unqualified approbation which he had given to 
Sir J. H.'s Tract, which, in fact, recognised the utility 
of those measures which have since been viewed in so 



14 

different a light ;— but to those observations' Sir J. H. has 
received no reply. A very copious Extract of the same 
Tract has beert rece.vW- given to the public in the third 
volume of " The History of Inland to October, ISlO, 
by Francis Plowden, Esq." It has therefore been thought 
advisable to reprint those Extracts, together with such 
part of Mr. Clinch's Letter as refers to the republica- 
tion of the Tract, the other part being of a private na- 
ture, with no reference to the subject in question. — Some 
observations on such parts of Mr. Plowden's History, as 
relate to what he styles the " Veto Controversy" wiit 
follow the extracts. 



Extract of a Letter from J. B. Clinch, Esq. Bar- 
rister at Law, to Sir J. C. Hippisley, Bart, 
dated 2btii November, 1806. 

— " I was directed by 3VI*. R d . ABishop Troy to inform you 
particularly, that your argument on the Catholic question has 
been very generally read by intelligent and prudent persons., 
and that the wish of all those who have read it, is, that you 
may be prevailed upon to publish it, or to allow it to be pub- 
lished in Ireland. With regard to me, as I was favoured with 
a copy from Doctor Troy, it is but candid to declare that I am 
persuaded the most beneficial consequences will arise from the 
dissemination of that work, not only from the systematic and 
comprehensive information it affords on many important points, 
which those of the one persuasion were ignorant of, and those 
of the other were not able to give, in so unincumbered and 
satisfactory a way ; but from the reconciling nature of such a 
Toto ragionato delivered by a character of trust and weight. 
It will furnish arguments to those who, rather from an equita- 
ble and generous instinct, than a knowledge of the cause, had 
befriended our petition, and will give to those who may wish to 
retrace their steps, and conform to the more liberal and pro- 
vident spirit of the times, an highly decent opportunity to 
acknowledge themselves converted. But above all, it is but 



15 

justice, that you should avow yourself as the most competent 
person to give counsel on any possibly to be devised measure 
for sealing the domestic peace of the Empire. Unless you" 
stand forward in this character, I am persuaded it will in such 
a case devolve on persons not so fit as you, by learning, or ex- 
perience, or what in this case is a chief point, and a very sore 
one, by a conscientious and dignified tenderness for the inte- 
grity of our religion and sacred customs. And though it were 
possible to find another gentleman possessing those titles to 
Protestant and Catholic confidence, in the same degree with 
you, sir, — yet the fact is, as far as my acquaintance with the 
sentiments of our people extends, that you alone possess that 
confidence entirely with the highest orders of our teaching 
body, and with all those who are competent to judge on Ca- 
tholic affairs amongst us. Without meaning to flatter or to 
offend, I sincerely own that I scarcely expected to find in any 
English publication either the facts, or the reasoning, or the 
worthiness of sentiment, which I saw in your speech ; espe- 
cially as I had begun to apprehend, from the publications of 
************* that it was intended to 
subjugate the real liberties of our Church, and to lay it open 
to the invasion of lewd and unprincipled ambition, which does 
unfortunately exist in some individuals * * * *. I thank 
you, sir, for rescuing our cause at once from ignorant slander 
and from domestic treachery. My wish has always been that 
the Catholics should find in Protestants a better support than 
in their own communion ; because otherwise I saw it difficult 
to produce universal concord, and because many things, now 
apparently irreconcilable, would easily be settled, when once 
the parties became attached to each other. This principle I 
have perhaps urged too far in conversation, yet I have expe- 
rienced that it was wished by several of our religion. I hope, 
sir, that you will incline to have our argument published, at 
least to declare that you will not resent its being done in Ire- 
land. We have got a beautiful set of types in Dublin which 
served for the second edition of my pamphlet." 

.fjE iwonioi 



16 

Extracts from fi Tlie Substance of Additional 
Observations intended to have been delivered in 
the Debate on the Petition of the Roman Catho- 
lics of Ireland, on the lith May, 1805." - 

Note. — The following extracts, from the Tract referred to by Mr. 
Clinch, are made, verbatim, from a copy which had been transmitted to 
Dr. Troy, for his corrections previous to the publication of the new edi- 
tion, so much solicited. In tha margin of the copy were a few corrections 
in Dr. Troy's hand, and ail such as occur in the parts novo extracted) are given 
in Dr. Troy's words. The whole of the marginal corrections of Dr. 
Milner are also added, in the Notes, from his own hand. This copy was 
delivered to Sir J. H. by Mr. Clinch, with a few corrections aLo on Dr. 
Troy's Letters, which were annexed to the Tract, and which are reprinted 
and added to the " Substance of Sir J. Hiypisletfs Speech in 1310.' ; — 
[Faultier.] 

[From page 85.] 

I will now, Sir, beg to follow the conduct of Rome a little 
farther, to the distance of two years subsequent to the alte- 
ration of the Pontifical Oath. And here, Sir, I must submit 
to the imputation of some degree of egotism : but I consider 
the facts to which I shall refer as materially illustrating the 

general argument which I have endeavoured to support. 

But, it may be here necessary previously to call the recol- 
lection of Gentlemen to the relative situation of the govern- 
ments of Great Britain and Rome. The estrangement which 
had subsisted for little less than three centuries, and the exist- 
ence of highly penal laws, though the occasions which gave 

th to them had long ago ceased to exist, were apparent 
obstacles to a friendly intercourse between the two countries. 
An event, however, occurred, which at least illustrated the 
inutility of such restrictions; — operating as a sort of admo- 
nition against artificial and political antipathies, and enforcing 
the wholesome truth that states, like individuals, were bound 
together by the chain of mutual necessities. From a great 
failure cf the crops, in other parts of Italy, the Roman State 
offered the only material source of supply to our fleet and to 
many thousand of our troops in the Mediterranean. The 



17 

fleet consisted of 40 sail of men of war, and there were no 
ordinary official means of providing for the exigency. Being 
at that period in Rome, the extent of the necessities expe- 
rienced by our army and navy were intimated to me, and my 
interposition with the Roman government was anxiously soli- 
cited. — From a long residence, at different periods in Italy, 
and the influence of social habits, strengthened by a family 
connexion, I had lived in intimacy with many of the leading 
members of the Roman government. — I scrupled not to 
make our necessities known to the Sovereign Pontiff, whose 
liberality was as eminent, as it was prompt. A supply of 
grain and flour was immediately granted, equal to the con- 
sumption of 12,000 men, for three months, with a considerable 
quantity of cattle, all free of the duties of transit, and at a 
price from 30 to 40 per cent, under that of the market. — The 
channel of application thus opened, further supplies were 
from time to time as liberally administered, and afterwards 
as liberally acknowledged by his Majesty's Government. 

I have mentioned this preliminary fact, as only leading to 
that intercourse which had a more immediate relation to ob- 
jects intimately connected with the question now before the 
House, and to which I shall beg to advert. I say intimate'y 
connected with the question, as the conduct of the See of 
Rome, with respect to this country, has ever been regarded 
with a watchful jealousy at least, and the apprehensions 
excited by that consideration, seem, at present, to constitute 
much of the reluctance to admitting the prayer of the 
Petition now before us. — But, Sir, to return to facts. — The 
speech of a Noble Lord in the Irish Parliament had appeared 
in several foreign Gazettes, complaining of the ingratitude 
and seditious conduct of many Catholics of that kingdom. 
I will not scruple, Sir, to repeat in this place, what I avowed 
at the moment, to the King's Ministers, that I thought it 
might be for the advantage of his Majesty's government, at 
such a crisis, that the See of Rome should not be uninformed 



18 

of this imputation, which, to a certain extent, might proba- 
bly be too well founded. — The correspondence between the 
See of Rome and the Prelates of that communion, in Ireland, 
was known to be frequent, and the most wholesome admo- 
nitions had often proceeded from the Roman Pontiff, as the 
chief and centre of unity of the Catholic communion :— no 
doubt was entertained but that the Roman Catholic Prelates, 
and the great mass of their inferior clergy, would have 
zealously anticipated the sentiments of their Chief Pastor on 
this occasion; but the lower classes of those professing the 
Roman communion, had been taught to believe that the cause 
of the insurgents was the cause of religion, and patronized 
by the See of Rome. The result of this communication was, 
that the letters were addressed to the Irish Roman Catholic 
Clergy, expressive " of his Holiness' s deep concern and dis~ 
t( approbation of the conduct of those ill-advised Catholics, 
" who had suffered themselves to be seduced, recalling them back 
" to their duty, and admonishing them to be aware of the 
" snares laid for them, by those who had no other view but to 
" subvert all religion and the throne." — And here I must re- 
mark, that this and other letters, dictated in the same spirit, 
from Rome, at this period, were admitted to have produced 
very beneficial effects. 

• I shall state another fact in proof of the readiness of the 
See of Rome to concede to suggestions intimately connected 
with the good order of his Majesty's government. — It will be 
recollected that there are certain national establishments at 
Rome, founded for the education of his Majesty's Roman 
Catholic subjects, and principally to qualify them to officiate 
as ecclesiastics in Great Britain and Ireland. The practice 
had long obtained to appoint Italian superiors charged with 
the education of the students. The national clergy had, for 
more than twenty years, endeavoured to procure a reform in 
favour of national superiors, and in this object they had often 
been indirectly sanctioned by the approbation of his Majesty's 



19 

government.* Whole seminaries, expressly appropriated to 
the education of British subjects, existed at Rome ; the system 
and principles inculcated, necessarily became objects of cir- 
cumspection. Urged by the entreaties of this description of 
my fellow-subjects, during my residence at Rome, I also con- 
sidered it my duty to devote my endeavours to aid the suc- 
cess of so interesting a reform ; and I had the gratification 
to see it established by an order of the late Sovereign Pontiff, 
and confirmed by his successor. The principle which I con- 
sidered as justifiable, and consequently ventured to urge in 
support of this reform was, — that although Rome might 
reasonably expect or demand that the youth so educated, 
should be trained up to the doctrines and discipline of her 
own Church, yet, on the other hand, the British government 
had an imperious interest in securing their early and national 
attachment to the civil constitution of the state in which they 
were destined to exercise their clerical functions. From their 
relation to the British government, certain high duties neces- 
sarily flowed, which, of course, required a clear discernment 
of their extent and obligation. — From Italian superiors it was 
little probable they would be disciplined to these habits. — 
No plan to secure this advantage was likely to be so effective 
as that of committing to British subjects the superintendance 
of these seminaries of education. The Bishops and Irish 
Catholic Prelates having themselves taken the oaths of alle- 
giance, might then be answerable for the superiors of the 
national colleges, whose nomination was thus transferred to 
them, that they should give the same test of their allegiance. 
An education conducted on any other principle, must neces- 
sarily be foreign to the manners, the habits, and the interests 
of their native country, and to the claims of its established 
government. In justice to the Cardinal York, it should also 
be stated that, after the disorders incident to the irruption of 
the French, during which a derangement of this system was 
the natural consequence, his Eminence, probably animated 

* Particularly that of Lord North. 



20 

Trill; a jimt sense of his Majesty's beneficence towards bin;, 
manifested great zeal to effect and complete this reform 
under the present Pontificate, and a superior was afterward* 
placed at the head of the Scotch College, who had previously 
taken the Oaths of Allegiance to his Majesty, in Great 
Britain. * 

When it is considered, Sir, that the Roman Catholic popu- 
lation, including- Great Britain and its colonies, cannot be 
estimated to be less than fi. ve millions, the education of the 
Roman Catholic Clergy can never be regarded with indiffe- 
rence by an enlightened and provident government; nor can 
the favourable disposition of Rome itself be an object of se- 
condary or subordinate consideration. Admitting even, that 
the prayer of the Petition before us is not such as should be 
conceded, how little suited to the interests of his Majesty'* 
government is much of the invective we have heard in the 
course of this debate i In a national view, we have many fair 
motives to cultivate a good understanding with the Roman 
government ; and I will not suppose, that, because it is nearly 
at its extreme point of depression, there is no chance of its 
again rising to some consideration even in the scale of tem- 

* It seems that Bonaparte has recently held out a lure to invite 
British and Irish Catholics to receive their education in France. He 
has issued a decree, consolidating all the funds and other property 
of the Catholic Seminaries (for men), which were confiscated at the 
time of Robespierre , into one establishment, which is fixed in the 
Hue des Posies, and the Rue Cheval Vert. A Dr. Welch, a native of 
Ireland, is appointed President of this college. Those who had claims 
on the former establishments, are invited to send young men to it ; 
which, if they neglect to do before the middle of next May, they are 
to forfeit their presentations : and these conditions have been lately 
intimated, by the new President, to some of his Majesty's subjects 
in this kingdom. This fact is well worth the attention of his Majesty'* 
Ministers, who certainly are called upon to provide greater induce- 
ments for the King's Catholic subjects to renounce foreign con- 
nexions. — In Ireland, the Government has been liberal in the esta- 
blishment of the College of Maynooth. 



21 

poral states. — The History of the Popes, from the earliest 
ages, presents a greater number of instances of revolutions, 
depositions, and imprisonments of their persons, even by 
Christian Princes, than can be found in the annals of any 
other state whatever. — Whether we consider the influence 
which the Supreme Pontiff must ever maintain over the minds 
of a large majority of those professing the Roman communion, 
in spirituals; or whether we are to regard him as a temporal 
prince, possessing a fertile territory, with convenient ports in 
the Mediterranean and Adriatic Seas, to which, in a political 
and commercial view, it may be of considerable importance 
to us to have access on the most favourable terms ; the language 
of temperate discussion, at least, is equally enjoined. 

The fallen state of Rome was also, in the course of this de- 
bate, inferred by an Honourable Member, from the circum- 
stance of the late Pope, Pius VI., being guarded, as it was 
said, by British troops in his capital. I advert to it, merely 
to demonstrate how much it is the fate that every transaction 
connected with Rome should be misrepresented ofmisunder* 
stood. The fact alluded to, is, that a part of his Majesty's 
12th regiment of light dragoons was received at CivitaVec- 
chia with the most marked hospitality by the late Pope, and 
entertained, during a period of three months, in his domi- 
nions, after having solicited and being refused admission into 
the ports of our allies. An Honourable Member, whom I 
see in his place, commanded the detachment, and I know will 
bear willing testimony to the courtesies of the Pontifical Go- 
vernment. — The official notification of the order which recalled 
them from the Ecclesiastical States, concluded with this ac- 
knowledgment : " We are not the less indebted to the 

" friendly and seasonable hospitality by which Pius VI. stands 
" distinguished in Italy, both for steady attachment to Eng- 
" land, and for manliness with regard to the common 
" enemy." * 

* Extract of a letter from the Right Honourable Sir G. Elliot, 
Bart, (now Lord Minto), one of his Majesty's Plenipotentiaries in 



Without entering into the details of our intercourse, at this 
period, with the Court and See of Rome, which was incessant 
and multiplied from the pressure of our necessities, I am per- 
suaded that I shall be scarcely censured as departing- materi- 
ally from the question, if I advert, on this point, to the senti- 
ments of a truly great man, whose very name is ever impres- 
sive of veneration within these walls, though considered by the 
learned Member as " one of the active and able agents of 
" Rome + j" — I mean the late Mr. Burke. 

u As to what you have done," said he,t " with regard to 
*' the supply of his Majesty's fleet in the Mediterranean, 
" there can be no doubt of its propriety. — Circumstances may 
" happen to render the good disposition of the government of 
™ the country where you reside, of great use to the general 
" cause* Nobody can be so very squeamish as to refuse be- 
" nefits, (nothing else will ever be offered by his Holiness) be- 
" cause they come from the Pope. He would be an Admiral 
" of wonderful theological talents, but of not quite such splen- 
" did military qualities, who should scruple the receipt of 
" those indigencies called Munitions de Guerre et de Bouche, 
" from a Prince Prelate that believes in purgatory. — I should 
" not think a great deal better of a statesman at home, who, 
" from a disposition to polemic divinity, was so indifferently 
" qualified for the conduct of any other kind of warfare. But 
" we have no such Admirals and no such Ministers. — I con- 
" fess I would, if the matter rested with me, enter into much 
*i more distinct and avowed political connections with the 
" Court of Rome than hitherto we have held. If we decline 
tl them, the bigotry will be on our part, and not on that of 
u his Holiness. — Some mischief has happened, and much good 

the Mediterranean,— to Sir J. C. H. dated St. Fiorenzo, March 31, 
1794. — Vide Appendix IX. 

f See Dr. Duigenan's Speech, Hatchard, page 39. 

X In a Letter of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke to Sir 
J. C. H. dated 10th Oct. 1793. 



\ 



" has, I am convinced, been prevented by our unnatural alie- 
" nation. If the present state of the world has not taught us 
" better things, our error is very much our fault. This good 
" correspondence could not begin more auspiciously than in 
" the person of the present Sovereign Pontiff, who unites the 
Ct Royal and Sacerdotal characters with advantage and lustre 
*' to both. He is indeed a Prelate, whose dignity as a Prince 
" takes nothing from his humility as a Priest, and whose mild 
" condescension as a Christian Bishop, so far from impairing in 
" him, exalts the awful and imposing authority of the secular 
fi Sovereign/' 

I have no light gratification, in adverting to such an opi- 
nion, flowing from such a man. This, Sir, is not the language 
of the bigoted Romanist, nor, to borrow the learned Gentle- 
man's description, " of the active agent of Rome," — " of agents 
" imposing the grossest falsehoods on the British Ministry'' 
but of the wise and provident statesman, viewing the subject 
through the medium of an enlightened and equitable policy. 

[From page 101. 

I will now proceed to the consideration of certain provisions 
of an act of the 31st of his present Majesty, the avowed ob- 
ject of which is to relieve his Majesty's Roman Catholic Sub- 
jects from penalties and disabilities imposed by former statutes. 
The act in question is, indeed, speaking strictly, an English 
act; but as every subject of his Majesty, of ihe Roman com- 
munion, when residing in England, is equally bound by its 
provisions, I cannot consider the observations which I shall 
make upon it as foreign to the subject under discussion. 

It has been contended, that the free exercise of their reli- 
gion has been assured, by the Legislature, to Roman Catho- 
lics, in every part of the King's dominions. — We shall pre- 
sently see how far the assertion is warranted by the 'fact. 

With a view to concede what is considered as complete tole- 
ration in favour of those who shall take and subscribe the oath 



24 

prescribed by the statute of the 31st of the King, many provi- 
sions of various enumerated acts, commencing with the 1st of 
Elizabeth, are, in the whole or in part, v repealed ; — yet the 
highly penal act of the 13th of Eliz. ch. 2. is left entire en our 
statute books, and, as I consider it, in full force. 

By this it is enacted, that " any person ivho shall get from the 
" See of Rome any Bull, Writing, or Instrument, written or 
" printed, containing any thing, matter, or cause whatever," 
shall be deemed guilty of high treason :— -any application to the 
See of Rome for such rescripts, by the 25th of Henry VIII, 
subjects the person so applying to a Praemunire : — and, " the 
" importation of beads, crosses, fyc. and offering them to be 
" worn or used, by any person/' also subjects the offender to 
the penalties of Pramunire, by the fame statute of Elizabeth. 
— Yet need I say that such procurations and importations are 
of daily occurrence, and that Bulls, Writings, and Instruments, 
from the See of Rome, are considered by Roman Catholics, in 
various cases, as essential to the exercise of their religion ?— 
Such, for instance, as the renewal of the extraordinary facul- 
ties granted to the British Roman Catholic Prelates : — for dis- 
pensations likewise in cases of matrimony, within the second 
degree of consanguinity, and in a variety of other instances of 
frequent occurrence, in conformity to the established practice 
and discipline of the Church of Rome. ~-s 

Those who are alarmed at the possible encroachments of 
the See of Rome, contend in favour of the 13th of Eliz. that 
it constitutes the only substantial bulwark to protect us against 
the introduction and promulgation of Papal Rescripts, hostile 
to our establishment in Church and State : — yet the prohibi- 
tion, in mass, of all Bulls, Writings, &c. from Rome, mili- 
tates against the spirit and avowed object of the act of the 31st 
of his Majesty, inasmuch as the " rites, practice, and ob- 
ie servance of the Roman Catholic Religion," to use the words 
of that act, cannot be said to be fully tolerated, if a correspon- 
dence with the See of Rome, which is deemed essential to its 
discipline, remains proscribed. 



25 

But, in fact, the severity of the act of Elizabeth has defeated. 
Itself, as unnecessary rigour ever does ; for penalties may be 
carried so far, and be so oppressive, as in the laws of Draco, 
that none will be found to execute the law; so that if we are 
to admit any hostile disposition on the part of the Roman Pon- 
tiff now or at any time, we are more exposed to suffer from 
it, as far as an injury can be attempted through the medium 
of such missive writings, than if no such law had ever been 
enacted. It does not appear, indeed, that either in Scotland 
or Ireland any similar statute exists. A statute of his present 
Majesty enacts, that Ireland thenceforth shall be bound only 
by her own laws, and nearly at the same period an act passed, 
enumerating certain English acts as obligatory on Ireland. — 
This highly penal statute of the l3th of Elizabeth was not of 
that number. — I conceive that the act of the 31st of the King, 
which professes to give complete toleration to such of his Ma- 
jesty's Roman Catholic subjects as take the prescribed oath, 
leaves the interdiction of intercourse with the See of Rome 
in the same state as if that act had never passed, and that the 
13th of Elizabeth still bears equally on all Catholics casually 
or permanently resident in this part of the United Kingdom, 
whether they take the oath or not. 

Much as I am disposed to favour the objects of the Petition 
before the House, and much as my feelings are abhorrent from 
the penalties of the act to which I have just now adverted, I 
am by no means adverse to the principle that gave birth to 
them. — I would wish to be considered as not less jealous of a 
foreign interference and abuses, than our ancestors were in the 
days of Edward III. and Richard II. from which period the 
statutes of provisors and ur&munire take their date ; and though 
my view of the subject with respect to the mischief to be ap- 
prehended from the admission of a foreign Primacy, in Spi- 
rituals, is very different from those in general who oppose the 
present question, I will meet them in a wish to institute a solid 
and rational barrier against any possible encroachment of the 

D 



26 

3ee of Rome, in the place of those visionary guards, which coon* 
teract their own purposes from their sanguinary tendency. 

By instituting regulations to this end, we shall be counte- 
nanced by the practice of, I believe, nearly every other Eu- 
ropean state, Catholic or Protestant; and the Noble Viscount, 
who conducted the arrangements of the Union, will do me the 
justice to recollect, that I urged the adoption of such regula- 
tions as I would now propose, when the Catholic subject was 
"known to have occupied much of the attention of the King's 
Ministers ; and " the exemption of the Irish. Roman Catholic* 
" from the remaining disabilities (as avowed by my Honour- 
* able Friend then in the Cabinet), was the principal object 
" of those who concurred with the measure of the Union."-* 

The repeal of the 13th of Elizabeth, ch. 2, I then stated as 
necessarily enjoined by the purview of the act of the 81st of 
his present Majesty, ch. 32; and in lieu thereof, I proposed the 
enacting that no Bull, nor other Papal Rescript, containing 
any ordinances of the See of Rome, should be circulated or 
puhlished till after it had been transmitted to one of his Ma- 
jesty's Secretaries of State, or some other appointed officer, 
and in certain cases also be laid before his Majesty's Privy 
Council, if thought expedient, to which such Prelates as were 
of the Council should be specially summoned. — If, on due exa- 
mination, those instruments contained only the ordinary fa- 
culties or regulations of internal discipline, they should be 
certified, without delay, by the officer appointed, as contain- 
ing nothing contrary to the establishment in Church or State. 
—•A regulation of this description might, with facility, be so 
modified, as to give perfect satisfaction to his Majesty's Roman 
Catholic subjects, by avoiding all unnecessary' and vexatious 
interference or delay, and, at the same time, to afford com- 
plete security to the establishment^ 

* Vide Mr. Windham's Speech. 

-f Dr. Milner has annexed a MS. Note to this Section of the Tract, 
which is as follows : — " Neither in ancient France, nor in any other 



27 

Another regulation suggested at the same period, was, that 
any Roman Catholic Priest or Schoolmaster applying to be li- 
cenced under the act of the 31st of the King, should, in addi- 
tion to the Oath of Allegiance therein prescribed, produce a 
certificate from his immediate Superior, if a Priest, or from 
some known respectable persons, if a* layman, attesting his 
good moral character, and attachment to the civil constitution 
of the state ; which certificate should be authenticated by the 
nearest resident Magistrate, and in consequence of which the 
licence should then be granted as in the manner now directed. 
— As the law now stands, any Priest or Schoolmaster, merely 
on his own avowal, however notoriously bad his character may 
be, provided he scruple not to take the oath, may demand a 
licence on paying one shilling for his certificate. — It is unne- 
cessary to observe, that the law is not so loose with respect to 
the Clergy and Schoolmasters professing the established reli- 
gion, in view to whose functions, testimonials and certificates 
are the required qualifications. 

And further, with respect to the statute of the 13th of Eliza- 
beth. — By not enforcing its provisions, which we are con- 
strained to connive at from their excess of severity, we tacitly 
permit the circulation of every sort of papal instrument without 
resorting to those safeguards which other states, as I have ob- 
served, have wisely instituted. — Those who are apprehensive 
that the rescripts of the Thuilleries may be occasionlly imposed 
upon us in the guise of decretals of the Vatican, will necessa- 
rily be alive to the possible abuse of a want of some rational 
and practical restriction. 

The restrictions to which I allude, are in strict conformity 

" Catholic state, did the civil power take cognizance of the inter- 
41 course of its subjects with Rome in for o interiorly — -Dr. Milner 
is so far correct, that when the cases were certified to fall vjithin the 
forwn internum, they were not examined by the civil power ; and this 
remission was all that Pius VI. could obtain from Joseph II. — but 
that certification was necessary. — This is the only observation made 
by Dr. Milner, In other respects his approbation is to be found in hit 
printed Lettersr 



28 

to the provident institutions of the old Gallican Church, ever 
jealous of the encroachments of Rome, and her privileges de- 
pended on two prominent maxims : — 1st, That the Tope had 
no authority to order, or interfere in any thing-, in which the 
civil rights of the kingdom were concerned : — 2dly, That not- 
withstanding the Pope's Supremacy was acknowledged in 
cases pu re ly spiritual and ecclesiastical, yet in other respects 
his power was limited by the decrees of the ancient Councils of 
the Realm. — The Supreme Council of Psovence, in the year 
1482, decreed—" That no letters eoming from foreign jurisdic- 
** tions, though only in spirituals, should be executed without the ' 
" ratification of the Court" — In consequence of these recog- 
nised principles, it was provided that every rescript from Rome 
should be presented to one of the Courts of Parliament, where 
it was examined, lest it should contain any thing hostile to 
the ,( Privileges of the Gallican Churchy and the temporal Rights 
" of the Crown/' — It afterwards became current, under a cer- 
tificate, as a matter of mere ecclesiastical discipline. 

The Calvinistic States of the United Provinces regulated 
their conduct with respect to their subjects of the Roman 
Communion on similar principles. — The nomination even of a 
Cure (or Parish Priest) was certified by the Arch-Priest to 
the Provincial Magistrate, and if objected to, another was ap- 
pointed. — But indeed, regulations analogous to those proposed, 
obtain in almost every state in Europe *. 

The adoption of such regulations would fully meet the ob- 
ject of the 13th of Elizabeth, divested of its sanguinary pro- 
visions. While it remains unrepealed, the toleration held out 
by the act of the 31st of his Majesty is illusory, as recourse 
to the See of Rome in certain instances, as I have stated, is 
not to be avoided,, consistently with Catholic discipline. — I 
could state the testimony of a truly great man +, now unfor- 
tunately no more, one indeed of the greatest and wisest men 

* In the kingdom of Naples, though a nef or the Church, similar 
regulations were instituted, and often put in force with great rigour, 
f The Right Hon. £. Burke. 



29 

that ever had the honour of a seat within these walls, who 
was himself deterred from receiving a letter, purely compli- 
mentary, addressed to him by the late Pontiif Pius VI. by 
the interdiction of this formidable statute. At the same 
period letters came addressed to his Majesty, which were 
withheld, probably from the same consideration. — This statute 
may perhaps be classed with such of our laws as my lord 
Bacon, I think, somewhere calls " long-sleepers." — But who 
will say that these sleeping terrors will never be awakened ? 
or, to use the words of Blackstone, speaking of the penal 
statutes against Catholics — " it ought not to be left in the 
" breast of every merciless bigot, to dr^g down the vengeance 
"■of these occasional laws, upon inoffensive though mistaken 
" subjects, in opposition to the lenient inclinations of the civil 
" Magistrate, and to the destruction of every principle of 
" toleration and religious liberty/' — We must recollect that 
obsolete statutes, which lay dormant for near two centuries, 
were called into action within the last few years, to ground 
proceedings against the Clergy for non-residence." At least/' 
(as I could not refrain from observing on another occasion, 
when speaking of the harsh and impolitic provisions of this 
statute of Elizabeth,) " there can be no security against their 
" enforcement, so long as theological rancour and polemical 
" hatred inflame the heart of man. — Our security is not to 
* be sought for in prohibitions so repugnant to the temper 
" and spirit of the age ; — in statutes dictated by other cir- 
'-* cumstances, in other times, — and which now throw a san- 
" guinary hue over our wise and healthful institutions/' — 

--" In his neque jiducia, neque securitas, neque spes." 

As so much misconception and misrepresentation has ob- 
tained with respect to the different forms of the Roman 
Church Government, as existing in the different parts of the 
United Kingdom, I conceive it to be of considerable im- 
portance to state, distinctly, in what that difference consists.— 
It has been very recently intimated, in another place, that it 
would be desirable that the practice of the Roman Catholic 



30 

religion in Ireland, as to this particular, should be put on the 
same footing as it is in Great Britain. It has been signified 
al^o, that the influence of Rome on her hierarchy in Ireland, 
was greater than on that here, and that it could be more 
easily directed to dangerous purposes.— I confess I was much 
surprised to hear that these opinions were to be traced to so 
high an authority, as 1 conceive that a very little examination 
into the subject would have established a conviction directly 
the reverse. 

In Great Britain, the Church Government of the Roman 
Catholics is vested in Vicars-Apostolic, with the rank of 
Bishops in partibus *— that is, deriving their titles from an- 
cient Sees, mostly in the East, and having no ordinary juris- 
diction. — In Ireland, the Roman Catholic Bishops exercise 
the ecclesiastical power of Ordinaries. The Vicars-Apostolic 
are delegated by the See of Rome, and removable at pleasure. 
— The Bishops Ordinaries, once appointed, can only be re- 
moved fop some great canonical offence, proved upon them by 
process, canonically instituted. The Vicars- Apostolic can by 
their special faculties suspend or remove the inferior clergy, 
9U their pleasure : — the Bishops ordinaries, though they ap- 
point, cannot suspend or remove them but for canonical 
offences, which also must be canonically proved. 

Now, Sir, so far am I from agreeing with the Noble Lord 
in a wish to promote such a change as he professes to think 
desirable in Ireland, that I shall ever be of opinion that while 
we are necessarily obliged, in justice and policy, to tolerate, 
at least, the practice of the Roman Catholic religion among 
any part of our fellow-subjects, it would be highly desirable 
that the superior Clergy should exercise an ordinary juris- 
diction, circumscribed and limited by the known canons of 
the Church, in spirituals, rather than, as the case is at present 
in England, a vicarial and indefinite authority from the See 
of Rome. — Were the constitution of the Roman Church 
government the same in Great Britain as in Ireland, we cer- 

* In partibus infidelium. 



31 

tainly should find the possible interference of foreign autho- 
rity removed to a still greater distance, by thus getting rid of 
vicarial, or delegated power, that delegation being, to use the 
Pontifical phrase, — " ad nottrum et scdis Apostolicct benepla- 
citum." — I must again repeat, no such delegation exists in 
Ireland. 

I shall beg to pursue this subject a little further, as it seems 
to be so much misconceived, and as the prejudices, resulting 
from that misconception, have been so injuriously operative. 
The Vicars-Apostolic, though agents of the See of Rome, are 
not invested with those canonical rights which are considered 
as inherent in Bishops ordinaries. — They have no power to 
deliberate whether they shall publish a Bull from the See of 
Rome or not ; — they must obey. — If a Bull be canonically 
published, the great mass of Catholics consider it as binding 
on their consciences, provided it be not contrary to their alle- 
giance. — Bishops ordinaries, such as those of the Roman com- 
munion in Ireland, have an unquestionable canonical power 
to receive or reject any Bull from the See of Rome, which 
they may deem objectionable ; in some of the Roman Catholic 
Dioceses in Ireland, the discipline of the celebrated Council 
of Trent respecting Clandestine Marriages* has never been 
canonically received and published. We know that many 
Catholics of this part of the United Kingdom, have expressed 
their apprehensions of a possibly mischievous interference of 
the See of Rome, and alledge that, having independent duties 
to acquit, they require a more independent Church Govern- 
ment within themselves. — I do not wish here to enter into an 
examination of the different opinions entertained by Catholics 
on this subject ; I speak only to the fact, that in this respect, 
a considerable number of Roman Catholics in Great Britain 
have expressed a wish to be so far on a footing with their 



* The words — "respecting Clandestine Marriages," — are here 
introduced from Dr. Troy's marginal note. 



fellow-subjects of Ireland. — The Apostolic Vicars themselves 
also must naturally incline to such a reform, as investing them 
with an authority more agreeable to themselves, and more 
congenial to the principles of the constitution of their country. 

I can speak with the greater confidence on this point, it 
being one of the many considerations connected with this 
important subject, on which I have heard much discussion, 
both in this country, and also many years since, from the 
highest authorities in the quarter from which the reform must 
originate, if at all. — I am persuaded also that there are many 
Prelates of the Established Church who view it in the same 
light, and are of opinion, that regulations might be made 
without difficulty, to guard against any possible encroachment 
of the See of Rome on the national Church, either in name, 
poiuer or dignity. — With equal confidence I can affirm, that it 
would not have been opposed in the quarter to which I have 
alluded, if it had been considered as a reform, sanctioned witft 
the concurrence of his Majesty's Government *. 

In this view of the subject it is difficult to conceive how a 
preference can be given to the delegated Roman Ecclesiastical 
Government as existing in Great Britain, though exercised as 
it is by Prelates of approved and exemplary loyalty, to the 
exclusion of that canonically regulated system which is sub- 
ject, in the instances I have described, comparatively, to much 
less dependence on a foreign jurisdiction. 

And now, Sir, speaking of the Roman Catholic hierarchy, I 
beg to examine the subject a little further, and I am the more 
induced to do so, as an Honourable and Learned Member f , 
who spoke with great temper and intelligence, has entertained 
an opinion that his Majesty, instead of the See of Rome, 
should, in future, nominate to the vacant Sees of Bishops of the 

* In a conference, in 1794, on this subject, with the Cardinals 
Zclada and Antonelli (the Secretary of State and Prefect of Propa- 
gand. F.) their Eminences declared such to be the disposition of the 
See of Rome. 

| Mr. Lee, Member for the County of Watciford. 



33 

Roman Communion, and has asked my Honourable friend 
(who has this day moved the question), " to what extent the 
Catholics zvould go in this respect." — I conceive, Sir, that 
neither the Catholics could consistently concede such an inno- 
vation, nor could his Majesty consistently assume such an 
exercise of power :* — but the wholesome end which the 
Learned Gentleman had in view, might easily be attained by 
another regulation, though not directly by the means he has 
proposed. 

In the vacancy of any titular Roman Catholic diocese in 
Ireland, the Chapter elects a Vicar-capitular, to govern it per 
interim, and having what is termed the right of postulation ; 
the Chapter also recommends three persons to the See of 
Home, and confirmation with the permission of being conse- 
crated f is granted to one of them ; — generally to the first on 



* Mr. Burke in his " Letter to a Peer of Ireland on the Penal 
,x Laws of Catholics" — speaking of the measure then suggested, of 
giving to the Castle, the patronage of the presiding Members of the 
Catholic Clergy, thus expresses himself: — " Never were the mem- 
" bers of one religious Sect fit to appoint Pastors to another. Those 
" who have no regard for their welfare, reputation, or internal quiet, 
" will not appoint such as are proper. The Seraglio of Constanti- 
" nople is as equitable as we are, whether Catholics or Protestants ; 
" and where their own .Sect is concerned, full as religious; but the 
w sport which they make of the miserable Dignities of the Greek 
" Church, the factions of the Hararn, to which they make them sub- 
" servient, the continual sale to which they expose and re-expose the 
" same Dignity, and by which they squeeze all the inferior orders 
" of the Clergy, is nearly equal to all the other oppressions together 
*' exercised by Musselmen over the unhappy members of the 
" Oriental Church. — It is a great deal to suppose that the present 
** Castle would nominate Bishops for the Roman Church of Ireland, 
" with a religious regard for its welfare. Perhaps they cannot ;— 
" perhaps they dare not do it," Sec. &c. — Burke's Works, Vol. VI. 
p. 290. 

f The words " with tlie permission of being consecrated" are here 
introduced from Dr. Troy's marginal note. 



34 

the list. The titular Deans are also appointed by the Pope, 

on the recommendation of their respective Diocesans, and in 
this instance also a Papal Bull is necessarily expedited.— 
Among" the various regulations I ventured to suggest to his 
Majesty's Government, at that period to which I before 
alluded, antecedent to the Union, was one, providing that in 
future all Lists of persons recommended to fill vacant titular 
Sees or Deaneries, previous to their transmission to Rome, 
should be communicated to his Majesty's Ministers, stating 
the particular clerical situation or charge, residence, ana other 
circumstances connected with each person so recommended. 
— It is certain that by the Concordat between Francis I. and 
Pope Leo X. this Monarch secured to the crown the nomi- 
nation to all the vacant Bishoprics within the realm, leaving 
merely the formulary of collation to Rome. In a Pro- 
testant Government we cannot see the same direct facility : 
but from the adoption of the measure suggested, there is no 
doubt but the names, thus submitted to Government, would 
be unexceptionah}e as to their choice. — I have stated the 
practice heretofore obtaining in the United Provinces, when 
any exception was taken to the persons nominated. — We will 
not suppose, with respect to the particular appointment, that 
it could be wished to be made an object of state patronage. — 
I could, however, without difficulty, point out several instances 
where Rome has invariably fixed her choice on the individual 
who was represented as carrying with him the countenance of 
his Majesty's Ministers.* — Were we to go into a Committee, 
I should think the occasion favourable for adducing many other 
heads of regulation which I conceive to be usefully con- 
nected with the concession of the objects of the Petition — so 
necessary, in my opinion at least, that I should not think 
myself justified in voting ultimately in favour of that conces- 
sion, if unaccompanied with provisions of a similar tendency; 
and, under the influence of the same opinion, they were sub- 



* Two instances were quoted by Sir J. H. on the authority of 
tlie Cardinal Prefect of Propaganda \ but, on Dr. Troy's statement, 
that there was a misconception of those cases, Sir J. H. has omitted 
them. 



35 

mitted to the consideration of his Majesty's Ministers, while 
the great measure of the Union was then pending. I should 
hope that no Catholic subject of his Majesty would imagine 
that those regulations were suggested from my thinking less 
favourably of the mass of the Roman Catholics of this king- 
dom, than of those of the established communion. — lam per- 
suaded that such regulations would not be considered, even at 
Rome, as incompatible with the acknowledgment of its Spiri- 
tual Supremacy : But, in acknowledging that supremacy, 

I cannot participate in the alarms of an Honourable and 
Learned Member, * who considers the "Papistry" as he terms 
it, of the Roman Catholics, more formidable in Ireland at 
present, than before the Revolution. — If it be so, let us meet 
the evil with wholesome and practicable provisions, extending 
equally to every part of the United Kingdom. — Cease then to 
stigmatize with the most opprobrious epithets, the Sovereign 
Pontiff. — Do not any longer hold out, in the pages of our 
Rubric, the terrours of Popish Plots, to no other end than to 
create uncharitable distinctions, and excite lawless riot. — Our 
James the 1st felt no difficulty in corresponding with this 
dreaded Pontiff, nor in acknowledging him as the first of 
Christian Bishops in rank and dignity — nor in styling him the 
Patriarch of the West. — We must admit, in favour of the 
great mass of our Catholic fellow-subjects, that their Bishops 
must have their mission from him, and that recourse in all 
(which they term) the greater causes must be had to him; 
but, as I have observed, let us guard that intercourse, and 
fence it with the most rational and secure barriers against any 
possible encroachment that can be made upon our Constitu- 
tion, after the example of other states who have manifested an 
equal jealousy to preserve their rights and liberties, civil and 
ecclesiastical, from violation. — I agree however with the same 
Honourable and Learned Member in a conviction that "without 
11 a knowledge of the Catholic doctrines, and of the influence of 

f Mr. Alexander, 



36 

" those doctrines, the question cannot be fairly understood, and 
*' that wilful or assumed ignorance of their opinions is unjus- 
" tifiable in a Gentleman agitating such a question." * — Im- 
pressed with this conviction, I have endeavoured to call the 
attention of the House to those doctrinal opinions which were 
supposed most to clash with the spirit of our own civil esta- 
blishment.— I should have gone further into that part of the 
subject, had it not been so ably treated by some of my friends 
on this side of the House. — I could wish most sincerely thai 
every Member, before he gives his vote on this important 
question, would report to the three Questions proposed to the 
principal Foreign Universities, in the year 1789, with the 
answers returned to them. These are so pointed and full, 
that I own, I cannot fancy a mind so constituted as not to 
derive complete conviction from them, — a conviction, I mean 
to say, that no recognised principle of the Roman Catholic 
Religion is incompatible with the duties of good citizens and 
good subjects of the realm. Those questions were put by the 
Committee commissioned by the body of English Catholics, 
at that period, to solicit and promote the repeal of the sta- 
tutes then in force against them. The Minister f, it is under- 
stood, was perfectly satisfied with regard to the sentiments of 
that body itself, but expressed a desire to know, whether, in 
making the declarations which they then made, they had not 
departed from the general tenets of the Roman Catholic 
Church ? — To afford his Majesty's Ministers, and the nation 
in general, the most complete evidence which could be ob- 
tained on this head, it was considered by them that nothing 
could be more effectual than to propose those Questions in the 
manner that was done. — As they have already been adverted 
to in this House, and in another place, I will not repeat them; 
— but I will content myself with observing, that the answers 
given by the several learned Faculties contain the most irre- 
fragable refutation cf all the charges hitherto adduced against 
^.^ «— — — — — «^ 

* Vide Mr. Alexander's Speech, p. 69.— Cuthell's Edition, 

t Mr. Pitt, 



37 



the civil and social principles of Roman Catholics, as Catholics 
and as members of a Protestant State, that words can 
convey. 

It is unnecessary to go further into the general subject, 
which has been so ably treated by my Honourable Friend, 
and in which the policy and expediency of the concession 
have been so luminously demonstrated ; I will conclude such 
observations, as I conceived, from circumstances to which I 
alluded, it was peculiarly my duty to offer on this subject, 
with giving my hearty assent to the motion for going into a 
Committee. Some modifications of existing Statutes affecting 
the security of the Roman Catholic part of the community, 
even in the participation of those privileges which were 
meant to be assured to them by Law, I conceive, in justice 
and ^honour, are to be no longer withheld ; and in the Com- 
mittee moved for, that part of the subject can be most ad- 
vantageously discussed. 

If the admission of Roman Catholics to a full participation 
of civil privileges be a question which must be considered 
with an assiduous reference to + he circumstances of the times 
when they are asserted, yet we arc bound ever to recollect 
that civil protection and civil obedience are reciprocal duties, 
and that the exclusion of large bodies of men from the ge- 
neral franchises, narrows the basis of the social and political 
fabrick. To the general question therefore, whenever it may 
be thought most advisable to bring it forward, I shall think it 
my duty on these principles to give my affirmative, with the 
reservations I have premised ; — And I cannot grant that assent 
upon a stronger and truer principle than that expressed by the 
great Statesman * whose words 1 have more than once quoted. 
— " Our Constitution," says he, " is not made for great, gene- 
" ral, proscriptive exclusions: — sooner or later it will destroy 
" them, or they will destroy the Constitution." 

* Vide Letter of Mr. Burke to Sir Hercules Lansrishe, Bart. 1792. 



38 

From a perusal of the preceding Extracts, it will be 
discerned that no measure whatever has been proposed by 
the parliamentary friends of the Catholics which are not 
comprehended in them. — The actual nomination to Ro- 
man Catholic Sees, though strongly pressed by another 
Member of Parliament, is here rejected, and Mr* Burke's 
authority adduced in support of the rejection ; but that 
concurrence with government, which can best tend to se- 
cure those objects, in which the Catholics must have a 
common interest with the members of the Establishment, 
is recommended on authority which cannot be question- 
able. Dr. Milner has himself shewn, that the See of 
Rome does not object to a negative upon such appoint- 
ments, so guarded that it may not become an actual nomi- 
nation, and he has quoted a letter from the Cardinal 
Borgia, to himself, in proof of such acquiescence. — He has 
himself demonstrated even the actual nomination that is ex- 
ercised by some Protestant Sovereigns, and he enumerates 
among them the nomination of the Roman Catholic Bi- 
shops in Canada, by our own. Sir J. H. stated, in the ] 
course of his speech, on Mr- Grattan's motion in 18 10, 
that in the instance of the Bishopric of St. Domingo, when 
in our possession, the nomination was made by the King, 
and distinctly approved by the See of Rome. 

During the debates on the Catholic Question in 1805, 
Monsignor Caleppi, Nuncio from Pius VII. to the Court 
of Portugal, was in this country. — The question, as affect- 
ing the King's negative, was proposed to him by Sir J. H. 
He immediately recognized the soundness of the princi- 
ple, and gave, in his own writing, to Sir J. H. a list of those 
Episcopal Sees in Russia, Poland, Silesia, &c. in which 
the actual nomination was exercised by the respective 
Sovereigns of those states, not being in communion zcith 
the See of Rome. Cardinal Borgia had observed to Dr. 
Milner, that the See of Rome had refused to enter into an 



39 

actual Concordatum with the King of Prussia, thereby 
conceding the actual appointment to an uncatholic Sove- 
reign, — but in all instances, where such Sovereigns take 
upon themselves the nomination, the See of Rome assents, 
and grants the Faculties of Institution, &c. — Notwith- 
standing such assumptions, acquiesced in as we see it has 
been by Rome, it is not however contended, that it is an 
advisable course to pursue, as every beneficial object of 
state-security can be obtained, by the negative power be- 
ing vested in the Crown ; and we have the admission of the 
four Archbishops and six senior Bishops of Ireland, that 
such security, obtained by the exercise of a negative in the 
Crown, Ci is just, and ought to be agreed to :" we will 
not suppose that such characters would be disposed to 
make such an admission, in direct opposition to Catholic 
principles : — we have also the authority of the titular 
R, C Primate of Ireland, subsequent to the Vote of the 
Bishops in 1808, (when they deemed it ec inexpedient" to 
introduce any alteration, &c) "that the inexpediency was 
of a temporary nature, and resulting from existing circum-* 
stances." But it is needless to oppose these autho- 
rities in confutation of the soundness of a principle sup- 
ported by the actual practice of every state in Europe, to 
the extent at least of a negative authority. 



* The authority of the practice in the United Provinces was com- 
municated by letter to Sir J. H. when last at Rome, by the Cardinal 
Zondadari, at that time Secretary of Propaganda, and now Arch- 
bishop of Sienna. The Edict of the Empress Catherine, respectiag 
the Imperial Nomination to Episcopal Sees, Sec. was obtained also, 
at the same period, at Rome, from Count Cernichef, and since veri- 
fied by other authorities. As the communications on this subject, 
with the several ministers of the Pope, were chiefly oral, Sir J. H. is 
not possessed of any written documents of those ministers, to sub- 
stantiate the facts; but the result of his conferences was, from 



40 

la (he course of bis Speech on this question in 1811, 
Sir J. H. observed that the Wardai ofGahva?/, exerci- 
sing Episcojjal Jurisdiction over thirteen parishes and 
above 100,000 inhabitants, was elected by the Mayor and 
Corporation of Gal way, and received institution from the 
eight Vicars. — Tins was in consequence of a regulation of 
Gregory VIII. in 1431. Another regulation of Clement 
XII. about the year 1735, gave a visitorial power to the 
Archbishop of Tuara. Sir J. II. then drew an inference, 
that " here was an instance of an election conferring 
Episcopal Jurisdiction on Lay Patrons and Protestants." 
Sir J. H. has been requested, by a most respectable Ca- 
tholic Prelate, so far to correct this statement, as applies 
to " Protestant Electors" as u the election is now in 
the hands of the representatives of ancient Catholic fami- 
lies." — Be it so; it is nevertheless an instance of a lay 
nomination to a Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction. 
But, however strongly some of the opponents of the ncga* 
tive of the Crown may contend against the anomaly of a 
lay interference in appointments of such a nature, it must 
be in remembrance that one of the writers, who is least 
measured in his animadversions on the conduct of the sup- 
porters of the negative power in the Crown, scruples not 
to recommend the institution of a popular Veto upon the 
appointment of R. C. Bishops, " vesting a controlling 
power of assent or negative on the acts of convention, in 

time to time, communicated to some of His Majesty's confidential 
Ministers. Sir J. H.'s letters to the late Mr. Windham, in confirma- 
tion of those facts, have, since his decease, been returned to Sir J. H. 
by his executors, superscribed, or docketed, in his own hand. Dr. 
Milner has quoted the authority of one of those ministers of the Pope, 
Cardinal Borgia, " tliat there was no objection to a negative power in 
" the Crown, on the appointment of Bishops, properly guarded, that it 
"might not become operative as an actual nomination;" and such 
was the opinion of all. 



41 

the people at large simultaneously polled in all the pa* 
rishes*" 

With respect to " a state provision for the R. C. 
Clergy," which the R. C. Prelates, in their Resolutions of 
1799, declare " ought to be thankfully accepted," 
although that also has been a subject of great controversy, 
it is here sufficient to observe, that the Congregation of 
Propaganda Fide, at the command of Pius VI. in an 
official letter addressed to Sir J. C Hippisley on the 26th 
July, 1S00, distinctly expresses the approbation of such 
a provision in relation to the Roman Catholic Bishops 
and Clergy of Scotland. 

Mr. Plowden, in the third volume of f* His History of 
Ireland," refers to the Tract from which the preceding 
extracts are taken, and describes it as coming from the pen 
" of a warm and indefatigable advocate in the Catholic 
" cause"* — adding — " Of all his Majesty's subjects, this 
" Gentleman has, perhaps, the most knowledge of the 
" modern style and spirit of the Court of Rome, of the re* 
u lations kept up between the Roman Pontiff, and Catho* 
lie, and other independent States, andofthe nature, forms^ 
and practice, by which the See of Rome exercises, ex* 
ternally, supreme jurisdiction over its spiritual subjects ." 
— As so much depends on the authority of the preceding 
pages, it is not irrelevant to bring in aid the opinion of a 
writer who had dedicated so much of his own work to a 
criticism of the Tract, of which he thus speaks of the au- 
thor ; and to those who are less acquainted with the sub- 
ject, it may be not unsatisfactory to know how far they 
may confide in the author's competency, leaving his cre- 



* Vide the pamphlet of Mr. C. Keogh, who has introduced 
in It the Sketch of Sir J. H.'s proposed Improvement of the Plan 
of the R. C. Prelates in 1799. 



42 

dit to be estimated by other means. — On the same princi- 
ple, a reference may be made to the corresponding testi- 
mony of two eminent Prelates of the R. C. Church, one 
of whom, Dr. Milner, in the year 1808 — a ttw weeks pre- 
ceding his communications with Mr. Ponsonby, Mr. Grat- 
tan, &c. on the subject of the Resolutions of the Irish Pre- 
lates in 1799 — compiled a defence of the Tract in ques- 
tion, in b6 pages, which he addressed to a Gentleman of 
Dublin, and which were also printed in order to be annexed 
to a new edition.— Speaking of the author, Dr. Milner 
observes in the second page of that work, that "few 
" could have entered upon th& discussion of the subject with 
u such eminent advantages of information, connected with 
" the doctrine, discipline, character, and situation of Ca-> 
" t ho lies, S?c. #c." 

The titular Archbishop of Dublin, Dr. Troy, in a 
printed letter, also expressly written for annexation to 
the same Tract, and which is also subjoined to the second 
edition of the Substance of Sir J. IPs Speech on Mr. Grat- 
tan's motion in 1810, is pleased to address Sir J. H. in 
these words, u / am much relieved by considering that I 
tl have the advantage of addressing a gentleman whose 
u ktwwledge of Roman Catholic manners, usages and 
" disciplinary laws, completely entitks him to judge above 
u the suspicion, either of undue partiality, or of vulgar 
" prejudice. It gratifies me, Sir, to remember that you 
" derive your acquaintance with our Ecclesiastical polity 
f( from far better resources than those writers had access 
6i to" — [alluding to certain Parliamentary speeches at that 
time published.] — " You have seen and conversed with 
u the very first ministers of our religion, and therefore 
u may well recollect the ideas you took from experience, 
u and compare them with the a.ccusation and the defence. 



4S 

if My obligations to your friendship commenced at that 
ts time, when you were in a situation to observe the rules 
6t and practices of the Catholic Church, in the centre of 
" Papal authority." 

It is somewhat singular that Sir J. H. should, at this 
hour, be at issue with both those Prelates whose authori- 
ties are cited, in reference to the principles of the very 
Tract which, at a period, so shortly elapsed, had called 
forth, from their pens, such unqualified eulogy. 

When Mr. Plowden speaks of the illegitimate concor- 
dat, with the Maynooth Trustees, [p. 672] we must keep 
in mind that those Trustees comprehended the four Arch- 
bishops and six senior Bishops of the Roman Catholic 
bench ; and we must therefore give some credit to men, 
risen to that eminence in their Church, for a knowledge 
of its doctrine and discipline, and, further, for no disposi- 
tion basely to sacrifice them. It has been repeatedly 
shewn that no such sacrifice was intended, and that no 
such could be made, had they adhered implicitly to their 
resolutions. Sir J. H. is represented [p. 674] " to have 
been more than a Secretis to Lord Grenville," — no such 
inference can be drawn from any part of his Parliamentary 
speeches or publications. A letter is given [in p. 678 J 
which is expressly stated by Mr. Plowden " to have been 
u written by Lord Grenville to his Constituents at Oxford;" 
and a note, in the publication of Sir J. IPs Speech of 
1810, is produced as the proof. In that note no such as- 
sertion is made : — but, that Lord Grenville's name and 
authority may not be injuriously mingled with Sir J. H.'s 
act, for such it was, though under the signature of (i Oxo~ 
niensis," — it is requested that a reference may be made to 
the loth page of the publication of Sir J. IPs Speech, 



44 

printed by Faulder, in lSlO, and a further proof is offered 
in the letter itself, * subjoined in a note. 

* Copt/ of a Letter, written during the contest for 
the Chancellorship of the University of Oxford, 
to the Editor of the Bath Herald. 
SIR, 

The candid question of Oxoniensis Alter, which appeared 
in the Salisbury Journal of the 4th instant, is entitled to the 
earliest answer. He says, he has read, that it was declared in 
a recent Meeting of the Roman Catholics at Cork, that the 
Irish Roman Catholic Prelates had decided, that it is against 
their religion to allow any check from a Protestant King and 
Government upon the appointment oj their Bishops ; and that a 
majority of the Meeting concurred in that determination of 
their Prelates. He then pays a just compliment to the charac- 
ter of Lord Grenville, adding, that u if Oxoniensis can tell what 
are his Lordship's sentime.^s, on the declaration of the Irish 
Roman Catholic Prelates, and of the Meeting at Cork, the in- 
formation will be highly interesting." 

I am persuaded, Sir, that Lord Grenville has never swerved 
from the sentiments he expressed in his Speech in Parliament, 
on the 10th of May, 1805, and in that more particularly as re- 
ferring to the subject of inquiry, of the 27th of May, 1808. — 
Thcstate of the question, as agitated in Parliament, is, in 
general, very ill understood. The Catholics petitioned for 
equal rights: Lord Grenville never moved that the House 
should agree to the prayer of the petition; but that it should 
resolve itself into a Committee, to consider the Petition. In 
that Committee, he adds, the subject could be fully investi- 
gated : to consider what new safeguards its adoption might 
require — by what suggestions jealousy could be satisfied, and 
fear allayed — that, on this subject, he had concurred entirely 
with Mr. Pitt ; their opinions had been formed together, by 



45 

Mr. Plowden accuses Lord Grenville of u gross igno- 
rance, misrepresentation, and falsehood," in stating in 
his speech of 1808, u that no one of our Princes has ever 



mutual communication and unreserved confidence ; their plans 
embraced the whole Ecclesiastical State of Ireland, including 
measures of considerable benefit to the Established Church — 
calculated to promote both its honour and advantage. The 
erection of Churches and Glebe Houses, in a country where, 
of 2400 parishes, not more than 400 had Glebe Houses, formed 
an essential part of their plan. 

The state of the Roman Catholic Church, administering to 
the spiritual wants of four millions of our people, had also been 
an object of their deliberate consideration. If you tolerate the 
Roman Catholic Church, which is Episcopal, you must of 
course allow it to have Bishops ; but, adds Lord Grenville, " it 

IS UNQUESTIONABLY PROPER THAT THE CrOWN SHOULD EXERCISE 
AN EFFECTUAL NEGATIVE OVER THE APPOINTMENT OF THE PER- 
SONS CALLED TO EXERCISE THESE FUNCTIONS." Lord Grenville 

then proceeded to enumerate the measures with which Mr. 
Pitt and himself always meant to accompany the proposal. — 
** Great and important safeguards/' says his Lordship, " they 
were for the civil and ecclesiastical constitution of the realm ; 
wise and salutary provisions for promoting the interests of re- 
ligion — for extending the beneficial intercourse of our re- 
formed and established Church — for conciliating the warm- 
est affections of a people, whose various interests and feelings 
were thus consulted — and for insuring the success of a system 
of universal and unreserved benevolence." 

" What I ask (says Lord Grenville) is only that you should 
enter fully into the discussion ofthe subject. Whatever be the 
result of your deliberations, much benefit will be derived from 
the mere examination of these questions — asperities will be 
softened— unfounded jealousies allayed. Let it be indelibly 



46 

claimed the 4 Supremacy* except Henry VIII." Bishop 
Bramhall's authority, however, in support of Lord Gren- 
ville's assertion, which was quoted by his lordship, is not 



impressed upon the mind of Ireland, that it is only by Union 
— by elose and intimate Union — with Great Britain, that she 
can, in this dreadful convulsion of the world, defend her soil, 
protect her people, or maintain her independence. " 

Such, Sir, was the state of the question when last brought 
forward in Parliament. Of Lord Grenyille's sentiments at a 
more recent period I am also competent to speak, having very 
lately seen an avowal of them under his own hand, in a cor- 
respondence with a friend on that part of the question, in which 
Oxoniensis Alter expresses so much anxiety to be informed. — 
In that correspondence Lord Grenville declares, that, with re- 
spect to the appointment of the Roman Catholic Bishops, he 
could admit of no qualification short of a direct negative 

POWER ON THE PART OF THE CROWN. 

I trust that my Brother Oxonian will accept this as a satis- 
factory answer to his question. If he should still have any 
doubt remaining in his mind, as to the accuracy of the fact I 
have stated, I have not the least objection to attest it under 
my real name, which you, Sir, are authorised to impart to him, 
instead of that of my former signature. 

Oxford, Dec. 7, 1809. OXONIENglS. 

P. S. — The statement that u the Irish Roman Catholic Pre- 
lates had resolved that it was against their religion to allow any 
check from a Protestant King or Government upon the appoint- 
ment of their Bishops/* is not correct. 

In 1799, the Roman Catholic Prelates of Ireland resolved, 
" That in the appointment of Roman Catholic Prelates, such 
interference of Government as may enable it to he satisfied of the 
loyalty of the persons appointed, is just, and ought to be agreed 
to." V 



47 

shaken by any thing which Mr. Plowden has here urged. 
Mr. Plowden contends, that " the Royal approbation, 
" whether it precedes, accompanies or follows, the pro- 



In 1808, after a great ferment being excited in Ireland on 
this question, mostly proceeding from misconception, the Ro- 
man Catholic Prelates resolved, u that it was inexpedient to 
introduce any alteration," &c. " but that the Prelates pledged 
themselves to recommend only such persons as are of unim- 
peachable loyalty and peaceable conduct/' 

And upon the Roman Catholic Primate, Dr. O'Reilly, be- 
ing called upon for an explanation of this resolution, he ad- 
dressed a letter to Lord Sidmouth and Sir Edward Bellew, in 
which he expressly states, '* That the Prelates did not mean to 
decide, that the admission to a negative power on the part of 
the Crown, would be contrary to the doctrines of the Roman 
Catholic Church ; but that the resolution arose from an ap- 
prehension of danger, &c. but such danger, in his mind, and 
in the opinion of several other Prelates, was of a temporary 
nature, resulting from existing circumstances/' 

As to the proceedings of the Meetings held the 2d Novem- 
ber last, at Cork, they certainly must have been much misre- 
presented to have excited alarm. Mr. Boyle proposed (in 
amendment of their original motion) " the offer of a negative 
power to the Crown in the appointments to the Roman Catholic 
Prelacy." This was certainly negatived by the majority of 
tite Meeting — not upon the principle of not according the ne- 
gative p oners to the Crown; but because it v/as considered not 
to be in the province of the Laity to make such an offer ; and 
that it was imprudent to mingle the question of the pursuit of 
civil franchises with the discipline of the Church. On this prin- 
ciple alone the question of amendment was then negatived. — 
It is for Parliament alone to protect the Establishment by ade- 
quate institutions. 



48 

u posed appointment is, in its nature, unjust, and must 
" produce mischief, as the collation of mission, or spi- 
" ritual jurisdiction, is an act purely spiritual, and there- 
" fore not within the competency of the civil authority to 
" effect. " The invalidation of Mr. Plowden's argument 
is found, as has been shewn, in the practical authority of 
all Europe. 

Mr. Plowden quotes [p. 6.07] the resolution of the 
Irish Prelates in 1808 ; but he has forborne to give the in- 
terpretation of their Primate, Dr. O'Reilly, in his Letter to 
Lord Southwell and Sir Edward Bellew. — We know also 
that three of the Prelates then assembled voted against the 
resolution. Mr. Plowden mentions [p. 777] that " in a 
" notable case brought before the House of Commons, Sir 
l< J. H. interposed out of tenderness and attention to his 
" Majesty's Ministers." The fact was, that what Sir J. H. 
stated in Parliament, was from tenderness and attention 
to, and on the authority of, Mr. Green, the Roman Ca- 
tholic priest, with whom he had been acquainted 
in Italy, and whose conduct had been misrepresented to 
Government. — Sir J. Pi's opinions, and Parliamentary 
conduct whenever such subjects came before the House, 
were certainly uninfluenced by any deference to the 
feelings of Ministers, at the expence of his own judg- 
ment. Few, if any persons, have laboured more than 
himself to procure for the Catholic, serving in his Ma- 
jesty's military or naval forces, the completest toleration of 
their religious worship. — The Speech of Sir J. H. in 1811 
is complained of by Mr. Plowden (p. 790) as being 
" amphibious :" — Sir J. H. must console himself in the 
reflection that Mr. Grattan's speech is pronounced, by the 
same gentleman, to be " ambiguous" (p. 8l5). Sir J. H's 
speech of that Session, was in strict conformity to every 
thing -he had before urged in Parliament, or had been the 



49 

subject of his communication with Ministers, Ex-Minis- 
ters, or the Catholics themselves. The history of Sir J. H.'s 
sketch of improvement, as he conceived, of the Bishops' 
resolutions in 1799, is given by Mr. Plowden (p. 790). 
The sketch is printed in the course of these Notes, and 
will speak for itself: — it had been approved by Catholics 
of every description, not excepting those of the Prelacy. 
" The Letter of Lord Grenville, the proposal of Sir J". 
JHippisley, the overt and occult workings of the more busy 
advocates of the Veto from England" &c. amount, in 
the estimation of Mr. Plowden (816), as demonstrations 
of" a very extensive, dark, complicated, and dangerous 
confederacy against the settlement of the Crown and safety 
of the British empire!" and Mr. Plowden has conceived 
it to be his duty to develope it. Lord Grenville's Letter 
must speak for itself; but with respect to Sir J. H/s de- 
precated proposal, it is a known fact, that, within the 
course of the last few weeks, it was very pointedly read, 
as far as applied to the appointment of the Bishops, to a 
venerable Divine of the Roman Catholic Church, who 
stands equally high in estimation for theological learning 
and devotion to his communion. His reply was given in 
the presence of a Catholic Priest, late Superior of the 
Scotch College in Rome ; who also, in the presence of 
Sir J. Hippisley, attested it to three of the Vicars Apos- 
tolic of England. The reply was, " that none but a bigot 
could object to it.'* Let it here be understood, that th« 
Apostolic Vicars were wholly unapprised that such a 
communication was to be made to them. At the instance 
of Sir J. H. they committed themselves in no opinion on 
the subject, and they were requested merely to hear that 
declaration in silence. — Sir J. H. was not desirous to ia* 
volve them in new controversy. 

G 



50 

But this note is extending to a pamphlet in itself : It 
is proper, however, not to pass over the detailed note of 
Mr. Plowden (835) unnoticed. Sir J. H. is not insensible 
to the marked compliments paid thereinto himself, though 
he must lament the erroneous statements of Mr. Plowden 
in but too many instances. 

The inference of a positive nomination, or negative, 
being exercised by Sovereigns, merely because a civil esta- 
blishment or temporal fief was annexed to the Prelacies in 
nomination, is unfounded, as has been proved in the in- 
stance of Russia. The real motive for the exercise of 
such a prerogative is found in the extensive influence 
which the Prelacy of the Roman Catholic Church must 
necessarily have upon the minds of those of their com- 
rouni n : therefore, where those prelacies are recognised, 
at all, by the State, the confirmation of the State, in respect 
to the individuals exercising the episcopal functions, 
though merely in spirituals, should be concurrent with 
their appointment. In this principle every publicist has 
written, and on this principle every State has acted. But, 
going back some pages in Mr. Plowden 's History, he 
observes (p. 662), that Dr. Milner informed the public, 
that " on the very day after the debate," (in which Mr. 
Ponsonby and Mr. Gratfan had mentioned in the House 
the proposal of the Veto), st namely, May 26, he printed 
a protest against the use which had been made of his 
name on the preceding evening, with respect to the pro- 
posal in question." Mr. Plowden hereupon observes, 
" that Lord Grenville dilated upon, and rather confirmed 
than retracted or qualified the construction to offer the 
proposal to Parliament. Now (he continues) as Lord Fin- 
gal and Dr. Milner were both in London, it appears 
straDge that on the intermediate day, namely, the 26th, 



51 

on which Dr. Milner wrote and published his protest 
against what Mr. Ponsonby had advanced in the Com- 
mons, Lord Grenville should not have been instructed to 
retract, deny, qualify, soften, or explain the assumptions 
or proposals of Mr. Ponsonby, against which Dr. Milner 
had protested." The answer to this is very clear, namely, 
that the postscript to the printed Protest of Dr. Milner, 
dated May 28, consists only of these words, but sufficient 
for the elucidation of what Mr. Plowden considers to be 
so obscure. 

il P. S. The writer has the satisfaction to add, that Lord 
Grenville, to whom he had the honour to explain the pre- 
sent subject, yesterday morning, gave a very accurate 

ACCOUNT OF-THEM IN HIS VERY BRILLIANT SPEECHES 
LAST NIGHT AND THIS MORNING.* 

" London, May 28." 

*Dr. Milner, in his various publications on the Veto, has fre* 
quently referred to the paper which he printed in the interval 
of the debates in the Commons and in the Lords. It is im- 
portant in many respects, and particularly as to the fact above 
stated ; — and also to the fact of his having acted " upon the 
" advice of a most venerable and learned ecclesiastical perso- 
'* nage," whom he does not name, and which must have 
been prior to any communication with Mr. Ponsonby, &c. 
The measure proposed, must, at some antecedent period, have 
been well understood by Dr. Milner, and one, at least, of his 
constituents, — " and that" a most venerable and learned 
" personage." 

[ COPY. ] 

A misrepresented account of a-communication between the 
Ht. Hon. Mr. Ponsonby and Dr. Milner, who is appointed 
agent to the Catholic Prelates of Ireland, relative to the inter* 



52 

It has been before remarked, that Lord Granville, Mr. 
Ponsonby, and Mr. Grattan, after the debate in 1808, 
received letters of thanks from the titular Archbishop of 

ference of the Crown in the nomination of Catholic Bishops to 
the vacant Sees in that island having appeared in the news- 
papers, Dr. Milner finds it necessary, in justification of him- 
self, to print and circulate among his Catholic brethren a few 
copies of the following true statement of that communication. 

Dr. M. on his arrival in London last week, found the most 
respectable part, both of the Catholic and Protestant public, 
extremely warm and anxious upon the subject of those nomi- 
nations, and decided in their opinion that something was 
necessary to be done at the present critical time, in order to 
convince the legislature and the nation, that none but good 
and loyal subjects would be appointed to those important si- 
tuations, and that the public enemy should not have any 
influence over them. This, in particular, was the earnest wish 
of our great and genereu3 advocates, the Rt. Hon. Mr. Grattan, 
and the Rt. Hon. Mr. Ponsonby. 

The last-mentioned Rt. Hon. Gentleman had expressed a 
wish to see Dr. M., understanding thakhe was honoured with 
a commission from the Catholic Bishops of Ireland, imme- 
diately upon his arrival in London. Accordingly, the very 
next morning after his arrival there, namely, on Saturday 
last, he waited on Mr. P. accompanied by Lord Fingal. 

In the conversation which took place on that occasion, Dr. 
M. expressed a decided opinion, that " the Catholic Bishops 
" of Ireland, neither would nor could, consistently with their 
" religion, give any sort of positive power to the Crown in 
" this concern, in such manner that it might actually nomi- 
" nate to vacant Catholic Prelacies, this being a mark of com- 
" munion with the Catholic Church ; M but he said, " he had 
" reason to believe they would consent to the Crown's using a 



53 

Dublin, in the nameof thePrelacy, for their Parliamentary 
conduct on that occasion. And here, for the present, the 
observations on Mr. Plowden's continuation of his History 

" negative power ;" which is to say, that after they themselves 
shall have determined, in the manner they are accustomed to 
do, " who is the fittest person to fill the vacant See, they will 
" transmit the name of the person to his Majesty's ministers, 
" in order to ascertain whether they entertain any suspicion 
" of his loyalty and peaceableness ; which name, if they 
" should object to, the Bishops will present another, and 
" another, in succession, to a reasonable number, until one 
" shall occur, against whose civil and social principles no ob- 
" jections shall be made." — To prevent any mistake in this 
important matter, Dr. M. afterwards sent the plan, so laid 
down, in the form of a letter to the Right Honourable Gentle- 
man. — In this letter he added, that " if the Pope, who alone 
" can confer the spiritual faculties essential to the exercise of 
" the Catholic Episcopacy, should object to the person so 
u named and approved of, they, the Bishops," (in his opinion) 
" would name another or others in succession, till a Prelate 
" should be found against whom the Crown would have no oh- 
" jection on one hand, and to whom the Holy See would think 
" proper to confide spiritual powers on the other."— As Lord 
Fingal is ready to bear witness to the accuracy of the first 
part of this statement, so Dr. Milner's hand-writing, which he 
believes is still in the possession of Mr. P. will prove the fide- 
lity of the second part, as well as the whole of it. — The self- 
same statementwhich Dr. M. made to Mr. Ponsonby, he made 
also to Mr. Grattan. 

This being so, Dr. M . maintains— First, that it appears he 
did not, in the above-stated communications, intimate the 
most distant approbation, either on the part of his employer* 
or of himself, of any change in the faith or essential discipline 



54 

close, and to this extent they may be considered as not 
altogether uninteresting in reference to a subject, the dis- 
cussion of which is to be solemnly renewed in Parliament, 



of the Catholic Church, or of the King's becoming the spi- 
ritual head or governor of it : — Secondly, that he did not 
therein express the slightest intimation that the Catholic 
Bishops could or would surrender to a Sovereign of a different 
communion the power of actually appointing, nominating, 
presenting or recommending to Catholic Bishoprics — In further 
proof of this, it is to be added, that Dr. M. with the advice of 
a most venerable and learned ecclesiastical personage, pro- 
posed that the Bishops should name one sole parson, at a time, 
to the Crown, instead of three, to prevent its exercising an 
actual power of choosing one of the three, and also to prevent 
ambition and intrigues* : — Thirdly, as Dr. Milner is Satisfied 
that not only the Bishops in Ireland, but even his Holiness at 
Borne, see the propriety of, and earnestly wish, that the Ca- 
tholic Prelates to be appointed in his Majesty's dominions, 
6hould not be obnoxious to him, and as they are in the habit 
of attending to this point in the elections which they actually 
make ; so there are the strongest grounds to believe that they 
will make no objection, or difficulty, actually to consult the 
King's Ministers upon this point, previously to their sending 



* It has been suggested to the writer, that, in case the names of 
three persons were sent up to the Castle at a time, they would socn 
be known to many Noblemen and Gentlemen, to whom it might be 
an important object, for the sake of Parliamentary interest, to pro- 
cure the nomination of some one of them over whom they might 
have, or expect to have considerable influence. The detrimental 
consequences of this, in a religious point of view, are too obvious 
to need pointing out. 



55 



and under very peculiar circumstances, in the course of a 
few day^ on the motion of Mr. Canning. 



any name or names for spiritual faculties to the Holy See. 

Lastly, it appears from the present statement, that, though 
Dr. M. gave his decided opinion upon the present measure, 
yet that he only gave it as an opinion which he had formed 
upon the grounds stated above ; (and, indeed, upon others 
still stronger.) Hence, if the pressure of the Catholic Ques- 
tion had not precluded the possibility of actually taking the 
sense of the Irish Catholic Prelacy upon the matter, he would 
certainly have done so, us he more than once signified in the 
communications. Hence also it follows, that the Catholic 
Prelates are not absolutely concluded in what their Agent has, 
in a short and pressing moment, (when called upon by our 
best friends to say something to the point) expressed in the 
manner stated aboye. He rests, however, in the fullest per- 
suasion that they will, upon the information which has now 
been sent to them, support him, as far as he has actually gone, 
though certainly they cannot support him as far as he is 
reported, in the Newspapers and other uncertain vehicles of 
intelligence, to have gone. 

J. MILNER, D. D. 
London, May 2G, 1808. 



P. S. The writer has the satisfaction to add, that Lord Gren- 
ville, to whom he had the honour of explaining his ideas of 
the present subject yesterday morning, gave a very accurate 
account of them in his very brilliant speeches last night and 
this morning. 



56 

(P. 36.) " In January, 1799, the Resolutions 
" of the Bishops, comprehending this Arrange- 
ce ment, were presented to Government." 

These Resolutions have been repeatedly published, but 
for convenient reference they are again introduced. 

No. I. 

, Resolutions of tJie Roman Catholic Prelates 
assembled at Dublin, in 1799. 

AT a meeting of the Roman Catholic Prelates held in Dublin, 
the 17th, 18th, and 10th of January, 1799, to deliberate on a 
proposal from Government, of an independent provision for the 
Roman Catholic Clergy of Ireland, under certain regulations, 
not incompatible with their doctrines, discipline, or just in- 
fluence — 

It was admitted that a provision, through Government, for 
the Roman Catholic Clergy of this Kingdom, competent and 
secured, ought to be thankfully accepted. 

That, in the appointment of the Prelates of the Roman 
Catholic Religion to vacant Sees within the Kingdom, such 
interference of Government, as may enable it to be satisfied of 
the loyalty of the person appointed, is just, and ought to be 
agreed to* 

That, to give this principle its full operation, without in- 
fringing the discipline of the Roman Catholic Church, or 
diminishing the religious influence which Prelates of that 
Church ought justly to possess over their respective flocks, the 
following regulations seem necessary : — 

1st, In the vacancy of a See, the Clergy of the Diocese to 
recommend, as usual, a candidate to the Prelates of the eccle- 
siastical province who elect him, or any other they may think 
more worthy, by a majority of suffrages : in the case of equality 
©f suffrages, the Metropolitan or senior Prelate to have the 
casting vote. 



57 

2d. In the election of a Metropolitan, if the provincial Pre- 
lates do not agree within two months after the vacancy, the 
senior Prelate shall forthwith invite the surviving Metropolitans 
to the election, in which each will then have a vote : in the 
e^uahty of suffrages, the presiding Metropolitan to have a 
casting vote. 

3d. In these elections, the majority of Suffrages must be, 
ultra rhedietatem, as the Canons require, or must consist of the 
suffi agc£ of mere than half the electors. 

4ih. The candidates so selected to be presented by the Pre- 
sident of the election to Government, which, within one month 
after such presentation, will transmit the name of the said can- 
didate, if no objection be made against him for appointment, 
to the Holy See, or return the said name to the President of 
the election, for such transmission, as may be agreed on. 

5th. If Government have any proper objection against such 
candidates, the President of the election will be informed 
thereof within one month after presentation, who, in that case, 
will convene the electors to the election of another candidate. 

Agreeably to the discipline of the Roman Catholic Church, 
these regulations can have no effect without the sanction of 
the Holv See, which sanction the Roman Catholic Prelates of 
this Kingdom shall, as soon as may be, use their endeavours to 
procure. 

The Prelates are satisfied that the nomination of Parish 
Priests, with a certificate of their having taken the oath of 
allegiance, be certified to Government. 

RICHARD O'REILLY, R.C.A.B. Armagh. 

J. S. TROY, R.C.A.B. Dublin. 

EDWARD DILLON, A.B. Tuam. 

THOMAS BRAY, R.C.B. Cashel. 

P. J. PLUNKETT, R.C.B. Meath. 

J. MOYLAN, R.C.B. Cork. 

DANIEL DELANY, R.C.B. Kildare. 

EDMUiND FRENCH, R.C.B. Elphin. 

JAMES CAULFIELD, R.C.B. Femes. - " 

JOHN CRUISE, R.C.B. Ardagh. 

H 



58 



No. II. 

Subsequent Resolution of the Roman Catholic Prelates, 
assembled in Dublin, in 1799. 

The Prelates, assembled to deliberate on a proposal from 
Government of a provision for the Clergy, have agreed, that 
M. R. Doctor O'Reilly, M. R. Doctor Troy, R. R. Doctor 
Plunkett, and such other of the Prelates who may be in town, 
be commissioned to transact all business with Government, 
relative to said proposal, under the substance of the regula- 
tions agreed on and subscribed by them. 

'Dublin, 2Sth January, 1799. 

EDWARD DILLON, A.B. Tuam. 
THOMAS BRAY, R.C.B. Cashel. 
J. MOYLAN, R.C.B. Cork. 
DAN. DELANY, R.C.B. Kildare. 
EDMUND FRENCH, R.C.B. Elphin. 
JAMES CAULFIELD, R.C.B. Femes. 
JOHN CRUISE, R.C.B. Ardagh. 



No. III. 



Resolutions of the Roman Catholic Prelates assembled in Dublin 

in 1S08. 

n It is the decided opinion of the Roman Catholic Prelatei 
of Ireland, that it is inexpedient to introduce any alteration in 
the canonical mode hitherto observed in the nomination of the 
Irish Roman Catholic Bishops, which mode long experience 
has proved to be unexceptionable, wise, and salutary." 

" That the Roman Catholic Prelates pledge^themselves to 
adhere to the rules by which they have hitherto been uniformly 
guided ; — namely, to recommend to his Holiness only such 
persons as are of unimpeachable loyalty, and peaceable con- 
duct." 



59 

No. IV. 

Substance of a Letter from the R, C, Archbishop, of Armagh y > 

1808. : 

The Roman Catholic Gentlemen of the county of Louth 
having addressed a letter to the Rev. Dr. O'Reilly, Roman 
Catholic Archbishop of Armagh, requesting to know his opi- 
nion of the resolution entered into by the Roman Catholic 
Bishops lately assembled in Dublin, respecting the negative 
proposed to be given to the Crown, in the appointment of * 
Roman Catholic Bishops; Doctor O'Reilly has returned an 
answer, (addressed to Viscount Southwell and Sir Edward 
Bellew, as representatives of the Roman Catholics of the 
county of Louth,) in which he says, " I think, and am certain, 
" that, in forming their resolution, the Prelates did not mean 
" to decide that the admission of a veto, or negative, on the part 
" of the Crown, with the consent of the Holy See, in the 
4t election of Roman Catholic Bishops, would be contrary to 
" the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Chtirch, or to any prac- 
" tice or usage essentially and indispensably connected with 
(t the Roman Catholic Religion. — Candour, however, and 
" truth oblige me to say, that the declaration made by the 
" Bishops on the above occasion, was dictated by what I long 
" conceived to be a well-founded apprehension, that the con- 
cession in question might eventually be attended with con- 
•" sequences dangerous to the Roman Catholic Religion ; such 
" danger, in my mind, and in the opinion of several other 
" Prelates, is of a temporary nature, resulting from existing • 
" circumstances, though m any persons suppose it to arise from the 
" nature of the measure, thus giving to the Resolution of the 
" Bishops a meaning it does not deserve *" 

* On the 2d Feby. 1810, the R. C. Prelates of Ireland assembled, 
and published very detailed Resolutions, though in no respect im- 
pugning the principle of the Resolutions of 1799 : — they are inserted, 
in No. VII. of the Appendix to the Substance of Sir J. H.'s Speech in 
1810. (Faulder.) 



60 



No. V. 

Sketch of the proposed Regulations concurrent with the Esta-* 
blishfient of a State Provision for the Roman Catholic C/crgy 
of Ire fan (J, 1S09.* 

" In the event of a state provision for the Roman Catholic 
" Clergy becoming a measure of parliamentary regulation, it 



* As the above Sketch had appeared in a Pamphlet published by 
C. Keogh, in consequence of it having been communicated to a Com- 
mittee in Dublin, — a measure which certainly was not in Sir J. H.'s 
contemplation, when he transmitted it as a confidential paper, marked 
private, to a R. C. Prelate in Ireland; theiollowing note was soon 
after printed in the Dublin Evening Post, British Press, fyc. 

« CATHOLICS OF IRELAND. 

" An article having appeared in the Dublin Evening Post of the 
18th inst and copied in the British Press, of the 23d inst. stating, 
", that an English Baronet, a member of the House of Commons, had 
"proposed a Bill making it imperative on the R. C. Bishops, when- 
"ever a vacancy occurs, to return to the office of the Secretary of 
" State a list of candidates, from which any objectionable person is to 
" be struck out, and the vacancy to be filled by one of the approved 
11 candidates'' ; we have authority to state the following facts : That 
no such Bill had been prepared, or intended to be moved in Par- 
liament by the Member supposed to be alluded to : nor has he been 
apprised that it is in the contemplation of any other Member to- 
bring forward such a Bill. 

" The mis-statement lias evidently arisen from the following cir- 
cumstances. — Some time after the discussion of the petition of the 
Irish Catholics, in the last Session of Parliament, and the appearance 
of many publications in Ireland on the subject of, what is termed 
" the Veto" or proposed negative on the part of the Crown, the 
Member alluded to dre«s up a sketch of regulations founded ontho.se 



61 

'* is suggested that regulations, to the following purport, should 
" also receive the sanction of the Legislature. 



proposed by tlie four metropolitan and six senior R. C. Bishops of 
Ireland, in 1799. 

tl This sketch was communicated, as a matter of mere private sug- 
gestion, to some of his friends of the R. C. Clergy in Ireland.— He 
had consulted no person whatever in framing it, nor was it ever com- 
municated to any member of either House of Parliament, tiil a con- 
siderable time after it had been mentioned to those Catholic friends, 
and then only to a very few, as a sketch, merely speculative, and 
subject to any amendment. 

" It was stated, at the same time, that, in the opinion of the au-v 
thor of the Sketch, " the proposal of the Prelates, in 1799, seemed to 
" have been made with less circumspection than might have been, 
'* expected — as the presentation of a candidate to Government, after 
" a canonical election had taken place in his favour (as proposed in 
" 1799), necessarily placed such person in a painful state of degra- 
" dation, if rejected :" that " the freedom of election was much 
'* better secured by the amended provisions, than by the mode pre- 
" scribed in the proposal of the Roman Catholic Prelates — which, in 

M fact, afforded no security:" and further, " as it was expedient 

" that no undue influence or interference, direct or indirect, should be 
" assumed or exercised on the part of the servants of the Crozvn, in 
" favour, or to the prejudice of any individual candidate in such 
u election," — certain provisions were also sketched, which, it was 
conceived, would effectually secure ine H. C. Clergy from such un- 
due influence. 

*' Such were the motives assigned ; and the Member conceived he 
had some claim to be credited for his sincerity by those to whom 
the Sketch was originally communicated. In every point, the de- 
parture from the proposal of the R. C. Bishops was wholly on the 
side of the Catholic. 

" It has been premised that no Bill has been proposed, or is 
intended to be moved in Parliament by the Member alluded to, or' 
within his knowledge, by any other member, with reference to this 
subject — it is, therefore, unnecessary to add more," 



6« 

" The preamble of the act to state : 

" That whereas it is expedient, that en the legal admission 
"of the Roman Catholic Clergy to the exercise of the func- 
"tiousofthe episcopacy of the Roman communion in Ireland, 
" the most adequate security should be afforded of the eligibi- 
" lity of such persons as are proposed for election to fill the 
f vacant Roman Catholic See : and as it may occur, that His 
" Majesty's Government may entertain a persuasion of the 
" ineligibility of a candidate, arising from the knowledge of 
** facts, which may be unknown to the electors themselves ; — 
" or from other consideration?, which may reasonably con- 
" stitute either a temporary or permanent objection against the 
m election of such candidate on the actual vacancy ; — 

•' And whereas it is also expedient that no undue influence 
"or interference, direct or indirect, should be assumed or 
" exercised by the servants of the Crown, in favour or to the 
" prejudice of any individual candidate in such elections ;— 
a the following prorisions are suggested; — 

"■ 1st. That on every vacancy, by the death or removal of a 
" Prelate exercising the functions of a Bishoo of the Roman 
tf communion in Ireland, a list shall be prepared, containing 
" the names of not less than four, nor exceeding eight persons, 
" subjects of His Majesty ; from whom it is proposed to elect 
" a successor to the vacant Roman Catholic See. 

[Note. — " The mode of preparing such list is not prescribed, but 
" left as a measure of internal regulation, to be governed by the esta- 
" blished discipline, as obtains, on such occasions, among the I\o- 
" man Catholic Clergy in Ireland."] 

" 2d. That the list so prepared shall be transmitted by the 
" president of election (who is usually the Roman Catholic 
" Metropolitan, or senior Bishop of the province) to the chief 
" Secretary, in order that it may belaid before His Majesty's 
" Government in Ireland; and within one calendar n onth of 
" the receipt of such list, it shall be returned to the said pre- 



63 

" sident of election, accompanied with a certificate of the 
'• chief Secretary or his representative to the following pur- 
** port : viz. 

H * That whereas the names of A, B, &c. kc. have been 
" « transmitted to His Majesty's Government, under the sig- 
" ' nature of N. N, president of election of a Roman Catholic 
" ' Prelate, from which list it is proposed to elect a successor 

." c to X. X. — late of , agreeably to the provisions of the 

" * statute in such case made and provided : — and no cause 
" ' being known to exist which can be deemed valid to exclude 
" ' either of the persons, whose names stand on the list afore- 
i{ t said, from being elected to supply the said vacancy; I do 
" ' hereby certify the same, and under my hand and seal 
" f affixed to the said list, in order that the said election may 
" ' proceed without further delay. 

" ' I do also certify and declare, to the best of my knowledge 
" ' and belief, that no means whatever, direct or indirect, at 
" ' the instance of any servant of the Crown, or by any other 
*' * person connected with His Majesty's Government, hare 
" ' been used in order to influence the voice of any elector, in 
" ( favour or to the prejudice of any person whose name stand* 
" ' on the said list. 

(Signed) < Z. Z. 

<L. S.' < Chief Secretary/ " 

" 3d. — That in the event of an objection being taken by Hi* 
" Majesty's Government against any person, whose name 
" stands on such list, the form of certificate shall be varied to 
" the following purport : viz. 

" (After the words ' in such case made and provided, &c/ 
" the following shall be substituted) : 

" e His Majesty's Government is of opinion, that it would 
(i * not be expedient in the present instance, that F. F. (whose 



64 

" 'name stands in the said list) should be nominated to fill the 
" ' said vacancy ; — and I do hereby certify the same, &c. &c, 
" (to conclude in the form preceding)." 

[Note. — <( In the original sketch of this head of regulation it wax 
" stated, that the cause or ground of objection should be invariably 
" notified by the chief Secretary of Government to the President of 
" election ; in like manner as it is understood to be the practice of 
M the See of Rome; but it has been very properly suggested by a 
u noble early that cases might occur in which such notification might 
" possibly be attended with injurious consequences. — It seems, 
" therefore, advisable, that the provision in such case should be thus 
" qualified — viz. 

" ' That the cause or ground of such objection should be communi- 
" ' cated by the Secretary of Government, if required by the Pre- 
" ' sident of election, except in those cases wherein such communi- 
" ' cation miglit possibly be attended with injurious consequences to 
" ' the state.' 

" This head of provision must therefore necessarily involve a dis- 
" cretion on the part of Government, which cannot be subject to 
" specific regulation, and, at any rate, it may become a matter of 
" ulterior consideration. 

" Cases may be easily imagined, where the objection to the no- 
" mination of a particular individual may be of a temporary nature, 
if and not personal." 

'* 4th. — A clause to be introduced, containing the form of 
" an oath, to be taken by the President of election, and by 
" him also to be administered to his colleagues, to the purport 
" that they will not give their suffrages in favour of any per- 
* son but one who is known to be firmly attached to His Ma- 
" jesty, and the civil constitution of the realm. 

" Also the form of an oath to be administered to the Prelate 
94 elect, (and in such terms as may be hereafter advised,) 
" which several oaths are to be subscribed with the signatures 
" of the several electors, and transmitted, under the hand and 
'* seal of the President of election, to the chief Secretary of 
« government in order to be enrolled. 



65 

« 5th.— A clause also to declare, that no person to whoae 
<{ nomination an objection shall be certified to the President of 
" election by the chief Secretary of Government, shall be com- 
" petent to be elected on actual vacancy. — The objection may 
" afterwards be removed, and in that case certified as no 
" longer existing to the Roman Catholic Metropolitan or 
"senior Prelate of the province. — Electors offending against 
"this provision, to be subjected to the penalty of praemunire,* 

" or , and the election to be void to all intents and pur- 

"poses whatever, as to the effect of conferring any legal 
"'authority on the person so elected, to exercise the functions 
" of a Roman Catholic Bishop within the realm. 

" 6th.— As the Deans of the Roman Catholic communion in 
" Ireland are elected nearly in the same manner as their 
" Bishops, and receive institution alike by Bulls from Rome ; 
" it is suggested, that a similar provision should be enacted 
" respecting the election of Deans — so also, with respect to the 
" election of the Warden of Galway, who exercises an episcopal 
"jurisdiction in spirituals with some exceptions. 

[Note. — "The concluding regulation, proposed by the Roman 
" Catholic Clergy, to Government, in January 1799, states, " • That 
" * the Prelates are satisfied, that the nomination of Parish Priests, 
" ' with a certificate of their having taken the oath of allegiance, be 
" ' certified by Government/ 

" This in part is consonant to the invariable practice in the United 
" Provinces, where the Arch-Priest (for there was no Bishop) pre- 
" sented each Priest nominated to a parish, to the civil magistrate for 
" approbation — ' pour eirc avouch Perhaps some regulations with 
" respect to these appointments may well have place on such a par- 
" liamentary arrangement. The preceding regulations are prin- 

* Objection was taken, and not improperly, to the severity of 
this penalty :— the blank was originally left for its mitigation — and, 
upon reflexion, the invalidity, as stated in the latter part of the 
sentence, would be an adequate provision, in itself), if the proposed 
measure were adopted, 

I 



66 

" cipally applicable to the state of the Roman Catholic Clergy is 
" Ireland. They must necessarily be varied with respect to the ap- 
" pointment of the Roman Catholic Prelates in Great Britain."] 

" It is submitted that these provisions will obviate every 
" reasonable objection, that can be raised by the opponents of 
" the measure proposed by the four Catholic Metropolitan and 
"six senior Bishops in January 1799, — though many of the 
11 objections which have been urged against that measure are 
" untenable, and pressed with an acrimony of discussion, verv 
" little suited to the subject and occasion ; the proposal, never - 
" theless, seems to have been made with less circumspection 
" than might have been expected. 

" The presentation of the candidate to Government, after a 
" canonical election had taken place in his favour as proposed 
" in 1799, necessarily placed such person in a painful state of 
" degradation, if rejected. This is obviated by the regulation 
" now proposed. Those w T ho are apprehensive of undue in- 
" fluence of Government, will probably consider the freedom 
" of such an election better secured by the measure now pro- 
" posed, than by the mode prescribed in the proposal of the 
u Roman Catholic Prelates ; which, in fact, afforded no se- 
u curity. 

" The extended number of candidates is calculated to conceal 
" from Government the individual, on whom, if not objected to, 
" the choice of the electors is most likely to fall : — 

" And the solemn attestation proposed to be officially given by 
" the chief Secretary in the name of Government , affords also a 
*' pledge, as high as the nature of the case can possibly afford. 

* The apprehensions of Mr. Burke, expressed in his letter to 
" Dr. Hussey, ' of the too frequent intercourse of the Roman 
" \ Catholic Bishops with the Castle/ were founded in a per- 
" suasion, as he avows, that it might terminate in an absolute 
" appointment by Government. Against such appointments 
" the mode suggested may be considered as providing a more 
" adequate guard, than any other hitherto practised or pro- 



67 

f< posed. If ever a Catholic Prelate was to be considered as a 
" virtual nominee of the Castle, Dr. Hussey himscJf was as- 
suredly that individual. If he had not been patronized by 
" the Ministers of the Crown in the appointment to Maynooth, 
*' there was but little probability that he would have been re- 
" commended to Koine, for the Roman Catholic See of Water- 
" ford. The electors, apprised of the sentiments of the King's 
•' Ministers, doubtless considered his election as a graceful con- 
" cession to Government. In the event of a repeal of the re- 
" maining disqualifying statutes, and the establishment of a 
" state provision for the Roman Catholic Clergy, the circum- 
" stances of the great mass of Catholic population and con- 
" dition of society ivould be so materially changed, as to render 
*' this concert between Government and the Catholic Prelacy, 
*' a measure of prudence, if not of necessity. If the Catholic 
" is to be secured against the undue influence of the Minister 
"of the Crown, as affecting the Hierarchy of his communion, 
" the Protestant is not to be denied the security he claims in 
■" favour of the establishment. The avowed object of the mea- 
!' sure proposed, is to give energy to both. To unite the Ca- 
*' tholic with the Protestant, in ascertaining by the best means 
u the loyalty and general eligibility of the candidate proposed 
" to be elected to fulfil the duties of a high and sacred office, 
*.' possessing great influence, as respecting Ireland, on the 
" minds of a vast majority of the people. 

" The possible objection to be raised by Government in the 
" ease of any individual candidate, it has been stated, may be 
" considered as permanent or temporary. As the late Dr. 
" Hussey's name has been introduced, of him also may it now 
f be said, that if the Ministers of the Crown, who were so 
" friendly to his nomination ; or the Catholic electors, who 
•■ were so much disposed to gratify the King's ministers in 
" the instance of his election, had been aware of his conduct 
" in the latter part of his mission to the court of Madrid, in 
u the year 1T80 (the circumstances of which are now before 



68 

" the public) — it may be assumed that he would not have 
u been advanced to the See of Waterford. Neither is it pro- 
u bable that Dr. Bellew, whatever testimonials he might have 
" borne, and justly been entitled to, for his approved loyalty, 
" would have been selected for the See of Killala at the mo- 
r " ment when his brother, under the style of General Bellew, 
" appeared in arms against his country, as he did on the de- 
u scent of Humbert at Killala, in 1798. In both these cases 
" Government might have had information of the facts, before 
" they could reach the knowledge of the electors ; and these 
" instances may be cited as cases of tenable disqualifying ob- 
jection, either 'permanent or temporary, as applicable to the 
ft objects of this arrangement. Indeed, in the instance of 
" Doctor Hussey, the notoriety of his being confidential chap- 
" lain to the Spanish Embassy to London, might in itself have 
" constituted a tenable ground of objection. 

" It is assumed that the right of the imperial Parliament to 
" legislate in the spirit of these provisions will not be ques- 
" tioned. The authority of almost every state, of whatever 
" established communion, Roman Catholic, Greek, Reformed, 
" &c. &c, is to be adduced in support of the principle. Nor 
" can a concordat with Rome, under the circumstances sug- 
" gested, be deemed necessary, even on Catholic principles, 
u although the concurrence of the Roman Pontiff was consf- 
" dered by the Catholic Prelates, in 1799, as an indispensable 
" sanction of the measures then proposed. The distinction is 
"obvious. The presentation of the candidate for the appro- 
ri bation of government, by the proposal of 1799, ivasio be sub- 
" sequent to a canonical election, when the usual faculties were 
" only wanting from Rome for his institution. By the mode 
" now suggested, the names of certain persons are to be trans- 
" mitted to Government merely as candidates for election, un- 
" known possibly to themselves, and the objection, if taken to 
" any, may be equally unknown; it will rest much with tilt 
4< discretion of the electors. 



69 

" The various documents in the Appendix* are not cited as 
f perfect models for imitation. Many of the regulations are 
'.' known to have been influenced by caprice or spleen, espe- 
" cially in the instances of Austria and Venice : nevertheless 
" many are the result of a sound and liberal policy, and all 
" confirm the principle, that the sovereign power in every 
" state, of whatever religious communion, has considered itself 
" armed with legitimate authority to legislate in all matters 
" of ecclesiastical arrangement f within its dominion." 



* The original Appendix here referred to, contained the Edicts, 
&c. of various States, and was annexed to a Summary of Corre- 
spondence not published. 

f This is to be understood in reference to the security of the 
temporal rights of the Sovereign. The preceding Sketch was con- 
fined to the object in view of the R. C. Prelates in 1799, not ad- 
verting to other regulations which it might be deemed advisable to 
adopt. 



70 



(P. 47.) ec Our Catholic Ancestors, animated 
i( with the generous spirit of enlightened Patriot- 
" ism, secured their Freedom, by raising at once 
" a barrier against the encroachments of the 

Crowd and of the Tiara." 

OF PRAEMUNIRE. 



<i 



Extract from Blackstone's Commentaries, Book IV. Ch.S. 



" PRJEMUNIRE: so called from the words of the Writ, 
" preparatory to the prosecution thereof." Prxmunire facias, 
A. B. &c. 

" It took its original from the exorbitant power claimed and 
'* exercised in England by the Pope, which, even in the day* 
" of blind zeal, was too heavy for our ancestors to bear. 

" It may justly be observed that religious principles, which, 
" when genuine and pure, have an evident tendency to make 
" their professors better citizens, as well as better men, have 
** • when perverted and erroneous* been usually subversive of 
" civil government, and been made both the cloak and the ir- 
" strument of every pernicious design that can be harboured 
" in the heart of man. 

" The dreadful effects of a religious bigotry, when actuated 
" by erroneous principles, even of the Protestant kind, are suf- 
" ficiently evident from the history of the Anabaptists in Ger- 
" many, the Covenanters in Scotland, and that deluge of Sec- 
" taries in England, who murdered their Sovereign, overturned 
" the Church and Monarchy, shook every pillar of law, jus- 
° tice, and private property, and most devoutly established * 
•/ kingdom of the Saints in their stead. — But these horrid de- 



71 

gl vastations, the effects of mere madness, or zeal that wai 
" nearly allied to it, though violent and tumultuous, were but 
" of short duration : whereas, the progress of the Papal po- 
" licy, long actuated by the steady counsels of successive Pon- 
" tiffs, took deeper root, and was at length in some places with 
" difficulty, in others never yet extirpated. 

" The establishment also of the feodal system in most of the 
u governments of Europe, whereby the lands of all private 
" proprietors were declared to be holden of the Prince, gave 
" a hint to the Court of Rome for usurping a similar authority 
" over all the preferments of the Church. 

" At length the Holy Father went a step beyond any exam- 
" pie of either Emperor or feodal Lord. He reserved to him- 
" self, by his own apostolical authority, the presentation to all 
" benefices vohich became vacant while the incumbent was attend- 
u ing the Court of Rome, upon any occasion, or on his journey 
" thither, or back again; and moreover such also as became va- 
" cant by his promotion to a bishoprick or abbey; — etiamsi ad 
'* ilia persona? consueverint et debuerint per electionem aut 
" quemvis alium modum assumi. — And this last the Canon* 
" ists declared was no detriment at all to the patron, being 
" only like the change of a life in a feodal estate by the Lord; 
" Dispensations to avoid these vacancies begat the doctrine of 
" Commendams ; and Papal provisions were the previous nomi- 
" nation to such benefices, by a kind of anticipation, before they 
" became actually void ; though afterwards indiscriminately 
" applied to any right of patronage exerted or usurped by the 
" Pope. In consequence of which the best livings were filled 
" by Italian and other foreign Clergy, equally unskilled in and 
" adverse to the laws and constitution of England. 

" The statutes of Praemunire, which were framed to encoun- 
" ter this overgrown yet increasing evil, King Edward I. & 
" wise and magnanimous Prince, set himself in earnest to 
" shake off this servile yoke. He would not suffer his bishops 
" to attend a general council, till they had sworn not to re 



72 



" ceire the Papal benediction. He made light of all Papal 
" bulls and processes; attacking Scotland in defiance of one, 
" and seizing the temporalities of his Clergy, who, under pre- 
" tence of another, refused to pay a tax imposed by Parlia- 
" ment. He strengthened the statutes of Mortmain, thereby 
" closing the great gulph in which all the lands of the king- 
*' dom were in danger of being swallowed. And one of hii 
" subjects having obtained a bull of excommunication against 
" another, he ordered him to be executed as a traitor, accord- 
" ing to the ancient law; and in the 35th year of his reign 
" was made the first statute against Papal provisions, being, 
" according to Sir Edward Coke, the foundation of all the sub- 
" sequent statutes of Prcemunire ; which we rank as an offence 
" immediately against the King, because every encourage- 
" ment of the Papal power is a diminution of the authority of 
" the Crown. 

7 In the weak reign of Edzuard the Second, the Pope again 
" endeavoured to encroach, but the Parliament manfully with- 
" stood him; and it was one of the principal articles charged 
" against that unhappy Prince, that he had given allowance 
" to the Bulks of the See of Rome. But Edward the Third was 
u of a temper extremely different; and, to remedy these in- 
** conveniences first by gentle means, he and his nobility 
" wrote an expostulation to the Pope ; but receiving a mena- 
" cing and contemptuous answer, withal acquainting him that 
" the Emperor (who, a few years before, at the Diet of Nu- 
" remberg, A. D. 1323, had established a law against provi- 
" sions,) and also the King of France, had lately submitted to 
" the Holy See,, — the King replied, that if both the Emperor 
" and the French King should take the dope's part, he was 
" ready to give battle to them both, in defence of the liberties 
" of the Crown. Hereupon more sharp and penal laws were 
" devised against Provisors, which enact severally, that the 
t( Court of Rome shall not present or collate to any bishoprick 
" or living in England ; and that whoever disturbs any Patron 



73 

" in the presentation to a living, by virtue of a Papal provi- 
" sion, such provisor shall pay fine and ransom to the King at 
'* his will, and be imprisoned till he renounces such provision : 
" and the same punishment is inflicted on such as cite the 
'•King, or any of his subjects, to answer in the Court of 
" Rome : And when the Holy See resented these proceedings, 
" and Pope Urban V. attempted to revive the vassalage and 
" annual rent to which King John had subjected his kingdom, 
'* it was unanimously agreed by all the estates of the realm in 
u Parliament assembled, 40 Edward III. that King John'i 
" donation was null and void, being without the concurrence 
a of Parliament, and contrary to his coronation oath ; and all 
" the temporal Nobility and Commons engaged, that if the 
" Pope should endeavour, by process or otherwise, to main- 
*9 tain these usurpations, they would resist and withstand him 
" with all their power. 

" This, then, is the original meaning of the offence, which 
u we call Prcemunire, viz. introducing a foreign power into 
* this land, and creating imperium in imperio, by paying that 
" obedience to Papal process, which constitutionally belonged 
" to the King alone, long before the Reformation in the reign 
" of Henry the Eighth." 

The preceding extract is confined to the object of the 
statute of Prcemunire, anterior to the Reformation, as a 
necessary guard, instituted by a Catholic State, against the 
usurpations of the Roman PontifFs, and principally for 
the protection of presentations or collations to Bishoprics 
and Ecclesiastical Benefices. It may be said that there is 
little chance of such an abuse in modern times; in that 
case, then, the statute is merely a dead letter. The Ca- 
tholic Prelacy transmit their postulations to Rome in 
favour of particular subjects of his Majesty, but has Rome 
never deviated from them ? — Has she never collated^ even 

K 



74 

during the reign of his present Majesty, any person in 
whose favour no postnlation had been made, or, if made, 
was unknown to have been made? — And has not Rome 
also turned aside the postulations of Bishops and Apos- 
tolic Vicars, and, for many years together, refused to act 
upon them ; and, in other instances, rejected the person 
who was the chief object of postulation ? — To each of 
these questions an answer must be given in the affirmative; 
and yet it is not contended that, in either instance, it 
was in the contemplation of Rome to have acted with 
hostility to the interests of the State, but on the contrary, 
in some instances alluded to, the conduct of Rome was influ- 
enced by a manifest desire to act in deference to those 
interests. Until the death of the father of the late Car- 
dinal of York, however, we know that the See of Rome, 
almost invariably, acted upon the recommendations of the 
representative of the House of Stuart. 

Should a Papal Bull be directed to an alien, or to a 
notoriously disaffected subject, collating such a person to 
a Roman Catholic See within the realm, will the Catholic 
Prelacy contend that, suojure> they could reject the ope- 
ration of such a Bull ? — Thej^ must answer in the negative; 
and herein municipal regulation is required in aid of the 
subject. 

It is a well-known fact that Buonaparte, with the Pope 
even in his custody, while he secured, by concordatum, 
such objects of ecclesiastical arrangement which were 
considered merely of a spiritual nature, legislated 
against the unlicenced intromission of all Papal Bulls, 
Brieves, and Rescripts emanating from Rome, or any 
foreign jurisdiction. Had Buonaparte more reason to be 
apprehensive of Papal usurpation than we have? Although 
there may be very little probability of its revival, it is 
not unwise to be provident — " Nullum numen abest si sit 
prudential 



75 

So recently as in the year 1794, an alien Bishop was 
sent to Ireland, and the Roman Catholic Metropolitan, 
within whose province he intruded himself, expressed his 
disapprobation in these words: u / was surprised to hear 
of an alien Bishop coming into my province, which was 
a treatment I didnot expect from the sacred Congregation, 
who gave me no notice thereof. If Cardinal Antonelli 
had remained in his station, I would have taken the liberty 
of letting him know my mind very candidly.' 1 '' — 'Another 
elevated dignitary of the Roman Catholic Church, after 
much discussion on this subject, thus expresses himself: 
" But whilst I say and advance all this as a steadfast 
Roman Catholic, not ill versed in all doctrinal points of 
this Church, I am, from a long-acquired experience, bold 
to say, that I am far from being prejudiced, or so sold to 
Rome, as not to allow that it behoves every National 
Church, or even State, to guard against certain encroach- 
ments, cabals, and intrigues of Rome and of her Curia, 
whose finesse and the most refined policy are ever in prac- 
tice." — The originals of both these letters are in the pos- 
session of Sir J. Hippisley. 

If such be the opinions of eminent Ecclesiastics of 
the See of Rome, jealous of the independence of their 
Church, shall the Members of the Establishment wholly 
shut their eyes against the possibility of encroachment? 
And shall they, who seek the protection of their Catholic 
fellow-subjects, equally with their own, be calumniated, 
because they are not disposed to surrender their reason to 
the voice of clamour? If the representative body of the 
nation, the guardians of its interests and security, 
should be so little alive to their duties as to turn aside 
from wholesome legislation, in yielding to such clamours, 
but little permanent good could be augured from conces- 
sions exacted by such ill-grounded apprehensions. 



76 

The diligent inquirer, on this subject, should not neg- 
lect a reference to a work, of the Lord Chancellor Claren- 
don, entitled " Religion and Policy ;"a valuable p ihli ■ •a- 
tiou from the Clarendon Press, for which, the public arc 
indebted to the Earl o/Mansfield, the Bishop of Loudon, 
and the present Speaker of the House of Commons, as 
Trustees under the will of the late Duchess of Queensberry. 
Great information will be derived from a perusal of this 
work, though the Frondeurs of the Councils of Literan 
and Constance will feel but little satisfaction in perceiv- 
ing that the noble historian has passed over the Acts of 
those Councils, without the least allusion to their sanc- 
tioning the dispensing or deposing doctrines, or breach of 
faith with Heretics. It is evident, that Lord Clarendon 
could collect no such legitimate inference from the Acts 
of those Councils, though his eye appears to have been 
acutely directed to the detection of all encroachments of 
the See of Rome. The last pages of the 2d Volume, are 
particularly worthy of attention, at the present crisis: 
nevertheless, Lord Clarendon had still much to learn ; and 
his opinions, if he could have anticipated the Acts 
of the Pontificate of Pius VI. would have removed 
many of his fears. 

The obligations of the public are not less due to an 
Illustrious Personage, who has added to his most interest- 
ing speech in the House of Lords, a valuable collection 
of documents. [Vide particularly the notes L, M, N,0. 
annexed to the Speech of His R. H. the Duke of Sussex, 
delivered on the 21st of April 1812.] 



77 



Decree of the Empress of Russia, Catherine IL con- 
cerning the Roman Catholics of her Empire; trans- 
mitted to the Senate, Jan. 17th, 1782. 

(translation.) 

Our ancestors and ourself, having granted the free exercise 
of different Religions in our Empire, and, among others, that 
of the Church of Rome ; and as a great number of personi 
who profess the tenets of the same, are to be found in various 
parts of Russia, even the most remote, we thought it ne- 
cessary, in 1773, to appoint for those persons a Bishop, from 
among our subjects, and chose for that dignity the Bishop 
Stanislaus Sextrencewitz, who, in consequence of the unequi- 
vocal proofs given us, for a length of time, of his devotion to 
our person, his zeal for his church, his wisdom in guiding 
the flock entrusted to him, and his diligence for the public 
good, had rendered himself worthy of our benevolence. — 
Resuming now our cares for our faithful subjects of the Ro- 
man Catholic Communion, after having concerted the ne- 
cessary measures for the better direction of the affairs of their 
Church, we have judged it expedient to adopt the following 
Regulations : — 

I. — We now erect the City ofMohilow, the capital of the Go- 
vernment of the same name, into an Archbishopric k of the 
Roman Catholic Religion, including within the jurisdiction 
of its archbishoprick all the churches and convents of the 
said Religion which are in the governments of Mohilow and 
of Polotski, as well as those of our two capitals, and in all 
other parts of the Russian Empire. 

II. — We graciously name the Bishop Stanislaus Sextrencewitz, 
to the Archbishoprick See of the Roman Catholic Church of 
Mohilow. 

III. — To aid the same in his functions, we appoint a co- 
adjutor, and elevate to that dignity the Abbot John Benis- 
lasshi, Canon of the Archiepiscopal Church of Mohilow, and 



78 

Superior of Danbrg; ! and we have given orders that mca- 
tures shall be taken for his elevation to the Episcopacy. 

IV. — Twelve hundred rubles a-year shall be assigned to the 
co-adjutor of the Jrchicpiscopal Church of Mohilow* 

V. — The Archbishop of the Roman Catholic Church of 
Mohilow shall not receive any order from any person whatever, 
besides us and our Senate. 

VI. — The Archbishop shall appoint a Consistory of Canons, 
natives of our dominions, or naturalized in them, to examine 
and judge, under his direction, all ecclesiastical as well as 
secular affairs, appertaining to his jurisdiction ; but in the 
case of a judgment affecting a secular person, he shall be 
obliged to call a deputy from the State Tribunal, to co- 
operate with the other members of the Consistory in passing 
the judgment which may be requisite; and such individuals 
who may not be content with the sentence of the Consistory 1 
and of the Archbishop, shall be at liberty to appeal to the 
Senate. 

VII. — The Tribunal of Livonia, Estonia, and Finland, is 
forbidden to interfere, in any way, in the affairs concerning 
the Roman Catholic Churches. 

VIII. — The appointment of Superiors and Heads of Con- 
vents, of Curates for the parishes, and of all other promotion* 
to the ecclesiastical degrees of the Roman Catholic Religion, 
shall be dependent, in ail the extent of the Russian Empire, 
on the will of the Archbishop whom we have appointed : and 
we order him to examine, either personally, or by means of 
his co-adjutor, all the aforesaid superiors and curates; to let 
those remain who were born our subjects, or are become such, 
to appoint others that are so, and to dismiss and send away 
those who may have come from foreign countries, and not to 
suffer any of them to come in for the future, forbidding them 
to return, under the penalty of being juridically prosecuted for 
having disobeyed the decrees of the Supreme Government. 
IX. — With regard to what concerns the direction of the 



79 

Roman Catholic Church of Petersburg!] , the same remain! 
confirmed by our privileges and regulations ; but, as to the 
appointment of Priests to that Church, it shall be, for the fu- 
ture, according to the above specified regulations ; for, if it 
was permitted formerly to call and to receive foreign monks, 
it was only because Russia then had no bishops of the Roman 
Catholic Religion of her own establishment. 

X. — We confirm the prohibition expressed in our decrees 
of July 3d, 1779, addressed to the Governor-General of White 
Russia, and of Jan. 31st, 1780, to all the Governors-General, 
not to permit the entrance within our frontiers of ecclesias- 
tics of foreign appointment : and we direct that, wherever 
any of them appear, they shall be sent back, and threatened 
with being delivered over to the Tribunals of our Depart- 
ments, to be judged according to the laws : and finally, those 
who, contrary to this decree, receive them, without the per- 
mission of the Archbishop, shall be sent to the competent 
tribunals, to be there judged according to the laws. 

XI. — We command that all the Religious Orders of the 
Romish Religion shall only be dependent on the Archbishop of 
Mohilow, on his co-adjutor, and on his consistory, without 
daring to submit to any other ecclesiastical power out of our 
Empire, to send to such power any portion of their incomes, 
or to have any connection with it, under the penalty of being 
juridically prosecuted for disobeying the laws of the Supreme 
Government. 

XII. We order the Archbishop of the Romish Church of 
Mohilow, to send us a detailed account of all its convents, 
specifying those which he truly thinks useful to Religion and 
the Country, whether on account of their knowledge, the 
education of youth, or their care in assisting the poor and 
the needy; — of the measures he may take for maintaining 
them, and likewise of those who live in sloth and only for 
themselves, doing nothing for the public good, and becoming 
a burden to society ;. in order that we may adopt the best mea*- 



80 



sures possible on the subject for the promotion of the glory of 
God, and the good of society. 

XIII. — We confirm our preceding Decrees, which prohibit 
the reception of any Bull from the Pope, or any other writings 
sent in his name ; ordering that the same shall be sent to our 
Senate, who, after having examined their contents, and par- 
ticularly any thing that may he found contrary to the laws of the 
Russian Empire, or to the rights of the Ecclesiastical power 
which we have received from God, shall be obliged to communi- 
cate to us its opinion, and to wait our permission or prohibi- 
tion in rendering public such bulls or tvrilings. 

The present Decree shall be published wherever it may 
concern, and be delivered to all Catholic Churches, that every 
one of them may come to a knowledge of what is hereby 
published. 

The original, subscribed by the Director of the Senate, was 
printed and published by order of the Senate, at Petersburgh, 
1782. 



Edict of his Majesty Charles III. King of Spain, 8fc. 
dated Buen Retiro—%7 Nov. 1T61- 

( TRANSLATION.) 

Having considered that my religious zeal cannot satisfy the 
sincere desire I preserve for protecting on all occasions either 
the determinations of the Holy See, or those of the Inquisi- 
tion of these kingdoms in the serious and important business 
committed to their care, and which is executed with so much, 
zeal by that tribunal, unless I should be acquainted with those 
same determinations previous to any notice given of them to 
my vassals, and unless the most secure regulations should be 
established for avoiding before the publication thereof every 
danger of embarrassment or inconvenience ; I have resolved, 
after mature deliberation, and with advice of my council, that 



81 



henceforwards neither pontifical bulls, briefs, rescripts, exhor* 
tat ions, nor letters upon any subject whatsoever, treating to 
establish a law, regulation, or general observance, whether di- 
rected in particular or in general to the tribunals, juntas, ma- 
gistracies, archbishops, bishops, or prelates of these kingdoms, 
shall be published or obeyed, unless it appears to have been first 
teen, and examined by me ; and if ever they should be addressed 
to the apostolic nuncio, he must pass them to my hands by the se- 
cretary of state's office: and that all bulls or briefs for business 
between private persons or parties, whether they be of grace or 
justice, shall be presented to and examined by the council of 
Castile, in order to discover, if any prejudice can result from its 
observance, either to the concor 'datum or to the laws, good cus- 
toms and practices, or to the tranquillity of the kingdom, or to 
the prejudice of any third person, excepting solely from this pre- 
sentation, the dispensations and briefs dispatched by the holy 
penitevtiary for the internal forum of consciences ; and that the 
inquisitor-general shall not publish any edict proceeding from 
any pontifical bull, or brief, unless it be transmitted to him by 
my order ; for they must all be delivered by the nuncio to my 
person, or to my first secretary of state ; and that if they be- 
long to the prohibition of any books, the formality must be 
observed, as expressed in the 14th Auto, tit. 7. book I. causing 
the books to be examined again, and then if they should deserve 
it, prohibiting them by his own authority, and without insert- 
ing the brief: and likewise that the inquisitor-general shall 
not publish in the court, or out of it, any edict, or expurgatory, 
without first giving notice thereof to me, by the secretary of 
dispatch, of grace, and justice, or in his absence from my per- 
son, by the secretary of state ; nor without obtaining in answer 
my consent : and finally, that before any book or paper be con- 
demned by the Inquisitor-General or by the tribunal of the 
Inquisition, they shall hear the defence that the concerned 
may desire to make, citing them for that purpose, according to 
the regulations prescribed to the Inquisition of Rome by Pope 

X. 



82 

Benedict XIV, in the Apostolic Constitution, which begins, 
Sglicita ac provida, &c. Buen Retiro, the ?7th of November, 
1761. 



*** (Similar edicts were published in 1709, addressed to the 
Viceroy of Naples, commanding that all bulls, rescripts, and 
provisions, coming from Rome, should be strictly subjected to 

examination and the " Regium Exequatur" In the States 

©f the Empire, and in Spanish and Austrian Flanders; — in 
i Vance — Portugal — Savoy — Milan — Florence — Venice, &c, 
fimilar regulations obtained, under different appellations, — 
whether denominated the "Exequatur Regium" — " Placet" — 
" Obedietur" — " Pareatis" &c. — which Van Espen and other 
writers trace back to times of high antiquity). 



Extracts of the Convention, or Concordatum, be- 
tween the French Government and his Holiness 
the Pope Pius VII. ratified the 23d Fruc- 
iidor, year 9 3 (\0th September, 1801.) 

TRANSLATION. 

VI. The bishops, before they enter upon their functions, 
shall take, before the Chief Consul, the oath of fidelity which 
was in use before the revolution, expressed in the following 
words : 

" I swear and promise to God, upon the Holy Evangelists, to 
preserve obedience and fidelity to the government established 
by the constitution of the French Republic. I likewise promise 
to carry on no correspondence, to be present at no conversa- 
tion, to form no connection, whether within the territories ol 
the republic or without, which may, in any degree, disturb the 
public tranquillity: and i£> in my diocese or elsewhere, I dis- 



83 

cover that any thing is going forward to the prejudice of the 
state, I will immediately communicate to Government all the 
information I possess." 

VII. Ecclesiastics of the second order shall take the same 
oath before the civil authorities appointed by the Government. 

X. The bishops shall have the appointment of the parish 
priests. — Their choice shall not fall but on persons approved 
of by Government. 

XIV. The Government shall grant a suitable salary to 
bishops and parish priests, whose dioceses and parishes are 
comprised in the new division. 

XVI. His Holiness recognises in the Chief Consul of the 
French republic the same rights and prerogatives in religious 
matten which the ancient Government enjoyed. 



Concurrent with the above Convention, regulations were 
also enacted by authority of the Senate, upon which occa- 
sion, the following observations were made by the Senator 
Simeon : 

" Although the enterprises of the Court of Rome, 
<c thanks to the progress of reason, and of her own wisdom, 
" may be classed among those antiquated historical facts, 
i( whose return is little to be feared, France had defended 
<c herself too well against them ; she had too well esta- 
" blished, even under the pious Louis IXth, the indepen- 
" dence of her Government, and the liberties of her 
" Church, to leave it in our power to neglect the already 
" existing barriers. According to the former usage of 
" France, no bull, brief, rescript, nor any dispatches 
" whatever, coming from Rome, can be received, printed, 
" published, or executed, without the authority of the 
ff Government." 



84 



Regulations of the Gallican Churchy concurrent 
-with the preceding Convention, and enacted by 
the Senate, September, 1801. 

[extract.] 

TITLE I. 

Of the Regulations of the Catholic Church, as connected with the 
Policy of the State. 

Article I. No bull, rescript, decree, provision, or any 
thing in the place of a provision, nor other missive from the 
Court of Rome, even though it should relate to individuals only, 
shall be received, published, printed, or otherwise put in force, 
without the authority of the government. 

II. No individual styling himself nuncio, legate, apostolic 
vicar or commissary, or assuming any other character what- 
ever, shall exercise, without the same authority, within the 
territories of France, or elsewhere, any function relative to 
the affairs of the Gallican Church. 

III. The decree of foreign synods, or even of general 
councils, shall not be published in France before the govern- 
ment shall have examined their form, their conformity to the 
laws, rights, and privileges of the French Republic, and what- 
ever might in their publication have a tendency to alter or to 
affect public tranquillity. 

IV. No national or metropolitan council, no diocesan 
synod, no deliberative assembly, shall be allowed to be held 
without the express permission of government. 

V. Atl ecclesiastical functions shall be gratuitous, with the 
exception of those oblations which shall be authorised and 
fixed by particular regulations. 

VI. Recourse shall be had to the Council of State in every 
instance of abuse, on the part of superiors, andother ecclesias- 
ical persons. The instances of abuse are— usurpation, or ex- 



85 

cess of power, contravention of the laws and institutions of the 
Republic ; infraction of the rules consecrated by the canous 
received in France; any attack upon the liberties, franchises, 
and customs of the Gallican Church ; and any attempt, which, 
in the exercise of worship, can compromise the honour of citi- 
zens, arbitrarily trouble their conscience, or lead to oppression, 
injury, or public scandal. 

XVI. No person can be named a bishop who is not a 
Frenchman born, and who is not at least thirty years of age. 

XVII. Before the decree for his nomination is dispatched, 
he shall be bound to produce an attestation of the correctness 
of his conduct and manners, furnished by the bishop of that 
diocese in which he shall have exercised the functions of the 
ministry; he shall undergo an examination respecting his 
tenets, by a bishop and two priests commissioned by the Chief 
Consul, and who shall address the result of their examination 
to the Counsellor of State who presides over the department 
of ecclesiastical affairs. 

XVIII. The priest, nominated by the Chief Consul, shall 
endeavour without delay to procure installation from the Pope ; 
he shall be permitted to perform no function till the bull au- 
thorizing his installation shall have received the sanction of 
government, and till he shall have taken in person the oath 
prescribed by the convention entered into between the French 
Government and the Holy See. This oath shall be taken to 
the Chief Consul, and a minute of it shall be entered by the 
Secretary of State. 

XIX. The bishops shall nominate and install the cures; they 
shall not, however, make, public their appointment; nor shall 
they give them canonical institution till this nomination shall 
have been agreed to by the Chief Consul. 

XXV. The bishops shall send every year to this Counsellor 
of State the names of the students of those seminaries who are 
destined to the holy ministry. 

XXXVII. It shall be the duty of the metropolitans and 



86 



the cathedral chapters to communicate to the government 
without delay, information of the vacancy of sees, and the steps 
which may have been taken for the government of vacant 
dioceses. 

LXIV. The salary of the archbishops is to be 15,000 
francs (about 800/. sterling.) 

LXV. The bishops are to receive 10,000 francs (about 
500?. sterling.) 

LXVI. The cures are divided into two classes. The 
salary of the cures of the first class is to be about 1500 francs 
(between 70 and 80/. sterling) ; that of the second class is to 
be 1000 francs (between 50 and 60/. sterling.) 



%* The Speeches of the Senators Portalis, Simeon, and 
Lucien Buonaparte, in reference to the ancient regulations 
of the Gallican Church, are extremely interesting, and 
are annexed to the Proceedings of the Senate, published 
by Fitzpatrick, Dublin. 



87 

[note omitted page .] 

In Sir J. H's Tract, entitled " The Substance of addi- 
tional Observations 1806," of which Dr. Milner wrote so 
able a defence ; he should recollect, that those vigilant 
institutions of foreign States, both Catholic and Protestant, 
'which he now stigmatizes with the distorted appellations 
of Inquisitions, Star-Chambers, &;c. were recognized as 
salutary provisions of Civil Polity. — In the same Tract, 
that concurrence between Government and the Roman 
Catholic Prelacy, in reference to the civil eligibility of can- 
didates for vacant Catholic Sees, was also recognised, and 
the principle stated to have been observed, in the United 
Provinces, even in the admission of Cures to their re- 
spective charges. Not a word of dissent was expressed by 
Dr. Milner, in either of his printed letters before men- 
tioned ; and indeed, in various publications from his pen, 
since that period, he has distinctly stated his approbation 
of the principle of those measures, which he has since so 
much reprobated. In his Letter to a Parish Priest, after 
denouncing, by anticipation, the conduct of the Catholic 
Bishops of Ireland, in a possible departure from their re- 
solutions of 1799? which, he asserts, are sanctioned by the 
practice of every State ; he suddenly turns round, on the 
important discovery, that his Parliamentary friends wished 
to demand of Catholics, " security for their own religious 
establishment." — Was it in this spirit that, some ten 
years before, he swore to maintain the " Protestant" suc- 
cession eo nomine, and consequently gave that security 
himself? Has it escaped his memory, that Catholics have 
repeatedly declared to Parliament, that they are ready to 
defend with their lives, that Constitution which necessarily 



88 

includes security for its religious, as well as its civil esta- 
blishment ? But to give Dr. Milner the full advantage of 
his own words, qualified with his saving clause ; " I dis- 
" covered (says he), to my great surprise, that what our 
V friends really required of us was, to secure their reli- 
¥ gious, not their civil establishment, and I blessed God 
" who had directed the Prelates to decide as they had 
cc done. It is thus seen, that I acknowledge my error, 
11 in the face of the public of both Islands, &c. On ihe 
u same principle, I hereby publicly retract and condemn 
" my aforesaid Letter to a Parish Priest, and all my other 
a letters and writings, whether printed or in manuscript, 
" on the subject of the teto, which I wrote whilst I was 
" under the aforesaid delusion ; that is to say, from the 
" latter end of May, till about the conclusion of Novem- 
" ber, 1S08." — Such are Dr. Milner's motives, and such 
his facilities of self-dispensation, from the inferred obliga- 
tions imposed by his own writings ; facilities, we fear, 
which may afford, to his old polemical antagonists, but 
too much cause for triumph. 



89 
CONCLUDING NOTE. 

In the 2d part of u A Statement of the Penal Laws 
which aggrieve the Catholics of Ireland, c\c." some copies 
of which have recently been received from Dublin, where 
it was printed in 1812, and which is understood to be 
the work of a Barrister, in great estimation with the 
Catholic Body, is the following passage— (p. 257). 

"In 179 1 an Englishman, Clerk to the Neapolitan Em* 
bassy, ventured to apply to the Court of Rome for a sup- 
ply of provisions for the British fleet, then lying in the 
Mediterranean, and in great distress. He succeeded in 
obtaining the Pope's written order for an ample supply ; 
relieved the fleet — and, according to strict law, should 
have been hanged upon his return. — He was, however, 
raised to a baronetage, and his patent is a just satire upon 
the state." — The marginal direction in this work is— 
" See Bet ham's Baronetage, Article Cox Hippisley" 
printed 1805. 

This misrepresentation of the condition of the person 
alluded to, is the more extraordinary, from the authority 
quoted. Previous to the publication, Mr. Betham ap- 
plied to individuals, as is usual, in order to obtain such 
materials as were suited to his work. — The transaction to 
which the author of the " Statement" alludes, was one 
of the transactions, of a public nature, recorded under the 
name to which he refers ; — but it required some industry 
of misrepresentation to qualify the instrument of it with 
the description of a " Clerk to the Neapolitan Embassy," 
especially when the letters of his Majesty's Minister to 
the Court of Naples, with the expressions of his acknow- 

M 



90 

ledgment, are subjoined to the narrative in the same 
work. 

The Author of the Statement appears to have adopted, 
from the publication of Sir J. Hippislcy's Speech in 1810, 
the observations made by him on the 1 1 3th Cation of the 
Church of England, and his reference to the opinion of 
Lord Kenyon, in the case of Du Batre, with his marked 
observation on the case of the King and Sparkes : those 
who compare the pages 24 and 25, of the 2d part of the 
"Statement" with the 46th and 47th pages of the 2d 
edition or Sir J. H.'s Speech in 1810, will have little 
doubt of the intermediate source, at least, from which the 
Author of the Statement has taken Ii is authority. — This is 
mentioned only as an additional presumption that the 
Author of the Statement had before him sufficient light to 
have avoided so tortuous a representation as he has been 
pleased to make of the character in which Sir J. H. ac- 
quitted those acts for which, on the Author's construc- 
tion of the law, 'i.he should have been hanged on his 
return ;" — but which nevertheless were not passed over by 
others without that sort of recognition, which must ever 
carry with it (he best reward of gratuitous services. 

From the period when Mr. Fox brought forward 
his motion in Parliament on the subject of Catholic 
Claims, in 1805, Sir J. H- has been assailed by a variety 
of periodical and other publications on both sides of St. 
George's Channel, with a wantonness of abuse not a little 
misplaced. Some industry has not been spared also to mis- 
represent his parliamentary conduct to his constituents. 

In his parliamentary course he is not conscious 

of having deviated from that line which is justified in the 
soberest conviction of his own judgment, and supported 
by the concurring authorities of the most eminent and 



91 

soundest statesmen, as well as of the most exemplary di- 
vines, on a great state question, wherein a Pitt, — a Fox, 
— a Burke, — and a Windham, concurred with such Pre- 
lates as Bishop Watson, — Bishop Bathurst, — and others 
of the Episcopal Bench, who have recorded their opi- 
nions, and to whose great names may be added those able 
divines, Dr. Parr, Dr. Butler, Dr. Maltby, and Dr. 
Valpy # ; divines sanctioned by the highest patronage, to 
superintend and direct the education of the rising genera- 
tion. — If on such a question Sir J. H. has thought, and 
spoke, and acted in the full spirit of those luminaries of 
the Church and State,— he surely can take no shame to 
himself, nor seek to correct opinions thus corroborated. — 
And he may be allowed to say, with the venerable and en- 
lightened Prelate under whose tutelary charge his own 
constituents are placed (Bishop Bathurst), that u with- 
out fear of contradiction, the judgment of four such men as 
Mr. Burke, Mr. Pitt, Mr. Fox, and Mr. Windham, carries 
far more weight, upon a question like this, than the judgment 
of both the Universities, and indeed all the Divines who ever 
sat in Convocation under the dome of St. Paul's, or in the 

Jerusalem Chamber, to the present hour." He may 

also exclaim with the same worthy Prelate, and with 
whom, from a very early period of his life, he has had 
the happiness to be connected in the closest friendship :— 
u Such are the leading articles of my creed ; — a creed 



* The celebrated work of Dr. Parr, under the title of Plnhpatris 
Farvicencis ; — the extended notes subjoined to Dr. Butler's Installa- 
tion Sermon, at Cambridge; — and also to Dr. Valpy's Sermons and 
Essays; with some Tracts of Dr. Maltby, Vicar of Buckden, will be 
found of very interesting reference, in addition to the Diocesan 
Charges and Parliamentary Speeches of the Prelates above named. 



92 

winch I am now much too old to change ; nor in truth, if 
I were given to change, do I know where lo go for a bet- 
ter ; — for one, I mean, belter calculated to promote indivi- 
dual happiness, and at the same time, that public union 
of heart and hand, if not of opinion, which is so loudly 
called for, and at the present very serious crisis, so much 
wanted: — that real, affectionate union, I mean, which is 
the very bond of peace, of perfectness ; and an unassaila- 
ble bulwark of security, prosperity, and permanency to, I 
believe, the purest ecclesiastical establishment, and the 

best form of civil government in the universe!" With 

these observations, and in reference to those official testi- 
monies which could scarcely have escaped the eye of the 
Author of " The Statement," when he himself referred to 
Mr, Betham's publication, Sir J. H. will repeat what had 
been before observed upon an occasion not dissimilar ; 
that " in the discussion of a question which is of import- 
ance in proportion as it involves a great measure of state 
polity, rather than a mere justification of the sentiments 
or conduct of individuals, the concurring testimonies of 
statesmen and other eminent public characters, though 
tinctured with much flattering personal allusion, may be 
allowably introduced." 

Extract of a letter from the Right Honourable Sir William 
Hamilton, K. B. Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Pleni- 
potentiary at the Court of Naples, dated July 13, 1793. 

" What you did, in taking upon yourself to negotiate 

" with the Pope, was certainly well judged ; I should have 
* been greatly distressed if Lord Hood's fleet had come here 
" a month ago, for we had not a sufficiency of corn for our- 
m gelves." 



93 

Extract of a letter from the Right Honourable Sir William 
Hamilton, K. B. &c. &c. dated Naples, April H, 1795. 

" I am concerned, that your private affairs should call you 
" from Italy at so interesting a crisis, when the continuance 
"of your patriotic and disinterested exertions, which have 
" already been of so much public benefit, might still mate* 
*' rially contribute to the advantage of his Majesty's service. 
" I have great satisfaction in expressing my personal obliga- 
" tions for your constant and useful communications; and I 
(< can say, with truth, that their Sicilian Majesties and their 
" Ministers are not less impressed with their value,.&c/' 

Extracts of letters from Lord Viscount Hood, Commander in 
Chief in the Mediterranean, dated Victory, Toulon Road, 
7th Oct. 1793. 

" You were very good in anticipating my wants; I have 
" now to provide for 10,000 troops, and all the inhabitants of 
" Toulon, not one of whom, I believe, has tasted animal food 
" for several weeks. — In all my letters home, I have expressed 
" how much I felt myself obliged to the Pope for the readiness 
" which his Holiness manifested in furnishing me with what- 
" ever supplies his dominions afforded. " 

From Lord Hood, dated Toulon Road, Oct. 14, 1793. 

fC As the enemy has cut off the water from all the 

" mills, the inhabitants of Toulon are in great want of flour, 
" which leads me to desire, that you will cause this circum- 
" stance to be made known to the Pope, with my humble 
" request, that his Holiness will be pleased to grant permis- 
H sion to export, from Civita Vecchia, as much flour as can be 
rt spared without distressing his own subjects/' 

Extract of a letter from his Excellency Lord Minto, Viceroy 
of Corsica, dated Bastia, May 22, 179S. 

" If you are still at Rome, your departure seems so near> 
" that I need say nothing of business, farther than, thanking 



9± 

" you, most sincerely and cordially, for all the assistance yoo 
" have given me, and all the labour, which has been immense 
" and indefatigable, you have bestowed on this as well as 
" other interests of the Public. You carry with you the 
" praise and industry of zeal beyond most, if not all public 
" men ; and I shall be ever of opinion, and have often expressed 
" it, that you have laid in a stock of public merit which can- 
" not, because it ought not to be unproductive." 

From Monsignor Barberi, Chief Secretary of the Congrega- 
tion of State, (consisting of the Cardinal Secretary of State, 
and five Cardinals, Chiefs of the Departments of the Go- 
vernment). 

Vatican, It 2G Mai, 1795. 

u Instruite du prochain depart de Mr. Hippisley de cette 
" capitale pour Londres, la sacree Congregation d'etat a cru 
" que la justice et la bonne foi demandoient qu'k l'exemple 
'? du Saint Pere lui-meme, qui lui a donne les plus eclatantes 
" preuves de la satisfaction qu'il avoit de la conduite qu'il a 
" tenue, soit en particulier, soit en traitant diverses affaires 
(( tres-graves, la sacree Congregation lui fit offrir, aussi en 
'* son nom, un temoignage permanent de la sienne. 

" Elle m'a charge acet efFet, en qualite de son Secretaire, 
" d'assurer Mr. Hippisley de Padmiration sincere avec la- 
" quelle elle a vu la perspicacite qu'il a fait eclater dans ses 
" Negociations, et la maniere dont il a heureusement reussi a 
" faire connoitre et procurer les communs interets des deux 
u Nations, et a etablir une bonne harmonie entre la cour de 
tf Rome et la cour Britannique. 

" Mr. Hippisley peut juger par-la combien tout ce qu'il 
" a fait a ete agreable a la sacree Congregation, quelle pro- 
" fonde reconnoissance elle fait profession d'avoir pour lui, et 
" avec quelle juste confiance elle espere que par-tout, et dans 
■' toutes les occasions, il voudra bien continuer a. agir d'apres 
" les memes principes, et chercher a resserrer toujours de 



95 

r/ plus les liens de reciproque intcret 'et de correspondance 
•* amicale qui unissent anjourd'liui les deux dites cours et les 
'•' deux nations. 

" En m'acquittant par ce respectueux billet du devoir qui 
' f m'a ete impose par la sacree Congregation, je regarde 
" comme un bien grand avantage pour moi de pouvoir y 
" joindre l'hommage des'sentimens de la profonde estime, et 
* de Pinvariable devouement avec lesquels je fais profession 
u d'etre de Mr. Hippisley 

Le tres humble, tres sincere, et 

devoue Serviteur, 

Gio. Barberi. 
M. M. Hippisky, Memb. du Pari. Brit. 

Extract of a letter from the Right Honourable Lord Gren- 
ville, Secretary of State for the Foreign Department, dated 
Oct. 29, 1793. 

" I think it my duty to take this opportunity of returning 
" you my thanks for the exertions made by you in the public 
" service. — The motives which induced you to act in the 
" manner you did, in consequence of the applications made 
" to you, cannot be mistaken ; and the consequences of the 
*' steps taken by you on this important occasion*, will, I am 
" persuaded, be of material advantage to his Majesty's ser- 
" vice." 

From his Grace the "Duke of Portland, Secretary of State for 
the Home Department, dated Whitehall, April 24, 1796. 

" My dear Sir, 

" I have great pleasure in obeying the King's 
" commands, by acquainting you with His Majesty's gra- 
" cious intentions to confer upon you, forthwith, the dignity 



* The supplies obtained from the Government of Rome for the 
British fleet and troops in the Mediterranean. 



96 

" of a Baronetage, a* a mark of His gracious acceptance of 
" the many services you have rendered to your Country. 

" To me, who have been a witness of several of the meri- 
u torious transactions in which you have been concerned, 
u and which have procured you this honourable testimony of 
* Royal favour, and who have had the pleasure of hearing 
" from my Colleagues, and those under whose eye they have 
" been particularly displayed, the many and important in- 
" stances in which your zeal and abilities have equally ren- 
" dered themselves conspicuous, it cannot but be a very great 
*' satisfaction to find myself the instrument, by which His 
"Majesty is pleased to convey to you, and to the public, 
" this distinguished token of the Royal approbation. 

« I am, 
" With great truth and regard, &c. 

* PORTLAND." 

J. C. Hippislej/, Esq, fyc. 

From the Roman Catholic Metropolitan Prelates of Ireland, 
assembled in Dublin, dated Dublin, Dec. 4th, 1800. 

Sik, 

The R. C. Prelates of Ireland are not unacquainted 
with the manifold instances of your good-will towards them 
and their brethren in other parts of the empire. With a 
benevolence peculiar to yourself, you have espoused their 
cause in the worst of times, and omitted no opportunity of 
testifying the warm interest which you take in all their con- 
cerns : — You have stood forth as the advocate of our brethren 
in Scotland, when all human prospects seemed closed for 
them — You were the medium of an intercourse of amity and 
correspendence between our beloved Sovereign and the 
Supreme Pastor of our Church. Through your exertions, 
our national estabbshments in the capital of the Christian 
World, are at the eve of being fully restored to their original 
destination. — Such signal proofs of kindness command ou r 



97 

esteem, and call forth our warmest gratitude. Permit us, 
therefore, to offer you, in the name of all the R. C. Bishops 
of Ireland, the tribute of our united acknowledgments.— 
We have the honour to be, in perfect truth, 

Sir, 
Your most obedient and faithful Servants, 
RICHARD O'REILLY, R. C Metropolitan of Armagh. 
THOMAS BRAY, R. C. Metropolitan of Cashell. 
JOHN-THOMAS TROY, R. C. Metropolitan of Dublin. 
EDWARD DILLON, R. C. Metropolitan of Tuam. 
Sir J. C. Hippisley, Bart. M. P. 

From the Administrators of the Funds of the Clergy of the 
Roman Communion in Scotland, consisting" of the R. C; 
Bishops, &c. dated Aberdeen, 26th August, 1801. 

We, the administrators of the Funds of the Scotch R. Ca- 
tholic Clergy, have long been sensible of the great obligations 
you have laid us under, and wished for an opportunity of 
testifying our gratitude. We are now met, according to 
custom, with our bishops, for the first time since we felt the 
effects of your kindness, and are happy to be the organs of 
the whole body of Roman Catholic Clergy of Scotland in 
transmitting to you the sentiments of all. 

Bishops Hay and Chisholm laid before the meeting the 
whole of their correspondence with you ; and you will easily 
conceive with what satisfaction we saw, as it were at one 
glance, your generous and benevolent perseverance in pro- 
moting our interest. 

We consider Divine Providence as making use of the good- 
ness and humanity of your heart to relieve our very pressing 
necessities ; and find ourselves moved, by the strongest im- 
pulse of gratitude, to return you our sincerest thanks for 
what you have done. Permit us therefore, Sir, to do it in 
this public manner, and to beg that you will add to former 
favours, and to the great trouble you have already taken, 

Jf 



98 

that of assuring the Noble and Illustrious Persons of his Ma- 
jesty's Ministry, who have been pleased to consider our 
necessities, and (in the midst of the greatest public pressures) 
so graciously to relieve them, of our heartfelt gratitude. 

Let them know, Sir, that, as we have always considered k 
one of the first of our duties to entertain in ourselves, and to 
propagate among others, sentiments of loyalty to His Majesty's 
sacred ptrson, and of attachment to our happy constitution ; we 
shall consider ourselves as henceforth bound by a new tie to 
fulfil the same duty. 

We beg of God to be your and their eternal reward, and 
long to preserve the life of one whom we justly consider as a 
generous and disinterested friend ; and permit us, honoured 
Sir, to look upon ourselves as your clients, committed to your 
protection by the Author of all good ! 

We have the honour to be, &c. &c. 

(Signed, by appointment of the General Meeting,) 

JOHN CHISHOLM, Preses. V. A, 
REM. MAC DONALD, Sec. 
To Sir J. C. Hippisley, Bart. M. P. 



With these Extracts this Note is concluded : they have 
been resorted to, indeed, from personal considerations; 
yet, in a candid view, under all the circumstances, the 
motive is, perhaps, not inadmissible. — A similar propen- 
sity was not resisted by a great authority of ancient times : 
u Scribam verb de me" said the Roman Orator, u MuU 
u torum ab exemplo et clarorum virorum" 



J.Brettell, Printer, Marshall-Street, 
Golden- Square, London.