printed by Mr. Townsend in the notes to his speech at North Allerton, Jan. 28, 1829, p. 54. Lord Bexley, p. 16.

It cannot be really contended, that the eligibility and the return of Papists may be treated as different things. If the eligible are not to be elected, it is wanton mischief thus to agitate so dangerous a question. Such an argument will not bear a serious discussion: the Papists, if eligible, will undoubtedly be elected: in what number at first, it is not easy to conjecture but it has been calculated, that, under the old franchise, Ireland would have returned 70 Papists (50 for counties, and 20 for boroughs) at least.

If our Constitution is to be changed, it should be done openly and avowedly. Lord Eldon declares, what the preambles and titles of many a statute express in various forms, that it follows, from the nature of the British Constitution, that King, Lords, and Commons shall be Protestant. Speech, Feb. 5, 1829, pp. 14. Saunders and Otley, p. 9.

That our Constitution is to be changed, is evident enough, if the following brief statement of what might have been done for the Papists in full consistence with the arguments used on their behalf is at all fair. The Report of a Committee should have stated the exact force of every existing law against Papists, and the exact force of every existing law concerning Protestant members of the Legislature. Upon this report, all distinctions founded upon these laws should at once have been abrogated, and the same oaths tendered to all peers or commoners in the same manner; and every office, even the Crown itself, made attainable by Papists. The elective franchise for counties should have been kept the same throughout the realm, and some boroughs been disfranchised; and their members given to the hundreds and to the large towns, upon a high qualification in real or personal property, measured by the taxes paid.

It would be better that the divisions of each House should be published by authority, both in the Gazette and the Journals

of each House, and also the names of the Members present each night. If any difficulties be apprehended in the Commons, measures might be taken to secure the presence of Members enough to make a House every night. The money would be well spent, if official reporters printed the debates; and the same advantages of situation that they enjoyed, were offered to the newspaper reporters also.

The common law rests in the bosom of the judge; and can only be brought into play by the decision of a jury, when any alleged offence requires that it should be brought into play. The common law is the expression of a vital principle. A statute is an admission that such a principle did not exist, when it is not passed, as happens occasionally, to declare the existence of a principle which has been doubted.

66

In the Morning Journal of Thursday, March 19, Mr. Peel is represented as saying, that the Attorney-General did not say the common law afforded a remedy for the suppression of the Catholic Association, and did agree that it would be inexpedient to risk the trial of the question by means of the common law : but Lord Eldon says, Speech, p. 13, " They who think that the danger can be gotten over by the mere passing of a bill, are grossly deceived. It is idle to talk of putting down the Association by act of Parliament. They who suppose that an end can be put to the Association, without making its leaders and itself answerable to the common law for their acts and speeches, are grossly misled." And again, p. 8, "If instead of putting down the Catholic Association, the Legislature proceed to strengthen its hands by granting the Roman Catholics additional privileges, it will be neither more nor less than a surrender of the Throne and the Constitution into the hands of those persons." There is a good Pamphlet on this subject, entitled, "The admission of the Catholics into the Legislature inconsistent with Constitutional Principles, &c." Hatchards, 1827. pp. 55. See p. 49.

printed by Mr. Townsend in the notes to his speech at North Allerton, Jan. 28, 1829, p. 54. Lord Bexley, p.

16.

It cannot be really contended, that the eligibility and the return of Papists may be treated as different things. If the eligible are not to be elected, it is wanton mischief thus to agitate so dangerous a question. Such an argument will not bear a serious discussion: the Papists, if eligible, will undoubtedly be elected: in what number at first, it is not easy to conjecture: but it has been calculated, that, under the old franchise, Ireland would have returned 70 Papists (50 for counties, and 20 for boroughs) at least.

If our Constitution is to be changed, it should be done openly and avowedly. Lord Eldon declares, what the preambles and titles of many a statute express in various forms, that it follows, from the nature of the British Constitution, that King, Lords, and Commons shall be Protestant. Speech, Feb. 5, 1829, pp. 14. Saunders and Otley, p. 9.

That our Constitution is to be changed, is evident enough, if the following brief statement of what might have been done for the Papists in full consistence with the arguments used on their behalf is at all fair. The Report of a Committee should have stated the exact force of every existing law against Papists, and the exact force of every existing law concerning Protestant members of the Legislature. Upon this report, all distinctions founded upon these laws should at once have been abrogated, and the same oaths tendered to all peers or commoners in the same manner; and every office, even the Crown itself, made attainable by Papists. The elective franchise for counties should have been kept the same throughout the realm, and some boroughs been disfranchised; and their members given to the hundreds and to the large towns, upon a high qualification in real or personal property, measured by the taxes paid.

It would be better that the divisions of each House should be published by authority, both in the Gazette and the Journals

of each House, and also the names of the Members present each night. If any difficulties be apprehended in the Commons, measures might be taken to secure the presence of Members enough to make a House every night. The money would be well spent, if official reporters printed the debates; and the same advantages of situation that they enjoyed, were offered to the newspaper reporters also.

The common law rests in the bosom of the judge; and can only be brought into play by the decision of a jury, when any alleged offence requires that it should be brought into play. The common law is the expression of a vital principle. A statute is an admission that such a principle did not exist, when it is not passed, as happens occasionally, to declare the existence of a principle which has been doubted.

In the Morning Journal of Thursday, March 19, Mr. Peel is represented as saying, that the Attorney-General did not say the common law afforded a remedy for the suppression of the Catholic Association, and did agree that it would be inexpedient to risk the trial of the question by means of the common law : but Lord Eldon says, Speech, p. 13, " They who think that the danger can be gotten over by the mere passing of a bill, are grossly deceived. It is idle to talk of putting down the Association by act of Parliament. They who suppose that an end can be put to the Association, without making its leaders and itself answerable to the common law for their acts and speeches, are grossly misled." And again, p. 8, "If instead of putting down the Catholic Association, the Legislature proceed to strengthen its hands by granting the Roman Catholics additional privileges, it will be neither more nor less than a surrender of the Throne and the Constitution into the hands of those persons." There is a good Pamphlet on this subject, entitled, "The admission of the Catholics into the Legislature inconsistent with Constitutional Principles, &c." Hatchards, 1827. pp. 55. See p. 49.

CHAPTER II.

THE Considerations of Mr. Davison were published at a time when the return of Sir R. H. Inglis was, if possible, to be prevented; because a preference of Mr. Peel could only so be shewn. Such authorities as have been advanced on these pages from the words of Sir R. H. Inglis have been taken from his speeches on the 10th of May 1825, and the 9th of May 1828, as published in 1828; Hatchards, 8vo. pp. 174. And the references to all the quotations here made, under mere numbering, without any other reference, are to the pages of that edition. Any Member when he may see reason to change his opinion, and not before, ought to change it; and to tell his constituents his reasons for changing, and act upon his own opinions. "It is right, and, yet more, it is the duty of every man to change his opinions, when circumstances change around him." p. 125. Sir R. H. Inglis.

:

Mr. Davison's Considerations are such, that the answer to one is often conclusive against another of them but whilst the reader is desired to notice this fact as he goes through these pages, an attempt has been made, in addition to any virtual answer previously given, again to answer each particular Consideration, and each sentence and epithet in it distinctly, "not from any presumptuous confidence in myself, but from a perfect conviction of the strength and justice of a cause which will sustain the weakest advocate." p. 63. Sir R. H. Inglis.

The Bill of Rights, § 9, contains the following words: "Whereas it hath been found, by experience, that it is inconslstent with the safety and welfare of this Protestant kingdom