Printer1. Does Mr. Foster find in this speech, so printed, so circulated, any pledge, or even much encouragement to the Roman Catholics?

His words are these: "I will only observe upon it, that Mr. Pitt's language is of such a nature, that one would imagine he had the two religions on either side of him, and one was not to hear what he said to the other. He tells the Catholic in his speech, that it is not easy to say what should be the Church Establishment in this kingdom; and his fifth resolution states that the present Church Establishment is to be preserved. He tells them, that the time for discussing their situation must depend on two points, when their conduct shall make it safe, and when the temper of the times shall be favourable;' and Mr. Dundas adds,

if ever such a time shall come."" This was Mr. Foster's construction of Mr. Pitt's speech. He, at least, did not conceive that Mr. Pitt was circulating any distinct and positive pledge to the Roman Catholics: he, answering Mr. Pitt at the time, did not collect from that speech any assurance on the

"In discussing the subject, I must often allude to a speech published as Mr. Pitt's, and as various editions of it have been circulated, I shall select that to which the Government has given the sanction of its authority, the one printed by the King's Printer, under their direction, of which 10,000 copies have been circulated gratis by them, and all of which have been paid for at the public expence." Speech of the Right Hon. John Foster, 11th April, 1799, p. 1. London, 1799.

part of Mr. Pitt to that body, that, if they would support him in his object, he would support them in theirs. Let the House judge from Mr. Pitt's own words:

"By many I know it will be contended, that the religion professed by a majority of the people should at least be entitled to an equality of privileges. I have heard such an argument urged in this House; but those who apply it without qualification to the case of Ireland, forget surely the principles on which English interest and English connexion has been established in that country, and on which its present Legislature is formed. No man can say that, in the present state of things, and while Ireland remains a separate kingdom, full concession could be made to the Catholics without endangering the State, and shaking the constitution of Ireland to its centre.

"On the other hand, without anticipating the discussion, or the propriety of agitating the question, or saying how soon, or how late, it may be fit to discuss it, two propositions are indisputable: First, when the conduct of the Catholics shall be such as to make it safe for the Government to admit them to the participation of the privileges granted to those of the Established Religion, and when the temper of the times shall be favourable to such a measure: when these events take place, it is obvious that

1 Speech of the Right Honourable W. Pitt, on the Union, 31st Jan. 1799, p. 39, 40. Wright, London, 1799.

such a question may be agitated in an united Imperial Parliament with much greater safety than it could be in a separate Legislature. In the second place, I think it certain that even for whatever period it may be thought necessary after the Union to withhold from the Catholics the enjoyment of those advantages, many of the objections which at present arise out of their situation would be removed, if the Protestant Legislature were no longer separate and local, but general and imperial.'

I might quote much more from other members of the Government, and other supporters of the measure; but, as they are only the public speeches of private men, and not clothed with the authority of a Speech from the Throne to the two Houses, they could not, even if they contained distinct pledges to the Roman Catholics, do more than bind the individuals who delivered them.

The Right Honourable gentleman, the Knight of Kerry, states that there were private pledges given by the Irish Government, to the Roman Catholics, in order to secure their support of the Union; that he himself was a member of that Government at that time; and was not merely cognisant of the fact, but a party to it. No one who has the advantage of knowing that Right Honourable Gentleman, will hesitate for a moment to receive any fact on his statement of his personal knowledge of it, much more one connected with himself: but admitting, as I admit, all his facts, I ask again, what do they prove, except the obli

H

gation which such pledges imposed upon those who gave them? They left no obligation on others; they could attach no obligation upon the King, or upon Parliament.

Sir, in the first place, there was no official body to whom pledges of a public nature could be given ; there was no recognised organ of the Roman Catholics, with whom the Government could communicate all the intercourse was from individuals to individuals. The nearest approach to an assembly supposed to act for the Roman Catholics, was the meeting of the Prelates of that Communion then sitting in Dublin; and, though they deliberated on the question of a state-provision for the Roman Catholic Clergy', it does not appear that the larger subject ever came before them. In the next place, the Roman Catholics could do little in the matter, if, in return for any pledges made to them, they had been disposed to exert themselves in support of the Union. They had not then sitting a rival Parliament, or Association, the resolutions of which might have been accepted by their brethren throughout the Island.

In the last place, Sir, Mr. Plowden, one of their own Church, and no mean authority on the subject, says distinctly, that though they 66 generally gave all the weight they could command to

p. 59.

Papers before Parliament, No. 298, of Session 1815,

" Plowden's "Ireland since the Union," Vol. II. p. 120.

Mr. Pitt's proposition for the Union,'

though the predominant interest of the Catholics was certainly in favour of the Union, no public act of the body ever passed upon it: many Catholics in Dublin entered into very spirited and judicious resolutions against that fatal measure, and several of the most independent and best informed Catholics individually opposed it. Of all the King's subjects, the Irish Catholics had eminently the most reason to oppose the Union, by which they lost their own consequence." If, therefore, any pledge had been given, it does not fully appear, that the condition on which only, by the argument, it is assumed to be binding, was, on their part, fulfilled.

But, Sir, no pledge was or could be given, except by individuals; and no pledge was given, even individually, by many whose names are quoted on these occasions. The late Lord Auckland', referring, in his speech on the Roman Catholic Question in 1805, to the Union, in the arrangement of which measure he states himself to have been much engaged, distinctly declares that he never heard of any such pledge; nay more, that if the concessions were in the contemplation of the Government, they were industriously concealed from him and others of their associates. Above all, in 1805 Mr. Pitt as distinctly denied that any pledge was given by him".

1

2

Parl. Debates, 13th May, 1805, p. 826

? Parl. Debates, 14th May, 1805, p. 1015.