« AnkstesnisTęsti »
ral petition of the Roman Catholics of Ireland; and on the 8th of June following, moved the immediate reference of the Catholic claims to a committee of the whole House. Towards the close of the discussion, the noble earl, in conformity to the opinion expressed by several noble lords, proposed as an amendment to his own motion, "that the House should resolve into a committee upon the question at an early period of the next session." It can scarcely be necessary to add, that this amended motion, like all the noble earl's former propositions on the same subject, was lost.
Not discouraged by his frequent failures, Lord Donoughmore, on the 11th of June 1816, again presented the general petition of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, several petitions from the Catholics of respective counties, and the petition of the Irish Catholic Bishops and Clergy, suggesting domestic nomination as an effectual security against any danger that might be apprehended from foreign interference; and on the 21st of the same month, the noble earl moved a resolution, pledging their lordships to take the subject into their most serious consideration early in the next session.
In 1817, we find the noble earl returning to the charge. Having, on the 8th of May, presented to the House, with some accompanying observations, the general petition of the Irish Roman Catholics, and a petition from the Catholics of Waterford, he, on the 16th of the same month, moved, but in vain, that the House should resolve itself into a committee to consider the claims of the petitioners.
To the Habeas Corpus Suspension Bill, Lord Donoughmore, on the 19th of June 1817, gave his decided opposition; and in the succeeding month, he detailed his objections to the Irish Grand Jury Presentments Bill, unsuccessfully moving as an amendment
to the motion for the third reading of the bill," that it be read a third time that day three months."
On the 5th of May 1819, Lord Donoughmore presented a number of petitions from the Roman Catholics of Ireland; and on the 17th of the same month, unsuccessfully moved, that the House should resolve itself into a committee on the subject. Indisposition prevented the noble lord from addressing their lordships at any great length upon this occasion.
On the 17th of December 1819, Lord Donoughmore objected to the Seditious Meetings Bill, generally; and he especially protested against the extension of the measure to Ireland. On the 20th of December, when the bill was in a committee, the noble earl repeated his objection to the extension of its provisions to Ireland. the same month the noble lord expressed his strong disapprobation of the Newspaper Stamp Duties Bill; declaring that "ministers had wound up' to a happy and appropriate conclusion, by that attack upon the freedom of the press, those measures of indiscriminate coercion, that system of pains and penalties, which they had devised against a suffering and a prostrate people; and which had been carried into complete and unrelenting execution by overwhelming majorities in both Houses of Parliament."
During the proceedings preliminary to and consequent on the Bill of Pains and Penalties against her late Majesty, Lord Donoughmore took an active part in the examination and cross-examination of witnesses; and in the incidental discussions which thence arose. In the long and important debate which occurred on the motion for the second reading of the bill, the noble lord expressed a very unequivocal opinion on the subject under consideration. The noble earl proceeded to examine the evidence in detail, declared his
conviction of the Queen's guilt, and strongly reprobated the conduct of her counsel, more especially in the observations which they had permitted themselves to make upon his Majesty. On the 7th of November, when the bill was in the committee, Lord Donoughmore supported the divorce clause.
A bill for the removal of the Catholic disabilities having, in the session of 1821, been passed in the House of Commons, and brought to the House of Lords, Lord Donoughmore, on the 3d of April of that year, moved (as a matter of course) the first reading of the bill; observing, "that he was deeply impressed with a sense of the important situation in which he was placed, by being selected to advocate the claims of the Catholics in that house." On the 16th of April, the noble lord prefaced his motion for the second reading of the bill with a speech of great length and ability; in which he described the cruel and anomalous situation in which the Roman Catholics were placed, and urged the necessity of granting them relief.
On the 19th of July 1821, Lord Donoughmore was created a peer of the United Kingdom, by the title of Viscount Hutchinson, of Knocklofty, county of Tipperary, with remainder as before stated.
When the Marquis of Lansdowne, on the 14th of June 1822, moved a resolution in the House of Lords, that the state of Ireland required the immediate attention of parliament, Lord Donoughmore supported the motion. On the 19th of July in the same year, the noble Lord gave "his reluctant assent" to the Irish Insurrection Bill, as a measure of imperative necessity."
We have now arrived at the last session of the Earl of Donoughmore's laborious and patriotic parliamentary life. In the beginning of the year 1825, contrary to the advice and wishes
of his family and friends, the noble Lord hurried to London in a very weak state of health, once more to obey the call of the Roman Catholics of Ireland. On the very first day of the session, the 3d of February 1825, he declared the pain which he felt at the passage of his Majesty's speech, which related to the Roman Catholic part of the community in Ireland. His Lordship deprecated, in the then tranquil state of that country, any recourse to measures of coercion, and maintained, not only that the Catholic Association had produced no evil, but that it had effected much good.
On the 24th of February 1825, Lord Donoughmore presented the petition of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, "the value of whose confidence," the noble Earl said, " he fully appreciated;" and he accompanied the presentation with a few powerful remarks on the expediency of restoring to the petitioners their rights; and an eulogium on the conduct of Marquis Wellesley, in the vice-regal government.
The bill for the relief of the Roman Catholics having been passed in the House of Commons, and brought to the House of Lords,-on the 11th of May 1825, on the motion of the Earl of Donoughmore, it was read a first time. On the 18th of May 1825, Lord Donoughmore moved that the bill be read a second time; but was too much indisposed to take a part in the long and animated debate on that question; the result of which, it is scarcely necessary to add, was, that the bill was thrown out.
On the 21st of May, a numerously attended meeting of the Roman Catho lics of England and Ireland was held at the Crown and Anchor Tavern, the Duke of Norfolk in the chair. first resolution, which was proposed and carried, was a vote of thanks to the advocates of the Catholic cause, in both Houses of Parliament. Lord Do
noughmore, who had left the bed of sickness to be present at the meeting, was loudly called upon; and notwithstanding the bodily debility under which he was labouring, addressed the noble Chairman in an eloquent speech. Lord Donoughmore was mainly assisting in bringing together the sixtynine peers, whose resolutions, agreed to at the house of his grace the Duke of Buckingham, he was afterwards the chief instrument of publishing; thus, as it were, on his deathbed, leaving the Catholic cause supported by a solemn league and covenant, which bore the signatures of many of the greatest and most illustrious names in the British peerage, standing pledged to its principles.
From that period, the noble Earl rapidly declined; and on the 22d of August 1825, he died at the house of his brother, Lord Hutchinson, (now Earl of Donoughmore,) in Bulstrodestreet, Manchester-square, aged sixtynine.
By the death of Lord Donoughmore, Ireland lost a most devoted friend; the Roman Catholics, a dauntless advocate; the magistracy, an able and incorruptible judge; his tenantry,
a kind and indulgent landlord: and his family, a powerful and most affectionate member. He will long be remembered by his country; and more especially by the county, which, unlike the majority of the Irish aristocracy, he made the principal seat of his residence throughout life. By his mingled activity and moderation, he kept all tranquil in his neighbourhood, without any departure from constitutional principles; and it never became necessary to visit his barony with the inflictions of the Peace Preservation, or the Insurrection Act.
At an open meeting of the general committee of the British Catholic Association, held at the Crown and Anchor Tavern, Strand, on the 10th of November 1825, after a resolution had been carried expressive of the warmest acknowledgments of the meeting to the sixty-nine peers, for the resolutions adopted by them at the residence of his grace the Duke of Buckingham, resolutions were passed declaratory of the irreparable loss which the Catholics had sustained by the death of Lord Donoughmore," the hereditary champion of their claims.”
It appears from an official statement just published, that there are 256 Catholic chapels in England, 71 charity and other schools, and 348 officiating priests; of these, 12 chapels, one school, and eight priests, are in the county of Hants; six chapels and five priests in Sussex; three chapels and two priests in Wiltshire; six chapels and six priests in Devonshire; seven chapels, one school, and eight priests, in Dorsetshire. In Lancashire there appears to be the largest number, there being 81 chapels, six schools, and 79 priests.
The King has been graciously pleased to nominate and appoint Mr James Morison, preacher of the gospel, assistant and successor to the Rev. Roderick Morison, in the parish of Kintail and Presbytery of Lochcarron.
DEATH OF DR LINDSAY, BISHOP of Kildare.-On Thursday the 6th current, this venerable prelate paid the debt of nature, at his lordship's episcopal residence, Glasnevin. His lordship was consecrated in 1804. He was the brother of the Earl of Balcarras, and brother-in-law to the Earl of
Hardwicke. He was Dean of Christ's Church; and was translated from the see of Killaloe, to which he had been elevated in 1808.
19. EDINBURGH.-The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland met this day. His Grace General Lord Forbes, his Majesty's High Commissioner, took his seat on the throne at half past eleven o'clock.
The Rev. Dr George Cook of Laurencekirk was unanimously chosen Moderator, and took the chair.
His Grace the Commissioner announced his Majesty's grant of L.1000, for the propagation of the gospel in the Highlands; which intimation was appropriately replied to by the Moderator.
A letter from the Rev. Dr Macknight was read, requesting that, in consequence of his continued indisposition, his friend the Rev. Mr Simpson might be allowed to officiate for him as depute-clerk to the Assembly.
Dr Duncan, the late Moderator, moved that the request be complied with.
Dr Forbes, of Old Machar, expressed his surprise at the tenor of the letter they had just heard read. He was sure that Dr Macknight would not have written that letter if he had been aware of the objections which were stated at last Assembly. The granting of the request of that letter would be, that similar application would be made year after year to supply his place till the gentleman would come forward as his successor. Such a precedent was not to be permitted, as it would just come to be, that because a person has performed the duties gratuitously for a number of years, you must appoint him permanently when the office becomes vacant. With these feelings, he begged to propose Dr Lee, a gentleman who had paid great attention to the early history of the Church, who was peculiarly well qualified for the office, and who would act for Dr Macknight without any fee or reward. He begHe begged to state, that while he proposed Dr Lee, he did so with all respect for the gentleman who was the other candidate, against whom he had no objection.
Dr Andrew Thomson seconded the motion.
After some discussion, the House divided; when three appeared for Dr Lee, 112; for Mr Simpson, 58majority, 54.
20. The Assembly was duly constituted, when, after some formal business had been gone through, it adjourned.
Administration of the Sacrament. 23. This day the Assembly met at eleven o'clock.
An overture from the Presbytery of Hamilton, anent certain innovations in the mode of dispensing the
VOL. XVIII. PART III.
Lord's Supper, was read. It stated that, in some instances, it was the practice for communicants to sit in pews, instead of coming to the table. The overture prayed that the Assembly should enjoin every presbytery to put a stop to the innovation, and to see that every new church within its bounds was provided with a communion table, according to the law and the practice of the Church.
Dr Begg, of New Monkland, appeared in support of the overture. The matter had been formerly noticed in the Presbytery, and had also been brought before the Synod of Glasgow and Ayr. That reverend court disapproved of the innovation, and enjoined the presbyteries within its bounds to have the evil remedied. Consequently, in some churches, the abuse had been given up, while in others it had not. It was the object of the Reformation to reduce the forms of the church to simplicity, and to do away with superstitious practices. At the Reformation, there was no dispute about a table; it had formed part of the furniture of a church from the earliest ages. It was mentioned in the first book of discipline, which provides that every church should have doors, a bell to ring for assembling the people, a pulpit, à basin for baptism, and a communion table. In the year 1562, the order of Geneva was adopted as the directory, or book of common order. The order of Geneva recognises a communion table; and states that the minister was to come down from the pulpit, to take his place at the table; that all the communicants do leave their seats; and that every man come to the table of the Lord, as occasion served. The book of common order continued in force from 1562 to 1645. There were no doubt several alterations attempted to be made upon it. In 1608, at the General As