University of Oxford again comes forward with its protest. -That the possibility of a preponderating influence in Parliament, decidedly adverse to the establishment, should be sedulously resisted by the members of the Establishment, is a natural and obvious conclusion-the question, therefore, will be, whether the Franchise may not be conceded with the desired security* But, candour exacts our admission

* In the debate on Mr. Grattan's motion, on the 31st May, 1811, Sir J. H. adverted to a qualified measure, which might tend to remove any apprehensions of an eventual preponderation on the side of the Catholics, were the representative franchise conceded to them. The principle recognised in the treaty of Westphalia, (heretofore considered as the Magna Charta of the German Empire,) and the regulations fixing the relative proportion of Catholics and Protestants, in the Great Councils of the Empire-namely the Aulic Council and Chamber of Wetzlar, as well as in the general Diet, may be assumed as a precedent, at least, for a Parliamentary adjustment, which might adequately provide for the exigency. In the acts of the Congress of Vienna, 20th May, 1815-and the treaty between the King of Sardinia and the Republic of Genoa, the principle of such an adjustment is admitted in the prescribed elections of the principal officers of the Roman Catholic and Protestant communions, alternately and conjointly, in certain instances. In the treaty of Westphalia a provision is made for the alternate election of a Catholic and Protestant in the Bishopric of Osnaburgh.

Some years since, Sir J. H. transmitted to one of His Majesty's Cabinet Ministers, a sketch of an arrangement, which seemed calculated to obviate every material objection. Admitting that the ineligibility of Catholics to Parliament were abrogated, and their admission qualified by numerical restriction, the question would then be resolvable into the selection of the best practical expedient to fix and regulate such admission without eventual embarassment and insecurity to the Candidates themselves. A late writer, styling himself "a Lawyer and an Irishman," observes, that in Ireland, the Catholics, in the general

that the actual constitution of both Houses of Parliament, as governed by any existing statutes, is little calculated to

"population, may be in the proportion of nearly three to one, "yet, in rank, property and education, the Protestants are to "them, in the proportion of ten to one." But, without contending for the accuracy of such a statement, it was proposed to adopt the principle of regulation as applied to the conceded Parliamentary representation, on the scale of a combined ratio of an estimate of property and population,—and this preliminary operation might be the work of a Committee, consisting, say of twenty-one Members of Parliament, selected from the representation of the three integral parts of the United Kingdom. When such a proportion was determined—and the Maximum of Catholic representation fixed-the names of the several counties and boroughs might be placed in separate classes (in the manner directed by Mr. Grenville's Bill) and severally drawn, till the Maximum was completed-and it might then be announced in the Gazette, by authority of the Speaker-that, for such counties and boroughs, in the ensuing Parliament, Catholics would be permitted to sit, under a modification of the existing oaths-with limitation, nevertheless, that one Catholic representative, only, should be returned for each county-or for either of the cities which now return two Members-and, that for the university of Dublin, both the representatives should be necessarily Protestant. In the first Session of every Parliament, such a ballot might take place, to regulate the Elections in the succeeding Parliament—or, a general rota might be permanently fixed, as in the case of the actual representative Irish Prelacy. Although, to avoid embarrassment, and, in many instances, great eventual disappointment-the distinct counties, cities or boroughs, would be thus ascertained where the representation was equally open to Catholics and Protestants, at a general Election,-it might be a consideration, whether Catholics should not be generally eligible on vacancies offering subsequent to a general Election, (with the proceeding limitation) until the number of the Maximum of Catholic representation was completed. By such

alleviate such apprehensions, though practically, the Establishment maintains its ascendency :-Every description of

an arrangement, even supposing that a fourth of the present number of members returned for Ireland, were of the Catholic Communion-and a proportionate limited number, in a similar ratio, composed the representation of England and Scotland, the greatest alarmist could scarcely indulge any rational ground of apprehension, merely from this cause, for the security of the Establishment;-and when the ill instructed Catholic contends for unrestricted eligibility to Parliamentary representation as well as to every office of the State, on a principle of fundamental right-he might be reminded that our Constitution. is marked with the operation of an exclusive principle throughout, as respects our representation :-Thus circumstanced in the Election franchise, as limited to forty shilling freeholds, and to freeholds in exclusion of copyholds. So also the franchises of particular corporations, in exclusion of the great mass of local population from the exercise of the Elective franchise altogether -to say nothing of burgage tenures:-Thus, as the exclusion of revenue officers.-But the strongest exclusive feature is visible in limitation of the first estate itself, as the Crown cannot descend on the head of a Catholic, and is forfeited the moment the Sovereign professes the religion of Rome, and the people absolved from their allegiance.

The regulation with respect to the Peers-should the number of Catholic Peers at any time exceed the Maximum fixed as affecting that branch of our Parliament-might be regulated as in the cases provided by the two Acts of Union-which in themselves are founded on the same exclusive principle.—It is observable, that, in a recent parliamentary Debate, the Marquis of Lansdowne asks-" Whether there were persons who still seri"ously believed that the establishment would be endangered from "the admission of a LIMITED NUMBER of Roman Catholics to seats "in the two branches of the Legislature, &c."-Possibly, his Lordship might have in contemplation an arrangement of the nature now suggested.

Sectarist, nevertheless, may find legal admission, with the sole exception of the Roman Catholic-and both Houses of Parliament may, under the protection of a law, of recent enactment, be, wholly and avowedly, composed of members, who unequivocally and conscientiously deny the Divinity of Christ.

Again, another striking anomaly presents itself, by pointedly retaining, on our Statute Books, the highly penal Act of 13 Eliz. ch. 2, while those of the same reign, of anterior and subsequent enactment, respecting the Roman Catholics, are either abrogated, or qualified. By the 31st of Geo. III. ch. 32, we protect the Catholic in the undisturbed exercise of the rites, practices, and observances of his religion;—we know that the Catholic, in the spirit of his communion, considers it as a right of conscience, to have recourse, in certain penitentiary cases, to the See of Rome;-we know that such recourse actually obtains,-yet, we leave this fulminating statute, to press upon his feelings, exposing him to the penalties of high treason-for, "using or putting in "use, any Bull of absolution, writing, or instrument, of the Bishop of Rome, or other person claiming authority, by, or from him, or, for receiving, from the See of Rome, any "manner of Bull, writing, or instrument, written, or printed, "containing any thing, matter, or cause, whatever!"

It is well known that the penal construction of this Act, prevented the delivery of a gracious letter to His Majesty from the late Pope Pius VI. and the cause assigned by the Chancellor, Lord Loughborough-though this denounced intercourse is now of continual occurrence both with Protestants and Catholics, nor can the exercise of the Roman Catholic religion, be considered as tolerated, under the possible application and lash of a law, which, from its severity, defeats itself. If the law remains in desuetude-why is it retained at all?"It ought not," as Blackstone has, long since,

observed, "to be left to the breast of every merciless bigot, "to drag 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 civil "liberty."

The unfeeling and unnecessary policy, of dragging the Catholic to the altars of the Established Church, in the case of marriage, by him held as a sacrament, while we exempt, by statute, the Quaker and the Jew from that painful submission, is another remnant of the barbarism of the penal law-and looking farther to the state of Ireland, especially, and the predominant mass of its population, it is assuredly and rationally desirable that the Catholic should be equitably placed in a situation, different from that in which he stands at present-that of providing for the ministers of his own communion, together with those of the Establishment. A liberal State provision for the Roman Clergy might, in a great measure, obviate this objection, till the greater and more difficult question of tythe could be satisfactorily adjusted.

But, to recur particularly to the numberless anomalies of our laws as respect these conflicting claims, is a task ill calculated for these limited pages:-The most effectual proceeding to remove them, would, probably, be found in the appointment of a Committee, to which might be referred all the documentary information now upon recordwith instruction to examine and report a practical system of repeal, qualification, and enactment suited to the exigency, and the liberal policy of the times :-such an investigation, on the part of a Committee, possessing adequate powers, should, unquestionably, be accompanied by a bill of indemnity, for reasons which are sufficiently obvious.