round h-1 like a blue-bottle fly round a treacle barrel-and which the said deponent verily believes the said A. B. would have done, had he not been prevented."

A charge has been preferred against the Roman Catholic priesthood, by my right honourable friend (Mr. Peel) of which, if I thought them guilty, I know no language sufficiently strong to describe the baseness of their conduct; but I have learnt, from the debates upon this subject in this House, and even on this very night,-not to trust to extravagant accusations. The priests have been accused of garbling the catechism of the Church of England, on a point (the Second Commandment) which went to convict them of idolatry but I hold in my hand a work of great circulation in the Catholic schools of Ireland, where the Second Commandment is fully set forth.*

* Two points of Mr. Canning's speech, which occurred here, were indistinctly audible in the gallery. The first related to the charge of idolatry preferred against the Roman Catholic clergy, by the omission of the Second Commandment in the Roman Catholic catechism; from which charge Mr. Canning was understood to vindicate them, by reference to catechisms and other books of religious instruction, in general circulation among the Roman Catholics of Ireland. The second point related to the following passage in the speech of the Attorney-General for Ireland:

"But let the people of England consider what it is the people of Ireland demand? They claim no fanciful or supposed rightsthey claim their just share in the British Constitution; they demand what for 700 years has been in vain demanded-that the Irish

Sir, I have now done my duty to this question. -The present system against the Catholics may be sustained a little longer, and a little longer, from year to year; but speaking of the age of a country, the time of its duration must be short indeed. The motion of the honourable baronet does not, however, call upon those who may still be attached to that system to abandon it,-it is merely a declaration on the part of the House that the state of Ireland, and of the Roman Catholic people, require some consideration from the Legislature. To this proposition it is intended to oppose a direct negative, importing that Par

shall be sharers in the advantages of English law. Let me ask of the Protestant freemen of England-whom I respect as much as any man in this House, and to whose good sense I address myself— if they were deprived of their undoubted privileges, what would be their feelings, and how vehement would be their reclamations? Is there a man who hears me who would not freely lay down his life in such a cause? I know he would scorn to prove himself so base a recreant from the spirit of his forefathers. Would he not join with all his fellow-sufferers in demanding the restoration of his privileges, and his right to share in making and dispensing the laws of the land? If an attempt were here made to deprive him of his birth-right, it is not idle to say that he and the countless numbers who felt with him, would indeed display theira leonum vincla recusantum.'"

Mr. Canning defended this passage from the unfavourable interpretation assigned to it by Mr. Peel, who animadverted upon it, as language unfit to be addressed to Englishmen, many of whom (the Dissenters) laboured under greater civil disabilities than the Roman Catholics.

liament does not think the state of Ireland, or the laws affecting the Roman Catholics, deserve consideration. It is upon this vote that the House is about to divide. This resolution goes no farther than to state that the House adopts the opinion of its predecessors, as to the propriety of considering the question-of those predecessors, who sent up to the House of Lords, three bills of relief to the Roman Catholics. By voting with the honourable baronet, I do no more than sanction this proposition; reserving to myself the power of acting or not acting upon it as hereafter I may think proper. On the other hand, if this Resolution be negatived;-if the House of Commons shall decide that the consideration of the state of Ireland is not worthy to be entered upon, then is the House of Commons changed indeed; and I shudder to contemplate the consequences which from such a change may ensue!

[The Right Honourable Gentleman sat down amid loud and general cheering from both sides of the House.]

The House adjourned at five o'clock in the morning.

SPEECH ON THE PREMIERSHIP.

MAY 1st, 1827.

On the motion that a new writ be ordered for a member to serve in the present Parliament, for the borough of Ashburton, in the room of the Right Honourable W. S. Bourne, who had accepted the office of His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the Home Department,

MR. PEEL rose and said

Sir-As the motion that has just been made is most immediately connected with the accession of a right honourable gentleman to an office which I recently held, I trust the House will not think I am preferring an unreasonable request if I intreat them to allow me to offer some explanation as to the grounds on which I thought myself compelled to retire from the service of His Majesty. I know very well how much of personal matter must necessarily be mixed up with an explanation of this kind; but as I have so frequently, under other circumstances, experienced the kind consideration and indulgence of the House, I should be much disappointed if I should be deceived in the expectation that they will continue that indulgence, and will allow me to take this opportunity of fully explaining the reasons of my conduct. In that expectation I have abstained from resorting to any other mode of making public the motives which have influenced me in the course I have adopted.

Under the delay which has taken place,* I have been supported by the hope, too, that I should be able to vindicate myself from the unfavourable constructions that might have been put upon my conduct in consequence of my silence, and to show that the course which I had pursued was that which the necessity of my situation absolutely required. I say, Sir, vindicate the course I have pursued; because I do avow, that I think public men, who are embarked in the public service, have no right, upon light and insufficient grounds, to sever their connection with the State, and to disembark from that service into which they have entered.

If, Sir, I had acted in consequence of levity, of disappointed ambition, of personal pique, or opposition towards a rival, I should feel that I was, though not constitutionally, yet morally responsible; and that I should have shown by such conduct, I was unworthy of the confidence with which my Sovereign had honoured me. But, Sir, I acted from none of those motives: they did not form the grounds on which I retired from the public service. I acted solely upon principles which I had frequently professed, and which I considered to form part of my public character.

For a space of eighteen years I have pursued one undeviating course of conduct, offering, during the whole of that time, an uncompromising, but a temperate, a fair, and, as I believe, a constitutional resistance to the making of any further concessions to the Roman Catholics. During fourteen out of those eighteen years, I have held office; and during eleven of those years I have been closely connected

* The Easter recess intervened between the appointment of Mr. Canning to the office of Prime Minister, and the opportunity of offering this explanation to Parliament of the grounds of Mr. Peel's retirement.-EDITOR,