If, therefore, parliament was wise in opposing claims of higher and more extended power, they would act with equal wisdom in opposing the present claim, which, if granted, must have the tendency it was the desire and determination of parliament to counteract; for these reasons he must oppose the motion.

Lord Erskine thought that parliament would involve themselves in a dilemma if they acceded o the present motion; for by yielding to it they migh appear to break faith with the protestant to whom they granted the char ter; while by opposing it they would act unjustly towards the catholic, to whom they denied the fair right of interfering in the management of his own property.

Lord Harrowby began by saying, that although he could not presume to follow the noble and learned lord through his legal opinions, he could not refrain from remarking, what appeared to an unlearned man something like a contradiction. He had stated that the bank direction was not opened, nor meant to be opened, to the catholics by the act of 179, and had nevertheless agreed that refusing to open it to them now would be a breach of public faith. How did he explain this ? Why, he asserted that the only possible ground upon which the parliament of 1793 could have omitted to open it, must have been the persuasion that it could not have been opened without a violation of the bank charter then subsisting. Upon this point, with all due respect for the legal opinion of the noble and learned lord, he was inclined rather to bow to the legal opinion of the noble lord on the wo sack, who asserted that parliament might at that time, during the old charter, and might at any future time, during the prolongation of the charter, remove the restriction upon the admission of catholics, without any violation of the contract; and he was confirmed in this opinion by recol lecting what parliament had frequently done with respect to other charters, and particularly to the charter of the East India company. It being, then, far from clear that this opinion as the only ground upon which parlament had not given this privilege i 1793, it remained at least as probable that it was not then given, because parliament did not then intend to give it; and there was an end at once to the supposition of any breach of faith in refusing it now. Lord Harrowby then stated, that in the shape in which the question was brought before, their lordships

by his noble friend (lord Grenville), it was impossible to consider the proposal in any other light than as the grant of a pristlege of which the catholics were not now possessed, and they were driven to discuss, upon that sup position, the expediency of granting it. Before he gave his reasons agai st granting it, he begged leave to state, that if it should turn ut, upon a legal discussion, that it had been already granted, he should be as decidedly adverse to the revocation of it, as he was, under the present circumstances, to confer it. He wished not only that no privilege should be refused which the cholics could, by any fair construction of the law, be now stated to possess, but that every act which had been passed in their favour should not merely stand as a dead letter on the statutebook, but should be executed in the spirit of liberality and concession which led to its enactment. He wished also that all those differences in manners and opinions, more powerful, and more nearly affecting the comfort of mankind, then laws themselves, might day by day be softened down, till they at length entirely vanished. Much must depend upon the conciliating conduct of the government, and of the protestant gentry of Ireland; and he knew of nothing which appeared more clearly and obviously their duty than a strict adherence to this line of Conduct, in every instance where it was compatible with justice to the protestant interest, whose uniform and distinguished loyalty ought neither to be abandoned nor discountenanced. More, however, must depend upon the conduct of the catholics themselves; and it was well wor thy of their co sideration, how far a continual repetition. of their claims, without any new ground of argument or expediency, and without giving time for the change of these opinions, or, if you please, allaying those preju dices, which were adverse to their claims, did not in fact pledge their opponents deeper and deeper at every discussion, and remove to a more distant period the accomplishment of their wishes. This matter stood now upon a very different footing from what it did when the question was only respecting the repeal of the penal and disabling statutes. In that repeal it was not necessary for the government to consult the temper of its protestant subjects. No man could have a right to complain that he had no longer the power of injuring and persecuting his brethren. The law once passed, the business was at rest.

But with respect to eligibility to office, it was far otherwise. If the legal eligibility had no practical effect, where was the benefit to the catholic? If it had, before those feelings which the unfortunate situation of Ireland had naturally generated were softened down and worn away, the protestant would see, with jealousy and distrust, official colleagues forced upon him by govern ment; il blood and discontent would follow, and the contest would only be transferred from the exterior to the interior. This was peculiarly a case in which the legisla ture, if it governed wisely, would not far outstep the temper of the people whom it governed. Concessions exceeding those which that temper was disposed to grant would produce feelings not of conciliation but irritation. It seemed to him, therefore, naturally to follow, that while the legislature was of opinion, either that no time could arrive when further concessions, to the full extent of their claims, could be granted to the catholics, or (which was the necessary and the only legitimate parliamentary inference from their votes) that that time was not the present, the legislature was bound in prudence to refuse any branch of those claims, which might furnish the means of enforcing still greater concessions, before the opinion of the .country was ripe for them. The privilege of becoming directors of the bank of Ireland appeared to him to fall within this description. He was perfectly aware that many of the privileges which had been granted fell equally within it; but with respect to those we must take the law as we find it. The revocation of them would not only be an act of gross imprudence, but unless called for by the misconduct of the catholics, an act of gross injustice. There was, however, a material distinction.. Tho-e who felt most apprehensive from what had been granted must allow, that as far as related to appointments by the crown, there was this security, that the appointments vested in that branch of the government which was essentially protestant. The power of election, whether exercised by corporations, or by the people at large, could, as the law now stands, only be exercised in favour of protestants. But suppose the bank direction to be opened (the election, it must be recollected, was in the proprietors), could the catholics, who possessed a large proportion of the commercial wealth of Ireland, be so blind to their own

immediate interests (however an attention to their permanent interest might dictate a different conduct) as not to see the advantage they must derive from getting into their hands the direction of that great establishment? Would they not follow the example of the shipping interest in the East India direction, and make it an object to every catholic to become a bank proprietor for the purpose of influencing the election? Here was no check of any description whatever, from the crown, from parliament, or from the existing body of directors. The object was evident, the means of a taining it easy; the importance of the object once attained, he need not use many words to impress it upon the house. The influence of the bank of England upon the government of this country could be no secret to those who were acquainted with its history. By a singular wisdom in the choice of its directors, that influence which, in theory, might be regarded as so dangerous, had almost uniformly been exercised in a salutary direction; had it been otherwise, the effects must have been embarrassing in the extreme; and inasmuch as they might affect the public credit, even hazardous to the public safety. He was perfectly aware, that what had been stated by his noble friend, as to the dissimilarity of the influence of the bank of England upon the government of this country, and that of the bank of Ireland upon the Irish government, was not without its weight; but the influence differed, in his opinion, not in kind but in degree. It was not to be expected that so recent an establishment should already have acquired the influence which, after the lapse of a century, was possessed by the, bank of England; this might, however, soon increase. In king William's time our bank already began to be considered as a main support of the Revolution; and its weight in the last years of queen Anne, against her last administration, was severely felt; whether for the better or for the worse was not the point, the only question was as to the power, and not as to the application of it. Could it be said, however, that the bank of Ireland had no influence on the government? To whom did it apply with respect to loans? To the bank. Who negociated all the treasury bills? The bank. Who furnished notes and specie for the payment of the army? The same bank. He was not, therefore, raising a vague and extravagant alarm, when he supposed that the influ

ence of such an establishment might have great weight with the government, in what related to Ireland; and he trusted that he was saying nothing invidious, he was sure that he meant nothing invidious, towards the catholics, when he supposed that they would avail themselves of that influence to further the attainment of objects which were in themselves legitimate, and which appeared to them, not only advantageous to their own body, but to the general prosperity of our common country. Those, therefore, who were of opinion that all ought to be done for them now, or, if not to-day, at furthest on the morrow, without regard to the feelings of the legislature and of the people, were right in pressing a concession which they must consider as a stepping-stone to more. Those who were for ever adverse to all further concession, must, on the same grounds, be most anxious to resist this. But there was a large class of persons who entertained neither of these opinions; there were those who thought that, in the fluctuating state of human affairs, it was not wise to pledge themselves to any opinion which no possible circumstances within the reach of common foresight could alter. There were persons who doubted the propriety and prudence of saying to a large body of the people, that no degree of common danger, no change in the general sentiments of the majority, no loosening of the foreign holdings of the catholics, no practical and continued proof of their gratitude for benefits received, and of their active loyalty in the defence of their country, could ever produce any amelioration of their condition; persons of this description might, with perfect consistency, maintain that they would not grant that which might tend to deprive them of their free option of granting or of withholding the remainder. Were every thing else granted, it would be absurd to withhold this; but as long as the. catholics had further claims, for the attainment of which they were stated to be anxious, and to the attainment of which, on their part, the opinions of the legislature and of the country were at present adverse, it was neither invilious nor illiberal, but a mere act of comifion prudence, to decline placing in their hands an engine of great and indefinite power. Upon the general question, his lordship desired to be considered as giving no opinion whatever, applicable to all times and to all circumstances; he