66 soever; or shall publish, or by any means CHAP. X. put in use any such Bull, Writing, or English Stat."Instrument,; he, his procurers, abettors and 13 Eliz. ch. 2. counsellors to the fact and committing of the Prohibiting all said offence, shall be adjudged guilty of with the Bishop High Treason.” "And any person concealing the offer, motion, or mention of such Writing or Instrument, and not disclosing it to some Privy Counsellor within six weeks, shall be guilty of Misprision of High Treason. correspondence of Rome, &c. Statute. This severe Statute, though possibly not impolitic in the troubled reign of Elizabeth, is surely at present preposterous. If, for example, Inconvenience and impolicy of the Pope should think proper to grant a this severe "Concordat" to the British Monarch-the person who shall procure any written or printed Declaration from him, or from any of his ministers, to that or any other effect, is liable, by this Statute, to be punished as a Traitor. No Treaty, or overture, can commence subsist under such a prohibition. In 1794 and 1795, an Englishman, Clerk to the Neapolitan Embassy, ventured to apply to the Court of A curious Rome for a supply of Provisions for the British 1794. fleet, then lying in the Mediterranean, and in great distress. He succeeded in obtaining the or Pope's written order for an ample supply: instance CHAP. X. relieved the fleet-and, according to strict Law, should have been hanged upon his return.Baronetage," He was, however, raised to a Baronetage; and his Patent is a just satire upon the Statute. See" Betham's Article Cox Expostulation of the venerable Pius the VII. with a Protestant Nobleman, -1803. 66 Why is it," said his present Holiness to a Protestant Earl, at Rome, in 1803, "Why "is it, that your King has no Envoy at my "court? Does he know, that I am a temporal Prince; that I govern territories particularly important to a Naval Power, containing valuable sea coasts and harbours, and capable "of furnishing refreshments and provisions to "his seamen? Every other Prince in Europe, "Lutheran, Calvinist, Greek-sends me an 66 Envoy, and receives one from me.-But your subjects, and numerous fleets, maintains no "communication with me. Is not this neglect an injury to his people, and an omission of a "Monarch's duty?" No answer could be offered to a remonstrance so reasonable and pointed-except, that Queen Elizabeth and Pope Paul had had a furious quarrel 230 years ago-touching her legitimacy. SECTION 111. СНАР. Х. Of Penal Enactments—doubtful in construction. upon other enactments. BESIDES the Penal Laws, which avow- Doubts raised edly and unquestionably aggrieve the Catholics, there exist various enactments and regulations, upon which serious doubts have been raised, of a nature highly inconvenient and distressing in many respects.-If it be a just observation, that "misera est servitus, ubi "Jus est aut vagum aut incertum," the Catholics are surely entitled to complain of Hardship of such Laws, as may be construed to their disadvantage by Courts of Justice-or may even . involve them in litigation-embarrassed and perplexed by opposite opinions of learned and experienced Lawyers. Of this nature are the doubts following: this uncertainty. 1. Whether a Catholic may act as a Director Bank Directors, of the Bank of Ireland? CHAP. X. Questions raised. Clergy- Religious con version. Schoolmasters. Arras. Relapsed Ca tholics, Convention 4. or Guardian of a Protestant child?or of the child of a non-qualifying Catholic? 5. Whether a Catholic Clergyman may be the Guardian of any child ? 6. Whether a Catholic may endeavour to reconcile a Protestant to the Catholic Religion? 7. Whether a Catholic Schoolmaster may employ a Protestant Assistant or Usher? or receive or instruct a Protestant Pupil? 8. Whether the Protestant Servant of a Catholic Master may have or use Arms? 9. Whether a Catholic, having conformed to the Protestant Religion and afterwards returned to the Catholic faith, (or, in legal parlance, a relapsed Papist) is entitled to partake of the relief granted to Catholics by the remedial Statutes from 1778 to this day-upon the terms of qualification prescribed to all other Catholics? 10. Whether any Assembly of Catholics may appoint a select number of discreet persons-for the sole and "bona fide" purpose of preparing and presenting a Petition to the Throne, or to Parliament-praying the repeal of the Penal Laws, which aggrieve them? [This last Question is of recent origin: having been started, in 1811, by the discreet, Act. temperate, and liberal Administration of the CHAP. X. Duke of Richmond. It has employed, and Questions perhaps exhausted, all the vigour of the Irish raised. government, during nearly the last two years. Twelve Privy Counsellors, the Chancellor, Judges of the King's Bench, Attorney and Solicitor General, have vehemently pressed for a con- Convention struction, unfavourable to the Right of Petitioning. On the other hand, several of the most learned and independent Judges and Barristers of Ireland favour the opposite construction.-The Contradictory great Lord Erskine, too, perhaps the first Authority in the Empire upon such a question, has unequivocally condemned the construction attempted by the Irish Government, The learned and constitutional Sir Arthur Pigot, and Sir Samuel Romilly, concur with him. Lords Eldon and Ellenborough (though called upon in Parliament) maintained an expressive silence, which left room no doubt of their dissent from the Irish Court of King's Bench. constructions. After an expenditure of £20,000 of public Money, great public agitation, and irritating controversy, this question remains" adhuc sub judice." It is in regular progress through Litigation cons the Irish Law Courts, in the shape of Actions at the suit of certain arrested Catholics against William Downes, Esqr. (Chief Justice of the Irish King's Bench) for an Arrest and false tinued. |