speedily capitulated; Damietta was also occupied without resistance; and General Fraser was detached with two thousand five hundred men to effect the reduction of Rosetta, which commands one of the mouths of the Nile, and the possession of which was deemed essential to the regular supply of Alexandria with provisions. This place, however, held out; and as immediate succour was expected from the Mamelukes, Colonel Macleod was stationed with seven hundred men at El Hammed, in order to facilitate their junction with the besieging force. This detachment was speedily surrounded by an overwhelming body of Turkish horse, and after a gallant resistance, which repelled the attacks of their numerous squadrons till the whole ammunition was exhausted, entirely cut off. The promised Mamelukes never made their appearance; and General Stewart, severely weakened by so great a loss, with difficulty made good his retreat, fighting all the way, to Alexandria, where he arrived with a thousand fewer men than he had set out. 74. The fortifications of that place, however, enabled the British to bid defiance to their desultory opponents; and it was soon found that the apprehensions of scarcity which had prompted this ill-fated expedition to Rosetta were entirely chimerical, as provisions speedily became more abundant than ever. But the British government, in which an important change at this time took place, became sensible of the impolicy of longer retaining this acquisition at a crisis when every nerve required to be exerted to protect their shores from the forces of Napoleon. It was with lively satisfaction, therefore, that they heard of the conclusion of a convention in autumn, by which it was stipulated that all the British prisoners in the hands of the Turks should be released, and Alexandria surrendered to the latter; in virtue of which arrangement the English troops set sail from the mouth of the Nile in the end of September, and were brought to Gibraltar, where they were stationed, ere long co-operating in covering the retreat of the royal family of Portugal | from the Tagus, and ultimately taking a share in the glories of the Peninsular campaigns. 75. The public dissatisfaction arising from these repeated defeats was so strong, that it seriously shook the stability of the ministry, and produced a very general impression, even among that portion of the community who had hitherto supported them, that, however well qualified to direct the state during a period of profound peace, and when ample leisure was to be had for carrying into effect their projected reforms, they were not calculated for the existing crisis, in which these pacific ameliorations were of comparatively little consequence, and when what was imperatively called for was the capacity of warlike combination. But room was not afforded for this growing discontent to manifest itself in the usual way, so as to affect the fortunes of the administration, from another event at this time, which brought them into collision with the religious feelings of the sovereign, and ultimately led to their retirement from office. 76. It has been already mentioned that the general question of Catholic emancipation was brought forward in the session of 1804, and supported with all the weight and eloquence of the Whig party, (Ante, Chap. XXXIX. § 16). The ministerial leaders felt the necessity of making some effort, when in power, to redeem the pledges which they had so freely given when on the Opposition benches. Lord Grenville, in particular, who had formed part of the administration which resigned in 1801, in consequence of the declared repugnance of the sovereign to those concessions to the Catholics which Mr Pitt then deemed essential to the security of the country, considered him. self called upon by every consideration, both of public policy and private honour, again to press them upon the legislature. In consequence of these impressions, Lord Howick (afterwards Earl Grey) moved, on the 5th of March, for leave to bring in a bill which should enable persons of every religious persuasion to serve in the army and navy, without any other condition but that 78. On the other hand, it was strongly contended by Mr Perceval,-" The objections to this measure, strong as they are, are not so insuperable as to the system of which it forms a part, which originates in a laxity of principle on matters of religion, which is daily increasing, and threatens in its ultimate results to involve all our in able to preserve anything in our ancient and venerable establishments, it is indispensable to make a stand at the outset against any innovations in so essential a particular. This measure is, in truth, a partial repeal of the Test Act; if passed, it must at no distant period lead to the total repeal of that act, and with it to the downfall of the Protes of taking an oath specified in the bill, | now, with a large proportion, damped which was repugnant to no religious the spirit or soured the affections." opinions. By the existing law, a Catholic in Great Britain could not rise to the rank even of a subaltern, in consequence of the necessity of officers of every grade taking the Test Oath; while in Ireland, under an act passed in the Irish parliament in 1793, persons of that religious persuasion were permitted to rise to any situation in the army, excepting commander-in-stitutions in destruction. If it is desirchief of the forces, master-general of the ordnance, or general of the staff. 77" Was it prudent," said Lord Howick, "when we were contending with so powerful an enemy, to prevent, in this manner, a large portion of the population of the country from concurring in the common defence? What can be more anomalous than that in one united empire so great a discrep-tant ascendancy in Ireland. The advoancy should prevail, as that on one side of St George's Channel a Catholic may rise to the highest rank in the army, but on the other he cannot hold even an ensign's commission? It was declared in 1793, when this restriction was removed by the Irish parliament, by his Majesty's ministers in both houses, that in two months they would grant a similar indulgence to persons of the Romish persuasion in Great Britain; but this had never yet been done, and this monstrous inconsistency continued to disgrace the laws of the United Kingdom. It may fairly be admitted that the principle of this relaxation applies equally to dissenters of every description, and that it must lead to a general admission of persons of every religious persuasion to the army and navy; but where is the danger of such liberality? The proposed measure only enables the sovereign to appoint such persons to offices of high importance. It does not compel him to do so; their appointment would still depend on the executive government, which would naturally avoid any dangerous or improper exercise of its authority; and would, on the contrary, be enabled to take advantage, in the common defence, of the whole population of the country, without any of those restrictions which cates of the Catholics argue as if their measures were calculated to support toleration, whereas, in reality, and in their ultimate effects, they are calculated to destroy that great national blessing, by subverting the Protestant establishment, by which toleration has been always both professed and practised, and reinstating the Romish, by which it has been as uniformly repudiated. From the arguments that are advanced at the present day, one would be inclined to imagine that there was no such thing as truth or falsehood in religion; that all creeds were equally conducive to the temporal and eternal interests of mankind; and that, provided only the existing heats and dissensions on the subject could be allayed, it mattered not to what religious tenets either a government or a people inclined. True toleration is indeed an inestimable blessing, but it consists in permitting to every man the free exercise of his religion, not in putting into the hands of the professors of a hostile creed the means of overturning what they will never cease to regard as a pestilent heresy, and resuming from its present Protestant possessors the lost patrimony of St Peter in these islands. 79. "In point of law, it is incorrect to say, that a Catholic who has obtained a commission in Ireland is liable to accumulation, it will ultimately have that extorted from its weakness which its wisdom would be desirous to withhold.”* 80. The second reading of this in any penalties: the Mutiny Act authorises the King to require in any part of his dominions the services of every man in his army, and this is of itself a practical repeal of the disability affect-teresting bill was adjourned from time ing Catholics; for no man can be compelled to do what would subject him to a penalty. The argument that all offices should be thrown open to persons of all religious persuasions, is inconsistent with the British constitution as settled in 1688, which is root and branch a Protestant establishment. If pushed to its legitimate length, it would throw open all offices, even the Crown itself, to Catholic aspirants: what then becomes of the Act of Settlement, or the right of the house of Hanover to the throne? If this is to be the policy of our country, there is but one thing to be done to do everything to transfer the church lands in Ireland to the Catholics, re-establish the Catholic faith, and call over the Pretender to the throne of these realms. These are the great and dazzling objects which the Romish party have in view; it was to exclude them that all the restrictions were imposed by our ancestors on the persons professing that faith; it is to gain them that all these minor concessions are demanded by their adherents; their advances are only the more dangerous that they are gradual, unperceived, and veiled under the colour of philanthropy. The Catholics already enjoy everything which toleration can demand; to ask more is to demand weapons to be used against ourselves. The consequences of a storm are little to be apprehended; it is the gradual approaches which are really dangerous. If parliament goes on allowing this * Subsequent events, more particularly the fierce agitation for repeal in 1843, after Catholic emancipation had been conceded, and the miserable attempt at rebellion in 1848, have rendered these early debates and predictions on the effects of concession to the Catholics in the highest degree curious and interesting. Without pronouncing any decided opinion on a subject on which the light of experience is only now beginning to shine upon the world, it is the duty of the historian to urge the discussions on this subject on the attentive consideration of every candid inquirer, either into political wisdom or historic truth. So far back as 1803, Lord Redesdale wrote to government from Dublin:-"The present to time, without the nation being either alive to its importance, or aware of the quarter in which obstacles to its progress existed. But on the 24th March, it was suddenly announced in the newspapers that ministers had been dismissed; and two nights after, Lord Grenville in the House of Lords, and Lord Howick in the House of Commons, gave a full statement of the circumstances which had led to so unlooked-for a change. The draft of the bill, as usual in all matters of importance, had been submitted to his Majesty for his consideration; and it contained a recital of the Irish Act, which opened the army to Catholics for every grade, with the exception of the offices of master-general of the ordnance, commander-in-chief of the forces, and general of the staff; and then provided that the services of the Catholics should be received without any restriction, and on the condition only of taking the oath of allegiance. On this bill being proposed, the King manifested considerable objections to it; but these were at length so far overcome by the representation that the measure was a necessary consequence of the acts of 1793 and the union, so far as Ireland was concerned, that ministers were authorised to bring in the bill, and communications were made to the heads of the Catholics in Ireland, that they were to be admitted to every situation in the army, without exception. The King, however, rebellion is a beginning only, that I cannot doubt, All the actors have been puppets worked by persons behind the scenes. You must immediately arm us with a suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. But you must do more; you must renew the martial law, or pass some other bill to enable the military to act with greater promptitude if the Lordlieutenant shall see fit. We have done all we can, but armed rebellion must be met by arms. It is as necessary to destroy the influence of the terror of the rebels over the people's minds, as to meet them in the field."- LORD REDESDALE to MR ADDINGTON, July 25, 1803. PELLEW's Sidmouth, ii. 209. had laboured under some misappre- | consistent with the fundamental prinhension as to the extent and tendency ciple of the constitution, that the acts of the measure which was to be brought of government are to be held as those forward, and believed that it was not of the responsible ministers, and that intended to enlarge the facilities of ad- the adoption or rejection of no measure mission created by the act 1793 for is to be laid upon his Majesty; and as Ireland, but only to make that act the not less at variance with the fundageneral law of the empire; for no mental basis of the Act of Settlement, sooner was its import explained in the which is rested on the exclusion of Cadebate which occurred on the first read- tholics from the highest offices in the ing in the House of Commons, of which realm. His Majesty therefore required an abstract has already been given, a written pledge from ministers that than he intimated to the government they would propose no further concesthat he had invincible objections to sions to the Catholics. This pledge the proposed change.* ministers, on their side, considered as inconsistent with the fundamental principle of a free constitution, which is, that the king can do no wrong, and that the responsibility of all public measures must rest with his advisers, and equally repugnant to that progressive change in human affairs which might at no distant period render a repetition of the proposal a matter of necessity. They therefore declined, though in the most respectful terms, to give the proposed pledge, and the consequence was, that the King, in gracious terms, sent them an intimation that their services were no longer required; and on the same day the Duke of Portland, Lord Hawkesbury, and Mr Perceval, received the royal commands to form a new administration. The King was perfectly firm on this occasion: he himself said he regarded his crown at stake in the question at issue.+ 81. After some ineffectual attempts at a compromise, ministers, finding the King resolute, determined to withdraw the bill altogether, and intimated this decision to his Majesty, accompanied, however, with the conditions, that they should not be precluded from stating their opinions on the general policy of the measure in parliament, and that they should be at liberty, from time to time, to bring the matter again under his Majesty's consideration. The answer of the King, after expressing regret at the difference of opinion which had arisen, rejected these conditions as in 82. Parliament, after this unexpected event, was adjourned till the 8th April, and on that day the new ministers took their seats. The change of administration, of course, formed the first and most anxious subject of debate; and * Lord Sidmouth stated in the House of Lords, "That he (Lord Sidmouth) had stated to his Majesty, that he had been induced to concur in the proposed measure, as a necessary consequence of the Irish Act of 1793: from the consideration of which, combined with the act of union, it appeared to him there was no alternative but either the repeal of the Irish Act, or the adoption of the measure. His Majesty then declared that he would not consent to any new concession, but that in consequence of the Irish Act, and of it alone, he would take the proposition of the cabinet into further consideration. The answer stated was, that "however painful his Majesty had found it to reconcile to his feelings, the removal of objections which might have the most distant reference to a question which had already been the subject of such frequent and distressing discussion, he would not, under the circumstances so earnestly pressed, prevent his ministers from submitting to the consideration of parliament the proprietyofinserting the proposed clauses in the Mutiny Bill." While, however, the King so far reluctantly conceded, he thought it necessary to declare that he could not go one step further: and he trusted this proof of his forbearance would secure him from being at a future period distressed by any further-LORD ELDON. to Rev. Dr SWIRE, April 1, proposal connected with the question."- 1807; CAMPBELL'S Lives of the Chancellors, PELLEW's Life of Sidmouth, ii. 455, 456. vii. 207. "The King considers the struggle as for his throne; and he told me but yesterday, when I took the great seal, that he did so consider it, that he must be the Protestant king of a Protestant country, or no king. He is remarkably well, firm as a lion, placid, and quick beyond example in any moment of his life. The late ministers are satisfied that the King, whose state of mind they were always doubting, has more sense and understanding than all the ministers put together: they leave him with a full conviction of that fact." the interest of the country was excited | principle, that the acts of the king are to the highest degree, by the argu- those of his responsible advisers, will ments which were urged for and against be at an end. Who could, in such a that important and unwonted exercise view, set bounds to the dangerous enof the royal prerogative.* On the side croachments of unknown and irresponof the former ministers, it was urged sible advisers upon the deliberations of by Sir Samuel Romilly and Lord How- government, or say how far the ostenick:-"The true question at issue is, sible ministers might be thwarted and whether or not it would have been con- overruled by unknown and secret institutionally justifiable, or rather would fluence, which might totally stop the not have been a high crime and misde-action of a constitutional government? meanour, for any minister to have subscribed a written pledge that he would never in future bring a particular measure or set of measures under his Majesty's consideration. If any statesman could be found base enough to give such a pledge, he would deserve to lose his head, and the House would be guilty of a direliction of its duty, if it did not impeach a minister who so far forgot his duty to the country. This is a matter in which the interests of the crown were more at stake than even those of the people: for if the precedent is once to be allowed, that a minister is at liberty to surrender his own private judgment to the will of the reigning sovereign, it is impossible that the legal fiction, that the king can do no wrong, can any longer be maintained, and the great constitutional *The new cabinet stood thus:CABINET. The danger of the measure which has been adopted is only rendered the greater by the announcement now openly made, that in this, the most important step perhaps taken in his whole reign, his Majesty had no advisers. The constitution recognises no such doctrine; the advisers of the King throughout must be held to be those who have succeeded to his councils. There is no desire to bring the sovereign to the bar of the House of Commons; it is the new ministers who are really the objects of deliberation. The late administration was dismissed because they refused to bind themselves by a specific pledge never to renew the subject of Catholic concession; a new ministry have succeeded them; they must be held therefore to have given that pledge; and it is for the house to say, whether such a direliction of public duty is not utterly at variance with every principle of constitutional freedom." 83. On the other hand, it was argued by Lord Eldon, Mr Perceval, and Mr Canning:-" The question on which the imprudent zeal of the late administration has brought them into collision with the religious scruples and political wisdom of the sovereign is not one of trivial moment, in which the monarch may be expected to abide by the judgment of his constitutional advisers. It lies, on the contrary, at the foot of the whole constitution; it constitutes one of the foundations non tangenda non movenda, on which the entire fabric of our Protestant liberties has been reared. The present question regards the transference of the sword to Catholic hands; the same question on which Charles I. erected his standard at Northampton-the intrusting the direction of the military force to a |