danger as it is at prefent. But they who oppofe Ministers may be eager to defend the country. So it was in the American war. The hon. Gentleman concluded by faying, that he afked for no votes but from thofe who thought fomething more fhould be done for defending the country. The House then divided: Ayes Noes Majority for Ministers Adjourned at four o'clock in the morning. 204 256 52 Canning, right hon. George Cooper, J. E. Caulfield, hon. H. Chapman, C. Cavendish, Lord G. Cavendish, W. Carbery, Lord Coke, Thomas W. Coke, Edward Dalrymple, Sir H. Dickenfon, W. jun. Dickenfon, W. fen. Dupré, J. Dundas, hon. R. Dundas, C. Dundas, L. Bradshaw, R. H. Bligh, Thomas Berkeley, Admiral Barclay, Sir Robert Bourne, Sturges VOL. II. 1803-4. Smith, Asheton Phipps, J. G. Plumer, Wm. Pytches, John Ram, A. Stanhope, S. Somerfet, Lord E. Staniforth, John Stanley, Lord Thornton, Robert Turner, E. Thelluffon, I. P. Tarleton, General Townshend, Lord J. Wigram, R. Winnington, Sir E. Lord Temple, Tellers. S. Whitbread, f HOUSE OF LORDS. · TUESDAY, APRIL 24. The Marquis of Stafford moved, that his notice of a motion relating to the defence of the country, which flood for Friday, thould be difcharged, and that the fame should be poftponed to Monday, for which day he moved that the Lords thould be fummoned. Ordered. IRISH MILITIA. Lord Hawkesbury moved, that the Irish militia transfer bill be read a third time. The Lord Chancellor ftated the opinions which he had given 4 H 2 on on a former occafion, with refpect to some particular objections that had been urged against that part of the bill which it was contended would fubject the Irish militia to the penal. ties and difqualifications impofed by the ftatute of the 25th Charles II. He had given the fubject much confideration fince it was laft difcuffed, and the impreffion upon his mind was, that Roman Catholic officers or foldiers of the Irish militia, who fhould come into this country under the operation of the prefent act, would come into it with all the privileges and immunities attached to them, that they poffeffed in confequence of the act of the 33d of the King. Such, upon mature deliberation, was his opinion, and fuch he could af fert to be the opinion of another noble and learned Lord, whom he did not then fee in his place. The Duke of Norfolk afked whether Roman Catholics admitted into the Irifh militia in this country, would be exempt from the difabilities of the act of the 25th of Charles II. The Lord Chancellor gave it as his opinion that they would be exempt. Earl Spencer did not feel himself competent to argue the queftion with the profeffional ability of the noble and learned Lords, but it certainly, in the little judgment that he, a plain unlearned man, ould form on the fubject, appeared extremely neceffa ry tohim, as doubts had been entertained on the fubject, that a pofitive declaration and precife enactment fhould fet them to rest. The Lord Chancellor ftated, that one of the greatest inconveniencies profeffional men, who were called upon to pronounce judicial decifions, laboured under, arose from the confufion that was produced by overloading acts of parliament with unneceffary claufes. Of that defcription he conceived the claufe to be that it was propofed to introduce; and therefore he would feel it his duty to oppofe it. Lord Ellenborough corroborated the opinion of the noble and learned Lord on the woolfack, as to the exemption of Roman Catholic officers or privates of the militia from the operation of the laft act.. Lord Grenville had every refpect for, and was difpofed to receive with all the deference that was due to them, the opinions of profeffional members of that Houfe, on profeffional queftions. But this was a fubject of rather a legiflative than a judicial character, and, therefore, he was excufable in differing from the noble and learned Lords who had favoured the Houfe with their opinions on the queftion. If, indeed, the queftion had been decided in another place, by the noble and and learned Lord who prefided in the Court of King's Bench, there his authority was recognized, and his opinion would be fubmitted to with that general approbation that his great learning and profeffional talents entitled him to expect. But here, he spoke it with all due refpect, the noble Lord could only be confidered as a peer of parliament, and his opinion. was not entitled to more refpect than that of any other peer, except as it should be fupported by fuperior argument. He did not agree with the noble and learned Lord, that the claufe was unneceffary. Doubts had been excited in the breasts of his Majefty's Catholic fubjects, officers of militia, and, therefore, he deemed it extremely important that they thould be quieted. To effect that he had taken the trouble of preparing a claufe which he would take the liberty of offering to the House, the purport of which was, that perfons profeiling the Roman Catholic religion, and others ferving as officers, noncommiffioned officers, or privates, in the militia of Ireland, fhould not be fubject to any difabilities or penalties in this country that they were exempt fron in Ireland. Lord Carleton fupported the arguments of the two noble and learned Lords, and the opinions which they grounded on them. Lord Grenville profeffed himself not fatisfied with the extra judicial decifions that had been given on this point, and wished that the determination refpecting it thould reft on more folid and certain grounds, than opinions thrown out loofely and occafionally in the courfe of debate. He wifhed for a special provifion that would apply particularly to the question. The Bishop of St. Asaph was inclined to pay the utmost deference to the opinion of the noble and learned Lords; but he thought it his duty, as the perfon who had firft moved the question, to fupport the claufe propofed by the noble Ba ron, the effect of which, he had every reafon to fuppofe; would completely fatisfy the minds of the Roman Catholics ferving in the militia. Lord Hawkesbury and the Marquis of Sligo oppofed the elaufe, which was fupported by Lord Mulgrave, in reply to whom Lord Ellenborough role again, and gave it as his decided opinion, that no Roman Catholic officer who had been admitted into the Irish militia in that country, and who thould come here in confequence of the bill before the Houfe, would be fubject to the operation of the 25th of Charles, and for this good reafon, that it would not be poffible to frame fuch an information against fuch officer on that ftatute, as could bring |