traordinary change of opinion in Mr Brownlow and some others, for it would be no easy matter to add to the humiliation into which they have plunged themselves. Every greatstate- question is composed of a multitude of parts, which change, in their character and effects, every hour ; and, of course, nothing could be more preposterous than for us to argue, that, because a wan opposes a matter at one time, he is, for that reason alone, always to op- pose it. A few years may reverse a question in everything but name, and, in such case, a man must reverse his opinion respecting it, to be truly con- sistent. We believe a man to be a drunkard, because we witness his drunkenness, but then we are not from this to believe him a drunkard, if he reform and show proofs of his sobriety. The change, however, in the question, must precede and govern the change in opinion; and it must be distinct and satisfactory in the eyes of impar- tial men. The Catholic question has, no doubt, undergone some change in late years; but what is this change? The British and Irish Catholics have displayed far worse opinions, spirit, and conduct. The Catholicism of Eu- rope has become much more powerful and active it has renewed its offen- sive operations against Protestantism, and it has become a potent political instrument in the hands of foreign go- vernments. Now, the corresponding change in opinion ought evidently to be, a more determined opposition to the removal of the disabilities. Mr Brownlow, however, and those who followed his example, could only find in this change a reason for becoming strenuous friends of the Catholics. The winter's blast destroyed the summer's warmth, therefore they put out their fires and threw off their garments. On what did these individuals ground their change of opinion ? On the evi- dence of Bishop Doyle and Lawyer O'Connell. We know not by what un- accountable chance it happened that these two persons were examined. It is amazing, that after what they had done, spoken, and written, any one should have thought that their evi- dence would have the weight of a fea- ther with the nation ; and it is still more amazing that, after comparing this evidence with their opinions given on other occasions, any one should have dared to venture his reputation upon it. The reasons which Mr Brownlow and his friends assigned for their change, did not satisfy the public. The Bri- tish nation is in the practice of sub- jecting to a very severe scrutiny the reasons which public men assign for going from one opinion to another. It feels this to be a matter of absolute necessity : it knows that such men are surrounded by powerful temptations to change, from unworthy motives, and that their changes have often very great influence over its interests. There is, moreover, something in the nature of the Englishman whichholds change of side in abhorrence. If a public man cannot assign satisfactory reasons for his change of opinion, he loses public confidence then and for ever. This is most proper and necessary. It would be very idle in us to give any summary of the reasoning of the two parties. The real merits of the question were carefully avoided by the Catholic advocates. The most distin- guished of these rested principally upon abstract right, and the bad spi- rit and conduct of the Catholics. Mr Peel fought the battle with very great ability. His speech on the second reading of the Relief Bill cut a far bet- ter figure in the newspapers than that of Mr Canning, delivered on the same occasion. He was very powerfully sup- ported by Mr Goulburn. The bill passed the House of Com- mons, and the Catholics declare, that this proves that the British people are with them. Unluckily for them, it admits of arithmetical refutation. Mr Spring Rice, their champion, has as- serted, that two-thirds of the Irish members voted in favour of the bill. Now, no one not even a Catholic will say that the Irish members are the representatives of the British peo- ple. Assuming Mr Rice's assertion to be correct, and placing these members wholly out of sight, we fhid the majo- rity of the British members voted against the bill in all the divisions. We find that if the question had been left solely to the British members, the bill would never have entered the House of Commons. This, we think, is sufficiently decisive; it ought even to convince a Catholic.
We will look a little more closely at this boasted majority in favour of the Catholics. Many of the Irish mem- bers are elected by the Catholics, or by those who are, from personal rca-
