the suspicion of prejudice and partiality, instead of being, as the Constitution intends it to be, the fountain of grace and favour.

"But we are told that these concessions are to tranquillize Ireland; we are told that the mass of the people are in a state of irritation, and that nothing but Catholic emancipation can allay it: but, we are not told what this emancipation is to effect with respect to the mass of the people. Do you confer any direct and immediate benefit upon the lower orders? You argue, indeed, that the ultimate effects of emancipation will be to meliorate their condition, to raise up new classes in society, and to unite the lower and upper orders by gradations which are now wanting. Will the peȧsant understand this? will he feel any immediate benefit? will he receive any practical proof that his condition is improved? Will he be less subject to the influence of that most powerful body, the Roman Catholic Clergy?

"And reflect, how that body is affected by what you call Catholic emancipation. You confer certain privilegessubstantial benefits perhaps on the Aristocracy and the Bar; but you confer none on the Clergy; you do not even leave them as you find them: you concede to the Laity, but you accompany these concessions with regulations and restrictions, bearing exclusively on the Clergy; on that body whose influence is all-powerful, and who, of all classes, must naturally view your establishments with the greatest jealousy and hostility. And then, the connexion between the mass of the People and the Clergy remaining the same,-the People receiving no immediate advantage, nor prospective advantage which they can comprehend, and the Clergy being subjected to restrictions against which they vehemently protest, can we flatter ourselves that the predictions of tranquillity and concord are likely to be verified?

"You tell us that we have conferred substantial power on the Catholic, but subject him to mere mortifying ca

clusions, that serve but to irritate and annoy him;-that we have broken the chain which bound him, but still reserve some useless links of that chain to remind him of his former servitude. But you yourselves retain some of these links, fewer indeed in number, but just as offensive as a memento of degradation, and as a proof that the equality of privilege and the identity of interest is not established. And when you dwell, and with justice, upon the rank, and the station, and the character of Lord Fingal, let me ask you how, consistently with your principle, can you close against him for ever the first executive office of his native land, the only one, perhaps, to which he could aspire? He may represent his Sovereign in Jamaica or in Canada,--he may exercise in distant colonies all the functions of Sovereignty in Church and State;-but in Ireland he cannot represent him, -in Ireland, the source from which grace, and mercy, and favour flow, is still to continue Protestant, exclusively and for ever!

"But, though you must have a Protestant Lord-Lieutenant, you may have a Roman Catholic Secretary: his friend, his adviser, his representative in Parliament, may be a Roman Catholic. Sir, those who know any thing of the relation in which these two offices stand, must know how desirable it is, even on public grounds, that something more than mere cold official confidence, something partaking of personal esteem and mutual attachment, should subsist between those who fill them :-and if this faithful servant and friend of the Lord-Lieutenant shall presume, in some hour of careless confidence, to advise him in the appointment of any ecclesiastical, nay even any lay, office or preferment in the Protestant Church of Ireland, the Secretary shall—(observe the cautious provisions against danger)—he shall, being convicted by due course of law, be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor, and disqualified for ever from public service!

And this is the Bill which is to remove anoma

lies, to establish some perfect system of government, some final and satisfactory arrangement, to bury in oblivion, in all time to come, religious animosities!

"Then, again, the Crown is to remain Protestant, but the adviser of the Crown may be Roman Catholic. You confirm in the Bill the exclusion of the Roman Catholic from the Crown,-from that branch of the Legislature from which he was most recently excluded by law,—from thất high office from which he is excluded, not by the indirect operation of an oath, as is the case in other offices, but distinctly because he is a Roman Catholic. The irresponsible head of the executive government must be Protestant, but his responsible Minister, his Secretary of State, may be a Roman Catholic. You expose the successor to the Crown to be educated under the guidance of Roman Catholic Ministers; and if he, from sincere conviction, shall conform to the religion of those whom you have given to him as confidential and responsible advisers, you subject him for ever to the forfeiture of his inheritance. In all this I can see nothing that can lead to harmony,-nothing that can constitute a final and satisfactory settlement-nothing but a wild and irreconcilable contradiction of principles.

"I will now conclude.-Let me entreat Members to pause before they take the first step towards a radical alteration in the Constitution of their Country, and to reflect how difficult it is to predict the consequences of much less important alterations."

Sir, I will not weaken the impression which these just sentiments must produce, by any observations of my own on

this vital subject.

Believe, Sir,

To be always

Your devoted Servant,

THE AUTHOR.

LETTERS

ON THE REVIVAL OF POPERY,

&c.

SIR,

LETTER I.

Great Russel Street, March 16th, 1819.

Ir is the remark of a celebrated French writer on the Spirit and Influence of the Lutheran Reformation," that two objects are especially dear to the heart of man; and it is not rare to see him sacrifice for them all his other interests, and even life itself. One is, the preservation of his social rights; and the other, the independence of his religious opinions: liberty in his civil actions, and liberty in his acts of conscience. He attaches to both the one and the other a value equal to his very existence."— P. 29, Essai sur la Réformation, &c. par M. CHARLES VILLERS.

Knowing, Sir, your firm adhesion to the cause of civil and religious freedom, and also your fixed attachment to our Protestant United Church as established by law, I make no apology for inviting your candid notice of the following pages. The decided part you have lately taken in favour of the "Roman Catholic Claims," and the apparent inconsistency of such Parliamentary conduct with your known character as a Christian Patriot, will vindicate my boldness in addressing you, and may be the occasion of your affording a public statement of the principles and motives on which you were acting. It is certain that some of your best friends and former political supporters do not well understand your meaning, and that many of your bitterest foes

rejoice at this seeming deviation from the straight line of consistency: therefore, it has become due, both to them and your own reputation, to give a reason for this part of your Parliamentary proceedings. My conviction is, that you are carried away by a feeling of unbounded benevolence, which blinds your eyes to the real mischief of granting further power, where it may be immediately turned against the bulwarks of our constitution.

From the personal knowledge which I have of your private character, and the full assurance I possess of your excellent qualities, as a philanthropist and a Christian, I am quite satisfied that no unworthy or secular views influence your determination. But, it is because I respect you so highly, and venerate your name as one of the noblest champions for the true rights of man, that I am solicitous to call your attention towards a subject most intimately connected with the welfare of our dear country. I scarcely need inform you, that Judge Hale, Sir William Blackstone, and many more exalted legal characters, besides Lord Clarendon and Lord Somers as statesmen, Milton and Locke as political philosophers, and our revered King William III. as a sovereign, all deemed the usurped spiritual supremacy of the Roman Pontiff, however defined and exercised, to be at variance with the legitimate national rights and peace of this empire. They all, with one consent, on the plain simple ground of expediency and safety, regarded the principles avowed by Roman Catholics to be always and inevl tably hostile to the general liberty of other religious denominations; and they, therefore, condemned every attempt made to place their Papal foes on an equality with Protestants, as to the possession of civil rank and power.

It has indeed been said, by the Edinburgh Reviewers, "that the admission of the Catholics of Ireland into the Parliament of the United Kingdom would not only sooth the feelings of their whole body, but it would afford a