Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  


    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Volume 1

Ireland: the True Source of its Evils. The True Remedy

page break

Ireland: the True Source of its Evils. The True Remedy.

The Manifold Evils which this Nation Suffers from the Demoralized and Distressed Condition of Ireland, which cannot but Continue so Long as Popery is Upheld; and Thence the Duty and Wisdom of Government, to Encourage all Wise and Proper Measures for Affectionately Leading the Irish Roman Catholics to the Knowledge of Divine Truth, as Maintained by our Reformed and Protesting Church.

There never was a period in which the condition of the Irish people appears to have attracted more general attention, or to have more completely baffled the skill of British statesmen than in that of these latter years. Every measure intended for her amelioration seems to have failed in the object, if it did not aggravate pre-existing evils. But it is not to be wondered that such is the case, for in most instances they have been applicable only to superficial symptoms of social disorganization, whilst the undercurrent that influences so much the tide of events in Ireland is altogether unobserved amid the turmoil of parties. For a period of nearly seventy years the Irish agitators of the day have from time to time put forward grievance after grievance, complaint after complaint, in rapid succession, and as the former has been removed and the latter redressed, as each successive head of the hydra has been lopped off, another has presented itself, more formidable than any that preceded it. In vain has concession followed concession, until there remains nothing further to concede without subverting all the established institutions of the country, even the Monarchy itself,—Ireland still remains as distracted as ever,—her population in a perpetual state of smouldering rebellion,—her natural resources undeveloped,—her trade paralyzed,—life and property lamentably insecure, and every bonâ fide effort that modern legislators have made to rescue her from this deplorable condition has only increased the demands of her demagogues, and added fuel to the flame of discontent. Well would it be if the evil were confined to Ireland, but such is not the case; its emissaries have migrated from her shores to England, there to spread the leprosy. Irish demoralization and Irish distress stalk through the English counties. Millions page 4 have been freely lavished, but in vain. Foul disease, gaunt famine, gross superstition and intellectual debasement assail the doors of many an English home. These are beyond the power of pecuniary remedies, and though England groans beneath the burden thus cast upon her, those groans are not so much at the amount of her pecuniary sacrifices as at their utter inapplicability to existing evils—evils which, if unchecked any longer, must be subversive alike of the social happiness and the national welfare of England.

It is not to be wondered then that all eyes are turned to Ireland's present state—all ears awake to the wailing of distress which every breeze now wafts from her shores,—and all hands ready to aid in relieving her real wants and improving her condition. Each, however, would effect this desideratum in his own peculiar way, and we believe there never was a disease, social, political, or bodily, to cure which so many charlatans have come upon the stage and propounded each his nostrum. The state of Ireland has been too long a question of party, and in the political melee, the real measures for her amelioration have been neglected. But the time has now arrived when this should cease to be the case. The Sister Isle must be rescued from her degraded state, and in time, we trust, brought to a full participation in the prosperity and happiness of England.

But Roman Catholic Ireland is a strange anomaly amongst nations. Providence has blessed her with a fertile soil, a genial climate, and inexhaustible resources of undeveloped wealth, but her people know not how to appreciate those blessings, or make them available for the public good. During the last century, whilst England has made rapid strides to the highest point of civilization, science, literature, and social prosperity, Ireland has been the seat of anarchy and crime—destitution and misery—ignorance and superstition—disaffection and rebellion. These have impeded every effort for the improvement of the country, or the welfare and happiness of her people. Sad as this state of things undoubtedly is—following as it does the career of legislative concessions which began in 1784 and reached their climax with the Roman Catholic Relief Bill of 1829;—and increasing as it does with every fresh sacrifice to Romanism, we must cease to attribute those dire results to the hitherto supposed inciting causes, and seek for others. These we shall find in the blighting influence exercised upon her people by the Romish priesthood and the Romish faith, which is there inculcated in all its hideous deformity, stripped of that superficial gloss which it assumes in enlightened and Protestant England.

From its earliest dawn to the present time, wherever Christianity has been truly preached, it wins upon and humanizes even the savage breast, and developes all the better feelings of our nature. Christian man ceases to live in a state of perpetual warfare with his fellow-man. He learns to love his neighbour as himself. He learns mutual forbearance and forgiveness, and a hope arises within his breast, that when he shall be called from this his earthly pilgrimage it may be to a life of immortality and bliss. True Christianity is a religion of peace, and wherever it flourishes happiness page 5 and prosperity will abide. These are blessings which are unknown to Roman Catholic Ireland, for there, alas! true Christianity is a stranger to the bulk of her population, and its place is usurped by a religion, the tenets of which, wherever it prevails, are the parents of barbarism, and must in time debase the most civilized of nations. There is not, we believe, any other land, Christian even in name, in which demoralization and distress so fearfully prevail. There every evil passion that can influence the breast of man rules uncontrolled. The figure of distress rocks upon her seat and wrings her lank and withered hands, which she will not stretch forth to gather the gifts that God has scattered around with lavish bounty; and there is not another country in Europe in which life is valued less, and crime reduced to a regular system.

It shall be our duty in the first place to expose that system and to trace its bitter fruits, the prevailing demoralization and crime, to the moral and religious instruction received by the Irish Roman Catholics at the hands of their Church, and we trust we shall prove that whilst this is the case the regeneration of Ireland is hopeless, and that it can only be attainable by other and better measures than those hitherto pursued, and a line of policy hitherto unattempted.

In every country where social disorganization and popular ignorance prevail, designing men are always found to avail themselves of every element of discord and discontent for the furtherance of their own ambitious ends. So has it been in Ireland. At the time that the Roman Catholic clergy were permitted the free exercise of their religion, political Associations had their birth, and have continued to agitate the public mind, whilst the ignorant peasantry have banded together to destroy the peace of the country. At divers times and in divers places such Associations have been known by different names, but their objects were ever the same,—now springing into active life, the next moment apparently extinct, as circumstances or prudence suggested to their guiding powers. From time to time these Associations have been known by the several designations of Whiteboys, Rightboys, Levellers, Hearts of Oak, Hearts of Steel, Defenders and Threshers. For some years previous to 1795 these organizations of the Roman Catholic peasantry rapidly progressed, and were for a time open to the disaffected of every creed, but the objects of the overwhelming majority being decidedly and undisguisedly hostile to British connexion, and to everything bearing the name of Protestantism, the members of this faith abandoned the Union and rallied in defence of the laws and constitution. Thenceforward the Society of United Irishmen was exclusively Roman Catholic; its organization increased, it was thoroughly remodelled, and its name was changed to that of the Riband Association, alias the Sons of the Shamrock, the sons of St. Patrick, or the Religious Liberty Society.

That these several and successive Associations were for political and sectarian purposes there cannot be a doubt, and though such objects have been for long intervals kept in the back-ground, yet when time and opportunity seemed favourable, its guiding powers, quickly availing themselves of local causes, have never failed to bring page 6 them to bear in aid of political and religious objects. Every opportunity was seized to foster discontent, encourage disloyalty, and swell the numbers of the Society by voluntary enlistment or even by intimidation. Thus it has steadily progressed, until we believe that in history no record can be found of the existence of an Association so completely affiliated, so well organized, and at the same time in respect of which so much ignorance generally prevails, not only as to its nature and objects, but also as to the power by which its mysterious and formidable movements are regulated. We daily witness its destructive effects, but we cannot tell the quarter from which that destruction emanates.

The objects of the Society may be learned in part from the documents occasionally discovered, in part from the disclosures made by individuals who have belonged to it, and in part from the atrocities perpetrated by its instrumentality. We have frequently seen copies of its Rules and Regulations, and of the oaths taken by its members, and though they occasionally vary from each other in the wording, their essence is the same, religious, political, and agrarian. Religious, as against everything pertaining to Protestantism,—political, as against the Institutions and Government of this Protestant State,—and agrarian, for the purpose of drawing within its ranks every man whose personal wrongs, whether real or imaginary, require redress, knowing, as he does, that its organization will supply him with ample means to gratify "the wild justice of revenge."

In order to accomplish these its ulterior views, it is essential to command political power, whether Parliamentary or otherwise; to have a perfect control of that power without any seeming connexion with it; to defeat the ends of justice by the intimidation of both witnesses and jurors, whenever it was inimical to the political or religious views of Romanism; and, when necessary, to control the Legislature by physical intimidation. The members of this Association are sworn, and though the oath varies in some districts, yet the substance of all that have been discovered is much the same. Their oaths are of two kinds, the initiatory oath of secrecy, and the subsequent oath of full profession. The following is an authentic specimen of the latter:—

"I, A. B., with the sign of the cross, do declare that I come here, and promise of my own free-will and accord to join my R. C. Bn. (Roman Catholic Brethren) the Knights of St. Patrick, or Sons of the Shamrock, in all things appertaining thereto. 2. That I will not buy or purchase any article or commodity from an O. M., B., or P., (Orangeman, Brunswicker, or Protestant,) if a Brother or R. C. (Roman Catholic), disposes of the same article as good and as cheap as they do. 3. That I will be ready at two hours' warning to aid and assist "any true and loyal Br. (Brothers) when they or any loyal Brother calls upon me, if I am not prevented by sickness or business of distress. 4. That I will not knowingly or willingly provoke, challenge, or fight with any of my true and loyal Bn. (Brethren), if I know them to be such; and if a Br. (Brother) be unjustly treated or ill spoken of, I will espouse his cause if it be just: but if a Br. (Brother) be in fault I will advise and save him if possible I can do page 7 so. 5. That I will not allow any person of ill-fame, or evil character into this Bond of Eternal Trust, and that I will propagate brotherly love and friendship to all such of my acquaintances as may be thought worthy of our Trust. 6. That in town or country I will give the preference of my dealings to my true and loyal Bn. (Brethren) as reasonable as to any other, if I know them to be attached to our national interest. 7. That I will never see a Br. (Brother) short-taken or in distress for the amount of a shilling or sixpence, a meal's meat, or a night's lodging if possible I can relieve him. 8. That at the place of our meetings I never will drink to intoxication, so that any person might know my mind, or for fear of disobedience, or mentioning the name of any regular member. 9 That I never will discover of any true and loyal Br. (Brother) if I were hanged, beheaded, and quartered. 10. That I will never injure a true and loyal Br., his wife, sister, daughter, or mother, except in the lawful bonds of marriage. 11. That I will be true and loyal to our holy the R. C. (Roman Catholic) Church dedicated to God by St. P—k (Saint Patrick), our holy Apostle and Patron of Ireland in all things lawful, but not otherwise. 12. That I never will discover of any of my true and loyal Brs. or of any of my Comrs., (Committees) names, or any one here present except on certain or lawful occasions, if I were hanged up in chains to dry before the sun. 13. That I will attend all meetings and all proceedings when duly noticed by my true and loyal Brs. or any Comts., or thereunto pay any fine that may be struck against me. 14. That I will be ready at two hours' warning to stand till death to my true and loyal Brs. or any Comts. cause, if I be not prevented by sickness or death."

From this oath the religious and political nature of the Society may be clearly seen; and although there is much in the oath, there is far more in the interpretation put upon it by the members, who consider that thereby they undertake an obligation to subvert all our Protestant Institutions; to effect a separation of the two countries, and establish an independent Government in Ireland; to root out the Protestant faith, and restore the forfeited estates to the Roman Catholic descendants of their original possessors; to effect a transfer of the revenues of the Protestant Church to the Roman Catholic priesthood, and the establishment of their long-sought temporal power in Ireland.

The constitution of the Society is peculiar. It is unlimited in numbers, and its members believe it to comprise nearly every male Roman Catholic in Ireland from sixteen to fifty years of age. It is apparently governed by a body of persons in Dublin, called The Grand Riband Lodge of Ireland, in which is an individual appointed to regulate its proceedings in each county of Ireland; to communicate with the baronial delegates therein, and to transmit to them the orders and regulations promulgated therefrom for the general government of the Society. To this "Grand Lodge" quarterly returns are made of the number of members in each parish, but no list or roll is kept for fear of detection, the only register being that of the names of the baronial delegates throughout the kingdom, which is sufficient for all working purposes. This so-called "Grand Lodge" in reality page 8 consists only of the confidential correspondents of each county, and is again controlled, and all its important proceedings regulated by some agency, invisible to the members at large, but believed by them to be the Roman Catholic hierarchy and clergy. Beyond these corresponding members, who are mostly men in humble life, selected for their acuteness and intelligence, nothing has been as yet discovered, and on this point Major Warburton, one of the most active and intelligent of the Irish Stipendiary Magistrates, has declared* that "the Grand Riband Lodge" and its system was so mysteriously conducted that "the members themselves know nothing of the source from which its orders emanate; but that from the ability with which it was conducted it must have some very able directing power, and persons of decided ability and talent must be concerned in its organization." Ere we close we trust to establish what constitutes that directing power. Next in descent are the county or district lodges, composed of baronial delegates, who regulate the proceedings of the baronial lodges, and each baronial lodge is composed of a delegate from each parish lodge by which he is selected for the purpose. From this Baronial lodge the parish delegate takes the instructions and orders to the parochial lodge, from the committeeman or master of which, such instructions are again communicated by the parish Master or Secretary to the different members of the lodges. The Society is, in the first instance, introduced in a parish by the formation of a Committee, varying from twelve to twenty in number, to whom is confided the organization and extension of a Riband Lodge in that parish. Such parochial lodge must consist of at least thirty-six members before it is considered to be fully formed, but it may then extend to any practicable number, the individuals composing it being first approved, (if admitted,) and then sworn by the parochial Committee. No candidate is admitted until the most careful scrutiny is instituted to ascertain whether he is connected by blood or marriage with any Protestant; if he be, he is rejected, unless the connexion be so slight or remote as not to endanger by his admission the discovery of the secrets of the Society. The initiatory oath of secresy only, is then administered, and his final admission does not take place until the next meeting of the Committee, when, if there be no further objection made, he is received; if there be he is rejected. Should he pass this second ordeal he is then placed on his knees, in which position he takes the final oath, which is administered by the parish Master; and the signs and pass-words by which the members know each other are communicated to him. These are changed every quarter, and even more frequently if by any chance they have been discovered. They are of three kinds, lstly. The pass-words known to the members at large. 2dly. Those known only to the officers. And 3dly. The quarrelling and night-words. The following is an authentic sample:—

* The statements as to the constitution and objects of this Society are in part based on the evidence taken before the Committee of the House of Lords in 1839, and partly on documents in the writer's possession.

page 9

Q. Ireland is much distressed? A. Yes; for the want of her rights.

Q. What rights does she want? A. Equal share as England and Scotland.

Old Erin's son once was free,
May she obtain her liberty.

Night-word.—Q. The moon is pleasant? A. So is fine weather.

Quarrelling-word.Q. Do not offend me. A. You seem provoking.

Or thus:—

Q. Who comes there? A. The lamb of God without spot.

Q. Who comes there? A. A true loyal Defender.

Q. Who comes there? A One of the Sons of Liberty.

Q. Who comes there? A. A friend to God and my Brothers.

Q. How would you brighten a dark night? A. By flint, steel, powder and ball.

Q. How would you straighten a crooked stick? A. As well as I would brighten a dark night.

Q. How is that? A. With the help of God, and all good Christians.

These signs and pass-words emanate from the head lodge in Dublin, and are sent quarterly in a printed form to the baronial delegate, who writes out as many copies as he finds necessary for the parish Master or secretary, who again makes as many copies of the same as he thinks may be required for his branch of the Society, and they are then communicated to the members. The expenses of each lodge are defrayed by subscription, regulated in a great measure by local circumstances, and varying in amount; besides which there are occasional subscriptions to meet particular expenses and demands, and there are fines for breach of the rules, which go to the same purpose. There is also a fund for the purchase of arms, which are raffled for by the members. The arms thus purchased appear to be the property of the lodge, and are transferred from the custody of one member to another, the better to guard against their being discovered. In addition to this, they assemble at night in numbers varying from one hundred to four hundred or more, for the purpose of drill and instruction in military evolutions, embracing even the very latest improvements in that department.

The extent to which the Society has spread is incredible. It exists in every county in Ireland. It has its ramifications in the manufacturing districts of England and Scotland, and even in the Canadas and United States it has its corresponding branches and sympathizers. But the most extraordinary feature is the baneful influence it exercises on the social state of Ireland, there being no relation of life that is not affected by it. In the absence of more general or public duties being imposed upon its members, it is made available by individuals for the purpose of redressing or revenging their personal injuries or quarrels, and no man dare discharge a labourer or farm servant, however improper his conduct,—no landlord dare remove a defaulting tenant,—introduce a new plough or any agricultural improvement, or attempt in any way to ameliorate the condition of his tenantry or page 10 estate, by agrarian improvements, or the diffusion of religious or moral instruction, save as the guiding powers of the Association may will,—no witness dare give evidence,—no juror dare convict,—no elector dare vote as he might wish, unless in accordance with the views of this formidable Association. Disobedience or resistance is certain of punishment, too often of death. If the elector come up to the hustings to vote with his landlord against the popular (?) candidate, a Riband sign is made to him, and he gives a reluctant vote the other way. We have often witnessed its effect upon the frightened elector. We have also known it fail of its intended effect, and before the vote was well recorded we have seen the elector felled to the earth, and treated in the most savage manner. We have known many instances of vengeance being carried farther, and the shades of night have scarcely fallen ere the cottage of the victim has been in flames, or levelled to the ground, or, if the case be strongly marked, he is reserved for the denunciation of his priest from, the altar of the chapel on the following Sabbath, and it may be that he pays the penalty of his disobedience even with his life.

In the administration of the laws, its effects upon jurors and witnesses are equally visible. Intimidation operates upon each alike. Informations are sworn against a party for some heinous crime, the witnesses are visited by night and required to abandon the prosecution; if they refuse they are beaten, if they appear and give evidence they are waylaid and perhaps murdered on their return to their homes; and so frequently is this the case, it is an undoubted fact, that the Crown cannot reckon at any time on a conviction, unless the principal witnesses to sustain the case belong to the better classes, or be members of the police force. At times also such witnesses are met by perjury, and a host of individuals come forward to establish "alibis," or give other evidence tending to an acquittal. Thus, in every possible way, laws which were intended for the protection of the peaceable and the punishment of the evil-doer, are rendered inoperative.

Another singular feature of the Society is the rapidity with which its orders are transmitted and carried into execution. If the object be the plunder of arms, they are previously "set" by some one of the Society. Information is at once given to the Committeeman or Master of a lodge in some parish distant ten or twelve miles from the spot, and the duty being taken by the members in rotation, the number next for duty are warned to assemble at a certain time and place. Arms are there distributed by the Master to such as are not provided with them, and they receive their orders. The individual who has given the information then guides the strangers to the spot, and leaves them to commit the outrage. Whatever be the offence against the laws of the Society, the mode of dealing with it is the same. A Committee, consisting of the parish Masters, sits to try the offender, and decide upon the measure of punishment. If the man is to be beaten only, the party are selected and brought in the manner already stated. If the individual is to be shot, one or more, if necessary, is appointed to do the deed; but whoever is ordered must obey, or his own life is sure to be forfeited. So immediate, too, are the party in page 11 assembling and executing their orders, that it is almost impossible (if any one should by chance be so disposed) to give information to the intended victim. If intelligence or orders are to be made known to the members, they are communicated from one to the other by "threes," that is, each member is bound to communicate it forthwith to three other members, and those three each to other three, thus multiplying the messengers by three each time. As the circle extends, intelligence flies like magic, and by this means every member might be in possession of the same intelligence within a few hours from its first promulgation.

Thus it will be seen that, although this Society is formed of the rudest materials, its organization is almost perfect. It combines secresy with the greatest possible security against detection, there being little committed to writing; and although documents have been from time to time discovered, and the authorities have come upon the assembled lodge and seized both papers and parties, they have during a long lapse of years been able to ensure a conviction only in one or two eases. It may be supposed that in so numerous a body individuals must be found willing to give information to the Government of their proceedings. No doubt there have been such, but pecuniary temptation fails to induce parties who have given private information to come forward publicly as witnesses, it being a universal stipulation in such eases that, under no circumstances, should their names be divulged, as then the vengeance of the Society would be certain to overtake them even in a foreign land. Indeed, it is an undoubted fact that parties who have been suspected of being in communication with the Government have been murdered, or have suddenly and mysteriously disappeared, being compelled by the Society to quit the country altogether; and the system of terror which it enforces is such that many thousands are known to have joined it for the sole purpose of ensuring their personal safety.

Sobriety and temperance amongst its members were all that its secret movers desired to add to it, and that has been done. The founder of the Temperance movement, we are sure, never contemplated its application to politics or crime; but as it progressed it was evident to every reflecting mind that it must, without doubt, be made ancillary to such purposes. At first, the Roman Catholic priesthood either ridiculed the Temperance movement or gave it the most strenuous opposition. But as the benefits which it conferred upon the people became apparent, it found favour with them in defiance of the priesthood, and much social good was arising. Then, and not until then, did the Roman Catholic parochial clergy become enthusiastic converts to the system. They suddenly assumed its direction, and parochial Temperance Associations, with the priest as the president, were universally formed. From that hour its course was changed. Social amelioration was sacrificed to clerical power. The Temperance Clubs became debating societies for religion and politics. Musical bands were formed; banners procured; processions followed; and at last came monster meetings of the physical force of "regenerated and temperate Ireland."

page 12

It was on the 17th of March, 1840, that the first simultaneous display of Temperance physical force took place. At that time Lord Stanley's Irish Registration Bill was before Parliament; and as it struck at the root of the political power of the priests and demagogues, every effort was being made to get up a popular agitation against it. Several meetings consequently took place, and at one held in Dublin, on the 4th of April, 1840, the well-known Father Maguire pledged himself "to have three million of Teetotallers before three months expired, and he would unfurl the flag of Repeal," if Lord Stanley's Bill were carried.

From this time the members of the Temperance Society caught at every pretext for display. Marching in military array, exhibiting party flags, and playing party tunes, until they gradually merged into the Riband Association: and the pass-words of the United Societies, subsequently discovered, give clear evidence of the fact. The repeal agitation then commenced. The first public meeting for that purpose took place at Rathmines, near Dublin, on the 12th of July, 1840. It was followed by many others, at which (to use the language of Father Hughes of Clare Morris) "the people exhibited themselves in the determined attitude of millions of sober, cool, and United Irishmen." This repeal movement was checked for a time by the change of Government in 1841, and as agitation then ceased there was a visible and rapid improvement in the general prosperity of the country, and the return of the people to more settled habits of industry, there being a general belief that the laws would be vigorously administered and agitation and agitators discouraged. But after a time, the policy of Sir R. Peel, so fatal to Ireland, by which he repudiated the services of the loyal, or made those services a disqualification for Government countenance and support, whilst the agitators and disturbers of the public peace mere the objects of favour, had its natural effect. The loyal were disgusted and the traitors elated, and although from March, 1841, to March, 1843, only three repeal meetings took place, from the latter date to the ensuing October, nearly forty monster meetings were held, at all of which the Temperance Societies assembled in military array, and the political and treasonable designs of the controlling powers of the Riband Association—the Irish priests—were openly avowed. Indeed, the Rev. Thomas Maguire, in a letter of his extant, says, "I can state it as a fact, that there are not six parish priests in Ireland who could not rouse the people to resist the violent and monstrous encroachments of a bully and depopulating Tory confederacy;" and that "should this (Lord Stanley's) Bill pass, the troops must return to Ireland, then shall agitation strive with railroad speed, and then shall the people of Ireland join the moral force Chartists of England." Thus, in the hands of these Reverend agitators, that Temperance movement, which was hailed as a blessing to the country, was converted into an additional source of demoralization and distress.

The secret intelligence existing between the Romish priest and the Irish Ribandman was no longer concealed, and the Association progressed rapidly. Day by day the victim continued to be marked out, his death-warrant signed, and the executioner named to do the deed page 13 of death, sometimes for reward, at other times under the influence of intimidation. The order to assassinate is received, no question is asked as to the source from which the order emanates; the assassin is intuitively aware of the authority under which it is given, and it is invariably obeyed. There is no offence against the public weal or private rights which cannot thus be perpetrated with impunity. The assassin courts the bright sunshine and openly glories in his crime. He has no dread of apprehension; he knows that he will be sheltered by the peasantry, and that no reward, however great, can induce his betrayal. A striking instance of this will be found in the case of the late Lord Norbury, for the conviction of whose murderer a reward of several thousand pounds, and a life annuity of 200l. to the informer, was offered but never claimed, for money had lost all influence when weighed against the sense of terror. We have now before us a return of the rewards offered by the Lord-Lieutenant from June 3 to December 1, 1840, or by officers of the police, from January 1 to March 10, 1840, and thence to December 31, 1840, by Stipendiary Magistrates. The sum thus offered was 38,876l., of which only 492l. was claimed, and that chiefly in the more tranquil counties. The disturbed districts presented a different result. In Limerick, 3,380l. was offered and none claimed; in Tipperary 6,818l. was offered, and only 33l claimed.

No wonder then that witnesses come forward with great reluctance, and that when they do, unless protected by the Government, their lives are unsafe. This system of intimidation is, in fact, one of the greatest misfortunes of the country, and, coupled with the existing sympathy for crime, renders it very difficult to get evidence to convict the offender. Hence it is that the number of cases brought to justice bears but a small proportion to the number of crimes. This system of terror works upon the jurors as well as witnesses, and instances are of common occurrence in which it seems to paralyze the country, and men summoned upon the panel risk the infliction of heavy fines for non-attendance rather than serve, with the knowledge that the conscientious discharge of their duty is often the sentence of death upon themselves. Ireland, indeed, is not a country like England, where every man aids in the administration of justice; there, under the influence of the Riband Association, almost every Roman Catholic among the lower classes, and even some above them, avoid assisting, their sympathy being in favour of the criminal. Indeed, great endeavours have been made of late years to procure, by any means, the acquittal of persons charged with crime, by the subornation of false evidence, the suppression of truth, and the removal or intimidation of witnesses; and so effectually is this done, that the existing laws are in general paralyzed by the system of intimidation thus brought to bear upon the witnesses, who know that if they give honest testimony they must inevitably suffer. Perjury, of course, is a principal auxiliary. It prevails in all the courts in Ireland to an awful extent; so frequently does it present itself to notice, so prevalent is it among the lower classes, that the direct truth can scarcely ever be expected from any witness; and such is their ingenuity, that almost any case can be met, and page 14 witnesses can be at once procured to meet each changing feature; indeed, the facility of procuring witnesses is so great that the application of money is not at all necessary for the purpose. Well would it be that the effects of perjury were confined to the escape of the guilty, but there is no safety for him who in any way has become obnoxious; and cases do occur in which innocent persons have suffered in consequence of the perjury plausibly sustained against them. Much of this is done in pursuance of the denunciations, more with the connivance of the Roman Catholic priests. Nothing can occur in the country in respect of the Riband Association that they are not acquainted with. True it is they sometimes speak against it in the chapels, but "the people consider any such condemnation of the system as superficial, and merely intended to lull the suspicions of the Government, and the people say they do not believe the priests to be sincere therein No wonder this should be their belief when they see the same priests, it may be the next moment, avail themselves of its organization for political or religious (?) purposes, affording them peculiar facilities for a large assembly being got together at any time, it being merely for the officers of the Society to give their directions, and the members must attend, and "if the priests direct that there shall be a large meeting at any particular point, of course the officers of the Society will give their directions accordingly, and this is done without any special directions from the altar." *

It will be evident to any one that a system so totally demoralizing in its effects, so incompatible with national prosperity, and so evidently the parent of misery and crime, cannot exist except in a country where religion is corrupted, morality low, and ignorance almost universal; and such, alas! is the case amongst the Roman Catholic population of Ireland, for there ignorance and crime are encouraged, whilst religion and morality (save in such sort as the Roman Catholic Church inculcates them) are ecclesiastical sins. Nay, we have it on the authority of Dr. Murray, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, "that the Roman Catholic clergy have always been unwilling to allow their flocks to receive any moral and religious instruction except such as may be strictly in accordance with the views of the Romish Church." Acting on this principle it is that they forbid the reading of the Scriptures, and where the parents have still wished that they should read them (for, mark well, he admits they do wish it) "the clergy have used spiritual authority to prevent it, even to the refusal of the Sacrament to the parents"

When such are the recorded sentiments of so high a dignitary of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland, are we not justified in holding the Roman Catholic hierarchy and clergy responsible for the religious and moral education which they do permit, nay, Compel their flocks to receive? Have we not a right to know in what their approved instruction consists? Undoubtedly we have, and though they have

* All the statements made in this paragraph are on the authority of the evidence given before the "Lords' Committee on the Stare of Crime in Ireland," and are made almost in the words of the respective witnesses.

See his evidence before the Lords' Committee in 1839.

page 15 ever made, and will continue to make, every effort to disguise and conceal the tenets they inculcate, we still may know them by their bitter fruits. But the time is rapidly coming when they must be generally known, and it shall now be our duty to exhibit the Romish Church, not with the smooth and painted face which it has hitherto worn in Protestant England, but such as she may be found in Ireland; and when we have done so we feel confident that few can doubt that in the religion and, morality taught by the Irish Roman Catholic priests to an ignorant people, will be found the main cause of the demoralization and consequent distress which prevail in the Roman Catholic districts of the country, for we are happy to say the Protestant districts are exceptions. There scriptural education and true Christianity will be found, and if we contrast their state in point of education with the Roman Catholic provinces, the results are startling. We have before us the Report of the Committee of National Education for the year 1844, (the latest we can at the moment refer to,) and from it we learn that on the 30th of September of that year there were 3,153 schools in operation under the National system, attended by 387,935 children; 1,337 of which, attended by 128,244 children, were in Protestant Ulster, leaving the residue to be divided among the three Roman Catholic provinces: and thus it will be seen that, objectionable as the National system is to the Irish Protestants, on account of its rejection of scriptural instruction as an essential part of education, the number of schools in Ulster far exceeds, and the number of children in attendance is nearly double, that in any other province: and if the proportion otherwise receiving scriptural education were added, we have not the slightest doubt that the number both of schools and scholars there would far exceed the aggregate of the three Roman Catholic provinces.

Having made these preliminary observations we shall now proceed to expose the system of religious and moral education, for which we must hold the Irish Roman Catholic clergy responsible, and we shall develope the means by which the minds of their flocks are prepared for the discipline of the Riband Association, and a misled and ignorant people are worked upon in furtherance of Romish power, and Romish hostility to Protestantism in both Church and State.

It is one of the boasts of the Roman Catholic Church, that her doctrines are unchangeable—her power universal, and that in every quarter of the globe the former are taught, and the latter felt. She knows that the spread of her doctrine and the increase of her power must ever be greatest where the greatest extent of popular ignorance exists, for it is on the ignorance of the people that Romanism is enthroned. No wonder, then, that she restricts education and forbids the Scripture, whilst, through the agency of her priesthood and the confessional, she disseminates principles not only subversive, but destructive of the prosperity and happiness of the people, who are recklessly sacrificed to ecclesiastical aggrandizement.

We shall best ascertain the most demoralizing tenets of the Roman Catholic Church from the works of her eminent theologians, and by reference to them we shall trace the path to crime so characteristic of page 16 Romish Ireland. "Knowledge is power," and in the opinion of the Romish Church both are, or ought to be, its exclusive attributes, Hence popular ignorance is desirable; nay, if we believe the Church of Rome, it is the true path to heaven. "It is sufficient," (says Vincent Filliucius*) "for unlearned men to act rightly that they follow the opinion of a learned man. . . . Learned men may follow the less probable and less safe opinion, rejecting the more probable and more safe. The reason is, that a man acts prudently in believing those that are experienced in the art, submitting himself to the judgment of the wise. Neither is it necessary to be certain of acting rightly, for then it would not be lawful to follow the more probable but less safe opinion." Hence it will be seen that when the unlearned and illiterate Roman Catholic consults the "wise" priest, he mill act prudently and rightly even should he, under his direction, do that which his own breast must tell him is wrong.

If this doctrine be true, how happy must the Irish people be in their ignorance, for what says another theologian, George de Rhodes? "Wherever there is no knowledge of wickedness there is also of necessity no sin. It is sufficient to have at least a confused knowledge of the heinousness of a sin, without which knowledge there never would be a flagrant crime. For instance, one man hills another, believing it indeed to be wrong, but conceiving it to be nothing more than a trifling fault: such a man does not greatly sin, because it is a knowledge only which points out the wickedness or the grossness of it to the will. Therefore, criminality is only imputed according to the measure of knowledge; . . . . as a knowledge of the wickedness is necessary to constitute the sin, so is a full, clear knowledge and reflection necessary to constitute a heinous sin."

The obvious effect of this doctrine is, that the priest is made the keeper of the Romanist's conscience, that he may call evil good and good evil, and so reconcile the ignorant layman to any act conducive to his personal or ecclesiastical interest. But he is more than the keeper of his conscience, he is "in loco Dei;'"—in the place of Him of whom another theologian, John Marin, thus impiously expresses himself:—"God can speak equivocally for a righteous purpose, and a righteous purpose is often found;" and Peter Alagona says, "By the command of God it is lawful to kill an innocent person, to steal, or to commit fornication, because he is the Lord of life and death and all things, and it is due to him thus to fulfil his command." §

Well and truly has it been recorded by several high-minded Roman Catholics examined before the Lords' Committee on the state of crime

* Vincent Filliucius, Moralium Quæstionum de Christianis Officiis et Casibus Conscientiæ, ad formam cursÛs qui prælegi solet in Coil. Rom. Soc. Jes., Lugduni, 1633, Ursellis 1625. Ed. Coll. Sion., tom, ii., Tr. 21, c. 4, de Conscientiâ, n. 126-8.

George de Rhodes. Disputationum Theologiæ Scholasticæ, tomus prior, Lugduni 1671. De Actibus Humanis, Disp. 2, Quæst 2, sect. 1, § 2.

John Marin, Theologiæ Speculativæ et Moralis. Venetiis, 1720; tom. ii. Tr. 14; De Fide Divinâ, Disp. 5. sect. 1, n. 9.

§ Peter Algona, S. Thomæ Aquinatis, Summæ Theologiæ Compendium; Lucetiæ Parisiorum, 1620. Ex primâ Secundæ, Quæst. 94.

page 17 in Ireland, in 1839, that the lower class of Roman Catholics "take their opinions on both politics and religion very much from what the priests tell them" that "they are mere puppets in their hands," and that, in fact, "the Roman Catholic clergy have the complete control and power of the whole country." Their influence will admit of no control and their dicta of no question; "and instances are frequent where Roman Catholic gentlemen have been totally destroyed in consequence of having had the manliness to think for themselves." "The priests are deeply committed in every political agitation," in it "their activity is general." They admit of no countervailing influence, and though in former days the Protestant landlord and his Roman Catholic tenant had one common interest, yet in later times, (we may date from the fatal concession of 1829,) when the mask which concealed the real features of Romanism ceased to be morn in unhappy Ireland, "it was the object of the Roman Catholic priesthood to disunite the landlord and tenant for all purposes." That was chiefly effected by interference with the exercise of the elective franchise, and "not a rational doubt can exist but that the Roman Catholic tenantry would at all times vote with their landlords were it not for the interference of the priests."
The interference of these pastors poisons every relation of life, and blights the happiness of the domestic circle. But with the licentiousness of Romanism we shall not pollute our pages. Emmanuel Sa* declares, "if you have taken anything that you doubt to be your own, some say that you ought to restore it, others deny it, because in the doubt the condition of the possessor is the better." The son may rob his father after this manner, according to Stephen Facundez:—"An useful doubt arises in the case of a son who transacts at a distance his father's business, or always remains with him in the house to sell the goods of his father who is a merchant, whether he may take secretly as much of his father's property in return for his labour and industry, as his father would have given to an hired servant for the same labour and occupation, and that too in addition to his father's expense in maintaining him? The reply must be made in the affirmative." "Servants, also, are not bound to restore to their masters whatever they have taken beyond their wages and proper food, if that their masters have compelled them to fulfil duties over and above those for which they have agreed, for then they may take something more, (provided it be just) for the duty and service which they are compelled to discharge beyond their agreement," and Valerius Reginald says, "servants may not take the property of their masters secretly and by way of compensation in pretence that their wages are not equitable, unless it should in reality appear to be the case in the opinion of an experienced man," and "servants are excused both

* Aphorismi Confessariorum Coloniæ 1590. Coloniæ 1615, Ed. Coll. Sion. Aphorismi, verbo fur/urn, n. 7.

Stephen Fagundez, In quinque posteriora Præcepta Decalogi, Lugduni, 1640, (Ed. Coll. Sion) tom, ii., lib. vii., c. 3, n. 11, and Ibid. c. 11, n. 4.

Praxis Fori Pænitentialis, Lugduni, 1620. Coloniæ, 1622, Ed. Coll. Sion. tom, i., Praxis, lib. x., c. 18, n. 258; tom. ii. Muguntiæ, 1622, lib. xxv., c. 44, n. 555.

page 18 from sin and, restitution if they only take in equitable compensation; that is, when they are not furnished with such things necessary for food and clothing as are usual in other houses, and which ought to be provided for similar servants, they only take so much of their master's property as will compensate for such an injustice and no more. . . . Among the conditions of a lawful compensation is that the debt cannot be obtained by any other means." We next come to another point: Tamburin* asks, "May servants requite themselves clandestinely when their masters deny them a just remuneration? They certainly may if they refuse them equitable recompense, but only on the conditions described." And Bussenbaum and Lacroix declare, that "He does not steal who takes in just compensation if he cannot obtain what is due to him by any other means. For instance, if a servant cannot otherwise obtain his lawful wages, or is unjustly compelled to serve for an unjust remuneration;" and again, "an extremely poor man may steal what is necessary for the relief of his want, . . . and what any one may steal for himself he may also steal for another whose indigence is extreme;" and Lessius, Dicastelle, and Tamburin add, "that he who should prevent another from stealing what he thus required might be killed by such a poor man, as the thief who steals or forcibly retains valuable or at least necessary things, might be killed, according to what has been said before."
From the Romish tenets in respect of theft, we come to other crimes which strike at the root of the social system, the due administration of justice, and are destructive of all confidence between man and man,—equivocation, lying, perjury. The Church that asserts "God can speak equivocally for a righteous purpose," will not fail to claim the privilege for all within its fold, and so it does. Reginald says, "If there is a lawful cause for using equivocation in swearing, even although he to whom the oath is sworn should understand it in a sense different from that in which it is understood by him who swears it, and would thus be deceived, a mortal sin is not committed, and sometimes it does not amount even to one which is venial." From thence the question comes, "Whether it is lawful to conceal the truth by speaking ambiguously?" and it is answered thus: "It is lawful;" and the ambiguity by which the truth may be concealed without a falsehood is such, that what a man utters shall be true according to his own meaning, although it may be false according to the sense of his hearer and the common acceptation. The equivocation which is here spoken of is not only that which arises from the different signification of words, but that which happens when words are pronounced which are indeed false when uttered aside and taken separately, but are true with certain additions which are understood by the speaker, and, says

* Explicatio Decalogi. Lugduni, 1655; lib. viii., Trac. 2, c. 3, § 1, n. 3, et ibidem, de Compensat occult, c. 5, § 5, n. 1.

Theologia Moralis, nunc pluribus partibus aucta à R. P. Claudio Lacroix, Societatis Jesu. Colonise, 1757, tom, ii., lib. 3, Pars 1, Tr. 5, c. 1. Dub. n. 935, resol. 3; Ibid. c. 1, Quæst. 211, § 2, n. 950.

Valerius Reginald. Ante, tom, ii., lib. 18, c. 7, sect. 1, n. 90. Ibid. lib. 24, c. 1, sect. 4, n. 9. Ibid. n. 10.

page 19 Sanchez, * "he would not sin mortally who, without deception, but influenced by his reverence for an oath, and from scruple, should feign to swear, so that the by-standers and the notary might think that he did swear" Vincent Filliucius asks also, "Whether it is wrong to use equivocation in swearing? It must be premised that equivocation is nothing more than this, that the swearer understands the words in a sense different from that in which another person receives them. I answer, firstly, that it is not in itself a sin to use equivocation in swearing. This is the common doctrine, after Suarez. Secondly, that it may often be a sin to use equivocation, as when it is done without a reasonable cause, or in order to deceive, in which sense some holy fathers are to be understood. . . . Is it perjury or sin to equivocate in a just cause? It is not perjury; as, for instance, in the case of a man who has outwardly made a promise without the intention of promising. If he is asked whether he has promised, he may deny it, meaning that he has not promised with a binding promise, and thus he may swear; otherwise he might be compelled to pay a debt which he did not owe." Again, "if the equivocation be only mental is the oath lawful? I answer, first, that it is a probable opinion that it is not lawful to swear in such a case. . . . I answer, secondly, that it is more probable that it is lawful But Suarez is referred to, and here are his words: "It is not intrinsically wrong to use equivocation even in making oath, whence it is not always perjury." This is the sure and common opinion, . . . for to speak with such equivocation is not always a lie, neither is it therefore intrinsically wrong, and therefore to confirm it by an oath is neither perjury nor intrinsically a sin. The reason is that a lie is a declaration contrary to the sense of the speaker, for it is he who is bound to adapt his words to his own meaning, and he is not always bound to adapt them to the understanding of his hearers; but he who uses ambiguous words in a sense which is agreeable to his own meaning cannot be said to speak against his meaning, therefore he does not lie, he does not utter a lie; therefore thus to speak is not intrinsically wrong, for there can only be such wickedness in consequence of the lie. Whence it is inferred that to confirm such an expression with an oath is not perjury, because by that oath God is not called to witness a lie, since that is not a lie."

But this wholesale system of lying, equivocation, and perjury, must be discreetly used, and therefore it is asked by Vincent Filliucius, § "with what precaution is equivocation to be used? When we begin, for instance, to say 'I swear,' we must insert in a subdued tone the mental restriction 'that to-day,' and then continue aloud, 'I have not eaten such a thing;' or 'I swear,' then insert 'I say,' then conclude in the same loud voice, 'that I have not done this or that thing, 'for thus the whole speech is very true'"

* Thomas Sanchez, Opus Morale in Præcepta Decalogi. Venetiis, 1614. Pars 2, lib. 3, c. 7, n. 2.

Vincent Filliucius, ante; tom, ii., Trac. 25, c. 11, de Juram., n. 321—326.

Francis Suarez, Operis de Virtute et Statu Religionis. Lugduni, 1614. Lib. iii., de Juram. Præcept. et Peccat. eis cont. c. 9. Assert. 1, n. 2.

§ Ante, tom. ii. Tr. 25, c. 11, de Juram., n. 328.

page 20

When such are the tenets inculcated by the Romish Church, is it to be wondered that the ends of justice are so completely and so often frustrated, and so little reliance to be placed upon the good faith of the people? Most assuredly not; nor will it be a matter of surprise that Valerius Reginald says, * "if you are preparing to give false evidence against me by which I should receive sentence of death, and I have no other means of escape, it is lawful for me to kill you, since I should otherwise be killed myself." No wonder then that witnesses are murdered. But Romanism is no respecter of persons. The judge is equally marked out, for Fagundez says, "if a judge had been unjust and had proceeded (in trial) without adhering to the course of the law, then certainly the accused might defend himself by assaulting and even killing the judge, because in that case he cannot be called a judge; but cm unjust aggressor and a tyrant;" and this theologian further adds, "it is lawful for us to kill a man when, if we kill him not another will kill us." That this abominable doctrine prevails in Ireland is beyond a doubt, and is frequently illustrated in the practice of the Riband Association. It has even been publicly proclaimed by Mr. O'Connell, in his celebrated speech at a public dinner at Carlow in the year 1837, when he said "We have no course left us now but that which I have hitherto deprecated—the shedding of blood.—Blood must be shed. My reason for now saying that blood must be shed is, to prevent the shedding of blood, for if your enemies again get into power your blood will be shed."

We have shewn how the Romish Church teaches the son to rob the parent without the imputation of sin; it also teaches him the way to a harmless, nay, a commendable parricide. "A son," says Anthony Escobar, "either is obliged or is not obliged to support an Infidel father, who is in extreme necessity, if he endeavour to turn him from the faith. . . . . I conceive the latter opinion must be certainly maintained, for Catholic sons may accuse their parents of the crime of heresy, although they may know that their parents would be committed to the flames for it, as Tolet teaches. . . . They might also refuse them sustenance, although they should perish for want of food; and Fagundez adds, that they might even kill them with the moderation of a blameless defence, as enemies who violate the rights of human nature, if they forcibly compel their children to desert the faith: but still that they are not to force them into imprisonment so that they die of hunger."

Would to God that these were the worst specimens of the moral and religious doctrines of the Church of Rome; but when equivocation, lying, perjury, theft, parricide, are not only justified, but inculcated as meritorious under certain circumstances, need we be surprised at the crime of murder being placed on the same footing, whether it be perpetrated by the "wise" priest or the ignorant peasant? We shall proceed with our authorities.

* Ante, tom. ii. lib. 21, c. 5, n. 57.

Ante, tom. ii. lib. 8, c. 32, n. 5. Ibid., tom. i. lib. 5, c. 6, n. 11.

Anthony Escobar. Theologia Moralis. Lugduni, 1663, tom, iv., lib. 31, sect. 2, de Præcept. iv., probl. 5, n. 55, 56, 57.

page 21

Henry Henriquez teaches, * "if an adulterer, even although he should be an ecclesiastic, reflecting on the danger, has entered the house of an adulteress, and being attacked by her husband, kills his aggressor in the necessary defence of his life or limbs, he is not considered irregular." And Francis Amicus says, "it will be lawful for an ecclesiastic, or one of a religious order, to kill a calumniator who threatens to spread atrocious accusations against himself or his religion when other means of defence are wanting." And Airault discussing the same subject, says, "If you endeavour to ruin my reputation by false impeachment, before a prince, a judge, or men of distinguished rank, and I cannot by any means avert this injury of character unless I kill you secretly, may I lawfully do it? Bannez asserts that I may. ....The right of defence extends itself to everything which is necessary for ensuring protection from every injury. Still the calumniator should first be warned that he desist from his slander; and if he will not, he Should be killed, not openly on account of the scandal, but secretly."

Yes; the man who dares to raise his voice against either priest or Papacy may be murdered without the slightest sin attaching to the act, the only thing essential is, that it be not done "openly, on account of the scandal, but secretly." Thousands have fallen victims to this doctrine whose blood is still unavenged, so secretly has the deed been done; and thousands more must fall unless preserved by the timely exhaustion of the spring from which such evils flow.

We have now traced upwards, from the minor to the greater crimes, those tenets of Romanism which, however she may repudiate, are in full operation in Ireland, where they cannot but seriously affect the social system and the relations between man and man. We shall now enter upon the tenets of that Church, as they relate to the allegiance of the Roman Catholic clergy to the State, and of the people to a Protestant sovereign, and the modes by which they are brought into combined operation; from which it will be seen that thereby the field of blood is widely extended. It may be said by some that these are questions of politics totally apart from our subject; but without steady loyalty to the sovereign and respectful obedience to the laws of the land, no people can be prosperous or happy. Nay, more, we shall show that where the majority of the people and their clergy are of the Roman Catholic faith, whilst the institutions of the country are Protestant, the minority of the people Protestant, and the sovereign Protestant, those elements of social order cannot be found; in fact, their existence is incompatible with Romanism, whose allegiance, under such circumstances, is but a mask to be cast aside at the fitting moment. A country so situated must suffer perpetually from the efforts of the Church of Rome to bring what she calls "her erring

* Summæ TheoIogiæ Moralis. Venetiis. 1600. Tom. i., lib. 14, de Irregularitate c. 10, § 3.

CursÛs Theologici Duaci. 1642. Tom. v. Disp. 36, sect. 5, n. 118.

Airault, Propositions dictées an Collège de Clcremont à Paris de la Sociélé de ceux qui se disent Jésuites. Collation fait à la requêlo de l'Uuiversité du Paris. 1643, 1614. Paris, 1720. Cens. pp. 319, 320.

page 22 sons" within her power, and to prostrate the heretic sovereign at her feet; and however much loyalty may be professed we fearlessly assert that their real and only allegiance is given to the Sovereign Pontiff, whose commands at all times override the foreign state, whether it be Roman Catholic or heretic.
"The rebellion of an ecclesiastic," teaches Emanuel Sa, * "is not a crime of high treason, because he is not subject to the king." And Francis Tolet declares, "Since the spiritual power, for the better and more effectual fulfilment of its office, has thought Jit to separate certain classes of persons from the secular power, it is indeed rightly done; and the language of Saint Paul is not opposed to it, who means that "all men should be subject to the higher powers, but not to the secular powers," for he does not deny to spiritual ministers the power of exempting all as many as they shall choose from the secular power, whenever they may deem it expedient." And John De Dicastille writes, that "the clergy are exempt from lay power even in temporal things is thus proved. No man is directly subject to one who has not any jurisdiction over him, but the lay prince has no jurisdiction over clergy or ecclesiastics. It is proved, secondly, in this manner: He to whom another is subject can punish him when his authority seems useless without the exercise of restraint. But a secular prince cannot punish ecclesiastics, therefore ecclesiastics are not subject to lay princes. . . . The clergy are exempt from lay power, not only by human, civil, and canonical law, but also by the Divine law." And James Platel declares, § "since secular princes, without the privilege or consent of the sovereign Pontiff', have no power over the persons of the clergy, the latter cannot be punished by them." John Baptist Taberna says, "as to the directive power ecclesiastics are bound, indirectly, at least, by the common laws of the state in which they live, if their substance relate to them and does not contain anything unsuited to their state, to the sacred canons, or to the immunity of the Church. I have said as to the directive power; because secular princes upon their own authority, and without any privilege or consent ceded by the sovereign Pontiff, have no compulsive power over the clergy; but when the latter do anything wrong they ought to be punished by their own superiors." Cornelius Lapide declares, "The priestly kingdom of the Church is apparent, first in bishops and Episcopacy, but chiefly is it apparent in Papacy and in the sovereign Pontiff, a vast and ample power extending itself over the whole world, by which he commands kings, (whence suppliant princes prostrate themselves before him, and place their sceptres at his feet.) and can deprive of their dominions kings who have rebelled against the

* Ante, Aphorismi, verbo Clericus. Ed. Coloniæ, 1590.

Francis Tolet, Commentarii et Annotationes in Epis. B. Pauli, Apost. ad Romanos. Lugduni, 1603. Annot. 2 in cap. 13, Ep. ad Rom).

De Justitiâ et Jure cæterisque Virtutibus Cardinalibus. Antverpiæ, 1641. Lib. ii. Tr. 1, disp. 4. Dub. 8, de Judicio prout Actus Justitiæ, n. 126.

§ Synopsis CursÛs Tbeologici Duaci, 1679. Pars. 2, c. 5, sect. 5, n. 466.

Synopsis Tlieologiæ Practicæ, 1736. Tom. i., Tr. 4, c. 5.

Commentaria in Acta Apostolorum et in Epistolas Canonicas. Lugduni, 1627. In 1 Epis. S. Petri, c. ii., v. 9.

page 23 Church, as he often has deprived them." James Gretser* teaches, it is meet that "the clergy ought indeed to be subject to the higher powers, but to their own, and to those which are suited to their state, that is, the ecclesiastical powers. . . . . . The clergy should also be obedient to the laws of princes which they enact with the assent and concurrence of the ecclesiastical magistrate. And all men who are under the jurisdiction of the king should know that they will be punished by the king, if they commit a punishable offence. But the clergy do not belong to the king's jurisdiction. Therefore, the exhortation of the Synod has no reference to them."

Here, then, is an imperium in imperio, even though that State be of the Roman Catholic faith. What then are we to expect in a Protestant country? We fear, but little mercy at the hands of the Papacy. "Does a prince, by reason of his apostasy, lose his sovereignty over his subjects, so that they are no longer bound to obey him?" demands Peter Alagona. He answers, "No; because sovereignty and infidelity are not incompatible, and may subsist together; but the Church can deprive him of his sovereignty by a decree. Wherefore as soon as he is declared excommunicate on account of his apostasy from the faith his subjects are absolved from the oath of allegiance." "Hence the whole school of theologians and ecclesiastical lawyers (says Andrew Philopater) maintain (and it is a thing both certain and Matter of Faith) that every Christian prince, if he has manifestly departed from the Catholic religion, and has wished to turn others from it, is immediately divested of all power and dignity, whether of Divine or human right, and that, too, even before the sentence pronounced against him by the supreme pastor and judge; and that all his subjects are free from every obligation of the oath of allegiance which they had sworn to him as their lawful prince; and that they may and Must (if they have the power) drive such a man from the sovereignty of Christian men as an apostate, a heretic, and a deserter of Christ the Lord, and as an alien and enemy to his country, lest he corrupt others, and turn them from the faith by his example or command. This true, determined, and undoubted opinion of very learned men is perfectly confirmed, and agreeable to the apostolic doctrine."

Here, then, we see that the Roman Catholic has no option left him. He could not be loyal if he would, for "it is a thing both certain and matter of faith," that he "Must, if he have the power," drive the heretic prince from the throne, and should he not, if required by his Church so to do, he becomes excommunicate and subject to

* Opera Omnia. Defensio Romanorum Pontificum, tom. vii. lib. 1. Con. 3. p. 468. H. C. D. & E.

Sancti Thomæ Aquinatis Summæ Tlieologiæ Compendium. Lutetiæ Parisiorum, 1620. Ex Secundâ Secundæ, Quæst. 12.

Andrew Philopater. Elizabethæ Augliæ Reginæ, hæresim Calvinianam propugnantis sævissimum in Catholicos sui regni Edictum, quod in alios quoque Reipublicæ Christianæ prineipes contumelias continet indignissimas. Lugduni, 1593. Responsio ad Edictum, see. 2, n. 157, and n. 158. This Andrew Philopater is better known as the Jesuit Cresswell, in connexion with the plots for the murder of Queen Elizaboth.

page 24 all the penalties of such a state. But Romanism can be at times pliant and accommodating; thus Bellarmine teaches, * "the spiritual power does not blend itself with temporal affairs, but it suffers all things to proceed as they did before they were united, provided they are not opposed to any spiritual object, or are not necessary to obtain it. But if any such thing should occur the spiritual power may and must restrain the temporal power by every mean and expedient which may be considered necessary. It may change kingdoms and take them from one to transfer them to another as a spiritual prince, if it should be necessary for the salvation of souls. Christians may not tolerate an infidel or heretic king, if he endeavour to draw his subjects to his heresy or infidelity, but it is the province of the sovereign Pontiff to whom the care of religion has been intrusted to decide whether the king draws them to heresy or not. It is therefore for the Pontiff to decide whether the king must be deposed or not." "Therefore," writes Alphonso Salmeron, "if they undertake anything against the Church and the glory of Christ, he (the Pontiff) may deprive them of their empire and kingdom, or he may transfer their dominions to another prince, and absolve their subjects from their allegiance which they owe to them, and from the oath which they have sworn;" or even without any such cause, according to John Ozorius, for "when it is expedient for the spiritual welfare, the Pope can remove rulers, kings, and emperors, and can take away their dominions from wicked and disobedient kings, who impede the promulgation of the Gospel;" that is, as taught by the Papacy.
Now this has been done in the case of Ireland, even without the pretence of heresy, when one Pope deprived a native Irish sovereign of his kingdom, and transferred it to an English king, and another Pope confirmed the act; at a subsequent period, as far as bulls could do it, Henry VIII. and Elizabeth were deprived of the sovereignty of these realms. But Roman Catholic theologians are not unmindful of the position of the Romish Church in England, and Paul Layman teaches, § that "the Church does not receive but reproves those laws of secular princes, which affect by command or prohibition the possessions, and particularly the persons of ecclesiastics, although they should seem to conduce to the interest or protection of the Church. The reason is, that in such laws the direct jurisdiction of lay princes overrules the ecclesiastical, (for to legislate is an act of jurisdiction,) but such an usurpation of power is opposed to ecclesiastical immunity, and therefore an injury rather than a benefit is brought upon the Church;" and it is the opinion "of Azor and Suarez, of Bellarmine, in his Apology for the Kings of England, and of Adam Tanner, that the clergy are not directly and specially bound by the civil

* Disputationes de controversiis Christianæ Fidei adversùs hujus tcmporis Hæreticos. Ingolstadii, 1596, lib. v. c. 6, de Romano Pontifice, pp. 888, 891.

Commentarii in Evangelieam Historiam, et in Acta Apostolorum. Coloniæ Agrippinæ, 1612. Tom. iv. pars 3, Tr. iv. p. 410.

Concionum Joannis Ozorii. Societatis Jesu, de Sanctis Parisiis, 607. Tom. iii. Conc, in Cathedrâ, S. Petri, p. 70.

§ Theologia Moralis, Wirceburgi, 1748. Lib. i., Tr. 4, c, 13, n. 1.—Ibid, n. 6.

page 25 laws, either by virtue of the laws themselves, or of the civil legislative power; for they are entirety exempt from such authority by every hind of right:" and Bussenbaum and Lacroix go so far as to say, that, "to strike one of the clergy or to bring him before a secular tribunal is personal profanation. The Pope has at least an indirect jurisdiction over the whole world, even in temporal things, as far as may be necessary for the administration of spiritual affairs, as all the Catholics maintain, and, as Saurez proves, against the kings of England."

Probably it may be said that all these are obsolete doctrines, long since repudiated, or fallen into desuetude. But such is not the fact, they are in full force and exercise to the present day. No one now attempts to deny that "Dens' Theology" is the class-book of the Roman Catholic priesthood, and there we find these doctrines reiterated and enjoined in his treatise, "De Potestate Temporali," vol. ii., p. 164*, and subsequently. There are, alas! too many instances in the present day of these obnoxious doctrines being in force in Ireland, and too much evidence of priestly disrespect and disregard of the laws of the land to need our dwelling upon it. The claim of the Church to power over heretics cannot be altogether unnoticed. It is stated by Dens, vol. ii., p. 78, "that Protestants are heretics, and as such worse than Jews or Pagans; that they are made by baptism subject to the Church, and are thus bound by the laws of the Church (p. 289), and though the rites of the Jews may be tolerated, the rites of heretics are not to be tolerated because they are so bad that no truth or utility can thence be derived to the good of the Church (pp. 82, 83), and their heresy is to be extirpated unless there be some prudential reasons which may induce us to tolerate it," otherwise "it is the duty of the Roman Catholic Church to compel heretics by corporeal punishment to submit to the faith, but it is not always expedient that the Church should use this right. The punishments against heretics are confiscation of property, exile, imprisonment, and death," and these penalties are incurred by the fact of heresy without any judicial investigation, "the notoriety of the heresy is sufficient." Thus far the power of the Church is clearly defined, and Bellarmine tells us, that "it is not for monks or ecclesiastics to take away life, but it is customary to divest them (heretic sovereigns) of their royal dignity and authority if the case require it. The execution belongs to others and, as regards this kingdom, those others are at all times to be found in the Riband Association of Ireland.

Alas I how often in later years have these principles been acted upon by the Romish hierarchy and clergy in Ireland! How often have the altar-denunciations of the heretic, whether lay or clerical, been uttered! How often have we known their property to be confiscated, and they themselves driven into exile, immured in prisons, the victims of conspiracies, or sacrificed beneath the weapons of the assassin! No

* Ante; tom, ii., lib. 3, pars 1, Tr. 1, c. 2. Dub. 2, n. 48. Resol. 1.—Ibid, Tr. 4, c. 1. Dub. 2. Quæst. 178, § 4, n. 795.

Bellarmine. Tractatus de Potestate Summi Pontificis in Temporalibus adversùs Gulielmum Barclaium. Romæ, 1610. Operum, tom. vii., Truc. c. 7, p. 876. Some of Bellarmine's Works are amongst the Maynooth Studies.

page 26 wonder then that the fields of Ireland have been steeped with the blood of her Protestant inhabitants, and that the Roman Catholic peasantry have been so familiarized with scenes of rapine and bloodshed, disgraceful to a barbarous, much more to a civilized nation.

These are startling principles and tenets which we charge as held by the Church of Rome, and we have no doubt that both clergy and laity will disown them now as they have done before. We care not if they do. We care not if they say, these are the tenets of individuals, not the doctrines of the Church, and are all long since obsolete or condemned. We reply that they are in full force, and, in the words of Andrew Philopater, already quoted, "are both certain and a matter of faith," which Roman Catholics "may and must maintain." No one can now deny that on the 14th Sept., 1808, the Roman Catholic bishops in Ireland unanimously agreed that "Dens' Complete Body of Theology" was "the best work on the subject that could be republished as containing the most secure guidance for those ecclesiastics who could not have access to libraries," (for the works of those Roman Catholic theologians from which we have quoted are only to be had in libraries,) and it was not without reason that they thus adopted Dens as a substitute, for whoever will take the trouble to turn over the pages of his Theology mill find in almost every chapter ample quotations from, or reference to, the writers from whom we have quoted, and he evidently so refers to them as unquestioned authorities in matters of Romish faith.

We have shown that, in the eye of the Church of Rome, the greater the ignorance of the individual, the greater his freedom from sin, and the fitter instrument is he for the advancement of the Papal power; moulded as his every thought, and directed as his every act will be by the "learned" priest, the keeper of his conscience. No system can be better calculated to place an unlimited power in priestly hands, and we have shown on the testimony of Roman Catholics that "the complete control and power of the whole country is at their disposal, and that the people are mere puppets in their hands, taking their opinions on both religious and political matters very much from what the priests tell them." Here then are men who, if they would, might long ago have regenerated Ireland, and yet, what is their conduct? It has been proved over and over again, and is plain to the most superficial observer, "that all great excitement of the people in Ireland causes crime," and in particular "political agitation which acts upon its social state,"—"crime generally increasing with political agitation." Yet do the priests promote tranquillity? No. "They are at the head of every agitation in Ireland." The kindly relations of landlord and tenant are essential to the tranquillity of the country and the welfare of both: do the priests promote those kindly relations? No. "It is the object of the Roman Catholic priest to disunite the landlord and tenant for all purposes." Respect for the laws and the free exercise of even-handed justice are essential to the tranquillity of the country and the prosperity of the people: do the priests respect the one or promote the other? No, not they. The laws of a Protestant state do not bind Popish ecclesiastics, and are not page 27 respected by them. "There are many instances of a witness giving obnoxious information being denounced from the altar." They interfere in every case, and in open court have "thrown the (Riband) sign" to the witness on the table, which has sealed his lips and enabled the guilty culprit to escape. They will even go farther and get up false evidence to ruin an innocent person, if he in any way have become obnoxious to them. Of this there are many cases on record, but the case of Archibald Slye will sufficiently illustrate the statement. A priest named Walsh, in the county of Carlow, was killed by a fall from his horse at night, near the house of Slye, who was a respectable Protestant farmer. It was said by some that he was murdered by this man, who was tried on the charge and acquitted. The witnesses against him were placed in the dock charged with perjury, and some were convicted. "One of them made a full confession, naming the individuals by whom he was instigated to the crime, and stating that he was assured by his priests that a person giving false testimony against a Protestant was doing rather a praise-worthy than a criminal act. This man, on being arraigned, was about to plead guilty to the charge, when a priest under him looked up significantly at him, and he pleaded differently, was tried, and convicted. He then denied his confession, and subsequently admitted it, stating that he denied it at the instigation of others, one of whom was a priest."

There is another essential to the prosperity of a country—security to life and property. Is this promoted or even permitted by the Irish priesthood? Take an instance or two. Lords Norbury and Charleville were both denounced by the priest from the altar, not by name certainly, but by unmistakeable description, coupled with the observation that as long as they were in the country, they (the priests) could expect no good. The words were, in fact, considered a "sort of suggestion by the priest to do some mischief." The hint was taken, and shortly after Lord Norbury was assassinated. Another case was even stronger. "Mr. Brabazon was murdered in Westmeath. He was previously denounced from the altar, and so notorious was the cause and result, that a Roman Catholic farmer declared he could not acquit the priest of the parish of being concerned in some way with the transaction, inasmuch as he had spoken against him from the altar."

But we have had quite enough of these horrors, of the tenets of Romanism as taught in Ireland, and the ready instrument of her power and vengeance—the Riband Association, which, like the burning torrent from a volcano, pour over the land and destroy everything in their course. There is, in fact, a double process of demoralization going on in Ireland. Blood is shed without remorse, and perjury committed without compunction. Every oath tending to the ends of justice may be violated with impunity, whilst the oaths which bind together the members of that blood-stained instrument of Papal power—the Riband Association, can only be violated with the certain penalty of death, and it is in vain the Roman Catholic pledges himself by oath to support a Protestant Stale whilst he is bound by prior and paramount obligations to the Papal Church, and in obedience page 28 to its orders may be, and has been, often driven into rebellion against his lawful sovereign.

In Ireland, too, national prejudices and religious hostility tend to increase the evils of Popery. In England, Popery by its contact with Protestantism, or by policy, is mitigated; but in Ireland its contact with Protestantism but drams out its horrors; and should Romanism unfortunately triumph in Ireland, from that moment the glory of Great Britain must decline, and Irish misery and Irish distress be indigenous to England; on the other hand, if Protestantism increase, as a natural consequence the social blessings and prosperity that follow in its train, and are enjoyed in England, must become of native growth in Ireland. We ask, then, has England nothing to fear from Popery? Has she not got a footing in the land? Nay, is she not suffering at this moment from her presence? And is it not an undeniable fact that in all those districts in England where Romanism prevails there the greatest amount of demoralization and distress are to be found.

Yet such is the religion taught to millions of the Irish people, and what is the result? The population are in the lowest state of ignorance and superstition, in turn the dupes and the victims of designing men, both lay and ecclesiastical. Literature and science are almost unknown, industry is paralyzed, improvement of every kind is prohibited, life and property are lamentably insecure, and tranquillity is so alien to the land, that those who seek it search for it in another clime. The country has vast resources, but they remain altogether undeveloped; manufactures are scarcely known but in the Protestant districts of the North, where the productions of the country rival if they do not excel any in Europe. There is vast water power unemployed in every quarter of the country, so much so that we believe on about twelve miles of the Shannon, from Killaloe to Limerick, it exceeds the whole water power of England. Yet there it is, unprofitable and waste. The mineral resources are equally great: the beds of coal, chiefly of the anthracite, (now discovered to be the most valuable for manufacturing purposes,) are of vast extent, yet lying idle; industry is paralyzed, capital is either altogether absent or locked up, property is deteriorated in value, and life but little esteemed; plague, pestilence, and famine, in turns or together devastate the land; and every feeling of self-respect, self-reliance, and self-exertion has been sacrificed beneath the debasing and soul-destroying influence of Romanism.

What, then, are the remedies for this sad state of social demoralization and distress? Is it beyond the reach of any? Is the case hopeless? No: we believe there is much for hope, as the remedies are in our power, if we will but apply them slowly, steadily, systematically, simultaneously, and perseveringly. Such evils cannot be cured by superficial or temporary expedients. We must get to the root and eradicate it from the soil. We must have an immediate change of treatment and of policy. No direct means can put an end to the existing evils, they must be assailed through many breaches and with many weapons. The majesty of the law and its paramount power over priestly and other evil influence must be vindicated, and life and page 29 property must be made secure. Then capital will be diffused, the energy of her people will be brought into action, industry will have free scope, improvement will be unchecked, and the landlord and the tenant, the peer and the peasant, will be found once more united in the glorious labour of the regeneration of their country. It is by such means that the obstacles which have hitherto impeded her progress in social improvement can alone be removed. Ecclesiastical despotism, that greatest of all enemies to social enterprise and individual exertion, must be shaken off, and whatever can encourage labour by ensuring its due reward must be promoted. Employment, permanent employment, is an essential, and that can only be provided by private enterprise, without which no country can ever flourish. Let her agricultural interests and her agricultural improvement be subjects of special care, and in proportion as they prosper, manufactures will infallibly have birth and will increase, and prosper also. We must enter upon whatever will encourage industry, diffuse capital, bring the landlord and the occupier in friendly contact, and introduce the manufactures of the North to the other districts of the country; and these combined will be powerful auxiliaries to the regeneration of Ireland. True it is that in many cases the landlords have not discharged their social duties; in some few instances the will was wanting; whilst in others, borne down by a heavy accumulation of encumbrances upon the estate, which absorbed the greater part, in some the whole, of its revenue, they were utterly powerless for good; but by far the larger portion were always willing, and, were it not for priestly influence, would have zealously and faithfully discharged the duties, and mildly exercised the rights of property. By such men we have no doubt the means of improvement now opened to them will be generally turned to good account, and where this is the case, let those who, to the best of their ability, have discharged the landlords' duties, be cherished and sustained, but where the landlord has forgotten or neglected those duties, or where his embarrassments or other causes rendered him unable to discharge them let every facility be given to remove him from that post, and so make way for other, and better men, * who will join heart and hand with those who "have been tried in the balance and not found wanting," and together let them re-conquer the affections of the Irish people. The vast mass, who are superabundant and unemployed in many districts, must, for a time, impede their efforts, but that portion which cannot be advantageously employed in reproductive labour must be provided for, and that speedily, by an extensive system of emigration, so as to relieve the pressure upon those who remain, as quickly as circumstances will admit.

It has long been the custom to smile at the pedantry and folly of our first King James, but with all his royal absurdities we must allow that he adopted one of the most rational courses, so far as human means were concerned, for the amelioration of Ireland; and his plantation of Ulster remains to this day a growing and imperishable

* Since this was written "The Encumbered Estates Act" passed, under which this principle is now being carried out.

page 30 monument of his social wisdom, a beacon-light which ought to, but did not, guide subsequent sovereigns and statesmen. They have, to the present day, despised the measures of that king,—they have disregarded that light,—they have successively adopted another course, and have successively been wrecked on the stormy sea of Irish politics, whilst the country of their experiments has been their reproach as well as their punishment.

In every way have they varied from the course of James and his wise minister, Cecil, but in none more so than their religious policy, and by none more so than by the legislators of the last twenty years. James encouraged the spread of the Protestant faith in Ireland, but they have discouraged, nay laboured to extinguish it, in order to conciliate Popery. James, whilst he disclaimed and condemned all idea of religious coercion, discountenanced Romanism in every way; but they have upheld, encouraged, promoted, and rewarded it, so much so that Popish principles and the patrons of them were, and still are, the favoured and exclusive objects of official countenance, whilst Protestant principles and Protestant loyalty are only recognised in the hour of need and danger. It was in 1829 that the Roman Catholic disabilities were removed, and the bulwarks of Protestantism torn down. It was then that Popery and quasi-liberal Protestantism concluded their unholy league; it was then that "the false prophets in sheep's clothing" entered into the fold, and our Protestant Church, our Protestant municipalities, our scriptural education, and our social and political welfare, were, as far as the Executive could do so, sacrificed, not for the amelioration of the Irish people, but for the aggrandizement of the Romish Church.

Now, what have been the fruits of this fatal policy? The events of the last twenty years must long stand prominently forward in the history of this country as a warning to future statesmen. Our blessed Saviour tells us, "Every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, but a corrupt tree evil fruit;" and let us ask, what have been the fruits of this sacrifice to Belial? The increase of irreligion and ignorance, and the perpetuation of a career of rapine, bloodshed, and murder. Every social tie has been severed, and the last links of better feeling that held man and man together have been everywhere rudely broken. Political agitation has been fostered; a crusade has been preached against Protestant doctrines, Protestant principles, Protestant property and Protestant lives, and their fearless advocates and defenders have been repudiated and trampled upon, or, in many cases, driven into voluntary exile by the so-called Protestant Ministers of this Protestant State, whilst Popery is sheltered beneath their wings, and from thence looks exultingly around on the wreck she has made. What a contrast does the scene present to the pictures of prosperity and happiness which were promised as the results of this fatal policy I We behold misery unparalleled, aggravated by rebellion scarce crushed; whilst plague, pestilence, and famine, year after year devastate the land, rendering what might be the seat of happy homes and smiling prosperity, a desert, houseless, lifeless waste.

But what else could be expected from any attempted union between page 31 Protestantism and Popery for political ends? For religious purposes they never can combine. We believe that in the history of Europe there is but one other instance on record, and that instance ought to have been a warning to our erring and guilty statesmen. Bohemia was the cradle of the Reformation on the Continent of Europe, and it was there that, led on by the martyrs Huss and Jerome of Prague, the blow was first successfully struck at Papal power. It was there that the Reformed doctrines were so widely, so rapidly diffused, that when the Reformers were driven to arms in their defence, the Emperor Sigismund with a vast army was unable to stand before them, and when the Papacy took the field, a further triumph was obtained over Cardinal Julien at the head of an army of 100,000 men. But in after-times, when the Protestant population of Bohemia revolted against their sovereign, and invited the Elector Palatinate to accept their throne, their treason was severely punished, though not suppressed. This treason led to the subsequent, league of Bohemia, the Palatinate, and other German States with France and Sweden against the House of Austria, in the affairs of which the French openly sought to interfere, and subsequently, in the person of Louis XIV., even aimed at the Imperial sceptre. The French availed themselves of Protestant aid during the wars that followed, but on the conclusion of peace, the Protestants were sacrificed by their Roman Catholic ally. From the first exhibition of the treason of the Bohemians, their religious privileges were rapidly torn from them, until at length the very name of Protestantism was almost extinguished in a country in which, not long before, three-fourths of the population professed that faith. The most Christian King Louis XIV. repaid these Protestant allies of his country with the most determined hostility to French Protestantism. He revoked the Edict of Nantes, refused toleration to his Protestant subjects, banished them from France, and then marched his armies into the states of his recent allies, where the atrocities perpetrated upon the inhabitants were generally viewed as the fruits of this alliance, and brought the very name of Protestant into disfavour. The exploits of the French on that occasion have branded them with eternal disgrace. Rapine, murder, and the flames were the fate of young and old, whilst high and noble ladies, as well as the lowly peasants were alike abandoned to the indiscriminate, brutal, and uncontrolled lust of the French soldiers; so complete was the ruin, that Protestantism has since been almost extinct in the Palatinate. The results are well described by a modern historian: "Every possible favour was shown to the Catholic, while simple justice was denied to the Protestant, who was held in almost the same estimation as the Jew, to whom the honourable offices of the State and the magistracy were inaccessible, and who was ground to the earth by harassing and vexatious regulations. The consequent emigration of many thousands to other parts of Germany, and of a still greater number to the United States of America, did not add much to the prosperity of the Reformation in this part of Germany. Such is a forcible illustration of the benefits which that Reformation derived from its friendly league with Catholic France."

page 32

How applicable is this passage to the results arising from the modern union of our Protestant rulers with the apostate Church in Ireland! There, too, the same policy has been since pursued, and the same results, in some respects, have followed; and it is a singular circumstance, that many thousands of these expatriated Germans of the Palatinate took refuge in the south and west of Ireland, where their descendants continue to the present day, and are known by the name of "Palatines," maintaining there the Protestant faith, and living as patterns of loyalty, industry, and happiness, to the Romish population around them, until latterly, when the same policy that expatriated their ancestors two hundred years ago is now rapidly driving them from the country of their adoption to another land.

But in the steps to regenerate Ireland there is, above all, "one thing needful,"—Popery must not be any longer encouraged, but met with "the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God." It is in vain that the impediments to social improvement are removed, and it is in vain we look for such improvement unless we lay for its basis religious instruction. Whilst Popery is fostered as it has been, demoralization and distress must exist, and all remedial measures be vain. It is in Ireland the battle of Protestantism is to be fought. It is there, too, the death blow must be dealt to Popery, both religious and political. It is there that Popery has been most awake and rampant; but, thank God, the Irish Protestant clergy are vigilant, energetic, and fearless. To them it has been no cause of dismay that the State has abandoned the scriptural instruction of the people, and surrendered them to the religious and moral training of the Irish priests, as embodied in the Romish theologians from whose works we have been quoting. The Protestant clergy of Ireland have not overlooked what the priests have seen with dismay, that the Irish Roman Catholics panted for scriptural education, and would have it in defiance of the priests and the treason of the Government. In the year 1831 there were no less than 372,000 children of all denominations receiving scriptural education at the hands of the several religious associations in Ireland, and of that number not less than 175,000 were Roman Catholics, and should not this have been a strong inducement to have made a system so well received one of National Education? If that had been done (and the country had every right to expect it) we should in time have seen scriptural education penetrate into the most remote districts of Ireland, spreading its benign and peaceable influence over every relation of life, and diffusing its glorious light where all now is night.

But a different course was adopted: religious education was sacrificed to the Moloch of Popery, and the National System of Education without religion was supported by liberal grants from the State, and forced upon the people. Yet, at the end of twelve years from its origin, the number of children receiving education without morality, and doctrine without religion, barely exceed the number who were receiving religious instruction on the rejected system. But, however the State may have deserted its duty and betrayed the outposts of Protestantism to the enemy, the Irish Protestant clergy and the Irish Protestants were true to theirs. The Church Education Society was immediately page 33 formed for providing scriptural education to the Irish; and, with even the limited means supplied by private benevolence, it had, in the year 1844, 1,812 schools in operation, educating 104,968 children, of whom 32,834 were Roman Catholics.

We care not what may be the opinions of the priests, or their educational supporters, as to religious education; we have daily evidence of those of the poor ignorant people themselves. Three hundred years ago their prayer to England was, that there should be some learned Irishmen brought up, not being infected with the poison of the Bishop of Rome, who should be sent to preach the Word of God in Ireland. Their prayer is still the same, but the means are totally inadequate to the necessity of the case. Let the numbers and efficiency of the Irish Church be increased in every way. Let the zealous, hardworking minister of the Gospel be encouraged, and let him remember that his labours should be missionary, that all within his parish should be his peculiar care, and that, although they may be without the fold, they are still his sheep, though under another name, and professing a different faith. Let him remember that they are within his mission, and that it is his bounden duty to preach to those stray sheep the "glad tidings of salvation," and "so bring them back to the Shepherd and Bishop of their souls." In many parts of Ireland there is no obstacle to the zealous and faithful discharge of these duties, save the discountenance shown to it by a Protestant Government, and the inadequacy of the means to the wants and wishes of the people themselves. Yes, in the English districts more aid is, we repeat it, needed than the Established Church with her untiring zeal can supply. In defiance of Popery and the religious treason of the rulers of this Protestant land, the Protestant faith is silently and steadily increasing. During the recent visitations of pestilence and famine, the Protestant clergyman, regardless of priestly denunciations, acted the good Samaritan to the suffering Romanist, who failed not to contrast his conduct and language with that of the priest, and the Protestant clergy did not lose by the comparison. Their worth, their utility, and their Christian charity were appreciated, and in the breasts of the people there is now a growing desire to know more of men whom, though reviled, persecuted, and contemned by them in former times, they found by their side, in the midst of pestilence and famine, dispensing food to the fainting body and comfort to the departing spirit.

The Roman Catholic clergy know and feel that their influence is shaken, if not lost, and that among their nominal flock many an anxious wish and look are given to the clergy of another faith; they know, too, that if this moment be seized upon by Protestantism, and religious instruction imparted, the reign of Popery in Ireland must come to a close; and demoralization and distress be succeeded by social happiness and national prosperity. We say, then, the time is come, and it is for Protestant England to guide her erring but repentant sister to the way of truth. Her past policy must be abandoned. She has tried for three hundred years to promulgate the Reformed faith in Ireland by means of the universal adoption of the English page 34 tongue, and she has failed. In one half of Ireland the native tongue alone is spoken, or English at best so imperfectly understood as to be useless as a means of religious instruction. There the people would hear the Word of God preached in their native tongue, as it was in the days of their great Apostle, St. Patrick. When that is once more universally the case then will primitive Christianity (identical with Protestantism of the present day) be restored to her, and then peace and plenty, happiness and prosperity, will once more bless the land. A few short years, and a few humble individuals have already shown how much may be done in this way. To several of the remote districts of the south and west of Ireland, ministers acquainted with the Irish tongue have found their way, and commenced their humble missionary labours, and what has been the result? At the first sound of the Gospel in their native tongue, the people have fled from their faithless shepherds, and at strangers' hands have joyfully received the cup of life, and now these humble converts on the Sabbath-day repair in hundreds to the modest temple which they have raised, from which the sound of the church-going bell invites them to the worship of their Maker, there to hear the simple truths of the Gospel preached to them in their native tongue. This has not been done without contests with the priests, whose craft was endangered. Altar-denunciations and brute-force have alike been tried to drive the missionaries from the scene of their labours, and the people from the word of life, but in vain. The Irish church is filled, whilst the Romish chapel is deserted.

But the individuals thus competent by a knowledge of the Irish language to carry on this work are few indeed contrasted with the want. This missionary labour is new to the Irish Church, and altogether unprovided for by the State. A little has been done by individual exertions to meet the want. Some Irish scholarships have been lately founded in the University of Dublin for the cultivation of a knowledge of the Irish language there, and a public and collegiate school has been founded at Stackallan in the county of Meath, for the purpose of training up a body of clergy for the Irish Mission. This institution is still in its infancy, and years must elapse before the labours of those trained within its walls can be entered upon; but even were it in full operation to-morrow, it would be totally inadequate to meet the wants of the people.

Ample provision must, therefore, be made for training up a host of men qualified for the Christian Mission among the native Irish, to whom they may go and preach the Gospel of Christ, and for whom they may perform the ministerial office, and discharge their pastoral duties in the language of the people. Every facility for the education of such men should be afforded, every encouragement given to those who may be disposed to enter on the labours of such a Mission. Ample means for the religious and moral education of the people through the native tongue should also be supplied; plant the standard of the faith, erect the humble house of prayer, and many a straggling sheep will seek its shelter and there abide.

In the foregoing observations we have painted the state of Papal page 35 Ireland, and the miseries which Romanism has brought upon it; and, ere we close, we would ask, Are not these, too, sometimes reflected upon England? Do we not occasionally witness extensive outbreaks in the manufacturing districts, and then feel that probably one-half of the demoralization and misery by which they have been aggravated, if not caused, is of Irish growth? Do we not see increasing pauperism in the agricultural districts of England, in part arising from a vast immigration of Irish labour? Do we not also see the dreaded power of the Papacy, the parent of all these evils, rapidly spreading over the land? And can Englishmen hesitate for a moment in adopting such a course as, by regenerating Ireland, cannot fail to eradicate them? We have hitherto seen the Irish people prostrated under the debasing influence of Romanism, from the hour that Henry II. as the Papal champion, forced it upon them, but we must recollect that a brighter side of the picture is yet to be seen. Nature has been lavish of her bounty upon the Emerald Isle. It possesses a most fertile soil, a genial climate, and vast internal resources; whilst her people are endowed with latent talent and high intellect, which we see occasionally bursting the chains that bind them down, astonishing and delighting us by their brilliancy, and shedding an honourable lustre on the sister country. We must recollect, too, what Ireland once was, when true Christianity flourished there, and literature and science flowed from thence all over Europe. We should also recollect that it was from Irish missionaries England first received the words of everlasting life; and a sense of gratitude for this, the greatest of all blessings, should, and we doubt not will, weigh with the English people to repay that debt. The contrast between ancient and modern Ireland is great indeed, and can only be owing to some fatal error of her English rulers—the neglect, of religion in the pursuit of power, and the enslavement of the people to the Romish faith. Yes, this is the blot upon the Saxon rule in Ireland. Millions' have been spent in the conversion of the heathen in distant lands, whilst Ireland is altogether neglected, or even worse, the mass of Protestantism that remained has, by a fold compromise with Popery, been nearly sacrificed to obtain an imaginary peace with Rome. England, however, must know that Irish Protestantism is her greatest bulwark; and instead of compromising with the foe, she should remember, that, as long as Popery is upheld, Ireland cannot prosper. Let Protestant England, therefore, now strike at the root of this evil; let her be the bearer of God's message to her Irish fellow-subjects; let her do to Ireland as she does so liberally to heathen lands, and instead of that country being one of the foulest stains upon the nation, and Us most vulnerable point to the foe, it will soon become her impregnable bulwark and the brightest jewel in the British Crown.

Macintosh, Printer, Great New-street, London.