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

Orangeism and its Slanderers

page break

Orangeism and its Slanderers.

Mr. Chairman.—I shall have to draw a little on your patience and attention while dealing with the subject now before us. All of us, I believe, will admit its importance; and if we are able to set out the truth concerning the Institution in whose welfare we are interested, our time this evening will not be unprofitably spent, and my labor in preparing this lecture for the public will be amply rewarded.

Let us clearly understand, then, what I have to do. I propose to discourse to you on "Orangeism and its Slanderers." I have to deal with a system, and with those who oppose it. I shall look at its origin and principles—its aims and spirit, and then consider the objections of those who either oppose it, or avow that they are its enemies. There are four things then, which we shall regard as the heads of the following remarks:—First, the origin of this system; secondly, its principles; thirdly, the objections to it; and, fourthly, we shall conclude with an appeal to all Orangemen who wish well to their Institution, who love it, who honor it, who are truly embued with its spirit, who heartily concur in its aim, and who wish to commend it to the outside public, as to what is their duty in their special circumstances.

To proceed, then, we begin with the origin of "Orangeism." In order to trace out this we must go back to the England of 1688. At that time there was a King upon the throne whose name is held, by all true-hearted Britions, in perpetual abhorrence. He was James II. It is almost enough to say of this man that he was "one of the Stuarts," and perhaps the worst of the detestable line. But there is so much to be said of him, that even an outline of his baseness, intrigues, and unfaithful undoings of the Constitution which he had sworn to uphold and protect, would fill many volumes. When as yet he was only the Duke of York, and his brother Charles was on the throne, England saw what was the struggle which was approaching. The "Exclusion Bill," by which the Commons sought, in a desperate manner, to avoid the miseries most surely to be anticipated from the ascent of a Romish King to the throne, was the proof how the people of England were preparing for the struggle. The religion of Charles was the worthless profession of a man whose highest virtue was hypocrisy. His morality was so low that his profession of any religion at all was a reproach rather than an honor; and his Court and his policy were alike any dishonor to any church which would claim him as a member. Fast and loose he played with everything. A Papist at heart, he professed to be a Protestant only to year the crown; and up to the last and especially at the last, he revealed the hollowness and falseness of his character. You all know the scandalous circumstances death-bed scene of this nefarious hypocrite: how, on the night before the fatal stroke—it was a Sunday night—he sat in his palace toying with his three titled mistresses, while the galleries were crowded with gamblers and black-legs; how, the next day, while he lay on his bed, a dying man, his favorite mistress hung over him with the fondness and familiarity of a wife; how, when the Protestant Bishops urged him to repentance and preparation for his end, the King said nothing how, when they offered him the sacrament, in testimony that he died in the communion of the Protestant Church, the King refused; how, on the suggestion of his titled concubine, a Romish priest was sent for, to reconcile the King to the Romish Church; how James, who was just about to succeed to the throne, secretly admitted the priest that the King might be shriven and made safe for purgatory; and how, thus, when the nation of England had been mocked and deceived, the so-called "Head of the Protestant Church," page 2 and defender of the liberties of a Protestant people betrayed his country, and went down to the grave with a lie in his right hand! You know all this; and such flagrant immorality, and treacherous subserviency to the will of a Church which is the natural enemy of all England's liberties, were enough to rouse every patriotic heart throughout the kingdom, and join heart to heart for the coming struggle.

Charles died, and James immediately was proclaimed the King. The suddenness of the event gave James the advantage of getting to the throne without being hampered by those special securities for the civil and religious liberties of the kingdom, about which the Commons had so long been anxious. Within a quarter of an hour after his brother's decease, James, as King, presided at a meeting of the Privy Council. He was now a professed Papist; had been a Papist for several years; and had only a few days ago assisted, in the most scandalous manner, with a concubine and a priest, to make his brother, the dying King, a Papist too. Yet, when he now was at the head of affairs—when the summit of his ambition had now been reached—when all dangers as to his succession were now passed—he pretended so well to be fair and faithful, that he deceived the councillors who heard his first words and promises as King; for, while he promised to "maintain the established Government, both in Church and State; to defend the laws and Church of England; and to support the just liberties of all in the kingdom," not very long after he attempted to explain his promises away, and to apologise for his language as having been used "without due consideration!"

A reign thus commenced—commenced in falsehood and deceit—commenced as if some Jesuit priest had suggested the course—was not long in yielding some of its legitimate fruit. Feeling that he had triumphed over those who had sought his exclusion from the throne because of his religion—feeling that he had now the power to crush his enemies—he no longer observed the modesty and reserve with which he had practised his Romish worship; and, therefore, while, as a Prince, he had had his private chapel, where he performed his adorations out of the sight of men, he now, as a King and as the head of the Protestant Church of England, went in state to his Romish oratory, threw open its doors to invite the attention of visitors to the palace, and required his ministers to worship with him! Not only this, but, in an ostentatious manner, James resolved on making "Popery" the religion of the court. When Lent came he had a pulpit erected in one of the chief rooms of the palace, where Popish divines preached their sermons about holy fasting; and then, when Passion week came. James did defiance to all the kingdom, and publicly made false his promises to "maintain the established religion," by going in all the grandeur and pomp of royalty to hear mass from a priest, just as his predecessors had gone to Protestant services! And not only this: the designs of James were soon made apparent in another most convincing proof of his duplicity; for, in view of the ceremony of his coronation, he so altered and abridged the usual ritual that his plan to release himself, at some future time from troublesome obligations, could scarcely be doubted by a watchful people; for example, the Communion service was not read at the ceremony; nor was a copy of the bible presented to him, with the usual exhortation, that he should study it as the rule of both faith and practice, and as the source of the rights and liberties of England!

But other movements, still more significant, and of a different kind, speedily revealed to the real friends of the nation, that their fears about the succession of a Popish King were too soon to be realized. Like all tyrants and despots James had an unconquerable love of arbitrary power, and an instinctive hatred of constitutional rule. He could not bear to be dependent upon his people. He had a horror of the discussions and inquiries and votes of the Commons. He therefore commenced, from the very outset of his reign, a violent stuggle for kingly power. Basely he accepted the gold of Louis, the King of France, to help him to degrade his own Parliament and people. That his Commons should be corrupted by French money was quite acceptable to him. He wanted to have the control of the purse. He wanted to have power to raise money without the will of Parliament. He wanted to have unlimited power to dispense with the laws, that his illegal objects might be accomplished under the protection of law. And by dint of unbending pursuit of his scheme he attained to a marvellous degree of success. The famous, or rather infamous, Jeffries, was his right hand man; and other traitors (who are never far off when baseness is purpled and seated upon the throne) in great numbers, encouraged the king to pursue hie course of page 3 ruining the laws and liberties which he had sworn to defend. His first success lay in the first election of a new House of Commons. By the most disgraceful management and corruption a House was elected which removed all anxiety from the mind of the King. He spoke of it as "exactly the sort of Home which he would himself have appointed" It was servile enough, indeed, at its meeting; but even that servile House could not help protesting against the King's most arbitrary will, in dispensing with the laws, violating the constitution in raising money without authority, and in setting aside those religious safeguards which the nation had approved of to protect the constitution of both Church and State. Even the House of Lords was more noble and manly than the House of Commons, in condemning the course which the King had followed; it was impossible, thought the patriots, to submit to such despotic power; by such encroachments the liberties of England were not secure for a day; and, therefore, in rage and disappointment, James sought his refuge in the dissolution of the Parliament.

This check to the progress of tyranny and Popery on the part of the King did not come too soon. The exuberant loyalty which had greeted him on the day of his ascension to the throne was already well nigh spent. The nation had been disposed to hope for the best. Although the dark background of the bloody reign of the Popish Mary was still quite manifest in the nation's remembrance, it was willing to hope that the Popish James would respect the oath and promises which he had given; and, therefore, while there were many who feared that the worst would happen, and that the usual curse of priests and Popery would soon be experienced in oppressions throughout the kingdom, those "fearers of evil" were not popular at first, and they were obliged to keep quietly their unpopular views. But the worst that was feared soon began to be realised. The best judges of the future were those who most faithfully had studied the past. The miserable Tories who had set themselves to worship the rising sun, when James was about to ascend the throne—the equally miserable trimmers who thought that they could be equally loyal to a Romish and a Protestant King—and the still more senseless crowd, who are always in favor of something new, and whose opinions upon questions in which principle is involved, are much like the changing of fickle wind, were found to have trusted to a broken reed; they proved their ignorance of what Popery is; and they realised their folly when they saw themselves deceived; but the real patriots were those who had judged that a Popish King could not be bound by oaths, and that treason and treachery were as natural to him, in reference to everything which a Protestant nation would esteem as liberty, as that a tiger or a lion should love the taste of blood! What was the fact? Why, that this Popish James was no sooner on the throne than he set himself deliberately to undermine and destroy the civil and religious liberties of the people. Not only did he set up the mass in the palace, and make priests and confessors his advisers and keepers; but he sent to Rome an envoy to make his humble submission to the Pope, and to "pave the way for the re-admission of heretical England to the Romish Church." He did this immediately after he had solemnly sworn to protect the establishment of the Protestant Church! Then he claimed to be able to raise money for the Government, independently of the will and vote of his Parliament. Then he raised an army and appointed Papists to the chief command. Then he remodelled corporations, so that they might be more subservient to his plans and purposes. Then he sought to repeal the "Habeas Corpus Act"—one of the grandest protections of our civil freedom. The Courts of Justice he corrupted or overawed, so that legal questions and criminal prosecutions might be decided in his favor. Then he suspended the Test Act, by which it was required that holders of important offices should be members of the Protestant Church; and this suspension was made that those important offices might be conferred upon favorites of the Romish Church. Then, in defiance of all law most expressly laid down, he appointed a Court of Ecclesiastical Commission, and put the infamous Jeffries at its head, for the trial of the clergy who might dare to show their Protestant zeal against the treason which was publicly developing; and it is one of the glories of our country, at that time, that that infamous and illegal court got something to do in the trial of Bishops and other individuals, who dared to speak out on behalf of the truth, and in defence of the Church of Protestant England!

And, truly, it was necessary that some should thus be loyal to God and to his truth. For it was the King's purpose, by a steady undermining of the page 4 Protestant Establishment, and by unprincipled inroads upon the civil constitution, to make himself an irresponsible King, and to re-establish the Romish Church as the Church of the Kingdom. Already he had appointed some priests of Rome to some Protestant benefices. Already he had shown that the path to preferment was by apostacy to Romanism. Already he had shown that the high offices of state were the reward of zeal for the Romish religion. In Scotland, in Ireland, and in England the same policy was pursued; Protestants were dismissed and Romanists were appointed. Every position of power thus changed hands. Romanists swarmed in every direction. "A small junta of Romanists, with the King's confessor at their head, took the management of all matters upon themselves." And, in the insolence of the priests and the Popish instruments of arbitrary power, the Protestants saw, with alarm and anxiety, that their country was on the brink of total ruin, or on the eve of miseries even greater and more terrible than any through which it had ever passed!

Well now, let all these circumstances be brought clearly into your view. Let us realise the sufferings and fears of our noble forefathers, as the subjects of a traitor so base as James. They had a Church which was betrayed and mocked in its nominal and temporal Head. They had rights and liberties which were trampled under foot, and remonstrance was the way to ensure condemnation. The prisons were filled with the best of the people. The vilest and most insolent rose highest in place. In Scotland, the most ferocious laws were passed against liberty. For example, "whoever preached in a conventicle with a roof, or should attend, as a preacher or a hearer, a conventicle in the open air, was punished with death and confiscation of goods." Under this ferocious law thousands of the pious and noble of Scotland laid down their lives. They were hunted on mountain and moor as a sort of pastime and sport. And they were driven by the force of their sufferings, and the galling oppressions under which they groaned, to rise in bloody and fatal rebellion, in which the Earl of Argyle (the ancient head of that "Clan Campbell," now so honored by alliance with the throne of our illustrious Sovereign, Queen Victoria, was cruelly executed, with hundreds of others who had gallantly fought with him for their country and their religion. In Ireland, too, the Protestants were oppressed and goaded beyond all human endurance. It was there that James thought he could do just as he liked. As the majority of the people were one with him in religion, as the priests were there the rulers of a violent, ignorant, and superstitious people, he counted on being able to crush out all opposition that might come from the Protestants. Accordingly, all authority and power was transferred from the Protestants to the hands of Romanists. Protestant officers in the army were superseded by Romish officers. Protestant magistrates, judges, and councillors were dismissed or removed to make way for those who would serve the King. Protestant heads of departments were sent about their business to strengthen the cause which the King had at heart. Even common soldiers, to the number of some thousands, known to be Protestants, were dismissed the army, and thrown out almost nuked to starve upon the streets. Protestants, who were known to have arms, were ordered to deliver them up on the false pretence that the action was necessary for the preservation of the peace. And then, when the Protestants were thus made helpless, they were robbed, and plundered, and insulted by the Popish mobs, who were ready for anything which would please the King; and the barbarous conspiracy of King and priests justified the fear that plans had been laid for the renewing of the massacres of a former period!

What, now, was to be thought of such a king? In four short years he had reduced every glory of Protestant England to the most desperate state. He bad made Scotland a shambles of the most deserving in the land. He had prepared Ireland for the ravages of wild and murderous hordes. He had made every court in the three kingdoms corrupt. He had made the army an enemy to the nation, and had put traitors at the head of it. He had put his Popish heel on the neck of that loyal Church which had brought him to the throne, and raised the apostate Church of Rome to be virtually established. He had overawed the Universities, degraded the Bishops, and made the Dissenters his tools to accomplish his own objects. There was scarcely a law which he had not violated. There was scarcely a principle of the Constitution which he had not sacrificed. Treason against the State he had boldly perpetrated in a thousand forms. And thus the glorious country he had been called upon to rule—a country free and noble even in her page 5 wrongs—a country mighty in her patience, and still more mighty when roused from her depths—was already manacled with Popish chains, and lay bleeding at his feet!

There was some who saw the crisis had come. There were some whose hearts heaved with indiguation that a Popish despot should thus rob them of their liberties, and hurry their Church and country to ruin. The trial of the bishops, which had stirred the country to its depths, made many of the Tories in the Church and State reconsider the doctrine of "passive resistance." Many who had rejected the "Exclusion Bill," and had made themselves officious and ridiculous in avowing their devotion to the throne, however corrupt and however unconstitutional, now began to feel that there were reciprocal obligations between kings and subjects, and that "extreme oppression" would justify resistance. The trial of the bishops, after their unlawful imprisonment, was an event which cast a wondrous light upon this interesting question. The new view spread fast through the nation. In the army, in the navy, in the court, in the Church, and among the country nobility it spread and was accepted almost as a revelation. And, under the influence of this view, the eyes of the nation began to turn across the sea, in the hope that from the shores of Holland a deliverer might come who would hurl the Popish tyrant from the throne, and avenge at once the injured Church, and the trampled down nation! The nation knew of one who was living there in whom the utmost confidence could be placed. He was a prince of the royal blood, and was married to the heiress apparent of the throne. His right was not diminished by the birth of a son in the household of James, which the nation repudiated as a trick of the Jesuits. He was a thorough Protestant. He was the hero of a hundred battles—battles really in the interest of the faith, and battles in which he had conquered the French, the cruel murderers of thousands of Protestants. The little, thin, wiry Stadtholder of the Hague was a great warrior, and a great ruler. By his heroic spirit he had saved his own country, Holland, and by the power of his arms he had rolled back its enemies from its walls and gates when it was reduced to almost the last extremity. To this imperturbable, unconquerable prince, the English now began to look. They knew his character, they knew his principles; they knew his courage; and they were now convinced that if ever England was to rise from the disgrace in which she now lay—if over she was to become, what she was entitled to become, "great, glorious, and free"—if ever her laws, liberties, and institutions were to be vindicated and established—the Popish despot who was now on the throne must at last "be excluded," and the sceptre must be put into the hands of the prince who was now their hope—whose name, "of blessed memory," deserves to be held, and will be held, by all honest-hearted and intelligent Britons throughout the world in everlasting remembrance—"William of Nassau, Prince of Orange."

This state of feeling existing in England was speedily made known to William in Holland. When the news came to him, "Now or never" he said, as he foamed his resolution. Friends, in secret, immediately took up his cause. While he himself proceeded with consummate skill, to prepare arms and forces for a descent upon England, a few patriots in London, with equal skill, prepared to give him suitable support and a national welcome. They formed the famous "Orange Confederation." They held their meetings in different places, and their pass-words of admission were "Orange" and "Nassau." Russell, Shrewsbury, Danby, Sidney, Compton, the Bishop of London, and a few others constituted the little band of original Orangemen. And on the very day when the Bishops were acquitted, after a lengthened trial, to the immense disgust of the infuriated James, and when the nation was in a ferment of holy enthusiasm for the Protestant cause, that little "lodge of loyal Orangemen" signed and despatched an invitation to William, assuring him that if he came to English soil, engaging to uphold the "Protestant religion," and engaging "to conserve the rights and laws and liberties of the whole people," the throne and crown would be instantly made his by the will and vote of the whole nation. Noble men, who thus stood in the gap! Noble men, who thus spoke for the nation! Noble men, who thus interpreted the longings and prayers of the people! Noble Orangemen, again we say, who thus struck the blow when the iron was hot, and risked their lives, their estates and their all that their country might be freed from the ignominious thraldom of a Popish traitor!

Such, then, is the undoubted beginning of the "Orange Institution." I have been thus lengthened and particular so that the exact nature and circumstances of the institution might be truly known. For, just as it had its origin in loyalty to page 6 law, loyalty to truth, loyalty to liberty, and loyalty to England, so in all its movements and spread from that day until now, unwaveringly it has sought and supported the very same objects. The first Orange confederates were England's most faithful friends. Not one of them sought else but England's good. And who were they who afterwards joined them? Who were they who formed sister confedracies in all the chief towns to welcome William, when it was known that he was coming? Who were they who rallied to his standard, when this was the glorious motto which it unfurled, "The Protestant religion and the liberties of England I will maintain"? Who were they who first drew up and signed the rules and principles which are unchangeably the rules and principles of the Orange Institution—"We who have hereunto subscribed our names, who have now joined the Prince of Orange for the defence of the Protestant religion, and for the maintaining of the ancient Government, laws, and liberties of England, Scotland, and Ireland, do engage to Almighty God, to His Highness the Prince, and to one another, to stick firm to this cause, in the defence of it, and never to depart from it till our religion, laws, and liberties are secured by a free Parliament"?—who, I say, were all these who thus stood up on the side of William? Were they rebels or assassins, as some have alleged? Were they disturbers of the peace of England, as James complained? Were they the enemies of God and man, as some have had the infinite baseness to say? No: but they were the flower of the country, and the lovers of law, and of truth, and of righteousness—they were genuine Protestants—they were loyal Orangemen.

I need scarcely detain you to tell you how Orangeism, thus commenced, spread like wildfire through the three kingdoms. In Scotland, where the people had risen up againse their fiendish oppressors, the minions of James, there was a loyal burst from one end of the country to the other in favor of William and Protestant-ism—the whole nation became a nation of Orangemen. And in Ireland, where thousands of Romanists were ready to fight for James and the Pope, the cause of William found among Protestants a unanimous support. Everywhere Orange associations were formed "for self-defence, for securing the Protestant religion, lives, liberties, and properties, and the peace of the kingdom, disturbed by Popish and illegal councillors and abettors." While the creatures of James attempted to raise armies of half savage Irish to fight for James, the loyal Irish united for William. From the very first they suffered for the sake of William. They were few, but they were resolute. The Popish rulers of the country oppressed and threatened them in every conceivable way, But they were not dismayed; they stood shoulder to shoulder; their cause was one of liberty and truth, they banded for law, order, and good government; they were "Orangemen" because the Prince of Orange had promised to administer law and justice according to the Constitution of the United Kingdom; and hence, from the walls of their cities, where they stood to do battle on the side of right, they gave forth a shout which struck terror to their enemies—"For God and for William, and no surrender."

Thus the cause of William took deep root, and spread widely. The orange color was exhibited everywhere. Every hat and carriage had orange ribbons. The women as well as the men vied with each other in giving welcome to William. For once, the Protestants, forgetting their divisions and jealousies, formed one grand, compact body, and faced their common danger, and gave welcome to William. Their union was seen at Derry, at the Boyne, at Enniskillen, at Anghrim, at Limerick, and at other places. By their strong arms and their faithful hearts the Prince of Orange finally triumphed. By their stedfast heroism the power of James was for ever broken. When his Popish forces and his auxiliaries from France faced the bold front of resolute Orangemen, it was not long doubtful which side must prevail. And, by the splendid and decisive victories which the God of Battles gave to the arms of the Orange leader, the glorious revolution was virtually completed; for the Popish despot then fled to France, and William and his people then perfected the work of settling the Crown and Constitution of England to be forever Protestant!

I Come now to the second head or division of my subject—The Principles of Orangeism. It will be plainly seen from the tracing which I have just given of the origen of the Institution what are some of the leading principles on which it is page 7 based. When the first Orange Confederates banded together to dethrone King James and to welcome William, their objects were to deliver their country from tyranny and wrong, and to bring back to England the religion, the laws, and the liberties which James had betrayed, after having sworn to defend them. When those Orange confederates despatched their pledge and invitation to William, the objects they avowed were still the same—"to defend the Protestant religion, and to maintain the ancient laws and liberties of the realm of England." "When William displayed his banner, as he landed his troops on the soil of England, the objects avowed were still the same—"The Protestant religion and the liberties of England I will maintain." When a free Parliament met, and William was made King, the Acts which were passed made clear the objects of the completed revolution—"The Protestant religion and the liberties of England." When attempts were made by Popish villains to assassinate William, and the Orange Institution, with greater zeal, united for defence, the objects were still precisely the same—"The Protestant religion and the liberties of England." And when at length, by the Bill of Rights and Act of Succession, the Constitution of England was declared for ever to be free from the intrusion of a Popish king, and to be free from the tyranny of arbitrary rule, the objects in view were still the same—"The Protestant religion and the liberties of England." Let this, then, be accepted as a true description of the "Jachin and Boaz"—the two chief pillars in the temple of Orangeism; for neither William himself, nor any of those who took his color and fought for his cause, had any object contrary to those two—"The Protestant religion and the liberties of England."

But we have these two fundamentals properly broken up into several particulars. Let us take, then, the full account of the principles of Orangeism, as given in the printed works of the institution:—

"Section I.—Objects of the Orange Institution.—The Institution is composed of Protestants, resolved to the utmost of their power to support and defend the rightful Sovereign, the Protestant Religion, the Laws of the Country, the Legislative Union, and the Succession to the Throne in the House of Brunswick—being Protestant; and united, further, for the defence of their own Persons and Properties, and the Maintenance of the Public Peace. It is exclusively an Association of those who are attached to the Religion of the Reformation, and will not admit into its Brotherhood persons whom an intolerant spirit leads to persecute, injure, or upbraid any man on account of his religious opinions. They associate also in honor of King William III., Prince of Orange, whose name they bear, as supporters of his glorious memory.

"Section II.—General Qualifications—The Master and Members of every Lodge into which a Candidate has been elected, must satify themselves with all due solemnity, previous to his admission, that he possesses the following qualifications:—An Orangeman should have a sincere love and veneration for the Heavenly Father; a humble and steadfast faith in Jesus Christ, the Saviour of mankind, believing in Him as the only Mediator between God and man. He should cultivate truth and justice, brotherly kindness and charity, devotion and piety, concord and unity, and obedience to the laws. His deportment should be gentle and compassionate, kind and courteous; he should cultivate the society of the virtuous, and avoid the company of the evil; he should honor and diligently read the Holy Scriptures, and make them the rule of his faith and practice; he should love, uphold and defend the Protestant religion, and sincerely desire and endeavor to propagate its doctrines and precepts; he should strenuously oppose the fatal errors and doctrines of the Church of Rome, and scrupulously avoid countenancing (by his presence or otherwise) any act or ceremony of Popish worship. He should, by all lawful means, resist the ascendancy of that Church, its encroachments and the extension of its power; ever abstaining from all uncharitable words, actions, or sentiments towards his Roman Catholic brethren. He should remember to keep holy the Sabbath-day, and attend the public worship of God, and diligently train up his offspring and all under his control in the fear of God and in the Protestant faith. He should never take the name of God in vain, but abstain from all cursing, swearing and profane language, and use every opportunity of discouraging those, and all other sinful practices in others, His conduct should be guided by wisdom and prudence, and marked by honesty, temperance, and sobriety. The glory of God and the welfare of man, the honor of his Sovereign, and the good of his country, should be the motives of his actions."

Now, let us gather out of this particular account the principles which make up the entire fabric of Orangeism. Out of the two fundamentals, which express very clearly the "objects" of the institution, viz.:—"To defend and support the rightful Sovereign, being Protestant, the Protestant Religion, and the laws of the country; and to defend persons, properties, and the public peace," there are these four others which express the qualifications of a genuine Orangeman. "First, he must be a religious man. Secondly, he must be a moral man. Third he must be a leyal man; and fourth, he must be a neighborly man." Having, then, two glorious pillars standing in front, not pillars of brass, but pillars of gold, and within these four walls, which are truly walls of precious stones, the Orange Institution has taken its place. We challenge for it that these are its principles. page 8 We deny that it has any other principles whatever. Its goodness and glory are to be tried by these principles. Side by side with all the Institutions which appeal to the confidence and respect of intelligent men, the Orange Institution lifts up its appeal. Equal to any of them—nay, superior to all of them—it claims as its friend every man whose religion is the religion of the Bible—every man whose conduct is upright and virtuous—every patriot whose loyalty and love of country are based on truth—and every neighbor whose generous heart and open hand will do good unto all men, "especially to those who are of the household of Faith."

The first of these principles has respect to "religion." The Orange Institution knows no other religion but the Protestant Religion. Nor is there any other true religion but the Protestant Religion. The experience of the world proclaims this fact. The history of England makes clear this fact. It is the religion of the Bible; it is the religion of reason; it is the religion of liberty; and, as the enemy of ignorance, tyranny, and vice, wherever it goes it gives enfranchisement to the slave, light to the ignorant, conscious independence to the spiritually debased, and scatters priceless blessings to all the rest of the people. There is no question here of sects and parties. The "Protestant Religion" is not to be confounded with conflicting denominations. The Orange Institution knows no denomination. It holds the "common Protestantism" in which Episcopacy, and Presbytery, Wesleyan and Baptist are perfectly agreed. Its wide and apostolic arms embrace all who belong to the church of Jesus Christ. The church which it disowns is the church which has been an apostate and a persecutor from the beginning. It repudiates Anti-Christ. It has nothing to do with Infallible Popes. It discards all Angels and Saints and Virgins as mediators with God. Its creed is the Ancient and Apostolic creed which believes in Christ as the "only way"—in his dying on the cross as the only atonement,—in his advocacy in Heaven as the only intercession, and which gives every man a personal right to deal with his Saviour without the intervention or permission of Priests. And hence the scriptural words of the rule which I have read:—"An Orangeman should have a sincere love and veneration for his Heavenly Father; a humble and steadfast faith in Jesus Christ, the Saviour of mankind, believing in him as the only mediator between God and man." He should honor and diligently read the Holy Scriptures, and make them the rule of his faith and practice. He should love, uphold, and defend the Protestant Religion, and sincerely desire and endeavor to propagate its doctrines and precepts. He should strenuously oppose the fatal errors and doctrines of the Church of Rome, and scrupulously avoid giving an encouragement to Popish worship. He should remember the holy day of the Lord, attend the public worship of God, and train up his children in God's fear and service. And the glory of God, as the high end of his being, should be the motive and object of all his actions."

The second of the principles which have now been mentioned refers to morality. The Orange Institution, as accepting and professing the true religion of Christ, is the friend and advocate of all sound morals. It holds that true religion and sound morals are inseparably conjoined. Its religion and its morals are those of the New Testament. Its strongest protests are against those morals of Priests and Jesuists which justify and palliate the most abominable crimes, and which sap the foundation of all truth and virtue. It has no scheme for making sin and wickedness easy. It has no confessional where crimes are revealed and felonies are compounded. It has no license from Heaven to make oaths and perjuries a mere matter of convenience. It has no license from the Devil to make "stealing" for the church no "stealing" at all—to make "lying" for the church no "lying" at all—and to purchase exception from the pains of perdition by magnificent bequests, and masses for the soul, after a life of infamy. It has never taught that a man may be a Christian and yet a murderer, an adulterer, and a perjurer. Its pure morality is abundantly explicit in the rules which I have read—"An Orangeman should cultivate truth and justice, brotherly kindness and charity. His deportment should be gentle and compassionate, kind and courteous. He should cultivate the society of the virtuous, and avoid that of the evil. He should never take God's name in vain. And his life should be guided by wisdom and prudence, and marked by honesty, temperance, and sobriety."

page 9

The third of the principles of the Orange Institution refers to loyalty. The Orange Institution is pre-eminently a loyal and patriotic body. Religion and loyalty, expressed in the words "Fear God and honor the King," are never dissociated by any true Orangeman. Yet his loyalty is not blind. It is not the loyalty of a slave; but that of a freeman. It is not the loyalty of superstition; but that of enlightened and thoughtful intelligence. It is not the loyalty which bends to the Tyrant King, who has arbitrary power, nor to an Infallible Pope, who assumes to speak with the authority of God; hut the loyalty of men who have assented to laws, who own the supremacy and majesty of law, and whose rights to have free and liberal Government have been won as the price of their forefathers' blood. Let this be noticed as the intelligent loyalty of the Orange Institution. There is, indeed, a species of loyalty which will yield to power, whatever it is. There was once the Jacobin loyalty, which would prostrate its neck to the heel of oppression. There is now the Popish loyalty which submits to everything which the Priest may say, because the Priest keeps the conscience of his people in his pocket; but the loyalty of free and intelligent men—the loyalty of reason—the loyalty of Scripture—the loyalty which makes England the country which it is, is that which recognises that both the King and the people are subject to law—that the law is the free expression of the will of the people—that the King reigns for the good of the people—and that, when the King becomes a Traitor to his country and its laws, oppressing his people and trampling with ignominy their liberties under his feet, then he has forfeited all claim to allegiance and the throne, and the people do well to hurl him to the ground! Hence, the Orange Institution, in this loyalty of Britons, binds itself to defend the "rightful Sovereign, the laws of the kingdom, and the succession to the Throne of Rulers who are Protestant It pledges itself to "concord, and unity, and obedience to the laws." It engages to "resist, by all lawful means, the encroachments or ascendancy" of any foreign power. And the honor of the Sovereign, and the good of the country are imperatively required of all who would be its members.

Now, the fourth principle of the Orange Institution refers to neighborliness. I am not afraid nor ashamed to claim for the Orange Institution this charitable principle, that it is neighborly to Romanists. It feels towards Romanists in a very different manner from that in which those Romanists feel towards it. It does for Romanists what is abundantly well known Romanists never have and never will do for it. For example, the Orange Institution refuses to receive as members of its brotherhood "persons of an intolerant and persecuting spirit, and who would injure and upbraid any man whatever for his religious opinions." Again, the Orange Institution charges its members "to abstain from all uncharitable words, actions, or sentiments towards their Roman Catholic brethren." And still again, never do Orangemen meet in their lodges but prayer is offered, in the most charitable benevolence, that all the members of the Church of Rome may be delivered from the errors by which they are bound, and be blessed with a purer and truer religion. How different is all this from what obtains on the other side! The reason, of course, is very obvious. Romanism cannot but be intolerant and persecuting. It cannot but intrigue and plot for the subversion of Protestants. It breeds riot, violence, and cruelty, and makes the heart as hard and unfeeling as iron. And, instead of prayer on behalf of heretics, it breathes out threatening and slaughter against them, and fulminates the most horrible and horrifying curses!

Much has been said about Penal laws, and about the strenuous opposition of Orangemen to Popery. But it should never be forgotten that the "Penal laws" were the result of the teaching and doings of Popery; and that Orangeism distinguishes between the men and the system. What had Popery been teaching in the world when Orangeism took its rise? What had the results been giving to the nations? What had been the encroachments and tyranny of the Priests, when the Reformation brought their tyranny to an end? It is well known that the Penal laws were devised as a protection against the treason and the immorality of a system which sets all truth at defiance to gain its end. Not one of those laws would ever have been passed, if it had been possible to trust a pack of Priests, which not even oaths, however solemn, could bind. And those laws have been relaxed, or altogether abolished, just as circumstances have so changed that all grounds for fear have given place to confidence. Not that opinion has changed as to the nature and aim of the Romish religion. It cannot but be hostile to a page 10 Protestant people. It cannot but seek the destruction of the Protestant cause. It cannot but make its people unsocial and bigoted and uncharitable. Its claims and its aspirations are in open antagonism to all that distinguishes a free people. And its atrocious principles, "that faith should not be kept with heretics"—that heretics should be "burned as worse than thieves"—that there is "no salvation out of the Romish Church," cannot but give rise, wherever there is power, to the bloody massacres which have given a hideous character to Popery in all the world! Hence the sufferings and disabilities of Protestants in Romish countries up until only the other day. Hence the barbarous and persecuting principles of the Pope's famous encyclical letter. And hence, it has been avowed by candid Romanists in England, only recently, that if power were again in the hands of their Church, they would burn or persecute the Protestant heretics: at least, they would not tolerate their religion for one moment.

Not such monstrous uncharitableness as this will be found among the principles of Orangeism. Were there anything like this, what would become of the thousands of Romanists, who are fed, and clothed, and protected by Protestants? Were there strict retaliation, what would be the position of Romanists amongst ourselves? Were there anything like this, would Orangemen, while detesting the system of Rome as a plague, and using all lawful means to do it away, be the friends, the neighbors, the employers, and the helpers of those very men, who are taught by their religion to denounce them as heretics, and to hate them as the implacable enemies of both God and man?

We claim, then, distinctly, as essentially a part of the Orange Institution, that it has the kindest feelings of humanity and religion towards the Catholic people. We hate the system; but we love the men. We are the enemies of the system; but the friends of the men. We resist the encroachments and ascendancy of their Apostate Church; but we are willing to live on the terms of good neighborhood with all the people. By all "lawful means" we will resist the claims and assumptions and errors of that church. While feeding the Romish poor, we will thus resist; while clothing the Romish naked, we will thus resist; while giving equal rights and liberties to our Romish fellow-citizens, we will thus resist; and yet not in one hair of their head will Orangeism harm them;—not one Irish landlord will it tumble down—not one penal law will it revive against them—not one civil right will it take away from them—not one moment of disquiet will it inflict upon them. Nay, in charity and kindness it will defend even them from the tyranny which their priests love to exercise over them, Provided they will be contented to submit to the laws, and not provoke by attempts to put their unsocial and priestly principles into prsctice amongst us.

Let us proceed now to the third division or head of our lecture.

I propose to deal in this division with objectors and slanderers. The objections of some deserve kind consideration; the slanders of others we shall try to dispose of with all fairness.

It has been objected, then, to the Orange Institution that the principles and rules which I have just submitted are not all the rules and principles which govern the Society. How am I to reply to this? How am I to certify to respectable objectors that the book which we offer, as containing the principles and rules of the Orange Institution, is not a fraud, but a true statement of the whole matter? I can do nothing more than give my word; and I now, therefore, affirm that the book referred to contains a true and particular account of the objects and principles of the Orange Institution. I challenge for it on the ground of the purity and scripturalness of its principles, from all honorable and intelligent men, and from all good Protestants, respect and confidence; and, after this affirmation and challenge, I denounce as a slander any insinuation, by word or action, which implies that something is kept back from the uninitiated.

This is the objection which I put first, because I have found, in my inter-course with the public, that many desirable and respectable people have a hidden suspicion that there is something more than what is avowed in our printed pamphlet. They say—"Oh, yes, your printed book is all very well; but there is something more. There is something too bad for public view; and there cannot but be something exceedingly bad, since the 'Orange' name has been so much spoken against." Let me assure all these, on the word of a Christian gentleman and page 11 minister, that this is all; and, when this is examined, I am sure that the feeling will be strong, and the conviction will be acknowledged, that something more—something exceedingly had—is undoubtedly needed to warrant the reproaches and scorn, the misrepresentations and calumnies, which have been so freely cast against the Orange Institution.

But again. It has been objected against the Orange Institution that it is a secret, society. Protestantism hates secresy. It loves the light. Its glorious function is "to give light." And, because of this open and candid spirit, characteristic of Protestantism, secret societies and working in the dark are peculiarly repugnant to its genius and history. Hence, many Protestants shrink from uniting with the Orange Institution, because they have a dread of secret societies; and those "secret societies" are associated in their minds with the black atrocities of the "Gunpowder plot," and the "unparalleled butcheries" of St. Bartholomew's Eve. But, my answer is, that the charge is utterly and absolutely untrue. In no sense whatever is the Orange Institution a "secret society It is totally different from a "secret society." It has nothing in common with a "secret society." So far from this,—its objects are avowed; it has books in which all its doings are entered; and those books are open to the regular inspection of the public authorities as often as those authorities may desire to oversee them. What "secret society" in all the world can say anything like this? And if this be true of the "Orange Institution," as I affirm it is, what honorable man, what man of intelligence will accept against it the great calumny, and the wicked reproach, that it is a "secret society?" Of course, the Orange Institution, like every institution, has its "private business;" but it has no private business but what entered in its books. There is an oath of fidelity to the Cause, and of loyalty to the Crown. And, in accordance with this, it has its private signs as pass wonts for the recognition of its friends. But if, on account of these things, the Orange Institution is to have the reproachful stigma of a "secret society," there is not a benefit society—there is not a merchant's office—there is not a bank—there is not a department in the public service, but what is liable to the same reproach, for in every one there is some private business, and some special way of securing that that private business shall be kept for those who are particularly interested in it.

But again. It has been objected that the Orange Institution is an "illegal society." Old Mr. Plunkett used to say so. Daniel O'Connell also said so. The Pope says so. Archbishop Polding says so. And the notorious Father John, the Father Confessor of convicted Fenians, is sure to say so. But what of that? Everything is illegal in the estimation of such interpreters which tends to check the encroachments of "the Church." Everything is illegal which is contrary to Koine, and which stands like a wall of iron and adamant against the nefarious schemes which Rome has laid to overthrow our Protestant liberties. But it is enough for all reasonable and candid men to know that by the highest authorities in law and justice, in government and business, the Orange Institution has been publicly declared to be a "legal society." It is true that on one occasion, by the false reports of interested men—by the clamour and threatening of the Pope's brass band, the House of Commons broke up the Institution, as contrary to law; but not long after, when the Institution again revived, and when juster views began to prevail, the verdict given was directly the reverse. On many occasions the legality of "Orangeism" has been publicly acknowledged. Orangemen have been thanked by the British Government for their great services in Ireland: and the most eminent barristers in England, and in these colonies, have been asked their "opinions" on the principles of Orangeism, and by one and all of them testimony has been borne, in the most ample terms, to the high character and legality of the Orange Institution. The charge of "illegality," is, therefore, a slander. It was raised by men who had a purpose to serve—which was not very legal. It is repeated by men who are not very caring for British law. It is a scarecrow to those who are thoughtless or ignorant. But, will reasonable men ask better proof than the proof which we give them, that a more legal association of loyal men is not to be found in all the world.

Again. It has been further objected that the Orange Institution is unnecessary. Ha! Yes. "Unnecessary." But who is to judge of what is, or what is not necessary? This is the rub. If we go to the Romanists, they are sure to tell us that all Orange societies are decidedly unnecessary. If we go to the "lovers of page 12 ease and peace," they are sure to reiterate that all such societies are "perfectly unnecessary." If we go to those who are so full of charity that they live "in a land of milk and honey," and breathe out only an atmosphere of Irish shamrocks and mosses, they will instantly tell us that all such societies are decidedly unnecessary. And then, if we consult the man who is anxious about the customers of his trade—or the politician who is hunting for votes and place, the thing is as certain as that the sun is in the heavens, that the echo will be—"decidedly unnecessary!" But, there are many others, far more respectable than any of these, who have hastily adopted this same objection. For example, there are many who say that no danger is to be apprehended from Romanism now. The days, they say, of its aggressions and tyranny are past. It can never gain, say they, the ascendency now. And, therefore, while Orange societies were useful in the past, they are now, in the strength of the Protestant throne, "altogether unnecessary." But, is not such reasoning as this in the very teeth of astounding facts which are patent to all men? On this plan of "lying down and loving to slumber" England has been acting for a century past. But what has she gained by it? While she has been taking her rest, the enemy has been working. While she has been fancying herself secure, the enemy has been sapping the foundation of her bulwarks. While she has been boasting of her strength like Samson, luxuriating in the lap of Delilah, that wicked woman has been cropping his hair and making something very like a "Roman tonsure/" In a word, so bold and aggressive have Romanists been, within the last forty years, that the Pope has added England, as a "recovered star," to his papal firmament;—he basset up his church in the very heart of the kingdom, in defiance of law; he has parcelled out the country according to his will, and given titles of honor in defiance of the fumings of British statesmen; he has set up his convents, and schools, and nunneries, in open violation of the clearest statutes; and by help of his subjects, as voters and legislators, he has virtually established his Popery in Ireland; he has covered all England and Scotldnd with churches and priests; by chaplains and teachers he has got his foot in every workhouse and gaol and asylum; and his claims have now risen to this high degree, that the way shall again be open for a Romanist to hold the highest offices in England;—nay, for a Papist King to sit again on the throne! Such are the doings, such the prosperity, and such the aspirations of the bishops and priests of Rome's church in England. Their doings and prosperity are precisely similar in all these colonies. And, as we see the numerous defections in the English Church; as we see the cowardly truckling of English statesmen; as we hear of England's Premier promising "guarantees for the safety and independence of the Pope; as we see the mighty strides which Romanism has taken among the nobility and poor of the land; as we study the demands of Cardinal Cullen and his political tools, which are the Pope's brass band, is it wisdom or folly to be wide awake? Is it true or false that combination is necessary? Is it our nation's duty to accept or discard that mighty instrument which has never failed to support and defend England's laws and throne—"the Orange Institution?" All loyal Orangemen will agree to this, that when Rome ceases plotting their work will be done. But, meantime, as the work of plotting goes on, all Orangemen believe in the wisdom of being ready. "Prevention is better than cure." Yes, and the policy of being ready is the death-blow to plotters. England would be better and safer than she is, this colony would be more peaceful and united than it is, had there been less tampering, less trafficking, less dishonesty, and less self-seeking among our public men; but Popery has been coaxed, and fattened, and flattered, until now it can demand, with its usual insolence, and mock at the simpletons who have been busily caressing it!

Judge, then, all reasonable men, as to what is necessary! The want of combination is the weakness and ruin of the Protestant cause. The marvellous union of the Romanists is the secret of their power. They are ever combining. By their church, by their guilds, by their confraternities and purgatory associations, by their St. Patrick societies, by their "Irish Patriot and Christian Doctrine Unions," they are kept by their shepherds as a separate people. In a moment they can act, when action is needed; with power they can make their voice to be heard, when they want to be heard. And what, then, is wisdom, on the part of Protestants? Is it to be careless and indifferent until the country has been brought to the brink of revolution? Is it to wait until encroachment has advanced so far that violence page 13 will be needed to drive it back? Nay, is it not wisdom rather to foresee the objects which the enemy is seeking; and, by the lawful, and open, and British means of uniting for the defence and maintenance of our rights and liberties, to disconcert and scare the wily enemy without resorting to violence?

Lastly here. It has been objected to Orangeism that its existence has been the cause of illwill and contention, and its history has been marked by violence and bloodshed. The very same charge has been made by infidels against Christianity itself. It is precisely the charge of Voltaire, and Hume, and Rousseau, and Gibbon, against the religion of Jesus. When these infidels would deny the mission of Christ—when they would refute the doctrines which Jesus taught—when they would ridicule the Scripture as an inspired revelation, they point to the wars and confusions and strifes which have come into the world in connection with the Christian religion. And, harping upon the atrocity and numbers of those wars, they have spoken eloquently against the truth and divinity of that heaven-sent religion! But, what is the reply? Christianity claims to be tried by its principles. It demands that it be judged by the teachings of the New Testament. And, judged by this test, the decision is inevitable that this charge against it is deliberately false! The same justice we claim on behalf of Orangeism. Try the system by the principles which it avows. Judge of it by its laws, and spirit, and ordinances. Make it amenable only for what is its own. Spare it not in searching its teachings. But never be so false to honor and justice as to make it accountable for what it really repudiates! Doubtless, there are bad Christians all over the world; but is religion to be accountable for those unprincipled men? In every church in Sydney hypocrites are to be found. Is the Bible responsible for the existence of those hypocrites? And, because there are some bad and worthless Orangemen—men who are unworthy of the name which they bear—men who are a disgrace to the cause which they own—men who are really not Orangemen at all—are these worthless men to be held up as the patterns and exponents of the Orange cause?

We utterly deny, therefore, and repudiate the charge. "Illwill and contention," no doubt, have arisen; but these would have arisen in any case from the very nature of the Popery and Fenianism to which Orangeism is opposed. "Violence and bloodshed," no doubt, have taken place; but these would have occurred in any case, from the very claims and policy which the priests have maintained in ruling their people. But, further, this may also be affirmed with all good conscience, that Orangeism has no ill will to Romanists. It cannot, and it will not, do them any wrong. It will be the first to help them in the time of need. But, under cover of charity, it will not be seduced into countenancing their religion. While tolerating and protecting them, it will keep a watchful eye on their designing priests. And, should those designing priests rouse their poor victims to the folly of violence, and the chance of arms, then, undoubtedly, in justifiable defence, Orangeism will rise in the greatness of its might, and turn to flight the forces of the aliens!

It is a cruel slander, therefore, that Orangeism is uncharitable, or that it delights in violence. Neither its origin nor its history will support such a charge. It is never the aggressor; but it is mighty in defence. If there have ever been excesses, those excesses have been provoked. Amply, too, it will atone for any excesses. But the foe which opposes it never gives quarter. It is a foe which would burn, and massacre, and annihilate all heretics. It is a foe which prefers treason and sedition to open warfare. And then, like every bully and coward, when it finds that it has fallen into the grip of a lion, its bellowings are heard to the ends of the earth, as if it were innocently suffering!

But I have now to dispose of some more villainous slanderers before I have done. Those already alluded to I have dealt with as respectable; but those who are now to be referred to for a little are of another class, and are so vulgar and contemptible that they hardly deserve the application of the lash.

We have all heard, then, the slander, repeated again and again, that Orangemen take an oath to wade "knee-deep in Popish blood." Again and again has this been alleged by the "White boy," "Yellow boy," and "Green boy" crew. And, what is not a little provoking, this infamous slander has been partially believed by many who assume to be charitable and liberal! I cannot say more than that it is page 14 utterly untrue; but, what is the secret of so foul an accusation? Who have invented it? And what is the cause? Shall I be charged with uncharitableness if I venture the explanation, that as the thief who is chased repeats the cry of the police-man pursuing him, so as to mislead the attention of the public looking on, Papists and Fenians, who delight in blood, have raised this slander that they themselves may escape!

Another slander is, that Orangemen keep up their color and their days for the purpose of provoking and insulting others. Hence, some who are never done talking of charity, tell us to forget the 5th of November, and the 12th of July. They say that the past should all be forgotten and forgiven. They say that all party colors and names should be given up. And, they boldly assert that, because Papists resort to violence and blood to put down the observance of the days referred to, the Orangemen are guilty of provoking and inciting to that hatred and violence! But, what gross injustice is in this mode of reasoning? Are Orangemen not to have liberty to think? Are they to forget the 5th of November, and the 12th of July, because the Papists choose to abhor those days? Are the Papists to have St. Patrick's days, and Saints' days innumerable, without let or hindrance, and all others are to be forbidden? Because Papists choose to be violent, are all others meekly to succumb? Instead of yielding to such insolent demands—instead of basing the liberty of Orangemen on the whim of Papists—is not the proper way to show those creatures, who delight in blood, that their riots and violence will obtain no sympathy, and that the strong arm of the law will protect the rights and liberties of all men? I claim for Orangemen the right to judge as to whether or not they shall make famous any days. So long as they do so in accordance with ths law, they have a right to their liberty. And if Papists take offence, and resort to violence, their offence is so unreasonable, and their violence so cowardly, that, instead of slandering Orangemen for their refusal to submit to the whims of Papists, all good men should unite in upholding them, as the true friends of liberty. We mean no unkindness—we mean no insult—we mean no uncharit, ableness—when we look into history, and thank God for his mercy in preserving our country from the devices of the enemy. We only mean to stir up ourselves to watch the same enemy who is still lurking at our gate to do us damage. And, if the agents of that enemy will be offended at this—if they will resort to violence to deny us this liberty—and, if unprincipled Protestants will join with them, in sympathy, with their unreasonable demands, is not this only a proof that watchful-ness is needed, and that the lessons of history ought never to be forgotten?

We have not forgotten the infamous slander of the Sydney Morning Herald. The Editor of that paper, whose Papal services have not yet been rewarded by a red hat from the Pope, pronounced a slander, which will never be forgotten until it be buried with him in the grave, viz.—that "Orangemen think more of the 'battle of the Boyne than of the sufferings of Calvary!'" This miserable Editor acts the part of the tailor, whose standard measure for everybody was himself. The mind that conceived such gross impiety is the only mind which could be guilty of the deed. The comparison is the thought of gross impiety. No Orangeman could have ever thought of such a thing. The "sufferings of Calvary" are too holy and sacred, in the estimation of every Orangeman, to be brought into neighborhood with the "battle of the Boyne." Yet, are we to be driven from our views by the impiety of an Editor, who dares to impute to us such frightful crime? Are we to think little of the "battle of the Boyne" because the Editor of the Herald impiously associates it with the unparalleled agonies of the dying Christ? No, we shall scorn the slander, and yet make use of it. In the "sufferings of Calvary" we will see the great deliverance which has been given to the world—a deliverance which Popery would obscure and diminish; and, in the "battle of the Boyne" we will see the great deliverance which was wrought out for our country—a deliverance which Popery would now make in vain by the drivelling and impiety of hireling scribes, who would sell their birthright, and the birthright of their people, for a mess of pottage!

What shall I now say of the slanders of the Empire and Evening News, which have accused us of everything but what is Christian and honorable? What shall I say of the slanders of the "rag" which values a workman's midnight labor at 8d. an hour? What shall I say of the slanders of the Freeman, which tells its ignorant and priest-ridden readers, in its weekly issue, that Orangeism is the worst page 15 of all wicked tilings? This I will say, that when they put their slanders into a tangible shape, I will try to refute them; but, meantime, I appeal to all reasonable and candid men, to set over against the unproved charges of venal newspapers and hirelings of priests, the principles which form the foundation of Orangeism, and then judge as to the side where the truth is to be found.

Last of all, I come to the last of all the slanders which have recently been hurled against our glorious Orangeism. It is the slander of Mr. William Forster, M. P. The other day he told the House—he told the world—that "Orangeism was just as bad, or as good as Fenianism!" Poor man! Great allowance must be made for the views of our friend. He has not forgotten the defeat of St. Leonard's. He has not forgotten the exposure of Ryde. It is natural, therefore, that he should show his anger in saying "hard things." The wonder, however, is, not that he said that "Orangeism is just as bad as Fenianism," but that he did not say that it is a great deal worse! For, without doubt, Orangeism is infinitely worse than Fenianism, to all such Protestants as Mr. Forster. It never has given him a "Sunday Morning Breakfast." It has never honored him, in the presence of an Archbishop, with a cup and saucer, in praise of the "Immaculate conception of the Virgin. It has never believed in his being a Protestant, since he has repudiated the very name. And it has thwarted and checked him on many occasions, when his measures and influence have been judged to be injurious to the liberty of the people. It is certain, therefore, that to all who will act and speak like Mr. Forster, "Orangeism" is infinitely worse than "Fenianism." And worse, I trust, it will always remain. The slander, however, we scorn, that the most loyal of all the Institutions of Britain should be compared to the one whose sedition and treason are the horror of the world; but we are not offended. We shall not do violence because of the insult, although it might almost warrant a little "tarring and feathering." We will only say that the difference between Orangeism and Fenianism. will be best illustrated to Mr. Forster in this, that whereas the Fenians would revenge themselves, if they could, by hitting Mr. Forster from behind a fence, the Orangemen will revenge themselves in the more manly way of sending Mr. Forster a copy of their rules!

I will now conclude this lengthened lecture by offering to the friends and supporters of Orangeism a few friendly counsels.

Let me say, then, that the best system which was ever constructed may be abused and ruined by bad administration and unworthy support. By this very process Christianity degenerated, through many ages, until Popery was developed with all its spiritual tyranny and vile abominations. I find it easy and pleasant to defend Orangeism; but, I confess, I cannot so easily find a defence for the conduct and doings of all Orangemen. I find it easy and pleasant to defend the religion which is to be found in the new Testament; but I should shrink from the task of defending the religion which is found in all our so-called churches, and in all professing Christians. What, then is to be done? for good principles ought to be made manifest in corresponding conduct. What is to be done? for the world is justified in judging of a system by the character of its friends. I say the world is justified—at least to this extent: that the conduct of its friends will always be an element to the judgment formed respecting any system. Bad Christians are truly a disgrace to religion. They do not prove that religion is false; nor do they prove that the principles which they profess are bad; but, nevertheless, they damage religion, and give rise to prejudices in the minds of the people which are not wholly to be blamed. And so with bad Orangemen. They do not prove that Orangeism is false; nor do they prove that the principles of the system are bad; but, they give a handle to the slanderer and the enemy to heap up reproach, and they give warrant and color to some atrocious calumnies. For my part I will say that as unfaithful Christians will never prove that Christianity is false, unfaithful Orangemen will never shake the incorruptible principles on which the system of "Orangeism" is built; and yet, it must be added, that the excellence of the principles will never be an excuse for the unfaithful Christian, or the unfaithful Orangeman.

Let me, then, counsel all true-hearted and genuine Orangemen, wisely to take heed. Let me remind them that their system is essentially a religious one. Let me remind them that the religion which they accept, as the basis of their system, page 16 is the Protestant religion;" and the Protestant religion may be summed up in this, "To fear God and keep his commandments King William III. gave us liberty to have, and liberty to enjoy, this reasonable religion. Our Reformation is not worth anything if it have not made us earnest in this ennobling religion. Our Revolution has not accomplished its work if it have not decided us on the side of this true religion. And our Orangeism is really nothing at all if it be not a pledge—stronger than any which is given by others—that whatever others may choose to do, "we will serve the Lord."

My advice to every Orangeman is this, "Be zealous for the honor and purity of your cause. Lower not its standard. Forget not its object Sacrifice not its history. And remember that the eyes of a thousand slanderers are ever watching for a halt and a tripping." The only way to answer slanderers is to live them down. Glory in your principles, brethren; but illustrate your principles in your daily conduct. You are not Orangemen unless you be "good men." If you dishonor God, the institution disowns you. If you break the law of the land, or fail to uphold it, your are not Orangemen. If you company with those who are evil doers, yon are unfaithful to your pledge. If you act or speak unjustly towards Papists, you are forgetting the cause in which you are engaged. If you are Sunday strollers—church forsakers—wife neglecters—leaving your children without proper care—having bibles in your houses, but never opening them—unjust in your business—intemperate in your habits—or immoral in your conduct—you are not Orangemen. All such the Orange Institution repudiates and disowns. It will rather have none, than have such supporters as these. It will rather stand alone than have such friends as these. If, therefore, all who profess the Orange cause will consider the holiness of their solemn obligations; if they will study their rules, and live up to their rules; if they will faithfully use what the Prince of Orange gave them liberty to use; if they will rise to the freedom and glory of their privileges; if they will "fear God and honor the King;" if they will "love the brotherhood, and be kind to all men"—not only will the slanderers be shamed in their villainy, but the thousand who doubt, and stand aloof from our cause, will have the very demonstration which they are waiting to receive, that "Orangeism is the embodiment of all that is "loyal" in our relation as citizens, and of all that is "holy" in regard to religion!

graphic border

Gibbs, Shallard, and Co., Steam Letterpress and Lithographic Printer?, 108 Pitt Street.