disroyal, in not giving you the preference in all my dedi cations. I will, however, endeavour to write you one that shall be worth all I have written before, and thus compensate, as well as apologize for my past disrespects.

You are not only the Head of the State but you are the Head of the Church too, and as I am an intermeddler with the matters both of Church and State, notwithstanding the forbiddings of your Banishment Act, I feel it quite consistent that I should dedicate my volume to both heads at once, with the most profound hope and prayer, that neither of them may ache after reading it.

I was never near enough to your person to distinguish the position of the two heads upon your shoulders, or whether the two faces squared with the shoulders or the bosom. It is a public misfortune that the heads of the Church and the State are not oftener exhibited to public view, that the people may see and admire. The only effectual means to excite veneration is to exhibit in the most public manner that which is venerable, and if your Royal Reverence does not meet with due veneration, you may attribute it to the circumstance of being constantly secluded and not sufficiently seen.

I address you from a prison, and I am a prisoner for no other crime, than, because, I would not practise the common vice of the day, and play the canting hypocrite. Hypocrisy dreads discussion, I want it free, and for its practice alone am I a prisoner.

The question of Parliamentary Reform, and the question of Catholic Emancipation have been the prevailing state questions for many years past, but there is a question

arising that will supersede them, and exhibit itself with much force, a force irresistible, for it has this advantage above other questions, it embraces them both, and whilst we are contending for its having the sanction of the Legislature, we can practise it in every shape without that sanction.

Under this view of the matter, it would be a feather in the cap of the Chief Magistrate, who has the power of recommending a law to the other branches of the Parliament, to make a virtue of necessity, and, in opening the next session of Parliament, propose the adoption of a law, that shall put a stop to all further prosecutions for what are called public libels, and, in fact, all criminal proceedings for libel, so that the spirit of Free Discussion may have its full scope.

What member of the Parliament would rise and say that Free Discussion on all matters was improper? Corrupt as I believe that Parliament to be, I do not think a single member would rise in the present day, and say openly there was any thing improper in Free Discussion. What better subject can any member find to initiate a law upon? It would supersede all the clamour about tithes, and every other abuse in Church and State, for it would quickly level all abuses, and preserve and strengthen every thing that is useful to the community. If you, Sir, wish to avoid a civil war in this country, let me advise you, that the only means to that end, is to establish the right of Free Discussion. Where there was free and fair discussion, there would never be internal war: the whole of the community, would soon subside into patriots of the same mind, and the interest of all would be seen to be placed upon the same basis.

It is very likely that this question will be pressed upon

your attention and that of the Parliament within a few weeks, and I would have you all bear in mind, that whether you sanction it or not, we, the people, can practice it. Some will shrink from it for fear of the pains and penalties now attending it, but there are others who are determined to practise it at all costs. One individual who takes the right path can agitate the whole community upon an important question.

It is the agitation of the mind that produces knowledge, and Free Discussion is the best of all means to generate knowledge and to civilize mankind. No people will merit the title of being civilized so long as there is the least restraint upon discussion among them. Free Discussion will be the first stamp-mark of civilization.

It is hinted in the public papers, that you are anxious to abrogate one barbarous and uncivilized law that affects your present happiness, and you may rely on it that any thing of this kind will find the approbation of the people, so far as they care about the matter. I allude to that law which compels the Royal Family to seek husbands and wives from other Royal Families. The same or a similar law prevents you from marrying a Catholic, and it would be well, if by one simple act of the Parliament, you abolished all such barbarous restraints and proclaimed universal freedom in all religious matters and marriages. Every man would prefer your taking a beautiful woman to wife of our own country, in preference to your bringing a female from abroad and saddling the industry of this country, with the charge of another family of Royal Beggars. We have had quite enough of the Brunswicks and the Cobourgs to enrich already, and you will not lose an atom of popularity were you to take to wife some healthy and handsome milk-maid of this coun

try. I know not where a cross of breed is more essential than among the existing Royal Families of Europe, for the whole of them have actually grown up to a state of idiotcy, and if the breed be not crossed with some healthy and intelligent persons, we shall soon see a new species of degraded human beings that have no more intellect than the baboon tribe. At present there is neither soul or animation in them, similar to what is found among the industrious mass of mankind.

Never a King has had a greater opportunity of bettering the condition of mankind than you have had, and unless you proceed to perform something of the kind, you may rely onit that the people of this country will dispense with your services and do what is necessary for themselves. You told your father, as report goes, during the French Revolution, that he would outlive the race of Kings, or live until Kings were out of fashion, and they seem to be on the decline in a most rapid manner; but why do not you suit yourself to the taste of the times? You have no kind of excuse, and for the few years that you can calculate on living, if you were to assist in abrogating some of the barbarous laws which enthral the people of this, and a neighbouring Island, you would place yourself upon a bed of roses, in comparison to what your present situation must be.

The people want a cheap government, a strong government, and one that leaves them every species of personal and mental liberty, and you would find yourself much more secure by seeking to support yourself by the patronage of such a people, than by the multifarious species of corruptions which are now in existence, to support, what is basely called, the necessary influence of the crown.

If you do not, at present, feel disposed to yield to any abrogation of old laws and customs but this one which is necescessary to indulge yourself with a young home-born wife, let me advise you to add, that which, as I have before said, will be but making a virtue of necessity, the one which shall sanction every species of Free Discussion. Government exists or ought to exist, not for the benefit of Kings, but for the people, and they ought to assert the right of Free Discussion, that they may decide, upon sound knowledge, what is best, and enforce its establishment.

All feudal notions are now abrogated with the great body of the people. Aristocracy has no influence. I look upon myself as equal to any man living. I treat none as superiors and none as inferiors whose moral characters are good and I have determined to put myself on a footing of equality with any man with whom I may come in contact. It is upon this principle that I see nothing gracious in your Majesty, and offer you no such fulsome adulation.

R. CARLILE.