that in 1810, he was employed in | Moorfields; why he quitted his employment he does not state, but it is more than probable he would not wish to make the occasion too public. I will pass over the greater part of his evidence, and come to that part which is most important to the present question. In answering one of the questions put to him, he took occasion to remark, that "the Irish have a disinclination to send their children to schools avowedly Protestant;" and it was with a knowledge of such disinclination that his masters urged him, or he urged his masters, I care not which, to stile their schools Catholic; for they well knew, that while the Irish objected to any thing Protestant, their partiality to every thing Catholic was not less strong: so that, by their own declaration, we find hypocrisy was of necessity resorted to, in order to obtain the attendance of the children at the schools and this is yet the case; for, although in the evidence given before the Committee, as well as in all their late public appeals, the word Catholic is omitted, and that of Free introduced, yet look at the inscription over the door of the school-house, and you will find the word "Catholic" still remaining and but a little time ago I met with the school in procession, with their purple flags, and, in gilt conspicuous letters, on them was, "St. Giles's Irish Catholic Schools." From this it is evident that they wish to carry two faces; the one for their liberal minded subscribers, and the other for the unfortunate victims of their hypocrisy. On this latter score, I have further and more conclusive evidence, namely, the testimony of the poor people themselves; for out of upwards of 40 families which I visited, all having children at Finnigan's schools, I did not find one acquainted with the circumstance of his having declared himself a Protestant, as well as his establishment, until I informed them, which was about two months ago. Until then they had all thought him a Catholic; indeed, that circumstance seemed only to increase their contempt for his character: but they are in general so wretchedly poor, they are unable to procure covering for their children. They assured me that nothing but necessity, hard necessity, prevented their withdrawing their children from what they termed Finigan's schools. It is at this time, when they see a remedy before them, that of giving clothes to the children, that the Catho lics ought to come forward, and en deavour to accomplish that most desirable object; it is now that the Catholic charities should strain every nerve to clothe all the children on their different establishments; nay, it is their duty to do so; and I am sensible that if all their members would make it a point to send their left off clothes to the school, (which would be an act of charity) instead of giving them to their servants, (which is no charity) it would not be difficult to effect the clothing of all the children, though not in uniform; and then let the uniform be considered as a reward for good behaviour. What an opportunity now offers itself for the selfnamed Board to come forward and redeem its character with the Catholic public! How well would their funds be employed in assisting in clothing the children of their poor!-They would then, in deed and word, be a Catholic Board, worthy the support and admiration of their Catholic brethren; they would then be engaged for the honour and glory, instead of the degradation, of their religion : but, alas! vain would be the hopes and futile the expectations of him who could form the most distant anticipation of such a circumstance. Among its leaders there is too much religion on the lip, and too much hypocrisy in the conscience; they have a load of liberality, but no charity. These observations do not of course apply to all its members; no, far from it: many of them are very active in Catholic charities, and great supporters of them. They are confined principally to the leaders of that Board, is not then the love of civil liberty, I but hatred to Catholicity, which predominates in the breast of our self praising philosophers and illuminees. In proof of this, we have only to quote the words of another enlightened Scotchman at the Glasgow meeting, a Mr. Russel, who said "what grieves us worst of all is, to think of the the woful result of all this waste of blood and treasure. The restoration of Bourbon to the throne of France, seemingly contrary to the wishes and will of at least nine-tenths of the French people the restoration of the Pope and all his delusive train of priests, monks, nuns, friars, and such stuff, for whose downfall our clergymen once used zealously to pray-the restoration of the deceitful Jesuitsthe restoration of the grateful and persecuting Ferdinand, and the horrible torments of the Inquisition. These, O cursed war, (exclaimed the pious speaker) are thy fruits; and these have at least partly been accomplished by British gold, British blood, and British valour. The sorrow of this staunch popery-hater at the result of the late war, appears to have spread to the whole assembly, and to have dreadfully alarmed them lest the "Scarlet Lady" with her delusive train of monks and friars, and the deceitful Jesuits, should spread themselves around the Continent, and from thence step over to Scotland and delude or deceive them out of those 66 glorious" privileges which, in their innate love of " liberty," they have so long exclusively enjoyed. For in one of their resolutions they say We have only to refer to the forcible reestablishment of the despicable family of Bourbon on the throne of France, to the restoration of the Pope in Italy, and of the Jesuits and the Inquisition in Spain, and, in short, to the re-establishment every where of that bigotry and despotism, which disgraced the darkest periods of European his tory; the whole filling us with the most anxious concern, not only for our own civil and religious liberties, but - also for the civil and religious liberties of the whole of Europe." Really these are very kind, very philanthropic patriots; they are not only alarmed for themselves, but they are under the greatest apprehension for Europe also; yet the sweetly-benevolent creatures, cannot not feel a pang for their poor proscribed Catholic fellow-subjects in Ireland. Year after year have they petitioned to be admitted to those pri vileges enjoyed by Catholics under Protestant Sovereigns on the continent, but not a simper, nor a sigh, have they been able to obtain in their behalf from these choice friends of ciyil and religious liberty! They can talk of protecting the liberties of Europe; they can blubber at the sup posed persecutions of French Protestants; they can accuse others of injustice, when they are far more guilty of it themselves towards their own Catholic fellow-subjects; they can dwell on the supposed grievances of Europe, but they cannot even notice those which oppress the Catholics of Ireland. To be just at home is not the object of our modern statesmen ; their charity must be extended to fo reign countries, and it is to this dabbling in the concerns of other nations, instead of attending to their own, we must attribute all the calamities under which we labour. But in order to make the absurdity of these declamations more clear to the reader, I will conclude this article with quoting the arguments used by some of these patriots against the adversaries of a Reform in Parliament, for which they are now strongly contending. In the first place, then, Mr. Cobbett, in a letter addressed to Sir Francis Burdett, pub lished in one of his late Registers, says, 66 However, it is necessary to state somewhat of the outline of the Reform we seek; because, as is the ease in most other good cases, there are sham Reformers, who mean any thing but that which the people wish for and want. What the people seek for is a real Reform; a restoration to the whole of their own rights, without violating the rights of others. The rights of the people according to Magna Charta; according to the Constitution and the ANCIENT laws of the kingdom are, that they are to be taxed only by their own consent, and that they shall yearly chose their representatives." He farther observes, "the ancient law, above quoted by Mr. Baron Maseres, gives this very reason for annual Parliaments: Item: for maintenance of the said articles and statutes, and the redress of divers mischiefs and grievances, which daily happen, a parliament shall be holden every year, as formerly was ordained by statute. So that, (he adds) this was no new law even in 1331;" which be it observed was 200 years before the spiritual supremacy of the pope was abrogated by an English lay Parliament, and conferred on the lustful Henry. Secondly, Mr. Walter Fawkes, a Member of the Hampden Club, in a letter to Lord Milton, published about four years ago, says, "Your Lordship has often demanded of the Friends of Reform, to what period they would revert to seek for the Constitution of England. The Reformers, my Lord, will make answer and tell you, that the REAL CONSTITUTION, only with a much greater latitude of suffrage than is now sought for, existed from the earliest times;" and .6 the Reformers will tell you, my Lord, that it was lost, BOTH IN THEORY AND PRACTICE, during the distracted times of the latter period of the 15th century;" that is, when it was thought necessary to reform religion by introducing corruption into the state. Thirdly, This is farther confirmed by the following declaration of the Pirmingham Hampden Club, established in September last:Annual Parliaments were proved (say they) by an experience of several centuries to be amply sufficient for all the legitimate purposes of the state, and for the security of the national interests. It was not, till the sovereign found it convenient, for the gratification of a criminal ambition, that ORTHOD. JOUR. Vol. IV. their duration was extended. History shews, that these innovations were always attended with the most baneful consequences; as in the case of Henry VIII, who, to promote the objects of his brutal lust, his insatiable avaric, and relentless cruelty, first extend d their duration beyond the period of three years; truly calculating, as facts subsequently proved, that, when a Parliament becomes, for a short period, independent of the people, there happens a most dangerous dependence somewhere else. The latter periods of our history furnish decisive and melancholy evidence of the slavish submission of Parliaments of an unconstitutional duration to the influ ence of the Crown; and the experience of our own times, distinguished by incessant war-lavish and unnecessary. expenditure-overwhelming debtinsupportable taxation-and augmented pauperism-confirms the testimony of former ages, and loudly demands a return to the ANCIENT practice of the Constitution."---So far our Protestant Réformers. What now becomes of the lamentation of the Glasgow meet-' ingers, at "the re-establishment every where of that bigotry and despotism which disgraced the darkest periods of European history?" Is it not here acknowledged by men enrolled in the cause of obtaining a restoration of their rights, that in these dark ages, and in these dark ages only, this country enjoyed the blessings of civil free-. dom? Is it not here avowed that from the period of the Reformation, so called, the liberties of the people have been gradually devouring by the hydra-headed monster Corruption? And is it not here plainly declared, that the experience of our own times loudly demands a return to the ancient practice of the Constitution, as it was under our Catholic ancestors? Can any words give the lie direct more plainly to the so often asserted ca. lumny, that the Catholic religion is inimical to civil liberty, than the declaration of our Protestant advocates. for Reform? How absurd, how in-> 3 I consistent; then is the conduct of, those public speakers, who endeav ur to inflame the popular feelings against the religious principles of five millions of their fellow subjects, who have had no hand in regulating the national affairs, seeing they are deprived of their civil privileges, and which they are desirous of regaining that they may exercise them for the benefit of the commonweal. Neither the Pope, nor the Jesuits, nor the Inquisition, had any influence in bringing on the distresses which now afflicts us, why then abuse them for what we suffer? There is something so mean, so cowardly, so base in this conduct; something so unworthy the character of a high-minded Briton, that one cannot help feeling the utmost contempt and indignation at the stupid and gross religious prejudices of our self-conceited and vain-boasting apostles of civil and religious freedom; whom I shall endeavour to shew in my next, have been hitherto only worshipping the shadow of liberty, while they ostentatiously brag of enjoying the substance. EDUCATION OF ROMAN CATHOLIC CHILDREN. After the foregoing article was prepared for the press, I received by the two-penny post a pamphlet just published, entitled, On the Education of Roman Catholic Children, and the Rejection of the Bible by their Priests; to which is subjoined an Extract from the Pope's Bull Unigenitis: the whole being reprinted from an Appendix to a History of the Jesuits, &c. in two volumes, 8vo. 1816; wherein the origin, progress, suppression, revival, and present proceedings of that Order, are fully detailed and authenticated.” This pamphlet contains eighty pages, seven of which only, including the title and an advertisement page at the end, contain original matter; the rest, with the exception of a few notes, is formed of a portion of the printed evidence given before the Committee of the House of Commons on the Education of the Poor, and selected with peculiar care for the purpose intended, that of feeding the prejudices of Protestants against their Catholic brethren, and to serve as a harbinger or feeder to the history in question. I was informed some months ago, that such a work was in the press, and that the author of it was no less a celebrated character than Mr. RALIB, alias LACIUS, otherwise W. B., who has figured away of late years as the bitter enemy of Popery and Popish Priests, and is a leading member of the Bloomsbury Committee for reforming the manners of the poor Irish in St. Giles's, by learning their children to read the Protestant Bible, without any other kind of religious instruction. Indeed this poor gentleman is much to be pitied; for notwithstanding his skill in pharmacy, he is so inveterately afflicted with those dreadful maladies, that were he not subject to these perithe Bible influenza and Jesuitphobia, odical discharges of bile, the workings of his diseased stomach would be too powerful for his unhappy cranium, and the most fatal consequences might be expected from the strength of the disorder. But had I not received this information, the very stile and spirit of the language is sufficient to discover the author; for a greater degree of malignancy against Popery, or more insuperable bigotry, cannot be displayed, than runs through all the productions of this writer, of which the following advertisement prefixed to the pamphlet is a genuine sample: "A formal and elaborate defence of Jesuitism having appeared, in which (among other strange things) the system of up to public admiration, a Keply to Education afforded by the Jesuits is held Mr. Dallas's work, together with a regular History of the Order of the Jesuits, was printed, in two volumes, át the close of the present year; and an Appendix was added to the second volume, treating exclusively on the Education of Roman Catholics. It has been deemed proper to reprint that Appendix in a separate pamphlet, as this subject had recently excited the attention of the Honourable House of Commons, and of the British Public in general. The friends of religious and civil liberty will here see what in these times! Dare to scorn the are the grand obstacles to the instruction | borrowed plume.) and, he contiand civilization of a large class of our nues, they "will regret to find, that poor countrymen; and will regret to find, no measures of kindness or conciliation that no measures of kindness or conciliacan remove the prejudices and mitition can remove the prejudices and mitigate the intolerance of Romish Priests, gate the intolerance of the Romish* while actuated by the tenets of a domi Priests, while actuated by the tenets neering Hierarchy. How far it may be of a domineering Hierarchy."-Why, prudent to invest men of such illiberal what a set of obstinate fellows these principles with legislative or political pow- "Romish Priests" must be, that neier, in a Protestant State, is a question de- ther bribery, nor threats, nor corrupserving the gravest consideration: for it tion, nor slander, nor kindness, nor must be hazardous to place implicit and cajolery, nor conciliation, (a fashionunmixed confidence in any professions, able charm too) nor any means which however solemn, which the inflexible members of that Church may make of have hitherto been tried, can make personal attachment to Protestants. Se- them swerve one jot from that line of veral persons (says Dean Milner,) and duty which they conscientiously beeven some of our leading Senators, sup- lieve to be right, and which they pose that Popery has long since been a- have devoted their time and talents, bundantly meliorated; but I wish they and even their lives, to preserve and may not be nearer the truth, who think maintain. What! dare to be honest that the spirit of Protestantism has great ly degenerated."" I shall pass over the disingenuity of" kindness and conciliation" of scripthe writer in attempting to explain the motive which induced him to issue this "separate" pamphlet, and come at once to the apparent object which he intended it should produce, which is neither more nor less than to influence the public mind against the claims of the Catholics to be admitted to the civil privileges of the Empire, because, forsooth, they are, to a man, inflexibly attached to their duty, and zealously opposed to the sham liberality of the Bloomsbury Saints, who wish to Protestantize the children of indigent Irishmen, under the specious pretence of enlightening their understandings, instead of devising measures whereby their parents might exercise their own industry, and support and educate their children, without availthemselves of the present fashionable pauperizing system. tural infatuation! Dare to set at can only be done, in my opinion, by The friends of religious and civil liberty will see, he says, by the evidence of those Catholics who were examined before the Education Com-duty must be strongly enforced, which mittee what are the grand obstacles to the instruction and civilization of a large class of our poor countrymen (Does the author wish to pass for an Irishman? If he does, I am sure they will not acknowledge him, any more than the birds did the jackdaw in his they receive from their pastors.”Well, reader, can any thing be more just, can any thing be more conducive to the instruction and civilization of the lower orders, than the princi |