they were; on the contrary, new sources of discontent were open to them by refusing them admission to the higher ranks of the army, by refusing them promotion at the bar, and in other respects, and it was only by giving them the same facilities of arriving at promotion that were enjoyed by their protestant brethren, that that discontent could be allayed. It was said that this would lead to the repeal of the test act, and other, what were called securities. He (lord Grey) could not see any danger in this consequence; he, on the contrary, thought the catholics of Ireland ought to have all the lines of promotion opened to them; that the catholics of Eng land, who were worse off than the former, though their loyalty had been conspicuous, ought also to receive the same advantages, and that with regard to the dissenters, of whose loyalty and attachment to the government there could be no doubt, the test act ought to be repealed, which, in fact, had become a dead letter, by the passing of an annual indemnity bill.

The lord CHANCELLOR could not agree with the noble earl. The ground of his opposition was, the nature of our constitution with respect to the king's supremacy. He would pass over the time of Henry VIII, when the king's supremacy was established; he would pass over the statute of the 1st of Elizabeth, when the supremacy of the church was again established; but let their lordships remember, that at the revolution, if ever a legislative measure was adopted to secure to the utmost the protestant establishment, it was at that time.Much had been argued from the writings of Locke; but he would venture to say, that no man in the world had been so decidedly hostile to the claims of the catholics That eminent writer had positively declared, that, according to the Romish creed, faith was not to be kept with heretics; that they pronounced all who are not of their own communion to be heretics; and that they claimed the power of excommunicating kings; he, therefore, thought that they ought not to be admitted into power, since they delivered themselves over to another prince, When he (the lord Chancellor) stated, that these were the opinions of Mr. Locke, at the revolution, he hoped he might say, that there had been times when the principles of the catholics were considered to be dangerous. He hoped he might be permitted to call the attention of their lordships, that they were now debating what they should do between catholics and protestants, considering the obligation they had all come under to maintain the constitution of England. It could not be forgotten, that an act was passed in the reign of Charles II. to enforce a declara. tion against transubstantiation. It was for the better prevention of Roman catholics

being admitted into parliament that that act was passed; and no man living could read the bill of rights without seeing that the civil and religious liberties of this country were to support each other. The preamble of that bill expressly stated, that the late king James had endeavoured to subvert the protestant religion, and therefore certain persons had sent for king William for what? Not merely to secure their civil liberties, but also their religion. They tendered the crown to him, as a crown to be worn by a protestant, and by a protestant only; and it was positively declared, that in case the crown should devolve on a person professing the Roman catholic religion, he should be considered as ipso facto dead, and the crown should devolve on the next protestant heir. It was utterly impossible that any man could read the bill of rights without understanding that popery was inconsistent with the principles of our constitution. The oath

of supremacy was established at the same time; and it asserts, that no foreign power ought to have any jurisdiction, either civil or religious, within this realm. Again, if we looked at the oath of a privy counsellor, it denied the authority, both civil and ecclesiastical, of all foreign prelates whatsoever. With respect to himself, he had long entertained an opinion utterly inconsistent with the principles on which this question had been debated this night. He must say, that according to his reason and apprehension, it went to the destruction of all the safeguards of the constitution. His majesty was to lose his throne if he became a Roman catholic; and be it remembered, that the bishops were specially summoned to consult as to the good of the church. If the king, then, could not be a Roman catholic, how could the affairs of the state be administered by popish officers? He would repeat, that our ancestors, at the time of the revolution, had made it their business to secure this nation against the effects of popery, and this was the constitution which we were bound to transmit to posterity. The Roman catholic religion was decidedly hostile to the principles of a free government. The most eminent writers, Milton, Locke, Temple, Somers, and king William himself, had recorded this opinion; and James the second was deprived of his crown because he had attempted to introduce that religion into the state. What, then, should we now overturn all that our ancestors had done? What would the nation say to this? What would be the feelings of the protestant part of our people. As he understood the constitution, it was his bounden duty to give his dissent to the motion it was hostile to the liberties of the country, both civil and religious; and went to the destruction of every security for which our ancestors had struggled.

since been addressed to the editor of The Courier, by the bishop of Ossory, in expla nation of what had been said by the rev. prelate in another place, which stated, that at the inauguration of the king of the Netherlands, a letter had been thrust under every door, declaring that no good catholic could take the oath of allegiance to a protestant prince; but the Brussel's Gazette soon after contained an account, that when the king was at Tournay, he had resided with the bishop, and expressed his satisfaction at the conduct of the Roman catholic clergy, and said that the differences between himself and them would be shortly settled by the interference of the holy see. The honourable baronet then obseryed generally, that there was no foundation for the charges which had been made against Ireland, and concluded by moving, "That an humble address be presented to his royal highness the prince regent. that be would be graciously pleased to have laid before the house, copies of extracts of any communications which may have been received from the college of Maynooth, relative to the course of edu cation adopted in that seminary."

Sir JOHN Cox HIPPPISLEY seconded the motion; and observed, that the subject then before the house was one of the greatest importance to the interest of the empire at large; for it referred to the religious and moral education of the people, and involved their own happiness and the safety of the empire. Sir John Cox Hippisley then answered the call upon him, to ascertain what was to be understood by transalpine doctrines, stated to be maintained at Maynooth. The infallibility of the pope constituted the first principle, and from thence flowed his superiority over general councils, and the assumption of a supremacy in temporals as well as spirituals; but it was not to be understood as the general maintained doctrine, even at the Vatican; a more liberal and rational code prevailed there. Individual and powerful pontiffs, such as Gregory the seventh, and many of his predecessors, bad asserted these arrogant principles, but their adherents, he believed, were now but few; nevertheless, they were to be guarded against, and there was scarcely a state in Europe, of whatever religious communion, but had so guarded itself against their contagion. The honourable baronet then went into farther detail, and said that he had given notice of a motion for the production of the Concordat between the court of Portugal and the see of Rome, and as he wished to spare the time of the house, he should now shortly state his motion, as it was not unconnected with the object of the present question, and thereby spare the house any farther comment. In one of many publications, adverting to the late report of the select

committee on catholic regulations, a charge had been made of withholding this docu ment, which, in fact, was only an agree ment between Portugal and Rome, to divide the patronage of the benefices falling vacant in the papal months of patronage. It appeared, by the printed letter of Sir Charles Stuart, that it had been sent by him to the foreign office; but, as it was not deemed of sufficient importance to be printed, an implied charge was raised on the omission. The honourable baronet then proceeded to the work of Mr. Gandolphy, a work which had been stated as approved by the official authorities of Rome, and licensed as such. Well might it attract the observation and denunciation of those honourable members who noticed it. Nothing could be more insulting to the establishment, and the government of the country. The honourable baronet then read a passage, in which protestants were charged with intentionally debauching the morals of their own children, if they suspected them inclined to lend an ear to catholic teachers. Fortunately, however, for the catholics and for the public, though Mr. Gandolphy's works had surtively obtained the official Imprimatur of Rome,he now stood censured by the same authority, and was ordered to suppress his books, and make a formal and public recantation of his errors to his immediate superior, the apostolic vicar of his district. Such was the fate of Mr. Gandolphy's works-at one moment declared fit to be enclosed in cedar and gold-at the next doomed to censure and abrogation. But to return to the immediate subject of the motion. He begged to call the attention of the house to the documents which had been moved for some years since. Nothing could be more opposed to transalpine opinions.— The course of education was precisely conformable to the principles of the Galican church, and the courses of the Sorbonne, where Dr. De la Hogue had been himself a professor. Under such a visitorial power as obtained at Maynooth, it was scarcely possible that the exploded transalpine doctrines could be suffered to be taught. The lord chancellor, the chief justices, lord Fingal, and other highly accredited and loyal persons, constituted the visitors; and the hon. baronet said, he had the satisfaction of receiving within a few days from lord Fingal, then in the actual exercise of his visitatorial powers, the full confirmation of the rectitude of their courses as conformable to the tracts which had been laid before the house. From professor de la Hogue, he had also received a letter complaining of the imputation in the printed speech of the hon. member for Yarmouth, and after particularising the courses, be exclaims, Is this to teach Transalpine doctrines?" He referred also in the same letter to the fact of the hon. baronet's

ba ving, in a former debate, led Mr. chancellor Perceval to a confession that he had not made a due distinction between the construction of decrees of doctrine and discipline, as the former were held to be immutable, and discipline might change and be adapted to times and circumstances. He then stated, as an instance, the discipline of the council of Trent respecting marriages, which had been adopted by the church of England; it nevertheless was not re. ceived or acted upon in six of the principal dioces of Ireland, includiug Dublin, nor could. therefore, all decrees of general councils be held to be generally obligatory. The honourable baronet then adverted to the report of the aggregate meeting of Dublin, on the 4th instant, in which they persisted in their former resolution, adverse to the interference of the crown, and supporting domestic nomination. A vote of thanks to Mr. Hayes also was referred to the consideration of the board-to Mr. Hayes, the delegate of the aggregate meeting to the see or Rome-to a person distinguished by the insolence of his attacks upon the constitution of his country, upon its go. vernment, and even npon the principal functionary of the Roman government, the cardinal secretary of state to a person who, on being admitted to the pope to receive his benediction, was dismissed with the pontifical reproval of "Depart, rash man!" It was worth noticing that this father, delegate Hayes, loudly demanded associates in his embassy, or the whole would be lost. Dr. Drom. goole, well known by his speeches and writings, and a Mr. M'Auley, a brother of a count of that pame, attached to the ex-empress of France, was another associate. Sir John Cox Hippisley here read from a Dublin paper, an extract of a letter from Dr. Dromgoole, suggesting how necessary it was for Rome to be on its guard against the govern. ment of England-in a word, of most mischievous import, and which merited the reprobation of every loyal subject. Of such materials were the accredited delegates of the aggregate meetings of Ireland composed! Of the same complexion was a work which had been presented to the ministers of Rome, and stated to "be got nearly by heart by one of them"-the statement of penal laws. It was sufficient to refer to the speech of the attorney general, and the denunciation of the judge who tried an information against this book, to appreciate the value of the present, as coming from a British subject to a Roman minister. Sir J. H. followed with a quotation from Mr. Clinch's Inquiry. The works of this gentleman had been presented to the ministers of the pope; it was fair to Mr. Clinch, however, to state, that he was at issue with his patrons when be asserted, that "the protestantism of the crown would, even in the case of the concession to the catholic claims, remain as a land-mark to shew that our freedom has been a gift." The honourable baronet observed, that it had been argued that we had sedulously maintained securities for the protestant church. If by protestant church was meant the church of England, he would ask, where was the security? where was the security in any test Dow required, to exclude protestant dissenters of every denomination from sitting in parliament-or even the musselman, if a natural born subject? Sir J. H. regretted that in all the discussions of this important subject, none had ever yet taken place that could be deemed satisfactory, either to

the protestant or the catholic. No inquiry into the real tenets of catholics of the present day had ever been instituted a few set speeches annually closed the debate-no inquiry-no evidence whatever. Was it possible that such a course could be

satisfactory? Sir J. H. then referred to a pamphlet circulated by Dr. Milner, naming himself the agent of the Irish Bishops-an agency, however, which was strenuously denied by the bishops themselves, when recently on a mission to London. But Dr. Milner had great facilities of dispensing with the inaccuracies, to say the least, of his own statements. In this solemn address to the members of the house, Dr. Milner was pleased coarsely to accuse Sir J. H. with the wilful statement of an untruth. Sir J. H. read the original words of archbishop Egan's letter, which Dr. Milaer at tempted to fasten on him as a fabrication. Sir J. H. adverted also to this prelate's vacillations-at one moment the strenuous advocate of the Vetoat the next as strenuous an impugner of it. This gentleman was pleased also to represent Sir J. H. as the candidate for office-at one moment an em. bassy to Rome--at another for the Ministre de Culte. It is possible, observed the hon. baronet that I may early revisit that clime to which this prelate alludes-unquestionably, however, unaccredited and unpaid. He should not be withheld from attempting to rendersuch services tohis country, as at a former period he had not unsuccessfully attempted, and to represent the real state of this important question to those whom it imports so much to be apprised of it, might, at such a crisis, be not unreasonably considered as an act of some public benefit. He should, at least, not be deterred from the denunciations of such commentators. His walk over this thorny ground had been undeviating: nor should he now diverge from the course which, in his own humble opinion, was traced on the soundest constitutional ground of justice and expediency.

Mr.BUTTERWORTH rose to defend the principle

on which the schools for the education of the lower orders of the people in Ireland were founded, and which, he asserted. was far removed from the spirit of proselytism, of which the hon. baronet had complained, He read some extracts from the report of the committee on education in Ireland, to shew that the catholic priests were unwilling to suffer children of their church to attend at those schools, and that their parents feared to send them there, under the apprehension of excommunication. With respect to the opposition made by the pope to the distribution of bibles in Polaud, and which had been attributed to the attempts of the bible societies at proselytism, he stated that the pope's bull had been issued before a bible society had been established in Poland.

Sir H. PARNELL decla: ed, that in his speech this evening he had by no means confined his remarks to the speech of the learned member for Yarmouth. The reason why he had not alluded to this subject earlier was, he apprehended, evident. The grant to Maynooth college had been repeatedly postponed, and he was thus deprived of the opportunity of making the observations he had made. As to the imputations cast upon the catholic clergy, of eithe opposing any attempts of the bible soeieties or any others for the diffusion of education in Ireland, or withholding their aid from so laudable a pursuit, he could assure the house, that there was not the slightest foundation for such an imputation. The motion was then carried.

THE

DETECTED.

THE trifling error committed by our protestant manufacturers of papal bulls, in addressing one to the primate of a see, which I proved in my number for May to be vacant, has somewhat put the inventors of these base and indefensible tricks to a nonplus. But, hardened in their bigotted and iniquitous practises, their champion has again had recourse to the father of lies, to help them out of the scrape into which they have fallen, thus following the course adopted by old father MARTIN, in his attempt to put down the idolatrous mummery of the mass In the fourth number of the Antibiblion, which has been just handed to me, I find the following note explanatory of this blunder, which the inventors were so unwittingly guilty of:

"The unsettled orthography of Mohilef, on the river Dnieper, now under the government of Ru-sia, may mislead and confuse some leaders. It is likewise spelt Mogileff. Mogilev, Moghilev, Moghileff, Moghiley, Mohilev, Mohilov, and Mohilow.

The first manuscript of the pope's bull which arrived here, dated September 3, 1816, was addressed Archiepiscopo Mecheloviensi: but it should have been written either Mohileviensi or Mohiloviensi; aud this error was not observed before a second copy had been received from different part of the continent, after the translation of No. III. was printed off. The readers of the Antibiblion, therefore,

a

must remember that this last bull was addressed to the ARCHBISHOP OF MOHI

MECHLIN. The slight error of a German transcriber being thus rectified, will de

prive the Orthodox Journalist of his ridiculous pretence for boasting and cavil !— The two papal bulls are at present very SCRIPT, among the Romish clergy abroad; diligently and widely circulated, IN MANUand we regret that any Roman catholic in this country is so uncandid as still to doubt their perfect authenticity."

In addition to this explanation, the editor takes great credit to himself for not being ashamed to confess this small mistake, which he thinks is very bearable; but he is not willing to endure "the shame attached to the unblushing editor of the Orthodox Journal, for denying the authenticity of this papal document, on account of so trivial an error.”

When the bigots think it necessary to revile the catholics, for their credulity in believing the existence. of miracles, the latter are stunned with declamations against priestcraft and the impostures practised by the clergy to deceive and impose upon the ignorant and unwary of their flocks. But if the imputed inventions of popish priests were as clumsily contrived as the forgeries of protestant bigots, and the explanations given, in case of detection, as weak and worthless as that under discussion, they would obtain very few believers, but soon be descried as the veriest knaves in the world. Mr. Luther-Scrutator in skipping from the Dender to the Dnieper, unluckily

ORTHOD. JOUR. Vol. V.

2 L