testant, his father shall be tenant for life," is the horror of Chriftendom, and an indelible ftain on her memory. "Laws written in cha"racters of blood," fays an illuftrious member, in his fpeech on the Popery bills. This law effectually diffolves the ties of nature, reverfes filial duty, and fubjects a tender and aged father to the empire of a profligate fon, who for the fake of pleasure and diffolution, would fubfcribe the Alcoran in Conftantinople, as Toon as he would the thirty-nine articles in Dublin, and fay with the Count of Bonneval, "In turning Turk I have only exchanged my "hat for a turban." It is true, that her victorious generals have graced the annals of the queen, but in the eyes of a Chriftian, her inclemency and ductility, fhall for ever difgrace the hiftory of the Stuarts.

1

Hitherto we have taken a retrofpective view of our obligations to thofe our royal benefactors: let us now look forward to the agreeable scene, and enchanting profpect of riches and bleflings, we expect from their refloration.

In reality, fir, a dear bought experience has broke this charm that bewitched our ancestors in favour of the Stuarts. Whilft they were our kings, we exerted ourselves to fupport them on the throne, more from principle than

faction; and had other monarchs fwayed the fceptre, we would have done the fame. In a word, we fell with our kings, and the very offspring of thofe kings have chained us clofer to the ground. Now the tide of thofe fatal commotions has fubfided. This tumult that distracted the nation in the Stuarts reign is allayed. Are we to quit the reality in pursuit of a fhadow? What would we have gained, had the Pretender been crowned at Weltminfter? An aggravation of our yoke, and new calamities? The penal laws relaxed in their execution by the clemency of government, would have been revived with new vigour. The edge of perfecution, blunted by the very humanity of our fellow fubjects, would have been new tempered, and fharpened.

You will answer, perhaps, that fuch ufage could not be expected from a Catholic prince. Folly! pardon the expreflion. You know that the throne is the moft dazzling object of human ambition. Tho' a great distance from its steps, and the impoflibility of obtaining it renders the moft part of mortals infenfible to its charms, yet in regard to those who are entitled to it by their birth, it is a magnet that attracts their hearts, the great idol, to which they would facrifice their very blood, and the water of Lethe,

erazing

erazing by its oblivious qualities all impreffions of friendship, gratitude, and even religion. Of this, hiftory, both facred and profane, affords feveral inftances. Athalia murdered the princes of the royal houfe of Judah. Tullia drove her chariot over her father's body, and dyed its wheels in his blood, from an eagerness to be faluted queen. In the time of the crufades, a Catholic prince was found in the number of the flain, with the marks of circumcifion on his body. He expected the kingdom of Jerufalem from Saladin; and this fervent Chriftian, who a few years before would have Spilt his blood in defence of Chrift's fepulchre, fold Christ himself, for the dominion of a city in which he had been crucified,

I do not mean, fir, that any of our regal candidates would turn Turks for the fake of a crown. But certain I am, that the tranfition is eafy from Popery to Proteftantifm, and from Proteftantism to Popery, when a diadem is the reward of converfion. In my humble opinion, Charles the Third, would have removed Pope and Popery out of his way to the throne. To clear himself from the fufpicion of a Popish cancer, the oppreflion of Papifts would have been the best deterfive. A Catholicon very familiar to the Stuarts!

Perhaps

Perhaps I país a rafh judgment on this che rifhed twig of the Stuart ftock: If fo, I retract. But all we expect from him is the liberty to faft and pray; this we enjoy without his mediation, and it would be madnefs to forfeit.

Incapable and unwilling to hurt the public, willing and incapable to ferve it; equally deftitute of property and arms to defend it, our duty is confined to paffive loyalty, inforced by religion. Let intereft and the liberty of purchafing step in as an active principle, you will not find one Catholic in the kingdom but will be as fanguine as yourself in defence of his fubftance, and the common caufe, against Pope or Pretender. We daily fee two brothers fight with the animofity of open enemies, for a legacy or a spot of ground. We read of Popes, who in defence of their territories have entered into leagues with Proteftant princes, against Catholic powers. Property then is fo interwoven with felf-prefervation, that few or none will run the hazard of lofing it in compliment to another, were he even a faint, and of all mortals the Stuarts are the leaft entitled to the facrifice of our acknowledgment.

Yet, as the frowardnefs of fuperiors does not evert their authority, and as the defcendants of bad princes may have a rightful claim, one

point more remains to be difcuffed, viz. Whether we can in confcience renounce all allegiance unto the grandfon of James the Second, whofe abdication of the throne has been the effect of fear and compulfion? Has not the fon a right tọ the eftate of which his father has been deprived by force? And in oppofing this right do I not commit a flagrant injufticé?

This important queftion is to be folved by the fundamental laws of the realm, general principles, grounded on impartial reason, and the ordinary difpenfation of Providence, directing the revolutions and viciffitudes of human affairs.

From the earliest times, the laws have decreed, that although the crown be hereditary, yet the right of fucceffion is not indefeasible. The English have defeated, and altered the fucceffion as early as the time of Edward the Confeffor, who was chofen king during the life of the lawful heir. The hiftory of England affords feveral inftances of the kind, a long time before the acceflion of the Stuarts to the throne. The law both in present and past times, is, and has been, "That the crown is hereditary in "the wearer: that the king and both houfes "of parliament can defeat this hereditary right, and by particular limitations exclude the im"mediate