A HISTORY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 * « . - . - 
 
 IN 
 
 Kttfllamr autr Kvetantt; 
 
 Showing how that event has impoverished the main 
 
 BODY OF THE PEOPLE IN THOSE COUNTRIES ; AND CON¬ 
 TAINING A LIST OF THE ABBEYS, PRIORIES, NUNNERIES, 
 HOSPITALS, AND OTHER RELIGIOUS FOUNDATIONS IN ENG¬ 
 LAND, AND WALES, AND IRELAND, CONFISCATED, SEIZED 
 ON, OR ALIENATED, BY THE PROTESTANT “ REFORMATION 5 ’ 
 SOVEREIGNS AND PARLIAMENTS. 
 
 £Y WILLIAM COBBETT, M. P. 
 
 IN A SERIES OF LETTERS, 
 
 ADDRESSED TO ALL SENSIBLE AND JUST ENGLISHMEN, 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
 ro WHICH IS NOW ADDED, THREE LETTERS, BYTHF 
 SAME AUTHOR, NEVER EEFORE PUELISHED 
 IN THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 NEW-YORK : 
 
 PUBLISHED BY D. & J. SADLIER & Co., 
 
 164 WILLIAM STREET, 
 
 BOSTON:—128 ‘FEDERAL STREET. 
 MONTREAL.:—1?9 NOTRE-DAME STREET 
 
 , 
 
 ooh-esk i: b ra n >r 
 
 t \ PSJsxkut u ill, ma sh 
 
I :i8802 
 
A HISTORY 
 
 ? Ur ' V'° 
 
 OF THE 
 
 PROTESTANT « EBFOEMATION^ 
 
 LETTER I. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Kensington, 29th Nov. 1824. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 1. We have recently seen a rescript from the King- to the 
 Bishops, the object of which was to cause them to call upon 
 their Clergy, to cause collections of money to be made in the 
 several parishes throughout England, for the purpose of pro¬ 
 moting what is called the “ religious education” of the people. 
 The Bishops, in conveying their instructions on this subject, to 
 their Clergy, direct them to send the money thus collected to a 
 Mr. Joshua Watson, in London, who, it seems, is the Treasurei 
 of this religious education concern, and who is, or lately was, a 
 wine and spirit dealer, in Mincing-lane, Fench-church-street.—- 
 This same Mr. Watson is also the head man of a society called 
 the “ Society for promoting Christian knowledge.” The pre¬ 
 sent Bishop of Winchester, in his first charge to the Clergy of 
 his diocese, says, that this society is the “ correct expounder of 
 evangelical truth, and firm supporter of the established church; 
 and he accordingly strongly recommends, that the publications 
 put forth by this society be put into the hands of the scholars 
 of those schools, to promote which, the above-mentioned col¬ 
 lections were made by royal authority. 
 
 2. We shall, further on, have an opportunity of asking what 
 sort of a Clergy this must be, who, while they swallow, in Eng¬ 
 land and Ii'eland, about eight millions a year,' t 'call upon their 
 parishioners for money to be sent to a wine and spirit merchan 4 
 
 nat he may cause the children of the country to have a “ rel’ 
 gious education But, not to stop, at present, for this purpose, 
 pray observe, my friends, that this society for “ promoting 
 Christian knowledge,” is continually putting forth publications 
 the object of which is to make the people of England believe, 
 that the Catholic religion is “ idolatrous and damnable and 
 that, of course, the one-third part of the whole of our 
 
4 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 subjects are idolaters , and are destined to eternal perdition, and 
 liiat they, of course, ought not to enjoy the same rights that we 
 Protestants enjoy. These calumniators know well, that this 
 same Catholic religion was, for nine hundred years , the only 
 Christian religion known to otr forefathers. This is a fact which 
 they cannot disguise from intelligent persons ; and, therefore, 
 they, like the Protestant Clergy, are constantly applauding the 
 change which took place about two hundred years ago, and 
 which change goes by the name of the REFORMATION. 
 
 3. Before we proceed further, let us clearly understand the 
 meaning of these words : Catholic, Protestant, and Refor¬ 
 mation. Catholic means universal , and the religion, which 
 takes this epithet, was called universal, because ail Christian 
 people of every nation acknowledge it to be the only true reli¬ 
 gion, and because they all acknowledge one and the same head 
 of the church, and this was the Pope, who, though he generally 
 resided at Rome, was the head of the church in England, in 
 France, in Spain, and, in short, in every part of the world 
 where the Christian religion was professed. But there came a 
 time, when some nations, or, rather, parts of some nations, cast 
 off the authority of the Pope, and, of course, no longer ac¬ 
 knowledged him as the head of the Christian Church. These 
 nations, or parts of nations, declared, or protested , against the 
 authority of their former head, and also against the doctrines 
 of that church, which, until now, had been the only Christian 
 Church. They, therefore, called themselves Protestors, or Pro- 
 lestanls; and this is now the appellation given to all who are 
 not Catholics. As to the word Reformation, it means an altera¬ 
 tion for the belter; and it would have been hard indeed if the 
 makers of this great alteration could not have contrived to give 
 it a good name. 
 
 4. 'Now, my friends, a fair and honest inquiry will teach us, 
 that this was an alteration greatly for the worse; that the Re¬ 
 formation, as it is called, was engendered in beastly lust, brought 
 forth in hypocrisy and perfidy, and cherished and fed by plun¬ 
 der, devastation, and by rivers of innocent English and Irish 
 blood; and that, as to its more remote consequences, they are, 
 some of them, now before us, in that misery, that beggary, that 
 nakedness, that hunger, that everlasting wrangling and spite, 
 which now stare us in the face and stun our ears at every turn, 
 and which the “ Reformation” has given us in exchange for the 
 ease and happiness and harmony aild Christian charity, enjoy¬ 
 ed so abundantly, and for so many ages, by our Catholic fore¬ 
 fathers. 
 
 5. Were there, for Ae entering on this inquiry, no motive 
 other than that of a bare love of justice, that motive alone, 
 would. I hope, be sufficient with the far greater part of English' 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 6 
 
 men. But, besides this abstract motive, there is another of great 
 and pressing practical inportance. A full third part of our fel- 
 /ow-subjects are still Catholics ; and when we consider that the 
 principles of the “ Reformation ” are put forward as the ground 
 for excluding them from their civil rights, and also as the 
 ground for treating them in a manner the most scornful, de¬ 
 spiteful, and cruel; when we c insider, that it is not in human 
 nature -hr men to endure such treatment, without wishing for, 
 and without seeking opportunities for taking vengeance ; when 
 we consider the present formidable attitude of foreign nations, 
 naturally our foes, and how necessary it is that we should all ba 
 cordially united, in order to preserve the independence of our 
 country ; when we consider that such union is utterly impossi¬ 
 ble as long as one-third part of the people are treated as out¬ 
 casts, because, and only because, they have, in spite of two 
 hundred years of persecutions unparalleled, adhered to the re¬ 
 ligion of their and of our fathers : when we consider these 
 things, that fair and honest inquiry, on which a bare love of 
 justice might well induce us to enter, presses itself upon us as a 
 duty which we owe to ourselves, our children, and our country. 
 
 6. If you will follow me in this inquiry, I will first show you 
 how this thing called the Reformation began; what it arose out 
 of; and then I will show you its progress, how it marched on, 
 plundering, devastating, inflicting torments on the people, and 
 shedding their innocent blood. I will ti'ace it downward through 
 all its stages, until I show you its natural result in the schemes 
 of Parson Malthus, in the Oundle-plan of Lord John Russell’s 
 recommending, in the present misery indescribable of the la¬ 
 bouring classes in England and Ireland, and in that odious and 
 detestable system, which has made Jews and paper-money ma¬ 
 kers the real owners of a large part of the estates in this kingdom 
 ' 7. But, before I enter on this series of deeds and of conse 
 quences, it is necessary to offer you some observations of a more 
 general nature, and calculated to make us doubt, at least, of the 
 truth of what we have heard against the Catholic religion. Our 
 minds have been so completely filled with the abuse of this re¬ 
 ligion, that at first we can hardly bring ourselves to listen to 
 any thing said in defence of it, or in apology for it. Those 
 whom you will, by-and-by, find in possession of the spoils of 
 the Catholic Church, and, indeed, of those of the Catholic no¬ 
 bles and gentlemen, not forgetting those of the poor; these 
 persons have always had the strongest possible motive for cau¬ 
 sing the people to be brought up in the belief, that the Catholic 
 religion was, and is, something to inspire us with horror. From 
 ®ur vei’y infancy, on the knees of our mothers, we have been 
 taught to believe, that to be a Catholic, was to be a false, cruel, 
 and bloody wiCch ; and “ popery and slavery' 1 ' 1 have been rung 
 
6 
 
 INTF.DDUCTION. 
 
 in our ears, till, whether we looked on the Catholics in their 
 private or their public capacity, we have inevitably come to the 
 conclusion, that they were every thing-that was vicious and vile. 
 
 8. But you may say, why should any body, and particularly 
 our countrymen, take such pains to deceive us l Why should 
 they, for so many years, take the trouble to write and publish 
 books of all sizes, from hig folios down to half-penny tracts, in 
 order to make us think ill of this Catholic religion ? Now, my 
 friends, take an instance in answer to this why. The immense 
 property of the Catholic Church in Ireland, in which, mind, the 
 poor had a share, was taken from the Catholics and given to the 
 Protestant Bishops and Parsons. These have never been able 
 to change the religion of the main body of the people of that 
 country; and there these Bishops and Parsons are enjoying the 
 immense'revenues without having scarcely any flocks . This 
 produces great discontents, makes the country continually in a 
 state of ferment, causes enormous expenses to England, and 
 exposes the whole kingdom to great dangers in case of war.— 
 Now, if those who enjoy these revenues, and their close con¬ 
 nexions in this country, had not made us believe that there was 
 someting very bad, wicked and hostile in the Catholic religion, 
 should we not, long ago, have asked why they put us to all this 
 expense for keeping that religion down? They never told us, 
 and they never tell us, that this Catholic religion was the only 
 religion known to our own forefathers for nine hundred years. 
 If they had told us this, we should have said, that it could not 
 possibly have been so very bad a religion, and that it would be 
 better to leave the Irish people still to enjoy it; and that, since 
 there were scarcely any Protestant flocks, it would be better for 
 us all if the Church revenues were to go again to the original 
 owners! 
 
 9. Ah ! my friends! here we have the real motive for all the 
 abuse, all the hideous calumnies that have been heaped upon 
 the Catholic religion, and upon all that numerous body of our 
 fellow-subjects who adhere to that ancient faith. When you 
 think of the power of this motive, you will not be surprised at 
 the great and incessant pains that have been taken to deceive 
 us. Even the Scripture itself has been perverted in efrder to 
 blacken the Catholics. In books of all sizes, and from the pul¬ 
 pit of every church, we have been taught from our infancy, that 
 the “ beast, the man of sin, and the scarlet whore,” mentioned 
 in the Revelations, were names which God himself had given to 
 the Pope ; and we have all been taught to believe of the Catho¬ 
 lic Church, that her worship was ‘ idolatrous,” and that her 
 doctrines were “ damnable.” 
 
 10. Now let us put a plain question or two to ourselves, and 
 ■o these our teachers ; and we shall quickly be able to form a 
 
INTRODUCTION - . 
 
 7 
 
 just estimate of the « Ailesty, sincerity, and consistency of these 
 revilers of the Catholic religion :—they will not, because they 
 cannot, deny, that this religion was the ONLY CHRISTIAN 
 religion in the world for fifteen hundred years after the death of 
 Christ. They may say, indeed, that for the first three hundred 
 years there was no Pope seated at Rome. But, then, for twelve 
 hundred years there had been ; and, during that period, all the 
 nations of Europe, and some part of America, had become 
 Christian, and all acknowledged the Pope as their head in reli¬ 
 gious matters; and, in short, there was no other Christian 
 Church known in the world, nor had any other ever been 
 thought of. Can we believe, then, that Christ, who died to save 
 sinners, who sent forth his gospel as the means of their salva¬ 
 tion, would have suffered a false Christian religion, and no other 
 than a false Christian religion, to be known amongst men all 
 this while l Will these modest assailants of the faith of their 
 and our ancestors assert to our faces, that, for twelve hundred 
 years at least, there w'ere no true Christians in the world ? Will 
 they tell us, that Christ, who promised to be with the teachers 
 of his word to the end of the world, wholly left them, and gave 
 up hundreds upon hundreds of millions of people to be led in 
 darkness to their eternal perdition, by one whom his inspired 
 followers had denominated the “ man of sin, and the scarlet 
 whore” ? Will they, indeed, dare to tell us, that Christ gave up 
 the world wholly to 11 Antichrist” for twelve hundred years ] Yet 
 this they must do; they must thus stand forward with bold and 
 unblushing blasphemy; or they must confess themselves guilty 
 of the most atrocious calumny against the Catholic religion. 
 
 11. Then, coming nearer home, and closer to our own bo¬ 
 soms,' our ancestors became Christians about six hundred years 
 after the death of Christ. And how did they become Christian ? 
 Who first pronounced the name of Christ to this land ? JVho 
 converted the English from Paganism to Christianity ? Some 
 Protestant saint, doubtless, warm from a victory like that of 
 Skibbereen; Oh, no! the work was begun, continued, and 
 ended by the Popes, one of whom sent over some Monks (of 
 whom we shall see more by-and-by) who settled at Canterbury, 
 and from whose beginnings the Christian religion spread, like 
 the grain of mustard-seed, rapidly over the land. Whatever, 
 therefore, any other part of the world might have known of 
 Christianity before the Pope became the settled and acknow¬ 
 ledged head of the church, England, at any rate, never had 
 known of any Christian religion other than that at the head of 
 which was the Pope ; and in this religion, with the Pope at its 
 head, England continued to be firmly fixed for nine hundred 
 years. 
 
 12 . What then : will our kind teachers tell us that it was “ the 
 
8 
 
 INTRIDUCTION 
 
 scarlet whore’' 1 and “ Antichrist” who brought the glad tidings 
 of the gospel into England! Will they tell us, too, that all the 
 millions and hundreds of millions of English people, who died 
 during those nine hundred years, expired without the smallest 
 chance of salvation? Will they tell us, that all our fathers, 
 who first built our churches, and whose flesh and bones form 
 the earth for many feet deep in all the church-yards; will thej 
 tell us, that all these are now howling in the regions of the 
 damned? Nature beats at our bosom, and bids us shudder at 
 the impious, the horrid thought! Yet this, even this, these pre- 
 sumptuous men must tell us-, or they must confess their base ca¬ 
 lumny in calling the Pope “ Antichrist,” and the Catholic wor¬ 
 ship “idolatrous,” and its doctrines “damnable.” 
 
 13. But, coming to the present time, the days in which we 
 ourselves live; if we look round the world, we shall find that 
 now, even now, about nine-tenths of all those who profess to be 
 Christians are Catholics. What, then ; has Christ suffered “ An¬ 
 tichrist” to reign almost wholly uninterrupted, even unto this 
 day ? Has Christ made the Protestant church ? Did he suggest 
 the “ Reformation”—and does he, after all, then, suffer the fol¬ 
 lowers of “ Antichrist” to out-number his own followers nine to 
 one 1 But, in this view of the matter, how lucky have been the 
 Clergy of oar Protestant church, established by law! Her 
 flock does not, if fairly counted, contain one-Jive-hundredth-part 
 of the number of those who are Catholics; while,, observe, her 
 Clergy receive more, not only than all the Clergy of all the Ca¬ 
 tholic nations, but more than all the Clergy of all the Christian 
 people in the world, Catholics and Protestants all put together! 
 She calls herself a church “ by law established.” She never 
 omits this part of her title. She calls herself “ holy, godly,” 
 and a good deal besides. She calls her ministers “ reverend ,” 
 and her worship and doctrines “ evangelical .” She talks very 
 much about her reliance for support upon her “ founder,” (as 
 she calls him) Christ; but in stating her claims and her quali¬ 
 ties, she never fails to conclude with, “ by LAW established.” 
 This law, however, sometimes wants the bayonet to enforce it; 
 and her tithes are not unfrequently collected by the help of sol¬ 
 diers, under the command of her ministers, whom the laic has 
 made Justices of the Peace! 
 
 14. To return: are we to believe, then, that Christ has, even 
 unto this day, abandoned nine-tenths of the people of Europe 
 to “ Antichrist?” Are we to believe, that if this “ law estab¬ 
 lished” religion had been the religion of Christ, and the Catho¬ 
 lic religion that of Antichrist; if this had been the case, are we 
 to believe that the law-established religion, that our “ holy reli¬ 
 gion,” as George Rose used to call it, while his grasping paw 
 was deep in our purses ; if this had been the case, are we to b^ 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 9 
 
 lieve that the law-established religion, that the holy religion of 
 John Bowles, the Dutch commissioner; are we to believe that 
 that holy religion (the fruits of which Ave behold in those wor¬ 
 thy sous of the church, Vital Christianity and Jocelyn Roden) 
 would, at the end of two hundred years, have been able to count 
 only one member for about every five hundred members (taking 
 all Christendom together) of that church against which the 
 “ law” church -protested and still protests ?' 
 
 15. Away then, my friends, with this foul abuse of the Ca¬ 
 tholic religion, which, after all, is the religion of about nine- 
 tenths of all the Christians in the w orld ! Away with this shame¬ 
 ful calumny, the sole object of which is, and always has been, 
 to secure a quiet possession of the spoils of the Catholic church, 
 and of the poor; for, Ave shall, by-and-by, clearly see how the 
 poor were despoiled at the same time the church was. 
 
 16. But, there remains to be noticed, in this place, an instance 
 or two of the consistency of these revilers of the Catholic church 
 and faith. We shall, in due time, see Iioav the Protestants, the 
 moment they began their u Reformation,” were split up into 
 dozens and scores of sects, each condemning the other to eter¬ 
 nal flames. But, I will here speak only of the “ Church of 
 England,” as it is called, “by law established.” Noav, Aveknow 
 very Avell, that Ave, Avho belong to this Pi’otestant church, be¬ 
 lieve, or profess to believe, that the new Testament, as printed 
 and distributed amongst us, contains the true and genuine 
 “ word of God;" that it contains the “ icords of eternal life ;”— 
 that it points out to us the means, and the only means, by which 
 Ave can possibly be saved from everlasting fire. This is whatAve 
 believe. Now, how did we come by this NeAv Testament? Who 
 gave us this real and genuine “ word of God?” from whom 
 did we receive these “ words of eternal life?” Come, Joshua 
 Watson, Avine and spirit merchant, and teacher of religion to 
 the people of England ; come Joshua, answer these questions ? 
 They are questions of great importance ; because, if this be 
 the book, and the only book, Avhich contains instructions rela¬ 
 tive to the means of saving our souls, it is manifest, that it is a 
 matter of deep interest to us, who it was that this book came 
 from to us, through what channel Ave received it, and what proof 
 Ave have of its authenticity. 
 
 17. Oh! Joshua Watson! Alas! wine and spirit merchant, 
 who art at the head of a society “ for promoting Christian 
 knoAvledge,” which society the Bishop of Winchester calls the 
 u correct expounder of evangelical truth, and the firm supporter’ 
 of the Zate-established church : Oh ! Joshua, teacher of religion 
 to the people of England, who pay six or eight millions a-year 
 to the parsons who employ thee to do this teaching : Oh ! Joshua, 
 what a shocking thing it is, that we Protestants should have re- 
 
10 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ceived this New Testament; this real and genuine “ word of 
 God these “words of eternal life this book that points out 
 to us the means,* and the only means of salvation : what a shock¬ 
 ing fact, that we should have received this book from that Pope 
 and that Catholic church, to make us believe that the first of 
 whom is the whore of Babylon, and that the worship of the last 
 is idolatrous, and her doctrines damnable, you, Joshua, and 
 your society for “ promoting Christian knowledge,” are now, 
 at this very moment, publishing and pushing into circulation no 
 less than seventeen different books and tracts 1 
 
 18. After the death of Christ, there was a long space of time 
 before the gospel was put into any thing like its present shape. 
 It was ‘preached in several countries, and churches were estab¬ 
 lished in those countries, long before the written gospel was 
 known much of, or, at least, long before it was made use of as 
 a guide to the Christian churches. At the end of about four 
 hundred years, the written gospels were laid before a council of 
 the Catholic church, of which the Pope was the head. But, 
 there were several gospels besides those of Matthew, Mark, 
 Luke, and John! Several other of the apostles, or early disci¬ 
 ples, had written gospels. All these, long after the death of the 
 authors, were, as 1 have just said, laid before a council of the 
 Catholic church; and that council determined which of the gos¬ 
 pels were genuine and which not. It retained the four gospels 
 of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; it determined that these 
 four should be received and believed in, and that all the rest 
 should be rejected. 
 
 19. So that here Joshua Watson’s society is without any other 
 gospel; without any other word of God; without any guide to 
 eternal life; without any other than that which that society as well 
 as all the rest of us have received from a church, which that 
 society calls “ idolatrous,” and the head of which it calls “ the 
 beast, the man of sin, the scarlet whore, and Antichrist!” To 
 a pretty state, then, do we reduce ourselves by giving in to this 
 foul-mouthed calumny against the Catholic church : to a pretty 
 state do we reduce ourselves by our tame and stupid listening 
 to those who calumniate the Catholic church, because they live 
 on the spoils of it. To a pretty state do we come, when we, if 
 we still listen to these calumniators, proclaim to the world, that 
 our only hope of salvation rests on promises contained in a 
 book, which we have received from the scarlet whore, and of 
 the authenticity of which we have no voucher other than that 
 scarlet whore and that church, vhose worship is “ idolatrous,” 
 and whose doctrines are “ damnable.” 
 
 20. This is pretty complete; but still this, which applies to 
 all Protestants, is not enough of inconsistency to satisfy the law 
 church of England. That church has a Liturgy in great part 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 11 
 
 made up of the Catholic service ; but, there are the two creeds, 
 the Nicene and Alhanctsian. The first was composed and pro¬ 
 mulgated by a Council of the Catholic church, and the Pope ; 
 and, the second was adopted, and ordered to be used, by ano¬ 
 ther council of that church, with the Pope at its head.' Must 
 not a Parson of this /aw-church be pretty impudent, then, to 
 call the Pope “ Antichrist,” and to call the Catholic church 
 “idolatrous.” Pretty impudent, indeed; but we do not, eten 
 vet, see the grossest inconsistency of all. 
 
 21. To our faw-church Prayer-Book there is a calendar pre¬ 
 
 fixed, and in this calendar there are, under different days of 
 the year, certain names of holy men and women. Their names 
 are put here in order that their anniversaries may be attended 
 to, and religiously attended to, by the people. Now, who are 
 those holy persons'/ Some Protestant Saints, to be sure. Not 
 one; What, not saint Luther, nor saint Cranmer, nor saint 
 Edward the Sixth, nor the “ VIRGIN” saint Elizabeth ? Not 
 a soul of them ; but a whole list of Popes, Catholic Bishops, 
 and Catholic holy persons, female as well as male. Several 
 virgins; but not the “ VIRGIN Queen ;” nor any one of the Pro¬ 
 testant race. At first sight this seems odd ; for this calendar 
 was made by Act of Parliament. But, the truth is, it was ne¬ 
 cessary to preserve some of the names, so long- revered by the 
 people, in order to keep them in better humour, and to lead 
 them by degrees into the new religion. At any rate, here is 
 the Prayer-Book, holding up for our respect and reverence a 
 whole list of Popes and of other persons belonging to the Ca¬ 
 tholic church, while those who teach us to read and to repeat 
 the contents of this same Prayer-Book, are incessantly dinning 
 in our ears, that the Popes have all been “ Antichrists,” and 
 that their church was, and is, idolatrous in its worship, and 
 damnable in its doctrines ! * 
 
 22. Judge Bayley (one of the present twelve Judges) has, I 
 have heard, written a Commentary on the Common Prayer- 
 Book. I should li’'e to know what the Judge says about these 
 Catholic Saints (ib^J no others) being placed in this Protestant 
 Calendar. We shall in due time, see the curious way in which 
 this Prayer-Book was first made, and how it was new-modelled 
 from time to time. But, here it is now, even to this day, with 
 the Catholic Saints in the calendar, whence it seems, that, even 
 down to the reign of Charles II., when the last “ 
 
 was made in it, there had not appeared any Protestant Saint to 
 supply the place of the old Catholic ones. 
 
 23. But there is still a dilemma for these revilers of the Ca¬ 
 tholic religion. We swear on the four Evangelists! And these, 
 mind, we get from the Pope and a council of the Catholic 
 church. So that, if the Pope be “ Antichrist,” that is to say, 
 
12 
 
 INTRODUCTION'. 
 
 if those who have taught us to abuse and abhor the Catholics*, 
 if those be not the falsest and most malignant wretches that 
 ever breathed, here are we swearing upon a book handed down 
 to us by “ Antichrist.” And, as if the inconsistencies and ab¬ 
 surdities springing out of this Protestant calumny were to have 
 no end, that “ Christianity ,” which the judges say “is part and 
 parcel of the law of the land;” that Christianity is no other 
 than what is taught in this same New Testament. Take the 
 New Testament away, and there is not a particle of this “ part 
 and parcel” left. What is our situation; what a figure does 
 this “ part and parcel of the law of the land” make, with a do¬ 
 zen of persons in gaol for offending against it? What a figure 
 does it make, if we adopt the abuse and falsehood of the revi- 
 lers of the Catholic church! What a figure does that “part 
 and parcel” make, if we follow our teachers; if we follow Jo¬ 
 shua Watson’s society ; if we follow every brawler from every 
 tub in the country, and say that the Pope (from whom we got 
 the “part and parcel”) is Antichrist and the scarlet whore! 
 
 24. Enough, aye, and much more than enough to make us 
 sorely repent of having so long been the dupes of the crafty 
 and selfish revilers of the religion of our fathers. Were there 
 ever presumption, impudence, inconsistency, and insincerity, 
 equal to those of which we have just taken a view? When we 
 thus open our eyes and look into the matter, we are astonished 
 at, and ashamed.of, our credulity; and this more especially, 
 when we reflect, that the far greater part of us have suffered 
 ourselves to be misled by men not possessing a tenth part of our 
 own capacity; by a set of low-minded, greedy creatures; but, 
 indefatigable; never losing sight of the spoil; and, day after 
 day, and year after year, close at the ears of the .people, from 
 their very childhood, din, din, din, incessantly, until from mere 
 habit the monstrous lie got sucked in for gospel-truth. Had the 
 lie been attended with no consequences, it might have been merely 
 laughed at, as all men of sense laugh at the old silly lie about 
 the late king having “ made the judges independent of the crown.” 
 But, there have been consequences, and thosv. most dreadful.— 
 By the means of the great Protestant lie, the Catholics and Pro¬ 
 testants have been kept in a constant state of hostile feeling to¬ 
 wards each other; and both, but particularly the former, have 
 been, in one shape or another, oppressed and plundered, for 
 ages, with impunity to the oppressors and plunderers. 
 
 25. Having now shown, that the censure heaped on the reli¬ 
 gion of our forefathers is not only unjust, but absurd pud mon¬ 
 strous ; having shown that there could be no good feason for al¬ 
 tering the religion of England from Catholic to Protestant; 
 having exposed the vile and selfish calumniators, and duly pre¬ 
 pared the mind of every just person for that fair and honest in- 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 13 
 
 quiry, of which I spoke in paragraph 4; having done this, I 
 should now enter on that inquiry, and show, in the first place, 
 how this “ Reformation/’ as it is called, “ was engendered by 
 beastly lust;" but, there is yet one topic to be touched on in 
 this preliminary Number of my little Work. 
 
 26. Truth has, with regard to this subject, made great pro¬ 
 gress in the public mind, in England, within the last dozen 
 years. Men are not now to te carried away by the cry of “ No 
 Popery,” and the “ Church in danger.” Parson Hay, at Man¬ 
 chester, Parson Dent, at North-allerton, and their like all over 
 the country, have greatly enlightened us. Parson Morritt, at 
 Skibbereen, has done great good in this work of enlightening. 
 Nor must we forget a Right Reverend Protestant Father in God, 
 who certainly did more in the opening of eyes than any Bishop 
 that I ever before heard of. So that it is now by no means rare 
 to hear Protestants allow, that, as to faith, as to morals, as to 
 salvation, the Catholic religion is quite good enough; and, a 
 very large part of the people of England are forward to de¬ 
 clare, that the Catholics have been most barbarously treated, 
 and that it is time that they had justice done them. 
 
 27. But, with all these just notions, there exists, amongst 
 Protestants in general, an opinion, that the Catholic religion is 
 unfavourable to civil liberty, and also unfavourable to the pro¬ 
 ducing and the exerting of genius and talent. As to the former, 
 I shall, in the course of this work, find a suitable place for pro¬ 
 ving, by the melancholy experience of this country, that a total 
 want of civil liberty was unknown in England, as long as its re¬ 
 ligion was Catholic ; and, that the moment it lost the protection 
 of the Pope, its kings and nobles became horrid tyrants, and its 
 people the most abject and most ill-treated of slaves. This I 
 shall pro>e in due time and place ; and I beg you my friends, 
 to bear in mind that l pledge myself to this proof. 
 
 28. And now to the other charge against the Catholic religion; 
 namely, that it is unfavourable to the producing of genius and 
 talent , and to the causing of them to be exerted. 1 am going, 
 in a minute, to prove, that this charge is not only false, but ridi¬ 
 culously and most stupidly false; but before I do this, let me 
 observe, that this charge comes from the same source with all 
 the other charges against the Catholics. “ Monkish ignorance 
 and superstition” is a phrase that you find in every Protestant 
 historian, from the reign of the VIRGIN Elizabeth to the pre 
 sent hour. It has, with time, become a sort of magpie-saying, 
 like “ glorious revolution ,” “ happy constitution“good old 
 king ,” “ envy of surrounding nations ,” and the like. But there 
 tas always, false as the notion will presently be proved to be, 
 there has always been a very sufficient motive for inculcating it. 
 Blackstone, for instance, in his Commentaries on the Laws of 
 
 o 
 
14 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 England, never lets slip an opportunity to rail against u Monk¬ 
 ish ignorance and superstition.” Blackstone was no fool. At the 
 very time when he was writing these Commentaries, and read¬ 
 ing them to the students at Oxford, he was, and he knew it, 
 LIVING upon the spoils of the Catholic Church, and the spoils 
 of the Catholic gentry, and also of the poor! He knew that 
 well. He knew that, if every one had had his due, he would 
 not have been fattening where he was. He knew, besides, that 
 all who heard his lectures were aware of the spoils that he was 
 wallowing in. These considerations were quite sufficient to in¬ 
 duce him to abuse the Catholic church, and to affect to look 
 back with contempt to Catholic times. 
 
 29. For cool, placid, unruffled impudence, there have been 
 no people in the world to equal the “ Reformation” gentry 
 and Blackstone seems to have inherited this quality in a direct 
 line from some altar-robber of the reign of that sweet young 
 Protestant saint, Edward the Sixth. If Blackstone had not ac- 
 felt the spoils of the Catholics sticking to his ribs, he would 
 have recollected, that all those things, which he was eulogiz¬ 
 ing, magna charta, trial by jury, the offices of sheriff, justice 
 of the peace, constable, and all the rest of it, arose in days of 
 “ monkish ignorance and $uperstilion.' ,, If his head had not been 
 rendered muddy by his gormandizing on the spoils of the Ca¬ 
 tholic church, he would have remembered, that Fortescue, and 
 that that greatest of all our lawyers, Lyttleton, were born, 
 bred, lived and died in the days of “ monkish ignorance and 
 superstition.” But, did not this Blackstone know, that the very 
 roof under which he was abusing our Catholic forefathers, was 
 made by these forefathers ? Did he not, when he looked up to 
 that roof, or, when he beheld any of those noble buildings, 
 which, in defiance of time, still tell us what those forefathers 
 were; did he not, when he beheld any of these, feel that he 
 was a pigmy in mind, compared with those whom he had the 
 impudence to abuse ? 
 
 30. When we hear some Jew, or Orangeman, or parson-jus¬ 
 tice, or Jocelyn saint, talk about monkish ignorance and super¬ 
 stition, we turn from him with silent contempt; but Blackstone 
 is to be treated in another manner. It was at Oxford where he 
 wrote, and where he was reading his Commentaries. He well 
 knew that the foundations for learning at Oxford were laid and 
 brought to perfection, not only in monkish times, but, in great 
 part, by monks. He knew “ that the abbeys were public schools 
 for education, each of them having one or more persons set 
 apart to instruct the youth of the neighbourhood, without any 
 expense to the parents.” He knew that “ eaeh of the greater 
 monasteries had a peculiar residence in the universities ; and, 
 whereas, there were, in those times, nearly THREE HUN- 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 15 
 
 DRED HALLS and PRIVATE SCHOOLS at Oxford, besides 
 the colleges, there were not above EIGHT remaining towards 
 the middle of the seventeenth century.” [Phillips’ Life of Car¬ 
 dinal Pole, part I. p. 220.] That is to say, in about a hundred 
 years after the enlightening “ Reformation” began. At this 
 time (1824) there are, I am informed, only FIVE Halls remain¬ 
 ing, and not a single school. * • 
 
 31. I shall, in another place, have to show more fully the 
 folly, and, indeed, the baseness of railing against the monastic 
 institutions generally; but, I must here confine myself to this 
 charge against the Catholic religion, of being unfavourable to 
 genius i talent, and in short, to the powers of the mind. It is a 
 strange notion ; and one can hardly hear it mentioned without 
 suspecting that, some how or other, there is plunder at the bot¬ 
 tom of the apparently nothing but stupid idea. Those who put 
 forward this piece of rare impudence do not favour us with 
 reasons for believing that the Catholic religion has any such 
 tendency. They content themselves with the bare assertion, not 
 supposing that it admits of any thing like disproof. They look 
 upon it as assertion against assertion ; and, in a question which 
 depends on mere hardness of mouth, they know that their tri¬ 
 umph is secure. But this is a question that does admit of proof, 
 and very good proof too. The Reformation in England, was 
 pretty nearly completed by the year 1600 : by that time all the 
 “ monkish ignorance and superstition” were swept away. The 
 monasteries were all pretty nearly knocked down, young Saint 
 Edward’s people had robbed all the altars, and the VIRGIN 
 Queen had put the finishing hand to the pillage. So that all 
 was, in 1600, become as Protestant as heart could wish. Very 
 well; the kingdom of France remained buried in monkish igno¬ 
 rance and superstition until the year 1787 ; that is to say, 187 
 years after happy England stood in a blaze of Protestant light. 
 Now then, if we carefully examine into the number of men re¬ 
 markable for great powers of mind, men famed for their know¬ 
 ledge or genius; if we carefully examine into the number of 
 such men produced by France in these 187 years, and the 
 number of such men produced by England, Scotland and Ire¬ 
 land, during the same period ; if we do this, we shall get at a 
 pretty good foundation for judging of the effects of the two re¬ 
 ligions with regard to their influence on kno wledge, genius, 
 and what is generally called learning. 
 
 32. “ Oh, no !” exclaim the fire-shovels ; ,£ France is : a great 
 deal bigger, and contains more people than these islands ; and 
 this is not fair play /” Do not be frightened, good fire-shovels. 
 According to your own account, these islands contain twenty - 
 one millions, and the French say that they have thirty millions. 
 Therefore, when we have got the numbers, we will make an al- 
 
16 
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 lowance of one-third in our favour accordingly, If, for instance, 
 the French have not three famous men to every two of ours, 
 then I shall confess, that the law-established church, and its fa¬ 
 mily of Muggletonians, Cameronians, Jumpers, Unitarians 
 Shakers, Quakers, and the rest of the Protestant litter, are 
 more favourable to knowledge and genius, than is the Catho¬ 
 lic church. 
 
 33. But how are we to ascertain these numbers ! Very well. 
 I shall refer to a work which has a place in every good library 
 in the kingdom ; I mean the Universal Historical , Critical, and 
 Bibliographical Dictionary .” This work, which is every where 
 received as authority as to facts, contains lists of persons of all 
 nations, celebrated for their published works: but then, to have 
 a place in these lists, the person must have been really distin¬ 
 guished ; his or her works must have been considered as wor¬ 
 thy of universal notice. From these lists I shall take my num¬ 
 bers, as before proposed. It will not be necessary to go into all 
 the arts and sciences, eight or nine will be sufficient. It may 
 be as well perhaps, to take the Italians as well as the French ; 
 for we all know that they were living in most shocking “ monk¬ 
 ish ignorance and superstitionand that they, poor, unfortu¬ 
 nate, and unplundered souls, are so living unto this very day ! 
 
 34. Here then is the statement; and you have only to observe, 
 that the figures represent the number of persons who were fa¬ 
 mous for the art or science opposite the name of which tho 
 figures are placed. The period is from the year 1600 to 1787, 
 during which period France w r as under what young George 
 Rose calls the dark despotism of the Catholic church, and w r hat 
 Blackstone calls “ monkish ignorance and superstition and 
 during the same period these Islands were in a blaze of light , 
 sent forth by Luther, Cranmer, Knox, and their followers.— 
 Here then, is the statement: 
 
 
 Eng. Scot. 
 
 and Ireland France. 
 
 Italy. 
 
 Writers on Law 
 
 : : 6 
 
 51 
 
 9 
 
 Mathematicians 
 
 : : 17 
 
 52 
 
 15 
 
 Physicians and Surgeons : 13 
 
 72 
 
 21 
 
 Writers on Natural History : 6 
 
 33 
 
 11 
 
 Historians : 
 
 : : 21 
 
 139 
 
 22 
 
 Dramatic Writers 
 
 : : 19 
 
 66 
 
 6 
 
 Grammarians 
 
 : 7' 
 
 42 
 
 O 
 
 Poets : : 
 
 : : 38 
 
 157 
 
 34 
 
 Painters : 
 
 : : 5 
 
 64 
 
 44 
 
 
 132 
 
 676 
 
 164 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 17 
 
 35. Here is that very “ SCALE,” which a modest Scotch 
 writer spoke of the other day, when he told the public, that, 
 “ Throughout Europe, Protestants rank higher in the scale of 
 intellect than Catholics, and that Catholics in the neighbour¬ 
 hood of Protestants are more intellectual than those at a distance 
 from them.” This is a fine specimen of upstart Protestant im¬ 
 pudence. The above scale is, however, a complete answer to 
 it. Allow one-third more to the French on account of their su¬ 
 perior populousness, and then there will remain to them 451 to 
 our 132 ! So that they had, man for man, three and a halftimes 
 as much intellect as we, though they are buried, all the while, in 
 *• monkish ignorance and superstion,” and though they had no 
 Protestant neighbours to catch the intellect from ! Even the Ita¬ 
 lians surpass us in this rivalship for intellect; for their popula¬ 
 tion is not equal to that of which we boast, and their number of 
 men of mind considerably exceeds that of ours :—but do I not, 
 all this while, misunderstand the matter 1 And, by intellect, 
 does not the Scotchman mean the capacity to make, not books 
 and pictures, but checks, bills, bonds, exchequer-bills, inimitable 
 notes, and the like ? Does he not mean loan-jobbing and stock- 
 jobbing. insurance-broking, annuities at ten per cent., and all 
 the mtellectual proceedings of ’Change Alley ;—not, by any 
 means, forgetting works like those of Aslett and Fauntleroy ! 
 Ah! iu that case I confess that he is right. On this scale Pro¬ 
 testants do rank high indeed! And I should think it next to im¬ 
 possible for a Catholic to live in their neighbourhood without 
 being much “ more intellectual ;” that is to say, much more of 
 a Jewish knave, than if he lived at a distance from them. 
 
 36. Here, then, my friends, sensible and just Englishmen, I 
 dose this Introductory Letter. I have shown you how grossly 
 we have been deceived, even from our very infancy. I have 
 shown you, not only the injustice, but the absurdity of the abuse 
 heaped by our interested deluders on the religion of their and 
 our fathers. I have shown you enough to convince you, that 
 there was no obviously just cause for an alteration in the reli¬ 
 gion of our country. I have, I dare say, awakened in your 
 minds a strong desire to know how it came to pass, then, that 
 this alteration was made; and, in the following Letters, it shall 
 be my anxious endeavour fully to gratify this desire : but, ob¬ 
 serve, my chief object is to show that, this alteration made the 
 main body of the people poor and miserable, compared with 
 what they w r ere before ; that it impoverished and degraded them; 
 that it banished at once that “ Old English Hospitality,” of 
 which we have since know n nothing but the name; and that, 
 in lieu of that hospitality, it gave us pauperism, a thing, the 
 very name of which was never before known in England. 
 
LETTER II. 
 
 Origin of the Catholic Church. History of the Church 
 in England, down to the time of the “ Reformation.' 
 Beginning of the “ Reformation” by King Henry Vill. 
 
 M>' Friends, Kensington, 30 th Dec. 1824. 
 
 37. It was not a reformation, but a devastation of England, 
 which was. at the time when this event took place, the happiest 
 country, perhaps, that the world had ever seen; and it is my 
 chief business to show, that this devastation impoverished and 
 degraded the main body of the people: but, in order that you 
 may see this devastation in its true light, and that you may feel 
 a just portion of indignation against the devastators, and against 
 their eulogists of the present day, it is necessary, first, that you 
 take a correct view of the things on which their devastating 
 powers were exercised. 
 
 38. The far greater part of those books which are called 
 “ Histories of England ,” are little better than romances. They 
 treat of battles, negociations, intrigues of courts, amours of 
 kings, queens, and nobles : they contain the gossip and scandal 
 of former times, and very little else. There are Histories of 
 England, like that of Dr. Goldsmith, for the use of young per- 
 ions; but, no young person, who has read them through, knows 
 any more, of any possible, use, than he or she knew before.— 
 The great use of history is, to teach us how laws, usages, and 
 institutions arose, what were their effects on the people, how they 
 promoted public happiness, or otherwise; and these things are 
 precisely what the greater part of historians, as they call them¬ 
 selves, seem to think of no consequence. 
 
 39 We never understand the nature and constituent parts of 
 a thing so well as when we ourselves have made the thing: next 
 to making it is the seeing of it made: but, if we have neither 
 of these advantages, we ought, r t least, if possible, to get at a 
 true description of the origin of the thing, and of the manner 
 in which it was put together. I have to speak to you of the 
 Catholic church generally ; then of the Church in England, 
 under which head 1 shall have to speak of the parish-churches, 
 the monasteries, the tithes, and other revenues of the church 
 It is, therefore, necessary that I explain to you how the Catho¬ 
 lic church arose; and how churches, monasteries, tithes, and 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 1 $ 
 
 other church revenues came to be in England. When you have 
 this information, you will well understand what it was which 
 was devastated by Henry VNI. and the “ reformation” people. 
 And, I am satisfied, that, when you have read this one Number 
 of my little work, you will know more about your country than 
 you have learned, or ever will learn, from the reading of hun¬ 
 dreds of those bulky volumes called u Histories of England.” 
 
 40. The Catholic church originated with Jesus Christ himself. 
 He «.elected Peter to be head of his church. This apostle’s name 
 was S'mon, but his Master called him Peter, which means a 
 stone e ■ rock; and he said, “ on this rock will I build my church.” 
 Look at the Gospel of Saint Matthew, xvi. 18, 15, and at that 
 of Saint John, xxi. 15, and onward; and you will see that we 
 must deny the truth of the Scriptures, or acknowledge, that 
 here was a head of the Church promised for all generations. 
 
 41. Saint Peter died a martyr at Rome, in about sixty years 
 after the birth of Christ But another supplied his place ; and 
 there is the most satisfactory evidence, that the chain of suc¬ 
 cession has remained unbroken from that day to this. When I 
 said in paragraph 10, that it might be said, that there was no 
 Pope seated at Rome for the first three hundred years, I by no 
 means meant to admit the fact; but to get rid of a pretence, 
 which, at any rate, could not apply to England, which was con¬ 
 verted to Christianity by missionaries sent by a Pope, the suc¬ 
 cessor of other Popes, who had been seated at Rome for hun¬ 
 dreds of years. The truth is, that, from the persecutions which, 
 for the first three hundred years, the church underwent, the 
 Chief Bishops, successors of Saint Peter, had not always the 
 means of openly maintaining their supremacy ; but they always 
 existed; there was always a Chief Bishop, and his supremacy 
 was always acknowledged by the church; that is to say, by all 
 The Christians then in the world. 
 
 42. Of later date the Chief Bishop has been called, in our 
 language, the Pope, and in the French, Pape. In the Latin he 
 is called Papa, which is an union and abbreviation of the Latin 
 words Pater Patrum, which mean Father of Fathers. Hence 
 comes the appellation of Papa, which children of all Ch r islian 
 nations give to their fathers; an appellation of the highest res¬ 
 pect and most ardent and sincere affection. Thus then, the Pope, 
 each as he succeeded to his office, became the Chief or Head of 
 the Church; and his supreme power and authority were ac¬ 
 knowledged, as I have observed in paragraph 3, by all the bi¬ 
 shops, and all the teachers of Christianity, in all the nations 
 where that religion existed. The Pope was, and is, assisted by. 
 a body of persons called Cardinals, or Great Councillors ; and 
 at various and numerous times, Councils of the church have 
 been held, in order to discuss and settle matters of deep inter- 
 
20 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 est to the unity and well-being of the church. These councils 
 have been held in all the countries of Christendom. Many were 
 held in England. The Popes themselves have been taken pro¬ 
 miscuously from men of all the Christian nations. Pope Adrian 
 IV. was an Englishman, the son of a very poor labouring man; 
 but having become a servant in a monastery, he was there 
 taught, and became himself a monk. In time he grew famous 
 for his learning, his talents and piety, and at last became the 
 Head of the Church. 
 
 43. The Popedom, or office of Pope, continued in existence 
 through all the great and repeated revolutions of kingdoms and 
 empires. The Roman Empire, which was at the height of its 
 glory at the beginning of the Christian era, and which extend¬ 
 ed indeed nearly over the whole of Europe, and part of Africa 
 and Asia, crumbled all to pieces ; yet the Popedom remained; 
 and at the time when the devastation, commonly called the Re¬ 
 formation of England began, there had been, during the fifteen 
 hundred years, about two hundred and sixty Popes, following 
 each other in due and unbroken succession. 
 
 44. The History of the Church in England, down to the time 
 of the Reformation, is a matter of deep interest to us. A mere 
 look at it, a bare sketch of the principal facts, will show how 
 false, how unjust, how ungrateful those have been who have vi¬ 
 lified the Catholic church, its Popes, its Monks, and its Priests. 
 It is supposed, by some, and, indeed, with good authorities on 
 their side, that the Christian religion was partially introduced 
 into England so early as the second century after Christ. But 
 we know for a certainty, that it was introduced effectually in 
 the year 590 ; that is to say, 923 years before Henry VIII. be¬ 
 gan to destroy it. 
 
 45. England, at the time when this religion was introduced, 
 was governed by seven kings, and that state was called the 
 Heptarchy. The people of the whole country were PAGANS. 
 Yes, my friends, our ancestors were PAGANS: they worship¬ 
 ped gods made with hands; and they sacrificed children on the 
 altars of their idols. In this state England was when the Pope 
 of that day, Gregory I., sent forty monks, with a monk of the 
 name of Austin (or Augustin) at their head, to preach the gos¬ 
 pel to the English. Look into the Calendar of our Common 
 Prayer-Book, and you will find the name of Gregory the Great 
 under the 12th of March, and that of Augustin under the 26th 
 of May. It is probable that the Pope gave his order to Austin 
 on the former day, and that Austin landed in Kent on the lat¬ 
 ter; or, perhaps, these maybe the days of the year on whicn 
 these great benefactors of England were born. 
 
 46. Now please to bear in mind, that this great event took 
 place in the year 596. The Protestant writers have been strage- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 2i 
 
 ly embarrassed in their endeavours to make it out, that up tv 
 this time, or thereabouts, the Catholic church was pure, and 
 trod in the steps of the Apostles ; but that, after this lime, that 
 church became corrupt. They applaud the character and acts 
 of Pope Gregory; they do the same with regard to Austin ; 
 shame would not suffer them to leave their names out of the 
 calendar; but, still, they want to make it out, that there was no 
 pure Christian religion after the Pope came to be the visible 
 and acknowledged head, and to have supreme authority. There 
 are scarcely any two of them that agree upon this point. Some 
 say that it was 300, some 400, some 500, and some 600 years 
 before the Catholic church ceased to be the true church of 
 Christ. But, none of them can deny, nor dare they attempt it, 
 that it was the Christian religion as practised at Rome; that. 
 was the Roman Catholic religion that was introduced into 
 England in the year 596, with all its dogmas, rites, ceremonies, 
 and observances, just as they all continued to exist at the time 
 of the “ Reformation,” and as they continue to exist in that 
 church even unto this day. Whence it clearly follows, that, if 
 the Catholic church were corrupt at the time of the 11 Reforma¬ 
 tion,” or be corrupt 7iow, be radically bad now, it was so in 596; 
 and then comes the impious and horrid inference, mentioned in 
 paragraph 12, that “ All our fathers who first built our church¬ 
 es, and whose bones and flesh form the earth for many feet 
 deep in all the church-yards, are now howling in the regions of 
 the damned!” 
 
 47. “ The tree is known by its fruit.” Bear in mind that it 
 was the Catholic faith as now held, that was introduced into 
 England by Pope Gregory the Great; and bearing this in mind, 
 let us see what were the effects of that introduction ; let us-see 
 how that faith worked its way, in spite of wars, invasions, ty¬ 
 rannies, and political revolutions. 
 
 48. Saint Austin, upon his arrival, applied to the Saxon king, 
 within whose dominions the county of Kent iav. He obtained 
 leave to preach to the people, and his success was great and 
 immediate. He converted the king himself, who was very gra¬ 
 cious to him and his brethren; and who.provided dwellings 
 and other necessaries for them at Canterbury. Saint Austin 
 and his brethren being monks, lived together in common, and 
 from this common home went forth over the country, preach¬ 
 ing the gospel. As their community was diminished by death, 
 new members were ordained to keep up the supply ; and, be¬ 
 sides this, the number was in time greatly augmented.- A church 
 was built at Canterbury, Saint Austin was, of course, the Bishop 
 c r Head Priest. He was succeeded by other bishops. As Chris¬ 
 tianity spread over the island, other communities, like that at 
 Canterbury, were founded in other cities; as at London, Win- 
 
22 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 Chester, Exeter, Worcester, Norwich, Yorit, and so of all the 
 other places, where there are now Cathedrals, or Bishops’ 
 churches. Hence, in process of time, aro>e those majestic and 
 venerable edifices, of the possession of which we boast as the 
 work of our forefathers, while we have the folly and injustice 
 and inconsistency, to brand the memory of these very forefa¬ 
 thers with the charge of grovelling ignorance, superstition and 
 idolatry ; and while we show our own meanness of mind in dis¬ 
 figuring and dishonouring those noble buildings by plastering 
 them about with our childish and gingerbread “ monuments ,” 
 nine times out of ten, the offspring of vanity or corruption. 
 
 49. As to the mode of supporting the clergy in those times, 
 it was by oblations or free gifts, and sometimes by tithes, which 
 land-owners paid themselves, or ordered their tenants to pay, 
 though there was no general obligation to yield tithes for many 
 years after the arrival of Saint Austin. In this collective, or 
 collegiate state, the clergy remained for many years. But in 
 time, as the land-owners became converted to Christianity, they 
 were desirous of having priests settled near to them, and always 
 upon the spot, ready to perform the offices of religion:—the 
 land was then owned by comparatively few persons. The rest 
 of the people were vassals or tenants of the land-owners. The 
 land-owners, therefore, built churches on their estates, and ge¬ 
 nerally near their own houses, for the benefit of themselves, 
 their vassals, and tenants. And to this day we see, in numer¬ 
 ous instances, the country church close by the gentleman’s 
 house. When they built the churches, they also built a house 
 for the priest, which we now call the parsonage-house ; and, in 
 most cases, they attached some plough-land, or meadow-land, 
 or both, to the priest’s house, for his use : and this was called 
 his glebe; which word, literally taken, means the top earth, 
 which is turned over by the plough. Besides these, the land- 
 owners, in conformity with the custom then prevalent in other 
 Christian countries, endowed the churches with the tithe of the 
 “produce of their estates. 
 
 50. Hence parishes arose. Parish means a prieslship, as the 
 land on which a town stands is a townshiji. So that the great 
 man’s estate now became a parish. He retained the right of 
 appointing the priest, whenever a vacancy happened ; but, he 
 could not displace a priest, when once appointed ; and the whole 
 of the endowment became the property of the church, inde¬ 
 pendent of his controul. It was a long while, even two centu¬ 
 ries, or more, before this became the settled law of the whole 
 kingdom ; but, at last, it did become such. But, to this posses¬ 
 sion of so much property by the church, certain important con¬ 
 ditions were attached ; and to these condit ions it behoves us, of 
 the present day, to pay particular attention] for we are, at this 
 

 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 23 
 
 time, more than ever, feeling the want of the performance of 
 these conditions. 
 
 51. There never can have existed a state of society; that is to 
 say, a state of things in which proprietorship in land was acknow¬ 
 ledged, and in which it ivas maintained by law ; there never can 
 have existed such a state, without an obligation on the land-owners 
 to take care of the necessitous , and to prevent them from perishing 
 for want. The land-owners in England took care of their vassals 
 Mid dependents ; but, when Christianity, the very basis of which 
 u charity , became established, the taking care of the necessi¬ 
 tous w as deposited in the hands of the clergy. Upon the very 
 face of it, It appears monstrous, that a house, a small farm, 
 and the tenth part of the produce of a large estate should have 
 been given to a priest, who could have no wife, and, of course, no 
 family. But, the fact is, that the grants were for other purposes 
 as well as for the support of the priests. The produce of the bene¬ 
 fice was to be employed thus : “ Let the priests receive the tithes 
 of the people, and keep a written account of all that have paid 
 them; and divide them, in the presence of such as fear God, ac¬ 
 cording to canonical authority. Let them set apart the first share 
 for the repairs and ornaments of the church ; let them distribute 
 the second to the poor and the stranger with their own hands, in 
 mercy and humility; and reserve the third part for them¬ 
 selves.” These were the orders contained in a canon, issued by 
 a Bishop of York. At different times, and under different 
 Bishops, regulations somewhat different were adopted; but 
 there w r ere always two fourths, at the least, of the annual 
 produce of the benefice to be given to the necessitous, and to 
 be employed in the repairing, or in the ornamenting of the 
 church. 
 
 52. Thus, the providing for the poor, became one of the great 
 duties and uses of the church. This duty rested before, on the 
 land-owners. It must have rested on them; for, as Blackstone 
 observes, a right in the indigent “ to demand a supply sufficient 
 to all the necessities of life from the more opulent part of the 
 community, is dictated by the principles of society.' 1 ' 1 This duty 
 could be lodged in no hands so fitly, as in those of the clergy; 
 for thus, the w r ork of charity, the feeding of the hungry, the 
 clothing of the naked, the administering to the sick, the com¬ 
 forting of the widow, the fostering of the fatherless, came always 
 in company with the performance of services to God. For the 
 uncertain disposition of the rich, for their occasional and some¬ 
 times capricious charity, was substituted the certain, the steady 
 the impartial hand of a constantly resident and unmarried admi¬ 
 nistrator of bodily, as well as of spiritual comfort to the poor, the 
 unfortunate and the stranger. 
 
 O i 
 
 We shall see, by-and-bye, the condition that the poor were 
 
24 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 placed in, we shall see how all the labouring 1 classes were impo¬ 
 verished and degraded, the moment the tithes and other reve¬ 
 nues of the church were transferred to a protestant and married 
 clergy; and we shall have to take a full view of the unparal¬ 
 leled barbarity with which the Irish people were treated at that 
 time : but I have not yet noticed another great branch, or consti¬ 
 tuent part of the Catholic church; namely, the Monasteries, 
 which form a subject full of interest and worthy of our best atten¬ 
 tion. The choicest and most highly impoisoned shafts in the quit 
 ver of the malice of Protestant writers, seem always to be select¬ 
 ed when they have to rail against Monks, Friars, and Nuns. 
 We have seen Blackstorie talking about “ monkish ignorance and 
 superstition and we hear, every day, Protestant bishops and 
 parsons railing against what they call “ monkery talking of the 
 • drones ” in monasteries, and, indeed, abusing the whole of those 
 ancient institutions, as something degrading to human nature, 
 m which work of abuse they are most heartily joined by the thir¬ 
 ty or forty mongrel sects, whose bawling-tubs are erected in eve¬ 
 ry corner of the country. 
 
 64. When I come to speak of the measures by which tne mo¬ 
 nasteries were robbed, devastated, and destroyed, in England 
 and Ireland, I shall show how unjust, base, and ungrateful, this 
 railing against them is; and how foolish it is besides. I shall 
 show' the various ways in which they were greatly useful to the 
 community ; and I shall especially show how they operated in 
 behalf of the labouring and poorer classes of the people. But, 
 in this place, I shall merely describe, in the shortest manner pos¬ 
 sible, the origin and nature of those institutions, and the extent 
 to which they existed in England. 
 
 55. Monastery means a place of residence for monks, and the 
 word monk comes from a Greek word, which means a lonely per¬ 
 son, ora person in solitude. There were monks, friars, and nuns. 
 The word friar comes from the French word frere, which, in 
 English, is brother; and the word nun comes from the French 
 word nonne, which means a sister in religion, a virgin separated 
 from the world. The persons, whether male or female, compos, 
 ing one of these religious communities, were called a convent , 
 and that name was sometimes also given to the buildings and 
 enclosures in which the community lived. The place where 
 monks lived was called a monastery ; that there were friars lived, 
 a friary ; and that where nuns lived, a nunnery. As, however, 
 we are not, in this case, inquiring into the differences in the rules, 
 orders, and habits of the persons belonging to these institutions, 
 I shall speak of them all as monasteries. 
 
 66. Then, again, some of these were abbeys, and some prio - 
 Ties ; of the difference between which it will be sufficient to say 
 that the former were of a rank superior to the latter, and had va 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 25 
 
 fious privileges of a higher value. An abbey had an Mot or an 
 abbess; a priory, a prior , or a prioress. Then there were differ 
 ent orders of monks, friars , and nuns ; and these orders had dif¬ 
 ferent rules for their government and mode of life, and were dis¬ 
 tinguished by different dresses. With these distinctions, we have 
 here, however, little to do; for we shall, by-and-bye, see them all 
 involved in one common devastation. 
 
 57. The persons belonging to a monastery, lived in common; 
 they lived in one and the same building ; they could possess no pro¬ 
 perty individually; when they entered the walls of the monastery 
 they left the world wholly behind them ; they made a solemn vow’ 
 of celibacy; they could devise nothing by will; each had a life-in¬ 
 terest , but nothing more, in the revenues belonging to the commu¬ 
 nity ; some of the monks and friars w r ere also priests, but this was 
 not abvays the case; and the business of the whole was, to say 
 masses and prayers, and to do deeds of hospitality and charity. 
 
 58. This mode of life began by single persons separating 
 themselves from the world, and living in complete solitude, pas¬ 
 sing ail their days in prayer, and dedicating themselves w'holly 
 to the serving of God. These w r ere called hermits, and their 
 conduct drew towards them great respect. In time, such men, 
 or men having a similar propensity, formed themselves into so¬ 
 cieties, and agreed to live together in one house, and to possess 
 things in common. Women did the same. And hence, came 
 those places called monasteries. The piety, the austerities, and 
 particularly, the w orks of kindness and of charity performed by 
 those persons, made them objects of great veneration ; and the 
 rich made them, in time, the channels of their benevolence to the 
 poor. Kings, queens, princes, princesses, nobles, and gentlemen, 
 founded monasteries; that is to say, erected the buildings, and 
 endowed them with estates for their maintenance. Others, some 
 in the way of atonement for their sins, and some from a pious 
 disposition, gave, while alive, or bequeathed at their death, lands, 
 houses, or money, to monasteries already erected. So that, in 
 time, the monasteries became the owners of great landed estates; 
 they had the lordship over innumerable manors, and had a te¬ 
 nantry of prodigious extent, especially in England, where the 
 monastic orders were always held in great esteem, in consequence 
 of Christianity having been introduced into the kingdom by a com¬ 
 munity of monks. 
 
 59. To give you as clear a notion as I can of what a monaste¬ 
 ry w r as, I will describe to you with as much exactness as my me¬ 
 mory will enable me, a monastery which I saw in France, in 
 1792, just after the monks had been turned out of it, and when 
 it w'as about to be put up for sale ' The w hole of the space en¬ 
 closed was about eight English acres, which was fenced in by a 
 
 3 
 
 < 
 
26 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 wall about twenty feet high. It was an oblong square, and at one 
 end of one of the sides was a gate-•way, with gates as high as the 
 wall, and with a little door in one of the great gates for the ingress 
 and egress of foot-passengers. This gate opened into a spacious 
 court-yard, very nicely paved. On one side, and at one end of this 
 yard, were the kitchen, lodging-rooms for servants, a dining or eat¬ 
 ing place for them and for strangers and poor people ; stables, coach¬ 
 houses, and other out-buildings. On the other side of the court¬ 
 yard, we entered in at a door-way to the place of residence of the 
 monks. Here was about half an acre of ground of a square form, 
 for a burying ground. On the four sides of this square there w'as a 
 cloister , or piazza, the roof of which was, on the side of the bury¬ 
 ing ground, supported by pillars, and at the back, supported by a 
 low building, which went round the four sides. This building con¬ 
 tained the several dormitories , or sleeping rooms of the monks, each 
 of whom had two little rooms, one for his bed, and one for his 
 books and to sit in. Out of the hinder room, a door opened into a 
 little garden about thirty feet wide, and forty long. On one side of 
 the cloister there.was a door opened into their dining-room, in one 
 corner of which, there was a pulpit for the monk who read while 
 the rest were eating in silence , which was according to the rules 
 of the Carthusians, to which order these monks belonged. On 
 the other side of the cloister, a door opened into the kitchen gar¬ 
 den, which was laid out in the nicest manner, and was well stock¬ 
 ed with fruit trees of all sorts. On another side of the cloister, 
 a door opened and led to the church , which, though not large, 
 was one of the most beautiful that I had ever seen. I believe that 
 these monks were, by their rules, confined within their walls. 
 The country people spoke of them with great reverence, and most 
 grievously deplored the loss of them. They had large estates, 
 were easy landlords, and they wholly provided for all the indigent 
 within miles of their monastery. 
 
 60. England, more, perhaps, than any other country in Eu¬ 
 rope, abounded in such institutions, and these more richly en¬ 
 dowed than any where else. In England there was, on an ave¬ 
 rage, more than twenty (we shall see the exact number by-and- 
 
 bye) of those establishments to a county ! Here w r as a prize for 
 an unjust and cruel tyrant to lay his lawless hands upon, and for 
 “ reformation'’’ gentry to share amongst them ! Here was enough 
 indeed, to make robbers on a grand scale cry out against “ monk¬ 
 ish ignorance and superstition !" No wonder that the bowels of 
 Cranmer, Knox, and all their mongrel litter, yearned so piteous¬ 
 ly as they did, when, they cast their pious eyes or. all the farms 
 and manors , and on all the silver and gold ornaments belonging 
 to these communities ! We shall see by-and-bye, with what ala¬ 
 crity they ousted, plundered, and pulled down: we shall s$e 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 21 
 
 them robbing', under the basest pretences, even the altars of the 
 county parish Churches, down to the very smallest of those 
 Churches, and down to the value of five shillings. But, we must 
 first take a view of the motives which led the tyrant, Henry 
 VIII., to set their devastating and plundering faculties in mo¬ 
 tion. 
 
 61. This King succeeded his father, Henry VII., in the year 
 1509. He succeeded to a great and prosperous kingdom, a full 
 treasury, and a happy and contented people, who expected in 
 him the wisdom of his father without his avarice, which seems 
 to have been that father's only fault. Henry VIII. was eighteen 
 years old when his father died. He had had an elder brother 
 named Arthur, who, at the early age of twelve yearn, had been 
 betrothed to Catharine, fourth daughter of Ferdinand, King of 
 Castile and Arragon. When Arthur was fourteen years old, 
 the Princess came to England, and the marriage ceremony was 
 performed ; but Arthur, who was a weak and sickly bojr, died 
 before the year was out, and the marriage never was consum¬ 
 mated ; and, indeed, who will believe that it could be ? Henry 
 wished to marry Catharine, and the marriage%as agreed to by 
 the parents on both sides; but it did not take place until after the 
 death of Henry VII. The moment the young King came to the 
 throne, he took measures for his marriage. Catharine being, 
 though only nominally, the ividow of his deceased brother, it was 
 necessary to have, from the Pope, as supreme head of the Church, 
 a dispensation , in order to render the marriage lawful in the eye 
 of the canon law. The dispensation, to which there could be no 
 valid objection, was obtained, and the marriage was, amidst the 
 rejoicings of the whole nation, celebrated in June, 1509, in less 
 than two months after the King’s accession. 
 
 62. With this lady, who was beautiful in her youth, and whose 
 virtues of all sorts seem scarcely ever to have been exceeded, ha 
 lived in the married state seventeen years, before the end of which 
 he had three sons and two daughters by her, one of whom only, 
 a daughter, was still alive, who afterwards was Mary, Queen of 
 England. But now, at the end of seventeen years, he being 
 thirty-five years of age, and eight years younger than the queen, 
 and having cast his eyes on a young lady, an attendant on the 
 queen, named Anne Boleyn, he, all of a sudden, affected to be¬ 
 lieve that he was living in sin , because he was married to the 
 widow of his brother , though, as we have seen, the marriage be¬ 
 tween Catharine and the brother had never been consummated, 
 and though the parents of both the parties, together with his own 
 Council, had unanimously and unhesitatingly approved of his 
 marriage, which had, moreover, been sanctioned by the Pope, 
 the head of the Church, of the faith and observances of which 
 Henry himself had, as we shall hereafter see, been, long since his 
 
 "marriage, a zealous defender! 
 
28 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 63. Rut the tyrant’s passions were now in motion, and he re¬ 
 solved to gratify his beastly lust, cost what it might in reputation, 
 in treasure, and in blood. He first applied to the Pope to divorce 
 him from his queen. He w’as a great favourite of the Pope, he 
 was very powerful, there were many strong motives for yielding 
 to his request; but that request was so full of injustice, it would 
 have been so cruel towards the virtuous queen to accede to it, 
 that the Pope could not, and did not, grant it. He, however, in 
 hopes that time might induce the tyrant to relent, ordered a 
 court to be held by his Legate and Wolsey, in England, to hear 
 and determine the case. Before this court the Queen disdained 
 to plead, and the Legate, dissolving the court, referred the mat¬ 
 ter back to the Pope, who still refused to take any step towards 
 the granting of the divorce. The tyrant now became furious, 
 resolved upon overthrowing the power of the Pope in England, 
 upon making himself the head of the Church in this country, and 
 upon doing whatever else might be necessary to ensure the gratifi¬ 
 cation of his beastly desires, and the glutting of his vengeance. 
 
 64. By making himself the supreme head of the Church, he 
 made himself, he having the sword and the gibbet at his com¬ 
 mand, master of all the property of that church, including that of 
 the monasteries !—His counsellors and courtiers knew this; and, 
 as it was soon discovered that a sweeping confiscation would take 
 place, the parliament was by no means backward in aiding his 
 designs, every one hoping to share in the plunder. The first 
 step was to pass acts taking from the Pope all authority and 
 power over the Church in England and giving to the King all 
 authority whatever as to ecclesiastical matters. His chief adviser 
 and abettor was THOMAS CRANMER, a name which de¬ 
 serves to be held in everlasting execration; a name which we 
 could not pronounce without almost doubting of the justice of 
 God, were it not for our knowledge of the fact, that the cold¬ 
 blooded, most perfidious, most impious, most blasphemous caitiff 
 expired at last, amidst those flames which he himself had, been 
 the chief cause of kindling. 
 
 65. The tyrant, being now both Pope and King, made Cran- 
 mer Archbishop of Canterbury, a dignity just then become 
 vacant. Of course, this adviser and ready tool now become chief 
 Judge in all ecclesiastical matters. But, here was a difficulty; 
 for the tyrant still professed to be a Catholic ; so that his new 
 Archbishop was to be consecrated according to the usual ponti¬ 
 fical form,Which required of him to swear obedience to the Pope. 
 And here a transaction took place that will, at once, show us of 
 what sort of stuff ’ the “ reformation” gentry were made. Cran- 
 MER, before he went to the altar to be consecrated, went into a 
 chapel, and there made a declaration on oath , that, by the oath, 
 that he was about to take, and which for the sake of form , he 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 29 
 
 was obliged to take, he did lot intend to bind himself to any 
 thing that tended to prevent him from assisting the King in mak¬ 
 ing any such “ reforms ” as he might think useful in the Church 
 of England ! I once knew a corrupt Cornish knave, who having 
 sworn to a direct falsehood, (and that he, in private, acknowledg¬ 
 ed to be such,) before an Election Committee of the House of 
 Commons, being asked how he could possibly give such evidence, 
 actually declared, in so many words “ that he had, before he left 
 “ his lodging in the morning, taken an oatk, that lie would swear 
 falsely that day.” He perhaps, imbibed his principles from this 
 yery Archbishop, who . occupies the highest place inlying Fox’s 
 lying book of Protestant Martyrs. 
 
 66. Having provided himself with so famous a judge in ecclesi¬ 
 astical matters, the King lost, of course, no time in bringing his 
 hard case before him, and demanding justice at his hands ! Hard 
 case, indeed; to be compelled to live with a wife of forty-three , 
 when he could have, for next to nothing, and only for asking a 
 young one of eighteen or twenty! Areally hard case; and he 
 sought relief now that he had got such an upright and impartial 
 judge, with all imaginable despatch. What I am now going to 
 relate of the conduct of this Archbishop and of the other parties 
 concerned in the transaction is calculated to make us shudder with 
 horror, to make our very bowels heave with loathing, to make us 
 turn our eyes from the paper and resolve to read no further But, 
 w r e must not give way to these feelings if we have a mind to 
 know the true history of the Protestant “ Reformation.*’ We 
 must keep ourselves cool; we must reason ourselves out of our 
 ordinary impulses ; we must beseech nature to be quiet within 
 us for a while ; for from first to last, we have to contemplate 
 nothing that is not of a kind to fill us with horror and dis¬ 
 gust. 
 
 67. It was now four or five years since the king and Cran- 
 mer had begun to hatch the project of the divorce ; but, in 
 the meanwhile, the king had kept Anne Boylen, or, in more 
 modern phrase, she had been “ under his protection ,” for a- 
 bout three years. And, here, let me state, that, in Dr Bayley’3 
 life of Bishop Fisher, it is positively asserted, that Anne Boylen 
 was the king’s daughter , and that Lady Boylen, her mother said to 
 the king, when he ivas about to marry Anne, “ Sir, for the rever- 
 “ ence of God, take heed what y du do in marrying my daughter, for, 
 “ if you record your own conscience well, she is your own daugh - 
 “ ter as well as mine.” To which the king replied, “ Whose daugh- 
 “ ter soever she is, she shall be my wife.” Now, though I believe 
 this fact, I do not give it as a thing the truth of which is unde¬ 
 niable. I find it in the writings of a man, who was the eulogist, 
 (and justly,) of the excellent Bishop Fisher, who suffered death 
 because he stood firmly on the side of Queen Catherine. I be- 
 
 3 * 
 
 i 
 
30 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 lieve it; but I do not give it., as l do the other facts that I state, 
 as what is undeniably true. God knows, it is unnecessary to 
 make the parties blacker than they are made by the Protestant 
 historians themselves, in even a favourable record of their hor¬ 
 rid deeds. 
 
 68. The King had had Anne, about three years “ under his 
 protection,” when she became, for the first time, with child. 
 There was now, therefore, no time to be lost in order to “ make 
 an honest woman of her.” A private marriage took place in Jan¬ 
 uary, 1533. As Anne’s pregnancy could not be long disguised, 
 it became necessary to avow her marriage; and, therefore, it 
 was also necessary to press onward the trial for the divorce; for, 
 it might have seemed rather aukward, even amongst ‘‘ reforma¬ 
 tion” people, for the king to have tivo wives at a time ! Now, then, 
 the famous ecclesiastical judge, Cranmer, had to play his paid.; 
 and, if his hypocrisy did not make the devil blush, he could have 
 no blushing faculties in him. Cranmer, in April, 1533, wrote a 
 letter to the King, begging him, for the good of the nation, and 
 for the safety of his own soul, to grant his permission to try the 
 question of the divorce, and beseeching him no longer to live in 
 the peril attending an “ incestuous intercourse!” Matchless, as¬ 
 tonishing hypocrite ! He knew, and the king knew that he knew, 
 and he knew that the king knew that he knew it, that the king 
 had been actually married to Anne, three months before, she be¬ 
 ing with child at the time that he married her! 
 
 69. The King graciously condescended to listen to this ghost¬ 
 ly advice of his pious primate, who was so anxious about the 
 safety of his royal soul; and without delay, he, as Head of the 
 Church, granted the ghostly father, Cranmer, who, in violation 
 of his own clerical vows, had, in private, a woman of his own ; 
 to this ghostly father, the King granted a licence to hold a spi¬ 
 ritual court for the trial of the divorce. Queen Catherine, who 
 had been ordered to retire from the court, resided, at this time, 
 at Amp thill in Bedfordshire, at a little distance from Dunstable. 
 At this latter place, CrAnmer opened his court, and sent a cita¬ 
 tion to the queen to appear before him, which citation she treat¬ 
 ed with the scorn it deserved. When he had kept his “ court” 
 open the number of days required by the law, he pronounced 
 sentence against the queen, declaring her marriage with the King 
 null from the beginning; and having done this, he closed his far¬ 
 cical court. We shall see him doing more jobs in the divorcing 
 line; but thus he finished the first. 
 
 70. The result of this trial was, by this incomparable judge, 
 made known to the King, whom this wonderful hypocrite grave¬ 
 ly besought to submit himself with resignation to the will oj God, 
 Sis declared to him in the decision of the spiritual court, acting 
 according to the laws of holy Church! The pious and resigned 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 31 
 
 King yielded to the admonition ; and then Cranmer held another 
 court at Lambeth, at which he declared, that the King had been 
 lawfully married to Anne Boleyn, and that he now confirmed 
 the marriage by his pastoral and judicial authority, which he 
 derived from the successors of the Apostles ! We shall see him 
 by-and-bve, exercising the same authority to declare this new 
 marriage* null and void from the beginning, and see him assist in 
 bastardizing the fruit of it: but we must now follow Mrs. Anne 
 Boleyn (whom the Protestant writers strain.hard to whitewash) 
 till we have seen the end of her. 
 
 71. She was deliverod of a daughter (who was afterwards 
 Queen Elizabeth) at the end .of eight months from the date of her 
 marriage. This did not please the king, who wanted a son, and 
 who was quite monster enough to be displeased with her on this 
 account. The couple jogged on apparently without quarrelling 
 for about three years, a pretty long time, if we duly consider the 
 many obstacles which vice opposes to peace and happiness. The 
 husband, however, had plenty of occupation ; for, being now, 
 “head of the Church ,” he had a deal to manage: he had, poor 
 man, to labour hard at making a new religion, new articles of 
 faith, new rules of discipline, and he had new things of all sorts 
 to prepare. Besides which, he had, as we shall see in the next 
 number, some of the best men in his kingdom, and that ever liv¬ 
 ed in any kingdom or country, to behead, hang, rip up, and cut 
 into quarters. He had, moreover, as we shall see, begun the 
 grand work of confiscation, plunder, and devastation. So that 
 he could not have a great deal of time for family squabbles. 
 
 72. If, however, he had no time to jar with Anne, he had no 
 time to look after her, which is a thing to be thought of, when 
 a man marries a woman half his own age; and that this “great 
 female reformer,'" as some of the Protestant writers call her, 
 wanted a little husband-like vigilance, we are now going to see. 
 The freedom, or rather the looseness of her mannei’s, so very dif¬ 
 ferent from those of that virtuous Queen, whom the English 
 court and nation had had before them as an example, for so ma¬ 
 ny years, gave offence to the more sober, and excited the mirth, 
 and set a-going the chat of persons of another description^ In 
 January, 1536, Queen Catherine died. She bad been banished 
 from the court. She had seen her marriage annulled by Cran- 
 mer, and her daughter, and only surviving child bastardized by 
 act of Parliament; and the husband, who had had five children 
 by her, that “ reformation" husband had had the barbarity to 
 keep her separated from, and never to suffer her, after her ban¬ 
 ishment, to set her eyes on that o ;iy child! She died, as she had 
 lived, beloved and revered by every good man and woman in the 
 kingdom, and was buried amidst thi sobbings and tears of a vast 
 assemblage of the people, in the Abt 3y-church of Peterborough. 
 
32 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 73. The King, whose iron heart seems to have been softened, 
 for a moment, by a most affectionate letter, which she dictated 
 to him from her death bed, ordered the persons about him to 
 wear mourning on the day of her burial. But, our famous u great 
 female reformer'''' not only did not wear mourning, but dressed 
 herself out in the gayest and gaudiest attire ; expressed her un¬ 
 bounded joy ; and said that she was now in reality a Queen ! 
 Alas, for our w great female reformer!” in just three months 
 and sixteen days from this day of her exultation, she died, her¬ 
 self; not, however, as the real queen had died, in her bed, deep¬ 
 ly lamented by all the good, and without a soul on earth to im¬ 
 pute to her a single fault; but on a scaffold, under a death-war¬ 
 rant, signed by her husband, and charged with treason, adultery 
 and incest! 
 
 74. In the month of May, 1536, she was, along with the King, 
 amongst the spectators at a tilting-match, at Greenwich, when 
 being incautious, she gave to one of the combatants, who was 
 also one of her paramours, a sign of her attachment, which 
 seems only to have confirmed the King in suspicions which he 
 before entertained. lie instantly quitted the place, returned to 
 Westminster, ordered her to be confined at Greenwich that night, 
 and to be brought by water to YVestminster the next day. Bui 
 she was met by his order on the river, and conveyed to the tow¬ 
 er ; and, as it were, to remind her of the injustice which she had 
 so mainly assisted in committing-against the late virtuous Queen, 
 as it were to say to her, “ see, after all, God is just she was im¬ 
 prisoned in the very room in which she had slept the night be¬ 
 fore her coronation ! 
 
 75. From the moment of her imprisonment, her behaviour in¬ 
 dicated any thing but conscious innocence. She was charged 
 with adultery with four gentlemen of the King’s household, and 
 with incest with her brother Lord Rockford, and she was, of 
 course, charged with treason, those being acts of trf.ason by law. 
 They were all found guilty, and all put to death. But, before 
 Anne was executed, our friend Thomas Cranmer had another 
 tough job to perform. The King, who never did things by halves, 
 ordered, as u head of the Church ,” the Archbishop to hold his “spi¬ 
 ritual court,” and to divorce him from Anne ! One would think 
 it impossible that a man, that any thing bearing the name of a 
 man should have consented to do such a thing, should not have per¬ 
 ished before a slow fire rather than do it. What! he had, we have 
 seen in paragraph 70, pronounced the marriage with Anne “ to 
 be lawful , and had confirmed it by his authority, judicial and pas¬ 
 toral which he derived from the successors to the Apostles.” How 
 was he now then, to annul this marriage 7 How was he to de¬ 
 clare it unlawful ? 
 
 76. He cited the King and Queen to appear in his court , 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 33 
 
 (Oh ! that court!) His citation stated, that their marriage had 
 been unlawful, that they were living in adultery, and that, for 
 the “ salvation of their souls," they should come and show cause 
 why they should not be separated. They were just going to be 
 separated most effectually ; for this was on the 17th of May, and 
 Anne, who had been condemned to death on the 15th, was to be, 
 and was executed on the 19th ! They both obeyed his citation, 
 and appeared before him by their proctors; and after having 
 heard these, Cranmer, who, observe, afterwards drew up the 
 Book of Common Prayer, wound up the blasphemous farce, by 
 pronouncing, “ in the name of Christ, and for the honour of God," 
 that the marriage “ was and always had been null and void!” 
 Good God ! But we must not give way to exclamations, or they 
 will interrupt us at every step. Thus was the daughter, Eliza¬ 
 beth, bastardized by the decision of the very man who had not 
 only pronounced her mother’s marriage lawful, but who had 
 been the contriver of that marriage! And yet Burnet has the 
 impudence to say. that Cranmer “ appears to have done every 
 thing with a good conscience /” Yes, with such another con¬ 
 science as Burnet did the deeds, by which he got into the Bishop¬ 
 ric of Salisbury, at the time of “ Old Glorious," which, as we 
 shall see, was by no means disconnected with the “ Reforma¬ 
 tion.” 
 
 77. On the 19th, Anne was beheaded in the Tower, put into 
 an elm coffin, and buried there. At the place of execution, she 
 did not pretend that she was innocent; and there appears to me 
 to be very little doubt of her having 1 done some at least of the 
 things imputed to her : but if her marriage with the king had 
 “ always been null and void,” that is to say, if she had never been 
 married to him, how could she, by her commerce with other 
 men, have been guilty of treason ? On the 15th, she is condemn¬ 
 ed as the wife of the king, on the 17th she is pronounced never 
 to have been his wife, and on the 19th, she is executed for having 
 been his unfaithful wife 1 However, as to the effect which this 
 event has upon the character of the “Reformation,” it signifies 
 not a straw whether she were guilty or innocent of the crimes 
 now laid to her charge ; for if she were innocent, how are we ta 
 describe the monsters who brought her to the block ? How are 
 vve to describe that “ Head of the Church” and that Archbishop, 
 who had now the management of the religious affairs of Eng¬ 
 land ? It is said, that the evening before her execution, she beg¬ 
 ged the lady of the lieutenant of the Tower to go to Princess 
 Mary, and to beg her to pardon her for the many wrongs she 
 had done her. There were others to whom she had done wrongs. 
 She had been the cause, and the guilty cause of breaking the 
 heart of the rightful queen ; she had caused the blood of More 
 and of Fisher to be shed; and she had been the promoter of 
 
34 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 Cranmer, and his aider and abettor in all those crafty and per 
 nicious councils, by acting upon which, an obstinate hard-heart¬ 
 ed king had plunged the kingdom into confusion and blood. 
 The king, in order to show his total disregard for her, and, as it 
 were, to repay her for her conduct on the day of the funeral of 
 Catherine, dressed himself in ivhite on the day of her execution; 
 and the very next day, was married to Jane Seymour, at Mare- 
 vell Hall in Hampshire. 
 
 78. Thus, then, my friends, we have seen that the thing called 
 the u Reformation” “ was engendered in beastly lust , and brought 
 forth in hypocrisy and perfidy."" How it proceeded in devastat¬ 
 ing and in shedding innocent blood, we have yet to see. 
 
 LETTER ni. 
 
 Resistance to the King’s Measures.—Effects of abolishing 
 the Pope’s Supremacy.—Death of Sir Thomas More and 
 Bishop Fisher.—Horrible murder of Catholics.—Luther 
 and the New Religion.—Burning of Catholics and Pro¬ 
 testants AT THE SAME FIRE.-EXECRABLE CONDUCT OF CrAN- 
 
 mer.—Title of Defender of the Faith. 
 
 Kensington , 31s/ January , 1825. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 79. No Englishman, worthy of that name, worthy of a name 
 which carries along with it sincerity and a love of justice ; no 
 real Englishmen can have contemplated the foul deeds, the base 
 hypocrisy, the flagrant injustice, exposed in the foregoing Let 
 ter, without blushing for his country. What man, with an ho¬ 
 nourable sentiment in his mind is.there, who does not almost 
 wish to be a foreigner , rather than be the countryman of Cran¬ 
 mer and Henry VIII. ? If, then, such be our feelings already, 
 what are they to be by the time we have got through those scenes 
 of tyranny, blood, and robbery, to which the deeds which we havo 
 already witnessed, were merely a prelude ? 
 
 80. Sunk, however, as the country was by the members of 
 Parliament, hoping to share, as they finally did, in the plunder 
 of the church and the poor; selfish and servile as was the con¬ 
 duct of the courtiers, the king’s councillors, and the people’s 
 representatives, still there were some men to raise their voices 
 against the illegality and cruelty of the divorce from Catharine, 
 as well as against that great preparatory measure of plunder, 
 the taking of the spiritual supremacy from the Pope and giving 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 35 
 
 it to tho king. The bishops, all but one, which one we shall pre¬ 
 sently see dying on the scaffold rather than abandon his integrity, 
 were terrified into acquiescence, or, at least, into silence. But 
 there were many of the parochial clergy, and a large part of tho 
 monks and friars, who were not thus acquiescent or silent. 
 These, by their sermons, and by their conversations, made the 
 truth pretty generally known to the people at large ; though they 
 did not succeed in preventing the calamities which they saw ap¬ 
 proaching, they rescued the character of their country from the 
 infamy of silent submission. 
 
 81. Of all the duties of the historian, the most sacred is that 
 of recording the conduct of those who have stood forward to 
 defend helpless innocence against the attacks of powerful guilt. 
 This duty calls on me to make particular mention of the conduct 
 of the two friars, Peyto and Elstow. The former, preaching be¬ 
 fore the king at Greenwich, just previous to his marriage with 
 Anne, and, taking for his text the passage in the first book of 
 Kings, where Micaiah prophesies against Ahab, who was sur¬ 
 rounded with flatterers and lying prophets, said, u I am that Mi¬ 
 caiah whom you will hate, because I must tell truly, that this 
 marriage is unlawful; and I know that I shall eat the bread of 
 affliction, and drink the waters of sorrow; yet because our Lord 
 hath put it in my mouth I must speak it. Your flatterers are the 
 four hundred prophets, who, in the spirit of lying, seek to de¬ 
 ceive you. But take heed, lest you, being seduced, find Ahab’s 
 punishment, which was to have his blood licked up by dogs. It 
 is one of the greatest miseries in princes to be daily abused by 
 flatterers.” The king took this reproof in silence; but the next 
 Sunday, a Dr. Curwin preached in the same place before the 
 king, and having called Peyto dog, slanderer, base, beggarly friar , 
 rebel, and traitor, and having said that he fled for fear and shame , 
 Elstow, who was present, and who was a fellow-friar of Peyto, 
 called out aloud to Curwin, and said, “ Good Sir, you know that 
 Father Peyto is now gone to a provincial council at Canterbury, 
 and not fled for fear of you; for, to-morrow he will return. In 
 the meanwhile, I am here, as another Micaiah, and will lay down 
 my life to prove all those things true, which he hath taught out 
 of Holy Scripture; and to this combat I challenge thee, before 
 God and all equal judges; even unto thee, Curwin, I say, which 
 art one of the four hundred false prophets, into whom the spirit 
 of lying is entered, and seekest by adultery, to establish a suc¬ 
 cession, betraying the king into endless perdition.” 
 
 82. Stowe, who relates this in his Chronicle, says that Elstow 
 K waxed hot, so that they could not make him cease his speech, 
 until the king himself bade him hold his peace.” The two friars 
 were brought the next day before the king’s council, who re¬ 
 buked them, and told them that they deserved to be put into 4 
 
36 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 sack and thrown into the Thames. “ Whereupon, Elstow said 
 smiling: threaten these things to rich and dainty persons, who 
 are clothed in purple, fare deliciously, and have their chiefest hope 
 in this world; for we esteem them not, but are joyful, that 
 for the discharge of our duty, we are driven hence; and, with 
 thanks to God, we know the way to heaven to be as ready by 
 water as by land.” 
 
 83 It is impossible to speak with sufficient admiration of the 
 conduct of these men. Ten thousand victories by land or sea 
 would not-bespeak so much heroism in the winners of those vic¬ 
 tories as was shown by these friars. If the bishops, or only one 
 fourth part of them, had shown equal courage, the tyrant would 
 have stopped in that career which was now on the eve of pro¬ 
 ducing so many horrors. The stand made against him by these 
 two poor friars, was the only instance of bold and open resistance, 
 until he had actually got into his murders and robberies; and. 
 seeing that there never was yet found even a Protestant pen, 
 except the vile pen of Burnet, to offer so much as an apology 
 for the deeds of this tyrant, one would think that the heroic 
 virtue of Peyto and Elstow ought to be sufficient to make us 
 hesitate before we talk of “monkish ignorance and supersti¬ 
 tion.” Recollect, that theTe was no wild fanaticism in the con¬ 
 duct of those men; that they could not be actuated by any sel¬ 
 fish motive; that they stood forward in the cause of morality, 
 and in defence of a person whom they had never personally known, 
 and that too, with the certainty of incurring the most severe pun¬ 
 ishments, if not death itself. Before their conduct, how the he¬ 
 roism of the Hampdens and the Russels sink from our sight! 
 
 84. We now come to the consideration of that copious source 
 of blood, the suppression of the Pope’s supremacy. To deny 
 the king’s supremacy, was made high treason , and to refuse to 
 take an oath acknowledging that supremacy, was deemed a de¬ 
 nial of it. Sir Thomas Moore, who was the Lord Chancellor, 
 and John Fisher, who was Bishop of Rochester, were put to 
 death for refusing to take this oath. Of all the men in England, 
 these were the two most famed for learning, for integrity, for 
 piety, and for long and faithful services to the king and his father. 
 It is no weak presumption in favour of the Pope’s supremacy that 
 these two men, who had exerted their talents to prevent its suppres¬ 
 sion, laid their heads on the block rather than sanction thnt sup¬ 
 pression. But, knowing as we do, that it is the refusal of our Catho¬ 
 lic fellow-subjects to take this same oath, rather than take which, 
 Moore and Fisher died ; knowing that this is the cause of all that 
 cruel treatment which the Irish people have so long endured, and to 
 put an end to which ill treatment they are now so arduously strug¬ 
 gling ; knowing that it is on this very point that the fate of England 
 herself may rest in case of another war; knowing these things, it be- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 37 
 
 comes us to inquire with care, what is the nature, and what are 
 the effects of this papal supremacy, in order to ascertain, whe¬ 
 ther it be favourable or otherwise, to true religion and to civil 
 liberty. 
 
 85. The Scripture tells us, that Christ’s Church was to be 
 ONE. We, in repeating the Apostle’s Creed, say “I believe in 
 the Holy Catholic Church.” Catholic , as we have seen in para¬ 
 graph 3, means Universal. And how can we believe in an uni¬ 
 versal church, without believing that that Church is One, and 
 under the direction of one head ? In the gospel of St. John, 
 chap. 10, v. 16, Christ says that he is the good shepherd, and 
 that 1 there shall be one fold and one Shepherd.” He afterwards 
 deputes Peter to be the Shepherd in his stead. In the same gos¬ 
 pel, chap 17, v. 10 and 11, Christ says, “ And all mine are thine, 
 and thine are mine, and I am glorified in them. And now I am 
 no more in the world, but they are in the world, and I come to 
 thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name, those whom 
 thou hast given me, that they may be one , as we are.” St. Paul, 
 in his second epistle to the Corinthians, says, “ Finally breth¬ 
 ren, farewell: be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind.” 
 The same Epistle to the Ephesians, chap. 4, v. 3, says, “ Endea- 
 \ curing to keep the unity of the spirit, in the bond of peace. 
 There Ts one body and one spirit, even as ye ar^ called in one 
 hope of your calling; one Lord, one Faith, and one Baptism, 
 one God and Father of all.” Again, in his first epistle to the 
 Corinthians, chap. 1, v. 10, “ Now, I beseech you, brethren, by 
 the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same 
 things and that there be no divisions amongst you: but that ye be 
 perfectly joined together in the same mind /md the same judgment.” 
 
 86. But, besides these evidences of scripture, besides our men 
 creed , which we say we have from the Apostles , there is the rea¬ 
 sonableness of the thing. It is perfectly monstrous to suppose 
 that there can be T WO'true faiths. It cannot be: one of the two 
 must be false. And will any man say that we ought to applaud 
 a measure, which, of necessity, must produce an indefinite num¬ 
 ber of faiths 1 If our eternal salvation depend upon our belters 
 ing the truth , can it be good to place people in a state of ne¬ 
 cessity to have different beliefs 1 And does not, that which 
 takes" away the head of the Church, inevitably produce such a 
 state of necessity 1 How is the faith of all nations to contin¬ 
 ue to be one, if’there be in every nation, a head of the Church, 
 who is to be appealed to, in the last resort, as to all questions, 
 as to all points of dispute which may arise 1 .How, if this be 
 the case, is there to be one fold and one shepherd, how is there 
 to be one faith and one baptisin'?” How are the “ unity and 
 the spirit and the bond of peace” to be preserved 1 We shall 
 presently see what unity and what peace tliere were in England 
 
38 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 the moment that the king became the head of the church. 
 
 87. To give this supremacy to a King, is, to give it occasions 
 ly to a woman ; and still more frequently to a child, even t r . a 
 baby. We shall very soon see it devolve on a boy, nine yea .s of 
 age, and we shall see the monstrous effects that it produced. 
 But if his present Majesty , and all his Royal brothers were to die 
 to-morrow, (and they are all mortal,) we should see it devolve on 
 a little girl, only five years old. She would be the “ one shep¬ 
 herd, she, according to our own creed, which we repeat every 
 Sunday, would be head of the holy Catholic Church ! She 
 would have a council of regency. Oh ! then there would be a 
 whole troop of shepherds. There must then be pretty “ unity 
 of spirit,” and a pretty bond of peace.” 
 
 83. As to the Pope’s interference with the authority of the King 
 or state, the sham plea set up was, and is, that he divided the go 
 vernment with the king, to whom belonged the sole supremacy 
 with regard to every thing within his realm. This doctrine 
 pushed home, would shut out Jesus Christ himself, and make the 
 king an object of adoration. Spiritual and temporal authority 
 are perfectly distinct in their nature, an ought so to be kept in 
 their exercise ; and that, too not only for the sake of religion, 
 but also for the sake of civil liberty. It is curious enough that 
 the Protestant sectarians, while they most cordially unite with 
 the established clergy in crying out against the Pope for “ usurp¬ 
 ing” the king’s authority, and against the Catholics for Counte¬ 
 nancing that usurpation, take special care to deny, that this 
 same king has any spiritual supremacy over themselves ! The 
 Presbyterians have their synod, the Methodists their conference, 
 and all the other motley mongrels, some head or other of their 
 own. Even the “ meek” and money-making followers of George 
 Fox have their Elders and Yearly Meeting. All these heads 
 exercise an absolute power over their members. They give or 
 refuse their sanction to the appointment of the bawlers; they re¬ 
 move them, or break them at pleasure. We have recently seen 
 the synod in Scotland ordering a preacher of the name of Fletch¬ 
 er to cease preaching in London. He appears not to have obey¬ 
 ed ; but the whole congregation has, it seems, been thrown into 
 confusion in consequence of this disobedience. Strange enough, 
 or rather impudent enough, is it, in these sects, to refuse to ack¬ 
 nowledge any spiritual supremacy in the king, while they de¬ 
 claim against the Catholics, because they will not take an oath 
 acknowledging that supremacy: and is it not, then, monstrous, 
 that persons belonging to these sects, can sit in Parliament, can 
 ait in the king’s council, can be generals, or admirals, or judges, 
 while, from all these posts, and many others, the Catholics aro 
 excluded, and that, too, only because their consciences, their 
 honourable adherence to the religion of their fatlers, will not 
 allow them to acknowledge this supremacy, but bids them be- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 39 
 
 long to the “ one fold and the one shepherd,” and to know none 
 other than w one Lord, one faith, and one baptism ?” 
 
 89. But the Pope was a foreigner exercising spiritual power in 
 England ; and this the hypocrites pretended was a degradation, 
 to the king and country. This was something to tickle John 
 Bull, who has, and I dare say, always has had, an instinctive 
 dislike to foreigners. But, in the first place, the Pope might be 
 an Englishman, and we have, in paragraph 42, seen one instance 
 of this. Then how could it be a thing degrading to this nation, 
 when the same thing existed, with regard to all other nations ? 
 Was king Alfred, and were all the long line of kings, for 900 
 years degraded beings ? Did those who really conquered Fiance 
 not by subsidies and bribes , but by arms; did they not understand 
 what was degrading, and what*was not.? Does not the present 
 King of France, and do not the present French people, under¬ 
 stand this matter ? Are the sovereignty of the former, and the 
 
 • freedom of the latter less perfect, because the papal supremacy 
 is distinctly acknowledged, and has full effect in France ? And 
 if the synod in Scotland can exercise its supremacy in England, 
 and the conference in England exercise its supremacy in Scot¬ 
 land, in Ireland, and in the Colonies ; if this can be without any 
 degradation of king or people, why are we to look upon the ex¬ 
 ercise of the papal supremacy as degrading to either ? 
 
 90. Aye : but there was the money. The money of England 
 went to the Pope. Popes cannot live, and keep courts and am¬ 
 bassadors, and maintain great state without money, any more 
 than other people, A part of the money of England went to 
 the Pope ; but a part also of that of every other Christian nation 
 took the same direction. This money, was not, however, thrown 
 away. It was so much given for the preservation of unity of 
 faith, peace, good will, and charity, and morality. We shall, 
 in the broils that ensued, and in the consequent subsidies and 
 bribes to foreigners, soon see that the money, which went to the 
 Pope, was extremely well laid out. But how we Protestants 
 strain at a gnat, while we swallow camels by whole caravans 1 
 Mr. Perceval, gave more to foreigners in one single year , than 
 the Popes ever received from our ancestors in four centuries. 
 We have bowed for years, to a Dutchman, who was no heir to 
 the crown any more than one of our workhouse paupers, and who 
 had not one drop of English blood in his veins; and we now send 
 annually to Hanoverians and other foreigners, under the name 
 of half-pay, more money than was ever sent to the Pope in twen¬ 
 ty years. From the time of the “ Glorious Revolution,” we have 
 been paying two thousand pounds a year to the heirs of “ Mar¬ 
 shal Schomberg,” who came over to help the Dutchman ; and 
 this is, mind, to be paid as long as there are such heirs of Mar¬ 
 shal Schomberg, which to use the elegant and logical and philo> 
 
40 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 sophical phrase of our great u Reformation” Poet, will, I dare 
 say, be “ for ever and a day.” And have we forgotten the Ben- 
 tincks and all the rest of the Dutch tribe, who had estates of the 
 crown heaped upon them: and do we talk, then, of the degrada¬ 
 tion and the loss of money occasioned by the supremacy of the 
 Pope 1 It is a notorious fact, that not a German soldier would 
 have been wanted in this kingdom, during the last war, had it 
 not been for the disturbed and dangerous state of Ireland, in 
 which the German troops were very much employed. We have 
 ong been paying, and have now to pay, upwards of a hundred 
 housand pounds a year to the half-pay officers of these troops, 
 one single penny of which, we now should not have had to pay, 
 if we had dispensed with the oath of supremacy from the Catho¬ 
 lics. Every one to his taste; but,ior my part, if I must pay for¬ 
 eigners for keeping me in order, I would rather pay, u pence to 
 Peter” than pounds to Hessian Grenadiers. Alien Priories , the 
 establishment of which, was for the purpose of inducing learned 
 persons to come and live in England, have been a copious source 
 of declamatory complaint. But, leaving their utility out of the 
 question, I, for my particular part, prefer Alien Priories, to Alien 
 Armies, from which latter, this country has never been, except 
 for very short intervals, wholly free, from the day that the for¬ 
 mer were suppressed. I wish not to set myself up as a dictator 
 in matters of taste ; but I must take leave to say, that I prefer 
 the cloister to the barrack; the chaunting of matins to the re¬ 
 veille by the drum; the cowl to the brass-fronted hairy cap; the 
 shaven crown to the mustachio, though the latter be stiffened 
 with black-ball; the rosary with the cross appendant, to the belt 
 with its box of bullets ; and, beyond all measure, I prefer the 
 penance to the point of the bayonet. One or the other of these 
 things, it would seem, we must have ; for, before the u Reforma¬ 
 tion,” England knew, and never dreamed of such a thing, as a 
 standing soldier; since that event she has never, in reality, known 
 what it was to be without such soldiers : till, at last, a thunder¬ 
 ing standing army, even in time of profound peace, is openly 
 avowed*to be necessary to the “ preservation of our happy con¬ 
 stitution in Church and State !” 
 
 91. However, this money part of the affair is now over, with 
 regard to the Pope. No one proposes to give him any money 
 at all, in any shape whatever. The Catholics believe, that the 
 unity of their church would be destroyed, that they would in 
 short, cease to be Catholics , if they were to abjure his supremacy ; 
 and, therefore, they will not abjure it: they insist that their 
 teachers shall receive their authority from him : and what, do 
 they, with regard to the Pope, insist upon, more than is insisted 
 upon and acted upon by the Presbyterians, with regard to their 
 synod 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 41 
 
 92. Lastly, as to this supremacy of the Pope, what was its ef¬ 
 fect with regard to civil liberty ; that is to say, with regard to the 
 security, the rightful enjoyment, of men’s property and lives? 
 We shall, by-and-by, see, that civil liberty fell by the same ty¬ 
 rannical hands that suppressed the Pope’s supremacy. But, 
 Whence came our civil liberty? Whence came those laws of Eng¬ 
 land, which Lord Coke calls “ the birth-righV ’ of Englishmen, 
 and which each of the States of America, declare, in their consti 
 tutions, to be “ the birth-right of the people thereof ?” Whence 
 came these laws ? Are they of proteslant origin ? The bare 
 question ought to make therevilers ofthe Catholics hang their 
 heads for shame. Did protestants establish the three courts and 
 the twelve Judges , to which establishment, though, like all other 
 human institutions, it has somtimes worked evil, England owes 
 so large a portion of her fame and her greatness ? Oh, no ! This 
 institution arose when the Pope’s supremacy was in full vigour. 
 It was not a gift from Scotchmen nor Dutchmen nor Hessians j 
 from Lutherans, Calvanists, or Hugonots ; but was the work of 
 our own brave and wise English Catholic ancestors: and Chief 
 Justice Abbott is the heir, in an unbroken line of succession, 
 to that Bench, which was erected by Alfred, who was, at the 
 very same time, most zealously engaged in the founding of 
 churches and of monasteries. 
 
 93. If, however, we still insist, that the Pope’s supremacy and 
 its accompanying circumstances, produced ignorance, superstition 
 and slavery, let us act the part of sincere, consistent and honest 
 men. Let us knock down, or blow up, the Cathedrals and col¬ 
 leges, and old churches ; let us sweep away the thiee courts, the 
 twelve judges, the circuits and the jury boxes ; let us demolish all 
 that we inherit from those whose religion we so unrelentingly per¬ 
 secute, and whose memory we affect so heartily to dispise ; let us 
 demolish all this, and we shall have left, all our own , the capaci¬ 
 ous jails and penetentiaries; the stock-exchange ; the hot and 
 ancle and knee-swelling and lung-swelling cotton-factories ; the 
 whiskered standing army and its splendid barracks; the parson- 
 captains, parson-lieutenants, parson-ensigns, and parson-justices; 
 the poor-rates and the pauper houses ; and, by no means forgets 
 ting, that blessing which is peculiarly and doubly, and “ glorious¬ 
 ly ” protestant, the NATIONAL DEBT. Ah! people of Eng¬ 
 land, how have you been deceived ! 
 
 Section 94. But, for argument’s sake, counting the experience 
 of antiquity for nothing, let us ask ourselves what a chance civil 
 liberty can stand if all power , spiritual and lay, be lodged in the 
 hands of the same man. That man must be a despot , or his 
 power must be undermined by an Oligarchy, or by something. 
 If the President, or the Congress, of the United States, had a 
 spiritual supremacy; if they appointed Bishops and Ministers, 
 
 4* 
 
42 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 though they have no benefices to give, and would have no tenths 
 and first fruits to receive, their government would be a tyranny 
 in a very short time. Montesquieu observes, that the people 
 of Spain and Portugal would have been absolute slaves, without 
 the power of the Church, which is, in such a case, “ the only 
 check to arbitrary sway.” Yet, how long have we had “ papal 
 usurpation and tyranny” dinned in our ears! This charge 
 against the Pope surpasseth all understanding. Plow was the 
 Pope to be an usurper, or tyrant, in England ? He had no fleet, 
 no army, no judge, no sheriff, no justice of the peace, not even 
 a single constable or beadle at his command. We have been 
 told of “ the thunders of the Vatican” till we have almost believ¬ 
 ed, that the Pope’s residence was in the skies ; and, if ive had be¬ 
 lieved it quite, the belief would not have surpassed in folly our 
 belief in numerous other stories, hatched by the gentry of the 
 “ Reformation.” The truth is, that tlie Pope had no power but 
 that which he derived from the free will of the people. The peo¬ 
 ple were frequently on his side, in his contests with kings; and, 
 by this means, they, in numerous instances, preserved their rights 
 against the attempts of tyrants. If the Pope had had no power, 
 there must have sprung up an Oligarchy, or a something else, to 
 check the power of the King; or, every King might have been a 
 Nero, if he would. We shall soon see a worse than Nero in Hen¬ 
 ry VIII.; we shall soon see him laying all law prostrate at his feet; 
 and plundering his people, down even to the panymony of the poor. 
 But, reason says that it must be so; and, though this spiritual 
 power be now nominally lodged in the hands of the King ; to how 
 many tricks and contrivances have we resorted, and some of 
 them most disgraceful and fatal ones, in order to prevent him 
 from possessing the reality of this power! We are obliged to 
 effect by influence and by faction ; that is to say, by means in¬ 
 direct, disguised, and frequently flagitiously immoral, not to say 
 almost seditious into the bargain, that which was effected by 
 means direct, avowed, frank, honest, and loyal. It is curious 
 enough, that while all Protestant ministers are everlastingly 
 talking about “ papal usurpation and tyranny ,” all of them, ex¬ 
 cept those who profit from the establishment, talk not less inces¬ 
 santly about what they have no scruple to call, “ that two-head¬ 
 ed monster, Church and State.” What a monster would it have 
 been then, if the Catholics had submitted to the “ Veto ;” that 
 is to say, to give the King a rejecting voice in the appointment 
 of Catholic Bishops ; and thus to make him, who is already “the 
 Defender of the Faith,” against which he protests, an associate 
 with the Sovereign Pontiff, in carrying on the affairs of that 
 thurch, to which the law strictly forbids him to belong! 
 
 95. Thus, then this so much abused papal supremacy was a 
 most salutary tiling it was the only check, then existing, on des 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 43 
 
 potic power, besides it being absolutely necessary to that unity 
 of faith, without which there could be nothing worthy of the 
 name of a Catholic church. To abjure this supremacy was an 
 act of apostacy, and also an act of base abandonment of the 
 rights of the people. To require it of any man was to violate 
 Magna Charta, and all the laws of the land; and to put men to 
 death for refusing to comply with the request, was to commit un¬ 
 qualified murder. Yet, without such murder, without shedding 
 nnocent blood, it was impossible to effect the object. Blood 
 must flow. Amongst the victims to this act of outrageous ty¬ 
 ranny, was Sir Thomas More, and Bishop Fisher. The for¬ 
 mer had been the Lord High Chancellor for many years. 
 The character given of him by his contemporaries, and by eve¬ 
 ry one to the present day, is that of as great perfection for learn¬ 
 ing, integrity, and piety, as it is possible for a human being to 
 possess. He was the greatest lawyer of his age, a long tried, 
 and most faithful servant of the king and his father, and was, 
 besides, so highly distinguished beyond men in general, for his 
 gentleness and humility of manners, as well as for his talents 
 and abilities, that his murder gave a shock to all Europe. Fisher 
 was equally eminent in point of learning, piety, and integrity. 
 He w'as the only surviving privy councillor of the late King, 
 whose mother (the grandmother of Henry VIII ) having outliv¬ 
 ed her son and daughter, besought, with her dying breath, the 
 young King, to listen particularly to the advice of this learned 
 pious, and venerable prelate ; and, until that advice thwarted his 
 brutal passions, he was in the habit of saying, that no other 
 prince could boast of a subject to be compared with Fisher. He 
 used, at the council-board, to take him by the hand, and call 
 him his father; marks of favour and affection which the bishop 
 repaid by zeal and devotion which knew no bounds other than 
 those prescribed by his duty to God, his King, and his country. 
 But, that sacred duty bade him object to the divorce, and to the 
 king’s supremacy; and then, the tyrant, forgetting at once, all 
 his services, all his devotion, all his unparalleled attachment, 
 sent him to the block, after fifteen months’ imprisonment, dur¬ 
 ing which, lie lay, ivorse than a common felon, buried in filth, 
 and almost destitute of food; sent him, who had been his boast 
 and w'hom he ha*h called his father, to perish under the axe; 
 dragged him forth, with limbs tottering under him, his vene¬ 
 rable face and hoary locks begrimed, and his nakedness scarce¬ 
 ly covered with the rags left on his body; dragged him thus 
 forth to the scaffold, and, even w hen, the life w r as gone, left him 
 to lie on that scaffold like a dead dog! Savage monster! Rage 
 stems the torrent of our tears; hurries us back to the horrid 
 scene, and bids us look about us for a dagger to plunge into the 
 heart of the tyrant. 
 
44 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 96. And yet, the calculating, cold-blooded and brazen Bur¬ 
 net has the audacity to say, that “ such a man as Henry \ III. 
 was necessary to bring about the Reformation!’* He means, of 
 course, that such measures as those of Henry were necessary; 
 and, if they were necessary, what must be the nature and ten¬ 
 dency of that “ Reformation !” 
 
 97. The work of blood was now begun, and it proceeded with 
 steady pace. All who refused to take the oath of supremacy j 
 that is to say, all who refused to become apostates, were consi¬ 
 dered, and treated as traitors, and made to sutler death accom¬ 
 panied with every possible cruelty and indignity. As a speci¬ 
 men of the works of Burnet's necessary reformer, and to spare 
 the reader repetition on the subject, let us take the treatment of 
 John Houghton, Prior of the Charter-house in London, which 
 was then a convent of Carthusian monks. This prior, for having 
 refused to take the oath, which, observe, he could not take, with¬ 
 out committing perjury, was dragged to Tyburn. He was scarce¬ 
 ly suspended, when the rope was cut, and he fell alive on the 
 ground. His clothes were then stripped off; his bowels were 
 ripped up; his heart and entrails were torn from his body, and 
 flung into a fire ; his head was cut from his body; the body was 
 divided into four quarters and par-boiled; the quarters were 
 then subdivided and hung up in different parts of the city ; and 
 one arm was nailed to the wall, over the entrance into the monas¬ 
 tery ! 
 
 98. Such were the means, which Burnet says were necessary 
 to introduce the Protestant religion into England ! How differ¬ 
 ent,, alas ! from the means by which the Catholic religion had 
 been introduced by Pope Gregort, and Saint Austin! These 
 horrid butcheries were perpetrated, mind, under the primacy of 
 Fox’s great martyr, Cranmer, and with the active agency of 
 another great ruffian, named Thomas Cromwell, whom we 
 shall soon see, sharing with Cranmer, the work of plunder, and 
 finally sharing, too, in his disgarceful end. 
 
 99. Before we enter on the grand subject of plunder , which 
 was the mainspring of the “ Reformation,*’ we must follow the 
 King and his primate through their murders of Protestants as 
 well as Catholics. But first, we must see how the Protestant re¬ 
 ligion arose, and how it stood at this juncture. Whence the term 
 Protestant came, we have seen in paragraph 3. It was a name 
 given to those who declared, or protested against the Catholic, 
 or universal church. This work of protesting was begun in Ger¬ 
 many, in the year 1517, by a friar, whose name was Martin Lu¬ 
 ther, and who belonged to a convent of Augustin friars in the 
 electorate of Saxony. At this time, the Pope had authorized 
 the preaching of certain indulgences, and this business having 
 been entrusted to the order of Dominicans, and not to the order 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 45 
 
 to which Luther belonged, and to which it had been usual to 
 commit such trust, here was one of the motives from which Lu¬ 
 ther’s opposition to the Pope proceeded. He found a protec¬ 
 tor in his sovereign, the Elector of Saxony, who appears to have 
 had as strong a relish for plunder as that with which our English 
 tyrant and his courtiers and Parliament were seized a few years 
 afterwards. 
 
 100. All accounts agree that Luther was a most profligate 
 man. To change his religion he might have thought himself 
 called by his conscience ; but conscience could not call upon him 
 to be guilty of all the abominable deeds of which he stands con¬ 
 victed, even by his own confessions, of which I shall speak more 
 fully, when I come to the proper place for giving an account of 
 the numerous sects into which the Protestants were soon divided, 
 and of the fatal change which was, by this innovation in religion 
 produced, even according to the declaration of the Protestant 
 leaders themselves, in the morals of the people, and the state of 
 society But, just observing, that the Protestant sects had, at 
 the time we are speaking of, spread themselves over a part of 
 Germany, and got into Switzerland, and some other states of 
 the continent, we must now before we state more particulars 
 relating to Luther and the sects that he gave rise to, see how 
 the King of England dealt with those of his subjects who had 
 adopted the heresy. 
 
 101. The Protestants immediately began to disagree amongst 
 themselves ; but they all maintained that faith alone was suffici¬ 
 ent to secure salvation; while the Catholics maintained, that good 
 works were also necessary. The most profligate of men the 
 most brutal and bloody of tyrants, may be a staunch believer : 
 for the devils themseves believe : and therefore, we naturally 
 at first thought, think it Strange, that Henry VIII. did not in¬ 
 stantly become a zealous Protestant; did not become one of the 
 most devoted disciples of Luther. He would, certainly ; but 
 Luther began his “Reformation” a few years too soon for the 
 king. In 1517, when Luther began his works, the king had 
 been married to his first wife, only eight pears; and he had not 
 then conceived any project of divorce . If Luther had begun 
 twelve years later, the king would have been a Protestant at 
 once, especially after seeing, that this new religion allowed Lu¬ 
 ther ancteeven others of his brother leaders in the “ Reforma¬ 
 tion” to grant under their hands, a licence to the Lancrave of 
 Hesse to have TWO WIVES at one and the same J.ime ! So 
 complaisant a religion would have been, and doubtless was, at the 
 time of the divorce, precisely to the king's taste ; but, as I have 
 iust observed, it came twelve years too soon for him; for not on¬ 
 ly had he not adopted this religion, but had opposed it as a so¬ 
 vereign ; and, which was a still more serious affair, had opposed 
 
46 
 
 FROTESTANT {REFORMATION. 
 
 it as an AUTHOR! He had, in 1521, written a BOOK against 
 it. His vanity, his pride, were engaged in the contest; to which 
 may be added, that Luther, in answering his book, had called 
 him w a pig, an ass, a dunghill, the spawn of an adder, a basi¬ 
 lisk, a lying buffoon dressed in a king’s robes, a mad fool with a 
 frothy mouth and a whorish face and had afterwards said to 
 him, “you lie, you stupid and sacrilegious king.” 
 
 102. Therefore, though the tyrant was bent on destroying the 
 Catholic church, he was not less bent on the extirpation of tho 
 followers of Luther and his tribe of new sects. Always under 
 the influence of some selfish and base motive or other, he was 
 with regard to the Protestants, set to work by revenge, as in the 
 case of the Catholics he had been set to work by lust, if not by 
 lust, to be gratified by incest. To follow him step by step, and 
 in minute deia.il through all his butcheries and all his burnings 
 would be to familiarize one’s mind to a human slaughter-house, 
 and a cookery of canibals. I shall, therefore, confine myself to 
 a general view of his works in this way. 
 
 103. His book against Luther had acquired him the title of 
 “ Defender of the Faith f of which we shall see more by-and-by. 
 He could not, therefore, without recantation, be a Protestant 
 and, indeed, his pride would not suffer him to become the prose¬ 
 lyte of a man who had, in print too proclaimed him to be a pig, 
 an ass, a fool and a liar. Yet he could not pretend to be a Ca¬ 
 tholic. He was, therefore, compelled to make a religion of his 
 own. This was doing nothing, unless he enforced its adoption 
 by what he called law. Laws were made by him and by his 
 servile and plundering parliament, making it heresy in, and con¬ 
 demning to the flames, all who did not expressly conform, by 
 acts, as well as by declarations, to the faith and worship, which, 
 as head of the church, he invented and ordained.. Amongst his 
 tenets, there were such, as neither Catholics, nor Protestants 
 could, consistently with their creeds adopt. He, therefore, sent 
 both to the stake, and sometimes, in order to add mental pangs 
 to those of the body, he dragged them to tho fire on the same 
 hurdle , tied together in pairs, back to back, each pair contain¬ 
 ing a Catholic and a Protestant. Was this the way that Saint 
 Austin and Saint Patrick propagated their religion i Yet, 
 such is tho malignity of Burnet, and of many, many others 
 called Protestant u divines ,” that they apologize for, if they do 
 not absolutely applaud this execrable tyrant, at the very mo¬ 
 ment that they are compelled to confess that he soaked the earth 
 with Protestant blood, and filled the air with tho fumes of their 
 roasting flesh. 
 
 104. Throughout the whole of this bloody work, Cranmer, 
 who was the primate of the King's religion, was consenting to, 
 sanctioning, and aiding and abetting in, the murdering of Pro- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. . 4? 
 
 testants as well as of Catholics ; though, and I pray you to mark 
 it well, Hume, Tili.otson, Burnet, and all his long list of eulo¬ 
 gists, say, and make it matter of merit in him, that all this while, 
 he was himself, a sincere Protestant in his heart ! And, indeed, 
 we shall by-and-by, see him openly avowing those very tenets 
 for the holding of which he had been instrumental in sending, 
 without regard to age or sex, others to perish in the flames. The 
 progress of this man in the paths of infamy, needed incontestible 
 proof to reconcile the human mind to a belief in it. Before he 
 became a priest, he had married : after he became a priest, and 
 had taken the oath of celibacy , he, being then in Germany, and 
 having become a Protestant, married another wife , while the first 
 was still alive. Being the primate of Henry’s church, which still 
 forbade the clergy to have wives, and which held them to their 
 oath of celibacy , he had his wife brought to England, in a chest, 
 with holes bored in it to give her air! As the cargo was destin¬ 
 ed for Canterbury, it was landed at Gravesend, where the sai¬ 
 lors, not apprised of the contents of the chest set it up on one 
 end, and the wrong end downwards, and had nearly broken the 
 neck of the poor frow ! Here was a pretty scene ! A German 
 frow, with a litter of half German, half English young ones, kept 
 in huggar-muggar on that spot which had been the cradle of En¬ 
 glish Christianity; that spot where St. Austin had inhabited, and 
 where Thomas A. Bucket had sealed with his blood, his opposi- 
 • tion to a tyrant, who aimed at the destruction of the church, and 
 at the pillage of the people ! Here is quite enough to fill us with 
 disgust; but, when we reflect, that this same primate, while he 
 had under his roof his frow and her litter, was engaged in as¬ 
 sisting to send Protestants to the flames, because they dissented 
 from a system that forbade the clergy to have wives, we swell 
 with indignation, not against Cranmer, for, though there are so 
 many of his attrocious deeds yet to come, he has exhausted our 
 store ; not against Hume, for he professed no regard for any re 
 ligion at all,; but against those who are called “ divines ,” and 
 who are the eulogists of Cranmer ; agains Burnet, who says, 
 that Cranmer w did all with a good conscience and against Ur. 
 Sturges, or rather the Dean and Chapter of Winchester, who 
 clubbed their u talents' ’ in getting up the “ Reflections on Pope- 
 ry,” who talk of the “ respectable Cranmer,” and who have the 
 audacity to put him, in point of integrity, upon a level with Sir 
 Thomas More ! As Dr. Milner, in his answer to Sturges, ob¬ 
 serves, they resembled each other in that the name of both was 
 Thomas ; but, in all other things, the dissimilarity was as great 
 as that which the most vivid imagination can ascribe to the dis¬ 
 similarity between hell and heayen. 
 
 105. 'i'ho infamy of Cranmer in assisting in sending people to 
 the flames for entertaining opinions, which he afterwards con- 
 
48 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 fessed that he himself entertained at the time that he was so 
 sending them, can be surpassed by nothing of which human de 
 pravity is capable ; and it can be equalled by nothing but that 
 of the king, who, while he was, as lie hoped and thought, laying 
 the axe to the root of the Catholic faith, still stiled himself .its de¬ 
 fender ! He was not, let it be borne in mind, defender of what 
 he might as others have, since his day, and in his day, called 
 the Christian faith. He received the title from the Pope , as a 
 reward for his written defence of the Catholic faith against Lu¬ 
 ther. The Pope conferred on him this title which was to de¬ 
 scend to his posterity. The title was given by Pope Leo X. in 
 a bull, or edict, beginning with these words : “ Leo, servant of 
 the servants of the Lord, to his most dear son, Henry, King of 
 England, Defender of the Faith, all health and happiness.” The 
 bull then goes on to say, that the king, having, in defence of the 
 faith of the Catholic Church written a book against Martin Lu¬ 
 ther, the Pope and his council had determined to confer on him 
 and his successors, the title of Defender of the Faith. “ We,” 
 says the bull, u sitting in this Holy See, having, with mature de¬ 
 liberation, considered the business with our brethren, do, with 
 unanimous council and consent, grant unto your Majesty, your 
 heirs and successors, the title of Defender of the Faith ; which 
 we do, by these presents, confirm unto you ; commanding all the 
 faithful to give your Majesty, this title.” 
 
 106. What are we to think, then, of the man who could con 
 tinue to wear this title, while he was causing to be acted before 
 him, a farce in which the Pope and his council were exposed to 
 derision, and was burning, and ripping up the bowels of people 
 by scores, only because they remained firm in that faith of which 
 he had still the odious effrontery to call himself the Defender ? 
 All justice, every thing like law, every moral thought must have 
 been banished before such monstrous enormity could have been 
 suffered to exist. They were all banished from the seat of power. 
 An iron despotism had, as we shall see, in the next Number, come 
 to supply the place of the papal supremacy. Civil liberty was 
 wholly gone : no man had any thing that he could call proper¬ 
 ty ; and no one could look upon Ills life as safe for twenty-four 
 hours. 
 
 107. But there is a little more to be said about this title of 
 Defender of the Faith , which, for some reason or other that one 
 can hardly discover, seems to have been, down to our time, a 
 singularly great favourite. Edward VI., though his two “ Pro¬ 
 tectors” who succeeded each other in that office, and whose 
 guilty heads we shall gladly see succeeding each other on the 
 block, abolished the Catholic faith bp laic; though the Protest¬ 
 ant faith was, with the help of foreign troops, established, in its 
 stead, and though the greedy ruffians of his time, robbed the vo- 
 

 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 49 
 
 ry altars, under the pretext of extirpating that very faith, of 
 which his title called him the Defender, continued to wear this 
 title throughout his reign. Elizabeth continued to wear this 
 title during her long reign of u mischief and of misery,” as Whit¬ 
 aker justly calls it, though during the whole of that reign, she 
 was busily employed in persecuting, in ruining, in ripping up the 
 bowels of those who entertained that faith, of which she styled 
 herself the Defender, in which she herself had been born , in which 
 she had lived for many years, and to which she adhered, openly 
 and privately, till her self-interest called upon her to abandon 
 it. She continued to wear this title while she was tearing the 
 bowels out of her subjects for hearing mass ; while she was re¬ 
 fusing the last comforts of the Catholic religion to her cousin, 
 Mary, Queen of Scotland, whom she put to death by a mdckery 
 of law and justice, after as Whitaker has fully proved, having 
 long endeavoured, in vain, to find amongst her subjects, a man 
 base, and bloody enough to take her victim off by assassination. 
 This title was worn by that mean creature, James I, who took, 
 as his chief councillor, the right worthy son of that father, who 
 had been the chief contriver of the murder of his innocent mo¬ 
 ther, and whose reign was one unbroken series of base plots and 
 cruel persecutions of all who professed the Catholic faith. But, 
 not to anticipate further matter, which will, hereafter, find a 
 more suitable place, we may observe, that, amongst all our sove¬ 
 reigns, the only real Defenders of the Faith since the reign of 
 Mary, have been the late king and his son, our present sove¬ 
 reign : the former by assenting to a repeal of a part of the penal 
 code and by his appointing a special commission to try, condemn, 
 and execute the leaders of the ferocious mob who set fire to, and 
 who wished to sack London, in 1780, with the cry of “NO PO¬ 
 PERY” in their mouths, and from pretended zeal for the Pro¬ 
 testant religion : and the latter, by his sending, in 1814, a body 
 of English troops to assist as a guard of honour at the re-instal¬ 
 ment of the Pope. Let us hope, that his defence of the faith is 
 not to stop here,; but that unto him is reserved the real glory of 
 being the defender of the faith of all his subjects, and of healing 
 for ever those deep and festering wound s,which, for more than 
 two centuries have been inflicted on so large and so loyal a part 
 of his people. 
 
 108. From the sectarian host, no man can say what ought to 
 be expected ! but, from the “ divines” of the established church, 
 even supposing them dead to the voice of justice, one would 
 think, that when they reflect on the origin of this title of their 
 sovereign, common decency would restrain their revilings. It ia 
 beyond all dispute, that the King holds this title from the Pope, 
 and from nobody else. His divine right to the crown is daily dis¬ 
 puted and he himself has disclaimed it. But as to the Defender 
 
 5 
 
50 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 of the Faith, he owes it entirely to the Pope. Will, then, the 
 Protestant divines, boldly tell us, that their and our sovereign 
 wears a title, which, observe, finds its way, not only into every 
 treaty, but into every municipal act, deed, or covenant; will they 
 tell us, that he holds this title from the “ Man of Sin, Antichrist, 
 and the scarlet whore ?” Will they thus defame that sovereign, 
 whom they, at the same time, call on us to honour and obey ? 
 Yet this they must do ; or they must confess, that their revilings, 
 their foul abuse of the Catholic church, have all been detestably 
 false. 
 
 109. The King’s predecessors had another title. They were 
 called Kings of France; a title of much longer standing than 
 that of Defender of the Faith. That title, a title of great glory, 
 and one of which we were very proud, was not won by “ Gos¬ 
 pellers,” or Presbyterians, or New Lights, with Saint Noel or 
 Saint Butterworth at their head. It was, along with the Three 
 Feathers which the king so long wore, won by our brave Catho¬ 
 lic ancestors, it was won while the Pope’s supremacy, while 
 confessions to priests, while absolutions, indulgences, masses, 
 and monasteries existed in England. It was won by Catholics 
 in the ‘‘dark ages of monkish ignorance and superstition." It 
 was surrendered in an age enlightened by “ a heaven-born Pro¬ 
 testant and pledge-breaking Minister. It was won by valour, 
 and surrendered by fear; and fear, too, of those, whom for years, 
 we had been taught to regard as the basest (as they certainly 
 had been the bloodiest) of all mankind. 
 
 110. It would be time, now, after giving a rapid sketch of the 
 progress which the tyrant had made in prostrating the liberties 
 of his people, and in despatching more of his wives, to enter on 
 the grand scene of plunder, and to recount the miseries which 
 immediately follow ed ; but these must be the subject of the next 
 Letter. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 51 
 
 LETTEk IV. 
 
 Horrid Tyranny.—Butchery of the Countess of Salisbu¬ 
 ry.—Celibacy of the Clergy.—Bishops of Winchester. 
 
 —Hume’s Charges, and Bishop Tanner’s Answer. 
 
 Kensington , 28th Feb. 1825. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 111. Wo have seen, then, that the “ Rcformation > ' > was engen¬ 
 dered in beastly lust, brought forth in hypocrisy and perfidy 
 and we have had some specimens of the acts by which it caused 
 innocent blood to be shed. We shall now, in this letter and the 
 next, see how it devastated and plundered the country, what po¬ 
 verty and misery it produced, and how it laid the sure founda¬ 
 tion for that pauperism, that disgraceful immorality, that fear¬ 
 ful prevalence of crimes of all sorts, which now so strongly mark 
 the character of this nation, which was formerly tho land of vir¬ 
 tue and of plenty. 
 
 112. When, in paragraph 97, we left the King and Cranmer 
 at their bloody work, we had come to the year 1536, and to 
 the 27th year of the King's reign. In the year 1528, an act had 
 been passed to exempt the King from paying any sum of money 
 that he might have borrowed; another act followed this, for 
 a similar purpose, and thus thousands were ruined. His new 
 Queen, Jane Seymour, brought him, ha 1537, a son, who was 
 afterwards King, under the title of Edward VI.; but the mother 
 died in child-birth, and, according to Sir Richard Baker, “ had 
 her body ripped up to preserve the child !” In this great “ Re¬ 
 formation” man all was of a piece : all was consistent: he seem¬ 
 ed never to have any compassion for the cufiering of any human 
 being ; and this is a characteristic which Whitaker gives to his 
 daughter Elizabeth. 
 
 113. Having a son for a successor, he, with his Parliament, 
 enacted, in 1537, that Mary and Elizabeth, his two daughters, 
 were bastards , and that, in case of a want of lawful issue , the 
 King should be enabled by letters patent, or by his last will, to 
 give the croivri to whomsoever he pleased ! To cap the whole, 
 to complete a series of acts of tyranny such as was never before 
 heard of, it was enacted in 1537, and in the 2Sth year of his 
 
52 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 reign, that, except in cases of mere private right, “ the Kings 
 Proclamations should be of the same force as Acts of Parlia¬ 
 ment Thus, then, all law and justice were laid prostrate at 
 the feet of a single man, and that man a man with whom law 
 was a mockery, on whom the name of justice was a libel, and to 
 whom mercy was wholly unknown. 
 
 114. It is easy to imagine that no man’s property or life could 
 have security with power like this in the hands of such a man 
 Magna Ciiarta had been trampled under foot from the moment 
 that the Pope’s supremacy was assailed. The famous act of Ed¬ 
 ward the Third, for the security of the people against unfound¬ 
 ed charges of high treason , was wholly set aside. Numerous 
 things were made high treason, which were never before thought 
 criminal at all. The trials were for a long while a mere mock¬ 
 ery ; and, at last they were altogether, in many cases laid aside, 
 and the accused were condemned to death, not only without be¬ 
 ing arraigned and heard in their defence ; but in numerous cases 
 without being apprized of the crimes, or pretended crimes, for 
 which they were executed. We have read of Deys of Algiers, and 
 of Beys of Tunis; but never have heard of them, even in the most 
 exaggerated accounts, deeds to be, in point of injustice and cru¬ 
 elty, compared with those of this man, whom Burnet calls “ the 
 first-born son of the English 1 Refromation The objects of his 
 bloody cruelty generally were, as they naturally would be, chos¬ 
 en from amongst the most virtuous of his subjects; because from 
 them, such a man had the most to dread. Of these, his axe hewed 
 down whole families and circles of friends. Pie spared neither 
 sex nor age, if the parties possessed, or were suspected of pos¬ 
 sessing that integrity which made them disapprove of his deeds. 
 To look awry excited his suspicion, and his suspicion was death, 
 England, before his bloody reign, so happy, so free, knowing so 
 little of crime as to present to the judges of assize, scarcely three 
 criminals in a county in a year, now saw upwards of sixty thou¬ 
 sand persons shut up in her jails at one and the same time. The 
 purlieus of the court of this “ first born son of the Reformation ” 
 were a great human slaughter-house, his people, deserted by 
 their natural leaders who had been bribed by plunder, or the 
 hope of plunder, were the terrified and trembling flock, while he 
 the master-butcher, fat and jocose, sat in his palace issuing or¬ 
 ders for the slaughter, while his High Priest, Cranmer, stood 
 ready to sanction and to sanctify all his deeds. 
 
 115. A detail of these butcheries could only disgust and weary 
 the reader. One instance, however, must not be omitted; name¬ 
 ly, the slaughtering of the relations, and particularly the mother 
 of Cardinal Pole. The Cardinal, who had, when very young 
 tnd hefore the King’s first divorce had beon acitatod beer* a 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 53 
 
 great favourite with the King, and had pursued his studies and 
 travels on the Continent at the King’s expense, disapproved of 
 the divorce, and of all the acts that followed it; and, though cal¬ 
 led home by the King, he refused to obey. Fie was a man of 
 great learning, talent, and virtue, and his opinions had grea 
 weight in England. His mother, the Countess of Salisbury 
 wes descended from the Plantagenets, and was the last living 
 descendant of that long race of English Kings. So that the Car¬ 
 dinal, who had been by the Pope raised to that dignity, on ac¬ 
 count of his great learning and eminent virtues, was thus, a re¬ 
 lation of the King, as his mother was of course, and she was, too, 
 the nearest of all his relations. But, the Cardinal was opposed 
 to the King’s proceedings ; and that was enough to excite and 
 put in motion, the deadly vengeance of the latter. Many were 
 the arts that he made use of, and great in amount was the trea¬ 
 sure of his people that he expended, in order to bring the Cardi¬ 
 nal’s person within his grasp; and these having failed, he resolv¬ 
 ed to wreak his ruthless vengeance on his kindred and his aged 
 mother. She was charged by the base Thomas Cromwell, (of 
 whom we shall soon see enough) with having persuaded her 
 tenants not to read the new translations of the Bible , and also 
 with having received bulls from Rome, which, the accuser said, 
 were found at Courdray House, her seat in Sussex, Cromwell 
 also showed a banner , which had, he said, been used by certain 
 rebels in the North, and which he said he found in her house. 
 All this was, however, so very barefaced, that it was impossible 
 to think of a trial. The judges were then asked, whether the 
 Parliament could not attaint her ; that is to say condemn her, 
 without giving her a hearing ? The judges said that it was a 
 dangerous matter ; that they could not, in their courts, act in 
 this manner, and that they thought the Parliament never would. 
 But, being, asked, whether, if the Parliament were to do it, it 
 would remain good in law , they answered in the affirmative. 
 That Was enough. A bill was brought in, and thus was the Coun¬ 
 tess, together with the Marchioness of Exeter and two gentle¬ 
 men, relations of the Cardinal, condemned to death. The two 
 latter were executed, the Marchioness was pardoned, and the 
 Countess shut up in prison as a sort of hostage for the conduct 
 of her son. In a few months, however, an insurrection having 
 broken out on account of his tyrannical acts, the king chose to 
 suspect, that the rebels had been instigated by Cardinal Pole, 
 and forth he dragged his mother to the scaffold. She, who was 
 upwards of soventy years of age, though worn down in body by 
 her imprisonment, maintained to the last, a true sense oi her 
 character and noble descent. When bidden to lay her head upon 
 the block: “ No,” answered she, “ my head shall never bow to 
 tyranny: it never committed treason; and, if you will have it. 
 
54 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION, 
 
 you must get it as you can.” The executioner struck at lief 
 neck with his axe, and, as she ran about the scaffold with her 
 grey locks hanging down her shoulders and breast, he pursued, 
 giving her repeated chops, till at last he brought her down ! 
 
 116. Is it a scene in Turkey or in Tripoli that we are contem¬ 
 plating ? No ; but in England , where Magna Ciiarta had been 
 so lately in force, where nothing could have been done contrary 
 V) law ; but where all power, ecclesiastical, as well as lay, being 
 placed in the hands of one man, bloody butcheries like this, 
 which would have roused even a Turkish populace to resistance, 
 could be perpetrated without the smallest danger to the perpe¬ 
 trator. Hume, in his remarks upon the state of the people in 
 this reign, pretends, that the people never hated the King, and 
 “ that he seems, even, in some degree, to nave possessed to the 
 last, their love and affection.” He adds, that it may be said with 
 truth , that the “ English , in that age , were so thoroughly subdu¬ 
 ed 1, that, like eastern slaves, they were inclined to admire even 
 those acts of violence and tyranny, which were exercised over 
 themselves, and at their own expense.” This lying historian 
 every where endeavours to gloss over the deeds of those who 
 destroyed the Catholic Church, both in England and Scotland. 
 Too cunning, however, to applaud the bloody Henry himself, 
 he would have us believe that after all, there was something ami¬ 
 able in him, and this belief he would have us found on the fact, 
 of his having been to the last , seemingly beloved by his people. 
 
 117. Nothing can be more false than this assertion, if repeat¬ 
 ed insurrections against him accompanied with the most bitter 
 complaints and reproaches, be not to be taken as marks of po¬ 
 pular affection. And, as to the remark, that the English, “ in 
 that age were so thoroughly subdued ,” while it seems to refute 
 the assertion as to their affection for the tyrant, it is a slander, 
 which the envious Scotch writers all delight to put forth and re¬ 
 peat. One object always uppermost with Hume, is to malign 
 the Catholic religion ; it, therefore, did not occur to him, that 
 this sanguinary tyrant was not effectually resisted, as King John 
 and other bad Kings had been, because this tyrant had the means 
 of bribing the natural leaders of the people to take part against 
 them ; or, at the least, to neutralize those leaders. It did not oc¬ 
 cur to him to tell us, that Henry VIII. found the English as gal¬ 
 lant and just a people as his ancestors had found them ; but that, 
 having divided them , having, by holding out to the great, an 
 enormous mass of plunder as a reward for abandoning the rights 
 of the people, the people became, as every people without lead¬ 
 ers must become, a mere flock, or herd, to be dealt with at plea¬ 
 sure. The malignity and envy of this Scotchman blinded him 
 to this view of the matter, and induced him to ascribe to the peo¬ 
 ple’s admiration of tyranny, that submission, which, after re- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 55 
 
 pealed struggles, they yielded, merely from the want of those 
 leaders, of whom they were now, for the first time, wholly de¬ 
 prived, What! have we ever known any country, consisting of 
 several millions of people, oppressed and insulted, even for ages, 
 by a mere handful of men ? And are we to conclude, that such 
 a country submits, from admiration of the tyranny under which 
 they groan ? Did the English submit to Cromwell from ad¬ 
 miration; and, was it from admiration that the French submit¬ 
 ted to Robespiere ? The latter was punished, but Cromwell 
 was not: he, like Henry, died in his bed ; but, to what mind, 
 except to that of the most malignant and perverse, would it oc¬ 
 cur, that Cromwell’s impunity arose from the willing submis¬ 
 sion, and the admiration of the people ? 
 
 118. Of the means by which the natural leaders of the people 
 were seduced from them ; of the kind and the amount of the 
 prize of plunder , we are now going to take a view. In para¬ 
 graph 4,1 have said that the “ Reformation” was cherished and 
 fed by plunder and devastation. In paragraph 37, I have said, 
 that it was not a Reformation , but a Devastation of England; and 
 that this devastation impoverished and degraded the main body 
 of the people. These statements I am now about to prove to be 
 true. 
 
 119. In paragraphs from 55 to 60 inclusive, we have seen how 
 monasteries arose, and what sort of Institutions they were. There 
 were, in England, at the time we are speaking of, 645 of these 
 Institutions, besides 90 colleges, 110 Hospitals, and 2374 Chan- 
 teries and Free Chapels. The whole were seized on, first and 
 last, taken into the hands of the King, and by him granted to 
 those who aided and abetted him in the work of plunder. 
 
 120. I pray, you, my friends, sensible and just Englishmen, 
 to observe here, that this was a great mass of landed property ; 
 that this property was not by any means used for the sole bene¬ 
 fit of monks, friars, and nuns; that, for the far greater part, its 
 rents flowed immediately back amongst the people at large; and 
 that, if it had never been an object of plunder, England never 
 would, and never could have heard the hideous sound of the 
 words pauper and poor rate. You have seen, in paragraph 52, 
 in what manner the tithes arose, and how they were disposed of; 
 and you are by-and-by, to see how the rents of the monasteries 
 were distributed. 
 
 121. You have, without doubt, fresh in your recollection, all 
 the censures, sarcasms, and ridicule, which we have, from our 
 very infancy, heard against the monastic life. What drones the 
 monks, and friars, and nuns were: how uselessly they lived; how 
 much they consumed to no good purpose whatever ; and particu¬ 
 larly how ridiculous, and even how wicked it was to compel men 
 and women to live unmarried . to lead a life of celibacy, and 
 
56 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 thus, either to deprive them of a great natural pleasure, or to 
 expose them to the double sin of breach of chastity, and breach 
 of oath, 
 
 122. Now, this is a very important matter. It is a great mo» 
 ral question ; and therefore, we ought to endeavour to settle this 
 question ; to make up our minds completely upon it, before we 
 proceed any further. The monastic state necessarily was ac¬ 
 companied with vows of celibacy ; and therefore, it is, before we 
 give an account of the putting down of these institutions in En¬ 
 gland, necessary to speak of the tendency, and, indeed, of the 
 natural and inevitable consequences of those vows. 
 
 123. It has been represented as “unnatural" to compel men 
 and women to live in the unmarried state, and as tending to pro¬ 
 duce propensities, to which it is hardly proper, even to allude. 
 Now, in the first place, have we heard of late days, of any pro¬ 
 pensities of this sort ? Have they made their odious appearance 
 amongst clergymen and bishops ? And, if they have, have those 
 clergymen and bishops been Catholics, or have they been Pro - 
 teslants ? The answer, which every one now living in England 
 and Ireland, can instantly give to these questions, disposes of 
 this objection to vows of celibacy. In the next place, the Ca¬ 
 tholic church compels nobody to make such vow. It only says, 
 that it will admit no one to be a priest, monk, friar, or nun, who 
 rejects such vow. Saint Paul strongly recommends to all Chris¬ 
 tian teachers, an unmarried life. The church has founded a rule 
 on this recommendation; and that too, for the same reason that 
 the recommendation was given; namely, that those who have 
 flocks to watch over, or, in the language of our own Protestant 
 church, who have the care of souls, should have as few as possi¬ 
 ble of other cares, and should, by all means, be free from those 
 incessant, and sometimes racking cares, which are inseparable 
 from a wife and family. What priest, who has a wife and fami¬ 
 ly, will not think more about them than about his flock? Will 
 he, when any part of that family is in distress, from illness, or 
 other cause, be wholly devoted, body and mind/to his flock ? 
 Will he be as ready to give .alms, or aid of any sort, to the poor, 
 as he would be, if he had no family to provide for ? Will he ne¬ 
 ver be tempted to swerve from his duty, in order to provide pa¬ 
 tronage for sons, and for the husbands of daughters ? Will he 
 always as boldly stand up and reprove the Lord or the ’Squire 
 for their oppressions and vices, as he would do if he had no son 
 for whom to get a benefice, a commission, or a sinecure ? Will 
 h:a wife never have her partialities, her tattlings, her bickerings, 
 amongst his flock, and never, on any account induce him to act 
 towards any part of that flock, contrary to the strict dictates ot 
 his sacred duty ? And to omit hundreds, yes, hundreds of rea¬ 
 sons that might, in addition, be suggested, will the married priest 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 57 
 
 be as ready as the unmarried one to appear at the bed-side of 
 sickness and contagion ? Here it is, that the calls on him are 
 most imperative, and here it is that the married priest will, and 
 with nature on his side, be deaf to those calls. From amongst 
 many instances that I could cite, let me take one. During the 
 war of 1776, the King’s house at Winchester was used as a pri¬ 
 son for French prisoners of war. A dreadfully contagious fever 
 broke out amongst them. Many of them died. They were chiefly 
 Catholics, and were attended in their last moments by two or three 
 Catholic priests residing in that city. But, amongst the sick 
 prisoners, there were many Protestants; and these requested the 
 attendance of Protestant parsons. There were the parsons of 
 all the parishes at Winchester. There were the Deans and all 
 the Prebendaries. But not a man of them went to console the 
 dying Protestants; in consequence of which, several of them de¬ 
 sired the assistance of the priests, and, of course, died Catholics. 
 Dr. Milner, in his letter to Dr. Sturges (page 56,) mentions 
 this matter, and he says, “ the answer” (of the Protestant par¬ 
 sons) “ I understand to have been this: ‘ We are not more afraid, 
 as individuals, to face death than the priests are; but we must 
 not carry poisonous contagion into the bosoms of our families." 
 No, to be sure! But then, not to call this the cassock’s taking 
 shelter behind the petticoat, in what a dilemma does this place 
 the Dean and Chapter ? Either they neglected their most sacred 
 duty, and left Protestants to flee, in their last moments, into the 
 arms of “ popery or, that clerical celibacy, against which they 
 have declaimed all their lives, and still declaim, and still hold up 
 to us, their flocks, as something both contemptible and wicked, 
 is, after all, necessary to that “ care of souls," to which they pro¬ 
 fess themselves to have been called, and for which they receive 
 such munificent reicard. 
 
 124. But conclusive, perfectly satisfactory, as these reasons 
 are, we should not, if we were to stop here, do any thing like 
 justice to our subject; for, as to the parochial clergy, do we not 
 see, aye, and feel too, that they, if with families, or intending to 
 have families, find little to spare to the poor of their flocks ? In 
 short, do we not know that a married priesthood and pauperism 
 and poor-rates, all came upon this country at one and the same 
 moment ? And, what was the effect of clerical celibacy with re¬ 
 gard to the higher orders of the clergy ? A bishop, for instance, 
 having neither wife nor child, naturally expended his revenues, 
 amongst the people in his diocese. He expended a part of them 
 on his Cathedral church, or in some other way, sent his revenues, 
 back to the people. If William of Wvckham had been a married 
 man, the parsons would not now have had a College at Win¬ 
 chester, nor would there have been a College either, at Eaton, 
 W estminster Oxford, or Cambridge, if the bishops iu those days 
 
58 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 had eeen married men. Besides, who is to expect of human na 
 ture, that a bishop with a wife and family will, in his distribution 
 of church preferment, consider nothing but the interest of reli¬ 
 on ? We are not to expect of man more than that, of which we, 
 from experience know that man is capable. It is for the law¬ 
 giver to interpose, and to take care that the community suffer not 
 from the frailty of the nature of individuals whose private virtues 
 even may, in some cases, and those not a few, not have a tenden¬ 
 cy to produce public good. I do not say, that married bishops 
 ever do wrong , because I am not acquainted with them well 
 enough to ascertain the fact; but, in speaking of the diocese in 
 which I was bom, and with which I am best acquainted, I may 
 say, that it is certain, that, if the late Bishop of Winchester had 
 lived in Catholic times, he could not have had a wife , and that he 
 could not have had a wife's sister , to marry Mr. Edmond Poul- 
 ter, in which case I may be allowed to think it possible, that Mr. 
 Poulter 'would not have quitted the bar for the pulpit , and that 
 he would not have had the two livings of Meon-Stoke and Sober- 
 ton and a Prebend besides ; that his son Brownlow Poulter 
 would not have had the tico livings of Buriton and Petersficld ; 
 that his son Charles Poulter would not have had the three liv¬ 
 ings of Alton, Binstead, and Kingsley; that his son-in-law Ogle 
 would not have had the living of Bishop’s Waltham! and that his 
 son-in-law Ha ygarth would not have had the two livings of Up- 
 ham and Durley. If the bishop had lived in Catholic times, he 
 could not have had a son, Charles Augustus North, to have 
 the two livings of Alverstoke and Havand, and to be a Prebend; 
 that he could not have had another son, Francis North, to have 
 the four livings of Old Alresford, Medstead, New Alresford, and 
 St. Mary’s, Southampton, and to be, moreover, a Prebend and 
 Master of Saint Cross; that he could not have had a daughter to 
 marry Mr. William Garnier to have the two livings of Droxford 
 and Brightwell Baldwin, and to be a Prebend and a Chancellor 
 besides ; that he could not have had Mr William Garnier’s bro¬ 
 ther, Thomas Garnier, for a relation, and this latter might not, 
 then have had the two livings of Aldingboum and Bishop’s Stoke; 
 that he could not have another daughter to many Mr. Thomas 
 de Grev, to have the four livings of Calbourne, Fawley Mer¬ 
 ton, and Rounton, and to be a Prebend and also an Archdeacon 
 besides ! In short, if the late Bishop had lived in Catholic times, 
 it is a little too much to believe, that these twenty-four livings , 
 five Prebends , one Chancellorship , one Archdeaconship , and one 
 Mastership , worth, perhaps, altogether, more than twenty thou¬ 
 sand pounds a year , would have fallen to the ten persons above 
 named. And, may we not reasonably suppose, that the bishop, 
 instead of leaving behind him, (as the newspapers told us he 
 did) saving's to nearly the amount of three hundred thousand 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 59 
 
 pounds in money, would, if he had had no children nor grand¬ 
 children, have expended a part of this money on that ancient 
 and magnificent Cathedral, the roof of which has recently been 
 in danger of falling in, or would have been the founder of some 
 tiling for the public good, and national honour, or would have 
 been a most munificent friend and protector of the poor, and 
 would never' at any rate, have suffered SMALL BEER TO BE 
 SOLD OUT OF HIS EPISCOPAL PALACE AT FARNHAM ? 
 With an excise licence, mind you! I do not say, or insinuate, 
 that there was any smuggling carried on at the palace. Nor do 
 I pretend to censure the act. A man who has a large family to 
 provide for, must be allowed to be the best judge of his means ; 
 and, if he happen to have an overstock of small beer, it is natu¬ 
 ral enough for him to sell it, in order to get money to buy meat, 
 bread, groceries, or other necessaries. AVhat I say, is, that I do 
 not think that William of Wyckham ever sold small beer, either 
 by wholesale or retail; and I most distinctly assert, that this was 
 done during the late Bishop’s life time, from his Episcopal Pa¬ 
 lace at Farnham ! William of Wyckham (who took his sur¬ 
 name from a little village in Hampshire) was not Bishop of Win¬ 
 chester half so long as the late bishop ; but, out of his revenues, 
 he built, and endowed one of the Colleges at Oxford, the College 
 of Winchester, and did numerous other most munificent things, 
 in some of which, however, he was not without examples in his 
 predecessors, nor without imitators in his successors as long as 
 the Catholic church remained: but when a married clergy came, 
 then ended all that was munificent in the bishops of this once 
 famous city. 
 
 125- It is impossible to talk of the small beer, and of the Mas¬ 
 ter of Saint Cross, without thinking of the melancholy change 
 which the “ Reformation” has produced in this ancient establish¬ 
 ment. Saint Cross, or Holy Cross, situated in a meadow about 
 half a mile from Winchester, is an hospital, or place for hospital¬ 
 ity, founded and endowed by a Bishop of Winchester, about se¬ 
 ven hundred years ago. Succeeding bishops added to its endow¬ 
 ments till at last, it provided a residence aud suitable mainte¬ 
 nance for forty-eight decayed gentlemen, with priests, nurses, 
 and other servants and attendants ; and, besides this, it made pro¬ 
 vision for a dinner every day for a hundred of the most indigent 
 men in the city. These met daily in a hall, called “ the hundred 
 men's hall.” Each had a loaf of bread, three quarts of small 
 beer, and “two messes,” for his dinner; and they were allowed 
 to carry home that which they did not consume upon the spot. 
 What is seen at the hospital of Holy Cross now? Alas ! TEN 
 poor creatures creeping about in this noble building, and 
 THREE out-pensioners; and to those an Attorney from Win- 
 chesster carries, or sends, weekly, the few pence, whatever they 
 
60 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 may be, that are allowed them ! But, the place of the “ Master 
 is, as I have heard, worth a round sum annually. I do not know 
 exactly what it is; but, the post being a thing given to a son of 
 the Bishop, the reader will easily imagine, that it is not a trifle. 
 There exists, however, here, that which, as Dr. Milner observes, 
 is probably the last remaining vestige of “ old English hospital- 
 ity for here, any traveller who goes and knocks at the gate 
 and asks for relief, receives gratis, a pint of good beer, and 
 hunch of good bread. The late Henry Stuart told me, that he 
 once went, and that he received both. 
 
 126. But (and I had nearly forgotten it) there is a Bishop o. 
 Winchester now . And what is he doing ? I have not heard 
 that he has founded, or is about to found, any colleges or hospi¬ 
 tals. All that I have heai*d of him in the EDUCATION way, is, 
 that in his first charge to his clergy (which he published) he urg¬ 
 ed them to circulate amongst their flocks, the pamphlets of a So¬ 
 ciety in London, at the head of which, is Mr. Joshua Watson, 
 wine and spirit merchant of Mincing-lane; and all I have heard 
 of him in the CHARITY way, is, that he is VICE-PATRON of 
 a self-created bodj', called the “ Hampshire Friendly Society 
 the object of which is to raise subscriptions amongst the poor 
 for “ their mutual relief and maintenance or, in other words 
 to induce the poor labourers to save out of their earnings, the 
 means of supporting themselves, in sickness or in old age, with¬ 
 out coming for relief to the poor-rates! Good God ! Why Wil¬ 
 liam of Wyckham, Bishop Fox, Bishop Wynfleet, Cardinal 
 Beaufort, Henry de Blois, and, if you take in all the Bishops 
 of Winchester, even back to Saint S within himself; never would 
 they have thought of a scheme like this for relieving the poor ' 
 Their way of promoting learning was, to found and endow col 
 leges and schools; their way of teaching religion was, to build 
 and endow churches and chapels : their way of relieving the poor 
 and the ailing, was, to found and endow hospitals: and all these 
 at their oivn expense; out of their own revenues. Never did one 
 of them, in order to obtain an interpretation of “ Evangelical 
 truth” for their flocks, dream of referring his clergy to a Socie¬ 
 ty, having a wine and brandy merchant at its head. Never did 
 there come into the head of any one of them, a thought so bright 
 as that of causing the necessitous to relieve themselvesl Ah! 
 but they alas ! lived in the * dark ages of monkish ignorance and 
 superstition .” No wonder that they could not see, that the poor 
 were the fittest persons in the world to relieve the poor! And, 
 besides, they had no wives and children ! No sweet babes to 
 smile on, to soften their hearts. If they had, their conjugal and 
 paternal feelings would have taught them that true charity be¬ 
 gins at home • and that it teaches men to sell small beer, and not 
 give it away. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 61 
 
 127. Enough now, about the celibacy of the clergy ; but it is 
 impossible to quit the subject without one word to Parson Mal- 
 thus. This man is not only a Protestant, but a parson of our 
 church. Now, he wants to compel the labouring classes to refrain 
 to a great extent from man iage ; and Mr. Scarlett actually 
 brought a Bill into Parliament, having, in one part of it, this ob¬ 
 ject avowed in view ; the great end, proposed by both, being to 
 cause a diminution of the poor-rates. Parson Malthus does 
 not call this recommending celibacy; but “ moral restraint 
 And, what is celibacy but moral restraint! So that, here arc 
 these people reviling the Catholic church for insisting on vows 
 of celibacy on the part of those who choose to be priests, or nuns; 
 and, at the same time, proposing to compel the labouring classes 
 to live in a state of celibacy, or to run the manifest risk of perish¬ 
 ing (they and their children) from starvation l Is all this sheer 
 impudence, or is it sheer folly ? One or the other: it is greater 
 than ever was before heard from the lips of mortal man. They 
 affect to believe, that the clerical vow of celibacy must be nuga¬ 
 tory, because nature is constantly at work to overcome it. This 
 is what Dr. Sturges asserts. Now, if this be the case with men 
 of education; men on whom their religion imposes abstinence, 
 fasting, almost constant prayer, and an endless number of aus¬ 
 terities ; if this be the case with regard to such men, bound by a 
 most solemn vow, a known breach of which, exposes them to in¬ 
 delible infamy; if such be the case with such men, and if it be, 
 therefore, contemptible and wicked, not to compel them, mind, to 
 make such vows, but to permit them voluntarily to do it, what 
 must it be to compel young men and women labourers to live in 
 a state of celibacy, or be exposed to absolute starvation? Why, 
 the answer is, that it is the grossest of inconsistency, or of pre¬ 
 meditated wickedness; but that, like all the other wild schemes 
 and cruel projects relative to the poor, we trace it at once back 
 to the “ Reformation,” that great source of the poverty and mi¬ 
 sery and degradation of the main body of the people of this king¬ 
 dom. The “ Reformation” despoiled the working classes of their 
 patrimony ; it tore from them that which nature and reason had 
 assigned them ; it robbed them of that relief for the necessitous, 
 which was theirs by right inprescriptable, and which had been 
 confirmed to them by the law of God and the law of the land. It 
 brought a compulsory, a grudging, an unnatural mode of relief, 
 calculated to make the poor and rich hate each other, instead 
 of binding them together, as the Catholic mode did, by the bonds 
 of Christian charity. But, of all its consequences that of intro¬ 
 ducing a married clergy has, perhaps, been the most prolific in 
 mischief. This has absolutely created an order for the procrea¬ 
 tion of dependants on the state ; for the procreation of thousands 
 of persons annually, who have no fortunes of their own, and who 
 
 6 
 
62 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 must be, some how or other, maintained by burdens imposed 
 upon the people. Places, commissions, sinecures, pensions; 
 something or other must be found for them; some sort of living 
 out of the fruit of the rents of the rich, and the wages of labour 
 If no excuse can be found ; no pretence of public service ; no cor* 
 ner of the pension list open; then they must come as a direct 
 burden upon (he people; and thus it is, that we have, within the 
 last twenty years, seen sixteen hundred thousand pounds, voted 
 by the parliament out of the taxes, for the “ relief of the poor 
 clergy of the Church of England;” and, at the very time that 
 this premium on the procreation of idlers was annnally being 
 granted, the parliament was pestered with projects for compel¬ 
 ling the working part of the community to lead a life of celibacy ! 
 What that is evil, what that is monstrous, has not grown out of 
 this Protestant “ Reformation !” 
 
 128. Thus then, my friends, we have, I think, settled this great 
 question ; and, after all that we have, during our whole lives, 
 heard against that rule of the Catholic church, which imposed a 
 vow of celibacy on those who chose the clerical or the monastic 
 life, we find, whether we look at this rule in a religious, in a mo¬ 
 ral, in a civil, or in a political point of view, that it was founded 
 in wisdom, that it was a great blessing to the people at large, 
 and that its abolition is a thing to be deeply deplored. 
 
 129. So much, then, for this topic of everlasting railing against 
 the Catholic church. We must, before we come to an account 
 of the deeds of the ruffian, Thomas Cromwell, who conducted 
 the work of plunder, say something in answer to the general 
 charge which Protestant writers, and particularly the malignant 
 Scotch historians, have preferred against the monasteries; for, 
 if what they say were true, we might be disposed to think (as, in¬ 
 deed, we have been taught to think) that there was not so much 
 harm in the plunderings that we are about to witness. We w r ill 
 take this general charge from the pen of Hume, who (Vol. 4, p. 
 160,) speaking of the reports made by Thomas Cromwell and 
 his myrmidons says “ it is safest to credit the existence of vices 
 naturally connected with the very institution of the monastic 
 life. The cruel and inveterate factions and quarrels therefore, 
 which the commissioners mentioned, are VERY CREDIBLE 
 among men, who being confined together w ithin the same walls 
 can never forget their mutual animosities, and who, being cut 
 off from all the most endearing connexions of nature, are com¬ 
 monly cursed with hearts more selfish and tempers more unre¬ 
 lenting than fall to the share of other men. The pious frauds, 
 practised to increase the devotion and liberality of the people 
 may be regarded AS CERTAIN, in an order founded on ilia - 
 sion, lies, and superstition. The SUPINE IDLENESS also, and 
 its attendant, PROFOUND IGNORANCE, with which the con- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 63 
 
 vents were reproached, ADMIT OF NO QUESTION. No man* 
 ly or elegant knoicledge could be expected among men, whose 
 life, condemned to a tedious uniformity, and deprived of all emu¬ 
 lation, afforded nothing to raise the mind or cultivate the genius.” 
 
 130. I question, whether monk ever w rote sentences contain¬ 
 ing worse grammar than these contain: but, as to the facts; 
 thesa. “ very credible ,” these ‘ certain" these “ unquestionable' 1 
 facts are almost upon the face of them, a tissue of malignant lies. 
 What should there be “ factions” and “ quarrels” about, amongst 
 men living so “irf/e” and “ unambitious ” a life? How much 
 harder are the hearts of unmarried, than those of married ec¬ 
 clesiastics, we have seen above, in the contrast between the c/ia- 
 rities of Catholic and those of Protestant bishops. It is quite 
 “ credible ” that men, lost in 11 supine idleness ” should practice 
 frauds to get money, wdiich their 6tate prevented them from 
 either keeping or bequeathing, and who were totally destitute of 
 all “ emulation.” The malignity of this liar exceeded his cun¬ 
 ning, and made him not perceive that he was, in one sentence, 
 furnishing strong presumptive proof against the truth of another 
 sentence. Yet, as his history has been, and is, much read, and 
 as it has deceived me along with so many thousands of others, 
 I shall, upon this subject, appeal to several authorities, all Pro¬ 
 testants, mind, in contradiction to these his false and base asser¬ 
 tions, just remarking, by the way, that he himself never had a 
 family or a wife, and that he was a great fat fellow, fed in con¬ 
 siderable part, out of public ‘money, without having merited it by 
 any real public services. 
 
 131. In his history of England, he refers, not less than two 
 hundred times to Bishop Tanner, w ho was Bishop of St. Asaph 
 in the reign of George the Second. Let us hear, then, what Bi¬ 
 shop Tanner; let us hear what this Protestant Bishop says of 
 the character and effects of the monasteries which the savages 
 under Henry VIII. destroyed. Let us see how this high autho¬ 
 rity of Hume agrees with him on this, one of the most interest¬ 
 ing and important points in our history. We are about to wit¬ 
 ness a greater act of plunder, a more daring contempt of law and 
 justice and humanity than ever was, in any other case, w itnessed 
 in the whole world. We are going to see thousands upon thou 
 sands of persons stripped, in an instant, of all their property ; 
 torn from their dwellings, and turned out into the wide world to 
 starve ; and all this too, in violation, not only of natural justice, 
 but of every law of the country, written and unwritten. Let us, 
 then, see what was the character of the persons thus treated, 
 and what were the effects of the institutions to which they be¬ 
 longed. And let us see this, not in the description given by an 
 avowed enemy, not only of the Catholic, but cf the Christian re¬ 
 ligion ; but in that description which has been given us by a Pro* 
 
/ 
 
 84 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 testant Bishop, and in a book written expressly to give “ an ac- 
 count of all the abbies, priories, and friaries, formerly existing in 
 England and Wales; bearing in mind, as we go along, that Humk 
 has, in his History of England, referred to this very work up¬ 
 wards of two hundred limes, taking care, however, not to refer 
 to a word of it relating to the important question now before us. 
 
 132. Bishop Tanner, before entering on his laborious account 
 of the several monastic institutions, gives us, in pages 19, 20 and 
 21 of his preface, the following general description of the cha¬ 
 racter and pursuits of the monasteries, and of the effects of their 
 establishments. I beg you, my friends, to keep, as you read 
 Bishop Tanner’s description, the description of HuxME constant¬ 
 ly in your minds. Remember, and look now-and-then, back at 
 his charges of “ supine idleness,' 1 “profound ignorance," want 
 of all “ emulation and all manly and elegant knowledge and, 
 above all things remember his charge of selfishness, his charge of 
 “frauds ” to get money from the people . The bishop speaks thus, 
 upon the subject. 
 
 133. “ In every great abbey, there was a large room called 
 the Scriptorium, where several writers made it their whole busi¬ 
 ness to transcribe books for the use of the library. They some¬ 
 times, indeed, wrote the leiger books of the house, and the mis¬ 
 sals, and other books used in divine service, but they were gene* 
 rally upon other works, viz. the Fathers, Classics, Histories, he. 
 &lc. John Whethamsted, abbot of St. Alban’s, caused above 
 eighty books to be thus transcribed (there was then no printing) 
 during his abbacy. Fifty-eight were transcribed by the care of 
 one abbot at Glastonbury; and so zealous were the monks in ge¬ 
 neral for the work, that they often got lands given, and churches 
 appropriated for the carrying of it on. In all the greater abbies, 
 there were also persons appointed to take notice of the principal 
 occurrences of the kingdom , and at the end of every year, to di¬ 
 gest them into annals. In these recoi'ds they particularly pre¬ 
 served the memoirs of their founders and benefactors, the years 
 and days of their births and deaths, their marriages, children 
 and successors; so that recourse was sometimes had to them for 
 proving persons’ ages, and genealogies ; though it is to he fear¬ 
 ed that some of those pedigrees were drawn up from tradition 
 only; and that in most of their accounts they were favourable 
 to their friends, and severe upon their enemies. The constitutions 
 of the clergy in their national and provincial 6ynods, and (after 
 the conquest) even Acts of Parliament were sent to the abbies to 
 be recorded; which leads me to mention the use and advantages 
 of these religious houses. For, FIRST, the choicest records and 
 treasures in the kingdom were preserved in them. An exempli¬ 
 fication of the charter of liberties granted by King Henry I. 
 (Migna Charta) was sent to some abbey in every county to be 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 65 
 
 preserved. Charters and inquisitions relating to the county of 
 Cornwall were deposited in the Priory of Bodmin; a great many 
 roils were lodged in the Abbey of Leicester and Priory of Kenil¬ 
 worth, till taken from thence by King Henry III. King Edward 
 I. sent to the religious houses to search for his title to the Kingdom 
 of Scotland , in their leigers and chronicles, as the most authen¬ 
 tic records for proof of his right to that crown. When his so¬ 
 vereignty was acknowledged in Scotland, he sent letters to have 
 it inserted in the chronicles of the Abbey of Winchomb , and tho 
 Priory of Norwich , and probable of many other such like places. 
 And when he decided the controversy relating to the crown ot 
 Scotland, between Robert Bruce and John Baliol, he wrote to the 
 Dean and Chapter of St. Paul's, London, requiring them to en¬ 
 ter into their chronicles the exemplification there with sent of 
 that decision. The learned Mr. Selden hath his greatest evi¬ 
 dences for the dominion of the narrow seas belonging to the King 
 of Great Britain, from Monastic records. The evidences and mo¬ 
 ney of private families were oftentimes sent to these houses to 
 be preserved. The seals of Noblemen were deposited there upon 
 their deaths. And even the King's money was sometimes lodged 
 in them. —SECONDLY, they were schools of learning and edu¬ 
 cation; for every convent had one person or more appointed for 
 this purpose; and all the neighbours that desired it, might have 
 their children taught grammar and church music without any ex¬ 
 pense to them. In the Nunneries, also, young women were taught 
 to work and to read English, and sometimes Latin also. So that 
 not only the lower rank of people who could not pay for their 
 learning, but most of the noblemen's and gentlemen's daughters 
 were educated in those places. —THIRDLY, all the Monasteries 
 were, in effect, great hospitals. And were most of them obliged 
 to relieve many poor people every day. There were, likewise, 
 houses of entertainment for almost all travellers. Even the no¬ 
 bility and gentry, when they were upon the road, lodged atone 
 religious house, and dined at another, and seldom or never went 
 to inns. In short, their hospitality W'as such, that in the Priory 
 of Norwich, one thousand five hundred quarters of malt, and above 
 eight hundred quarters of wheat, and all other things in propor¬ 
 tion, were generally spent every year. —FOURTHLY, the nobili¬ 
 ty and gentry provided not only for their old servants in these 
 houses by corrodies, but for their younger children and impover¬ 
 ished friends, by making them first monks and nuns, and in time 
 priors and prioresses, abbots and abbesses.—FIFTHLY, they 
 were of considerable advantage to the Crown; 1. By the profits 
 received from the death of one Abbot or Prior, to the election, 
 or rather confirmation of another. 2. By great fines paid for 
 the confirmation of their liberties. 3. Bi r many corrodies grant¬ 
 ed to old servants of the crown, and pensions to the King’s clerks 
 
 6 * 
 
56 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 and chaplains, till they get preferment.—S IXHLY, they were 
 likewise of considerable advantage to the places where they had 
 their sites and estates: 1. By causing great resort to them, and 
 getting grants offairs and markets for them. 2. By freeing them 
 from the forest laws. 3. By letting their lands at easy rates .— 
 LASTLY, they were great ornaments to the country; many of 
 them were really noble buildings: and though not actually so 
 grand and neat, yet perhaps, as much admired in their times, as 
 Chelsea ond Greenwich hospitals are now. Many of the abbey- 
 churches were equal, if not superior to our present Cathedrals; 
 and they must have been as much an ornament to the country, 
 and employed as many workmen in building and keeping them 
 in repair, as noblemen’s and gentlemen’s seats now do.” 
 
 134. Now then, malignant Hume, come up, and face this Pro¬ 
 testant bishop, whose work you have quoted more than tico hun¬ 
 dred times, and who here gives the lie direct to all, and to every 
 part of your description. Instead ofyour “ supine idleness," we 
 have industry the most patient and persevering; instead of vc^ir 
 “profound ignorance," we have, in every convent, a school for 
 teaching, gratis, all useful sciences; instead of your want of all 
 “ manly and elegant knowledge,” we have the study, the teach¬ 
 ing, the transcribing, the persevering of the classics; instead of 
 your “selfishness" and your “pious frauds" to get money from 
 the people, we have hospitals for the sick, doctors and nurses to 
 attend them, and the most disinterested, the most kind, the most 
 noble hospitality; instead of that “ slavery," which, in fifty parts 
 of your history, you assert to have been taught by the monks, 
 we have the freeing of the people from the forest laws, and the 
 preservation of the great charter of English liberty, and you know 
 as well as I, that w hen this charter was renewed by King John', 
 the renewal was, in fact, the work of Archbishop Langton, who 
 roused the barons to demand it, he having, as Tanner observes, 
 found the charter deposited in an abbey ! Back, then; down 
 then, malignant liar, and tell the devil that the Protestant Bishop 
 Tanner has sent thee ! 
 
 135. Want of room compels me to stop; but here, in this one 
 authority, w r e have ten thousand times more than enough to an¬ 
 swer the malignant liar IIume, and all the revilers of the monas¬ 
 tic life, which lies and revilings it was necessary to silence be¬ 
 fore proceeding, as I shall in the next letter, to describe the base, 
 the cruel, the bloody means by which these institutions were de¬ 
 vastated and destroyed. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMAT£ON. 
 
 67 
 
 LETTER V. 
 
 Authorities relating to the effect of the Monastic In¬ 
 stitutions.—Their great utility, and the political wis¬ 
 dom in which they were founded.—The appointment of 
 
 THE RUFFIAN, THOMAS CROMWELL.-HlS PROCEEDINGS IN THE 
 
 work of Plunder and Devastation.—The first act of 
 Parliament authorising the Plunder. 
 
 Kensington, 31 st March, 1825. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 136. When at the close of the foregoing Letter, I appeared to 
 content myself with the authority of the Protestant Bishop Tan¬ 
 ner, as a defender of monastic institutions against the attacks, 
 the malignant lies of Hume, 1 had in reserve other authorities in 
 abundance, some of which, I should then have cited, if I had had 
 room. Bishop Tanner goes, indeed, quite home to every point; 
 but, the matter is of such great importance, when we are about 
 to view the destruction of these institutions, that, out of fifty au¬ 
 thorities that I might refer to, I will select four or five. I will 
 take one foreign, and four English ; and, observe, they are all 
 Protestant authorities. 
 
 137. Mallet, flistory of the Swiss, Vol. \,p. 105. “The 
 monks softened by their instructions, the ferocious manners of 
 the people, and opposed their credit to the tyranny of the nobility, 
 who knew no other occupation than war, and grievously oppres 
 sed their neighbours. On this account, the government of monks 
 was preferred to theirs. The people sought them for Judges. 
 It was an usual saying, that it was belter to be governed by the 
 Bishop's crosier , than the Monarch's sceptre." 
 
 138. Drake. Literary Hours, Vol. JI. p. 435. “ The monks 
 
 of Cassins, observes Wharton, were distinguished not only for 
 their knowledge of sciences, but their attention to polite learning 
 and an acquaintance with the classics. Their learned Abbot, De- 
 siderius, collected the best Greeek and Roman authors. The fra¬ 
 ternity not only composed learned treatises on Music, Logic, As¬ 
 tronomy, and the Vitruvian Architecture, but likewise employ¬ 
 ed a portion of their time in transcribing Tacitus, &c. 1 his lau¬ 
 dable example was, in the 11th and 12th centuries, followed with 
 great spirit and emulation, by many English monasteries.” 
 
 139. Turner. History of England, Vol. II. p. 332 and 361. 
 “ No tyranny was ever established that was more unequivocally 
 the creature of popular will, nor longer maintained by popular 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 68 
 
 support; in no one point did personal interest and public welfare 
 more cordially unite than in the encouragement of Monasteries.” 
 
 140. Bates. Rural Philosophy,p. 322. “ It is to be lamented 
 that while the papists are industriously planting Nunneries and 
 other societies in this kingdom, some good Protestants are not 
 so far excited to imitate their example, as to form establish¬ 
 ments for the education and protection of young women of seri¬ 
 ous disposition, or who are otherwise unprovided, where they 
 might enjoy at least, a temporary refuge, be instructed in the 
 principles of religion, and in all such useful and domestic arts, 
 as might qualify them, who were inclined to return into the 
 world, for a pious and laudable discharge of the duties of com¬ 
 mon life. Thus might the comfort and welfare of many indi¬ 
 viduals be promoted to the great benefit of society at large, and 
 the interests of Popery, by improving on its own principles, be 
 considerably counteracted,.” 
 
 141. Quarterly Review. December, 1811. “ The world has 
 never been so indebted to any other body of men as to the illustrious 
 order of Benedictine monks ; but historians, in relating the evil 
 of which they were the occasion, too frequently forget the good 
 which they produced. Even the commonest readers are ac¬ 
 quainted with the arch miracle-monger, St. Dunstan, whilst the 
 most learned of our countrymen scarcely remember the names 
 of those admirable men, who went forth from England, and be¬ 
 came the Apostles of the North. Tinian and Juan Fernandez 
 are not more beautiful spots on the ocean, than Malmesbury, 
 Lindisfarne, and Jarrow were in the ages of our heptarchy. A 
 community of pious men devoted to literature and to the useful 
 arts as well as to religion, seems, in those days, like a green 
 Oasis amid the desert. Like stars on a moonless night, they 
 shine upon us with a tranquil ray. If ever there w r as a man, who 
 could truly be called venerable, it was he, to whom the appella¬ 
 tion is constantly fixed, Bede, whose life was passed in instruct¬ 
 ing his own generation, and preparing records for posterity. In 
 those days, the Church offered the only assylums from the evils 
 to which every country was exposed—amidst continual wars, 
 the Church enjoyed peace—it was regarded as a sacred realm 
 by men, who though they hated one another, believed and fear¬ 
 ed the same God. Abused as it was by the w’orldly-minded and 
 ambitious, and disgraced by the artifices of the designing, and 
 the follies of the fanatic, it afforded a shelter to those who were 
 better than the world in their youth, or weary of it in their age. 
 The wise, as well as the timid and gentle, fled to this Goshen of 
 God, which enjoyed its own light and calm, amidst darkness and 
 storms.” 
 
 142. This is a very elegant passage ; but as Turner’s Pro¬ 
 testantism impels him to apply the term “ tyranny ” to that which 
 honest feeling bids him say was the ‘ creature of the populat 
 
PROTES JANT REFORMATION. 
 
 69 
 
 will,” and was produced and upheld by “ a cordial union of per* 
 sonal interest and public welfare ,” so the Protestantism of the 
 Reviewers leads them to talk about “ evil' 1 occasioned by an 
 Order, to whom “ the world is more indebted than to any other 
 body of men ; and it also leads them to repeat the hacknied 
 charge against St. DuNtTA*, forgetting, I dare say, that he is 
 one of the Saints in our Protestant Church Calendar ! However, 
 here is more than enough to serve as an answer to the whole 
 herd of writers, who have put forth their venom against the Mo¬ 
 nastic Orders. 
 
 143. Can we refer to these.authorities ;can we see all the in¬ 
 dubitable proofs of the real Christian charity and benevolence, 
 which were essentially connected with the religion of our fore¬ 
 fathers^ without feeling indignation against those, who, from our 
 infancy to our manhood, have been labouring to persuade us, 
 that the Catholic church produced selfishness, hardness of heart, 
 greediness in the clergy, and particularly a want of feeling for 
 the poor? Undeniable as is the fact, that the “Reformation” 
 robbed the poor ’of their patrimony ; clear as we shall, by-and- 
 bv. see the proofs of its power in creating paupers, and in tak¬ 
 ing from the higher all compassion for the lower classes, how in- 
 cessant;'have been the efTbrts, how crafty the schemes, to make 
 us believe precisely the contrary ! If the salvation of their own 
 souls had been the objects they had in view, the deceivers could 
 not have laboured with more pains and anxiety. They have 
 particularly bent their attention to the implanting of their false¬ 
 hoods in the minds of children. The press has teemed, for two 
 centuries and more, with cheap books having this object princi¬ 
 pally in view. Of one instance of this sort, I cannot refrain from 
 making particular mention: namely, a Fable in a Spelling- 
 Book, by one Fenning, which has been in use in England, for 
 more than half a century. The fable is called: “ The Priest 
 and the Jester .” A man, as the fable says, went to a “ Romish 
 Priest, 11 and asked charity of him. He began by asking for a 
 guinea, but lowered the sum til) it came to a farthing, and still 
 the priest refused. Then the beggar asked for “ a blessing, 11 
 which the priest readily consented to give him : 11 No,” said the 
 beggar; if it were worth but one single farthing, you would not 
 give it me.” How indefatigable must have been these deceivers, 
 when thev could resort to means like these! What multitudes 
 of children! how many millions of people have, by this book 
 alone, had falsehood the most base and wicked engraven upon 
 their minds! 
 
 144. To proceed now with our inquiry relative to the effects 
 of the Monastic institutions, we may observe, that authorities, 
 in this case, seemed necessary. The lies were of long-standing: 
 hypoerhkai selfishness, backed by every species of violence, ty- 
 
70 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 ranny and cruelty, had been at work for ages to delude the peo¬ 
 ple of England. Those who had fattened upon the spoils of 
 the church and the poor, and who wished still to enjoy the fat¬ 
 ness in quiet, naturally laboured to persuade the people, that 
 those who had been despoiled, were unworthy people; that the 
 institutions which gave them so much property, were, at least, 
 useless; that the possessors were lazy, ignorant, and base crea¬ 
 tures, spreading darkness over the country instead of light; de¬ 
 vouring that which ought to have sustained worthy persons. 
 When the whole press and all the pulpits of a country are leagued 
 for such a purpose, and supportecbin that purpose by the state; 
 and when the reviled party is, by terrors hardly to be described, 
 reduced to silence: in such a case, the assailants must prevail; 
 the mass of the people must believe what they say. Reason, in 
 such a state of things, is out of the question. But truth is im¬ 
 mortal; and, though she may be silenced for a while, there al¬ 
 ways, at last, comes something to cause her to claim her due and 
 to triumph over falsehood. 
 
 145. There is now come that which is calculated to give our 
 reasoning faculties fair play. We see the land covered, at last, 
 with pauperism, fanaticism and crime. We hear an increase oj 
 the people talked of as a calamity; we hear of Scotch “ feeloso - 
 jfers” prowling, about the country, reading lecture's to the manu¬ 
 facturers andartizans to instruct them in the science of prevent¬ 
 ing their wives from being mothers; and, in one instance, this has 
 been pushed so far as to describe, hi print , the mechanical pro¬ 
 cess for effecting this object! In short, we are now arrived at a 
 point which compels us to inquire into the cause of this mons¬ 
 trous state of things. The immediate cause we find to be the 
 poverty and degradation of the main body of the people; and 
 these, through many stages, we trace back to the “ Reforma¬ 
 tion/’ one of the effects of which, was to destroy those Monastic 
 Institutions, which, as we shall now see, retained the produce 
 of labour in the proper places, and distributed it in a way natu¬ 
 rally tending to make the lives of the people easy and happy. 
 
 146. The authorities that I have cited ought to be of greaf 
 weight in the question; but, supposing there to be no authorities 
 on the side of these institutions, of what more do they stand in 
 need, than the unfettered exercise of our reason ? Reason, in 
 such a case, is still better than authorities; but who is to resist 
 both ? Let us ask, then, whether reason do not reject with dis¬ 
 dain the slander that has been heaped on the monastic institu¬ 
 tions. They flourished in England for nine hundred years ; they 
 were beloved by the people ; they were destroyed by violence, 
 by the plunderer’s grasp, and the murderer’s knife. Was there 
 ever any thing vicious in itself, or evil in its effects, held in ve¬ 
 neration by a whole people for so long a time? Even in ou? 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 71 
 
 own time, we see the people of Spain rising - in defence of their 
 monasteries ; and we hear the Scotch “ feelosofers” abuse them, 
 because they do not like to see the property of those monasteries 
 transferred to English Jews. 
 
 147. If the Monasteries had been the cause of evil, would they 
 have been protected with such care by so many wise and virtu¬ 
 ous kings, legislators and judges ? Perhaps Alfred was the 
 greatest man that ever lived. What writer of eminence, whe¬ 
 ther poet, lawyer, or historian, has not selected him as the ob¬ 
 ject of his highest praises ? As king, as soldier, as patriot, as 
 lawgiver, in all his characters' he is, by all, regarded as having 
 been the greatest, wisest, most virtuous of men. And is it rea¬ 
 sonable, then, for us to suppose, that he, whose soul was wrap¬ 
 ped up in the hope of making his people free, honest, virtuous, 
 and happy ; is it reasonable to suppose, that he would have been 
 as he was, one of the most munificent founders of monasteries, 
 if those institutions had been vicious in themselves, or had tend¬ 
 ed to evil 1 We have not these institutions and their effects im¬ 
 mediately before our eyes. We do not actually see the monas¬ 
 teries ; but we know of them two things; namely, that they were 
 most anxiously cherished by Alfred and his tutor, St. Swithin; 
 and that they were destroyed by the bloody tyrant, Henry the 
 Eighth, and the not less bloody ruffian, Thomas Cromw ell. 
 Upon these two facts alone, we might pretty safely decide on 
 the merits of these institutions. 
 
 148. And what answer do we ever obtain to this argument? 
 Mr. Mervyn Archdall, in the preface to his History of the Irish 
 Monasteries, says: “When wc contemplate the universality of 
 that religious zeal which drew thousands from the elegance and 
 comforts of society to sequestered solitude, and austere macera¬ 
 tion ; when we behold the greatest and icisest of mankind the dupes 
 of a. fatal delusion, and even the miser expending his store to par¬ 
 take in the felicity of mortified ascetics: again, when we find 
 the tide of enthusiasm subsided, and sober reason recovered from 
 her delirhun, and endeavouring, as it were to demolish every 
 vestige of her former phrenzy, we have a concise sketch of the his¬ 
 tory of Monachism, and no common instance of that mental weak¬ 
 ness and versatility which stamp the character of frailty on the hu¬ 
 man species. We investigate these phenomena in the moral world 
 with a pride arising from assumed superiority in intellectual pow¬ 
 ers, or higher degrees of civilization: our vanity and pursuit are 
 kept alive by a comparison so decidedly in favour of modern 
 times." Indeed, Mr. Archdall! And where are we to look for 
 the proofs, or signs of this “ assumed superiority this compari¬ 
 son so decidedly in favour of modern times ?" Are we to find them 
 in the ruins of those noble edifices, of the plunder and demolition 
 of which, you give us an account ? Are we to find them in the 
 
72 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 total absence of even an attempt to ornament your country with 
 any thing to equal them in grandeur or in taste ? Are we to look 
 for this “ superiority” in the numerous tithe-battles, pistol in 
 hand, like that of Skibbeueen ? Are modern times proved to 
 be “ decidedly superior ” to former times by the law that shuts 
 Irishmen up in their houses from sun-set to sun-rise ? Are the 
 people’s living upon pig-diet, their nakedness, their hunger, their 
 dying by hundreds from starvation, while their ports were crowd¬ 
 ed with ships carrying provisions from their shores, and while 
 an army was fed in the country, the business of which army w as 
 fc> keep the starving people quiet: are these among the facts on 
 which you found your “ comparison so decidedly in favour oj 
 modern times V' What then, do you look with “ PRIDE” to the 
 ball at the Opera House, for the relief of the starving people ol 
 Ireland ? the BALL-room “ DECORATED with a transparency 
 / exhibiting an Irishman, as large as life, EXPIRING FROM 
 HUNGER?” And do you call the u greatest and wisest of man 
 kind” dupes ; do you call them “ the dupes of a fatal delusion ,” 
 when they founded institutions which rendered the thought of 
 Opera-house relief impossible? Look at the present wretched 
 and horrid state of vour country, then look again at your lisi 
 of ruins ; and then, (for you are a church-parson, ] see,) you wil 
 I have no doubt, say, that though the former have evidently eomr 
 from the latter, it was “ sober reason.” and not thirst for plunde. 
 that produced those ruins, and that it was “ frenzy and mentis 
 weakness” in the “ greatest and wisest of mankind” that produc 
 ed the foundations of which those rains are the melancholy me 
 mortals. 
 
 149. The hospitality and other good things proceeding frons 
 the monasteries, as mentioned by the Protestant Bishop Tax' 
 ner, are not to be forgotten ; but we must take a closer view of 
 the subject,in ordertodo full justice to these calumniated institu¬ 
 tions. It is our duty to shew, that they were founded in great 
 political wisdom, as well as in real piety and charity. That they 
 were not, as the false and malignant and selfish Hume has des¬ 
 cribed them, mere “ dolers out of bread and meat and beer;” but 
 that they were great diffusers of general prosperity, happiness, 
 and content; and that one of their natural and necessary effects 
 was, to prevent that state of things which sees but two classes 
 of people in a community, masters and slaves, a very few enjoy¬ 
 ing the extreme of luxury, and millions doomed to the extreme 
 of misery. 
 
 150. From the land all the good things come. Somebody 
 must own the land. Those who own it must have the distribution 
 of its revenues. If these revenues be chiefly distributed amongst 
 the people, from whose labour they arise, and in such a way as 
 to afford to them a good maintenance on easy terms, the com- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 73 
 
 munity must be happy. If the revenues be alienated in very 
 great part; if they be carried away to a great distance, and ex¬ 
 pended amongst those, from whose labour no part of them arise, 
 the main body of the community must be miserable : poor-houset, 
 jails, and barracks must arise. Now one of the greatest advan¬ 
 tages attending the monasteries, was, that they, of necessity, 
 caused the revenues of a large part of the lands of the country 
 to be spent on the spot whence those revenues arose. The hos¬ 
 pitals and all the other establishments of the kind had the same 
 tendency. There w r ere, of the whole, great and small, not less, 
 on an average, than fifty in each county; so that the revenues 
 of the land diffused themselves, in great part, immediately 
 amongst the people at large. We all well know how the state 
 of a parish becomes instantly changed for the worse, when a 
 noble, or other great land-owner quits his mansion in it, and 
 leaves that mansion shut up. Every one knows the effect which 
 such a shutting up has upon the poor-rates of a parish. It is no¬ 
 torious, that the non-residence of the clergy and of the noble¬ 
 men and gentlemen is universally complained of, as a source of 
 evil to the country. One of the arguments, and a great one it 
 is, in favour of severe game laws, is, that the game causes noble¬ 
 men and gentlemen to reside. What, then, must have been the 
 effect of twenty rich monasteries in every county, expending con¬ 
 stantly a large part of their incomes on the spot? The great 
 cause of the miseries of Ireland at this moment, is “ absentee- 
 ship that is to say, the absence of the land-owners, who draw 
 away the revenues of the country, and expend them in other 
 countries. If Ireland had still her seven or eight hundred Mo¬ 
 nastic Institutions, great and small, she would be, as she former 
 ly was, prosperous and happy. There would be no periodical 
 famines, and typhus fevers; no need of sun-set, and sun-rise laws; 
 no Captain Rocks, no projects for preventing the people from in¬ 
 creasing ; no schemes for getting rid of a “ surplus population 
 none of that poverty and degradation that threaten to make a 
 desert of the country, or to make it the means of destroying the 
 greatness of England herself. 
 
 151. Somebody must own the lands ; and the question is, w he 
 ther it be best for them to be owned by those w ho constantly live, 
 and constantly must live, in the country and in the midst of their 
 estates; or, by those who always may, and who frequently will, 
 and do, live at a great distance from their lands, etnd draw away 
 the revenues of them to be spent elsewhere. The monastics are, 
 by many, called drones. Bishop Tanner has show n us, that this 
 charge is very false. But, if it were true, is not a drone in a 
 cowl as good as a drone in a hat and top-boots ? By drones, are 
 meant those w ho do not w-ot k : and do land-owners usually work J 
 The |hy land-owner aivd his family spend more of their revenues 
 
 7 
 
74 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 in & way not useful to the people, than the monastics possibly 
 could. But, besides this, besides the hospitality and charity of 
 the monastics, and besides, moreover, the lien, and legal lien, 
 which tne main body of the people had, in many cases, to a share, 
 directly, or indirectly, in the revenues of the monasteries, we 
 are to look at the monks and nuns in the very important capa¬ 
 city of landlords and landladies. All historians, however Pro¬ 
 testant or malignant, agree, that they were “ easy landlords;” 
 that they let their lands at low rents, and on leases of long term 
 of years; so that, says even Hume, •* the farmers regarded them¬ 
 selves as a species of proprietors, always taking care to renew 
 their leases before they expired.” And was there no good in a 
 class of landlords of this sort? Did not they naturally, and ne¬ 
 cessarily create, by slow degrees, men of property ? Did they 
 not thus cause a class ofyeomen to exist, real yeomen, indepen¬ 
 dent of the aristocracy ? And was not this class destroyed by 
 the “ Reformation,” which made the farmers rack-renters and 
 absolute dependents, as we see them to this day ? And, was this 
 change favourable then, to political liberty ? Monastics could 
 possess no private property, they could save no money, they 
 could bequeath nothing. They had a life interest in their es¬ 
 tate, and no more. They lived, and received, and expended in 
 common. Historians need not have told us, that they were “ easy 
 landlords.” They must have been such, unless human nature 
 had taken a retrogade march expressly for their accommoda¬ 
 tion. And, was it not happy for the nation, that there was such 
 a class of landlords ? What a jump for joy would the farmers of 
 England now give, if such a class were to return to-morrow, to 
 get them out of the hands of the squandering, and needy lord, 
 and his grinding land-valuer! 
 
 152. Then, look at the monastics as causing, in some of the 
 most important of human affairs, that fixedness which is so much 
 the friend of rectitude in morals, and which so powerfully con¬ 
 duces to prosperity, private and public. The monastery was a 
 proprietor that never died : its tenantry had to do with a death¬ 
 less landlord; its lands and houses never changed owners; its 
 tenants were liable to none of many of the uncertainties that 
 other tenants were; its oaks had never to tremble at the axe of 
 the squandering heir; its manors had not to dread a change of 
 lords; its villagers had all been born and bred up under its eye 
 and care; their character was, of necessity a thing of great va¬ 
 lue, and as such, would naturally be an object of great attention. 
 A monastery was the centre of a circle in the country, natural¬ 
 ly drawing to it, all that were in want of relief, advice, and pro¬ 
 tection, and containing a body of men, or of women, having no 
 cares of their own, and having wisdom to guide the inexperienc¬ 
 ed, and wealth to relieve the distressed. And was it a good thjnfc, 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 75 
 
 then, to plunder and devastate these establishments : was it a re¬ 
 formation to squander estates, thus employed, upon lay persons, 
 who would not, who could not, and did not, do any part or par¬ 
 ticle of those benevolent acts, and acts of public utility, which 
 naturally arose out of the monastic institutions ? 
 
 153. Lastly, let us look at the monasteries as a resource for 
 the younger sons and daughters of the Aristocracy, and as the 
 means of protecting the government against the injurious effects 
 of their clamorous wants. There cannot exist an Aristocracy, 
 or body of Nobility, without the means, in the hands of the go¬ 
 vernment, of preventing that body from falling into that con¬ 
 tempt, which is, and always must be, inseparable from Noble- 
 poverty. “ Well,” some will say, “ why need there be any such 
 body ?” That is quite another question ; for we have it, and havo 
 had.it, for more than a thousand years; except during a very 
 short interval, at the end of which, our ancestors eagerly took 
 it back again. I must too, though it really has nothing to do 
 with the question before us, repeat my opinion, many times ex¬ 
 pressed, that we should losemore than we should gain by getting 
 rid of our Aristocracy. The basest and most corrupt govern¬ 
 ment that I ever knew any thing, or heard any thing of, is the 
 republican government of Pennsylvania, and, withal, the most 
 truly tyrannical: base and corrupt from bottom to top ; from the 
 root to the topmost twig : from the trunk to the extreme point 
 of every branch. And if any Pennsylvanian, who has a name, 
 and who will put it to a challenge to me to prove my words, I will 
 before the face of all Europe, prove them in the most complete 
 and ample manner. I am not, therefore, for republican govern¬ 
 ment; and then, it follows, that I am for an aristocracy; for, 
 without it, there can be no limit to a kingly government. 
 
 154. However, this has nothing at all to do with the present 
 question : we have the aristocracy, and we must, by a public pro¬ 
 vision of some sort, for the younger branches of it, prevent it 
 from falling into the degradation inseparable from poverty. 
 This provision was, in the times of which we are speaking, made 
 by the monasteries, which received a great number of its monks 
 and nuns from the families of the nobles. This rendered those 
 odious and burdensome things, pensions and sinecures, unneces¬ 
 sary. It, of course, spared the taxes. It was a provision that 
 was not degrading to the receivers; and it created no grudging 
 and discontent amongst the people, from whom the receivers 
 took nothing. Another great advantage arising from this mode 
 of providing for the younger branches of thp nobility, was, that 
 it secured the government against the temptation to give offices, 
 and to lodge power in unfit hands. Look at our pension and sin¬ 
 ecure list; look at the list of those who have commands, and who 
 fill other offices of emolument; and you will, at once see the great 
 
76 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 benefit which must have been derived from institutions, which 
 left the government quite free to choose commanders, ambassa 
 dors, governors, and other persons to exercise power, and to be 
 intrusted in the carrying on of the public affairs. These insti¬ 
 tutions tended too, to check the increase of the race of nobles; to 
 prevent the persons connected with that order from being mul¬ 
 tiplied to the extent to which they naturally would, otherwise, be 
 multiplied. They tended also to make the nobles not so depend¬ 
 ent on the crown, a provision being made for their poor rela¬ 
 tions without the crown’s assistance; at the same time, they 
 tended to make the people less dependent on the nobles than 
 they otherwise would have been. The monasteries set the ex¬ 
 ample, as masters and landlords; an example that others were, 
 in a great degree, cojnpelled to follow. And thus, all ranks and 
 degrees were benefitted by these institutions, which, with malig¬ 
 nant historians, have been a subject of endless abuse, and the 
 destruction of which they have recorded with so much delight, 
 as being one of the brightest features in the “ Reformation /” 
 155. Nor must we, bv any means, overlook the effects of these 
 institutions on the mere face of the country. That soul must 
 be low and mean indeed, which is insensible to all feeling of 
 pride in the noble edifices of its country. Love of country, that 
 variety of feelings which, altogether constitute what we proper¬ 
 ly call patriotism, consist, in part of the admiration of, and xe- 
 neration for, ancient and magnificent proofs of skill and of opu¬ 
 lence. The monastics built as well as wrote for posterity. The 
 never-dying nature ol their institutions set aside, in all their un¬ 
 dertakings, every calculation as to time and age. Whether they 
 built or planted, they set the generous example of providing for 
 the pleasure, the honour, the wealth, and greatness of genera¬ 
 tions upon generations yet unborn. They executed everything 
 in the very best manner: their gardens, fish-ponds, farms; in 
 all, in the whole of their economy, they set an example tending 
 to make the country beautiful, to make it an object of pride with 
 the people, and to make the nation truly and permanently great. 
 Go into any county, and survey, even at this day, the ruins of 
 its, perhaps, twenty Abbeys and Priories ; and, then, ask your¬ 
 self. “ what have we in exchange for these ?”—Go to the site of 
 some once-opulent convent. Look at the cloister, now become, 
 in the hands of a rack-renter, the receptacle for dung, fodder, 
 and faggot-wood: see the hall, where, for ages, the widow, the 
 orphan, the aged, and the stranger found a table ready spread ; 
 see a bit of its walls now helping to make a cattle-shed, the rest 
 having been haul id away to build a work house : recognize, in 
 the side of a bain,,, a part of the once-njagnificent chapel: and, 
 if chained to the spot by your melancholy musings, you be ad¬ 
 monished of the approach of night by the voice of the screech- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 77 
 
 owl, issuing 1 from those arches, which once, at the same hour, 
 resounded with the vespers of the monk, and which have, for 
 seven hundred years, been assailed by storms and tempests in 
 vain : if thus admonished of the necessity of seeking food, shel¬ 
 ter, and a bed, lift your eyes and look at the white-washed, and 
 dry-rotten shell on the hill, called the “ gentleman’s houseand, 
 apprized of the “ board-wages” and the spring-guns, suddenly 
 turn your head; jog away from the scene of devastation; with 
 “ old English hospitality” in your mind, reach the nearest inn, 
 and there, in a room half-warmed, and half-lighted, and with a 
 reception precisely proportioned to the presumed length of your 
 purse, sit down and listen to an account of the hypocritical pre¬ 
 tences, the base motives, the tyrannical and bloody means un¬ 
 der which, from which, and by which, that devastation was ef¬ 
 fected, and that hospitality banished for ever from the land. 
 
 156. We have already seen something of these pretences, mo¬ 
 tives, and acts of tyranny and barbarity; we have seen that the 
 beastly lust of the chief tyrant was the ground-work of what is 
 called the *• Reformation ;” we have seen that he could not have 
 proceeded in his course without the concurrence of the parlia 
 ment; we have seen, that to obtain that concurrence, he held out 
 to those who composed it, a participation in the spoils of the mo¬ 
 nasteries; and, when we look at the magnitude of their posses¬ 
 sions, when we consider the beauty and fertility of the spots on 
 which they, in general, were situated, when we think of the en¬ 
 vy which the love borne them by the people must have excited 
 in the hearts of a great many of the noblemen and gentlemen; 
 when we thus reflect, we are not surprised, that these were ea¬ 
 ger for a “ Reformation” that promised to transfer the envied 
 possessions to them. 
 
 157. When men have power to commit, and are resolved to 
 commit, acts of injustice, they are never at a loss for pretences. 
 We shall presently see what were the pretences under which this 
 devastation of England was begun; but, to do the work, there 
 required a workman, as, to slaughter an ox, there requires a 
 butcher. To turn the possessors of so large a part of the es¬ 
 tates out of those estates, to destroy establishments venerated 
 by the people from their childhood, to set all law, divine as well 
 as human, at defiance, to violate every principle on which pro¬ 
 perty rested, to rob the poor and helpless of the means of suste¬ 
 nance, to deface the beauty of the country, and make it literal¬ 
 ly a heap of ruins; to do these things, there required a suitable 
 agent; and that agent the tyrant found in Thomas Cromwell, 
 whose name, along with that of Cranmer, ought “ to stand for 
 aye, accursed in the calendar.” This Cromwell was the son of 
 a blacksmith of Putney in Surrey. He had been an underling 
 of some sort in the family of Cardinal Wolsey, and had recom 
 
 7* 
 
78 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 mended himself to the king by his sycophancy to him, and hia 
 treachery to his old master. The king now became head of the 
 church , and having the supremacy to exercise, had very judici¬ 
 ously provided himself with Cranmer as a primate ; and to match 
 him, he provided himself with Cromwell who was equal to 
 Cranmer in impiousness and baseness, rather surpassed him in 
 dastardliness, and exceeded him decidedly in quality of ruffian. 
 All nature could not, perhaps, have afforded another man so fit 
 to be the “Royal Vicegerent and Vicar-General” of the 
 new head of the English church. 
 
 158. Accordingly, with this character, the brutal blacksmith 
 was invested. He was to exercise “ all the spiritual authority 
 belonging to the king, for the due administration of justice in all 
 cases touching the ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and the godly re¬ 
 formation and redress of errors, heresies, and abuses in the said 
 church.” We shall very soon see proofs enough of the base¬ 
 ness ot this man, for whom rujjian is too gentle a term. What 
 chance, then, did the monasteries stand in his hands ? He was 
 created a peer. He sat before the primate in Parliament; he 
 sat above all the bishops in assemblies of tliG clergy, he took 
 precedence of all the nobles, whether in office, or out ot office, 
 and, as in character, so in place, he was second only to the chief 
 tyrant himself. 
 
 159. In order to begin the “ godly reformation that is to 
 say, the work of plunder, the “ Vicegerent” blacksmith set on 
 foot a visitation of the monasteries ! Dreadful visitation He, 
 active as he was in wickedness, could not do all the work him¬ 
 self. He therefore appointed deputies to assist in making this 
 visitation. The kingdom was divided into districts for this pur¬ 
 pose, and two deputies were appointed to visit each district. 
 The object was to obtain grounds of accusation against the monks 
 and nuns. When we consider what the object was, and what 
 \^as the character of the man, to whom the work was committed, 
 we may easily imagine what sort of men these deputies were. 
 They were, in fact, fit to be the subalterns of such a chief. Some 
 of the very worst men in all England; men of notoriously in¬ 
 famous characters; men who had been convicted of heinous 
 crimes; some who had actually been branded; and, probably, 
 not one man who had not repeatedly deserved the halter. 
 Think of a respectable, peaceful, harmless, and pious fami¬ 
 ly, broken in upon, all of a sudden, by a brace of burglars, 
 with murder written on their scowling brows, demanding an in¬ 
 stant production of their title-deeds, money, and jewels ; imagine 
 such a scene as this, and you have then some idea of the visi¬ 
 tations of these monsters, who came with the threat of the ty¬ 
 rant on their lips, who menaced the victims with charges ot 
 high treason , who wrote in their reports, not what was, but 
 what their merciless employess wanted them to write. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 79 
 
 160. The monks and nuns who had never dreamed of the pos¬ 
 sibility of such proceedings, who had never had an idea that 
 Magna Charta, and all the laws of the land could be set aside in 
 a moment, and whose recluse and peaceful lives rendered them 
 wholly unfit to cope with at once, crafty and desperate villainy, 
 fell before these ruffians, as chickens fall before the kite. The re¬ 
 ports made by these villains, met with no contradiction ; the ac¬ 
 cused parties had no means of making a defence ; there was no 
 court for them to appear in; they dared not, even if they had had 
 the means, to offer a defence, or make a complaint; for they had 
 seen the horrible consequences, the burnings, the rippings up, 
 of all those of their brethren who had ventured to whisper their 
 dissent from any dogma or decree of the tyrant. The project 
 was to despoil people of their property; and yet the parties, from 
 whom the property was to be taken, were to have no court, in 
 which to plead their cause, no means of obtaining a hearing, 
 could make even no complaint but at the peril of their lives.— 
 They, and those who depended on them were to be, at once, strip¬ 
 ped of this great mass of property, without any other ground 
 than that of reports made by men sent, as the malignant Hume 
 himself confesses, for the express purpose of finding a pretence 
 for the dissolution of the monasteries, and for the King’s taking 
 to himself property that had never belonged to him or his pre¬ 
 decessors. 
 
 161. Hume dares not, in the face of such a multitude of facts 
 that are upon record to the contrary, pretend that these reports 
 were true ; but he does his best to put a gloss upon them, as we 
 have seen in paragraph 129. He says, in order to effect by in¬ 
 sinuation, that which he does not venture to assert, that “ it is 
 indeed, probable, that the blind submission of the people, during 
 those ages , rendered the friars and nuns more unguarded, and 
 more dissolute than they are in any Roman Catholic country at 
 present .” Oh ! say you so ? And why more blind than now ? 
 It is just the same religion , there are the same rules ; the people 
 if blind then, are blind now : and it would be singular indeed, 
 that when dissoluteness is become more common in the world, 
 the “friars and nuns,” should have become more guardedl How¬ 
 ever, we have here his acquittal of the monasteries of the pre¬ 
 sent. day ; and that is no small matter. It will be difficult, I be¬ 
 lieve ,to make it appear “ probable ” that they were more un¬ 
 guarded, or more dissolute in the 16th century ; unless we be¬ 
 lieve that the profound piety (which Hume calJ^ superstition) of 
 the people was not partaken of by the inhabitants of convents. 
 Before we can listen to his insinuations in favour of these reports, 
 wo must believe that the persons belonging to the religious com¬ 
 munities were a body of cunning creatures, believing in no part 
 of that religion which they professed, and we must extend this 
 
80 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 our belief even to those numerous commun'ties of women, who 
 devoted their whole lives to the nursing of the sick poor! 
 
 162. However, upon reports thus obtained, an act of Parlia¬ 
 ment was passed in March, 1536, the same year that saw the end 
 of Anne Boleyn, for the suppression, that is to say, confiscation 
 of three hundred and seventy six Monasteries, and for granting 1 
 their estates, real and personal, to the king and his heirs ! He 
 took plate, jewels, gold and silver images and ornaments. This 
 act of monstrous tyranny was, however, base as the Parliament 
 was, and full as it was, of greedy plunderers, not passed without 
 some opposition. Hume says, that “ it does not appear that any 
 opposition was made to this important law." He frequently 
 quotes Spelman as an historical authority; but it did not suit 
 him to quote Spelman’s “ History of Sacrilege," in which this 
 Protestant historian says, that “ the bill stuck long in the lower 
 house, and could get no passage, when the King commanded the 
 Commons to attend him in the forenoon in his gallery, where he 
 let them wait till late in the afternoon, and then, coming out of 
 his chamber; walking a turn or two amongst them, and looking 
 angrily on them, first on one side, and then on the other, at last, 
 I hear, (saith he) that my bill will not pass, but I will have it pass, 
 or I will have some of your heads; and, without other rhetorick, 
 returned to his chamber. Enough was said, the bill passed, 
 and all was given him as he desired." 
 
 163. Thus, then, it was an act of sheer tyranny ; it was a pure 
 Algerine proceeding at last. The pretences availed nothing: the 
 reports of Cromwell’s myrmidons were not credited; every ar¬ 
 tifice had failed ; resort was had to the halter apd the axe to ac¬ 
 complish that “ Reformation," of which the Scotch historian 
 Burnet, has called this monster, “ the first born son!" Some 
 such man, he says was necessary to bring about this “ great and 
 glorious 1 ’ event. What! was ever good yet produced by wick 
 edness so attrocious ? Did any man but this Burnet, and his 
 countryman Hume, ever affect to believe that such barefaced in¬ 
 justice and tyranny were justified on the ground of their tend¬ 
 ing to good consequences ? 
 
 164. In the next Number, when I shall have given an account 
 of the whole of that devastation and sacking, of which we have, 
 as yet, only seen a mere beginning, I shall come to the conse¬ 
 quences, not only to the monks and nuns, but to the people at 
 large; and shall show how a foundation was, in this very Act of 
 Parliament, laid for that pauperism, misery, degradation and 
 crime, which are now proposed to be checked by laws to render 
 the women barren, or to export the people to foreign lands. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 81 
 
 LETTER VI. 
 
 Confiscation of the Monasteries.—Base and cruel means 
 
 OF DOING THIS.-The SACKING AND DEFACING OF THE COUN¬ 
 
 TRY.—Breaking up the tomb of Alfred.—More wives di¬ 
 vorced AND KILLED.—DEATH OF THE MISCREANT CROMWELL, 
 —Death of the tyrant himself. 
 
 Kensington, 30 th April, 1825. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 165. At the close of the foregoing Letter, we saw the begin¬ 
 ning only of the devastation of England. In the present Letter 
 we shall see its horrible progress, as far as there was time for 
 that progress, during the reign of the remorseless tyrant Henry 
 VIII. We have seen in what manner was Obtained the first act 
 for the suppression of monasteries; that is to say, in reality, for 
 robbing the proprietors of estates, and also the poor and the 
 stranger. But, l must give a more full and particular account 
 of the Act of Parliament itself, before I proceed to the deeds 
 committed in consequence of it. 
 
 166. The Act was passed in the year 1536, and in the 27th 
 year of the King’s reign. The preamble of the Act contains the 
 reasons for its enactment; and, as this act really began the ruin 
 and degradation of the main body of the people of England and 
 Ireland ; as it was the first step taken, in legal form, for robbing 
 the people under pretence of reforming their religion ; as it was 
 the precedent on which the future plunderers proceeded, until 
 they had completely impoverished the country; as it was the 
 first of that series of deeds of rapine by which this formerly well- 
 fed, and well clothed people have, in the end been reduced to 
 rags, and to a worse than jail allowance of food, I will insert its 
 lying and villainous preamble at full length. Englishmen in ge¬ 
 neral, suppose that there were always poor-laivs and paupers in 
 England. They ought to remember lhat for nine hundred years 
 under the Catholic religion there were neither. They ought, 
 'when they hear the fat parson cry “ no popery, to answer him by 
 the cry of “ no pauperism .” They ought above all things to en¬ 
 deavour to ascertain how it came to pass, that this land of roast 
 beef was changed, all of a sudden, into a land of dry bread, or of 
 oatmeal porridge. Let them_ attend, then, to the base and hy¬ 
 pocritical pretences that they will find in the following preamble 
 to this attrocious act of pillage. 
 
82 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 167. “ Forasmuch as manifest synne, vicious, carnal, and abo¬ 
 minable living isdayly used and committed commonly in such 
 little and small Abbeys, Priories, and other Religious Houses of 
 Monks, Canons and Nuns, where the Congregation of such Re¬ 
 ligious Persons is under the Number of twelve Persons, whereby 
 the Governors of such Religious Houses, and their Convent, 
 spovle, destroye, consume, and utterly waste, as well their 
 Churches, Monasteries, Priories, principal Farms, Granges, 
 Lands, Tenements, and Heriditaments, as the Ornaments of 
 their Churches, and their Goods and Chattels, to the high dis¬ 
 pleasure of Almighty God, Slander of good Religion, and to the 
 great infamy of the King's Highness and the Realm, if Redress 
 should not be had thereof. And albeit that many continual Vi¬ 
 sitations hath been heretofore had, by the Space of two hundred 
 years and more, for an honest and charitable Reformation of 
 such unthrifty, carnal, and abominable Living, yet neverthe- 
 lesse, little or none Amendment is hitherto had, but their vicious 
 Living shamelessly increaseth and augmenteth, and by a cursed 
 Custom so rooted and infected, that a great multitude of the reli¬ 
 gious persons in such small houses do rather choose to rove abroad 
 in Apostacy, than to conform themselves to the observation of 
 good Religion ; so that without such small Houses be utterly sup- 
 •» pressed, and the Religious Persons therein committed to great and 
 honourable Monasteries of Religion in this Realm, where they 
 may be compelled to live religiously for Reformation of their 
 Lives, the same else be no Redress nor Reformation in that Be 
 half. In Consideration whereof,.the King’s most Royal Majes 
 ty, being Supreme Head on Earth, under God, of the Church 
 of England, dayly studying and devy sing the Increase, Advance¬ 
 ment and Exaltation of true Doctrine and Virtue in the said 
 Church, to the only Glory and Honour of God, and the total ex 
 tirping and Destruction of Vice and Sin, having Knowledge that 
 the premises be true, as '.veil as the Accompts of his late Visita¬ 
 tions, as by sundry credible informations, considering also that 
 divers and great solemn Monasteries of this Realm, wherein 
 ( Thanks be to God) Religion is right well kept and observed, be 
 destitute of such fall Number of Religious Persons, as they ought, 
 and may keep, hath thought good that a plain Declaration should 
 be made, of the Premises, as well to the Lords Spiritual and Tem¬ 
 poral, as to other his loving Subjects, the Commons, in this pre¬ 
 sent Parliament assembled: Whereupon, the said Lords and 
 Commons, by a great Deliberation, finally be resolved, that it is, 
 and shall lie much more to the pleasure of Almighty God, and 
 for the Honour of this his Realm, that the Possessions of such 
 small Religious Houses, now being spent, spoyled and wasted for 
 Increase and Maintenance of Sin, should be used and committed 
 to bettes uses, and the unthrifty Religious Persons, so spending 
 the same, to be compelled to reform their Lives.” 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 83 
 
 168. This preamble was followed by enactments, giving the 
 whole of the 'property to the King, his heirs and assigns, u to do, 
 and use therewith, according- t'o their own wills, to the pleasure 
 of Almighty God, and to the honour and profit of this realm.'* 
 Besides the lands, and houses, and stock, this tyrannical act gave 
 him the household goods, and the gold, silver, jewels, and‘every 
 other thing belonging to those monasteries. Here was a breach 
 of Magna Charta in the first place; a robbery of the monks and 
 nuns in the next place; and, in the third place, a robbery of the 
 indigent, the widow, the orphan, and the stranger. The parties 
 robbed, even the actual possessors of the property were never 
 heard in their defence; there was no charge against any particular 
 convent; the charges were loose and general, and levelled against 
 all convents, whose revenues did not exceed a certain sum. This 
 alone was sufficient to show that the charges were false; for who 
 will believe that the alleged wickedness extended to all, whose 
 revenues did not exceed a certain sum, and that when those re¬ 
 venues got above that point, the wickedness stopped ? It is clear 
 that the reason for stopping at that point was, that there was yet 
 something to be done with the nobles and gentry, before a seiz 
 ure of the great monasteries could be safely attempted. The 
 weak were first attacked, but means were very soon lound for 
 attacking, and sacking the remainder. 
 
 169. The moment the tyrant got possession of this class of the 
 church estates, he began to grant them away to his “ assigns ,” 
 as the act calls them. Great promises had been held out, that 
 the king, when in possession of these estates, would never more 
 want taxes from the people; and it is possible, that he thought 
 that he should be able to do withont taxes: but he soon found, 
 that he was not destined to keep the plunder to himself; and 
 that, in short he must make a sudden stop, if not actually undo 
 all that he had done, unless he divided the spoil with others, who 
 instantly poured in upon him for their share, and they so beset 
 him that lie had not a moment’s peace. They knew that he had 
 good things; they had taken care to enable him to have *‘ as~ 
 signs ;” and they, as they intended from the first, would give him 
 no rest, until he, “ to the pleasure of Almighty God, and to the 
 honour and profit of the realm,” made them those “ assigns .” 
 
 170. Before four years had passed over his head, he found 
 himself as poor as if he had never confiscated a single convent 
 so sharp-set were the pious reformers, and so eager to “ please 
 Almighty God.” When complaining to Cromwell of the rapa¬ 
 city of the applicants for grants, he exclaimed, “ By our Lady, 
 the cormorants, when they have got the garbage, will devour 
 the dish ” Cromwell reminded him, that there was much more 
 vet to come. “Tut man, *' said the king, “ my whole realm 
 would not stanch their maws.” However, he attempted this 
 very soon after, by a seizure of the larger monasteries. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 84 
 
 171. We have seen, in paragraph 167, that the parliament, 
 when they enabled him to confiscate the smaller monasteries, 
 declared, that in the “ great and solemn monasteries, ( thanks be 
 *o God) religion is right icell kept and observed.' 1 It seemed, 
 therefore, to be a work of some difficulty to discover (in so short 
 a time after this declaration was made) reasons for the confis¬ 
 cation of these larger monasteries. But tyranny stands in need 
 of no reasons ; and, in this case, no reasons were alleged. Crom- 
 v ell and his myrmidons beset the heads of these great establish¬ 
 ments; they threatened, they promised, they lied, and they bul 
 lied. By means the most base that can be conceived, they ob¬ 
 tained from some few, what they called a “ voluntary surrender. 1 
 However, where these unjust and sanguinary men met with stur¬ 
 dy opposition, they resorted to false accusations, and procured 
 the murder of the parties, under pretence of their having com¬ 
 mitted high treason. It was under this infamous pretence, that 
 the tyrant hanged and ripped up and quartered the Abbot of the 
 famous Abbey of Glastonbury, w hose body was mangled by 
 the executioner, a’hd w hose head and limbs were hung up on 
 what is called the lorre w'hich overlooks the abbey. So that the 
 surrender, wherever it did take place, was precisely of the na 
 ture of those “ voluntary surrenders” which men make of their 
 purses, when the robber’s pistol is at their temple, or his blood¬ 
 stained knife at their throat, 
 
 172. After all, however, even to obtain a pretence of voluntary 
 surrender, w'as a work too troublesome for Cromwell and his 
 ruffian visitors, and much too slow for the cormorants who wait 
 ed foi the plunder. Without more ceremony, therefore, an act 
 was passed (31 Hen. VIII. chap- 13 giving all these u surren¬ 
 dered" monasteries to the king, his heirs and assigns, and also 
 ALL OTHER MONASTERIES ; and all hospitals .and colleges 
 into the bargain! It is useless to waste our time in uttering ex¬ 
 clamations, or in venting curses on the memory ot tne monsters 
 who thus made a general sacking of this then fine, rich, ■and beau¬ 
 tiful country, which, until now, had been, for nine hundred years, 
 the happiest country, and the greatest country too, that Europe 
 had ever seen. 
 
 173. The carcass being thus laid prostrate, the rapacious vul¬ 
 tures, w ho had assisted in the work, flew on it, and began to tear 
 it in pieces. The people here and there rose in insurrection 
 against the tyrant’s satellites ; but, deprived of their natural lead¬ 
 ers, who had, for the most part, placed themselves on the side 
 of tyranny and plunder, what were the mere common people to 
 do ? Hume affects to pity the ignorance of the people (as our 
 stock-jobbing writers now r affect to pity the ignorance of the coun¬ 
 try people in Spain) in showing their attachment to the monks. 
 Gross ignorance, to be sure, to prefer easy landlords , leases for 
 lift, hospitality, and plenty; “gross ignorance and superstition 1 
 to ureter these to grinding rack-rents, buying small beer at hi- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 85 
 
 shop's palaces, and living - on parish pay. We shall see shortly, 
 how soon horrid misery followed these tyrannical proceedings ; 
 but, we must trace Cromwell and his ruffians in their work of 
 confiscating, plundering, pillaging, and devastating. 
 
 174. Tyrants have often committed robberies on their people; 
 but, in all cases but this, in England at least, there was always 
 something of legal process observed. In this case there was no 
 such thing. The base parliament, who were to share, and who 
 did most largely share, in the plunder, had given not only the 
 lands and houses to the tyrant, or, rather, had taken them to 
 themselves ; but had disposed, in the same short way, of all the 
 moveable goods, stock on farms, crops, and, which was of more 
 consequence, of the gold, silver, and jewels. Let the reader judge 
 of the ransackings that now took place The poorest of the con¬ 
 vents had some images, vases, and other things of gold or silver. 
 Many of them possessed a great deal in this way. The altars 
 of their churches were generally enriched with the precious me¬ 
 tals, if not with costly jewels ; and, which is not to be overlook¬ 
 ed, the people in those days, were honest enough to suffer all 
 these things to remain in their places, without a standing army, 
 and without police officers. 
 
 175. Never, in all probability, since the world began, was 
 there so rich a harvest of plunder, The ruffians of Cromwell 
 entered the convents; they tore down the altars to get away the 
 gold and silver; ransacked the chests and drawers of the monks 
 and nuns; tore off the covers of books that were ornamented 
 with the precious metals. These books were all in manuscript. 
 Single books had taken, in many cases, half a long life-time to 
 compose and to copy out fair. Whole libraries, the getting of 
 which together, had taken ages upon ages, and had cost im¬ 
 mense sums of money, were scattered abroad by these hellish 
 ruffians, when they had robbed the covers of the rich ornaments. 
 The ready money, in the convents, down to the last shilling, 
 was seized. In short, the most rapacious and unfeeling soldiery 
 never, in towns delivered up to be sacked, proceeded with gree¬ 
 diness, shamelessness and brutality to be at all compared with 
 those of these heroes of the Protestant Reformation; and this, 
 observe, towards persons, women as well as men, who had com¬ 
 mitted no crime known to the laws, who had had no crime regu¬ 
 larly laid to their charge, who had had no hearing in their defence 
 a large part of whom had, within a year, been declared, by this 
 same parliament, to lead most godly and useful lives, the whole of 
 whose possessions were guaranteed to them by the Great Char¬ 
 ter, as much as the King’s crown was to him, and whose estates 
 were enjoyed for the benefit of the poor, as well as for that of 
 these plundered possessors themselves. 
 
 8 
 
96 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 176. The tyrant was of course, the great pocketter of this 
 species of plunder. Cromwell carried or sent it to him in par¬ 
 cels, twenty ounces of gold at one time, fifty ounces at another ; 
 now a parcel of precious stones of one sort, then a parcel of ano¬ 
 ther. Hume, whose main object is to blacken the Catholic re¬ 
 ligion, takes every possible occasion for saying something or 
 other in praise of its destroyers. He could not, he was too cun¬ 
 ning to ascribe justice or humanity to a monster, whose very 
 name signifies injustice and cruelty. He therefore, speaks of 
 his high spirit, his magnificence and generosity. It was a high- 
 spirited and magnificent king to be sure, who sat in his palace, 
 in London, to receive with his own hands, the gold, silver, jewels, 
 and pieces of money, of which his unoffending subjects had been 
 robbed by ruffians sent by himself to commit the robbery. One 
 of the items runs in these words:— “Item, delivered unto the 
 King’s royal Majesty, the same day, of the same stuffe, foure 
 chalices of golde, with foure pattens of golde to the same ; and a 
 spoon of gold, weighing, altogether, one hundred and six ounces. 
 Received: HENRY, REX.” 
 
 177. There areshigh spirit, magnificence, and generosity !— 
 Amongst the stock of this “ generous prince’s” pawnbroker’s 
 shop; or rather, his store-house of stolen goods, were images of 
 all sorts, candlesticks, sockets, cruets, cups, pixes, goblets, ba¬ 
 sins, spoons, diamonds, sapphires, pearls, finger-rings, ear-rings, 
 pieces of money of all values, even down to shillings, bits of gold 
 and silver torn from the covers of books, or cut and beaten out 
 of the altars. In cases where the wood work, either of altars, 
 crosses, or images, was inlaid with precious metal, the wood was 
 frequently burnt to get at the metal. Even the Jew thieves of 
 the present day, are not more expert at their trade, than the 
 myrmidons of Cromwell were. And, with these facts before 
 us; these facts undenied and undeniable; with these facts before 
 us, must we not be the most profound hypocrites that the world 
 ever saw ; must we not be the precise contrary of .that which 
 Englishmen have always been thought to be, if we still affect to 
 believe, that the destruction of the shrines of our forefathers, 
 arose from motives of conscience 1 
 
 178. The parcel of plunder mentioned in the last paragraph 
 but one, brought into this royal Peachum, was equal in value to 
 about eight thousand pounds of money of the present day; and 
 that parcel was, perhaps, not a hundredth part of what he re¬ 
 ceived in this way. Then who is to suppose that the plunderers 
 did not keep a large share to themselves ? Did subaltern plun¬ 
 derers ever give in just accounts ? It is manifest, that, from this 
 specimen, the whole amount of the goods of w hich the convents 
 were plundered, must have been enormous. The Reforming gen¬ 
 try ransacked the Cathedral churches as w r ell as the convents and 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 87 
 
 their churches. Whatever pile contained the greatest quantity 
 of the “ same stujfe ,” seemed to be the object of their most keen 
 rapacity. Therefore, it is by no means surprising, that they di 
 rected, at a very early stage of their pious and honest progress, 
 their hasty steps towards Canterbury , which, above all othei 
 places, had been dipped in the “ manifest e synne ” of possessing 
 rich altars, tombs, gold and silver images, together with “ ma¬ 
 nifestly synneful” diamonds and other precious stones. The 
 whole of this city, famed as the cradle of English Christianity, 
 was prize ; and the “ Reformation” people hastened to it with 
 that alacrity, and that noise of anticipated enjoyment, which we 
 observe in the crows and magpies, when flying to the spot where 
 a horse or an ox has accidentally met with its death. 
 
 179. But there were, at Canterbury, two objects by which 
 the “ Reformation” birds of prey were particularly attracted; 
 namely, the monastery of Saint Austin, and the tomb of Tho¬ 
 mas a Becket. The former of these renowned men, to whose 
 preaching, and whose long life of incessant and most disinter¬ 
 ested labour, England owed the establishment of Christianity 
 in the land, had, for eight or nine centuries, been regarded as 
 the Apostle of England. His shrine was in the monastery de¬ 
 dicated to him, and as it was, in all respects, a work of great 
 magnificence, it offered a plenteous booty to the plunderers, who, 
 if they could have got at the tomb of Jesus Christ himself, and 
 had found it equally rich, would, beyond all question, have torn 
 it to pieces. But, rich as this prize was, there was a greater in 
 the shrine of Thomas a Becket, in the Cathedral church. Beck¬ 
 et, who was Archbishop of Canterbury, in the reign of Henry 
 II., who resisted that king, when the latter was manifestly pre¬ 
 paring to rob the church, and to enslave and pillage the people, 
 had been held in the highest veneration all over Christendom 
 for more than three hundred years, when the Reformation plun¬ 
 derers assailed his tomb; but especially was his name venerat¬ 
 ed in England, where the people looked upon him as a martyr 
 to their liberties as well as their religion, he having been barbar¬ 
 ously murdered by ruffians sent from the king, and for no other 
 cause than that he persevered in resisting an attempt to violate 
 the Great Charter. Pilgrimages were continually made to his 
 tomb; offerings incessantly poured into it; churches and hospi¬ 
 tals and other establishments of piety and charity were dedicat¬ 
 ed to him, as, for instance, the church of St. Thomas in the city 
 of London, the Monastery of Sende, in Surrey, the Hospital oj 
 St. Thomas , in the borough of Southwark, and things of this sort, 
 in great numbers, all over the country. The offerings at his 
 shrine had made it exceedingly rich and magnificent. A king 
 of France had given to it a diamond, supposed to be the most 
 valuable then in Europe. Hume, never losing sight of the double 
 
88 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 object of maligning the Catholic religion and degrading the En 
 glish nation, ascribes this sort of half-adoration of Becket to 
 the craft of the priests and to the folly and superstition of the 
 people. He is vexed to death to have to relate, that more than 
 a hundred thousand pUgrims to Becket’s shrine have been as¬ 
 sembled at one time in Canterbury. Indeed ! why, then, there 
 must have been some people living in England, even in those old 
 times ; and those people must have had some wealth too ; though, 
 according to the whole tenor of the lying hook which the Scotch 
 call our history, this was, at the time I am now speaking of, a 
 poor, beggarly, scarcely inhabited country. The city of Canter¬ 
 bury does not now contain men, women, and children, all counted 
 and well puffed out, more than twelve thousand seven hundred and 
 twenty souls ! Poor souls ! How could they find lodging and en¬ 
 tertainment for a hundred thousand grown persons ! And this, 
 too, observe, at one corner of the Island. None but persons of 
 some substance could have performed such a journey. Here is 
 a fact that just slips out side-way which is of itself much more 
 than enough to make us reflect a d inquire before we swallow 
 what the Scotch philosophers are now presenting to us on the 
 subjects of national wealth and population. And, then, as to 
 the craft and superstition which Hume says produced this con 
 course of pilgrims. Just as if either were necessary to produce 
 unbounded veneration for the name of a man, of whom it was 
 undeniably true, that he had sacrificed his life, and that, too, 
 in the most signal manner, for the rights and liberties and reli¬ 
 gion of his country. Was it “folly and superstition ,” or was it 
 wisdom and gratitude and real piety to show, by overt acts, ve¬ 
 neration for suqh a man? The bloody tyrant who had sent 
 Moore and Fisher to the block, and who, of course, hated the 
 name of Becket, caused his ashes to be dug up and scattered in 
 the air, and forbade the future insertion of his name in the Calen 
 dar. We do not, therefore, find it in the Calendar in the Com¬ 
 mon Prayer-Book; but, and it is a most curious fact, we find it 
 in Moore’s Almanack ; in that Almanack it is for this year 1825; 
 and thus, in spite of the ruthless tyrant, and in spite of all the 
 liars of the “ Reformation,” the English nation has always con¬ 
 tinued to be just and grateful to the memory of this celebrated 
 man. 
 
 180. But to return to the “ Reformation” robbers; here was 
 a prize! This tomb of Becket was of wood, most exquisitely 
 wrought, inlaid abundantly with the precious metals, and thick¬ 
 ly set with precious stones of all sorts. Here was an object for 
 “ Reformation” piety to fix its godly eyes upon! Were such a 
 shrine to be found in one of our churches now, how the swadlers 
 would cry out for another “ Reformation '” The gold, silver, 
 and jewels filled two chests, each of which required six or eight 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 89 
 
 men of that day (when the labourers used to have plenty vf meat) 
 to move them to the door of the Cathedral! How the eyes of 
 H ome's “ high-minded , magnificent, and generous prince” must 
 have glistened when the chests were opened! They vied, I 
 dare say, with the diamonds themselves. No robbers of which 
 we have ever had an account, equalled these robbers in rapaci¬ 
 ty, in profligacy, and in insolence. But, where is the wonder? 
 The tyrant’s proclamations had now the force of laws ; he had 
 bribed the people’s natural leaders to his side ; his will was lawj 
 and that will constantly sought plunder and blood. 
 
 181. The monasteries were now plundered, sacked, gutted, 
 for this last is the proper word whereby to describe the deed. 
 As some comfort, and to encourage us to endure the horrid re¬ 
 lation, we may here bear in mind, that we shall, by and by, see 
 the base ruffian, Cromwell, after being the chief instrument 
 in the plunder, laying his miscreant head on the block; but to 
 seize the estates, and to pillage the churches and apartments of 
 the monasteries was not all. The noble buildings, raised with 
 the view of lasting for countless ages; the beautiful gardens; 
 these ornaments of the country must not be suffered to stand, for 
 they continually reminded the people of the rapacity and cru¬ 
 elty of their tyrant and his fellow-plunderers and partakers in 
 the plunder. How the property in the estates was disposed of, 
 we shall see further on; but the buildings must come down. To 
 go to work in tlik usual way would have been a labour without 
 end; so that, in most instances, GUNPOWDER was resorted 
 to ; and thus, in a few hours, the most magnificent structures, 
 which it had required ages upon ages to bring to perfection, 
 were made heaps of-ruins, pretty much such as many of them 
 remain even unto this day. In many cases, those who got the 
 estates were bound to destroy the buildings, or to knock them 
 partly down, so that the people should, at once, be deprived of 
 all hope of seeing a revival of what they had lost, and in order 
 to give them encouragement to take leases under the new oioners. 
 
 182. The whole country was thus disfigured ; it had the ap¬ 
 pearance of a land recently invaded by the most brutal barba¬ 
 rians ; and this appearance, if we look well into it, it has, even to 
 this day. Nothing has ever yet come to supply the place of 
 what was then destroyed. This is the view for us to take of the 
 matter. It is not a mere matter of religion; but a matter of rights, 
 liberties, real wealth, happiness, and national greatness. If all 
 these have been strengthened, or augmented by the “ Reforma¬ 
 tion,” even then we must not approve of the horrible means; but 
 if they have all been weakened, or lessened, by that “ Reforma¬ 
 tion,” what an outrageous abuse of words is it to call the event 
 by that name ! And, if I do not prove that this latter has been 
 the case; if I do not prove, clear as the day-light, that, before 
 
90 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 the “Reformation,” England was greater, more wealthy, more 
 moral, and more ha-ppy, than she has ever been since; if I do not 
 make this appear as clearly as any fact ever was made to ap¬ 
 pear, I will be content to pass, for the rest of my life, for a vain 
 pretender. 
 
 183.' If I look at the county of Surrey, iri which I myself was 
 born, and behold the devastation of that county, I am filled with 
 indignation against the ruffian devastators. Surrey has very 
 little of natural wealth in it. A very considerable part of it is 
 mere heath-land. Its present comparative opulence is a crea¬ 
 ture of the fictitious system of funding. Yet this county was, 
 from one end of it to the other, ornamented and benefited by 
 the establishments which grew out of the Catholic church. At 
 Bermondsey there was an Abbey; at St. Mary Overy there 
 was a Priory, and this convent founded that very St. Thomas's 
 Hospital which now exists in Southwark. This hospital also was 
 seized by the ruffians, but the building was afterwards given to 
 the city of London. At Newington there was an hospital, and 
 after its revenues were seized, the master obtained a license to 
 beg! At Merton there was a Priory. Then going across to 
 the Sussex side, there was another Priory at Reigate. Coming 
 again near the Thames, and more to the west, there was a Prio¬ 
 ry at Siiene. Still more to the west, there was an abbey at 
 Ciiertsey. At Tandridge there was a Priory. Near Guil¬ 
 ford, at Sende, there was a Priory. And, at the lower end of 
 the county, at Waverley, in the parish of Farnham, was an 
 Abbey. To these belonged cells and chapels at a distance from 
 the convents themselves : so that it would have been a Work of 
 some difficulty for a man so to place himself, even in this poor, 
 heathy county, at six miles distance from a place where the door 
 of hospitality was always open, to the poor, to the aged, the or¬ 
 phan, the widow, and the stranger. Can any man now place 
 himself, in that whole county, wjthin any number of miles, of 
 any such door 1 No: nor in any other county. All is wholly 
 changed, and all is changed for the worse. There is now no 
 hospitality in England. Words have changed their meaning. 
 We now give entertainment to those who entertain us in return. 
 We entertain people because we like them personally; and very 
 seldom because they stand in need of entertainment. An hospi¬ 
 tal in those days, meant a place of free entertainment; and not 
 a place merely for the lame, the sick, and the blind; and the ve¬ 
 ry sound of the words “ Old English Hospitality,” ought to raise 
 a blush on every Protestant cheek. But, besides this hospitality, 
 exercised invariably in the monasteries, the weight of their ex¬ 
 ample was great with all the opulent classes of the community; 
 and thus, to be generous and kind, was the character of the na¬ 
 tion at large; a niggardly, a base, a money-loving disposition 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 91 
 
 could not be in fashion, when those institutions to which all men 
 looked with reverence, set an example which condemned such a 
 disposition. 
 
 1S4. And, if I am asked why the thirteen monks of Waver- 
 LEY, for instance, should have had 196Z. 13a\ lid. ayear to spend 
 making about four thousand pounds a year of the money of the 
 pfesenl day, I may answer by asking*, why they should not have 
 had it? And, I may go on, and ask, why any body should have 
 any property at all ? Aye, but they never worked; they did 
 nothing to increase the nation's store ? Let us see how this is. 
 They possessed the lands of Waverley, a few hundred acres of 
 very poor land with a mill, and perhaps about twenty acres of 
 very indifferent meadow-land, on one part of which, sheltered by 
 a semicircle of sand-hills, their Abbey stood, the river Wey (about 
 twenty feet wide) running close by the outer wall of the con¬ 
 vent. Besides this, they possessed the impropriated tithes of the 
 parish of Farnham, and a pond or two on the commons adjoin¬ 
 ing. This estate in land, belongs to a Mr. Thompson, who lives 
 on the spot, and the estate in tithes, to a Mr. Halsey, who lives 
 at a distance from the parish. Now, without any disparagement 
 to these gentlemen, did not the monks work as much as they do ? 
 Did not their revenue go to augment the nation’s store as much 
 as the rents of Mr. Thompson, or the tithes of Mr. Halsey?— 
 Aye, and which is of the most importance, the poor of the parish 
 of Farnham, having this monastery to apply to, and having for 
 their neighbour, a Bishop of Winchester, who did not sell small 
 beer out of hispalace ; stood in no need of poor-rates, and had ne¬ 
 ver heard the horrid word pauper pronounced. Come, my towns¬ 
 men of Farnham, you, who, as well as I, have, when we were 
 boys, climbed the ivy-covered ruins of this venerable Abbey (the 
 first of its order in England ;) you, who, as well as I have, when 
 looking at those walls, which have outlived the memory of the 
 devastators, but not the malice of those who still taste the sweets 
 of the devastation; you, who, as well as I, have many times won¬ 
 dered what an Abbey was, and how, and why this one came to 
 be devastated ; you shall be judge in this matter. You know what 
 poor-rates are, and you know what church-rates are. Yery well 
 then, there were no poor-rates, and no church-rates as long as 
 Waverley Abbey existed, and as long as Bishops had no wives 
 This is a fact wholly undeniable. There was no need of either. 
 The church shared its property with the poor and the stranger 
 and left the people at large to possess their own earnings. And, 
 as to matters of faith and worship, look at that immense heap of 
 earth round the church, where your parents, and my parents, 
 and where our progenitors, for twelve hundred years, lie buried ; 
 then, bear in mind, that, for nine hundred years out of the twelve, 
 they were all of the faith and worship of the monks of Waver- 
 
PROTEST ANT REFORMATION. 
 
 92 
 
 ley ; and, with that thought in your mind, find if you can, the 
 heart to say, that the monks of Waverley, by whose hospitality 
 your fathers, and my fathers, were, for so many ages, preserved 
 from bearing tiie hateful name of pauper, taught an idolatrous, 
 and damnable religion. 
 
 185. That which took place in Surrey, took place in every 
 other county, only to a greater extent in proportion to the great¬ 
 er wealth and resources of the spot. Defacing followed closely 
 upon the heels of confiscation and plunder, if buildings could 
 have been murdered, the tyrant and his plunderers would have 
 made short work of it. As it was, they did all they could: they 
 knocked down, they blowed up, they annihilated as far as they 
 could. Nothing, indeed, short of diabolical malice was to be 
 expected from such nien; but there w ere two Abbeys in England 
 which one might have hoped, that even these monsters would 
 have spared; that which contained the tomb of St. Austin, and 
 that which had been founded by, and contained the remains of 
 Alfred. We have seen how they rilled the tomb of St. Austin 
 at Canterbury. They tore down the church and the Abbey, 
 and with the materials built a menagerie for wild beasts, and a 
 palace for the tyrant himself. The tomb of Alfred w as in an 
 Abbey at Winchester, founded by that king himself. The Ab¬ 
 bey and its estates were given by the tyrant to Wriothesley, 
 who was afterwards made Earl of Southampton, and who got a 
 pretty good share of the confiscations in Hampshire. One al¬ 
 most sickens at the thought of a man capable of a deed like the 
 destruction of this Abbey. Where is there one amongst us, who 
 has read any thing at all, who has not read of the fame of Al 
 Fred ? What book can we open, even for our boyish days, that 
 does not sound his praise? Poets, moralists, divines, historians, 
 philosophers, lawyers, legislators, not only of our own country, 
 but of all Europe, have cited him, and still cite him, as a model 
 of virtue, piety, wisdom, valour, and patriotism; as possessing 
 every excellence, without a single fault. He, in spite of diilicul- 
 ties, such as no other human being on record ever encountered, 
 cleared his harrassed and half-barbarised country of horde after 
 horde of cruel invaders, w ho, at one time, had w holly subdued 
 it, and compelled him, in order to escape destruction, to resort 
 to the habit and life of a herdsman. From this state of depres¬ 
 sion, he, during a not long life, raised himself and Ins people to 
 the highest point of happiness and of fame. He fought, with 
 his armies and lleets, more than fifty battles against the enemies 
 of England. He taught his people by his example, as w ell as by 
 his precepts, to be sober, industrious, brave and just. He pro. 
 moted learning in all the sciences; he planted the University of 
 Oxford ; to him, and not to a late Scotch lawyer, belongs “ Tri¬ 
 al by Jury;” Blackstone calls him the founder of the commou 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 93 
 
 law; the counties, the hundreds, the Hikings, the courts of justice 
 were the work of Alfred ; he, in fact, was the founder of ail 
 those rights, liberties, and laws which made England to be what 
 England has been; which gave her a character above that of 
 uther nations; which made her rich, and great, and happy be¬ 
 yond all her neighbours, and which still gives her whatever she 
 possesses of that pre-eminence. If there be a name under hea¬ 
 ven, to which Englishmen ought to bow with reverence approtich- 
 ing towards adoration, it is the name of Alfred. And we are 
 not unjust and ungrateful in this respect, at any rate ; for, whe- 
 .her Catholics or Protestants, where is there an Englishman to 
 be found, who would not gladly make a pilgrimage of a thou¬ 
 sand miles to take off his hat at the tomb of this maker of the 
 English name ? Alas ! that tomb is no where to be found. The 
 barbarians spared not even that. It was in the Abbey before- 
 mentioned, called Hyde Abbey, which had been founded by Al¬ 
 fred himself, and intended as the place of his burial. Besides 
 the remains of Alfred, this abbey contained those of St. Gim- 
 bald, the Benedictine monk, whom Alfred brought into En¬ 
 gland to begin the teaching at Oxford. But what cared the plun¬ 
 derers for remains of public benefactors ? The abbey was knock 
 ed down, or blown up; the tombs were demolished ; the very 
 lead of the coffins w as sold ; and which fills one with more indig¬ 
 nation than all the rest, the estates were so disposed of as to make 
 the loan-makers, the Barings, at this day, the sucesssors of Alfred 
 the Great ! 
 
 1S6. Wriothesley got the manors of Micheldever and 
 Stratton, which by marriage, came into the hands of the fami¬ 
 ly of Russell, and from that family, about thirty years ago, they 
 were bought by the Barings, and are now in possession of Sir 
 Thomas Baring. It is curious to observe how this Protestant 
 ‘Reformation” has worked. If it had not been, there would 
 nave been no paupers at Micheldever and Stratton ; but, then the 
 Russels would not have had the estates, and they could not have 
 sold them to the Barings; aye, but then there would have been, 
 too, no national debt, as well as no paupers, and there would 
 nave been no loan-makers to buy the estates of the Russels. Be¬ 
 sides this, there would have been no Bridewell erected upon the 
 precise spot where the abbev-church stood; no tread-mill, per- 
 naps, over the very place where the ashes of Alfred lay ; and, 
 
 . what is more, there would have been no need of bridewell or 
 tread-mill. It is related of Alfred, that he made his people so 
 honest, that he could hang bracelets up by the waj' side, without 
 danger of their being touched. Alas! that the descendants of 
 that same people should need a tread-mill ! Aye, but in the days 
 of Alfred there were no paupers ; no miserable creatures com¬ 
 pelled to labour from month’s end to month’s end without seeing 
 
94 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 meat; no thousands upon thousands made thieves by that hun 
 ger which acknowledges no law, human or divine. 
 
 187. Thus, then, was the country devastated, sacked, and de¬ 
 faced ; and I should now proceed to give an account of the com¬ 
 mencement of that ■poverty and degradation which were, as I have 
 pledged myself to show, the consequences of this devastation; 
 and which I shall show, not. by bare assertion, nor irom what are 
 called “ Histories of England but from Acts of Parliament, 
 and from other sources, which every one can refer to, and the 
 correctness of which, is beyond all dispute. But, before we come 
 to this important matter, we must see the end of the ruffian 
 “ Vice-gcrentf and also the end of the tyrant himself, who was, 
 during the events that we have been speaking of, going on mar¬ 
 rying, and divorcing, or killing his wives; but, whose career was, 
 after all, not very long. 
 
 188. After the death of Jane Seymour, who was the mother 
 of Edward VI., and who was the only one of all the tyrant’s wives 
 who had the good luck to die a queen, and to die in her bed; af¬ 
 ter her death, which took place in 1537, he was nearly two years 
 hunting up another wife. None, certainly, but some very gross 
 and unfeeling woman could be expected to have, voluntarily, 
 any thing to do with a man, whose hands were continually steep¬ 
 ed in blood. In 1539 he found, however, a mate in Anne, the 
 sister of the Duke of Cleves. When she arrived in England, he 
 expressed his dislike of her person; but he found it prudent to 
 marry her. In 1540, about six or seven months after the mar¬ 
 riage, he was divorced from her, not daring, in this case, to set 
 his myrmidons at work to bring her to the block. There was no 
 lawful pi'etence for the divorce. The husband did not like his 
 wife ; that was all: and this was alleged loo, as the ground of 
 the divorce. Cranmer, who had divorced him from two wives 
 before, put his irons into the fire again for this occasion; and 
 produced, in a little time, as neat a piece of work as ever had 
 come from the shop of the famous “Reformation ” Thus, the 
 king and queen were single -people again; but the former had 
 another young and handsome wife in his eye. This lady’s name 
 was Catharine Howard, a niece of the Duke of Norfolk. This 
 Duke, as well as most of the old nobility, hated Cromwell; 
 and now was an opportunity of inflicting vengeance on him. 
 Cromwell had been the chief cause of the king’s marriage with 
 Anne of Cleves; but, the fact is, his plundering talent was no 
 longer wanted, and it was convenient to the tyrant to get rid of 
 him. 
 
 189. Cromwell had obtained enormous wealth, from his se- 
 • vera.l offices, as well as from the plunder of the church, and the 
 
 poor. He had got about thirty of the estates belonging to the 
 monasteries; his house, or rather palace, was gorged with the 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 95 
 
 fruits of the sacking; he had been made Earl of Essex; he had 
 precedence of every one but the king: and he, in fact, represented 
 the king in the parliament, where he introduced and defended 
 all his confiscating and murdering laws. He had been barba¬ 
 rous beyond all description towards the unfortunate and unof¬ 
 fending monks and nuns; without such an instrument, the plun¬ 
 der never could have been effected : but he was no longer want¬ 
 ed; the ruffian had already lived too long; the very walls of the de¬ 
 vastated convents seemed to call for public vengeance on his head 
 On the morning of the 10th of June, 1540, he was all powerful, 
 in the evening of the same day, he was in prison, as a traitor.-- 
 He lay in prison only a few days before he had to experience 
 the benefit of his own way of administering justice. He had, 
 as we have seen in the last number, invented a way of bringing 
 people to the block, or the gallows, without giving them any form 
 of trial; without giving them even a hearing ; but merety bv pas¬ 
 sing a law to put them to death. This was what this abominable 
 wretch had brought about in the case of the Countess of Salis¬ 
 bury ; and this was what was now to fall on his own head. He 
 lived only about forty-eight days after his own arrest; not half 
 long enough to enable him to enumerate, barely to enumerate 
 the robberies and murders committed under his orders. His 
 time seems, however, to have been spent, not in praying God to 
 forgive him for these robberies and murders, but in praying to 
 the tyrant to spare his life. Perhaps, of all the mean and das¬ 
 tardly wretches that ever died, this was the most mean and das¬ 
 tardly. He who had been the most insolent and cruel of ruffi¬ 
 ans, when he had power; was now the most disgustingly slavish 
 and base. He had, in fact, committed no crime against the 
 king; though charged with heresy and treason, he was no more 
 a heretic than the king was; and, as to the charge of treason, 
 there was not a shadow of foundation for it. But, he was just 
 as guilty of treason as the Abbots of Reading, Colchester, and 
 Glastonbury, all of whom, and many more he had been the chief 
 instrument in putting to death. He put them to death in order 
 to get possession of their property ; and, I dare say, to get at 
 his property, to get the plunder back from him, was one of the 
 motives for bringing him to the block. This very ruffian had 
 superintended the digging up of the ashes of Thomas a Bucket 
 and scattering them in the air ; and now, the people who had 
 witnessed that, had to witness the letting of the blood out of his 
 dirty body, to run upon the pavements to be licked up by hogs 
 or dogs. The cowardly creature seems to have had, from the 
 moment of his arrest, no thought about any thing but saving his 
 life. He wrote repeatedly to the king, in the hope of getting 
 pardoned ; but all to no purpose: he had done what was wanted 
 of him ; the work of plunder was nearly over; he had, too, got 
 
96 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 a large share of the plunder, which it was not convenient to leave 
 in his hands; and, therefore, upon true “ Reformation” prin¬ 
 ciples, it was time to take away his life. He, in his letters to 
 the king, most vehemently protested his innocence. Aye, no 
 doubt of that: but he was not more innocent than were the but¬ 
 chered Abbots and Monks; he was not more innocent than any one 
 out of those thousands upon thousands whom he had quartered, 
 hanged, burned, or plundered; and amongst all those thousands, 
 upon thousands, there never was seen one female or male, so com¬ 
 plete a dastard as himself. In these letters to the tyrant, he fawn¬ 
 ed on him in the most disgusting manner; compared hissmiles'and 
 frowns to those of God: besought him to suffer him to “ kiss his 
 balmy hand once more, that th e fragrance thereof might make 
 him fit for heaven !” The base creature deserved his death, if 
 it had only been for writing these letters. Fox, the “ Martyr” - 
 man calls this Cromwell, the “ valiant soldier of the Reforma¬ 
 tion.” Yes, there have been few soldiers to understand sacking 
 better ; he was full of valour on foraging parties ; and when he 
 had to rifle monks and nuns, and to rob altars : a brave fellow 
 when he had to' stretch monks and nuns on the rack, to make 
 them confess treasonable words or thoughts ; but when death be¬ 
 gan to stare him in the face, he was, assuredly, the most cow¬ 
 ardly caitiff that ever died. It is hardly necessary to say, that 
 this man is a great favourite of Hume, who deeply laments Crom¬ 
 well’s fate, though he has not a word of compassion to bestow 
 upon all the thousands that had been murdered or ruined by 
 him. He, as well as other historians, quote, from the conclu¬ 
 sion of one of Cromwell’s letters to the king, these abject ex¬ 
 pressions : “ I, a most woeful prisoner, am ready to submit to 
 death, when it shall please God and your majesty; and yet the 
 frail flesh incites me to call to your grace for mercy and pardon 
 for mine offences.—Written at the Tower, with the heavy heart 
 and trembling hand of your highness’s most miserable prisoner, 
 and poor slave, Thomas Cromwell. —Most gracious prince, I 
 cry for mercy, mercy, mercy !” That is the language of Fox’s 
 “ valiant soldier.” Fox meant valiant, not in the field, or on 
 the scaffold, but in the convent , pulling the rings from women's 
 fingers, and tearing the gold clasps from books: that was the 
 Protestant valour of the “ Reformation.” Hume says, that Crom¬ 
 well “ deserved a better fate” Never was fate more just or 
 more appropriate. He had been the willing, the officious, the 
 zealous, the eager agent in the execution of all the tyrannical, 
 sacrilegious, and bloody deeds of his master; and had, amongst 
 other things, been the very man who first suggested the condem¬ 
 ning of people to death without trial. What could be more just 
 than that he should die in the same way? Not a tear was shed 
 at his death, which produced on tne spectators an effect such as 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 97 
 
 is produced, when the foulest of murderers expiate their crimes 
 on the gallows. 
 
 190. During the seven years that the tyrant himself survived 
 this his cruel and dastardly Vice-gerent, he was beset with dis¬ 
 appointments, vexations, and torments of all sorts. He disco¬ 
 vered, at the end of a few months, that his new queen had been, 
 and still was, much such another as Anne Boleyn. He, with 
 very little ceremony, sent her to the block, together with a whole 
 posse of her relations, lovers, and cronies. He raged and foam¬ 
 ed like a wild beast, passed laws most bloody to protect himself 
 against lewdness and infidelity in his future wives, and got, for 
 his pains, the ridicule of the nation and of all Europe. He, for 
 the last time, took another' wife ; but this time, none would face 
 his laws, but a widow; and she very narrowly escaped the fate 
 of the rest. He, for some years before he died, became, from 
 his gluttony and debaucheries, an unwieldy and disgusting mass 
 of flesh, moved about by means of mechanical inventions. But, 
 still he retained all the ferocity and bloody-mindedness of his 
 former days. The principal business of his life was the order¬ 
 ing of accusations, executions, and confiscations. When on his 
 death-bed, every one was afraid to intimate his danger to him, 
 lest death to the intimater should be the consequence; and he 
 died before he was well aware of his condition, leaving more 
 than one death-warrant unsigned for want of time! 
 
 191. Thus expired, in the year 1547, in the fifty-sixth year of 
 his age, and in the thirty-eighth of his reign, the most unjust, 
 hard-hearted, meanest, and most sanguinary tyrant that the 
 world had ever beheld, whether Christian or heathen. That Eng¬ 
 land, which he found in peace, unity, plenty, and happiness, he 
 left, torn by factions and schisms, her people wandering about 
 in-beggary and misery. He laid the foundations of immorality, 
 dishonesty, and pauperism, all which produced an abundant 
 harvest in the reigns of his unhappy, barren, mischievous, and 
 miserable children, with whom, at the end of a few years, his 
 house and his name were extinguished for ever. How he dispos¬ 
 ed of the plunder of the church and the poor; how his succes¬ 
 sors completed that work of confiscation which he had carried 
 on so long; how the nation sunk in point of character and of 
 wealth ; how pauperism first arose in England; and how were 
 sown the seeds of that system, of which we now behold the ef¬ 
 fects in the impoverishment and degradation of the main body 
 of the people of England and Ireland; all these will be shown 
 in the next number: and shown, I trust, in a manner which will 
 leave, in the mind of every man of sense, no doubt, that, of all 
 the scourges that ever afflicted this country, none is to be put in 
 comparison with the Protestant “ Reformation." 
 
 9 
 
 4 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 lb 
 
 LETTER VII. 
 
 % 
 
 EdwakdYI. Crowned.—Perjury of the Executors of Hen¬ 
 ry VIII.— New Church “By Law Established.”—Rob¬ 
 bery of the Churches.—Insurrections of the people.— 
 Treasons of Cranmer and his Associates.—Death of thb 
 King. 
 
 Kensington, May, 1825. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 192. Having, in the preceding numbers, shown, that the thing 
 impudently called the “ Reformation,” was engendered in beast¬ 
 ly lust, brought forth in hypocrisy and perfidy, and cherished 
 and fed by plunder, devastation, and by rivers of innocent Eng¬ 
 lish and Irish blood I intended to show, in the present Number, 
 how the main body of the people were, by these doings, impo¬ 
 verished and degraded up to this time ; that is to say, I intended 
 to trace the impoverishment and degradation down to the end 
 of the reign of the bloody tyrant, Henry VIII. But. upon re¬ 
 viewing my matter, I think it best, first, to go through the whole 
 of my account of the plunderings, persecutings, and murderings 
 of the “ Reformation” people ; and, when we 'have seen all the 
 robberies and barbarities that they committed under the hypo¬ 
 critical pretence of religious zeal 1 or, rather, when we have seen 
 such of those robberies and barbarities as we can find room for; 
 then I shall conclude with showing how enormously the nation 
 lost by the change; and how that change made the main part of 
 the people poor, and wretched, and degraded. By pursuing this 
 pian, I shall, in one concluding Number, give, or at least, endea¬ 
 vour to give, a clear and satisfactory history of this impoverish¬ 
 ment. I shall take the present Protestant labourer, with his cold 
 potatoes and water, and show him how his Catholic forefathers 
 lived ; and if those cold potatoes and water, if this poorer than 
 pig-diet, have not quite taken away all the natural qualities of 
 English blood, I shall make him execrate the plunderers and hy¬ 
 pocrites by whom was produced that change which has finally 
 led to his present misery, and to nine-tenths of that mass of cor¬ 
 ruption and crime, public and private, which now threatens to 
 uproot society itself. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 99 
 
 193. In pursuance of this plan, and in conformity with my pro¬ 
 mise to conclude my little work in Ten Numbers, I shall distri 
 bute my matter thus : in Number VII, (the present) the deeds and 
 events of the reign of Edward VI. In number VIII, those of the 
 reign of Queen Mary. In Number IX, those of the reign of 
 Queen Elizabeth; and in Number X, the facts and arguments to 
 establish my main point; namely, that the thing impudently cal¬ 
 led the “ Reformation,” impoverished and degraded the main 
 body of the people. In the course of the first three of these Num¬ 
 bers, I shall not touch, except incidentally, upon the impoverish- 
 ing, and degrading effects of the change ; but, shall reserve these 
 for the last Number, when, having witnessed the horrid means, 
 we will take an undivided view of the consequences, tracing those 
 consequences down to the present day. 
 
 194. In paragraph 190, we had the satisfaction to see the sa¬ 
 vage tyrant expire at a premature old age, with body swelled 
 and bursting from luxury, and with a mind torn by contending 
 passions. One of his last acts was a will, by which he made 
 his infant son his immediate successor, with remainder, in case 
 he died without issue, to his daughter Mary first, and then, in 
 default of issue again, to his daughter Elizabeth; though, ob¬ 
 serve, both the daughters still stood bastardized by Act of Parlia¬ 
 ment, and though the latter was born of Anne Boleyn while the 
 King’s first wife, the mother of Mary was alive. 
 
 195. To carry this will into execution, and to govern the king¬ 
 dom until Edward, who was then ten years of age, should be 
 eighteen years of age, there were sixteen executors appointed, 
 amongst whom was Seymour, Earl of Hertford, and “ honest 
 Cranmer.” These sixteen worthies began by taking, in the 
 most solemn manner, an oath to stand to, and maintain, the last 
 will of their master. Their second act was to break that oath by 
 making Hertford, who was a brother of Jane Seymour, the 
 king’s mother, 11 protector,' 1 ' 1 though the will gave equal powers 
 to all the executors. Their next step was to give new peerages 
 to some of themselves. The fourth, to award to the new peers, 
 grants of the public money. The fifth was to lay aside at the Co- 
 ronatiou, the ancient English custom of asking the people if they 
 were willing to have and obey the King. The sixth was to “ at¬ 
 tend at a solemn high mass." 1 And the seventh was to begin a 
 series of acts for the total subversion of all that remained of the 
 Catholic religion in England, and for the effecting of all that 
 Old Harry had left uneffected in the way of plunder. 
 
 19fi. The monasteries were gone; the cream had been taken 
 off; but,there remained the skimmed milk of church-altars, chan 
 teries, and guilds. Old Harry would, doubtless, if he had lived 
 much longer, have plundered these ; but he had not done it, and 
 he could not do it without openly becoming Protestant, which, 
 
100 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 lor the reasons stated in paragraph 101, he would not do. But 
 Hertford, and his fifteen brother worthies, had in their way no 
 such obstacle as the ruffian King had had. The church-altars, 
 the chantries, and the guilds contained something valuable ; and 
 they longed to be at it. The power of the Pope was gotten rid 
 of; the country had been sacked; the poor had been despoiled : 
 but, still there were some pickings left. The piety of ages had 
 made every church, however small, contain some gold and sil¬ 
 ver appertaining to the altar. The altars, in the parish-churches 
 and, generally, in the Cathedrals, had been left, as yet, untouch¬ 
 ed; for, though the wdfe-killer had abjured the Pope, whose pow 
 er he had taken to himself, he still professed to be of the Catho¬ 
 lic faith, and he maintained Ihe mass and the sacraments and 
 creeds with fire and faggot. Therefore he had left the church- 
 altars unplundered. But, they contained gold, silver, and other 
 valuables, and the worthies saw these with longing eyes and itch¬ 
 ing fingers. 
 
 197. To seize them, however, there required a pretext ; and 
 what pretext could there be short of declaring, at once, that the 
 Catholic religion was false and wicked, and, of course, that there 
 ought to be no altars, and of course, no gold and silver things ap¬ 
 pertaining to them ! The sixteen worthies, with Hertford at 
 their head, and with Charmer amongst them, had had the king 
 crowned as a Catholic; he, as well as they, had taken the oaths 
 as Catholics; they had sworn to uphold that religion ; they had 
 taken him to a high mass, after his coronation: but, the altars 
 had good things about them; there was plunder remaining; and 
 to get at this remaining plunder, the Catholic religion must be 
 wholly put down. There were, doubtless, some fanatics; some 
 who imagined that the religion of900 years’standing ought not to 
 be changed ; some who had not plunder,and plunder only in view; 
 but it is impossible for any man of common sense, of unperverted 
 mind, to look at the history of this transaction, at this open avow¬ 
 al of Protestantism, at this change from the religion of England to 
 that of a part of Germany, without being convinced that the prin¬ 
 cipal authors of it had plunder, and plunder only in view. 
 
 198. The old tyrant died in 1547; and, by the end of 1549, 
 Cranmkr, who had tied so many Protestants to the stake for not 
 being Catholics, had pretty nearly completed a system >f Pro¬ 
 testant worship. He first prepared a book of homilies and a ca¬ 
 techism, in order to pave the wav. Next came a law to allow 
 the clergy to have wives; and then, when all things had been 
 prepared, came the Book of Common Prayer and Administra¬ 
 tion of the Sacraments. Gardiner, who was Bishop of Win¬ 
 chester, reproached Cranmkr with his duplicity ; reminded him 
 of the zeal with which he had upheld the Catholic worship un¬ 
 der the late king, and would have made him hang himself, or 
 cut his throat if ne had had the slightest remains of shame in fiiin 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 101 
 
 199. This new system did not, however, go far enough for the 
 fanatics ; and there instantly appeared arrayed against it, whole 
 tribes of new lights on the continent. So that Cranmer, cunning 
 as he was, soon found that he had undertaken no easy matter. 
 The proclamations put forth, upon this occasion, were disgust- 
 ingly ridiculous ; coming, as they did, in the name of a king on- 
 ’y ten years of age, and expressed in words so solemnly pom¬ 
 pous, and so full of arrogance. However, the chief object was 
 the plunder; and to get at this, nothing was spared. There 
 were other things to attract the grasp ; but it will be unnecessa¬ 
 ry to dwell very particularly on any thing but the altars and 
 the churches. This was the real “ Reformation reign;' 1 for, it 
 was a reign of robbery and hypocrisy without any thing to be 
 compared to them; any thing in any country, or in any age. Re¬ 
 ligion, conscience, was always the pretext: but, in one way or 
 another, robbery, plunder, was always the end. The people, 
 once so united and so happy, become divided into innumerable 
 sects, no man knowing hardly what to believe; and, indeed, no 
 one knowing what it was lawful for him to say ; for it soon became 
 impossible for the common people to know what was heresy, and 
 what was not heresy. 
 
 200. That prince of hypocrites, Cranmer, who during the 
 reign of Henry, had condemned people to the flames for not be¬ 
 lieving in transubstantiation, was now ready to condemn them 
 for believing in it. We have seen, that Luther was the begin¬ 
 ner of the work of “ reformation but he was soon followed 
 by further reformers on the continent. These had made many 
 attempts to propagate their doctrines in England ; but old Hen¬ 
 ry had kept them down. Now, however, when the churches 
 were to be robbed of what remained in them, and when, to have 
 a pretext for that robbery, it was necessary to make a complete 
 change in the form of worship, these sectarians all flocked to 
 England, which became one great scene of religious disputation. 
 Some were for the Common Prayer Book others proposed al¬ 
 terations in it; others were for abolishing it altogether; and there 
 now began that division, that multiplicity of hostile opinions, 
 which has continued to the present day. Cranmer employed a 
 part of the resources of the country to feed and fatten those of 
 these religious, or rather, impious, adventurers, who sided with 
 him, and who chose the best market for their doctrines. Eng¬ 
 land was over-run by these foreign traders in religion; and this 
 nation, so jealous of foreign influence, was now compelled to 
 bend its haughty neck, not only to foreigners, but to foreigners 
 of the most base and infamous character and description. Cran¬ 
 mer could not find Englishmen sufficiently supple to be his tools 
 in executing the work that he had in hand. The Protector 
 Hertford, whom we must now call Somerset, (the child-king 
 having made him Duke of Somerset,) was the greatest of all 
 
 9* 
 
102 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 “ reformers' 1 that had yet appeared in the world, And, as we 
 shad soon see, the greatest, and most audacious of ail the plun¬ 
 derers that this famous reformalion had produced, save and ex¬ 
 cept Old Harry himself. The total abolition of the Catholic wor¬ 
 ship was necessary to his projects of plunder; and, therefore, 
 he was a great encourager of these greedy and villainous for¬ 
 eigners. Perhaps the world has never, in any age, seen a nest 
 of such attrocious miscreants as Luther, Zuinglius, Calvin, 
 Beza, and the rest of the distinguished reformers of the Catho¬ 
 lic religion. Every one of them was notorious for the most scan¬ 
 dalous vices, even according to the full confession of his own 
 followers. They agreed in nothing but in the doctrine, that 
 good works were useless; and their lives proved the sincerity of 
 their teaching; for, there was not a man of them whose acts did 
 not merit a halter. 
 
 201. The consequences to the morals of the people were such 
 as were naturally to be expected. All historians agree, that vice 
 of all sorts, and crimes of every kind were never so great and so 
 numerous before. This was confessed by the teachers themselves 
 —and yet the Protestants have extolled this reign as the reign 
 of conscience and religion ! It was so manifest that the change 
 was a bad one, that men could not have proceeded in it from er¬ 
 ror. Its mischiefs were all manifest before the death of the old 
 tyrant: that death afforded an opportunity for returning into 
 the right path; but there was plunder remaining, and the plun¬ 
 derers went on. The “ reformation” was not the work of vir¬ 
 tue, of fanaticism, of error, of ambition ; but of a love of plunder. 
 This was its great animating principle: in this it began, and in 
 this it proceeded till there was nothing left for it to work on. 
 
 202. The old tyrant had, in certain cases, enabled his minions 
 to rob the bishopricks; but now, there was a grand sweep at them. 
 The Protector took the lead, and his example was followed 
 by others. They took so much from one, so much from ano¬ 
 ther, and some they wholly suppressed, as that of Westminster, 
 and took their estates to themselves. There were many chan¬ 
 tries (private property to all intents and purposes ;) free chapels, 
 also private property, alms-houses, hospitals, guilds, or frater¬ 
 nities, the property of which was as much private property as 
 the funds of any Friendly Society now are. All these became 
 lawful plunder. And vet there are men who pretend that what 
 is now possessed by the Established Church is of so sacred a na¬ 
 ture as not to be touched by Act of Parliament! This was the reign 
 in which this, our present Established Church was founded , 
 for though the fabric was overset by Mary, it was raised again 
 by Elizabeth. Now it was, that it was made. It was made, 
 and the new worship along with it, by Acts of Parliament, and 
 it now seems to be high time, that, by similar Acts, it should be 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 103 
 
 ranmade. It had its very birth in division, disunion, discord ; and 
 its life has been worthy of its birth. The property it possesses 
 was taken, nominally, from the Catholic Church ; but in reality, 
 from that church, and also from the widow, the orphan, the in¬ 
 digent and the stranger. The pretext for making it was, that 
 it would cause an anion of sentiment amongst the people: that 
 it would compose all dissensions. The truth, the obvious truth, 
 that there could be but one true religion, was acknowledged and 
 loudly proclaimed; and, it was not to be denied that there were 
 already twenty, the teachers of every one of which declared, 
 that all the others were false; and, of course, that they were, at 
 the very least, no better than no religion at all. Indeed, this is 
 the language of common sense ; though it is now so fashionable 
 to disclaim the doctrine of exclusive salvation. I ask the Unita¬ 
 rian parson, or prater, for instance, why he takes upon him 
 that office; why he does not go and follow some trade, or why 
 he does not work in the fields. His answer is, that he is more 
 t usefully employed in teaching. If I ask, of what use his teach¬ 
 ing is, he tells me, he must tell me, that his teaching is necessary 
 to the salvation of souls. Well, say I, but why not leave that bu¬ 
 siness to the Established Church, to which the people all pay 
 tithes ? Oh no ! says he, I cannot do that, because the church 
 does not teach the true religion. Well, says I, but true or false, 
 if it serve for salvation, what signifies it? Here I have him pen¬ 
 ned up in a corner. He is compelled to confess, that he is a 
 fellow wanting to lead an easy life by pandering to the passions 
 or whims of conceited persons; or to insist, that his sort of belief 
 and teaching, are absolutely necessary to salvation; as he will 
 not confess the former, he is obliged to insist on the latter; and 
 here, after all his railing against the intolerance of the Catho¬ 
 lics, he maintains the doctrine of exclusive salvation. 
 
 203. Two true religions, two true creeds, differing from each 
 other, contradicting each other, present us with an impossibili¬ 
 ty : what then, are we to think of twenty or forty creeds, each 
 differing from all the rest ? If deism, or atheism be something 
 not only wicked in itself, but so mischievous in its effects as to 
 Call, in case of the public profession of it, for imprisonment for 
 years and years; if this be the case, what are we to think of laws, 
 the same laws, too, which inflict that cruel punishment, tolerat- 
 ating and encouraging a multiplicity of creeds, all but one of 
 which must be false ? A code of laws, acknowledging and toler¬ 
 ating but one religion, is consistent in punishing the deist and 
 the atheist; but if it acknowledge or tolerate more than one , it 
 acknowledges or tolerates one false one; and let divines say. 
 whether a false religion is not as bad as deism or atheism ? Be¬ 
 sides, is it just to punish the deist or the atheist for not believing 
 'u the Christian Religion at all, when he sees the law tolerate so 
 
104 
 
 PROTESTANi REFORMATION. 
 
 many religions, all but one of which must he false ? What 13 
 the natural effect of men seeing- constantly before their eyes, a 
 score or two of different sects, all calling- themselves Christians, all 
 tolerated by the law, and each openly declaring that all the rest 
 are. false ? The natural, the necessary effect is, that many men 
 will believe that none of them have truth on their side ; and, of 
 course, that the thing is false altogether, and invented solely for 
 the benefit of those who teach it, and who dispute about it. 
 
 204. The law should acknowledge and tolerate but one reli¬ 
 gion ; or it should know nothing at all about the matter. The 
 Catholic code was consistent. It said, that there was but one true 
 religion; and it punished, as offenders, those who dared, openly 
 to profess any opinion contrary to that religion. Whether that 
 were the true religion or not, we have not now to inquire; but, 
 while its long continuance, and in so many nations too, was a 
 strong presumptive proof of its good moral effects upon the peo¬ 
 ple, the disagreement amongst the Protestants was, and is, a 
 presumptive proof, not less strong, of its truth . If, as I observ- t 
 ed upon a former occasion, there be forty persons, who, and 
 whose fathers, for countless generations, have, up to this day, 
 entertained a certain belief; and, if thirty-nine of these say, at 
 last, that this belief is erroneous, we may naturally enough sup¬ 
 pose, or, at least, we may think it possible, that the truth, so long 
 hidden, is, though late, come to light. But, if the thirty-nine 
 begin, aye, and instantly begin, to entertain, instead of the one 
 old belief, thirty-nine new beliefs, each differing from all the 
 other thirty-eight, must we not, in common justice, decide, that 
 the old belief must have been the true one ? What; shall we 
 hear these thirty-nine protestors against the ancient faith, each 
 protesting against all the other thirty-eight, and still believe that 
 their joint protest was just! Thirty-eight of them must now be 
 in error: this must be: and are we still to believe in the cor¬ 
 rectness of their former decision, and that, too, relating to the 
 same identical matter? If, in a trial, relating to the dimensions 
 of a piece of land, which had been proved to have always been } 
 time without mind, taken for twenty acres, there was one survey¬ 
 or to swear that it contained twenty acres, and each of thirty- 
 nine other surveyors to swear to each of the other number of 
 acres, between one and forty, what judge and jury would hesi¬ 
 tate a moment in crediting him who swore to the twenty, and in 
 wholly rejecting the testimony of all the rest ? 
 
 205, Thus the argument would stand, on the supposition that 
 thirty-nine parts out of forty of all Christendom had protested; 
 but there were not, and there are not, even unto this day, two 
 parts out of fifty. So that here we have thirty-nine persons 
 breaking off* from about two thousand, protesting against the 
 faith which the whole, and their fathers have he^i; we have each 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 105 
 
 ©f these thirty-nine instantly protesting that all the other thirty- 
 eight have protested upon false grounds ; and yet we are to be¬ 
 lieve, that their joint protest against the faith of the two thou¬ 
 sand, who are backed by all antiquity, was wise and just 1 Is 
 this, the way in which we decide in other cases ? Did honest 
 men, and men not blinded by passion, or by some base motive, 
 ever decide thus before ? Besides, if the Catholic faith were so 
 false as it is, by some, pretented to be, how comes it not to have 
 been extirpated before now ? When indeed, the Pope had very 
 great power; when even kings were compelled.to bend to him, 
 it might be said, and pretty fairly said, that no one dared use the 
 weapons of reason against the Catholic faith. But, w r e have seetf 
 the Pope a prisoner in a foreign land; we have seen him without • 
 scarcely food and raiment; and we have seen the press of more 
 than half the world at liberty to treat him and his faith as it 
 pleased to treat them. But, have we not seen the Protestant 
 sects at work for three hundred years to destroy the Catholic 
 faith ? Do we not see, at the end of those three hundred years, 
 that that faith is still the reigning faith of Christendom ? Nay, 
 do we not see that it is gaining ground at this very moment even 
 m this kingdom itself, where a Protestant Hierarchy receives 
 eight millions sterling a year, and where Catholics are still rigid¬ 
 ly excluded from all honour and power, and, in some cases, 
 from all political and civil rights, under a constitution founded 
 by their Catholic ancestors ? Can it be, then, that this faith is 
 false? Can it be that this worship is idolatrous? Can it be 
 that it was necessary to abolish them in England, as far as law 
 could do it ? Can it be that it was for our good, our honour, to 
 sack our country, to violate all the rights of property, to deluge 
 the country with blood, in order to change our religion ? 
 
 206. But, in returning, now to the works of the plunderers, 
 we ought to remark, that in discussions of this sort, it is a com¬ 
 mon, but a very great error, to keep our eyes so exclusively fix¬ 
 ed on mere matters of religion. The Catholic church included 
 in it a great deni more than the business of teaching religion 
 and of practising worship and administering sacraments. It had 
 a great deal to do with the temporal concerns of the people. It 
 provided, and amply provided for all the wants of the poor and 
 the distressed. It received back, in many instances, what the 
 miser and extortioner had taken unfairly, and applied it to works 
 of beneficence. It contained a great body of land proprietors, 
 whose revenues were distributed in various ways amongst the 
 people at large, upon terms always singularly advantageous to 
 the latter. It was a great and powerful estate, independent both 
 of the aristocracy and the crown, and naturally siding with the 
 people. But, above all things, it was a provider for the poor, 
 and a keeper of hospitality. By its charity and by its benevo- 
 
106 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 lence towards its tenants and dependant's, it mitigated the rigour 
 of proprietorship, and held society together by the ties of reli¬ 
 gion rather than by the trammels and terrors of the law. It 
 was the great cause of that description of tenants called life- 
 holders, who formed a most important link in the chain of so¬ 
 ciety, coming after the proprietors in fee, and before the tenant 
 at will, participating, in some degree, of the proprietorship of 
 the estate, and yet, not wholly without dependence on the pro¬ 
 prietor. This race of persons formerly so numerous in England, 
 lias by degrees, become almost wholly extinct, their place hav¬ 
 ing been supplied by a comparatively few rack-renters, and by 
 swarms of miserable paupers. The Catholic church held the 
 lending of money for interest, or gain, to be directly in the face 
 of the gospel. It considered all such gain as usurious, and of 
 course, criminal. It taught the making of loans without inte¬ 
 rest; and thus it prevented the greedy-minded from amassing 
 wealth in that way in which wealth is most easily amassed. (Jsu- 
 ry amongst Christians was wholly unknown, until the wife-killing 
 tyrant had laid his hands on the property of the church and the 
 poor. The principles of the Catholic church all partook of ge¬ 
 nerosity ; it was their great characteristic, as selfishness is the 
 characteristic of that church which was established i,n its stead. 
 
 207. The plunder which remained after the seizure of the mo¬ 
 nasteries was comparatively small; but, still, the very leavings 
 of the old tyranny, the mere gleanings of the harvest of plunder 
 were something ; and these were not suffered to remain. The 
 ;plunder of the churches, parochial as well ds collegiate, was pre¬ 
 ceded by all sorts of antics played in those churches. Calvin^ 
 had got an influence opposed to that of Cranmer; so that there 
 was almost open war amongst these protestants, which party 
 should have the teaching of the people. After due preparation 
 in this way, the robbery was set about in due form. Every 
 church-altar had, as I have before observed, more or less of gold 
 and silver. A part consisted of images, a part of censers, can¬ 
 dlesticks, and other things used in the celebration of the mass . 
 The mass was, therefore, abolished, and there was no longer 
 to be an altar but a table in its stead. The fanatical part of the 
 reformers amused themselves with quarrelling about the part of 
 the church where the table was to stand; about the shape of it, 
 and whether the head of it was to be placed to the North, the 
 East, the West, or the South; and whether the people were to 
 stand, kneel,, or sit at it i The plunderers, however, thought 
 about other things : they thought about the value of the images, 
 censers, and the like. 
 
 208. To reconcile th epeople to these innovations, the plunder¬ 
 ers had a Bible contrived for the purpose, which Bible was a per¬ 
 version of the original text, wherever it was found to be necessa* 
 
PROTESTANT REI< ORMATION. 
 
 307 
 
 ry. Of all the acts of this hypocritical and plundering reign, 
 this was, perhaps, the basest. In it we see the true character 
 of the heroes of the “ Protestant Reformation and the poor 
 and miserable labourers of England, who now live upon pota¬ 
 toes and water, feel the consequences of the deeds of the. infa¬ 
 mous times of which I am speaking. Every preparation being 
 made, the robbery began, and a general plunder of churches 
 took place by royal and Parliamentary authority ! The rob¬ 
 bers took away every thing valuable, even down to the vestments 
 of the priests. Such mean rapacity never was heard of before, 
 and, for the honour of human nature, let us hope that it will ne¬ 
 ver be heard of again. It seems that England was really be¬ 
 come a den of thieves, and of thieves, too, of the lowest, and 
 most despicable character. 
 
 209. The Protector, Somerset, did not forget himself. Hav 
 ing plundered four or five of the bishopricks, he needed a. palace 
 in London For the purpose of building this palace, which was 
 erected in the Strand, London, and which was called “ Somer 
 set-House,” as the place is called to this day, he took from three 
 bishops their town-houses ; he pulled these down, together with 
 a parish church, in order to get a suitable spot for the erection. 
 The materials of these demolished buildings being insufficient 
 for his purpose, he pulled down a part of the buddings apper¬ 
 taining to the then Cathedral of Saint Paul; the church of Saint 
 John near Smithfield ; Barking chapel near the Tower; the col¬ 
 lege church of St. Martin-le-Grand ; St. E wen’s church, New¬ 
 gate; and the parish church of Saint Nicholas. He, besides 
 these, ordered the pulling down of the parish church of Saint 
 Margaret, Westminster; but, says Dr, Heyreyn, “ the workmen 
 had no sooner advanced their scaffolds, when the parishioners 
 gathered together in great multitudes, with bows and arrows 
 and staves and clubs; which so terrified the workmen that they 
 ran away in great amazement, and never could be brought again 
 upon that employment.” Thus arose Somerset House, the 
 present grand seat of the power of fiscal grasping. It was first 
 erected literally with the ruins of churches, and it now serves, 
 under its old name, as the place from which issue the mandates 
 to us to give up the fruit of our earnings, to pay the interest of a 
 Debt, which is one of the evident and great consequences of 
 the “ Protestant Reformation,” without which that Debt never 
 could have existed. 
 
 210. I am, in the last Number, to give an account of the im¬ 
 poverishment and degradation that these and former Protestant 
 proceedings produced amongst the people at large; but 1 must 
 here notice, that the people heartily detested these Protestant ty- 
 rants and their acts. General discontent prevailed, and this, in 
 koine cases, broke out into open insurrection. It is cuviota 
 
108 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 enough to observe the excuses that Hume, in giving an account 
 ©f these times, attempts to make for the plunderers and their 
 44 reformation.” It was his constant aim to blacken the Catho* 
 lie institutions, and particularly the character and conduct of 
 the Catholic clergy. Yet he could not pass over these discon¬ 
 tents and risings of the people; and, as there must have been a 
 cause for these, he is under the necessity of ascribing them to the 
 badness of the change, or to find out some other cause. He, there¬ 
 fore, goes to work in a very elaborate manner to make his rea¬ 
 ders believe, that the people were in error as to the tendency of 
 the change. He says, that “ scarce any institution can be ima¬ 
 gined less favourable in the main, to the interests of mankind,” 
 than that of the Catholic ; yet, says he, “ as it was followed by 
 many good effects, which had ceased with the suppression of the 
 monasteries, that suppression was very much regretted by the 
 people .” He then proceeds to describe the many benefits of 
 the monastic institutions ; says that the monks always residing 
 on their estates caused a diffusion of good constantly around 
 them; that, “ not having equal motives to avarice with other men, 
 they were the best and most indulgent landlords;” that, when 
 the church lands became private property, the rents were rais¬ 
 ed, the money spent at a distance from the estates, and the ten 
 ants exposed to the rapacity of stewards *, that whole estates 
 were laid waste ; that the tenants were expelled; and that even 
 the cottagers were deprived of the commons on which they for¬ 
 merly fed their cattle; that a great decay of the people, as well 
 as a diminution of former plenty was remarked in the kingdom; 
 that, at the same time, the coin had been debased by Henry, and 
 was now further debased; that the good coin was hoarded or 
 exported; that the common people were thus robbed of part of 
 their wages; that 44 complaints were heard in every part of the 
 kingdom .” 
 
 211 . Well; was not this change a bad one, then? And what 
 are the excuses which are offered for it by this calumniator of 
 the Catholic institutions ? Why, he says that “ their hospitali¬ 
 ty and charily gave encouragement to idleness, and prevented 
 the increase of public wealth ;” and that “ as it was by an addi¬ 
 tion alone, of toil, that the people were able to live, this increase 
 of industry was, at last, the effect of the PRESENT SITUA¬ 
 TION, an effect very beneficial to society .” What doe3 he mean 
 by “ the present situation V 1 The situation of the country, l 
 suppose, at the time when he wrote; and, though the “ reforma¬ 
 tion” had not then produced pauperism and misery and Debt 
 and taxes equal to the present, it was on the way to do it. But, 
 what does he mean by “public riches ?” The Catholic institu¬ 
 tions “ provided against the pressure of ibant amongst the people; 11 
 but, prevented the increase of “ public riches l 11 What, again I 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 109 
 
 ask, is the meaning; of the words, “ public riches V What is, 
 or ought to be the end of all government and of every institu- 
 tion? Why, the happiness of the people. But this man seems, 
 like Adam Smith, and, indeed, like almost every Scotch writer, 
 to have a notion, that there may be great public good , though 
 producing individual misery. They seem always to regard the 
 people as so many cattle, working for an indescribable some¬ 
 thing that they call “ the public The question with them, is, 
 not whether the people, for whose good all government is insti¬ 
 tuted, be well off, or wretched; but, whether,the “ public” gain, 
 or lose, money , or money's worth. I am able to show, and 1 
 shall show, that England was a greater country before the “ re¬ 
 formation” than since; that it was greater positively, and rela¬ 
 tively ; that its real wealth was greater. But, what we have, at 
 present, to observe, is that thus far, at any rate, the reformation 
 had produced general misery amongst the common people ; 
 and that, accordingly, complaints were heard from one end of 
 the kingdom to the other. 
 
 212. The Book of Common Prayer was to put an end to all 
 dissensions; but, its promulgation, and the consequent robbery 
 of the churches were followed by open insurrection, in many of 
 the counties, by battles and executions by martial law. The 
 whole kingdom was in commotion ; but, particularly, to the great 
 honour of those counties, in Devonshire- and Norfolk. In the 
 former county the insurgents' were superior in force to the hired 
 troops, and had besieged Exeter. LORD Russell was sent 
 against them, and, at last, reinforced by GERMAN TROOPS, 
 he defeated them, executed many by martial law, and most gal¬ 
 lantly hanged a priest on the top of a tower of his church ! This, 
 
 I suppose, Mr. Brougham reckons amongst those services of the 
 family of Russell, which he tells us, England can never repay! 
 In Norfolk, the insurrection was still more formidable; but was 
 finally suppressed by the aid of FOREIGN TROOPS, and was 
 also followed by the most barbarous executions. The people of 
 Devonshire complained of the alterations in religion; that, as 
 Dr. Heylevn (a Protestant divine) expresses it, “ that the free¬ 
 born commonalty was oppressed by a small number of gentry, 
 who glutted themselves with pleasures, while the poor commons, 
 wasted by daily labour, like pack horses, live in extreme slave¬ 
 ry ; and that holy rites, established by their fathers, were abo¬ 
 lished, and a new form of religion obtruded and they demand¬ 
 ed, that the mass and a part of the monasteries should be restor¬ 
 ed, and that priests should not be allowed to marry. Similar were 
 the complaints and the demands every where else. But, Cram¬ 
 mer’s Prayer Book, and the Church “ by law established,” back 
 <ed by foreign bayonets, finally triumphed, at least for the present, 
 
 10 
 
110 
 
 PROTESl'ANT REFORMATION. 
 
 and during 1 the remainder of this hypocrital, base, corrupt, and 
 tyrannical reign. 
 
 213. Thus arose the Protestant church, as by law established 
 Here we see its origin. Thus it was that it commenced its ca- 
 reer. How different, alas ! from the commencement of that 
 church of England which arose under Saint Austi.v at Canter¬ 
 bury, which had been cherished so carefully by Alfred the 
 Great, and under the wings of which, the people of England 
 had, for nine hundred years, seen their country the greatest in 
 the world, and had themselves lived in ease and plenty, and real 
 freedom, superior to those of all other nations ! 
 
 214. Somerset, who had brought his own brother to the block 
 in 1549, chiefly because he had opposed himself to his usurpa¬ 
 tions (though both were plunderers,) was, not long after the com¬ 
 mission of those cruelties, on the people, destined to come to that 
 block himself. Dudley, Earl of Warwick, who was his rival 
 in baseness and injustice, and his superior in talent, had out-in¬ 
 trigued him in the council; and, at last, he brought him to that 
 end which he so well merited. On what grounds this was done, 
 is wholly uninteresting. It was a set of most wicked men, cir¬ 
 cumventing, and if necessary, destroying each other; but it is 
 worthy of remark, that amongst the crimes alleged against this 
 great culprit, was, his having brought foreign troops into the 
 kingdom! This was, to be sure, rather ungrateful in the pious 
 reformers; for, it was those troops that established for them 
 their new religion. But, it was good to see them putting their 
 leader to death, actually cutting oft’his head, for having caused 
 their projects to succeed. It was, in plain words, a dispute about 
 the plunder. Somerset had got more than his brother-plunder¬ 
 ers deemed his share. He was building a palace for himself; and 
 if each plunderer could have had a palace, it would have been 
 peace amongst them; but, as this could not be, the rest called 
 him a “ traitor,” and, as the king, the Protestant St. Edward, 
 had signed the death-warrant of one uncle at the instigation of 
 another uncle ; he now signed the death-warrant of that other, 
 the “ Saint” himself, being, even now, only fifteen years of age ! 
 
 215. Warwick, who was now become Protector, was made 
 Duke of Northumberland, and got granted to him, the immense 
 estates of that ancient house, which had fallen into the hands of 
 the crown. This was, if possible, a more zealous Protestant 
 than the last Protector; that is to say, still more profligate, ra¬ 
 pacious, and cruel. The work of plundering the church went 
 on, until there remained scarcely any thing of the name of cler¬ 
 gy. Many parishes were, in all parts of the kingdom, united in 
 one, and having but one priest amongst them. But, indeed, 
 there were hardly any persons left, worthy of the name of cler 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 Ill 
 
 gy. All the good and all the learned had either been killed, 
 starved to death, banished, or had gone out of the country ; and 
 those who remained were, during this reign of mean plunder, 
 so stripped of their incomes, so pared down, that the parochial 
 clergy worked as carpenters, smiths, masons, and were not un- 
 frequently, menial servants in gentlemen’s houses. So that this 
 Church of England, “ as by law (and German troops) establish¬ 
 ed,” became the scorn, not only of the people of England, but 
 of all the nations of Europe. 
 
 216. The king, who was a poor sickly lad, seems to have had 
 no distinctive characteristic, except that of hatred to the Catho¬ 
 lics and their religion, in which hatred, Cranmer and others 
 had brought him up. His life was not likely to be long, and 
 Northumberland, who was now his keeper, conceived the pro 
 ject of getting the crown into his own family, a project quite wor 
 thy of a hero of the “ Reformation.” In order to carry this 
 project into effect, he married one of his sons, Lord Guilford 
 Dudley, to Lady Jane Gray, who, next after Mary and Eliza¬ 
 beth, and Mary Queen of Scotland, was heiress to the throne. 
 Having done this, he got Edward to make a will, settling the 
 crown on this Lady Jane, to the exclusion of his two sisters. The 
 advocates of the “ Reformation,” who, of course, praise this boy- 
 king, in whose reign the new church was invented, tell us long 
 stories about the way in which Northumberland persuaded 
 “ Saint Edward” to do this act of injustice, but, in all probabi¬ 
 lity, there is not a word of truth in the story. However, what 
 they say, is this: that Lady Jane was a sincere Protestant; that 
 the young king knew this; and that his anxiety for the security 
 of the Protestant-religion induced him to consent to Northum¬ 
 berland’s proposition. 
 
 217. The settlement met with great difficulty when it came to 
 be laid before the lawyers , who, some how or other, always con¬ 
 trived to keep their heads out of the halter. Even old Harry’s 
 judges used, when hard pressed, to refer him to the Parliament 
 for the committing of violations of Law. The Judges, the Lord 
 Chancellor, the Secretaries of Si* ^ the Privy Council; all were 
 afraid to put their names to this*? Jinsfer of the crown. The thing 
 was, however, at last accomplished, and with the signature of 
 Cranmer to it, though he, as one of the late king’s executors, 
 and the first upon that list, had sworn in the most solemn manner, 
 to maintain his will, according to which will, the two sisters, in 
 case of no issue by the brother, were to succeed that brother on 
 the throne. Thus, in addition to his fourth act of notorious per¬ 
 jury, this maker of the Book of Common Prayer, became clearly 
 guilty of high trtason. He now, at last, in spite of all his craft, 
 had woven his own haltejr, and that, too, beyond all doubt, for 
 the purpose of preserving his bishopric. The Princess Mary 
 
112 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 was next heir to the throne. He had divorced her mother; he had 
 been the principal agent in that unjust and most wicked transac- 
 tion ; and, besides, he knew that Mary was immoveably a Ca¬ 
 tholic, and that, of course, her accession must be the death of his 
 office and his church. Therefore, he now committed the great¬ 
 est crime known to the laws, and that, too, from the basest of 
 motives. 
 
 218. The king having made this settlement, and being kept 
 wholly in the hands of Northumberland, who had placed his 
 creatures about him, would naturally, as was said at the time, 
 not live long ! In short he died ou the 6th of July, 1553, in the 
 sixteenth year of his age, and the seventh of his reign, expiring 
 on the same day of the year that his savage father had brought 
 Sir Thomas More to the block. These were seven of the most 
 miserable and most inglorious years that England had ever 
 known. Fanaticism and roguery, hypocrisy and plunder, divid¬ 
 ed the country between them. The people were wretched be¬ 
 yond all description; from the plenty of Catholic times, they had 
 been reduced to general beggary ; and, then, in order to repress 
 this beggary, laws the most ferocious were passed to prevent 
 even starving creatures from asking alms. Abroad as well as 
 at home, the nation sunk in the eyes of the world. The town 
 of Boulogne in France, which had been won by Catholic Eng¬ 
 lishmen, the base Protestant rulers now, from sheer cowardice, 
 surrendered; and from one end of Europe to the other, were 
 heard jeering and scoffing at this formerly great and lofty na¬ 
 tion. Hume, who finds goodness in every one who was hostile 
 to the Catholic institutions, says, “ All English historians dwell 
 with pleasure on the excellencies of this young king, whom the 
 flattering promises of hope, joined to many real virtues, had 
 made an object of the most lender affections of the public. He 
 possessed ■mildness of disposition; a capacity to learn and to 
 judge, and attachment to equity and justice .” Of his mildness, 
 we have, I suppose, a proof in his assenting to the burning of 
 several Protestants, who did not protest in his way ; in his sign¬ 
 ing of the death warrants of his two uncles; and in his wish to 
 bring his sister Mary to trial for not conforming to what she 
 deemed blasphemy, and from doing which, he was deterred on¬ 
 ly by the menaces of the Emperor, her cousin. So much for his 
 mildness. As for his justice, who can doubt of that, who thinks 
 of his will to disinherit his two sisters, even after the judges had 
 unanimously declared to him, that it was contrary to law ? The 
 “ tender affection” that the people had for him, was, doubtless, 
 evinced by their rising in insurrection against his ordinances, 
 from one end of the kingdom to the other, and by their demand¬ 
 ing the restoration of that religion, which all his acts tended 
 wholly to extirpate. But, besides these internal proofs of the 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 113 
 
 falsehood of Hume’s description, Dr. Heylyn, who is, at least, 
 one of “ all the English historians,” and one, too, whom Hume 
 himself, refers to no less than twenty-four times in the part ofhis 
 history relating to this very reign, does not “ dwell with plea¬ 
 sure on the excellences of this young prince,” of whom he, in 
 the 4th paragraph of his preface, speaks thus: “ King Edward 
 whose death I cannot reckon for an infelicity to the church of 
 England; for, being ill-principled in himself, and easily inclin¬ 
 ed to embrace such counsels as were offered him, it is not to be 
 thought but that the rest of the bishopricks (before sufficient¬ 
 ly impoverished) would have followed that of Durham, and 
 the poor church be left as destitute as when she came into the 
 world in her natural nakedness.” Aye, but this was his great 
 merit in the eyes of Hume. He should have said so then, and 
 should have left his good character of tyrant in the egg, to rest 
 on his own opinion; and not have said, that “ all English histo¬ 
 rians dwelt with pleasure on his excellencies .” 
 
 219. The settlement of the crown had been kept a secret from 
 the people, and so was the death of the king for three whole days. 
 In the meanwhile Northumberland, seeing the death of the 
 young “ Saint” approaching, had, in conjunction, observe, with 
 Cranmer and the rest of his council, ordered the two princesses 
 to come near to London, under pretence that they might be at 
 h-and to comfort their brother; but with the real design of put¬ 
 ting them into prison the moment the breath should be out of his 
 body Traitors, foul conspirators, villains of all descriptions, 
 have this in common, that they, when necessary to their own in¬ 
 terest, are always ready to betray each other. Thus it happen¬ 
 ed here; for the Earl of Arundel, who was one of the council, 
 and who went with Dudley and others, on the tenth of July, to 
 kneel before Lady Jane, as Queen, had in the night of the sixth, 
 sent a secret messenger to Mary, who was no farther off than 
 Hoddesden, informing her of the death of her brother, and of 
 the whole of the plot against her Thus warned, she set off on 
 horseback, accompanied only by a few servants, to Kinninghali 
 in Norfolk, whence she proceeded to Framlingham, in Suffolk, 
 and thence issued her commands to the council to proclaim her 
 as their sovereign, hinting at, but not positively accusing them 
 with, their treasonable designs. They had, on the day before, 
 'proclaimed Lady Jane to be Queen! They had taken all sorts 
 of precautions to ensure their success: army, fleet, treasure, all 
 the powers of government were in their hands. They, therefore, 
 returned her a most insolent answer, and commanded her to sub¬ 
 mit, as a dutiful subject, to the lawful queen, at the bottom of 
 which command, Cranmer’s name stood first. 
 
 220. Honesty and sincerity exult to contemplate the misgiv¬ 
 ings. which, in a few hours afterwards, seized this band of al 
 
 10* 
 
114 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 most unparalleled villains. The nobility and gentry had in¬ 
 stantly flocked to the standard of Mary: and the people, even 
 in London, ivho were most infected with the pestiferous princi¬ 
 ples of the foreign miscreants that had been brought from the 
 continent to teach them the new religion, had native honesty 
 enough left to make them disapprove of this last and most dar¬ 
 ing of robberies. Ridley, the Protestant Bishop of London, 
 preached at Saint Pauls to the Lord Mayor, and a numerous as¬ 
 semblage, for the purpose of persuading them to take part against 
 Mary ; but it was seen that he preached in vain. Nortmmiber- 
 land himself, marched from London on the 13th of July, to at¬ 
 tack the Queen. But, in a few days, she was surrounded by 
 twenty or thirty thousand men, all volunteers in her cause, and 
 refusing pay. Before Northumberland reached Bury St. Ed¬ 
 munds, he began to despair; he marched to Cambridge, and 
 wrote to his brother conspirators for reinforcements. Amongst 
 these, dismay first, and then perfidy began to appear. In a few 
 days, these men who had been so audacious, and who had sworn 
 solemnly to uphold the cause of Queen Jane, sent Northumber¬ 
 land an order to disband his army, while they themselves, pro¬ 
 claimed Queen Mary, amidst the unbounded applause of the peo¬ 
 ple. 
 
 221. The master-plotter had disbanded his army, or, rather, 
 it had deserted him before the order of the council reached him. 
 This was the age of “reformation” and of baseness. Seeing 
 himself abandoned, he, by the advice of Dr. Sands, the Vice 
 Chancellor of the University, who, only four days before, had 
 preached against Mary, went to the market-place of Cambridge, 
 and proclaimed her Queen, tossing, says Stowe, “ his cap into 
 the air, in token of hisjioy and satisfaction,” In a few hours af¬ 
 terwards, he was arrested by the Queen’s order, and that, too, 
 by his brother conspirator, the EarJ of Arundel, who had been 
 one of the very first to kneel before Lady Jane 1 No reign, no 
 age, no country, ever witnessed rapacity, hypocrisy, meanness, 
 baseness, perfidy, such as England witnessed in those who were 
 the destroyers of the Catholic, and the founders of the Protes¬ 
 tant, church. This Dudley, who had for years been a plunder¬ 
 er of the church ; who had been a promoter of every ruffian-like 
 measure against those who adhered to the religion of his fathers ; 
 who had caused a transfer of the crown, because, as he alleged, 
 the accession of Mary would endanger the Protestant religion ; 
 this very man, when he came to receive justice on the block, con 
 fessed his belief in the Catholic faith; and, which is more, ex 
 horted the nation to return to it. He, according to Dr. Heylyn, 
 (a Protestant, mind) exhorted them “ To stand to the religion 
 of their ancestors, rejecting that of later date, which had occa¬ 
 sioned all the misery of the foregoing thirty years ; and that, if 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 115 
 
 they desired to present their souls unspotted before God, and 
 xcere truly affected to their country, they should expel the preachers 
 of the reformed religion. For himself, (he said) being - blinded 
 by ambition, he had made a rack of his conscience by temporiz¬ 
 ing - , and so acknowledged the justice of his sentence.” Fox, au¬ 
 thor of the lying “ Book of Martyrs,' 1 ' 1 of whose lies we shall see 
 more by-and-bye, asserts that Dudley made This confession in 
 consequence of a promise of pardon. But, when he came on the 
 scaffold, he knew that he was not to be pardoped: and besides, 
 he himself expressly declared the contrary at his execution ; and 
 told the people that he had not been moved by any one to make 
 it, and had not done it from any hope of saving his life How¬ 
 ever, we have yet to see Cranmer himself recant, and to see the 
 whole band of Protestant plunderers on their knees before the. 
 Pope’s legate, confessing their sins of heresy and sacrilege, and 
 receiving absolution for their offences! 
 
 222. Thus ended this reign of “ reformation,” plunder, wretch¬ 
 edness and disgrace. Three times the form of the new worship 
 was changed, and yet those who adhered to the old worship, or 
 who went beyond the new w'orship, were punished with the ut¬ 
 most severity. The nation became every day more and more 
 despised abroad, and more and more distracted and miserable 
 at home. The church, “ as by law established,” arose and was 
 enforced under two protectors, or chi?f ministers, both of whom 
 deservedly suffered death as traitors. Its principal author was 
 a man who had sent both Protestants and Catholics to the stake; 
 who had burnt people for adhering to the Pope, others for not 
 believing in transubstantiation, others for believing in it, and 
 who now burnt others for disbelieving in it for reasons different 
 from his own; a man, who now openly professed to disbelieve in 
 that, for not believing in which, he had burnt many of his fellow- 
 creatures, and who, after this, most solemnly declared, that his 
 own belief was that of these very persons ! As this church “ by 
 law established,” advanced, all the remains of Christian charity 
 vanished before it. The indigent, whom the Catholic church 
 had so tenderly gathered under her wings, were now, merely 
 for asking alms, branded with red-hot irons and made slaves, 
 though no provision was made to prevent them from perishing 
 from hunger and cold; and England, so long famed as the land 
 of hospitality, generosity, ease, plenty, and security to person 
 and property, became, under a Protestant church, a scene of 
 repulsive selfishness, of pack-horse toil, of pinching want, and 
 of rapacity and plunder and tyranny that made the very names 
 of law and justice a mockery. 
 
116 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 LETTER VIII. 
 
 Mary’s accession to the Throne.—Her mild and benevo¬ 
 lent laws.—The nation reconciled to the Church.— 
 The Queen’s great generosity and piety.—Her marriage 
 with Philip. —Fox’s “Martyrs” 
 
 Kensington, 30th June, 1825. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 223. We are now entering upon that reign, the punishments 
 inflicted during which, have furnished such a handle to the ca¬ 
 lumniators of the Catholic church, who have left no art untried 
 to exaggerate those punishments in the first place, and in the 
 second place, to ascribe them to the Catholic Religion, keeping 
 out of sight, all the while} the thousand times greater mass of 
 cruelty occasioned by Protestants in this kingdom. Of all cru~ 
 elties I disapprove. I disapprove, also, of all corporal and pe¬ 
 cuniary punishments, on the score of religion. Far be it from 
 me, therefore, to defend all the punishments inflicted, on this 
 score, in the reign of Queen Mary ; but, it will be my duty to 
 show,ytrs£, that the mass of punishment then inflicted, on this ac¬ 
 count, has been monstrously exaggerated ; second, that the cir¬ 
 cumstances under which they were inflicted found more apolo¬ 
 gy for the severity, than the circumstances under which the Pro¬ 
 testant punishments were inflicted; thirdly, that they were in 
 amount, as a single grain of wheat is to a whole bushel, compar¬ 
 ed with the mass of punishments under the Protestant church, 
 “ as by law established lastly, that, be they what they might, 
 it is a base perversion of reason to ascribe them to the principles 
 of the Catholic religion; and that, as to the Queen herself, she 
 was one of the most virtuous of human beings, and was render¬ 
 ed miserable, not by her own disposition or misdeeds, but by 
 the misfortune and misery entailed on her by her two immediate 
 predecessors, who had uprooted the institutions of the country, 
 who had plunged the kingdom into confusion, and who had left 
 no choice but that of making severe examples, or, of being an 
 encourager of, and a participator in, heresy, plunder, and sa¬ 
 crilege. Her reign, our deceivers have taught us to call the 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 117 
 
 reign of “ BLOODY QUEEN MARYwhile they have taught 
 us to call that of her sister, the “ GOLDEN DAYS OF GOOD 
 QUEEN BESS.” They have taken good care never to tell us, 
 that, for every drop of blood that Mary shed, Elizabeth shed a 
 pint; that the former gave up every fragment of the plunder of 
 which the deeds of her predecessors had put in*her possession, 
 and that the latter resumed this plunder again, and took from 
 he poor, every pittance which had, by oversight, been left them 
 —that the former never changed her religion, and that the lat 
 ter changed from Catholic to Protestant, then to Catholic again, 
 and then back again to Protestant; that the former punished peo¬ 
 ple for departing from that religion in which she and they and 
 their fathers had been born, and to which she had always adher¬ 
 ed ; and that the latter punished people for not departing from the 
 religion of her and their fathers, .and which religion, too, she 
 herself professed, and openly lived in, even at the time of her 
 coronation. Yet we have been taught to call the former “ bloody ” 
 and the latter “ good !" How have we been deceived! And is 
 it not time, then, that this deception, so injurious to our Catho¬ 
 lic fellow-subjects, and so debasing to ourselves, should cease 1 
 It. is, perhaps, too much to hope, that I shall be able to make it 
 cease ; but, towards accomplishing this great and most desirable 
 object, I shall do something, at any rate, by a plain and true 
 account of the principal transactions of the reign of Mary. 
 
 224. The Queen, w'ho as we have seen in paragraph 219, was 
 at Framlingham, in Suffolk, immediately set off for London, 
 where, having been greeted on the road with the strongest de¬ 
 monstrations of joy at her accession, she arrived on the 31st of 
 July, 1553. As she approached London, the throngs thicken¬ 
 ed; Elizabeth, who had kept cautiously silent while the issue 
 was uncertain, went out to meet her, and the two sifters, riding 
 on horseback, entered the city, the houses being decorated, the 
 streets strewed with flowers, and the people dressed in their gay 
 est clothes. She was crowned soon afterwards, in the most 
 splendid manner, and, after the Catholic ritual, by Gardiner, 
 who had, as we have seen, opposed Cranmer’s new church, and 
 whom she found a prisoner in the Tower, he having been de¬ 
 prived of his Bishopric of Winchester; but, whom we are to see 
 one of the great actors in restoring the Catholic religion.—- 
 The joy of the people was boundless. It was a coronation of 
 greater splendour, and more universal joy than ever had before 
 been witnessed. This is agreed on all hands. And this fact 
 gives the lie to Hume, who would have us believe that th e people 
 did not like the Queen’s principles. This fact has reason on its 
 * side as well as historical authority; for, was it not natural that 
 the people, who, only three years before, had actually risen in 
 insurrection in all parts of the kingdom against the new church 
 
118 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 and its authors, should be half mad with joy at the accession of 
 a Queen, who, they were sure would put down that church, and 
 put down those who had quelled them by the aid of German 
 troops 1 
 
 225, Mary began her reign by acts the most just and benefi¬ 
 cent. Generously disregarding herself, her ease, and her means 
 of splendour, she abolished the debased currency which her fa¬ 
 ther had introduced, and her brother had made still baser; she 
 paid the debts due by the crown ; and she largely remitted taxes 
 at the same time. But that which she had most at heart, was 
 the restoration of that religion, under the influence of which, the 
 kingdom had been so happy and so great for so many ages, and 
 since the abolition of which, it had known nothing but discord, 
 disgrace, and misery. There were in her way great obstacles; 
 for though the pernicious principles of the German, and Dutch, 
 and Swiss reformers had not, even yet, made much progress 
 amongst the people, except in London, which was the grand 
 scene of the operations of those hungry and fanatical adventur¬ 
 ers, there were the plunderers to deal with ; and these plunder¬ 
 ers had power. It is easy to imagine which, indeed, was the un¬ 
 doubted fact, that the English people, who had risen in insurrec¬ 
 tion, in all parts of the kingdom, against Cranmer’s new church; 
 who had demanded the restoration of the mass and of part, 
 at least, of the monasteries, and who had been silenced only by 
 German bayonets, and halters and gibbets, following martial 
 law; it is easy to imagine, that this same people would, in only 
 three years afterwards, hail, with joy indescribable, the pros¬ 
 pect of seeing the new church put down, and the ancient one 
 restored; and that too, under a Queen, on whose constancy and 
 piety and integrity they could so firmly rely. But, the plunder 
 had been so immense, the plunderers were so numerous, they 
 were so powerful, and there were so few men of family of any 
 account, who had not participated, in one way or another, in 
 deeds hostile to the Catholic church, that the enterprise of the 
 Queen was full of difficulty. As to Cranmer’s church “ by law 
 established,” that was easily disposed of. The gold and silver 
 and cups and candlesticks, and other things, of which tlw altar 
 robbers of young “ Saint Edward’s” reign had despoiled the 
 churches, could not, indeed, be restored; but, the altars them 
 selves could, and speedily were, and the tables which had been 
 put in their stead, and the married priests along with them, were 
 soon seen no longer to offend the eyes of the people. It is curi¬ 
 ous to observe, how tender-hearted Hume is upon this subject. 
 H e says, “ Could any notion of law, justice, or reason, be attend¬ 
 ed to, where superstition predominates, the priests would never- 
 have been expelled for their past marriages, which, at that time, 
 were permitted by the 'aws of the kingdom .” I wonder why it 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 1 19 
 
 never occurred to him to observe, that monks and nuns ought 
 not, then, to have been expelled ! Were not their institutions 
 ** permitted by the laws of the kingdom ” ? Aye, and had been 
 permitted by those laws for nine hundred years, and guaranteed 
 too by Magna Charta. He applauds the expelling of them ; but 
 this “ new thing,” though only of three years and a half stand¬ 
 ing, and though “ established” under a boy-king, who was under 
 two protectors, each of whom was justly beheaded for high trea¬ 
 son, and under a council who were all conspirators against the 
 lawful sovereign; these married priests, the most of whom had, 
 like Luther, Cranmer, Knox, Hooper, and other great “ Re¬ 
 formers,” broken their vows of celibacy, and were, of course, 
 perjurers ; no law was to be repealed, however contrary to pub¬ 
 lic good such law might be, if the repeal injured the interest of 
 such men as these! The Queen had, however, too much justice 
 to think thus, and these apostates were expelled, to the great 
 joy of the people, many of whom had been sabred by German 
 troops, because they demanded, amongst other things, that 
 priests might not be permitted to marry. The Catholic bishops, 
 who had been turned out by Cranmer, were restored, and his 
 new bishops were, of course, turned out. Cranmer himself 
 was, in a short time, deprived of his ill-gotten See, and was in 
 prison, and most justly, as a traitor. The mass was, in all parts 
 of the country, once more celebrated, the people were no longer 
 burnt with red-hot irons and made slaves merely for asking alms, 
 and they began to hope, that England would be England again, 
 and that hospitality and charity would return. 
 
 226. But, there were the plunderers to deal with * x And, now, 
 we are about to witness a scene, which, were not its existence so 
 well attested, must pass for the wildest of romance. What? 
 That parliament, who had declared Cranmer’s divorce of 
 Catherine to be lawful, and who had enacted that Mary was a 
 bastard, acknowledged that same Mary to be the lawful heir to 
 the throne! That Parliament which had abolished the Catholic 
 worship and created the Protestant worship, on the ground that 
 the former was idolatrous and damnable, and the latter agree¬ 
 able to the will of God, abolish the latter and restore the for¬ 
 mer! What? Do these things ? And that, too, without any 
 force ; without being compelled to do them ? No i not exactly 
 so: for it had the people to fear, a vast majority of whom were 
 cordially with the Queen as far as related to these matters, res¬ 
 pecting which it is surprising what dispatch was made. The late 
 King died only in July, and, before the end of the next November , 
 all the work of Cranmer, as to the divorce as well as to the ivor- 
 ship, was completely overset, and that, too, by Acts of the very 
 Parliament who had confirmed the one and “ established the 
 other. The first of these acts declared, that, Henry and Cathe- 
 
120 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 rine had been lawfully married, and it laid all the blame upon 
 Cranmer by name! The second Act called the Protestant 
 Church, “ as by law established,” a “ new thing imagined by a 
 few singular opinioits” though the parliament, when it estab¬ 
 lished it, asserted it to have come from “ the Holy Ghost.” What 
 was now said of it was true enough : but it might have been ad¬ 
 ded, established by German bayonets, %'he great inventor, 
 Cranmer, who was, at last, in a fair way of receiving the just 
 reward of his numerous misdeeds, could only hear of the over¬ 
 throw of his work; for, having, though clearly as guilty of high 
 treason as Dudley himself, been, as yet, only confined to his 
 palace at Lambeth, and hearing that mass had been celebrated 
 in his Cathedral church of Canterbury, he put forth a most in¬ 
 flammatory and abusive declaration (which, mind, he afterwards 
 recanted,) for which declaration, as well as for his treason, he 
 was committed to the Tower, where he lay at the time when 
 these Acts were passed. But, the new Church required no law 
 to abolish it. It was, in fact, abolished by the general feeling 
 of the nation; and, as wc shall see in the next Number, it ie» 
 quired rivers of blood to re-establish it in the reign ofElizabeth, 
 Hume following Fox, the “ Martyr”-man, complains bitterly of 
 the “court” for its “contempt of the laws, in celebrating, before 
 “ the two Houses, at the opening of the Parliament, a mass of La- 
 “ tin, with all the ancient rites and ceremonies, though abolished 
 ‘by Act of Parliament .” Abolished! Why, so had Cromwell 
 and his canting crew abolished the kingly government by Act 
 of Parliament, and by the bayonet; and yet this did not induce 
 Charles to wait for a repeal before he called himself king. Nor 
 did the bringersover of the “deliverer,” William, wait for an Act 
 of Parliament to authorize them to introduce the said “ deliver¬ 
 er.” The “ new thing” fell of itself. It had been forced upon 
 the people, and they hated it. 
 
 227. But, when the question came, whether the Parliament 
 should restore the Papal Supremacy, the plunder was at stake; 
 for, to take the Church property was sacrilege, and, if the Pope 
 regained his power in the kingdom, he might insist on restitu 
 tion. The greater part of this property had been seized on 
 eighteen years before. In many cases it had been divided and 
 subdivided; in many, the original grantees were dead. The 
 common people, too, had, in many cases, become dependents on 
 the new proprietors; and, besides, they could not so easily 
 trace the connexion between their faith and that supremacy, as 
 they could between their faith and the mass and the sacraments. 
 The Queen, therefore, though she most anxiously wished to 
 avoid giving, in any way whatever, her sanction to the plunder 
 was reduced to the necessity of risking a civil war for the Popes' 
 supremacy ; to leave her kingdom unreconciled to the Church; 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 121 
 
 and to keep to herself the title of Head of the Church, to her so . 
 haieful; or to make a compromise with the plunderers. She 
 was induced to prefer the latter; though it is by no means 
 certain that civil war would not have been better for the coun¬ 
 try, even if it had ended in the triumph of the plunderers, which, 
 in all human probability, it would not. But, observe in how 
 forlorn a state, as to this question, she was placed. There was 
 scarcely a nobleman, or gentleman of any note, in her king¬ 
 dom, who had not, in one way or another, soiled his hands with 
 the plunder. The Catholic bishops, all but Fisher, had as¬ 
 sented to the abolition of the Pope’s supremacy. Bishop Gar 
 Diner, who was now her High Chancellor, was one of these, 
 though he had been deprived of his bishoprick, and imprisoned 
 in the Tower, because he opposed Cranmer’s further projects. 
 These Catholic Bishops, and Gardiner especially, must natu 
 rally wish to get over this matter as quietly as possible; for, 
 how was he to advise the Queen to risk a civil war for the resto¬ 
 ration of that, the abolition of which he had so fully assented 
 to, and so strenuously supported? And how was she to do any 
 thing without councillors of some sort ? 
 
 228. Nevertheless the Queen, whose zeal was equal to her 
 sincerity, was bent on the restoration; and, therefore, a com¬ 
 promise with the plunderers was adopted. Nov), then, it was 
 fully proved to all the world, and novj this plundered nation, 
 w ho had been reduced to the greatest misery by what had been 
 impudently called the “ Reformation,” saw as clearly as they 
 saw the light of day, that all those who had abetted the “ Re¬ 
 formation ;” that all the railings against the Pope ; that all the 
 accusations against the monks and nuns ; that all the pretences 
 of abuses in the Catholic Church ; that all the confiscations, 
 sackings, and bloodshed; that all these, from first to last, had 
 proceeded from the love of plunder; for, now, the two Houses 
 of Parliament, who had, only about three or four years before, 
 established Cranmer’s Church, and declared it to be “ the 
 work of the Holy Ghost;" now these pious “ Reformation” 
 men, having^rs? made a firm bargain to keep the plunder, con- , 
 fessed (to use the words of Hume) “ that they had been guilty 
 
 “ of a most horrible defection from the true Church; professed 
 “ their sincere repentance for their past transgressions; and de- 
 “ dared their resolution to repeal all laws enacted inprejudict 
 “ of the Pope's authority Are the people of England aware of 
 
 this ? No ; not one man out of fifty thousand. These, let it be 
 remembered, were the men who made the Protestant religion in 
 England! 
 
 229. But this is a matter of too much importance to be dis¬ 
 missed without the mention of some particulars The Queen 
 had not about her one single man of any eminence, who had 
 
 11 
 
122 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 not, in some degree, departed from the straight path, during 
 one or the other, or both, of the two last reigns. But there was 
 Cardinal Pole, of whom, and of the butchery of whose aged 
 and brave mother, we have seen an account in paragraph’ 115. 
 He still remained*on the continent; but now he could with 
 safety return to his native country, on which the fame of his 
 talents and virtues reflected so much honour. The Cardinal 
 was appointed by the Pope to be his Legate, or representative, 
 in England. The Queen had been married on the 25th of July, 
 1554, to Philip, Prince of Spain, son and heir of the Emperor 
 Charles V., of which marriage I shall speak more fully by* 
 and-by. 
 
 230. In November, the same year, a Parliament was called, 
 and was opened with a most splendid procession of the two 
 houses, closed by the King and Queen, the first on horseback, 
 the last in a litter, dressed in robes of purple. Their first act 
 was a repeal of the attainder of Pole, passed in the reign of the 
 cruel Henry VIII. While this was going on, many noblemen 
 and gentlemen had gone to Brussels, to conduct Pole to Eng¬ 
 land ; and it is worth observing, that amongst these was that 
 Sir William Cecil who was afterwards so bitter and cruel an 
 enemy of the Catholics and their religion, in the reign of Eliza¬ 
 beth. Pole was received at Dover with every demonstration of 
 public joy and exultation ; and, before he reached Gravesend, 
 where he took water for Westminster, the gentlemen of the 
 country had flocked to his train, to. the number of nearly two 
 thousand horsemen. Here is a fact, which, amongst thousands 
 of others, show's what the populousness and opulence of England 
 then were, 
 
 231. On the 29th of November the two houses petitioned the 
 King and Queen. In this petition they expressed their deep^re- 
 gret at having been guilty of defection from the Church ; and 
 prayed their Majesties, who had not participated in the svi, to 
 intercede with the Holy Father, the Pope, for their forgiveness, 
 and for their re-admission into the fold of Christ. The next 
 
 « day, the Queen being seated on the throne, having the King on 
 her left, and Pole, the Pope’s legate, on her right, the Lord 
 High Chancellor, Bishop Gardiner, read the petition ; the King 
 and Queen then spoke to Pole, and he, at the close of a long 
 speech, gave, in the name of the Pope, to the two Houses and 
 to the w hole nation, absolution in the name of the Father, Son 
 and Holy Ghost, at which words the members of the two Houses, 
 being on their knees, made the hall resound with AMEN ! 
 
 232 Thus was England once more a Catholic country. She 
 was restored to the “fold of Christ”; but the fold had been 
 plundered of its hospitality and charity ; and the plunderers, 
 before they pronounced the “ amen,” had taken care, that the 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 123 
 
 plunder should not be restored. The Pope had hesitated to 
 consent to this; Cardinal Pole, who was a man full of justice, 
 had hesitated still longer ; but, as we have seen before, Gardi¬ 
 ner, who was now the Queen’s prime minister, and, indeed, all 
 her council, were for the compromise; and, therefore, these 
 “ amen" people, while they confessed that they had sinned by 
 that defection, in virtue of which defection, and of that alone, 
 they got the property of the Church and the poor; while they 
 prayed for absolution for that sin ; while they rose from their 
 knees to join the Queen in singing Te Deum in thanksgiving 
 for that absolution; while they were doing these things, they 
 enacted, that all the holders of Church properly should keep it, 
 and that any person who should attempt to molest or disturb 
 them therein should be deemed guilty of preemunire, and be 
 punished accordingly! 
 
 233. It, doubtless, went to the heart of the Queen to assent to 
 this act, which was the very icorsl deed of her whole reign, the 
 monstrously exaggerated fires of Smithfield not excepted. We 
 have seen how she was situated as to her councillors, and parti¬ 
 cularly as to Gardiner, who, besides being a most zealous and 
 active minister, was a man of the greatest talents. We have 
 seen, that there w r as scarcely a man of any note, who had not, 
 first or last, partook of the plunder ; but still, great as her diffi¬ 
 culty certainly was, she would have done better to follow the 
 dictates of her own mind, insisting upon doing what was right , 
 and leaving the consequences to God, as she had so nobly done, 
 when Cranmer and the rest of the base council of Edward VI., 
 commanded her to desist from hearing mass, and most cruelly 
 took her chaplains from her. 
 
 234. However, she was resolved to keep none of the plunder 
 herself. Old Harry, as “ head of the Church ,” had taken to 
 hiffiself the tenths an d first fruits; that is to say. the tenth part 
 of the annual worth of each church benefice and the first whole 
 year’s income of each. These had, of course, been kept by 
 King Edward. Then there were some of the Church estates, 
 some of the hospitals, and other things, and these amounting to 
 a large sum altogether, that still belonged to the crown ; and of 
 which the Queen was, of course, the possessor. In November, 
 1555, she gave up to the Church the tenths and first fruits , 
 which, together with the tithes, which her two immediate prede¬ 
 cessors had seized on and kept, were worth about 63,000/, a 
 year in money of that day, and were equal to about a million a 
 year of our present money 1 Have we ever heard of any other 
 sovereign doing the like? “ Good Queen Bess” we shall find 
 taking them back again to herself; and, though we shall find 
 Queen Anne giving them up to the Church, we are to bear in 
 mind, that, in Mary’s days, the Crown and its officers, ambassa- 
 
 
124 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 dors, judges, pensioners, and all employed by it, were supported 
 out of the landed estate of the Crown itself, the remains of which 
 estatewe nowsee in thepilifulrestof “ Crown-lands.” Taxes were 
 never, in'those days, called for, but for wars , and other really 
 national purposes; and Mary was Queen two years and a half, 
 before she imposed upon her people a single farthing of tax in 
 any shape wha'tever ! So that this act of surrendering the tenths 
 and first fruits was the effect of her generosity and piety; and 
 of hers alone too; for it was done against the remonstrances of 
 her council, and it was not without great opposition that the bill 
 passed in parliament, where it was naturally feared that this 
 just act of the Queen would awaken the people’s hatred of the 
 plunderer’s. But the Queen persevered, saying, that she would 
 be “ Defender of the Fdith” in reality, and not merely in name. 
 This was the woman; whom we have been taught to call “ the 
 Bloody Queen Mary”! 
 
 235. The Queen did not stop here, but proceeded to restore 
 all the Church and Abbey lands, which were in her possession, 
 being, whatever might be the consequence to her, firmly re¬ 
 solved not to be a possessor of the plunder. Having called 
 some members of her council together, she declared her resolu¬ 
 tion to them, and bade them prepare an account of those lands 
 and possessions, that she might know what measures to adopt 
 for the putting of her intention in execution. Her intention w as 
 to apply the revenues, as nearly as possible, to their ancient 
 purposes. She began with Westminster Abbey, which had, in 
 the year 610, been the site of a church immediately after the 
 introduction of Christianity by St. Austin, which church had 
 been destroyed by the Danes, and, in 958, restored by King 
 Edgar and St, Dunstan, who placed twelve Benedictine monks 
 in it; and which became, under Edward the Confessor, in 1049, 
 a noble and richly endowed abbey, which, when plundered and 
 suppressed by Henry, had revenues to the amount of 3,977/. a 
 year of good old rent, in money of that day, and, therefore, equal 
 to about eighty thousand pounds a year of money of this day ! 
 Little of this, however, remained, in all probability, to the 
 Queen, the estates having, in great part, been parcelled out 
 amongst the plunderers of the two last reigns. But, whatever 
 there remained to her she restored; and Westminster Abbey once 
 more saw a convent of Benedictine monks within its w’alls. She 
 next restored the Friary at Greenwich, to which had belonged 
 friars Pkyto and Elstovv, whom w r e have seen, in paragraphs 
 81 and 82, so nobly pleading, before the tyrant’s face, the cause 
 of her injured mother, for which they had felt the fury of that 
 ferocious tyrant. She re-established the Black Friars in Lon¬ 
 don. She restored the Nunnery at Sion near Brentford, on the 
 spot where Siou-House now stands. At Sheen she restored the 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 12S 
 
 Priory. She restored and liberally endowed the Hospital of 
 St. John, Smilhjiefd. She re-established the Hospital in the 
 Savoy , for the-benefit of the poor, and allotted to it a suitable 
 yearly revenue out of her own purse ; and, as her example 
 would naturally have great effect, it is, as Dr. Heylyn (a Protes¬ 
 tant, and a great enemy of her memory) observes, “ hard to say 
 “ how far the nobility and gentry might have done the like, if 
 “ the Queen had lived some few years longer.” 
 
 236. These acts were so laudable, so unequivocally good, so 
 clearly the effect of justice, generosity and charity, in the Queen, 
 that, coming before us, as they do, in company with great zeal 
 for the Catholic religion, we are naturally curious to hear what 
 remarks they bring from the unfeeling and malignant Hume. 
 Of her own free will, and even against the wish of very power¬ 
 ful men, she gave up, in this way, a yearly revenue of probably 
 not less than a million and a half of pounds of our present mo¬ 
 ney. And for what ? Because she held it unjustly ; because it 
 was plunder; because it had been taken to the crown in viola¬ 
 tion of Magna Charta and all the laws and usages of the realm ; 
 because she hoped to be able to make a beginningin the restor¬ 
 ing of that hospitality and charity which her predecessors had 
 banished from the land; and because her conscience, as she 
 herself declared, forbade her to retain these ill-gotten posses¬ 
 sions, valuing, as she did (she told her council), “ her conscience 
 more than ten kingdoms.” Was there ever a more praise-wor 
 thy act? And were there ever motives more excellent? Yet 
 Hume, who exults in the act which the plunderers insisted on, 
 to secure their plunder, calls this noble act of the Queen an “ im¬ 
 pudent’' one, and ascribes it solely to the influence of the new 
 Pope, who, he tells us, told her ambassadors, that the English 
 would never have the doors of Paradise opened to them, unless 
 the whole of the Church property was restored. How false this 
 is, in spite of Hume’s authorities, is clear from this undeniable 
 fact; namely, that she gave the Tenths and First Fruits to the 
 Bishops and Priests of the Church in England, and not to the. 
 Pope , to whom they were formerly paid. This, therefore, is a 
 malignant misrepresentation. Then again, he says, that the 
 Pope’s remonstrances on this score, had “little influence with 
 the nation.” With the plunderers , he means; for, he has been 
 ibliged to confess, that, in all parts of th£ country, the people, in 
 Edward’s reign, demanded a restoration of a part of the monas¬ 
 teries ; and, is it not clear, then, that they must have greatly re¬ 
 joiced to see their sovereign make a beginning in that restora¬ 
 tion ? But, it was his business to lessen, as much as possible, the 
 merit of these generous and pious acts of this basely calumni¬ 
 ated Queen. 
 
 237. Events soon proved to this just and good, but singular 
 
 11* 
 
126 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 ly unfortunate Queen, that she would have done better to risk a 
 civil war against the plunderers than assent to the Act of Par¬ 
 liament by which was secured to them the quiet possession of 
 their plunder. Her generous example had no effect upon them ; 
 but, on the contrary, made them dislike her, because it expos¬ 
 ed them to odium, presenting a contrast with their own conduct, 
 so much to their disadvantage. From this cause, more than 
 from any other, arose those troubles which harassed her during 
 the remainder of her short reign. 
 
 238. She had not b°en many months on the throne before a 
 rebellion was raised against her, instigated by the “Reforma¬ 
 tion” preachers, who had bawled in favour of Lady Jane Grey, 
 but who now discovered, amongst other things, that it was con¬ 
 trary to God’s word to be governed by a woman. The fighting 
 rebels were defeated, and the leaders executed, and, at the same 
 time, the Lady Jane herself, who had been convicted of high 
 treason, who had been kept in prison, but whose life had hither¬ 
 to been spared, and would evidently still have been spared, if it 
 had not manifestly tended to keep alive the hopes of the trai¬ 
 tors and disaffected. And, as this Queen has been called “the 
 bloody ,” is another instance to be found of so much lenity shown 
 towards one, who had been guilty of treason to the extent of ac¬ 
 tually proclaiming herself the sovereign ? There was another 
 rebellion afterwards, which was quelled in like manner, and was 
 followed by the execution of the principal traitors, who had 
 been abetted by a Protestant faction in France, if not by the 
 government of that country, which was bitterly hostile towards 
 the Queen on account of her marriage with Philip, the Prince 
 of Spain, which marriage became a great subject of invective 
 and false accusation with the Protestants and disaffected of all 
 sorts. 
 
 239. The Parliament, almost immediately after her accession, 
 advised her to marry, but not to marry a foreigner. How 
 strangely our taste is changed! The English had always a 
 deep-rooted prejudice against foreigners, till, for pure love of 
 the Protestant religion, they looked out for, and soon felt the 
 sweets of one who began the work of funding , and of making 
 national debts ! The Queen, however, after great deliberation 
 determined to marry Philip, who was son and heir of the Em¬ 
 peror Charles V., and who, though a widower, and having chil¬ 
 dren by his first wife, w^as still much younger than the Queen, 
 who was now (in July, 1554,) in the 39th year of her age, while 
 Philip was only 27. Philip arrived at Southampton in July 1554, 
 escorted by the combined fleets of England, Spain, and the Ne¬ 
 therlands ; and on the 25th of that month, the marriage took 
 place in the Cathedral of Winchester, the ceremony being per 
 formed by Gardiner, who was the bishop of the See, and being 
 
 i 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 127 
 
 attended by great numbers of nobles from all parts of christen* 
 dom. To show how little reliance is to be placed, on Hume, I 
 will here notice, that he says the marriage took place at West¬ 
 minster, and to this adds many facts equally false. His account 
 of the whole of this transaction is a mere romance, made up 
 from Protestant writers, even whose accounts he has shameful¬ 
 ly distorted to the prejudice of the views and character of the 
 Queen. 
 
 240. As things then stood, sound and evident good to Eng¬ 
 land dictated this match. Leaving out Elizabeth, the next 
 heir to the throne was Mary Queen of Scots, and she was be¬ 
 trothed to the Dauphin of France; so that England might fall 
 to the lot of the French King: and, as to Elizabeth, even sup¬ 
 posing her to survive the Queen, she now stood bastardized by 
 two Acts of Parliament; for the Act which had just been passed, 
 declaring Catharine to be the lawful wife of her father, made 
 her mother (what indeed Cranmer had declared her) an adul- 
 tress in law, as she was in fact. Besides, if France and Scotland 
 were evidently likely to become the patrimony of one and the 
 same prince, it was necessary that England should take steps 
 for strengthening herself also in the way of preparation. Such 
 was the policy that dictated this celebrated match, which the 
 historical calumniators of Mary have attributed to the worst and 
 most low and disgusting of motives ; in which, however, they 
 have only followed the example of the malignant traitors of the 
 times we are referring to, it being only to be lamented that they 
 were not then alive to share in their fate. 
 
 241. Nothing ever was, nothing could be, more to the honour 
 of England than every part of this transaction ; yet, did it form 
 the pretences of the traitors of that day, who, for the obvious 
 reasons mentioned in the last paragraph, were constantly en¬ 
 couraged and abetted by France, and as constantly urged on 
 by the disciples of Crammer and his crew of German and Dutch 
 teachers. When the rebels had, at one time, previous to Mary’s 
 marriage, advanced even to London, she went to the Guildhall, 
 where she told the citizens, that, if she thought the marriage 
 were injurious to her people, or to the honour of the stale , she 
 would not assent to it; and that, if it should not appear to the 
 Parliament to be for the benefit of the whole kingdom, she would 
 never marry at all. “ Wherefore,” said she, “ stand fast against 
 these rebels, your enemies and mine ; fear them not; for I assure 
 ye, that I fear them nothing at all.” Thus she left them, leav¬ 
 ing the hall resounding with their acclamations. 
 
 242. When the marriage articles appeared, it was shown, that, 
 on this occasion, as on all others, the Queen had kept her word 
 most religiously: for even Hume is obliged to confess, that these 
 articles were “ as favourable as possible for the interest and seen 
 
128 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 rity and even the grandeur of England.” What more was want¬ 
 ed, then? And if, as Hume says was the case, “these articles 
 gave no satisfaction to the nation ,” all that we can sav is, that 
 the nation was very unreasonable and ungrateful. This is, how¬ 
 ever, a great falsehood ; for, what Hume here ascribes to the 
 whole nation, he ought to have confined to the plunderers and 
 the fanatics, whom, throughout his romance of this reign, he al¬ 
 ways calls the nation. The articles quoted from Rymer by H ume 
 himself, were that, though Philip should have the title of king, 
 the administration should be wholly in the Queen; that no fo¬ 
 reigner should hold any office in the kingdom, that no change 
 should be made in the English laws, customs, and privileges; 
 that sixty thousand pounds a year (a million of our present 
 money) should be settled on the Queen as her jointure to be 
 paid by Spain if she outlived him; that the male issue of this 
 marriage should inherit, together with England, both Burgun¬ 
 dy and the Low Countries ; and that, if Don Carlos, Philip’s son 
 by his former marriage, should die, leaving no issue, the Queen’s 
 issue, whether male or female, should inherit Spain, Sicily, Mi¬ 
 lan, and all the other dominions of Philip. Just before the mar¬ 
 riage ceremony was performed, an envoy from the Emperor, 
 Philip’s father, delivered to the English Chancellor, a deed re¬ 
 signing to his son the kingdom of Naples and the Duchy of Mi¬ 
 lan, the Emperor thinking it beneath the dignity of the Queen 
 of England to marry one that was not a king. 
 
 243. What transaction was ever more honourable to a nation 
 than this transaction was to England 1 What Queen, what so¬ 
 vereign, ever took more care of the glory of a people 1 Yet the 
 fact appears to be, that there was some jealousy in the nation at 
 large, as to this foreign connexion ; and, I am not one of those 
 who are disposed to censure this jealousy. But, can 1 have the 
 conscience to commend, or, even to abstain from censuring, this 
 jealousy in our Catholic forefathers, without feeling as a Protes¬ 
 tant, my cheeks burn with shame at what has taken place in Pro¬ 
 testant times, and even in my own time! When another Mary , 
 a Protestant Mary, was brought to the throne, did the Parlia¬ 
 ment take care to keep the administration wholly in her, and to 
 
 give her husband the mere title of king ? Did they-take 
 
 care then that no foreigners should hold offices in England ? Oh, 
 no 1 That foreign, that Dutch husband', had the administration 
 vested in him; and he brought over whole crowds of foreigners, 
 put them into the highest offices, gave them the highest titles, 
 and heaped upon them large parcels of what was left of the 
 Crown estate, descending to that crown, in part, at least, from 
 the days of Alfred himself! And this transaction is called 
 “ glorious 1 '; and that, too, by the very men, who talk of the “in¬ 
 glorious” reign of Mary 1 What, then, are sense and truth ne- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 129 
 
 ver to reign in England ? Are we to be duped unto all genera- 
 tions ! 
 
 244. And, if we come down to our own dear Protestant days, 
 do we find the Prince of Saxe Cobourg the heir to mighty do¬ 
 minions ? Did he bring into the country, as Philip did, twenty- 
 nine chests of bullion, loading to iht Tower, 22 carts and 99 
 pack-horses? Do we find him settling on his wife’s issue great 
 stales and kingdoms ? Do we find his father making him a king, 
 on the eve of the marriage, because a person of lower title would 
 be beneath a Queen of England ? Do we find him giving his 
 bride, as a bridal present, jewels to the amount of half a million 
 of our money ? Do we find him settling on the Princess Char¬ 
 lotte a jointure of a million sterling a year, if she should outlive 
 him ? No ; but (and come and boast of it, you shameless revil- 
 ers of this Catholic queen!) we find our Protestant Parliament 
 settling ON HIM fifty thousand pounds a year to come out of 
 taxes raised on us, if he should outlive her; which sum we now 
 duly and truly pay in full tale, and shall possibly have to pay it 
 for forty years yet to come! How we feel ourselves shrink, 
 when we thus compare cur conduct with that of our Catholic 
 fathers ! 
 
 245. In my relation, I have not adhered to the exact chrono¬ 
 logical order, which would have too much broken my matter 
 into detached parcels; but, I should here observe, that the mar¬ 
 riage was previous to the reconciliation with the Pope, and also 
 previous to the Queen’s generous restoration of the property, 
 which she held, of the Church and the poor. It was also previ¬ 
 ous to those dreadful punishments which she inflicted upon here¬ 
 tics, of which punishments I am now about to speak, and which, 
 though monstrously exaggerated by the lying Fox and others, 
 though a mere nothing compared with those inflicted afterwards 
 on Catholics by Elizabeth, and though hardly to be called cruel, 
 when set in comparison with the rivers of Catholic blood that 
 have flowed in Ireland, were, nevertheless, such as to be deeply 
 deplored by every one, and by nobody more than the Catholics, 
 whose religion, though these punishments were by no means 
 caused by its principles, has been reproached as the cause, and 
 the sole cause of the whole of them. 
 
 246. We have seen, in paragraphs 200 and 201, what a Babel 
 of opinions and of religions had been introduced by Cranmer 
 and his crew; and we have also seen, that immorality, that vice 
 of all sorts, that enmity and strife incessant, had been the con¬ 
 sequence. Besides this, it was so natural that the Queen should 
 desire to put down all these sects, and that she should be so anxi¬ 
 ous on the subject, that we are not at all surprised that, if she 
 saw all other means ineffectual for the purpose, she should re¬ 
 sort to means of the utmc«t severity that the laws of the land 
 
130 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 allowed of, for the accomplishment of that purpose. The trai¬ 
 tors and the leading- rebels of her reign were all, or affected to 
 be, of the new sects. Though small in number, they made up 
 for that disadvantage by their indefatigable malignity ; by their 
 incessant efforts to trouble the state, and, indeed, to destroy the 
 Queen herself. But, I am for rejecting all apologies lor her 
 founded on provocations given to her; and also for rejecting all 
 apologies founded on the disposition and influence of her coun¬ 
 cillors ; for, if she had been opposed to the burning of heretics, 
 that burning would, certainly, never have taken place. Tha* 
 burning is fairly to be ascribed to her; but, as even the malig¬ 
 nant Hume gives her credit for sincerity , is it not just to conclude, 
 that her motive was to put an end to the propagation, amongst 
 her people, of errors which she deemed destructive of their souls, 
 and the permission of the propagation of which, she deeemed 
 destructive of her own t And, there is this much to be said in 
 defence of her motive, at any rate, that these new lights, into 
 however many sects they might be divided, all agreed in teach¬ 
 ing the abominable doctrine of salvation by faith alone, without 
 regard to works. 
 
 247. As a preliminary to the punishment of heretics, there 
 was an Act of Parliament passed in December, 1554 (a year 
 and a half after the Queen came to the throne) to restore the 
 ancient statutes relative to heresy. These statutes were first 
 passed against the Lollards, in the reigns of Richard II. and 
 He nry IV. And they provided, that heretics, who were obsti¬ 
 nate, should be burnt. These statutes were altered in the reign 
 of Henry VIII. in order that he might get the properly of heretics ; 
 and, in that of Edward, they were repealed. Not out of mercy, 
 however; but, because heresy was, according to those statutes, 
 to promulgate opinions contrary to the Catholic Faith; and this 
 did, of course, not suit the state of things under the new church, 
 “as by law established.” Therefore, it was then held, that he¬ 
 resy was punishable by common law, end, that, in case of obsti¬ 
 nacy, heretics might be burnt; and, accordingly, many were 
 punished, and some burnt, in that reign, by process at common 
 !aw; and these were, too, Protestants dissenting from Cranmer’s 
 Church, who himself condemned them to the ffames. Now, how¬ 
 ever, the Catholic religion being again the religion of the coun¬ 
 try, it was thought necessary to return to ancient statutes; which, 
 accordingly, were re-enacted. That which had been the law, 
 during seven reigns, comprising nearly two centuries, and some 
 of which reigns had been amongst the most glorious and most 
 happy that England had ever known, one of the Kings having 
 w on the title of King of France, and another of them having ac¬ 
 tually been crowned at Paris; that which had been the law for 
 so long a period was now the law again: so that here was no 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 131 
 
 thing new, at any rate. And, observe, though these statutes 
 were again repealed, when Elizabeth's policy induced her to 
 be a Protestant, she enacted others to supply their place, and 
 that both she and her successor James I. burnt heretics; though 
 they had, as we shall see, a much more expeditious and less noisy 
 way of putting out of the world those who still had the constan 
 cy to adhere to the religion of their fathers. 
 
 248. The laws, being passed, were not likely to remain a dead 
 letter. They were put in execution chiefly in consequence of 
 condemnations in the spiritual court, by Bonner, Bishop of Lon¬ 
 don. The punishment was inflicted in the usual manner; drag¬ 
 ging to the place of execution, and then burning to death, the 
 sufferer being tied to a stake, in the midst of a pile of faggots, 
 which, when set on fire, consumed him. Bishop Gardiner, the 
 Chancellor, has been, by Protestant writers, charged with being 
 the adviser of this measure. I can find no ground for this charge, 
 while all agree, that Pole, who was now become Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, in the place of Cranmer, disapproved of it. It is 
 also undeniable, that a Spanish friar, the Confessor of Philip, 
 preaching before the Queen, expressed his disapprobation of it. 
 Now, as the Queen was much more likely to be influenced, if at 
 all, by Pole, and especially by Philip, than by Gardiner, the 
 fair presumption is, that it was her oxen measure. And as to Bon¬ 
 ner, on whom so much blame has been thrown on this account, 
 he had, indeed, been most cruelly used by Cranmer and his 
 Protestants; but, there was the Council continually accusing all 
 the Bishops (and he more than any of the rest) of being too slow 
 in the performance of this part of their duty. Indeed, it is ma 
 nifest, that, in this respect, the Council spoke the almost then 
 universal sentiment; for, though the French ceased not to hatch 
 rebellions against the Queen, none of the grounds of the rebels 
 ever were, that she punished heretics. Their complaints related 
 almost solely to the connexion with Spain t and never to the 
 “fames of Stnithfield,” though we of latter times have been 
 made to believe, that nothing else was thought of; but, the fact 
 is, the persons put to death were chiefly of very infamous cha¬ 
 racter, many of them foreigners, almost the whole of them re¬ 
 siding in London, and called, in derision by the people at large, 
 the “ London Gospellers Doubtless, out of two hundred and 
 seventy-seven persons (the number stated by Hume on authori¬ 
 ty of Fox) who were thus punished, some may have been real 
 martyrs to their opinions, and have been sincere and virtuous 
 persons ; but, in this number of 277, many were convicted felons, 
 some clearly traitors, as Ridley and Cranmer. These must 
 be taken from the number; and, we may, surely, take such as 
 were alive when Fox first published his book, and who express¬ 
 ly begged to decline the honour of being enrolled amongst his 
 
132 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 H Martyrs.” As a proof of Fox’s total disregard of truth, there 
 was, in the next reign, a Protestant parson, as Anthony Wood 
 (a Protestant) tells us, who, in a sermon , related, on authority 
 of Fox, that a Catholic of the name of Grimwood had been, as 
 Fox said, a great enemy of the Gospellers, had been “ punished 
 by a judgment of God, and that his “ boicels fell out of his body.” 
 Grimwood was not only alive at the time when the sermon was 
 preached, but happened to be present in the church to hear it; 
 and he brought an action of defamation against the preacher ! 
 Another instance of Fox’s falseness relates to the death of Bi¬ 
 shop Gardiner. Fox and Burnet, and other vile calumnia¬ 
 tors of the acts and actors in Queen Mary’s reign, say, that Gar¬ 
 diner on the day of the execution of Latimer and Ridley, kept 
 dinner waiting till the news of their suffering should arrive, and 
 that the Duke of Norfolk, who was to dine with him, expressed 
 great chagrin at the delay ; that, when the news came, “ trans¬ 
 ported with joy,” they sat down to table, where Gardiner was 
 suddenly seized with the disury, and died, in horrible torments, 
 in a fortnight afterwards. Now, Latimer and Ridley were put 
 to death on the 16th of October; and Collier, in his Ecclesias¬ 
 tical History, p. 386, states, that Gardiner opened the Parlia¬ 
 ment on the 21st of October; that he attended in Parliament 
 twice afterwards ; that he died on the 12th of November of the 
 gout, and not of disury ; and that, as to the Duke of Norfolk, 
 he had been dead a year, when this event took place ! What a 
 hypocrite then, must that man be, who pretends to believe in this 
 Fox ! Yet, this infamous book has, by the arts of the plunder¬ 
 ers and their descendants, been circulated to a boundless extent 
 amongst the people of England, who have been taught to look 
 upon all the thieves, felons, and traitors, whom Fox calls “ 1Mar¬ 
 tyrs,” as sufferers resembling St. Stephen, St. Peter, and St. 
 Paul! 
 
 249. The real truth about these “ Martyrs,” is, that they were, 
 generally a set of most wicked wretches, who sought to destroy the 
 Queen and her government, and, under the pretence of conscience 
 and superior piety, to obtain the means of again preying upon 
 the people. No mild means could reclaim them: those means 
 had been tried: the Queen had to employ vigorous means, or, 
 to suffer her people to continue to be torn by the religious fac¬ 
 tions, created, not by her, but by her two immediate predeces¬ 
 sors, who had been aided and abetted by many of those who 
 now were punished, and who were w'orthy often thousand deaths 
 each, if ten thousand deaths could have been endured. They 
 were, without a single exception, apostates, perjurers, or plun¬ 
 derers; and, the greater part of them had also been guilty of 
 flagrant high treason against Mary herself, who had spared their 
 lives ; but whose lenity they had requited by every effort within 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 133 
 
 tliei:* power to overset her authority and her government. To 
 make particular mention of all the ruffians that perished upon 
 this occasion, would be a task as irksome as it would be useless ; 
 but, there were amongst them, three of Cranmer’s Bishops and 
 himself l For now, justice, at last, overtook this most mischie¬ 
 vous of all villains, who had justly to go to the same stake that he 
 had unjustly caused so many others to be tied to ; the three others 
 were Hooper, Latimer, and Ridley, each of whom, was, in¬ 
 deed, inferior in villainy to Cranmer, but to few other men that 
 have ever existed. 
 
 250. Hooper was a Monk; he broke his vow of celibacy and 
 married a Flandrican ; he, being the ready tool of the Protector, 
 Somerset, whom he greatly aided in his plunder of the churches, 
 got two Bishopricks, though he himself had written against pleu • 
 ralities; he was a co-operator in all the monstrous cruelties in¬ 
 flicted on the people during the reign of Edward, and was par¬ 
 ticularly active in recommending the use of German troops to 
 bend the necks of the English to the Protestant yoke. Lati¬ 
 mer began his career, not only as a Catholic priest, but as a most 
 furious assailant of the Reformatiosi religion. By this he obtain¬ 
 ed from Henry VIII. the Bishoprick of Worcester . He next 
 changed his opinions; but, he did not give vp his Catholic Bi- 
 shoprick! Being suspected, he made abjuration of Protestan¬ 
 tism ; he thus kept his bishoprick for twenty years, while he in¬ 
 wardly reprobated the principles of the Church, and which bi¬ 
 shoprick he held in virtue of an oath to oppose, to the utmost of 
 his power, all dissenters from the Catholic Church : in the reigns 
 of Henry and Edw ard, he sent to the stake, Catholics and Pro- 
 test.unts for holding opinions, which he himself had before held 
 openly, or that he held secretly at the time of his so sending them. 
 Lastly, he was a chief tool in the hands of the tyrannical Protec¬ 
 tor Somerset, in that black and unnatural act of bringing his bro¬ 
 ther, Lord Thomas Somerset, to the block. Ridley had been 
 a Catholic Bishop in the reign of Henry VIII., when he sent to 
 the stake, Catholics who denied the king’s supremacy, and Pro¬ 
 testants who denied transubstantiation. In Edward’s reign he 
 was a Protestant Bishop, and denied transubstantiation himself; 
 and then he sent to the stake Protestants who differed from the 
 creed of Cranmer. He, in Edward’s reign got the bishoprick 
 of London by a most roguish agreement to transfer the greater 
 part of its possessions to the rapacious ministers and courtiers of 
 that day. Lastly, he was guilty of high treason against the Queen, 
 in openly, (as we have seen in paragraph 220), and from the 
 pulpit, exhorting the people to stand by the usurper, Lady Jane ; 
 and thus endeavouring to produce civil war and the death of his 
 sovereign, in order that he might, by treason, be enabled to 
 
 12 
 
134 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 keep that bishoprick which he had obtained by Simony, include 
 ing perjury. 
 
 251. A pretty trio of Protestant “ Saints ,” quite worthy, how¬ 
 ever, of“ Saint ” Martin Luther, who says, in his own works, 
 that it was by the arguments of the Devil (who, he says, fre¬ 
 quently ate, drank, and slept with him) that he was induced to 
 turn Protestant: three worthy followers of that Luther, who 
 is, by his disciple Melancthon, called “ a brutal man, void of 
 piety and humanity, one more a Jew than a Christian:” three 
 followers altogether worthy of this great founder of that Protes¬ 
 tantism, which has split the world into contending sects: but, 
 black as these are, they bleach the moment Cranmer appears 
 in his true colours. But, alas! where is the pen, or tongue, to 
 give us those colours ! Of the 65 years that he lived and of the 
 35 years of his manhood, 29 years were spent in the commission 
 of a series of acts, which for wickedness in their nature and for 
 mischief in their consequences, are absolutely without any thing 
 approaching to a parallel in the annals of human infamy. Be¬ 
 ing a fellow of a college at Cambridge, and having, of course, 
 made an engagement (as the felloivs do to this day), not to mar¬ 
 ry while he was a fellow, he married secretly, and still enjoyed 
 his fellowship. While a married man, he became a priest, and 
 took the oath of celibacy; and, going to Germany, he married 
 another wife, the daughter of a Protestant “ saint;” so that he 
 had now two wives at one time, though his oath bound him to have 
 no wife at all. He, as Archbishop, enforced the law of celiba¬ 
 cy, while he himself secretly kept his German frow in the palace 
 at Canterbury, having, as we have seen in paragraph 104, im¬ 
 ported her in a chest. „ He, as ecclesiastical judge, divorced 
 Henry VIII. from three wives, the grounds of his decision in two 
 of the cases being directly the contrary of those which he him 
 self had laid down when he declared the marriages to be valid; 
 and, in the case of Anne Boleyn, he, as ecclesiastical judge, 
 pronounced, that Anne had never been the king's wife; while, as 
 a member of the House of Peers, he voted for her death, as hav¬ 
 ing been an adultress, and, thereby, guilty of treason to her hus¬ 
 band. As Archbishop under Henry (which office he entered 
 upon with a premeditated false oath on his lips) he sent men and 
 women to the stake because they were not Catholics, and he sent 
 Catholics to the stake because they would not acknowledge the 
 King’s supremacy, and thereby perjure themselves as he had so 
 often done. Become openly a Protestant, in Edward’s reign, 
 and openly professing those very principles, for the professing 
 of which he had burnt others, he now burnt his fellow-Proles- 
 tants, because their grounds for protesting were different from 
 Ms. As executor of the will of his old master, Henry, which 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 135 
 
 gave the crown (after Edward) to his daughters, Mary and Eli¬ 
 zabeth, he conspired with others to rob those two daughters of 
 their right and to give the crown to Lady Jane, that Queen of 
 nine days, whom he, with others, ordered to be proclaimed. 
 Confined, notwithstanding his many monstrous crimes, merely 
 to the palace at Lambeth, he, in requital of’the Queen’s lenity, 
 plotted with traitors in the pay of France to overset her govern¬ 
 ment. Brought, at last, to trial and to condemnation as a here¬ 
 tic, he professed himself ready to recant. He was respited for 
 six weeks, during which time, he signed six different forms of re¬ 
 cantation, each more ample than the former. He declared that 
 the Protestant religion was false ; that the Catholic religion was 
 the only true one; that he now believed in all the doctrines of 
 the Catholic church; that he had been a horrid blasphemer 
 against the sacrament; that he was unworthy of forgiveness; 
 that he prayed the people, the Queen, and the Pope, to have pity 
 on, and to pray for his wretched soul; and that he had made 
 and signed this declaration without fear, and without hope of 
 favour, and for the discharge of his conscience, and as a warn¬ 
 ing to others. It was a question in the Queen’s council, whether 
 he should be pardoned, as other recanters had been ; but it was 
 resolved, that his crimes were so enormous that it would be un¬ 
 just to let him escape; to which might have been added, that it 
 could have done the Catholic Church no honour to see recon¬ 
 ciled to it a wretch covered with robberies, perjuries, treasons, 
 and bloodshed. Brought, therefore, to the public reading of his 
 recantation, on his way to the stake ; seeing the pile ready ; now 
 finding that he must die, and carrying in his breast all his ma¬ 
 lignity undiminished, he recanted his recantation, thrust into the 
 fire the hand that had signed it, and thus expired, protesting 
 against that very religion in which, only nine hours before, he 
 had called God to witness that he firmly believed! 
 
 252. And Mary is to be called “ the Bloody ”, because she put 
 to death monsters of iniquity like this ! It is, surely, time to do 
 justice to the memory of this calumniated queen; and not to do 
 it by halves, T must, contrary to my intention, employ part di 
 the next Number in giving the remainder of her history 
 
136 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 LETTER IX. 
 
 Mary at War with Franck.—The Capture of Calajs bt 
 the French.—The death of Queen Mary.—Accession of 
 Queen Elizabeth.—Her cruel and bloody laws relative 
 to Religion.—Her perfidy^ with regard to France.— 
 The disgrace she brought upon her government and the 
 
 COUNTRY BY THIS PERFIDY.—HER BASE AND PERPETUAL SUR¬ 
 RENDER of Calais. 
 
 Kensington, 31 si July, 1825. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 253. I now, before I proceed to the “ Reformation” works in 
 the reign of Elizabeth, must conclude the reign of Mary. 
 “ Few and full of -sorrow” were the days of her power. She had 
 innumerable difficulties to struggle with, a most inveterate and 
 wicked faction continually plotting against her, and the state of 
 her health, owing partly to her w eak frame, and partly to the an¬ 
 xieties of her whole life, rendered her life so uncertain, that the 
 unprincipled plunderers, though they had again become Catho¬ 
 lics, were continually casting an eye towards her successor, who, 
 though she was now a Catholic, was pretty sure to become Pro - 
 teslant whenever she came to the throne, because it was impos¬ 
 sible that the Pope should ever acknowledge her legitimacy. 
 
 254. In the year 1557, the Queen was at war w ith France, on 
 account of the endeavours of that Court to excite rebellion 
 against her in England. Her husband, Philip, whose father, 
 the Emperor, had now retired to a convent, leaving his son to 
 supply his place, and possess all his dominions, was also at war 
 with France, the scene of which war was the Netherlands and 
 the North of France. An English army had joined Philip, who 
 penetrated into France, and gained a great and important vic¬ 
 tory over the French. But a French army, under the Duke of 
 Guise, took advantage of the naked state of Calais to possess 
 itself of that important town, which had been in possession of 
 the English fc'r more than two hundred years. It was not Calais 
 alone that England held ; but the whole country round for many 
 miles, including Guisnesse, Fanim, Ardres, and other places, to- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 137 
 
 gether with the whole territory, called the county of Oye. Ed¬ 
 ward III. had taken Calais after a siege of nearly a year. It 
 had always been regarded as very valuable for the purposes of 
 trade; it was deemed a great monument of glory to England, 
 and it was a thorn continually rankling in the side of France. 
 Dr. Heylyn tells us, that Monsieur de Cordes, a nobleman who 
 lived in the reign of Louis XL, used to say, “ that he would be 
 content to lie seven years in hell, upon condition that this town 
 were regained from the English.” 
 
 255. The Queen felt this blow most severely. It hastened 
 that death which overtook her a few months afterwards; and, 
 when her end approached, she told her attendants, that, “ if 
 they opened her body, they would find Calais at the bottom of 
 her heart.” This great misfortune was owing to the neglect, if 
 not perfidy, of her councillors, joined to the dread of Philip to 
 see Calais and its dependencies in the hands of Mary’s succes¬ 
 sor. Doctor Heylyn (a Protestant, mind) tells us, that Philip, 
 n seeing that danger might arise to Calais, advised the Queen 
 of it, and freely offered his assistance for the defence of it; but, 
 that the English Council, over-wisely jealous of Philip, neglected 
 both his advice and proffer ” They left the place with only Jive 
 hundred men in it; and that they did this intentionally it is hard 
 ly possible to doubt. Still, however, if the Queen had lived but 
 a little longer, Calais would have been restored. The war was 
 not yet over. In 1558, Philip and the King of France began 
 negotiations for peace; and one of the conditions of Philip (who 
 was the most powerful, and who had beaten the French) was, that 
 Calais should be restored io England; and this condition would 
 unquestionably have been adhered to by Philip; but in the midst 
 of these negotiations, Mary died ! 
 
 256. Thus, then, it is to the “ Reformation,” which had caus¬ 
 ed the loss of Boulogne, in the plundering and cowardly reign 
 of Edward VI., that we, even to this day, owe, that we have to 
 lament, the loss of Calais, which was, at last irretrievably lost 
 by the selfishness and perfidy of Elizabeth. While all historians 
 agree, that the loss of Calais preyed most severely upon the 
 Queen, and hastened her death ; while they all do this great ho¬ 
 nour to her memory, none of them attempt to say, that the loss 
 of Boulogne had even the smallest effect on the spirits of her 
 “Reformation” brother! He was too busy in pulling down 
 altars and in confiscating the property of Guilds and Fraterni¬ 
 ties to think much about national honour; or, perhaps, though 
 he, while he was pulling down altars, still called himself “ De¬ 
 fender of the Faith,” he might think, that territory and glory, 
 won by Catholics, ought not to be retained by Protestants. Be 
 this as it may, we have seen a loss to England much greater than 
 that of Calais ; we have seen the half of a continent cut off from 
 
 12* 
 
138 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 the crown of England, and seen it become a most formidable 
 rival on the seas; and we have never heard, that it greyed much 
 upon the spirits of the sovereign, in whose reign the loss took 
 place. 
 
 257. With the loss of Calais at the bottom of her heart, and 
 with a well-grounded fear, that her successor would undo, as to 
 religion, all that she had done, the unfortunate Mary expired 
 On the 17th of November, 1558, in the forty-second year of her 
 age, and in the sixth year of her reign, leaving to her sister and 
 successor, the example of fidelity, sincerity, patience, resigna¬ 
 tion, generosity, gratitude, and purity in thought, word, and 
 deed; an example, however, which, in every particular, that 
 sister and successor took special care not to follow . As to those 
 ;'punishments , which have served as the ground for all the abuse 
 heaped on the memory of this Queen, what were they other than 
 punishments inflicted on offenders against the religion of the 
 country? The “ fires of Smithjield ” have a horrid sound; but, 
 to say nothing about the burnings of Edward VI., Elizabeth, 
 and James I., is it more pleasant to have one’s bowels ripped 
 out, while the body is alive (as was Elizabeth’s favourite way), 
 than to be burnt ? Protestants have even exceeded Catholics in 
 the work of punishing offenders of this sort. And, they have 
 punished, too, with less reason on their side. The Catholics have 
 one faith; the Protestants have fifty faiths; and yet, each sect, 
 whenever it gets uppermost, punishes, in some way or other, 
 the rest as offenders. Even at this very time, there are, accor¬ 
 ding to a return recently laid before the House of Commons, no 
 less than fifty-seven persons, who have, within a few years, suf¬ 
 fered imprisonment and other punishments added to it, as offen¬ 
 ders against religion ; and this, too, at a time, when men are per¬ 
 mitted openly to deny the divinity of Christ, and others openly 
 to preach in their synagogues, that there never was any Christ 
 at all. A man sees the laws tolerate twenty sorts of Christians 
 (as they all call"themselves), each condemning all the rest to 
 eternal flames; and if, in consequence of this, he be led to ex¬ 
 press his belief, that they are all wrong, and that the thing they 
 are disputing about is altogether something unreal, he may be 
 punished with six years (or his whole life) of imprisonment in a 
 loathsome gaol! Let us think of these things, when we are talk¬ 
 ing of the “ bloody Queen Mary.” The punishments now-a-days 
 proceed from the maxim that “ Christianity is part and parcel 
 of the law of the land." When did it begin ? Before, or since, 
 the “ Reformation” ? And, who, amongst all those sects, which, 
 it would seem, this law tolerates; which of them is to tell us; 
 from w'hich of them are we to learn what Christianity is ? 
 
 258. As to the mass of suffering, supposing the w hole of the 
 277 persons who suffered in the reign of Mary, to have suffered 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 139 
 
 solely for the sake of religion, instead of having been, like 
 Cranmer and Riijley, traitors and felons as well as offenders on 
 the score of religion ; let us suppose the whole 277 to have suffer¬ 
 ed for offences against religion, did the mass of suffering surpass 
 the mass of suffering, on this same account, during the reign of 
 the late King? And, unless Smillifield and burning have any 
 peculiar agony, any thing worse than death, to impart, did Smith- 
 field ever witness so great a mass of suffering as the Old Bailey 
 has witnessed, on account of offences against that purely Pro¬ 
 testant invention, bank notes? Perhaps this invention, express¬ 
 ly intended to keep out Popery, has cost ten times, if not ten times 
 ten times, the blood that was shed in the reign of her, whom we 
 still have the injustice, or the folly, to call the “ bloody Queen 
 Mary,” all whose excellent qualities, all whose exalted virtues, 
 all her piety, charity, generosity, sacred adherence to her faith 
 and her word, all her gratitude, and even those feelings of anxi¬ 
 ety for the greatness and honour of England, which feelings 
 hastened her to the grave : all these, in which she was never 
 equalled by any sovereign that sat on the English throne, Al¬ 
 fred alone excepted, whose religion she sought to re-establish 
 for ever: all these are to pass for nothing, and we are to call her 
 the “ bloody Mary,” because it suits the views of those who fat¬ 
 ten on the spoils of that church which never suffered Englishmen 
 to bear the odious and debasing name of pauper. 
 
 ELIZABETH. 
 
 259. To the pauper and ripping-up reign we now come. This 
 is the reign of 11 good Queen Bess.” We shall, in a short time, 
 see how good she was. The Act of Parliament, which is still in 
 force, relative to the poor and poor-rates, was passed in the 43d 
 year of this reign ; but, that was not the only act of the kind: 
 there were eleven acts passed before that, in consequence of the 
 poverty and misery, into which the “ Reformation” had plung¬ 
 ed the people. However, it is the lasl Number of my work, which 
 is to contain the history of the rise and progress of English pau¬ 
 perism, from the beginning of the “ Reformation” down to the 
 present, time. At present, I have to relate what took place with 
 regard to the affairs of religion. 
 
 260. Elizabeth, during the reign of her brother, had been a 
 Protestant, and, during the reign of her sister, a Catholic. At 
 the time of her sister’s death, she not only went to mass public¬ 
 ly ; but she had a Catholic chapel in her house, and also a con 
 fessor. These appearances, had not, however, deceived her sis¬ 
 ter, who, to the very last, doubted her sincerity. On her death 
 bed, honest and sincere Mary required from her a frank avow¬ 
 al of her opinions as to religion. Elizabeth, in answer, prayed 
 God that the earth might open and swallow her, if she were not a 
 
140 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 true Roman Catholic. She made the same declaration to the 
 Duke of Feria, the Spanish envoy, whom she so completely de¬ 
 ceived, that he wrote to Philip, that the accession of Elizabeth 
 would make no alteration in matters of religion in England. In 
 spite of all this, it was not long before she began ripping up the 
 bowels of her unhappy subjects, because they were Roman Ca¬ 
 tholics. 
 
 261. She was a bastard by law. The marriage of her mother 
 had been, by law, which yet remained unrepealed, declared to 
 be null and void from the beginning. Her accession having 
 been, in the usual way, notified to foreign powers, that is, that 
 “ she had succeeded to the throne by hereditary right and the 
 consent of the nation,” the Pope answered, that he did not un¬ 
 derstand the hereditary right of a person not born in lawful wed¬ 
 lock. So that he, of course, could not acknowledge her heredi¬ 
 tary right. This was, of itself, a pretty strong inducement for 
 a lady of so flexible a conscience as she had, to resolve to be a 
 Protestant. But, there was another and even a stronger motive. 
 Mary, Queen of Scotland, who had married the Dauphin of 
 Franee, claimed the crown of England, as the nearest legitimate 
 descendant of Henry VII.; so that Elizabeth ran a manifest risk 
 of losing the crown, unless she became a Protestant, and cram¬ 
 med Cranmer’s creed down the throats of her people. If she 
 remained a Catholic, she must yield submission to the decrees 
 from Rome ; the Pope could have made it a duty with her peo¬ 
 ple, to abandon her; or, at the very least, he could have great¬ 
 ly embarrassed her. In short, she saw clearly, that, if her peo 
 pie remained Catholics, she could never reign in perfect safety. 
 She knew, that she had no hereditary right; she knew that the 
 law ascribed her birth to adultery. She never could think ot 
 reigning quietly over a people, the head of whose Church re¬ 
 fused to acknowledge her right to the crown. And, resolving 
 to wear that crown, she resolved, cost what ruin or blood it 
 might, to compel her people to abandon that very religion, bci 
 belief in which she had, a few months before, declared, by pray¬ 
 ing to “ God that the earth might open and swallow her alive, 
 if she were not a true Roman Catholic.' 11 
 
 262. 'The Pope’s answer was honest; but it was impolitic, and 
 most unfortunate it was lor the English and Irish people, who 
 had now to prepare for sufferings such as they had never known 
 before. The situation of things was extremely favourable to 
 the Protestants. Mary, the Queen of Scots, the real lawful heir 
 to the throne, was, as we have seen, married to the Dauphin of 
 France. If Elizabeth were set aside, or, if she died without is¬ 
 sue before Mary, England must become an appendage of 
 France. The loss of Calais and of Boulogne had mortified the 
 nation enough; but, for England herself to be transferred to 
 
PROTESTANT RE t OITYIATIGN. 
 
 141 
 
 France, was what no Englishman could think of with patience, 
 ' So that she became strong from the dread that the people had 
 of the consequences of her being put down. It W'as the betroth 
 ing of Mary, Queen of Scots, to the Dauphin, which induced 
 Mary, Queen of England, to marry Philip, and thereby to se¬ 
 cure an ally for England in case of Scotland becoming a depen 
 dence of France. How much more pressing was . the danger 
 now, when the Queen of Scots was actually married to the Dau¬ 
 phin (the heir apparent to the French throne), and when, if she 
 were permitted to possess the crown of England, England, in 
 case of her having a son, must beeome a province of France ! 
 
 263. This state of things was, therefore, most unfortunate for 
 the Catholics. It made many, very many of themselves cool in 
 opposition to the change which the new Queen soon showed her 
 determination to effect; for, however faithful as to their religion* 
 they were Englishmen, and abhorred the thought of being the 
 underlings of Frenchmen. They might hate the Queen for her 
 apostacy and tyranny; but still they could not but desire that 
 England should remain an independent state; and to keep her 
 such, the upholding of Elizabeth seemed absolutely necessary. 
 Those who eulogize Henry IV. of France, who became a Ca¬ 
 tholic expressly and avowedly for the purpose of possessing and 
 keeping the throne of that country, cannot, very consistently 
 blame Elizabeth for becoming a Protestant for an exactly simi¬ 
 lar reason. I do not attempt to justify either of them; but I 
 must confess, that if any thing would have induced me to up 
 hold Elizabeth, it would have been, that she, as far as human 
 foresight could go, was an instrument necessary to preserve 
 England from subjection to France; and, beyond all doubt, this 
 was the main reason for which, at the outset, at least, she was 
 upheld by many of the eminent and powerful men of that day. 
 
 264. But, if we admit that she was justified in thus consulting 
 her preservation as a Queen, and the nation’s independence, at 
 the expense of religious considerations; if we admit that she 
 had a right to give a preference to Protestants, and to use all 
 gentle means for the totally changing of the religion of her peo¬ 
 ple ; if we admit this, and that is admitting a great deal more 
 than justice demands of us, who can refrain from being filled 
 with horror at the barbarity which she so unsparingly exercised 
 for the accomplishment of her purpose ? 
 
 265. The intention to change the religion of the country be¬ 
 came, in a short time, so manifest, that all the Bishops but one 
 refused to crown her. She, at last, found one to do it; but even 
 he would not consent to do the thing without her conformity to 
 the Catholic ritual. Very soon, however, a series of acts were 
 passed, which, by degrees, put down the Catholic worship, and 
 tfe-introdueed the Protestant; and she found the plunderers and 
 
142 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 possessors of plunder just as ready to conform to her ecclestas 
 tical sway, as they had been to receive absolution from Cardinal. 
 Pole, in the last reign. Cranmer’s Book of Common Praver, 
 which had been ascribed by the Parliament to the suggestions 
 of the “ Holy Ghost,” had been altered and amended even in 
 Edward’s reign. It was now revived, and altered and amended 
 aerain: and still it was ascribed to the “ dictates of the Holy 
 Ghost!” 
 
 266. If these Acts of Parliament had stopped here, they would 
 certainly have been bad and disgraceful enough. But such a 
 change was not to be effected without blood. This Queen was 
 resolved to reign : the blood of her people she deemed necessa¬ 
 ry to her own safety; and she never scrupled to make it flow. 
 She looked upon the Catholic religion as her mortal enemy; and, 
 eost what it might, she was resolved to destroy it, if she could, 
 the means being, by her, those which best answered her end. 
 
 267. With this view, statutes the most bloody were passed. 
 All persons were compelled to take the oath of supremacy, on 
 pain of death. To take the oath of supremacy ; that is to say, 
 to acknowledge the queen’s supremacy in spiritual matters, was 
 to renounce the Pope and the Catholic religion; or, in other 
 words, to become an apostate. Thus was a very large part of 
 her people at once condemned to death for adhering to the reli¬ 
 gion of their fathers; and, moreover, for adhering to that very 
 religion, in which she had openly lived till she became Queen, 
 and to her firm belief in which, she had sworn at her coronation ! 
 
 268. Besides this act of monstrous barbarity, it was made high 
 treason in a priest to say mass; it was made high treason in a 
 priest to come into the kingdom from abroad ; it was made high 
 treason to harbour or to relieve a priest. And, on these grounds, 
 and others of a like nature, hundreds upon hundreds were but¬ 
 chered in the most inhuman manner, being first hung up, then 
 cut down alive, their bowels then ripped up, and their bodies 
 chopped into quarters: and this, I again beg you, sensible and 
 just Englishmen, to observe, only bceause the unfortunate per¬ 
 sons were too virtuous and sincere to apostatize from that faith 
 which this Queen herself had, at her coronation, in her corona¬ 
 tion oath, solemnly sworn to adhere to and defend ! 
 
 269. Having pulled down the altars, set up the tables ; having 
 ousted the Catholic priests and worship, and put in their stead 
 a set of hungry, beggarly creatures, the very scum of the earth, 
 with Cranmer’s prayer-book amended in their hands; having 
 done this, she compelled her Catholic subjects to attend in the 
 churches under enormous penalties, which rose, at last, to death 
 itself, in case of perseverance in refusal! Thus were all the 
 good, all the sincere, all the conscientious people in the king* 
 dom incessantly harassed, ruined bv enormous fines, brough. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 143 
 
 to the gallows, or compelled to flee from their native country. 
 Thus was this Protestant religion watered with the tears and the 
 blood of the people of England. Talk of Catholic persecution 
 and cruelty ! Where are you to find persecution and cruelty 
 like this, inflicted by Catholic princes ? Elizabeth put, in one 
 way or another, more Catholics to death, in one year, for not 
 becoming apostates to the religion which she had sworn to be 
 hers, and to be the only true one, than Mary put to death in her 
 whole reign for having apostatized fi'om the religion of her and 
 their fathers, and to which religion she herself had always ad¬ 
 hered. Yet, the former is called, or has been called, “ good 
 Queen Bess,” and the latter, “ bloody Queen Mary.” Even the 
 horrid massacre of St. Bartholomew was nothing, when fair¬ 
 ly compared with the butcheries and other cruelties of the reign 
 of this Protestant Queen of England; yes, a mere nothing; and 
 yet she put on mourning upon that occasion, and had the con¬ 
 summate hypocrisy to affect horror at the cruelties that the 
 King of France had committed. 
 
 270. This massacre took place at Paris, in the year 1572, and 
 in the 14th year of Elizabeth’s reign; and, as it belongs tp the 
 history of that day, as it was, in fact, in part, produced by her 
 own incessant and most mischievous intrigues, and, as it has 
 been made a great handle of in the work of calumniating the Ca¬ 
 tholics, even to this day, it is necessary that I give a true account 
 of it, and that I go back to those civil wars in France which she 
 occasioned, and in which she took so large a part, and which 
 finally lost Calais and its territory to England. The “ Refor¬ 
 mation,” which Luther said he was taught by the Devil, had 
 found its way into France so early as in the year 1530, or there¬ 
 abouts. The “ reformers” thei'e were called Huguenots. For 
 a long while, they were of little consequence; but they, at last, 
 in the reign of Charles IX., became formidable to the govern¬ 
 ment by being taken hold of by those ambitious and rebellious 
 leaders Conde and Coligni. The faction, of which these two 
 were the chiefs, wanted to have the governing of France during 
 the minority of Charles, who came to the throne in the year 
 1561, at ten years of age. His mother, the Queen Dowager, 
 gave the preference to the Duke of Guise and his party. The 
 disappointed nobles, Conde and Coligni, needed no better mo¬ 
 tive for becoming most zealous Protestants, the Guises being zea>- 
 lous in the Catholic cause ! Hence arose an open rebellion on 
 the part of the former , fomented by the Queen of England, who 
 seemed to think, that she never could be safe as long as there 
 were Catholic prince, priest, or people left upon the lace of the 
 earth; and who never stuck at means, if they were but calculat¬ 
 ed to effect her end. She was herself an apostate; she wanted 
 to annihilate that from which she had apostatized; and, by her 
 
144 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 endeavours to effect her purpose, she made her people bleed at 
 every pore, and made no scruple, upon any occasion, to sacri 
 fice the national honour. 
 
 271. At her coming to the throne, she found the country at 
 war with France, and Calais in its hands, that fortress and ter¬ 
 ritory having, as we have seen in paragraph 254, been taken 
 by a French army under the Duke of Guise. She almost imme¬ 
 diately made peace with Franee, and that, too without getting 
 Calais hack , as she might have done, if she had not preferred 
 her own private interest to the interest and honour of England. 
 The negotiations for peace (England, Spain, and France being 
 the parties) were carried on at Chateau Cambrensis, in France. 
 All was soon settled with regard to Spain and France ; but Phi¬ 
 lip, (Mary’s husband, remember,) faithful to his engagements, 
 refused to sign the treaty, until the new Queen of England should 
 be satisfied with regard to Calais; and he even offered to conti¬ 
 nue the war for six years, unless Calais were restored, provided 
 Elizabeth would bind herself not to make a separate peace dur¬ 
 ing that period. She declined this generous offer; she had be¬ 
 gun tf> rip up her subjects, and was afraid of war; and she, there¬ 
 fore, clandestinely entered into negotiations with France, and 
 it was agreed that the latter should keep Calais for eight years , 
 3r pay to England 500,000 crowns! Never was there a baser 
 act than this treaty, on the part of England. But this was not 
 all; for the treaty further stipulated, that if France committed 
 any act of aggression against England, during the eight years, 
 or if England committed any act of aggression against France, 
 during that time, the treaty should be void, and that the former 
 should lose the right of retaining, and the latter the claim to the 
 restoration, of this valuable town and territory. 
 
 272. This treaty was concluded in 1559, and it was a treaty 
 rot only of friendship, but of alliance between the parties. But, 
 before three years out of the eight had passed away, “good 
 Queen Bess,” out of pure hatred and fear of the Catholics ; from 
 a pure desire to make her tyrannical sway secure; from the sole 
 desire of being still able to fine, imprison, and rip up her unfor¬ 
 tunate subjects, forfeited all claim to the I'estoration of Calais, 
 and that, too, by a breach of treaty more flagrant and more base 
 than, perhaps, had ever before been witnessed in the worid. 
 
 273. Conde and Coligni, with their Huguenots, had stirred 
 up a formidable civil war in France. “ Good Queen Bess’s” am¬ 
 bassador at that Court stimulated and assisted the rebels to the 
 utmost of his power. At last, Vidame, an agent of Conde and 
 Coligni, came secretly, over to England to negotiate for military, 
 naval, and pecuniary assistance. They succeeded with “ good 
 Bess,” who, wholly disregarding the solemn treaties by which 
 she was bound to Charles IX., King of France, entered into a 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 14A 
 
 formal treaty with the French rebels to send them an army and 
 money, for the purpose of carrying on war against their sove¬ 
 reign, of whom she was an ally, having bound herself., in that 
 character, by a solemn oath on the Evangelists! By this treaty 
 she engaged to furnish men, ships, and money ; and the traitors, 
 on their part, engaged to put Havre de Grace at once into her 
 hands, as a pledge, not only for the repayment of the money to 
 be advanced, but for the restoration of Calais ! This infamous 
 compact richly deserved the consequences that attended it. 
 
 274. The French ambassador in London, when he found that 
 an intercourse was going on between the Queen and the agents 
 r-f the rebels, went to Cecil, the Secretary of State, carrying 
 the treaty of Chateau Cambrensis in his hand, and demanded, 
 agreeably to the stipulations of that treaty, that the agents of 
 the rebels should be delivered up as traitors to their sovereign, 
 and he warned the English government, that any act ol aggres¬ 
 sion on its part, would annihilate its claim to the recovery of Ca¬ 
 lais at the end of the eight years. But “good Bess” had caused 
 the civil wars in France; she had, by her bribes, and the other 
 underhand means stirred them up, and she believed that the suc¬ 
 cess of the French rebels were necessary to her own security 
 on her throne of doubtful right; and, as she hoped to get Calais 
 in this perfidious way, she raw nothing but gain in the perfidy, 
 
 275. The rebels were in possession of Dieppe, Rouem, Havre 
 de Grace, and had extended their power over a considerable 
 part of Normandy. They at once put Havre and Dieppe into 
 the hands of the English. So infamous and treacherous a pro¬ 
 ceeding roused the Catholics of France, who now became asham¬ 
 ed of that inactivity, which had suffered a sect, less than a hun¬ 
 dredth part of the population, to sell their country under the blas¬ 
 phemous plea of a love of the Gospel. “ Good Bess,” with her 
 usual mixture of hypocrisy and effrontery, sent her proclama 
 tions into Normandy, declaring, that she meant no hostility 
 against her “good brother ” the King of France; but merely to 
 protect his Protestant subjects against the tyranny of the House 
 of Guise; and that her “ good brother” ought to be grateful to 
 her for the assistance she was lending! This cool and hvpocri 
 tical insolence added fury to the flame. All France could but 
 recollect, that it was the skilful, the gallant, the patriotic Duks 
 of Guise, who had, only five i^ears before, ejected the English 
 from Calais, their last hold in France; and they now saw these 
 “ sons of the Gospel,” as they had the audacity to call them 
 selves, bring those same English back again, and put two French 
 sea-ports into their hands at once ! Are we to wonder at the in- 
 fcjrtlnguishable hatred of the people of France against this trai¬ 
 torous sect? Are we to wonder that they felt a desire to extir* 
 
 13 
 
146 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 pate the whole of so infamous a race, who had already sold their 
 country to the utmost of their power? 
 
 276. The French nobility, from every province and corner of 
 France, flew to the aid of their sovereign, whose army was com¬ 
 manded by the Constable, Montmorency, with the Duke of 
 Guise under him. Conde was at the head of the rebel army, 
 having Coligni as a sort of partner in the concern, and having 
 been joined by the English troops, under the Earl of Warwick, 
 nephew of “ good Bess’s paramour, Dudley, of whom the Pro¬ 
 testant clergymen, Heylin and Whitaker, will tell us more than 
 enough bv-pnd-by. The first movement of the French against 
 this combined mass of hypocrisy, audacity, perfidy and treason, 
 was the besieging of Rouen, into which, Sir Edward Poinings, 
 who had preceded Warwick, had thrown an English reinforce¬ 
 ment to assist the faithful “sons of the Gospel." In order to 
 encourage the French, the Queen-Mother (Catherine de Medici), 
 her son the young King, Charles (now twelve years of age), and 
 the King of Navarre, were present at the siege. The latter was 
 mortally wounded in the attack; but the Catholics finally took 
 the town by assault, and pat the whole of the garrison to the 
 nvord, including the English reinforcement sent by “good Queen 
 Bess." 
 
 277. In the meanwhile, the brother of Coligni had, by the 
 money of “good Bess," collected together a body of German 
 mercenary Gospellers, and had got them to Orleans, which was 
 then the main hold of the Huguenots ; while “ good Bess," in or¬ 
 der to act her part faithfully, ordered public prayers, during 
 three whole days, to implore God’s blessing “ upon her cause 
 and the cause of the Gospel ." Thus reinforced by another bo¬ 
 dy of foreigners brought into their country, the base traitors, 
 Conde and Coligni, first made a feint on the side of Paris ; but, 
 finding themselves too weak on that side, they took their way 
 towards Normandy, in the hope of there having the aid of the 
 English forces. But, the Catholics, still under Montmorency 
 and the Duke of Guise, followed the traitors, overtook them at 
 Dreux, compelled them to fight, took Conde himself prisoner 
 and though Montmorency was taken prisoner by the rebels, the 
 Duke of Guise took the chief command, and drove the rebel Co 
 ligni and his army before him ; and this, too, observe, in spite 
 of “ good Bess’s three whole days of prayers. 
 
 278. Nevertheless, Coligni kept the field, and pillaged Nor- 
 mandy pretty severely. “ Good Bess" sent him some money, 
 and offered to be bound for more, if he could get any merchants 
 (that is, Jews) to lend it himj but she sent him no troops; those, 
 undeft* the Earl of Warwick, being kept safe and sound in the 
 itrong fortress of Havre de Grace, which place, honest and 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 147 
 
 good Bess” intended to keep, let thing’s go which way they 
 might, which honest intention we shall, however, find defeated 
 in the end. Coligni and his ruffians and German mercenary 
 Gospellers cruelly plundered the Normans as far as they could 
 extend their arms. The Catholics, now under the Duke of Guise, 
 laid siege to Orleans. While this siege was going on, one Pol- 
 trot, a Huguenot, in the pay of Coligni, went, under the guise 
 of being a deserter* from that inveterate rebel chief, and entered 
 into the service of the army under the Duke of Guise. In a short 
 time, this miscreant found the means to assassinate that gallant 
 nobleman and distinguished patriot, instigated, indeed, employ¬ 
 ed for the express purpose by Coligni, and urged on by Beza, 
 the “ famous preacher as Hume calls him, but really one of the 
 most infamous of all the “ reforming preachers, and, perhaps, 
 second to none but Luther himself. This atrocious deed met, 
 afterwards with retaliation in the massacre of St. Bartholomew, 
 when on Coligni’s mangled body there might have been placard 
 ed the name of Poltrot. This wretch had been paid by Co¬ 
 ligni, and the money had come from honest and sincere “good 
 Queen Bess,” whom we shall hereafter find plainly accused b^ 
 Whitaker (a clergyman of the Church of England) of plotting 
 the assassination of her own cousin, and finding no man in her 
 kingdom base enough to perform the deed. 
 
 279. This foul deed seems to have made Condc ashamed of 
 nis infamous associate and followers. Ambition had made hint 
 a rebel; but he had sense of honour enough left to make him 
 shudder at the thought of being the leader of assassins; and he, 
 with one drop of true blood in him, could not think without hor¬ 
 ror of such a man as the Duke of Guise, who had rendered such 
 inestimable services to France, being swept from existence by 
 so base a miscreant as that whom his late colleague had hired 
 and paid for that purpose. If the son of the Duke of Guise could 
 have destroyed Coligni and his whole crew, he would have been 
 justified in so doing. And yet, the world has been stunned with 
 the Protestant cries of horror at the death of this same Coligni 
 and a small part of his followers ! 
 
 280. Condc now sought to get rid of his miscreant associates 
 by proposing, in February 1563, a pacification, and tendering 
 his submission to his sovereign on condition of an act of oblivion. 
 Coligni was included in^the amnesty. The king granted to the 
 Huguenots permission to practice their worship in one town in 
 every bailiwick; and thus were all matters settled between the 
 king and his rebellious subjects. Sad tidings for “ good Queen 
 Bess,” who, as Whitaker well observes, continually sought her 
 safety in the divisions and misery of others. Conde, in his trea¬ 
 ty with her, had stipulated not to conclude any peace without 
 ker consent; but, had she a right to complain of a want of good 
 
148 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 faith? She, who had broken her treaty and her oath wit 
 Charles IX., and who, in defiance of both, had entered into a 
 treaty with rebels, in open arms against their king ? 
 
 281. The French king, wishing to get her troops quietly out 
 of Havre de Grace, and finding that she now pretended to hold 
 it as a pledge for the surrender of Calais, at the end of the eight 
 years, offered to renew the treaty of Chateau Cambrensis, by 
 which Calais was to be restored to England in 1567. But, she re¬ 
 acted this fair and reasonable proposal. She had got Havre; no 
 matter how; and she said, that “ a bird in hand was worth two 
 in the bush,” snapping her fingers at the same time, and, as was 
 the common practice with her upon such occasions, confirming 
 her resolution with a thundering oath, so becoming in a “ Vir¬ 
 gin Queen.” Finding, however, that all parties in France were 
 now united for the expulsion of the English, she reluctantly gave 
 way. She authorised her ambassadors to present a new pro¬ 
 ject of treaty ; but, by this time, the French army, under Mont¬ 
 morency, Conde, “ good Bess’s late friend and ally being serv 
 ing in the army, was on its way to regain Havre by force of arras, 
 the king of France being well convinced, that treaties with 
 “good Betsy” were things perfectly vain. 
 
 282. Still, it was not a trifling thing to take Havre out of the 
 hands of the English. A great deal of taxes had been imposed 
 upon this nation, (to say nothing of the “prayers"), in order to 
 ensure the possession of this place. The Earl of Warwick, in¬ 
 stead of sending troops to assist Bess’s allies, had kept his army 
 at Havre; had, with six thousand soldiers and seven hundred 
 pioneers, rendered the place “ impregnablehad, as soon as 
 he heard that the rebellion was at an end, expelled all the French 
 people from Havre, to their utter ruin, and in direct breach of 
 Bess’s treaty with Conde and Coligni. But, in spite of all this, 
 Montmorency was, at the end of a short time, ready to enter the 
 place by assault, having made his breaches in preparation. The 
 Queen-mother and the King were present in the camp, where 
 they had the indescribable pleasure to see “ Good Queen Bess’s” 
 General humbly propose to surrender the place to its rightful so 
 vereign, without any mention of Calais and its territory , and on 
 no condition whatever, but that of being permitted to return to 
 England with the miserable remnant of his army ; and England, 
 after all the treasure and blood, expended to gratify the malig 
 nity of “good Bess,” and after all the just imputations of perfi 
 dy that she had brought upon it, had to receive that remnant 
 that ratification of disgrace, greater than it had to support from 
 the day when glorious Alfred finally expelled the Danes. And, 
 yet, this woman is called, or has been called, “good Queen 
 Bess,” and her perfidious and butchering reign has been called 
 glorious t 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 149 
 
 'AWS Great as the mortifications of “good Bess” now were, 
 u«rttgr»*«vt as were the misfortunes of the country, brought upon 
 i> ty in s * her proceedings of hitherto unheard of hypocrisy and 
 bvea^ii of faith, we have, as yet, seen the full measure of neither 
 the one nor the other. For, u glorious and good Bess” had now 
 to sue for peace, and with that King, with whose rebel subjects 
 she had so recently co-operated. Her ambassadors, going with 
 due passports, were arrested and imprisoned. She stamped and 
 swore, but she swallowed the affront, and took the regular steps 
 to cause them to be received at the French court, who, on their 
 part, treated her pressing applications with a contemptuous 
 sneer, and suffered many months to pass away, before they 
 would listen to any terms of peace. Smith was one of her en¬ 
 voys, and the other was that same Throckmorton, who had 
 been her ambassador at Paris, and who had been her agent in 
 stirring up Conde and Coligni to their rebellion. The former 
 was imprisoned at Melun, and the latter at Saint Germain’s. 
 Smith was released upon her application; but Throckmorton 
 was detained, and was made use of for the following curious, 
 and, to “ good Bess,” most humiliating purpose. The treaty of 
 Chateau Cambrensis, which stipulated for the restoration of Ca¬ 
 lais in eight years, or the forfeiture of 500,000 crowns by the 
 French, contained a stipulation, that four French noblemen 
 should be held Try “good Bess,” as hostages for the fulfilment of 
 the treaty on the part of France. “ Good Bess,” by her aiding 
 of the French rebels, had broken this treaty, had lost aH just 
 claim to Calais, and ought to have released the hostages; but, 
 as “good Bess” very seldom did what she ought to; as she 
 Slight, almost every day of her mischievous life, have, with per¬ 
 fect truth, repeated that part of the Prayer-Book “ amended,' 1 
 which says, “ we have done those things which we ought not 
 to do, and have left undone those things which we ought to do ;” 
 so,this “good” woman hadkeptthc hostages, though she had for¬ 
 feited all just claim to that for the fulfilment of which they had 
 been put into her hands. Now, however, the French had got a 
 “ bird in hand” too. They had got Throckmorton, their old ene¬ 
 my, and he had got a large quantity of “good Bess’s” horrible se¬ 
 cret: locked up in his breast! So that, after long discussions, dur¬ 
 ing which Throckmorton gave very significant signs of his de¬ 
 termination not to end lis days in prison without taking revenge, 
 of some sort, on his merciless employer, the “good” woman 
 agreed to exchange the four French noblemen for him; and, as 
 a quarter of a loaf was better than no bread, to take 125,000 
 crowns for the relinquishment of Calais to France inperpetuity i 
 284. Thus, then, it was “good Queen Bess,” after all, glorious 
 and Protestant Bess, that plucked this jewel from the English 
 crown! Nor was this the onlv signal consequence of her un« 
 
 13* 
 
150 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 
 hallowed and unprincipled treaty and intrigues with the French 
 rebels. The plague which had got into the garrison of Havre 
 de Grace, and which had left Warwick with only about two 
 thousand out of his seven thousand men ; this dreadful disease 
 was brought,' by that miserable remnant of infected beings, to 
 England, where Hume himself allows, that it “swept off great 
 multitudes, especially in London, where above twenty thousand 
 persons died of it in one year" ! Thus was the nation heavily 
 taxed, afflicted with war, afflicted with pestilence; thus were 
 thousands upon thousands of English people destroyed or ruin¬ 
 ed, or rendered miserable, merely to gratify this proud and ma¬ 
 lignant woman, who thought that she could never be safe until 
 all the world joined in her flagrant apostacy. Thus, and mere¬ 
 ly for this same reason, was Calais surrendered for ever; Ca¬ 
 lais, the proudest possession of England ; Calais, one of the two 
 keys to the Northern Seas; Calais that had been won by our 
 Catholic forefathers two hundred years before; Calais, which 
 they would have no more thought of yielding to France, than 
 they would have thought of yielding Dover; Calais, the bare 
 idea of a possibility of losing which had broken the heart of the 
 honest, the virtuous, the patriotic, and most calumniated Mary ! 
 
 285. It is surprising what baseness Hume discovers in treat¬ 
 ing of the whole of this important series of transactions ; how 
 he glosses over all the breaches of faith and of oath, on the part 
 of the “ good Bess”; how he lets pass, without censure, the fla 
 grant and malignant treason of the rebels ; and even how he in¬ 
 sinuates apologies for them; how he skips by the rare fidelity of 
 Philip to his engagements; how he praises the black-hearted 
 Coligni, while he almost censures Conde for seeking peace after 
 the assassination of the Duke of Guise ; how he wholly suppres¬ 
 ses the deep humiliations of England in the case of Smith and 
 Throckmorton; how he makes the last bill of sale 200,000, in¬ 
 stead of the fourth pari of 500,000; how he passes over the loss 
 of Calais for ever, as nothing in “ good Bess,” though he had 
 made the temporary loss of it every thing in Mary; but, above 
 all the rest, how he constantly aims his malignity at that skilful, 
 brave, faithful, and patriotic nobleman, the Duke of Guise, wnile 
 he extols Conde as long as he was a rebel and a traitor, engaged 
 in selling his country ; and how he lauds the inveterate and trea¬ 
 cherous Coligni to the last hour of that traitor’s life. 
 
 286. Is there any man who does not see the vast importance 
 of Calais and its territory ? Is there any man who does not see 
 how desirable it would be to us to have it now ? Is there an Eng¬ 
 lishman who does not lament the loss of it ? And is it not clear 
 as the sun at noonday, that it was lost for ever by “ good BessV* 
 perfidy in joining the rebels of France ? If, when those rebels 
 were formidable to their sovereign she had pressed him to rt* 
 
151 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMAT ON. 
 
 •tore Calais at once , and to take an equivalent for such antici¬ 
 pated restoration, is it not obvious, that he would have consent¬ 
 ed, rather than risk her displeasure at such a moment? And, 
 what is the apology, that Home makes for her conduct in join¬ 
 ing the rebels ? “ Elizabeth, besides the general and essential 
 
 interest of supporting the Protestants, and opposing the rapid 
 progress of her enemy, the Duke of Guise” (how was he her 
 enemy ?) “ had other motives which engaged her to accept this 
 proposal. When she concluded the peace at Chateau X'ambren- 
 sis, she had good reason to foresee, that France would never vo¬ 
 luntarily fulfil the article with regard to the restitution of Ca¬ 
 lais; and many subsequent incidents tended to cyifirmthis sus¬ 
 picion. Considerable sums of money had been laid out on the 
 fortifications ; long leases had been granted of the lands ; and 
 many inhabitants had been encouraged to build and settle there, 
 by assurances that Calais would never be restored to the English. 
 The Queen, therefore, very wisely concluded, that, could she get 
 possession of Havre, a place which commanded the mouth of 
 the Seine, and was of much greater importance than Calais, 
 she should easily constrain the French to execute the treaty, and 
 should have the glory of restoring to the crown that ancient pos¬ 
 session, which was so much the favourite of the nation.” 
 
 287. Away, then, goes, at once, all her professions of desire 
 to defend the “ cause of the Gospel :” she is a hypocrite the most 
 profound at once: she breaks faith with the king of France, and 
 with the rebels too. But, if she really foresaw that the French 
 would not voluntarily fulfil the treaty of Chateau Cambrensis, 
 why did she conclude it, when Philip was ready to aid her in 
 compelling France to restore Calais at once ? And, as to the 
 44 subsequent incidents ,” which had confirmed her suspicions, 
 why should not the French government repair the fortifications, 
 and why should they not give 14 assurances that the territory 
 would never be restored to the English ,” seeing that she had bar¬ 
 gained for the perpetual surrender of 500,000 crowns ? The 
 French meant, doubtless, to pay the money at the end of the eight 
 years. They never, after she had rejected the offer of Philip, 
 intended to give up Calais: that every body knew, and nobody 
 better than “ good Bess:” she had hostages for the payment of 
 the money ; and she held those hostages, after she had receiv¬ 
 ed Havre from the rebels as a security for the payment of that 
 money! She had, she thought, two birds in the hand; but, 
 though she “ concluded very wisely ,” both birds escaped: she 
 out-witted and overreached herself: and the nation has, to this 
 day, to lament the consequences of her selfishness, bad faith, 
 and atrocious perfidy. 
 
 288. 1 should now proceed to follow 14 good Bess” and her 
 worthy friend Coligni down to the date of the niassacre of Saint 
 
 / 
 
152 
 
 PROTEST AN! REFORMATION. 
 
 Bartholomew, which was a sort of wholesale of the same work 
 that 11 good Bess” carried on in detail; but, I have filled my pa* 
 t>er; and I now see, that it will be impossible for me to do any 
 thing like justice to my subject without stretching my little work 
 further than I intended 
 
 1 ■ 
 
 LETTER X. 
 
 Massacre of Saint Bartholomew,—Tail-piece to it. —A 
 man’s hand cut off for thwarting Bess in her love-sick 
 fit.—Her favourites and ministers.—History and mur¬ 
 der of Mary, Queen of Scotland^ 
 
 Kensington, 31s/ August, 1825. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 288. Though the massacre of Saint Bartholomew took place 
 in Fance, yet it has formed so fertile a source of calumny against 
 the religion of our fathers ; it has served as a pretence with Pro¬ 
 testant historians to justify, or palliate so many atrocities on the 
 part of their divers sects; and the Queen of England and her 
 ministers had so great a hand in first producing it, and then in 
 punishing Catholics under pretence of avenging it, that it is ne- 
 tessary for me to give an account of it. 
 
 289. We have seen in the paragraphs from 273 to 281, the 
 •reacherous works of Coligni, and, in paragraph 278, we have 
 leen that this pretended Saint basely caused that gallant and pa¬ 
 triotic nobleman, the Duke of Guise, to be assassinated. But, 
 in assassinating this nobleman, the wretch did not take off the 
 whole of his family. There was a son left to avenge that father, 
 and the just vengeance of this son the treacherous Coligni had 
 yet to feel. We have seen, that peace had taken place between 
 the French king and his rebellious subjects; but, Coligni had all 
 along discovered that his treacherous designs only slent. The 
 King was making a progress through the kingdom about four 
 years after the pacification; a plot was formed by Coligni and 
 his associates to kill or seize him; but, by riding fourteen hours 
 without getting off his horse, and w ithout food or drink, he cs- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 153 
 
 caped, and got safe to Paris. Another civil war soon broke out, 
 followed by another pacification ; but, such had been the barba¬ 
 rities committed on both sides, that there could be, and there 
 was, no real forgiveness. The Protestants had been full as san¬ 
 guinary as the Catholics; and, which has been remarked even 
 by their own historians, their conduct was frequently, not to 
 say uniformly, characterized by plundering and by hypocrisy 
 and perfidy, unknown to their enemies. 
 
 290. During this pacification, Coligni had, by the deepest dis¬ 
 simulation, endeavoured to worm himself into favour with the 
 young King, and upon the occasion of a marriage between the 
 King’s sister and the young King of Navarre (afterwards the 
 famous Henry IV.), Coligni, who, Conde being now dead, was 
 become the chief of his sect, came to Paris, with a company of 
 his Protestant adherents, to partake in the celebration, and that, 
 too, at the King’s invitation. After, he had been there a day or 
 two, some one shot at him, in the street, with a blunderbuss, and 
 wounded him in two or three places, but not dangerously. His 
 partizans ascribed this to the young Duke of Guise, though no 
 proof has ever been produced in support of the assertion. They, 
 however, got about their leader, and threatened revenge, as was 
 very natural. Taking this for the gi'ound of their justification, 
 the Court resolved to anticipate the blow; and, on Sunday, the 
 24th of August, 1572, it being St. Bartholomew’s day, they 
 put their design in execution. There was great difficulty in pre¬ 
 vailing upon the young King to give his consent; but, at last, 
 by the representations and entreaties of his mother, those of the 
 Duke of Anjou, his brother, and those of the Duke of Guise, he 
 was prevailed upon. The dreadful orders were given ; at the 
 appointed moment, the signal was made; the Duke of Guise 
 with a band of followers rushed to and broke open the house of 
 Coligni, whose dead body was soon thrown out of the window 
 into the street. The people of Paris who mortally hated the 
 Protestants, and who could not have forgotten Coligni’s having 
 put the English in possession of Dieppe and Havre ; who could 
 not have forgotten, that, while the old enemy of France was 
 thus again brought into the country by Coligni and his Protes¬ 
 tants, this same traitor and his sect had basely assassinated that 
 brave nobleman, the late Duke of Guise, who had driven the Eng¬ 
 lish from their last hold, Calais, and who had been assassinated 
 at the very moment when he was endeavouring to drive this 
 old enemy from Havre, into which this Coligni and his sect had 
 brought that enemy : the people of Paris could not but remem¬ 
 ber these things, and remembering them, they could not but hold 
 Coligni and his sect in detestation indescribable. Besides this, 
 there were few of them some one or more of whose relations had 
 not perished, or suffered in some way oi other, from the plun* 
 
154 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 derings, or butcheries, of these marauding and murdering Cal¬ 
 vinists whose creed taught them that good works were unavail* 
 ing, and that no deeds, however base or bloody, could bar their 
 way to salvation. These “ Protestants,” as they were called, 
 bore no more resemblance to Protestants of the present day, than 
 the wasp bears a resemblance to the bee. That name then was, 
 and it was justly, synonymous with banditti; that is, robber and 
 murderer; and the persons bearing it had been, by becoming the 
 willing tool of every ambitious rebel, a greater scourge to France 
 than foreign war, pestilence and famine united. 
 
 291. Considering these things, and taking into view, that the 
 people, always ready to suspect even beyond the limits of rea¬ 
 son, heard the cry of “ treason ” on all sides, is it any wonder 
 that they fell upon the followers of Coligni, and that they spar¬ 
 ed none of the sect that they were able to destroy ? When we 
 consider these things, and especially when we see the son of the 
 assassinated Duke of Guise lead the way, is it not a most mon 
 strous violation of truth to ascribe this massacre to the principles 
 of the Catholic religion ? With equal justice might we ascribe 
 the act of Bellingham (who sent for his Church Prayer Book 
 the moment he was lodged in Newgate) to the principles of the 
 Church of England. No one has ever been base and impudent 
 enough to do this; why, then, are there men so base and impu¬ 
 dent as to ascribe this French massacre to Catholic principles? 
 
 292. The massacre at Paris very far exceeded the wishes of 
 the court; and orders were instantly dispatched to the great 
 towns in the provinces to prevent similar scenes. Such scenes 
 took place, however, in several places; but, though, by some 
 Protestant writers, the whole number of persons killed, has been 
 made to amount to a hundred thousand, an account published in 
 1582, and made up from accounts, collected ffomtht ministers in 
 the different towns, made the number, for all France, amount to 
 only 786 persons 1 Dr. Lingard (Note T. Vol. V.), with his 
 usual fairness, says, “ if we double this number, we shall not be 
 far from the real amount.” The Protestant writers began at 
 100,000; then fell to 70,000; then to 30,000; then to 20,000; 
 then to 15,000; and, at last, to 10,0001 All in round numbers ! 
 One of them, in an hour of great indiscretion, ventured upon 
 obtaining returns of names from the ministers themselves; and, 
 then, out came the 786 persons in the whole! 
 
 293. A number truly horrible to think of; but a number not 
 half so great as that of those English Catholics whom “ good 
 Queen Bess” had, even at this time (the 14th year of her reign), 
 caused to be ripped up, racked till the bones came out of their 
 sockets, or caused to be dispatched, or to die, in prison, or in 
 exile; and this, too. observe, not for rebellions, treasons, rob¬ 
 beries and assassinations, like those of Coligni and his follow 
 
1-KU IE ST ANT REFUKMAuuiV 
 
 IcW 
 
 ♦rs; but simply and solely for adhering- to the religion of their 
 and her fathers, which religion she had openly practised for 
 years, and to which religion she had most solemnly sworn 
 that she sincerely belonged ! The annals of hypocrisy con¬ 
 joined with impudence afford nothing to equal her behaviour 
 upon the occasion of the St. Bartholomew. She was daily 
 racking people nearly to death to get secrets from them; she was 
 daily ripping the bowels out of women as well as men for saying, 
 or hearing, that mass, for the celebration of which the churches 
 of England had been erected; she was daily mutilating,racking, 
 and butchering her own innocent and conscientious subjects : 
 and yet, she and her profligate court-women, when the French 
 ambassador came with the King of France’s explanation of 
 the cause of the massacre, received him in deep mourning, 
 and with all the marks of disapprobation. But, when she 
 remonstrated with her “ good brother,” the King of France, 
 and, added her hope, that ho would be indulgent to his Pro¬ 
 testant subjects, her hypocrisy carried her a little too far; 
 for, the Queen Mother, in her answer to “ good Bess,” observ¬ 
 ed, that, as to this matter, her son could not take a safer guide 
 than his “good sister of England”; and that, while, like her, 
 he forced no man’s conscience; like her, he was resolved to suf¬ 
 fer no man to practise any religion but that which he himself 
 practised. The French Queen Mother was still short of “ good 
 Betsy’s” mark; for she not only punished the practice of all re¬ 
 ligion but her own, she, moreover, punished people for not prac¬ 
 tising her religion; though she herself was a notorious apostate, 
 and that, too, from motives as notoriously selfish. 
 
 294. But, there is a tail-piece, which most admirably eluci¬ 
 dates “ good Betsy’s” sincerity upon this memorable occasion, 
 and also that same quality in her which induced her to profess, 
 that she wished to live and die a virgin Queen. The Parliament 
 and her ministers, anxious for an undisputed succession, and 
 anxious, also, to keep out the Scotch branch of the royal fami 
 ly, urged her several times to marry. She always rejected their 
 advice. Her “ virgin ” propensity led her to prefer that sort of 
 intercourse with men, which I need not more particularly allude 
 to. Her amours with Leicester, of whom we shall see enough 
 by-and-by, were open and notorious, and h»ave been most am¬ 
 ply detailed by many Protestant historians, some of whom have 
 been clergymen of the Church of England; it is, moreover, well 
 known that these amours became the subject of a play, acted in 
 the reign of Charles II. She was now, at the time of the St. 
 Bartholomew, in the 89th year of her age; and she was, as she 
 long had been, leading with Leicester, the life that I have allud 
 ed to. Ten years afterwards, whether from the advanced age of 
 Leicester, or from some other cause, the “ virgin ” propensity 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 156 
 
 seemed, all of a sudden to quit “ good Betsy”; she became beat 
 on wedlock; and, being now forty-nine years of age, there was, 
 to be sure, no time to be lost in providing an hereditary succes¬ 
 sor to her thorrie. She had, in .he 13th year of her reign, as¬ 
 sented to an Act that was passed, which secured the crown to 
 her “ natural issue ,” by which any bastard that she might have 
 by any body became heir to the thorne ; and it was, by the same 
 Act, made high treason to deny that such issue was heir to it. 
 This Act, which is still in the Statute-Book, 13 Eliz. chap. 1. S. 
 2., is a proof of the most hardened profligacy that ever was wit¬ 
 nessed in woman, and it is surprising, that such a mark of appa¬ 
 rent national abjectness and infamy should have been suffered 
 to remain in black and white to this day. However, at forty-nine 
 “good Betsy” resolved to lead a married life; and, as her sa¬ 
 vage father, whom she so much resembled, always looked out 
 for a young wife, so “ good vergin Betsy ” looked out for a young 
 husband; and, in order to convince the world of the since¬ 
 rity of her horror at the massacre of St. Bartholomew, who 
 should she fix on as a companion for life, who should sli6 
 want to take to her arms, but the Duke of anjou, brother of 
 Charles IX., and one of the 'perpetrators of those bloody deeds , 
 on account of which she and court ladies , all of her own stamp, 
 had gone into mourning ! The Duke was not handsome ; but, 
 he had, what the French call la beauty du diable : he was young: 
 only 28 years of age ; and her old paramour, Leicester. was 
 now fifty! Betsy, though well stricken in years herself had 
 still a “ colt’s tooth.” Her ministers and the nation, who saw 
 all the dangers of such a match to the independence of their 
 country, protested against it most vehemently, and finally de¬ 
 terred her from it; but, a gentleman of Lincoln’s Inn, who had 
 written and published a pamphlet against the marriage, was 
 prosecuted, and had his right hand chopped off for this public- 
 sprited effort in assisting to save England from the ruin about 
 to be brought upon it for the mere gratification of the appetite 
 of a gross libidinous, nasty, shameless old woman. It was said 
 of her monster of a father, who began the “Reformation,” that 
 “ he spared no man in his anger, and no woman in his lust” : 
 the very same, in substance, with a little change of the terms, 
 might be said of this his monster of a daughter, who completed 
 that “ Reformation”; and something approaching to the same 
 degree of wickedness might be justly ascribed to alomst every 
 one, who acted a conspicuous part in bringing about that, to 
 England, impovensiling and degrading event. 
 
 295. Before we come to the three other great transactions of 
 the long reign of this wicked woman, her foul murder of Mary 
 Stuart, Queen of Scotland; her war with Spain; and her scourg¬ 
 ing of Ireland , which unhappy country still bears the marks of 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 15* 
 
 ner scorpion lash; before we come to these, it will be necessary 
 to make ourselves acquainted with the names and characters of 
 some of her principal advisers and co-operators ; because, unless 
 we do this, we shall hardly be able to comprehend many things, 
 which we ought, nevertheless, to carry along clearly in our 
 minds. 
 
 296. Leicester was her favourite, both in council and in the 
 field. Doctor Heylin (History of the Reformation, Elizabeth, 
 p. 168) describes him in these words: “ Sir Robert Dudley, 
 the second Son of the Duke of Northumberland” (the odious 
 traitor executed in the last reign), “ she made, soon after she 
 came to the throne, Lord Denbeigh and Earl of Leicester, hav¬ 
 ing before made him her Master of Horse, Chancellor of the 
 University of Oxford, and a Knight of the Garter; and she now 
 gave him the fair manor of Denbeigh, with more gentlemen ow¬ 
 ing suit and service to it than any other in England in the hands 
 of a subject, adding even to this the goodly castle and manor of 
 Kenilworth. Advanced to this height, he engrossed unto himself 
 the disposing of all offices in court and state, and of all prefer¬ 
 ments in the church, proving, in fine, so unappeasable in his ma¬ 
 lice, and so insatiable in his lusts, so sacrilegious in his rapines, so 
 false in promises, and so treacherous in point of trust, and finally 
 60 destructive of the lives and properties of particular persons, 
 that his Utile finger lay far heavier on the English subjects, than 
 the loins of all the favourites of the two last Kings.” And, mind, 
 those -‘(wo Kings ” were the plundering and confiscating Hen¬ 
 ry VIII. and Edward VI,! ,l And, that his monstrous vices 
 might either be connived at, or pot complained of, he cloaks 
 them with a seeming zeal for true religion, and made himself 
 the head of the Puritan faction, who spared no pains in setting 
 fortn nis praises; nor was he wanting to caress them after such 
 manner as he found most agreeable to these holy hypocrites, 
 using no other language in his speech and letters than the Scrip- 
 lure phrase, in which he was as dexterous as if he had received 
 the same inspirations as the sacred penmen,” We must bear in 
 mind, that this character is drawn by a Doctor of the Church 
 of England (Betsy’s own Church), in a work dedicated by per¬ 
 mission to King Charles II. She, beyond all doubt, meaned to 
 marry Leicester, who had, as all the world believed, murdered 
 his own wife to make way for the match. She was prevented 
 from marrying him by the reports from her ambassadors of what 
 was said about this odious proceeding in foreign courts, and al¬ 
 so bythe remonstrances of her other ministers. Higgons, an 
 historian of distinguished talent and veracity, states, distinctly, 
 that Leicester murdered his first wife for the purpose of marry¬ 
 ing the Queen. He afterwards married, secretly, a second wife, 
 and when she, upon his wanting to marry a third, refused to be 
 
158 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 divorced, lie poisoned her ; at least, so said a publication called 
 Leicester’s Republic, put forth in 1568. Yet, after all these Jhings, 
 this man, or rather this monster continued to possess all his 
 power, and his emoluments, and all his favour with the “ virgin” 
 Queen, to the last day of his life, which ended in 1588, after 30 
 years of plundering and oppressing the people ofEngland. This 
 was a “ reformer" of religion, truly worthy of being enrolled 
 with Henry VIII., Cranmer, Thomas Cromwell, and “ good 
 Queen Bess/’ 
 
 297. Sir William Cecil was her next man. » He was her 
 Secretary of State; but she afterwards made him a lord, under 
 the title of Burleigh, and also made him Lord Treasurer. He 
 had been a Protestant in the reign of Edward the Sixth, when he 
 was Secretary, first under the Protector Somerset, w ho, when 
 Dudley overpowered him, was abandoned by Cecil, who took 
 to the latter, and was the very man that drew up the treason¬ 
 able instrument, by which, Edward, on his death-bed, disinhe¬ 
 rited his sisters Mary and Elizabeth. Pardoned for his treason 
 by Mary, he became a most zealous Catholic, and was, amongst 
 others, a volunteer to go over to Brussels, to conduct Cardinal 
 Pole to England. But, the wind having changed, he became 
 Protestant again, and Secretary of State to “ good Betsv,” w ho 
 never cared any thing about the character or principles of those 
 she employed, so that they did but answer her selfish ends. This 
 Cecil, who was a man of extraordinary abilities, and of still 
 greater prudence and cunning, was the chief prop of her throne 
 for nearly forty of the forty-three years of her reign. He died 
 in 1598, in the 77th year of his age: and if success in unprinci¬ 
 pled artifice ; if fertility in cunning devices ; if the obtaining of 
 one’s ends without any regard to the means; if, in this pursuit, 
 sincerity be to be set at nought, and truth, law, justice, and mer¬ 
 cy, be to be trampled under foot; if, so that you succeed in your 
 end, apostacy, forgery, perjury, and the shedding of innocent 
 blood be to be thought nothing of, this Cecil was certainly the 
 greatest statesman that ever lived. Above all others he w as con- 
 fided in by the Queen, who, when he grew old, and feeble in his 
 limbs, used to make him sit in her presence, saying, in her accus¬ 
 tomed masculine and emphatical style: “I have you, not for 
 your weak legs, but for your strong head.” 
 
 298. Francis Wai.singham became Secretary of State after 
 Cecil; but, he had been employed by the Queen almost from the 
 beginning of her reign. lie had been her ambassador at seve 
 ral courts, had negotiated many treaties, was an exceedingly 
 prudent and cunning man, and wholly destitute of all care about 
 means, so that he carried his end. He was said to have fifty- 
 three agents and eighteen real spies in foreign courts. lie was a 
 most bitter and inflexible persecutor of the Catholics; but, be 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 159 
 
 fore his death, which took place in 1590, he had to feel, himself, 
 a little of that tyranny and ingratitude, and that want of mer¬ 
 cy, of which lie had so long mainly assisted to make so many in¬ 
 nocent persons feel. 
 
 299. Paulet St. John, Marquis of Winchester. This was 
 not a statesman. He, like many more, was a backer-on. He 
 presided at trials; and did other such-iike work. These are un¬ 
 worthy of particular notice here, and Paulet is named merely 
 as a specimen of the character and conduct of the makers and 
 supporters of the famous “reformation.” This Paulet (the 
 first noble of the family) was, at his out-set Steward to the Bi¬ 
 shop of Winchester, in the time of Bishop Fox, in the reign of 
 Henry VII. He was, by old brutal Harry VIII , made Treasu¬ 
 rer of the king’s household, and, zealously entering into all the 
 views of that famous “ Defender of the Faith,” he was made 
 Lord St. John. He was one of those famous executors, who were 
 to carry into effect the will of Henry VIII. Though Harry had 
 enjoined on these men to maintain his sort of half Catholic re¬ 
 ligion, Paulet now, in the reign of Edward, became a zealous 
 Protestant, and continued to enjoy all his offices and emoluments, 
 besides getting some new grants from the further spoils of the 
 church and poor. Seeing that Dudley was about to supplant 
 Somerset, which he finally diif, Paulet joined Dudley, and actu 
 ally presided at the trial and passed sentence of death on So¬ 
 merset, “ whose very name,” says Dr. Milner, “ had, a little 
 more than two years'before, caused him to tremble.” Dudley 
 made him, first Earl of Wiltshire, and then Marquis of Winches¬ 
 ter, and gave him the palace of the Bishop of Winchester at Bi¬ 
 shop’s Waltham, together with other spoils of that Bishopric. 
 When Mary came, which was almost directly afterwards, he 
 became once more, a Catholic, and continued to hold and en¬ 
 joy all his offices and emoluments. Not only a Catholic, but a 
 most furious Catholic, and the most active and vigorous of all the 
 persecutors of those very Protestants, with whom he had made 
 it his boast to join in communion only about two years before! We 
 have heard a great deal about the cruelties of the “ bloody Bi¬ 
 shop Bonner”; but, nobody ever tells us, that this Marquis of 
 Winchester, as President of the Council, repeatedly reprimand¬ 
 ed Bonner, in very severe terms, for want of seal and diligence 
 in sending Protestants to the slake! Fox says, that, “of the Coun¬ 
 cil, the most active in these 'prosecutions was the Marquis of Win - 
 Chester," But, now, Mary being dead, and Elizabeth being re¬ 
 solved to extirpate the Catholics, Paulet instantly became a 
 Protestant again, a most cruel persecutor of the Catholics, Pre¬ 
 sident on several commissions for condemning them to death, 
 and he was in such high favour with “ good Bess,” that she said, 
 were he not so very old, as he was, she would prefer him, as a 
 
160 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 husband , to any man in her dominions. He died in die 13th 
 vear of her reign, at the age of 97, having kept in place during 
 the reigns of jive sovereigns, and having made four changes in 
 his religion to correspond with the changes made bv four out of 
 the five. A French historian says, that Paulet being asked, 
 iiow he had been able to get through so many storms, not only 
 unhurt, but rising all Ike while, answered, “ En etant un saule, 
 et non pas un ckene “by being a willow, and not an oak” 
 Our present prime minister, w ho, in 1S22, while collections were 
 making for the starving Irish, ascribed the distresses of the coun 
 try to a surplus of food, seems also to be of this willow kind; 
 for, with the exception of about fifteen months, he has been in 
 place ever since he was a man. He was under Pitt the first time ; 
 Pitt went out, but he stuck in with Addington; Addington went 
 out, but he stuck in again with Pitt second time: lie was pushed 
 quite out by the “ Whigs” ; but in he came again with the Duke 
 of Portland ; he stuck in with Percival; and, at last, he got to 
 the top, where he will remain for his natural life, unless the pa¬ 
 per-money storm should tear even “ willows” up by the roots. 
 What this Bible-Saint would have done, if there had been a 
 change of religion at every change of ministry, I shall not pre¬ 
 tend to say. 
 
 300. Such were the tools with which “good Bess” had to 
 work; and we have now to see in what manner they all worked 
 with regard to Mary Stuart, the celebrated and unfortunate 
 queen of the Scotch. Without going into her history, it is im¬ 
 possible to make it clearly appear how Betsy was aole to establish 
 the Protestant religion in England in spite of Ike people of Eng¬ 
 land; for it was, in fact, in spite of almost the whole of the people 
 of all ranks and degrees. She actually butchered, that is to say, 
 ripped up thebellies, of some hundreds of them; she put many and 
 many hundreds of them to the rack ; she killed in various wavs 
 many thousands; and she reduced to absolute beggary as many 
 as made the population of one of the smaller counties of Eng¬ 
 land; to say nothing, at present, of that great slaughter-house, 
 Ireland. It is impossible for us to see how she came to be able 
 to do this; how she came to be able to get the Parliament to do 
 the many monstrous things that they did; how they, without 
 any force, indeed, came to do such barefaced things, as to pro¬ 
 vide that any bastard that she might have should inherit the 
 throne, and to make it high treason to deny that such bastard 
 was rightful heir to the throne. It is impossible to account for 
 her being able to exist in England after that act of indelible in¬ 
 famy, the murder of Mary Stuart. It is impossible for us to see 
 these things in their causes, unless we make ourselves acquaint¬ 
 ed with the history of Mary, and thereby show how the English 
 were influenced at this most interesting period, the transactions 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 161 
 
 of which were so decisive as to the fate of the Catholic religion 
 in England. 
 
 301. Mary Stuart, born in 1542 (nine years after the birth 
 of Elizabeth), was daughter of James V. King of Scotland, and 
 of Mary of Lorraine, sister of that brave and patriotic nobleman, 
 the Duke of Guise, who, as we have seen, was so basely murder¬ 
 ed by the vile traitor, Coligni. Mary Stuart’s father died when 
 she was only eight days old; so that she became the reigning 
 queen of Scotland, while in the cradle. Her father (James V.) 
 was the son of James IV. and Margaret the eldest sister of the. 
 old savage Henry VIII. This “ Defender' of the Faith” wished 
 Mary Stuart to be betrothed to his soil Edward, and by that 
 means to add Scotland to the dominions of England. The fa¬ 
 mily of Guise were too deep for the old “ Defender.” Marv 
 Stuart (a Regency having been settled in Scotland) was taken to 
 France, where she had her education, and where her heart seem¬ 
 ed to remain all her life. The French, in order to secure Scot¬ 
 land to themselves, as a constant ally against England, got Ma¬ 
 ry to be betrothed to Francis, Dauphin of France, son and suc¬ 
 cessor of Henry II., king of France. She, at the age of 17 years, 
 was married to him, who was two years younger than herself, 
 in 1558, the very year that Elizabeth mounted the throne of 
 England. 
 
 302. That very thing now took place which old Harry had 
 been so much afraid of, and which, indeed, had been the dread 
 of his councillors and his people. Edward was dead, Queen 
 Mary was dead, and, as Elizabeth was a bastard, both in law 
 and in fact, Mary Stuart was the heiress to the throne of Eng - 
 land, and and she was no w the wife of the immediate heir to the 
 King of France. Nothing could be so fortunate for Elizabeth. 
 The nation had no choice but. one : to take her and uphold her; 
 or, to become a great province of France. If Elizabeth had 
 died at this time, or had died before her sister Mary, England 
 must have become degraded thus ; or, it must have created n new 
 dynasty, or become a republic. Therefore, it was, that all men, 
 whether Catholics or Protestants, were for the placing and sup¬ 
 porting of Elizabeth on the throne ; and for setting aside Mary 
 Stuart, though unquestionably she was the lawful heiress to the 
 crown of England. 
 
 Cj 
 
 303. As if purposely to add to the weight of this motive, of it¬ 
 self weighty enough, Henry II., King of France, died in eight 
 months after Elizabeth’s accession; so that Mary Stuart was 
 now, 1559, Queen consort of France, Queen of Scotland, and cal¬ 
 led herself Qticen of England; she and her husband bore the 
 arms of England along with those of France and Scotland; and 
 the Popk had refused to acknowledge the right if Elizabeth to 
 the English throne. Thus, as old Harrv had foreseen, when he 
 
 14* 
 
,62 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 made his will setting aside the Scotch branch of his family, was 
 England actually transferred to the dominion of France, unless 
 the°nation set at nought the decision of the Pope, and support¬ 
 ed Elizabeth. 
 
 304. This was the real cause of Elizabeth’s success in her 
 work of extirpating the Catholic religion. According to the de¬ 
 cision of the head of the Catholic church, Elizabeth was an 
 usurper; if she were an usurper, she ought to be set aside ; if she 
 were set aside, Mary Stuart and the King of France became 
 Queen and King of England ; if they became Queen and King 
 of England, England became a mere province, ruled by Scotch¬ 
 men and Frenchmen, the bare idea of which was quite sufficient 
 to put every drop of English blood m motion. All men, thei e- 
 tore. of all ranks in life, whether Protestants or Catholics, were 
 for Elizabeth. To preserve her life became an object dear to 
 all her people ; and, though her cruelties did, in one or two in¬ 
 stances, arm Catholics against her life, as a body they were as 
 as loyal to her as her Protestant subjects; and, even when her 
 knife was approaching their bowels, they, without a single ex¬ 
 ception, declared her to be their lawful Queen. Therefore, 
 though the decision of the PorE was perfectly honest and just in 
 itself, that decision was, in its obvious andinevitale consequences, 
 rendered, by a combination of circumstances, so hostile to the 
 greatness, the laws, the liberties, and the laudable pi ide ol Eng¬ 
 lishmen, that they were reduced to the absolute necessity of set- 
 tin"- his’decision at nought, or, of surrendering their very name 
 as a nation. But, observe, by-tlie-bye, this dilemma and all the 
 dangers and sufferings that it produced, arose entirely out of the 
 “ Reformation,” Had the sfivage old Harry listened to Sii lho- 
 mas More and Bishop Fisher, there would have been no obstacle 
 to the marrying of his son with Mary Stuart; and, besides, he 
 would have had no children, whose legitimacy could have been 
 disputed, and, in all human probability, several children to be, 
 in lawful succession, heirs to the throne of England. 
 
 305. Here we have the great, and, indeed, the only cause, of 
 Elizabeth’s success ir. rooting out the Catholic religion. Her 
 people were, ninety-nine hundredths of them, Catholics. T hey 
 had shown this clearly at the accession of her sister Mary. Eli¬ 
 zabeth was as great a tyrant as ever lived; she was the most 
 cruel of women; her disgusting amours were notorious ; yet she 
 was the most popular sovereign that had ever reigned since 
 the days of Alfred ; and we have thousands of proofs, that her 
 people', of all ranks and degrees, felt a most anxious interest in 
 every thing affecting her life or her health. Effects like this dc 
 not come from ordinary causes. Her treatment ot great masses 
 of her people, her a'most unparalleled cruelties, hei Hagiant 
 falsehoods, her haughtiness, her insolence and her lewd life 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. j 63 
 
 were naturally calculated to make her detested and to 
 
 “ ‘h« S-tes, aSh" ^ce V* 
 
 a»rfaaSSa 
 
 of Eno-landl ti .' Vhitake ? ( a clergyman of the Church 
 „ • f 1 ' ca s tllls a niost infamous act. It was in itself 
 
 n»V aeT4 Tu"'' abjec, ' less in natio^ which ft 
 
 consider well wha't’l Sf'r ,‘?i ‘‘f' 0 ' 0 ’ disa PP Cars , "'hen wc 
 
 "a7af ilmt’tLT 0 K ma * l ‘ r *“P <silt^/Teteuck, 
 
 tie dm‘c Phathlr T7’ f cribes Elisabeth’s popularity to 
 
 ‘ tr/ e ° P 6 had ' Vllat he calls ‘he “ Romish 
 y .. . ‘ Vhiiakek ascribes the extirpation of th« Cetho 
 
 tholir? 10 ! 1 t0 t lC C/ !° ice °f her P e <>ple : and not to her. The Ca* 
 f* hi r r a . scnl ’ e “ to her cruelties; and they are right so 
 
 caule to pts tTlC ‘ haVe e “ deaTOUre ‘ 1 “> »»’ .howVoV” 
 came mi! ’ > th ° se . ! mmerous a «<l unparalleled cruelties 
 
 The ouesdo P u r w P uLT d “'f im ’ tta & her tor ministers! 
 
 si:,,, 1 / the nation was, m short, the Protestant reli- 
 
 fjary S narl i’d \1„“‘ T™,‘ n ? 1 .° r ’ ,he C »‘tolic region, 
 
 ind oiria a tfor i'aT aU ‘ he CaIamitks ’ aad >"* «»> tragical 
 
 is accession, and was succeeded by Charles IX 
 then not more than three years old. Her husband's mother* 
 Catherine de Medici, soon convinced her, that to be anythin" 
 
 ti::z: tz-° 5 ? /w * s “ ^ 
 
 leavy heart anticipating very little quiet in a country which 
 
 deepCthan Fnl f ° f the “ reformation ” even more 
 
 2 y than England had been. Her long minority together 
 
 i n , r kc(ion )S of 06 n m her dom,nions > h «tl given rise’to contend- 
 other and ? f . nobles ’ who alternately triumphed over each 
 ot ier, and who kept the country in a state of almost incessant 
 
 Sh rh V #i r ’ ac ? oln P an,ed w »th deeds of perfidy and ferocity of 
 which there ,s scarcely any parallel to be found in history an 
 
 ° l modern * Ad dedto this was the work of the new Saints. 
 
164 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 who had carried the work of “ reformation” much further than 
 in Finland. The famous John Knox, an apostate monk, whom 
 Dr. Johnson calls the “ Ruffian of the Reformation,” was leader 
 of the “ holy hypocrites” (as Dr. Heylin calls them) in Scotland. 
 Mary, who had been bred a Catholic, and who had almost been 
 deified in the court of France, was not likely to lead a happy 
 life amongst people like these, 
 
 307. All this, however, Elizabeth and her ministers, and (tor 
 let us have no disguise) the English people, saw with great and 
 ungenerous satisfaction. There was, for the present, at least, an 
 end to the danger from the union of Scotland with France. But, 
 Mary Stuart might marry again. There were the powerful fa¬ 
 mily of Guise, her near relations } and she was still a formidable 
 person, especially to Elizabeth. If Mary had been a man, Bet¬ 
 sy would certainly have married her; but here was a difficulty 
 too great even for Cecil to overcome. The English queen soon 
 began to stir up factions and rebellions against her cousin ; and, 
 indeed, by her intrigues with the religious factions and with the 
 aspiring nobles, became, in a short time, with the aid of her mo¬ 
 ney (a drug of infallible effect with the Scotch reformers), more 
 the real ruler of Scotland than poor Mary was. She had, for 
 the greater part of her whole reign, always a band of one fac 
 tion or the other at, or about, her court. Her object was to keep 
 Mary from possessing any real power, and to destroy her, if, by 
 any means short of detectable murder, she could effect that pur¬ 
 pose. 
 
 308. In 1565, about three years after the return of Mary to 
 Scotland, she was married to Henry Stuart, Earl of Darnley, 
 her cousin, in which she over-reached the Queen of England, 
 who, fearing that a visible heir to her own throne (as it actually 
 happened) might come from this marriage, took desperate mea< 
 sures to prevent it; but those measures came too late. Darnley, 
 though young and handsome, proved to be a very foolish and 
 disagreeable husband, and he was a Protestant into the bargain. 
 She soon treated him with great contempt, suffered him to have 
 no real authority, and, in fact, as good as banished him from her 
 court and disowned him. Darnley sought revenge. He ascrib¬ 
 ed his ill-treatment to Mary’s being under the advice and cbn- 
 troul of her Catholic favourites, and particularly to the advice 
 of Rizzio, a foreigner, her private secretary. Several mal¬ 
 content “reformed” nobles joined with Darnley in agreeing to 
 assist him in the assassinating of Rizzio, taking a bond from him to 
 protect them against evil consequences. Mary was sitting at 
 supper w ith some ladies of her court, Rizzio and other servant* 
 being in waiting, when the conspirators rushed in. Darnley 
 went to the back of the Queen’s chair; Rizzio, seeing their ob 
 ject, ran to the Queen for protection ; she, who was in the sixth 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 165 
 
 month of her pregnancy, endeavoured by entreaties and screams, 
 to save his life. The ruffians stabbed him at her feet, and then 
 dragged him out and covered his body with wounds. 
 
 309. This black and bloody transaction, for which not one of 
 the assistants of Darnley was ever punished, was, in all probability 
 the cause, the chief cause, of the just, though illegal killing of 
 Darnley himself. The next year after the murder of Rizzio, 
 1567, Mary having, in the mean while, brought forth a son (after¬ 
 wards our James I. of half Pope and half Puritannical memory), 
 Darnley was taken ill at Glasgow. The Queen went to visit 
 him, treated him with great kindness, and, when he became 
 better in health, brought him back to Edinburgh; but, for the 
 sake of better air, lodged him in a house, at some distance from 
 other houses, out of the town, where she visited him daily, and 
 where, in a room immediately under his, she slept every night. 
 But, on the night of the 10th of February (1567), she having 
 notified it to him, slept at her palace, having promised to be 
 present at the marriage of two of the attendants of her court, 
 which marriage took place, and at which she was present: on 
 this very night, the king’s lodging house was blown up by pow¬ 
 der, and his dead body cast into an adjoining piece of ground ! 
 If the powder had given this base and bloody man time foi 
 thought, he would, perhaps, have reflected on the stabs he had 
 given Rizzio in spite of the screams of a swooning and preg¬ 
 nant wife. 
 
 310. Now it was that the great and life-long calamities of this 
 unfortunate Queen began. She had been repeatedly insulted 
 and even imprisoned by the different factions, who, aided and 
 abetted by the English Queen, alternately oppressed both her 
 and her people; but, she was now to lead the life and die the 
 death of a malefactor. It has been proved beyond all doubt, 
 that the Earl of Bothwel, with other associates, bound in a 
 “ bloody bond," murdered Darnley. This was openly alleged, 
 and, in placards about the streets, it was averred that Mary 
 was in the plot. No positive proof has ever been produced to 
 make good this charge ; but, the subsequent conduct of the 
 Queen was of a nature very suspicious. I shall simply state 
 such facts as are admitted on all hands; namely, that Bothwel 
 had, before the murder, been in great favour with the Queen, 
 and possessed power that his talents and character did not en¬ 
 title him to ; that, after the murder, he was acquitted of it. by a 
 mock trial, which she might have prevented ; that, on the 24th 
 of April (53 days after the murder) she was, on her return from 
 a visit to her infant son, seized by Bothwel at the head of 3,000 
 horsemen, and carried to his castle of Dunbar ; that, before she 
 left the castle, on the 3d of May, she agreed to marry him ; that 
 he had a wife then alive; that a divorce, both Protestant and 
 
166 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 Catholic, in one court for adultery and in the other for consan¬ 
 guinity, took place between Bothwel and his wife, in the space 
 of six days : that, on the 12th of May, Bothwel led the Queen 
 to the Sessions House, where, in the presence of the judges, she 
 pardoned him for the violence committed on her person ; that, 
 on the 13th of May, she openly married him ; that the French 
 Ambassador refused to appear at the ceremony; and that Mary 
 refused, in this case, to listen to the entreaties of the family of 
 Guise. 
 
 311. Scores of volumes have been written, some in support 
 of the assertion, that Mary was consenting to the murder of her 
 husband ; and others in support of the negative of that propo¬ 
 sition. Her enemies brought forward letters and sonnets, which 
 they alleged to have been written by Mary to Bothwel, previous 
 to her husband’s murder. Her friends deny the authenticity of 
 these ; and, l think the}' make their denial good. Whitaker, 
 an Englishman, a Rector in the Church of England, mind ; a 
 man, too. who has written much against the Catholic religion, 
 defends Mary against the charge of having consented, or having 
 known of the intention, to murder her husband. But, nobody 
 can deny the above-stated facts ; nobody can deny, that she 
 was carried off by Bothwel; that she, being at perfect liberty, 
 pardoned him for that; and that she immediately married him, 
 though it excited horror in the family of Guise, whom she had 
 always theretofore listened to with the docility of a dutiful 
 daughter. 
 
 312. This gross conduct, almost equal, in power of exciting 
 odium, to the murder of such a wretch as Darnlev, was speedi¬ 
 ly followed by tremendous punishment. A part of her subjects 
 armed against her, defeated Bothw el, who was compelled to 
 flee the country, and who, in a few years afterwards, died in 
 prison in Denmark. She herself became a prisoner in the 
 hands of her own subjects; and she escaped from their prison 
 walls only to come and end her life within those of Elizabeth, 
 her wily and deadly enemy. 
 
 313. The rebels were headed by the Earl of Murray, a na 
 tural son of Mary’s father, and to her a most unnatural and 
 cruel brother. He had imprisoned and deposed the Queen, had 
 had her son crow'ned at thirteen months old, and had had him 
 self elected Regent of the Kingdom. Murray had begun his 
 life of manhood, not onlv as a Catholic, but as an ecclesiastic. 
 He was prior of St. Andrews; but, finding that he could gain b} 
 apostacy, he, like Knox, apostatized, and, of course, broke his 
 oath; and Witaker says of him, that though “ he was guilt} 
 of the most monstrous crimes, yet he was denominated a good 
 man by the reformers of those days.” His great object was to 
 extirpate the Catholic religion, as the best means of retaining 
 
PROTESTANT REFORM AT TON. 
 
 167 
 
 his power; and, being' also a “ bold liar” and a man that, stuck 
 at no forgery, no perjury, no bloody deed, that answered his 
 purpose, he was a man after “ good Queen Bess’s” own heart. 
 
 314. She, however, at first, affected to disapprove of his con¬ 
 duct, threatened to march an army to compel him to restore the 
 Queen, gave the Queen positive assurances of her support, and 
 invited her to take, in case of need, shelter, and receive pro¬ 
 tection, in England. In evil hour, Mary, confiding in these 
 promises and invitations, took, contrary to the prayers of her 
 faithful friends, on their knees, the fatal resolution to throw her¬ 
 self into the jaws of her who had so long thirsted for her blood. 
 At the end of three days she found that she had escaped to a 
 prison. Her prison was, indeed, changed two or three times ; 
 but a prisoner she remained for nineteen long years ; and was, 
 at last, most savagely murdered for an imputed crime, which 
 she neither did nor could commit. 
 
 315. During these nineteen years, Elizabeth was intriguing 
 with Mary's rebellious subjects, tearing Scotland to pieces by 
 means of her corruption spread amongst the different bands of 
 traitors, and inflicting on a people, who had never offended her, 
 every species of evil that a nation can possibly endure. 
 
 316. To enumerate, barely to enumerate, all, or one half, ot 
 the acts of hypocrisy, perfidy, meanness, and barbarity that 
 u good Bess” practised against this unfortunate Queen, who 
 was little more than twentv-five vears of a<re when she was in- 
 
 %> * o 
 
 veigled within the reach of her harpy claws; barely to enume¬ 
 rate these would require a space exceeding that of this whole 
 Number. While she affected to disapprove of Murray, she in¬ 
 stigated him to accuse his Queen and sister; while she pre¬ 
 tended to assert the inviolability of sovereigns, she appointed a 
 commission to try Mary for her conduct in Scotland ; while she 
 was vowing vengeance against the Scotch traitors for their re¬ 
 bellious acts against her cousin, she received, as presents from 
 them, a large part of the jewels which Mary had received from 
 her first husband, the King of France ; and when, at last, she 
 was compelled to declare Mary innocent of having consented to 
 the murder, she not only refused to restore her agreeably to her 
 solemn promise repeatedly made, but refused also to give her 
 her liberty, and, moreover, made her imprisonment more close, 
 rigorous and painful than ever. Murray, her associate in per¬ 
 fidy, was killed in 1570 by a man whose estate he had unjustly 
 confiscated; but, traitor after traitor succeeded him, every 
 traitor in her pay, and Scotland bleeding all the while at every 
 pore, because her cruel policy taught her that it was necessary 
 to her own security. Whitaker produces a crowd of authori¬ 
 ties to prove, that she endeavoured to get Mary’s infant son into 
 
163 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 her hands, and that, having failed in that, she endeavoured tc 
 cause him to be taken off by poison! 
 
 317. At last, in 1587, the tygress brought her long-suffering 
 victim to the block ! Those means of dividing and destroying, 
 which she had, all her life long, been employing against others, 
 began now to be employed against herself, and she saw her life 
 in constant danger. She thought, and, perhaps, rightly, that 
 these machinations against her arose from a desire in the Ca¬ 
 tholics (and a very natural desire it was) to rid the world of 
 her and her horrid barbarities, and to make way for her Catho¬ 
 lic, lawful successor, Mary ; so that, now, nothing short of the 
 death, of this Queen seemed to her a competent guarantee for 
 her own life. In order to open the way for the foul deed that 
 had been resolved on, an act of parliament was passed, making 
 it death for any one who was within the realm to conspire with 
 others for the purpose of invading it, or, for the purpose of pro¬ 
 curing the death of the Queen. A seizure was made of Mary’s 
 papers. What Was wanting in reality was, as Whitaker lias 
 proved, supplied by forgery, “ a crime,” says he, “ which, with 
 shame to us, it must be confessed, belonged peculiarly to the 
 Protestants .” But, what right had Bess to complain of any hos¬ 
 tile intention on the part of Mary ? She was a Queen as well as 
 herself. She was held in prison by force ; not haring been 
 made prisoner in war; but having been perfidiously entrapped 
 and forcibly detained. Every thing had been done against her 
 short of spilling her blood; and, had she not a clear ana indis¬ 
 putable right, to make war upon, and to destroy, her remorse 
 less enemy, by all the means within her power ? And, as to a 
 trial, where was the law, or usage, that authorized one Queen to 
 invite another into her dominions, then imprison her, and then 
 bring her to trial for alleged offences against her ? 
 
 318. When the mode of getting rid of Mary vas debated in 
 “ good Bess’s” council, Leicester was for poison; others were 
 for hardening her imprisonment, and killing her in that way; 
 but Walsingham was for death by means of a trial, a legal 
 proceeding being the only one that would silence the tongues ol 
 the world. A commission was accordingly appointed, and 
 Mary was tried and condemned; and that, too, on the evidence 
 of papers, a part, at least, of which, were barefaced forgeries, 
 all of which were copies, and the originals of none of which 
 were attempted to be produced ! The sentence of death was 
 pronounced in October. For four months the savage u good 
 Queen Bess” was employed in devising plans for causing her 
 victim to be assassinated, in order to avoid the odium of being 
 herself the murderer ! This is proved by Witaker beyond all 
 possibility of doubt; but, though she had entrusted the keeping 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 16 $ 
 
 of Mary to two men, mortal enemies of the Catholics, they, 
 though repeatedly applied to for the purpose, perse veringly re¬ 
 fused. Having ordered her Secretary Davison, to write to 
 them on the subject, Sir Amias Paulet, one of the keepers', re¬ 
 turned for answer, that he “ was grieved at the motion made to 
 him, thAt he offered his life and his property to the disposal of 
 her Majesty; but absolutely refused to be concerned in the 
 assassination of Mary.” The other keeper, Sir Drue Drury, 
 did the same. When she read this answer, she broke out in re¬ 
 proaches against them, complained of the “ daintiness of their 
 consciences,” talked scornfully of “ the niceness of such precise 
 fellows,” and swore that she would “ have it done without their 
 assistance.” At the end, however, of four months of unavailing 
 efforts to find men base and bloody enough to do the deed, she 
 resorted to her last shift, the legal murder, which was committed 
 on her hapless victim on the 8th of February, 1587, a day of 
 everlasting infamy to the memory of the English Queen, “who,” 
 says Whitaker, “ had no sensibilities of tenderness, and no sen¬ 
 timents of generosity; who looked not forward to the awful i 
 verdict of history, and who shuddered not at the infinitely more 
 awful doom of God. I blush, as an Englishman, to think that 
 this was done by an English Queen, and one whose name, I was 
 taught to lisp in my infancy, as the honour of her sex, and the 
 glory of our Isle.” 
 
 319. Ah ! and thus was l taught; and thus have vfe all been 
 taught. It is surely then our duty to teach our children to know 
 the truth. Talk of “ answers ” to me, indeed 1 Let them deny, 
 if they can, that this she “ Head of the Church," this maker of 
 it, was a murderer, and wished to be an assassin, in cold blood. 
 
 15 
 
170 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 LETTER XI. 
 
 Bess’s hypocrisy as to the death oeMary Stuart.—Spanish 
 Armada.—Poor-Laws.—Barijarous treatment ok Ireland. 
 —Bess’s Inquisition.—Horrid persecution of the Catho¬ 
 lics.—The racks and tortures she employed.—Her 
 
 DEATH. 
 
 Kensington, 30 Ih Sept. 1825. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 320. Detestably base as was the conduct of “ good Queen 
 Bess” in the act of murdering her unfortunate cousin, her sub¬ 
 sequent hypocrisy was still more detestable. She affected the 
 deepest sorrow for the act that had been committed, pretended 
 that it had been done against her wish, and had the superlative 
 injustice and baseness to imprison her Secretary, Davison, for 
 having dispatched the warrant for the execution, though she, 
 observe, had sigjied that warrant, and though, as Whitaker 
 has fully proved, she had reviled Davison for not having dis¬ 
 patched it, after she had, in vain, used all the means in her power 
 to induce him to employ assassins to do the deed. She had, 
 by a series of perfidies and cruelties, wholly without a parallel, 
 brought her hapless victim to the block, in that very country t'* 
 which she had invited her to seek safety ; she had, in the last sad 
 and awful moments of that victim, had the barbarity to refuse 
 her the consolations of a divine of her own communion ; she had 
 pursued her with hatred and malice that remained unglutted 
 even when she saw her prostrate under the common hangman 
 and when she saw the blood gushing from her severed neck; un¬ 
 sated with the destruction of her body, she, Satan-like, had 
 sought the everlasting destruction of her soul: and yet, the deed 
 being done, she had the more than Satan-like hypocrisy to affect 
 to weep for the untimely end of her “ dear cousin” ; and, which 
 was still more diabolical, to make use of her despotic power to 
 crush her humane secretary, under pretence that he had been 
 the cause of the sad catastrophe! All expression? of detestation 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 171 
 
 and horror fall short of our feelings, and our only consolation 
 is, that we are to see her own end ten thousand times more to 
 be dreaded than that of her victim. 
 
 321. Yet, such were the peculiar circumstances of the times, 
 that this wicked woman escaped, not only for the present, but 
 throughout her long reign, that general hatred from her sub¬ 
 jects, which her character and deeds so w'ell merited ; nay, it 
 perversely happened, that, immediately after this foul deed, 
 there took place an event, which rallied all her people round 
 her, and made her life, more than ever, an object of their soli¬ 
 citude. 
 
 322. Philip II., King of Spam, wno was also sovereign of the 
 Low r Countries, resolved on an invasion of England, with a fleet 
 from Spain and with an army from Flanders. She had given 
 him quite provocation enough ; she had fomented rebellions 
 against him, as she long had in France against the king of that 
 country. Philip was the most powerful monarch in Europe; 
 he had fleets and armies vastly superior to hers ; tlie danger to 
 England was really great; but, though these dangers had been 
 brought upon it solely by her malignity, bad faith, and perfidy, 
 England was still England to her people, and they unanimously 
 rallied round her. On this occasion, and, indeed, on all others, 
 where love of country was brought to the test, the Catholics 
 proved, that no degree of oppression could make them forget 
 their duty as citizens, or as subjects. Even from Hume it is 
 extorted, that the Catholic gentlemen, though her laws excluded 
 them from all trust and authority, “ entered as volunteers in her 
 fleet or army. Some equipped ships at their own charge, and 
 gave the command of them to Protestants : others were active 
 in animating their tenants and vassals and neighbours, to the 
 defence of their country : and, every rank of men, burying, for 
 the present, all party distinctions, seemed to prepare themselves 
 with order as well as vigour, to resist these invaders.” Charles 
 I., James II., George I., and George II., and even George III., 
 all saw the time, when they might have lamented the want of 
 similar loyalty in Protestants. The first lost his head; the 
 second his throne ; the third and fourth were exposed to great 
 danger of a similar loss ; and the fifth lost America; and all by 
 the doings of Protestants. 
 
 323. The intended invasion was prevented by a tremendous 
 storm, which scattered and half destroyed the Spanish fleet, 
 called the Armada, and, in all human probability, the invaders 
 would not have succeeded, even if no storm had arisen. But, 
 at any rate, there was great danger ; no one could be certain of 
 
 j the result; the Catholics, had they listened to their just resent- 
 s ment, might have greatly added to the danger; and, therefore, 
 
 ; their generous conduct merited some relaxation of the cruel 
 
172 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 treatment, which they had hitherto endured under her iron 
 sceptre. No such relaxation, however, took place : they were 
 still treated with every species of barbarous cruelty . subjected 
 to an inquisition infinitely more severe than that of Spain ever 
 had or ever has been ; and, even on the bare suspicion of disaf¬ 
 fection, imprisoned, racked, and not unfrequentlv put to deatii. 
 
 324. As to Ireland, where the estates of the convents, and 
 where the church property had been confiscated in the same 
 way as in England, and where the greater distance of the peo¬ 
 ple from the focus of power and apostacy and fanaticism, had 
 rendered it more difficult to effect their “ conversion ” at the 
 point of the bayonet, or by the halter or the rack; as to this 
 portion of her dominions, her reign was almost one unbroken 
 series of robberies and butcheries. One greedy and merciless 
 minion after another were sent to goad that devoted people into 
 acts of desperation ; and that, too, not only for the obvious pur¬ 
 pose, but for the avowed purpose, of obtaining a pretence for 
 new confiscations. The u Reformation” had, from its very out¬ 
 set, had plunder written on its front ; but, as to Ireland, it was 
 all plunder from the crown of its head to the sole of its foot. 
 This horrible lvnx-like she-tyrant could not watch each move¬ 
 ment of the Catholics there, as she did in England ; she could 
 not so harass them in detail; she could find there no means of 
 executing her dreadful police; and therefore she murdered 
 them in masses. She sent over those parsons whose successors 
 are there to the present day. The ever blood-stained sword 
 sec, d them the tithes and the church-lands; but even that 
 bloo stained sword could not then, and never did, though at 
 one time wielded by the unsparing and double-distilled Protes¬ 
 tant, Cromweli., obtain them congregations. However, she 
 planted, she watered with riveis of blood, and her long reign 
 saw take last root in the land, that tree, the fruit of which the 
 unfortunate Irish taste to this hour; and which will, unless pre¬ 
 vented by more wise and more just measures than appear to 
 have been yet suggested, finally prove the overthrow of England 
 herself. 
 
 325. I am to speak, further on, of the monstrous immorali¬ 
 ties produced in England by the “ Reformation,” and also of 
 the poverty and misery that it produced ; and then I shall have 
 to trace (through Acts of Parliament ) this poverty and misery 
 up to the “ Reformation ;” yes, for therein we shall see, clearly 
 as we see the rivulet bubbling out of the bed of the spring, the 
 bread and icaler of England and the potatoes of Ireland ; but, 
 even in this place, it is necessary to state the cause of the 
 greater poverty and degradation of the IriSh people. Forages, 
 that ill-treated people have, in point of clothing and food, 
 formed a contrast with the English. Dr. Franklin, in speaking 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 173 
 
 of Ireland, says, that “ one would think that the east-off clothes 
 of the working-people of England were sent over to be worn by 
 the working-people here.' 1 
 
 326. Whence comes it that this contrast has so long existed ? 
 The soil and the climate of I reland are as good as those of England. 
 The islands are but a few miles asunder. Both are surrounded 
 by the same sea. The people of the former are as able and as 
 willing to labour as those of the latter; and of this they have 
 given proof in all parts of the world, to which they have mi¬ 
 grated, not to carry packs to cheat fools out of their money, not 
 to carry the lash to make others work, but to share themselves, 
 and cheerfully to share, in the hardest labours of those amongst 
 whom they have sought shelter from the rod of unrelenting op¬ 
 pression. Whence comes it, then, that this contrast, so unfa¬ 
 vourable to Ireland, has so long existed! The answer to this 
 interesting question we shall find by attending to the different 
 measures, dealt out to the two people, during the long and cruel 
 reign of which we are now speaking; and we, at the same time, 
 trace all the miseries of Ireland back, at once, to that “ Re¬ 
 formation,” the blessings of which have, with such persevering 
 falsehood and hypocrisy, been dinned in our ears for ages. 
 
 327. We have seen, in Letter III. of this little work, para¬ 
 graphs 60, 51, and 52, that the Catholic Church was not, and 
 is not, an affair of mere abstract faith ; that it was not so very 
 spiritual a concern as to scorn all cares relative to the bodies of 
 the people ; that one part, and that a capital part, of its business 
 was, to cause works of charily to be performed; that th ; s cha¬ 
 rity was not of so very spiritual a nature as not to b at all 
 tangible, or obvious to the vulgar sense; that it showed self in 
 good roorks done to the*needy and suffering; that the tithes and 
 offerings and income fromreal property, of the Catholic ChurBi, 
 went, in great part, to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to 
 lodge and feed the stranger, to sustain the widow and the or¬ 
 phan, and to heal the wounded and the sick; that, in short, a 
 great part, and indeed one of the chief parts, of the business of 
 this Church was, to take care, that no person, however low in 
 life, should suffer from want either of sustenance ov care; and 
 that the priests of this Church should have as few selfish cares 
 as possible to withdraw them from this important part of their 
 duty, they were forbidden to marry. Thus, as long as this 
 Church was the national Church, there were hospitality and 
 charity in the land, and the horrid word “ pauper ” had nevei 
 been so much as thought of. 
 
 328. But, when the Protestant religion came, and along witn 
 it a married priesthood, the poorer classes were plundered of 
 their birth-right, and thrown out to prowl about for what they 
 could beg or steal. Luthkr and his followers wholly rejected 
 
 15* 
 
174 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 the doctrine, that good works were neccessary to salvation, 
 "^hey held, that faith, and faith alone, was necessary. They 
 expunged from their Bible the Epistle of Saint James, because 
 it recommends, and insists on the necessity of, good works; 
 which Epistle Luther called, “ an Epistle of straw.” The 
 “ Reformers” differed from each other, as widely as the colours 
 of the rainbow, in most other things ; but they all agreed in 
 this, that, good works were unnecessary to salvation, and that 
 the “ saints ” as they had the modesty to call themselves, could 
 not forfeit their right to heaven by any sins, however numerous 
 and enormous. By those, amongst whom plunder, sacrilege, 
 adultery, polygamy, incest, perjury, and murder were almost 
 as habitual as sleeping and waking; by those, who taught that 
 the way to everlasting bliss could not be obstructed by any of 
 these, nor by all of them put together; by such persons, charily, 
 besides that it was a so well-known Catholic commodity, would 
 be, as a matter of course, set wholly at nought. 
 
 329, Accordingly we see that it is necessarily excluded by the 
 very nature of all Protestant establishments ; that is to say, in 
 reality ; for, the name of charity is retained by some of these es¬ 
 tablishments ; but, the substance no where exists. The Catho¬ 
 lic establishment interweaves deeds of constant and substantial 
 charity with the faith itself. It makes the two inseparable. The 
 Douay Catechism, which the Protestant parsons so much abuse, 
 says, that “ the first fruit of the Holy Ghost is charily .” And, 
 then, it tells us what charity is ; namely, “ to feed the hungry, to 
 give drink to the thirsty, to clothe the naked, to visit and ran¬ 
 som captives, to harbour the harbourless, to visit the sick, to 
 bury the dead.” Can you guess my friends, why fat Protestant 
 parsons rail so loudly against this “ wicked Douay Catechism” ? 
 It is in the nature of man to *ve all this. This is what “ the 
 gates of hell will never prevail against.” This is what our fa¬ 
 thers believed, and what they acted upon ; and this it was that 
 produced in them that benevolent disposition which, thank God, 
 has not yet been wholly extirpated from the breasts of their de¬ 
 scendants. 
 
 330. Returning now, to paragraphs 50, 51, and 52, just men¬ 
 tioned; it is there seen, that the Catholic Church rendered all 
 municipal laws about the poor, wholly unnecessary; but, when 
 that Church had been plundered and destroyed; when the 
 greedy leading li Reformers” had sacked the convents and the 
 churches; when those great estates, which of right belonged to 
 the poorer classes, had been taken from them; when the par 
 sonages had been first well pillaged, and the remnant of their re 
 venues given to married men; then the poor (for poor there will 
 and must be in every community) were left destitute of the means 
 of existence, other than the fruits of begging, theft, and robbery. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 175 
 
 Accordingly, when “ good Queen Bess’ had put the finishing 
 hand to the plundering of the Church and poor, once-happy 
 and free and hospitable England became a den of famishing 
 robbers and slaves. Stryjpe, a Protestant, and an authority to 
 whom Hume appeals and refers many hundreds of times, tells 
 us of a letter from a Justice of the Peace in Somersetshire, to 
 the Lord Chief Justice, saying: “ 1 may justly say, that the able 
 men that are abroad, seeking the spoil and confusion of tin! land, 
 are able, if they were reduced to good subjection, to give the 
 greatest enemy her majesty hath, a strong battle, and, as they 
 are now, are so much strength to the enemy. Besides, the ge¬ 
 neration that daily springeth from them, is likely to be most 
 wicked . These spare neither rich nor poor; but, whether it be 
 great gain or small, all is fish that coaaeth to net with them ; and 
 yet I say, both they and the rest are trussed up a-pace.” The 
 same Justice says: Xi In default of justice, many wicked thieves 
 escape. For most commonly the most simple countrymen and 
 women, looking no farther than to the loss of their own goods, 
 are of opinion that they would not precure any man’s death, for 
 all the : in the world.” And while the “ good Bess” com¬ 
 plained bitterly of the non-execution of her laws, the same Pro¬ 
 testant historian tells us, that “she executed more than jive hun ¬ 
 dred criminals in a year , and was so little satisfied with that num¬ 
 ber, that she threatened to send private persons to see her penal 
 laws executed ‘for ’profit and gain's sake It appears that she 
 did not threaten in vain; for soon after this, a complaint was 
 made in Parliament, that the stipendiary magistrate of that day 
 was 1 a kind of living creature, who, for half a dozen of chickens 
 would dispense with a dozen of penal statutes.’ ” She did not, 
 however, stop, with this" liberal ” use of the gallows. Such was 
 the degree of beggary, of vagabondage ancf of thievislmess and 
 robbery, that she resorted, particularly in London and its neigh¬ 
 bourhood, to martial law . „ This fact is so complete a proof of 
 the horrible effects of the " Reformation” upon the moral state 
 of the people, and it is so fully characteristic of the government, 
 which the people of England had, in consequence of that Refor¬ 
 mation, become so debased as to submit to, that I must take the 
 statement as it stands in Hume, who gives the very words of 
 11 good and glorious Bess's” commission to her head murderer 
 upon this occasion. “ The streets of London were very much 
 infested with idle vagabonds and riotous persons : the Lord 
 Mayor had endeavoured to repress this disorder: the Star- 
 chamber had exerted its authority, and inflicted punishment 
 on these rioters . But the Queen, finding these remedies ineffec¬ 
 tual, revived” [revived ? What does he mean by revived 7 j 
 ** martial laiv , and gave Sir Thomas Wilford a commission, as 
 Provost-martial: ' Granting him authority, and commanding 
 
176 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 him, upon signification given by the justices of the peace in Lon¬ 
 don or the neighbouring counties, of such offenders, worthy to 
 be speedily executed by martial law, to take them, and according 
 to the justice of martial law, to execute them upon the gallows or 
 gibbet.’” And yet, this is she, whom we have been taught to call 
 “good Queen Bess”; this is she, of the “ glories ” of whose reign 
 there are men of learning base enough to talk, even to this day ! 
 
 331. But, such were the natural consequences of the destruc¬ 
 tion of the Catholic Church, and of the plundering of the poor, 
 which accompanied that destruction, and particularly of lodging 
 all powpr, ecclesiastical and civil, in the same hands. How¬ 
 ever, though this terrible she-tyrant spared neither racks nor 
 halters, though she was continually reproving the executors of 
 her bloody laws, for their remissness while they were strew ing 
 the country with the carcasses of malefactors or alleged male¬ 
 factors, all would not do; that hunger, which breaks through 
 stone-walls, set even her terrors and torments at defiance; at 
 last, it was found to be absolutely necessary to make some ge¬ 
 neral and permanent ami solid provision for the poor; and, in 
 the 43d year of her reign, was passed that Act, which is in force 
 to this day, and which provides a maintenance for indigent per¬ 
 sons, which maintenance is to come from the land, assessed and 
 collected by overseers, and the payment enforced by process 
 the most effectual and most summary. And here we have the 
 
 w 
 
 great, the prominent, the staring, the horrible and ever-durable 
 consequence of the “ Reformation”; that is to say, pauperism 
 established by law. 
 
 332. Yet this was necessary. The choice that the plunderers 
 had in England was this: legal pauperism, or extermination ; 
 and this last they could not effect, and if they could, it would 
 not have suited them. They did not possess power sufficient to- 
 make the people live in a state of three fourths starvation, there¬ 
 fore they made a legal provision for the poor; not, however, 
 till they had tried in vain all other methods of obtaining a some¬ 
 thing to supply the place of Catholic charily. They attempted, 
 at first, to cause the object to be effected by voluntary collec¬ 
 tions at the churches; but, alas! those who now entered those 
 churches, looked upon Luther a3 the great teacher; and he 
 considered Saint James’s Epistle as an “epistle of straw.” 
 Every attempt of this sort having failed, as it necessarily must, 
 when the parsons, who were to exhort others to charity, had 
 enough to do to rake together all they could for their own w ives 
 and children ; every Act (and there were many passed) short of 
 a compulsory tax, enforced by distraint of goods and imprison¬ 
 ment of person, having failed to this “ glorious Bess” and her 
 ” Reformation Parliament at last came; and here we have it to 
 this day filling the country with endless quarrels and litigation. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 177 
 
 setting parish against parish, man against master, rich against 
 poor, and producing, from a desire of the rich to shuffle «ut of 
 its provisions, a mass of hypocrisy, idleness, fraud, oppiH&en, 
 and cruelty, such as was, except in the deeds of the oHginal 
 11 Reformers,’’ never before witnessed in the world. 
 
 333. Nevertheless, it was, as far as it went, an act of justice. 
 It was taking from the land and giving to the poor, a part, at 
 least, of what they had been robbed of by the u Reforma¬ 
 tion.” It was doing, in a hard and odious way, a part of that 
 which had been done, in the most gentle and amiable way by the 
 Church of our fathers. It was, indeed, feeding the poor like 
 dogs, instead of like one’s children; but it was feeding them. 
 Even this, however, the “good Bess” and her plundering mi¬ 
 nions thought too much to do for the savagely-treated Irish peo¬ 
 ple ; and here we come to the real cause of that contrast, of which 
 I have spoken in paragraph 325; here we come to that which 
 made Dr. Franklin suppose, or, to say, that any one might na¬ 
 turally suppose, that “ the old clothes of the working classes in 
 England, had been sent over to be worn by the same class in 
 Ireland.” 
 
 334. We have seen how absolute necessity compelled “good 
 Bess” and her plunderers to make a legal provision for the re¬ 
 lief of the indigent in England; we have seen, that it was only 
 restoring to them a part of that of which they had been plun¬ 
 dered ; and, upon what principle was it, that they did not do 
 the same with regard to the people of Ireland? These had been 
 plundered in precisely the same manner that the former had ; 
 they had been plunged into misery by precisely the same means, 
 used under precisely the same hypocritical pretences; why were 
 not they to be relieved from that misery in the same manner; 
 and why was not the poor law to be extended to Ireland J 
 
 335. Base and cruel plunderers! They grudged the relief in 
 England ; but, they had no compulsory means to be obtained out 
 of England; and they found it impossible to make Englishmen 
 compel one another to live in a state of three-fourths starvation. 
 But, they had England to raise armies in to send to effect this pur¬ 
 pose in Ireland, especially when those English armies were urg¬ 
 ed on by promised plunder, and were (consisting as they did of 
 Protestants) stimulated by motives as powerful, or nearly so, as 
 the love of plunder itself. Thus it was, that Ireland was pillag¬ 
 ed without the smallest chance of even the restoration w r hich 
 the English obtained ; and thus have they, down unto this our 
 day, been a sort of outcasts in their own country, being stripped 
 of all the worldly goods that God and nature alotted them, and 
 having received not the smallest pittance in return. We talk of 
 “ the outrages in Ireland”; we seem shocked at the violences 
 committed there; and ttiat sapient, profound, candid and modest 
 
178 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 gentleman, Mr. Adolphus, the other day, in pleading at one of 
 the police-offices in London (a sphere to which his talents are 
 exceedingly well adapted), took occasion, sought occasion, went 
 out otlns way to find occasion, to “ thank God ” that we, on this 
 side of St. George’s channel, knew nothing of those outrages, 
 which, when they were mentioned to the Irish, they ascribed to 
 the misrule of ages. Now, it might be a little too much to ex¬ 
 pect an answer of any sort from a lawyer so dignified as this 
 police-pleader; but, let me ask any English gentleman, or, any 
 Englishman of any rank, except Mr. Adolphus, what, he thinks 
 would be the consequences here, if the 'poor-laws were abolished 
 to-morrow ? Mr. Adolphus can hardly help knowing, that par¬ 
 son Malthus and his tribe have been preaching up the wisdom 
 of such abolition; he may remember, too (for the example was 
 terrific), that Mr. Scarlett was “twisted down ” in conse¬ 
 quence of his having had the folly to mould this proposition of 
 Malthus into the form of a Bill; but, Mr. Adolphus may not 
 know, that petitions were preparing against that Bill, and that, 
 too, from the payers of the poor-rates, stating, that, if such Bill 
 were passed, there wou'.d be no safety for their property or I heir 
 lives. Let us, then, have a little justice, at any rate; and, above 
 all things, let us not, adding blasphemy to ignorance, insolence, 
 and low, mob-courting sycophancy, “thank God ” for the ab¬ 
 sence of outrages amongst us, as the wolf, in the fable, “ thank¬ 
 ed God” that he was not ferocious. 
 
 336. Why, there have been “ ages of misrule ” in Ireland, 
 many, many ages too; or the landholders of England have, 
 during those ages, been most unjustly assessed. But, they are 
 sensible, or, at least, the far greater part of them, that a provi¬ 
 sion for the indigent, a settled, certain, legal provision, coming 
 out of the land, is a right which the indigent possess, to use the 
 words of Blackstone, “in the very nature of civil society.” 
 Every man of reflection must know, that the labours, winch the 
 affairs of society absolutely demand, could never be performed 
 but by persons who work for their bread; he must see, that a 
 very large part of these persons will do no more work than is 
 necessary to enable them to supply their immediate wants; and, 
 therefore, he must see, that there always must be, in every com¬ 
 munity, a great number of persons, who, from sickness, old age. 
 from being orphans, widows, insane, and from other causes, 
 will need relief from some source or other. This is the lot of 
 civil society, exist wherever and however it may, and it will re¬ 
 quire a solider head than that which is on the shoulders of Mr. 
 Scarlett, to show, that this need of relief, to which all are lia¬ 
 ble, is not a necessary ingredient in the cement of civil society. 
 The United States of America is a very happy country. The 
 world has never yet seen a people better off. But, though th* 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 179 
 
 Americans cast off their allegiance to our king; though they 
 abolished the monarchical rights ; though they cast off the aris¬ 
 tocracy of England; though they cast off the Church of Eng¬ 
 land ; they did not cast of the. English poor-laws; and this very act 
 of turbulent Bess, extorted from her by their English forefathers, 
 is, at this moment, as completely in force in New York as it is in 
 Old York, in New London as in Old London, in New Hampshire 
 as in Old Hampshire, and in that whole country, from one end 
 to the other, as it is in Old England herself. 
 
 337. Has it not, then, been a “misrule of ages ” in Ireland ? 
 Have not that people been most barbarously treated by Eng¬ 
 land ? An Irishman who has a thousand times been ready to 
 expire from starvation in his native land, who has been driven 
 to steal sea weed to save himself from death, goes to America, 
 feels hunger without having the means of relieving it; and there, 
 in that foreign land, he finds, at once, be he where he may, an 
 overseer of the poor, ready to give him relief! And is such mon¬ 
 strous, such crying injustice as this still to be allowed to exist? 
 The folly here surpasses, if possible, the injustice and the cru¬ 
 elty. The English landholders make the laws : we all know that. 
 They subject, justly subject, their own estates to assessments for 
 the relief of the poor in England ; and, while they do this, they 
 exonerate the estates of the Irish landholders from a like assess¬ 
 ment, and choose rather to tax themselves and to tax us, and to 
 tax the Irish besides, for the purpose of paying an army to keep 
 that starving people from obtaining reliefby force! Lord Liver¬ 
 pool, when the Scotch Lords and others applied to him, in IS 19, 
 for a grant out of the taxes, to relieve the starving manufactur¬ 
 ers in Scotland, very wisely and justly said, “ No: have poor- 
 laws, such as ours, and then your poor will be sure of relief. ” 
 Why not say the same thing to the Irish landholders ? Why 
 not compel them to give to the people that which is their due ? 
 Why is Ireland to be the only civilized country upon the face 
 of the earth, where no sort of settled, legal provision is made 
 for the indigent, and where the Pastors are, at the same time, 
 total strangers to the flocks, except in the season of shearing? 
 Let us, at least, as long as this state of things shall be suffered 
 to exist, have the decency not to cry out quite so loudly against 
 the “ outrages of the Irish'' 
 
 338. I must now return from this digression (into which the 
 mention of “good Bess’s” barbarous treatment of Ireland has 
 led me), in order to proceed with my account of her “ reform - 
 ing ” projects. Betsy was a great Doctor of Divinity. She was 
 extremely jealous of her prerogatives and powers, but particu¬ 
 larly in what regarded her headship of the Church. She would 
 make all her subjects be of her religion, though she had solemnly 
 sworn at her coronation, that she was a Catholic, and though, in 
 
 turning Protestant, she had made a change in Cranmer’s Prayer- 
 
180 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 Book and in his articles of faith. In order to bend the people's 
 consciences to her tyrannical will, which was the more unjust, be¬ 
 cause she herself had changed her relig ion, and bad even chang¬ 
 ed the Protestant articles, she established an inquisition the most 
 horrible that ever was heard of in the world. She gave what she 
 called a Commission to certain Bishops and others, whose power 
 extended overthe whole kingdom, and over all ranks and degrees 
 of the people. They were empowered to have an absolute con¬ 
 trol over the opinions of all men, and to punish alt men accor¬ 
 ding to their discretion , short of death. They might proceed le¬ 
 gally, if they chose, in the obtaining of evidence against parties; 
 but, if they chose, they were to employ imprisonment, the rack , 
 or torture of any sort, for this purpose. If their suspicions alight¬ 
 ed upon any man, no matter respecting what, and they had no 
 evidence, nor any even hearsay, against him, they might admi¬ 
 nister an oath, called ex-officio, to him, by which lie was hound, 
 if called upon, to reveal his thoughts, and to accuse himself, his 
 friend, his brother, or his father, upon pain of death. These 
 subaltern monsters inflicted what fines they pleased \ they im¬ 
 prisoned men for any length of time that they pleased. They put 
 forth whatever new articles of faith they pleased; and, in short, 
 this w'as a Commission exercising, in the name, and for the pur¬ 
 poses of “good Queen Bess,” an absolute control overthe bodies 
 and the tninds of that people, whom the ba9e and hypocritical and 
 plundering “ reformers” pretended to have delivered from a 
 **slavish subjection to the Pope,” but whom they had, without 
 any pretending, actually delivered from freedom, charity, and 
 hospitality. 
 
 330. When one looks at the deeds of this foul tyrant, when 
 one sees what abject slavery she had reduced the nation to, and 
 especially when one views this Commission, it is impossible for 
 as not to reflect with shame on what we have so long been say 
 ing against the Spanish Inquisition, which, from its first estab¬ 
 lishment to the present hour, has not committed so much cruelty 
 as this ferocious Protestant apostate committed in any one single 
 year of the forty-three years of her reign. And, observe again, 
 and never forget, that Catholics, where they inflicted punish¬ 
 ments, inflicted them on the ground, that the offenders had de¬ 
 parted from the faith in which they had been bred, and which 
 they had professed; whereas the Protestant punishments have 
 been inflicted on men because they refused to depart from the 
 faith in which they had been bred, and which they had professed 
 all their lives. And, in the particular case of this brutal hypo¬ 
 crite, they were punished, and that, too, in the most barbarous 
 manner, for adhering to that very religion, which she had open¬ 
 ly professed for many years of her life, and to which she, even 
 at her coronation, had sworn that she belonged! 
 
 340. It is hardly necessary to attempt to describe the suffer- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 181 
 
 fcigs that the Catholics had to endure during this murderous 
 reign. No tongue, no pen is adequate to the task. To hear 
 mass, to harbour a priest, to admit the supremacy of the Pope, 
 to deny this horrid virago's spiritual supremacy, and many 
 other things, which an honourable Catholic could scarcely 
 avoid, consigned him to the scaffold and to the bowel-ripping 
 knife. But, the most cruel of her acts, even more cruel than 
 her butcheries, because of far more extensive effect, and far 
 more productive of suffering in the end, were the penal laws 
 inflicting juries for recuscancy , that is to say, for not going to her 
 new-fangled Protestant church. And, was there ever tyranny 
 equal to this ? Not only were men to be punished for not con¬ 
 fessing that the new religion was the true one: not only for 
 continuing to practise the religion in which they and their fathers 
 and children had been born and bred ; out also punished, for not 
 actually going to tne new assemblages, and there performing 
 what they must, if they were sincere, necessarily deem an act 
 of open apostacy and blasphemy \ Never, in the whole world, 
 was there heard of before tyranny equal to this. 
 
 341. The fines were so heavy, and were exacted with such 
 unrelenting rigour, and, for the offence of recusancy alone the 
 sums were so enormous, that the whole of the conscientious Ca¬ 
 tholics were menaced with utter ruin. The priests who had never 
 been out of England, and who were priests before the reign of 
 this horrible woman, were, bv the 20th year of her reign few in 
 number , for the laws forbade the making of any new ones on pain 
 of death, and, indeed, none could be made in England, where 
 there was no clerical authority to ordain them, the surviving Ca¬ 
 tholic bishops being forbidden to do it on pain o(death. Then 
 she harassed the remainder of the old priests in such a way, that 
 they were, by the 20th year of her reign, nearly exterminated; 
 and, as it was death for a priest to come from abroad, death to 
 harbour him, death for him to perform his functions in England, 
 death to confess to him, there appeared to be an impossibilty of 
 preventing her from extirpating , totally extirpating from the 
 hind, that religion, under which England had been so great and 
 so happy for ages; that religion of charity and hospitality; 
 ihat religion which made the name of proper unknown ; that 
 religion which had built the churches and cathedrals, which 
 had planted and reared the Universities, whose professors had 
 made Magna Charta and the Common-Law, and who had per¬ 
 formed all those glorious deeds in legislation and in arms, which 
 had made England really “ the envy of surrounding nations 
 and the admiration of the world”: there now appeared to be 
 an impossibility, and especially if the termagant tyrant should 
 live for another twenty years, (which she did), to prevent her 
 from effecting this total extirpation. From accomplishing ting 
 
 16 
 
182 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 object she was prevented by the zeal and talents of William 
 Allen, an English gentleman, now a priest, and who had be¬ 
 fore been of the University of Oxford. In order to defeat the 
 *he-tvrant’s schemes for rooting out the Catholic religion, he 
 formed a Seminary at Douay, in Flanders, for the education ot 
 English priests. He was joined by many other learned men ; 
 and, from this depot, though at the manifest hazard of their 
 lives, priests came into England ; and thereby the malignity of 
 this inexorable apostate was defeated. Tt.ere was the sea be¬ 
 tween her and Allen, but, while he safely defied her death¬ 
 dealing power, she could not defy his, for she could not erect a 
 wall round the island, and into it priests would come and did 
 come ; and, in spite of her hundreds of spies and her thousands 
 of “ pursuivants ,” as were called the myrmidons who executed 
 her tormenting and bloody behests, the race of English priests 
 was kept in existence, and the religion of their fathers along 
 with it. In order to break up the seminary of Allen, who was 
 afterwards made a Cardinal, and whose name can never be 
 pronounced but with feelings of admiration, she resorted to all 
 sorts of schemes; and, at last, by perfidiously excluding from 
 her ports the fleet of the Dutch and Flemish insurgents, to 
 whom she stood pledged to give protection, she obtained from 
 the Spanish Governor, a dissolution of Allen’s college ; but, he 
 found protection in France, from the House of G uise, by w hom 
 he and his colleagues were, in spite of the most bitter remon¬ 
 strances from “ good Bess,” to the King of France, re-estab¬ 
 lished at Rheims. 
 
 342. Thus defeated in all her projects for destroying the mis¬ 
 sionary trunk, she fell with more fury than ever on the branches 
 and on the fruit. To jay mass, to hear mass, to make confes¬ 
 sion, to hear confession, to teach the Catholic religion, to be 
 taught it, to keep from her church service; these were all great 
 crimes, and all punished with a greater or less degree of seve¬ 
 rity; so that the gallowses and gibbets and racks were in con¬ 
 stant use, and the gaols and dungeons choking with the victims. 
 The punishment for keeping away from her church was 20/. a 
 lunar month, which, of money of the present day, was about 
 250/. Thousands upon thousands refused to go to her church ; 
 and thus she sacked their thousands upon thousands of estates ; 
 for, observe, here was, in money of this day, a fine of 3250/. a 
 year. And now, sensible and just reader, look at the barbarity 
 of this “ Protestant Reformation.” See a gentleman of, per¬ 
 haps, sixty years of age or more ; see him, born and bred a 
 Catholic, compelled to make himself and his children beggars, 
 actual beggars, or to commit, what he deemed, an act of apos- 
 tacy and blasphemy. Imagine, if you can, barbarity equal to 
 this; and yet even this is not seen in its most horrible light, 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 183 
 
 unless we take into view, that the tyrant who committed it, had, 
 for many years, of her life, openly professed the Catholic re* 
 ligion, and had, at her coronation, sworn that she firmly be¬ 
 lieved iu that religion. 
 
 343. In the enforcing 1 of these horrible edicts, every insult 
 that base minds could devise, was resorted to and in constant 
 use. No Catholic, or reputed Catholic, had a moment’s security 
 or peace. At all hours, but generally in the night-time, the ruf¬ 
 fians entered his house by breaking it open: rushed, in dif¬ 
 ferent divisions, into the rooms : broke open closets, chests, and 
 drawers; rummaged beds and pockets; in short, searched every 
 place and thing for priests, books, crosses, vestments, or any 
 person or thing appertaining to the Catholic worship. In order 
 to pay the fines, gentlemen were compelled to sell their estates 
 piece by piece ; when they were in arrear, the tyrant was, by 
 law , authorised to seize all their personal property, and two- 
 thirds of their real estate every six months; and they were in 
 some cases suffered, as a great indulgence, to pay an annual 
 composition for the liberty of abstaining from what they deemed 
 apostacy and blasphemy. Yet, whenever she took it into her 
 suspicious head that her life was in danger, from whatever 
 cause, and causes, and just causes enough there always were, 
 she had no consideration for them on account of the fines or the 
 composition. She imprisoned them, either in gaol, or in the 
 houses of Protestants, kept them banished from their own homes 
 for years. The Catholic gentleman’s own house afforded him no 
 security; the indiscretion of children or friends, the malice of 
 enemies, the dishonesty or revenge of tenants or servants, the 
 hasty conclusions of false suspicion, the deadly wickedness of 
 those ready to commit perjury for gain’s sake, the rapacity and 
 corruption of constables, sheriffs, and magistrates, the virulent 
 prejudice of fanaticism ; to every passion hostile to justice, 
 happiness, and peace; to every evil against which it is the ob¬ 
 ject of just laws to protect a man, the conscientious Catholic 
 gentleman lived continually exposed; and that, too, in that 
 land which had become renowned throughout the world by 
 those deeds of valour and those laws of freedom which had been 
 performed and framed by his Catholic ancestors. 
 
 344. As to the poor conscientious “ recusants ,” that is to say, 
 keepers away from the tyrant’s church, they, who had no money 
 to pay fines with, were crammed into prison, until the gaols 
 could (which was very soon) hold no more, and until the coun¬ 
 ties petitioned to be relieved from the charge of keeping them. 
 They were then discharged, being first 'publicly whipped , or 
 having their ears bored with a hot iron. This not answering the 
 purpose, an act was passed to compel all “ recusants ,” not 
 worth twenty marks a year, to quit the country in three months 
 
184 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 after conviction, and to punish them with death, in case of their 
 return. The old 11 good Bess” defeated herself here; for it was 
 found impossible to cause the law to be executed, in spite of all 
 her menaces against the justices and sheriffs, who could not 
 be brought up to her standard of ferociousness ; and they, there¬ 
 fore, in order to punish the poor Catholics, levied sums on them 
 at their pleasure, as a composition for the crime of abstaining 
 from apostacy and profanation. 
 
 345. The Catholics, at one time entertained a hope, that, by 
 a declaration of their loyalty, they should obtain from the Queen 
 some mitigation, at least, of their sufferings. With this view, 
 they drew up a very able and most dutiful petition, containing 
 an expression of their principles, their sufferings and their 
 prayers. Alas I they appealed to her to whom truth and justice 
 and mercy were all alike wholly unknown. The petition being 
 prepared, all trembled at the thought of the danger of present¬ 
 ing it to her. At last, Richard Shelley, of Michael Grove, 
 Sussex, assumed the perilous charge. She had the (as it would 
 have been in any other human being) incomparable baseness 
 to refer him, for an answer, to the gloomy echoes of a pestife¬ 
 rous prison, where he expired, a victim to his own virtue and to 
 her implacable cruelty. 
 
 346. Talk of Catholic tyrants 1 Talk of the Catholics having 
 propagated their faith by acts of force and cruelty! I wonder, 
 that an English Protestant, even one whose very bread comes 
 from the spoliation of the Catholics, can be found witli so little 
 shame as to talk thus. Our lying Protestant historians tell 
 us, that the ships of the Spanish Armada were “ loaded with 
 RACKS,” to be used upon the bodies of the English, who were 
 preserved from these by the wisdom and valour of “good and 
 glorious Queen Bess.” In the first place, it was the storm, and 
 not “ glorious Bess,” that prevented an invasion of the coun¬ 
 try ; and, in the next place, the Spaniards might have saved 
 themselves the trouble of importing RACKS, seeing that gentle 
 Betsy had always plenty of them, whici she kept in excellent 
 order, and in almost daily use. It is to inflict most painful feel¬ 
 ings on Protestants, to be sure; but, justice demands, that I de¬ 
 scribe one or two of her instruments of torture ; because in them 
 we see some of the most powerful of those means which she made 
 use of for ESTABLISHING HER PROTESTANT CHURCH ; 
 and here I thank Dr. Lingard for having, in note U of volume 
 V. of his history, enabled me to give this description. One kind 
 of torture, which was called, “ the Scavenger’s Daughter, was 
 a broad hoop of iron, consisting of two parts, fastened by a 
 hinge. The prisoner was made to kneel on the pavement and 
 to contract himself into as small a compass as he could. Then 
 |he executioner, kneeling on his shoulders, and having intro- 
 
PROTESTANT RE EORM AT ION. 
 
 185 
 
 duced the hoop under his legs, compressed the victim close to¬ 
 g-ether. till Itc was able to fasten the fed mul hands together over 
 the small of the back. The time alotted to this kind of tor 
 tore was an hour and a half, during- which lime the blood 
 gushed from the nostrils, and. sometimes, from the hands and 
 feet.” There were several other kinds of arguments of corner- 
 sion that gentle Betsy made use of to eradicate the '* damnable 
 errors” of Popery; luit, her great argument was. the RACK. 
 “ This was a large open frame of oak. raised three, feet from the 
 ground. The prisoner was laid under it, on his back, on the 
 floor. His wrists and ancles wore attached bv cords to two rol¬ 
 lers at the ends of the frame: these w ore moved l»y levers in op¬ 
 posite directions till the body rose to a level with the frame. 
 Questions were then put; and, if the answers did not prove satis¬ 
 factory. the sufferer was stretched more and mure till Ihe bones 
 started from their sockets.'' 
 
 347. There, Protestants: there, revilers of the Catholic reli¬ 
 gion: there are some of the means which "good Queen Bess” 
 made use of to make her Church, “ established by law.'' Com¬ 
 pare, oh ! compare, if you have one particle of justice left in 
 you ; compare these means with the means made use of by those 
 who introduced and established the Catholic Church ! 
 
 348. The other deeds and events of the reign of this ferocious 
 woman are now of little interest, and, indeed, do not belong to 
 my subject; but, seeing that the pensioned poet. Jammy Thomi* 
 so.v, iiethat sickly stuff of his, which no man of sense ever can 
 endure after he gets to the age of twenty, has told us about “ the 
 glories of Ihe maiden reign," it may not be amiss, before l take 
 my leave of this "good" creature, to observe, that her “ glories” 
 consisted in having broken innumerable solemn treaties and 
 compacts; in having been continually bribing rebel subjects to 
 annoy their sovereigns; in having had a navy of freebooters; in 
 having had an army of plunderers; in having bartered, for a 
 little money, the important town of Calais; and in never having 
 added even one single leaf oflaurel to that ample branch which 
 had, for ages, been seated on the brows of England: and that, 
 as to her maiden virtues, Whitaker (a Protestant clergyman, 
 mind) says, that “ her life was stained with “gross licentiousness, 
 and she had many gallants, while she called herself a maiden 
 queen.” Her life, as he truly says, was a life of “ mischief and 
 of misery”; and, in her death (which took place in t he year 1603, 
 tlie 70th year of her age, and the 45th of her reign) she did all 
 the mischief that it remained in her power to do, by sulkily re¬ 
 fusing to name her successor, and thus leaving to a people, whom 
 she had been pillaging and scourging for forty-five years, a pro¬ 
 bable civil war, as ” a legacy of mischief after her death.” His¬ 
 torians have been divided in opinion, as to which was the worst 
 
 16 * 
 
1S6 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 vi(i7i tliat England ever produced, her father, or Cranmcr; but, 
 all mankind must agree, that this was the tcorsl woman that ever 
 existed in England, or in the whole world, Jezabel herself not 
 excepted. 
 
 LETTER XII. 
 
 Accession of James I.— Horrid persecution of the Catho¬ 
 lics.—Gunpowder Plot.—Charles I. qualified for the 
 rank of Martyr.—“ Reformation” the second, or “ tho¬ 
 rough Godly Reformation.”—Charles 11.; the plots and 
 ingratitude of his reign.—James II.; his endeavours to 
 introduce general toleration.—Dawn of “ GLORIOUS” 
 Revolution. 
 
 Kensington, 3Is/ Oct. 1825. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 349. In the foregoing Numbers, it has been proved, bey on a all 
 contradiction, that the “ Reformation,” as it is called, “ was en¬ 
 gendered in beastly lust, brought forth in hypocrisy and perfidy, 
 and cherished and fed by rivers of innocent English and Irish 
 blood.” There are persons, who publish what they call an¬ 
 swers to me; but, these answers (which 1 shall notice again be¬ 
 fore I have done) all blink the main subject: they dwell upon 
 what their authors assert to be errors in the Catholic religion; 
 this they do, indeed, without attempting to show, how that Pro¬ 
 testant Religion, which has about forty different sects, each at 
 open war with all the rest, can be free from error; but, do they 
 deny, that this new religion began in beastly lust, hypocrisy and 
 perfidy: and do they deny, that it was established by plunder, by 
 tyranny , by axes, by gctlloicscs, by gibbets and by racks 1 Do they 
 face, with a direct negative, either of these important proposi¬ 
 tions? No: there are the facts before them ; there is the history; 
 and (which they cannot face with a negative) there are the ActsoJ 
 Parliament, written in letters of blood, and some of these re¬ 
 maining in force, to trouble and torment the people and to en 
 danger the State, even to the present day. What do these an 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 1S7 
 
 swerers do, then ? Do they boldly assert, that beastly lust, hy 
 pocrisy, perfidy, that the practice of plunder, that the use of 
 axes, gallowses, gibbets, and racks, are good things, and out¬ 
 ward signs of inward evangelical purity and grace? No: they 
 give no answer at all upon these matters; but rail against the 
 personal character of priests and cardinals and popes, and 
 against rites and ceremonies and articles of faith and rules of 
 discipline, matters with which I have never meddled, and which 
 have very little to do with my subject; my object, as the title of 
 my work expresses, being to “ show, that the * Reformation’ has 
 impoverished and degraded the main body of the people of Eng¬ 
 land and Ireland.” I have shown that this change of religion 
 was brought about by some of the worst, if not the very worst, 
 people that ever breathed; I have shown that the means wjpre 
 such as human nature revolts at: so far I can receive no answer 
 from men not prepared to deny the authenticity of the statute- 
 book: it now remains for me to show, from the same sources, 
 the impoverishing and degrading consequences of this change 
 of religion, and that too, with regard to the nation as a whole, 
 as well as with regard to the main body of the people. 
 
 350. But, though we have now seen the Protestant religion 
 established , completely established by the gibbets, the racks, and 
 the ripping-knives, I must, before I come to the impoverishing 
 and degrading consequences, of which I have just spoken, and 
 of which I shall produce the most incontestible proofs; I must 
 give an account of the proceedings of the Reformation-people 
 after they had established their system. The present Number 
 will show us the Reformation producing a second, and that, too, 
 (as every generation is wiser than the preceding) with vast im~ 
 provements; the first being only “ n godly Reformation,” while 
 the second we shall find to be “ a thorough godly” one. The 
 next (or thirteenth) Number will introduce to us a third Refor¬ 
 mation, commonly called the “ glorious ” Reformation, or, revo¬ 
 lution. The 14th Number will give us an account of events still 
 greater; namely, the American Reformation, or revolution, and 
 that of the French. All these we shall trace back to the first Re¬ 
 formation as clearly as any man can trace the branches of a tree 
 back to its root. And, then we shall, in the remaining Number, 
 or Numbers, see the fruit in the immorality, crimes, poverty 
 and degradation of the main body of the people. It will be cu¬ 
 rious to behold the American and French Reformations, or re¬ 
 volutions, playing back the principles of the English Reforma¬ 
 tion-people upon themselves ; and, which is not less curious, and 
 much more interesting - , to see them force the Reformation-people 
 begin to cease to torment the Catholics, whom they had been tor¬ 
 menting, without mercy for more than two hundred years. 
 
 351. The “ good and loriou* and maiden” and racking and 
 
188 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 lipping-up Betsy, who, amongst her other “godly" deeds, grant¬ 
 ed to her minions, to whom there was no longer church-plunder 
 to give, monopolies of almost all the necessaries of life, so that 
 salt, for instance, which used to be about 2d. a bushel, was rais¬ 
 ed to to 155., about seven pounds of our present money ; the 
 
 maiden" Betsy, who had, a* Whitaker says, expired in sulky 
 silence as to her successor, and had thus left a probable civil 
 war as a legacy of mischief, w-as, however, peaceably succeeded 
 oy James 1., that very child of whom poor Mary Stuart was 
 pregnant, w hen his father, Henry Stuart, Earl of Darnlev, and 
 associates, murdered Rizzio in her presence, as we have seen 
 in paragraph 308, and which child, when he came to man’s es¬ 
 tate, was a Presbyterian, was generally a pensioner of Bess, 
 abandoned his mother to Bess’s wrath, and, amongst his first 
 acts in England, took by the hand, confided in and promoted, 
 that Cecil, who was the son of the Old Cecil, who did, indeed, 
 inherit the great talents of his father, but who had also been, as 
 all the world knew, the deadly enemy of this new king’s unfor¬ 
 tunate mother. 
 
 352. James, like all the Stuarts, except the last, was at once 
 prodigal and mean, conceited and foolish, tyrannical and weak ; 
 but the staring feature of his character was insincerity. It would 
 be useless to dwell in the detail on the measures of this contemp¬ 
 tible reign, the prodigalities and debaucheries and silliness 
 of which, did, however, prepare the way for that rebellion and 
 that revolution, which took place in the next, when the double- 
 distilled “ Reformers” did, at last, provide a “ martyr" for the 
 hitherto naked pages of the Protestant Calendar. Indeed, this 
 reign would, as far as my purposes extend, be a complete blank, 
 were it not for that 11 gunpowder plot," which alone has caused 
 this Stuart to be remembered, and of which, seeing that it has 
 been, and is yet, made a source of great and general delusion, I 
 shall take much more notice than it would otherwise be entitled 
 to. 
 
 353. That there was a plot in the year 1605 (the second year 
 after James came to the throne), the object of which w’as to blow 
 up the king and both houses of Parliament, on the first dav of 
 the session ; that Catholics, and none but Catholics, were parties 
 to this plot; that the conspirators were ready to execute the 
 deed; and that they all avowed this to the last; are facts which 
 no man has ever attempted to deny, any more than any man 
 has attempted to deny that the parties to the Cato-street plot 
 did really intend to cut off the heads of Sidmouth and Castlc- 
 reagh, which intention w'as openly avowed by these parties from 
 first to last, to the officers who took them, to the judge who con¬ 
 demned them, and to the people who saw their heads severed 
 from their bodies 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 189 
 
 354. But. as the Parliamentary Reformers in general were 
 most falsely and basely accused of instigating to the commission 
 of the last-mentioned intended act, so were the Catholics in 
 general, and so are they to this day, not less falsely and less 
 basely accused of instigating to the intended act of 1(505. But, 
 as to the conspirators themselves; as to the extent oftheir crime , 
 are we wholly to leave out of our consideration the provocation 
 they had received? To strike a man is an assault; to kill a 
 man is murder; but are striking and killing always assault and 
 murder ? Oh, no; for we may justifiably assault and kill a rob¬ 
 ber or a house-breaker. The Protestant writers have asserted 
 two things ; first, that the Catholics in general instigated to, or 
 approved of, the gunpowder plot; and, second, that this is a 
 proof of the sanguinary principles of their religion. As to the 
 first, the contrary was fully and judicially proved to be the fact; 
 and, as to the second, supposing the conspirators to have had 
 no provocation , those of Cato-street were not Catholics at any 
 rate, nor were those Catholics who qualified Charles I. for a post 
 in the Calendar, and that, too observe, after he had acknow¬ 
 ledged his errors, and had made compensation to the utmost of 
 his power. 
 
 355. However, these conspirators had provocation; and now 
 let us see what that provocation was. The king, before he came 
 to the throne, had promised to mitigate the penal laws, which, 
 as we have seen, made their lives a burden. Instead of this, 
 those laws were rendered even more severe than they had been 
 in the former reign. Every species of insult as well as injury 
 which the Catholics had had to endure under the persecutions 
 of the established church was now heightened by that leaven of 
 Presbyterian malignity and ferocity, which England had now 
 imported from the North, which had then poured forth upon 
 this devoted country endless hordes of the most greedy and ra¬ 
 pacious and insolent wretches that God had ever permitted to 
 infest and scourge the earth. We have seen, in paragraphs 
 340, 341, 342, 343, how the houses of conscientious Catholic 
 gentlemen were rifled, how they were rummaged, in what con¬ 
 stant dread these unhappy men lived, how they were robbed of 
 their estates as a punishment for recusancy and other things 
 called crimes; we have seen, that, by the fines, imposed on 
 these accounts, the ancient gentry of England, whose families 
 had, for ages, inhabited the same mansions and had been vene¬ 
 rated and beloved for their hospitality and charity ; we have 
 seen how all these were gradually sinking into absolute beggary 
 in consequence of these exorbitant extortions: but what was 
 their lot now! The fines, as had been the practice, had been 
 suffered to fall in arrear, in order to make the fined party more 
 completely at the mercy of the crown ; and James, whose prodi- 
 
190 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 galitv left him not the means of gratifying the greediness ol 
 his Scotch minions out of his own exchequer, delivered over 
 the English Catholic gentry to these rapacious minions, who, 
 thus clad with royal authority, fell, with all their well-known 
 hardness of heart, upon the devoted victims, as the kite falls 
 upon the defenceless dove. They entered their mansions, ran¬ 
 sacked their closets, drawers and beds, seized their rent-rolls, 
 in numerous instances drove their wives and children from their 
 doors, and, with all their native upstart insolence, made a 
 mockery of the ruin and misery of the unoffending persons 
 whom they had despoiled. 
 
 356. Human nature gave the lie to all preachings of longer 
 passive obedience, and, at last, one of these oppressed and in¬ 
 sulted English gentlemen, Robert Catesbv, of Northampton¬ 
 shire, resolved on making an attempt to deliver himself and his 
 suffering brethren from this almost infernal scourge. But, how 
 was he to obtain the means? From abroad, such was the state 
 of things, no aid could possibly be hoped for. Internal insur¬ 
 rection was, as long as the makers and executors of the barba¬ 
 rous laws remained, equally hopeless. Hence he came to the 
 conclusion, that to destroy the whole of them afforded the only 
 hope of deliverance ; and to effect this there appeared to him 
 no other way than that of blowing up the parliament-house 
 when, on the first day of the session, all should be assembled 
 together. He soon obtained associates ; but, in the whole, they 
 amounted to only about thirteen; and, all except three or four, 
 in rather obscure situations in life, amongst whom was Guy 
 Fawkes, a Yorkshireman, who had served as an officer in the 
 Flemish wars. He it w T as, who undertook to set fire to the 
 magazine, consisting of two hogsheads and thirty-two barrels of 
 gunpowder; he it was, w ho, if not otherwise to be accomplished, 
 had resolved to. blow himself up along with the persecutors of 
 his brethren; he it was, who, on the 5th of November, 1605, a 
 few hours only before the Parliament was to meet, w as seized in 
 the vault, with two matches in his pocket and a dark lantern by 
 his side, ready to effect his tremendous purpose ; he it was, 
 who, when brought before the King and Council, replied to all 
 their questions with defiance ; he it was, who, when asked by a 
 Scotch lord of the Council, why he had collected so many bar¬ 
 rels of gunpowder, answered, “ to blow you Scotch beggars back 
 to your native mountains and, in this answ er, proclaimed to 
 the world the true immediate cause of this memorable conspiracy; 
 an answer, which, in common justice, ought to be put into the 
 mouth of those effigies of him, which crafty knaves induce foolish 
 boys still to burn on the 5th of November. James (w hose silly 
 conceit made him an author ) was just, in one respect, at any 
 rate. In his works, he calls Fawkes, “ the English Sca:voi.a”; 
 
PROTESTANT REFORM Ana*. 
 
 l & x 
 
 and history tells us that that famous Roman, having 1 missed his 
 murk in endeavouring to kill a tyrant, who had doomed his 
 country to slavery, thrust his offending hand into a hot fire, and 
 let it burn, while he looked defiance at the tyrant. 
 
 357. Catesby and the other conspirators were pursued ; he 
 and three of his associates died with arms in their hands fighting 
 against their pursuers. The rest of them (except Thresham , 
 who was poisoned in prison) were executed, and also the famous 
 Jesuit, Garnet, who was wholly innocent of any crime con¬ 
 nected with the conspiracy, and who, having come to a know¬ 
 ledge of it, through the channel of confession, had, on the con¬ 
 trary, done every thing in his power to prevent the perpetrating 
 of its object. He was sacrificed to that unrelenting fanaticism, 
 which, encouraged by this and other similar successes, at last, 
 as we are soon to see, cut off the head of the son and successor 
 of this very King. The King and Parliament escaped from 
 feelings of humanity in the conspirators. Amongst the disa¬ 
 bilities imposed on the Catholics, they had not yet, and were 
 not until the reign of Charles II., shut out cf Parliament. So 
 that, if the House were blown up, Catholics, Peers and Mem¬ 
 bers, would have shared the fate of the Protestants. The con¬ 
 spirators could not give warning to the Catholics without ex¬ 
 citing suspicions. They did give such warning where they 
 could ; and this led to the timely detection ; otherwise the whole 
 of the two Houses, and the King along with them, would have 
 been blown to atoms; for, though Cecil evidently knew of the 
 plot long before the time of intended execution ; though he took 
 care to nurse it till the moment of advantageous discovery ar¬ 
 rived ; though he was, in all probability, the author of a warning 
 letter, which, being sent anonymously to a Catholic nobleman, 
 and communicated by him to the Government, became the 
 ostensible cause of the timely discovery ; notwithstanding these 
 well-attested facts, it by no means appears, that the plot ori¬ 
 ginated with him, or, indeed, with any body but Catesby, of 
 whose conduct men will judge differently according to the dif¬ 
 ference in their notions about passive obedience and non-resist¬ 
 ance. 
 
 35S, This would be enough of the famous gunpowder plot; 
 but, since it has been ascribed to bloody-mindedness, as the 
 natural fruit of the Catholic religion; since, in our COMMON 
 PRAYER BOOK, we are taught, in addressing God, to call all 
 Catholics indiscriminately, “ our cruel and blood-thirsty ene¬ 
 mies,” let us see a little what Protestants have attempted, and 
 done, in this biowing-up way. This King James, as he himself 
 averred, was nearly being assasinated by his Scotch Protestant 
 subjects. Earl Gowry and his associates; and, after that, nar¬ 
 rowly escaped being blown up, with all his attendants, by the 
 
192 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 furious Protestant burghers of Perth. See Collier’s Church 
 H istory, Vol. JI. p. 663 and 664. Then again, the Protestants 
 in the Netherlands, formed a plot to blow up their governor, the 
 Prince of Parma, with all the nobility and magistrates of those 
 countries, when assembled in the city of Antwerp. But the 
 Protestants did not always fail in their plots, nor were those 
 who engaged in them obscure individuals. For, as we have 
 seen in paragraph 309, this very King James’s father, the King 
 of Scotland, w as, in 1567, blown up by gunpowder and thereby 
 killed. This was doing the thing effectually. Here was no 
 warning given to any body ; and all the attendants end ser¬ 
 vants, of whatever religion and of both sexes, except such as 
 escaped by mere accident, w ere remorselessly murdered along 
 with their master. And who was this done by ? By blood¬ 
 thirsty Catholics”? No: but by the lovers of the “ Avangel," 
 as the wretches called themselves ; the followers of that Knox, 
 to whom a monument has just been erected, or is now erecting 
 at Glasgow’. The conspirators, on this occasion, were not 
 thirteen obscure men, and those, too, w ho had received provo¬ 
 cation enough to make men mad; but a body of noblemen and 
 gentlemen, who really had received no provocation at all from 
 Mary Stuart, to destroy whom was more the object than it 
 was to destroy her husband. Let us take the account of these 
 conspirators in the w'ords of Whitaker; and, let the reader 
 recollect, that W'hitaker, who published his book in 1790, w as 
 a parson of the Church of England, Rector of Ruhan-Lanv* 
 home in Cornwall, and that he was amongst those clergymen 
 who was most strenuously opposed to the rites and ceremonies , 
 and tenetsof the Catholic Church: but he was a truly honest man, 
 a most zealous lover of truth and hater of injustice Hear this 
 staunch Church-Parson, then, upon the subject of this Protes¬ 
 tant Gunpowder-Plot, concerning which he had made the fullest 
 inquiry and collected together the clearest evidence. He (Vin¬ 
 dication of Marv, Queen of Scots, vov. iii. p. 235,) savs, in 
 speaking of the Plot, “ The guilt of this wretched woman, Eli¬ 
 sabeth, and the guilt of that wretched man, Cecil, appear too 
 evident, at last, upon the face of the whole. Indeed, as iar as 
 we can judge of the matter, the whole disposition of the mur¬ 
 derous drama was this. The whole was originally planned and 
 devised betwixt Elizabeth , Cecil, Morion, and Murray; and 
 the execution committed to Lethington, Bothwell, and Balfour; 
 and Elizabeth, we may be certain, was to defend the original 
 and more iniquitous part of the conspirators, Morton and Mur¬ 
 ray, in charging their oxen murder upon the innocent Mary." 
 Did hell itself, did the devil, who was, as Luther himself says, 
 so long the companion and so often the bed-fellow of this first 
 u Reformer,” ever devise wickedness equal to this Protestant 
 
193 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 * 
 
 plot ? Let us hear no more, then, about the blood-thirstiness of 
 the Catholic religion ; and, if we must still have our 5tli of No¬ 
 vember , let the “ moral ” disciples of Knox, the inhabitants of 
 “ Modern Athens,” have their 10/// of February. Let them, 
 too, (for it was Protestants that did the deed) have their 30//t of 
 January, the anniversary of the killing of the son of this same 
 king- James. Nobody knew better than James himself the his¬ 
 tory of his father’s and his mother’s'end. He knew that they 
 had both been murdered by Protestants, and that, too, with cir¬ 
 cumstances of atrocity quite unequalled in the annals of human 
 infamy ; and therefore he himself was not for vigorous measures 
 against the Catholics in general, on account of the plot; but 
 love of plunder in his minions prevailed over him; and now 
 began to blaze, with fresh fury, that Protestant reformation 
 spirit, which, at last, gave him a murdered son and successor, 
 as it had alreadv given him a murdered father and mother. 
 
 359. Chari.ks 1., who came to the throne on the death of his 
 • . * t # 
 
 father, in 1(325, with no more sense and with a stronger tincture 
 
 of haughtiness and tyranny than his father, seemed to wish to 
 go back, in church matters, towards the Catholic rites and 
 ceremonies, while his parliaments and people were every day 
 becoming more and more puritanical. Divers were the grounds 
 of quarrel between them, but the great ground was that of reli¬ 
 gion. The Catholics were suffering all the while, and especially 
 those in Ireland, who were plundered and murdered bv whole 
 districts, and especially under Wentworth, who committed 
 more injustice than ever had before been committed even in 
 that unhappy country. But all this w r as not enough to satisfy 
 the puritans ; and Laud, the Primate of the Established Church, 
 having done a great many things to exalt that church in point of 
 pow'er and dignity, the purer Protestants called for “ another 
 Reformation ," and what they called “ a thorough godly Re¬ 
 formation.” 
 
 360. Now, then, this Protestant church and Protestant king 
 had to learn that “ Reformations,” like comets, have tails. 
 There was no longer the iron police of Old Bess, to watch and 
 to crush all gainsayers. The puritans artfully connected politi¬ 
 cal grievances, which were real and numerous, with religious 
 principles and ceremonies; and, having the main body of the 
 people with them as to the former, while these were, in conse¬ 
 quence of the endless change of creeds, become indifferent as 
 to the latter, they soon became, under the name of “ The Par¬ 
 liament the sole rulers of the country ; they abolished the 
 Church and the House of Lords, arid, finally brought, in 1649, 
 during the progress of their “ thorough godly reformation,” the 
 unfortunate king himself to trial and to the block ! 
 
 361. Ail very bad to be sure; but all very natural , seeing 
 
194 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 what had gone before. If “some such man as Henry VIII.” 
 were, as Burnet says he was, necessary to begin a “ Refor¬ 
 mation,” why not “some such man” as Cromwell to complete 
 it? If it were right to put to death, More, Fisher, and thou¬ 
 sands of others, not forgetting the grandmother of Charles on 
 a charge of treason, why was Charles's head to be so very sa¬ 
 cred l If it were right to confiscate the estates of the monaste¬ 
 ries, and to turn adrift, or put to death, the abbots, priors, monks 
 friars, and nuns, after having plundered the latter of even the 
 ear-rings and silver thimbles, could it be so very wrong to take 
 away merely the titles of those who possessed the plundered pro 
 perty ? And, as to the Protestant Church, if it were right to es¬ 
 tablish it on the ruins of the ancient Church, by German bayo¬ 
 nets, by fines, gallowses and racks, could it be so very w rong to 
 establish another newer one on its ruins by means a great deal 
 milder? If, at the time we are now speaking of, one of “ good 
 Bess’s” parsons, who had ousted a priest of Queen Mary, had 
 been alive, and had been made to fly out of his parsonage-house, 
 not with one of Bess’s bayonets at his back, but on the easy toe 
 of one of Cromwell’s godly, bible-reading soldiers, could that 
 parson have reasonably complained ? 
 
 362. Cromwell, (whose reign w’c may consider as having 
 lasted from 1649 to 1659) therefore, though he soon made the 
 Parliament a mere instrument in his hands; though he w as ty¬ 
 rannical and bloody : though lie ruled with a rod of iron ; though 
 he was a real tyrant, was nothing more than the “ natural issue ,” 
 as “ maiden” Betsy would have called him, of the “ body” of 
 the “ Reformation.” He was cruel towards the Irish ; he killed 
 them without mercy ; but, except in the act of selling 20,000 of 
 them to the West Indies as slaves, in what did he treat them w orse 
 than Charles, to whom, and to whose descendants they were 
 loyal from first to last? And, certainly, even that sale did not 
 equal, in point of atrociousness, many of the acts committed 
 against them during the three last Protestant reigns; and, in 
 point of odiousness and hatefulness, it fell far short of the ingra - 
 tude of the Established Church in the reign of Charles II. 
 
 363. But, common justice forbids us to dismiss the Cromwel¬ 
 lian reign in this summary way ; for, we are now to behold “ Re¬ 
 formation” the second, which its authors and executors called 
 “ a thorough godly Reformation” ; insisting that “ Reformation” 
 the first was but a half-finished affair, and that the “ Church of 
 England as by law established” v>as only a daughter of the “ Old 
 Whore of Babylon.” This “ Reformation” proceeded just like 
 the former; its main object was plunder. The remaining pro¬ 
 perty of the Church was now, as far as time and other circum¬ 
 stances would allow, confiscated and shared out amongst the 
 *• Reformers,” w ho, if they had had time, would have resumed 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 195 
 
 all the former plunder (as they did part of it) and have shared * 
 it out again ! It was really good to see these “ godly 11 persons 
 ousting- from the abbey-lands the descendants of those who had 
 got them in “ Reformation” the first; and, it was particularly 
 good to hear the Church-bishops and parsons crying “ sacrilege ,” 
 when turned out of their palaces and parsonage-houses ; aye, 
 they, who and whose Protestant predecessors had, all their lives 
 long, been justifying the ousting of the Catholic bishops and 
 priests, who held them by prescription, and expressly by Mag¬ 
 na Charta. 
 
 364. As if to make “ Reformation” the second as much as 
 possible like “ Reformation” the first, there was now a change 
 of religion made by laymen only; the Church clergy were ca¬ 
 lumniated just as the Catholic clergy had been; the mshops were 
 shutout of. Parliament as the abbots and Catholic bishops had 
 been ; the cathedrals and churches were again ransacked ; Cran- 
 mer’s tables (put in place of the altars ) were now knocked to 
 pieces ; there was a general crusade against crosses, portraits of 
 Christ, religious pictures, paintings on church windows, images 
 on the outsides of cathedrals, tombs in these and the churches. 
 As the mass-books had been destroyed in "Reformation” the 
 first, the church-books were destroyed in “ Reformation” the 
 second, and a new book, called the “ Directory,” ordered to 
 be used in its place, a step which was no more than an imitation 
 of Henry Vlllth’s “ Christian Man” and Cranmer’s “Prayer 
 Book.” * And, why not this “Directory”? If the mass-book 
 of nine hundred years’ standing, and approved of by all the 
 people, could be destroyed, surely, the Prayer-Book, of only one 
 hundred years’ standing, and never approved of by one half of 
 the people, might also be destroyed. If it were quite right to put 
 the former down, and that, too, as w r e have seen in paragraph 
 212, with the aid of the sword, wielded by German troops, it 
 might naturally enough be thought, that it could not be very 
 wrong to put the latter down with the aid of the sword, wielded 
 by English troops, unless, indeed, there were, which we have 
 not been told, something peculiarly agreeable to Englishmen in 
 the cut of German steel. 
 
 365. It was a pair of “Reformations,” as much alike as any 
 mother and daughter ever were. The mother had a Cromwell 
 (see paragraph 157) as one of the chief agents in her work, and 
 the daughter had a Cromwell, the only difference in the two 
 being, that one was a Thomas and the other an Oliver ; the for¬ 
 mer Cromwell was commissioned to make “ a godly reformation 
 of errors, heresies and abuses in the church,” and the latter was 
 commissioned to make “ a thoroughly godly reformation in the 
 church;” the former Cromwell confiscated, pillaged and sacked 
 the church, and just, the same did the latter Cromwell, except 
 
196 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 that the latter did not, at the same time, rob the poor, as the for* 
 mer had done; and, which seems a just distinction, the latter 
 died in his bed, and the former, when the tyrant wanted his ser¬ 
 vices no longer, died on a scaffold. 
 
 366. The heroes of “ Reformation” the second were great Bible - 
 readers, and almost every man became, at times, a preacher. 
 The soldiers were uncommonly gifted in this way, and they 
 claimed a right to preach as one of the conditions upon which 
 they bore arms against the king. Every one interpreted the 
 Bible in his own way ; they werp all for the Bible without 
 note or comment. Roger North (a Protestant) in his “ Ex¬ 
 am en” gives an account of all sorts of blasphemies and of 
 horrors committed by these people, who had poisoned the 
 minds of nearly the whole of the community. Hence all 
 sorts of monstrous crimes. At Dover, a woman cut off the head 
 of her child, alleging that, like Abraham, she had had a particu¬ 
 lar command from God. A woman was executed at York, for 
 crucifying her mother. She had, at the same time, sacrificed a 
 calf and cock. These are only amongst the horrors of that 
 “ thorough godly Reformation”; only a specimen. And why 
 not these horrors ? We read of killings in the Bible; and, if 
 every man be to be his own interpreter of that book, who is to 
 say that he acts contrary to his own interpretation ? Why not all 
 these new' and monstrous sects ? If there could be one new' re¬ 
 ligion, one new creed made, why not a thousand ? What right 
 had Luther to make a new religion, and then Calvin another 
 new one, and Cranmer one differing from both these, and then 
 “good Bess” to make an improvement upon Cranmer’s? Were 
 all these to make new religions, and were the enlightened sol¬ 
 diers of Cromwell’s army to be deprived of this right? The 
 former all alleged, as their authority, the “ inspiration of the 
 Holy Ghost.” What, then, were Cromwell and his soldiers to 
 be deprived of the benefit 6f this allegation? Poor “ godly” 
 fellows, why were they to be the only people in the world not 
 qualified for choosing a religion for themselves and for those 
 whom they had at the point of their bayonets ? One of Crom¬ 
 well’s “godly” soldiers went, as North relates, into the church 
 of Walton-upon-Thames, w ith a lantern and five candles, telling 
 the people that he had a message to them from God, and that 
 they would be damned if they did not listen to him. lie put out 
 one light as a mark of the abolition of the sabbath ; the second, 
 as a mark of the abolition of all tithes and church dues; the third, 
 as a mark of the abolition of all ministers and magistrates^ and 
 then the fifth light he applied to setting fire to a Bible, declar¬ 
 ing that that also was abolished ! These were pretty pranks to 
 play ; but, they were the natural, the inevitable, consequence of 
 “ Reformation” the first. 
 
197 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 367. In one respect, however, these new reformers differed 
 from the old ones. They did, indeed, make a new religion, and 
 command people to follow it; and they inflicted punishments 
 on the refractory ; but, those punishments were beds of down 
 compared with oak-planks, when viewed by the side of those 
 inflicted by “ good Bess” and her Church. They forbade the 
 use of the Common-Prayer-Book in all churches and also in 
 private families; but, they punished the disobedie jt with a pe¬ 
 nalty oC Jive pounds for the first offence, ten pounds for the 
 second, and with three years’ imprisonment for the third ; and 
 did not hang them and rip out their bowels, as the Church of 
 England sovereigns had done by those who said ox heard mass. 
 Bad as these fanatics were, wicked and outrageous as were their 
 deeds, they never persecuted, nor attempted to persecute, with 
 a hundredth part of the cruelty that the Church of England had 
 done ; ave, and that it did again, the moment it regained its 
 power after the restoration of Charles II., when it became more 
 cruel to the Catholics even than it*had been in the reign of 
 “ good Queen Bess”; and that, too, notwithstanding that the 
 Catholics, of all ranks and degrees, had signalized themselves, 
 during the civil war, in every way in which it was possible for 
 them to aid the royal cause. 
 
 368. This, at first sight, seems out of nature; but, if we. con¬ 
 sider, that this Church of England felt conscious, that its posses¬ 
 sions did once belong to the Catholics, that the Cathedrals and 
 Churches and the Colleges, were all the work of Catholic piety, 
 learning and disinterestedness; when we consider this, can we 
 be surprised that these new possessors, who had got possession 
 by such means, too, as we have seen in the course of this work; 
 when we consider this, are we to be surprised, that they should 
 do every thing in their power to prevent the people from seeing, 
 hearing, and contracting a respect for those whom these new 
 possessors had ousted ? Here we have the true cause of all the 
 hostility of the Church of England Clergy towards the Catho¬ 
 lics. Take away the possessions, and the hostility would cease 
 to-morrow ; though there is, besides that, a wide, and, on their 
 side, a very disadvantageous difference, between a married 
 clergy, and one not married. The former will never have an 
 influence with the people, any thing like approaching that of 
 the latter. There is, too, the well-known superiority of learning 
 on the side of the Catholic clergy ; to which may be added the 
 notorious fact, that, in fair controversy, the Catholics have 
 always triumphed. Hence the deep-rooted, the inflexible, the 
 persevering and absolutely implacable hostility of this Estab¬ 
 lished Church to the Catholics; not as men, but as Catholics. 
 To what else are we to ascribe, that, to this day, the Catholics 
 are forbidden to have steeples or bells to their chapels? They, 
 
 17 * 
 
198 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 whose religion gave us our steeples and our bells ! To what 
 else are we to ascribe, that their priests are, even now, forbiddea 
 to appear in the streets, or in private houses, in tilth' clerical 
 habiliments, and even when to perform their functions at fune¬ 
 rals ? Why all this anxious pains to keep the Catholic icligiou 
 out of sight ? Men may pretend what they will, but these pain# 
 argue any thing but consciousness of being right, on the part o 
 thoso who take those pains. Why, wnen the English nun# 
 came over to England, during the French Revolution, and set¬ 
 tled at Winchester, get a bill brought into Parliament (as the 
 Church clergy did) to prevent them from taking Protestant 
 scholars, and give up the bill only upon a promise that they 
 would not take such scholars? Did this argue a conviction in 
 the minds of the Winchester Parsons, that Bishop North’s was 
 the true religion, and that William of Wickham’s was the falsa 
 one? The Church parsons are tolerant enough towards sects 
 of all descriptions : quite love the Quaker, who rejects baptism 
 and the sacrament; shake hands with the Unitarian, and allow 
 him openly to impugn that, which they tell us in the Prayer 
 Book, a man cannot be saved if he do not firmly believe in : suf¬ 
 fer these, ave, and even JEWS, to present to church-livings, and 
 refuse that right to Catholics, horn whose religion all the church- 
 livings came! 
 
 369. Who, then, can doubt of the motive of this implacable 
 hostility, this everlasting watchfulness, this rancorous jealousy 
 that never sleeps ? The common enemy being put down by the 
 restoration of Charles, the Church fell upon the Catholics with 
 more fury than ever. This king, who came out of exile to 
 mount the throne in 1660, with still more prodigality than either 
 his father or grandfather, had a great deal more sense than 
 both put together, and, in spite of all his well-known profli- 
 •gacy, he was, on account of his popular manners, a favourite 
 with his people; but, he was strongly suspected to be a Catho¬ 
 lic in his heart, and his more honest brother, James, his pre¬ 
 sumptive heir, was an openly declared Catholic. Hence the 
 reign of Charles II was one continued series of plots, sham or 
 real; and one unbroken scene of acts of injustice, fraud, and 
 false-swearing. These were plots ascribed to the Catholics, but 
 really plots against them. Even the great fire in London, which 
 took place during this reign, was ascribed to them, and there is 
 the charge, to this day, going round the base of “ the 1Monu¬ 
 ment," which Fope justly compares to a big, lying bully, 
 
 “ Where London’s column, pointing to the skies, 
 
 Like a tall bully, lifts its head, and lies.” 
 
 The words are these: “ This monument is erected in memory of 
 the burning of this Protestant city, by the Popish faction, in Sept. 
 A. D. 1666, for the destruction of the Protestant religion ar.d of 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 199 
 
 old English liberty , and for the introduction of Popery and 
 slavery. But the fury of the Papists is not yet satisfied.It is 
 curious enough, that this inscription was made by order of Sir 
 Patiknce Ward, who, as Echard shows, was afterwards con¬ 
 victed ojperjury. Burnet (whom we shall find in full tide by- 
 and-by) says, that one Hubert, a French Papist, “ confessed 
 that he began the fire;” but Higgons (a Protestant, mind,) 
 proves that Hubert was a Protestant, and Rapin agrees with 
 Higgons ! Nobody knew better than the King the monstrous 
 ness of this lie; but Charles II. was a lazy, luxurious de¬ 
 bauchee. Such men have always been unfeeling and ungrate • 
 ful; and this King, who had twice owed his life to Catholic 
 priests, and who had, in fifty-two instances, held his life at the 
 mercy of Catholics (some of them very poor) while he was a 
 wandering fugitive, with immense rewards held out for taking 
 him, and dreadful punishments for concealing him ; this profli¬ 
 gate king, whose ingratitude to his faithful Irish subjects is 
 without a parallel in the annals of that black sin, had the mean¬ 
 ness and injustice to suffer this lying inscription to stand. It 
 was effaced by his brother and successor; but, when the Dutch¬ 
 man and the “ glorious revolution” came, it was restored ; and 
 there it now stands, all the world, except the mere mob, know- 
 it to contain a most malignant lie. 
 
 370. By conduct like this, by thus encouraging the fanatical 
 part of his subjects in their wicked designs, Charles 11. pre¬ 
 pared the way for those events by which his family were ex¬ 
 cluded from the throne for ever. To set aside his brother, who 
 w'as an avowed Catholic, was their great object. This was, 
 indeed, a monstrous attempt; but, legally considered, what 
 was it more than to prefer the illegitimate Elizabeih to the legi¬ 
 timate Mary Stuart ? What was it more, than to enact, that 
 any “ natural issue ” of the former should be heir to the throne 7 
 And, how could the Protestant Church complain of it, when its 
 great maker, Cranmer, had done his best to set aside both the 
 daughters of Henry VIII., and to put Lady Jane Grey on the 
 throne 7 In short, there was no precedent for annulling the 
 rights of inheritance, for setting aside prescription, for disre¬ 
 garding the safety of property and of person, for violating the 
 fundamental laws of the kingdom, that the records of the “ Re¬ 
 formation” did not amply furnish: and this daring attempt to 
 set aside James on account of his religion, might be truly said 
 as it was said, to be a Protestant principle ; and it was, too, a 
 principle most decidedly acted upon in a few years afterwards. 
 
 371. James II. w'as sober, frugal in his expenses, economical 
 as to public matters, sparing of the people’s purses, pious, and 
 sincere; but weak and obstinate, and he was a Catholic, and 
 his piety and sincerity made him not a match for his artful, nu- 
 
200 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 merous and deeply interested foes. If the existence of a few 
 missionary priests in the country, though hidden behind wain¬ 
 scots, had called forth thousands of pursuivants, in order to 
 protect the Protestant Church ; if to hear mass in a private 
 house had been regarded as incompatible with the safety of that 
 Church ; what was to be the fate of that Church, if a Catholic 
 king continued to sit on the throne ? It was easy to see that the 
 ministry, the army, the navy, and all the offices under the go¬ 
 vernment, would soon contain few besides Catholics ; and it 
 was also easy to see that, by degrees, Catholics would be in the 
 parsonages and in the episcopal palaces, especially as the king 
 was as zealous as he was sincere. The “ Reformation” had 
 made consciences to be of so pliant a nature, men had changed, 
 under it, backward and forward so many times, that this last 
 (the filling of the Church with Catholic priests and bishops,) 
 would, perhaps, amongst the people in general, and particularly 
 amongst the higher classes, have produced but little alarm. 
 But, not so with the clergy tnemselves , who soon saw their dan¬ 
 ger, and who, “ passive” as they were, lost no time in preparing 
 to avert it. 
 
 372. James acted, as far as the law would let him, and as far 
 as prerogative would enable him to go beyond the law, on prin¬ 
 ciples of general toleration. By this he obtained the support of 
 the sectaries. But the Church had got the good things, and it 
 resolved, if possible, to keep them. Besides this, though the 
 abbey lands and the rest of the real property of the Church and 
 the poor, had been a long xchile in the peaceable possession of 
 the then owners and their predecessors, the time w as not so very 
 distant but that able lawyers , having their opinions backed by a 
 well-organized army, might still find a flaw in, here and there, 
 a grant of Henry VIII., Edward VI., and Old Betsy. Be their 
 thoughts what they might, certain it is, that the most zealous and 
 most conspicuous and most efficient of the leaders of the “ Glo¬ 
 rious Revolution” which took place soon afterwards, and which 
 drove James from the throne, together with his heirs and his 
 house, were amongst those whose ancestors had not been out of 
 the way at the time when sharing of the abbey lands took place. 
 
 373. With motives so powerful against him, the king ought 
 to have been uncommonly prudent and wary. He was just the 
 contrary. He was severe towards all who opposed his views, 
 how r ever powerful they might be. Some bishops who presented 
 a very insolent, but artful, petition to him, he sent to the Tower, 
 had them prosecuted for a libel, and had the mortification to see 
 them acquitted. As to the behaviour of the Catholics, prudence 
 and moderation was not to be expected from them. Look at 
 the fines, the burning irons, the racks, the gibbets, and the rip¬ 
 ping-knives of the late reigns, and say if it were not both natural 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 201 
 
 and just, that their joy and exultation should now be without 
 oounds. These were, alas ! of short duration, for a plan (we 
 must not call it a plot) having been formed tor compelling the 
 king to give up his tolerating projects, and “ to settle the king¬ 
 dom,” as it was called, the planners, without any act of par¬ 
 liament, and without consulting the people in any way what¬ 
 ever, invited William, the Prince of Orange, who was the 
 Stadtholder of the Dutch, to come over with a Dutch army to 
 assist them in “ settling ” the kingdom. All things having been 
 duly prepared, the Dutch guards (who had been suffered to get 
 from Torbay to London by perfidy in the English army) having 
 come to the king's palace and (/trusted out the English guards, 
 the king, having seen one “ settling ” of a sovereign, in the reign 
 of his father, and, apparently, having no relish for another set¬ 
 tling of the same sort, fled from his palace and his kingdom, 
 and took shelter in France, instead of fleeing to some distant 
 English city and there rallying his people round him, which, if 
 he .had done, the event would, as the subsequent conduct of the 
 people proved, have been very different from what it was. 
 
 374. Now came, then, the “ glorious Revolution,” or Re¬ 
 formation the third ; and, when we have taken a view of its 
 progress and completion, we shall see how it, in its natural 
 consequences, extorted, for the long-opprossed Catholics, that 
 relief, which, by appeals to the justice and humanity of their 
 persecutors, they had sought ir vain for more than two hundred 
 years. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 202 
 
 i r m . . . 
 
 LETTER XIII. 
 
 “ Glorious” Revolution, or Reformation the third.—The 
 Dutoii King and his delivering army.—The '* Crimes” of 
 James II., with elucidations.—Parliamentary purity.— 
 The Protestant Bishop Jocelyn.—Sydney, and others 
 of the .Protestant patriots.—Habeas Corpus Act.— 
 Settlement of American colonies. 
 
 Kensington, 30 th Nov 1825. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 375. At the close of the last Number, we saw a Dutchman in¬ 
 vited over with an army to “ settle” the kingdom ; we saw the 
 Dutch guards come to London and thrust out the English guards; 
 we saw the King of England flee for his life, and take refuge in 
 France, after his own army had been seduced to abandon him 
 The stage being now clear for the actors in this affair, we have 
 now to see how thev went to work, the manner of which we shall 
 find as summary and as unceremonious as heart, however Pro¬ 
 testant, could have possibly wished. 
 
 376. The King being gone, the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of 
 London, with a parcel of Common Councilmen, and such Lords 
 and members of the late King Charles’s Parliaments as chose to 
 join them, went, in February 1688, without any authority from 
 King, Parliament or people, and forming themselves into “ a 
 Convention ,” at Westminster, gave the crown to William (who 
 was a Dutchman) and his wife (who was a daughter of James, 
 but who had a brother alive), and their posterity FOR EVER ; 
 made new oaths of allegiance "or the people to take; enabled 
 the new King to imprison, at pleasure, all whom he might sus- 
 peel; banished, to ten miles from London, all Papists, or reput¬ 
 ed Papists, and disarmed them all over the kingdom; gave the 
 advowsons of Papists to the Universities; granted to their new 
 majesties excise duties, land-taxes and poll-taxes for the “ ne¬ 
 cessary defence of the realm declared themselves to be the 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 200 
 
 14 Two Houses of Parliament as legally as if they had been sum¬ 
 moned according to the usual form :” and this they called a “ glo¬ 
 rious Revolution,” as we Protestants call it to this present day. 
 After 44 Reformation” the second, and upon the restoration ol 
 Charles, the palaces and livings and other indestructible plun¬ 
 der, was restored to those from whom the 44 thorough godly” * 
 had taken it, except, however, to the Catholic Irish, who had 
 fought for this King’s father, who had suffered most cruelly lor 
 this King himself, and who were left still to be plundered by the 
 “thorough godly,” which is an instance of ingratitude such as, 
 in no other case, has been witnessed in the world. However, 
 there were, after the restoration, men enough to contend, that 
 the episcopal palaces and other property , confiscated and grant¬ 
 ed away by the 44 thorough godly,” ought not to be touched; 
 for that, if those grants were resumed, why not resume those oj 
 Henry VIII. I Aye, why not indeed ! Here was a question to 
 put to the Church Clergy, and to the Abbey-Land owners! It 
 nine hundred years of quiet possession, and Magna Charta at 
 the back of it; if it were right to set these at nought for the sake 
 of making only 44 a godly Reformation,” why should not one hun¬ 
 dred years of unquiet possession be set at nought for the sake 
 of making 44 a thorough godly Reformation” ? How did the 
 Church clergy answer this question? Why, Dr. Heylin, who 
 was Rector of Alresford in Hampshire, and afterw ards Dean ol 
 Westminster, who was a great enemy of the 44 thorough godly,” 
 though not much less an enemy of the Catholics, meets the ques¬ 
 tion in this way, in the Address, at the head of his History of 
 Reformation the first, where he says, 44 that there certainly must 
 needs be a vast disproportion between such contracts, as were 
 founded upon Acts of Parliament, legally passed by the king’s 
 authority, with the consent and approbation of the three estates 
 and those which have no other ground but the bare voles and or¬ 
 ders, of both Houses only. By the same logic it might be con¬ 
 tended, that the two Houses alone have authority to depose a 
 Hug.” 
 
 377, This Church-Doctor died a little too soon; or, he would 
 nave seen, not tw r o Houses of Parliament, but a Lord Mayor of 
 London, a parcel of Common Councilmen, and such other per¬ 
 sons as chose to join them, actually setting aside one king and 
 putting another upon the throne, and without any authority from 
 King, Parliament, or people ; he would have heard this called 44 a 
 glorious’ 1 thing; and, if he had lived to our day, he would have 
 seen other equally 44 glorious ” things grow directly out of it ; 
 and, that notwithstanding Blackstone had told the Americans, 
 that a 44 glorious” revolution was a thing never to be repeated, 
 Doctor Heylin would have heard them repeating, as applied to 
 George Ill., almost word for word, the charges which the u glo- 
 
204 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 rious ” people preferred against James II., though they, naughty 
 Yankees, knew perfectly well, that, after the “ glorious ” affair, 
 a King ofiEnglaud (being a Protestant) could “ do no wrong ” l 
 The Doctor’s book, written to justify the “ Reformation ,” did, as 
 Pierre Orleans tells us, convert James II. and his first wife to 
 the Catholic religion; but his preface, above quoted, did not 
 succeed so well with Protestants. 
 
 378. VVe shall, in due time, see something of the COST of 
 this “glorious’’ revolution to the people; but, first, seeing that 
 this revolution and the exclusion acts which followed it were 
 founded upon the principle, that the Catholic religion was in* 
 compatible with public freedom and justice, let us see what things 
 this Catholic King had really done, and in what degree they 
 were ivorse than things that had been and that have been done 
 under Protestant sovereigns. As William and his Dutch army 
 have been called our deliverers, let us see what it really was, af¬ 
 ter all, that they delivered the people from; and here, happily, 
 we have the Statute-book to refer to, in which there still stands 
 the List of Charges, drawn up against this Catholic King. How¬ 
 ever, before we examine these charges, we ought, in common 
 justice, to notice certain things that James did not do. He did 
 not, as Protestant Edward VI. had done, bring German 
 troops into the country to enforce a change of religion ; nor did 
 he, like that young Saint, burn his starving subjects with a hot 
 iron on the breast or on the forehead add make them wear 
 chains as slaves, as a punishment for endeavouring to relieve 
 their hunger by begging. He did not, as Protestant Betsey 
 had done, make use of whips, borinsr irons, racks, gibbets, and 
 ripping-knives to convert people to his faith; nor did he impose 
 even any fines for this purpose ; but on the contrary, put, as far 
 as he was able, an end to all persecution on account of religion : 
 oh! but I am forgetting, lor this we shall find amongst his Ca¬ 
 tholic crimes : yes, amongst the proofs of his being a determined 
 and intolerant. Popish tyrant! He did not, as Protestant Bet¬ 
 sey nad done, give monopolies to his court minions, so as to 
 make salt, for instance, which, in his day, was about fourpence 
 a bushel, fourteen pounds a bushel, and thus go on, till, at last, 
 tne Parliament feared, as they did in the time of “ good Bess,” 
 that there would be a monopoly even of bread. These were 
 amongst the things, which, being purely of Protestant birth, 
 James, no doubt from “Catholic bigotry ,” did not do. And, 
 now, let us come to the things which he really did, or, at least, 
 which he was charged with having done. 
 
 379. Indictments do not generally come after judgment and 
 execution; but, for some cause or other, the charges against 
 James were postponed until the next year, when the crown had 
 been actually given to the Dutchman and his wife. No matter: 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 208 
 
 they came out at last; and there they stand, 12 in number, in 
 Act 2, Sess. Win. and JV1. chap. 2. We will take them one by 
 one, bearing- in mind, that they contained all that cduld even be 
 said against this Popish King. 
 
 CHARGE 1. “ That he assumed and exercised a power of 
 dispensing with and suspending laws, and the execution of laws, 
 without consent of Parliament.”—That is to say, he did not en¬ 
 force those cruel laws against conscientious Catholics, which 
 had been enacted in former reigns. But, did not Betsey and her 
 successor Janies I. dispense with, or suspend, laws, when they 
 took a composition from recusants? Again, have we ourselves 
 never seen any suspension of, or dispensing with laws without 
 consent of Parliament ? Was there, and is there, no dispensing 
 w ith the law, in employingybreign officers in the English army, 
 and in granting pensions from the croivn to foreigners? And, 
 was there no suspension of the law, when the Bank stopped paj r - 
 ment in 1797? And, did the Parliament give its assent to the 
 causing of that, stoppage ? And, has it ever given its assent to 
 the putting of foreigners in offices of trust, civil or military, or 
 to the granting of pensions from the crown to foreigners ? But, 
 did James ever suspend the Habeas Corpus Ad 1 Did his Se- 
 crefarics of State ever imprison whom they pleased, in any gaol 
 or dungeon that they pleased; let the captives out when they 
 pleased ? Ah ! but what he and his Ministers did in this way (if 
 they did any thing) was all done “ without consent of Parlia¬ 
 ment;” and who is so destitute of discrimination as not to per¬ 
 ceive the astonishing difference between a dungeon with con¬ 
 sent of Parliament and a dungeon without consent of Parlia¬ 
 ment ! 
 
 CHARGE IK ‘'That he committed and prosecuted divers 
 worthy prelates, for humbly petitioning to be excused from con¬ 
 curring to the said assumed powers.” He prosecuted them as 
 libellers, and they were acquitted. But he committed them be¬ 
 fore trial and conviction; and, why ? because they refused to give 
 bail. And they contended that it was tyranny in him to de¬ 
 mand such bail! Oh, heavens ! How many scores of persons 
 have been imprisoned for a similar refusal, or for want of ability 
 to give bail on a charge of libel, during the last eight years! 
 Would not Mr. Clement have been imprisoned, the other 
 day only, if he had refused to give bail,^ not on a charge of 
 libel on a king upon bis throne, but on a Protestant profes¬ 
 sor of humanity? And, do not SIX ACTS, passed by a 
 Parliament, from which tyrannical Catholics are so effectually 
 excluded, declare to us free Protestants, that this has always 
 been the law of the land ! And, is that all ? Oh, no ! For we 
 may now be banished for life, not only for libelling a king on his 
 
 ' 18 
 
206 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 throne, but for uttering- any thing that has a TENDENCY to 
 bring either House of Parliament into contempt! 
 
 CHARGE 111. “ That he issued a commission for erecting a 
 Court, called the Court of Commissioners for Ecclesiastical 
 Causes." Bless us 1 What! was this worse than “ good Betsey’s” 
 real inquisition, under the same name ? And, good God ! have 
 we no court of this sort now ? And was not (no longer than 
 about nine months ago) Sarah Wallis (a labourer’s wife of 
 Hargrave, in Norfolk), for having “ brawled," in the church-yard, 
 sentenced by this Court to pay 24 1. Os. bd. costs; and was she 
 not sent to gaol for non-payment; and must she not have rotted 
 in gaol, having not a shilling in the world, if humane persons 
 had not stepped forward to enable her to get out by the Insol¬ 
 vent Act 1 And, cannot this Court, now, agreeably to those of 
 young Protestant Saint Edward’s Acts, in virtue of which the 
 above sentence was passed, condemn any one who attempts to 
 fight in a church-yard, to have one ear cut off, and, if the offen¬ 
 der “ have no ears" (which speaks volumes as to the state of the 
 people under Protestant Edward), then to be burnt with a hot 
 iron in the cheek, and to be excommunicated besides? And, did 
 not the revolution Protestants, who drew up the charges against 
 James, leave this law in full force for our benefit? 
 
 CHARGE IV. “ That he levied money for and to the use of 
 the crown, by pretence of prerogative, for other time, and in 
 other manner, than was granted by Parliament.” It is not pre¬ 
 tended that he levied more money than was granted ; but he was 
 not exact as to the time and manner. Did the Parliament, grant 
 Betsey the right to raise money by the sale of monopolies, by 
 compositions with offenders, and by various other of her means ? 
 But did we not lately hear of the hop duty payment being shifted 
 from one year to another l Doubtless, with w isdom and mercy ; 
 but I very much doubt of James’s ever having, in this respect, 
 deviated from strict law to a greater amount, seeing that his whole 
 revenue did not exceed (taking the difference in the value of 
 money into account) much above sixteen times the amount of a 
 good year’s hop duty. 
 
 CHARGE V, “ That he kept a standing army in time ofpeace, 
 without -consent of .Parliament.” Ah ! without consent of Par¬ 
 liament, indeed ! That was very wicked. There were only se¬ 
 ven or eight thousand men, to bg.sure, and such a thing as a 
 barrack, had never been heard of. But, without consent of Par¬ 
 liament ! Think of the vast difference between the prick of a 
 bayonet coming without consent of Parliament, and that of one 
 coming with such consent! This king’s father had been de¬ 
 throned and his head had been cut off by an army kept up with 
 consent of Parliament, mind that, however. Whether there were, 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 207 
 
 in the time of James, any such affairs as that at Manchester, on 
 the memorable 1 Jth of August, 1819, history is quite silent; nor 
 are we told, whether any of James’s priests enjoyed military 
 half-pay; nor are we informed, whether he gave half-pay, or 
 took it away, at his pleasure, and without any “ consent of Par¬ 
 liament” : so that, as to these matters, we have no means of 
 making a comparison. We are in the same situation with re¬ 
 gard to foreign armies; for we do not find any account what¬ 
 ever of James’s having brought any into England, and especi¬ 
 ally of his having caused foreign Generals to command even the 
 English troops, militia and all, in whole districts of England. 
 
 CHARGE VI. “That he caused several good subjects, being 
 Protestants, to be disarmed, at the same time that Papists were 
 both armed and employed, contrary to law." SIX ACTS dis¬ 
 armed enough of the king’s subjects; aye, but, then, these were 
 not “ good" ones ; they wanted a reform of the House of Com¬ 
 mons. And besides, there was “ law ” for this. And, if people 
 will not see what a surprising difference there is between being 
 disarmed by law and disarmed by ’proclamation, it really is use¬ 
 less to spend valuable Protestant breath upon them. 
 
 CHARGE VII. “ That he violated the freedom of election of 
 Members to serve in Parliament.” Oh, monstrous! Aye, and 
 “ notorious as the sun at noon-day” 1 Come up, shades of Per¬ 
 ceval and Castlereagh ; come voters of Sarum and Gatton : as¬ 
 semble, ye sons of purity of election, living and dead, and con¬ 
 demn this wicked king for having “ violated the freedom of 
 elections”! But, come, w r e must not suffer this matter to pass 
 off in the way of joke. Protestant reader, do you think, that this 
 “violating of the freedom of elections for Members to serve in 
 Parliament “ w-as a crime in King James ? He is not accused of 
 having done all these things with his own tongue, pen, or hands ; 
 but with having done them with the aid of “ divers wicked minis¬ 
 ters and councillors. Well; but do you, ray Protestant readers, 
 think that this violation of the freedom of elections was a bad 
 thing, and a proof of the wicked principles of Popery ? If you 
 do, take the following facts, which ought to have a place in a 
 work like this, which truth and honour and justice demand to be 
 recorded, and which I state as briefly as I possibly can. Know, 
 then, and be it for ever remembered, That Catholics have been 
 excluded from the throne for more than a hundred years: 
 That they have been excluded from the English Parliament 
 ever since the reign of Charles II., and from the Irish Parlia¬ 
 ment ever since the 22d year of George III.: That, therefore, 
 the throne and the Parliament were filled exclusively with 
 Protestants in the year 1809: That, in 1779, long and long 
 after Catholics had been shut out of the English Parliament, 
 the House of Commons resolved, “ That it is HIGHLY CRX 
 
 *#- 
 
 4 
 
208 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 MINAL for anv Minister or Ministers, or any other servant of 
 the crown in Great Britain, directly or indirectly, to make use 
 of the power of his office, in order to influence the election of 
 Members of Parliament, and that an attempt to exercise that 
 influence is an attack upon the dignity, the honour, and the inde¬ 
 pendence of Parliament, an infringement of the rights and the 
 liberties of the people, and an attempt to sap the basis of our free 
 and happy constitution .”— That, in 1809, Lord Castlereagh, a 
 Minister and a Privy Councillor, having been charged before 
 the House with having had something to do about bartering a 
 seat in the House, the House on the 25th of April of that year, 
 resolved, 11 That while it was the bounden duty of that House to 
 maintain ul all times a jealous guard upon its purity, and not to 
 suffer any attempt upon its privileges to pass unnoticed, the at¬ 
 tempt, in the present instance (that of Lord Castlereagh and 
 Mr. Reding) not having been carried into effect, that House did 
 not think it then necessary to proceed to any criminating reso¬ 
 lutions respecting the same.”— That on the 11th of May, 1809, 
 (only sixteen days afterthis last resolution was passed) William 
 Mabocks, member for Boston, made a charge in the following 
 words, to wit: “ l affirm, then, that Mr. Dick purchased a seat 
 in the House of Commons, for the Borough of Cashel, through 
 the agency of the Honourable Henry Wellesley, who acted for, 
 and on behalf of the Treasury; that, upon a recent question of 
 the last importance, when Mr. Dick had determined to vote ac 
 .cording to his conscience, the noble Lord Castlereagh, did inti¬ 
 mate to that gentleman the necessity of either his voting with 
 the government, or resigning his seat in that House ; and that 
 Mr. Dick, sooner than vote against his principles, did make 
 choice of the latter alternative, and vacate his seat accordingly 5 
 and that to this transaction, I charge the right honourable gen¬ 
 tleman, Mr. Perceval, as being privy, and having connived at 
 it. This i engage to prove by witnessess at your bar, if the House 
 will give me leave to call them.” That, having made his charge, 
 Mr. Madocks made a motion for INQUIRY into the matter:— 
 That, after a debate, the question was put to the vote :—That 
 there were three hundred and ninety-five members in the house, 
 all Protestants, mind :— That (come up and hear it you accusers 
 of James and the Catholic religion !) there were EIGHTY-FIVE 
 for an inquiry, and THREE HUNDRED AND TEN against it! 
 'THAT, this same PROTESTANT Parliament, did, in 1819, on 
 the MOTION OF THAT VERY SAME LORD CASTLE¬ 
 REAGH, pass a law by which any of us may now be BANISHED 
 FOR LIFE for publishing any tiling having a TENDENCY to 
 bring THAT VERY HOUSE into CONTEMPT! TPIAT 
 this Lord Castlereagh was Secretary of State for foreign affairs. 
 THAT he continued to be the leading Minister in the Plouse of 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 209 
 
 - • 
 
 Commons (exclusively Protestant) until the close of the session 
 of 1822, which took place on the 6th of August of that year. 
 THAT, on the 12th of the same month of August, he cut his own 
 throat, and killed himself at North Cray, in Kent; that a coro¬ 
 ner’s jury declared him to have been insane, and that the evi¬ 
 dence showed, that he had been insane for several weeks, though 
 he had been the leader of the House up to the 6th of August, 
 and though he was, at the moment when he killed himself, Se 
 cretary of State for foreign affairs, and also temporary Secre 
 tary for the Home Department and that of the colonies! THAT 
 his body was buried in Westminster Abbey-church, mourned 
 over by his colleagues, and that, as it was taken out of the hearse, 
 a great assemblage of the people gave loud and long-continued 
 cheers of exultation. 
 
 CHARGE VIII. “ That he promoted prosecutions in the Court 
 of King's Bench for matters and things cognizable only in Par¬ 
 liament; and that he did clivers other arbitrary and unlawful 
 things.” That is to say, that he brought before a jury matters 
 which the Parliament wished to keep to itself! Oh, naughty 
 and arbitrary king! to have jury-trial for the deeds of pariia- 
 ment-men, instead of letting them try themselves! As to the 
 Hirers other such arbitrary things, they not being specified, we 
 cannot say what they were. V 
 
 CHARGE IX. “ That he caused juries to be composed of par¬ 
 tial, corrupt, and unqualified persons, who were not freehol¬ 
 ders.” Very bad, if true, of which, however, no proof, and no 
 instance, is attempted to be given. One thing, at any rate, there 
 were no special juries in those days. They, which are “ appoint¬ 
 ed ” by the Master of the Crown-Office, came after Catholic 
 kings were abolished. But, not to mention that Protestant Bet¬ 
 sey dispensed with juries altogether, when she pleased, and 
 tried and punished even vagabonds and rioters by martial law , 
 do we not now, in our own free and enlightened and liberal Pro¬ 
 testant days, see many men transported for seven years, WITH¬ 
 OUT ANY JURY AT ALL? Aye, and that too, in numerous 
 cases, only for being more than 15 minutes at a time out of their 
 houses (which the law calls their castles) between sunset and sun¬ 
 rise ? Ah ! but this is with consent of Parliament! Oh! I had 
 forgotten that. That’s an answer. 
 
 CHARGE X. “That excessive bail hath” (by the Judges, of 
 course) been required of persons committed in criminal cases, 
 to elude the benefit of the laws made for the liberty of the sub¬ 
 ject.” 
 
 CHARGE XL “That excessive fines have been imposed and 
 illegal and cruel punishments inflicted.” 
 
 CHARGE XII. “ That he had made promises and grants of 
 fines before conviction and judgment on the party.” 
 
 18 * 
 
210 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 I 
 
 380. I take these three Charges together. As to fines and 
 bail, look at Protestant Betsey’s and Protestant James l.’s reigns. 
 But, coming to our own times; /, Cor having expressed my in¬ 
 dignation at the flogging of English local-militia men, in the 
 heart of England, under a guard of German troops, was two 
 year’s imprisoned hi a felon’s gaol, and, at the expiration of 
 the time, had to pay a. fine of a thousand pounds, and to give bail 
 for SEVEN YE\RS, myself in three thousand pounds with two 
 sureties in two thousand pounds each. The “ Convention,” who 
 gave us the “ Protestant Deliverer” does not cite any instances , 
 but, while we cannot but allow, that the amiable lenity ‘of our 
 Protestant bail-works appeared most conspicuously, in 1822, in 
 the 500/. bail taken of the Protestant Right Reverend Father in 
 God, Percy Jocelyn, Bishop of Clogher, brother of the late, and 
 uncle of the present Earl of Roden, w hich Protestant Bishop 
 stood, on the oaths of seven witnesses, accused of (in conjunction 
 w ith John Movei.ly, a soldier of the foot Guards in London) an 
 unnatural offence, and which Protestant Bishop finally fled from 
 trial ; though our Protestant bail-works appeared so gentle and 
 so amiable here, and exacted only a bail of five hundred pounds, 
 with tw o sureties in two h undred pounds each, from a PROTES 
 TANT BISHOP (charged, o« the oaths of seven witnesses, with 
 such an enormous offence), whose income had, for many years, 
 been about twelve or fifteen thousand a year; though our Pro¬ 
 testant bail-works appeared so amiable, so dove-like in this case, 
 and also in the case of the Soldier (partner of the Bishop), from 
 whom bail of 200/. with two sureties in 100/. each was taken, 
 and the Soldier, who was at once let out of prison, did, in imi¬ 
 tation of the Bishop, flee from trial, though he was an enlisted 
 soldier, and though his regiment was stationed in London:— 
 That, while we cannot but allow, that our Protestant bail-works 
 were characterized by gentleness and mildness in these memo¬ 
 rable cases; yet they have not always been in the same dove- 
 like mood; for, That, in the year 1811, James Byrne, a Catho¬ 
 lic, who had been a coachman in the Jocelyn family, having as¬ 
 serted that this same Protestant Bishop attempted to commit an 
 unnatural offence on him, the said James Byrne was imprisoned 
 at once before indictment, and was, from his prison, brought to 
 trial as a criminal: That, at his trial, the Protestant Bishop 
 aforesaid, declared, on his OATH, that Byrne had charged him 
 FALSELY :— That Byrne was sentenced, for this alleged libel, 
 proved on the oath of this Protestant Bishop, to be imprisoned 
 in a felon’s gaol for tivo years, to be three times publicly whip¬ 
 ped, and, at the end of the two years, to give bail for life, in 500/. 
 himself, with tw r o sureties in 200/. each:— That James Bvrne 
 was carried into the gaol, having been first flogged half to death : 
 —That, at the end of two years, Byrne lay several months 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 211 
 
 more in gaol for want of sureties:— That this Protestant Bishop 
 was, at this time, Bishop of Ferns, and tiiat he was, after this, 
 promoted to be Bishop of Cloghkr, and made a Commissioner 
 of the Board of Education. So that our Protestant bail-works 
 have not always been so very gentle. Nay, if we were to look 
 into our gaols, even at this moment, we might find a man who 
 has hardly a penny in the world, whose crime was libel, who 
 has a fine of 600/. to pay, who has more than 500/. bail to find, 
 with two sureties FOR LIFE, whose period of imprisonment 
 has expired years ago, and who may, not only possibly, but 
 probably, end his life in that gaol from inability to pay his fine 
 and to find the requisite bail.—Until, therefore, some zealous 
 admirer of the “glorious revolution” will be pleased to furnish 
 us with something specific as to the bail and fines in James’s 
 reign, we ought, in prudence, to abstain from even any mention 
 of this charge against the unfortunate king; for, to talk of them 
 in too censorious a strain, may possibly receive a no very cha¬ 
 ritable interpretation. But there had been illegal and cruel pu¬ 
 nishments in his reign. What punishments ? There had been 
 no people burnt, there had been no racks as there had been in 
 the reigns of Protestants Betsey and James 1. Why, Sir John 
 Cox Hippesley, in u petition to Parliament, a year or two ago, 
 asserted that the tread-mill was “ cruel and illegal .” Yet it 
 stands, and that too, for very trifling offences. Sir John might 
 be wrong; but this shows that there might also be two opinions 
 about punishments in the time of James ; and we have to lament 
 that those who brought in “ the deliverer” were so careless as 
 to specify none of those instances, which might have enabled us 
 to make, as to this matter, a comparison between a Catholic 
 king and a Protestant one.—But, he granted away fines before 
 the conviction of the party. Indeed! What, then, we have, in 
 our happy day, under a Protestant king, no fines granted before¬ 
 hand to informers of any sort? Ah ! but this is ivith the consent 
 of Parliament ! 1 had forgotten that again. 1 am silenced .' 
 
 381. These were the offences of king James; these were the 
 grounds, as recorded in the Statute-book of the “glorious revo¬ 
 lution,” made, as the same Act expresses, to “deliver this king¬ 
 dom from Popery and arbitrary power , and to prevent the Pro¬ 
 testant religion from being subverted and, seeing that this was 
 immediately followed by a perpetual exclusion of Catholics, and 
 those who should marry with Catholics, from the throne, it is 
 clear that this was a revolution entirely Protestant, and that it 
 was an event directly proceeding from the “Reformation.” 
 This being the case, I should now proceed to take a view of the 
 consequences, and particularly of the costs of this grand change, 
 which was “ Reformation” the third. But there are still to no¬ 
 tice some things, which lying history and vulgar prejudice urge 
 
212 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 against this unfortunate Catholic king, who has been asserted 
 to have been the adviser of his late brother, in all those deeds 
 which have been deemed wicked, and especially in the putting of 
 Lord Russkll and Algernon Sidney to death for high treason. 
 
 382. Alas! Low have we been deluded upon this subject! I < 
 used to look upon these as two murdered men. A compulsion 
 to look into realities, and to discard romance, has taught me 
 the contrary. The Protestants were, in the reign of Charles II., 
 continually hatching Popish plots, and by contrivances the most 
 diabolical, bringing innocent Catholics to the scaffold and the 
 gibbet; and, in the course of these their proceedings, they were 
 constantly denying tfie prerogative of the king to pardon, or to 
 mitigate the punishment of their victims. But, at last, the king 
 got real proof of a Protestant plot! The King was ill, and a 
 conspiracy was formed for setting aside his brother by force of 
 arms, if the King should die. The King recovered, but the Pro¬ 
 testant plot went on. The scheme was to rise in arms against the 
 government, to pay and bring in an army of Protestants from 
 Scotland, and, in short, to make now that sort of “ Reformation” 
 the third, which did not take place, till, as we have seen, some years 
 afterwards. In this Protestant plot Russell and Sidney were 
 two great leaders. Russell did not attempt to deny that he had 
 had a part in the conspiracy; his only complaint was, that the in¬ 
 dictment was not agreeable to law ; but, he was told, which was 
 true, that it was perfectly agreeable to numerous precedents in 
 cases of trials of Popish plotters ! When brought to the place ot 
 execution, Russell did not deny his guilt, but did not explicitly 
 confess it. That part of his sentence, which ordered his bowels 
 to be ripped out, while he was yet alive, and his body to be quar¬ 
 tered, was, at the intercession of his family, remitted by the 
 King, who, in yielding to their prayer, cuttingly said, “ Mr 
 Lord Russell shall find, that I am possessed of that prerogative, 
 which, in the case of Lord Strafford, he thought Jit to deny me.'' 
 
 383. As to Sidney, he had been one of the leading men in 
 the “ thorough godly ” work of the last reign, and had even been 
 one of the Commissioners for trying Charles 1. and bringing him 
 to the block, though, it is said by his friends, he did not actual¬ 
 ly sit at the trial. At the restoration of Charles II., he had taken 
 refuge abroad. But, having confessed the errors of his younger 
 years, and promised to be loyal in future, this King, under the 
 guidance of a Popish brother, pardoned him, great as his of- 
 fences had been. Yet, after this, he conspired to destroy the 
 government of that King, or, at the very least, to set aside that 
 brother, and this too, observe, by force of arms, by open rebel¬ 
 lion against the King who had pardoned him, and by plunging 
 into all the horrors of another civil war, that country, which he 
 had before assisted to desolate. If any man ever deserved an 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 213 
 
 ignominious death, this Sidney deserved his. He did not deny, 
 he could not deny, that the conspiracy had existed, and that he 
 was one of its chiefs. He had no complaint but one, and that 
 related to the evidence against him. There was only one parole 
 witness to his acts, and, in cases of high treason, the law of Eng¬ 
 land required two. And, here it was that a blush might (if it 
 were possible) have been raised upon the cheeks of these re- 
 vilers of Popery; for, this very law, this law, which has saved 
 the lives of so many innocent persons; this law which ought to 
 engrave gratitude to its author on the heart of every English¬ 
 man; this law came from that very Popish Queen Mary, whom 
 artful knaves have taught generations of thoughtless people to 
 call “ the bloody ,” while, too, she was the wife of, and had for 
 coadjutor, that Philip II. whom to hold up as a sanguinary 
 Popish tyrant has been a great, object with all our base deluders. 
 
 384. Seeing, however, that Sidney had such a strong attach¬ 
 ment to this Popish law, and that there really w'as but one wit¬ 
 ness against him ; seeing that he could not bear the thought of 
 dying without two witnesses against him, the crown-lawyers (all 
 Protestants, mind, who had abjured the “ damnable errors of Po¬ 
 pery”) contrived to accommodate him with acouple, by search¬ 
 ing his drawers and making up a second witness out of his own 
 papers! It was in vain that he rested upon this flaw in the pro¬ 
 ceedings ; all men knew that hundreds of Catholics had suffered 
 death upon evidence slight indeed, compared with that against 
 him: men were not to be amused with this miserable special 
 plea; and all men of sense and justice concurred in the opinion, 
 that he received substantial justice, and no more. 
 
 385. So much for the “ good old cause, for which Hampden 
 died in the field, and Sidney on the scaffold.” What credulous 
 creatures w r e have been, and who more so than myself! Aye, 
 but these Protestant patriots only contemplated insurrection and 
 the introduction of Foreign armies. And with what more was 
 O’Quigly charged, only about twenty-seven years ago ? With 
 what more were the Shearses and Lord Edward Fitzgerald 
 and Watt and Bownie and Despard, ami scores of others 
 charged? And were Thistle wood, Ings, Brunt and Tidd 
 charged with more ? Oh, no; but w ith a great deal less; and 
 they suffered, not for compassing the death of the King, but of 
 his Ministers, a crime made high treason, for the first time , in 
 our own Protestant days, and by a Parliament from which ty¬ 
 rannical Popish people are wholly excluded. There was one 
 Keiling, who, from a Protestant plotter, became an informer, 
 and he, in order to fortify his own evidence, introduced his bro¬ 
 ther-in-law to the conspirators, in order to betray them, and 
 bring them to justice. Weil, but have we not had our Cas- 
 ffLESES, our Olivers and our Edwardses, and has not Mr * 
 
214 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 Bhougham said, in the House of Commons, that “while there 
 are such men as Jngs in the world, there must be such men as 
 Edwards ?” However, no historian^ Protestant as he may have 
 been, enemy as he may have been of Charles’s and James’s me* 
 mory, ever had the impudence to impute to either of them the 
 having employed people to instigate others to commit acts of 
 high treason, and then bringing those others to the block, while 
 they rewarded the instigators. 
 
 386. It is said, and I think truly, that Charles II. was, at one 
 time, in pecuniary treaty with the King of France, for the pur¬ 
 pose of re-establishing the Catholic Church in England. Well, 
 had not he as much right to do this, as Edward VI. had to bring 
 over German troops to root out that ancient Church which had 
 been established for 900 years, and which was guaranteed to 
 the people by Magna Charta? And, if doing this by means of 
 French troops were intended by Charles, can that be complained 
 of by those, who approve of the bringing in of Dutch troops to 
 “ settle” the kingdom ? After all, however, if it were such a 
 deadly sin for a Popishly advised King of England to be in a 
 pecuniary treaty with the King of France, which treaty neither 
 King nor Catholics ever acted upon, what w as it in the Protes¬ 
 tant and Catholic-hating Sidney, and the Younger Hampden 
 and Armstrong and others to be real and bona-Jide and money • 
 touching pensioners of that same King of Franee, which fact ha* 
 become unquestionable from Dalrymple’s Memoirs, page 315 
 of Appendix ? 
 
 387. But, now, if James be to be loaded with all those which 
 have been called the bad deeds of his brother’s reign, we cannot 
 with common justice, refuse him the merit of the good deeds of 
 that reign. This reign gave us, then, the Act of Habeas Corpus, 
 which Blackstone calls “ the second Great Charier of English 
 Liberty .” There are many Qther acts of this reign, tending to 
 secure the liberties and all the rights of the people; but, if there 
 had been only this one Act, ought not it alone to have satisfied 
 the people, that they had nothing to apprehend from a Popishly 
 inclined king on the throne? Here these “ Popish tyrants," 
 Charles and James, gave up, at one stroke of the pen, at a sin¬ 
 gle writing of Charles’s name, all prerogatives enabling them, 
 as their predecessors had been enabled, to put people into pri¬ 
 son, and to keep them there in virtue of a mere warrant, or or¬ 
 der from a Minister. And, was this a proof of that arbitrary 
 disposition, of which we hear them incessantly accused? We 
 are always boasting about this famous Act of Habeas Corpus; 
 but, never have we the gratitude to observe that it came from 
 those against whom Russell and Sidney conspired, and the last of 
 whom was finally driven from his palace by the Dutch guards 
 in 1688. 
 
PROTESTANT REFC RMATION. 
 
 215 
 
 38S. Then, again, was this act ever suspended during the 
 reigns of these Popish kings ? Never; not even for a single day. 
 But, the moment the “ glorious revolution.” or Reformation the 
 third came, the Dutch “ deliverer ” was, by the Protestant 
 “ Convention,” whose grand business it was to get rid of “ ar¬ 
 bitrary power''; the moment that this “ glorious” affair had ta¬ 
 ken place, that moment was the Dutch “ deliverer" authorized 
 to put in prison, and to keep there, any Englishman that he or 
 his Ministers might suspect l But, why talk of this ? We our¬ 
 selves have seen this “ second Great Charter of English liber¬ 
 ty” suspended for seven years at a time; and, besides this, we 
 have seen the King and his Ministers authorized to imprison 
 any one whom they chose to imprison, in any gaol that they 
 chose, in any dungeon that they chose; to keep the imprisoned 
 person from all communication with friends, wives, husbands, 
 fathers, mothers and children; to prevent them from the use 
 of pen, ink, paper and books; to deny them the right of being 
 confronted with their accusers; to refuse them a specification 
 of their offence and the names of their accusers; to put them 
 out of prison (if alive) when they pleased, without any trial; 
 and, at last to hold them to bail for good behaviour , and that, 
 too, mind, still without stating to them the names of the wit¬ 
 nesses against them, or even the nature of their offence! All 
 this we have seen done in our own dear Protestant times, while 
 our parliament house and our pulpits ring with praises of the 
 “ glorious revolution” that “ delivered us from Popery and sla¬ 
 very ” 
 
 389. There was another great thing, too, done in the reigns 
 
 of these Popish kings; namely, the settling of the Provinces 
 (now States) of America. Virginia had been attempted to be 
 settled under 11 good Bess,” by that unprincipled Minion, Sir Wal¬ 
 ter Raleigh, who, in the next reign, lost, on the scaffold, that 
 ?ife, which he ought to have lost thirty years before; but the 
 attempt wholly failed. A little, and very little, was done, in the 
 two succeeding reigns. It was not until that of Charles II. that 
 charters and patents were granted, that property became real , 
 and that consequent population and prosperity came. This was 
 a great event: great in itself, and greater in its consequences, 
 some of which consequences we have already felt, others we are 
 now feeling, but others, and by far of greater moment, we have 
 yet to feel. % 
 
 390. All these fine colonies were made by this popishly in¬ 
 clined King, and by his really Popish brother. Two of them, 
 the Carolinas, take their name from the King himself; another, 
 and now the greatest of all, New-York, from the King’s brother, 
 who was Duke of the city of that name in Old England. These 
 were the men who planted these the finest and happiest colonies 
 
216 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 that thf sun ever lighted and warmed. They were planted by 
 these Popish people ; from them, from their “ mere motion, as 
 the law calls it, came those charters and patents, without 
 which those countries might, to this hour, have been little better 
 than a wilderness. From these Popish kings the colonies came. 
 By whom were they lost ! Not by abused and calumniated 
 Papists, at any rate. Our Popish ancestors had, at different 
 times, made England mistress of different parts of France. 
 Protestant Edward, VI. lost Boulogne, and Protestant Betsey 
 bartered away Calais and the county of Oye for 100,000 
 crowns, and thus put her Protestant seal to England’s everlast¬ 
 ing expulsion from the continent of Europe, After one more 
 Pi otestant reign, inglorious beyond all example, came these two 
 Popish kings, who planted countries which were more than a 
 compensation for the European loss. Then came that “ glori¬ 
 ous” affair, and it furnished all those principles, by which, at the 
 end of only about seventy years, this compensation was wrested 
 from us ; and not only this, but by which was created a power, 
 a great maritime power, at the very name of which, affect 
 what they may, Englishmen, once so high and daring, now 
 grow pale. 
 
 391. We shall, before the close of the next number, and after 
 we have taken a view of the torments inflicted on the Catholics 
 (Irish and English) in the reigns of William, Anne, and the 
 Georges, trace this “ Reformation” the fourth, directly back to 
 “ Reformation” the third ; we shall show, that, in spite of the 
 fine reasoning of Blackstone, the deeds of the “ Convention” 
 were things to be imitated ; we shall find that the List of Char¬ 
 ges against James, drawn up by the “ Lord Mayor of London, 
 Aldermen, Common Councilmen, and others,” was as handy in 
 1770 as it had been in 1688; we shall find this Reformation the 
 third producing, in its progress, that monster in legislation, that 
 new and heretofore unheard-of species of tyranny, called Bills 
 of Pains and Penalties, which are of pure Protestant origin ; and 
 we shall finally see, that this famous and “ glorious” affair, all 
 Protestant as it was, did, at last, bring, though it crossed the At¬ 
 lantic to fetch it, that daion oj -liberty, which the Catholics be¬ 
 gan to behold at the end of a night of cruel slavery, which had 
 lasted for more than two hundred years. But, 1 must not even 
 here, lest it should not occur to my mind again, omit to notice, 
 and to request the reader to notice, that, of the above mentioned 
 colonies, the only ones that wholly abstained from religious per¬ 
 secution the only ones that, from the first settling, proclaimed 
 complete religious liberty, were those granted by patent to the 
 Duke or York (afterwavds the Catholic James 11.) to Lord 
 Baltimore, a Catholic nobleman, and to William Penn, who 
 suffered long imprisonment for his adherence to this Popish 
 
9 
 
 / 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 217 
 
 king. We shall, by-and-by, find all the colonies cordially united 
 In declaring- the character of a Protestant king to be “ marked 
 by every act that may define a tyrant ;” but, this much we 
 know, at any rate, that the colonies granted to and settled by 
 Catholics, and by Penn, an adherent of James, were the only 
 ones that had, from first to last, proclaimed and strictly ad¬ 
 hered to complete freedom as to matters of religion ; and that, 
 too, after the Protestants, at home, had, for more than a hun¬ 
 dred years, been most cruelly and unremittingly persecuting 
 the Catholics. 
 
 LETTER XIV. 
 
 William’s triumph over James and the Catholics.— A “No- 
 
 Popery” WAR REQUIRES MONEY TO CARRY IT ON.—BURNERS 
 SCHEME OF BORROWING AND FUNDING —ORIGIN OF BANKS AND 
 
 Bank notes.—Heavy taxes, excise, septennial bill.— 
 Attempt to tax the Americans.—Americans revolt in 
 THE FACE OF THE DOCTRINES OF BlACKSTONE.-THEIR CHAR¬ 
 
 GES against George III. 
 
 Kensington, 3\st Dec. 1825. 
 
 My F RIENDS, 
 
 392. We have seen, in the foregoing Letter, that Reforma¬ 
 tion the Third, commonly called the “ Glorious Revolution 
 grew directly out of Reformation the Second ; and we are now 
 to see Reformation the Fourth, commonly called “ the Ame¬ 
 rican Revolution,' 1 ' grow directly out of Reformation thb 
 Third ; and we are, before we get to the end of this present Let¬ 
 ter, to see how severely the English people have been scourged, 
 anil how much more severely they are likely still to be scourged 
 in consequence of these several “ Reformations,” which have 
 all proceeded from Reformation the First, as naturally as the 
 Stem and the branches of the tree proceed from the root. 
 
 393. We have seen, that King James and his family were set 
 aside, because they were Catholics; and we are to bear that in 
 mind, not forgetting, at the same time, that Alfred the Great 
 was a Catholic, and that those kings of England, who realty 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 218 
 
 conquered France, and won that title of King of France, which 
 George III. gave up, were also Catholics. But we are now par 
 ticularly to bear in mind, that James, an Englishman, was 
 set aside, that William, a Dutchman, was made king in his 
 stead, and that James’s heirs were set aside too, because he and 
 they were Catholics. Bearing these things constantly in mind, 
 we shall now see what took place, and how the “ Protestant 
 Reformation” worked, till it produced the Debt, the Banks, 
 the Stock-Jobbers, and the American Revolution. 
 
 394. James found faithful adherents in his Irish subjects, who 
 fought and bled in his cause with all that bravery and disregard 
 of life of which so many Irishmen have given proof. But, with the 
 aid of Dutch and German armies, paid by England, the “ Deli* 
 verer” finally triumphed over James and the Irish, and the whole 
 kingdom submitted to the sway of the former. It is hardly neces¬ 
 sary to say, that the Catholics were notv doomed to suffer punish¬ 
 ments heretofore unknown ; and that, if their faith still existed in the 
 kingdom, it could scarcely be owing to any thing short of the imme¬ 
 diate superintendence of Providence. The oppressions which they 
 had had to endure under former sovereigns were terrible erjough ; but 
 now began a scries of acts against them, such as the world never 
 heard of before. I shall, further on, have to give a sketch, at least, 
 of these acts, which we shall find going on increasing in number 
 and in severity, and, at least, presenting a mass of punishment which, 
 but to think of, makes one’s blood run cold, when, all of a sudden, 
 in the 18th year of George III., came the American Revolution , 
 which grew out of the English Revolution , and (mark the justice 
 of God!) which produced the first relaxaticn in this most dreadfully 
 penal code. 
 
 395. But HOW did the American Revolution grow out of the 
 Dutch Deliverer’s, or “ Glorious” Revolution ? A very pertinent 
 and important question, my friends, and one that it is my duty to an¬ 
 swer in the fullest and most satisfactory manner; for this points to 
 the very heart of my subject. We shall, by-and-by, see the Ame¬ 
 rican Revolution producing wonderful events; and therefore we 
 must, with the greatest possible care, trace it to its true source; es¬ 
 pecially as, in all human probability, this nation has yet to receive 
 from that quarter blows far heavier than it has ever yet had to sus¬ 
 tain. 
 
 396. The “ Protestant Deliverer” had, in the first place, brought 
 over a Dutch Army for the English nation to support. Next, there 
 were the expenses and bloodshed of a civil war to endure for the 
 sake of the “ deliverance from popery” But these, though they 
 produced suffering enough, were a mere nothing compared to what 
 was to follow; for this was destined to scourge the nation for ages 
 end ages yet to come, and to produce, in the end, elfecte that the 
 human mind can hardly contemplate with steadiness. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 219 
 
 397. King James had, as we have seen, been received in France . 
 Louis XIV. treated him as King of England, Scotland and Ireland. 
 William hated Louis for this ; and England had to pay for that hat¬ 
 red. All those who had assisted, in a conspicuous manner, to bring 
 in the “Deliverer,’* were now embarked in the same boat with him. 
 They were compelled to humour and to yield to him. They, histo¬ 
 rians say, wished to give the crown solely to his wife, because, she 
 being James’s daughter, there would have been less of revolutionm 
 this than in giving the crown to an utter alien. But he flatly told 
 them, that he “ would not hold his power by the apron strings' ’ ; 
 and, the dispute having continued for some time, he cut the matter 
 short with them by declaring, that if they did not give him the crown 
 he would go back to Holland , and leave them to their old sovereign ! 
 This was enough: they gave him the crown without more hesita¬ 
 tion ; and they found, that they had got not only a “ Deliverer,” 
 but a master at the same time. 
 
 398. The same reasons that induced a submission to this con¬ 
 duct in the “ deliverer,” induced the same parties to go cordially 
 along with him in his war against Prance. There was James in 
 France; a great part of his people were still for him; if France 
 were at peace with England, the communication could not be cut 
 off. Therefore, war with France was absolutely necessary to the 
 maintenance of William on the throne ; and, if he were driven from 
 the throne, what was to become of those who had obtained from 
 him , as the price of their services in bringing him in, immense 
 gi'ants of Crown Lands and various other enormous emoluments, 
 none of which they eould expect to retain for a day, if James were 
 restored ? Besides this, there was the danger, and very great dan¬ 
 ger too, to their own estates and their lives : for, though that which 
 they did was, and is, called a “ glorious revolution,” it would, if 
 James had been restored, have been called by a very different name; 
 and that name would not have been an empty sound; it would have 
 been applied to very practical purposes ; and, the chances are, that 
 very few of the principal actors would have wholly escaped. And 
 there were, moreover, the possessors of the immense property of 
 the Church, founded and endowed by our fathers. The confisca¬ 
 tion of this was not yet of so ancient a date as to have been forgot - 
 ten. Tradition is very long-lived. Many, and many, then alive, 
 knew all the story well. They had heard their grandfathers say, 
 that the Catholic Church kept all the poor; that the people were 
 then better off; and, they felt , the whole of the people felt, that 
 England had lost by the change. Therefore, in case of the resto¬ 
 ration of James, the possessors of Church property, whether they 
 were lay or clerical, might reasonably have their fears. 
 
 399. Thus, all these deeply interested parties, who were also the 
 most powerful parties in the kingdom, were for a war with France , 
 which they rightly regarded as absolutely necessary to the keeping 
 
220 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 of William on the throne, and to the quiet enjoyment of their great 
 possessions, if not actually to the Safety of their lives. This war 
 ought, therefore, to have been called, “ a war to preserve Church 
 property, Crown-lands, and other great emoluments, to their pre¬ 
 sent possessors.” But, those who make wars, like those who make 
 confiscations of property belonging to the church and poor, gene¬ 
 rally know how to give them a good name ; and, accordingly, this 
 was called, and proclaimed, as a war, “to preserve the Protestant 
 Religion, and to keep out Popery and slavery .” It was a real 11 no¬ 
 popery ” war, and, though attended with the most dreadful conse¬ 
 quences to the nation, it answered all the purposes of its inventors. 
 The history of this war, as an affair of fighting, is of little conse¬ 
 quence to us. It was, indeed, attended, in this respect, with dis¬ 
 grace enough; but, it answered the great object of its inventors. It 
 did not hurt France ; it did not get rid of James and his son ; but, 
 it made the English people IDENTIFY their old King and his son 
 with the FOREIGN ENEMIES of England! That w r as what the 
 inventors of the war wanted; and that they completely got. It 
 was in vain that King James protested, that he meant no harm to Eng - 
 land; it was in vain that he reminded the people, that lie had been 
 compelled to flee to France ; in vain his declarations, that the French 
 only wanted to assist in restoring him to his rights. They saw him 
 in France; they saw the French fighting for him and against Eng¬ 
 land : that was quite sufficient. Men do not reason in such a case; 
 and this the inventors of this war knew very well. 
 
 400. But, though passion muddles the head, though even honest 
 feeling may silenee the reasoning faculties, the PURSE is seldom 
 to be quieted so easily : and, this war, though for “ the preserva¬ 
 tion of the Protestant religion and for keeping out Popery and sla¬ 
 very,” soon began to make some most dreadful tugs at this most 
 sensitive part of those accoutrements that almost make part and 
 parcel of the human frame. The expenses of this famous “ no-pa- 
 
 pery ” war.Good God ! what has this kingdom not 
 
 suffered for that horrid and hypocritical cry!.The expen¬ 
 
 ses of this famous “no-popery” war were enormous. The taxes 
 were, of course, in proportion to those expenses ; and the people, 
 who already paid more than four times as much as they had paid in 
 the time of James, began, not only to murmur, but to give no very 
 insignificant signs of sorrow for having been “ delivered /” France 
 was powerful; the French King liberal and zealous; and the state 
 of tilings was ticklish. Force, as Far as law, and the suspension of 
 laic, could go, was pretty fairly put in motion ; but a scheme was, 
 at hist., hit upon, to gel the money , and yet not to tug so very hat'd at 
 that tender part, the purse. 
 
 401. An Act of Parliament was passed, in the year 1694, being 
 the 5th year of William and Mary, chap. 20, the title of which Act 
 is in the following words ; words that every man should bear in 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 ‘221 
 
 mind; words fatal to the peace and the happiness of England 
 words which were the precursor of a Scourge greater than ever 
 before afflicted any part of God’s creation.—“ An Act for grant¬ 
 ing to their Majesties several rates and duties upon Tonnage of 
 ships and vessels, and upon Beer, Ale, and other Liquors, for se¬ 
 curing certain RECOMPENCES and ADVANTAGES in the 
 said Act mentioned, to such persons as shall VOLUNTARILY 
 ADVANCE the sum offifteen hundred thousand pounds towards 
 carrying on ike war against France ” This Act lays certain du¬ 
 ties, sufficient to pay the interest of this sum of 1,500,0001. Then 
 it points out the manner'of subscribing; the mode of paying the 
 interest, or annuities ; and then it provides, that, if so much of 
 the whole sum be subscribed by such a time, the subscribers shall 
 iiave a charter, under the title of “THE GOVERNOR AND 
 COMPANY OF THE BANK OF ENGLAND”! 
 
 402. Thus arose loans, funds, banks, bankers, bank-notS, and 
 a NATIONAL DEBT; things that England had never heard, 
 or dreamed of, before this war for “ preserving the Protestant re¬ 
 ligion as by law established;” things without which she had had 
 a long and glorious career of many centuries, and had been the 
 greatest and happiest country in the world ; things which she 
 never would, and never could, have heard of, had it not been 
 for what is audaciously called the “ Reformation,” seeing that 
 to lend money at interest; that is to say, for gain; that is to 
 say. to receive money for the use of money ; seeing that to do 
 this was contrary, and still is contrary to the principles of the 
 Catholic Church ; and, amongst Christians, or professors of 
 Christianity, such a thing was never heard of before that which 
 is impudently called the “The Reformation.” The Rev. Mr. 
 O’Callaghan, in his excellent little work, which I had‘ the 
 honour to republish last winter, and which ought to be read by 
 every man and especially every young man, in the kingdom, 
 has shown that the ancient philosophers, the Fathers of the 
 Church, both Testaments, the Canons of the Church, the deci¬ 
 sions of Pope and Councils, all agree, all declare, that to take 
 money for the use of money is sinful. Indeed no such thing was 
 ever attempted to l>; justified, until the savage Henry VIII had 
 cast off'the supremacy of the Pope. Jews did it; but, then 
 Jews had no civil righis. They existed only by mere suffer¬ 
 ance. They could be shut up, or banished, or even sold, at the 
 king’s pleasure. They were regarded as a sort of monsters, 
 who professed to be the lineal descendants and to hold the 
 opinions of those who had murdered the Son of God and Sa¬ 
 viour of men. They were not permitted to practice their blas¬ 
 phemies openly. If they had synagogues, they were unseen by 
 the people. The horrid wretches themselves were compelled 
 to keep out of public view on Sundays, and on Saints' days —• 
 
222 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 They were not allowed to pollute with their presence the streets 
 or the roads of a Christian country, on days set apart for pub¬ 
 lic devotion. In degraded wretches like these usury, that is, 
 receiving money for the use of money, was tolerated, just for the 
 same cause that incest is tolerated amongst dogs. 
 
 403. How far the base spirit of usury may now have crept in 
 even ainongsl Catholics themselves 1 know not, nor is it of im¬ 
 portance as to the matter immediately before me. It is certain, 
 that, before the “ Reformation” there was no such thing known 
 amongst Christians as reciving money, or profit in any shape, 
 merely for the use of money. It would be easy to show, that 
 mischiefs enormous are inseparable from such a practice ; but, 
 we shall see enough of those mischiefs in the end. Suffice it, 
 for the present, that this national usury, which was now invent¬ 
 ed for the first time, arose out of the “ Reformation.” 
 
 404fc This monstrous thing, the usury, or funding system, was 
 not only a Protestant invention ; not only arose out of the 
 “ Reformation ;” not only was established for the express pur¬ 
 pose of carrying on a war for the preservation of this Church of 
 England agamst the efforts of Popery; but, the inventor, BUR¬ 
 NET, was the most indefatigable advocate for the “ Reforma¬ 
 tion’ that had ever existed. So that the thing was not only in¬ 
 vented by Protestants to do injury to Catholics; it was not only 
 intended by them for this purpose ; it was not only destined, 
 by the wisdom and justice of God to be a scourge, to be the 
 most terrible of all scourges, to the Protestants themselves ; it 
 was not only destined to make, at last, the “ Church by law es¬ 
 tablished” look at the usurers with no very quiet feelings: 
 the thing was not only thus done and thus destined to operate ; 
 but, the instrument was the fittest the very fittest, that could 
 have been found in the whole world. 
 
 405. Burnet, whose first name, as the Scotch call it, was 
 Gilbert, was, in the first place, a Political Church Parson; 
 next, he a was monstrously lying historian ; next, he was 
 a Scotchman ; and, lastly, he received the thanks of 
 Parliament for his “ History of the Reformation that is 
 to say, a mass of the most base falsehoods and misrepre¬ 
 sentations that ever were put upon* paper. So that, the instru¬ 
 ment was the very fittest that could have been found on earth. 
 This man had, at the accession of James II., gone to Holland, 
 where he became a Secretary to William (afterwards the “ De¬ 
 liverer ;”) and where he corresponded with, and aided the 
 “ Glorious Revolutionizers” in England ; and, in 1689, the 
 year after the “ deliverance,” the “ deliverer” made him BI¬ 
 SHOP OF SALISBURY, as a reward for his 11 glorious revo¬ 
 lution” services! 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 223 
 
 406. This was the fittest man in the world to invent that which 
 was destined to be a scourge to England. Though become a 
 Bishop, lie was still a most active politician; and, when the diffi¬ 
 culty of carrying on the “ no-popery ” war arose, and when those 
 fears, mentioned in paragraph 400, began to be powerful, this 
 Bishop of the “ law- established Church” it was, who invented, 
 who advised, and who, backed by the “ Deliverer,” caused to be 
 adopted the scheme of borrowing, of mortgaging the taxes, and 
 of pawning the property and labour of future generations. Pretty 
 “ deliverance'’ .' Besides sparing the purses of the people, and 
 quieting their discontents on account of taxes, this scheme had 
 a further and still more important object in view; namely, to 
 make all those who had money to lend wish to see the new king 
 and new dynasty, and all the grants and emoluments of the “g/o- 
 rious revolution” folks upheld ! That was the permanent object 
 of this “ no-popery ” project. 
 
 407. The case was this, and we ought clearly to understand 
 it, seeing that here is the true origin of all our present alarms, 
 dangers and miseries. James II. and his son had been set aside, 
 because they were Catholics: a “ glorious revolution” had been 
 made; the great makers of it had immense possessions, which 
 had been public or church possessions. If James were restored, 
 all these w ould be taken from them, together with all the titles 
 of nobility, all the bishoprics, and in short, every thing granted 
 by the “ deliverer.” And as the 4< deliverer” was liable to die, 
 •t was necessary to these great possessors and “ glorious” ac¬ 
 tors to take care, if possible, that James, or his son, should not 
 be the successors of the deliverer Acts of Parliament were pas¬ 
 sed to provide against this danger: but still, experience had 
 shown that Acts of Parliament were, in some cases, of but little 
 avail, when the great body of the people, feeling acutely, were 
 opposed to them. Therefore, something was wanted to bind 
 great numbers of the people fast to the new dynasty. The cry of 
 “ no -pop cry" had some power ; but it had not power sufficiet to 
 weigh down that which, in later times, Castlereagh had the 
 insolence to call, the “ ignorant impatience of taxation;" and for 
 ‘\hich impatience the English were, in former times, always re¬ 
 markable. 
 
 408. The “ deliverer,” and all those who had brought him in, 
 together with all those who had been fattened or elevated by 
 him, were, as I said before, embarked in the same boat; but the 
 great body of the people were not yet thus embarked. Indeed, 
 very few of them, comparatively, were thus embarked. But, if 
 all, or a great part, of those w ho had money to lend, could, by 
 the temptation of great gain, be induced to lend their money on 
 interest to the Government; if they could be induced to do this, 
 t was easy to see that all this description of person; would then 
 
224 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 be embarked in the same boat too ; and that they, who must ne 
 cessarily be a class having great influence in the community,, 
 would be amongst the most zealous supporters of the “ delive¬ 
 rer,” and the “ glorious" aiders, abettors, and makers of the “ re¬ 
 volution” which had just taken place. 
 
 409. For these purposes, this funding-system was invented. 
 It had the twofold object, of raising money to carry on the “ no- 
 popery" war ; and, of binding to the “No-popery” Government 
 all those persons who wished to lend money at high interest: and 
 these were, as is always the case, the most greedy, most selfish, 
 least public-spirited, and most base and slavish and unjust part 
 of the people. The scheme, which was quite worthy of the mind 
 of the Protestant Bishop Burnet, answered its purposes: it en¬ 
 abled the “deliverer” to carry on the “ no-popery" war: it bound 
 fast to the “ deliverer” and his bringers-in all the base and sel¬ 
 fish and greedy and unfeeling part of those who had money. 
 The scheme succeeded in effecting its immediate objects: but, 
 good God ! what a scourge did it provide for future generations! 
 What troubles, what shocks, what sufferings it had in store for a 
 people, whose rulers, in an evil hour, resorted to such means 
 for the purpose of causing to be trampled under foot those whose 
 only crime was that of adhering to the faith of their fathers! 
 
 410. The sum at jfirst borrowed was a mere trifle. It deceived 
 by its seeming insignificance. But, it was very fir from being 
 intended to stop with that trifle. The inventors knew well what 
 they were about. Their design was to mortgage, by degrees, 
 the whole of the country, all the lands, all the houses, and all 
 other property, and even all labour, to those who would lend 
 their money to the State. The tiling soon began to swell at a 
 great rate; and before the end of the “ glorious ” no-popery war, 
 the interest alone of the DEBT, the annual interest, amounted 
 to 1,310,942/. a-year, which, observe, was a greater sum than 
 the whole of the taxes had yearly amounted to in the reign of the 
 Catholic James 11 . ! So that here were taxes laid on for ever ; 
 mind that: here were, on account of this grand no-popery affair; 
 merely on account of this “ glorious revolution.” which was ex¬ 
 pressly made for the purpose of getting rid of « Catholic King : 
 here were additional taxes, laid on for ever, to a greater amount 
 than the whole of the taxes raised by that Catholic King! Thus 
 does the justice of God work! The treatment of the Catholics, 
 at this time, was truly horrible: the main body of the English 
 people either approved of this treatment, or winked at it: this 
 debt-scheme was invented by a Protestant Bishop for |he purpose 
 of utterly extirpating the Catholic religion: and, that religion 
 still lives in the kingdom ; nay, there are in the kingdom a great¬ 
 er number of Catholics than there are persons of any one other 
 religion; while the scheme, the crafty, the cunning, the deep 
 
£ 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 225 
 
 scheme, has, from its ominous birth, been breeding swarms of 
 Jews, Quakers, Usurers of every description, feeding and fatten¬ 
 ing on the vitals of the country ; till, at last, it has produced what 
 the world never saw before; starvation in the midst of abundance 1 
 Yes, verily ; this is the picture we now exhibit to the world: the 
 Law-Church parsons putting up, in all the churches, thanksgiv * 
 ing for a plenteous harvest; and, the main mass of the labour¬ 
 ing people fed and clad worse than the felons in the gaols ! 
 
 411. However, we must not anticipate. We shall, further on, 
 see something of the probable ultimate effects of this dreadful 
 scheme. At present, we have to see how it, together with the 
 “ glorious revolution,” out of which it arose, led to and produced 
 the American Revolution; or, “ Reformation ” the fourth, by 
 which two things were accomplished; first, the lopping off of a 
 large and valuable part of the dominions of England; second, the 
 creating of a new mercantile and naval power, capable of dispuU 
 ing with her that dominion of the sea, which has, for so many ages, 
 been her chief glory, and without possessing which, she must 
 become a second-rate power in Europe, These were the things 
 which were accomplished by the American Revolution: and, 
 therefore, let us now see what it was that produced that revolu¬ 
 tion ; or, rather, let us see how it grew directly out of the “ glo* 
 rious revolution,” and its “ no-popery” wars and debts. 
 
 412. Burnet’s contrivance did very well for present use: it 
 made the nation deaf to the voice of all those who foreboded mis¬ 
 chief from it: it made all those who were interested in the funds 
 advocates for taxation : the deep scheme set the rich to live upon 
 the poor, and made the former have no feeling for those who 
 bore the burden of the taxes : in short, it divided the nation into 
 two classes, the tax-payers, and the tax-eaters, and these latter 
 had the government at their back. The great protection of the 
 people of England always had been, that they could not be taxed 
 without their own consent. This was always, in Catholic times, 
 the great principle of the English government; and, it is express¬ 
 ly and most explicitly asserted in Magna Charta, which was 
 the work of a Catholic Archbishop of Canterbury more than of 
 any body else. But, how was it to be expected, that this grand 
 principle would be maintained, when a large part of the rich 
 people themselves lived upon the taxes? When a man’s next 
 door neighbour received the taxes paid by that man ? When, 
 in short, the community was completely divided, one part having 
 a powerful interest in upholding that which was oppressive and 
 ruinous to the other part? 
 
 413. 4 axes, of course, went on increasing, and the debt went 
 on in the same way. The Protestant interest demanded more 
 wars, and brought on a couple of civil wars. Taxation marched 
 on with dreadful strides. The people did not like it. At the ” glo • 
 
226 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 rious revolution” it had been settled and enacted, that ther« 
 should be a new Parliament called every THREE YEARS at 
 least; and this had been held forth as one of the great gains of 
 the “glorious revolution.” Another “great gain” was, that no 
 pensioner and no placeman were to sit in the House of Commons. 
 These things were enacted; they were laws of the land; they 
 were held forth to the people as great things, gained by “Glori¬ 
 ous.” This last act was soon repealed; and placeman and pen¬ 
 sioners have sitten in the House of Commons ever since! But 
 the other act, the act securing the people a fresh choice every 
 three years, at least; that was a vital law. That law was. in the 
 new state of things, a state of taxes and debts; a state of things 
 which demanded new taxes almost every year: in such a state 
 of things, frequent and?iew; parliaments, new choosings at short 
 intervals, were absolutely necessary to give the people a chance, 
 even so much as a chance, of avoiding oppressive taxation, and 
 opptession, indeed, of every sort. It was, in short, the only 
 means of protection that was left to the people. 
 
 414. Yet, to uphold the new system, it was necessary to de¬ 
 molish even this barrier of liberty and property ; and in the year 
 1715, being the first year of the reign of George I., chap, xxxviii. 
 this law, this vital law, this solemn compact between the Protes¬ 
 tant dynasty and the people, was repealed and for ever abolished; 
 and the THREE YEARS were changed for SEVEN ; and that, 
 too, observe, by the very men whom the people had chosen to sit 
 only for THREE YEARS ! Yes, men chosen by the people to sit 
 for three years enacted that they would sit for SEVEN ; that they 
 themselves would sit for seven; and that those who had chosen 
 them, together with their descendants for ever, should have no 
 choice at all, unless they voted for men who might, at the king’s 
 pleasure, sit for seven years l 
 
 415. It is useless for us to feel indignation and rage. They 
 can do us no good. We shall do well to keep ourselves cool. 
 But, we ought to bear in mind, that this thing, which has scourg 
 ed us so famously, was not done by Catholics; that they had no 
 hand in it; nay, that it was not. only done under the new Protes¬ 
 tant dynasty ; but that this thing also; this thing, the like of 
 which the world never had and never has heard of, that this 
 thing also was done from hostility to the religion of our fathers ! 
 Good God! What has this nation not suffered, and what has it 
 not yet to suffer, for this hostility ! There is hardly one great 
 calamity, or disgrace, that has befallen England during the last 
 three hundred years which we do not clearly trace to this fatal 
 source. 
 
 416. But this SEPTENNIAL BILL; this measure, which is 
 perfectly matchless in its nature, and which has led to such 
 dreadful effects ; this is a thing which we must have in its origi- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 221 
 
 nal black and while ; and we must have every word of it too** for 
 here we have a complete “ no-popery ” law ; and of this law we 
 are tasting the effects to the present hour, and we shall taste them 
 for a long while yet to come. The following are the words, all 
 the words, of this memorable Act. 
 
 417. “ Whereas in and by an Act of Parliament made in the 
 sixth year of the reign of their late Majesties King William and 
 Queen Mary (of ever blessed memory) intitulated, An Act for 
 the frequent meeting and calling of Parliaments : It was among 
 other things enacted, that from thenceforth, no Parliament what¬ 
 soever, that should at any time then after be called, assembled 
 or held, should have any continuance longer than for three years 
 only at the farthest, to be accounted from the day on which by 
 the writ of summons the said Parliament should be appointed to 
 meet:' And whereas it has been found by experience, that the 
 said clause hath proved very grievous and burthensome, by oc¬ 
 casioning much greater and more continued expenses in order 
 to elections of members to serve in Parliament, and more vio¬ 
 lent and lasting heats and animosities among the subjects of this 
 realm than were ever known before the said clause was enact¬ 
 ed ; and the said provision, if it should continue, may probably 
 at this juncture, WHEN A RESTLESS AND POPISH FAC¬ 
 TION ARE DESIGNING and endeavouring to renew the rebel¬ 
 lion within this kingdom, and an invasion from abroad be des¬ 
 tructive to the peace and security of the government.” “ Be it 
 enacted by the King’s most excellent Majesty, by and with the 
 advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and 
 Commons, in Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the 
 same, That this present Parliament, and all* Parliaments that 
 shall at any time hereafter be called, assembled or held, shall 
 and may respectively have continuance for seven years, and no 
 longer, to be accounted from the day on which by the writ of 
 summons this present Parliament hath been, or any future Par¬ 
 liament shall be appointed to meet, unless this present or any 
 such Parliament hereafter to be summoned, shall be sooner dis¬ 
 solved by his Majesty, his heirs, or successors.” 
 
 418. So, here it is again ! The “ restless Popish faction ” was 
 at work! So that the rights, the most precious rights of the 
 whole of the people, were to be taken away merely on account 
 of the designs and wishes of a “ Popish faction”! What harm 
 could a mere “ faction ” do at an election? The truth is, these 
 pretences were false : the people, the great body of the people, 
 smarting under the lash of enormous taxation, became disaffect¬ 
 ed towards the new order of things ; they were strongly dispos¬ 
 ed to revert to their former state; it was suspected, and, indeed, 
 pretty well known, that they would, at the next election, have 
 chosen, almost every where, members having the same sent!- 
 
/ 
 
 228 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 ments; and, therefore, it was resolved, that they should not have 
 the power of doing it. However, the deed was done ; we have 
 felt the effects of it from that day to this ; and we have now to 
 remember, that even this terrible curtailment of English liberty we 
 owe to the hostility to the religion of out fathers; that religion, dur¬ 
 ing the dominance of which, there was always a new House of Com¬ 
 mons every time the Parliament ivas assembled; that religion, along 
 with which were bound up the people’s civil and political rights ; 
 that religion, the followers of which, while it was predominant, ne¬ 
 ver heard of Parliaments for seven years or for three years or even 
 for one year; but who, as often as they saw a Parliament called, 
 saw a Commons’ House chosen for that one session, and for no 
 more. 
 
 419. After the passing of the Septennial Act, the people would, 
 of course, lose nearly all the control that they had ever had with 
 regard to the laying of taxes and to the expending of the public 
 money. Accordingly taxes w'ent on increasing prodigiously. The 
 EXCISE-SYSTEM, which had* had a little beginning in former 
 Protestant reigns, and the very name of which had never been heard 
 of in Catholic times, now assumed somewhat its present form ; and 
 the “ castles ” of Englishmen became thenceforth things to be visit¬ 
 ed by excisemen. Things went on in this way, until the reign of 
 George III., when, by the means of “ no-popery ” wars, and other 
 measures for “ preserving the Protestant Religion as by law estab¬ 
 lished, 1 ’ the debt from 1,500,000/. had swelled up to 146,682,844/. 
 The yearly interest of it had sw elled up to 4,840,821/., which was 
 about four times as much as the whole annual amount of the taxes in 
 the reign of the Popish James II.! And the whole of the yearly 
 taxes had swelled i?p to 8,744,682/. That is to say, about eight 
 times as much as James had raised yearly on this same “ no-popery ” 
 people ! 
 
 420. Nowg though men will do much in the way of talk against 
 “ Popery,’' or against many other things ; they are less zealous and 
 active, when it comes to money. The nation most sensibly felt the 
 weight of these burdens ; and the burdens received no alleviation 
 from the circumstance of their being most righteously merited. 
 The people looked back with aching hearts to former happy days , 
 and the nobility and gentry began to perceive, with shame and fear, 
 that, already, their estates w r ere beginning to pass quietly from them 
 (as Swift had told them they w'ould) into the hands of the Jews, 
 Quakers, and other money-changers, created by the “no-popery” 
 w r ar, and by the scheme of the Scotchman, Burnet. But, it w r as 
 now too late to look back; and yet, to look forward to this certain, 
 and not very slow ruin, was dreadful, and especially to men of an¬ 
 cient family and by no means destitute of pride. Fain would they, 
 even at that time, have applied a sponge to the score brought against 
 
 , them by Burnet’s tribes. But this desire was effectually coun- 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 229 
 
 teracted by the same motive which led to the creation of the debt; 
 the necessity of embarking, and of keeping embarked, great masses 
 of the money-owners in the same boat with the Government. 
 
 421. In this dilemma, namely, the danger of touching the inte¬ 
 rest of the debt, and the danger of continuing to pay that interest, a 
 new scheme was resorted to, which, it was hoped, would obviate 
 botli these dangers. It was, to tax the American colonies, and to 
 throw a part, first, and perhaps, the whole, in the end, of the “ no¬ 
 popery” debt, upon their shoulders! Now, then, came ‘Reforma¬ 
 tion’ the fourth, having for cause, the measures necessary to effect 
 the ‘ glorious revolution,’ taking the principles and the manner of 
 that revolution as its example in these respects, beginning with a 
 “ CONVENTION,” assembled without authority of king, parlia¬ 
 ment, or people; proceeding with CHARGES against the king, 
 with making it HIGH TREASON TO ADHERE TO HIM; and 
 ending with setting aside his authority, and extinguishing his rights 
 and those of his family FOR EVER ! Aye, but besides all this, 
 bringing the first dawn of relief to the long-suffering Catholics of 
 England, Scotland, and Ireland! What it ivas that these, our coun¬ 
 trymen, had to suffer for the crime of adhering to the religion of 
 their and our fathers, I shall leave to state fhrther on ; but I now 
 proceed to show how this “reformation” the fourth commence! 
 and proceeded. 
 
 422. The Septennial gentlemen proceeded, at first, very slowly 
 in their attempts to shift the pressure of the debt from their own 
 shoulders to that of the Americans. They sent out tea to pay a tax ; 
 they imposed a stamp duly on certain things in the colonies ; but 
 they had a clever, a sharp-sighted, and a most cool and resolute 
 and brave people to deal with. The Americans had seen debts, and 
 ftinds, and taxation, and abject submission, creep, by slow degrees, 
 over the people of England; and they resolved to resist, at once, 
 the complicated curse. The money-people there were not, like 
 those in England, the owners of stock and funds. They w r ere not, 
 as the money-people of England were, embarked in the same boat 
 with the government: if they had, there would have been more 
 hesitation on the subject of resistance; if they had been entangled 
 in Burnet’s artful web, the Americans might, at this day, have 
 been hardly known in the world; might have been a parcel of bands 
 of poor devils doomed to toil for haughty and insolent masters. 
 Happily for thejn, the Scotch bishop’s deadly trammels had not 
 reached them , and, therefore, they at once, resolved not to sub¬ 
 mit to the septennial commands. 
 
 423. It is curious enough that they should, as the “ glorious peo- 
 people had done, call themselves WHIGS ! But the Septennial 
 people were Whigs too ; so that there were now Whigs resisting 
 Whigs. A Whig means, in England, one who approves of the set¬ 
 ting of James and his heirs aside. A Whig means, in America, 
 
230 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 one who approves of the setting of George and his heirs aside. 
 The English Whigs called a convention; so did those of America. 
 The English Whigs published a declaration, containing) as we 
 have seen in paragraph 379, CHARGES against James : so did 
 those of America against George. The charges against James 
 were twelve in number. This is a favourite number with Whigs , 
 for the American Whigs had twelve charges against George. 
 We have seen, in paragraph 379, what Protestants accused a Po¬ 
 pish king of; and it is but fair for us to see what Protestants and 
 Calkolics too accused a Protestant king of. Blackstone, in jus¬ 
 tifying the “ glorious ” affair, took good care to say, that the like 
 tvas never to take place again ; and the Septennial gentlemen de¬ 
 clared, and, I think, enacted, that the king in future (being, of 
 course, a Protestant) could do no wrong. Now, the Americans 
 seemed to think it hard, that they should thus be positively forbid¬ 
 den to do what was so “ glwnous” in Englishmen. Blackstone 
 had told them, that, to justify another revolution, all the same cir¬ 
 cumstances must exist: not a part of them, but the whole of them. 
 The king must not only endeavour to subvert the laws ; he must 
 not only commit acts of tyranny; but he must be a Catholic, and 
 must have a design to overthrew the Protestant religion ; and he 
 must, into the bargain, have abdicated his authority by going out o* 
 the kingdom. So that, according to this lawyer, there never could, 
 by any possibility, be a “glorious” revolution again, seeing that 
 two essential circumstances must, in any future case, be wanting, 
 as no Catholic was ever to be king again, and as no king was ever 
 to do wrong any more. 
 
 424. But, alas! these American Whigs did not listen to Black¬ 
 stone, though he had talked so picusly about the “dark ages of 
 monkish ignorance and superstition .” They thought, nay they said, 
 that a Protestant king might do wrong, and had done wrong. They 
 thought, or, at least, they said, that a king might abdicate his au¬ 
 thority, not oniy without going out of the country, but also without 
 ever having been in it! In short, they drew up, a la “ glorious ,” 
 charges against their Protestant king, his late Majesty ; and, as the 
 charges against James II. are found in an Act of Parliament, so the 
 charges against George III. are found in an Act of Congress, pass¬ 
 ed on the memorable 4th of July, 1776. These charges were as 
 follows:— 
 
 425. “ The history of the present King of Great Britain is a his¬ 
 tory of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object 
 the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these States. To 
 prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world. 
 
 “ I. He has refused to pass laws for the accommodation of large 
 districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the 
 right of representation in the Legislature —a right inestimable 
 to them an d formidable to tyrants only. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 231 
 
 “II, He has called the legislative bodies at places unusual, 
 uncomfortable, and distant from the repository of their pub¬ 
 lic records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into com¬ 
 pliance with his measures. 
 
 •HI. He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly for op¬ 
 posing with firmness his invasions on the rights ot the peo* 
 pie. 
 
 <•' IV. He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refus¬ 
 ing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers. 
 
 V. He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the 
 tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of 
 their salaries. 
 
 “ VI. He has created a multihide of new offices, and sent 
 hither swarms of officers to harrass our people and eat their 
 substance. 
 
 ‘VII. He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies, 
 without the consent of our legislatures. 
 
 '‘VIII. He has affected to render the military independent of, 
 and superior to, civil pow er. 
 
 “ IX. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdic¬ 
 tion foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our 
 laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation. 
 
 ‘ X. He has imposed taxes on us without our consent. 
 
 '‘XII. He has deprived us, in many cases, of the benefits of 
 trial by jui’y. He has ABDICATED government here, by 
 declaring us out of his protection, and waging war against 
 us. In every stage of these oppressions, we have petitioned 
 for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions 
 have been answered by repeated injury. A prince whose cha¬ 
 racter is thus marked by every act which define a tyrant, is 
 unfit to be the ruler of a free people.’’ 1 
 
 426. Now, justice to the memory of the late King demands, 
 that we expressly assert, that here are some most monstrous ex¬ 
 aggerations, and especially at the close; but, does not that same 
 justice demand of us, then, to be cautious how we give full cre¬ 
 dit to the charges made against James II. ? However, the ques¬ 
 tion with us, at the present moment, is, not whether the grounds 
 of one of these revolutions were better than those of the other; 
 but, whether the last revolution grew directly out of the former ; 
 and, of the affirmative of this question, no man, who has read 
 this Number, can, I think, entertain a doubt. 
 
 427. I should now proceed to show, that the French Revolu¬ 
 tion, or “ Reformation” the fifth, grew immediately out of the 
 American Revolution ; and then to sum up tTie consequences ; but 
 I am at the end of my paper. 
 
232 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 LETTER XV. 
 
 American “Reformation” brought relief to Catholics*-— 
 Persecutions up to Reign of James II.— Law Church op* 
 poses Liberty of Conscience.—Horrible Penal Code.— 
 Softened, at last, from motives of Fear.—French Re* 
 volution produces a Second softening of the Code.— Pe 
 nal Code, as it now stands.—Result of the “Reforma* 
 ftion” as far as relates td Religion. 
 
 Kensington, 31s/ Jan. 1826. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 428. We have now traced the “ Reformation,” in its deeds 
 down from the beginning, in the reign of Henry VIII., to the 
 American Revolution ; and, all that remains is, to follow it 
 along through the French Revolution, and unto the present day. 
 This is what I propose to do in the present Number. In the 
 next Number I shall bring under one view my proofs of this 
 proposition ; namely, that, before the event called the “ Refor¬ 
 mation,” England was more powerful and more wealthy, and 
 that the people were more free, more moral, belter fed and better 
 clad, than at any time since that event. And, when I have done 
 that, I shall, in the concluding Number, give a List of all ab- 
 bies, priories, and other parcels of property, which, according 
 to Magna Chart a, belonged to the Church and the poor, and 
 which were seized on by the Reformation-people. I shall range 
 these under the heads of Counties, and shall give the names of 
 
 he parties, to whom they were granted by the confiscators. 
 
 429. The American Revolution, which, as we have seen, grew 
 irectly out of those measures which had been adopted in Eng¬ 
 land to crush the Catholics and to extinguish their religion for 
 ever, did, at its very outset , produce good to those same Catholics , 
 by inducing the English government to soften, for the sake of 
 its own safety, that PENAL CODE, by which they had so long 
 been scourged. But, now, before we speak of the immediate 
 cause, and of the manner and degree of this softening, we must 
 have a sketch of this HORRIBLE CODE; this monster in le¬ 
 gislation, surpassing, in violation of the dictates of humanity 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 233 
 
 and justice, any thing dlse that the world has ever seen existing 
 under the name of law. 
 
 430. We have seen how cruelly the Catholics were treated 
 under “ good Queen Bess ,! and James I.; we have seen how they 
 were fined, mulcted, robbed, pillaged, and punished in body; 
 but, though the penal code against them was then such as to 
 make every just man shudder with horror, we think it then, gen¬ 
 tleness, when we look at its subsequent ferocity. W i have seen, 
 how Catholics were fined, harrassed, hunted, robbed, pillaged, in 
 the reign of “ good Bess.” We have seen the same in the reign 
 of her immediate successor, with this addition, that Englishmen 
 were then handed over to be pillaged by Scotchmen. We have 
 seen, that Charles I., for whom they afterwards fought against 
 Cromwell, treated them as cruelly as the two former. We have 
 seen Charles II. most ungratefully abandon them to the perse¬ 
 cutions of the church bv law established ; and, during this reign 
 we have seen that the Protestants had the baseness, and the king 
 the meanness, to suffer the lying inscription to be put on the mo- 
 rruMENT on Fish-street Hill, in the city of London, though Lord 
 Clarendon' (whose name the law-church holds in so much ho¬ 
 nour), in that work which the University of Oxford publishes 
 at the “ Clarendon Press,” expressly says (p. 348, continuation) 
 that a Committee of the House of Commons, “ who were very 
 diligent and solicitous to make the discovery, never were able to 
 ftnd any probable evidence, that there was any other cause of 
 that woful fire than the displeasure of Almighty God.” W’hat 
 infamy, then, to charge the Catholics with it; what an infamy to 
 put the lying inscription on the pillar; what an act of justice, in 
 James II., to efface it; what a shame to William to suffer it to be 
 restored ; and what is it to us, then, who now suffer it to remain, 
 without petit ioning for its erasure! 
 
 431. But, it was after James II. was set aside that the PE¬ 
 NAL CODE grew really horrible. And here it is of the great¬ 
 est consequence to the cause of truth, that we trace this code to 
 its real authors; namely, the Clergy of the Established Church. 
 This is evident enough throughout the whole of this Church’s 
 history; but, until the reign of James II., the sovereign was of 
 the Church religion ; so that the persecutions appeared to come 
 from him, or her. But now, when the King was for softening 
 the penal code ; when the King was for toleration; now the world 
 saw who were the real persecutors ; and this is a matter to be ful¬ 
 ly explained and understood, before we come to a more minute 
 account of the code, and to the causes which finally led to its, 
 in great part, abolition. 
 
 432. James II. wished to put an end to the penal code; he 
 wished for general toleration; he issued a proclamation, suspend¬ 
 ing all penal laws relating to religion, and GRANTING A GE- 
 
 20 * 
 
234 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 NERAL LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE TO ALL HIS SUB- 
 JECTS. This was his OFFENCE. For this, he and his fami¬ 
 ly were SET ASIDE FOR EVER! No man can deny this. 
 The clergy of the Church set themselves against him. Six of the 
 bishops presented to him an insolent petition against the exercise 
 of this his prerogative, enjoyed and exercised by all his predeces - 
 sors. They led the way in that opposition which produced the 
 “ glorious revolution,” and they were the most active and the most 
 bitter of all the foes of that unfortunate king, whose only real of¬ 
 fence was his wishing to give liberty of conscience to all his subjects , 
 and, by showing respect to whose mortal remains (displaced by the 
 French revolutionists) our present King has done himself very great 
 honour. 
 
 433. Now, we are going- to see a sketch of this terrible code 
 It must be a mere sketch; two hundred Numbers like this would 
 not contain the whole of it. It went on increasing in bulk and 
 
 , in cruelty, from the coronation of Elizabeth, till nearly twenty 
 years af ter that of George Ill., till events came, as we shall see, 
 and broke it up. It consisted, at last, of more than a hundred 
 Acts of Parliament, all made for the express purpose of punish¬ 
 ing men, because, and only because, they continued faithfully 
 to adhere to the religion, in which our , as well as their fathers 
 had lived and died, during a period of nine hundred years! The 
 code differed, in some respects, in its application with regard to 
 England and Ireland respectively. 
 
 434. IN ENGLAND this code, I., stripped the peers of their 
 hereditary right to sit in Parliament; II , It stripped gentlemen 
 of their right to be chosen Members of the Commons’ House; 
 III., It took from all, the right to vote at elections, and, though 
 Magna Charta says, that no man shall be taxed without his own 
 consent, it double-taxed every man who refused to abjure his re¬ 
 ligion, and thus become an apostate : IV .', It shut them out from 
 all offices of power and trust., even the most insignificant; V., It 
 took from them the right of presenting to livings in the Church, 
 though that right was given to Quakers and Jews: VI. It fined 
 them at the rate of 20/. a month for keeping away from that 
 Church, to go to which they deemed apostacy ; VII., It disabled 
 them from keeping arms in their houses for their defence, from 
 maintaining suits at law, from being guardians or executors, 
 from practising in law or physic, from travelling five miles from 
 their houses, and all these under heavy penalties in case of dis¬ 
 obedience ; VIII., If a married woman kept away from Church, 
 she forfeited two-thirds of her dower, she could not be executrix 
 to her husband, and might, during her husband’s life-thne, be 
 imprisoned, unless ransomed by him at 10/. a month; IX., It 
 enabled any four justices of the peace, in case a man had been 
 convicted of not going to church, to call him before them, to 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 235 
 
 compel him to abjure his religion, or, if he refused, to sentence 
 him to banishment for life (without judge or jury), and, if he re¬ 
 turned, he was to suffer death ; X., It enabled any two justices of 
 the peace to call before them, without any information, any man 
 that they chose, above sixteen years of age, and if such man re 
 fused to abjure the Catholic religion, and continued in his refu 
 sal for six months, he was rendered incapable of possessing land, 
 and any land, the possession of which might belong to him, came 
 i.ito the possession of the next Protestant heir, who was not 
 obliged to account for any profits; XI., It made such man inca¬ 
 pable of purchasing lands, and all contracts made by him, or 
 for him, were null and void; XII., It imposed a fine of 10/. a 
 month for employing a Catholic schoolmaster in a private fa¬ 
 mily, and 21. a day on the schoolmaster so employed ; XIII., It 
 imposed 100/. fine for sending a child to a Catholic foreign 
 school, and the child so sent was disabled from ever inheriting, 
 purchasing, or enjoying lands, or profits, goods, debts, legacies, 
 or sums of money; XIV., It punished the saying of mass by a 
 fine of 120/., and the hearing of mass with a fine of 60/.; XV., 
 Any Catholic priest, who returned from beyond the seas, and who 
 did not abjure his religion in three days afterwards, and also 
 any person who returned to the Catholic faith, or procured ano¬ 
 ther to return to it, this merciless, this sanguinary code, punish¬ 
 ed with hanging, ripping out of bowels, and quartering! 
 
 435. In IRELAND the code was still more ferocious, more 
 hideously bloody; for, in the first place, all the cruelties of the 
 English code had, as the work of a few hours, a few strokes of 
 the pen, in one single act, been inflicted on unhappy Ireland; 
 and, then, IN ADDITION, the Irish code contained, amongst 
 many other violations of all the laws of justice and humanity, the 
 following twenty most savage punishments.—I. A Catholic 
 schoolmaster, private or public, or . even usher to a Protes¬ 
 tant, was punished with imprisonment, banishment, and final¬ 
 ly as a felon. —II. The Catholic clergy were not allowed to be 
 in the country, without being registered, and kept as a sort 
 of prisoners at large, and rewards were given (out of the reve¬ 
 nue raised in part on the Catholics) for discovering them, 50/. 
 for an archbishop, or bishop, 20/. for a priest, and 10/. for a 
 schoolmaster or usher.—III. Any two justices of the peace might 
 call before them any Catholic, order him to declare, on oath, 
 where and when he heard mass, who were present, and the name 
 and residence of any priest or schoolmaster that he might know 
 of; and, if he refused to obey this inhuman inquisition, they had 
 power to condemn him (without judge or jury) to a year's im¬ 
 prisonment in a felon's gaol, or to pay 20/.—IV. No Catholic 
 could purchase any manors, nor even hold under a lease for 
 more than thirty-one years —V. Any Protestant, if he suspect- 
 
236 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 ed any one of holding' property in trust for a Catholic, or of be* 
 ing concerned in any sale, lease, mortgage, or other contract, 
 for a Catholic; any Protestant, thus suspecting, might^/e a bill 
 against the suspected trustee, and take the estate, or property, 
 from him.—VI. Any Protestant, seeing a Catholic tenant of a 
 farm, the produce of which farm exceeded the amount of the 
 rent by more than one-third, might dispossess the Catholic, and 
 enter on the lease in his stead. —VII. Any Protestant seeing a Ca¬ 
 tholic with a horse worth more than five pounds, might take the 
 horse away from him upon tendering him five pounds. —VIII. In 
 order to prevent the smallest chance of justice in these and si¬ 
 milar cases, none but known Protestants were to be jurymen in 
 the trial of any such cases.—IX. Horses of Catholics might be. 
 seized for the use of the militia; and, besides this, Catholics were 
 compelled to pay double towards the militia.—X. Merchants, 
 whose ships and goods might be taken by privateers, during a 
 war with a Catholic Prince , were to be compensated for their 
 losses by a levy on the goods and lands of Catholics only, though, 
 mind, Catholics were, at the same time, impressed, and compel¬ 
 led to shed their blood in the war against that same Catholic 
 Prince.—XI. Property of a Protestant, whose heirs at law were 
 Catholics, was to go to the nearest Protestant relation, just the 
 same as if the Catholic heirs had been dead, though the proper¬ 
 ty might be entailed on them. —XII. If there were no Protestant 
 heir; then, in order to break up all Catholic families, the entail 
 and all heirship were set aside, and the property was divided, 
 share and share alike, amongst all the Catholic heirs.—XIII. If 
 a Protestant had an estate in Ireland, he was forbidden to mar¬ 
 ry a Catholic, in, or out, of Ireland.—XIV. All marriages be¬ 
 tween Protestants and Catholics were annulled though many 
 children might have proceeded from them,—XV'. Every priest, 
 who celebrated a marriage between a Catholic and a Protestant, 
 or between two Protestants, was condemned to be hanged. —XVI. 
 A Catholic father could not be guardian to, or have the custody 
 of, his own child, if the child, however young, pretended to be & 
 Protestant; but the child was taken from its own father, and put 
 into the custody of a Protestant relation.—XV11. If any child of 
 a Catholic became a Protestant, the parent was to be instantly 
 summoned, and to be made to declare, upon oath, the full value 
 of his or her property of all sorts, and then the Chancery was to 
 make such distribution of the properly as it thought fit. —XVIII. 
 “ Wives be obedient unto your own husbands,” says the great 
 Apostle. “ Wives be disobedient to them,” said this horrid code; 
 for, if the wife of a Catholic chose to turn Protestant, it set aside 
 the will of the husband, and made her a participator in all his pos¬ 
 sessions, in spite of him, however immoral, however bad a wife, 
 or bad a mother she might have been.—XIX. “ Honour thy fa* 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION, 
 
 237 
 
 ihtr and thy mother, that thy days may be long m the land which 
 the Lord, thy God, giveth thee “ Dishonour them,” said this 
 savage code; for, if any one of the sons of a Catholic father be¬ 
 came a Protestant, this son was to possess all the father had, 
 and the father could not sell, could not mortgage, could not leave 
 legacies, or portions, out of his estate, bv whatever title he might 
 hold it, even though it might have been the fruit of his own toil. 
 —XX. Lastly (of this score, but this is only apart), “the Church, 
 is by law established,” was, in her great indulgence, pleased 
 not only to open her doors, but to award (out of the taxes) thir¬ 
 ty pounds a year for life to any Catholic priest who would ab¬ 
 jure his religion, and declare his belief in hers! 
 
 436. Englishmen, is there a man, a single man, bearing that 
 name, whose blood wi!/ not chill at this recital; who, when he 
 reflects that these barbarities were inflicted on men, because, 
 and only because, they adhered with fidelity to the faith of their 
 and our fathers; to the faith of Alfred, the founder of our na¬ 
 tion ; to the faith of the authors of Magna Charta, and of all those 
 venerable institutions of which we so justly boast; who, when 
 he thus reflects, and when he, being, as I am, a Protestant of the 
 Church of England, further reflects, that all these cruelties were 
 inflicted for the avowed purpose of giving and preserving pre¬ 
 dominance to that Church, will not, with me, not only feel deep 
 sorrow and shame for the past, but heartily join me in best en¬ 
 deavours to cause justice to be done to the sufferers for the time 
 to come ? 
 
 437. As to the injustice, as to the barbarity, as to the flagrant 
 immorality of the above code, they call for no comment, being 
 condemned by the spontaneous voice of nature herself; but in 
 this shocking assemblage, there are two things which impel us 
 to ask, whether the love of truth, whether a desire to eradicate 
 religious error, could have formed any part, however small, o i 
 the motives of these punishers ? These two things are, the re¬ 
 ward offered to Catholic priests to induce them to come over to 
 our Church ; and the terrible means made use of to prevent the 
 intermarriage of Catholics and Protestants. Could these mea¬ 
 sures ever have suggested themselves to the minds of men, who 
 sincerely believed that the Church religion was supported by ar¬ 
 guments more cogent than those by which the Catholic religion 
 was supported? The Law-Church had all the powers, all the 
 honours, all the emoluments, all the natural worldly allurements. 
 These she continually held out to all who were disposed to the 
 clerical order. And if, in addition to all these, she had felt strong 
 in argument, would she have found it necessary to offer, in di¬ 
 rect and barefaced words, a specific sum of money to any one 
 who would join her; and that too, when the pensioned convert 
 must, as she weli knew, break his solemn vow, in order to be en 
 
238 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 titled to the pay ? And as to intermarriages , why not suffer 
 them, why punish them so severely, why annul them if the Law- 
 Church were sure that the arguments in her favour were the most 
 cogent and convincing? Who has so much power over the mind 
 of woman as her husband ? Who over man, as his wife ? Would 
 one persuade the other to a change of religion ? Very likely. 
 One would convert the other in nineteen cases out of twenty. 
 That passion which had subdued religious prejudices, would, in 
 almost every case, make both the parties of the same religion. 
 But, what had the Law-Church to object to this, if she wer e sure 
 that hers was the true faith; if she were sure that the arguments 
 (or her were more clear than those for her opponent; if she were 
 sure that every one who really loved another, who was beloved 
 bv that other, and who belonged to her communion, would easily 
 persuade that other to join in that communion? What, in short, 
 had she, if quite sure of all this, to fear from intermarriages? 
 And, if NOT QUITE SURE of all this, what, I ask you, sensible 
 and just Englishmen, what had she to plead in justification of 
 the inhuman penal code? 
 
 d38. Talk of the “ fires in Smithfield”! Fires, indeed, which 
 had no justification, and which all Catholics severely condemn: 
 but what, good God ! was the death of about two hundred and 
 seventy-seven persons, however cruel and unmerited that death, 
 to the torments above described, inflicted, for more than two 
 hundred years, on millions upon millions of people, to say no¬ 
 thing about the thousands upon thousands of Catholics, who 
 were, during that period, racked to death, killed in prison, hang¬ 
 ed, bowelled, and quartered! Besides, let it never be forgotlen, 
 that the punishments in Sm'thficld were for the purpose of re¬ 
 claiming; for the purpose of making examples of a few, who 
 set at nought the religion of their fathers, and that in which they 
 themselves had been born. And, if these punishments were un¬ 
 just and cruel, as all men agree that they were, what shall we 
 say of, how shall we express sufiicient abhorrence of, the above 
 penal code, which was for the punishment, not of a few, but of 
 millions of people; or the punishment, not of those w ho had 
 apostatized from the religion of their fathers, but of those who, 
 to their utter worldly ruin, adhered to that religion ? If we find 
 no justification, and none, we all say there was, for the punish¬ 
 ments of Marv’s reign, inflicted, as all men know they were, on 
 very few persons, and those person* not only apostates from the 
 faith of their fathers, but also, for the most part, either notori 
 ous traitors, or felons, and, at the very least, conspirators against 
 or most audacious insulters of, the royal authority and the per¬ 
 son of the Queen ; if we find no justification, and we all agree that 
 there was none, for these punishments, inflicted, as all men know 
 they were, during a few months of furious and unreflecting zeal. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 239 
 
 just after the quelling of a dangerous rebellion, which had clearly 
 proved that apostate and conspirator were one and the same, 
 and had led to the hasty conclusion, that the apostacy must be 
 extirpated, or that it would destroy the throne , if we find, even 
 under such circumstances, no justification for these punish¬ 
 ments, where are we to look for, not a justification, but for a 
 ground of qualification of our abhorrence of the above-mention¬ 
 ed barbarities of more than two hundred years, inflicted on mil¬ 
 lions upon millions of people ; barbarities premeditated in the 
 absence of all provocation; contrived and adopted in all the 
 calmness of legislative deliberation ; executed in cold blood, and 
 persevered in for ages in defiance of the admonitions of con¬ 
 science; barbarities inflicted, noton apostates, but on those who 
 refused to apostatize; not on felons, conspirators, and rebels, 
 but on innocent persons, on those who had, under all and every 
 circumstance, even while feeling the cruel lash of persecution, 
 been as faithful to their king as to their God ; and, as if we were 
 never to come to the end of the atrocity, all this done, too, with 
 regard to Ireland, in flagrant breach of a solemn treaty with the 
 English king! 
 
 439. And, is this the “ tolerant, the mild, the meek Church as 
 by law established” ? Have we here the proofs of Protestant 
 faith and good works ? Was it thus that St. Austin and St. Pa¬ 
 trick introduced, and that St. Swithin and Alfred-and William 
 of Wickham, inculcated, the religion of Christ? Was it out of. 
 works like these, that the cathedrals and the palaces and the 
 universities, and the laws and the courts of justice arose ? What! 
 punish men for retaining the faith of their fathers; inflict all 
 sorts of insults and cruelties on them for not having become 
 apostates ; put them, because they were Catholics, out of the pro¬ 
 tection of all the laws that their and our Catholic ancestors had 
 framed for the security of their children; call their religion 
 “ idolatrous and damnable ,” treat them as obstinate idolaters, 
 while your Church-Calendar contains none but saints of that ve¬ 
 ry religion ; boast of your venerable institutions, all of Catholic 
 origin, while you insult, pillage, scourge, hunt from the face of 
 the earth, the true and faithful adherents to the faith of the au¬ 
 thors of those institutions ? “ Aye,” the persecutors seem to 
 
 have answered, “ and hunt them we toill.” But why, then, if 
 religion be your motive; if your barbarities arise from a desire to 
 convert men from error, why be so lenient to Quakers and Jews; 
 why not only not punish, but suffer them even to appoint parsons 
 to your churches ? Ah ! my friends, the Law-Church had taken 
 no tithes and lands, and others had taken no abbies and the like, 
 from Quakers and Jews! Here was the real foundation of the 
 whole of that insatiable rancour, which went on from 1558 to 
 1778, producing, to millions of innocent people, torment added 
 
240 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 to torment, and which, at the end of that long period, seemed 
 to have resolved to be satisfied with nothing short of the total 
 extermination of its victims. 
 
 440. But, now, all of a sudden, in 1778, the face of things be - 
 gan to change ; the Church, as by law established, was, all at 
 once, thought capable of existing in safety, with a great relaxa¬ 
 tion of the penal code! And, without even asking it, the Catho¬ 
 lics found the code suddenly softened, by divers Acts of Parlia¬ 
 ment, in both countries, and especially in Ireland! This huma¬ 
 nity and generosity will surprise us; we shall wonder whence it 
 came; we shall be ready to believe the souls of the parties to 
 have been softened by a sort, of miracle, until we look back to 
 paragraphs 424 and 425. There we seethe real cause of this sur¬ 
 prising humanity and generosity; there we see the Americans 
 unfurling the standard of independence , and, having been backed 
 by France, pushing on towards success, and, thereby, setting an 
 example to every oppressed people, in every part of the world, 
 unhappy, trodden down Ireland, not excepted ! There was, too, 
 before the end of the war, danger of invasion on the part of 
 France, who was soon joined in the war by Spain and Holland: 
 so that, before the close of the contest, the Catholics had obtain¬ 
 ed leave to breathe the air of their native country in safety ; and, 
 though, as an Englishman, I deeply lament, that this cost Eng¬ 
 land her right arm, 1 most cordially rejoice in contemplating 
 the event. Thus was fear gratified, in a moment, at the very 
 first demand, with a surrender of that, which had, for ages, 
 been refused to the incessant pleadings of justice and humanity; 
 and thus the American revolution, which, as we have seen, grew 
 immediately out of the “ no-popery*' or “ glorious/’ revolution 
 in England, which latter was, as we have clearly seen, made for 
 the express purpose of extinguishing the Catholic religion for 
 ever: thus was this very event the cause of the beginning of a 
 cessation of the horrible persecutions of those who had, with fide¬ 
 lity wholly without a parallel, adhered to that religion ! 
 
 441. This great event was soon followed by another still great¬ 
 er: namely, the French Revolution, or “ Pieformation” the 
 fifth. Humiliation greater than the English government had 
 to endure, in the above event, it is difficult to conceive; but the 
 French Revolution taught the world what “ Reformations" can 
 do, when pushed to their full and natural extent. In England 
 the “ Reformation ” contented itself with plundering the con¬ 
 vents and the poor of their all, and the secular clergy in part. 
 But, in France, they took the whole : though we ought to mark 
 well this difference: that, in France, they applied this whole to 
 the use of the public : a bad use, per haps; but, to public use they 
 applied the whole of the plunder; while, in England,the plun¬ 
 der was scrambled for, and remained divided amongst indivi¬ 
 duals ' 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 24 
 
 
 442. Well; but, here was a great triumph for the clergy of the 
 “ church as by law established”? They, above all men, must 
 have hailed with delight the deeds of the French “ Reformation” ? 
 No : but, on the contrary, were amongst the foremost in calling 
 for war to put down that “ Reformation” ! What! Not like this 
 “Reformation”! Why, here were convents broken up, and 
 monks and nuns dispersed; here were abbey-lands confiscated; 
 here was the Catholic religion abolished; here were Catholic 
 priests hunted about and put to death in almost as savage a man¬ 
 ner as those of England had been; here were laws, seemingly 
 translated from our own code, against saying or hearing mass, 
 and against priests returning into the kingdom ; here was a com¬ 
 plete annihilation (as far as legislative provisions could go) of 
 that which our church clergy called “ idolatrous and damna¬ 
 ble' here was a new religion “ established by law"; and, that 
 no feature might be defective in the likeness, here was a royal 
 family set aside by law for ever, by what they called a “ glori¬ 
 ous revolution”; and there would have been an abdicating king, 
 but he was, by mere accident, stopped in his flight, brought 
 back, and put to death, not, however, without an example to 
 plead in tbe deeds cf the English double-distilled Protestant 
 “ Reformation” people. 
 
 443. What! Can it be true that our church-clergy did not like 
 this French “ Reformation"? And that they urged on war 
 against the men, who had sacked convents, killed priests, and 
 abolished that which was u idolatrous and damnable"? Can it 
 be true, that they w ho rose against King James because he want¬ 
 ed to give Catholics liberty of conscience ; that they who upheld 
 the horrid penal code , in order to put down the Catholic religion 
 in England and Ireland; can it be true, that they wanted tear, 
 to put down the men, who had put down that religion in France? 
 Aye, aye' But these men had put down all TITHES too! Aye, 
 and all bishoprics, and deaneries, and prebendaries and all fat 
 benefices and pluralities! A :d, if they were permitted to do 
 this with impunity, OTHERS might be tempted to do the same 1 
 Well, but, gentlemen of the /aw-church, though they were wick¬ 
 ed fellow’s for doing this, still this was better than to suffer to re* 
 main that which you always told us was “ idolatrous and dam¬ 
 nable." “Yes, yes; but, then, these men established, by Ltip, 
 ATHEISM, and not Church-of-England Christianity." Now, 
 in the first place, they saw about forty sorts of Protestant reli¬ 
 gion ; they knew that thirty-nine of them must be false: they 
 had seen our rulers make a church by law, just such an one as 
 they pleased; they had seen them alter it by law: and, if there 
 were no standard offaith : no generally acknowledged authority: 
 if English law-makers were to change the sort of religion at their 
 pleasure: why, pray, were not French law-makers to do the 
 
 2 
 
242 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 tame 1 If English law-makers could take the spiritual supreme 
 cy from the successor of Saint Peter, and give it to Henry the 
 wife-killer, why might not the French give theirs to Lepeau 1 
 Besides, as to the sort of religion, though Atheism is bad enough, 
 could it be WORSE than what you tell us is “ idolatrous and 
 damnable ”? It might cause people to be damned; but could it 
 cause them to be more than damned ? Alas, there remains only 
 the abolition of the TITHES and of the FAT CLERICAL 
 POSTS, as a valid objection, on your part, aga’nst “ Reforma¬ 
 tion'’ the FIFTH; and, I beg the nation to remember, that the 
 war against it has left us to pay, for ever, the interest of a debt, 
 created by that war, of sevenhundred millions of pounds sterling, 
 a war which we never should have seen, if we had never seen 
 that which is called a ‘'Reformation.” 
 
 444. The French Revolution, though it caused numerous hor¬ 
 rid deeds to be committed, produced, in its progress, and in its 
 end, a great triumph for the Catholics. It put the fidelity of the 
 Catholic priests and the Protestant pastors to the test; and, while 
 not one of the former was ever seen to save his life by giving up 
 his faith, all the latter did it without hesitation. It showed, at 
 last, the people of a great kingdom returning to the Catholic 
 worship by choice; wheh they might have been, and may now 
 be, Protestants, without the loss of any one right, immunity, 
 or advantage, civil or military. But the greatest good that it 
 produced fell to the lot of ill-treated Ireland. The revolutionists 
 were powerful, they were daring, they, in 1793, cast their eyes 
 on Ireland; and now, for the second time, a softening of the pe¬ 
 nal code took place, making a change which no man living ever 
 expected to see! Those who had been considered as almost be¬ 
 neath dogs, were now made capable of being M AGISTRATES; 
 ami now, amongst many other acts of generosity, we saw estab¬ 
 lished, at the public expense, a COLLEGE for the education of 
 Catholics exclusively, thus doing, ly law, that which the law¬ 
 givers had before made HIGH TREASON! Ah! but, there 
 were the French with an army of four hundred thousand men; 
 and there were the Irish people, who must have been something 
 more, or less, than men, if their breasts did not boil with resent¬ 
 ment. Alas! that it should be said of England, that the Irish 
 have never appealed with success but to her fears! 
 
 445. And, shall this always be said? Shall it ever be said 
 again ? Shall we not now, by sweeping away for ever every 
 vestige of this once horrible and still oppressive code, reconcile 
 ourselves to our long ill-treated brethren and to our own con¬ 
 sciences ? The code is still a penal code: it is still a just ground 
 of complaint: it has still disqualifications that are greatly inju¬ 
 rious, and distinctions that are odious and insulting. I. It still 
 shuts Catholic peers out of those seats, in the House of Lords, 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 243 
 
 which are their hereditary right, and Catholic gentlemen out of 
 the House of Commons. II. Then, as if caprice were resolved 
 not to be behind hand with injustice, this code, which allows Ca¬ 
 tholic freeholders, in Ireland, to vote at elections, for members 
 of the parliament of the now li united kingdom,” refuses that 
 right to all Catholics in England! Ill, It excludes Catholics from 
 all coporations. IV. It excludes them from all offices under the 
 government, in England, but admits them to inferior offices in 
 Ireland. V. It takes from them the right of presenting to any 
 ecclesiastical benefice, though Quakers and Jews are allowed to 
 enjoy that right! VI. It prevents them from endowing any 
 school, or college, for educating children in the Catholic reli¬ 
 gion ; and this, too, while there is now, by law established, a col¬ 
 lege, for this very purpose, supported out of the taxes ! Here is 
 consistency; and here is, above all things, sincerity! What, 
 maintain, out of the taxes, a college to teacn exclusively, that re¬ 
 ligion, which you call “ idolatrous and damnablt '7 VII. This 
 code still forbids Catholic priests to appear in their canonical 
 habiliments, except in their chapels or in private houses ; and it 
 forbids the Catholic rites to be performed in any building which 
 has a steeple or hells l What! forbid the use of steeples and bells 
 to that religion which created all the steeples and all the bells; 
 that built and endowed all the churches, all the magnificent ca¬ 
 thedrals, and both the universities ! And V)hy this insulting, this 
 galling prohibition ? Why so sedulous to keep the symbols of' 
 this worship out of the sight of the people ? Why, gentle law- 
 church, if your features be so lovely as you say they are, and if 
 those of your rival present, as you say they do, a mass of disgust¬ 
 ing deformity ; why, if this be the case, are you, who are the most 
 gentle, amiable, and beautiful church that law ever created; 
 why, I say, are you so anxious to keep your rival out of sight 1 
 Nay, and out of hearing too ! What! gentle and all-persuasive 
 and only true law-church, whose parsons and bishops are such 
 able preachers, and mostly married men into the bargain, what 
 are you afraid of from the steeples and hells if used by Catholics ? 
 One would think, that the more people went to witness the “ ido¬ 
 latrous'’ exhibitions, the better you wodld like it. Alas ! gentle 
 and lovely /aw-church, there are not now in the kingdom, many 
 men, so brutishly ignorant as not to seethe real motives for this 
 uncommonly decent prohibition. VIII. It forbids a Catholic 
 priest in Ireland to be guardian to any child. IX. It forbids Ca¬ 
 tholic laymen in Ireland, to act in the capacity of guardian to 
 the children or child of any Protestant. X. It forbids every Ca¬ 
 tholic in Ireland to have arms in his house, unless he have a 
 freehold of ten pounds a year, or 300/. in personal property. 
 XI. It disables Irish Catholics from voting at vestries on ques¬ 
 tions relating to the repair of the church, though they are com- 
 
244 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 pelled to pay for those repairs. XII. Lastly, in Ireland, this code 
 still inflicts death, or at least, a 500/. penalty , on the Catholic priest, 
 who celebrates a marriage between two Protestants, or between a 
 Protestant and a Catholic. Some of the judges have decided, that 
 it is death; others , that it is the pecuniary penalty. Death, or 
 money, however, the public papers have recently announced to us, 
 that such a marriage has now been openly celebrated in Dublin, 
 between the present Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (who must 
 be a Protestant) and a Catholic Lady of the late rebellious 
 American States! So that, all put together, Dublin exhibits, at 
 this moment, a tolerably curious scene : a College established by 
 law, for the teaching of that religion, which our Church regards as 
 “ idolatrous and damnable and to be guilty of teaching whichwaa, 
 only a few years ago, high treason! A Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, 
 who must belong to our Church, and who must have taken an oath 
 protesting against the Catholic supremacy, taking to his arms a Ca¬ 
 tholic wife, who must adhere to that supremacy ! Then comes a 
 Catholic priest, marrying this pair, in the face of two unrepealed 
 laws, one of which condemns him to death for the act, and the other 
 of which condemns him to pay a fine of five hundred pounds ! And, 
 lastly, comes, as the public prints tells us, a complimentary letter y 
 on the occasion, to the bridegroom, on the part, and in the hand¬ 
 writing, of the King! 
 
 446. Well, then, is this code, is any fragment of it, longer to 
 continue ? Is it to continue now , when all idea of conversion to 
 Protestantism is avowedly abandoned, and w hen it is notorious that 
 the Catholic faith has, in spite of ages of persecution, done more 
 than maintain its ground ? Are peers still to be cut off from their 
 hereditary rights and honours ; are gentlemen to be shut out of 
 the Commons’ House ; are lawyers to be stopped in their way to 
 the bench ; are freeholders and free-men to be deprived of their fran¬ 
 chises ; are the whole to lie under a stigma, which it is not in human 
 nature should fail to fill them with resentment; and all this, because 
 they adhere to the religion of their and our fathers, and a religion, 
 too, to educate youth in w'hich, exclusively, there is now a college 
 supported out of the taxes? Is all this great body of men, forming 
 one-third part of the whole of the people of this kingdom, containing 
 men of all ranks, from the peer to the labourer, to continue to be 
 thus insulted, thus injured, thus constantly irritated, constantly 
 impelled to wish for distress, danger, defeat, and disgrace to their 
 native country, as affording the only chance of their obtaining jus¬ 
 tice ? And are we, merely to gratify the Laic-Church, by uphold¬ 
 ing her predominance, still to support, in peace, a numerous and 
 most expensive army; still to be exposed, in war, to the danger of 
 seeing concession come too late, and to all those consequences, the 
 nature and extent of which it makes one shudder to think of ? 
 
 447. Here, then, we are, at the end of three hundred years 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 245 
 
 from the day when Henry VIII. began the work of “ Reforma¬ 
 tion” : here we are, after passing through scenes of plunder and of 
 blood, such as the world never beheld before: here we are, with 
 these awful questions still before us; and here we are, too, with 
 forty sorts of Protestant religion, instead of the one fold, in which 
 our forefathers lived for nine hundred years ; here we are, divided 
 and split up into sects, each condemning all the rest to eternal 
 flames ; here we are, a motley herd of Church people, Methodists, 
 Calvanists, Quakers, and Jews, chopping and changing with every 
 wind ; while the faith of St. Austin and St. Patrick still remains 
 what it was when it inspired the heart and sanctified the throne of 
 Alfred. 
 
 448. Such, as far as religion is concerned, have been the effects 
 of what is called the “ Reformation’^; what its effects have been 
 in other respects ; how it has enfeebled and impoverished the na¬ 
 tion ; how it has corrupted and debased the people; and how it 
 has brought barracks, taxing-houses, poor-houses, mad-houses, 
 and jails, to supply the place of convents, hospitals, guilds, and 
 alms-houses, we shall see in the next number; and then we shall 
 have before us the whole of the consequences of this great, memo¬ 
 rable, and fatal event 
 
 LETTER XVI. 
 
 FORMER POPULATION OF ENGLAND AND IRELAND.-FORMER 
 
 WEALTH.-FORMER POWER.-FORMER FREEDOM.—FORMER 
 
 PLENTY, EASE, AND HAPPINESS. 
 
 Kensington, 31 st March, 1826. 
 
 My Friends, 
 
 449. This Letter is to conclude my task, which task was to 
 make good this assertion, that the event called the “ Reformation” 
 had impoverished and degraded the main body of the people of 
 England and Ireland. In paragraph 4, I told you, that a fair and 
 honest inquiry would teach us, that the word “ Reformation” had, 
 
 21 * 
 
246 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 in this case been misapplied ; that there was a change , but a change 
 greatly for the worse; that the thing, called the Reformation, was 
 engendered in beastly lust, brought forth in hypocrisy and perfidy, 
 and cherished and fed by plunder, devastation, and by rivers of 
 innocent English and Irish blood ; and that, as to its more remote 
 consequences, they are, some of them, now before us, in that mi¬ 
 sery, that beggary, that nakedness, that hunger, that everlasting 
 wrangling and spite, which now stare us in the face and stun our 
 ears at every turn, and which the “ Reformation” has given us in 
 exchange for the ease and happiness and harmony and Christian 
 charity, enjoyed so abundantly, and for so many ages, by our Ca¬ 
 tholic forefathers.” 
 
 450. All this has been amply proved in the fifteen foregoing 
 Letters, except that I have not yet shown, in detail, how our Catholic 
 forefathers lived, what sort and what quantity of food and raiment 
 they had, compared with those which we have. This I am now 
 about to do. I have made good my charge of beastly lust, hypo¬ 
 crisy, perfidy, plunder, devastation and bloodshed ; the charge of 
 misery, of beggary, of nakedness and of hunger, remains to be ful¬ 
 ly established. 
 
 451. Rut, I choose to be better rather than worse than my 
 w r ord ; I did not pledge myself to prove any thing as to the popular- 
 lion, wealth, power , and freedom of the nation ; butl will now show 
 not only that the people were better off, but better fed and clad, 
 before the “ Reformation” than they ever have been since ; but, 
 that the nation was more populous, wealthy, powerful and free be¬ 
 fore, than it ever has been since that event. Read modern roman¬ 
 cers, called historians, every one of whom has written for place or 
 pension ; read the statements about the superiority of the present 
 over former times; about our prodigious increase in population, 
 wealth, power, and, above all things, our superior freedom ; read 
 the monstrous lies of Hume, who, (voh 5, p. 502,) unblushingly 
 asserts “ that one good county of England is now capable of making 
 a greater effort than the whole kingdom was in the reign of Ilenry V. 
 when to maintain the garrison of the small town of Calais required 
 more than a third of the ordinary revenues”; this is the way in which 
 every Scotchman reasons. He always estimates the wealth of a 
 nation by the money the government squeezes out of it. He for¬ 
 gets that “ a poor government makes a rich people.” According 
 to this criterion of Hume, America must now be a wretchedly poor 
 country. This same Henry V. could conquer, really conquer, 
 France, and that too, without beggaring England by hiring a mil¬ 
 lion of Prussians, Austrians, Cossacks, and all sorts of hirelings. 
 But writers have, for ages, been so dependant on the government 
 and the aristocracy, and the people have read and believed so much 
 of what they have said, and especially in praise of the “ Reforma- 
 mation,” and its effects, that it is no wonder that they should 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 247 
 
 think, that, in Catholic times, England was a poor, beggarly spot, 
 having a very few people on it; and that the u Reformation,” and 
 the House of Brunswick and the Whigs, have given us all we pos¬ 
 sess of wealth, of power, of freedom, and have almost created us, 
 or, at least, if not actually begotten us, caused nine-tenths of us to 
 be born. These are dil monstrous lies ; but they have succeeded 
 for ages. Few men dared to attempt to refute them ; and, if any 
 one made the attempt, he obtained few hearers, and ruin, in some 
 shape or other, was pretty sure to be the reward of his virtuous 
 efforts. NOW, however, when we are smarting under the lasii of 
 calamity ; NOW, when every one says, that no state of things ever 
 was so bad as this; NOW men may listen to the truth, and, there¬ 
 fore, I will lay it before them. 
 
 452. Populousness is a thing not to be proved by positive facts, 
 because there are no records of the numbers of the people in for¬ 
 mer times ; and because those which we have in our own day are 
 notoriously false ; if they be not, the English nation has added a 
 third to its population during the last tiventy years ! In short, our 
 modern records I have, over and over again, proved to be false, 
 particularly in my Register, No. 2, of Volume 46. That England 
 was more populous in Catholic times than it is now we must be¬ 
 lieve, when we know, that in the three first Protestant reigns, 
 thousands of parish churches Avere pulled down, that parishes were 
 united, in more than two thousand instances, and when we know 
 from the returns now before Parliament, that, out of 11,761 parish¬ 
 es, in England and Wales, there are upwards of a thousand, 
 whichdo not contain a hundred persons each, men, women, and 
 children. Then again, the size of the churches. They were 
 manifestly built, in general, to hold three, four, five, or ten 
 times the number of their present parishioners, including all the 
 sectarians. What should men have built such large churches 
 for ? We are told of their “ piety and zeal yes, but there must 
 have been men to raise the buildings. The Lord might favour the 
 work; but there must have been hands as well as prayers. And, 
 what motive could there have been for putting together such large 
 quantities of stone and mortar, and to make walls four feet thick, 
 and towers and steeple, if there had not been people to fill the 
 buildings ? And how could the labour have been performed ?— 
 There must have been men to perform the labour; and, can any 
 one believe, that this labour would have been performed, if there 
 had not been a necessity for it ? We now see large and most 
 costly ancient churches, and these in great numbers too, with only 
 a few mud-huts to hold the thirty or a hundred of parishioners. Our 
 forefathers built for ever, little thinking of the devastation that we 
 were to behold! Next come the lands, which they cultivated, 
 and which we do not, amounting to millions of acres. This any 
 *ne may verify, who will go into Sussex, Hampshire, Dorsetshire 
 
248 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 Devonshire and Cornwall. They grew corn on the sides of hiTl», 
 which we now never attempt to stir. They made the hill into the 
 form of steps of a stairs, in order to plough and sow the flat parts. 
 These flats, or steps, still remain, and are, in some cases, still cul¬ 
 tivated ; but, in nine cases out of ten, they are not. Why should 
 they have performed this prodigious labour, if they had not had 
 mouths to eat the corn 1 And how could they have performed such 
 labour without numerous hands ? On the high lands of Hamp¬ 
 shire and Dorsetshire, there are spots of a thousand acres together, 
 which still bear the uneffaceable marks of the plough, and which 
 now never feel that implement. The modern writings on the sub¬ 
 ject of ancient population are mere romances ; or they have been 
 put forth with a view of paying court to the government of the day. 
 George Chalmers, a placeman, a pensioner, and a Scotchman, 
 has been one of the most conspicuous in this species of deception. 
 He, in what he calls an u Estimate, '’"states the population of 
 England and Wales, in 1377, at 2,092,978. The half of these 
 were, of course, females. The males then, were 1,046,486. The 
 children, the aged, the infirm, the sick, made a half of these ; so 
 that there were 523,343 left of able bodied men in this whole king¬ 
 dom ! Now, the churches, and the religious houses amounted, at 
 that time, to upwards of 16,000 in number. There was one Priest 
 to every church, and these Priests, together with the Monks and 
 Friars, must have amounted to about 40,000 able men, leaving 
 483,243 able men. So that, as there were more than 14,000 pa¬ 
 rish churches, there were not quite twelve able bodied men to eacht 
 HuME^ays, Yol. III. p. 9, that Wat Tyler had, in 1381, (four 
 years after Chalmers’s date,) “a hundred thousand meU assem¬ 
 bled on BLACKHEATH so that, to say nothing of the nu¬ 
 merous bodies of insurgents, assembled, at the same time, “in 
 Hertford, Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk, and Lincoln to say nothing 
 of the King’s army of 40,000,” (Hume, Vol. III. p. 8 ;) and, to 
 say nothing of all the nobility, gentry, and rich people, here 
 Wat Tyler had got together, on Blackheath, MORE THAN 
 ONE-FIFTH of all the able bodied men in England and Wales’ 
 And, he had, too, collected them together in the space of about 
 six daysf Do we want, can we want, any thing more than 
 this, in answer, in refutation of.these writers on the ancient po¬ 
 pulation of the country ? Let it be observed, that, in these days, 
 there were, as Hume himself relates, and his authorities relate 
 also, frequently 100,000 pilgrims at a lime assembled at Can¬ 
 terbury, to do penance, or make offerings, at the shrine of 
 Thomas a Becket. There must, then, have been 50,000 men 
 here at once; so that, if we were to believe this pensioned Scotch 
 writer, we must believe, that more than A TENTH of all the able 
 bodied men of England and Wales were frequently assembled, 
 at one and the same time, in one city, in an extreme corner of 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 249 
 
 the island, to kneel at the tomb of one single saint. Monstroug 
 lie ! And, yet it has been sucked down by “ enlightened Pro¬ 
 testants,” as if it had been a part of the Gospel. But, if Can¬ 
 terbury could give entertainment to 100,000 strangers at a time, 
 what must Canterbury itself have been 1 A grand, a noble, a 
 renowned city it was, venerated, and even visited, by no small 
 part of the Kings, Princes, and Nobles of all Europe. It is 
 now a beggarly, gloomy looking town, with about 12,000 inha¬ 
 bitants. and, as the public accounts say, with 3,000 of those in¬ 
 habitants paupers, and with a part of the site of its ancient and 
 splendid churches, convents and streets, covered with barracks, 
 the Cathedral only remaining, for the purpose, as it were, of 
 keeping the people in mind of the height from which they have 
 fallen. The best criterion of the population is, however, to be 
 found in the number and size of the churches, and that of the re¬ 
 ligious houses. There was one parish church to every four 
 square miles, throughout the kingdom; and one religious house, 
 (including all the kinds,) to every thirty square miles. That is 
 to say, one parish church to every piece of land two miles each 
 way; and one religious house to every piece of land five miles 
 long, and six miles wide. These are facts that nobody can de¬ 
 ny. The geography tells us the number of square miles in the 
 country, and as to the number of parishes and religious houses, 
 it is too well known to admit of dispute, being recorded in 
 books without number. Well, then, if the father of lies himself 
 were to come, and endeavour to persuade us, that England was 
 not more populous before the “ Reformation” than it is now, he 
 must fail with all but downright ideots. The same may be said 
 with regard to Ireland, where there were, according to Arch- 
 dall, 742 religious houses in the reign of Henry VIII.; and, of 
 course; one of these to every piece of land six miles each way ; 
 and where there was a parish church to every piece of land a 
 little more than two miles and a half each way. Why these 
 churches? What were they built for ? By whom were they 
 built? And how were all these religious houses maintained ? 
 Alas! Ireland was, in those days, a fine, a populous, and a 
 rich country. Her people were not then half naked and half 
 starved. There^were, then, no projects for relieving the Irish 
 by sending them out of their native land ! < 
 
 453. THE WEALTH of the country is a question easily de¬ 
 cided. In the reign of Henry VIII., just before the “ Reforma¬ 
 tion,” the whole of the lands in England and Wales, had, ac¬ 
 cording to Hume, been rated, and the annual rental was found 
 to be three millions; and, as to this, Hume, (Vol. 4. p. 197.) 
 quotes undoubted authorities Now, in order to know what 
 these three millions were worth m our money, we must look at 
 the Act of Parliament, 24 th year of Henry VIII., Chap. 3, which 
 
250 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 says, that “ no person shall take for beef or pork above a half¬ 
 penny, and for mutton or veal above three farthings a pound, 
 avoirdupoise weight, and less in those places where they be now 
 sold for less." This is by retail, mind, it is sale in the butchers' 
 shops. So that, in order to compare the then with the present 
 amount of the rental of the country, we must first see what the 
 annual rental of England and Wales now is, and then we must 
 see what the price of meat now is. I wish to speak here of no¬ 
 thing that 1 have not unquestionable authority for, and I have no 
 such authority with regard to the amount of the rental as it is 
 just at this moment; but^ 1 have that authority for what the 
 rental was in the year 1804. A return, printed by order of the 
 House of Commons, and dated 10th July, 1804, states that “the 
 returns to the Tax-office [property tax,] prove the rticA'-rental 
 of England and Wales to be thirty-eight millions a year," Here, 
 then, we have the rental to a certainty; for what was there that 
 could escape the all-searching, taxing eye of Pitt and his under¬ 
 strappers ? Old Harry’s inexperience must have made him a 
 poor hand, compared with Pitt, at finding out what people got 
 for their land. Pitt’s return included the rent of mines, canals, 
 and of every species of real property ; and the rental, the rack- 
 rental, of the whole amounted to thirty-eight millions. This, 
 observe, was in time of Bank-restrictions ; in time of high 
 prices : in time of mostrously high rents : in time of high price 
 of meat; that very year I gave 18s. a score for fat hogs, taking 
 head, feet, and all together; and, for many years, before and 
 after, and including 1804, beef, pork, mutton and veal were, 
 taken on the average, more than tenpence a pound by retail.— 
 Now, as Old Harry’s Act orders the meat to be sold, in some 
 places, for less than the halfpenny and the three farthings, we 
 may, I think, fairly presume, that the general price was a half¬ 
 penny. So that a halfpenny of Old Harry’s money was equal 
 in value to tenpence of Pitt’s money : and, therefore, the three 
 millions of rental in the time of Harry, ought to have become 
 sixty millions in 1804 ; and it was, as we have seen, only thirty 
 eight millions. In 1822, Mr. Curwen said, the rental had fal¬ 
 len to twenty millions. But, then meat had also fallen in price. 
 It is safer to take 1804, where we have undoubted authority to 
 • go on. This proof is of a nature to bid defiance to cavil. No 
 man can dispute any of the facts, and they are conclusive as to 
 the point, that the nation was more wealthy before the “ Refor¬ 
 mation” than it is now. But, there are two other Acts of Par¬ 
 liament, to which I will refer, as corroborating, in a very striking 
 manner, this fact of the superior general opulence of Catholic 
 times. The Act, 18th year of Henry VI., Chap. XI., after set¬ 
 ting^ forth the cause for the enactment, provides, that no man 
 shall, under a heavy penalty, act as a. justice of the peace who 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 251 
 
 has not lands and tenements of the dear yearly value of twenty 
 pounds. This was in 1439, about a hundred years before the 
 above-mentioned Act, about meat, of Henry VIII. The money 
 was of still higher value in the reign of Henry VI. However, 
 taking it as before, at twenty times the value of our money, the 
 justice of the peace must then have had four hundred pounds a 
 year of our money; and we all know, that we have justices 
 of the peace of one hundred a year. This Act of Henry VI. 
 shows, that the country abounded in gentlemen of good estate; 
 and, indeed, the Act itself says, that the people are not content¬ 
 ed with having “men of small behaviour set over them.” A 
 thousand fellows, calling themselves historians, would never 
 overset such a proof of the superior general opulence and ease 
 and happiness of the country. The other of the Acts, to v#lich 
 I have alluded, is 1st year of Richard III. Chap. 4., which fixes 
 the qualification of a juror at twenty shillings a year in freehold, 
 or twenty-six and eight pence copyhold, clear of all charges 
 That is to say, a clear yearly income from real property of, at 
 least, twenty pounds a year of our money l And yet the Scotch 
 historians would make us believe, that our ancestors were a set 
 of beggars ! These things prove beyond all dispute, that Eng¬ 
 land was, in Catholic times, a real wealthy country ; that wealth 
 was generally diffused; that every part of the country abound¬ 
 ed in men of solid property ; and that, of course, there were al¬ 
 ways great resources at hand in cases of emergency. If we were 
 now to take it into our heads to dislike to have men of “ small 
 behaviour set over us;” if we were to take a fancy to justices 
 of the peace of four hundred a year; and jurors of twenty 
 pounds a year; if we were, as in the days of good king Hen¬ 
 ry, to say, that we “ would not be governed or ruled ” by men 
 of “ small behaviour ,” how quickly we should see Botany Bay ! 
 When Cardinal Pole landed at Dover, in the reign of Oueen 
 Mary, he was met and escorted on his way by two thousand 
 gentlemen of the country on horseback. What! 2000 coun¬ 
 try gentlemen, in so beggarly a country as Chalmers describes 
 it! Aye, and they must have been found in Kent and Surrey 
 too. Can we find such a troop of country gentlemen there 
 now ? In short, every thing shows, that England was then a 
 country abounding in men of real wealth ; and that it sa 
 abounded precisely because the king’s revenue was small: yet 
 this is cited by Hume, and the rest of the Scotch historians as 
 a proof of the nation’s poverty! Their notion is, that a people 
 are worth what the government can wring out of them, and not 
 a farthing more. And this is the doctrine which has been acted 
 upon ever since the “ Reformation,” and which has, at last, 
 brought us into our present wretched condition. 
 
 454. As to the POWER of the country, compared with what 
 It is now what do we want mo r « than the fact) that, for many 
 
252 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 centuries, before the “ Reformation,” England held possession 
 of a considerable part of France ; that the “ Reformation” took, 
 as we have seen, the two towns of Boulogne and Calais from 
 tier, leaving her nothing buf those little specks in the sea, Jer¬ 
 sey and Guernsey ? What do we want more than this 1 France 
 was never a country that had any pretensions to cope with Eng¬ 
 land until the “ Reformation” began. Since the “ Reformation” 
 she has not only had such pretensions, but she has shown to all 
 the world that the pretensions are well founded. She, even at 
 this moment, holds Spain in despite of us, while, in its course, 
 the “ Reformation” has wrested from us a large portion of our 
 dominions, and has erected them into a state more formidable 
 than any we have ever before beheld. We have, indeed, great 
 stamling armies, arsenals and barracks, of which our Catholic 
 forefathers had none; but they were always ready for war never¬ 
 theless. '1 hey had the resources in the hour of necessity. They 
 had arms and men ; and those men knew what they were to fight 
 for before they took up arms. It is impossible to look back, to 
 see the respect in which England was held for so many, many ' 
 ages; to see the deference with which she was treated by all na¬ 
 tions, without blushing at the thought of our present state. 
 None but the greatest potentates presumed to think of marriage 
 alliance with England. Her Kings and Queens had Kings and 
 princes in their train. Nothing felly ever thought of approach¬ 
 ing her. She was held in such high honour, her power was so 
 universally acknowledged, that she had seldom occasion to as¬ 
 sert it by war. And what has she been for the last hundred and 
 fifty years ? Above half Ihe lime at war ; and with a debt never 
 ♦o be paid, the cost of that war, she now rests her hopes of safety 
 solety on her capacity of persuading her well-known foes, that 
 it is not their interest to assail her. Her warlike exertions have 
 been the effect, not of her resources, but of an anticipation if 
 those resources. She has mortgaged, she has spent before-hand, 
 the resources necessaiy for future defence. And, there she new 
 is, inviting insult and injury by her w'ell-known weakness, and, 
 in case of attack, her choice lies between foreign victory over 
 her, or internal convulsion. Power is relative. You may have 
 more strength than you had, but if your neighbours have gained 
 strength in a greater degree, you are, in effect, weaker than you 
 were. And, can we look at France and America, and can we 
 contemplate the inevitable consequences of war, without feeling 
 that we are fast becoming, and, indeed, that we are already be¬ 
 come, a low and little nation 1 Can we look back to the days of 
 our Catholic ancestors, can we think of their lofty tone and of 
 the submission instantly produced by their threats, without sigh¬ 
 ing, alas 1 those days are never to return ! 
 
 455. And, as to the FREEDOM of the nation, where is the man 
 who can tell me of any one single advantage that the “ Reforma 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 253 
 
 tion” has brought, except it be freedom to have forty religious 
 creeds instead of one ? Freedom is not an empty sound; it is 
 not an abstract idea; it is not a thing that nobody can feel. It 
 means, and it means nothing else, the full and quiet enjoyment 
 of your own property. If you have not this; if this be not well 
 secured to you, you may call yourself what you will, but you are 
 a slave Now, our Catholic forefathers took special care upon 
 this cardinal point. They suffered neither kings nor parliaments 
 to touch their property without cause clearly shown. They did 
 not read newspaper's, they did not talk about debates, they had 
 no taste for “ mental enjoyment;” but they thought hunger and 
 thirst great evils, and they never suffered any body to put them 
 to board on cold potatoes and water. They looked upon bare 
 bones and rags as indubitable marks of slavery, and they never 
 failed to resist any attempt to affix these marks upon them. You 
 may twist the word freedom as long as you please; but, at last, 
 it comes to quiet enjoyment of your property, or it comes to no¬ 
 thing. Why do men want any of those things that are called 
 political rights and privileges ? Why do they, for instance, want 
 to vote at elections for. members of Parliament? Oh ! because 
 they shall then have an influence over the conduct of those mem¬ 
 bers. And of what use is that ? Oh ! then they will prevent the 
 members from doing wrong. What wrong? Why, imposing 
 taxes, that ought not to be paid. That is all; that is the use, and 
 the only use, of any right or privilege that men in general can 
 have. Now how stand we, in this respect, compared with our 
 Catholic ancestors ? They did not, perhaps, all vote at elections. 
 But do we ? Do the fiftieth part of us ? And have the main 
 body of us any, even the smallest, influence in the making of 
 laws and in the imposing 6f taxes ? But the main body of the 
 people had the Church to protect them in Catholic times. The 
 Church had great power; it was naturally the guardian of the 
 common people; neither kings nor Parliaments could set its 
 power at defiance; the whole of our history shows, that the 
 Church was invariably on the side of the people, and that, in all 
 the much and justly boasted of triumphs, which our forefathers 
 obtained over their kings and nobles, the Church took the lead. 
 It did this because it was dependent on neither kings nor nobles; 
 because, and only because, it acknowledged another head; but 
 we have lost the protection of the Church, and have got nothing 
 to supply its place ; or rather, whatever there is of its power left 
 has joined, or has been engrossed by, the other branches of the 
 Stale, leaving the main body of the people to the mercy of those 
 other branches. “ The liberties of Fngland ” is a phrase in every 
 mouth ; but what are those liberties ? The laws which regulate 
 the descent and possession of property ; the safety from arrest, 
 unless by due and settled process • the absence of all punishment 
 
 22 
 
264 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 without trial before duly authorised and well known judges and 
 magistrates ; the trial by jury ; the precautions taken by the di¬ 
 vers writs and summonses ; the open trial; the impartiality in 
 the proceedings. These are the “ liberties of Eitgland.” And, 
 had our Catholic forefathers less of these than we have? Do we 
 not owe them all to them ? Have we one single law, that gives se¬ 
 curity to property or to life, which we do not inherit from them ? 
 The tread-mill, the law to shut men up in their houses from sun¬ 
 set to sunrise, the law to banish us for life if we utter any thing 
 having a tendency to bring our “representatives” into contempt 
 these, indeed, we do not inherit, but may boast of them, and of 
 many others of much about the same character, as being, un¬ 
 questionably, of pure Protestant origin. 
 
 456. POVERTY, however, is, after all, the great badge, the 
 never-failing badge of slavery. Bare bones and rags are the 
 true marks of the real slave. What is the object of government? 
 To cause men to live happily. They cannot be happy without 
 a sufficiency of food and of raiment. Good government means 
 a state of tilings in which the main body are well fed and well 
 clothed. It is the chief business of a government to take care, 
 that one part of the people do not cause the other part to lead 
 miserable lives. There can be no morality, no virtue, no since¬ 
 rity, no honesty, amongst a people continually suffering from 
 want; and, it is cruel, in the last degree, to punish such people 
 for almost any sort of crime, which, is, in fact, not crime of the 
 heart, not crime of the perpetrator, but the crime of his all-con¬ 
 trolling necessities. 
 
 457. To what degree the main body of the people in England, 
 are now poor and miserable; how deplorably wretched they now 
 are ; this we know but too well; and now, we will see what was 
 their state before this vaunted." Reformation.” I shall be very 
 particular to cite my authorities here. I will infer nothing; I 
 will give no “ estimate but, refer to authorities, such as no 
 man can call in question, such as no man can deny to be proofs 
 more complete than if founded on oaths of credible witnesses, 
 taken before a judge and jury. I shall begin with the account 
 which Fortesque gives of the state and manner of living of 
 the English, in the reign of Henry VI., that is, in the 15th 
 century, when the Catholic Church was in the height of its 
 glory. Fortesque was Lord Chief Justice of England for 
 nearly twenty years; he was appointed Lord High Chancel¬ 
 lor by Henry VI. Being in exile, in France, in consequence 
 of the wars between the Houses of York and Lancaster, and 
 the King’s son, .Prince Edward, being also in exile with him, 
 the Chancellor wrote a series of Letters, addressed to the 
 Prince, to explain to him the nature and effects of the Laws of 
 England, and to induce him to study them and uphold them 
 
PROTESTAJN L REFORMATION. 
 
 255 
 
 This work, which was written in Latin, is called De Laudibus 
 Legum Anglice; or Praise of the Laws of England. This 
 book was, many years ago, translated into English, and it is a 
 book of Law Authority, quoted frequently in our courts at this 
 day. No man can doubt the truth of facts, related in such a 
 work. It was a work written by a famous lawyer for a Prince; 
 it was intended to be read by other cotemporary lawyers, and 
 also by all lawyers in future. The passage that I am about to 
 quote, relating to the state of the English, was purely inciden¬ 
 tal ; it was not intended to answer any temporary purpose. It 
 must have been a true account. 
 
 458. The Chancellor, after speaking generally of the nature 
 of the laws of England, and of the difference between them and 
 the laws of France, proceeds to show the difference in their ef¬ 
 fects, by a description of the state of the French people, and 
 then by a description of the state of the English. His words, 
 words that, as I transcribe them, make my cheeks burn with 
 shame, are as -follows: “ Besides all this, the inhabitants of 
 France give every year to their King the fourth part of all their 
 trines, the growth of that year, every vintner gives the fourth 
 penny of what he makes ofhis wine by sale. And all the towns 
 and boroughs pay to the King yearly great sums of money, 
 which are assessed upon them, for the expenses of his men at 
 arms. So that the King’s troops which are always considera¬ 
 ble, are subsisted and paid yearly by those common people, who 
 live in the villages, boroughs and cities. Another grievance is, 
 every village constantly finds and maintains two cross-bow-men, 
 at the least; some find more, well arrayed in all their accoutre¬ 
 ments, to serve the King in his wars, as often as he pleaseth to 
 call them out, which is frequently done. Without any conside¬ 
 ration had of these things, other very heavy taxes are assessed 
 yearly upon every village within the kingdom, for the King’s 
 service; neither is there ever any intermission or abatement of 
 taxes. Exposed to these and other calamities, the peasants live 
 in great hardship and misery. Their constant drink is water, 
 neither do they taste, throughout the year, any other liquor, un¬ 
 less upon some extraordinary times, or festival days. Their 
 clothing consists of frocks, or little short jerkins made of can¬ 
 vass, no better than common sackcloth; they do not wear any 
 woollens, except of the coarsest sort; and that only in the gar¬ 
 ment under their frocks; nor do they wear any, trowsers but 
 from the knees upwards; their legs being exposed and naked. 
 The women go barefoot, except upon holidays. They do not 
 eat Jlesh, except it be the fat of bacon, and that in very small 
 quantities , with which they make a soup. Of other sorts, either 
 boiled or roasted, they do not so much as taste, unless it be of the 
 inwards and offals of sheep and buliocks, and the like, which 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 256 
 
 are killed for the use of the better sort of people, and the mtr- 
 chants; for whom also quails, partridges, hares, and the like, are 
 reserved, upon pain of the gallies; as for their poultry, the sol¬ 
 diers consume them, so that scarce the eggs, slight as they are, 
 are indulged them, by way of a dainty. And if it happen that a 
 man is observed to thrive in the world, and become rich, he is 
 presently assessed to the king's tax, proportionably more than his 
 poorer neighbours, whereby he is soon reduced to a level with the 
 rest.'' Then comes his description of the English, at that same 
 time ; those “ priest-ridden” English, whom Chalmers and 
 Hume, and the rest of that tribe, would fain have us believe, 
 were a mere band of wretched beggars.—“ The King of Eng 
 land cannot alter the laws, or make new ones, without the ex 
 press consent of the whole kingdom in Parliament assembled. 
 Every inhabitant is at his liberty fully to use and enjoy whatever 
 his farm produceth, the fruits of the earth, the increase of his 
 flock, and the like; all the improvements he makes, whether by 
 his own proper industry, or of those he retains in his service, are 
 his own, to use and to enjoy, without the let, interruption or de¬ 
 nial of any. If he be in any wise injured, or oppressed, he shall 
 have his amends and satisfactions against the party offending. 
 Hence it is, that the inhabitants are rich in gold, silver, and in 
 all the necessaries and conveniences of life. They drink no wa¬ 
 ter, unless at certain times, upon a religions score, and by way 
 of doing penance. They are fed in great abundance, with all 
 sorts of flesh and ,flsh, of w hich they have plenty every where; 
 they are clothed throughout in good woollens; their bedding and 
 other furniture in their houses are of wool, and that in great 
 store. They are also well provided with all other sorts of house¬ 
 hold goods and necessary implements for husbandry. Every 
 one, according to his rank, hath all things which conduce to make 
 life easy and happy." 
 
 459. Go, and read this to the poor souls, who are now eating 
 sea-weed in Ireland; who are detected in robbing the pig-troughs 
 in Yorkshire; who are eating horse-flesh and grains, (draff,) in 
 Lancashire and Cheshire; who are harnessed like horses, and 
 drawing gravel in Hampshire and Sussex; who have 3d. a day 
 allowed them by the Magistrates in Norfolk; who are, all over 
 England, worse fed than the felons in the gaols. Go, and tell 
 them, when they raise their hands from the pig-trough, or from 
 the grains-tub, and, with their dirty tojjgues, cry “ No-Popery," 
 go, read to the degraded and deluded wretches, this account of 
 the state of their .Catholic forefathers, who lived under what is 
 impudently called “ popish superstition and tyranny," and in 
 those times which we have the audacity to call “ the dark ages.'* 
 
 460. Look at the then picture of the French ; and, Protestant 
 Englishmen, if you have the capacity of blushing left, blush at 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 257 
 
 the thought of how precisely that picture fits the English now • 
 Look at all the parts of the picture ; the food, the raiment, the 
 game! Good God! If any one had told the old Chancellor, 
 that the day would come, when this picture, and even a picture 
 more degrading to human nature, would fit his own boasted 
 country, what would he have said? What would he have said, 
 if he had been told that the time was to come, when the soldier, 
 in England, would have more than twice, nay more than thrice, 
 the sum allowed to the day-labouring man ; when potatoes would 
 be carried to the field as the only food of the ploughman ; when 
 soup-shops would be opened to feed the English ; and when the 
 judges, sitting on that very Bench on which he himself had sit- 
 ten for twenty years, would, (as in the case last year of the com 
 plaint against Magistrates at Northallerton,) declare that 
 bread and water were the general food of working people in 
 England? What would he have said? Why if he had been 
 told, that there was to be a “ Reformation,” accompanied by 
 a total devastation of Church and Poor property, upheld by 
 wars, creating an enormous debt and enormous taxes, and re¬ 
 quiring a constantly standing army ; if he had been told this, he 
 would have foreseen our present state, and would have wept for 
 his country ; but, if he had, in addition, been told, that, even in 
 the midst of all this suffering, we should still have the ingratitude 
 and the baseness to cry “ No-Popery ,” and the injustice and the 
 cruelty to persecute those Englishmen and Irishmen, who ad¬ 
 hered to the faith of their pious, moral, brave, free and happy 
 fathers, he would have said, “ God’s will be done: let them suf 
 fer.” 
 
 461. But, it may be said, that it was not, then, the Catholic 
 Church, but the Laws that made the English so happy ; for the 
 French had that Church as well as the English. Aye! but in 
 England, the Church was the very basis of the laws. The very 
 first clause of Magna Charta provided for the stability of its 
 property and rights. A provision for the indigent, an effectual 
 provision was made by the laws that related to the Church and 
 its property; and this was not the case in France; and never 
 was the case in any country but this: so that the English people 
 lost more by a “ Reformation” than any other people could have 
 lost. 
 
 462. Fortesque’s authority would, of Itself, be enough; but I 
 am not to stop with it. White, the late Rector of Selbourne, 
 in Hampshire, gives, in his history of that once famous village, 
 an extract from a record, stating, that, for disorderly conduct, 
 men were punished by being “ compelled to fast a fortnight on 
 bread and beer /” This was about the year 1380, in the reign 
 of Richard II. Oh ! miserable “ dark ages /” This fact must 
 be ^wc. White had no purpose to answer. His mention of 
 
258 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 the fact, or, rather, his transcript from the record, is purely in- 
 cidental; and trifling as the fact is, it is conclusive as to the ge¬ 
 neral mode of living in those happy days. Go, tell the harnessed 
 gravel-drawers, in Hampshire, to cry “ No-Popery /” for that, if 
 the Pope be not put down, he may, in time, compel them to fast 
 on bread and beer, instead of suffering them to continue to regale 
 themselves on nice potatoes and pure water. 
 
 463. But, let us come to Acts of Parliament, and, first, to the 
 Act above quoted, in 453, which see. That Act fixes the price 
 of meat. Alter naming the four sorts of meat, beef, pork, mut¬ 
 ton and veal, the preamble has these words: “ These being the 
 FOOD OF THE POORER SORT.” This is conclusive. It 
 is an incidental mention of a fact. ItisinanAct of Parliament. 
 It must have been true: and, it is a fact that we know well, that 
 the judges have declared from the bench, that bre'ad alone is now 
 the food of the poorer sort. What do we want more than this to 
 convince us that the main body of the people have been impo¬ 
 verished by the “Reformation?” 
 
 464. But, I will prove, by other Acts of Parliament, this At t of 
 Parliament to have spoken truth. These Acts declare what 
 the wages of workmen shall be. There are several such Acts, 
 but one or two may suffice. The Act of 23d of Edward III. fixes 
 the wages without food as follows. There are many other things 
 mentioned, but the following will be enough for our purpose. 
 
 s. d. 
 
 A woman hay-making, or weeding corn for the day, 0 1 
 
 A man filling dung-cart, . , 
 
 • 
 
 • • 
 
 . 0 3A 
 
 A reaper . 
 
 • 
 
 9 9 
 
 . 0 4 
 
 Mowing an acre of grass, . . 
 
 Thrashing a quarter of wheat, . 
 
 • 
 
 • • 
 
 . 0 6 
 
 • 
 
 • • 
 
 . 0 4 
 
 The price of shoes, cloth, and of 
 time that this law continued in force 
 
 provisions, throughout th* 
 was as follows: 
 
 l. s. d. 
 
 A pair of shoes 
 
 • 
 
 . 0 
 
 0 4 
 
 Russet broad-cloath, the yard, . 
 
 • 
 
 . 0 
 
 1 1 
 
 A stall-fed ox 
 
 • 
 
 . 1 
 
 4 0 
 
 A grass-fed ox . 
 
 • 
 
 . 0 
 
 16 0 
 
 A fat sheep unshorn . . . 
 
 • 
 
 . 0 
 
 1 8 
 
 A fat sheep shorn 
 
 • 
 
 . 0 
 
 1 2 
 
 A fat hog, two years old . 
 
 • 
 
 . 0 
 
 3 4 
 
 A fat goose .... 
 
 • 
 
 . 0 
 
 o 24 
 
 Ale, the gallon, by Proclamation 
 
 9 
 
 . 0 
 
 0 1 
 
 Wheat, the quarter . . . 
 
 9 
 
 . 0 
 
 3 4 
 
 White wine, the gallon 
 
 9 
 
 . 0 
 
 0 6 
 
 Red wine '. 
 
 • 
 
 . 0 
 
 0 4 
 
 These prices are taken from the Preciosum 
 
 of Bism p Fleet 
 
 wood, who took them from the accounts kept by the 
 
 bursers 0 / 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 259 
 
 convents. All the world knows that Fleetwood’s book is of 
 undoubted authority. 
 
 d65. We may, then, easily believe, that “beef, pork, mutton, 
 and veal,” were “ the food of the poorer sort,' when a dung-cart 
 filler had more than the price of a fat goose and a half for a day's 
 work , and when a woman was allowed, for a day's weeding, the 
 price of a quart of red wine ! Two yards of the cloth made a 
 coat for the shepherd; and as it costs 2 s. 2 d. the reaper would 
 earn it in 6 ^ days; and, the dung-cart man would earn very 
 nearly a pair of shoes every day l This dung-cart filler would 
 earn a fat shorn sheep in four days; he would earn a fat liog, two 
 years old, in twelve days ; he would earn a grass-fed ox in twen¬ 
 ty days; so that we may easily believe, that “beef, pork, and 
 mutton” were “the food of the poorer sort." And mind, this 
 was “a priest-ridden people;” a people “buried in Popish su¬ 
 perstition /” In our days of “ Protestant light ” and of “ mental 
 enjoyment ,” the “ poorer sort are allowed by the Magistrates of 
 Norfolk, 3d. a day for a single man able to work. That is to 
 say, a halfpenny less than the Catholic dung-cart man had ; and 
 that 3d. will get the “ No-popery" gentlemen about sue ounces of 
 old ewe-mutton, while the Popish dung-cart man got, for his day, 
 rather more than the quarter of afdt sheep. 
 
 466. But, the Popish people might work harder than “ en- 
 lightened Protestants.” They might do more work in a day. 
 This is contrary to all the assertions of the feelosophers; for they 
 insist that the Catholic religion made people idle. But, to set 
 this matter at rest, let us look at the price of the job-labour ; at 
 the mowing by the acre, and at the thrashing of wheat by the quar¬ 
 ter : and let us see how these wages are now, compared with the 
 price of food I have no parliamentary authority since the year 
 1821, when a report was printed by order of the House of Com¬ 
 mons, containing the evidence of Mr. Ellman, of Sussex, as to 
 wages, and of Mr. George, of Norfolk, as to price of wheat. The 
 report was dated 18th June, 1821. The accounts are for 20 
 years, on an average, from 1800 inclusive. We will now pro¬ 
 ceed to see how the “ popish, priest-ridden” Englishman stands 
 in comparison with the “ No-popery ” Englishman. 
 
 Popish man. 
 s. d. 
 
 Mowing an acre of grass ... 0 6 
 Thrashing a quarter of wheat ..04 
 
 No-popery man. 
 s. d. 
 
 3 7§ 
 
 • 4 0 
 
 Here are “ waust improvements, Mau’m!” But now let us look 
 at the relative price of the wheal, which the labourer had to pur¬ 
 chase with his wages. We have seen that the “ popish supersti¬ 
 tion slave ” had to give fivepence a bushel for his wheat and the 
 
260 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 evidence of Mr. George stales, that the “enlightened Protes¬ 
 tant” had to give 10 shillings a bushel for his wheat; that is 24 
 times as much as the “ popish fool” who suffered himself to be 
 “ priest-ridden.” So that the “ enlightened ” man, in order to 
 make him as well off as the “ dark ages” man was, ought to re¬ 
 ceive twelve shillings instead of 35 . l\d. for mowing an acre of 
 grass; and he, in like manner, ought to receive, for thrashing a 
 quarter of wheat, tight shillings, instead of the four shillings, 
 which he does receive. If we had the records, we should, doubt¬ 
 less, find, that Ireland was in the same state. 
 
 467. There! That settles the matter; and, if the Bible-Society, 
 and the “ Education” and the “ Christian-knowledge” gentry 
 would, as they might, cause this little book to be put into the 
 hands of all their millions of pupils, it would, as far as relates to 
 this kingdom, settle the question of religion for ever and ever* 
 I have now proved, that Fortesque’s description of the happy 
 life of our Catholic ancestors was correct. There wanted no 
 proof; but I have given it. I could refer to divers other acts of 
 Parliament, passed during several centuries, all confirming the 
 truth of Fortesque’s account. And there are, in Bishop Fleet- 
 wood’s book, many things that prove that the labouring people 
 were most kindly treated by their superiors, and particularly 
 by the clergy; for instance, he has an item in the expenditure 
 of a convent, “30 pair of autumnal gloves for the servants.” 
 This was sad “ superstition.'' In our “enlightened” and Bible- 
 reading age, who thinks of gloves for ploughmen ? We have 
 priests as well as the “ dark ages” people had ; ours ride as well 
 as theirs ; but theirs fed at the same time : both mount, but theirs 
 seem to have used the rein more, and spur less. It is curious to 
 observe, that the pay of persons in high situations was, as com¬ 
 pared with that of the present day, very low', when compared 
 with the pay of the working classes. If you calculate the year's 
 pay of the dung-cart man, you will find it, if multiplied by 20, 
 (which brings it to our money,) to amount to 91 pounds a year ; 
 while the average pay of the Judges did not exceed 60/. a year 
 of the then money, and, of course, did not exceed 1 , 200 /. a year 
 of our money. So that a Judge had not so much pay as fourteen 
 dung-cart fillers. To be sure, Judges had, in those “ dark ages,” 
 when Littleton and Fortesque lived and wrote, pretty easy 
 lives; for Fortesque says, that they led lives of great “ leisure 
 and contemplation!,” and that they never sat in court but three 
 hours in a day, from 8 to 11 ! Alas! if they had lived in this “ en¬ 
 lightened age,” they would have found little time for their “con¬ 
 templation /” they would have found plenty of work ; they would 
 have found, that theirs was no sinecure, at any rate, and that ten 
 times their pay was not adequate to their enormous labour. 
 Here is another indubitable proof of the great and general hap- 
 
PROTESTANI REFORMATION. 
 
 261 
 
 piness and harmony and honesty and innocence that reigned in the 
 country. The Judges led lives of leisure! In that one fact, inci¬ 
 dentally stated by a man, who had been twenty years Chief Justice 
 of the King’s Bench, we have the true character of the so long ca¬ 
 lumniated religion of our fathers. 
 
 468. As to the bare fact, this most interesting fact, that the 
 main body of the people have been impoverished and degraded since 
 the time of the Catholic sway; as to this fact there can be no 
 doubt in the mind of any man who has, thus far, read this little 
 work. Neither can there, I think, exist in the mind pf such a man, 
 any doubt, that this impoverishment and this degradation have 
 been caused by the event called the u Reformation ,” seeing that I 
 have, in former Numbers, and especially Number XIV., clearly 
 traced the debt and the enormous taxes to that event. But I can¬ 
 not bring myself to conclude, without tracing the impoverishment 
 in its horrible progress. The well-known fact, that no compulsory 
 collections for the poor; that the disgraceful name of pauper ; that 
 these were never heard of in England, in Catholic times ; and that 
 they were heard of the moment the “Reformation” had begun ; 
 this single fact might be enough, and it is enough; but, we will see 
 the progress of this Protestant impoverishment. 
 
 469. The Act, 27 Henry VIII. chap. 25, began the poor laws. 
 The monasteries were not actually seized on till the next year; 
 but the fabric of the Catholic Church was, in fact, tumbling 
 down; and, instantly, the country swarmed with necessitous 
 people, and open begging, which the Government of England 
 had <jRvays held in great horror, began to disgrace this so late¬ 
 ly happy land. To put a stop to this, the above Act authorized 
 sheriffs, magistrates and churchwardens to cause voluntary 
 alms to be collected ; and, at the same time, it punished the per 
 severing beggar, by slicing off part of his ears, and, for a second 
 offence, put him to death as a felon! This was the dawn of that 
 “ Reformation,” which we are still called upon to admire and 
 to praise! 
 
 470. The “ pious young Saint Edward,” as Fox, the Mar¬ 
 tyr-man, most impiously calls him, began his Protestant reign, 
 1st year Edward VI., chap. 3, by an Act, punishing beggars, 
 by burning with a red-hot iron, and by making them slaves for 
 two years, with power in their masters to make them wear an 
 iron collar, and to feed them upon bread and water and refust 
 meat! For even in this case, still there was meat for those who 
 had to labour: the days of cold potatoes and of bread and wa 
 ter alone were yet to come: they were reserved for our “en¬ 
 lightened” and Bible-reading days : our days of “ mental en¬ 
 joyment.” And, as to horse-flesh and draff, (grains,) they ap¬ 
 pear never to have been thought of. If the slave ran away, or 
 were disobedient, he was, by this Protestant Act, to be a slave 
 
262 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 for life. This Act came forth as a sort of precursor of the Acta 
 to establish the Church of England ! Horrid tyranny. The 
 people had been plundered of the resource, which Magna Char- 
 ta, which justice, which reason, which the law of nature, gave 
 them. No other resource had been pi ovided; and, they were 
 made actual slaves, branded and chain< d, because they sought 
 by their prayers to allay the cravings of hunger ! 
 
 471. Next came “ good Queen Bess,” who, after trying her 
 hand eight times, without success, to causo the poor to be re¬ 
 lieved by alms, passed that compulsory Act which is in force to 
 the present day. All manner of shifts had been resorted to, in 
 order to avoid this provision for the poor. During this ami the 
 two former reigns, LICENSES TO BEG had been granted.— 
 But, at last, the compulsory assessment came, that true mark, 
 that indelible mark, of the Protestant Church, as by laic esta¬ 
 blished. This assessment was put off to the last possible mo¬ 
 ment, and it was never relished by those who had got the spoils 
 of the Church and the poor. But, it was a measure of absolute 
 necessity. All the racks, all the law-martial, of this cruel leign 
 could not have kept down the people without this Act, the au¬ 
 thors of which seem to have been ashamed to state the giounds 
 of it; for, it has no preamble whatever. The people, so happy in 
 former times ; the people, described by Fortesque, were now be¬ 
 come a nation of ragged wretches. Defoe, in one of his ti acts, 
 says that “good Bess,” in her progress through the kingdom, upon 
 seeing the miserable looks of the crow ds that came to see her, fre¬ 
 quently exclaimed, “ pauper ubique jacet that is, the po>)£ cover 
 the land. And this was that same country in which Fortesquk 
 left a race of people, “having all things which conduce to make 
 life easy and happy!” 
 
 472. Things did not mend much during the reigns of the Stu¬ 
 arts, except in as far as the poor law had effect. This rendered 
 unnecessary the barbarities that had been exercised before the 
 passing of it; and, as long as taxation was light, the paupers were 
 comparatively little numerous. But, when the taxes began to grow 
 heavy, the projectors were soon at work to find out the means of 
 putting down pauperism. Amongst these was one Child, a mer¬ 
 chant and banker , whose name was Josiah, and who had been 
 made a. knight or baronet, for he is called Sir Josiah. His pro¬ 
 ject, which w r as quite worthy of his calling, contained a provision, 
 in his proposed Act, to appoint men, to be called “ Fatheis of the 
 Poor;” and, one of the provisions relating to these “ Fathers” 
 w r as to be, “that they may have power to send such poor, as they 
 may think fit, into any of his Majesty's plantations !” That is to 
 say, to transport and make slaves of them ! And, gracious God! 
 this was in Fortesque’s country. This was in the country of 
 Magna Charta ! And this monster dared to publish this project! 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 263’ 
 
 And we cannot learn that any man had the soul to reprobate the 
 conduct of so hard-hearted a wretch. 
 
 • 473. When the “ deliverer ” had come, when a “ glorious revolu¬ 
 tion” had taken place, when a war had been carried on, and 
 a debt and a bank created, and all for the purpose of putting 
 down popery for ever , the poor began to increase at such a fright¬ 
 ful rate, that the parliament referred the subject to the Board of 
 Trade to inquire, and to report a remedy. Locke was one of the 
 Commissioners, and a passage in the Report of the Board is truly 
 curious. “ The multiplicity of the poor, and the increase of the 
 tax for their maintenance, is so general an observation and com¬ 
 plaint, that it cannot be doubted of; noi; has it been only since 
 the last war that this evil has come upon us, it has been a growing 
 burden on the kingdom this many years, and the last two reigns 
 felt the increase of it as well as the present. If the causes of 
 this evil be looked into, we humbly conceive it will be found to 
 have proceeded, not from the scarcity of provisions , nor want of 
 employment for the poor ; since the goodness of God has blessed 
 these times with plenty no less than the fbrmer ; and a long peace, 
 during three reigns, gave us as plentiful a trade as ever. The 
 growth of the poor must therefore have some other cause ; and it 
 can be nothing else but the relaxation of discipline and corruption ; 
 virtue and industry being as constant companions on the one side, 
 as vice and idleness are on the other.” 
 
 474. So, the fault icasin the poor themselves ! It does not seem 
 to have occurred to Mr. Locke that there must have been a cause 
 for this cause. He knew very well, that there ivas a time , when 
 there were no paupers at all in England ; but, being a fat place¬ 
 man under the “ deliverer ,” he could hardly think of alluding to 
 that interesting fact. “ Relaxation of discipline!” What discip¬ 
 line ? What did he mean by discipline ? The taking away* of the 
 Church and Poor’s property, the imposing of heavy taxes, the giv¬ 
 ing of low wages compared with the price of food and raiment, the 
 drawing away of the earnings of the poor to be given to paper-har¬ 
 pies and other tax-eaters ; these were the causes of the hideous and 
 disgraceful evil; this he knew very well, and therefore it is no 
 wonder, that his report contained no remedy. 
 
 475. After Locke, came, in the reign of Queen Anne, Defoe 
 who seems to have been the father of trie present race of projectors, 
 Malthus and Lawyer Scarlett being merely his humble fol 
 low'ers. He was for giving no more relief to the poor; he imputed 
 their poverty to their crimes, and not their crimes to their poverty, 
 and their crimes he imputed to “their luxury, pride and sloth.”— 
 He said the English labouring people ate and drank three times as 
 much as any foreigners ! How different w r ere the notions of this 
 insolent French Protestant from those of the Chancellor Fortes- 
 quE, who looked upon the good living of the people as the best 
 
264 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 possible proof of good laws / and seems to have delighted in rela- 
 ting, that the English were “ fed, in great abundance, with all sorts 
 ifflesh and fish !” 
 
 476. If Defoe had lived to our “enlightened age,” he would, 
 at any rate, have seen no “ luxury ” amongst the poor, unless he 
 would have grudged them horse-flesh, draft’ (grains,) sea-weed, or 
 the contents of the pig-trough. From his day to the present, there 
 have been a hundred projects, and more than fifty laws, to regulate 
 the affairs of the poor. But still the pauperism remains for the 
 Catholic Church to hold up in the face of the Church of England. 
 “Here,” the former may say to the latter, “here, look at this: 
 here is the result of your efforts to extinguish me; here in this one 
 evil, in this never-ceasing, this degrading curse, I am more than 
 avenged, if vengeance I were allowed to enjoy : urge on the delu¬ 
 ded potatoe-crammed creatures to cry 1 No Popery■ still, and, when 
 they retire to their straw, take care not to remind them of the cause 
 oftheir poverty and degradation.” 
 
 477. Hume, in speaking of the sufferings of the people, in the 
 first Protestant reign, says, that, at last, those sufferings 11 produced 
 good,” for that they “ led to our present situation.” What, then, 
 he deemed our present situation a better one than that of the days of 
 Fortesque ! To be sure, Hume wrote 50 years ago; but he 
 wrote long after Child, Locke, and Defoe. Surely enough the 
 “ Reformation” has led to “ our then present and our now present 
 situation.” It'has, “ at last,” produced the bitter fruit, of which we 
 are now tasting. Evidence, given by a Clergyman too, and pub¬ 
 lished by the House of Commons, in 1824, states the labouring 
 people of Suffolk to be a nest of robbers, tbo deeply corrupted ever 
 to be reclaimed ; evidence of a Sheriff of Wiltshire, (in 1821,) 
 states the common food of the labourers, in the field, to be cold 
 potatoes; a scale, published by .the magistrates of Norfolk, in 
 1825, allows 3d. a day to a single labouring man ; the Judges of 
 the Court of King’s Bench, (1825,) have declared the general food 
 of the labouring people to be bread and water ; intelligence from 
 the northern counties, (1826,) published upon the spot, informs us, 
 that great numbers of people are nearly starving, and that some 
 are eating horse-flesh and grains, while it is well known that the 
 country abounds in food, and while the Clergy have recently put 
 up, fiom the pulpit, the rubrical thanksgiving for times of plenty; 
 a law recently passed, making it felony to take an apple from a 
 tree, tells the world that our characters and lives are thought no¬ 
 thing worth, or that this nation, once the greatest and most moral 
 in the world, is now a nation of incorrigible thieves; and, in either 
 case, the most impoverished, the most fallen, the most degraded 
 that ever saw the light of the sun. 
 
 478. I have now performed my task. I have made good the po¬ 
 sitions with which I began. Born and bred a Protestant of the 
 
PROTESTANT REFOPvMATlON. 
 
 266 
 
 Church of England, having a wife and numerous family professing 
 the same faith, having the remains of most dearly beloved parents 
 lying in a Protestant church-yard, and trusting to conjugal or filial 
 piety to place mine by their side, I have, in this undertaking, had 
 no motive, I can have had no motive, but a sincere and disinterest¬ 
 ed love of truth and justice. It is not for the rich and the power¬ 
 ful of my countrymen that I have spoken; but for the poor, the 
 persecuted, the proscribed. I have not been unmindful of the ur> 
 popularity and the prejudice that would attend the enterprise ; but, 
 when I considered the long, long triumph of calumny over the re¬ 
 ligion of those, to whom we owe all that we possess that is great 
 and renowned; when I was convinced that I could do much 
 towards the counteracting of that calumny ; when duty so sacred 
 bade me speak, it would have been baseness to bold my tongue, 
 and baseness superlative would it have been, if, having the will as 
 well as the power, I had been restrained by fear of the shafts of 
 falsehood and of folly. To lie clear of self-reproach is amongst the 
 greatest of human consolations; and now, amidst all the dreadful 
 perils, with which the event that I have treated of has, at last, sur¬ 
 rounded my country, l can, while I pray God to save her from still 
 further devastation arid misery, safely say, that, neither expressly 
 nor tacitly, am 1 guilty of any part of the cause of her ruin. 
 
 END OF VOL. h 
 
A HISTORY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 PROTESTANT REFORMATION 
 
 IN 
 
 Enjjlatttr auJf Ireland; 
 
 » 
 
 SHOWING HOW THAT EVENT HAS IMPOVERISHED THE MAIN 
 BODY OF THE PEOPLE IN THOSE COUNTRIES; AND CON¬ 
 TAINING A LIST OF THE ABBEYS, PRIORIES, NUNNERIES, 
 HOSPITALS, AND OTHER RELIGIOUS FOUNDATIONS IN ENG¬ 
 LAND, AND WALES, AND IRELAND, CONFISCATED, SEIZED 
 ON, OR ALIENATED, BY THE FROTESTANT “ REFORMATION^ 
 
 SOVEREIGNS AND PARLIAMENTS. 
 
 * 
 
 BY WILLIAM COBBETT, M. P. 
 
 IN A SERIES OF LETTERS, 
 
 1J9DRESSED TO ALL SENSIBLE AND JUST ENGLISHMEN. 
 
 VOL. II. 
 
 ro WHICH IS NOW ADDED, THREE LETTERS, BY THS 
 SAME AUTHOR, NEVER BEFORE PUBLISHED 
 IN THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 IPV L * » 
 
 NEW-YORK : 
 
 PUBLISHED BY D. & J. SADLIER & Co., 
 
 164 WILLIAM STREET, 
 
 BOSTON :—128 FEDERAL STREET. 
 MONTREAL.:—179 NOTRE-DAME STREET. 
 
T 
 
 Entered according to Act c Congress, in the year 1S34, by John Doyle, in the 
 Clerk’s Office of the District Court of the Southern D's'/iei ;' York. 
 
 ) 
 
 t 
 
 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 1. The foregoing volume of this Work contains the 
 History of the Protestant “Reformation,” the object 
 of which was to show, and, I trust, it has shown most 
 clearly, that that event “ has impoverished and degra¬ 
 ded the main body of the people.” In speaking of the 
 motives to the producing of the event, I said, that a fair 
 and honest inquiry would teach us, that the chief of 
 those motives was plunder. The inquiry was fair and 
 honest, and it has taught to every reader, that plunder 
 was the main object, and, indeed, the only object, with 
 all the most active, and the most powerful, of the actors 
 in that drama of devastation. The chief object of the 
 present little volume, is, to show, as far as my means 
 will enable me, the enormous extent and amount of that 
 plunder. 
 
 2. To this end I here present to the reader the 
 List, which is described in the title-page, but which 
 stands in need of those short explanations which I am 
 now about to give: and, when I have given which, I 
 shall add some observations, which, while they are sug¬ 
 gested by bare justice to our well-fed and well-clad ' 
 
 , Catholic forefathers, are, as the reader will see, impe¬ 
 riously demanded at my hands by mercy to ourselves, 
 their unfortunate, half-famished, ragged, pauperized de¬ 
 scendants. 
 
 3. The explanations, to which I have alluded in the 
 last paragraph, relate chiefly to the arrangement of the 
 several articles in the List. The order is Alphabetical 
 throughout, except that Wales follows England, leav¬ 
 ing Ireland to come last. The List, for England, be¬ 
 gins, of course, with Bedfordshire, and ends with York¬ 
 shire. Then, under the name of each county, the order 
 is alphabetical again; the List for Bedfordshire, for 
 instance, beginning with Bedford, and ending with 
 Woburn. 
 
4 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 4. In each article I have given, as far as my mate¬ 
 rials would enable me, 1. a description of the nature 
 of the foundation; 2. the name of the founder; 3. the 
 date of the foundation; 4 . the estimated yearly value 
 at the time of the confiscation by Henry VIII.; 5. the 
 present yearly value, according to the change in the 
 value of money; 6. by what king, or queen, the property 
 was granted away; 7. to whom it was granted. I will 
 here give a specimen in the article just mentioned. 
 “ At Woburn. A Cistercian Abbey, founded near this 
 place, in the year 1145 , by Hugh de Bolebec. Valued 
 at £430 135 . ll^-d.,now worth <£ 8,613 195 . 2d. Granted, 
 l Edward VI., to John Lord Russell.” 
 
 5. Alas! when the Russells were hunting the poor 
 Catholics about, in the reign of Charles II., I wonder 
 whether they ever thought of pious and generous Hugh 
 de Bolebec! Bishop Tanner tells us, that this grant 
 was made to Russell in the first year of Edward VI.; 
 Doctor Heylin tells us that the people of Devonshire 
 rose, in the second year of Edward VI., and, amongst 
 other things, demanded that some of the monasteries 
 should be re-established; and Hume tells us, that they 
 were, at last, quelled, and punished by martial law, by 
 Lorb Russell, aided by German troops ! Alas ! and 
 poor Hugh de Bolebec never thought of all the while, 
 I would almost be sworn! 
 
 6. The whole of the articles are not so perfect in 
 their information as is the one above cited. In some 
 the name of the grantee has not been to be come at; 
 in others the valuation is not recorded; in others the 
 name of the founder is wanting; and, with regard to 
 Ireland, the information is still more scanty, and that, 
 too, in every respect, and in a very great degree. Ne¬ 
 vertheless, the List, taken altogether, is, I trust it will 
 be thought, a very interesting historical and statistical 
 document, and will be found very commodious as a 
 work of reference; for, if you see, or hear of, any an¬ 
 cient foundation, in any pa~t of the kingdom, and wish 
 to know what it was, and when it arose, how it was 
 put down, and who got it; knowing in what county it 
 is, or finding this out by the Index at the end of the 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 5 
 
 Volume, you turn to the county, which you will find 
 in the order of the alphabet. Then, knowing in or 
 near what city, town, or village it is, you turn, accord¬ 
 ing to the alphabet, to the city, town, or village ; or, to 
 the usual name of the Abbey, Priory, or other founda¬ 
 tion. Thus you, with as little inconvenience as possible, 
 get at the best information that I have been able to give. 
 
 7. But, it is in the mass,, it is as the ground of a gene¬ 
 ral conclusion, that the contents of this volume are of the 
 greatest importance. Here are about three hundred pa¬ 
 ges of close print filled with a bare list of pieces of once 
 public property, now worth from one hundred pounds 
 to upwards of fifty thousand pounds a year each! Some 
 few of the things in the List, as in the cases of several 
 of the Colleges, Chapters, Hospitals, and other founda¬ 
 tions, still continue to be public property; but, these 
 form but a comparatively small part of the general 
 mass; and there is, after all, wholly left out of the List, 
 the numerous private estates, seized on and granted 
 away by the u Reformation” sovereigns, in virtue of 
 acts of attainder and other means, grounded on the ad¬ 
 herence of the owners to the religion of their fathers. 
 As, for instance, estates like that of which Cowdry- 
 House, in Sussex, was the chief seat, and which was 
 seized on by Henry VIII., in virtue of the attainder of 
 the Countess of Salisbury and her heirs, and granted 
 by him to his physician, Sir Anthony Brown, who 
 obtained from that execrable tyrant, manors and estates 
 running over a considerable part of the north-west of 
 Sussex and of the south-west of Surrey. 
 
 8. Besides the public property described in this List, 
 there vsere the tithes, which were thus seized on and 
 granted away to lay persons by the Protestant “ Re¬ 
 formation” sovereigns. Until that event took place, no 
 man had an idea, that it could be possible for tithes to 
 be claimed by any but those who administered religion. 
 But, it was soon found, that a large part of those tithes, 
 the sole objects of which were the promotion of reli¬ 
 gion, and the relief of the poor and the stranger, had, 
 all at once, by a mere touch of the Protestant Wand, 
 been converted into estates for the already nobles and 
 
 1 * 
 
6 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 rich men. Such they continue to this day ; and, hence 
 those monstrous things, called lay-impropriations, gi¬ 
 ving, in many cases, thousands of pounds a year to a 
 layman, who never sees the parish, and a few pounds 
 a year to a clergyman who does whatever clerical duty 
 is done in that same parish. The whole affair was a 
 real taking away from the middle and lower class, and 
 a giving to the nobles and the rich. Yet there are men 
 so blind, or so perverse, as to think, or to pretend to 
 think, that the thing, called the “ Reformation,” ought 
 to be looked upon as “ a blessing!” 
 
 9. The whole of the rents of the estates of the 
 Church, including those tithes which were confiscated 
 and transferred to lay-parsons, amounted to, perhaps, a 
 third part of the whole rental of the kingdom. There 
 are no means of knowing what the amount really was; 
 for the valuation was, in. fact, no valuation at all. It 
 was all plundering with one hand and squandering 
 with the other, as may well be imagined, when the 
 historians tell us, that Old Harry (the name which the 
 English gave to the Devil for many years after Old 
 Harry’s death, and the name which the Americans 
 give to the Devil to this day;) when historians tell us 
 that Old Harry gave a church-estate to a woman, who 
 had made a pudding to please him, and that Sir Miles 
 Partridge won a ring of church bells of him at dice! 
 It is impossible to come at any thing like an exact ac¬ 
 count of the worth of the possessions of the Catholic 
 Church. Protestant writers have endeavoured to make 
 the Churches’ rental as great as possible, in order to 
 exhibit the clergy as monstrous devourers of the na¬ 
 tional income. According to the recorded valuations, 
 the rental did not amount to more than a tenth part of 
 the rental of the kingdom. But, then, these valuations 
 were founded, apparently, solely upon the reserved 
 rents, leaving out fines, renewals, heriots, deodands and 
 various other sources of income; and, therefore, I agree 
 with those historians, who think that the Church in¬ 
 come, including the impropriated tithes, amounted to 
 a full third part of the income of all the landowners 
 (clergy included') in the whole nation. 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION, 
 
 7 
 
 10. Well, then, the good and thoughtless Protestant, 
 who has been, as I was, duped from infancy to man* 
 hood ; well, then, such good Protestant will ask: “ Was 
 not this a great deal too much to be devoured by a par¬ 
 cel of lazy monks and priests and nuns, who did no 
 work of any kind, who lived but to eat and drink and 
 sleep, and who kept the people in ignorance ?” Now, 
 my good brother Protestant, be you who you may, you 
 cannot be more zealous or more loud upon this score 
 than I was, for many years of my life; until I, at last, 
 examined for myself, not the pages of lying, hired, place¬ 
 hunting, pension-hunting, benefice-seeking, or roman¬ 
 cing historians; but*the pages of the statute-book and 
 of the books of the ancient laws of my country. This 
 being the case, you are entitled to a patient hearing and 
 a kind answer from me, to this, your very natural ques¬ 
 tion ; a question such as I should, about ten years ago; 
 have been very likely to put myself. 
 
 11. Now, then, if the monks and priests and nuns 
 were such lazy people; if they worked neither by 
 hand nor head ; if they did nothing but eat, drink and 
 sleep; if this were their real character, and this the habit 
 of their lives, how can you possibly believe, that they 
 had any influence at all over the minds of the people ? 
 And, unless they had very great influence over their 
 minds, how can you possibly believe, that they kept 
 the people in ignorance? What, my friend! Were 
 the people susceptible of knowledge ? Had they (just 
 as we have) nature’s works and laws to enlighten them ? 
 Had they a desire to become skilful and learned? 
 And were they kept in a state of ignorance, were their 
 Capacities benumbed and their propensities thus com¬ 
 pletely thwarted by lazy creatures who lived only to 
 eat, drink and sleep ? 
 
 12. By this time, you, I am sure, begin to be ashamed 
 of these assertions ; and, the further I go, the more 
 fully will you be convinced, fhat you have been and 
 are, as I formerly was, the dupe of those, who now live 
 upon the spoils of the Church of our fathers. Now, 
 then, is it a fact, is it true, that the Catholic clergy 
 kept, or endeavoured tc keep, the people in ignorance ? 
 
8 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 This is a charge that fat and luxurious fellows of the 
 present day are incessantly preferring against them; 
 but, is it not a false charge? That it is a false charge 
 you will find proved in the most satisfactory manner, 
 in the first Volume of this work, in paragraphs from 28 
 to 36, and in paragraphs from 129 to 134. But, my 
 friend, look into the present volume. Turn over, zea¬ 
 lous hater of u monkish ignoranceturn over to the 
 county of Oxford ; then go on to Oxford city. Aye 1 
 there it is, in that cc learned University,” the colleges 
 of which are all filled with rosy-gilled and most doctor¬ 
 like Protestants, and the walls of which colleges in¬ 
 cessantly ring with abuse poured forth on the Catholic 
 religion, and especially on the clergy of that Church, 
 who are here, above all the places in the world, accused 
 of keeping the people in ignorance; there it is, surely, 
 that you will, my good Protestant friend, find some¬ 
 thing in the way of proof to make good this accusa¬ 
 tion ! Turn over the leaves, then, and come to the 
 word “ Oxford.” $ 
 
 13. What! Aye, do ! Rub your eyes bright, and then 
 look again. What I nothing at all! Oh ! everlasting 
 shame on the name of Protestant! Not one single col¬ 
 lege, hall, or school, founded by Protestants, nor since 
 the day that the word Protestant was pronounced in 
 England ! About twenty colleges in all, and all found¬ 
 ed and endowed by Catholics ; and, as if to put the ca¬ 
 lumniators of the Catholije# clergy to shame eternal, as 
 if to make them undergo a sort of hell in this world, 
 out of the twenty, eleven were founded by Catholic 
 Bishops; two by Monks; otic by Nuns; and jive by 
 Catholic kings, nobles, gentlemen and ladies. Aye, 
 and here is the record, that the University itself was 
 founded by Alfred, whose father took him to Rome, 
 where he was anointed by the Pope himself! Nay, as 
 if all this were not enough, here is the record, that the 
 teaching at this University was begun by a monk, who 
 came to England for the express purpose, and in grati¬ 
 tude for the services of whom Alfred founded and en¬ 
 dowed a monastery for him at Winchester. 
 
 14. Thus, then, my good and true Protestant friend, 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 9 
 
 we have, I think, settled thq question about keeping the 
 people in ignorance. We now come to the other as¬ 
 sertion which is put forth by you, namely, that this full 
 third part of the rents of the nation “ was a great deal 
 too much to be devoured by the. monks and priests 
 and nuns,” and which you have, as I used to do, re¬ 
 peated out of the books of the really devouring vermin 
 of the present day. Yes, it was “ a great deal too 
 much to be so devoured but, then, my friend, you are 
 not yet aware, that your basis is an assumed fact; and 
 that this assumed fact is a most monstrous lie ! In the 
 first place it was physically impossible that they should 
 devour a fiftieth part of it. How, for instance, were 
 the fourteen monks in the Abbey of Chertsey, in Surrey, 
 to devour rents, which, in our money, amounted to 
 14,893£. a year ? Bishop Tanner (a Protestant bishop, 
 mind,) says, that “ all the monasteries were, in effect, 
 great schools and great hospitals (meaning, in those 
 days, places of hospitality ;) and were, many of them, 
 obliged to relieve many poor people every day. They 
 were likewise houses of entertainment for almost all 
 travellers. In short, their hospitality w r as such, that, 
 in the Priory of Norwich, one thousand five hundred 
 quarters of malt, and above eight hundred quarters 
 of wheat, and all other things in proportion, were 
 generally spent every year.” 
 
 15. There ! my good duped Protestant friend ; that 
 is the way in which monks and nuns “ devoured” their 
 rents ! There were but twenty-two monks in this 
 Priory ; so that, in fact, they were the mere agents for 
 distributing amongst the needy and the strangers the 
 rents of their estates. Ah ! Good God! what has the 
 thing called the “ Reformation” produced at Norwich ! 
 Who is there at Norwich now to keep hospitality ? “ St. 
 Andrew’s Hall,” as it is now called, which was the 
 church of this Priory, is the Corn-market, and now 
 hears, instead of the chantings of its benevolent monks, 
 the chafferings and the cheapenings, the lying and 
 roguish cant, of sly Quaker corn-monopolizers. The 
 questions here now are,, not how and when malt and 
 wheat shall be distributed to the poor and the stranger; 
 
10 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 but, how they shall be hoarded up, made dear, and kept 
 from the thirsty and the hungry. It was from the 
 platform, on which once stood the high-altar of this 
 Priory, that I tendered to the people of Norfolk, that 
 Petition, which they did me the honour to pass, which 
 was afterwards presented to the Parliament, which now 
 lies on the table of the House of Commons, and which 
 is, I trust, destined finally to be the ground-work of 
 measures, calculated, not, certainly, to restore to us the 
 happiness enjoyed by our Catholic fathers, but to take 
 away by law, and to give back to the poor, a part, at 
 least, of those Church-revenues, which, in Catholic 
 times, were deemed to be, and actually were, the inhe¬ 
 ritance of the poor and the stranger; for, this is the 
 grand thing for which that Petition prays; and, cer¬ 
 tainly, if the spot from which it sprang could be sup¬ 
 posed capable of giving it any degree of effect, one more 
 appropriate than the altar-base of this munificent Priory 
 could not have been chosen. 
 
 16. Yes, my good and duped Protestant friend, u a 
 great deal too much to be devoured by monks and 
 priests and nuns j” and, accordingly, the monks and 
 nuns did not, as you have seen, devour it, nor hardly 
 any part of it. And now, as to the priests, including 
 the bishops. They could not marry ; they could have 
 no wives; they had, in fact, no families to provide for; 
 while, as to the monks and nuns, they could possess no 
 private property, could leave nothing by will, and, 
 therefore, were completely trustees for the poor and the 
 stranger. Of the manner, in which the bishops spent 
 their incomes, we have a specimen in the eleven col¬ 
 leges, out of twenty, founded and endowed by them at 
 Oxford. But the main thing of all is, that the Catholic 
 priesthood, taken all together, wholly maintained the 
 poor and the stranger, and suffered not the name of 
 pauper to be known in England; and, it never was 
 known in England, until the thing, called the “ Reform¬ 
 ation,” came. 
 
 17. This is a matter, which is, at this time (July, 
 1827,) of infinite importance. In the Norfolk Petition, 
 before mentioned, we prayed that “ a part of the public 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 11 
 
 property, commonly called Church property,’' might be 
 taken away by law, and applied to other public pur¬ 
 poses. My anxious wish, and my hope, is, that the 
 prayer of this Petition may finally be granted by the 
 Parliament; whether before the Parliament be reformed, 
 I cannot say ; but, granted it will be, in the end, I have 
 no doubt; and with this in my mind, it is, that I put 
 forth this little volume, the utility of which, in the case 
 thus hoped for, we shall presently see. But, first, we 
 ought to consider a little the origin of this “ Church 
 property,” as it is now called, and as it never was called, 
 and as no one ever presumed to call it, until it had 
 the name given it by Protestant priests and bishops, 
 when they once got it into their hands. It was, in fact, 
 the portion of the poor, the infirm, the aged, the widow, 
 the orphan, the stranger, and of all the necessitous, 
 which portion was lodged in the hands of the clergy 
 for just and wise distribution. 
 
 IS. In the first Volume of this Work, in paragraphs 
 from 49 to 59 inclusive, this matter is fully and clearly 
 stated. To those paragraphs I beg to refer the reader. 
 There it is clearly shown, that tithes, and every other 
 species of income of the clergy, were looked upon, and 
 were, in fact and in practice, more the property of the 
 poor than of the monks, nuns, priests, and bishops. 
 Thus it was that there were, in this then happy coun¬ 
 try, neither paupers nor common beggars. But, when 
 a part of the tithes and estates had been seized and 
 taken away from the clergy altogether, and when the 
 remainder had been given to bishops and priests, who 
 were allowed to marry, and who, of course, had fami¬ 
 lies of their own to feed and clothe and to get fortunes 
 for, the beggars, as we have seen in paragraphs 471 
 and 472, began to appear, and they soon “ covered the 
 land,” as the lice did the land of Egypt. Attempts 
 were, as we have there seen, made to keep down their 
 numbers by punishments the most horrible; so that 
 England, which had never before known what poverty 
 was, now saw it in all its most hideous forms. 
 
 19. At last, when the butchering and racking Eliza¬ 
 beth had tried whipping, scourging, and even martial 
 
12 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 law. in vain, and when she and the principal plunderers 
 began to fear, that raging hunger would, if not, by some 
 means or other, assuaged, deal them deadly blows; 
 then, and not till then, the Poor-Laws were passed; 
 and this fruit of the famous “ Reformation” sticks to 
 the landowners, clings fast to them, unto the present 
 day. The real history of the poor-rates and of English 
 pauperism is given Vol. I., paragraphs from 227 to 237 ; 
 and in paragraphs from 457 to 478. And, we are al¬ 
 ways to bear in mind, that the money, or food, or 
 clothing, proceeding from the poor-rates, is the poor’s 
 property. It is not alms; it is what they have a right 
 to by the law of nature, by the law of God, and by the 
 common law of the land; aye, that same law, which, 
 and which alone, gives a man a right to the enjoyment 
 of his field or garden, also gives the poor and necessi¬ 
 tous a right to be relieved out of the fruits of the earth. 
 
 20. Civil society it was that caused that which is 
 called private property. In a state of nature, when 
 man was and the lands were as God made them and 
 left them, the lands were for the common use of all the 
 people. When the people of any country agreed to 
 give up their common right, and to permit private own¬ 
 ership to exist, they must have done it with a view to 
 make their lives safer and happier; and, therefore, it is 
 impossible; it is absolutely impossible, that they could 
 have contemplated, as a consequence of their social 
 compact, that the lives of the millions would ever be 
 placed at the mere mercy of the thousands, or, perhaps, 
 of the hundreds. Malthus denies the right of the poor 
 to relief; he denies that they have any right to claim 
 relief from those who hold the lands and houses as 
 their private property; and he actually recommends to 
 the Parliament to be so foolish as well as so unjust and 
 cruel as to pass a law to refuse relief to all who shall 
 be born after a certain day, and also to all the parents 
 of such persons. In the way of justification of this 
 horrid proposal, he says, that the man wanting relief 
 after this, “ should be left to the punishment of nature;” 
 that he should be told, that the “ laws of nature had 
 doomed him and his family to starve;” and that, 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 13 
 
 whatever might be their state of distress, they “ had no 
 claim on society for the smallest portion of food !” 1 
 
 need hardly say, that this came from the pen of a 
 Church of England Parson ! Arrogant, insolent, stu¬ 
 pid, and cruel as it is, its source will be a question of 
 doubt with few men. 
 
 21. To the “punishment of nature” this stupid and 
 
 cruel projector would leave the necessitous. Well, 
 Parson, the poor would, I dare say, take you at your 
 word, and jump for joy to be thus referred to the laws 
 of nature. Those laws, Parson, bid them, when they 
 want food, to take it where thev can find it, and to care 
 nothing about the place or the person that they take it 
 from. The laws of nature know nothing about theft or 
 robbery or burglary. When, indeed, in no shop, house, 
 barn, mill, or other place, the hungry man can discover 
 food sufficient to satisfy his hunger; or, w r hen finding 
 it, he has not, whether by force of arms or otherwise, 
 the ability to get at it and eat it; then, indeed, I allow, 
 that, “ the laws of nature have doomed him to starve 
 but, Parson, it is only when he cannot discover the ex¬ 
 istence of the food, or when, knowung where it is, he 
 has not force to seize it, that the “ laws of nature doom 
 him to starve.” , 
 
 22. We very well know, that all men are subject, 
 and ought to be subject, as I have, on more than one 
 occasion, before stated, to be called forth, to be com¬ 
 pelled to come forth, and, at the risk of their lives, de¬ 
 fend their country against a foreign enemy, and also to 
 defend the lands or houses, which are the private pro¬ 
 perty of the possessors, in case of any illegal attempt 
 to take away, or to injure, those lands or houses. Now, 
 sifppose the country invaded, or suppose a band of 
 rebels to be gutting, or pulling down, the house of a 
 Lord. Suppose Parson Malthus to go to a poor man, 
 to whom he has before been preaching his doctrine; 
 and suppose him to call upon this man to come forth, 
 as a militia-man, to repel the invaders, or to quell the 
 rebels. 
 
 Parson.— Here, Chopstick ! Come away, and bring 
 your arms to defend your country. 
 
14 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Chopstick. —My country, Parson: how is it mine, it 
 I have not in it even a security against being starved 
 to death while the land abounds in food ? 
 
 Parson. —But, here is the law, and forth you must 
 come, or be punished severely. 
 
 Chopstick. —Law! Why, the law of nature bids me, 
 first, not to risk my life; next, it bids me stay at home 
 in these times of peril, to quiet the alarms of, and to 
 protect, my wife and children. 
 
 Parson. —But, here are a parcel of rebels, gutting 
 and pulling down the good Lord Rottenborough’s house. 
 
 Chopstick.—W ell! let him drive them away. 
 
 Parson. —But, he cannot; he is not able ; one man 
 cannot fight with a thousand; and the law commands 
 us to come forth to the protection of each other. 
 
 [Enter Overseer.] , 
 
 Chopstick. —Law ! Oh, no ! Parson, the law of na¬ 
 ture bids the strong to do what they please with that 
 which the weak have got; that law bids these strong 
 poor men to go and take the goods and to pull down 
 and divide amongst them the big house of this rich 
 weak man; and, if I be to be referred to that law, when 
 1 and my wife and children are starving for want of re¬ 
 lief ; if the Overseer be to answer my application by 
 telling me, “ that the law of nature has doomed us to 
 starve,” surely I may refer my Lord to the sentences 
 of the same law. 
 
 Overseer. —Why, John, who has been filling thy 
 head with this nonsense ? When did I talk to you about 
 the law of nature ? Are there not the poor laws to pro¬ 
 vide for you, in case of distress ; and do you not, in this 
 way, partake in the yearly rents, and, in fact, in the 
 ownership, of my Lord’s estate ? 
 
 [Exit Parson, slipping off.] 
 
 Chopstick. —Aye! That’s another man’s matter, 
 Master Pinchum ! Then, indeed, if I be a sort of a part- 
 owner with my Lord, it is just that I should [ taking a 
 club down from the rack'] go and fight for the protec¬ 
 tion of his goods and his house; and here I go to do my 
 best against these rebels. 
 
 23. This is the true, the common-sense, view of the 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 15 
 
 matter. Agreeably to these principles there are, and 
 always have been, in all countries except in ill-fated 
 Ireland, since the Reformation,” a legal provision, of 
 some sort or other, for the necessitous; a law of some 
 sort, that effectually provided that they should not die 
 for want of food and raiment; and, though in England, 
 many attempts have been made, by Sturges and others, 
 to alter the law in such a way as to make it more and 
 more difficult for the indigent to obtain relief; though 
 attempts of this sort are continually making; they ne¬ 
 ver can, upon the whole, be attended with success ; for, 
 before they could obtain that success, the kingdom 
 would be convulsed to its centre; and, indeed, it is 
 clear to every man of sense and reflection, that it is 
 the poor-rates, and the poor-rates alone, which, at this 
 very moment, cause the peace of the country to be pre¬ 
 served. 
 
 24. But, though these rates are just and necessary, 
 we are never to forget, that they were not at all neces¬ 
 sary, that they never existed,- and that the hateful name 
 of pauper never was known in England, until that 
 u Reformation,” as it is called, which caused the enor¬ 
 mous confiscations, the particulars of which are stated 
 in this second Volume of my History. Before that 
 time, the indigent were relieved out of the produce ot 
 the tithes, out of the revenues of the monasteries, and 
 out of those of the manors and other estates of the bi¬ 
 shops. We have seen, in the first volume of this work, 
 how a large part of the tithes and almost all the re¬ 
 venues of the monasteries were alienated from the 
 poor and from the public, and in what manner they 
 became private property. As to the poor, they, after 
 about fifty years of whipping, branding, iron-collaring, 
 shooting, and hanging, got a provision, such as it was, 
 in the poor-rates; but, observe, the public got no com¬ 
 pensation for what the aristocracy had taken from it; 
 and every man had now, if not a pauper himself, to 
 pay poor-rates, to make up for what the aristocracy had 
 got divided amongst them ! 
 
 25. A pretty large part of the tithes and of the ma¬ 
 nors and the other estates belonging to the Bishops, the 
 
16 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Cathedrals, and the Colleges, remained unconfiscated, 
 and were turned over to the Protestant Parsons, Bishops, 
 Deans, Prebendaries, Fellows of Colleges, and other 
 “ spiritual persons” (as the law calls them) of the pre¬ 
 sent “ Protestant Church of England, as by law esta¬ 
 blished.” Now, it is a clear case, that the Parliament, 
 which could take this property from the clergy of one 
 religion, and give it to those of another religion ; the 
 Parliament that could, in spite of Magna Charta and in 
 spite of the law of the land of a thousand years’ stand¬ 
 ing, do this, though, in doing this the Parliament set at 
 nought the wills, or grants, of all the founders of the 
 numerous religious houses and establishments; it is a 
 clear case, that all those who contend, that the Par¬ 
 liament had a right to do these things, must allow, 
 that the Parliament has a right to dispose as it pleases 
 of all that part of the Church property, which still 
 continues to belong to the nation, or, in other words, 
 which is not private property. The divers religious 
 foundations were made agreeably to the law. If the 
 religion was to be changed, and a new one was to be 
 established, the property in the foundations ought, in 
 justice, in bare justice, to have reverted to the founders, 
 or to their heirs, who, in most cases, were to be found, 
 and were ready to put forward their claim to it. If the 
 religion were found to be bad, the property, the lands, 
 the trees and the buildings, had committed no offence. 
 Nevertheless, the property was all seized on by the 
 King and Parliament. The Parliament gave it all to 
 the King; and the King, and his successors, gave the 
 greater part of it, in return, amongst the members of 
 the two houses of Parliament, or their relations ! Now, 
 if the King and Parliament had a right to deal thus 
 with property, the heirs of the founders of which were 
 ready to claim it, surely no one can deny, that the pre¬ 
 sent King and Parliament have a right to apply to public, 
 purposes that part of this great mass of property, which, 
 as stated above, continues to be the property of the pub¬ 
 lic. There is, I venture to assert, no man that will deny 
 this, and especially no man, who possesses, by descent 
 or otherwise, any part of the Catholic Church estates ; 
 
PROTEST AMT REFORMATION. 
 
 17 
 
 for. what title has such man to his estate ? What plea 
 has he against an ejectment? He has no title, he has 
 no answer, except those which are furnished by those 
 Acts of Parliament of Henry VIII., which seized, and 
 granted to the King, the estates of the Church. This 
 sauce for the goose, so delicious as it long has been 
 acknowledged to be, must, when the time for another 
 repast shall arrive, be allowed to be sauce for the gan¬ 
 der ; and, of this sauee, Norfolk Petition would, if acted 
 upon, give the nation a taste. 
 
 26. Plunkett, who has now been made a lord, and 
 about whom the bleaters in Ireland are, just now, ma¬ 
 king such a fuss, asserted, in the debate on Mr. Hume’s 
 motion for applying part of the clerical incomes in Ire¬ 
 land to other public purposes; this Plunkett asserted, 
 in the most unqualified terms, that all tithes, glebes, 
 and all sorts of property, called Church property, -were 
 as sacred from the touch of the Parliament, that the 
 Parliament had not more right to sell them, or to apply 
 them in any way, than it had to sell, or otherwise dis¬ 
 pose of, any parcel of any man’s private property ! In¬ 
 deed, Plunkett ! What, then, are any of those titles 
 good for, by which men now hold the immense masses 
 of property described in this volume ? If this King 
 and Parliament have no right to touch that which be- 
 longs to the nation, could Harry VIII. and his Parlia¬ 
 ment have a right to seize and to alienate all these 
 masses of property, great part of which were really 
 private property, and had claimants, legal claimants, 
 to demand them? If this King and Parliament have 
 no right to take public property, and to apply it to pub¬ 
 lic purposes, can those titles be worth one single straw, 
 which rest on Acts of Parliament, which Acts seized 
 on private property and applied it to private purposes ? 
 I mightj by comparing the tenure of what the Church 
 parsons hold with the tenure of private property, show 
 the gross absurdity of the doctrine of this Plunkett, 
 who, I recollect, was anxious to check the circulation 
 of small pamphlets, because the mass ol the people 
 were now become so much more enlightened than for¬ 
 merly; I might, by the comparison just mentioned, 
 2 * 
 
18 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 show the monstrous absurdity of the doc trine of this 
 Plunkett: but, I say, No: I say, Let his doctrine stand, 
 if the parsons like; and, then, all the tithes of all the 
 holders of Abbey-lands, aye, and of the greater part ol 
 the Cathedral and College-lands, are not worth one 
 single pinch even of Scotch snuff. 
 
 27. However, as there certainly is not a man in the 
 kingdom (except some parson, perhaps,) besides Plun¬ 
 kett, to hold a doctrine like this, we will leave Plun¬ 
 kett to have his hearing faculties tickled by the bleaters 
 of Ireland, and will now go on to see a little how, if 
 applied to this mass of “public property, commonly 
 called Church property,” Norfolk Petition would work. , 
 
 28. The property which remains to the nation is, I. 
 The Parochial Tithes and Glebes. II. The Bishop¬ 
 ric revenues. III. The Dean and Chapter Revenues, 
 IV. The College revenues. Here is still an immense 
 mass of property, and all of it, or nearly all of it, di¬ 
 verted from the uses to which it was formerly applied, 
 and to which it was intended that it should always be 
 applied. But, the questions for us here are, whether 
 it be now well applied; and whether it could not be 
 much better applied than it now is. As to the real 
 amount of it, that will never be got at by the public, 
 as long as it shall remain in the hands in which it now 
 is. No man has ever been able to get an account laid 
 before Parliament, of the amount of this property ! Ac¬ 
 counts of every thing else can be got; but, of this no 
 account can ever be come at. Some years ago, a return 
 was made to Parliament, stating the name of each li¬ 
 ving, the population of the parish, the size of the church, 
 the state of the parsonage-house, and the annual worth 
 of the living, if under one hundred and fifty pounds ! 
 Here was a crafty trick! Why not state the annual 
 worth if above one hundred and fifty pounds! Why 
 this close disguise if above that mark? Is not the an¬ 
 swer ready ? To have stated the annual worth of the 
 whole of the livings would have shown to this beg¬ 
 gared people what an immense sum is swallowed an¬ 
 nually by these comparatively few men and their fami¬ 
 lies, whose Catholic predecessors kept all the poor, and 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 19 
 
 also kept the churches in repair out of these same tithes. 
 The tithes of England, Wales and Ireland have been 
 estimated, by several writers, at eight millions a-year. 
 The parsons affect to say that this is an over statement. 
 But, when any public functionary hears his gains over 
 stated, and knows that he is thereby placed before the 
 public in a disadvantageous light, what is his remedy ? 
 Why, to publish an exact account of what he really 
 does receive. Ave, and this is what the parsons would » 
 do, to be sure, if they had it in their power to prove 
 that their gains had been over-rated. For my part, I 
 am convinced, that, if we include the rent of the par¬ 
 sonage-houses and glebes, the compulsory offerings and 
 fees, and all the estates of the Bishops, Chapters, Col¬ 
 leges and other foundations, which, though not legally, 
 nor necessarily, engrossed by the Church-parsons, are 
 so in fact; if we include the whole, I am convinced, 
 that this Church-Establishment costs this “ enlighten¬ 
 ed Protestant nation,” more than twelve millions op 
 pounds sterling a year ; and this, too, observe, without 
 including further millions that are required to maintain 
 the PoLicE-Establishment and the Troops, which the 
 public papers so frequently exhibit to us as employed in 
 collecting, or in aiding and defending those who are em¬ 
 ployed in the collecting of tithes! This “Church pro¬ 
 perty,” as it is called, must, like the Debt, not be esti¬ 
 mated by the bare amount of itself, but, there must be 
 added to this amount, the cost of the army, which is 
 required on account of it. If we leave this out of our 
 estimate, we shall be as far short of the true mark, as 
 we should be if we were to leave out of the estimate 
 of the custom and excise taxes the amount of the sala 
 ries of the custom-house and excise officers ; or as if 
 we were, in our account of the cost of post-chaise hire, 
 to leave out the amount of the sums paid to the post-boy 
 and the ostler. The cost, then, of this establishment 
 is perfectly enormous : and, what is the establishment 
 worth to the nation 1 Is the “ service” rendered by this 
 body of persons, called the clergy, worth twelve or fil 
 teen millions a year ? Is it worth one million ? Is it 
 worth one pound ? Is not the name of “service” wrong- 
 
20 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ly applied in this case? Has not this establishment now 
 been proved, by ample experience, to be injurious, ra¬ 
 ther than beneficial, to the country ? Ought the incomes 
 to be applied to other public purposes? The stating, 
 and shortly remarking on, a few well-known facts, re¬ 
 lating to each of the above four classes of “ spiritual 
 persons,” taking the classes in the order in which they 
 there stand, will enable us to answer these questions; 
 and, if we find the last of these questions to be an¬ 
 swered in the affirmative; that is to say, if we find, 
 that these several parcels of public property ought to be 
 applied to other public purposes, there will remain for 
 us to determine only on the manner and degree, in 
 which it is our duty to petition the King and Parliament 
 to cause the taking away, or alienation, to be made. 
 
 29. To begin with the first class, the Tithes and 
 Glebes, or property now possessed by the common par¬ 
 sons, or parish clergy, it must always be borne in mind, 
 that this property was only so much put into the hands 
 of the priest for the purposes of relieving their indigent 
 parishioners, of showing hospitality to the stranger, of 
 keeping the church in repair and keeping up its orna¬ 
 ments, and of furnishing a decent maintenance for the 
 parish priests themselves. This was not only the in¬ 
 tention of the founders and endowers of parish-livings; 
 but, it was the law of the land as well as the law of 
 the church. In the first volume, paragraph 51, I have 
 shown by a reference to the canon-law, that the poor 
 were to have relief out of the tithes. And, to prove be¬ 
 yond all doubt, that this was the practice as well as the 
 law, I need only mention an Act of the 15th year of 
 Richard II., which provides that, if the living of the 
 parish be in the hands of any convent, the convent shall 
 always leave in the hands of their vicar, a part of the 
 income sufficient for the relief of the poor. Another 
 Act, enforcing this Act, was passed in the 4th year of 
 Henry IV. So that it is quite clear, that the tithes, 
 glebe, and all the income of every church living, were 
 to be employed, as far as necessary, in relieving and in 
 otherwise doing good to the poor and the stranger. 
 
 30. It is not necessary to say that the income arising 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 21 
 
 from this class of public property has been wholly di¬ 
 verted from the purposes to which it was, at first, des¬ 
 tined, and to which it was, until the “ Reformation,” 
 as we Protestants call that sad event, fairly applied. 
 Why, therefore, should these parcels of property re¬ 
 main any longer, at any rate, in the hands of the pre¬ 
 sent possessors ? If they would, even now, do as the 
 Catholic priests did ; if they would maintain the poor 
 of their parishes, and would entertain and help all stran¬ 
 gers in distress ; if they would repair the churches, keep 
 up the ornaments (there are none left, by the by ;) if, 
 m short, they would put an end to poor-rates and church- 
 rates, and keep the poor and repair the church, they 
 might still keep the tithes and the glebes and par¬ 
 sonage-houses and gardens. But, if they will do nei¬ 
 ther of these, what reason is there for their having the 
 property ? “ They have law for it.” Oh, aye ! And 
 
 the Catholic clergy, and more especially the monks 
 and nuns, had “ law for it” too, and law a little older, 
 at any rate, than the law that our parsons have for it. 
 They have law for it till another law come to take this 
 their law away ; and what reason is there, I again ask, 
 for leaving the property in their possession ? What 
 reason is there that another law should not come to 
 take this their law away ! 
 
 31. Most monstrously have they always been afraid 
 of questions like this. Most anxious have they always 
 been to keep out of sight the origin of the poor-rates. 
 A Hampshire farmer, who had read the “ Protestant 
 Reformation,” told me a few weeks ago, that, at a 
 meeting, relative to the poor, lately held at the poor- 
 hoi^se, in his parish, and at which meeting the parson 
 presided, there was a great deal said about the fright¬ 
 ful increase of, and great hardship inflicted by, the poor- 
 rates, of which the parson complained more vehemently 
 than any body else. He (the farmer) took this occa¬ 
 sion to ask, in all simplicity, of his Reverence, “ How 
 tnere came to be such a thing as poor-rates in Eng¬ 
 land, and who it was that used to maintain the poor 
 in old times V 1 “Well,” said I, “and what did he 
 say to you in answer ?” “ Zay,” replied he, “ ha 
 
22 
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 did n’t zay much; but ha screwed down T s brows, 
 and, looking as black as the very devil; ha zed, that 
 tw’oud be a good deal better if every man wou’d mind 
 J 3 woan business.” This was a pincher indeed \ 
 Our parsons know all about the Catholic claims to 
 tithes ; they know all about the collection of tithes; 
 all about moduses and endowments and the like ; they 
 have at their finger’s ends all the history of the “ su¬ 
 perstitions and idolatries” of the Catholic Church ; but 
 ignorant as horses they appear with regard to the way 
 in which the poor were kept in Catholic times ; and, I 
 can tell you another thing ; namely, that whoever dares 
 to make any thing public on that subject, is, if they can 
 reach him, sure to feel, in some way or other, the ef¬ 
 fects of their implacable vengeance ; of the truth of 
 which we have the most complete proof in the curious 
 affair of Mr. Ruggles, to the circumstances of which I 
 have once before merely alluded, but which, in jus¬ 
 tice to myself as well as my subject, and, which is of 
 still more importance, in justice to the middle and 
 working classes of my countrymen, I must here fully 
 relate. 
 
 32. In the year 1793, Deighton, bookseller, Holborn, 
 published a book in two vols. octavo, with the follow¬ 
 ing title : “ The History of the Poor : the rights, duties, 
 and the laws respecting them : .in a Series of Letters. 
 By Thomas Ruggles, F. A. S. One of His Majesty’s 
 Justices of the Peace for the Counties of Essex and 
 Suffolk.” In this work, Mr. Ruggles explained the 
 foundation of the right of the poor to a maintenance 
 from the land.; he explained the principle on which the 
 Catholic Church took charge of the pqpr ; he traced the 
 Church-estates, including tithes, glebes, personal tithes 
 and all, back to one and the same source ; namely, 
 charity ; he insisted, that gifts, out of which the 
 Church-property arose, were gifts not to bishops and 
 priests, or to any religious order, for their own use, 
 but that they were gifts in trust to them for certain 
 purposes, one of which purposes w r as, the maintenance 
 of the poor ; and this his doctrine he founded and up¬ 
 held on the canons of the Church, on the waitings of 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 23 
 
 the fathers, on the common-law of England, and on the 
 statute-law of England. 
 
 33. Having established his doctrine of gifts in trust, 
 he proceeded to inquire, whether this doctrine ought 
 not now to be acted upon; and, he came to the conclu¬ 
 sion, that it ought to be acted upon; that, not only 
 the holders of what is still called Church-property, but 
 the holders of abbey-lands also, ought, even now, to be 
 made to pay annually, towards the maintenance of the 
 poor, a full fourth, at least, of the net yearly profits of 
 such property, and this, observe, over and above the 
 proportion that might be called for from those who held 
 no such property ! For, he contended, and, indeed, he 
 proved, that the grants of the Parliament to Henry 
 VIII. did not set aside, nor at all enfeeble, the claim 
 of the poor to their share of the benefit of the gifts in 
 trust; and that, though the claim had lain dormant for 
 a long while, it was by no means become extinct. 
 In short, he proposed to revive the claim, to act upon 
 it, and to call upon all the holders of Church-property, 
 whether coming from the Catholic seculars or regu¬ 
 lars, whether now held by clerical or lay persons, to 
 give up, if it should be wanted by the poor, a fourth 
 part of the net profits of their estates, be they of what 
 nature they might, for, or towards, the maintenance of 
 the poor, and this, too, over and above the rates paid 
 by other people. He proposed, in short, that the poor 
 should be maintained out of the Church-property, if a 
 fourth of its income would do it, and, if it would not, 
 he proposed first to take that fourth, and then to raise 
 in the present manner, and by general assessment, 
 whatever might be wanted further. 
 
 34. Observe, now, that it was no jacobin, no radical, 
 no republican, who proposed this ; but, in the first place, 
 a land-owner ; in the next place, a Justice of the Peace 
 in two counties ; in the next place, a most loyal gen¬ 
 tleman ; in the next place, one of the adorers of the 
 u Heaven-born” Pitt; and, lastly, a most zealous Pro¬ 
 testant, asserting that the Catholic Church had “ rested 
 on fear and superstition,” and that the “ Reformation,” 
 springing up at the “ magic touch of Henry VIII 
 
24 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 gave rise to a system “ more consonant to the principle* 
 of sober piety and good sense I” A sort ol “ piety’ 1 
 and “ good sense” that had, it seems, Mr. Ruggles, 
 little to do with charity, or with an honest execution 
 of “ trusts !” However, such was the author of this 
 book; such was the maintainer of these doctrines. 
 u And,” the reader will exclaim, “ why were the doc¬ 
 trines not acted upon ?” Aye ! that is the pith of the 
 story: that is the very thing we are going to see. 
 u See !” the reader will exclaim j “ but, what answer 
 was given to Mr.'Ruggles ?” Alas ! reader, no answer 
 was given to poor Mr. Ruggles j but he soon found 
 himself under the necessity of answering himself. In 
 
 short HE PUBLISHED A SECOND EDITION OF HIS BOOK, LEFT 
 OUT ALL HIS ABOVE-MENTIONED DOCTRINES AND PROPOSALS, 
 AND ALMOST BEGGED PARDON FOR HAVING PUT FORTH 
 THOSE DOCTRINES AND PROPOSALS ! 
 
 35. “ What!” exclaims the honest reader, “ an En¬ 
 glishman do this ! an English Gentleman do such a 
 thing as this !” O, yes ! And your “ Gentlemen-of 
 England,” as that former demagogue and now creep¬ 
 ing courtier, Sir Francis Burdett, calls them, have 
 proved to the world, by a long series of acts, that they 
 are, generally speaking, the meanest and most cow¬ 
 ardly of all mankind. But, what was it, then, that 
 this poor Thomas Ruggles, Esq., this unfortunate Jus¬ 
 tice of the Peace for the counties of Essex and Suffolk ; 
 what was it that the poor man left out of his second 
 edition? We will now see what it was that he left 
 out, what words he ate, in order to appease the wrath of 
 the parsons ; for he expressly says, in the preface to his 
 second edition, that “ his principles as a friend to the 
 
 HIERARCHY, HAD EEEN SOMEWHAT CALLED IN QUESTION,” 
 
 in consequence of his attempt “ to revive the claim” 
 of the poor on the revenues of the clergy. Poor fellow 1 
 That was enough for him ! He was marked out for 
 vengeance: he evidently saw it; and published his 
 “ second edition” in order to save himself, if possible. 
 And, now let us see what it was that the poor, ter¬ 
 rified 11 Esquire” left out. 
 
 3G. In the Preface to his first edition, he is speaking 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 25 
 
 of the monstrous burdens on the land, especially of the 
 poor-rates ; and, here he says, that, in his book, he has 
 made an inquiry into the matter. “ More especially,” 
 says he ; and then he goes on in the following words ; 
 and, mind, these words that I am now going to copy 
 here, are left oftt in the second edition. The poor 
 “ ’Squire” re-publishes, in the second edition, the Pre¬ 
 face to the first edition ; and, at the end of the thirteenth 
 paragraph of that preface he leaves out, he sinks, he 
 eats the words, and every word, of the following pas¬ 
 sage : “ More especially as to that part of the case, 
 which relates to the productiveness and application of 
 those estates which were originally given to the clergy, 
 in trust for eleemosynary purposes; but if the laity 
 were to claim from the legislature that equity which 
 the Court of Chancery would decree on a bill filed in 
 common cases, on complaint of a cestui que trust; that 
 the trustees should fulfil those trusts, for the purposes 
 for which the estate was granted ; a cry of, ‘ The 
 church is in danger,’ much more serious and distress¬ 
 ing would arise throughout the land, than any attempts 
 of the secretaries have occasioned. This also requires 
 the attention of the Minister; but the pen of no indi¬ 
 vidual can ever be expected to .rouse him to action on 
 this point; nothing but the public voice is equal to that 
 effect; such an equitable decree of the legislature, 
 clashing with the interests of so reverend a portion of 
 our fellow subjects.” Poor ’Squire ! He was com¬ 
 pelled to eat these words even in his Preface ! But 
 we are now to see what a dreadful meal, or, rather, 
 counter-vomit, he had to undergo, in the work itself. 
 
 37. In his 27th Letter, first edition, after describing 
 the origin of tithes, he speaks of the practice as to the 
 distribution of them. The following are his words, 
 which words he leaves out in the second edition.— 
 “ That such was their origin, is not only the true the¬ 
 ory ; but, that, in former days, the practice flowed in 
 conformity with the principle, has been already proved 
 in the instance d. an application from St. Augustine 
 to Pope Gregory, with respect to the distribution ot 
 tithesfrom ancient canons of the church, and from 
 
26 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 other instances, where the three-fold or four-lold divi 
 sion of the tithes was directed, as the sees of the Bi¬ 
 shop were, or were not, endowed. The writings of the 
 fathers also corroborate the proof of this theory, as well 
 as of the practice ; and the evidence of those who first 
 held these fiduciary estates for the benefit of the poor 
 and the church, is evidence of the highest authority, 
 and establishes the most convincing proof. The sta¬ 
 tute law also proceeded on this idea ; or else the legis¬ 
 lature looked on the possessions of the ecclesiastics as 
 the property of the kingdom, in the reigns of Richard 
 II. and Henry IV.”—Yes ! the parsons of Essex and 
 Suffolk did not like to hear of any “divisions of the 
 tithes, or any distribution of them.” They did not like 
 to hear of “ fiduciary estates;” that is to say, trust-held 
 estates. And so the poor ’Squire found that his safest 
 way was to swallow all this down again. 
 
 38. The next is a still bigger mass for poor ’Squire 
 Ruggles to get back down his throat. He has been, in 
 the sentences immediately preceding what I am now 
 about to quote, speaking of the turbulent times (from 
 Henry V. to Henry VIII., and the still more turbulent 
 in and after this last reign) which caused the above- 
 mentioned claim of the poor to lie dormant. Then he 
 goes on in the words which I am just about to quote, 
 and which words the poor ’Squire has wholly sunk in 
 his second edition:—“No wonder, that” [during the 
 turbulent times, and after the Reformation,] “ these 
 claims should have remained dormant, but it. by no 
 means follows, as a consequence, that because such 
 rights of charity as these, owing to the rough and un¬ 
 settled circumstances of the times, were dormant, they 
 should become extinct, especially when so large a por¬ 
 tion of the revenue still remained to the Church; the 
 possessors of which, however charitable in their doc¬ 
 trines, by DEGREES WITHDREW THE RIGHTFUL AND AC¬ 
 CUSTOMED PROPORTION OF THEIR ESTATES FROM THE RE¬ 
 PAIR OF CHURCHES AND THE MAINTENANCE OF THE POOR J 
 
 and although they still presided in our high courts of 
 conscience, and through the ensuing century gave vs 
 chancellors, were, notwithstanding, very careful how 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 2 ? 
 
 
 they permitted such a claim to be established over the 
 estates of the dissolved monasteries: knowing that 
 their own possessions were held by the same tenure, 
 given, at first, for the same purposes, and liable to si¬ 
 milar trusts.”—No wonder that fclie ’Squire’s “princi¬ 
 ples” as a friend to the hierarchy, were somewhat 
 “called in question.” No wonder that he was com¬ 
 pelled to swallow these words. 
 
 39. Having told us, that the claims, though they had 
 been dormant, were not extinguished, he proceeded to 
 prove, that the right still existed in 1793, as good as it 
 was, as complete as it was, in the 12th or 14th century, 
 never having been weakened by any positive law. The 
 following is the passage; most excellent it is ; and it 
 is unnecessary for me to add, that it was left out of the 
 Second edition.—“We all know, that a claim to the 
 third or fourth part of the ecclesiastical revenue for the 
 benefit of the poor, is nearly vanished in the oblivion 
 of past times ; but a right may remain, although the 
 nse of it has been long neglected. A maxim of law 
 prevails in ecclesiastical rights, nullum tempus occurrit 
 ecclesia ; the poor are a part of the Church ; the pos¬ 
 sessions of the Church are the possessions of the poor; 
 the revenues have been so styled by the fathers of the 
 Church; they were obtained in the name of the poor, 
 for the love of God: are not the poor, therefore, per¬ 
 mitted to claim the benefit of the same maxim ? Is not 
 that the law of the part, which is the law of the whole ? 
 At least there is as much justice in the maxim for the 
 one, as for the other; therefore, nullum tempus occur¬ 
 rit pauperibus. If positive ordinances of the state have 
 not destroyed this right, no length of time should be 
 allowed to weaken it. Let those who doubt the truth 
 of these assertions, find, if they can, an affirmative in¬ 
 junction, that the Church should hold its revenues free 
 and clear of those trusts, for the benefit of the poor, 
 which were created by the donors, when they gave 
 their lands and tithes for eleemosynary purposes; no 
 such discharge is to be seen in the Acts of Parliament 
 in the 27 and 31 Henry VIII., which empowered the 
 crown to alienate the possessions of the monasteries; 
 
28 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 those, therefore, who are possessed of estates, which 
 were formerly monastic, held them quod hoc, subject 
 to the same equitable claim.”—Alas ! for poor Jus¬ 
 tice Ruggles ! No wonder, good God ! that his “ prin¬ 
 ciples, as a friend to the hierarchy, were somewhat 
 called in question.” However, here we have law, not 
 only equity, but law also, for going with a demand, if 
 we chose it, on the holders of Abbey-lands for a part, 
 at least, of their revenues! 
 
 40. One more extract shall finish ; and a pretty com 
 plete finish it is : for, it contains nothing short of a pro¬ 
 position, to take away from all holders of what is, or 
 what ever was, ecclesiastical property, a full fourth part 
 of the net annual profits of such property! Not a word, 
 not a breath of this, in the ’Squire’s second edition! 
 “ Mum !” says the ’Squire; but I have found out the 
 first edition; and in that the ’Squire shall now be heard. 
 —“ In any future revisal of the laws, respecting the 
 poor, their maintenance, employment, and relief, it may 
 be worth the attention of the legislature to call to mind 
 for w r hat purposes the ecclesiastical revenues of the 
 kingdom were originally granted, to inquire whether 
 they are employed in those purposes ; to investigate 
 the fact,- on what trusts and on account of what duties, 
 the clergy originally received the clerical estates ; and 
 to ask whether those duties and those trusts are now 
 fulfilled ? and when they are convinced of the purposes 
 for which those estates were originally granted, and 
 can find no positive law to abrogate those purposes, 
 and perceive that the poor stand as much in need of 
 the performance of those duties, as they did when the 
 estates were first granted to the Church ; the principle 
 on which the legislature should proceed is manifest. I 
 am aware of the nature of such investigations, and fully 
 sensible that no man can expect, in those whose per¬ 
 formances of the duties, for which they have received 
 their estates, is challenged and brought to the test, a 
 favourable audience, nor expect from them a candid 
 interpretation of the motives which instigate to the in¬ 
 quiry; but be that as it may; the present situation of 
 the poor; their wretched state; their increasing misery; 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 29 
 
 the increasing burthen upon the people for their main¬ 
 tenance ; these warrant the inquiry; the inquiry brings 
 to light the evidence; the deductions are the conse¬ 
 quence of a free and candid use of the reasoning facul¬ 
 ties ; if any error lie either in fact or argument, candour 
 requires an explanation from those who conceive that 
 there is the least intention in the writer to mislead the 
 judgment of the public; which explanation will be 
 thankfully received; as it will, nevertheless, tend to 
 establish one great object of this investigation, that is 
 truth. Assuming, therefore, the foregoing state of the 
 matter as fact, would it be a hard compromise with the 
 possessors of ecclesiastical estates, that those in the 
 possession of lay patrons, on whom no parochial duty 
 is incumbent, should, after a medium of the poor rates 
 has been taken throughout the kingdom for the last 
 three years, bear the increased expense of the mainte¬ 
 nance of the poor alone, until the rate upon their eccle¬ 
 siastical estates amount to one fourth of the net annual 
 receipt of their profits, before the lay estates be further 
 encumbered; and that the clergy stajtfhl be rated in the 
 same proportion?”—Not one word ora'll this in the se¬ 
 cond edition! 
 
 41. These opinions, doctrines, and especially, this last. 
 proposition, to take away a fourth part of the revenues 
 even of the lay impropriators and from the abbey-land 
 holders, as well as from the parsons and bishops, must 
 have obtained for, and secured to, poor ’Squire Ruggles 
 a comfortable time of it! This book came out just 
 before high Anti-Jacobin times, when it was pretty 
 nearly as much as a man’s life was worth to express a 
 doubt of the excellence of the Church establishment. 
 The Church property and all private estates in general 
 had been confiscated, or nearly so, together, in France ; 
 plunder, guillotining, burning of nobles’ houses, putting 
 royal persons in prison, and, finally, to death : all these 
 had, in France, come along with, in company with, a 
 taking away of tithes. “ Lpok you there !” said our 
 parsons: “ see the dreadful consequences of touching 
 tithes ! If you touch tithes, you see, plunder, murder, 
 house-burning and king-killing, and atheism must fol • 
 
30 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 low! They must all follow, if you touch tithes,” 
 This was the cry of the parsons, throughout the whole 
 of this then deluded country. Every one was called 
 an enemy of God as well as of the King, if he but hinted 
 a doubt of the wisdom of suffering this Church clergy 
 to swallow up so many millions a year. In this state 
 of things, the arrogance of the parsons was beyond de¬ 
 scription. They were as active as they were arrogant. 
 And, at a time when a man dared hardly speak his 
 mind in private conversation, if his sentiments were at 
 all hostile to the parsons, judge, reader, of the life that 
 poor Justice Ruggles must have led, until he publicly, 
 in a second edition, published his recantation, and in 
 the face of the nation, did as good as do penance for 
 his sins against Tom Cranmer’s and Old Betsey’s 
 Church “ as by law established.” Judge of the life 
 that he must have led, at a time, when not to bow to 
 the earth before a Church parson, was to run a risk of 
 being deemed an atheist and a jacobin, and when such 
 deeming had its practical effects always at hand, ready 
 for the victim. As to tradesmen and farmers, they 
 dared not open their mouths to speak of a parson in 
 any terms but those of positive praise. It was during 
 this “ reign of terror,” real reign of terror, much more 
 real than it ever was in France, that poor ’Squire Rug¬ 
 gles recanted ! It is very curious to observe the effect 
 of the reign of terror in this case. The ’Squire wrote 
 the matter of his book in 1792, and published it in a 
 periodical work, called the “ Annals op Agriculture.” 
 He published the first edition, in the book-shape, very 
 early in 1793. Now, observe, the war against France 
 was not begun when this edition must have been in 
 the press. So that the reign of terror had not com¬ 
 menced, and could not have been anticipated, when 
 this first edition, with all the above-quoted passages in 
 it, went to the press from the hands of Mr. Ruggles. 
 But when the second edition went to the press, the 
 reign of terror was in full swing ; the Act of Habeas 
 Corpus was suspended ; and there was an Act to em¬ 
 power the Ministers to imprison, just where and when 
 they pleased, any body (’Squires not excepted) that 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 31 
 
 they might suspect of treasonable practices i No 
 wonder, therefore, that Mr. Ruggles changed his tone, 
 recanted, and expunged the passages which were of¬ 
 fensive to the parsons, who now saw plenty of barracks 
 and German troops in the country, and who, to use 
 their own phraseology, made the “ enemies of social 
 order and our holy religion” shake in their shoes. 
 
 42. Without stopping here to congratulate my readers 
 (which, had I room, I would, in the strongest and 
 fullest terms that our language admits of) on the change 
 which thirty years of war and borrowing money have 
 produced relative to the parsons; without stopping to 
 congratulate my readers on the amazing change in the 
 minds of the people, relative to these same Church par¬ 
 sons, I now proceed again to ask, what reason is there 
 that this great mass of property, now used solely by the 
 clergy, should not be applied to some other public pur¬ 
 pose ; and, again I come (after my long but most useful 
 digression relating to Mr. Ruggles ;) again I come, 
 to that class of property, which is in the hands of the 
 common parsons, or parish clergy. This class of pro- 
 
 a consists of several sorts, tithes, great and small, 
 , glebes, tithes in money, parsonage-houses and 
 gardens, compulsory offerings, compulsory fees. These, 
 like all other religious property, whether secular or re¬ 
 gular, were made, granted, or established, in trust. 
 The objects, that they were intended to effect, were, 
 to make a sure provision for the poor, to build, repair, 
 and ornament churches, to keep hospitality for the 
 stranger, and to support unmarried priests, to be the 
 personal friends, comforters, advisers, admonishers of 
 all their parishioners ; and, particularly, to teach all the 
 children of the parish their moral and religious duties: 
 and that, too, not by merely the reading of prayers to 
 them and the reading of what are called sermons to 
 them from the desk, or pulpit; but by personal, indi¬ 
 vidual teaching, the church being, at certain appointed 
 times of very frequent occurrence, a real religious and 
 moral school. Are these objects now effected by the 
 means of these several sorts of parish-church property ? 
 Will any man say, that any one of these objects is now 
 
32 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 effected by the parish clergy' 15 / Will any man say, that 
 any one of these objects is now effected, or attempted 
 to be effected, by means for instance, of the 2s. 9 d. in 
 the pound, which the citizens of London pay, for tithe, 
 on the rack-rent of their houses ? When that tithe 
 was settled, there were no more poor-rates, no church- 
 rates ; and the poor and church were, of course, to be 
 maintained out of this 2s. 9 d. in the pound; and. as 
 Mr. Ruggles most justly observes, there never has been 
 any law passed to release the city-clergy of this claim 
 on the tithes. 
 
 43. Besides, as to the public utility of the thing, it 
 is perfectly notorious, that there are now about forty 
 different religions, all professing to be founded on the 
 Bible ; it is equally notorious, that a very small propor¬ 
 tion of the people, even in England and Wales, go to 
 the Established Church, and that in Ireland, there is 
 not above one person out of seven that goes to that 
 Church. In the Hampshire list of persons taking out 
 game certificates for 1825, there was one parson out of 
 every thirteen persons; so that, if this were the case 
 generally, a thirteenth part of all the sportsmen in 
 England consisted of parsons ^tlone. It is notorious, 
 that there is a very large part of the parishes, even in 
 the finest counties in England, in which the parsonage- 
 houses have been suffered to fall down and totally dis¬ 
 appear ; and it is equally notorious, that, in more than 
 one half of the parishes, there are no houses that the 
 parsons deem fit for them to live in, while, at the very 
 same time, large, even enormous, sums of money have 
 .been voted out of the taxes for the u relief of the poor 
 clergy of the Church of England.” It is notorious, that, 
 in numerous parishes, the churches have been suf¬ 
 fered to tumble down, and to leave scarcely a trace be¬ 
 hind, while the tithes do, nevertheless, continue to be 
 most rigidly exacted by the parsons. It is notorious 
 that many of the parsons have several livings ; and 
 that many receive the tithes for years together, without 
 ever setting their eyes on the parish. It is notorious, 
 that a considerable part of the parish-parsons are, at the 
 same time, colonels, captains, or subalterns, in the 
 
army, or navy, and that they continue to receive half¬ 
 pay as such officers, though the half-pay is held, by the 
 Government, to be a retaining fee for future service, 
 and though the law forbids these men ever to be mili¬ 
 tary or naval officers again. Lastly, (for the enumera¬ 
 tion would never end,) it is notorious that a large part 
 of txiese parsons are Justices of the Peace, and are, at 
 the same time, rectors or vicars of several parishes 
 each. 
 
 44. It being manifest, then, that the revenues re¬ 
 ceived by these persons are not applied as they for¬ 
 merly were, and that they are not applied to any bene¬ 
 ficial public purpose, we must determine that they 
 ought to be otherwise applied ; that they ought to be 
 applied to some really useful public purpose. To what 
 public purpose I will speak of by and by, and also of 
 the manner and degree of the alienation, or subtraction. 
 
 45. Next come the enormous Revenues of the 
 Bishops, several of whom have died, of late years, each 
 leaving personal property to an amount exceeding two 
 hundred thousand pounds, after having lived in the 
 style of princes. Will any man say, that this ought to 
 be, and that, at the same time that these men’s gains 
 and accumulations are thus going on, the people at 
 large ought to see one million six hundred thousand 
 pounds of the money raised on them, taken from them, 
 in taxes, or out of public loans, voted away for the 
 
 “ relief ot the poor clergy of this same church ?” Will * 
 any man say, that this ought to be? Will any man 
 say it, let him be who or what he may ? 
 
 46. As to the Deans and Chapters, of what use are 
 they to the nation ? As far as I have ever heard, it is 
 not even pretended that they perform any duty, any ser¬ 
 vices at all to the public, to either king or people : and, . 
 besides, the persons who receive the revenues of the 
 Cathedral churches, have generally, if not always, a 
 parish-living besides, at many miles’ distance, and, 
 sometimes, two or three such livings '. Yet, as this 
 Second Volume of my work will show, the Chapters 
 have immense estates. And is there a man on earth, 
 except he be one who gains by the thing, who will say, 
 
34 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 that the nation’s estates ought thus to be used ? Will 
 even Sir James Graham say, that the fundholder, who 
 has lent his money to those, who, in fact, enjoy the 
 greater part of these and all such like estates ; will even 
 Sir James Graham say, that a farthing of interest ought 
 to be deducted from the fundholder, while there is any 
 part of this public property unapplied to the liquidation 
 of the debt due to him ! 
 
 47. The Colleges present us with another immense 
 mass of public property, from which the parsonS and 
 the aristocracy alone derive, or can, under the present 
 regulations, derive any possible advantage. The es¬ 
 tates of these Colleges are very great in worth, and, of 
 course, in yearly amount. This amount is divided 
 amongst parsons, who are the schoolmasters to the aris¬ 
 tocracy ! As to the nation at large, it can have no 
 share in the benefit produced by these estates, seeing, 
 that the scholars are admitted only on such terms as 
 must effectually shut out all the middle and working 
 classes. And, are we, then, going to back the men, 
 who would strip our neighbours, the fundholders, while 
 these estates remain to be used for the exclusive bene¬ 
 fit of the aristocracy and their schoolmasters ? These 
 estates, like all those which are held by the rest of the 
 clergy, are public property ; as such they may be dealt 
 with by the King and Parliament. It would be hypo¬ 
 crisy, calling for the punishment of the cat o’nine tails, 
 to pretend that this great mass of public property, or, 
 that the whole of the Church Establishment, all taken 
 together, is of any use to the public, as it is now em¬ 
 ployed. It is a large part of the property of the whole 
 country, divided amongst, and enjoyed exclusively by, 
 the aristocracy. That is the real fact. The Bishop- 
 ricks, the Parish-livings, the Deanships, the Stalls, the 
 Fellowships, are, in fact, all in their gift. The pro¬ 
 perty is, in short, the public’s in right and in name, 
 and the aristocracy’s in possession and enjoyment. 
 And, as to its being necessary for the religious instruc¬ 
 tion of the people, that is the very thing that I have 
 showed to be false, in the very first Paragraph of the 
 first volume of this work to which I beg the reader 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 35 
 
 to turn, if he have it not in his recollection. In short, 
 this is a great and enormous mass of public property, 
 now enjoyed by the few; and the time is apparently 
 not far distant, when all men will be convinced of the 
 necessity of applying it to purposes of a really public 
 nature, or, in one word, to the liquidation of part of the 
 Debt. 
 
 48. With regard to the manner of withdrawing this 
 public property from the control that it is at present 
 under, the means would be an Act of Parliament, and, 
 provided the provisions of the Act were effectual, the 
 manner might be as mild as the parsons themselves 
 could have demanded, even in “ Anti-Jacobin” times, 
 when the workings of our avenging friend, the Deet, 
 were not perceived. The degree would be a matter 
 of more difficulty ; or, I sliould say, it would require 
 a little more thought. There are two opinions with 
 respect to ne w regulations $ the one is, that there 
 ought to remain no Church-establishment at all, but 
 that each sect, or sort, ought to be left to provide for its 
 own religious instructers. The other is, that there 
 ought to be an establishment upon an almost apostoli¬ 
 cal allowance. 1 am for the former ; because, as long 
 as there is an establishment, making a part of the state, 
 there must always be a contest ^oing on amongst the 
 divers sects for a preference of some kind or other. 
 Before, however, we can say, what the degree of aliena¬ 
 tion or subtraction ought to be, we must know which 
 of these two changes would be adopted. But, one 
 thing I am fixed on, and that is, that I, for my own 
 part, would never join in any petition to king or parlia¬ 
 ment, for any new modelling or any alienation, or sub¬ 
 traction, of these public revenues, if such petition 
 stopped short of taking, and applying to public purposes, 
 nine-tenths of these revenues, taken as a whole. 
 
 49. If any one should be disposed to characterize 
 such a deduction as harsh, I here, before-hand, beg 
 leave to observe to him, that I have no desire to see 
 any deduction at ail, if the nation can continue to pay 
 the interest of the Debt in full and in gold of standard 
 weight and fineness. I look upon this immense mass 
 
36 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 of public property as enjoyed almost exclusively by the 
 aristocracy and its immediate dependants. I do not 
 like this; but, for me, let it still be thus, if the fund- 
 holders can continue to be paid as I have just stated. 
 But, is there a man in the world, who will not say, that 
 every shilling’s worth of public property ought to be 
 applied to the payment of the Debt, before a thought 
 be entertained of taking from those who have lent their 
 money, any portion of their right to a demand of pay¬ 
 ment ? We have seen, that Mr. Ruggles insists on 
 the right, the legal right, of the nation, to demand, 
 that the Abbey-lands, that is, that all property seized 
 and granted away by the “ Reformation” sovereigns 
 and Parliaments, whether it consist of lay impropria¬ 
 tions, Abbey-lands, or what not, though now in the 
 hands of lay persons, and deemed private property ; we 
 have seen, that he, who was a landowner, a Justice, 
 and, I believe, a lawyer, insists, that a part of even this 
 property could be legally, and might be justly, applied 
 to the public purpose of relieving the poor. Now, as 
 for me, I never wish to see proposed any measure that 
 shall touch this description of property, which may now 
 fairly be called private property. But, is not a man’s 
 stock-certificate; is not that private property also ? 
 Has he not, to a certainty, given his money for it ? 
 Therefore, though God forbid the necessity should 
 arise, I have no hesitation in saying, that I would rather 
 see even the lay-impropriations and the abbey-lands re¬ 
 sumed by Act of Parliament, than see an Act of Par¬ 
 liament making a great deduction from the property of 
 the fundholder; and most assuredly, I would much 
 rather see a resumption of grants by the Crown of the 
 lands and houses and mines and other property, which 
 the Crown has granted away since the reign of Henry 
 VIII., out of the ancient crown estate ; and, as we al¬ 
 ways ought to bear in mind, which granting away has 
 been the cause of that continual and copious drain, the 
 Civil List. But of all the horrible things in this world, 
 would not the most horrible be, to borrow £1,600,000 to 
 make a present of to the parsons of the Church ; and, 
 to reduce the interest of the Debt; that is to say, to take 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 37 
 
 away a part of the property of the fundholder, who 
 lent the money thus made a present of; to take, I say, 
 part of his property away while the clergy were suf¬ 
 fered to keep the £1,600,000 ! Observe, that, during 
 the years, during all the years, that the Parliament 
 was making the Church clergy a present of £100,000 a 
 year, the making of loans was going on : so that, this 
 £100,000 a year, came out of the loans: it was borrowed 
 money; the lender is to be paid his interest: and, will 
 any man say, that it is not most horrible to think of 
 deducting from this interest; to think of doing this on 
 account of the poverty of the state, while the state 
 suffers the clergy to keep this money 1 
 
 50. The thing called Queen Anne’s Bounty, is an 
 annual sum, taken from the people, to be given to the 
 Church parson^, in addition to all their monstrous re¬ 
 venues. What pretty names they give to these things! 
 The Crown had, for part of its income, the tenths and 
 first fruits of the clergy. Queen Anne was the sove¬ 
 reign when this branch of income was granted away 
 from the Crown, in order to augment the value of su§all 
 livings; but, one good turn deserves another ; such 
 “ generosity” in the Queen merited a return ; but, alas ! 
 the people had to make the return; and, accordingly, 
 they have had to pay more to the Civil List ever since, 
 on account of this “Bounty” than the “Bounty” itself 
 amounts to. However, here is another great annual 
 sum (in addition to the tithes and all the other things 
 that we have before seen) going from the pockets of 
 the people into those of the clergy. 
 
 51. Here, again, we have another effect of the Pro¬ 
 testant “ Reformation.” Before that event there was 
 no Civil List. Poor-rates, Civil List, Queen Anne’s 
 Bounty, Septennial Bill, National Debt ; all, yea all, 
 are the fruit of the event called “ the Reformation 
 and, though the rest might, or may be overcome, the 
 Debt cannot, \«lthout making a change in that Pro¬ 
 testant Church, to establish which on the ruins of the 
 Catholic Church, the debt was made! All history, 
 though full of instances of retribution, does'not, I ve¬ 
 rily believe, throughout its thousands of volumes, fur- 
 
39 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 nish us with one so complete, so striking, and reading 
 to mankind so tremendous a lesson as this. Here, at 
 this moment, is England, famed, during fifty ages, for 
 her liberties and her laws; but, still more famed for 
 the happiness of her people, and the plenty in which 
 they lived: here she is, and here she has been for 
 years, avowedly in deep distress, engaged in contri¬ 
 vances for getting rid of her people, who are petition¬ 
 ing to be transported from their native land, in the 
 hope of mending their miserable lot! Here she is, co¬ 
 vered with the disgrace of ten times the gaol-room that 
 was formerly necessary, and with that of a regulation, 
 which allots to the convicted felon in her gaols more 
 and better food and raiment than to the honest labour¬ 
 ing man in her woods and fields ! And, what is the 
 cause of this? The Debt is the sole cause ; for that 
 renders monstrous taxes necessary ; they render a great 
 standing army necessary; so that it is the Debt, and 
 that alone, which has made England the most degraded 
 and miserable of countries, Ireland always excepted. 
 And what caused the Debt ? An Act of Parliament for 
 the making of loans and paper-money. And for what 
 were loans and paper-money made? Why, the very 
 act itself declares, that they were made for the purposes 
 of waging a war, in order u to keep out Popery, and to 
 preserve the Protestant Church as by law established 
 so that the Debt is an invention and institution as purely 
 Protestant as half-pay parsons are, or as is the tread¬ 
 mill itself. And, at last, that Debt, that Protestant 
 Debt, which was created for the declared, nay, Jhe 
 boasted, purpose of preserving this Church, now threat¬ 
 ens this very Church with destruction; now fixes its 
 eyes on the property of that Church as the first thing 
 to fly to in case of necessity; and that such necessity 
 will and must arise, and is even now at hand, where 
 is the man of sense who does not believe ? And, where 
 is the just man who will not say, that those who have 
 lent their money for the waging of wars to ct keep out 
 Popery,” ought not to be bilked of one farthing of their 
 demand, while there is left to the Protestant clergy a 
 single ear of wheat, or a single blade of grass ? 
 
PROTESTANT REFORMATION. 
 
 39 
 
 52. Here I conclude. I have (in the first Volume) 
 given a history of^the manner in which Church pro¬ 
 perty had been deaK with heretofore. In the second 
 Volume I give an account of the property, show the 
 worth of it, and who has it. In this Introduction, I 
 have endeavoured to show, that it is just and reason¬ 
 able, that the immense mass which still continues to 
 be public property, ought to be dealt with again, and 
 legally applied to purposes really public; and, as a re¬ 
 ward for all the labour I have bestowed, I am quite sa¬ 
 tisfied with the firm belief, that the day is not far off, 
 when the knowledge that I have communicated, and 
 when the principles that I have taught, relative to this 
 great subject, will be adopted by persons in authority, 
 
 and acted upon to their full extent. 
 
 Here I had signed my name and was about to put the 
 date. It was on its way from my mind to my hand, 
 when I stopped my hand all at once and exclaimed: 
 “ Good God ! the ninth of July,! the anniversary of my 
 sentence of two years’ imprisonment in a felon’s gaol, 
 with a fine of a thousand pounds to the King, and, at 
 the end of the two ye^.rs, with seven years’ bail, myself 
 in three thousand pounds and two sureties in a thou¬ 
 sand pounds each; and all this monstrous punishment 
 for having expressed my indignation at Englishmen 
 having been flogged, in the heart of England, under a 
 guard of German troops! Good God !” exclaimed I 
 again ; “ What! am I, on the anniversary of that day, 
 which called forth the exultation of the Hampshire 
 parsons, who (though I had never committed any of¬ 
 fence, in private life, against any one of them) crowed 
 out aloud in the fulness of their joy, 1 Ha! he’s gone for 
 ever! He will never trouble us any more !’ and who, 
 in a spirit truly characteristic of their corps, actually 
 had, as a standing toast, c Disgrace to the Memory of 
 Cobbett.’—What!” exclaimed I again, “and am I, on 
 the anniversary of that very day, putting the finishing 
 hand ; yea, sending from under my fingers to the press, 
 the last, the very last words, the completing words, ihe 
 closing point, of a work, which doqs the Job for them 
 and for all their tribe, of the former part of which 
 
40 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 work, I, myself, have sold forty thousand copies, con¬ 
 taining six hundred and forty thousand Numbers; and 
 which work is now sold in English, in three Stereo¬ 
 typed Editions in the United States of America ; which 
 work has been published at Madrid and at New York 
 m Spanish, at Paris, Geneva and Alost in French , at 
 Cologne in German , and at Rome in Italian ; and all 
 this took place just about sixteen years after these 
 Hampshire parsons had taken for a standing toast: 
 ‘ Disgrace to the Memory of Cobbett!’ ” And, then, 
 feeling health and vigour in every vein and in every 
 nerve; seeing lying before me, manuscript (equal to 
 twenty pages of print) written by me this very day ; 
 knowing the effects, which, in the end, that manuscript 
 must have on these parsons, and the great good that it 
 must do to the nation; reflecting, feeling, seeing, know¬ 
 ing, thus it is, that I, in justice to our pious, sincere, 
 brave, and wise forefathers, and in compassion to my 
 suffering countrymen, and to the children of us all, 
 send this little volume forth to the world. 
 
 Wm. cobbett 
 
 Kensington, 9lh July, 1827. 
 
LIST 
 
 OF 
 
 ABBEYS, PRIORIES, &c. 
 
 BEDFORD (County.) 
 
 At Bedford. An Hospital of St. Leonard’s Hospi¬ 
 talers, founded in the reign of Edward IV., by a towns¬ 
 man, the yearly revenue of which was £16 6s. 8 d. in 
 26 Henry VIII.; now worth £326 13s. 4 d. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded by Mabilea de 
 Plateshull, in the reign Edward II., valued yearly 
 at £5, now worth £100;* granted, 31 Hen. VIII., 
 to John Gostwyke. 
 
 At Biggleswade. A Chantry; revenue £7, now 
 worth £140. 
 
 At Bissemede. A Priory of Augustine Canons, found¬ 
 ed by Hugh Beauchamp, in the reign of Henry II.: 
 annual revenue, £81 13s. 5J-cZ., now worth £1,623 9s. 
 2d. •; granted, 29 Hen. VIII., to Sir William Gascoigne. 
 
 At Caldwell. An Augustine Priory, founded in the 
 reign of John, by Robert of Houghton. Revenue £148 
 15s. 10cZ., now worth £2,975 16s. 8d .; granted, 5 Eli¬ 
 zabeth, to Thomas Leigh. 
 
 At Chicksand. A Priory of Nuns of St. Gilbert, 
 founded, in the year 1150, by Pain de Beauchamp and 
 his wife. Yearly value, £230 3s. 4 hi., now worth 
 £4,603 7s. Qd. Granted, 31 Hen. VIII., to R. Snow. 
 
 * All the calculations in this work are in English money, but 
 may be converted into United States’ money by reckoning 4s. 
 6 d. to the dollar, and adding eight per cent thereto, which is the 
 usual rate of exchange. This makes the pound sterling about 
 $4.80. Thus as one pound sterling is $4.80: lOOh is $480— Am. Ed, 
 
 i 
 
42 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Dunstable. A Priory of Augustine Canons, 
 founded by Henry I. Yearly value ,£402 145. 7■£(/., 
 now worth £8,054 125. G d. Granted to Sir Leonard 
 Chamberlayne. 
 
 At Eaton. A College, or Guild. Yearly value £7 
 165. now worth £156. 
 
 At Elstow. An Abbey of Benedictine Nuns, found¬ 
 ed by Judith, niece to the Conqueror, and wife to Wal- 
 theof, Earl of Huntington. Yearly value £325 25. l^d., 
 now worth £6,502 2s. 6 d. Granted, 7 Edward VI., to 
 Sir Humphrey Radcliff. 
 
 At Farle. An Hospital, founded by Hen. II. Grant¬ 
 ed, 26 Hen. VIII., to the Provost and Fellows of Cam¬ 
 bridge College. 
 
 At Grovesbury. Priory of Aliens, whose posses¬ 
 sions still remain. Revenue uncertain. 
 
 At Harwood. A Priory of Augustine Nuns, founded, 
 in the reign of Stephen, by Sampson Le Forte. Yearly 
 value £47 35. 2d., now worth £943 35. 4cZ. Granted to 
 William Lord Parr, 35 Henry VIII. 
 
 At Melcheurn, or Mechelburn. A Preceptory of 
 Knights Hospitalers, with a Manor and a Church, set¬ 
 tled by Lady Alice, or Adelize, de Claremonte, Countess 
 of Pembroke, in the reign of Henry I. The Lands be¬ 
 longing to this Preceptory were valued at £241 95.10 d., 
 now worth £4,829 165. 8 d.) granted, 3 Edward VI., 
 to John Earl of Bedford. 
 
 At Mergate, or Market-street. A Nunnery of 
 Benedictine Nuns, founded in a wood, near this place, 
 in the parish of Caddington, by Ralph, the Dean and 
 Chapter of St. Paul’s, London, in the year 1145. Va¬ 
 lued, 26 Henry VIII., at £143 I85. 3 d\ now worth 
 £2,878 5s. Granted, 2 Edward VI., to George Fer¬ 
 rers. 
 
 At Newenham, near Bedford. A Monastery of Au¬ 
 gustine Canons, founded in the reign of Henry II., by 
 Simon Beauchamp. Yearly revenue £343 15 5 . 5d., 
 
COUNTY OF BERKS. 43 
 
 now worth £6,875 85 . 4 d .; granted, 32 Henry VIII., 
 to Urian Brereton. 
 
 At Northwell, Northill, or Norrell. A Collegiate 
 Church, founded, 6 Henry IV., by Sir Gerard Bray- 
 brook, Knt., Thos. Pevre, John Harvey, John Ward, 
 Edm. Hampden, and John Hertshorne, for the souls of 
 Sir John Traylly and son. Yearly value at the disso¬ 
 lution, £61 5s. 5d., now worth £1.225 85 . 4 d.; granted, 
 2 Edwartl VI., to William Fitzwilliam. 
 
 At Warden. An Abbey of Cistercian Monks, found¬ 
 ed, in the year 1135, by Walter Espec. Yearly value 
 £442 11s. lid., now worth £8,851 18s. 4d .; surren¬ 
 dered, by the Abbot and fourteen Monks, December 
 4, 1538. 
 
 At Woburn. A Cistercian Abbey, founded near this 
 place, in the year 1145, by Hugh de Bolebec. Valued 
 at £430 13s. 11 ^d., now worth £S,613 19s. 2d .; grant¬ 
 ed, 1 Edward VI., to John Lord Russell. 
 
 BERKS (County.) 
 
 At Abingdon. Here was an Abbey of Benedictine 
 Monks, 500 in number, in the time of the Ancient Bri¬ 
 tons, where Constantine the Great is said to have been 
 educated; it was destroyed by the Danes, A. D. 955; 
 but afterwards rebuilt by the Abbot Ethelwold, through 
 the bounty of King Edred and King Edgar. Valued, 
 at the dissolution, at £2,042 2s. 8 -fcZ. yearly, now worth 
 £40,842 14s. 2cZ.; granted, 1 Edw. VI. to Sir Thomas 
 Seymour; and 5 Edward VI., to Sir Thomas Wroth. 
 
 At Bustlesham. A Priory of Augustine Canons, 
 founded by Hugh de Spencer, Jun., originally for the 
 Knights of St. John of Jerusalem. Valued, at the dis¬ 
 solution, at £661 14s. 9 d. yearly, now worth £13,234 
 15s.; granted, 7 Edward VI., to Sir Edward IJoby. 
 
 At Ciiolsey, near Wallingford. Monastery de- 
 itroyed; founded by King Ethelred, in the year 986. 
 
44 ENGLAND. 
 
 The revenue, at the general dissolution, granted to Sir 
 Francis Englefield. 
 
 At Donington, near Newbury. A Friary, of the 
 Order of the Plessed Trinity, founded 16 Richard II. 
 Valued at £20 16s. 6d., now worth £416 10s. 
 
 At Farendon. A Cistercian Cell was settled here, 
 by some Monks, in the year 1203. The possessions* 
 were granted to Sir Francis Englefield. 
 
 At Hurley. A Priory, or Cell of Benedictine Monks, 
 founded in the reign of William the Conqueror, by 
 Godfrey de Magna Villa. Valued, 26 Henry VIII., at 
 £134 10s. 8ti., now worth £2,690 13s. 4 d.; granted to 
 Leonard Chamberlayne, 36 Henry VIII. 
 
 At Poughely, in the Parish of Chaddleworth. A 
 Priory of Augustine Canons, founded in the year 1160, 
 by Ralph de Chaddleworth. Valued at £71 10s. 7cZ., 
 now worth £1,430 11s. 8d. 
 
 At Reading. In the year 1121, Henry I. founded 
 here an Abbey for 200 Benedictine Monks ; income, at 
 the dissolution, £2,116 3s. 9^cZ., now Avorth £42,323 15s. 
 10 d .; granted, 4 Edward VI., to Edward Duke of So¬ 
 merset. 
 
 A Friary, in the north side of Castle-street, 
 founded in the year 1400. Granted to the Mayor 
 and Burgesses, as a site for a bridewell! 
 
 At Sandleford. A Priory of Augustine Canons, 
 founded in the year 1205, by Jeffrey, Earl of Perch and 
 Maud his wife: value £40 yearly, now worth £200. 
 
 At Siiottesbrooke. A Chantry or College ; founded 
 in the year 1337, by Sir William Trussel, Knt.; valued 
 £33 18s. 8cZ., now worth £678 13s. 4 d .; granted, 2 
 Edward VI., to Thomas and Edward Weldon. 
 
 At Steventon, or Stennington, near Abingdon. 
 An Alien Priory of Monks, founded by the Abbey of 
 Bee, in Normandy, prior to the reign of Hqnry I. 
 
 At Stratfield-say. A Priory of Alien Benedictine 
 
COUNTY OF BUCKINGHAM. 45 
 
 Monks, founded in the year 1170, by Nicholas de 
 Slotevile. 
 
 At Wallingford, or Waring. A Benedictine Cell, 
 founded in the reign of William the Conqueror, by Gil- 
 frid, Abbot of S£ Alban; granted, 38 Henry VIII., to 
 John Norres. * 
 
 A College, endowed before or during the reign 
 of King John, by Edmond, Earl of Cornwall; 
 yearly revenue £147 Ss. 0^-c/., now worth £2,848 
 0.?. 10c/.; granted, 2 Edward VI., to Michael 
 Stanhope and John Bellew. 
 
 BUCKINGHAM (County.) 
 
 At Ankerwyke. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded 
 in the reign of Henry, by Sir Gilbert de Montficet, Knt., 
 and his son ; yearly value £45 14s. 4c/., now worth 
 £914 7s. 8 d. Granted to Lord Windsor, 31 Hen. VIII. 
 and to Sir Thomas Smith, 4 Edward VI. 
 
 At Bittlesden. A Cistercian Abbey, founded here 
 through the bounty of Ernald de Bosco, in the year 
 1147 ; yearly value £142 Is. 3cZ., now worth £2,842 
 5s.; granted, 32 Hen. VIII., to Thomas Wriothesley. 
 
 At Braoewell. A Benedictine Priory, founded in 
 the reign of Stephen, by the Baron of Wolverton; va¬ 
 lued at £53 11s. 2d. yearly, now worth £1,071 3s. 4c/.; 
 granted 34 Henry VIII. to Arthur Longfield. 
 
 At Burnham. An Augustine Nunnery, founded in 
 the year 1265, by Richard, King of the Romans; yearly 
 value £91 5s. ll^-cl., now worth £1,825 19s. 2d., granted, 
 36 Hen. VIII. to William Tyldesly. 
 
 At Esserug, or Askeridge, in the Parish of Pitston. 
 A College of Bonhommes, founded by Edmond, Earl 
 of Cornwall, in the year 1283 ; valued yearly at £447 
 18s. 04c/., now worth £8,958,10 d .; granted, 17 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to John Dudley and John Ayscaugh; it is now 
 the seat of the Duke “of Bridgewater. 
 
46 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Gare, or Gore, in the Parish of Hanslap. A 
 Nunnery, destroyed. 
 
 At Hogshaw. An Hospital of-.he Knights of St. 
 John of Jerusalem, founded about 1180; granted, 35 
 Henry VIII., to Matilda Lane. 
 
 At Lavinden. An Abbey of Premonstratensians, 
 founded and endowed in the reign of Plenry II., by 
 John de Bidun. Yearly revenue £91 85. 34cZ., now 
 worth £1,828 5,9. IOcZ. ; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to 
 Sir Edmond Peckham. 
 
 At Ludgarshall, or Littershall. An Alien Hos¬ 
 pital, founded through the bounty of Henry II. 
 
 At Medmenham, or Mendham. A Cistercian Abbey, 
 founded in the year 1204, by Hugh de Bolebec. Re¬ 
 venue, at the dissolution, £23 17s. 2d .; now worth 
 £477 3s. 4cZ.; granted, 38 Hen. VIII., to Robert Mone, 
 and others. 
 
 At Little Merlow, or Minchin Marlo. A Bene¬ 
 dictine Nunnery, founded by Jeffrey, Lord Spensar, 
 about the year 1244. Yearly revenue, £37 6s. Hr/., 
 now worth £746 18s. 4cZ.; granted, 32 Henry VIII.. to 
 John Titley and E. Restwold. 
 
 At MeursLey, or St. Margaret’s. A Benedictine 
 Nunnery, founded by Plenry de Blcis, Bishop of Win¬ 
 chester, in the year 1160. Here nine Nuns were turned 
 out, and their yearly property, £22 6s. 7c/., now worth 
 £446 11s. 8c/., granted, 29 Hen. VIII., to Sir John 
 Dance. 
 
 At Missenden. An Abbey of Augustine Canons, 
 founded by Sir William de Missenden, in the year 
 1133; yearly value, at the dissolution, £285 15s. 9cZ., 
 now worth £5,715 15s.: granted, 7 Edward VI., tQ^the 
 Duke of Northumberland ; and, 16 Elizabeth, to Robert 
 Earl of Leicester. 
 
 At Newinton-Longaville. A Priory of Foreign 
 Monks, founded in the reign of Hen. T. grafted to the 
 College of Oxford. 
 
COUNTY OF CAMBRIDGE. 
 
 47 
 
 At Noctele, or Nuttley. An Abbey of Augustine 
 Canons, founded in the year 1162, by Walter Giffard, 
 Earl of Buckingham, and Ermangard his Lady ; yearly 
 revenue £495 18s. 5 \d .; now worth £9,918 9s. 2d.; 
 granted, 1 Edward VI., to Sir William Paget. 
 
 At Ravinston. An Augustine Monastery, founded 
 in the reign of Henry III., by the bounty of Peter de 
 Chaseport, Pastor of Ivingho; value yearly £66 13s. 4 d., 
 now worth £1,333 6s. 8 d. j granted, 2 Edward VI., to 
 Sir Francis Bryan. 
 
 At Snellshall. A Benedictine Priory, founded, 10 
 Henry III., by Ralph Mortel; yearly revenue £24, now 
 worth £480 ; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Francis 
 Piggot. 
 
 At Stony Stratford. An Hospital, founded prior 
 to 1240. x 
 
 At Tykeford, or Tickford, near Newport St. Mary. 
 A Priory of Aliens, founded before 1475 ; yearly value 
 £126 17s., now worth £2,537; sold by James I. to 
 Henry Atkins, M. D. 
 
 At Wenge. A Priory of Aliens, bestowed, by Maud 
 the Empress, to the Monastery of St. Nicholas; but 
 granted, by Henry VIII., to Sir Robert Dormer. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE (County.) 
 
 At Anglesey. A Priory of Augustine Canons, found¬ 
 ed by Henry I.; yearly value £149 18s. 6cZ., now worth 
 £2,998 10s.; granted to John Hynde, 30 Henry VIII. 
 
 At Bareham, or Bercham, in the Parish of Lynton. 
 A Priory, founded before the reign of Edward I .; 
 granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Philip Paris, and afterwards 
 to John Millecent, Esq. 
 
 At Barnwell. A Priory, founded in the year 1092, 
 by Picot. a Norman Lord, and his Lady ; yearly value 
 
48 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 £351 15s. 4 d., now worth £7,035 6s. Sd. ; granted, 38 
 Henry VIII., to Antony Brown; and, 6 Edward VI., 
 to Edward Lord Clinton. 
 
 At Cambridge. A Benedictine Cell, founded by 
 John de Cranden, Prior of Ely, in the reign of Richard 
 III.; granted to William Bateman, Bishop of Nor¬ 
 wich 
 
 A Gilbertine Priory, founded prior to the year 
 1291, by the bounty, or gift, of B. fil. Walteri; 
 yearly revenue, £16 16s., now worth £336.; grant¬ 
 ed, 35 Henry VIII., to Edward Elrington and 
 Humphrey Metcalf. 
 
 Catherine Hall, founded and endowed about the 
 year 1474, by Robert Woodlark, D. D.; yearly re¬ 
 venue at the suppression £39 2s. 7 d., now- worth 
 £782 11s. Sd. 
 
 Christ’s College, for twenty-four Scholars in 
 Grammar, founded by William Bingham, in the 
 year 1442, Pastor of St. Zachary, London ; being 
 afterwards augmented by the bounty of others. 
 Yearly revenues at the dissolution, 26 IJenry VIII.. 
 made £190 10s. 10^-cZ., 1 now worth £3,810 i7s. 6 d. 
 
 King’s College, built and endowed in the year 
 1443, by Henry VI.; revenues valued at £751 8s. 
 Id., now worth £15,028 Is. Sd. 
 
 Queen’s College, founded by Margaret of An¬ 
 jou, Queen of Henry VI., about the year 1448; 
 yearly income £230 15s. 2 Jrd., now worth £4,615 
 4s. 2d. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded by Sir Jeffrey 
 Picheford, Knight, before the year 1290; granted, 
 36 Henry VIII., to William Keynsham. 
 
 A Dominican Priory, founded by some pious 
 persons before the year 1275; granted to Edward 
 Elrington and Humphrey Metcalf, 35 Henry VIIL 
 
 A Friary of Mendicant Franciscans, founded by 
 
COUNTY OF CAMBRIDGE. 
 
 49 
 
 the bounty of Edward I. Sold, 38 Henry VIIL, 
 to the Executors of Lady Frances Sidney. 
 
 A Friary of Carmelites, founded by Edward I. 
 and by some noblemen; granted, 36 Henry VIII., 
 to John Eyer. 
 
 At Chateris. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded by 
 Alfwen, wife of Ethelstan, Earl of the East Angles, 
 with the advice and assistance of her brother Ednod, 
 Bishop of Ramsey, in the year 980; yearly revenue 
 £112 35. 6 d., now worth £2,243 10s.; granted, 5 Ed¬ 
 ward VI., to Edward Lord Clinton. 
 
 At Chippenham. An Asylum of Knights Hospital¬ 
 ers, founded, in the year 1184, most bountifully, by 
 William de Mandevill; valued at £33 6s. 8 d. yearly, 
 now worth £666 13s. 4 d .; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to 
 Sir Edward North. 
 
 At Denny. An Abbey of Minor Nuns, founded, 15 
 Edward III., by Mary de St. Paulo, Widow of Ado- 
 marc Earl of Pembroke ; revenues yearly £218 Os. 1 Jrd., 
 now worth £4,360 2s. 6 cl .; granted, 31 Henry VIII., 
 to Edward Elrington. 
 
 At Ely. A great Benedictine Priory and Cathe¬ 
 dral, that had been often destroyed and rebuilt again 
 during the various invasions of the Danes, and other 
 convulsions of the country, were finally rebuilt and 
 richly endowed, in the year 970, by Ethelwold, Bishop 
 of Winchester, through the bounty of King Edgar and 
 others. Revenues of the Cathedral at the dissolution 
 £2,134 18s. 6^cZ., and of the Monastery £1,084 6s. 9 \cL 
 yearly; now worth £42,698 10s. lOd, and £21,686 
 15s. 10<i.; granted in the year 1541. 
 
 An Hospital of Hospitalers, founded here early 
 by a Bishop; yearly revenue £25 5s. 3^-tZ., now 
 worth £505 5s. 10cZ., granted, 4 Elizabeth, to the 
 Master and Fellows of Clare Hall, in Cambridge. 
 
 At Fordham. A Convent of fclilbertine Canons, 
 founded near this town by the Dean of Fordham, in 
 
50 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 the reign of Henry III.; yearly value £46 3.5. S d., now 
 worth £128 13s. 4 d.; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Phi¬ 
 lip Parry. 
 
 At Ikelington. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded in 
 the reign of Henry II., by Aubery de Vere, Earl of 
 Oxford ; yearly value £80 15. 10now worth £1,601 
 175. 6d. ; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to the Bishop of Ely. 
 
 At Iselham. An Alien Priory, founded here at an 
 early period; valued yearly £10 135. 4 d., now worth 
 £213 65. 8 d. 
 
 At Lynton. An Alien Priory. 
 
 At Mirmaud, Marmonde, or Welle. A Gilbertine 
 Priory, founded in the reign of Richard I., by Ralph 
 de Hauvill; valued, 26 Henry VIII., at £13 65. 1 £cZ., 
 yearly, now worth £266 25. 6d. ; granted, 10 Elizabeth, 
 to Percival Bowes and John Mosyer. 
 
 At Shengay, near Wendy. A Preceptory of Knights 
 Hospitalers, endowed, in the year 1140, by Sibylla de 
 Raynes, daughter of the Earl of Montgomery ; valued 
 at £175 4s. 6 d. yearly, now worth £3,504 105.; granted, 
 32 Henry VIII., to Richard Longe. 
 
 At Spinney, in the Parish of Wykes, or Wicken. 
 An Augustine Priory, founded by Sir Hugh de Male- 
 bisse and Beatrix his wife, in the reign of Henry III. ; 
 granted, 36 Henry VIII., to. Sir Edward North. 
 
 4 
 
 At Steresbergh, or Sturbridge, near Cambridge. 
 An Hospital of Lepers, founded prior to the year 1245, 
 under the patronage of the Bishop of Ely ; but granted, 
 36 Henry VIII., to the Mayor and Bailiffs of Cambridge; 
 and, 4 James I., to John Shelbury, and Philip Chewte, 
 Gentleman. 
 
 At Swafam. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded by one 
 of the Bolebec family, before the reign of King John; 
 yearly value £46 IQ5, 8 d., now worth £930 135. 4 d.\ 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to the Protestant Bishop of Ely. 
 
 At Tiiorney. A Benedictine Abbey, founded by 
 
51 
 
 COUNTY OF CHESTER. 
 
 the first Albot of Peterburgh, as early as the time of 
 St. Etheldreda ; yearly value £508 125. 5(2., now worth 
 £10,172 8s. 4(2.; granted, 3 Edward VI.. to John, Earl 
 of Bedford. 
 
 CHESTER ( County.) 
 
 At Baraw. An Hospbal of the Knights of St. John 
 of Jerusalem, founded in the reign of Edward I., by 
 Robert de Bachepuz; yearly value at the dissolution 
 £107 35 . 8<2., now worth £2,140 13s. 4 d. 
 
 At Berkinhead. A Benedictine Priory, founded in 
 the reign of Henry II., by Hamon Massy, Baron of 
 Dunham Massy ; valued at £102 I 65 . 10 d. yearly, now 
 worth £2,056 I 65 . 8 d .; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to 
 Ralph Worseley. 
 
 At Dunbury. A College, founded in the year 1386, 
 by Sir Hugh Calvely, Knight; value £42 2s. 8(2., now 
 worth £842 13s. 4 d. yearly ; sold by Queen Elizabeth, 
 to Thomas Aldersey, London, Merchant Tailor. 
 
 At Chester. A Benedictine Abbey, or Nunnery, 
 founded in the time of the Saxons, but afterwards en¬ 
 larged by Elfleda, Countess of Mercia, and by other 
 benefactors; yearly revenue £1,073 175. 7^(2., now 
 worth £21,477 12s. 6(2.; granted 26 Henry VIII. 
 
 A Benedictine Nunnery, founded in the reign of 
 William the Conqueror, by Randal, Earl of Chester; 
 valued at £99 I 65 . 2(2., now worth £1,996 35 . 4<2.; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Urian Brereton and 
 Son. 
 
 St. John’s College, founded by King Ethelred, 
 in the year 689; yearly income at the dissolution 
 £88 I 65 . 8(2., now worth £1,776 135. 4<2.; granted, 
 4 Elizabeth, to John Fortescue. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, outside the north gate, pos¬ 
 sessing anciently great privileges, and containing 
 
5 2 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 at the dissolution, 26 Henry VIII., a Chaplain and 
 six poor Brethren; yearly income £28 10s. 4 d. } 
 now worth £570 6s. 8 d. 
 
 • A Friary, founded southward of the city, by a 
 Bishop of Chester; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to 
 John Coke. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded in the reign of 
 Henry III.; granted to John Coke. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, founded in the year 1279, by 
 Thomas Stadham, Gentleman ; granted by Henry 
 VIII. to John Coke. 
 
 At Combermere. A Cistercian Abbey, founded in 
 the year 1133, by Hugh de Malbane, Lord of Nant- 
 wich ; yearly value £255, now worth £5,100; granted, 
 32 Henry VIII., to William Cotton, Esq., and now it 
 belongs to Sir Robert Salusbury Cotton. 
 
 At Nantwich. An Hospital anciently founded here 
 held the tithes, which were granted, 6 Elizabeth, to 
 William Grys. 
 
 At Norton. A Priory of Augustine Canons, founded 
 by a Mr. Williams of Chester ; yearly value at the dis¬ 
 solution £258 11s. 8cZ., now worth £5,171 13s. 4cZ.; 
 granted, 37 Henry VIII., to Richard Brook. 
 
 At Pulton. A Cistercian Abbey, founded by Robert, 
 butler to the Earl of Chester, in the year 1153; granted, 
 36 Henry VIII., to William Cotton, Esq. 
 
 At Stanlaw. A Cistercian Abbey, founded by John 
 Constable and Baron Holton of Chester, in the year 
 1172; granted, 7 Edward VI., to Sir Robert Cotton, 
 Knight. 
 
 At Valeroyal. King Edward, in the year 1277, ex¬ 
 pended on building a Monastery here £32,000 ; yearly 
 value at the dissolution £540 6s. 2d., now worth £10,806 
 3s. 4 d .; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Thomas Holcroft. 
 
COUNTY - OF CORNWALL. 
 
 53 
 
 CORNWALL (County.) 
 
 At St. Antony. A Benedictine Cell, founded here 
 us early as Richard’s time; granted, b Elizabeth, to 
 William and John Killigrew. 
 
 At Bodmin. A Priory of Augustine Canons, foupded, 
 in honour of the bones of St. Petroc, that are deposited 
 there, in the year 905; yearly income at the dissolu¬ 
 tion £289 11s. lid, now worth £5,791 18s. 4d ; grant¬ 
 ed, 36 Henry VIII., to Thomas Sternhold. 
 
 At St. Burien. A College, founded by King Athel- 
 stan near the Land’s End, in honour of St. Buriena, a 
 holy woman from Ireland, who had an oratory and was 
 buried here. Yearly income £55 7s. Id, now worth 
 £1,107 Is. 8d; granted to the Duke of Cornwall. 
 
 At German’s. A Collegiate Church, founded in ho¬ 
 nour of St. German, one of the famous French Bishops 
 who came into Britain to oppose the Pelagian heresy, 
 in the year 936; yearly revenue £243 8s., now worth 
 £4,868 ; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Catharine Cham- 
 pernoun, John Ridgway, &c. 
 
 At Helston. An Hospital, founded by a Mr. Kylle- 
 grew, at an early period ; yearly value £14 7s. 4d, now 
 worth £287 6s. 8d 
 
 At St. Karentoc. A College, founded in the reign 
 of Edward the Confessor, in honour of St. Carantocus, 
 disciple of St. Patrick ; yearly value £89 15s. Sd, now 
 worth £1,795 13s. 4d; now in the patronage of John 
 Buller, Esq. 
 
 At Lanachebran. A Cistercian Cell, founded about 
 the Conquest, under the tutelage of St. Achebran; grant¬ 
 ed, 2 Elizabeth, to Francis Earl of Bedford. 
 
 At Launceston. A College of Augustine Canons, 
 founded before the Conquest, about half a mile from 
 this town; yearly revenue £392 11s. 2d, now worth 
 £7,851 3s. 4 a .; granted 26 Henry VIII. 
 
54 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At St. Michael’s Mount. A Priory of Alien Monks, 
 founded in the year 1085, by Edward the Confessor; 
 yearly value £110 125. 0now worth £2,212 lOrf. 
 
 At Penryn, or Glaseney, in the Parish of Gluvias. 
 A College built by the good Bishop of Exeter, Walter 
 Bronescorab, in the year 1270; valued at £205 10$. 6d, 
 now worth £4,110 10s. 
 
 At St. Probus. A College, founded before the Con¬ 
 quest ; yearly income £22 10s., now worth £450; grant¬ 
 ed 26 Henry VIII. 
 
 At St. Syriac. A Cluniac Cell, founded as early as 
 the time of Richard I., granted, 37 Henry VIII., to 
 Laurence Courtney. 
 
 At Treleigh, or Turleigh. A Preceptory of Knights 
 Hospitalers, founded by the bounty of Henry de Pome- 
 rai and Reginald Marsh; yearly value £81 8s. 5d, now 
 worth £1,628 8s. 4d This, among other undisposed 
 possessions, belonged to the Hospitalers, 5 Philip and 
 Mary ; but was granted at their dissolution, 16 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to Henry Wilby and George Blythe. 
 
 At Truro. A Dominican Convent, founded by the 
 Reskiner family, in the reign of Hen. III.; granted, 7 
 Edward VI., to Edward Anglianby. 
 
 At Truwardraith, in the Deanery of Pawder. An 
 Alien Priory of Benedictine Monks, founded in the 
 year 1169, by some Noblemen; yearly value £151 16s. 
 Id, now worth £3,036 Is. 8d; granted, 34 Henry 
 VIII., to Edward Earl of Hertford. 
 
 CUMBERLAND (County.) 
 
 At Armethwait. A Benedictine Nunnery, endowen 
 by William Rufus; yearly value £18 8s. 8d, now 
 worth £368 13s. 4d; granted, 6 Edward VI., to Wil¬ 
 liam Gryme, or Carleil. 
 
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND. 
 
 55 
 
 At St. Bee’s. A Benedictine Cell, or Monastery, 
 founded in the year 650, by Bega, a holy Woman from 
 Ireland. There were a Prioress and six Nuns at the 
 dissolution. Yearly income £149 19s. 6c/., now worth * 
 £2,999 10s.; granted, 7 Edward VI., to Sir Thomas 
 Challoner. 
 
 At Caldre, in Copeland, near Egremond. A Cis¬ 
 tercian Abbey of Monks, founded in the year 1134, by 
 Ranulph, Earl of Chester; income at the dissolution 
 £64 3s. 9(/., now worth £1,283 15s.; granted, 30 Henry 
 VIII., to Thos. Leigh. 
 
 At Carlisle. An Augustine Priory of Monks, and 
 a Nunnery, founded in the year 686; were destroyed in 
 the Danish wars, but rebuilt by William Rufus, and 
 Walter, a Norman Priest. Income £531 4s. 11c/., now 
 worth £10,624 18s. 4 d. 
 
 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, founded by the Ancestors 
 of Richard I. for thirteen Lepers; granted, 33 
 Henry VIII. 
 
 At Graystoke. A Collegiate Church, founded be¬ 
 fore the year 1/59, by William Lord Graystock ; yearly 
 income £82 14s., now worth £1,654; granted, 6 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to William Grice, and Antony Foster. 
 
 At Holm cultram. A Cistercian Abbey, founded 
 by Henry, son to David King of Scotland, in the year 
 1150; income £535 3s. 7c/., now wprth £10,703 12s. 6cL 
 
 At Kirk Oswald. A College of twelve secular 
 Priests, founded, 20 Henry VIII., by Robert Threlkeld ; 
 valued at £78 17s., now worth £1,577; granted, 30 
 Elizabeth, to Edward Downinge, and Miles Doddinge, 
 Esqrs. 
 
 At Lanercost. An Augustine Monastery, founded 
 in the year 1169, by Robert de Villibus, Lord of Gille- 
 Lsland ; yearly value £79 19s., now worth £1,599 $ 
 granted to Thomas Lord Dacre. 
 
 At Setox, alias Lekely. A Benedictine Nunnery, 
 founded by Henry Kirby; yearly income £13 17s„ 4c/., 
 
56 ENGLAND. 
 
 . • 
 
 now worth £277 65 . 8 c?. ; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to 
 Hugh Askue. 
 
 At Wetherall. A Benedictine Cell, founded in the 
 reign of William Rufus, by Ranulph Meschin, Earl of 
 Cumberland ; income £128 5s. 3^-c?., now worth £2,565 
 5s. 10c?.; granted, 33 Henry VIII. 
 
 DERBY (County.) 
 
 At De Bello Capite, near Norton. An Abbey of 
 White Canons, founded in the year 1183, by Robert 
 Lord Alfreton, one of the executioners of the Arch¬ 
 bishop of Canterbury, Thomas a Becket; income £157 
 10s. 2c?., now worth £3,150 3s. 4c?.; granted, 28 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Nicholas Strelly. 
 
 At Brisoll. An Augustine Friary, founded in the 
 reign of Henry III.; income £10 17s. 9c?., now worth 
 £217 15s.; granted, 6 Edward VI., to Henry Duke of 
 Suffolk. 
 
 At Calke. An Augustine Cell, founded in the year 
 1161, by Maud, widow of the Earl of Chester; granted* 
 1 Edward VI., to John Earl of Warwick. 
 
 At Chesterfield. An Hospital of Lepers, founded 
 as early as the reign of Richard I.; suppressed by 
 Henry VIII. 
 
 At Le Dale, in the Deanery of Derby. A Premon- 
 stratensian Abbey, founded in the reign of Henry II., 
 by Sterlo de Grendon; yearly income £144 12s., now 
 worth £2,892; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Francis Poole. 
 
 At Derby. A Cell of Cluniac Monks, founded in 
 the year 1140, by Waltheof; yearly income £10, now 
 worth £200 ; dissolved in the reign of Henry VIII. 
 
 All Saints College ; income £38 14s. now worth 
 £774. 
 
COUNTY OF DERBY. 
 
 57 
 
 A Monastery of Friars (Dominicans;) granted, 
 35 Henry VIIL, to John Hynde. 
 
 At Little Direy, or Darley. An Augustine Friary, 
 founded in the reign of Henry I., by Robert de Ferraris, 
 Earl of Derby ; yearly income £285 9s. 6^-d, now worth 
 £5,709 105. lOd; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Sir Wil¬ 
 liam West. * 
 
 At Greisley, in the Deanery of Repingdon. A Priory 
 of Augustine Canons, founded in the reign of Henry I., 
 by William de Greisley; income £39 135. 8d, now 
 worth £793 135. 4 d .; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Hemv 
 Crutch. 
 
 At King’s Mead, near Derby. A Benedictine Nun¬ 
 nery, founded in the year 1160, by the Abbess of Derby; 
 value £21 185. 8d, now worth £438 135. 4 d .; granted 
 35 Henry VIII., to Francis Earl of Shrewsbury. 
 
 At Repingdon. A Monastery of Augustine Monks 
 stood here in the year 660; destroyed in the Danish 
 Wars, but rebuilt in the year 1172, by Maud, widow of 
 Ranulph, Earl of Chester ; yearly income £167 18s. 2d, 
 now worth £3,358 35. 4d 
 
 At Spittel, on the Peak, between the villages of 
 Hope and Castleton, an Hospital, founded 12 Edward 
 III.; valued 26 Henry VIII., at £2 yearly, now worth 
 £40. 
 
 At Yeveley, or Stede. A Preceptory of Knights 
 Hospitalers, founded in the reign of Richard I., by 
 Ralph le Fun and Sir William Meynill, in the year 
 1268; valued at £107 35.8£d yearly, now worth £2,343 
 145. 2d; granted 35 Henry VIII., to Charles Lord 
 Montjoy. 
 
 DEVON (County.) 
 
 At Axminster. A College, founded by King Ethel- 
 stan, for seven Priests, to pray for the souls of those 
 
ENGLAND. 
 
 08 
 
 who were slain in a battle which he fought against the 
 Danes, at Bremaldown, near this place. 
 
 At Axmouth. An Alien Priory, founded by Richard 
 de Rivers, Earl of Devonshire, in the reign of Henry 
 II. j granted, 6 Edward VI., to Walter Earl. 
 
 At Barnstaple, in the Deanery of Barnstaple. A 
 Cluniac Priory, founded in the reign of William the 
 Conqueror, by Johel, of Totness; yearly value £129 
 15s. 3 j-cl., now worth £2.595 5s. 10 d.; granted, 29 
 Henry VIII., to William Lord Howard. 
 
 At Bcckland, in the Deanery of Tamerton. A Cis¬ 
 tercian Abbey, founded in the year 1278, by Amicia, 
 Countess of Devonshire ; yearly income £341, now 
 worth £6,820 ; granted, 33 Henry VIIL, to Richard 
 Greynfeld. 
 
 At Buckfastre. A Cistercian Abbey founded in 
 the year 1137, by Ethelwerd, son of William Pomerei j 
 income £466 11s. 2 ±d.; now worth £9,331 4s. 2d,: 
 granted, 31 Henry VlII., to Sir Thomas Dennys. 
 
 At Careswell. A Cluniac Cell, founded at some 
 early period; granted, 38 Henry VIII., to John Etherege 
 or Afhrege 
 
 At Chulmeleigb. A College, said to have been 
 founded, before the time of Edward I., by the Lady of 
 the Manor, for seven children, whom she saved from 
 being drowned by their own father, who looked upon 
 himself as unable to maintain them; yearly income 
 £24 8s. 4 d., now worth £488 6s. 8 d. 
 
 At Cornworthy, in the Deanery of Totness. An 
 Augustine Nunnery, founded by the Edgecomb fami¬ 
 ly ; income £63 3s. 1C )d., now worth £1,263 16s. 8c?.; 
 granted, 2 Elizabeth, to Edward Harris and John Wil¬ 
 liams. 
 
 At Crediton, or Kirton, in the Deanery of Kenne. 
 A College, founded in the Saxon times, but underwent 
 afterwards many alterations ; yearly income, at the dis¬ 
 solution, £323 17s. 5}d. } now worth £6,657 9s. 2d. 
 
I 
 
 COUNTY OP DEVON. 59 
 
 yearly; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to Elizabeth Countess 
 of Bath and to Sir Thomas Darcy. 
 
 At Dunkeswell. A Cistercian Abbey, founded in 
 the year 1201, by William Briwere; yearly income 
 £298 11s. 10<2., now worth £5,971 16s. 8 d.\ granted, 
 26 Henry VIII., to John Lord Russell. 
 
 At Exeter. The number of religious houses here 
 suppressed is not known; though, from the celebrity of 
 this city, in the Roman, British, and Saxon times, there 
 is not the least doubt that vast numbers of religious, of 
 all orders, flocked hither. There is particular mention 
 of .three religious houses, within the precincts of the 
 city: first, a Nunnery, which is now the Dean’s house; 
 second, a Monastery, founded by Ethelred, in the year 
 868 ; and the third, a Monastery, founded in the year 
 932, by Ethelstan, and endowed with twenty-six vil¬ 
 lages for its support. The monks repeatedly fled, for 
 fear of the. Danes, but were finally recalled, and settled 
 in more lands and privileges than ever, by King Canute, 
 in the year 1019. 
 
 A Benedictine Priory, founded by William the 
 Conqueror; yearly income £145 12s., now worth 
 £2,912; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Sir Thomas 
 Dennys. 
 
 Boneville’s Hospital, founded in the year 1407, 
 by Sir William Boneville, in Rockslane, for twelve 
 poor people, with the income of fifty marks per 
 annum. This Almshouse was demolished, and 
 the site converted into a garden, and granted to 
 -Newton, Esq. 
 
 St. Mary Magdalene Hospital, founded prior to 
 the year 1163, without the south gate, to Avhich 
 Bishop Bartholomew Iscanus was a benefactor; 
 granted 26 Henry VIII. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded on the north side 
 of the Cathedral Church; granted, by Edward I., 
 to John Lord Russell, now called Bedford house. 
 
60 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded without the south 
 gate, in the reign of Edward I., by Bishop Button; 
 dissolved and granted to Humphrey Rolles. 
 
 At Ford, in the parish of Thorncomb. A Cistercian 
 Abbey, founded in the year 1136, by Richard Fitz 
 Baldwin, Sheriff of Devonshire, and by Andelicia, his 
 sister and heiress; yearly income £381 10s. 6 \d., now 
 worth £7,620. 10s. 10 d .; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to 
 Richard Pollard. 
 
 At Frethelstoke, or Fristoke. An Augustine Fri¬ 
 ary, founded 8 Henry III., by Sir Robert Beauchamp, 
 Knt.; yearly income £127 2s. 4 ^d., now worth £2,542 
 7s. 6d .; granted, 29 Hen. VIII., to Arthur Viscount 
 Lisle. 
 
 At Hertland. An Augustine Monastery, founded, 
 in the reign of Henry II., by Githa, wife to the Earl 
 Godwin; yearly income £306 13s. 24d., now worth 
 £6,133 4s. 2 d.) granted, 37 Hen. VIII., to William 
 Abbot. 
 
 At Legh, or Leye, in the parish of Burlescomb. An 
 Augustine Nunnery, founded, in the reign of Henry II., 
 by Walter Clavell; yearly income £202 15s. 3d., now 
 worth £4,055 5s.; granted, 35 Henry VIIT. to Sir John 
 St. Leger. 
 
 \ 
 
 At Modbury, in the Deanery of Plymton. An Alien 
 Priory, founded, in the reign of Stephen, by Sir Peter 
 sur Dive, in Normandy. 
 
 At Newenham, or Neuham, in the parish of Axmin- 
 ster. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the year 1246, 
 by Reginald de Mohun, Earl of Somerset: income 
 £231 14s. Ad. yearly, now worth £4,634 6s. 8d .; granted, 
 5 Elizabeth, to Thomas Duke of Norfolk. 
 
 At Ottery. A College, founded in the year 1337, 
 by John Gradison, of Exeter; income £303 2s. 9 (L 
 yearly, now worth £6,062 15s.; granted, 37 Henry VIII., 
 to Edward Earl of Hertford. 
 
 At Otterington. An Alien Priory, founded in the 
 
COUNTY OF DEVON. 
 
 61 
 
 reign of William the Conqueror, by the Monks of St. 
 Michael, in Normandy, income £87 10s. 4 d. yearly, now 
 worth £1,750 6s. 8rf.; granted 31 Henry VIII., as parcel 
 of Sion, to Richard Duke. 
 
 At Pilton, near Barnstaple. A Benedictine Cell, 
 founded by King Ethelstan ; valuation £56 12s. 84cZ. 
 now worth £1,132 14s. 2d. 
 
 At Plymouth. A Friary, in the east part of the 
 town; granted, 38 Henry VIII., to Giles Iselham. 
 
 At Plymton. A Free Chapel of Augustines, founded, 
 in the year 1121, by William Warlewast, Bishop of 
 Exeter; value £912 12s. 8^-cZ., now worth £18,252 14s, 
 2d .; granted, 2 Elizabeth, to Arthur Champernoun. 
 
 At Polleshoo. A Benedictine Nunnery, erected in 
 the reign of Richard I., by William Briwere, Bishop of 
 Exeter; value £170 2s. 3 \d. yearly, now worth £3,402 
 5s. lOd.; granted, in the reign of Edward VI., to John 
 Earl of Warwick. 
 
 At Slapton. A College, founded, in the year 1373, 
 by Sir Guy de Brien; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to 
 Thomas Arundel. 
 
 At Tavestock. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, in 
 the year 961, by Ordgar, Earl of Devonshire, and his 
 son; valued at £902 5s. l\d. yearly, now worth £18,045 
 12s. 6cZ.; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to John Lord 
 Russell. 
 
 At Torr, in the Deanery of Iplepen. A Premon- 
 stratensian Abbey, founded, in the year 1196, by Wil¬ 
 liam Briwere; yearly value £396 0s. llcZ., now worth 
 £7,920 18s. 4 d .; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Sir John 
 St. Leger. 
 
 At Totness. An Alien Priory, founded in the reign 
 of William the Conqueror, by John Aluredi; value 
 £124 10s. 2\d. yearly, now worth £2,490 .-2s. 6 d.\ 
 granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Catherine Champernoun 
 and others. 
 
62 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 DORSET (County.) 
 
 At Abbotsbury. A Benedictine Abbey, founded by 
 Orcius, steward to King Canute, in the year 1026; in¬ 
 come £485 3s. 5 ^d. yearly, now worth £9,703 95. 2d.\ 
 granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Sir Giles Strangwaies. 
 
 At Athelington. An Hospital, founded at an early 
 time, by Mr. Chidiock; income £7 85. 4 d. yearly, now 
 worth £148 65. 8cZ.; granted, 3 Edward VI., to Sir 
 Michael Stanhope. 
 
 At Bindon. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1172, by Robert de Burgo and his wife Maud; 
 income £229 2s. l^d. yearly, now worth £4,582 2s. Qd .; 
 granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Sir Richard Poynings. 
 
 At Bridport. A Priory, at the end of the town, in¬ 
 come £6 yearly, now worth £120; converted into a 
 dwelling house, called St. Jones. 
 
 An Hospital over the bridge to the west of the 
 town; income £8 65. Id. yearly, now worth £166 
 I5. 8d. 
 
 At Cern, or Cernell. A Benedictine Abbey, founded 
 in the Saxon times, by a Mr. Egelward; underwent 
 several changes in after times ; valued, at the dissolu¬ 
 tion, at £623 13s. 2\d. y now worth £12,473 45. 2d .; 
 granted, 17 Elizabeth, to John Dudley and others. 
 
 At Cranburn, in the Deanery of Pimpern. A Bene¬ 
 dictine Cell, founded in the year 980, by Elwardus 
 Snew; granted, 2 Elizabeth, to Thomas Francis. 
 
 At Dorchester. St. John’s Hospital. 
 
 A Franciscan Abbey, founded, 4 Edward II., by 
 the ancestors of Sir John Chidiock; granted, 35 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Edmund Peckham. 
 
 At Fr^mpton. An Alien Priory, founded by William 
 the Conqueror; granted, 14 Elizabeth, to Sir Christo¬ 
 pher Hatton, who sold it to John Brown, Bsq. 
 
COUNTY OP DORSET. 
 
 63 
 
 At Holme. A Cluniac Cell, founded before the 
 reign of Edward I.; granted, 1 Edward VI., to John 
 Hannon. 
 
 At Horton. A Benedictine Cell, founded in thfe 
 year 970, by Ordgar, Earl of Devonshire; granted, 1 
 Edward VI., to Edward Duke of Somerset, and after his 
 attainder, to William Earl of Pembroke, 7 Edward VI. 
 
 At Lodress. An Alien Priory, founded in the reign 
 of Henry I., by Richard de Redveriis. 
 
 At Lyme. An Hospital; valued at £38 11s.; now 
 worth £771. 
 
 At Mayne. A Preceptory of Knights Hospitalers ; 
 granted, 6 Elizabeth, to William Pole and Edward 
 Downing. , 
 
 At Melcomb, or Milton. A Dominican Friary, 
 founded by Rogers, of Brianston; granted, €5 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir John Rogers, of the same family. 
 
 At Middleton. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, by 
 King Ethelstan, in the year 933, to expiate the murder 
 of his brother Edwin; income £720 4s. Id. yearly, 
 now worth £14,408 Is. 8 d. \ granted, 31 Henry VIII., to 
 Sir John Tregonwall. 
 
 At Shaftesbury. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, 
 in the year 888, by King Alfred; value £1,329 Is. 3d. 
 yearly, now worth £26,581 5s.; granted, 1 Edward VI., 
 to William Earl of Southampton. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, super montem de Shaftes¬ 
 bury, founded ; granted, 2 Edward VI., to Randle 
 Burgh and others. 
 
 An Almshouse, in St. James’s parish, in the 
 west side of St. Mary’s lane ; granted, 28 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to Edward Read. 
 
 At Shireburn. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, about 
 the year 1200, by King John ; value, at the Dissolution, 
 £692 14s. 7 ^d. yearly, now worth £13,654 12s. Qd. j 
 granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Sir John Horsey. 
 
64 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Spectesbury. An Alien Priory, founded, in tlie 
 reign of Henry I., by Robert Earl of Mallent and Lei¬ 
 cester; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Charles Blount, Lord 
 Mountjoy, as parcel of the possessions of Witham. 
 
 At Tarent. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded, in the 
 year 1230, by Richard Power, Bishop of Chichester; 
 valued, at the dissolution, at £239 11s. 10cZ., now worth 
 £4,691 16s. 8 d .; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Sir Tho¬ 
 mas Wyat. 
 
 At Warham. Alien Priory, bestowed in the reign 
 of Henry I., to the Convent of Lira, in Normandy, by 
 Robert, Earl of Leicester; granted to Thomas Reve 
 and George Cotton. 
 
 At Wilcheswood. A Priory, founded here, at a very 
 early period; value £12 16s. 4 d. yearly, now worth 
 £256 6s. Bd .; suppressed, with the minor Monasteries, 
 in the reign of Henry VIII. 
 
 At Winburn, or Twineorn. A Nunnery, founded, 
 in the year 705, by St. Cuthburga, daughter of Kenred, 
 King of the West Saxons, where several of the Saxon 
 Kings were buried ; valuation, at the dissolution, £131 
 14s. now worth £2,634; granted, 1 Edward VI., to 
 Edward Duke of Somerset, then to Giles Keylway and 
 William Leonard, but finally to Edward Lord Clinton. 
 
 DURHAM (County.) 
 
 At Bishop’s Auckland. A College, founded, and 
 well endowed by Anthony Beck, Bishop of Duiham; 
 yearly value £180 3s. 2d., now worth £3,603 3s. 4 d. 
 
 At Chester on the Street. A College, founded in 
 the year 883, by Bishop Eardulfus, who had been forced 
 to flee hither with the body of St. Cuthbert from Lin- 
 disfarne. The seven Prebends here were valued, 26 
 Henry VIII., at £77 12s. 8 d., now worth £1,552 13s. 4 d. 
 
 I 
 
COUNTY OP DURHAM. 
 
 66 
 
 At Derlington. A College, founded early, by Hugh 
 Pusar, Bishop of Durham, in the reign of Henry II.; 
 valued at £51 85 . 4c/., now worth £1,028 65 . 8 d. 
 
 At Durham. A Cathedral, and Benedictine Priory, 
 founded about the year 995. The body of the tutelar 
 Saint, Cuthbert, was magnificently enshrined behind 
 the high altar; yearly income £4,436 16s. 3c/., now 
 worth £88,736 5s. 
 
 At Finchale. A Benedictine Cell, founded, in the 
 year 1128, by Randal, Bishop of Durham, for the Monks 
 of Durham; yearly value £146 19s. 2d., now worth 
 £2,939 3s. 4 d .; granted, 26 Henry VIII., to the Dean 
 and Chapter of Durham. 
 
 St. Edmond’s Hospital, founded, by Nicholas de 
 Farneham, Bishop of Durham, in the year 1247; 
 yearly, value £109 4s. 4c/., now worth £2,184 6 s. 
 8 c/.; granted, 7 Edward VI., to the Mayor and Bur¬ 
 gesses of Newcastle. 
 
 At Gretham. An Hospital, founded, in the year 1262, 
 by Robert de Stichill, Bishop of Durham ; yearly va¬ 
 lue £97 6 s. 34-cZ., now worth £1,946 5s. 10c/.; granted, 
 26 Henry VIII., to the Bishop of Durham. 
 
 At Jarrow. A Benedictine Cell, or Monastery, 
 founded in the year 684, by King Egfrid. The learned 
 and venerable Bede had his education here. Yearly 
 income £40 7s. 8 c/., now worth £807 13s. 4 d .; granted, 
 36 Henry VIII., to William Lord Eure. 
 
 At Keypier, near Durham. An Hospital, founded, 
 in the year 1112, by Randal, Bishop of Durham, and 
 Hugh, Bishop of the said place; yearly income £167 
 2s. 11c/., now worth £3,340 18s. 4 d .; granted, 36 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir William Paget. 
 
 At Langcester. A College, founded, in the year 
 1283, by Anthony Beck, Bishop of Durham; yearly in¬ 
 come £49 3s. 4c/., now worth £983 6 s. 8 c/.; granted, 7 
 Edward VI., to Simon Weldbury, and Christopher 
 Moreland 
 
66 
 
 ENGLAND 
 
 At Norton. A College, ancienlly founded, in the 
 patronage of the Bishop of Durham ; valued yearly at 
 £34 13s. 4 d. : now worth £693 6s. 8d. 
 
 At Shireburn. An Hospital, founded by the above 
 mentioned Hugh Pusar, Bishop of Durham, in the reign 
 of Henry II.: yearly revenue £135 7s. now worth £2,707 
 Here were maintained sixty-five Lepers, a Master, and 
 some Priests. Granted, in the reign of Henry VIII., 
 to the Bishop of Durham. 
 
 At Staindrop. A College, founded, in the reign of 
 Henry IV., by Ralph Nevill, Earl of Westmoreland, 
 for six decayed Gentlemen, six poor Officers, and other 
 poor Men; yearly revenue £126 5s. 10c?., now worth 
 £2,525 8s. id. 
 
 At Wermouth. A Benedictine Cell, built by the fa¬ 
 mous Abbot, Benedict Biscopius, in the year 674, who 
 received this town from King Egfrid. Yearly value 
 £26, now worth £520; granted, 37 Henry V III., to 
 Thomas Whitehead. 
 
 ESSEX (County.) 
 
 At Berden. An Augustine Friary, founded in the 
 reign of Henry III.; yearly income £31 5s. \^d .; now 
 worth £625 2s. 6 d .; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Henry 
 Parker. 
 
 At Berking, or Bedenham. A Benedictine Nunnery, 
 founded, in the year 675, by Erkinwald, son of Anna, 
 King of the East Angles, and afterwards Bishop of 
 London; yearly income £1,084 6s. 2%d. ) now worth 
 £21,686 4s. 2d .; granted, 5 Edward VI., to Edward 
 Lord Clinton. 
 
 At Bileigh, near Maldon. Premonstratensian Abbey, 
 founded, in the year 1180, by Robert Mantel; income 
 £196 6s. 5 d. yearly, now worth £3,926 8s. 4cZ.; granted, 
 32 Henry VIII.. to Sir John Gate. 
 
COUNTY OF ESSEX. 
 
 67 
 
 At Blackmore. An Augustine Monastery, founded, 
 m the reign of King John, by Adam and Jordan de 
 Samford ; income £85 95. Id. yearly, now worth £1,709 
 1 Is. 8 d. j granted, 32 Henry VIII., to John Smith. 
 
 At Chelmesford. A Dominican Friary, founded, at 
 an early date here, or in the adjoining hamlet Fulsham; 
 income £9 6s. 5 d. yearly, now worth £186 8s. 4 d.; 
 granted, 34 Henry VIII., to Antony Bonvixi. 
 
 At Chich. An Augustine Priory, founded, by Ri¬ 
 chard de Belmeis, Bishop of London and St. Osith, be¬ 
 fore the year 1118; income £758 5s. 8 d. now worth 
 £15,165 8s. 4 d.\ granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Thomas 
 Lord Cromwel, and after his attainder, to Sir Thomas 
 Darcy, 5 Edward VI. * , 
 
 At Coggeshale, or Coxhall. A Cistercian Abbey, 
 founded, in the year 1142, by King Stephen; yearly 
 income £298 8s., now worth £5,968; granted, 29 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Thomas Seymour. 
 
 At Colchester. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, m 
 the year 1096, by Eudo, courtier of William the Con¬ 
 queror ; income £523 17s. 0^-<2. yearly, now worth 
 £10,477 Os. IOcZ. ; granted, 1 Edward VI., to John Earl 
 of Warwick. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded, in the reign ot 
 Henry I., in the south part of the town, by Ernul- 
 phus, who became afterwards prior of it, income 
 £113 12s. 8 d. yearly, now worth £2,272 13s. 4 d .; 
 granted, 28 Henry VIII., to Sir Thomas Audley. 
 
 A Friary, without the walls of the town, on the 
 southward, founded, in the year 1244, for the crouch¬ 
 ed Friars ; value £7 7s. 8d. yearly, now worth £147 
 13s. 4 d .; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Thomas Lord 
 Audley. 
 
 Monastery of Grey Friars, founded, in the year 
 1309, by Robert Lord Fitzwalter, near the east 
 gate, who became a Friar before his death, in 1325 ; 
 granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Francis Jobson and 
 
68 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 Andrew Audley, and by King Edward VI., to John 
 Earl of Warwick. 
 
 At Colum, or Colun. A Benedictine Priory, found¬ 
 ed, in the reign of Henry I., by Albericus de Vere, who 
 became a Monk there; yearly value £175 14s. 8-^-d., 
 now worth £3,514 14s. 2d .; granted, 28 Henry VIII.J 
 to John Earl of Oxford. 
 
 At Cressing Temple. A Preceptory of Knights 
 Templars, founded, by King Stephen, in the year 1150; 
 f granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Sir W. Hughes, Knight. 
 
 At Dunmowe Parva. An Augustine Monastery, 
 founded, in the year 1104, by Lady Jugaj revenues 
 £173 2s. 4cZ., now worth £3,462 6s. 8 d .; granted, 28 
 Henry VIII., to Robert Earl of Sussex. 
 
 At Halstede. A Benedictine Cell, founded, in the 
 reign of William the Conqueror, by Ingelrica, wife of 
 Ranulf Peverell; income £83 19s. Id. yearly, now 
 worth £1,679 11s. 8 d .; granted, 29 Henry VIII., to 
 Giles Leigh. 
 
 At Halfield Regis. A Benedictine Priory, founded, 
 in the year 1140, by Aubrey de Vere, father of the Earl 
 of Oxford ; revenues £157 3s. 2£&, now worth £3,143 
 4s. 2d .; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Thomas Noke. 
 
 At Castlehedingham, or Heningham. A Benedictine 
 Nunnery, founded, in the year 1190, by Aubrey de Vere, 
 first Earl of Oxford, or rather by his Countess Lucia, 
 who became the first Prioress; revenues, at the sup 
 pression, £29 12s. 10<2., now worth £392 16s. 8cZ.; grant- 
 ed, 28 Henry VIII., to John Earl of Oxford. 
 
 At Horkesley Parva. A Cluniac Priory, founded, 
 in the reign of Henry I., by Robert Fitz Godebold; re¬ 
 venues £38 14s. 7cZ., now worth £774 11s. 8<i. 
 
 At Latton. An Augustine Priory, founded, before 20 
 Edward I., by some person, whose name is not known j 
 granted, 28 Henry VIII., to Sir Henry Parker. 
 
 At Layer Morney. A College, founded, in the year 
 1330, by William de Morney, Lord of the Manor. 
 
COtn\TY OK ESSEX. 
 
 6$ 
 
 An Hospital, or Almshouse, erected in the year 
 1523, in pursuance of the will of Henry Lord Mor- 
 ney; granted, by Queen Elizabeth, to William Tip¬ 
 per and Robert Dawe. 
 
 At Lighe3. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 reign of Henry III., by Sir Ralph Gernoun; yearly re¬ 
 venue £141 145. 8c/., now worth £2,834 13s. 4 d .; grant¬ 
 ed, 27 Henry VIII., to Sir Richard Rich. 
 
 At Maldon. A Carmelite Friary, founded, in the 
 reign of Edward II., by some persons unknown; value 
 £26 Os. 8 d. yearly, now worth £520 13s. 4 cl .; granted, 
 36 Henry VIII., to George Duke and John Sterr. 
 
 At Maldon Juxta. An Hospital for the leprous 
 townsmen, founded, by some one of the ancient Kings 
 of England; granted, 30 Hen. VIII., to Thomas Dyer; 
 and, 25 Elizabeth, to Theophilus and Robert Adams. 
 
 At Little Maplestead. A Preceptory of Knights 
 Hospitalers, founded, in the reign of* Henry I., by Ju¬ 
 liana, daughter and heiress of Robert Dorsnell; grant¬ 
 ed, at the dissolution, to George Harper. 
 
 At Mercy, or West Meresey. An Alien Priory, 
 founded by King Edward the Confessor; granted, 34 
 Hen. VIII., to Robert Dacres, Esq. 
 
 At Newportpond. An Hospital, founded, in the 
 reign of King John, by Richard Serlo; valuation £23 
 10s. 8 d., now worth £470 13s. 4c/.; granted, by Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Martin Bowes. 
 
 At Paunsfield. An Alien Priory, founded, 4 Wil¬ 
 liam the Conqueror, by Walteran Fitz Ranulph; grant¬ 
 ed, 30 Henry VIII., to Sir Giles Caple. 
 
 At Plecy. A College, founded, 17 Rich. II., by Tho¬ 
 mas Duke of Gloucester; valuation £139 3s. 10c/. 
 yearly, now worth £2,783 18s. 4cZ.; granted, 38 Henry 
 VIII., to John Gales. 
 
 At Pp.ittlewell. A Cluniac Priory, founded, m the 
 reign of Henry II., by Robert Fitz Swain; yearly va- 
 
70 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 lue, £194 145. 3 cl., now worth £3,894 55 . lOd.; granted. 
 29 Henry VIII., to Thomas Audley ; and, 5 Edward 
 VI., to Sir Richard Rich. 
 
 At Sedeburbrook. A Free Chapel, founded, in the 
 reign of Edward I.; granted, 7 Edward VI., to Sir An¬ 
 thony Brown and Richard Weston. 
 
 At Stanesgate, in the Parish of Steeple. A Clu- 
 niac Priory, founded, by the predecessors of the Prior of 
 Lewes, antecedently to the year 1176; value £43 85 . 
 6 d. yearly, now worth £868 105.; granted, 35 Henry 
 VIII., to Edmund Mordaunt. 
 
 At Stratford, in the parish of West Ham. A Cis¬ 
 tercian Abbey, built, in the year 1134, by William de 
 Montfichet; income £573 155. 6 \d. yearly, now worth 
 £11,475 IO 5 . IOcZ. ; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Peter 
 Meawtis, Esq. 
 
 At Thobey, near Ingatestone. An Augustine Pri¬ 
 ory, founded early, by Michael Capra and wife and 
 son; value £75 105. 6 d. yearly, now worth £1,510 105.; 
 granted, 22 Henry VIII., to Sir Richard Page, Knt. 
 
 At Thremhall. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the reign of William the Conqueror, by Gilbert de Mon- 
 tefixo; valuation £70 195. 3£<£, now worth £1,419 55. 
 lOtZ.; granted, 28 Henry VIII., to John Carey. 
 
 At Tiltey. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, about the 
 year 1152, by Robert Ferrers, Earl of Derby, and Mau¬ 
 rice Fitz Jeffrey; valuation £177 9s. 4c/., now worth 
 £3,549 65 . 8 d .; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Thomas 
 Lord Audley. 
 
 At Tiptree. An Augustine Monastery, founded, in 
 the reign of Edward I., by Ralph de Munchensi; value 
 £22 I 65 . 4 d. yearly, now worth £456 65 . S d. 
 
 At Little Walden. A Benedictine Abbey of 
 Monks, founded in the year 1136, by Jeffrey Mandevil, 
 Earl of Essex; income £406 15s. llcZ. yearly, now 
 worth £8,135 I85. 4 d.) granted, 29 Henry VII1.. to Sit 
 Thomas Audley. 
 
COUNTY OF GLOUCESTER. 
 
 71 
 
 At Waltham. An Augustine Monastery, founded, 
 in the year 1062, by Earl Harold; value £1,079 12s. 
 Id. yearly, now worth £21,592 Is. 8d .; granted, 1 Ed¬ 
 ward VI., to Sir Anthony Denny. 
 
 _ * 
 
 At Wikes. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry I., by Walter and Alexander Mas- 
 cherell, brothers'; value £92 12s. 3 d., now worth £1,852 
 5s.; granted by Henry VIII. 
 
 At Wudeham. An Augustine Monastery, founded, 
 in the reign of Henry II., by Maurice Fitz Jeffrey and 
 Tiretai, Sheriff of Essex; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to 
 Henry Polstead. 
 
 GLOUCESTER (County.) 
 
 At Beccanford. An Alien Priory, given, in the 
 reign of Henry I., to the Abbey of St. Martin, in Nor¬ 
 mandy ; value £53 6s. 8d. yearly, now worth £1,066 
 13s. id .; granted, 1 Edward VI., to Sir Richard Lee. 
 
 At Cirencester. An Augustine Monastery, mag¬ 
 nificently built, in the year 1117, by Henry I.; yearly 
 value £1,051 7s. Lk/., now worth £21,027 2s. 6 d.) 
 granted, 1 Edward VI., to Sir Thomas Seymour; 
 6 Elizabeth, to Richard Masters. 
 
 At Daeglesford. A Monastery, founded, in the 
 year 718, by one Begia, on a site, granted him for that 
 purpose, by King Ethelbald ; dissolved. 
 
 At Derehurst. An Alien Priory, founded, about 
 the year 980, by Doddo, Duke of Mercia; granted, 34 
 Henry VIII., to William Throckmorton. 
 
 At Flexeley, or Dene. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, 
 in the time of Stephen, by Roger Earl of Hereford; 
 value £112 13s. Id yearly/now worth £2,253 Is. 8a?.; 
 granted, 36 Henry VIII.. to Sir Anthony Kingston. 
 
72 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Gloucester. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, in 
 the year 680, by Wulphere, the first Christian King of 
 Mercia, and Ethelred, his brother and successor, who 
 was afterwards Monk and Abbot of Bardney. There 
 were, according to the Saxon custom, religious of both 
 sexes: this house was honoured by having, for ninety 
 years, three Gueens successively the presiding Ab¬ 
 besses; valuation, at the dissolution, £1,550 4s. 5 $d. 
 now worth £31,004 95. 2d .; granted, by Henry VIII., 
 to the Bishop and his officers. 
 
 An Augustine Monastery, founded, as some 
 writers say, in the year 660, by Merwald, Viceroy 
 of West Mercia; or, as others, with more appear¬ 
 ance of certainty, say, by Ethelred, Earl of Mer¬ 
 cia, in the year 909; income £90 105. 2j-d. yearly, 
 now worth £1,810 45. 2d .; granted, 31 Henry 
 VIII., to John Jennings. 
 
 A Friary, not far from the south-gate, founded, 
 before the year 1268, by Lord Berkley ; granted, 
 35 Henry VIII., to John Jennings. 
 
 A Monastery of Dominicans, founded, near the 
 Castleyard, by Henry III., in the year 1239; grant¬ 
 ed, 31 Henry VIII., to Thomas Bell, who made it 
 a drapering house. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, founded in the suburbs 
 without the north gate, by Gueen Elenor, Sir Tho¬ 
 mas Gifford and Sir Thomas Berkley, in the time 
 of Henry III.; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Richard 
 Andrews and Nicholas Temple. 
 
 At Minchin Hampton. An Alien Priory, according 
 to some authors, was founded here very early, but others 
 say, that this idea took rise from the fact that the manor 
 was given to the Nuns or Minchins of the Holy Trinity, 
 in Normandy, by William the Conqueror; revenues 
 valued at £117 16s. lit/., now worth £2,356 I85. 4 d .\ 
 granted, 34 Henry VIII., to Andrews Lord Windsor. 
 
 At Hayles, or Tray. A Cistercian Monastery, 
 
73 
 
 COUNTY OF GLOUCESTER. 
 
 . \ 4 
 founded, in the year 1251, by Richard Earl of Cornwall 
 afterwards King of the Romans and Emperor of Ger¬ 
 many ; valuation £357 7s. 8-^tZ., now worth £7,147 14s. 
 2 cl .; granted, 1 Edward VI., to Sir Thomas Seymour, 
 nnd after his attainder, to William Marquis of North¬ 
 ampton, 4 Edward VI. 
 
 At Horkslegh, or Horsley. An Alien Priory, en¬ 
 dowed, in the time of William the Conqueror, by Roger 
 Earl of Shrewsbury; granted, 7 Edward VI., to Sir 
 Walter Dennys. 
 
 At Lantony, near Gloucester. An Augustine Mo¬ 
 nastery, founded, in the year 1136, by Milo Earl of 
 Hereford, on the south side of the city; income £748 
 19s..ll^cZ., now worth £14,979 19s. 2d. ; granted, 32 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Arthur Porter. 
 
 At Lechelade. An Hospital, founded, 30 Henry III., 
 by Lady Isabel Ferrers; granted, 14 Elizabeth, to 
 Denis Tappes. 
 
 At Noent, or Newenton. An Alien Priory, founded, 
 on the manor given by William the Conqueror to the 
 Convent of Cormeili in Normandy; granted, 1 Edward 
 VI., to Sir Richard Lee. 
 
 At Gueinington. A Preceptory of Knights Hospi¬ 
 talers, founded, through the bounty of Agnes de Lacy 
 and her daughter before the reign of John; valued at 
 £137 7s. 1 %d. yearly, now worth £2,747 2s. 6d. ; grant¬ 
 ed, 37 Henry VIII., to Sir Richard Morisine and to Sir 
 Anthony Kingston. 
 
 At Stanley. A Benedictine Cell, founded, in the 
 year 1136, by Roger Berkley; yearly income £126 Os. 
 8cZ., now worth £2,520 13s. 4 d .; granted to Sir An¬ 
 thony Kingston. 
 
 At Stow-on-the-Wold. An Hospital, founded, 
 about the year 1010, by Ailmar, Earl of Cornwall and 
 Devonshire; valued at £25 4-s. 4 d. yearly, now worth 
 £504 6s. 8 d. 
 
74 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Theokesbury, or Tewkesbury. A Benedictine 
 Monastery, built and endowed by two brothers, Oddo 
 and Doddo, in the year 715, but enlarged in the year 
 1102, by Robert Fitz Haimon,a noble Norman; valued 
 at £l,59S Is. 3d. yearly, now worth £31,961 5s.; grant¬ 
 ed, 36 Henry VIII., to Thomas Strowde, Walter Erie, 
 and James Paget. 
 
 At Westbury on Trin, or Trymme. A Benedictine 
 Cell and College, founded, in the year S24, and en¬ 
 dowed with several lands by Ethelric, son of Ethel- 
 mund. Having suffered by Avars and other convulsions, 
 it was rebuilt, in the year 1288, by Godfrey Giffard, 
 Bishop of Worcester; valued at £232 14s. 0±d. yearly, 
 now worth £4,654 Os. IOcZ. ; granted, 35 Henry VIII., 
 to Sir Ralph Sadler. 
 
 At Winchelcombe. A Benedictine Monastery, or 
 Nunnery, founded, 787, by Kin^ Offa ; and in 798, King 
 Ranulph laid there the foundation of a stately Monas¬ 
 tery ; valued at £759 11s. 9 d. yearly, now worth £15,191 
 15s.; granted, 1 Edward VI., to Sir Thomas Seymour. 
 
 HANTS (County.) 
 
 At South Badeisley. A Preceptory of Knights 
 Templars; valued at £118 16s. Id. yearly, now worth 
 £2,376 11s. 8c/.; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Sir Nico¬ 
 las Throckmorton. 
 
 At De Bello Loco Regis, or Beaulieu, in the New 
 Forest. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, by King John, 
 in the year 1204, for thirty monks; income £428 16s. 
 8 \d. yearly, now worth £8,576 4s. 2d .; granted, 30 
 Henry VIII., to Thomas Wriothesley, Esq. 
 
 At Bromere. An Augustine Monastery, founded, 
 by Baldwin de Redveriis, and his uncle, Hugh, in the 
 reign of Henry I.; valued at £200 5s. 1 ±d. yearly, now 
 worth £4,005 2s. 6d .; granted, 28 Henry VIII., to 
 Henry, Marquis of Exeter. 
 
COUNTY OF HANTS. 
 
 75 
 
 At Burton, i:i the Isle of Wight. A College, found¬ 
 ed, 1282, by John de Insula, rector of Shalfleet, and 
 Thomas de Winton, rector of Godshill; granted, 18 
 Henry VIII., to Winchester College. 
 
 At Hailing. An Alien Priory, founded, by King 
 William, and afterwards by King Henry I.; granted, 
 33 Henry VIII., to the College of Arundel. 
 
 At Merewelle. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 reign of John, by Henry of Blois, Bishop of Winches 
 ter; granted, 5 Edward VI., to Sir Henry Seymour. 
 
 At Motisfont. An Augustine Priory, founded, by 
 William Brimere, in the reign of John ; valued at £167 
 15s. 8 j-d. yearly, now worth £3,355 14s. 2 d .; granted, 
 28 Henry VIII., to William, Lord Sandys. 
 
 At Nettely, near Southampton. A Cistercian Ab¬ 
 bey, founded, 1239, by King Henry III.; valued at 
 £160 2s. yearly, now worth £3,202 15s. 10.; 
 granted, 28 Henry VIII., to Sir William Paulet. 
 
 At Porchester. An Augustine Monastery, founded, 
 1133, by King Henry I.; valued at £314 17s. IO^-cZ. 
 yearly, now worth £6,297 17s. 6 d .; granted, 30 Henry 
 VIII., to John White. 
 
 At Portesmouth. An Hospital, founded, in the time 
 of John, by Peter de Rupibus, Bishop of Winchester; 
 valued at £33 19s. 5\d. yearly, now worth £679 9s. 2d. 
 
 At Qjjarrer, in the Isle of Wight. A Cistercian 
 Monastery, founded, 1132, by Baldwin de Redveriis, 
 afterwards Earl of Devonshire; valued at £184 Is. 
 IOcZ. yearly, now worth £3,681 18s. 4 d.\ granted, 36 
 Henry VIII., to John and George Mills. 
 
 At Rumesey. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, 967, 
 by Edward, or Ethelwold, a Saxon nobleman; valued 
 at £528 8s. IO^cZ. yearly, now worth £10,568 19s. 2d .; 
 granted, 38 Henry VIII., to John Bellew and R. Pigot. 
 
 At Southampton. An Augustine Priory, built, by 
 Henry I., upon the river, two miles above the town j 
 
76 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 valued at £91 9s. yearly, now worth £1,829; granted 
 30 Henry VIII., to Francis Dawtrey. 
 
 An Hospital, called God’s House, founded, in 
 the time of Henry III., by two brothers, Gervase 
 and Protase, of Hampton, for the poor. 
 
 St. Mary Magdelan Hospital, founded, 1179, 
 for lepers. * 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded, 1240, near the 
 wall, in the south part of the town; granted, 36 
 Hefary VIII., to John Pollard, and, 5 Edward VI., 
 to Arthur Darcy. 
 
 At Twinham. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the time of Edward the Confessor; valued at £541 16s. 
 yearly, now worth £10,896; granted, 37 Henry VIII., 
 to Joseph Kirton. 
 
 At Tychfield. A Premonstratensian Abbey, found¬ 
 ed, in the time of Henry III., by Peter de Rupibus, 
 Bishop of Winchester; valued at £280 19s. 10£tZ. 
 yearly, now worth £5,619 19s. 2d .; granted, 29 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Thomas Wriothesley, who built a stately 
 house here. 
 
 At Wherwell. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, 
 by Elfrida, Queen Dowager of King Edgar, in the 
 year 986, to expiate the crime of her being concerned 
 m the murders both of her first husband, Ethelwolf, 
 that she might be queen, and of her son-in-law, King 
 Edward, that her own son might be king; here she 
 spent the latter part of her life in doing penance, like 
 David, for her sins, and for regaining, like the prodigal 
 child, the good graces of her heavenly Father; valued 
 at £403 12s. lOr/. yearly, now worth £8,072 ISs. 4 d .; 
 granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Sir Thomas West, lord 
 de la Ware. 
 
 At Winchester. A Benedictine Priory, founded, 
 as they say, by King Lucius, but destroyed in Diocle¬ 
 tian’s persecution, in the year 266; rebuilt, by Deoda- 
 lus, the Abbot, in the year 300; the monks were mas- 
 
COUNTY OF HANTS. 
 
 77 
 
 sacred, and the house perverted into a temple for the 
 idolatrous worship of Dagon, by Cerdic, King of the 
 West Saxons, but finally restored by the Saxon Chris- 
 tian Kings; value, at the suppression, £1,507 17s. 2i, 
 yearly, now worth £^0,157 3s. 4 d. 
 
 A Nunnery, founded, in the east part of the city, 
 by King Alfred; here St. Edburg was Abbess; 
 valued at £179 7s. 2 d. yearly, now worth £3,587 
 3s. 4 d .; granted, 38 Henry VIII., to John Bel- 
 lew and John Broxholme. 
 
 A Monastery, founded, by King Alfred, for the 
 learned Monk Grimbald, whom he had brought 
 from Flanders. It was removed, 1110, to Hyde, 
 without the city ; valued at £865 Is. 6 cl. yearly, 
 now worth £17,301 Os. 10 d.\ granted, 37 Henry 
 VIII., to Richard Bethel. 
 
 St. Elizabeth College, founded, by John de Pom 
 toys, Bishop of Winchester, 1300; valued at £112 
 17s. 4 d. yearly, now worth £2,257 6s. 8 d .; granted, 
 35 Henry VIII., to Thomas, Lord Wriothesley. 
 
 Wykeham College, founded, by the munificent 
 prelate, William of Wykeham, Bishop of Win¬ 
 chester, 1387, outside the city to the southward; 
 valued at £639 8s. Id. yearly, now worth £12,788. 
 
 St. Cross Hospital, founded, south-west of the 
 town, by Henry le Blois, Bishop of Winchester, 
 in the year 1132, for the whole maintenance of 13 
 poor brethren in lodging, clothing, and diet, and 
 for dining 100 poor persons every day. In the 
 year 1185, Richard, Bishop of Winchester, made 
 provision for dining another 100 poor persons every 
 day; and, in the time of Henry VI., Cardinal 
 Beaufort made additional provisions for a rector, 
 two chaplains, 35 poor men, and three poor women; 
 value, at the dissolution, £184 4s. 2d. yearly, now 
 worth £3,684 3s. 4 d. 
 
 An Hospital for the poor folk, stood Outside the 
 
78 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 King’s Gate, maintained by the Monks of SB 
 Swithin, now suppressed. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, stood a little without t!i 
 south gate, on the way to Hampton; the site ol 
 this as well as of three other Friaries, granted. 
 
 Grey Friary, founded, by King Henry III., Hose 
 by the east gate, on the inside ; granted, 35 Henry 
 
 VIII. 
 
 At Winteney. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded, in 
 the time of William the Conqueror, by the son of Pe¬ 
 ter Jeffrey; valued at £59 Is. yearly, now worth 
 £1,181; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Richard Hill, 
 Esq., Serjeant of the King’s Cellar. 
 
 HEREFORD (County.) 
 
 At Acley. An Alien Priory, founded, in the yea* 
 1160, by the ancestors of Robert Chandos; granted, 
 33 Henry VIII., to Sir Philip Hobby. 
 
 At Acornbury. An Augustine Nunnery, founded, 
 by Margery, wife of Walter de Lacy, three miles south 
 of Hereford, in the reign of King John; valued at £75 
 7s. h\d. yearly, now worth £1,507 9s. 2cl. ; granted, 
 33 Henry VIII., to Hugh de Harry. 
 
 At Bromyard. A College, founded, prior to the 
 reign of Henry III.; granted, 14 Elizabeth, to one 
 Henry James. 
 
 At Clifford. A Cluniac Priory, founded, in the 
 time of Henry I., by Simon Fitz Richard; valued at 
 £65 11s. 11 d. yearly, now worth £1,311 18s. 4 d.\ 
 granted, 7 Edward VI., to William Herbert, Earl of 
 Pembroke. 
 
 At Dore. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the time 
 of King Stephen, by Robert Ewyas; valued at £118 
 
COUNTY OF HEREFORD. 79 
 
 2s. yearly, now worth £2,362; granted, 31 Henry VIII., 
 to John Scudamore. 
 
 At Dynmore. An Hospital of Knights Hospitalers, 
 
 founded, by Sir Thomas-, a brother of the order, 
 
 in the time of Henry II. ; granted, 2 Edward VI., to 
 Sir Thomas Palmer. 
 
 At Flanesford. An Augustine Monastery, founded, 
 1347, by Richard, Lord Talbot; valued at £15 85 . 9 d. 
 yearly, now worth £308 15s.; granted, 30 Henry VIII., 
 to George, Earl of Shrewsbury. 
 
 At Hereford. A Cathedral, founded here, in the 
 year 6 S 0 ; again destroyed by the wars, and rebuilt by 
 William the Conqueror; valued, at the general sup¬ 
 pression, £831 4s. Id. yearly, now worth £16,624 Is. 8 d. 
 
 A Benedictine Cell, founded here very early, 
 but enlarged in after times by several benefactors ; 
 valued at £121 3s. 3 ^d. yearly, now worth £2,423 
 5s. 10 d .; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to John ap 
 Rice. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital of Templars, stood in the 
 suburbs, without the north gate ; granted, 6 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to Robert Freke and John Walker. 
 
 A Friary, founded, in the time of Edward III., 
 in the north suburbs, by Sir John Daniel; granted, 
 5 Elizabeth, to Elizabeth Wynne. 
 
 A Friary, founded, without the Freregate, by 
 Sir William Pembrugge, in the time of Edward 
 I.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to James Boyle. 
 
 At Kilpecke. A Benedictine Cell, founded, about 
 1134, by Hugh, the son of William the Norman; 
 granted, 13 Henry VIII., to the Bishop of Gloucester. 
 
 At Leominster. A Benedictine Cell, founded, 
 about 660, by Merwald, King of West Mercia, but 
 destroyed and rebuilt in after times ; valued at £660 
 16s. 8 d. yearly, now worth £13,216 13s. 4 d.\ granted 
 to the Baililfs and Burgesses of the town. 
 
80 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Lymbroke. An Augustine Nunnery, founded, 
 about a quarter of a mile from the left bank of the 
 river Lugg; valued at £23 17 s. 8d. yearly, now worth 
 £477 13s. 4 d .; granted, 7 Edw. VL, to John West 
 and Robert Gratwick. 
 
 At Wigmore. An Augustine Monastery, founded, 
 m the year 1100, by Ralph de Mortimer; but, for 
 want of water and convenience, shifted up and down, 
 and finally settled into a stately monastery, a mile 
 beyond the town; valued at £302 12s. 3 ^d. yearly, 
 now worth £6,025 5s. 10 d .; granted, 2 Edward VI., 
 to Sir Thomas Palmer. 
 
 At Wormeley. An Augustine Abbey, founded, in 
 ihe time of King John, by Gilbert Talbot; valued at 
 £83 10s. 2d. yearly, now worth £1,670 3s. 4c£; granted, 
 37 Henry VIII., to Edward, Lord Clinton. 
 
 HERTS (County.) 
 
 At St. Alban’s. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, 
 in the year 793, by King Offa, for 100 monks, in honour 
 of St. Alban, the first Briton who suffered martyrdom; 
 valued at £2,510 6s. 1 \d. yearly, now worth £50,206 
 2s. 6 d .; granted, 7 Edward VI., to the Mayor and 
 Burgesses. 
 
 St. Julian’s Hospital, founded, in the time of 
 Henry I., by Jeffrey, the Abbot, near this town, on 
 the London road, for leprous persons ; granted. 
 36 Henry VIII., to Richard Lee. 
 
 At Berkhamsted. Two Hospitals stood here in the 
 reign of King John, for poor lepers ; revenues granted, 
 36 Henry VIII., to Robert Hordern. 
 
 At Cestrehunt, or Chesthunt. A Benedictine 
 Nunnery, founded, in the year 1183 ; valued at £27 6s. 
 8 d. yearly, now worth £546 13s. 4 d .; granted, 28 Hen 
 VIII., to Sir Anthony Denny. 
 
COUNTY OF HERTS. 
 
 81 
 
 At Clothale. An Hospital of ancient foundation ; 
 valued at £4 2s. 8d. yearly, now worth £82 13s. Id .; 
 granted 2 James I. 
 
 AiDelaPraye. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, 
 m the year 1190, by Garinus, Abbot of St. Alban’s, 
 granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Ralph Rawlet, Esq. 
 
 At Temple Dynnesley. A Preceptory of Templars, 
 richly endowed in lands, in the time of King Stephen, 
 by Bernard de Balliol; granted, by King Henry VIII., 
 to Sir Ralph Sadler. 
 
 At Flamsted. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded / 
 in the time of Stephen, by Roger de Toney. Yearly 
 value £46 16s. 1 4d., now worth £936 2s. 6 d .; granted, 
 31 Henry VIII., to Sir Richard Page. 
 
 At Hertford. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, in 
 the time of William the Conqueror, by Ralph de 
 Limesie; value yearly £S6 14s. 8d., now worth £1,734 
 13s. 4 d .; granted, 29 Henry VIII., to Sir Anthony 
 Denny, and to his wife. 
 
 At Hitchin. A Gilbertine Nunnery, founded, at 
 some early period; value yearly, at the suppression, 
 £15 11s. lcZ., now worth £301 18s. 4d .; granted, 36 
 Henry VIII., to John Cock. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded, at the end of 
 this town, by King Edward, about 1316; yearly 
 value £4 9s. 4 d., now worth £89 6s. 8d .; granted, 
 38 Henry VIII., to Edward Watson andH. Hend- 
 son. 
 
 At King’s Langley. A Friary, founded, near the 
 royal palace here, by Roger Helle, an English Baron, 
 but endowed by Edward I., Edward II., Edward III, 
 and Edward IV., so that it exceeded all houses ot the 
 order in England; yearly value £150 14s. 8 d., now 
 worth £3,014 13s. 4 d .; granted, 16 Elizabeth, to Ed¬ 
 ward Grimston. 
 
 At Redbtjpn. A Benedictine Cell, subservient to 
 
62 ENGLAND. 
 
 St. Alban’s, founded, before 1195; granted, 31 Henry 
 VIII.,'to John Cock. 
 
 At Royston. An Augustine Monastery, founded, 
 in the time of Henry II., by Eustace de Merc; yearly 
 value £106 3s. Id ., now worth £3,123 Is. 8c?.; granted, 
 32 Henry VIII., to Robert Slete, Esq. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, founded, in the time of 
 Henry III.; valued at £5 6s. 10c/., now worth 
 £106 8s. 4cZ.; granted, 5 James I., to Roger Aston. 
 
 At Rowheing, or Rownay. A Benedictine Nun¬ 
 nery, founded, 10 Henry II., by Conan, Duke of Bri¬ 
 tain; valued, at the dissolution, £13 10s. 9c?., now 
 worth £270 15s. 
 
 At Sopewell. A Benedictine Nunnery, built by 
 Jeffrey, sixteenth Abbot of St. Alban ; yearly revenue? 
 £68 8s., now worth £1,368 ; granted, 30 Henry VIII., 
 to Sir Ricliard Lee. 
 
 At Standon. An Hospital of Knights Hospitalers, 
 endowed with 140 acres of lands, by Richard de Clare, 
 before 1180; granted, 36 Hen. VIII., to Sir Ralph 
 Sadler. 
 
 At Ware. An Alien Priory, endowed by Hugo de 
 Grentemaisnil, before 1081; granted by Henry VIII. 
 
 At Wymondesley Parva. An Augustine Hospital 
 built in the time of Henry III., by Richard Argentein 
 yearly value £37 10s. 6£c?., now worth £750 10s. 10c?. 
 granted, 29 Henry VIII., to James Nedeham, surveyor 
 of the king’s works. 
 
 HUNTINGDON (County.) 
 
 At Hinchingbrooke, near Huntingdon. A Benedic¬ 
 tine Nunnery, founded by King William the Conqueror; 
 value yearly £19 9s. 2c?., now worth £389 3s 4'i.; 
 
COUNTY OF HUNTINGDON. 83 
 
 granted, 29 Henry VIII., to Sir Richard Cromwell, 
 alias Williams. 
 
 At Huntingoon. An Augustine Monastery, found¬ 
 ed, outside the town, by Eustace de Luvetot, in the 
 dme of King Stephen; yearly value £232 7s., now 
 worth £4,647 ; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Sir Richard 
 Cromwell, alias Williams. 
 
 At St. Ives, olim Slepe. A Benedictine Cell, 
 founded, by Ednoth, Abbot of Ramsey, in honour of 
 St. Ivo, whose relics were found here in the year 1001; 
 granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Sir Thomas Audley. 
 
 At St. Noet’s. A Benedictine Priory, founded by 
 Noet, but was destroyed in the subsequent wars, and 
 restored in the year 1113 ; yearly value £256 13s., now 
 worth £5,125 5s .; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Sir Ri¬ 
 chard Cromwell, alias Williams. 
 
 At Ramsey. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, 969, 
 by Aihvine, Earl of East Angles; yearly value £983 
 15s. 3 £d., now worth £19,675 5s. 10 cl; granted, 31 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Richard Cromwell, alias Wil¬ 
 liams. 
 
 At Saltrey. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, 1146, by 
 Simon, Earl of Northampton; yearly value £199 11s. 
 8 cl., now worth £3,991 13s. 4c/.; granted, 29 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Richard Cromwell, alias Williams. 
 
 At Stoneley. An Augustine Priory, founded, 1180, 
 by William Mandeville; yearly value £62 12s. 3 $d,, 
 now worth £1,252 5s. 10 d .; granted, 36 Henry VIII., 
 to Oliver Leder. 
 
 KENT (County.) 
 
 At Aylesford. A Carmelite Friary, founded, 1240. 
 by Richard Lord Grey ; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Sir 
 Thomas Wyat. 
 
84 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Bilsington. An Augustine Priory, founded, 1253, 
 by John Mansell; valued yearly £81 Is. 6d., now worth 
 £1,621 10s.; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to the Archbi¬ 
 shop of Canterbury. 
 
 At Boxley. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, 1146, by 
 William de Ipre, Earl of Kent, who afterwards became 
 a Monk himself, at Laon in France ; valued at £218 
 19s. 10cZ., now worth £4,379 18s. 4 d .; granted, 32 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Thomas Wyat. 
 
 At Bradgare. A College, founded, 16 Richard II., by 
 Mr. Pmbert, pastor of the town, and seven gentlemen; 
 granted, 29 Henry VIII., to the Archbishop of Canter¬ 
 bury. 
 
 At Bradsold, near Dover. A Premonstratensian 
 Abbey, founded, 1191, by King Richard I.; yearly va¬ 
 lue £142 8s. 9 d., now worth £2,848 15s.; granted, by 
 Henry VIII., to the Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 At Burne, or Patrickseurn. An Alien Priory, found¬ 
 ed, 1200 ; granted, 4 Edward VI., to Sir Thomas Chei- 
 ney. 
 
 At Canterbury. A Cathedral Church, and Bene¬ 
 dictine Priory, founded, by King Ethelbert, on his con¬ 
 version to Christianity, in the year 600. The Cathedral 
 was built by Lanfranc, in the year 1080. Besides the 
 great offerings at Thomas a Becket’s shrine, the yearly 
 revenues, at- the dissolution, made £2,489 4s. 9cZ., now 
 worth £49,784 16s. 
 
 St. Augustine’s Monastery, founded, by the same 
 Convert, Ethelbert, King of Kent, by the advice ol 
 St. Augustine, who was buried here. The yearly 
 revenues £1,274 0s. 104cZ., are now worth £29,480 
 17s. 6 d. 
 
 St. Gregory’s Hospital, founded, in the year 
 1084, by Archbishop Lanfranc; yearly revenues 
 £166 4s. 5^-cZ., now worth £3,328 9s. 2d .; granted, 
 28 Henry VIII., to the Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 St. Sepulchre’s Nunnery, founded, 1100, by Arch- 
 
COUNTY OF KENT. 
 
 85 
 
 bishop Anselm, in the south east of the city; re¬ 
 venues £38 195. 7^c?., now worth £779 12s. 6 d .; 
 granted, 38 Henry VIII., to James Hale. 
 
 Eastbridge Hospital, founded, as some say, by 
 Lanfranc; or, as others think, by St. Thomas the 
 Martyr, for the entertainment of Pilgrims ; yearly 
 value £23 18s. 9^-c?, now worth £478 15s. 10c?. 
 
 St. Laurence’s Hospital, founded, south east of 
 this town, in the year 1137, by Hugh, the Abbot of 
 St. Augustine’s ; yearly revenues £31 10s. 7c?., now 
 worth £630 11s. 8c?.; granted to Sir John Parrot. 
 
 St. Margaret’s Hospital, founded, 1243, by Simon 
 de Langton v Archdeacon of Canterbury, for poor 
 infirm priests ; yearly value £10 13s. 8c?., now worth 
 £213 13s. 4c?.; granted, 13 Elizabeth, to the Mayor, 
 &c., and is now a Bridewell. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded, in the reign of 
 Edward I., by Richard French, baker; granted, 33 
 Henry VIII., to G. Harper. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded, about 1221, by 
 King Henry III.; granted, 2 Elizabeth, to Thomas 
 Wiseman, and then to John Harrington. 
 
 A Franciscan Monastery, founded, 1270, by John 
 Diggs, an Alderman of the city; granted, 31 Henry 
 VIII., to Thomas Spilman. 
 
 At Cumbwell, in the Parish of Goudhurst. An Au¬ 
 gustine Priory, founded, by Robert de Turneham, in 
 the reign of Henry II.; yearly value, £80 17s. 6^-c?., 
 now worth £1,617 10s. 10c?.; granted, 29 Henry VIII., 
 to Thomas Culpepper, and, 34 Henry VIII., to Sir 
 John Gage. 
 
 At Davington. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, 
 1153, by Fulk de Newenham ; yearly value £21 13s. 
 10c?., now worth £433 8s. 4c?.; granted, 38 Henry VIII., 
 to Sir Thomas Cheiney. 
 
 At Dartford. An Augustine Nunnery, founded, 
 
86 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 1355, by King Edward III.; value, at the dissolution, 
 £40S., now worth £8,160 ; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to 
 Edm. Mervyn, and finally became the property of the 
 Earl of Salisbury. J 
 
 At Dover. A Benedictine Priory, founded, 640, 
 within the Castle, by King Eadbald, removed down 
 into the town, 696; yearly value £232 Is. 5}cL now 
 worth £4,641 95. 2d. 5 
 
 At Greenwich. A Dominican Friary, founded, 1376 
 
 by King Edward III. and Sir John Norbury. The re¬ 
 ligious were restored by Q,ueen Mary twenty years af¬ 
 ter they were expelled by her father, but were finally 
 expelled by Elizabeth. 3 
 
 At Harbaldown. An Hospital, founded, about a 
 mne from the west gate of Canterbury, for tire poor, 
 by bishop Lanfranc; yearly Value £109 7 s. 2d., now 
 
 worth £2,187 3s. 4 d. ; suppressed in the reign of Ed¬ 
 ward VI. ® 
 
 At Monk’s Horton. A Cluniac Cell, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry II., by Robert de Vere ; yearly Va- 
 
 a f, 1 !, 1 16s vMt d -’ now worth £2,236 19s. 2d; grant¬ 
 ed, 39 Henry VIII., to Richard Tate, and after to —-- 
 
 Mantell. 
 
 At West Langdon. A Premonstratensian Abbey, 
 founded, 1192, by William de Auberville ; yearly value 
 £56 6s. 9 d., now worth £1,126 15s.; granted, 30 Henry 
 V 111., to the Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 At Leedes. An Angustine Priory, built, 1119, by 
 Robert Crocheart, Knight; yearly value £362 7s. 7 d. 
 now worth £7,247 11s. 8d. ; granted, 4 Edward-VI., to 
 Sir Anthony St. Leger. 
 
 At LiLLECHURCH, or Heyiiam. A Benedictine Nunnery, 
 founded, 1151, by King Stephen; granted, by Henry 
 VIII.., to Cambridge College. 3 
 
 lo^rf ^ A *? ST ° NE * A ^°lfog e j or Hospital, founded, 
 12o0, by Boniface Archbishop of Canterbury ; valua- 
 
COUNTY OF KENT. 87 
 
 tion £159 7s. 10 d. yearly, now worth £3,137 18s. 4 d. ; 
 granted, 3 Edward VI., to Lord Cobham. 
 
 At Malling. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, in 
 the reign of William Rufus, by Gundulph, bishop of 
 Rochester; yearly value £245 10s. 2£cZ., now worth 
 £4,910 4s. 2d .; granted, 12 Elizabeth, to Henry Cob- 
 ham, alias Brook. % 
 
 At Meeton. An Hospital, granted to Sir Henry 
 Wyat. 
 
 At Muttiden. A Friary, founded, 1224, by Sir Mi¬ 
 chael de Ponynges; yearly value £30 13s. O^cL, now 
 worth £613 Os. 10 d .; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Sir 
 Anthony Aucher. 
 
 At Ospringe. An Hospital, founded, 1235, by King 
 Henry III.; granted by Henry VIII. 
 
 At West Peckham. An Hospital of Hospitalers; 
 yearly value £63 6s. 8d., now worth £1,266 13s. 4 d. ; 
 granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Sir Robert Southwell. 
 
 At Puckeshall. An Hospital, granted by King 
 Henry VIII., to Lynch, his Physician; granted to Sir 
 John Parrot. 
 
 At Rochester. A Cathedral and Benedictine Priory, 
 founded, in the year 600, by King Ethelbert; yearly 
 value £486 11s. 5eZ., now worth £9,731 8s. 4 d. 
 
 At Sevenoaks. Two Hospitals, one founded in the 
 year 1418, for twenty men and women, by William 
 Sevenoke; another in the gift of the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury; both granted, 31 Henry VIII. to Arch¬ 
 bishop Cranmer. 
 
 At Shepey. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded,, in 
 the year 675, by Sexburg, widow of Ercombert, King 
 of Kent; yearly value £122 14s. 6^-cZ., now worth 
 £2,454 10s. IOcZ. ; granted, 29 Henry VIII., to Sir Tho¬ 
 mas Cheinev. 
 
 At New work, near Rochester. An Hospital, founded, 
 
 i 
 
88 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 in the year 1194, by Bishop Glanville of Rochester, for 
 the reception of poor travellers, and other indigent per¬ 
 sons, granted, 33 Henry VIII. 
 
 At S Wingfield, near Dover. An Hospital of Sister 
 Hospitalers, founded, in the year 1190, by Sir Robert de 
 Clotingham, Arnulf Cade, and others; yearly value 
 £SS 3s.3^d., now worth £1,763 5s. 10 d.; granted, 33 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Thomas Aucher. 
 
 At Tanington. An Hospital, founded, in the reign 
 of Henry II.; yearly value £33 11s. Id., now worth 
 £671 Is. 8d .; granted, 5 Edw. VI., to Robert Dartnall. 
 
 At ThurleGh. An Alien Priory, bestowed, 22 Henry 
 II., to the Abbey of St. Bertin at St. Omers. 
 
 At Wengham. A College, founded, in the year 1826, 
 by John Peckham, Archbishop of Canterbury; yearly 
 revenues £33 6s. 8 d., now worth £666 13s. 4 d .; granted, 
 7 Edward VI., to Sir Thomas Palmer. 
 
 At W estwood. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the year 1178, by Richard de Lucy, Viceroy here from 
 the King, who was absent in France; next year he 
 quitted his great palaces, took the religious habit, and 
 died in this house ; yearly revenues £186 9s., now 
 worth £7,329; granted, 28 Henry VIII., to Sir Ralph 
 Sadler. 
 
 At Wye. A College, founded, in the year 1431, by 
 John Kempt, Archbishop of York; yearly value £93 
 2s. 0o d., now worth £1,862 Os. 10 d .; granted, 36 Henry 
 VIII., to Walter Buckler.. 
 
 LANCASTER (County.) 
 
 At Burscough. An Augustine Priory, founded, m 
 the reign of Richard I., by Robert Fitz Henry, Lord of 
 Latham; yearly value £129 Is. 10cZ., now worth £2,581 
 16s. 8 d. 
 
89 
 
 COUNTY OF LANCASTER. 
 
 * 
 
 At Cockersand. A Premonstratensian Abbey, found¬ 
 ed, in the reign of Henry II., by William Lancastre; 
 yearly value £282 7s. 7now worth £5,647 125. €>d .; 
 granted, 35 Henry VIII., to John Kechin. 
 
 At Conisheved. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry II., by Gabriel Pennington ; yearly 
 value £124 25. Id ., now worth £2,482 15. 8d. 
 
 At Furnes. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1127; yearly value £966 75 . 10cZ., now worth 
 £19,327 165. 8 d. 
 
 At Holand. A Benedictine Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1319, by Walter, Bishop of Litchfield } yearly 
 value £78 125., now worth £1,572; granted, 37 Henry 
 VIII., to John Holcroft. 
 
 At Horneby. A Premonstratensian Abbey, founded 
 by the ancestors of Sir Thomas Stanley ; valuation 
 £26 yearly, now worth £520; granted. 36 Henry VIII., 
 to Lord Monteagle. 
 
 At Kershall. A Cluniac Cell, bestowed by Henry 
 II. to the monastery of Lenton, Nottinghamshire; grant¬ 
 ed, 32 Henry VIII., to Baldwin Willoughby* ^ 
 
 At Kertmel. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1188, by William Mareschall, Earl of Pembroke; 
 yearly value £212 115. 10c?.; now worth £4,251 165 . 
 8d .; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to John Holcroft. 
 
 At IgANCASTER. An Alien Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1094, by Earl Roger of Poictiers; yearly value 
 £90, now worth £1,600. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded, 44 Henry III., by 
 Sir Hugh Harrington; granted, 3 Henry VIII., to 
 John Holcroft. 
 
 At Lythom. A Benedictine Cell, founded, by Rich¬ 
 ard Fitz Rogers, in the reign of Richard I.; yearly 
 value £53 15s. IOcZ. ; now worth £1,075 I 65 . 8 d .; grant¬ 
 ed to Sir Thomas ^ol croft. 
 
90 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Manchester. A College, founded, 9 Henry V., 
 by Thomas de la Ware, pastor of the town; yearly 
 value £213 10s. lid, now worth £4,270 18s. 4d 
 
 At Penwortham. A Benedictine Priory, founded, 
 in the reign of William the Conqueror, by the bounty 
 of Warine Bussel; yearly value £114 16s. 9id, now 
 worth £2,296 15s.; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to John 
 Fleetwood. 
 
 At Preston. A Friary, founded, on the northwest 
 of this town, by Edmond, Earl of Lancaster, son of 
 Henry III.; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Thomas Hol- 
 croft. 
 
 At Warrington. An Augustine Friary, built at the 
 end of the bridge, in the year 1379; granted, 32 Henry 
 VIII., to Thomas Holcroft. 
 
 At Whalley. A Cistercian Abbey, founded in the 
 year 1296; valued at £551 4s. 6d yearly, now worth 
 £11,024 10s.; granted, 7 Edward VI., to Richard As¬ 
 ton and John Braddyll. 
 
 LEICESTER (County.) 
 
 # 
 
 At Belton. An Augustine Nunnery, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry III., by Iiosia de Verdon; yearly 
 value £101 8s. 2^-d, now worth £2,028 4s. 2d ; granted, 
 30 Henry VIII., to Humphrey Foster. 
 
 At Braddley. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the time of King John, by Robert Bundy; valued at 
 £20 15s. 7 d. yearly, now worth £415 11s. 8d ; granted, 
 29 Henry VIII., to Thomas Newell, Esq. 
 
 At Bredon. An Augustine Cell, founded, in the 
 year 1144, by Robert Ferrers, Earl Nottingham; valued 
 at £25 8s. Id yearly, now worth £508 Is. 8 d .; granted, 
 7 Edward VI., to John, Lord Grey. 
 
COUNTY OF LEICESTER. 
 
 91 
 
 At Burton Lazars. An Hospital, founded, in the 
 time of King Stephen, by Roger de Moubray; valued 
 at £265 10s. 2^d. yearly, now worth £5,310 4s. 2d.; 
 granted, 36 Henry VIII., to John Dudley, Lord Lisle. 
 
 At Chorley and Ulvescroft. An Augustine Priory, 
 founded, in the time of Henry II., by Blanchmain’s, 
 Earl of Leicester; valued at £101 3s. 10^d. yearly, 
 now worth £2,023 17s. 6d.; granted to Frideswide, 
 widow. 
 
 At Croxton. A Premonstratensian Abbey, founded, 
 m the year 1162, by William Porcarius; valuation, at 
 the suppression, £458 19s. 1 ^-d. yearly, now worth 
 £9,179 19s. 2d.; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Thomas, 
 Earl of Rutland. 
 
 At Dalby. An Hospital of Knights Templars, 
 founded, it is thought, by Robert Bossu, Earl of Leices¬ 
 ter, in the reign of Henry IIL; yearly value £103 16s. 
 7^-d., now worth £2,076 12s. 6d.; granted, 35 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Andrew Nowell. 
 
 At Castle Donington. An Hospital, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry II., or sooner, by John Laey, Con¬ 
 stable of Chester ; yearly value £5 13s. 4d., now worth 
 £113 6s. 8d. 
 
 At Gerondon. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in'tne 
 year 1133, by Robert Bossu, Earl of Leicester; yearly 
 value £186 15s. 2£dL, now worth £3,735 4s. 2d.; grant¬ 
 ed, 32 Henry VIII., to Thomas, Earl of Rutland. 
 
 At Hether. An Hospital of Knights Hospitalers, 
 founded, in reign of King John; yearly value £39 Is. 
 5d., now worth £7S1 8s. 4d. 
 
 At Hinkley. An Alien Priory, founded,. in the 
 year 1173, by Robert Blanchmaines, Earl of Leicester; 
 granted, 34 Henry VIII., to the Dean and Chapter of 
 Westminster. 
 
 At Kerkbey on the Wrethek. An Augustine 
 Priory, founded, 9 Edward II., by Roger Beller ; yearly 
 
92 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 value £178 75. IO^cZ., now worth £3,567 175. 6<Z.; 
 granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Charles Blount, Lord 
 Mountjoy. 
 
 At Landa. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 reign of Henry I., by Richard Basset and Maud his 
 wife; yearly value £510 165.54cZ., now worth£10,216 
 95. 2 d .; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Thomas, Lord 
 Cromwell. 
 
 At Langley. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry II., by William Pontulf; yearly 
 value £32 65. 2d., now worth £646 35. 4 d .; granted, 
 35 Henry VIII., to Thomas Grey. 
 
 At Leicester. An Augustine Monastery, founded 
 near the town, in the year 1143, by Robert Bossu, 
 Earl of Leicester; yearly value £1,062 05. 4 $d., now 
 worth £21,240 7s. 6 d .; granted, 4 Edward VI., to 
 William, Marquis of Northampton. 
 
 The College of St. Mary the Less, founded, m 
 the year 1107, by Robert, Earl of Mallent and 
 Leicester; yearly value £23 125. lid .; now worth 
 £472 185. 4cZ. 
 
 The College of St. Mary the Greater, founded, 
 in the year 1330, by Henry Earl of Leicester; 
 yearly value £595 7s. 4 d., now worth £11,907 65. 
 8eZ.; granted, 2 Edw r ard VI., to John Beaumont 
 and William Guyse. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, founded, prior to 1235, 
 which was converted into a gaol, 31 Elizabeth. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, granted to John Bellew 
 and John Broxholm. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded, in the reign of 
 Henry III., by the Earl of Leicester; granted, 38 
 Henry VIII., to Henry, Marquis of Dorset. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded, in the year 1265, 
 by Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester; granted 
 
COUNTY OF LINCOLN. 93 
 
 37 Henry VIII., to John Bellew and John Brox- 
 holm. 
 
 At Lutterworth. An Hospital, founded, in the 
 reign of King John, by Roise de Verdon and her son 5 
 yearly value £26 95 . 5c?., now worth £529 85 . 4c?. 
 
 At Melton Moubray. A Cluniac Cell, subject to 
 the Monastery of Lewes in Sussex; granted, 29 Henry 
 VIII., to Thomas, Lord Cromwell. 
 
 At Mouseley. A College, founded, 2 Edward I., 
 by Sir Anketine de Martival; yearly value £87, now 
 worth £340. 
 
 At Osulveston. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry II., by Sir Robert Grimbald; yearly 
 value £173 18s. 9c?., now worth £3,478 15s ; granted, 
 30 Henry VIII., to Sir John Harrington. 
 
 At Rotheley. An Hospital of Knights Templars, 
 endowed by Henry III.; yearly value £231 7s. 10c?., 
 now worth £4,627 16s. 8 c?.; granted, 35 Henry VIII., 
 to Henry Cartwright. 
 
 I 
 
 — 
 
 ? LINCOLN (County.) 
 
 ' 
 
 At Alvingham. A Gilbertine Priory, founded, m 
 the reign of King Stephen, by Robert Chemey, Bishop 
 of Lincoln ; yearly value £14115s., now worth £2,835; 
 granted, 5 Edward VI., to Edward, Lord Clinton. 
 
 At Aslakeby. An Hospital of Templars, founded, 
 in the reign of Richard I., by John le Mareschal; 
 granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Edward, Lord Clinton. 
 
 At Bardney. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, about 
 the year 697, by the bounty of Ethelred, King of Mer¬ 
 cia, who resigned his crown, and became a Monk here, 
 and afterwards an Abbot, until his death; valuation 
 
94 ENGLAND. 
 
 £429 7s., now worth .£8,587; granted tJo Sir Robert 
 Tirwhit. 
 
 At Barlings. A Premonstratensian Abbey, found¬ 
 ed, in the year 1154, by Ralph de Haye; yearly value 
 £307 16s. 6c/., now worth £6,556 10s.; granted to 
 Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Belvoir. A Benedictine Cell, founded, in the 
 reign of William the Conqueror, by Robert de Belve¬ 
 dere ; yearly value £129 17s. 6c/., now worth £2,597 1 Os.; 
 granted, to Thomas, Earl of Rutland, and to Robert 
 Tirwhit. 
 
 At Long Benygton. An Alien Priory, founded, in 
 the year 1175, by Ralph de Filgeries; granted, 34 
 Henry VIII. 
 
 At Boston. An Augustine Friary, founded by King 
 Edward II.; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to the Mayor 
 and Burgesses of the town. 
 
 A Dominican Monastery, founded prior to the 
 year 1288; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Charles, 
 Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 A Franciscan Monastery, founded, by the Ester- 
 ling Merchants, at an early period; granted, 37 
 Henry VIII., to the Mayor and Burgesses. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, founded in the year 1300, 
 
 to the west of the river, by Sir-Orreby, 
 
 Knight; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to the Mayor 
 and Burgesses of the town. 
 
 At Bourn. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1138, by Baldwin Fil. Gilsberti: yearly value 
 £200, now worth £4000; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to 
 Richard Cotton. 
 
 At Temple Bruer. An Hospital of Knights Tem¬ 
 plars, founded, prior to the year 11S5; granted, 33 
 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk; yearly value 
 £195 2s. 2±d,j now Avortli £3,902 4s. 2d. 
 
 At Bullington. A Gilbertine Priory, founded, in 
 
COUNTY OF LINCOLN. 
 
 95 
 
 the reign of King Stephen, by Simon Fitzwilliam; 
 yearly value £1S7 7 s. 9 cl., now worth £3,747 155.; 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Bur well. An Alien Priory, founded by the 
 Lords of Kyme; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Charles, 
 Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Cameringham. An Alien Priory, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry II., by Richard de Haya and 
 Maud his wife; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to Robert 
 Tirwhit. 
 
 At Catteley. A Gilbertine Priory, founded, in 
 the reign of King Stephen, by Peter de Belingey; 
 yearly value £38 135. 8 c?., now worth £773 135. id .; 
 granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Robert Carr of Sleford. 
 
 At Gotham. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded in the 
 reign of Henry I., by Alan Muncel; yearly value £46 
 175. 7c?., now worth £937 115. 8 d .; granted, 32 Henry 
 VIII., to Edward Shipwith. 
 
 At Crowland. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, in 
 the year 716, by Ethelbald, King of Mercia. After 
 the Religious were murdered, and the Monastery 
 burned, by the Danes, in the year 870, King Edred re¬ 
 stored the lands, in the year 948, and rebuilt the house. 
 Yearly value £1,217 os. lid ., now worth £24,345 I 85 . 
 id. ; granted, 4 Edward VI., to Edward, Lord Clinton. 
 
 At Deping. A Benedictine Cell, founded, in the 
 year 1139, by Baldwin Fil. Gilsberti; granted, 32 
 Henry VIII., to the duke of Norfolk. 
 
 At Egle. An Hospital of Knights Templars, found¬ 
 ed, by King Stephen; yearly value £144 I 85 . 10 c?., 
 now worth £2,898 I 65 . 8 d .; granted, 33 Henry VIII., 
 to Thomas, Earl of Rutland, and Robert Tirwhit. 
 
 At Ellesham, or Ailesham. An Augustine Priory, 
 founded in the year 1166, by Beatrix de Amundeville, 
 for several poor brethren; yearly value £83 175. 10c?., 
 now worth £1,677 I 65 . 4c?.; granted, 30 Henry VIII., 
 to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
96 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At the Priory in the Wood, near Eppworth, in 
 the Isle of Axholm. A Carthusian Priory, founded, 
 19 Richard II., by Thomas Moubray, Earl of Notting¬ 
 ham; yearly value £290 11s. Id., now worth £5,811 
 12s. 6d .; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Mr. John Candish. 
 
 At Fosse. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, in the 
 reign of John, by the inhabitants of Torkeysy; yearly 
 value £8 5s. id., now worth £165 6s. 8 d ,; granted, 5 
 Edward VI., to Edward, Lord Clinton. 
 
 At Gokwelle. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded in 
 the year 1185, by William de Alta Ripa; yearly value 
 £19 18s. 6 d., now worth £398 10s.; granted, 30 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir William Tirwhit. 
 
 At Grantham. A Franciscan Friary, built in the 
 year 1290; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Robert Bocher 
 and David Vincent. 
 
 At Greenfield. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded, in 
 the year 1153, by Eudo de Greinsby, and Ralph his 
 Son; yearly value £79 15s. lcZ., now worth £1,595 Is. 
 8 d .; granted, 12 Elizabeth, to Sir Henry Stanley and 
 Lord Strange. 
 
 At Grimesby. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded be¬ 
 fore the year 1185; yearly value £12 3s. Id., now 
 worth £243 11s. 8d .; granted 34 Henry VIII. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded prior to the yeai 
 1304; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to Augustine Por¬ 
 ter and John Bellew. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded, in the reign ol 
 Edward II.; granted, 38 Henry VIII., to John Bel¬ 
 lew and Robert Brokesby. 
 
 At Hagh. An Alien Priory, founded, in the year 
 1164, by Henry II.; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to John, 
 Lord Russell. 
 
 At Hagham. An Alien Priory, founded, by Hugh 
 Earl of Chester; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to John 
 Bellew and J. Broxholm. 
 
COUNTY OP LINCOLN. 
 
 97 
 
 At Hagneby. A Premonstratensian Abbey, founded, 
 in the year 1175, by Herbert de Orreby, and Lady Ag¬ 
 nes, his wife; yearly value £98 7s. 4d., now worth 
 £1,967 6s. 8d.; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to John 
 Freeman, of London. 
 
 At Haverholm. A Gilbertine Priory, founded, in* 
 the year 1137, by the Bishop of Lincoln, Alexander; 
 yearly value £88 55. 5 d., now worth £1,765 85. 4 d.; 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Lord Clinton. 
 
 At Heyninges. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded, in 
 the year 1180, by Reyner Everniere ; yearly value £58 
 135. 4d., now worth £1,173 65. 8d.; granted, 31 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Thomas Heneage. 
 
 At HoLLANnBRiDGE. A Gilbertine Priory, founded, 
 in the reign of King John, by Godwin, a citizen of 
 Lincoln; yearly value £5 15 . lid., now worth £101 
 I85. 4d.; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Edward, Lord 
 Clinton 
 
 At Humbersteyn. A Benedictine Monastery, found¬ 
 ed, in the reign of Henry II., by William Hermeri 
 yearly value £42 115. 3d., now worth £851 55.; grant 
 ed, 5 Edward VI., to John Cheke, Esq. 
 
 At Hyrst. An Augustine Cell, founded, in the reign 
 of Henry I., by Nigel de Albini; yearly value £7 115. 
 
 8d., now worth £151 135. 4d.; granted, 1 Edward VI.. 
 to John. Earl of Warwick. 
 
 At Irford. A Premonstratensian Nunnery, founded, 
 in the reign of Henry II., by Ralph de Albini; yearly 
 value £14 135. 4d., now worth £293 65. 8d.; granted, 
 31 Henry VIII., to Robert Tirwhit. 
 
 At Kirksted. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1139, by Hugh Britto; yearly value £338 135. 
 
 11^-d., now worth £6,673 195. 2d.; granted, 30 Henry 
 VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Kyme. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 reign of Henry II., by Philip de Kyme; yearly value 
 
 9 
 
98 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 £138 95 . 4d, now worth £2,769 65 . 8 d; granted, 33 
 Henry VIII., to Thomas, Earl of Rutland, and Robert 
 Tirwhit. 
 
 At Lekeburn. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded, in 
 the year 1150, by Robert Fitz Gilbert; yearly value 
 *£57 135. 54d, now worth £1,153 9s. 2d; granted, 32 
 Henry VIII., to Thomas Heneage. 
 
 At Lemburgh Magna. An Alien Priory, founded, 
 in the reign of Henry II., by Richard de Humet; 
 granted, 36 Henry VIII., to John Bellew and others. 
 
 At Lincoln. A Cathedral, founded, in the reign of 
 William the Conqueror, by Remigius, Bishop of Dor¬ 
 chester ; the Bishop’s revenue. £1,962 175. 4^-d; the 
 Chapter’s, £575 85 . 2d .; both sums would make now 
 £50,765 105. lOd 
 
 A Gilbertine Priory, in the south-west suburbs; 
 yearly value £270 15. 3d, now worth £5,401 5s .; 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of 
 Suffolk. 
 
 A Benedictine Cell, founded by Plenry II., year¬ 
 ly value £26 15. 3d, now worth £521 5s.; granted, 
 37 Henry VIII., to John Bellew and John Brox- 
 holm. 
 
 The Holy Innocent’s Hospital, founded, by Re¬ 
 migius, Bishop of Lincoln, for leprous persons; 
 granted, 7 Edward VI., to Sir William Cecil. 
 
 An Augustine Monastery, founded, prior to the 
 year 1291, on the south side of the city; granted, 
 37 Henry VIII., to John Bellew and }ohn Brox- 
 holm. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, in the east of the city; 
 granted, 37 Henry VIII, to John Bellew and John 
 Broxholm. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded, in the year 1230, 
 by William de Beningworth; granted, 36 Henry 
 VIII. to J. Pope. 
 
COUNTY OF LINCOLN. 
 
 99 
 
 The White Friary, in High-street, founded, by 
 Odo of Kilkenny, Ireland, in the year 126$ ; grant¬ 
 ed, 36 Henry VIII., to John Broxholm. 
 
 At Louth Park. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in 
 the year 1139, by Alexander, Bishop of Lincoln; yearly 
 value £169 5s. 6^-cZ., now worth £3,385 10s. 10 d.y 
 granted, 12 Elizabeth, to Sir Henry Stanley. 
 
 At Markeby. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the reign of John, by Ralph Fitz Gilbert; yearly value 
 £163 17s. Qd., now worth £3,277 10s.; granted, 30 
 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Minting. An Alien Priory, founded, in the year 
 1129, by Ranulph de Meschines; granted, 34 Henry 
 
 VIII. 
 
 At Neubo. A Premonstratensian Abbey, founded, 
 in the year 1198, by Richard de Malebisse ; yearly value 
 £115 11s. 8d ., now worth £2,211 13s. 4 d .; granted, 29 
 Henry VIII., to Sir John Markham. 
 
 At Neus, or Newhouse. A Premonstratensian Ab¬ 
 bey, founded, in the year 1143, by Peter de Gousel; 
 yearly value £114 Is. 4^-tZ., now worth £2,281 7s. 6d .; 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Newstede on Alcolm. A Gilbertine Priory, 
 granted, within the bounds of Cadney, by Henry II.; 
 yearly value £55 Is. 8 d. } now worth £1,101 13s. 4dL; 
 granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Robert Heneage. 
 
 At Newstede. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry III., by William de Albini; yearly 
 value £42 Is. 3d., now worth £841 5s.; granted, 31 
 Henry VIII., to Richard Manners. 
 
 At Nocton. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 reign of King Stephen, by Rob. D’Arcey; yearly value 
 £52 19s. 2^cl., now worth £1,059 4s. 2d .; granted, 30 
 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk; and 12 
 Elizabeth, to Sir John Stanley. 
 
 At Northomersby. A Gilbertine Priory, founded, > 
 
100 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 in the reign of King Stephen, by William, Earl ol 
 Albemarle; yearly value £98, now worth £1,960 * 
 granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Robert Heneage. 
 
 At Revesby. A Cistercian Monastery, founded, in 
 the year 1142, by William, Earl of Lincoln ; valued at 
 £349 45 . 10 d. yearly, now worth £6,988 18$. 4cZ.; 
 granted, 30 HenryVIll., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Sempringham. A Gilbertine Priory, founded, in 
 the year 1139, by Sir Gilbert, of Sempringham; valued 
 at £359 125. Id. yearly, now worth £7,192 11s. Sd .; 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Edward, Lord Clinton. 
 
 At- Sixhill. A Gilbertine Priory, founded by- 
 
 Grelle; valued at £170 85. 9 d. yearly, now worth 
 £3,408 15s.; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Thomas 
 Heneage. 
 
 At Skirbeke. An Hospital, founded for ten poor 
 persons, in the year 1130, by Sir John Multon ; the 
 Knights Hospitalers settled there; granted, 33 Henry 
 VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Spalding. A Benedictine Monastery, founded, 
 Dy Thorold de Buckenhale, in the year 1052; valued at 
 £878 IS5. 3d. yearly, now worth £17,578 5s.; granted, 
 3 Edward VI., to Sir John Cheke. 
 
 At Spillesbey. A College, founded, 12 Edward III., 
 oy Sir John Willoughby; granted, 4 Edward VI., to 
 the Duchess of Suffolk. 
 
 At Stanfeld. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry II., by Henry Percy ; valued at £112 
 5s. yearly, now worth £2,245; granted, 29 Henry VIII., 
 to Robert Tirwhit. 
 
 At Stanford. A Benedictine Cell, or Nunnery, 
 founded, in the reign of Henry II., by William, Abbot 
 of Peterburgh; valued at £78 I 85 . 10^rZ. yearly, now 
 worth £1,578 175. 6 d.; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to 
 Richard Cecil. 
 
 Benedictine Cell, dedicated to St. Leonard; 
 
COUNTY OF LINCOLN. 
 
 101 
 
 valued at £37 17s. yearly, now worth £757; grant¬ 
 ed, 5 Edward VI., to Sir William Cecil; it is now 
 a farm-house belonging to the Earl of Exeter, 
 under the name of St. Cuthbert’s fee. 
 
 Augustine Friary, in the west of the town, found¬ 
 ed, before the year 1340, by the Archdeacon of 
 Richmond; granted, 6 Edward VI., to Edward, 
 Lord Clinton. 
 
 Dominican Friary, founded on the east of the 
 town, before the year 1240; granted, 33 Henry 
 VIII., to Robert Bocher and David Vincent. 
 
 Franciscan Convent, founded, 48 Edward III.; 
 granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suf¬ 
 folk. 
 
 At Stykeswold. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded, 
 m the reign of King Stephen, by the Countess Lucy; 
 valued at £163 Is. 2±d. yearly, now worth £3,261 4s. 
 2d .; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Robert Dighton. 
 
 At Swinshed. A Cistercian Monastery, founded, in 
 the year 1134, by Robert de Griesley; valued at £175 
 19s. 10 d. yearly, now worth £3,519 16s. 8cZ.; granted, 
 6 Edward VI., to Edward, Lord Clinton. 
 
 At Tateshale. A College, founded, 17 Henry VI., 
 by Sir Ralph Cromwell; valued at £348 5s. 1 Id. yearly, 
 now worth £6,965 18s. 4 d.\ granted, 36 Henry VIII., 
 to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Thorne^ton upon the Humber. An Augustine 
 Priory, founded, in the year 1139, by William, Earl of 
 Albemarle; valued at £730 17s. 2^d. yearly, now worth 
 £14,617 4s. 2d.", granted, 1 Edward VI., to the Bishop 
 of Lincoln. 
 
 At Thornholm. An Augustine Priory, founded by 
 King Stephen; valued at £155 19s. 6 d. yearly, now 
 worth £3,119 10s.; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Charles. 
 Duke of SufTolk. 
 
 At Torkesey. An Augustine Priory, built by King 
 9* 
 
102 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 John; valued at £27 2s. 8cZ. yearly, now worth £542 
 13s. 4 d .; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Sir Philip Hoby 
 
 At Tupholm. A Premonstratensian Monastery, found¬ 
 ed, in the reign of Henry II., by Alan de Nevill and 
 Gilbert his brother; valued at £119 2s. 8 d. yearly, now 
 worth £2,382 13s. 4cZ.; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Sir 
 Thomas Heneage. 
 
 At Vaudey. A Cistercian Monastery, founded, in 
 the year 1147, by William, Earl of Albemarle ; valued 
 at £177 15s. 7 \d. yearly, now worth £3,555 12s. 6cZ.; 
 granted 30 Hen. VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Wellow. An Augustine Priory, founded by King 
 Henry I.; valued at £152 7s. 4cZ. yearly, now worth 
 £3,047 6s. 8 d .; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Sir Thomas 
 Heneage. 
 
 At Willesford. An Alien Priory, founded, in the 
 reign of King Stephen, by Hugh de Evermue; granted, 
 30 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Wileketone. An Hospitaler’s House, founded, 
 m the reign of King Stephen, by Roger de Buslei; 
 valued at £174 11s. 1^-cZ. yearly, now worth £3,491 2s. 
 6cZ.; granted, 37 Henry VlII., to John Cock and John 
 Thurgood. 
 
 At Witham. A Templar’s Hospital, founded, in the 
 /ear 1164, by Hubert de Ria and Margaret de Perci; 
 granted, 5 Elizabeth, to Stephen Holford. 
 
 MIDDLESEX (County.) 
 
 At Hermondesworth. An Alien Priory; granted, 
 1 Edward VI., to Sir William Paget. 
 
 At Hounslow. A Trinitarian Friary, founded, for 
 the redemption of captives, 3 Edward I.; valued at 
 
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX. 
 
 103 
 
 €80 15s. 0^-eZ. yearly, now worth £1,615 05. 10c/. ; 
 granted to William, Lord Windsor. 
 
 At Kylburn. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry I., by the Convent of Westminster;, 
 valued at £121165. yearly, now worth £2,436; granted, 
 1 Edward VI., to John Earl of Warwick. 
 
 In London. St. Paul’s Cathedral, founded, in the 
 year 604, by Bishop Mellitus: rebuilt, 961, by iElfstan; 
 Durnt, 1666; rebuilt, 1675; yearly revenues, £1,855 
 155. 11^-c/., now worth £17,115 195. 2d. 
 
 St. Bartholomew’s Priory, founded, in the year 
 1123, by Rayere; valued at £757 85. 4 $d. yearly, 
 now worth £15,148 7s. 6cZ.; granted, 1 Elizabeth, 
 to Lord Rich. 
 
 Charter-House, founded, in the year 1349, by 
 Sir Walter de Manny, without West Smithfield 
 Bars; valued at £736 2s. 7 d. yearly, now worth 
 £14,722 115. 8c/.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Sir 
 Thomas Audley. 
 
 Christ Church, within Aldgate, founded, by 
 Queen Maud, in the year 1108; granted, 23 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Thomas Audley, Speaker of the 
 House of Commons. 
 
 Clerkenwell Monastery, founded, in the year 
 1100, by Robert, a priest; valued at £282 I65. 5d. 
 yearly, now worth £5,656 8s. 4 d.; granted, 37 
 Henry VIII., to Walter Hanley, and John Wil¬ 
 liams, Knight. 
 
 Epstminster, New Abbey, founded, east of the 
 Tower of London, by King Edward III., in the 
 year 1349; revenues at the dissolution, £602 lls. 
 10^-c/., now worth £22,051 175. 6c/.; the site grant¬ 
 ed, 34 Henry VIII., to Sir Arthur Darcy, on which 
 Tower-hill now stands. 
 
 At Elsing Spittle, near Cripplegate. A College, 
 founded, in the year 1329, by William Elsing, of Lon- 
 
104 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 don; valued at £239 13s. 11 d. yearly, now worth 
 £4,793 18s. 4cZ.; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to John 
 Williams, master of the King’s jewels; but it was 
 burnt on the following Christmas eve, as he was living 
 in it. 
 
 At Haliwell. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, in 
 the year 1127, by Robert Fitz More; yearly revenues 
 £347 Is. 3d., now worth £6,941 5s.; granted, 36 Henry 
 VIII., to William Webb. 
 
 At St. Helen’s. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, 
 in the year 1210, by William Fitz Williams; revenues 
 yearly £376 6s., now worth £7,526; granted, 33 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Richard Cromwell. 
 
 St. James’s Chapel on the Wall, founded near 
 the wall, as early as the time of Richard I., cor¬ 
 ner of Monkwell-street; granted, 34 Henry VIII., 
 to William Lamb, clothmaker, from whom it was 
 called Lamb’s Chapel. 
 
 St. John of Jerusalem, founded, near West 
 Smithfield, by Jordan Briset, in the year 1100; 
 valued at £2,385 12s. 8 d. yearly, now worth 
 £47,712 13s. 4cZ.; suppressed 1 Elizabeth. 
 
 r 
 
 The Minories, or Nunnery of the ladies of St. 
 Clare, founded, by Blanch, Queen of Navarre, in 
 the year 1293, in the street leading from the Tower 
 to Aldgate; yearly revenues £342 5s. 10-^-d., now 
 worth £6,845 18s. Ad .; granted, 6 Edward VI., to 
 Henry, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 Barking Chapel, within the Church of Allhal¬ 
 lows, Barking, founded, by King Richard I.; sup¬ 
 pressed, 2 Edward VI. 
 
 Holmes’ College, founded, by Chancellor 
 'Holmes, in the year 1395, near the north door of 
 the Cathedral of St. Paul; granted, 2 Edward VI., 
 to John Hulson and W. Pendred. 
 
 London, or Guild Hall College, founded, in the 
 
COUNT 1 OK MIDDLESEX. 
 
 105 
 
 Chapel of St. Mary Magdalen, by Adam Francis 
 and Henry Frowick, in the year 1368; yearly re¬ 
 venues £12 185. 9 d., now worth £258 15s.; grant¬ 
 ed, 4 Edward VI., to the Mayor and Corporation 
 of London. 
 
 St. Martin-le-Grande, within Aldersgate, found¬ 
 ed, about the year 700, by Victred, or Wicthred, 
 King of Kent; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to the 
 Dean and Chapter of Westminster. 
 
 St. Michael, Crooked-lane, founded, about the 
 year 1380, by William Walworth, Mayor of Lon¬ 
 don; granted to George Cotton and Thomas 
 Reeves. 
 
 Poultney College, founded, in the year 1332, by 
 Sir John Poultney; yearly revenues £97, now 
 worth £1,940; granted, 1 Edward VI., to J % ohn 
 Cheke, and Osbert Mountford, and Thomas Gawdy. 
 
 Whitingdon College, or Hospital, in the Church 
 of St. Michael Royal, founded, in the year 1424, 
 by Sir Richard Whitingdon, Mayor of London; 
 yearly revenues £20 Is. 8cl ., now worth £401 13s. 
 4 d.\ granted, 2 Edward VI., to Armigel Wade. 
 
 St. Anthony’s Hospital, on the west of Thread- 
 needle-street, given, by King Henry III., to the 
 Brethren of St. Antony; yearly revenues £55 6s. 
 ScZ., now worth £1,106 13s. 4 d. 
 
 St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, founded, in Smith- 
 field, by a Courtier of King Henry I., for sick per¬ 
 sons and women in labour, and for the mainte¬ 
 nance of the orphans, until the age of seven, 
 whose mothers died in the Hospital; yearly reve¬ 
 nues £371 13s. 2d., now worth £7,433 3s. 4 d. 
 
 St. Giles’ College for leprous persons, founded, 
 by the charitable Maud, Queen of Henry I.; 
 granted, 36 Henry VIII., to John, Lord Dudley. 
 
 St. Catherine’s Chapel, near the Tower, found¬ 
 ed in the year 1148, by Maud, Queen of King 
 
106 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 Stephen; yearly revenues £315 14s. 2d ., now 
 worth £6,314 3s. 4 d. 
 
 St. Mary Spittle, without Bishopgate, a Priory, 
 founded, in the year 1197, by Walter Fitz Eal- 
 dred; yearly revenues £557 14s. 10d., now worth 
 £11,154 17s. 6c/.; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to 
 Stephen Vaughan. 
 
 Roundcivall Hospital, on the south side of the 
 Strand, between York-buildings and Northumber¬ 
 land house, founded, by William Mareschall, Earl 
 of Pembroke, in the time of Henry III.; granted, 
 3 Edward VI., to Sir Thomas Cawarden. 
 
 Savoy Hospital, near the Strand, founded, by 
 Henry VII., in the year 1505, for 100 poor people; 
 yearly revenues £529 5s. 7-^-tZ., now worth £10,585 
 . 12s. 6 d .; suppressed 7 Edward VI. 
 
 Almshouses in Staining-lane, ten in number, 
 founded, near Plaberdasher’s Hall, by Thomas 
 Huiulow, for the poor of that Company, in the 
 year 1539. 
 
 St. Thomas of Aeon, an Hospital, founded, on 
 the north side of Cheapside, by Thomas Fitz 
 Theobald and his wife, sister to St. Thomas, in 
 the reign of Henry II.; yearly revenues £300, 
 now worth £6,000; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to 
 the Mercers’ Company. 
 
 Augustine Monastery, founded, on the west side 
 of Broad-street, London, by Humphrey Bohun, 
 Earl of Hereford, in the year .1253; valued at £57 
 0s. 5d. yearly, now worth £1,140 8s. 4 d .; granted, 
 in the year 1550, to John a Lasco, as a preaching- 
 house for his congregation of Walloons and still 
 continues a Dutch house. 
 
 Black Friar’s Monastery, founded about the year 
 1221, near Holborn, in Chancery-lane; yearly re 
 venues £104 15s. 7 d., now worth £2,095 11s. 8 d. 
 granted to Thomas Cawarden. 
 
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX. 
 
 107 
 
 Grey Friars, or Franciscan Abbey, founded near 
 Newgate, about the year 1224, by John Ewin and 
 others; yearly revenues £32 19s. 10e/., now worth 
 £659 17s. 6 d .; granted 38 Henry VIII. 
 
 Carmelite Friary, founded, on the south side of 
 Fleet-street, between the New Temple and Salis- 
 bury-court, by Sir Richard Gray; yearly revenue 
 £62 7s. 3c/., now worth £1,247 5s.; granted, 32 
 Henry VIII., to Richard Moresyne and William 
 Butts. 
 
 Holy Cross Friary, founded, near Tower-hill, in 
 the year 1298, by Ralph Hosier and William So- 
 herns; yearly revenue £52 13s. 4c/., now worth 
 £1,053 6s. 8 d .; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Sir 
 Thomas Wyat. 
 
 At Riselipp. An Alien Priory, founded, in the reign 
 of William the Conqueror, by Ernulph de Heding; 
 yearly revenue £18, now worth £360; granted, 16 
 Henry VIII. 
 
 At Stratford. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, 
 in the reign of William the Conqueror, by William, 
 Bishop of London; yearly revenue £121 16s., now 
 worth £2,436; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Ralph 
 Sadler. 
 
 At Syon. A Brigitine Nunnery, founded, in the 
 year 1414, by King Henry V.; yearly revenue £1,944 
 11s. 8£cZ., now worth £38,891 14s. 2 d .; granted, 7 Ed¬ 
 ward VI., to John, Duke of Northumberland. 
 
 Syon, or Brentford Hospital, founded in the east 
 end of the town, 25 Henry V., by John Summer- 
 set, Chancellor of the Exchequer; granted, 1 Ed¬ 
 ward VI., to Edward, Duke of Summerset. 
 
 At Westminster. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, 
 on the ruins of the Temple of Apollo, by King Lucius; 
 rebuilt in the year 610, by the Saxon King, Sebert; 
 destroyed in the Danish wars ; restored by King Ethel- 
 bert; and Dunstan, Bishop of London, in the year 958 
 
103 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 and largely endowed by King Edward the Confessor; 
 yearly revenue £3,977 6s. 4£cZ., now worth £79,546 
 7s. 6 d. 
 
 St. Stephen’s chapel, founded, in the year 1347, 
 by Ring Edward III. ; rents £1,085 10s. 5 d., now 
 worth £21,710 8s. 4 d .; granted, 6 Edward VI., 
 to Sir John Gate. 
 
 St. James’ Hospital, founded, before the con¬ 
 quest, for 14 leprous women; on or near it is built 
 St. James’ Palace; yearly value £100 now worth 
 £ 2 , 000 . 
 
 MONMOUTH (County.) 
 
 At Aeergavenny. A Benedictine Priory, founded, 
 in the reign of William the Conqueror, by Hamelin 
 Baylon; rents £59 4s., now worth £1,184; suppressed. 
 
 At Goldcliff. An Alien Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1113, by Robert de Chandos; valued at £144 18s. 
 1 d., yearly, now worth £2,S93 Is. Scl. 
 
 At Grace-Dieu, or Stow. A Cistercian Abbey, 
 built in the year 1226, by Sir John of Monmouth; 
 rents £26 Is. 4c7., now worth £521 6s. 8d .; granted, 
 37 Henry VIII., to Thomas Herbert and William 
 Bretton. 
 
 At St. Kenmercy. A Priory, founded, prior to 
 1291; valued at £8 4s. 8cZ., now worth £164 13s. 4 d. 
 
 At Llanhodenei, or Lantony. An Augustine Priory, 
 founded, before the year 110S, by Hugh Lacy; valued 
 at £71 3s. '2d. yearly, now worth £1,423 3s. 4 d.\ 
 granted, 38 Henry VIII., to Nicholas Arnold. 
 
 At Llatgkywan. An Alien Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1183; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to John Doyley 
 and John Scudamore. 
 
109 
 
 COUNTY OF NORFOLK. 
 
 3 
 
 At Llantarnam. A Cistercian Monastery, with the 
 yearly revenue of £71 3s. 2d., now worth £1,423 3s. 
 4 d.; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to John Parker. 
 
 At Malpas. A/Cluniac Cell, founded in the reign 
 of Henry I., by Winebald de Baeluna; rents £15 65. 
 8 d., now worth £306 135. 4 d .; granted, 1 Edward VI., 
 to Sir William Herbert. 
 
 At Monmouth. A Benedictine Priory, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry I., by Wihenoc of Moamouth, 
 rents £56 15. llcZ., now worth £1,121185. 4 d .; granted 
 to Richard Price and Thomas Perry. , 
 
 At Newport. A Friary stood by the Key, beneath 
 the Bridge; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Sir Edward 
 Carn. 
 
 At Stroguil. An Alien Priory, founded, in the 
 reign of King Stephen, stood here; rents, at the disso¬ 
 lution, £32 45., now worth £644. 
 
 At Tintern. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1131, by Walter de Clare; rents £256 115. 6 d. 
 now worth £5,131 105.; granted, 28 Henry VIII., to 
 Henry, Earl of Worcester. 
 
 At Usk. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, before 
 the year 1236; rents £69 95. 8 d., now worth £1,389 
 135. 4d .; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Roger Williams. 
 
 NORFOLK (County.) 
 
 At Aldeby. A Benedictine Cell, founded, in the 
 reign of Henry I., by Bishop Herbert. 
 
 At Atteleurgh. A College, founded, 7 Henry IV., 
 by Sir Robert Mortimer; rents £21 I65. 0?rd., now 
 worth £436 O5. 10<2.; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to 
 Robert, Earl of Sussex. 
 
110 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Beeston. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 reign of Plenry III., by Lady Margery de Cressy; 
 yearly value £50 65. 4pc/., now worth £1,006 7s. 6c/.; 
 granted, 37 Henry VIII., to Sir Edmund Windham and 
 Giles Seafoule. 
 
 At Bek Hospital. An Hospital, founded, in the 
 reign of Henry I., by William de Bek, on the great 
 road from Norwich to Walsingham with thirteen beds 
 and night’s lodging for poor travellers ; granted tG 
 Sir John Parrot. 
 
 At St. Bennet’s of Hulme. A Benedictine Abbey, 
 founded, in the year 800, by Prince Horn, in this soli¬ 
 tary place, for Hermits; yearly value £677 9s. SpcZ.; 
 now worth £13,549 14s. 2cZ.; granted, 27 Henry VIII., 
 to the Bishop of Norwich. 
 
 At Binham. A Benedictine Cell, founded, in the 
 reign of Henry I., by the Nephew of William the 
 Conqueror; yearly value £160 Is., now worth £3,201; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Thomas Paston, Esq. 
 
 At Blackborough. A Benedictine Nunnery, found¬ 
 ed, in the reign of Plenry II., by Roger de Scales; 
 yearly value £76 3s. 9^-cZ., now worth £1,523 15s. 10c/.; 
 granted, 4 Edward VI., to the Bishop of Norwich and 
 his successors. 
 
 At Blakeney. A Carmelite Monastery, founded, 
 24 Edward I., by Richard Stomer and others; granted, 
 33 Henry VIII., to William Rede. 
 
 At Bromehill. An Augustine Priory, founded, 
 about the year 152S, granted to the Fellows of Christ’s 
 College, Cambridge, by Edward VI. 
 
 At Bromholm. A Cluniae Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1113, by William de Glanvill; yearly value £144 
 19s. Or [cl., now worth £2,899 0s. 10cZ.; granted, 37 
 Henry VIII., to Thomas Woodhouse. 
 
 At Oldbuckenham. An Augustine Priory, founded, 
 in the reign of King Stephen, by William de Albini, 
 
COUNTY OF NORFOLK. Ill 
 
 Earl of Chichester; rents £131 115., now worth 
 £2,631; granted, to Sir Thomas Lovell. 
 
 At Burnham Nortan. A Carmelite Monastery, 
 founded, in the year 1241, by Sir Ralph de Hemen- 
 hale ; yearly value £2 5s. kd .; now worth £85 6s. 8d. : 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to William, Lord Cobham. 
 
 At Carbroke. A House of Knights Hospitalers, 
 founded, in the reign of Henry II., by Maud, Countess 
 of Clare ; yearly value £65 2s. lie/., now worth £1,302 
 18s. 4 d .; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Sir Richard 
 Gresham and Sir Richard Southwell. 
 
 At Castleacre. A Cluniac Priory, founded, before 
 the year 1085, by William Warren, Earl of Surrey; 
 yearly value £324 17s. 5%d., now worth £6,497 9s. 
 2d .; granted, 29 Henry VIII., to Thomas, Duke of 
 Norfolk. 
 
 At Costre by Yarmouth. A College, founded, in 
 the reign of Edward I., by Sir John Falstaff; yearly 
 value £2 13s. 4 d., now worth £53 6s. 8d. 
 
 At Chosell. A Lazarite Monastery, founded, bi fore 
 the time of Edward I., by Earl Gilfard; yearly *alue 
 £13 ISs. 2d., now worth £276 3s. 4 d.y granted, 36 
 Henry VIII., to Sir John Dudley, Viscount Lisle. 
 
 At Cockesford. An Augustine Canons, established 
 in the reign of King Stephen, by William Che .ny; 
 yearly value £153 7s. Id., now worth £3,067 Is. 8d .; 
 granted, 29 Henry VIII., to Thomas, Duke of Norfolk. 
 
 At Crabiiouse. An Augustine Nunnery, founded, 
 in the south of the parish of Wigenhale, in the year 
 1181, by the Convent of Reynham; yearly value £31 
 16s. 7 d., now worth £636 Us. 8 d .; granted to Sir 
 John Gage. 
 
 At West Dereiiam. A Premonstratensian Abbey, 
 founded, in the year 11S8, by Plubert, Bishop of Salis¬ 
 bury ; yearly value £252 12s. 1 \~d., now worth £5,052 
 19s. 2d .; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Thomas Dere¬ 
 ham. 
 
112 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Fieldallyng. An Alien Priory, built in the 
 reign of Henry II., Maud de Harscolye ; granted to 
 Martin Hastings and James Borne. 
 
 At Flitcham. An Augustine Cell^ given in the 
 reign of Richard I., to Dametta de Fucham; yearly 
 value £62 10s. 6^-cZ., now worth £1,250 10s. 10cZ.; 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Edward, Lord Clinton. 
 
 At Hampton. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the time of Henry I., by Roger de St. Martins; rents 
 £39 Os. 9c/., now worth £780 15s.; granted, 37 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir William Fermer. 
 
 At Heringley. An Hospital de Dieu, founded, in 
 the year 1475, by Hugh Attefenne; yearly value £23 
 6s. 5c/., now worth £466 8s. 4 d .; granted, 37 Henry 
 VIII, to Sir Thomas Clere. 
 
 At Hickling. An Augustine Priory,, founded, in 
 the year 1185, by Theobald de Valentia; yearly value 
 £137 0s. 1^-cZ., now worth £2,740 2s. 6c/.; granted, 37 
 Plenry VIII., to the Bishop of Norwich, and his suc¬ 
 cessors. 
 
 At Hitciiam. A Cluniac Cell, founded, in the time 
 of William Rufus, by William Warren, Earl of 
 Surrey ; granted, 29 Henry VIII., to Thomas, Duke 
 of Norfolk. 
 
 At Horsham. A Benedictine Priory, found, in the 
 year 1105, by Robert Fitzwalter; rents £193 2s. 3-kZ., 
 now worth £3,864 5s. 10c/.; granted, 35 Henry VIII., 
 to Sir Edward Elrington. 
 
 At Ingham. A College for the redemption of Cap¬ 
 tives, founded, in the year 1360, by Sir Miles Staple- 
 ton ; yearly value £74 2s. 7^-c/., now worth £l,4S2 12s. 
 6c/.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to the Bishop of Norwich. 
 
 At Langley. A Premonstratensian Abbey, built in 
 the year 1198, by Robert Fitz Roger; rents £128 19s. 
 9£</., now worth £2,579 15s. 10 d .; granted, 38 Henry 
 VIII. to John Berney. 
 
COUNTY OF NORFOLK. 113 
 
 At Lynn. A Benedictine Cell, founded, in the year 
 1100, by Bishop Herbert. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, founded, in the reign of 
 Edward I.; yearly value £7 6s. lid., now worth 
 £146 18s. id. 
 
 St. Mary Magdalen’s Hospital founded 1145. 
 
 An Augustine Monastery, founded, in the reign 
 of Edward I.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to John 
 Eyer ; yearly value £1 4s. 6d., now worth £24 10s. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded, 21 Edward I., by 
 Thomas Gedney; valued at 18s. yearly, now 
 worth £18; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to John ' 
 Eyer. v 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, founded, in the year 1264, 
 by Thomas de Feltsham; granted to John Eyer. 
 The steeple stands as a sea mark. 
 
 White Friar’s House, founded, in the year 1269, 
 by some Noblemen ; yearly value £l 15s. 8d., now 
 worth £35 13s. id. 
 
 At Mariiam. A Cistercian Nunnery, endowed in the 
 year 1251, by the Countess of Arundel; yearly value 
 £42 4s. 74d., now worth £844 12s. 6cZ.; granted, 38 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Nicholas Hare and Robert Hare. 
 
 At Massingham Magna. An Augustine Priory, 
 founded, in the year 1260, by Nicholas de Syre; grant¬ 
 ed to Sir Thomas Gresham. 
 
 At Modney. A Benedictine Cell, in the parish of 
 Helgay ; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Robert Hogan. 
 
 At Monte Jo vis, or Mountjoy. An Augustine Pri¬ 
 ory, founded, in the reign of King John, by William 
 de Gisnetto. 
 
 At Newbridge. A Hermit’s Chapel, built in the 
 year 1373; rents £3 7s. 6d .; now worth £67 10s. 
 
 At Norwich. A Cathedral and Benedictine Priory, 
 built, in the year 1094, by Herbert, Bishop of Thetford. 
 
 10 * 
 
114 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 The revenues of the bishoprick were valued at £1,050 
 175. 6c/., and of the convent £1,061 145. 3.^c/. yearly; 
 both sums now worth £42,251 155. 10c/. The estates 
 granted, 27 Henry VIIL, to the Bishops of Norwich, 
 but instead of the estates, they got the revenues of some 
 monasteries. 
 
 St. Leonard’s Benedictine Cell, founded, on a 
 hill near the city, by Bishop Herbert; granted, 5 
 Elizabeth, to Thomas, Duke of Norfolk. 
 
 Kairo, or Caiow. A Benedictine Nunnery, en¬ 
 dowed, in the year 1146, by King Stephen ; yearly 
 value £84 125. 1^-c/., now worth £1,692 2s. 6c/.; 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to John Shelton, Knight. 
 
 Chapel in the Fields, built, in the year 1250, by 
 John Brown, Priest; rents £86 16s. 04c/., now 
 worth £1,736 05. 10c/.; granted, 37 Henry VIII., 
 to Doctor Miles Spenser. 
 
 St. Gile’s Hospital, founded, in the year 1249, 
 by Walter, Bishop of Norwich; rents £90 125.; 
 now worth £1,812. 
 
 Lazar’s Houses, several of them founded here 
 for the poor; granted to Edmond Newport. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, settled here in the time of 
 Edward I.; granted, 2 Edward VI., to Sir Tho¬ 
 mas Heneage and to William Lord Willoughby. 
 
 The Black Friary, founded, by Sir Thomas Gel- 
 ham, in the year 1226; granted, 32 Henry VIII. 
 to the Mayor and Citizens. 
 
 The House of Grey Friars, founded in the year 
 1226, by John de Hastingford; granted, 30 Henry 
 VIII., to the Duke of Norfolk. 
 
 The White, or Carmelite, Friary, founded, in 
 the year 1256, by Philip Cougate of Norwich; 
 granted, 34 Henry VIII., to Richard Andrews and 
 Leonard Chamberlavne. 
 
COUNTY OF NORFOLK. 
 
 115 
 
 At Pentney. An Augustine Priory, founded, m the 
 reign of William the Conqueror, by Robert de Valli- 
 leus; yearly value £215 18s. 8c/., now worth £4,318 
 13s. 4 d .; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Thomas Mild- 
 may. 
 
 At Peterstone. An Augustine Priory, founded, be¬ 
 fore the year 120C ; granted 4 Edw. VI. 
 
 At Rushworth. A College, founded, in the year 
 1342, by Sir Edmond de Gonville, Priest; yearly value 
 £85 15s. 0+c/., now worth £1,715 0 . 5 . 10c/.; granted, 33 
 Henry VIII., to Henry, Earl of Surrey ; and after that 
 to Sir John Cheke. 
 
 At Shouldham. A Cistercian Priory, founded, in 
 the reign of Richard I., by Jeffrey Fitz Piers, Earl of 
 Essex ; rents £171 65. 8c/., now worth £3,426 13s. 4c/. 5 
 granted, 7 Edward VI., to Thomas Mildmay. 
 
 At Slevesholm. A Cluniac Cell, in the parish of 
 Methwold, by William Earl, Warren, in the year 1222; 
 granted, 23 Elizabeth, to Osbert Mundeford. 
 
 At Sporle. An Alien Priory, granted, 1 Elizabeth, 
 to Eaton College. 
 
 At Thetford. A Cluniac Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1104, by Roger Bigod, Nobleman; yearly value 
 £418 6s. 3c/., now worth £8,369 5s.; granted, 32 Henry 
 VIII., to Thomas, Duke of Norfolk. 
 
 A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, about the year 
 1160, by Hugh de Norwold, Abbot; rents £50 9s. 
 8c/., now worth £1,009 13s. 4 d .; granted, 30 Henry 
 VIII., to Richard Fulmerston, Esq. 
 
 A College, or Guild, founded, in the reign of 
 Edward I., by Gilbert de Pykenham; rents £5 9s. 
 7c/., now worth £109 11s. 8c/.; granted, 7 James 
 I., to Francis Morice and Francis Philips, Esqrs. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, founded for Lepers: granted, 
 32 Henry VIII., to Richard Fulmerstone, Esq. 
 
116 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 St. Mary Magdalen’s Hospital, founded, by John 
 de Warren, Earl of Surrey, and he endowed it 
 with S64 acres of land; yearly value £l 13s. 6 d. 
 only, now worth £33 10s.; granted to Sir Richard 
 Fulmerstone. 
 
 An Augustine Friary", granted, 32 Henry VIII., 
 to Sir Richard Fulmerstone. 
 
 At Thomeston. A College, founded, 23 Edward 
 III., by Sir Thomas de Shardelau and his brother; 
 yearly value £52 15s. 1%d. r now worth £1,055 12s. 6c/., 
 granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Sir Edmond Knyvet. 
 
 At Waburn. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 reign of Henry II., by Sir Ralph Meyngaryn ; yearly 
 value £28 7s. 2c/., now worth £567 3s. 4 d .; granted to 
 Richard Heydon, 37 Henry VIII. 
 
 At Walsingham. An Augustine Priory, built in the 
 year 1061, by the widow of Richoldis de Favarches ; 
 yearly value £446 14s. 44c/., now worth £8,934 7s. 6c/., 
 granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Thomas Sidney. . 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded, about the year 
 1346, by Elizabeth de Burgo, Countess of Clare; 
 value yearly £3, now worth £60; granted, 36 Henry 
 VIII., to John Eyer. 
 
 At Welles. An Alien Friory, founded, in the time oi 
 William the Conqueror, by William de Streis ; granted, 
 2 Edward VI., to the Bishops of Ely. 
 
 At Wendling. A Premonstratensian Monastery, 
 founded, 50 Henry III., by the Rev. William de Wend¬ 
 ling ; valuation £55 18s. 44c/., now worth £1,118 7s. 
 6c/.; granted, 16 Elizabeth, to Edward Dyer and H. 
 Cressener. 
 
 At Westacre. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the time of William Rufus, by Oliver, the parish priest, 
 value £308 19s. 114c/. yearly, now Worth £6,179 19s. 
 2c/.; granted, 7 Edward VI., to Thomas Gresham. 
 
 At Weybridge. An Augustine Priory, founded early, 
 
COUNTY OF NORFOLK. 
 
 117 
 
 by the Bigod family; value £7 13s. 4 d. yearly, now 
 worth £153 6s. 8 d .; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Ri¬ 
 chard Fulmerstone. 
 
 At Wirham. An Alien Priory, founded, by tlfe Earls 
 of Clare, in the time of Richard I.; value £7 16s. yearly, 
 now worth £156; granted to Thomas Guibon and Wil¬ 
 liam Mynn. 
 
 At Wormgay. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the time of Richard I., by William de Warren; grant¬ 
 ed, 4 Edward VI., to the Bishop of Norwich. 
 
 At Wymondham. A Benedictine Monastery, found¬ 
 ed, in the year 1107, by William de Albini; yearly va¬ 
 lue £72 5s. Ad., now worth £1,445 6s. 8 d .; granted, 37 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Walter Hadden. 
 
 An Hospital, founded, by William de Albini, in 
 the year 1146; granted to the Corporation of Nor¬ 
 wich. 
 
 At Yarmouth. A Benedictine Cell, built, in the 
 year 1101, by Herbert, Bishop of Norwich; now belongs 
 to the Cathedral of Norwich. 
 
 St. Mary’s Hospital, built in the time of Edward 
 
 1., by Thomas Falstaff; the chapel and rooms are 
 now a grammar school, and workhouse for the poor. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, built, 55 Henry III., by Sir 
 William Garbridge; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to 
 Richard Andrews and Leonard Chamberlayne. 
 
 A Grey BViary, founded in the time of Henry 
 
 111., by Sir William Garbridge; granted, 33 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Richard Cromwell, alias Williams. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, founded, in the year 1278, 
 by King Edward I.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to 
 Thomas Denton and Richard Nottington. 
 
113 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 NORTHAMPTON (County.) 
 
 At Canon’s Ashby. An Augustine Priory, founded 
 in the time of John; valuation £127 19s. yearly, now 
 worth £2,559 ; granted, 29 Henry VIII., to Sir Francis 
 Bryan. 
 
 At Barnacke. A College, granted, 6 Edward VI., 
 to David Vincent. 
 
 At Chacomb. An Augustine Priory, founded, m the 
 time of Henry II., by Hugh de Chacomb ; value £93 
 6s. yearly, now worth £l,866 5s. 10cZ.; granted, 
 38 Henry VIII., to Michael Fox.. 
 
 At Cotherstoke. A College, founded, in the year 
 1336, by the Rev. John Gifford ; granted, 1 Edward 
 VI., to Sir Robert Kirkham. 
 
 At Daventree. A Cluniac Priory, built in the time 
 of William the Conqueror, by Hugh de Leicester j 
 value £236 7s. 6 d. yearly, now worth £4,727 10s.; 
 granted, by Henry VIII., to Christ Church, in Oxford. 
 
 At St. Dewes, or St. David’s, near Northampton. 
 An Hospital, founded, in the year 1200, by Walter the 
 Prior of St. Andrew’s; value £24 6s. Id. yearly, now 
 worth £486 Is. S d. 
 
 At Dingley. A House of Hospitalers, built in the 
 time of Stephen ; rents £108 13s 54-rZ., now worth 
 £2,173 9s. 2d.; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Edward 
 Griffith. 
 
 At Fodringhey. A College, founded, in the year 
 1411, by King Henry IV.; value £419 1 Is. 10£c7. yearly, 
 now worth £8,391 17s. 6cZ.; granted to James Crew. 
 
 At Higham Ferrers. A College, founded, in the 
 time of Henry V., by the most reverend and munificent 
 Henry Chicheley, Archbishop of Canterbury; value 
 £156 2s. 7kd. yearly, now worth £3,124 12s. 6 d.\ 
 granted, 6 Elizabeth, to John Smith and Richard Duf- 
 field. 
 
COUNTY OF NORTHAMPTON. 
 
 119 
 
 At Castle Hymel. An Augustine Priory, founded, 
 m the reign of John, by Richard Engain, Lord of 
 Blatherwike; value £62 16s. yearly, now worth £1,256; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to John, Lord Russell. 
 
 At Irtelingburgh. A College, founded, in the time 
 of Edward III., by the executrix of John Pyel; value 
 £64 12s. 10 ^d. yearly, now worth £1,292 17s. 6 d .; 
 granted, 23 Elizabeth, to Edward Downing and P. 
 Ashton. 
 
 At Katebi, or Katesby. A Benedictine Nunnery, 
 built in the time of Richard I., by Robert de Esseby ; 
 value £145 Os. 6 d. yearly, now worth £2,900 10s. ; 
 granted, 28 Henry VIII., to John Onley. 
 
 At LuEfield. A Benedictine Priory, founded, 24 
 Henry I., by Robert Bossu, Earl of Leicester; yearly 
 value £19 19s. 2d., now worth £399 3s. 4 d .; granted 
 5 Edward VI., to Sir Nicholas Throkmorton. 
 
 At Northampton. A Cluniac Priory, founded, in 
 the year 1076, by Simon Seinliz, Earl of Huntingdon; 
 value £344 13s. Id. yearly, now worth £6,893 11s. 8 d .; 
 granted, 4 Edward VI., to Sir Thomas Smith. 
 
 An Augustine Priory, founded, in the year 1112, 
 by William Peverell, natural son of William the 
 Conqueror; value £213 17s. 2d. yearly, now worth 
 £4,377 3s. 4<i.; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to Nicho¬ 
 las Gitfard. 
 
 A Cluniac Nunnery de Pratis, founded, in the 
 time of Stephen, by Simon Seinliz, Earl of Nor¬ 
 thampton; value £119 9s. 7 ±d. yearly, now worth 
 £2,389 12s. 6 d .; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to John 
 Mershe. 
 
 A College, founded, 38 Henry VI., value £1 19s. 
 4rf. yearly, now worth £39 6s. 8 d .; granted, 2 Ed¬ 
 ward VI., to William Ward and Richard Venebles. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, for the sick, founded, in the 
 year 1137, by Walter, Archdeacon of Northamp- 
 
120 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 ton; value £25 6s. 2\d. yearly, now worth £516 
 4s. 2d. ; granted, 26 Henry VIII. 
 
 St. Leonard’s Hospital, m East Cotton, founded, 
 outside the town, by William the Conqueror; value 
 £11 65. 8 d. yearly, now worth £226 13s. 4 d. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded, in the year 1322, 
 by John Longville; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to 
 Robert Dighton. 
 
 A Black Friary, founded, in the year 1240, by 
 John Dabington; value £5 7s. 10rZ. yearly, now 
 worth £107 18s. 4cZ.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to 
 William Ramesden. 
 
 A Grey Friary, founded about the year 1224; 
 revenues £6 13s. 4cZ., now worth £133 6s. 8 d.\ 
 granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Richard Taverner. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, built in the year 1271, by 
 Thomas Chetwood and Simon Montford; value 
 £10 10s. yearly, now worth £230; granted, 36 
 Henry VIII., to William Ramesden. 
 
 At Oxney. A Benedictine Cell, founded before the 
 time of Richard I.; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Roger 
 Horton. 
 
 At Peterburgh. A Benedictine Abbey, begun in 
 the year 655, by Peada, King of Mercia; but afterwards 
 it underwent many changes during the wars ; Elhel- 
 wold, Bishop of Winchester, assisted by King Edgar, 
 rebuilt it magnificently, in the year 970; income £1,972 
 7s. 0^-cZ. yearly, now worth £39,447 0s. lOrf. 
 
 At Pike well. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1143, by William de Boutwylein; value £347 8s. 
 6^d. yearly, now worth £6,948 0s. IOcZ. ; granted, 1 
 Edward VI., to William, Marquis of Northampton. 
 
 At Rothwell. An Augustine Nunnery, supposed 
 to have been founded by the Clare family; value £10 
 10s. 4 d. yearly, now worth £210 6s. 8d.; granted, 37 
 Henry VIII., to Henry Lee. 
 
COUNTY OF NORTHUMBERLAND. 121 
 
 At Sewardesley. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded, 
 in the time of Henry II., by Richard de Lestre ; yearly 
 value <£18 11s. 2d., now worth £371 3s. 4 d .; granted, 
 4 Edward VI., to Richard Fermer. 
 
 At Sulbey. A Premonstratensian Abbey, founded, 
 about the year 1155, by William de Wideville; rents 
 £305 8s. 5 $d., now worth £6,108 3s. 2d. ; granted, 10 
 Elizabeth, to Sir Christopher Hatton. 
 
 At Towcester. A College, founded, in the time of 
 Henry VI., by William Sponne, D. D., pastor of the 
 town ; rents £19 6s. 8 d., now worth £386 13s. 4 d .; 
 granted, 4 Edward VI., to Richard Heybourn and Wil¬ 
 liam Dalby. 
 
 At Wyrthorp. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded in 
 the time of Henry I.; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to 
 Richard Cecil. 
 
 NORTHUMBERLAND (County.) 
 
 At Alnwick. A Premonstratensian Abbey, founded, 
 in the year 1147, by Eustace Fitz John; value £194* 
 7s. yearly, now worth £388 7s.; granted, 4 Edward 
 VI., to Ralph Sadler and Laurence Winnington. 
 
 At Blanca Landa. A Premonstratensian Abbey, 
 founded, in the year 1165, by Walter de Bolebec; yearly 
 value £44 9s. l^d., now worth £889 2s. 6 d .; granted, 
 37 Henry VIII., to John Bellew and John Broxholm. 
 
 At Brekenburne. An Augustine Priory, founded in 
 the reign of Henry I., by Osbertus Colutarius; yearly 
 value £77, now worth £1,540 granted, 4 Edward VI., 
 to John, Earl of Warwick. 
 
 At Hamburgh. An Augustine Cell, founded by 
 Henry I.; yearly value £124 15s. Id., now worth £2,495 
 11s. 8 d .; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to John Foster. 
 
122 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Hexham. A Cathedral Church, Abbey, and Au¬ 
 gustine Priory. St. Wilfrid and St. Etheldreda the 
 Queen of Egfrid, King of Northumberland, founded, 
 in the year 674, a Church and Monastery of the finest 
 architecture ever seen in these parts of Europe. The 
 Priory was founded in the reign of William the Con¬ 
 queror, by Archbishop Thomas; revenues at the disso¬ 
 lution, £138 Is. 9cZ., now worth £2,761 15s.; granted, 30 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Reginald Carnaby. 
 
 An Hospital, founded, in the time of John, it is 
 thought, by the Archbishop of York ; granted, 3C 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Reginald Carnaby. 
 
 At Holm. A Carmelite Friary, founded, in the year 
 1240, by John Lord Vesci; granted, 6 Elizabeth, to 
 Thomas Reve, and William Ryvet. 
 
 At Lindisfarne. A Cathedral Church and Benedict¬ 
 ine Cell. King Oswald gave this Island, in the year 
 635, to St. Aidan, who came from Scotland to plant 
 Christianity in Northumbria, and there fixed his see. 
 The Cell was founded, in the year 1082; yearly value 
 £60 5s., now worth £l,205 ; granted, 33 Henry VIII., 
 to the Dean and Chapter of Durham. 
 
 At Lambley upon the Tyne. A Benedictine Nun¬ 
 nery, founded, by King John, in honour to St. Patrick; 
 yearly revenue £5 15 s. 8 cl., now worth £115 13s. 4 d.; 
 granted, 7 Edward VI., to John, Duke of Northumber¬ 
 land. 
 
 At Nesseham. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, it 
 is thought, by Lord Dacres; yearly value £26 9s. 9d., 
 now worth £529 15s.; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to James 
 Lawson. * 
 
 At Newcastle. A Benedictine Nunnery, built in 
 the reign of William the Conqueror ; yearly value £37 
 4s. 2d., now worth £744 3s. 4 d .; granted, 36 Henry 
 VIII., to William Barentine and others. 
 
 St. Catherine’s Hospital, built in the reign of 
 
COUNTY OF NORTHUMBERLAND. 123 
 
 Henry IV., by Roger Thornton; yearly income 
 £8 Os. Id, now worth £160 Is. 8 d. 
 
 St. Mary the Virgin’s Hospital, built in the reign 
 of Henry III.; yearly value £26 13s. 4d, now 
 worth £533 6s. 8d 
 
 St. Mary the Virgin’s Hospital, the second ot 
 that name, founded, in the reign of Henry I. 
 
 St. Mary Magdalen Hospital, founded, by Henry 
 I.; yearly value £9 11s. 4d, now worth £191 6s. 8d 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded by Lord Ross; 
 granted, 5 Edward VI., to John, Duke of Northum¬ 
 berland. 
 
 A Black Friary, founded, in the year 1260, oy 
 Sir Peter and Sir Nicholas Scot; granted, 35 Henry 
 VIII., to the Mayor and Burgesses of the town. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, founded, by Richard I.; 
 granted 37 Henry VIII., to Richard Gresham and 
 Richard Billingford. 
 
 A Trinitarian Friary for the redemption of Cap¬ 
 tives, founded by William Wakefield, the master; 
 granted, 37 Henry VIII., to Richard Gresham and 
 Richard Billingford. 
 
 At Novum Monasterium, near Morpeth. A Cister¬ 
 cian abbey, founded, by Ranulph de Merlay, in the year 
 1138; yearly value £140 10s. 4d, now worth £2,810 
 Gs. 8d; granted 7 James I., to Robert Brandling. 
 
 At Ovingham. An Augustine Cell, founded, by Mr. 
 Ufranville ; rents £13 4s. 8d, now worth £268 13s. 4d 
 
 At T inmouth. A Benedictine Cell, founded, by St. 
 Oswald, the first Christian King of Northumberland. 
 St. Herebald was Abbot here in the beginning of the 
 eighth century. Yearly value £511 4s. Id, now worth 
 £10,224 Is. 8 d .; granted, 5 Edward VI., to John, Duke 
 of Northumberland. 
 
124 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 NOTTINGHAM (County.) 
 
 At Beauvale. A Carthusian Priory, founded, 17 
 Edward III., by Nicholas de Cantilupo; valued at £227 
 8s. yearly, now worth £4,548; granted 4 Edward VI., 
 to Richard Morison. , 
 
 At Blyth. A Benedictine Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1088, by Roger de Builly; rents £126 8s. 2 ±d. 
 yearly, now worth £2,528 4s. 2d .; granted, 35 Henry 
 VIII.j to Richard Andrews and William Ramesden. 
 
 An Hospital, founded, for the sick, by William 
 de Cressy, Lord of Hodesac; yearly value £8 14s., 
 now worth £174. 
 
 At Brodholm. A Premonstratensian Nunnery, found¬ 
 ed in the reign of Stephen, by Agnes de Camvile ; yearly 
 revenue £16 5s. 2d., now worth £325 3s. id .; granted, 
 6 Elizabeth, to John Caniers and William Haber. 
 
 At Clifton. A College, founded, in the year 1156, 
 Dy Ralph Brito; rents £61 4s. 8c/., now worth £1,224 
 13s. 4cZ.; granted to Anthony Strelly. 
 
 At Fiskarton. An Augustine Cell, founded, by Ralph 
 de Ayneourt; granted to Edward Fynes, Lord Clinton, 
 and Thomas Morison. 
 
 At Lenton. A Cluniac Priory, founded, by William 
 Peverell, in the reign of Henry I.; rents £417 19s. 3d., 
 now worth £8,359 5s.; granted, 5 Elizabeth, to John 
 Harrington. 
 
 At Marshe. A Benedictine Cell; valued yearly at 
 £63 6s. 8 d., now worth £1,266 13s. id. 
 
 At Mattersey. A Gilbertine Priory, founded, in 
 the year 1192, by Robert de Maresey ; granted, 31 
 Henry VIII., to Anthony Neville, Esq. 
 
 At Newark. An Hospital, founded, by Alexander 
 Bishop of Lincoln, in the reign of Henry I.; yearly 
 revenue £17 Is. 9£c/., now worth £341 15s. IOcZ. 
 
COUNTY OF NOTTINGHAM. 
 
 125 
 
 An Augustine Friary; granted, 35 Henry VIII., 
 to John Andrews. 
 
 At Newstead. An Augustine Priory, built by Henry 
 II. in the year 1170; yearly revenue £219 18s. 8£d., 
 now worth £4,398 14s. 2d .; granted, 32 Henry VIII., 
 to Sir John Byron. 
 
 At Nottingham. St. Jones’ Hospital, for the sick 
 poor, founded before the time of John; rents £4 13s. 
 4tZ., now worth £93 6s. ScZ. 
 
 Plumtree’s Hospital, founded, 16 Richard II., 
 by John Plumtree, for poor old widows ; rents £11 
 Is., now worth £221. 
 
 A House of Grey Friars, founded, Henry III., 
 in the year 1250; granted, 2 Edward VI., to Tho¬ 
 mas Heneage. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, founded about the year 1276, 
 by Lord Grey, of Wilton, and Sir John Shirley; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to James Hurley. 
 
 At Rodington. A College, founded, by William 
 Babington, Esq., in the time of Henry VI., rents £30, 
 now worth £600 
 
 At Rufford. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 114S, by Gilbert, Earl of Lincoln; value £254 
 6s. 8 d., yearly, now worth £5,086 13s., 4 cL ; granted to 
 George, Earl of Shrewsbury. 
 
 At Shelford. An Augustine Priory, founded in 
 the time of Henry II., by Ralph Hanselyn ; rents £151 
 14s. Id., now worth £3,034 Is. 8 d .; granted, 31 Henry 
 VIII., to Michael Stanhope. 
 
 At Sibthorp. A College, founded, in the time ot 
 Edward II., by Geffrey le Scrop; rents £25 18s. SrZ., 
 now Avorth £518 13s. 4 d. ; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to 
 Richard Whalley and Thomas Magnus. 
 
 At Southwell. A College, founded, in the year 
 630, by Paulinus Archbishop of York; worth, at the 
 
 II* 
 
126 ENGLAND. 
 
 valuation of 26 Henry VIII., £516 Is. 64c/., now worth 
 £10,321 10s. 10 d. 
 
 At Stoke, by Newark. An Hospital for sick per¬ 
 sons, founded, very early ; valued at £9 yearly, now 
 worth £180 ; granted, IS Elizabeth, to John Mersh and 
 Francis Greneham. 
 
 At Thurgarton. An Augustine Priory, founded, 
 m the year 1130, by Ralph de Ayncourt; yearly value 
 £359 15s. 10c/., now worth £7,195 16s. 8c/.; granted, 
 30 Henry VIII., to William Cooper. 
 
 At Wallingwells. A Benedictine Nunnery, found¬ 
 ed, in the reign of Stephen, by Ralph de Cheurolcourt; 
 yearly income £87 11s. 6c/., now worth £1,751 10s.; 
 granted, 6 Elizabeth, to Richard Pype and Francis 
 Boyer. 
 
 At Welbeck. A Premonstratensian Abbey, founded, 
 in the year 1153, by Thomas Jocei; yearly income 
 £29S 4s. 8c/., now worth £5.964 13s. 4c/.; granted, 3C 
 Henry VIII., to Richard Whalley. 
 
 At Wirkesop, or Radford. An Augustine Priory, 
 founded, 3 Henry I., by William de Luvetol; yearly 
 value £302 6s. 10c/., now worth £6,046 16s. 8 cl .; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Francis, Earl of Shrews¬ 
 bury. 
 
 OXFORD (County.) 
 
 At Banbury. A College; yearly income £48 6s., 
 now worth £966. 
 
 An Hospital for several sick persons, founded, 
 in the reign of John ; yearly value £15 Is. 10c/., 
 now worth £301 6s. 8c/. 
 
 At Brueria, or Bruerne. A Cistercian Abbey, 
 founded, in the year 1147, by Nicholas Basset \ yearly 
 
COUNTY OF OXFORD. 127 
 
 value £124 10s. 10tZ., now worth £2,490 16s. 8 d., 
 granted, 8 James I., to Sir Anthony Coke. 
 
 At Burcester. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the year 1182, by Gilbert Basset, Baron of Hedington; 
 yearly value £167 2s. 10cZ., now worth £3,342 16s. 
 Sd .; granted, 30 Henry VIIL, to Charles, Duke of 
 Suffolk. 
 
 At Burford. An Hospital; valued at £13 6s. 6c7., 
 now worth £266 10s.; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Ed¬ 
 ward Herman. 
 
 At Caversham. An Augustine Cell, founded in the 
 year 1162. 
 
 At Charleton. An Alien Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1081, by Hugh Grentemoisnil; granted to Sir 
 Thomas White and others. 
 
 At Clattercote. A Gilbertine Priory, founded in 
 the time of King John; yearly value £34 19s. lie?., 
 now worth £699 18s. 4 d .; granted, 2 Elizabeth to 
 Thomas Lee. 
 
 At Crowmersh. An Hospital, built before the 
 year 1248 ; granted to Thomas Gratewick and Anselm 
 Lamb. 
 
 At Dorchester. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the year 1140, by Alexander, Bishop of Lincoln; 
 yearly value £219 12s. Ofc?., now worth £4,392 0s. 
 IOcZ. ; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Edmund Ashfield. 
 
 At Egnesham. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, in 
 the year 1005, by Ailmer, Earl of Cornwall; yearly 
 value £441 16s, 1 d. : now worth £8,836 Is. 8 d .; grant¬ 
 ed, 35 Henry VIII., to Sir Edward North and William 
 Darcy. » 
 
 At Ewelme. An Hospital for the Poor, founded, in 
 the year 1437, by William de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk; 
 yearly value £20, now worth £400. 
 
 At Godeston. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, by 
 Editha, a religious woman, in the reign of Henry L; 
 
128 ENGLAND. 
 
 yearly value £319 185. 8cZ., now worth £6,398 135. 4 d .; 
 granted, by Henry VIII., to his Physician, Doctor 
 George Owen. 
 
 At Goring. An Augustine Nunnery, founded in 
 in the time of Henry II.; yearly value £60 5s. 6cZ., 
 now worth £1,205 105.; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to 
 Charles, Duke of Suffolk, and afterwards to Sir Tho¬ 
 mas Pope. 
 
 At Gosford. A House of Hospitalers, founded, in 
 the year 1180, by Robert D’Oily; granted, 34 Henry 
 VIII., to Anthony Stringer and John Williams. 
 
 At Littlemore. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded 
 in .the reign of Henry II.; yearly value £33 65. 8cZ., 
 now worth £666 135. 4cZ.; granted, 38 Henry VIII., to 
 William Owen and John Bridges. 
 
 At Norton. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 reign of Henry II., by William Fitz Alan; yearly 
 value £50, now worth £1000; granted to the Brazen 
 Nose College Oxford. 
 
 At Aseney. An Augustine Priory, built, in the 
 year 1129, by Robert D’Oily, on an island in the river, 
 near the Castle of Oxford ; yearly value £755 I85. 6£ d. } 
 now worth £15,118 10$. lOd. 
 
 At Oxford. St. Frideswide’s, now Christ Church. 
 King Didanus built this as a Nunnery, in the year 
 730 ; his own daughter Frideswide, who was after¬ 
 wards canonized, had presided there. It became, in 
 the course of time, a Priory, which was suppressed by 
 virtue of a Bull from Pope Clement VII., dated April 3, 
 1525; and the site and lands granted to Cardinal 
 Wolsey, who founded there a noble College for a 
 Dean, Sub-dean, one hundred Canons, thirteen Chap¬ 
 lains, professors of the Canon and Civil Law, Physic, 
 and of all the Arts and Sciences, and other persons, to 
 the number of 186 in the whole. The revenues were 
 valued at £224 45. 8cZ., now worth £4,484 ,135. 4 d. It 
 supports now a Dean, eight Canons, one hundred and 
 
COUNTY OF OXFORD. 129 
 
 one Students, eight Chaplains, eight Clerics, eight Cho¬ 
 risters, twenty-four Almsmen, &c. 
 
 St. George’s College, founded, in the year 1149, 
 on the ruins of an ancient Monastery, which was 
 built by Robert D’Oily and Roger Tueri. 
 
 All Soul’s College, founded, in the year 1438, 
 by Henry Chicheley, Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 for a Warden and forty Fellows, with Chaplains, 
 Clerks, and Choristers; yearly value £392 2s. 3d., 
 now worth £7,842 5s. 
 
 Baliol College, built by the widow of Sir John 
 Baliol, in the year 1284, for poor Scholars; year¬ 
 ly value £74 35 . 4 d., now worth £l,4S3 65. 8 d.\ 
 it now consists of a Master, 12 Fellows, and 14 
 Scholars. 
 
 St. Bernard’s College, founded, in the year 1436, 
 by Henry Chicheley, Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 for monastic Students ; the revenues and buildings 
 were converted in the year 1555, to support what 
 is called St. John the Baptist. 
 
 Brazen Nose College, built by William Smith, 
 Bishop of Lincoln, and Sir Richard Sutton, in 
 the year 1511, for a Master and several Students. 
 
 Canterbury College, founded, in the year 1349, 
 by the most Reverend Simon de Islip, Archbishop 
 of Canterbury, to repair the chasm which was 
 made in the Clergy by the pestilence ; he purcha¬ 
 sed some lands and built on it this, under the 
 name of Canterbury Hall, for Students in the 
 Canon and Civil Laws. It was made, 38 Henry 
 VIII., a part of Christ Church College. 
 
 Corpus Christi College, built in the year 1513, 
 by Richard Fox, Bishop of Winchester, and Hugh 
 Oldham, Bishop of Exeter, for Augustine Stu¬ 
 dentsyearly value £382 85 . 9 d., now worth 
 £7,648 155.; supports at present a Superior, twen- 
 
130 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 ty Fellows, twenty Scholars, two Chaplains, an€ 
 two Clerks, &c. 
 
 Durham College, founded in the year 1290, by 
 the Convent of Durham, for their Students; in¬ 
 creased afterward in buildings, revenues and books, 
 by Hugh de Bury, the learned Bishop of that see; 
 yearly value £115 4s. 4c/., now worth £2,304 6s. 
 8 cl .; now called Trinity College. 
 
 Exeter College, or Stapleton Hall, founded, in 
 the year 1314, by Walter Stapleton, Bishop of 
 Exeter, for his Students, where Hart Hall now 
 stands; revenues £81 9s. yearly, now worth £1,629. 
 Supports now a Rector, twenty-two Fellows, and 
 some Scholars. 
 
 Glocester Hall, or College; the site was given, 
 ?n the year 1283, by Sir John Giffard, to the Bene¬ 
 dictine Friars, to build a habitation in the Univer¬ 
 sity, called now Worcester College. 
 
 Lincoln College, founded, in the year 1427, by 
 Richard Flemming, Bishop of Lincoln, and the 
 Archbishop of York and others ; yearly value £101 
 8s. 10c/., now worth £2,028 16s, 8 d. Supports a 
 Rector, twelve Fellows, and some Scholars. 
 
 London College, founded, in the year 1421, by 
 Richard Clifford, Bishop of London, for secular 
 and regular Students of Civil Law; suppressed in 
 the reign of Henry VIII. 
 
 Magdalen College. William Patten, Bishop of 
 Winchester, founded in the year 1448, a Hall for 
 Students; and in the year 145S a fine College, for 
 a President, forty Fellows, thirty Scholars, four 
 Chaplains, eight Clerks, sixteen Choristers, &c.; 
 yearly value £1,076 5s. 2c/., now worth £21,525 
 35 . 4 d. 
 
 St. Mary College, founded, by Thomas Holden, 
 Esq., in the year 1435, for the Augustine Students; 
 
COUNTY OF OXFORD. 131 
 
 granted, 38 Henry VIII., to William Ramesden 
 and Richard Vavasor. 
 
 Merton College, founded, in the year 1267, by 
 Walter de Merton, Lord Chancellor of England, 
 and afterwards Bishop of Rochester, for Chaplains 
 and Students; yearly value £354 2.9. 6c/., now 
 worth £7,082 10s. Supports a Warden, twenty- 
 four Fellows, fourteen Post Masters, &c. 
 
 New College, or Winchester College, founded, 
 and amply endowed by William of Wykeham, 
 Bishop of Winchester, in the year 1386, for a War¬ 
 den, seventy Scholars, ten Chaplains, three Clerks, 
 and sixteen Choristers ; yearly value £487 7s. 8c/., 
 now worth £9,747 13s. id. 
 
 Oriel, or St. Mary College, built, in the year 
 1324, by King Edward III., and Adam de Brom, 
 Almoner to King Edward II., for students ; valued 
 at £182 8s. 6 d. yearly, now worth £3,684 10s. 
 This supports now a Provost, 18 Fellows, &c. 
 
 Queen’s College, founded, in the year 1340, by 
 Robert de Eglesfield, Chaplain to Queen Philippa; 
 yearly value £302 2s. 10c/., now worth £6,042 16s. 
 8cZ. It supports now a Provost, 16 Fellows,, two 
 Chaplains, some Bachelors, two Clerks, and 19 
 under-graduate Scholars. 
 
 University College. King Alfred founded in this 
 city three Societies or Halls; one for students in 
 grammar; the second for philosophy; and the 
 third for divinity: but it is certain that this Uni¬ 
 versity was either rebuilt or enlarged by the boun¬ 
 ty of William Archdeacon of Durham, Walter 
 Skirlaw, Bishop of Durham, and some Noblemen, 
 in the year 1249, valued, 26 Henry VIII., at £78 
 14s. 7c/., now worth £1,574 11s. 8c/.; supports 
 now a Master, 12 Fellows, 13 Scholars, &c. 
 
 St. Bartholomew’s College, half a mile east of 
 the town, supposed to have been founded by King 
 Henry I. 
 
132 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 Carmelite Friary, settled in the royal palace of 
 Beaumont, by King Edward II.; granted, 33 Hen¬ 
 ry VIII., to Edward Powel. 
 
 Trinity House, for the redemption of Captives, 
 founded, in the year 1291, by Edmond, Earl of 
 Cornwall. 
 
 At Rewley. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1280, by the executors of Richard, King of the Ro¬ 
 mans, to pray for his soul; yearly value £174 3s. 0^c£., 
 now worth £3,483 Os. IOcZ. ; granted, 38 Henry VIII., 
 to the Dean and Chapter of Christ Church, Oxford. 
 
 At Saunford. A Templar’s Hospital, founded, by 
 Maud, Queen of King Stephen, granted, 33 Henry 
 VIII., to Edward Powel. 
 
 At Stodeley. A Benedictine Nunnery, built in the 
 
 reign of Henry II., by Bernard de St. Walerico; 
 
 yearly value £102 6s. 7•£</., now worth £2,046 12s. 
 
 6c/.; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to John Croke. 
 
 « 
 
 At Tame. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1137, by the bounty of Alexander, Bishop of Lin¬ 
 coln ; yearly value £256 13s. 7 $d., now worth £5,133 
 12s. 6d. ; granted, 1 Edward VI., to Edward, Duke of 
 Somerset. 
 
 At Wroxton. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry III., by Mr. Michael Belet; yearly 
 value £78 14s. 3c/., now worth £1,574 5s.; granted, 36 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Thomas Pope, who gave a part to 
 Trinity College, Oxford. 
 
 RUTLAND (County.) 
 
 At Brooke. An Augustine Priory, founded, by Hugh 
 Ferrers in the reign of Richard I.; yearly value £43 
 13s. 4 d., now worth £873 6s. 8d .; granted, 28 Henry 
 VIII., to Anthony Coope. 
 
COUNTY OF SALOP. 
 
 133 
 
 At Edith Weston. An Alien Priory, built in the 
 reign of Henry I., by William de Tankerville; granted, 
 4 Edward VI., to William, Marquis of Northampton. 
 
 A College, founded, 25 Edward III., by William 
 Wade and John Wade, Chaplain; yearly value 
 £22 18* 6d., now worth £458 10*.; granted, 1 
 Elizabeth, to John, Lord St. John. 
 
 At Okeham. A College for poor people, built in the 
 year 1398, by William Dalby of Exton; yearly value 
 £26 13*. 4 d.j now worth £533 6s. Sd .; granted, 26 
 Henry VIII., to Richard Flower, of Whitewell. 
 
 SALOP (County.) 
 
 At Battlefield. A College, a mile north of Shrews¬ 
 bury, founded, in the year 1403, by Henry IV.; yearly 
 value £54 Is. 10 d., now worth £1,081 16s. 8d. 
 
 At Bildewas. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1135, by Roger Bishop of Chester; yearly value 
 £129 6s. 10d., now worth £2,586 16s. 8 d .; granted, 29 
 Henry VIII., to Edward, Lord Powis. 
 
 At Brewood. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded, prior 
 to the reign of King John ; yearly value £31 14s., now 
 worth £621 6s. 8 d .; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Wil¬ 
 liam Whorwood. 
 
 At Bridgenorth. A College, founded, in the reign 
 of William Rufus, by Robert, Earl of Shrewsbury; 
 granted, 21 Elizabeth, to Sir Christopher Hatton. 
 
 Hospital, founded, in the reign of Richard I., by 
 Ralph le Strange; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to 
 Leonard Edwards. 
 
 At Bromfield. A Benedictine Cell, built about the 
 time of Henry I.; yearly value £77 18s. 2d ., now 
 worth £1,558 5s.; granted to Charles Fox. 
 
134 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Burford. A Collegiate Church, founded m the 
 reign of Edward I.; granted 13 Elizabeth, to William 
 James and John Grey. • 
 
 i 
 
 At Chirbury. An Augustine Priory, founded 11 
 Henry III.; yearly value £87 7s. 4 cl., now worth 
 £1,747 6s. 8 d. ; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to Edward 
 Hampton. 
 
 At Haghmon. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1110, by William Fitz Alan, of Clun; yearly 
 value £294 12s. 9 d., now worth £5,892 15s.; granted, 
 32 Henry VIII., to Edmund Littleton. 
 
 At Hales. A Premonstratensian Abbey, founded, 
 16 John, by Peter de Rupibus, Bishop of Winchester ; 
 yearly .value £337 15s. 6^-cZ., now worth £6,755 10s. 
 IOcZ. ; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Sir John Dudley. 
 
 At Halstone. A Templar’s Hospital; yearly value 
 £160 14s. 10rf., now worth £3,214 16s. 8eZ.; granted, 5 
 Elizabeth, to William Horne. 
 
 At Lilleshull. An Augustine Priory, built in the 
 year 1145; yearly value £327 10s., now worth £6,550; 
 granted, 31 Henry VIII., to James Leveson. 
 
 At Ludlow. An Hospital, built in the reign of John; 
 yearly value £27 16s. 10rZ., now worth £556 16s. 8d.; 
 granted, 1 Edward VI., to John, Earl4)f Warwick. 
 
 Augustine Priory, built about the year 1282; 
 granted to George Cotton and William Man. 
 
 Carmelite Friary, founded, in the year 1349, by 
 Lawreance of Ludlow; granted, 2 Elizabeth, to 
 Richard Hacket and Thomas Trentham. 
 
 At Morfield. A Benedictine Cell, founded, and 
 endowed by the Earl of Shrewsbury ; yearly value 
 £15, now worth £300; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to 
 Henry, Lord Lisle. 
 
 At Newport. A College, founded, 20 Henry VI., 
 
COUNTY OF SALOP. 
 
 135 
 
 oy Thomas Draper; granted, 13 Elizabeth, to Edmond 
 Dowing and Peter Ashton. 
 
 Ponsbury. A College built before the reign of Ed¬ 
 ward I.; yearly value £40 175. 3d., now worth £817 5s. 
 
 At Rattlingcope. An Augustine Cell, built in the 
 reign of John; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to Robert 
 Long. 
 
 At Shrewsbury. A Benedictine Monastery, found¬ 
 ed, in the year 1083, by Roger de Montgomery, Earl 
 of Arundel; yearly value £615 4s. 3d., now worth 
 £12,304 5s.; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Edward Wat¬ 
 son and Henry Herdson. 
 
 St. Chadd’s College, founded before the time of 
 William the Conqueror; yearly value £14 14s. 4d., 
 now worth £294 6s. 8d.; granted, 3 Edward VI., 
 to John Southcott and John Chadderton. 
 
 St. Michael’s College, founded, prior to the 
 time of Edward the Confessor; rents and tythes 
 made £13 Is. 8d., now worth £261 13s. 4d.; 
 granted to Thomas Reeve and George Cotton. 
 
 St. Chadd’s Hospital for poor persons, founded 
 by the society of Mercers in the town. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, built prior to the time of 
 Edward II.; rents £4 10s. 4 d., now worth £90 
 6s. 8d. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded, by the Staffords; 
 granted, 53 Henry VIII., to Richard Andrews and 
 Nicholas Temple. 
 
 A House of Black Friars, founded by Lady 
 Geneville; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Richard 
 Andrews and Nicholas Temple. 
 
 A House of Grey Friars, founded, in the reign 
 of Henry III., by Hawise, Countess ot Powis; 
 granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Richard Andrews and 
 Nicholas Temple, v 
 
136 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Tonge. A College, founded, in the year 1410, 
 by Isabel, widow of Sir Fulk Pembroke and the Reve¬ 
 rend William Swan, and the Reverend William 
 Mosse; valued yearly at £22 85 . \d ., now worth £448 
 Is. 8cZ.; granted, 1 Edward VI., to Sir Richard Man¬ 
 ners. 
 
 At Wenlock. A Cluniac Priory, founded, 14 Wil 
 liam the Conqueror, by Roger of Montgomery, Earl of 
 Arundel and Chichester, on the ruins of a Nunnery, 
 founded, in the year 680, by St. Milburga, daughter of 
 King Merwald; yearly value £434 Is. 2^-cZ., now worth 
 £8,681 4s. 2d .; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Augustino 
 de Augustinis. 
 
 At Wombride. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry I., by William Fitz Alan ; revenues 
 at the dissolution, £72 15s. 8cZ., now worth £1,455 13s. 
 4cZ.; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to James Leveson. 
 
 At Woouhouse. An Augustine Monastery, given 
 to that order by the Tuberville family, in the year 
 1250; granted to Thomas Reeves and George Cotton. 
 
 SOMERSET (County.) 
 
 At Athelney. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, in 
 the year 888, by King Alfred; yearly value £209 Os. 
 2d ., now worth £4,180 5s.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., 
 to John Clayton. 
 
 At Barlinch. An Augustine Priory, built in the 
 reign of Henry II., by William Say ; yearly value 
 £98 14s. 8<Z., now worth £1,974 13s. 4 d .; granted, 30 
 Henry VIII., to Sir John Wallop. 
 
 At Bath. A Cathedral, founded, in the reign oi 
 Henry I., by John Bishop of Wells, on the ruins of a 
 Benedictine Abbey, which was originally ‘built, 676, 
 by King Osric, but destroyed and rebuilt several times 
 
COUNTY OF SOMERSET. 
 
 137 
 
 afterwards; yearly value £695 65. l^c/., no worth 
 £13,806 2s. 6d .; granted, 34 Henry .YIIL, to Humphry 
 Colies. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, near the Cross and Hot 
 Baths, founded, in the year 1180, by Reginald 
 Bishop of Bath, for poor strangers; yearly value 
 £22 16s. 9c/., now worth £456 15s.; granted, by 
 Elizabeth, to the Mayor and Corporation. 
 
 At Bearwe, or Borrow Gurney. A Benedictine 
 
 Nunnery, founded, in the year 1200, by-Gurney, 
 
 Lord of Stoke Hamden; yearly value £29 6s. 8c/., 
 now worth £586 13s. 4 cl.', granted, 36 Henry Y1II., to 
 William Clerke. 
 
 At Bridge Water. St. John’s Hospital, founded, 
 before 15 John, by William Bruer, for Secular Clergy, 
 under condition of keeping hospitality for the poor 
 natives, and for strange pilgrims; yearly value £120 
 19s. L£c/., now worth £2,419 2s. 6 d .; granted, 34 
 Henry VIII., to Humphry Colies. 
 
 At Bruton. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1005, by Algar, Earl of Cornwall; yearly value 
 £4S0 17s. 2c/., now worth £9,617 3s. 4c/.; granted, 37 
 Henry VIII., to Maurice Berkely. 
 
 At Minchin Buckland. A Nunnery and Hospital of 
 Hospitalers, founded, about the year 1180, by Henry 
 II.; yearly value £223 7s. 4c/., now worth £4,467 6s. 
 8 d .; granted, 36 Henry VIIL, to Alexander Popham 
 and William Halley. 
 
 At Berkely. An Augustine Priory, built in the year 
 1199, by William of Edingdon; yearly value £6 5s. 
 2£c/., now worth £125 4s. 2d .; granted,* 7 Edward VI., 
 to John and James Bisse. 
 
 At Canyngton. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, 
 in the reign of King Stephen, by Robert de Courcey ; 
 yearly value £39 15s. 8c/., now worth £795 13s. 4 d, j 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Edward Rogers. 
 
 12 * 
 
138 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Clyve, or Cliff. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, 
 m the year 1188, by William de Romare, Earl of Lin¬ 
 coln; yearly value £155 9s. 5 d., now worth £3,109 
 8s. 4 d .; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Thomas, Earl of 
 Sussex. 
 
 At Temple Comb. A House of Hospitalers, founded, 
 in the year 1185, by Serlo Odo ; yearly value £128 7s. 
 6cZ., now worth £2,567 10s.; granted, 34 Henry VIII., 
 to Richard Andrews and Leonard Chamberlayne. 
 
 At Dijnster. A Benedictine Cell, founded, in the 
 time of William the Conqueror, by Sir William de 
 Mahun; yearly value £37 4s. 8 d., now worth £744 
 13s. 4 d .; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to Humphry Colles. 
 
 At Glastonbury. A Benedictine Monastery, found¬ 
 ed, as historians say, by Joseph of Arimathea. The first 
 congregation of Monks, they say, were brought together 
 by a disciple of St. Patrick, in the year 435. Yearly 
 value £3,508 13s. 44eZ., now worth £70,173 7s. 6 d .; 
 granted, 1 Edward VI., to Edward, Duke of Somerset, 
 and 1 Elizabeth, to Sir Peter Carew. 
 
 At Keynsham. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the year 1170, by William, Earl of Gloucester; yearly 
 value £450 3s. 6 cl., now worth £9,003 10s., granted, 
 6 Edward VI., to Thomas Bridges, Esq. 
 
 At Michelney. A Benedictine Monastery, founded, 
 in the year 939, by King Athelstan ; yearly value £498 
 16s. 3now worth £9,976 5s. 10<2.; granted, 29 
 Henry VIII., to Edward, Earl of Hertford. 
 
 At Martock. A Priory, granted, 34 Henry VIII., 
 to Humphry Colies. 
 
 At Charterhouse on Mendip. A Cell, granted, 36 
 Henry VIII., to Robert May. 
 
 At Montecute, olim Mons Acutus. A Cluniac Pri¬ 
 ory, founded, by William the Conqueror; yearly value 
 £524 11s. 8d., now worth £10,491 13s. 4 d .; granted, 
 16 Elizabeth, to Robert, Earl of Leicester. 
 
COUNTY OF SOMERSET. 
 
 139 
 
 At Slaverdale. An Augustine Priory, built by Sir 
 William Zouch; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to John, 
 Earl of Oxford. 
 
 At stoke Curcy. An Alien Priory, founded, in the 
 reign of Henry II.; valued at the dissolution at £58, 
 now worth £1,160. 
 
 At Stoke. A College, founded, in the year 1304, 
 by Sir John de Bello Campo; granted, 2 Elizabeth, to 
 Cuthbert Vaughan. 
 
 At Taunton. An Augustine Priory, built in the 
 reign of Henry I., by William Giffard, Bishop of Win¬ 
 chester ; yearly value £438 95. 10c/., now worth £8,769 
 165. 8 d .; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Mathew Cole- 
 hurst. 
 
 At Wells. A Cathedral Church, built in the year 
 704, by King Ina; enlarged afterwards by different Bi¬ 
 shops ; revenues of the Bishop were valued at £1,843 
 195. 4c/., and of the Canons £897 5s. 11c/., both sums 
 now worth £54,825 5s. 
 
 Mauntery College, built in the year 1401, by 
 Ralph Erghum, Bishop of Bath and Wells, for 
 the Clergy of the Cathedral; yearly value £11 
 1S5. 8d., now worth £238 135. 4c/.; granted, 2 
 Edward VI., to John Aylworth and John Lacy. 
 
 Vicar’s College, began by Walter de Hull, Ca¬ 
 non ; enlarged, in the year 1347, by Rad. de Sa- 
 lopia, Bishop of Wells: yearly value £72 105. 
 9^-c/., now worth £1,450 155. 10 d. 
 
 Brigstreet Hospital, founded, for twenty-four 
 poor persons, by Nicholas Buthwith, Bishop of 
 Bath, about the year 1424, but maintains now, they 
 say, only twenty. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, founded, ir the reign of 
 King John, by Hugh of Wells, afterwards Bishop 
 of Lincoln; yearly value £41 35. 6 2 c/., now worth 
 £823 IO5. 10c/.; granted, 13 Elizabeth, to Christo¬ 
 pher Hatton. 
 
140 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Witham. A Carthusian Priory, built and en¬ 
 dowed by King Henry II.; yearly value £227 Is. 8d., 
 now worth <£4,541 13s. 4eZ.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., 
 to Ralph Hopton. 
 
 At Worspring. A Regular Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1210, by William de Courtney ; yearly value £110 
 18s. 4 \d., now worth £2,218 7s. 6 d .; granted, 2 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to William and John Lacy. 
 
 At Bristol. A Benedictine Priory, built by Robert, 
 son of Henry I., in the north east of the city j granted, 
 35 Henry VIII., to Henry Brayne. 
 
 Great St. Augustine’s, now Holy Trinity and 
 Cathedral, founded, in the year 1148, by Robert 
 Fitzharding; yearly value £767 15s. 3 d. } now 
 worth £15,355 5s. 
 
 St. Mary Magdalen Nunnery, founded, by Eva, 
 wife to Robert Fitzharding, in the reign of Henry 
 II., yearly value £21 11s. 3c/., now worth £431 5s. j 
 granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Henry Brayn and John 
 Marsh. 
 
 St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, granted by Henry 
 VIII., to the executors of Robert Thorn and Sir 
 Thomas West; is now a grammar school. 
 
 St. Catherine’s Hospital, founded, 4 Henry III., 
 by Robert de Berkele f yearly value £21 15s. 8d., 
 now worth £435 13s. 4 d. 
 
 Gaunts, or Billeswyke Hospital, built in the 
 year 1229, by Maurice de Gaunt, for one hundred 
 poor people; yearly value £140, now worth £2,800; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to the Mayor and Citi¬ 
 zens ; is now an Orphan Hospital. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, built by John, Earl of More- 
 ton, afterwards King of England, for the sick; 
 yearly value £51 10s. 4c?., now worth £1,030 6s. 
 8d .; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to G. Owen. 
 
 St. Lawrence’s Hospital, founded, before 8 Henry 
 
0<JUl\ X i Or x MX 
 
 III.; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Sir Ralph Sad- 
 leyr. 
 
 Lyons, or Lewin’s Mede-street Hospital, found¬ 
 ed, in the year 1460, by William Spenser. 
 
 St. Michael’s-hill Almshouse, founded, in the 
 year 1504, by John Foster, for one priest, eight 
 poor men, and. five poor women, is yet in being. 
 
 Radcliff-hill Almshouse, built in the year 1442, 
 by William Cannings, is still in being, though ha¬ 
 ving no endowment. 
 
 Temple-street Hospitals. Under Tucker’s Hall 
 is one founded by the Tucker’s Company ; under 
 the Weaver’s Hall is another founded at a very 
 early period. 
 
 Temple Gate Hospital, built by Roger Magda¬ 
 len of Nonney. 
 
 Trinity Hospital, founded, 4 Henry V., by John 
 Barnstable, merchant of the town ; granted, 20 
 Elizabeth, to the Mayor and Corporation 5 is still 
 in being. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, built in the reign of Ed¬ 
 ward II., by Sir Simon and Sir William Monta- 
 cute ; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Maurice Dennis. 
 
 The Black Friary, founded by Sir Maurice Gaunt; 
 granted, 31 Henry VIII., to William Chester. 
 
 The Grey Friar’s House, founded in the year 
 1234; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to the Mayor and 
 Citizens. 
 
 STAFFORD (County.) 
 
 At Blythbury. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, 
 in the reign of Henry I., by Hugh Malveysin. 
 
142 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Briwerne, or, the Black Ladies of Buewood, 
 founded, prior to the time of Richard I.; yearly value 
 £11 Is. 6cZ., now worth £221 10s.; granted, 30 Henry 
 VIII., to Thomas Gifford. 
 
 At Burton-upon-Trent. A Benedictine Abbey, 
 founded, in the year 1004, by Walfric Spot; yearly 
 value £356 16s. 3 %d. : now worth £7,136 5s. IOcZ. ; grant¬ 
 ed, by Henry VIII., to Sir William Paget. 
 
 At Calwick. A Benedictine Priory, built in the 
 year 1142, by Geva, daughter of Hugh, Earl of Ches¬ 
 ter; yearly value £25 10s. 3cZ., now worth £510 5s. 
 
 At Chotes. A Qistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1176, by Bertram de Verdun; yearly value £103 
 6s. Id., now worth £2,066 11s. 8cZ.; granted, 36 Henry 
 VIII., to Jeffrey Foljamb. 
 
 At Dieulacres. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in 
 the year 1214, by Randal de Blunderville, Earl of 
 Chester; value £243 3s. 6 d. yearly, now worth £4,S63 
 10s.; granted, 6 Edward VI., to Ralph Bagnall. 
 
 At Dudley. A Cluniac Cell, founded, in the year 
 1161, by Ralph Painell, lord of the* manor, in pursu¬ 
 ance of his father’s will; value £33 Is. 4(Z. yearly, now 
 worth £661 6s. 8cZ.; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Sir 
 John Dudley. 
 
 At Gnoushall. A College, founded, in the time of 
 Henry I.; rents £54, now worth £1,080 ; granted, 1 
 Edward VI., to the Bishop of Lichfield and his suc¬ 
 cessors. 
 
 At Hulton. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1223, by Henry Audley; value £76 14s. ll^cZ. 
 yearly, now worth £1,534 19s. 2d.) granted, 34 Hen¬ 
 ry VIII., to Sir Edward Aston. 
 
 At Lappf.le. An Alien Priory, founded, in the time 
 of Edward the Confessor, by Algar, Earl of Chester or 
 Mercia; granted, 1 Edward VI., to Sir Richard Man- 
 nors. 
 
COUNTY OF STAFFORD. 
 
 143 
 
 At Lichfield. A Cathedral Church, built, m the 
 year 656, by King Oswy; underwent many changes 
 and repairs since that time; revenues £703 5s. 2d.) 
 and of the Chapter £275 13s. 2d .; make together now 
 £19,578 6s. 8 d. 
 
 Vicar’s Choral, that is, the Sub-Chanter, Sa¬ 
 crist and Clerks, of this Cathedral, had a separate 
 Establishment; value £199 10s. Id. yearly, now 
 worth £3,990 11s. Sd. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital; value £46 18s. Id., now 
 worth £938 Is. Sd .; it continues to this day. 
 
 A Grey Friary, founded, in the year 1229, by 
 Alexander, Bishop of Lichfield ; granted, 36 Hen¬ 
 ry VIII., to Richard Crumbilthorn. 
 
 At Penkridge. A College, or Free Chapel; grant¬ 
 ed, 17 John, by Mr. Hugh House, to the Archbishop 
 of Dublin and his successors; value £106 15s. yearly, 
 now worth £2,135; granted, 2 Edward VI., to John 
 Earl of Warwick. 
 
 At Roucester. An Augustine Priory, built in the 
 year 1146, by Richard Bacoun; rents £111 11s. Id., 
 now worth £2,231 11s. 8d.; granted, 31 Henry VIII., 
 to Richard Trentham. 
 
 At Sandwell. A Benedictine Priory, founded, in 
 the time of Henry II., by William Guy, of Ophani; 
 rents made £26 8s. Id., now worth £528 11s. 8 d. 
 
 At De Sartis, or Ronton. An Augustine Priory, 
 founded, in the time of Henry II., by Robert Noeli; 
 value £102 11s. Id. yearly, now worth £2,031 Is. Qd. ; 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to John Wiseman. 
 
 At Stafford. A College, or Free Chapel; granted, 
 by King Stephen, to the Bishop and Chapter of Lich¬ 
 field; value £38 yearly, now worth £700; granted, 14 
 Elizabeth, to the Burgesses of Stafford. 
 
 An Augustine Priory, built in the year 1180, by 
 Richard Peche, Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield 
 
144 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 value £198 Os. 9 %d. yearly, now worth £3,96C 
 15s. lOd. ; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Doctor 
 Rowland Lee, Bisnop of Coventry and Lichfield. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, for poor brethren. 
 
 St. Leonard’s Spy tell, or Free Chapel; value 
 £4 12s. 4 d. yearly, now worth £92 6s. 8 d. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded 10 Edward I.; 
 valued at £35 13s. 10 cl., now worth £713 16s. 8d ., 
 granted, 31 Henry VIII., to James Leveson. 
 
 An Augustine Monastery, founded, in the year 
 1344, by Ralph, Lord Stafford; granted to Tho¬ 
 mas Neve and Giles Isam. 
 
 At Stone. An Augustine Priory, built originally 
 ty Wolphere, King of Mercia, for the salvation of his 
 two sons Wolfadus and Rufinus, whom he murdered 
 before his conversion to Christianity, in the year 670. 
 Rents £119 14s. 1 l frcl., now worth £2,394 19s. 2d .; 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to George Harper. 
 
 At Tamworth. A College ; St. Editha, daughter ot 
 Edgar, founded here a Convent, which became a Col¬ 
 lege afterwards, and valued at £42 2s. 4 d., now worth 
 £842 6s. 8 d .; granted, 23 Elizabeth, to Edward Down¬ 
 ing and Peter Ashton. 
 
 An Hospital, founded, 15 Edward 1., by Philip 
 Marmion, for the Premonstratensian Friars; and 
 he gave them in Ashfield pasture for four oxen and 
 two horses, under condition of praying for his soul; 
 yearly value £3 6s. 8 d., now worth £66 13s. 4(i. 
 
 At Tetenhall. A College, founded, in King Ed¬ 
 gar’s reign; value £21 6s. 8 cl. yearly, now worth £426 
 13s. 4d .; granted, 3 Edward VI., to Walter Wrottesley. 
 
 At Trickingham. An Augustine Priory, founded, 
 in the time of Henry I., on the ruins of a convent, 
 founded, in the year 680, by King Ethelred, for his 
 daughter, St. Werburgh, who dfed there an Abbess 
 
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK. 
 
 145 
 
 value £106 3s. lOcZ. yearly, now worth £2,123 16s. 8c7.; 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Tutbury. A Benedictine Priory, founded, in 
 the year 1080, by Henry de Ferrers; rents £244 16s. 
 8cZ., now worth £4,896 13s. 4 d .; granted, 6 Edward 
 VI., to Sir William Cavendish. 
 
 At Wolverhampton. A College, or Monastery, 
 built in the year 996, and amply endowed by a pious 
 widow, Wulfruna; underwent many alterations in af¬ 
 ter times, and finally became one of the King’s Free 
 Chapels; the' Deanery valued, 26 Henry VIII., at £38 
 yearly; and five Prebends £28; both sums would 
 make now £1,320; granted, 7 Edward VI., to John, 
 Duke of Northumberland. 
 
 SUFFOLK (County.; 
 
 At Alensborne. An Augustine Priory, founded, 
 before the year 1446; granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Sir 
 John Wingfield. 
 
 An Hospital of Templars, founded, in the time 
 of Henry II.; rents £53 10s., now worth £1,070; 
 granted, 35 Henry VIII.. to Sir Richard Gresham. 
 
 At Bliburgh. An Augustine Priory, settled, by 
 Henry I.; rents £48 8s. 10 d., now worth £968 16s. 8 d .; 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Sir Arthur Hopton. 
 
 At Brusyard. A Nunnery of Minoresses, founded, 
 at Ash, by Maud, Countess of Ulster, in the year 1354; 
 yearly value <£56 2s. 1 d., now worth £1,122 Is. 8d .; 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Nicholas Hare. 
 
 At Bungay. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, in 
 the time of Henry II., by Roger de Glanville; value 
 £62 2s. 14-fZ. yearly, now worth £1,242 2s. 6d .; granted, 
 29 Henry VIII., to Thomas, Duke of Norfolk. 
 
140 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Bury St. Edmond. A Benedictine Abbey, 
 founded, in the year 633, by Segebert, King of the 
 East Angles, who, quitting his crown, became a reli¬ 
 gious there. The place took its name from the body of 
 St. Edmond, King, that was translated thither, in the 
 year 903; valued, at the dissolution, at £2,336 16s. 
 0£d, now worth £46,736 Os. IOcZ. ; granted, 2 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to John Eyer. 
 
 A College, founded in the time of Edward IV.; 
 granted, 2 Edward VI., to Richard Corbet. 
 
 St. Nicholas Hospital, founded by an Abbot of 
 the town; valued at £6 19s. lid, now worth £139 * 
 18s. 4d 
 
 St. Peter’s Hospital, founded, in the time of 
 Henry I., by Abbot Anselm, for the maintenance 
 of aged and sick priests; value £10 18s. 10£d 
 yearly, now worth £218 17s. 6d 
 
 St. Saviour’s Hospital, founded, in the year 
 1184, by Abbot Samson and his Convent, for the 
 support of a warden, twelve chaplains, six clerks, 
 twelve poor gentlemen, and twelve poor women; 
 granted, 34 Henry VIII., to Antony Stringer and 
 John Williams. 
 
 A Grey Friary, founded about the year 1256; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Antony Harvey. 
 
 At Butley. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1171, by Ranulph de Glanville, the famous law¬ 
 yer; income £318 17s. 2^cZ., now worth £6,377 4s. 2d; 
 granted, 36 Henry VIII., to William Forth. 
 
 At Campess. An Augustine Nunnery, founded, 6 
 Richard I., by Jane and Agnes, daughters of Theobald 
 de Valoins, on a piece of ground which he gave them 
 for that purpose; income £182 9s. 5d, now worth 
 £3,649 Ss. 4d; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Sir Wil¬ 
 liam Willoughby. 
 
 At Clare. An Augustine Monastery, built in the 
 
COUNTY OP SUFFOLK. 147 
 
 year 1248, by Richard de Clare, Earl of Gloucester; 
 granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Richard Friend. 
 
 At Dodnash. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 time of Edward I., by the ancestors of the noble family 
 of Norfolk; yearly value £42 18s. 8 ±cl., now worth 
 £858 14s. 2d .; granted, by Henry VIII., to Thomas 
 Alverde. 
 
 At Dunwich. A House of Knights Templars; 
 granted, 4 Elizabeth, to Thomas Andrews. 
 
 St. James’s Hospital, founded in the time of 
 Richard I.; revenues £26, now worth £520. 
 
 A Black Friary, granted, 36 Henrv VIII., to 
 John Eyre. 
 
 A Grey Friary, founded, in the time of Henry 
 III., by Robert Fitz John, granted to John Eyre. 
 
 At Eye. A Benedictine Priory, founded, in the time 
 of William the Conqueror, by Robert Malet; yearly 
 value £184 9s. 7now worth £3,689 12s. 6 d .; grant¬ 
 ed, 28 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Flixton. An Augustine Priory, built in the year 
 1258, by Margery Harnes, widow of Bartholomew de 
 Clerk ; value £23 4s. lcZ. yearly, now worth £468 Is. 
 ScZ.; granted, 26 Henry VIII., to John Tasburgh. 
 
 At Giselingham. A Preceptory of Templars, found¬ 
 ed, before the time of Richard I., by Sir Robert de 
 Burgate; granted, 7 Edward VI., to John Grene and 
 Robert Hall. 
 
 At Gorleston. An Augustine Priory, built in the 
 time of Edward I., by William Woderove; granted, 36 
 Henry VIII., to John Eyre. 
 
 At Heringfleet. x\n Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the time of Henry III., by Roger Fitz Osbert; rents 
 £4^ 11s. 7d., now worth £991 11s. 8cZ.; granted, 38 
 Henry VIII., to Henry Jerningham. 
 
 4 
 
 At Hoxon. A Benedictine Cell, founded, about the 
 
148 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 year 950, by Theodred, Bishop of London ; and richly 
 endowed with lands, in the year 1130, by Maurice of 
 Windsor, and Egidia his wife, for supporting there 
 Monks, in order to pray for the soul of Ralph Dapifer; 
 rents £18 Is., now worth £351; granted 38 Henry 
 VIII., to Richard Gresham. 
 
 At Ipswich. An Augustine Priory, built before the 
 year 1177, by Norman Eadnothi; rents £88 6s. 9(7., 
 now worth £1,766 15s.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to 
 Sir Thomas Pope. 
 
 St. Peter and Paul, another Priory of Augustine 
 Canons, founded, in the time of Henry II., by 
 Thomas Lacy; granted, 9 James I., to Richard 
 Percival and Edmund Duffield. 
 
 St. Mary Magdalen and St. James’ Hospital, 
 founded in the time of King John. 
 
 Dandy’s Almshouse; founded, in the year 1515, 
 by Edmund Dandy, for the poor; granted by Ed¬ 
 ward YI. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded, in the time of 
 Henry III., by Henry de Manesby and others ; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to William Sabyne. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, built about the year 1279, 
 by Sir Thomas de Loudham; granted, 36 Henry 
 VIII., to John Eyre. 
 
 An Augustine Priory, built in the time of William 
 the Conqueror, by Gilbert Blund; rents £280 9s. 
 5(7., now worth £5,609 Ss. 4cZ.; granted, 30 Henry 
 VIII., to Richard Codington. 
 
 At Kersey. An Austin Priory, founded before 3 
 Henry III.; granted, 25 Henry VIII., to the King’s 
 College in Cambridge. 
 
 At Letherlngton. An Austin Cell; yearly value 
 £26 18s. 5(7., now w r orth £538 8s. 4cZ.; granted, 7 Ed¬ 
 ward VI., to Elizabeth Naunton, daughter of Sir An¬ 
 thony Naunlon of Wingfield. 
 
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK. 
 
 149 
 
 At Leyestone. A Premonstratensian Abbey, found¬ 
 ed, in the year 1182, by Ralph de Glanville ; yearly 
 value £181 17s. 1^-rZ., now worth £3,637 2s. 6 d .; grant¬ 
 ed, 28 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Metingham. A College, built 6 Richard II.; 
 yearly value £202 7s. 5%cl., now worth £4,047 9s. 2d .; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Thomas Denny. 
 
 At Mindham. A Cluniac Priory, founded, in the 
 time of Stephen, on the island of Hurst, in this parish, 
 by William of Huntingfield; granted to Richard 
 Freston. 
 
 At Redlingfield. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, 
 in the year 1120, by Manasses, Earl of Ghisnes ; yearly 
 value £81 2s. 5^cZ., now worth £ 1,622 9s. 2d .; granted, 
 28 Henry VIII., to Edmund Bedingfield. 
 
 At Rumburgh. A Benedictine Cell, built about the 
 time of the Conquest. ' 
 
 At Si 3 T 0 N. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1149, by William de Cheney; yearly value £250 
 15s. 7^-cZ., now worth £5,015 12s. 6tZ.; granted, 1 Ed¬ 
 ward VI., to Sir Antony Denny. 
 
 At Snape. A Benedictine Priory, built in the year 
 1155, by William Martel; yearly value £99 Is. ll^cZ., 
 now worth £1,981 19s. 2d .; granted, 34 Henry VIII., 
 to Thomas, Duke of Norfolk. 
 
 At Stoke. A College, founded, in the year 1124. 
 by Richard de Clare, Earl of Hertford; yearly value 
 £324 4s. l^cZ., now worth £6,484 2s. 6tZ.; granted, 2 
 Edward VI., to Sir John Cheke and Michael Mildmay. 
 
 At Sudbury. A College, founded, in the year 1374, 
 by Simon, Bishop of London, on the ruins of a very an¬ 
 cient church ; yearly value £122 18s. 3cZ., now worth 
 £2,45S 5s.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Sir Thomas 
 Paston. 
 
 A Benedictine Cell, founded, in the reign of 
 13* 
 
150 ENGLAND. 
 
 Henry II., by Wilfric ; granted, 34 Henry VIII., 
 to the Dean and Chapter of Westminster. 
 
 An Hospital, founded, in the time of John, by 
 Arnicia, Countess of Clare ; granted, 5 Edward 
 VI., to John Cheke, Esq. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded, in the reign of 
 Edward I., by Baldwin de Shipling; granted, 31 
 Henry VIII., to Thomas Eden, Esq. 
 
 At Wangford. A Cluniac Cell, founded, before the 
 year 1160, by Doudo Asini; yearly value £30 9 . 9 . or/., 
 now worth £609 85 . 4rZ. ; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to 
 Thomas, Duke of Norfolk. 
 
 At Wilton St. Felix. A Benedictine Cell, found¬ 
 ed, in the reign of William Rufus, by Roger Bigod 3 
 granted, 19 Elizabeth, to Thomas Sexford. 
 
 At Great Weltham. A House of Crossed Friars, 
 bounded, 2 Edward I.; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to 
 Antony Rouse. 
 
 At Wickham. A Monastery, built in the reign of 
 King Stephen, by Robert de Salco Villa, Knight. 
 
 t 
 
 At Wingfield. A College, built in the year 1362, 
 by Lady Alianor, relict of Sir John Wingfield 3 yearly 
 ralue £69 14s. 5c/., now worth £1,394 8 $. 4 d .; granted 
 by Edward VI., to the Bishop of Norwich. 
 
 At Woodbridge. An Austin Priory, founded, before 
 the time of Edward II., by Ernaldus Ruffus ; yearly 
 value £50 3s. 5£cl., now worth £1,003 9s. 2d .; granted, 
 19 Elizabeth, to Thomas Sexford, Master of Requests. 
 
 SURREY (County.) 
 
 At Aldbury. An Austin Priory, built in the reign 
 of Richard I., by Rual de Calva 3 yearly value £294 
 
 
COUNTY OF SURREY. 
 
 151 
 
 18s. 4%d., now worth £5,893 7s. 6 d.\ granted, 36 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Antony Brown. 
 
 At Bermondsey. A Cluniac Abbey, built about the 
 year 1089, by Aylwin Child, citizen of London ; yearly 
 Income £548 2s. 5 ±d., now worth £10,962 9s. 2d. ; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Sir Richard Southwell. 
 
 At Chertsey. A Benedictine Abbey, built in the 
 year 666, by Erkenwald, Bishop of London ; destroyed, 
 with the Abbot and ninety Monks killed, in the Danish 
 wars; rebuilt by King Edgar ; income £744 13s. 6 ^d. 
 yearly, now worth £14,893 10s. IOcZ. ; granted, 7 Ed¬ 
 ward VI., to Sir William Fitz Williams. 
 
 At Lingfield. A College, built in the time of Hen¬ 
 ry VI., by Reginald Cobham; income £79 15s. 10 ^d. 
 yearly, now worth £1,595 17s. 6 d.\ granted, 38 Henry 
 VIII., to Thomas Cawarden. 
 
 At Merton. An Austin Priory, founded, in the year 
 1117, by Gilbert Norman, Sheriff of Surrey; yearly 
 value £1,039 5s. 3 d., now worth £20,785 5s. 
 
 At Newington. An Hospital, continued here until 
 the year 1551, when their proctor, William Cleybroke, 
 had a 'protection or license to beg. 
 
 At Reigate. An Austin Priory or Hospital, founded, 
 by William de Warren, Earl of Surrey; income £78 
 16s. 10rZ., now worth £1,576 16s. 8cZ. ; granted, 33 
 Henry VIII., to William, Lord Howard. 
 
 At Shene. A Carthusian Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1414, by Henry V., income £962 11s. 6d, now 
 worth £19,251 10s.; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Ed¬ 
 ward, Earl of Hertford. 
 
 At Southwark. St. Mary Overy, Austin Priory, 
 built on the ruins of an ancient Nunnery, that was 
 founded, by Mary, and endowed with the profits of a 
 ferry on the Thames; value £656 10s. 0 ^d. yearly, 
 now worth £13,130 0s. IOcZ.; granted, 36 Henry VIII, 
 to Sir Antony Brown. 
 
152 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 Overy Hospital, or St. Thomas’s, founded, about 
 the year 1228, by the Bishop of Winchester, Peter 
 de Rupibus; value £309 Is. lid., yearly, now 
 worth £6,181 18s. 4 cl .; contained, 30 Henry VIII., 
 beds, food, and firing, for forty poor and sick per¬ 
 sons, when it was given up. 
 
 At Tandridge, or Tanregge. An Austin Priory, 
 founded, in the time of Richard I., and much contri¬ 
 buted to by Odo de Dammartin; rents £86 7s. 6d., 
 now worth £1,727 10s.; granted, 29 Henry VIII., to 
 John Rede. 
 
 At Waverley. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in 
 the year 1128, by William Gifford, Bishop of Winches¬ 
 ter ; value £169 13. lid., yearly, now worth £3,933 
 18s. 4d.; granted, 28 Henry VIII., to Sir William Fitz 
 Williams. 
 
 SUSSEX (County.) 
 
 At Arundel. An Alien Priory, founded, in the time 
 of William the Conqueror, by Roger of Montgomery; 
 became afterwards a College, and valued at £263 14s. 
 9 d., yearly, now worth £5,274 15s.; granted, 36 Henry 
 VIII., to Henry, Earl of Arundel. 
 
 An Hospital, built 18 Edward II., by Richard, 
 Earl of Arundel; rents £89 5s. 2£d., now worth 
 £1,785 4s. 2d.; granted to Sir Richard Lee. 
 
 At Battel. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, by 
 William the Conqueror, on the spot where a, decisive 
 battle was fought, October 14, 1066, between King 
 Harold and William, Duke of Normandy; value £987 
 Os. lO.Vd. yearly, now worth £19,740 17s. 6d.; granted, 
 30 Henry VIII., to Sir Antony Brown. 
 
 At Beigham. A Premonstratensian Abbey, founded, 
 m the year 1200, by Robert de Turreham ; value £152 
 9s. 4gd. yearly, now worth £3,049 7s. 6d. 
 
COUNTY OF SUSSEX. 
 
 153 
 
 At Bosanham. A College, originally founded, in 
 tne year 681, by St. Wilfrid ; granted, 6 Elizabeth, to 
 the Dean and Chapter of Chichester. 
 
 At Boxgrave. A Benedictine Priory, founded, in 
 the time of Henry I., by Robert de Hay a; income £145.- 
 10s. 2 ±d., now worth £2,910 4s. 2d .; granted, 3 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to Henry, Earl of Arundel. 
 
 At Bramber. An Hospital, valued, 26 Henry VIII., 
 at 20s. yearly. 
 
 At Chichester. A Cathedral, founded, in the year 
 1075, by Bishop Stigand; valued at the dissolution at 
 £677 Is. 3cZ. yearly ; the Chapter’s revenues made £601 
 7s. 10eZ.; both together would make no w £25,589 Is. 8cZ. 
 
 A College of Vicars, had revenues £31 12s. 6cZ. 
 now worth £632 10s. 
 
 St. James’s Hospital, founded, in the reign of 
 King John; rents £4 3s. 9cZ., now worth £83 15s. 
 
 St. Mary’s Hospital, founded for the poor; value 
 £11 11s. 6^-cZ. yearly, now worth £231 10s. IOcZ. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded, in the time of 
 Edward I., by Queen Alianor* 1 ; granted, 32 Henry 
 VIII., to Edward Millet. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, built in the reign of Henry 
 III.; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to the Mayor and 
 Citizens. 
 
 At Dureford. A Premonstratensian Abbey, founded, 
 in the year 1169, by Robert Hoese; value £108 13s. 
 9cZ. yearly, now worth £2,173 15s.; granted, 29 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir William Fitz Williams. 
 
 At Easeborne. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, 
 in the time of Henry III., by Sir John Bohun; yearly 
 value £47 3s., now worth £943; granted 28 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir William Fitz Williams. 
 
 At Hastings. A College, built in the time of Henry 
 I., by Hugh de Augo; value £41 13s. 5cZ. yearly, not? 
 
154 ENGLAND. 
 
 worth £833 85 . 4cZ.; granted, 38 Henry VIII., to Sir 
 Antony Brown. 
 
 An Austin Priory, founded, in the time of Rich¬ 
 ard I., by Sir Walter Bricet; value £57 Is. 9 d. 
 yearly, now worth £1,159; granted, 29 Henry 
 VIII., to John Baker. 
 
 At Lewes. A Cluniac Priory, founded, in the year 
 1078, by Earl William de Warrenna; income £1,091 
 9s. 6 ^d., now worth £21,829 10s. 10r/.; granted, 2 
 Elizabeth, to Richard Baker and Richard Sackville. 
 
 At South Mallyng. A College, founded, in the 
 year 688 , by Ceadwalla, King of the West Saxons; 
 yearly value £45 12 s. 5^-cZ., now worth £912 9s. 2d. 
 
 At Michelham. Austin Canons, established in the 
 time of Henry III., by Gilbert de Aquila; yearly in¬ 
 come £191 19s. 3d., now worth £3,839 5s.; granted, 
 33 Henry VIII., to William, Earl of Arundel. 
 
 At Pleydone. An Hospital, granted, 34 Henry VIII., 
 to Andrew, Lord Windsor. 
 
 At Pyniiam. An Austin Priory, built in the time of 
 Henry I., by his Queen Adeliza; income £43 Os. 10 d., 
 now worth £860 16s. 8 d .; granted, 5 James I., to An 
 tony, Lord Montage. 
 
 At Robert’s Bridge. A Cistercian Abbey, built in 
 the year 1176, by Alfred de St. Martino ; yearly income 
 £272 9s. 8 d., now worth £5,449 13s. 4 d. ; granted, 33 
 Henry VIII., to Sir William Sidney. 
 
 At Ruspur. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded before 
 the time of Richard I.; income £39 13s. Id., now worth 
 £793 11 s. 8d. ; granted, 29 Henry VIII., to Sir Robert 
 Southwell. 
 
 At Sele. An Austin Priory, built in the year 1075, 
 by William de Braiosa; valued at £26 9s. L Jd. yearly, 
 now worth £529 15s.; granted to the College of Oxford. 
 
 At Shoreham. St. James’s Hospital; valued at £l 
 
< 
 
 COUNTY OF WARWICK. 155 
 
 6 s. 8d., now worth £26 13.9. 4 d .; granted, 16 Elizabeth, 
 to John Mersh. 
 
 At Tortington. An Austin Priory, founded, m the 
 time of John, by Lady Hadwisa Corbet; value £101 
 45 . 1 d. yearly, now worth £2,024 Is. 8d .; granted, 42 
 Elizabeth, to Sir John Spencer. 
 
 At Wilmington. An Alien Priory, built in the reign 
 of William Rufus, by Robert, Earl of Morteton ; grant¬ 
 ed, 7 Elizabeth, to Sir Richard Sacftville. 
 
 At Winchelsey. A Dominican Friary, granted 36 
 Henry VIII., to William Clifford, and Michael Wild- 
 bore. 
 
 -At Wolinchmere. An Austin Priory, founded by 
 Ralph de Ardern; income £79 15s. 6c?., now wortli 
 £1,595 10s.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Antony 
 Brown. 
 
 WARWICK (County.) 
 
 At Alencester. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, in 
 the year 1140, by Ralph Pincerna; yearly value £101 
 14s., now worth £2,024; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to 
 William and John Sewester. 
 
 At Astley. A College, founded, 17 Edward III., 
 by Sir Thomas de Astley; rents £3b 10s. 6 d., now 
 worth £790 10s.; granted, 3S Henry VIII., to Henry, 
 Marquis of Dorset. 
 
 At Atherston. An Austin Friary, built 49 Edward 
 III., by Ralph, Lord Basset; valued at £1 10s. 2c?. 
 yearly, now worth £30 3s. 4 d.; granted, 35 Henry 
 ,*VlII., to Henry Cartwright. 
 
 At Avecote. A Benedictine Cell, built in the year 
 1159, by William Burdett; rents £28 6s. 2c?., now 
 
150 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 worth £566 3s. id .; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to Tho¬ 
 mas, Lord Audley, and Sir Thomas Pope. 
 
 At Balshall. A House of Templars, built in the 
 rei^n of Stephen, by Roger de Moubray; granted, S 
 Elizabeth, to Sir Robert Dudley. 
 
 At Birmingham. An Hospital, founded before tlie 
 time of Edward I.; yearly value £8 5s. 3 d., now worth 
 £165 5s. 
 
 At Combe. A Cistercian Abbey, built in the year 
 1150, by Richard de Camvilla; rents £343 Os. 5d., now 
 worth £6,860 8s. id.; granted, 1 Edward VI., to John, 
 ' Earl of Warwick. 
 
 At Coventry. A Cathedral, created out of a Mo¬ 
 nastery that was built in the year 1043, by Leofric, the 
 good Earl of Mercia, on the ruins of a Nunnery built 
 by the Saxons, before the year 1016; rents £499 7s. 4cZ., 
 now worth £9,987 6s. 8 d .; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to 
 John Combes and Richard Stansfiel. 
 
 A Charter-House, founded, in the year 1381, by 
 William, Lord Zouch; rents £251 5s. 9ri., now 
 worth £5,035 15s.; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to 
 Richard Andrews, and Leonard Chamberlayne. 
 
 Bablake College, founded, before the year 1350, 
 by the Burgesses; yearly value £111 13s. 8<i., now 
 worth £2,233 13s. id. 
 
 Bablake Hospital, founded, in the year 1506, by 
 Thomas Bond, draper: rents £49 11s. 7 d., now 
 worth £991 11s. 8d. 
 
 Grey Friars’ Hospital, built in the year 1529, by 
 William Ford, for five poor men and one poor 
 woman. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, built in the reign of Henry 
 II., by Edmund, Archdeacon of Coventry; yearly 
 value £83 3s. 3cZ., now worth £1,663 5s.; granted 
 to John Hales, Esq. 
 
COUNTY OF WARWICK. 
 
 157 
 
 Grey Friary, founded, in the year 1234, by Ralph, 
 Earl of Chester; granted, 34 Henry VIIL, to the 
 Mayor and Bailiffs of the town. 
 
 Carmelite Friary, erected in the year 1342, by 
 Sir John Poultney; yearly income £7 135. 8 cl, 
 now worth £153 13s. id .; granted, 36 Henry VIII., 
 to Ralph Sadler. 
 
 At Nun'Eaton. A Nunnery, founded, in the reign 
 of Henry II., by Robert Bossu, Earl of Leicester; in¬ 
 come £290 5s. 0^-cZ., now worth £5,805 Os. IOcZ. ; grant¬ 
 ed, 32 Henry VIII., to Sir Marmaduke Constable. 
 
 At Erdbury. An Augustine Priory, built in the 
 reign of Henry III., by Ralph de Sudley; rents £122 
 8 s. 6cL, now worth <£2,448 10s.; granted, 30 Henry 
 VIII., to Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Heanwood. A Benedictine Nunnery, built in the 
 reign of Henry II., by Katelbern de Langdon; income 
 £21 2s. 0 ±d., now worth £422 Os. IOcZ.; granted, 31 
 Henry VIII., to John Higford. 
 
 At Kenilworth. An Augustine Priory, built in the 
 year 1122, by Jeffery de Clintone, Chamberlain to 
 Henry I.; income £538 19s., now worth £10,779; 
 granted, by Henry VIII., to Sir Andrew Flamock. 
 
 At Monk’s Kirby. An Alien Priory, founded, in 
 the year 1077, by Gosfred de Wircha; income £220 
 3s. 4 d., now worth £4,403 6s. 8 d .; granted, 37 Henry 
 VIII., to Trinity College, Cambridge. 
 
 At Knoll. A College, built 4 Henry V., by Lady 
 Elizabeth Clinton; income £18 5s. 6a., now wortli 
 £365 10s. 
 
 At Maxstoke. An Augustine Priory, built in the 
 year 1336, by Sir William de Clinton, Earl of Hunt¬ 
 ingdon; income £129 11s. 8 Jrd., now worth £2,591 4s. 
 2d .; granted 30 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of 
 Suffolk 
 
 At Mereval. A Cistercian Abbey, built in the year 
 
15S 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 1148, by Robert, Earl of Ferrers; income £303 10s., 
 now worth' £6,070; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Wal¬ 
 ter, Lord Ferrers. 
 
 At Oldbury. A Benedictine Nunnery, built in the 
 reign of William the Conqueror, by Walter de Hast¬ 
 ings ; income £6 Os. 10c/., now worth £120 16s. 8 cl .; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Pinley. A Cistercian Nunnery, built in the reign 
 of Henry I., by Robert de Pilardinton; yearly value 
 £27 14s. 7c/., now worth £554 11s. 8d .; granted, 36 
 Henry VIII., to William Wigston, Esq. 
 
 At Pollesworth. A Benedictine Nunnery, built by 
 King Egbert for Modwenna, a holy woman lately come 
 from Ireland; here his own daughter, St. Editha, pre¬ 
 sided; income £87 16s. 3d., now worth £1,756 5s.; 
 granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Francis Goodyere, Esq. 
 
 At Stonely. A Cistercian Abbey, built by King 
 Henry II., in the year 1154; income £178 2s. 5 ^d., 
 now worth £3,562 9s. 2cZ.; granted, 30 Henry VIIL, 
 to Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Stratford. A College, founded, about the year 
 703; income £123 12s. 9c/., now worth £2,472 15s.; 
 granted, 4 Edward VI., to John, Earl of Warwick. 
 
 Hospital, built in the reign of Henry II. > 
 
 At Studley. An Augustine Priory, built in the reign 
 of Henry II.; rents £181 3s. 6c/., now worth £3,623; 
 granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Sir Edmund Knightly. 
 
 At Thelesford. A Maturine Friary, founded, m 
 the reign of John, by William de Cherlecote; income 
 £23 10s.; now worth £470; granted, 35 Henry VIII., 
 to William Whorwood, Esq., and William Walter. 
 
 At Warmington. An Alien Priory, founded, in the 
 reign of Henry I., by Paul de Prattelles; granted, 35 
 Henry VIII., to William and Francis Seldon, Esqrs. 
 
 At Warwick. An Augustine Priory, built in the 
 
 N 
 
COUNTY OF WARWICK. 
 
 159 
 
 reign of Henry I., by Henry of Newburgh; income 
 £49 135. 6cZ., now worth £993 10s.; granted, 38 Henry 
 VIII.j to Thomas Hawkins. 
 
 Hospital of Templars, built in the reign of Hen¬ 
 ry I., by Roger, Earl of Warwick; income £14 6s. 
 8 d., now worth £286 13s. 4 d. 
 
 St. James’s College, built in the reign of Rich¬ 
 ard II. 
 
 St. Mary’s College, built before the time of Wil¬ 
 liam the Conqueror; income £247 13s. 0^-cZ., now 
 worth £4,953 Os. 10cZ.; granted, 37 Henry VIII., 
 to the Burgesses of Warwick. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, built in the reign of Henry 
 II., by William, Earl of Warwick, for the enter¬ 
 tainment of travellers and strangers; income, £19 
 3s. Id.. now worth £3S3 11s. 8 d .; granted, 27 
 Henry VIII., to Anthony Staughton. 
 
 St. Michael’s Hospital, founded, in the reign of 
 Henry I., by Roger, Earl of Warwick, for the 
 sick; income £10 19s. 10cZ., now worth £219 
 16s. 8 d. 
 
 Black Friary, built in the reign of Henry III., by 
 the Botelers, Lords of Sudley ; income £4 18s. (kZ., 
 •now worth £98 10s.; granted, 5 Edward VI., to 
 John, Duke of Northumberland. . 
 
 Carmelite Friary, built 18 Edward III., by John 
 Peyto, jun.; granted, 4 Edward VI., to John, Earl 
 of Warwick. 
 
 At Wolfricheston. An Alien Priory, built soon 
 after the conquest, by Roger de Montgomery; granted, 
 3 Edward VI., to Richard Fielde and Richard Wood¬ 
 ward. 
 
 At Wroxhall. A Benedictine Nunnery, built in 
 the reign of Henry I., by Hugh de Hatton; yearly 
 
160 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 value £78 10.9. 1 }d., now worth £1,570 2s. 6cZ.; grant¬ 
 ed, 36 Henry VIII., to Robert Burgoin and John Scud¬ 
 amore. 
 
 WESTMORELAND (County/) 
 
 At Brough. An Hospital, founded, in the 16th cen¬ 
 tury, by John Brunskill, with a chapel, and beds for 
 travellers and other poor persons; yearly income £7 
 4s. 4 d., now worth £144 6s. 8 d. 
 
 At Hepp. A Premonstratensian Abbey, built in the 
 reign of Henry II., by Thomas Fitz Gospatrick : yearly 
 value £166 10s. 6cZ., now worth £3,330 10s.; granted, 
 36 Henry VIII., to Thomas, Lord Wharton. 
 
 At Kirkley. An Hospital for lepers, built before 
 the time of Henry II.; yearly income £6 4s. 5 d., now 
 worth £124 8s. 4 d.\ granted, 38 Henry VIII., to Alan 
 Bellingham, and Alan Wilson. 
 
 WILTS (County.) 
 
 At Amesbury. A Nunnery, built by Alfrida Queen 
 of Edgar; income £558 10s. 2fZ., now worth £11,170 
 3s. 4 d .; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Edward, Earl of 
 Hertford. 
 
 At Ansty. An Hospital of Hospitalers, built 12 
 John, by Walter de Turbelville ; yearly income £81 
 8s. 5 d., now worth £1,628 8s. 4 d .; granted, 38 Henry 
 VIII., to John Zouch. 
 
 At Avebury. An Alien Priory, built in the reign of 
 Henry I., by William de Tancervilla; granted, 2 Ed¬ 
 ward VI., to Sir William Sharington. 
 
COUNTY OF WILTS. 
 
 161 
 
 At Bhadenstoke. An Augustine Priory, founded, 
 in tlie year 1142, by Walter de Evreux; yearly value 
 £270 105. 8cZ., now worth £5,410 13s. 4 d .; granted, 38 
 Henry VIII., to Richard Pexall. 
 
 At Mayden Bradeley. An Augustine Priory, found¬ 
 ed, in the reign of Stephen, by Manasses Biset; yearly 
 value £197 18s. 8eZ., now worth £3,958 13s. 4cZ.; grant¬ 
 ed, 29 Henry VIII., to Sir Edward Seymore. 
 
 At Caln. An Hospital, built in the reign of Henry 
 III.; income £2 2s. 8cZ., now worth £42 13s. 4 d. 
 
 At Charleston. An Alien Priory, built in the year 
 1187, by Reginald de Pavely; yearly income £22, now 
 worth £440; granted, 2 Edward VI., to Sir William 
 Sharington. 
 
 At Cosham. An Alien Priory, built in the reign of 
 William the Conqueror; yearly income £22 13s. 4(Z., 
 now worth £453 6s. ScZ.; granted, 6 James I., to Philip 
 Moore. 
 
 At Cricklade. An Hospital, built in the reign ot 
 Henry III.; yearly income £4 7s. 10^-cZ., now worth 
 £87 17s. 6d. 
 
 At Edindon. Bonhommes, built about the year 1347; 
 rents £521 12s. 5£cZ., now worth £10,432 9s. 2d .; grant¬ 
 ed, 33 Henry VIII., to William Pawlet, Lord St. John. 
 
 At Eston. A Trinitarian Friary, founded, for the re¬ 
 demption of captives, in the reign of Henry III., by 
 Stephen, Archdeacon of Salisbury ; yearly income £55 
 14s. 4eZ., now worth £1,114 6s. 8cZ.; granted, 6 James I., 
 to Edward, Earl of Hertford. 
 
 At Farleigii. A Cluniac Priory, built in the year 
 1125, by Humphrey de Bohun; yearly income £152 3s. 
 7cZ., now worth £3,043 11s. 8d .; granted, 28 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Edward Seymore. 
 
 At Heytesbury. A College, built in the year 1300; 
 yearly income £28 12s. 6(Z., now worth £572 10s. 
 
 14* 
 
J62 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 Hospital, founded, about the year 1470, by Lady 
 Margaret Hungerford, for twelve poor men and 
 one poor woman; yearly income £38 4s. 7c/., now 
 worth £764 11s. 8c/.; it stands to this day. 
 
 At Toy Church. An Augustine Priory, built in the 
 reign of Henry II.; yearly income £133 Os. 7^c/., now 
 worth £2,660 12s. 6c/.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to 
 John Barwick. 
 
 At Keinton. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded 2 
 Henry II.; yearly income £38 3s. 10£c/., now worth 
 £763 17s. 6 d .; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Sir John 
 Long. 
 
 At Kingswood. A Cistercian Abbey, built in the 
 year 1139, by William de Berkly; yearly income £254 
 11 s. 3c/., now worth £5,091 3s. 4c/.; granted, 2 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to Sir John Thynne. 
 
 At Lacock. An Augustine Priory, built in the year 
 1232, by Ela, Countess of Salisbury; yearly income 
 £203 12s. 3c/., now worth £4,072 5s.; granted, 32 
 Henry VIII., to Sir William Sharington. 
 
 At Longleat. An Augustine Priory; granted, 32 
 Henry VIII., to Sir John Thynne. 
 
 At Malmesbury. A Benedictine Abbey, built in the 
 year 675, in the place of an ancient nunnery; yearly 
 income £803 17s. 7c/., now worth £16,077 11s. Sc/.; 
 granted, 36 Henry VIII., to William Stump. 
 
 At Marleborough. A Gilbertine Abbey, founded, 
 in the reign of John; yearly income £38 19s. 2d., now 
 worth £779 3s. 4c/.; granted to Anthony Stringer. 
 
 Hospital, St. John’s, built 16 John, by Mr. Leve- 
 noth; yearly income £6 18s. 4c/., now worth £138 
 6s. 8 c/. 
 
 Carmelite Friary, built in the year 1316, by John 
 Godwin and William Ramesbesch; granted, 34 
 Henry VIII., to John Pye and Robert Brown. 
 
COUNTY OF WILTS, 
 
 163 
 
 At Pulton. A Gilbertine Priory, built, 21 Edward 
 III., by Sir Thomas Seymore ; yearly value £20 3s. 
 2d., now worth £403 35 . id ,; granted, 36 Henry VIII., 
 to Sir Thomas Stroude, Walter Erie, and John Paget. 
 
 At Temple Rockley. An Hospital of Templars, 
 built 2 Henry II., by John Mareschall; granted, 32 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Edward Bainton. 
 
 At Salisbury. A Cathedral Church, the building of 
 which took forty years; was finished in the year 1258; 
 the revenues of the Bishop made £1,367 115. Qd., 
 of the Chapter £601 125.; both would now make 
 £39,383 105. 
 
 St. Edmond’s College, founded, by Walter de 
 la Wyle, Bishop of Salisbury, in the year 1270; 
 revenues £94 5s., now worth £1,885; granted, 38 
 Henry* VIII., to William St. Barbe. 
 
 College de Vaux, and possessions; granted, 35 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Michael Lister. 
 
 Vicar’s College, incorporated 11 Henry IV.; 
 revenues £47 185 . 0 \d., now worth £958 05. 10 d. 
 
 Harnham College, founded, in the year 1220, by 
 Bishop Poore; rents £25 25. 2d., now worth £502 
 35 . id .; it was for the poor, and still continues. 
 
 Trinity College, founded for the sick, 17 Richard 
 II., by John Chandeler. 
 
 Dominican Friary, founded, by King Edward I.; 
 granted, 36 Henry VIII., to John Pollard, and 
 William Byrte. 
 
 Franciscan Friary, built by a bishop of the 
 tow; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to John Wroth. 
 
 At Stanlegh. A Cistercian Abbey, built in the year 
 1154, by King Henry II., and his mother Maud; rents 
 £222 195. id., now worth £4,459 65 . 8 d .; granted, 28 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Edward Bainton. 
 
 At Uphaven. An Alien Priory, built in the reign of 
 
ENGLAND. 
 
 164 
 
 Henry 1.; granted, 4 James I., to Francis and A. An¬ 
 derson. 
 
 At Wilton. A Benedictine Nunnery, built by King 
 Edgar, in the year 871, on the ruins of an Abbey built 
 773, and destroyed by the Danes; yearly revenues 
 £652 11s. 5.}d, now worth £13,051 9s. 2d; granted, 
 35 Henry VIII., to Sir William Herbert. 
 
 St. Giles’ Hospital, built by Q,ueen Adelicia, 
 wife of Henry I.; yearly value £5 13s. 4d, now 
 worth £113 6s. 8d 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, built in the year 1217, for a 
 Prior and poor brethren; rents £14 13s. 10£d, now 
 worth £393 17s. 6d 
 
 WORCESTER (County.) 
 
 At Astley. An Alien Priory, built in the reign of 
 William the Conqueror, by Ralph de Todenei; granted, 
 by King Henry VIII., to Sir Ralph Sadler. 
 
 At Bordesley. A Cistercian Abbey, built in the 
 year 1138, by the Empress Maud ; rents £392 8s. 6d, 
 now worth £7,848 10s.; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to 
 Andrew, Lord Windsor. 
 
 At Cokehill. A White Nunnery, built in the reign 
 of Richard I., by Gervase of Canterbury; rents £34 
 15s. lid, now worth £695 18s. id .; granted, 34 Henry 
 VIII., to Nicholas Fortescue, whose posterity now in¬ 
 habit the ancient Priory-house. 
 
 At Dodford. A Premonstratensian Cell, built by King 
 Henry II.; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to John Dudley, 
 who sold it to John Fownes. 
 
 At Dkoitwich. An Hospital, built 13 Edward I., by 
 William de Dovere, Pastor of Dodderhill; rents £21 
 11s. 8d, now worth £431 13s. 4d 
 
COUNTY OF WORCESTER. . 165 
 
 At Elmely. A College, built in the reign of Edward 
 II., by Guy, Earl of Warwick; granted, 37 Henry VIII., 
 to Sir Thomas Hobby. 
 
 At Evesham. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, and 
 endowed 701, by Egwin Bishop of Worcester; yearly 
 value £1,268 9s. 9d., now worth £25,369 15s.; granted, 
 34 Henry VIII., to Philip Hobby, Esq. 
 
 At Malvern Major. A Benedictine Priory, founded 
 by Edward the Confessor; rents £375 Os. 6^-d., now 
 worth £7,500 10s. lOd.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to 
 William Pynnok. 
 
 • 
 
 At Malvern Minor. A Benedictine Cell, founded 
 in the year 1171, by Joceline and Edred, brothers, who 
 were afterwards Priors there ; rents £102 10s. 9^d., 
 now worth £2,050 15s. lOd.; granted, 35 Henry VIII., 
 to Richard Andrews and Nicholas Temple. 
 
 At Pershore. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, in 
 the year 6S9, by Oswald, nephew of King Ethelred ; 
 rents £666 13s., now worth £13,333 ; granted, 36 Hen¬ 
 ry VIII., to William and Francis Sheldon. 
 
 At Westwood. A Fontevrauld Nunnery, built in 
 the reign of Henry II., by Eustachia de Say ; rents £75 
 18s. lid., now worth £1,518 17s. 6d.; granted, 30 
 Henry VIII., to John Pakinton. 
 
 — ▼ .' ' 
 
 At Worcester. A Cathedral Church, built in the 
 year 964, by Bishop Oswald, which became after¬ 
 wards a Monastery; rents £1,290 10s. 64d.; now worth 
 £25,810 10s. 10 d. 
 
 Whiston Nunnery, built by a Bishop of Wor¬ 
 cester; rents £56 3s. 7d., now worth £1,123 11s. 
 8d.; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Richard Callow- 
 hile. 
 
 St. Oswald’s Hospital, founded, by Bishop Os¬ 
 wald himself, before the year 1268, for the poor; 
 with revenues £15 18s., now worth £318 ; granted, 
 by Henry VIII., to Christ Church, Oxford,, 
 
166 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded, by Beauchamps 
 of Powike; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to the Bai¬ 
 liffs and Citizens of Worcester. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, built in the year 1268, by 
 Charles of Warwick; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to 
 the Bailiffs, &c. of Worcester. 
 
 YORK (County.) 
 
 At North Allerton. St. James’s Hospital, found¬ 
 ed, in the reign of Henry II., by Hugh Pusar, Bishop 
 of Durham, for the poor brethren; rents .£56 2s. 2cl. y 
 now worth £1,122 35 . 4 c/.; granted, 32 Henry VIII., 
 to Christ Church, Oxford. 
 
 Maison de Dieu, built ih the year 1476, by Ri¬ 
 chard Moore, draper, for thirteen poor persons; 
 four only are now supported on it. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, built in the year 1354, by 
 Thomas Hatfield, Bishop of Durham. 
 
 At Nun Appleton. A Cistercian Nunnery, built in 
 the reign of King Stephen, by Adeliz de St. Quintin; 
 rents £83 5s. 3c/., now worth £1,665 155.; granted, 33 
 Henry VIII., to Robert Darknall. 
 
 At Arden. A Benedictine Nunnery, built in the 
 year 1150, by Peter de Hotton; rents £13 75 . 4c/., now 
 worth £267 65 . 8 c/,; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Tho¬ 
 mas Culpeper. 
 
 At Arthington. A Benedictine Nunnery, built in 
 the time of King Stephen, by Peter de Aldington ; 
 rents £19, now worth £380; granted, 34 Henry VIII., 
 to Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 At Nether Aulcaster. A College, founded, by 
 Robert Stillington; rents £27 135. 4c/., now worth 
 
COUNTY OP YORK. 
 
 167 
 
 £553 6.?. 8 d .; granted, 2 Edward VI., to John Hulse 
 and William Pendred. 
 
 At Bagby. An Hospital for the sick and poor. 
 
 At Base dale Hoton. A Cistercian Nunnery, built 
 in the year 1162, by Ralph de Neville ; yearly value 
 £21 19^. 4 d., now worth £439 6s. 8d .; granted, 36 
 Henry VIII., to Ralph Bulmer and John Thynde. 
 
 At Bawtree. An Hospital, built in the year 1316, 
 by Robert Moreton, Esq. for the poor; rents £6 6s. ScL, 
 now worth £126 13s. 4 d .; yet in being. 
 
 At Begare. An Alien Priory, built in the reign of 
 Henry III.; granted to Eton College. 
 
 At Beverley. A College, built in the year 700, by 
 John, Archbishop of York. After various alterations, 
 it supported, at the dissolution, one Provost, eight Pre¬ 
 bendaries, a Chancellor, Precentor, seven Rectors, 
 Choral, nine Vicars Choral, many Chantry Priests, 
 Clerks, Choristers, officers and Servants. Revenues 
 £345 13s. 2d., now worth £6,913 Is. 8 d .; granted, 2 
 Edward VI., to Michael Stanhope and John Bellew. 
 
 A House of Hospitalers, built in the year 1201, 
 by Sibylla de Valoniis; rents £167 10s., now 
 worth £3,350; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Wil¬ 
 liam Barkely. 
 
 St. Giles’s Hospital, built before the conquest 
 by a Mr. Wulse ; rents £8, now worth £160 j 
 granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Thomas, Earl of Rut¬ 
 land. 
 
 St. Nicholas’s Hospital, built before the year 
 1268; yearly value £5 14s. 6 d., now worth £114 10s. 
 
 A Dominicans’ Friary, founded, before the year 
 1311; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to John Pope and 
 Anthony Foster. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded, in the year 1297, 
 by William Liketon and Henry Weighton ; grant¬ 
 ed, 32 Henry VIII., to Thomas Culpeper. 
 
168 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 At Bolton. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1120, by William Meschines; yearly value £212 
 3s. 4 d., now worth £4,243 6s. 8 d .; granted, 33 Henry 
 VIII., to Henry, Earl of Cumberland. 
 
 At Monk Bretton. A Cluniac Priory, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry II., by Adam Fitz Swain; rents 
 £323 8s. 2d., now worth £6,468 3s. 4 d .; granted, 32 
 Henry VIII., to William Blithman. 
 
 At Bronnum. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry III., by Roger de Merely, Lord 
 Morpeth; rents £10 3s. 3d., now worth £203 5s.; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Robert Tirwhit. 
 
 At Burlington. An Augustine Priory, built in the 
 reign of Henry I., by Walter de Gant; rents £682 13s. 
 9 d., now worth £13,653 15s. 
 
 At Byland. A Cistercian Abbey, built in the year 
 1143, by Roger de Mowbray; rents £295 5s. id., now 
 worth £5,905 6s. 8 d.) granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Wil¬ 
 liam Pykering. 
 
 At Corham. A Premonstratensian Abbey, built m 
 the reign of Henry II., by Ralph Fitz Robert, Lord 
 of Middleham ; rents £207 14s. 8 d., now worth £4,154 
 13s. id. 
 
 At Doncaster. A Franciscan Friary, erected before 
 the year 1315; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to William 
 Gifford and Michael Welbore. 
 
 At Drax. An Augustine Priory, built before the 
 reign of Henry I., by William Paynel; rents £181 18s. 
 3$d., now worth £3,638 5s. 10rf., granted, 30 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Marmaduke Constable. 
 
 At Eglestone. A Premonstratensian Abbey, found¬ 
 ed, in the reign of Henry II.; by Ralph de Multon ; 
 rents £36 8s. 3d., now worth £728 5s.; granted, 2 Ed¬ 
 ward VI., to Robert Shelley. 
 
 At Elreton. A Cistercian Nunnery, built in the 
 reign of Henry II., by Warnerius Dapifer, Earl of 
 
COUNTY OF YORK. 169 
 
 Richmond; rents £15 10s. 6c/., now worth £310 10s.; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to John Aske. 
 
 At Elreton on the Derwent. A Gilbertine Priory, 
 built in the year 1212, by William Fitz Peter, under 
 condition that they would maintain thirteen poor per¬ 
 sons ; rents £78 Os. 10c/., now worth £1,560 16s. 8c/.; 
 granted, 33 Henry VIII., to John Aske. 
 
 At Esseholt. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded in the 
 year 1172; rents £19, now worth £380; granted, 1 
 Edward VI., to Henry Thompson. 
 
 At North Ferry. An Augustine Priory, valued 
 yearly £95 11s. 7•£•</., now worth £1,911 12s. 6c/.; 
 granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Thomas Culpeper. 
 
 At Fountains, in the Deanery of West Riding. A 
 Cistercian Abbey, built in the year 1132; rents £1,173 
 0s. 7^-c/., now worth £23,560 12s. 6c/.; granted, 32 
 Henry VIII., to Sir Richard Gresham. 
 
 At Giseburne. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the year 1129, by Robert de Brus; rents £712 6s. 6c/., 
 now worth £14,246 10s.; granted, 4 Elizabeth, to Sir 
 Thomas Chaloner. 
 
 At Grosmont. An Alien Priory, built in the reign 
 of John, by Joanna, daughter of William Fossard; 
 rents £14 2s. 8c/., now worth £282 13s. 4 cl .; granted, 
 35 Henry VIII., to Edward Wright. 
 
 At Haltemprice. An Augustine Priory, founded, 15 
 Edward II., by Thomas, Lord Wake of Lyddel; yearly 
 value £178 0s. 10^c/., now worth £3,560 17s. 6c/.; grant¬ 
 ed, 32 Henry VIII., to Thomas Culpeper. 
 
 At Handale. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, in 
 the year 1133, Dy William Percy ; rents £29 7s. 8c/., 
 now worth £407 13s. 4c/,; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to 
 Ambrose Beckwith. 
 
 At Hanehope. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded, in 
 the year 1170, by William de Clarefai; rents £85 6s. 
 
170 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 lid, now worth £1.706 18.?. 4d ; granted, 6 Edward 
 VI., to Francis Aisiaby. 
 
 At Hedon. An Hospital, founded, in the time ol 
 King John, by Alan Ouberni; rents £11 18s. 4d, now 
 worth £238 6s. 8d; granted, 7 Edward VI., to Robert 
 Constable. 
 
 At Helagh Park. An Augustine Priory, founded, 
 in the year 1218, by Berthram Haget; rents £86 5s. 
 9d, now worth £1,725 15s.; granted, 31 Henry VIII., 
 to James Gage. 
 
 At Hemingburgh. A College, founded in the year 
 1426; rents £36 Is., now worth £721. 
 
 At Howden. A College, founded, in the year 1266, 
 by Robert, Bishop of Durham; rents £13 6s., now 
 worth £266. 
 
 At Temple Hurste. An Hospital of Templars, 
 founded, in the year 1152, by Ralph de Hostings; 
 granted to Lord Darcy. 
 
 At Joreval. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, about the 
 year 1156, by Conan, Duke of Richmond ; yearly va¬ 
 lue £455 10s. 5d, now worth £9,110 8s. 4d ; granted, 
 36 Henry VIII., to Matthew, Earl of Lenox. 
 
 At Keldon. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded, in the 
 reign of Henry I., by Robert Stuteville; rents £29 6s. 
 Id, now worth £586 Is. 8d; granted, 30 Henry VIII., 
 to Ralph, Earl of Westmoreland. 
 
 At Nun Kelynge. A Benedictine Nunnery, built in 
 the reign of King Stephen, by Agnes de Archis; rents 
 £50 17s. 2d, now worth £1,017 3s. 4d; granted, 32 
 Henry VIII., to Richard Gresham. 
 
 At Killingwoldgrove. An Hospital, founded for 
 women before the year 1169; rents £12 3s. 4d, now 
 worth £243 6s. 8d 
 
 At Kingston. A Cistercian Priory, built about the 
 time of Richard III., by Michael de la Pole, Earl of 
 
COUNTY OF YORK. 171 
 
 Suffolk; rents £231 175. 3d., now worth £4,637 55.; 
 granted, 6 Edward VI., to Edward, Lord Clinton. 
 
 Grigge’s and Mariners’ Hospitals; one for Priests 
 and the other for Sailors; founded, by John Grigge ; 
 valued, 26 Henry VIII., at £10, now worth £400 
 yearly. They are in being to this day. 
 
 Pole’s Hospital, founded in the year 1384, by 
 Michael de la Pole, for thirteen poor men and so 
 many poor women ; rents £10, now worth £200 ; 
 still in being. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, founded by King Edward 
 I., or by some others; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to 
 John Henneage. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, granted, 36 Henry VIII., 
 to John Broxholm. 
 
 At Kirkham. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1121, by Walter Espec ; rents £300 155. 6d, now 
 worth £2,015 105.; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Henry 
 Knyvet. 
 
 At Kirkleghes. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry II., by Reynerus Flandersis ; rents 
 £20 75. 8 d., now worth £407 135. 4 d .; granted, 36 
 Henry VIII.. to John Tasburg and Nicholas Saville. 
 
 At Kirkstall. A Cistercian Abbey, built in the 
 year 1147, by Henry de Lacy; rents £512 135. 4 d., now 
 worth £10,253 65. 8 d. 
 
 At Knaresburgh. A Trinitarian Friary, built in the 
 reign of Henry III., by Richard, Earl of Cornwall, and 
 King of the Romans; rents £35 105. 11 d., now worth 
 £710 I85. id .; granted, 7 Edward VI., to Francis of 
 Shrewsbury. 
 
 At Laysingby. A College, founded, 18 Edward I., 
 by John de Lythegraynes ; rents £9 65. 8 d., now worth 
 £186 135. id. 
 
 At Old Malton. A Gilbertine Priory, founded, in 
 
172 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 the year 1150, by Eustace Fitz John; rents £257 7s., 
 now worth £5,147; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Ro¬ 
 bert Holegate, Bishop of Landaff. 
 
 At Little Marcis. A Benedictine Nunnery, built 
 in the year 1163, by Roger de Clere; rents £26 6s. 8d., 
 now worth £526 13s. 4 d .; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to 
 Robert Holgate, Bishop of Landaff; after him to the 
 Bishop of York. 
 
 At Marton. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 reign of Henry II., by Bertram de Bulmer; rents £183 
 12s. Ad., now worth £3,672 6s. 8 d .; granted, 34 Henry 
 VIII., to the Archbishop of York. 
 
 At Maryke. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry II., by Roger de Asac ; rents £64 
 16s. 9 d., now worth £1,296 15s.; granted, 37 Henry 
 VIII., to John Uvedale. 
 
 At Melsa. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, m the 
 year 1150, by William le Gross, Earl of Albemarle; 
 rents £445 10s. 5 d., now worth £8,910 8s. Ad .; grant¬ 
 ed, 3 Edward VI., to John, Earl of Warwick. 
 
 At Middleham. A College, founded, in the year 
 1476, by Richard, Duke of Gloucester, afterwards King 
 Richard III., rents £16 9s. 4cZ., now worth £329 3s. 4 a. 
 
 At Middlesburgh. A Benedictine Cell, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry I., by Robert de Bruce; rents £21 
 13s. 8 d., now worth £433 13s. Ad .; granted, 6 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to Thomas Reve. 
 
 At Molesley. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded 
 by Henry II., in the year 1167; rents £32 6s. 2d., 
 now worth £646 3s. Ad .; granted to the Archbishop of 
 York. 
 
 At Nun Monketon. A Benedictine Nunnery, built 
 in the reign of Stephen, by William de Arches; rents 
 £85 14s. 8 d., now worth £1,714 13s. Ad .; granted, 29 
 Henry VIII., to John, Lord Latimer 
 
COUNTY OP YORK. 
 
 173 
 
 At Mountgrace. A Carthusian Priory, founded in 
 the year 1396, by Thomas de Holland, Duke of Sur¬ 
 rey ; rents £323 2s. 104(7., now worth £6,462 17s. 6(7.; 
 granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Robert Strangeways. 
 
 At Mount St. John. A House of Hospitalers, found¬ 
 ed in the reign of Henry I., by William Percy; rents 
 £102 13s. 10(7., now worth £2,053 16s. 8c7.; granted 
 34 Henry VIII., to the Archbishop of York. 
 
 At Newburgh. An Augustine Priory, built in the 
 year 1145, by Roger de Mowbray; rents £457 13s. 4c7., 
 now worth £9,153 8s. 5(7.; granted, 38 Henry VIII., 
 to Margaret Simson and Anthony Bellasis. 
 
 At Newland. A House of Hospitalers, founded by 
 King John; rents £202 3s. 8(7., now worth £4,043 13s. 
 4(7.; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to Francis Jobson and 
 Andrew Dudley 
 
 At Newton. An Hospital, built in the year 1179, 
 by William Gross, Earl of Albemarle ; rents £21 0s. 2(7., 
 now worth £420 3s. 4(7.; granted, 16 Elizabeth, to 
 John Stanhope. 
 
 At Nostell. An Augustine Priory, built in th« 
 reign of Henry II.; by Robert de Lacy; rents £606 
 9s. 3(7., now worth £12,129 5s.; granted, 31 Henry 
 VIII., to Thomas Leith. 
 
 At Oveton. A Gilbertine Priory, founded, 5 John 
 by Alan de Wilton; rents £11 2s. 8(7., now worth 
 £222 13s. 4(7. 
 
 At Pontefract. A Cluniac Priory, built in the time 
 of William Rufus, by Robert de Lacy ; rents £472 
 16s. 14(7., now worth £9,456 2s. 6(7.; granted, 7 Ed¬ 
 ward VI., to William, Lord Talbot. 
 
 St. Clement’s College, founded, in the reign ol 
 William Rufus, by Ilbert de Lacy. 
 
 Knolles’ College, and Almshouse. Sir Robert 
 Knolles founded, in the year 1385, a College fora 
 Master and six Fellows ; and adjoining it an Alms- 
 15* 
 
J74 
 
 ENGLAND 
 
 house for a Master, two Chaplains, and 13 poor 
 men and women; revenues £200 5s. 10£d., now 
 worth £4,005 0s. 10 d. 
 
 St. Nicholas’s Hospital, founded, in the reign of 
 Henry I., by Robert de Lacy ; rents £97 13.9. 4 d., 
 now worth £1,953 6s. 8 d .; it maintained until the 
 dissolution one Chaplain and 13 poor persons. 
 
 Dominican Friary, built before the year 1266, 
 by Simon Pyper; granted, 36 Henry VIII., to 
 William Clifford, and Michael Wildbore. 
 
 Franciscan Friary. 
 
 At Rerecross Hospital. An Hospital, built in the 
 year 1171, by Ralph de Multon; granted, 7 Edward 
 VI., to William Bucton, and Roger Marshall. 
 
 At Ribstane. An Hospital of Templars, founded 
 in the reign of Richard I., by Robert, Lord Ross ; rents 
 £265 9s. 6^-rf., now worth £5,359 10s. lOd.; granted, 
 33 Henry VIII., to Charles, Duke of Suffolk. 
 
 At Richmond. A Benedictine Cell, founded, m the 
 year 1100, by Wymar, Steward to the Earl of Rich¬ 
 mond ; rents £43 16s. 8 d., now worth £876 13s. 4 d.: 
 granted, 4 Edward VI., to Edward, Lord Clinton. 
 
 A Premonstratensian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1151, by Roald, the Constable of Richmond j 
 rents £188 16s. 2d., now worth £3,776 3s. 4 d.\ 
 granted, 14 Elizabeth, to John Stanhope. 
 
 St. Nicholas’s Hospital, founded by King Henry 
 II.; rents £10 yearly, now worth £200. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded, in the year 1258, 
 by Ralph Fitz Randal, Earl of Middleham ; grant¬ 
 ed, 36 Henry VIII., to John Banaster, and William 
 Metcalf. 
 
 At Rippon. A College, built and endowed in the 
 reign of William the Conqueror, by Archbishop Alfred, 
 on the ruins of a Monastery that had been founded be- 
 
COUNTY OF YORK. 
 
 175 
 
 fore the year 661 by Alchfrid, king of Northumbers, 
 but afterwards burnt down in the civil wars; seven 
 Prebends made here at the dissolution £361 195. 6d., 
 six Vicars Choral £36, other revenues £47 165. 3d., 
 total £445 15s. 3d.; now worth £8,915 5s. 
 
 St. John’s Hospital, founded, before 4 John, by 
 the Archbishops of York; rents £12 Us. 4d., now 
 worth £240 6s. 8d. 
 
 Magdalen Hospital, founded, by the Archbishops 
 of York for lepers; rents £24 Os. 7d., now worth 
 £480 11s. 8d. 
 
 At River. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1131, by Walter Espec ; rents £351 14s. 6d., now 
 worth £7,134 10s.; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Tho¬ 
 mas, Earl of Rutland, in exchange for other lands. 
 
 At Roch. A Cistercian Abbey, built in the year 
 1147, by Richard Fitz Turgis ; rents £271 19s. 4d., 
 now worth £5,439 6s. 8d.; granted, 38 Henry VIII., 
 to William Ramesden, and Thomas Vavasor. 
 
 At Rosedale. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, m 
 the reign of Richard I., by Robert de Stuteville; rents 
 £41 13s. 8d., now worth £833 13s. 4d.; granted, 30 
 Henry VIII., to Ralph, Earl of Westmoreland. 
 
 At Sallay. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1146, by William de Percy; rents £221 15s. 8d., 
 how worth £4,435 13s. 4d. 
 
 At Selby. A Benedictine Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1069, by William the Conqueror; rents £819 2s. 
 6d., now worth £16,382 10s.; granted, 32 Henry VIII., 
 to Sir Ralph Sadler. 
 
 At Sinningthwaite. A Cistercian Nunnery, found¬ 
 ed, in the year 1160, by Bertram Haget; rents £62 6s., 
 now worth £1,246; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to Robert 
 Tempest. 
 
 At Snaith. A Benedictine Cell, founded in the 
 
176 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 year 1106, by Girard, Archbishop of York; granted, 4 
 Edward VI., to John, Earl of Warwick. 
 
 At Sportburgh. An Hospital, founded, in the year 
 1363, by Mr. Fitz Williams; rents £9 13s. 11c?,, now 
 worth £193 16s. 8 d. 
 
 At Sutton. A College; valued at £13 18s. 8c?, 
 yearly, now worth £278 13s. 4 d. 
 
 An Hospital; valued at £7 18s. 4c?., now worth 
 £158 6s. 8 cl. 
 
 At Swinhey. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded, in 
 the reign of Stephen, by Roberd de Verli; rents £134 
 6s. 9c?., now worth £2,686 15s.; granted, 32 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Richard Gresham. 
 
 At Thickhed. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, 
 m the reign of Richard I., by Roger Fitz Roger; rents 
 £23 12s. 2c?., now worth £472 3s. 4c?.; granted, 33 
 Henry VIII., to John Aske. 
 
 At Tickhill. A College founded, by Eleanor, Queen 
 of Henry II.; granted, 4 Edward VI., to Francis, Earl 
 of Shrewsbury. 
 
 At Tockwith. An Augustine Cell, founded, in the 
 year 1114, by Jeffrey Fitz Pain; rents £8, now worth 
 £160; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Thomas Leigh. 
 
 At Warter. An Austin Priory, built in the year 
 1132, bv Jeffrey Fitz Pain; rents £221 3s. 10c?., now 
 worth £4,423 16s. 8c?.; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to 
 Thomas, Earl of Rutland. 
 
 At Watton. A Gilbertine Priory, succeeded in the 
 year 1150 a Nunnery that was built 686; income 
 £453 7s. 8c?., now worth £9,067 13s. 4c?.; granted, 
 3 Edward VI., to John, Earl of Warwick. 
 
 At Welle. An Hospital, founded, in ihe year 1342, 
 by Sir Ralph de Neville; income £65 5s. 7c?., now 
 worth £1,305 11s. 8c?. 
 
 At Whitbey. A Benedictine Abbey grew up in 
 
COUNTY OF YORK. 
 
 177 
 
 the time of Henry I., instead of an ancient one built 
 by St. Hilda in the year 657; income £505 9s. lcZ., now 
 worth £10,109 Is. 8 d .; granted, 4 Edward VI., to John 
 Earl of Warwick. 
 
 At Widkirk. An Augustine Cell, built in the reign 
 of Henry I., by William, Earl of Warren and others; 
 income £47 Os. 4cZ., now worth £940 6s. 8cZ.; granted, 
 7 Edward VI., to George Talbot and Robert Saville. 
 
 At Wilburfosse. A Benedictine Nunnery, founded, 
 in the year 1153, by Alan de Cotton, income £28 8s. 
 8cZ., now worth £568 13s. 4cZ.; granted, 7 Edward VI., 
 to George Gale. 
 
 At Wykham. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded, in 
 the year 1153, by Pain Fitz Osbert de Wykham; rents 
 £25 17s. 6cZ., now worth £517 10s.; granted, 32 Henry 
 VIII., to Francis Poole. 
 
 At Yarum. An Hospital, founded, before the year 
 1185, by the Brus family; income £5, now worth £100. 
 
 Dominican Friary, founded, in the year 1271, 
 by Peter de Brus ; surrendered by Miles Wilcock, 
 Prior, five Friars and Novices, 1539. 
 
 At York. A Cathedral, built in the year 1137, by 
 the care of Archbishops Roger, Romane, Milton, and 
 Thoresby, in the place of a church originally founded, 
 627, by King Edwin, on his conversion to Christianity, 
 but was burnt down in 741; yearly revenues of the 
 Archbishop £2,035 3s. 7rZ., Canons £439 2s. 6eZ., Dean 
 £308 10s. Id .; total £2,772 16s. 8cZ.; now worth 
 £55,456 13s. 4cZ. 
 
 St. Mary’s, a Benedictine Abbey, founded and 
 endowed by William Rufus, in the year 1088 ; in¬ 
 come £2,085 Is. 5^cZ., now worth £41,701 9s. 2d. 
 
 St. Clement’s, a Benedictine Convent, or Nun¬ 
 nery, founded in the year 1130, westward of the 
 town, by Archbishop Thurston; revenues £55 11s. 
 llcZ., now worth £1,111 18s. 4cZ.; granted, 33 
 Henry VIII., to Edward Shipwith. 
 
K?8 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 St. Andrew’s, a Gilbertine Priory, founded, m 
 the year 1200, by Hugh Murduc ; income £57 5s. 
 9cZ., now worth £1,145 155.; granted, 37 Henry 
 VIII., to John Bellew and John Broxholm. 
 
 Trinity, or Christ Church. An Alien Priory, 
 founded, in the year 1089, by Ralph Painell; 
 yearly income £196 17s. 2d ., now worth £3,937 
 135. 4 d .; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to Leonard 
 Beckwith. 
 
 All Saints, a Benedictine Cell, built by the 
 bounty of William Rufus; completely demolished 
 at the Reformation, so that it could not be ascer¬ 
 tained where it stood. 
 
 Beddern, or Vicar’s College, founded, in the 
 year 1252, by Walter Gray, Archbishop, for the 
 Choristers and other officers of the Cathedral; re¬ 
 venues £255 75. 8d., now -worth £5,107 13s. 
 
 St. Sepulchre’s College, founded, in the year 
 1161, by Roger, Archbishop of York; income £138 
 195. 2£d., now worth £2,779 4-5. 2d. 
 
 St. William’s College, founded, in the year 
 1460, by Richard Neville, Earl cf Northumber¬ 
 land, and his brother George Neville, Bishop of 
 Exeter; yearly income £22 125. 8ri., now worth 
 £452 135. 4d .; granted, 4 Edward VI., to Michael 
 Stanhope and John Bellew. 
 
 Boutham Hospital, founded, in the year 1314, 
 by Robert Pykering, Dean of York; income £11 
 65. 8 d., now worth £226 135. 4 d. 
 
 Boutham Hospital, Minor, built in the year 1481 
 by John Gyseburgh; rents £9 6s. Sd. : now worth 
 £186 135. 4cZ. 
 
 Fossgate Hospital, founded, 45 Edward III., by 
 John de Rucliff, for the poor; income £6 135. 
 4 d. } now worth £133 65. Sd. ; still in being. 
 
 St. Nicholas’ Hospital, said to have been found- 
 
COUNTY OF YORK. 179 
 
 ed, by the Empress. Maud, for leprous persons; 
 income £29 Is. 4c/., now worth £581 6s. 8 d. 
 
 St. Peter’s or Leonard’s Hospital, founded, by 
 King Stephen, for a Master, 13 Brethren, four 
 secular Priests, eight Sisters, 30 Choristers, two 
 Schoolmasters, 206 Beadmen, and six Servitors ; 
 with revenues of £362 11s. l^d., now worth £7,251 
 2s. 6c/.; granted, 6 Elizabeth, to Robert, Lord 
 Dudley; it is now called the Mint Yard . 
 
 St. Thomas’s Hospital, founded, before the year 
 1391, yet stands. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded, in the year 1278, 
 by Lord Scroop; granted, to Thomas Rawson. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded, by King Henry 
 II., and the city of York; granted, 34 Henry VIII., 
 to Leonard Beckwith. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, founded, in the >ear 1255, 
 by Lord Vesey and Lord Percy; granted, 35 Henry 
 YlII., to Ambrose Beckwith. 
 
 WALES. 
 
 ANGLESEY (County.) 
 
 At Glannagh. A Benedictine Priory, founded in an 
 island in the east part of Anglesey in the year 1221, by 
 Lleweline, Prince of North Wales; income £40 17s. 
 9oc/., now worth £817 15s. 10c/.; granted, 6 Elizabeth, 
 to John Moore. 
 
 At Holy Head. A College rose instead of a Mo¬ 
 nastery built in the year 380, by St. Kebius; income 
 £24, now worth £4S0; granted, 7 James I., to Francis 
 Morrice and Francis Filips. 
 
180 
 
 WALES. 
 
 BRECKNOCK (County.) 
 
 At Brecknock. A Benedictine Priory, built in the 
 reign of Henry I., by Bernard de Newmarch; yearly 
 income £134 11s. 4 d., now worth £2,691 6s. Sd .; 
 granted, by Henry VIII., to John ap Rice. 
 
 A College, made of a Dominican Friary, is 
 standing to this day. 
 
 CAERMARTHEN (County.) 
 
 At Abeegwilly. A College, founded, in the year 
 1287, by Thomas Beck, Bishop of St. David’s; rents 
 £42, now worth £840.^ 
 
 At Abelanda. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1143, by Bernard, Bishop of St. David’s; yearly 
 value £153 17s. 2d., now worth £3,077 3s. Ad .; granted, 
 36 Henry VIII., to Henry Audley and John Cordel. 
 
 At Cadwell. A Benedictine Priory, founded, in 
 the year 1130, by Roger, Bishop of Salisbury; rents 
 £29 10s., now worth £590. 
 
 At Caermarthen. An Austin Priory, founded be- 
 fore the year 1148; rents £164 0s. Ad., now worth 
 £3,280 6s. ScZ.; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Richard 
 Andrews and Nicholas Temple. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary; granted, 5 Edward VI., 
 to Sir Thomas Gresham. 
 
 At Tallagh. A Premonstratensian Abbey, founded, 
 in the year 1197, by Rhese Griffith Price, of South 
 Wales; income £153 Is. Ad., now worth £3,061 Cs. 8 d. 
 
COUNTY OF CARDIGAN. 
 
 181 
 
 CAERNARVON (County.) 
 
 At Bangor. A Cathedral Church, founded at some 
 early time ; the revenues of the Bishoprick were valued 
 at £131 I 65 . 4 d., now worth £2,636 6 s. 8 d. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded in the year 1276, 
 and granted, 7 Edward VI., to Thomas Brown, 
 and converted into a Free School, 1557. 
 
 At Bardsley, Isle of Birds. . An Abbey, founded, be¬ 
 fore the year 516; it produced great numbers of holy 
 men; yearly income £56 6 s. 2d., now worth £1,120 
 3s. 4c/.; granted, 3 Edward VI., to John, Earl of War¬ 
 wick. 
 
 At Bethkelert. An Augustine Priory, founded 
 very anciently; yearly value £69 3s. 8 d., now worth 
 £1,383 13s. 4c/.; granted, by Henry VIII., to Lord 
 Rkdnor. 
 
 CARDIGAN (County.) 
 
 At Cardigan. A Benedictine Cell, with revenues 
 of £13 4s. 9 d., now worth £264 15s.; granted, 31 
 Henry VIII., to William Cavendish. 
 
 At Llandewi-brevi. A College, founded, in the 
 year 1187, by Thomas Beck, Bishop of St. David’s, in 
 honour of St. David, who preached at a Council held 
 in 519, and thereby extinguished the Pelagian heresy; 
 rents £38 11s., now worth £771. 
 
 At Llanleir. A Cistercian Nunnery, of yearly in¬ 
 come £57 5s. 4d., now worth £1,145 6 s. 8 c/.; granted, 
 7 Edward VI., to William Sackville and John Dudley. 
 
 At Strata Florida. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, 
 in the year 1164, by Rhesus, son of Griffith of South 
 Wales; income £122 6 s. 8 c/., now worth £2,446 13s. 4 d 
 
182 
 
 WALES. 
 
 DENBIGH (County.) 
 
 At Maynan. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1283, by King Richard I.; revenues £162 15s., 
 now worth £3,255; granted, 5 Elizabeth, to Elezeus 
 Wynne, in whose family it continues still. 
 
 At Ruthin. A College, founded, in the year 1310, 
 by John de Grey, Lord of Dyffryn, Cly wd; granted, 4 
 Edward VI., to William Winlove and John Stevens. 
 
 At De Valle Crucis Llanegwast. A Cistercian 
 Abbey, founded, in the year 1200, by Madoc ap Grif¬ 
 fith Maylor, Prince of Powis; income £213 5s. 5 d., 
 now worth £4,283 8s. 4 d. ; granted, 9 James, to Ed¬ 
 ward Wotton. 
 
 FLINT (County.) 
 
 At St. Asaph. A Bishoprick, founded, in the sixth 
 century, by a holy and good man, St. Asaph, or Aas- 
 saph. This See, and a Monastery that had been also 
 there, were frequently destroyed and rebuilt during the 
 wars between the English and Welsh; revenues £187 
 11 s. 6cZ., now worth £3,751 10s. 
 
 At Basingwerk. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in 
 the year 1131, by Ranulph, Earl of Chester; rents 
 £157 15s. 2 cl., now worth £3,155 3s. 4d.; granted, 32 
 Henry VIII., to Henry ap Harry. 
 
 At Rhudland. A Dominican Friary founded, in 
 the year 1268; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to Henry ap 
 Harry. 
 
COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY. 
 
 183 
 
 GLAMORGAN (County.) 
 
 At Llandaffe. A Bishoprick, founded, about tne 
 year 522, by St. Dubritius ; suffered much in the wars; 
 revenues £242 7s. Id., now worth £4,847 Is. 8 d. 
 
 At Morgan. A Cistercian Abbey; founded, in the 
 year 1147, by Robert, Earl of Gloucester; rents £183 
 14s., now worth £3,774; granted, 32 Henry VIII., to 
 Sir Richard Moxell, and is now the property of Tho¬ 
 mas, Lord Marsel. 
 
 At Neth. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the reign 
 of Henry I., by Richard de Grainville; rents £150 4s. 
 9 d., now worth £3,004 15s.; granted, 33 Henry VIII.. 
 to Sir Richard Williams, alias Cromwell. 
 
 At Swansey. An Hospital, founded, in the year 
 1332, by Henry, Bishop of St. David’s; rents £20, 
 now worth £400. 
 
 At Wenny. A Benedictine Cell, founded, in the 
 year 1141, by Maurice, of London; rents £59 4s., now 
 worth £1,184; granted,' 37 Henry VIII., to Edward 
 Cam. 
 
 MERIONETH (County.) 
 
 At Kinner. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1200, by Lleweline, the son of Gervase; rents 
 £58 15s. 4 d., now worth £1,175 6s. 8 d. 
 
 MONTGOMERY (County.) 
 
 At Llanlugan. A Cistercian Nunnery, founded in 
 the year 1239; rents £22 13s. 8d., now worth £453 
 13s. 4 d .; granted, 37 Henry VIII., to Sir Arthur Darcy. 
 
134 
 
 WALES. 
 
 At Ystrat Marchel, or Paol, A Cistercian Abbey, 
 founded, in the year 1170, by Owen Keveliog; rents 
 £73 7s. 3 d., now worth £1,467 5s .; granted, 8 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to Rowland Howard and Thomas Dixton 
 
 PEMBROKE (County.) 
 
 At Caldey. A Tyrone Cell, the gift of Robert Fitz 
 Martin’s mother; rents £5, now worth £100. 
 
 At St. David’s. A Bishoprick, founded by St. Pa¬ 
 trick about 470; underwent several convulsions after¬ 
 wards ; revenues at the dissolution £193 14s. 10cZ., now 
 worth £3,874 IQs. 8 cl. 
 
 A College, founded, in the year 1365, by John, 
 Duke of Lancaster; revenues £106 3s. 6d., now 
 worth £2,123 10s.; dissolved by Edward VI. 
 
 At St. Dogmael. A Tyrone Abbey, founded, in 
 the reign of Henry I., by Robert Fitz Martin; rents 
 £87 8s. 6 d., now worth £1,748 10s.; granted, 35 Hen 
 ry VIII., to John Bradshaw. 
 
 At Haverford. An Austin Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1200, by Robert of Haverford, Lord of the place; 
 rents £135 6s. Id., now worth £2,706 Is. 8 d .; granted. 
 38 Henry VIII., to Roger and Thomas Barlow. 
 
 At Pembroke. A Benedictine Cell, founded, in the 
 year 1098, by the Earl of Pembroke; yearly value 
 £113 2s. Qd., now worth £2,262 10s.; granted, 37 
 Henry VIII., to John Vaughan. 
 
 At Pilla, or Pille. A Benedictine Priory, founded, 
 in the year 1200, by Adam de Rupe; yearly income 
 £52 2s. 5 d., now worth £1,042 8s. 4 d .; granted, 38 
 Henry VIII., to Roger and Thomas Barlow. 
 
 At Slebagh. A House of Hospitalers, founded, in 
 the year 1301, by Wizo and Walter his son; rents 
 
THE ISLE OF MAN. 
 
 185 
 
 £184 10s. 11^-cZ., now worth £3,690 19s. 2 d.\ granted, 
 together with several things in these parts, to Rogei 
 and Thomas Barlow. 
 
 RADNOR (County.) 
 
 At Cumhire. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1143, by Cadwathelan, though it seems that the 
 fabric was finished; the revenues, at the dissolution, 
 made £24 19s. id., yearly, now worth £499 Gs. 8 d .; 
 granted, 37 Henry VIII., to Walter Henley and John 
 Williams. 
 
 THE ISLE OF MAN. 
 
 Duffglass. Near this place was a Nunnery, which 
 is now a dwelling house. 
 
 At Russin. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1098, by Mac Manis, Governor of the island. 
 This foundation continued for some time after the 
 general suppression of such houses in England. The 
 Isle of Man was converted to Christianity by St. Pa¬ 
 trick, about the year 447 
 1G* 
 
IRELAND. 
 
 ANTRIM (County.) 
 
 At Ballycastle. An Abbey, when founded, is not 
 known, but it seems, from an inscription on a chapel 
 that had been built in the year 1612, by Randal Mac 
 Donnell, Earl of Antrim, that the Abbey stood until 
 the Reformation. 
 
 At Bonamargy. A Monastery, founded, during the 
 fifteenth century by Mac Donnell, granted to his Apos¬ 
 tate descendants. 
 
 At Carrickfergus. A Franciscan Abbey, founded, 
 in the year 1232, by Hugh Lacy, Earl of Ulster 5 grant¬ 
 ed to Sir Arthur Chichester; is now the Mansion of 
 the Earls of Donegal. 
 
 Cluain. An Abbey built in the early ages by St. 
 Olcar; now the Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Glenarm. A Franciscan Abbey, built in the 
 year 1465, by Robert Bisset, a Scotchman ; granted, to 
 Alexander Mac Donnell, ancestor to the Earl of An¬ 
 trim. - 
 
 At Goodborn. A Premonstratensian Priory, founded, 
 about the year 1242; surrendered in the year 1542 to 
 the Commissioners of Henry VIII. 
 
 At Kells, or Disert. A Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1200; surrendered, in the year 1542 to the Com¬ 
 missioners of Henry VIII. 
 
 At Kilitragh. A Church built by St. Patrick ; now 
 the Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Lambeg. A Franciscan Monastery, founded by 
 Mac Donnell about the year 1500. 
 
COUNTY OF ARMAGH. 
 
 187 
 
 At Lhannavach. The Church of the Dwarf, founded 
 by St. Patrick; now the Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Massareene. A Franciscan Abbey, founded 
 about the year 1500, by O’Neil; granted, in the year 
 1621, to Sir Arthur Chichester, Baron of Belfast. 
 
 At Muckamore. A Monastery, founded, in the year 
 550, by St. Colman ; surrendered, after having been 
 for many ages the light of the world, the nursery of 
 saints and of learning, to Henry VIII.; granted, in the 
 year 1639, to the Longford family. 
 
 At Rachlin Island. A Church, founded, in the 
 year 546, by St. Columba. This house, celebrated for 
 learning and sanctity, stood in the year 1558, when the 
 Earl of Essex, Lord Deputy, gained possession of the 
 island. 
 
 At Rathmoane. A Church, founded, by St. Patrick, 
 for his disciple St. Ereclasius; now the Protestant 
 place of worship. 
 
 Rathmuighe (on the sea-shore, eight miles from 
 Dunliffsia, or Dunluce.) A Monastery, founded by 
 St. Patrick. 
 
 At Tulach. A Church built by St. Patrick, for St. 
 Nehemias, in the diocese of Connor; now the Protest¬ 
 ant place of worship. • 
 
 [Besides these, there are upwards of thirty reli¬ 
 gious houses on record, which were principally 
 founded by St. Patrick in this county, but they are 
 omitted because there is no proof that they subsist¬ 
 ed until the Reformation.] 
 
 ARMAGH (County.) 
 
 At Armagh. An Augustine Abbey, built in the year 
 457, by St. Patrick. 
 
188 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 A Priory of the Culdei, or Choristei's of the 
 Cathedral, had for revenues seven ballyboes, or 
 town-lands, worth £46, now worth £920. Sir 
 Toby Caulfield, Lord Charlemount, received, in 
 the year 1620, the rents for Henry VIII. 
 
 Temple Fortagh, founded by St. Patrick for St. 
 Lupita, his eldest sister, who was buried here; 
 granted, in the year 161S, by King James, to Fran¬ 
 cis Annesley, Esq. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded, in the year 1261, 
 by Archbishop Scanlon. Solomon M’Conny was 
 superior, in 1583, when the Reformation was com 
 pleted. «. 
 
 Clonfeakle, that is, the Church of the Tooth, so 
 Qamed from a tooth of St. Patrick, which was pre¬ 
 served here; is now the Protestant place of worship; 
 five miles from Armagh. 
 
 At Kilmore. A Church, founded, by St. Mochtee; 
 now the Protestant place of worship; three miles from 
 Armagh. 
 
 At Kilslere. A Franciscan Monastery. Thomas 
 Ornay was superior in the year 1457. 
 
 At Killevy. A Nunnery, built about the year 517, 
 by St. Donerca, otherwise called Monena, sister to St. 
 Patrick, at the foot of Sliev Gullen; now a Protestant 
 place of worship. 
 
 At Stradhailloyse. A Franciscan Monastery, 
 founded, in the year 1282. 
 
 , [There are five religious foundations of St. Pa¬ 
 trick and his disciples omitted in this county as in 
 the preceding.] 
 
 CARLOW (County.) 
 
 At Athaddy. An Augustine Nunnery, founded, in 
 the year 1151, by Dermot, son of Murchard, King of 
 Leinster. 
 
COUNTY OF CAVAN. 189 
 
 At Bally M £ William-Roe, near Clonegall. A Pre- 
 ceptory of Templars, founded about the year 1300. 
 
 At Killarge. A Preceptory of Templars, (which 
 was afterwards granted to the Knights of St. John of 
 Jerusalem,) founded in the reign of King John, by 
 Gilbert de Borard ; granted, 1590, by Queen Elizabeth, 
 to the wife of Gerard Aylmer. 
 
 At Leigiilin, a town formerly of considerable note. 
 The great Abbey, founded, by St. Gobban, celebrated 
 for the Synod held there in the year 630, regarding the 
 celebration of Easter. St. Laserian, Abbot in 632, had 
 at one time 1500 Monks under him ; he was consecra¬ 
 ted Bishop, by Pope Honorius, and was Legate from 
 the Holy See. 
 
 Leighlin Bridge. A Carmelite Monastery, found¬ 
 ed, in the reign of Henry III., by one of the Carew 
 family; had many endowments and privileges from 
 Kings Henry III., Richard II., and Henry IV.; was 
 finally converted, at the suppression, into a fort. 
 
 At St. Mdllin’s. An Abbey of Augustines, founded, 
 in the year 632, by St. Moling; plundered and burnt 
 before the year 1138. 
 
 At Tullagh. An Augustine Abbey, built in the 
 reign of Edward II., on a grant of land made by Simon 
 Lumbard and Hugh Tallon ; granted, 1557, by Queen 
 Elizabeth, to Thomas, Earl of Ormond. 
 
 CAVAN (County.) 
 
 At Ballylinch. An Hospital, when founded, by 
 whom and with what endowments, is unknown; grant¬ 
 ed by King James, 1605, to Sir Edward Moore, ances¬ 
 tor to the Earl of Drogheda, for three pence yearly 
 rent. 
 
190 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Cavan. A Dominican Monastery, founded, in 
 the year 1300, by Giolla O’Reilly, of the dynasty of 
 Breffiny ; stood until the general dissolution, but there 
 is not now the least remains of it. 
 
 At Dromlomman. An Hospital, leased by King 
 James to Sir Edward Moore, for 2s. 6 d. yearly rent. 
 
 At Drumlane or Drumlahan. A Monastery, found¬ 
 ed, before the year 550, as some suppose, by St. Mai- 
 doc, because he was born in that year; granted, 13 
 Elizabeth, to Hugh O’Reilly, head of the Erenie sept, 
 for the term of 21 years, at the rent of £8 14 s. 8cl., now 
 worth £174 13s 4cZ. 
 
 At Killachad. An Abbey, founded, before the year 
 800, by St. Tigernach, who was buried there in the 
 year 805, plundered by the English in the reign of 
 Henry II 
 
 At Kilmore. An Abbey, founded, in the sixth cen¬ 
 tury, by St. Columb ; now the Protestant Bishop’s See. 
 
 At Lough Oughter. An Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1237, by Clarus M. Moylin, Archdeacon of El- 
 phin; granted, 1570, by Q,ueen Elizabeth, to Hugh 
 O’Reilly of the Brenie, head of his sept, for 21 years, 
 at the rent of £2 15s. ,8d. } now worth £55 13s. 4 cl. 
 Perhaps he was ejected for non-payment of rent; for, 
 by an inquisition taken 27 Elizabeth, he was found in 
 arrears for 11^ years rent, for this and the Monastery 
 of Drumlan, above said. 
 
 At Mounterconaght. An Endowed Hospital, 
 granted by King James to Sir Edward Moore, at Is. 
 3 d. yearly rent, now worth £1 5s. See Ballylinch. 
 
 CLARE (County.) 
 
 At Clare. An Augustine Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 1195, by Donald O’Brien, King of Limerick; 
 granted, 1661, to Henry, Earl of Thomond. 
 
COUNTY OF CLARE. 
 
 191 
 
 At Corcumroe. A Cistercian Abbey, founded, in 
 the year 1194, and largely endowed by Donald O’Brien, 
 King of Limerick ; granted to Richard Harding. 
 
 At Ennis. A Monastery of Franciscans, built m 
 the year 1240, by Donagh Carbrac O’Brien; it is the 
 place of interment of the _ family of the O’Briens; 
 granted, 1621, to William Dongan, Esq.; is now the 
 Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Glan Cfioluimchille. An Abbey, founded by- 
 St. Columb; is now a Protestant place of worship in 
 the diocese of Kilfenora. 
 
 At Inchycronane, an Island on the river Shannon. 
 A Monastery, founded in the year 1190, by Donald 
 O’Brien, King of Limerick; granted, 1661, to Henry, 
 Eari of Thomond. 
 
 At Inchmore, an Island in the Shannon. An Abbey, 
 founded by St. Senan, who placed over it his disciple, 
 St. Liberius. 
 
 At Inisanlaoi. A magnificent Abbey, built in the 
 year 1305, by Turlogh, King of Thomond, where he is 
 buried. 
 
 At Iniskeltair, an Island in Loughderg. An Abbey, 
 founded, in the year 653, by St. Camin, who is interred 
 there. This Island is one of the stations for pilgrim¬ 
 age in the Loughderg. 
 
 At Inisnegananagh, or the Island of Canons, in the 
 Shannon. A priory of Augustines, founded, in the 12th 
 century, by Donald O’Brien, King of Limerick; grant¬ 
 ed, 1661, to Henry, Earl of Thomond. 
 
 At Inisscattery. A rich and beautiful Island in 
 the mouth of the Shannon. An Abbey, founded by St. 
 Senan, or, as some suppose, by St. Patrick himself, 
 who appointed over it St. Senan; he had eleven 
 churches for Friars, and allowed no women to come 
 into the Island. Granted, 20 Elizabeth, to the Mayor 
 and Corporation of Limerick, at £3 125. Scl. rent, now 
 
192 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 worth £72 13s. 4 d. This Island is a great resort of 
 pilgrims, on certain festivals. 
 
 At Kilcarragh. A Monastery, granted to John 
 King. 
 
 At Killoen, in the Barony of Islands. A Nunnery, 
 built in the year 1190, by Donald O’Brien, of Lime¬ 
 rick. Slaney, daughter of Donogh, King of Tho- 
 mond, was Abbess, and died in 1260. She excelled 
 all the women then in Munster for piety, alms-deeds, 
 and hospitality 
 
 At Kilshanny, in the Barony of Corcumroe. A 
 Monastery, granted to Robert Hickman. 
 
 At Q,uin, or Quinchy, five miles east of Ennis. A 
 Franciscan Monastery, built in the year 1402, by 
 M‘Namara; the building is entirely of black marble ; 
 granted, 15S3, to Sir Tirlagh O’Brien, of Irishdyman. 
 The Roman Catholics repaired this Monastery in 
 1604. 
 
 At Shraduffe, an Abbey, granted, in 1611, to 
 Sir Edward Fisher, together with its site and posses¬ 
 sions. 
 
 At Tomgrany, four miles east of Loughderg. An 
 Abbey. St. Manchin, Abbot, died in the year 735 
 It is now the church. 
 
 Fifteen religious foundations of the early ages in this 
 county are omitted. 
 
 CORK (County.) 
 
 At Abbey Mahon, near Timoleague, by Count 
 M‘Sherry-bay. A Cistercian Monastery, built by the 
 Friars, and endowed by Lord Barry with eighteen 
 plowlands, that is, the whole parish of Abbey Mahon, 
 which were seized by the crown. 
 
COUNTY OF CORK. 
 
 193 
 
 At Ballybeg, near Buttavant. An Augustine Prio¬ 
 ry, founded, in the year 1229, by Philip de Barry; the 
 steeple, the arcade over the dome, remaining yet, to¬ 
 gether with the traces of many external buildings, 
 show that it had been a magnificent structure ; yearly 
 value £260, now worth £5,200 ; granted, 16 Elizabeth, 
 for 21 years, to George Boucher, Esq., who forfeited it 
 for non-payment of rent; then granted to the wife of 
 Sir Thomas Norris, Governor of Munster. 
 
 At Bally mac ad ane, four miles south of Cork, on the 
 Bandon Road. An Augustine Nunnery, founded, in 
 the year 1450, by Cormac M £ Carthy. 
 
 At Ballvourney, or the town of the Beloved. An 
 Abbey or Nunnery, built in the year 650, by St. Abban, 
 for St. Gobnata, descendant of O’Connor the Great. 
 Monarch of Ireland; her festival is on the 14th Febru 
 ary. 
 
 At Bantry, a pretty Town on the Bay of that name. 
 A Franciscan Monastery, built in the year 1466, by 
 Dermot O’Sullivan Beare; is now demolished. 
 
 At Bridge Town, on the Black Water, above Fer- 
 moy. A Priory, pleasantly situated in a deep valley 
 at the confluence of the rivers Aubeg and Black 
 Water. 
 
 At Brigowne, near Michelstown. A Church, found¬ 
 ed by St. Finchu. 
 
 At Butte v ant, formerly a corporate town, governed 
 by a Mayor and Aldermen. A Franciscan Monastery 
 founded in the year 1290, by David Oge Barry, Lord 
 Buttevant; the walls of the choir and nave are yet 
 entire; the steeple, a high square tower, standing on a 
 fine gothic arch, fell in 1822. There is a beautiful 
 window in the east end. 
 
 At Cape Clear. An island on the south-west coast 
 of Ireland, containing 12- plowlands, 300 houses, and 
 about 1200 inhabitants. 
 
194 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Cariciliicy, in the parish of Myros, West Car- 
 berry. A Monastery, built in the year 1172, by Dermot 
 M‘Carthy, King of Desmond; granted, with all the 
 possessions, 30 Elizabeth, to Nicholas Walshe for ever, 
 at the yearly rent £28 6s. 6d., now worth £566 10s. 
 
 At Castle Lyons. A Dominican Monastery, found¬ 
 ed in the year 1307, by John de Barry. The Earl ot 
 Cork obtained the possessions and bestowed them on 
 the Countess of Barrymore, his daughter. 
 
 A Carmelite Abbey, founded in the Barry family. 
 
 At Clonmene, in Duhallow. An Augustine Monas¬ 
 tery ; founded, by Mr. O’Callagan. 
 
 At Cloyne, a town near Youghal. A Cathedral 
 Monastery, and Nunnery destroyed; the revenues pre¬ 
 served for parsons. 
 
 At Cork. A Monastery founded, in the year 600, 
 by St. Finbar; it is recorded, that in the eighth centu¬ 
 ry 700 Monks and 17 Bishops were living there a 
 contemplative life; the possessions were granted, 33 
 Elizabeth, to Cormac M‘Carthy and to Sir Richard 
 Grenville ; a Protesta.nt place of worship was erected 
 on the site. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded, in the year 1214, 
 by Dermot M‘Carthy Reagh; granted, 8 Elizabeth, 
 to Andrew Skydy, at £2 18s. 8d., now worth £58 
 13s. 4 d. This building stood on the north side of 
 the city. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded, in the year 1229, 
 by Philip de Barry; it stood on an island in the 
 south of the city; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to 
 William Boureman, for 9s. 6cZ. yearly rent, now 
 worth £9 10s. 
 
 An Augustine Monastery, founded, in the reign 
 of Henry IV., by Lord Kinsale; granted, 19 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to Cormac M‘Carthy, at £13 16s. Qd. yearly 
 rent, now worth £276 13s. id .; it is converted into 
 a sugar-house now called the red Abbey. 
 
COUNTY OP CORK. 
 
 195 
 
 A Nunnery, founded, by William de Barry, 
 about the year 1327; it is thought it stood where 
 the market-house now is. 
 
 A Preceptory of Templars; built in the year 
 1292. 
 
 Priory of St. Stephen, founded, for lepers, be¬ 
 fore the year 1295; converted into the Blue-coat 
 Hospital in 1674. 
 
 At Donaghmore, eight miles north-west of Cork 
 A Monastery, founded, by St. Fingene, disciple of St. 
 Finbar; it is now the Church. 
 
 At Fermoy, a large town. A Cistercian Abbey, to 
 which Maurice Fleming was a benefactor; granted, 33 
 Elizabeth, to Sir Richard Grenville, at <£15 18s. 4 d. 
 yearly rent, now worth £318 6s. 8d. ' 
 
 At Glanworth. A Dominican Monastery founded, 
 in the 1227, by the Roche’s family. 
 
 At Iniscara, on the river Lee, five miles above Cork. 
 An Abbey, built by St. Senan of Iniscattery; dis¬ 
 solved. 
 
 At Inishircan, near Cape Clear. A Franciscan 
 Monastery, founded, in the year 1460, by Florence 
 Moar O’Driscoll; the walls and steeple are still in 
 good order. 
 
 At Kilbeacan, in Muscryciure. A large Monastery, 
 founded, in the year 650, by St. Abban; St. Beacon 
 presided there. 
 
 At Kilcrea. A Nunnery, where St. Chera was 
 Abbess. 
 
 A Franciscan Monastery, founded, in the year 
 1465, by Cormac M c Carthy Moor, King of Des¬ 
 mond ; great part of the building still remains; 
 granted, by Oliver Cromwell 1641, to Lord Brog- 
 hill. 
 
 At Kinsale. A Priory of regular Canons dedicated 
 to St. Gobban. 
 
196 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary; when founded, is not 
 known, it flourished in 1350. 
 
 At Legan. A Monastery, stood in the year 1301; 
 at the suppression of religious houses, the Prior of St. 
 John in Waterford was seized of this house. 
 
 At Lueim, near the city of Cork. A Monastery, of 
 which David de Cogan was patron in the year 1318. 
 
 At Middleton. An Abbey, founded, in the year 
 1180, by the Fitzgeralds, or. as some think, by the 
 Barrys; Gerald, Bishop of Cloyne, endowed it with 
 several vicarages in 1476. 
 
 At Monanimy, on the Black Water, three miles below 
 Mallow. A Commandery, for the support of which 
 the parishes of Clenor, Carrigdownen, Carig, and Tem- 
 plebodane, were charged in the King’s books with £3 
 105. crown rent, now worth £70. 
 
 At Mourne, or Ballynamona, three miles south of 
 Mallow, on the Cork road. A Preceptory, first of 
 Templars, and afterwards of Hospitalers, founded, in 
 the reign of John, by Alexander de Sancta Helena. 
 
 At Ross Carberry. An Abbey, founded in the year 
 590 by St. Fachnan Mougah, or the hairy , because he 
 was covered with hair at his birth ; he was Abbot of 
 Molona, in the county of Waterford also; a city with 
 a large seminary grown up here. 
 
 It was also an Episcopal See. This diocese is now 
 joined to the diocese of Cloyne. 
 
 At Timoleague, in the Barony of Barryroe, eight 
 miles west of Kinsale. An Abbey of Franciscans, 
 founded at Cregan, and translated hither in the year 
 1279, by William Barry, Lord of Ibaun. At the sup* 
 pression, the possessions fell to Lord Inchiquin. The 
 walls, arcades, and tower are still in good order. 
 
 At Tracton, two miles south of Carigline. A Cis¬ 
 tercian Abbey, built in the year 1221, by M c Carthy ; 
 great numbers of pilgrims resorted hither on Holy 
 
COUNTY OF DERRY. 
 
 197 
 
 Thursday to venerate the Holy Cross; granted, by 
 Queen Elizabeth, 1568, to Sir James Craig and Henry 
 Guilford; the former assigned it to the Earl of Cork. 
 
 At Weeme, near Cork. An Augustine Priory, stood 
 at the fourteenth century, and, without doubt, until 
 the general dissolution. 
 
 At Youghal, a large sea port town. A Franciscan 
 Monastery, built in the year 1224, by Maurice Fitz¬ 
 gerald, Lord Chief Justice of Ireland, who died and 
 was buried in 1257, after^ having spent many years 
 here under the habit of a Monk. This house stood to 
 the South of the town ; there are no traces of it now. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, built to the north, in the 
 year 1268, by Maurice, descendant of Lord Offaly; 
 granted, 23 Elizabeth, to William Walsh, at Is. 
 lOeZ. yearly rent, now worth £l 165. 8cZ. 
 
 DERRY (County.) 
 
 At Arragell, in the Barony of Coleraine. A Mo¬ 
 nastery, founded, by St. Columb, to which the Protes¬ 
 tant place of worship has succeeded. 
 
 At Badoney, in Glaun Aide, two miles from Derry. 
 A Church, founded, by St. Patrick. 
 
 At Coleraine. A Priory of regular Canons, found¬ 
 ed, it is thought, by St. Carbreus, a disciple of St. 
 Finian of Clonard. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded, in the year 1244, 
 by the O’Cahanes; Shane O’Boyle, the last prior, 
 surrendered it to the King’s Commissioners, 1 Jan. 
 1542. 
 
 At Derry. An Augustine Abbey, founded, about 
 the year 521, by St. Columb. 
 
 17* 
 
198 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 A Nunnery, founded, in the year 1218, by Tur 
 logh O’Neil, of Strabane. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, built in the year 1274, by 
 O’Donnel, Prince of Tyrconnell; the house sup¬ 
 ported generally 150 Monks. 
 
 At Dezertoghill. An Abbey, built by St. Columb, 
 is now converted into a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Donaghmore. A Church, built in the time of 
 St. Patrick, is now converted into the Protestant place 
 of worship. 
 
 At Dungiven. An Augustine Priory, founded, in 
 the year 1100, by Prince O’Cahane; it stood to the 
 fourteenth, and, without doubt, to the sixteenth, cen¬ 
 tury. 
 
 At Magillagan, near Loughfoyle. A Monastery, 
 founded, by St. Columb. 
 
 At MoYcosauiN, near Coleraine. An Abbey, found¬ 
 ed, in the year 1172. It stood until the fifteenth cen¬ 
 tury. 
 
 DONEGALL (County.) 
 
 At Astrath, on the river Erne, near Ballyshannon. 
 A Cistercian Abbey, built in the year 1178, by Rode¬ 
 rick O’Cananan, Prince of Tyrconnell; by a valuation 
 of Queen Elizabeth, the revenues made £19 11s. 8 d. 
 yearly, now worth £39 13s. 4 d. 
 
 At Bothchonais, in Inis-eoguin. A Monastery, in 
 which St. Coemgall was Abbot in the eighth, and St. 
 Maelisa (whose writings are still extant) in the ele¬ 
 venth century. 
 
 At Clonleigh, on the river Foyle. A Church, built 
 by St. Columb, where his disciple, St. Lugad, is 
 honoured j St. Carnech was Abbot and Bishop here 
 
COUNTY OF DONEGALL. 
 
 199 
 
 about the year 530. It is now the Protestant place of 
 worship in the diocese of Derry. 
 
 At Clonmany, near the sea. A Monastery, built by 
 St. Columb; now the Church. 
 
 At Conwall, near the river Sevilly. An Abbey, 
 founded about the year 587; now a Church of worship, 
 in the diocese of Raphoe. 
 
 At Cnodain, on the river Erne. A Monastery, in 
 which St. Conan was Abbot. 
 
 At Domnachglinne Tochuir, in Inisoen. A Church, 
 founded, by St. Patrick, in which he appointed Mac- 
 earthen, brother to the Saint of Clogher, Bishop; there 
 are still preserved the Saint’s penitential bed, and 
 other sacred relics; a great resort of pilgrims on St. 
 Patrick’s day, 17th March. 
 
 At Donegall. A Franciscan Monastery, founded, 
 in the year 1474, by Odo Roe O’Donnell, Prince of 
 Tyrconnell. The place of interment of great men 
 and scholars. 
 
 At Drumhome, on the Bay of Donegall. A Monas¬ 
 tery, in which St. Ernan lived in the year 640; con¬ 
 tinued to the general dissolution; now the Protestant 
 place of worship. 
 
 At Faiian, six miles north-west of Derry, on Lough- 
 swilly. A noble Monastery, founded by St. Columb. 
 This grand Edifice was held in the greatest veneration, 
 from the reverence paid to the patron saint, from the 
 many monuments of antiquity preserved there, and 
 from its being the interment of many illustrious saints 
 and great men. The only relics still remaining are 
 some fragments of the acts of St. Columb, written in 
 Irish verse by St. Muran, a large chronicle, and the 
 crosier of St. Muran, richly ornamented with jewels, 
 which is preserved by the O’Neils. 
 
 At Fanegaragh. A Franciscan Friary, built by 
 M‘Ruinifaig. 
 
200 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Garton, two miles west of Kilmacrenan. A Mo¬ 
 nastery, founded by St. Columb; now the Protestant 
 place of worship. 
 
 At Hilfothuir. A Cistercian Abbey, built in the 
 year 1194, by O’Dogharty. 
 
 At Inver, five miles east of Killybegs. A Francis¬ 
 can Friary, founded, about the year 1500, on the ruins 
 of an ancient Monastery, that was built, 563, by St. 
 Natalis. 
 
 At Inis Keel, an Island off the coast, an Abbey. 
 
 At Ines Samer. Some Religious House; in which 
 Flaherty, King of Tyrconnell, died in retirement in 
 the year 1197, after having laid off his crown and 
 worldly cares. 
 
 At Kilbaron, on the Bay of Donegall. A Church, 
 • founded by St. Columb; now the Protestant Church. 
 
 At Kilcartaich. A Church, in which St. Carthach 
 was Bishop about the year 540; it is supposed to be 
 Killcarr, which is a Protestant house in the diocese of 
 Raphoe. 
 
 At Killybegs. A Franciscan Friary, built by 
 M c Sweeny-bannig. 
 
 At Kilmacrenan, on the river Gannon. An Abbey, 
 richly endowed by St. Columb; and a Franciscan 
 Friary, built by O’Donnel, which is now the Protes¬ 
 tant Church. 
 
 At Kil O’Donnel. A Franciscan Monastery, found¬ 
 ed, before the year 1600, by O’Donnell; by an inqui¬ 
 sition ordered by James I., the revenues made 3a 
 annually, now worth £3. 
 
 At Loughdearg, in the parish of Templccaran ; there 
 are several islands, and in the largest called St. Dabeoc, 
 was an Augustine Priory, founded, by St. Dabeoc, 
 about the year 492. St. Patrick’s purgatory, celebrated 
 all over Europe, and visited by all nations, particularly 
 in the fourteenth century, is situated in one of these 
 
COUNTY OF DOWN. 201 
 
 islands; the lough continues still to be the resort of 
 great numbers of pilgrims. 
 
 At Movill on Loughfoyle. A Monastery, founded 
 by St. Patrick; now the Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Raphoe. A Monastery, founded by St. Co- 
 lumb. 
 
 At Rathmullin on Loughswilly. A Carmelite 
 Friary, founded by M’Sweeny Fannagh. The reve¬ 
 nues valued, 43 Elizabeth, at 6s. 8cl. } now worth £6 
 13s. 4 d. 
 
 At Seinglean, in the diocese of Raphoe. A Monas¬ 
 tery, founded by St. Columb. 
 
 At Taughboyne. A Monastery, founded by St. 
 Baithen, disciple and kinsman of St. Columb, in the 
 year 584. 
 
 At Torre Island. A Monastery, founded before 
 the year 650, in which St. Ernan was Abbot. 
 
 At Tully, near Loughswilly. An Abbey, founded 
 by St. Columb. 
 
 DOWN (County.) 
 
 At Achadhcaoil, near the Bay of Dundrum. An 
 Abbey, in which St. Killen was Abbot in the fifth, and 
 St. Senan in the sixth century. 
 
 At Bangor, or the White Choir, formerly the Vale 
 of Angels. An Abbey, founded, in the year 555, by 
 St. Corngall, of noble parentage in Ulster, and disciple 
 of St. Fintan in Clonagh. This house continued until 
 the Reformation a celebrated school for great men ; and 
 an asylum for Kings and Princes from the busy stage 
 of the world; by an inquisition held 5 James I. the 
 revenues were worth £3, now worth £60. 
 
202 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Black Abbey, in the Great Ardes. A Benedic¬ 
 tine Abbey, founded by St. John de Courcey ; granted 
 by James I. to the Protestant Bishop of Armagh. 
 
 At Bretain, near the town of Down. An Abbey, 
 m which St. Loarne was Abbot, in the year 540; is 
 now a Nobleman’s seat. 
 
 At Castle Buy, near the Lough of Stranford. A 
 Commandery, built in the year 1200, by Hugh de 
 Lacie; now in ruins. The Echlin family possess the 
 property. 
 
 At Cumber, on the Lough of Strangford. An Abbey, 
 founded, about the year 1201, by the O’Neils of Clan- 
 deboy. By an inquisition held, 1 James I., John 
 O’Mulligan was Abbot; the revenues made then £23 
 195. 4 cl., now worth £479 65 . 8d. 
 
 At Downpatrick, a town on the Lough of Strang¬ 
 ford. An Abbey, founded, by St. Patrick, in which hv? 
 was interred in the year 493. 
 
 A Priory of Regular Canons, founded in the 
 year 1138, by Malachi O’Morgair; granted to 
 Gerald, Earl of Kildare. 
 
 A Priory of Crossbearers, founded by Sir Johs. Je 
 Courcey; granted to the above Nobleman. 
 
 A Cistercian Abbey, founded, about the y^ar 
 1200, by a Mr. Bagnal. 
 
 A Cistercian Nunnery, founded there also. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, built in the year 1240, by 
 Hugh de Lacey, Earl of Ulster; granted to Ge 
 raid, Earl of Kildare. 
 
 / 
 
 An Hospital of Lepers, granted to the same Earl 
 
 At Dromore, a town originated by St. Coleman, » 
 disciple of M‘Nissy, Bishop of Connor. A Francis¬ 
 can Priory, built by him about the year 513. 
 
 At Drumboe. An Abbey, founded by St.Patrick, in 
 
COUNTS OF DOWN. 203 
 
 which St. Mochumma was Abbot in the 7th century; 
 now the Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Dundrum, in the Barony of Lecale. A Castle, 
 built by Sir John de Courcey, for the Templars, before 
 the year 1313; yearly revenues £6 13s 4c/., now worth 
 £133 6s. Sd .; granted to Gerald, Earl of Kildare. 
 
 At Eynf.s. A Priory, founded, in the year 1411, by 
 Thomas Chelene; it became the dwelling of Charles 
 Ecklin,'Esq. 
 
 At Glangragh, Yale of Charity. An Abbey, 
 founded in the year 1200. 
 
 Gray Abbey, on the Lough of Stranford, founded, 
 in the year 1192, by Africa, daughter of Godfrey, King 
 of Man, and wife of Sir John de Courcey ; by an inqui¬ 
 sition held in the first year of James I., the revenues 
 made £2, now worth £40; granted to Gerald, Earl of 
 Kildare ; now the Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Hollywood, on the Bay of Carrickfergus. A 
 Monastery of Franciscans ; rents valued, in 5 James I., 
 £1 3s. 4c/., now worth £23 6s. 8d. 
 
 At Iniscourcey, in the Lough of Strangford. A 
 Cistercian Abbey, built by Sir John de Courcey, in the 
 year 1180; granted to Gerald, Earl of Kildare. 
 
 At Kilcliff, on the Lough of Strangford. An Abbey, 
 in which St. Eugene and St. Niell were Abbots; now 
 the Protestant place of worship. 
 
 An Hospital for Lepers, under the patronage of 
 St. Peter. 
 
 At Kilmbian. An Abbey, built by St. Fergus. Bi¬ 
 shop of Down, about the year 583. St. Neman lived 
 here too. 
 
 At Magherelin, on the river Lagan, near Dromore. 
 A Monastery, built by St. Colman, who died in the 
 year 699; now a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Moville. An Abbey of Augustines, flourished 
 
204 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 from the year 559 until 1542, when it had been sup¬ 
 pressed after having produced many illustrious saints 
 and great literary characters. 
 
 At Newrey. A Cistercian Abbey, built by Maurice 
 M £ Lochlain, Monarch of all Ireland; made into a 
 Protestant place of worship in 1543. College also de¬ 
 stroyed. 
 
 At Newtown. A Monastery, founded, in. the year 
 1244, by Walter de Burgo, Earl of Ulster; surrendered 
 32 Henry VIII. ^revenues worth £13 35., now worth 
 £263. 
 
 .At Saul, in the Barony of Lecale. An Abbey, 
 founded, by St. Patrick, where he died, March 17, 493, 
 and in the 120th year of his age, and was buried with, 
 great solemnity at Downpatrick; granted to Gerald, 
 Earl of Kildare. 
 
 At Slieve Donard, a high mountain. A Mo 
 nastery, founded, by St. Domangart, a disciple of St 
 Patrick. 
 
 At Toberglory, a well near Downpatrick. An 
 Abbey, founded, by Sir John de Courcey, and richly 
 endowed. 
 
 DUBLIN (County.) 
 
 At Baldongan, in the Barony of Balruddery. A Cas¬ 
 tle of Templars, that was converted into a Friary and 
 Nunnery alternately. 
 
 At Ballymadun, in the same Barony. A Cell and a 
 Churoh; on the ruins of which Robert Preston, Esq. 
 had his seat in the year 1542. 
 
 At Castle Knock. An Augustine Abbey founded 
 by Richard Tirrel; now the Protestant place of wor- . 
 
 ship. 
 
COUNTY OF DUBLIN. 
 
 205 
 
 At Clondalkin. An Abbey, in which St. Cronan 
 Mochua was the first Abbot before the year 776 ; after 
 having produced many Sains, it is made the Protest¬ 
 ant place of worship. 
 
 At Clontarf. A Monastery, built in the year 550; 
 now a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 Commandery of Templars, founded in the reign 
 of King John. 
 
 At Dublin. Abbey of the Virgin Mary, founded, it 
 is supposed, by the Danes after their conversion to 
 Christianity, about the year 948. It was at first a 
 Benedictine monastery, but it was granted to the Cis¬ 
 tercians in the year 1139. The house was considera¬ 
 bly enriched by the bounty of Bishops, Abbots, and 
 Princes, and always held in the greatest veneration for 
 the numerous saints and learned men it produced, as 
 well as for the sacred relics which it contained. In 
 the year 1180, Fitz Andelm, and Miles Cogane, and 
 Fitz Stephen, brought from Armagh, and bestowed 
 upon this church a stone altar, and the most holy staff 
 of Jesus, which St. Patrick used to carry in his hand ; 
 this staff was covered with gold and overlaid with 
 pearls, being held so sacred that the" possessor of it, if 
 a Bishop, was always deemed the canonical owner of 
 the See of Armagh. The history of the staff is thus 
 given by Joceline: “ St. Patrick, moved either by divine 
 instinct or angelical revelation, on his tour in the south 
 of Europe, visited one Justus , an ascetic in the island 
 of the Tuscan Sea, who was spending a solitary life 
 of the most edifying sanctity. After mutual salutations 
 and discourse on heavenly matters, he presented the 
 Irish Apostle with a staff, which he averred he had re¬ 
 ceived from the hands of Jesus Christ himself. In this 
 island there were some men in the bloom of youth, 
 and others who appeared aged and decrepid. St. 
 Patrick, upon conversing with them, found that those 
 persons seemingly old were sons of those who appear¬ 
 ed young. He was astonished at this miraculous ap¬ 
 pearance, until he was told that from their infancy they 
 
206 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 had served God; that they were constantly employed 
 in works of charity, and their doors ever open to the 
 traveller and the distressed; and that one night a 
 stranger, with a staff in his hand, came to them whom 
 they accommodated to th« best of their power; and 
 that in the morning he blessed them, and said, I am 
 Jesus Christ whom you have always faithfully served, 
 but last night you received me in my proper person. 
 He then gave this staff to their spiritual father, with 
 directions to deliver it to a stranger named Patrick, 
 who would shortly visit them. On saying this he 
 ascended into heaven, and left us in that state of juve 
 nility in which you behold us, and our sons, then 
 
 J oung, are the old decrepid persons you now see.” 
 
 oceline goes on then to relate that with this staff our 
 Apostle collected every venemous serpent and snake 
 in the island of Erin to the top of the mountain ol 
 Crough Phadruig, or Patrick’s Hill, in the county of 
 Mayo, and from thence precipitated them into the 
 ocean. This story was handed down by general tra¬ 
 dition in that country since the earliest ages, being 
 related by many authors who flourished prior to the 
 days of Joceline, in the year 1185. This house and 
 possessions were granted 31 Elizabeth, to Edmund 
 Fitz Alexander; rent £4 17s. 8cZ., now worth £97 
 13s. 4 d. ^ 
 
 Nunnery of St. Mary de Hogges; founded, in 
 the year 1146, by Dermot, son of the King of 
 Leinster; granted, 6 Edward VI., to James Sed- 
 grave; rent 11s. Scl., now worth <£11 13s. 8d. 
 
 Nunnery of St. Mary les Dames; without the 
 gate. 
 
 Abbey of St. Olave. 
 
 Priory of All Saints, in Hoggin Green, now 
 called College Green, was founded, about the yeai 
 1166, by Dermot, son of Muchard, King of Lein¬ 
 ster; granted, 30 Henry VIII., to the Mayor, &c. 
 of the city of Dublin, for the yearly rent of £4 3s 
 0 ^d. y now worth £83 Os. 19cZ. 
 
COUNTY OF DUBLIN. 
 
 207 
 
 Abbey of St. Thomas, founded, by Henry II., 
 in that part which is now called Thomas Court; 
 the possessions were granted to divers persons in 
 33 Elizabeth; yearly value £24 2s. 4 d., now 
 worth £482 6s. 8 d. 
 
 Priory of St. John Baptist, founded, in the 12th 
 century, by Ailred le Palmer. In this house was 
 an infirmary, which contained fifty beds for the 
 sick; the house, site and possessions were granted 
 to James Sedgrave of Dublin, for £1,078 15s. 8cZ., 
 now worth £21,575; and the yearly rent of 2s. 6<2., 
 now worth £2 10s. 
 
 Friary of St. Saviour, near the old bridge, od 
 the north bank, founded, about, the year 1202, by 
 William Mareschall,- Earl of Pembroke. The 
 King’s Inns, containing courts of law, rolls, &c., 
 are built on the site of this sacred edifice. 
 
 Monastery of St. Francis, built where Francis 
 street now runs, by Ralph le Porter, in the year 
 1235; granted, 24 Henry VIII., to Thomas Ste¬ 
 phens, at 2s. yearly rent, now worth £2. 
 
 Monastery of the Holy Trinity, founded, in the 
 year 1259, by the Talbot family; granted, 34 Hen¬ 
 ry VIII., to Walter Terrell, at the yearly rent of 
 6s. Id ., now worth £6 Is. 8 d. 
 
 A Carmelite Monastery, in the parish of St. 
 Peter, built in the year 1278; granted, 34 Henry 
 VIII., to Nicholas Stony hurst, at the yearly rent 
 of 2s. 6d., now worth £2 10s. 
 
 Hospital of St. Stephen, founded, in the yeai 
 1344. 
 
 Steyne Hospital, built and endowed in tne yeai 
 1220, by Henry Loundres, Archbishop of Dublin. 
 
 Allen’s Hospital, founded, for the poor about the 
 year 1500, by Walter, Archbishop of Dublin. 
 
 At Fingla, two miles from Dublin. An Abbey, 
 
203 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 founded, as people think, by St. Patrick. St. Kenicus 
 was Abbot and its patron Saint. Here is a well, dedi¬ 
 cated to St. Patrick, and remarkable for many miracles, 
 and its sanative effects ; now the house is made a Pro¬ 
 testant place of worship. 
 
 At Glassmore. A Nunnery, founded, in the year 
 1190, by John Comin, Archbishop of Dublin, in this 
 place, which is three miles north of Swords; at an 
 inquisition of 33 Henry VIII., the revenues made 
 yearly £112 Is., now worth £2,241. 
 
 At Holm Patrick. A Priory, founded, by Sitrie, 
 son of Muachard on Inis Patrick. The holy Moel 
 Finian, Prince of the Bregii, resigned his throne, be¬ 
 came a Monk here, was afterwards Abbot, and died in 
 the year 898; granted, 20 Elizabeth, to Thomas Fitz 
 Williams. 
 
 At Inis-Patrick, Ireland’s Eye, a small rocky isl¬ 
 and, north of Howth Hill, where S-t. Nessau founded, 
 in the year 570, an Abbey, in which he spent the eve¬ 
 ning of a holy life in praying and fasting. 
 
 Kilmainham Priory, founded, in the year 1174, by 
 Richard Strongbow, Earl of Pembroke, for the Knights 
 Templars, but on the suppression of that order by the 
 Pope, in 1312, the Priory was given to the Hospitalers 
 By an inquisition taken, 32 Henry VIII., the revenues 
 made £64 14s. Id, now worth £1,294 Is. 8d; grant¬ 
 ed, 20 Elizabeth, to William Browne, part of the reve¬ 
 nues for £57 10s., now worth £1150 yearly. 
 
 At Kilsaghlan, in the Barony of Castle Knock. 
 A Monastery, valued 28 Henry VIII.; that is all we 
 know of it. 
 
 At Lusk. An Abbey, founded very early. 
 
 At Moortown. A Monastery, in which St. Cronan 
 was the first Abbot, before the year 571. 
 
 At Palmersto^wn, on the Liffey, three miles from 
 Dublin. A Priory of St. Laurence. 
 
COUNTY OF FERMANAGH. 
 
 209 
 
 At Saggard. A Priory, founded about the year 
 650, by St. Mosacre; now the Protestant place ot 
 worship. 
 
 At St. Catherine’s. A Priory, amply endowed by 
 Warrisius de Peche, for the salvation of his soul and of 
 the souls of his ancestors, about the year 1220. 
 
 At Swords. A Monastery, founded, in the year 
 512, by St. Columb, to which he bestowed a small Mis¬ 
 sal, written by himself, and appointed St. Finan Lob- 
 hair, Leper, as Abbot. This is the church at present. 
 
 A Nunnery, founded before the reign of King 
 Edward IV. 
 
 At Tallaght, five miles from Dublin. A Monas¬ 
 tery, founded early by St. Maelwan, they suppose, be¬ 
 cause he was the first Bishop; now a Protestant place 
 of worship. 
 
 FERMANAGH (County.) 
 
 At Clinish, an Island in Lough Earn. St. Synell 
 was Abbot of Clain Inis, about the year 550; now a 
 Protestant Place of worship. 
 
 At Derough. A Collegiate Church, vested in the 
 crown on the general suppression. 
 
 At Devenish, an Island in Lough Earn, near Ennis¬ 
 killen. An Abbey, built in Daimb-inis, about the 
 year 563, by St. Laserian; it stood until the general 
 plunder. 
 
 At Gola, near Lough Earn. A Monastery, founded, 
 by M‘Manus, Lord of the place ; granted to Sir John 
 Davis, Knight. 
 
 At Inis-mac-Saint, an Island in Lough Earn, an 
 18 * 
 
210 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 Abbey, founded in 523, by St. Nenn. Remained as a 
 Parish Church till the time of Queen Anne. 
 
 At Lisgool, an Abbey founded very early. Grant¬ 
 ed to St. John Davis, Knt. 
 
 At Ross Orry,' on Lough Earn. A Nunnery, 
 founded about the year 480, by St. Faiichea ; now a 
 Protestant place of worship, in the diocese of Clogher. 
 
 GALWAY (County.) 
 
 Abeey Gormogan, nine miles east of Loughrea; grant¬ 
 ed, 34 Henry VIII., to Ulick, first Earl of Clanricarde. 
 
 At Abeey Knockmoy, near Tuam. An Abbey, 
 founded, for the Cistercians, in the year 1190, by Ca- 
 thol 0‘Connor, King of Connaught, who took there the 
 religious habit, and died in 1224, and is interred there; 
 valued, 27 Elizabeth, ’yearly £209 4s., now worth 
 £4,184; granted to Valentine Blake, Esq. 
 
 At Aghrim, near Ballinasloe. An Augustine Priory, 
 founded, in the year 1200, by Theobald Butler; grant¬ 
 ed, with several other Houses, to Richard, Earl of 
 Clanricarde, for the yearly rent of £68 9s. Qd. 
 
 At Ahaskeragh, in the Barony of Kilconnell. An 
 Abbey, in which St. Cuan died in the year 788; now a 
 Protestant place of worship, in the diocese of Elphin. 
 
 At Arran Naomh, that is, Arran of the Saints* 
 Many churches were erected in these Islands, (three in 
 number,) on the coast of Galway ; the bodies of many 
 saints repose in them; the King of Cashell, at the re¬ 
 quest of St. Albeus, granted the largest of these Islands 
 to St. Enna, who built ten churches in it about the 
 year 490. 
 
 At the Middle Island. Two Churches. 
 
 At Ardoilen, the third of the Islands of Arran. 
 
COUNTY OF GALWAY. 
 
 211 
 
 Three Churches, and a Monastery, which was founded 
 by St. Fechin; the pious Abbot, St. Gormgal, died 
 here in 1017. A Franciscan Friary was founded in 
 these Islands, about the year 1485. 
 
 At Athenry. A Dominican Friary, founded, in the 
 year 1241, by Meyler de Bermingham. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded in the year 1464, 
 by Thomas, Earl of Kildare, the Earl of Desmond, 
 and by O’Tully. 
 
 At Ballynehinch. A Carmelite Monastery, found¬ 
 ed in the year 1356, by O’Flaherty. 
 
 At Beagh. A Franciscan Monastery, founded about 
 the year 1441; valued, in the 28 Elizabeth, £618, now 
 worth £6 13s. 4 d. yearly. 
 
 At Boilean Clair, in the diocese of Tuam. A rich 
 Franciscan Monastery, 'founded, in the year 1291. 
 
 At Clare Galway. A Franciscan Monastery, 
 built about the year 1290, by John de Cogan; now a 
 Roman Catholic Chapel is built in its stead. 
 
 At Clonfert. An Abbey, founded, by St. Brendan, 
 about the year 553 ; he founded several other Abbeys, 
 and had at one time presided over three thousand 
 monks, each of whom did industriously earn a sufficien¬ 
 cy for his own support; we find that many saints lived 
 and died here; dissolved at the Reformation. 
 
 At Clonkeen. A Franciscan Monastery, founded, 
 about the year 1435, by Thomas O’Kelly, Archbishop 
 of Clonfert. 
 
 At Clonthuskert. A Monastery of Canons, found¬ 
 ed, about the year 809, by Boadan ; granted to Richard, 
 Earl of Clanricarde. 
 
 At Clooneyvornoge. An Augustine Cell, founded, 
 about the year 1441; worth, according to an inquisi¬ 
 tion held 28 Elizabeth, 65 . 8 d. y now worth £6 13s 4 d. 
 
 At Crevaghbane. A Carmelite Friary, founded, in 
 
212 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 or about the year 1400, by the Earl of Clanricardej 
 granted to the Burgesses and Citizens of Athenry. 
 
 At Dundrynan. A Monastery, in which Thomas 
 was Abbot in the year 1374. 
 
 At Dunmore. An Augustine Friary, built in the 
 year 1425, on the site of the Monastery founded by St. 
 Patrick; the Market-place and the Protestant place of 
 worship stand in its stead. 
 
 i 
 
 At Enagh Dune, in the Barony of Clare. An Abbey, 
 founded in the seventh century, of which St. Melden 
 was Abbot. 
 
 A Nunnery, founded by St. Brendan, of Clon- 
 fert, for his sister Briga j granted to the Earl of 
 Clanricarde. 
 
 St. Mary’s Abbey. 
 
 A Franciscan Abbey, to which were subordi¬ 
 nate all the Connaught and Ulster Monasteries; 
 revenues made yearly £3 6s. now worth £66. 
 
 At Fallig. A Monastery, founded by a Mr. Fallig, 
 an Irishman, for Grey Friars, in the year 1390. The 
 Parson resides there at present. 
 
 At Fidhard. An Abbey, founded by St. Patrick for 
 St. Justus; it is now a Protestant place of worship, in 
 the diocese of Elphin. 
 
 At Galway. A Franciscan Friary, founded in the 
 year 1296, by Sir William de Burgh, Leigh, or Grey, 
 in the Island of St. Stephen, by the north gate. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, built first for Nuns, which, 
 when they forsook it, was possessed a long time by 
 the secular Clergy ; but finally granted, by Inno¬ 
 cent III., to the Dominicans, in the year 1488. 
 Demolished, in 1652, by the orders of Oliver 
 Cromwell. 
 
 An Augustine Priory, founded on a hill near the 
 
• COUNTY OF GALWAY. 213 
 
 town, in the year 1508, by Stephen Lynch, son to 
 the Mayor of Galway. 
 
 A Nunnery, built in the Island of Lough Corrib, 
 west of the town. 
 
 At Immagh. An Abbey, founded in the year 664, in 
 this island, on the coast of Galway, by St. Fechin, who 
 is the patron saint of the Island. Now a Protestant 
 place of worship. 
 
 At Inisouin, an island of Lough Corrib. St. Bren- 
 don erected an Abbey, and made St. Meldon Abbot, 
 who died in the year 626. 
 
 At Kilbought. A Monastery, built by the Waley 
 family ; suppressed by the orders of Q,ueen Elizabeth. 
 
 At Kilbrenan. A Monastery, and its appurtenan¬ 
 ces, granted to the Mayor, &c. of Athenry. 
 
 At Kilcorban. A Dominican Friary; granted, by 
 Thomas Burgh, Bishop of Clonfert, to the Dominicans, 
 in the year 1446. Pope Eugene IY. confirmed the 
 grant. 
 
 At Kilcolgan. An Abbey, built in the year 580, by 
 St. Colgan, the patron saint j it is now the Protestant 
 place of worship. 
 
 At Kilcolgan. A Monastery, in the diocese of Clon¬ 
 fert, founded by St. Columbkill. 
 
 At Kilconnell. A Franciscan Monastery, found¬ 
 ed, in the year 1400, by William O’Kelly, a nobleman, 
 on the ruins of an Abbey, built in the days of St. Pat¬ 
 rick, as it is supposed, by the Abbot St. Conall; grant¬ 
 ed to Charles Calthorpe. 
 
 At Kilcoonagh. An Abbey, founded, by Tipraid, a 
 Prince of that country, for St. Columb, who placed 
 over it St. Cuonnan, maternal brother to St. Carthag. 
 This is now a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Kilcreunata. A Nunnery, founded, in the year 
 1200, by Cathald O’Connor Crovderg, for Benedictine 
 
214 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 Nuns, Lady Fynola, daughter of Felym O’Connor, 
 was Abbess in 1300; granted to Richard, Earl of Clan- 
 ricarde. 
 
 At Killine Bonaina. A Franciscan Friary, built 
 about the year 1428. 
 
 At Kili.oebhain. A religious house of some sort. 
 St. Maccectus of this house was smith to St. Patrick, 
 and made the famous relic called Finnfaidheach. Now 
 the Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Kilmacduach. An Abbey, founded, in the year 
 620, by St. Colman, son of Duack; it became an Au¬ 
 gustine Monastery in 1283; here are many venerable 
 and noble ruins that bespeak the former greatness and 
 piety of the Irish. The round tower projects seventeen 
 feet from its perpendicular line. The celebrated lean¬ 
 ing tower of Pisa in Italy projects only thirteen feet; 
 granted to the Earl of Clanricarde. 
 
 At Kilrickill. A Nunnery, built by St. Patrick for 
 his sister St. Richella ; now a Protestant place-of wor¬ 
 ship, in the diocese of Clonfert. 
 
 At Kiltullagh. A Franciscan Cell, built prior to the 
 year 1441. 
 
 At Kinalekin. A Commandery of Hospitalers, 
 founded, about the year 1250, by O’Flaherty. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded before the year 
 1325. 
 
 At Loughreagii. A Carmelite Friary, founded, in 
 the year 1300, by Richard de Burgo, Earl of Ulster; 
 granted to Richard, Earl of Clanricarde. 
 
 A Leper Hospital was there too. 
 
 At Maghce, Maghele, or Maghelle. Three Mo¬ 
 nasteries, founded by St. Alban, who died in the year 
 650. 
 
 At Milick, on the Shannon. A Franciscan Friary, 
 founded by O’Madden, Dynast of that country. Grant¬ 
 ed to the. Earl of Clanricarde. 
 
COUNTY OF GALWAY. 
 
 215 
 
 At Muci?,’is. An Abbey, wherein Regulus was Abbot 
 in the time of St. Columb; this place is in Loughdearg, 
 in the county Galway. 
 
 At Pallice. A Carmelite Friary, built in the four¬ 
 teenth century, by Bermingham, Baron of Athenry; 
 granted, 31 Elizabeth, to John Rawson, at the yearly 
 rent of £8 125. Id. Irish, now worth £172 11s. 8 d. 
 
 At Portumna. A Cistercian Abbey, which became 
 in the course of time a Dominican Friary; the still ex¬ 
 isting walls show that it had been a noble structure. 
 The ancient choir is now the Protestant place of wor¬ 
 ship. 
 
 At Rathmath, on Lough-Corrib. An Abbey, built 
 by St. Fursey, son of Fintan, of the royal race of 
 South Munster, who died about the year 653, being 
 called now Kilfursa ; it is the Protestant place of wor¬ 
 ship. 
 
 ► _ 
 
 At Ross, in the diocese of Tuam. A Franciscan Fri¬ 
 ary, built in the year 1431. 
 
 At Rosserelly. A Franciscan Monastery, founded, 
 in the year 1498, by Lord Gannard ; granted to the Earl 
 of Clanricarde. 
 
 At Sleushancogh. A Franciscan Friary; granted 
 to Sir Francis Sammes. 
 
 At Templegaile, or Teagii Sassan. A Franciscan 
 Friary, founded in the reign of Henry VII., by the 
 Burgo family ; granted to the Burgesses and Common ¬ 
 alty of Athenry. Another Franciscan Friary was 
 granted here to Edmond Barret. 
 
 At Tombeola, at the head of Roundstowne Bay. A 
 Dominican Friary, founded, in the year 1427, by 
 O’Flaherty, Dynast of that country ; demolished in the 
 reign of Elizabeth, and the stones carried away to build, 
 a castle in the neighbourhood. 
 
 At T>sjam. An Abbey, built in the year 4S~, was 
 
216 IRELAND. 
 
 converted in the sixth century into a Cathedral t>y the 
 good St. Jarlath. 
 
 A Priory of St. John the Baptist, built in the 
 year 1140, by Tirdelvac O’Connor, King of Ire¬ 
 land ; granted to Richard, Earl of Clanricarde. 
 
 A Premonstratensian Abbey, founded, in the 
 reign of King John, by the Burgh family ; grant¬ 
 ed, 20 Elizabeth, to the Burgesses and Common 
 alty of Athenry. 
 
 KERRY (County.) 
 
 At Aghadoe. An Abbey, where Aodh, grandson of 
 AulifFMor. O’Donoghue, King of Aoganacht Locha- 
 lein, was buried in the year 1231. 
 
 At Aghamore. An Abbey, founded, in the seventh 
 century, by the Friars of St. Finbar, of Cork; it is 
 situated on a small island near the mouth of the Ken- 
 mare river. 
 
 At Ardfert. A sumptuous Monastery, built in the 
 sixth century, by St. Brendan; destroyed repeatedly 
 by fire and wars. Thomas, Lord of Kerry, built, iD 
 the year 1253, a Monastery there, which became the 
 burial ground of several illustrious families; this house 
 was high in estimation for the numerous miracles 
 , wrought there. The ruins of this noble edifice stand 
 ' a little east of the town ; the walls of the steeple, choir, 
 cloisters, dormitory, and chapel for morning are entire. 
 In the church is a figure of St. Brendan in relievo; 
 the round tower, the finest in Ireland, 120 feet high, 
 unfortunately fell in the year 1771. 
 
 At Ballynaskeligs, or St. Michael’s Mount, in 
 Toragha. An Augustine Abbey, removed thither from 
 the Island of Great Skelig; the ruins on the sea shore, 
 that is continually wearing it away, represent the an- 
 
COUNTY OF KERRY. 
 
 217 
 
 cient Abbey as a noble edifice. There is a holy well 
 consecrated to St. Michael, which is annually visited 
 on the 29th of September; granted, 28th Elizabeth, to 
 John Blake; rent £6 136*. 4d., yearly, now worth £133 
 6s. 8 d . 
 
 At ChoEBHEAGH. An Abbey, founded, by St. Patrick, 
 for his disciple, St. Daluan; St. Trian was Abbot and 
 Bishop here about the year 450. 
 
 At Dingle. A Monastery, which was a cell to the 
 Abbey of Killagh, Castlemain. 
 
 At Innisfallen, an island on the Lake of Killarney. 
 An Abbey, founded by St. Finian Lobhar, or the Leper, 
 disciple of St. Brendan, and son of the King of Mun¬ 
 ster, in the sixth century. In 1180, this house was held 
 sacred as paradise, and the clergy were deemed so holy 
 and trustworthy, that the treasures and valuable effects 
 of the whole country were deposited in their hands, 
 notwithstanding the Abbey was, in this year, destroyed 
 by Maolduim, son of Daniel O’Donaghoe, and many 
 of tine clergy were slain, even in their cells, by the 
 McCarthy’s. Granted, 37th Elizabeth, to Robert Col- 
 lan; rent £72 3s., now worth £1443. 
 
 At Irelagh, near Loughlean. A Franciscan Friary, 
 founded in the year 1440, by Thady M‘Carthy. Grant¬ 
 ed to Robert Collan, at 10‘s, yearly rent, now worth £16. 
 
 At Killachad-Conchean. A Nunnery, founded, in 
 the sixth century, by St. Abban, for St. Conchenna. 
 
 At Killagh. A Priory of Regular Canons, founded, f 
 in the reign of John, by Geoffry de Mariscis; granted 
 to Thomas Clinton; rent £17 yearly, now Avorth £240. 
 
 At Lislaghtin. A Franciscan Monastery, founded in 
 the year 1464, by O’Conner, Prince of Kerry; granted 
 to Sir Edward Denny, rent £3 11s. 1 £cZ., now worth 
 
 £71 2s. 6 d. 
 
 Monaster ni Oriel, in the Barony of Glanerought. 
 
 At Odorney. A Cistercian Abbey, founded in the 
 19 
 
218 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 year*1154; was demolished 39 Elizabeth, and the pos¬ 
 session's granted to the Provost and Fellows of Trinity 
 College, Dublin. It is now a shapeless ruin. 
 
 At Rattoo, or Rathoy, in the Barony of Clanmau- 
 rice. A Monastery of Regular Canons, founded, in the 
 13th century, in the place of a Commandery of'Hospi¬ 
 talers ; granted, 23 Elizabeth, to John Zouche, at the 
 rent of 65 . 7 d., now worth £6 11 s. 8 d. 
 
 At Skelig, an Island on the Coast of Iveragha. An 
 Abbey, founded, by St. Finian, in the year 812. The 
 Danes plundered and destroyed the Abbey, and kept 
 the Monks in close confinement until, through hunger, 
 they perished. 
 
 At Tralee. A Dominican Friary, founded, in the 
 year 1213, by Lord John Fitz Thomas. The general 
 burial place of the Earls of Desmond. 
 
 Commandery of the Knights of St. John. 
 
 KILDARE (County.) 
 
 At Athy. A Monastery of Crossed Friars, founded, 
 in the reign of King John, by Richard de St. Michael; 
 granted, 17 Charles II., to Dame Mary Meredith. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded, in the year 1253, 
 by the families of Boiseles and Hogans; granted, 
 • with all its possessions, 35 Henry VIII., to Martin 
 Pelles: rent 2s. 8d. Irish, now worth £2 13s. 4 d. 
 
 At Castle Dermot. A Priory of Regular Canons, 
 founded in the year 500, by St. Dermot, whose festival 
 falls on 21st June. 
 
 A Friary of Crouched or Crossed Friars, found¬ 
 ed in the reign of King John, by Walter de Rid- 
 dlesford; grar ted, 23 Elizabeth, to Henry Har¬ 
 rington. 
 
COUNTY OF KILDARE. 
 
 219 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded in the year 1302, 
 by Thomas, Lord OfFaley. 
 
 At Clane. A Priory, founded about the year 54S, 
 by St. Ailbe. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded about the year 
 1266, by Gerard Fitz Maurice, Lord Offaley, as 
 people suppose; granted, 24 Henry VIII., to Ro¬ 
 bert Eustace, John Trevor, and others, in capita , 
 at the yearly rent of 2s. 4 d. Irish, now worth £2. 
 6 s. 8d. 
 
 At Clonagh. A Chapel, dedicated to St. Fynan, 
 demolished by John Lye, of Rathbridge, according to 
 an inquisition that was held 6 James I. 
 
 At Cloncurry. A Carmelite Friary, built in the 
 year 1347, by John Roche; granted, 35 Henry VIII., 
 to William Dickson, at 8d. yearly rent; granted,8 Eli¬ 
 zabeth, to Richard Slayne, for 21 years; rent 16s., 
 now worth £16. 
 
 At Grany, near Castle Dermot. A Nunnery, < 
 built in the year 1200, by Walter de Riddlesford; 
 richly endowed by the benefactions of several ladies 
 and noblemen ; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to Sir Antho¬ 
 ny St. Leger. 
 
 At Great Conall. A Priory, founded, in the year 
 1202, by Mayler Fitz Henry, grandson of Henry I. It 
 became the cradle and tomb of great and learned 
 men. Granted, 3 Elizabeth, for sixty-one years, to Sir 
 Nicholas White ; rent £26 19s. 5cZ., now'worth £539 
 8s. 4 d. 
 
 At Kilbegs. A Commandery of Hospitalers. 
 
 At Kilcock. A Monastery, ledicated to the Virgin 
 St. Cocho. 
 
 At Kilcullen. A Monastery, founded by St. Pa- 
 
220 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 trick, who appointed St. Isernin superior. He was suc¬ 
 ceeded by St. Mactalius, who died of the plague in the 
 year 548. 
 
 At Kildare. A Nunnery and Monastery, founded 
 in the year 453, by St. Brigid, the first Nun in Ireland. 
 The houses and revenues granted by Elizabeth to An¬ 
 thony Deeringe; rent £3 10s. &d. Irish, now worth 
 £70 13s. 4 d. 
 
 A Franciscan Abbey, built in the year 1260, by 
 Lord William de Vesey; granted, 34 Henry VIII. 
 to Daniel Sutton; rent 2s. 3d. Irish, now worth 
 £2 5s. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, built in the year 1290, by 
 William de Vesey. 
 
 At Kilhill. A Commandery of Hospitalers, built 
 in the 13th century, by Maurice Fitzgerald ; granted 
 to John Allen. 
 
 At Killossey, near Kildare. An Abbey, founded 
 by St. Patrick, for his nephew, St. Auxil, who died 27th 
 August, 454; hence the place was called Kil-usaille, 
 and afterwards Kill-ussi. It is now the Protestant 
 place of worship. 
 
 At Kilrushe. An Augustine Abbey, founded, in the 
 13th century, by William Mareschal, Earl of Pem¬ 
 broke ; granted to the Earl of Ormond. 
 
 At Leixlip. A Monastery stood in the year 1463, 
 
 near this village. 
 
 \ 
 
 At Maynooth. A College, founded about the year 
 1518, by Gerald, Earl of Kildare, for a Provost, Vice 
 Provost, five Priests, two Clerks, and three boys, to 
 pray for his own soul, and for the soul of his wife. 
 
 At Monasterevan. A sumptuous Abbey, built by 
 St. Alban, in the 7th eentury. St. Emin, or Evin, of 
 the Eogonacht’s family in South Munster, brought a 
 number of Monks from thence to this house; his festi 
 val is held on 22d December. At the suppression U 
 
COUNTY OP KTLDARE. 
 
 221 
 
 fell into the hands of the Earl of Drogheda, and is 
 now the mansion of that family, under the name of 
 Moore Abbey. 
 
 At Moone. A large old Church, of which the cross, 
 and several Irish inscriptions, still remain. 
 
 At Naas. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1200, by the Baron of the town; granted, 1553, to 
 Richard Mannering, at the rent of £35 185. 2d, now 
 worth £718 35. 4 d. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded about the year 
 1355, by the Eustace family: granted, 34 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir Thomas Luttrell, at 9s. 4 d. rent, now 
 worth £9 6s. 8 d. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded in the year 1484. 
 The possessions were valued, in the reign of 
 Elizabeth, at £6 12s. 8d, now Avorth £132 13s. 
 4d ; granted to Nicholas Aylmer. 
 
 At New Abbey. A Franciscan Monastery, founded, 
 in the year 1460, by Sir Rowland Eustace, Lord Treasu¬ 
 rer of Ireland; granted, 1582, to Edmond Spenser; 
 yearly rent £3 Irish, now worth £60. 
 
 At St. Wolstan’s. A Priory, built in the year 1202, 
 by Adam de Hereford, in honour of St. Wolstan, 
 Bishop of Worcester, lately canonized; granted, 28 
 Henry VIII., to Allen of Norfolk, at the rent of two 
 knight’s fees. 
 
 At Timolin. A Priory of Regular Canons, founded 
 here very early; stood in the year 927, and, of course, 
 continued until the general suppression. 
 
 A Nunnery, founded, in the reign of John, by 
 Robert, son of Lord Noragh, in which his grand¬ 
 daughter Lecelina was Nun. This house was 
 richly endowed by the bounty of several Catholic 
 Bishops. Granted, 23 Elizabeth, to Henry Har¬ 
 rington and his heirs, at the yearly rent of £21 
 195. Irish money, now worth £439. 
 
 19* 
 
222 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Tully, near Kildare. A Commandery of Hospi¬ 
 talers, founded before the year 1308. This Commande¬ 
 ry, with all its possessions, were granted to Sir Henry 
 Harrington, at the rent of £21 6s. 8c/., now worth 
 £426 13s. 4c7. It is now held in commendam with 
 the Protestant See of Kildare. 
 
 KILKENNY (County.) 
 
 At Callan. An Augustine Friary, founded, as some 
 persons say, by Hugh de Mapilton, Bishop of Ossory, 
 in the year 1251; or, as others think, by the Ormonds; 
 granted, together with the Abbey of Athassel, to Tho¬ 
 mas, Earl of Ormond, in the year 1557. 
 
 Chantry, of which the nave and aisles are still 
 m good preservation; the choir being the Protest¬ 
 ant place of worship. 
 
 At Fertagh. A Priory, dedicated to St. Kieran, 
 by the Blanchfield family, in the thirteenth century; 
 granted, 9 Elizabeth, to James Butler, jun.; rent £12 
 13s. 3c/., now worth £253 5s. 
 
 At Fiddown. An Abbey, by St. Maidoc, in the year 
 590. Now a Protestant parochial place of worship. 
 
 At Freshford. An Abbey, founded by St. Lactan, 
 Bishop and Abbot; he died in the year 622. There is 
 a celebrated fountain near Cashell dedicated to him. 
 This is now a Protestant place of worship, and called 
 a Prebend of Aghour. 
 
 At Graignemanagh. A Monastery, founded, in the 
 year 1212, by William Mareschal, Earl of Pembroke; 
 this was enriched by the bounty of several Bishops 
 and Nobles. The house, with all its possessions, were 
 granted, 8 Elizabeth, to the Butlers. 
 
 At Jerpoint, near Thomastown. A Cistercian Ab- 
 
COUNTY OF KILKENNY. 
 
 223 
 
 bey, founded, by Donogh O’Donoghoe, (in the year 
 1180,) King of Ossory; and richly endowed by him. The 
 house with all the possessions were granted to James, 
 Earl of Ormond, at the annual rent of £49 3s. 9cZ., 
 now worth £983 15s. 
 
 At Inistioge on the Noire. An Augustine Priory, 
 built in the year 1210, by Thomas Seneschal, of Lein¬ 
 ster ; granted, with all the possessions, to James Butler 
 and his heirs at the rent of £28 12s., now worth £572. 
 A rectory granted in Whitchurch to the Earl of Or 
 mond, 31 Elizabeth. 
 
 At Kells. An Augustine Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1193, by Jeffrey, for the salvation of Earl Richard, 
 Governor of the country. Granted, by Henry VIII., to 
 James, Earl of Ormond. 
 
 At Killagiiy. An Abbey, in which St. Sinchell 
 was Abbot, and died of the plague, 26th of March 548, 
 in the 130th year of his age; he was interred in this 
 place. 
 
 'At Killamary, five miles south of Callan. St. Gob- 
 ban presided here over a thousand monks; the place is 
 now a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Kilcleeheen, opposite the City ol Waterford. 
 A Nunnery, built in the year 2151, by Dermot, son of 
 Murchad, King of Leinster. It was sumptuousLy en 
 dowed by himself and other Noblemen. Catherine 
 Motyng, the last Abbess, surrendered the Abbey, 2d 
 April, 31 Henry VIII.; granted, 26 Elizabeth, to the 
 Mayor, Sheriffs, and Corporation of Waterford; rent, 
 yearly, £59 Is. 8cZ.; now worth £1181 13s. 4 d. 
 
 At Kilfane. An Abbey, erected by St. Phian, it is 
 now a Protestant place of worship, seven miles from 
 Kilkenny. 
 
 At Kilkenny, a large handsome town on the river 
 Noire, and capital of the County; it can justly boast 
 of three singular properties—fire without smoke, water 
 without mud. and streets paved with marble. 
 
224 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 The Cathedral of St. Kenny, though long since 
 made the Protestant place of worship, still remains 
 the ancient Catholic Cross, and many statues of 
 Saints and Catholic Bishops, with several other 
 reliques of Catholicity. 
 
 St.John’s Abbey, founded, in the year 1211, for 
 the relief of the indigent poor, by William Mares- 
 chal, Earl of Pembroke; and richly endowed by 
 him with seveial lands. Richard Cantwell, the 
 last Prior, surrendered this house with all the pos¬ 
 sessions, .31 Henry VIII.; granted to the mayor 
 and citizens of Kilkenny, with 100 acres of land, 
 40 gardens, a water-mill in Magdalen-street, a 
 wood called Chanons-grove in the liberties of the 
 town, with 200 acres of land adjoining, ten mes¬ 
 suages and 200 acres in Drakeland, in the county, 
 and another messuage in the town. 
 
 The Black Abbey, in the Irishtown. A Domi- 
 nician Priory, founded, in the year 1225, by Wil 
 liam Mareschal, jun., Earl of Pembroke; he was 
 interred in the choir in the year 1231. The house 
 -was endowed by King Henry VI., and the Bishops 
 of Ossory. Peter Cantwell, the last Prior, surren¬ 
 dered it; and, 35 Henry VIII., it was granted to 
 Walter Archer, the sovereign, and to the burgesses 
 of Kilkenny for ever, at the yearly rent of 12s. 4 d. 
 Irish money; now worth £12 6s. 8 d. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded, on the bank of 
 the Noire, by Richard Mareschal, Earl of Pem¬ 
 broke, 15th October, 1244. King Henry III. granted 
 £20 to be paid annually for buying tunicks for 
 the Franciscans of Kilkenny, Dublin, Cork, Wa¬ 
 terford, and Athlone. 17th Nov., 1338, a great 
 flood destroyed all the bridges, mills, and build¬ 
 ings in and about Kilkenny, but did not approach 
 the great altar of this Monastery. The noble and 
 venerable ruins of this edifice stand yet, reaching 
 from the city wall to the river. Yearly value oi 
 
THE KING’S COUNTY. 225 
 
 the possessions was then £9 7s. 1 d. ; or in money 
 of the present day, £187 Is. 8d. 
 
 At Kilmanagh. An Abbey, founded, in the year 
 563, by St. Natalis. 
 
 At Knocktopher. A Carmelite Friary, founded, in 
 the year 1356, by James, the second Earl of Ormond j 
 granted, with all the appurtenances, to Patrick Barn- 
 wall, 34 Henry VIII., for ever, at the yearly rent of 
 4s. Irish; now worth £4. 
 
 At Rossibercan. A Monastery, founded, 1267, by 
 the Walsh family; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Luke 
 Blake, of New Ross, County Wexford. 
 
 At Thomastown. A Dominican Friary. 
 
 At Tibrach, on the Suir below Carrick. An Abbey, 
 where St. Dominic lived in the sixth century ; now a 
 Protestant place of worship. 
 
 THE KING’S (County.) 
 
 At Birr, now Parsonstown, a beautiful town, fifty- 
 seven miles west of Dublin. An Abbey, founded by 
 St. Brendan, son of Neim. 
 
 • 
 
 At Clonemgre. An Abbey, founded, by St. Pul- 
 cherius. 
 
 At Clonefertmulloe. An Abbey, founded, in the 
 sixth century, by St. Molua, or St. Luan, the son of 
 Carthar, of Munster. Clonefertmulloe is now a Pro¬ 
 testant place of worship. [Clone, with which these 
 names are compounded, is an Irish word and signifies 
 enclosure; and ferta , another Irish word, signifying 
 miracles, so that this name signifies the miracle-retreat 
 of St. Mulloa.] 
 
 •I V 
 
226 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Clonmacnoise, on the Shannon, in the Barony of 
 Garycastle. St. Kieran having received this place, 
 and the Island of Saints, together with one hundred 
 Churches in Meath, from Dermid, son of Cervail, 
 monarch of Ireland, and having bestowed the church 
 of Clonard upon his master, St. Finian, and the island 
 upon St. Domnan, he founded, in the year 548, an 
 Abbey for himself at Clonmacnoise, which became a 
 celebrated Monastery. Besides a Cathedral Church, 
 there were ten small churches built by different pro¬ 
 vincial Kings, and a Nunnery with a Church, which 
 was accidentally burnt in 1180, and rebuilt by the 
 Queen of Meath. 
 
 At Durrow. A Monastery of Augustine Canons, 
 founded in the sixth century, which flourished in 
 learning and sanctity for many ages, until it was 
 granted, 4 Elizabeth, to Nicholas Herbert, Esq., for 
 the term of twenty-one years, at £10 yearly rent; now 
 worth £200. 
 
 At Frankford, formerly called Kilcormuck, on the 
 Shannon. A Monastery of Carmelites, founded by Odo 
 O’Molly, a chief of that country. In the year 1479, 
 died Charles O’Molly, a brave and holy man. This 
 house with all the possessions were granted to Robert 
 Leicester. 
 
 At Gallen. A Monastery, founded, in the year 
 492, by St. Canoe; granted, with all the possessions, 
 4th June, 1612, to Sir George Moore, at the yearly rent 
 of £15 7s. llcZ., now worth £307 185. 4(/. 
 
 - At Gleane, or Gun, on the river Brusna, near Fir- 
 bance. A Monastery, founded by St. Dermid, whose 
 feast is held on the 8th of July; it stood till the 
 eleventh century, and, of course, until the general 
 dissolution. 
 
 At Kilcolgan. An Abbey, founded, in the year 
 580, by St. Colgan, in the Barony of Garycastle. 
 
 At Kilcolman. An Abbey, founded, in the year 
 
THE KING’S COUNTY. 
 
 227 
 
 570, near the parish of Birr, by St. Colgan, son of 
 Aengus, King of Munster; now a Protestant place of 
 worship. 
 
 At Kilcomin, near Roscrea. An Abbey, founded, or 
 governed by St. Cumene, surnamed the White, who 
 was educated in the Abbey of Hy. 
 
 At Killegally. An Abbey, in which St. Trena was 
 Abbot in the sixth century ; now a Protestant place of 
 worship in the Barony of Garycastle. 
 
 At Killeigh. A Priory of regular Canons, in which 
 the Abbot St. Sincheal died of the plague in the 
 year 550. This house, 18 Elizabeth, with three mes¬ 
 suages, 124 acres of arable land, 24 of pasture, 3 of 
 meadow, and 4 of wood, and three messuages, six 
 cottages, 24 acres of arable land, and 7 of pasture, in 
 the town of Donfeigh in this county, with the tithes, 
 &c., were granted to Gerald, Earl of Kildare, and his 
 heirs, at the yearly rent of £l 13.?. 4 d., now worth 
 £33 6s. 8cZ., with the condition that he maintain be¬ 
 sides one able horseman. 
 
 A Nunnery, founded by the Warren family 
 soon after the arrival of the English. A Domin- 
 can Friary, built in the reign of Edward I., by 
 O’Connor; granted to John Allee. 
 
 At Killiaduin. A Nunnery, founded, in the 5th 
 century, by Si. Keran, for his mother Liadana. 
 
 . At Kinnitty, near Birr. An Abbey, founded in the 
 year 557, where St. Finian was Abbot that year. In 
 the year 871, died Abbot Colga M’Conagan, who was 
 esteemed the best and most polished poet of those 
 days in the kingdom, and the principal historian. 
 
 At Lemanaghan, A Monastery, in which St. Mau- 
 chan died of the plague in the year 661; became 
 afterwards a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Leithmore. A Monastery, founded, in the year 
 655, by St. Pulchsrius, in the Irish language Mochoe- 
 
22S IRELAND. 
 
 moc. Many Saints and holy Abbots flourished here 
 until the dissolution. 
 
 At Lynnally. A Monastery, founded 516, by St 
 Colman. 
 
 At Monisteroras. A Franciscan Friary, built 1325, 
 by Sir John of Bermingham, Earl of Louth; granted 
 to Nicholas Herbert. 
 
 At Mugna. An Abbey, founded by St. Finian, of 
 Clonard, on a piece of land which was given him by 
 the King of Leinster, Carbreus. 
 
 At Rathbeg. An Abbey, founded, south of Birr, 
 by St. Abban, who died in the year 650 
 
 At Rathlibthen, in the Barony of FercaL. An 
 Abbey, founded by St. Illand about 540 ; his statue is 
 still to be seen in the church, with his mitre and cro¬ 
 sier in his hand. 
 
 At Reynach. A Nunnery, founded by St, Regnacia, 
 sister to St. Finian, who died in the year 563; his 
 mother, Tolacia, was Abbess here; now a Protestant 
 place of worship. 
 
 At Seirkeran, four miles east of Birr. A Monaste¬ 
 ry, founded 402, by St. Kieran, native of Cape Clear, 
 in the county of Cork. It was consigned, with all the 
 possessions, in the year 1568, to Sir William Taafe, 
 who assigned it to James, Earl of Roscommon. 
 
 At Tuileim. A Monastery, in which Abbot Carnech 
 died in the year 556. 
 
 LEITRIM (County.) 
 
 At Anaghduffe, near Loughboffin. An Abbey, 
 founded in the year 766; now a Protestant place of 
 worship in the diocese of Ardagh. 
 
COUNTY OF LEITRIM. 
 
 229 
 
 At Balleguarcy. A beautiful Monastery, founded, 
 in the year 1518, by Cornelius O’Brien; some writers 
 attach this place to the county of Longford. 
 
 At Clone. An Abbey, formerly of great repute, 
 founded, about the year 570, by St. Fraech; now a 
 Protestant place of worship in the diocese of Ardagh. 
 
 At Creevlea, on the river Boonid. A Franciscan 
 Friary, founded, in the year 1508, by Margaret, daugh¬ 
 ter of Lord O’Brien, and wife of Lord O’Roirk; she 
 died in 1512, and was interred here; dissolved in the 
 reign of James I. 
 
 At Doiremelle, in Lower Breffiny. A Nunnery, 
 founded by St. Tigenach for his mother, St. Mella, 
 who died before the year 787. 
 
 At Dromleas, on Loughgille. A Monastery, built 
 by St. Patrick for St. Benignus; now a Protestant 
 place of worship. 
 
 At Dromahaire. See Creevlea. 
 
 At Fenaugh, in the Barony of Leitrim. A Monas¬ 
 tery, in which St. Callin was Abbot in the time of St. 
 Columb. This place was formerly celebrated for the 
 School of Divinity, and was the general resort of stu¬ 
 dents from all parts of Europe; half a mile from the 
 edifice is a well, dedicated to St. Callin; now a Pro¬ 
 testant place of worship in the diocese of Ardagh. 
 
 At Jamestown. A Franciscan Friary. 
 
 At Kildareis, or Cell of the Two Palms of the 
 Hands ; called also Carcuirshineill, or the Reclusory of 
 St. Sinell, is situated in Lough Melvin. St. Sinell, who 
 was bell-founder to St. Patrick, died in the year 548. 
 
 At Kilnaile. St. Natalis, or Naal, was Abbot of 
 the Abbey here, and died in the year 563 ; the Festival 
 is on the 27th of January. 
 
 At Leitrim, on the Shannon. An Abbey, in which 
 St. M‘Leigus was Abbot. 
 
 20 
 
230 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Mohill. An Abbey, founded, in the year 608, 
 by St. Manehan, who was the patron of seven churches. 
 Many glebes, fees, lands, and tithes ? were given to this 
 house; they were valued at the dissolution at £2 65 . 
 8(7. ; now worth £46 13s. 4(7. 
 
 At Thacineling, a house for Grey Friars, founded, 
 in 1414 by William O’Reily. 
 
 LIMERICK (County.) 
 
 At Abbington. A Monastery, founded for the Cis¬ 
 tercian Monks, in the year 1205, by Theobald Fitzwal- 
 ter, Lord of Garrick, who richly endowed it, and was 
 interred here in the year 1206. December 6, 5 Eliza¬ 
 beth, this Monastery was granted, with its appurte¬ 
 nances in the counties of Limerick, Kerry, and Carlow, 
 to Peter Walshe, at the yearly rent of £57 2s. 3(7. 
 Irish money, now worth £1,142 5s.; he was to main¬ 
 tain one horseman on the premises besides. 
 
 At Abbeyfeal. A Cistercian Abbey, built in the 
 year 1188. 
 
 At Adaire, formerly a respectable place, though now 
 but a miserable village. A Friary of the order of the 
 Holy Trinity, founded in the reign of Edward I., by 
 John, Earl of Kildare; granted, 37 Elizabeth, with all 
 the possessions, together with the possessions of the 
 Grey Friars, Preaching Friars, and Augustiriian Friars, 
 the Abbey of Monasternenagh, and the Nunnery of St. 
 Katherine, to Sir Henry Wallop, at the rent of £26 
 17s. 8d, now worth £537 13s. 4(7., he being bound to 
 maintain two horsemen on the premises. 
 
 Augustine Friary, founded, about 1315, by 
 John, Earl of Kildare; granted to Sir Thomas 
 Wallop, together with the possessions. Of this 
 friary remain, still in good preservation, the steeple, 
 which is supported on an arch, the choir, nave, 
 
COUNTY OF LIMERICK. 
 
 231 
 
 and aisle; there are some beautiful cloisters with 
 Gothic windows, the sides of which are ornament¬ 
 ed with escutcheons and saltire crosses alternately ; 
 the workmanship is both simple and elegant. 
 
 Grey Friary, founded in the east part of the 
 town, in the year 1465, by Thomas, Earl of Kil¬ 
 dare, and Joan his wife, daughter to the Earl of 
 Desmond; they presented unto the house two sil¬ 
 ver chalices, and a bell that cost £10, now worth 
 £200. The Countess was interred in the choir in 
 the year 1486. 
 
 The Friary, with its possessions, sixteen acres 
 of land, a church, three parks, a water-mill and 
 water-course, with a fishing wier on the river 
 Mage, was granted, 37 Elizabeth, to Sir Henry 
 Wallop, Knt. 
 
 At Any, in the Barony of Small County. Augus¬ 
 tine Friary, built in the reign of Henry II., by sundry 
 persons; granted, 31 Elizabeth, to Edward, John, and 
 Mary Absley, at the yearly rent of £47 7s. 64-c/., now 
 worth £947 10s. 10 d. 
 
 At Askeaton, on the river Deel. There was a Cas¬ 
 tle here in the sixteenth century which belonged to 
 the Earls of Desmond, one of whom founded a Monas¬ 
 tery adjoining the Castle for Franciscans. 
 
 At Ballynebraher, barony of Small County. A 
 Friary of Conventual Franciscans, founded, 13th cen¬ 
 tury, by the Clangibbon family. Granted, by Henry 
 VIII., to Robert Browne. 
 
 At Ballynegall, a Monastery for Dominican Friars, 
 founded, by the family of Roche, in the 14th century; 
 granted, by Queen Elizabeth, to the University of 
 Dublin. 
 
 At Ballyniwillin, a house for Dominican Friars. 
 Granted, by Henry VIII., to Robert Browne. 
 
 At Castle-Town Macnairy. A large Monastery in 
 ruins. 
 
232 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Cluncagh, near Rathkeale. A Convent, built by 
 St. Maidoc, of Ferns, who died in the year 624; now 
 a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Croagh, near Rathkeale, formerly a large town. 
 There is a large church, which was anciently collegiate. 
 
 At Galbally, in the Barony of Cashlea. A large 
 Monastery, founded by the O’Briens; the ruins thereof, 
 which are yet visible, together with the ruins of several 
 other religious foundations, clearly evince the ancient 
 magnificence of this town. This Monastery, with 
 three gardens, six messuages, and six acres of arable 
 land, were granted, 35 Henry VIII., to John Desmond 
 for ever, at the yearly rent of id. Irish, now worth 
 65 . 8 d. 
 
 At Greany, formerly a town of Corporation in the 
 Barony of Coanagh. A Collegiate Church, destroyed 
 when the town fell into insignificance and obscurity. 
 
 Hospital. This town took its name from a cele¬ 
 brated Hospital of Hospitalers, which was founded in 
 the reign of King John, by Jeffrey de Mariscis, chief 
 Governor of Ireland in the year 1215. Q,ueen Eliza¬ 
 beth granted this hospital and all the possessions to 
 Sir Valentine Brown, ancestor of the noble family ot 
 Kenmare in Killarney; he built a magnificent castle 
 on the venerable ruins. 
 
 At Kildimma, near Adaire. A Monastery, built by 
 Dimma, a Priest, who was the preceptor of St. Declan. 
 See Kilmamhambeg, page 85, hujus. 
 
 At Kilmallock, formerly a respectable walled town, 
 but now a miserable Priory of regular Canons, founded 
 by St. Mocheallog, who died about 639; now the Pro¬ 
 testant place of worship. 
 
 Dominican Friary, founded, in the year 1291, by 
 Gilbert, son of Lord Offalley; granted, 36 Eliza¬ 
 beth, with the possessions, to Nicholas Maigh, so¬ 
 vereign, and the Corporation, for ever, at the yearly 
 rent of £2 135. 8d ., now worth £53 13s. id. 
 
COUNTY OF LIMERICK. 
 
 233 
 
 At Kilshane, or Kilshonna, near the county of Cork. 
 A Franciscan Monastery, founded by Fitzgerald, Lord 
 of Clenlis. 
 
 A Cistercian Abbey, founded in the year 1198, 
 
 At Kilteel. An Hospitaler’s Commandery, found 
 ed in the Barony of Counagh. 
 
 At Kilteidhill, in the Territory of Ara. An Abbey 
 which was the place of interment of the Saints Mumis 
 and Lomchuo, disciples of St. Patrick, and of seven 
 other holy Bishops. 
 
 Ivynnethin. An Abbey stood there in the year 1300, 
 and we may presume that it stood until the general de¬ 
 vastation. 
 
 At Limerick, as celebrated for its brave defence 
 against King William in the year 1691, as for the in¬ 
 famous treachery on his part in violating the articles of 
 capitulation. A Nunnery, founded, in the year 1374, 
 by Donald O’Brien, King of Limerick. 
 
 A Priory of Regular Canons, founded, by Simon 
 Minor, before the year 1319; granted, at the sup¬ 
 pression, to Edmond Sexton. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded, in the year 1250, 
 by Donogh C. O’Brien, King of Thomond. In 
 the year 1462 died James, son of the Earl of Des¬ 
 mond; the ancient records of this house represent 
 them bound to celebrate annual masses for the soul 
 of this nobleman, and for the souls of his parents 
 and successors, with their wives. 
 
 Henry, the last Prior, was found at the suppres¬ 
 sion to be seized of the site, church, steeple, dor¬ 
 mitory, three chambers, a cemetery, and sundry 
 closes, containing one and a half acre, within the 
 precincts; a garden of four acres without the walls 
 of the monastery, and thirty acres of land, called 
 Cortbrecke, in the liberties ; salmon weir, St. Tho¬ 
 mas’s Island, and land near Parteen, called Mona- 
 20 * 
 
234 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 brahir. This house, with all the possessions, were 
 granted, 35 Henry VIII., to James, Earl of Des¬ 
 mond, in capite , at the yearly rent of 5s. 2d., now 
 worth £5 3s. 4 d. A part of the Friary is convert¬ 
 ed into a tan-yard, and a large barrack is built on 
 the other part. 
 
 A Grey Friary, founded, in the time of Henry 
 III., by O’Brien, of the royal houses of Limerick 
 and Thomond, outside the walls of the city, on 
 the spot where a court-house was built, which is 
 since converted into an hospital; granted to Ed¬ 
 mond Sexton, by King Henry VIII., at the yearly 
 rent of 25. 2d., now worth £2 35 . 4 d .; though by 
 a valuation then made, it was worth a great deal 
 more. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded, in the 13th cen¬ 
 tury, by O’Brien, of the kingly race of .Limerick 
 and Thomond, near Q,uay-lane, but not a trace of 
 it is to be seen now. The possessions of this house 
 in lands and houses, through town and country, 
 were valued at £8 65 . Id., now worth £166 15. 8 d. 
 
 An Hospital of Templars stood near the above 
 house, but not a vestige of this either is to be seen. 
 
 At Miltown, or Ballywullin. A Carmelites’ Friary, 
 founded, by Nellan O’Mulloy. 
 
 At Monasternenagh, in the Barony of Poble O’Brien. 
 A Cistercian Abbey, founded, by O’Brien, in the year 
 1151. This house, with all the possessions, consisting 
 of five plough lands, and many other revenues and 
 privileges, were granted to Sir Henry Wallop. 
 
 At Monasternacalliagh, near Lough-Girr. An Au¬ 
 gustine Nunnery, to which belonged the rectories of 
 Drishane, Cullon, Nohavel, Kilmeen, and Dromtariff, 
 in the county of Cork; granted to Sir Henry Wallop. 
 
 At Mungret, three miles south of Limerick. A Mo¬ 
 nastery, built prior to the coming of St. Patrick to Mun¬ 
 ster; he placed St. Nessan over it, who died in the 
 
COUNTY OP LONGFORD. 
 
 235 
 
 year 551. The Psalter of Cashel relates that there 
 were, within the walls of this Abbey, six churches, 
 that contained 1500 religious; 500 of whom were learn¬ 
 ed preachers, 500 psalmists, and the remaining 500 
 engaged in spiritual exercises. The ruins are still 
 visible. 
 
 / 
 
 At Newcastle. Hospital of Templars founded here, 
 and then a walled town, which, since the destruction 
 of this hospital or castle fell into its present insignifi¬ 
 cance. 
 
 At Rathkeale. A Priory of Augustinians, built by 
 a Mr. Harvey. 
 
 LONGFORD (County.) 
 
 Abbey Shrule, near the river Inny, founded by 
 O’Farrell, for Cistercian Monks; granted, 11 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to Robert Dillon, with the appurtenances, twen¬ 
 ty-four cottages, in the town of Vore; one hundred and 
 eighty acres of land near it; eighty acres of pasture 
 and underwood, near said town also; one messuage, 
 four cottages in Cranaghe ; sixty acres near said town; 
 two messuages and four cottages in Ballynamanoghe; 
 sixty-four acres near the same, for. the yearly rent of 
 £10 14s. 4d, now worth £214 6s. 8c2. 
 
 At Ardagh, near Longford. A Monastery, founded 
 by St. Patrick. 
 
 At Ballynasaggard. A Franciscan Friary, built 
 by the O’Farrells. 
 
 At Clonebrone, near Granard. A Nunnery, found¬ 
 ed by St. Patrick, for the two Emerias of St. Guasact, 
 Abbot of Lerha. This great asylum of virgins stooa 
 until the year 1107, and, of course, until the general 
 dissolution of Abbeys. 
 
 At Deirg, or Abbey Delrg. A Priory, founded in 
 
236 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 the time of Jean, by Gormgall O’Quin; value at the 
 suppression £2 yearly, now worth £40; granted to 
 Nicholas Aylmer. 
 
 At Inchymory, or Great Island. A Monastery, 
 founded, by St. Columb, about the year 450, where St. 
 Boadon, of Inismore, died, on the 14th January. In 
 the year 1414 died Edward M’Finbair, Prior. 
 
 At Inisboffin, an Island in Lough Rie. An Abbey, 
 founded by St. Risch, son of St. Dorerca, sister of St. 
 Patrick. 
 
 At Inisclothrann, an Island in the same Lough. An 
 Abbey, founded, in the year 540, by St. Dhearmuid 
 Naoimb or St. Jerome the Just, and brother Ho Felix, 
 Bishop of Kilmore, who wrote a learned and pious 
 work, in the nature of a Psalter. On the 17 th Decem¬ 
 ber, 1160, died Gilla, or Nehemias O’Dunin, professor 
 and celebrated scholar, poet and historian. 
 
 At Island, or All Saints, in Lough Rie. A noble 
 Monastery, built in the year 544, by St. Kieran. In 
 four years afterwards he procured a very large endow¬ 
 ment for the support of its poor ; and having appoint¬ 
 ed St. Domnan his successor, he quitted this Island, 
 and built the Abbey of Cionmacnoise. 
 
 At Kilglass. A Nunnery, where St. Echea, sister 
 of Mell, was Abbess 
 
 At Kilinmore. An Abbey, founded by St. Palla- 
 dius, who lived in the year 450; now the Protestant 
 place of worship. 
 
 At Lerha, near Granard. A Monastery, founded by 
 St. Patrick, for St. Guasacht, the son of his old mas 
 ter; another Monastery, founded in the year 1205, by 
 Lord Richard Tuit, who was killed in Athlone, in tlit 
 year 1211, by the falling of a tower, and was burieo 
 here. The possessions, at the surrender, valued at 
 £8 13s. 4d. yearly, now worth £173 6s. 8 d. 
 
 At Longford. An Abbey, founded by St. Idus, a 
 
COUNTY OF LOUTH. 
 
 237 
 
 disciple of St. Patrick, whose feast falls on the 14th 
 July. In 1400 a fine Monastery was founded by 
 O’Farrell, for the Dominicans; granted, together with 
 possessions, in the year 1615, by King James I., to 
 Francis, Viscount Valentia. The church of this Prio¬ 
 ry is now the Protestant place of worship in the parish. 
 
 At Moydoe, three miles from Ardagh. St. Modan, 
 whose feast falls on the 12th February, was Abbot, in 
 591 . 
 
 At St. John’s-town. There was a Grey Friary 
 near this town, which had, of course, been ingulfed in 
 the general vortex of the Reformation. 
 
 LOUTH (County.) 
 
 At Ardee. A Crouched Friary, founded by Roger, 
 Lord Ardee, for the salvation of his own soul, and the 
 souls of his wife, Alicia, his father, William, his mo¬ 
 ther, Joan, his brethren, Gilbert and Peter, in the year 
 1207, for the Augustinians. The founder, for the bet¬ 
 ter support of this house, and to enable the Friars to 
 exercise, more liberally, their works of mercy and cha¬ 
 rity, granted them the carucate of land which Osmond 
 Doubleday held ; also, full liberty to bring water for the 
 use of the house, and a sufficient cart-way. This 
 house was considerably endowed, by grants and dona¬ 
 tions, from several other pious Catholics. In the year 
 1612, James I. granted the house and possessions to Sir 
 Garret More, at the yearly rent of £115 5s. Sd., now 
 worth £2,305 135. id. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, founded in the time of Ri¬ 
 chard I. In the year 31 Henry VIII., Patrick, the 
 last Prior, surrendered this house and all the pos¬ 
 sessions, valued yearly at £1 75. 2d., now worth 
 £27 35. id. 
 
 Ardpatrick. Church founded by St. Patrick. 
 
238 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Carlingf/Ord. A Dominican Friary, founded, in 
 the year 1305, by Richard de Burgh, Earl of Ulster j 
 granted, 34 Henry VIII., to Nicholas Bognell, at the 
 yearly rent of £4 6s. 8e7. } now worth £86 13s. 4 d. 
 
 At Drogheda. A Priory of regular Canons, cele^ 
 brated.for the Synod held there by Cardinal Papiro, in 
 the year 1152. 
 
 St. Mary’s Hospital, founded by Ursis de Swe- 
 mele, who, by the consent of his wife, Christiana, 
 bestowed on this house all his lands and rents in 
 Ireland. The house was seized, 31 Henry VIII., 
 of 60 acres of land in Glaspistell, rent 13s. Ad .; 
 30 acres in Carlingford, rent 13s. 4tZ.; two mes¬ 
 suages in Dundalk, rent 6s.; two acres in Sta- 
 banane, rent 2s.; besides some other rectories, 
 lands, &c. Granted -to the Mayor of Drogheda; 
 rent £l 14s. 4(7., now w 7 orth £34 13s. Ad. 
 
 St. Laurence’s Priory; granted to the Mayor ol 
 Drogheda. 
 
 A Dominician Priory, founded in the year 1224, 
 by Lucas, Archbishop of Armagh. Granted, 35 
 Henry VIII., with all the possessions, to Walter 
 Dowdel and Edward Becke, at the rent of 2s. 2c7., 
 now worth £2 3s. 4eZ. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, in which some murderers 
 took shelter, and abjured the land, in the year 
 1300; granted, 34 Henry VIII., to Gerald Aylmer; 
 rent 3s. 6cZ., now worth £3 10s. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded in the time of 
 Richard I.; granted to the Mayor, &c., of the town. 
 
 A House of St. Bennet; the parliament held at 
 Drogheda, in the year 1467, under John, Earl of 
 Worcester, the Lord Deputy, it was decreed that 
 several lands and rents would be granted to this 
 house. 
 
 At Dromcar. An Abbey, in which Ceallagh, Ab» 
 
COUNTY OF LOUTH. 
 
 239 
 
 bot, died in the year 811; now a Protestant place o r 
 worship, in the diocese of Armagh. 
 
 At Druimfioinn. An Abbey, where St. Finian was 
 Abbot and Bishop, in the time of St. Columb. 
 
 At Drumshallon. A noble Monastery, founded by 
 St. Patrick. In 969, the Danes plundered and possess¬ 
 ed this house; it reformed in 1247. 
 
 At Dundalk. An hospital, founded for the sick and 
 the aged of both sexes; founded, in the time of Henry 
 II., by Berthram de Yerdon, lord of the town ; granted, 
 with all the possessions, in town and country, 1 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to Henry Dray cot, at the yearly rent of £11, now 
 worth £220. 
 
 A Grey Friary, built in the time of Hen. III., by 
 Lord John de Yerdon ; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to 
 James Brandon, at the fine of £9 105., and rent 6c?., 
 now worth £190 105. 
 
 At Faugher, the native place of St. Brigid. A 
 Nunnery, founded by St. Monenna, in the year 638, 
 where she presided over 150 virgins, but resigned it to 
 Orbilla, or Sirvila, and built another Nunnery for her¬ 
 self at Kilsleive, in the county of Armagh. 
 
 A Priory of Canons, built in the early ages, and 
 now become the Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Inisicin. A Monastery, built by St. Dageus, 
 smith to St. Kieron; is now protestantized. 
 
 At Kilclogiier, on the Boyne. A Monastery, found¬ 
 ed by St. Nectan, nephew to St. Patrick; now protest- 
 anized, also. 
 
 At Kilsaran. A commandery of Templars, found¬ 
 ed in the twelfth century, by Maud de Lacie; it was 
 given to the hospitalers, in the reign of Edward II. 
 This house was rich imlands. 
 
 At Knock, near Louth. An Augustine Priory, found¬ 
 ed in the year 1148, by Donchad Hua Kervail, prince 
 
240 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 of that country, and Eadan, Bishop of Clogher. Thi9 
 house and all the possessions were granted, 31 Henry 
 VIII., to Sir John King, at the yearly rent of £16 5s. 
 4 d., now worth £325 6s. 8 d. 
 
 At Louth. A noble Monastery and School, found¬ 
 ed by St. Patrick, for St. Mocteus or Mochtalugh, a 
 Briton, who died 19th August 534, at the age of three 
 hundred years. The house and immense possessions 
 were granted to Sir Oliver Plunket. 
 
 At Mellifont, five miles from Drogheda. A Cister¬ 
 cian Abbey, built by Donogh M c Carrol, Prince of Uriel, 
 to which St. Bernard sent the Monks from the Monas¬ 
 tery of Clairvaux in France, in the year 1142. A great 
 , Synod was held there in the year 1157, at which assist¬ 
 ed the Archbishop of Armagh, the then Pope’s legate, 
 together with many Bishops and Princes; on this 
 occasion many rich presents were made to the Abbey, 
 particularly by Murchertach O’Loughlainn, King of 
 Ireland; he gave 140 oxen, 60 ounces of gold, and a 
 town-land near Drogheda, called Finnabhuir Naning- 
 hean; O’Carrol, Prince to Uriel, gave 60 ounces of 
 gold ; Dervorgilla, wife of O’Rourke, Prince of Breffiny, 
 gave 60 ounces of gold, a gold chalice for the high 
 altar, and vestments for nine other altars in the same 
 house. This house, and its extensive possessions, were 
 granted, in the year 1641, to Sir Gerald Moore. 
 
 At Monasterboioe. A Religious house, founded by 
 St. Bute, who died 7th December, 521. We find that 
 it continued a celebrated school of religion, and both 
 profane and sacred literature, until the twelfth century, 
 and doubtless until the fifteenth. 
 
 At Terfeckan. A Monastery, founded, in the year 
 665. A Nunnery, founded in the year 1195, by McMa¬ 
 hon. By an inquisition taken, 33 Henry VIII., the 
 last Abbess, Margaret Hobbert, was found to be seized 
 of one hall, two houses in a ruinous state, a haggard, 
 park wood, three gardens within the precincts of the 
 Convent, valued, besides reprises, 35. 4 d .; two messua- 
 
COUNTY OF MAYO. 
 
 241 
 
 ges, two gardens, three parks, and five acres of land in 
 Termonfeghan, value, besides reprises, 17s. 4 d .; eight 
 messuages, three parks, six acres, and three stangs of 
 land, and one of meadow in Killiligger, value £l; thir¬ 
 teen messuages, four parks, one hundred acres of arable 
 land and four of meadow, and twenty of pasture, in 
 Killaghton, annual value, besides reprises, £4 8s., and 
 the church or rectory of Killaghton, value 50s.; 
 making together £8 18s. 8 d., now worth £178 13s. 4 d.\ 
 granted, 20 April, 1578, to Catharine Bruton. 
 
 MAYO (County.) 
 
 At Agh^gower, five miles from Ballintobber. A 
 Monastery, built by St. Patrick, for St. Senach; now 
 a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Aghamore. A Monastery, built by St. Patrick, 
 for his disciple St. Loarn; now a Protestant place of 
 worship. 
 
 At Annagh. A Franciscan Friary ; worth 13s. 4rf., 
 now worth £13 6s. 8 d .; it stood to the year 1440, 
 when Walter, Lord M William Oughter died there. 
 
 At Ballagh, in the Barony of Clonmorris. An 
 Abbey, built by St. Mochuo, who was the first Abbot 
 of it, and died in the year 637, whose feast falls on the 
 1st January. 
 
 At Ballentully. A Monastery, worth at the sup¬ 
 pression, eight quarters of land, valued each 13s. 4d., 
 now £13 6s. 8 d. each, or £106 13s. 4 d. 
 
 At Ballyhaunes. An Augustine Friary, which was 
 founded by the Nangle family, and which, according to 
 an inquisition held, 12 May, 1608, possessed twelve 
 acres of land. 
 
 At Ballina, on the river Moy. An Abbey; sup 
 pressed. 
 
242 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Ballynasmall. A Carmelite Friary, founded, in 
 the 13th century, by the Prendergasts; Donogbuy 
 O’Gormealy was the last Prior, and possessed, at the 
 suppression, lands worth yearly 13s. 4cZ., now worth 
 £13 6s. Sd. ; granted to Sir John King. 
 
 At Ballinrobe. An Augustine Friary ; by an inqui¬ 
 sition held 27 Elizabeth, the possessions were worth 
 14s. lOcZ., now worth £14 16s. 8 d. 
 
 At Ballintobber, or Town of Well. An Augustine 
 Abbey, founded, in the year 1216, by Cathol O’Cono- 
 gher, King of Connaught. Inquisition, held 36 Eli¬ 
 zabeth, found this house possessed of many lands; 
 granted, in the year 1605, to Sir John King. 
 
 At Boghmoyen. A Franciscan Friary, dissolved. 
 
 At Bophin Island, in the Ocean, twelve miles from 
 the Barony of Morisk. An Abbey, founded, in the 
 year 667, by St. Colman; in the year 916 died Abbot 
 Fearadagh. 
 
 At Borriscarra. A Carmelites’ Friary, which Pope 
 John XXIII. gave, in the year 1412, to the Augus¬ 
 tine Friars; at the general suppression it possessed one 
 quarter of land, then valued at 13s. 4 cl., now £13 
 6 s. 8 d. 
 
 At Bowfinan. A Franciscan Friary, possessed at 
 the suppression in the year 1608, four quarters of land 
 and their appurtenances. 
 
 At Burishool. A Dominican Friary, built, as 
 appears from the bull of Pope Innocent Till., dated 9th 
 February, 1486, by Richard de Burke, Lord M’William 
 Oughter, and the head of the Turlogh family; con¬ 
 signed to Theobald Vincent Castillogalen. 
 
 At Clara, an Island near the Town of Morisk. A 
 Carmelite Friary, founded, in the year 1224. 
 
 At Cong, formerly the royal residence of the Kings of 
 Connaught, now but a miserable village, a magnificent 
 Monastery, built by St. Fechan, who died in 664. 
 
COUNTY OF MAYO. 
 
 243 
 
 jEneas McDonnell, the last Abbot, surrendered it at 
 the general suppression; granted, 10 December, 1605, 
 to Sir John King, ancester to the Earl of Kingstone, 
 county of Cork. The ruins of several churches are 
 seen there. 
 
 •At Cross. A Monastery belonging to the Abbey of 
 Ballintober. By an inquisition, held 27 Elizabeth, it 
 possessed lands then valued at 135. 4cZ., now £13 
 6s. 8 d. 
 
 At Crossmalyne. An Abbey. In 1306, thiee men 
 were indicted for assaulting and imprisoning the Abbot, 
 and for taking away his goods and chattels, to the 
 amount of ten marcs. By an inquisition of 27 Eliza¬ 
 beth, this house possessed four quarters of land, each 
 valuing 135. 4 d. : now worth £13 65. 8 d. each, or £53 
 25. 8 cZ. the four. 
 
 At Domnacmor. An Abbey, founded, by St. Patrick, 
 for St. Muckna. 
 
 At Erew. A Friary, erected at the extreme end of 
 Erew, which is a peninsula, stretching out in the 
 barony of Tirawley, in which St. Leogar was Abbot; 
 his feast is held on the 30th September. By an in¬ 
 quisition of 27th Elizabeth, it possessed one quarter of 
 land, then worth 135, 4 d., now £13 6s. 8 d. 
 
 At Inchmean, an Island, where there was an Abbey, 
 in which Maoliosa, son of Thurlogh O’Connor, was 
 Abbot, in the year 1223. 
 
 At Inistormor. An Augustine Friary, built by Eu¬ 
 gene O’Gorman and Thady M‘Firbiss, on a spot of 
 ground which was granted them, in the year 1454, by 
 Thady O’Doud, which grant was confirmed by a bull 
 of Pope Nicholas Y. 
 
 At Killecraw. A Religious House was seized at 
 the inquisition of 30 Elizabeth, of some lands worth 65. 
 yearly, now worth £6. 
 
 At Killedan. A Franciscan Friary, possessed at 
 the inquisition of 1608, several lands and tenements. 
 
244 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Killetrynode, or the Abbey of the Trinity, en¬ 
 dowed with a quarter of land. 
 
 At Kilfinian. An Abbey, founded by St. Finian. 
 
 At Kilmormoyle, in the Barony of Tirawley. A 
 Monastery, founded by St. Olcan, disciple of St Pat¬ 
 rick, now a Protestant place of worship in the diocese 
 of Killala. 
 
 At Kilnegarvan. A Church, founded by St. Fe* 
 chan, who died in the year 664. 
 
 At Kilveny. A Franciscan Friary, which, accord¬ 
 ing to an inquisition of 27 Elizabeth, was worth, in 
 lands and tenements, 13s. 4<7. yearly, now worth £13 
 6s. 8 d. 
 
 At Kyllyn. An Abbey was founded, and endow¬ 
 ed, at the same time, of some lands and tithes. 
 
 At Mayo. A Priory of Regular Canons, founded, 
 m the year 670, by St. Colman, who came over from 
 Landisfarne, Northumberland. He was followed hither 
 by St. Gerald and his three brothers, with three thou¬ 
 sand disciples from England. Many illustrious saints 
 and great men lived and died here; granted, 20 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to the Burgesses and Corporation of Galway; rent 
 £26 12s., now worth £532. 
 
 A Nunnery, in which St. Segretia, the Abbess, 
 (sister to St. Gerald,) and one hundred virgin Nuns 
 died of the plague in the year 664. 
 
 At Morisk, a town on the Bay of Newport. An 
 Augustine Friary, founded by the O’Maillies, Lords of 
 the country ; at the suppression it possessed lands 
 valued at 13s. 4 d. now worth £13 6s. 8d. 
 
 At Moyne. A Franciscan Friary, founded in the 
 year 1460, by William O’Rourke; granted, 37 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to Edmund Barrett, with all the possessions, at 
 5s. rent, now worth £5. 
 
 At Rathbran. A Dominican Friary, founded by 
 
COUNTY OF MEATH. 
 
 245 
 
 the Dexter family; granted, in the year 1577, to Tho¬ 
 mas Dexter; the venerable ruins of the sacred edifice 
 stand there amidst a few wretched cabins. 
 
 At Rosserick. A Franciscan Friary, built by a Mr. 
 Joice ; granted to James Garvey. There is here, and 
 also in Moyne, a confessional of hewn stone for two 
 confessors to sit in, and a hole in each side for the peni¬ 
 tents to speak through. 
 
 At Strade, on the Moy, near Athlethan. A Fran¬ 
 ciscan Friary, built by the sept of MUordan, but it was 
 given to the Dominicans in the year 1252, by Jordan, 
 .of Exeter, Lord of Athlethan, at the request of Basilia 
 his wife, daughter of Lord Meiler, of Birmingham ; on 
 the ISth of March, 1434, Pope Eugene IV. granted 
 several indulgences to this house; granted, 30 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to Patrick Barnwell. 
 
 At Tarmancarra. A Nunnery stood in the penin¬ 
 sula of Mullet. 
 
 At Urlare, in the Barony of Costello. A Domini¬ 
 can Friary, founded by the Wangle family, who after¬ 
 wards took the name of Costello, and became Lords of 
 the Barony. The Dominicans settled there in the 
 year 1430. The house underwent two inquisitions, 
 one on the 12th of May, 1608, the other 24th of May, 
 1610; granted to Lord Dillon. 
 
 MEATH (County.) 
 
 At Ardbraccan, a village in the Barony of Navan, 
 an Abbey. 
 
 At Ardcath, a village near Duleck. A church or 
 perpetual chantry, a priest was stationed, with the ob¬ 
 ligation of celebrating mass; the chantry was a body 
 corporate. The inquisition held 14 James found it in 
 possession of some lands against the statute. 
 
246 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Ardmulchan, near Pains-town. There was a 
 parish church; a perpetual chantry of one priest; hut 
 the inquisition of 10th James found it in possession of 
 lands against the statute, which of course was suffi¬ 
 cient cause for suppressing it; value 17s. annually, 
 now £17. 
 
 At Ardsallagh, a village on the Boyne. A Monas¬ 
 tery, founded by St. Finian, who died 12th December, 
 563. 
 
 At Athboy. A Carmelite Friary, founded on a site 
 which was given by William, of London, in the year 
 1517. This Friary, with eleven messuages, three cel¬ 
 lars, one orchard, and six gardens ,in Athboy, with four 
 acres of meadow, called the Friar’s meadow in Ad- 
 venston, were granted, 34 Henry VIII., to Thomas Ca¬ 
 sey for ever, at the yearly rent of 2s., now worth £2. 
 
 At Ballybogan, or Priory De Laude Dei. An Au¬ 
 gustine Friary, founded, in the 12th century, by Jor¬ 
 dan Comin. This house was granted, 34 Henry VIII., 
 to Lord Carbray, at the yearly rent of £4 3s. 4 d., now 
 worth £83 6s. 8 d .; some of the possessions were grant¬ 
 ed, 4 Elizabeth, to Edward Fitzgerald. 
 
 At Beaubec. A Church of St. Mary and St. Lau¬ 
 rence, endowed in the reign of King John, by Walter 
 de Lacie, stood, until the 14th century, and, without 
 doubt, until the general dissolution. 
 
 At Bectiff, near Trim. A Cistercian Monastery, 
 founded, in the year 1146, by Murchard O’Melaghlin, 
 King of Meath; surrendered, 34 Henry VIII., with all 
 the possessions. 
 
 At Clonard. An Abbey of Canons, founded by St. 
 Finian. This Abbey, with all the possessions, were 
 granted, 6 Edward VI., to Thomas Cusacke, at the 
 yearly rent of £8, now worth £160; some of the pos¬ 
 sessions were granted, 8 Elizabeth, to Richard Hayne; 
 rent £3 8s. 6 d., now worth £68 10s.: another parcel 
 of the possessions was granted, 36 Elizabeth, to Wil¬ 
 liam Browne. 
 
COUNTY OF MEATH. 
 
 247 
 
 At ColpEj a village on the Boyne. An Abbey of 
 regular Canons, founded, in the year 1182, by Hugh 
 de Lacie. “ At the suppression of Monasteries, the 
 Prior was seized of the following tithes in Meath: 
 Colpe, eight couple of corn; Newtown, one and half; 
 St. James, one ; Pylleston, one; Ballangstone, four and 
 half; Paynstone, two and half.” 
 
 At Diserttola. An Abbey, founded by St. Tola, 
 who was made Bishop of Clonard, and died in the 
 year 733. This house stood until the 12th century. 
 
 At Donnygarney. A Nunnery, granted to Miss 
 Draycot, who married a Mr. Talbot. 
 
 At Donogh Patrick, an Abbey, founded by Conol 
 O’Neil. 
 
 At Drogheda. A Priory of Hospitalers, founded, in 
 the time of Joan, or principally endowed by Walter de 
 Lacie. It possessed immense revenues, though they 
 were granted, 6 Edward VI., to James Sedgrave, for 
 10s. 10 d. yearly rent, now worth £210. 
 
 A Carmelite Friary, built by the inhabitants of 
 Drogheda. There were two grants made, one by 
 the Corporation, in the time of Edward II., of 
 eighty virgates of land, and another by William 
 Messager, of Drogheda, in the time of Edward III., 
 in the year 1346, of four acres of land to the Friars 
 for the purpose of maintaining lights before the 
 image of the Blessed Virgin in this church. 
 
 At Duleek, an Abbey, the extensive possessions of 
 which were granted, 10 James I., to Sir Gerald Moor. 
 
 A Priory of the Virgin Mary. Several inquisi¬ 
 tions were held on this house; all the possessions 
 were granted to Sir Gerald Moor; rent £9 11s. 
 7cZ., now worth £191 11s. Sd. 
 
 An Hospital, founded before the year 1403. 
 
 At Dunshaghlin. A Church, founded by St, 
 Seachlan. 
 
248 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Indenen, near Slane, an Abbey. 
 
 At Kells, a celebrated Monastery, founded about the 
 year 550. Henry VIII. granted it, in the 34th year of 
 his reign to Gerald Fleming and to Sir Gerald Plunket. 
 
 A Priory or Hospital, founded in this town, in 
 the time of Richard I., by Walter de Lacie, Lord 
 of Meath. This house was surrendered by the 
 last Prior, with the several possessions, 31 Henry 
 VIII., and granted, 8 Elizabeth, to Richard Slayne, 
 at the yearly rent of £14 10s., now worth £290. 
 
 A Chantry for three priests. 
 
 At Kilberry, near Navan. A Chantry of two 
 priests or chaplains. 
 
 At Killeen, a Priory of Canons, founded by St. 
 Eudeus, in the year 540. 
 
 A Nunnery, built by St. Eudeus previous to the 
 year 580. 
 
 At Kilmainhameeg, twelve miles north of Navan. A 
 Commandery of Templars, founded, in the time of 
 Richard I., by Walter de Lacie, Lord of Meath. This 
 Commandery was granted, 33 Elizabeth, to Sir Patrick 
 Barnwall, at the yearly rent of £63 12s. 2\d. y now 
 worth £1,272 4s. 2d .; now the Church. 
 
 At Kilmainham Wood. A Commandery of Hospi¬ 
 talers, built in the 13th century, by the Prestons. 
 Granted, 23 Sept., 1587, to Henry Duke, at the yearly 
 rent of £4 10s., now worth £90. 
 
 At Kilshire. An Abbey, founded in the year 580. 
 
 At Lismullen, near Tarah. A Nunnery, founded 
 m the year 1240. This house, with its valuable pos¬ 
 sessions, were granted, 33 Henry VIII., to Gerald, 
 Earl of Kildare, and to Mabell his wife, and to Robert 
 Harrison. 
 
 7 . * 
 
 At Lough Shillen, near Cavan. A Friary, built on 
 
COUNTY OF MEATH. 249 
 
 an island in this lake, which is still a remarkable bury¬ 
 ing place. 
 
 At Navan. A Monastery, built or rebuilt in the 
 12th century, by Joceline de Angulo or Nangle; it 
 stood with a great deal of celebrity until 31 Henry 
 VIII.; it was granted, with all the possessions; the 
 horse-barrack is now erected on the site of it. 
 
 At Newtown. A Priory of Canons, founded, in the 
 year 1206, by Simon de Rochfort; it flourished for 
 many centuries, and possessed many valuable lands 
 and tenements; granted by the Parliament, in the year 
 1536, to King Henry VIII.; he granted, in 1550, a par¬ 
 cel of them to Henry Draycot, at £4 yearly rent, now 
 worth £80. 
 
 A Priory or Hospital of Cross-bearers, or 
 Crouched-friars, founded by the Bishop of Meath, 
 in the 13th century; granted to Robert Dillon. 
 
 At Odder. A Nunnery, founded by the Barnwall 
 family, before the year 1195. This house, and all the 
 possessions, were granted, 15th Elizabeth, to Richard 
 Power. 
 
 At Pierstown. An Abbey, founded in the early 
 ages. 
 
 At Rathossain. A Monastery, founded by St. Os- 
 sian, who died 17th February, 686. 
 
 At Ratoath, thirteen miles north of Dublin ; an Ab¬ 
 bey, that possessed, in the reign' of Plenry III., forty 
 acres of land, value 65. 8cZ., now worth £6 13s. 4 d. 
 
 A Chantry for three priests; by the inquisition 
 of Henry VIII., they were found to possess some 
 lands contrary to statute, and were suppressed. 
 
 At Rosse, near Tarah. An Abbey, founded by St. 
 Coeman Breae, who died 14th Sept. 614. 
 
 At Skrine, an Abbey of Regular Canons; granted, 
 34 Henry VIII., to Thomas Cusack, at the rent of 5d, 
 now worth 8s. id. 
 
250 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 A Chantry. 
 
 At Slane, an Abbey of regular Canons; this house, 
 with all the possessions, were granted, 32 Henry VIII., 
 to James Fleming, Knt.; rent Id: yearly, now worth 
 Is. 8 d. , 
 
 At Teltown, or Kiltalton. A Church, founded 
 cy St. Abbon ; now a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Trevet, a large Monastery. 
 
 At Trim, a magnificent Monastery, founded by St. 
 Patrick. This house was granted, 34 Henry VIII., 
 with all the lands, &c. to Anthony St. Leger, Knt. 
 
 A Gray Friary, founded, by King John, but 
 granted, with all the appurtenances, 34 Henry 
 VIII, to Lodwicke O’Tudor, parson of Roslaye, 
 JohnMoyre, parson of Walterston, and John Wake- 
 ly; rent £2 10s., now worth £50 10s. OcZ. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded, in the year 1263, 
 by Jeffrey de Genville, lord of Meath ; there was a 
 great Synod held in this church,'in the year 1291. 
 
 A Priory of Cross-bearers, a magnificent build¬ 
 ing ; the Parliament, in the years, 1484, 1487, and 
 1491, was held in the spacious hall of it; granted, 
 with all the possessions, to Sir Thomas Cusack, 
 27 Henry VIII., at the rent of 8s. bd. yearly, now 
 worth £S 8s. 4 d. 
 
 A Nunnery, founded by some person unknown. 
 
 A Church of Grecians, founded very anciently. 
 
 A Chantry for three priests. 
 
 MONAGHAN (County.) 
 
 At Clones, a small town. A Priory of regular Ca¬ 
 nons, Elizabeth granted the house and possessions, in 
 the 19th of her reign, to Sir Henry Duke. 
 
COUNTY OF QUEEN’S. 
 
 251 
 
 At Monaghan, a Monastery, built by St. Moeldoius, 
 before the Sth century; granted to Edward Withe j 
 Lord Blancy has erected a castle on the site. 
 
 At Teh allan, in the barony of Monaghan. A reli¬ 
 gious house, in which St. Killian was Abbot. 
 
 QUEEN’S (County.) 
 
 Abbey Leix, founded, in the year 11S3, by Corcher- 
 ger 0‘Moore, for Cistercian Monks. There were twc 
 inquisitions held on this house, one 5 Edward VI., and 
 the other 5 Elizabeth, when the lands were estimate^! 
 at 820 acres, and were let to the Earl of Ormond for 
 £10 5s. yearly rent, now worth £205. 
 
 At Aghaeoe, four miles from Montrath, a magnifi¬ 
 cent Monastery, founded, by St. Canice. The Monas¬ 
 tery, with its appurtenances, were granted, 43 Eli¬ 
 zabeth, to Florence Fitzpatrick; rent £5 18s., now 
 worth £118. 
 
 At Aghmacart, lour miles west of Durrow, Upper 
 Ossory, an Abbey, built about the year 550; also a 
 Priory, granted, 43 Elizabeth, together with several 
 other Monasteries, and parcels of their possessions, to 
 Florence Fitzpatrick, at the rent of £36 85. 2 d. } now 
 worth £728 3s. 4 d. 
 
 At Annatrim, in Upper Ossory. An Abbey, found¬ 
 ed about the year 550; now a Protestant place of 
 worship. 
 
 At Clonenagh, a village in the barony of Marybo¬ 
 rough. A magnificent Monastery, founded by St. Fin- 
 tan. It is now a Protestant place of worship in the 
 diocese of Leighlin. 
 
 At Cluain Chaoin an ancient Monastery. 
 
 At Desert Enos, two miles south east of Marybo- 
 
252 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 rough. This is now called Desert, and is a Protes¬ 
 tant place of worship, in the diocese of Leighlin. 
 
 At Desert Odrain, in the territory of Hyfalgia. 
 
 At Killedelig, in Upper Ossory, a Monastery, now 
 a Church. 
 
 At Killebane, four miles south west of Athy. A 
 sumptuous Abbey, built by St. Abban, about the year 
 650 ; now a Church. 
 
 At Killermogh, in Upper Ossory. An Aboey, built 
 by St. Columb, about the year 558; now a place of 
 worship. 
 
 At Leamchuill. An Abbey, built by St. Finton- 
 chorach, in the sixth century. 
 
 At Mundrehid, in upper Ossory. A Monastery, built 
 by St. Lasren, in the year 600. 
 
 At Rosstuirc. An Abbey near the mountain of 
 Slieve Bloom, governed by St. Brendan. 
 
 * 
 
 At Sletty, near Carlow. An Abbey, by St. Ficah. 
 
 At Stradbally. A Franciscan Friary, founded, in 
 the twelfth century, by Lord O’Mora; granted, with 
 all the possessions, in the year 1592, to Francis Cos- 
 bey, by Knight’s service, or the twentieth part of a 
 Knight’s fee, and at the annual rent of £17 65. 3c/., now 
 worth £346 5s. 
 
 At Timohoe. A Monastery, built by St. Mochoe, 
 who died in the year 497 ; there is a round tower, with 
 some ruins of the ancient building to be seen yet. 
 
 ROSCOMMON (County.) 
 
 At Ardcarna, in the Barony of Boyle. An Abbey 
 of Regular Canons; granted, 39 Elizabeth, to the 
 
COUNTY OF ROSCOMMON. 
 
 253 
 
 Provost and Fellows of Trinity College, Dublin, with 
 eighty acres of land in Cloncalliagh; six acres of land 
 in Kilgefin. 
 
 A Nunnery of Benedictines, which was a Cell 
 to the Abbey of Kilcreunata, in the county of Gal¬ 
 way. 
 
 At Athdalaragh. An Abbey of Canons, where 
 Comgallan was Bishop in the time of St. Patrick. This 
 Abbey existed in the year 1201. 
 
 At Athlond, a Cistercian Abhey. It was enriched 
 by grants from King John and King Edward I. Grant¬ 
 ed, with the possessions, 20 Elizabeth, to Edmond 
 O’Fallon of Athlone. 
 
 At Baslick, three miles south of Castlereagh, an 
 Abbey ; now a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Bealaneny. A Franciscan Friary ; granted, to¬ 
 gether with the possessions, to Edmond O’Fallon of 
 Athlone, at the yearly rent of £2 4s. Id. now worth 
 £44 11s. 8 d. 
 
 At Boyle. A celebrated Cistercian Abbey, granted 
 with all the property, in the year 10*03, to Sir John 
 King. 
 
 At Caldrywolagh, in the Barony of Boyle. A Fran¬ 
 ciscan Friary ; granted, 24 Aug., 1582, to Bryan M’Der- 
 not, at the yearly rent of 95. 4d., now worth £94. 
 
 At Clonrahan. A Franciscan Monastery, built by 
 O'Conor Roe, in the reign of Henry VIII. 
 
 At Clonshanvill. An Abbey, built by St. Patrick; 
 granted to Lord Dillon. 
 
 At Clounthuskert, seven miles north east of Ros¬ 
 common. A Priory, founded, in the early ages, by St. 
 Faithlec ; granted, 33 Elizabeth, to Fryal O’Farrell, 
 for 21 years, at the rent of £1195. 8c/,, now worth 
 £229 135. 4 d. 
 
 At Clooncfaff. A Monastery, founded by St. Pat- 
 
254 IRELAND. 
 
 rick ; it existed in the 12th century; now a Protestant 
 place of worship. 
 
 At Cluainemuin. An Abbey existed in the 11th 
 century. 
 
 At Edardrium. An Abbey, founded by St. Diradius, 
 brother to St. Canoe, who flourished in the year 492 
 now a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Elphin. A Church, founded by St. Patrick, 
 for St. Assicus. The house and possessions were 
 granted to Terence O’Birne. 
 
 At Fidhard, in South Connaught. An Abbey, built 
 by St. Patrick, for St. Justus ; now a Protestant place 
 of Worship. 
 
 At Inchmacnerin, an Island in Loughree. A Monas¬ 
 tery; granted, with the extensive possessions in lands 
 and tithes, 28 Elizabeth, to William Taaffe, who as¬ 
 signed them to Thomas Spring. 
 
 At Inchmore, an Island in Loughkee. A Priory of 
 Canons, built, as people think, by St. Liberius, whose 
 memory is held in much honour on the island even to 
 this day; granted, 9 Elizabeth, to Lord Delvin, for 23 
 years, at £$ 14s. 8d. rent, now worth £134 13s. 4 d. 
 
 At Kilcooley. An Abbey, built by St. Olcan ; now 
 a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Killaragiit. A Nunnery, built by St. Patrick, 
 for St. Athracta. The Inquisition held, 10 August, 33 
 Elizabeth, the Abbess of this house was seized of three 
 carucates of land near the water of Lorgbella; two to 
 the north of the waters, and on the west; the whole 
 valued at 5s. besides reprises. Granted to Terence 
 O’Birne, who assigned it to the Earl of Clanrickard. 
 
 At Killuckin, four miles north of Elphin. A Nun¬ 
 nery, where St. Lunechaixia is honoured; she was 
 born before the year 637; now a Protestant place of 
 worship. 
 
 
COUNTY OF ROSCOMMON. 255 
 
 At Kilmore. An Abbey, built by St. Patrick; now 
 Protestantized. 
 
 A Priory, built by Con. O’Flanagan, and conse¬ 
 crated by Donogh O’Conor, Bishop of Elphin, in 
 the year 1232, granted in the year 1580, for 21 
 years, to Tyren O’Farrel; rent £3 10s., now 
 worth £70; granted afterwards to Sir Patrick 
 Barnwall. 
 
 At Killomy. A Monastery, founded before the 
 year 760. 
 
 At Kiltullagh. A Franciscan Friary, founded 
 about the year 1441. 
 
 At Knookvicar. A Monastery of Dominicans, 
 founded four miles east of the town ; granted, 26 Eli¬ 
 zabeth, together with the Abbey of Tocmonia, Clone- 
 meaghan, and Court, in the county of Sligo, to Richard 
 Kendlemareh. 
 
 A t Loughkee, in this Lake, is Trinity Island, where 
 stood a Monastery dedicated to the Holy Trinity, in 
 the year 700; rebuilt in 1215, by Claras M‘Moylon, 
 Archdeacon of Elphin ; granted, 10 August, 36 Eliza¬ 
 beth, with all the possessions, to Robert Harrison, for 
 ever, in free soccage, at £26 13s. 8d., now worth £533 
 13s. 4 d. 
 
 • • 
 
 At Lysduffe. A Priory in O’Conor’s Country, 
 granted to the Provost and Fellows of Trinity College, 
 Dublin. 
 
 At Monastrevan, a Monastery. 
 
 At Oran, five miles west of Roscommon. A Mo¬ 
 nastery built by St. Patrick; continues a remarkable 
 place for pilgrimage; now the Protestant place of wor¬ 
 ship. 
 
 At Randown, seven miles north of Athlone. A Pri¬ 
 ory of Hospitalers or Crossbearers, built in the reign 
 of King John. Phil Nangle was a great benefactor in 
 
255 IRELAND. 
 
 the reign of Henry III. This town died away, as well 
 as the castle. 
 
 A Priory, founded by Clarus Archdeacon of 
 Elphin. 
 
 i 
 
 Roscommon, a town that has acquired much respec¬ 
 tability from its monastic edifices. 
 
 An Abbey of Regular Canons, founded by St. 
 Coemon, disciple of St. Finian. This house was 
 granted, 20 Elizabeth, with the appurtenances, to 
 Sir Nicholas Malleye; rent £30 5s. 10 d. : now 
 worth £605 18s. icL 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded in the year 1253; 
 granted, with all the possessions, 29 Jan., 1615, to 
 Francis Viscount Valentia. 
 
 At Teaghnaninghean. A religious house in Con¬ 
 naught, where the seven daughters of Fergus are 
 honoured. 
 
 At Tibohin. A Church, and formerly a great School, 
 but now a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Toberelly, in the plain of Roscommon. A Fran¬ 
 ciscan Cell; it possessed some lands of the value of 
 13s. 4cZ., now worth £13 6s. 8 d. 
 
 At Toemonia. A Franciscan Monastery, founded 
 by O’Connor; granted with all the lands, 30 Eliza¬ 
 beth, for twenty-one years, to Richard Kyndelinshe, 
 at the yearly rent of £2 17s. 2 }d., now worth £57 
 4s. 2d. 
 
 At Tulsk, a Dominican Monastery, built in the 
 15th century, by M‘Duill. It fell under the inquisition 
 which was held 33 Elizabeth. 
 
 SLIGO (County.) 
 
 At Achonry, a small Village and Episcopal See. 
 An Abbey. 
 
COUNTY OP SLIGO. 
 
 257 
 
 At Akeras, or Kilmatin. A Priory, founded, in the 
 year 1280, by the O’Donalds. By the inquisition, this 
 house was found to possess lands to the value of £16 
 8s. 4c/., now worth £308 6s. 8 cl. 
 
 At Ardnary. A Monastery for Eremites, following 
 the rule of Augustine, buflt in the year 1427. 
 
 At Athmoy. A Premonstratensian Monastery, 
 founded, by Clarus M c Maylin, Archdeacon of Elphin, 
 in the year 1251; possessions were granted to Robert 
 Harrison, who assigned them to William Crofton. 
 
 At Ballingdown, in the barony of Tirerril. The 
 family of M‘Donogh founded a Monastery in 1427, 
 for the Nuns of the order of St. Dominick. Elizabeth’s 
 inquisition valued the possessions at 6s. Sc/, per annum, 
 English money; now worth’ annually £6 13s. 4cZ.‘, 
 granted to Francis Crofton. 
 
 At B allin ley, in the barony of Tyreragh, are the 
 ruins of an Abbey of whic-h nothing is known. 
 
 At Ballymote, in the barony of Coran. A Monas¬ 
 tery founded by one of the M‘Donogh’s for Franciscan 
 Friars. Granted to Sir Henry Broneard, who assigned 
 it to Sir William Taafe, Knt. 
 
 At Ballysadare, in the Barony of Tirerril, a Monas¬ 
 tery, founded by St. Fechin, and richly endowed. 
 Elizabeth’s inquisition found it possessed of lands, 
 tenements, and tithes, to the annual value then of £2 
 yearly, value at this day £20. 
 
 At Bennada, a Barony of Leyney, a Friary of Cre- 
 nites, founded, in 1423, through the industry of a 
 brother of the order, called Charles. No value stated. 
 
 At Bile. An Abbey founded by St. Fechin, and now 
 the parish church. 
 
 At Clonymeaghan. A Monastery, founded 1488, 
 for Dominican Friars. Valued at 13s. 4c/., worth now 
 £13 6s. 3d. yearlv, granted to Richard Kyndelinshe. 
 
 Jl 
 
 / 
 
258 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Court, barony of Leyney, a small Monastery, 
 built by O’Hara, for Franciscan Friars. Valued at £1 
 6s. 8 d. annual; worth now £26 13s. 4 cl. a year, granted 
 to Richard Kyndelinshe. 
 
 At Drumcliffe, a celebrated Monastery, founded by 
 Saint Columba, in 590. Parish Church built on part 
 of its foundation. 
 
 At Drumcollumb, a church of St. Columb and St. 
 Finbar; now the parish church. 
 
 At Drumratt. An Abbey, founded by Saint Fe- 
 chin ; now the parish church. 
 
 At Ecijenach, a church built by St. Maveus; now 
 the parish church. 
 
 At Killaraght, a Nunnery, built by St. Patrick; now 
 the parish church. 
 
 At Kilnemauagh, an Abbey founded by St. Fechin. 
 Granted to Richard, Earl of Clanrickard; now the 
 parish church. 
 
 At Knockmore, a Friary, erected, in the 14th centu- 
 *y, by O’Gara. 
 
 At Sligo, a Monastery, founded* 1252, for Dominican 
 Friars, by Maurice Fitzgerald, granted to Sir William 
 Taafe. This place is described as having been very 
 spacious and beautiful. 
 
 TIPPERARY (County.) 
 
 At Ardi*ennan, on the river Suire, in the barony of 
 Offa and Iffa, an Abbey and Friary, in ruins ; built, 
 1184, by John, Earl of Morton. 
 
 An Abbey of regular Canons, founded by St. 
 Finian, in 903. 
 
 A Friary for Conventional Franciscans. 
 
COUNTY OF TIPPERARY. 
 
 259 
 
 At Atiiassell, in the barony of Clanwilliam, Wil¬ 
 liam de Burgo founded a priory for the regular Canons 
 of the order of St. Augustine. With its lands and 
 tithes, valued in the reign of Edward VI. at £141 14s. 
 2d, or, of present money, £2,834 3s. 4 cl. annually. It 
 was reduced very much ; and, in the reign of Philip 
 and Mary, let to the Earl of Ormond. Elizabeth 
 granted, it in fee to the same Nobleman. One of the 
 largest and richest Abbeys in the kingdom. 
 
 At Cahir, in the barony of Offa and Iffa, Geoffry of 
 Camvill, founded a priory for Augustine Canons. 
 Leased by Queen Elizabeth to Peter Sherlock, for £24 
 11s. 6 cl. per annum. 
 
 At Carrick, William de Cantell, and Dionisia, his 
 wife, founded a Priory for the Canons of St. Augus¬ 
 tine. Granted to the Earl of Ormond. 
 
 At Cashel, an Hospital for the poor, with fourteen 
 beds and chaplains, was founded by Sir David le Lati¬ 
 mer. It was endowed by two succeeding Bishops. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded in the year 1243, 
 by David M‘Keily, Archbishop of Cashel; granted, 
 35 Henry VIII., with the appurtenances, to Walter 
 Fleming, at the yearly rent of 2s. Qd., now worth 
 £2 10s. 
 
 Hore Abbey, or St. Mary’s Abbey, of the rock 
 of Cashel, founded by the Benedictines, but given, 
 in the course of time, to the Cistercian Monks. 
 This really splendid edifice was richly endowed; 
 granted to Thomas Sinclair, 42 Elizabeth, at the 
 yearly rent of 2s., now worth £2. 
 
 Hacket’s Abbey, belonging to the Franciscans. 
 The house, and its possessions were valued, when 
 surrendered by the last Prior, at £3 10s. 2d .; 
 granted, .30 Henry VIII., for ever, to Edmund 
 Butler, Archbishop of Cashel, at the yearly rent of 
 2s. 10c/., now worth £2 16s. 8 d. 
 
260 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Clonaul. An Hospital of Hospitalers, founded 
 before the thirteenth century. 
 
 At Clonmell. A Dominican Friary, founded in 
 the year 1269. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, built in the year 1269, by 
 Otho de Grandison. There was a miraculous 
 image of St. Francis. This splendid house, and 
 all its extensive possessions, were granted, 34 
 Henry VIII., to James, Earl of Ormond, and to 
 the Commonalty of Clonmell. 
 
 At Donaghmore, in the barony of Offa and Ilfa. 
 There was an Abbey by St. Farannan; now a Protes¬ 
 tant place of worship. 
 
 At Emly, an ancient and celebrated Archiepiscopal 
 city, in the county of Tipperary. 
 
 A Monastery, founded by St. Ailbe, who was 
 styled a second St. Patrick; he died in the year 
 527, and was interred here. 
 
 At Fetherd. An Augustine Monastery. By an in¬ 
 quisition of 31 Henry VIII., this house had possessions 
 to the amount of £7 13s. 4d., now worth <£153 6s. 8d. 
 Granted to Sir Edmund Butler, at the yearly rent of 
 5s. 4 d., now worth £5 6s. 8 d. 
 
 At Holy Cross. A Cistercian Monastery, built by 
 Donogh O’Brien, King of Limerick. This was a 
 sumptuous house, and was very richly endowed in 
 lands and other tenements. Granted, 5 Elizabeth, 
 with all the appurtenances, to Gerald, Earl of Ormond, 
 at the yearly rent of £15 10s. 4 d., now worth £310 
 6s. 8 d . 
 
 At Inislounagh, in the barony of Offa and Iffa, on 
 the Suir. An Abbey, founded by St. Mochoemse, 
 who died on the 13th March, 655; he was succeeded 
 by Congan, about the year 1153, who supplied St. 
 Bernard with materials for writing the Life of St. Ma- 
 lachy. Donald O’Brien, King of Limerick, rebuilt 
 this Monastery in 1187, and endowed it, with the as- 
 
COUNTY OF TIPPERARY. 
 
 261 
 
 sistance of Malachy O’Foelan, Prince of the Decies; 
 granted, 33 Elizabeth, to Edward Geogh; rent £24, 
 now worth £480. There is a holy well, which is fre¬ 
 quented by people from all quarters. 
 
 At Kilcomin. A Benedictine Priory, founded by 
 Philip, of Worcester, chief governor of Ireland, in the 
 year 1184. He supplied it wilh friars from the Abbey 
 of Glastonbury. 
 
 At Kilcooly. A Cistercian Abbey, built by Do- 
 nogh Carbragh O’Brien, in the year 1200; it had ex¬ 
 tensive possessions; granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Tho¬ 
 mas, Earl of Ormond. 
 
 At Kilmore, in Upper Ormond. An Abbey, found¬ 
 ed in the year 540; now a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Killinenallagh. A Franciscan Friary, built in 
 the time of Henry VI; granted, 35 Henry VIII., with 
 the possessions, to Dermot Ryan; rent 4 cl. Irish, now 
 worth 65. 8d. 
 
 At Lorrah, a small village in Lower Ormond, neai 
 the Shannon. An Abbey, founded by St. Ruadan, who 
 presided over 150 monks, and died in the year 584. 
 Turgesius, and his Norwegians, burnt and destroyed 
 this town,- with all the religious houses, in the year 
 845. This is now a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded, in the year 1269, 
 by Walter de Burgo, King of Ulster. 
 
 At Monaincha, situated almost in the centre of the 
 great bog of Monela, three miles southeast vf Roscrea, 
 a Monastery of Culdean Monks. The house and 
 revenues were granted, 28 Elizabeth, to Sir Lucas 
 Dillon. 
 
 At Moylagh, two miles west of Carrick. A*Nun- . 
 nery, under the invocation of St. Brigid; granted to 
 Sir Henry Radcliff. 
 
 At Nenagii. A Hospital for Augustines, who were 
 to attend constantly the sick and infirm; it was endow- 
 
262 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 ed by Theobald Walter. Though the possessions of 
 this house were immense, they were granted, together 
 with the house itself, 5 Elizabeth, to Oliver Grace, for 
 the rent of £39 Os. 10c/., now worth £780 16s. 8 d. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, built in the reign of Hen¬ 
 ry III., by the Butler family; granted, 30 Eliza¬ 
 beth, to Robert Collum, at the yearly rent of £22 
 17s. 8c/., now worth £457 13s. 4 d. 
 
 At Roscrea. A magnificent Monastery, built by 
 Saint Cronan. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded, in the year 1490 
 by Mulruany na Feasoige O’Carroll, or by his 
 wife Bibiana. An inquisition was held 27 Dec., 
 1568; this house and the possessions were grant¬ 
 ed to the Earl of Ormond, wno assigned the same 
 to William Crow. 
 
 Thurles. A Carmelite Monastery, founded, in the 
 year 1300, by the family of Butler; granted, together 
 with the possessions, to the Earl of Ormond. 
 
 Tipperary. A Monastery of Augustine Eremites, 
 founded in the reign of Henry III.; granted, with the 
 possessions, 34 Henry VIII., to Dermot Ryan; rent 
 8 d. Irish, now worth 13s. 4c/. 
 
 Tirdaglass, on the bank of Lough Derg. A Mo¬ 
 nastery, founded by St. Cclumba, a disciple of St. 
 Finian ; he died of the plague in the year 552. His 
 feast falls on 13 Dec., and the feast of St. Aidbeus 
 falls on 24 May. Many illustrious saints and scholars 
 flourished in this house until the twelfth century. 
 
 Toome, six miles south of Tipperary. A Priory of 
 Canons. St. Donan was honoured here, and it is sup¬ 
 posed that he was the founder. Queen Elizabeth 
 granted this for twenty-one years to Miler Magragh, 
 Archbishop of Cashall. 
 
COUNTY OF TYRONE. 
 
 263 
 
 TYRONE (County.) 
 
 Ardboe. A noble and celebrated Monastery, built 
 by St. Colman. 
 
 Ballinesagart, in the Barony of Dungannon. A 
 Franciscan Friary, built by Con. O’Neil, in the year 
 1489. 
 
 Clogher. An Episcopal See and Borough, three 
 miles and a half south west of Lurgan. A Priory o. 
 regular Canons, presided over by St. Patrick, who 
 resigned it to St. Kertern, who founded the celebrated 
 abbey here. King James granted this abbey and reve¬ 
 nues to George Montgomery, Bishop of Clogher. 
 
 Cluaindubhain, near Clogher. A large Nunnery, 
 founded by Syt. Patrick. 
 
 Corock. A Franciscan Monastery, built in the fif¬ 
 teenth century; granted to Sir Henry Piers. 
 
 Donnaghmore, three miles west of Dungannon. An 
 Abbey, built by St. Patrick, in which St. Columb was 
 honoured; it stood until the thirteenth century, and of 
 course until the general dissolution. 
 
 Dungannon, a borough town. A Franciscan Friary 
 built by Con. O’Neil, in the reign of Henry VII.; 
 granted to Richard, Earl of Westmeath, who assigned 
 it to Sir Arthur Chichester. 
 
 Gervaghkerin. A Franciscan Friary, built in the 
 fifteenth century ; granted to Sir Henry Piers, with the 
 friary of Corock. 
 
 Omagh. An Abbey, founded, in the early ages, and 
 in the fifteenth century a Franciscan Friary; granted 
 with the friary of Corock. 
 
 Puble. A Franciscan Friary, founded, in the fif 
 teenth century; granted to Sir Henry Piers. 
 
264 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 WATERFORD (County.) 
 
 Achaddagain. An Abbey, by St. Dogain, who was 
 a strenuous supporter of the ancient mode of celebrating 
 Easter. 
 
 Ardmore, a village four miles east of Youghal. An 
 Abbey, founded by St. Declan, w T hose feast falls on 24 
 July. St. Ultan, his successor, was living after the year 
 550. The splended round tower, and stately ruins of 
 several churches; the Adam and Eve, with the tree 
 and serpent; the judgment of Solomon, all in alto re¬ 
 lievo, strike the traveller’s mind with awe, as well as 
 with regret for its fallen degraded state from its an¬ 
 cient wealth and piety. 
 
 Ballyvony, six miles north-east of Dungarvan. A 
 large building in ruins, 150 feet by 90, fvhicli is sup¬ 
 posed to be a Commandery of Hospitalers. 
 
 Bewley, two miles south of Lismord. An Hospital 
 of Hospitalers, in ruins. 
 
 Cappaga, three miles and a half west of Dangorvan. 
 The ruins of a Corrimandery of Hospitalers. 
 
 Carrickbeg, near Carrick-on-Suir. A Franciscan 
 Friary, built in the year 1336, by the Earl of Ormond; 
 granted, 31 Henry VIII., to Thomas, Earl of Ormond. 
 The steeple still remains, a very curious building, 
 about sixty feet high, rising like a pyramid, which 
 point begins several feet from the ground in the mid¬ 
 dle of the church. 
 
 Clashmore, three miles and a half north of Yougnah 
 An Abbey, founded, by Cuanceor, according to the 
 orders of Mochoemoc, who had raised Cuanchear from 
 the dead; that saint died 13th March, 655. Granted 
 to Sir Walter Raleigh. 
 
 Crooke, on the bay, four miles from Waterford. A 
 Commandery, founded, in the thirteenth century, for 
 
COUNTY OF WATERFORD. 
 
 265 
 
 the Hospitalers, by the Baron of Curraghmore; grant¬ 
 ed, 27 Elizabeth, to Antony Power, for sixty years j 
 rents £12 11s. lOd, now worth £251 16s. 8 d. 
 
 Dungarvan. There was a Priory of Canons, found¬ 
 ed, in the 7th century, by St. Garbhan, a disciple of 
 St’. Finbar. 
 
 An Augustine Friary, founded by Thomas, Lord 
 Offaley; the O’Briens were benefactors; granted, 
 with sundry lands, 37 Elizabeth, for twenty-one 
 years, to Roger Dalton; rent £40 10s., now worth 
 £810. There was an hospital also under the in¬ 
 vocation of St. Brigid. 
 
 Kilbarry, one mile and a half from Waterford. An 
 Hospital of Hospitalers. 
 
 Killunkart, near Dungarvan. A Commandery oi 
 Hospitalers. 
 
 Killure, two miles east of Waterford. A Com 
 mandery of Hospitalers; granted, together with reve¬ 
 nues, 25 Elizabeth, to Nicholas Aylmer, for fifty years, 
 at the yearly rent of £13 6s. 8 d. : now worth £266 
 16s. 8 d. 
 
 Kilmboynan Abbey had a house in Waterford, 
 called the Old Court, which could not escape the 
 all-seeing inquisition of Elizabeth. 
 
 Lismore. An Abbey of regular Canons, founded, 
 by St. Mocheda, in the year 630, together with a cele¬ 
 brated school; though St. Senan, St. Lugad, St. Ne¬ 
 man, and St. Madoc, seem to have been there bishops 
 before him. Corcran Cieirach, anachorite of all Ireland, 
 died at Lismore, in the year 1140. He was a celebra¬ 
 ted divine ; and so greatly excelled all the western 
 Europe in religion and learning, that every contest 
 throughout the kingdom was referred to him. In 1127 
 Cormac McCarthy, King of Munster, being dethroned, 
 he was compelled to go on a pilgrimage to Lismore, 
 where he erected two churches. In 1135 Daniel 
 
266 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 O’Brien, King of Dublin, resigned his crown, and died 
 a professed monk in this house. 
 
 An Hospital for Lepers, founded, under the in 
 vocation of St. Brigid. 
 
 A Cell of Anchorites, appertaining to the church 
 of Lismore. 
 
 Molana, an island in the Black Water, two miles 
 and a half above Waterford. There was an Abbey, 
 founded, in the sixth century by St. Molanfide. Queen 
 Elizabeth granted this house and possessions to Sir 
 Walter Raleigh, who assigned them to the Earl of 
 Cork. 
 
 Mothel, two miles south of Carriek. An Augus¬ 
 tine Monastery, built by St. Brogan, and was succeed¬ 
 ed by St. Coan in the sixth century; granted, 33 Hen¬ 
 ry VIII., with all the possessions, to-Butler and 
 
 Power; rent £6 45., now worth £128. 
 
 Rhincrfav, two miles west of Youghal. An Hos¬ 
 pital of Hospitalers; granted to Sir Walter Raleigh, 
 who assigned it to the Earl of Cork. 
 
 Waterford, a large commercial sea-port. An Au¬ 
 gustine Priory, founded by the Ostmen ; it was richly 
 endowed by different persons in the course of time; 
 granted, with several other possessions, 31 Elizabeth, 
 to Elizabeth Butler, alias Sherlock, for twenty-one 
 years; rent £47 55. 8 d. : now worth £2,345 135. 4 d. 
 
 The Hospital of St. Stephen, founded for Lepers, 
 by the Power family. 
 
 The Priory of St. John the Evangelist, founded, 
 in the year 1185, by John, Earl of Morton, for the 
 Benedictines. This house received several grants 
 of lands and tenements. Granted to William 
 Wyse, Esq., at the annual rent of a knight’s fee. 
 
 The Monastery of our Saviour, built by the 
 Dominicans, in the reign of Henry III., granted, 
 34 Henry VIII., to James White ; rent 4s., now 
 
COUNTY OF WESTMEATH. 267 
 
 worth £4. The County Court House is called 
 Black Friars. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary founded in the year 1240, 
 by Lord Hugh Purcell, who was interred here the 
 same year, by the side of the high altar; granted, 
 33 Henry VIII., to Patrick Walsh and scholars, at 
 the yearly rent of 8s., now worth £8 ; and a fine of 
 £151 13s. 4c/., now worth £3,033 6s. 8 d. The 
 Holy Ghost Hospital has been erected on a part 
 of the ruins of this Priory. 
 
 WESTMEATH (County.) 
 
 Ardcharn. An Abbey by St. Beoaid, who died the 
 8th March, 523. 
 
 Athlone. This town is built on the river Shannon, 
 partly in the county of Roscommon and partly in the 
 county of Westmeath. A Monastery was built on this 
 side for Franciscans, by Charles, or Cathal Croibh 
 Dearg O’Connor, Prince of Connaught; and by Sir 
 Henry Dillon, who was interred here. 
 
 Athnecarne. A Dominican Friary, built in the 
 fourteenth century, by Robert Dillon, of Druinrany; 
 granted, with all its possessions in this county, 37 
 Henry VIII., to Robert Dillon, at the fine of £13 135. 
 4c/., now worth £273 6s. 8 d .; and a rent of 6c/., now 
 worth 10s. 
 
 Ballimore, on Lough-Seudy, ten miles west of 
 Mullingar. A Monastery, founded before the year 700. 
 
 An Abbey, built in the year 1218, by the family 
 of Lacie, for Nuns and Friars : they lived under 
 the same roof, but in different apartments. This 
 house had extensive possessions, and underwent 
 several inquisitions in the reigns of Henry VIII., 
 and Elizabeth. 
 
268 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 Clonfad, five miles and a half east of Mullingar. 
 A Church, founded by St. Ethchen, who died in the 
 year 577. Clonfad is now a Chapel. 
 
 Clonrane, seven miles south of Mullingar. An Ab¬ 
 bey, inhabited by several Saints from the sixth to the 
 tenth century; suppressed. 
 
 Comraire, near the hill of Usmeach. An Abbey in 
 which St. Colman was honoured; he died in the year 652. 
 
 Drumrany, or Drumrath, six miles north-east of 
 Athlone. An Abbey built in the year 588. In the 
 year 946 this house with 150 persons in it ; was burnt to 
 the ground by the Ostmen. 
 
 At Dysart, four miles south of Mullingar. An Ab 
 bey, built by St. Colman; it became a Franciscan Fri¬ 
 ary before the year 1331. 
 
 At Farrenemanaghe. The inquisition of James, in 
 the third year of his reign, finds this Abbey in ruins, 
 though possessed of a cartron of land, tithes, and other 
 tenements, value 12cZ., now worth £l. 
 
 Farren-Mac-Heigkese. The inquisition of James 
 III. finds the ruins of a Nunnery that was possessed of 
 some lands. 
 
 There was an Abbey here; and it is recorded 
 that in the year 665, St. Finchin governed three 
 thousand Monks in it. 
 
 Fore, once a celebrated town, now an obscure village. 
 This Abbey and possessions made, according to the in¬ 
 quisition held, 31 Henry VIII., £161 125., now worth 
 £3,232 yearly ; granted in the year 1588, for thirty-one 
 years, to Christopher Baron of Delvin. 
 
 At Cloncall, bordering on Kilkenny West. A 
 Monastery, built in the year 486. by St. Munis; now a 
 chapel. 
 
 At Hare Island, in Loughree. A Monastery, by 
 the family of Dillon. 
 
 
COUNTY OF WESTMEATH. 269 
 
 At Kenard, near the county of Longford, north of 
 Inny. A Nunnery built early. 
 
 At Killare, in the barony of Raconrath. Three 
 churches, one dedicated to St. Aid, another called Tem¬ 
 ple Brigid, and the third the court of St. Brigid; there 
 were three holy wells. St. Cuman was Abbot here. 
 
 At Kilbeggan, a borough town. A Monastery, built 
 cy St. Becan. Another Monastery, founded on the 
 same, rebuilt in the year 1200, by the family of Dalton. 
 This Abbey, and all its extensive possessions, were 
 granted, after having undergone several inquisitions in 
 the reign of Henry VIII. and his son Edward VI., to De 
 held of the King and of the castle of Dublin, in free 
 and common soccage. 
 
 At Kilbixy, an ancient town adorned with a castle 
 Delonging to the Lacie family; and a Monastery or an 
 Hospital for the lepers, under the invocation of St. Bri¬ 
 gid ; it stood until the fifteenth century. 
 
 Kilconiregii and Conry were chapels in the barony 
 of Moycashell; St. Fearfio, son of a smith, was Abbot 
 in the year 758. 
 
 At Kilkenny West. A Friary, built by Thomas, a 
 priest and Friar, the grandson of Sir Thomas Dillon, 
 who eame into Ireland, in the year 1186 ; granted, with 
 the possessions, 11 Elizabeth, to Robert Dillon; rent 
 £22 10s., now worth £450 : there was also a holy well 
 here. 
 
 At Killuken, five miles east of Mullingar. An Ab¬ 
 bey, built by St. Lucian, whose feast falls on 27th 
 July; now a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 At Kilmacahill, or Kilmichael. A Franciscan Fria¬ 
 ry, built by the family of Petyt; granted to Robert 
 Nangle. 
 
 At Kiltoma, or Kiltoamen. An Abbey, built by St. 
 Nennid or Ninn, whose feast falls on 13th November. 
 
 At Leckin, in the Barony of Corkerry. An Abbey, 
 
270 IRELAND. 
 
 built by St. Crumin, who died in the year 664; now a 
 parish church. 
 
 At Lynn, m the Barony of Delvin. An Abbey, 
 founded in the early ages; now a Protestant place of 
 worship. 
 
 At Mullingar, an ancient town. A Priory^, called 
 the House of God of Mullingar; founded for Canons 
 in the year 1227, by Ralph Petyt, Bishop of Meath, 
 who died in the year 1229; this house, with all the 
 possessions, were granted, 34 Elizabeth, to Richarc 
 Tuyte; rent £16 5s. 10 d., now worth £325 16s. 8 d. 
 
 A Dominican Friary, founded by the family o* 
 Nugent, in the year 1237; granted, 8 Elizabeth, 
 to Walter Hope ; rent £10, now worth £200. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, built in the year 1622, by 
 the Friars; like the lambs building amongst the 
 wolves. 
 
 At Multifernam. A Monastery, built in the year 
 1235, by William Delamar, for the Franciscans ; grant¬ 
 ed, with the possessions, 8 Henry VIII., to Edmond 
 Field, Patrick Clynch, and Phil. Petency, for a fine of 
 £S0, worth now £1,600, together with the rent of 4s., 
 that is £4 of the present money. It appears that the 
 Friars possessed themselves again of this house until 
 the year 1641. 
 
 At Rathugh. A Monastery by St. Aid ; now a 
 chapel. 
 
 At Rathyne, six miles east of Mullingar. A Monas 
 tery built by St. Carthag or Mochuda, where he pre¬ 
 sided for forty years, over eight hundred and sixty- 
 seven Monks , who supported themselves and the neigh¬ 
 bouring poor by labour. 
 
 At Teaghbaoithen. A Monastery, built by St. 
 Baithen; stood until the 13th century. 
 
 At Teaghtelle. Monastery, built by St. Cera, of 
 Muskerry, but being recommended by St. Munnu to 
 
 
COUNTY OF WEXFORD. 
 
 271 
 
 resign the house to St. Tellius, she did, and then re¬ 
 turned home to her native country, in the year 576. 
 
 At Tippert. A Monastery, built by St. Fechin, of 
 Fore; now a chapel. 
 
 At Tober. Pope Innocent VIII. granted license to 
 Edmond de Lantu Laici to build a Monastery here for 
 Dominicans; granted, 31 Elizabeth, to Henry Mat¬ 
 thews. 
 
 At Tristernagh, on the banks of Lough Iron. A 
 Priory, founded, by Geoffry de Constantine, an Eng¬ 
 lish emigrant, about the year 1200; granted, for twen¬ 
 ty-one years, to Captain William Piers, 31 Henry 
 VIIL, at the yearly rent of £60, now worth £120. 
 
 WEXFORD (County.) 
 
 At Achadhabhla. A Monastery, founded by St. 
 Finian, of Clonard. 
 
 At Airdne Coemhain. A Monastery, by St. Coe- 
 man, brother of St. Dagan, who died in the year 639, 
 Abbot here. 
 
 At Ballyhack. A Commandery, subordinate to 
 that of Kilcoghan. 
 
 At Begery or Little Island, an Island north of 
 Wexford harbour. A celebrated Monastery, and a 
 School, founded, by St. Ibor or Ivor, who died in the 
 year 500. 
 
 At Camros. An Abbey, built by St. Abban, who 
 died in the year 640; and the Abbot St. Mosacre died 
 in the year 650. 
 
 At Carnsore. A Monastery, built by St. Doman- 
 gort, of Ossory, at the foot of a high hill that overhangs 
 the Irish Channel; now a Protestant place of worship. 
 
272 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 At Clonmines. An Augustine Monastery, founded, 
 by the family of Cavanagh, before the year 1385; 
 granted, with the possessions, 35 Henry VIII., to John 
 Parker; rent 2s. 6 d., now worth £2 10s. 
 
 At Darinis, an island near the town of Wexford. 
 A Monastery, built by St. Nemhan, whose feast falls 
 on 8th March; St. Gobban and St. Caiman were ab¬ 
 bots here before the year 540. 
 
 At Down, six miles from Inniscorthy. A Monaste¬ 
 ry, built before the arrival of the English, and con¬ 
 tinued until it was granted, in 1637, to the Lord Balti¬ 
 more. 
 
 At Druim Chaoin. An Abbey, founded by St. Ab- 
 ban, who died in the year 650. 
 
 At Dunbroddy, four miles south of Ross. An Ab¬ 
 bey, founded, through the bounty of Harvey de Monte 
 Maurisco, Seneschal to the Earl of Pembroke. The 
 Earl himself and his son Walter were benefactors ; by 
 an inquisition held 37 Henry VIII., the possessions 
 were valued at £25 45. 8cZ., now worth £504 3s. Ad .; 
 granted to Osborne Itchingham; rent £3 10s. 6 d., now 
 worth £70 10s. 
 
 At Inniscorthy, a borough town. A Cell to the Ab¬ 
 bey of St. Thomas, in Dublin; founded, and richly en¬ 
 dowed for the salvation of his own and the souls of his 
 wife, father and mother, by Gerald de Prendergast, 
 about the year 1225; granted in the year 1581, to Ed¬ 
 ward Spenser ; rent £13 5s., now worth £265. 
 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded, in the year 1460, 
 by Donald Cavanagh; granted, 37 Elizabeth, to 
 Sir Henry Wallop, for a Knight’s service, and 
 Tent £10 16s. Ad., now worth £216 6s. 8 d. 
 
 Ferns. Abbey founded, on land given by Brandub, 
 King of Leinster, to St. Moadhog, called also Aidan ; it 
 continued a celebrated house until the general suppres¬ 
 sion. In 1166, Dermot M‘Meerchad, King of Leinster, 
 
COUNTY OF WEXFORD. 
 
 273 
 
 burned the town, and in atonement to God for this 
 sin, he founded an Augustine Abbey here, and richly 
 endowe-d the same : granted, with all the possessions, 
 26 Elizabeth, for 60 years, to Thomas Masternson ; rent 
 £16 4 d., now worth £320 Is. 6d. 
 
 Glasscarig. On the sea, six miles north of Gorey. 
 Griffin Cordon, Cicilia Barry, his wife, and Roboric 
 Burhe, her father, and three other persons, granted all 
 their lands in Cousinquilos, &e., for building here a 
 Benedictine Priory. Two different inquisitions, one 
 35 Henry VIII., and the other, 5 Edward VI., found 
 this house in possession of many lands, and other tene¬ 
 ments. 
 
 Hoartown. Carmelite Priory, built in the 14th 
 century by a Mr. Furlong ; granted to Sir John Davis 
 and Francis Talbot. 
 
 Inbherdaoile. Monastery, built by Sir Dagain, 
 brother to St. Coemgene, who was also Bishop of 
 Achad Dagain in Leinster, and died 639. 
 
 Kilcleghan. Near the mouth of the Suir. Com- 
 mandery built by O’Moore, for the Templars, but on 
 the suppression of this Order, it was given to the Hos¬ 
 pitalers ; underwent an inquisition 32 Plenry VIII.; 
 granted, 30 Elizabeth, to Sir Henry Harrington, for the 
 fourth part of a knight’s fee, and rent £35 165. 8d.,; 
 now worth £716 135. 4 cl. 
 
 Maghere Nuidhe. A noble Monastery, founded by 
 St. Abban, who died in the year 650. 
 
 Cross Friary, for the redemption of captives, was 
 built on a rising ground. 
 
 Monastery of St. Saviour, erected for the Fran¬ 
 ciscans, by Sir John Devereux before the year 1300; 
 granted, 30 Elizabeth, to the Earl of Ormond. The 
 east end of the house is now a Protestant place of 
 worship. 
 
 Augustine Friary, built in the reign of Edward 
 III.; this house had some valuable possessions 
 
274 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 though granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Richard But¬ 
 ler, at the yearly rent of 17 d. Irish; now worth 
 £l 8s. 4cl. 
 
 Tintern. On the Banowbay, three miles north east 
 of Duncannon Fort. William, Earl of Pembroke, 
 having been in great danger, on sea, made a vow to 
 build an Abbey on the first spot where he should land 
 in safety ; he put into this bay, and religiously re¬ 
 deemed his vow, by erecting a Cistercian Abbey for 
 Monks, whom he brought from Tintern Abbey, Mon¬ 
 mouthshire ; he endowed it with many valuable lands ; 
 he died in 1219, and King John confirmed his will. 
 Though this house and possessions amounted, according 
 to the inquisition held 31 Henry VIII., to £75 7s. 8d. } 
 now worth £1517 13s. 4 d r , they were granted to An¬ 
 thony Colclough, at £26 4s. yearly rent; now worth 
 £524. 
 
 Wexford. A sea-port town, and a borough. Priory 
 of regular Canons. It was richly endowed by several 
 noblemen. There was an inquisition held on it, 31 Hen¬ 
 ry VIII., another 1 Edward VI., when it was granted 
 for ever to John Parker, for the annual rent of 15s. 4d .; 
 now worth £15 10s.; but a third inquisition was held, 
 26 Elizabeth, when the house and possessions were 
 found in the hands of Philip Devereux of Wexford. 
 This Church still remains with a large tower in the 
 middle. 
 
 Priory of Hospitalers, founded by William 
 Mareschal, Earl of Pembroke. 
 
 Grey Friary, or Franciscan, founded in the reign 
 of Henry III., granted, 35 Henry VIII., to Paul 
 Turner and James Devereux; rent 10 d. Irish; 
 now worth 16s. 8 d. 
 
 Hospital of Lepers, to which Henry IV., in the 
 year 1408, made a grant of lands. 
 
 
COUNTY OF WICKLOW. 
 
 275 
 
 WICKLOW (County.) 
 
 Arklow. Formerly the residence of the Kings of 
 Dublin ; a town then of great note, and adorned with a 
 monastery which Theobald Fitz Walter founded for 
 the Dominicans; granted, 35 Henry VIII., to John 
 Travers, rent 2s. 2 cl .; now worth £2 3s. 4 d. 
 
 Ballykine. Six miles and a half west of Arklow 
 Abbey, founded by St. Keivin. On the site of which 
 a Mr. Whaley built a house, called the Whaley Abbey. 
 
 Baltinglass. A borough town, on the river Slainey. 
 Cistercian Abbey, built in the year 1148, by Dermot 
 M £ Murchad O’Cavanagh, King of Leinster; granted, 
 30 Elizabeth, to Sir Henry Harrington, at £11 19s. 
 yearly rent, now worth £239; though it was worth 
 double that sum. 
 
 Donard. A church, built by St. Silvester, who 
 came to Ireland with St. Palladius about the year 430 ; 
 now a Protestant place of worship. 
 
 Glendalogh. Twenty-two miles from Dublin, ano 
 eleven north-west of Wicklow, formerly an Episcopal 
 See, and a well inhabited city full of religious edifices. 
 An Abbey founded, and presided over for many years, 
 by St. Keivin, who died 3d June, 618, at the age of 120 
 years. On the 3d June, immense multitudes of pil¬ 
 grims visit the seven churches of Glendalogh, to vene¬ 
 rate St. Keivin, and his sister, St. Molibba. The 
 seven churches are, the Cathedral Church, St. Keivin’s 
 Kitchen, Our Lady’s Church, Priory of St. Saviour, 
 the Ivy Church, Teampul na Skellig, the Rhepart. 
 
 Inisboyne. Four miles east of Wicklow. An Ab¬ 
 bey by St. Baitheu. 
 
 Kilgorman. An Abbey, by St. Gorman, nephew to 
 St. Patrick ; now a Protestant p.ace of worship. 
 
276 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 Killaird. A Nunnery, built in the year 588 by St. 
 Tamthinna. 
 
 Sruthair. An Abbey built by St. Mogoroc, brother 
 to St. Canoe; it stood to the 14th century. 
 
 Wicklow. Capital of the county, and a borough. 
 A Franciscan Friary, founded in the reign of Henry 
 III., by the O’Byrnes and the O’Tooles ; granted, 7 Eli¬ 
 zabeth, to Henry Harrington for 21 years j rent £3 12s. 
 9 d. } now worth £72 15s. 
 
TO THE CLERGY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CHURCH OF ENGLAND, 
 
 Kensington , 15 th April , 1824. 
 
 Parsons. 
 
 You have, in all sorts of ways, been at me for a 
 great many years; and the time appears now to be ar¬ 
 rived for me to bestow a little time upon you. You shall 
 not catch me at what you call “ blasphemy .” It is 
 your temporalities that I mean to confine myself to 
 chiefly, to the corn and to the wool and the lambs: 
 lambs, I mean, such as we eat: and I shall take care 
 to leave other lambs , that you sometimes talk of, to be 
 talked of by Father in God Jocelyn , his soldier , Mo 
 velly , and their like. You have had your full swing 
 at me quite long enough. I shall now attend a little to 
 you. I remember your Address to the King, in 1812, 
 urging him to push on the war. I remember your ex¬ 
 ultation when the French people were said, and were 
 thought, to be conquered , and to have had tithes im¬ 
 posed on them again ; I remember you at Winchester , 
 just as the Power-of-Imprisonment Bill was passing. 
 Parsons, I remember you: I know you well: you have 
 been at me personally for years. Before two years be 
 at an end, you shall find, Parsons, that I am neither 
 forgetful nor ungrateful. 
 
 At present I have to do with some of your money 
 collections for what you call the National Schools: 
 and I shall begin by inserting, first, the King’s Circular 
 
278 
 
 TO THE CLERGY OF THE 
 
 Letter. It is curious enough that we know little of 
 you except in connexion with money. You always 
 approach us, accompanied with some money demand. 
 I remember somebody telling me that the late Duke of 
 Portland said, that tithes were absolutely necessary 
 to make the clergy known to the people. I do not 
 know that his Grace, in his wisdom, took the trouble to 
 show, that it was at all necessary that there should be 
 any such men known to the people ; that it was at all 
 necessary that we should pay any body to teach us re¬ 
 ligion, seeing that we had the Word of God itself in 
 our houses. However, more of this by-and-by. The 
 King’s letter, which I am about to insert, is called, 
 u King's Letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury .” 
 There was one also to the Archbishop of York, of the 
 same tenor and date. 
 
 “George R. 
 
 “ Most Reverend Father in God, our right trusty and 
 right entirely beloved Councillor , we greet you well: 
 Whereas the Incorporated National Society , for pro¬ 
 moting the education of the poor in the principles 
 of the established Church throughout England and 
 Wales, have by their petition humbly represented unto 
 us, that the President and Governors of the said So¬ 
 ciety have pursued with their best endeavours the de¬ 
 sign adopted for extending more effectually the benefit 
 of religious education to the growing population 
 of our realm: that they are duly sensible that in no 
 case can the great end of public happiness be so essen¬ 
 tially promoted as by cultivating the principles of reli¬ 
 gious faith and moral duty : that the means for ac¬ 
 complishing their purpose have been supplied already 
 to a considerable extent by the National Society , in 
 the grants for erecting schools upon the model of the 
 Central School; the charge of building rooms of suita¬ 
 ble dimensions forming the chief burden of expense in 
 these provisions : that the Returns of the last year have 
 presented the welcome spectacle of the near and dis¬ 
 tant operation of this comprehensive scheme of educa¬ 
 tion exhibited in 1817, United Schools affording reli¬ 
 gious culture with every beneficial influence on the 
 
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 279 
 
 minds and manners, the habits and appearance, of more 
 than three hundred and fifty thousand children : that 
 the sums contributed by royal munificence and individual 
 bounty in former benefactions have been thus expended, 
 whilst a bare sufficiency remains in annual subscriptions 
 for the maintenance of the Central School, from which 
 so much benefit is derived to all parts of the country: 
 that the call to be excited under favour of our mandate, 
 for which the Society make their humble suit , will be 
 wholly applied, should the prayer of their Address be 
 crowned with a successful issue, to the furtherance of the 
 same object in all parts of our realm, by multiplying 
 schools, and by lending aids for procuring sites and for 
 building public seminaries: and so much of good having 
 already been accomplished , the said Society, in order 
 to enable the labourers in this prolific field to persevere 
 with increasing vigour, have, therefore, most humbly 
 implored us that collections may be made in the 
 Churches and Chapels, throughout England and Wales, 
 in furtherance of this important object: we, taking the 
 premises into our royal consideration, and being always 
 ready to give the best encouragement and countenance 
 to undertakings which tend so much to the promotion 
 of true piety and of our holy religion , are graciously 
 pleased to condescend to their request; and do hereby 
 direct you that these our Letters be communicated to 
 the several suffragan bishops within your province, ex¬ 
 pressly requiring you and them to take care that pub¬ 
 lication be made hereof on such Sunday and in such 
 places, within your and their respective dioceses, as 
 you and the said bishops shall appoint; and that upon 
 this occasion the Ministers in each parish do effectually 
 excite their parishioners to a liberal contribution , 
 whose benevolence towards carrying on the said cha¬ 
 ritable work shall be collected the week following at 
 their respective dwellings by the Churchwardens or 
 Overseers of the poor in each parish ; and the Minis¬ 
 ters of ihe several parishes are to cause the sums so 
 collected to be paid immediately to the treasurer for 
 the time being of the said Society , to be accounted for 
 by him to the said Society, and applied to the further- 
 
280 
 
 TO THE CLERGY OF THE 
 
 ance of the above-mentioned good designsand so we 
 bid you very heartily farewell. 
 
 “ Given at our Court at Carlton House, the second 
 day of July, 1823, in the fourth year of our reign. 
 
 “ By his Majesty’s Command. 
 
 “ (Countersigned) R. Peel.” 
 
 “ Buckden Palace , 21 st July , 1823. 
 
 “ Reverend Sir, 
 
 “Inclosed I transmit to you a copy of the King’s 
 Letter.—Not doubting your readiness to comply with 
 any command from His Majesty, I feel it almost unne¬ 
 cessary to add my earnest wish that you should use 
 your best endeavours to promote His Majesty’s bene¬ 
 volent and pious object.—It is required that publication 
 of the Letter be made in your Church or Chapel on 
 Sunday the Seventeenth Day of August next, and that 
 the officiating Ministers in each Parish do effectually 
 excite their Parishioners to a liberal contribution to the 
 Charity recommended, by such means as are suggested 
 in the King’s Letter, and by all others which they may 
 possess. 
 
 “ I am, Rev. Sir, 
 
 “ Your faithful Servant, 
 
 “ G. Lincoln. 
 
 “ N. B .—You are directed, as soon as may be after 
 the Collection, to remit the amount by a safe convey¬ 
 ance to Joshua Watson, Esquire, Treasurer of the Na¬ 
 tional Society, Bartlett’s Buildings, London; and you 
 are further requested to return by Post the inclosed 
 Form of Account, properly filled up, which is addressed 
 to Mr. Freeling.” 
 
 I am now to take it for granted, that the readers of 
 this will have read the two letters with attention, and 
 will have particularly noted the words which I have 
 caused to be putin italic characters. Let us, then, look 
 at the whole of this thing. I will engage that such a 
 thing never was heard of before in any country in the 
 
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 231 
 
 world. Here is the King of a great kingdom calling 
 upon his bishops to call upon the clergy, to call upon 
 his people in his name, by his mandate , to excite the 
 said people to a liberal contribution. The clergy are 
 to excite them effectually. And the instrument, by 
 which they are called upon to do this, is called a “ Royal 
 Mandate .” 
 
 Now, Parsons, this is not absolute force: it is not 
 commanding the people to surrender some of their 
 money, and to refuse at their peril. It is not absolute 
 force, such as the tax-gatherer employs; but can any 
 one say that it is voluntary ? Can any one say that 
 the far greater part of the people will not look upon it 
 as resisting the King's command if they do not give 1 
 But, the plain truth is. this : when the churchwardens 
 and other officers go round to the people, and the people 
 know, that they are not compelled by law to give them 
 any thing; still they give them out of fear; for these 
 churchwardens, overseers, and other officers, are also tax- 
 gatherers ; and where is the man who is not always 
 in debt for taxes ? So that it is very voluntary work! 
 The Parson either goes round himself, or he lets it be 
 well known that he wishes people to subscribe. In¬ 
 deed, he preaches in favour of subscribing. Pie has 
 power to raise his tithes , or to take them in kind.— 
 The Landlord , the Squire , the Dead-weight Admiral , 
 or General , or Colonel , or Captain , (all monstrously 
 pious creatures,) deal with tradesmen that are called 
 upon to subscribe for pious purposes. Here are pretty 
 effectual excitements to charity ! In short, impudent, 
 indeed, must be the hypocrite who does not acknow¬ 
 ledge, that, upon these occasions, much more is given 
 out of fear than out of love. I was pressed once to sub¬ 
 scribe for the relief of the u German sufferers .” The 
 subscription collector was also the collector of our as¬ 
 sessed taxes. u Not a farthing ,” said I: “ I wish the 
 French had stripped the slaves of their very skins." 
 Slap went his hand into his pocket, and out he pulled, 
 ready prepared, a Bill for the assessed taxes that I 
 owed! “ I thought as muchf said I; “but thank God ! 
 
282 
 
 TO THE CLERGY OF THE 
 
 here’s youi money that I must pay ; and, thank God ! 
 I am m a state to dare to refuse to give my money to 
 the rascally Germans, who have been doing all that 
 they have been able to do to make me as perfect a 
 slave as themselves. Here ! take your tax money, and 
 carry your subscription book and present it to the devil; 
 at any rate, take it out of my house , and yourself along 
 with it, and that, too, in very quick time.” 
 
 But, though I dared refuse, many of my neighbours, 
 and a very great majority of them, too, dared not to re¬ 
 fuse. They gave money to the “ Suffering Germans ” 
 when they, themselves, wanted money to buy a joint 
 of meat. Yet, there was no letter from the King upon 
 that occasion ; no royal mandate; no order from the 
 King effectually to excite to liberal contribution. In 
 the present case, the thing is very nearly a tax. It 
 wants but very little of a tax. The means made use 
 of amount so nearly to compulsion, that it is an abuse 
 of words; and it is, in fact, a falsehood to call it a vo¬ 
 luntary contribution. 
 
 What, then, is all this for ? Strange thing, to be¬ 
 hold a King calling upon his bishops, and the bishops 
 upon their clergy, to call upon the people at large to 
 subscribe sums of money, to be sent up to London to 
 one Joshua Watson, in order that Joshua may employ 
 it in extending religious education to the people! 
 Good God ! the King, that is to say, the royal and sa¬ 
 cred head of the church, and all his bishops, and all his 
 clergy, issuing mandates; putting forth pastoral letters ) 
 preaching sermons, sufficient almost to lull the raging 
 sea to repose; and the churchwardens and oyerseers 
 going round from door to door, praying and beseeching 
 His Majesty’s loyal and pious people to aid in the cha¬ 
 ritable work. And all for what ? To get a parcel of 
 money together to be sent to Joshua Watson, Esquire , 
 Spirit and Wine Merchant , of Mincing-lane , or late 
 ol Mincing-lane, which runs down out of Fenchurch- 
 street towards Billingsgate, in the city of London ; and 
 this in ordef that the said Esquire and Wine and Spirit 
 Merchant may lay out the said money in causing to be 
 
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 283 
 
 cultivated the principles of religious faith ! Match that, 
 if you can, Roman Catholics, or any body else. Match 
 that, or “ hide your diminished heads .” Mind you, 
 Parsons, it is not figuratively that I am talking here. I 
 mean to say, that this Joshua Watson is, or was some 
 time ago, a wine and spirit merchant, in Mincing-lane, 
 aforesaid, and living in that lane with hi.-i family. 
 For several years, since you began upon me, and espe¬ 
 cially since Sidmouth began in 1817, I have formed a 
 resolution, that nothing shall be done under my roof in 
 the way of drink ; or, at least, in the wine and spirit 
 way. Judge Jeffries said, and with reason, that he 
 was afraid of none but sober men. It is long, there¬ 
 fore, since I had any communion with wine and spirit 
 sellers ; but, at the time when I was fool enough to 
 suffer people to drink wine and spirits under my roof, I 
 bought wine and spirits of this very Joshua Watson ! 
 Aye, this very Joshua Watson, to get money to be 
 sent to whom, all the by-law established pulpits in the 
 kingdom are put in a state of requisition! What a 
 strange concern is this ! The extending of religious 
 faith is to be left to Joshua Watson, wine and spirit 
 merchant, of Mincing-lane. The King does not, in¬ 
 deed, name Joshua ; but he says, the Treasurer of the 
 Society for the time being; and the Bishops say that 
 that Treasurer is Joshua. The Ministers might as well 
 have gone a little farther, and advised the King to 
 name Joshua at once; for, much lower than the tenor 
 of this paper it was next to impossible to go. When 
 Mr. Peel’s hand was in, he might as well have gone 
 the full length ; but, indeed, the production is, as it now 
 stands, a pretty good specimen of what we have to ex¬ 
 pect from that illustrious family, which the Spinning- 
 Jenny Sire had, (as we are told in his pedigree in the 
 Baronetage.) u a presentiment that he should be the 
 founder of” 
 
 But, Parsons, let me come a little closer to you. 
 What is the subscription for ? For what is this money 
 collected and sent to Joshua Watson? It is, that 
 Joshua may lay it out. And what is Joshua to lay it 
 out upon ? Why, it is to be laid out in something 
 
284 
 
 TO THE CLERGY OF THE 
 
 about schools: about buildings, wherein to teach people. 
 And what are the people to be taught, Parsons? I ask, 
 or would ask, if I could get at him, the Right Trusty 
 and Right entirely Beloved Afchbishop. I would say, 
 I greet you well; and pray tell me now what is Joshua 
 Watson to cause to be taught with this money ? But, 
 Parsons, let me stop here a bit: it is the growing po¬ 
 pulation of our realm that is to be taught. Now, pray 
 tell me, Parsons, what this word growing means. A 
 most elegant paper this is. It has no full point till it 
 gets to the end. However, what does it mean by grow¬ 
 ing population ? Does it mean that the people that 
 are to be taught must be fine growing girls and boys ; 
 and that no notice is to be taken of those that are set or 
 stunted ; or, would it insinuate that the number of the 
 people in this country is increasing ; and thus hint at 
 an apology for resorting to these extraordinary means. If 
 the former be meant, it will only call forth a laugh; 
 and if the latter, I have something to say to that by- 
 and-by, when, probably, we shall see that this word 
 growing was not stuffed in without a motive. 
 
 To return now to the ground that I quitted but a 
 minute ago, I would say to the Archbishop, I greet you 
 well, and pray tell me what Joshua Watson is tc 
 cause to be taught to the “ growing population ” of our 
 realm? Is it shoemaking or tailoring? No. Is it law- 
 yering'or doctoring ? No. Is it discounting or stock- 
 jobbing? No. Is it the Chinese or the French lan¬ 
 guage? No. Is it military tactics, or the slang of the 
 blue and buff? No. Well, then, is it writing a fair 
 hand ; is it one or all the branches of mathematics ? 
 No : it is none of all these. 
 
 Pray, then, most Reverend Father in God, what is 
 it that Joshua is to have taught by the means of all this 
 money ? The most Reverend Father in God would, 
 perhaps, answer : Why, you graceless dog, what do you 
 think it is that he is to teach but the things mentioned 
 in His Majesty’s Letter? Well, then, this is religion 
 —Joshua Watson is to lay out the money in extending 
 religious education. In cultivating the principles of 
 eligious faith , in affording religious culture. What, 
 
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 285 
 
 then, ye Reverend Sirs, is it the Mahommedan, or the 
 Chinese, or the Otaheitan; or what religion is it that 
 Joshua is to have taught? “No,” I think I hear the 
 fire-shovels exclaim with thundering voice, “No, you 
 seditious dog, you accursed wretch, you terrible Jaco¬ 
 binical villain, it is the Christian religion, to be sure.” 
 Beg your pardons, Reverend Sirs: beseech your for¬ 
 giveness, spiritual persons; but it must then be, to be 
 sure, the Roman Catholic religion, or the Anabaptist 
 religion, or the Presbyterian, or the Methodist, or the 
 duaker, or the Jumper, or the Shaker religion ? “ No, 
 
 you rebellious dog; it is the religion of this kingdom, 
 as by law established .” Graceless wretch that I am, 
 -I now see my mistake ; for His Majesty in his letter 
 says, that the money is to be sent to the Treasurer ; 
 that is to say, to Joshua Watson, Esquire, Wine and 
 Spirit Merchant, to be by him laid out in promoting 
 education, in the principles of the established church. 
 
 Good Lord ! did one ever hear of the like of this be¬ 
 fore ? Here the business is to teach religion; to bring 
 children up in a religious manner ; to cultivate religious 
 faith ; to give religious culture to the minds of child¬ 
 ren, to promote true piety ; and to promote, also , our 
 holy religion. And who is to do all this but Joshua 
 Watson, the Wine and Spirit Merchant! We have a 
 King at the head of this holy religion. How much His 
 Majesty receives a year, as Head of the Church, I do 
 not pretend to say. We have forty-four Bishops be¬ 
 longing to this Church, who receive amongst them very 
 little short of half a million a year. We have a 
 Clergy that receive about seven millions and a half a 
 year, exclusive of a vast deal of property. Here is a 
 pretty sum of money to be given to support a Church 
 establishment. Here is more money given to this 
 Church, which does not boast of four millions of per¬ 
 sons that belong to it and frequent it: here is more 
 money given to the Ministers of this Church, than is 
 given to all the rest of the teachers of religion in the 
 Christian world. And, notwithstanding all this; not¬ 
 withstanding all the boasting of the learning and piety 
 of the clergy of this Church; notwithstanding these 
 
2S6 
 
 TO THE CLERGY OF THE 
 
 things, the King himself now tells us that it is neces¬ 
 sary to go round with a begging-box, to raise money by 
 subscription, to be sent to a Wine and Spirit Merchant 
 in Mincing-lane , in order that he may lay the money 
 out in cultivating the principles of 11 religious faith” 
 and in the promotion of true piety and our holy reli¬ 
 gion ! 
 
 Such a thing baffles all description. No talent can 
 place it in so strong a light as it is placed by a simple 
 statement of the facts. This rich, this Church over¬ 
 gorged with riches; this Church which is everlastingly 
 bragging of the learning and piety of its clergy ^.-ithis 
 Church going begging about for money, in order to 
 send it to a Wine and Spirit Merchant in London, in 
 order that he may lay it out in u promoting our holy 
 religion,” is such a thing as we may boldly say the 
 world never heard of before, and never will hear ol 
 again. What are all these parsons for? Why have 
 we Deacons, Priests, Prebendaries, Curates, Vicars, 
 Rectors, Canons, Deans, Archdeacons, Bishops, and 
 Archbishops ? Why have we twenty thousand of these 
 men and their families to keep without work ? Go and 
 get up upon a hill; see how thickly the spires arise 
 around you in all directions. What are all these men 
 and all these buildings for, if the King must send round 
 a begging box, in order to get money to be sent up to 
 Joshua Watson, that he may lay it out in “cultivating 
 the principles of religious faith, and in the promotion 
 of true piety, and our holy religion ?” 
 
 Ah! Parsons! in this transaction we have a tacit 
 confession that those who have contended that this 
 enormously expensive establishment is worse than use- 
 JessS, and ought to be unestablished by law ; here we 
 have a tacit confession, that such persons have reason 
 clearly on their side. For what are the churches, il 
 Joshua Watson is to be applied to to cultivate the 
 principles of religious faith, and to promote true piety 
 and our holy religion? If it be necessary, I say, to 
 raise money to send to Joshua Watson for these pur¬ 
 poses, I want to know what the churches are for. 
 Come, nc;v: unlock for once : speak out plainly: tell 
 
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 287 
 
 me what the churches are for. If they are not the 
 places to cultivate the principles of religious faith, and 
 to promote true piety and our holy religion, what are 
 they for? The devil a bit! No answer shall I ever 
 get from you ; but I will tell you the uses that I have 
 seen the churches put to, by those who still adhered to 
 the religion of those who built the churches. 
 
 Now, hear me, Parsons, and you will see how the 
 /egging-box and Joshua Watson might be dispensed 
 with. In France, in a village much about as populous 
 as the village of Botley, with a church a little bigger ; 
 the population being about equal in amount to that of 
 Botley, I resided for some time. In the month of April, 
 at six o'clock in the morning , I was going (just after 
 I came to reside in the village) across the church-yard. 
 I heard a great many voices in the church. I went in; 
 and there I saw the parson with about forty children 
 of the village, teaching them the “ principles of reli¬ 
 gious faithteaching the principles of religious faith 
 to the growing population. Was not this the way to 
 teach religious faith, Parsons? Here was no school¬ 
 master wanted : no begging-box ; no Joshua Watson, 
 and no “ Tracts .” Here was a parson performing his 
 duty, and in the proper place. Every morning at six 
 o’clock, in all the churches of all the villages round 
 about, this was going on. The boys and girls were at 
 home by seven or eight o’clock, ready to go to work, 
 At the time that I am referring to, the priests were pre¬ 
 paring the children for the Feast of Easter. At other 
 times of the year they were preparing them for other 
 festivals ; so that every child, upon arriving at a certain 
 age, had been regularly taught the principles of reli¬ 
 gious faith. There was no pay given to the parson for 
 this. His benefice was his pay; and even that he was 
 expected to divide between his poorer parishioners. 
 
 “ Go you and do likewise.” Get you up in the 
 morning, and take the boys and girls to the church, 
 teach them there those principles of religious faith 
 which you want to have them taught, do as those Ca¬ 
 tholics did who built the churches, and who had them 
 wrested from them by a series of deeds more un»us* 
 
TO THE CLERGY OF THE 
 
 and more bloody than any other that the world ever 
 heard of: but, how are you to do as they did ? Great 
 numbers of you do not reside in the livings of which 
 you receive the tithes, and with regard to which you 
 have undertaken the care of souls. In a large part of 
 Ireland, and in not a few places in England, there are 
 actually no churches: the churches have been suffered 
 to tumble down and fall into heaps of rubbish, while 
 you have retained the tithes. In numerous instances, 
 one person attends to seven or eight parishes in Ire- 
 •land ; and, in many instances, to two, three, or four 
 parishes in England. How then can you teach the 
 principles of religious faith to the growing population ? 
 How can you do as the priests did in France, and as 
 they formerly did in England? Your parishioners sel¬ 
 dom see you, except merely on the Sunday, and, then, 
 perhaps you do not speak to a single man of them: 
 and, as to the children of the poor, who ever saw you 
 attempting to educate any one of them ? Churches 
 were not made to be locked up from week’s end to 
 week’s end. As far as religion is concerned, the church 
 is the parish school, to be sure ; and what is the par¬ 
 son for, if he be not to be the parish teacher. 
 
 It is clear enough that this religious teaching ought 
 to be delegated to no Society whatever. There being 
 an established Church, that Church being so richly en¬ 
 dowed, that Church having such immense possessions 
 in land, in house, in all sorts of ways, it is quite mon¬ 
 strous to see the work of religious teaching delegated 
 to a Wine Merchant and his Society. Yet this is no 
 more than acting upon the advice given by the Bishop 
 of Winchester, in his last year’s Charge to his Clergy. 
 The Bishop says, in that Charge, that “ nothing will 
 De more useful than giving to the young people a selec¬ 
 tion of those excellent tracts , which are furnished by 
 the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge; 
 tliat correct expounder of evangelical truth, thatjirra 
 supporter of the Established Church .” 
 
 This, as I observed at the time, was a putting of the 
 Church under the protection of this Society, a self- 
 created Society : a society publishing tracts of the most 
 
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 289 
 
 impudent character, full of falsehoods and calumnies. 
 The Bishop recommends the National School, people 
 to get their tracts from this Society, and, indeed, this 
 is the source from which the National Schools are sup¬ 
 plied. The Societies are, in fact, as far as relates to 
 publications, one and the same. The School Society 
 appear to pay for the buildings, while the other Society 
 furnishes the books. In a Report of .the Society for the 
 promoting of Christian Knowledge, I find several 
 statements respecting the number of children educated 
 in the schools supplied by the Society for the promo¬ 
 tion of Christian Knowledge; so that these are to be 
 viewed as one and the same body. 
 
 Our friend, Joshua Watson, is Treasurer to the So¬ 
 ciety for the promoting of Christian Knowledge also, 
 as well as to the School Society ; and the rendezvous 
 of both Societies, is in Bartlett's Buildings , Holborn , 
 London. Now, then, what are the pretty books, which 
 the Society gives to the children to read ? They begin 
 with about a score of books abusive of the ancient wor¬ 
 ship of this country ; that is to say, of the Catholic Re¬ 
 ligion. I am surprised that some Catholic does not 
 were it only for sport, take up his pen and turn these 
 wretched things into ridicule. Pretty fellows these, 
 indeed, are to talk; pretty fellows to rail against the 
 Catholic Church, or even against any religious sect, 
 when they are, what the Bishop of Winchester calls 
 the Defenders of the Established Church : no: its 
 11 supporters." What a pretty thing this is, then, an 
 Established, Church, which stands in need of a nume¬ 
 rous band of supporters ! Can this be the Church of 
 Christ ? He said, “ on this rock will I build my 
 Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against 
 it.” This is the text that the Catholics rely upon. 
 They do not want any supporters. Then they are, in 
 Ireland, at the end of more than two hundred and fifty 
 years of most hellish persecution ; with all the Churches 
 taken by the Protestants; all the tithes; all the im¬ 
 mense glebes; all the offices, civil and military : there 
 they are at the end of two hundred and fifty years, a 
 Protestant Church by law established, and by bayonet 
 
290 
 
 TO THE CLERGY OF THE 
 
 upheld; a Protestant army ; a Protestant magistracy ; a 
 Protestant government; and a Catholic people ! And 
 this Society comes out with its catalogue of books for 
 the cultivating of the principles of religious faith, and 
 that catalogue contains, altogether in one place, fifteen 
 publications, some at as low a price as a half-penny, 
 “ against popery /” 
 
 And who are the Members of this famous Society ? * 
 I find that one of the Members last year was Castle- 
 reagh, who cut his throat at North Cray. This liberal 
 and pious soul subscribed fifty pounds towards the de¬ 
 lightful tracts of this Society. Indeed, to balance against 
 this, we have the Rev. Thomas Jephson, Fellow of 
 St. John’s College, Cambridge. This gentleman ap¬ 
 pears to be doubly zealous, he subscribes for the pur¬ 
 poses of the Society generally ; and then he gives an 
 additional subscription, “ to the special fund in counter¬ 
 action of infidel and. blasphemous publications .” So 
 that the Rev. Thomas Jephson,* of St. John’s College, 
 Cambridge, may be called one of the Dons of this So¬ 
 ciety for the promoting of Christian Knowledge. If I 
 had time, I could make a very pretty collection of 
 names out of this list of subscribers. Unquestionably, 
 many of them have subscribed to the old Society with 
 a sincere desire of promoting Christian knowledge. 
 But, after the abusive Tracts which have lately come 
 out; after those false and impudent Tracts which I 
 have so often noticed, whoever continues a Member of 
 this Society, will merit to be dealt with in the roughest 
 manner. 
 
 Parsons, do you think that you will make much pro¬ 
 gress in getting upholders of the church that the Reve¬ 
 rend Mr. Morritt belongs to? You have it in evi¬ 
 dence, that he sent people to drive his parish for tithes. 
 You have it in evidence that five sheep of one poor 
 parishioner were seized for five shillings worth of tithes, 
 that they were sold at public auction for five shillings, 
 and that the parson’s own driver bought them for 
 five shillings. You have several other things in evi- 
 
 * This gentleman was tried in England for a most heinous 
 offence.—A m. Ed. 
 
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 291 
 
 deuce. It is perfectly notorious, that, without a large 
 
 STANDING ARMY, TITHES COULD NOT BE COLLECTED. You 
 
 see a great Kingdom on the other side of the Channel, 
 where the Catholic religion exists, where it is, in fact, 
 the religion of the country; where it is indeed “ estab¬ 
 lished by law,” and yet, where it has no tithes. Now, 
 do you think, Parsons, that Joshua Watson will be 
 able to persuade people, that all this enormous wealth 
 ought to remain in your hands, when your congrega¬ 
 tions do not consist of more than a fourth part of the 
 people in the Kingdom ? Oh ! no ! Joshua Watson 
 will be able to do no such a tiling. If he still live in 
 Mincing-lane , and deal in wine and brandy, he might, 
 perhaps, if he chose to bestow a few bottles on his 
 neighbours of Billingsgate, convert them into a Church 
 and King-mob ; but nobody else, be you well assured, 
 in this whole Kingdom. 
 
 The character of this church, “ as by law establish- 
 edf is very sufficiently described in the transactions 
 relative to the non-residence of its clergy. To teach 
 the people, you must be where the people are. This 
 is clear enough ; and the law, which established the 
 church, required, that, generally speaking, you should 
 live along with the people; that is to say, in the same 
 parish with the people, of whose souls you had enga¬ 
 ged to have a care , and whose sweat and property gave 
 you a living. In order to compel you to do this; in 
 order to prevent you from being so unjust, as to pocket 
 the pay without rendering any services; and in order 
 to prevent you from carrying away the produce of your 
 livings to spend them elsewhere than in your parish, 
 the law, which gave you the tithes, bound you to resi¬ 
 dence. , under a pecuniary penalty. Nothing could be 
 more reasonable than this ; for, what right had you to 
 the tithes, unless you resided amongst the people who 
 paid them ? In short, you were paid to teach the 
 people, to give them religious instruction , to cultivate 
 in their minds the principles of religious faith ; and 
 to do all those things, which Joshua W atson, the 
 Wine and Spirit Merchant of Mincing-lane , is ap¬ 
 pointed to do. If you had all obeyed the law : could 
 
292 
 
 TO THE CLERGY OP THE 
 
 Joshua Watson and his tract-men have been wanted ? 
 What need, for instance, had the Rev. Thomas Jephson 
 to make part of a London Society for promoting Christ¬ 
 ian Knowledge , if he and all the rest of you had resid¬ 
 ed constantly in your parishes, and had taken care of 
 your flocks ? What do you call them jlocks for ; and 
 why do you call yourselves Pastors , unless you reside 
 with and take care of them ? 
 
 Nevertheless, so notorious is your absence from your- 
 u flocksto such an extent have you disobeyed the 
 law of your establishment and incurred its penalties, 
 that, act after act were passed, from 1799 to 1803, to 
 screen you from the just vengeance of the outraged 
 law. New indulgences were granted you in 1803. 
 But, you disobeyed even the new and indulgent law. 
 And, again in 1814, act after act were again passed to 
 screen you again ! Does the parliament act thus by 
 any other par t of the people ? If this be to be the 
 case, what law is there to make you do your duty 7 
 
 It is my intention to write, in a week or two, an essay 
 to show the evils of the Reformation ; to show how it 
 has injured England; how it has taken away its free¬ 
 dom and its happiness, and how it has, at last, led to 
 that decline of power and character, which is now ac¬ 
 tually taking place. I shall then have to speak more 
 fully of these acts to screen you. But, I cannot, even 
 now, refrain from mentioning (for, perhaps, the thou¬ 
 sandth time) the sums that you have, of late years, re¬ 
 ceived out of the taxes , over and above the amount of 
 all the tithes , all the manors , all the lands , and all the 
 houses , which constitute what vulgarly is called 
 “ church property but which is public property , the 
 use of which is given to you in consideration of your 
 teaching those very things which Joshua Watson is 
 now delegated to teach. The sums, I say, that you 
 have had out of the taxes , over and above the “ church 
 property,” amounting, as we have before seen, to eight 
 millions of pounds a year. These sums were, £100,000 
 a year, granted by the people at Westminster,* and 
 
 * The parliament sits in Westminster.— Ed. 
 
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 293 
 
 raised in taxes upon the people. Sums granted for the 
 “ relief of the poor Clergy of the Church of England ! n 
 Good God ! Two Bishops have lately died, leaving 
 nearly three hundred thousand pounds each ! And 
 yet, this wretched, this starving people, is called upon, 
 and compelled , to give money to the 11 poor Clergy ” of 
 this church! This was carried on by the people at 
 Westminster for about sixteen years: and was drop¬ 
 ped only the year before last. Perceval began it; 
 and accordingly they of you who belonged to the Dio- 
 cess of Salisbury did, in 1812, in an address to the 
 Prince Regent, “ condole” with his Royal Highness on 
 what they call the “ assassination of that upright Mi¬ 
 nister, and one of the brightest examples of public 
 and private virtue .” They well knew that this same 
 Perceval had been accused of seat-selling ; they knew 
 that Mr. Maddocks offered to produce proof of this at 
 the bar of the House of Commons; they knew that 
 Perceval dared not deny the fact, and that he besought 
 the House not to hear the evidence ; they knew that 
 the House did not hear it; and yet, the Bishop, Dean , 
 and, Chapter and Clergy of the Diocess of Salisbury, 
 had the front to declare this very man to be u one of 
 the brightest'ex am pies of public virtue /” 
 
 But, though he had been charged with selling a seat , 
 he had proposed and carried on these grants of money 
 to the Clergy. And, now, Parsons, do you think that 
 this money is not to be repaid? You can find time 
 to be Justices of the Peace , while you call on us to 
 send money to the Wine and Brandy Merchant, that 
 he may teach us religion. You seem to study the 
 law ; and, do you think that this affair, that this long 
 reckoning, will be settled without your being called 
 upon to repay the sixteen hundred thousand pounds , 
 .aken out of the taxes, to be given to you? There 
 was a law for it. Oh, yes ! And so there was for the 
 works of Empson and Dudley. Law for it! Aye, and 
 there is law for banishing men, and for shutting men 
 up in their houses from sunset to sunrise. Law ! to 
 be sure; and there is law to “ indemnify ” all the stern- 
 path people of 1817. Law enough; but do you imagine 
 
294 
 
 TO THE CLERGY OF THE 
 
 that we shall ever consent to the reducing of the inte* 
 rest of the Debt in the amount of one single penny, 
 without first making you pay back these sixteen hun¬ 
 dred thousand pounds ? Total ruin, however, falls on 
 the aristocracy, on those who exulted at the laws to 
 screen you and to give you our money ; total ruin falls 
 on them, unless the interest of the Debt be greatly re¬ 
 duced. And this reduction cannot, will not, shall not, 
 take place, without vour refunding the sixteen hun¬ 
 dred thousand pounds. 
 
 Only mind what a wicked, what an odious, what a 
 detestable act it would be, to take away part ot the 
 debt, until you were made to refund. Where did the 
 sixteen hundred thousand pounds come from? We 
 say, out of the taxes , because it was public money. 
 But, the Government was borrowing money and con¬ 
 tracting debt every year, during the period that these 
 sixteen hundred thousand pounds were given to you. 
 If there had been none of the public money given to 
 you, there would not, of course, needed so much to be 
 borrowed. Consequently, the money was borrowed 
 to be given to you. These sixteen hundred thousand 
 pounds make part of the debt. And, shall those who 
 lent the money that was given to you, ifovv have their 
 interest taken away from them, while you keep the 
 principal ? Oh, no ! my good fire-shovel hat gentle¬ 
 men. We will show you how we can play at this 
 game. In short, is there any one in human.form, beast 
 enough to suppose that you are to be suffered to keep 
 all , while every other description of persons is to be 
 compelled, and must be compelled, to make sacrifices. 
 
 You are the great promoters of the war and the bor¬ 
 rowing. When the rest of the nation, when even the 
 borough-mongers seemed to wish for peace, you were 
 for war. And, can it ever be proposed to reduce the 
 interest of the Debt, without calling upon you to re¬ 
 fund? To refund what was given to you, at any rate. 
 Aye; and mat is not all. You will have to refund 
 what you received in the way of gift; and you will, 
 moreover, have to pay off a part of that great Debt 
 that was contracted on your account. It is notorious 
 
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 295 
 
 that the war was to put down French 'principles. And 
 what were French principles ? Why, that titles of 
 nobility and tithes ought to be put an end to ; and that 
 all that mass of property, called “ church property,” was 
 national , or public property , and ought to be sold for 
 the defence of the kingdom and for the paying off its 
 debts. Now, we went to war, and obstinately perse¬ 
 vered in war, and renewed the war, and so went on, 
 till the war had cost (besides the taxes raised and ex¬ 
 pended) nine hundred millions sterling, in fund-holder 
 debt, dead-weight debt, and pauper debt. This cannot 
 now be paid without transferring the estates away 
 from the present possessors. We must lop a part off, 
 then. Aye ; but not while you, for whom half the ex¬ 
 pense, half the debt , was contracted ; not till you have 
 given up what you have, if your all be necessary. 
 
 This is what poses, perplexes, embarrasses, torments 
 you! You are become bitter beyond expression to¬ 
 wards me, who remind the people of these things, and 
 who say positively, that the interest of the Debt shall 
 not be reduced , until you refund the sixteen hundred 
 thousand pounds that the people at Westminster gave 
 to you out of the public money. What! get this sum 
 of money as a gift , besides all the tithes and other 
 things ; and come to us after all this for money to -send 
 to the Mincing-lane Wine and Spirit Merchant, that 
 he may lay it out in teaching the children their reli¬ 
 gious duty ? Faith ! this thing stops: this thing goes 
 no further at this rate. Mr. Hume says, that he does 
 not think, that you (in England) have too much. Mr. 
 Hume will not do, then. Mr. Hume will go on one side, 
 like an old garment. 
 
 Ten thousand times would I rather see the Jews in 
 oossession of the whole of the estates, than see a reduc¬ 
 tion of the Jew interest without your being first com¬ 
 pelled to refund. If there be no reduction, never can 
 the country again face a foe in arms , though that foe 
 came up the Thames and attack the Tower. And, u so 
 help me God,” as Mr. Canning said, I would rather see 
 the Tower attacked ; aye, and fall too; and see the 
 country actually conquered, than the “ widow and 
 
296 
 
 TO THE CLERGY OF THE 
 
 orphan” lose part of their interest, until you had re¬ 
 funded the sixteen hundred thousand 'pounds. Oh, 
 no ! my brave»fire-shovel hats : never can such a thing 
 be done. I shall not see the Tower attacked : I shall 
 see the interest reduced: and I shall see you refund 
 previous to such reduction. 
 
 These, Parsons, are the sayings that you hate me 
 for. At Exeter, about six months back, (18th Sept.) 
 there was a Pitt-Club Dinner. We shall find some¬ 
 thing in the report (from the Chronicle of the 24th 
 Sept.) applicable to the subject before us. I will insert 
 it first, and then remark upon a passage or two in it. 
 
 “ Devon Pitt-Club. —The members of this Club 
 held their meeting at the Hotel on Thursday (the 18th 
 inst.) at which Sir Tray ton Drake presided, with the 
 gallant Sir George Collier as Vice -President. About 
 fifty sat down to a most excellent dinner. On the cloth 
 being removed, the President proposed the health of 
 c The King,’ which was drunk with four times four, 
 and was succeeded by 1 God save the King,’ verse and 
 chorus. The following toasts were given in succes¬ 
 sion, with the usual cheering and appropriate glees:— 
 
 “ i The Duke of York and the Army,’ ‘Duke of 
 Clarence and the Navy,’ c The rest of the Royal Family.’ 
 
 “ The President said he had next to propose a toast 
 intimately connected with the object of their Meeting, 
 and which, he was persuaded, would be received by 
 deep feelings of respect. The Minister whose birth 
 they were met to commemorate, and whose name should 
 inspire gratitude in every Englishman’s breast, had 
 studied his country’s good as his only object; and to 
 his system, which had been followed by succeeding 
 Administrations, was owing the glorious attitude of 
 England among the nations of the world, which she 
 had maintained amidst the concussion of empires, and 
 still preserved. History could not record a brighter 
 example of statesman-like integrity than that illus¬ 
 trious individual had furnished ; and he knew that every 
 heart present would respond in unison with his, in pay¬ 
 ing a silent but sincere tribute of respect, 1 To the im¬ 
 mortal memory of the Right Hon. William Pitt.’ ” 
 
 1 
 
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 297 
 
 “ The Rev. William Radford, Rector of Lapford, 
 said, he should do injustice to his feelings if he were 
 to remain silent on the mention of that great States¬ 
 man, whose transcendent abilities and political integ¬ 
 rity had, next to Divine Providence, secured the inde¬ 
 pendence of these kingdoms, and restored liberty to 
 Europe. In the times of domestic disturbance, his 
 principles operated towards the promotion of loyal and 
 proper feelings, and ultimately restored harmony. But, 
 though great danger had been quelled, an evil spirit 
 was still lurking about , endeavouring to accomplish 
 by artifice what force could not effect. The jarring 
 principles of designing men had been made subservient 
 to individual interests. He (Mr. Radford) was aware 
 that party spirit would carry men even beyond the 
 bounds of common courtesy ; but he never could have 
 supposed that individuals of rank would have counte¬ 
 nanced such scoundrels as Carlile , Hone , and Cobbett 
 —wretches who had nothing to lose, but every thing 
 to gain, and who would willingly play a desperate 
 game to obtain their object. That gentlemen of exalt¬ 
 ed station in society should aid such adventurers, was 
 downright suicide of character; and they would do well 
 to recollect, that the same principles, called into ac¬ 
 tion, which brought the unfortunate Louis to the scaf¬ 
 fold, would ultimately draw the life-blood of a Russell 
 [hear, hear !] They were xiot now met under any spe¬ 
 cious pretence, but to indulge in those feelings of grate¬ 
 ful remembrance which were due to a man who equal¬ 
 ly respected the altar, the throne, and the people. He 
 trusted they would all imitate his worth—his talents 
 they could not hope to attain—but in defence of their 
 country, their King, and their God , he was sure they 
 would follow his example to the latest period of their 
 lives—[ cheering .”] 
 
 Well done, Parson Radford ! You are a fair speci¬ 
 men ; a sample ; a thing for us to judge by. Now you 
 know very well, that I dissent openly from the notions, 
 about religion, of Mr. Carlile. You do not know any 
 thing at all of my publications; or, you know, that I 
 have, in print, expressed, in a Letter to Mr. Carlile, 
 
29S 
 
 TO THE CLERGY OF THE * 
 
 my dissent from his opinions, not only as to religion , 
 but also as to republican government. You know this 
 very well. You know also, that I have written Thir¬ 
 teen Sermons , more of which, perhaps, have been sold 
 than of all the sermons that the Church Parsons , ever 
 published since the “Reformation.” You know, that 
 these sermons are all founded on passages in the Bible. 
 This you know ; and what (if the above report be true) 
 —what a liar , what a malignant wretch , what a 
 scoundrel you must be, Parson Radford ! To be sure, 
 I as well as Mr. Carlile, laid on upon the Right Re¬ 
 verend Father in God , Percy Jocelyn , Doctor of Di¬ 
 vinity,. and his Soldier. But, it is not less true, that 
 Mr. Carlile and 1 do not agree as to matters of reli¬ 
 gion and as to forms of government. I do not person¬ 
 ally know him ; but I have always heard, that lie is a 
 very honest and sober and industrious and virtuous 
 man ; and I know well, that he and his family and ser¬ 
 vants have been most cruelly treated, and that I most 
 cordially detest his and their persecutors of every de¬ 
 scription. And I further declare, that, if I ever have 
 the power, I will do my best toAvards obtaining for him 
 and his family and servants ample justice. But still 
 there is no apology for you, Parson Radford. You 
 knew that you were inculcating a lie ; that you were 
 sending a lie about the world. You, without any pro¬ 
 vocation, called me wretch and scoundrel. I will pu¬ 
 nish you for it, Parson, in the only way in which I, at 
 present , can get at you. 
 
 And you were one of those, were you, Parson Rad¬ 
 ford, who called upon the people to give money to be 
 sent up to the Wine and Brandy Merchant, for him to 
 lay out in teaching us the principles of the established 
 church. Faith ! this was unnecessary, Parson. We 
 know the principles pretty well. You and Parson 
 Morritt* let us see what they are. Joshua may hold 
 bis peace. What do you mean, Parson, by “ defend¬ 
 ing God ?” The God that men in general worship is 
 
 * Parson Morritt is a Church of England priest at Skibbereen 
 in Ireland, who had a regular battle for Tithes, in which the 
 military were employed, and the people were fired upon. 
 
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 29S 
 
 not supposed to want defenders. The God that you 
 talk of must be a poor thing; he never can be the 
 Almighty. The all-powerful can stand in need of no 
 defenders, and especially such poor muckworms as are 
 seen at Pitt-Clubs. You are guilty of base blasphemy, 
 Parson. Yours is real blasphemy ; and the writing o* 
 Mr. Carlile is not. So that you are (if the report of 
 your speech be true) a base, blaspheming blackguard. 
 You are a degree worse than Smythies, the butcher’s 
 son. 
 
 “ An evil spirit lurking about: designing men .” 
 Poor fool! How comes there to be such a spirit after 
 all your il teachings ,” all your “ victories ,” and all 
 your “ glories ?” Poor sot! a “ spirit lurking about” 
 indeed ! This is like your kidney : at once malignant 
 and nonsensical. And, then, there was the wise Pre¬ 
 sident, and the “ gallant ” Vice-President. They 
 know, I dare say, what they toast and bawl for. But 
 only think of their bragging of the “ glorious attitude ” 
 which the country “ still preserves .” This is pretty 
 well, at a moment when the country is really prostrate 
 at the feet of France. Singular enough, too, that the 
 £C gallant Vice-President” should have already figured 
 as a cut-throat! There was, I think, quite proof 
 enough of this fellow’s being insane, when he was 
 seen, at this Club, a cat’s-paw to Parson Radford. 
 
 However, you are tackled Parson. The debt is 
 your tackier. This debt is with us; and you go the 
 way of all flesh. Something about reducing the inte¬ 
 rest of the debt; or about altering the value of money ; 
 something about one or the other must take place. I 
 do not care which; and I am in no hurry about either. 
 I am quite ready for either , when it comes, but I do 
 not think, that it would be an advantage to us to have 
 it too soon. I think it would be best, that all the old, 
 stupid, stinking Jolterheads, should be ousted by the 
 Jews, first; and that the Radicals should then come 
 and deal with Mosey ! Squeeze him like a sponge; 
 and settle matters according to principles of justice. 
 The. little Jolterheads and fire-pans, who have, for years 
 and years, been place-hunting for their sons and bro- 
 
300 
 
 TO THE CLERGY OF THE 
 
 thers and other relations, are now sadly put to it. They 
 see the spring cut off. There is nothing to give away. 
 The thing begins to be so tame , and so bareboned , 
 thdt its former adorers view it with affright. I should 
 like to know, whether Joshua, our great teacher, have 
 any snug corner in the concerns of the thing. So 
 much zeal and piety must merit some rew r ard. His 
 brother, indeed, has three or four livings in that 
 Church, the true principles of which Joshua is to teach 
 us. This brother has the livings of Digswell, Hack¬ 
 ney, and Homerton, and he is Archdeacon of St. 
 Albans. Well said, brother J. James Watson ! Joshua 
 must be wanted to help to teach some, at any rate, of 
 J. James’s people ; but, if J. James had but one living , 
 and there were three other parsons for the others, 
 Joshua’s services would not be necessary. Aye, but 
 then, brother J. James, the “ Venerable J. James, Doc¬ 
 tor of Divinity,” would not get the tithes and so forth 
 of the four benefices !—Poh ! It is nonsense, Parsons, 
 to say any more about it. You know how it is, and 
 we know how it is. Parson Morritt has given us the 
 true practical illustration of the thing ; his tithes be¬ 
 come “ due,” as it is called, and he, without any dis¬ 
 guise, sends armed men to the spot to enforce the col¬ 
 lecting of the money. The people resist; the armed 
 men shoot; some are killed and some wounded on 
 both sides ; the battle is bloody; but, at last, the par¬ 
 son gets his tithes ; and “ the Church, as by law estab¬ 
 lished,” triumphs ! 
 
 In conclusion, Parsons, I have two things to men¬ 
 tion : First, that I should like to be informed, whether 
 Joshua have any of the public money himself, and 
 whether he have any sons , or any other relations, be¬ 
 sides his brother, the venerable J. James, whose zeal 
 has led them to serve their country. I wish for inform¬ 
 ation on this subject. Perhaps some correspondent 
 can give it me. I also wish to know, whether our 
 teacher, Joshua, still sells wine and spirits , and whe¬ 
 ther this traffic, if carried on at all, be still carried on 
 in Mincing-lane. Second, I have to mention, that I 
 shall, about December next, send Joshua, in Manu- 
 
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 301 
 
 script, a religious tract , written by me, for the use of 
 the National Schools , and that, if our teacher, Joshua, 
 do not cause it to be published, I will. And, it is, fur¬ 
 ther, my intention to supply Joshua with one a month, 
 during the next winter and spring. In every case, il 
 Joshua do not publish, I will. And, then, we shall see, 
 what Joshua is made of; and, if he refuse to publish, 
 we shall see, who will distribute the greatest number 
 of tracts, Joshua or I. 
 
 I must defer, till another opportunity, my remarks on 
 the Burial Bill, and on the grant for the building of 
 new Church of England Churches : and, Parsons, “ so,” 
 as the King says, “ I bid you very heartily farewell,” 
 for the present, with a promise to return to you with all 
 convenient speed. 
 
 WILLIAM COBBETT. 
 
 TO THE EARL OP RODEN, 
 
 ON HIS HAPPY CONVERSION THROUGH THE MEANS OF THE 
 
 BIBLE SOCIETY 
 
 ‘ So he was exceedingly ' sorrowful; but it pleased God in that 
 society to inform his mind with the right principles. He re¬ 
 tired to his closet , poured forth his wishes to the God of meres, 
 and it pleased that God to listen to his prayers , and to lead\ 
 him into the way of truth and life .”—The Earl of Roden’s 
 Speech at a Meeting of the Bible Society.—May, 1824. 
 
 Bagshot , June 10, 1824. 
 
 My Lord —The Public have read with great interest 
 the account of your Lordship’s conversion. This con¬ 
 version it is that has induced me to make some remarks 
 on this Bible Society and its proceedings, and I address 
 myself to you for reasons that will be obvious enough 
 before 1 have done. The meeting, at which this speech 
 of yours was made, was only one of many, held about 
 the same time, in the pious Wen.* There were many 
 
 * The writer calls London, on account of its enormous and 
 unnatural increase of late years, The Wen.— Ed. 
 
302 
 
 LETTER TO THE 
 
 others, some of which, if I have room, I shall notice in 
 the course of this letter. 
 
 My work may, I hope, be expected to live till all this 
 monstrous stuff shall be put down ; and it is pleasing 
 to me to reflect, that it may then be said, that there was 
 one man, who, in spite of all the powers of cant, had 
 the sense and the courage to set his face against it. 
 
 This Meeting is called an anniversary Meeting ; so 
 < that, it seems that we have it yearly—I am going to 
 state my opinions of the undertaking, and I shall do it 
 without any sort of reserve. I shall ask to have point¬ 
 ed out to me, what is, or can be, the use of it; and I 
 shall, I think, point out many mischiefs that it must 
 naturally produce. But, first of all, let me insert the 
 report of the proceedings on which I am about to com¬ 
 ment. 
 
 “ The Twentieth-Anniversary of the British and 
 Foreign Bible Society, was held yesterday at the Free¬ 
 masons’ Tavern. The room was crowded before eleven 
 o’clock, at which period several Noblemen and Gentle¬ 
 men entered the room. We observed on the platform 
 the Bishop of Litchfield and Coventry, Lord Gambier, 
 Lord Calthorpe, Charles Grant, Esq. M. P. and many 
 other distinguished persons.” 
 
 “ The President, Lord Teignmouth, was unanimous¬ 
 ly called to the chair.” 
 
 “ The Secretary, (the Rev. Mr. Bramble,) then pro¬ 
 ceeded to read an abstract of the Society’s proceedings 
 for the last year, by which it appears that the progress 
 of the Society has increased since the last annual 
 meeting.” 
 
 “ While the Secretary was reading the Report, Lord 
 Harrowby entered the room, and was received by the 
 Meeting with the warmest expressions of applause; 
 Lord Roden, shortly afterwards entered, and was re¬ 
 ceived with similar demonstrations of applause^ The 
 accounts from South America were peculiarly gratify¬ 
 ing ; ‘ her fields,’ in the language of the Report, ‘ were 
 already white for the harvest;’ but, indeed, there was 
 no quarter of the world from which the accounts were 
 not equally encouraging. The accounts from the 
 
EARL OF RODEN. 
 
 303 
 
 friends of this Society throughout England, proved that 
 the cause was rapidly advancing throughout this island. 
 In Scotland too the Society was advancing with a 
 steady progress. And Ireland had not been neglected 
 — Applause .” 
 
 “ The Earl of Harrowby rose to move that the re¬ 
 port—an abstract of which they had just heard read, 
 might be printed. The Meeting would permit him to 
 make a few observations. ( Hear .) It was gratifying to 
 him, that while our benevolence crossed the Line, and 
 wandered forth to visit all who were benighted and 
 ignorant, our own people at home were not neglected 
 or forgotten. It was very gratifying to him to see that 
 the state of Ireland was not neglected ; that was a 
 country in which their exertions would be most useful¬ 
 ly, and in which, indeed, necessarily they ought to la¬ 
 bour. Ireland would not, one day or other, be insen¬ 
 sible of such exertions.” 
 
 “ The Earl of Roden said, that the Noble Lord who 
 had just sat down had so ably touched on some parts 
 of the Report, that he had left him little to say, except 
 to second the resolution, that the Report in question, to 
 an extract of which they had with so much gratifica¬ 
 tion attended, should be printed under the direction of 
 the Committee. But he could not help expressing his 
 gratitude that he was now permitted, with the Meet¬ 
 ing, to witness the Twentieth Anniversary of the Bri¬ 
 tish and Foreign Bible Society, {Cheers.) It would 
 ill become him to take up the time of the Meeting, in 
 entering into the details of the progress of the Society, 
 and of the blessings to be derived from it; but there 
 was one simple fact which he could not omit stating to 
 the assembly. I will not, said the Noble Lord, say how 
 many years since, I knew a man who was involved in 
 all the scenes of fashionable dissipation which the Irish , 
 metropolis doth most abundantly supply. It was his 
 chief object to look for pleasure, and to stifle the thoughts 
 of futurity. He had no care for heavenly things, but 
 in this world’s worthlessness he took especial pleasure. 
 It happened to this individual, to whom I allude, to be 
 present at one of the Meetings of your society in Dub- 
 
3(H 
 
 LETTER TO THE 
 
 lin ; he was led there from idle curiosity ; and, asham¬ 
 ed to be detected in such a place, he retired to a corner 
 of the room. While that man stood there so secretly 
 and so concealed, he heard opinions delivered which 
 were indeed new to him, and which penetrated his soul, 
 for he then felt that if these sentiments were correct, 
 his eternal misery was well nigh accomplished.—He 
 was not an old man, but years flew apace ; so thought 
 the individual to whom I am alluding; and what then 
 was to become of his immortal soul ? So he was ex¬ 
 ceedingly sorrowful, but it pleased God in that Society 
 to inform his mind with right principles, for a good 
 rfian was there, and he spoke.of the power of God unto 
 salvation, and he cautioned that meeting, and every 
 soul there, to build their faith upon the Bible, and not 
 upon the words of man (hear ;) and he told them thaf. 
 to all who sought the assistance of the Holy Spirit 
 that assistance would not be denied, for that God hath 
 promised 1 to open to them who had knockedand 
 that by prayer and supplication the word of God would 
 be made manifest to all. This individual, therefore, 
 retired to his closet; poured forth his wishes to the 
 God of mercy, and it pleased that God to listen to his 
 prayers, and to lead him to the way amid the truth and 
 the life; and though I cannot describe to you the joy 
 and peace of mind which that man experienced, yet 
 will I say, that in all his griefs, and God hath given 
 him his share, he has never despaired since that day of 
 the blessings and protection of Heaven. There, in the 
 Bible, he has found a protection from the storm which 
 few have felt more keenly, but I trust few with more 
 perfect resignation— (Applause.') That individual is 
 permitted this day to have the honour of addressing 
 you, (loud applause ;) he is permitted now to declare 
 the obligations which he owes to an Anniversary Meet¬ 
 ing of your Society. The Noble Lord, in concluding, 
 expressed his gratitude to the Society for their efforts 
 in Ireland, and gave to the resolution his most cordial 
 support.” 
 
 “ The Bishop of Litchfield and Coventry moved the 
 next resolution, c That the thanks of the Meeting should 
 
EARL OF RODEN. 
 
 305 
 
 fee given to Lord Teignmouth, President of the Society, 
 for his unceasing attention to the interests of the insti¬ 
 tution.’ The Noble and Rev. Prelate, in adverting to 
 Colombia, stated, that, in consequence of the progress 
 of the Society in that quarter of the globe, that despot¬ 
 ism, civil and religious, had covered that land, and im¬ 
 paired her moral energies—had made it the seat of su¬ 
 perstition—the very fastness of papal power. (Cheers.) 
 But the storm had at length subsided, and tliey were 
 now permitted, under the guidance of Him, c who guid¬ 
 ed the whirlwind and directed the storm,’ to spread 
 through that country the glorious tidings of 1 peace on 
 earth, and good will toward men.’” (Cheers.) 
 
 “ A French Peer, whose name we could not ascer¬ 
 tain, was here introduced to the meeting. Pie stated 
 that the Bible Society in Paris, felt most grateful to 
 the British and Foreign Society for their beneficent 
 assistance. He assured the Society that the Protestants 
 of France were attached to the cause of Evangelical 
 Religion.— (Applause”) 
 
 Before I proceed to comment upon this curious mat¬ 
 ter, I shall make a few general observations with re¬ 
 spect to the utility of this Society and its exertions ; for 
 though it seems to be taken for granted, that these 
 exertions must do some good, I question the fact, and 
 I not only doubt the good of the acts themselves, but I 
 also question the goodness of the motives. 
 
 One thing is, I think, very clear; namely, the Par¬ 
 sons, Bishops, and all the rest of that tribe, whether 
 they belong to the Church, the Methodists, the Presby¬ 
 terians, the Baptists, the Seceders, the Independents, 
 the Separatists, the Lutherans, the Calvinists, the So- 
 cinians, the Universalists, the Unitarians, the Muggle- 
 tonians, or the New Sect, which some people call the 
 Humbugonians ; whatever sect, swarm, or nest, people 
 may belong to, it must be contemptibly ridiculous to 
 pay preachers, if the professed objects of this Society 
 be not a wretched humbug. 
 
 We are told by this Society, that the Bible is every 
 thing ; that they have got several new versions of it; 
 that they have converted alreacy by it a large part of 
 
306 
 
 LETTER TO THE 
 
 the South Americans; that the Bible is hard at work 
 converting the Irish; that, in short, here is a book 
 through which God himself speaks to every one; and 
 that you, the worthies of this Bible Society, are going 
 on spreading about this book, and that you will perse¬ 
 vere in your exertions, “ until the whole earth be filled 
 with the Gospel of God.” 
 
 This is either true or it is a humbugging lie; if the 
 latter, there may still be occasion for giving money to 
 parsons and the like ; but if it be true, it must be a sort 
 of blasphemy to suffer a parson to talk to you about re¬ 
 ligion ; for, what is this short of saying to God—“ We 
 have your own word here before us; but that is not 
 enough for us ; we must have a parson to save us from 
 hell; we have a greater opinion of the parson’s word 
 than we have of yours.” Talk of blasphemy, indeed. 
 Where will you find blasphemy equal to this ? Mr. 
 Joseph Gurney, the sleek Secretary of the Norfolk and 
 Norwich Bible Association, who is, I suppose, a sort ot 
 Hickory Quaker, observed, that the Scriptures, given 
 as they were by inspiration, might be read by them¬ 
 selves, without note or comment. Ah ! sleek Joseph l 
 You were for getting rid of the interpreters. I join 
 you, sleek Joseph, with all my heart; and if I come to 
 a determination, which I must, that this is God’s own 
 word—I also come to a determination that this ought to 
 be put into the hands of every man, how can I be beast 
 enough to perceive that no parson can be necessary ? 
 
 Lord Harrowby (for all now join in the great work) 
 seemed to be highly delighted with the success, as he 
 called it, of the Society. His Lordship has a brother, 
 who is a Bishop, with a pretty fat income, and I should 
 be glad to hear from that Bishop if every man ought to 
 have the Bible put into his hands. It is beastly to put 
 it into his hands if you are not well assured that he can 
 understand it. It is perfectly beastly to put it into his 
 hands, unless you are persuaded he can understand it. 
 If he cannot read it and comprehend it, and if he be 
 not convinced of this, what a shocking piece of sham 
 to put the book into his hands ; and if you be convinced 
 of this, you are convinced that he has God for his 
 
EARL OF RODEN. 
 
 307 
 
 teacher, what need has he of a Bishop, though that 
 Bishop’s name may be Rider? There was, it seems, 
 a Bishop present and speechifying at this meeting. He 
 is called the Bishop of Litchfield and Coventry, what 
 his name is I do not know; but if I had been present, 
 I would have asked him what was the use of his office, 
 if this Bible Society was working for good. 
 
 The business of the priest is to teach the people re 
 ligion; to teach the children especially ; to hold, in 
 fact, a religious school; to tell the flock what is the 
 will of God; to keep God’s word in their possession, 
 and to be the interpreters of him to the people. There 
 is common sense in this. There is consistency in it.— 
 Here no one pretends that the people themselves can 
 understand the word of God ;‘and, therefore, that word 
 is not put into their hands. R is perfectly monstrous 
 to say to a man, take that book, it contains the words 
 of eternal life, they are words which God himself ad¬ 
 dresses to you, for the purpose of saving your soul; but 
 mark me, you must give one tenth of all your com, and 
 milk, and sheep, and pigs, and cows, to a parson, in 
 order that he may teach you religion.—To talk thus to 
 a man, argues insanity, or hypocrisy incomprehensible. 
 
 I am of opinion that the printing and publishing of 
 the Bible has done a great deal of mischief in the world. 
 No matter how good the contents ot the book may be, 
 no matter how true the history of it, no matter how ex¬ 
 cellent its precepts and examples.—Like most other 
 good things, it is possible for it to be so applied as to 
 produce mischievous effects. And what was the first 
 effect of this printing and publishing? The splitting 
 up of the people, who had before been all of one faith, 
 into numerous sects, each having a faith different from 
 all the rest. However, this really seems to be, by 
 some persons, regarded as a happy circumstance. This 
 patch and piebald work in religion is spoken of by some 
 as affording to the Almighty the pleasing spectacle of 
 great variety ! 
 
 But come, let us try this a little. What! a variety 
 of religious creeds pleasing to God ! Will any one 
 openly hold that God delights in lies ? Yet he must 
 
308 
 
 LETTER TO THE 
 
 delight in lies, if he delights in a variety of beliefs. 
 There can be but one true belief, all the rest must be 
 false. Every deviation from the truth is a lie. Each 
 must believe that all the other sects are on the high 
 road to perdition. To think in any other way about 
 the matter, is to consider all faith and all religion as a 
 mere farce. And yet there are men to pretend that a 
 variety of faith is pleasing to the God of truth. 
 
 There can be but one true religion. All the rest 
 must be false. It is dismal enough, then, to know that 
 there are forty of them, or thereabouts. The printing 
 and publishing of the Bible may possibly have estab¬ 
 lished the one true religion; but, at any rate, it must 
 have created thirty-eight false religions. There can 
 be but one true one, mind. I beg you may not forged 
 that; so that, this printing and publishing have caused 
 thirty-eight false religions to rise up, at any rate. 
 Whether it caused the one true one to rise up is more 
 than I shall attempt to determine. But we may make 
 this observation, that, if the Catholic religion was not 
 the true religion, it seems strange, that it should have 
 existed all over Europe for so many centuries ; it seems 
 strange, too, that those who protest against that reli¬ 
 gion, should, at the end of more than two centuries of 
 preaching and printing and publishing about it; and 
 after having caused Europe to be deluged in blood ; it 
 is strange, I say, that these Protestants should still be 
 found in so contemptible a minority. 
 
 Insist, my Lord Roden, that the Bible-spreading re¬ 
 ligion is the true one; and then ask yourself how it 
 happens, that in your own country, where the property 
 of the ancient church has been taken and given to its 
 subverters by law, those subverters split into forty dif¬ 
 ferent sects, form, at the end of two hundred years, 
 only a seventh part of the nation. What says the word 
 of God, which you are so industrious in circulating'? 
 “ One faith, one church.” And again, 11 1 will build 
 my church upon a rock, and the gates of hell shall not 
 prevail against it.” Look at your own country then, 
 my Lord, and say whether this promise has not then 
 been fulfilled. 
 
EARL OF RODEN. 
 
 309 
 
 The influence of this Society of yours appears to be 
 similar in its operation and effects. Its benevolence 
 and its success have reached China. Its translation of 
 the scriptures have gone forth to enlighten and convert 
 the natives of Asia.—Lord Harrowby tells us, in the 
 exultation of his piety, to look at the works of the So¬ 
 ciety in the Pacific Ocean; to look at the licentious in¬ 
 habitants of the islands in that Ocean; inhabitants 
 whom the Society have made anxious to receive and 
 profit by the scriptures “ of the living and true God, 
 and Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent.”—The pious 
 President of the Council, after having again bade you 
 look to your work in the vast empire of China, con¬ 
 cluded with observing, that the success “ was the 
 Lord’s doing, and marvellous ndeed, was that success 
 in his eyes.—The Report of the Society told you, that 
 the Report from South America was peculiarly gratify¬ 
 ing, that her fields were already white for the harvest.” 
 
 Now, my Lord, is it not something strange? You 
 will please to understand me, my Lord ;—I by no means 
 say that these reports and statements are impudent 
 lies. But, with the greatest deference and respect, my 
 Lord, I ask you, who are an Irishman, and who ought 
 to understand a pretty deal about that country, seeing 
 that you receive (as your noble father before you) what 
 I call a thundering sum of money every year out of the 
 taxes, the effects of which upon poor Ireland are pretty 
 notorious, I ask you, my Lord, whether it be not some¬ 
 thing strange that this converting Society of yours ; 
 that this Society, which, as the wonderful President of 
 the Council observes, has been so successful in thi 
 Pacific Ocean ; in the vast empire of China, that has 
 made the fields of South America already white for 
 the harvest; is it not somewhat strange, I say, my 
 Lord, that this Society, when it comes to talk about 
 Ireland, has no more to say, than that Ireland has not 
 been neglected, and that “ Ireland will, one day, or 
 another, (at least Lord Harrowby says so,) not be in¬ 
 sensible to such exertions.”—One day or other ! Not 
 insensible ! What tne devil, then, while you have 
 been making such conversions in the vast empire of 
 
310 
 
 LETTER TO THE 
 
 China, and among the frolicksome damsels in the Islands 
 of the Pacific ; while you have made the fields of South 
 America already white for the harvest, though, as even 
 the Bishop of Litchfield and Coventry says, those fields 
 were “the very fastness of Popery again, my Lord, 
 let me ask you, is it not strange that while this Society 
 has been converting half the world, it has not as yet ; 
 it may, as Lord Harrowby says, “ one day or other/’ 
 not be “ insensible to the Society’s exertions but 
 what I have to say, my Lord, is this ; is it not strange 
 indeed, that this Society, which has been converting so 
 large a portion of mankind, should never as yet have 
 been able to convert one single irishman ? 
 
 “You lie, you villain, scoundrel; jacobin radical 
 rascal!” I think I hear some enraged Orangeman ex¬ 
 claim, and then ask me, with lips drawn up, head push¬ 
 ed forward, teeth looking like those of a dog that is just 
 going to bite you, “ has not the Society converted my 
 Lord Roden ?” “ Aye, you teef, and in Dublin too ?” 
 
 Gently, good Orangeman, I beg his Lordship’s par¬ 
 don.—I had forgotten the conversion of his Lordship, 
 I allow, (because I cannot dispute the word of the noble 
 peer,) whose word of honour, you know, is fully equal, 
 (and upon my soul I sincerely believe it,) to the oath 
 of a thousand common Orangemen,) the Noble Lord 
 has said it; and therefore I believe that he was con¬ 
 verted by the Society. But pray, observe, good Orange¬ 
 man, (and do not, my friend, foam and grind your teeth 
 at such a rate;) pray, I say, observe, good Orangeman, 
 that it was not a Jew, a Mahometan, or a Pagan convert¬ 
 ed to Christianity ; nor was it a Catholic, converted to 
 a Protestant; but a sinner, a mere sinner, converted to 
 a saint! 
 
 This is a very different thing from the other sorts of 
 conversion. Observe too, that this most blessed effect 
 was produced by talking to the Noble Lord, and not by 
 nis reading; for the noble person himself says, that he 
 cared not for heavenly things, “till he heard opinions 
 delivered which penetrated his soul; that made him 
 perceive that his eternal misery was well nigh accom¬ 
 plished.” The noble person expressly says, “ that the 
 
EARL OF RODEN. 
 
 311 
 
 good man spoke of the power of God and of salvation.” 
 It is strange that the noble person should never have 
 cared about heavenly things before, seeing that he had 
 an uncle who was a Right Reverend Father in God, 
 and who was first Bishop of Ferns, and afterwards 
 Bishop of Clogher. This, however, aside for the pre- 
 sbnt; it was, as I said before, the changing of an Irish 
 sinner into a saint, and not the changing of an Irish 
 Roman Catholic into a Protestant. 
 
 It is of this latter sort of conversion, that Ireland, my 
 Lord Roden, stands so much in need, in order to give 
 her a chance of tranquillity. How is it then, my Lord, 
 that this Society, which, by means of its comparatively 
 puny subscriptions ; that this Society, which has made 
 the fields white for the harvest amongst the Catholics 
 of South America, where, as this Bishop of Litchfield 
 and Coventry tells us, Popery had its fastnesses ; how 
 is it, my Lord, that this Society alone, can thus carry 
 on the conversion of the Catholics of South America, 
 and cannot, even with the aid of all the Irish Bishops 
 and Parsons, convert one single Irish Catholic ? nay, 
 how is it, my Lord, that this same Society, aided by 
 all those Bishops and Parsons, cannot prevent the pen¬ 
 niless popish Priests from converting the Protestants 
 to be Catholics; and that, too, to such an extent as to 
 threaten to leave eighteen Bishops, and above two 
 housand Parsons, without any congregation at all ? 
 
 Again, I say, that I mean not to assert, that the above 
 nserted report and speeches contain a parcel of most 
 abominable lies. I do not pretend to assert that, my 
 Lord ; but, I most flatly assert, that if the statement in 
 the above report be true, the non-conversion of the Irish 
 is the most surprising thing that ever was heard of in 
 the world. 
 
 Another observation I have to make, is, that the cir¬ 
 culation of Bibles, like every other measure, ought to 
 be judged of by its effects. If the effects be good, the 
 measure may be called good; if bad, the measure ought 
 to be called bad.—As to the effects of the measure 
 amongst the Chinese, or amongst the gay lasses ot 
 Otaheite, no argument can be built on that, because 
 
312 
 
 LETTER TO THE 
 
 we have no evidence, except that which we derive from 
 your missionaries, a sort of evidence only admissible in 
 a court of cant, and to which, therefore, I take leave to 
 object. We must confine ourselves to evidence to be 
 collected in this kingdom. And what evidence is this 
 to be ? The opinion of this man or that man is worth 
 nothing. The observation, or pretended observation, 
 of individuals, is likewise worth nothing, in such a 
 case; men, however upright they may be, generally 
 think that they see their own opinions verified. Even 
 in resorting for evidence to the state of society, we 
 must take care that our instances be not partial. 
 
 But let us try your Bible work by experience, and let 
 that experience be proved to us by general and striking 
 facts which nobody can deny. Twenty years, then, is, 
 you tell us, the age of your society. You tell us that 
 your measures must produce great and general effect. 
 What, then, has been the effect? We have no posi¬ 
 tive proof that it has produced any effect at all. We 
 cannot produce any proof of its bad effects; but we 
 have proof enough that it has produced no good effects, 
 seeing that we may date from Pitt’s birth a vast in¬ 
 crease of misery, wickedness, and degradation; an 
 enormous increase of pauperism and of crimes; a doub¬ 
 ling of the size of gaols ; more than a doubling of the 
 persons transported ; and more than a doubling of the 
 persons hanged. Five times the number of persons 
 sent to gaol, and three times the number of persons 
 convicted of crimes; a fourfold increase of misery in 
 England, and tenfold increase of misery in Ireland. 
 
 You will say that the circulating of Bibles is charge¬ 
 able with none of these; and this may be so; but if 
 this circulation of Bibles be contemporary with this 
 constant increase of evil, it remains for you to show 
 that the circulation of Bibles has produced no part of 
 that increase ; while we, on our part, have a right to 
 presume in favour of the affirmative of the proposition. 
 If the measure had been one of great and extensive 
 utility, its benefits must have been felt in a greater or 
 less degree. The state of the people would have been 
 better for it; but that state has, upon an average of 
 
EARL OF RODEN. 
 
 313 
 
 years, been getting worse and worse, till at last one 
 third of them are allowed to be half naked and half 
 starved, while the greater part of the rest are in a state 
 but very little better.*The Bibles had, perhaps, nothing 
 to do with the matter; but at any rate, men were never 
 shut up in their houses from sunset to sunrise, and 
 never transported without trial by jury, until the birth 
 of this society; so that if it has not been the cause of, 
 it has come in company with, the greatest calamities 
 and oppressions that the country ever knew. 
 
 The Bishop of Litchfield and Coventry seemed to 
 have a peculiar delight in the conversions that the So¬ 
 ciety has made, or pretends to have made in Spanish 
 America. He said that he congratulated the Meeting 
 on the prospects now opening to their view in Columbia. 
 The Bishop did not tell us precisely what these pros¬ 
 pects were ; but he said that we were now permitted to 
 “ spread through that country the glorious tidings of 
 peace on earth, and good will to men.” Peace, sayest 
 thou, Right Rev. Father in God? Peace!—Why 
 what hopes have we of selling our cottons, and our 
 guns, pistols, and swords; what hopes have we of 
 doing this, except through the means of a bloody civil 
 war? It is not peace, Mr. Bishop, but really and lite¬ 
 rally a a sword” that we are sending to the people. Are 
 you for this revolution, are you, Bishop ? Why were 
 you not for the revolution in France? You rail against 
 the Popish power in South America ; but were you not 
 one of those who applauded the war,* waged for the 
 purpose of restoring the House of Bourbon and the 
 Pope, and, of necessity, the Catholic Religion? The 
 Bishop talks a good deal about South America having 
 been the seat of superstition ; and yet the Bishop heard 
 you patiently enough give an account of your miracu¬ 
 lous conversion. But the Bishop talked also of the 
 “ despotism, civil and religious,” in South America. I 
 do not know who this Bishop is, but if I cannot get at 
 him to ask him, somebody else may. The Bishop talks 
 of despotism, civil and religious; he says that we are- 
 going to spread through the country the glorious tidings 
 of deliveran;e. 
 
314 
 
 LETTER TO THE 
 
 Bishop ! turn this way a bit, Bishop, and hear i little 
 of what I have got to say about this same despotism : 
 before you made the assertion relative to the despotism, 
 civil and religious, of South America, you must, doubt¬ 
 less, have read something about it. You must have read 
 something about it in some book, and you know, to be 
 sure, where to find that book. Let me ask you, then, were 
 the people of South America compelled to pay tithes 
 to a sect which had been fastened on them by another 
 and more powerful country ? were they compelled to 
 live under the domination of a priesthood, who had 
 taken their own churches.and church endowments from 
 them, and whose religion they abhorred? Were the 
 people of South America shut up in their houses from 
 sunset to sunrise? Was any army kept at their own 
 expense to assist in collecting taxes from them ? Come, 
 come, Right Reverend Father in God, you talk of the 
 Popish despotism in South America, give us one single 
 instance, if you can, of South America having witness¬ 
 ed a battle like that of Skibbereen ! Show us, if you 
 can, a book in which it is recorded that the South 
 Americans were half naked, and that whole parishes of 
 them received the extreme unction preparatory to ap¬ 
 proaching death from starvation; and that, too, at a 
 time when the public authorities were declaring that 
 the food was too abundant. 
 
 It may be observed, that our Protestant Clergymen 
 always keep the worst word that they have to bestow, 
 to bestow upon Popery. They mortally hate the Ca¬ 
 tholic Priests, men who have no wives, and who hoard 
 up no fortunes ; men who never wear buckskin breeches 
 and go a fox-hunting; men who never sally out at the 
 head of a squadron to collect tithes; men who do not 
 go rambling all the world over, but who live with their 
 flocks ; men who do not pocket millions in the amount 
 of tithes, and hand the religious education of the people 
 over to Joshua Watson, wine and spirit merchant, 
 Mincing-lane, Fenchurch-street, London; men who 
 have no cant, no evangelical twattle, no sighing, no 
 sobbing, and the devil knows what. Our Parsons know 
 very well why they dislike the Catholic Priests. They 
 
EARL OF RODEN. 
 
 315 
 
 know, in short, that, if these Priests had fair play, 
 they would carry on conversion indeed. Our Par* 
 sons are cunning enough; but it does not require 
 much cunning to perceive how soon they would be 
 ousted, if the Catholic Priests had but a fair chance 
 against them. 
 
 Besides this, our parsons remember how their prede¬ 
 cessors first got possession of the good things of the 
 Church. They remember old Hal and all his tricks 
 and all his wives. They remember his subornings, 
 menacings, bribings, cuttings, maimings, hangings, and 
 burnings. They remember his sequestrations, and con¬ 
 fiscations. They cannot but look back to him as the 
 fountain of their possessions and their power. They, 
 therefore, acting upon the Spanish proverb, hate the 
 Catholics for this reason as well as the reason before 
 mentioned, Methodist, Quaker, Jumper, Unitarian, Jew, 
 Turk, Deist, or Atheist; any thing they like better than 
 a Catholic; and Joshua Watson’s Society for “pro¬ 
 moting Christian knowledge,” publishes ten tracts 
 against the Catholics where they publish one against 
 the Deists and Atheists. Thus, though nobody else at 
 the meeting said any thing about any particular sect, 
 the Father in God could not hold his tongue upon the 
 subject. He must let his ill will peep out, even upon 
 an occasion like this, when there was such a boasting 
 of universal benevolence and philanthropy. 
 
 But was the Bishop aware that he-was giving his 
 sanction to rebellion in South America'? Is he aware 
 of the doctrine which he cooks up for a country nearer 
 home ? He is not aware of this, perhaps ; but to a cer¬ 
 tainty that doctrine will be cooked up. South America 
 being at a great distance does not excite so much alarm. 
 To seize upon Church property there, and to apply it 
 to public purposes, appear to our old Pittites to be right 
 enough. It is very strange, that they should seem to 
 have entirely forgotten all their outcry against the Re¬ 
 publicans of France for what they call their sacrilege. 
 If it were sacrilege to seize upon Church property in 
 France, why is it not sacrilege to do the like in South 
 America ? 
 
316 
 
 LETTER TO THE 
 
 And now let 'me address myself once more to the 
 Bishop. Between the years ninety-three and ninety- 
 five, wonderful were the praises which our church be- 
 stowed on the French church, and especiallv the priests; 
 but that which appeared the most wonderful was their 
 praising the Pope and the Catholic religion. The 
 Bishop of Rochester, in a charge to his clergy, bade 
 them look upon the French Catholic priests as their 
 brethren. This was wonderful to me, who had always 
 been told, that the Pope was the beast with seven heads 
 and ten horns: that he was the man of sin; and that 
 he was the whore of Babylon. I never had troubled 
 my head much about the matter, and I comprehended 
 nothing of this abusive application. But, I gathered 
 from it, that the popish clergy were a set of very wick¬ 
 ed devils, whom it was clearly my duty to hate, with¬ 
 out any further inquiry. I was, therefore, not a little 
 surprised when I saw the French Catholic priests re¬ 
 ceived as brothers by our parsons. Since that, my sur¬ 
 prise has entirely ceased ; for I have found, that the 
 parties were not brothers in Christ, but brothers in 
 tithes. If the French people confiscated tithes, the 
 English people might do the same. They will do it } 
 indeed ; but that is not the question at present: if the 
 French people confiscated Church property, it was evi¬ 
 dent that sort of property here would be brought into 
 imminent danger. Therefore our pulpits rang with re- 
 vilings against the French people ; and, in fact, for 
 what ? For having put down those who were under 
 him, whom our parsons called the beast, the man of 
 sin, and the scarlet whore of Babylon, with robes steep¬ 
 ed in the blood of saints. It was an affair of tithe alto¬ 
 gether : the French people had put down tithes, but it 
 would not do to cry out against them for that; there¬ 
 fore they were represented as sacrilegious wretches, 
 blasphemers, enemies of God, when all the while they 
 were only enemies of tithes. 
 
 This was the foundation of the friendship of our par¬ 
 sons for the French Catholic priests. They have no 
 such feelings for the priests in South America ; though 
 the religion of their priests is just the same as the reli 
 
EARL OF RODEN. 
 
 317 
 
 gion of the priests of France was. Our parsons do not 
 imagine that we shall take any example from the South 
 American people in putting down of priests. Our par¬ 
 sons know that that country is far off, and our news¬ 
 papers, by keeping up a constant lying backward and 
 forward, will always prevent us from knowing what is 
 actually going on. Therefore, they have no feeling in 
 common with those priests. Then the black-coated, 
 honies of ours, who always smell danger further than 
 any body else, begin to perceive that the House of 
 Bourbon is growing strong. They know very well 
 that that strength is greatly favourable to the Irish Ca¬ 
 tholics. Yes, though you may think that I am smelling 
 for them, my Lord, they do smell this for themselves. 
 They know that British weakness, relative or positive, 
 is strength to the Irish Catholics, whom they fear more 
 than at any former time. Our parsons, for those rea¬ 
 sons, do not like to see an increase of the strength of 
 the House of Bourbon; and they know well how 
 powerful that House would become, if Spanish Ame¬ 
 rica were completely tranquillized. Hence, my Lord, 
 the Bishop’s joy at “the prospect now opening in Co¬ 
 lumbia hence his anxious wishes for the success of 
 the insurgents; hence his praise of the insurgent go¬ 
 vernment ! As to the fact, I should not wonder on hear¬ 
 ing that the government was completely overturned; 
 but that is no matter. We have got at a solution of 
 this mysterious language of the Bishop, and now we 
 will, for a little, at any rate, take our leave of the Fa¬ 
 ther in God, who, perhaps, will not be so forward ano¬ 
 ther time in making speeches against Popery, at the 
 Freemasons’ Tavern. 
 
 It is a pity that the reporter was not able to give us 
 the name of the French Peer who is said to have been 
 present, and who assured t^e Society, that the Pro¬ 
 testants of France were attached to the cause of evan¬ 
 gelical religion. As you dealt in anecdote, my Lord, 
 
 I will do the same. After one of the political brawls 
 at Paris, one of those little revolutions of parties that 
 took place, there was a French physician who saved 
 himself by getting off to America in a Philadelphia 
 
318 
 
 ,ETTER TO THE 
 
 ship. Upon his arrival, he found that the Quakers 
 were the richest part of the community, he put on a 
 buttonless coat, and a hat with a brim eight inches 
 broad, he was not only a “ Friend,” but a friend occa¬ 
 sionally moved by the spirit; and a French lady and I 
 (she pestering him all the while, and I laughing) ac¬ 
 tually heard him preach in the great meeting-house in 
 Philadelphia. He could not speak English ; but had 
 an interpreter ! yes, the spirit had an interpreter !.— 
 Pray, my Lord Roden, was the spirit that you talked 
 about, a spirit of this sort ?—But, to make short of my 
 story, John Marselack became the Quaker physician. 
 He got a good deal of money, nobody was heard of 
 among the Friends but John Marselack. It was such 
 a triumph ! to make a convert of a celebrated French 
 Physician. It was in a small way like your great So¬ 
 ciety making a field in South America white for the 
 harvest! In about two years, however, John Marse- 
 lack’s party having got uppermost again in France, and 
 John having got some pretty good sacks of dollars, ana 
 being heartily tired of the restraint and mummery in 
 which he was compelled to live, prepared to return to 
 France. 11 Friends” were in despair; there was such 
 a whining and such a sighing! At last the day came, 
 and with a thousand silent squeezes by the hand, and 
 with sweetmeats enough to serve twenty families for a 
 year, off he came in a fine merchant ship, but not with¬ 
 out six elders to accompany Friend John down to the 
 mouth of the river Delaware. There they took leave 
 of their brother broadbrim.—They went back in the 
 pilot-boat; and John, before they were half a mile from 
 the ship, went down into the cabin, stripped off his 
 Quaker garb, and put on a suit of uniform of the na¬ 
 tional garb of France, came upon the deck, with a fiddle 
 in his hand, playing the t^ine of c,a ira. 
 
 Now, my Lord, far be it from me to suppose, that a 
 French Peer would play you a naughty trick like this; 
 but to believe that there is such a thing as a French 
 Methodist in the world, I must see him with my own 
 eyes,, hear him with my own ears, touch him with my 
 own hands, and have a certificate of his birth, parent- 
 
EARL OF RODEN. 
 
 319 
 
 age, and education. A sister society of yours, the 
 “ Continental Society,” as it calls itself, lament most 
 feelingly, that they can do nothing with the French i 
 Frenchmen, I respect you for it. Keep tyranny out of 
 your country, if you can ; but, with still more care, keep 
 from you all-degrading cant. In conclusion, (and the 
 time for concluding is come,) let me ask Lord Harrow- 
 by, who tells us that the spread of the Bible is the 
 Lord’s work, whether the readers of the Bible in China 
 and elsewhere, have ever heard of what passed in the 
 House of Commons in the year 1789; whether care 
 has been taken to inform them of what boroughs mean; 
 whether, in short, the history of the country from which 
 these Bibles go, is made known to those who are told 
 that the book contains the means of their salvation. 
 
 As to yourself, my Lord, (for I must pass over the 
 Watson, the Rose, and the Gambier, which I find at 
 the foot of the report;) as to yourself, my Lord, I had 
 said enough, I thought, already, but happened to see 
 towards the close of your speech, that God had given 
 you your share, my memory sent me back to the Sine¬ 
 cure List, where I found you to be Auditor-General of 
 something in Ireland, with the sum of three thousand 
 five hundred and sixty-eight pounds [about $17,126] 
 a-year; and I found that you had enjoyed this with 
 your father from the year eighteen hundred. I found 
 also that your father was searcher of the port of Gal¬ 
 way, with a receipt of six hundred and five pounds 
 a-year. What you have had besides, I am sure I can¬ 
 not say ; but supposing you to have had only the one 
 office, you and your father have received from that 
 office alone, eighty-five thousand six hundred and thir¬ 
 ty-two pounds; and you yourself now receive, at least, 
 and may receive for forty or fifty years longer (if the 
 present system continue) three thousand five hundred 
 and sixty-eight pounds a-year. What your relations 
 have received and still receive, I have not, at present, 
 the means of pointing out; but, my Lord, you tell us 
 yourself that you once lived in the pursuit of nothing 
 but pleasure. “ Whether God have yet given you 
 your share of griefs,” 1 know not j but, I know well, 
 
320 
 
 LETTER TO THE EARL OF RODEN. 
 
 tnat this miserable nation has been compelled to give 
 you your full share of money. I do know a man, my 
 Lord, who has had much more than his due share of 
 griefs. An innocent man, half flayed alive by the 
 scourges of merciless Orangemen: and can I hear you, 
 with every luxury upon earth at your command, sup¬ 
 plied too, by the sweat of the people ; can I hear you 
 complain of griefs, and not think of the sufferings of 
 the half-murdered Byrne ! 
 
 I am, my Lord, 
 
 Your most obedient and most humble servant, 
 
 WILLIAM COBBETT. 
 
I 
 
 A LETTER 
 
 TO HIS 
 
 HOLINESS, POPE PIUS VIII. 
 
 ON THE CHARACTER, THE CONDUCT, AND THE VIEWS, OP 
 THE CATHOLIC ARISTOCRACY AND LAWYERS OF ENGLAND 
 AND IRELAND. 
 
 Barn-Elm Farm , 10 th Nov. 1828. 
 May it Please your Holiness, * 
 
 1. I, who am the author of the li History of the 
 Protestant Reformation,” having been informed by 
 a Catholic gentleman, of undoubted veracity, that, at 
 an interview, some time ago, with your Holiness, at the 
 Vatican, you, after some praises bestowed on my work, 
 expressed to him your wonder how it was that the Ca¬ 
 tholics of this Kingdom did not cause me to be a 
 Member of the Parliament; and that you hoped, that 
 a considerable part of the rent , collected from the Ca¬ 
 tholics in Ireland, went , at any rate , to be the reward 
 of my unparalleled services to the Catholics in every 
 part of the world. This information has induced me 
 to make a statement of the true reasons fftr that which 
 excited the wonder of Your Holiness; and, in order 
 to do this satisfactorily, it will be necessary for me to 
 describe the. character, conduct, and views of the Ca¬ 
 tholic Aristocracy and Lawyers of England and Ire¬ 
 land ; after which description Your Holiness will cease 
 to wonder upon the subject of the seat in Parliament, 
 and also on the subject of the Catholic Rent. 
 
 2. If your Holiness wondered why the opulent Ca- 
 
 
322 
 
 LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 tholics did not put me into the Parliament, what will 
 he your wonder, "when you shall hear the following 
 facts; namely, that there is held in London an annual 
 (or more frequent) meeting of the noblemen, gentle¬ 
 men, and other opulent Catholics in general, who call 
 themselves the English Catholic Association: that 
 this Association well knew, for they constantly had 
 them under their eye, my often-repeated and strenuous 
 exertions to cause all my Catholic countrymen to be 
 cleared from the obloquy that rested upon them; that 
 they had, in 1824, witnessed these exertions of mine 
 during several years ; that, in the last-mentioned year, 
 at one of their meetings held in London, one of the 
 Members of the Association made a motion, or propo¬ 
 sition, that the Association should tender to me, in 
 token of its gratitude, a copy of the History of England, 
 written by the Rev. Dr. Lingard, a Catholic Priest; 
 that, upon this proposition being made, one Charles 
 Butler, an English Lawyer, besought the proposer to 
 withdraw the pfoposition, and added, that he would go 
 upon his knees, if nothing else would induce him to 
 suffer the proposition to be withdrawn ; that, the rea¬ 
 son assigned by this Lawyer was, that Mr. Cobbett 
 was known to be hostile to, and to be disliked by, 
 many of those Members of the Parliament, who were 
 friendly to what he called the “ Catholic cause that 
 the Association did, at last, set aside the proposition; 
 that this transaction, this mark of deep ingratitude, took 
 place before any part of the History of the Protest¬ 
 ant Reformation was written ; that, since that work 
 Was written and published, this Association has voted 
 its thanks to numerous persons, upon different occa¬ 
 sions, and to'some persons for books written in defence 
 of the adherents to the ancient faith, but that it never 
 has shown towards me the slightest mark of approba¬ 
 tion ; and that, as to putting me into Parliament, though 
 Several individuals amongst them have the absolute 
 .oower of doing it as completely as your Holiness has 
 vhe power of consecrating a Bishop, or ordaining a 
 Priest, even in your own States, so far from having a 
 disposition to do this, not one single Catholic Noble- 
 
LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 323 
 
 man subscribed a single farthing towards putting me 
 into Parliament, in 1826, when I offered myself for that 
 purpose, with the exception of the Earl of Shrews¬ 
 bury, who, having an income of about fifty thousand 
 pounds sterling a-year, found, in the generosity of his 
 pious, zealous, and grateful soul, to subscribe the very 
 munificent sum of five pounds , while there was one 
 ,‘otestant Nobleman to subscribe fifty pounds. 
 
 3. Lest the Catholics of other countries should sup¬ 
 pose, and lest the Catholics of my own country in par¬ 
 ticular, should entertain the supposition, that I wrote 
 the History of the Protestant Reformation with a view 
 of obtaining reward , of any sort, from the Catholics, it 
 is necessary that I should state to your Holiness, or 
 rather, that I should repeat, that this proof of the mon¬ 
 strous ingratitude of these noble and opulent Catholics, 
 was given me before I put pen to paper in the writing 
 of that now-celebrated book. Not only had I this proof 
 of the ingratitude of this description of persons, but I 
 noticed it in print at the very time that I notified my 
 intention of writing the book. On the 22d October, 
 1824, the transaction took place as above mentioned, at 
 the Catholic Association: on the 30th of that same 
 month I published some remarks on the proceeding, and 
 concluded those remarks in the following words ad¬ 
 dressed to this Association. Having in the former part 
 of the article declared my intention of writing a His¬ 
 tory of the Protestant Reformation, I concluded it thus: 
 <£ I do assure you, Gentlemen, that I have no objection 
 to your, or any body else, presenting a copy of my His¬ 
 tory to Dr. Lingard, whose laborious work will never, 
 until the last page shall have been destroyed by the 
 hand of time, produce a thousandth part of the effect 
 that mine will produce in the space of three years.” 
 The work has not been published complete, more than 
 thirty-one months; it was sixteen months coming 
 forth, in monthly numbers ; it was concluded on the 
 31st March, 1826 j and it has, literally, gone over the 
 whole world. 
 
 4. I beg your Holiness to bear in mind, that I was, 
 therefore, fully apprised of the ingratitude of this body 
 
324 
 
 LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 of persons even before I began to write the book ; and 
 that, therefore, I could have been actuated by nothing 
 but a love of truth and justice, and a sense of my duty 
 towards my country. But, as the idea occurred to your 
 Holiness that I might possibly have reward from Ire¬ 
 land in my eye , particularly as the Catholic Rent was, 
 at that time, begun to be collected, by a Catholic As¬ 
 sociation in Ireland, the leaders in which were chiefly 
 very noisy, but very unprincipled, lawyers, it is neces¬ 
 sary that I state, that I disclaimed, from the beginning, 
 all reward whatsoever, coming from that Association ;* 
 and that I exposed the corrupt intrigues of the leaders 
 of that Association during the first five months that the 
 History of the Protestant Reformation was going 
 through the press. It is well known to every man in 
 England and Ireland, that I would not, on any account, 
 or in any emergency, receive a farthing of that rent if 
 it were tendered to me; and it is equally well known 
 to every man in these countries (though the fact will 
 ’ shock every true Catholic upon the face of the earth, 
 who has not yet heard of it) that a large part of this 
 Rent , the fruits of the piety of the poor Catholics of 
 Ireland, is, in part, expended by the unprincipled men 
 who receive it, in the paying of prostituted writers to 
 vilify and calumniate the author of the Protestant Re¬ 
 formation ! These men have established newspapers 
 of their own; they have hired others which were al 
 ready established ; and one of the great purposes to 
 which they apply these publications is, to endeavour, 
 by the foulest of all possible means, to do injury to the 
 
 * To put this beyond all doubt, I honestly state, that, soon 
 after the Catholic Rent began to be collected, a Member of that 
 body wrote to me, suggesting, that out of this fund the Associa¬ 
 tion ought to pay me for leave to republish and to circulate the 
 Register in Ireland, a suggestion which I instantly rejected. 
 Before this time the Association had sent me a. vote of thanks ; 
 and had also voted, that it was the duty of its Members to pro¬ 
 mote the circulation of the Register. But, in 1825, the leading 
 Members of this Association having proposed to the Government 
 to disfranchise the great body of Catholic freeholders in Ireland , 
 as the price of “ emancipation ” for themselves ; that is to say, 
 having proposed to take from half a million of poor Catholics 
 their best and most precious right; having, by the mouths of 
 
jETTER to the pope. 
 
 325 
 
 character of him who is an object of praise anil grati¬ 
 tude with every sincere Catholic in every part of the 
 world. The Catholic Association in London, as if 
 fearing to be surpassed in ingratitude, falsehood, and 
 malignity, by their sister Association of Ireland, have 
 established, and support, a publication in London, hav¬ 
 ing the same objects in view. 
 
 5. This conduct in these two bodies of persons ap¬ 
 pears to be so unnatural, so opposed to every ordinary 
 feeling of the human heart; so directly in opposition to 
 what people in general must think to be the interests 
 of the parties themselves ; that, without an explana¬ 
 tion of the causes, the Catholic world, and, indeed, 
 every body else, must be lost in amazement in the con¬ 
 templation of such a hideous prodigy. It is notorious 
 that my work has softened all those asperities against 
 the Catholics that heretofore existed in the breasts of 
 numerous Protestants ; that it has dissipated a great 
 part of the prejudices that existed against the ancient 
 
 two of their leaders, the one named Daniel- O’Connell,* and 
 the other Richard Sheil, both of them Irish Lawyers; having 
 made this proposition to the government; having expressly 
 pledged itself it) assist in thus enslaving the poor Catholics of 
 Ireland, and having, with the aid of certain persons in England, 
 particularly of one Burdett, a baronet, actually procured a bill 
 to be brought into Parliament to effect this unjust and cruel 
 purpose; the Association having, at the same time, and by the 
 same organs, suggested to the Government, that the Catholic 
 Bishops and Priests of Ireland should have salaries paid them, 
 by the Government out of the taxes; and that there should be a 
 commission of Catholic Bishops, selected and appointed by the 
 Government , to exercise, in fact, all the functions of a Head of 
 the Catholic churchy which commission was to be revocable at 
 the pleasure of the Government; the Association having thus 
 suggested to the Government, measures, not only for the en¬ 
 slaving of the poor Catholics of Ireland, but for the subversion 
 of the Catholic Church itself, in that country; the Association 
 having made this attempt, I used my power to the utmost to 
 prevent the success of the wicked project, which, by the honour 
 and integrity of the House of Lords, was finally defeated, to the 
 cruel mortification of the perfidious projectors. The Association 
 ascribed to me a part, at least, of that decision which prevented 
 its Members from enriching and exalting themselves by addl 
 to the misery and degradation of their poor Catholic countrymen. 
 
 * Mr. O’Connell has since acted a better part towards his countrymen, and 
 the empire at large, which Mr. Cobbett has acknowledged ; and, also, that he 
 was mistaken in attributing to Mr. O’Connell any corrupt motives. 
 
326 
 
 LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 church; that it has caused the Catholics in this king¬ 
 dom to carry their head aloft, and openly pride them¬ 
 selves in their religion, instead of sneaking about and 
 shunning the acknowledgment that they were of it; 
 that the Catholic chapels are much more frequented 
 than they were before the work was published, and that 
 numerous converts, in every populous part of England, 
 have been amongst its effects. These things are noto¬ 
 rious : the celebrity of the book is also notorious : it is 
 equally notorious that, in every Catholic country, it has 
 been honoured with the eulogiums of the highest dig¬ 
 nitaries of the Catholic church: and it is also notorious 
 that it has received the sanction of Your Holiness, and 
 has been printed at the press of the Vatican : it is no¬ 
 torious, further, that the Catholic priests in England 
 and Ireland, together with all their flocks, in every 
 part of the kingdom, with the exception of the aristo¬ 
 cracy and the lawyers, feel and express towards me, 
 upon all occasions, gratitude the most profound. One 
 proof of this I cannot refrain from citing; and I do it 
 for the double purpose of doing justice to myself, but 
 more especially for that of doing honour, as far as I am 
 able, to the memory of the truly great man, whose let¬ 
 ter (written to me just after the appearance of the first 
 number of my book) I am now about to insert, and in 
 which letter Your Holiness will find a corroboration 
 of what I have said, and shall say, relative to our Ca¬ 
 tholic aristocracy and lawyers: 
 
 “ Wolverhampton , 6 th Dec. 1824. 
 
 “ Dear Sir, —In rendering you the warm thanks ot 
 a numerous class of British subjects, the most calum¬ 
 niated and oppressed of any who inhabit these Islands, 
 as well as my own, for your just and generous defence 
 of them, I cannot adopt more appropriate terms than 
 those of the great Pope Leo, the first of his name, in 
 speaking of one of the mysteries, £ Eme edit multumque 
 super emmet humani eloquii facultatem magnitndo 
 bcnejicii , et hide oritur dijjicultas fandi , unde adest 
 ratio non tacendV * But, Sir, I cannot express this 
 
 * The greatness of the obligation exceeds and far surpasses 
 the power of any human expression; and the difficulty of ex- 
 
LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 327 
 
 general sentiment of the Catholics without lamenting 
 the pusillanimity of a particular Association of them, 
 who, influenced by the declarations and entreaties of a 
 certain counsellor among them, refused to afford their 
 powerful advocate the pitiful countenance of presenting 
 him with a book upon sale ; lest they should appear to 
 have adopted all his political opinions ! It does not, 
 indeed, become the Helotes of the state, to talk of pu¬ 
 rifying its senate, lest they should be reproached as the 
 plebeians were of old: ‘ Antecjuam liberi eatis domi - 
 nari vultis Still, no policy ought to prevent us 
 
 from testifying our gratitude to our disinterested, no 
 less than powerful, defender'. It is plain, Sir, from the 
 mention which you have made, in one of the Registers, 
 of the counsellor alluded to, that you have never read 
 my Commentaries on a part of his writings ; or, you 
 would have witnessed such a mean degradation of 
 himself and of his religion to every party, and subdivi¬ 
 sion of a party, who had power , or who seemed likely 
 to have it , during the forty-four years of his manage¬ 
 ment of Catholic affairs, as would have enabled you to 
 form a just estimate of his declarations. > 
 
 “ I have the honour to remain, 
 
 “ Dear Sir, 
 
 u Your faithful and grateful humble servant, 
 
 “ J. MILNER. 
 
 <( To William Cobbett, Esq., 
 
 “ Kensington.” 
 
 6. These are the words of an English Catholic 
 Bishop, whose long life, which, however, ended too 
 soon, was spent in the due and zealous discharge of 
 his priestly duties, and in most ably defending and up¬ 
 holding the character and the doctrines of the Catholic 
 Church, and the rights, civil and religious, of the Ca¬ 
 tholic people. Seeing the testimony, and an expression 
 of such profound gratitude, from this celebrated and 
 venerated prelate, who was the greatest glory of the 
 
 pressing my feelings arises from the same source as does the 
 reason which induces me to break silence. 
 
 * Before ye have obtained your '-eedom, ye wish to play th® 
 tyrant. 
 
328 
 
 LETTER TO THE ROPE. 
 
 OathoL^ Church, England has had to boast of during 
 the last two hundred years; and, apprised of all the 
 facts above stated, the sincere Catholic, who is a stran¬ 
 ger to our domestic politics, which connect themselves 
 with this question of religion, must be utterly astound¬ 
 ed at the relation which I have given relative to the 
 conduct of the Catholic aristocracy and lawyers. It is 
 necessary, therefore, that I fully explain the causes of 
 this apparent prodigy in nature. But, before I do that, 
 it is not unnecessary that I explain who and what I 
 myself am ; and also the cause of my writing the His¬ 
 tory of the Protestant Reformation. 
 
 7. I was, what is called, born and bred at the plough 
 tail, and received no book-learning of any sort, except 
 that which I myself acquired, during eight years that I 
 was in the army, part of the time a private soldier, and 
 the larger part a non-commissioned officer. I have now 
 been twenty-seven years the author of a Weekly Pub¬ 
 lication, called the Political Register. I was born at 
 Farnham, in the county of Surrey, which town is 
 over-looked by that very palace which was formerly 
 inhabited by William of Wickham, and by so many 
 other munificent Catholic Bishops of Winchester; and 
 out of which palace a late Protestant Bishop SOLD 
 SMALL BEER TO THE PEOPLE, as stated by 
 me in paragraph 124, vol. I. of the History of the. Pro¬ 
 testant Reformation, where • the fact will remain for 
 ages to warm the heart of the Catholic with just pride, 
 and to make the Protestant cheek burn with shame. 
 At about a mile from this town of Farnham, stand, at 
 a place called Weverly, the ruins of an abbey, which 
 was formerly the abode of Cistercian Monks. When 
 I was a little boy, I worked in the grounds near these 
 ruins, of the former magnificence of which some traces 
 still are left. I frequently prowled about amongst thes-e 
 ruins by myself, climbed up on the ivy which partly 
 covered the walls, where I found birds’ eggs, or young 
 birds, to take. Persons so young have very little 
 thought; but I used to wonder why such ruin had been 
 made. At the age of about ten, I saw, by accident, 
 the fine Cathedral of Winchester, about twenty miles 
 
LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 329 
 
 from my own home. Little impression was made on 
 my mind by the sight, other than a sort of a vague 
 idea, that England must have had a different people 
 living in it, in the days when such buildings were 
 raised. At the age of fourteen, or thereabouts, I saw 
 the Cathedral at Salisbury, which strengthened the 
 idea that I had formerly imbibed, that it must have been 
 a very different race of people that inhabited England, 
 in former days. These thoughts were, however, ba¬ 
 nished from my mind by the passions, the noise, and 
 the bustle of that sort of life in which I arrived at man¬ 
 hood ; and, as “ Popery and Slavery ,” and “ Slavery 
 and Popery ,” had been continually dinned into the 
 ears of us all ; and as it was not my business to dive 
 into the question, I went on taking the assertions upon 
 trust until the year 1818, when I arrived at the age of 
 fifty-two years. At this time the people of England 
 were in very great distress ; and those poor rates , 
 which rose out of the “ Reformation,” and the history 
 of which poor-rates your Holiness has read in paragraph 
 331 to paragraph 338, vol. I. of my work; these poor- 
 rates having become very burthensome to the owners 
 and occupiers of the land, one Malthus, a Protestant 
 Church Parson, wrote a book to show that the poor 
 had no claim upon the land for relief; and that they 
 ought to he left to that law of nature which doomed 
 them and their families to perish , if they had no 
 lawful means of their own whereby to obtain sus¬ 
 tenance ; and he actually called upon the Parliament 
 to pass a law to this horrid effect. I, who had been 
 bred amongst the labouring classes, read, with indigna¬ 
 tion, of a project like this; and I wrote and published 
 a letter to the Parson upon the subject. 
 
 8. In order to overset his assertion, that the poor 
 have no claim upon the land for relief it was neces¬ 
 sary for me to look back into History. I knew very 
 well that the laws for the relief of the poor had their 
 origin in the forty-third year of the reign of the horrible 
 Elizabeth ; but it was necessary to ascertain the sources 
 whence the poor were provided for previous to that 
 bloody reign. I went back to the very origin of the 
 
330 
 
 LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 common law of England; I examined the canons of 
 the Catholic church ; I read all the acts of parliament 
 relative to the subject. This inquiry, while it recalled 
 from banishment my early thoughts about the ruins of 
 Weverly Abbey, and about the Cathedrals, brought me 
 acquainted with the causes, the progress, and the effects, 
 of the Protestaii: Reformation : it enabled me to lay 
 prostrate the cruel doctrines of Parson Malthcs ; but 
 it did a great deal more than that; it made me asha¬ 
 med of having been, for so many years of my life, delu¬ 
 ded by crafty and designing hypocrites to make one 
 amongst the revilers, or the contemners, at least, of the 
 religion of my fathers; of that religion which fed the 
 poor out of the tithes and other revenues of the church ; 
 of that religion which had inspired men with piety and 
 generosity, to erect every edifice now remaining in the 
 country, worth the trouble of walking a hundred yards 
 to see, and had created every seminary of learning, and 
 caused to be enacted every law, and to be framed every 
 institution, of which England has a right to be proud. 
 
 9. I could not know all this myself, and not, as far 
 as I had the power, communicate that knowledge to 
 others, without being guilty of falsehood and injustice ; 
 for, to suppress the truth is falsehood, and to omit to 
 do justice is to be unjust. I, therefore, resolved, in 
 that year, ISIS, to make my countrymen see how 
 grossly they had been deceived upon this subject, 
 which resolution I expressed in one of my Registers 
 published at that time. So that six years passed be¬ 
 tween the forming of the resolution and the execution 
 of the duty ; but, in the meanwhile, I read still more 
 upon the subject, and set myself to work when duly 
 prepared, and at a time when my great increase of po¬ 
 pularity as a writer was likely to aid in the extension 
 of the effect of a work, to send which forth to the world 
 I regarded as a most sacred duty towards my country 
 men, and, above all things, towards the memory of our 
 wise, just, generous, and pious, forefathers. 
 
 10. Such being the motives which led to the writing 
 of the History of the Protestant Reformation ; su^h 
 oeing, also, well known to be the motives, lor I nad 
 
LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 331 
 
 repeatedly announced my intention, and the grounds 
 of that intention, and had repeatedly also expressed 
 my resolution not to accept of pecuniary reward in any 
 shape ; such being the motives, and the work itself 
 being such as it was, and having all the effects which 
 are now well known to the whole world, that world 
 must not only be shocked at the monstrous ingratitude 
 of the persons above-mentioned, but also must be 
 anxious to be made acquainted with the real cause of 
 that ingratitude; must be anxious to have it explained 
 to them how it has happened, that nature herself would 
 seem to have inverted her laws upon this particular oc¬ 
 casion. This cause, therefore, I will now proceed to 
 explain. 
 
 11. It is pretty well known to all statesmen, and 
 well informed persons, in foreign nations, that Eng¬ 
 land, once so powerful and so jealous of her honour, so 
 apt to be rather too forward than too backward in as¬ 
 serting her rights, and in resenting injuries and insults; 
 it is now pretty well known to all such persons, that 
 she is in a strangely altered state, and that, some how 
 or other, while she maintains an army at home, about 
 eight times as numerous and expensive as she ever 
 maintained during any former period of peace, she sees 
 herself reduced to the necessity of standing an inactive 
 spectator, while other powers are taking measures and 
 pursuing enterprises, which "she knows, and which 
 every Englishman feels, must of necessity tend to a 
 diminution of her own wealth and power; these things 
 are now become perfectly notorious, throughout all fo¬ 
 reign nations. 
 
 12. At home her situation is still more degrading, 
 and more portentous of evil. The taxes necessary to 
 defray the expenses of a debt, the principal of which 
 amounts to more than the value of all the gold and 
 silver in the whole W'orld ; necessary also to the sup¬ 
 port of nearly one hundred thousand men, in the midst 
 of profound peace, the existence of which men, suppos¬ 
 ing it to be necessary, is of itself a proof of the unfor¬ 
 tunate state of the country; taxes required also for the 
 payment of pensions, sinecures, grants, and placemen 
 
332 
 
 LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 to a greater amount than any other ten nations of the 
 same population ; taxes which are bestowed also on 
 about twenty thousand commissioned officers, naval 
 and military, who are still maintained, and are to be 
 maintained for their lives, on what is called half-pay , 
 and part of which naval and military officers, who, 
 after the end of the war, became parsons in the church , 
 continued, for many years, to receive the naval and 
 military half-pay, and the incomes of their benefices at 
 the same time : the taxes raised for all those purposes, 
 and for many others, with an enumeration of which I 
 will not trouble your Holiness; these taxes, aided by a 
 paper money, by the changes in which they have in 
 fact been nearly doubled since the peace was made ; 
 these taxes thus augmented by the alterations in the 
 value of money, and co-operating with a system of 
 usury and monopoly, now become as general as the 
 air that we breathe ; these taxes, together with their 
 adjuncts, paper money, usury, and monopoly, have be¬ 
 come so burdensome as to have produced more bank¬ 
 ruptcies and insolvencies of persons engaged in trade 
 and agriculture in one single year, than formerly took 
 place in any twenty, or even fifty, successive years ; a 
 fact which will easily be believed, when I state, that 
 the Interest of the Debt alone requires a greater sum 
 annually to pay it, than the sum which is annually re¬ 
 ceived as the rent of all the. lands, all the houses, all 
 the woods, all the mines, and of every other species of 
 real property in this once w r ealthy kingdom. There¬ 
 fore, taxes have been laid on every thing that forms a 
 necessary of life, with the exception of bread and of 
 meat, and these are taxed through the land, and through 
 the labour performed upon the land, and the imple¬ 
 ments used upon it. It will easily be believed that 
 these taxes must be next to unbearable, when I state, 
 with a certain knowledge of the fact, and with a cer¬ 
 tain knowledge that the fact will be denied by no man 
 who has a reputation to lose, that the taxes annually 
 collected in England and Wales, exceed in amount 
 twice the whole sum which is paid in rent for all the 
 lands, houses, and other real property of the kingdom. 
 

 LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 333 
 
 13. It is hardly necessary to state to a person like 
 your Holiness, that, the weight of these taxes must go 
 on pressing downwards, leaving part of their pressure 
 at every stage, squeezing more and more each succes¬ 
 sive class which it finds in its descent, till at last it 
 squeezes the poor, if not actually out of existence, into 
 a state of misery such as God never intended a people 
 to endure, except, perhaps, temporarily, for some great 
 and wise purpose. In order to give your Holiness 
 some idea of the extent of this misery of the people of 
 England, who were formerly the best clad and the best 
 fed people on the face of the earth; in order to give 
 you some idea of the extent of this misery, I will state 
 certain facts wholly undeniable and perfectly notorious. 
 Your Holiness has heard enough of the horrible state 
 of misery in which the people of Ireland are, but I will 
 here confine myself to the people cf once happy Eng¬ 
 land, who never knew misery of any sort until the 
 Protestant Reformation took place, and who never 
 knew misery, even since that epoch, at all to be com¬ 
 pared to that which they suffer now. 
 
 14. General descriptions are, in a case like this, in¬ 
 sufficient for the purpose ; bare assertions, without 
 proof, are of no avail; particular instances are not ade¬ 
 quate to the end, in a case where so many tongues and 
 so many pens are ready to dispute the general infer¬ 
 ence, and where millions of money are at the command 
 of bodies of men, w r ho have the strongest possible inte¬ 
 rest to controvert the conclusion, having at their nod a 
 press wide spreading as the light of the sun, and, gene¬ 
 rally speaking, corrupt as the carrion putrified by the 
 heat of his beams. In such a case, the facts must be 
 indubitable, and must be drawn, if possible, from those 
 who would controvert them if they had the power. 
 
 15. The first fact which I shall relate, consists of a 
 document put forth by the Magistrates of one of the 
 divisions of the county of Dorset. I should premise 
 he^e, that the Magistrates are, by the Law, to regulate 
 the allowance of money, or food, that the labouring 
 poor shall receive. The Magistrates of the Stourmin- 
 ster division of Dorsetshire put forth, on the 21st 
 
334 
 
 LETTER TO THE POPE 
 
 August, 1826, the following scale for feeding the la 
 bouring people. This scale was, in fact, a scale by 
 which the farmers, in all ordinary cases, regulated the 
 price of labour , taking care, in general, that his pay¬ 
 ment did not exceed that which the Magistrates would 
 order to be given, in case any labourer made applica¬ 
 tion to them for relief. The following is a copy of this 
 scale, to which I shall have to add some explanations. 
 
 O 
 
 <D 
 
 * £ 
 
 Ph 
 
 CD 
 
 ■Si? 
 
 ° s 
 
 kj 
 
 Sffe 
 
 £ 
 
 o 
 
 t—i 
 
 m 
 
 i—t 
 
 t> 
 
 >—i 
 
 Q 
 
 W 
 
 £H 
 
 .02 
 
 £ 
 
 k-H 
 
 & 
 
 o 
 
 E-i 
 
 02 
 
 W 
 
 M 
 
 EH 
 
 £ 
 
 W 
 
 o 
 
 «2 
 
 0) 
 
 o 
 
 -a 
 o 
 
 © G 
 
 «-S 
 
 © 
 
 © <D 
 
 Ph M 
 © 2 
 S fcD 
 0.5 
 
 co 
 
 C+H CQ 
 «D ^ 
 
 P$ g 
 
 2 
 
 £ 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 aj 
 
 Ph 
 
 O 
 
 S * 
 
 d © 
 
 G <d 
 
 8* 
 rd © 
 
 <5 © 
 
 rd 
 £ 
 
 © 
 
 wro 
 
 .5 g 
 
 Si 
 
 © 
 
 o 
 
 fa 
 
 G 
 
 2 
 
 o' 
 
 Cfl 
 
 a 
 
 o 
 
 J 
 
 G 
 
 CD 
 
 G 
 
 G 
 
 Gt 
 
 a 
 
 <D 
 
 4 -* 
 
 cj 
 
 CD 
 
 (—» 
 
 s 
 
 cj 
 
 -d 
 
 d 
 
 ri 
 
 >*-» 
 
 02 
 
 © 
 
 rd 
 
 d 
 
 © 
 
 d! 
 
 7 cZ. 
 
 _ 
 
 ^ 2 ® H °° 
 C^) H H H •-( H 
 
 'a 
 
 ^ i~H GO CO C 4 
 
 CO 
 
 Co OJ *-h i—i —« •—i 
 
 -a 
 
 ^ O i!) W U! 
 
 O 
 
 oj 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 . 
 
 1 -^ 
 
 cc (M OJ »—» *—* »—« 
 
 'a 
 
 ^ o oj cr. to m 
 
 
 
 »—t 
 
 Co (M (M i-i 
 
 "a 
 
 H ^ H S U 5 
 
 
 
 »—4 
 
 co ro Cl i—< i—< —h 
 
 ^0 
 
 © 
 
 <*> 
 
 Pd 
 
 3 
 
 a 
 
 ■d 
 
 « . 
 
 © ?» 
 _Q Q-0 
 
 © 
 
 O 
 
 PS 
 
 a 
 
 > 
 
 i, 
 
 $ 
 
 <u 
 
 ctf 
 
 © 
 
 © 
 
 £ 
 
 © 
 
 2 * 
 
 *0 
 
 . w 
 
 * >H » 
 
 © 
 
 © 
 
 >> 
 
 * • 
 
 Tfl 
 
 © 
 
 • > • 
 
 o 
 *o 
 
 • »—I 
 
 -rf >-r 
 •r o 
 bfi „ 
 
 ’ >-2 
 O ^ 
 
 - 
 
 P O . 
 
 G n ^ 
 
 £ ® 
 
 bo 0 .fc2 © 
 
 C g' ^ -© 
 
 "C © jr -h* c 
 s a ® 3 
 
 o c ^ „ „ 
 
 ^ I iJJ 
 
 c! ci cc r ©'d 
 
 u V- t- 
 
 o o o o o 
 
 fe fe fe Ed fa 
 
 cn> 
 
 V* 
 
 O 
 
 G 
 
 CD 
 
 G 
 
 a 4 
 
 CD 
 
 C/i 
 
 G 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 s-. 
 
 G 
 
 O 
 
 T3 
 
 aS 
 
 O c 
 
 J-. CD 
 CD O 
 
 4 -> 
 
 S o 
 
 d ? 
 
 c*-* 
 © o 
 
 C§ 
 ^ a* 
 
 O W 
 +-> • 
 
 ^ W) 
 
 © © 
 .2 « 
 to >• 
 
 d 
 
 C 
 
 © 
 
 © O. 
 © 
 
 bfl 
 
 c 
 
 © 
 
 © 
 
 IS 
 
 O 
 
 w 
 
 H 
 
 O 
 
 £ 
 
LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 335 
 
 16. This county of Dorset is a maritime county, and 
 one of the finest and most fertile in England, abound¬ 
 ing in food of all sorts, in flocks and herds innumerable, 
 and in sheep which yield lambs the finest in the world, 
 but which are all drawn away to feed those who live 
 upon the taxes. I beseech Your Holiness to look at 
 this scale for feeding the labourers of England ; and 
 this scale, you will be pleased to observe, is much 
 about the same, or rather better, than the scale of other 
 counties. The man, the hard labouring man, he who 
 toils from morn to night, is, according to this scale, to 
 receive thirty ounces of bread in a day ; an English 
 ounce being the same as a French ounce in weight. 
 The man may have the thirty ounces in money if he 
 choose ; but the best way of stating his case, is, to 
 state the amount of victuals in the first place. Next, 
 he is to have nothing for fuel, for clothing, for mend¬ 
 ing his clothes, or for washing his clothes, except he 
 deduct it from the thirty ounces of bread, out of which 
 he is to deduct, too, the expense of drink , or he is to 
 drink water; and this, too, Your Holiness will be 
 pleased to observe, not in a climate like that of Italy ; 
 but in a climate where the rain falls on an average, 
 more or less every day, during one half of the days of 
 the year; where the labourer has to walk and to work 
 in the wet; and where there are three months of severe 
 weather, and three months more of weather, such as 
 require fuel in use every day, and where the peftple 
 must be nearly perished, if left destitute of fuel. The 
 weight of the standard quartern loaf, is sixty-nine Eng¬ 
 lish ounces. In this table 11 d” signifies pe?ice, and 
 “s” shillings , and there are twelve-pence in a shilling. 
 Furnished with these facts, foreigners, of whatever 
 country, may judge of the state of degradation and 
 misery, into which the people of England are fallen. 
 
 17. The next fact, or rather two facts, 1 draw from 
 a report that was laid before the House of Commons, 
 in the year 1821, and ordered to be printed by that 
 house. This report came from a committee of that 
 house itself, and had subjoined to it, the evidence of 
 certain gentlemen and farmers who had been called 
 
336 
 
 LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 before the committee. One of the farmers, who came 
 from the county of Sussex, said, that, “ forty years ago, 
 every labouring man in the parish where he lived, 
 brewed his own beer at his own house; and that now, 
 not a single labourer of the parish did the same thing.” 
 The cause of this is, that the tax upon the malt and 
 the hops has been more than doubled, and that poverty 
 has deprived the labourers of their utensils for brew¬ 
 ing; and Your Holiness should be informed, that beer 
 is the general drink in England, and if the labourer 
 cannot get that, he has nothing else except ■water. Be¬ 
 fore the same committee appeared a gentleman from 
 Somersetshire, whose evidence stated, that the labourers 
 in that rich and fine county, which produces fat oxen 
 in such numbers, lived almost exclusively upon pota¬ 
 toes ; and, having been asked, what they carried out 
 into the fields to eat during the day, he answered, that 
 they took cold potatoes , and eat them in the field. 
 
 18. I have mentioned in the History of the Protest¬ 
 ant Reformation, several instances of the misery of the 
 people, and I could now produce many of actual death 
 by starvation ; many others of such degradation, as it is 
 impossible to describe in a manner to do justice to the 
 horrid subject, but, I shall content myself at present, as 
 for as relates to the misery of the people, with men¬ 
 tioning a fact that must carry conviction to the mind 
 of every foreigner. The Parliament has had numerous 
 committees appointed, to inquire into the cause of these 
 increasing evils, which assume, at last, a truly fright¬ 
 ful aspect; and, during the last two years, the House 
 of Commons has had a committee to inquire, whether 
 the misery of the country might not be lessened by 
 getting rid of a part of the people ; that is to say, by 
 sending them away in ships across the sea, to the 
 northern parts of America! The very idea will shock 
 every man upon earth, whose ear it will reach. Never¬ 
 theless, the proposition has been seriously made to the 
 Parliament, and that too, by a man who belongs 10 the 
 Ministry. In order to obtain the means, or in other 
 words to pay the expense, of thus sending away a part 
 of the people, this man proposed that the poor rates 
 
LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 337 
 
 
 should be mortgaged ! Your Holiness will certainly 
 not be able to understand the proposition, unless I give 
 you some explanation. Every parish is compelled by 
 law, to provide for the relief of necessitous persons; 
 and this provision is made by means of a tax levied 
 upon the lands and the houses. Now, this man wished 
 money to be borrowed of the Jews, or of any body that 
 would lend it, and for the parishes to be bound to pay 
 the interest upon the loan, the principal of which was 
 to be applied to the sending away of the people. This 
 scheme was not, indeed, adopted ; it did not become a 
 law; but the bare proposition must prove to all the 
 world, the wretched and distracted state in which the 
 affairs of this nation now are. 
 
 19. Poverty and misery have always been, are now, 
 and always must be, the prolific parents of crime j and 
 thus has it happened here. During the last session of 
 Parliament, the Earl of Caernarvon declared in his 
 place in the House of Lords, that the whole of the la¬ 
 bourers surrounding his parish, in the North of Hamp¬ 
 shire, were either poachers or thieves. But, something 
 still more authentic and undeniable I have to produce 
 from a petition to Parliament from the whole of the 
 magistrates of the county of Warwick, signed at their 
 general Sessions, held on the fourteenth day of January 
 of this present year. In this Petition the Magistrates 
 complain of the alarming increase of crime, particularly 
 amongst the juvenile part of the male inhabitants; and 
 they conclude by praying for a law to be passed to 
 enable the Magistrates to punish juvenile delinquents 
 by their own authority, and without bringing them to 
 public trial; that is to say, to such an extent has 
 crime increased, and so dreadful is its progress, that 
 these Magistrates think it necessary that, in an endless 
 number of cases, the trial by jury , the pride and boast 
 of Englishmen, the best safeguard for their property, 
 liberty, and lives, the most precious legacy of their 
 wise and just and brave Catholic ancestors; these Ma¬ 
 gistrates, all the noblemen, and all the gantlemen of a 
 very populous and opulent county, pray that this sacred 
 law, this best part of the whole of our Constitution, 
 
338 
 
 LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 may be set aside with regard to all the young people in 
 the country, to whom it is more necessary than to any 
 other class! What, then, must be the state of this 
 county of Warwick? How terrific the increase of its 
 crimes ! One of these magistrates, a Baronet, named 
 E. E. Wilmot, wrote and published, in the early part 
 of this year, a pamphlet to show the necessity of such 
 new regulation; and this gentleman, amongst the rea¬ 
 sons which he assigns for the increase of crime, has 
 one which I state in his own words. u Our prisons are 
 infinitely more comfortable, and the food allowed in 
 them much more certain and palatable, than nine out 
 of ten of the prisoners enjoyed at their own homes ; and 
 thus their condition is really improved by the very 
 means employed as a punishment .” 
 
 20. Let that fact speak for itself; only with this ad¬ 
 dition, that, the scale for feeding the labourers in Berk¬ 
 shire, gave the labourer little more than half as much, 
 when I examined the matter in 1826, as was allowed 
 to the convicted felon in the jail; so that the honest 
 and hard-working labourer was nearly starved, while 
 the thief, the house-breaker, and criminal of every other 
 description, were living tolerably well. While this is 
 the state of the labouring people, the soldiers are paid 
 double what they were paid forty years ago; for, Avhile 
 the Magistrates of Dorsetshire allow from three shillings 
 and a penny to one shilling and ten pence (varying ac¬ 
 cording to the price of bread ;) while this is the allow¬ 
 ance to a hard working labouring man, for a week, the 
 lowest of the foot soldiers are paid seven shillings and 
 seven-pence a week, and are secured meat and bread 
 at a low fixed price, and have fuel, candle-light, and 
 clothing and lodging, furnished them in addition. For¬ 
 merly the pay of the soldier was not half so much as 
 the common wages of the labouring man ; now it is 
 more than double the amount of those wages; which 
 fact alone, if there were no other, would be sufficient 
 to enable any foreign statesman to judge of the fearful 
 change which has taken place in this country. 
 
 21. To show the rapid progress of crime, I state 
 from reports laid before the Parliament this year, that 
 
LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 339 
 
 the expense for the maintenance of prisoners in the city 
 of London, was, in the year 1S11, seven thousand seven 
 hundred and nine pounds ; and that in the year 1827, 
 it was nineteen thousand two hundred and seventy-six 
 pounds; that in the rest of the county of Middlesex, 
 the expense in 1811 was fifteen thousand six hundred 
 and sixteen pounds; and that in 1827, it was twenty- 
 one thousand eight hundred and one pounds ; that, at 
 one jail in Lancashire the total number of persons 
 committed for felony, in the year 1809, was one hund¬ 
 red and eighty-eight, and that the number committed to 
 the same jail for felony, in the year 1826, was nine 
 hundred and thirty-seven. Such has been, and is the 
 progress of crime in this country, till at last, there is 
 scarcely any 'poor man that is not looked upon as a 
 probable thief. In order to obtain security for their 
 property, the landlords, farmers, and others, keep nightly 
 watches in some cases ; and in others form themselves 
 into associations for the detection and prosecution of 
 thieves, finding the laws of the land insufficient for the 
 purpose. At a meeting of an association of this sort, 
 held in the county of Suffolk, of which meeting Lord 
 Huntingfield was the chairman ; the chairman said, 
 cc that there was nothing now that the thieves would 
 not steal; from the barns, pig-styes, fowl-houses, and 
 also the most trifling articles.” He said, that, u the 
 state of the agricultural population was deplorable,” 
 and mentioned that, “ during the recent harvest such 
 crowds had attacked his fields to glean in them, that 
 he was obliged to hire constables at half-a-crown a day 
 to keep them in order.” 
 
 22. Such, may it please Your Holiness, is the state 
 of this country, which was once so solidly rich, so truly 
 free, so happy and so honest. The change has come 
 upon us so rapidly within the last forty years, and the 
 causes are so visible, that the nation must be lost with¬ 
 out hope of resuscitation, if there were no men in it to 
 feel a desire to put a stop to the ruinous and desolating 
 system by which this mass of misery and crime at 
 home, and the notorious degradation of the nation 
 abroad, has been produced. There never is an effect 
 
340 
 
 LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 without a cause ; nor have these effects come unprece¬ 
 ded by adequate causes. Attentive observers of these 
 causes, and of their horrible effects, have traced them, 
 and can trace them, literally, to Acts passed by the 
 Parliament. There is no one evil, of whatever nature 
 it may be, and existing in that excess in which the 
 evils now exist, which is not fairly ascribable to Acts 
 of the Parliament. The Debt, which requires one half 
 of the taxes to be paid in interest, and which demands 
 a large standing army at the same time, consists of the 
 aggregate of loans, every one of which was made in 
 virtue of an Act of the Parliament: the taxes required 
 for the support of the army, of the pensions, the sine¬ 
 cures, and all the enormous establishments, surpassing, 
 I believe, those of any four of the greatest nations in 
 the world ; these taxes have all been imposed by Acts 
 of the Parliament. In short, here has been, and is, the 
 root of the evil, and of every evil that has so long 
 afflicted, and now cripples this country. - 
 
 23. It has long been the opinion of a great part of 
 the people that such Acts never would have been pass¬ 
 ed, if the Members of the House of Commons had been 
 chosen by the people at large , and had corresponded 
 with their title of “ Representatives of the People 
 because they would have taken care of the people’s 
 money, and prevented it from being unwisely disposed 
 of. In ancient times, and until the Protestant Reform¬ 
 ation, the common people had a church, not only to 
 relieve them in their necessities, but to protect them 
 against oppression, coming against them in the name 
 of the Crown, but generally from the aristocracy ; but, 
 the people have now lost that protection, and they 
 have, in fact, lost the protection of a Plouse of Com¬ 
 mons chosen by themselves, and are, therefore, at the 
 mere mercy of the aristocracy. In the year 1793, a 
 petition was presented to the House of Commons by 
 Mr. Grey, who is now Lord Grey, in which petition 
 it was alleged, that, in fact, “ a majority of the "whole 
 of the members of the Commons’ House was put into 
 that House by a hundred and fifty-four powerful 
 men, without any assent whatsoever of the people j 
 
LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 341 
 
 and that this evil threatened, in its progress, to usurp 
 the sovereignty of the country, to the equal danger of 
 the King, of the Lords, and of the Commons.” 
 
 24. Now, may it please Your Holiness, this is the 
 great question of the people of England, a very great 
 majority of whom are satisfied that they shall never 
 see better days, that their country will continue to be 
 miserable, and the people criminal; that it will draw 
 nearer and nearer to a state of abject subjection to mili¬ 
 tary sway ; that all its ancient and inestimable institu¬ 
 tions will crumble away one by one ; and that Eng¬ 
 land, once so great, so glorious, so free, and so happy, 
 will become the most despicable nation upon the face 
 of the earth, unless a correction of this monstrous abuse 
 shall speedily take place. The people, especially in 
 the more populous parts of the country, where their as¬ 
 sembling together is a matter of more ease, have re¬ 
 peatedly petitioned the parliament, in the most urgent, 
 and yet in the most humble manner, to make this ne¬ 
 cessary reformation; but, instead of being listened to, 
 they have been treated with every severity known to 
 any existing law; and new laws have been passed, 
 suspending the old laws made for the preservation of 
 their liberties, in order to sanction proceedings against 
 them, not warranted by the ordinary laws of the land. 
 They have been abused, calumniated, stigmatized in 
 every way, by all possible devices that corrupt ingenu¬ 
 ity has had at its command. The word REFORMER 
 has been used as a term of reproach, and interpreted to 
 mean a seditious man. a disturber of the peace, a rebel, 
 or a ruffian. Still, however, there have been some 
 men found to set at nought all the dangers attending 
 a perseverance in so righteous a cause. Amongst those 
 men, I have the honour to be numbered; and for this 
 cause I have long been an object of the hatred, the 
 deadly animosity, the malignant persecution, of all 
 those who buy or sell seats in the parliament, or who 
 derive emolument from the wicked and mischievous 
 practices described in the petition of Lord Grey. 
 
 25. Your Holiness will want nothing to convince 
 you that a man, who is an enemy to bribery, to corrup- 
 
342 
 
 LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 tiorij to false swearing, to beastly drunkenness, to 
 riotousness, and to all sorts of odious crimes, is not, for 
 that reason, less worthy of being respected and beloved j 
 and that, if he happen to have written in favour of the 
 ancient religion of his country, he is not, for this same 
 reason; for his enmity to bribery, corruption, false 
 swearing, and the rest, to be hated and libelled by those 
 who profess themselves to be of that ancient religion. 
 But, though this will be the opinion of Your Holiness, 
 the facts are proved that that opinion, if applied to this 
 particular case, is not correct. Unhappily, for the 
 credit of the Catholic religion in England, that religion 
 is one thing, and that which is called the “ Catholic 
 cause” is another thing; and the lawyer, before men¬ 
 tioned by name, has explicitly declared, “ that, though 
 Mr. Cobbett has done a great deal for the Catholic 
 religion , he has done a great deal against the Catholic 
 cause” This was stating the whole case, very pro¬ 
 fligately to be sure, but very frankly and fully at the 
 same time. 
 
 26. What, then, may it please Your Holiness, is the 
 Catholic cause. It is the obtaining of seats in the 
 House of Lords for Catholic Peers, seats in the House 
 of Commons for Catholic gentlemen, and seats upon 
 the Bench for Catholic lawyers, and the obtaining of 
 no one probable, or even possible, good for the Catholic 
 people at large. The name which this cause has as¬ 
 sumed is, “ Catholic Emancipation” Now, that 
 which is asked for is not a setting free from slavery, 
 but an exaltation to power, and an admission to the 
 taking of a share of those taxes which press us to the 
 earth, and which have produced all the horrible effects 
 which I have before described; and, as those persons, 
 who are seeking for what they call emancipation , but 
 who are, in reality, seeking to obtain the means of 
 sharing in profitable power at the expense of the people 
 detest all those who would cause the Parliament to be 
 reformed ; because that reform would annihilate their 
 prospects of obtaining a share of the taxes ; they detest 
 me more than other reformers, because they think that 
 I have more power than others to prevent their success. 
 
LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 343 
 
 If I had written a book in favour of trafficking in seats ; 
 a book endeavouring to show that bribery, corruption, 
 false swearing, and public robbery, were good things, 
 and in strict conformity with the Catholic faith, I should 
 have rolled in wealth if I had desired it, and should 
 have had votes of thanks as numerous as the pages of 
 my book. But I, somewhat in accordance with the 
 practice of our fathers, have held a contrary doctrine ; 
 constantly reprobated trafficking in seats, unmerited 
 pensions, standing armies in times of peace, and all the 
 other mischievous consequences arising from a want of 
 a reform in the Parliament. It was clearly seen that 
 this reform would render the emancipation of little use 
 to those who were so anxious to obtain it; and, there¬ 
 fore, as the u Catholic cause” as it is called, would 
 have been, in fact, defeated, as to its main object, by 
 the adoption of the measures recommended by me, 
 those who were eager for the success of that cause, 
 preferring the profits of bribery and corruption to the 
 principles of their religion, naturally became my bitter 
 enemies, totally disregarding all that I had done to 
 wipe away the stigma on the ancient faith and church. 
 
 27. This is the true cause of the hostility of this 
 Catholic aristocracy, and these lawyers, to the author 
 of a book, which has drawn forth the gratitude of every 
 sincere Catholic in every nation. Your Holiness will 
 please to observe, that these men have no feeling in 
 common with the Catholics in the middle and lower 
 ranks of life, who are amongst the most honest, the 
 most sober, the most virtuous men in this kingdom, and 
 singularly attached to their religion, and punctual in the 
 performance of all the duties belonging to it. This 
 aristocracy and these lawyers have no feeling in com¬ 
 mon with the priests, whose lives are so exemplary as 
 to put, generally speaking, the Protestant parsons to 
 shame. The greater part of the aristocracy and law¬ 
 yers are only a kind of mongrel Catholics : the former 
 retaining the name of their religion from family pride, 
 and the latter retaining it because, without it, they 
 would have little or no practice in tlieir profession 
 amongst the Catholics, who form, at least, four fifths 
 
344 
 
 LETTER TO THE POP*. 
 
 of the middle and lower classes in Ireland. In Eng¬ 
 land, where the Catholics are still numerous, they na¬ 
 turally give the preference to lawyers of their own re¬ 
 ligion. This preference serves to supply the place of 
 legal knowledge and talent; and men, who would 
 never have a brief, never be employed as lawyers, if 
 they were not Catholics, do, by the means of this pre¬ 
 ference, make a tolerable figure in their profession. 
 Were it not for these motives, these two descriptions 
 of men, generally speaking, would apostatize at once , 
 and in a body. The former; that is to say, the aristo¬ 
 cracy, do steal out of the barren fold, one by one ; and, 
 while they remain in it, they clearly show, that they 
 have the strongest desire to be battening and fattening 
 in the rich pastures of bribery, corruption, and taxa¬ 
 tion. One of them has recently so far apostatized as 
 to contribute largely towards the erection of a Protest - 
 ant CHURCH, and personally to assist in laying the 
 foundation of that Church from the pulpit of which he 
 knew that the Catholic religion would be denounced 
 as idolatrous and damnable , and Your Holiness de¬ 
 scribed as the “ man of sin,” “ the beast f the “ scarlet 
 whore of Babylon,” with “ garments dipped in the 
 blood of the saints .” Judge, then, as Your Holiness 
 easily will, whether such men as these be fit to be en¬ 
 trusted with power: judge whether we do not act wisely 
 in keeping such men from having power over our purses 
 and our lives. 
 
 28. Another of them has openly declared that the 
 Catholic priests ought to marry, as the Protestant par¬ 
 sons do ; and this same man is. a member of, and has 
 openly assisted at, those Bible Societies, in which it 
 is contended, that every man, be he what he may, is to 
 interpret the Bible, rendered in the vulgar tongue, ac¬ 
 cording to his own way of thinking. 
 
 29. This man, too, is not only a member of the Ca¬ 
 tholic Association in London, but is one of “ the Com¬ 
 mittee of that Association ; one of its organs in those 
 negotiations with Your Holiness, which, it is said, 
 are, at this time, on foot, and which are intended to 
 end in that sort of compromise , which would, in fact. 
 
LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 345 
 
 be a sacrifice of the unity and purity of the Catholic 
 Church in England, Scotland, and Ireland, for the pur¬ 
 pose of opening the way for these men to obtain power 
 and profit. Doctor Doyle, who appears to be the pre¬ 
 late of the project, has promulgated a scheme for UNI¬ 
 TING the two Churches of England and of Rome ! If 
 the Doctor had proposed to unite darkness with light, 
 the proposition would have been just as reasonable. 
 He meant, doubtless, to divide the tithes and other re¬ 
 venues of the Church, between the clergy of this united 
 body ; but we, both Protestants and Catholics, regard 
 such union, as the English farmer would regard an 
 •union between the rats and the cats, shut up together 
 in his pantry, or his lofts of cheese; or, as the Italian 
 farmer would regard an union between the wolves and 
 the sheep-dogs, from which he would certainly antici¬ 
 pate additional worrying, and slaughter committed upon 
 his flock. This same Doctor has contended, that the 
 tithes and other revenues, now enjoyed by the Protest¬ 
 ant Church, are enjoyed by it, not only in fact and by 
 law, but by divine right; and that it is sinful in Ca¬ 
 tholics to endeavour to relieve themselves from the 
 burthen. And, to crown the whole, he has recently 
 contended, that Your Holiness has no right to inter¬ 
 fere in the appointment of Catholic Bishops, in any 
 part of this kingdom ; lie has complained that the 
 exercise of this right is still claimed by the Holy See ; 
 and has distinctly proposed that a law should be passed 
 to abrogate this right. 
 
 30. These are the schemes that arc said to be at pre¬ 
 sent in agitation ; and, though the Protestants care little 
 about them, they are subjects of great and just alarm 
 with all the true Catholics, who, to a man, most fer¬ 
 vently pray, that no change whatever may take place 
 with regard to their religion. If any such change were 
 to take place, the Catholic religion would be extirpated 
 in this country in a very few years. Men would not 
 know what to think or what to believe : if one regula¬ 
 tion of the church could be altered, another might; and 
 if another, why not the whole , why not be Protestants 
 at once ? The antiquity, the hoar, of so many ages 
 
346 
 
 LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 would be rubbed off, and the veneration along with 
 them. This is what the aristocracy and lawyers are 
 aiming at. For the reasons before mentioned they 
 shrink from the act of open apostacy ; but, they would 
 gladly see the religion of their fathers chipped away by 
 slow degrees; they would gladly see it rendered a 
 thing no longer regarded as unchangeable : and then 
 they would slide into the ranks of the Protestants, 
 without any movement being perceived. Doctor Doyle 
 has not confined his labours, in this way, to works 
 from the press; but has, in evidence given by him, be¬ 
 fore the Houses of Parliament, spoken in the most light, 
 not to say contemptuous, manner of the authority and 
 influence of the Pope relative to the Catholic church. 
 This excited great wonder amongst Protestants, and 
 great indignation amongst Catholics. But, the object 
 of all these compromising parties is, to blind and de¬ 
 lude the Catholic people, while they themselves make 
 a bargain with the government that will, in fact, un¬ 
 dermine the Catholic religion and let them into a share 
 of the general spoils. The people, whether Catholic 
 or Protestant, have little or no power to resist the exe¬ 
 cution of their schemes ; if these men and the govern 
 ment agree, there will be nothing to resist the success 
 of their projects, unless they meet that resistance from 
 Rome. They hope for, and they are now, it is said, 
 hard at work to obtain, the sanction of Y our Holiness 
 to some concordat , or some bargain or other, with a 
 view of effecting their purposes with your apparent 
 sanction; for, without this they can effect nothing 
 with the Catholic people; and with this, they would, 
 in a short time, leave scarcely the name of Catholic 
 existing in any part of this kingdom; and, thus, that 
 which three hundred years of oppression and cruelties, 
 exercised on Catholics by the bitter enemies of their 
 church, have been unable to effect, would be completely 
 effected by one single word written by the hand of the 
 Pope. 
 
 31. I have now laid before Your Holiness a true 
 account of the character, the conduct, and the views of 
 the Catholic aristocracy and lawyers of England and 
 
LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 347 
 
 Ireland; and have explained the real causes of that 
 which appeared, and which naturally appeared, so 
 wonderful to Your Holiness. I entertain the deepest 
 sense of gratitude towards the memory of our Catholic 
 fathers, who framed all those institutions which cause 
 England to be regarded as the cradle of true liberty; 
 which have spread themselves over the United States 
 of America, and have, in part or in whole, been a 
 blessing to many other parts of the world. I venerate 
 the memory of these our fathers; from whom we de¬ 
 rive every thing, yea, every thing, of which this coun¬ 
 try has a right to be proud. I know how great and how 
 happy England was as long as the Catholic religion 
 was the religion of the country ; how high she stood 
 amongst the nations of the world ; I know that she has, 
 with now and then, a gap in her progress, been declin¬ 
 ing from that day to this; and I have only to open my 
 eyes to see, and, seeing, to lament, how low she is now. 
 I cannot, without a degree of regret that it is impossible 
 for me to express, see that there is no hope for a return 
 of those days, when the poor, the widow, the orphan, 
 and the stranger, were relieved out of the tithes, and 
 other revenues of the church. I cannot live amidst a 
 nation of miserable paupers and thieves, without look¬ 
 ing back to those happy days when the name of pauper 
 had never been sounded in English ears, and when, as 
 Fortescue tells us, the judges of England led a life of 
 learned leisure , having very little to do in their courts: 
 I cannot live in this state of things without regretting 
 the change, and without expressing my gratitude to¬ 
 wards the memory of those who wielded the destinies 
 of England before that change took place. But, because 
 I thus know and thus feel, I am not to favour the selfish 
 views of an aristocracy and a band of lawyers, who 
 under the name of “ Catholic Emancipation would, 
 if they could, render our political situation infinitely 
 worse than it now is, by sacrificing their religion on 
 the shrine of Mammon. 
 
 32. Having now discharged that which I regarded 
 as a duty to myself, and to the general body of Catho¬ 
 lic priests and people in this kingdom, I conclude with 
 
348 
 
 LETTER TO THE POPE. 
 
 expressing my anxious desire, that the designs of these 
 conspirators against the fleeces of us all, and against 
 the unity of the fold to which they profess to belong, 
 may be defeated, by ourselves as far as relates to the 
 former, and by the fidelity and firmness of the Shep¬ 
 herd of the fold, as far as relates to the latter. For 
 having discharged this duty, I shall receive the cordial 
 thanks of every true Catholic in this kingdom ; and, in 
 the hope that I shall not have discharged it in vain, 
 
 I am, may it please Your Holiness, 
 
 With the most profound respect, 
 
 Your Holiness’s most obedient, 
 
 And most humble servant, 
 
 WM. COBBETT. 
 
 Extracts from a work of Mr. Cobbett called 
 “ Rural Rides.” 
 
 / 
 
 This town of Reigate had, in former times, a Priory, 
 which had considerable estates in the neighbourhood ; 
 and this is brought to my recollection by a circumstance 
 which has recently taken place in this very town. We 
 all know how long it has been the fashion for us to 
 take it for granted , that the monasteries were bad 
 things ; but, of late, I have made some hundreds of 
 thousands of very good Protestants begin to suspect , 
 that monasteries were better than poor-rates , and that 
 monks and nuns, who fed the poor , were better than 
 sinecure and pension men and women, who feed upon 
 the poor. But, how came the monasteries? How 
 came this that was at Reigate, for instance ? Why, 
 it was, if I recollect correctly, founded by a Surrey gen¬ 
 tleman, who gave this spot and other estates to it, and 
 who, as was usual, provided that masses were to be 
 said in it for his soul and those of others, and that it 
 should, as usual, give aid to the poor and needy. 
 
 Now, upon the face of the transaction, what harm 
 tould this do the community? -On the contrary, it 
 must, one would think, do it good j for here was this 
 
RURAL RIDES. 
 
 349 
 
 estate given to a set of landlords who never could quit 
 the spot; who could have no families ; who could 
 save no money ; who could hold no private property ; 
 who could make no will; who must spend all their 
 income at Reigate and near it ; who, as was the cus¬ 
 tom, fed the poor, administered to the sick, and taught 
 a great part of the people gratis. T .lis, upon the face 
 of the thing, seems to be a very good way of disposing 
 of a rich man’s estate. 
 
 “ Aye, but,” it is said, “ he left his estate away 
 from his relations .” That is not sure , by any means. 
 The contrary is fairly to he presumed. Doubtless, 
 it was the custom for Catholic Priests, before they took 
 their leave of a dying rich man, to advise him to think 
 of the Church and the Poor; that is to say, to exhort 
 him to bequeath something to them ; and this has been 
 made a monstrous charge against that Church. It is 
 surprising how blind men are, when they have a mind 
 to be blind ; what despicable dolts they are, when they 
 desire to be cheated. We, of the Church of England, 
 must have a special deal of good sense and of modesty, 
 to be sure, to rail against the Catholic Church on this 
 account, when our own Common Prayer Book, copied 
 from an act of Parliament, commands our Parsons to 
 do just the same thing ! 
 
 Ah ! say the Dissenters, and particularly the Uni¬ 
 tarians ; that queer sect, who will have all the wisdom 
 in the world to themselves; who will believe and 
 won’t believe ; who will be Christians and who won’t 
 have a Christ j who will laugh at you, if you believe 
 in the Trinity, and who would (if they could) boil you 
 in oil if you do not believe in the Resurrection : “ Oh !” 
 say the Dissenters, “ we know very well, that your 
 Church Parsons are commanded to get, if they'can, 
 dying people to give their money and estates to the 
 Church and the poor , as they call the concern, though 
 the poor , we believe, come in for very little yrhich is 
 got in this way. But, what is your Church? We 
 are the real Christians; and we, upon our souls, never 
 play such tricks; never, no never, terrify old women 
 out of their stockings full of guineas.” “ And, as to 
 30 
 
350 
 
 RURAL RIDES. 
 
 us,” say the Unitarians, u we, the most liberal crea¬ 
 tures upon earth ; we, whose virtue is indignant at the 
 tricks by which the Monks and Nuns got legacies from 
 dying people to the injury of heirs and other relations ; 
 we, who are the really enlightened, the truly consist¬ 
 ent, the benevolent, the disinterested, tne exclusive 
 patentees of the salt of the earth, which is sold only 
 at, or by express permission from our old and original 
 warehouse and manufactory, Essex-street, in the Strand, 
 first street on the left, going from Temple Bar towards 
 Charing Cross; we defy you to show that Unitarian 
 Parsons.” 
 
 Stop your protestations and hear my Reigate anec¬ 
 dote, which, as I said above, brought the recollection of 
 the Old Priory into my head. The readers of my 
 Register heard me, several times, some years ago, 
 mention Mr. Baron Maseres, who was, for a great 
 many years, what they call Cursitor Baron of the 
 Exchequer. He lived partly in London and partly at 
 Reigate, for more, I believe, than half a century ; and 
 he died, about two years ago, or less, leaving, I am told, 
 more than a quarter of a million of money. The 
 Baron came to see me, in Pall Mall, in 1800. He 
 always came frequently to see me, whenever I was in 
 London ; not by any means omitting to come to see me 
 in Newgate, where I was imprisoned for tw r o years, 
 with a thousand pounds fine and seven years heavy 
 bail, for having expressed my indignation at the flog¬ 
 ging of Englishmen, in the heart of England, under a 
 guard of German bayonets ; and, to Newgate he always 
 came in his wig and gown, in order, as he said, to 
 show his abhorrence of the sentence. I several times 
 passed a week, or more, with the Baron at his house, 
 at Reigate, and might have passed many more, if my 
 time and taste would have permitted me to accept of 
 his invitations. Therefore, I knew the £.aron well. 
 He was a most conscientious man; he was, when I first 
 knew him, still a very clever man; he retained all his 
 faculties to a very great age: in 1815,1 think it was, I 
 got a letter from him, written in a firm hand, correctly 
 as to grammar, and ably as to matter, and he must then 
 
RURAL RIDES. 
 
 351 
 
 liave been little short of ninety. He never was a 
 bright man; but had always been a very sensible, just, 
 and humane man, and a man too who always cared a 
 great deal for the public good; and he was the only 
 man that I ever heard of, who refused to have his sa¬ 
 lary augmented , when an augmentation was offered, 
 and when all other such salaries were augmented. I 
 had heard of this: I asked him about it when I saw 
 him again; and he said: “ There was no work to be 
 added, and I saw no justice in adding to the salary. It 
 must,” added he, “ be paid by somebody , and the more 
 I take, the less that somebody must have.” 
 
 He did not savd%ioney for money’s sake. He saved 
 it because, his habits would not let him spend it. He 
 kept a house in Rathbone Place, chambers in the Tem¬ 
 ple, and his very pretty place at-Reigate. He was by 
 no means stingy, but his scale and habits were cheap. 
 Then, consider, too, a bachelor of nearly a hundred 
 years old. His father left him a fortune, his brother 
 (who also died a very old bachelor^) left him another; 
 and the money lay in the funds, and it went on doubling 
 itself over and over again, till it became that immense 
 mass which we have seen above, and which, when the 
 Baron was making his will, he had neither Catholic 
 priest nor Protestant parson to exhort him to leave to 
 the church and the poor, instead of his relations ; though, 
 as we shall presently see, he had somebody else to 
 whom to leave his great heap of money. 
 
 The Baron was a most implacable enemy of the 
 Catholics, as Catholics. There was rather a peculiar 
 reason for this, his grand-father having been a French 
 Huguenot and having fled with his children to England, 
 at the time of the revocation of the edict of Nantz. 
 The Baron was a very humane man; his humanity 
 * made him assist to support the French emigrant priests; 
 but, at the same time, he caused Sir Richard Mus - 
 grave's book against the Irish Catholics to be pub¬ 
 lished at his own expense. He and I never agreed 
 upon this subject; and this subject was, .with him, a 
 vital one. He had no asperity in his nature ; he was 
 naturally all gentleness and benevolence; and there- 
 
352 
 
 / 
 
 RURAL RIDES. 
 
 fore, he never resented what I said to him on this sub¬ 
 ject (and which nobody else ever, I believe, ventured 
 to say to him :) but, he did not like it; and he liked it 
 the less because I certainly beat him in the argument. 
 However, this was long before he visited me in New¬ 
 gate : and it never produced (though the dispute was 
 frequently revived) any difference in his conduct to¬ 
 wards me, which was uniformly friendly to the last 
 time I saw him before his memory was gone. 
 
 There was great excuse for the Baron. From his 
 very birth he had been taught to hate and abhor the 
 Catholic religion. He had been told, that his father 
 and mother had been driven out *bf France by the 
 Catholics: and there was that mother dinning this in 
 his ears, and all manner of horrible stories along with 
 it, during all the tender years of his life. In short, the 
 prejudice made part of his very frame. In the year 
 1803, in August, I think it was, I had gone down to his 
 house on a Friday, and was there on a Sunday. After 
 dinner, he and I and his brother walked to the Priory, 
 as is still called the mansion house, in the dell at Rei- 
 gate, which is now occupied by Lord Eastnor, and in 
 which a Mr. Birket, I think, then lived. After coming 
 away from the Priory, the Baron, (whose native place 
 was Betchworth, about two or three miles from Reigate) 
 who knew the history of every house and every thing 
 else in this part of the country, began to tell me why 
 the place was called the Priory. From this he came 
 to the superstition and dark ignorance that induced 
 people to found monasteries ; and he dwelt particularly 
 on the injustice to heirs and relations ; and he went 
 on, in the usual Protestant strain, and with all the bit¬ 
 terness of which he was capable, against those crafty 
 priests, who thus plundered families by means of the 
 influence which they had over people in their dotage, 
 or who were naturally weak-minded. 
 
 Alas ! poor Baron! he does not seem to have at all 
 foreseen what was to become of his own money! 
 What would.he have said to me, if I had answered his 
 observations by predicting, that he would give his great 
 mass of money to a little parson for that parson's own 
 
RURAL RIDES. 
 
 353 
 
 •private use; leave only a mere pittance to his own 
 relations; leave the little parson his house in which 
 we were then sitting (along with all his other real 
 property;) that the little parson would come into the 
 house and take possession j and that his own relations 
 (two nieces) would walk out! Yet, all this has ac¬ 
 tually taken place, and that, too, after the poor old j 
 Baron’s four score years of jokes about the tricks of! 
 Popish priests, practised, in the dark ages, upon the * 
 ignorant and superstitious people of Reigate. 
 
 When I first knew the Baron, he was a stanch 
 Church of England man. He went to church every 
 Sunday once, at least. He used to take me to Reigate 
 church; and I observed, that he was very well versed 
 in his prayer book. But, a decisive proof of his zeal 
 as a Church of England man is, that he settled an an¬ 
 nual sum on the incumbent of Reigate, m order to in¬ 
 duce him to preach, or pray, (I forget which,) in the 
 church, twice on a Sunday, instead of once ; and, in 
 case this additional preaching, or praying, were not 
 performed in Reigate church, the annuity was to go 
 (and sometimes it does now go) to the poor of an 
 adjoining parish, and not to those of Reigate , lest, I 
 suppose, the parson, the overseers, and other rate-pay¬ 
 ers, might happen to think that the Baron’s annuity 
 would be‘better laid out in food for the bodies than for 
 the souls of the poor; or, in other words, lest the mo¬ 
 ney should be taken annually and added to the poor- 
 rates to ease the purses of the farmers. 
 
 It did not, I dare say, occur to the poor Baron (when 
 he was malting this settlement,) that he was now 
 giving money to make a church-parson put up addi¬ 
 tional prayers , though he had, all his life-time, been 
 laughing at those, who, in the dark ages, gave money, 
 for this purpose, to Catholic priests. Nor did it, I dare 
 say, occur to the Baron, that, in his contingent settle¬ 
 ment of the annuity on the poor of an adjoining parish, 
 he as good as declared his opinion, that he distrusted 
 the piety of the parson, the overseers, the church-war¬ 
 dens, and indeed, of all the people of Reigate : yes, at 
 the very moment that he was providing additional 
 
 0 * 
 
354 
 
 RURAL RIDES. 
 
 prayers for them, he in the very same parchment, put a 
 provision, which clearly showed that he was thoroughly 
 convinced that they, overseers, churchwardens, people, 
 parson, and all, loved money better than prayers. 
 
 What was this, then? Was it hypocrisy; was it 
 ostentation? No: mistake. The Baron thought that 
 those who, could not go to church in the morning, ought 
 to have an opportunity of going in the afternoon. He 
 was aware of the power of money ; but, when he came to 
 make his obligatory clause, he was compelled to do 
 that which reflected great discredit on the very church 
 and religion, which it was his object to honour and 
 uphold. 
 
 However, the Baron was a stanch churchman, as 
 this fact clearly proves: several years he had become 
 what they call a Unitarian. The first time (I think) 
 that I perceived this, was in 1812. He came to see me 
 in Newgate, and he soon began to talk about religion , 
 which had not been much his habit. He went on at a 
 great rate, laughing about the Trinity, and I remember 
 that he repeated the Unitarian distich, which makes a 
 joke of the idea of there being a devil, and which they 
 all repeat to you, and at the same time laugh and look 
 as cunning and as priggish as jack-daws; just as if 
 they were wiser than all the rest in the world ! I hate 
 to hear the conceited and disgusting prigs, seeming to 
 take it for granted, that they only are wise, because 
 others believe in the incarnation, without being able to 
 reconcile it to reason. The prigs don’t consider, that 
 there is no more reason for the resurrection than for the 
 incarnation ; and yet having taken it into their heads to 
 come up again , they would murder you, if they dared, if 
 you were to deny the resurrection. I do most heartily 
 aespise this priggish set for their conceit and impu¬ 
 dence ; but, seeing that they want reason for the in¬ 
 carnation ; seeing that they will have effects , here, 
 ascribed to none but usual causes , let me put a ques¬ 
 tion or two to them. 
 
 1. Whence comes the white clover , that comes up and 
 covers all the ground, in Americi, where hard- 
 
RURAL RIDES. 355 
 
 wood trees, after standing for thousands of years, 
 have been burnt down ? 
 
 2. Whence come (in similar cases as to self-woods) 
 the hurtle-berries in some places, and the rasp¬ 
 berries in others ? 
 
 3. Whence come fish in new made places where no 
 fish have ever been put ? 
 
 4. What causes horse-hair to become living things ? 
 
 5. What causes frogs to come in drops of rain, or 
 those drops of rain to turn to frogs, the moment 
 they are on the earth ? 
 
 6. What causes musquitoes to come in rain water 
 caught in a glass, covered over immediately wijh 
 oil paper, tied down and so kept till full of these 
 winged torments ? 
 
 7. What causes flounders, real little fiat fish , brown 
 on one side, white on the other, mouth side-ways, 
 with tail, fins, and all, leaping alive, in the inside 
 of a rotten sheep’s, and of every rotten sheep’s 
 liver ? 
 
 There, prigs ; answer these questions. Fifty might 
 be given you ; but these are enough. Answer these. 
 I suppose you will not deny the facts? They are all 
 notoriously true. The last, which of itself would be 
 quite enough for you, will be attested on oath, if you 
 like it, by any farmer, ploughman, and shepherd, in 
 England. Answer this question 7, or hold your con¬ 
 ceited gabble about the “ impossibility ” of that which 
 I need not here name. 
 
 Men of sense do not attempt to discover that which 
 it is impossible to discover. They leave things pretty 
 much as they find them ; and take care, at least, not 
 to make changes of any sort, without very evident ne¬ 
 cessity. The poor Baron, however, appeared to be 
 quite eaten up with his “ rational Christianity.” He 
 talked like a man who has made a discovery of his own. 
 He seemed as pleased as I, when I was a boy, used to 
 be, when I had just found a rabbit’s stop, or a black¬ 
 bird’s nest full of young ones. I do not recollect what 
 I said upon this occasion. It is most likely that I said 
 nothing in contradiction to him. I saw the Baron ma» 
 
356 
 
 RURAL RIDES. 
 
 ny times after this, but I never talked with him about 
 religion. 
 
 Before the summer of 1822, I had not seen him for 
 a year or two, perhaps. But, in July of that year, on a 
 very hot day, I was going down Rathbone Place , and, 
 happening to cast my eye on the Baron’s house, I 
 knocked at the door to ask how he was. His man ser¬ 
 vant came to the door, and told me that his master was 
 at dinner. “Well,” said I, “never mind; give my 
 best respects to him.” But, the servant, (who had al¬ 
 ways been with him since I knew him) begged me to 
 come in, for that he was sure his master would be glad 
 to see me. I thought, as it was likely that I might 
 never see him again, I would go in. The servant an¬ 
 nounced me, and the Baron said, “ Beg him to walk 
 in.” In I went, and there I found the Baron at dinner ; 
 but not quite alone ; nor without spiritual as well as 
 carnal and vegetable nourishment before him: for, 
 there, on the opposite side of his vis-d-vis dining table, 
 sat that nice, neat, straight, prim, piece of mortality, 
 commonly called the Reverend Robert Fellowes, 
 who was the Chaplain to the unfortunate Queen un¬ 
 til Mr. Alderman Wood's son came to supply his 
 place, and who was now, I could clearly see, in a fair 
 way enough. I had dined, and so I let them dine on. 
 The Baron was become quite a child, or worse, as to 
 mind , though he ate as heartily as I ever saw him, and 
 he was always a great eater. When his servant said, 
 “ Here is Mr. Cobbett, Sir;” he said, “ How do you 
 do, Sir? I have read much of your writings, Sir; 
 but never had the pleasure to see your person before .” 
 After a time I made him recollect me ; but he, directly 
 after, being about to relate something about America, 
 turned towards me, and said, “ Were you ever in 
 America , Sir ?” But I must mention one proof of the 
 state of his mind. Mr. Fellowes asked me about the 
 news from Ireland, where the people were then in a 
 state of starvation (1822,) and I answering that, it 
 was likely that many of them would actually be 
 starved to death , the Baron, quitting his green goose 
 s»ud green pease, turned to me and said, “ Starved, 
 
RURAL RIDES. 
 
 357 
 
 Sir! Why don’t they go to the parish?” “Why, 51 
 said I, “ you know, Sir, “ that there are no poor-rates 
 in Ireland.” Upon this he exclaimed, “ What! no 
 poor-rates in Ireland ? Why not ? I did not know 
 that; I can’t think how that can be.” And then he 
 rambled on in a childish sort of way. 
 
 At the end of about half an hour, or, it might be 
 more, I shook hands with the poor old Baron for the 
 last time, well convinced that I should never see him 
 again, and not less convinced, that I had seen his heir. 
 He died in about a year or so afterwards, left to his own 
 family about 20,000/., and to his ghostly guide, the 
 Holy Robert Fellowes, all the rest of his immense 
 fortune, which, as I have been told, amounts to more 
 than a quarter of a million of money. 
 
 Now, the public will recollect that, while Mr. Fel¬ 
 lowes was at the Queen’s, he was, in the public papers, 
 charged with being a Unitarian , at the same time 
 that he officiated as her chaplain. It is also well 
 known, that he never publicly contradicted this. It is, 
 besides, the general belief at Reigate. However, this 
 we know well, that he is a parson, of one sort or the 
 other, and that he is not a Catholic priest. That is 
 enough for me. I see this poor, foolish old man, leav¬ 
 ing a monstrous mass of money to this little Protest¬ 
 ant parson, whom he had not even known more, I be¬ 
 lieve, than about three or four years. When the will 
 was made I cannot say. I know nothing at all about 
 that. I am supposing that all was perfectly fair ; that 
 the Baron had his senses when he made his will; that 
 ne clearly meant to do that which he did. But then, I 
 must insist, that, if he had left the money to a Catholic 
 priest , to be by him expended on the endowment of a 
 convent, wherein to say masses and to feed and teach 
 me poor, it would have been a more sensible and pub¬ 
 lic spirited part in the Baron, much more beneficial to 
 the town and environs of Reigate, and beyond all mea¬ 
 sure more honourable to his own memory. 
 
 This Ireing Sunday, I heard, about 7 o’clock in the 
 morning, a sort of a jang.’ing, made by a bell or two in 
 
358 
 
 RURAL RIDES. 
 
 the Cathedral. We were getting ready to be off, to 
 cross the country to Burghclere, which lies under the 
 lofty hills at Highclere, about 22 miles from this city ; 
 but hearing the bells of the cathedral, I took Richard 
 to show him that ancient and most magnificent pile, 
 and particularly to show him the tomb of that famous 
 bishop of Winchester, William of Wykham ; who was 
 the Chancellor and the Minister of the great and glo¬ 
 rious King, Edward III.; who sprang from poor parents 
 in the little village of Wykham, three miles from Bot- 
 ley ; and who, amongst other great and most munificent 
 deeds, founded the famous College, or School, of Win¬ 
 chester, and also one of the Colleges at Oxford. I told 
 Richard about this as we went from the inn down to 
 the cathedral; and, when I showed him the tomb, 
 where the bishop lies on his back, in his Catholic robes, 
 with his mitre on his head, his shepherd’s crook by his 
 side, with little children at his feet, their hands put 
 together in a praying attitude, he looked with a degree 
 of inquisitive earnestness that pleased me very much. 
 I took him as far as I could about the cathedral. The 
 “service” was now begun. There is a dean , and 
 God knows how many prebends , belonging to this im¬ 
 mensely rich bishopric and chapter: and there were, 
 at this “ service ,” two or three men and jive or six 
 boys in white surplices, with a congregation of fifteen 
 women and four men ! Gracious God ! If William of 
 Wykham could, at that moment, have raised from his 
 {omb ! If Saint Swithin, whose name the cathedral 
 bears, or Alfred the Great, to whom St. Swithin 
 wasitutor: if either of these could have come, and had 
 been told, that that was now what was carried on by 
 men, who talked of the “ damnable errors” of those 
 who founded that very church! But, it beggars one’s 
 feelings to attempt to find words whereby to express 
 them upon such a subject and such an occasion. How, 
 then, am I to describe what I felt, when I yesterday 
 saw in Hyde Meadow, a county bridewell, standing 
 on the very spot , where stood the Abbey wlych was 
 founded and endowed by Alfred, which contained the 
 bones of that maker of the English name, and also 
 
RURAL RIDES. 
 
 359 
 
 those of the learned monk, St. Grimbald, whom Alfred 
 brought to England to begin the teaching at Oxford* 
 
 After we came out of the cathedral, Richard said, 
 “ Why, Papa, nobody can build such places now, can 
 they?” “ No, my dear,” said I. “ That building was 
 made when there were no poor wretches in England, 
 called paupers; when there were no poor-rates; 
 when every labouring man was clothed in good wool¬ 
 len cloth ; and when all had a plenty of meat and 
 bread and beer.” This talk lasted us to the inn, where, 
 just as we were going to set off, it most curiously hap¬ 
 pened, that a parcel, which had come from Kensington, 
 by the night coach , was put into my hands by the 
 landlord, containing, among other things, a pamphlet, 
 sent to me from Rome, being an Italian translation of. 
 No. I. of the “ Protestant Reformation .” 
 
 Mr. Hanford’s house is on the side of Bredon Hill; 
 about a third part up it, and is a very delightful place. 
 The house is of ancient date, and it appears to have 
 been always inhabited by, and the property of Roman 
 Catholics ; for there is, in one corner of the very top of 
 the building ; up in the very roof of it, a Catholic cha¬ 
 pel, as ancient as the roof itself. It is about twenty- 
 five feet long and ten wide. It has arch-work, to 
 imitate the roof of a church. At the back of the altar 
 there is a little room, which you enter through a door 
 going out of the chapel; and, adjoining this little room, 
 there is a closet, in which is a trap-door made to let 
 the priest down into one of those hiding places, which 
 were contrived for the purpose of evading the grasp of 
 those greedy Scotch minions, to whom that pious and 
 tolerant Protestant, James I., delivered over those Eng¬ 
 lish gentlemen, who remained faithful to the religion of 
 their fathers, and, to set his country free from which 
 greedy and cruel grasp, that honest Englishman, Guy 
 Fawkes, wished, as he bravely told the King and his 
 Scotch council, u to blow the Scotch beggars back to 
 their mountains againP Even this King has, in his 
 works, (for James was an author,) had the justice to 
 call him “ the Er glish Scvevola j” and we English- 
 
360 
 
 RURAL RIDES. 
 
 men, fools set on by knaves, have the folly, or the 
 baseness, to burn him in effigy on the 5th November, the 
 anniversary of his intended exploit! In the hall of 
 this house there is the portrait of Sir Thomas Winter, 
 who was one of the accomplices of Fawkes, and who 
 was killed in the fight with the sheriff and his party. 
 There is also the portrait of his lady, who must have 
 spent half her life-time in the working of some very 
 curious sacerdotal vestments, which are preserved here 
 with great care, and are as fresh and as beautiful as 
 they were the day they were finished. 
 
 A parson said to me, once, by letter : “ your religion, 
 Mr. Cobbett, seems to me to be altogether 'political 
 “Very much so indeed,” answered I, “and well it 
 may, since I have been furnished with a creed which 
 makes part of an Act of Parliament” And, the fact 
 is, I am no Doctor of Divinity, and like a religion, any 
 religion that tends to make men innocent and benevo¬ 
 lent and happy, by taking the best possible means of fur¬ 
 nishing them with plenty to eat and drink and wear. I 
 am a Protestant of the Church of England, and, as such, 
 blush to see, that more than half the parsonage houses 
 are wholly gone, or are become mere hovels. What I 
 have written on the “ Protestant Reformation,” 
 has proceeded entirely from a sense of justice towards 
 our calumniated Catholic forefathers, to whom we 
 owe all those of our institutions that are worthy of 
 our admiration and gratitude. I have not written as a 
 Catholic, but as an Englishman; yet, a sincere Catho¬ 
 lic must feel some little gratitude towards me ; and, if 
 there was an ungrateful reptile in the neighbourhood 
 of Preston, to give, as a toast, “ success to Stanley and 
 Wood,” the conduct of those Catholics that I have 
 seen here has, as far as I am concerned, amply com¬ 
 pensated for his baseness. 
 
 THE END. 
 
uperij (Sbife 
 
 OF 
 
 STANDARD CATHOLIC WORKS, 
 
 PUBLISHED BY 
 
 D. & J. SADLIER k CO., 
 
 No. 164 William Street, New York; 128 Federal Street, Boston; 
 Corner of Notre Dame and St. Francis Xavier Streets, 
 Montreal, Canada East. 
 
 AND OFFERED TO COLLEGES, RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS, BOOK¬ 
 SELLERS, AND DEALERS GENERALLY, AT PRICES BUT 
 LITTLE BEYOND THE COST OF MANUFACTURE. 
 
 •-•-«#»-• - 
 
 Lives of the Fathers, Martyrs, and other principal 
 Saints, (Sadlier’s Edition). By the Rev. Alban Butler, 
 as originally published by him in twelve, now complete in four volumes, 
 royal octavo, containing upwards of 3100 pages of letter-press, printed 
 in a clear, bold type, with marginal lines, from entirely new stereotype 
 plates, which for beauty and excellence of finish cannot be excelled. To 
 this edition is now added the Lives of all the Saints canonized in 1839, 
 under the pontificate of Pope Gregory XVI., of blessed memory ; with 
 the celebrated preface written by the Right Rev. Dr. Doyle, Bishop of 
 Kildare and Leighlin ; making this edition the most perfect ever published 
 in Europe or this country, and altogether forming a complete Catholic 
 Library, a copy of which should be in the possession ofevery Catholic fam¬ 
 ily. This edition also contains 25 fine steel engravings, and four illumi¬ 
 nated titles in various bindings, with the approbation of the Most Rev. 
 John Hughes, D. D., Archbishop of New York, and 29 Archbishops and 
 Bishops of the Catholic Church—printed on the finest paper, super extra 
 and flexible, in English or French syle, bevelled, gilt edges, $16 00. Tur¬ 
 key super extra, $14 00. American Morocco, gilt sides and edges, $12 
 50. American Morocco, marbled edges, $10 50. Embossed Sheep extra, 
 spring backs, marble edges, $9 00. 
 
 The Publishers, at the solicitation of several clergymen, being desi- 
 rous of extending the circulation of this inestimable work, have resolved 
 to issue a cheap edition, to suit the wants of such persons as cannot afford 
 to buy the more expensive copies, but they strongly recommend all those 
 who can purchase their illustrated edition, in all instances to take them in 
 preference to this cheap edition, as from the extraordinary care which 
 they bestow on the printing and binding of the former, they can, with the 
 fullest confidence assert that no work published here or elsewhere, will 
 be found cheaper, or give more general satisfaction. 
 
 Sadlier’s Cheap Edition of Butler’s Lives of the Saints, 
 
 In 4 vols. royal octavo, complete, with one engraving in each, full cloth, 
 embossed, lettered, $5 00. Half Roan cloth sides, strong, $5 00. 12 vols. 
 half bound, for Libraries, $8 00. 
 
2 
 
 D. AND J. SADLIER AND CO. S 
 
 Holy Bible, [Superb New Edition,] From the Version 
 
 of the Douay and Rheims. Translated from the Lartin Vulgate, and 
 diligently compared with the Hebrew. Greek, and other editions iu 
 various languages. Annotations, References, Tables, &.C., by the ven¬ 
 erable Dr. Clialloner, V. A., with Ward’s Errata of the Protestant Bible 
 with the approbation of the Most Rev. JOHN HUGHES, D. D., Arch¬ 
 bishop of New York. Printed on fine paper, illustrated with 26 engra¬ 
 vings, and bound in the best style of art. Imperial quarto, bevelled 
 flexible, $11 60. Imperial quarto, flexible, clasps, $14 60. Imperial 
 quarto, antique carved and panelled, $15 00. Imperial quarto, painted 
 medallion, $22 00. 
 
 Holy Bible, [Illustrated Edition,] Translated from the 
 Latin Vulgate, and diligently compared with the Hebrew, Greek, and 
 other editions in various languages. Annotations, Tables, &c., by the 
 venerable Dr. Challoner, V. A., printed on fine paper with 17 steel engra¬ 
 vings, and Ward’s Errata of the Protestant Bible. Royal quarto. Imit. 
 calf, marble edges, $6 00. Imit. morocco, marble edges, $6 60. Imit. 
 morocco, gilt edges, $7 60. Morocco, extra flexible, $9 00. Morocco, 
 extra flexible, clasps, $12 00. 
 
 Sadliers’ Extraordinary Cheap Edition of the Holy 
 Bible. The great demand for the Douay Bible amongst the 
 Catholics of the United States and Canada, has induced the publishers to 
 issue this edition, which, for cheapness and durability, cannot be equal¬ 
 led. It contains 4 steel engravings, family records, with historical, and 
 chronological tables, &c. It also possesses these two great advantages 
 over all other Bibles published in the United States, first, that the print 
 is considerably larger, and secondly, that the binding is more durable. 
 Quarto, good stout sheep, $2 25. Imitation morocco, marble edges, $3 
 25. Imitation calf, marble edges, $3 25. Imitation morocco, gilt edges, 
 10 plates, $4 50. Imitation morocco, extra, gilt edges, 10 plates, $6 00. 
 
 Holy Bible Translated from the Latin Vulgate, 12 mo. 
 
 strong sheep, $1 00. 12mo., roan, $1 60. 
 
 Douay Testament, with Annotations, and chronological, and 
 analytical tables, as approved by the Most Rev. John Hughes, D. D,, 
 Archbishop of New York. 18mo., cloth extra, 37]c. 
 
 ■■ ■ -- ■ ... +»♦ - 
 
 GERMAN BIBLES. 
 
 The Holy Bible in German, with Annotations, Referen¬ 
 ces, Tables, &c., by Rev. Joseph Tranz Allioli, D. D., with the approba¬ 
 tion of the Most Rev. JOHN HUGHES, D. D., Archbishop ol New 
 York. Printed on fine paper, and illustrated with 16 steel engravings, 
 and four family records. Imperial 8vo. Turkey, super extra, bevelled, 
 clasps, $10 60. Turkey, super, extra, bevelled, $8 00. Turkey, super, 
 extra, $7 60. American morocco, gilt edges, $6 50. Turkey, extra, 
 marbled edges, $5 60. Roan, plain edges, $5. 
 
 The Holy Bible in German. Cheap Edition. Royal Svo. 
 American Morocco, gilt edges, $4 00. American morocco, marbled 
 edges, $3 00. Sheep, plain edges, $2 00. 
 
CATALOGUE OF VALUABLE BOOKS. 
 
 3 
 
 Testament in German, with Annotations References, Ta¬ 
 bles, &c., by Rev. Joseph Tranz Allioli, D. D. 8vo., large type, fine 
 paper. Half hound, 75c. Sheep, $1 00. 
 
 
 The History of the Life of Our Lord Jesus Christ, from 
 
 his Incarnation until his Ascension, denoting and incorporating tbe words 
 of the Sacred Text from the Vulgate. Also, The History of the Acts of 
 the Aposties, connected, explained, and blended with reflections. Trans¬ 
 lated from the French of Father Francis De Ligny, of the Society of 
 Jesus, by Mrs. J. Sadlier. With the approbatian of the Most Rev. JOHN 
 HUGHES, D. D., Archbishop of New York. This splendid work is now 
 ready ; making one of the most beautiful works printed. Illustrated with 
 13 splendid steel engravings, 750 pages, imperial octavo. Cloth, extra, 
 $4 00. English, imitation, marbled edges, $5 00. Imitation gilt edges, 
 $6 00. Morocco, extra, $7 00. Flexible, bevelled, $8 00. 
 
 This is the Only complete Life of Christ and his Apostles published 
 in the English language. The Catholic press have spoken of the work in 
 the most favorable manner. 
 
 Essays and Reviews on Theology, Politics, and So¬ 
 cialism. By O. A. Brownson, LL. D. One volume, 536 
 pages, royal 12mo., printed on fine paper. Cloth, extra, $1 25. Sheep, 
 extra, library, $1 50. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The Church against no Church. 
 
 The Episcopal Observer versus the 
 Church. 
 
 Thornwell’s Answer to Dr. Lynch, 
 (April and October, 1S4S.) 
 Protestantism ends in Transcenden¬ 
 talism. 
 
 Protestantism in a Nutshell. 
 Authority and Liberty. 
 
 Political Constitutions. 
 
 War and Loyalty. 
 
 The Higher Law. 
 
 Catholicity necessary to sustain pop¬ 
 ular Liberty. 
 
 Legitimacy and Revolutionism. 
 Native Americanism. 
 
 Labor and Association. 
 
 Socialism and the Church. 
 
 Postage 24 cents. 
 
 History of the Variations of the Protestant Churches. 
 
 By Rt. Rev. James Benign Bossuet, D. D., Bishop of Meaux. Two vols. 
 12mo. This is one of the most celebrated works in the Catholic Library, 
 it is styled by Mosheim. the Protestant Church Historian, “ The Bul¬ 
 wark of Popery. 5 ’ Cloth extra, $1 50. Postage 36c. 
 
 This celebrated work is now ofl'ered to the public at one-half its 
 former price. 
 
 Religion in Society, or the Solution of Great Problems 
 placed within the reach of every mind. Translated from the French of 
 the Abbe Martinet. With an introduction by the Most Rev. JOHN 
 HUGHES, D. D., Archbishop of New York. 1 vol. IQmo., cloth, $1 P5 
 
 “Religion in Society. —(Grands Problemes )—We rejoice to state mat 
 this very interesting work of the Abbe Martinet, in an excellent English 
 translation, is now published and ready. This is a book for every Catholic 
 that reads ; and a book for every person that reads Catholic books. We 
 shall hasten to give it a fuller notice. 5 ’—New York Freeman’s Journal. 
 
 Postage 20c. 
 
1 
 
 4 D. AND J. SADLIER AND CO.’S 
 
 Christian Directory, Guiding Men to Eternal Salvation, 
 by the Rev. Robert Parson, of the Society of Jesns. 1 vol., royal l2mo., 
 600 pages. Cloth, extra, $1 25. Postage 30c. 
 
 The Life of St. Elizabeth, of Hungary, Duchess of 
 Thurugia. By the Count De Montalembert, Peer of Fi ance. 
 Translated from the French, by Mary Hackett, and Mrs. J. Sadlier. One 
 vol. Royal 12mo. Fine paper, with a splendid portrait a f ter Overbeck, 
 engraved on steel. Cloth extra, $1 00. Cloth, gilt, $1 50. English mo¬ 
 rocco, extra, $2 00. Postage 20c. 
 
 In the translation of this work, published in Dublin, the introduc¬ 
 tion, which forms about 150 pages of the original, and nearly one-third of 
 the whole work was omitted. Our edition will contain the entire work. 
 This is one of the most interesting biographies in any language. We defy 
 even the most lukewarm Catholic to read it, without inwardly thanking 
 God that he belongs to a Church that can produce such purity, and holi¬ 
 ness, and so much humility and self-denial as is exemplified in the life of 
 the “ dear St. Elizabeth.” Postage 24 cents. 
 
 The Following of Christ. New Translation from the Ori¬ 
 ginal Latin, in four books, by Thomas a Kempis. To which are added 
 Practical Reflections, and a prayer at the end of each chapter, with the 
 approbation of NICHOLAS, Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster. 
 -J- JOHN, Archbishop of New York. New and elegant edition, printed 
 on the finest paper, with a splendid steel frontispiece, 600 pages, 18mo., 
 and bound in the following styles :—Full cloth, or roan, gilt edges, $1 00. 
 English Morocco, extra, $1 50. Morocco, super, extra, $2 00. Morocco 
 super, extra flexible, bevelled, $2 60. 24mo. edition, same type, cloth, 
 plain, 37£ cents. Roan, plain, 50c. Roan, gilt edges, 75c. 
 
 Postage, from 10 to 20c. 
 
 “ This is the finest edition of the ‘ Following of Christ ’ ever printed on 
 this side of the Atlanntic. Every Catholic, whether old or young, should 
 have a copy of this treasure of a book ”— Montreal True Witness. 
 
 “A beautiful copy of the well-known devotional work of Thomas 
 a Kempis, which has so long been regarded with favor by the whole Chris¬ 
 tian world. This edition is one of the finest specimens of American typo¬ 
 graphy and paper, particularly in a religious work, which we have ever 
 seen.”— Norton’s Literary Gazette. 
 
 New Month or Graces of Mary. Compiled by the 
 
 Fathers of the Oratory of St. Philip, of Neri; to which is added Prayers 
 at Mass and Vespers, with other devotions for the month of May, with 
 the approbation of the Most Rev. JOHN HUGHES, D. D., Archbishop 
 of New York. New and elegant edition, printed on the finest paper, 
 with a splendid steel frontispiece, 500 pages, 18mo., and bound in the fol¬ 
 lowing styles :—Roan, gilt edges, $1 00. English Morocco, extra, $1 
 50. Morocco super, extra, $2 00. Morocco flexible, bevelled, $2 50. 
 24mo. edition, same type, cloth, plain, 37^c. Roan, plain, 50c. Roan 
 gilt edges, 75c. Postage, 16c. 
 
 Lives of the Saints of the Desert, and many Holy Men 
 and Women who have dwelt in Solitude. By the Rt. Rev. Richard Cfial- 
 loner, D. D., with additional Lives, translated from the French, by Mrs. 
 J. Sadlier. Printed on fine paper, 2 plates, in one volume, 600 pages 
 I6mo. Cloth, extra, 75c. Cloth, extra, gilt edges, $1 12. 
 
 Postage 18c. 
 
I 
 
 CATALOGUE OF VALUABLE BOOKS. 5 
 
 Home and the Abbey. By the Authoress of “Geraldine, 
 a Tele of Conscience.” 12mo. of 412 pages, with 2 plates, printed on fine 
 paper. Cloth extra, 75c. Postage, 18c. 
 
 Doctrinal and Scriptural Catechism. By the Rev. Pere 
 
 Collet, Doctor of the Sorbonne. Translated from the French, by Mrs. 
 J. Sadlier. For the use ol the Brothers of the Christian Schools. 
 
 This is considered by competent judges as the most complete, and, 
 at the same time, the most concise Catechism of the Christian Religion and 
 of Scripture History that has yet been offered to the public. It is admirably 
 adapted for adults requiring instruction, as well as for children. The an¬ 
 swers are all so condensed that they are easily committed to memory ; and 
 there is not a single point connected with religion, either of doctrine, dis¬ 
 cipline, or ceremonial, that is not fully explained. 
 
 We know that this w r ork requires only to be known to secure for it a 
 very wide circulation. In order to place the work within the reach of ev¬ 
 ery person, we have determined to put it at the following low prices :— 
 12mo. 440 pages, half-bound, 37£c. Cloth, 50c. To Schools and Colleges 
 $25 per 100. 
 
 Reeve’s History of t.he Holy Bible, comprising the most 
 
 remarkable events in the Old and New Testaments, interspersed with 
 Moral and Instructive Reflections, chiefly taken from the Holy Fathers. 
 By the Rev. Joseph Reeve. Illustrated with 230 engravings. 12mo. of 
 583 pages. Price only 60 ce.nts 
 
 This is beyond doubt the cheapest book ever issued from the Ameri¬ 
 can press. Just fancy a book of 583 pages, and 230 cuts, well bound, for 
 only 50 cents. 
 
 History of the Christian Church, from her Birth to her 
 
 Final Triumphant State in Heaven ; chiefly deduced from the Apoca¬ 
 lypse of St. John, the Apostle and Evangelist. By Sig. Pastorini. Neat 
 English muslin, 75c. 
 
 Cobbett’s History of the Reformation. The History of 
 
 the Reformation in England and Ireland ; showing how that event has 
 impoverished the main body of the people in those’countries. By Wil¬ 
 liam Cobbett. Two vols. bound in one. 
 
 The second volume contains a list of the Priories, Nunneries, Ab¬ 
 beys, Hospitals, and other religious foundations seized on, or alienated, by 
 the “ Protestant Reformation,” Sovereigns and Parliaments ; with an Ap¬ 
 pendix, containing Cobbett’s Three Letters to the Pope, the Earl of Roden, 
 and the Clergy of the Church of England, making this valuable book the 
 only complete edition ever published in this country. Such was the great 
 estimation in which this work was held when first published, that it was 
 translated into five different languages. 18mo., 660 pages of neat and close 
 letter-press, on fine paper, cloth extra, 75c. Postage 20c. 
 
 Cobbett’s Legacies, two volumes complete in one. The 
 first volume consists of Six Letters addressed to the Church Parsons in 
 general. The second volume is addressed to the working classes, with 
 Dedication to Sir Robert Peel, Bart. 18mo., large type, full cloth, 37|c. 
 
 Postage, 12 cents. 
 
 Pope and Maguire’s Discussion. 12mo. fine paper, 75c. 
 
 {fry- Perhaps no discussion ever excited so much attention as this. Rev. 
 MriPope was an itinerant controversialist, who went about challenging 
 
i 
 
 6 D. AND J. SADLIER AND CO.’S 
 
 the Priests to come forth and defend the doctrines of their Church,—the 
 Rev. Mr. Maguire accepted the challenge. Up to that time his name was 
 scarcely known beyond the precincts of his parish, (which was situated in 
 the mountains of Leitrim,) but after the discussion, “Father Maguire” 
 became the most popular Priest in Ireland. Pope retired from the contest 
 conscious of defeat, tor he never challenged any more Priests. 
 
 The End of Controversy; by the Rt. Rev. Dr. Milner. To 
 which is added, his Address to the Lord Bishop of St. David’s, and his 
 Postscript to the same. 12mo., with Apostolic Three. Cloth extra, 50c 
 
 Ward’s Cantos: or England’s Reformation; a poem of 
 
 four Cantos, by Thomas Ward, Esq. To which ate added, Publisher’s 
 Preface, Life of the Author, Notes to justify the facts related, and several 
 additions faithfully extracted from the Author’s Manuscript. 18mo., fine 
 paper, clear type, 50c. 
 
 Ward’s Errata of the Protestant Bible. A Work show¬ 
 ing the errors of the Protestant Translations of the Scriptures. Imperial 
 8vo., half bound, 50c. 
 
 A History of the First Beginning and Progress of the 
 Protestant Religion, by way of question and answer. 
 By Bishop Challoner. A most excellent and instructive work. 18mo., 
 clear type. Cloth, ISc. 
 
 Practical Piety, set forth by St. Francis of Sales, Bishop 
 and Prince of Geneva. Collected from his Letters, Discourses, and Med¬ 
 itations. Translated from the French. 18mo. Cloth extra, 50c. 
 
 Postage 15 cents. 
 
 St. Augustine’s Confessions. Translated from the Latin, 
 
 by a Catholic Clergyman. 18mo. 334 pages. Price 50c. 
 
 {■ The above is a work that should be in the hands of every Catholic 
 The name of the Author is a sufficient guarantee of its usefulness. 
 
 Duty of a Christian Towards God. Being an improved 
 version of the original Treatise, written by the venerable J. B. Salle, 
 Founder of the Brothers of the Christian School. Translated from the 
 French by Mrs. J. Sadlier, with the Prayers at Mass, and the Rules of 
 Christian Politeness. 12mo. 400 pages. Half-bound, 37£ cents, Cloth 
 extra, 50 cents. 
 
 The Mission of Death. A Tale of the New York Penal 
 Laws, by M. E. Walworth. 1 vol. 18mo. Fine paper, cloth extra, 50c. 
 Full gilt, 76c. Postage 16c. 
 
 Life of the Rt. Rev. Dr. Doyle, Bishop of Kildare and 
 
 Leighlin. With a Portrait. 
 
 The Life of this Patriot Bishop should be in the house of every 
 Catholic; more especially those of Irish origin. a It gives a summary of 
 his examination before the House of Lords, on tne Catholic question. It 
 is a work which every Irish father should place in the hands of his child¬ 
 ren, as his name should be engraved indelibly upon the hearts of Irish¬ 
 men and their offspring. 
 
 Catholic Christian Instructed, in the Sacraments, Sacri¬ 
 
 fices, Ceremonies, and Observances of the Church. By Rt. Rev. R. 
 
CATALOGUE OF VALUABLE BOOKS. 
 
 7 
 
 Challoner, D. D. Large type, 18mo. Flexible cloth, 26c. Cloth extra 
 3Sc. Postage 10c. 
 
 Manual of Devotions to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. 
 
 Containing a Novena and other exercises for the use of the members of 
 the Confraternity of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. 24mo. Cloth extra, 25c. 
 
 Postage 8c. 
 
 The Christian Instructed; or Precepts for Living Chris- 
 tianly in the World. From the Italian of Father Quadrupani, with se¬ 
 lections from the works of St. Francis de Sales, and the Nineteen Sta¬ 
 tions of Jerusalem, approved by Rt. Rev. Bishop Fitzpatrick. Large 
 type, 24mo. Cloth extra, 25c. Postage 8c. 
 
 Think Well On’t; or Reflections on the Great Truths of 
 the Christian Religion for every day of the month. By the Rt. Rev. R. 
 Challoner, D. D. 32mo. Cloth extra, 19c. Postage 4c. 
 
 Nine Days’ Devotion; or a Npvena, preparatory to the 
 Feast of St. Patrick, Apostle and Patron of Ireland ; to which is added, 
 Devotions for Confession and Communion, Prayers at Mass, and Stations 
 of the Cross. Cloth, flexible, 15c. Postage 8c. 
 
 Tales of the Festivals. In Fancy Paper Covers, with a 
 
 Plate in each. Price 7c. In packages of Six, 38c. 
 
 No. 1. 
 
 Month of Mary. 
 
 The Feast of Corpus Christi. 
 
 No. 2. 
 
 The Feast of the Sacred Heart of 
 Jesus. 
 
 Feast of the Assumption. 
 
 No. 3. 
 
 Feast of the Nativity. 
 
 Feast of the Purification. 
 
 No. 4. 
 
 Feast of Ash-Wednesday. 
 Festival of the Annunciation. 
 
 No. 5. 
 
 Festival of the Holy Week. 
 Festival of Easter. 
 
 No. 6. 
 
 Rogation day. 
 
 Feast of Pentecost. 
 
 Bound in one vol. 24mo. Seven plates, fine paper. Cloth extra, 38c. 
 Cloth, gilt edges, 63c. Cloth extra, gilt edges, 75c. Postage 12c. 
 
 Blanche Leslie; or The Living Rosary, and other Tales, 
 for young people. In Fancy Paper Covers, with a plate in each. Price 
 7c. In packages of Six, 38c. 
 
 No. 1. 
 
 Blanche Leslie ; or, the Living Ro¬ 
 sary . 
 
 The Little Italians ; or, the Lost 
 Children of Mount St. Bernard. 
 Power of Prayer. 
 
 No. 2. 
 
 Ellen’s Dream. 
 
 Easter ; or, the Two Mothers. 
 
 No. 3. 
 
 The Poor Widow. 
 
 A Tale of the Ardennes. 
 
 The Cherries. 
 
 No Virtue without a Struggle. 
 
 No. 4. 
 
 Seven Corporal Works of Mercy. 
 
 No. 5. 
 
 Hans, the Miser. 
 
 Perrien and Lucette. 
 
 The Envious Girl Reformed. 
 
 No. 6. 
 
 Divine Providence. 
 
 Lucy’s Pilgrimage. 
 
 Little Adam the Gardener. 
 
 Cloth extra, 38o 
 Postage 12c. 
 
 Bound in one vol. 24mo. Seven plates, fine paper. 
 Cloth, gilt edges, 63c. Cloth Extra, gilt edges, 75c. 
 
8 
 
 D. AND J. SADLIER AND CO.’S 
 
 Benjamin ; or, Pupil of the Christian Brothers. Translated 
 from the French, by Mrs. J. Sadlier. 24mo. Cloth extra, 25c. Full 
 gilt, 3T£c. 
 
 The Life of the Blessed Virgin. To which is added a 
 Novena in honor of Her Immaculate Conception, with an Historical ac¬ 
 count of the Origin and Effects of the MIRACULOUS MEDAL, and 
 the Life and Death of the Child of Mart. 2 plates, large type, 
 24mo., revised by the late Very Rev. Felix Varella. Cloth extra, 25c. 
 Gilt edges, 37£c. 
 
 CATHOLIC CHURCH MUSIC. 
 
 The Catholic Choir Book ; or The Morning and Evening 
 Service of the Catholic Church. Comprising a choice collection of 
 Gregorian and other Masses, Litanies, Psalms, Sacred Hymns, Anthems, 
 Versicles, and Motets, selected and newly arranged from the composi¬ 
 tions of thfi first masters. Compiled and respectfully dedicated to the 
 Rt. Rev. Dr. Fenwick, by R. Garbett, Esq. $2 00. 
 
 The Catholic Harp, containing the Morning and Evening 
 Service of the Catholic Church ; embracing a choice collection of 
 Masses, Litanies, Psalms, Sacred Hymns, Anthems, Versicles, and Mo¬ 
 tets, all selected from the compositions of the first masters : compiled 
 by Philip A. Kirk. Half bound, 37Jc. 
 
 Eight Easy Pieces of Sacred Music, for Four Voices : 
 Soprano, Alto, Tenor, Bass, with the Accompaniment of the Organ. 
 Composed and dedicated to the Rt. Rev. J. B. Fitzpatrick, Bishop of Bos¬ 
 ton, by A. Werner, Organist at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross. 
 
 No. 1 Asperges me. 
 “ 2 Alma. 
 
 “ 3 Ave Regina. 
 u 4 Regina Cceli. 
 Price 37£ cents. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 No. 5 Salve. 
 
 “ 6 Tantum Ergo. 
 
 “ 7 Veni Creator spiritus. 
 
 “ 8 Passion Canticle. 
 
 Postage 2c. 
 
 ♦ 
 
 SADLIER’S FIRESIDE LIBRARY. 
 
 In 18mo. vols., from 300 to 400 pages. 
 
 Illustrated w ith engravings, printed on fine paper, and bound in cloth 
 - extra, price, 50 cents per vol. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 Orphan of Moscow; or, The Young Governess. A tale 
 translated from the French of Madame Woillese, by Mrs. J. Sadlier. 
 Illustrated with steel engraving and illuminated title. Cloth, 50c. Gilt 
 edges, 75c. 
 
CATALOGUE OF VALUABLE BOOKS. 
 
 9 
 
 No. II. 
 
 The Castle of Roussillon; or Quercy in the Sixteenth Cen¬ 
 tury. A tale translated from the French of Madame Eugene de la Ro- 
 chere, by Mrs. J. Sadlier. Cloth extra, 50c. Steel plate, gilt edges, 75c. 
 
 No. m. 
 
 Sick Calls: from the Diary of a Missionary Priest. By the 
 
 Rev. Edward Price, M. A. 2 steel plates, cloth extra, 50c., gilt edges, 75c. 
 
 No. IY. 
 
 Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, or 
 Lily of Israel. Translated from the French of the Abb6 
 Gerbcrt. 18mo. of 400 pages. Steel frontispiece. Price 50c. to $1 00. 
 
 No. V. 
 
 New Lights; or Life in Galway. A Tale of the New Re¬ 
 formation. By Mrs. J. Sadlier. 18mo. of 450 pages, with 2 engravings. 
 Cloth, 60c. Full gilt, $1 00. 
 
 (fry- The main object of this story is to bring under the notice of Catho¬ 
 lics in America, and of Irish Catholics in particular, the nefarious system 
 of proselyting going on from day to day, and from year to year, in the re¬ 
 mote and famine-stricken districts of Ireland ; the fearful persecutions and 
 temptations by which the starving poor are incessantly assailed, and their 
 steadfast adherence (with comparatively few exceptions) to the ancient 
 faith of their fathers. , 
 
 No. VI. 
 
 The Poor Scholar, and other Tales of Irish Life. By 
 
 William Carleton. Illustrated with two plates. Price 50c. cloth extra, 
 75c. gilt. 
 
 No. vn. 
 
 Tales of the Five Senses. By Gerald Griffin, Author of 
 “ Half Sir,” “ Collegians,” with a portrait of the Author. Cloth extra, 
 60c., gilt, 75c. * 
 
 No. vm. 
 
 Tubber Derg; or the Red Well, and other Tales of Irish 
 
 Life. By William Carleton. 2 plates. Cloth extra, 50c. Gilt, 75c. 
 
 Other volumes in Press. 
 
 In Press, Nos. IX, X, XI. 
 
 A Collection of Irish Tales, by Mrs. J. Sadlier. Com¬ 
 prising amongst others, the following :—Father Shehey ; The Daughter 
 of Tyrconnell; Fate of the Sheares’; Norman Steel, or The Priest 
 Hunter; The Later Days of the O’Reillys; O’Grady, or The Expatri-• 
 ated ; Granu Wail, a Tale of the Desmonds, Sic., &c. 
 
 (fry- Some of these Tales appeared in the Boston Pilot, and others of 
 them were published in a collected form, entitled “Tales of the Olden 
 Time. They will form three 50 cent volugnes,—each volume complete in 
 itself. Revised and corrected by the Author. 
 
10 
 
 D. AND J. SADLIER AND CO.*S 
 
 STANDARD CATHOLIC PRAYER BOOKS. 
 
 The following Prayer Books are all printed on fine paper, in clear, bokl 
 type, and for beauty of finish, and durability of binding, cannot be ex¬ 
 celled. They contain all the Prayers and Devotions used by Catholics, 
 all carefully revised, and published with the approbation of his Eminence 
 Cardinal WISEMAN, Archbishop of Westminster, and the Most ReV. 
 JOHN HUGHES, D. D., Archbishop of New York : 
 
 The Golden Manual, being a Guide to Catholic Devotion, 
 
 Public and Private. Compiled from approved sources. ISmo., 1041 pages. 
 Neatly bound in sheep, 1 plate. 75;. Roan, plain, 1 plate, $1 00. Roan, 
 antique edges, 1 plate, $1 25. i-oan, gilt edges, 1 plate, $1 25. Ameri¬ 
 can morocco, gilt edges, 6 plates, $1 75. English morocco, gilt edges, S 
 plates, $2 00. Morocco, extra illuminated, 8 plates, $2 50. Morocco, 
 extra illuminated, clasps, $3 25. 
 
 Fine Taper, Illuminated Title, 12 Plates. 
 
 Morocco, bevelled, $3 00. Morocco, bevelled, clasps, $3 75. Morocco, 
 antique, clasps, $5 50. Rich velvet, clasps and corners, paper cases, $9 
 00. Rich velvet, medallion on the side, $10 00. Also, various styles, 
 from $10 00 to $20 00. 
 
 (XThis Manual contains, in addition to forms in general use, various 
 Devotions selected from approved Continental works, making it the most 
 complete Manual ever published in the English language. The Prayers, 
 Litanies, &c., &c., have been llated with the Latin originals, wherever 
 such were known to exist. T. English version of the Psalms here given, 
 has been constructed by a comparison of the authorized Douay text, (to 
 which, in substance, it adheres,) with the several other versions which, 
 from time to time, have been sanctioned for the purpose of devotion. The 
 Indulgence Prayers have been literally translated from the Racolta. Bou- 
 vier’s Treatise on Indulgences, and the last edition of the Cceleste Palme- 
 tum. The particulars connected with the Confraternities, &c., to which 
 indulgences are attached, have been carefully collected from authorized 
 sources, and published with the approbation of his Eminence, Cardinal 
 Wiseman. The present edition has been enlarged with numerous trsnsla 
 tions from the French and Italian, and selections of prayers in general use 
 in this country ; together with the complete offices of the Blessed Virgin, 
 and the Gospels and Collects t oughout the year, and explanations ol all 
 the festiva of the year. 
 
 The Way to Heaven.* A Select Manual of Prayers for 
 
 every day use. Compiled from approved sources. With the approba¬ 
 tion of the Most Rev. JOHN HUGHES, D. D., Archbishop of New York. 
 Illustrated with splendid steel plates. 18mo., 700 pages, fine paper. Roan, 
 antique edges, 5 plates, $1 00. Roan, gilt edges, 5 plates, $1 25. Eng¬ 
 lish morocco, gilt edges, 5 plates, $1 50. Turkey morocco extra, 5 plates, 
 $2 25. Turkey morocco, bevelled, nine plates, $2 75.; Bevelled, clasps, 
 $3 63 ; Velvet, from $6 to $12. 
 
 The Garden of the Soul. A Manual of Fervent Prayers, 
 Pious Reflections, and Solid Instructions, calculated to answer the use of 
 the members of all ranks and conditions of Holy Catholic Church ; to 
 which is prefixed an Historical Explanation of the Vestments, Ceremo¬ 
 nies, etc., appertaining to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. By the Rt. 
 
CATALOGUE OF VALUABLE BOOKS. 
 
 11 
 
 Rev. Dr. England, late Btshop of Charleston ; with a great many other 
 valuable additions, under the care of an eminent divine of New York. 
 Large 18mo., 550 pages. Sheep, neat, 50c. Roan, gilt edges, 75c. Roan 
 full gilt, $1 00 Roan, full gilt, clasps, $1 25. English morocco, $1 25. 
 Morocco extra, $-2 00. Morocco extra, clasps, $2 50. Bevelled, flexible, 
 $2 50. Bevelled, flexible, clasps, $3 00. 
 
 The Key of Heaven. Greatly enlarged and improved, 
 with the Stations of the Cross. Large 24mo. Cloth extra, 2 plates, 3!c. 
 Roan, embossed, 2 plates, 38c. Roan, gilt sides, 4 plates, 50c. Roan, 
 gilt edge3, 4 plates, 63c. Imitation morocco, full gilt, 6 plates, 75c. 
 Imitation morocco, full gilt, clasps, 6 plates, 88c. Morocco extra, 8 plates, 
 $1 50. Morocco extra, clasps, 8 plates, $2/25. Morocco extra, bevelled, 8 
 plates, $1 75. Morocco extra, bevelled, clasps, 8 plates, $2 50. Velvet, 
 corners, clasps, 8 plates, cases, $5 00. Velvet, corners, fine, clasps, 5 
 plates, cases, $6 00. >» » 
 
 The Path to Paradise. 32mo., (large edition,) with 12 
 fine steel engravings. Cloth extra, 1 plate, 25c. Imitation morocco, 4 
 plates, 37c Imitation morocco, gilt, 4 plates, 50c. Imitattion morocco, 
 gilt edges, clasps, 63c. 
 
 Fine Pa}>er. 
 
 Morocco, super, extra, 6 plates, $1 25. Morocco, super, e^tra, clasps, 
 6 plates, $2 00. Morocco, super, extra, bevelled, 12 plates, $1 60. 
 Morocco, super, extra, bevelled, clasps, $2 25. Velvet, clasps and co 
 ners, cases, 12 plates, $4 00. Velvet, clasps, and corners, fine, cases, 12 
 plates, $5 00. 
 
 The Path to Paradise, (beautiful^ /mature edition,) 12 
 fine steel engravings. Cloth extra, 1 plate, 30c. Roan, plain, 1 plate, 
 25c. Roan, gilt, 4 plates, 38c. Roan, gilt, clasps, 4 plates, 50c. Roan, 
 
 • full gilt, 50c. Morocco extra, 6 plates, $1 00. Morocco extra, clasps, 6 
 plates, $1 50. Velvet, very fine, cases, 12 plates, $4 00. 
 
 Gate of Heaven ; or, Way of the Child of Mary. A Manual 
 of Prayers and, \ instructions, compiled from approved sources, for the 
 use of Young Persons. Illustrated with 40 plates. 320 pages, 32mo. 
 Fine paper, cloth extra, 20c. R.oan, 32c. R.oan, gilt, 38c. Roan, full 
 gilt, 60c. Clasps, 63c. 
 
 Pocket Manual, (a very neat Pocket' Prayer Book,'' .with 
 
 steel engravings. 4Smo. Turkey morocco, gilt edges, 50c. (Ip acks,) 
 38c.’ Imitation turkey, gilt edges, 31c. Embossed, gilt, 25c. Cloth 
 extra, 13c. 
 
 Joumee du Cretien. A very fine French Prayer Book, 
 
 containing 630 pages, fine steel engravings. 24mo. With the approba¬ 
 tion of the Rt. Rev. Ignatius Bourges, D. D , Bishop of Montreal, C. E. 
 Cloth extra, l plate, 32c. Roan, plain, 1 plate, 37c. Imitation, full gilt, 
 4 plates, 03c. Morocco extra, 10 plates, $1 50 Morocco extra, clasps, 
 10 plates, $2 00. Velvet, finely mounted caSes, $4 00 Velvet, finely- 
 mounted medallion, $5 00. * 
 
 Paroissien Petits Enfants Fieux. A beautiful French 
 
 Prayer Book. Cloth extra, 13c. Roan, gilt, 1 plate, 25c. Cloth, full 
 gilt, 1 plate, 25c. Imitation, gilt, 1 plate, 32c. Morocco, extra, 1 plate, 60c. 
 
hJs'"*-~ 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
3 JO 
 
 Cb 
 
 l33802 
 
 DOES NOT HiRH H ATE 
 
 BOSTON COLLEGE LIBRARY 
 
 UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS 
 CHESTNUT HILL, MASS. 
 
 Books may be kept for two weeks and may be 
 renewed for the same period, unless reserved. 
 
 Two cents a day is charged for each book kept 
 overtime. 
 
 If you cannot hnd what you want, ask the 
 Librarian who will be glad to help you. 
 
 The borrower is responsible for books drawn 
 on his card and for all fines accruing on the same. 
 
l§* 
 
 ' -'-• , *£■ 6Rh\5j*I;,