Ex Librii 
 C. K. OGDEN
 
 /O.jD 

 
 A 
 
 LETTER 
 
 TO 
 
 AN ENGLISH LAYMAN, 
 
 ON 
 
 Coronation att), 
 
 HIS LATE MAJESTY'S CORRESPONDENCE 
 WITH LORD KENYON AND MR. PITT; 
 
 IN WHICH ARE CONSIDERED 
 
 THE SEVERAL OPINIONS OF MR. JEFFREY IN THE EDINBURGH 
 
 REVIEW, NO. XCI. OF MR. DILLON, DR. MILNER, 
 
 AND MR. CHARLES BUTLER ; 
 
 AND 
 
 THE APPLICATION OF THE WHOLE 
 
 TO 
 
 THE PRESENT CLAIMS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLICS 
 IN IRELAND. 
 
 BY 
 
 REV. HENRY PHILLPOTTS, D.D. 
 
 RECTOR OF STANHOPE. 
 
 LONDON: 
 JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET. 
 
 MDCCCXXVIII.
 
 ATT 
 
 CANCELU 
 LIBRARY. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 PRINTED BY C. ROWOHTH, BELL YARD, 
 TEMPLE BAR.
 
 PRINCIPAL MATTERS. 
 
 Page. 
 
 1 . The Church of England an essential part of the Bri- 
 
 tish Constitution 7 
 
 2. Forma Juramenti Regis Angl. in Coronatione sua 
 
 (Edw. II.) 14 
 
 Oath of Ed. VI . . 18 
 
 James II 19 
 
 Present Coronation Oath 21 
 
 3. King George III.'s interpretation of the Oath . . 24 
 
 4. Alterations made in this Oath at the Revolution . . 25 
 
 5. Security against Popery, the especial object at the 
 
 Revolution 30 
 
 6. Another interpretation of the Oath 51 
 
 6. Mr. Jeffrey's attack on his late Majesty in the Edin- 
 
 burgh Review 54 
 
 7. Mr. Dillon, Essay on the Coronation Oath .... 74 
 
 8. The King as Legislator 76 
 
 9. The King as Legislator is bound by his Coronation 
 
 Oath . 84 
 
 L^
 
 iv CONTENTS. 
 
 ,0. Mr. Burke's Letter to Sir Hercules Langrishe . .102 
 
 11. Dr. Milner's " Case of Conscience." 107 
 
 12. Mr. C. Butler's Letter on the Coronation Oath . .116 
 
 13. No pledge of Concession to Irish Roman Catholics 
 
 given at the Union 136 
 
 14. Mr. Pitt's Letter to King George HI 146 
 
 15. Test devised by Mr. Burke 157 
 
 <>6. Authority of Lord Bacon Lord Coke Blackstone . 170 
 
 1 7. Lord Kenyon's interpretation of the Coronation Oath 1 73 
 
 18. Application of the preceding argument 176 
 
 19. Language and Conduct of Irish Roman Catholic Pre- 
 
 lates ... 186 
 
 20. Claims of Roman Catholic Bishops in Ireland . . . 258 
 
 21. Power of Roman Catholic Bishops and Clergy over 
 
 the Representation of Ireland 268 
 
 22. Case of the 40*. Freeholders .274 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 A. (p. 55.) On Note in Edinburgh Review, No. LXXV. 293 
 
 B. (p. 96.) Calumnious Attack on King Charles I. in Edin- 
 
 burgh Review, No. XCI 297 
 
 C. (p. 141.) No Pledge of Concession given at the Union 
 
 to the Irish Roman Catholics 303 
 
 D. (p. 233.) Dr. Mac Hale, Roman Catholic Coadjutor 
 
 Bishop of Killala's Examination before the Commis- 
 sioners of Education Inquiry in Ireland . . . .314 
 
 E. (p. 242.) Nag's Head Fable respecting Archbishop 
 
 Parker's Consecration . . . 328
 
 LETTER 
 
 THE CORONATION OATH 
 
 TO 
 
 AN ENGLISH LAYMAN. 
 
 MY DEAR FRIEND, 
 
 I HAVE received your Letter, in which 
 you thank me for giving to the world the inte- 
 resting and valuable Correspondence of our late 
 revered Sovereign with Lord Kenyon and Mr. 
 Pitt. You need not, however, be told, that some 
 of our common friends have doubted the expe- 
 diency of that publication ; while many of our 
 opponents have affected to rejoice at it, as a 
 measure decidedly favourable to their views. 
 In particular, the British Roman Catholic As- 
 sociation, very soon after the correspondence 
 appeared, passed a resolution to print and cir- 
 culate it in an edition of their own ; a resolu- 
 tion, which, I am sorry to say, seems to be not 
 yet carried into effect. Mr. Charles Butler, 
 
 B
 
 2 LETTER ON CORONATION OATH. 
 
 too, was induced to announce a new edition of 
 his "Letter on the Coronation Oath;" and 
 lastly, a writer in the Edinburgh Review has 
 put forth an article, entitled, " George III. and 
 the Catholic Question," in which, with the 
 usual accompaniment of sneers and sarcasms, 
 I am thanked for " the very signal service I 
 have done to the great cause of Catholic 
 Emancipation," by this extraordinary instance 
 of " indiscreet and unthinking zeal." 
 
 This formidable array of adverse judgments 
 gives me, you will readily believe, very little 
 concern. But as you, and some other of my 
 friends, think it may be useful to expose the 
 weakness of the grounds, on which these gen- 
 tlemen build their opinion, I shall not decline 
 the task proposed to me. 
 
 It can hardly, I hope, be necessary for me to 
 assure you, in the outset, that I feel most 
 strongly the delicate and solemn nature of the 
 duty I incur, in thus venturing to comment on 
 the obligation of my Sovereign's Oath. It is a 
 subject, which, in itself, and under any circum- 
 stances, would demand from a religious mind, 
 to be treated with the strictest and most scru- 
 pulous sincerity. But, if it were otherwise 
 possible, in the heat of controversy, to forget 
 this duty, the awful event, which has removed
 
 MR. CANNING AND EDINBURGH REVIEW. O 
 
 for ever from the scene of our contention the 
 ablest and most distinguished of all the indivi- 
 duals engaged in it, could hardly fail to recall us 
 to better thoughts, to admonish us, in a voice 
 more eloquent even than his own, " what sha- 
 " dows we are, and what shadows we pursue." 
 Bear with me, I entreat you, for a very short 
 space, while I do justice to myself, in speaking 
 of the eminent person to whom I have here al- 
 luded. I have been accused, in a late number 
 of the Edinburgh Review, of treating him with 
 " scurrility ;" a charge, which, without stooping 
 to confute it, I fling back on the head of my ac- 
 cuser. Had I ever addressed to Mr. Canning 
 any language, which a public man, on a public 
 question, would have a right to complain of 
 hearing, much more, had I ever used towards 
 him the smallest portion of that coarse and un- 
 manly ribaldry, which this very Review,* as 
 
 * In the 74th Number of this Review is an elaborate article 
 of 30 pages, entitled " Mr. Canning and Reform," founded on 
 a collection, made by a country bookseller, of his Speeches at 
 his Elections for Liverpool. To select all the gross and in- 
 sulting passages, which this article contains, would be to tran- 
 scribe a very large portion of it j but for one or two specimens 
 I must find room. 
 
 It will perhaps be remembered that Mr. Canning, in address- 
 ing his late constituents, when about to sail for the government 
 
 B 2
 
 4 MR. CANNING 
 
 often as it suited its factious purposes, delighted 
 to heap upon him, I should now feel, what it 
 
 of India, intimated his opinion, that it was desirable to compro- 
 mise the Roman Catholic Question, rather than keep alive the 
 discord attending its continued agitation. The reviewer cha- 
 racterizes this part of the speech as " advertising for the place " 
 of Leader of the House of Commons, then vacant by the death 
 of Lord Londonderry : " Tenacity of place," he continues, 
 " being to ' public men,' what tenacity of life is to reptiles. 
 " Therefore, the Catholic Question is got rid of with very little 
 " ceremony, in a passage which we will not cite, because it 
 " varies materially from the first newspaper report of this 
 " speech ; and though either edition is humiliating enough 
 "for Mr. Canning, and must be sufficiently grateful to the 
 " Lord Chancellor and the Orange party, yet we might, by 
 " giving the one, misrepresent him unfavourably ; and by 
 " adopting the other we might weaken the sOrt of recantation 
 " which he unquestionably intended to make." 'Again " The 
 *' fear of reform, the love of our ancient order of things., could, 
 " it seems, avail nothing, unless place was superadded to the 
 " calls of duty : but the instant this graceful and convenient 
 " union is formed, he is all ear to those claims to which he had 
 " been so often and so obstinately deaf, and after ridding 
 " himself of the Catholic Question, he steps unencumbered into 
 " his situation," &c. p. 388. 
 
 Once more : after charging him with wilful and " gross mis- 
 " representation of the Reformers,'' and speaking of one " great 
 " source of our calamities being the profligate conduct of our 
 " statesmen, Mr. Canning among the number," &c. " But 
 " what cares Mr. Canning for these things ? He had a story 
 " to tell about a red lion, and he must make, if he could not
 
 AND EDINBURGH REVIEW. 5 
 
 would perhaps be well for my accuser, if he 
 himself were capable of feeling. As it is, no con- 
 
 " find, a way to let it into his speech. We shall not extract 
 " this fable, as the reader has, in all probability, already seen 
 " it ; but we will remind its author of an old maxim connected 
 " with the subject of lions, the substance of which, though 
 " not in the same language, his new colleagues " (A. D. 1822) 
 " will, doubtless, oftentimes have in their minds during the 
 " limited period of their connexion with him . 
 
 6v 2pjj \tovTog 0Kvp.vov iv iro\t.i 
 r\v ' KTpa<j)rj rtg, TOIQ rpoiroic; v 
 
 " which may be thus shortly expressed ; " If you choose to 
 " take up one of this breed, and make much of him, you must lay 
 " your account with having to bear with his tricks" (literally his 
 " ' tropes.') p. 404. 
 
 " It is impossible to conclude this article, without expressing 
 " more distinctly, the astonishment with which we have been 
 " stricken at the prodigious assurance with which Mr. Canning 
 " ventures to treat the subject of the country's distresses. His 
 " levity we say nothing more of; but it required the evidence 
 " of our senses to make us believe, that any man in his situation 
 " could have the audacity to come forth and tell the ruined 
 " landowners of England, that the only thing he could recom- 
 " mend to them was patience. Patience enough, indeed, they 
 " had shown, before he had obtruded his advice ; and if they 
 " can endure that advice, they will prove that they have no 
 " need of it ; for to be patient under such an outrage is more 
 " hard than to bear all the other bufferings of their cruel for- 
 " tune. He, indeed, to tell them so ! and in the body of the 
 " .advertisement for the place which he has since gotten ! He to 
 " recommend patience as the only remedy ! the coadjutor of
 
 6 MR. CANNING. 
 
 sideration, not even the call of self-defence, shall 
 prevail with me to violate the Sanctuary of the 
 Tomb, or to recur to any parts of Mr. Can- 
 ning's character or conduct, but those on which I 
 can offer an honest, however humble, tribute of 
 respect to his memory. His genius, his elo- 
 quence, all the best and noblest endowments of 
 his highly-gifted mind, devoted by him to the 
 service of his country, during the long period of 
 her greatest danger ; he himself ever foremost, 
 
 " those ministers whose blundering and profligate courses have 
 " brought the landowners to rnin ! For which, of all the 
 " schemes that have sunk them to the earth, did not this talker 
 " support ? Which of all the men that have stript them of their 
 " revenues did not this place-hunter league with ? And when 
 " he sees staring him in the face, the countless miseries which he has 
 " occasioned, he can coolly stop the current of his mirth, to give 
 " them a bit of serious advice it is all he can do for them, after 
 " what he has done to them. ' Take my word for it (says he) 
 " we have undone you so completely, that no power on earth 
 " can mend your lot, and all you have for it, is to bear with 
 " patience what we have brought upon you.' Such experiments 
 " upon the temper of the country could only be attempted in 
 " the present state of its representation ; and we may venture 
 " to foretel, that the House of Commons will practise the car- 
 " dinal virtue thus recommended to the landowners, in a man- 
 " ner as exemplary as Mr. Canning could desire. They will 
 " bear even him, and his gibes, and his counsels, that is to say, 
 " as long as the court pleases." p. 407.
 
 MR. CANNING. 7 
 
 in office and out of office, in vindicating the 
 righteousness of her cause, in cheering and sus- 
 taining the spirit of her gallant people, and ele- 
 vating them to the level of the mighty exigence, 
 on which their own freedom and the liberties of 
 the world depended; protecting, meanwhile, 
 our Constitution at home from the wild projects 
 of reckless innovation, shaming and silencing, 
 by his unequalled wit, those who were inacces- 
 sible to the reasoning of his lofty philosophy : 
 These great deservings, be the judgment of pos- 
 terity on other matters what it may, will ensure 
 to him a high and enduring place in the proudest 
 record of England's glory. 
 
 His saltern accuninlem donis, et fungar inani 
 Munere. 
 
 But I will not longer delay addressing my- 
 self to the subject before me. 
 
 The Church of England an essential part of the 
 British Constitution. 
 
 Those who have inquired into the history of 
 the British Constitution, will testify to the close 
 connexion of civil and religious polity, which has 
 ever subsisted in it. From the very earliest pe- 
 riod, the monarchy of England has always pre-
 
 8 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND AN ESSENTIAL 
 
 sented itself, as a government which regards its 
 subjects in the full dignity of their real nature, 
 as religious creatures ; as beings, whose in- 
 terests are not limited to this transitory scene, 
 but reach onwards to an infinitely higher and 
 more enduring state. Accordingly, instead of 
 making religion the handmaid of civil policy, 
 instead of adopting and endowing it, merely as 
 an useful auxiliary to secure the submission of 
 subjects, and give a new sanction to the autho- 
 rity of rulers, the English Lawgiver has always 
 regarded Religion as having, by right, a para- 
 mount place and dignity in the great scheme of 
 national polity. Hence it is, that the Gospel 
 is reverently acknowledged to be part of the 
 common law of the land. Hence, too, it is, 
 that as the Gospel supposes all Christians to be 
 members of the Church of Christ, and that 
 Church to be a society under the government 
 of certain rulers appointed by God himself to 
 their high office, the law of England, from the 
 first conversion of this nation to the faith of 
 Christ, not only has always recognized the State 
 of England, inasmuch as it is a Christian State, 
 to be also the particular Church of England ; 
 but it has, by consequence, regarded the Gover- 
 nors of the Church as an essential part of this 
 Christian State. Whatever may -have been the
 
 PART OF THE BRITISH CONSTITUTION. 
 
 practice of other countries, and whatever may 
 have been the language of private individuals 
 even here, both the language, and the practice, 
 of our law have been uniform and constant on 
 this particular. In the words of the law itself;* 
 " By divers sundry old authentic Histories and 
 " Chronicles it is manifestly declared and ex- 
 " pressed, that this Realm of England is an Em- 
 " pire, and so hath been accepted in the world, 
 " governed by one supreme Head and King, 
 " having the Dignity and Royal Estate of the 
 " Imperial Crown of the same ; unto whom a 
 " Body Politick, compact of all Sorts and Degrees 
 " of People, divided in terms, and by names of 
 " Spiritualty and Temporally, ben bounden and 
 " owen to bear next to God, a natural andhum- 
 " ble obedience." "When any cause of the Law 
 " Divine happened to come in question, &c., that 
 " part of the said Body Politick called the Spiritualty 
 " being sufficient and meet of itself to declare 
 " and determine all such doubts, and to admi- 
 " nister all such Offices and Duties, as to their 
 " rooms spiritual doth appertain," " and the 
 " law temporal was and yet is administered by 
 " sundry judges of that other part of the said 
 " Body Politick called the Temporally" 
 
 * 24 Hen. VIII. c. 12.
 
 10 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND AN ESSENTIAL 
 
 To endow the Spiritualty with temporal dig- 
 nities, was no essential part of the duty of the 
 Christian legislature : but in England, from the 
 earliest times, " the King's most noble Proge- 
 " nitors, and the Antecessors of the Nobles of 
 " this Realm, have sufficiently endowed the said 
 " Church both with honours and possessions." 
 
 " Thus the Clergy," to speak again in the 
 language of the Law, 8 Eliz. c. 1., " being one 
 " of the great States of the Realm," have always 
 been called to bear a distinguished part in the 
 great Council of the Nation. In all the ac- 
 counts which remain to us of the Mysel Sy- 
 noth, the Great Assembly, or, as it was at other 
 times called, Wittenagemote, the Assembly of 
 the Wise Men of the Realm, we find the Bi- 
 shops mentioned among its chief members. 
 Ina, King of West Saxons, A. D. 702, caused 
 the great Council of his Realm to be convened, 
 consisting ex episcopis, principibus, proceribus, 
 &c.* Egbert, who united the Heptarchy into 
 one Kingdom, assembled at London his Bi- 
 shops and greatest Peers, pro concilio capiendo 
 adversus Danicos Piratas. Canutus, on the 
 death of Edmund Ironside, omnes Episcopos 
 et duces, necnon et principes cunctosque opti- 
 
 * Spelman, p. 40?,,
 
 PART OF THE BRITISH CONSTITUTION. 11 
 
 mates gentis Angliae Londoniae congregari jus- 
 sit. Edward the Confessor granted his char- 
 ters to the Church of Westminster, cum consilio 
 et decreto Archiepiscoporum, Episcoporum, Co- 
 mitum, aliorumque Optimatium. 
 
 And it is particularly worthy of remark, that 
 they had this their seat in the Parliament, or 
 Great Council of the Realm, not by reason of 
 the tenure of their temporal possessions, (for 
 hitherto their lands were held by them in frank- 
 almoigne,) but simply and merely as spiritual 
 lords: so that even " the Guardians of the Spi- 
 " ritualties, in the times of vacancy," as Selden* 
 tells us, " and the Vicars-general of Bishops be- 
 " yond sea," had sometimes place and suffrage 
 in the House of Lords, in the ages following.'!' 
 
 Meanwhile, the charters of our early sove- 
 
 * Titles of Honour, Selden's Works, vol. iii. p. 748. 
 
 t After the conquest, a new title to these seats accrued to 
 the Bishops by the change of the tenure of their lands from 
 frank-almoigne to military tenure. But this, as we have seen, 
 was not the foundation or origin of their seats, but only con- 
 ferred a new right to them. Before, they sat ratione qfficii ; 
 thenceforward, both by right of office, and in respect of tbeir 
 possessions. And so plain is their right at common law to sit 
 in the House of Lords, that when Henry VIII. erected six new 
 Bishoprics, these new Bishops took their seats, without any Act 
 of Parliament empowering them to do so, but simply by their 
 common law right, ratione qfficii.
 
 12 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND AN ESSENTIAL 
 
 reigns are as precise in promising protection to 
 the rights of the Church, as in assuring those 
 of the temporalty. Thus the charter of Henry 
 L, " Ego respectu Dei et amore quern erga vos 
 " omnes habeo, Sanctam Dei Ecclesiam, impri- 
 " mis liberam facio," fyc.* That of Henry II., 
 " Sciatis me ad honorem Dei et Sanctae Ec- 
 " clesiae, et pro communi emendatione totius 
 " regnimei,concessisseetreddidisse,&c. Quare 
 " volo et firmiter praecipio, quod sancta Ecde- 
 " sia, et omnes Comites et Barones, et omnes 
 " mei homines, omnes illas consuetudines et 
 " donationes, et libertates, et liberas consue- 
 " tudines," &c. The Magna Charta of King 
 John, " Sciatis nos, &c. imprimis concessisse 
 " Deo, et hac praesenti Charta nostra con- 
 " firmasse pro nobis et haeredibus nostris in 
 " perpetuum; qudd Anglicana Ecclesia libera 
 " sit, et hdbeat jura sua Integra, et libertates 
 " suas illcesas, et ita volumus observari, 8$c. Et 
 " de scutagiis assidendis summoneri f adenitis 
 " Arckiepiscopos, Episcopos, Abbates, Comites, 
 " et majores Barones regni sigillatim per li- 
 " teras nostras." 
 
 And, as their charters thus recognized the 
 rights of the Church, so also (which more im- 
 
 * Wilkins, Leges Anglo-Saxon, p. 233.
 
 PART OF THE BRITISH CONSTITUTION. 13 
 
 mediately belongs to our present inquiry) did 
 the Oaths which were taken by them at their 
 coronation. Henry II. swore to preserve the 
 liberty of the Church, and made to this effect 
 a written promise to God, which he placed on 
 the altar, for the purpose of binding himself 
 more strongly.* Richard I. swore at his co- 
 ronation, " quod pacem, honorem, et reve- 
 " rentiam, omnibus diebus vitae suaB portabit 
 " Deo et sanctfE Ecclesia: et ejus ordinatis"^ John 
 swore, " quod sanctam Ecclesiam et ejus or- 
 " dinatos diligeret, et earn ab incursione ma- 
 " lignantium indemnem conservaret."J Henry 
 III.'s oath was conceived in similar terms. 
 But, without seeking to ascertain the exact ex- 
 pressions in which every one, in succession, of 
 our early princes swore to the maintenance and 
 protection of the Church's Rights, we find, at 
 length, a fixed and regular form, in which all 
 our kings, from Edward II. to Henry VIII. in- 
 clusive, pledged their faith to the Church and 
 People of England. 
 
 * Wilkins, p. 318. f Ib. 339. 
 
 \ Ib. 353. Ib.381.
 
 14 OATH TAKEN FROM EDW. II. TO HENRY VIII. 
 
 " FORMA JURAMENTI REGIS ANGL. IN CORO- 
 NATIONE* SUA. (EDW. II.) 
 
 " Si Rexfuerit literatus^ talis est. 
 
 " Arcbiepiscopus Cantuar. ad quern de jure et con- 
 suetudine Ecclesiae Cant, antiq. et approbata, pertinet 
 Reges Angliae inungere et coronare, die Coronationis 
 Regis, antequam Rex coronetur, faciet Regi interro- 
 gationes subscriptas. 
 
 " Si leges et consuetudines, ab antiquis justis et Deo 
 devotis Regibus plebi Anglorum concessas, cum Sacra- 
 menti confirmatione eidem plebi concedere et servare 
 ( ) et prassertim leges et consuetudines et liber- 
 
 tates a glorioso Rege Edwardo Clero populoque con- 
 cessas ? 
 
 " Et respondeat Rex. Concedo et servare volo, 
 et sacramento confirmare. 
 
 " Servabis Ecclesiae Dei, Cleroque et Populo, pacem 
 ex integro et concordiam in Deo, secundum vires tuas ? 
 
 " Et respondeat Rex. Servabo. 
 
 " Facies fieri in omnibus judiciis aequam et rectam 
 justitiam, et discretionem, in misericordia et veritate, 
 secundum vires tuas ? 
 
 " Et respondeat Rex. Faciam. 
 
 " Concedis justas leges et consuetudines esse te- 
 nendas, et promittis per te esse protegendas, et ad ho- 
 norem Dei corroborandas, quas vulgus elegerit, secun- 
 dum vires tuas ? 
 
 " Concedo et promitto." 
 
 * This is given in vol.i. p. 168, of Statutes, printed by the 
 Royal Commissioners, 1806. 
 
 f" Si nonfuerit liter atus, the same was administered in French.
 
 HENRY VIII. 15 
 
 This, I repeat, was the Oath taken by Henry 
 VIII. Whether by any, and by what actions, he 
 violated this Oath, is not a question, in which the 
 honour of the reformed Church of England is at 
 all involved. But I will remark in my way, that 
 the Statutes by which he cast off the usur- 
 pations of the Pope, were certainly not in 
 the number. This is not the place to prove, 
 what has been often proved, and no where 
 more clearly or triumphantly, than by Lord 
 Coke,* that Henry's assertion of his right to 
 Ecclesiastical supremacy was most properly 
 and truly a resumption of the ancient legal and 
 recognized right of the English crown. But it 
 is observable, that in the Oath, which he had 
 taken, particular mention is made of the laws of 
 Edward the Confessor, as the measure of the 
 ancient liberties of the Church and People of 
 England. Now, in those laws, the office and 
 duty of king are thus expressly set forth, f as 
 they relate to the Church. " Rex, quia vicarius 
 Regis est, ad hoc est constitutus ut 
 
 * 5 Reports, Cowdrey's Case. 
 
 *t~ Leges Edovardi, 1 7. De Regis Officio et de Jure et ap- 
 pendiciis Coronae Regni Brytanniae. 
 
 J How far this is consistent with the decree of the Council 
 of Florence, respecting the Pope, I leave to those whom it may 
 concern. It is worth remarking, that in the laws of Edward
 
 16 HENRY VIII. 
 
 " regnum terrenum, et populum Domini, et 
 " super omnia sanctam veneretur Ecclesiam ejus, 
 " et regat, et ab injuriosis defendat, et maleficos 
 " ab ea evellat, et destruat, et penitus disperdat. 
 " Illos decet vocari Reges, qui vigilanter de- 
 " fendunt et regunt Ecclesiam Dei, et populum 
 " ejus." Again: " Debet sanctam Ecclesiam 
 " regni sui, cum omni integritate et libertate, 
 " juxta constitutiones patrum et prsedecessorum 
 " servare, fovere, manutenere, regere, et contra 
 " inimicos defendere." 
 
 Henry's invasion of the property of the 
 Church, however covered by legal forms, may 
 admit of less easy justification. But this, I 
 repeat, is not a matter, for which the reformed 
 Church of England is, in any way, answerable. 
 The heads of that Church have never justified 
 it; but, on the contrary, one of the most dis- 
 tinguished of them, Archbishop Whitgift, thus 
 boldly remonstrated with Queen Elizabeth, when 
 she was inclined to follow her father's example, 
 in laying violent hands on the property of the 
 
 the Confessor is given what professes to be an " Epistle from 
 " Pope Eleutherius to Lucius, king of Britain, anno 169 a 
 " passione Christi," and must, therefore, have been regarded 
 as very ancient in Edward's time. In it the Pope says to the 
 King, " Vicarius Dei estis in regno." Wilkins, p. 201.
 
 ARCHBISHOP WHITGIFT. 17 
 
 Church, and forcing the Incumbents to sub- 
 mit to iniquitous surrenders, or exchanges, of 
 the possessions belonging to their Benefices. 
 " They that consult Magna Charta,"* said the 
 stout-hearted old man, " shall find, that as all 
 " your predecessors were at their Coronation, 
 " so you also were sworn before all the Nobility 
 " and Bishops then present, and in the pre- 
 " sence of God, and, in his stead, to him that 
 " anointed you, To maintain the Church lands, 
 " and the rights belonging to it:" "and, though 
 " I shall forbear speaking reproachfully of your 
 " father, consider, that, after the violation of 
 " those laws to which he had sworn in Magna 
 " Charta, God did so far deny him his restrain- 
 " ing Grace, that, as King Saul, after he was 
 " forsaken of God, fell from one sin to another, 
 "so he, till he at last fell into greater sins than 
 " I am willing to mention." f 
 
 On the death of Henry VIII., it appears, from 
 the Council Book, cited by Burnet, J not only 
 that many of the ceremonies of the Coronation 
 were altered, in order to accommodate them to 
 
 * He had sworn to Magna Charta inter " leges et con- 
 suetudines ab antiquis justis, et Deo devotis Regibns con- 
 cessas." 
 
 f Collier's Eccles. Hist. ii. 685. 
 
 t H. R. vol. ii. App. p. 94.
 
 18 OATH OF EDWARD THE SIX^TH. 
 
 the change of laws, but, also, that the Coronation 
 Oath was in some small respects amended. It 
 was taken by Edward VI. in the following 
 form. 
 
 THE OATH OF EDWARD THE SIXTH. 
 
 (See Burnet, vol. ii. Coll. Rec. p. 94.) 
 
 " Archbishop. Will you grant to the people of Eng- 
 land, and others your realms and dominions, the laws 
 and liberties of this realm and others your realms 
 and dominions ? 
 
 " King. I grant and promise. 
 
 "Archbishop. You shall keep, to your strength and 
 power, to the Church of God, and to all the people, 
 holy peace and concord. 
 
 " King. I shall keep. 
 
 "Archbishop. You shall make to be done, after your 
 strength and power, equal and rightful justice in all 
 your dooms and judgments, with mercy and truth. 
 
 " King. I shall do. 
 
 "Archbishop. Do you grant TO MAKE NO LAWS but 
 such as shall be to the honour and glory of God, and 
 to the good of the Commonwealth ; and that the same 
 shall be made by the consent of your people, as hath 
 been accustomed ? 
 
 " King. I grant and promise. 
 
 " The King, laying his hand on the Book, shall say, 
 
 " The things which I have before promised, I shall
 
 CORONATION OATH OF K. JAMES IT. 19 
 
 observe and keep. So God help me, and those holy 
 Evangelists by me bodily touched upon this holy altar !" 
 
 Of the amendments here introduced, it is 
 not necessary that I should at present say any 
 thing ; on the most important of them I shall 
 have occasion to remark more particularly here- 
 after. 
 
 It should seem that Mary, haying been 
 crowned according to the ancient ceremonial, 
 used the ancient form of the Coronation Oath, 
 which (with one alteration introduced under 
 James I.) appears to have been observed at the 
 Coronation of every succeeding Sovereign, 
 James II. included, whose Oath was in the 
 following form. 
 
 KING JAMES II.'s CORONATION OATH. 
 
 (Liber Regalis apud Decanum Westminst. and Sandford's 
 Account of the Coronation.) 
 
 " Archbishop. Sir, Will you grant and keep, and by 
 your oath confirm to the people of England, the laws 
 and customs to them granted by the Kings of England, 
 your lawful and religious predecessors ; and, namely, 
 the laws and customs and franchises granted to the 
 Clergy by the glorious King St. Edward, your pre- 
 decessor, according to the laws of God, the true pro- 
 
 c2
 
 20 CORONATION OATH OF K. JAMES II. 
 
 fession of the Gospel established in this kingdom, and 
 agreeing to the prerogative of the kings thereof, and 
 the ancient custom of this realm ? 
 
 "King. I promise and grant to keep them, 
 
 "Archbishop. Sir, Will you keep peace and godly 
 agreement entirely according to your power, to the 
 Holy Church, the Clergy, and the People? 
 
 "King. I will keep it. 
 
 "Archbishop. Will you to your power cause law, 
 justice, and discretion, in mercy and truth, to be exe- 
 cuted in all your judgments ? 
 
 "King. I will. 
 
 " Archbishop. Sir, Will you grant to hold and keep 
 the rightful customs which the commonalty of this your 
 kingdom have; and will you defend and uphold them 
 to the honour of God so much as in you lieth ? 
 
 "King. I grant and promise so to do. 
 
 " The Request^ or Petition, of the Bishops. 
 
 "Bishops. Our Lord and King, we beseech you to 
 pardon, and to grant, and to preserve unto us, and the 
 churches committed to our charge, all canonical pri- 
 vilege, and due law and justice : and that you will pro- 
 tect and defend us ; as every good King in his kingdom 
 ought to be Protector and Defender of the Bishops 
 and Churches under their government. 
 
 " King. With a willing and devout heart I promise 
 and grant you my pardon, and that I will preserve and 
 maintain unto you and the Churches committed to your 
 charge, all canonical privileges, and due law and justice : 
 and that I will be your Protector and Defender to my
 
 PRESENT CORONATION OATH. 21 
 
 power, by the assistance of God, as every good King in 
 his kingdom ought in right to protect and defend the 
 Bishops and Churches, and their government. 
 
 " Then the King arises out of his chair, and goeth 
 to the altar, and there kneeleth upon the steps, and 
 maketh a solemn oath, each in the sight of all that great 
 assembly, to observe the promises; and, laying his 
 hand upon the holy table, says, 
 
 " These things which I have here before promised, 
 I will perform and keep. So help me God, and the 
 contents of this Book !" 
 
 PRESENT CORONATION OATH. 
 
 And thus we are arrived at the period when 
 the present Oath was, after much deliberation, 
 devised and established, to the right under- 
 standing of which, the view we have taken 
 of the preceding forms will be found to afford 
 some important assistance. 
 
 The following is the form of the Coronation 
 Oatb, as it now stands, in the terms prescribed 
 by 1 William and Mary, c. 6. 
 
 " The Archbishop or Bishop shall say, 
 
 " Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern 
 the people of this kingdom of England, and the do- 
 minions thereto belonging, according to the Statutes in 
 Parliament agreed on, and the laws and customs of the 
 same ?
 
 22 PRESENT CORONATION OATH. 
 
 " The King and Queen shall say, 
 
 " I solemnly promise so to do. 
 
 " Archbishop or Bishop. Will you to your power 
 cause law and justice, in mercy, to be executed in all 
 your judgments ? 
 
 " King and Queen. 1 will. 
 
 " Archbishop or Bishop. Will you, to the utmost of 
 your power, maintain the laws of God, the true pro- 
 fession of the Gospel, and the Protestant reformed 
 religion established by law? And will you preserve 
 unto the Bishops and Clergy of this realm, and to the 
 Churches committed to their charge, all such rights and 
 privileges as by law do or shall appertain unto them, 
 or any of them ? 
 
 " King and Queen. All this I promise to do. 
 
 " After this the King and Queen, laying his and her 
 hand upon the Holy Gospels, shall say, 
 
 " King and Queen. The things which I have here- 
 before promised, I will perform and keep. So help me 
 God." 
 
 A subsequent statute, 5 Ann, c. 8 (the Act 
 of Union with Scotland), after reciting and con- 
 firming (s. 7) an Act made in contemplation of 
 the Union, entituled, " An Act for securing the 
 " Church of England, as by law established," of 
 which the following is an extract, " That an Act 
 " made in the 13th year of Queen Elizabeth, inti- 
 " tuled, ' An Act for the Ministers of the Church 
 " to be of sound Religion ; ' and also another
 
 PRESENT CORONATION OATH. 23 
 
 " Act made in the 13th year of King Charles 
 " II., intituled, ' An Act for the Uniformity of 
 " the Public Prayers,' &c. and all and singular 
 " other* acts of Parliament, now in force for the 
 " establishment and preservation of the Church 
 " of England," "and the doctrine, worship, dis- 
 " cipline, and government thereof, shall remain 
 " and be in full force for ever;" after reciting 
 and confirming this statute, I repeat, the Act of 
 Union thus proceeds (s. 8.), "And be it further 
 " enacted, that for ever hereafter every King or 
 " Queen succeeding and coming to the Royal 
 " Government of the kingdom of Great Britain, 
 " at his or her coronation, shall, in the presence 
 " of all persons who shall be attending, &c. take 
 " and subscribe an Oath to maintain and pre- 
 " serve inviolably the said settlement of the Church 
 " of England, and the doctrine, worship, dis- 
 " cipline, and government thereof, as by law 
 " established, within the kingdoms of England 
 " and Ireland, the dominion of Wales, and Town 
 " of Berwick upon Tweed, and the territories 
 " thereunto belonging." 
 
 Now, as the Oath still continues to be taken 
 only in the form prescribed by 1 William and 
 
 * Among which the laws requiring the Oath of Supremacy 
 and the Test against Popery are expressly enumerated in Wil- 
 liam's first declaration.
 
 24 K. GEORGE III/S INTERPRETATION OF OATH. 
 
 Mary, c. 6, that form must, it is evident, be 
 considered as including the full meaning ex- 
 pressly put upon it by the Act of Union ; and the 
 Sovereign must therefore understand himself, 
 and be understood by others, to swear " that 
 " he will, to the utmost of his power', maintain and 
 " preserve inviolably, within the kingdoms of 
 " England and Ireland, the Protestant Reformed 
 " Religion established by Law, and the settlement 
 " of the Church of England, (described in the 
 " Statute cited in the 7th section of the Act of 
 " Union,) and the Doctrine, Worship, Disci- 
 " pline, and Government thereof, as by Law 
 " established." 
 
 Thus far there can be no pretence whatever 
 for cavil or dispute. All must admit, that the 
 obligation of the Oath extends as far, as the 
 true meaning of these words shall be found to 
 enjoin. But what that true meaning is, has 
 been differently understood by different per- 
 sons. 
 
 King George Ill's Interpretation of the Oath. 
 
 His late Majesty (whose judgment on this 
 point will never be brought into discussion, 
 without sentiments of heartfelt reverence, by 
 any man who deserves the name of English- 
 man) His late Majesty, together with other 
 most respectable authorities, considered this
 
 K. GEORGE III/S INTERPRETATION OF OATH. 25 
 
 Oath as binding the Sovereign to refuse the 
 Royal Assent to any Bill, though presented to 
 him by both Houses of Parliament, which 
 should violate what he conceived a fundamental 
 maxim of the Constitution, namely, that " the 
 " Church of England being the established 
 " Church, those who hold employments in the 
 " State must be members of it, and, conse- 
 " quently, must be obliged not only to take 
 " Oaths against Popery, but also to receive the 
 " Holy Communion, agreeably to the Rites of 
 " the Church of England."* 
 
 Between a full and unqualified assent to this 
 interpretation of the Oath, and the utter con- 
 tempt of it, which has been recently expressed, 
 there will perhaps be found some important 
 shades of difference. 
 
 But in. order to do justice to the question, 
 and particularly to the view which His late 
 Majesty took of it, we must look more particu- 
 larly to the circumstances, under which the 
 Oath was enacted. 
 
 Alterations made in the Coronation Oath at the 
 Revolution. 
 
 And, first, the consideration that it was sub- 
 stituted for the form of Oath, which had been in 
 substance used for so many ages, will lead to a 
 
 * Letters of King George III., c. p. 37.
 
 26 ALTERATIONS MADE IN THE OATH AT 
 
 particular inquiry into the nature and spirit of 
 the alterations, which were thus introduced. 
 The Coronation Oath, as I hardly need to re- 
 mark, has always been regarded, though not as 
 constituting, yet as recognizing, affirming, and 
 sanctioning, " the original contract" (I speak 
 the language of the Convention Parliament of 
 1688-9) " between King and People." Any 
 variation in its terms, therefore, deliberately 
 introduced, must, it is apparent, be deserving 
 of the gravest consideration. Now, an inspec- 
 tion of the new form of Oath, compared with 
 that which it superseded, will shew, that it was 
 not the civil, but the religious, interests of the 
 State, which it was especially designed to 
 strengthen. As far as regards the civil rights 
 and liberties of the People, the new Oath, if a 
 more condensed and pithy instrument, is, how- 
 ever, not a more strong and comprehensive one, 
 than the former. But in the Clause which re- 
 lates to the Church, it cannot escape observa- 
 tion, how much more powerful, as well as more 
 clear, is the language of the new Oath. Instead 
 of engaging, as before, to " grant, keep, and 
 " confirm the laws, customs, and franchises 
 " granted to the Clergy by King Edward the 
 " Confessor, according to the Laws of God, 
 " the true Profession of the Gospel established 
 " in this Kingdom, and agreeing to the Prero-
 
 AT THE REVOLUTION. 27 
 
 4t gative of the Kings thereof, and the ancient 
 " custom of this Realm :" the King is now re- 
 quired to swear, " That He will, to the utmost 
 " of his power, maintain the Laws of God, the 
 " true Profession of the Gospel, and the Protes- 
 " tant Reformed Religion established by Law." 
 
 And, whatever conclusion may be drawn 
 from the increased clearness and strength of 
 the expressions in the new Oath on this point, 
 acquires much greater force from the historical 
 facts connected with its establishment. It was 
 recent experience of the encroaching and dan- 
 gerous spirit of the Church of Rome, and of the 
 want of a plainer and more effectual security 
 against its machinations, in the conscience of 
 the Sovereign, that made the great men to whom 
 we owe the restoration of our liberties, regard 
 it as one of their first and most imperative 
 duties " to amend the Coronation Oath" Ac- 
 cordingly, on the very day after the Throne was 
 declared vacant by the abdication of James II. 
 (January 29th, 1688-9), Sir Richard Temple* 
 thus stated the three things essentially necessary 
 to the resettling of the Government : 1 . Secu- 
 rity against encroachments upon Parliament, 
 by providing for the certainty and frequency 
 of holding its assemblies, and allowing no stand- 
 
 * Cobbett's Parl. Hist. v. p. 54.
 
 28 ALTERATIONS MADE IN THE OATH 
 
 ing army without its consent : 2. Security for 
 the faithful administration of the Laws by giving 
 salaries instead of fees to the Judges, and 
 making their places to be held " during life :" 
 3. The Settlement of the Coronation Oath. 
 
 Of these tria necessaria, the last, the subject 
 of our present investigation, so early as the 
 28th of February, when nothing but the most 
 urgent matters had been previously done, was 
 referred to a Committee, with instructions " to 
 " inspect the Coronation Oath, and consider what 
 11 alterations ought to be made therein."* 
 
 This Committee, having sat several times, 
 and being unable to come to a determination, 
 the House, on the 25th of March, " resolved 
 " itself into a Committee of the whole House 
 " to take the same matter into their considera- 
 " tion;" and the result, after much discussion, 
 was the modelling the Oath in the form in 
 which it now stands ; and which, I repeat, when 
 
 * Journals of Commons, 25 die Februarii, 1 William and 
 Mary. It is not unworthy of remark, that the " Act for esta- 
 " Wishing the Coronation Oath" stands the sixth in the Statutes 
 of William and Mary, immediately after other most necessary and 
 most urgent things, viz. : 1 . the Act for removing all disputes 
 concerning that Parliament. 2. For empowering his Majesty to 
 apprehend persons conspiring against the Government. 3. For 
 granting the King a present aid. 4. For reviving actions and 
 process at Law, discontinued by the vacancy of the Crown. 
 5. The Mutiny Bill.
 
 AT THE REVOLUTION. 29 
 
 compared with the one hitherto taken, leaves it 
 undeniably manifest, that the chief object, 
 sought to be obtained by the alterations intro- 
 duced into it, was security against Popery. So 
 entirely was this the intention of men of every 
 party in framing the Oath, and so completely 
 did their object appear to all to be obtained, 
 that the only questions in debate related to 
 Protestant Dissenters, whether, and in what 
 degree, the King might be precluded by the 
 Oath, when he should have taken it, from 
 giving to them that relief which he had pro- 
 mised, and which a large portion of members 
 of both Houses of Parliament earnestly desired. 
 
 The following is the language of Mr. Hamp- 
 den, jun. on the occasion : " As to religion, in 
 " some things the King swears positively to 
 " the true profession of the Gospel, that is, the 
 ' ' Christian Religion, no latitude in that; and 
 " then comes to Christian Religion, as it is 
 "against Popery; and this is the stress of all 
 " your Oath" Again, " This Coronation Oath is 
 " the very touchstone and symbol of your Govern- 
 " ment."* 
 
 Need I strengthen the conclusion derived 
 from this quarter, by reference to the other 
 public and solemn transactions of the most im- 
 
 . * Cobbett's Parl. Hist. v. p. 202.
 
 30 ALTERATIONS MADE IN OATH AT REVOLUTION. 
 
 portant epoch in the History of our Country ? 
 Need I prove to Englishmen, that it was the 
 first and chiefest labour of the great Statesmen 
 at the Revolution, not more to rescue our civil 
 liberties from the encroachments of the Crown, 
 than to protect our pure and Reformed Church 
 against the recurrence of those dangers, from 
 which it had so lately and so hardly escaped ? 
 
 Mortifying as it is to feel the necessity, it 
 must be felt and submitted to. One of the 
 favourite paradoxes of this liberal age has been, 
 that the misconduct of James, which led to the 
 Revolution, was caused merely by his impa- 
 tience of all restraint on the Royal Prerogative, 
 not properly by his religion ; that his religion 
 was no more than an instrument employed by 
 him in aid of his designs against the civil liber- 
 ties of his subjects, not the dominant principle, 
 which made it at once his duty and his glory, 
 to trample on all their liberties, both civil and 
 religious. 
 
 Security against Popery, the especial object at the 
 Revolution. 
 
 Without entering into all the questions 
 which this statement involves, it is enough for 
 our present purpose to show, that the illus- 
 trious actors in that great emergence had a 
 very different feeling of the dangers, which they
 
 CONSTITUTION ESSENTIALLY PROTESTANT. 31 
 
 were to provide against. They, uniformly, in 
 all their proceedings, testified their dread and 
 abhorrence of the religion of James. It was 
 " Popery" no less than " Slavery," that was 
 the object of their jealous and vigilant precau- 
 tion. They never deemed it a matter that 
 could admit of doubt, whatever be the con- 
 tempt or ridicule with which it is the fashion 
 of these days to treat the notion, that " the 
 " British Constitution is essentially Protest- 
 " ant." The kingdom itself they called " this 
 " Protestant kingdom," and, in consequence, 
 its king, they expressly voted, must be a Pro- 
 testant;* not only so, he must "join in com- 
 " munion with the Protestant Church of Eng- 
 " land."f All that bear offices of greatest trust 
 in the State must be Protestant, its judges 
 must be Protestant, its Parliament must be 
 Protestant. In one word, the head, and all 
 the great powers of the State, the legislative, 
 the executive, the judicial, must be Protestant, 
 and yet there are men, who will gravely affect 
 to question, whether the State itself be funda- 
 mentally and essentially Protestant. 
 
 * Resolved, " That it hath been found by experience, to be 
 inconsistent with the safety and welfare of this Protestant 
 Kingdom, to be governed by a Popish Prince." Journals, H. 
 C. Jan. 29, 1 W. & M. 
 
 t 12 and 13 W. III. c. 2.
 
 32 CONSTITUTION ESSENTIALLY PROTESTANT. 
 
 It is true, that, by the liberal concessions of 
 subsequent times, especially during the reign, 
 and with the hearty concurrence, of our late truly 
 tolerant King, much has been done to lighten 
 the pressure of the restrictive laws on the Ro- 
 man Catholics ; but these concessions were 
 uniformly made on the express ground, that 
 they were not inconsistent with this funda- 
 mental principle of the British Constitution: 
 and, if the effect of modern innovation has 
 been, in any degree, to cast even a shadow of 
 doubt upon it, the true friends of that Con- 
 stitution, in its genuine purity, will need no 
 stronger motive to resist every fresh application, 
 however plausible, which would draw them 
 still further from those old ways, in which alone 
 it will be found safe to stand. Meanwhile, 
 whatever be deemed of the Constitution at 
 present, it ought, at least, to be acknowledged 
 by every fair inquirer, that such it was under 
 King William, that such it was expressly de- 
 signed to be by its great regenerators at the 
 Revolution, and that in contemplation of it, as 
 such, was the oath in question devised and esta- 
 blished by them. 
 
 I will hazard the appearance of trespassing 
 unnecessarily on the patience of my readers, 
 by proving this point a little more at large.
 
 DECLARATION OF PRINCE OF ORANGE. 33 
 
 The argument, however unnecessary, is, at 
 least, not irrelevant to the inquiry in which we 
 are engaged. 
 
 The famous " Declaration" of the Prince of 
 Orange, when he embarked on his glorious en- 
 terprise, opened in the following terms : " It 
 " is both certain and evident to all men, that 
 " the public peace and happiness of any state 
 " or kingdom cannot be preserved, where the 
 " laws, liberties, and customs, established by 
 " the lawful authority in it, are openly trans- 
 " gressed and annulled ; more especially where 
 " the alteration of Religion is endeavoured, and 
 " that a Religion, which is contrary to law, is 
 " endeavoured to be introduced, upon which 
 " those who are most immediately concerned 
 " in it are indispensably bound to endeavour 
 " to preserve and maintain the established laws, 
 " liberties, and customs, and, above all, the Re- 
 " ligion and Worship of God, that is established 
 " among them ; and to take such an effectual 
 " care, that the inhabitants of the said state or 
 " kingdom may neither be deprived of their re- 
 " ligion, nor of their civil rights." The same 
 Declaration afterwards proceeds with particu- 
 lar reference to the Test Laws; " It is also ma- 
 " nifest and notorious, that, as his Majesty 
 " (King James II.) was, upon his coming to 
 
 D
 
 34 DECLARATION 
 
 " the crown, received and acknowledged by 
 " all the subjects of England, Scotland, and 
 " Ireland, as their King, without the least op- 
 " position, though he made then open profes- 
 " sion of the Popish Religion, so he did then 
 " promise and solemnly swear at his Corona- 
 " tion, that he would maintain his subjects in 
 " the free enjoyment of their laws, rights, and 
 " liberties; and in particular, that he would 
 " maintain the Church of England, as it was 
 " established by law. It is likewise certain, 
 " that there have been, at divers and sundry 
 " times, several laws enacted for the preservation 
 " of those rights and liberties, and of the Pro- 
 " testant Religion; and, among other securities, 
 " it has been enacted, ' That all persons what- 
 " soever, that are advanced to any ecclesias- 
 " tical dignity, or to bear office in either uni- 
 " versity, as likewise all others that should be 
 " put in any employment, civil or military, 
 " should declare that they were not Papists, but 
 " were of the Protestant Religion, and that, by 
 " their taking of the Oaths of Allegiance and 
 " Supremacy, and the Test:' yet these evil coun- 
 " sellers have, in effect, annulled and abo- 
 " lished all those laws, both with relation to 
 " ecclesiastical and civil employments." 
 It makes it one of the greatest grievances
 
 OF PRINCE OF ORANGE. 35 
 
 complained of in the conduct of James's evil 
 counsellors, that " they had tried the members 
 " of the last Parliament, to gain them to consent 
 " to the Repeal of the Test and Penal Laws ; and 
 " procured that Parliament to be dissolved, 
 " when they found that they could not, neither 
 " by promises nor threatenings, prevail with 
 (< the members to comply with their wicked 
 " designs." It subsequently thus states the 
 purpose of William's enterprise. " We now 
 " think fit to declare, that this our expedition 
 " is intended for no other design, but to have a 
 " free and lawful Parliament assembled as soon 
 " as possible ;" " and that the Members of 
 " Parliament, being lawfully chosen, they shall 
 " meet and sit in full freedom, that so the two 
 " Houses may concur in the preparing of such 
 " laws, as they, upon full and free debate, 
 " shall judge necessary and convenient, both for 
 " confirming and executing THE LAW CONCERNING 
 " THE TEST, and such other laws as are neces- 
 " sary for the security and maintenance, of the 
 " Protestant Religion ; as likewise for making 
 " such laws as may establish a good agreement 
 " between the Church of England and all Pro- 
 " testant Dissenters," &c. " And we, for our 
 " part, will concur in every thing that may 
 " preserve the peace and happiness of the na- 
 
 D2
 
 36 DECLARATION OF PRINCE OF ORANGE. 
 
 " tion, which a free and lawful Parliament 
 " shall determine ; since we have nothing be- 
 " fore our eyes, in this our undertaking, but 
 " the preservation of the Protestant Religion, the 
 " covering of all men from persecution for 
 " their consciences, and the securing to the 
 " whole nation the free enjoyment of their 
 "laws, rights, and liberties, under a just and 
 " legal government." In conclusion of the 
 whole, " We will endeavour, by all possible 
 " means, to procure such an establishment in 
 " all the three kingdoms, that they may all 
 " live in a happy union and correspondence 
 " together; and that the Protestant Religion, 
 " and the peace, honour, and happiness of 
 ' these nations may be established upon lasting 
 "foundations" 
 
 Of this " Declaration," on so many accounts 
 worthy of our close attention, it is more espe- 
 cially to be observed, that it was the hinge on 
 which the subsequent great transactions were 
 made to turn; the principles and ends pro- 
 claimed in it were referred to, as the guiding 
 rule, the chart and compass, by which the 
 vessel of the state was steered in safety through 
 its perilous and obstructed course. Immedi- 
 ately on its appearance, and in express appro- 
 bation of the principles contained in it, more
 
 NOTTINGHAM PAPER. 37 
 
 than one public declaration was made, as well 
 by the most distinguished individuals, as by 
 numerous bodies of Englishmen. In particu- 
 lar, " the Nottingham Paper," subscribed by a 
 great number of the nobility, gentry, &c. and 
 published at that town, set forth, " That not 
 " being willing to deliver their posterity over 
 " to such a condition of Popery and slavery 
 " as their oppressions inevitably threatened, 
 " they would, to the utmost of their power, 
 " oppose the same, by joining with the Prince 
 " of Orange, for the recovery of their almost 
 " ruined laws, liberties, and Religion. And 
 " herein they hoped all good Protestant sub- 
 " jects would, with their lives and fortunes, be 
 " assistant to them, and not be bug-beared with 
 " the opprobrious term of rebels, by which the 
 11 Court would fright them, to become perfect 
 " slaves to their tyrannical insolences and usur- 
 " pations. For they assured themselves, that 
 " no rational or unbiassed person could judge 
 " it rebellion to defend their Laws and Religion, 
 " which all English princes have sworn at their 
 " coronation; which Oath, how well it had been 
 " observed of late, they desired a free Parliament 
 " might have the consideration of."* 
 
 * Cobbett's Parl. Hist. v. 1 7.
 
 38 DECLARATION OF LORDS. 
 
 On James's withdrawing himself into France, 
 the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in and about 
 London, thirty in number, met solemnly at 
 Guildhall, and, sending for the Lord Mayor 
 and Aldermen of the City, made a Declaration, 
 of which the following is a part; " We doubt 
 " not but the world believes, that in this great 
 " and dangerous conjuncture, we are heartily 
 
 " and zealously concerned for the Protestant 
 
 * j 
 
 " Religion, the laws of the land, and the liber- 
 " ties and properties of the subject. We can- 
 " not, without being wanting to our duty, be 
 " silent under these calamities, wherein Popish 
 " Councils, which so long prevailed, have mi- 
 " serably involved this realm. We do there- 
 " fore unanimously resolve to apply ourselves 
 " to his Highness the Prince of Orange, who, 
 " with so great kindness to these kingdoms, 
 " such vast expense, and so much hazard to 
 " his own person, has undertaken, by endea- 
 " vouring to procure a free Parliament, to res- 
 " cue us, with as little effusion as possible of 
 " Christian blood, from the imminent danger 
 " of slavery and Popery. And we do hereby 
 " declare, that we will, with our best endea- 
 " vours, assist his Highness in the obtaining 
 " such a Parliament with all speed, wherein 
 " our laws, our liberties, and properties may
 
 WILLIAM'S SPEECH TO ASSEMBLY OF LORDS. 39 
 
 " be secured, and the Church of England in 
 "particular, with a due liberty to Protestant 
 " Dissenters." 
 
 The City of London followed this Declara- 
 tion with an address to the Prince, " present- 
 " ing their most humble thanks to him, parti- 
 " cularly for appearing in arms for this king- 
 " dom, to carry on and perfect his glorious 
 " designs to rescue these kingdoms from slavery 
 " and Popery, and in a free Parliament to esta- 
 " blish the Religion, and the laws and liberties 
 " of these kingdoms, upon a sure and lasting 
 "foundation," and, in conclusion, earnestly 
 " beseeching him to repair to this city." 
 
 On William's arrival at St. James's, Decem- 
 ber 21, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, to 
 the number of above sixty, appeared and as- 
 sisted in a great council, to whom his Highness 
 made this short speech : " My Lords, I have 
 " desired to meet you here to advise the best 
 " manner how to pursue the ends of my Declara- 
 " tion in calling a free Parliament for thepre- 
 " servation of the Protestant Religion,* the restor- 
 " ing the rights and liberties of the kingdom, 
 " and settling the same, that they may not be in 
 " danger of being again subverted."" 
 
 The Lords, after reading of the Prince's De- 
 claration, the better to consider the most effectual
 
 40 ADDRESS OF LORDS AND COMMONS. 
 
 means to obtain the ends of that declaration, re- 
 solved to assemble in their ancient House, 
 where, four days afterwards, being ninety in 
 number, they addressed the Prince, to take 
 upon him the administration of the govern- 
 ment till the meeting of the intended convention 
 on the 22nd of January next ensuing. 
 
 The Commons, also, who had sat in the Par- 
 liament of Charles II., to the number of one 
 hundred and sixty, assembled, on William's 
 summons, at St. James's, and, having there heard 
 from him a speech similar to that which he had 
 delivered to the Peers, they repaired to their own 
 House, and addressed him in the like manner, 
 concluding in these words, " This we humbly 
 " offer to your Highness, as our best advice, in 
 " this exigency of affairs, for attaining the ends 
 " of your Highnesses declaration, and as the best 
 " means tending to such an establishment, as 
 " that our religion, laws, and liberties may not 
 " be in danger of being again subverted." 
 
 The " Association," signed at Exeter, (and 
 brought into the meeting of the Commons, 
 26th December, 1688,) pledged those who had 
 subscribed it, " for the defence of the Protestant 
 religion, and maintaining the ancient govern- 
 ment, &c. never to depart from it, until their 
 Religion, their laws, and their liberties should be
 
 JAMES'S ABDICATION VOTED. 41 
 
 so far secured to them in a free Parliament, 
 that they should be in no danger of falling under 
 Popery and slavery."* 
 
 When the convention met, on January 22, 
 William, in a letter to both Houses, thus ad- 
 monished them. " It now lieth upon you to 
 lay the foundation ofajirm security for your reli- 
 gion, your laws, and your liberties. I do not 
 doubt, but that by such a full and free repre- 
 sentative of the nation, as is now met, the ends 
 of my declaration will be attained"^ 
 
 The first important debate in the House of 
 Commons, that on the State of the Nation, 
 which occurred on the 28th of January, ter- 
 minated in the ever -memorable resolution, 
 " That King James the Second, having endea- 
 " voured to subvert the constitution of this 
 " kingdom, by breaking the original contract be- 
 " tween King and People, and, by the advice 
 " of Jesuits, and other wicked persons, having 
 " violated the fundamental laws, and having with- 
 " drawn himself out of this kingdom, has abdi- 
 " cated the government, and that the throne is 
 " thereby become vacant." In the debate itself, 
 
 * See Journals of the House of Commons, 26th December, 
 1688. 
 t Ibid. 22nd January, 1688-9.
 
 42 SIR GEORGE TREBY. MR. SOMERS. 
 
 it is remarkable how large a stress is laid on 
 the misconduct of James in respect to Religion. 
 "All he has done," says Sir Richard Temple, 
 " may be reduced to that head of the destruction of 
 " the Church, by suspending the ecclesiastical laws, 
 " to destroy all that will not comply with Popery" 
 
 " He dispensed with the statute of Provisors," 
 said Sir George Treby, " and the consequence 
 " was, the Pope sent a nuncio hither, and the 
 " consequence is, he declares, ' he can no longer 
 " ' nor further treat with his people in Par- 
 " ' liament.' As soon as that is done, he 
 " assumes an inherent indispensable authority 
 " to vacate all our laws, dispense with the Act 
 " of Uniformity, and set up the Ecclesiastical 
 " commissions." " It was the great argument 
 " in the Exclusion Bill, * what hurt can be done 
 " * by a Romish king is in the royal office only: 
 " ' but it is impossible in the rest of the offices 
 " ' of the Government; for no Papist could 
 " ' come into them by law, because of the tests.' 
 " This was the judgment of King James's friends 
 " then, and that it was that preserved the crown 
 " to him." 
 
 Mr. Somers. " He sent an ambassador to 
 " Rome, received a nuncio from thence, re- 
 " ceived a foreign jurisdiction, and setup Romish 
 " Bishops in England, that the Popish religion
 
 MR. FINCH. SIR R. HOWARD. SIR H. CAPEL. 43 
 
 " might intervene with the Government, thereby 
 " to subject the nation to the Pope, as much as 
 " to a foreign Prince." 
 
 Mr. Finch. " This is of the highest conse- 
 " quence that ever any debate was here, for law 
 " and Religion to be established sure and Jirm. 
 " However we may weather it, posterity may 
 " curse our memory in after-ages if we fail in 
 " this weighty matter." 
 
 Sir Robert Howard. " The constitution of the 
 " Government is actually grounded upon pact 
 " and covenant with the people. If this be so, 
 " what remains but that the King has made 
 " abdication of the Government, and at one 
 " time has lopped off both Church and State. 
 " Could he have compassed ' liberty of con- 
 " ' science,'* he would have cut off Church and 
 " State at one stroke, and settled Popery." 
 
 Sir Henri/ Capel. " Popery and a Protestant 
 " Government are inconsistent." 
 
 On the following day, after the resolution, 
 " That it hath been found, by experience, to 
 " be inconsistent with the safety and welfare of 
 
 * I need scarcely say, that this refers to James's " De- 
 " claration for Liberty of Conscience," the architype of the 
 present proceeding of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, on pre- 
 tence of the same principle.
 
 44 SIR R. TEMPLE. MR. SOMERS. 
 
 " this Protestant kingdom, to be governed by a 
 " Popish Prince," a debate ensued, which ended 
 in the following vote : " That, before the Com- 
 " mittee proceed to fill the throne, now vacant, 
 " they will proceed to secure our religion, laws, 
 " and liberties ;" and this was followed by ap- 
 pointing a Committee to " bring in general 
 " heads of such things as are absolutely neces- 
 " sary for securing the laws and liberties of the 
 " nation." It was in the course of this debate 
 that Sir Richard Temple delivered his judgment, 
 as I have stated above, on the three things ne- 
 cessary to this great end, the third of which was 
 the settling "the Coronation Oath." "Pursue," 
 said he, "the end of the Princes declaration with 
 " some such securities as I have mentioned, 
 " that these things may be taken care of, to 
 " recommend to posterity what you have done 
 " for them." 
 
 In the discussion which ensued at a free con- 
 ference between the Lords and Commons oa 
 the word " abdicated," in the resolution of the 
 Commons, which, it will be remembered, the 
 Lords at first refused to assent to, Mr. Somers 
 urged that King James, by going about to 
 subvert the constitution, by breaking the original 
 contract between King and People, and by vio- 
 lating the fundamental laws, hath renounced to
 
 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS. 45 
 
 be a king according to the law, such a king as 
 he swore to be at his coronation, such a king to 
 whom the allegiance of an English subject is due* 
 
 Sir Robert Howard, in the same conference, on 
 declaring the throne to be vacant, thus addresses 
 the Lords, " Have you not concurred with us in 
 " our vote, That it is inconsistent with our religion 
 " and our laws to have a Papist to reign over us? 
 " Must we not come then to an election, if the 
 " next heir be a Papist? Nay, suppose there 
 " were no Protestant heir at all to be found, would 
 " not your Lordships then break the liner' 
 
 The next great act of this convention was 
 framing, and presenting to William, the De- 
 claration of Rights, on February 12, in which, 
 first stating the misconduct by which James 
 had abdicated the throne, reciting as the head 
 and sum of all, that " He did endeavour to 
 
 * Upon this the Earl of Clarendon observed, " I would take 
 " notice that his obligation thereunto doth not proceed from his 
 " Coronation Oath ; for our law says he is as much king be- 
 " fore he is crowned as he is afterwards ; and there is a natural 
 " allegiance due to him from the subjects immediately upon the 
 " descent of the crown upon him. And though it is a very 
 " requisite ceremony, to put him under a further obligation by the 
 " conscience of his OatJi, yet it cannot be denied, I think, but 
 " that, as King, he was bound to observe the laws before - } and 
 " nobody will make that Oath to be the original contract, as 
 " I suppose."
 
 46 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS. 
 
 " subvert and extirpate the Protestant religion, 
 " and the laws and liberties of this kingdom ; " 
 reciting further, that the throne being thereby 
 become vacant, his Highness the Prince of 
 Orange did (by the advice of the Lords spiritual 
 and temporal, and divers principal persons of 
 the Commons) cause letters to be written to 
 the Lords spiritual and temporal, being Pro- 
 testants, and other letters to the several counties, 
 cities, &c. for the choosing of such persons to 
 represent them, as were of right to be sent to 
 Parliament, to meet and sit at Westminster 
 upon the 22nd day of January, 1688 (1688-9), 
 in order to such an establishment, as that their reli- 
 gion, laws, and liberties might not again be in 
 danger of being subverted. And thereupon the 
 Lords spiritual and temporal, and Commons, 
 being now assembled in a full and free repre- 
 sentative of this nation, taking into their most 
 serious consideration the best means for attain- 
 ing the ends aforesaid, do, in the first place, for 
 vindicating and asserting their ancient rights 
 and liberties, declare, c. To which demand 
 of their rights they are particularly encouraged 
 by the declaration of his Highness the Prince of 
 Orange, as being the only means for obtaining 
 a full redress and remedy therein. Having, 
 therefore, an entire confidence that his said
 
 WILLIAM AND MARY PROCLAIMED. 47 
 
 Highness the Prince of Orange will perfect the 
 deliverance so far advanced by him, and will 
 still preserve them from the violation of their 
 rights which they have here asserted, and from 
 all other attempts upon their Religion, rights, 
 and liberties ; the said Lords spiritual and tem- 
 poral, and Commons, do resolve, " That Wil- 
 " liam and Mary, Prince and Princess of 
 " Orange, be, and be declared King and Queen 
 " of England," &c. 
 
 The next day William and Mary were pub- 
 licly proclaimed, the proclamation commencing 
 with these memorable words, " Whereas it hath 
 " pleased Almighty God in his great mercy to 
 " this kingdom to vouchsafe us a miraculous 
 " deliverance from Popery and arbitrary power; 
 " and that our preservation is due, next under 
 " God, to the resolution and conduct of his 
 " Highness the Prince of Orange, whom God 
 " hath chosen to be the glorious Instrument of 
 " such an inestimable happiness to us and our 
 " posterity," &c. and being highly sensible and 
 " fully persuaded of the great and eminent vir- 
 " tue of her Highness the Princess of Orange, 
 " whose zeal for the Protestant Religion will, no 
 " doubt, bring a blessing along with her upon 
 " this nation," (so resolute were they to mark 
 their preference of religion, even over the
 
 48 NEW CORONATION OATH ESTABLISHED. 
 
 claim of propinquity of blood,) " we, therefore, 
 " the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Com- 
 " mons, together with the Lord Mayor and Ci- 
 " tizens of London, and others of the Commons 
 " of this realm, do with full consent publish 
 " and proclaim William and Mary, Prince and 
 " Princess of Orange, to be King and Queen of 
 " England." 
 
 The throne being now full, and the conven- 
 tion having been voted a Parliament, one of the 
 first things done by the House of Commons, 
 after attending to the most pressing exigencies 
 of the government, was, as I have said before, 
 " to inspect the Coronation-Oath, and consider 
 " what alterations or amendments were fit to be 
 " made therein." 
 
 On the very day * on which the Royal As- 
 sent was given to the Bill for establishing the 
 amended Oath, a Committee was appointed " to 
 " prepare an address of thanks to His Majesty 
 "for his gracious declaration to maintain the 
 " Church of England by law established." The 
 Lords concurred in the same address,! which, 
 after having largely praised the Church for " its 
 " zeal against Popery," as well as for " its loy- 
 
 * See Journals of the House of Commons, 9th April, 1689. 
 f Id. 13th April.
 
 MAINTENANCE OF PROTESTANT RELIGION. 49 
 
 " alty," ascribing the misfortunes of the late 
 reign to " the endeavours that were used to 
 " subvert it," proceeded, as follows ; " We, 
 " therefore, humbly pray, your Majesty will be 
 " graciously pleased to continue your care for 
 " the preservation of the same, whereby you 
 " will effectually establish your throne, by se- 
 " curing the hearts of your Majesty's subjects 
 " within these your realms ; who can no way 
 " better show their zeal for your service, than by a 
 "Jirm adherence to that Church, whose constitution 
 " is best suited to the support of this monarchy." 
 
 On the 1 1 th of April the ceremony of the 
 Coronation took place, and the House of Com- 
 mons attended on the next day to congratulate 
 their Majesties on the occasion, when the 
 Speaker * addressed them (after a complimen- 
 tary exordium) in the following terms, com- 
 prising the substance of the whole : 
 
 " We are all sensible, that your Majesties' 
 " greatness is the security of your subjects. It 
 " is from your power that we derive to ourselves 
 " an assurance of being defended from our ene- 
 " mies; and from your justice, that we expect 
 " a full enjoyment of our laws and liberties : 
 " But that which completes our happiness is, the 
 
 * The House adopted the sentiments ot the Speech as their 
 own, and desired him " to print the same." Journals of the 
 House of Commons, 14th April. 
 
 E
 
 50 THE FIRST OBJECT AT THE REVOLUTION. 
 
 " experience we have of your Majesties continual 
 " care to maintain the Protestant Religion ; so 
 " that we can no longer apprehend any danger 
 " of being deprived of that inestimable blessing, 
 " either by secret practices, or by open vio- 
 " lence." 
 
 Here we have an express acknowledgment, 
 that the maintenance of the Protestant Religion 
 was the first object of the statesmen of that 
 day ; and connecting this acknowledgment with 
 the occasion, on which it was made, and the 
 plain allusion to the Oath their Majesties had 
 just taken, we cannot doubt that the intention 
 of the legislature, which imposed that Oath, 
 was thereby to bind the sovereigns of this 
 realm, by the strongest ties of religion and con- 
 science, to the perpetual maintenance of the 
 Protestant Church of England.* 
 
 Taking, then, these things together, the De- 
 claration of William, which was, I repeat, uni- 
 formly recognised as the foundation of all sub- 
 sequent proceedings, the stress put in that 
 Declaration on the Test Laws against Popery, 
 the determined spirit evinced by the King 
 
 * Ralph, Hist. Eng. ii. 71. tells us, on the authority 
 of the author of " Caveat against the Whigs," that William 
 himself had testified an unwillingness to swear to maintain the 
 Church of England. This unwillingness of his, and the suspi- 
 cious conduct of the Dissenting Interest in the House of Com- 
 mons, induced the friends of the Church, who were the majority, 
 to take care to make the matter sure. See below ; note p. 101.
 
 K. GEO. III/S INTERPRETATION OF THE OATH. 51 
 
 and the Parliament, in conformity with it in 
 all their acts, particularly in the modelling and 
 enacting the Coronation Oath, lastly the Sta- 
 tute of Union, reciting and confirming the "Act 
 " for securing the Church of England as by 
 " law established," (which Act in terms pro- 
 vided, " that all and singular Acts of Parliament 
 " now in force, for the establishment and pre- 
 " servation of the Church of England," among 
 them of course the Oath of Supremacy and the 
 Test Act, " shall remain and be in full force for 
 " ever,") and further enacting, " that the So- 
 " vereign shall at his Coronation take and sub- 
 " scribe an oath to maintain and preserve in- 
 " violably the said settlement of the Church of 
 " England," taking, I say, these things to- 
 gether, I cannot be surprised that a Prince* 
 most anxiously alive to every conscientious ob- 
 jection, should, as our late Sovereign did, con- 
 sider himself absolutely and specifically bound, 
 by his Coronation Oath, to reject every proposi- 
 tion for repealing the Test Laws. 
 
 Another Interpretation of the Oath. 
 I have, already, in a former publication,* pre- 
 
 * " Short Letter to Mr. Canning," pp. 20, 21 : where the 
 same opinion is somewhat differently expressed. It was in con- 
 sequence of reading that passage, that Lord Kenyon was pleased 
 to confide to me the Letters which have given occasion to the 
 present publication. 
 
 E 2
 
 52 ANOTHER INTERPRETATION OF THE OATH. 
 
 sumed to express an opinion, that the proper 
 construction of that oath may not carry the 
 matter quite so far ; and I scruple not to repeat 
 it in substance here. The oath taken by the 
 King is a purely personal act ; it is an act be- 
 tween himself and God,* one in which his own 
 conscience is concerned, and on which he must 
 decide according to that conscience, not ac- 
 cording to the judgment or advice of others, 
 however he may think fit to consult with others 
 for the purpose of informing or satisfying him- 
 self. Without contending, and without thinking, 
 that the repeal of any particular statute is spe- 
 cifically forbidden by that oath, it is not too 
 much to say, that every act whatever is by im- 
 plication forbidden, which appears to the con- 
 science of the Sovereign to be at variance with 
 one of the great and expressed objects of the 
 oath, namely, " that he will maintain, to the 
 " utmost of his power, the laws of God, the true 
 " profession of the Gospel, and the Protestant 
 " Reformed Religion established by law, and 
 " will also maintain and preserve inviolably the 
 " Settlement of the Church of England, the 
 " doctrine, worship, discipline, and government 
 " thereof, and all the rights and privileges which 
 
 * That is, (as I scarcely need to explain) inasmuch as it is 
 an Oath, inasmuch as it is a promise, those to whom the pro- 
 mise is made, are a party to the act.
 
 LORD KENYON. 53 
 
 " belong by law to the Bishops and Clergy 
 " of the same, both in England and in Ireland" 
 
 Less than this, I venture to submit, cannot 
 be stated on just grounds, as the real meaning 
 of the Oath; accordingly, whether any measures 
 proposed for the relief of the Roman Catholics 
 or of Protestant Dissenters, the repeal, for 
 instance, of the Acts against Popery, or the re- 
 peal of the Test and Corporation Acts, may 
 be assented to with a safe conscience by the 
 Sovereign, must depend on his own personal 
 conviction of the tendency of such measures, in 
 respect to the established Church and Religion 
 of the country. 
 
 That this construction of the Oath has had 
 the sanction of the deliberate judgment of the 
 late Lord Kenyon a judge, who, on such a 
 question of law and conscience, has scarcely 
 had an equal since the days of Sir Matthew 
 Hale cannot but greatly confirm the confi- 
 dence with which I again adduce it. " It seems 
 " to me,"* says that venerable authority, " that 
 " the judgment of the person who takes the 
 " Coronation Oath must determine, whether any 
 " particular statute proposed does destroy the 
 " government of the Established Church. It 
 " seems that the Oath, couched in the general 
 " terms in which it is found, does not preclude 
 
 * Letters, &e. p. 26.
 
 54 MR. JEFFREY 
 
 " the party sworn from exercising a judgment, 
 " whether that which he is bound to maintain will 
 " be essentially, or in a great degree, affected 
 " by the proposed measure." 
 
 Mr. Jeffrey's attack on his late Majesty in the 
 Edinburgh Review. 
 
 It is true, that in the article of the Edinburgh 
 Review, on the Correspondence of King George 
 III. with Lord Kenyon* on this subject, the 
 Reviewer thinks proper to dispose at once of 
 all the argument, as well as the authority, of 
 that great Judge, by one single pert intimation, 
 that his Lordship knew not how to spell, be- 
 cause, forsooth, being an old-fashioned man, he 
 preferred the old-fashioned supre#wz to its more 
 modern, and, it may be, more correct form, 
 supreme. Now, really, when one considers who 
 Lord Kenyon was, and who Mr. Jeffrey is, 
 (for I shall not scruple to treat Mr. Jeffrey as 
 the Reviewer,) at what an immeasurable dis- 
 tance the one name stands above the other, it 
 does require some effort of patience and for- 
 bearance, not to have recourse to part of Mr. 
 J.'s own vocabulary on this occasion, and to 
 talk a little of " audacity" and " prodigious 
 " assurance." 
 
 I have said that I shall not scruple to treat 
 
 * Ed. Rer. No. 91, p. 164.
 
 IN THE EDINBURGH REVIEW. 55 
 
 Mr. Jeffrey as the Reviewer, and I will state 
 at once, why I choose to address myself to 
 him in person, rather than hold communication 
 with any of his brethren in masquerade. 
 
 I had occasion, some years ago, to charge 
 one of these personages with wilful mis-state- 
 ment of what I had written in a tract, which he 
 professed to review; he submitted in silence to 
 that charge ; and I then resolved never again 
 to trouble myself with these incognitos, but to 
 hold the editor responsible for every thing of- 
 fensive which might appear in his Review. 
 Accordingly, having been afterwards again 
 insulted and calumniated, I addressed Mr. 
 Jeffrey himself, and extorted from him the 
 following very satisfactory avowal : " that he 
 " merely superintended or sanctioned the publica- 
 " lion? and, therefore, " though he might have 
 " been legally responsible, he is really at a loss to 
 " understand how he could be deemed morally or 
 " individually blameablef* In other words, that 
 he has hired himself out to a bookseller, to be 
 the midwife and the nurse to every unfathered 
 brood of calumnies, which the malice of his 
 faction shall engender. A person who places 
 himself so very low in the scale of moral 
 
 * " Note on Dr. Phillpotts," Ed. Rev. No. 75. In conse- 
 quence of this " Note," I addressed to Mr. Jeffrey what will 
 be found in App. Note A.
 
 56 MR. JEFFREY 
 
 feeling, cannot insult me ;* and to any thing 
 he may ever again say on any concern of mine, 
 I shall answer in the only way, in which, it 
 seems, his conscience is accessible, through 
 my lawyer, a channel of communication, to 
 which, he may be glad to hear, I shall not 
 easily be induced to have recourse. 
 
 But, in the present instance, there is a duty 
 incumbent on me, quite distinct from all per- 
 sonal considerations. I have been the instru- 
 ment of giving to the world letters written by 
 King George the Third, which, having been 
 attacked by Mr. Jeffrey, with a vulgar malig- 
 nity, unexampled even in the literature of these 
 days, it is my bounden duty to defend. By 
 Mr. Jeffrey, I repeat, they have been at- 
 tacked ; for, whether he be the original author, 
 or not, as he " superintended and sanctioned" 
 the attack, as he, after reading the nauseous 
 production of his brother reviewer, coolly and 
 deliberately affixed his official fiat for its pub- 
 lication, he is in every way, in which the case 
 
 * In his Article on " George III. and the Catholic Question," 
 No. 91. p. 165. he broadly insinuates, that I am " an expectant 
 " Beneficiary, who come forth with posthumous adulation, or, 
 " under pretence of paying tribute to the memory of the departed 
 " Prince, fawn vpon the living Prelate, and pursue my calling, at 
 " the risk of even vilifying the reigning Monarch, and his chosen 
 " advisers."
 
 IN THE EDINBURGH REVIEW. 57 
 
 can be considered, legal and moral, literary and 
 honourable, completely " particeps criminis." 
 
 Besides, Mr. Jeffrey is a lawyer among 
 the most eminent in professional reputation at 
 Edinburgh, and often called to London to plead 
 at the bar of the highest Court of Judicature 
 in the Empire. He professes even to be some- 
 thing more than a mere lawyer of the Courts : 
 he claims to understand the British Constitution 
 to watch over its interests with a most jealous 
 eye and to instruct and enlighten his readers 
 in its hidden excellencies, and, above all, in its 
 many secret defects. Now, such a man cannot 
 have permitted an article, on one of the most 
 important chapters of constitutional law, to 
 enter into his journal, without his full appro- 
 bation and concurrence. On all these ac- 
 counts, therefore, there is more than common 
 fitness in treating Mr. Jeffrey as, in fact, the 
 reviewer and, I trust, that when next he 
 comes to this metropolis, he will come bla- 
 zoned in all the conscious dignity, which must 
 attach to that character. He will present 
 himself to his admiring hearers, as one, who, 
 calling himself a Briton, could yet find a grati- 
 fication in insulting the memory of the Father 
 of his people as one, who could lift the hoof 
 of brutal insolence against the dead lion of the 
 House of Brunswick as one, who could avail
 
 58 MR. JEFFREY'S ATTACK 
 
 himself (as he hoped) of a miserable disguise 
 to outrage the feelings of this whole nation 
 towards a King, beloved, honoured, and la- 
 mented, like George the Third. This shall be 
 his high distinction ; and, if in the scorn of every 
 truly English mind he can find nothing to 
 abash or disconcert him, his sensibilities shall 
 yet be excited ; for I will make him feel, that 
 the publication, which he has dared to put 
 forth, is as unfounded in principle, and as con- 
 temptible in argument, as it is loathsome and 
 detestable in spirit. 
 
 To that easy, but odious duty, I shall now 
 address myself and I call on Mr. Jeffrey, 
 if he has the spirit of a man, either to admit 
 his fault, or to add to his other darings the 
 harder and bolder task of defending what he has 
 dared to do.* 
 
 The King, in one of his Letters to Mr. Pitt, 
 had said that he considered the Coronation 
 Oath as a religious obligation on him to main- 
 tain the fundamental maxims of the Constitu- 
 tion, namely, that, the Church of England being 
 the established one, those who hold employ- 
 
 * A rumour having prevailed in Edinburgh, and elsewhere, 
 that Mr. Brougham is the author of the article in question, I 
 feel it right to say, that I know, on unquestionable authority, 
 that this rumour is unfounded.
 
 ON HIS LATE MAJESTY. 59 
 
 ments in the State must be members of it, and 
 consequently obliged not only to take oaths 
 against Popery, but to receive the Holy Com- 
 munion, agreeably to the rites of the Church of 
 England. He adds, that this opinion was not 
 formed on the moment, but had been imbibed 
 by him for forty years.* We have already seen 
 the grounds on which His Majesty's opinion 
 rested ; and whether it be fully assented to, or 
 not, no candid person will deny, that there was 
 great apparent foundation for it. 
 
 Mr. Jeffrey, however, with the folly, as 
 well as malice, of a true Thersites, is pleased 
 to charge His Majesty, in very plain terms, 
 for expressing these sentiments, with the alter- 
 native either of falsehood or of dotage. " It is 
 " quite impossible," says he, " that one having 
 " all his faculties about him, could write this, 
 " with the regard to truth, which the late King 
 " has been so much praised for." To prove 
 this charge he proceeds as follows. " To say 
 " nothing of the Forty Indemnity Bills which he 
 " had made Acts, how came he to pass the 
 " Irish Acts of 1778 and 1793, which took off 
 " infinitely more restrictions from the Catholics, 
 " than they left behind them?" 
 
 Mr. Jeffrey knows quite well, what is the 
 nature of an Indemnity Act, and he has probably 
 looked into one of those of which he is speak- 
 Letters, &c. 3739.
 
 60 MR. JEFFREY'S ATTACK 
 
 ing. He must know, therefore, that there is 
 nothing whatever in such an Act, at variance 
 with the principle which his Majesty professed; 
 that so far from it, a Bill of Indemnity pro- 
 ceeds on the very principle of recognising the 
 binding character of the Law, which has been 
 violated, though it excuse the violation in con- 
 sideration of the special circumstances of the 
 occasion. As far, therefore, as the Indemnity 
 Acts are concerned, it is quite plain, that Mr. 
 Jeffrey has made this indecent charge abso- 
 lutely without a particle of ground on which 
 to sustain it. 
 
 But he speaks further of the Irish Acts 
 of 1778 and 1793, saying that His Majesty 
 could not with truth, if he were in his senses, 
 assert that he had the view he professes of 
 his Coronation Oath, when he assented to 
 them. Did Mr. Jeffrey ever look into these 
 Statutes ? The first of them, I am bound in 
 charity to believe, that he never so much as 
 saw. For if he had seen it, he could not have 
 had the effrontery to affect to adduce it in 
 derogation of his Majesty's honour. That Act 
 enables Papists, on taking certain oaths, to enjoy 
 the rights of property on the same footing as 
 their Protestant fellow-subjects. What is there 
 in this at variance with his Majesty's principle, 
 of maintaining it as a fundamental maxim of
 
 ON HIS LATE MAJESTY. 61 
 
 the Constitution, that those who hold em- 
 ployments in the State must be members of the 
 Established Church ? 
 
 There remains the statute of 1793. And 
 what are the provisions of that Act? Why, 
 that Roman Catholics may hold " all offices 
 " civil and military," except those which are 
 properly, and according to all reasonable con- 
 struction, "employments in the State," from these 
 they are, by that very statute, expressly excluded. 
 
 Let my readers now look back to the inso- 
 lent charge brought by Mr. Jeffrey against 
 this prince, who, beyond all who ever sat before 
 him on the British throne, deserved and ac- 
 quired the glorious title of a Patriot King, 
 and then let them assign to his calumniator 
 that measure of indignation which their own 
 feelings will dictate. 
 
 But Mr. Jeffrey is not satisfied with reviling 
 the late King; he must also give us his no- 
 tion of what is the duty of all kings, in the 
 
 / o ' 
 
 very delicate matter of informing their own 
 conscience, in a case in which their own con- 
 science alone is responsible ; and the result is, 
 that the sovereign must, in fact, have no con- 
 science at all. He must consider himself as 
 degraded from the rank of a moral and account- 
 able creature, and must submit to be directed
 
 62 MR. JEFFREY'S ATTACK 
 
 in all his sentiments, even of religious duty, by 
 his cabinet for the time being. This is really 
 the sum and substance of Mr. Jeffrey's opi- 
 nion, though he has thought fit to express it in 
 the following very peculiar terms : "We much 
 " question the fairness, if not the constitu- 
 " tionality, of secretly consulting a chief justice, 
 " and an attorney-general, instead of a cabinet 
 " minister, upon the policy to be pursued in a great 
 " question of State." Mr. Jeffrey is no fool ; 
 he knows as well as any man, that the point 
 on which the King consulted Lord Kenyon, was 
 nothing like what he has thought proper here 
 to state it. He knows, that his Majesty did not, 
 on this occasion, consult his chief justice on 
 any matter of State at all, but on a previous 
 question, which, whatever may be Mr. J.'s 
 sentiments upon it, appeared to George III., 
 and, thank God, appears to George IV., 
 infinitely more important to him than any 
 matter of State whatever. His previous ques- 
 tion was, whether, if a measure which had 
 been, in fact, rejected by his cabinet at that 
 particular time,* should ever hereafter be pro- 
 posed to him, he, the King, was not so bound 
 by his Coronation Oath, that he must give his 
 
 * It was not revived during the next six years.
 
 ON KING GEORGE III. 63 
 
 decided negative to it ? This, I say, was the 
 point on which Lord Kenyon was consulted ; 
 it was a point of conscience ; and on it the 
 King, with perfect " fairness," and perfect 
 " constitutionality," might have consulted any 
 person whatsoever, Mr. Jeffrey, if he had 
 pleased. If it were not so, what a puppet 
 would the King of England be! what a slave 
 amidst the surrounding liberty of his free-born 
 subjects ! a slave in the tenderest and most 
 momentous of all concerns ! Literally, his very 
 soul would not be his own, but would be held 
 at the arbitrary will of the minister of the day. 
 But suppose the question were, what Mr. 
 Jeffrey states it to be, a question of State 
 policy, is he so ignorant of the British Consti- 
 tution as to assert, or does he think the rest of 
 the world so ignorant of it as to believe, that it 
 is unfair or unconstitutional for the King of 
 England to consult the chief justice of Eng- 
 land, and to demand from him a written opi- 
 nion (thus making him formally responsible for 
 his opinion) on a question of State intimately 
 connected with constitutional law, that chief 
 justice being a peer of the realm, (and, as 
 such, called by his very patent to advise his 
 Majesty in the arduous concerns of the realm,) 
 and one of his sworn privy-councillors ? " Yes,"
 
 64 MR. JEFFREY'S ATTACK 
 
 says Mr. J., " unless the same chief justice, 
 " peer, and privy-councillor, be also a cabinet 
 " minister." I will not condescend to answer 
 such an assertion, but will send him who makes 
 it, if he is honest in making it, to learn better 
 what the Constitution of England is, before he 
 presumes thus to read lectures on it to his 
 sovereign. Meanwhile, it can hardly be ne- 
 cessary to remind him, that somewhat more 
 than twenty years ago, it was a matter of grave 
 discussion in both Houses of Parliament, whe- 
 ther it was consistent with the spirit of the 
 Constitution, however it might be justified by 
 the letter, for the chief justice to be a member 
 of the cabinet at all. In the course of that 
 discussion, which was handled (among others) 
 by men to whom it would not be derogatory 
 to Mr. Jeffrey, and his whole fraternity of 
 Reviewers, to look up with some deference 
 and respect, in the course of that discussion, 
 I repeat, never once was any thing so prepos- 
 terous asserted, or even imagined, as this 
 newly-discovered maxim (which, however, if 
 true, would have been conclusive of the whole 
 question,) that a chief justice may not be con- 
 sulted by his sovereign at all, unless he be first 
 made a cabinet minister. What was the lan- 
 guage of Mr. Fox on that occasion ? "I have
 
 ON KING GEORGE III. 65 
 
 " always held, and still hold, that a Cabinet 
 " Council is unknown to our law ;"* and, in 
 order that Mr. Jeffrey may not ride off on 
 the distinction suggested by the word Law, I 
 will add another dictum of the same states- 
 man : " In point of fact, there is nothing in 
 " our CONSTITUTION which recognises any 
 " such institution as a Cabinet Council." But 
 Mr. Fox's language went still further, and was 
 still more conclusive in settling the present 
 point. " Where no personal objections are, 
 " or can be, stated, one must hear it recom- 
 " mended with astonishment, that a class of 
 " officers, who are admitted to be perfectly 
 " eligible to the Privy Council, should not be 
 '' allowed to discharge the duties of a Privy 
 " Councillor, should, in fact, be excluded from 
 " the performance of duties, which, on their ad- 
 " mission to the Privy Council, they are sworn to 
 "perform." 
 
 In truth, if any cabinet should dare to ex- 
 ercise the right, which Mr. Jeffrey claims 
 for them, that of excluding from the royal 
 closet any peer of the realm who has demanded 
 an audience of his sovereign, much more who 
 has been required by the sovereign to advise 
 
 * Hansard's Debates, vol. vi. p. 309. 
 F
 
 66 MR. JEFFREY'S ATTACK 
 
 him, they would incur the guilt for which 
 ( inter alia) the two Spencers, in Edward II. 's 
 time, were impeached and banished the king- 
 dom, viz.: "That they, by their evil covin, 
 " would not suffer the great men of the realm, 
 " the king's good counsellors, to speak with 
 " the king, or to come near him ; but only in 
 " the presence of the said Hugh the father, and 
 " Hugh the son, or one of them, and at their 
 " will, and according to such things as pleased 
 " them."* 
 
 So much for this very shallow person's 
 knowledge of the Constitution :, so much for 
 his qualifications to set up as " Schoolmaster 
 " with his Primer' for the instruction of kings. 
 
 I have next to remark on what he is pleased 
 to say of my having selected a period, when the 
 late King's reason was clouded, for " trying his 
 " intellects in conflict with those of Mr. Pitt." 
 
 Mr. Jeffrey, here, too, knows that there 
 is not the smallest shadow of reason for the 
 assertion he has found it convenient to make ; 
 he knows, that there was, in this case, no 
 " trying of intellects in conflict" one with 
 another; for he knows, that the parties were 
 speaking to two very different points; that 
 
 * 1 Blackstone, p. 229.
 
 ON KING GEORGE III. 67 
 
 Mr. Pitt addressed to his Majesty a state- 
 ment (a most able and most exquisitely written 
 statement) of his views of the expediency of 
 conceding to the Roman Catholics a full and 
 equal share of all the powers of the state, 
 (under certain most important conditions, of 
 which I shall have more to say hereafter,) 
 while his Majesty, in answer, expressly waves 
 all discussion of Mr. Pitt's question, and tells 
 him at once, that he is precluded from entering 
 into it by higher considerations than the highest 
 reasons of State expediency which can be de- 
 vised. 
 
 Mr. Jeffrey makes his observations on 
 this matter, in language respecting the qua- 
 lity of the late King's intellects, with which I 
 certainly shall not disgust the readers of these 
 pages. But thus much I will say that his 
 Majesty's honest, manly, straight-forward, sin- 
 gle-minded, and truly English understanding, 
 was one, which the habits and feelings of an 
 Edinburgh Reviewer render him morally inca- 
 pable of appreciating. I will add with the 
 most entire sincerity of heart that for all the 
 purposes of directing him in the discharge of 
 the duties of his high office, it was incalculably 
 superior to that of his Censor. 
 
 This is not a mere gratuitous assertion, or 
 F 2
 
 68 MR. JEFFREY'S ASSERTION THAT THE OATH 
 
 idle opinion. Fortunately, Mr. Jeffrey has 
 enabled us to bring the matter to the test of 
 actual experiment, and that too on this very 
 question of the right understanding of the Co- 
 ronation Oath. We have seen his Majesty's 
 construction of it, and the grounds on which 
 that construction rests we will now direct our 
 attention to Mr. Jeffrey's. 
 
 It may be comprised in one principle, 
 which I will give in his own very pregnant 
 terms. 
 
 " The Oath plainly applies to the conduct of 
 " the King in his executive capacity, not as a 
 " branch of the legislature, it forbids him, either 
 " to hang men without judgment, or to attack 
 " the Church illegally; or to take from Religion 
 " its lawful sanction ; or to take from the 
 " Church its lawful rights." 
 
 I have called the terms, in which this sen- 
 tence is expressed, very pregnant terms ; and, 
 in truth, I believe them to be big with a mean- 
 ing far more important, than they may at 
 first sight appear to convey. Coming from 
 the Edinburgh Review, a journal remark- 
 able almost from its commencement for its 
 hostility to the Church of England, (occa- 
 sionally, indeed, though rarely, tempered 
 with articles of a better spirit,) I cannot but
 
 69 
 
 think we .have here, an intimation of the views 
 and wishes of a whole party ; or, at least, a 
 clue to the otherwise inexplicable impolicy of 
 this very weak, however offensive, article of 
 Mr. Jeffrey's. " To attack the Church II- 
 " legally," in this land of law and justice, would 
 be beyond the enterprise of the hardiest Re- 
 former. The true mode of attacking it with 
 success, must be to attack it by the law itself, 
 and as, in these days of triumphant liberality, 
 there is nothing liberal which a sanguine Re- 
 former may not hope to carry through at least 
 one House of Parliament, he has here abundant 
 encouragement to attempt to sap the main 
 buttress of the Established Church, the King's 
 Coronation Oath. If His Majesty could but 
 be persuaded, that this Oath does not really 
 prevent him from assenting to any Bill, pre- 
 sented to him by Parliament, however hostile 
 to the interests or the existence of the Church, 
 what might not be hoped in the long run, from 
 adroitly practising on (what must sometimes 
 occur) " the fears of the brave, and the follies 
 " of the wise ?" At any rate, the object is 
 obviously worth the trial, therefore Mr. 
 Jeffrey tries it by means of this notable dis- 
 tinction, " the Oath plainly applies to the con-
 
 70 MR. JEFFREY'S ASSERTION THAT THE OATH 
 
 " duct of the King in his executive capacity, not 
 " as a member of the legislature.'" 
 
 Now, in the first place, in what chapter of 
 the Constitution, in what page of the Common 
 or Statute Law of the Realm, has Mr. Jeffrey 
 discovered this two-fold royal person an exe- 
 cutive and a legislative? The word person I 
 use advisedly ; for it is plain that Mr. Jeffrey 
 treats the most important faculty of the soul, 
 that of conscience, as quite distinct in the legis- 
 lative from the executive. " /swear," says the 
 King, " that /will, to the utmost of my power, 
 " maintain," &c. But Mr. Jeffrey tells his 
 Majesty, that it is only the executive King, 
 not the legislative, that has taken this oath ! 
 After this exquisite specimen of ingenuity, 
 his present Majesty may, I fear, be tempted 
 to adopt " the weightiest dictum," as Mr. 
 Jeffrey calls it, of his royal Father, " I hate 
 " all metaphysics, above all, Scotch meta- 
 " physics." 
 
 But Mr. Jeffrey is not without an argu- 
 ment in support of his distinction (when was 
 there a metaphysician without an argument for 
 any thing?) " The first promise of the Oath 
 " rides over the whole." This first promise is 
 as follows " I solemnly promise and swear,
 
 APPLIES NOT TO THE KING AS LEGISLATOR. 71 
 
 " that I will govern the people of the kingdom 
 " of England, &c. according to the Statutes in 
 " Parliament agreed on, and the laws and customs 
 " of the same" 
 
 " Now," says Mr. Jeffrey, " it is quite 
 " plain that this can affect the King only in his 
 " executive capacity the second promise does 
 " the same (" I will, to my power, cause law 
 " and justice in mercy to be executed in all my 
 " judgments,") Therefore the third must do so 
 likewise! Such is the logic of this distin- 
 guished orator, critic, and metaphysician. 
 
 But without pressing the absurdity further, I 
 will undertake to show, first, that even the first 
 of these promises affects the King as legislator, 
 no less than " in his executive capacity." Se- 
 condly, that whether it does so or not, nothing 
 but utter ignorance, or the grossest disingenu- 
 ousness, could have induced Mr. Jeffrey to 
 hazard such an assertion respecting the third 
 promise of the oath, that which binds the King 
 to maintain the Established Church. 
 
 First, of the first. Till Mr. Jeffrey shall be 
 able to persuade the world, that to " govern a 
 " people does not include the notion of making 
 " laws for them," he will, I apprehend, find few 
 persons disposed to agree with him in the view 
 he takes even of his strongest position. True,
 
 72 MR. JEFFREY'S ASSERTION THAT THE OATH 
 
 the King is to govern the people of this king- 
 dom " according to the Statutes in Parliament 
 " agreed on," and if the sentence ended here, 
 there might be some small pretence for Mr. J.'s 
 construction of the first promise, but, unfor- 
 tunately, there are some other words behind, 
 " and the laws and customs of the same" i. e. 
 kingdom of England. 
 
 Taking these last words into the account, and 
 viewing the whole passage with due considera- 
 tion of the nature of the obligation, and the time, 
 purpose, and design, of imposing it, it is plain 
 that the King is bound thereby to refuse to 
 concur in making laws, contrary to the existing 
 constitution, and the fundamental laws of the 
 land. That there are " fundamental laws," if 
 not above the power, yet beyond the moral 
 competence, of the whole legislature to rescind 
 them, what Englishman will hesitate to affirm ? 
 what Prince, who has read the Bill of Rights, 
 will refuse to acknowledge ? None of the illus- 
 trious House of Brunswick, I am well assured ; 
 and if the two Houses of Parliament should be 
 so reckless of their duty, as to present a Bill 
 for the Royal Assent, conferring on the Sove- 
 reign an universal and permanent dispensing- 
 power, enabling him to tax his subjects without 
 their consent, or any other atrocious violation
 
 APPLIES NOT TO THE KING AS LEGISLATOR. 73 
 
 of the principles of the English Constitution, the 
 King would be the first to tell them, that by his 
 Coronation Oath, by swearing to " govern ac- 
 " cording to the laws and customs of the king- 
 " dom," he is compelled for ever to withhold 
 his assent to such a Bill. Will Mr. Jeffrey 
 be bold enough to affirm the contrary ? If he 
 will not, what becomes of his palmary, his only, 
 argument for the wild notion, that it is " in his 
 " executive capacity only," that the King in- 
 curs the obligations of his Coronation Oath ? 
 
 I am aware, that it is not now for the first 
 time, that this distinction has been insisted 
 on. Mr. Jeffrey himself, in an earlier Number 
 of the Edinburgh Review,* taught the same 
 doctrine in the following still more felicitous 
 language. " The Coronation Oath has no sort 
 " of relation to the King's acts as part of the 
 " legislature ; it binds him as an executive 
 " magistrate only," an expression immedi- 
 ately borrowed from the very liberal school of 
 Mr. Thomas Paine and Dr. Richard Price, and 
 most perfectly accordant with their views of 
 the English Constitution. But as the liberality 
 of the present age has not attained to the full 
 
 * No. xix. p. 139.
 
 74 MR. DILLON. 
 
 maturity, in which it displayed itself in those 
 choicer spirits, Mr. Jeffrey does well to have 
 recourse to a less startling phraseology. 
 
 It is also true, that the same notion, in Mr. 
 Jeffrey's present expression of it, has been 
 adduced by a Roman Catholic barrister,* Mr. 
 Dillon, and maintained with much learning, 
 ingenuity, and moderation, both of sentiment 
 and language. I know not whether this Gentle- 
 man be still alive; if he be, I heartily sympathize 
 with his feelings, on seeing his own argument so 
 marred by the blunders, and disgraced by the 
 virulence, of Mr. Jeffrey. 
 
 Mr. Dillons Essay on the Coronation Oath. 
 
 Without entering into a minute examination 
 of Mr. Dillon's tract, I shall beg leave briefly to 
 state the view the Law of England takes of the 
 relation which the Sovereign bears to the laws, 
 in order to prove that when he swears, that 
 " he, to the utmost of his power, will maintain 
 " and preserve inviolably" any object whatever, 
 he must be understood to do so in his whole 
 regal character, one of the highest and most 
 
 * Essay on the History and Effect of the Coronation Oath, 
 by John Joseph Dillon, of Lincoln's Inn, Esq. 1807.
 
 MR. DILLON. 75 
 
 essential particulars of which is that of being 
 lawmaker : and I entreat the pardon of those of 
 my readers, to whom this view of the case must 
 be familiar, for presuming thus to hold my 
 feeble lamp, to illustrate what they must already 
 consider to be clear as the light of day. 
 
 Convenient as it may be for writers on the 
 constitution of England to distribute the powers 
 and functions of the crown into executive and 
 legislative, and to talk of the King as a branch 
 of the legislature, it is a distinction which the 
 language of the law itself is very far from en- 
 couraging. We there read, that the laws are the 
 laws of the King* that Parliament is the great 
 council of the nation, summoned to advise the 
 King concerning the arduous affairs of the realm, 
 and without whose advice and consent no law 
 can be made by him. I need hardly remark, 
 that the form of making statutes, at this very 
 day, recognises this to be the true constitutional 
 view of the matter. The new law is enacted by 
 the King, by and with the advice and consent 
 of his great council, the Parliament. He enacts 
 
 * " Albeit," says Lord Coke, " the kings of England de- 
 " rived their ecclesiastical laws from others, yet so many as 
 " were proved, approved, and allowed here, by and with a 
 " general consent, are aptly and rightly called the King's 
 " Ecclesiastical Laws of England.". 5 Rep. Cowdrey's Case.
 
 76 THE KING AS LEGISLATOR. 
 
 by willing that their advice take effect; he re- 
 fuses his consent, by announcing his purpose of 
 considering the matter with himself. But this 
 matter becomes still plainer, by looking into the 
 ancient law of the land. 
 
 The King as Legislator. 
 
 The laws of Edward the Confessor, which 
 were the foundation of all the charters of sub- 
 sequent Sovereigns, and to the maintenance of 
 which our Kings were expressly bound by their 
 Coronation Oath, from a very early period to 
 James II. inclusive, those laws, in the 17th 
 chapter De Regis Officio, thus declare this part 
 of the kingly office, " Debet bonas leges, et con- 
 " suetudines approbatas erigere, pravas autem 
 " delere, et omnes a regno deponere;" and they 
 also give the constitutional limitation of his 
 power; "Debet omnia rite facere, et perjudi- 
 " cium procerum regm.'" 1 * 
 
 The laws of William the Conqueror begin thus : 
 " Hie intimatur quid Gulielmus, Rex Anglias, 
 " cum principibus suis, constituit post conquisi- 
 " tionem Anglise." And presently afterwards, 
 " Hoc quoque;?r<c/p/0, ut omnes habeant et te- 
 
 * Wilkins, Leges Angfosax. p. 200.
 
 THE KING AS LEGISLATOR. 77 
 
 " neant leges Regis Edvardi in omnibus rebus, 
 " adauctis his quae ctinstituimus ad utilitatem 
 " Anglorum. Et prohibeo, ut nullus,"* &c. 
 
 William Itufus won the favour of the English 
 by promising them " faciles leges" &c. Again, 
 when sick at Gloucester, 1092, and under the 
 fear of death, he promised " sese pravas leges 
 " emendaturum"-\ 
 
 Henry /., on the death of Rufus, (his eldest 
 brother being absent in the Holy War) pro- 
 mised an amendment of the laws ; whereupon the 
 Clergy (i. e. Prelates), and all the great men, 
 (Magnates,) answered, that if he would grant, 
 and by charter confirm, the liberties and ancient 
 customs which they enjoyed in the reign of 
 St. Edward, they would make him King. He 
 promised accordingly, and kept his promise, 
 giving a charter, in the full style of maker, or 
 granter, of the laws which are therein recounted, 
 and by which various grievances were redressed. 
 ' ' Omnes malas consuetudines," says he, " quibus 
 " Regnum Angliae injuste opprimebatur, inde 
 " aufero, quas malas consuetudines hie pono." 
 He then enumerates them. The whole was 
 subscribed by divers Lords spiritual and tem- 
 
 * Wilkins, Leges Anglosax, pp. 207, 208. 
 f Mat. Par. 11, 12.
 
 78 THE KING AS LEGISLATOR. 
 
 poral, as witnesses,* thus implying their own 
 assent. 
 
 Stephen obtained the crown under similar 
 promises of amending the laws. *' Congregatis 
 " Londoniis regni magnatibus, meliorationem 
 " legum promisit " -\ 
 
 Henry II. made many laws for the good of 
 the kingdom. " Leges quas idem Rex ad utili- 
 " tatem regni statuit" says Matthew Paris, 
 " hoc in loco scriberem, si lectorem offendere 
 " pro prolixitate non dubitarem."J 
 
 Richard I. set forth his Charter de Statutis 
 illorum, qui per mare ituri erant, in the follow- 
 ing terms. " Richardus, Dei gratia, &c. omni- 
 " bus hominibus nostris, &c. salutem. Sciatis 
 " nos, de communi proborum virorum consilio, 
 " fecisse has justitias subscriptas." 
 
 The Great Charter of John is conceived in 
 similar terms. " John, by the advice of Ste- 
 " phen, Archbishop of Canterbury, and divers 
 " his Lords spiritual and temporal, and others 
 " his liege subjects, grants," &c. 
 
 So also that of Henry III. " Sciatis quod 
 " nos, &c. spontaned et bond voluntate nostrd de- 
 " dimus et concessimus, &c. His testibus, Domino 
 
 * Mat. Par. 3840. f Ibid. 50. J Ibid. 107. 
 
 Wilkins, p. 342.
 
 THE KING AS LEGISLATOR. 79 
 
 " S.Cantuar.Archiep.," and twenty-eight other 
 Prelates, and thirty temporal Lords. 
 
 And thus we are come to the Statute Law of 
 the land. It is, indeed, expressly said by Lord 
 Coke,* that Acts of Parliament were set forth 
 in those days under the form of a Royal Charter. 
 Again : he has said (what is equally to the pre- 
 sent purpose) that, " in ancient times Acts of 
 " Parliament were in form of Petitions"-^ Some 
 were drawn up " sub formula diplomatis sui 
 " brevis," J as Statutum de Religiosis, 7th Ed- 
 ward I. " Rex justic' suis de Banco salutem," 
 &c. : many in a mandatory style, as 13th 
 Edward I. Stat. Wynton. " Our Lord the King, 
 " for to abate the power of felons, hath established 
 " a pain in this case ;" and, in the conclusion, 
 " the King commandeth and forbiddeth" no fur- 
 ther notice being taken of Parliament than that, 
 " in Statuti (ut ita dicam) fronte, Dominus Rex 
 " in Parliamento suo edidit." 
 
 The 28th Edward I., De , Appellatis, "Our 
 " Lord the King, at his Parliament holden at 
 " Westminster, &c. hath granted, ordained, and 
 " provided," &c. 
 
 And it is the remark of Lord Coke,j| that 
 
 * 8 Rep. 19. f 4 Inst. 5. J 8 Rep. 20. 
 
 8 Rep. 19. || Ibid. 20.
 
 80 THE KING AS LEGISLATOR. 
 
 there are many statutes thus expressed, " Do- 
 " minus Rex statuit." 
 
 Of these Acts of Parliament in the time of 
 Edward I., Sir Matthew Hale* says, that they 
 " were drawn up into the form of a law in the 
 " first instance, and so assented to by both 
 " Houses, and the King, as may appear by the 
 " very contexture and fabric of the statutes of 
 " those times." We have seen the contexture 
 and fabric of several, I will add one more, the 
 35th Edward I., De Asportatis Religiosorum, 
 which concludes in these words : " Our Lord 
 " the King, after full deliberation and confer- 
 " ence had with the Earls, Barons, Lords, and 
 " other nobles, &c. of his realm, touching the 
 " premises, hath ordained and enacted, that the 
 " ordinances and statutes aforesaid shall be in- 
 " violably observed, and in force for ever." 
 
 Sir Matthew Hale continues, " But from near 
 " the beginning of the reign of Edward III. till 
 " very near the end of Henry VI., they were 
 " not in the first instance drawn up in the form 
 " of Acts of Parliament ; but the petition and 
 " the answer were entered in the Parliament 
 " Rolls, and out of both, by advice of the 
 " Judges, and others of the King's council, the 
 
 * History of the Common Law, p. 14.
 
 THE KING AS LEGISLATOR. 81 
 
 " act was drawn up conformable to the petition 
 " and answer." 
 
 Now, let us see what was the form in which 
 the Sages of the law themselves drew up the 
 statutes. 
 
 5th Edward III. " At the Parliament sum- 
 " moned at Westminster, our Lord the King, by 
 " the assent of the Prelates, Earls, Barons, and 
 " other great men of the realm there assembled, 
 " to the honour of God and of the holy Church, 
 " and at the request of his people, granted and 
 " established these things underwritten." 
 
 1st Richard II. " Richard, by the grace of 
 " God, &c. to the sheriff of Middlesex, greeting. 
 " Know thou that, &c. with the assent of the 
 " Prelates, Dukes, &c. at the instance and 
 " especial request of the Commons of our realm 
 " aforesaid, assembled at our Parliament, &c. 
 " we have caused to be ordained and established 
 " certain statutes in amendment and relief of 
 " this our said realm, in form following." 
 
 1st Henry IV., 1st Henry F., 1st Henry VI. 
 are all conceived in similar terms. " Henry, 
 " by the grace of God, &c. with the assent of 
 " the Prelates, Dukes, &c. and at the instance 
 " and special request of the Commons of the 
 " said realm, assembled at his Parliament 
 " holden at Westminster, hath caused to be or- 
 
 G 
 
 \
 
 82 THE KING AS LEGISLATOR. 
 
 " darned and established certain ordinances and 
 " statutes." 
 
 It uniformly was the King that ordained, with 
 the assent of his great council. " The King of 
 " England," says Lord Coke,* "is armed with 
 " divers councils, one whereof is called Com- 
 " mune Concilium, and that is the Court of 
 " Parliament." " This court consisteth of the 
 " King's majesty sitting there, as in his Royal 
 " politick capacity, and of the three estates of 
 " the realm."f " The jurisdiction of this court 
 " is so transcendent, that it maketh, enlargeth, 
 " repealeth, and reviveth lawes," J &c. " Habet 
 " Rex curiamsuam in Parliamentis suis, praesen- 
 " tibus Prselatis, Comitibus, Baronibus, Pro- 
 " ceribus, et aliis viris peritis, ubi terminatae 
 " suntdubitationesjudiciorum, et, novisinjuriis 
 " emersis, nova constituuntur remedia." 
 
 Lord Coke further says, that "the King is 
 " caput, principium, et Jinis of his Court of Par- 
 liament." 4 Inst. 3. 
 
 In 22 E. 3. Hil. Term, Plea 25, it is laid down 
 thus : Et fuit dit, que le Roy fait les Leis par 
 assent des Peres et de la Commune, et non pas 
 les Peres, et la Commune. 
 
 IVhitelock, m his comment on the Parlia- 
 
 * 1 Inst. 110. f 4 Inst. 1. +1 Inst. 110.
 
 THE KING AS LEGISLATOR. 83 
 
 mentary Writ, says, " The making of Statutes is 
 " by the King, with the assent of the Lords and 
 " Commons in Parliament." Vol. i. p. 406. 
 
 Sir Matthew Hale (Jurisd. of the Lords, p. 1 1) 
 speaks of " The legislative power being lodged in 
 " the King with the assent of the two Houses 
 " of Parliament." 
 
 Such is the monarchy of England, as de- 
 scribed by the laws of England, and by the 
 greatest Sages of the law, " an absolute Mo- 
 " narchy," Lord Coke elsewhere* calls it, by 
 a title of an odious sound, though he evidently 
 means not absolute in the sense in which that 
 expression is commonly used, i. e. without legal 
 restrictions on the prerogative, but " omnibus 
 " numeris absoluta," perfect in all that is ne- 
 cessary to a monarchy, wherein the King is 
 not, in strictness of speech, a branch of the 
 legislature, but rather he is the legislator, 
 limited, indeed, and restrained, moved and ad- 
 vised, in the exercise of legislation, by the law- 
 ful and constitutional power of " the great 
 " Council of the nation assembled in Parlia- 
 " ment ; " that is, not the nation's, but the 
 King's, great Council, the nation assembled to be 
 his council by their representatives in Parliament. 
 
 * 5 Rep. 40. 
 o2
 
 84 THE KING AS LEGISLATOR 
 
 The King, as Legislator, is bound by his Coro- 
 nation Oath. 
 
 If this were a mere speculative nicety, I 
 should have abstained from treating of it at all ; 
 but it has, as must be apparent, a most im- 
 portant practical bearing, when a questionable 
 expression (which, however, I presume not to 
 blame) is thus made the foundation of an argu- 
 ment to change the whole character of the 
 Coronation Oath. But can it be any longer 
 seriously maintained, that this Oath, taken by 
 the King, as King, at the time of his solemn 
 inauguration into his high office, is yet not 
 binding on him when he is, as we have seen in 
 an especial manner, " sitting in his Royal po- 
 " litick capacity" to make laws in his great 
 council of the realm ? 
 
 That he is thus bound, as lawmaker, is ex- 
 pressly stated in what remains to us of the most 
 ancient Oath, though the exact form in which 
 it was taken (if, indeed, there were any one 
 exact form from the first) does not appear. 
 The draught and outline of the Oath, in its 
 very origin, is exhibited to us in the laws of 
 Edward the Confessor; and it is interesting and 
 most satisfactory to note, how faithfully the 
 spirit of that venerable original has been
 
 IS BOUND BY HIS CORONATION OATH. 85 
 
 throughout preserved. The Chapter de Regis 
 Officio, et de Jure et Appendiciis Coronse Regni 
 Brytannise, after saying what I have just now 
 cited, " The King ought to do all things accord- 
 " ing to known and established order (rite), and 
 " by the counsel of his great men," proceeds as 
 follows : " Moreover, the King ought to fear 
 " God, and love him above all things : he ought 
 " to preserve, cherish, maintain, rule, and de- 
 " fend against all enemies the holy Church of his 
 " realm in all its integrity and liberty, &c. : he 
 " ought also to make good laws and approved 
 " customs, but to expunge the bad, and root 
 " all such out of his kingdom:* he ought also 
 " to do right judgment in his kingdom, and to 
 " keep to justice by the counsel of the great 
 " men of his kingdom. And to the perform- 
 " ance of all these things, the King, in his 
 " proper person, looking to and touching the 
 " holy Gospels, and upon the sacred and holy 
 " relics, in the presence of all his realm, and the 
 " Priesthood and the Clergy, ought to swear 
 " before he is crowned by the Archbishops and 
 " Bishops of the realm." Compare this with the 
 old form of the Coronation Oath, and even with 
 that which is taken at present, and see how 
 fully it accords with them. 
 
 * " Debet etiam bonas leges et consuetudines approbatas 
 " erigere, pravas autem delete, et omnes a regno deponere."
 
 86 THE KING AS LEGISLATOR 
 
 The accounts which history gives us of the 
 Oaths of the first sovereigns correspond with 
 this law of Edward's, especially in the particular 
 we are now considering. 
 
 Henry I. having sworn to grant the ancient 
 liberties and customs of Edward the Confessor, 
 and to confirm them by his charter, did accord- 
 ingly in his charter abolish from the realm all 
 bad customs.* 
 
 The coronation of Richard I. is described by 
 Matthew Paris with much minuteness, and it 
 is interesting tp mark its resemblance to a 
 coronation in our own times. His Oath con- 
 tained the three particulars; first, in favour of 
 the Church ; secondly, that he would execute 
 right justice to the people; thirdly, that he 
 would abolish bad laws and unjust customs, if 
 any such should be, and would observe the 
 good.f 
 
 John's Oath, administered with more than 
 ordinary solemnity and precision, from appre- 
 hension of his future wickedness, bound him to 
 the same particulars, the second being " quod 
 " perversis legibus destructis, bonas substi- 
 " tueret."J 
 
 * Mat. Par. 38. " Omnes malas consuetudines, quibus reg- 
 " num Angliae injuste opprimebatur, inde aufero." 
 t Matt. Par. 108. J Ibid. 138.
 
 IS BOUND BY HIS CORONATION OATH. 87 
 
 Henry III.'s Oath was to the same effect.* 
 The Oath which has been already | cited as 
 the fixed form of Oath in Edward II. 's time, 
 does not so expressly state the matter of making- 
 laws, but it contains the following clause. " Con- 
 " cedis justas leges et consuetudines esse te- 
 " nendas, et promittis per te esse protegendas, 
 " et ad honorem Dei corroborandas, quas vul- 
 " gus elegerit, secundum vires tuas ?" 
 
 Of this form Mr. Dillon says, " that it 
 " continued with very trifling alteration until 
 " the Revolution of 1688. It was taken by 
 " Edward VI" (of this more presently) " and 
 Charles I." p. 39. And shortly afterwards he 
 thus proceeds. 
 
 " In the earlier Oaths we find the King sworn 
 " to ordain and introduce wholesome laws, and 
 " abolish those which were inconvenient or un- 
 " just. In later times, when the constitution 
 " of Parliament was firmly established, and the 
 " regal prerogative in the enactment of laws 
 " ascertained and accurately defined, the clauses 
 
 * " Quod honorem, pacem, et reverentiam portabit Deo, et 
 " sanctis Ecclesiae, et ejus onlinatis ; quod in populo sibi com- 
 " missorectamjustitiam tenebit 5 quodque leges malasetiniquas 
 " consuetudines, si quae sint in regno, delebit, et bonas obser- 
 " vabit et ab omnibus faciet observari." Mat. Par. 200. 
 
 f Vide supra, p. 15.
 
 88 THE KING AS LEGISLATOR 
 
 " of the old Coronation Oath relating to the 
 " legislative duties of the Sovereign were ex- 
 " punged as unnecessary. It was then con- 
 " sidered, that as the right of the people to 
 " concur in the enactment of laws was secured, 
 " it was only by the bad administration of them 
 " that the liberties of the subject could be in- 
 " vaded. Accordingly, the terms of the Coro- 
 " nation Oath, from the reign of Richard II. to 
 " the Revolution, obviously affected the Sovereign 
 " solely in his executive capacity." 
 
 Now, in this passage I must first remark an 
 important historical mistake, where Mr. Dillon 
 ascribes the origin of this Oath to the time of 
 Richard II. The Statutes at Large, published 
 by authority, state this same Oath to have 
 been the Oath of Edward II.; and, if the autho- 
 rity of this edition were not conclusive, the 
 document produced by Mr. Dillon himself, the 
 Rot. Parl. Henry IV. n. 17, proves the same 
 thing. For we there find that Oath to be 
 styled, " Forma juramenti soliti et consueti 
 " praestari per Reges Angliae in eorum coro- 
 " natione, quod Archiepiscopus Cantuariensis 
 " ab eisdem Regibus exigere et recipere con- 
 " suevit, prout in libris Pontificalium, Archiepis- 
 " coporum, et Episcoporum plenius continetur." 
 Now, I submit, that the meaning of the words
 
 IS BOUND BY HIS CORONATION OATH. 89 
 
 soliti, consueti, consuevit is not satisfied by sup- 
 posing it to have been adopted in only one in- 
 stance before the reigning Monarch, that to 
 extend it to two instances more, and thus to 
 harmonize with the more authoritative state- 
 ment, is the least that can be deemed reason- 
 able. 
 
 I doubt not, indeed, that it was merely Mr. 
 Dillon's own fair spirit which induced him to 
 claim no higher antiquity for this form of Oath, 
 than that which is here expressed; for, it is 
 quite plain, that the higher he could carry it, 
 the better it would seem to be for his purpose. 
 Unfortunately, however, the carrying it up to 
 Edward II., is fatal to the whole argument 
 which he draws from it: for it happens, that 
 in a statute of the 15th of this prince, another 
 statute, which had been passed in Parliament 
 at Westminster that same year, is repealed 
 on the following expressed ground, because 
 " unto our Lord the King at a Parliament as- 
 " sembled at York, it was showed by the Pre- 
 " lates, Earls, Barons, Knights of shires, and 
 " Commonalty of his realm, there assembled 
 " by his command, that the said statute, ordi- 
 " nance, &c. were sinfully and wrongfully made 
 " and granted, against reason and common
 
 90 THE KING AS LEGISLATOR 
 
 " right, and against the Oath of our Lord the 
 " King, which he made at his Coronation"* 
 
 This, I contend, is an irrefragable proof, 
 that in the very reign of Edward II., to which 
 the Coronation Oath, taken before the Revolu- 
 tion, is traced, it was held by Parliament, that 
 that Oath does extend to the King as legis- 
 lator. 
 
 So sacred, indeed, was this Oath then held, 
 and so manifestly was it deemed to apply to 
 the King in making laws, that in the commis- 
 sion (to exercise the most important of the 
 King's functions) granted by the King in the 
 5th year of his reign, by letters patent under 
 the great seal, " to the Prelates, Earls, Barons, 
 " and Commons of the said realm, that they 
 " may choose certain of the prelates, earls, 
 " and Barons, whom they shall think sufficient, 
 " with full power to order the state of our house- 
 " hold and Realm," There is a proviso, that 
 their ordinances be " to the honor of God, &c. 
 " according to right and reason, and the Oath 
 
 * If this Oath could be carried a single reign higher, the 
 argument would be still stronger : for Edward I., the English 
 Justinian, as Blackstone calls him, (1 Bl. 425) twice in one 
 statute, 27 Edw. I., c. 1. (the Statute of Fines levied) makes a 
 reservation, that nothing be thereby granted contrary to his 
 Oath.
 
 IS BOUND BY HIS CORONATION OATH. 91 
 
 " which we made at our Coronation." These or- 
 dinances, forty-one in number, relate to the 
 liberties of the Church, the keeping the great 
 charter, and charter of the forests, holding Par- 
 liaments yearly, &c. &c., extending, in short, to 
 all the main particulars of the rights and liberties 
 of the Church and Nation, and the principal 
 heads of the common law of the land. 
 
 I do not mean to say any thing of the law- 
 fulness of this commission. It was, as is well 
 known, extorted from the weakness of this un- 
 happy prince, by his prelates and barons in 
 Parliament assembled, who were goaded to this 
 violent measure by the lamentable misgovern- 
 ment of Edward and his minion, Piers Gaveston. 
 But it shows (and for this purpose only is it 
 adduced by me,) what was the construction put 
 on the Coronation Oath by the Parliament of that 
 reign, the very reign in which it seems to have been 
 first imposed. 
 
 But this is not all. Mr. Dillon was in error, 
 when he said, that the Oath was taken by 
 Edward VI. in the same form. On the con- 
 trary, it appears from the Council Book,* that 
 the Lord Protector, and other of the council 
 appointed by Henry VIII. to administer the 
 
 * Burnet, H. R. vol. ii. Rec. p. 94.
 
 92 THE KING AS LEGISLATOR 
 
 government during the minority of his son, 
 made many alterations in the old ceremonial of 
 the coronation, in order to accommodate it to 
 the new laws, and that at the same time they 
 determined, that the Coronation Oath should 
 be taken by Edward in the form given by me 
 above.* Of that form, the following clause 
 manifestly applies to the King as legislator. 
 " Do you grant to make," (that is, do you 
 grant that you will make, in the same manner 
 as in the first clause, " Do you grant to 
 " keep to the people of England the laws and 
 " liberties of this realm," must mean, do you 
 grant that you will keep,} " Do you grant to 
 " make no laws, but such as shall be to the ho- 
 " nor and glory of God, and to the good of the 
 " commonwealth ; and that the same shall be 
 " made by the consent of your people, as hath 
 " been accustomed ?" 
 
 After this, no one, I imagine, will attempt to 
 defend Mr. Dillon's hypothesis, " that the 
 " clauses of the old Coronation Oath, relating 
 *' to the legislative duties of the Sovereign, were 
 " expunged" in the new Oath, as no longer suited 
 to the Constitution. Waving, therefore, all 
 
 * See above, p. 1 9.
 
 IS BOUND BY HIS CORONATION OATH. 93 
 
 further notice of this part of his argument, I 
 shall proceed to another. 
 
 " It may be considered," says he, " as a po- 
 " litical axiom, that in every state there neces- 
 " sarily exists a Supreme Power, capable of 
 " ordaining every regulation which it may deem 
 " expedient for the public good." Again : " To 
 " promote to the utmost the public good, is the 
 " grand and indispensable duty of all govern- 
 " ment. Salus ReipublicBB suprema lex." pp. 
 27, 28. Without contending on this point, it 
 is sufficient to say, that the law of England has, 
 in the Coronation Oath, assisted the Sovereign 
 in determining what is " the public good," and 
 what is most essential to the " Salus Reipub- 
 " licae," by specifying certain great particulars, 
 and binding his conscience to maintain them in- 
 violably. 
 
 But he adds something of more seeming im- 
 portance. " The positions which I have en- 
 " deavoured to establish with respect to the 
 " transcendent obligation imposed upon the 
 " King to consent to any Bill proposed to him 
 " by Parliament (in case his Majesty shall be- 
 " lieve such a Bill to be expedient to the public 
 " welfare) are confirmed by the positive decla- 
 " rations of the English legislature. For by the
 
 94 PREAMBLE OF STATUTE OF PROVISORS. 
 
 " 25th Edward III. stat. 6. (the Statute of Pro- 
 " visors) it is expressly declared, " That the 
 " RIGHT OF THE CROWN OF ENGLAND AND THE 
 " LAW OF THE REALM is SUCH, that upon the 
 " mischiefs and damages which happen to this 
 " Realm, the King OUGHT and is BOUND BY HIS 
 " OATH, with the accord of the people in Parlia- 
 " ment, to make remedy and law." * 
 
 How Mr. Dillon can cite this statute, and 
 gravely contend that the Coronation Oath does 
 not bind the Sovereign as legislator, is past my 
 comprehension. What is the sum and sub- 
 stance of it ? " That the King is bound by his 
 " Coronation Oath, to make laws, with the ac- 
 " cord of his people, to remedy any emergent 
 " mischief." Most certainly he is ; but common 
 sense imposes the restriction, that he do not, in 
 remedying one mischief, introduce a greater ; 
 and the law, by imposing the Coronation Oath 
 on the Prince, has told him that the mischiefs 
 which are the greatest of all, and which he is 
 on no account to hazard, are those which would 
 endanger certain objects, which he is thus 
 placed under the most solemn engagement to 
 preserve. 
 
 After all, however, Mr. Dillon seems to have 
 
 * I have followed Mr. Dillon's own Typography.
 
 CHARLES I. 95 
 
 been a little of a plagiarist in pressing into his ser- 
 vice this preamble of the statute of 25th Edward 
 III. The real authors of this happy expedient, 
 were the parliamentary leaders in Charles's time, 
 who, in their famous Remonstrance, made, if 
 not so honest, yet an infinitely more efficacious 
 use of it than Mr. Dillon. They disdained to em- 
 ploy his diluting parenthesis (in case his Ma- 
 jesty shall believe such a Bill to be expedient to the 
 public welfare) and boldly told their Sovereign, 
 that " they are the most proper judges " (what 
 the public welfare requires) " who are sent from 
 the whole kingdom for that very purpose," and 
 therefore they demanded very sturdily, that his 
 Majesty should not think himself at liberty 
 to withhold his assent to any Bills which the 
 Parliament should present to him.* 
 
 This was urging the point to some purpose, 
 but king Charles, like king George, presumed 
 to have a conscience of his own ; he told them 
 that this pretension of theirs was " a thing never 
 " heard of till this day," that it rested on a mis- 
 taken translation by them of the Latin form of 
 Oath, which was clear in the English as he had 
 taken it, that it would defeat the very object 
 
 * Clarendon H. R. vol. i. p. 154. folio.
 
 96 CHARLES I. 
 
 of the Oath, and disable him to perform the great 
 business of his high office, which was to pro- 
 tect them. " What discharge would it be for 
 " his Majesty, either before God or man, when 
 " his good subjects, whom God and the law had 
 " committed to his charge, should be worried 
 " and spoiled, to say that he trusted others to 
 " protect them ? That is, to do that duty for 
 " him, which he was bound to discharge."* 
 
 Afterwards, the same unhappy King was 
 tried still more severely on this very point ; and 
 manfully and nobly he sacrificed his life to a 
 firm adherence to his conscientious construction 
 of his Coronation Oath, which forbade him to assent 
 to a Bill presented to him by Parliament for the 
 destruction of the Church of England;^ and, yet, 
 had the modern distinction been then devised, 
 that his " Oath affected him in his executive 
 " capacity only, not as a branch of the legis- 
 " lative," how easy would the whole matter 
 have been made ! Unluckily, the parliamen- 
 tary leaders of those days, who have not com- 
 monly been reckoned blockheads, in all their 
 consultations on this main difficulty, were to- 
 
 * Clarendon, vol. i. 484. 
 
 t Clarendon, iii. 168. (See below, Appendix, Note B.)
 
 MR. SOMERS. 97 
 
 tally unable to hit off an expedient, which our 
 modern luminaries assure us is " plainly," and 
 " obviously," on the very surface. 
 
 The same darkness appears to have spread 
 over the intellects of our great men (as they 
 have been wont to be esteemed) at the Revo- 
 lution. They all regarded the Coronation Oath 
 as extending to the whole Kingly Office. Mr. 
 Somers, as I have already had occasion to 
 show, declared at the conference with the 
 Lords, (5 February, 1688-9,) that James II. 
 had, " by avowing to govern by a despotic power" 
 (of which, making Laws must be deemed the 
 main part,) " unknown to the constitution, and 
 " inconsistent with it, renounced to be such a 
 " King as he swore to be at his Coronation, 
 " such a King to whom the allegiance of an 
 " English subject is due." 
 
 But it has been said by Mr. Dillon, " Did 
 " the mischief of which our ancestors then 
 *' complained proceed from an undue exercise 
 " of the legislative Authority? The answer will 
 " be best given by the Bill of Rights, which 
 " makes a formal recognition, that it was solely 
 " by the executive department of the Royal Au- 
 " thority the Church had been endangered."* 
 
 * Dillon, p. 49. 
 H
 
 98 BILL OF RIGHTS. WILLIAM III. 
 
 There are some propositions, which it is dif- 
 ficult to suppose to have been intended seri- 
 ously : among these I must reckon that which 
 I have here quoted. The very first particular 
 of James's misconduct, recited in the Bill of 
 Rights, was his " assuming and exercising a 
 " power of dispensing with Laws, and the exe- 
 " cution of laws, without consent of Parliament" 
 Now, if this is not an Act of Legislation, I 
 know not what Legislation is ; and if it be not 
 here complained of, as such, I know not what 
 the meaning of plain words is. But how is 
 this particular commented upon by King Wil- 
 liam himself? " A main and fundamental 
 " point of this Constitution, says he, is, That 
 " the subjects ought to be governed by laws 
 " enacted in Parliament, and not by the mere 
 " pleasure of the King. The late King set 
 " himself to overturn this, not only in some 
 " practices that imported it by consequence, 
 " but by a public Act of State; by which he de- 
 " dared, that the power of dispensing with laws 
 " was a right of the Crown, upon which he 
 " assumed it. This struck at the foundation 
 " of the Government ; and the exercise and 
 " progress of it must have been fatal to the li-
 
 BILL OF RIGHTS SIR GEORGE TREBY. 99 
 
 " berties of the people."* Was not this 
 " public Act of State" an Act of Legislation ? 
 
 Again, can the third particular, that of " Is- 
 " suing, and causing to be executed, a Com- 
 " mission under the Great Seal, for erecting 
 " a Court called, The Court of Commissioners 
 " for Ecclesiastical Causes," not only without 
 law, but contrary to an express statute, be 
 deemed an act of executive power ? Most evi- 
 dently not : it involved a claim to the power 
 of legislation by the Royal Prerogative without 
 consent of Parliament. 
 
 And how did " our Ancestors" themselves 
 speak of these things ? We have heard what 
 Mr. Somers said. Let me now adduce the 
 language of Sir George Treby at the same free 
 conference. " The King having a limited au- 
 " thority, by which he was obliged to keep 
 " the laws made, as to the executive part of 
 " his government, and to observe the constitution 
 "for making such new laws, as the people 
 " should find necessary, and present him for 
 " his consent ; when he doth violate, not a 
 " particular law, but all the fundamentals, 
 " not injure a particular person in Religion, 
 
 * " Memorial drawn by King William's special direction'' 
 and under his own eye, the draught being examined by him- 
 self. Lord Somers' Tracts, vol. xi. p. 110. 
 
 H 2
 
 100 DEBATES ON THE BILL 
 
 " Liberty, or Property, but fall upon the whole 
 " Constitution, what doth all this speak? He 
 " therein saith, I will no more keep within my 
 " limited authority, nor hold my kingly office 
 " upon such terms. This title I had by the 
 " original contract between King and People," 
 (of which contract the Coronation Oath is, on 
 the King's part, the bond); " I renounce that, 
 " and will assume another to myself; that is, 
 " such a title, as by which I may act, as if there 
 " were no such law to circumscribe my authority.'" 
 
 But all this, it may be urged, applies to the 
 old Coronation Oath, which differs from that 
 which is now taken in several particulars, and 
 why not in this ? I have already, (in observ- 
 ing on Mr. Jeffrey's position,) endeavoured to 
 answer the question, and to show that the pre- 
 sent Oath applies to the King in making laws ; 
 I shall, therefore, not again argue the point, 
 but shall content myself with confirming my 
 argument by the authority of names, which are 
 still considered to merit some regard. 
 
 In Grey's Report of the Debates, which 
 took place on the 25th of March, 1688-9, when 
 the Coronation Oath was fixed, and on the 
 29th, when a proviso was proposed by way of 
 rider to it, " That no Clause in this Act shall
 
 FOR ESTABLISHING THE PRESENT OATH. 101 
 
 " be understood so to bind the Kings or 
 " Queens of this realm, as to prevent their 
 " giving their Royal Assent to any Bill, which 
 " shall be at any time offered by the Lords 
 " and Commons, assembled in Parliament, for 
 " the taking away or altering any Form or 
 " Ceremony in the Established Church, so as 
 " the doctrines of the said Church, a public 
 " Liturgy, and the Episcopal Government of 
 " it, be preserved ;" meagre and confused as 
 the Report is, enough is given to establish the 
 one main point of our present inquiry. For, 
 it is observable, that not one single speaker, 
 on either side, said, what, if true, would have 
 been conclusive of the whole matter of debate, 
 that the Oath applies to the King " in his 
 " executive capacity only;" on the contrary, 
 enough was said by many of them to show, 
 that it was taken as a matter of course, that it 
 bound the King's conscience in making new 
 laws.* 
 
 * On the first night, the only question in debate was, whe- 
 ther, in the clause which binds the King " to maintain the 
 " Protestant Reformed Religion established by law," should be 
 inserted any such words as these, " as it is, or shall be," esta- 
 blished. Those who may be called the low Church Party 
 were anxious for the insertion ; because they apprehended, 
 that, without it, occasion might be taken to tell the King, that
 
 102 MR. BURKE'S LETTER TO 
 
 Mr. Burke 's Letter to Sir H. Langrishe, in 1792. 
 
 I am not aware, that the meaning of the Co- 
 ronation Oath was ever again brought into 
 
 he was precluded by his Oath from consenting to any Bill for 
 carrying into effect the promise of a toleration made by him to 
 the Dissenters. Thus Mr. Hampden, Jim. " You do not say, 
 " ' according to the laws in being,' (which he afterwards 
 moved to insert.) " By this" (i. e. the Oath as it stands,) 
 " every casuist will tell the King he is obliged, in the strictest 
 " sense, never to alter them." 
 
 Mr. Garroway. " You have a great work upon your hands, 
 upon which our future happiness must depend. You must 
 consider what it is the King can, and what it is fit for him to 
 take. I am for 'the National Church:' if you tie it up 
 strictly ' according to law,' you do not know whether the 
 King be free to grant what you require. I would have the 
 Church-doors made wider, and I think it might easily be done. 
 In order to that I move, that the King, in the Oath, swear to 
 maintain the Protestant Religion which is, or shall be, esta- 
 blished by law." 
 
 Major Wildman. " Consider whether it is reasonable, some 
 comprehension or toleration being intended, to swear so gene- 
 rally. Consider, the next day after the King has taken this 
 Oath, who shall excuse him from his Oath, before the House 
 has agreed any alteration (in favour of Protestant Dissenters)? " 
 
 Mr. Somers. " I desire the addition, for great regard to the 
 Legislature. In the former paragraph, it is ' Statutes, and 
 Laws, and Customs in being' in the other establishment (the 
 civil). He that gives his consent to take away, does not main- 
 tain them."
 
 SIR H. LANGRISHE. 103 
 
 discussion, till the publication of Mr. Burke's 
 celebrated letter to Sir Hercules Langrishe, in 
 
 Meanwhile, the other party, the warm friends of the Church 
 of England, resisted the insertion, as worse than unnecessary. 
 At the head of these was Mr. Finch, second son of the Earl 
 of Nottingham, and afterwards created Earl of Aylesford, one 
 of the ablest and most considerable members of the House, 
 who expressed himself as follows : " The insertion is needless, 
 " because, the words being implied, you need not add them. 
 " But I think it necessary, that the world may know we mean 
 " the established Protestant Religion. To show, that, by these 
 " words, we mean the Reformed Protestant Religion established 
 " by law, I am against the words ' shall be established.' No 
 " man can have any colour, but that still a liberty is to consent 
 " to any other laws to PRESERVE Religion. No man, from the 
 " Bishop downwards, is against any comprehension or ease to 
 " tender consciences j but v this is, as if there were another 
 " Protestant Religion to be established by law.'' 
 
 Mr. Godolphin. " All our securities rest upon the King's con- 
 " scientiousncss, I would not put in the words, because I 
 " would not leave a doubt, if it is not in the intention of the 
 " House to alter the Religion established by law. I would have 
 " tender consciences come in at the door, not pull down the rafters 
 " of the house to come in at the roof!' 
 
 These reasons prevailed 5 but on the subsequent day some 
 of the defeated party introduced the proviso already mentioned. 
 It was rejected, partly as unnecessary ; partly, as seeming to 
 trench on the legislative power, a matter highly unseemly in 
 any Act of Parliament. But in the whole debate, there is no- 
 thing said in contradiction of the sentiments expressed on the 
 former night, recognising the words of the Oath, as, in their 
 proper meaning, binding the King's conscience in making laws.
 
 104 MR. BURKE'S LETTER TO 
 
 1792. That great man declared, and entered 
 into an argument to prove, that there was no- 
 thing in the Oath, which forebade His Majesty 
 to consent to any Bill conferring on the Roman 
 Catholics of Ireland the particular indulgences 
 they then sought. 
 
 " If," said he, " such means can with any 
 " probability be shown, from circumstances, to 
 " add strength to our mixed ecclesiastical and 
 " secular constitution, rather than to weaken 
 " it ; surely they are means infinitely to be 
 " preferred to penalties, incapacities, and pro- 
 " scriptions, continued from generation to ge- 
 " neration. They are perfectly consistent 
 " with the other parts of the Coronation Oath, 
 " in which he swears to maintain the laws of 
 " God, and the true profession of the Gospel, 
 " and to govern the people, according to the 
 " Statutes in Parliament agreed upon, and the 
 " laws and customs of the Realm. In con- 
 " senting to such a Statute, the Crown would act 
 " at least as agreeable to the Laws of God, &c. 
 " as George I. did, when he passed the Statute 
 " which took from the body of the people 
 
 and binding him, therefore, to consent to none which, in his 
 serious judgment, shall appear to hurt, or endanger, that 
 which he swears to maintain, to the utmost of his power, 
 namely, the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law.
 
 SIR H. LANGRISHE. 105 
 
 " every thing which, to that hour, and even 
 " after the monstrous Acts of the 2d and 8th of 
 " Anne, they still enjoyed inviolate." This ar- 
 gument, we may perceive, takes for granted 
 that the King is bound to withhold his consent 
 from Bills which would really endanger the safety 
 of the Church. Again, " There is no man on 
 " earth, I believe, more willing than I am to 
 " lay it down as a fundamental of the Consti- 
 " tution, that the Church of England should be 
 " united and even identified with it : but allowing 
 " this, I cannot allow that all laws of regula- 
 " tion* made from time to time, in support of 
 " that fundamental law, are, of course equally 
 "fundamental and equally unchangeable:" 
 " none of this species of secondary and subsidiary 
 " laws have been held fundamental." 
 
 It is apparent, therefore, that this high autho- 
 rity must be added to those of all public men, 
 whose sentiments on the subject are on record, 
 
 * If the Church of England be a. fundamental of the Constitu- 
 tion, the King is, of course, bound to preserve it, and to reject 
 all Bills, in his judgment, seriously endangering it. Mr. 
 Burke here virtually admits this ; but surely he carries his no- 
 tion respecting laws of regulation too far, when he says, " In 
 " the Coronation Engagements of the King, I do not find one 
 " word to preclude his Majesty from assenting to any arrange- 
 " ment which Parliament may make with regard to the civil 
 " privileges of any part of his subjects." p. 361.
 
 106 LORD KENYON. 
 
 up to the end of the last century ; they all re- 
 cognised the Coronation Oath as binding the 
 conscience of the Sovereign in all the acts of his 
 kingly office, above all, in the most important 
 of all, his acts as legislator. 
 
 But I do not wish to dissemble, that Mr. 
 Burke argued the point in a manner highly fa- 
 vourable to the views of the Roman Catholics. 
 To the particular object of which he was then 
 the advocate, I shall have occasion to refer here- 
 after. Meanwhile, I may be permitted to say, 
 (though I say it with unfeigned reluctance, and 
 with a profound sense of the value of that judg- 
 ment which, in this instance, I cannot but ques- 
 tion) that he argued on grounds which, in part, 
 appear untenable ; I mean, where he attempts 
 to show, that our ancestors, at the Revolution, 
 were not more eager to guard the Church of 
 England against the dangers of Popery, than 
 against those which arise from other modes of 
 dissent. That they laboured to guard the 
 Church against dangers from every quarter, no 
 man will question; but, after what we have 
 seen, it is surely too much to affirm, that Popery 
 was not the main object of their precautions. 
 " It cannot well pass observation," says Lord 
 Kenyon,* that the whole system of Laws, as to the 
 
 * Letters of his late Majesty, &c. p. 24.
 
 DR. MILKER'S CASE OF CONSCIENCE. 107 
 
 " purpose of the present inquiry, was to guard 
 " against the possible introduction of Popish influ- 
 " ence into any branch of the legislature. As 
 " far as respects the Sovereign, it is guarded by 
 " the Oath he takes ; and with respect to the 
 " Houses of Parliament, by the Declaration in 
 << 30 Car. II." 
 
 1 have thus endeavoured to show, both by 
 reasoning, and by authority, the utter futility of 
 the notion, that " the Coronation Oath applies 
 " to the conduct of the King in his executive ca- 
 " pacity only, not as a branch of the legisla- 
 " ture." But other grounds have been taken 
 for virtually evacuating this Oath, which I must 
 not pass unnoticed. 
 
 Dr. Milner's Case of Conscience. 
 
 Dr. Milner was, I believe, the first writer who 
 laboured in this holy undertaking. The larger 
 portion of his " Case of Conscience " is occu- 
 pied with an attempt to show that the Corona- 
 tion Oath never prevented our Princes from 
 making such alterations in the laws affecting 
 the Church as on the whole they thought fit, 
 (a matter with which our present argument is 
 not concerned j) in particular, " that. Charles I.
 
 108 DR. MILNER'S CASE OF CONSCIENCE. 
 
 " gave his consent to the Bill for excluding 
 " Bishops from sitting in Parliament, in order, 
 " as it appeared at the treaty of Uxbridge, to 
 " prevent their entire degradation : he afterwards, 
 " at a still more calamitous period, yielded to a 
 " greater curtailment of their power and dig- 
 " mty,for the purpose oj preserving the establish- 
 " mentfrom sinking into absolute Presbyterianism" 
 All this is perfectly true ; and in the necessity 
 for such concessions, sincerely and honestly be- 
 lieved by Charles to exist, and in that necessity 
 only, do we find the justification of the actions 
 which it caused. Whenever such a necessity 
 shall again occur, it will be for the King of 
 England first to satisfy himself of its existence, 
 and, if he be convinced that it really exists, to 
 follow the dictates of the highest species of pru- 
 dence, that master-virtue which balances con- 
 flicting duties, and decides which, in the colli- 
 sion, is to be preferred decides, however, not 
 according to the shifting appearance of tempo- 
 ral expediency, but according to the eternal 
 rules of truth and justice. Meanwhile, he will 
 not be very ready to give ear to those, who 
 either affirm or insinuate, that the necessity 
 is come, or likely to come. Come when it may, 
 it will, we may be sure, make its presence to be 
 seen and felt ; and even in its approach, it will
 
 CHARLES I. 109 
 
 " cast its shadow" long " before." The instance 
 of Charles, however, is happily chosen. It will 
 serve either as an example or as a warning: 
 As an example, should the Sovereign wish to fall 
 with dignity, and, in his fall, to avoid making 
 " shipwreck of a good conscience ;" as a warn- 
 ing, if he choose rather to preserve himself, and 
 all the high and sacred interests committed to 
 his charge, from falling at all.* 
 
 * The circumstances of the present day are not so wholly 
 dissimilar to some of the incidents ot that unhappy reign, as, 
 amidst the security of our own land, we may be disposed to take 
 for granted. From the opposite shore of St. George's Channel 
 a voice has of late been repeatedly heard, threatening the utter 
 destruction of the Church, unless the demands of what is called 
 Emancipation be complied with; and, even here, there are not 
 wanting those, who tell us that such compliance would disarm 
 the hostility, without stimulating the ambition, of the adversary. 
 Now let us look to the former most calamitous aera, and learn 
 from the experience of the spectators and the actors in that 
 mournful tragedy, what reliance may be placed on the policy of 
 timid and unjust concession. " The truth is," says Lord Cla- 
 rendon, " they who had made in their hearts the most destruc- 
 " live vows against the Church, never durst communicate their 
 " bloody wishes to their best friends, whose authority gave them 
 te their greatest credit." " The first design that was entertained 
 " against the Church, and which was received in the House of 
 " Commons with a visible countenance and approbation of 
 " many who were neither of the same principles nor purposes, 
 " was a short Bill that was brought in ' to take away the 
 " ' Bishops' votes in Parliament, and to leave them out in all
 
 110 DR. MILNER'S CASE OF CONSCIENCE. 
 
 I return to Dr. Milner. He does not confine 
 himself to historical argument, but, as the title 
 
 " ' commissions of the Peace, or that had relation to tem- 
 " poral affairs.' Many who were well-disposed to Episcopal 
 " Government were persuaded the passing that Bill would be 
 " no prejudice, so they prevailed with others, who heartily de- 
 " sired that there might be no such diminution of their honour 
 " and aiithority, by persuading them, that there was a great 
 " concurrence towards the passing this Bill," &c. " but that 
 " if this Bill were once passed, a greater number in both 
 " would be so well satisfied, that the violenter party would be 
 " never able to prosecute their designs. And this reason did 
 " prevail over many men of excellent judgment, and unques- 
 " tionable affections." When, some months afterwards, it 
 had passed both Houses, " Those of greatest trust about the 
 " King, and who were very faithful to his service, though in this 
 " particular exceedingly deceived in their judgments, and not 
 " sufficiently acquainted with the Constitution of the Kingdom, 
 " persuaded him that the passing of the Bill was the only way 
 " to preserve the Church ;" that " by the passing of it many 
 " persons in both Houses would be so fully satisfied, that they 
 " would join in no further alteration : but, on the other hand, 
 " if they were crossed in this, they would violently endeavour 
 " an extirpation of Bishops, and a demolishing of the whole 
 " fabric of the Church."* " The passing that Bill,'' such was 
 the reflection of this great statesman, " exceedingly weakened 
 " the King's party, not only as it swept away so considerable a 
 " number out of the House of Peers, which were constantly de- 
 " voted to him, but as it made an impression on others, whose 
 <f minds were in suspense, as when foundations are shaken." 
 They " never after retained any confidence that he would deny 
 
 * Clarendon, TO!, i. p. 333.
 
 DR. MILNER'S CASE OF CONSCIENCE. Ill 
 
 of his Tract prepares us to expect, favours us 
 with some reasoning as a casuistical divine. It 
 will not be uninteresting to see a specimen of 
 Roman Catholic casuistry on this subject. " In 
 " the first place," says he,| " it is evident, that 
 " a promissory oath, which at a certain period 
 " was good and valid, may cease to be obliga- 
 " tory by some material change in circumstances, 
 " either with respect to the object itself, or to 
 " any of the parties concerned in it ; so that, 
 " for example, a measure which was originally 
 " wise, and beneficial, and desirable, becomes 
 " the reverse of all this." 
 
 Dr. Milner here is guilty of a most unphiloso- 
 phical, but very convenient, inaccuracy of ex- 
 pression. In common parlance, a material 
 " change in circumstances " is equivalent to an 
 important change in circumstances ; but the 
 
 " what was importunately asked ; and so, either absolutely 
 " withdrew themselves from those consultations, thereby avoid- 
 " ing the envy, and the danger of opposing them, or quietly 
 " suffered themselves to be carried by the stream, and to consent 
 " to any thing that was boldly and lustily attempted. And then, 
 " it was so far from dividing the other party, that I do not re- 
 " member one man, who vehemently insisted on, or indeed 
 " heartily wished the passing of that Bill, that ever de- 
 " serted them till the kingdom was in a jlame." Dii omen 
 avertant ! 
 f P. 27.
 
 112 DR. MILNER'S CASE OF CONSCIENCE. 
 
 " material change," which Jurists intend, as a 
 ground for evacuating the obligation of a lawful 
 oath, is a change in the matter not in the cir- 
 cumstances. However, let us take Dr. Milner 
 in his own way. " Has there been no material 
 " change in the situation of the Church as 
 " well of the State since this oath was last 
 " taken, forty years ago ? * Was it foreseen at 
 " that time that Ireland, from being a depen- 
 " dency on Great Britain, would be associated 
 " in legislative union with it, &c. ? Was the 
 " French Revolution expected in those days ? 
 " In one word, is it from the side of Popery, or 
 " from the opposite quarter of Jacobinism that 
 " the Established Church is most in danger at 
 " the present day? If this question be an- 
 " swered in the manner in which it must be an- 
 " swered, then I apprehend the very obligation 
 " of maintaining this Church to the utmost of the 
 " Sovereigns power requires a different line of 
 " conduct and politics from that which was 
 " pursued at his Majesty's accession to the 
 " crown." 
 
 It is possible that this may be so ; and we 
 only ask that Dr. Milner and others will allow 
 his Majesty to decide for himself, and according 
 to his own conscience, what is the line of con- 
 
 *Dr. Milner wrote this Tract in 1801.
 
 DR. MILNER'S CASE OF CONSCIENCE. 113 
 
 duct, which the obligation of his oath, being 
 equally valid as at the first, does now require. 
 But Dr. Milner undertook, and his argument 
 required him, to show, when an oath, originally 
 valid, becomes invalid; and he ends with ad- 
 mitting of the oath in question, that it is as valid 
 as ever ! 
 
 But he goes further he gives an illustration, 
 a most fearful, though, I am very ready to 
 admit, a most apposite illustration. " Suppose 
 " you had thought proper to exact an oath from 
 " your head steward, the purport of which was, 
 " that he would watch over and preserve every 
 " part of your property to the utmost of his 
 " power ; and that sometime afterwards, in 
 " your absence, a lawless mob, or a crew of 
 " pirates, had made a certain requisition of 
 " corn or cattle at his hands, to be complied 
 " with, under the threat of burning down your 
 " house, and despoiling your whole property, 
 " would you hold him bound by the letter of 
 " his oath, in such new and unforeseen circum- 
 " stances? Would you not expect from his 
 " sense and integrity, that he should rather 
 " attend to, and be guided by, the spirit of it?" 
 
 Most reasonable men would expect a person 
 to be bound by the spirit of his oath, rather 
 than by the letter, under all circumstances. In 
 
 i
 
 114 DR. MILNER'S CASE OF CONSCIENCE. 
 
 the supposed case, the steward must certainly 
 comply with the requisition. But in the case 
 which is really in question, matters, happily, 
 have not yet gone so far. True, there is " a law- 
 less mob," a " crew of pirates," who tell us very 
 plainly what they wish, and hope to do. But 
 they have not yet got the means of doing it ; 
 and our steward has sense enough to see, and 
 honesty enough to feel, that he is bound by his 
 oath, not only not to supply the pirates with 
 ships, and the mob with arms, but to take care 
 to barricade our storehouse, and require all that 
 are under him to stand to its defence. If these 
 should be either such fools, or rogues, or cow- 
 ards, as to neglect their duty, and counsel him 
 to yield to the requisition, while he has the 
 means to resist it; he will not hesitate to send 
 them about their business, and take some honest 
 sound-hearted fellows in their places. 
 
 But Dr. Milner favours us with some other 
 cases, of evacuating a valid promissory oath, by 
 the remission of the party in whose favour it was 
 made, or by the commutation of the matter of it 
 into something else, with that party's consent ; 
 or, lastly, by the abrogation of it by those who 
 have proper authority, for this purpose, over 
 the parties, or over the subject matter of the 
 oath.
 
 DR. MILNER'S CASE OF CONSCIENCE. 115 
 
 Of the remission, or commutation, I shall 
 have better opportunity of speaking presently, 
 when I address myself to Mr. Charles Butler. 
 On the abrogation Dr. Milner has said certain 
 things, which require a few words to be spoken 
 to himself. 
 
 He is pleased to consider the Parliament, as 
 having competent authority both over the Oath 
 itself, and over the subject matter of it, the 
 Church of England, to enable it to abrogate the 
 Oath. " That such an authority exists in Par- 
 " liament," says he, " in both these particulars, 
 " it would be treason to deny !" Then I am 
 guilty of that treason, for I scruple not to deny 
 both. 
 
 By Parliament, I suppose Dr. Milner means 
 the King in Parliament; for, without the King, 
 the Parliament has no authority, rather, it 
 has no existence whatever. But taking it as 
 the King in Parliament ; I venture to affirm, 
 that his Majesty has no more right (his Majesty 
 himself has nobly proclaimed the same truth,) 
 to abrogate the obligation of the Oath he has 
 taken, than the meanest of his subjects has to 
 absolve himself from the Oath of Allegiance. 
 
 The reason, which Dr. Milner gives for his 
 position, is the following : " The present 
 " Coronation Oath owes its authority and its 
 
 i 2
 
 116 MR. CHARLES BUTLER'S LETTER 
 
 " very existence to Parliament." " The same," 
 he adds, " must be said of the Church itself, in 
 " whose favour this Oath was devised ;" A 
 sneer too contemptible to merit refutation, or 
 any further notice. 
 
 Mr. Charles Butlers Letter on the Coronation 
 Oath. 
 
 I turn to Mr. Charles Butler's " Letter on 
 the Coronation Oath," of which, it seems, the 
 late publication of King George the Third's 
 Correspondence has induced him to put forth a 
 new edition. He has my hearty wishes that 
 the sale of it may induce him to put forth many 
 more editions : for it is most desirable, that it 
 should be generally known, how very slender a 
 case even the learning and acuteness of Mr. 
 Butler are able to produce on this occasion. I 
 will take his arguments in their order. 
 
 1. My readers will not be surprised to find, 
 that this gentlemen is too sound and constitu- 
 tional a lawyer, and too prudent a man, to give 
 any countenance to Mr. Jeffrey's silly hypo- 
 thesis ; he says not one word about the Oath 
 " affecting his Majesty in his executive capa- 
 " city only." On the contrary, he sets out with 
 an argument drawn from 25 Edw. III. st. 6. 
 which declares the King to be affected by the
 
 ON THE CORONATION OATH. 117 
 
 Coronation Oath as legislator; "The right of 
 " the Crown of England and the law of the 
 " realm, is such, that, upon the mischiefs and 
 " damages which happen to this realm, the 
 " King ought, and is bound by his Oath, with the 
 " concord of the people in Parliament, to make 
 " remedy and law.' 1 
 
 Having already treated this matter, I shall 
 content myself with referring to what has been 
 said above.* 
 
 2. " No prospective act of the legislature can 
 " discharge the King from the paramount duty 
 " thus imposed upon him, of giving his assent 
 " to a Bill presented to him by the two Houses 
 " of Parliament, which he himself approves of 
 " and deems salutary." 
 
 Suppose a King should arise, who " approves 
 of and deems salutary" the changing the limited 
 monarchy of England into an unlimited and ar- 
 bitrary despotism ; suppose, too, that a corrupt 
 Parliament should be prevailed with to go still 
 further than the Parliament of Henry VIII. ac- 
 tually went, and should pass a Bill making the 
 proclamations of the Crown to be, in all cases, 
 equivalent to statutes; does Mr. Butler think 
 that the King would not be bound by his 
 Coronation Oath, to withhold his assent from 
 
 * Vide supra, p. 94.
 
 118 MR. CHARLES BUTLER'S LETTER 
 
 such a Bill ? Ought it to avail absolutely 
 nothing in such a case, that the sovereign had 
 sworn to " govern the people of this kingdom 
 " according to the laws and customs of the same ?" 
 Mr. Butler will not hazard so rash an assertion. 
 He will, I am sure, see on reflection, that the 
 Coronation Oath protects us, in the particulars 
 therein provided for, not only from the wilful 
 encroachments of an unprincipled tyrant, (with 
 whom, indeed, such a bond would be good for 
 little,) but also against the honest but mistaken 
 views of any well-meaning prince, who might 
 fancy it very " salutary" to make his own will 
 the law of the land. The plain truth is, that 
 the Constitution has, by the Royal Oath, which 
 in substance is as old as the Constitution itself, 
 assisted, as well as limited, the discretion of 
 the King, in determining what is salutary to the 
 State. 
 
 But Blackstone says something " of the 
 " omnipotence of Parliament ;" of its uncon- 
 trollable power " in making, restraining, abro- 
 " gating, and repealing laws concerning mat- 
 " ters of all possible denomination, ecclesias- 
 " tical or temporal." He avers most explicitly, 
 that " Parliament can alter the established 
 " religion of the land." 
 
 It is very true, that Blackstone says all this ;
 
 ON THE CORONATION OATH. 119 
 
 and I will tell Mr. Butler something else that 
 he says : " In order to prevent the mischiefs that 
 " might arise by placing this extensive authority in 
 " hands that are either incapable, or else im- 
 " proper, to manage it, it is provided, that no 
 " one shall sit or vote in either House, unless 
 " he be twenty-one years of age." So much 
 for ' incapable ;' now for ' improper.' " It is also 
 " enacted, by 30 Car. II. st. 2, and 1 Geo. I. 
 " c. 13, that no member shall vote or sit in 
 " either House, till he hath, in the presence of 
 " the House, taken the Oaths of Allegiance, 
 " Supremacy, and Abjuration, and subscribed and 
 " repeated the Declaration against transubstantia- 
 " tion, and invocation of Saints, and the Sacrifice 
 " of the Mass" 
 
 So much for the power of Parliament. Be- 
 cause it is " uncontrollable," the Constitution 
 has taken the security of a sworn Declaration 
 against Popery, to keep it out of " improper 
 " hands." It has further imposed the Corona- 
 tion Oath, as an additional security for the ex- 
 ercise of the King's share in the same power. 
 
 But Mr. Butler moreover shows, that, ac- 
 cording to " the ancient Constitution of Eng- 
 " land, the king could not bind his successors 
 " against the Liberty of the Crown" This also- 
 is perfectly true, and it is no less true, as has
 
 120 MR. CHARLES BUTLER'S LETTER 
 
 been shown already, usque ad nauseam, that 
 " the Liberty of the Crown" never exempted 
 him, who wore it, from the duty of preserving 
 the Church of England. 
 
 To Mr. Butler's observations on the historical 
 circumstances at the Revolution, and on the 
 language of some of the speakers in the second 
 debate on the Bill establishing the Oath, I 
 have nothing to answer, beyond a reference to 
 what has been said above.* 
 
 3. He next " considers the language of the 
 " Coronation Oath." But to his remarks on 
 this subject, I shall only say, that whether 
 " the laws now solicited to be repealed, will 
 " not," either by direct operation, or by just 
 and necessary consequence, " interfere with 
 " the legal establishment of the Church, with 
 " its hierarchy," &c. or whether there be not a 
 fair and reasonable ground of apprehension 
 that such repeal would endanger the same, 
 is a question not to be decided by the dictum 
 of Mr. Butler, but by the conscientious and 
 deliberate conviction of the Sovereign who has 
 taken the Oath. 
 
 4. Mr. Butler's fourth, and apparently most 
 triumphant ground, is as follows : " In every 
 " case where one person takes an Oath to 
 
 * Vide Supra, p. 100105.
 
 ON THE CORONATION OATH. 121 
 
 " another, the person to whom, or in whose fa- 
 " vour, the Oath has been taken, may, at his 
 "pleasure, release, either wholly or partially, 
 " the person taking the Oath, from all the ob- 
 " ligations to which he bound himself by it." 
 
 This is, I suspect, Mr. Butler's favourite 
 point, though it is not so entirely his own, as 
 some of the others. Dr. Milner, in his " Case 
 " of Conscience," has urged it; so has Mr. 
 Dillon, in his " Essay." This latter gentleman, 
 indeed, has been pleased to say, that it " must 
 " be admitted as decisive, and preclude the 
 " possibility of doubt on the subject." 
 
 As I always wish to do justice to the argu- 
 ment, which I am answering, I will give Mr. 
 Butler's, on the present occasion, in its full 
 strength, which is, in truth, purely typogra- 
 phical. 
 
 " THE CORONATION OATH is MADE TO THE 
 " PEOPLE, AS REPRESENTED BY PARLIAMENT." 
 
 After the reader has recovered from the 
 effect which these imposing Roman Capitals 
 must have produced on his vision, both corpo- 
 real and mental, he will perceive, that the pro- 
 position, conveyed by them, is one of the most 
 unsound and inaccurate, that ever fell from the 
 learned author's pen ; that if trusted to Ruby, 
 Minion, Nonpareil, or Pica itself, it could not
 
 122 MR. CHARLES BUTLER'S LETTER 
 
 stand for a single instant. In the first place, 
 the Coronation Oath is not made " to the 
 People" only, which, however, would be ab- 
 solutely necessary, to make Mr. Butler's argu- 
 ment worth anything, and, secondly, it is not 
 made " to the People, as represented by Parlia- 
 " ment," at all. 
 
 1 . It is not made to the People only. There 
 is one party in this most solemn transaction, of 
 whom, I am sure, Mr. Butler has not inten- 
 tionally lost sight. He "by whom kings 
 " reign," the " King of Kings," is not merely 
 invoked as a Witness, but Himself receives 
 from his anointed servant, under circumstances 
 of the most awful kind, at his Holy Table, a 
 promise ratified by an Oath, and immediately 
 followed (as our late good King* feelingly states 
 it,) by the Sacrament of our Blessed Lord's 
 body and blood, a promise, that he will never 
 be unmindful of the Almighty hand by which his 
 Crown is given, but that he will, to the utmost 
 of his power, maintain the laws of God, the 
 true profession of the Gospel, and the Pro- 
 testant Reformed Religion established by law. 
 Where is the mortal Legislature that shall dare 
 to abrogate this solemn vow ? 
 
 * Letters from his late Majesty, p. 37.
 
 ON THE CORONATION OATH. 123 
 
 But neither is this all. The Oath is, in part, 
 taken not only in favour of, but also to, another 
 human party, besides the people at large: the 
 Bishops and Clergy of the Church of England. 
 These have an interest in the last clause of the 
 Oath, which, whatever be the power of Parlia- 
 ment, it is certainly not within its moral com- 
 petence to surrender. Nevertheless, it is, on 
 this account, I imagine, that Mr. Butler's Ro- 
 man Capitals exhibit the very curious state- 
 ment, that the Coronation Oath is taken to the 
 people, as represented by Parliament. 
 
 Now, as a matter of fact, it will be recol- 
 lected, that Parliament has nothing what- 
 ever to do with his Majesty's Coronation. 
 There is, in truth, no reason for the cere- 
 mony being performed during the sitting, or 
 even the existence, of Parliament; and it has, 
 I believe, of late, commonly taken place dur- 
 ing the prorogation. The Peers bear part in 
 it, not as Lords of Parliament, but as Peers of 
 the Realm : the House of Commons does not 
 bear part in it at all. Even at William's Coro- 
 nation, which took place during the Session of 
 Parliament, and only two days after the pre- 
 sent Oath was established, the lower House was 
 expressly excluded. " It is remarkable," says 
 Ralph, " that the Commons, who had given
 
 124 MR. CHARLES BUTLER'S LETTER 
 
 " his Majesty the Crown, were not permitted 
 " to assist in putting it on ;"* and the Speaker 
 acquainted the House, " That his Majesty had 
 " been pleased to direct him to give notice to 
 " them, that he had appointed a gallery for 
 " their reception in the Abbey, and another in 
 " Westminster Hall, and a dinner to be pro- 
 " vided in the Exchequer Chamber; but that 
 " his Majesty did not think it altogether conve- 
 " nient for the House to bear any part in the 
 " proceeding'^ 
 
 The Bishops have, on the other hand, al- 
 ways borne an important part in the solemn 
 ceremonies of that day. Not only must 
 the King be crowned by an Archbishop, or 
 Bishop, who administers the Oath to him, but 
 an important clause of the Oath has always 
 been taken especially to them. In the form 
 which prevailed till the Revolution, this, as has 
 been already seen, was most distinctly done : J 
 
 * Hist. Eng. vol. ii. p. 71. 
 
 t Journals H. C., 5 April, 1689. The next day a Com- 
 mittee was appointed " to examine how the Members of the 
 " House may, with the most convenience, see their Majesties' 
 " Coronation." 
 
 J Then one of the Bishops reads this admonition to the 
 King, before the people, with a loud voice. " Our Lord and 
 " King, we beseech you to pardon, and to grant unto us, and
 
 ON THE CORONATION OATH. 125 
 
 and the clause, which succeeded to it in the 
 new form, is of equivalent force." Archbishop 
 " or Bishop. Will you preserve unto the Bishops 
 " and Clergy of this realm, and to the Churches 
 " committed to their charge, all such rights 
 " and privileges as by law do or shall appertain 
 " unto them, or any of them IKing. All this 
 " I promise to do." 
 
 It appears, therefore, not only that it is not 
 to the people, as represented by Parliament, that 
 the Oath is taken, but that a part of it is not 
 taken to the people at all. 
 
 There is, indeed, an argument often brought 
 forwards, which, if sound, would fully meet the 
 difficulty. It is said, that, all the estates of the 
 realm being represented in Parliament, what- 
 ever is done by Parliament must be taken as 
 done freely by all. So far as to give to an Act 
 of Parliament the full assent of the general will 
 of the people, this cannot be questioned; but 
 whenever the nature of the case requires the 
 particular assent of individuals, or of bodies of 
 
 " to the Churches committed to our charge," &c. And the 
 King answereth, " With a willing and devout heart I promise, 
 " &c. and that I will preserve and maintain to you, &c. and 
 " that I will be your protector and defender, to my power, by 
 " the assistance of God, as every good King in his kingdom 
 " ought to protect and defend the Bishops, and the Churches 
 " under their government."
 
 126 PARLIAMENT CANNOT ABSOLVE THE KING 
 
 men, then that particular assent must be ob- 
 tained, if not to make the act legal, at least to 
 make it what it professes to be, the voluntary 
 act of such individual, or bodies of men. 
 
 If the doctrine of virtual representation is to 
 hold in such cases, the consequences will be 
 most absurd, as well as most iniquitous. For 
 instance, if a person petitions against a rail- 
 road, or enclosure, bill, and the bill passes in 
 spite of him, he may be told that he has no right 
 to complain, for he himself consented to it, by 
 Parliament, which represents the will and power 
 of all the estates of the realm. An act of at- 
 tainder, in the same way, may be said to have 
 the consent of the party punished by it. Nay, 
 to bring the matter closer to our present sub- 
 ject, if this doctrine be true, the Roman Catho- 
 lics throughout the empire, especially those of 
 Ireland, have no grievance whatever to com- 
 plain of; for they have themselves freely con- 
 sented, and they continue to consent, to the 
 existing state of the law, by that Parliament 
 which represents them, as well as every other 
 class and description of his Majesty's subjects. 
 
 What, then, it may be asked, is the question 
 of concession to the Roman Catholics to de- 
 pend, after all, on the consent of the Bishops 
 and Clergy ? Most certainly not : nothing so
 
 FROM THE CORONATION OATH. 127 
 
 extravagant was ever contemplated. All that 
 is contended for is this, that the King being 
 bound by his Coronation Oath to the Bishops 
 and Clergy to preserve their rights and privi- 
 leges, the two Houses of Parliament cannot 
 absolve his Majesty from that obligation; on 
 the other hand, whenever those rights and pri- 
 vileges are affected or endangered, the Bishops 
 and Clergy have no right to prescribe to his 
 Majesty what particular course he ought to 
 pursue, but the decision must be left to his own 
 conscience, under the awful sanction of the 
 Oath which he has taken. 
 
 To sum up the whole, the King has sworn in 
 his Coronation Oath to Almighty God, that "he 
 " will, to the utmost of his power, maintain the 
 " Protestant reformed religion established by 
 " law." From this Oath no earthly power can 
 absolve him. He has also sworn to the Bishops 
 and Clergy, that " he will preserve to them and 
 " to the Churches committed to their charge, all 
 " such rights and privileges as by law do or 
 " shall appertain to them, or any of them." 
 From this Oath it is not in the power of Parlia- 
 ment to absolve him. 
 
 I have felt it necessary to state this matter 
 more largely than it may seem to require, be- 
 cause, by means of it, frequent attempts have
 
 128 PARLIAMENT CANNOT ABSOLVE THE KING 
 
 of late been made to get rid altogether of the 
 obstacle which this Oath presents to the schemes 
 of our modem innovators. Dr. Milner has sug- 
 gested a Bill to be presented by the two Houses 
 of Parliament to his Majesty, " declaring, in 
 " the name of his subjects, that they no longer 
 " hold him bound to the obligations of the 
 " Oath, which they had formerly exacted of 
 " him ; on the other hand, the King, by pass- 
 " ing such an act, would declare that he ac- 
 " cepted of this remission of his obligation."* 
 Such is the mode of discharging the Royal 
 conscience which the late Roman Catholic 
 Bishop of the midland district was so consider- 
 ate as to devise. A learned Layman of that 
 communion, Mr. Dillon, seems to prefer pro- 
 ceeding in a somewhat different way. " Why," 
 says he, " should not both Houses of Parlia- 
 " ment, the constitutional organs of the public 
 " voice, pass a resolution upon the subject cal- 
 " culated to remove at any period all scruples 
 " in the Royal mind upon a point of such im- 
 " portance to the tranquillity and prosperity of 
 " the empire?" Or, if it be determined to pro- 
 ceed by Bill, he would rather " that the three 
 " estates of the realm in Parliament assembled 
 
 * Case of Conscience, p. 76.
 
 FROM HIS CORONATION OATH. 129 
 
 " shall present a Bill to his Majesty, praying 
 " that the disabilities to which the Catholics 
 " are liable may be removed ; " to such a Bill, 
 he adds, " surely his Majesty may grant his 
 " royal sanction, since the very form of the Bill 
 " expressly states, that the measure is proposed 
 " with the advice and consent of his subjects." 
 Mr. C. Butler would approve any one of these 
 methods ; for, as he affirms, (with all the force 
 that uncial letters can give,) that " the Coro- 
 " nation Oath is made to the people, as repre- 
 " sented by Parliament," he very consistently 
 argues, that the people, represented by Parlia- 
 ment, being the persons, and the only persons, 
 entitled to the benefit of the Oath, have full power 
 and authority to release the Monarch who took 
 the Oath, and all his successors, from its obli- 
 gations. 
 
 These are the ingenious devices of Roman 
 Catholic casuists, clerical and lay. Our Pro- 
 testant lawyer, Mr. Jeffrey, proves his admirable 
 fitness for the office of " Keeper of the King's 
 " Conscience," by a much more effectual expe- 
 dient, by a bit of special pleading, which he may 
 safely challenge any one of his English brethren 
 in Westminster Hall, or at the Old Bailey, to 
 equal. " The thing promised," says he, " is, 
 *' to support the religion established by LAW, 
 
 K
 
 130 PARLIAMENT CANNOT ABSOLVE THE KING 
 
 " the rights and privileges promised to be pre- 
 " served are those which ' are, or shall' be 
 " given to the Church ' by law'"* It follows,- 
 that all the King is bound to do, in order to 
 satisfy at once the obligations of this Oath, and 
 the demands of any of the enemies of the Church 
 who may chance for a time to get a majority in 
 Parliament, is, to attack the Church by law, to 
 take away by law its rights, privileges, and 
 establishment, and then the very subject matter 
 of the Oath is removed, and the King may join 
 in overturning the Church with a safe con- 
 science. 
 
 Such is the crowning achievement of modern 
 liberality, as applied to the Royal Oath : it will, 
 doubtless, in due time, be equally successful in 
 accommodating the duty of subjects, and the 
 " Oath of Allegiance," to its plans for the im- 
 provement of the social system. Meanwhile, 
 lam old-fashioned enough to remind my readers, 
 that Oaths have been wont to be considered 
 pre-eminently, as stricti juris, as admitting no 
 laxity of interpretation, no sense to be put upon 
 them, which a pious and prudent mind would 
 not easily, and at first sight, deduce from the 
 words in which they are conceived : again, that 
 
 * Edinburgh Review, No. 91, p. 169.
 
 FROM HIS CORONATION OATH. 131 
 
 singleness and simplicity of purpose are pecu- 
 liarly demanded by this sacred obligation. 
 Jur amentum ante omnia decet simplicltas. Such 
 are the feelings, which every sound moralist 
 enjoins, such too are the feelings, we are proud 
 and thankful to acknowledge, with which our 
 present most gracious Sovereign regards his 
 oath, " I will, to the utmost of my power, main- 
 " tain the Protestant Reformed Religion esta- 
 " blished by law :" and Mr. Jeffrey, and all 
 his band, may wear their pens to the very 
 stump, before they move Him from the ada- 
 mantine rock on which his righteous purpose 
 is fixed. 
 
 5. To return to Mr. Butler : his next argu- 
 ment is derived from " the conduct of his Ma- 
 " jesty's august predecessors, which incontro- 
 " vertibly shows, that they, the Parliament, 
 " and the nation, have uniformly construed the 
 " Coronation Oath in the sense which" Mr. 
 Butler " suggests." 
 
 Of the conduct of our sovereigns, before the 
 Revolution,* I have already said all that is ne- 
 cessary. Of King William III. he states two 
 things; first, that immediately after he had 
 
 * Mr. Butler will allow me to remind him, that he is under 
 a grievous error in stating that Edward VI. had sworn to sup- 
 port the (Roman) Catholic Religion. 
 
 K2
 
 132 PARLIAMENT CANNOT ABSOLVE THE KING 
 
 taken the Coronation Oath he assented to the 
 Bill, which (in accommodation to the conscien- 
 tious scruples of certain Protestant Dissenters) 
 altered the Oath of Supremacy from an " affir- 
 " mation of the King's ecclesiastical supremacy 
 " in this realm to a negative assertion that this 
 " supremacy is not possessed by any foreign 
 " power." " Now this," says Mr. Butler, " was 
 " a breach of the Coronation Oath, unless our 
 " interpretation of it be admitted," namely, that 
 " the consent of Parliament frees the monarch 
 " from the obligation." 
 
 In order to undeceive Mr. Butler on this 
 
 point, I will give him the words of William 
 
 himself, in answer to an address from the House 
 
 of Commons, on the very next day after the 
 
 House had gone into a Committee on the Lords' 
 
 amendment to that Bill, " Though I have had 
 
 " many occasions of assuring yon. that I will 
 
 " maintain the Church of England as by law 
 
 " established, yet I am well pleased with every 
 
 " opportunity of repeating those promises, 
 
 " which I am resolved to perform :" " it is a 
 
 " great satisfaction to me, that, by the success 
 
 " God has given me, I am in a station of de- 
 
 " fending this Church, which has effectually 
 
 " shown her zeal against Popery, and shall 
 
 " always be my peculiar care : and I do hope that
 
 FROM HIS CORONATION OATH. 133 
 
 " the ease you design to Dissenters will contribute 
 " very much to the establishment of this Church''* 
 It appears, therefore, that William passed this 
 Bill, not because " the consent of Parliament 
 " freed him, in this instance, from the obliga- 
 " tion" of his Oath, to preserve, to the utmost 
 of his power, the Protestant Reformed Religion, 
 established by law, but because, by passing it, 
 he believed himself to bring new strength and 
 security to the Church. The same remark ap- 
 plies to the argument drawn by others from 
 William's assent to the Toleration Act. 
 
 After all, however, can it have escaped Mr. 
 Butler's recollection, that this alteration of the 
 Oath of Supremacy really preceded the esta- 
 blishment of the Coronation Oath, that it was 
 part of the Declaration of Rights nay, that it 
 had been already enacted, in the case of Mem- 
 bers of both Houses of Parliament, by the 1st 
 W. &M. c. 1.? 
 
 But he has another important instance to his 
 purpose in the conduct of William. " The 
 " same Monarch took an Oath to maintain the 
 " Church of Scotland, which was at that time 
 " Episcopalian; but he soon afterwards made 
 
 * Journals of the House of Commons, 20th April, 1 689.
 
 J34 MR. C. BUTLERS LETTER 
 
 " a new settlement of the Scottish Church in 
 " the Presbyterian form." 
 
 Mr. Butler must here permit me to express 
 my regret, as well as astonishment, that he 
 should, however unintentionally, have allowed 
 any work, bearing his very honourable name, 
 to be the medium of conveying this foul and 
 unfounded charge on one of the most conscien- 
 tious sovereigns that ever sat on the English 
 throne. A very little inquiry, and surely it 
 was his duty to have made much inquiry, be- 
 fore he hazarded such an assertion, but, a very 
 little inquiry would have been sufficient to in- 
 form him, that the fact was directly contrary to 
 his assertion. " A convention of states," says 
 Burnet,* " was summoned in Scotland, as in 
 " England." " On the llth of April (1689), 
 " they declared William and Mary King and 
 " Queen of Scotland. But with this, as they 
 " ordered the Coronation Oath* to be tendered to 
 
 * Hist, own Times, ii. 2123. 
 
 *T This Coronation Oath itself is extant in Parl. Hist. vol. ii. 
 p. 259 (Lond. 1742.)" We, William and Mary, &c. faithfully 
 " promise and swear, &c. that we, according to the same Holy 
 " Word, shall maintain the true Religion of Christ Jesus, the 
 " preaching of his Holy Word, and the due and right minis- 
 " tration of the Sacraments, now received and preached within
 
 ON THE CORONATION OATH. 135 
 
 " them, so they drew up a claim of Rights, 
 " which, they pretended, were the funda- 
 " mental and unalterable laws of the kingdom. 
 " By one of these it was declared, that the 
 " Reformation in Scotland having been begun 
 " by a parity among the clergy, all Prelacy in 
 " that Church was a great and insupportable 
 " grievance to that kingdom." Burnet proceeds 
 to show how this was brought about (by " the 
 " bishops, and those who adhered to them, 
 " having left the convention,") and thus con- 
 cludes, " upon this, the abolishing Episcopacy in 
 " Scot land was made a necessary article of the new 
 " settlement." 
 
 Happily, Mr. Butler is not always thus in- 
 accurate. He says, truly, of King George the 
 Third, that he gave his sanction to divers Acts 
 of Parliament, relieving his Roman Catholic 
 subjects in England, Scotland, and Ireland, 
 from " more than three-fourths" of all their al- 
 leged grievances. But Mr. B. argues most in- 
 consequentially, that his Majesty's conduct in 
 so doing was inconsistent with his construction 
 of the Coronation Oath. As I have already 
 
 <f the Realm of Scotland ;" " and shall procure, to the ut- 
 " most of our power, to the Kirk of God, and whole Christian 
 " people, true and perfect peace in all time coming," &c.
 
 136 NO PLEDGE OF CONCESSION TO R. CATHOLICS 
 
 spoken to this point, in what I have said to 
 Mr. Jeffrey,* I will not here recur to it. 
 
 7. His seventh averment is " That the claim 
 " of Ireland to the relief solicited is peculiarly 
 " strong," from the expectations held out at 
 the Union, first by the particular statesman who 
 carried that measure into execution, and, se- 
 condly, by certain words in the Act of Union 
 itself. 
 
 Mr. Butler begins with citing the following 
 words of Mr. Pitt, when he proposed the 
 Articles of Union to the House of Commons : 
 " No man can say, that, in the present state 
 " of things, and while Ireland continues a se- 
 " parate kingdom, full concessions can be 
 " made to the Catholics, without endangering 
 " the State, and shaking the Constitution to 
 " the centre." Reader, gentle Reader, this is 
 all the evidence of Mr. Pitt's engagements to 
 the Roman Catholics of Ireland, which Mr. 
 Charles Butler the able and indefatigable, the 
 zealous and devoted advocate of the Roman 
 Catholic cause during the last forty years has 
 been able to discover in all the speeches which 
 Mr. Pitt ever delivered! But on this small 
 scrap, he is pleased to rear the following mag- 
 
 * Vide supra, p. 60,
 
 GIVEN AT THE UNION. 137 
 
 nificent demand. " Is not this saying, that, 
 " after the Union should have taken place, full 
 " concessions might be made to Ireland without 
 " danger?" 
 
 " The Member, who proposed the Union, 
 " expressed himself," it seems, " in similar 
 " terms" to those of Mr. Pitt; but Mr. Elliot, 
 who " might be supposed to have some official 
 " knowledge" on the subject, says something 
 much more to the purpose. " It is true, in- 
 " deed, that no bond was given to the Ca- 
 " tholics on that point; but there were cer- 
 " tainly expectations, and something like pro- 
 " mises held out to them, which, in my mind, ought 
 " to be more binding than a bond" How, in such 
 a case, something like promises, given by those 
 who had no right to bind any but themselves, 
 should be more binding on others, than actual 
 promises, or than a bond, is past my compre- 
 hension. That those who gave these " some- 
 " thing like promises," ever flew from their en- 
 gagement, is not even pretended. To be sure, 
 a Right Honourable Gentleman did last year 
 give notice of a motion in the House of Com- 
 mons for the purpose of enabling him to state 
 what had fallen under his own knowledge of 
 promises and pledges, given to the Roman Ca- 
 tholics, at the Union. But as that Right Ho-
 
 138 NO PLEDGE OF CONCESSION TO R. CATHOLICS 
 
 nourable Gentleman did not think fit to avail 
 himself of his own notice, but chose rather to 
 serve his countrymen, both Roman Catholic 
 and Protestant, in the more pressing business 
 of his Majesty's Treasury his testimony cannot 
 be added to that which has been already cited. 
 Perhaps, on some future occasion, when released 
 from the burthen of Treasury business, he may 
 be more communicative. Meanwhile, I will 
 give two or three trifling pieces of evidence on 
 the other side. 
 
 On the 13th of May, 1805, Mr. Fox, speaking 
 directly to this very point, said as follows : " I 
 " have been told, that at the time of the Union, 
 " no distinct promise of redress was made to the 
 " Roman Catholics, and / believe it. No mi- 
 " nister could promise that which depended 
 " upon the determination of Parliament. The 
 " Right Honourable Gentleman opposite could 
 " have done nothing more than promise to recom- 
 " mend their claims"* 
 
 Mr. Pitt himself thus observed on these 
 words of Mr. Fox, in the adjourned debate, on 
 the following night " I felt, that in no pos- 
 " sible case, previous to the Union, could the 
 " privileges now demanded be given, consis- 
 
 * Hansard's Debates, vol. iv. p. 849.
 
 GIVEN AT THE UNION. 139 
 
 " tently, with a due regard to the Protestant 
 " interest in Ireland, to the internal tran- 
 " quillity of that kingdom, the frame and 
 " structure of our Constitution, or the proba- 
 " bility of the permanent connexion of Ireland 
 " with this country. It is true, Sir, that, after 
 " the Union, I saw the subject in a very different 
 " light ; but, whilst that event was in contem- 
 " plation, I did state, as the Honourable Gen- 
 " tleman says, that the measure would make a 
 " material difference in my opinion ; but he 
 " has also stated, what is very true, that / did 
 " not make a distinct pledge. On the contrary, I 
 " believe the line of argument I took was, that 
 " if it should be thought right to give what the 
 " (Roman) Catholics required, it might be 
 " given after the Union with more safety to 
 " the empire; or, if it were thought proper to 
 " refuse giving it, that it then might be refused, 
 " without producing those disastrous conse- 
 " quences, which might have been apprehended 
 " before the Union."* 
 
 On the 25th of May, 1810, Lord Castlereagh 
 (who, I need not say, was the minister more 
 particularly engaged in all the details of the 
 Union in Ireland,) adverted, in his place in the 
 
 *Id. p, 1015.
 
 140 NO PLEDGE OF CONCESSION TO R. CATHOLICS 
 
 House of Commons, to " the insinuations falsely 
 " and ignorantly thrown out of pledges given 
 " to the Roman Catholics." " He asserted that 
 " none such existed to his knowledge, and he 
 " could venture to make the same assertion on 
 " behalf of those with whom he had acted." 
 He admitted that speeches were made in Parlia- 
 ment at the time, on which the Roman Catholics 
 formed expectations, " but those speeches 
 " could only conclude the individuals who made 
 " them, they could neither commit the Parlia- 
 " ment nor the Government, whose language 
 <( uniformly was, that it was a question which must 
 " remain for the unfettered wisdom of the united 
 " Parliament to dispose of; and so pointedly 
 " distinct was Mr. Pitt's language on the sub- 
 " ject, that, when opening the measure, after 
 " setting forth all the immediate advantages of 
 " Union, he expressly argued, that it would be 
 " more safe, in an united legislature, either to 
 " concede, or to refuse, the Roman Catholic 
 " claims. 
 
 " So anxiously solicitous was the Irish Go- 
 " vernment not to mislead the Roman Catholics 
 " with false hopes, that they never gave them, 
 "' during the two years the Union was in agi- 
 " tation, any reason to know what line Mr. Pitt 
 " was likely ultimately to take upon their measure.
 
 GIVEN AT THE UNION. 141 
 
 " In consequence of this studious reserve on 
 " their part, much of the influence of the Roman 
 " Catholic body was exerted against the Union, and 
 " so little did the Roman Catholics, who had 
 " been in communication with the Irish govern- 
 " ment, feel themselves entitled, from any pre- 
 " vious explanations they had received, to ex- 
 " pect Mr. Pitt to take the decisive line he did 
 " in favour of their claims, that he believed his 
 " doing so was a matter of considerable sur- 
 " prise to them."* 
 
 Shall I give further evidence? Yes: there 
 remains one testimony too decisive, and too 
 venerable, to be withholden. Our late gracious 
 King himself has, in his first letter to Mr. Pitt, 
 given the following statement of his own notori- 
 ous declaration on the subject ; after which, if 
 the minister had ventured to commit the go- 
 vernment by any pledge, promise, or " some- 
 thing like promise," to the Roman Catholics, he 
 must have been one of the silliest as well as 
 basest of men. 
 
 * Speech of Lord Viscount Castlereagh on the 25th of 
 May, 1810. Stockdale. 1810. pp. 33 35. The importance 
 of this testimony, and the use lately made (Speech of Lord 
 Rossmore at a meeting of the British Catholic Association) of 
 the supposed pledge given to the Irish Roman Catholics before 
 the Union, induces me to add some further important docu- 
 ments. See Appendix, Note C.
 
 142 NO PLEDGE OF CONCESSION TO R. CATHOLICS 
 
 " When the Irish Propositions," said his 
 Majesty, " were transmitted to me by a joint 
 " message from both Houses of the British Par- 
 " liament, I told the Lords and Gentlemen sent 
 " on that occasion, that I would with pleasure, 
 " and without delay, forward them to Ireland; 
 " but that, as individuals, I could not help ac- 
 " quainting them, that my inclination to an 
 " Union with Ireland was principally founded 
 " on a trust, that the uniting the Established 
 " Churches of the two Kingdoms would for ever 
 " shut the door to any further measures with re- 
 " spect to the Roman Catholics."'* 
 
 So much for the expectations held out by the 
 King's minister at the time of the Union. But 
 Mr. Butler has a stronger ground to take, than 
 the language of any minister. He has the words 
 of the Act of Union itself, blazoned by him again 
 in all the dazzling majesty of Roman capitals. 
 
 " It enacted, That every of the Lords and 
 " Commons of the Parliament of the United 
 " Kingdom, in the first and every succeeding 
 " parliament, should, UNTIL THE PARLIAMENT 
 
 " OF THE UNITED KINGDOM SHOULD OTHERWISE 
 
 " PROVIDE, take the oaths then provided to be 
 " taken." " Is not this," says Mr. Butler, " an 
 
 * " Letters from his late Majesty," frc. p. 38.
 
 GIVEN AT THE UNION. 143 
 
 " explicit intimation, that a change of oaths, 
 " after the Union, in favour of the Catholics, 
 " was then contemplated ? Was not a sure and 
 " certain hope of it held out to them by these 
 " words ? Is it not incontrovertible proof, that 
 " all the statesmen who favoured the Union 
 " were convinced that Catholic Emancipation 
 " might be granted without affecting the Coro- 
 " nation Oath ?" 
 
 There is something quite refreshing in the 
 contemplation of the vigorous and sanguine 
 temperament of Mr. Butler in witnessing his 
 more than youthful facility of convincing him- 
 self of the truth of every thing he at any time 
 wishes to believe. It is my somewhat invidi- 
 ous task, to chill his genial ardour, and to dispel 
 the visions of his creative fancy. In the present 
 instance, I must inform him, that the words, on 
 which he lays so much stress, are, together 
 with many other words, copied from the Act of 
 Union of Scotland * and, therefore, that just so 
 much (and no more) encouragement was held 
 out by them to the Roman Catholics, as was 
 afforded by the preceding statute,! which 
 enacted that all the disabilities, the repeal of 
 which would constitute what Mr. Butler calls 
 
 * 5 and 6 Anne, c. 8. art. 22. t The same, sect. 7.
 
 144 MR. BUTLER S LETTER 
 
 emancipation, " shall remain and be in full force 
 "for ever." 
 
 8. But Mr. Butler is too good a general not to 
 provide for every contingency. He has a force 
 in reserve, sufficient to restore the fortune of 
 the day, even if he should be beaten at every 
 point. We have it in his Argument, No. 8, 
 " Strange as after so much has been said on the 
 " subject it must necessarily appear, all this 
 " discussion, so far as Ireland is concerned in 
 " it, is absolutely superfluous a mere waste of 
 " words." 
 
 It would have become a generous enemy, like 
 Mr. Butler, to have drawn out this overpower- 
 ing argument in the beginning of the day, and 
 so, by compelling a surrender, to have saved all 
 that unnecessary " waste of words" which he 
 so feelingly deplores. As it is, I too have a 
 little reserve, with which I must do the best 
 I can. But to the point: "The Coronation 
 " Oath," says Mr. B., " was fixed in Ireland by 
 " the 1st of William fy Mary. In Ireland, at 
 " that time, Roman Catholics held their seats 
 " and voted in the House of Lords ; Roman Ca- 
 " tholic commoners were eligible to the House 
 " of Commons, and all civil and military offices 
 " were open to them. They were deprived of 
 " these rights by the Acts of the 3d and 4th of
 
 ON THE CORONATION OATH. . 145 
 
 " William % Mary, and the 1st and 2d of Queen 
 " Anne" " To those laws, therefore, or to any 
 " similar law, the Coronation Oath cannot, with 
 " a semblance of propriety, be referred." 
 
 To this formidable charge of logic and chro- 
 nology combined, I have one small fact to op- 
 posethat by the 5th and 6th of Anne, c. 8. 
 (the Act of Union with Scotland) after provid- 
 ing (as I have just stated) that all the laws then 
 in force for the establishment and preservation 
 of the Church of England, shall remain and be 
 in ful] force for ever, it is enacted, "That every 
 " future King or Queen of England, at his or 
 " her Coronation, shall take and subscribe an 
 " Oath to maintain and preserve inviolably the 
 " said Settlement of the Church of England, as 
 " by law established, within the kingdoms of 
 " England and IRELAND." 
 
 I have thus examined every argument and 
 statement, of which I am myself aware, affect- 
 ing either the extent of the obligation of the 
 Coronation Oath, namely, to the whole kingly 
 office, or to its applicability to the question of 
 the Roman Catholic claims, both in England 
 and in Ireland.
 
 146 MR. PITT'S LETTER 
 
 Mr. Pitt's Letter to King George III. Jan. 31, 
 1801. 
 
 But my task is not completed. As I under- 
 took it, in defence of the Royal Correspondence, 
 lately published by me, I feel myself bound to 
 notice those parts of that Correspondence which 
 have been, most unreasonably in my opinion, 
 claimed as advantageous to the cause of the 
 Roman Catholics. Some of these have been 
 already treated; of the remainder, the most 
 considerable is the first letter of Mr. Pitt. 
 
 Of that letter, it is scarcely possible to speak 
 in terms of too exalted praise. Distinguished 
 by the most finished grace of composition, it 
 possesses the infinitely higher merit of combin- 
 ing the utmost freedom in delivering the wri- 
 ter's own sentiments, on a great question of na- 
 tional policy, with the most respectful and 
 reverential regard to the dignity of his royal 
 master. Never was there any thing less like 
 dictation, or the presumption of conscious ta- 
 lent. His Majesty, on his part, proved him- 
 self worthy of being thus addressed by one of 
 the ablest and most faithful counsellors it was 
 ever the fortune of a Sovereign to call his own.
 
 TO KING GEORGE III. 147 
 
 Who can read, without emotion, the dignified 
 expression of his warm affection for the minis- 
 ter, whose honest counsels, on this great ques- 
 tion, his own honest and long-considered prin- 
 ciple of religious duty forbade him to follow ? 
 Who can read his earnest entreaty to that mi- 
 nister, to continue his services to him to the 
 end of his then declining life, without deeply 
 lamenting, that any conflicting principles of 
 duty and honour, in two such men, should have 
 led even to a temporary separation between 
 them? Above all, who could make the Royal 
 Writer's less polished diction, in giving ut- 
 terance to his noble sentiments, a theme for 
 sneer and insult? Who, but one, who, if he 
 ever had a heart capable of generous and loyal 
 feeling, has hardened and debased it by the 
 long-continued habit of " sanctioning and super- 
 " intending" anonymous attacks on the fame or 
 feelings of his equals? But 1 am ashamed of 
 mixing such a person's concerns with the high 
 subject before me. I return to Mr. Pitt's first 
 letter. 
 
 Looking to the matter of it, we find it to 
 consist of two most important parts; first, of 
 an able, brief, but comprehensive statement of 
 all the reasons ever adduced for granting the 
 claims of the Roman Catholics. I know not 
 
 L2
 
 148 MR. PITT'S PROPOSED CONDITIONS 
 
 that any considerable argument in favour of that 
 measure is there omitted, except those, which 
 both the King and the minister would have 
 equally disdained, the arguments addressed to 
 the fears of Englishmen: nor am I aware of a 
 single reason there given, which had not been 
 urged elsewhere by Mr. Pitt himself or others. 
 To that part of his letter I shall not presume to 
 say any thing. 
 
 But, secondly, it contains a clearer and fuller 
 statement of the conditions, which he proposed 
 to annex to concession, than has before been 
 given to the public. It is, on this account, 
 above all others, that the letter appears to me 
 of inestimable value. 
 
 Let us look at these conditions a little in 
 detail. 
 
 1. The first is a continuance of the Oaths 
 already required to be taken by Roman Ca- 
 tholics in Ireland. 
 
 2. The gradually attaching their clergy to 
 the government, and, for this purpose, making 
 them dependent for a part of their provision 
 (under proper regulations) on the state. 
 
 3. The subjecting these Popish Clergy to 
 superintendence and control. 
 
 4. The requiring a distinct political Test, 
 pointed against the doctrine of modern Jaco-
 
 OF CONCESSION TO ROMAN CATHOLICS. 149 
 
 binism, from the Preachers of all Roman Ca- 
 tholic Congregations, and from the Teachers of 
 all their Schools. 
 
 Such were his proposed conditions affecting 
 Roman Catholics ; but as th'e repeal of the 
 Test and Corporation Acts in England, would 
 make Protestant Dissenters admissible to of- 
 fices which they cannot now hold, and as some 
 of them, "it is feared, entertain principles dan- 
 " gerous to the Constitution," it was part of 
 Mr. Pitt's plan to require from them the poli- 
 tical test, as " a much more just and more 
 " effectual security, than that which now 
 " exists." This same Test was moreover to be 
 required " from the preachers of all Dissenting 
 " Congregations, and from the teachers of 
 " Schools of every denomination." 
 
 " It was on these principles Mr. Pitt con- 
 " ceived a new security might be obtained for 
 " the civil and ecclesiastical constitution of 
 " this country, more applicable to the present 
 " circumstances, more free from objection, 
 " and more effectual in itself, than any which 
 " now exists." 
 
 1. Of the conditions affecting the Roman 
 Catholics, the first, the continuance of the pre- 
 sent Oaths, does not need any remark. It is 
 a security of no mean nature, and might be im-
 
 150 MR. PITT'S PROPOSED CONDITIONS 
 
 proved by one or two easy alterations ; in par- 
 ticular by omitting the qualification in one of 
 its present most important clauses, " I do 
 " hereby disclaim, disavow, and solemnly ab- 
 " jure any intention to subvert the present 
 " Church Establishment, for the purpose of sub- 
 " stituting a Catholic Establishment," and by 
 substituting, for the disclaimer of all intention, 
 a positive engagement not to assist in any plan, 
 to subvert the present Church Establishment. 
 Surely, such a condition would not be too 
 much to require, even at present, from any sect 
 of religionists tolerated by the state. 
 
 2. Of the second of these conditions, that 
 which relates to a provision for the Roman Ca- 
 tholic clergy, it is especially worthy of remark, 
 in how guarded a manner Mr. Pitt speaks of 
 it, even in the brief summary of his plan, which 
 he here presents. That great man, doubtless, 
 saw the just objections to such an expedient, 
 and was prepared to obviate them. " Under 
 " proper regulations," he wisely considered, 
 that the measure would tend to attach its ob- 
 jects to the government. Without proper re- 
 gulations, he was well aware, that it would 
 tend only to excite their ambition, and encou- 
 rage their hopes of further advantages. If given 
 to them to be enjoyed as a right, and not to be
 
 OF CONCESSION TO ROMAN CATHOLICS. 151 
 
 forfeited, otherwise than by such misconduct 
 as the law of the land would punish, it would 
 have amounted to nothing less than an esta- 
 blishment. Yet such was the measure, which, 
 in the session of 1825, was actually received 
 with favour in the English House of Commons; 
 the Bill conferring it had an ascertained 
 passage through that House, and the Roman 
 Catholics of Ireland were brought to regard it, 
 not as a boon for which it became them to be 
 grateful, but as a mere act of scanty justice 
 which the legislature besought them to take in 
 good part. They had, it is true, shown, from 
 the first, no disposition to be satisfied with any 
 pecuniary provisions of a less independent 
 nature. Dr. Doyle had plainly told the Com- 
 mittees, that he and his brethren would rather 
 receive nothing from the State, and that cer- 
 tainly if they received at all, it should be on such 
 terms only as should give them a vested life- 
 interest in the grant.* The obsequious House 
 of Commons framed their measure accordingly ; 
 and Mr. O'Connell, when reproached by his 
 less judicious associates for having acceded to 
 an expedient which bore the name, if not 
 the semblance, of a security to this Protestant 
 
 * Evitl. Com. of H. of C, 182. r >, pp. 184. 210.
 
 152 MR. PITT'S PROPOSED CONDITIONS 
 
 " Establishment," justified himself by charac- 
 terizing very truly the prospect of carrying this 
 measure as " the likelihood of establishing, like the 
 " Scotch, an Established Church" * 
 
 Mr. Pitt was too wise to entertain for a mo- 
 ment the notion of such " a security." His 
 guarded proposal of making a provision for 
 the Roman Catholic Clergy, " under proper 
 regulations" proves that he had a very diffe- 
 rent plan in view such a plan, most pro- 
 bably, as is pursued towards the Presbyterian 
 Ministers in Ireland, a Regium Don urn, which 
 might be withdrawn at any time, but would 
 certainly never be withdrawn, so long as its ob- 
 jects proved themselves worthy of the bounty 
 of the State. 
 
 3. The third of Mr. Pitt's conditions, that of 
 " subjecting the Popish Clergy to superintendence 
 and control" (I use his own strong language) 
 would have been the most difficult to effect, 
 though on every account the most important. 
 That Mr. Pitt thought it indispensably necessary 
 to any tolerable plan for removing the political 
 disabilities of the Roman Catholics, is placed 
 beyond all question by the invaluable document 
 
 * " Catholic Meeting," (abridged from Dublin Freeman's 
 Journal,) St. James's Chronicle, July 14, 1825.
 
 OF CONCESSION TO ROMAN CATHOLICS. 153 
 
 before us. He was not a man who would trifle 
 with his Sovereign in such a transaction, much 
 less who would attempt to cajole either the So- 
 vereign, or the country, by the show, without the 
 reality, of securities. I will not therefore insult 
 his memory by making it a question, whether 
 he would have been either a dupe, or an accom- 
 plice, in the contemptible fraud practised suc- 
 cessfully on the House of Commons by the Bill 
 of 1825. " The superintendence and control," 
 to which he would have required the Roman 
 Catholic Clergy to be " subjected," must have 
 been real and effectual ; every thing short of 
 that would have been rejected with scorn by his 
 lofty and honourable mind. 
 
 Whether the practical difficulties attending 
 the settlement of such a point would have been 
 found too great even for Mr. Pitt to overcome, 
 is a question into which it is not necessary now 
 to enter. That these difficulties, great in them- 
 selves, have, since his time, become incalculably 
 greater, is unhappily too manifest; nor does 
 there appear the smallest reason to believe, had 
 he been spared to his country to the present 
 day, that, according to the' principles uniformly 
 proclaimed by him, he could now be found 
 among the advocates for concession. It is true,
 
 154 MR. PITT. 
 
 that he never would have endured that the 
 mischief should have reached its present hideous 
 magnitude, without any attempt to keep it 
 down ; he never would have endured that the 
 known laws of the land should be outraged with 
 impunity, that they, whose duty it was to ex- 
 ecute and enforce those laws, should not only 
 witness their violation with calm complacency, 
 but should, even in their place in Parliament, 
 themselves pronounce the most plausible excuse 
 for past delinquency, and administer the strong- 
 est provocative to future excesses : above all, 
 he never would have endured, that the Majesty 
 of British Legislation should be made the scorn 
 and laughing-stock of Irish demagogues that 
 an illegal association, put down by an express 
 statute in one month, should, in the next, rear 
 its brazen front, without even the decent hypo- 
 crisy of a change of name, should beard Par- 
 liament with its insolent defiance, should raise 
 a revenue for the purposes of disaffection 
 should even make the shameless but not the 
 imprudent avowal, (for confidence, in such a 
 case, is strength,) that the collection of this re- 
 venue is not merely a contribution for past or 
 present charges, but a bond of union and a 
 pledge of future co-operation, in the revolution-
 
 MR. PITT. 
 
 ary jargon of the day, it is " a means of organiz- 
 " ing and affiliating the people"* All this, I 
 repeat, would not have been endured, had Mr. 
 Pitt still guided the helm of government, aye, 
 or had any one truly British statesman felt him- 
 self responsible, in his own individual fame, for 
 the results of the policy which has been pursued. 
 It was only when we were given over to divided 
 councils and conflicting principles, worst of 
 all, when the wretched system was adopted, 
 of compromising all difference of opinions, 
 by acting upon none, of banishing even the 
 name of Ireland from the deliberations of our 
 rulers, of putting off to " a convenient season'' 
 the most perilous and urgent concerns of that 
 distracted country, " stulta dissimulatione, 
 remedia potius malorum, quam mala, diffe- 
 rentes," it was only then, that we reached the 
 full maturity of our present evils, evils so great, 
 that we can neither bear their pressure, nor en- 
 dure their cure ; but we go on, from day to day, 
 from year to year, seeking, by any wretched 
 nostrum the quackery of the age can furnish, 
 to palliate a corroding plague, which is fast 
 
 * So it has been lately called by Mr. Shiel, who adds, " Every 
 man, who contributes the smallest fraction of money, becomes 
 the member of a vast corporation instituted for the liberty of 
 Ireland."
 
 156 MR. PITT'S CONDITIONS. 
 
 eating to our very vitals. Thank God ! even 
 
 while I am writing, the dawn of a brighter day 
 has beamed upon us. We are again cheered 
 with the prospect of a wise, and, above all, 
 an uniform system of policy : We are again 
 permitted to hope, that any scheme of conces- 
 sion to our Roman Catholic or other dissenting 
 countrymen should any be deemed practica" 
 ble will be tempered by at least as provident 
 a care of all the vital interests, all the funda- 
 mental and integrant portions of this Protestant 
 State, as marked the conduct of Mr. Pitt. 
 
 4. To the fourth and last condition, proposed 
 by him to accompany concession, let me now 
 advert, " a political Test, pointed against the 
 " doctrines of modern Jacobinism, to be taken 
 " by the Roman Catholic Clergy and School- 
 " masters, as also by the Teachers and School- 
 " masters of all other denominations of Dis- 
 " senters." 
 
 What the terms of that Test were designed by 
 him to be, is not disclosed in the brief statement 
 of his plan comprised in this letter. That it in- 
 cluded as full an acknowledgment, as words 
 could make, of the rights of the Established 
 Church, and as strong a pledge of faithful ob- 
 servance of them, cannot be doubted : for of all 
 " the doctrines of modern Jacobinism," against
 
 MR. BURKE'S NEW TEST. 157 
 
 which the new Test was to be directed, none 
 was, or is, more prominent, or more inveterate, 
 than hostility to every Established Church. 
 This, therefore, must be added to the account, 
 before we have attained the full sum of security 
 designed by Mr. Pitt. 
 
 Test devised by Mr. Burke; and the Authority of 
 Mr. Burke. 
 
 And here it is not irrelevant to recur to the 
 opinion of his illustrious contemporary, whose 
 name, like his, is constantly and triumphantly 
 claimed by the partisans of concession, I mean 
 Mr. Burke. Whether there had been at any 
 time any communication between these two 
 great statesmen on the subject of this '' Political 
 " Test against the doctrines of modern Jaco- 
 " binism," in lieu of the existing religious Test, 
 we have no sufficient evidence to enable us to 
 assert. But it is most remarkable, that in the 
 posthumous works of Mr. Burke, published 
 since Mr. Pitt's Letter to the late King was 
 written, we find such " a Political Test," drawn 
 with much deliberation, and intended to have 
 been proposed in Parliament in 1790, if, con- 
 trary to Mr. B.'s declared opinion and vote, the 
 motion then made for repealing the Test and 
 Corporation Acts, in favour of Protestant Dis-
 
 158 MR. BURKE'S NEW TEST. 
 
 senters, had been successful. The following is 
 that Test, to the terms of which, coming from 
 such an authority, it cannot be necessary for 
 me to invite the particular attention of every 
 reader. 
 
 " I A. B. do, in the presence of God, sincerely pro- 
 fess and bel'^ve, that a Religious Establishment in this 
 State is not contrary to the Law of God, or disagree- 
 able to the Law of Nature, or to the principles of the 
 Christian Religion ; or that it is noxious to the commu- 
 nity ; and I do sincerely promise and engage, before 
 God, that I never will, by any conspiracy, contrivance, 
 or political device whatever, attempt, or abet others in 
 any attempt, to subvert the Constitution of the Church 
 of England, as the same is now by law established, and 
 that 1 will not employ any power or influence, which I 
 may derive from any office corporate, or any other 
 office, which I hold, or shall hold, under his Majesty, 
 his Heirs and Successors, to destroy and subvert the 
 same ; or, to cause members to be elected into any cor- 
 poration, or into Parliament, give any vote in the elec- 
 tion of any member or members of Parliament, or into 
 any office, for or account of their attachment to any 
 other or different religious opinions or establishments, 
 or with any hope, that they may promote the same to 
 the prejudice of the Established Church, but will duti- 
 fully and peaceably content myself with my private 
 liberty of conscience as the same is allowed by law."* 
 
 * Burke's Works, vol. x. p. 6 1 . octavo.
 
 MR. BURKE. 159 
 
 Such is this remarkable document. It is va- 
 luable on many accounts, but, most especially, 
 as affording the plainest evidence of what Mr. 
 Burke considered to be the necessary and in- 
 dispensable duty of Parliament in every case, 
 in which it is proposed to remove any of the 
 existing securities of the Established Church. 
 It is an obvious consequence, that, whenever 
 Mr. Burke was found among the advocates for 
 any change of the law on this fundamental 
 point, he must be always understood as mean- 
 ing either to provide some stronger bulwark 
 for the Church by the proposed change, or, at 
 least, not to diminish its existing security. 
 Carrying this principle with us, and adding to 
 it the evidence derived from other parts of his 
 writings, we shall find it easy to show that 
 Mr. Burke, like Mr. Pitt, if he were now alive, 
 would, of necessity, be adverse to the present 
 claims of the Roman Catholics. I say this, 
 with full recollection of the argument of his 
 first Letter to Sir Hercules Langrishe, and with 
 perfect readiness to give due weight to all that 
 he urged in favour of the concessions then 
 sought. In truth, this one expression, " then 
 sought," is the clue to the whole labyrinth, if 
 there be one, the answer to all, or almost all, 
 the arguments founded on this great man's au-
 
 160 MR. BURKE'S AUTHORITY AGAINST 
 
 thority on the question. All that was then 
 sought, and, in one most important particular, 
 more than all, has long ago been granted. 
 The Irish Act, of 1793, gave to the Roman 
 Catholics all that Mr. Burke laboured, by that 
 letter, to obtain for them ; and it moreover 
 threw into the chalice one fatal ingredient, 
 which has corrupted and poisoned all the rest 
 has perverted what was meant for a cup of 
 blessing, a well-spring of mutual love and 
 lasting tranquillity, into a source of bitterest 
 and deadliest hatred, a stimulant to the most 
 insatiable and turbulent ambition ; I mean, the 
 unrestricted grant of the elective franchise. 
 
 Mr. Burke's argument had not this grant in 
 contemplation. He sets out with stating, that 
 he knows not with certainty what the Roman 
 Catholics intend to ask, but that he " conjec- 
 " tures, something is in agitation towards ad- 
 " mitting them, under certain qualifications, to 
 " have some share in the election of Members of 
 " Parliament."* Now if, under these impres- 
 sions, he had used the strongest and most un- 
 qualified terms in favour of their cause, still 
 this limitation in the outset must, in all fair con- 
 struction, have been held to qualify and miti- 
 
 * Letter to Sir H. L., Bnrke's]Works, vol. iii. p. 547.
 
 THE PRESENT CLAIMS OF R. CATHOLICS. 161 
 
 gate the whole. But this is not the case ; 
 often, in the course of his argument, he repeats 
 and insists on the limitation. Why, he 
 asks, is it inconsistent with the Coronation 
 Oath for the King to " restore to his Roman 
 " Catholic people, in such measure, and with such 
 " modification, as the public wisdom shall think 
 " proper to add, some part in those franchises 
 " which they formerly had held without any 
 " limitation at all?"* Nay, at the conclusion of 
 the whole, he says expressly, " the object pur- 
 " sued by the (Roman) Catholics is, I under- 
 " stand, (and have all along reasoned as if it were 
 " so,) in some degree or measure, to be again ad- 
 " mitted to the franchises of the Constitution." 
 This being so, with what fairness can it be 
 pretended, that the authority of Mr. Burke, as 
 given in this very argument, is in favour of the 
 unqualified concession of every franchise ? 
 Surely, his forbearing to intimate such an 
 opinion, when arguing on a matter leading so 
 naturally to it, affords a much stronger pre- 
 sumption, that his judgment was the other way. 
 And yet we have heard one of the most dis- 
 tinguished senators of the age, (Lord Plunket, 
 in the debate of March, 1827,) gravely refer to 
 
 * Letter to Sir H. L., Burke's Works, vol. iii. p. 565. 
 M
 
 162 MR. BURKES AUTHORITY AGAINST 
 
 the following passage, as if it was meant by 
 the writer to apply to the present state of the 
 question. " Whenever I shall be convinced, 
 " which will be late and reluctantly, that the 
 " safety of the Church is utterly inconsistent with 
 " all the civil rights whatsoever of the far larger 
 
 o o 
 
 " part of the inhabitants of Ireland, I shall be 
 " extremely sorry for it, because I shall think 
 "the Church to be truly in danger; it is 
 " putting things into the position of an ugly 
 ".alternative, into which, I hope in God, they 
 " never will be put." 
 
 Thus the case would stand, if this Letter to 
 Sir Hercules Langrishe were all that Mr. Burke 
 had written on this matter. But, happily, it is 
 not all. He wrote a second Letter to the same 
 gentleman, in which he says, with reference to 
 his former one, " In the Catholic question, I 
 " only considered one point: Was it, at the 
 " time, and in the circumstances, a measure which 
 " tended to promote the concord of the citi- 
 " zens? I have no difficulty in saying, it was ; 
 " and as little in saying, that the present concord 
 " of the citizens" (he wrote before the Rebellion, 
 and before any indication of increased expecta- 
 tions on the part of the Roman Catholics) " was 
 " worth buying, at a critical season, by grant- 
 " ing a few capacities, which, probably, no man
 
 THE PRESENT CLAIMS OF R. CATHOLICS. 163 
 
 " now living is likely to be served or hurt 
 " by."* 
 
 In a Letter to another gentleman (Baron 
 Smith) he states in more full and express terms 
 the principle which guided and directed all his 
 views. " My whole politics, fit present, centre in 
 " one point ; and to this the merit, or demerit, 
 " of every measure (with me) is referable; that 
 " is, what will most promote, or depress, the 
 " cause of Jacobinism ." This it was, that made 
 him, at that time, think, " that all the three Re- 
 " ligions,- prevalent, more or less, in the various 
 " parts of these islands, ought all, in subord'ma- 
 "' tion to the legal establishments, as they stand in 
 " the several countries, to be all countenanced, 
 " protected, and cherished; and that, in Ire- 
 " land particularly, the Roman Catholic religion 
 " should be upheld in high respect and venera- 
 " tion; and should be, in its place, provided 
 " with all the means of making it a blessing to 
 " the people who profess it." " I am the more 
 " serious on the positive encouragement to be 
 " given to this religion, (always, however, as se- 
 " condary,) because the serious and earnest be- 
 " lief and practice of it by its professors form, 
 " as things stand "(fan. 1795,) "the most effectual, 
 
 * Borke's Works, vol. v. p. 292. 
 M 2
 
 164 MR. BURKE'S AUTHORITY AGAINST 
 
 " barrier, if not the sole barrier against Jaco- 
 " binism" 
 
 Would that be his opinion now? Could it be 
 so? Where is the spirit of Jacobinism now 
 most active ? Where are all its energies most 
 strongly, most unceasingly exerted ? Where, 
 but in the Association, the Mock-Parliament at 
 Dublin? Whither are now the wishes, the hopes, 
 the sanguine and ardent longings, of every 
 Jacobin in the King's dominions directed, but 
 to the same stirring scene? And would Mr. 
 Burke have leagued himself with such a band? 
 Would he have become, in his old age, " the 
 " champion of Jacobinism," the zealot of that 
 unholy cause, abhorrence of which mastered 
 every other passion and feeling of his heart 
 could suspend the anguish of his almost fren- 
 zied grief, could make him for awhile forget 
 the bereavement of the one sole object of his 
 earthly hopes, and rouse him to exertion even 
 from the listlessness of despondency? The sup- 
 position is absurd. 
 
 In the very work which has been cited in 
 furtherance of the Roman Catholic cause, he 
 hesitated not to say of persons, whose language 
 and whose actions had been far less offensive, 
 and infinitely less dangerous, than the leaders 
 or the promoters of the present Association,
 
 THE PRESENT CLAIMS OF R. CATHOLICS. 165 
 
 that they were " unworthy of any privilege 
 " which may be thought fit to be granted, that 
 " such men ought, by name, to be excepted from 
 " any benefit, under the constitution, to which 
 " they offer this violence."* 
 
 Nor ought we to forget, that whatever his 
 opinion might be of the fitness of concession, it 
 was professedly influenced by a view of what 
 were then the existing facts of the case, which 
 facts have since been changed in a degree 
 scarcely to be estimated. " As to the capacity 
 " of sitting in parliament," says he in 1795, 
 " after all the capacities of voting," &c. have 
 been granted, " it is a dispute de lan caprina, 
 " in my poor opinion, at least on the part of 
 " those who oppose it." " On a fair canvass 
 " of the several prevalent parliamentary inte- 
 " rests in Ireland, I cannot, out of the three 
 " hundred members, of whom the Irish parlia- 
 " ment is composed, discover that above three, 
 " or, at the utmost, four, Catholics, would be re- 
 " turned to the House of Commons." 
 
 Is this the case now ? Is it not, on the con- 
 trary, found by experience, that neither the in- 
 fluence of property, nor hereditary attachment 
 to ancient and honourable names, nor the ties 
 of gratitude, nor the hope of future favour, nor 
 
 * Burke's Works, vol. iv. p. 584.
 
 166 MR. BURKE'S AUTHORITY AGAINST 
 
 any earthly motive, can avail against the man- 
 dates of spiritual authority ? Is it not certain 
 that a very large portion, and only uncertain 
 how large, of the representation of Ireland, is in 
 the hands of the Priests ? Mr. O'Connell has 
 scrupled not to say, that the whole, or almost 
 the whole will soon be in the same hands : and, 
 in proof of his own reliance on the accuracy of 
 this assertion, he has scrupled not to proclaim 
 his readiness to offer himself as candidate to 
 represent a county (the county of Cavan) in 
 which he has not (as I am informed) a single 
 acre of ground, on the mere strength of his 
 merit as an agitator. 
 
 This is the answer to every argument drawn 
 from the authority of Mr. Burke, respecting the 
 concession of seats in parliament to the Roman 
 Catholics of Ireland. His general principles 
 are opposed to it; and the exception, which he 
 admitted in their favour, was founded on a state 
 of things, which not only is gone by, but has 
 been succeeded by one utterly and essentially 
 at variance with it. Nor may we forget, that 
 in his earliest and most earnest appeal to the 
 generosity and justice of England, in behalf of 
 the then really injured population of Ireland, 
 he distinctly allowed, that they ought not to be 
 admitted to a share of the government. " They
 
 THE PRESENT CLAIMS OF R. CATHOLICS. 167 
 
 " are," said he, " excluded from all offices in 
 " Church and State, which, though a just and 
 " necessary provision, is yet no small restraint."* 
 At a subsequent period, when, with that 
 generous zeal for the cause of the oppressed 
 which was the proudest distinction of his cha- 
 racter, he devoted to them the best faculties of 
 his exalted mind, and drew up for them a state- 
 ment of their grievances in a Petition to his late 
 Majesty, conceived in terms the most eloquent, 
 the most energetic, the most persuasive, yet, 
 at the same time, the most considerate and 
 most respectful, what was the argument on 
 which he insisted ? Was it a claim of right ? 
 Far otherwise ; it was their " dutiful, peacea- 
 " ble, submissive behaviour for more than four- 
 " score years :" " if in all that time," such were 
 the words of the Petition, " amongst all our 
 " people, in the daily increase of severe laws 
 " against us, one treasonable insurrection, or 
 " one treasonable conspiracy can be proved; 
 " if amongst our Clergy, one seditious sermon can 
 " be shoivn to have been preached ; we will rea- 
 " dily admit, that there is good reason for con- 
 " tinuing the present laws in all their force 
 " against us." Could the man who wrote this 
 sentence, and that man, Mr. Burke, had 
 
 * Burkc's Works, vol. v. p. 241.
 
 168 MR. BURKE'S AUTHORITY AGAINST 
 
 he lived to witness the smallest part of that 
 system of deliberate outrage and intimidation, 
 which has been adopted by the whole mass of 
 Roman Catholics in Ireland, and, above all, by 
 their Hierarchy and their Priesthood, could 
 he, I ask, be the advocate and patron of such 
 a cause ? Could he give the sanction of his 
 honoured name to the demands of those who 
 avowedly and exultingly proclaim their dead- 
 liest hate, their most active unmitigable hos- 
 tility to the Church of Ireland, the Protestant 
 Episcopal Church there established by law ? 
 Let Mr. Burke himself answer the question. He 
 will tell us, even in his first letter to Sir H. 
 Langrishe, that the Church is, by one of the most 
 solemn acts of legislation, " declared to be fun- 
 " damental and essential for ever, in the Consti- 
 " tution of the United Kindom ;"* he will there 
 tell us, that the King is bound by his Corona- 
 tion Oath, to " do nothing to the prejudice 
 " of the Church in favour of sectaries" of any 
 kind, that the Church so to be protected by 
 him, is the Church " established by law/' and 
 that, in order " to define it beyond all possi- 
 " bility of doubt, he ' swears to maintain the 
 " ' Bishops and Clergy, and the Churches 
 
 * Burke's Works, vol. iv. p. 562.
 
 THE PRESENT CLAIMS OF R. CATHOLICS. 169 
 
 " ' committed to their charge,' in their rights, 
 " present and future." 
 
 Mr. Burke knew nothing of that refined 
 policy, which holds it illiberal and unwise, 
 much less unjust, to exclude men from an equal 
 share of civil privileges on account of their re- 
 ligious belief. " In a Christian commonwealth," 
 says he, " the Church and the State are one and 
 " the same thing, being integral parts of the 
 " same whole."* " Dissent, not satisfied with tole- 
 " ration, is not co?iscience, but ambition." Again, 
 " when gentlemen complain of the subscrip- 
 " tion," (pari ratione, of Tests) "as matter of 
 " grievance, the complaint arises from con- 
 " founding private judgment, whose rights are 
 " anterior to law, and the qualifications which 
 " the law creates for its own magistracies, 
 " civil or religious. To take away from men 
 " their lives, their liberty, or their property, 
 " those things for the protection of which so- 
 " ciety was introduced, is great hardship and 
 " intolerable tyranny ; but to annex any con- 
 " dition you please to benefits artificially created, 
 " is the most just, natural, and proper thing in the 
 
 Still less did Mr. Burke assent to the frantic 
 
 * Burke's Works, vol. v. p. 353. f Ibid. p. 332.
 
 170 , MR. BURKE. LORD BACON 
 
 theory of those who maintain, that religious 
 opinions are altogether out of the province of 
 civil government. " So far from Religion being 
 " out of the province, or the duty, of a Christian 
 " magistrate," says he, " it is, and it ought to 
 " be, not only his care, but the principal thing 
 " in his care, because it is one of the great 
 " bonds of human society ; and its object the 
 " supreme good, the ultimate end and object 
 " of man himself." " As Religion is one of 
 " the bonds of society, he ought not to suffer 
 " it to be made the pretext of destroying its peace, 
 " order, liberty, and its security. Above all, he 
 " ought strictly to look to it, when men begin 
 " to form new combinations, and especially, when 
 " they mingle a political system with their religious 
 " opinions, true or false, plausible or implausi- 
 " ble." 
 
 Authority of Lord Bacon Lord Coke 
 Blackstone. 
 
 Such were the opinions of this great man. Not 
 less strong was the judgment of those, who were 
 the lights and ornament of elder times, men 
 whom the wisest of every generation, till the 
 present, were not ashamed to acknowledge as 
 their teachers.
 
 LORD COKE. PARLIAMENTARY WRIT. 171 
 
 Sir Francis Bacon says, " It is not possible, 
 " in respect of the great sympathy between the 
 " state civil and the state ecclesiastical, to make 
 " so much alteration in the Church, but that it 
 " would have a perilous operation on the king- 
 "dom."* 
 
 And a greater authority even than Bacon, in a 
 question of constitutional policy, Lord Coke, thus 
 states " the matters of Parliament. 1. Touching 
 " the King. 2. The State of the Kingdome of 
 " England. 3. The Defence of the Kingdome. 
 "4. The State of the Church. And this appear- 
 " eth by express words in the Parliament Writ in 
 " these words: ' Pro quibusdam arduis urgen- 
 " ' tibus negotiis, nos, statum, et defensionem 
 " ' regni nostri Anglise et Ecclesiae Anglicanae 
 " ' concernentibus, quoddam Parliamentum, 
 " ' nostrum, &c. teneri ordinavimus.' And 
 " though the State and Defence of the Church 
 " of England be last named in the Writ, yet it 
 " isjlrst in intention, as it appeareth by the Title 
 " of every Parliament. As for example, ' To the 
 " ' honour of God and of holy Church, and the 
 " ' quietness of the people.' 36 Edward III."t 
 
 There is another distinguished name which I 
 am unwilling to omit, the rather, because his 
 
 * Bacon's Works, (4to. Loud. 1 730,) vol. iv. p. 436. 
 f 4 Inst. 1.
 
 172 SIR WILLIAM BLACKSTONE. 
 
 authority is often claimed in favour of the pre- 
 sent demands of the Roman Catholics, for ad- 
 mission into Parliament, and into every depart- 
 ment of the State, I mean Sir William Black- 
 stone. But surely none who has ever read 
 what he has written on this point, can be mis- 
 taken as to his opinions. The concessions, 
 which he favoured, were merely a relaxation of 
 the ancient penal code concessions made long 
 ago, and in ampler measure, than he ever con- 
 templated. 
 
 The restrictions, which still remain, are those 
 which he not only approved, but deemed 
 essential to the safety of the State. We have 
 already* seen, that the declaration against 
 Popery is treated by him as a necessary pre- 
 caution to prevent " the extensive authority 
 " which belongs to Parliament from falling into 
 " improper hands ;" and " the Test and Corpo- 
 " ration Acts, which secure both our civil and 
 " religious liberties," are numbered by him 
 among those particulars which made " the 
 " reign of Charles II." (wicked, sanguinary, and 
 turbulent as it was) " to be the era from which 
 " we may date, not only the re-establishment 
 " of our Church and Monarchy, but also the 
 
 * See above, p. 119.
 
 LD. KENYON'S INTERPRETATION OF THE OATH. 173 
 
 '' complete restitution of English Liberty, for 
 " the first time, since its total abolition at the 
 " Conquest."* 
 
 Lord Kenyoris Interpretation of the Coronation 
 Oath. 
 
 From this long, but not, I trust, irrelevant 
 digression, I return to my more immediate sub- 
 ject the Coronation Oath, and to what yet 
 remains to be stated more particularly the 
 judgment of the late Lord Kenyon respect- 
 
 ing it. 
 
 That judgment may be summed up in the 
 following terms, taken from his Lordship's con- 
 cluding letter,-)" in answer to the questions pro- 
 posed to him by his royal master. 
 
 " The supreme power of the State cannot 
 " limit itself;" therefore no words of any sta- 
 tute can be construed to disable the Legislature 
 from any legislative act, however " improper," 
 for instance, from even " entertaining and 
 " passing a bill to abolish the Supremacy, and 
 " the whole of the government and discipline of 
 " the Church of England, as now by law esta- 
 " blished." 
 
 * 4 Blackstone, 438. 
 
 f Letters, &c. pp. 2126.
 
 174 LORD KENYON'S INTERPRETATION 
 
 But though the power itself is thus supreme 
 and incapable of limitation, yet securities may 
 be devised for the proper exercise of it as, for 
 instance, by providing for the fit qualifications 
 of those entrusted with it, or by demanding a 
 promissory oath from them, that they will ex- 
 ercise, or forbear to exercise it, in such and 
 such a way. " Our ancestors, at the time of 
 " the Revolution, did not suppose, that there 
 " was any danger to the Reformed Religion of 
 " the Country from the Members of the Houses 
 " of Parliament," who not only could not take 
 their seats without disclaiming on oath certain 
 essential dogmas of Popery, but also had all 
 their feelings and principles in declared hosti- 
 lity to the Popish cause. " Therefore, the 
 " Statute Book does not exact any promissory 
 " oath, binding them not to receive or pass 
 " Bills hostile to the Reformed Religion as by 
 " law established. But that is not the case of 
 " the King.''' From him a promissory oath not 
 to pass such Bills is exacted. For " recent 
 " misconduct in the reign of King James II. had 
 " raised great jealousy, and therefore the Coro- 
 " nation Oath exacts from the King an oath to 
 " maintain the Laws of God, the true profession 
 " of the Gospel, and the Protestant Reformed 
 " Religion established by law, &c. &c."
 
 OP THE CORONATION OATH. 175 
 
 The exact mode of effecting these purposes 
 is not prescribed by the Oath. That is left to 
 the conscience of the Sovereign who has taken 
 it. He " must determine whether any parti- 
 " cular statute proposed does destroy the 
 " Government of the Church," or will " essen- 
 " tially, or in any great degree, affect that 
 " which he is bound to maintain." For, as 
 " to overthrow any part of the Church Esta- 
 " blishment (the King's Supremacy ; the 
 " main fabrick of the Act of Uniformity, the 
 " doctrine, discipline, and government of the 
 " Church of England, and the provision for its 
 " ministers kept as an appropriated fund) 
 " would militate against the Coronation Oath," 
 so to become a party to any measure, which he 
 who has taken the Oath deems likely to lead to 
 such a result, is plainly within its prohibition. 
 For instance, " how far the Statute of 30 
 " Car. II. st. 2, disabling Papists from sitting 
 " in either House of Parliament, still continues a 
 " fence for the Church as by Law established, 
 " must be judged of by those who are to act 
 " on the proposed repeal, if such a measure be 
 " brought forward," especially the King him- 
 self. " Those who think it is an important and 
 " necessary part of the defence of the Esta- 
 " blished Church, may also think that the
 
 176 LORD KEN YON 'S INTERPRETATION 
 
 " Coronation Oath was meant to provide 
 " against the King's consenting to the Repeal" 
 of that Statute specifically; and, at any rate, 
 the King himself, if he hold such an opinion of 
 the importance of that Statute, must, on the 
 principles before stated, consider himself bound 
 by the general obligation of the Oath to refuse 
 his consent to the repeal. 
 
 In truth, with reference to the particular 
 measure of admitting Roman Catholics to seats 
 in Parliament, the intention of the Legislature, 
 which established the Coronation Oath, is sin- 
 gularly clear. For, " it cannot well pass ob- 
 " servation, that the whole system of Laics, as to 
 " the purpose of the present inquiry, was to guard 
 " against the possible introduction of Popish In- 
 "Jluence into any Branch of the Legislature. As 
 "far a& respects the Sovereign, IT is GUARDED 
 " BY THE OATH HE TAKES, and with respect to 
 " the Houses of Parliament by the Declaration 
 " in 30 Car. II." 
 
 Application of the Preceding Argument. 
 
 I have thus endeavoured to prove, that the 
 Oath taken by the King at his Coronation has 
 a most important bearing on the great question 
 of concession to the Roman Catholics : and I
 
 PRESENT DEMANDS OF ROMAN CATHOLICS. 177 
 
 think it has been made manifest, that the Oath 
 does most undeniably restrain the King from 
 concurring in any Act, for that or any other 
 purpose, of which his Majesty is not in his 
 conscience assured, that it neither overthrows, 
 nor seriously endangers, any part of the Pro- 
 testant Church Establishment, in England, or 
 in Ireland. 
 
 If this be so, the first inquiry, respecting the 
 application now made to the Legislature by 
 the Roman Catholics, ought to be, whether 
 they ask for that which it is inconsistent with 
 his Majesty's Oath to grant. If they do, (and 
 most certainly they do,) it is the kinder course 
 of proceeding towards the applicants them- 
 selves, as well as the wiser and more consi- 
 derate for the preservation of public tran- 
 quillity, to say to them at once, " What you 
 " ask, it is impossible for us to grant. We 
 " are ready to do the best we can for you, and 
 " shall sincerely rejoice, if we find that we 
 " can do much. But, remember, that with the 
 " best possible disposition towards you on our 
 " part, your success is much more in your 
 " own power, than it is in ours. The course 
 " you have of late pursued is the very worst 
 "you could have chosen; and if you have 
 " been sincere in the language you have used, 
 
 N
 
 178 PRESENT DEMANDS OF ROMAN CATHOLICS, 
 
 " the principles you have avowed, the objects 
 " you have proclaimed, you must think us the 
 " most incapable set of dastards that ever 
 " were entrusted with the interests of a great 
 " country, should we give ear to you for a 
 " single hour. You ask for ' total, unqualified, 
 " ' unconditional' concession. How can you be 
 " so absurd ? The wise among you know, that 
 " this you cannot have the honest do not de- 
 " sire it. You call the objects of your de- 
 " mands, the ' just and indefeasible rights of 
 " men and citizens.' What nonsense is this ! 
 " Your very oracles, Dr. Doyle and Mr. O'Con- 
 " nell, have admitted the contrary ; they have 
 " admitted, that, during the time of the Stuarts, 
 " it was ' necessary for the English govern- 
 " ' ment to pass restrictive laws against the 
 " ' Roman Catholics,'* in other words, that 
 " the legislature must exercise its discretion, 
 " when, and what, restrictions shall be imposed. 
 "Go home, then try to make us forget, 
 " by your peaceable and rational conduct, the 
 " folly of your body, and the worse than folly 
 " of your leaders. We wish to give you all 
 " that can be given with safety to those ob- 
 " jects, which, whatever you may think of 
 " them, are, in our estimation, fundamental, 
 
 * See Evidence before Commons, p. 218.
 
 INCONSISTENT WITH THE CORONATION OATH. 179 
 
 " essential, indispensable. The security of 
 " our own Church is the first of these ob- 
 " jects ; to consult for it the most imperative 
 " of all our duties ; and, even if we could be 
 " base enough to desert it, the King will not. 
 " He knows that he is bound by his Corona- 
 " tion Oath to maintain that Church, ' to the 
 " ' utmost of his power ;' and, if we should pro- 
 " pose to him to violate his Oath, the only re- 
 " suit would be, to manifest his firmness, and 
 " to bring hatred and contempt on ourselves. 
 " He, like his illustrious father, would be 
 " ' ready to ascend a scaffold, and lay his 
 " ' head on a block,'* if his duty should de- 
 " mand it; but he has not courage to defy 
 " God. Let not, however, any among you 
 " flatter yourselves, that there is really any 
 " danger to him in following the dictates of 
 " his conscience. His throne is built on the 
 " hearts of his people; and those hearts only 
 " love, honour, and venerate him the more, 
 " for witnessing his faithfulness to his high 
 " engagements. 
 
 " In one word, then, see whether you can 
 " offer us any real and adequate security for 
 11 our Church, if the boon you ask be granted, 
 
 * King George III.'s speech to Lord Grenville, in 1307. 
 N2
 
 1 80 FAVOURABLE INDICATIONS 
 
 " or try to find the securities, which we, on 
 " our part, may devise, such as you can con- 
 " scientiously accede to. If the result be, 
 " that religious duty on both sides makes en- 
 " tire accordance impossible, let us come as 
 " near together as we can, and respect each 
 " other the more for not sacrificing spiritual to 
 " worldly interests." 
 
 Such, I venture to think, is the language 
 which the friends of the Roman Catholics of 
 Ireland, (and what Englishman does not wish 
 to be their friend ?) ought steadily and un- 
 ceasingly to hold towards them. If it please 
 not the zealots on either side, it is not, on that 
 account, the less likely to be wise and salutary. 
 Happily, indeed, in the midst of all that we 
 have to deplore, and to condemn, in the recent 
 conduct of the Irish Roman Catholics, there 
 are not entirely wanting indications of a better 
 kind. In particular, we are enabled to trace 
 the turbulent and insolent demeanour, the 
 threatening attitude, the combined action, the 
 ostentatious unanimity of the whole body, to 
 causes less malignant, and much less for- 
 midable, than any universal spirit of disaffec- 
 tion in the people. The appearances of con- 
 cert and union have been artfully and success- 
 fully got up. But in this very success, the
 
 IN THE MIDST OF PRESENT TURBULENCE. 181 
 
 intrinsic weakness of the combination has been 
 disclosed. The presumption and vanity of 
 those, who prepared it, have, as is frequent in 
 the history of that country, defeated their 
 own pestilent design. In squabbling for the 
 praise of the first invention, or in setting forth 
 the merits of their respective devices, they 
 have let out the secret of the real hollowness 
 of the whole proceeding. Mr. O'Connell,* a 
 
 * Extract of a Letter read in the Irish Association 22d Sep- 
 tember, 1827. 
 
 " Nothing has occurred in Catholic Politics so much to dis- 
 " hearten me, as the neglect to collect this national fund. Some- 
 " times I feel a kind of melancholy satisfaction at the argu- 
 " ment it affords me in justification of my not succeeding in 
 " obtaining emancipation. How is it possible to succeed for 
 " a people who will not make a small sacrifice to the common 
 " cause ? But any satisfaction is soon overpowered by the more 
 " melancholy reflexion that Irishmen will be said not to merit 
 " freedom when they refuse to purchase the chance of obtaining 
 " it at so insignificant a price to each individual. There only 
 " remain to us who appreciate freedom as the greatest pos- 
 " sible earthly good and who are determined never to ac- 
 " quiesce in our Country's wrong, to redouble our exertions 
 " and to make, by our own struggle, the best compensation 
 " we can for the deplorable neglect of others. 
 
 " I am really astonished how any human being can tread 
 " this lovely green land, and not feel his heart glow within 
 " him with the warmest anxiety to see her what she ought to 
 be you know the rest. My dear friend, 
 
 " Very faithfully Your's, 
 
 " E. DWYER, ESQ.'' " DANIEL O'CONNELL."
 
 182 FAVOURABLE INDICATIONS 
 
 very few months ago, " deplored, with bitter 
 " but unavailing regret, the apathy which then 
 " appeared to pervade so many on the subject 
 " of the Catholic Rent." " How," he feelingly 
 asked, " is it possible to succeed for a people 
 " who will not make a small sacrifice to the 
 " common cause?" Again, so late as the 27th 
 of December last, he told the Association, that 
 " he had to complain much of the apathy ex- 
 " hibited in Dublin many of those, who used to 
 " take a part in Catholic affairs, have deserted 
 " them." Mr. Shiel, when, in the fullness of 
 self-gratulation, he was pleased to announce 
 his plan of simultaneous meetings, at the same 
 time apprised us of the absolute necessity of 
 some such plan, in order to prevent the present 
 eagerness of the people from speedily sinking 
 into absolute indifference. 
 
 " We must recollect," says he, " that we are acting 
 for a sanguine, impetuous, ardent, and impassioned 
 multitude, to whose wishes and passions something 
 must be conceded, and that, while upon one hand it is 
 of importance to consult the official convenience of our 
 advocates in power," (his Majesty's late Ministers,) " it 
 is of still greater consequence to keep alive the feeling 
 in this country, which it has cost much labour to call 
 up, and which may subside as rapidly to such a point 
 of depression, that it will hereafter be difficult, if it do 
 not become almost impossible, to raise it again to that 
 degree of excitation which it has now usefully attained ;
 
 IN THE MIDST OF PRESENT TURBULENCE. 183 
 
 but from which, If care be not taken, it may irreme- 
 diably recede /" 
 
 Again, 
 
 [< Look to the effects which were produced in 
 Ireland by the cessation of Catholic meetings in the 
 year 1821. There was neither Committee, nor Board, 
 nor Association. The result was, that a total stagna- 
 tion of public feeling took place, and the Catholic Ques- 
 tion was nearly forgotten. All public meetings had 
 ceased no angry resolutions issued from public bo- 
 diesno exciting speeches appeared in the papers, 
 &c. &c. Causes of public exasperation were gradually 
 dropping out of the national memory. The country 
 was then in a state of comparative repose" 
 
 From this repose, we may readily believe, 
 the country would never have been effectually 
 moved, but for the laudable efforts of Mr. 
 Shiel and his brethren, and the equally lau- 
 dable supineness of those to whom the admi- 
 nistration of the laws was entrusted. But these 
 very considerations justify a hope, that a firm, 
 but temperate, recurrence to the power of law 
 may yet be successful. This hope is strength- 
 ened by another symptom; for, happily, the 
 not unusual effect of efforts disproportioned to 
 the occasion, has occurred in the present in- 
 stance. They, who have evoked the daemon of 
 civil discord, have startled at the aspect of the 
 hideous phantom which has answered to their 
 incantation. They who hoped to strike dismay
 
 184 FAVOURABLE INDICATIONS. 
 
 into the hearts of Englishmen by the imposing 
 enumeration of the hosts that follow them, 
 who boasted, that " the tramp of seven millions 
 " of men," marching to demand their rights, 
 will be heard in the Courts of Princes and in 
 the Halls of Senates, seem to have been them- 
 selves stunned by the echo of their own me- 
 nace. The whole proceeding affords an illus- 
 tration of the judicious remark of Carte, on the 
 predecessors of Messrs. Shiel and O'Connell, 
 the lawyers of 1641, who, in spite of their rea- 
 diness to drive matters to the very verge of re- 
 bellion, wished there to stop, " being a sort of 
 " men always averse to war, in which their 
 " profession is of little use." Accordingly, in 
 the present instance, the tone of intimidation, 
 the threat of physical force, have suddenly sub- 
 sided into the expedients of legal cunning, and 
 the trickery of an election committee. Those 
 members of the legislature, who support the 
 ministers of their sovereign, are, it seems, de- 
 nounced as the enemies of Ireland ; they are to 
 be driven at the earliest opportunity from the 
 seats they occupy ; as if the ostentatious 
 exercise of present power, in open violation 
 of the best privilege of Parliament, were an 
 argument for the wisdom of higher and larger 
 concession. 
 
 Not that the legal actors in this strange
 
 BAD SPIRIT OF IRISH R. C. PRELATES. 185 
 
 drama have performed the most effective, 
 though, it may be, the most prominent parts. 
 The clergy, and, above all, the hierarchy, may, 
 with the best reason, claim to themselves, in 
 these our days, the same proud distinction, 
 which has ever belonged to them, in almost 
 all the convulsions of their unhappy country. 
 A recent work,* which ought to be in the hands 
 of every one, who wishes to have a just notion 
 of the spirit which has uniformly actuated the 
 Roman Catholic Prelates of Ireland, informs 
 us what has been that spirit, down to the epoch 
 of the great rebellion. Walsh, the honest 
 Franciscan, Carte, the Biographer of Ormond, 
 the preamble to the Irish Statute of 9 William 
 III., c. l.,f and, though last in the enumera- 
 tion, not least in authority, the living Irish 
 Roman Catholic Priest, Dr. O'Conor, have ex- 
 tended the statement to a much later period ; 
 and the narrative is at length taken up, and 
 completed even to the present times, by the 
 conduct and the language of the living prelates 
 themselves. 
 
 * Dr. Pbelan's " Policy of the Church of Rome in Ireland." 
 
 f " Whereas it is notoriously known, that all the late rebd- 
 
 11 lions have been contrived, promoted, and carried on by Popish 
 
 " Archbishops, Bishops, Jesuits, and other ecclesiastical persons 
 
 f( of the Romish Clergy."
 
 186 LANGUAGE AND CONDUCT 
 
 Language and Conduct of Irish Roman Catholic 
 Prelates. 
 
 This is a matter which will require some de- 
 tail. 
 
 The Roman Catholic Prelates of Ireland 
 have been remarkable for the skill, with which 
 they have always accommodated their conduct 
 to their own views of the situation, in which 
 they are placed. While no prospect presents 
 itself of obtaining advantages by rousing the 
 passions of the multitude, they observe the 
 semblance, (and often, let us hope, the reality,) 
 of dutiful and contented submission to the go- 
 vernment under which they live. They express 
 themselves in terms of exemplary loyalty, they 
 chide the excesses, and deplore the rashness, 
 of their erring people. Meanwhile, with a vigi- 
 lance that never sleeps, with an elasticity of 
 hope, which no degree of pressure can ever 
 wholly keep down, with a passionate and anx- 
 ious longing for the restoration of the power 
 of their Church and of their order, they never 
 omit a single occasion of serving that holy 
 cause, and of preparing for what they confi- 
 dently expect must one day happen, its signal 
 and enduring triumph. This ardent and stirring
 
 OF IRISH ROMAN CATHOLIC PRELATES. 187 
 
 zeal has made them at all times the formidable 
 enemy of the government under which they 
 are placed; and incalculably more formidable 
 would they be, were they not at the same time 
 as much distinguished by the extravagance of 
 their projects, the wildness of their hopes, the 
 wantonness of their presumption, whenever the 
 faintest prospect of success opens upon them, 
 as by their fixed and rooted hostility to every 
 adverse establishment. 
 
 It is not uninteresting to trace the variety 
 of tone, which has, at different recent periods, 
 marked their language. 
 
 Before any part of the penal code was re- 
 pealed, we meet with an exhortation read from 
 their altars, in the year 1757, immediately after 
 the accession of the Duke of Bedford to the 
 Lieutenancy of Ireland, a nobleman, who was 
 believed to entertain kindly sentiments towards 
 their body. " A series of more than sixty 
 " years," says this exhortation, " spent, with a 
 " pious resignation, under the hardships of ve*y 
 " severe penal laws, and with the greatest thank- 
 f( fulness for the lenity and moderation with which 
 " they were executed, ever since the accession 
 " of the present Royal Family, is certainly a 
 " fact, which must outweigh, in the minds of 
 " all unbiassed persons, any misconceived opi-
 
 188 PEACEFUL TONE OF IRISH R. C. PRELATES, 
 
 " nions of the doctrines and tenets of our Holy 
 " Church/'* 
 
 At a subsequent period, soon after the Bill 
 was passed, which relieved them, and their lay 
 brethren, from all that was oppressive in the 
 penal laws, giving the elective franchise, 
 and leaving no restraints or disabilities, but 
 those which were deemed essential to the safety 
 of the State, the Prelates addressed his late 
 Majesty, in terms not only of the warmest gra- 
 titude, but of the most complete contentment. 
 Avoiding the very name of a Roman Catholic 
 Church, (such was their cautious regard to the de- 
 corum of their condition,) they thus began: "We 
 " the undersigned, &c. Prelates of the Roman 
 " Catholic Communion in Ireland, impressed 
 " with the lively sentiments of inviolable attach- 
 " ment to your Majesty's sacred person and 
 " Government, which, we trust, will ever dis- 
 " tinguish those of our order in this Kingdom, 
 " are happy to avail ourselves of this occasion, 
 '* the earliest that has offered, of humbly adding 
 " the tribute of our acknowledgments to the gene- 
 " ral voice of a grateful people" 
 
 " The recollection of our past, and the con- 
 " temptation of our present condition, will best 
 
 * Parnell's History of Penal Laws, p. 47. 6s.
 
 EVEN AT RECENT PERIODS. 189 
 
 " illustrate the character of a Patriot King, im- 
 " partially attending to the wants and deserts 
 " of his people. Under your Majesty's auspi- 
 " cious reign, and particularly through your 
 " late paternal recommendation to Parliament, 
 " heavy penalties, to which we were subject, have 
 " been removed. We were patient under disa- 
 " bilities ; we are thankful for our happy change. 
 " Ministers of a Gospel, which enjoins meek- 
 " ness in adversity, and submission to those 
 " who are constituted in authority over us, we 
 " have not at any time omitted to inculcate the 
 " lesson of obedience and loyalty. The favours 
 " we have received, add private feeling to public 
 " obligation; we shall continue, with unremit- 
 " ting zeal, to discharge that indispensable duty." 
 Such, in the beginning of 1794, was the lan- 
 guage, if not the feelings, of the Romish Hierar- 
 chy in Ireland. It continued to be so, to a 
 comparatively recent period; nor ought it to 
 have been expected, that this language should 
 ever change. For, in truth, whatever may be 
 the grievances of the lay members of that Com- 
 munion, their Clergy, supposing them to be 
 sincere in disclaiming all hopes of aggrandize- 
 ment, have absolutely nothing to complain of. 
 They are under no disabilities : and so, be it 
 remembered, so late as 1805, it was distinctly
 
 190 DR. DOYLE'S PASTORAL ADDRESS 
 
 admitted, or rather urged, by Dr. Troy, then 
 Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, in his 
 Letter to Sir J. C. Hippesley.* " The Roman 
 " Catholic Clergy in Ireland," says he, " were by 
 " no means connected with the object of the Petition; 
 " they were, of all the Irish Roman Catholics, 
 " the only persons that were not to be benefited) as 
 " a professional description, by the concession 
 " of the political favours for which their lay 
 " brethren humbly asked." 
 
 In full accordance with this peaceful and un- 
 ambitious strain, in November, 1822, Dr. Doyle 
 put forth a " Pastoral Address" against the ille- 
 gal associations, which had recently disturbed 
 the peace of Ireland. In it, he employed all 
 the energy and eloquence of no ordinary mind, 
 to bring back the misguided multitude to a 
 sense of their wickedness, and to warn them of 
 the misery they were inflicting on themselves 
 and on their country. " "What is the period," 
 he demands, " which you have chosen to form 
 " a dark and bloody conspiracy against all that 
 " is established by the will of God., in a country 
 " that should be more dear to you, than life? 
 " Precisely that, when our gracious Sovereign 
 
 * See Speech of Sir J. C. Hippesley, 18th May, 1810. 
 Faultier and Booker. Supp. App. p. 32.
 
 IN NOVEMBER, 1822. 191 
 
 " visited us like a common father, quelling the 
 " tumult of the passions, allaying the spirit of 
 " party and dissension, and dispensing among 
 " every class and description of his people the 
 " spirit of peace and good-will;" " when Eng- 
 " land, with a bounty and generosity peculiarly 
 " her own, had watched over our distress, with 
 " the anxiety of a mother, and ministered out 
 " of her abundance to all our wants; raising 
 " up her charities, like a shield, to protect us 
 " against famine and pestilence, clothing the 
 " naked, feeding the hungry, and consoling the 
 " distressed, forgetting our crimes and atrocities 
 " in the South, the innocent blood that called to 
 " Heaven for vengeance against us, and remem- 
 " bering only that we were men and Christians, 
 " though many of us undeserving of that name. 
 " This was the period, when ' mercy and truth 
 " ' seemed to have met, and justice and peace 
 " ' to have kissed each other;' that you were 
 " impelled by the enemy of all good to defeat the 
 " designs of Heaven upon your country, and 
 " oppose new obstacles to her improvement. Shall 
 " Ireland, my dear, but infatuated brethren, 
 " be always doomed to suffer, and to suffer 
 " through the blindness and malice of her own chil- 
 " drenl Who will in future sympathize in her 
 " misfortunes? Who will vindicate her rights?
 
 192 DR. DOYLE'S PASTORAL ADDRESS 
 
 " Who will proclaim the virtues of her sons, if 
 " a portion of them appear not only disaf- 
 " fected, but also blind to their own inte- 
 " rests ; and if what never, until now, could be 
 " objected to them, that they are ungrateful?" 
 
 Such was the warm, and high, and earnest 
 tone of reproof which then seemed to Dr. Doyle 
 to be demanded by the sacredness and autho- 
 rity of his station. And it is worthy of remark, 
 that he not only, throughout this Address, ab- 
 stains from alluding to any grievance affecting 
 the Church, or Clergy of the Church, of Rome, 
 (this, i t may be said, the occasion forbade,) 
 but he even goes out of his way to declare, 
 that there was no such grievance existing. 
 " You are intolerant and uncharitable, brethren, 
 " on this head ; but it is not your religion, but 
 " your prejudices and passions, that render you 
 " so." " In this country your religion is not only 
 " tolerated, but protected by law ; it is poor, but 
 " poverty is the cradle in which Christianity 
 " was nursed, and riches have always been its 
 " bane. Your Clergy have a competency, alike 
 " removed from poverty and affluence, and de- 
 " rived from a source, which secures to you 
 " their attention, and protects the purity of 
 " their own lives. They seek, they desire 
 " nothing more. It is clear, then, that on the
 
 IN NOVEMBER 1822. 193 
 
 " score of religion, your conspiracies are without 
 " an object ; and it is the Angel of Darkness, 
 " who transforms himself into an Angel of 
 " Light, that he may seduce you to violate all 
 " the charities of the Gospel, under the ap- 
 " pearance of zeal for the faith." 
 
 " Return, dearly beloved, to the ways of 
 " peace; leave the Legislature to pursue those 
 " means of improving your country, which their 
 " wisdom will devise; let the Government meet 
 " with a grateful return for the solicitude they 
 " manifest in maintaining the rights, and pro- 
 " viding for the wants, of the people. Leave 
 11 your Church to enjoy the liberty she possesses. 
 " Wipe away, by your peaceable demeanour 
 " for the time to come, that foul stain, which 
 " your conduct has, to a certain extent, already 
 " cast upon your religion." 
 
 We have here the language of Dr. Doyle at 
 the close of the year 1822. But, before the fol- 
 lowing year was very far advanced, he was en- 
 lightened to a new view of the situation of 
 his countrymen, and to a very different judg- 
 ment of the course, which his duty, as a Bishop 
 of the Irish Roman Catholic Church, called on 
 him to pursue. What particular considerations 
 induced this change it were useless to inquire. 
 Be it sufficient to know, that from his latter
 
 194 DR. DOYLE IN 1823. 
 
 course the course of stimulating even to mad- 
 ness all the worst passions of his people he 
 has never since swerved except during the 
 very brief period of his residence in England, 
 and in his testimony before the Committee of 
 the late Parliament. 
 
 In 1823, he set forth, under the initials of 
 his Episcopal title, J. K. L. (James Kildare and 
 Leighlin) a " Vindication of the Religious and 
 *' Civil Principles of the Irish Catholics, ad- 
 " dressed to his Excellency the Marquis Wel- 
 " lesley." In it he proclaims his " object to 
 " be to offer to his Excellency some reflections 
 " in vindication of the proscribed body to which 
 " he belongs, and of the insulted religion which 
 " he professes."* He tells him, that " the lights 
 " of the last century, and the humanity of the 
 " late King mitigated the evils," which had be- 
 fore weighed down his countrymen. " The op- 
 " pressed were permitted to breathe, and straw, 
 " wherewith to make their bricks, was given to 
 " them, not for their own sake, but that they 
 " might become more available to their proprietors. 
 " They were allowed, under certain limita- 
 ' tions,| to acquire and inherit property ; even 
 " the shadow of freedom, but that only, in the 
 
 * p. 6. j- What limitations ?
 
 DR. DOYLE IN 1823. 195 
 
 " elective franchise, was suffered to appear to 
 " them."* 
 
 Such was now Dr. Doyle's description of the 
 same state, which, a few brief months before, 
 he had characterized as a state of liberty, pro- 
 tected by a benign government, which had 
 thereby entitled itself not only to the obedience, 
 but to the love and gratitude of its much-fa- 
 voured subjects. These very subjects, even in 
 their late guilty insurrection, were now to be 
 considered as " men who, writhing under 
 " wrongs and oppression, had struggled against 
 " the chains which bound them."f 
 
 I will not dwell on the seeming incon- 
 sistency ; for, in truth, the inconsistency is only 
 seeming, an inconsistency of words, dictated by 
 a spirit of the most entire oneness and immuta- 
 bility. In 1822, it was deemed expedient to 
 cajole the Protestants, and, therefore, to observe 
 the appearance, and acquire the character, of 
 the most devoted loyalty; in 1823, it had be- 
 come more important to excite the Roman Ca- 
 tholics, and, for that purpose, to set an example 
 of stern defiance of the hostility of Government, 
 and of the most daring invectives against the 
 existing laws. He whose principle of action 
 
 * p. 8. f p- 11. 
 
 o 2
 
 196 DR. DOYLE R. C. BISHOP 
 
 is, in all circumstances, to advance the interests 
 of his church, must, of course, vary his mode 
 of advancing them, according to the shifting 
 character of the times he lives in. Dr. Doyle 
 may, indeed, claim the praise of more con- 
 sistency, even of words, than might be, at first 
 sight, allotted to him. For he himself tells us, 
 that whatever may have been the language of 
 his printed " Pastorals," his esoteric doctrines 
 were always much more liberal. " How often," 
 says he, " have 1 perceived, in a congregation 
 " of some thousand persons, how the very men- 
 " tion,/r0??z my own tongue, of the penal code, 
 " caused every eye to glisten, and every ear to 
 " stand erect! The trumpet of the last judg- 
 " ment, if sounded, would not produce a more 
 " perfect stillness in any assemblage of Irish 
 " peasantry, than a strong allusion to the wrongs 
 " we suffer"* 
 
 That this latter tone is the tone which best 
 accords with his real feelings, and will ever 
 characterize his private Addresses to his flock, 
 nay, will, in future, dictate his language before 
 the world, he has elsewhere frankly told us, 
 and in this we may be sure he will keep 
 his word. " We will never cease" says he, 
 " whilst our tongues can move, or our pens can 
 
 Letters of J. K. L. p. 287.
 
 OF LEIGHLIN AND KILDARE 197 
 
 " write, to keep alive, in the whole empire, as 
 " well as in our own people, a sense of the 
 " wrongs we suffer, and to exhibit to an indig- 
 " nant world, all the privations we endure, 
 " Our fetters are too galling- our chains are too 
 " closely riveted our keepers are too unfeeling, 
 "for us to remain silent, or permit them to enjoy 
 " repose"* 
 
 But Dr. Doyle is not the only prelate who 
 has evinced this spirit. If he were, I should 
 not have thought it necessary to have dwelt 
 thus at length on his solitary instance. The 
 recent proceedings of the Association at Dub- 
 lin, and of other meetings in different parts of 
 Ireland, have shown us, that it is only the su- 
 perior energy and talents of this individual that 
 have fixed on him the distinction of being ac- 
 tuated by feelings, which, in fact, belong to all 
 his brethren. I will here beg leave to select a 
 few instances to prove the justice of this re- 
 mark. 
 
 " Connaught Provincial Catholic Meeting." -\ 
 
 " At a most numerous and highly respectable 
 " meeting of the Catholic inhabitants of the pro- 
 
 * Vindication, p. 44. 
 
 t See Dublin Evening Post, Oct. 911, 1827.
 
 198 DR. KELLY R. C. ARCHBISHOP OF TUAM. 
 
 " vince of Connaught, convened by public re- 
 " quisition," (the Roman Catholic Archbishop's 
 name was first in the list of requisitors), " and 
 " held in the parish Chapel of Ballinasloe, on 
 " Sunday, the 7th of October, 1827," (during 
 the Ballinasloe fair, where thousands from all 
 parts of Ireland were gathered together,) his 
 Grace the Catholic Archbishop of Tuam having 
 been called, by acclamation, to the Chair, the 
 following resolutions were unanimously adopted: 
 
 1. " That liberty of conscience is the inhe- 
 " rent right of all mankind, and cannot be taken 
 " away without opposition,* nor surrendered 
 " without a crime." (On the modern zeal for 
 " liberty of conscience" in these prelates, I 
 shall have occasion to say something pre- 
 sently.) 
 
 5. " That we earnestly entreat the people of 
 " this province to re-commence the collection 
 " of ' the rent,' to form a fund for the protection 
 " of those numerous patriots, who had the firm- 
 " ness to assert their constitutional right of 
 " elective franchise, and as a means of affording 
 " every individual an opportunity of manifest- 
 " ing his feeling in one common cause." 
 
 After this resolution had been moved and 
 
 * This, it appears, was a misprint for " oppression," the- 
 word moved in the resolution at the Meeting.
 
 DR. KELLY R. C. ARCHBSIHOP OF TUAM. 199 
 
 seconded the Chairman, (his Grace the R. C. 
 Archbishop of Tuam) said, " there was no re- 
 " solution which he felt so much pleasure in 
 " putting from that place," (his seat as Chair- 
 man in the Parish Chapel, on Sunday, immedi- 
 ately after the performance of divine service) 
 " as one recommending the speedy and general 
 " collection of the Catholic rent." 
 
 Now, in order to do justice to this speech of 
 his Grace, it is proper to bear in mind, that 
 " the Patriots" whose " firmness, in asserting 
 " their right of elective franchise," demanded 
 so generous a protection, were men, who are 
 described by Dr. Doyle as "steeping their souls 
 " in perjury" by swearing to a freehold which they 
 did not possess; and that this description is con- 
 firmed by divers witnesses before the Parlia- 
 mentary Committee of 1825, particularly by 
 Dr. Kelly himself* and Mr. O'Connell.t It 
 must also be remembered, that the other ob- 
 ject of the " rent," stated in this resolution, 
 had been just before publicly called by Mr. 
 Shiel " a means of organizing and affiliating 
 " the people, by which every man, who con- 
 " tributes the smallest fraction of money, be- 
 
 * Corns. Com. 252. f Lords' Com. p. 255.
 
 200 DR. KELLY R. C. ARCHBISHOP OF TUAM. 
 
 " comes the member of a vast corporation in- 
 " stituted for the liberty of Ireland." * 
 
 And lest there should be any doubt that the 
 Archbishop, and the Meeting, over which he 
 presided, entered into the full force of Mr. 
 Shiel's language on this occasion, their 14th 
 unanimous Resolution proclaims, " That Robert 
 " Shiel, Esq. is pre-eminently entitled to thegra- 
 " titude of the Roman Catholics of this pro- 
 " vince, whose cause he has so often advocated, 
 " with that splendid eloquence and uncompro- 
 " mising energy, which render him at once the 
 " pride and bulwark of his suffering fellow-coun- 
 " trymen." 
 
 I will here beg leave to adduce one or two 
 other specimens of this gentleman's " uncom- 
 " promising energy," which has entitled him to 
 his Grace's signal praise and gratitude. 
 
 In his Speech at the Roman Catholic Asso- 
 ciation, made about a fortnight before this Con- 
 naught Meeting, and to which it is quite evi- 
 dent, that the resolution of that Meeting parti- 
 cularly referred, this " permitted incendiary," 
 as he has been called, thus expresses him- 
 self: -t 
 
 " Much has been already done, but much more may 
 
 * See above, p. 155. 
 
 t Dublin Evening Mail, 22 Sept. 1827.
 
 MR. SHIEL. 201 
 
 " still be done. We have admirable materials in our 
 " hands. In every parish in Ireland there is a parish 
 11 priest and a curate. The Clergy of Ireland consti- 
 " tute a sort of intellectual aristocracy, and supply the 
 " place of an aristocracy of rank or wealth, in which 
 " we are deficient. I shall take an early opportunity 
 " of carrying into effect, a project which I before sug- 
 " gested, of establishing a communication between a 
 " central committee of correspondence and every parish 
 " in Ireland. Thus simultaneous meetings, through the 
 " whole country may be produced. There are difficul- 
 " ties in the way, but difficulties vanish before the 
 " spirit of genuine enterprise. A great exertion ought 
 " to be, and by the blessing of God, shall be made. 
 " The whole population of Ireland shall be aroused a 
 "fiercer ardour for liberty, than ever yet was raised, 
 " shall be called up, and the tables of the Legislature 
 " shall groan beneath the burthen of petitions that 
 " shall be accumulated upon them. Let our English 
 " Legislators learn what they have to expect from the 
 " refusal of all justice to our country. It cannot be too 
 " often and too powerfully impressed upon them. Let 
 " there be no prostration, no debasement, in the senti- 
 " ments which those petitions shall breathe; let us de- 
 " mand our equalization as a right, indefeasible and 
 " immutable, and show that when we ask for liberty, we 
 " are animated by the emotions of men who are de- 
 " serving to be free. The tone and the attitude of Ire- 
 " land should correspond with her increasing import- 
 " ance and power. She should stand at the bar of the 
 " Legislature erect and independent; and stretching 
 " forth her vigorous and gigantic arm, upon which a
 
 202 MR. SHIEL. 
 
 " chain should no longer be worn, she should remind 
 " her oppressors of the breach of contracts, of the in- 
 " fractions of treaties, of the violation of all right, of 
 " the outrage upon all honour, and, having demon- 
 " strated her injuries, having disclosed all her wrongs, 
 " having torn open her bosom, if I may so say, and 
 " shewn the hideous cancer of faction eating her to the 
 " heart, and corroding the life and substance of her 
 " being, she should tell them that she will be eventually 
 " as strong as she is miserable, and exclaim, ' Do me 
 " ( justice rescue me from wretchedness, and from dis- 
 " ' traction give me back my liberty raise me to the 
 " 'place I should maintain in the empire give me 
 " ' back my spoliated rights restore me to my violated 
 " 'franchises give me back my liberty or . 
 
 " * 1 pause upon the brink of the alter- 
 
 " ' native to which I have hurried ; and receding from 
 " ' it, leave it to you to complete the sentence.' " 
 (Loud cheers.) 
 
 The first emotion excited by the perusal of 
 this choice effusion (after a little old-fashioned 
 indignation) is a feeling of curiosity a desire 
 of knowing, whether the ancient office of At- 
 torney-General in Ireland is merely a channel 
 for conveying six or seven thousand pounds per 
 annum into the pockets of some liberal lawyer, 
 or still continues to be encumbered with 
 certain duties. The next emotion is grati- 
 tude to Mr. Shiel, for drawing forth so very 
 distinct an expression of the real principles
 
 DR. KELLY DR. BURKE. 203 
 
 and feelings of the Most Rev. Dr. Kelly,* the 
 Roman Catholic Archbishop of Tuam, a pre- 
 late who has well merited the especial thanks 
 of the Association^ in Dublin, for his more than 
 common zeal. 
 
 The next prelate, whom I shall adduce, is the 
 Right Rev. Dr. Burke, R. C. Coadjutor Bishop 
 of Elphin, who did himself the honour of pre- 
 siding at a dinner given by the forty-shilling 
 
 * This same prelate, in September, 1826, is stated to have 
 addressed several thousand persons, at a meeting held under the 
 ruins of the ancient Abbey of Murisk, in the County of Mayo, 
 in the following terms : " Look around, and behold those ve- 
 " nerable ruins under which we are assembled such is the 
 " disgraceful and oppressive system of the penal laws, that if I 
 " had means of throwing a roof over this building, that you might 
 " congregate here for the worship of God, that act would be ille- 
 " gal, although this church was built by the pious offerings of 
 " your ancestors. On every side to which we turn, there are 
 " pains and penalties for the persecuted Catholic. Is he not corn- 
 " pelled to break through the ordinances of his church, or be 
 " dismissed from his employment ? Must he not work at fac- 
 " tories not far from where we now stand, on days on which he 
 " should worship his God, or be turned out of employment, 
 " and stigmatized by the name of Papist ? My friends, these 
 " things are quite familiar to us ; if any other nation suffered 
 " as we have suffered, if our English friends were to endure such 
 " oppression, do you not imagine that they would be long since 
 " removed ) " 
 
 t Mr. O'Connell's Speech in the Association, Friday, Jan. 
 25, 1828.
 
 204 DR. BURKE R. C. COAD. BISHOP OF ELPHIN. 
 
 freeholders at Sligo, on the 14th of November, 
 1827, " to their distinguished and valued coun- 
 " tryman, Mr. Lawless," a gentleman connected 
 with the public press in Ireland, for whom, I 
 must frankly confess, I have far more respect, 
 than for all the other orators of the Association. 
 There is an air of honesty and sincerity, what- 
 ever be thought of his wisdom or moderation, 
 in all he says, which places him far above the 
 majority of those who commonly address that 
 Assembly. But for Dr. Burke. 
 
 That Right Rev. person, in the course of 
 discharging his function of toast-master, rose 
 and said, " to guard against the misconception 
 " of the next toast, ' Ireland as she ought to be,' 
 " I simply mean, that she should cease to be 
 " treated as an alien, and should receive some- 
 " thing like paternal affection." Admirable 
 prudence ! " Ireland as she ought to be" hav- 
 ing been disposed of, the Chairman again rose, 
 " Gentlemen, fill a bumper full as your 
 " hearts. I cannot select a more appropriate 
 " time than the present, after the toast we have 
 " already drank, to give the health of our 
 " highly-distinguished guest." " He has ad- 
 " vocated the liberties of Ireland fearlessly and 
 ' honestly." " He has spurred on to the glorious 
 " cause of liberty and independence, many who
 
 DR. BURKE MR. LAWLESS. 205 
 
 " would otherwise have remained in a state of 
 " apathy and indifference, and communicated to 
 " them the electric fluid of patriotism, with which 
 " he is surcharged!" " So long as Ireland has 
 " a name in the nations around her, his name 
 " shall live in the records of his country, and 
 " be pronounced as the watch-word of civil 
 " and religious liberty." " He stands this 
 " day upon an elevated pedestal, to be gazed 
 " on with delight and admiration. I shall no 
 " longer restrain your impatience, but shall 
 " propose the health of John Lawless, Esq." 
 
 This gentleman immediately proved his title 
 to the venerable prelate's panegyric by a long 
 and animated speech, of which the following 
 is a specimen : " What Englishman will re- 
 " fuse to acknowledge the cruelty and in- 
 " justice which my country has suffered ? 
 " None ; no, not one but him whose heart 
 " and head are corrupted by place, and power, 
 " and pension then Protestant and Catholic 
 " are equally the sycophant and the slave ; 
 " but the unplaced, the unpensioned English- 
 " man, Scotchman, or Irishman, cannot close 
 " his eyes upon the damned injustice under 
 " which Ireland has suffered, and continues to 
 " suffer. England drew the sword and con- 
 " quered, Scotland drew the sword and con-
 
 206 DR. BURKE MR. LAWLESS. 
 
 " quered, you petitioned, and you are still in 
 " chains. (Cheers.) You petitioned, against 
 " what ? against a system which would drive 
 " England into rebellion, call up all her great and 
 " glorious spirits, and once more revive the scene 
 " of Runnimede." 
 
 It is but justice to Mr. Lawless here to say, 
 that the debate in the English House of Com- 
 mons, in March last, afforded him very high 
 Protestant legal authority for this part of his 
 argument. But he proceeds : " What is that 
 " system? I put it thus : suppose this a Pro- 
 " testant nation, the great majority Protestant 
 " suppose the Established Church Catholic, 
 " the Bench of Justice Catholic, the High 
 " Sheriffs Catholic, the industry, the sweat 
 " and labour of the Protestant community 
 " were eternally drawn upon by the avarice, 
 " and profusion, and insolence of Catholic mo- 
 " nopoly. (Loud cheers.) What would be the 
 " feelings of this Protestant Ireland ? Would 
 " they petition ? Yes ; but it would be a Pe- 
 " tition of Rights, asserting their place in their 
 " country, and dissipating to the world the 
 " audacious usurpers of their rights and privi- 
 " leges. Catholic Ireland bows her head, and 
 " year after year, goes, like a beggar, with her pe- 
 " tition tathe bar of a Foreign Parliament. Two-
 
 DR. BURKE MR. LAWLESS. 207 
 
 " and-twenty years she has been travelling this 
 " weary journey; for twenty-two years she has 
 " been insulted and mocked with one plea or 
 " another." 
 
 I will not cull any more flowers of this gen- 
 tleman's rhetoric ; but will proceed to identity 
 his feelings with those of the Right Reverend 
 Chairman. That personage's health having 
 been proposed by Mr. Lawless himself, his 
 gratitude and admiration were thus expressed: 
 " After the flow of eloquence which you have 
 " just heard, and which must have thrilled to the 
 " heart's core, how can an humble individual, 
 " like myself, attempt to address you ?" " I 
 " know we members of the prelacy are charged 
 " with being too fond of mixing in politics;" 
 " but surely the enlightened and discriminating 
 " will allow us the privilege of advocating and 
 " mingling in that struggle for the religious 
 " freedom of our fellow men ; and how could 
 " six or seven and twenty Bishops, and two 
 " thousand priests, prevent that religion from 
 " being wholly swept away, did not the people 
 " stick to us ? Shame should attach to us, unless 
 " we persevered in the same course, and embarked 
 " in the same vessel" " I feel it the highest 
 " honour to have my health proposed by so II- 
 " lustrious an individual. I am not sufficient to
 
 208 DR. EGAN DR. WALDRON. 
 
 " the task of returning my thanks, but I offer 
 " you the homage of a grateful heart."* 
 
 From the Right Rev. Dr. Burke proceed we 
 to the Right Rev. Dr. Egan, R. C. Bishop of 
 Ardfert. But to this prelate, and those that 
 follow, I cannot afford so much space as to his 
 preceding brethren. 
 
 At the aggregate meeting of the Roman Ca- 
 tholics of Kerry, held in the Chapel of Killarney, 
 by his Lordship's express permission, on the 
 7th of December last, Dr. Egan " proposed the 
 "resolution of thanks to the Association. Ire- 
 " land," he said, ' was deeply indebted to that 
 " invaluable body. It had supported the hier- 
 " archy, and protected the people." " He 
 " would not praise the Catholic Association, 
 " the universal voice of Ireland had already 
 " proclaimed its title to the most unbounded con- 
 "Jidence" 
 
 The Right Rev. Dr. Waldron, R. C. Bishop 
 of Killala, summoned and presided over a meet- 
 ing of his clergy, at Ballina, on the 27th Sep- 
 tember last, at which it was unanimously re- 
 solved, " That we (the clergy} pledge ourselves 
 " not to relax our constitutional efforts, until 
 " that unconditional Emancipation shall have been 
 
 * See " The Western Luminary," Sligo, Nov. 23, 1827.
 
 DR. WALDRON DR. KERNAN. 209 
 
 " achieved, without which Ireland cannot be con- 
 " tented, nor the British Empire secure" 
 
 They further resolved, " That for the vigour 
 " with which the prostrate freeholders at length 
 " arose, and simultaneously walked forth out 
 " of their political thraldom, they have fixed 
 " the admiration, and earned the gratitude of 
 " the Empire, and that in this tardy exertion 
 " of their independence, we recognize a just 
 " retribution exercised on some landlords, who 
 " have perfidiously striven to sunder the sacred 
 " connexion that has hitherto bound the pastor and 
 " the people." 
 
 The Right Rev. Dr. Kernan, R. C. Bishop of 
 Clogher, in a circular letter to his clergy, dated 
 Carrickmacross, Jan. 2, 1828, calls on them 
 to forward the plan of simultaneous meetings 
 throughout Ireland, in conformity to the appli- 
 cation of " their inestimable friend, and highly 
 " distinguished countryman, Daniel O'Con- 
 " nell ;" and he concludes in the following 
 terms " I have, therefore, to request you will 
 " call a meeting of the Catholics of your parish, 
 " to be held on Sunday the 13th inst. for the 
 " laudable and highly necessary purpose of 
 " petitioning Parliament for emancipation, and 
 " thereby effecting the redemption of the Catholics
 
 210 DR. FFRENCH DR. COPPINGER. 
 
 " of Ireland from slavery, and establishing peace 
 " throughout our unhappy country." 
 
 The Right Rev. Dr. Ffrench, R. C. Bishop of 
 Kilmacduagh , and Warden of Gal way, writes 
 to Mr. O'Connell, that " in compliance with 
 " his just and patriotic request, he had lost no 
 " time to issue circulars, praying his clergy to 
 " hold simultaneous meetings on the 13th of 
 " January, in order to petition Parliament for 
 ' ' a full and unqualified repeal of the penal code, 
 " affecting their just and natural rights as men 
 " and citizens," and concludes with " assuring 
 " him, that no one values more his unwearied 
 " exertions in favour of civil and religious 
 " liberty." 
 
 The Right Rev. Dr. Coppinger, R. C. Bishop 
 of Cloyne, "the patriarch of the Irish Church," 
 (as his lay namesake calls him,) the rival of Mr. 
 O'Connell himself, in the merit of introducing 
 the Catholic rent; " for," says the orator, " if 
 " Mr. O'C. gave that measure its birth and 
 " name, it received its confirmation from Dr. 
 " Coppinger;" this venerable person informs 
 the Association, in a letter dated Jan. 3, that he 
 " had partly anticipated Mr. O'Connell's com- 
 " munication on the subject of parochial peti- 
 " tions, by announcing it from the pulpit, most
 
 DRS. MURRAY COEN J. KELLY LOGAN. 211 
 
 " emphatically : and that he moreover had sent 
 " to Cork, a form of prayer to be read on the 
 " occasion, upon Sunday the 13th, and upon 
 " every subsequent one, until the result of their 
 " petitions should be made known." 
 
 In reference to this letter, Mr. O'Connell, 
 after " hoping the other prelates would adopt 
 " the plan," made the following very significant 
 remark: " A large portion of his Majesty's army 
 " were Catholics; and it would be most useful, 
 " after having devoted the week to the service 
 " of their King, that their thoughts should, on 
 " the Sabbath day, be directed to their God 
 " and to their country." 
 
 The Most Rev. Dr. Murray, R. C. Archbishop 
 of Dublin, " felt grateful to the Association for 
 " the kind manner in which they received his 
 " subscription to the Catholic rent, and expressed 
 <l himself warmly attached to that body." 
 
 The Right Rev. Dr. Coen, R. C. Coadjutor 
 Bishop oj'Clonfert, and Dr. J. Kelly, R. C. Bishop 
 of Dromore, send in their adhesion in very am- 
 ple form so does Dr. Logan, R. C. Bishop of 
 Meath, in terms of the most flattering confi- 
 dence in Mr. O'Connell. 
 
 The R. C. Primate of all Ireland, the Most 
 Rev. Dr. Curtis, Archbishop of Armagh, goes 
 further. He not only adopts the measure of 
 
 p 2
 
 212 DR. CURTIS. 
 
 the simultaneous meetings on the 13th of Janu- 
 ary, and announces his zealous exertions for 
 raising the Catholic rent ; but he also promises 
 Mr. O'Connell his support in his future mea- 
 sures, as he " shall always feel extremely 
 " happy to afford Mr. O'C. every proof in his 
 " power, of that sincere respect, esteem, and 
 " gratitude, to which he has so many indis- 
 " pu table and daily-increasing claims on the 
 " whole Catholic body." 
 
 It is a matter of reasonable curiosity to inquire 
 what his Grace considered on January 2, the 
 date of this letter, to be Mr. O'Connell's " daily 
 " increasing claims," and a reference to the 
 measures proposed, and the language held by 
 that gentleman, just before that time, in the 
 Catholic Association, will give us the informa- 
 tion we desire. It appears, then, that the im- 
 mediate occasion of his Grace's high panegyric 
 was " a Circular Address, imploring the aid, 
 " countenance, and active co-operation of the 
 " venerable and venerated Catholic Clergy of 
 " Ireland," in holding simultaneous meetings 
 on Sunday the 13th of January, immediately 
 after the last mass, to petition the legislature 
 ." for relief from the most cruel as well as cause- 
 " less persecution that ever afflicted any nation." 
 It also appears, that on the day when Mr.
 
 DR. LAFFAN THE CLERGY. 213 
 
 O'Connell proposed this Address, the 27th of 
 December last, he said to the meeting, " There 
 " always has been one measure, the darling 
 " object of my life, I mean the Repeal of the 
 "Union. If Ireland had a legislature, &c. Are 
 " you then astonished to hear me declare, that 
 " there is but one safety for Ireland, the Repeal of 
 " the Union?" (Cheers.) 
 
 I need not seek for further instances. I will 
 only remark that one only prelate, the Most 
 Rev. Dr. Laffan, Roman Catholic Archbishop of 
 Cashell, having been applauded in the Protestant 
 newspapers, for discountenancing the simulta- 
 neous meetings, " the foul calumny" was indig- 
 nantly disclaimed;, and the Rev. Mr. Ryan, one 
 of his priests, after denying " the imputation 
 " against his ordinary," declared, that " he 
 " would have remained in his wished-for retire- 
 " ment, but Catholic affairs had now taken such a 
 " turn, that longer silence would be a crime In the 
 " Catholic Clergy (loud cheers,) it would, in 
 " his mind, be a dereliction of that duty 
 ." which the Catholic clergy owed to their 
 
 " country and their God." " It was the duty 
 
 " of every man to show, that he felt that he was a 
 " slave, and that he was determined to be free. 
 " Sooner would the Atlantic run dry, than that 
 " thirst be quenched, unless by a full draught
 
 214 DR. LAFFAN THE CLERGY. 
 
 " from the fountain of freedom. (Applause.) 
 " He wished a priest from every parish in Ire- 
 " land was present. Their feelings were the 
 " feelings of the people. They would generate a 
 "focus of discontent . (Hear, hear.) It would give 
 " a lesson to he would not call them oppres- 
 " sors" (amiable forbearance !) " to their much 
 " mistaken rulers."* (Cheers.) 
 
 Before I quit this part of my subject, I must 
 exhibit Mr. Shiel's confident reliance on the 
 co-operation of the hierarchy and clergy, and 
 his previous description of the mode, in which 
 his own measure, the holding " simultaneous 
 " meetings on Sunday, the 13th of January," 
 would be carried into effect. 
 
 " Seven millions of the inhabitants of this country 
 have been enjoined to meet in the temples of their an- 
 cient creed at the same moment. The priest will ap- 
 pear in his stole he will ascend the steps of the altar 
 he will offer the holy and mysterious sacrifice, and 
 lift up the chalice with his consecrated hands to Hea- 
 ven. His fellow believers will bow down in the per- 
 formance of that solemn and venerable rite, and when 
 the divine oblation shall have been concluded, the mi- 
 nister of a worship endeared by long suffering for its 
 sake to the people, shall turn round and say, * I am a 
 citizen as well as a priest, and in my double character, 
 
 * Catholic Association, January 19tb, 1828.
 
 DR. LAFFAN THE CLERGY. 215 
 
 and, in the name of your country and of your God, I 
 call on you to seek redress for the wrongs of the one, 
 and to relieve from shame the religion of the other.' 
 (Cheers.) This, or language like this, uttered at the 
 same instant from every altar, will achieve much." 
 
 Such was the plan as at first devised; we 
 have seen how assiduously to speak with Dr. 
 Coppinger, how " most emphatically" the Pre- 
 lates recommended it; and we will now see 
 how faithfully the priesthood laboured to ex- 
 ecute it. Of innumerable instances, one shall 
 suffice : 
 
 " ST. JOHN'S (WATERFORD.) 
 
 " As soon as possible after the conclusion of the last 
 mass, the Rev. Thomas Dixon, Catholic Curate, was 
 called to the chair" (in his Chapel, be it remembered) 
 " by loud and continued acclamation. When the ap- 
 plause had subsided, he explained the object of the 
 meeting, namely, to advance their great and glorious 
 cause. ' They felt the iron grasp of slavery, the 
 springs of society were poisoned by the policy pursued 
 towards the country. They would not, they could not 
 be satisfied, until the system was entirely abolished. 
 It had been said, that their meetings were too nume- 
 rous ; but if their labours in the sacred cause were to 
 be commensurate with the magnitude of the evil, they 
 could not assemble too often. If they could not ob- 
 tain the repeal of the present penal laws, they would at 
 least keep their opponents from enacting new. They 
 deserved a state of everlasting ignominy and prostra- 
 tion, if they did not vigorously labour until they obtained
 
 216 VIEWS OF HIERARCHY AND CLERGY. 
 
 * full, unconditional, and unqualified emancipation.' 
 The Rev. Orator then adverted sharply to the Vestry 
 and Subletting Acts, and concluded his energetic ad- 
 dress amidst deafening cheers from his parishioners"* 
 
 * This is an extract from " The Waterford Mirror," given 
 in the Dublin " Morning Register." I am induced to subjoin 
 one other instance, though not from the number of simulta- 
 neous meetings. At a meeting of the Parish of Nenagh on 
 the 1st of January last, at which " an immense multitude of the 
 " lower orders attended, and took a lively interest in the pro- 
 " ceedings," the Rev. Mr. Barry spoke as follows: " We are 
 " now met in this sacred edifice, not to give vent to any acrid 
 " or hostile spirit unbefitting the solemn occasion, but to vin- 
 " dicate the dignity of the national character, to lift our voices 
 " in defence of an oppressed people, and to proclaim the 
 " cruelty and injustice of that execrable Code, by which our 
 " country has been brought to a state of ruin and degradation, 
 " unparalleled in the annals of the world. (Cheers.) Sure 
 " he was, that the spectacle of a faithful, but deeply injured 
 <f people, asserting the dignity and rights of human nature, teas a 
 " sight not uninteresting to Heaven. (Hear, hear.) To God, 
 " who is the principle of order and justice, slavery and oppres- 
 " siun are an abomination. God has impressed on the heart 
 " of man the sacred love of liberty. He wills not, that Slaiery 
 " disfigure and debase his noblest work. (Cheers.)'' " What 
 " can be more ignominious than the savageness of a people 
 " proud of their own liberties, but wickedly attempting to de- 
 " stroy the liberty and happiness of another ? (Cheers.) But 
 " the faith of history informs us, that the power and influence 
 " of a Government raised by injustice on the ruins of the people, 
 " is like a Colossus of clay, which astonishes for a moment, but 
 " crumbles into clay at the first occasional shock. (Immense
 
 VIEWS OF HIERARCHY AND CLERGY. 217 
 
 Having thus identified the feelings of the 
 Hierarchy and Clergy with the most infuriate 
 violence of the lay agitators, I must recur to 
 the remark which I before suggested, that in 
 one important particular there is a wide differ- 
 ence in the two descriptions ; the clergy, and 
 especially the Prelates, have evinced none of 
 that apprehension of the ultimate results of 
 their measures, which seems, on the sudden, 
 to have paralysed their legal brethren. And, 
 
 " Cheers.} Whether this political truth might be illustrated 
 " in the fate of England, a little time may develope. Perhaps 
 " a crisis was arising, when England may stand in need of the 
 " vigorous assistance of the faithful Irish. (Hear.) But how 
 " could she hope to secure the services of men whom she 
 " cruelly deprives of the enjoyment of peace, property," (a por- 
 tentous word) " and constitutional freedom ? (Cheers.) As 
 *' they loved peace and order, they ought to appeal to the jus- 
 " tice, policy, and interest of the English people, to heal the 
 " wounds and redress the grievances of this suffering country, 
 ' ' ere it be too late. For, if the hour of danger should arrive, 
 " and Ireland continue smarting with the recollection of her 
 " wrongs, he conceived the ' decline and fall' of England ineoita- 
 " ble. (Cheers.) And posterity would have no pity for a 
 " besotted nation, which, when difficulties and dangers gathered 
 " thick around it, sacrificed its fame and stability to antiquated 
 " prejudices which clung to that intolerance, of which the 
 " rest of Europe had grown ashamed which talked proudly 
 " of human rights, yet practised injustice which boasted of 
 " being free, yet never learned to be just," &c. &c.
 
 218 VIEWS OF HIERARCHY AND CLERGY. 
 
 for the cause of this difference, we need only 
 to look to the obvious and characteristic dis- 
 tinctions between them. The one body are 
 connected, not only in their personal interests, 
 but by the dearest ties of domestic affection, 
 with the present prosperity and future peace of 
 their country to the other, their Church is 
 their family its interests are their main or 
 only object of affection in forwarding those 
 interests, their views are not limited to the land 
 in which they live, much less to the age on 
 which their lot is cast to promote the cause 
 of Catholicity, and, in that, of the spiritual do- 
 mination of their own Apostolic order,, is an 
 object, to which their individual comfort, and 
 even their lives, would, if it were necessary, 
 be sacrificed without a murmur. Principles, in 
 short, of the highest, the most generous, and 
 most sacred kind, mix with their dreams of per- 
 sonal or corporate ambition, and elevate and 
 sanctify the whole. 
 
 If, in this complex state of their feelings, 
 there is something to approve, and much to ad- 
 mire, there is more to condemn, and, most un- 
 happily, there is every thing to dread. To the 
 sober inquirer into the dangers to be appre- 
 hended from them, it will not appear least re- 
 markable, that they venture on the profession of
 
 FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE PROCLAIMED. 2 19 
 
 principles, which we are sure they clo not hold, 
 and have recourse to expedients, which nothing 
 but the sacredness of the end proposed can 
 appear, even to themselves, to justify. 
 
 They profess, as we have already seen, to 
 admit, nay, zealously to contend for, the right of 
 private judgment in matters of religion. Their 
 Coadjutor Bishop of Elphin, Dr. Burke, gave the 
 sanction of his warmest praise to a speech of 
 Mr. Lawless, in which he described Presby- 
 terianism as " a Religion based on the freedom 
 " of the human mind." Their Coadjutor Bishop 
 of Killala, Dr. Mac Hale, in a petition to Parlia- 
 ment, drawn up by him, (as Mr. O'Connell in- 
 formed the Association on the 21st of January,) 
 from the parish of Kilmore Moy, speaks of the 
 present disabilities of the Roman Catholics as 
 " a coercion of that freedom of conscience, which 
 " is the birth-right not only of every British 
 " subject, but of every individual of the human 
 " race" Yet (will it be believed ?) the man, 
 who has the confidence to put these words into 
 the mouth of his lay-subjects for the purpose of 
 deceiving a Parliament of Protestants, has thus 
 expressed himself in his own notorious work, 
 the " Letters of Hierophilos to Mr. Canning," 
 p. 82. " Though the Catholic Church venerates 
 " the Scriptures more than the sectaries, she
 
 220 FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE PROHIBITED. 
 
 " never will descend to capitulate with those, 
 " who, in defiance of the express words of the 
 " Bible, which they would fain revere, have re- 
 " nounced her lawful authority." 
 
 They have voted, by their Archbishop of 
 Tuam, " that liberty of conscience is the inherent 
 " right of all mankind, and cannot be taken 
 
 o 
 
 " away without oppression, or surrendered with- 
 " out a crime."* They have declared by their 
 Bishop of Ardfert, that it is " good sense and fine 
 " feeling to leave every man to his own con- 
 " science, and to permit all Christians to go to 
 " Heaven their own way"^ (Laughter and 
 cheers.) 
 
 The laughter which accompanied the plaudits 
 of the Right Rev. Prelate's audience, proves 
 how excellently well he played his part. But 
 is it quite prudent to venture on so broad 
 a farce ? We Protestants are not ignorant, 
 that the Catechism, which Dr. Egan is bound to 
 recognize as containing the doctrine of his 
 Church, nay, " to have faithfully translated into 
 " the vulgar tongue, and expounded to the 
 
 * See above, p. 198. 
 
 t Dr. Egau's Speech at Kerry Aggregate Meeting, the 7th 
 of December last. I cite the passage from one of the accre- 
 dited Roman Catholic newspapers, the Dublin Morning Regis- 
 ter.
 
 FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE PROHIBITED. 221 
 
 " people by all curates," (the Catechism of the 
 Council of Trent,) declares, " that heretics, 
 " though they have fallen from the Church, and 
 " belong to it no more than vagabonds and re- 
 " negadoes belong to an army, from which they 
 " have run away, are yet in the power of the 
 " Church, to be judged by her, to be punished, 
 " and condemned with an anathema." The oath, 
 which Dr. Egan must repeatedly have taken, on 
 appointment to his successive preferments, has 
 declared " the Church of Rome to be the Mother 
 " and Mistress of all the Churches," the bull 
 " Unam Sanctam,"* taught in the Text Book at 
 
 * The part of this celebrated Bull, which is decretal, and, 
 as such, contains the doctrine of the Church, is as follows : 
 " Porrd snbesse Romano Pontifici omnem humanam creaturam, 
 " declaramus, definimus, et pronunciamus, omninb esse de ne- 
 " cessitate salutis" On this passage Delahogue, De Eccle- 
 sia, the Class-Book at Maynooth, remarks, " Quod quidem 
 " quisque Catholicits admittit in Spiritualibus : sed ipse Pontifex 
 " ex divina Providentia a meraorandis temporalibus abstinuit.'' 
 p. 264. 
 
 Dr. Slevin distinctly affirms the same (8th Rep. Com. Ed. 
 Inq. p. 191.) It is quite plain, therefore, that this is the doc- 
 trine taught at Maynooth, and that this Bull is there (as well 
 as elsewhere) fully accepted. Yet Dr. Doyle, in his eager desire 
 to cajole the Protestant statesmen of the empire,has not scrupled 
 to affirm, that the Bull " Unam Sanctam'' is " rejected by the 
 world." Essay on the Catholic Claims, addressed to the Earl of 
 Liverpool, p. 38.
 
 222 FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE PROHIBITED. 
 
 Maynooth, to be of indisputable authority, de- 
 clares that " it is necessary to sal-cation to be 
 " subject to the Pope." Every divine of the 
 Church of Rome must hold, and does hold, as 
 Dr. Doyle has expressly admitted, that even if 
 invincible ignorance protect an individual from 
 the guilt of heresy, yet if he belong not to the 
 visible Church of Rome, he cannot have the 
 pardon of his sins, committed after baptism, be- 
 cause that pardon is dispensed only in the sa- 
 craments, which, out of that visible Church, he 
 cannot receive. All this (and more than all this 
 might be cited, if more were necessary,) but all 
 this, I say, must have been believed by Dr. Egan, 
 when he ventured to tell the aggregate meeting 
 of the county of Kerry, in his own chapel at 
 Killarney, that " it is good sense and fine feeling 
 " to leave every man to his own conscience, and 
 " to permit all Christians to go to Heaven in 
 " their own way." 
 
 But we shall doubtless be told, that all that 
 Dr. Egan intended, was, to deny the wisdom, or 
 the right, of the State to interfere by laws, 
 affecting temporal interests, with the religious 
 opinions of its subjects. Be it so. Then, on 
 this matter, I appeal from the Right Rev. Dr. 
 Egan to his Holiness Pius VI. That Pontiff, 
 in an allocution on the 29th of March, 1790,
 
 FREEDOM OP CONSCIENCE PROHIBITED. 223 
 
 spoke as follows : " Protestants have been ren- 
 " dered eligible" (in France) " to fill all employ- 
 " ments, whether municipal, civil, military, &c. 
 " Can we, on being informed of these events, 
 " keep silence on so many evils, and not raise 
 " our apostolic voice against those fatal decrees 
 " whose object is to destroy religion? " 
 
 The same Pope, in his circular letter to all the 
 Cardinals, dated Feb. 5, 1808, thus reprobates 
 the clause in Buonaparte's code, granting the 
 liberty of every species of public worship : "This 
 " article," says he, " was rejected by us, as con- 
 11 trary to the canons, and to the councils, to the 
 " Catholic Religion, to the tranquillity of life, 
 " and to the happiness of the State, by the 
 " mournful consequences which would flow 
 " from it."* 
 
 In July 1815, the Roman Catholic Bishops of 
 Belgium addressed a strong remonstrance to 
 their Sovereign on a similar law. They say to 
 him, " Sire, the existence and the privileges of the 
 " Catholic Church, in this part of your king- 
 " dom, are inconsistent with an article of the 
 " plan of the new Constitution, by which equal 
 " favour and protection are promised to all reli- 
 
 * Relation de ce qui s'est pass& a Rome, &c. t. i. p. 43. 
 London : Keating and Brown, 1812.
 
 224 MODERATION OF IRISH 
 
 " gions." Again, they say, " We do not hesi- 
 " tate to declare to your Majesty, that the 
 " canonical laws, which are sanctioned by the 
 " ancient Constitutions of the country," (and 
 the authority of which have been acknowledged 
 on oath by the Roman Catholic Prelates of Ire- 
 land) " are inconsistent with the projected Con- 
 " stitution which would give in Belgium equal 
 " favour and protection to all religions"* 
 
 But, whatever may have been held or done 
 elsewhere, in Ireland, Mr. O'Connell assures us, 
 " the Catholics were always the friends of civil 
 " and religious liberty. In the reign of James 
 " II. the Catholics got power, and they exercised 
 " it calmly, and without avenging themselves on 
 " their foes."-\ God shield our brethren in that 
 unhappy country from ever again experiencing 
 such tender mercies ! History can hardly 
 parallel the monstrous iniquities which were 
 
 * See this important document in the Annual Register of 
 1815. 
 
 f Mr. O'Connell's Speech at Catholic Meeting, Dec. 31, 
 1827. On Monday, January 21st, he said further "The 
 " Irish Parliament was, during that reign, composed of more 
 " thanfae-sixths Catholics ;" (which could not have been with- 
 out the most illegal and tyrannical management of the Corpo- 
 tions ;) "they never persecuted one single Protestant; they 
 " never passed one persecuting law."
 
 ROMAN CATHOLICS IN 1689. 225 
 
 perpetrated on the Protestants of Ireland, 
 during this brief period of subjection to their 
 unrelenting enemies. Though the dread of 
 the indignation of England withheld the go- 
 vernment from venturing on measures of public 
 violence, yet private bigotry and malice were 
 allowed, nay incited, to hold their detestable 
 course without restraint. All the rights of pro- 
 perty were, practically, extinguished : not only 
 were the movables, even the provisions, of Pro- 
 testants, openly plundered, but the titles to their 
 estates were assailed by every artifice of fraud and 
 perjury, which the most undisguised partiality* 
 of the Courts could encourage. Their houses, 
 meanwhile, were burned, their lives threatened, 
 
 * " The Lord Chancellor, Sir Alexander Fitton, after hear- 
 " ing a cause between a Protestant and a Papist, would often 
 " declare that he would consult a divine, before he gave a de- 
 " cree that is, he would have the opinion of a Popish Priest, 
 " his chaplain, educated in Spain, and furnished with distinc- 
 " tions to satisfy his conscience, how far he should do justice 
 " to Protestants." Archbp. King's State of the Protestants in 
 Ireland under King James II. p. 60, 4to. 1691. Of the 
 Chief Justice of the King's Bench, Nugent, made by James 
 Lord Riverstown, Archbishop King says, " In all the causes 
 " that ever were before him, wherein plaintiffs and defendants 
 " were Papists and Protestants, I could never learn, from the 
 " most diligent observer, that he ever gave sentence for the 
 " latter." Ib.
 
 226 MODERATION OF IRISH R. C. IN 1689. 
 
 and in many instances actually invaded. When, 
 at length, all, who possessed the means of escape, 
 had been driven for refuge into England, a Par- 
 liament was called, consisting almost entirely of 
 Papists;* one of whose earliest acts was to 
 pass a sweeping bill of attainder, more bloody 
 than the bloodiest proscription of ancient Rome. 
 Without any judicial proof, or even inquiry, but 
 merely on "common fame," near five and twenty 
 hundred of the most eminent persons in the 
 kingdom, peers and peeresses, bishops and arch- 
 bishops, knights, esquires, and gentlemen, were 
 by name attainted, robbed of their estates, sen- 
 tenced to the death of traitors, " if they did not 
 " come in against a certain day; and yet the 
 " law, that subjected them to this penalty, was 
 " made a secret, and they not suffered to know 
 " one word of it, till the time allowed them to 
 " come in was past at least three months."t 
 
 * There remained in Ireland only four or five out of 69 
 Protestant temporal peers, and only seven spiritual lords. The 
 House of Commons was filled with Papists, the charters of cor- 
 porations having been seized into the king's hands, by illegal 
 quo warrantos. King, p. 151. 
 
 f King, p. 159. If we condemn the extreme severity of 
 the penal code, which was afterwards enacted, can we wonder 
 at its adoption by men smarting under the recollection of such 
 atrocities ?
 
 INTENTIONS OF IRISH R. CATHOLICS. 227 
 
 Such was the mode in which the Roman Ca- 
 tholics of Ireland proved themselves " the friends 
 " of civil and religious liberty" when last they 
 raised that sacred cry ; and, till Mr. O'Connell 
 shall have erased the records of nations, and 
 stifled the voice of history, such is the lesson 
 which that warning voice will not cease to im- 
 press on the memory of every reflecting Pro- 
 testant. 
 
 But I am tired of these details; and other 
 matter, equally momentous, and equally weari- 
 some, remains behind. 
 
 Language and avowed Intentions of Irish Roman 
 Catholics respecting the Protestant Church. 
 
 I must show what the Irish Roman Catholic 
 prelates, and their lay instruments, say of the 
 Protestant Church and what are their avowed 
 intentions in reference to it. 
 
 Mr. Lawless, in the Speech so rapturously ap- 
 plauded by the Right Rev. Dr. Burke, the Chair- 
 man of the festive day at Sligo, described the 
 Clergy of the Established Church, in England, 
 as " watch-towers of corruption mountains 
 " which oppress by their weight, and wither by 
 " their shade, the drag-chains on the wheels 
 " of society interrupting all social intercourse 
 
 Q 2
 
 228 INTENTIONS OF THE IRISH R. CATHOLICS 
 
 " perverting human feeling making religion 
 " odious to the people, an instrument of torture, 
 " taxation, and fraud, instead of being, as it 
 " ought to be, the shield of protection to the 
 " helpless, the honest, and the virtuous." 
 
 Mr. Shiel, who was declared in a resolution 
 " carried by acclamation,'"' at the R. C. Arch- 
 bishop of Tuam's Connaught Meeting, to be 
 " pre-eminently entitled to the gratitude of the 
 " Roman Catholics, for the splendid eloquence 
 " and uncompromising energy, which render him 
 " at once the pride and bulwark of his suffering 
 " fellow-countrymen ;" this gentleman, at a re- 
 cent sitting of the association, thus spoke : "The 
 " other topic, to which I refer, is the Established 
 " Church. (Hear.) We have too long observed 
 " a prudential silence in relation to that enor- 
 " mous mass of abuses, that huge accumulation 
 
 " of evil, that what shall I call it? that 
 
 " nuisance in politics, and monstrosity in reli- 
 " gion the anti-christian and anti-apostolic opu- 
 " lence of the Established Church" He after- 
 wards proceeded in a tone, which, I verily 
 believe, was never before ventured upon, 
 never, I am sure, applauded, in any assembly 
 of men. " Good God ! what an object a bishop 
 " of the Establishment presents upon his death- 
 " bed ! He grasps with his trembling hands,
 
 TOWARDS THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH. 229 
 
 " shaken with the tremour of agony, a renewal 
 " fine of ten thousand pounds, and then he goes 
 " to pass his account before ' Heaven's high 
 " * Chancery,' where he will, I fear, get but few 
 " credits, and an enormous balance will be struck 
 " in favour of the devil." (Loud laughter), 
 " The death of a bishop ! "(Cheers.) " It is 
 " a fertile theme, and to which I shall revert. 
 " I wonder how the late Bishop of Winchester 
 " looked, when his mitred spectre stood before 
 " the face of the living God, before whom, we 
 " are told by himself, it is dreadful to appear." * 
 Language, like this, will appear to English 
 readers, too detestable to be at all dangerous. 
 But I must inform them, not only that it was 
 received with the loudest applause by the Asso- 
 ciation, but that this very Speech was delivered 
 there, a very few days before the Roman Ca- 
 tholic Prelates of Ireland addressed to that body 
 their warm and unqualified approbation of its 
 past proceedings, and promised their earnest co- 
 operation for the future. 
 
 From the many testimonies of Mr. OCon- 
 nelVs feelings towards the Established Church, 
 
 * I cite from the " Morning Register/' one of the most 
 favoured Roman Catholic papers.
 
 230 INTENTIONS OF IRISH R. CATHOLICS 
 
 I shall select but one if not the most eloquent, 
 it is, however, one of the most important 
 
 " It would be well, if religion were put on the 
 " same footing in these countries, as in America. 
 " There, every man may choose what pastor he 
 " pleases, and, if he please, choose to have none 
 " at all : he may frequent every place of wor- 
 " ship, and, if he choose, he may go to none at 
 " all. I believe in the truths of the Christian re- 
 " ligion with all the certainty of faith; and it is 
 " because I so believe, that I consider the plan 
 " adopted in America as the best. It is a fact, 
 " that there is no country on the face of the 
 " globe, in which there is so much real atten- 
 " tiqn paid to religion, its performance, ceremo- 
 " nies, and substances, as in that country of 
 
 ' Happy homes and altars free.' 
 " I struggle for that state of things here'' 
 
 Now there are two considerations which give 
 peculiar importance and significance to this 
 declaration of Mr. O'Connell ; first, it was deli- 
 vered by him "at one of the most numerous 
 " and respectable meetings ever witnessed, 
 " Lord Killeen in the Chair ; and that noble 
 " Lord, in opening the business of the day, had 
 " congratulated the meeting on the singular 
 " unanimity, which existed among them/'
 
 TOWARDS THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH. 231 
 
 Secondly, and chiefly, it was delivered a very 
 few days only before the R. C. Prelates sent in 
 their " adhesion," and, in particular, before their 
 Primate thus addressed Mr. O'Connell, in a 
 formal letter signed " P. Curtis, Archbishop." 
 
 " I shall always feel extremely happy to 
 " afford you every proof in my power of that 
 " sincere respect, esteem, and gratitude, to 
 " which you have so many indisputable, and 
 " daily increasing claims, not on me alone, but 
 " on the whole Catholic body." 
 
 This speech of Mr. O'Connell's, therefore, 
 cannot but be considered as in strict harmony 
 with the feelings of the Irish Roman Catholics 
 in general, and, above all, of their Prelates. 
 
 But I must say something of the declared 
 sentiments of some of these Prelates them- 
 selves. 
 
 The Right Rev. Dr. Mac Hale, Coadjutor 
 Bishop of Killala, second only to Dr. Doyle 
 in reputation among them, in his " Letters of 
 " Hierophilos to Mr. Canning," speaks of the 
 Established Religion as " a Religion of mere 
 " State creation, which cannot lend to the State 
 " any other authority, than that which it has 
 " received from the State to which it owes its 
 " creation ;"* a Religion whose " tendency is to 
 
 * Hierophilos, p. 29.
 
 232 INTENTIONS OF IRISH R. CATHOLICS 
 
 " lead to that indifference about truth or error, 
 " which extinguishes those moral obligations, 
 " that mitigate the sway of the government, and 
 " ennoble the obedience of the subject"* " The 
 " Establishment, instead of being a connecting 
 " medium between England and Ireland, is cal- 
 " culated to keep them asunder ;" and, in per- 
 fect accordance with this declaration, he imme- 
 diately adds, " doubtless, the two countries 
 " should approach with stronger affinities by 
 " the removal of the intermediate body, with 
 " which one cannot associate." Not, however, 
 that he would be " numbered amons: those rash 
 
 O 
 
 " theorists, who, without regard to the urgency 
 " of circumstances, would instantly subvert a 
 " long-established system. With such theorists 
 " he has no concern, conscious that their imma- 
 " ture conceptions would be often more dan- 
 " gerous in their execution than inveterate 
 " abuses.'^ In conclusion of the whole, he 
 very considerately tells his readers, that " a 
 " stronger faith in the fundamental doctrines of 
 " Christianity is necessary for the sickly mo- 
 " rality of the English nation; and that a large 
 " infusion of the sound principles of Catholics, 
 " instead of endangering its existence, would 
 
 * Hierophilos, p 37. f Ib. p. 59.
 
 TOWARDS THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH. 233 
 
 "finally prove the salvation of the Constitu- 
 " tion."* 
 
 If, after this, our legislature will be blind to 
 the intentions of these Right Reverend per- 
 sonages, and their followers, it is not Dr. Mac 
 Male's fault, nor, I am bold to say, shall it be 
 mine. 
 
 Turn we to Dr. Doyle. I will not again en- 
 counter the disgusting task of collecting this 
 Prelate's scurrilous abuse of the Established 
 Church ; (that has been done sufficiently al- 
 ready;!) but I shall confine myself to his calmer 
 statements of the utter invalidity of our Epis- 
 copal Order, and his intimations of what is due 
 injustice to the Bishops of his own Communion. 
 
 * Hierophilos, p. 96. As a specimen of robust and sturdy 
 virtue, in contradistinction to " the sickly morality" of us weak 
 Protestants., I shall give (see Appendix) some extracts from Dr. 
 Mac Hale's sworn evidence before the Commissioners of Edu- 
 cation Inquiry in Ireland, 8th Report. 
 
 f See " Supplemental Letter to Mr. Butler," pp. 606-7, 
 and " A Letter to the Eight Hon. G. Canning," p. 99. I will 
 subjoin only one specimen of his more recent language on the 
 same subject, taken from p. 102 of his Reply to the " Charge 
 " of the Protestant Archbishop of Dublin," and published in 
 1827. " The Established Church is loyal, who doubts it? 
 " where is the pampered slate who is not attached to his 
 " master ?"
 
 DR. DOYLE S DENIAL OF THE VALIDITY 
 
 Denial of the Validity of Ordination in the 
 Church of England and Ireland. 
 
 On the first of these subjects, he has, it is 
 true, in his Pastoral Address already referred to, 
 distinctly admitted our Episcopacy. " They 
 " have Bishops," says he, speaking of the Irish 
 Established Church ; but in a letter to the 
 Archbishop of Dublin, of nearly the same date, 
 under his polemic signature, " J. K. L.," he 
 thus gives vent to his real sentiments, or, rather, 
 to his real wishes : " As an Archbishop of the 
 " Established Church, I would beg leave to ask 
 " you, my Lord, who are you, and where did 
 " you come from ? From what heaven have 
 "you fallen? What earth produced you? 
 " Turn over the records of your Church, tell us 
 " the names of the Bishops who preceded you ; 
 " show us how they were connected with the 
 " Apostles, or with those who received the faith 
 " from them. Produce your claim to that title 
 " of ' Apostolic,' which you so ostentatiously 
 " put forth, but to which your Grace has as 
 " good a claim as to the Dukedom of Leeds"* 
 
 I need hardly remind my readers, that, ac- 
 cording to the common principles of the Chris- 
 
 * Letter of J. K. L. to Archbishop Magee, p. 11.
 
 OF PROTESTANT EPISCOPACY. 235 
 
 tian Church, a Bishop, without a just claim to 
 the title of ' Apostolic,' or, in other words, with- 
 out receiving his Episcopate in uninterrupted 
 succession from the Apostles, is, in truth, no 
 Bishop : and so Dr. Doyle fully intends to be 
 understood. He has lately expressed himself in 
 terms somewhat different, but of equivalent, 
 and still more insulting, meaning. " Can any 
 " person suppose, that I alone, in these coun- 
 " tries, do not know, that his Majesty the 
 " King can confer titles, or annex them to ba- 
 " ronies or offices ; and, that in the Greek and 
 " Roman States, previous to the coming of 
 " Christ, certain persons were called ' Bishops ;' 
 " that it is, and must be, perfectly within the 
 " competency of the Sovereign, in a Christian 
 " State, to create offices and officers, and call 
 " them ' Bishoprics' and ' Bishops.' I have 
 " never refused to acknowledge the right of any 
 " Protestant Bishop, or Archbishop, or Primate, 
 " within these realms, to the titles legally claimed 
 " by them, or used by them."* 
 
 Here we have a broad avowal of the only 
 sense in which Dr. Doyle admits the Episco- 
 pacy of the Established Church. Its Bishops 
 
 * J. K. L.'s Letter to the Editor of the Dublin Evening 
 Post, on " Appendix to the Bishop of Ferns' Charge."
 
 236 DR. DOYLE'S DENIAL OF THE VALIDITY 
 
 are Bishops, merely inasmuch as the King has 
 the power to confer any titles on any of his sub- 
 jects whomsoever, nay, merely as certain heathen 
 officers were called Bishops ! But he is pleased 
 to add, " I have not even disputed about the va- 
 lidity of their ordination, as many have done." 
 
 True; Dr. Doyle has not disputed, but he 
 has dogmatized most peremptorily on the sub- 
 ject, as I have already shown from his Letter to 
 Archbishop Magee, he has also insinuated the 
 same sentiment in terms which no other human 
 'being, who calls himself a Christian, would dare 
 to use : " I should be tempted to remove the 
 " cross and set up the crescent* if I saw the chief 
 
 * Reply of J. K. L. to " The Charge of the Protestant Arch- 
 tf bishop of Dublin," p. 90. " The Crescent" is, with Dr. Doyle, 
 a favourite type of the Established Church : " As to the church 
 " itself," (he is speaking of the Established Church) " her 
 " doctrine, discipline, government, and laws, they are matters 
 " about which no rational Catholic feels more concern than he 
 " does about the state of Mahometanism on the Bosphorus." 
 He presently afterwards gives us the following statement of his 
 feelings towards our Episcopacy. " We venerate her hierarchy 
 " as the very image of the truth ; for we Catholics give venera- 
 " tion to images, on account of what thei/ represent. " Therefore, 
 what a crucifix, a piece of carved or painted wood, is to the 
 real person of the Saviour of the World, that the Protestant 
 Episcopacy is to the Roman Catholic ! See " Vindication," 
 &c. by J. K. L., p. 29.
 
 OF PROTESTANT EPISCOPACY. 237 
 
 " ministers of my religion derive their commis- 
 " sion to preach the word, to administer the sa- 
 " craments, to rule the church, from any source 
 " that was not pointed out and established by 
 "Christ." 
 
 But on Dr. Doyle's forbearance to dispute 
 the validity of our Episcopal ordination, some- 
 thing more remains to be said. I fear, indeed 
 that I must trespass on the patience of my 
 readers at greater length than I would wish, in 
 doing justice to a matter which will be found of 
 more than common importance. 
 
 The hostility of the Irish Roman Catholic 
 hierarchy to the Protestant Established Church, 
 is in no other instance so strongly marked, 
 as in the wish to deny the validity of our eccle- 
 siastical orders. Certainly no point can be 
 more important to their cause. For if Eng- 
 lish and Irish Protestants have no Pastors, we 
 have no Church ; and pastors we certainly have 
 none, unless the authority of our clergy be 
 derived to them by uninterrupted succession 
 from the Apostles of our Lord. Hence it be- 
 comes of prime moment to the enemies of our 
 Church to establish this point against us. And 
 it is a matter at once instructive and amusing, 
 to observe the course which the Roman Catholic 
 Prelates have pursued respecting it, on two very
 
 238 DR. DOYLE'S DENIAL OF THE VALIDITY 
 
 grave occasions, in their evidence before Parlia- 
 ment, and again, more recently, before the Com- 
 missioners of Education Inquiry. 
 
 To deny our right to the ministerial character, 
 boldly and categorically, would, doubtless, have 
 been the most desirable step ; but then it would 
 have been somewhat hazardous ; for, as Parlia- 
 mentary Committees and Royal Commissioners 
 are in the habit of printing the evidence taken 
 before them, the declarations of the Prelates on 
 this, as well as on other particulars, might be 
 subjected to the comments of very troublesome 
 inquirers. The safer way, therefore, appeared 
 to be, to venture no further, than giving very 
 strong intimations of the doubtfulness of the 
 validity of Protestant ordination. Dr. Doyle 
 led the way, in his examination before the Com- 
 mittee of the House of Lords (p. 379, 380), and 
 he managed the matter with his usual adroit- 
 ness. 
 
 " Do the Roman Catholic hierarchy of Ireland ac- 
 knowledge the ordination in the Protestant Establish- 
 ment to be carried on in an uninterrupted succession, 
 as in the Church of Rome ?" 
 
 This is the question proposed by their Lord- 
 ships. It is as plain as any that could well be 
 put. The inquiry had all along respected Ire- 
 land, and it is obviously the purpose of the ex-
 
 OF PROTESTANT EPISCOPACY. 239 
 
 aminers to ascertain what the Roman Catholic 
 hierarchy of Ireland thought of the ordination 
 in the Protestant Church of Ireland. But to 
 this question Dr. Doyle did not find it conve- 
 nient to give a direct answer. He, therefore, 
 first, contrives to mystify the matter by mixing 
 up with it the distinction between ordination 
 and jurisdiction, and then slides quietly out of 
 Ireland into England. 
 
 " The ordination of Bishops is one thing, and their 
 mission, or spiritual jurisdiction, is another thing. We 
 have some doubt with regard to the validity of or- 
 dination of English Bishops of the Establishment. 
 That doubt does not arise from the manner of ordina- 
 tion."* " But it arises with regard to the valid ordina- 
 tion of one of the Archbishops of Canterbury, I believe 
 Matthew Parker. It is a matter of fact about which 
 we cannot be well acquainted, and therefore a doubt re- 
 mains on our minds. Then, as to the mission, which a 
 Bishop, when validly ordained, has or has not, we do 
 
 * Dr. Doyle afterwards, p. 380, says, " The succession of 
 " order we would recognize in the Established Church, were it 
 " not for this doubt," (namely, whether the person who under- 
 took to consecrate Dr. Parker really was a Bishop or not). 
 Again, " If a Bishop of the Established Church conformed to 
 " our's, we would think it necessary to confer a consecration 
 " upon him under condition, having reference to the matter of 
 " fact, and not the. mode of ordination" These admissions we 
 shall find very important presently.
 
 240 DR. DOYLE'S DENIAL OF THE VALIDITY 
 
 think, that no Bishop, outside the pale of the Roman 
 Catholic Church, has this due mission." 
 
 Here we have a good long answer, given with 
 much apparent openness and candour, but not a 
 single syllable " germane to the matter," namely, 
 whether the Roman Catholic hierarchy in Ire- 
 land, acknowledge the succession from the 
 Apostles in the ordination given in the Esta- 
 blished Church of Ireland. Dr. Doyle, hoped, 
 no doubt, that he should thus stave off an in- 
 quiry, which he felt to be inconvenient. But 
 their Lordships presently revert to it: 
 
 Q. " The doubt you have stated applies to the 
 Established Church in England ; does any such doubt 
 exist respecting the Church of Ireland ?" 
 
 A. " I cannot state, without adverting to the history 
 of that period. / am not aware whether the succession 
 was kept up in Ireland or not. I believe all the Bishops, 
 who were in the country in the time of Mary, were de- 
 posed, and Bishops sent from this country to take their 
 Sees." 
 
 Here then we have Dr. Doyle admitting, that 
 he has not informed himself of a simple his- 
 torical fact, on which he should consider the 
 validity of the Ordination of the Bishops and 
 Clergy of the Established Church in Ireland 
 to depend. And yet, at that very time, he had 
 boldly ventured, in his letters by J. K. L., to 
 treat the ordination of the Church of Ireland as
 
 OP PROTESTANT EPISCOPACY. 241 
 
 so decidedly invalid, that he can speak of the 
 clergy of that Church, as not really clergy 
 they are " Clergymen so called;"* that in an 
 Address to the Lord Lieutenant, he can speak 
 of our Hierarchy as a mere " image of the Truth;" 
 nay, that he could tell the Archbishop of Dub- 
 lin he has no better claim to the title of " Apos- 
 tolic," that is, Christian bishop, than he has lo 
 " the dukedom of Leeds !" 
 
 Dr. Doyle, I repeat, did not choose to inform 
 himself of the very simple fact, on which, how- 
 ever, he makes the orders of the Church of 
 Ireland altogether to depend. Perhaps he did 
 well to abstain from all inquiry into it ; for the 
 slightest possible inquiry must have satisfied him, 
 that his historic doubt was as wild a dream as 
 ever suggested itself to any unfortunate polemic 
 hard-pressed in defending an untenable position. 
 He would have found, that instead of the Church 
 of Ireland being stripped of all the bishops of 
 Mary's time, and receiving a supply from Eng- 
 land of those who were consecrated by Parker, 
 it has been uniformly urged, and never contra- 
 dicted^ as an argument against the idle tale of 
 Parker's irregular consecration, to which Dr. 
 Doyle alludes, but which has long been aban- 
 
 * Letter of J. K. L. p. 329. 
 R
 
 242 DR. DOYLE'S DENIAL OF THE VALIDITY 
 
 cloned by every decent controversialist, that 
 there was no necessity for having recourse to 
 any such disgraceful expedient, for there were 
 many Protestant bishops in Ireland, who could 
 have had no scruple in consecrating him nay, 
 one of them, John Bale, Bishop of Ossory, was 
 in the number of the seven bishops to whom 
 Elizabeth's letters-patent for the confirmation 
 and consecration of Parker were directed. * 
 
 Such was Dr. Doyle s bold, but feeble, attempt 
 to throw doubt on the validity of the ordination 
 of our Irish bishops. Those, who have followed 
 him in this laudable undertaking, are grown a 
 little wiser. They give up the Nag's Head 
 Fablef as too gross a fiction for their purpose ; 
 but they have devised a new pretense, for not 
 only denying our claim of Apostolic succession, 
 but also for pronouncing the ordination, in itself, 
 to be absolutely invalid. This, it is true, is in 
 direct contradiction to Dr. Doyle, who, as we 
 have seen above, admits, in strict conformity with 
 the doctrine of his own Church, that there is 
 nothing in the manner of ordination with us, on 
 which any doubt of its validity could be founded; 
 nay, he says, " were it not for the doubt of that 
 
 * See Archbp. Brarahall's Works, pp. 438, 450. 
 t For an account of this matter see App. E.
 
 OF PROTESTANT EPISCOPACY. 243 
 
 " fact" (which has been already disposed of) 
 " we would recognize the succession of order in 
 " the Established Church." 
 
 "The highly-talented Dr. Mac Hale." Bishop 
 of Maronia " in partibus" and Coadjutor Bishop 
 of Elphin, takes up a very safe position : while 
 he industriously proclaims his doubts of the va- 
 lidity of ordination in the Protestant Church, he 
 avoids all mention of the reason on which he 
 founds those doubts : 
 
 " It is no wonder," says he, " that I should doubt 
 " whether they" (the Protestant bishops) " can exercise 
 " any spiritual authority, since I have doubts about its 
 " source. Valid ordination is the channel through 
 " which spiritual power is transmitted, and as I enter- 
 " tain serious and well-grounded doubts about the one, 
 " I entertain similar ones regarding the other."* 
 
 But Dr. Slevin, late Professor in the Irish 
 College at Salamanca, and now " Prefect of 
 " the Dunboyne Establishment," Maynooth, in 
 which character he presides over, and directs the 
 studies of the highest order of students, in short, 
 the greatest theological authority which that 
 college contains, wasexamined at much length 
 by the Commissioners of Education Inquiry, re- 
 specting the validity of ordination in the Pro- 
 
 * Eighth Report of Commissioners of Irish Education In- 
 quiry, p. 307. 
 
 R2
 
 244 DR. SLEVIN DISPUTES THE VALIDITY 
 
 testant Church. This part of his examination 
 took its origin in the somewhat startling fact, 
 that the Class-book of Canon Law, used at May- 
 nooth, is dedicated, in the broadest and most un- 
 qualified terms, " to the Most Reverend Father 
 " in God Patrick Curtis, ARCHBISHOP OF AR- 
 
 " MAGH, AND PRIMATE OF ALL IRELAND." 
 
 As there is another individual at present possess- 
 ing that title, the Commissioners naturally tes- 
 tified some curiosity on the occasion ; and the 
 Doctor is pleased to inform them that he con- 
 siders that " both Dr. Curtis, and Lord John 
 " Beresford, have a right to claim that title, but 
 " in different respects and on different princi- 
 " pies; the one being recognized as such by the 
 " Roman Catholic Church and instituted by the 
 "Pope; and the other being received as such 
 " in the Protestant Church, and constituted by 
 " the government of the country. 
 
 " With regard," he adds, " to the nature of the 
 " powers of both, of course they are very different; the 
 " powers of the Roman Catholic Archbishop are 
 " purely spiritual, because he receives none from the 
 " State, the source of all temporal authority ; the 
 " powers of the other are of a temporal nature, so far 
 " as the law of the land invests him with them." 
 
 Q. " Do you consider. that there is any thing spi- 
 " ritual, properly speaking, that attaches itself to the
 
 OF PROTESTANT EPISCOPACY. 245 
 
 " character of that Primate of all Ireland who is recog- 
 " nized by law ?" 
 
 A. " To answer the question in a satisfactory man- 
 " ner, I must distinguish two sorts of spiritual power in 
 " bishops; the one is called the power of order, the 
 " other that of jurisdiction. The former is imparted 
 " by consecration, and is never lost or delegated ; the 
 " latter, &c." " With regard to the power of order, the 
 " Protestant Archbishop of Armagh may possess it ; 
 " this depends entirely upon the validity of his ordina- 
 " tion and consecration, a point on which I do not 
 "presume to decide" 
 
 Q. " Supposing the ordination or consecration of the 
 " Archbishop of Armagh to be good, could he, as a 
 " Protestant prelate, confer holy orders ?" 
 
 A. " In virtue of his ordination he can confer all the 
 " sacraments that do not require jurisdiction, among 
 " which we reckon that of holy orders." 
 
 Q. " Does your last answer mean to imply, that his 
 " ordination was, in your opinion, valid ?" 
 
 A. " I have mentioned already, that / do not pre- 
 " sume to pronounce on that point." " The validity of 
 " the Anglican ordination has been always questioned, 
 " and is questioned to this day ; a great deal has been 
 " written on both sides, and the matter still remains 
 " doubtful among Catholics." 
 
 Q. " You mean, questioned as a matter of fact?" 
 
 A. " Merely as a matter of fact ; because for the 
 " validity of any sacrament we require that the matter 
 " and form, instituted by Christ, should be applied by
 
 246 DR. SLEVIN DISPUTES THE VALIDITY 
 
 " a proper minister." " Applying this principle to the 
 " Anglican ordination, the first question that occurs is, 
 " whether the minister who ordained the first bishops, 
 " was the minister instituted by Christ, that is, whether 
 " he himself was a lawfully ordained bishop ? the se- 
 " cond question is, whether the person ordaining em- 
 " ployed the proper matter and form* in ordination ? 
 " Doubts have arisen on these two points, and hence it 
 " is still a question with us, whether the Anglican ordi- 
 " nation be valid or not ? '' p. 254. 
 
 Now here it is remarkable, as to the first ques- 
 tion, that Dr. Slevin will not commit himself 
 so far as to say, that he participates in the doubt 
 founded on the fable of the Nag's Head, even in 
 respect to English ordination, much less in re- 
 spect to the Irish : lie takes care to use a word, 
 " Anglican," which may be taken to include the 
 case of Ireland, or not, as shall be most conve- 
 nient. But as to the second question, that which 
 arises from the matter and form (conjoined by 
 Dr. Doyle in the term manner), Dr. Slevin has 
 devised a ground of doubt, which Dr. Doyle had 
 expressly disclaimed. And it is upon this new 
 
 * Forma Episcopates oratio est per quam ab Episcopo con- 
 secrantCj dum ordinando manus iraposuit, gratia Sancti Spiritus 
 invocatur. Drown de Re Sac. t. 7, p. 759.
 
 OF PROTESTANT EPISCOPACY. 247 
 
 ground of doubt of his, I undertake to convict 
 him of the grossest disingenuousness : I forbear 
 to use the only word which adequately expresses 
 the disingenuousness of a sworn witness. 
 
 " The matter of the Sacrament of Orders," says he, 
 " according to the doctrine of the Roman Catholic 
 " Church, consists in the delivery of the instruments 
 " employed in the sacrifice of the Mass, and in the 
 " imposition of hands." p. 255. 
 
 Whether Dr. Slevin himself holds the matter 
 of the Sacrament of Orders to be what he has 
 here stated, is of no moment to our inquiry : 
 (I believe him to be too learned a person to en- 
 tertain any such notion;) but that such is the 
 doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, I ut- 
 terly deny, and I defy Dr. Slevin, who has sworn 
 that it is so, to bring a single declaration of his 
 Church in proof of his assertion.* 
 
 * That which looks most to the purpose, is Eugenius IV.'s 
 instructions to the Armenians in the Council of Florence. 
 Sextum Sacramentum est Ordinis, cujus materia est illud per 
 cujus traditionem confertur Ordo, sicut Presbyteratus traditur 
 per calicis cum vino et paten* cum pane porrectionem, &c. 
 But besides the answers given in the Maynooth Class-Book, 
 Bailly Theol. Mor. t. 4, p. 42, this would prove too much j for 
 it would show that the imposition of hands was not necessary, 
 the delivery of the instruments only being mentioned. Besides, 
 the same Council makes the matter of Ordination of Deacons
 
 248 DR. SLEVIN'S DISINGENUOUSNESS 
 
 Imposition of hands alone is held by his Church 
 to be the matter of the Sacrament of Order ; 
 but imposition of hands, he knows, is used in 
 ordination by the Church of England and Ire- 
 land ; the delivery of the instruments is not 
 used by our Church ; and therefore it is, that 
 Dr. Slevin, in order to have some decent plea 
 for disputing the validity of our orders, chooses 
 to say, that it is part of the matter of the Sacra- 
 ment of Orders, and by consequence, essential 
 to valid ordination, according to the doctrine of 
 the Church of Rome. 
 
 I will proceed briefly to establish by proof 
 what I have here asserted of the doctrine of that 
 Church, and, I again say, I defy Dr. Slevin 
 to contradict me. 
 
 In the first place, the Church of Rome recog- 
 nizes and admits the orders of the Greek Church, 
 and in the Greek Church, it is perfectly noto- 
 rious, there is no delivery of the instruments of 
 sacrifice ; erg6, the Church of Rome cannot re- 
 quire this particular as essential to valid ordina- 
 tion, or as part of the matter of the Sacrament. 
 
 to be the delivery of the Book of the Gospel ; it could not 
 therefore have been instituted by Christ, (the first Deacons 
 could not have been so ordained,) for no Gospel was then 
 written.
 
 PROVED FROM HIS OWN BOOKS. 249 
 
 So powerfully was the force of this argument 
 felt, that, in order to get rid of it, Father Har- 
 douin (the same ingenious Jesuit who undertook 
 to prove, that almost all the writings of classic 
 antiquity were forged by monks of the 13th 
 century) devised the following whimsical solu- 
 tion of the present difficulty : 
 
 " Christ," he said, " instituted two forms of 
 " ordination, one, which he gave to St. Peter 
 " for the West, the other to St. Paul for the East, 
 " and the reason for the simplicity of the latter 
 " was the necessary rapidity of St. Paul's move- 
 " ments, who could not carry the chrism with 
 " him, nor find instruments ready made, nor wait 
 " for the making of them." So ludicrous a para- 
 dox has, I believe, never hitherto found a sup- 
 porter, unless Dr. Slevin magnanimously under- 
 takes that office. 
 
 Secondly, the rituals and pontificals of -the 
 Church of Rome itself (as is proved by those of 
 its own members, who are most learned in eccle- 
 siastical antiquities, by Morin, Mabillon, Mar- 
 tenne, and others) did not include the delivery 
 of the instruments : of course, therefore, it 
 formed no part of the matter of the Sacra- 
 ment. 
 
 Thirdly, the Council of Trent itself, in its
 
 250 DR. SLEVIN S DIS1NGENUOUSNESS 
 
 solemn decree* pronouncing orders to be a 
 Sacrament, says nothing of the instruments, but 
 refers solely to imposition of hands. The same 
 Council, in declaring who are the ministers of 
 the Sacrament of Extreme Unction, says that 
 the elders mentioned by St. James are not the 
 seniors in years, or in rank, but either bishops 
 or priests, rightly ordained by them by impo- 
 sition of hands of the presbytery .f 
 
 Drouen, one of the most learned and accurate 
 writers " De Re Sacramentaria," one in Dr. 
 Slevin's list of " Books recommended or referred 
 to by him in his lectures," (p. 45 1) treats the 
 point as not admitting of question, " Sacra Orcli- 
 " natio" (says he, De Sac. Ord., t. vii. p. 10,,) 
 " in impositione manuum et oratione consistit." 
 Again, " Materia Episcopates in sola manuum 
 " impositione consistit." p. 755. 
 
 But it is unnecessary to seek for proof be- 
 
 * C&m Scripturae testimonio, Apostolicd traditione, et patrum 
 unanimi conseusu perspicuum sit, per sacramOrdinationem,quae 
 verbis et signis exterioribus perficitur gratiam conferri, dubitare 
 nemo debet, ordinem esse vere et proprie unum ex septem 
 Sanctae Ecclesiee sacramentis : inquit enim Apostolus "Admoneo 
 " te, ut resuscites, gratiam Dei, quae est in te per impositionem 
 " manuum meanim." Sess. xxiii. c. 3. 
 t Sess. xvi. c. 3.
 
 PROVED FROM HIS OWN BOOKS. 251 
 
 yond the books which Dr. Slevin professes to 
 make the foundation and text of his own in- 
 structions at Maynooth. These very books ex- 
 pressly and peremptorily contradict him. 
 
 Cabassutius (Jur. Can. Th. et Pr., t. i. p. 361, 
 a work which Dr. Slevin, in his Evidence, p. 
 185, names as one of the Class-Books,) proves 
 that the order of deacon is a sacrament, be- 
 cause it is conferred by imposition of the bi- 
 shop's hands; " but," says he, " that such im- 
 " positions of hands in ordination, particularly 
 " if they be accompanied" (as they are in our 
 ordinal) " with the express collation of the Holy 
 " Ghost, do confer grace beyond all doubt, is 
 " proved by various passages in Scripture." 
 
 The point is still more plainly and expressly 
 established by another of the Class-Books, the 
 " Theologia Moralis of Bailly, Tract, de Or- 
 " dine." For, first, the proof of order being a 
 sacrament is made to rest entirely on the impo- 
 sition of hands being the outward sensible rite, 
 conferring grace, instituted by Christ himself, 
 and constantly and uniformly used in the church 
 in the ordination of bishops, priests, and dea- 
 cons. Secondly, in the chapter, " De materia 
 " et forma Sacramenti Ordinis," pars. i. c. i. p. 5, 
 the third proposition is as follows: "Neither 
 " the delivery of instruments, nor the anointing
 
 252 DR. SLEVIN'S DISINGENUOUSNESS 
 
 " of the bead or hands, ought to be considered 
 " as the essential matter of ordination." This 
 is proved from the utter silence of Scripture and 
 ancient tradition respecting them, by the fact 
 that they are not used at this day by the Greek 
 Church, and by there being no traces of their 
 use in the Latin Church during the first ten 
 centuries. If, then, they were essential to valid 
 ordination, no orders were valid during that pe- 
 riod, a result which no Catholic, either of the 
 Church of Rome, or of our own Church, can 
 contemplate with composure ; for, in that case, 
 it is obvious that the claim to Apostolic succes- 
 sion is at an end with all of us. 
 
 The fourth proposition of the same chapter is 
 yet more decisive, " Imposition of hands, and 
 " that only, is the essential matter of the sacra- 
 " ment of orders." This is proved by nearly the 
 same arguments as the preceding. 
 
 Of the form, that is, the words accompanying 
 the imposition of hands, there is no question 
 moved. 
 
 Having thus examined the subject on the prin- 
 ciples of the Church of Rome itself, and under 
 the guidance of the very authorities which Dr. 
 Slevin professes to follow in his own lectures at 
 Maynooth, we have found that there not only is
 
 PROVED FROM HIS OWN BOOKS. 253 
 
 no foundation for his assertion, but there is the 
 most peremptory and decisive contradiction to 
 it. What, then, must every honest man think, 
 of a sworn witness, of the profession and station 
 of Dr. S levin,* who dares thus to trifle with the 
 solemnity of an oath, and to favour his false and 
 injurious allegations respecting the ministry of 
 another Church by a fraudulent exposition of the 
 doctrine of his own? Let him not have recourse 
 to the miserable subterfuge, that the delivery of 
 the instruments is sometimes spoken of as the 
 accidental, accessory, or integrant, matter of 
 order : for, be it remembered, that the only 
 question before the Commissioners was of the 
 essential matter, that of which Dr. Slevin him- 
 self says, " that any substantial alteration in it 
 " would render the sacramentf void." If he 
 will avail himself of such a quibble, it will, in 
 fact, only prove more strongly the full delibera- 
 
 * Of Dr. Slevin, Mr. O'Connell, in a recent speech at a 
 meeting of the Association, said as follows : " In the Report 
 " of the Education Committee, Dr. Slevin afforded a fine 
 " sample of the second order of our clergy, of those men from 
 " amongst whom our bishops ought to be taken." 
 
 t It is hardly necessary to remark, even to my lay readers, 
 that I here use Dr. Slevin's own words, of course without as- 
 senting to the notion, that Order is a sacrament in the same strict 
 sense, as we, of the Church of England, hold Baptism and the 
 Lord's Supper to be.
 
 254 HOSTILITY TO THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH 
 
 tion with which he spoke; though, in truth, 
 the notice,* with which the Commissioners have 
 introduced his evidence, has deprived him of all 
 right to shelter dishonesty under the plea of 
 haste and inadvertence. 
 
 It yet remains for me to state, that the inva- 
 lidity of the Episcopal Order of the Protestant 
 Church, the denial, therefore, of its existence as 
 a Christian Church, is treated as a matter per- 
 fectly settled, in the Class-Books at Maynooth. 
 It is true, that the principles, there maintained, 
 would fully establish the right of our Bishops to 
 the power of Order, (whatever might become of 
 their claim of jurisdiction,) but even this is de- 
 nied to them ; it is denied, in the mode, which 
 of all others proves most strongly the inveterate 
 hostility of those who deny it, namely, on occa- 
 sions, where no question concerning Episcopacy 
 is raised, or can be connected with the matter 
 in hand. In the Class- Book on " Logic," by Dr. 
 Francis Anglade, Professor of Moral Philosophy 
 at Maynooth, the name of the illustrious Bishop 
 Berkeley happening to be mentioned, it is ac- 
 companied with the insolent and false addition, 
 
 * " It is necessary to observe, that the corrections and additions 
 " proposed by Dr. Slevinfor insertion in his Evidence, "were more 
 " than usually numerous. The Commissioners have admitted the 
 " corrections as extensively as possible into the text." p. 183.
 
 CONTRARY TO PETITION OF 1792. 255 
 
 " in Hibernia Pseudo-Episcopus :"* False, I 
 repeat, because, on the principles of the Roman 
 Catholic Church itself, his Episcopate was valid, 
 whether his jurisdiction, or mission, were regu- 
 lar or not. 
 
 And now, on quitting this part of my subject, 
 
 I must call the attention of my readers (and 
 most especially of those friends of the Roman 
 Catholic cause, who profess themselves sincere 
 Protestants) to two very important facts ; first, 
 That the Petition of the Irish Roman Catholics 
 in 1792 (on faith in the averments of which the 
 act of Relief was passed in the next year,) con- 
 tains, among much other instructive matter, 
 the following passage : 
 
 "We solemnly and conscientiously declare, 
 " that we are satisfied with the present condi- 
 " tion of our ecclesiastical policy. With satis- 
 " faction we acquiesce in the establishment of the 
 " national Church; we neither repine at its 
 " possessions, nor envy its dignities ; we are 
 " ready, upon this point, to give every assurance 
 
 II that is binding upon 
 
 * Inst. Phil. Logica, Pars Prima, p. 82. 
 f See the Petition in Sir H. Parnell's " History of the Penal 
 Laws," p. 90, 91.
 
 256 HOSTILITY TO THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH 
 
 But this declaration, it may be alleged, was 
 binding only on those who made it; and most 
 of them have long since gone to their graves. 
 Be it so ; what shall be said of the second 
 fact, which remains to be stated ? 
 
 An Oath was framed in conformity with that 
 declaration; that Oath has been taken by All 
 those persons who have heaped such coarse and 
 virulent invectives upon the Established Church, 
 who have proclaimed their deadliest and most 
 unrelenting hostility towards it, who have in- 
 vited, stimulated, applauded, that hostility in 
 others all these, be they lay or clerical, lawyers 
 or bishops, all have " solemnly sworn" as the 
 very condition on which they hold any rights 
 whatever in this Protestant Realm not only 
 " that they have no intention to subvert the 
 " present Church Establishment, for the pur- 
 " pose of substituting a Catholic Establishment 
 " in its stead," but " that they will not exercise 
 " any privilege to which they are or may become 
 " entitled, to disturb and weaken the Protestant 
 " religion, and Protestant Government in this 
 " Kingdom/'* 
 
 What may be the effect of this one fact on 
 
 * See Irish Statute of 33 Geo. III. entitled " Act for afford- 
 " ing relief to His Majesty's Popish or Roman Catholic Sub- 
 " jects in Ireland/' $. 7.
 
 CONTRARY TO OATH TAKEN BY R. CATHOLICS. 257 
 
 others, I pretend not to conjecture. For my- 
 self, I frankly avow, that it takes from me, in 
 matters wherein the interests of the Roman Ca- 
 tholic Church are involved, all confidence what- 
 ever in the Oath of every man among them, 
 who has thus polluted his soul, and stained it 
 with the deadly dye of perjury. The contemp-. 
 tible subterfuge, that the Oath is not violated 
 unless both the Protestant Religion and Pro- 
 testant Government are disturbed and both 
 " weakened by disturbance"* must, in the 
 estimation of every honest man, serve only to 
 aggravate their guilt, and prove more strongly 
 the deliberate and deep malignity of the whole 
 proceeding. But what a state of mental 
 darkness, of spiritual bondage, is this, in which 
 seven millions of our fellow-subjects in Ireland 
 are still fatally enthralled ! How hideous the 
 corruption it engenders, when men of the most 
 sacred function can thus blind their understand- 
 ing, and harden their hearts, against the first 
 and plainest dictates, I will not say of true reli- 
 gion, but of natural reason ! What must be the 
 misery, what the conflict of better feelings, in 
 
 * See Note to Sir J. C. Hippesley's Speech, Cobbett's De- 
 bates, May 11, 1813. See also " Letter to Mr. Canning on 
 " the Bill of 1825," p. 45. 
 
 S
 
 258 CLAIMS OF ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS. 
 
 the unseared, unhackneyed, conscience of the 
 young and the ingenuous, of all, whose minds 
 are not yet completely bowed and broken to the 
 yoke ! 
 
 Claims of Roman Catholic Bishops in Ireland. 
 
 But the spirit of the Roman Catholic Clergy 
 in Ireland cannot be duly estimated by their 
 language and doctrine respecting the Esta- 
 blished Church. They have pretensions, on 
 their own part, which, we may be quite sure, 
 they will not fail in due time to announce, and 
 to enforce; for these pretensions follow most 
 undeniably from the principles already avowed 
 by them. 
 
 We are told by one of the most distinguished 
 Roman Catholic Divines in Ireland, the late 
 Vice-President of the College at Maynooth, and 
 now the Head of the Jesuit Establishment for 
 Education at Clongowes, the Reverend Peter 
 Kenney that the Roman Catholic Church in 
 Ireland " is, in the eye of the See of Rome, to 
 " all intents and purposes, as much as in any 
 " country in the world, a Church having all the 
 " settled rights of a Church, with a Hierarchy, 
 " the Bishops of which are Bishops in ordi- 
 " nary.' * Of the Bishops of the Established 
 
 * Eighth Report of the Committee of Irish Education, p. 392-3.
 
 CLAIMS OF ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS. 259 
 
 Church, they say that they arc not Bishops y in any 
 other than a civil and political sense, as certain 
 Heathen officers were styled Bishops;* and the 
 result is, that they themselves, the Bishops who 
 derive jurisdiction from Rome, are the only 
 Bishops, properly so called, in Ireland. But 
 be it remembered, that the real and proper 
 Bishops, be they who they may, are they, who 
 by the Common Law of the land are entitled to 
 a place in Parliament. 
 
 All the Statutes, therefore, which have inter- 
 fered with this Common Law Right, are part of 
 the Penal Code, and, as such, ought to be re- 
 pealed they are incompatible with that " total, 
 " unqualified, unconditional, Emancipation," 
 which alone will satisfy the just claims of 
 " Catholic Ireland." 
 
 That this conclusion was fully deduced, and 
 plainly stated, a very few years ago, at Rome, 
 I need hardly remind my readers. It is extant 
 in that important document, the letterf of Pius 
 VII. to " the Archbishops and Bishops of Ire- 
 land," (Feb. 1, 1816,) recommending them to 
 accede to a modified Veto ; in which are these 
 words : 
 
 * See above, p. 235. 
 f Butler's Mem. of English Cath, vol. 2. App. p. 426.
 
 260 CLAIMS OF ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS 
 
 " An additional motive of jealousy must arise in the 
 mind of Government towards us, and the Catholic 
 Cause, that the Bishops, subject to its dominion, being 
 rendered by the Emancipation (supposing it granted) 
 qualified to sit in Parliament, new precautions might 
 appear necessary to remove all possibility of doubt 
 concerning their loyalty." 
 
 How His Holiness acquired this notion, whe- 
 ther by his own lights, or by intimations from 
 Ireland of the hopes there entertained, will 
 hardly admit a doubt. 
 
 Now, whatever may be thought, or affected 
 to be thought, of the wildness of this pretension 
 whatever may be said of the absurdity of even 
 imagining the possible introduction of Roman 
 Catholic Bishops into the British Parliament 
 I undertake to show a pretension, as wild, ac- 
 tually brought forwards by Dr. Doyle, and a 
 claim founded upon it, which would make the 
 demand of a place in Parliament to be little 
 more than a necessary consequence of admitting 
 their character of Bishops. 
 
 In his " Vindication of the Religious and 
 " Civil Principles of the Irish Catholics," ad- 
 dressed to the Lord Lieutenant, the Marquis 
 Wellesley, he thus describes a grievance which 
 he apparently does not think it possible any libe- 
 ral man can justify, much less wish to perpetuate :
 
 IN IRELAND. 261 
 
 " Some of our Clergy are judges in ecclesiastical 
 matters in virtue of their office, and must decide on the 
 validity of marriages, and on various other matters, 
 on which the peace and happiness of individuals de- 
 pend through life, and yet they cannot administer an 
 Oath, nor examine witnesses JURIDICALLY, without be- 
 ing exposed to the penalties of a prosecution."* 
 
 This, it will be immediately seen, is a demand 
 of a very extensive nature; but the magnitude 
 of the claim is not half so important, or so 
 instructive, as the tone in which it is set forth. 
 Dr. Doyle adduces it, expressly ', as a specimen of 
 the moderation of himself and his brethren. He 
 has just before disclaimed, on his own and their 
 behalf, all " desire of the possessions of the 
 Establishment." " Our pretensions, my Lord," 
 says he, " are much more becoming our depressed 
 " condition." And it is in the enumeration of 
 these " pretensions," that what I have cited 
 finds a place. But, if in their " depressed 
 " condition" they venture to put forwards, as a 
 moderate and humble " pretension," a claim 
 which the laws of their country, even before the 
 Reformation, did not think it safe, or tolerable, 
 to grant, what may not be expected from them, 
 when their " condition" shall be no longer 
 " depressed," when their horizon shall extend 
 
 * Vindication, &c. p. 41.
 
 262 CLAIMS OF ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS 
 
 itself with the elevation to which they already 
 look forwards as their right ? I say, that even 
 before the Reformation, the laws of the Realm 
 would not have sanctioned this impudent de- 
 mand : for then, as now, the power of deter- 
 mining Causes of marriage, and other questions 
 of " the laws spiritual," was committed to the 
 Bishops, and others of the Clergy, as the King's 
 Judges in such causes; they were to decide 
 them according to the King's Ecclesiastical 
 Laws ; and the very claim of independent ex- 
 ternal jurisdiction would have rendered those, 
 who made it, liable to the penalties of little less 
 than treason. 
 
 While the Bishops have been thus active, the 
 Lay Champions of "Emancipation" have not 
 been unmindful of their duty to the Church. 
 With a more decent dissimulation, indeed, of 
 their real object, than they have of late usually 
 thought it necessary to observe, they have in- 
 structed a Committee " to prepare a draft of a 
 " Petition in favour of Catholic Charities, to 
 " recognize in Courts of Law and Equity the 
 " successors of Catholic Prelates as Trustees for 
 " charitable purposes."* 
 
 * See Resolutions of the Roman Catholic Association, Ja- 
 nuary 8th ; 1828,
 
 IN IRELAND. 263 
 
 This is really a very pretty and promising 
 expedient. It bears on the face of it the pro- 
 tection of " Catholic Charities," and who can be 
 so illiberal perhaps it will be even said, so un- 
 christian as to oppose so laudable an object ? 
 But, if once "the succession of Catholic Pre- 
 " lates be recognized by law," what may not be 
 hoped as a consequence of the recognition? 
 I repeat, therefore, that the expedient is very 
 promising ; and I am quite ready to admit, that 
 much has been done by one House of Parlia- 
 ment to justify the most sanguine hopes of the 
 Association in adopting it. For the Committee 
 of the House of Commons, in 1825, not only 
 permitted Drs. Curtis, Murray, Doyle, &c. to 
 call themselves by the Titles which they claim, 
 but even recognized the justice of the claim, by 
 giving them the same Titles in the " Minutes 
 " of Evidence," printed with the Report. 
 
 Happily, the Lords are not quite so liberal 
 for though a very well-imagined attempt was 
 made, last year, to obtain a similar, though 
 slighter, recognition from the Upper House, by 
 sliding in a Petition from a " Roman Catholic 
 Bishop of the Diocese of Waterford," their 
 Lordships were not to be so caught ; the sentinel 
 was at his post; the veteran Earl of Eldon 
 warned the House that the Constitution of this
 
 264 CLAIMS OF ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS 
 
 realm forbade them to acknowledge the exist- 
 ence of any such Bishop ; and the Petition was 
 rejected accordingly. 
 
 We may, therefore, venture to predict the 
 failure, for the present, even of this charitable 
 plan of Mr. O'Connell ; and these Irish Prelates 
 must be content to wait some time longer, be- 
 fore the first and dearest object of their wishes 
 can be obtained. 
 
 Meanwhile, it is but justice to them, and to 
 their friends, to say, that they have not been 
 wanting to their own cause. Whenever it can 
 be prudently done, the full title is now given 
 and taken, without any qualification or reserve. 
 We have seen the formal dedication of a Class- 
 Book at Maynooth to " The Most Rev. Father 
 " in God, Patrick Curtis, Archbishop of Armagh, 
 "and Primate of all Ireland." Some of the 
 Prelates themselves, Bishops of the Province of 
 Connaught, thus subscribed an appeal to the 
 Pope, November 29, 1809* : 
 
 " DOMINICUS, ALADENSIS. 
 THOMAS, CLONFORTENSIS. 
 EDMUNDUS, ELPHINENUS. 
 NlCOLAUS, DUACENSIS. 
 JOANNES, ACCADENSIS." 
 
 * See Columbanus, No. 6, p. 208.
 
 IN IRELAND. 265 
 
 In November, 1 825, at the " Dedication of 
 " the Roman Catholic Metropolitan Church" 
 (so it was designated by the Association Journal) 
 the following printed billet was distributed : 
 
 " The most Reverend Father in God, Daniel Mur- 
 ray, by the Grace of God, and the Apostolic See, 
 Archbishop of Dublin, grants to all persons here pre- 
 sent, forty days true indulgence, according to the usual 
 forms of the Church. You will pray for the happy 
 state of his Holiness Pope Leo the Twelfth, of Ms 
 Grace the Archbishop, and of the Holy Catholic 
 Church." 
 
 In June of last year, the following article ap- 
 peared in " the Weekly Register," the Journal 
 of the Association : 
 
 " CONSECRATION OF THE RIGHT REV. DR. BROWNE. 
 
 " This solemn and impressive ceremony was per- 
 formed on Sunday, the' 10th instant, in the Chapel of 
 the Royal College, Maynooth, by his Grace the Ve- 
 nerable and Most Rev. Dr. Curtis, assisted by the 
 Right Rev. Dr. Crolly and the Right Rev. Dr. Keat- 
 ing. There were present besides, his Grace, the Most 
 Rev. Dr. Murray, and the Bishops of Raphoe, Dro- 
 more, and Maronia."* 
 
 * The following part of the same article is, on other accounts, 
 too interesting to be withholden. " The Archbishop asked 
 " whether the necessary Apostolic mandate had been received, 
 " and being answered in the affirmative, called for the important 
 " document, and carefully inspected it. His Grace then kissed
 
 266 CLAIMS OF ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS 
 
 In the Morning Register of 27th Dec. 1827, 
 is an account of the death of the late Right 
 Rev. Dr. Marum, who is called without qualifi- 
 cation " Bishop of Ossory ;" and we are told, in 
 conclusion, that " Dr. Doyle, Bishop of Leigh- 
 " I'm and Kildare, and Dr. Kelly, Bishop of Wa- 
 " terford and Lismore, presided at the perform- 
 " ance of the solemn services of the funeral : 
 " Dr. Murray, Archbishop of Dublin, was ex- 
 " pected, but was prevented from attending by 
 " indisposition." 
 
 In another number of the same newspaper is 
 an article, headed " The Church" giving an ac- 
 count of" the Archbishop of Dublin's" intended 
 visitations through his archdiocese. 
 
 Now, in order to feel the full importance of 
 these recent assumptions, it is proper to bear in 
 mind, that in a debate on the Petition of the 
 Roman Catholics, in May, 1805, Lord Redes- 
 dale having stated that " the Catholic Clergy 
 " considered the Protestant Clergy as usurpers ; 
 " that they denominated themselves the regu- 
 
 " it respectfully, and handed it to his notary, who received it on 
 <( his knees, and read it aloud from beginning to end, from the 
 " platform of the altar. The will of the Supreme Pontiff" being 
 " thus proclaimed, and the elect having taken the usual oath of 
 "fidelity to the Catholic Church, and to the successor of St. 
 " Peter, the consecrating Bishop proceeded."
 
 IN IRELAND. 267 
 
 " lar successors of the ancient Bishops of the 
 " country, and took their titles, used their 
 " insignia, and assumed every thing appertain- 
 " ing to the Prelacy, which was not prohibited 
 " by law ;"* and the then Bishop of St Asaph, 
 Dr. Horsley, having grounded his refusal to vote 
 for the Committee, mainly on this point ;f Dr. 
 Troy, the R. C. Archbishop of Dublin, addressed 
 a letter to Sir J. C. Hippesley, in which he says, 
 " The actual state of the Catholic hierarchy in 
 " Ireland bears very little resemblance to the 
 " description of it given by the learned lord. 
 " We do not claim an exterior jurisdiction, in 
 " exclusion of the legal claims of the esta- 
 " blished prelacy and priesthood. We do not 
 " treat the prelates or priests of the Established 
 " Church as usurpers or intruders, under this 
 " establishment. No Catholic Archbishop pub- 
 " licly takes to himself such a title as Arma- 
 " chens." In fine, he " repels, by a total and 
 " emphatical denial, these novel imputations of 
 " assumed rank."$ 
 
 Let the tone of this guarded disclaimer be 
 compared with the language at present held by 
 
 * Parl. Deb. vol. iv. p. 713. f Ib. p. 729. 
 
 f See Speech by Sir J. C. Hippesley, 1810. Supp. App. 
 pp. 2, 3.
 
 268 POWER OF R. C. BISHOPS AND CLERGY 
 
 the R. C. hierarchy, and their people, and it will 
 be seen, how great an advance has been made 
 by them in the course of the last twenty years : 
 it will also be seen by every man among- us, who 
 is not wilfully blind to the danger, how impe- 
 rative is the duty of preventing, by the most 
 effectual restraints, this same encroaching spirit 
 from still further extending itself; above all, 
 from having the means of realizing those pro- 
 jects of ambition, of the existence of which it 
 would be weakness any longer to doubt. 
 
 Power of the Roman Catholic Bishops and Clergy 
 over the Representation of Ireland. 
 
 Unhappily, in the present state of the Elec- 
 tive Franchise, they have an engine of power 
 and influence, which, a very short time ago, it 
 would have been deemed the wildest dream of 
 bigoted folly to affect to apprehend. The ad- 
 vocates for the expediency of admitting Roman 
 Catholics into Parliament were once accus- 
 tomed to found their best argument on the 
 improbability of many seats being affected by 
 the measure. Mr. Burke, as we have seen 
 above,* believed it impossible, that more than 
 
 * See above, p. 165.
 
 OVER THE REPRESENTATION OF IRELAND. 269 
 
 three, or at the most four, Roman Catholics 
 could be elected. But, in the present day, the 
 prospect is completely changed. There is no 
 longer a County, a Town, a Parish, in Ireland, 
 in which the political influence of the Priest- 
 hood is not strongly felt. Nor is it the least 
 striking, nor the least instructive, particular in 
 the case, that they do not, as formerly, attempt 
 to conceal their power, but, on the contrary, are 
 eager, on every occasion, to obtrude the most 
 public and ostentatious avowal of it. The 
 Priests themselves openly boast of having " in- 
 " duced the 40s. Freeholders at the last elec- 
 " tions to vote against their Landlords ;" they 
 claim from the Association money advanced to 
 these Freeholders to save them from eject- 
 ments:* and their Lay followers are not slow to 
 acknowledge the value of their services. 
 
 "The Clergy," says Mr. O'Connell, "from 
 " the most venerable and reverend prelates in 
 " the land, to the youngest curate of the most 
 " remote parish, make common cause with the 
 " people, "t 
 
 " The aid of the Catholic Priesthood," says 
 
 * See Letter from Rev. P. Byrne of Castletown, July 26, 
 1827, read in the Association, 
 f Fourteen Days Meeting, 1st Day, January, 1828.
 
 270 POWER OF R. C. BISHOPS AND CLERGY 
 
 Mr. Lawless, " and their intelligent and zea- 
 " lous co-operation, will ever be necessary to the 
 "foundation of the national cause: that aid 
 " we enjoy in an unlimited degree"* The same 
 gentleman on a very recent occasion giving 
 notice of a motion in the Association, " that 
 " they would consider any member of Parlia- 
 " ment, who supported the present Administra- 
 " tion, at the head of which was the Duke of 
 " Wellington, as an enemy to Ireland ;" and 
 further saying, that he would recommend the 
 calling on all the parishes to meet and adopt a 
 similar resolution proceeded as follows : 
 
 "They all knew, that the 40*. Freeholders and the 
 Roman Catholic Clergy could dispose of the represen- 
 tation of this country as they liked. They were all per- 
 fectly aware, that the 40*. Freeholders could, in fact, 
 command the return of the members ; and if the Clergy 
 supported them, he would be a bold man indeed that 
 would support the Wellington Administration."f 
 
 Mr. O'Connell, as I have already said,J bears 
 similar testimony. " In Cavan," (a county, in 
 which, at the last general election, the Romanists 
 property in fee did not exceed 3000 acres I 
 
 * Answer to Address from the Inhabitants of Longford, 
 December 9, 1827. 
 
 t Fourteen Days Meeting, 3d Day. See " Times of 25th 
 of January, 1828." 
 
 % See above, p. 166.
 
 OVER THE REPRESENTATION OF IRELAND. 271 
 
 speak on the authority of a gentleman most 
 intimately acquainted with the state of property 
 there ;) 
 
 " In Cavan," said Mr. O'Connell,* " Young Maxwell 
 and Saunders would have been ousted, if the Catholic 
 Clergy had been well urged on, and had exerted them- 
 selves. In three baronies, where the people were 
 roused to a sense of duty, the liberal candidate had a 
 complete majority." " If the Catholic Claims were 
 conceded, he would not feel the smallest reluctance in 
 going down to Cavan himself,^ and opposing the illi- 
 berals." 
 
 Mr. Shiel speaks still more plainly : 
 
 " ToJ;he Protestants of Ireland I do not look for eman- 
 cipation. It does not depend on them. We are, to a 
 great extent, masters of the representation of Ireland ; 
 and I trust that, before long, every county member shall 
 obey our bidding ; therefore I scarce care one jot, whe- 
 ther the Irish Protestants are favourable to us or not. 
 But on the English Protestants I do depend, and for 
 their conviction I rely, not on the justice of our 
 claims," &c. 
 
 One further intimation he gives, which is too 
 important to be withholden. 
 
 " I rejoice to be able to add, that the present condition 
 of the Catholics, when all of us, from the highest to the 
 
 * Catholic Meeting, November 5, 1827. 
 t Mr. O'Connell, I am informed, has no property whatever 
 in that county.
 
 272 POWER OF R. C. BISHOPS AND CLERGY 
 
 lowest, are bound together, portends to the bad mono- 
 poly, which is misnamed the Constitution, no ordinary 
 peril."* 
 
 Looking, then, to this unhappy state of 
 things, to the unconstitutional power over the 
 great majority of Irish Representatives, possessed 
 by the Roman Catholic Prelates and Priesthood 
 and looking, too, to the known and avowed 
 hostility of themselves, and of all the most pro- 
 minent of their Lay adherents, to the Established 
 Church, both in England and in Ireland, can it 
 
 * Speech at New Ross, 23d of October, 1827. That the as- 
 sertion of the power of the Priesthood over the representation of 
 Ireland, is not an idle boast, the experience of the late elections 
 manifested in the face of the world. But this influence is not 
 limited to the instances in which it was thus notorious. Of the 
 members, who sit in Parliament for Irish counties, there are, it 
 is to be feared, not a few, who know that they hold their seats 
 at the will of the Roman Catholic Priesthood. One of these, 
 who always votes for their claims, has himself told me, that if he 
 did not so vote, he should be driven from his seat ; " that," said 
 he, " I should not mind ; but I should be driven from my house, 
 " and compelled to quit the place of my fathers." That this 
 is not a solitary instance, I know from authority which the 
 delicacy of the case forbids me to name. I might even appeal 
 to the internal conviction of more than one county member 
 returned to the present Parliament, who have always supported 
 the cause of the Roman Catholics, whether they would have 
 had a chance of success, if Roman Catholic candidates could 
 have been opposed to them.
 
 OVER THE REPRESENTATION OF IRELAND. 273 
 
 be safe to give them the great additional power 
 of choosing from those very adherents a large 
 and important part of the British Parliament? 
 Can any friend of the Church wish to see its 
 interests exposed to the machinations of such 
 men ? Can any friend of the Constitution wish 
 to see the writ of summons to Parliament " for 
 " some great weighty affairs concerning Us, the 
 " state and defense of our kingdom, and of our 
 " Church of England and Ireland" directed to 
 those whose language and intentions towards 
 that Church we have just read ? Above all, can 
 a Prince, who has sworn to " maintain, to the 
 " utmost of his power, the laws of God, the 
 " true profession of the Gospel, and the Pro- 
 " testant Reformed Religion, established by 
 " law" can he, without violating that Oath, 
 give his Royal Assent to a Bill, which would 
 confer on eighty, perhaps a hundred, of the bit- 
 terest enemies of the Protestant Church, power 
 to interfere in all its concerns, to legislate for all 
 its interests, to dispose of all its endowments, to 
 defeat and annihilate all its laws? Thank God ! 
 our King himself feels that he cannot ; and has 
 proclaimed on his Royal Word, that he will not. 
 And every loyal subject, be his own opinion on 
 the great question itself what it may, will exult 
 in the conscientious decision of the Sovereign, 
 
 T
 
 274 CASE OF THE 40,y. FREEHOLDERS 
 
 and will gratefully acknowledge in it a new 
 and powerful claim on the attachment of his 
 people. 
 
 Case of the 40s. Freeholders in Ireland. 
 
 And here I should conclude, were there not 
 one matter remaining, closely connected with 
 the last particular we have been considering, 
 and too important to be omitted, I mean the case 
 of the 40*. Freeholders in Ireland. We have 
 seen how powerful an engine of mischief they 
 are made in the hands of our bitterest enemies. 
 But this is not the consideration, on which I am 
 now about to dwell. It is to the hideous, the 
 unexampled, extent of perjury, of which their 
 suffrage is the cause, and in which it is difficult 
 to acquit the British Legislature of being the 
 accomplices, that I now presume to invite atten- 
 tion. 
 
 I say, that it is difficult to acquit the British 
 Legislature of being accomplices in this per- 
 jury; and, whatever may be the animadversion 
 to which the assertion is exposed, whatever the 
 offense given by it, and in whatever quarter, I 
 persist in making it, and in offering testimony 
 and argument of its truth. 
 
 In the Evidence taken before the Committees
 
 IN IRELAND. 275 
 
 in 1825, much was said on this point, the sub- 
 stance of which I will endeavour to reduce to 
 three heads first, the way in which the alleged 
 Freeholds are created ; secondly, the falsehood 
 and perjury committed in swearing to them ; 
 thirdly, the manner in which the Freeholders are 
 treated. 
 
 Mr. A. R. Blake, a Roman Catholic gentle- 
 man, who needs not my testimony to his distin- 
 guished respectability, Remembrancer of the 
 Court of Exchequer in Ireland, and one of the 
 Commissioners of Education Inquiry, in his 
 Examination before the Committee of the House 
 of Commons, thus states the common mode of 
 creating 40*. freeholds. " The tenants" (holding 
 leases for life) " in general pay what is originally 
 " a rack-rent for the land; they then build mud- 
 " huts upon it, and if they make out of the land 
 " a profit of 40*. a-year, a profit produced by the 
 " sweat of their brow," this is considered by 
 them as " an interest in the land to the extent of 
 " 40*. a-year, whereas the gain is produced not 
 " through an interest in the land, but through 
 " their labour."* 
 
 These huts, it appears, are sometimes erected 
 
 * Committee of the House of Commons, 1825, p. 43. 
 T 2
 
 276 CASE OF THE 40s. FREEHOLDERS. 
 
 for20*. each; and Mr. Blackburne,(King's Coun- 
 sel, appointed to administer the Insurrection Act 
 in the County of Limerick,) informs the Com- 
 mittee of 1824,* that the article of the most 
 value in them is the roof, which is commonly 
 constructed for 40,?. They have no floor. 
 
 Mr. Dominick Browne (Member for the 
 County of Mayo) gives to the Lords' Corn- 
 mi tteef the following account of the manufac- 
 ture of freeholds. " Supposing a farm of 100 
 acres is to be let, that land would probably be 
 sub-divided into from 20 to 25 holdings : the 
 landlord would let it to those people at a greater 
 rent than the grazier could afford to pay him, 
 inconsequence of their security being inferior; 
 those persons would, immediately on taking out 
 their leases, commence inclosing their garden, or 
 building a house, or rather a hut, and would 
 perhaps within the same week, or frequently be- 
 fore the ink was dry of the signature of their 
 leases, register a 40.?. Freehold out of the land, 
 for which they paid a rack-rent." 
 
 Such is the mode of creating these 40s. Free- 
 holds. The extent of the perjury committed 
 
 * Committee of the House of Commons, 1824, p. 10. 
 t p. 957.
 
 THEIR PERJURY. 
 
 277 
 
 will be manifest from the state of the law. 
 For, to make these freeholds available, they must 
 be registered ; this registering must be repeated 
 within eight years, and, as a preliminary to the 
 registry, every person registering must swear to 
 a freehold of 40s. per annum! 
 
 Now the number of the persons so swearing 
 is most enormous. In every county of Ireland, 
 the great majority of voters consists of them ; 
 of men perjured, and known to be perjured.* 
 Some proprietors are said to reckon their free- 
 holders by thousands in other words, to suborn, 
 or suffer agents to suborn, thousands of their 
 tenantry to perjure themselves for the pur- 
 
 * By a Return, made to an Order of the House of Commons, 
 dated 19th May, 1824, of the numbers of each Class of 
 Freeholders, (viz. 40*. 20Z. and 501. Freeholders and Rent 
 Chargers,) registered from 1st January, 1795, to 31st Dec. 
 1823, it appears that the following is, in round numbers, the 
 amount in the following instances. The Freeholders of a 
 higher order are included among those of 50/. per annum. 
 
 County. 
 
 Fr'eliMdersf 
 
 Other 
 Classes. 
 
 fount* Forty Sh ill inz Other 
 toullt! '- Freeholders. Classes. 
 
 Antrim - 
 
 30,000 ' - 
 
 850 Londonderry - 
 
 24,289 
 
 - 1,057 
 
 Armagh 
 
 23,500 - 
 
 830 Longford - 
 
 8,300 
 
 630 
 
 Carlow - 
 
 1 1 ,000 - 
 
 1,500 
 
 Mayo 
 
 43,000 
 
 630 
 
 Cavan 
 
 18,000 - 
 
 954 ' Monaghan - 
 
 18,000 
 
 310 
 
 Clare 
 
 24,000 - 
 
 1,800 
 
 Queen's - 
 
 16,500 
 
 - 2,500 
 
 Cork - 
 
 22,000 - 
 
 5,350 
 
 Roscommon 
 
 16,090 
 
 - 1,023 
 
 Down 
 
 49,000 - 
 
 1,300 
 
 Sligo 
 
 9,250 
 
 925 
 
 Dublin 
 
 5,100 - 
 
 1,800 
 
 Tyrone 
 
 12,827 
 
 378 
 
 Fermanagh 
 
 25,450 - 
 
 1,200 
 
 Waterford 
 
 7,880 
 
 - 1,375 
 
 Kerry - 
 
 14,842 - 
 
 2,074 
 
 Westmeath - 
 
 7,450 
 
 - 1,150 
 
 Kilkenny 
 
 4,150 - 
 
 1,060 ; Wexford 
 
 22,700 
 
 - 2,250 
 
 King's County 
 
 6,792 - 
 
 1,406 Wicklow 
 
 8,000 
 
 800 
 
 Limerick 
 
 '23,000 - 
 
 3,450 
 

 
 278 THE PERJURY CAUSED BY THE LAWS 
 
 poses of their ambition.* Meanwhile, smaller 
 persons emulate their superiors in the guilty 
 traffic; attorneys and others buy small pieces 
 of land, for the mere purpose of manufacturing 
 freeholders, and selling the influence thus ob- 
 tained. 
 
 But I proceed to the evidence. Mr. Black- 
 burnefi making strong representations of the 
 dreadful and horrible disregard of oaths, which 
 he had witnessed in the discharge of his official 
 duties, ascribes it, in a main degree, to this prac- 
 tice of swearing to fictitious freeholds. 
 
 Mr. Harrington, Crown Solicitor for the 
 Munster Circuit, states the lamentable indiffe- 
 rence to the obligation of an Oath, which pre- 
 vails in Ireland, and specifies as a principal cause, 
 the Freeholder's Oath. He says, that " almost 
 " all the [persons taking it consider it as more 
 " a matter of form than any thing else."J 
 
 Mr. Blake says, in reference to the accounts 
 laid before him officially, as Remembrancer, that 
 
 * It is an act of justice to one nobleman, possessed of some 
 of the largest estates in Ireland, to mention his name as proved 
 to be pure from this crime, the Duke of Devonshire. See Ev. 
 before Com. p. 307. Let us in charity hope, that his Grace is 
 not a solitary instance. 
 
 t Evidence before Commons, 1824, p. 43. 
 
 J Commons, 1825, p. 577.
 
 RESPECTING 40s. FREEHOLDERS. 279 
 
 a great mass of tenants, who were in arrear, 
 in consequence of holding at exorbitant rents, 
 had sworn to forty-shilling freeholds. 
 
 Mr. O 'Conn ell, as I have already had occasion 
 to remark, states, that the system of regulations 
 respecting forty-shilling freeholders, " produces 
 " great perjury."* 
 
 Dr. Magaurin, (R. C. Bishop of Ardfert,) 
 says, " Pei jury is committed to a very great 
 " extent in consequence of the forty-shilling 
 " freeholders'^ system." 
 
 Dr. Kelly (R. C. Archhishop of Tuara) gives 
 the following statement of conversations held 
 by him with these unfortunate persons: 
 
 " They have often called upon me to represent their 
 condition, and stated that the quantity of land they 
 held was very small ; that they were very apprehensive 
 about taking the oath, that they were forty-shilling 
 freeholders, and they requested me to advise them 
 what to do upon the occasion. My advice uniformly 
 was, for no person to register, as a freeholder, unless 
 he could do it with safety to his own conscience. I 
 have met them afterwards, and they acknowledged to 
 me, that although they did not feel their consciences 
 quite at ease, they were obliged to register those free- 
 holds; that they had been threatened to be expelled 
 from their holdings, and to be deprived of their land, 
 unless they registered those freeholds" " The system 
 
 * Commons, 1825, p. 131. f Ib. p. 292.
 
 280 THE PERJURY CAUSED BY THE LAWS 
 
 is replete with much mischief; it is highly injurious to 
 the morals of the people; it Is a source of perjury in 
 
 many instances." " I have not the least doubt of the 
 
 effect it must have generally on the population of the 
 country, the being either induced or menaced by their 
 landlords, who are their magistracy, and who ought to 
 be their protectors, and instigated to the commission of 
 perjury for the sake of advancing the political influ- 
 ence of the person under whom they derive."* 
 
 Mr. W. Grant, one of the Commissioners of 
 Education Inquiry, says, "t.jat he found the 
 " condition of forty-shilling freeholders univer- 
 " sally mentioned as a subject to be lamented on 
 " all sides, as being a great source of perjury "-\ 
 
 The Hon. R. Day, (for twenty-one years one 
 of the Judges of the Court of King's Bench,) 
 after stating that " a man creates a herd of 
 " those nominal freeholders, and disposes of them 
 
 * Commons, p. 252. In citing the evidence of the Roman 
 Catholic Prelates, I must remark, that neither they, nor the 
 Priesthood, appear to have had any scruples in availing them- 
 selves, to the utmost, of the perjury of these Voters at the last 
 General Election, or to have taken any pains to rouse them to 
 a sense of their wickedness. On the contrary, they seem to 
 have universally encouraged and applauded them. Can there 
 be a more instructive instance of the tendency of their religion 
 to sacrifice every object to the aggrandisement of the Church ? 
 Or, can we need a more powerful warning of the danger of 
 " full, unqualified, unconditional, Emancipation ?" 
 
 f Lords, p. 126.
 
 RESPECTING 40s. FREEHOLDERS. 281 
 
 " for his own benefit, for the purpose of obtain- 
 " ing a place, or for sale," adds, " I think even 
 " the evil of universal suffrage would be a great 
 " improvement upon the present system, for that 
 " would be free from perjury."* 
 
 I will not multiply testimonies to the same 
 effect; but, in order to complete our view of 
 the case of these miserable men, I will adduce 
 a few proofs, in the third place, of the manner in 
 which the forty-shilling freeholders are treated. 
 
 Mr. O'Connell tells the Committee of Com- 
 mons, that " he has often heard the phrase, 
 " * drive them into vote;' and has seen it done:" 
 that " the ' freeholders' are considered, in many 
 " instances, as part of the live-stock of the 
 " estate." That " the system of ordering elec- 
 " tors into the hustings is by a note from the 
 " bailiff, as he is called in the north, or the 
 " driver in the south."f 
 
 Mr. O'Connor says, that " they are driven up 
 " like sheep to vote."J 
 
 Mr. Shiel, that " the peasantry are driven in 
 " droves of freeholders to the hustings." 
 
 The Hon. Archdeacon Trench says, in his 
 
 * Lords, p. 871. t lb. p. 131. 
 
 + lb. 142. Ib. p. 105.
 
 282 THE PERJURY CAUSED BY THE LAWS 
 
 sworn evidence before the Lords,* " I have seen 
 " such freeholders in troops going into the 
 " county town at the time of the election, with 
 " a little man mounted on a wretched mule, and 
 " with a thonged whip as if in the act of driving 
 " them : I do not say that I saw the man strike 
 " the poor people. I was travelling at the 
 " time, and just asked, ' Who are these men?' 
 " and was answered that ' they were such a 
 
 " gentleman's freeholders.' " Q. " You con- 
 
 " ceived the thonged whip was intended for the 
 
 "freeholders as well as the mule ?' A. " It 
 
 " could be for no other purpose ; it was too long 
 " for the mule."t 
 
 Here I stop ; and I will now venture to ap- 
 peal to the generosity of Englishmen, whether 
 such a system of unfeeling brutality ought to be 
 tolerated for a single day I appeal to their ho- 
 nest pride to say, whether they will quietly en- 
 dure, that the nominees of persons such as these, 
 be they under the influence of priests or peers, 
 shall sit in Parliament with the representatives 
 of freemen ; above all, I appeal to their sense 
 
 * Lords, p. 731. 
 
 t It is but fair to say, that the driver does not take his name 
 from driving these men, but from driving cattle, when dis- 
 trained for rent.
 
 RESPECTING 40$. FREEHOLDERS. 283 
 
 of morality, to their principles of religion, whe- 
 ther they will silently stand by, while the legis- 
 lature permits these facts to be detailed to them 
 by a cloud of witnesses of veracity the most in- 
 disputable, and yet takes no step to put an end 
 to such enormities. 
 
 In the House of Commons, nearly three years 
 ago, a Bill had almost passed to stay this moral 
 pestilence; but though, to the honour of its 
 author,* it was recommended by him warmly on 
 the grounds of morality and religion, it was 
 treated by the House at large merely as append- 
 ant on a great political measure. Nay, a clause 
 was introduced, expressly empowering those 
 who had already perjured themselves, to repeat 
 their perjury, as often as it could be made avail- 
 able. But this was not all. History will record, 
 that a learned and very eloquent Member was 
 received with " Cheers and Laughter," while he 
 exhausted all his powers in ridiculing the plea 
 of morality, and in pretendingt to find a justifi- 
 
 * Mr. Littleton, M. P. for the County of Stafford. 
 
 f I use this word advisedly. That there are any Members 
 of the House of Commons, so lost to all sense of religion, as to 
 swear that they are possessed of qualifications to which, at the 
 time of swearing, they have not a legal title, I cannot believe. 
 If there be any such, let them be exposed to the scorn they 
 merit. But, on the other alleged instance, I must be a little
 
 284 THE PERJURY CAUSED BY THE LAWS 
 
 cation of the perjury of the poor Irish in the 
 examples set them by Members of that House, 
 
 more particular. The following are the words ascribed to Mr. 
 B. (see Hansard's Deb. vol. xiii. p. 201.) in the debate of 26th 
 of April, 1825. " The Bishops were in the habit of talking of 
 " perjury as a crime not to be heard of without abomination 
 " they declared that truth, sincerity, and frankness, were the 
 " essence of religion. If, then, perjury were criminal, when 
 " committed by laymen, it must be ten times more odious when 
 " practised hy churchmen ; and yet, what did these reverend 
 " persons do? He would suppose, that a reverend gentleman 
 " was about to be inducted into a bishopric of about ,4,000 
 " a-year. He declared in the name of God, that he felt inwardly 
 " moved yes, that he felt inwardly moved, at that moment, by 
 " the Holy Ghost, to take upon himself the Office of Bishop, and 
 " the administration thereof, and for no other reason." 
 
 " He could not help thinking, that the Members of that 
 " House who took one oath, and the Bishops and Clergy out of 
 " doors who took another, were the last persons in the world 
 " who should be so exquisitely squeamish with regard to the 
 " conduct of the Irish Freeholders, whom they all along treated 
 " as if they were the only mortals under Heaven who had ever 
 " been guilty of perjury." 
 
 Now this foul charge on the highest order of God's ministers 
 amongst us, is absolutely without any foundation whatever. 
 
 It is pure, unmixed, unmitigated what shall I call it ? The 
 
 English language has but one word for it, and that is a word 
 which may not be used. But the speaker, we shall be told, 
 did not know that the charge was false. I dare say, that he 
 did not : he only endeavoured to make others believe, that he 
 knew it to be true. Whatever difference there may be in the 
 morality of the two cases, he is freely welcome to the full 
 benefit of it.
 
 RESPECTING 40tf. FREEHOLDERS. 285 
 
 and by the Bench of Bishops ! History will 
 
 also record, that one of the first Law Officers of 
 the Crown, now filling a high Judicial Station 
 in Ireland, declared on the same occasion, that 
 he " would not vote for the measure before the 
 " House, standing alone, because, alone, it was 
 " not wanted / and, until the Catholics were in 
 " possession of their rights," (that is the word the 
 King's Attorney General is reported to have 
 used,) " he would never consent that the 
 " slightest portion of their strength, of whatever 
 " description, should be taken from them !" 
 
 Before the House of Lords the Bill never 
 came : and, if nothing was then done by their 
 Lordships, it ought to be remembered, that 
 the circumstances of the time presented peculiar 
 difficulties to any attempt of theirs to legislate 
 in the matter. Once, indeed, there was a Mem- 
 ber of that House, who, in such a cause, would 
 have cast all difficulties behind him ; who, in 
 despite of clamour, obloquy, and opposition of 
 every kind, would have stood forth as the 
 guardian and vindicator of outraged morality ; 
 would have made every heart thrill with indig- 
 nation at the bare disclosure of a system so 
 abominable ; what would he have said to the 
 open and deliberate palliation of them? He 
 would then, if ever, have " called on the unsul-
 
 286 THE PERJURY CAUSED BY THE LAWS 
 
 "lied sanctity of the Lawn, the purity of the 
 " Ermine, to save us from this pollution, to 
 " perform a lustration, to purify Parliament 
 " and the Country from this enormous sin." 
 If the same commanding genius must not be 
 again looked for, at least we might have hoped, 
 that in the very Sanctuary of Justice and of 
 Honour, in the Assembly of all that is most 
 illustrious, and all that is most venerable, in the 
 land, some noble or reverend breast would have 
 glowed with the same generous impatience of 
 national disgrace, the same holy zeal for the 
 morals and religion of his country, which was 
 the source of highest inspiration even to the 
 eloquence of Lord Chatham. But we have 
 fallen on degenerate days, when the ancient 
 sternness of British principle is abandoned for a 
 vain-glorious liberality on the one hand, and for 
 a false and dastardly discretion on the other. 
 Were it not so, year after year would not pass 
 away, without one single effort being made to 
 wash out this " damned spot," without one 
 single voice being raised in either House of 
 Parliament to denounce this opprobrium of the 
 British name. Is this what might be hoped 
 from an English Legislature aye, or from the 
 English people ? Are we alive to every sin and 
 crime committed in our dependencies across the
 
 RESPECTING 40$. FREEHOLDERS. 287 
 
 Atlantic? Can we take praise to ourselves for 
 what the public voice of Englishmen has effected 
 in redressing the wrongs of negroes, and en- 
 forcing the demands of justice and religion in 
 another hemisphere ? and shall we look on for 
 ever, in guilty indifference, while nothing is 
 even attempted, to purge our own laws " of that 
 perilous stuff," which has poisoned the principles 
 of a whole nation, and cries with trumpet-tongue 
 to Heaven against us? 
 
 In the troubled state of Ireland at this very 
 hour, we are tasting some of the bitter fruits of 
 our iniquitous folly. " We have sown the wind, 
 " and we are reaping the whirlwind." They, 
 who have been seduced into perjury to swell the 
 little miserable importance of an electioneering 
 landlord, have turned on their seducer, and 
 spurned his mandate in obedience to a more 
 powerful Master. Who can lament the righteous 
 retribution ? Meanwhile, the State, which has 
 patiently borne the guilt and shame of conniving 
 at such abominations, is now threatened with 
 the subversion of its most sacred institutions, 
 nay, with all the horrors of civil war, arising 
 mainly out of the unnatural power thus given 
 to a wild and unprincipled multitude, by the 
 permitted perversion of its own laws. 
 
 And what, after all, is the reason for bearing
 
 288 THE PERJURY CAUSED BY THE LAWS 
 
 any longer with so pernicious an abuse ? Mr. 
 Blake, one of the most temperate as well as 
 ablest of Irish Roman Catholics, has, in his evi- 
 dence before the Lords,* stated the only plea. 
 " The possession of political power is generally 
 " considered as the security which men possess 
 " for the due enjoyment of all their rights. If 
 " you take away from the forty-shilling free- 
 " holders the right of voting, you would take 
 " away from the mass of the Roman Catholics 
 " of Ireland, the great political power which 
 " they now possess.'' 
 
 But this same witness has himself testified, 
 that this alleged right is in truth the foulest 
 wrong ; that it is bottomed in crime, and per- 
 jury, and usurpation of the rights of others. 
 For, be it never forgotten, that the power of the 
 perjured serf is, in truth, the extinction of the 
 power and rights of the lawful freeholder. And 
 can an argument of justice be founded on such 
 a plea? Or can the State hesitate, for a single 
 instant, on the bounden duty, much less the 
 lawfulness, of putting an end, at once, to a sys- 
 tem so pregnant with danger as well as crime? 
 
 Among the results of such a measure, it might 
 not, perhaps, be the least gratifying, that by 
 
 * Lords, p. 164.
 
 RESPECTING 406'. FREEHOLDERS. 289 
 
 restoring political power to its just and consti- 
 tutional quarter, property, one of the strongest 
 objections to any great diminution of the dis- 
 abilities of the Roman Catholics, would be 
 removed. But to clog an act of manifest duty 
 with any engagement whatsoever, would be as 
 mischievous, as it would be unbecoming: it 
 would only encourage wild and extravagant 
 pretension, and take from the boon conferred all 
 the grace of voluntary concession. 
 
 But I am getting into matters, foreign to my 
 purpose, and beyond my reach. My chief object 
 has been attained, if I have shown, that our 
 gracious Sovereign's construction of his Royal 
 Oath is as sound in principle, as it is fixed and 
 holy in purpose ; that it forbids him to assent 
 to any measure, which, in his own conscientious 
 judgment, endangers the welfare of the Esta- 
 blished Church of England and Ireland, or the 
 rights and privileges of any of its ministers.* 
 
 * Since the preceding sheets were printed, I have read a 
 learned and ingenious pamphlet, entitled " The Coronation 
 Oath considered in reference to the Principles of the Revolu- 
 tion of 1688," by C. T. Lane, Esq. Second Edition. 1 am 
 happy to have so able a coadjutor, who has, indeed, carried the 
 argument from the " animus imponentis" a little further than I 
 am prepared to go. 
 
 U
 
 290 RESPECTING 4O. FREEHOLDERS. 
 
 If to this main subject of my inquiry I have 
 ventured to append some feeble remarks on a 
 great and crying national sin, I shall need no 
 indulgence in those quarters, where only I am 
 anxious to obtain it. 
 
 H. P. 
 
 February, 1828.
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 u 2
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 PACK. 
 
 A. (p. 55.) On Note in Edinburgh Review, No. LXXV. 293 
 
 B. (p. 96.) Calumnious Attack on King Charles I. in 
 
 Edinburgh Review, No. XCI 297 
 
 C. (p. 141.) No Pledge of Concession given at the Union 
 
 to the Irish Roman Catholics 303 
 
 D. (p. 233.) Dr. Mac Hale, Roman Catholic Coadjutor 
 
 Bishop of Killala's Examination before the Com- 
 missioners of Education Inquiry in Ireland . . . 314 
 
 E. (p. 242.) Nag's Head Fable respecting Archbishop 
 
 Parker's Consecration 328
 
 NOTE A. 
 
 {Page 55.) 
 
 Extract from Remarks by the Rev. H. PMllpotts, 
 D.D. on Mr. Jeffrey's Note in No. LXXV. of the 
 Edinburgh Review. 
 
 [Published in Blackwood's Magazine, May, 1823.] 
 
 I HAVE done with my Reviewer. Of the Editor of the 
 Review something still remains to be said. 
 
 He seeks, it seems, to extenuate the injuries of which 
 I have complained. " The charges against Dr. P. in 
 " the Review are little more, than that he is a violent 
 " political agitator, and had written intemperate pam- 
 " phlets and addresses." Has then this Editor fallen 
 so low ? Can he stoop to the paltry artifice of dissem- 
 bling, that in the very page from which these charges 
 are selected by him, I am called by implication " a tool 
 "of party," " a hireling of government/" " a slanderer," 
 " a libeller," nay, that in the same paragraph, not by 
 implication, but in broad and express terms, I am de- 
 nounced to all the world as a " Calumniator?" And is
 
 294- EDITOR OF THE EDINBURGH REVIEW. 
 
 this, in his estimation, but a little charge? He has, 
 unhappily, too much reason to wish it to be deemed so. 
 But let me remind him of the definition of calumny, 
 given on a memorable occasion in his own Review,* 
 when some of his associates were suffering under the 
 chastisement of a far more powerful hand, than is now 
 raised against himself. " Calumny," we were then 
 truly told, when the honour of a Reviewer required 
 that the imputation of it should be repelled as unwar- 
 rantable, " Calumny is an attack on the moral cha- 
 " racter, and is grounded in falsehood. It may be de- 
 " fined, if we mistake not, ^fictitious recital, made for 
 f the purpose of hurting the moral character of an in- 
 " dividual, or a body of individuals." Is it a trifle, then, 
 that the name of a Christian minister should be branded 
 with such an epithet, through all the wide career of the 
 Edinburgh Review? 
 
 The Editor will not say that it is. He is become 
 exquisitively sensitive on this subject : 
 
 " Begins to kick, and fling, and wince," 
 
 " on seeing his name blazoned in capital letters in all 
 " the newspapers and shop windows, in connexion with 
 " the charges of falsehood and malignity," brought 
 against his Review, and of one other charge directed 
 against himself. I am glad that even-handed Justice 
 has done her work so faithfullyr The Editor's own 
 feelings on this occasion, may perhaps give him some 
 lasting touches of remorse, for more than twenty long 
 and guilty years of wanton or wilful disregard of the 
 
 * See Edinburgh Review, Vol. XVI. p. 158, under Article entitled 
 " Calumnies against Oxford."
 
 EDITOR OF THE EDINBURGH REVIEW. 295 
 
 feelings of others. Let him, in his present mood, look 
 on the catalogue of honourable and distinguished names, 
 which he and his confederates have laboured to make 
 the sport or the victims of their spleen, their arrogance, 
 or their party-fury. Let him reflect on the meanness, 
 as well as the injustice, of abusing the power, which 
 the extensive circulation of his Journal gave him, to 
 " blazon those names" in every quarter to which Eng- 
 lish literature could reach, " in connection with epithets" 
 scarcely less painful (except that they were, for the most 
 part, unmerited) than those under which he now 
 writhes, with the bitter consciousness that they are 
 deserved. Let him remember, that during so long a 
 period, he has by himself, or his minions, pandared to 
 all the envious and malignant feelings of his readers 
 used every engine of literary torture that could wound 
 and lacerate ingenuous minds left unessayed no single 
 gradation of cruelty, from ruffian violence, down to the 
 subtler and safer expedients of mock candour and con- 
 temptuous commendation to establish a despotism of 
 the pen, which, like other despotisms, has ended in de- 
 stroying itself. Let him read in the indignation, or the 
 pity, of every impartial mind, his own large share in 
 the common ignominy, which has long been thickening 
 around his Band : And then let him, if he will, affect 
 to hide his shame under the babyish plea, that he did 
 not load the piece, he only primed it and drew the 
 trigger ; in language of his own, that he " merely su- 
 " perintended or sanctioned the publication!" and 
 therefore, " though he might have been legally re- 
 " sponsible, he is really at a loss to understand how lie 
 " could be deemed morally or individually blameablej"
 
 29G EDITOR OF THE EDINBURGH REVIEW. 
 
 that he has, in short, only hired himself out to a 
 bookseller, for some stated hundreds of miserable pelf, 
 to be the midwife and the nurse to every unfathered 
 brood of calumnies, which the malice of his faction 
 shall engender. If he will, let him talk thus, and per- 
 sist to defend what he knows is indefensible. But, 
 rather, let him seek, in this his day of deep humiliation, , 
 the real benefit, which he ought to draw from it. Let 
 him meditate on the painful contrast of what he is, with 
 what he might have been and what he yet may be : 
 And then let him cast off at once the vile slough 
 with which he is encumbered again stand forth in 
 some ingenuous form, and vindicate anew his title to 
 that high respect, of which no man, but himself, could 
 rob him. Let him do this, and he will yet have reason 
 to rejoice, that in one, whom he had doomed for his 
 victim, he has found a monitor and a friend. 
 
 H. P. 

 
 EDINBURGH REVIEW ON CHARLES I. 297 
 
 NOTE B 
 
 (Page 96.) 
 
 IN the same Number of the Edinburgh Review, which 
 contains the Article " On George III. &c." is one on 
 " Ellis's Original Letters," in which the spirit of that 
 Journal takes occasion to vent itself in certain com- 
 ments on the character of King Charles I. 
 
 Charles had, it seems, written a Letter to Dr. Juxon, 
 Bishop of London, containing " A Case of Conscience." 
 The case is as follows : 
 
 " I need not tell you the many persuasions and threatenings 
 that hath been used to me for making me change Episcopal 
 into Presbyterial Government, which absolutely to do, is so 
 directly against my conscience, that by the grace of God no 
 misery shall ever make me : but I hold myself obliged by all 
 honest means to eschew the mischief of this too visible storm, 
 and I think some kind of compliance with the iniquity of the 
 times may be fit, as my case is, which at another time were un- 
 lawful. These are the grounds that have made me think of this 
 inclosed proposition, the which, as one way it looks handsome 
 to us, so in another I am fearful least I cannot make it with a 
 safe conscience ; of which I command you to give me your 
 opinion upon your allegiance; conjuring you, that you will 
 deal plainly and freely with me, as you will answer it at the 
 dreadful Day of Judgment. 
 
 " I conceive the question to be, whether I may, with a safe 
 conscience, give way to this proposed temporary compliance, 
 with a resolution to recover and maintain that doctrine and 
 discipline wherein I have been bred. The duty of my Oath is
 
 298 EDINBURGH REVIEW'S CALUMNIOUS ATTACK 
 
 herein chiefly to be considered : I flattering myself that 
 this way I better comply with it, than being constant to a flat 
 denial; considering how unable I am by force to obtain that 
 which this way wants not probability to recover, if accepted, 
 (otherwise there is no harm done.) For my regal authority once 
 settled ; I make no question of recovering Episcopal govern- 
 ment, and God is ray witness, my chiefest end in regaining 
 my power, is to do the Church service. , 
 
 The Reviewer's remark on this is as follows: 
 " We conceive that a greater instance of perfidy than this 
 letter discloses, cannot be pointed out in the whole history of 
 intrigues, even among Cardinals and other Romish Priests 
 themselves. Let it be carefully remarked, that the doubt raised 
 in the King's mind, is not whether he can conscientiously de- 
 ceive the Presbyterians, but whether he can, conscientiously to- 
 wards the Church, give a temporary and seeming acquiescence 
 to its disadvantage. This is plain, &c." " So that he never 
 once dreamt of considering whether he was acting a fair, an 
 honest, or conscientious part, by the Presbyterians, in pretending 
 it) be against Episcopacy, and for Presbytery, with the secret 
 design of restoring Episcopacy, and putting down Presbytery, 
 which he says, ' God is his witness, is his chiefest end in re- 
 gaining his power.' The candid and reflecting reader of the 
 above memorable letter cannot well have any doubt as to the 
 measure of the blessed Martyr's conscientious scruples; and, 
 without any want of Chanty, we must take leave to suspect, 
 that, even the scruples which he puts forward, are fabricated 
 for the occasion, and that his real fears were, lest his apparent 
 compliance, misunderstood, might alienate the Church, while it 
 conciliated the Sectaries." 
 
 Such are the comments of this worthy contributor to 
 Mr. Jeffrey's Review; they evince all the qualifications 
 which fit him for his employment ignorance, presump- 
 tion, and malignity.
 
 ON KING CHARLES I. 299 
 
 No one, who has ever at all looked below the surface 
 of the History of Charles's Reign, can need to be in- 
 formed what must have been the nature of the propo- 
 sition, on which that unhappy monarch entertained the 
 doubts he here submitted to Bishop Juxon. The date 
 of the letter, " Newcastle, 30th Sept. 1646," is alone 
 sufficient for our purpose. It will be remembered, that 
 on the 24th of July preceding, certain " Propositions of 
 Peace" had been presented to the King, at Newcastle, 
 from the two Houses of Parliament of England, and the 
 Commissioners of Scotland. The principal articles, so 
 far as our present inquiry is concerned, were, " that his 
 Majesty should swear, and sign the late solemn League 
 and Covenant," and " that a Bill be passed for the 
 utter abolishing and taking away of all Archbishops, 
 Bishops, &c. &c. out of the Church of England, and 
 out of the Church of Ireland." 
 
 It appears from a paper in Rushworth, (vol. vi. p.328,) 
 dated on the 26th of September, that the King, in con- 
 ference with the Commissioners, (having, on the preced- 
 ing day, after refusing to accede to the Propositions pre- 
 sented to him, required, on his part, that " the Church 
 government should be left to his conscience, and those 
 of his opinion,") now offered some concession. " I shall 
 be content," said he, " to restrict it to some few dio- 
 ceses, as Oxford, Winchester, Bristol, Bath and \Vells, 
 and Exeter, leaving all the rest of England freely to the 
 Presbyterian Government." 
 
 The letter to Juxon, dated four days afterwards, 
 shows that, in the interval, he had thought of some 
 other expedient; and by looking to the ultimatum, 
 which he gave in on the 18th of May following, we
 
 300 EDINBURGH REVIEW'S CALUMNIOUS ATTACK 
 
 shall find the furthest limit of concession, to which that 
 letter can, with any shadow of reason (I will not talk of 
 charity to such a censor) be conceived to extend. 
 
 May 18, 1647, (Rushworth, vol. vi. p. 487.)" This day 
 was read in both Houses his Majesty's Letter ; in it his Ma- 
 jesty gives answer to the Propositions formerly sent to him at 
 Newcastle. To some he consents in whole, to others in part; 
 to others he saith he cannot consent, and gives reasons. For 
 the Presbyterian Government, he is willing to have it settled for 
 three years,* and consenteth to ratify the Assembly of Ministers 
 sitting at Westminster, propounding a certain number of his 
 own Ministers to be added to the Assembly, to consider what 
 government to settle after the three years, whether the Presby- 
 tery, or some other, and in the mean time, that he and his own 
 Household may be free to use the old Form, and Common Prayer 
 
 That the compliance, intimated in the King's Letter 
 of the 30th of September preceding, could not have 
 gone further than this, is, I repeat, quite clear; that it 
 did not go so far, is made probable by the fact, that the 
 Parliament of Scotland, which, to its eternal infamy, 
 sold the confiding Monarch to his murderers, made this 
 the justification of their treachery, that " he had not 
 given a satisfactory answer to the Propositions" (See 
 Declaration of the Kingdom of Scotland, January 16, 
 1647, (1647-48,) Rushworth, vol. vi. p. 396.) And, on 
 the 28th of January, the King remonstrating with the 
 Scotch Lords for betraying him, " they told his Ma- 
 jesty, that they had considered his speech, and that 
 since his Majesty had refused to take the Covenant and 
 sign the Propositions, they were to deliver him to the 
 
 * Here we have the " temporary compliance" mentioned in the King's 
 Letter to Juxon.
 
 ON KING CHARLES I. 301 
 
 Commissioners of both Houses of Parliament of Eng- 
 land, who were come to attend him to Holmby. 
 
 So much for Charles's " pretending to be against 
 Episcopacy, and for Presbytery" But it may be sug- 
 gested, that perhaps the King's proposition was so in- 
 tolerably bad, that Bishop Juxon (whom, though a 
 Bishop, this Reviewer will hardly deny to have been an 
 honest man) could not but dissuade him from making it. 
 No ; even this plea is not not admissible ; for it is quite 
 notorious, that Charles's conscience was more tender on 
 this point, than even that of Juxon and the rest of his 
 divines ; they urged and entreated him at the Treaty 
 in the Isle of Wight (November 28, 1648) " to consider 
 the safety of his own person, even for the Church's 
 and his People's sakes, who had some hope still left 
 whilst he should be preserved, which could not but be 
 attended with many blessings: whereas, if he were de- 
 stroyed, there was scarce a possibility to preserve them : 
 that the moral and unavoidable necessity, that lay 
 upon him, obliged him to do any thing that was not sin : 
 and that upon the most prudential thoughts which oc- 
 curred to them, the Order, which he, with so much 
 piety and zeal, endeavoured to preserve, was much 
 more like to be destroyed by his not complying, than 
 by his suspending it till Ms Majesty and his two 
 Houses should agree upon a future Government,' 
 which, they said, much differed from an abolition of it." 
 
 " Hereupon/' says Clarendon,* " he gave them (the Com- 
 missioners) his final answer, that after such condescensions, 
 and weighed resolutions, in the business of the Church, he had 
 expected not to be further pressed therein ; it being his judg- 
 ment, and his conscience." He said, " he could not, as he 
 
 * Hist. Reb. vol. iii, p. 175, folio.
 
 302 EDINBURGH REVIEW'S CALUMNIOUS ATTACK. 
 
 was then informed, abolish Episcopacy out of the Church ; 
 yet because he apprehended how fatal new distractions might 
 be to the kingdom, and that he believed his two Houses would 
 yield to truth, if it were made manifest to them, as he had 
 always declared that he would comply with their demands, if 
 he were convinced in his conscience, he did therefore again 
 desire a consultation of Divines, in the manner he had before 
 proposed, and would in the meantime suspend the Episcopal 
 powers, as well in point of ordination of ministers, as of juris- 
 diction, till he, and the two Houses, should agree what Govern- 
 ment should be established for the future." 
 
 These concluding words prove, that the mode by 
 which Charles hoped, if his regal power should be 
 restored, to put down the Presbyterian Form, and to 
 restore Episcopacy, was not a treacherous, but an open 
 and legal proceeding, by the act of a free Parliament, 
 the representative of all the Estates of the Realm, whose 
 power and right to effect the change will hardly be 
 denied even by this very ignorant Reviewer. 
 
 The feelings of this person, be he who he may, 
 towards monarchy in general, may be gathered from the 
 following decent remark: "We doubt if son ever 
 wept less" (than Charles II.) "for death of father, even 
 when he had not fallen under the hand of public jus- 
 tice:" his zeal for justice itself may be estimated by 
 his description of that great public crime, which the 
 laws of the land require us annually to deplore before 
 God and man, he calls it, with amiable simplicity, 
 " the deed which was done on the 30th of January" 
 
 Such are the qualities, moral and intellectual, of 
 those persons, who, under the " sanction and super- 
 intendence" of Mr. Jeffrey, aspire to direct public 
 opinion in the Edinburgh Review !
 
 PROOF THAT NO PLEDGE WAS GIVEN AT THE UNION. 303 
 
 NOTE C. 
 
 (Page 141.) 
 
 Further Extract from Lord Castlereagh' s Speech. 
 
 " THAT Lord Cornwallis never considered any pledge 
 or assurance to have been given, he had the means of 
 proving, beyond the possibility of doubt, from a com- 
 munication received from that noble lord, in 1801, in 
 reply to inquiries made by himself relative to two 
 papers, which the House will recollect were circulated 
 in Ireland at that time, and which he (Lord Castlereagh) 
 had never seen till they appeared in print : on the con- 
 trary, the principle upon which Lord Cornwallis acted 
 was, that the measure, to be either conciliatory or digni- 
 fied, ought to be the spontaneous and gratuitous act of 
 the united legislature. The memorandum received from 
 Lord Cornwallis, he would, with permission, read. 
 
 " Dublin Castle, March 3, 1801. 
 
 " ' MY DEAR LORD, 
 
 * In answer to the queries stated in your lordship's 
 letter to the Lord Lieutenant of the 26th instant, his 
 Excellency has directed me to inclose to you the state- 
 ment which accompanies this letter, and which has been 
 prepared according to his Excellency's directions. 
 ' I am ever, my dear Lord, 
 ' Most truly, 
 
 ' Your Lordship's servant, 
 ' E, COOKE.' 
 ' Viscount Castlereagh, c. $c. fyc.
 
 304 PROOF THAT NO PLEDGE OF CONCESSION 
 
 MEMORANDUM. 
 
 " When it was notified to the Lord Lieutenant, that 
 Mr. Pitt, Lord Grenville, Lord Spencer, Lord Camden, 
 Mr. Dundas, and Mr. Windham, had requested per- 
 mission to retire from his Majesty's councils, upon their 
 not being sanctioned in bringing forward such measures 
 as they thought essential to secure to the empire the 
 full benefit of the Union the most important of which 
 measures was a concession of further privileges to his 
 Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects his Excellency 
 conceived that it was expedient that the Catholic body 
 should have an authentic communication upon a subject 
 so deeply affecting their situation and interests, and so 
 calculated to influence their future conduct. His Ex- 
 cellency had long held it as his private opinion, that the 
 measure intended by those of his Majesty's ministers 
 who were retiring from office was necessary for securing 
 the connection of Ireland with Great Britain. He had 
 been, however, cautious in his language on the subject, 
 and had studiously avoided any declaration to the Ca- 
 tholics, on which they could raise an expectation, that 
 their wishes were to be conceded. Through the whole 
 measure of the Union, which was in discussion for two 
 years, and during which period every effort was made 
 to procure a resistance to the measure on the part of 
 the whole body of the Catholics, no favourable assur- 
 ance or promise was made to them. 
 
 " Their judicious conduct during that trying period 
 confirmed his Excellency in the opinion, that every 
 measure tending to secure their attachment to the em-
 
 WAS GIVEN TO THE R. CATHOLICS AT THE UNION. 305 
 
 pire in future, which they had, in this instance, so 
 essentially served, ought, in true policy, to be at- 
 tempted. 
 
 " His Excellency did, therefore, recommend it to his 
 chief secretary, who was engaged with his Majesty's 
 ministers in the course of the summer in England, to 
 second every disposition for effecting the object of the 
 Catholics ; at the same time, he retained a prudential 
 reserve to the Catholics during the progress of the dis- 
 cussions of the cabinet. 
 
 " His Majesty having approved of the solicitation of 
 the majority of his Majesty's ministers to retire from his 
 Majesty's councils, and his Excellency having requested 
 that his Majesty would extend to him the same indul- 
 gence, it became a matter of public duty for his Excel- 
 lency to explain to the Catholic body the sentiments 
 which had been held with respect to them, and to in- 
 culcate the line of conduct which, in this arduous crisis, 
 it became them to pursue. His Excellency, therefore, 
 being apprized of the sentiment held by Mr. Pitt, did, 
 on the 13th of February, send for Lord Fingal and 
 Dr. Troy, and gave them two Papers to be by them 
 circulated among the principal Catholics in different 
 parts of Ireland. 
 
 " The first, his Excellency felt assured, corresponded 
 with Mr. Pitt's sentiments ; and the other conveyed his 
 own private sentiments formed on the speeches and 
 conduct of many of the most eminent characters of all 
 parties and distinctions. 
 
 " It being of great importance, that any communica- 
 tion made by his Excellency should not be misunderstood 
 or misinterpreted, and that it should make a due im- 
 
 x
 
 306 PROOF THAT NO PLEDGE OF CONCESSION 
 
 pression, and produce a general good effect, his Excel- 
 lency preferred a written to a mere verbal communica- 
 tion, which might have been ill reported, and might 
 have been subject to perversion, according to the incli- 
 nation or capacity of those who should circulate and 
 receive it. His Excellency has seen a happy result 
 from this mode of proceeding. Rumours having been 
 transmitted from England, that the wishes of the Ca- 
 tholics were likely to be acceded to, every ill conse- 
 quence from their disappointment has been obviated ; 
 and there is now every reason to believe, that they will 
 take that line of conduct, which the well-wishers to his 
 Majesty's service and the cause of the empire would 
 desire." 
 
 " The House will perceive from this statement, not 
 only that no pledge was given previous to the Union, 
 but that the papers in question, which have been often 
 confounded in point of date with the Union, and been 
 supposed to contain some pledge, were framed and is- 
 sued in Ireland long after that measure had been ef- 
 fected, without the knowledge or authority of any mem- 
 ber of the Government in England. The sentiments 
 contained in one of these Papers (No. 1) Lord Corn- 
 wallis knew to be Mr. Pitt's, having been conveyed in 
 a letter from himself (Lord Castlereagh) to his Lord- 
 ship, which letter was previously seen and approved of 
 by Mr. Pitt, though not expressed precisely in the 
 terms used in the Paper ; but that the opinions con- 
 tained in the second Paper (No. 2) were given to the 
 Roman Catholics simply as his Lordship's own sentiments 
 at the moment, appeared distinctly, not only from the
 
 WAS GIVEN TO THE R. CATHOLICS AT THE UNION. 307 
 
 Memorandum which he had read, but still more point- 
 edly from a correspondence which subsequently took 
 place between Lord Cornwallis and Mr.Plowden (No.3), 
 with reference to these Papers, in which his Lordship 
 declares, ' that he was never authorized, directly or 
 indirectly, by any member of the administration, who 
 then resigned his office, to give a pledge, that he would 
 not again embark in the service of government, except 
 on the terms of the Roman Catholic privileges being 
 obtained.' " 
 
 PAPERS REFERRED TO IN THE PRECEDING 
 EXTRACT. 
 
 No. 1. 
 Lord Castlereagti s Communication to Lord Cornwallis. 
 
 " THE leading part of his Majesty's ministers, finding 
 insurmountable obstacles to the bringing forwai'd mea- 
 sures of concession to the Catholic body whilst in of- 
 fice, have felt impossible to continue in administration, 
 under their inability to propose it with the circumstances 
 necessary to carrying the measure with all its advan- 
 tages, and they have retired from his Majesty's service, 
 considering this line of conduct as most likely to con- 
 tribute to its ultimate success. 
 
 " The Catholic body will, therefore, see how much 
 their future hopes must depend upon strengthening 
 their cause by good conduct in the meantime. They 
 will prudently consider their prospects, as arising from
 
 308 PROOF THAT NO PLEDGE OF CONCESSION 
 
 the persons who now espouse their interest, and com- 
 pare them with those which they could look to from 
 .any other quarter. They may, with confidence, rely 
 on the zealous support of all those who retire, and of 
 many who remain in office, when it can be given with 
 a prospect of success. They may be assured, that Mr. 
 Pitt will do his utmost to establish their cause in the 
 public favour, and prepare the way for their finally at- 
 taining their objects. And the Catholics will feel, that 
 as Mr. Pitt could not concur in a hopeless attempt to 
 force it now, he must, at all times, repress, with 
 the same decision as if he held an adverse opinion, 
 any unconstitutional conduct in the Catholic body. 
 
 " Under these circumstances, it cannot be doubted, 
 that the Catholics will take the most loyal, dutiful, 
 and patient line of conduct that they will not suffer 
 themselves to be led into measures, which can, by any 
 construction, give a handle to the opposers of their 
 wishes, either to misinterpret their principles, or to 
 raise an argument for resisting their claims ; but that, 
 by their prudent and exemplary demeanour, they will 
 afford additional grounds to the growing number of 
 their advocates, to enforce their claims on proper occa- 
 sions, until their objects can be finally and advantage- 
 ously attained."
 
 WAS GIVEN TO THE R. CATHOLICS AT THE UNION. 309 
 
 No. 2. 
 
 Sentiments of a sincere Friend to the Catholics, 
 (Lord Cornwallis.) 
 
 " If the Catholics shall now proceed to violence, or en- 
 tertain any ideas of gaining their object by convulsive 
 measures, by forming associations with men of Jacobi- 
 nical principles, they must, of course, lose the aid and 
 support of those, who have sacrificed their own situa- 
 tion in their cause, but who would, at the same time, 
 feel it to be their indispensable duty to oppose every 
 thing tending to confusion. On the other hand, should 
 the Catholics be sensible of the benefits they possess, 
 by having so many characters of eminence pledged not 
 to embark in the service of Government, except on the 
 terms of the Catholic privilege being obtained, it is to 
 be hoped, that, on balancing the advantages and disad- 
 vantages of their situation, they would prefer a quiet 
 and peaceable demeanour to any line of conduct of an 
 opposite description."
 
 310 PROOF THAT NO PLEDGE OE CONCESSION 
 
 No. 3. 
 
 Correspondence between Lord Cornwallis and 
 Mr. Plowden. 
 
 " Essex Street, 6th April, 1805. 
 
 " MY LORD, 
 
 " Having, by the publication of my Historical 
 Review of the State of Ireland, largely committed myself 
 to the present and future generations, I will not dis- 
 semble, that I am anxious to preserve, and hand down 
 to posterity, my character free, as I know it to be, 
 from the slightest stain upon its honour, honesty and 
 truth. Ere your Lordship quits this country, I have 
 one request more to make of you, which, as it is an act 
 of justice to the Irish nation and to yourself, I do ex- 
 pect will be attended to. It is merely that your Lord- 
 ship verify my assertion of your having given the papers 
 mentioned in my Historical Review, 3d vol. p. 944, to 
 Doctor Troy, in the presence of Colonel Littlehales. 
 My reason for asking this act of justice at your hands 
 is, in order, that, in your absence, I may effectually 
 repel the charge which has been made to me personally 
 in Downing-street and elsewhere, by members of par- 
 liament, calling themselves your Lordship's confidential 
 friends, that you never did give such a pledge to Dr. 
 Troy, nor ever did entertain a sentiment like those 
 which are expressed in that paper. I am encouraged 
 by several of the first characters of this country, to 
 prepare an abridged edition of my work, for more ge- 
 neral consultation, and I shall, of course, avail myself
 
 WAS G1W2N TO THE R. CATHOLICS AT THE UNION. 311 
 
 of fresh evidence to confirm what I hope is true, as 
 well as to correct what I should lament was false in the 
 present edition. Your Lordship will not wonder that 
 a certain degree of scepticism has assailed my mind 
 upon coupling in my thoughts some recent appoint- 
 ments with many characters of eminence, pledged not 
 to embark in the service of government, except on the 
 terms of the Catholic privileges being obtained. I 
 therefore thought it consistent with the character of a 
 gentleman to present you my works, to write to and to 
 call upon your Lordship. As these intended marks of 
 attention have remain unnoticed, I should think it in- 
 consistent with that character to renew them. 
 
 " I have the honour to be, with all due respect, 
 " Your Lordship's 
 
 " Obedient humble servant, 
 (Signed) " FRANCIS PLOWDEN. 
 
 " The Marquess Cornwallis." 
 
 Lord Cornwattis's Answer. 
 
 " Burlington-street, 7th April, 1805. 
 
 " SIR, 
 
 " I have received your letter of yesterday's 
 date, and I feel no difficulty in giving the most satisfac- 
 tory answer to it in my power. 
 
 " I have neither a copy nor a distinct recollection of 
 the words of the paper that I gave to Dr. Troy; but 
 this I perfectly well remember, that the paper was 
 hastily given to him by me, to be circulated amongst 
 his friends, with the view of preventing any immediate
 
 312 PROOF THAT NO PLEDGE OF CONCESSION 
 
 disturbances, or other bad effects, that might be appre- 
 hended from the accounts that had just arrived from 
 England ; and if I made use of the word pledged, I 
 could only mean that, in my own opinion, the ministers, 
 by resigning their offices, gave a pledge of their being 
 friends to the measure of Catholic Emancipation ; for I 
 can assure you that / never received authority, directly 
 or indirectly, from any member of administration who 
 resigned his office, to give a pledge that he would not 
 embark again in the service of government, except on 
 the terms of the Catholic privileges being obtained. 
 
 "Sir, 
 
 " I have the honour to be, &c. 
 (Signed) " CORNWALLIS. 
 
 " Francis Plowden, Esq." 
 
 From Mr. Plowden. 
 
 " Essex Street, 8th April, 1805. 
 
 " MY LORD, 
 
 " Having given to your Lordship a copy of 
 my History, and, in my letter of the 6th instant, pointed 
 to the page of it which contained that important paper, 
 of which you say that you have neither copy nor a dis- 
 tinct recollection, I take the liberty of inclosing an 
 exact copy of it, from the manuscript of Dr. Troy, in 
 my possession, which led me to believe that it had nei- 
 ther been hastily given, nor insidiously intended to
 
 WAS GIVEN BY THE R. CATHOLICS AT THE UNION. 313 
 
 answer a temporary purpose, or to meet the effects of 
 a flying report. 
 
 " I have the honour to be, with all due respect, 
 " Your Lordship's 
 
 " Obedient humble servant, 
 (Signed) " FRANCIS PLOWDEN. 
 " The Marquess Cornwallis" 
 
 Lord Cornwallis's Answer. 
 
 " Burlington Street, 9th April, 1805. 
 
 " SIR, 
 
 " I alluded, in my former letter, to a short 
 paper which I gave to Dr. Troy on the morning after 
 the account of the resignations arrived. I have no 
 copies of the papers that you transmitted to me. I do 
 not, however, doubt their authenticity; but of one cir- 
 cumstance I can speak with absolute certainty, viz. 
 that / had, on no occasion) any authority for making 
 use of the word pledged, but the act of resignation. 
 " I have the honour to be, Sir, 
 
 " &c. &c. &c. 
 
 (Signed) " CORNWALLIS. 
 " Francis Plowden, Esq."
 
 314 MORALITY OF DR. MAC HALE, 
 
 NOTE D. 
 
 (Page 2330 
 
 Morality of Dr. Mac Hale, Bishop of Maronia. 
 
 IN the course of the year 1823, a very able pamphlet, 
 entitled " The Case of the Church of Ireland stated, 
 &c. in reply to the charges of J. K. L.," was published 
 under the signature of " Declan," by the Rev. Mr. 
 Phelan, a distinguished Member of Trinity College, 
 Dublin. The success of this pamphlet, written not 
 only with great eloquence, strength of argument, and 
 historical research, but also with much of moderation 
 and forbearance, in the main, though it occasionally rises 
 into a tone of manly indignation, made it necessary to 
 counteract, if possible, its effect on the public mind by 
 some effort adequate to the occasion. With this view, 
 Mr. Coyne, the principal Roman Catholic bookseller 
 and publisher in Dublin, applied to Dr. Mac Hale, then 
 Professor of Dogmatic Theology, now Bishop of Ma- 
 ronia, in partibus, and Coadjutor, cum jure successions, 
 to the Roman Catholic Bishop of Killala. Dr. Mac 
 Hale accepted his proposal, pocketed the honorarium, 
 and engaged to produce an answer to Declan. 
 
 But, unfortunately for the bookseller,* when the 
 
 * From examination of Mr. Richard Coyne, p. 442 "Did you buy 
 the copyright of it? I did; I gave him '20 for writing the pamphlet. 
 Was it intended to answer any particular work, in writing that pamphlet ? 
 Yes ; to serve as a defence of Dr. Doyle, in reply to Mr. Phelan, and to 
 Mr. O'Sullivan. You applied to Dr. Mac Hale to do it? I did. We
 
 COADJUTOR R. C. BISHOP OF KILLALA. 315 
 
 promised work came forth, it was found to contain 
 scarcely a word of reference to Declan, and to be any 
 thing but an answer to that formidable adversary. It 
 was, in truth, a feeble, unargumentative, tiresome, 
 farrago of common-places, enlivened here and there by 
 some matter of a more offensive kind, which the Com- 
 missioners of Education Inquiry have deemed of suffi- 
 cient moment to exercise their curiosity. I will adduce 
 one or two of these passages, not so much on account of 
 their own importance, as to illustrate the simplicity and 
 ingenuousness with which an Irish Roman Catholic 
 Prelate, when the interests of his Church are con- 
 cerned, gives his testimony upon oath, and especially as 
 a specimen of Dr. Mac Male's robust and sturdy 
 morality. The similar exhibitions of his brethren be- 
 fore the Parliamentary Committees in 1825, will not 
 soon be forgotten. 
 
 From page 31 of the " Letters of Hierophilos (Dr. 
 Mac Hale) on the Moral and Political State of Ireland," 
 the Commissioners (page 293.) select the following 
 paragraph, as connected with one of the Right Rev. 
 author's declared topics, " the feelings of the lower 
 ranks towards the higher ones." 
 
 presume you intended it as a reply to Mr. Phelan's work, and to Declan ? 
 It was intended as a reply to Mr. Phelan, who was reputed to be the author 
 of the pamphlet signed ' Declan,' and to Mr. O'Sullivan. Are you aware 
 that neither Mr. Phelan's nor Mr. O'Sullivan's names are mentioned once in 
 the whole pamphlet, and Declan but twice, and no one of the three men- 
 tioned in the title page ? I am not aware of it ; but I was disappointed 
 in not having a direct answer, and if I had known that it had not been so, 
 I would not have published it. Do you consider it as an answer to Mr. 
 Phelan, or to Mr. O'Sullivan ? Certainly not. Do you mean not a perfect 
 answer? I did not think it an answer such as I contemplated.
 
 316 MORALITY OF DR. MAC HALE, 
 
 " To convey to the English reader an idea of the humanity 
 of some of our Irish gentry, it will be sufficient to observe, 
 that there are individuals who associate their exertions in pre- 
 serving the peace with their sportful amusements. It is a 
 literal fact, that on the evenings of some of the most tragic 
 days that disgrace our country, these individuals express their 
 horror of shedding human blood by the savage facetiousness of 
 ' a fine days grousing.' In the absence of men of rank, and 
 influence, and integrity, the preservation of the peace is neces- 
 sarily entrusted to men who are unfit organs to convey the spirit 
 of the laws, and who often trade on their violation." 
 
 " We beg you, v say the Commissioners, " to state your own 
 view of that passage, and in particular that you would mention 
 any individuals whom you may know to hare used suck an expression." 
 
 In answer to this very plain and reasonable enquiry, 
 Dr. Mac Hale is pleased to go into much detail, respect- 
 ing " the general tendency of his letters, and the cir- 
 cumstances which had an influence on their publication," 
 especially " the Biblical exhibitions, of which Ireland 
 has been the theatre." And, besides this, the author 
 insists on "the natural right of repelling unjust aggres- 
 sion ;" a right of which " a Professor of the College at 
 Maynooth is not divested," "the publications from 
 members of Protestant Universities, denouncing the 
 doctrines of his Church as idolatrous and supersti- 
 tious" the presentation of a living worth o1500 per 
 annum to the author of the pamphlet by Declan ; conclud- 
 ing with a long citation from his own letters to prove that 
 his " principles are consistent with the duty that every 
 person owes to his sovereign, and also to the laws of his 
 country." The answer which he thus gives to the plain 
 inquiry of the Commissioners, occupies three pages of 
 very closely printed folio, and must have taken at least
 
 COADJUTOR R. C. BISHOP OF KILLALA. 317 
 
 a quarter of an hour in the delivery ; but however 
 instructive on other points, it cautiously abstains from 
 giving a single syllable on the particular matter on 
 which he is questioned. In consequence, the Commis- 
 sioners, after admitting all the rights he claims, find it 
 necessary to remind him what that matter really is 
 " The last question proposed to you," say they, " had 
 reference merely to the passage relating to the conduct 
 of the magistrates in the country, respecting whom it is 
 there stated as * a literal fact, that on the evenings of 
 the most tragic days that disgrace our country, these 
 individuals express their horror of shedding human 
 blood, by the savage facetiousness of "a fine day's 
 grousing," the question was to ask you to name the 
 instances you have there referred to." 
 
 Dr. Mac Hale. " The instances, I must say, have now 
 escaped my memory, but I can say also, that I had it from one 
 or more of the newspapers of the day ; but as I do not specify 
 any individual, I could not injure personal character. As to the 
 reflection on the magistracy, I shall appeal to a public fact : 
 that shortly after the present Viceroy came to this country, he 
 instituted an examination into the conduct of the magistracy of 
 the country, and many persons were removed from their situ- 
 ations. I should consider that the Marquis Wellesley would be 
 incapable of removing any person from any official situation on 
 account of any imputations which were not founded in truth ; 
 therefore the observation 1 have made is justified by reference to 
 the conduct of the Lord Lieutenant." 
 
 Q. " Might he not very reasonably have been the cause 
 of their removal from the magistracy for instances of unfitness 
 or delinquency, falling far short of what you have attributed to 
 them in the note ; will you explain what you mean by the ex- 
 pression of ' a fine day's grousing'?"
 
 318 MORALITY OF DR. MAC HALE, 
 
 Dr. M. " I have not marked the degree of their delin- 
 quency. That some were corrupt, is proved by the fact I have 
 stated. I had seen the expression in one of the newspapers at 
 the time ; it is so long since, that it cannot be wonderful that 
 it should have escaped my memory ; but it was mentioned in 
 one of the newspapers, that they had said, after killing some 
 people, that it was ' a fine day's grousing'?" 
 
 Q. " You have said, that that was a literal fact ; surely 
 there are many things mentioned in the newspapers, that are 
 not literal facts ?" 
 
 Dr. M. " Yes ; but things are not to be rejected as literal 
 facts, because they are mentioned in the newspapers." 
 
 Here this edifying part of the Bishop of Maronia's 
 sworn evidence closes. 
 
 I proceed to another passage of Hierophilos, on 
 which the Commissioners (p. 300.) question their Right 
 Reverend witness. It is taken from the 33d page 
 of his Letter to Mr. Canning. The passage itself will 
 demonstrate the author's respect for England, as his 
 examination upon it will tend further to prove the 
 value of his sworn testimony. 
 
 " However, if the opinions of Paley, or some of the other 
 most admired champions of the Church, were fixed for an 
 orthodox standard, the cumbrous Creed of the Establishment 
 would be soon reduced to more than apostolical simplicity. 
 
 " You must therefore easily observe, that amongst the most 
 distinguished Protestants, there is little of conviction in the 
 leading articles of their creed ; and we know, that where the 
 principles of belief are loose, the rule of private or public virtue 
 cannot be rigid. That approbation, then, of every error, which 
 insensibly creates an indifference to religion, and enervates the 
 vigour of public morals, must be eventually injurious to society."
 
 COADJUTOR R. C. BISHOP OF KILLALA. 319 
 
 Q. ' Pray explain what you mean by " the approbation of 
 every error" by the Church of England ?' 
 
 Dr. M. ' That indiscriminate approbation of the sectaries, 
 which seems to characterize the present state of the Establish- 
 ment.' 
 
 Q. ' Did you mean to convey to the readers of the Letters, 
 that there is little of conviction of the truth of the leading arti- 
 cles of their creed among distinguished Protestants ?' 
 
 Dr. M. ' Among many distinguished Protestants, I did.' 
 
 Q. ' Do you not think that Protestants may be as sin- 
 cerely attached to their opinions, and to their religion, as Ro- 
 man Catholics r' 
 
 Dr. M. ' In the extensive sense of the word Protestant, it 
 is nothing more than a negative title. Provided one is not a 
 Pagan, in the sense in which we understand the word Pro- 
 testant, it is sufficient not to be a Catholic, to be a Protestant,' 
 &c. 
 
 Q. ' Does not this passage relate, not to Protestants in gene- 
 ral, but to the Established Church in particular, and is so ex- 
 pressed f 
 
 Dr. M. ' I will show the Commissioners how I understand 
 the word Protestant, by a reference to other parts of the Letters 
 of Hierophilos, where I give something like what I conceive to 
 be a definition of it in two places. In p. 50 there is this pas- 
 sage, which shows that / take Protestant in a larger sense, than 
 the Establishment :' 
 
 " For what is the Protestant religion but a negative system, 
 fashioned to the genius of every clime, and bending to the 
 caprice of every teacher ; incorporating in its creed doctrines 
 the most discordant ; and concealing, by a community of name, 
 sectaries the most irreconcileable ; Episcopalian in England, 
 rejecting Episcopacy, as Anti-Christian, in Scotland and Ge- 
 neva/' &c.
 
 320 MORALITY OF DR. MAC HALE, 
 
 ' Now I will refer to p. 1 94, to show that I did not confine 
 the word Protestant to the Church of England :' 
 
 " When I am told that the Bible is the religion of Pro- 
 testants, the word Protestant presents an idea of such unbounded 
 and intricate meaning, that I must confess it is difficult to com- 
 prehend its extent, or unravel its perplexity. The Protestant 
 religion must be true, as the Bible is its sole rule of faith. A 
 member of the Church of England must therefore be right, be- 
 cause the Bible is his rule of faith, and he is a Protestant. The 
 Presbyterian must be right, because the Bible is his rule of 
 faith, and fie is a Protestant. The Socinian, who shakes the 
 pillars of Revelation, must be right, because the Bible is his 
 rule of faith, and he is a Protestant. The Antinomian, who 
 piously absolves his followers from the obligation of the evan- 
 gelical law, must of course be right, because the Bible is his 
 rule of faith, and he is a Protestant. And thus, while infidelity 
 and Popery lie at the opposite extremes, inaccessible to her in- 
 fluence, truth, with the variety of a camelion and the velocity 
 of lightning, beams on each chequered and deformed system 
 that fills up the immense interval." 
 
 ' It was in that sense that I generally used the word Pro- 
 testant.' 
 
 Q. ' We beg to direct your attention to the passage that 
 immediately follows the one you have been referring to, in 
 which you sum up the argument thus, (p. 36) : " / have thus 
 discussed the religious complexion of the Protestant Establish- 
 ment at some length." Does it not follow from that phrase, 
 that it is not Protestantism in the abstract, but the Protestant 
 established Church of these kingdoms, that is the subject of dis* 
 cussion in the passage referred to in your books ?' 
 
 Dr. M. ' It may be. To give, however, a clear and satis- 
 factory answer to this question, I beg leave to refer the Com- 
 missioners to the following passages in pp. 28, 29.'
 
 COADJUTOR R* C. BISHOP OF KILLALA. 
 
 " In speaking of the Protestant Establishment, it may be 
 considered in the relation of a religious or political system. If 
 we view it merely under the former complexion, there is no 
 Christian who will think it deserving of his reverence, only* in 
 the same proportion as it reflects the revealed doctrines of 
 Christianity. Under this point of view, its conformity with the 
 doctrines of Christ becomes a subject of fair investigation ; and 
 should it appear that the doctrine of the Establishment has de- 
 parted widely from that which Christ has revealed, such a reli- 
 gion could not be deemed essential to society ; unless we were 
 to suppose, that error is more favourable than truth to the hap* 
 piness of mankind, &c. &c. 
 
 " If, on the other hand, we view it as a political establish- 
 ment, endowed with temporalities, deriving its origin entirely 
 from the legislature, and thus proving by the admission, that it 
 can be dissolved by the authority by which it was created, theii 
 we are relieved from the embarrassment that is produced by 
 confounding it with its religious pretensions. We may bring 
 to the subject a mind unawed by the reverence, which a belief 
 in the true religion imposes, and judge of the utility or inutility 
 of the Protestant Establishment, by an impartial view of the 
 benefits which it confers, or the evils of which it is productive. 
 
 " Or, in fine, if we should consider the Protestant Esta- 
 blishment as a religious and political system, united by the 
 legislature, the question will resolve itself into the views already 
 exhibited, since no state can derive support from religion but 
 because it is supposed to be true ; nor is it easily conceived, 
 that any religion of mere state creation can lend to the state by 
 which it was created, any other authority than that which it 
 has received from the state to which it owes its creation." 
 
 ' I refer to these passages,' continues Dr. Mac Hale, ' be- 
 cause they show that the Protestant Church is viewed under 
 
 * Qu. except. 
 Y
 
 MORALITY OF DR. MAC HALE, 
 
 different relations. As far as the members of the Established 
 Church form a political body, the word Protestant is under- 
 stood in that exclusive political sense : as far as they are con- 
 sidered professors of a religious creed, we find them as unsettled 
 in their system of belief as any other Protestants in Europe.' 
 
 Such is Dr. Mac Hale's " clear and satisfactory an- 
 swer" to the very simple question proposed to him. 
 Unluckily, however, he finds the pertinacity of the Com- 
 missioners to be proof against all evasion, and accord- 
 ingly they recur to their inquiry in the following still 
 more precise terms: 
 
 " Is it your opinion that it is the tendency of the established 
 religion to lead to that 'indifference about truth or error which 
 extinguishes those moral obligations that mitigate the sway of 
 government, and ennoble the obedience of the subject'?" 
 
 In reply, Dr. Mac Hale has again the confidence to 
 try their patience, and to pour forth half a folio page 
 of mere verbiage, which I do not think it necessary to 
 inflict on my readers, as it contains not a single syllable 
 to the purpose. But in answer to their next question^ 
 which presses him still closer, finding all further dou- 
 bles profitless and hopeless, he boldly turns round on 
 his persecutors, tells them that " the interpretation" to 
 be put upon the passage " is the obvious interpretation 
 that the sentences bear," that he cares not a straw 
 for any of them. " For my own personal character," 
 says he, " I have no apprehension, the writings are 
 before the public, and its judgment has been fixed; 
 but the reason of my delicacy (a phrase, it seems, 
 which in the modern Hiberno-Romaic signifies the 
 foulest prevarication) arises from my former connection 
 with the College at Maynooth !"
 
 COADJUTOR R. C. BISHOP OF K1LLALA. 323 
 
 After this, it will not be worth our while to accom- 
 pany the Commissioners in their further researches 
 into the Letters of Hierophilos. But the worthy au- 
 thor's " delicacy" for Maynooth will be found to merit 
 some additional illustration. 
 
 One of the statutes of that College enjoins, that " if 
 any member of it whatever shall publish books or 
 writings, or shall be privy to the publication of them, 
 without the knowledge and approbation of the Presi- 
 dent, he shall be expelled."* Upon this statute, it 
 was reasonable to ask, whether " the President was, 
 in point of fact, aware of the publication of the Letters 
 of Hierophilos;" and to the question so put, Dr. Mac 
 Hale scruples not to answer ' No, he had no official 
 knowledge of it.' (p. 298.) And yet it appears from 
 his answers a little further on, that he had presented a 
 copy of the work himself to the President, as a mark 
 of respect for him as such, that it was a matter of 
 notoriety that the book was his, and though there 
 was not any judicial knowledge of it, it was as well 
 ascertained nearly, as if he had put his name to it. 
 All this, I say, appears from his own mouth, though in 
 answer to the question, whether, in point of fact > the 
 President was aware of the publication, he had, with- 
 out hesitation, answered ' No, he had no official know- 
 ledge of it.' 
 
 But let this pass. The Commissioners further ask, 
 whether ' the publication, under the circumstances 
 stated, does not appear to him at variance with that 
 
 * Si quis omnium libros scriptave evulgavcrit, edenlibusve conscius fuerif, 
 Pneside et inscio ct improbarite,exigitor.
 
 MORALITY OF DR. MAC HALE, 
 
 Statute.' He has again the confidence to answer ' No;' 
 adding, ' I look upon that as a Statute, to the penalty 
 of which I voluntarily exposed myself, without any sort 
 of moral violation of the Statute.' ' When I published 
 without my name, I incurred no responsibility what- 
 ever, nor did I expose the College to any responsibility. 
 The work was anonymous, and it was discretionary 
 with the author, whether he should reveal his name.' 
 * You consider, then, that a person would be justified 
 in publishing anonymous works under that law?' 
 ' YES.' 
 
 ' The Commissioners beg now to point your atten- 
 tion, in a particular manner, to three Resolutions, which 
 were all passed by the Trustees of Maynooth, on the 
 13th of December, 1809, and which must be taken in 
 connection with each other.' One is, " Resolved, that 
 any member of the College convicted of writing anony- 
 mous letters on any subject whatever, whether printed 
 or not, or circulating them in the College or elsewhere, 
 shall be expelled." Another of the Resolutions is, 
 " Resolved, that the introduction of newspapers and 
 other periodical publications amongst the students, has 
 alienated them from the necessary attention to their 
 studies and other duties, and that the President be 
 required to prevent it." Another is, " Resolved, that 
 any student convicted of reading newspapers, maga- 
 zines, or similar periodical publications, in the prayer, 
 study, or lecture halls, shall be expelled." The ques- 
 tion is, whether you do not think that the course you 
 adopted was at variance with that pointed out in those 
 three resolutions,?' ' No, / do not think it was at all
 
 COADJUTOR R. C. BISHOP OF KILLALA. 325 
 
 at variance with those resolutions. / wrote those let- 
 ters upon my own responsibility" &c. 
 
 ' The Commissioners will beg now to direct your at- 
 tention to another statute : " If any master or pupil 
 wishes to publish any thing of his writings, let him do 
 that with the consent of the president, on whom the 
 trustees are to cast the responsibility, if any thing is 
 improperly laid down in those lucubrations." ' Did 
 you consult the president, in pursuance of that Sta- 
 tute, with respect to the publications in question ?' ' I 
 mentioned that I did not consult him.' ' Do not you 
 think that the Statute required that you should consult 
 him ?' ' If I were to publish any thing with my name, 
 the Statute required it.' ' You think that the circum- 
 stance of your publishing it without your name left you 
 at liberty to avoid the requisition of the Statute?' 
 ' Just so.' ' Was not its influence likely to be at least 
 as great, if it was circulated amongst the students of 
 that class, it being a matter of notoriety that the Pro- 
 fessor was the author of the work, as if his name were 
 actually attached to it?' 'Yes; but that question 
 would seem to suppose, what / cannot suppose, that 
 there was any thing improper in the letters. / wrote 
 them from a high sense of duty, with a conviction that 
 they would be useful to Religion, and that there was 
 nothing in them subversive of established order, or in- 
 jurious to the government: and if I did not give my 
 name, it was from a delicacy of not appearing before 
 the public.' 
 
 Here let us pause. We have come, if I mistake not, 
 to something which makes intelligible the monstrous,
 
 326 MORALITY OF DR. MAC HALE, 
 
 and the otherwise unaccountable, mass of insincerity, 
 which has preceded. It turns out, that it was " a high 
 sense of duty" which had impelled Dr. Mac Hale to 
 write these letters in defiance of the Statutes of his 
 College, and " a conviction that they would be useful to 
 Religion" In other words, where the interests of his 
 religion are at stake, all other interests, all other du- 
 ties, must give way. He must become, if necessary for 
 those great objects, absolutely insensible to the plainest 
 meaning of the laws by which he is bound, and to the 
 most obvious dictates of that truth which he had sworn 
 to observe. Such a practical illustration of the prin- 
 ciple, that the end sanctifies the means, it is not often 
 our fortune to encounter. 
 
 Before we quit this subject, it is but justice to re- 
 mark, that Dr. Crotty, the President of Maynooth 
 College, does not assent to Dr. Mac Hale's strange in- 
 terpretation of the Statutes. He considers him as 
 having most palpably and undeniably violated them. 
 And yet it appears, (p. 107), that Dr. Mac Hale had 
 solemnly subscribed an engagement " most faithfully 
 to keep all and singular the statutes and constitutions 
 of the College, and to do and say nothing intentionally 
 by which the said statutes and constitutions should 
 receive any detriment, or the other pupils be induced 
 to violate or despise them." It further appears, that it 
 is enjoined by the Statutes, that " in order that all the 
 members of the College may thoroughly know what 
 they are bound to do, and avoid, the Statutes be read 
 by the President at the beginning of every Academic 
 year in the Chapel, after the celebration of Mass, and
 
 COADJUTOR R. C. BISHOP OF KILLALA. 327 
 
 Solemn Prayer for the assistance of the Holy Ghost." 
 (p. 104.) 
 
 It is under such solemn sanctions, that those laws are 
 set forth which Dr. Mac Hale considers himself at 
 liberty completely to set at nought, whenever what he 
 thinks the interests of his religion require it. And if 
 this be so, it becomes a matter of no light moment to 
 determine whether any oaths can be devised, which are 
 strong enough to bind the conscience of such a man, in 
 opposition to those interests. Now, Dr. Mac Hale, the 
 Bishop of Maronia, be it remembered, is one of the 
 most distinguished, most active, and most influential 
 members of the Irish Roman Catholic Hierarchy. He 
 has been recommended and accepted for the succession 
 to the See of Killala, since his publication of the letters 
 of Hierophilos, since he had thus publicly proclaimed 
 himself the inveterate enemy of the Establishment of 
 the Church of England ; nay, even since he had dared 
 to instigate his countrymen to open rebellion, since he 
 had boldly urged them, " instead of bending to un- 
 availing complaint, to assert with their swords the com- 
 mon inheritance of freedom."* 
 
 * What other construction can be reasonably put on the following pas- 
 sage ? " To illustrate more clearly the justice of our cause, let us reverse 
 for a moment the relative condition of Catholics and Protestants ; and 
 suppose that the interests of six millions of Protestants were sacrificed to 
 the pride and intolerance of half a million of Catholics ; would not the 
 empire ring with the loud and reiterated complaints of injustice? but no; 
 the Protestants, instead of bending to unavailing complaint, would assert 
 with their swords the common inheritance of freedom." Hierophilos's 
 Letters, p. 97. Against the obvious meaning of language like this, 1 do not 
 attend to the artful explanations of such a witness as Dr. Mac Hale, or to 
 any reference lie may be pleased to make to other passages written in a 
 more subdued and cautious tone.
 
 328 NAG'S HEAD FABLE 
 
 NOTE E. 
 
 (Page 242.) 
 
 Nag's Head Fable. 
 
 THE following is a brief abstract of the fable, and of it's 
 confutation, taken from Archbishop Bramhall's Works, 
 p. 435 : 
 
 " In the beginning of the reign of James I. between 
 forty and fifty years after the consecration of Archbishop 
 Parker, two Jesuit Priests, Father Talbot and another, 
 put forth the following account of that consecration : 
 
 " Having told him the Protestant Doctors who were 
 designed for bishopricks, in the beginning of Queen 
 Elizabeth's reign, had prevailed with Anthony Kitchen, 
 Bishop of LandafF, to give them a meeting at the Nag's 
 Head, in Cheapside, in hope he would ordain them 
 Bishops there. And how the Bishop of LandafF, 
 through Bishop Bonner's threatning, refused, (all which 
 shall be examined and laid open to the view of the 
 world in due order, how it is stuffed with untruth and 
 absurdities.) They add, that " being thus deceived of 
 their expectations, and having no other means to come 
 to their desires, (that is, to obtain consecration,) they 
 resolved to use Mr. Scories help, an apostate religious 
 priest, who having borne the name of Bishop in King 
 Edward the Sixth's time, was thought to have sufficient 
 power to perform that office, especially in such a strait 
 necessity as they pretended. He having cast off, toge- 
 ther with his religious habits, all scruple of conscience, 
 willingly went about the matter, which he performed in
 
 RESPECTING ARCHBISHOP PARKER'S CONSECRATION. 829 
 
 this sort; having the Bible in hand, and they all kneeling 
 before him, he laid it upon every one of their heads or 
 shoulders, saying, take thou authority to preach the 
 word of God sincerely. And so they rose up Bishops 
 of the new Church of England." 
 
 " So the controversie between them and us is this ; 
 they say that Archbishop Parker, and the rest of the 
 Protestant Bishops, in the beginning of Queen Eliza- 
 beth's reign, or at least sundry of them, were conse- 
 crated at the Nagge's Head, in Cheapside, together, by 
 Bishop Scory alone, or by him and Bishop Barlow, 
 without sermon, without sacrament, without solemnity, 
 in the year 1559, (but they know not what day, nor 
 before what publick Notaries,) by a new phantastick 
 form. And all this they, upon the supposed voluntary 
 report of Mr. Neale, (a single malicious spy,) in private 
 to his own party, long after the business, pretended to 
 be done. 
 
 " We say Archbishop Parker was consecrated alone 
 at Lambeth, in the Church, by four Bishops, authorised 
 thereunto by Commission under the Great Seal of 
 England, with sermon, with sacrament, with due solem- 
 nities, upon the 17th day of December, anno 1559, 
 before four of the most eminent publick Notaries in 
 England, and particularly the same publick Notary was 
 principal actuary, both at Cardinal Pole's consecration 
 and Archbishop Parker's. And that all the rest of the 
 Bishops were consecrated at other times, some in the 
 same month, but not upon the same day, some in the 
 same year, but not the same month, and some the year 
 following. And to prove the truth of our relation, and
 
 330 " NAG'S HEAD FABLE. 
 
 falshood of theirs, we produce the Register of the See 
 of Canterbury, as authentic as the world hath any, t/te 
 Registers of the other fourteen Sees then vacant, all as 
 carefully kept, by sworn officers, as the records of the 
 Vatican itself. We produce all the Commisions under the 
 Privy Seal and Great Seal of England. We produce the 
 rolls or records of the Chancery ; and if the records of 
 the Signet Office had not been unfortunately burned in 
 King James his time, it might have been verified by 
 those also. We produce an Act of Parliament express 
 in the point, within seven years after the consecration : 
 We produce all the controverted consecrations pub- 
 lished to the world in print Anno 1572, three years 
 before Archbishop Parker's death, whilst all things 
 were fresh in men's memories" 
 
 To comment on this matter would be superfluous. 
 What must be the sentiments of the Irish prelates 
 respecting their own cause, when they can gravely pre- 
 tend to give credit to such a miserable fiction, exposed 
 to the scorn of the world two hundred years ago ? 
 
 The Meeting at the Nag's Head Tavern, which gave 
 rise to this Fable, was merely for the persons who had 
 attended at Bow Church at the confirmation of Parker's 
 Election, to dine together after the ceremony. Parker 
 himself teas not present.