The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-09-27 00:00:00

SOT.II I II LANCASHIRE GREAT PROTESTANT MEETING. Yesterday proved a great constitutional festival for the Protestants of South Lancashire and Cheshire. It was on the occasion of the meeting of the Protestant Associations of the two counties, which took place in the Theatre Royal, Manchester. An especial train was engaged by the members of the association resident in Liverpool, for the conveyance of those anxious to witness, and take part in the proceedings, and the towns of Wigan, Warrington, Bolton, and other populous places in the neighbourhood, also contributed to swell the numbers of the respectable auditory who assembled on this gratifying occasion. The chair was announced to be taken at eleven o'clock, but long before that hour, the doors were besieged by respectable persons, and by half-past ten, the boxes, pit, and gallery were tilled to an overflow. Indeed, to use an expression wade by the keeper of the theatre, such " a bumper" the oldest frequenter of the theatre had never seen within the walls before. The boxes and pit were crowded by both ladies and , gentlemen, and the gallery was filled by the industrious classes, besides the usual audience departments, the stage was crowded by clergymen, mer chants, manufacturers, and agriculturists, from various parts of the counties of Cheshire and Lancashire. The estima tion of numbers frequeptly leads to discussion, but if we were to hazard an opinion formed by consulting persons con nected with the theatre, and, consequently, in the habit of knowing what the house holds, we should say, that there could not be less than between three and four thousand spectators present,_ The borough policemen were in attendance to tender any civilities the company might require in alighting from coaches, &c. &c. The best accommodation was afforded for the gentlemen of the press in the orchestra, for which they were indebted to the polite attention of Mr. Crisp, the zealous and inde fatigable secretary of the Association. The chandeliers were lighted, and the appearance of the theatre was of a pleasing and novel character. A few minutes after eleven o'clock, J. Evans, Esq., the Boroughreeve of Manchester entered, ac companied by the Rev. Hugh M'Neile, the Rev. Mortimer O'Sullivan, Dr. Cooke, the Rev. Hugh Stowell, and several other eminent divines. They were received by the assembly with rapturous applause. Among the clergy and [cantle men on and about the stage, we noticed : Rev. G. L. Stone. Rev. R. Rigg W. Burns, Farnworth F. Barker, Liverpool J. Quirk, Royton M'Guire, St. Helens A. Lane, Pendleton W. M. Bunting W. Carpenter, Douglas. Rigg J. Wright, Latchford. Rees Edward Dalton. London. M'Owan T. Nolan, Stockport Methley H. Allen, Bury Josh. Taylor, Chairman of W. Hosier, Denton the District W.H.Mann, 'leer of Bowden Barnard Slater C. G. Helton B. B. Waddy Mr. Wonder G. Steward R. Martindale, Sandbark Amos Learoyd H. W. M'Grath T. Ingle W. A. Cave. Flixton John Smith Nason, Tiutwistle Robert Gardner, Esq. Dr. Warren W. Atkinson, Esq. W. Hall W. Townend, Esq. W. C. Cruttenden, Maceles- T. Townend, Esq. field W. Hill, Esq. Herbert Attkin, Hyde John M'Clure, Esq. A. Campbell John Woollam, Esq. W P. Bunting J. Wood, Esq. P. Brown, Oswaldwistle Dr. Bardsley W. K. Maxim, ditto John Westhead, Esq. T- White W. W. Murray W. Huntington James Wood, Esq. R. Rigg. Elleubrook Jamer Dyer, Esq. J. Hollist James Consterdine, Esq. W. G. Mayne James Kennedy, jun., Esq. J. Dobson T. H. Redhead, Esq. R. Powell, Wigan J. Chesshyre, Esq. H. S. Josephs, Liverpool Josh. Hamilton, Esq. J. R. Connor, ditto Edward Brook, Esq. W. Maynard, ditto W. N. S. Cooper, Esq. B. Marshall, ditto B. Williams, jun., Esq. J. Brindley, Warrington John Clare, Eaq.,Warrington Thos. Lowe, ditto C. Boutfiower, sq., Liverpool J. Mackensie, 'Wigan S. Holmes, Esq., ditto J. Todd, Warrington J. Rigby, Esq., ditto C. W. Lawrence, Liverpool C. S. Parker, Esq., ditto IL 0. Brien, Heywood J. Howard, Esq., ditto G. C. Nash, ditto D. Hodgson, Esq., ditto D. Vaudrey, Northwich A. Browne, jun., Esq., ditto Davies, Ruacora Ralph Ousey, Esq. A. M'Conkey J. Lyons, Bolton H. WlCeil, Liverpool. Dr. O'Sullivan. Dr. Cooke, Belfast. H. Stowell. R. Frost. E. Birch. Taos. TowsgND, Esq., then came forward and opened the proceedings of the day, by proposing that the Borough reeve of Manchester should take the chair. (Cheers.): Crts.s. BOUTYLOWER, Esq. seconded the nomination, which was carried by acclamation. The BOROJGE ItiXVE having taken the chair, called upon the Rev. Mr. Stone to open the meeting with prayer. The Rev. Mr. STONX then read in an impressive manner, few appropriate prayers from the church service. The Boaouonaaava then came forward amid the most enthusiastic cheers. He said, that the chair which he had the honour to hill, was is have been occupied by the Right Honourable the earl of Roden, but an accident which had occurred to that worthy and noble.lord, had been the cause of his unavoidable absence. A requisition had been for warded to his lordship, requesting the honour of his presi dency. It was, signed by a number of the clergy of South Lan cashire and Cneshire, resident in the towns of Manchester, Liverpool, Northwich, Warrington. Wigan, and other Places. The requisition was as follows : " TO THE RIGHT HON. THE EARL OF RODEN. " We, the undersigned, representing the committees of the Liverpool, Manchester, Warrington, Wigan, and Northwich Protestant Associations, are deeply impressed with the duty of combined exertion in defence of the scriptural institutions of our country, satisfied that the best defence of these insti tutions will be found in the revival of that great principle of nationalism in religion to which we are indebted for their first formation. We are convinced, further, that the Protestant Associations already formed have contributed, and are still contributing, to the furtherance of this very desirable object, and we are consequently anxious to add to their number and efficiency. With these views we have arranged a combined meeting of our friends, to be held on the 26th of September, and the object of this address is to request your lordship to preside at our meeting. It is true we have not the privilege of any local connexion with your lordship, but the subject is, in our view of it, one of national importance, and already the eyes of our christian fellow-subjects throughout th e U n it e d Kingdom are fixed upon the Right Honourable the Earl of Roden, as the distinguished leader of the only course from which (under the blessing of Almighty- God) any reasonable expectations can be entertained of permanence to either the civil or religious liberties of the empire. In assembling, therefore, to give expression to our convictions respecting the anti-national influence exercised upon our government and our legislative by the subjects of the Papal Court resident amongst us, and to petition against the continuance of public support to Maynobth College, or to any system of combined education which withdraws from the children of the poor the free unfettered use of the authorised version of the Holy Scriptures, we venture to hope for, rud with grateful respect to solicit, the distinguished honour of your lordships coun tenance and co-operation as our chairman. We are your lordship's faithful servants, grateful fellow-subjects, and attached fellow-christians, " On behalf of the Liverpool Committee, " Rev. HUGH M'NEILE, " JOHN RIGBY, Esq. " On behalf of the Manchester Committee, " Rev. G. L. STONE. " On behalf of the Warrington Committee, " Rev. E. T. ALDER, " Rev. .1. WRIGHT, " WILLIAM HALL, Esq., J.P. " Oa behalf of the Wigan Committee, " Rev. B. POWELL. " On behalf of the Northwich Committee, " Rev. D. VAUDREY, " T. WAKEFIELD, Esq." To this respectable requisition, his lordship returned the jollowinp answer : " TO JOSEPH CI:LISP, NUL " Tollymore Park, Sept. 18, 1839. " Stit,--Your parcel containing a letter from you, dated 2d August, and a memorial from the Committees of the Protestant Aesoeiations of Liverpool, Manchester, Warring ton, Wigan, and Northwich, requesting me to take the chair at a Protestant Meeting at Manchester, to be held on the 26th of September, reached me this morning. I should make arrangements to be at the meeting on the 26th to do myself the honour of taking the chair, were I not confined to my bed for the last fortnight by a severe accident which I have met with. And though I hope to move into another room to-day, my medical adviser declares it to be quite impossible for me to undertake a journey so soon as to reach Manches ter on the 26th. As these events are beyond my control, I need not offer any apology, but sincerely wish you every suc cess in your important object. I beg you will assure the gen tlemen of the several committees who have expressed their wish that I should be their chairman, that I feel most grate ful for their good opinion of me, and that it is some consola— tion, in the midst of so Enoch want of genuine Protestantism in the country, that at all events there is a large class of per sons in the middle ranks of society in England, who are boldly standing forward in defence of the Protestant faith, upon the maintenance of which depends the future safety and happiness of the empire at large. I trust God will bleasyour exertions, and that the members of your associations will in crease ; don't wait for high names and titled Chairmen, if you proceed, they must follow you. You need not doubt the success of your work, and ought not to question it when en gaged in a cause which aims only at the vindication of the truth. He who alone can command success, often uses in struments to ES apparently the most unlikely to effect his great purpose. Few things would have given me greater plea sure than to have been with you on the 26th, but it is not now possible. I beg my grateful acknowledgments to those gentlemen who hare signed the address before me, and " I am, Sir, " Your faithful humble servant, " RODEN." He (the bor), , ,ghteeve) sincerely regretted the absence of the noble lord Kho was first selected to fill the chair, not only on account u! . the accident he had unfortunately met with, which all pret,ut would regret, but because the presence of a nobleman who possessed so much important informa tion, whose exertions ist the cause of protestantism had been so extensive, would have been highly valuable and gratifying to the number of persona congregated on this occasion. (Hear.) The committee who conducted the proceedings of the associations, hariag been disappointed of his lordship's choice and assistance, had done him the honour of request ing hire to officiate. Ifs had much pleasure in so doing, although he must say that he felt himself unequal to the arduous task. He was, however, unwilling, if the committee thought he Gould serve them, to pass over their kindness without attempting a requital, and he therefore cheerfully accepted the office. (Cheers.) He considered, under the circumstances, that it was more a matter of duty than of device to obey their wishes, and if he should prove inadequate to discharge the duties of his office, in comparison with others who could have been selected, he must throw himself on their indulgence and good nature for support. He felt convinced that the enlightened and powerful advocates in the cause of protestantism, who had that day done the asso ciation the honour of attending, would, by their presence, be the means of stimulating the Protestants of the division to greater exertions in the good cause in which they were embarked. It was quite evident to any casual observer, t tat their opponents had recently become in very great favour with the rulers of the country ; and it was a dangerous thing to see the progress which their doctrines were making. When they saw this it behoved every true Protestant,, singly and united, to do all in his power to stem the tide which was so powerfully carrying with it, both popery, infidelity, and dis affection. (" Hear, hear," and cheers.) If there had been any lethargy on the part of the protestants in furthering the ob jects of true religion, he thought they must now see that it was time for them to exert themselves, and place themselves in that formidable position, so as to be enabled effectually to protect that sacred fabric the Church of England from fur ther molestation, and of restoring it to that state in which it ought to be the pride and glory of the people, as being the chief prop of our glorious constitution. (Cheers.) He would not detain the meeting with making any further ob servations, as it would be a mere waste of time, in the pre sence of ao many eloquent divines. He might remark that he had received a great number of letters from noblemen and gentlemen of influence in the county, regretting their un avoidable absence, but expressing their good wishes forthe success of the.. cause. The Boroughreeve then concluded with cheers, by calling upon the Rev. Mr. M. O'Sullivan to propose the first resolution—previous to which the following letters were read To JOSEPH CRISP, ESQ. " Sir,—l beg leave to inform you that I am unable to ac. eept, at this moment, any invitation to a distance, but, whilst eekuowledgiug the honour of the receipt yesterday of your letter of the 18th instant, I am anxious to express my earnest sympathy in all constitutional resistance to the dangerous machinations, and to the alarmingly increasing influence of the church of Rome in these realms.—l am, Sir, your very obedient servant, G. H. ROSE." " Sandhills, Christchurch, Hampshire, Sept. 23, 1839. " TO JOSEPH CRISP, ESCL. Sir,—l have to acknowledge the receipt of a letter con taining a very flattering invitation to a festival to be held at Manchester, on the 26th instant. I regret that it will not be in my power to attend that meeting, in consequence of other arrangements, although I perfectly coincide in the sen timents of all the resolutions which appear in the circular.— I have the honour to be, Sir, your obedient servant, POWERSCOURT." " Powerscourt, Sept. 23, 1839. Dr. MORTIMER O'SULLIVAN then stepped forward to address the assembly, and was received with loud cheers. He commenced by enumerating various acts of the govern ment in aid of Romanism in our colonies, and at home, and said, that with such materials at his command, when moving a resolution which affirmed the predominance of an alien, and an only influence in the national councils, he could not be at a loss for topics or proofs. His difficulties were alto gether of another description ; subjects of great moment were to be brought before the meeting by speakers whose merits were well known. Every unnecessary observation would be under such circumstances a fault. He would try to avoid the error, and would accordingly abstain from all introductory observations, and would confine himself within the limits traced out for him by the terms of his resolution. He would not enlarge upon the topic of national education— there was an express resolution on the subject—nor on the indiscret attempts made to establish Roman Catholic priesthood. These belonged more properly to the resolu tion—the Royal College of Maynooth. (Hear, hear.) He would confine himself to the merits of Lord Normanby's government in Ireland—merits for which the noble lord was raised to high dignity in the peerage—was honoured with expressions of her Majesty's royal approbation—was now set in authority over the domestic affairs of Great Britain — and was, perhaps, as it was said, soon to be raised to the highest dignity and power which could be bestowed upon a subject. After some further observations, the rev. gentle man proceeded to give extracts from the evidence recently taken before the committee of the House of Lords on the state of Ireland. He introduced the citations by a notice of the circumstances under which the committee had been ap pointed. There was cause and cross-cause between the Irish government and the Protestants of that country. Both perhaps agreed that there was much crime, disorder, and distress in Ireland ; but they differed as to the degree. (Hear, hear.) The Irish gentry said that the evils were increasing. The government insisted that they were on the decline. They differed also as to the cause. The gentry said that the evils they complained of were chargeable on the government. The government retorted, that the gentry were to blame ; and said, further, that if the crime and disorder of Ireland became enlarged to such a degree as to break out into rebellion, the landlords of Ireland should hold themselves responsible for miseries of which they were the authors. Such were the differences between these contend ing statements. There was another difference in the conduct of the parties respectively who advanced them. The Irish conservatives said, give us an opportunity and we will prove our charges, and establish our innocence. The government said, we will not condescend to give proof or to receive it. We say that we are innocent—that you are guilty. This ought to satisfy any reasonable person. We pledge for the truth of our assertions the authority of our unblemished names. The people of England know what we are worth, and they will be satisfied. But the people of England knew what they were worth, and they were not satisfied. On the contrary, popular opinion on the subject became right, and eventually a Committee of the House of Lords was appointed to en quire into the state of Ireland. After some well merited compliments to Earl Roden, to whose persevering exertions, the appointment of the committee should be ascribed, and to whose conduct on the committee, its success might mainly be attributed, the Rev. Dr. proceeded. The case on the part of the Government should have precedence. It consisted of two parts—their accusation against the Irish landlords—the defence which they vouchsafed of themselves. The first they altogether abandoned. They did move—they disproved it. They actively by their own paid officers gave evidence on oath that the charges they had previously made were altogether groundless. Dr. O'Sullivan next enumera ted the items of the policy for which God had taken credit. They had become identified with the popular party—an iden tification which Lord Normanby had said was effected by them for the past time in the Annals of the country. They had formed an alliance with the Priests, who, in tha old Tory time, were, as Dr. Doyle's venerable expression showed, unconcerned to preserve the peace or to protect the country from the horrors of rebellion—but who seem now cordially disposed to promote that peace which the present govern ment was desirous of establishing. 3.—They bad possessed themselves of an admirable constabulary force for the main tenance of which, the country paid four hundred thousand pounds per annum.. 4.—They had a most efficient array of well salared stipendrary magistrates. s.—They had a legal array of law officers prosecuting at sessions and assizes for whose assistances the country paid a liberal price. 6. They turned all these resources to account, to cut off fruitful sources of crime—preventing factious fights and riots at fairs in the south and west, suppressing orange processions in the north, and adopting for the latter purpose, the reverend speaker admitted, the most expensive and irritating expe dients. All this he admitted. We required only that the benefits which were to be expected had resulted from the exercise of the power with which the executive government had become invested. The government offered no proof— , namely, that properties could be sold, and at a high rate in Ireland. Dr. O'Sullivan doubted the cogency of this species of a government, because we purchase a baronet who had recently purchased gave evidence of the uncertainty of life and property, declaring that because he had adopted measures for exercising his rights, and recovers his rents, he had received threatening notices. The fact therefore that property had been purchased at high rates in Ireland, was not of necessity a proof that the country was tranquil. The last evidence he should examine in the case of the foremost was the tabular statement of crime which Mr. Drummond had submitted. Mr. Drummond had exhi bited a comparative view of the committals for crime within the three last years. The years 1835, 1837, and 1838—with the committals of the years ten years before-1826, 1827, and 1828, as exhibits a fair view of the state of the country then and now. The comparison, as it was natural to expect, was the best he could make. He compared the three stormy years when the country was convulsed with the effects of Roman Catnolic struggling, for conquering emancipation with those of the halcyon years in which the country was blessed with Lord Normanby's government, and when men might rejoice in the blessings they had now from the tories. Having compared a season in which repose might be expected with years when the country was in a storm, it would not be unreasonable to expect a corresponding decrease of crime. Further, having compared a time in which the government had such forces and influences at their command, with a time when all these advantages were wanting, or were given in aid of agitation, a further diminution of crime might reasonable have been anticipated. What was the fact? Mr. Drum mond's own tables—his comparison formed under these fa vourable circumstances, showed that crime had enormously increased, increasad, not merely in matters of no moment, but in crimes of the grossest character—in murder, in per jury, in administering oaths unlawfully, in appearing in arms by night, in short, in all crimes which denoted an unsound state of society and morals. Mr. Drummond, however, has entered a species of protest against the conclusion to which his statements might lead. The population of Ireland has increased since 1828—it has increased, he says, a seventh. A remark, therefore, should be added to the returns of crime for the former years. Without investigating the principle of his arithmetic of crime, Dr. O'Sullivan said he would give him the benefit of it, and how then stood the case ? Adding a seventh to the returns, from which Mr. Drummond would show the crimes of the former years, and comparing the pro duct with the returns under Lord Normanby's government, there was still a mournful increase of crime, a diminution in offences of minor moment, an increase in those crimes which are calculated to occasion the most serions alarm, in those that indicate an unsound state of society and morals, in holding forcible possession, in appearing in arms by night, in robbery of arms, in riots, in perjury, in assaults, and in assaults with intent to murder. Such are the returns which the Irish go verntnent has itself supplied, to exhibit the state to which Ireland has become reduced under its popular and liberal policy. (Hear, and cheers.) Dr. O'Sullivan then entered in the case against government, and quoted various extracts from the evidence we have already for the most part appeared in our columns, and by which he established his charges against the Governnien ; disclaiming at the outset, all in tention of imputing evil motives to any person, he undertook to shaw that the acts of the government were in themselves, and in their tendency hostile ; 1, to the rights of property ' • 2, to the administration of justice ; 3, t o th e cause of morals favourable to agitation—favourable to crime, and fovourable to the spread of a foul and formidable conspiracy, which, he said, had already estranged from England and her laws, the affections of the great mass of the Irish people, and which under the adminstration, for which Lord Normanby was so highly rewarded, had advanced with rapidity towards maturity of organisation, and towards a convulsion in which the best interests of the empire may be shaken. In proof of his charges, he commenced with a citation from Lord Melbourne's confession, that he had been constrained to strike a heavy blow at Protestantism, thus avowing himself as a secular earn, an executioner for persecuting Rome, and cited Mr. Drummond's evidence, that he could not answer why govern ment delayed for three years, that measure for the settlement of the Church question which has proved so beneficial. He next turned to the case of landlords as the other branch of the question respecting property, and showed how the govern ment aspersed them before the Committee was appointed, and when an opportunity was given to establish the truth• of its charges, actually sent witnesses who proved their innocence—actually proved, by their own paid servants, the innocence of the landlords whom they had so grievously and, as it appeared, wrongfully accused. In this part of his subject, Dr. O'Sullivan read extracts from the speeches of Lords Wharncliffe and Lurgan, members of the com mittee—the one chairman, the other one of the new peers, who acted on the committee no doubt with a most friendly feeling to Lord Normanby, and who both declared in the most unqualified terms their conviction that the landlords of Ireland were beyond all suspicion. (Hear, hear.) They had, also, the evidence of Mr. Tabutean and Mr. Cahill, both stipendiaries of Government, the one a magistrate, the other a Crown prosecutor, both residing in the county (Tipperary), which the Government described as most unfortunate in its landed proprietary, and both bearing testimony which proves that the charges of their Government were false. Dr. O'Sul livan next addressed himself to the conduct of the Govern ment, in order to prove its hostility to the administration of justice, and its teudencv to encourage the production of per jured witnesses, the swearing in of incompetent juries, and to strip the judicial character and station of the power and majesty with which it was for the interest of the community that it should be richly invested. The policy towards jurors was in many respects objectionable. An act of Parliament had of late years become law by which all persons possessing the elective franchise became eligible as jurors. This might be a wise arracgement of the qualification to vote, were such as the letter and spirit of the Reform Act contemplated, but as it was well known, men had qualified themselves to vote by the enterprise not the truth of their oaths—it might happen that a man who by perjury had purchased a title to vote for a parliamentary representative, might by the same act have purchased the privilege to perjure himself on a jury for some associate in trouble. Parliament, of course, passed its law under the impression that Government would correct the evils to which it furnished occasion by a discreet exercise of the power to set incompetent jurors aside. (Hear, hear, hear.) This, however, the Government virtually surrendered. A direction was issued that no juror should be ordered to stand aaide in consequence of his religious or po litical opinions. As a general principle, Dr. O'Sullivan ap proved of this rule. So long as the law leaves men eligible to any office or trust, it is wrong to complain that they have been elected to it. A law may be bad, and we may complain of it; but; so long as it is bad, we might not to complain that it is executed. But while it would be wrong to set aside jurors because they are Roman Catholics or whigs. It would be equally wrong, because of their political or religious opinions, to leave them on a jury, for which they were dis qualified by character of circumstances. A man may hold his religious creed with a bigotry which renders him regard less of God's law or of his own conscience. A man may push his political opinions to such intemperance, that, al though a gentleman and a magistrate, (and to such a case el usion was made during the sittings of the committee) he shall expose man to the peril of taking a false oath, ratherithan for feit an advantage to his party. Such men should surely be set aside, as well as those whose circumstances exposed them to intimidation, and to such cases counsel for the crown should have applied, with a sound discretion, the powers which had been conAded to them, Mr, O'Connell, however, on the restoration of Lord Melbourne to power, and the ap pointment of Lord Normanby to Ireland, instructed his clients that, henceforth, under Perrin and O'Loughlin, no man need fear the being tried by a packed jury, and, accord ingly, since that time, the packing has been of that kind which has not proved disserviceable . to the offender's interestd or the progress of crime. Dr. 0' ullivan next condemned the practice of retrying in the castle chambers, a cause on which the verdict of a jury had already been pro nounced, and very strongly reprobated the encouragement held out by government to a new form of intimidation, in their entertaining the memorials which jurors might be in fluenced to subscribe. A jury, he said; was sufficiently ex posed to danger, for delivering an honest verdict. The go vernment, if wisely advised and honestly disposed, should set its face against encouraging a new persecution—that of the memorial system ; in which it might be offered as a con dition of pardon for an obnoxious verdict, that the juror would sign a memorial praying to have his verdict set aside. (Hear, hear.) From the case of the juries Dr. O'Sullivan turned to that of the bench, and dwelt at some length on the insult offered to Lord Chief Justice Doherty. This case — that of Gahan—has already been before the public, in our extracts from the evidence. Lord Brougham's admirable speech has fixed attention upon it. The point of view in which Dr. O'Sullivan regarded it was this. The Chief Jus tice is grossly insulted by some anonymous underling in the Castle. Dr. O'Sullivan was especially cautious to exempt from his censures any of those clerks in the Chief or Under Secretary's office whose names are known, and payed a warm and well-merited compliment to the chief clerk. But, he said, somebody, or some mischievous nobody, contrary to the wish and design of the Lord Lieutenant, sends in to the Chief Justice the foul affront, instead of returning it to the rude priest for whom Lord Normanby designed it. And what is the conduct of the noble marquis ? Does he insti tute a search into the offence, and find out the daring offen der, and admonish or remove him ? No—he leaves him safe in his obscurity, and he directs an order to be issued that thenceforth all communication must be suspended between her Majesty's Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas and the Viceroy of Ireland. (Hear, hear.) This was in deed a strange and anomalous procedure. There was ano ther circumstance in this remarkable case to which Dr. O'Sullivan would advert. One of the persons charged in the same offence with Gallan t the prisoner who was blessed in having a priest for his brother, and for whom the Irish government was so very solicitous, had been tried by Judge Moore—had been sentenced by him to the se verest punishment the law allowed—had been subsequently recommended for a mitigation of punishment when the learned judge was brought to think him innocent; and then, when it was intimated to him that a year's imprisonment was rather too severe a punishment for being innocent, to agree in the propriety of immediate liberation. This Judge Moore, with whose report Lord Morpeth did not think it right to furnish the Chief Justice Dogherty, appeared to give evidence before the committee. He there explained the principle on which he pronounced so severe a sentence as seven years' trans portation on a man whom he thought not guilty. This ex planation was as follows : " When the jury had given credit to the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution, and had convicted, I thought it would produce an outcry in the country if I did not pro nounce that sentence, leaving it for consideration - whether, if the charge was found, on inquiry, to be well sustained, the sentence ought not to be carried into effect." Is this, asked the rev. speaker, to be henceforth the moral of the judicial bench ? Are our judges to take counsel not from the evidence—the case—but from the outcry of popular opinion, or the voice of power ? Are they to become organs of the peoples frenzy, or the state's malice—and to render passion and vengeance intolerably powerful by impressing them with a counterfeit semblance of justice. Is this really the explanation of the learned judge's misplaced severity ? No ; I would not hear his enemy offer it. I will not leave i him to his own rash explanation. There is evidence from himself against it. Here Dr. O'Sullivan quoted the obser vations of the learned judge on the trial of General Sir Geo. Bingham, whom Mr. O'Connell prosecuted. Popular feeling ran high—the jury returned, as the learned judge thought, an improper verdict, and, in consequence, he fined the prisoner• sixpence and dismissed him, with the most soothing expres sions he was capable, under the circumstances, of using. By that judgment, on that occasion, Judge Moore had provided a defence against his recent explanation. He was seeking an excuse to be 'merciful. When he was younger—Lord Normanby was not in power. Then his conduct was different from that for which he has now offered an explanation. The Irish government was not satisfied with teaching its moral duties to the bench. It must be trained in the modern code of manners also—in court-etiquette, and accordingly, the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas is put to learn froth - the new guide, Sir Michael O'Loghlen, who pronounces that the conduct of the Lord Chief Justice in taking a copy of the insult offered to him and the bench, deserved that exile from communication with the Castle of Dublin by which he has been punished. Now, when it is remembered that this was the second affront of the kind passed upon the Chief Justice—that it was passed upon him after he had remonstrated formerly—the exclusion seems exceedingly harsh. But there is something little less than ludicrous in the juxta position of Chief Justice Doherty as a pupil and the present Master of the Rolls as teacher in the matter of etiquette. Hogarth's picture of ancient and modern grace—might give some idea of it—when a dancing master was angrily schooling the Antinous into shape might not be altogether an unfair representation of the case. The Chief Justice, one of the foremost among the most accom plished gentlemen of his time—accomplished—not merely in outward manner—but by the sentiment which gives man ner its being, grace, and charm—one whose " honour," with an accurracy unsurpassed, " clock to itself, knew the true moment when exception bade him strike"—he was to receive instruction from the Master of the Rolls in the art of conducting himself towards the functionaries of govern ment. Were these asked the rev. speaker the principles of morals and manners in which the Judges of the land were to be instructed ? On the bench were they to watch how the breezes of popular tumult, or of tyrant power were labouring, and to set their sails obsequiously to catch them ? In their inter course with government, were they to be seen assuming the positions of submission taught by the new Court Guide? Was the judge, when he had come down from the transient majesty of the bench, to cringe and endure at the castle—to imitate the Carthagenian exile at the Bythenian court—taking the s' offs and scorns of every insolent menial, until it pleases the Sybarite tyrant to awake and tell them their contumelies have been too offensive. And in the meantime is he to take lessons as to the precise angle at which he must boo from Sir Pertinax O'Loghlin. Dr. O'Sullivan expressed his own unwillingness to make any personal observations which might prove in the least degree offensive. He willingly repeated that he bad beard Sir Michael O'Loghlen praised for his conduct in private life and on the bench, and he would not withhold the praises to which he was entitled. For himself he had but one objection to him—the interpretation which he had given —on which he had acted—to his oath of qualification as a Roman Catholic. For this he thought him strongly censurable—and while he acknowledged that in other respects he might meet high praise —he could not think, without some surprise, of his attempting to act as a censor upon Chief Justice Doherty in matters upon which the honour and sen timent of an accomplished gentleman, feeling what was due to his station and to himself, were to pronounce a decision. From the cases of the judges and jurors. Dr. O'Sullivan turned to that of witnesses, and showed how the policy of government was likely to increase the course of perjury. In the first place, the practice of rehearing cases in the castle chamber was dangerous. Witnesses might be produced sure to be discredited by a jury, in the expectation that their tes timony, when backed by a priest's memorial, might satisfy the law officers of the crown, and win pardon from the Lord Lieutenant. In the next place, the assimilation of the Irish to the English law, in indulging prisoners with copies of the informations sworn against them, must give a new oppor tunity for fabricating perjuries. The conduct of the govern ment was also strongly calculated to encourage falsehood. Of this Dr. O'Sullivan gave some instances ; one in which prisoners were pardoned who had, it would appear, suborned ten witnesses to swear falsely in their behalf, and on whose aggravated guilt the government pronounced no censure. (Hear, hear.) For this he referred to a correspondence which appeared in the evidence of the Lord Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench, Chief Justice Rushe. By overlooking this instance of perjury, the government stood, by their act, he would not say by intention, in the condition of accessories after the fact, to the subornation of perjury. The next in stance he adduced was one in which he said they might be considered accessories before the fact. It was their conduct at the special commission in Clonmel, where they not only paid two hundred guineas to defend the prisoners they prose cuted, but paid eighty pounds for the purpose of procuring witnesses for them. And what did these witnesses depose? Double alibis. Alibis to prove that the witnesses were re mote from the place where they had sworn they were pre sent—alibis to prove that the prisoners were absent from the place where crime had been committed. This is a strange case. If the witnesses, on whom the Crown bestowed public money to procure on behalf of the prisoners, swore truth, the govern ment have put innocent men to an ignominoius death. If the witnesses on the part of the Crown swore truth, then govern ment paid for the production of perjurers to defame them. . The culprits in Tipperary were of a class whom Roman Ca tholic Priests had taken under their protection. There was an accused person elsewhere, whom Roman Catholic Priests desired to prosecute. Dr. O'Sullivan then entered into de tails of the case of Sly, and cited passages to show the man ner in which Sly had been prosecuted, and the inexplicable ac cidents by which the perjurers who had conspired his death, would have been protected, had the case rested with the law officers of the government. [Our space will not permit us to follow the rev. gent. through the details.] An intense sensa tion appeared to pervade the meeting at the recital of the circumstances under which Sergeant Pattieson had been dis missed. We have given but a brief outline of the speech, and should not forget to add, that in every instance of miscon duct on the part of government, whether as respected judges or culprits, the agency of the Roman Catholic priesthood could be discerned. After speaking for nearly three hours, the rev. speaker said that he had not been aware how long he had trespassed. " I have gone," he said, " through but half my case :" then, turning to the Rev. Hugh M'Neile, he.added, " I hope to finish 4at Liverpool. I spared you," said he, addressing the assembly, " introductory observa tions—l will spare you a formal conclusion. I leave my facts to speak for me, and resign you now to matter more entertaining.- You are sure.to be recompensed for the pa tience with which you have listened to my dry and disagree able details, and will experience, I have no doubt, the truth of Mrs. Malaprop's philosophy, that where a change is sure to come, 'tis better begun with a little aversion." The rev. doctor then sat down, after moving the first resolution, amid loud applause. C. S. PARKER, Esq., seconded the resolution, expressing his entire concurrence in the sentiments of the previous speaker, and in the spirit of the resolution. The Rev. HUGH STOWELL moved the second resolution, which was as follows :—" That this meeting determine to petition, and to promote petitions, to both Houses of Par liament, imploring our legislature to withhold all future grants of public money from the College of Maynooth, and also from the Irish Education Board, and from any other measure of education compromising the great Protestant principles of the constitution, or either directly or indirectly recognising Popery." Having read the resolution, Mr. Stowell said, It may be allowed me, Mr. Boroughreeve, as connected with this locality, to trespass for a few moments while I offer some brief remarks in reference to this locality. First allow me to observe, that I, for one, deplore, in com mon with many others, that we should have been compelled, for want of proper accommodation elsewhere, to hold a meeting of a religious character in such a place as this. (Hear.) At the same time, as God, while he is no respecter of persons, is likewise, where the purpose is good, no re specter of places, I cannot but feel, that the fact of prayer having been made to God within a temple of folly and dis sipation, is a pledge that it shall ere long be con verted into a temple of literature, or, better still, into a temple of religious and spiritual worship. (Cheers.) I may further remark, that I deeply regret so many of our friends seem to think they have been ill-treated in regard to tickets, and that some expression of u n ki n d ness , not t o say of retaliation, have been vented against our honest-hearted printer and bookseller, Mr. Pratt. I trust those who may have threatened him with exclusive dealing will leave all ex clusive dealing to the opposite party. (Hear and cheers.) But to address myself at once to the object of the meeting, allow me to remark, that I conceive that object to be one of a most high, and solemn, and sacred character. We are not met, as we shall be tauntingly told, for the purpose . of break ing the peace, or of promoting discord. If there were a be sieged citadel, and a number of individuals were to come in the guise and mask of peace, and to set to work sapping and un dermining the foundations and ramparts of the citadel—if those within the citadel were to come out in hostile array, and insist that they should desist from their dark practices, or else fall upon them as enemies, would it be fair in the sappers and miners to charge the defenders of the citadel with being the first to break the peace ? They might, perhaps, out of policy do so; but they would get little credit from re fleeting men for their logic. (Hear.) Just on a par with such logic is that of our opponents, and the opponents of Protestantism, of Scripture, and of truth, in their charges against the clergy and laity of the Church of England. Be cause, forsooth, we will not let them go on with their dark, mining, sapping practices, till they have got their mines ripe, when the match shall be put to the train, and we shall find our glorious fabric of church and state in ruins about our deluded ears. (Cheers.) We are men of peace, ambassa dors of peace, servants of the Prince of Peace ; our message is a message of peace—peace to him that is near, and to him that is afar off. But there is something we love better than peace, without which, peace is but a curse instead of a bles sing. That is truth—eternal truth. (Loud cheerS.) We are not met to break the peace, but to defend the truth. (Cheers.) We are not met in order to produce discord, ex cept as discord is to be produced by resistance to falsehood and fraud. (Cheers.) We are not come together for any mere political purpose, if by that term is to be understood a party political purpose. We are not met to oppose her Ma jesty's Ministers, except as they are opposed to Protestant ism and to truth. (Hear.) If, in coming in collision with Pa pists, we come into collision with the present Administration, whose fault is this ? If, in coming to expose the unparalleled atrocities perpetrated under the mask Of govertifnent and jus tice in Ireland, *e come in collision with ministers, whose fault is it ? Not the fault of honest, true-hearted men, who grieve to see England and Ireland so degraded and debased, and their moral sense and feeling so laid prostrate and ground in the dust, the fault is not ours, but theirs. If this meeting had been for a party-political purpose, I, for one, would never have entered these walls. Party-political purposes are very far aloof from the high and holy calling of a Christian ambas sador, a messenger of mercy and of God. But we cannot, as men of truth and honesty—as ministers of Christ—as the ac credited clergy of this Christian land—we cannot stand by and see politics set up against religion, instead of beilig one' with religion. We cannot stand by and see religious truth torn silver cord by silver cord out of the weft and warp of our glorious constitution, without lifting up our voices like a trumpet, and showing Britain her transgressions, and the house of Britain eis sins. By the providence of God and the laws of the land, we ars not only as pastors to attend to their quiet flocks in quiet folds, but also as watchmen on the walls of our national Zion. (Cheers.) We are called to be soldiers as well as shepherds. The clergy of the Church of England are quite in their places in denouncing evil whether stalking in high places or crawling in the mire. Who are to tell the people their faults ? Who are to tell the Ministry the truth ? Who are to interpret the signs of the thnes, if not the watch men on the walls of Zion ? We will not let the cry of "Political parsons," " Reverend agitators," "Breakers of the peace,' bind our consciences or tie our tongues. (Hear, and cheers.) The Papists must do what they did in former days—take out our tongues—before we' will be silent. They must take off our right hands before they cease to be held up for Protestantism, for the Bible, and for God. (Loud applause.) Neither let it be said that we are met together for the purpose of promoting Conservatism, and for bringing the Conservative party into power. Let her Majesty's ministers confess their faults—let them do penance—let them break off from the traitorous boscim of the harlot of Rome,who is hugging them to destroy them. Let there. rive the fet ters that the monster with the fiery tail in Ireland has wound around them. (A laugh.) Let them say, we will do your dirty work no longer; and if the good old church of Eng land is to be laid on the funeral pyre, it shall be other hands than those of her professed children that shall take the torch to light the paricidal flame. (Cheers.) Let them do this, and I answer for the clergy of the church of England, that they will be as firm in supporting as they have been in op posing them, (Cheers.) ft Will be said, no doubt, that we favour the Conservative party, a n d so we do. (Cheers.) If we wish to see that party in power, and we do devoutly wish and pray for it, it is because, that we see her Majesty's min isters have not the moral courage to assert their freedom, and that they are too deep in the mire ever to get out. (Hear.) O that they had never tied themselves to the chariot-wheels of Popery, and allowed her to drag them thro' the deceitful quagmire ! If it be said that many of the Conservatives are wanting in moral courage and character, we admit and lament it, but if we had a Conservative Government to-morrow, we could surround our virgin Queen with men of purity and moral principle. (Cheers.) I, for one, if I had a voice— feeble and unweighty as it might be—l could say, I would not have in power any Conservative, however I honour the name, that had ever had trim. con. connected with his name —not one lady within the palace, however high her rank, or beautiful her person, or rich her accomplishments, unless she carried the fair gem of purity and modesty brightly shining on her brow. (Cheers.) We could furnish men of unblem ished reputation to surround our Queen. Need I mention Lord Stanley, or Lord Ashley, or Sir James Graham? (Cheers.) Did slander ever breathe upon their reputations? Need I mention Mr. Gladstone ? (Cheers.) Whoever im peached his moral character ? Need I mention Lord Sandon, worthy descendant of a worthy house? (Loud ( heers.) Need I mention Colquhoun, the champion of Protestantism ? (Cheers.)—Or Roden, though branded as a bigot. (Cheers.) I would to God all our Peers were such bigots. (Loud ap plause.) lam no political parson •, but I cannot, as a min ister of God, and an accredited minister of the church of this nation,--I cannot but blush—l would almost say weep tears of blood in private,—to think that our virgin Queen should -be surrounded by such characters as that a blot has been put upon the fair fame of England's court, such as it has never known since it has been a court, and I trust never will know again. (Cheers.) Do we say her Majesty's ministers are identified with it ? Why do they not drag the traitors to light ? (Hear.) Why have they not scoured the court till they found out where, I might almost say, the death-spot of blood was to be found on the brow? I cannot trust myself on this point. Do we then, as it will be slanderously reported of us, bring insinuations against our Queen ? Are the Protestant Asso ciations disloyal ? No: long live the Queen ! (Cheers.), When the moon broke forth bright and pure as she rose on our ho rizon, lending her sweet influence and her genial silvery rays to dance along the hills, and light up the woods and valleys— when by and by noisome fogs and dark mists gather around her and hide her from our eyes, the unskilled observer may blame the moon, and cry out, because of her darkened vi sage, that she has ceased to shine : but the skilful man and the man of penetration will say, blame , not the moon, but blame the dark fogs that have shrouded her ; blame not the moon, but blame the mists that have come between us and her radiance ; let them roll away, and she will be seen walk ing in majesty and light, fair and unstained as before. our fair young Queen rose on the horizon of our country like the moon in her purity and untainted brightness ; every eye watched her, every tongue blessed her, every heart thrilled towards her; a nation's homage awaited her-- a nation's heart was bound up in her. Why is it now that heads hang down and tongues are silent when she walks among her once gratulant and joyous people ? Why is there not still that universal enthusiastic turning of every heart like the sun-flower to the fair orb rising in our favoured sky ? Because of the dark clouds and mists that have gathered round her. (Loud cheers.) Let the Conservatives come in, and if they do not roll away those mists and clouds, let them go out tomorrow. (Hear, and applause.) We are not ,met for a party-political purpose, to abet or support Whigs, Ra dicals, or Tories. We meet to support men of principle where we find them,—men who will dare to go right though the world cried shame upon them ;—who will set the star of eternal truth before them, and steer right on through the winds and waves, not heeding the lash of the waves nor the hiss of the winds. These are the men we want ; and if the Duke of Wellington and Sir Robert Peel came in, they would only secure Protestant support by upholding Pro- . testant principles, by repairing and strengthening the consti tution, which, alas ! they made a sad rent in by their disas trous betrayal—but I will not call it a betrayal, for they did it in ignorance, in the unsuspecting honesty of their hearts. (Cheers - 0 They did not believe that there was such roguery and rascality in the earth under the mask of religion as they have found under the mask of Popery. (Hear.) Where are now the pledges of peace—the promises of protect' on—the oil that was.to be thrown over the troubled waters of Ireland—the absence of bitterness, feud and fraud—the oaths to defend the rights of Protestantism and the Church of England ? (Hear, and cheers.) Where are those who glosed, and flattered, and whispered, and sung, while they cheated us poor gullible creatures? (Loud cheers.) I beg pardon : many of you they cheated not : they cheated not me ; neither have they cheated my reverend friends around me. (Cheers.) We knew that Popery professed to be infallible, and because infallible, immutable ; and they knew that if she sanctioned perjury for the good :of the church at one time she must sanction it at another ; that if she sanctioned the betrayal of heretics by any means at one time, she must sanction it at another. (Hear and cheers.) We have not been decei ved. Popery has done precisely what we expected her to do. Since the passing of that most ill-starred and ill-fated bill that this country ever .witnessed, have we had quiet, absence of party spirit—settlement in our laws—fixedness in.our con stitution—promotion of moral feeling—promotion of tender ness of conscience—promotion of all that makes a nation great and glorious ? (No. no.) Did the Conservatives reap the support they anticipated ? Did they find that they had seated themselves in their places never to be unseated ? No ; they dislocated the parties of the country ; they threw the best part of the Conservatives almost to the antipodes, and it was long before they began to gather together. They are now gathering, and 1 hope they will rally round Wellington and Peel, for I am sure that those two statesmen have re pented of the fatal act they committed in 1829. (Hear, hear.) This may be thought to be the effusion of a heated imagina tion. But those who think so have never studied the sub ject closely and deeply ; they have never marked how the Jesuits are worming their way up and down through our country—how the mines and countermines are passing under neath this land as well as Ireland—how the Ribbon con spiracy, as it has been proved, is at work in England as well as across the channel ; they cannot see that the administra tion must go on as the Papists desire them or leave their places—that the Papists are increasing in power and number round the Queen, and that one place after another is filled up by Roman Catholics—that Lord Normanby, too bad for Ireland, is good enough for England, and that Mr. Wyse, the father and foster-father of the education scheme, that monstrous abortion that has neither head, nor tail, nor mid dle— " If shape it can be called that shape has none" — has beer, put irythe council, where he can train up his off spring, and make of -it -what he can, aml nourish it into a giant strength, that it may be powerful enough to devour up the Protestant education of the country. How Popery stalks forth in high places. We find from the papers that the King of Belgium, accompanied by his Queen, from the great Protestant court of England wended their way to the mass house, while the Queen of England took her departure for the Protestant church. I marvel that there should not have been feeling enough in the court to forbid connivance at such an insult to the memory of one whose name is embalmed in every Briton's heart. (Hear,) I am now going to enter into a deeply painful but not therefore a less important point. There is, in the bosom of our own reformed church, no small indica tion of a drawing towards Popery by men who ought to know better. (Hear.) I will confine myself simply to one or two facts, which if called upon, I can vouch for and authenticate. A gentleman, whose name, if it be demanded in private, he will not be ashamed to own, assured me that he had gone in to the splendid new Roman Catholic chapel at Leeds, and had there heard the priest, with great eloquence and plausi bility, dilate on the admirable sentiments which had emana ted from Oxford. (Hear.) He admired them and eulogised them and their followers at Leeds. I have nothing to do with the inference from this fact. I leave you to draw it. In the Newcastle Journal of January the sth, there is an account of a dinner given to a Mr. Turnbull by a Rotnish congrega tion of North Shields. 'Amongst the toasts given, I find, " His present Holiness, the father of the Christian world— Dr. Pusey, and the Church of England reformers at Oxford, and thanks to them for their excellent tracts." (Hear, hear.) 1 may follow this up by a quotation from the Catholic Ma gazine for March, p. 165. [The extract expressed sincere and unaffected congratulations to " our brethren of Oxford," on the opening of their eves to the evils of private judgment, and on their fast approach to the church of all times and all lands, whose maternal arms were ever open to receive her, repentant children.] I hope, continued Mr. Stowell, that this writer will prove a false prophet. I cannot but hope that, good and honourable men, as many of the Oxford divines are, they will not, in their zeal against dissent and schism, run the opposite rock of bigotry and superstition, which is worse. I would not have made these statements, but for the sake of truth. We want the church of England to be as one man, but not to be bound together by the icy bands of Popery. I will mention another fact. A lady lately arrived from Rome, brought a quantity of Italian tracts published by the Propaganda at Comer. I saw one of them, which was headed, "Marvellous approximation of numbers 'of the English Church to the true Catholic Church again.. ) ' Do I speak of these things in anger ? No ; in sorrow and shame. (Hear) I lament deeply over it, and I would entreat my reverend brethren to be careful how they read the protestations ~to which I allude. They contain much that -is good, and true, and sound, and needful, in these latitudinarian days—much of solid assertion, ofindependent, bold principle; but the ho ney only makes the poison the more dangerous. (Hear, hear,) Mr. Stowell concluded by a forcible appeal to diffe. rent classes of individuals to promote the signing of petitions to the legislature on this all-important subject. The Rev. Dr. COOKE, of Belfast, rose to second the resolu lutioh. After some preliminary observations relative to the difficulties of his position, owing to the ability of the speak ers who had preceded him, and other causes, and having vindicated himself and his coadjutors from the harge of un charitableness in the proceeding in which they were engaged, and others of a similar character, he said, I feel it, Mr Bo roughreeve, a duty and a right on my part to be with you on this occasion, because I felt that a member of the church of Scotland ought to stand by the church of England, and though feeling my incapacity—as one of the lightest troops to • stand by the paridees, yet I reflect at the same time that tho' we may not be able from our little camp of stature to scale the breach, we can stand at a distance and fire a shot o'er their heads. (Hear and a laugh.) So far as I have it in my power I have endeavoured to show that the church of Scotland and the church of England ought to be united together. (Cheers.) I have another reason for lending my assistance on this occasion. I feel it my duty, because I hold myself to be as much a bishop as the Archbishop of Canterbury. I call myself an episcopalian—my diocese is not so extensive as his—l have Only a single parish with six Presbyters-as my suffrages. Ido not know where the essential difference lies. I rejoice that there are men able to do more than I am, whether through habit, talent, or the grace of God, which is beyond both—but for my single self, I have always found that when I had one parish exclusively under my care, 1 had a great deal too much to do. (Hear, hear.) I remember "being struck with a remark once made to me by a fellow labourer in the gospel. On my saying that such a one had but a small congregation, " Oh, replied he, we shall all, at the Day of Judgment, find that our congregations have been too large. (Hear.) With regard to everythitig else we are one and the same. I hold that the Church of England is apos tolical, and I hold that the Church of Scotland is as aposto lical as she is. (Cheers, and a laugh.) One is not the man, and the other the child—one,is not the greater, and the other the lesS—but, though one has one :duty and another holds 'a different view, I would never allow for a moment, the idea of the 'different build of the Church of England—to make me desirous of undermining her foundations, or to bring down her splendid minarets. (Cheers.)' If she has stained gothic windows, while we have only plain glass, that is no reason why I should take pebbles to break them. (A laugh.) I cannot imagine thatbecause she clothes her ministers in a surplus, while I wear a plain Geneka gown, I am to tear it off the Church of England minister's back, nor yet, because she reads her prayers, while we pray extemporaneously, that I am to fling her liturgy to the winds ; nor, as Dr. Doyle would say, commit it to the flames, (Hear, hear, and loud cheering.) On this ground I attend here to day, and I would that all who are here would hold one thing in view. There is an old proverb that says, " out of sight, out of mind: Why, what is the reason that we find affection itself sometimes cross when the object is long and far re moved ? Just in the principle of the incapacity of our nature to retain impressions. Why is Protestantism at such a dis count,' that we find a "Big Beggarman" threatening that he will clap it wholesale into his wallet. Because, we have ' been acting - largely on the proverb " out of sight, out of mind. We have allowed the claims of the Bible to be advo cated in the narrow corner meetings of the Bible Societies, with occasionally one vast and splendid anniversary in Dub lin or elsewhere. (Hear,. hear.) Mr. Stowell has looked forward to the day when a certain bill should be repealed. (Hear, hear.)' I assure him that iiti greater misfortune could happen to the country. There was one of old in Rome, who ever cried the parrot's song—" delanda est Carthago. Carthage was blotted out, and Rome sunk into chains from that time. All the eloquence of my valued friend would not tell the advocates which Mr. O'Connell and that bill have conferred upon Protestantism. They have opened eyes that were before blind as moles !—that they brought souls together who were previously divided by use less microscopic polenices. They have joined not hands only, but blent together, and produced a glorious zone of sisters, which we now survey. (Applause.) But for them, the eloquence of my revered friend himself would not, as it has done, waked and thrilled and electrified us. (Cheers.) This worthy friend of ours, Daniel, htts added to his tither characters, that of a prophet. He says in his letter to the English nation, that in the present times it is admitted on all hands " that Protestantism, in all and every of its multitudinous shapes and forms, has lost all expensive power—in fact, its power of expansion ceased almost entirely within one century after the invention of the name of Protestantism." This is fact the first. I did hold it my duty, as far as I could, to prove that I had the expansive power of coming from Belfast to Manchester. (Laughter and cheers.) Hear him further :—" You have the unimpeachable and, in this respect, the unerring state mens of the Rev. Mr. Gleig to the fact, that Protestantism in Germany means or produces infidelity"—a very gentle hint to those who shoulder him on, and lend him a crutch to go on his mendicant expeditions. (Tremendous cheers.) " Englishmen," he adds, " reflect on these facts—weigh well this truth." Well, I declare, Daniel, if you utter a truth, I will weigh it (loud laughter) ; and if it profess to be involved in a fact, I will send to the Apothecaries' Hall for apothecaries' weights, to test the nonentity of .the truth that can proceed out of so lying a mouth. (Continued laughter, and cheers.) " Weigh well this truth—that no incitement to CatholiCity can be found in temporal or mercenary motives." Mr. O'Sullivan has pro Ned that a judge may be sent to Co ventry, or a little thing in office ready to be kicked out for incapacity may he pitchforked—into the House of Lords. (Much laughter and applause.) f, in addition, you may be Irishmen, you may get a job'as long - as the Shannon. (Laughter.) Now, 1 have weighed the truth, and I have not, skill enough in decimal fractions to compute the amount. Yet he goes on—" Spite of all these obstacles and difficul ties, I repeat it with an honest—joy."----(An honest man is a noble one, and. lam glad heis turning honest.) " I repeat it with an lionest,joy, converts to Catholicity daily multiply, and the free Cliristendont is'witness to that xnultipliations." Catholicity-is certainly Protestantism—but we are not of the heresy of Rome. (Cheers. Romanism is not Catholicity. Would' any man 'take it into his head to say that York st: eet; oriMcsleysstreet, is all Manchester ? Romanism is but one street in the great Christian city and the worst in it. Protestantism cannot be true unless God has left miserable man to conjecture—to guesis,to. alter and remodel articles of belief without any authority—to decide contests, or to re ject gros4 arid irnakitiory• Interpretations." Well, tdere is one fragment of truth in this great dunghill—a gem, which it is worth while to . pick up in the midst of the filth cast on our common Protestantism—it is that Protestantism cannot be true if God has left us without authority. He has not so left. us. But it is not the authority of the Scarlet Lady of Rome—not the authority of the Councils—nor yet that most mysterions of all authorities, the unanimous and united cer tainty of the fatets, who never have been unanimous and unitedsinbe the beginning of the world, and never will be to theend of it. (Hear, hear and cheers.) My resolution tells me, that I am first to turn your attention to the neces sity of invading'the legislature with petitions against May nooth. , Why: may , we not let these harmless priests of rMay,noeth_ sleep on ? Just because they are not asleep. ( Hear, hear and cheering.) I have deard of a fox's sleep that' iaftheir.:sort of sleep, (A, laugh) The whole govern ment lad swore that popery was idolatry—th e y com bi ne d to build 'a college to teach" it. In the annals of human fatuity there' has been nothing equal to this—the only parallel to it would ,he that a number of the merchants of Manchester shoiild endow a college for pickpockets. (Hear and laughter.) The 6 history of this institution would be valuable, but time will-iy4tqlei:mit me to enser upon it. I will confine myself to one or two points. The first point is, that the very man who negOtiated withthat ever-to-be-revered statesman, Mr. Pitt— who threw rust in the eyes of that clear-sighted man—was one of the persons who, at the very same time, was engaged in the publication in Ireland of the Rhemish Testament, with the. Rhemish notes., I will tell you how Mr. O'Connell has characterized the notes of the Rhemish Testament. " They teach," he says, " that it is essential for a Roman Catholic to believe—that it is lawful to murder Protestants, and to break faith with heretics. (ffetti; hear.) - No one, who reads these notes can doubt that this was in reality a most righteous sen tence pronounced on this most iniquitous book ever foisted on a people under the name of an authoritative exposition of the word of God.. (Hear, hear.) I come now to Maynooth itself, and will give you .only the following brief statement from Delahogue, the writer of one of the most authentic class books of Maynooth. Maynooth, against which I call on you to petition, and to promote petitions teaching that there is no salvation out of the church of Rome; there is liberality, thereis charity for you, this is not enough, it teaches in the second place that Protestants must be d--d, and ought to be exterminated ; there is a double faced Janus liberality, that takes in the world above and the world be low, exterminates you here and d—'s you hereafter. (Loud Cheers,) The third principle inculcated in this book, is, that no other religion than romanism should be tolerated. This is a tolerant generation and ever love to prate 'of toleration, and are tolerating popery while Popery is forging chains, by which she expects to be tolerated to bind them. (Hear, hear, and Cheers.) I pledge myself, if the committee determine upon publishing an' uthentic report of the proceedings, to furnish documents at greater length than I can now venture to do, and to give chapter and verse. Another of their books, from which much edification is to be derived; is the Secunda Secundre of Thomas Aquinas. I would feelitany duty to illustrate from this author another principle from the church of Rome, to wit, the distinction between venal and mortal sin. What description of a pre cept must that be, which teaches that if from a rich man you steal four shillings and eleven pence half-penny farthing fraction, you do not commit a mortal sin. What does the word of God say ? It says, " Sin is the transgression of the law." What does the law say ? " Thou shalt not steal ;" and what says St. James ? " He that offendeth in one point, is guilty of all." (Hear, hear.) The second point I pledge myself to illustrate is this—that oaths, under any circum stance, ought, according to the principles of the Church of Rome, to be taken with a mental reservation, that is, saving the authority of my superior, if I have one. Every oath that a true Roman Catholic takes must always have this salvo, if the oath be contrary to pie honour and dignity of the Roman chair, it is not to be kept. The parliamen tary roll is the best prdof of this—there you will read that men have sworn not to use any power or place they might obtain to destroy the established religion. Listen to them afterwards., and you will hear them announcing their determination to take from it everything worthy of their appropriation. (Hear, hear.) Another subject before me is the Irish education question. I must discuss it a little, but it shall be briefly. The first point I shall bring before you, is the.exclusion of the Bible. The system has undergone so many changes that, like Proteus, you can scarcely tell what it is. One of the members of the Irish Education Board, the Reverend James . Carlile, on being asked if the Bible were read during school hours, anawerd—that :it could not be so read by the rules of the board. This will be sufficient on that head. The other point is, that in order to become entitled to the public fund, we must bind ourselves to encourage the teaching of Popery. There is a party in England who have so repeatedly denied this fact, that I must attempt to make a slight demonstration of it. It is a positive regulation of the board, that they will permit and encourage the clergy to give religious instruction to the children of their respective flocks, either before or after the ordinary school hours on certain days in the week. By this, we are.tolct that the board understand merely offer ing facilities to the clergy to give religious instruction to their pupils. Where the board found this interpretation of the word encourage I do not know ; it was certainly not in Johnson's Dictionary. Suppose a mother, wishing her child to take physid, were to set the cup upon the table aud to en courage the child to take it by simply pointing to it, the child might perhaps go so far as to apply its nose to the mix ture but I do not think it would be likely to go much further. (A laugh.) It is said that at the time of the threatened invasion , of Bonnaparte, a rustic wiseacre was asked by his companions, what was the meaning of an invasion ? " Why, John, said he, " an invasion is as if a man should say an invasion." (A laugh.) " I thought," ,continued the rev. gentleman, " that to encourage" was as if a man should say to encourage. The improvers in Dr. Johnson tells us that it is as if a man should say to afford fa cilities. (A laugh') What did the board do ? They sent us a copy of the rules, and when we stated our objections, they took a pair of sci ssors and cut out the obnoxious line, past ing the two ends of the paper together, and sending it back with their "mental reservation." We applied to know if the principle were withdrawn ,they drew up their shoulders in digni fied silence and would not reply. (Hear.) We were bound to protect Popery on this condition,' only can we obtain aught from the board. It is one of their queries, " will you take care that no children are present at the religious in stitutions or exercises, except those whose parents consent." We were required, in fact, to turn away Papists from hearing the Word of God. (Laughter.) I would not, for the best hopes I have within the wide circuit of this world, engage to prevent any child from hearing the truth. I would not use brute force to compel them; but I will never stand between man andthe, spirit and word of God. (Applause.) I dare not, on the allegiance I hold to Heaven, and no bribe that mammon can offer will, I trust, ever induce Protestants to join hands in suo4 a foul and unholy alliance, (Loud cheers.) The system, It is true, has undergone some changes, but they are changes in name rather than in na ture. The danger to Protestants does not lie in the gross and glaring enormity of the mischief, there is comparatively little danger in telling you to burn and bury your bibles, but there is danger in making a little separation in compro mising- the truth under the plausible pretext of liberality, and harmony. (Hear, hear.) What would a Manchester merchant think, if he were asked to be dishonest to the amount of a farthing, his whole mercantile character is within the com pass of that farthing. Oh, what a villain he would become for a £lOOO. I have another subject, but in reality it does not belong to me. It is the English system of education. When the Irish system was first propounded, I happened to be in England, and every one seemed to have a tilt with the Irishman, most of the persons whom I met being favourable to the system. They said, " Well, how do you like your new ' plan of education ?" It is a privilege which we assume in Ireland, when a man asks us a question with one knot on it to ask him one with two, that we may be untying our knot while he is fumbling with his. So I said, " Why how would you like it for yourselves ?" (Cheers.) I never found an Englishman that seemed willing to have a trial of it himself. (Cheers.) Whether they will swallow it at last, I cannot tell. Vertain, it is however, that when Rome has taken Ireland as an outport, it will not be long before she is in the centre of the citadel of England. (Long and loud con tinued cheering.) The English system is the Irish sys tem done with, as Queen Elizabeth is said to have done with the pudding—when they did not eat it all one day, she warmed it up for the next. There is one other re mark which I should wish to make as it has escaped Mr. Stow ell, it is as Ito the distinction between general and especial religion. lam aware that some of the most learned men, doctors of divinity, professors of chaos of humanity, and others, have admitted it ; but to my mind there is only one word in the English language—l do not know, by the bye, whether it is English or not—that can signify it, and that is HUMBUG. ,(Loud and prolonged applause.) In reality, it is the greatest insult to the human species that ever the logic of St. Homer invented—General religion ! Why, did time permit me, I would read you an account of it ; but it is un necessary. It will be found in a book entitled, " Recent Measures for Promoting Education in England." Generalre ligion includes all the doctrines we call essentially protestant ism, and in theirprinciple, they think they can instruct Roman Catholics and Protestants together. Where lies the fallacy ? The words are the same; the sense is the very opposite. What matters it that their book tells us that one of the points which may be inculcated is the doetrine of the atonement' of the Lord Jesus Christ. When the Protestant uses these words, he does not mean what the Roman Catholic means. The Protestant means the finished work of Christ ; the Roman Catholic means the finished work of Christ, with the merit of his holy Mother, of his Apostles Peter and Paul, and the Joint Stock Company of all the Saints , put together. (Loud cheers and laughter.) The Protestant doctrine of original sin in like manner is by the Council of Trent condemned with a solemn anethema ; yet this is one of the items of general religion that may be taught, I will give you a better term. I will call it equivocal religion. What would you think of equivocal honesty or equivocal truth. In the world of common sense, it would he dishonesty, in the world of theology, it is blasphemy. (Hear, hear.) Af ter some further obsarvations, the Rev. Gentleman concluded by ,seconding the motion. The Rev. HUGH M`NEriAt proposed the third resolution, observing that the question which is now under actite and wide-spreading discussion in this country ; and which must soon be practically determined, is whether the Protestant Reformation with its freely circulated English Bible, and its consequent blessings of civil, and religious liberty, shall be maintained : or whether the Romish system, ecclesiastical and civil, the known unchanged and unwearied antagonist of liberty, shall be introduced : first, countenanced as in ap parent equality with Protestantism, and eventually established in real unrivalled ascendancy. (Loud cheers.) Our object is to maintain the reformation, and to expand its blessings far and wide. In this conflict, therefore, we are the reformers, and we are opposed by two great parties—the English libe rals, and the Irish Romanists: The parties have different objects in view, though for the present they co-Operate. The English liberal has no notion of the Romish system being established in ascendancy. All he aims at, is equality. He thinks there should be no difference between the Catholic, as he calls him, and the Protestant. He says they equally pay the taxes of the state, and, therefore, they should equally enjoy the privileges of the state. This seems fair, and com mends itself to the honest candour of the English liberal. He does not, and will not, and he bught not to give it up, without some satisfactory reason to assign for maintaining Protestant ascendancy, we ought not to expect such a man to help us ; nay, we ought to abandon our present position, and become, in this point at least, lib era l s ourse l ves . (L ou d cheers.) Now, suppose we were to grant that equality of privilege, provided it be real, bond fide, permannet equa lity, is the very best state of things imaginable in any community ; then the next inquiry in sound reason, would be, is it attainable? Is the thing practicable ? Will existing human systems admit of, it ? Is human nature capable of receiving and retaining it ? To follow out this inquiry with intelligence requires, of course, a competent acquaintance with human systems. (Hear, hear.) If, upon mature -ex amination, it shall appear, that equa lit y o f pr i v il ege, th e beau ideal of liberalism, is utterly impracticable : that in order to attain to it, existing human systems must first be altered in a way which their numerous adherent's utterly re fuse to comply with : that in order to make them willing to comply with the requisite alterations, human nature must be changed in a way wholly out of the reach of human power ; so that working with the materials you have, and in the best way you can, equality of privilege, teal, bond fide, per manent equality, must be abandoned as hopeless by every sensible and practical man. If this be so, and if from the nature of things, there must in every state be ascendancy of some kind, then the alternatite to be decided has changed its aspect, the question is no longer between ascendancy and equality, but between one species of ascendancy and another. (Hear and cheers.) Of course the next step would be to enquire into the rival systems, and whichever of them was found most conducive to the protection and enlargement of human liberty, to the cultivation of the human mind, to the progressive developement of human resources, to the improve ment of human morals, and above all to the propagation or scriptural religibn, shOuld command the willing suffrages, and -aetive suppeirt of every enlightened Christian man. -.ln these general statements thus hypothetically announced, I antici pate agreement even from our opponents and I think I have a right to expect that they will not cut short inquiry by beg ging the question, and pronouncing dogmatically that equality is practicable, but that they will candidly enter into an exami nation of this question, that they will carefully enquire what Romanism is, and what Protestantism is ; whether, as these systems are, their adherents Can continue in any kingdom to enjoy equality of privilege, whether either the systems or their adherents can be so essentially altered as to render equality, manageable, and finally if there must be ascendancy some where, whether the Romish or the Protestant system be best entitled to possess it. (Hear, hsar.) Looking then at the two systems as they are, we put the question, is permanent equality of political privilege practicable ? If we were as ignorant of what essentially belongs to the Romish system, as some appear to be who dogmatise in this matter, we might probably answer, yes. But knowing that system as we know it, not from the interested and hypocritical disclaimers of in dividual Romanists arriving at political power by dissimula tion ; but from the authoritative, binding, and unrescinded laws essential to the system and ready to be made practical as soon as opportunity shall give feasible prospect of success, we are compelled to answer, no. There may be a modern SINON with bland sentences of charity, and affected lamentations over past hostilities and distresses, opening an apparently peaceful entrance into a Protestant citadel for the wooden horse of Romish perfidy, filled with its hidden but well-armed bulls and canons and excommunicat'ons and inquisitors. (Hear, hear.) There may be the serpent coil of spurious charity and real envy, hatred and malice, encircling and enfeebling the bold and faithful Laocoon who will dare to hurl a dart against the monster. There may be the national infatuation which refuses to be convinced by the warlike sound, the clank of intolerance, roused prematurely by that patriotic blow; there may be the infidelity which treats with contempt and scorn, the cassandra warnings of all who cry aloud and say sic notus Ulysses', which in this connexion may be translated, is that all you now of Ignatius Loyala ? There may be the gladsome congratulations of the simple that the war is ended, while the huge MYSTERY OF TREACH ERY is admitted within the walls. But all these are the preludes, not of permanent peace in the enjoyment of equality of previlege, but of the long sought opportunity, the dark and silent hour, where the repose of a confiding nation shall be suddenly broken by the savage warcry of triumphant deceivers, when the Palace, and even the person, of an heretical tho' gentle, Sovereign, shall sink under the murderous arm of some modern Pyrrhus, some genuine disciples of Hildebrand; and when Protestant ruins shall serve but as an elevation on which to unfurl to a world " wandering after the beast" the broad blood-stained banner of PAPAL SUPREMACY. (Loud and continual Cheering.) Is permanent equality of political previlege practicable I would ask ? May the sub jects of the court of Rome be permitted to exercise political power in England, with safety to the Crown, the Church, the People and the Institution of England ? (Hear, hear.) From the mass of evidence which might be adduced in proof of the impossibility of equality, I must of course confine myself to a brief selection. I am not about to quote an obsolete dead letter of the middle ages, no longer taught to be acted upon by living men • but instructions carefully inculcated up on th e Roman Catholic Priests at this day, with all the authority which their church can give them. I quote from the conon law, at this day taught in Maynooth College, and select that portion of it which refers to the restitution of all forfeted property.—(Hear, hear.)—lt is beyond all dispute that all that which is taken in an unjust war is to be restored since an occupation of this sort is nothing else than formal rapine. Extra controversiom est, in bello injusto, totum id, quod capitur. restituendum: quum occupatio hujusmodi nihil aliud sit, quam formalis rapina. So teaches St. Thomas secunda secundce. QuEest. 66, Art. 8, in the begin ing. These are his words. " About plunder we must make a distinction, because if they who plunder an enemy wage a just war, those things which they acquire by force are theirs, and this does not possess the character of rapine, therefore, they are not bound to restitution : bat if they who seize upon the spoil, wage an unjust :war, they commit rapine, and are bound to. restitution." But suppose property so seized in an unjust war, to have been sold, is the purchaser who gave a fair price Tor it, bound to restitution ? Yes—Be cause, since the seller, owing to the crime of the rapine, had acquired no right over the property violently taken away, occupied, and afterwards sold—so neither by parity of reasoning, can he who bought it be said to have acquired any right over the same. And because it is a general rule, that he who (though ignorant of the theft) buys any thing from a thief, is bound to restitution as soon as the true and louful owner appears. Si venditor, propter rapince vitium, nullum omnino jus habuit in ronniolenter ablatem, occu patam, et postea divenditam nil pariter juris in eamdem acquisisse diucendus est, qut eam mercatus fait. Quia regula generalis est, quod etiam ille, qui furti ignarus, a fure aliquid emit. in Toro conscientim, ad restitutionem te netur, simul ac verus legitimusque dominus OCCURRIT. (Hear, hear.) But suppose further, that property so seized in an unjust war, and sold, has been purchased by a true son of the Church of Rome, is it, eve n f rom hi m, su b ject to the decree of restitution because of the injustice of the original seizure ? Yes : for thus runs the canon law, Real property taken by an enemy, suppose pirates, infidels, he retics, ec., in an unjust war, even though it be bought by the faithful, ought to be restored to the rightful owner, without any price being exacted from him. Bona iminobi lia ab hostibus in hello injusto capta, puta a piratis infideli bus, si manful- a fidelibus? debent restitui propio domino, nullo exacto pretio ab eodem! (Hear, hear.) Such is the instruction given upon this most practical, and to most men, interesting and influential subject. Observe what it involves. The principle of restitution laid down, hinges entirely upon one single point ; has the property in question been taken in a just or in an unjust war? If in a just war, then there is to be no restitution : but if an un just war, then restitution is imperative. I cannot find in the cannon law any clear definition of what con stitutes the difference between justice and injustice in a war ; but I do find a most stringent curse and excommuni cation against all who shall in any way help infidels or here tics against the Pope of Rome, and the faithful. It is in the celebrated Bulla Came Domini, which is proved to be in force now in Ireland. " We excommunicate and curse, on the part of God Almighty, Father Son and Holy Ghost, and by the authority also of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own, all those who carry or transmit to Saraceus, Turks, and other enemies and foes of the Christian name, or to those expressly, or b y name, d eclared parties by that f this Holy see, horses, arms, iron, wire of iron, tin, steel, and any sort of metals, and instruments of war, piles of timber, hemp, ropes, as well of hemp as of any other matter, and the matter itself, and other things of this sort, with which they fight against Christians and Catholics, as also those who, by themselves or by others, give information of things concerning the state of the Christian world, to the Turks, and to the enemies of' the Christian religion, to the hurt and injury of Christians ; or to heretics, to t 1 1! Pe r ; judice of the Catholic religion, or, for that purls""' s ots them, in any way whatsoever, aid, advice or favourjt es, withstanding any privileges whatever, which pressly mention this sort of prohibition, hitherto grat r ipeei Us, and the aforesaid See, to any persons whatever, off, or Commonwealths.". From this it is tolerablY ee sio that if the faithful wage a war of conquest, and sucfcias seizing property, as they did in Peru, and Mexico, I nt i le pro' and the provinces of La Plata, it is a just war, mutt s s a sh' perty so seized has become - the lawful property of yi so ds• ful, and is not to be restored to the people of those.tbisi, But if heretics wage a war of conquest against the fa i thful, and succeed; it is an unjust war, it is rapine, the e°°., c ,l e s ight do ° te a lit acquire no right to the property ; and restitution to ;S' s se ller owner is a duty. If the property had been sold, til' is sr I/ i had no right to sell it, the purchasers acquired n° le f t ist! , , buying it, and still restitution is a duty, a r digiotil or ob s, So the Romish priests,' and through them the l os.) population are taught. (Hear, hear, and loud c ts is This -duty is not willingly performed by Protes t t r to this country, and as yet Romanists have not po" re ` ce ise insist upon its performance. The instruction theY.,. 0 11 keeps them ready however, as soon as opportunr)J serve. Of course they deny that they have tion, notwithstanding this suspicious instruction inset:leers with the authority of their church. To avow the its es' while protestant England has full power to frustratessles; ecution, would be obviously impolitic in the highest al de , but to deny the design and swear to the denial; by si e ,, to nials so attested to lull England into security ; grad u al' s of encroach upon England's sinews of power; to ge t . s s Vuli" , the faithful upon her decks, and daughters of the fa' in s ac , , her cabins, and watch the favourable moment to cessful mutiny, to spike her guns, to massacre therieroetstlics3/! crew, and carry the costly prize in triumph into a i: is sich any suc iinenteten,l port,—this this is worthy—this is the achievensePr ss erS shall obtain the gold ring and the scarlet robe ; 3° v s tbe step towards this great condemnation, the treasugooitli church is open ; and if of those steps requir e ha s ttel l i falsehood, perjury, poison, the ready produce of C on tinued sury is plenary indulgence. (Loud and long ° I :, sisi , cheering.) We are in no *ay surprised therefore, ' o t he that what is taught in the Romish College, is denie d "astse British parliament, solemnly and upon oath denied- fbe e must confess unfeigned surprise that Englishmen causs„oee soft, as to believe what a prisoner at the bar says, i s n. s 7;ose; tion to documents found upon his person, or in " l s •sessa l It is an undoubted truth that Romanists claim u l oi der dominion for the Holy See, that they are taught to s e t P OP conquest lawful and right, where they have neve r Yo, P . sessed, and resumption a duty, when it can be sa ~ ,,ssea ercised, where they have previously possessed, but ha t : v est° dispossessed. Nov, if there be any thing which dea e m as s " .name of political priyilege, it is the lawful and nea ss c e tes ral session of property ; and I would ask how van p f d sule and Romanists enjoy in this point permanent u" is st b e equality of political privilege? Similar seasoning mcstersl applied to various other branches of the Rornish ~t„. isi cii', and try it where you will, you will find that it is t"! ;Sao lesis , si possible to keep it balanced in political or ecc ; ti ts , equality with Protestantism.. Its aim is supremacY,tsePosno supremacy avowedly, but so working as to make comeet supremacy \ co-extensive with human fears and bunsaiL s e e ence, yes universal and unquestioned supremacy it t tu;sl) a° Rome is the soul of the system. (Hear.) Equalitttereoveiret'ilt,if, excommunicated heretic would be treason agsinst I of the Vicar of Christ. Equality ! Why, sir, wh e ,„ s soi °:, Romish system is unchecked by outward eircunissver iti prudence demanding , caution and patience ; whef e eti ssi" ,, t j il allowed to shew its inward and real self, not onlY L o 1 ,04 out of the question, but even toleration. As a tu ° ` — t se a ° of this, look at the coronation oath prepared for sits s q'l victorious Queen of Spain. Compared with the "estoil ranny of the despot Carlos, the Queen's party are, ;oo vat / as the friends of liberty ; yet hear how the corona" st e 6 1 . prescribed by the charter runs. "I, N•, by 14 "tild , God and the constitution of the Spanish, swear tY fe d th mighty and the holy Evangelists, that I will de iis ' 9 af'f Catholic, Apostolic, Roman religion, without toter° p ore' other in the kingdom. So help me od, and be tiq 'tf 0 110 11 .: anti if not, may God be my judge." Take also t!ie Lout als, ing passage from the answer of the University 11 rylit sS I t ; to Joseph (! !) Emperor of Austria, as given hY s „ 0 :6 1 „,,, the Belgic Revolution, The Emperor was " i '7',"i;et'," extend civil tolerance to Protestants, bat the t''', Pr . ' learned in the theology of their celebrated Profe ss ic °- o rd 3 A . i f then not long dead, answered his Majesty in thes e dt "'d h ire ' 7 . 1 " Tolerance would be the source of dissentious , , a rega ~,,t interminable discords, because the Catholic relgio ,g o der; , all heretics without distinction as victims devoted to perdition." (This observation of the speaker Prtili;ose.);l thrill of indignation and dread through the 11° d er en d ii Again I ask (continued the rev. gentleman) is l' r . ss es equality of political privilege practicable a ss i ilistsst is not without good cause and abundant evide u 'ja ev t be affirm, there can be no political tranquillity, exc e s tP or i a it the supremacy of Rome which leaves her no rivl"'„,t o itli s ,e, hopelessness of Rome which leaves her no opP° l% ; ciao is between these two that Englishmen have now Cati is s , If we had to. determine between keeping Roma ine itt 'pl in hopeless exclusion from British power t and liy o is : O t s, quil political equality with them ; there is not a s ta „ ,(0 us who would advocate exclusion for its own sat''' pesc e • t il hear.) On the contrary, we would delight in tu s In' e i , o f opportunities for religious argument, afforded to ss lie, s equality. But when we see and know that real el: se so c ii e , o permanent design, as well as present possession'e bet'' o d out of the question, and that we have to deterrailltsiofsi,ser: the evil of excluding them now before equality is atoori afte r the greater evil of being excluded by them veil ` odt ° ar we cannot hesitate of two evils to choose the lessersl sie, supremacy of one kind or other being inevitable, ' tie d To termined to retain our dearly bought, and highlYgo O A for testantism in the ascendant. (Hear, hear.) ' , y e. , the reasons, good and manifold, which might be as s t s t „d this preference, I will at present state but this oue'assel ' e t, testant ascendancy is favourable, and Papal asc e hale IS to the rights of conscience, the 'Ebert of private' ce• lean and the consequent progress of i n q uir y and intelitgaetensele, proof of this I will content myself at present wit h s s tile, sr to the still unrescinded Index Expurgatorius, B"speee,, guage of the present Pope, as they are given in 8 4 .- fig iii.oef livered last June at a Protestant Association M"` l t se g e st , land. The meeting was held in Elgin Church , „ o cle s fo st was the Rev. W. Shanks, who said,—" I will, in's-sent the briefly call your attention to the fact, that the Pr` - s scel li al has enunciated opinions which evince that he a i s os I se most intolerant sentiments in any of the q uotatt h oe 0 0 made, and of the bloodiest persecutions whi ch o r 'l a si' waged against religion and liberty. In the letter a nd i 4 1 0 published after he got upon the Papal chat? , „ a t - o pti ° A nously dated on the festival of the Virgin's -as s ; ae s vt* calls ' liberty of conscience an erroneous doetritlicb is: 0 1 ; 1 1 a most, pestilential error.' Then the press, w" is the et , instrumental of evil, but which also under God , S ea e s' palladium of our liberties—the press, and let the t l y d o t! of the press note this—is blamed as promoting libefficioo, science ; ' hitherto tends that worst and never 0; sis li sio be execrated and detested liberty of the press;, , 's l° 1 0 plains of being thereby inundated with ` bad boo S - 50 ger i lle size,' but big with evils, ' breathing a maledic t l cir i silli face of the earth.' (Hear, hear.) What roe Jo ? . Psi,' Pope propose for these ` big evils,' these ' bad "°° (' l! 'e confuting them no doubt. No, no ! Far othe, s e i , rhis s idi hath been the dicipline of the church in exterpati",°mo;dicl of bad books , . even as far back as the times of tbl, I V! who, we read, committed a great number of b s ." ° o ii Jr to the flames. (Acts xix.) 0 sagacious Pon e, riselejsr::j Bishop ! 0 admirable interpreter of Scriptu s t i e s ' s (it' s mistake the magicians of Ephesus for the skee's"` o ,ll t!' , o s l (Loud cheers.) Bethink thyself again. Wh e d thsee f o l ? books n , ar a e n b d u r t n h e e d , m th s e t r e ew i o l f l h i e n i n g o u n i e t y l . ejt t ( odef : e o : tlro th s e ti ri cr v t :hivs But, Mr. Chairman y , I ry must add, therei ß s : of suppressing the books hated at Rome . -Pa ilia know well the index of prohibited boolis.ie tr o i s l the elegant Addison, the philosophic 1 4°,_ c r l'es 7:',0, 1 lime Milton, and the classic historian of Ci' s t he I; pee, many other famous authors, are registered it! Ariu s( ' Os , books forbidden to be read. (Loud cheers.) go b Very' would address myself again to the English li,h cai prl s i ,d it, can you really accomplish equality of P° lit p i swi t , :i i'P's Can you manage to turn the millions who a r sn ",,sea 00 0 , V cates of Papal supremacy, into willing and ''' so hl h a se'ist: cipators in Protestant equality ? Can you t ° " ; „ s liet r sa,' fr r, tare at your will? subdue passions and pr e r - of 11 Pi; Ile the magic of concession eradicate the desis 0 so' ,11 0 , ment? If you think you can, and thereur"aobeVss equality, all I can say is, that your liberalism (evoststielio, only by your modesty, and that the man W ll° ; I s flee ) AI I vince you, exhibits about as much m odes, is o, l ,itr,s' (Hear, hear.) But if you admit that equalitY, T all' e feltst practicable, that your fondly imagined politicsofsa/iie . 4 . not be realized, and that in common with Y" ur j 1 : 143/ t ea creatures you must choose between evils, thol e tos is e 4s and consistently expect your co-operation in t h , o,o o ; s ic or rather the recovery of Protestant ascendan,c) the ' i s ss cheering.) This can be accomplished only 1 -' ) ; , Ott 10 tion into practical power of the slumbering, h f u t se I ;tie s sit i God, not extinguished, Protestant spirit ° the .Vet England. It is plain now, that whatsoecee.ss bes s o', that the parliament will become. If the na l : n( 1 5 v.„ 0 0 5 6r roughly Protestant, so will the parliaments:S-ocinsys' laws. Join, then, in forming Protestant fi os ., V I s ia I P, branches of associations. Employ your leiss e .; 's , culating Protestant information. Give PO` so fu" s sil, ment, and support to poor Roman Catholics II see seif e Y t leave the thraldom of their Priests, if they COd of 511 ,, f t ' l O l ., ae p xr e tp e fe t ucl o t f eadn a dt l o i v u e ns l r i h h eel o ew o n d ttihn b eg y rp l e i e o sro n sl e eu s ct t ui ot i ni n o d no u sf s , t a r Y ai:era , d a° : escrth : ov, o rf. :tit la iwy sl ,s i tt 0 0 : 1 e 1 to, have had time to imbibe the consisteneY A s -o'''(C 9 SfS inspiring n a g re th n e i m an wi y t s h u h eh op ; e a t n y d et othueryPniroatyestant P. ; cl• tlJ e . e 4 tip ' s st S el i os r ‘lva l nat r n e d j m o d i o c ivs e emco t o uer s na a tg y i nw th gh a itc t oh w th i t t ei h n i f n etw t h h ew e nh la oh s a t ( l h i, e e r e l ) c e ie f ,tie T,i,: , were e ' t og hi oe nj pot bi8"0 IP ' stimulate it, has assumed a new aspect, a is in s a, rfe i and an expansiveness which be to be . . i c oos S li itt !I / 1 0 ; Within the last few months new Assocm : s o , s af own have been formed in Derby, in E l e's th e Vl Several other important places are design ln ; in. e a' ,o beeninvited to go to the formation of the' l ol' vet o in She ffi eld, and Bradford. They are nosY!; i ssrer e i tisi ( J in London, Bristol, Bath, Hereford, Gu!„ l ,, at to° l- 41 Liverpool, Wigan, Warrington, Northw l : r elt e t 'sea; Manchester. You are invited to ledge ) p ' s r e w s s o ,: s lo in the formation of others. The rev. ge ll 7" 00' ; f el the third resolution, and resumed his Oa' , t y a Pia repeated applause. sonel s a eu iSriAll JOHN CLARE, Esq. (of Warrington) I res rss, osi a isiss tion. He said that he had been bcirn anu so ui s u,soo•Y?si testant faith, and so long as he lived, he ea re*" Os i s' his last breath, the principles of the r eforal t froil l iel sr ty and cheers.) His principles he had lear n t] , fi e siO o sy anti on the Book of God they were h s as f, e stiats' S t 'sfi t ,( and happy in having an opportunity I , i ' i4 e fl e . ° p r r 0 t e v ' it 9: ment to the cause, and however humb l e s 0 '", Oils,' s an s still there was no one who had the interes o oes Oil s ' V at heart more than himself. He felt ho; l i etn , so bo b pr , 1 ,1 lected to second the motion which hati„ t on Iss, re s/ s si eloquently proposed by the reverend ge"`,Thestesso° (I? ceded him. As long as he was able to fi rs t so sr i - i st e ve l i'd tion Society, he would be among the ' 1 1 , r ;130 41 , 1 he f t elP and if necessary to spend the last pennY "ci that the • e i i its objects. (Loud cheers.) He wishe 'e ach .gr l ib e er i of the reformers where more widely c ircUL tis •isto o ci ii si 4 „l , the support of those high in power, bw' sp ists.Siseiitli / state that the throne was surrounded bY P ho ttr i ./ v .:,, ; o ',d l ministration tainted with it also. (He ar ' s iotO l ea l s i so ls / 1 that before long the spirit of Englishmen t he s th e _sre l t& and that they would throw overboarst, all p le," th e pr i ',,ie Church and State, and that men of nrinclily for til . e A si , moral,—would succeed those who unhaPE s se a ssci r. r of the state and the welfare of society, ' co oe toI I S I ea ses t , is e r moment invested with power. The sP r of " 5 loud cheers. siseet"esaal/st in ils The Rev. WILLIAM HUNTINGDON, k- o f ut ilyt . o ,‘ ,o Manchester,) next proposed a vOte s tial r s ' ili re ,o'S . rt i.l Boroughreeve, for his able and inl i a is y n'T o su e s7 ~ chair, observing that however much t s 1 p 0 ii tii r e . e o f ,i, unavoidable absence of the Earl of R°" e 'it, a.' s 'tlieV i s o l , calculated than their excellent chairman it sel' h e 13 (:1 0 0 Fr,• his absence,—no man was better titted—c o dice ii o f , s h ~,d 4 1 ~: to his private character or to the o;s s. 1 -1 7i t e ' ~ss town. (Hear, and cheers.) The -fl ' e s' c led ` i" 4 e9 minister of the Scotch Church, s ec t . st ° o 'ent ~ 0' which having been carried by a eclanu,"; s lli I s s aISOS/ The CHAIRMAN acknowledged the cu t : s l . o o, e` e 'ref;i% gratulated them on meeting on the nee , Th ss ee , 1 1 ; : ss s i cially assembling in such large nitru b • er i;i . sh s cu I li : ° it, 1 1l meeting, he said, must have proved a o secisiseP.A;vl : Ate a..,P. pi cation and delight to all who had ~ a n ie ~: ot 0 then separated, it being between ", as 0 . 1 .5 s Siels s During the proceedings a collection 1 ' to o p_P et io‘s u i u funds of the society, which that silo ine sro su i se is worthy of remark, that durin; ..o "rail intense interest was manifested, ana s u to a to any of the speakers, w hose eloq u ' peered to carry cenviotion to talt ' 1 ' "'PPe• 6 +(L w ill 11:er An kock p Ni .;;=, ~„t a \jo : f • to e , , t