The Press.
London, England, 1856-11-01 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

1034

tical side. The sentiments of the Quarterly
deserve special consideration.
In the first place, we are happy to find, as
far as those views of " the attitude " of the
Romanist Church at concerned, that the
Quarterly expresses its opinions in a most
decided manner. The reviewer, casting
his eyes into the vista of the future, sees
that " the present policy of the Church of
" Rome must eventually raise the question,
" which should be reserved for the last ex-
" tremity, of the competency of the Catholics
" for the discharge of political rights." He
dwells upon " the monstrous and unheard-1f
" extravagances to which Rome has recently
" pushed her theology," and he comments with
justifiable severity on her political transactions
in various parts of Europe.
_ _

On the internal conduct of the Roman
Catholic Church the reviewer is equally de-
cided. He alludes to " the quiet and delete-
" rious change which has passed in the mind
" of her who says that. she never changes."
On this point we must of ourselves remark
that by far the most extraordinary thing in the
present policy of Rome is that she has entered
on a course of provocation. Her own prece-
dents in favour of compromise she audaciously
tramples under foot. Not forty years have
passed away since the Court of Rome was
perfectly willing to concede to the English
Crown the power of a veto on the nomination
of the Romanist Bishops in Ireland. It was
ready to make that concession even without
any Concordat. In those days the Court of
Rome was perfectly ready to adopt conditional
emancipation, though its extravagant followers
in Ireland, excited by anti-British politicians,
refused to accept such a measure as Lord
Livnnvoor.'s Cabinet might have given.
But now the Papacy has changed entirely.
The " attitude" is aggressive, atical, and
propagaud. It has entered upon an entirely
novel course of action, and seems to think
that it can never he called to account by the
rest of Christendom. But in thinking so, it
entirely miscalculates. We are not asleep in
England, and we have no idea of allowing our
national institutions to fall.
Yet in defending them we must take care
not to play our adversary's game. and we re-
joice therefore to see that the Quarterly Re-
view holds the same opinions about Maynooth
which we have placed before our readers. It
sees that the progress of events has " a ten-
" dency to give a certain amount of force and
" success to Mr. SPOONER and his friends," but
it contemplates that " success " (which we
must say is more apparent than positive) with
"serious misgivings for the permanence of
" the present ecclesiastical establishment in
" Ireland." Calling the attention of our
readers to this coincidence of opinion between
the Quarterly and ourselves, we shall now pass
on to another part of the article.
The reviewer refers to the new course of
" direction " introduced by the Church of
Rome, which he asserts to be "alive and
"active in England at this moment ;" and he
speculates on the momentous changes which
must ensue in England "if (to use his own
words) the domestic relations, if the conjugal
" and paternal affections of the educated, or if
" any of the high-born subjects of her Ma-
" jesty " be rendered subservient, by this new
" direction " introduced by those whom the
Quarterly designates as " the myrmidons" of
the Papacy.
On so highly delicate and so extremely a
serious subject it is to be regretted that the
Quarterly has been so brief. It is compara
tively easy for the journalist and the prac•
tical politician to deal with external acts, and
with recognised policy, but it is difficult,
though not impossible, to decide upon how
far one can grapple with the internal rela-
tions of any community of religionists. This
new system of " direction " is, indeed, most
formidable. It is no secret that the " paternal
affections " of the late brilliant editor of the
Quarterly were cruelly outraged by ministers
of the Church of Rome; and the pain which
that eminent person felt in his late hours at
seeing a beloved child taken from her father's
home, ani kept in the custody of strangers,
was stamped upon his countenance in " the
"hieroglyphics of an eternal sorrow." Nor
Call WO forget that the Quarterly has abundant

grounds for its allusions to " the high-born
" subjects of her Majesty," in relation to the
" direction " introduced by the Papacy. Upon
this peculiar topic we are aware that there
appeared sotne precipitate, though well.
meatt,remarke in some of our contemporaries.
There is one point on which we must supply
an omission of the Quarter/y. Reasoning on
the supposition that the Church of Rome will
not recede from its present " attitude," the
Quarterly concludes its article with these re-
uua•kable words :

In that unhappy case we venture to predict that one
amongst the main conditions exacted by the British people
from their rulers, of whatever political complexion, will be
this, that they shall take care that the privileges of sharing
in the administration of a free government will be ex•
tended only to the free, and that the Homan Pontiff, though
he might have co religionists, shall not have serfs or slaves
in the great council of Queen Victoria and of the British
empire.

We are justified in calling these words
remarkable as an emphatic statement of the
Quarterly in relation to the insidious hp-
proaches of the Church of Rome. Yet, strong as
arc those words, the Quarterly holds with our-
selves that to give battle to the Papacy on
Maynooth would be a bad policy for the pre-
sent time. What course, therefore, should be
followed ?

That is a question which shall in au early
number be considered in our columns, as we
have not space to enter upon it to-day. In
the meanwhile we must observe that when the
Quarterly, in the last extract, talks of rulers of
" whatever political complexion," it omits to
state what we now supply, that the Liberal
" rulers " have already failed egregiously in
dealing with the Papacy. Mr. MACAULAY, in
his last volume, admits that the Whigs were
mistaken about Catholic Emancipation, and
Lord JOHN RUSSELL chalked up " No Popery,"
and then ran away.
Besides, the Parliamentary organisation of
the Liberals is unfitted for dealing with the
Catholic question revived. The Roman
Catholic Irish have helped the Whigs to office ;
the commercial Radicals do nut care about
religious policy; and the Dissenting interest
is too often exaggerated, and is sometimes
factious in its course. We are convinced that
the Conservative party can alone supply
" the rulers," and can sustain them in power,
when once England has determined on taking
increased precautions against the Papacy,
which entered on a term of unrestrained
power in 1829 because Emancipation (contrary
to •OP advice of HENRY GRATTAN) was con-
ceded without any securities at all.

ANOTHER QUESTION OF IRISH
FINANCE.

WE have of late thought it somewhat remark-
able that even those who seem to wish to
make Irish ecclesiastical finance the great
question of the time, persistently overlook
one of the most important portions of that
subject—the small grant made annually to
the ministers of the General Assembly, and
other Presbyterian bodies in Ireland, known
in the estimates as the Regium Donum.
While the endowment of the College of
Maynooth was placed by Sir ROBERT PEEL on
a footing of permanency, avowedly to avoid
an annual contest, the pittance allowed to the
Presbyterian ministers of Ireland forms the
yearly means for Mr. EDWARD MIALL and
similar gentlemen to advocate that very
compulsory plan called " the voluntary
system." In the very last session an
acrimonious debate on the subject of the
Iteyium Donum ended by the item being
allowed only by a majority of two
or three, and a similar scene may be
expected in April. Now this is indecent,
unfair, and utterly impolitic. Can any rea-
son be conceived (even putting the mat-
ter on the lowest ground) why the Irish
Presbyterian population should be placed by
Government on a worse footing than the
Roman Catholics? The claims of the Presby-
terians differ toto ado from any that have ever
been devised on behalf of the persons who
adhere to the Church of Rome in Ireland. In

SATURDAY,

the great " Plantation of Ulster," described by
Lord BACON as "of all works the most royal
" and honourable," the great body of the
planters were of the Reformed Church of
Scotland: The provisions of that plantation
contemplated the Presbyterians as recipients
along with the Established Chinch of the
allowances for schools and churches. The
plantation (with the exception of a few of
ELIZABETH'S officers who had followed BLOUNT
and CAREW) was a Scottish and Presbyterian
plantation, and that form of Pretstantisin pre•
veiled chiefly in the province of Ulster.
With these Presbyterians came the minis-
ters of their religion, who obtained great hold
on the minds of the people—a task riot per-
haps difficult at a time when State papers
prove that the non-resident rectors of the
Established Church had fur their curates
Romish friars. Twenty-five years after this
plantation came the troublous times of
CHARLES 1., when the Irish Presbyterians,
like those of the same faith in England, op-
posed the final acts of Caomwimis usurpation
in such a mode as to provoke MILTON'S attack
on the " proud Presbyters of Belfast," who hind
dared to "resolve " that the death of CHARLES
was a " murder so foul and horrible that the
" records of no Christian nation loath the
" like." During the Irish wars of the Com-
monwealth, and especially after the expedition
of LESLEY, Earl of Leven, the Presbyterians
became very generally the incumbents of the
parishes of Ulster. This arrangement was over-
thrown at the Restoration. But the house of
Stuart was doomed, and amongst the first to re-
sist " Popery and arbitrary power" were the
Presbyterians of Ulster. The defence of Lon-
donderry (which has recently been related with
a power and eloquence that it is unfortunate
were not founded on better information) was
so great a service to the Commonwealth that
its first acknowledgment was the grant of the
first &giant Donuni by WiLtuot 111. from his
camp at Hillsborough. Since that period
tardy and even niggardly additions have been
made to this grant as the numbers of the
Presbyterians increased. The Irish and the
Imperial Parliament have both acknowledged
the right and its meritorious origin, and ho
who compares Ulster with Connaught, or even
Belfast with Dublin, will not say that this
very small gift is bestowed on an unworthy
race of men. The Presbyterians accept
it, because it is given without any stipulation
that in ecclesiastical matters they are to be
subject to the State. The Dublin Court of
Queen's Bench cannot command any Presby-
tery or Synod to do any ecclesiastical act,
and the Irish Presbyterians acknowledge the
Privy Council in their capacity of citizens
alone. With the arguments of Mr 1M lALL, as
to the propriety of the Regium Dolma, we
have nothing to do. He says the Irish
Presbyterians are a body rich enough to
support their own ministers ; and that is
so, as well it need to be, for the Irish
Presbyterians, after a voluMary contribu-
tion to their own clergy, pay cheerfully the
tithes of the Established Church. But
this Regium DOllll7ll is claimed as an an-
cient right. It is held by the Presbyterians,
and admitted by the Parliament, to be the
discharge of a bounden duty by the State ;
and so long as that is the fact, it ought, in
common fairness to the Presbyterians of Ire
land, to be made a permanent charge on the
Imperial revenue.

IbilllMMlliimme