The Express.
London, England, 1848-04-18 00:00:00

Not satisfied with this, he takes scripture into hie
mouth, and perverts the words of the religion of love
into an expression of diabolical hatred. After quot-
ing Lwex, to the effect that the rick man clothed in
purple and fine linen was " doomed to the torments
of hell," he expects his readers to keep that fact in
mind, adding, " Believe me, it will prove the best
and most certain balm this world can offer you."
The frivolity and imbecility of Mr. CHARLES
COCHRANE hate hitherto saved him from ridicule; he
was below it. The reckless malignity and utter cal-
, loussess even to the sentiment of religion which he
now evinces, render him too revolting an object to be
laughed at. He needs only to be shown in his true
figure to make even the most destitute and desponding
of outcasts shrink from his contact. The politicians
of the working classes have too often allowed
themselves to be misled by that aristocratic
sentiment which in some shape or another per-
vades all English minds. Between two candidates
for leadership in exclusively working-class move-
ments, they are sure to prefer the "gentleman,"
however questionable his character and capacity, to
the artisan, however shrewd and of approved honesty.
Instances of this snohbish propensity must present
themselves in crowds to the mind of every reader. We
believe that no small portion of the absurdities and
violences of which numbers of the extreme democracy
have from time to time made themselves guilty, have
been owing to the servility which prompted such
choices. Your genteel demagogues are, in ninety-nine
cases of a hundred, men who, having lost caste in their
own class, seek refuge,in the bitterness of their hearts,
among those with whom they have no real sympathy.
For one Sir CliAni.Es WOLsELEY, or Major CART-
wRIGHT, you may find a hundred CHARLEs Com-
RANEs. The zeal which is born of spite, kindled by
deserved 0121.'iquy, an unholy zeal; which is sure to
work for ill. Such men make thew followers mere
tools of their own spleen. The attempt to collect an
ill-disposed mob around Whitehall on Easter Monday
is so transparent a device of this dishonest kind, that
we anticipate lasting good from drawing the attention
of the honest and industrious working men to it.

AT the present crisis of Irish affairs much interest
is naturally felt concerning the sentiments of that
powerful body—the catholic priesthood. It is not a
little remarkable that very different opinions are pro-
pounded by apparently well-informed parties con-
cerning the spirit of the priests. We have been at
some pains to learn, as far as possible, the mode in
which the present crisis is viewed by the Irish catho-
lic clergy, and we will briefly lay before our readers
the conclusions at which we have arrived.

having been for nearly a quarter of a crltury not
only the priests but the tributes of the Iri-h people,
the catholic clergy arc by no means prepared to abdi-
cate the political functions which they have
wielded with so muc't energy. They are not
ready to relapse into a private station, and to forego
the pleasures of being prominent in the public eye,
and powerful over the local politicians of their dis-
tricts. They are not at all ready to acknowledge the
principle so repeatedly put forward by Mr. T. F.
:VIEAGIIER, that "the power of the priesthood was
not to go beyond the sanctuary." In the recognition
of such a principle they read the downfall of their
political power, and by the instinct natural to all cor-
porate bodies, they recoil from a system of politics
which in their opinion would reduce them before
their congregations to the level of a presbyterian
clergy. A sense of self-preservation, therefore, re-
strains them from any association with the Young
Inlanders, though a few eccentric priests have been
heedless enough to join the confederation.
Nor is it merely that the Irish priests are afraid of
the principles of the Young Irelandern. They base a
very natural dislike to being made catspaws of in the
service of crackbrained enthusiasts like Mr. MIT-
CHELL and his comrades, or talentless politicians like
Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN, who have neither the eloquence
nor energy of themselves to attract the notice, or com-
mand the sustained attention, of the public. Who
UT SMITH O'BRIEN and his companions in absurdity,
that a great and powerfui religious magistracy like
the Irish priesthood should cast their /Bats over them,
and make common cause with the mischievous persons
who have not only violated the laws of the land, but out-
raged every sense ofpropriety ? To be sure the priesthood
zealously and earnestly co-operated with DANIEL.
O'CONNELL, but he had fairly- entitled himself to their
gratitude by his transcendent service to the catholics ;
by the bold and brilliant exploits he had performed
in the public cause; and by his unrivalled success as
a popular leader. Nor was that all. Numbers of
the priesthood were under weighty personal obliga-
tions to him. To several amongst them he had proved
himself the friend in private life, the able counsellor
in difficult affairs, and the wary guide in times of
peril to the catholics. No wonder therefore that
such a man—so variously endowed with all the quali-
ties that secure popularity—throughout his public
life was sustained by the cordial help of the
priesthood. But what services, either to Ire-
land, or to the catholies, or to the priest-
hood, have the silliness of SMITH O'BRIEN,
the malignity of MITCIIFLL, or the balderdash of
:MEAGHER effected ? Would a thousand SMITH
O'BRIENs supply the place of an O'CONNELL? Or
would the fustian of :MEAGHER, if he were to spout
to the end of the century, serve Ireland as much as
a single one of the witty, hearty, pathetic, and
thoroughly national speeches of that mighty tribune,
whose talents cast lustre on the Irish name ?
The Irish priests are averse, therefore, to giving
their assistance to a ridiculous set of upstart
demagogues—insignificant by their talents, though
notorious for their follies, and dangerous by their
political vices. 'fhey shrink from being made
the tools of vain-glorious leaders. To such an extent
does this prevail amongst them, that they are not even
ready to back up Mr. J. O'CONNELL in his anxiety to
occupy the position filled by his great father. Nothing
but the fact of his being the son of the O'CONNELL
could induce them to give even the reluctant and
limited aid which some of them have afforded to the
member for Limerick in his not very successful
strivings to gain popularity. Thus it may be said
that neither of the parties who aspire to lead the po-
pulace of Ireland have the confidence of the priest-
hood. But at the same time, from the circumstances
of the country, and from the peculiarity of their own
position, they cannot abstain from public life. It will
not answer to leave a people in such a state of
imperfect civilisation as the Irish without the
aid of those leaders to whose guidance they have
been hitherto accustomed. Hence many of the
priests in various parts of Ireland are beginning to
attend repeal meetings, and address their hearers ac-
cording to the stereotyped pattern of "loyal national
, repeal" orations. They declaim about the necessity
of union amongst all sections of repeaters. They spurt
• out same hard words against the government—pro-
fess their indignation at the suspicion of disloyalty,
and proclaim their sympathy with the Irish people.
Alluding to continental changes, they bid the people
. take hope, but in the same breath warn them against
spies and secret associations. They leave the repeal
cause just as they found it, and are not at all prepared
to advise the bloody initiative necessary for carrying
it further.
Whether the course pursued by the priesthood is
the wisest they could follow at the present time is a
question which we will not discuss now. We content
ourselves with describing the state of feeling amongst
them. Upon the peaceful disposition of the over-
whelming majority of the Irish priests we believe
that confidence may be placed. But we are com-
pelled to observe that amongst many of the catholic
clergy there is still an unwholesome hankering after
"agitation„" for its own sake. Very many
amongst them are misinformed enough to be-
lieve that repeal might be carried by agitation,
as well as the Catholic Relief Bill. Accustomed
to look at Irish politics from an exclusively
local point of view, they do not comprehend the'
countless differences between repeal and catholic
emancipation. They overlook the material distinc-
tions arising from the unity of the Britiah empire,
and the impossibility of rival legislatures in one king-
dom. They forget that emancipation was not a
national question in any proper sense; that it was
merely one of religious toleration, resting on the
same basis as the civil freedom of the protestant dis-
senters. Not being very conversant with our political
history, they overlook the fact that in some shape
or other every first-class British statesman,
front CHATHAM down to CANNING, was in
favour of catholic emancipation, while not a
single respectable English name can be cited in
favour of repeal. The error of thus confounding the
feasibility of repeal with the concession of emancipation
prevails amongst too many of the catholic clergy,
owing to the uncommon pains taken by O'CONNELL
to spread that erroneous idea. But many of the