The Sun.
London, England, 1822-06-07 00:00:00

WILLS.

The subject of WILLS is of so much import-
ance in every civilized Country that the sub-
joined Documents are interesting to the commu-
nity at large, as well as to the individual whose
pretensions they immediately affect :

The MEMORIAL of the UNDERSIGNED, addressed to each
Member of the Commons' house of Parliament of the Em-
pire of Great Britain, &c. &c.

STATETH,—
That about the commencement of the second month called
February, in the year 1821, thy Memorialist prepared a Peti-
tion to the Commons' House of Parliament, which he intended
to have presented as early as possible in the then Session:
That thy Memorialist was actuated in this proceeding by a
principle of conscience, and that the petition was framl on
public grounds, from a desire of promoting the ends of distri-
butive justice.
That thy Memorialist transmitted a copy of the Petition to
a Member of Parliament, (who is a Barrister,) requesting him
to present it to the House as early in that Session as possible,
and give it his earnest support : and that to this request the
said Member promptly favoured thy Memorialist with a reply,
stating that he had read the petition " with interest and attention;"
and after making sonic comments respecting the numerous d?.
tails it comprised, he expressed himself " sorry to throw any
impediments in the way of presenting any petition." The
prayer he said was perfectly unobjectionable, and proposed,tlemt
if thy Memorialist sent a petition expressed in more general
terms, containing that prayer, he should feel himself bound to
offer it to the consideration of the House.
That thy Memorialist prepared two other drafts of a petition,
exactly conformable to the said Member's suggestions, each of
them containing the above-named prayer, and sent the two
copies for him to choose which to 'refer to the House, and re-
quested he would present the petition at his earliest convenience,
and return the copy he did not use.
That thy Memorialist not hearing from the aforesaid Mem-
ber, and the public journals not giving any account of the peti-
tion being presented to the House, at the end of about three
weeks thy Memorialist was induced to write to him, and repeat-
ed his wish that it should be presented as early as possible.—
That to this letter thy Memorialist received no reply. And
that, in consequence of being thus kept in daily expectation and
in great suspense, he wrote three other letters to the said Mem-
ber, at about the same intervening distance, expressing his
anxiety, and again repeated his desire that the petitioti should
be presented. That the said Member did not condescend to
make any reply to any one of thy Memorialist's letters, and that
the Session closed without his petition being presented.
That thy Memorialist wrote again to the said Meniber after
the Session had closed, and desired the copies might be return-
ed forthwith. That of this letter also no notice was taken ; and
that up to the present time, the 25th of the third month called
March, 1822, thy Memorialist bath had no, communication with
him verbally or written, nor bath he returned the copies of the
petitions, or deigned to answer a note of application for them
addressed to him by a personal friend of thy Memorialist.
That the annexed copy of the engrossed. Petition is in sub-
stance the same as each of those two which thy Memorialist
prepared agreeably to the suggestions of the aforesaid Member,
with the addition only of a few paragraphs, and that it con.
taineth the same prayer as chat which was so unequivocally ap-
proved of by the said Member.
That just prior to and since the commencement of the pre-
sent Session of Parliament, thy Meinorialist hath made:appli-
cation to no less than five several Members of the Commons'
House of Parliament, to request they would present tho,Peti-
tion, of which the annexed is a copy. That each of them re.
ceived thy Memorialist's application with the greatest readiness.
,That subsequently some made one excuse, and some another ;
some, that it would do me no good; others, that it was the bu-
siness of the lawyers ; another, that it was not a fit subject for
the House to legislate upon ; another, that thy Memorialist
must seek redress in the inferior Courts, &c. &c. &c.
That thy Memorialist explained to iose Members severally,
that he looked for no personal benefit from the Commons' House
of Parliament, and submitted that the prayer of the Petition
proved the contrary, and showed, that he petitioned on public
grounds ; and he contended that neither lawyers, nor the Courts
of Law, were our law-givers; but the Administrators of the
Law ; and that, in effect, he asked the guardians of our rights
only that the common law, the law of right reason, might not
he superseded by the example of his illegally decided case, or
the statute law violated and infringed upon in future, and
stated that lee was about to seek personal redress for his deeply
aggravated, unprecedented wrongs elsewhere.
,'hat none of those Members above alluded to, objected to
any one paragraph of thy Memorialist's Petition, or to the
prayer attached to it, though thy Monoriiliit proposed to make
any alteration (if they wished so) that he' could consistently
do ; and that each of them agreed to hig proposition, namely,
that it was the province of the House to decide whether they
should entertain his Petition, Or reject it, and not the province
of any individual Member.
That two of the aforesaid Members had actually engaged to
present the Petition, and each of them had twice fixed the time
and gave thy Memorialist an order of admittance into the
gallery. That one of those two, after a lapse of about two
weeks, declined to'redeem his pledge, alleging in excuse that
he was going to leave London for a month, and proposed that
thy Memorialist should commit it to the care of some other
Member who attended more frequently, and who knew more of
the forms of the House than himself did. And that when thy
Memorialist called on the said Member for the Petition he
,
found it was left at Brooks's Club House !! ! , .
That the other aforesaid Member, who had also twice'fixed
the time for presenting the Petition, and whom in the first in-
stance thy Memorialist saw in the House with the Petition in
his hand, seemingly prepared to offer it, left his seat juat plior
to his name being called by the Speaker, and the Petition
was not presented. That thy Monorialist soon after con-
ferred with him on' the subject, when he fixed a asscond
time to present it. And that some days shortly after, the said
Member came up to thy Memorialist in the lobby, and
told him " he had presented -the petition on 'the day lie last
saw thy Memorialist," (which was the twelfth of the. third
month called March,) that the petition was not printed, but
ordered to lie on the table."
That thy Memorialist's petitioning cause is the caiist`of the
public—a cause which thy Memorialist bath reason ;to believe
so much occupies the minds of that part of the public who are
more immediately interested in the just testamentary disposi-
tion of property, that, had it been consistent for him tn'solicit
subscribers, and he could conscientiously have joined in the
common forms of petitioning, he might have procured some
thousand signatures to his petition. - • '
That in consequence of thy Memorialist haiing been kept in
great agitation of feeling, anxiety and suspense, from being ob.
structed in and deprived of the free exercise of his common
right of petitioning the Commons' House of Parliament 'for the
long space of upwards of twelve months, and his petition hav-
ing been eventually presented after much delay; but not order-
ed to be printed, thy Memorialist is induced to adopt this mode
of bringing the subject of his petition before that august assem-
bly ; in the hope, and he cloth with all due deference humbly
implore, that some Member of that legislative body, into whose
hands these may come, will be pleased to take these subjects
into his most serious consideration, both as it regards this Me-
morial and the annexed petition of his Memorialist, and par.
sue such measures as to his judgriment appear to be best calcu.
fated to prevent any such obstrnetions in future to the' free grid
prompt exercise of the right of petitioning in general. And
that he will be pleased to make a motion in hit place, that thy
Memorialist's petition be taken into the consideratloh of the
House, and that a Committee be appointed to exam hie into
the Civil,Statute,and Common Law of Wills, respeceinge_gents,
or other persons who may be employed to prepare Wills,
making themselves heirs to Testators, from the first institution
of the laws of our ancestors the Romans, and to revise-anti
clearly define the same, so as effectually to prevent the case
stated in thy Memorialist's Petition from becoming an esta-
blished precedent, that the example of that unprecedented
illegally decided case may not be suffered to supersede the
Civil Law—the Common Law of right reason and justice, or
violate or infringe upon the Statute Laws, as they may be
found now to stand.

That the subject of the annexed petition, and the mode of
the proceeding adopted by the Memorialist, may be novel, but
that thy Memorialist humbly trusts that neither will be the less
attended to on that account, either by the individual Member
into whose hands these may come, or by the Commons' Ilouse
of Parliament, or from their coming from an humble indivi-
dual, whose views arc to endeavour to further the ends ;:f jus.
lice, and thereby discharge a duty to the public, dictated by
the principle of conscience,
That thy Memorialist bath caused these copies to be distrir
buted to the Members of the Commons' House of Parliament
indiscriminately, to extend of the limited number he hash po-
-Tided. And that he pledgeth himself (if permitted) to'be pre-
pared to prove the correctness of the facts of the'very brief state-
merit contained in this Memorial, and in the petition, to any
Member who may be pleased to favour him with an opportunity,
(Signed) EDWARD OLLIZT.
[The Petition to-tnorrowl•

TILE LONDON JOURNALS.

MIRACTS FROM THE DaILYc MORNING PAPERS,

June 7, 18'22.

[MORNING CHRONICLE.]
eve subjoin the Speech of the King of France—
(See THE SUN of this day)--on opening the Ses-
sion of the Chambers on Tuesday, of which we
received a copy yesterday by express, as well as
the Paris. Papers of that day.—A parade Docu-
ment of this description is seldom of much im-
portance—the present instance does not form an
exception. The language, with respect to the
East, is less confident than we should have ex-
pected, from the intelligence which we have re-
ceived'. The Sanitary Cordon could not of course
be described as any thing more than a precau-
tionaryineasure for the health of his good children.
This is, however, rather too glaring an insult to
our understandings, after
,the knowledge we al-
'ready possess of French intrigue in Spain.
In
despite of the evidence of every traveller, of every
party, as to the unpopularity of the Bourbons, the
whole population of -France are represented as
overflowing with zeal and devotedness to them.
,God-help the flatterers who could pen this, or
after-the manner in which the Lionese expressed
their indignation at the mockery of an Election
carried on in their presence, could talk of the small
number of the men who beheld with despair the
institutions which afford -a new support to the
Throne

[MORNING POST.]
It appears that the reason for convening the
French Chambers at so early a period,•is to
avoid recurring to those financial anticipations
which have been hitherto found necessary.—
During the last three or four Sessions it• has been
customary for the- Frenclolinistry, shortly after
the, opening, to demand a vole of credit for six
twelfths, or one Half of certain fixed taxes
paid the preceding year. By this means they
were enabled to raise a sufficient revenue for
the, current expences of the State, without
waiting to have the several items of the bud-
get discussed or modified by the Chambers.—
Besides the glaring inconveniences on the face
of-such a system, it betrayed so needy a trea-
sury as must have (though perhaps slightly)
depressed the public credit of France, and kept
down her pride among European nations. The
policy, therefore, of thus early convening the
hambers seems natural, even should no other
motive have dictated the measure. We can,
however, well conceive that the French Admi-
nistration find it wiser to give the ardent politi-
cians-of 'that country a free arena to exhibit and
evaporate their turbulence in, than to let it cur-
dle On their stomachs, and infect the choleric
pOrtiOn of the public with the same bad humour
during a long recess. In the oldest, best regu-
Wed,- and firmest Governments, experience has
preyed the utility of letting discontent vent it-
self where -the reason of the nation is collected to
neutralize its etTect, and where in the very effort
to enunciate his sentiments, a man may himself
,detect" their incorrectness. We can well con-
ceive that, under the present freedom of the
p*ess in France, reflections of this sort may have
suggested themselves to the French Ministry.

[THE TIMES.]

The Speech of the King of France, at the
oPening of, the Session of the Chambers, on Tues-
day; last, is extremely uninteresting. His ad-
dress to the same bodies on a similar occasion last
Noiember, was equally unin cumbered with mean-
ing-;--equally pregnant with nothing : but the
echo of the Chamber of Deputies to the Royal
NpOch, as the Address in answer to it is generally
calledi.-this echo varying widely, like the Irish
ettiV, from the original sound—expressed a great
(fall resounded throughout Europe, and drove
the Ministry - from their places. Such a re-
*apse- is not very likely on the present oc-
casion, if we can place reliance on the statements
-Which the royalist writers communicate, of the
aitditional success of the Ministry at the late
elections,. and the continued adherence of their
foiln6r supporters. It would be needless to
trouble oar readers with' the analysis of so
ichoCent a. document. On the two important
paints of the state of the negociations affecting
the east,. and the object of maintaining a strong
frirce,on_ the Pyrennean frontier, his Majesty's
declarations are satisfactory, or at leaSt they are
what might have been expected—that is, he. che-
rishes hopes of peace between Russia and Turkey,
and.' renounces the imputation of intending toin-
terfere•in the affairs of the Peninsula. The pre-
sent -Condition and future prospects of France are
drawn in• flattering colours, and nothing occurs to
ailOy the feeling of pleasure and of hope which
til4p but the late attempts at instirrec-
tfon, stud, the still unsubdued. efforts of incen-
diaries:.in the departments bordering on the
• •-. [NEW TIMES.]

The Speech of the King of France, on the
opening of the new Session, was received in Lon-
.'-yestrday, by` express, and produced a
fltiourable inipression on the Funds. Consols
bad opened in the morning at 808, but shortly
aftr the arrival of the express a large purchase
was madg to 'the extent of 400,0001. and the
Stock advanced to 80k, at which price it closed,
'faVoUrably for a further rise hereafter.
--2rhe Speech is plain and unpretending. It
states 'the "Pfosperous situation in which ,France
is placed, and urges a perseverance in that pru-
dene an;11. peiceful Policy to which she is in-
debted. fOr tier present-blessings. The piincipal
point to Which attention was immediately drawn,
upon our' own ;.E-xchange,, vas the manner in
which the disputes heki.pen Turkey and itussia
were alluded to : and this was found to be en-
tirely in unison • yrith'ithe opinion which has been
itiitirial4lymaliMAW on that subject in The New
.butAiterly irreconcilable with the fabri-
cations . Oflithe constitzttionne, so easily credited
bf maniEtiiiish Papers.. The King of France
distinctikiOative;, that he cherishes the hope
of Seei'l‘g re'stoted in the East,
o 1 Eiliopo, without the occurrence of a nt vf
wail' and he adds an -assurance whiCh goes`'
great way toward; the confirmation of that hope.

He says, that the efforts which have been made
to put an end to those calamities were concerted
between himself and his Allies, with a perfect
unanimity. This is the ground on which we
have all along rested our confidence that the
general peace of Europe would not be disturbed.
We were satisfied thatit could not be disturbed,
if only two or three of the great Powers were
seriously alive to the paramount necessity of re-
pose to Europe at large ; and we could not be-
lieve that a truth so obvious as that necessity was
not deeply impressed on the minds of those
great Statesmen to whose direction ke destinies
of the mighty Monarchies of Europe are com-
mitted.

[BRITISH PRESS.]
It is obvious that the Paris Papers delight in
exaggerating the puny efforts of every little law-
less band of malcontents that disfigure the ge-
neral tranquil surface of the Spanish territory,
who are, in fact, only the expiring embers of the
guerilla system of warfare, which has done such
essential service to the country. But the spirit
which actuates these insurgent bands does not
suit the taste of the French Government. The
Speech of the King of France attributes to ma-
levolence every effort to make the assemblage of a
large army on her southern frontier a cause of jea-
lousy and uneasiness to Spain ; but with all due
allowance for the candour which we have a right to
expect in official documents of this description,
we may he allowed to suspect that a few grains
of the spirit of these insurgents may have found
their way into the scale which preponderated in
the resolution of the French Councils to main-
tain a large army on its southern frontier to keep
out the Spanish plague—a plague now no more,
but of which the Speech intimates the possibility
of a return. Did a plague rage in Spain, which
we rejoice to say does not, the effectual way to
prevent its extension to France would be to cut
off all communication whatever. The planting
of an army at the foot of the Pyrenees brings
fuel to the fire. It will not hedge out the cuckoo.

[MORNING HERALD.]
We received last night, by express, the Paris
Papers of Tuesday. The articles in them from
the North and East of Europe are such as not to
require, indeed scarcely to admit of, observation.
The evacuation of the Principalities is repeated
from various quarters, but not in the form of de-
cisive confirmation. There are accounts from
St. Petersburgh of the 10th ; but at that time the
departure of the Turks could not have been
known in that capital. These papers do not,
of course, contain an account of the opening of
the French Chambers, being on the day of their
publication. The King's Speech, however, has
been received. in reading this document, it will
be observed that the French Ministry (for this
Speech is of course to be regarded as the Speech
of the Ministry) affects a popular and patron-
izing tone towards the Greeks; and it will be
found that the French Cabinet is represented as
entering into the views of Russia. But we suspect
that the latter statement is of no value, and
that the allusion in the former to the Greeks,
and to the protection afforded them by the
French flag, is but " a tub thrown out to the
whale" of French national vanity. What is
most important in this speech is, that the King
of France expresses no stronger hope of the con-
tinuance of peace than he might have done a
month since, or than he actually did at the late
closing of the Chambers. " I cherish the hope,"
he says, 44 of seeing tranquillity restored in those
countries, without the aggravation of a new war."
The conciliatory tone of the Divan, and the im-
portant concession of evacuating Moldavia and
Viallachia, must have been well known to those
who drew up this speech, yet it appears not to have
in the least influenced their opinions or hopes as to
the issue of the negociations. The King of France
rather angrily repels the notion that the sanitary
cordon on the Spanish frontier has any other ob-
ject than the professed one, of preserving the
public health. •

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JUNE 6.

DOE, ON THE DEMISE OF PALMER, v. GIVADKIN.

This was an action of ejectment to recover the possesSion
a house in George-street, Westminster. The lessor of the
plaintiff &lined, as heir at law to the late Marchioness of
Thomond, and the defendant, as devisee, under the will of her
Ladyship. The single question in the case was the validity of
the execution. The defendant admitted the plaintiff to be the
heir at law, but set up his title undex the 'will.
It appeared in evidence that the Marchioness of Thomond
began to make her will whilst living at Taplow Court, Bucks,
and continued writing it until the year 1816, when her Lady-
s'hip applied to Mrs. Tomline, the Lady of the Bishop of
Winchester, to know if the Bishop would be one of the
witnesses, and on his consent being notified, the Marchioness
orThornond brought her will, written on several sheets of
piper, not fastened together, and the Bishop saw her affix her
signature. He afterwards suggested that if any freehold pro-
perty was devised, it would be necessary to have three wit-
nesses, and as the house in question was devised, a gentleman
named- Smith was called in, and the Marchioness retraced her
signature in the first sheet in his presence. The will was af-
tefwarde 10dged with the solicitors of the Marchioness, and re-
mained in their possession till, after her demise.
Mrs; Tomline, the Bishop of 'Winchester, and the solicitor,
were examined, who proved the facts above stated.
'The LOAD CHIEF JUSTICE told the Jury that the single
question for their consideration was, whether this was the same
will which had been executed by the Marchioness of Thomond,
in the presence of the witnesses.
The Jury found a verdict for the defendant, thereby esta-
blishing the validity of the will.
WAKELING V. PIGGOTT, KEMP, AND COTTON.
This was -an action 'by an attorney's clerk for a libel,
im-
puting to him the crime of wilful and corrupt perjury,. The
defendant Kemp was clerk, and Cotton was steward to a Be-
nefit' Society, called the United Friendly Society; and Piggott
was the.printer of the libel, of which the others were said to be
the authors.. It appeared that the plaintiff had been a member
of the Society, and had represented. that he was of the age of 23,
and having fallen sick, he applied to the Society for the usual
allowance, which they refused to make, on the ground that he had
falsely represented himself to be 23 years old, and that he was a
merchant's clerk instead of an attorney's clerk. These being the
qualifications, no person being admitted to the Society, who was
not above 20 years old, and who was an attorney's clerk. The
plaintiff summoned the defendants at Worship-street, and they
were compelled to pay the allowance, the plaintiffswearing that
he was of the proper age. The defendants afterwards published
a hand-bill, stating the circumstances of the case, and accusing
the plaintiff of perjury. It appeared that the latter had pro-
L ceeded against the defendant by indictment, on which occasion
Piggott was a witness, under a promise that he should be saved
harmless.
The case was given up against Piggott, and all the facts being
left to the Jury, they found for the plaintiff—Dimages, One
Varthing. • • • . • •
THE HON. LADY BROMLEY V. KINSF.Y AND ANOTHER.
This was an action against the Hundred of Ossulston, to re-
cover damages for an injury done to the plaintiff's house by the
populace on the Rhig's Coronation. Her Ladyship's windows
WerelDroken to the -amount of 281., and for that sum she now
recoVered a verdict'

FOR THE SUN.

LETTER XI.

Mn. EDITOR—There appears to be a strange
anomaly iu the modern professors of Popery, that
they at once deny the fundamental principles of
their religion, and pertinaciously adhere to them.

The first must proceed from a sense of shame,
arising from a consciousness that they are of
that tyrannical, exterminating, and dangerous
nature ascribed to them, or from a wish to de-
ceive, or from both united ; yet, if it be from
shame that they thus deny what every person at
all acquainted with history must know to be the
doctrine of their Church, they want resolution,
I had well nigh said principle, to break those
" manacles and mufflers," " those two master-
principles—that they must believe as the Church
ordains, and that there is no salvation out of that
Church," which enchains their minds in a bondage

worse than Egyptian.
In the year 1791, certain queries were pro
pounded, it was said, by some members of the
British Cabinet, to the Universities of Paris,
Douay, Louvain, Salamanca, Valladolid, and
Alcala,—whether the Church of Rome still
maintained those detestable and dangerous doc-
trines—" that faith is not to be kept with here-
tics, that it is lawful to murder persons of that
description, and that Princes excommunicated by
the See of Rome may lawfully be deposed and
murdered by their subjects ?"—and the answer in
the negative has been much relied upon by all the
advocates of Popery, from that time. It is,how-
ever, not a little remarkable that, in the reign
of Queen Elizabeth, two of those Universities,
Salamanca and Valladolid, first entertained that
pestilent and dangerous question—" Whether
an Irish Papist may obey or assist his Protestant
Sovereign ?" which was decided in the negative
by the two following assertions :—" Ist, since
the Earl of Tyrone undertook the war for reli-
gion, and by the Pope's approbation, it was as
meritorious to aid him against the Heretics as to
fight against the Turks. 2dly, that it was a
mortal sin in any way to assist the English
against him; and those who did so could neither
have absolution nor salvation, without deserting
the Heretics, and repenting of so great a crime."
Upon the strength, I suppose, of the answer
given by the Universities in 1791, the General
Committee of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, in
March 1792, published a solemn Declaration,
under nine different beads, disavowing those
noxious and dangerous principles ascribed, and
justly, to their religion ; which was signed by
Edward Byrne, as Chairman, and by Richard
M'Cormick, as Secretary ; as also by Doctor
Troy, titular Archbishop of Dublin, and many of
his Clergy ; and from which I shall now submit a
few extracts to the consideration of your Readers.
After stating that it was "to give the most fall and
ample satisfaction to their Protestant brethren,
they make this deliberate and solemn declaration,"
they proceed—" First, we abjure, disavow, and
condemn the opinion, that Princes, excommuni-
cated by the Pope and Council, or by any
Ecclesiastical authority whatsoever, may therefore
be deposed and murdered by their subjects, or
any other persons. We hold such doctrine in
detestation, as wicked and impious; and we de-
clare we do not believe that either the Pope,
with or without a general council, or any Prelate
or Priest, or any Ecclesiastical power whatsoever,
can absolve the subjects of this kingdom, or any
of them, from their allegiance to his Majesty,
King George the Third, who is, by authority of
Parliament, the lawful King of this realm."
" 2d, We abjure, condemn and detest, as unchris-
tian and impious, the principle that it is lawful
to murder, destroy, or any ways injure, any per-
son whatsoever, for or under pretence of their
being heretics ; and we declare solemnly before
God, that we believe no act, in itself unjust, im-
moral, or wicked, can ever be justified or ex-
cused by or tinder pretence or colour that it was
done either for the good of the Church or in obe-
dience to any Ecclesiastical power whatsoever."
" 3d, We further declare that we hold it an un-
charitable and impious, principle, that no faith is
to be kept with heretics." This doctrine we de-
test and reprobate, not only as contrary to our
religion, but as destructive of morality, of society,
and even of common honesty ; and it is our firm
belief that an oath made by any person not of
the Catholic religion, is equally binding as if it
were made to any Catholic whatsoever.
And in the year 1793 the Lords Petre and
Stourton,and a number of Gentlemen of the Romish
Communion in England, in their application to
Parliament for further indulgence, made a similar
renunciation of those dangerous and uncharitable
doctrines ; upon which the Court of Rome im-
mediately took alarm, and announced strong dis-
approbation of the measure by a Vicar Apostolic
in England, who addressed a letter to those
Noblemen and Gentlemen, condemning, in the
most energetic terms, -what they had done ; and
this spiritual censure was approved of by the
Pope. Although I shall, before the close of this
letter, make further observations, I cannot help
here remarking that this conduct of the Sove-
reign Pontiff, in the year 1793, must, in the opi-
nion of every dispassionate man, invalidate the
authority assumed by the Universities in 1791.
How the Roman Catholics of Ireland escaped
Ecclesiastical censure, for their dereliction of
" Mother Church," when their brethren in Eng-
land were so severely reprehended,—is, I must
confess, beyond my comprehension; unless it was
a piece of Popish policy; as" his Holiness" might
have entertained hopes of re-establishing his spi-
ritual authority in the " land of Saints," in all its
pristine unrivalled greatness, through the means
of his dutiful children, which he could not ex-
pect to effect in England. Be that as it may,
Dr. Troy, who signed the Renunciation in March
1792, lost no time in applying an antidote ; as in
February 1793, he published his famous Pasto-
ral Letter, in which he declares, that "the Pope
Or Bishop of Rome, as successor to St. Peter,
Prince .of the Apostles in that See, enjoys, by
Divine right, a Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Pri-
macy; not only, of honour and rank, but of real
jurisdiction and authority in the, universal church."
" 'fhat the Spiritual and Ei:clesistical jurisdiction
of the Bishop of Rome, as successor to St. Peter,

is not limited to any province or kingdom,—it
extends, by Divine right, to the Christian Church
in general, and to every particular See in Chris-
tendom."—" That the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction
and authority assumed by the Kings of England,
was in its origin, and still continues to be, a pro-
fane usurpation," (he was one of those that pre-
sented a dutiful address to his Majesty George
IV.) " upon the inherent Spiritual and Ecclesi-
astical Primacy, not only of power and rank, but
of real jurisdiction and authority of the Pope or
Bishop of Rome, derived to him by Divine right
as successor to St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles
I in that See ;" and that 44 the Church is infallible
in her doctrinal decisions and canons, on points
of faith and morals ; and therefore, Catholics are
obliged to adhere implicitly to such decrees and
canons of the Church assembled in general coun-
cil, and confirmed by the Pope, as rules of

Faith."
I shall now refer to some of those General
Councils, to which " Catholics are obliged to ad.
here implicitly."
By the fourth Lateran Council, convened in
the year 1215, it is decreed, that " if any Sove-
reign Prince or inferior Lord shall become a He-
retic within a year, let it be signified to the Pope,
that he may declare his vassals absolved from
that time from their allegiance, and give his ter-
ritories to Catholics to occupy, who, having ex-
terminated the Heretics, may possess them with-
out being molested, and preserve them in purity
of faith,—saving the right of the principal Lord,
provided he makes no opposition to the execu-
tion of this decree. But the same law is to be ob-
served with respect to those who have no princi-
pal Lords." This Council, by its decree, appro-
ved of a Crusade against the Albigenses, as Here-
tics, of whom a million were butchered in the
most cruel manner. It also deposed Raymond,
Count of Toulouse, for being a Heretic—granted
part of his territories to Count Montfort, one of
the holy Crusaders—and reserved the remainder
in trust for Count Raymond's son, should he
prove not infected with heretical opinions.
The Council of Constance, convened in the year
1414, decrees, " That all Heretics, all followers
and defenders of them, all partakers with them,
though they shine in the dignity of Patriarchs,
Archbishops, Bishops, Kings, Queens, Dukes, or
any other ecclesiastical or mundane dignity, shall
be pronounced excommunicated, in the presence
of the people, every Sunday and holiday ; and
the Archbishops, Bishops, and Inquisitors, shall
diligently inquire concerning them ; and if they
shall be found guilty or infamed, they shall' pro-
ceed against them by the punishment of excom-
munication, suspension, interdiction, and depriva-
tion of their dignities, offices, and benefices
ecclesiastical ; or by taking and imprisoning
their persons, and executing on them any corporal
punishment, with which heretics are usually
punished, according to the canonical sanctions."
And the same Council commands " all Arch-
bishops, Bishops, Inquisitors, Commissaries, and
elect-persons, by virtue of their obedience, that
they, and every of them, within the limits or
places of their jurisdiction, do watch for the extir-
pation and correction of all heresies and errors."
Of the infallibility of General Councils, the
Council of Bazil says, " Nor let any person
presume to say that a General Council, legally
assembled, can err ; because, were this perni-
cious error allowed, the whole Catholic faith
may be overturned, and there would be no cer-
tainty in the Church ; for should any one error
be admitted, the remainder of them may err."—
" It would be blasphemy of any person to assert
that the sentences, canons, and decrees of the
General Councils were not dictated by the Holy
Ghost."—" Any person who should be of opi-
nion that the Church 'can err in any thing that
regards morality and the faith of the Church,
must be considered as a Heretic."—" Whoever
shall presume to contemn the opinions, mandates,
interdicts, sanctions, or decrees, wholesomely
promulgated by the Bishop of Rome, let him be
accursed."
Acting upon these principles, Pope GregorylX.
in his Decretal says, " Those who are bound
by any compact, however strongly confirmed, to
persons manifestly fallen into heresy, shall know
that they are absolved from the duty of fidelity,
homage, and obedience." And Pope Clement XI.
in a letter to the Emperor, Charles VI., dated
the 4th of June 1712, denounced the treaty of
Alt-Runstadt, and declared, " by the authority
committed to him by the Most Omnipotent God,
the Covenants to be, and to have been, and per-
petually to remain hereafter, de jure, null, vain,
invalid, unjust, reprobated, void, and evacuated,
of all force from the beginning ; and that no per-
son is bound to the observance of them, or any
of them, although the same have been repeated-
ly ratified or secured by an oath ; and that tbey
neither could nor ought to have been, nor can or
ought to be, observed by any person whatsoever."
As no General Council had been convened,
after that held at Trent, in the year 1545,—as
that Council, instead of abrogating, confirmed the
decrees of former Councils—and as no Pope
has, by his supreme power, as the infallible head
of the Church, rescinded them, it is worth in-
quiring upon what authority the Universities of
France and Spain grounded their answer to the
British Cabinet, in the year 1791 ; as also upon
what authority the Roman Catholics of Ireland,
in the year 1792, and those of England, in the
year 1793, disavowed the tenets and principles
of their Church ?
It must, therefore, be manifest to every un-
prejudiced mind, that those decrees, written in
characters of blood, are not extinct, but merely
quiescent, requiring only a little encouragement
to resuscitate with renovated vigour, and only
awaiting a favourable opportunity to lay Kings
and Nations prostrate at the feet of " the proud-
est domination that ever was endured upon earth,"
the ,Church of Rome. That encouragement, some
modern Revolutionists and State Empirics seem
well inclined to give • but I trust that the good
sense of the great body of Protestants will not
be imposed upon by the sophisticated arguments,
however graced by rhetoric, of the advocates of
Popery, who, from indifference to all religions,
from hostility to the Protestant Religion, from
mistaken liberality, or from the love of popu-
larity,—are labouring to subvert the Protestant

Church, and to exalt the Romish on its ruins ;
or, at least, to raise it to an equality.--
Should they, unhappily for the best interests
of the Country, succeed in their Belial-like
schethe—should the Legislature, in a frenzied
moment, yield_" possession of the Ark,"—it re-
quires, no great degree of prescience to tell what
will be the consequences in Ireland. The per-
secutions of 168$ and 1689 will be re-acted ; nor

Protestants be allowed to die in peace, but

the last struggle of nature will be embittered by
some furious zealot, as in the case of poor old
Halliday, in the town of Galway ; which might,
however, afford subjects of mirth to him, to whom
" the most sacred agonies of man are materials
for unholy jesting," 64 who strives to make the
contortions of anguish appear grotesque, and
speaks of the awful visitations of Heaven to jeer
the sufferers."
The opinion of that truly pious and learned
Prelate, Doctor Porteus, late Bishop of London,
as delivered in the House of Lords in 1805, i*
worthy the attention of Legislators at this awful
crisis. After touching upon the doctrines of the
Church of Rome, his Lordship added—" It has
been said, indeed, that those are not now the
tenets- of the Church of Rome, that they may
be found, perhaps, in some old musty recordh
but they are now grown obsolete, and are helkin
utter detestation by the whole body of Ronan
Catholics, both in England and Ireland ; but
those musty records, in which those doctrines ap-
pear, are nothing less than the Decrees of Ge'
neral Councils, confirmed by the Pope ; and
Doctor Troy, Titular Archbishop of Dublin,- /11
his pastoral Letter to the Roman Catholics of
his Diocese, published in 1793, tells his flock,
that they must adhere implicitly to the Decrees
and Canons of the Church assembled- in General
Council, and confirmed by the Pope—and the
celebrated Lay Roman Catholic writer, Mr.
Plowden, in his Case Stated, published in 1791,
mentions the same doctrine and the infallibility
of General Councils. Those therefore are 20'
questionably at this day the tenets of their Church
they have never been renounced or disavowed
and till they are disavowed by authority, every
good Catholic is bound to obey them."
In my next, I shall shew, from the oath of
fidelity to the Pope, taken by Romish Priests,
that they are bound 46 to adhere implicitly to
those Decrees," and to inculcate the observance
of them on their respective flocks.
Cork, May 20, 1822.

SIDNEY'