The Sun.
London, England, 1835-12-05 00:00:00

bility to feed their wives and children, exulting that'
" the parsons" were reduced to famine, and remarking
how much more profitable they would have found that
celibacy which was prescribed to the Popish priesthood,
we can with difficulty bring ourselves to suspect that
this mitred monk revelled in the torments of our pious
clergy from mere diabolical hatred of them as indi-
viduals—it follows that he figured to himself in their
poverty and worldly misery nothing but the humilia-
tion and downfall of their Church—and that it was
Protestantism he beheld perishing, and Protestantism
in whose agonies he triumphed. Then what did the apos-
trophe of the Bishop of London amount to more than
this? He adjured the assembled friends of the Church
to come forward for the support of the " Protestant
religion." And what else, let us ask, is threatened,
but the Protestant religion ? What other issue of all
these lawless agitations do O'Connell and his low-
minded followers anticipate openly but this one—
namely, that Papists " shall not in any case hereafter
contribute to the support of a Protestant clergy." The
entire destruction of the Established Church is the
consummation to which they avowedly look forward.
Then, once more, how else would the Bishop of
London, as an honest man, have described the pur-
pose for which he and his hearers had met together,
than as the support of Protestantism ? It is clear
that his Majesty, and his Royal Consort, bore
in mind this, the most sacred duty of a British
Sovereign of the House of Brunswick, by the eager
liberality with which they set an example for every
loyal and religious English man and woman to follow.
Richly and abundantly will this donation of William
IV. " fructify," for the benefit, not of this only, but
of all future generations, though it may taste like
wormwood to some of his Majesty's advisers ; and
more closely and lovingly than ever will it draw the
brave Irish Protestant to this his parent realm—the
land which fosters the religion of his forefathers, and
prolongs its caresses to their persecuted sons. The
Bishop of London stated, like a bold and right-think-
ing British subject, that one main object with all
' friends of the Church (and we will take leave to add
of civil liberty) ought to be the vindication of the law.
It is justice and wisdom so to address the people. So
long as tithe is lawful, it ought to be, and must be
legally enforced. It is proved to be possible. We
refer our readers to our Irish letter on this point.
The landlords of Ireland are chiefly bound for it.
And let them be exchequered until they pay it to the
uttermost farthing, with costs. That they should set
a pattern of contempt for the law is intolerable. The
idiots, do they flatter themselves that rents will escape?
So tithes, it seems, " is a" sanguinary " impost."
Who made it sanguinary, but they who dishonestly
and through violence withheld it from the lawful
owners ? Their advisers, their abettors, the priests
and agitators—they it is who have shed the people's
blood. We trust that the meeting of Thursday last
will be repeated in every part of England. Our paper
contains a very satisfactory list of those who have
already contributed to this fund. There were, we see,
one or two errors in our notice yesterday. The Arch-
bishop of Armagh gave 2,0001., not 2001. ; Oxford
University, 1,500/., not 2,5001. The suggestion in a
letter signed 66 A Protestant Layman" deserves atten-
tion. We recommend, indeed, collections at the doors
of ail the churches. The teachers of Christianity must
not starve.— Times.

KING'S BENCH-FRIDAY.

MAUND V. THE REV. MR. CAMPBELL AND OTHERS.