The Sun.
London, England, 1819-04-13 00:00:00

WAGGONS.

To HEMEL I-lEMPSTiA-D, Watford and Stanmore,Three
Times a II erk.
DISS, Beetles, Bumlay, Bury, anti Parts of Suffolk,
cverylsl,,nday.
CIREI:CESTER, Abingdon, Henley, Bristol, and Glen-
cester, '?'Per Times a Week.
SOUTHAMPTON, Winchester, Ramsey, Lyndhurst, Ly,
inin6ton, ChristcWeb, Itio4wood,Fordingbridge, Wimborn,
Po.le, Isle of Wight, Jersey, and Guernsey Waggons (Daily).
SUNBURY, Hampton, and Twickenham, Twice a Week.
GREENWiaI and ‘Voolwich, every Day.
TOTITNIIANI and Edmonton, every Day.
- - -

B. W. 1.1101:NTAIN and Co. respectfully acquaint their
Friends and the Public; that they will not be accounta4le fur
any Parcels. Passenger's Luggage, writings, Plate, Sze. for
more than Five Pounds Value, ifstolen, lost, or damaged, un •
less entered as such, and the /Insurance paid fur accordingly;
at the Satacas Head lan, Lowien.

Too true it is, that the infidel apathy which so
much prevails in religious a►atters, together with
the degenerate spirit of the times, cause a vast
tide of public opinion to flow in favour of their
designs—some, deceived by the specious cover
under which they advance—Others, who carry
their ideas of freedom to an extravagant and im-
possible degree—too many, who sincerely, or
under the mask of reality, enlist beneath the
banners of unlimited concession, from a mistaken
and dangerous patriotism—anti more, it is to be
feared,.there are, who, for want of sufficient exa-
mination of the actual merits of the question,
are either careless of the true welfare of their
country, or, influenced by the sophistry of the
Catholic patty, and under a delusive idea of serv-
ing' their,own interest, support and advocate the
Catholic Claims—Claims so reasonable. too, for-
sootb t.—for they profess to seek no innovation
upon the principles of our Constitution (while the
objects •claimed are via' glaring` innovations,
both on its letter and spirit—and. amounting to
an absolute annihilation of those great safe-
guards of the nation, and those distinguishing
principles, which were established at the Revolu-
tion in 1688) ; they only " demand, as the extent
of their political ambition, the enjoyment of
equal rights, in common with their Protestant fel-
low subjects"—or in those more explicit terms in
which the claim has lately been advanced, an
" entire repeal" of all those restrictive (1q them
denominated '' cruel" and "persecuting") sta-
tutes, which have so long secured the prosperity
and glory of this kingdom, by establishing a Go-
vernment and Constitution essentially and ma-
nifestly Protestant.

Have these misled advocates once reflected,
that they are striving to put into the desperate
hands of .our insidious --foe a sharp two-edged
sword, to whose vengeance themselves may per-
haps fall the early victims ? Oh that they would
rouse to reflection before the threatening torrent
of evil becomes irresistible ! Let them sift to the
very bottom the designs which the concessions
demanded may covertly promote Let them, with
an eye jealous of infringement on their present
tree and enlightened
.Constitution, look well to
the preservation of those laws, which have been,
and are, its chief supporters ! Let them retnem7
ber, that claims similar to the present have for-
merly been advanced, under the very same pre-
tences of conciliation and good-will, and that.
those professions have continually been followed
up by deeds of enmity, revenge, and blood

Plausible and insinuating as is the argument of
equal rights," it will, upon unprejudiced . in-
quiry, be found to have no true foundation.---'
Even we, who are Protestants, can claim no right
wsbare the guidance of the reins of Govern-
ment—as far as claim of right extends, our Ca-'
tholic brethren are upon an equal footing with
ourselves. The appointment to stations of trust
or honour, is at the discretion, and by the free'
gift Of the Sovereign, to be bestowed upon those,
whose known attachment to the Protestpt prin-
ciples of our Constitution combine with their
talents to point them out as worthy to partake'
its honours, and as those who will strenuously
defend its privileges with unswerving integrity.—
All that we are entitled to' of right, as members
of civilized society, is PROTECTION in return for
the OBEDIENCE we render to the higher powers
set over us.

The question, therefore, becomes entirely of
eligibility, toad unrittestiouably those persons are

most eligible to fill stations of importance to the.
interests of the Country who have giyen proof of
their undeviating attachment, to those principles
which have hitherto advanced its welfare. " No
man," said Lord Bolingbroke (I adduce time au-
thom ity of his Lordship's opinion not as hearing
on the religious considerations involved in this
great question, but merely in respect of his know-
ledge of the world amid his political judgment)—
" NO man ougiht to he frosted with any share of
power under a Government, who must, to act-con-
sistently with himself, endeavour the destruction
of that very Government." But to act con-
sistently with their uniform principles and prnc-
lice (when in power), such must be the unceasing
endeavour of the Papists against every Protestant
Government—therefore they are not entitled to
the concessions they dew ool—or, in other words,
they must not be suffered to establish themselves
by authority, in such stations as will enable them
at any furtive period to attempt or accomplish that
object—they must be excluded from all participa-
tion of POLITICAL POWER. It is folly to think
that' any limitation of the number of ItomanCa-
tholics who shall be admitted to these stations.
would be a sufficient guard against the designs of
Popery. It is my misfortune to know those who,
on reading the Marquess of Lansdowne's Speech in
the Lords' on the 22d ult., thought that his Lord-
ship had pointed to a very triumphant argument
in favour of the Papists, when he alluded to " the
admission of a few Persons of the Catholic per-
suasion into either House of Parliament." The
party I allude .to, dissentient from the Establish*
ment, was -read revert to an opinion favour.:
able to the Catholic Claims (whose indefensible
nature had been upon the most convincing proofs,
though sorely against inclination, lately acknow-
ledged), if but the shadow of an argument ap-
peared for them. If the admission of a few were
the object, still it would be a breach in the fence
which surrounds our Constitution, to which it
would never be possible to prescribe positive li-
mits. As in every past,example, so shall we now
find the same to be the case to our sorrow, that
as long as claim is followed by concession, so long
'will concession engender claim. Attack, followed
by success, and suecess followed by assault, would
•so widen the small and insignificant first breach in
-the citadel of our Constitutional rights, that every
.barrier of our security as Protestants would be
successively destroyed; all its important holds, and
commanding stations', would be in the possession
of a masked band of foes r; and the enemy would
at length openly rush in upon and endeavour to
overwhelm us, and the shattered remnant of Our
noble Establishment, in one common ruin.

But bow much more immediate the threatened

dangers, when we remember that the enemy is
even now in posseision of a mischievous degree
of political power, and that, instead of limited,
an entire, and unlimited surrender of all the poli-
tical safeguards of the Protestant Ascendancy is
demanded ? Let the Roman Catholics continue
excluded from Power--not "persecuted."—Perse•
cution forMs no part of Protestant principles or
of the British Constitution ; it has, indeed, been
charged upon us—and, if proved, would cast a dark
and disgrac,:ful shade over this bright period of
England's history. " Persecution is a tiara
word," but (and we may very truly speak from
experience) " when it comes from Words to blows
it is an harder thing. . The CHURCH OF ENGLAND
has felt it, • and she has a short memory if she
hath already forgot what it is."
The Laws against which such an outcry is
raised are self drfensive, and not made for the sake
of excluding the Roman Catholics fron► power on
account of their conscientious scruples, and their
religious principles, simply as such—bat because
their civil policy is ever guided by their spiritual
Authorities.

If (says Sherlock) there be no difference

between persecuting a man for his, opinions,

and securin& myself from being persecuted for thy
own, THEN, indeed, it is a persecution to exclude

men, for the sake of their disaffection to the 1744

tablished Church, from Civil l',)%ver."