The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-05-11 00:00:00

TO CORRESPOFDENTS.

Is " A Constant Reader' positive that he is not labourinr, under
any mistake? There are two "Town Missions" itirLiver-
pool, one of which ig in connexion with the Unitarians. 1) ,e
r"
haps his remarks apply to the agents of. that .society.. e
shall make some inquiries on the subject.
Questions on points of law do not come within our province,
but we are always ready to answer them, when it is in Or
power to do so.
A correspondent has sent us the following enquiries—perhaps
some. of our readers will be able to, affard a,eatisfactory
answer.—
Mr. EDITOR.—Sir, can you inform me of the year that Mr.
Young, the tragedian, left the stage? and the year the late
Edmund Kean died in ? 'also the year Geo. F. Cooke died in
• Yours, &e.

TVIESPIS.
" An Admirer of Pickwick"ls informed that most of the parti-
culars to which he alludes are incorrect. We cannot grve a
satisfactory answer to either his second or third question.
Perhaps thelpllowing cosy not prove uninteresting-118p'
reared sornMine ago in the Durham Advertiser:
"BOZ, vattscs HIS AUTO-BIOGRAPHER, DR.
MACKENZIE.
" We have received from the great and glorious Boz himself
—the highly talented Charles Dickens—the following contra-
dictions to the statements put forth by Dr. Mackenzie, of
Liverpool, and which were copied into our columns a fortnight
ago:—

"`Darlington; Saturday Morning.
Ste,—Waiting in this- place fur a York coach, this morn-
leg, I chanced, in the course of the few minutes I staved bete,
to take up your paper of January-the 26th, in which-1 saw a
brief auto-biography of myself by Dr-. Mackenzie. Dr. Mackenziel
whoever he may be, knows as much of inc as of the meaning of
the word auto-biography, in proof of which, may I beg, you to
state on my authority, that when I commenced the Pickwick
Papers, I was not living on five guineas a week as a reporter oil
the Morning Chronicle; that Messrs. Chapman and Hall were
never persuaded with some difficulty to become the Pickwick
publishers, but on the contrary first became known to ine by
waiting on me to propose.the work; that no such pecuniary ar-
rangement as the paragraph describes ever existed between us;
that by the Pickwick Papers alone I have not netted betwe/
£2OOO and £3000; that the sketch called " Watkin's 'Pottle
never appeared iu the Morning Chronicle; that I am not now
in the receipt of I:WO a-year; and that Mr. Bentley does no
give me £lOOO a-year fur editing his Miscellany, and twentY
guineas a sheet for what I write in it.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your most obedient Servant,
CHARLES DIOKENS,

To the Editor of the Durham Advertiser."'
We ate not aware of any source from which the desired infoy,7
motion may be obtained. "An Admirer of Pickwick" ,v 1"
most likely have his curiosity gratified upon consulting anyt
friend of his who may be in the habit of frequenting anY °
the clubs in London.
The rumour to which 4, Quis" alludes is, we believe, correct,
but, for obvious reasons, we must decline entering upon any

particulars. To his last question we reply " Cuu4o—ruatice.
" It. y.' must be a very careless reader of the public journals,

or he would never trouble us with his silly questions.
"An Honest Radical" is a questionable designation. e.
should almost as soon think of calling any one an honest rogue'
The lines to which " P. A. J." subscribes her name are stele°
from the Mercury. We almost suspect the writer of having
stolen the long-missing ultibrella,

tilittpool ,1.7,-"tanbarb.

FRIDAY MORNING, MAY 11, IS3S.

n- The Publication of the STAN DA RD commenced this lOrn.

ing at 6 o'clock.

JAMAICA.—We have received files of Jamaica papers
to the 24th of March, inclusive. The packet by which
they arrived, the Linnet, has brought about £5,000 on
freight. She 'sailed from Barbados on the 21st of Maiello
Jamaica, 23d, and St. Thomas, 31st. The'crops
maica are likely to be plentiful.
In spite of the eggregious mismanagement of the re'
sent administration there is evers, probability that met-
ters may still prove satisfactory in Jamaica. Though t"
cultivation of sugar and coffee, the two staple Predttct*
of the West Indies, may experience a ruinous change
when the' apprentices have fulfilled their period of servi-
tude, it appears that the planters have other' sources Of
profitable investment within their reach. Of thege, the
introduction of the mulberry tree for the purpose
rearing the silkworm seems to be the Most pronLsing•
On this subject we find the following remarks in

Kingston Chronicle of March '23 :
" As our sage government rulers seem inclined to afferd
every license to the apprentices to resist agricultural labour,
and to abandon the cultivation of the island staples, we ere re
joiced to lied that any new substitute can be found likely t 0
afford a living to the landed proprietors who are obliged to throw'
up their sugar and coffee plantations. It seems the mulberry
tree thrives very well in the island of Antigua and at Montserrat,
and we can bear witness to its having been planted with succtstit
and even bearing fruit, in the mountain lands $
Upon the leaves of the mulberry tree the silkworms at Mont'
serrat have been reared with success; and, as Mr. garker has_
also discovered another tree, called the ramoon, which is a good
substitute fur the mulberry, we suppose, as two plants will gruW
in the country upon which the silkworm will feed, there can be
little doubt that the silk of Jamaica with some attention,
soon become an article of commerce. /t is lamentable-to obserod
the destructive policy of the present ministry, alto use spread: in
misery and flan amongst the labouring cusses both of their co 4
flies and parent state. Fur, whilst their measures hard pa,a Yfe_,
t. Andre
the ay; icultui industry of the west, their free foreign trade

MAY- 11. 1S ?~

thrown their native artisans and mechanics entirely out of bread."
Tu the truth of the above remarks respecting the ruin-
ruts policy of the present ministry the experience of the
People of gpgland will bear the strongest testimony.
'Little else remlinspii; complete the measure of Whig• in-
latuation than to tIgIAV open the trade in corn, and thus
plunge ten millions of the population of Great Britain
into irretrievable ruin. We have very little doubt that
it is the intention of the Whigs to accomplish this
scheme, as soon as certain existing obstacles are re-
moied—Lhat is, if they are not previously driven from
power.

We are sorry to perceive that one melancholy result
of the full emancipation of the negroes has been the
death from -negligence of their children. The paper
front vi-hich we "hive already quoted has the following
distressing particulars
In looking over the catalogue of coroners inquests (pub-
lished by our contemporary of the St. Jago Gazetee, it is me-
lancholy to observe the number of poor free negro children
sacrificed by the listless negligence of their slothful mothers,
.._niany of whom, feel so little anxiety about the health or wel-
fare of their offspring, that they never observe they are ailing or
sick till they ate at the last extremity, and then they run with
them to the overseer or hospital doctor when it is too late to
save them. That our readers may hive authentic reports.of the
cases alluded to, we subjoin a few specimens as fallow :
WESTMORELAND:—OnIv the 12th September last, at My-
lerslield estate, on the body of a negrn child named Thomas
Riley. It appeared in evidence that the child had been sick
and was neglected by its mother; taken from her and given to
a morie; it came on bad weather; after weather over, nurse
brotight it to the overseer, who ordered a quart of flour to he
given for it. Nurse roasted two dutnp!iuge, it eat a little; asked
for water, drank some, then died alm,st unniediatety.—Verdict
Died by the visitation of God."—At the same place, and on
the same day, on the body of another negro child named Mary
Dobson, also a free child on the property. It appeared trom
the evidence of Rosey Beckford, that Mary Ann Clarke, the
c.hild's mother, left the child with her in the morning, and
when she, Rosey Beckford, went out, She left it playing in the
yard. When she returned she missed Mary Dobson, and
searchinv, for her she found her lying in a water hole quite
dead.—Verdict "Accidentally drowned."—On the al January,
at Prospect estate,.on the body of a negro child named George
Pennycock, about 3 years old. The child's mother being
sworn, deposed that two or three weeks ago her child was sick ;
took it to the overseer who gave her medicine fur it; the child
was afterwards taken very ill, and before she could take it to
the overseer it died.—Verdict "Thai the child came to its
death partly from neglect of its mother." On the 24th at
Spring Garden estate, On the body of a free child named Diana
Thomas.-Oriva Wedderburn, thechild's mother, being sworn,
deposed that returning.frinn her work on Friday, she found her
child blow quite. hard, took it immediately to Mr. Smith, the
overseer, who sent it to the hospital, where every care was
taken of her, but she died in less than an hour.—Verdict " Died
by the visitation of God."
" In the days of slavery such cruel neglect could seldom or never
occur, because the' negro children were under the superintend-
ence of nurses appointed by the proprietor to attend to all the
young children, to see them properly fed, clothed, and looked
after, and the mistress or ladies resident on the estate were assi-
duous in training the young negroes to domestic habits, and
paid them every possible attention when sick. But since the
parents of these free negro children have had their hearts turn-
ed against their former I enefactots, and they feel averse to
apprentice them, or trust them to the care of masters and mis-
tresses, they are suffered to run wild, and are doomed to perish
ftotac the neglect of their careless or depraved parents. What
the liiei of some of these negro mothers are, we may judge from
ehe following inquest :
On the 20th, at Retreat estate, on the body of a negro woman
named Mary Hogg Goodwin, late an apprentice on that pro-
perty. Mr. Cocker, the overseer, deposed, that on Thursday
shelt blow, he found deceased laying down drunk in the fowl-
house • she went home in the evening apparently pretty sober;
he ordered her to turn out to-work in the second gang; would
not.allow her near the house. Friday morning, she was found
lying on the King'S road beastly drunk ; bad her taken to the
hospital; sent for Dr. Mason, jun.; who used the stomach
pump, and did every thing possible to save her, but in vain;
she died about eight o'clock that evening. Verdict—"'That
Mary Hogg Goodwin died from excessive drinking of ardent
spirits."

" We may ask, what is become of all the children of the non-
praylials who have been kindly treated and coml., irtably lodged
in the houses or on the premises of the apprentice-masters dur-
ing their patents' term of service ? For, it is not reasonable
to expect that people will be willing to hire servants who will
turthen with children that are of no use, and cannot be kept
under proper control. And how they are to be otherwise pro-
vided fur in the present unsettled state of affairs, we are at a
loss to determine."
From these details it is evident that incalculable mis-
chielvvould be the unfailing consequence of immediate
`cmancination, and that it is no less an act of humanity,
towards the apprentices, than of justice towards the plan -
ters,-.that a reasonable period of probation should inter=
vene before the former are thrown entirely upon their.
We would, therefore, venture to ask the
emancipationists whether they are not virtually contri
bitting to swell the amount of human misery by seeking
to precipitate the perfect liberty of the negroesl Would
it not be much better to labour for the moral and spiritual
-4mprovernent of the apprentices, in older to fit them for
the proper exercise of the tights of citizenship, than to
seek to confer upon them privileges which they are in-
.capable of appreciating, and immunities Vthicli they are
-sine to abuse.?
IVe have been mach delighted with the following ex-
cellent slietrii.of the policy of our present ministers :
(Flom the Kingston Chronicle, March 20 )
" Addison, descrikog the whigs in the reign of Queen Anue
'says, addressing himself to Britannia--
Thy favourites grew not up by fortune's sport,
Nor from the.crimes or follies of a coma,
' On the °firm basis of desert they rise,
.From long try!cl.faitli, and friendship-rboly ties.
And Burke, too, says that in those days they believed that
toe only proper method of rising into power, was through
hard essays of practised friendship and experienced fidelity.
.At that time it was not imagined that patriotism was a bloody
idol, which required the sacrifice of children and parents,
.and the dearest connexions in private life, an of all vie-
toes which rise from those relations. They were not of that
Ingenious paradoxical morality, to imagine that a spirit of mo-
deration was properly shown in patiently bearing the sufferings
of your friends. Or that disinterestedness was clearly mani-
fested at the expense of other people's fortune. They believed
that no men could act in concert who did not act in confidence;
and that no men could act with confidence who were not bound
together by common opinions, common affections, and common
interests.

own resources.

" Thesa, wise men were too well-principled in these maxims,
upon which the whole fabric of public strength is built, to be
blown off their ground by the breath of any childish talker.
They were not afraid that they should be called an ambiguous
junto, or that their resolution to stand or fall together should,
by placemen, be interpreted as a scuffle for power. The govern.
:in, wilily,. of Queen Victus la's reign act upon no common principle
of reason 07 consistency, that we know of, but that of changing
.their measures to retain their places. To divide and reign is
.their maxim, and to split the county into- contending factions
:Appears to be the object of the acting administration. Their
baneful councils spread even to the colonial legislatures, and
has riiiduced in our J-maica assembly the same jarring and
disunited elements which are to be found in the parliament of
•the parent state. With this difference, that here the conservaf
Jive is Dot of that united, compact, and formidable phalanx
calculated to defeat the mischievous and destructive assaults
of their ever-restless and changeable foes. And, consequently
'their' contentious conflicts are the more likely-to effect general
confusion. If the conservative corps do not rally speedily, we can
have little hope for the future peace or prosperity of the country!''
4t is, indeed, perfectly true that the Whigs have no
.other principle—no other motive of action, than that of
.Pertinaciously ;keeping their places. To accomplish tl.is
..end they.are,ever willing to suit their policy to every
',emergency, and ready on all occasions to shape and alter
',their measures in obedience to considerations of expedi-
,ency. But it is high time that the Conservatives of
Great Britain should take souse
.decisit e plan for thrust-
ing these unpt incipled imbeciles out of office, before the
mischief which they are perpetrating becomes irrepara-
ble. Let the people of England pour their addresses at
the foot of the throne, and demand the expulsion of the
Whig- Radical faction from power. Let our gracious
Queen know the sentiments entertained by her loyal
tiubjects, and she will not assuredly lack the courage to
deal a ith her present ministers according to their merits,

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC OATH.—The Earl of Shrews-
bury, in pursuance to a notice of motion to that effect,
brought before the House of Lords on Tuesday last the
cunsideration of the Roman Catholic Oath. The exhi-
. bition which this doughty champion of Popery made of
himself on the occasion is as unaccountable as it is dis-
Imiceful to himself and to his party. Of all men in the
kingdom the E.rrl of Shrewsbury should have been the
list to utter a word in extenuation of the Popish ne-tn-
b"rs of Parliament. From the extracts which we shall
Presently introduce from a work published by the noble
earl before the passing of the Emancipation Bill, it ap-
Pears that Ito of all others, most efft:,atually laboured to
Oelude the Protestants of England into the belief that
the Papists were sincere in their professions with respect
the tests proposed to be incorporated in the bill. That
'indefatigable writer, Mr. Eneas Macdouneli, in a lettpr to
[log rftiggsdils very opportunely quoted set exat passages

front t lie work to which we refer. We einnot do better
than lay the whole of these passages before our readers+
for the purpose of showing the consumn,ate duplicity of
the Popish leaders. The following are the extracts, as
contained in Mr. M:tcdonnell's letter :
Sir.—As the Earl of Shrewsbury has appointed next Tuesday
for the consideration of: the Boman Catholic oath, I beg leave
to invite his Lordship's recurrence to the sentiments embodied
in his book published in the year 1828, entitled Reasons for not
taking the Test. I shall confine my reference to his "prelimi-
nary observations," and furnish the extracts unaccompanied by
a single line of note or comment thereupon. The noble author
observes as follows:—" The Protestant is now the .established
church. Let her rest satisfied with this advantage. It gives her
all the splendour and power and influence of worldly state, with
the largest ecclesiastical revenues in Christendom to support
them; thus insuring her as complete an ascendancy over every
other religion as can with justice be desired."—(Page 47.)
"Clemency and moderation will attach a large and
. . .
zealous body to her interests. Il'e should support her, not as a
church possessing purity of doctrine, but as a teacher of good
morals, and as a member of the great edifice of-the constitu,.
lion." (Page 49.) . . . . "I trust to show, that far from
there being any reasonable ground of danger to the establish
ment from reinstating the catholics in their civil rights, it would
be equally our interest and our inclination to uphold the honours
and temporalities of the church of England."—( Page 86) .
" It is equally improbable that we should unite with the dis-
senters for the purpose of despoiling the establishment." .
"The Bishop of Peterborough cannot surely be serious, that as
long as the establishment retains her temporalities with the influ-
ence necessarily attached to them, together with.the universi
ties, and her paramount political privileges, that she can ever
fall from that immense ascendancy which she now enjoys over
every other • religion of the state."—(Page 86 and 8i) . .
`• What object can Catholics have in unitingwith the Dissenters
tcrdespoil the establishment?—(Page 87.) " When the passions
are calmed, and the interests of every class are amalgamated
by equal laws and equal rights, the present lamentable dis-
cord will cease, religious harmony will he restored throughout
the land, and Christians of every denomination will he linked.
together by the honk' of charity and good will alone." . -
" Ihe Church qf England might-then enjoy her revenue and her
privileges in peace and comfiat,- to the hatred or envy qf her
neighbours." . . " The DisSenters have invariably, departed in-
finitely further from the parent church than the members of the
establishment. What, therefOre, should we gain by uniting
with them to despoil that establishment ? They, united, being
infinite y the stronger party, woad, in case of success, take
every thing for themselves. I speak not of -Ireland; any spolia-
tion of the Established Church there must proceed either from
a convulsion in the country or from the power of the Protestant
landholders." . The redress of the most grievous clerical
exactions, and a moderate competency from the Government to
the Catholic clergy, operating with the late amendments in.the
tithing system, and equal laws and equal rights, would so far
mystify the people as :o remove every idea from their minds of
despoiling the establishment."—(Page 88,89.) . . . 'The great
security of the Protestant establishment would consist in the
alliance which it should be her inclination to form with her Ca-
tholic brethren."—(Page 90) " Is it not, therefore, na-
tural that we should support the establishment, should we see it in-
vaded by Calvinists and
,Levellers?"--(Page 91.) . " Ca-
tholics most assuredly haVe nothing to anticipate from the
downfall of the church." . . .." An established church has
ever formed a part of the constitution of the country. She is
the promoter of learning, the preserver of the splendid memo-
rials of the piety of our ancestors; she is now become the en-
courager of the arts." . . . ''The property of the church in the
bands of laymen, or in possession of sectaries, neither would
nor could be half so advantageous to the country as it is now.
I have already said why we have no wish to see it in our own.
The sacrifice of the church establishment is, therefore, a sacrce
which we neither desire as Christians nor as members of the state."
—(Pages 91, 92, 93.) . . . . ‘• While iu all this I deliver only
the sentiments of an individu;,l, at the same time I believe that
I speak those of the body to which I belong ; at any rate, I am
sure-that what I hare said 1-have said in the sincet ily of my
heart."

Can any thing be plainer or more explicit than the
preceding language ? But will our readers credit us
when we say that, at
_the very time that this language
was held forth to induce the Protestants to concede the
measure of Catholic emancipation, the Earl of Shrews.
bury and his associates must have been aware that the
Pope had actually disapproved of the oath proposed as a
test for the achniS,ion of Papist. into both hou.es of Par-
liament? Can it be believed that the Pope had virtually
exonerated the Catholics from the obligatio❑ of the oath ?
Such was the fact, however diilic•olt of belief.
From the year 1815 to the year 1329, when the Eman-
cipation Bill paSsed, the oath to which we refer was again
and again put forward as having been sanctioned by the
Pope. 'But So far ~froni having 'sanctioned the obliga,
tions of that.oath, we find that in the forms proposed by
the l'ope there was not one word said respecting the in-
violability of the EstablisheilThurch. The Bishop of
Exeter, in reference to this part of the subject, remarked—
" As the noble earl had evinced such anxiety that everything
should be brought forward, be was astonished that the noble earl

had not called the attention of the house to an important docu-
ment, which bad been approved of by the Pope, and had been
sent by his full authority as contiining the sentiments of the

Pope, :especting the oath which he would permit the Roman
Catholics to take.• The noble earl had not been informed by

those individuals eho had supplied him with information on

other points respecting a letter of Cardinal Litta, which con

taiued an intimation to Dr. Poynter of the opinion of the Pope

The following letter, it was to be observed, had been addressed
by Cardinal Litta to Dr. Poynter, the Bishop Apostolic of the

London district :

• Genoa, April 26, 1815.
Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Lord ; —LYour lordship
has lately informed me of your speedy return to England,
earnestly entreating me, at the same time, to putyou in posses-
sion of his Holiness's ideas respecting the conditions to obtain
from the government the wished for bill of emancipation. His
Holiness has been pleased to communicate to me his sentiments
with regard to the only terms which, after rejecting all those
that have hitherto been proposed, his dear Catholic children of
Great Britian may admit with a safe conscience, should the bill
f their emancipation, as has long been expected, have passed.
The subjects Which come to be taken into consideration, namely,
those a hich the said government, for the tranquillity and secu-
rity of themselves and the state, so far as the Catholic subjects
concerned, appear anxious to settle on a firm footing, are, first,
the oath of ailegiant:e. In the event of emancipation, so as to
be favourable to the Catholics in general, his Holiness will per.!
mit them to adojxt for their oath any of the three forms follow-
ing, &c.

" In no one of the three was there a single word respecting
the Protestant Establishment, or Protestant succession to the
throne. One of the forms has the following:—" I will defend
the succession of the crown in the family of his Majesty."
With this letter there were given three forms of oaths of allegi-
ance which the Roman Catholics were permitted to adopt.
There was not one of the three forms, .which the Ro-
man Catholics were permitted to take as a security to
the Church and State of England, in 'which there was
one single word of the Protestant Establishment, or of
the Protestant succession 'to the throne. Throughout
these forms there was a studied abstinence front even al-

lulling to the Protestant succession to the throne. No
s,!curity whatever was 'offered for preserving the tempo-
ralities of the Church, nor would the Roman Catholic~
be permitted to enter into any such obligation.
Is it not, therefore, plain that the whole procedure of

the Popish faction was a deliberate and an enormous
fraud upon the Protestants of England ? It is of no use
to plead in reply that the oath actually taken by the Po-
pish members of the legislature imposes such an obliga-
tion upon their consciences as that which is implied in
the very terms of the oath. For what is said in refe-
rence to such oaths ? The Rotnish casuists declare that
an unlawful oath never binds—on oath taken against the
rights or real utility of the Church. Such?tl oath, ac-
cording to the Pope, must be an unlawful oath, and can-
not bind. This is certainly an awful doctrine; but it is
one which is distinctly maintained by the Popish Church.
Witness the language of Dr. 111°Hale, as quoted by the
Bishop of Exeter

'• Dr, Wllate, who was professor of dogmatical theology
was asked as to the power of the Church dispensing with

oaths ;

Dr. p. 283, :being asked respecting, a proposition in
Bailly, ' Exisset is Ecclesia potentas dispensandi iu Vohs et
Jw•araentis'--:-a proposition proved, first, from Matt.
Whatsoever you shall louse on earth shall also he loosen in
heaven,' admits this in the sense in which it is laid down) by the
author, hut he says there are limits to this power. When I
say that the Church has the power of dispensing from oaths I
understand that the Church is then the interpreter in some tuca-
sure of the Divine will.' If there was an oath or a vow which
was impossible in its performance, or which would clash with
other duties art more imperative nature, as they may be SOME,
times conflicting duties, then the Church is only expressing the
will of the Almighty himself in releasing a person from the in-
convenient obligation of an oath Or vow, which would trench
upon a superior obligation. In casuistry the shades between
right and wrung may be sometimes so very indistinct as not to
4e seen by ap rodivarY eye: then the Church, being the inter
preter of the Divine faw, only decides what seems best in the
particular case. The Church is the judge of what is expedient
or not in a doubtful case, and like every other tribunal may be
deceived in any particular case.
)"l'e find it laid down in p. 145 of that Class Book ( Bailly, 2,1
""; Or, Moral hettlOgv,') that the following are just causes of
dispensation, viz : the honour of God ; second, the
utility
of the Church ; third, iii common gotta of the retitadie ; fourth,
the common good of the society. Who is to be judge of what the
Attila try of the Church may require ?—The superiors of the Church.'"
Theology,l4o.
Jo order to explain more fully our doctrine of dispensation o

oath. I wish to ol,Nerve that there is nothing in our principles
•at Va riltwe with those of sound jurists anti civilians of every
creed. It' any person should take an oath which may-clash with
the (hits which he owed to another, he is absolr,d from that
oath he is told, ' You are not bound to fulfil it.' The Church,
in granting the dispensation, only declared to the individual that
be has initracted, or attempted to contract, by that nit an
obligation which is contrary to another dilly. Every duty
springs from God; and as God cannot contradict himself by ie-
quiring incompatible duties, the Church only interprets the
,ltivitte will. while she releases him from the obligation of Isis
:oath. In extraordinary cases (cases where persons may reason
each way), in which ordinary persons are not able to decide,
I am always to be directed by the superior.
When you say that the Church has the goiter of dispensing
oaths do not you mean the superiors of the. Church, and particu-
larly the Pope ? —The Pope and the bishops. In some cases
the bishops—in all the Pope, that is, in those cases in which
they are dispensable.
Is there any case in whiCh a dispensation can be ,;ranted, in
which the Pope cannot do it of himself, or in which it is neces-
sary, that there should be superadded to his power the power of
a bishop ?—Ni.. I know not any.
Is not an oath strictly a religious-act ?—Yes—ye call the Al-
mighty to witness.

Does it not therefore fall correctly within the principle of the
spiritual jurisdiction of the Pope, as distinguished from disci-
pline ?—Yes, it does; but at the same time, if the dispensation
should clash with any defined clear duty whi7h I owe to any
authority. I- am of course to disregard the dispensation, I my-
self being the judge, if it is a clear case.

If this language is not plain enough, look to the con-
duct of the Popish members since their admission into
Parliament. After taking an oath Which every sane
person must consider as a security for our Protestant
Establishment, have they not, on every occasion, availed
themselves of their privilege of. voting for the purpose of
upsetting the Church? Have they not distinctly avowed
it to be their aim and object to destroy the Irish Church?
Have they not also voted on all qoestions'a&cting the
temporalities of the Church of England? It is impos-
sible that there can be any mistake as to the tendency of
the votes given by the Papists in parliament o❑ all the
questions which have had any relation to the Church.
Every one of those votes was given in concert with the
proclaimed, the implacable enemies of the Church, and
they are all totally irreconcileable with the spirit of the
oath.

What, then, is the, conclusion to which we are corn-
,pelled to arrive on this subject ? It is simply this, that
these fraudulent Papists took these oaths, not with any
mental reservation, but with the deliberate conviction
that they were absolved 7:pyo facto from the obligations
of the oaths—that they took these oaths with the full de-
termination to overdo, the Church, and to set aside,
if po,sible, the Proh.st alit succession to the throne.
And will the Protestant people of England look on
these things without any concern ? Will they permit a
prig of perfidious perjurers to rob them of their blood-
bought privileges ? Are'thev content the Church should
become a spoil to Infidels and Papists ? If they are not,
they must speedily arouse from their apathy, and come
to the rescue.