The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-10-13 00:00:00

•
CONTINUATION OF REV. MR M`GHEE'S SPEECH
FROM FRIDAY'S " STANDARD."

_'.Before I enter upon this subject, I think it will be ad-
mitted that I have proved the first part of the resolution.
(Year, hear.) I think every one must admit that I have de-
mOnstrated, as far as documentary evidence, and inability on
the part of the speaker can go, that the popish bishops, in
direct violation of their oaths, have set up these laws in Ire-
land. I think that must be admitted. (Hear, hear.) The
second part of the resolution is this—
," That it therefore appears to this meeting, that it is
tne bounden duty bf the Protestants of this empire to unite
together firmly, to deliver themselves and their Roman Ca-
tholic fellow-subjects, from this anti-christian yoke, to
Petition the parliament."

A PLEDGE
FOR CIVLL AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTY FOR ALL ROMAN CATHOLIC
'ELECTORS, AND'ALL PERSONS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION
'ELECTED Olt APPOINTED TO (NT OFFICE IN THE BRITISH EM-
.PIEE.
Whereas by a certain document of the Church of Rome, professing to
be„ and commonly received and known as the third canon of a certain
eieneral Council, held in the year of our Lord /215, called the Fourth
La.!!!ti Council, it is among other things enacted as follows :--
, -wC excommunicate and anathematize every. heresy which ex-
i7fil itself against this holy, orthodox, and Catholic faith, which we
have set forth above ; condemning all heretics, by whatsoever names
they nay be reckoned : who have indeed divers faces, but their tails
are hound together, for they make agreement in the same folly.
Let such persons. when condemned, be left to the secular powers
who flay be present, or to their officers, to be punished in a fitting
dsinner, those who are of the clergy being first degraded from their or-
allso.7 that the goods of such condemned persons, being laymen,
be confiscated; but iu the case of clerks, be applied to the churches
"-'4l which they received their stipends. •
,7
" But let those who are only marked with suspicion, be smitten with
! word of auathema, and shunned by all men until they make pro-
1' _ satisfaction, unless, according to the grounds of suspicion and the
Quality of the person, they shall have demonstrated their innocence by
Ina Proportionate purgation. So that if any shall persevere in excom-
he7e,_Fation for a twelvemonth, thenceforth they shall be condemned as
be 'tea- And let the secular powers, whatever offices they may hold,
'Winced and admonished, and, if need be, compelled by ecclesiastical
thPlstire, that as they desire to be accounted faithful, they should, for
e
defence of the faith, publicly set forth au oath, that to the utmost
tbei• thefr, Power they will strive to exterminate from the lands under
so Jurisdiction all heretics who shall be denounced by the Church ;
.n.at whensoever any person is advanced, either to spiritual or tem.
pu
ral Power he be bound to confirm this decree with an oath.
Ch But if any temporal lord, being required and admonished. by the
hin7en, shall neglect to cleanse his country of this heretical filth, let
titan be bound with the chain of excommunication, by the metropo.
mak: and the other co-provincial bishops. And if he shall scorn to
vetLsatisfaction within a year, let this be signified to the supreme
from that, thenceforth, he may declare his vassals to be absolved
ire en`ualr fidelity to him, and may expose his land to
at occupied by
treditolies, who, having exterminated the heretics, y, without ?m-
-ot' the
e?.?1, possess it, and preserve it in purity of faith: saving the right
tie hinu,,l_cf lord, so long as he himself presents no difficulty and offers
seed „,.."tance in this matter : the same law, nevertheles, being ob.
Buis'ncerning those who have not lords in chief.
the reee. we decree also, to subject to excommunication, the believers,
Ivers, the defenders, the abettors of the heretics; firmly deter-
tbs.'wg that if any one, after he has been marked with excommunica-
th„cte Shall refuse to make satisfaction within a twelvemonth, he be
enceforth of right in very deed infamous, and be not admitted to pub-
.' offices or councils, nor to elect for any thing of the sort, nor to give
,evidence. Let him also be intestable, so as neither to have power to
"'Meath, nor to succeed to any inheritance.
let " Moreover, let no man be obliged to answer him in any matter, but
him be compelled to answer others. If, haply, he be a judge, let his
"`ntence have no force, nor let any causes be brought to his hearing. If
he be an advocate, let not his pleading be admitted. If a notary, let
the instruments drawn up by him be invalid, and be condemned with
their damned author. And we charge that the same be observed in
'indlar cases. But if he be a clerk, let him be deposed from every
t'„ilice and benefice, that where there is the greatest fault, the greatest
vengeance may be exercised.
We add, moreover, that every archbishop or bishop shall either by
"L'uself or his archdeacon, or other honest and suitable persons, twice,
se!' at lt once every year, go round his own diocese, in which there
more
eta report that heretics inhabit—and there shall compel three or
re men of credible testimony, or if it shall seem expedient, the whole
4.!ighbourhood to swear, that if they shall know any heretics there, or
• holding secret conventicles, or differing from the ordinary convex.•
°'
life, and morals of the faithful, they shall endeavour to give in-
. ',nation of it to the bishop ; but the bishop himself shall cite the per-
t?al'el' accused into his presence, who, unless they shall have cleared
eives from the crime alleged against them, or if, after having
besred themselves they shall relapse into their former perfidy, let them
ebrinished according to the canons. But if any of them, with damn-
,wjelistieuecy, rejecting the religion of an oath, shall, perhaps,- be un-
nig to swear, let them on that very ground be considered as heretics.
We will, therefore, and command, anti in virtue of obedience
blrly enjoin, that for the diligent performance of these things, the
„!rPs shall diligently unite throughout their dioceses, if they wish to
canonical vengeance for, if any bishop shall have been negli-
p• t, or remiss in purifying his diocese from the leaven of heretical
beVtY. when this shall be made to appear, by certain proofs, he shall
tut...be deposed from his Episcopal office, and another shall be substi.
e, in his place who shall be both willing aud able to confound
Areemi pravity.'.
lorwtd Whereas i the seventh session of the Council of Trent, the fol-
-“g canon wan s enacted "
If :
" FOURTEENTH CANON OF BAPTISM.
an
are lobe y Man shall say that baptized ch ldreu, when they grow up,
Promt;dosked whether they are willing to ratify what their sponsors
we e in their name when. they were baptized, and when they sh 11
r that they are not willing, that they are to be left to their oovalsmeb, and not to be compelled to a Christian life by any other punish-
Unless that they may be debarred from the reception of the
41..,Fist and other sacrameuts, till they repeut, let bine be anathem!a.
pri,lll, whereas in the Catechism of the Council of Trent, the following
whocalPie is laid down on the 9th article of the Creed, speaking of those
...re excluded from the Church:—
see• reties and schismatics (are excluded), because they have re-
4froln the Church, nor do they more belong to the Church than de-
belong to the army from which they have run away. Never-
s, it is not to be denied that they are in the power of the Church, as
de.-"ns who can be called into judgment by her, punished, and con-
wined by anathema:. •
ehrend, whereas in the aforesaid canons an authority is claimed by.the
tioe n of Rome over all baptized persons to submit to her domma-
refe' and to inflict on them pains, penalties, and persecutions if they
the refuse to do so. Now
only. do solemnly, in the presence of God, renounce and abjure
the _as qforesaid so far as they have now been recited. I believe
G:ta_te to be immoral, antisocial,
oftintoleran, repugnant to the taus of
eit,._ Lt. the statutes and constitution this realm, and fatala nto.
Gie„f. religious liberty. I declare that I believe the Popes. and
"4 Councils who enacted these canons aforesaid were, in _
• not only fallible but totally in error, and that they have not d
ee,ence not to have any power, weight, or authority over my con
dulec, w-hose names are hereunto subscribed, electors of
any
man
for ourselves cordially adopt this pledge. We consider that
.a_
or 107 an who refuses to do so is not fit to hold any office of civil power,
pi zetue for any
man to fill any office in the state ; and we do hereby
he 74. p IVeS. tO call on auy man who solicits our votes as alUxer:
tier. e_ !,',rnanient to subscribe it himself, and to use his utmost
admitted
to
szrarliament that it shall be made a test for every man
keaniberrlt British Legislature, or to vote at any electiou eitherfor
Parliament or for any Aber office in the British empire.
you• -
mark. Insist upon your representatives supporting
r petitions,
nearly useless. for without that the petitions of many are
" That no man
h
vote for a membersofall be admitted into Parliament, or to
tress trust or
t. Parliament, nor into any office of poli-
the sed' !until he shall have explicitly renounced
pa,,a I°llspower, intolerant, and persecuting canons of the
CY, and all pretended powers in the church of Rome to
give them any infallible authority or obligation over the con-
/ence of man, according to the test following."
4,NOW the question of the repeal of the emancipation bill prac-
'ically considered brings us to this. It is this. Let parlia-
ment restore the test by which Roman atholics were
excluded from parliament before the year 1829. That is a
tePeal of the emancipation bill ; that is a direct repeal of the
t7sueition bill. (Hear hear.) Now I )certainlycal attention
t" the onsideration of this. That test was effec-
tual in this way—that it effectually excluded Roman Catho-
,,es from parliament? not as Mr. O'Connell and others
i'ltend, because they had a conscientious regard for an oath.
aq'ear, hear.) We have seen what scrupulous conscientious-
hess they have had, since the bill of 1829. No ; it was
eca use they could not have taken that test, and entered into
parliamentr;: without a complete denunciation of the papal
ta;:al,°ll. (Cheers.) They must have stood, upon their ad-
de-slun to parliament, as having renounced the fundamental
po iet,slines of their church. (Hear, hear.) That was the
p". Now the test was effectual upon that ground, but I
%ill venture to express my humble opinion upon it, and say
tit notwithstanding that it was an unwise test, an inefficient
e and an injurious test. to the cause of the poor Roman
yallhtholics, and to their salvation. (Hear, hear.) I will give
50,."13' reasons. It was unwise because it left the whole
idcTi,siuns of the papal apostacy totally untouched, except
sed;a„"lr. Her perjury, her persecutions, her treachery, her
ere all
her base subjugation to an anti-christian tyrant,
kiive all completely severed from this test. It was really the
p?„ 1-social, the. immoral, the persecuting principles of the
pellfY that rendered them totally unfit to be trusted with
butdeal Power, and this test was adopted as an effectual test,
it
pe excl
puded Roman Catholics for no other reasons than
bare rinciple of idolatry itself. The principles of the
tinDse9 were indeed subject to incidental discussion and con-
thetled discussion in the House
disc Lords and Commons, but
p4est was not a subject of ussion in either house of
s ahla, 'tent The test by which they were excluded was not
that test.,
of discussion, but principles totally irrelevant to
tha" test., Now I say that the test by which these men
exell,!.,d be excluded from political power, if they are to be
the uued, should be a test specifying the crimes through which
a° are unfit to be entrusted with it, and obliging them to re-
ea,tinee those crimes. that if those crimes are proved to be
aa-u„ eeted with the dogmas of their faith, then they must re-
be'llee the crime and faith together, or they are not to
admitted to legislate for this country. Hear, hear.)
Roman
test was unwise for another reason—it united the
41 an Catholic hierarchy and laity in one indissoluble bond.
of stead of appealing, as we ought to do, to the laity ; instead
ee,,llPPealing, as we ought to do, to tbe understandings and I
ee'seiences of men ; instead of opening to them the base
of slavery and subjection, spiritual and temporal,
n,. winch they are kept by their priesthood ; that test per-
-Itted
ex,, the priests to tell the people—" Oh, we are altogether
~,,',oded, in one common bond of persecution, because we
esZere to the faith of our church—because we adore the sa•
1 mill:lents, and bedause we worship the Virgin Mary." Now
hi,7•Y a test to exclude Roman Catholics ought to sever the
h:arehy from the laity, it ought to shew the laity that it is
use they ;choose to submit themselves to the base de-
,"lal? slavery of the papacy, that, therefore, they are not
stand and legislate with freemen. (Loud cheers.) And
tier shall any good be done for England, for this empire,
pa' whatever means you take to deliver yourselves from the
e,Pal tyranny, you embody with those means faithful honest
u,atistian efforts to deliver the Rowan Catholic laity from
1„"e sabominable bondage of the papacy. (Continued cheer-
jr.) Just consider. You were accustomed to consider
popery in a very false point of view. Popery, as popery,
means the united priests and people. Now there is a great
:ad essential difference between the Roman Catholic hierarchy
d laity. (Hear, hear.) What is popery ? Popery is all
...sli
'"elesiastical system—a system of ecclesiastical tyranny, in-
"eated by Satan, by which men united together, in ecclesias-
4eal bonds are to enslave, to subsidize, and destroy the whole
1,-ttillati race, The hierarchy, from the Pope to the curate,
the members constituting this tyranny, the-Roman Ca-
irhe laity are its victims and its slaves. (Hear.) True
4aY are corrupted by it, true they are united to it, true they
ire madetools for carrying that wickedness into effect ; but
V. they are the victims, and not the authors of the crime.
bat the poor Roman Catholic laity of Ireland ever know that
toeleg theology was the standard by which their priests were
40.direet their consciences ? I. believe in my heart there is
CO man of them in Ireland that knew it. Did the Roman
'"ulic laity in Ireland ever see these provincial statutes for
Wl°
thei_Ps which they were to set up as the standard to govern
a a,: consciences? I believe not. (Hear.) There was not
tit;;: 111 in Ireland that ever saw the book in which Dr. Murray
-.Led his provincial statutes. He would not allow his
kse
Iler to dispose of a single copy. As soon as it was
otiled it was sent to him, and he with his own hands clis-
l'uted the copies to the bishops and priests ; and had
,it
A n..L been - for the providence of God, we should have known
OfTilla of it. The poor Roman Catholic laity are ignorant
froZ They are suffering under the effects of this system--
thZ the effects of those tremendous stimulants applied to
hei-L,?Y men that ought to be the physicians of their souls,
70 lead them to ruin. (Hear.) But the men who are
tie,ue secret medical college, they prescribe in their own
the llown characters—the bishops we will call the physicians.
who Priests the apothecaries, and the poor people the patients
the take their doses • thus they suffer under the stimulus of
dee- Potions prepared 'for them, without being aware of the
alt!) and damnable nature of the poison that is administered.
iih7ar-) Now, I say, let us boldly and faithfully testify
Loitilniat the primes of the hierarchy ; let us bring these crimes
den;leand fiiithfully before the laity, ar,d make them either
(14:1'Y themselves with them, or, like men, renounce them.
uaw.7l%) There was another ground upon which the test was
dee Ise. It furnished popery with a means to blind and to
do the the nation. The crimes of the papacy were not men-
Iv, az, -,.‘4 in the test. They were excluded from Parliament it
her 'rue, but it was merely for an article of conscientious
fortlef • hthe test,
.therefore, . enabled them to send
dehabr at most specious plea—it enabled popery, the. most
Ilespat4 temporal tyranny, and the most debasing spiritual
*ard .1841, that ever degraded the human race, to stand for-
eivii In the unnatural position of advocating the cause of
wb ta,r!(l religious liberty. (Hear.) There was another cause
/to "Is Was an unwise test resulting from this. It enabled
manti Catholic demagogues to form a most unnatural coali-
lie"arWith the Protestant dissenters of England. (Cheers.)
Year 1 theB6 address of Mr. O'Connell to the dissenters in the
OtOue contend for precisely similar objects. We, like you,
prOfC t'e free from all restrictions, if we could consent to
aol3i4ions which we do not believe. Our sincerity,

like yours, would be rewarded with the concession of all civil
rights, and if we were base enough to despise or undervalue
the sacred obligation of an oath, we could set persecution at
defiance, and obtain, at once, total emancipation."
This is Mr. O'Connell's appeal to the dissenters, and they
were deceived. Here, then, were the sentiments of this man
addressed to the Protestant dissenters, and what was the
consequence ? The consequence was that it produced, I must
say again, a most unnatural alliance between them. For Pro-
testant dissenters and churchmen, even in the utmost ex-
tremes of difference of opinion upon any other subject,
have on this but one common cause and one common interest
in standing together against the common enemy and oppres-
sor of conscience, of civil and religious liberty, the dethroner
of the Bible from the education of the fellow-men, and the
persecutress of liberty of conscience throughout the whole
world. (Hear.) Therefore, I say this test permitted popery
to escape from all her crimes, and to come out now as she
professed to come out, as the advocate of civil and religious
liberty, to pretend that she was deprived of her political free-
dom merely for a conscientious article of her creed. (Hear.)
Now I believe that this system of imposture by which Roman
, Catholics carried their point has so effectually blinded the
'nation, that I do not think that that test ever could be set
up in England again. That is my opinion upon the subject
,which I take the liberty of faithfully and plainly expressing.
Allow me now just to read the statement and the sentiments
of that most distinguished statesman, Sir Robert Peel, upon
this subject expressed this year. (Hear.) This is quoted—
I believe the speech of the right hon. baronet was delivered
in the House of Commons upon the question of a vote of
censure against ministers—by Mr. Eneas Macdonnell, in a
,letter to the Times—
" If it were no longer possible to maintain disabilities in
4829, surely to dream of imposing them now is among the
wildest visions that ever disturbed the imagination. Repeal
the Emancipation Bill! and what next? Will you leave to
the Roman Catholics the privileges which they held before
the Relief Bill, and independently of it ? But those privi-
leges (the elective franchise in particular), and the substan-
tial power which they conferred, were the main instruments
by which the Relief Bill was carried. If you are prepared to
withhold those privileges, (and withhold them you must), the
measure you advise is not the mere repeal of the Emancipa-
tion Act, but the retracing all the steps of gradual concession
for a century back, till you remount to penal laws and abso-
lute servitude."
High as is my opinion of this distinguished statesman, I can-
not possibly coincide with the last sentiment here expressed,
as to the imposition of penal laws—if you mean by that the
penalties that were inflicted upon Roman Catholics for con-
scientious adherence to their religion. The penal laws of
persecution I hold in utter abhorrence. (Hear.) But it is
a very different question to say whether protective laws for
British liberty, and Protestant freedom, are to be maintained
or established in this country. It is a very different ques-
tion, whether I am to protect myself from the invasion of
men who will periecute and enslave me, or whether I shall
persecute and enslave them. The one I hold to be a Chris-
tian duty ; the other I hold to be an anti-Christian curse.
(Cheers.) Hear again what the right hon. baronet said :
" I have observed, as the law has decreed a civil equality
to all classes in Ireland, without reference to religious dis-
tinctions, the crown ought not, by the interposition of its pre-
rogative, to create practically a difference which the law does
not recognise. I think the crown ought to act on the prin-
ciple of the law, and not make the religious opinions enter-
tained by any man the ground of disqualification for the ex-
ercise of civil functions."
Mark how the right hon. baronet himself is caught by the
delusion that Popery has been practising upon the nation,
that she is excluded from political power for a mere religious
opinion. (Hear, hear.) We shall, however, consider this
fact in a few moments. Now, I believe there is a mode free
from all these objections to this test, by whieh the Protes-
tants of this empire could effectually deliver themselves from
the power of the papacy, and from which they could go a
step further—the only step under God's providence—and
shield their Roman Catholic fellow-subjects from the bon-
dage of Popery too. (Hear.) But to do this you must act
very differently from the manner in which the Protestants of
this empire have acted. It is universally a part of the policy
of Popery for ever to attack. It is a trick of the Jesuits al-
ways to attack their opponents, to throw them upon their
defence, and thereby prevent them from making an attack in
return. If an individual comes forward to attack them, they
do not meet his arguments or proofs, but, by every species
of calumny and falsehood, they blacken his character, and so
they force him away from the object in dispute to defend
himself. (Hear.) So it was with Jezebel M'Neile and for-
gery M`Ghee. (Hear.) This is what they have done
throughout the whole history of this country ; this is what
they are doing at this moment. Show me one single point
on which concession to the Papacy has produced an instant of
peace to this empire. I defy you to do it. What is the fact?
As you have conceded one demand, another and a fresh one has
come forward with greater violence and atrocity. (Cheers.)
Who were the men most insulted and abused by those per-
sons to whom emancipation was granted? (Hear.) There
have not been two men in the empire more insulted or so
much abused, through the malignity of popery, as the Duke
of Wellington and Sir Robert Peel, the very men who granted
emancipation. After emancipation had been conceded then
came the cry for " Justice to Ireland." Next came the de-
mand for municipal corporations. Municipal corporations
were granted—aye, basely conceded to the Roman Catholics
of Ireland, and then comes out " the repeal of the Union !"
So they go on from one thing to another, till now they are in
an attitude of open hostility, and they are seektng to dismem-
ber the British empire. (Hear.) What is to be done then?
I do not believe you can restore the old test ; but I believe
you can put a new test upon them that will go into the very
heart of the papacy. (Cheers.) That is what you must do.
(Hear.) You must now turn and carry the war into the very
heart of Rome ; you must carry it into her politics, her mo-
rals, and her religion ; and so instruct your representatives ;
you must show and prove that the system and priesthood are
identified together in guilt and crime and apostacy from God.
(Cheers.) When I say you must so carry on the war, let me
remember, and do you remember, that the weapons of our
warfare are not carnal—it is not by carnal weapons that we
must conquer, but by the weapons of honest Christian fidelity,
of bold, determined, Christian truth, with the bible in one
hand and the laws of the country (to be founded upon that
bible and to be measured by that bible) M the other. (Great
cheering.) In therefore venturing to propose a new teat to
you, and to call upon you for the adoption of this test, I beg
to assure you I do not do so, nor should I presume to do so,
upon my own judgment. I have long deeply considered it.
I have consulted with those who are best informed upon the
subject of the principles of popery; and I know theat there
is not one man in the British dominions who will not think
that the test will be effectual if the Protestants of this
city will take it up, either to deliver themselves from
the papal tyranny, or from what is ten thousand times
more desirable, to deliver their poor Roman Catholic fel-
low-subjects from the tyranny of Rome, and that we may
be permitted to meet together with the bible in our hands,
and to come-together to the feet of our Lord and Saviour.
(Hear.) Then, I say, you must take the crimes of the pa-
pacy, and you must identify them with the faith of the
papacy. You must call upon men to take a test which, when
men read, their consciences must tell them that they can have
no possible right to refuse it. "It seems to me," says
Festus, " unreasonable to send a prisoner, and not withal to
signify the errors laid against him." Now I will send the
accusations with which I charge popery to the British parlia-
ment. The paper contains the test I propose ; it commences
thus : _ _

" Whereas by a certain document of the Church of Rome,
professing to be and commonly received and known as the
third canon of a certain General Council, held in the year of
our Lord 1215, called the Fourth Lateran Council, it is
among other things enacted as follows."
Then is recited the third canon of the Fourth Lateran Council,
which, as it is long, and will be printed for your perusal, I
will not now read, but recommend these two facts concerning
it. First, that you have it on Dr. Doyle's evidence that it
would upturn, if in force, the very foundations of society and
drench our streets and our fields in blood. Secondly, that
you have it proved that it is now set up in Ireland by the
papist prelates as the law for exterminating heretics out of
their dioceses. (Hear, hear.) Now I receite this iniquitous
canon. Then after this is recited, the following canon of the
Council of Trent :
" And whereas in the seventh session of the Council of
Trent, the following canon was enacted :
4 4 FOURTEENTH CANON OF BAPTISM.

" If any man shall say that baptised children, when they
grow up, are to be asked whether they are willing to ratify
what their sponsors promised in their name when they were
baptised, and when they shall answer that they are not will-
ing, that they are to be left to their own will, and not to be
compelled to a Christian life by any other punishment, unless
that they may be debarred from the reception of the Eucharist
and other sacraments, till they repent, let him be anathema.' "
Here I dare say you will ask, why recite this canoe ? we see
no great evil in this. The reason is, because it contains one
of the deepest, deadliest principles of papal persecution ; and
this canon is stated in the second volume of Dens, is the
standard authority for compelling all men, by corporal pu-
nishment, whenever the pope has the power, to return to the
faith of the church. (Hear.) It says, " Unbelievers who have
been betrayed." Now, young and old, remember this prin-
ciple : there is not one among you not interested in it. This
is one fundamental principle of the Church of Rome, that
every man upon earth that is baptised in the Christian church
is made thereby a subject of the Church of Rome ' • and if he
does not submit to the Church of Rome and acknowledge
her authority, the Church of Rome has aright, whenever she
has the power, to compel him to do so by corporal punish-
ment. This is one of her fundamental principles. Now
listen to this—

" That unbelievers have been baptised, as heretics and
apostates generally, and also baptised schismatics, can be
compelled by corporal punishments to return to the catholic
faith and the unity of the church.
" The reason is, that they by baptism are made subjects of
the church, and therefore the church has jurisdiction over
them, and the power of compelling them, by the ordained
means, to obedience, and to fulfil the obligations contracted
in their baptism.
" This also, obtains in the case of those who have been
baptised in their infancy, or who, compelled by fear or any
necessity, have received baptism ; as the council of Trent
teaches, session 7, canon 14 ; and the 4th council of Toledo,
canon 55."
Here you see the canon of Trent is quoted as the infallible
authority for this atrocious persecution. I take this out of a
proved standard of the church of Rome by which the Roman
catholic population are to be drilled. I take the canons
which they themselves have quoted as their authority for
compelling protestants to submit to the dominion of the p"-
paty, so that there is reason for taking that canon. There is
recited in the text the same principle taken from their funda-
mental standard, the catechism of the council of Trent, thus :
And whereas in the catechism of the council of Trent, the
following principle is laid down on the ninth article of the
creed, speaking of those who are excluded from the church :
" Heretics and schismatics (are excluded), because they
have revolted from the church, nor do they more belong to
the church than deserters belong to the army from which
they have run away. Nevertheless, it is not to be denied
that they are in the power of the church, as persons who can
be called into judgment by her, punished and condemned by
anathema."
Here are their proved canons—their demonstrated principles
from their fundamental standards first recited, then the test
itself is as follows :
And whereas in the aforesaid canons an authority is claimed
by the church of Rome over all baptised persons to submit to
her domination, and to inflict on them pains, penalties, and
persecutions if they refuse to do so. Now
" I A. B. do solemnly, in the presence of God, renounce
and abjure the canons aforesaid so far as they have now been
recited. I believe the same to be immoral, antisocial, into-
lerant, repugnant to the laws of God and to the statutes and
constitution of this realm, and fatal to civil and religious
liberty. I declare that I believe the popes and general coun-
cils who enacted these canons aforesaid were, in so doing,
not only fallible but totally in error, and that they have not
and ought not have any power, weight, or authority over
mil conscience,"
Here is the test, and now let me ask, is there a single man,
is there a single protestant in this empire that would not
gladly take that test? (Cheers.) I believe not one. We
believe these canons to be such as I have described. We
hold that the popes and the councils that enacted them were
not only fallible but totally in error. " Oh," but some
Roman Catholic will say, " that is coming to a dogma of my
faith, you point to my conscience, and I cannot admit that."
" What, then," I reply, " you do not deny this canon."
(Cheers.) Then you hold these persecuting principles; you
bold that y9t have a right to compel us by corporeal punish..
ment to returp,to the church of Rome. Then I tell you in
the face of day that you have no such right, and shull have no
such right if I can help, it to dictate to me, to rule over my
conscience or over the conscience of any one in this empire ?
(Cheers.) You want an equality of civil and religious privi-
leges. Very well. Let us stand upon an equality. Is it not
an equality, that I come to legislate for you when I claim no

i
authority over your conscience ? What right do protestants
claim over the consciences of Roman Catholics ? Do we say
they are accountable to us ? No. We say, and we de-
clare, and proclaim, and we call upon them to know thut they
are accountable, but accountable alone to the Lord God of
Heaven and earth. That is the ground upon which we
legislate for them. But when they come to legislate for us
they say, "Aye, but then you are baptised, and brought up
in the church, therefore you are accountable to him who is
the vicar of Christ on earth, our Lord God the pope ;
(cheers)—he has a right to you, you must submit to him, and
if you do not he has a right to compel you by corporeal
punishment to submit to his authority and to the authority of
the church of Rome." I call this not equality but slavery—
installing a foreigner into the right of persecuting me as a
slave, and if the protestants of England will do their duty
they will stand up as one man against it. (Cheers.) Now I
will go back for a moment to the speech of the right hon. bart.
Sir Robert Peel. He says he calls these religious opinions.
He means by this the test which was proposed and enacted
by the British parliament to exclude Roman Catholics from
power. He calls this a religious opinion. But I would ask
the right hon. bart. whether he calls the traitorous laws of
Lateran religious opinions ? Will he call the canons of the
council of Trent which authorizes popery to invade the rights
and liberty of the protestants of this empire as religious opi-
nions ? (Hear.) Will he say that power is to be given to
men who are to use that power against their sovereign and
against their fellow-subjects by laws which they themselves
acknowledge would have torn the very foundations of society
asunder, and drenched our streets and fields with blood ?
(Hear.) No man in the British empire would be further from
calling these religious opinions than the right hon. hart. But
then comes the question,—" How do you prove this ? "
(Hear.) Now we can reply—" Go to your universities."
(Hear.) I have petitioned to be called to the bar of the house
of commons, and lay these laws before them, and let Mr.
O'Connell deny them if he can. (Hear, hear.) My petition
has been shelved. I will never petition again, but I say—
Let those who doubt go to onr universities,--let them go
to the learning and talent of Oxford and Cambridge and in-
stitute a comparison of this test with the principles of the pa-
pacy. I would say to the hon. bart. you have heard the evi-
idence of these men. You have heard them renounce these
persecuting tenets, you have heard their oaths, their decla-
rations you have them recorded in the proceedings of parlia-
ment. Now go to your universities. (Hear.) Mr. Pitt
sent to foreign universities to enquire into their principles,
but you need not go so far. Go now to Oxford or Cambridge,
there you shall find their doctrines, their standards, and have
their laws, their notes of the Bible by which they instruct
the poor. Compare them with their oaths and ask them—
" Do you mean to stand up and tell the British nation these
are the religious principles of the church of Rome ? "
(Hear.) Now I dare say if the Roman catholic hierarchy
had to choose between this test and the test which has been
repealed by the bill of 1829, they would ask for that test ten
thousand times over. Here is the secret of Dr. Murray's
letter. I did not propose this test in Exeter Hall as I pro-
posed it to you, but I read it at Exeter Hall. (Hear, hear,
and loud cheers.) Dr. Murray and Mr. Daniel O'Connell
know the tremendous power of that engine, if it was
taken up by the Protestants of this country, and brought
forward in parliament, upon the subject of the papacy ;
therefore the letter was written directly from Dr. Murray,
and out it came, denying this bull and these canons. Let
him have the benefit of his denial, now we have proved it,
when and where he pleases. But I call upon you this day,
as you value all that is dear to man, to stand forward your-
selves and take this test. Insist upon the men who repre-
sent you in parliament, that they shall stand with that test,
or your petitions upon it, in their hands—present those peti-
tions, and support those petitions which you may prepare.
(Hear.) If the Protestant Association of Liverpool does
but maintain its own bold fidelity, such as I doubt not it
will ; if you do but take it up, it will go through the length
and breadth of the British empire, and a Protestant blow will
be struck at the very heart of the papal superstition. It will,
I trust in God, open the eyes of the Roman Catbolic laity,
and make them come out and deliver themselves from such
dark, degrading, damnable slavery as this is. (Great cheer-
ing.) I cannot conclude the subject without again express-
ing, that so far from feeling a sentiment of hostility to my
poor countrymen, before my God my heart grieves for their
subjugation. I say they should take that test. Oh ! that
they might take it! (Hear.) Oh! if the Roman Catholic
laity would take that test, and if they would but take it at
once, Rome is gone for ever in this empire. (Cheers.) Let
them renounce the canons of their creed and the fundamen-
tal articles of their church, by which those canons are brought
to bear upon their consciences and their souls, the infallibi-
lity of popes and councils, and the authority of the popish
hierarchy is blasted for ever in the consciences of the Roman
Catholic population. (Hear.) I commit the cause to God,
and under God I commit it this day to the fidelity, to the
Christian boldness, to the Christian principle, let me say to
the Christian love of Protestant liberty and freedom, let me
add to the love of the Bible, and let me say to the honest
Christian fidelity and love of the souls of our Roman Catho-
lic countrymen,—l commit it, I say, to these, in the pre-
sence of the Protestants of England. (The rev. gentleman,
whose admirable address occupied two hours and twenty
minutes, then resumed his seat, amidst thunders of applause
from all parts of the house.)

ARRIVAL OF THE STEAM-SHIP " ORIENTAL."

This deservedly favourite vessel arrived in the Mersey, on
Saturday morning, on her return voyage from Alexandria,
after the finest run out and home yet on record, exceeding
in speed, indeed, even the sanguine expectations of those
most deeply interested in her success. She accomplished
the passage—
From Alexandria to Malta in.
Malta to Gibraltar in
Gibraltar to Falmouth in
Falmouth to Liverpool in

351 hours.
The time within which she would be considered due by the
government at the three first ports respectively, is 120; 115,
and I'2o hours ; so that she performed the distance from
Alexandria to Falmouth in 321 hours less than was thus an-
ticipated.
She brought 26 passengers, some of whom, no doubt, were
desirous of landing at Falmouth ' • but as there is no Lazarette
at that port, the whole necessarily came round with the vessel
to the Mersey. The vessel, on her arrival, fired a salute from
the large guns which she carries, and proceeded to the
quarantine ground, where she still lies at anchor. There
being no sickness on board, no time was lost in making the
u'sual application to the proper authorities in London for her
release from " durance vile" under the yellow flag ; and it is
fully expected that to-morrow's post will bring down the
official order for the "emancipation" of those on board, who
will thereupon disembark with their luggage. Meantime,
they appear to have made up their minds to enjoy the good
things of this life on board, some fresh supplies of which have
been daily sent by the quarantine boats.*
Our reporter went alongside yesterday afternoon, and was
kindly favoured by Captain Soy with several Malta papers,
the latest to the 25th ult. Their contents are anticipated.
One of a later date, announcing the arrival of the Oriental
at Malta, with some news from the East, would also have
been handed to him, but had by some means got mislaid in
the saloon. Captain Soy also favoured us with the following
particulars of vessels he had spoken on the passage :-
Ist Oct.—Passed the barque Florence, of London. Spoke
the schooner Agnes, of London, lat. 38 50, long. 10 54.
sth Oct.—At 9 A.M., spoke the Great Liverpool, lat.
40 19, long. 90 19—about 45 miles north of Oporto. (The
sister ships, it need scarcely be said, exchanged three hearty
cheers on parting.)
As is usual, the newspapers, together with some letters to
be put into the post-office, given to our reporter, were all
taken on board the quarantine-officer's vessel, and fumigated
before they could be brought on shore.
The Oriental had generally tine weather going out to Alex-
andria, and light airs and a smooth sea throughout in coming
home. The ship and the engines worked to admiration, and
the passengers express the utmost satisfaction with the splen-
did accommodations, and the attention and urbanity of the
captain and officers. She has on board 45 tons of coals.'
The only paragraph of interest which we find in the papers
before us, relates to the British naval force now in the Me-
diterranean, which has probably since that date been con-
siderably increased. It is from Il Mediterraneo, Gazetta di
Malta, of the 23d ultimo :—" The British naval force in the
Mediterranean now consists of 12 line of battle ships, six
frigates, two post corvettes, one sloop, four brigs, two steam
frigates, four large war steamers, five steam-packets, one
steam tender, two surveying vessels, one receiving ship, and
one coal depot, forming iu all 41 pendants of the burthen of
45,600 tons, mounting about 1300 guns, and carrying 11,800
officers, men, and boys, of which 2,600 are marines and
marine artillery. The combined power of the 12 steamers is
that of about 2,420 horses. Nearly the whole of this large
force is concentrated off Beyrout. Many other vessels are
fitting out in England, of which no less than five line of
battle ships are for this station."
So soon as the " Oriental" is released from quarantine she
will be towed down by one of the government boats to the
Sloyne. She will not dock, we understand, until Saturday,
the deepening of the Coburg Dock not being yet so far com-
pleted as to allow of the gate being closed.

ABDICATION OF THE KING OF HOLLAND.

King William is now in his 68th year. He was born on
the 24th August, 1772 ; married on the Ist October, 1791,
a Princess of Prussia; in 1793 took the command of the
Dutch army upon the occasion of the declaration of war by
the French Directory against the Stadtholder of the United
Provinces. He took Lanerecies in 1794, retired into Hol-
land with his troops after the battle of Fleurus, embarked
with his family for England in 1785, and took possession in
1802 of the small German principalities which bad been
ceded to his father in exchange for his rights in Holland,
and which his father in turn had ceded to him. In 1806 he
inherited the sovereignty of Nassau ' • commanded the right
wing of the Prussians at the battle of Jena; was taken pri-
soner, and lost his estates after that battle ; afterwards took
service under the Austrian government, and assisted, in
1809, at the battle of Wagram • was recalled into Holland
at the moment when the entire Of Germany marched against
France ' • took the reins of government of the Low Countries
on the 6th December, 1813 ; received on the 30th March,
1814, the oath of allegiance as a sovereign prince ; on the
16th of March, 1815, took the title of King ; promulgated
the " fundamental law" on the 24th August, 1815 ; was
crowned on the 21st September, 1815; summoned all Hol-
land to arms on the sth October, 1830, after the success of
the Belgian insurrection ; and declared on the 20th October
in the same year, that he would confine himself to the go-
vernment of the northern provinces. He lost his royal
consort in the month of October, 1837 •, accepted the
" twenty-four articles" on the 14th of March, 1838 ; on the
26th May, 1839, signed the ratification of the treaty of the
19th of April ; and on the 4th of September, in the present
year, promulgated the changes introduced by him into the
fundamental law.

The Prince of Orange is 48 years old, having been born
on the 6th December, 1792. The news of the King's abdi-
cation produced an immense sensation, both at the Hague
and at Amsterdam. In the latter city, the funds imme-
diately fell one per cent, and a still further depression was
anticipated. A letter from
the Hague of the Ist October
states, that "persons living in the prince royal's intimacy
have already suffered some words to escape them as to the
line of conduct which the prince intended to pursue imme-
diately after his accession:: He proposes to commence by
two great measures, the object of which is to restore royalty
to that popularity, which, in the last conflict with the cham-
ber and with public opinion, it would seem to have irrevoca•
bly lost. The first of these measures consists in taking it
on himself to guarantee the payment of the interest on all
the loans contracted for (such as the construction of the
railway to Arnheim.) It had been a question whether this
guarantee should fall on the king himself, or on the heir
apparent. The new king, by taking this guarantee on him-
self, would solve the question in a mode the most satisfactory
to the holders of these securities. The second measure,
which is much more important still, is the immediate nomi-
nation of a state commission, charged with the duty of
renewing the fundamental law, and proposing, within the
shortest possible period, certain changes which would be
forthwith submitted to the chamber. In choosing the mem-
bers of this commission, it is understood that the new sove-
reign will be influenced by public opinion.
The Belgian papers. state, that the King of Holland's
principal motive for retiring into private life is, that he may,
without dispute, fulfil the sacred promise which he has given,
ana marry the Countess d'Oultremont. As there is no
longer any obstacle to oppose this union, it is supposed that
it will speedily take place.

MUNICIPAL REVISION.

TUESDAY.
The business of the court commenced at 9 o'clock, and the
mayor and assessors resumed the revision of the list for Scot-
land Ward.
Thos. Murphy, of Back Portland-street, was objected to
by the conservatives. He stated, that he had lived in Arley-
street, whence he removed in September, 1839. He had
lived there seven years, and had regularly paid his rates. On
examination by Mr. Wilkins, it appeared that the rates had
until recently been paid by 11Irs. Winifred Murphy.
Mr. WlLenes.—Who is Winifred Murphy ?
Witness.—My mother.
Mr. JAMES.—Oh, I suppose she's dead. When did your
mother die ?
Witness.—She never died at all—(laughter)—she's alive
yet.
Mr. WILKINS.—WeII, sir, you may go ; you'll not have
a vote yet. The name was struck off.
Martin Murphy, Woodstock-street, and Martin Murphy,
Carlton-street, were objected to by the conservatives. They
stated that they had paid their rates, but the money was bor-
rowed from the Protector Society. The money was paid by
themselves, and no person accompanied either of them. The
votes were allowed. Several similar cases occurred, the votes
being allowed where the parties proved the payment of the
rates in propria persona, without the intervention of another
party. A very large majority of the individuals called did
not answer, and these were allowed to stand over to appear
when the lists are again gone over, the proofs of service of
notice being given so as to save time in future. Many cases
were heard, in which the claims were immediately allowed on
both sides, and others in which the names were struck out.
The majority of these, however, were destitute of any point
or circumstance either of interest or importance. Such cases
as seemed to excite most amusement and interest in the court,
we shall record briefly ; the others would only occupy space,
without affording either gratification or instruction.
Robert Naylor, Collingwood-street, was objected to by the
reformers, but did not appear. The person who served the
notice of objection was called upon to prove the service. An
individual, evidently an Irishman, started up and exclaimed,
Robert Naylor, is it ? Och, 1 noticed him ! (Laughter.)
Mr. JAMES.—You noticed him ! What do you mean, did
you look at him ?
Witness.—Oh, I did !
Mr. WILKINS.—Did you serve him, sir ?
Witness.—l did ! I served him out. The notice server
was rebuked by the court, and proceeded to prove the notice
regularly. The case stood over.
Peter Nelson, Burlington-street, was objected to by the
reformers. A friend appeared for him, who proved that he
had resided in the house for which he claimed his qualification
four or five years, and it was shown that his rates had been
regularly paid.
Mr. JAMES.—What is Mr. Nelson ?
Witness.—He is a dealer in Irish provisions.
Mr. JAMES.—Is he not a foreigner ? •
Witness.—l should think he was an Irishman, and they
are aliens in the opinion of some people, sir. The vote was
allowed.
Richard "Williams, Green-street, was objected to by the
reformers. Mr. Williams appeared for her husband. In
reply to the questions put to her, she stated that she paid three
years' taxes at once. She did not borrow the money any-
where, but received it from her husband, and her husband
worked hard for it. Vote allowed.
James Waring, Rose-place, objected to by the reformers,
stated, that he had paid two years rates at once. He paid
them himself on the 31st August, at the parish-office, in Fen-
wick-street. He paid them with his own money, and did not
get any money from any one for the purpose. Vote allowed.
William Winstanley, voting for a house and warehouse in
Regent-road, was objected to by the reformers. It appeared
that he had resided on the premises, for which he claimeu,
twenty-one years, and had paid his rates regularly.
The MAyou. said he thought a case of this sort certainly
showed the necessity for some arrangement for getting rid of
frivolous objections.
Mr. 'WILKINS said he was sure that he had no objection
to such an arrangement.
Mr. JAMES said he had no authority to enter into such an
arrangement.
The list for Scotland Ward having beets entirely called
over, the court requested that those residing in that ward,
who happened to be in court, would step forward. Several
cases were thus disposed of.
Many cases were disposed of, involving points similar to
those already given. Much discussion took place occasion-
ally respecting the rules that had already been laid down.
At length Mr. HARVEY stood up, and produced a written
paper, in which, he said, he had laid down the principles on
which he thought they ought to act, drawn from the decisions
given. Mr. HARVEY read the first paragraph of his rules,
to which Mr. WRIGHT responded, " I dissent from that ; I
won't be bound by those rules." This was followed by loud
applause from the body of the court. Mr. HARVEY said he
had then no more to say.
Mr. WRIGHT said there had not been proper courtesy,
shown to him. If the paper had been read to him first, per-
haps that would not have happened. They had tried before
to get rid of him by a side wind; but they should not get rid
of him, he promised them. He would sit there and decide.
(Loud applause.)
The MAYOR said he must have misunderstood the words
uttered by Mr. Wright. Mr. WRIGHT said " they had en-
deavoured to get rid of him by a side wind." Did Mr.
Wright mean to imply that he (the Mayor) had been a party
to any such attempt ?
Mr. WRIGHT said he did not mean the words to apply to
the Mayor at all.
Here the conversation was continued between Mr. Wright
and Mr. Harvey, and Mr. Wright, in a low tone, and shortly
after the business was resumed.
Mr. John Coglan, one of the Protector Society, was brought
under examination, and, as in the course of his testimony,
he displayed some knowledge of that body. Mr. HARVEY,
as he was leaving the witness-box, said he should like, as
much as had arisen about this society, to know something
more about it. The witness was therefore, recalled, and in
reply to Mr. Harvey stated, that the members paid weekly
sums of money as they could afford. It was like a benefit
society. It was founded about twelve months ago. If the
poor people who belonged to it were short of money, they
could borrow it from this society. It was just the same as
a benefit society.
Mr. PINNINGTON.—IS it for the relief of the sick?
Mr. WILKINS said he should like, if the int:se-'on were to
gain information, to ask a great many question:, of this wit-
ness.
Mr. HARVEY said, he should certainly wish it himself.
The court permitted Mr. Wilkins to examine. The wit-
ness said, the society had no printed rules. He could not
say whether it was enrolled according to law. It was under
the management of different secretaries. Its objects were to
enable poor men to pay their rates, and become burgesses.
He (witness) had taken out about for different people.
He had himself paid in about £2 75., out of his own pocket.
He had no vouchers for his money, but the books would
show his payments. There was a fund belonging to the
society. He had known his neighbours to pay small dona-
tions to it. He did not know of any gentleman having con-
tributed to it. Had seen Mr. Ronson at the meeting, and
believed he was A barrister.
Mr. WlLKlNS.—Suppose I, as a tory, were to subscribe,
would the society allow me, as a tory, to draw money to pay
my rates, if I could not pay them myself?
Witness.—l won't answer any more questions.
Here ensued a great uproar of cheering, hissing, and cla-
mour. The mayor had done his utmost to suppress their
demonstrations, having absolutely forbidden them as unbe-
coming ; having also requested the counsel on both sides not
to say anything likely to excite party feeling, and the consta-
bles to put out of court any one who should be seen infring-
ing the rule which he bad laid down. His worship now
ordered a person to be put out who had uttered a loud cry
upon hearing the reply above recorded.
Mr. Coglan was about to retire, when Mr. JAMES requested
that he might be allowed to ask him a few questions. He
elicited nothing material, except that the parties who " bor-
rowed money" front the society undertook to repay it, and
that when they had money advanced to them they were
required to become members.
Mr. BRITHERTON said, if Mr. Wilkins wished to put any
questions relative to the Protector Society, he knew all about
that association, and was ready to answer.
Mr. WILKINS said, he would rather continue his examina-
tion of that witness.
This was acceded to, and the witness was told that lie must
answer the learned gentleman's question. He believed a
poor man would not be admitted to the society if lie were a
conservative. He did not know what the funds of the so-
ciety were. The payments were made either weekly or
monthly. He did not know of any collections being made
on Sundays, "at present." He had known them to be
made. Not at the Catholic Chapel, but at the neighbours'
houses. He did not know that Mr. O'Connell subscribed.
By Mr. Harvey—The society was not confined to Irish-
men. but it was confined to reformers.
Mr. BrtemenToss repeated his offer.
Mr. WRIGHT said they had nothing to do with the sub-
ject of the Protector Society.
Mr. WluKiss said he should wish very much to get what
information he could from Mr. Bretherton, but he should
take a great deal of time if he did so.
The MAYOR thought it would be best if Mr. Wilkins
wished to question Mr. Bretherton, to go on then with the
regular business, and take that after eight o'clock.
Mr. WILKINS.—No? upon my word I will not.
Here the subject dropped. Subsequently a Mr. Pickering
was called to speak to the nature of some premises, in respect
to which, a person claimed a qualification.
Mr. JAMES—In the cross-examination of this person, who
is a publican in Vauxhall-road, elicited from him, that he had
furnished Robert Jackson, a tenant of his, with money to
pay his rates. Much applause and uproar followed this an-
nouncement, upon which the Mayor declared, that he would
dismiss every officer in the court upon the spot, if they did
not do their duty, and remove those who were guilty of such
unseemly demonstrations in a court of deliberation. Mr.
Superintendent Tyrrell went to a person whom he had seen
clapping his hands, and wished to remove him. Some alter-
cation ensued, and the Mayor, on hearing that the superin-
tendent had seen the gentlemen clap his hands, requested
that the latter might be removed. The gentleman denied
that he had acted as stated, but he immediately withdrew.
Mr. James continued his examination of Mr. Pickering, who,
on being pressed with some severity, became much heated.
Mr. Wilkins interposed, on what he presumed were severe
araignments of the veracity of the witness, and some warm
words passed between the learned gentlemen, which, as is
usual in such cases, appeared to be forgotten as soon as ut-
tered. We have not space for the whole of Mr. Pickering's
cross-examination, but the facts elicited were, in substance,
as follows :
Witness had gone round the town and collected money to
pay the taxes of poor men. He gave the money to his wife.
He did not give any of it to any one else. He did not know
what had become of it. He could not say she had it now.
He inferred that it had been used for the payment of rates,
for he had seen that the rates of persons were paid who could
not pay them for themselves.
Mr. JAMES.—WIIO did you collect it from ?
Witness.—From different people.
Mr. JAMES.—How much did you collect ?
Witness.—l won't tell you.
Here there was another hubbub, which however quickly
subsided.
Mr. JAMES said he would have an answer, and the witness
protested that lie would not tell, saying, "you won't get it
out of me if you question me from this time till to-morrow
night. This Mr. James deemed impertinent which the wit-
ness took in high dudgeon. In reply to another question,
Mr. Pickering said he got the money from different gentle-
men. Mr. James wished to know their names, to which the
witness replied flatly, " I won't tell you!"
Mr. WILKINS said, after this he should ask from any wit-
ness whatever questions he pleased ; and instead of the list
being concluded in fourteen days, it would not be finished in
twice fourteen days.
The court adjourned at eight o'clock to nine this morning.
The MAYOR said, he hoped some arrangement would be
conic to by the opposing parties for abbreviating the business,
otherwise they were merely losing labour, for the whole list
would be disfranchised.

WEDNESDAY.
AN OBSTINATE PRECURSOR.
James M'Amley, housekeeper, Chisenhate-street, was ob-
jected to by the conservatives. The voter was a labourer
subject to the payment of rates. Borrowed the money to pay
his rates from a person named M'lntee, who lived in Rich-
mond-row. Did not know IVl`lntee ; got the money from
him on the 31st August ; could not tell what IVl'lntee did ;
went along with a neighbour ; paid some of the money last
night to the man who gave it to him on the 31st August.
Mr. WILKINS.—Upon your oath did you pay the money
to Mr. M'lntee?
Witness.--I paid it on the same table I got it from.
Mr. HARVEY.—YOB must be aware that in former cases

when the same line of conduct was pursued, the votes were
ejected.
Mr. WILKINS.—I again put the question. Did you bor-
row the money from the Protector Society ?
Witness.—l don't know.
If you did'nt know that Mr. M'lntee got it from the Pro-
tector Society, why did you pay it to the Protector Society ?
I had as good a right to pay it there as any other place.
Did you suppose Mr. M'lntee came from the Protector
Society ?
Yes.
How much money did you get ?
Fourteen shillings and fourpence.
Where did you get the receipt?
In my own house.
Mr. HARVEY (to Mr. Wilkins).—What object do you in-
tend to show by this examination?
Mr. WILKINS.—To show that this man is not to be be-
lieved.
Mr. HARVEY.—If you want to prove that this man has
prevaricated in his evidence there is no occasion.
Mr. WILKINS.—I don't want to make comparisons. My
duty is to endeavour to strike off as many objectionable voters
as possible.
Mr. JAMES contended that as the rates had been paid the
vote stood good. lie admitted that the voter had contra-
dicted himself in some points ; but he held that the assessors
were to receive what evidence had been of a satisfactory na-
ture, and not to reject the evidence altogether.
Mr. WILKINS spoke at great length, and defied his learned
friend to point out any part in which the voter had spoken
the truth. What was the motive that induced this man to
prevaricate to-day ? To get his name on the register. The
same motive would prompt him to say that his name was
James M'Amley • and it had not been proved that he was
the James Nl`Amley whose name was on the rate-book. He
submitted it for the consideration of the bench whether the
motive that actuated the man to tell a lie in the one case
would not induce him to tell it in the other?
Mr. HARVEY said he was so disgusted with several cases
which had been brought before them by both parties, that he
felt it would be necessary to come to some arrangement.
Mr. WRIGHT thought the arguments which had been
adduced were applicable to this case.
Mr. WILKINS would feel obliged if Mr. Wright would give
his opinion. His only object was to save time.
Mr. HARVEY said it was no use blinking the question.
The public were aware of the political opinions of Mr.
Wright and himself, and they were under the impression that
the assessors were biassed by party motives.- For himself
he sat there in the capacity of a lawyer, and he thought the
vote was good. . .

Mr. WiiIGHT would reject the vote ; but he was not to
have his opinion called forth ad captandlon at the desire of
any man.
The MAYOR said he had taken the best advice on this
case, and he was of opinion that the vote ought to be al-
lowed.

A LEARNED RADICAL.
Patrick M'Cabe was objected to by the conservatives. The
voter was a labourer, and occupied a house in Banastre-
street, for which he paid rates. Got the money from the
Protector Society ; had occupied the same house for the last
three years.
Mr. WILKINS.—How do you know that ?—Can you tell
me the name of the next month?
Witness.—l don't know. I am no scholar; I never re-
saved any laming.
What is the first month in the year.
I disremember. (Laughter.)
How many months are there in the year ?
Faith an' I'm not sure ; I think there's twelve.
Do you count four weeks to the month ?
I takes 'ens as they come. (Laughter.)
How do you know that you have been three years in that
house ?
Sure and the riot tells me.
The AI AY OR.—llow do you pay your rent?
Witness.—Once a-week only.
Mr. JAM as.—Do you remember when you went to the
house you now occupy.
Witness.—l'm not sartain ; it might be a week before
Christmas.
How many Christmas days have passed since you went to
that house ?
Faix, nearly a couple of 'em. (Roars of laughter.)
Mr. WRIGHT was proceeding to remark upon the nature
of the evidence, when
Mr. JAMES (with some warmth) interrupted him.—Let
me first conclude, and then you may comment.
Mr. WRIG llT.—l'll make an observation when I think
proper.
Mr. JAMES.—I am not asleep.
Mr. Wnienr.—Nor I.
Mr. Shaw, overseer, then examined the parish books, when
it was found that in 1838 M`Cabe was rated for a different
house to that on which he now claimed.
Mr. JAMES.—I must abandon this case.
Vote disallowed.
The court adjourned at.five o'clock.
THURSDAY.
The mayor, attended by the assessors, opened the court at
the time appointed. With the exception of some frivolous
cases of objections by both parties, which were either with-
drawn or speedily gone through, the time of the court was
taken up in attending to objections by the conservatives
against members of the Protector Society, or by radicals
against parties who had been put on the list by the conserva-
tives, and contained nothing materially different from those
already before the public.
FRIDAY.
The mayor and the assessors took their seats at 9 o'clock.
VAUXHALL WARD.
The remaining objections to voters in this ward were gone
through, without anything of interest occurring.
ST. PAUL'S WARD.
Mr. WILKINS, on this ward being called on, said he was
instructed to move for the postponement of the hearing of
cases in this ward on the ground of the abduction of a notice
server.
Two affidavits were handed in, and read by the clerk of the
court.
The first affidavit was the depositon of a female named
Alice Jackson, residing in Henry-street, and was to the effect
that a person named Thomas Turtle, who had been lodging
at her house, and who had been employed to serve notices of
objections upon the conservative interest, for St. Paul's
Ward, was at two o'clock on the morning of the 30th August,
when in liquor, taken away by two persons from her house,
and that she had not since heard of him. The second affida-
vit was that of James Richardson, another notice server, and
was to the effect that a Mr. Wm. Jones, attorney-at-law
had called upon deponent, and in the course of a conversa-
tion
asked him if lie had seen Thomas Turtle, to which de-
ponent answered he had not; and Jones replied, " he's right
enough ; " and offered deponent money and a situation if lie
would leave Liverpool and go to reside in Dublin. The affi-
davits further stated that dilligent search had been made for
Turtle, and that he could not be found.
Mr. Wilkins said it appeared to him that the affidavits
spoke so, strongly for themselves, that he should content
himself; witle merely moving that the court would not now
take St.• Paul's Ward, but proceed to Exchange Ward, in
order that time might be afforded to produce Turtle.
Mr. Harvey observed that there was one point which he
had not gathered from the affidavits : it was stated on the
face of the affidavits that Turtle had been taken .away, but
there was nothing to show that he had been traced.
Mr. Wilkins replied that they only traced him so far as
this ; that it was shown that he had been taken out of his
lodgings at two o'clock in the morning, and the parties so
taking him had been heard to state their intentions to place
him upon the packet; a diligent inquiry was shown to have
been made for him; and he (Mr. W.) then asked the court
to infer that he had been taken out of the town.
Mr. Harvey said if the court saw displayed a prima: facie
case to defeat the ends of justice, they should be disposed to
consider it, not only a gross contempt of court, but a most
unjustifiable attempt to defeat legitimate inquiry. :':le, for
his own part, thought sufficient had been shown from which
to infer that there had been an attempt to tamper with a man
whose evidence lay at the very root of the inquiry.
Mr. James objected to the application of Mr. Wilkins
being complied with, on the ground that it had not been made
at the proper time ; the affidavits were sworn on the 7th inst.
and he ought to have been furnished with copies. They (the
reformers) were not prepared to proceed with other wards.
Mr. Harvey suggested that when an objection made by
'aurae was come to, it should stand over.
Mr. JAMES said this would naturally lead him into the
merits of the case. The learned gentleman went on t o con-
tend that, to substantiate grounds for the application, it must
be shown that every individual connected with the ward, who
was brought into court, was implicated in, or connived at,
the abduction of Turtle ; because no individual ought to be
injured, because another party had chosen to interfere to take
away a notice server. Mr. James, in allusion to copies of
the affidavits not having been furnished, denounced it as a °
" trick" to serve a party purpose, and take him by surprise,
not being in a situation to proceed with tne cases in other
wards.
Mr. WILKINS, in his reply, in remarking upon copies of •
the affidavits not having been furnished, observed that these
was no recognised party upon whom to serve them.
After an exceedingly protracted discussion, in which much
warmth of feeling was displayed, not only by the learned .
barristers, but also by the members of the court, it was ar-
ranged that those cases in which objections had been served
by Turtle should stand over until the other cases in the
ward were gone through, and that Mr. Wilkins should then
be heard, if he had any further reasons to offer for a further
postponement. Copies of the depositions were ordered to be
' made and furnished to Mr. James as soon as completed.
John Agnew's name was then called upon as one of the
parties upon whom Turtle had served a notice of objection.
Mr. Wilkins called Richard William Windle, with a view to
prove that he accompanied Turtle to see him deliver the
objections, and to prove that in this particular instance the
objection paper had been delivered, in his presence, to the
party objected to. The witness, in his examination in chief,
produced a small memorandum book, in which were entered
the names of the different parties upon whom objections, in
his presence, had been served, and amongst which the name
of John Agnew. Witness stated that he wrote the names
and memorandums appended to each with a pencil, whilst
standing in the street, and afterwards " traced" the pencil
marks with a pen.
Mr. James requested witness to write a similar memoran-
dum to the one appended to the name of John Agnew, to do
so whilst standing, in a similar manner in which he entered ,
the original memorandum, and afterwards to trace it with
a pen.
Witness did so.
Mr. James then exhibited the books to the court, and con-
tended first, that what the witness termed tracing," was,
in fact, a recopying, inasmuch as the pencil marks were in
no means followed ; and that, therefore, supposing the book
containing the names of parties objected to to have been
similarly written, the witness could not refresh his memory
from that book, as it was not the original memorandum.
The Court here interfered, by observing that the point
raised by Mr. James was not of importance, as they (the
court), were decidedly of opinion that no pencil marks had
ever been written in the book produced by Windle ; there-
fore, they rejected his evidence.
Mr' WILKINS then supported his application to the court
for a postponement on another ground. He produced du-
plicates of about 180 objection papers, which he proved, by
the evidence of Mr. Marrow and Mr. Lysaght, to be endorsed
and signed in the handwriting of Turtle.
Mr. JAMES then contended, at great length, that this was
not sufficient evidence of a single notice having been served
by Turtle. Turtle, it had been shown, was a drunken
fellow ; and, with respect to the endorsements, it was quite
possible and probable that he had neglected his duty, had
never delivered a single notice, and had endorsed the dupli-
cates to blind his employers, and then taken himself off. The
court had no right, he contended, to assume that his (Mr-
James's) party had been accessary to his removal. For
aught he knew, he might at this moment be indulging his
Bachanalian propensities in some cellar in the town.
The Court finally decided that, although the duplicate ncs-
tices produced did not prove the due service of any objee,
tions by Turtle, yet they furnished
prima facie evidence,
which determined them to postpone the hearing of the cases
involved until the other objections in the ward were disposed
of, when Mr. Wilkins would again be heard (should Air.
Turtle then not be forthcoming) in support of further se set-
ponement. If, in the meantime, Mr. James should 51 toes
cause, there would be an end of the case.
The discussion of this case occupied upwards of three hce lrs.
A notice
the service
of a
belonging to
mined as to no notice oh e te
orbej feCrtrni o np irs , a o;Y t hw: sc
t() :ux LI :
cil for the party. WILKINS, in cross-examination, asked the witi less
what was the nature of his employment, and whether la :gu-
larly employed by the Reform Association?—No. Wa s he
not employed by the Protector Society?—No. Have you
not paid rates for several persons ?—I have paid some. il .ave
you not paid many?--I cannot really recollect how ms tny.
Will you swear you have not paid twenty ?—Yes. TA el ve ?

—Yes. Six ?—I wil not swear I have not paid six. Who
was the person you paid for ?—I do not know him by name.
Where does he live ?—ln Westmoreland-street, in a court on
the right from Vauxhall-road. Did you go to him, ordid he
come to yon?—l went to his house. Do you know the name
of the court ?—I do not. Nor the number of the house?—
No ; could find it if I went there. How did you come to find
him out ?—I inquired. How often did you inquire, a dozen
times ?—I do not think I did. Did you inquire six times ?
I may have done so. How long was this ago?—lt was two
or three weeks ago. I cannot say it was a month ago. I
will not swear it was five weeks ago. I did not go directly
to his house. Can't tell the name of any one from whom I
inquired where he lived. I did not know the man by name.
1 will not swear that I have not, paid six rates. I cannot
swear that I have not paid five or six rates. I, got the money
from the Protector Society. I stated to Mr. Murphy, who
gave me the money, for whom and for whatpurpose I wanted
it. I went to Back Castle-street for the money. I paid the
rates at the Parish-office. Ido not know to whom. I think
to Mr. Peachy. I cannot say how much. Not £lO nor £8
altogether in rates. I will not swear I have paid £7.
At this time Mr. ROSSON, who sat with Mr. Harvey, made
some remark to him in a whisper. - -
Mr. HARVEY rose and said, that he thought the cross-
examination of Mr. Wilkins had been conducted more
harshly than the conduct of the witness justified.
In this opinion the mayor concurred.
'Here Mr. WILKINS stated , that he would not allow any
interference upon the part of Mr. Rosson.
Mr. ROSSON instantly rose and said, he merely made a sug-
gestion to Mr. Harvey as amicav eurice.
Mr. WILKINS replied,—" You an maxims curia t Why,
you don't know the meaning of the words, sir."
A scene of great confusion here ensued, which the mayor
in vain endeavoured to check ; but, in the course of which,
Mr. ROSSON, addressing Mr. Wilkins said, do you dare
to tell me, sir, that I do not know thelneaning of the words
(miens curia' I
Mr. WILKENS.-1 do.
Mr. RossON.—Then, sir, I tell you, you are an ignorant
bully. • '

The confusion hereupon became considerably greater. The
mayor interposed, but was unable to suppress the tumult.
Mr. 'WRIGHT, who had risen during the proceedings, evi-
dently under strong excitement,
.instantly said, with vehe-
mence, " Mr. Mayor, I call upon you to call an officer to
take Mr. Rosson out of court; in which request Mr. Wil-
kins joined."
The MAYOR stated that he did not choose to be dictated
to by any third party, that he had risen the moment the al-
tercation began, for the purpose of checkingit, and that, .as
Mr. ROsson had apologised to the court for the indiscretion
of which.he had guilty, he did consider the matter might now
be suffered to drop.
Mr. WRIGHTstiII persisted in his request;-upon which Mr.
Rosson rose, and bowing left the court.
It was then stated that any party who bad received notice
of objection from Turtle, and who chose to answer to that
objection, if he came forward should be heard. Several cases
were disposed of, but they partook of no particular interest.
The court adjourned at five o'clock.