The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-07-12 00:00:00

MR. O'CONNELL TO ONE OF THE SECRETARIES OF THE PROTEST-

ANT ASSOCIATION.
10, Langham-place, June 29, 1836,
Ray. SIR—I have reason to complain—l really think I hdie
—that you should transmit tome any document emanating from
the.person who styles himself the Rev. Robert M`Ghee. After
that unhappy person's exhibitions in public, and especially af-
ter his indescribable conduct to that meek and venerable pre-
late, Dr. Murray, I do submit to your own good sense and good
feeling that you ought not to inflict any letter of his upon any
fellow-christian.
I therefore return you his letter without intending any disre-
spect. Upon reflection you will, I should hope, agree with ins,
that this is the only course which a rational man could take
with such a letter, particularly as the writer is so careless of all
the observances of life as to omit the ordinary courtesies be-
tween man and man ; but let me add that I freely forgive the
went of civility, or even decency, on your part in sending me
such an epistle.
With respect to Dens and the Rhemish Notes, I confess to
you that I feel the utmost indifference as to the resolutions your
meeting of the 12th of July may adopt. Resolve away as fast
and as long as you please, I care not; gratify yourselves as to
your mode of resolving; your resolutions can only harm your-
selves ; and that I admit you have a plain and obvious right to
do. Nobody ought to interfere in any way to prevent you. I
am quite sure I will not. Your resolutions therefore, for ought
I care, may be reproba-torv, lauda-tory, or explana-tory, or
any other tory you please. It is a species, allow me to say, of
tom-foolery, or rather of Tory foolery, with which I would not
upon any consideration interfere. Accept, I beg of you, my
full consent to your drawing up and passing any resolutions you
please.
As to naming members of parliament and sharing tickets,
and all that fantastic mummery, it really surprises me that a
gentleman of your good sense could think that such an absurd
farce could be entertained for one moment. I should be
laughed at if I were to propose it to any members of parliament
gifted with common sense, and if I refrain from laughing at it
in your case it is only because I do not choose to treat you with
want of courtesy.
The whole affair is, in plain truth, one of those miserable
managements which cannot be described by any English word
with accuracy. It is only in French that you can find their
right name. They are called " niaiseries," and as such I treat

them.
I cannot conclude without, in sober sadness, expressing my
most unfeigned regret that the very name of religion should
be tarnished by these theatrical buffooneries. I cannot possi-
bly lend them any countenance, either directly or indirectly.
Religion is indeed too awful a thing to be made the subject of
mountebank exhibitions. It is by far of too tremendous an im-
portance to be approached in any other spirit than that of hu-
mility surrounded by the purest charity. The spirit of charita-
ble humility is that in which religious controversy should be
proposed and carried on. It is so conducted in many protest-
ant countries, and the consequence is—l say it in no vain boast
—the wise and the good are daily forsaking the variegated errors
of anti-catholic belief, and crowding into the ranks of those
who endeavour—" to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of
peace," for " there is oNE body and ONE spirit, even as ye are
called in ONE hope of your callirg ; ONE LORD, ONE FAITH,
ONE BAPTISM; ONE on and Father of all."
That that gracious and good God may, in the plentitude of his
mercies, recal your fellow-labourers from their errors, and guide
to that ONE FAITH which your fathers and ours fathers held to
God, is I hope, the humble and fervent prayer of your obedient
servant,
Rev. J. R. Page.

DANIEL O'CONNELL

THE PROTESTANT ASSOCIATION TO D. O'CONNELL, ESQ., M.P.
No. 2, Exeter Hall, July 8, 1836.
SIR--The Rev. Mr. Page, to whom your letter of the 20th
was addressed, having laid it before the committee of the Pro-
testant Association, we are instructed to acknowledge its re-
ceipt, and to make one or two brief remarks as to its con-
tents.
The object of the meeting which is proposed to be held at
Exeter Hall, on Thursday next, is chiefly to pursue that very
inquiry which you yourself opened at the catholic board in Dub-
lin, in the year 1817. At that board, in December of that year,
you moved and obtained a committee "to prepare a disavowal
of the Rhemish Notes." Subsequently, on three different oc-
casions. you obtained for that committee "further time" to
agree upon its disavowal. At last the board itself was broken up
without agreeing on any such disavowal; and although you, Sir,
had declared that " not amoment should be lost" in condemn-
ing "these scandalous notes," never, either through the me-
dium of the catholic board or of the catholic association, has
this promised disavowal appeared. Now the Protestants, as you,
Sir, are well aware, have quite as much concern in this ques-
tion as the. Rotnanists ; and it is a perfectly legitimate object
for their investigation. That inquiry, therefore, which you
yourself commenced, but which for some reason or other you
;Afterwards allowed to drop, we now propose to resume, and as
you were so intimately concerned in the agitation of the ques-
tion we thought it but fair to invite your attendance. Whether
it may suit your views to he present or not is quite a matter for
your own consideration. Under any circumstances the commit-
tee will persevere in their original intention. The arrangements
proposed to you.for the meeting were merely those which have
usually been adopted in such cases, and on which your friends
have usually agreed. They were acted upon in the public dis-
cussion at the Roman Catholic college at Dow aside, in January,
1831. with which circumstances you, can hardly be entirely un-
acquainted. In neither the subject for discussion, therefore,
nor the arrangements proposed, do the committee feel that they
are at all open to the remarks which you have chosen to
make.
Of the character of the gentleman who proposes to introduce
the question, and towards whom you express yourself in such
opprobrious terms, the committee fell it quite unnecessary to
say anything except to express their unanimous feeling that the
invitation conveyed in our former letter conferred au honour
rather than an insult.
In conclusion. allow us to call your attention to a degree of
inconsistency or obscurity
which appears in your remarks on
the religious part of the ,question. At the commencement of
your letter you address us as " fellow-Christians," while at
its close you designate us as " anti-Catholics," and as having
no part in the " One Lord, one faith, one baptism" of the
Christian or Catholic church.
Now, Sir, we cannot imagine you to he so ignorant of the
meaning Of words as not to know that if. you rightly,address
us as " fellow-Christians" then we cannot be beyond, the pale
of the Catholic or Universal church; while, if you really be-
lieve us, as the close of your letter seems to intimate, to have
no part in that " one Lord, one faith, one baptism," which
belongs to all Christians, then your previous appeal to us as
" fellow-Christians" cannot escape the charge of insincerity.
You close by a.uspicating our " return to that one faith which
our fathers and your fathers held of God." It is our hope and
confidence that that faith is already possessed by us. Your
church, as you are doubtless aware. expresses her faith in four
creeds. Three of these are of ancient date; the Apostle's
creed, the Nicene, and the Att,anasian. All these, " which
your fathers and our fathers held to God," the Protestant
churches at this present moment cordially accept and maintain.
But the church of Rome hai added a further one of more mo-
dern date, the creed of Pope Pius IV., promulgated only in the
year 1564, the authority of which we entirely deny. It is upon
ihis novelty alone that the difference turns. " The faith which
your fathers and our fathers held to God" is ours still. Nay
we not, therefore, with more justice and propriety call upon you
to give up your modern additions, and to join us in that faith
whose antiquity you profess to revere ?—We have the honour to
be, &c., (Signed by the Secretaries.)

REcoVERy OF POSSESSION BY LANDLORDS.--There is now
before parliament a bill for facil►tating the recovery of the pos-
session of tenements after the determination of the tenancy.
By this bill it is proposed that where a tenant or occupier of
premises, the rent of which does not exceed £2O per annum,
holds over, the landlord may go before a magistrate, who shall
issue his warrant, directing the constables to assist the landlord
in retaking possession. If the landlord has not lawful right to
possession, an action will lie; but where he has lawful title to
possession, no irregularity will make him a trespasser. The
landlord, on getting possession, may remove the goods of the
tenant, to whom notice of the place of removal moat be then
given. Where premises are held at a higher rate than £2O a-
year, the landlord, on bringing an action of ejectment, may
apply to a judge for security for damages and mists.