The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-12-14 00:00:00

7. THE PRAYERS FOR THE DEAD.

Aerius believed the prayers and oblations of the church,
made for the dead, to be useless.—Bossuet's Discourse on
Universal History.
And yet that "only sure foundation," as the Council of
Trent declared the Catholic creed to be, did not contain the
article which Pius added respecting_ prayers for the dead.
8. WORSHIP OP RELICS.

Vigilantius "opposed the worship of the relics of holy mar-
tyrs, and termed those who received them • Cinerarios et
Idolatras' who venerated the bones of dead men; and the
miracles wrought at them, he affirmed to be the deceits of
evil spirits, declaring that they were altogether useless, be-
cause signs should be exhibited, not for the faithful, but for
unbelievers," &c.—Bar, Fpis., An, 406.

And the creed had no article on the veneration of relics.
9. WORSHIP OF THE EVER VIRGIN MOTHER OF GOD, AND
OF IMAGES.

Nestorius opposed one of the titles assigned to
the Virgin
Helvidus the other 6th „
'
Iconoclasts 9th „
And the Catholic creed did not become a refuge for the
condemned and persecuted opinions.
10. DOCTRINE OF INDULGENCES.

Waldenses.—"Seysselius at last exhorts the Waldenses to
believe the doctrine of indulgences, because. the universal
Church believes it, and says, that they run no hazard in it,
seeing they believe as the Church believes, whereas they
endanger their eternal salvation in condemning what the
Church approves of."—Du Pin, vol. iii., p. 353.
But neither Waldenses nor their persecutors could prevail
against the Catholic creed to accept the doctrine of indul-
gence.

11. ROME MOTHER AND MISTRESS OF CHURCHES. PETER

VICAR.

Church of Antioch, 39; of Rome, 45.—Baronius—Scrip-
ture—" Of Paul of Apollos of Cepbas."
And mighty Rome could not write its name upon the creed
of the Catholic Church.

12. CANONS AND COUNCILS TO BE RECEIVED WITHOUT A

DOUBT.

Augustine said that former councils could be amended by
later.—Gregory Nazianzen would shun them because un-
profitable.—This on the authority of De la Hugue, De
Ecclesia, pp. 170-172.

" Ireland renounced communion with Rome, when she
admitted the second council of Constantinople."—Authority,
Baronius, a Cardinal.
And vet, not a word about councils in the creed of the Ca-
tholic Church.

I am done, and I thank you: you have endured your opera-
tion patiently and well. (Much laughter, and cheers.)—
Will you pardon me when I tell you, that you might have
been spared the infliction, and that I make this confession
the preface to a further trespass upon you? (Cheers.) I
might have relied upon a solitary statement, to the effect that
Luther had opposed many articles of the creed of Pius the
Fourth—that Leo the Tenth had condemned in his writings
such instances of opposition in a bull issued in the year 1520
—that at the Diet of Augsburgh, held in the year 1530, the
Confession of Augsburgh was presented, the Confession of
Strasburgh and that of Zuinglius also, and that in each of
these confessions articles of the creed of Pius were impugned
—that while the opinions of the Reformers were in circula-
tion through the world, the following pontiffs occupied the
Papal chair: Leo X, Adria❑ VI, Clement VII, Paul 111,
Julius 111, Marcellus 11, Paul IV, and Pius IV;—and that,
while according to the doctrines of the Church of Rome
every one of these pontiffs had a right to frame a creed con-
demnatory of the Reformers, no Dope ventured on such an
enterprise until the day of Pius IV.; and that thus the tacit
testimony of seven popes was given in opposition to the doc-
trine set up by the modern Church of Rome. I might have
relied on a briefer, but a more direct testimony—that of the
Council of Trent. That council met, while the opinions of
heretics were in process of dissemination through the world.
It framed or professed a creed which was "to confound
heretics." It devoted an entire session—the third of its pro-
ceedings—to this important work. What was the creed
which it professed? The Nicene—that which we repeat in
our communion service. What were the terms in which it
introduced the creed? They were to this effect:—

CONC. TRED.-SESS. 3.

" Following the example of the Fathers, who were wont
in the more solemn councils (sacratioribuseonciliis) to oppose
this shield against all heresies, at the beginning of their
proceedings, by which alone they have sometimes drawn
heretics to the faith, have conquered heresies and confirmed
the faithful. Wherefore, the symbol of faith which the holy
Roman Church adopts, as that principle in which all who
profess the faith of Christ necessarily agree—the sure and
only foundation, against which the gates of hell never shall
preyail, in the words in which it is recited in all churches,
the council decrees shall be repealed."
Thus, on the evidence of Romanism herself, it appears that
her arguments to establish the claims she advances to anti.
quity are unfounded, and that she is, manifestly, new. Her
origin cannot be traced higher than the date of the creed of
Pius IV. But the structure of Romanism was not then
completed : the foundation was laid—the superstructure was
not erected for some years after. The creed shows traces of
imperfection. Priests swear in it to obey the canon law,
but the canon law was not then framed. They swear in it to
receive the interpretation the Church shall affix to the Bible,
but no interpretation of the Bible in the vulgar tongue gave
token of the nature of the power which the Chuich thoeght
fit to exercise. It was necessary, therefore, that a canon law
should be framed, and an interpretation of the Bible offered
to the public, in order to understand what was, as it has been
termed, the mind of the Church, in both particulars.—
After some further observations in this strain, and after
much cheering, the reverend gentleman proceeded.—Pius
having converted Romanism into a political system, of
which he was the absolute head, appears to have directed his
attention to the fabrication or promulgation of a code of laws
conformable to the principles which he had embodied in his
creed. Valuable service had been rendered to the Papacy by
the " Decretum Gratiani," compiled in the 11th or 12th cen-
tury, and which proved very instrumental to the establishing
and extending Papal power in the two centuries following.
In the sixteenth century a work of a similar character, but
greater extent, was undertaken. The enterprise was designed
in the pontificate of Pius IV. It was brought to its comple-
tion in that of Gregory XIII., in the year 1580, when it was
given to the world as containing the text of the canon law of
Romanism, under the name "Corpus Juris Canonici." Who
were the Pope's concerned in the preparation of this charac-
teristic work? Whose were the productions from which they
ordained that it should be compiled? The Corpus Jut is Ca-
nonici authenticated by Gregory XIII., consists of the fol-
lowing works :—the Decretum Gratiani, the work of a Bene
dictine monk of the 12th century;—the Decretals, a work
authenticated by Gregory IX., prepared under his direction
by Raymund, a Dominican (this compilation was published
in 1230);—the Sextus Decretalium, promulgated in 1298, by
Pope BonifaceV lll.;—the Clementine Constitutions, and the
Extravagantes Johannis, both edited by Pope John XXII.,
—and some few other decretals from different Popes, in a
tract termed Extravagantes Communes. This latter tract,
consisting of little more than nsnety pages. in a work con-
taining about two thousand five hundred, and being composed
of writings from several Popes, principally, however, from
those whose epistles constitute the other pelts of the work, it
would be unnecessarily tedious to examine. The monster
John XII. left two letters. One of them is a mete letter of
form, the other contains an excommunication. This latter
is found in the Extravagantes. We may return, therefore,
to the question—from whose works has Romanism selected
the canon law, by which the consciences of her members shall
be guided? From the works of Gratian, from works authen-
ticated by Gregory IX., Boniface VIII. and John XXII.
A word or two on each of these iudividuals, or his works,
may not be amiss. The Decretum Gratiani abounded in
errors. Spurious decretals were cited in it as authentic.
Many of its quotations were unfaithful, and many of its re-
ferences erroneous. But its author was a Benedictine monk,
of the same order with Hildebrand, and, as was naturally to
be expected, according in opinion with that able and ambi-
tious Pontiff, he compiled a work by which the pretensions
of the Popes were much favoured. Therefore, it was not
unbecoming in Popes to apply themselves :o the correction
of some of his errors, and to make his work a part of their
canon law. The second treatise on the canon law of Roma-
nism is the Decretalias of Gregory IX. His was a name
not unknown in history. His distinctions were derived from
his contest with the emperor Frederic 11. That prince is
said to have made a vow that he would carry arms into the
Holy Land. Because he postponed his vow ,Gporregvoarly,
t he
ex-
communicated him. Because, when he had
pernognaoguendeeidn
same the
cru sa d
Gregory
, he made
excommunicatedpeace w hou without
itmh the
anew,Pop Pope's v
approval,
him
deposed from his throne, declared his subjects released from
their allegiance, and offered his crown and dominion to the
King of France, for his brother, the Count D'Artois. This
enterprising Gregory is one of the select lawgivers of Roma-
nism. The Liber Sextus Decretalium is the third treatise in
the Corpus Juris Canonici. Its promulgator was Boniface
VIII. This is the Pope who frightened his predecessor
by alarming his conscience into renouncing the Papacy,
and who then, when he had had himself elected into his
place, in order, perhaps, to prevent hint from being con-
scientiously frightened back again, imprisoned him for life.
For the patience with which the deposed Pontiff endured
the sufferings and affronts of incarceration, as well as for
his other merits, the prisoner Celestir2es
ial%isa.sswbeereenadcoapntoend-
ised, but it was not because his invasion of the chair of St.
Peter, and his incarceration of a meek pontiff, added
became
a
sbayinittotionatohiesmca.leuldiaer,
at(hidaetdhiostshue7ezarrits.
He too,
embroiled, by his own seeking, in political contests. His
struggle with France, his excommunication of Philip le ?Jai,
and an attempt to place this kingdom under an interdict;
his exorbitant, and it would be surely not too much to say
blasphemous pretensions, and the remorseless determination
with which he laboured to enforce them ; his life and death,
in short, are too well known to justify me in detaining you
further with his story. It is sufficient to say he left memori-
als behind him in his collection of Decretals. 'they were re-
jected and prohibited in France, at least, no doubt, because
of his character, but they were brought forward into promi-
nence by the popes of modern times, and are acknowledged
as part of their law. The Clementine Constitutions, and the
Extravagantes Johannis, a fourth treatise of the canon law,
are both authenticated byJohn It is sufficient tosay of
him, that he acted in the spirit of his associates, excotnmu-
nicating and pronouncing deposed the Emperor Louis of
Bavaria, and exciting treacherous and bloody war between
sovereigns. He was himself strongly accused of heresy;
but he was pure from the heresy of moderation. His pre-
tensions to universal temporal dominion, seconded as they
were by bold endeavour, made ample amends for his
spiri-
tual delinquencies, and John XXII ranks among the law-
givers of the Church of Rome. We may turn now to the
editors of this remarkable prottuction- They constituted the
triumviral succession of Pius IV., Pius V., and Gregory
XIII. The first enslaved, and we may add, baffled and de-
ceived, (what Rome pretends to call) an oecumenical coun-
cil. It is unnecessary to speak of his other distinctions.
The second endeavoured to oppress religion by cruelty and
violence,—to kindle up the flames of cruel war—to infuse
into the hearts of loyal subjects, perfidy and treason. The
third added to such labours the other distinctions which
assigns to him a peculiar character. His intellectual claims
to be remembered, may be judged of from his correction of
the calendar. His moral and religious performances are
more memorable. He offered up a solemn thanksgiving to
God for the Bartholomew massacre. He eulogised the
monarch with whom that dreadful slaughter had been
planned, for treacherous assurances of love and peace with
which he deluded brave and loyal subjects, until the ar-
rangements were completed for their slaughter. He order-
ed that Hildebrand should be venerated and invoked as a
saint reigning with Christ in heaven. But he has acquired
a name in the history of your country. Pius V. had excom-
municated your illustrious Queen Elizabeth, and commanded
her subjects to withdraw from her their sworn allegiance.
Roman Catholics in England felt the command burden.
some. The court of the sovereign was powerful and august.
The counsellors of the queen were men of wisdom-411e
throne was girded round by chatnpions of lion heart, and the
sceptre was swayed by a hand worthy to sustain the weight
of empire. Rebellion was without hope, and the papacy
must, therefore, mitigate the sharpness
with which the
ofits
sot
England
long as
was
vigilance
warded, anfd valourorbade all attempts at their execu-
tion.
Gregory XIII. showed that he could accommodate
himself to the adverse circumstances of the case. He ex-
plained the bull of his predecessor Campion, and his associ-
ates were enabled to enter England, with a bull which taught
Roman Catholics, that the excommunication of Pins V.,
though fatal to the heretics, who were its especial objects,
was not, and was not to become, binding on Roman
Catholics, until it could be safely executed,—until, in
short, the time in which, openly or covertly, schemes
of rebellion could be prosecuted with hope of success.
This leads me, naturally, to the other boon made to Eng-
land, and the other, provision for his church during the reign
of this enterprising Pontiff. I mean tire Rhemish Trite-
ment. The character of this work was given, not incorrectly,
by Mr. O'Connell, when he described it as teaching that it
was lawful to put heretics to death for their religion; and
that faith might innocently be broken with them. The de-
sign of the work is set forth in the Dublin Notes, edited at its
first appearance, by Mr. O'Connell, Dr. Wyseman, and Mr.
Quin, which states that it was intended to promote the
success of the Spanish Armada,—that is, to excite disaffec-
tion throughout England.
In this interpretation of scripture, it may be said that the
system of modern Romanism had its completion. There
was now a creed,—a law,—aTestament,—all conformable to
each other. The character of the doctrines recommended in
them, you may understand even from the brief extracts
which I offer you from the text of Ito:nista law—tbu Corpus
luria Cononia,

•

"The Pope alone Vicar of God.
"The Pope alone above law.
"The Pope greater than any council.
"The Pope can depose Princes.
"The Pope can canonise saints.
"The Pope can take away the inconvenience of illegiti-
mate birth.

The Corpus also declares that he does not bear the place
of mere man, and
Charles Butler admits that be is called in it " Our Lord
God the Pope."

" ECCLESIASTICS

•
"Statutes of laws, contrary to the liberty of the church, do
not bind without consent of the church.

" A layman is not to be received as a witness against a
clergyman, although he may accuse him.
"Clergy not to he brought before a secular tribunal, nor
condemned by secular judges, unless deposed.
" He who imprisons a clergyman, or who abets the wrong,
excommunicated.

"HERETICS.
" Receivers of them excommunicated.
"Princes should be vigilant to extirpate heresies.
" Heretics, unless they repent, to be delivered to the secu-
lar arm, or, if having abjured, they relapse.
"Their goods confiscated to the church, children disin
herited.
Heretics may be proceeded against on suspicion alone.
"He that will not extirpate, to be excommunicated.
"Their favourers if they do not satisfy within a year, infa-
mous.

"All bound to them, in any way, are released from obliga-
tion.
" He is to be held a heretic who will not clear himself by
oath.

" AN OATH,
"To the prejudice of the church, is not to be kept, but is
itself rather a perjury.

• '6MURDER ort MASSACRE,
"Perpetrated through zeal for the church, is not to be
accounted homicide."

Such are the pretensions and morals of Romanism as
taught in that law, which, according to the Canonist's defini-
tion, "directs the actions of Christians to the end of ever-
lasting blessedness;" and set forth in a book, which, in the
Mor►l Theology, compiled by order of Cardinal Camus, it is
recommended that "all ecclesiastics should have, and study,
as the copious fountain whence, with full security, and with-
out much labour, they can draw forth the doctrine necessary
for their own salvation and that of others."

The rev, gentleman here entered into a detail explanation
of his noticing the characters of the Popes who were authors
and editors of the canon law, by showing the pernicious effect
of such examples on the ecclesiastics of their church, and
then proceeded to the following effect :—I have adduced
for you, in support of statements to which I desired your
assent, testimony offered by Mr. O'Connell and Dr. Milner;
but I beg you to understand that I do not require you to be-
lieve that either of these gentlemen should be reputed a wit-
ness of unblemished veracity. (Much laughter.) I adduce
them as my witnesses, simply because Irish Romanism re-
putes them her representatives. By the way, there is a
curious coincidence of qualification in the honours by which
these gentlemen became respectively suited for their offices.
The one is set forth as their representative and champion by
the ecclesiastical section of humanism in Ireland. " Read
Milner—Protestants of England read Milner's End of Con-
troversy," cries Dr. Murray—pay and support O'Connell—
the representative of all Ireland," cry out the political section
.(including, indeed, bishops, priests, and people) of Irish
Romanian. Thus are the two representatives proclaimed.
Now for their qualifications. Dr. Milner was expelled from
a society of Roman Catholic gentlemen in England, as a
liar and a slanderer; he was excluded from a meeting of
Roman Catholic ecclesiastics of his own rank in England, as
a liar and a slanderer, and for his performances in such cha-
racters, was reprimanded by the Pope. (Hear, hear, and
loud cheers.) Mr. O'Connell, I need not tell you how his
conduct has been regarded by individual gentlemen iu Eng-
land, nor is it to my purpose to do so. But that gentleman
is a member of the British parliament, and in that assembly
he was accused of crimes of the same character, with those of
the learned bishop; and in that assembly the charges against
him was established—and its that assembly he was condemn-
ed to receive the reprimand which wanton calumnies
' merited. (Loud cheers.) It is strange enough, at least suf-
ficiently remarkable, that Irish Romanism shall have chosen
as its representatives, two individuals, whose practices were
so peculiarly distinguishing; and it is well worthy of atten-
tion, that English gentry, Roman, Catholic as well as Pro-
testant, shall have been called on by circumstances to pro-
nounce an opinion so very extraordinary, and we vvoultihave
thought, so little gratifying, on Irish Romanian, as it ap-
peared in the forms of its two representatives. (Much
cheering.) But I must pause—my purpose is answered,
—which was, to satisfy you that I am not a voucher for the
fidelity of those two witnesses, but chose them simply because
Romanism having chosen them for herself, could not except
to them. She thinks them, however damaged they may be,
good enough to serve her purposes against the Protestants,
and the Protestants, accordingly, may serve their purposes
by returning upon the bands of Romanian her damaged
wares and witnesses. (Hear, hear, laughter and cheering.)
1 return from my digression to the proper subject upon which
I should address you—the constitution and character of
Rotnanism. It would be too much to expect that, if my
statements are new to you, their importance should, all at
once be understood; but I have no doubt, if you regarefthern
with attention, they will not seem to you trivial. What, I
repeat my question, is humanism ? It is a system which
aspires to universal dominion over the minds and bodies of
men, and which, in order to compass its ends, would blot out
the hand-writing of the law and the Gospel—would obliterate
all trace of the charities and humanities inscribed upon the
hearts of men, and would substitute principles, favourable to
its ambitious designs and feelings, which should receive
with ready reverence and submission its most un-
righteous commandments. It is a system which ex-
cludes the Bible from its proper place and office,
which would intrude a human being whom it terms
the vicar of the Lord into the power and place of the Saviour
of the world, and which would adopt, and entertain among
the agencies by which its ends are to be served, perjury,
murder, treason, and would, when time and circumstance re-
quired, recommend them to useful votaries as of the essence
of true religion. Such is Romanian, not my description,
but as you see it in its own -recorded principles—such as I
have detailed to you, from its authorised and authoritative
volumes. And this is the religion from which, we are told, it
is impossible to withdraw Romanists, against which it is in-
, expedient and wrong to warn Protestants. Roman Catho-
lics will not be won _from their creed, cry out our Protestant
adversaries, therefore you should be silent on the irritating
topics of Romish errors. This is the prophecy and the pre-
cept by which we are to he turned away from what we deem
a plain duty—ought we respect them? is the prediction
creditable to Roman Catholics? Is the accompanying precept
worthy of Protestants? Imagine the production true. The
Roman Catholics cannot be persuaded to renounce or change
a system against which charges of intolerance and perfidy
shall have been established—a system in defence of which no
one of its rulers can venture to lift up his voice in presence
of an accuser—a system convicted on the testimony of its
most honoured witnesses, and by the silence of its selected
representatives. Let it be supposed, that from such a sys-
tem Roman Catholics cannot be withdrawn—that they can-
not be influenced to make a change in it—what would then
be the duty of Protestants cognizant of the character of the
Church of Rome, and of the dispositions of its steadfast and
unscrupulous adherents ? Remember, I am here supposing
the charges against Humanism to be all proved—proved Olt
evidence which cannot, consistently, be contradicted or ques-
tioned. Remember, that against the slightest falsehood or
exaggeration, I would most sternly protest—and that, I trust,
there will ever be found, those enemies who do the duty of
friends, watching with jealousy, all our proceedings, quicken-
ing into more anxious vigilance our natural and most neces-
sary caution, by their eagerness to expose the most trival
inaccuracy of which they can convict us. Remember, that
I am supposing all our charges against the Church of Rome
to be established on evidence clear and convincing as their
momentus nature demanded. What, I ask the question—
if the prophecy of our Protestant adversaries be true—if, no
matter what may be the magnitude of its crimes —the foul-
ness of its principles, and the exorbitancy of its pretensions—
Roman Catholics will never be influenced to renounce or to
reform their church—what then becomes an upright Pro-
testant's duty ? Is it to be silent? To become partaker
in the iniquity by conniving at it—and to hope that, by
leaving a treacherous and intolerant system free to work its
will, you may propitiate it so that it shall work little harm?
Or is it his duty to ring out an alarm over a slumbering land,
to bid Protestants arouse them, and be on their guard—to
tell them that there are men amongst them not to be won by
a sense of justice, or touched by mercy, or troubled by shame,
nut to be influenced by any power, to withdraw from a system
which teaches and recommends the foulest doctrines, and
the foulest practices—to tell them that those who knowingly
countenance such a religion must resemble it—must be,
in a word, base, perfidious, intolerant, and that English-
men, if they would save their country or themselves, must
awake to unmask HI foulest of all conspiracies, and must
stand tip and preplke to meet the rudest shock their
country has yet exintrienced. (Hear, bear, and cheers.)
But is the prophecy founded in wisdom or truth? Nothing
is easier than to deliver predictions when the seer closes his
eyes upon the indications which ought to guide him, and is
fortified against the contradictions by which time may reply
to his promises; and yet, by some strange inconsistency or
anomaly iu our nature, no statements appear to exercise a
inure extensive influence over society than those which are
supported by confident predictions. I do nut wonder that so
severe a punishment was decreed in the OldTestamentagainst
the false prophets. Those who have once made prophecy a
profession, find their work so easy and their gulls so numer-
ous, that no sense of shame, no inconvenience from detection
and exposure, could abridge their profitable vocation so long
as life was left them to practice it. Note well the men who
tell you that Roman Catholics will adhere to their church, in
spite of all the lights and the voices which chew its iniquities
and warn to depart from it, and if your memory fail you not,
I venture to pronounce that you will find among them the pro-
phe”.ers of smooth things of a decidedly opposite character,
in time past. Before the eventful year 1829, they who now
describe the Roman Catholics as a rock of granite, repre-
sented them as a rope or a ball of sand; they adopted the beau-
tiful delusion that they were kept together, not by internal
cohesion, but by external compression, and you were told that
you had only to remove the repulsive securities by which your
religion and your church were guarded, in order to have Ro-
man Catholics in numbers renouncing their errors with their
prejudices, and united with you in worship. The prophecy
was adapted trkthe time. It served its purpose. It would not
suit the present'exigency, and, accordingly, it is not merely
suffered to pass into oblivion ; but it is, as it were, required to
give place to a prediction of a directly opposite character.
Both prophecies may have been spoken in a spirit of sincerity.
Prophets of 1829 were perhaps too sanguine. Prophets in
Ib2B may carry their incredulity to excess. Both, however,
maybe perfectly honest. But where you find that the con-
tradicting predictions have been uttered and are upheld by
the same individuals, you are justified in suspecting fratid.
They who allured you by the bland promises of the emanci-
pation days, and would now dishearten you by predictions
that the hopes they encouraged you to entertain are cheineri-
cal, and must end in disappointment, are not men to be
trusted. They seek to make you their dupes, or they are
weak enough to have yielded themselves dupes to the kna-
very of others. But is there truth in the prediction ? I am.
not disposed to think so harshly of our Roman Catholic bre-
thren as to believe it. I am persuaded, that numbers, great
numbers, of Roman Catholics are ignorant of the character
of their religion. They know not what they do when they
support. it. It is the art of Romanism to hide its iniquities
from those who would scorn them. With the providence,
but not in the spirit of Macbeth, it says to its honourable vo-
tary, "be ignorant," Until the day has conic for putting its
base theories into practice, it derives much advantage from
the membership of individuals whose conduct is such as to
grace their bad cause, and whose principles it leaves un-
vitiated, in order that their conduct may thus serve as a decent
cover. But this artifice reLders Romanian the more danger-
ous, and while I would ever protest against having my words
interpreted as if they were designed to expose individuals
whom I had not named, I would also fearlessly insist upon
the truth of the gravest charges which could be urged against
the Roman Church, and on the necessity of being prepared to
withstand it. There is no country in Europe, sir, except Great
Britain, which has not taken measures to resist the encroach-
ments of the Papal power. Roman Catholic Bishops must be
approved by the sovereign. Correspondence with the Pope
must be open to the inspection of the sovereign—the doc-
trine taught in religious seminaries—seminaries for educe-
tin., the priesthood, must be such as is satisfactory to the
sovereign. Papal edicts cannot tie published, unless at the
pleasure of the sovereign. Secrets of confession may not
be kept if they compromise the safety of the sovereign, or
protect the perpetrator of a capital crime from punishment.
Such are some of the securities adopted in other countries.
They are not provided for England, yet, where is the country
in which they are more needful, You have a representative
government,—you have trial by jury. These are your most
boasted institutions, and you admit, among your reprosenta•

lives, men pledged to extirpate, should they ever have the
power, your religion; and you invest with the solemn privi-
leges of a juror—privileges which you concede, from a per-
suasion that an oath is an effectual bond—individuals who
cannot be bound by any abjuration, but who, if they take an
oath to do impartial justice, are under an obligation to break
it, if the perjury can serve their church, and to think that the
keeping the oath, under such circumstances, would be the
sin to be avoided. There was a time when England, too,
had her securities—when she maintained, politically and
morally, a protest against popery—when her laws excluded
Humanists from offices and trusts for which they were dis-
qualified if they were true to the religion they professed;
and when the practise of her church, regulated by Canon,
made provision for instructing the people at seasonable
opportunities, (and at least four times in each year,) on the
ground on which the usurped authority of the foreign Poten-
tate was repudiated in England. It is unnecessary to dilate
now on the discontinuance of this practise, required by, I
believe, our first Canon. Romanism stooped to the necessi-
ties of the season; she put on a disguise of meekness; she
spoke smoothly, and in gentle accents; she contrived dis-
claimers to lull Protestant vigilance asleep, and soon ren-
dered it painful to a Protestant minister to discharge his
duty, and rendered many a Protestant congregation unwil-
ling to witness the discharge of it. As Romanism appeared
to renounce, tacitly, its pernicious opinions, Protestants
began to give her credit for a real renunciation, and the in-
tellectual and moral protest against her lapsed into disuse.
If the preacher spoke of Popery, it was as a superstitious and
unscriptural system, and controversy became, in process of
time, so indiscriminatingly charitable, that power departed
from it. But this is a subject on which it is not necessary now
to dwell. It remains to observe, that when the discontinu-
ance of the moral protest against Popery had bad its effect
upon the public mind, the abandonment of the political fol-
lowed. Romanism is now free to develope her plane, and is
encouraged to expose her principles. And what in conse-
quence becomes our duty? To take up, in such form and
manner as the times permit and pure religion sanctions, the
protest which is yet in our power,—to resume the moral, as
the political is lost, and to compensate by increased vigilance
and exertion on the part of individuals, the want of protec-
tion in the state, until at last the whole people are made ac-
quainted with the nature of Popery, and it is constrained to
accommodate itself to a state of things in which it must fear
that its iniquities cannot continue hidden. I am quite ready to
admit that add° not participate in our fears. To some it is mat-
ter of amazement that papal Rome had ever attained an
ascendancy over the kingdoms of the world, and they have
boldly affirmed that it cannot again effect the triumph it won
in the dark or middle ages. It seems to me a view of modern
philosophy—l mean the philosophy of politics--to be occu-
pied in proving that that which is was so to be, and in finding
out reasons why it must continue so, or at least experience
no further change than may be admitted within the range of
a very limited vision. Popery has had its day—superstition
has been dispersed, light has come into the world, and the
rivalry of steam and the press will prove too much for Ho-
, manism. Do the reasoners who thus make up their minds
from a review of one side of the question, give Romanisrn no
credit for power to see, as well as they see, the altered condi-
tion of human affairs, and for power also to adapt herself to
the new necessities ? Such seems to be the reasoning which
has a charm for the liberal politicians of modern times.
They see plainly enough what they mean to do themselves—
they desire popery no further than that she shall lend them
her aid in accomplishing the objects which they have at
heart. They believe that there is no such prevalence of
bigotry and superstition as should render the religion which
they are assisting a little because they think it serves them
much, formidable to them and to their cause, and they forget
that there are other passions of the human heart which
expose equally to danger, which equally bring into sebjec-
tion, and to which popery can address itself with facilities for
obtaining success not less effectual than those by which she
yoked superstition to toil in her service. They forget that
Romanism has found the vices of the human heart no less
profitable than its weaknesses ; and that by kindling up
animosity between states and parties, by misrepresenting
sovereigns to their subjects—by exasperating princes against
their people—and stirring up strife where there should have
been neighbourhood, she has been enabled to pursue a career
of aggrandisement, borne on triumphantly by the malevo-
lent passions of those whom she pretended' to favour, and
whom she degraded, almost as lowly as they deserved, to be
her slaves. How is it she has now gained dominion in Eng-
land ? What power had she in her own strength ? What,
in comparison with the illustrious of this land,—what was
her wisdom but very foolishness ? And yet she has seen
and had discernment enough to understand—and has laughed
her scornful laugh to see—wisdom, and eloquence, and exalted
character gracing and recommending a patriot cause, and has
seen all vain to shake the influence, empire rather, which she
has acquired over the fortunes of this sorely smitten country.
How did she gain this authority ? Party—afaction—silly strifes
and prejudices, separating Englishman from Englishman,
dividing people into parties, and detaching them from the
true love of country. This has given Popery power, by this
she maintains her power, and England, which in the palrniest
days of papal Rome, and the darkest season of superstition,
never yielded without a struggle and a protest, to the en-
croachments of the haughty Pontiff with all his attributes of
sovereignty around him, now submits to hold her place among
nations—the place to which she has been reduced, her flag
affronted—her cotntnerce endangered—her coasts undefended
—ocean torn from her sway, because faction has placed her
at the foot of a paltry section of Romanism which has per-
jured itself into the power of trampling on her—(loud and
long cheers). Who can say what mighty works may be
wrought by that ambitious power, while she cat: order Pro-
testant England as one of her dependencies ? What human
foresight can anticipate all the evil deeds which may be
done while that influence continues? or what sagacity can
trace out the consequences likely to follow from the deeds
'which have been done already ? Where is the man—go seek
him among the most daring and the darkest vaticinators of
past days or present—who could have hazarded a predic-
tion, but ten years since, that within so short a space of time
the destinies of England were, humanly speaking, to be
wielded by a government which should hold its tenure of
office at the pleasure of the church of Rome, and as the con-
dition of its occupancy should have consented to strike a
heavy blow at Protestantism ? Where is now the man, bold-
est in conjecture, most sagacious, farthest seeing, who could
venture to predict the consequences of that postponement of
the assembly of your representatives, by which you have been
all so surprised and confounded. A ministry holding its
place at the pleasure of Rotnanism, at its own pleasure, post-
pones under circumstances of almost unequalled interest and
anxiety, the meeting of your houses of parliament; and at a
time when, we might think, it would be most desirous of
legislative assistance and co-operation, takes to itself the
whole burden and responsibility of government. Who can
tell what this interval may bring forth ? Hew was the Eman-
cipation extorted ? It is well known that when Lord Mel-
bourne was Chief Secretary in Ireland, his indulgence towards
the assemblies in which Romanism exhibited and arrayed its
physical strength, was productive of mighty consequences.
The magistrates, it is said, were instructed to keep watch
over the vast assemblies of the people, but were prohibited
from dispersing them if they did not break out into violence.
The result might have been expected. Meeting after meet-
ing took place—hundreds of thousands came together, until
at last the whole physical force of Romanism in Ireland
was organised, and when Mr. Lamb and his government had
passed away, the mischief they had wrought did not depart
with them; and the mightiest man in all the world, rather
than encounter the horrors of a civil war, conceded the
`healing measure'—the relief bill. Thus was emancipation
won, Who can say what may not be won, by the misgovern-
ment which England may have to experience while her le-
gislature is dispersed? Who can say what she may suffer
from the consequences of acts of misgovernment by which
she has been smitten already? Aud while Popery profits
by the imprudence and treachery from which England suf-
fers—when she is to be seen, steadily advancing, with a ra-
pidity which ten years ago it would be thought madness to
anticipate—could we think the man honest if we thought
him wise, who should expect us to believe, that we may feel
quite at our ease, and believe it impossible that Romanisrn
ever can gain power, although we see her exercising
power little less than absolute over this Protestant country ?
This has English faction done, and with this result from
party contentions here among you, is it not too much to hear
how flippantly your wise and dainty politicians, of all shades
of opinion, say " Fie upon the factions of Ireland !" You
shall see the accomplished man of fashion, and the writer
who provides for him the regulating opinion—you shall see
the one in his haunt of fashion, the other in the retired ele-
gance of his study, inveighing each, with as much energy
and effort as good breeding tolerates, against the crimes and
contentions of Ireland.—[Here the rev. speaker gave a pic-
ture of the state of crime in Ireland, and alluded to a state-
ment shown him by a gentleman who had collected from
public journals the reports of crime—commented on the in-
effacy of the measures adopted by the Irish government to
prevent or to punish outrage—and expatiated on the too great
indifference with which such recitals are received iu Eng-
land, as the ordinary result of Irish faction. He then pro-
ceeded thus:l—Factions of Ireland!! Ireland has suffered
sorely—may suffer more—from faction. She has seen bad
men exalted, and many a good man delivered over to a vio-
lent and cruel death. Her name has become a by-word and
a scorn, and faction has wrought in her and against her all
this woe;—but, compared with the factious spirit which holds
the mighty energies of this sorely-endangered laud in dis-
persion, or arrays them in hostility—compared with this, the
factions of Ireland are wise and honourable. They have the
merit of being consistent. Their objects are adequate and
distinct—although not such as to afford an excuse for crime,
yet vast enough to call out high energies and to move strong
passions. One party has at heart to exterminate Protes-
tantism from Ireland—to break asunder the connection
which binds that country to you—and to recover properties
to which it pretends the occupiers have no sufficient title.
The other party would keep the lands their fathers bought or
won—would maintain the religion which they believe to be
scriptural and true—and, because they have been trained in
loyal attachment to every thing British, would guard the
integrity of their beloved British connection. Oh ! blame
them not for this. Their ancestors were English, and fathers
not degenerate have transmitted to them an English spirit.
Blame them not:—their mothers have taught them, even
from their tender infancy, while the mother's hand could
guide and govern, and her caresses were a rich reward, to
love and venerate the excellent glories of Britain; they have
taught them how this was a good land and a godly, favoured
by the Almighty with his choicest gifts—a pure religion—a
righteous law; how that on earth no sovereign was more
honoured than theirs, the ruler of England; how none of
mankind were nobler than the British peers; and how the
loveliest hut of the humblest peasant was secure in the eye of
the British law, equally with the baronial court and the royal
palace; how that England was the land where maintenance
of true religion was reconciled with the toleration of free-
born thought; and how God had honoured her, making the
boundless ocean an appendage to her sovereignty, and
strengthening her so that in every land upon which the sun
looked down, it beheld proud monuments of her fame. Oh!
blame them not:—their mothers have taught them to love
this good land—have taught them how it was from Eng-
land the everlasting Gospel went forth to speak to all
nations in their own tongues the wonderful works of God;
how it was from England liberty called aloud to the
manacled African, and that as he cast his fetters away, and
bounded aloft in the buoyant energies of recovered freedom,
in his thanksgiving to God he invoked a blessing on Britain;
and they have told them how, when the gloom of oppres-
sion covered the earth, and the people sat in darkness, the
first sound and sight of hope that startled the moral midnight,
was the thunder of the British artillery, and the gleam of the
British satire; and that, at the inspiring summons, the pros-
trate nations arose, and stood arrayed with England, to com-
bat for their rights and to conquer. In lessons of this kind
their early y-ears have been instructed, and they listened until
they were brought to regard the name of a gentleman of
England as a synonyme for taintless honour—until the name
of a British merchant awoke, by spontaneous association, the
thought of incorruptible integrity, and until words of most
power to animate, words such as valour—justice—honour—
worth—seemed deficient and unexciting until they became
localized, as it were, by the appropriate epithet which assigned
to them their proudest home, in association with the name of
Britain. Blaine them not that they have been thus brought
up—that they have been taught to temper and improve ar-
dent affection for tha land which gave them birth with a ra-
tional and a strong attachment to the land which was the home
of their fathers—and that the object their hearts desire for the
soil where they were born—for the welfare of its inhabitants,
their brothers—is to obtain for it and for them equality with
England;—not the base equality which would bring you
down—which would divide with you the miseries which afflict
their own country—would scatter over your fair land a por-
tion of the curses under which Ireland is blighted and wither-
ing—but that they might, by making their country acquainted
with your principles, make her a partner in your prosperity,
and cause her afflictions and her crimes to be remembered
no more, by introducing in their place the social advantages
of this good land, freedom, and faith, and peacefulness.—
And this is one of the factions—the Irish factions—by which
your dilettanti politicians are mortally annoyed and offended.
Ora ! that they would accept a lesson from it, or even, sir, that
they would draw the proper lesson that may be learned from

the worst faction by which this country, as well as Ireland„
is wronged and endangered. Whatever the vices of that fac-
tion may be, it is consistent. It watches carefully its own
interests, and while it strives to use, as its instrument, every
party or individual weak or wicked enough to lend it support,
it never barters for the desired assistance the interests of its
own cause. Let the politicians, or the philosophers, or the
elegant votaries of fashion, whom our rude Irish factions
offend, name an instance in which one of those factions was
found rejoicing in the glories of England, or s,rrowing over
her disasters, or postponing any one of its own objects to
secure advantage to your country, or to avert evil Crain her.
Let them name the instance in which that faction afforded
the slightest accommodation, incompatible with its own
purposes, to a British minister, or even to Britain her-
self, in some pressing necessity. Let them name the in-
stance in which it has neglected to advance the interests
of Romanism, or refused the opportunity to persecute
Protestants--to damage Protestantism, and shake all
English interests. Or let them name an instance in which
the other party did not, to the utmost of its power, pro-
mote, even to the sacrifice of its own feelings and interests,
the cause of Protestantism and England. (Loud cheers.)
If they name no such instances on the one side or the other,
let them henceforth be silent on the subject of Irish faith.
Faction here, among yourselves, has made Popery the arbi-
trator of your country's fortunes—England may in the divine
mercy be preserved—but the factions which have laid her
down at the feet of Rome have done their part to effect her
abasement and ruin—they have taken the enemy into the
divided house and given him the dangerous authority for
which they had been contending with one another. We have
one hope of them. They have done this evil ignorantly.
They knew not the nature of the power they thus raised up
above them. They know not that it must, of necessity, be
the implacable enemy of their religion. We have a better
hope—the hope which lights the path of duty—the trust that
faithful men have never been forsaken. Let us resolve each
and all of us to preserve this trust by a patient continuance
in well doing—learning for ourselves and assisting to make
known to others the_truths which are of essential moment,
and believing that He who has hitherto protected this great
country in its perils and distresses will deliver it again nom
an evil more formidable than any it has yet encountered.
Let us be true to our cause—acquainted with our duties—
and governed in our endeavour to discharge them by the
principles which should influence Christian men—and we
tut), safely leave the great issue with Hint who ordereth all
things well, and has never been far off from the heart which
trusted in him. I would conclude, thanking you for your
attention and offering this parting remembrance. Roinanism
has gained much by ignorance and may gain more. In past
days she profited by ignorance of everything except what she
wished to have taught. if you neglect your duty, she may
now profit more by a voluntary and therefore more culpable
ignorance of what she teaches. (Long continued applause.)
The CHAIRMAN announced that there would be another
meeting at six o'clock in the evening, and the meeting then
broke up at three o'clock.

THE EVENING MEETING.
In the evening at six o'clock, another meeting was held in
the large room of the Red Lion Hotel.—The platfurtn was
again crowded with the clergy and gentry of the town and
neighbourhood, and the room was densely crowded with a
highly respectable auditory. John Clare, Esq., was moved
into the Chair, and called on the Rev. James Wright, to
open the meeting with prayer.
The Cu A inmAN then briefly opened the business of the
meeting. It was with great satisfaction that he saw su
numerous an assemblage. He stood there as the advacate et
the Church of England, the poor man's Church, which was
open to all, and which had been virulently attacked. Ile
denounced the supineness of the government, in putting off
the meeting of Parliament for two months, when they ought
in plain English, to have " taken the bull by the horns," acid
have met the difficulties which now threatened us. Through
the mode in which that ministry had advocated Popery and
discountenanced Protestantism, Popery had made tearful
strides. Not only in our Colonies had the Government with-
held support from the National Establishment and given a
bounty tor the advancement of Popery—not only in New-
foundland had Popery, under the fostering hands of Govern-
ment, advanced so much that the Papists outnumbered the
Protestants, and Protestants ever subjected to open insult
on account of their creed,—not only in Canada, was the sup-
port, originally granted to the Church Establishment, with-
held from the Church, whilst large sums were given for the
support of a Catholic Bishop and Catholic clergy, thus directly
advancing Popery and discouraging Protestantism :—not
only in the colony of New South Wales, were the funds origi-
nally granted for the support of the Church equally divided
for support of all sects, whilst the Protestants numbered 10 to I
of any other sect, and thus a bounty was given to advance Po-
pery and Sectarisin—a bounty of 10 times the amount of that
given for the advancement of Protestantism; but even at home
was the same destructive policy pursued. Popery had by every
means been encouraged both in Ireland and in this country,
the Government yielding to the Mistaken feeling of liberalism
of the day, till from twenty chapels, the whole amount of
accommodation for Catholc worship 40 years ago, that num-
ber had increased to between five and six hundred, and while
temples of idolatery were thus increasing in the land, he
would ask, did it not behove them to increase their strength
and band together to stop the progress of this idolatry. He
alluded to the support given to the Catholic Colleges, one of
which, the college of Maynooth, cost this country £lO,OOO a
year; and to the new system of education which was to foster
Popery, and which cost this country no less than £70,000 a
year- He concluded with calling on the
Rev. Mr. NOLAN to propose the first resolution. He ad-
dressed the meeting at considerable length, advocating the
advancement of Protestantism, and taking a comprehensive
view of the insidious advancement of Popery, lie alluded
to the Popish system of national education which hail been
introduced. if they would fill their churches, they must fill
their schools. Children must be taught Protestantism from
childhood; they would then get thoroughly grounded in Pro-'
testaut principles, and they might defy all the efforts of Po-
pery. But let Popery insinuate itself into the schools, and
let the children imbibe the poison of its doctrines in early
youth, and the foundations of the noble structure of Protes-
tantism would be rapidly sapped. This was a part of the con-
cession in which we had been engaged for the last ten years,
and he called on them earnestly to set their faces against any
concession in this respect. Education unguided by religion
raised man, under the evil promptings of his nature, from
an ignorant being to a devil. He would rather have to do
with an untutored savage than with a well tutored infidel;
he was not half so dangerous, and was twice as noble. The
education board in Ireland was not wanted; the work of edu-
cation was going on before; there was a thirst for knowledge,
and for the knowledge of the Bible, when this plan was devised
to prevent the children of the poor from reading the Bible.
The grant was taken from the Kildare place society which
was doing so much good, and down came the education com-
missioners to cast the children of the poor into scriptural dark-
ness. The national system of education had been proved After
eight years trial to be a mere engine of Popery. The priests
had all the government of the schools, and the catholic chapel
clerks were in many instances the school masters. There
were those who valued that gospel which they enjoyed, and
which was the bulwark of the land, and he was sure there
was that spirit in England that, if that gospel were assailed,
would stain it with its life's blood rather than transmit it
maimed to posterity.—(Cheers.)
The Rev. Dr. O'SnLLIYAN was received with loud cheers.
He begged to defend Her Majesty's ministers from the at-
tack of his friend Mr. Nolan, that they had not given peace
to Ireland. (A laugh.) He had no hesitation in saying that
if Her Majesty's ministers had given peace to Ireland, they
would have been committing a ministerial suicide. They
could not exist if Ireland were peaceable. If the law hail its
full effect in Ireland, and Ireland were peaceable, that major-
ity would not exist which now governed this country. Every
country in Europe, except England, had adopted protections
against Popery, except our own. The Bishops of Rome must
be appointed at the pleasure of the sovereigns of each coun-
try, and the intercourse between the Bishop and the Pope
must be open to the inspection of the sovereigns and their
ministers. The schools must have their system of educa-
tion made known to the sovereign, and even in the article
of confession the secrets confided to the priests must be made
public. There was one part of the subject of confession which
he never dare enter upon. There was something so offensive
to every good and virtuous feeling in the idea of the prepara-
tion by which priests were prepared for their duties, that he
Mil not wish to allude to it. '1 bus much he must say, that no
imagination of the most profligate of men could exaggerate
the profligate abominations in which the minds of the Romish
priesthood were trained in tout them for the confessional: and
it was at the knee of one whose mind had been thus filled
with pollution, that the wives, and the daughters, and the
sisters of Roman Catholics, poor men and rich men, must
kneel, and must be schooled by this individulal, who calls
himself the representative of God, in the profligacy in which
he himself had graduated. But there was another part which
was safe for discussion, They were sometimes told that the
practice of the confessional was not politically injurious, and
that it did not tend to encourage crime, or to prevent the com-
mission of it. But if it did not tend to prevent the disclosure
of crime the Protestants said it was pre-eminently unjust. If
an individual were to come to hint or to any of his rev. bre-
thren, and make them confidants of any secret by which they
became conscious of the committal of any capital crime, the
law would regard them as partners in the guilt, if t hey did
not make the disclosure. But, if instead of coining to them
the poor wretched sinner went to a Catholic Priest, and shouts.
tell him even of the projected murder of the young Queen, the
priest to whom this was communicated was forbidden by hitt
allegiance to the Church of Rome, to discharge his duty to the
Queen of England; he must permit the monarch to walk un-
consciously to her death,, because it was in accordance with
what he called his religion to let the murder be consumma-
ted, rather than make it known.—They were told in reply
that no man would confess unless it were kn'wn that their
confession would not be divulged. He denied that this was
the case, and contended that men were frequently impelled by
a sense of crimes to confess them. Romanism provided a salve
for that prompting of conscience, and thus prevented many
from delivering themselves up to public justice. The good
which the confessional did was vaunted in frequently pro-
curing the restitution of stolen goods : these restitutions, how-
ever, were "fete and far between," but were well contrived
and directed, so as to win the regard of many persons of re-
pute in favour of the confessional, who said that but for the
confessional, this restitution never would have been made. Ile
denied that such was the case, and in proof of this, instanced
the condition of one county in Ireland, in which there were 2,34
coroner's inquests in one year, and he believed be did not
exaggerate when he said that at least three-fourths of those were
held on bodies of men that had been violently and cruelly mur-
dered. Within the last year in that county there was not one cri-
minal brought to justice. How did Romanism reconcile this
with the utility of the confessional? Was it proved by re-
storing the £5 or £6 stolen by the way side, or shown in the
concealment of one or two hundred murderers. He noticed
the system of subordination and the machinery of the church
of Rome, by which the bishops were bound to the pope, and
the priests to the bishops, and the laity to the priests, by con-
fession; and stated that it was customary for a delegate from
the bishops to visit Rome every year, and state to the papal
government there the progress of popery and its prospects.
There it was customary for delegates from every country to
meet together as subjects of the pope, and every particular
of the state of earls country was known; so that if needful,
the delegates of Romanisin from other countries might be
instructed to incite opposition and rebellion to this country
when she was weak, and take other measures for overthrow-
ing the Protestant government. This was only to be battled
against by keeping public attention fixed on the proceedings
of that church, and the ministers of that church would then
be obliged to be cautious in their conduct. He called on,
them to be consistent, and not to cry out against a system of
religion which they were paying their money to support, by
instructing men to teach it, and called on them to petition
the legislature to cease the grant to Maynooth college, where
popery was taught. It was the fault of the supineness of the
people that popery had so progressed; if they aroused them-
selves their representatives would be imbued with their feel.
ng and parliament would be guided by their will. Ile was
to
glad to hear of those dissenters who joined them hand
hand and shoulder to shoulder in opposition to the error!
popery. (A laugh.) To be serious, it was a most dangery
thing to make common cause with popery, and there d
his
victims, a surer way by which Satan gained a secure hold of
I,%'!ecrteimss,eriitheanplzoineflsamwihnog, tihntmtv
orderith htoostile passions: Tuhger_er
against some of our institutions, would jogiiriaittinfyy
foeeducation,
and mine them. He alluded to the system of national
the
and implored them to allow of no schoolmaster without
could
bible ; it was the bible and nothing but the bible which
the
cast the edifice of Romanism into ruins. Leokin!l at
it not
church of Rome as the enemy of the bible, he thous ,
all
too much to sa that they pledged themselves to resist
encroach-
ments ona,cr..
her encroachments; and if they did not resist her
nhseern
reignts they
shouldniigh t
bfee ar, as they
established.o
the
The CHAIRMAN, after passing a high eu 0,1 a
show of
gentlemen who had addressed them, and
eseit'lngg ti, them'
a doxology
ohnainledds
oinn ttehsethinnoonetyloogf ttohectllolnkus.itohf tshiPnctuiPegi
etnlng
three cheers were given for the CliairroaP, "`
ug(lLtOuthclaatptphlicat:lsueuP.lnjen::oev of
broke up at Woe o'clock.