As a complete answer to the personally abusive charge which You bring against me, at the beginning of the extract which I have just transcribed from your work, it would be sufficient to say, that, as both Dr. Southey's work and mine are addressed to the well informed, and as every thing stated by You is fully known to these, there was no obligation upon me to state the facts which You specify, and therefore no ground to criminate me for omitting them: it would have been both a needless and incongruous expansion of my work.

I might also observe, that this most evidently was not offered as a history of the times, but as a defence of the Catholics against certain charges of Dr. Southey.

But I am not reduced to the necessity of resorting to either of these defences. To repel your charges, I shall transcribe an extract from my "Historical Memoirs," and leave it to your own decision, whether the account which You have given, either of the state of Europe, or the state of England, during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, is more full, or more favourable to that princess, than mine. *

"Ancient and modern history differ in nothing so much, as the absence of religious wars and "controversies from the former, and the large "space which they occupy in the latter. During "the successive periods of the Assyrian, Persian, "Macedonian and Roman empires, the grand

Chapter XXVIII. with some addition, it is inserted in "The Reminiscences, Sect. XII. 6. Art. Holy Alliance.""

66:

political division of the world was, into the states "within the sway of those powerful empires, and "the states beyond it. At the end of the fifth "century of the Christian æra, by far the greater part of Europe was Roman; but after the "death of Trajan, the Romans ceased to be conquerors, and soon afterwards, the barbarians "of the north and the north-east, began to invade "their territories on every side, and to erect on "their ruins multitudes of principalities, inde

pendent on each other, but united by the pro❝fession of a common religion, by a common re66 gard for its interests, and by common sub"mission, in religious concerns, to the Pope, as "their common head. By degrees, Austria, "France, Spain and England, became the Euro

pean powers of the first order. The union of "the Imperial and Spanish crowns on the head of "Charles V. produced confederacies against him. "The French monarch was always at their head ; "and Europe thus became divided in two new

*

parties, the Austrian and the French. The "Reformation arrived, and then, according to "Schiller, the interests of the European states, "which, till that time, had been national, ceased "to be such, and the interests of religion formed a bond of union among subjects of different governments, who, till this time, had been un"known to each other. A sentiment more power

66

* "Histoire de la Guerre de Trente Ans :―Cited by M. "Bonald, in his interesting Essai, De l'Unitê Religieuses en 'Europe.'"

"ful in the heart of man, than even the love of "his country, rendered him capable of perceptions "and feelings which reached beyond its limits: "the French Calvinist found himself more in "contact with England, Germany, Holland 66 or Geneva, than with a Catholic of his own country.

"This effected a new political division in "Europe; France siding with the separatists from "the Church of Rome, and introducing to the "aid of their common cause the Ottoman power, "became the real head of one power; Austria "was

was the head of the other. But when, upon "the abdication of Charles the Fifth, his German "were divided from his Spanish territories, and "the civil wars of France weakened his connections "with the Protestant powers and the Porte, "Philip the Second of Spain, and Elizabeth " of England, became the conspicuous characters. "Philip, with the aid of Bavaria, was the centre "of the Catholic system: Elizabeth, with the "United Provinces at her disposition, was at the "head of the Protestant. During this period, "Germany, under the peaceable influence of Ru"dolph, took no part in the contest; but all the "temporal, and (which was of much greater con"sequence) all the spiritual power of Rome, co

66

operated with the Spaniard, and placed the Pope

"in the van of the Catholic array. Then, if "Schiller's remarks be just, the Protestants in

every country subject to the Spanish sway, "would be partisans of Elizabeth, and every

"Catholic in the territories subject to her dominion or controul, would be favourable to the "designs of Philip and the Pope. Pursuing his "reasoning, it would follow that this would be "particularly the case of the clergy of each division, on account of their nearer interests in the

concerns of religion; and still more the case of "the Catholic clergy, on account of their intimate "connection with the Roman See, and graduated "dependence upon her."

You tell me, (p. 185), that," You use my own "words when you add, that Elizabeth's religious "reformation seems to have been conceived on a "conciliatory and comprehensive scheme." You refer to my Historical Memoirs, Vol. I. p. 145 and page 234, of the 2d edition. No such expression is to be found in the pages to which you refer neither is any such expression applied as you apply it, to the general character of Elizabeth's religious reformation, to be found in any of my writings.

XV. 2.

Your Eulogy of the Pacific Tendency of Elizabeth's first measures respecting Religion.

PERMIT me to ask, if, while You brought forward, in this and other parts of your work, the persecution of Protestants by Catholics in foreign countries, You should not have equally brought into view the persecutions of Catholics by Protestants? Justice required it of You. I beg leave to refer

Your to what I have said upon this subject, in the fifth section of my fifteenth letter to Doctor Southey, and to Doctor Milner's fourth letter to Doctor Sturges. If You compare the different persecutions, either in the provocations of them, or in their length, or their atrocity, You will not find the Catholics more guilty than the Protestants.

Let us now inquire, whether the persecuting laws of Queen Elizabeth, speaking of them generally, can be justified upon any general principles of morality and civil justice,

1-At the time of the accession of Queen Elizabeth, the Roman Catholic was the national religion. Two-thirds of the nation professed it; all the bishops, both houses of convocation, and both the universities, protested against the introduction of the Protestant creed. The remaining third part of the nation, but divided into the episcopalian and puritan denominations, favoured Protestantism. Elizabeth herself was, or at least professed herself to be, an episcopalian Protestant.

In this situation of things, did any general principles of morality and justice confer a right upon Elizabeth and her government, to make episcopalian Protestantism the religion of the state?

Here, the relative merits of the two religions are beside the question: the only point to be considered is, whether morality and justice allowed Queen Elizabeth to make episcopalian Protestantism the state religion, against the will of an` immense majority of her subjects?