the decline, and that if a radical change be not soon adopted in one part of the empire, its glory seems likely to be extinguished for ever. Whatever diversity of opinion may prevail on this part of the subject, it must be acknowledged, that either by supineness, imbecillity, or the unfortunate train of human events, we are brought to that crisis, which must prompt every mind to conceive, and every hand to execute the most efficacious plans of defence.-To protect this country from the hostile designs of a dangerous neighbour, and to secure its independence, are objects which have long engrossed your attention. But your efforts appear to me to have been directed to means, which are il calculated to promote these desirable purposes. You certainly have not to learn, that the cheapest and most effectual defence of a nation, must arise from the spirit and unanimity of its inhabitants; and that opinion and sentiment are more powerful in this respect, than the strongest works of nature or of art. This principle is eternally true; it is one to which any politician can scarcely refuse an assent. Now, Sir, can you suppose that this desired unanimity pervades the whole empire? Can you have the assurance to tell your sovereign and the people, that Ireland, one third of the United Kingdom, is in a state of tranquillity? May not every loyal subject there say, in the language of a Roman poet, that he is walking over fires, concealed under treacherous embers, tholics in foreign countries; that every temptation was held forth to induce them to abandon their religious principles, and shake off every moral restraint; that sons were even encouraged to forsake their religion,' and in that case were authorized to drive their injured and persecuted parents from the possession of their estates. All this and more stands upon record; and the effects of this barbarous and inhuman policy are felt at this period. But, by the liberality of more enlightened times, by the wisdom of distinguished statesmen, and the beneficence of a gracious sovereign, these evils have been, in great measure, removed.-In order to form a closer connexion with the sister kingdom, and to promote the general interests of the empire, by simplifying the operations of government, you were the minister who proposed and carried the union. In this great struggle of parties, in which you succeeded in depriving Ireland of its independence, the Catholics gave you their interest, on a condition clearly understood that they should at tain, what they term, their complete emancipation. You appeared to espouse their cause, after availing yourself of their cooperation; you relinquished your situation from an inability to realise their hopes, and, as we may collect from the combined authority of two important papers before the public, one of which was written by Lord Cornwallis, the other by yourself, you stood pledged not to return to ofice, but on the condition of carrying into effect the claims of the Catholics. (See these two papers in Plowden's Historical Review, vol. 2, part 2, p. 944.) So far your conduct was fair, honourable, and manly; but, Sir, after this display of honour and disinterested patriotism, by what combination of circumstances has it happened, that you have been again Recent events have shewn, that the fire is smothered, not extinguished; and that it may shortly burst forth with irresistible violence. The affairs of that country unquestionably demand the most prompt and delicate interposition of government; and, if a remedy be not speedily applied, the proud-placed at the head of affairs amidst a total est bulwark of defence will be converted into an engine of destruction.-It has, for centuries past, been the crooked and dark policy of the English government, to treat Ireland, not as a part of the empire. but as a conquered country. The future historiar will hardly gain credit with posterity, when he relates, that the catholics of Ireland, composing almost the whole of the natives, laboured for more than 200 years under a state of persecution, for adhering to the religion of their fathers; and were harassed with a penal code, which would disgrace the memory of a Decius or a Dioclesian; that nothing was left unattempted to keep them in a state of ignorance, by prohibiting Catholic schools at home, and by preventing, as far as possible, the education of Ca and uninterrupted silence respecting the Catholic claims? Six months have now elapsed since your return to power, and no assurance has been given, that full and substantial justice will be done to so large a part of his Majesty's subjects. Honour, duty, a regard for your own reputation, and the good faith of your country, all possible motives which can prompt human actions, call for your exertions in this business; still, no indication of your designs has been discovered. The Catholics had surely no reason to expect such treatment. You recurred to their assistance, as long as they contributed to for ward your designs; you raised their expectations by a temporary shew of friendship, and now you appear to have abandoned their cause for ever. Resume, Sir, your former spirited and manly conduct, extend to four millions of his Majesty's subjects a full participation of the benefits of the constitution, and the peace of Ireland will be secured on the firmest basis. The union, which you were so successful in promoting, will ever be, without this measure, an airy phantom, a delusive advantage. It will belie its name, it will not be an union of sentiments, dispositions, and interests, but a perpetual source of uneasiness, dissention, and discord. The great mass of the people of Ireland will be, in some measure, strangers in their own country; obliged, indeed, to contribute largely to the support of the state by the profits of their industry, but rendered incapable of enjoying the smallest advantage resulting from offices and employments. Such a situation is a species of political servitude; and to suffer one fourth of the inhabitants of the United Kingdom to remain in such a state of degradation, after raising their hopes to fairer prospects, is an action inconsistent with justice, honour, and good faith. -Your friends have recourse to a singular method of justifying your conduct. They insinuate, that difficulties arise from the inflexible resolution of a certain personage, of whom it is not possible to speak but with the utmost affection and respect. This, Sir; is a mode of defence at once ungenerous and unconstitutional. You cannot but know and feel, in a peculiar manner, that the treatment experienced by the Irish Catholics, is a transaction of the most odious nature, and consequently that all responsibility, in this particular, must rest with your self. It is a ministerial proceeding; and, as you are minister, you must bear the whole weight of disgrace annexed to it. In fact, this defence of your friends stands refuted by your own conduct, unless you should be willing to suffer the imputation of the grossest inconsistency. After certain unsurmountable obstacles had prevented you from carrying the Catholic question, and had induced you, under that inability, to relinquish your situation, the continued existence of the same difficulties, should have prevented your return to power. But, as you are again in possession of the first dignities of the state, what conclusion are we to draw, but that honour and good faith should lead you, without delay, to comply with your engagements to the Catholics. The fact is certain, the inference is inevitable.-But, Sir, suffer me to observe, that not only your own honour, but the c edit and reputation of your country are intimately concerned in this transaction. As minister of a great and honourable nation, you assured the Irish, Catholics of your willingness to promote their cause; you consequently received their support on a critical occasion; and if you should neglect to pay the just and natural equivalent for their services, the good faith of the country will stand impeached. At the time that I am writing this letter, the enemy is hunting our agents from the neutral states on the continent, and employing the most insidious arts to blacken and vilify the British name and British faith throughout Europe. Your conduct towards Ireland will afford an excellent topic for the malicious oratory of an insidious foe, They will tell the people of Ireland, they have probably said already in very forcible language: "How can you repose any farther confidence in a mercenary government by "whom you have been so often deceived? "At the union, they promised you a full "participation of the privileges of the Bri"tish constitution; a British minister then "succeeded to the highest offices of the state, on the express condition of debar. "ring you from all that had been promised; to complete the farce, a Lord High Chan "cellor of Ireland, in a series of letters to a "Catholic peer, declared your religion in "compatible with your civil allegiance. "This language has never been disavowed "by the British government, and the po "bleman, who used it, still retains his sta "tion. Crimine ab uno disce omnes."-Such has unquestionably been the language of French agents in Ireland; and may the num ber of those, whom they have perverted from their indispensable duty of allegiance, be comparatively small! But, Sir, I solemnly intreat and beseech you to remove, as spee dily as possible, every occasion by which so foul an imputation can, with any appearance of truth, be produced.A very small degree of reflexion, will enable a man of your political sagacity and experience, to see that the benefit accruing to the Catholics from the measure in question, is not so consider. able as the advantages of security which will be reaped by the whole British empire. As long as Ireland continues in its present dis tracted state, it will be perpetually the thea tre of hostile intrigues and machinations. Of this, no doubt can be entertained, as every event which has yet taken place in that country, fully demonstrates the multiplied effects of French influence. But, once admit all to the fullest benefits of the con stitution, and you will completely annihi late the hopes of the enemy by removing the cause of dissension and discord: you will diffuse a general alacrity and vigour through the whole mass of the people, for all will be united by one common bond of interest; you will permanently secure the attachment of Ireland to a form of government, perhaps the most perfect yet devised by the accumulated wisdom of ages.That we have greater dangers to encounter than this country ever experienced in former ages, is a fact which admits of no doubt. A military nation, established in the heart of Europe, composing a population of more than thirty millions, and commanding almost an equal number of enslaved dependents in the surrounding countries; a nation either actually, or equivalently, possessing a line of coast, of which history has given no example since the flourishing periods of the Roman empire; a nation at once daring, adventurous, insidious and warlike, ruled by a tyrant in the flower of youth, who knows no law but that of force, who appears determined to enslave every country to which he can carry the terror of his arms: such a nation presents to our astonished view a spectacle which our ancestors never beheld. The distinguished statesmen in the days of King William, and many eminent men since that period, always considered the security of the country as depending on three great points; the independence of Holland; a close union with Continental Allies; and the maintenance of the Liberty of Europe."These" says Mr. Burke, speaking of the sentiments. entertained in the reign of King William, "these were the three immoveable pillars of "the safety and greatness of England, as they are now, and as they must ever be, to the "end of time." (Mr. Burke's Letters on the Regicide Peace, p 87.)-But what measures are to be now adopted for the safety of the empire, when Holland is but a province wholly dependent on France, when we have no ally on the continent capable of checking the ambition of the common enemy, and, when the liberty of Europe is no more? Let us provide for our security by composing all differences at home; let us all have but one common interest: let us be no more a divided people, and we may still retain our liberty and independence. The chains of the Catholics have been loosened by the humanity of his Majesty's govern ment; let them be broken, and thrown aside. Let us present to astonished and dismayed Europe, the noble spectacle of sixteen millions of people, united in one common interest, and animated by a generous resolution of maintaining their liberties and independence, against the most execrable tyranny that was ever suffered to infest mankind. If this can be effected, I think, Sir, you will provide a more powerful bul wark against the ferocious enemy, with whom we have to contend, than by fortifying the metropolis, or raising batteries on the coast. You will possess, not that precarious security, which arises from the mouldering and perishable works of art, but that which results from the invincible spirit of a free and united people. Confidence would thus be infused into all classes of the community, and the hopes of the enemy would in the same proportion decrease, and be finally extinguished.. We might then, notwithstanding many unfavourable symptoms of decline at home, and the general degradation of surrounding nations, cherish the fond hope of transmitting our independence unimpaired to our posterity, and of verifying the beautiful and patriotic lines of the poet, The nations not so blest as thee, Shall, in their turns, to tyrants fall, STATE OF IRELAND, LETTER IV. SIR, Having shewn in my two last letters, that the admission of the Irish Catholics into Parliament, is not inconsistent with the principles or safety of the constitu tion; I now shall endeavour to prove it to be consistent with the establishment of the Church of England. As the measures of the Catholic body which might endanger this establishment, must, as in the case of the constitution, be measures which they will be able to carry in Parliament, it is very evident that the arguments which have already demonstrated the impracticability of their forming such a party in either the House of Commons, or House of Lords, as to be able to injure the constitution, are applicable to my present purpose. The Church of England is always described," as by law esta"blished." This is the term made use of in the coronation oath; it is therefore, manifest that the establishment cannot be altered, except by the repeal of certain laws. If then, the admission of the Catholics into Parliament does not give them the means of effecting this repeal, the conclusion is selfevident, that their admission is not inconsistent with the established religion. Though my argument is very short, it loses nothing of its force by being so. Arguments are sound in proportion as the several deductions are the result of premises, which are them For the other communications of this writer, see Register, Vol. V. pp. 385, 463, 662, 737, 859, 894. selves sound. But, as it may be said, that notwithstanding the power of the Catholics. in Parliament, may be unequal to the task of rendering their own religion the religion of these realms, this power will certainly increase, because the Catholics will never cease to gain converts, and augment their party, or, even if they should tail in pursuing that course, that they will adopt other plans, and resist the authority of Parliament, promoting a republican form of government. Pr is requisite to say something in anticipafon of these objections. They appear to me to be the only objections that the most clouded imaginations conld suggest, and, as there will not be wanting the activity of every description of opposition to the claims of the Catholics, a detailed description of them may be of service; and, I hope, will not be found uninteresting. As to the powers of the Catholics, for the sake of argument, we will admit their success in passing a bill to repeal the laws which establish the Church of England. Could it pass into a law? No, the laws of the realm provide against a possible conjuncture of a prince sitting on the throne, who professes the Catholic religion; and the coronation oath binds every prince, who is, or may become our King, to refuse his consent to any law which has for its object the repeal of those statutes by which the Church of England is established. But to return to our subject, it is manifest that as long as our King must be a Protestant, and the coronafion oath a qualification of admission to the throne; so long it is utterly impossible for the Catholics to carry any measure that can repeal the laws for establishing our religion; and, consequently, that can endanger its existence. To those who argue that the Catholics are jacobins and repobiicans, and only wish to gain admittance into Parliament, or only make the exclusion from it a topic of complaint, in order to promote their levelling projects, and the empire of their church, for such must be the inconstancy of those reasoners, that these jacobins in politics must be tyrants in religion; it must be replied, that the conduct of the Catholics belies the supposition that they approve of republican doctrines. They are as a body, notorious for their loyalty to the dynasty of the House of Hanover. Facts that every one knows, and rio one can object to prove this assertion. In Ireland they adopted the cause of the Protestant ascendency in Chorch and State, in two rebellions against the House of Hanover, which promised them the ascendency of the Catholic faith. Incohetsferican war they armed to presente of their country to Great Stat le un just policy which had always been acted upon in respect to Ireland, had roused the people of America to action, and obliged the minis ter to draw all the British forces out of Ire land. At the Union, I assert it, and I do so without fear of contradiction, they supported the measure when all the Protestants with the exception of some few, who were sufficient to form a corrupt majority in Parlia ment, were infuriate against the measure, and the success of it was depending on the line of conduct which the Catholics would adopt. Is there any man living so great a bigot, or so great a knave, as to deny that their refu al to join their Protestant brethren, and their decision to promote the Union, are positive proofs of the loyalty of the Catholics of Ireland to the King, and the connexion with Great Britain. I do not impote disloyalty to the Protestants for adopting ano ther line of conduct, such an inputation could have no foundation, because they were loyal to their constitution. Nor, when I mention the Catholics, do I speak of the wretched ignorant, and semibarbarians of that body. Not that part of them which are led by their passions to express their sentiments by the use of pikes; but that part which possess sound and liberalnnderstanding, and express their sentiments by their deci sions on all public questions. The facts of the rebellions of the Pretender, the Volun teers, and the Union, stand recorded in the page of our history, and afford the most emphatic illustration of the absurdity of those blind politicians, who ruminate in the dark. ness of past ages, or in the illumed aberra tions of the present, to asperse with odium the character and the claims of their Catho lic fellow subjects. But, even if we again, for the sake of argument, admit that the Catholics under the circumstances of being. excluded from the constitution, and of their religion being insulted, are the republicans which some persons represent them to be, and so bigoted as to require nothing short of the re-establishment of their Church, would not the very boon of free admission into the possession of equal rights with their Protes tant brethren, completely alter their political sentiments, and teach them the policy of to lerating the religious establishments of long standing, and held in great veneration. Will it not remove those feelings of jealousy with which, if they have any feelings, they must contrast the pomp and the wealth of the Protestant Episcopacy with the poverty of their own. As it is not consistent with common sense to conclude that the rehef from poliu cal disabilities will encourage the support, and repress the oppugnancy of this body, to EEPENC & King's abdication, to frame an oath to prevent any future abuse of the royal prerogative. This view alone of the question would be sufficient to remove all doubts, in regard to the difficulties attending the constitution of the oath, and affords a proof that the ob the views and happiness of the Protestants in regard to religious matters. Having, as I trust, fully supported my position, that the admission of the Catholics into Parliament, is not inconsistent with the Protestant reformed religion as by law established, I cannot quit the subject without animadvert-ject of our ancestors was to control the ing on the rumours which have prevailed relave to the objection which the coronation oath has suggested. From the circumstances which have occurred, either the reasons for Mr Pitt's resignation in 1801, were unfounded, or the objection was certainly made, for Mr. Pitt was too powerful both in Parliament and in the Cabinet, to have found reasons to postpone bis favourite measure upon any other grounds than the objection abovementioned. If then, we may be induced to infer that such an objection was made, coming from the quarter it does, and originating in the conscientious consideration of the sacredness of an oath, it demands respect and admiration, however unfounded or injurious it may prove in the result." The "Protestant reformed religion as by law es"blished." In discussing the nature of this oath, there must be kept in view, first the circumstances under which it was framed; and, secondly, the expectation that may be said to have been formed of the conduct of his Majesty, as one of the contracting parties by Parliament as the other. For certainly, the object of the oath can best be explained by the circumstances that occasioned it; and his Majesty will act according to it, if he fulfils the expectations, which on taking it he encouraged those to entertain who received it of him. In regard to the time when the present coronation oath was first demanded of an English Prince, it would appear that it was founded upon two considerations; first, the conduct of James in attempting to establish the Catholic religion in defiance of Parliament; and, secondly, the preventing of the repeal of the laws for establishing the Protestant religion, should even Parliament require it. It is unnecessary to bring forward the several facts which proved the intention of James by force of his prerogative to establish the Catholic Church. He did, in truth, actually do so in Ireland, and his public con duct in favour of the Catholics in that country, was made a charge of accusation against him as to his intentions in this. How reasonable, therefore, was it for the Parliament on this * Mr. Pitt, Duke of Portland, Lord Chatham, Lord Spencer, Lord Grenville, and Mr. Dundas, the Cabinet is composed of 11 persons. King in his executive, not in his legislative men'. Or, did the King himself feel that his engagements were to this extent? It is very evident, that neither the King intended to keep them excluded, nor that the Parliament expected that he had undertaken to |