to look whither all this may tend; and to beware, lest our Lebanon give the helve to the cutting down of the forest; lest the shades of ignorance and superstition once more obscure the light of the Gospel; and, in divine wrath for our encouragement of error, this lamp of Heaven be taken from us, and we become a prey to that dominion of infidelity and tyranny, which is the scourge of God. If any one be inclined to consider these ideas as visionary, he is requested, at least, to pause before he condemns ; and to reflect, whether evil, moral or political, bring not on its own punishment; whether a sacrifice of the truth, and confirmation of error, be more likely to bring on a blessing, or a curse; and remember, that such, at least, were the ideas of those, who, by a struggle of one century, have made Britain, for two more, the happiest of nations.

There were undoubtedly some men of high character, and conspicuous abilities, who, at a very early period of the agitation of the Catholic Question, foretold much of what has followed. In its progress, its intent, which scarce seen arose, has, in its unfolding, been so aggrandized, that, like Virgil's fame, its utmost height may yet be enveloped in clouds; and whether there Romana be read for Anglicana, or the single or triple crown be the highest, cannot yet be plainly discerned. Our conception of what may be is formed on what has been. If we know the tree by its fruits, we also know what the fruits will be, with no less certainty, by the tree, wheresoever it can bear fruit.

Amongst those who gave a warning of what might

then be expected to follow, from the measures proposed in the Catholic Bill, introduced into the Irish House of Commons, was the celebrated Mr. Flood, who, in political sagacity, powerful language, and acute and solid reasoning, was at least not inferior to any of his contemporaries. As therefore the Hon. Author of The Considerations has liberally quoted another eloquent orator, the two following extracts from the speeches of Mr. Flood, on the Catholic Bill, may not improperly be introduced here.

Mr. Flood said, that "he always wished to embosom the Roman Catholics in the state; yet, without courting praise on one hand, or fearing censure on the other, he would; neglectful of both, deliver his opinion on this great subject, and hoped it would be received with the same candour it was given. About five years ago," said he," a law was passed, granting the Roman Catholics infinitely less than is now proposed; the day was celebrated with rejoicing, and it was thought we had reconciled every party. I am sorry now to hear Gentlemen speak as if nothing was done for them. The Right Honourable * Gentleman, who prepared the Bill now before us, well knows that I did object to that † indiscriminate clause;-one reason was, that while you were endeavouring to conciliate that estimable and beloved body of men, you seemed to hide your bounties, and to shew only the severity of the laws. If a sorry Popish agent had

* Mr. Gardiner, afterwards Lord Mountjoy, and who was massacred by the rebels. Such was his reward.

The words of this clause are not given in the Report.

done thus, he would have been unworthy the men for whom he acted, and it would much surprise me. But a Protestant Parliament should be wise and frank enough to explain and declare the whole scope of their intention. In the former laws, leases for years were granted to them upon the avowed principle of restraining them from any influence in elections. This law then goes beyond toleration; it gives them a power, and tends to make a change in the state. I have a great respect for the Roman Catholics; and though I will not condemn, yet I will not wholly approve, their conduct. Ninety years ago, the question was, whether Popery and arbitrary power should be established in the person of King James, or freedom and the Protestant religion in the person of King William? Four-fifths of the inhabitants of Ireland adhered to the cause of King James; they were defeated, and I rejoice in their defeat. The laws that followed this event were not laws of persecution, but of political necessity; and are you now prepared for a new government? Can you possibly suppose, though the Roman Catholics prefer you to every other people, that they will prefer you to themselves? What then is the consequence if you give them equal power with the Protestants? Can a Protestant constitution survive? Yet, should the majority of this nation attempt to alter the constitution, I firmly believe they would be repelled by the minority, and then a total convulsion must follow."

Irish Parl. Debates, Feb. 20th,

A. D. 1782, p. 255.

And again, on the 27th of the same month, he said: Though we talk as sentimentally as we please, yet we should not give without consideration. I admit the merits of the Roman Catholics, and that merit makes me consent to enlarge their privileges; but I will not consent to their having any influence in choosing Members for this House."

Such were the sentiments of Mr. Flood, which the events that have followed have but too strongly shown to have been not rashly expressed or ill-founded.

It is, therefore, by no means surprising, if this nation should not, without apprehension, observe the unremitted anxiety to acquire political power manifested by the Catholic body. The question is not one that involves merely the interests or occurrences of the present day; it comprehends the fate of ages, the happiness or misery of millions yet unborn.

Such is the importance of the question, on which the Hon. Author of The Considerations, and others, have endeavoured to affect the public mind with an opinion in favour of the petition of the Roman Catholics, by a publication possibly not expected after the question had been so fully debated and determined in Parliament: and still less so, that there should be so little that is new in argument, though the mode certainly entitles it to a higher estimation than any other publication of the same import which has hitherto appeared.

This publication may, however, claim attention as a comment on the petition itself, and giving a more ample view of its various objects, which, comprised as they are in the petition, in few but comprehensive

words, were less distinctly perceptible, and perhaps not sufficiently understood by the nation at large.

The arguments, that have the greatest appearance of novelty, are those suggested in favour of the doctrines of the church of Rome, as now held, upon an assumed position, that they have remained unvaried from the first ages of its introduction into this kingdom. To this suggestion, as the subject has long lain dormant, it will be necessary also to attend particularly; and, as far as may be, to point out the true origin of some of the peculiar doctrines of that church.

The report of the debates on the Catholic Question will make it less necessary to dwell on many of the author's arguments; and therefore it will be more the object of the present occasion to consider those which either are new, or may admit of further discussion.

To a Protestant it is a very new, and by no means a congenial, idea, that religion should be considered as having nothing to do with policy; still more so is it to conceive, that they who, in debating on such a question as the Catholic one, contend for the connexion of religion with policy, are not serious in so doing.

But, as the advocate of the Catholic Question represents this distinct consideration as an argument for the admission of the Catholics into places of trust, it is requisite to give it in his own statement:

*Catholics" (he says) "feel like other men ;

* Page 35.