wrong, the advisers of his late Majesty, King George the Fourth, did wrong in advising His Majesty to assent to the act relating to the Bishoprick of Durham, and the appropriation of such lands for founding a university. And who were such advisers? The Duke of Wellington, Sir Robert Peel, and Lord Lyndhurst. If the Catholic members have done wrong, the advisers of His present Majesty, in advising him to assent to the Irish Church Temporalities' Act, whereby ten bishopricks in Ireland and all benefices in which Divine Service had not been performed for three years before, are, or are liable to be, suppressed; and by which the Church Rates in Ireland are abolished, and a tax put upon all livings to answer the purposes of a Church Rate; and by which provisions relating to Church Lands, similar in substance, though not entirely in detail, were enacted. And who were such advisers? Lord Stanley and Sir James Graham. If the Catholic Members have done wrong, the Church Commissioners have done wrong in recommending, and His Majesty's Ministers in advising, His Majesty to give his assent to the Church Bill of last year, whereby so great an alteration has been made in the rights and privileges annexed and appertaining unto the bishops and clergy of this realm. And who were these commissioners? (Amongst others) the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Bishop of London. And who voted for that measure? All the bishops in the House of Lords, and Sir Robert Peel, Lord Stanley, Sir James Graham, Mr. Estcourt, Mr. Goulburn, and Mr. Law, in the House of Commons. If the individual member is not to be the sole judge, in whom is the discretion to be placed, or is there to be no discretion? If there be no discretion, the Catholic member is bound to vote on all occasions against any alteration, against the bishops, against the party calling itself the Church party, against the will of the king, the supreme head of the Church of England, in case any alteration should be considered necessary by any of these parties in the Establishment. But, as there is to be a discretion, by whom is it to be exercised? By the party taking the oath, as stated by Lord Eldon, Lord Kenyon, Lord Althorp, and Lord Stanley, or by whom else? Any individual member? Is such member pointed out by the act? Who is he? Is he defined? Is it Lord John Russell or Sir Robert Peel? The minister of the day, or the head of the opposition? Is it Sir James Graham sitting on the ministerial side, or Sir James Graham sitting on the opposition benches? Is it Sir James Graham voting for the Irish Temporalities' Act, or Sir James Graham voting against the Church Rate resolution ? Is it Sir John Wrottesley voting for the Irish Temporalities' act, and the appropriation clause in the Irish Tithe Bill, or voting against the Church Rate resolution? If such be the test, the Catholic member must have done right in voting for the Irish Temporalities' act; for if it be considered that he has acted wrong in voting for the Church Rate resolution, inasmuch as both Sir James Graham aud Sir John Wrottesley voted against it, surely it must be conceded that he did right in voting We have not space to notice the very able arguments by which the Observer supports the Catholic votes on these subjects. They appear to us to throw very great, and as we think, new light on these important topics. VOL. II.-NO. IV. 2 Q for the Irish Temporalities' act, as both the honourable members voted for it; and yet he was as much abused for this vote as he is for his vote on the Church Rate resolutions and the Appropriation Clause. Is it by a majority of the house? You would thereby be disfranchising the constituencies of the Catholic members, by a vote of the House of Commons; and if that majority was for the subversion of the Establishment, what would become of the security of the oath? No! the discretion must necessarily be placed in the individual member, and was by the act accordingly so placed; and that being the true intent and meaning of the act, I ask is it fair, is it just, to arraign the Catholic member for his exercise of that discretion? It is the more unjustifiable, looking at what occurred, and the discussions which took place, previously to the passing of the act, as to the coronation oath, and the correspondence between his late majesty King George the Third and Lord Kenyon, published in 1827. Is it then fair to contend that no such discretion is vested in the Catholic members, and this without being able to say in whom else the discretion is placed? For my own part, I think exclusion altogether would have been much more generous towards the Catholic. You admit him, as you say, into the constitution: you tell him he is emancipated, and yet you lay a snare for his conscience; and if he exercises that right which the act and constitution confer on him, he is liable to be called a perjurer by any individual who differs from him in opinion. The attempt to run down the Catholic in this matter is base and disgraceful. It is unjust in the extreme; it is unwise; as the only effect it can have is to irritate and disgust the Catholic member with those calling themselves the friends, but who, in my opinion, are the great enemies of the Church. But for the insolence engendered by the penal code towards the Catholics, such calumnies would never have been thought of. The Catholic members have never shunned, on the contrary, they have always courted and required, examination and investigation as to the meaning of this oath, declaring they would prefer being excluded from Parliament if such was the will of the legislature; but that whilst there, they would insist upon all the rights and the exercise of all the duties, of members of Parliament, according to their own discretion and judgment, and according to the constitution."+ Away, then, with the cant and hypocrisy which would PRESUME and INFER us out of those liberties and privileges, which have been inherited from the Catholic heroes of Runnymead! We call upon our Catholic legislators, as the representatives of those heroes, as the guardians and protectors of those liberties and privileges, to repudiate and shake off the calumnies with which they are assailed, and to claim as their RIGHT the SAME fair construction of THEIR oaths and conduct which good sense and constitutional knowledge have long since put upon the oaths and conduct of our Protestant kings and Protestant legislators. And we doubt not that our Protestant fellow-subjects will soon Observations, pp. 33-7. be brought to treat with equal and merited contempt the calumnious "charges" of a Philpotts, and the malignant ravings of a M'Ghee or an O'Sullivan, and to be equally indifferent whether "Perjury" or "No Popery" be the watchword of our oppo nents.* * The Times of the 20th ulto. having in a long paragraph, endeavoured to deduce a charge of perjury from certain writings of Roman Catholics, amongst which were some publications of Mr. Howard of Corby Castle; that gentleman sent the following letter to the self-dubbed "Leading Journal," but the conductors of that consistent and impartial "public instructor," declined to insert it. To the Editor of the Times. Corby Castle, Carlisle, 25th March, 1837. SIR-I find myself alluded to in your paper of the 20th instant, and I trust you will allow me to be the interpreter of my own sentiments. It does not appear necessary that I should follow you in the lengthened tracery of what those in chains may, for relief, have been willing to submit to, nor what those trained to oppression and persecution, so pertinaciously refused, until their fears that those chains might be broken on their own heads, induced them to concede. The unfortunate state of Ireland must be looked upon as retribution and punishment for misrule, and the perpetrators ought to bewail in penitence, sackcloth, and ashes, the effects of their own misgovernment, and deem themselves deprived of public confidence and unfit to rule over us. But the point is, What effect the present Catholic Oath ought to have on the conscientious Catholic, both in his private station and in any office of trust or profit in which he may be placed? To me it is clear, that its objects and bearing resemble the Oath of Allegiance, and bind us neither by force, nor publicly, nor privately, by cabal and conspiracy, to endeavour to subvert the religion by law established. But that any Englishman, feeling the value of our Constitution, should deem it intended to interfere with, or fetter any member of the Legislature, in the free exercise of his duties, according to whatever he believes to be the best for the country, is quite a sur prise to me, and from the language used by the imposers of the Oath, and even by its opponents, I must acquit them of any such unconstitutional intention. Such a limitation to the right of opinion and of voting, such piecemeal legislation, would militate against the right of the crown to be assisted by the free voice, as well as against the rights of the country and of the constituency; it would also be destructive of all Parliamentary usage. Both Peers and Commons are called together" De arduis tractandis," for their judgment and decision; and the summons of the Peers and calls of the House of Commons, practically prove, that free opinions and free voting in all that relates to the welfare of the country, are the object, and ought to regulate the conduct of every member; and by the call of the Commons, every member may be compelled to assist in the decision of the subject brought before him—and the closing of doors is not without precedent. Whether the measure respecting Church Rates, be or be not advantageous to the Established Church, is a matter of opinion; but Sir, as you have quoted me, may I beg you also to allow me to repeat what has been proved to have been the intention of the founders of the Establishment, that their grants of lands and tithes were a trust imposed on the clergy, and to be regulated in the distribution by the then existing canon law, which was enforced also by ancient enactment-namely, that one-third of that revenue should be employed for the use of the poor-another for the support of the edifices and service of the Churches-and one third part only for the use of the minister. If these rules have been set aside, by those who have accepted the foundations, are the laity to class this among the benefits of the Reformation? I remain, Sir, your's HENRY HOWARD. ART. XIV. Declaration of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland. 12mo. Dublin, 1835. N our first number, (ART. XII) we inserted the Declaration of the Catholic Bishops, the Vicars-Apostolic, and their coadjutors in Great Britain; and in fulfilment of the pledge therein made, we now give the Declaration of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Catholic Church in Ireland. We now repeat what we before stated, that it is by these expositions of our faith that we desire to be judged; and we utterly repudiate and reject any doctrines, principles or practices, which are or may be imputed to us, incompatible with these declarations. "DECLARATION Of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church in İreland. "At a time when the spirit of calm inquiry is abroad, and men seem anxious to resign those prejudices, through which they viewed the doctrines of others, the Archbishops and Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland, avail themselves, with pleasure, of this dispassionate tone of the public mind, to exhibit a simple and correct view of those tenets, that are most frequently misrepresented. If it please the Almighty that the Catholics of Ireland should be doomed to continue in the humbled and degraded condition in which they are now placed, they will submit with resignation to the Divine will. The Prelates, however, conceive it a duty which they owe to themselves, as well as to their Protestant fellow-subjects, whose good opinion they value, to endeavour once more to remove the false imputations that have been frequently cast upon the faith and discipline of that Church which is entrusted to their care, that all may be enabled to know with accuracy, the genuine principles of those men, who are proscribed by law, from any participation in the honours, dignities, and emoluments of the State. 1.-Established for promoting the happiness of mankind, to which order is essential, the Catholic religion, far from interfering with the constituted authorities of any state, is reconcilable with every regular form which human governments may assume. Republics as well as monarchies have thriven where it has been professed; and, under its protecting influence, any combination of those forms may be secure. "2.-The Catholics in Ireland, of mature years, are permitted to read authentic and approved translations of the Holy Scriptures, with explanatory notes; and are exhorted to use them in the spirit of piety, humility, and obedience. The Clergy of the Catholic Church, are bound to the daily recital of a canonical office, which comprises in the course of a year, almost the entire of the sacred volume; and her Pastors are required, on Sundays and on Festivals, to expound to the faithful, in the vernacular tongue, the epistle or gospel of the day, or some other portion of the divine law. "3.-Catholics believe that the power of working miracles has not been withdrawn from the Church of God. The belief, however, of any particular miracle not recorded in the revealed word of God, is not required as a term of Catholic Communion, though there are many so strongly recommended to our belief, that they cannot without temerity be rejected. "4.-Roman Catholics revere the Blessed Virgin and the Saints, and piously invoke their intercession. Far, however, from honouring them with divine worship, they believe that such worship is due to God alone, and that it cannot be paid to any creature without involving the guilt of idolatry. "5.-Catholics respect the images of Christ and of his Saints, without believing that they are endowed with any intrinsic efficacy. The honour which is paid to these memorials, is referred to those whom they represent; and should the faithful, through ignorance, or any other cause, ascribe to them any divine virtue, the Bishops are bound to correct the abuse, and rectify their misapprehensions. "6.-The Catholic Church, in common with all Christians, receives and respects the entire of the ten commandments, as they are found in Exodus and Deuteronomy. The discordance between Catholics and Protestants on this subject, arises from the different manner in which these divine precepts have been arranged. "7.-Catholics hold, that, in order to attain salvation, it is necessary to belong to the true Church, and that heresy or a wilful and obstinate opposition to revealed truth, as taught in the Church of Christ, excludes from the Kingdom of God. They are not, however, obliged to believe, that all those are wilfully and obstinately attached to error, who, having been seduced into it by others, or who having imbibed it from their parents, seek the truth with a cautious solicitude, disposed to embrace it when sufficiently proposed to them; but leaving such persons to the righteous judgment of a merciful God, they feel themselves bound to discharge towards them, as well as towards all mankind, the duties of charity and of social life. "8.-As Catholics in the Eucharist adore Jesus Christ alone, whom they believe to be truly, really, and substantially present, they conceive they cannot be consistently reproached with idolatry, by any Christian who admits the divinity of the Son of God. "9.-No actual sin can be forgiven at the will of any Pope, or any Priest, or any person whatsoever, without a sincere sorrow for having offended God, and a firm resolution to avoid future guilt, and to atone for past transgressions. Any person who receives absolution without these necessary conditions, far from obtaining the remission of his sins, incurs the additional guilt of violating a sacrament. "10.-Catholics believe that the precept of sacramental confession flows from the power of forgiving and retaining sins, which Christ left to his Church. As the obligation of confession, on the one hand, would be nugatory without the correlative duty of secresy on the other, they believe that no power on earth can supersede the divine obligation of that seal, which binds the confessor not to violate the secrets of auricular con |