claring that they are persecuted, although you mysteriously announce that you "have an opinion on that point," and you finally declare, that the question of persecution remains the same, "whether physical pain is inflicted by means of a "thumb-screw, or mental pain, by means of degradation from "rank." Whether this figure of the thumb-screw, may have been suggested by the convincing little instruments of that name still remaining in the Tower, as part of the spoil of the invincible Armada, I am not aware; but inasmuch as it is. not so well ascertained, that this or any other Protestant Nation, ever meant to employ the argument of the thumbscrew against the Roman Catholics, as it is that the Roman Catholics did actually intend to make use of it against the Protestants, I cannot but regard the allusion, as rather infelicitous on the part of an advocate for the Romish Claims. I know not indeed, whether I should have credit with you, for the sincerity of any professions I might make in reference to any of my Brethren in affliction, whether tortured by the thumb-screw of physical pain, or writhing under the mental anguish of heraldic degradation : I should, otherwise, put in my claim, as one who, in his character of a Man, was probably not unmindful of the rights of suffering humanity in any quarter of the Globe, and in answer to any charges or inuendoes of illiberality, hard-heartedness, and apathy, might perhaps exclaim, "Non adeo obtusa gestamus pectora," without however knowing, with certainty, how far you will give me credit for my professions of regard, for our more distant Brethren, I will still venture to prefer my claim to the possession of some portion of that charity which begins at home, and to express a hope that, however deficient you may consider me, in my affection for the Antipodes, you will believe that I can feel strongly-perhaps not censurably-for those of my own Religion, and my own blood. It was once said of a celebrated French Philanthropist, that he loved the Tartars so ardently, that he deemed himself dispensed, on that account, from loving his Neighbour; and it was once also said of the French in general, that they "were friends of

"their kind, and foes of their kindred." It is possible to feel very strongly, or to fancy that we do so, for Irish Roman Ca tholics, Political Fortune Hunters, and Religious Incendiaries, till our morbid sensibility for their imaginary misfortunes, and our quixotic resentment for their ideal wrongs, may well nigh absorb, and annihilate, all proper feeling for the interests of our 66 own people, and our Father's house." We are creatures of limited capacities, and powers, and it behoves us to beware, while we are for taking the whole world into our comprehensive embrace, that we do not let fall some of the simplest and most obvious duties of our flesh and kindred.—Wę live in an age of extensive liberality, and liberality is doubtless an estimable thing, but there is also such a spurious imitation of it as latitudinarianism, which, like the unintelligible" et cetera" of certain authors, by including every thing, takes in nothing." Non omnia possumus omnes."-We cannot serve two Masters-we cannot at once patronize and aid the Church of England, and the Church of Rome-the cause of darkness, and of light. The word of God, as well as the conditions and exigencies of our nature, compel us to take our choice between the two-and, therefore, with the most unfeigned attachment to the cause of liberty and charity all over the world, I cannot forget that I have some paramount obligations and primary duties at home. I cannot but remember with all due respect for the number "Five," that there are a few more Millions of PROTESTANTS, and I do not see how, without first voting all History a fable, we can properly suffer our sensitive feelings to be so far excited, touching the fanciful wrongs of the professors of another faith, as to overlook the undoubted rights of our Brethren, our Fellow worshippers, our Relatives, and our Friends, among the Protestants.

I am, Sir,

Your most obedient Servant,

AMICUS PROTESTANS.

Having established, to your entire satisfaction, in your Second Letter, that "the common suffering" of Priest and People, has united, and now binds them, in the strongest bonds; and that all our legislation, has been hitherto impolitic, because, its great tendency has been, to confirm this supposed connection of mutual misery: you thence argue, that the intended Acts of Parliament for their relief, will disunite these two bodies, now "grappled together, with hooks of steel," will cause them to "obey opposite tendencies," and, ultimately, to "diverge." All this, Sir, may look very well upon paper, and may even sound well in a debate upon "Catholic Emancipation," but, unless you are prepared to go the whole length, of surrendering the Eccle siastical Assendancy to the Roman Catholics, I roundly deny, that any Political relief, which you may design, will loose these grappling irons, either in England, or Ireland; or administer satisfaction, either to the Romish Priesthood, or to that part of the Romish Laity which cares for its own Religion. Both Priests and People, Sir, be assured, love their own Religious Creed, at least as much you love yours; and, with an accession of Political power, and privilege, neither party will be disposed to brook the denial of that, which lies nearer their hearts, as good Catholics, than any amount of civil, or social advantage, which kind-hearted Protestants, in their abundant candour, and wisdom, may be willing to concede. There will still remain a bond for the mutual union of the Romish Clergy, and Laity, in their com→ mon Faith, quite as strong as any which you propose to dissolve; and, until you can prove, that Religious suffering, is as easy of endurance, as Political suffering, you will find, that no ground will have been gained by all the concessions which you so charitably meditate. The Romish Clergy, and Laity, will never cease to ask, while any thing, and

especially, while the main thing, remains to be granted, nor will you gain any thing for your argument, by alledging, that they will ask in vain, and that Protestants will, with one voice, refuse them the ascendancy in matters of Religion; for if it shall once appear, that all the expedients for peace, and harmony, at whose shrine we are expected to sacrifice so much, are unlikely to accomplish your object, and will still leave the same morbid appetite, after an unattained good, to rankle in the minds of the Roman Catholics; the Protestant Church, and Cause, will, in that case, be left in a far worse condition, than they are in at present, since they will have gained just nothing, towards the desiderata of union, and concord, but will have lost, by the proposed measures, those Political safeguards, and fences, with which our Protestant Constitution, and our Protestant Laws, now gird, and invest, the interests of the Church, and the State.The advantage of this experiment must, therefore, be at best but problematical, while its evils, are palpable, and certain.

You tell us, indeed, in reference to all future danger, that you have, in vain, endeavoured to discover it, and that its existence, is highly improbable; and, in illustration of your opinion, (for I presume, that even you, Sir, would be unwilling to call it proof), that "a Catholic Privy Counsellor, would, probably, be a perfectly harmless person," you observe, that the public would neither know, nor regard, whether he were a Catholic or not; an observation, upon which, I may, perhaps, be excused, for declining to take up the time of our readers, by offering any formal comment. For other reasons, than because the public would give themselves no concern about the matter, you see nothing to fear, from Roman Catholic Judges, and Roman Catholic Members of Parliament, and these reasons are,-1st, because the Romish Judges must decide according to law, and because, British Juries would controul them, if they did not, as if Protestant Laws, and Protestant Juries, were likely long to survive the changes in question!-and, 2ndly,

because Catholic Members of Parliament, would be sur rounded by an immense Protestant majority,-an expectation, which I propose hereafter, to shew, is improbable, and delusive.

In concluding your Second Letter, on which I should apologise for having dwelt so long, you condemn the system of statutory restrictions, and penal laws, as mean and feeble instruments for the support of the Protestant Cause; and you instance LUTHER, and his associates, as disdaining such carnal means, and likely to blush for their professed followers, if they could witness our folly. Now, Sir, it does so happen, that a more unlucky example than that of LuTHER, could hardly have been suggested to you, by your evil genius. Not only did LUTHER, expressly deny the right of the Civil Magistrate, to encourage, and foster, the profession of the Romish Faith, (as you now call upon the Parliament, and the Government, to do), but he went much farther, for he contended, that it was the duty of the Civil Magistrate, (and herein, of the legislative, as well as the executive, power), to correct such abuses of true Religion, as Popery presents. MARTIN LUTHER, (says no less a man than PUFFENDORF, in his "Spiritual Monarchy of Rome)," not only inveighed against the errors, and abuses, which had crept into the Church, and the scandalous lives of the Monks, and Priests, but, "he maintained, that it was a duty incumbent upon the Civil Magistrate, to abolish these abuses." It is not therefore true, that he trusted to the powers of his own argument, nor even to the force of Divine Truth itself, and, although I am far from thinking that LUTHER was justified, in calling for the interference of the Magistrate, I still think it right to adduce this fact, in order to shew how far the great Champion of Protestantism was from holding that any favour, or countenance, should be afforded by the Civil Magistrate, to gross, and notorious Error; and, how little they are likely to understand the genius, either of Popery or Protestantism, who, in our days, can deliberately