in this United Kingdom, including a perfect list of their subscribers and different means of support, &c. I do not throw out this suggestion with any view to overrule such hostile institutions, or interfere with the management of them: for I abhor all kinds of spiritual oppression, or restrictive proceedings, nor would I wish ever to extend the hand of one person in authority to meddle with their religious concerns. An inspection and report of the actual case is all I want, to convince Protestant Statesmen of the growing evil of Popery, and to show what is the direct practical tendency of our improvident conduct for the last forty years. LETTER III. SIR, THOUGH I Should be one of the last men in this kingdom to wish for any interference with the religion of those who differ from me, by positive restraints or legal prohibitions; yet every government has a perfect right to know what progress is made, or effects arise, in the State, from any other religion than that which is deemed national, and what number of converts there may be, as well as what principles or means are employed for propagating such religion. If unrestricted liberty be granted, or only solicited, to teach the mass of the people, it is highly proper for the Legislature to ask whether the Petitioners and religious teachers do not promulgate doctrines subversive of civil society, or at least injurious to the settled form of government: otherwise, a legal encouragement and effective support may unwittingly be given to a set of men (like Mahomedans) who hold it right and just to use corporeal forcé, or inflict temporal chastisement, or even to maintain their religion by fire and sword. It is on this ground, I conceive, that some kind of evidence or security is reasonable to be demanded of those who claim political power, by which their full allegiance and entire submission to the existing Government may be discerned; for, without some specific and significant test, as proof, such religious professors may be placed wholly out of the reach of law, and obtain by artifice that supreme rule in the State which properly belongs to other persons. Whether or not the sign of complete loyalty should be strictly religious, or whether any other than a religious test, applying itself to the conscience, can be devised for that salutary purpose, is not now the subject of my inquiry: I am only hinting at the necessity of a Parliamentary investigation, by means of which the exact number and quality of all Popish establishments or charities should be well ascertained, prior to any discussion of the general question respecting UNCONDITIONAL CATHOLIC CLAIMS; and I consider this the more important, because I see vast multitudes of noble and wealthy people daily coming forward to promote Popery, by the indiscreet exercise of a most benevolent feeling, creditable indeed to their own hearts, but silently and gradually sapping the foundations of TRUE Christianity (as established by the Reformation) in the British empire. This remark, Sir, leads me back to various elementary schools, &c. under the entire control of Romish Priests, but in a great measure maintained by Protestant Laymen, many of them existing in the metropolis; and though my observations will apply chiefly, yet they are not meant exclusively so, to the "Benevolent Society of St. Patrick," an institution which once was, with much reason, patronized by the great and good of all parties who wished well to Ireland, though now made the tool of numerous Roman Catholics in England, guided by their Vicars Apostolic, to serve a po litical turn! Education may be the greatest instrument of doing incalculable and lasting mischief to the rising generation, if it be not watched and regulated by wise heads: a whole community is capable, in a few years, of being infected with poisonous principles, if money alone is afforded by a large body of supporters, while a small company of Clerical men conduct all the machinery and interior arrangements. Writing, reading, and the other useful arts taught in schools, may be misapplied to the very basest as well as the best of purposes; and it is possible to give such an education (though called RELIGIOUS) to infant minds, as shall train them up to be serpents in the bosom of their most liberal benefactors, if not unworthy members of the State which protects them! We cannot forget the solemn anti-scriptural explanations and answers given by Bishop Poynter to a Committee of the House of Commons, in 1816; nor shall I soon believe, that certain Laymen of the Latin Church will ever, by a few candid concessions to Protestants, perhaps mixed with secular views, cause any the least change in their ecclesiastical discipline, or move one of their own Prelates to sanction them. Their church-discipline may, it is true, be possibly amended; but it is only possible, by authority and command of the Roman Pontiff and concurring Bishops. I now, Sir, shall revert to St. Patrick's Schools, which are so pompously described in the Morning Post, and other London newspapers, of the 18th instant; and are held up as deserving unbounded support, from the Prince Regent, his Royal Brothers, the great Officers of the Crown, and every class of wealthy Protestants. Different publications have been issued from "St. Patrick's Charity Schools, and Asylum for Catholic Female Orphans, under the Patronage of the Right Rev. Dr. Poynter;" with a list of many Romish Priests annexed, as "the School Committee:" and I have read various printed Reso lutions of the said "School Committee," which were "confirmed by a Board of Governors," clearly demonstrating their plan of education to be exclusively Popish, without using the Scriptures. This is indeed natural, and might therefore be expected: but the question is, Whether it conforms to the original and fundamental laws of that institution? or, whether the present seminary, like some others, be not quite degenerated, and become a hot-bed for young political demagogues or religious disputants? It is certain that the said "School Committee" has authoritatively interposed to obstruct the gratuitous education of a very large body of other Irish children in St. Giles's, both Protestants and Roman Catholics; where no spontaneous hostile feeling or prejudice had ever before disturbed the harmony of either, and where a fine experiment to produce NATIONAL UNION had only been deranged by those very Priests! I also know, that the grand difficulty in effecting a cordial junction of parties and interests, is owing to the perpetual disorganizing attempts of such Ecclesiastics, in all corners of this empire; and that it is therefore vain to expect any lasting mutual amity or co-operation, while THEY possess the entire control of conscience, and the sole management of popular schools. But I will show you, that the system of exclusion which is thus acted on, looks too much like an insidious, fraudulent, and unjust scheme," an illiberal and cruel perversion of the charity, contravening its principle, and subverting its foundation." I do not probe this wound from a sense of animosity, but a pure feeling of public duty; which, I trust, may tend to open the eyes of benevolent Protestants to the danger of confiding in Roman Catholic faith towards supposed "HERETICS.” This beneficial result of my labour will be a recompense to me for the obloquy I shall sustain, in return for my philanthropic disclosure of the truth. LETTER IV. SIR, THE Report of a Committee on the Education of the lower Classes, printed by order of the House of Commons, in June 1816, states, that Mr. John Kelly, the Secretary and a Trustee of St. Patrick's Schools, was examined May 23rd; and being asked how long he had acted in those offices, he replied, Since 1803. The Committee (Henry Brougham, Esq. in the Chair) inquired of the Secretary and Trustee by what funds this institution was supported; when he answered," By voluntary contributions.” Now, Sir, mark the sequel! "What is the purpose of the charity ?"-Answer: "For the instruction of the poor children in St. Giles's and its vicinity; and if there is any superabundance of contributions" (Mr. Kelly said they had several thousand pounds in funded property), "it is applied towards the maintenance of orphans.”—He was properly asked, "Do you mean by children in St. Giles's and its vicinity, the children of the poor GENERALLY, or only the IRISH children ?"—Answer: "The children of the poor generally, if they are CATHOLICS; but we feel bound not to admit any persons into the school but those wнO ARE OF THAT RELIGION." Mr. Kelly added, that the number of children then in the schools was beyond four hundred. Thus it is clear, that the conductors "feel bound," by their religious obligations or ties, to make the above cruel distinction; but do not " feel bound" by a public and most solemn pledge, given in their "fundamental and unalterable laws," to make no such injurious distinction!!! A Society was formed in 1704, for the RELIEF of poor and distressed natives of Ireland, or their children, between seven and ten years old, residing in London. It does not |