waving a proud defiance to England, and surrounded by threatening multitudes before whom the might of Britain seems humbled as well as inactive. It is a formidable trial, to be exposed, under feelings awakened by such agencies, to the blandishments of a powerful and crafty body of men, who think their ends may be accomplished by menace and seduction, and who are left undisturbed by the state in their employment of those means, which they, with good reason, believe most likely to be effectual. Were adequate security given that the Protestants should be kept together as a loyal party, we should willingly allow the policy of forbearance to have a longer trial: if the loyal are neglected while the disloyal are indulged, the result must be evil. Already, as we have said, menacing symptoms have become visible; if government is warned by them, and alarmed into exertion, the faithless few who have forsaken their loyalty, before the circumstances were such as to palliate a delinquency like theirs, will have fallen from the body as light showers which the atmosphere discharges only that it may become purer and more serene; if the warnings are disregarded, the proselytes to repeal will have descended, few and scattered, as the heavy and separated rain drops, which part from a sky where there is yet brightness, and give notice of the coming storm which shall deluge the fields of earth, and spread thick darkness over all the face of heaven.

It may be said that strictures and wishes such as those to which we have here given utterance are too vague to be intelligible for any good purpose. We may be taken to task for not declaring more distinctly what we mean; and may be asked, is it our

wish that if repealers are indulged in the privilege of holding anti-Anglican processions, Orangemen should be restored to their constitutional right of celebrating again those great victories which insured the integrity of the British empire. We would answer to such an appeal, that we do not desire the revival of Orange processions. We think it was unjust as well as severe to prohibit them, and to leave demonstrations of an opposite character free. The state of Ireland demanded, it was said, a suspension, as it were, of the privileges extended to British subjects by their free constitution. One class of the Irish people conceived it an affront to them, that the battles of Aughrim and the Boyne should be commemorated. We do not wish to be critical in our judgments on this misplaced sensitiveness; a sensitiveness which would seem to denote the existence of strong prejudices adverse to the principle of civil and religious liberty. We wish to confine ourselves to the simple fact, that Protestants were prohibited from commemorating great anniversaries, because Roman Catholics were said to have taken offence at the commemorations. Such prohibition was an infringement upon constitutional rights. -an infringement justified by necessity, but not justified, we contend, unless Protestants who suffered the annoyance, had the benefit also of the act thus specially made and provided. If they must silence their music, and hide their flags, and discontinue their processions, because Roman Catholics disapproved of them, they should have protection in their turn against similar demonstrations on the part of their adversaries.* We do think that in a country circumstanced like Ire

together in hundreds of thousands, to march in sections, to obey leaders who give, with military precision, their words of command, to parade with flags and music, to combine the excitement of stimulating eloquence with that imparted by spectacles of immense physical force-shall all this be permitted as the legal right of disaffection?-and if the state, among its precautionary measures, shall think to combine and array those classes of its subjects whose loyalty may yet be relied upon, whose loyalty may be ensured by showing confidence in them, and concern for them-shall this be denounced as if it contained a menace of violence against the masses who threaten to shake and dismember the empire? Is repeal free to collect its armies?— are its soldiers to be esteemed as loyal subjects until they have actually commenced the war ?-are they to remain unmolested, enlarging their forces, extending their organization, improving their discipline, while waiting for the favourable moment or occasion in which the struggle is to commence ?— and if the state adopt the resolution of securing the services of more than two hundred thousand brave men, of tried loyalty, whose interests, inclinations, prejudices even, are all favourable to British connection, but who, if forsaken, may be warped from their allegiance, is a cry to be raised which will scare a just government from its purpose? Is THE STATE TO BE DENIED

THE POWER OF PROTECTING ITSELF AND SUBJECTS? ARE NO RIGHTS TO BE HELD SACRED SAVE THOSE OF INSURRECTION?

But supposing the state to observe still the policy against which so loud protests have been raised, to indulge the repealers in their licentious abuse of constitutional privileges, to leave the friends of British connection smarting under a sense of wrong, exposed to seductions which cannot be thought of without alarm, can any thing be done to avert the national ruin? Can individual exertion be so directed as to compensate the neglect with which the legislature and government have been charged? Yes it is possible yet to do much. It is possible, even yet, to combine the Protestants of Ireland into an efficient confederation-to diffuse union throughout the physical force of the body, and to provide an organ through which the reasonable

ness and justice of the Protestant cause may be rendered manifest to all who will return true verdict according to the evidence. We warn all who have influence or authority, all who can give counsel or assistance, to be on the alert.

Be wise in time, 'tis madness to defer. A great society should immediately be formed, into which not merely all Protestants, but all who can subscribe to the principle of the articles of union, should be admissible. It should combine the physical force of loyal men throughout the country, and it should have in the metropolis an arrangement for conveying assistance and instruction to its members, and for making known to the empire the whole strength, moral, intellectual, and physical, of the cause of those who uphold the legislative union in Ireland. There are materials for such a society; men upright, and wise, and revered, to direct its proceedings-multitudes honest and brave to constitute its strength. We commend the thought of it to all who have their country's interest at heart, and who can influence public opinion. It is possible to form a confederation of Protestants in Ireland, such as shall enable Great Britain, without shedding of blood, to maintain the legislative union—or, should England, which is scarcely to be believed, forsake them, to maintain themselves in separation.

That some efficient confederation be entered into for the maintenance of British connection, is rendered more evidently necessary by the fact that the difficulties of the subject are not known to the legislature. It will be in future times regarded as a memorable fact, that no man in the imperial parliament seemed to have an adequate sense of the danger to which the country is exposed by the exertions of the repeal party-no man seems to have an adequate idea of the repealers' designs. To think that the accumulated masses will be turned aside or turned back, that their leaders will be reduced to inactivity by such concessions as imperial statesmen are disposed to grant, is not to exercise that degree of ordinary good sense for which wise men get credit in the affairs of every-day life. Abolish the church, cries out one adventurous statesman-that is to say, impoverish the persons most cha

ritable in proportion to their means, most judicious in the distribution of their charities-impoverish the true friends of the poor, whether Protes tant or Roman Catholic, in order to recommend the union to the great masses of the Irish people. Can these philanthropists be aware that the Protestant clergy are now connected with the Roman Catholic poor only in relations of kindliness. They are felt to be benefactors-they are no longer known in the relation of creditors or claimants. But they are an annoyance to Roman Catholic gentry?-to men of such "stainless honour" as Mr. Moore O'Farrell!-to Roman Catholics who have purchased estates, and who think it a grievance to be required to pay that portion of the purchase money which is due to clergymen of the Church of England? These gentlemen, it is said, are aggrieved that they cannot keep to themselves, or bestow on their confessors, the properties of the Protestant clergy; and because they are thus covetous of what is not their own, and shameless enough to avow the cupidity, they find associates or confederates ready to join in their cry, and to say, that in order to gratify the dishonest rapacity of its debtors, the Catholic Church, established in Ireland, should be robbed of its rights. It is, indeed, a proposition rather difficult of proof, that moderate and charitable men ought to be stripped of the power (because they are Protestants) to serve the country and the poor; and that rapacious and dishonest claimants of what is manifestly not theirs, are to be the persons for whose sake the church establishment is ruined. We say you will be much more likely to tranquillize the country by doing that old-fashioned justice, which gives to every man his due, than by robbing friends of the poor for the sake of gratifying the rancour of the bigoted, and rewarding the dishonesty of the rapacious.

Others again say, let the relations between landlord and tenant be scrutinised, let the government patronage be more irrespectively distributed,-let loans to Ireland be granted more liberally, let the Roman Catholic clergy be paid. In short, since it was the fashion to lay down the sick in the marketplaces of Babylon, and to compel each passer-by to pronounce an opinion on

the disease, and the mode of cure, never were there prescriptions more adventurous or less qualified to produce a favourable effect than those which are hazarded in the British senate on the deep-seated diseases of Ireland.

All the remedies proposed in parliament were futile, all were inapplicable, none were adapted to the peculiarity of the disease. The mass of the Roman Catholics of Ireland desire nothing less than they demand, generally aim at more, and will not be conciliated by any of the poor offerings with which short-sighted or faint-hearted politicians pretend to appease them. They demand a repeal of the legislative union, and no concession of inferior moment will satisfy their expectations. Whatever the advocates of concession are willing to grant, is less than what would follow among the consequences of repeal-whatever the advocates of concession are ready to grant, would assist repealers in their accomplishment of the greater object. How can it, then, be hoped that the concessions which will serve to facilitate the onward progress of the repealers, shall have the contrary efficacy of arresting them in their career, or in turning them aside from it?

We do not know whether it should be ascribed to want of knowledge, or to that species of suicidal timidity in which men sometimes disguise from their medical and legal advisers the extent of their apprehensions; but however explained, the fact is, that no member of the imperial parliament declared unreservedly the real object which stimulates the great mass of the repealers. The revolution at which they aim is to them the same, with a sweeping confiscation of property; the same, with recovery of the forfeited estates, or a re-distribution of them among the victorious armies of repeal. There is scarcely a reflecting man in Ireland who is not aware of this truth; and although there are many reflecting men in the houses of Lords and Commons, there were none who had the boldness, we would say the wisdom, to declare it. Yes, there was one the upright and fearless member for Armagh, Colonel Verner, gave expression to his natural and reasonable apprehensions, and read for the instruction of the house, a portion of a letter, which furnished a very re

This is really the object for which the legions of the movement in Ireland are ready to contend. It is now

but little disguised. In rural districts, the peasantry have no reserve in expressing hopes for themselves, or in pointing out among their neighbours the rightful expectant to such doomed property. They are encouraging, too, to the poorer Protestants with whom they communicate, assuring them that their condition shall not be disimproved. To them they say, it matters little to whom the rents are paid, but it is of much consequence that the title of their tenancy shall be secured and the terms ameliorated; and both these advantages they very liberally promise. We boldly affirm, that every Irish gentleman, residing on his property, whose ears are open to current rumours, is aware of these insidious attempts upon the humbler Protestants in districts where they are numerous.

We affirm further, that every gentleman of ordinary information and capacity, knows that these promises, silly and hollow as they should be accounted, are not altogether without their influence; we wish much the advocates of forbearance and conciliation would teach the country gentlemen and clergy how the power of such seductions may be counteracted by arguments and representations which might not seem somewhat disrespectful towards the Church of Rome or its supporters.

We observe that, in his speech on Mr. Smith O'Brien's motion, Sir Robert Peel took credit to himself for discountenancing, to the utmost

of his power, every act or expression which might have the effect of keeping religious antagonism alive, or might at all minister to controversy between the Catholic and the Roman churches. He is entitled to the praise he claimed. He did every thing in his power to produce the result he contemplated. His power, however, was very limited, and appears to have extended only to those limits within which they could do mischief. He could influence some of those who were of his own side. The unworthy, who hoped personal favours from him -the upright, who thought he would be an instrument of good to his country, may have been, in some instances, reduced to inactivity or silence, in order that Sir Robert Peel might have no obstruction in his great enterprise to advance the interests of the empire. But his adversaries--the country's ene mies-those who hated and who feared the Catholic Church of England-what effect had his wishes and remonstrations on them? Has their religious system become more charitable? Have their politics become more conservative?

The answer has anticipated the question-all the Roman Catholic bishops in Ireland-the three thousand Roman Catholic priests of Ireland are repealers-the downfall of the Catholic church established in Ireland is threatened by the men WHO PROCURED THE

POWER TO DO IT HARM BY PLEDGING THEIR SOLEMN OATHS THAT THEY WOULD DEFEND IT. And an engagement to join Mr. O'Connell in his efforts to effect a repeal of the union, is declared the "holiest pledge" by which mortal ever bound himself. Such has been the result of one-sided conciliation. It has possibly silenced some Protestant advocates-it has disabled others-it has prevented the transmission of useful intelligence between some wise and well-informed men and the government-it has recognised in the revolutionary party a species of right to prescribe the limits within which the crown must restrict itself in its selection of those to whom posts of honourable duty are to be confided-it has, to some extent, inverted the policy of the wisest, perhaps, of heathen legislators, declaring neutrality