صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

siderable in value. Such as they were, however, they were applied to the object which the Act of 1791 contemplated, and during the last twenty years, this object has been understood by each successive Government, to be, not the maintenance only of Clergy of the Church of England, but also of Clergy of the Church of Scotland.

The rebels who lately disturbed the colony object to this arrangement, and advocate the principle, that this property given up to the Clergy by the Crown, and settled by Act of Parliament, should be seized and applied to other uses; and to this notable design Mr. Poulett Thompson and the Melbourne Government have agreed. So the Clergy Reserves' Bill provides that the Church of England shall have only one-fourth of the lands, that the Church of Scotland shall have only one-fourth more, and that the other half shall be appropriated to the support of all other denominations-the Papists being by far the most numerous of all, so much so, that at least another quarter would under this Act be apportioned to them. The Clergy Reserves Bill, therefore, may be described as a bill to spoliate Protestantism and endow Popery; and thus we see in another colony how Popery-ever active and ever unscrupulous-has succeeded in obtaining the sanction of the Colonial Legislature to another appropriation clause.

But that Colonial Legislature had no power, it appears, to act in this manner, and, therefore, this bill will be crushed and cannot rightly receive the royal assent; for the Act of 1791 only gave the Colonial Parliament power to apportion the lands among "Protestant Clergy," not among Papists. Had it been otherwise, had the bill not failed on this ground, the House of Lords, no doubt, would have defeated it in another manner by agreeing to the address to the Queen, which the Archbishop of Canterbury was ready to propose against her giving it her assent.

The readers of the Protestant Magazine will be glad to hear, that the Protestant Association was not inattentive to this gross instance of Popish ambition and intrigue. The following petition was adopted and published by the Committee, and was presented to the House of Lords:

"To the Right Honourable the Lords, Spiritual and Temporal, in Parliament assembled.

"The Petition of the undersigned members and friends of the Protestant Association.

"Humbly sheweth,

"That your Petitioners have heard with the greatest alarm and surprize of the act of the Canadian Legislature, on the subject of the Clergy Reserves, which has been laid before your Lordships.

"That your Petitioners consider that measure to be a flagrant act of

[ocr errors]

spoliation; that they object to it as an endowment to Popery and as another heavy blow and great discouragement to Protestantism.

“Wherefore your Petitiouers pray the said measure may not be suffered to pass into a law.

"And your Petitioners will ever pray, &c.”

Happily, by the illegal character of some of its provisions, the Popish Canadian plot has for the present been defeated; but surely such a specimen of wholesale plunder should open all men's eyes to the grasping and active conspiracy, which now in all the parts and dependencies of Britain is working to achieve its own greatness on the ruins of the Protestant institutions of the country. Truly with such craft and such unscrupulousness opposed to us, with a government aiding and abetting our foes, and with experience of so many dangerous Popish assaults, which nothing but the good Providence of God have defeated, we ought not to be high minded, but fear. We ought to trust in Him who alone "can hearts as streams command," earnestly and constantly praying that he will continue to be gracious, and will unite all who love His truth in firm resistance to those who attempt to overthrow it.

HISTORICAL SKETCH OF PROTESTANT

ASSOCIATIONS.

(Continued from page 112.)

THE means employed by the Protestant Union failed to rouse that active sympathy and influential co-operation which they deserved; and the Society probably ceased to exist after the year 1819. But the pretensions of the Roman Catholics were continued to be urged in Parliament with untiring perseverance, and in various forms on different occasions-sometimes to their full extent, and at other times only in part. Moreover, the strongest promises, declarations, abjurations, and protestations were volunteered by leading members of the Roman Catholic hierarchy and laity, disavowing and disclaiming every principle and practice hostile to our Protestant institutions.*

In the mean while some of the advocates of Protestant ascendancy perhaps became wearied with the continually repeated discussions in Parliament; and from the issues of those discussions, not only individuals, but constituencies were satisfied that whatever might be the result of the divisions upon the ques

See the extracts from Roman Catholic petitions in No. XXIII. of the Publications of the Protestant Association-tract called "The Repeal of the Popish Emancipation Act."

tion in the House of Commons, the Protestantism of the British Constitution was safely entrusted to the wisdom and decision of the House of Lords.

In 1821 a bill conceding the Roman Catholic claims was, for the first time, passed in the House of Commons; but it was rejected in the House of Lords. In 1822 a bill for admitting Roman Catholic Peers to sit and vote in the House of Lords was passed in the House of Commons; it also was rejected in the House of Lords. In 1823 two bills for placing English Roman Catholics on the same footing with Irish, one by conferring upon them the elective franchise, the other by opening to them the same offices to which the latter were admissible, were passed in the House of Commons; they also were rejected in the House of Lords. In 1824 similar bills were originated in the House of Lords, and rejected: but an act was passed, without a division, enabling persons to hold offices in the management, collection, and receipt of the revenue without taking any oath, except that of allegiance; also an act authorizing the Earl Marshal and his deputy to exercise that important office without taking the oath of supremacy, and making the declaration against transubstantiation-the Duke of Newcastle and Lord Abingdon only entering their protest against it. In 1825 a bill conceding the Roman Catholic claims was again passed in the House of Commons: on this occasion the Duke of York, in the House of Lords, declared his sentiments in opposition to the measure, and it was rejected.

In 1827, in a new parliament, a general election having taken place in 1826, the House of Commons rejected a resolution, "That the House is deeply impressed with the necessity of taking into immediate consideration the laws inflicting penalties on his Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects with a view of removing them: the numbers were

[blocks in formation]

2761

272 S

548

being a larger attendance of members than had ever before voted or did ever afterwards vote upon the question. In 1828, however, the same House agreed to a resolution, "That the House should take into its consideration the laws affecting his Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects in England and Ireland, with a view to such a final and conciliatory adjustment as might be conducive to the peace and strength of the Protestant Establishment, and to the general satisfaction and concord of all classes of his Majesty's subjects:" the numbers were

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

266} 538

The House of Lords refused to agree to a similar resolution. But in the same year an Act of Parliament was passed (stat. 9,

140

HISTORICAL SKETCH OF PROTESTANT ASSOCIATIONS.

Geo. IV. c. 17), which repealed the sacramental test as a qualification for office this was brought forward and pressed as a relief to Protestant Dissenters. The effect, however, of passing it, seems to have operated powerfully and fatally upon the admission of Papists to political power.

Upon the growth of a suspicion that a settlement, as it was called, of the Roman Catholic question was to be recommended in the speech from the throne on the opening of the session of 1829, many spirited efforts were made by individuals to oppose the traitorous and disastrous proposition; and many a cry of "No surrender," was raised.* The constituencies of the University of Oxford and of Newark, the former by the election of Sir Robt. H. Inglis, and the latter by the election of Mr. Sadler,† testified their sense of the policy then adopted by Protestant Statesmen, merely upon reasons of State and motives of political expediency. And though the people of Great Britain had no opportunity given to them of effectively expressing their opinion by their representatives elected for that purpose, very many petitions against further concessions were presented to the two Houses from counties, corporations, towns, parishes, archdeaconries, deanries, chapters, presbyteries, incorporations, and congregations of Protestant Dissenters. And yet no general associated opposition was organized out of Parliament in that momentous crisis.

We will not dwell upon the issue. The speech from the throne, after referring to the continued existence in Ireland of an association, the "Catholic Association," dangerous to the public peace and inconsistent with the spirit of the constitution, recommended the two Houses to take into their deliberate consideration the whole condition of Ireland, and to revise the laws which imposed civil disabilities on his Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects, and proceeds thus: "You will consider whether the removal of those disabilities can be effected consistently with the full and permanent security of our establishments in Church and State, and with the maintenance of the Reformed Religion established by

* Amongst the appeals by individuals were an Address to the Freeholders of Kent, by Lord Bexley; Letters from Lord Colchester to Lord Redesdale; Four Letters on the Catholic Question, by the Rev. G. S. Faber; the Security of the Protestant Establishment, incompatible with the concession of power to Roman Catholics, by the Rev. Geo. Townsend; a Letter to the Record, by the Rev. John Scott; a Letter, by the Rev. A. Brandram; a Statement of some reasons for continuing to Protestants the whole Legislature of Great Britain and Ireland, by W. W. Hull, Esq.; "No Surrender," being an appeal to the Gentry and Inhabitants of Great Yarmouth, by J. P. Cory, Esq.; and a small monthly publication, called the " Protestant Warder," commenced on the 1st of January, 1829, at Stourport, in Worcestershire.

+ His Speech on the second reading of the Roman Catholic Relief Bill in the House of Commons, has been reprinted by the Protestant Association.-Publications, No. XX.

law, and of the rights and privileges of the Bishops and of the Clergy of this realm, and of the Churches committed to their charge. These are institutions which must ever be held sacred in this Protestant Kingdom, and which it is the duty and the determination of his Majesty to preserve inviolate." It was in pursuance of such a recommendation that the Protestantism of our constitution was essentially impaired, even destroyed in two branches of the Legislature, by an act which received the Royal assent on the 13th of April;* and so was recognized a political union with an idolatrous church, hostile to the true profession of the gospel and the Protestant religion, which, under the guidance and protection of God, had been so long maintained and established by law in this Kingdom.

(To be continued.)

ILLUSTRATIONS.

(By Charlotte Elizabeth.)

NO. XV.

"IT is but a trifle-a mere external; and nothing vitally affecting the matter"—is a remark that has often met the expression of dissatisfaction, caused by the present style of a certain class of fashionable embellishments, from the highest rank of architecture down to the gilding and stamping of a cover for a sixpenny book. True, these things are externals only; and comparatively trifling -however much some of us may prefer the sober, chastened style of our plain old parish churches, to the innumerable crucifixes, images, turrets, and fantastic shapes, that overload the fabric, and almost conceal the real outline of their modern neighbours, now happily springing up on all sides, yet if the life-giving sound of the blessed gospel be heard within their walls, it matters comparatively little into what devices the mason may have moulded their outward shape. If the printed pages of a volume faithfully set forth the truth as it is in Jesus, as opposed to every species of idolatrous superstition, the value of the book is in no sort diminished, though figures borrowed from the store-house of Rome's idolatry be embossed, with curious skill, on either side, and shine in tinsel magnificence adown the back of that volume. Why, then, object; why express dissatisfaction, when Madonna heads, and crucifixes, and doves, all encircled with feigned rays of glory; and altars, and censers, and the whole etcetera of those things, the expulsion of which from our houses of prayer is so

Amongst those Peers who entered protests against the bill in the House of Lords, were the Duke of Newcastle; Earls Bradford, Brownlow, Eldon, Mansfield, Mountcashell, Winchelsea; Viscounts Farnham, Lorton, Sidmouth; Barons Bexley, Kenyon, Redesdale, Romney, Tenterden; and the Bishops of Bath and Wells, and Salisbury.

« السابقةمتابعة »