laboured work, in vain endeavoured to subvert the arguments of the king.

Cardinal Bellarmine says, "though it may be a sin to depose or kill an excommunicated prince, it is no sin if the pope commands you to do so; for if the pope should err, by commanding sin, or forbidding virtues, yet the church were bound to believe that the vices were good, and the virtues evil."

Azorius, highly eminent in the Romish church, says, "a catholick wife is not tied to pay her duty to an heretical husband. The sons of an heretical father are made sui juris, that is, free from their father's power; and servants are not bound to do service to such

masters.'

6

According to the decree of this council, and that of Constance also, it has been held, and the doctrine has been constantly carried into practice, that no faith is to be kept with hereticks; in consequence of which, no contracts, leagues, promises, vows, or oaths, are sufficient security to a protestant that deals with one of the church of Rome, if he shall make use of the liberty, which may, and is often granted to him that solicits it. But it is certain, that many good and conscientious Roman-catholicks spurn at this infamous privilege of fered by the pope, and adhere to the laws of God.' Vol. i. P. 7.

Then follows a long account of the application of these fanatical doctrines to the kingdom of Ireland, from the year 1567 to the present day-in which the Irish are represented as being the most besotted, abject, virulent, and sanguinary of all man, kind who have ever professed the popish religion, and upon whom the rays of science and civilisation have equally dawned in vain; and, not content with the proofs he has already advanced, Cicero, Juvenal, Mahomet, and Plutarch, in the true spirit of Irish chronology, are all brought forward to support his assertions. In what manner he can screw out the doctrine of popish or exclusive salvation, or even the very term itself, frora the following passage of the Roman satirist, we confess ourselves at a loss to determine.

Accipe, nostro
Dira quod exemplum feritas produxerit ævo.
Inter finitimos, vetus atque antiqua simultas,
Immortale odium, et nunquam sanabile vulnus,
Ardet huc, Ombos et Tentyra. Summus utrinque
Inde furor vulgo, quod numina vicinorum
Odit uterque locus; cum solos credat habendos
Esse deos, quos ipse colit."

• Eternal hate, unmitigated rage,

And bigot fury, burn from age to age;

Each scorns his neighbour's God, asserts his own,

And thinks salvation works for him alone.' Vol. i. P. 24.

This last line might have been rendered with equal accuracy,

and much more appropriation

And thinks potatoes made for him alone,

The fact is, our author has read much, but digested little; and hence he is perpetually falling into blunders. He says (vol. i. p. 17) that the Albigenses and Waldenses happened to obtain, about the close of the twelfth century, a translation of some parts of the New Testament.' The translation in common use among these people was in Latin: now, independently of the Latin Italic Bible which prevailed in all the western churches for the greater part of the first five centuries, and which extended to the whole of the canonical books, both of the Old and New Testaments, that of Jerom-better known under the name of the Vulgate was completed by this indefatigable scholar in the beginning of the fifth century, was progressively received into universal use, was the general text-book for eleven hundred years of all the western churches, and is still the public Scripture standard in those of the Roman communion.

Our author appears to make no distinction between canons and decrees, national synods and cecumenic councils; and regards as the same thing the Roman-catholic and the popish religion, although their difference is, in many cases, extreme, and they have often been at daggers-drawn against each other. Sir John Throckmorton, Mr. Berrington-or even Mr. Plowden, notwithstanding his superior attachment to the papal seewould have given him some very necessary information upon this subject, had he applied to their writings. The catholic religion,' says one of the most learned Roman-catholics of the present age, who died a few months ago only, in his address to the bishop of Comana, not only permits its children to be dutiful subjects, but expressly commands them to be such :---but not so, my lord, the popish religion. These two ought never to be confounded. The former is a most amiable matron, who inculcates nothing on the minds of her children but the peaceful maxims of the Gospel. The latter is an ambitious termagant, who has often encouraged her children to commit almost every sort of crime.' Had our author consulted the writings of this learned divine, he would have lost much of his implacability against the catholic church, and corrected many of his misconceptions concerning it, unless he had greatly consulted them in vain: he would have known. that it is not, nor ever has been, essentially necessary to a Roman-catholic to acknowledge infallibility in the papal see that this doctrine is even expressly denied by several of the propositions of that very council of Constance to which he immediately refers, since the Gallican church could not be induced to accede to it. He would have known, moreover, that many of the most learned ecclesiastics of this church have formally impugned a variety of the decrees, not only of the councils of Constance and Lateran, but also of the more celebrated and ecumenic council of Trent itself-not less than

twenty-three articles of which were formally objected to by the Gallican church, as subversive of its own liberties, as well as of the fundamental maxims of the French government: that Pasquier, and many other French divines, publicly opposed its entire principle, in spite of the papal prohibition-under pain of actual excommunication-of offering any comment, notes, or explanation upon it without the authority of the pope. He would have seen that it was possible for Father O'Leary, Father Corrin, or any other priest whatsoever, to have taken an oath of allegiance to his majesty without interfering with their spiritual fealty to the Roman see: he would have perceived, not only, as he himself asserts, that it is certain that many good and conscientious Roman-catholics spurn at this infamous privilege (of absolution from all faith with heretics) offered by the pope,' but the principle of the catholic communion itself upon which they act in so doing:-finally, he would have perceived also the grounds upon which it is not only possible for catholics and protestants to live in the same community without cutting one another's throats, but upon which this is actually carried into execution in Germany, Holland, Helvetia, and the whole civilised continent of North America-in all which countries and states, the various posts of government are equally open to professors of either persuasion, and in all which intolerance and persecution for religious opinions are totally unknown.

There is more vanity and self-conceit in this publication than we have lately noticed in any publication whatever: and if a belief in the doctrine of infallibity be a test of popery, our author is the arrantest papist in the world; for he seems only to refuse it to the pope in order to arrogate it to himself. Hence there is not an individual who differs from him in any shape, or upon any point whatever, whether designedly or incidentally, but is sure to be in an error, and is generally branded with some opprobrious epithet. Dr. Caulfield is a man of false and forward assertion, who pays no regard to truth? Mr. O'Leary an "anointed impostor*' the late Mr. Burke a deluder (Preface p. 8) : Mr. Butler of Lincoln's-Inn, the writer of a flimsy pamphlet,' (Preface, p. 12): Mr. Gordon, whose opinion of the Irish catholics we at least have thought sufficiently unfavorable, the encomiast of a monster,' and a man who pays more regard to policy than accuracy' (Observations, p. 55);--and even Mr. Plowden, of high, papal celebrity, does not advance far enough for our author, and is roughly handled for his historical errors. late lord-lieutenant himself does not altogether escape the challenge of this universal knight-crrant, and is accused of interested and party motives, both in condemning our author's his

The

* See the first twely pages of the Preface; as also of the Observations, which is so far merely a repetition of the former.

It has

tory, and in granting a protection to Dr. Caulfield. been discovered,' says he, that he (marquis Cornwallis), and the party to which he was attached in England, meant to put protestants and Roman-catholics exactly on the same footing:-it would then appear ungracious and inconsistent in him to sanction a work which exposed the malignant spirit of popery.-It is to be presumed that he paid great court to the heads of the popish clergy, who had unbounded influence over the multitude.'-Observations on the Reply, &c. p. 21. In paying such attention, and in condemning such a work, we are convinced that the noble marquis acted most wisely; and that, instead of being guided by party considerations, he was, in both instances, determined by a love of rectitude and truth alone.

It is useless to follow these Memoirs through the history of White-boys and right-boys, volunteers, defenders, Orangemen, United Irishmen, and yeomanry, of which the first ten or twelve sections consist, having already had occasion to advert to these various associations in anterior works upon the same subject. The bloody scenes which next follow are described with a minuteness of detail which has not hitherto been exhibited; and which, had the laborious baronet been himself freer from party spirit, and less precipitate in the admission of evidence, might have been highly serviceable to the future histo rian. But, since a comparison of the publications before us convicts him, in a great variety of instances, of gross misrepresentation, and distortion of facts-although much may be truewe are still treading on questionable ground, and dare not place a reliance even on what we have no direct means of controverting, lest this also should be tainted with the common canker of his mind. We must give our readers an opportunity of judging for themselves.

It will reflect eternal shame and dishonour on the popish priests of the county of Wexford, of whom numbers were constantly in the town, besides those who resided there, for having suffered such atrocities to be committed by their sanguinary flock, over whom they had unbounded influence, and by whom they were not only revered as men, but adored as Gods. The savage pikemen never met them in the streets, without bowing low to them with their hats off, and continued so while they were in their sight; and they never met doctor Caulfield, the popish bishop, without falling on their knees, and receiving his benediction.

Now it will appear by the following protection, that doctor Caulfield, the popish bishop, could protect the Enniscorthy as easily as the Wexford people, however odious they were. Two persons of the former were confined in the gaol of Wexford, and dreading that they might be massacred, applied to two priests of Enniscorthy to protect them; and having obtained a recommendation from them to doctor Caulfield, he gave them a protection, in consequence of

which they were liberated, and were never afterwards molested." Vol. i. r. 567.

Then follow copies of recommendation from Messrs. Sutton and Synnott to Dr Caulfield, in favour of two gentlemen of Enniscorthy who were protestants; in consequence of which, and at their earnest desire, he gave them the following protection.

"From the excellent characters of the above gentlemen, I beg leave, in the name of Jesus Christ, to recommend them to be protected.

Wexford,

June 15th, 1798. Vol. i. p. 568.

JAMES CAULFIELD."

To which are added recommendations or protections from other catholic priests, in favour occasionally of protestants, and occasionally of papists.

It will reflect indelible disgrace on the popish priests of Wex. ford, of whom there were no less than fifteen or sixteen in the town during the perpetration of these massacres, that none of them, except father Corrin, ever interfered to prevent them. They evinced the most unbounded influence on all occasions; for no protestant was ever injured who had been so fortunate as to obtain a protection from one of them. It has been said in defence of the priests, that they had been totally ignorant of the massacres, till Mr. Kellett sent to father Corrin.

It was well known, at an early hour, that the rebels meditated these scenes of savage cruelty, and their intention was announced by the procession which they made with a black flag. The assassina tions began at the gaol about two, on the bridge between three and four, and ended between seven and eight. At different times, the prisoners were conveyed in numbers of from ten to twenty, surTounded by ferocious pikemen, and preceded by that ensign of death, through the principal part of the town.

When every person of humanity in Wexford was petrified with horror at such tragick scenes, which continued for five hours, could the priests alone have remained ignorant of them in so small a town as Wexford? The idea is too absurd.

I have been informed, that a young man from Ross, who acted with the rebels, but who had more humanity than most of them, went to Dr. Caulfield, informed him of the massacres which were going forward, and besought him to prevent them; but he refused to interfere himself, but said he would send father Roche, his chaplain, who was present, for that purpose; but he never was known to exert himself. The person who gave this notice to doctor Caulfield, with whom father Corrin had dined, related it to many persons who assured me of it.

Mr. George Taylor, a man of great veracity, wrote a history of the rebellion in the county of Wexford, of which he is a native; and he tells us, "That while this work was going on, a rebel captain, being shocked at the cries of the victims, ran to the popish