unite with the people of England and Scotland;" and he immediately exclaims, "Unite! with whom? with him and his party who moved the resolution and forwarded it to Ireland, and who cannot now agree among themselves ?" Now this in terpretation is a most unfair and unjust one, and clearly shews that the writer laboured under an improper bias against the individual who presided at that assembly, probably from his having read rather too deeply the scurrilous and filthy attacks of Dr Slop on the character of Mr. Hunt. Had RATIO looked to my cited motto - Non quo sed quomodo, -he would have concluded differently. He would have discovered that the Irish catholics were not called upon to unite with Mr Hunt and his party, that is, with the nonrepresented part of the people as sembled in Smithfield, but with the WHOLE PEOPLE, speaking generally, of this island; and the catholics may rely upon it, that without such a consolidation of political sentiments between the people of the two islands, emancipation will never be obtained. Had the Smithfield meeting represented itself as the people, then might the persons composing it and their chairman be called a party.-Such a thing however was not done. The rule of economy laid down by that meeting in its principal resolutions and address, was-Reform, and Civil and Religious Liberty;-two propositions which I think cannot be objected to by any disinterested and sincere lover of his country.These propositions the Irish catholics were invited to adopt, with the protestants of England and the presbyterians of Scotland; happy would it have been for their cause, if they had treated the invitation with more courtesy and decorum. However, it is better late than never, and therefore I exhort them to lose no time in making a public avowal of their sentiments on the above points, for this they will be compelled to do, as I shall prove in another part of this number, or sink into insignificance and contempt.-My correspondent exults that Jord Fingal and others rejected the advance. "They knew," he says, "their duty too well, and had too much honour to wish for a moment the aid of a Hunt, to strike off the honourable, though unjust and galling, fetters they and their forefathers have borne for the sake of conscience, and no less disgraceful to those who rivetted them than to those who keep them fastened."-If a doubt existed before that RATIO did not look to the above motto, that he looked more to the man than to the measure, it must now be removed, and unfortunately he has implicated others in this petty and unworthy feeling. I say unfortunately, because a most favourable moment to promote the attainment of the cause of emancipation was sacrificed to the personal prejudice imbibed against an individual.-What greater abandonment of duty, what greater violation of honour, I should be glad to know, would lord Findal have been guilty of, in returning a favourable and complimentary answer to the chairman of the Smithfield meeting, than the leaders of the pretended board commit in paying their obsequious and servile court to George Canning and others, not one whit more respectable than Henry Hunt? If it is objected that the meeting was composed of the rabble, or the "lower classes," I maintain that it reflects the greater credit to the meeting that that class which took such an effectual part in the transactions of lord George Gordon's time, should be the first to espouse publicly sentiments if an opposite tendency, and proclaim their abandonment of religious prejudices.Surely such a circumstance ought to have excited" corresponding feel-land. Congratulate the Smithfield ings" on the part of the catholics, which expression of mine RATIO considers vague and indeterminate, though it was evidently confined to the simple avowal of freedom of conscience, as catholics, and the advocacy of constitutional principles, as citizens, by my noticing only the resolutions connected with these two propositions. Why the aid of Mr. Hunt should be rejected by the catholics, who once entertained a prejudice against them, but have had the candour to avow his error, while they are still seeking the assistance of those who are acknowledged by my correspondent to be playing at cups and balls with their sufferings, is a mystery to me. Plain sense would direct me to accept the aid of those who were apparently at least sincere in their professions of friendship, rather than solicit the help of those who had been making a jest of our petitions. Had I been the confidential adviser of my lord Fingal, I would have recommended him to have adopted a widely different course from that which he is said by RATIO to have taken. I would have advised him to disregard the reports raised by the enemies of Mr. Hunt against his personal and political character, and view him only as the organ of a large portion of the people of the British metropolis, who had generously declared their aversion to the restraints the catholics labour under, and consequently entitled to his notice. In returning, therefore, an answer to this official communication, I would have counselled the noble earl thus: My lord, this is a most auspicious moment to advance the cause of religion and the restoration of your civil hereditary rights, as well as those of the Irish catholics. Lay aside then the prejudices of party feeling, and shew yourself orthy the honourable station you meetingers on the gratifying circunstance of their return to reason and justice, and the prospect that now appears of the flame of bigotry, which has so long blazed in England and Scotland, and scorched the blossoms of civil and religious liberty in Ireland, being for ever extinguished. Point out to the meeting that, with respect to the catholics of Ireland, the reformers of the sixteenth century practised the same system of calumny and falsehood against them, as the corruptionists of the present day practise against the reformers.Inform them that the principles of the catholic religion were always opposed to persecution for conscience sake, and ever favourable to civil liberty. Refer them to the conduct of our catholic legislators in catholic times; draw a comparison between the language of the Scotch covenanters in Charles the first time, and the sentiments of the Irish catholics contained in their remonstrance to the same king. Shew them that the one breathed nothing but fury and destruction to all who presumed to differ from them in religious sentiments; the other complained only of real grievances, and those more severe than what the people now suffer generally, professed a faithful attachment to the just prerogatives of the crown, and the inalienable rights and liberties of the people,and beseeched his majesty to call a free parliament, whereby content and satisfaction might be secured to the country. Then conclude by assuring them, that, as a catholic, you never could approve of forcing any man's conscience to believe as you did, nor debar him of his civil rights because he differed from you on points of religion. That, as a peer of the realm, you were warmly attached to the genuine maxims of the British constitution, nearly all of which have been lost since catholics corres were excluded from exercising their fand jealousy, by circulating the political privileges, and that you most abominable falsehoods and cawere ready to join with the people,lumnies against the advocates for parin a legal manner, to obtain a restitu- liamentary reform and catholic emantion of their ancient immunities en- cipation. And is there a catholic, joyed under the constitution, as their beside the leaders of the Stoneundoubted birthright. To have buildings club, so stupid and so beacted thus would have ennobled lord sotted as to join with these hireling Fingal's name, and have been worthy bigots and servile tools of corruption the high rank he holds in society.- to rivet their own chains, rather than It would have conveyed a come manfully forward, and, by a ponding feeling" of patriotism to the public avowal of their sentiments in people of England and Scotland, and, favour of broad constitutional prinbeing backed by similar sentiments ciples and freedom of conscience, sefrom other distinguished characters cure public opinion on their side?— of the catholic body, would have Is there one catholic who does not dissipated the prejudices of the peo- see the necessity of resorting to more ple against the supposed danger of effectual measures for obtaining the catholic tenets, and contributed in long desired emancipation, than those an eminent degree to cement a reci- adopted by the would-be-leaders of procity of political interest between our body? Is there one amongst us catholics and individuals of all reli- that does not feel the character of gious persuasions, which it is the ob- his religion compromised, and the ject of party spirit to prevent. And political knowledge of the body inwhy should not the people of Eng-sulted, by the last act of these offiland, Scotland, and Ireland, unite cious and ignorant intermeddlers?— with each other in defence of civil Through the influence of private conand religious liberty, as well as the nexions and intrigue, a few persons people of the United States? Why were packed together last month in should they not cordially join in sup- a room in Stone-buildings, where, port of their civil rights, though they under the presidency of the first peer may differ with each other in matters of the realm, an address was voted to of religion? The catholic and pro- his present majesty, containing a testant cantons of Switzerland can notorious and palpable falsehood!!! live in peace and harmony, for the By a reference to the circular of the protection of their political indepen- secretary, inserted in the last page dence; and why should not the ca- the preceding number, it will be seen tholic and protestant isles of Great that the addressers "most humbly Britain and Ireland do the same? approach the royal presence," and It is because interested men profit inform the sovereign, that "if they by the divisions which exist among are NO LONGER regarded by their the people. Hence we find hungry countrymen as a proscribed and deplacemen and pensioners, corrupt | graded race, to the unceasing and sinecurists and greedy expectants, paternal benevolence of his late mafifth-of-November parsons and self-jesty they owe this inestimable beneinterpreting bible-mongers, religious fit." What, then, have the passers tinkers and poor-educating-associa- of this address discovered that they tors, all heartily combined to put are at length emancipated? For down the rising spirit of reform and this they must be, if they are NO civil and religious liberty-all zea- LONGER regarded as a proscribed lously labouring through the press and degraded race. The secretary to keep up the system of delusion very kindly requested that only "the of principal members of our body" | nest declaration of their sentiments, the 66 should be requested to authorize their names to be put to this address. Whether he thought that loyalty and lying were the peculiar privileges of 'higher order," and that of course the name of a plebeian would disgrace this admirable specimen of the pretended board's accuracy and wisdom, I know not; but this I know, that there is not one of the "lower order" of catholics that would think himself honoured by having his name affixed to such an incorrect and indecent document, to be laid at the foot of the throne. I am sure too, that it well becomes those who may have given consent to have their names placed to this address, to consider whether they are not conscientiously bound to withdraw them instantly, and enter a protest against such proceedings.For how can they justify themselves in consenting to use language which is clothed with falsehood, and is, of course, forbidden by their religion? How can they consistently petition parliament in future to be relieved from the remaining penalties of a code which keep them a proscribed and degraded race in their native land, after they have approached the throne of their sovereign, and told him they were no longer considered so by their countrymen? And this in the face of numerous decisions in parliament on their case, giving a flat contradiction to the assertion. It is true, the framers of the address have qualified their words with an "if," but this only adds to their shame; because ambiguity of language is disgraceful to those who use it, and insulting to those to whom it is offered, but more particularly so when it is addressed to royalty itself. No, it is not by the practice of delusion and deceit that catholics can expect to gain the good will of their fellow countrymen; this can only be obtained by a plain and ho and a firm co-operation in advancing the national good. For my part, I am surprised, after witnessing the noble and patriotic conduct of the duke of Norfolk at the York meeting; after his admirable and constitutional declaration at the Norwich Fox dinner,-I am surprised, I say, that his grace should suffer himself to be persuaded by a few amphibious, hacks, a band of servile sycophants to ministerial power and party opposition, to lend his high rank and name as a support to their sneaking pitiful measures, instead of placing himself constitutionally at the head of the English catholics in aggregate assembly. If his grace would but follow up his never-to-be-forgotten anticipation, that the descendants of the ancient hereditary nobility will not prove degenerate, but will be found straining every nerve to preserve to the people the rights and privileges which they then (under our ancestors) acquired, the catholic body would soon be raised high in the estimation of the nation, and his name would shine in the page of history, as brilliant and conspicuous as any of his noble progenitors. Why then will he permit himself to be cajoled and deceived by a set of intriguers, whose public measures are of the most despicable nature, and who would gladly have put him aside, for his manly conduct at the York meeting, lest some of the ministers should withdraw their support in parliament from our future petitions, could they have mustered courage sufficient to make the attempt. Yes, it is a fact, that, in consequence of the tate bold and praiseworthy conduct of his grace, and the lords. Arundel and Stourton, the would-beleaders of the club were alarmed, and dared not get up what they call a board last session, to petition parliament for emancipation, lest a spirit of opposition should be made to their plans, and umbrage given to polity. If the higher class of the softer sex deem it meritorious to encourage the masculine gender to deeds of valour and slaughter, surely the lower class of womankind are not more immodest and abandoned, by. inciting their male friends and rela tives to a firm and constitutional attempt to procure, for themselves and posterity, a restoration of those rights which the genuine constitution of the country guarantees to them? Again, my correspondent insinuates that the declarations of the reformers in favour of peaceable demeanour and good order is merely a pretence to deceive the unsuspecting and loyal part of the community. Such an inference is so ungenerous, it is so contrary to the open-mindedness of the English character and of catholic principles, that I really feel for the man, as well as for the cause he is advocating, who has recourse to such a subterfuge. But is RATIO aware, that if this mode of reasoning be good, without a shadow of proof in defence of it, he is justifying all the measures which have been enacted against the catholics since the reformation so called? There are several other points in RATIO's letter which I have not noticed, and which are scarcely worth noticing; still, however, as I know the same ideas are entertained by many of my readers, it may not be wholly useless to shew their puerility and triflingness. My correspondent says, "Even so far has the revolutionary system of France been imitated in this country, that shameless and abandoned females have been called in to aid the glorious, work, and to corrupt the minds of youth." Without entering into the propriety or impropriety of the conduct of these females, or questioning the veracity of the charge made against them, by the profligate hirelings of the press, of corrupting the minds of youth, I shall barely remind RATIO, that so far from these females imitating the behaviour of their sex in revolutionary France, the women of that country may be more truly said to have borrowed the example of interfering in political matters from protestant England. Long before the French revolution commenced, the females of this country were in the habit of taking part with their husbands and brothers in canvassing for, and contesting the elections of, our representatives in parliament.Since the revolution broke out, we have seen ladies taking a conspicuous share in promoting electioneering contests, and applauding the deeds of military bodies, by presenting colours and addressing incentive speeches to them. Therefore it is manifest injustice to blame one set of females for practising a line of conduct similar to another, merely be cause they differ on a point of civil Did not the pro testant legislators of old ground the |