republicanize his countrymen, he said, "il faut "commençer par décatholiçer la Françe."

5. You accuse the roman-catholics of " having "treated with Cromwell, for taking an oath of " submission to his government, as the price of that indulgence which he, in his true spirit of toleration, was willing to have granted.?"

But would not such an oath of submission have been justifiable? Would it not have been warranted, both by every acknowledged principle of national law, and by universal usage? But the fact is not as you represent it.—The treaty was never closed; those who engaged in it were very few; and they were disavowed. White, a romancatholic-clergyman, who took an active part in it, fell into great disrepute, and was reproached for his conduct till his latest breath.

You acquit the roman-catholics of being the authors of the fire of London: You call it a "senseless calumny." Then, why is this calumny perpetuated by a national monument, and the inscription upon it? Does there exist in any romancatholic country, with the consent of its government, a monumental marble, that thus,

<< Lifts its head, and lies!"-POPE.

and excites against one portion of the community the prejudice and animosity of the other?

XVIII. 3.

The Corporation and Test Acts.

1. I Do not recollect that you take notice of the Corporation Act*. The roman-catholics are, in common with the protestant dissenters, subject to its penal inflictions. The object of it was to exclude from corporations some disaffected persons, who had obtained admission into them during the preceding troubles: it was not, therefore, directed against the roman-catholics, and should not be continued in force against them. In fact, the object. of this act having long waved entirely, is it not clear that the time for its total repeal is arrived?

2. Of the Test Act† I shall only observe, that it was passed under the strong apprehensions: then entertained, of a roman-catholic successor to the British throne; an event, which the bill of rights has now rendered utterly impossible: no good reason can, therefore, be now assigned for keeping it in force.

• 13 Car. H. s. 2, c. 1, (1661).
† 25 Car. II. c. 2.

XVIII. 4.

The Act of the 30th of Charles II.* which excludes Romancatholics from sitting and voting in Parliament.

IN 1821, a bill was brought into parliament for the repeal of this act; it passed the house of commons, but was lost in the house of lords. While it was on the table of that noble house, your correspondent published "An Inquiry into the De"claration against Transubstantiation, contained "in the act of the 30th of Charles 11. which "excluded roman-catholics from parliament." I hope you will excuse my inserting it in this letter, which I have now the honour of addressing to you.

"In a few days, the bill, which has passed the house of commons, to relieve roman-catholic peers from the disabilities imposed upon them by the act of the 30th of Charles II. with regard to their right of sitting and voting in the house of peers, will come under the consideration of the members of that noble house.

"It is most clear that every generous mind will wish it success :-What peer can behold, indifferent and unmoved, the duke of Norfolk and the other roman-catholic peers, listening to a debate, which is to decide, whether, in the time to come, they are to enjoy their hereditary seat in the house, or their ignominious exclusion from it is to remain for ever?

'Assuredly it must be acknowledged, that, either to make it the duty or to reconcile it to the feelings of any peer, to vote for a continuance of this exclusion, the very strongest case must be supposed; -or, in other words, that it must be demonstratively proved, that the admission of half a dozen catholic peers to exercise their hereditary right of sitting and voting in the house of peers, will expose his majesty's person and government to real danger. -Nothing short of this can justify a measure, thus bitter and contumelious. Now, can the existence of this danger be gravely contended?-Has the crown, the state, or the law any better friends? Any, upon whose loyalty and attachment, under all imaginable circumstances, they can more confidently or more completely rely, than those, who profess the roman-catholic religion?

"This, the divine eloquence of Mr. Fox, Mr. Pitt, Mr. Burke, Mr. Grattan, Mr. Canning, Mr. Plunkett, and the other illustrious advocates of the catholic cause, has repeatedly urged. I trust that these noble effusions of oratory are present to the recollection of every noble personage, before whom the subject now comes for discussion. The wickedness of the act of Charles II. its injustice and impolicy, and the injustice and impolicy of preserv ing it in activity in the present state of things, were unanswerably proved by the right honourable mover of the bill*. His speech is deservedly the theme of universal admiration and applause. In the memory

The Right honourable George Canning.

of the grateful catholics it will ever live. They are an honourable body;-a person, who has thus deserved well of them, has not lived in vain.

"The bill is now on the table of the house of lords; and their lordships are now to decide on its justice and policy. On the latter, I shall say nothing; but I beg leave to offer some observations on the former. I submit them in a particular manner, (but with the utmost deference and humility), to the venerable prelates of the national church. To their opinions and feelings, especially on all questions that regard religious or moral bearings of any legislative measure, the house, (and I may add), the public at large, pay the greatest respect.-Their attention, therefore, to the following observations may, without impropriety, be, I apprehend, particularly solicited.

"The point which I mean to consider is, Whether A PROTESTANT OF THE church of ENGLAND can conscientiously make the declaration against transubstantiation and the invocation of saints contained in the act of the 30th of Charles 11. and required by that act to be taken by the members of both houses before they sit and vote in parlia

ment.

"This declaration is a solemn affirmation:-The Divine Being is solemnly adjured to witness it; and to attest the party's belief that what he affirms is true: The declaration, therefore, is a sacred act of religion.

Every person, who makes this declaration,