In the next article we have as follows:

"The Catholics of Ireland, far from claiming any right or title to forfeited lands resulting from any right, title, or interest, which their ancestors may have had therein, declare upon oath, that they will defend, to the utmost of their power, the settlement and arrangement of property in this country as established by the laws now in being."

"They also disclaim, disavow, and solemnly abjure any intention to subvert the present Church Establishment, for the purpose of substituting a Catholic establishment in its stead, And further, they swear that they will not exercise any privilege to which they are or may be entitled, to disturb or weaken the Protestant religion and Protestant government in Ireland."

There is the oath signed by these bishops, and now I can but touch on a few points of this oath at present: to illustrate it, I must go back to the Diocesan Statutes, and here is what is said with respect to the visitations of the bishops :

"Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock over which the Holy Spirit hath placed you as bishops, to rule the Church of God, which he hath purchased with his

own blood.

"By virtue of this apostolic precept, it behoves a bishop frequently to examine his whole diocese, that he may learn whether the whole flock committed to his care by the Chief Shepherd, and for whose salvation he must hereafter render an account, is duly and faithfully fed and governed in all things-and since it appertains to his office to take away all evil from his flock, and to commend and perfect every good work, and to excite the clergy as well as the laity to labour more fervently for the greater glory of God and their own eternal salvation, the Church, at different times, but especially in the Council of Trent, hath granted greater authority and privileges to the bishops visiting their dioceses, and a more plenary power to remove abuses, and to punish crimes in the course of their visitation."-Diocesan Statutes, pp. 175, 176.

He says that the bishops are called upon to visit their dioceses, and according to the canon law, to use their power for the punishment of abuses and offences in the diocese. Now, what is it that the canon law requires to be done by the bishops in these visitations? We have, here, the canon law set up in Ireland, and in this eighth volume of Dens, what is required to be done in this :-

"The bishops are, even where the Holy Inquisition is established, to take care and clear the diocese entrusted to them from heretics, and if they find any, to punish them with canonical punishments.”

They are to use their power ad abusus tollendos et ad delicta punienda. Here, then, the abuses to be taken away are heretics, and the punishments to be inflicted are canonical punishments. What is the authority quoted as the canon law for this? The canon law here republished for the visitation of the diocese by the bishop, and for the extermination of heretics, is neither more nor less than the third canon of the Fourth Lateran Council, which Dr. Murray has declared, upon his oath, is not in force in any country in Christendom. You have had his evidence; I believe I have

it here. Yes, I hold in my hand the parliamentary document, and here is Dr. Murray's own evidence:

"Is the authority of the third canon of fourth Lateran Council acknowledged by the Catholic Church? The third canon of the fourth Lateran Council has no authority whatever in any part of Christendom; it never had any authority in those countries, and it was made for a particular purpose, which has long since ceased."

Here, now, in the teeth of this evidence, is that canon recognised on his own authority; that canon, which is the most bloody in papal persecution, is the one which I say has been set up now by Dr. Murray, on his own confession, as the canon law in Ireland. Here are his own Diocesan Statutes, by which it is declared, that heretics are excommunicated. And here is this canon law, on the authority of which they are to be exterminated, and this in defiance of this smooth oath and declaration which I have just read.

Again, they swear, so far from claiming right or title to forfeited lands, they will defend the settlement and arrangement of property, as established by the laws now in being-this is their oath!

Now, here is their canon law, which I read to you at length, on the 2nd of last August, by which they lay down, as a matter of conscience, the restitution of every shilling of forfeited property in Ireland.

Again, they swear that they abhor the principle that no faith is to be kept with heretics, while what is the very principle for this restitution of property, laid down in the pope's letter to Lercari, the bull, on the authority of which they proceed. It is in this expressly stated, that no agreements entered into with heretical princes are allowed by the pope of Rome; therefore, that no faith is to be kept with heretics. There, then, is the oath signed by Dr. Murray, and there is his canon law!

Again, they declare on their oaths, that they believe that no foreign prince hath, or ought to have, any temporal or civil power or preeminence within this realm. There is their oath and here is their

canon law -

It is laid down that

"In the bull Pastoralis Regiminis (Bull. tom. 1, n. 47) laymen impeding the execution of the mandates, citations, and other provisions of the Roman court, are smitten with excommunication reserved for the Roman pontiff";"

That is, they are under a law, from which neither their priests nor their bishops can relieve or absolve them; no power under that of pope himself. It proceeds

"So are they also who afford aid, advice, or favour to those who impede it. Regulars and ecclesiastics incur, ipso facto, suspension as well from the exercise of

their orders as to their offices, both which censures are reserved for the Roman pontiff; but notaries or scribes refusing to execute the public instruments of these provisions and executions at the instance of the party, are deprived of the office of notary, and are declared infamous.”—Dens, vol. viii. p. 74.

They swear that popery had no power within this realm in 1826, and in 1832 they publish their canon law, by which it is declared, that if a single Roman Catholic impedes the command of the pope, he is excommunicated, and the case is reserved for the pope himself. And that you may see some more of this canon law, and that you may see what power is given, I wish you to mark this. They affect continually to say that all these things are mere ecclesiastical enactments, and that the power of the pope is merely spiritual. I will give you the evidence of one of them on his oath, in another case, and on another question, for that is the way to get at facts from Jesuits. All the lawyers in Westminster Hall would not get one of these, on cross-examination, to let out one single tittle of truth, except so far as it suited his purpose to tell it. It is by comparing their indirect testimony on different occasions, where they do not suspect that it is intended to entrap them, that you arrive at the truth. It is extracted from the appendix to the eighth report of the commissioners of Irish education, and this question is asked

"What is meant by the court of Rome ?"

Here is Dr. M'Hale's answer :—

"The doctrines and principles of the court of Rome are not sufficient to establish the doctrine of the Catholic church. We distinguish between the court of Rome and the see of Rome; for the court of Rome may be a scene of much intrigue and cabal,"

(that is an important topic; there may be a great deal of intriguing cabal which does not interfere with the pope as head of the Catholic church),

"without affecting, at the same time, the authority of the holy see, or decrees of the Catholic church."

"Q-By the court of Rome is meant the pope ?" “A.—The court is a political expression."

Now mark, the court is a political power; you have it here, then, in this canon law, that there is a political authority exercised directly from Rome, and if any Roman Catholic dares to oppose that authority, that Roman Catholic is to be excommunicated. But does this law interfere, in any respect, directly with any of the laws of England? Yes; England may doom the outlaw to exile, England may doom the murderer to the gallows, the court of Rome can take them under its protection, and make the laws of England of no estimation in their eyes. Here is the law, the canon law on homicide, of the Major Pœni

tentiarius-(I must explain that briefly.) The pope calls himself the vicar of Christ, and as he would feel the weight of the office rather too troublesome, therefore he is obliged to appoint one of his cardinals, whom he calls Major Poenitentiarius-that is, the person he appoints to grant dispensations, and this Major Pænitentiarius can appoint delegates wheresoever he pleases, to exercise his office of dispensation. Now hear his office :-"The Major Pœnitentiarius can grant a dispensation to outlaws and homicides, even murderers, so that they can enter into an approved religious order even as clergymen." The homicide, the murderer, and the outlaw, can receive a dispensation from the Major Pœnitentiarius, or any one whom he appoints, and he can enter into an approved religious order, and become a clergyman. He may be invested with the office of a bishop; and since exterminating heretics is part of his episcopal office, certainly no man can be so fitted for it as the person who had some experience. But here is the bull Pastor Bonus. If you think that what I have stated is a great power with regard to dispensations, it is almost nothing at all compared to that to which I shall now advert. Here is the same bull published as the canon law in 1832-recollect, it is five years old. This canon law is :

"We grant also to our Major Pænitentiarius, and for the time being, that he may, and may be able to absolve, and to order to be absolved, all and every the ecclesiastical seculars of whatsoever quality, dignity, and degree; also the regulars of whatsoever order, congregation, society and institution; also all lay persons whomsoever of either sex, as well present as absent, from all and whatsoever faults, crimes, and excesses, however weighty and atrocious, as well public as private, whensoever and howsoever they may have been committed and perpetrated."

All public and private crimes, criminals of every description, may be absolved by the power of the court of Rome-no matter what crimes they may have perpetrated. Yet there (holding up the eighth volume of Dens) is the canon law of Ireland, and there is the oath by which it is sworn that the pope has no power, directly or indirectly, within this realm!

But there is one crime of one criminal which the authority of this Major Pœnitentiarius cannot reach-no delegated power can absolve him. He is a traitor to Rome, and no power but that of the pope himself can pardon him. He must go bow his neck at the feet of the pope for pardon, for the exercise of liberty of conscience. That crime is the crime of heresy, and that traitor is the king of England. Mark, "Princes and all who preside over a state," in the name of a vicar, even a lord lieutenant, unless indeed he might happen to be a favourer of the pope, and then the church might be very indulgent to him. But

"Princes, or those who preside over a state by the title of a representative of majesty, kingdoms, and republics, and their governors, or those who are accustomed

to have the administration of them; bishops and superior prelates, in the public cases contained in the Bulla Cœnæ Domini, can by no means be absolved by the Major Pœnitentiarius."

The king, and all who derive any authority, civil or ecclesiastical, whether they be lord lieutenants, judges, bishops, or any thing else under him-these cannot be absolved by the Major Pænitentiarius, they must bow at the foot of the pope for pardon-for their liberty of conscience. That is the canon law of Ireland. I feel that I could go through a great variety of documents, but I also feel that I have already nearly exhausted my audience; and I would rather give place to my rev. brother. I cannot, however, sit down without offering a few remarks. My rev. brother and myself are accused of going about to excite religious rancour and hostility. Now, I would simply ask this question, What is the duty of a Christian on this subject? What is the duty of a Christian as to the principles, and what is the duty of a Christian as to the persons? I say, that the duty of Christians as to these principles, if there be a particle of Christian principle in their hearts, is to stand up, if they be a nation, as one man, with so loud a protest against it that it shall echo around every rock and shore in the empire. If you deserve the name of Protestants, I say, it is by protesting against principles, false principles, principles inconsistent with every command of God, and principles at war with every social obligation of the human race: and though we bring forward these documents and these principles to your notice, they are by no means the worst part of popery; they are merely shoots from the root; the root of popery is the cursed evil from which they spring. That root is this: the dark idolatry and guilty superstition of the church of Rome. God's eternal word, the light of his eternal truth, is shut out from the soul of man. Instead of having the Sun of righteousness arising upon him from the horizon of the glorious Word of God, with healing in his wings, that the poor sinner may fly to him and find rest, and peace, and joy, in turning to his Lord and Saviour, the church of Rome shuts out the light, and makes his soul an article of merchandize; and sells the dark and damnable idolatry and superstitions, the lying refuges that destroy the soul of man, instead of proclaiming the salvation of God that redeems him. You may talk of the injuries of Protestants-their sentences of excommunication—their persecutions, and cruel racks and tortures-what are all the injuries inflicted upon the Protestants of this kingdom, even if popery had done her worst, compared with the injuries inflicted on the poor Roman Catholics of Ireland? I stand forth to plead for my poor countrymen. I plead for the poorest amongst them. I plead for the Blackfeet, I plead for the Whitefeet, I plead for the Ribbonmen, for the Rockites