has had the honour of training some of the sons of the principal political Agitators of Ireland. No wonder that Emigration is out of fashion in Ireland, when such Education as this may be obtained without the risk of crossing the Seas! no wonder, that, with such "distinguished Presidents," the holy work of insurrection and rebellion should advance in Ireland, with so much spirit and success!

With regard to MR. DALLAS's assertion, that, "for more "than two Centuries, the penal laws have driven all English "and Irish Catholics who were not content to live in igno"rance at home, to seek education abroad;" this is, in the first place, no great compliment to the learning and talents of those Catholics who do not happen, in that space of time, to have had their education abroad; and, in the next place, it is a foul slander on those members of the Protestant communion, who, without going abroad at all, have been enabled to obtain such an education in the United Kingdom, as has qualified them to adorn the various stations they have occupied. If, indeed, by the word "Education" MR. DALLAS intends an education in politics as well as in science, in rebellion as well as in religion, there is an end of the argument; since it is not disputed, that, in order to the perfection of the clerical character in the Romish Church, certain other doctrines must be acquired in the course of education, besides those which are more immediately connected with the sacerdotal profession.

We find MR. DALLAS next protesting (p. 116) against SIR JOHN HIPPISLEY's proposal, that the large sum of money which has been devoted to the endowment of the Jesuits' Seminary in Ireland, should be appropriated to the Establishment for Educating Roman Catholic Priests at Maynooth.

What SIR JOHN has promised himself by this transfer of property, it is not indeed very easy to discover. That such a diversion of the fund would be more in unison with the mistaken and fatal error into which the British Legislature has permitted itself to fall, in harbouring and cherishing within its own bosom, the natural and eternal enemies of its own exist

ence and repose, may be readily conceded: and it may be also admitted, that if the sum of £30,000, or any annual Par liamentary grants, must necessarily be devoted, either to the support of Romish Priests or Jesuits, any man would choose the least of two evils, and prefer that the former should receive the money rather than the latter; but if the views which have been taken throughout this Answer should prove correct, all honest men who wish to live in peace, must surely deprecate pecuniary grants to either of these objects; nor will it appear to them a matter of much consequence, whether the money is remitted to Catholic Priests, or to their sworn friends, advisers, and colleagues, the Jesuits.

If to this it should be replied, that the Jesuits and the Priests have by no means always preserved the relations of amity; it may be answered, that, however they may have differed at other times, they have never failed to merge their mutual animosities, and to make common cause, when it was a question between THEMSELVES and THE PROTESTANTS: thus, we read that when our Saviour was to be destroyed, "the same day PILATE and HEROD were made friends together; "for, before they were at enmity between themselves” (Luke, ch. xxiii. ver. 12); and we know that the Romans forgot their bitterest quarrels, whenever Carthage was mentioned.

66

Before the subject of the Jesuits' College at Castle Browne is quitted, it may be asked whether Mr. Dallas, when he exalts this, as a Seminary for general learning (p. 117), seriously imagines that his readers will not distinguish between "general learning," and the utter abuse of learning, above all, of sacred learning, which has ever charac

*It is utterly inconceivable upon what principle a Protestant Legislature can involve itself in such contradiction and inconsistency, as thus to foster within its own bosom, the viper which is preparing to inflict the sting of death upon its patron and protector: the support of the College of Maynooth is an anomaly in Legislation, at the bare proposal of which our ancestors, who were better acquainted with the genius and character of Popery than we are, would have started with horror! "Quousque pascetis ignigenos istos?"-Apuleii Metam. 1. 7.

terized the learning of the Jesuits? and whether he really expects that the specious phrase of "general learning" is so far to besot our judgments, and fascinate our affections, that we are determined to provide for its promulgation, though it be no better, after all, than the inculcation of the corruptions and errors of Popery, embellished and relieved, at the same time, with some such aids and advantages of secular learning as may render them more palatable and less repulsive than when viewed in their naked grossness and deformity? Mr. Dallas, indeed, is very solicitous to keep out of sight the main fact of this seminary of learning being a seminary of Jesuits; one part of whose doctrinal system is the diffusion of a Religion which Protestants deny to be the Religion of the Bible, while the other part of their system inculcates such political principles as Englishmen deny to be consistent with the security of their own Constitution.

We come now to the authorities cited by MR. DALLAS in favor of the Jesuits (p. 123).

The first is that of the EMPRESS CATHERINE OF RUSSIA, of whose evidence in favor of the Jesuits something has already been said. MR. DALLAS begins by asserting, that the good people of Mohiloff in Russia" were very much attached "to the Order of Jesuits:" he then proceeds to state, that the Empress received and favored the Jesuits in her dominions; but he takes care to observe a profound silence upon the motive which has been generally ascribed to CATHERINE for the asylum she afforded to the proscribed Order of Jesuits, and of which he could hardly be uninformed-namely, her confi dent hope and expectation that the Jesuits of Europe and Ame rica would bring into White Russia their ill-gotten gain, and enrich her empire by their wealth and industry. The spoils of PARAGUAY, however, never found their way to MOHILOFF.

Whether the absolute despotism and the subtle policy of the Empress might not have prevented the Jesuits from effecting the same mischief in Russia latterly, as they had achieved there in an earlier period of their history, may form a problem

for the students in political learning; but it may be confidently affirmed, that the patronage of the Order of Jesuits by such an Empress as Catherine, in such an Empire as Russia, affords no example for the imitation of England or her Monarch. She was justly accused of being, not only a most licen, tious and abandoned woman, but even of murdering her hus band:-the despot of her own subjects, and the oppressor and subjugator of Poland; herself absolutely without Religion, and placed by her birth over an Empire whose national Religion bears a near affinity, in many of its doctrines, and most of its ceremonies, to that of the Church of Rome:-such a woman finds herself disposed (no matter from what motives of worldly policy) to extend her favor to the Order of Jesuits! Does this circumstance afford any better argument for the Order than the protection vouchsafed to them in every period of their history by intriguing Popes, by imbecile Monarchs, or by corrupt Ministers? Such patronage can only be ranked in the same class, and weighed in the same scale, with other acts of weakness and folly which (in Catholic countries especially) have at once disgraced the councils of Princes, and brought afflic tion upon their subjects. Nor will the exemption of Russia for the last thirty years from "religious or civil broils" (as boasted by MR. DALLAS) by any means prove that the Jesuits have changed either their principles or conduct; since, for twenty-nine years of that period, the Jesuits in Russia have been acting under the peculiar disadvantages arising out of the suppression of the Order elsewhere, and for the greater part of that period were under the government of a woman who, with all her vices of ambition and sensuality, must be allowed to have had as keen an eye upon her own interests as any Sovereign who ever reigned. It may be affirmed, therefore, without the hazard of refutation, that the history of the Jesuits in Russia, under the Empress Catherine, affords no precedent for their encouragement in England; the cases of the two countries, be

drawn from their reception by her, being invalid as affecting ourselves.

It has, indeed, been asserted, that the vices of the late Empress supply no reason for rejecting the evidence in favor of the Jesuits which her patronage afforded: and that argument is quite consistent, when used by such Defenders of the Order as MR. DALLAS, who either do not see, or will not admit, that the vices of the Jesuits themselves afford any good evidence against them; but in a country where moral probity holds so high a rank as in our own, this consideration will have its weight, nor can all the sophistry of those who defend or deny the recorded iniquities of this Order, or of its royal and literary Patrons, weaken its force.

But further: MR. DALLAS gives a Letter of the Empress of Russia to the Pope in favor of the Jesuits, from CASTERA'S History of Catherine II.; although it appears from that very History that the Empress herself positively disavowed this Letter in the Gazette of St. Petersburgh of the 20th April, 1783 (see CASTERA, Vol. ii. p. 323). If, indeed, the Letter had been authentic, MR. DALLAS was bound to have presented it as it appears in CASTERA; but he omits the last paragraph for obvious reasons. That paragraph runs thus: “Who "knows whether Providence may not design these pious men "as the instruments of uniting the Greek Church with the "Catholic? an union which has been so long desired. Let "Your Holiness dismiss all apprehension, for I will maintain "with all my power the rights which you have received from "Jesus Christ." Now, as Mr. DALLAS knew that the Protestants of England did not desire that the Jesuits should be a medium of reconciliation between the Reformed Church and the Church of Rome, and as he knew, also, that the King of England did not mean to maintain, with all his power, the rights of the Pope; he perceived, at once, that the want of analogy between the cases of Russia, under Catherine II. and of England, under George III. would be too striking: he therefore does not permit this concluding paragraph of the Empress's