vX\l-l!RRARY(9xC 
 

 
 A 
 LETTER 
 
 ADDRESSED TO 
 
 SAMUEL WHITBREAD, ESQ. M. P. 
 
 IN CONSEQUENCE OF 
 
 THE UNQUALIFIED APPROBATION 
 
 EXPRESSED BY HIM IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, 
 OF 
 
 MR. LANCASTER'S SYSTEM OF EDUCATION,
 
 S Gos.ir.i.i., Printer, Little Qi:ecn Street, Holborn.
 
 LETTER 
 
 ADDRESSED TO 
 
 SAMUEL imiTBREAD, ESQ. M. P. 
 
 IN CONSEQUENCE OF 
 
 THE UNQUALIFIED APPROBATION 
 
 EXPRESSED BY HIM 
 IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, 
 
 OF 
 
 MR. LANCASTER'S SYSTEM OF EDUCATION; 
 THE RELIGIOUS PART OF WHICH 
 
 IS HERE SHEWN TO BE 
 
 INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SAFETY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 established CJwrcft, 
 
 AND, IN ITS TENDENCY, 
 
 SUBVERSIVE OF CHRISTIANITY ITSELF. 
 
 INCLUDING ALSO 
 
 SOME CURSORY OBSERVATIONS 
 
 ON THE 
 
 CLAIMS OF THE IRISH ROMANISTS, 
 
 AS THEY AFFECT THE 
 
 SAFETY OF THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH. 
 
 BY JOHN BOWLES, ESQ. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 PRINTED FOR J. HATCHARD, PICCADILLY; RIVINGTONS, 
 
 ST. PAUL'S CHURCHYARD; RICHARDSON'S* CORNHILL ; 
 
 W. WALKER, OPPOSITE ST. CLEMENT'S, STRAKD f 
 
 AND W. MEYLERj BATH. 
 
 J807,
 
 Stack 
 Annex 
 
 LETTER, 
 
 SIR, 
 
 As the grand design of education is to 
 qualify youth for the stations which they are re- 
 spectively to occupy in after-lire, it may, I trust, 
 be considered as a most auspicious circumstance for 
 this country, that it is a prominent feature of the 
 plan which you lately presented to the House of 
 Commons for the regulation of the Poor Laws, to 
 make the education of the children of the lower 
 classes a national and a legislative object. I hope, 
 Sir, that in the pursuit of this object you will have 
 the true design of education, as above described, 
 constantly in view, and make it your endeavour to 
 furnish the inferior orders with such instruction, 
 both in kind and degree, and no other, as will be 
 calculated to render them useful members of so- 
 ciety, in the humble rank in which it has pleased 
 Providence to place them. But in the speech by 
 which you introduced your proposed measure to 
 the notice' of Parliament, I saw something which I 
 

 
 cannot but consider as affording just cause for 
 alarm. In that speech you are reported to have 
 bestowed unqualified praise on Mr. Lancaster's 
 system of education, and even to have expressed a 
 hope that this system will gradwlly be introduced 
 into general practice. The excellence of the me- 
 chanical part of this system, in affording most ex- 
 traordinary facilities for instruction, no one is more 
 disposed than myself to admit ; though I must 
 here be allowed to observe, that Mr. Lancaster 
 strangely neglects to acknowledge the obligations 
 which he is under to the Rev. Dr. Bell, who is 
 certainly the parent of the system ; and also that 
 the very excellence of the system, in affording 
 such iucilities for instruction, seems to impose the 
 uecessity of great caution, lest it should operate 
 as a disqualiftcatioji, rather than a qualification , for 
 the duties of the industrious poor. But the reli- 
 gious part of the system, which is almost the only 
 part that Mr. Lancaster has not borrowed from 
 Dr. Bell, I have long considered as liable to the 
 must serious and weighty objections ; and it is 
 well known that persons of distinguished emi- 
 nence for their talents and usefulness view it in 
 the same light. It is true, you did not specifi- 
 cally advert to Mr. Lancaster's system of eduoa-. 
 tion, as it regards religion ; but as you applied 
 the term L'igotry to those persons by whom it had 
 been opposed, it must be presumed that you had 
 in contemplation that part of it which relates tore-
 
 ligious instruction, when you bestowed unqualified 
 approbation upon the whole. I shall rejoice to find 
 myself mistaken ; but as the subject is indisputably 
 of the highest importance, it cannot be too seri- 
 ously or deliberately considered ; and I should pay 
 you but a very indifferent compliment if I thought 
 any apology necessary for endeavouring by this 
 address to fix. it upon your attention, and that of 
 the public, before you proceed farther in the great 
 measure in which you are engaged. In the dis- 
 cussion upon which I am about to enter, I have 
 only to request of those who may differ with me, 
 that any reasonings may not be encountered by 
 mere terms of reproach, as bigotry, prejudice, 
 fanaticism, and the like, but only by proof, 
 either that my principles and premises are erro- 
 neous, or that they do not authorize the conclu- 
 sions which I may deduce from them. 
 
 The avowed object of Mr. Lancaster's plan, as 
 k respects religion, is " the formation of a society 
 under whose patronage ALL the youth in these KING- 
 DOMS may be instructed to read their BIBLES ; and 
 to impress on their memories the knowledge of 
 ' those most essential parts which relate to the his- 
 tory and theory of Christianity *." The society 
 which he proposes to establish is to include all de- 
 nominations of professing Christians. " Let the 
 
 i! . '.V Ufl^^l 
 
 * Page J87. 
 B3
 
 friends of youth," he says, <c among every deno~ 
 mination of Christians exalt the standard of educa- 
 tion." But a difficulty here naturally presents it- 
 self. As the different denominations of Christians 
 entertain very different opinions on religious 
 subjects, how can a society composed of all those 
 denominations agree in a plan of religious instruc- 
 tion ? Mi. Lancaster is fully aware of the diffi- 
 culty, and he thus meets it : " Let me add, that a 
 society for this purpose should be established on 
 general Christian principles, and on them only. 
 Mankind are divided into sects, and individuals 
 think very differently on religious subjects, from 
 the purest motives ; and that gracious common 
 Parent who loves all his children alike, beholds 
 with approbation every one who worships him in 
 sincerity. Yet it cannot be reasonably expected 
 that conscientious men should promote a religious 
 opinion directly contrary to their own. A Presby- 
 terian, Baptist, Quaker, or any other, cannot with 
 sincerity sacrifice his opinions to those of his ami- 
 able and Christian brethren in the establishment. 
 Neither can the last conscientiously unite entirely 
 in opinion with other denominations ; but the 
 grand basis of Christianity alone is broad enough 
 for the whole bulk of mankind to stand on, and 
 join hands as children of one family. This basis 
 p * Glory to God, and the increase of peace and 
 ' good will amongst men' *." In thus describing 
 
 * Page 184.
 
 5 
 
 the grand basis of Christianity, Mr. Lancaster mis- 
 takes the effect for the cause. Glory to God and 
 peace on earth ought certainly to result from Chris- 
 tianity, and they must result from it, if it be ge- 
 nuine. But they cannot with any propriety be called 
 its ground-work or " basis." It appears, however,, 
 from the whole of the foregoing passage, that the 
 method by which Mr. Lancaster proposes to unite 
 all denominations of Christians, in a society for 
 the education of youth, is to refrain from promo- 
 ting, by means of such a society, any religious opi- 
 nions which are peculiar to any of those denomi- 
 nations, or about which they differ, and to incul- 
 cate those only in which they all agree. For he 
 says, " It cannot be reasonably expected that con- 
 scientious men should promote a religious opinion 
 directly contrary to their own." In another part 
 of jhis publication he says, " his object is to in- 
 struct youth in useful learning, in the leading and 
 uncontroverted principles of Christianity." And 
 he elsewhere * most explicitly and most emphati- 
 cally lays it down as a kind of dogma, that " above 
 all things education ought not to be subservient to 
 the propagation of the peculiar tenets of any sect. 
 Beyond the number of that sect," he adds, " it 
 becomes undue influence, like the strong taking 
 advantage of the weak." By which I understand 
 him to mean, in reference to his own plan, that 
 
 r ."iC>. 
 
 * Page 25.
 
 6 
 
 although each sect, acting separately, may properly 
 inculcate its own peculiar tenets, yet when all sects 
 unite in a society for the purpose of education, 
 they must acton what he calls '' general Christian 
 principles," and propagate no opinions which are 
 peculiar to any sect, but only those which are 
 common to all. In page I J of his Introduction, 
 Mr. Lancaster further says, " I long to see men 
 who profess Christianity, contend, not for creeds 
 of faith, or names, but in the practice of every 
 heavenly virtue." 
 
 With Mr. Lancaster's religious opinions, or 
 " creeds of faith," I have no right to meddle ; but 
 I consider myself not only entitled, but bound to 
 say, that the system of religious instruction pro- 
 posed by him is highly objectionable in a religious, 
 a moral, and a political view. It leads to conse- 
 quences of which, I should hope, Mr. Lancaster is 
 not aware, and which, if he were aware of them, 
 he would most earnestly deprecate. One of those 
 consequences is, that his system, if universally 
 adopted, would tend to the subversion of Christi- 
 anity itself. Strong as this assertion may appear, 
 I pledge myself to prove that it is well founded. 
 
 It will appear upon examination that all systems 
 which in their nature and tendency are injurious to 
 society, are founded in error. This is the case 
 with that of Mr. Lancaster, which is evidently
 
 7- 
 
 built upon the supposition that the different deno- 
 minations of Christians differ only in the non-essen- 
 tials, but agree in the essentials of Christianity. 
 This supposition is the basis of all his reasoning on 
 the subject now under consideration. It is clearly 
 implied in his general proposition that " the grand 
 basis of Christianity alone is broad enough for the 
 whole bulk of mankind to stand on ;" and it ap- 
 pears more distinctly when he proposes it as one of 
 the objects of his society to impress on the memo- 
 ries of youth the knowledge of those most essen- 
 tial parts which relate to the history and theory of 
 Christianity *. Indeed, one would not will- 
 ingly suppose that Mr. Lancaster would inten- 
 tionally leave youth uninstructed in what he deems 
 to be the essentials of Christianity. It must 
 therefore be presumed that he considers the various 
 denominations of Christians as agreeing in essen- 
 tials and differing only in non-essentials But in 
 truth the very reverse of this is the case. The 
 subjects upon which the various denominations of 
 Christians differ, involve the very essentials of 
 Christianity. They relate to matter of such high 
 importance, that if all belief, and, consequently, all 
 instruction, respecting them were excluded from a 
 system of faith, that system could not in any sense 
 of the word be denominated Christianity. A single 
 example will suffice to prove the truth of this as- 
 
 * Page 187,
 
 sertion. It is well known that one of the principal 
 differences which have agitated the Christian world 
 relates to the blessed Founder of our religion, re- 
 specting whose person, character, and office, the 
 most contradictory opinions have been strenuously 
 maintained. Will Mr. Lancaster say that a person 
 can be denominated a Christian who has no belief 
 whatever respecting the points in dispute between 
 the sects who hold different opinions on the above 
 subject ? But as Mr. Lancaster's proposed society 
 is to consist of all denominations of Christians, 
 and as it cannot be reasonably expected that " con- 
 scientious men should promote a religious opinion 
 directly contrary to their own," it necessarily 
 follows, according to such a scheme, that the Tri- 
 nitarian doctrine upon the subject in question i 
 not to be inculcated because it is <s directly con- 
 trary" to that maintained by Socinians, and vice 
 versd ; and that, in relation to a matter which is 
 palpably and necessarily fundamental in every pos- 
 sible system of Christianity, youth are not to form 
 any belief whatever. But how can a person be 
 called a Christian who has no opinion or belief 
 on the question whether the Author of his reli- 
 gion is an object of his adoration ? Nay, how is 
 he to attend any place of Christian worship, if he 
 is ignorant whether he is to worship the Son as 
 well as the Father ? In relation to this most 
 important and interesting subject, Mr. Lancaster, 
 as I think, most scripturally says, " To the
 
 9 
 
 name of Jesus all must bow, in mercy or in 
 Judgment *." But the youth to be brought up 
 by his society must not be taught to bow to that 
 name ; for, strange as it may appear, there is a 
 sect of professing Christians who consider such 
 adoration as idolatry. Indeed, all knowledge and 
 belief upon the essential and fundamental doctrine 
 above alluded to, must, according to his plan of 
 education, be withheld from youth, in order that 
 Trinitarians and Unitarians may unite in a society 
 for general education. 
 
 In like manner most of the essential doctrines 
 of Christianity have occasioned differences of opi- 
 nion or belief, and excited controversy among pro- 
 fessing Christians ; and the ardour of the contro- 
 versy has generally been in proportion to the sup- 
 posed importance of the question in dispute- 
 Upon all such doctrines, however, youth must re- 
 main totally uninstructed, if Mr. Lancaster's 
 principle be carried into effect. But when, in 
 conformity with that principle, he has excluded 
 from his system of religious education all instruc- 
 tion upon subjects about which the various deno- 
 minations of Christians differ, he will find that he 
 has excluded Christianity itself: for the religion 
 which will remain, when, in compliment to the 
 numerous sects of professing Christians, all the 
 
 * Introduction, p. H. 
 c
 
 10 
 
 doctrines in which they do not agree are kept 
 back, will certainly not be Christianity. It will 
 indeed be scarcely any thing else than DEISM. I 
 cannot conceive that any sect would, upon mature, 
 consideration, promote such a system of religious 
 education. For persons of all sects, whatever 
 their peculiar tenets may be, consider it a matter of 
 indispensable neces>itv to form some belief on the 
 subject of those tenets ; and unless they were of 
 opinion that salvation is confined to those of their 
 own persuasion, they would rather see youth edu- 
 cated in a faith from which they differ, than in no 
 faith at all ; or which, with regard to Christian 
 belief is the same thing, a faith in which all Chris- 
 tians agree. Thus it appears that the effect of 
 Mr. Lancaster's system would be to make youth 
 Deists rather than Christians ; and that what he 
 conceives to be the Iroad basis of Christianity, is, 
 in reality, so narrow, that no Christian, of any 
 sect or persuasion, can stand upon it. 
 
 If the mischievous effects of such a system 
 were confined to the season of youth, the ob- 
 jections to it on the grounds above stated, would 
 be insurmountable. For with regard to great 
 numbers, youth is the only period of existence 
 in this world, and it is impossible to say that 
 it will not bo. so in any particular case. And 
 who that is a Christian can reconcile himself to 
 the thought, that^this period should pass without 
 any knowledge of the fundamental doctrines of
 
 ti 
 
 "the Gospel without any belief in those doctrines'? 
 But the influence of such a system upon those 
 who are educated in it, must, in after-life, be of 
 the most pernicious kind. The best that can be 
 expected of such persons is, that they will not 
 " hold fast" any form of doctrine that they will 
 never be firm, or steady, or long consistent, in any 
 system of faith ; and that through life they will 
 be wavering and inconstant, and " blown about 
 by every wind of doctrine." But the danger, 
 nay, the probability is, that, after many fluctua- 
 tions, they will become sceptics, and, perhaps, 
 complete infidels. 
 
 That one error is generally the parent of another, 
 is a truth which is remarkably verified in Mr. Lan- 
 caster's system. The fundamental error of that 
 system, which consists in supposing that the va- 
 rious sects of professing Christians agree in essen- 
 tials, and differ only in non-essentials, has led to 
 a conclusion no less erroneous, that the plan of 
 religious education which Air. Lancaster proposes 
 to adopt, will tend to produce the moral effects 
 of Christianity. This is a position which he as- 
 sumes, and on which he reasons with as much 
 confidence as he could do if it were fully esta- 
 blished. Thus, after laying down his grand prin- 
 ciple, that " above all things education ought not 
 to be subservient to the propagation of the pecu- 
 liar tenets of any sect," he says, " Yet a reverence 
 
 C 2
 
 11 
 
 for the sacred name of God, and the Scriptures of 
 truth ; a detestation of vice ; a love of veracity ; 
 a due attention to duties to parents, relations!, 
 and to society ; carefulness to avoid bad company ; 
 civility without flattery; and a peaceable demean- 
 our ; may be inculcated in every seminary for 
 youth, without violating the sanctuary of private 
 religious opinion in any mind *." He proceeds, 
 " When obedience to the divine precepts keeps pace 
 with knowledge in the mind of any man, that man is 
 a Christian ; and when the fruits of Christianity are 
 produced, that man is evidently a disciple of our 
 blessed Lord, let his profession of religion be what 
 it may. The propagation of this knowledge, and 
 the production of those fruits, increase the number 
 of true Christians, which is far better than the in- 
 crease of party to any extent ; and at the same time 
 proves beneficial to society, in the improved prin- 
 ciple and conduct of its members ; and in private 
 life, by the steadiness and amiable disposition of 
 parents, masters, and children, who are influenced 
 by its mild and benignant precepts -}-." 
 
 All this is undoubtedly very specious, and its 
 specio'usness has, I dare say, contributed much to 
 the patronage which Mr. Lancaster has received 
 from the friends of good morals. But it is alto- 
 gether built upon fallacy. It is founded on the 
 fupposition that an effect may be produced with- 
 out iti appropriate cause. Mr. Lancaster says, 
 
 * Introduction, p. p. f Ib.
 
 13 
 
 '' When the fruits of Christianity are produced, 
 that man is evidently a disciple of our blessed 
 Lord." But how are the fruits of Christianity to 
 be produced, when the tree, of which those fruits 
 are the natural product, is not planted ? It is true, 
 according to Mr. Lancaster's system, a knowledge 
 of the divine precepts is to be inculcated ; for he 
 says, " When obedience to those precepts keeps, 
 pace with knowledge in the mind of any man, that 
 man is a Christian :" but he most unphilosophi- 
 callv, as ,well as most untheologically, expects 
 " obedience" without the principle by which alone 
 obedience can, in any case, be produced. That 
 principle is faith. Lest the truth of this position 
 should not be obvious to those who have paid but 
 little attention to the subject, some illustration of 
 it may not be amiss. 
 
 The obligation of all laws arises out of the rela- 
 tive situation of the legislators and those on whom 
 the laws are obligatory. It does not consist 
 merely in the right to impose penalties on dis- 
 obedience, nor does it operate merely by the dread 
 of those penalties. The conscientious mind will 
 discover something which requires obedience to 
 lawful authority, independently of all penalties, and 
 even on the supposition that they may be evaded ; 
 it will discover that a right to command involves 
 a corresponding duty to obey. But before the 
 mind can be sensible of the obligation to obedi- 
 ence, it must believe two things : first, that there
 
 M 
 
 exists in the legislator, a right to command ; 
 and secondly, that this right has been exercised 
 by the promulgation of certain commands, 
 which thereby assume the force of laws. Such 
 belief is but another term for faith. Thus it 
 appears that faith is the vital principle of obedience, 
 even in a state of human society. In such a state, 
 however, the relation subsisting between those 
 who have a right to command and those who are 
 under an obligation to obey, though very exten- 
 sive, is limited within certain bounds, and conse- 
 quently the authority of the former and the duty of 
 the latter arc limited also ; for with the relation 
 the authority on the one side, and the obligation 
 on the other, must be commensurate. But the re- 
 lation which subsists between theSupremeBeingand 
 His creatures is unlimited, and therefore involves in 
 it an unlimited right to command, and an unlimit- 
 ed obligation to obey. That inexpressibly great 
 and glorious Being is the universal Creator. He 
 made all things by his almighty Fiat. He gave 
 them whatever form, nature, and qualities, he 
 thought proper to bestow. They au all, collec- 
 tively and individually, absolutely dcpendeut upon 
 Him in every moment of their existence. His 
 will is, therefore, in all respects, their law. To 
 that law, as far as relates to ihclr physical existence, 
 they are compelled to conform ; a circumstance to 
 which is owing the undcviating order, the harmony 
 and regularity which reign throughout that im- 
 mense and complicated machine, the physical
 
 J5 
 
 world. In the moral world the obligation to obe- 
 dience is not less absolute, although the free 
 agency, which is an essential attribute of moral be- 
 ings, is necessarily accompanied with a power to 
 disobey. Still, however, uniform and invariable 
 obedience to the will of the Supreme Being is their 
 indispensable duty incapable, like the relation 
 from which it flows, of any limitation ; a duty from 
 which no possible situation or circumstances can 
 absolve them, and the performance of which con- 
 stitutes the very essence of virtue. In this case, as 
 in every other, the principle of obedience is faith ; 
 that is, according to the explanation already given, 
 a belief that there exists an absolute universal right 
 to command, which implies an unlimited obligation 
 to obey, and also that this right has been exercised. 
 A knowledge of every law, however, is an indis- 
 pensable preliminary to obedience ; the obligation 
 to the latter, therefore, necessarily implies the 
 duty of endeavouring to obtain the former ; and 
 thus we are bound to attend to every communica- 
 tion of the Divine will, our universal law, and to 
 avail ourselves of every opportunity of making our- 
 selves acquainted with it. The law which is writ- 
 ten in our hearts, even if we had no other, should 
 be carefully studied by us, for the band which 
 wrote it is Divine. But when an express revela- 
 tion of the Divine Will has been made, our first 
 duty, and that which is the basis of every other, is 
 to endeavour, as far as our limited faculties will ex-
 
 ifl 
 
 tend, to obtain a thorough acquaintance with it- 
 not merely with the moral precepts by which we 
 are commanded to regulate our practice, but with 
 every thing which the Deity has been pleased 
 to reveal to us respecting his own nature and 
 attributes. Nothing that is thus revealed can 
 be unimportant, and it would be the height of 
 impiety so to consider any communication from 
 God. In this view, faith or belief, independently 
 of its being the only spring of obedience, is itself a 
 moral duty, and the want of it is of the very es- 
 sence, as well as the main source, of vice : and this 
 observation applies no less to the doctrinal parts of 
 Scripture, than to its moral precepts, for both are 
 equally revealed by God. Indeed there is no sub- 
 ject Yipon which more stress is laid in the Scrip- 
 tures, than the importance of faith. Nor is there 
 any upon which the inspired writers display more 
 solicitude, than the preservation of it from error and 
 heresy. It is even represented by those writers, 
 when at once pure and productive of obedience, 
 as the operative means of salvation. It is made 
 the express condition on which alone those to whom 
 the revelation has been made, can hope to be saved. 
 And surely it ought not to be forgotten that the 
 Christian dispensation, as its fundamental doctrines 
 are explained by our Church, and as they arc be- 
 lieved by all Christians who are known under the 
 denomination of orthodox, presents to the mind 
 and to the heart the most powerful and captivating
 
 17 
 
 motives to love as well as to obedience ; that it 
 operates upon our affections and our gratitude by 
 the display of a scheme of Divine goodness and 
 mercy, so marvellous, that, had it not been ac- 
 tually realized, and proved to be so, by indubitable 
 evidence, it would far exceed all credibility ; and 
 that it thus binds us with the cords of love to a 
 most conscientious performance of our duty, in all 
 its parts. 
 
 But the doctrinal parts of Scripture, and espe- 
 cially those which are generally considered as most 
 essential, have given rise to differences of opinion, 
 and to controversy : they must therefore be ex- 
 cluded from Mr. Lancaster's plan of religious in- 
 struction, the object of which is to instruct youth 
 only in " the uncontr over ted principles of Christi- 
 anity." And thus it appears that the system in 
 question is not only philosophically false, inasmuch, 
 as it leads to an expectation of Christian obedience 
 without Christian faith, but also essentially immo- 
 ral, since it would have the effect of bringing up 
 youth as unbelievers, and consequently in habitual 
 "** disobedience to the Divine will, which is of the 
 very essence of immorality or sin *," 
 
 * See tf An Historical View of the Rise and "Progress of INFI- 
 DELITY, with a Refutation of its Principles and Reasonings, 
 in a Series of Sermons, by the Refr. W. Van Mildert, M. A. 
 Rector of St, Mary-le-Bow, London," yol. ii. p. 192. I cannot
 
 IB 
 
 Against a proposal to educate the youth of the 
 country, or any part of it, in such a manner, every 
 serious and considerate person must surely be ready 
 to enter his most formal and solemn protest. The 
 true principle of education is to " train up a child 
 in the way that he should go/' The youth, there- 
 fore, who are to be trained up according to Mr. 
 Lancaster's system, must be in tended to persevere 
 in the way which that system points out. And as 
 Mr. Lancaster expressly says, that the object 
 which he recommends is " the formation, of a so- 
 ciety under whose immediate patronage all the 
 youth in these kingdoms may be instructed, " his 
 plan, if its execution were to be commensurate 
 with its design, would lead to the extirpation of 
 Cliristianity from these kingdoms, in the place of 
 which would be introduced an anomalous general- 
 izing system of religion, which no existing sect 
 could, consent to denominate Christianity. It is 
 
 offer myself to advert to these Sermons without expressing", 
 however feebly, the acknowledgments which', in common with 
 the whole Christian world, 1 owe to the reverend author, for 
 one of the ablest, most luminous, a ad most convincing refura- 
 tionsofthe principles and reasonings of Infidelity that ever issued 
 from the press. In thus expressing myself I beg leave to be 
 understood, as uttering not merely rny own opinion, but what I 
 know to be the opinion of men who are best qualified to judge 
 upwn the subjrct. Earnestly do I v. '.ih that every infidel, nay, 
 that every person v.ho entertains any doubt about the great 
 truifcg of Christaiiity, iH|ld diligently peruse this valuabla- 
 werlt*
 
 19 
 
 true, Mr. Lancaster further proposes " to instruct 
 youth to read their Bibles, and to impress on their 
 memories those most essential parts which relate 
 to the history and theory of Christianity." But he 
 will hardly venture to deny that they stand in much 
 need of assistance to enable them properly to 
 " read their Bibles ;" in which, we are told, by 
 high authority, there are " many things hard to 
 be understood :" and we have seen that his plan is 
 of such a nature as to exclude the most essential 
 parts of the " theory of Christianity," and conse- 
 quently to suppress the true and only efficient mo- 
 tives to the practice of its duties. In a word, he 
 might most aptly have applied to his religious sys- 
 tem, by way of motto, that most false and perni- 
 cious sentiment, 
 
 For modes of faith let graceless zealots fight, 
 His can't be wrong whose life is in the right. 
 
 The reason assigned by Mr. Lancaster for the 
 recommendation of such a plan (of the effects of 
 which I should hope he could not be aware) is the 
 supposed necessity of excluding from a system of 
 religious instruction the " peculiar tenets" of every 
 sect of Christians, in order to unite all sects in a 
 society for the instruction, under their joint pa- 
 tronage, of " all the youth in these kingdoms." 
 The ground of that supposed necessity is, accord- 
 ing to Mr. Lancaster, that *' it cannot be reason- 
 
 D 2
 
 '20 
 
 ably expected that conscientious men should pro- 
 mote a religious opinion contrary to their own." 
 That ground, however, like all the grounds on 
 which Mr. Lancaster's system is built, is falla- 
 cious ; for in certain situations, conscientious men 
 may most reasonably be expected to promote reli- 
 gious opinions directly contrary to their owfi, and 
 particularly in the case where, unless they do so, 
 no religious opinions whatever would be pro- 
 moted. Mr. Lancaster will scarcely deny that any 
 religion is better than none ; and if it depended on 
 him, whether in a Mahometan country, the youth 
 should be brought up as Mussulmans or as Atheists, 
 I cannot doubt that he would prefer the former, in 
 order to preserve them from the greatest possible 
 evil, that of being educated without any religion 
 at all. In the case before us we find that if the 
 youth to be brought up under the patronage of 
 the proposed society be not instructed in the reli- 
 gious opinions of some one of the denominations of 
 Christians, of which the society is to be composed, 
 they will, in no sense of the word, be taught Chris- 
 tianity. There is therefore no other alternative 
 than either to instruct youth in the religious tenets 
 of some one of those denominations, or to edu- 
 cate them in total ignorance of most of the essen- 
 tials of the Christian faith : which part of this al- 
 ternative the society may reasonably be expected 
 
 to prefer, is a question which I trust may safely 
 
 * 
 be referred even to Mr. Lancaster himself".
 
 But another difficulty here presents itself: How 
 shall a society consisting of all sects of Christians 
 determine which of those sects ought to have the 
 preference, in the adoption of its religious tenets 
 as a system of education ? How is such a selection 
 to be made ? for it must he made if the youth to 
 be instructed are to be educated as Christians. 
 It certainly cannot be expected of any one sect of 
 Christians to admit that the faith of another sect 
 is preferable to its own. The converse of such an 
 admission is, or ought to be, the supposed basis 
 upon which every sect distinctively stands. The 
 difficulty, I own, appears to be insurmountable, 
 if the case be considered as Mr. Lancaster states 
 it. He says, " Mankind are divided into sects ;" 
 but this is an illogical distribution, and the whole 
 difficulty arises from its being so. It is of more 
 importance than most people are aware, to ar- 
 range and classify our ideas of genera and species 
 in such a manner as to correspond with the real 
 nature of things. If Mr. Lancaster had pursued 
 this course, he might have saved himself and his 
 readers a great deal of trouble. He would then 
 have found that mankind considered as Christians 
 in this country, which, with regard to the subject 
 in discussion, is the highest genus, are in the first 
 place divisible into those who belong to, and those 
 who dissent from the established Church ; and 
 that the latter are subdivisible into the various 
 sects of separatists or dissenters from that esfea-
 
 22 
 
 But Mr. Lancaster considers every 
 class or denomination of Christians as" a sect, and 
 he most inaccurately applies that appellation to the 
 establishment itself. According to his mode of 
 classification, it is impossible to discover any prin- 
 ciple by which the proposed society could be 
 brought to concur in any one system of Christian 
 faith, with a view to the religious instruction of 
 the youth patronized by them. For, considered 
 as sects, the various denominations of Christians 
 stand precisely on the same footing with regard to 
 each other ; and it cannot be reasonably expected 
 that they should recognize in any one of them the 
 least title to pre-eminence. But considered as 
 consisting of the established Church, and the va T 
 rious denominations of dissenters, properly called 
 'sects, there are very obvious reasons, to which I 
 conceive Mr. Lancaster, unless he avows himself 
 hostile to the Church, must readily subscribe, 
 for assigning to the former such a pre-emi- 
 nence. It might, indeed, be regarded as a self- 
 evident proposition, that when education is made 
 " a national concern," which Mr. Lancaster says, 
 in the present instance," it ought to become," the 
 youth who partake of its benefits ought to be edu- 
 cated in the national Church. Instead, however, 
 of relying on this proposition as a maxim which 
 can not be controverted, I shall consider it as a prin- 
 ciple which ought to be established.
 
 28 
 
 You, Sir, I am persuaded will admit that Mr. 
 Lancaster's system, and indeed any general system 
 of education, ought to be so framed and conducted 
 as to be compatible with the safety of the established 
 Church. Now it is obvious that the strength, and 
 consequently the safety of every establishment must 
 depend upon the numbers that are, upon principle, 
 attached to it. But it would be absurd to expect 
 that youth should, upon principle, be attached to 
 the Church, or, indeed, that they should have any 
 attachment whatever to it, unless they are brought 
 up in it. And as Mr. Lancaster's plan is of the 
 greatest magnitude, extending in ks design to the 
 " formation of a society under whose patronage all 
 the youth in these kingdoms may be instructed ;" 
 it is undeniable, that, unless it be conducted upon 
 the above principle, it must be fraught with the 
 utmost danger to the Church by bringing up ther 
 great mass of the population of this country, with- 
 out any attachment (to say the least) to that esta- 
 blishment. 
 
 Mr. Lancaster seems to be aware of the in- 
 fluence which any general plan of education, fa^ 
 vouring a particular system of religion, is calcu- 
 lated, on that account, to possess in the state. 
 For he says, " It has been generally conceived, 
 that if any particular sect obtained the principal 
 care in a national system of education, that part 
 would soon be likely to possess the greatest power
 
 24 
 
 and influence in the state. Fear that the clergy 
 should aggrandize themselves too much, has pro- 
 duced opposition from Dissenters to any pro- 
 posal of the kind ; on the other hand, the clergy 
 have opposed any thing of this nature which might 
 operate with Dissenters, locally or generally, fear- 
 ing an increase of the dissenting influence might 
 prove likely to prejudice the interests of the esta- 
 blishment*." This is a full recognition, on the 
 part of Mr. Lancaster, of the alternative, that a 
 system of national education, within the scope of 
 which religious instruction is comprised, must 
 tend either to the security or the destruction of 
 the national church. Mr. Lancaster alludes, in- 
 deed, to the former part of the alternative, by the 
 illiberal expression, te Fear that the clergy should 
 aggrandize themselves." The question, however, 
 is not, whether our clergy shall aggrandize them- 
 selves of that event, in the present state of so- 
 ciety, Heaven knows, there is little danger but 
 whether the security of the Church shall be con- 
 sulted. My position is, that, by Mr. Lancaster's 
 system, the Church would be exposed to the most 
 imminent danger ; for unless it be an essential and 
 indispensable part of that system to bring up the 
 youth instructed by it in the Church, there can be 
 no certainty that the case which he describes will 
 not happen, and that a particular sect will not ob- 
 
 * 
 
 * Page 18*.
 
 25 
 
 tain the principal care in the proposed tc national 
 system of education," in which case he admits that 
 such sect " will be likely to possess the greatest 
 power and influence in the state," an event neces- 
 sarily leading to the subversion of the Church. 
 But if no sect should thus predominate, yet, as 
 the system is now constructed, it would have the 
 effect of bringing up youth without any attachment 
 to the Church ; and then, although they might be 
 totally indifferent with regard to " sects," and even 
 to religion itself, still the Church would be deprived 
 of that support which is essential to her safety. 
 On these grounds I feel myself authorized to con- 
 clude, that whatever degree of " power and influ- 
 ence in the state" belongs to a system of national 
 education, ought to be thrown into the scale of 
 the national Church, and that this establishment 
 is entitled to all the support which it is capable of 
 deriving from such a system ; not, indeed, with a 
 view to aggrandize the clergy, but to secure the 
 Church against the danger to which it would 
 otherwise inevitably fce exposed, from the opera- 
 tion of the system. If the youth of the country 
 be not brought up in the Ghurch, it cannot be ex- 
 pected that they will ever find their way into it. 
 And if some of them should do so, their connexion 
 with it will not be cemented by the strongest of 
 all ties early attachment. But even of such ad- 
 ventitious adherents, the number would probably 
 be very small. And thus the national Church 
 

 
 26 
 
 wonld be subjected to the danger which must at- 
 tend it in that state of society, in which a majo- 
 rity of the population is brought up in separation 
 from it. 
 
 If, therefore, Mr. Lancaster's system be really 
 intended to be compatible with the safety of the 
 national Church, it must be made subvervient to 
 the propagation of the faith of that Church : and 
 indeed it must be founded on the principle, that 
 the youth who partake of its benefits must be brought 
 up as members of the establishment. In Scotland 
 this system is invariably acted upon, and no one 
 ever thinks of deviating from it. In that country 
 the education of the lower classes is a national con- 
 cern, provided for by legislative authority ; and 
 you, Sir, seem fully sensible of the great national 
 benefits which a due attention to it has produced. 
 But all the children so educated are brought up in 
 the national church, which, there, \sPresbyterian. 
 
 It cannot be justly pretended that the adoption 
 of such a principle would in the least encroach 
 upon parental rights. For the object is to supply 
 the lamentable defects of parental education among 
 the lower classes, the children of which are, as 
 Mr. Lancaster observes, " left destitute of a 
 suitable education." The parents of such children 
 are as unqualified to give them a religious, as any 
 other kind of education ; and by far the greater
 
 part of them are, as Mr. Lancaster's experience 
 must have convinced him, totally indifferent re- 
 specting the religious education of their offspring. 
 With regard even to the very few who feel any 
 concern upon this subject, and who wish their 
 children to be brought up in a particular persuasion, 
 if they would obtain for them the advantage of 
 charitable instruction, they cannot reasonably ex- 
 pect any deviation, on their account, from the 
 system of religious education which is adopted in 
 the school where that advantage is bestowed. A 
 conformity to such system is a necessary condition, 
 on which alone they can hope to partake of the 
 benefit of a charitable institution for the education 
 of youth. Upon this principle all charity-schools 
 are necessarily conducted, whenever religious in- 
 struction is one of their objects. But the above 
 principle is, in the most striking manner, reason- 
 able and necessary with regard to institutions of a 
 national kind ; in which, as has been shewn, no 
 faith but that of the national Church can be 
 taught, without danger to that Church, and con- 
 sequently to the state. Surely when the important 
 object of supplying the deficiency of " a suitable 
 education" among the lower orders is made a na- 
 tional concern, that object ought to be pursued in 
 such a manner, as to be consistent with the ge- 
 neral interests of the country, and the safety of 
 its establishments. 
 
 E 2
 
 IS 
 
 And it should not be forgotten, that besides the 
 necessity of adopting, in such a concern, the 
 principle upon which I am insisting, its adoption 
 is necessary, as I trust has been sufficiently shewn, 
 to render a national system of education subservient 
 to the propagation, in any form, of the essential 
 doctrines of Christianity, and consequently of 
 Christianity itself: since, as it cannot reasonably 
 be expected that the peculiar tenets of any sect 
 should be inculcated by a society composed of 
 persons of all religious persuasions, unless such a 
 society consent to inculcate the faith of the esta- 
 blished Church, the youth educated under its aus- 
 pices will not be instructed in any faith at all, and 
 consequently they will not receive a Christian edu- 
 cation. If, however, under all these circum- 
 stances, an objection should still be made to the 
 principle in question, because it would promote 
 the faith of the established Church, I feel myself 
 authorized to say, that such an objcotion can only 
 be attributed to that " sect-making spirit" which 
 Mr. Lancaster so severely and so justly censures. 
 I most cordially agree with Mr. Lancaster, that 
 the professors of Christianity should cultivate " a 
 spirit of brotherly love and peace ;" but where a 
 national religion is inseparably interwoven with the 
 constitution itself, and particularly when it 
 breathes, as is the case in this country, a most 
 mild and pure spirit of universal toleration, the 
 friends of such an establishment are surely not
 
 chargeable with any want of Christian charity, if, 
 while they secure, by all the means in their power, 
 a full enjoyment of the rights of conscience to all 
 who differ with them, they take the necessary 
 means of securing also their own establishment. On 
 the contrary, if those who dissent from such an 
 establishment, while they enjoy such ines- 
 timable privileges, will not cordially assent to 
 whatever is essential to its safety, they only subject 
 themselves to the censure so justly and so forcibly 
 applied by Mr. Lancaster to the " sect-making 
 spirit of party ;" and they would do well to im- 
 bibe the wish expressed by him, " That the pro 
 fessors.of Christianity would cultivate a spirit of 
 unity, brotherly love, and peace ; bearing one 
 with another in love ; avoiding all differences from 
 party spirit ; and, when they cannot unite in reli- 
 gious opinions, their dissent would /<? with Chris- 
 tian meekness, and respect to the opinions of 
 others *." * 
 
 Such, however, is the zeal by which sects are 
 generally animated in favour of their own distinc- 
 tive persuasion, that I fear their general and cor- 
 dial concurrence in a national system of education, 
 upon the principle which I have shewn to be essen- 
 tial to the safety of the established Church, is an 
 event rather to be desired than expected. I there- 
 
 * Introduction, p. 1O.
 
 30 
 
 fore think it fortunate, Sir, that the Legislature, 
 through your intervention, is about to take 
 Mr. Lancaster's system out of the hands of the 
 society in which that gentleman proposed to place 
 it. For in the case to which we are now autho- 
 rized to look forward, the safety of the national 
 Church, we are bound to presume, cannot but be 
 an object of most earnest solicitude. Of that 
 Church the Legislature is a constitutional guar- 
 dian ; and throughout the wide and extensive 
 range of its multifarious and complicated duties, 
 there is not one, 1 will venture to say, paramount 
 to that of protecting an establishment, which is the 
 hallowed bond of our religious and civil liberties, 
 and the preservation of which involves (as direful 
 experience has proved) the existence of the 
 throne, and the maintenance of the constitution 
 in all its parts. So anxiously has the constitution 
 provided for the security of that establishment, 
 that, in case the two Houses of Parliament should 
 ever forget that it is their bounden duty to protect 
 it, the King cannot, without actual perjury, forget 
 that duty, since he is obliged to swear, in the fun- 
 damental contract which he enters into at his coro- 
 nation, to defend and maintain the Protestant 
 Church, as by law established. 
 
 When I had written nearly thus far, I saw a publi- 
 cation, containing a reply on the part of Mr. Lan- 
 caster, to the objections which have been urged 
 against his system, under the catching title of " Aa
 
 31 
 
 Appeal for Justice in the Cause of ten thousand 
 poor and orphan Children, and for the Honour of 
 the Holy Scriptures." In this reply, which is on 
 of the most desultory performances I have ever 
 seen, is contained much illiberal and unfounded 
 censure on two of the most distinguished charac- 
 ters of the present day : the one * an eminent 
 theologian, and a most able champion of the 
 Church ; to whom that establishment is indebted 
 for having, on various occasions, most successfully 
 vindicated her truly apostolical constitution, and 
 her truly orthodox doctrines : the other -J- a lady 
 of distinguished talents, and, what is far better, of 
 the soundest principles ; who has contributed more 
 than almost any other individual of these times to 
 check the progress of infidelity and vice, and whose 
 correct views of Christian education are particularly 
 deserving of Mr. Lancaster's attention. Mr. Lan- 
 caster's main object in this publication seems to be 
 to vindicate himself against the charges brought 
 against him by the above writers, by an appeal to the 
 practice of his school, and a profession of his faith. 
 He endeavours to shew that neither the former nor 
 the latter justifies the charge of favouring a deist- 
 ical system of education. But the true question in 
 issue relates neither to Mr. Lancaster's practice, 
 
 * Rev. Charles Daubeny, Archdeacon of Sarum. 
 f Mrs. Trimmer, author of the Guardian of Education, 
 and of many other valuable works.
 
 32 
 
 nor his particular belief, but merely to the system 
 of education which he recommends to the nation. 
 This, as I trust I have satisfactorily shewn, is in 
 substance a deistical system ; at least it certainly 
 is not a Christian one. If his practice be not con- 
 formable with it, that circumstance evinces his own 
 inconsistency, and thereby furnishes a conclusive 
 argument against his system, by proving that upon 
 experiment he found it not fit for practice. In 
 such a case he surely ought to have taken the car- 
 lie^t opportunity of publicly renouncing it, and of 
 acknowledging his error. But instead of doing 
 this, he publishes edition after edition of his origi- 
 nal work, in each of which his pernicious theory 
 is repeated ; and it is a remarkable circumstance, 
 that at the end of the sixth edition, from which 
 the passages here cited are extracted, appears an 
 advertisement of his " Appeal to Justice," which of 
 course must have been published previously to the 
 edition in question. Thus does he at the same 
 time persist in promulgating an antichristian tlieory, 
 while he endeavours to vindicate himself from the 
 charges which, on tliat eery account, had been brought 
 against him, by pleading that his practice and his 
 faith are Christian. What is this but blowing hot 
 and cold with the same mouth ? Let it not, how- 
 ever, be supposed that the practice in his school, 
 with regard to religious instruction, comes up to 
 that standard which, for the reasons above stated, 
 can alone be permitted to regulate a system of na-
 
 33 
 
 tional education *. It is far from sufficient tor the 
 purpose of instructing youth in the faith of the 
 Church. Mr. Lancaster intimates, indeed, that 
 the Apostles' Creed, with the Lord's Prayer, and 
 the Tea Commandments, are received in his 
 school. Bat the Church has other creeds besides 
 that of the Apostles ; she has also a Catechism: and 
 these, though the learning of them is excluded 
 from Mr. Lancaster's practical system, must, I 
 .conceive, be taught where education is carried on 
 as a national concern. I am sorry to see in this 
 
 J 
 
 publication of Mr. Lancaster some very malignant 
 and indecent sneers against one of the creeds of 
 the Church (the Athanasian), on account of what 
 are called its damnatory clauses ; which at the 
 same time he misrepresents, by applying the pe- 
 nalty expressed in those clauses to the not compre- 
 hending or believing the whole of the creed. For 
 what appears to me a most satisfactory explanation 
 of the clauses in question, and one calculated to re T 
 move all the objections which have ever been 
 
 * What such a system ought to be, in regard to religious in- 
 struction, may be seen by referring to a publication entitled 
 *'.A new and appropriate System of Education fur the labour* 
 ing People, elucidated and explained according to the Plan 
 which has been established for the religious and moral Instruc- 
 tion of male and female Children admitted into the Free-school, 
 No. lp, Orchard Street , Westminster, &c. ' By P. Colrjuhoun,
 
 34 
 
 urged against them, I refer Mr. Lancaster to the 
 Orthodox Churchman's Magazine, for February 
 1807. 
 
 But turning from a theory so pernicious, and a 
 practice so defective, let us look forward with pleas- 
 ing confidence to the protection which, it cannot 
 be doubted, the Legislature is about to afford the 
 Church against the danger, to which she was ex- 
 posed by the inconsiderate benevolence of Mr. 
 Lancaster and his supporters. I trust, Sir, that 
 effectual means will now be taken to secure the 
 full operation of the principle, the necessity of an 
 invariable adherence to which has, I flatter my- 
 self, been sufficiently proved ; , that when edu- 
 cation is made a national concern, youth 
 must be brought up as members of the national 
 Church. The necessity of a strict adherence to 
 this principle is, at present, the more urgent, on 
 account of the alarming success with which a wild 
 and fanatical spirit is endeavouring, by the grossest 
 abuse of toleration, to draw away the lower classes- 
 of the community from the established Church. 
 The genuine spirit of toleration consists in a full 
 allowance, by the supreme authority in the state, 
 to all persons of whatever religious persuasion, to 
 worship their Maker according to the dictates of 
 their own conscience : but the most complete en- 
 joyment of this allowance does not require that
 
 35 
 
 persons, however unqualified, should be permitted 
 to exercise the important functions of preachers 
 and teachers. By the Toleration Act, 1 W. and 
 M. c. 18, the magistrates are bound to license all 
 persons \vho apply to them at the quarter 
 sessions, for permission to exercise those func- 
 tions. The consequence is, that many illi- 
 terate persons, in the very lowest stations of 
 life, some of whom cannot even write their names, 
 are so licensed ; and they not only, by their 
 fanatical rant, seduce great numbers from the 
 Church, and from every other place of worship 
 where sense accompanies devotion ; but also, by 
 their mischievous superstition, they not unfre 
 quently drive their deluded followers to despera- 
 tion, insanity, and even suicide. This evil has of 
 late years been rapidly increasing, and to check its 
 progress is an object which demands the serious 
 consideration of the Legislature. As the abuse of 
 whatever is excellent tends to its destruction, every 
 true friend of toleration must be anxious to see so 
 gross and mischievous an abuse of it, restrained by 
 efficient remedies. What remedies should be ap- 
 plied/or that purpose, this is not the place to in- 
 quire. It may not, however, be useless even here 
 to observe that one of the most operative causes of 
 the evil complained of is itinerancy. For the dis- 
 courses of most of those rhapsodists, who, by their 
 vehemence and vociferation, draw together im- 
 mense numbers, and estrange a large proportion 
 
 p 2
 
 36 
 
 not only of the Icnver, but even of the middle 
 orders, from the established Church, are so frothy, 
 so extravagantly wild and absurd, and at the same 
 time so destitute of variety and comprehension, 
 that the uniform nonsense of a single preacher 
 could not keep together a congregation for six 
 week.- in any oue place. Care is therefore taken, 
 by an incessant change of these illiterate dcclaimers, 
 to gratify the idle curiosity of their deluded fol- 
 lowers with novelty of lace and of gesticulation. This 
 statement obviously suggests the expediency, and,, 
 indeed, the necessity of imposing some restraint* 
 upon itinerancy, by restricting licensed preachers to 
 particular congregations. This could not be con- 
 sidered as an hardship, since it would only 
 place such preachers with regard to the exercise of 
 their functions, upon the snne tooling with the 
 ministers of the established Chuivh, and, indeed, 
 with all educated ministers who officiate out of 
 the Church. The right of conscience would in no 
 respect be violated by a legislative requisition, 
 that each congregation should have its regular offi- 
 ciating minister, who should be required to make it 
 appear, by proper testimonials, that he is desired to 
 fill that station before he be permitted to assume it. 
 And if, in addition, some evidence were requiredof a 
 suitable education, and of a good moral character, 
 before any one be permitted to become a religious 
 instructor ; such a regulation would evidently be 
 for the benefit of those who arc instructed, with- 
 out any infringement upon the right of toleration.
 
 37 
 
 It ought also to be remembered that the useful- 
 ness of the Church is greatly circumscribed, be- 
 i;:iu=e care has not been taken to make the esta- 
 blishment keep pace with the population of the 
 country.. The latter has increased in an astonish- 
 ing degree, with scarcely any increase in the num- 
 ber of churches belonging to the former. The 
 surplus population, which, in many places, cannot 
 be accommodated at church (where, indeed, the 
 accommodation of the lower orders is, alas ! but 
 little consulted), must be expected, if there exist 
 any sense of religion, to attend irregular places of 
 worship. To supply this lamentable deficiency na 
 mode would, perhaps, be at once so safe and so 
 efficacious, as the erection, under the superintend- 
 ance of the Bishop of the diocese, of free churches, 
 upon, the model of that called Christ Church, at 
 Bath; the whole area of which is allotted to the 
 reception gratis of the lower orders, and which has 
 the happiest effects in drawing away multitudes of 
 that description from the empty and unprofitable 
 declamation of fanatics. By the building of 
 churches of this description, wherever they are 
 wanted, a most effectual step would be taken, at 
 once to promote the genuine influence of religion,. 
 and to attach the mass of the people to the esta- 
 blished Church. 
 
 This discussion will not, I trust, be con- 
 sidered as entirely digressive,; as the subject,
 
 38 
 
 to which It rehtes, is her? introduced for the 
 purpose of shewing tint the dangers to which the 
 Church is exposed by the spread ol fanaticism, im- 
 pos'3 the necessity of u steady adherence to the 
 principle which I have endeavoured to establish, 
 with respect to national education, in the great 
 measure to which you, Sir, are now engaged. 
 
 put the actual state of Ireland furnishes a still 
 more cogent reason for n steady adherence to this 
 principle. In that country, the Church, though 
 it has long been in an alarming state of inferiority 
 arcl weakness, .with regard to the proportionate 
 number of her adherents, is daily losing ground, 
 and declining. PJJXTV has there of late years in- 
 creased, and it is still increasing, in a manner of 
 which few persons have any suspicion. I am 
 told by 'a gentleman who has taken incredible 
 pains to inform himself, by means of personal ob- 
 servation, on this interesting subject, that thcf 
 Protestants, who in the yr 1731 constituted 
 more than one third of the population of Ireland, 
 do not now amount to one fifth * ; in which are 
 included a considerable number who dissent from 
 the established Church. On the other hand, the- 
 Romanists, who are to the Protestants collectively 
 more than four to one, and whose relative num- 
 
 * For a more detailed statement of the information which I 
 have thus feceived respecting the growth of Popery in Ireland) 
 iee the Postscript.
 
 39 
 
 bers are constantly increasing, by means of those 
 arts of proselylism which they have ever been so 
 prone to exercise, are systematically endeavouring, 
 with all the aid which they can derive from num- 
 bers, union, zeal, and confidence, to get rid of 
 all the restrictions and disabilities, by which they 
 are excluded from a full and complete participation 
 of power with the members of the Protestant esta- 
 blishment. Such is the real object of those claims 
 to which is most insidiously applied the term, Ca- 
 tholic Emancipation ; a term expressive of as gross 
 a falsehood as language is capable of conveying, 
 since it intimates that millions of persons, on each 
 of whom has descended the inestimable inherit- 
 ance of British liberty, stand in fieed of email--- 
 cipation. 
 
 It is admitted by some of the most zealous ad- 
 vocates for the allowance of such claims, that the 
 restrictions and disabilities, '.vhich it is their wish to 
 remove, were necessary for the protection of the 
 Church, and the quiet of the State, at the time 
 when they were imposed- But it is urged in fa- 
 vour of their removal, that they have ceased to be 
 necessary for that purpose, in consequence of the 
 great change which has since ta^en place in Popery. 
 Admitting, however, that this religion is mate- 
 rially different from what it once was, in regard to 
 those qualities by which it became an instrument o.f 
 such extensive mischief, and that it*
 
 -10 
 
 have renounced the obnoxious tenets and prin- 
 ciples which rendered it essentially hostile to both 
 civil and religious rights ; admitting all this, still 
 those professors are in a state of separation from 
 the established Church ; and therefore they can- 
 not, with safety to that Church, be admitted to a 
 full participation of power with those who belong 
 to it. If the axiom, on which I have so much in- 
 gistcd, be entitled to that appellation that the 
 strength, and, consequently, the safety of every esta- 
 blishment, depend chiefly on the relative number 
 of those who are attached to it ; it necessarily fol- 
 lows that, in proportion to the number of those 
 who dissent from a religions establishment, such an 
 establishment must be weak and insecure. The 
 mere circumstance of separation necessarily sub- 
 jects it to danger ; for in proportion as the separa- 
 tists from it arc numerous, the number of those 
 pn whom alone it can rely for support, must be 
 small, while that of those who have no interest in 
 its preservation, and who arc generally" apt to sup. 
 pose that they have an interest in its overthrow, 
 must be formidable. When this is the r, 
 the perception of numbers inspire? a conscious- 
 ness of strength, and enconmgcs a liope for that 
 pre-eminence, which sects al \va\s view with jea- 
 lousy in an establishment, and which, on all 
 occasions that produce- division, and especially 
 when religion is concerned, mankind are desirous 
 of attaining. But when the strength which i> dc-
 
 41 
 
 rived from numbers is accompanied with the pos- 
 session of power, the temptation to use that power 
 tor the advancement of those who possess it, may 
 fairly be presumed to be irresistible ; and it would 
 denote the grossest ignorance of human nature to 
 doubt that they will employ it, in its fullest extent, 
 for that purpose: if they neglected to do so, they 
 would cease to be men, But when, as is now the 
 case in Ireland, a vast majority of the inhabitants 
 of a country are in a state of separation from the 
 established Church, and when, moreover, they 
 are firmly united in a sect, be it what it may ; to 
 assert that such a majority may, with safety to 
 that Church, be admitted to a full and complete 
 participation of power, in common with its mem- 
 bers, is to advance one of the most extravagant 
 propositions that can possibly be presented to the 
 notice of the human understanding. I confidently 
 defy the most expert reasoner now alive, to 
 reconcile such a proposition with common sense. 
 Such, however, is the absurdity in which the ad- 
 vocates for the claims of the Irish Romanists 
 involve themselves. It is not, therefore, because- 
 those formidable claimants are of a particular 
 religion, but because they are not of the esta- 
 blished religion, that their claims are inadmissible. 
 And I beg it may be remembered, that the question 
 is found to be susceptible of a most satisfactory so- 
 lution on the ground of admission, that Popery has 
 really undergone the change which is attributed ta
 
 42 
 
 it. But who that remembers what Popery once 
 was, can, in investing it with power, be free from 
 alarm, lest its metamorphosis may not be quite 
 so complete as has been supposed lest it should 
 hereafter resume somewhat of its former cha- 
 racter? In one respect it still retains, even in 
 the country where its pretensions are so high, 
 a quality, which is well calculated to excite the 
 apprehensions of every friend of social order. 
 The essential nature of the religion bestows on its 
 priests an ascendency over the minds of the igno- 
 rant and countless multitude, which is subversive 
 of the legitimate authority of government. That 
 ascendency constitutes what may most properly 
 be termed imperiwn in imperio. It produces a 
 state of vassalage and dependence, no less hostile 
 to civil freedom, than destructive of the ties 
 which unite subjects to government. It is in- 
 compatible with the safety of the state, collec- 
 tively, and of the individuals who profess the 
 Protestant faith. It even carries with it a power 
 of life and death for it is supported by the right 
 of excommunication, a sentence which ex- 
 poses the unhappy victim to perish for want of 
 subsistence, which, in such a case, not a single 
 Romanist can safely, or even conscientiously, 
 bestow. 
 
 It is also a most important circumstance, in the 
 case of the Irish Romanists, and should never be 
 lost sight of in a discussion of ttair claims, that they
 
 43 
 
 ' %^ ' ' ^L. < 
 
 consider themselves entitled to a very large portion 
 of the landed property of Ireland, of which they 
 have at different times heen deprived by forfeiture, 
 and the right to which, though lawfully vested in 
 other proprietors, they consider as descending in 
 their families from generation to generation, in the 
 hope that the time will arrive when it may success- 
 fully be asserted. 
 
 It having been shewn that the claims of the 
 Irish Romanists are incompatible with the safety 
 of the established Church, and, consequently, 
 with that of the constitution itself, of which that 
 Church is an essential and an inseparable part, 
 it follows that they are not only inadmissible, but 
 also, in the highest degree, unreasonable ; for 
 as their object is nothing else than to relieve the 
 persons in whose favour they are urged, from 
 certain disabilities and restrictions which are im- 
 posed upon them for the general good, to insist 
 upon them amounts to nothing less than a de- 
 mand that partial interests shall be preferred to 
 the welfare of the community, and, indeed, that 
 the latter shall be sacrificed to the former. If 
 such a sacrifice were even solicited as a boon, the 
 request would clearly be most unreasonable 
 but the claim is advanced as an indefeasible right ; 
 and it is even urged with such pertinacity, that 
 some persons are induced to favour the grant, 
 lest a refusal should lead to another rebellion. 
 
 G 2
 
 But, independently of every other consideration, 
 would jt not b ' madness to arm with power that 
 disposition, which, it is feared, may be prompted 
 to rebel by the refusal of concessions, that cannot 
 be. made consistently with the public safety ? 
 Other persons, abstaining from the argument in 
 terrorem, content themselves with urging the 
 expediency of conceding what is thus demanded, 
 for the purpose of quieting the minds of the Irish 
 Romanists, and with a view to conciliation. But 
 the ill success which has attended past attempts at 
 conciliation, by means of conccfssion, far from en- 
 aging a repetition of the experiment, autho- 
 rizes the conclusion that the concession of what 
 remains to be granted, instead of producing a 
 conciliatory effect, would serve only to encourage 
 
 the hope of attaining \\hile it would furnish the 
 
 1 
 
 means of pursuing what then will alone remain 
 to be obtained the establishment of the Roman 
 
 Church in Ireland. And with regard to the 
 
 . 
 quieting of the minds of the Romanists, I should 
 
 conceive that, in point both of justice and sound 
 policy, it is at least as desirable to quiet the minds 
 of the members of the established Church, who 
 have certainly much cause for disquietude and 
 alarm, and who, on the most solid grounds, ap- 
 prehend the utmost danger to their establishment, 
 from a removal of those barriers which their c-in- 
 ccsturs established for its protection. And it 
 ought not to be forgotten, that all which such 
 persons desire is, that the law should continue-
 
 45 
 
 as it is, while the others ask, not only for an al- 
 teration of the law, but for a fundamental change 
 in the constitution itself. 
 
 It is sometimes urged in favour of the claims in 
 question, that, in consequence of the extent of past 
 concessions, what remains to be conceded is com* 
 paratively little. What is this but to urge, that, 
 because the fortifications of a city have been aban- 
 doned, the citadel should also be given up ? I am 
 ready to admit that the extent of past concessions 
 renders it more difficult to defend what remains, 
 and that a considerable degree of embarrassment in 
 our situation is hereby produced. But this embar- 
 rassment serves only to confirm a truth, of which 
 history furnishes ?o many lamentable proofs, that it 
 is never safe to deviate from principles for the sake 
 of expediency. For though, abstractedly, no incon- 
 venience be produced by such deviation, the sacred- 
 ness of the principle is violated: and the mischief is 
 the greater, because no immediate evil ensues, or is 
 likely to ensue ; for thereby mankind arc induced 
 to think that the principle may be violated with 
 impunity* An occasional relaxation of principle 
 is further mischievous, because it tends to unsettle 
 the minds of men. Those who are really inte- 
 rested in maintaining the principle, know not how 
 to. think, or how to act ; . they have no settled rule 
 to enable them to judge how far they may go ; 
 while those who wish to subvert it are emboldened 
 b.v every deviation, however minute, to hope ulti-
 
 46 
 
 mat civ to triumph over the principle itself. Every 
 refusal to give it up then seems to them unreason- 
 ably harsh and rigid, because they have heen taught 
 that it is not inviolable. It is, therefore, much 
 better, as well for those upon whom it operates 
 as a restriction, as for others, that it should 
 be considered as a barrier that can never be passed. 
 They then the more readily acquiesce in the re- 
 striction, and, instead of being encouraged to wish 
 for what the safety of the state requires to be put 
 beyond their reach, they set themselves quietly to 
 enjoy the advantages which they possess, and 
 the security of which, in the case before us, is, 
 enhanced by the restrictions to which they arc 
 subjected. 
 
 Thus it appears that the true cause of the em- 
 barrassment under which we now labour, with 
 regard to the claims of the Irish Romanists, and 
 of the danger which we apprehend from their dis- 
 position to persist so pertinaciously in those claims, 
 is to be found in the concessions which have been 
 made to them from time to time. If tbe Legisla- 
 ture had contented itself with relieving them from 
 all penalties on account of religion, and, securing 
 to them full toleration, had firmly stood on the 
 constitutional ground of the test laws, our situa- 
 tion would, there is abundant reason to conclude, 
 have been most enviable in comparison with what it 
 now is. In that case the Romanists themselves, 
 knowing that they had no chance of obtaining jm
 
 47 
 
 admission to power, would naturally have endea- 
 voured to reconcile themselves to an exclusion Tom 
 it ; and instead of insisting, as they now do, to be 
 put upon an eqnal footing in all respects with the 
 members of the establishment, they would have 
 discovered and prized the inestimable privileges 
 which they actually enjoy, and which are secured 
 to them by the very disabilities of which they 
 complain. 
 
 But the embarrassment which we experience in 
 consequence of having conceded so much, should 
 enhance, in our estimation, the value of what still 
 remains ; as, with the destruction of some of the 
 Sibyl's books, the price of the remainder was in- 
 creased. It is high time, at length, to make a 
 stand, and to convince the Irish Romanists, that, 
 while their religious and civil rights are securely 
 protected, the sacred barriers of the constitution 
 must no further be encroached upon. Instead of 
 inflaming their hopes, as has lately been done, by 
 attempts at further concession, the wise statesman 
 will endeavour, by all fair and honourable means, 
 to strengthen the Protestant establishment. For 
 that purpose he will labour to ascertain the causes 
 which have impeded the progress of the principles 
 of the Reformation in Ireland, and to remove the 
 obstacles which are still in their way ; and, instead 
 of depriving the national Church of any of its 
 remaining bulwarks, he will thus provide for its more 
 romplete security, by an extension of it* .worship,
 
 I a diffusion of" its mild and tolerant spirit. 
 Such a svstein of conduct will be found much 
 better calculated to civilize the lower classes of our 
 Irish fello\v-subjects, to ameliorate their condition, 
 and to produce general harmony and strength, 
 
 a the rash and empirical experiment of con- 
 ceding what is far less likely to afford satisfaction, 
 than to enlarge expectation, and to invite demands, 
 which, unless we sacrifice the very existence of 
 our Church, as an establishment, must be re- 
 jected, and the rejection of which will excite dis- 
 contents, far more formidable, as they will be ac- 
 companied with power, than any which now exist. 
 
 Such, I trust, Sir, is the system which our states* 
 men, impelled by principle, and taught by experi- 
 ence, will hereafter pursue, with regard to Ireland. 
 I^ay, I do not hesitate to say, that an inflexible de- 
 termination to pursue that system, and to oppose 
 claims which are incompatible with the safety of 
 tile Church, ought to be considered as an indispen- 
 sable qualification for a British Minister. A differ- 
 en e between the King and his Ministers, on a 
 su^joct of this major importance, is an anomaly in 
 government, which should never be permitted to 
 recur. The Sovereign should never again be re- 
 duced to the painful necessity of appealing to his 
 Coronation oath, against a measure brought for- 
 ward in Parliament by his own Ministers. His 
 piternal heart, which rvould rejoice to diffuse sa- 
 tisfaction through every part of his empire, hould
 
 49 
 
 never again be reduced to the distressing necessity 
 of resisting the wishes of a part of his people, for 
 the sake of the whole for the maintenance of 
 those establishments, in Church and State, which 
 it is his first duty to protect. He should never 
 again be obliged to stand alone, until the sense 
 of the country can be declared as it now unques- 
 tionably is, and as, I hope, it soon will be in a more 
 solemn manner, by the warmest assurances of gra- 
 titude and support as a guardian of our national 
 religion ; as a defender of that Church, which", 
 by an express, original, and fundamental com- 
 pact, enforced by the sanctions of religion, as 
 well as by implied obligation, inseparably at- 
 tached to the royal character, he is pledged to 
 maintain. It cannot be supposed that a Sove- 
 reign of these realms will ever be unmindful 
 of these accumulated obligations ; it ought, 
 nevertheless, to fill our hearts with gratitude 
 to Divine Providence, to reflect, that, at the 
 critical period which we have recently witnessed, 
 so conscientious, so enlightened, and so firm 
 a defender of the Church, was seated on the 
 Throne. 
 
 I a"m, Sir, 
 
 Your most obedient Servant, 
 
 JOHN BOWLES. 
 
 Bath, 
 March 23 , 1807. 
 
 H
 
 POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 MUCH uncertainty exists respecting the actual po- 
 pulation of Ireland, and the relative numbers of 
 the Protestants and Romanists in that country. 
 All persons, however, agree that the latter consti- 
 tute an immense majority of that population ; a 
 fact which, whether the majority be greater or 
 less, affords, I conceive, a solid foundation for 
 the reasoning which is built upon it in the fore- 
 going pages. It may not be amiss, however, to 
 subjoin to this Tract the result of a communica- 
 tion which I have received from an intelligent 
 friend, resident in Ireland, respecting the state of 
 the population, and the increase of Popery in that 
 country ; together with his opinion as to the 
 causes which have led to such increase, and the 
 means by which so great an evil may mo'fct effec- 
 tually be checked. The calculations of my friend 
 are, I understand, founded in a great measure on 
 the publication entitled, " A Statistical and His- 
 torical Inquiry into the Progress and Magnitude of 
 the Population of Ireland, by Thomas Newen- 
 ham, Esq." .
 
 52 
 
 Population of Ireland in 1731 - - 2,010,2$! 
 
 Ditto in 1805 5,395,456 
 
 Number of Romanists in 1731, ac- 
 cording to a return made to the 
 House of Lords l,30p,76s 
 
 Number of Protestants at the same 
 
 period, as per return - - . . 700,452 
 
 Number of Romanists in 1805 - - 4,300,000 
 
 Number of Protestants at the same 
 
 period -------- 1,080,000 
 
 Increase of Romanists from 1731 to 
 
 1805 - -- 2,990,240 
 
 Ditto of Protestants during the same 
 
 interval --....- 379,548 
 
 Thus it appears, that in 1731 the Romanists 
 were to the Protestants not quite in the propor- 
 tion of two to one; and that in 1805 the former 
 were to the latter in the proportion of more than 
 four to one. Secondly, That from J731 to 1805; 
 the population had more than doubled ; that its 
 positive increase during that interval was 
 3,385,235 ; and that the increase of the Roman- 
 ists in comparison with that of the Protestants, 
 has been in the proportion of more than seven 
 to one. 
 
 This truly alarming decline of Protestantism 
 is owing to the great exertions of the Popish
 
 53 
 
 priests and their agents in making proselytes, and 
 the gross ignorance of the lower orders, which 
 exposes them to be easily perverted ; to the zeal 
 with which Popery is encouraged and promoted by 
 all its adherents , who possess any power or in- 
 fluencewhile, comparatively, little or no exer- 
 tion is made on the other side ; to the great in- 
 crease of Popish places of worship in counties 
 and towns, where splendid Chapels are erected, 
 while the Protestant Churches are suffered to fall 
 to decay ; and to the want of Protestant school- 
 masters, and the abundance of those of the Po~ 
 pish persuasion, who are perpetually perverting 
 the Protestant children. 
 
 It is obvious that the proper remedies for the 
 evil would be the building and maintaining of 
 Protestant Churches, together with means to se- 
 cure the residence of the clergy ; the establish- 
 ment of Protestant seminaries; and the circulation 
 of Bibles, Testaments, and tracts against Popery. 
 The people are extremely eager to obtain Bibles 
 and Testaments, while the priests, adhering, to 
 their ancient arts of delusion, are as vigilant and 
 active in preventing them from acquiring such 
 means of information. Accordingly, in the 
 South, there is scarcely a Bible in five hundred 
 Popish families.
 
 5. 1 
 
 If such means were adequately resorted to, 
 there is reason to hope that the Protestant reli- 
 gion, which is the strength and security of a Pro- 
 testant government, would gradually obtain an 
 increasing influence, without affording any just 
 Cause of complaint to the Romanists, and without 
 the least symptom of intolerance. 
 
 IT Was foreign from the design of the foregoing 
 Letter to enter into any examination of the mea- 
 sure which has led to a dismission of the late 
 Ministers from His Majesty's executive councils. 
 Some observations, however, upon that measure, 
 will not, I trust, be deemed irrelevant, even with 
 regard to my principal subject, as both are closely 
 connected with so important an interest in this 
 country, as the safety of its established Church. 
 
 The real object of the proposed measure, when 
 it assumed the form of a Bill, was to conciliate 
 the Irish Romanists, by relieving them from every 
 remaining restriction of a military nature, and 
 rendering them admissible to the highest ranks in 
 the army and navy. I say this was its real object ; 
 for though it contained an extension of the 
 Act of J7Q3 to Great Britain, that extension
 
 55 
 
 having been actually promised (whether wisely 
 or not, it is not my present business to in- 
 quire), it could not have met with any considerable 
 difficulty, had it been brought forward as a dis- 
 tinct, rather than a subordinate measure. It is 
 true the measure also extended to an admission of 
 the Dissenters of this country, of every descrip- 
 tion, to the same privileges which it was proposed 
 to confer on the Irish Romanists ; but it is obvious 
 that those Dissenters would not have been thought 
 of, on their own account, and that their interests 
 were attended to merely to facilitate the passing of 
 the Bill. With regard to the provision for securing 
 to the soldiers and sailors who dissent from the 
 established worship, the free exercise of their re- 
 ligious opinions, t/iat right is already fully en- 
 joyed, and therefore a legislative provision for it 
 was quite unnecessary. 
 
 Considering, therefore, the measure as having 
 for its real object the opening of the highest mili- 
 tary ranks to the Irish Romanists, it cannot be 
 viewed in any other light than as a direct conces- 
 sion of the most objectionable of what are called 
 the Catholic claims, and as an implied concession 
 of the whole of those claims, by a dereliction of 
 the principle upon which atone they ean be resisted. 
 Those claims amount to a demand of atlmissibility 
 to all situations of power and trust, civil and milj-
 
 tary, in the British empire. In both respects they 
 3re incompatible with the safety of our ecclesias- 
 tical establishment, because, on the principles al- 
 ready laid down, the possession of power, whe- 
 ther civil or military, by so numerous a body of 
 eparatists from the established Church, must, in 
 the nature of things, be fraught with danger to 
 that establishment. But it is obvious that greater 
 danger would be produced by the grant of military, 
 than of civil power, to such a body. For the exer- 
 cise of the latter may be checked and counter- 
 acted, though not without much difficulty and in- 
 cessant vigilance, by a Parliament composed chiefly 
 of Protestants ; but it requires no great exertion 
 of fancy to suppose a case in which a General of 
 the Romish persuasion, possessing the command of 
 an army in Ireland, might have, not only the Pro- 
 testant Church, but the Protestant government it- 
 self, in his power. Would the Protestants in such a 
 case think any of their establishments safe, even on 
 the supposition, which I am ready to admit, that at 
 present the Romanists intend nothing hostile to 
 those establishments ? Nor should it be forgotten, 
 that when, for the purpose of conciliation, the Ro- 
 manists are put on the same footing as the Pro- 
 testants with regard to military rank, that purpose 
 will be defeated if they should be, or even con- 
 ceive themselves to be (which they will be very 
 apt to do), objects of jealousy or apprehension.
 
 57 
 
 The most solid proofs must be given that they are 
 thought deserving of unlimited trust and confi- 
 dence ; and the slightest doubt upon this subject, 
 however unfounded, may produce a flame which 
 it will not be easy to stifle. 
 
 But besides the strong and insurmountable ob- 
 jection to which, in the case supposed, the grant 
 of military power, distinctly considered, is liable, 
 it should be remembered that such a grant would 
 have led to the necessity of conceding those claims 
 which it was proposed for the present to withhold; 
 and that, therefore, the measure in question really 
 involved an acquiescence in all the demands of the 
 Irish Romanists, in their utmost extent. For it is 
 well known that those claimants would not have 
 been satisfied with the concessions contained in the 
 Bill lately before the House of Commons, and that 
 they demand to be placed on the same footing, in 
 all respects, with the members of the established 
 Church a demand, the principle of which could 
 not be fully satisfied, unless their Bishops shared, 
 \vith the Protestant Bishops, a right to sit in the 
 House of Lords. Without, however, attributing 
 to them, at present, so extensive a view, it is evi- 
 dent, from the indisputable extent of their claims, 
 that the object of conciliation, even if the late Bill 
 had passed, would have failed in 1 inline ; and thnt 
 the persons for whose satisfaction it was intended, 
 would only have been encouraged, by such partial' 
 
 l
 
 58 
 
 success, to require a full compliance with their 
 wishes. But in making this requisition . they 
 would have appeared in a new, and a most formi-: 
 dable character. They would have been in posses- 
 sion of military power. They would have taken 
 their stand on their acknowledged right of admis- 
 sibility to the highest ranks in the army and navy. 
 They would, in short, as has been most justly ob- 
 served *, have been in possession of the sward. 
 Whether it would then have been safe to refuse 
 them any thing which would have been necessary 
 to quiet their minds, or whether such refusal would 
 not rather have been attended with more danger 
 than ever, are considerations well deserving the 
 attention of those persons who are desirous of 
 granting them the word, for the purpose of conci- 
 liation . Thus is that weak and temporizing pq- 
 licy, which, in order to get rid of present diffi- 
 culties, makes a sacrifice of permanent principles, 
 Mire to defeat its own object, and to produce an 
 increase, rather than a diminution, of difficulty 
 and danger. 
 
 To justify a concession of so alarming a nature, 
 it has been urged, that the state of Ireland ren- 
 dered it a necessary defence against invasion ; anc| 
 a Noble Lord -j- is reported to have argued in its 
 favour, that its object was not to invade, but to 
 secure the establishments of the empire ; and that if 
 Ireland were rendered insecure, the establishments of 
 
 * By Lord Hawkesbury. f Lord Viscount Howick.
 
 59 
 
 Englaiid would be exposed to greater danger than 
 any whrch could possibly result from suck a boon to 
 the Catholics * . Another Noble Lord -J- is reported 
 to have contended, that, in the prospect of a peace 
 between France and the Continent, and a continua- 
 ftnce of the war with England, the boon would be 
 necessary, iii order to conciliate and engage the po- 
 pulation of Ireland in the defence tif the empire. 
 That is to say, it cannot be denied that the boon 
 Vvould be productive of danger to our ecclesiastical 
 establishment, but this danger must be incur- 
 red for the security of the state against perils 
 from without. Indeed, the mere resorting, in 
 such a case, to an argument founded on general 
 
 * It is remarkable, that in the discussions which have taken 
 place on the subject under consideration, the term Catholics 
 should have been so generally applied to the description of per- 
 sons whose claims have produced those discussions. The ap- 
 plication of that term to the Romanists amounts to nothing 
 less than an admission that they constitute, exclusively, the 
 universal Church of Christ, and that the Protestants form no 
 part of that Church. That, by the assumption of the term, the 
 former should endeavour to inculcate such a doctrine, proves 
 only that there are no bounds to the exorbitancy of their 
 claims ; but that the latter should recognise a claim of this 
 description, which they do whenever they denominate the 
 members of the Romish Church Catholics, is a proof of 
 inconsideration, or rather of folly, which scarcely admits 
 of an adequate description. These reasons have induced me 
 to use the term Romanists throughout this publication. A, 
 correct use of terms of denomination is of more importance 
 to the cause of truth than is generally supposed. 
 
 f Lord Grenville. 
 
 I 2
 
 policy, is a clear though tacit admission, that the 
 Church has something to apprehend from the pro- 
 posed concession . I fit could be ?hc\vn that such aeon- 
 cession is compatible with the safety of the Church, 
 all difficulty would vanish, and it would be quite 
 unnecessary to argue the question on the grounds 
 of general security. For while, on the one hand, 
 no individuals have a right to complain of any re- 
 strictions to which it is necessary they should be 
 subject for the general good ; so, on the other, no 
 restrictions ought to exist in a state unless they are 
 conducive to that object. If, therefore, it could 
 be shewn that the restrictions in question are not 
 necessary for the safety of the Church, which is 
 the true reason of their being created, it would 
 follow of course that they ought to be removed ; 
 and men of the first-rate talents, with so conclu- 
 sive an argument for the removal in their power, 
 would not reason on the ground of general po- 
 licy. It behoves those persons, however, who 
 contend that the Church must be exposed to 
 danger, for the sake of the State, seriously to con- 
 sider what would become of the State without the 
 Church. At all events, I conceive it will not be 
 denied, that, in order to justify an exposure of 
 the Church for the safety of the State, both the 
 urgency and the efficiency of the measure which, 
 is proposed for that purpose, should be most evi- 
 dent, and that its adoption ought to appear to be 
 a matter of paramount necessity, admitting, in aH
 
 human probability, of no other alternative than 
 that of partial or total ruin : as in the case of a 
 man who has no other means of saving his own 
 life, than by pushing his fellow-creature into the 
 water from a plank which is unable to save both. 
 Thus, before we resolve to push the Church into 
 the water, we should be fully convinced that the 
 State, such as it will remain when dissociated from 
 the Church, has no other means of preservation 
 than b}' resorting to such an extremity. It hap- 
 pens, however, that no such necessity exists. 
 We have repelled the dangers of invasion, when 
 they were much more formidable than they are 
 now, or than, I trust, they will ever be again, 
 without conciliating the Romanists at the expense 
 of the Church. Experience, therefore, tends to 
 prove that there is no urgency for so desperate a 
 measure as that which is now proposed for our 
 adoption. But in what a light does the proposal 
 exhibit those in whose favour it is made ? For it 
 is founded upon the supposition that four millions 
 of His Majesty's subjects, who arc already admis- 
 sible to all ranks in the army below- that of stafT 
 officers, a rank which very few individuals among 
 them can ever hope to attain, and from which they 
 are excluded for the sake of the public welfare, 
 cannot be prevailed on to stand forward in the de- 
 fence of their King and country, unless .such a re- 
 striction be removed. If this be not a libel on 
 the Irish Romanists, I think it furnishes a coriclu-
 
 62 
 
 argument against the recognition of theif 
 da"im to A full participation of power with their 
 Protestant fellow-subjects. 
 
 It is not a little calculated to excite surprise, that 
 the question before us, as it relates to the Cororw- 
 tion oath, should have been argued so much on, 
 the ground of that respectful and loyal deference 
 to the scruples of the King's conscience, which is 
 undoubtedly due from all his subjects, and of a 
 laudable desire to consult His Majesty's personal 
 rase and Comfort ; as if it were really one of those 
 nice questions of casuistry, on tthich conscientious 
 men may think and feel differently. But the re- 
 verse of this, unless the principles which I have- 
 endeavoured to establish can be overthrown, is Sb 
 rlearly the case, that it seems impossible for any 
 mind that is not enslaved by prejudice, to eiiter- 
 tain a doubt upon the subject. So confident, in- 
 deed, do I feel of the impregnable strength of 
 those principles, that I defy the most Strenuous 
 advocate for the claims of the Irish Romanists to 
 controvert the proposition that a compliance with 
 those claims would be incompatible with the 
 safety of the established Church ; and unless this 
 proposition can be successfully controverted, it 
 leads unavoidably to' the conclusion that the King's 
 assent to those claims would be a violation of the 
 Coronation oath. If, therefore, any measure in- 
 volving a recognition of those claims, either in
 
 63 
 
 part or the whole, and especially in so important a 
 part of them as the grant of military power, had 
 been brought forward in Parliament by a member 
 not holding an official situation, it would, I con- 
 ceive, have been the indispensable duty of the 
 servants of the Crown, besides opposing such a 
 measure for the sake of the Church, to state, as 3 
 conclusive reason for its rejection, that it was at 
 variance with the oath which their Royal Master had 
 taken at his coronation ; and if such a represent- 
 ation had failed to produce its proper effect (a 
 supposition not compatible with the respect due to 
 Parliament), they should then have approached 
 the Throne with tfyeir dutiful advice, to excrcis^ 
 its undoubted prerogative, by refusing its assent 
 to a Bill which contained so flagrant an Attack on 
 jthe conscience of their Sovereign. As my object 
 in taking up my pen was by no means of a personal 
 or party nature, I refrain from animadverting more 
 directly on the conduct of the late Ministers, on 
 the occasion which has properly excited so deep 
 and universal an interest. But I must be allowed 
 the liberty of observing, that the reserve which 
 those Ministers claimed, and which has more im- 
 mediately led to their dismission, appears to me in 
 no other light than the reservation of a right to. 
 advise His Majesty, at any future time, to dispense 
 with the sacred obligations which are imposed 
 upon him by his Coronation oath.
 
 64 
 
 Let us hope, Sir, that this important question 
 will not be again argued on grounds which imply 
 any dor.bt of the propriety of those scruples by 
 which the Royal Mind has been actuated on a late 
 occasion. That those scruples arc entitled to the 
 n'most respect, r.nd that the firmness of His Ma- 
 
 \ in acting up to them deserves the highest 
 : an* truths which no one ventures to 
 
 ite ; but it is no less indisputable, that the 
 ju : f i -nt of our beloved Sovereign on this occa- 
 sion, was as correct, as his conduct was firm, or 
 his mind conscientious ; and that, in resisting the* 
 claims which have been so unwarrantably pressed 
 upon him, he has afforded a most seasonal-it sup- 
 port to the established Church, and, thereby, has 
 nobly sustained the exalted character of DJE^ 
 FENDER of the PROTESTANT FAITH. 
 
 ! 
 
 March 31, J80/. 
 
 THE SN'D. 
 
 
 CORRECTIONS. 
 
 Page 41, Ith line from bottom, between " therefore," and" because," 
 
 insert " so much." Next line but one dele " but," and substitute 
 
 " M." 
 Pie 4:, line ii, for " ascendancy," read " ascendiney." 41'.! line 
 
 afteiwards, the same alteration. 
 Page 48, 6th ! nc from bottom, for " reduced to the painful duty," 
 
 subjected to the painful necessity." 
 
 *. Gotnelt, Printrr.
 
 SUBSTANCE 
 
 Of THE 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 GT THE 
 RIGHT HONOURABLE 
 
 SIR WILLIAM SCOTT, 
 & c. &V.

 
 JUNI5B9 
 
 s 
 
 KCBKFJ 
 
 
 
 
 n n 1 
 
 '4- ^> 
 
 C5 ft? 
 
 o 
 
 3 = 
 
 = <r 
 
 C Li_ 
 
 ^ ^ 
 
 ^ X ^JWAW 
 
 ^ ^tOS-ANl 
 
 ^ x TV ^^BBh. 
 
 O o. 
 
 * ^/m\iN 
 
 ra ^ 
 

 
 DC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FAC