470 TO THE EDITOR OF THE EXAMINER. 



It is, I assure you, the opinion of the radicals of my acquaintance, 

 educated men, with eyes and ears open to the state of the country, well 

 acquainted from personal observation with the characters of the clergy ; 

 it is the opinion of my acquaintance of this stamp, that, however just 

 your general political views, the parsons are treated in an unmanly and 

 uncandid style by the Examiner. These friends of mine are hostile to 

 tithe as a mode of payment ; but they are not disingenuous enough to 

 quote the spirituality of inspired apostles against the modern clergy, for 

 endeavouring to force their debtors to do them justice. They and I 

 have been used, when boys, to laugh at the representation in the gallanty 

 show, or a caricature, of a bloated parson struggling against Mr. and 

 Mrs. Bumpkin and household for the possession of a pig ; but they are too 

 candid and well-informed to deem such pleasantry conclusive, or t fit to be 

 used in a serious argument, as the Church question is now become, 

 against the body of the clergy. We should all of us be ashamed of 

 lugging in the pig head and shoulders, as you did in your leading article 

 article, September 30th, in order to fix upon the clergy the detestable 

 and excessive criminality of causing, by their extortion and pugnacity, 

 general ill-will and hatred in the country. You cannot escape from the 

 charge of the most culpable levity at least, if it be not downright inhu- 

 manity, for having thrust in, where it appears in last Sunday's paper. 

 t{ Nothing in existence fights like a Church." Gratuitous taunts and insults, 

 Sir, are the most conclusive proof of an uncandid, unphilosophical, un- 

 manly enmity ; and surely this insult to the clergy was gratuitous. The 

 argument for the ballot was not in the least aided by it. You were very 

 properly treating with contempt the absurd plea of supporting man- 

 liness by artificial contention. But the plea is not in fashion now, as 

 you well know, and even were the permanency of the Church, as it is 

 likely, (which you are always asserting to be impossible,) you could not 

 therefore have wanted the instance of the Church to urge as a set-off 

 against the peacefullness of the ballot. Certain, as you declare yourself 

 to be, of the approaching dissolution of the tithe system, this attributing 

 of gross wickedness to a whole body of men is most palpably a piece 

 of gratuitous uncharitableness, and in the very teeth of your boastful 

 pretensions to philosophy and candour. Depend upon it, Sir, no man of 

 education, no manly liberal-minded man, who knows the state of the 

 country, and the existing tenure of landed property, would, however 

 a radical a reformer, blame the parson for claiming his tithe-pig ; but 

 would, on the contrary, admit the man who withheld it to be a knave, 

 and the parson a fool, if he submitted to the injustice. Recollect, Sir, 

 that, though here and there a canting fool or hypocrite amongst them 

 may represent himself as an apostle, on the authority of antiquated 

 Church pretensions, the parsons, as a body, do not pretend to be above 

 worldly wants and desires. Recollect they have families to support like 

 other men. Recollect, especially recollect, (for surely you cannot always 

 have been ignorant of the fact) that, whatever ijour philosophy may ex- 

 pect of them, other men do not want them to be content with the worldly 

 condition of inspired apostles, and then put these queries fairly to your 

 conscience. Do I not conduct my general argument against the clergy, 

 as uncandidly and illiberally, as the lowest and most ignorant scribbler 

 of the day ? Do I not gladly take advantage of any instance I can 

 rake up of clerical misconduct, in order to villify the whole body j thus 

 arguing from particulars to universals, though a loud exclaimer against 

 ffia irarfj rttitf .^isfo 3iit *h> <;- ? ^hkm> 



