1829.] Affairs in General. 177 
« The conduct of that body, and the language which they adopt, are 
such as to shew that emancipation alone will not satisfy them; and that 
they will be content with nothing short of Catholic ascendancy. 
« Now if it must be a trial of strength between the Catholic and the 
Protestant interest—and something like this is implied in the intemperate 
language of the Association, when they talk of six millions of men that 
can be repressed only by foree—if it must be a struggle, I think that 
the present time, and the present position, are the best that can be chosen 
to bring the matter to issue.” 
Thus, on the 17th of May, 1825, his Lordship’s opinion was, that war 
should be made upon the papists, with horse and foot, sword and gun ; 
and that the six millions should have the matter brought to issue in the 
fair field. If his words do not mean this, we cannot, under Heaven, 
conceive that they have any meaning whatever. In the month of 
December, 1829, his Lordship writes his dispatch to the six millions to 
the foregoing effect. Has his Lordship changed his mind? We do not 
believe a syllable of it. The six millons are just as much alive, their 
claims are more exorbitant, and their orators more open-mouthed than 
ever. Has the simple act of eating his cofelette at the Irish side of the 
Channel given him new knowledge of Ireland? Let those suppose it who 
will. But Ireland is as well known in the club-houses of St. James’s, as 
in the Castle of Dublin. We leave his Lordship to reconcile his opinions ; 
and think whether Philip drunk, or Philip sober, was the better hussar, 
to ask pardon at the next horse-guards levee. 
Those who wish to fathom the depths of this miserable intrigue, we 
refer to that masterly detector of pro-popery knavery and folly, the 
Standard ; a journal which almost redeems the character of the news- 
paper press, by the spirit of its style, and the accuracy of its information ; 
and still more, by the steady honour and soundness of its principles. 
Stephenson the banker's flight, after having given the idlers some- 
thing to talk of in the icy interval before the meeting of Parliament— 
after buoying up the spirits of the Bow-street officers with the hope of 
the 1,000/. reward—and after erecting even Sir Richard Birnie into 
something of public importance—has given birth to the curious meta- 
physical question: “ Whether a banker ought to live like a gentle- 
man?” 
One of our clever contemporaries goes through tie problem, as he 
would go through a speech of Lord John Russel’s, or any other Whig 
lauding popular election and returned for a close borough, the élite 
of Opposition, the proud and independent representative of my lord’s 
bailiff and barber. He dashes the difficulty to the right and left, and 
pronounces boldly that there is no earthly reason why bankers should 
not live like gentlemen. ‘To this we fully agree, with only the proviso 
—if they honestly can. And this proviso includes the whole question. 
If a money-dealer is rich enough to live showily, there is no law to 
make him live otherwise ; and, if there were, it would have no more 
effect than a law against poaching. However, this notion of bankers 
living like gentlemen, seems to be urged a little too far, when it means 
that bankers should live like peers—nay, like princes. The first opera- 
tion of a banker of the present day is what was the last of a banker of 
the past day. A magnificent establishment—a couple of town houses, 
acknowledged—probably as many more to which he does not allow the 
M.M. New Series —Vou. VII. No. 38. 2A 
