LIBERTY of CONSCIENCE. 
by our own experience, what devaluation former wood¬ 
men have made in the forefts.’ The younger trees were 
not much difpofed to profit by the wifdom and counfel 
of the elder. Their language was, ‘ The veterans are bi- 
gotted to antiquated notions, in conceiving it pofiible for 
an enlightened woodman to aft as others did in palt years. 
They are narrow-minded and illiberal in confulting the 
fafety of themfelves ; and in their precaution for us, who 
are confident our petitioner is more generous than ever to 
injure us for his own benefit. They are unjult in with¬ 
holding what the woodman - may claim as a right. He, 
like us, is a production of nature : he may afk for what 
he choofes ; and, if it is not conceded, he has a right to 
take it by force.’ The aged oaks were out-voted by 
numbers. A Hick was granted. A handle was prepared. 
After no long time the woodman laid about him. The 
younger trees would have remonltrated, but they per¬ 
ceived it would be in vain, for it was now too late. Oak 
after oak was felled to the ground ; and the woodman 
ceafed not till he had cut down all his oppofers ; and 
threatened even his friends if they murmured at his pro¬ 
ceedings. 
“Your Supplemental Obfervations are enlargements on 
your Speech. Your fpeech was delivered in the houfe of 
lords; confequently the lords, who difl'ented from your 
meafure, muft be confidered as the perfons to whom you 
direft this apoftrophe ; ‘ Beware, therefore, ye religious 
alarmifts, ye abhorrers of popery, left by your madnejs and 
folly ye change this f’o natural, fo prail’eworthy, a defire, 
into the molt furious and rancorous hatred.’ It is the 
part of thofe, who have done an aft of kindnefs, to for¬ 
get that they have conferred a favour. It is the duty of 
thofe, who have experienced fuch aft, to remember the 
favour. The former province (hall be left for your lord- 
Ihip ; the latter (ball belong to us. We thank you for 
having placed us on a ground which gives us an advan¬ 
tage over you. The advantage is, that, in return for re¬ 
proach, we lhall fay to your lord (hip nothing but what is 
refpeftful. Some, however, perhaps may be difpofed to 
think, you have endeavoured to make us as odious as 
poftible to the catholics. Some may obferve, ‘ If the ad¬ 
vocates of proteftantifm are thus afl'ailed even before the 
catholics are admitted into the legiflature, what words 
w ill they not hear, if they oppofe catholicifm, when the 
legillature (hall have in it a hundred catholics ?’ Others 
may fuggeft, that, when a controverfial opponent defcends 
to the language of exacerbation, it is commonly a proof 
that found argument begins to be exhaufted. Others may 
remark, there is a fimilarity between the ftyle of your 
lordfhip and that of bifhop Milner, who exclaims, ‘Do 
not tell me, as many do, of the wifdom of the legifla¬ 
ture in devifing thofe tefts for (hutting catholics out of 
both its houfes, and for preventing them from ferving 
their country in other refpefts. For it is a notorious faft, 
that thefe tefts were enafted, not in the wifdom, but in 
the folly and downright madnefs, of the legiflature and of the 
nation.’ 
“ In the well-grounded hope of receiving approbation 
from correft judges, a poet, familiar to both, of us in our 
youth, (Horace,) difregarded cenfure which he had not 
deferved. The fame hope may confole thofe, whom your 
lordflrip addrefles in terms of reprehenfion. Each of them 
will have the fatisfaftion of recollefting, that with his 
opinion concurred the fentiments of innumerable perfons, 
all competent to decide properly on the catholic queftion. 
Such, for inftance, were the great officers of (late, and the 
ableft lawyers, who in both houfes of parliament weread- 
verl'e to your propofal, and all who (bowed their difl’ent 
by fpeaking and voting. Such too as authors, equally as 
legislators, were the bifhops Barrington, Burgefs, and 
Tomline; and fuch was a temporal peer, lord Kenyon, 
whofe Obfervations demonllrate, that preponderance of ar¬ 
gument, drawn from law, faft, and expediency, neither is 
on your fide of the queftion ; nor can it be, till law and 
faft are totally altered. Such aifo, as writers, whole 
works are before the public, and are therefore open to 
the criticifm which pronounces their authors to be men 
diltinguifhed for much knowledge of catholicifm, for 
ftrong underftanding, for found reafoning ; fuch are thefe 
gentlemen ; by name, Churton, Coker, Daubeny, Elling¬ 
ton, Faber, Frefton, Kett, Kipling, Le-Meafurier, Nares, 
JMapleton, Reeves, Rennell, Ryan, Granville Sharp, and 
Van-Mildert. All the perfons, to whom reference has 
been made, whether in parliament or out of parliament, 
whether direftly or indireftly, are competent to decide 
properly on the catholic queftion, confidered either in a- 
political or religious point of view. And, if in con¬ 
futing the doctrines of catholicifm ; if in anxiety for the 
undilturbed enjoyment of proteftantifm in England and 
among their brethren in Ireland ; if in maintaining it is 
unreafonable to fay, imperfeft allegiance is entitled to 
full participation of privileges, which are rather to be 
fought as matters of favour, than claimed as matters of 
right; rather grantable by the power enabled to give, 
than demandable by the party wilhing to receive; if in 
adherence to the principles on which was founded the 
union between Great Britain and Ireland, to the princi¬ 
ples of the revolution, to the principles of the reforma¬ 
tion, to that which combines the principles of the union,, 
revolution, and reformation, the Britifh conftitution ; if- 
in thefe things there is blame, if in thefe things there is 
crime; all to whom we have referred, and millions of' 
others in the Britifh empire, are prepared to take their 
(hare with the members of adminiftration in fuch blame 
and crime; and with them ftand refponfible for whatever 
may be occafioned by a calm and ferious denial, that the 
admiflion of catholics as legiflators for proteftants can be 
a meafure either wife or expedient. Such confeflion of 
our equal culpability, and fuch declaration of our readi- 
nefs to participate in the refulr, have been rendered ne~ 
celfary by your telling us, ‘ the beft of the Irifli Roman 
catholics look with animofity to the adminiftration only.’ 
(Obf. p. 38.) Why to them alone? There is a holt of 
proteftants involved in the fame guilt, (upporters of mi- 
nifters on the catholic queftion, and equally determined 
to abide the confequence. Valuable indeed and definable? 
would be the good-will of thofe catholics. But, if they 
are difpleafed becaufe we choofe not, for their accommo¬ 
dation, to alter the whole fyftem of the empire civil and 
religious, we can but lament. ‘To the conftitution we 
cling ; with it we commit ourfelves to ftand or fall.’ 
“Your next paragraph reads us a left u re on ‘ kindnefs 
and moderation.’ Are then the members of the efta- 
bliftied church to be deemed unkind, and cenfured as in¬ 
temperate, becaufe they vindicate proteftantifm ? But fo 
it happens. If we do not defend our religion, we are 
reproached as fupine : if we do defend it, we are ftigma- 
tifed as bigots. Conceive rightly, my lord; this is men¬ 
tioned only as an obfervation on fact; do not tniftake it 
as though it were the etFufion of a querulous mood. 
Complaint is vveaknefs. Difficulties fnould ftimulate re- 
folution. We muft ftand firm to proteftantifm, and fup- 
port it by all the arguments, which truth and fair reafon¬ 
ing will warrant ; ami by all the exertions, which law and 
charity will authorife. * If the reformation was worth 
eftablifhing, it is 'worth maintaining.’ 
“ Mildnefs will be (hown in the manner mod compati¬ 
ble with public welfare, if the legiflature gives the catho¬ 
lics every aflurance of protection to their vvorfliip ; it will 
be (hown in a manner mo(t friendly to the catholics, if 
the legiflature difluades them from offering violence to 
the public mind by prefling claims difallowed by the em¬ 
pire at large. Under the idea of policy will it be faid, 
‘ Grant their claims, and they will be quiet towards you, 
but difunited among themfelves ?’ It is the very propo¬ 
fal of our enemy ; ‘ Refcind and renounce your maritime 
laws, and the continental confederacy (hall be difloived. ’ 
An unreafonable demand impofes the necellity of a poft- 
tive refufal. 
“ Let us put the cafe of two. writers on the Britifh' con- 
ftitutioa* 
