328 
The aét againit papal fupremacy having 
put the magiftrate above the church ; 
what was formerly called herefy, was 
now to be called treafon. Thefe vic- 
tims were hypocritically faid by the 
church to futfer for treafon. No de- 
firuction of a hoftile priefthood fo exten- 
five ever took place in any Catholic 
country. It has been rivalled in our own 
times by the atheiltic perfecution of the 
French Convention. .The nanies of the 
priefts executed by the Church of Eng- 
land, between 1570 and 1602, may be 
read in detail in Caulfield’s Hiftory of 
the Gunpowder-plot. Thus Elizabeth 
realized her will for No Popery. 
James overlooked with magnanimity 
the inferior ramifications of the powder- 
plot: with fuch a pretext for intolerance, 
there was virtue in his forbearance. He 
left to the vulgar the cry of No Popery. 
The vulgar took it up; and under 
Charles I. ufed the ery of No Popery, 
to bring a king into difrepute, who felt 
liberally toward the Catholics. All the 
feditious efforts of the Puritans, which 
produced fo long a civil war, and fo con- 
{picaous a judicial regicide, were cover- 
ed by that Protefiant fhield which Eliza- 
beth bad infcribed with the deadly words 
No Popery. 
After the Reftoration, the religion of 
Pucer, and the double intclerance of 
the magiitrate, returned. Popith plots 
were invented or deteéted. An act of 
uniformity plundered the  diflenting 
clergy of an oppofite defcription. 
James II. was expelled by the cry of 
No Popery: all the civil wars of the Re- 
volution had for their moft fpecious pre- 
text the prefervation of No Popery. 
William IIT. and the two firft Georges, 
not having been brought up in the reli- 
gion of Bucer, acquired the tolerant 
{pirit of foreign Proteftanifm. Under 
them, the temper of the Englith people 
was much foftened and liberalized. 
In this prefent reign, the American 
war feems firft to have revived from their 
long flumber thofe hierarchic divifions, 
which had agitated and difgraced our 
anceftors, and defolated our common 
country. ‘The cry of No Popery was 
full underfiood by the multitude to be an 
expreffion of abhorrence againft’ that 
high-church party, which-had prote¢ted 
Charles I. and oppofed the Revolution. 
Hence, during the riots of 4780, which 
were in faét the work of a whig mob, and | 
were infpired more by hatred of the mi- 
nifiry than of the Catholics, No Popery 
was the popular watch-word: and it was 
On Mr. Whitbread’s new Parochial Bill. 
[May 1, 
again, as of old, an animation to in 
juftice, to plunder and to violence. 
About 1790, the Irifh Catholics began 
their applications to the legflature for a 
repeal of the laws to their prejudice.— 
The refufal of this emancipation; again 
accompanied with the outcry of No Po- 
pery, has occafioned, before our own 
eyes, along and bloody civil war in Ire- 
land, diftinguifhed for inhumanities more 
atrocious than even the crufade againft 
the Albigenfes. Inrith. Catholics have 
been hali-hanged, half-flogged to death, 
pufhed with the pike-itaff indifcriminately 
from the bridge into the river; ihut up 
in barns and burned alive in bands; and 
fill the whoop of favage triumph was No 
Popery. 
If there be men, who glory in fuch 
deeds, who would again aroufe’ fimilar 
paffions, and make Ireland. once more 
the tlaughter-field of religious maffacre, 
let them pronounce aloud, and write up- 
on our walls, thefe words of death; but 
let focietybeware of fuch—lIf they fhould 
be found too numerous and too ftrong to 
be ruled by the civil power, and chaftized 
by the courts of juitice; the friends of 
humanity and tolerance muit again refort 
to fuch a focial interdict, as Saint Am-_ 
brofe of Milan carried into execution 
againft Theodofius, and the harbaric 
ruiians who obeyed him. The finile of 
greeting muft be withheld im the ftreet, 
and the cup of hofpitality denied at 
home to the partizans of a murderous in- 
tolerance. Thote churches and conven- 
ticles muft be fhunned with public fo- 
lermn indignation, where the preacher is 
heard to juftify any partial oppretlion of 
the common children of Chrift. It is in 
the power of public opinion, would it 
pronounce itfelf with energy, if not toe 
atone for its long injuitice, at leaft to 
prepare a more equitable futurity. 
sd eee 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
BSERVING, by your laft Magazine, 
that you rather mvited difcuffion 
on Mr. Whitebread’s new Parochial Bill, 
I-cannot help mentioning a few particu- 
lars, that, in reflecting on the heads of the 
intended bill given by that Gentleman, 
have ftruck me; and though I would not ° 
be ‘thought to have a worfe opinion of 
the lower claffes than they deferve, nor 
would I favour that fyftem of oppreffion 
and inhumanity fo often employed in 
houfes of nduftry, -yet as labour ought to 
be enforced among the poor, and this 
j 1 being 
