to be governed by a Popish prince, or by any King or Queen marrying a Papist; the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, do further pray that it may be enacted, That all and every person and persons that is, are, or shall be reconciled to, or shall hold communion with the See or Church of Rome, or shall profess the Popish religion, or shall marry a Papist, shall be excluded and be for ever incapable to inherit, possess, or enjoy the Crown and Government of this realm and Ireland, and the dominions thereunto belonging, or any part of the same; or to have, use, or exercise, any regal power, authority, or jurisdiction within the same: and in all and every such case or cases, the people of these realms shall be and are hereby absolved of their allegiance; and the said Crown and Government shall, from time to time, descend to and be enjoyed by such person or persons, being Protestants, as should have inherited and enjoyed the same in case the said person or persons so reconciled, holding communion, or professing, or marrying as aforesaid, were naturally dead."

The course pursued in this reply to Mr. Davison, is; first, to print the words in which he has expressed his own question; then the Answer to each question; and, afterwards such Remarks upon it as the occasion has seemed to require.

"I. Whether the stability of the Protestant religion in these realms does not depend upon the adherence and attachment to it of the majority of our people; and whether that preponderating majority is not, under God, its true, natural, and impregnable security."

6

ANSWER.-All forms of dissent are Protestant; but in order to justify the inference drawn in the second Consideration, Protestant' must here be construed Church of England.' Adherence and attachment are two things. Subject to these remarks, this first Consideration adds more strength to the cause Mr. Davison opposes, than to that which he supports.

REMARKS.

A numerical majority, a majority of our people, does not, in the present case, appear to supply any material argument for or against concessions to Papists: but such argument as it does now supply, shews such concession to be dangerous. The preponderating majority of our people does not perhaps adhere to the Established Church, when standing alone, in contra-distinction from Papists and all Dissenters: and if so, the first and second Considerations, which beg the existence of a majority attached and adhering to the Church of England, must, when that majority is against the Church of England, make against any concession to Papists, by the same implication which, on the contrary supposition, was urged in support of such concessions.

The Protestant religion in these realms must, in order to justify the conclusion and contrast in the second Consideration, be understood to mean the Church of England; which is there described under the words, "our national religion in its public establishment."

Adherence and attachment are two things. Many who adhere to the Church cannot, in any just sense, be said to be attached to it. They who adhere to the Church, whether attached to it or not, and they who do not attach themselves to any other form of worship, are perhaps not more than threefifths of the inhabitants in England and Wales. Adam, i. 414. In Great Britain, the adherents to the Church can hardly be two-fifths of the population. A very small proportion of its adherents can fairly be said to be attached to it, in such a sense as Mr. Davison necessarily implies; namely, that they have a reasonable conviction of its excellence as compared with Popery; and dissent, and love it accordingly.

But whatever is implied by Mr. Davison, to shew the power of a numerical majority, tells against Papist emancipation. The Papists are calculated at a hundred millions; and form, throughout the world, one compact body, and equal in number all the Pro

testant and Eastern Churches taken together. All the Protestants are estimated at seventy millions; and the Eastern and Greek Churches at thirty millions. It can hardly be said of any two Protestant Churches, that they form one body, as contrasted with the Papists: much less can it be said of all the Protestant Churches. In any given country, the particular body of Papists in contact with the Protestants in general, or with the particular Church of that country, form an active directory, to manage, as they are bound in conscience and the express words of the Creed of Pius the IVth, all the resources of the whole Popish Church, when and as they may be supplied, in furthering the temporal interests and spiritual dominion of the Popish Church among their heretical and perishing neighbours.

a

True security is understood to mean the contrary to such fictitious securities as may be supplied by law, and enforced by pains and penalties: and natural security, to mean a security founded on the kindly and affectionate feelings of the adherents to any Church, as opposed to an adherence from pride or carelessness or habit, or from any corrupt influence or intimidation. A security impregnable to-day may not be so to-morrow: majority to-day may be a minority to-morrow. We disarm our friends, because they have been too strong to be attacked, and therefore have not found use for their arms. We arm our enemies, because they threaten to attack us, if we do not give them arms and then are expected to believe that the majority, which was ours once, and while it lasted was termed an impregnable security, remains ours.

It is implied, that the stability of the Protestant religion depends upon a numerical majority: but the Protestant religion was established in these realms by a minority: and after it was established, was more than once endangered by a minority: and most endangered when political power and influence were most in the grasp of Papists, and then the numerical majority of our people were Protestants in profession.

The word 'majority' is ambiguous: a few active men may

each influence many adherents; and those adherents so held together, be for a season a numerical majority: but the death or disunion of the leaders breaks up that majority. Supposing the Papist and the Protestant equally sincere in their faith, a Popish majority is more likely to continue, and more to be trusted as such, than a Protestant majority: for each Papist has a more immediate interest, and a closer personal connexion with his cause, than a Protestant is likely to have. History and reasoning combine to prove that no security can be said to be impregnable in itself; so that the epithet impregnable' may at once be discarded, as being a relative term, and either begging the question or inoperative. An active minority will shake, an indolent and careless majority will forfeit, the security, which, under other circumstances, might have been fairly termed impregnable. It is not proved by Mr. Davison, although it is implied that there is a preponderating majority of our people in favour of the Church: and there is only a hope, that a minority may yet, if need be, form the true and natural security of our Christian Church against a preponderating majority, placed under lawful captains, organized under Parliamentary forms, and armed with new and heretofore untried means of assault. The subtle manoeuvre and ill-placed generalship with which this great measure has now been brought on, argue a belief in the Cabinet, that a numerical majority of the electors in this realm is against concessions to the Papists now. That it was so when the present House of Commons was elected, is almost certain, from the first opinion on the subject which the House gave. Ministers shrink from trying the electors, now the Premier is known: they take the petitions, they affect to disregard, as good and useful evidence against dissolving Parliament; and divide their bill to divide their opponents.

The Privy Council in England give the character to our Government; and the Statute declares the Crown forfeited, when its possessor becomes or even marries a Papist. This statute is left in force: and argues surely much anxiety to pre

vent the introduction of Popish measures into the Cabinet, by rendering less probable the presence there of Popish Ministers. If the Ministers may be Popish, so may the Crown be: for the Crown is only known, and can only act, by its Ministers. The same course of reasoning proves the risk of admitting Papists into the Houses of Parliament; particularly the Upper House, each Member of which has individually the right of insisting upon giving his advice to the Crown in person. He who supports the Papists, tries to give discontent a hand, and faction a mouth-piece, which they could not else have had: and, as if the Papists could not frame for themselves an Association sufficiently mischievous, gives them the only one of which Mr. Peel admits it to be true they might have been deprived. Our common law is declared inadequate to put down the Association: and as two statutes framed by Ministers friendly to Papists have also been declared inadequate, it is inferred that an effective statute cannot be framed and brought into action. Under the present measures, some offices are left unconceded; and Papists have all their old means of annoyance, and one more and that one more is conceded them under the strange belief, so strangely expressed in the Commons, that as the Popish Association would now meet in St. Stephen's, it had not, it would not have, occasion to meet elsewhere.

Whether the Church of England be a majority or minority, Protestants may well be at a loss to understand why we are to place upon a vantage-ground they could not gain without us, those who are not likely to be as good subjects as ourselves. Το say the least, they who believe in heart they justly may admit, and in word and deed do admit, the supremacy of the Crown in all cases, are better subjects than they who deny it in some. If the pride of the body or the individuals decline the admission of this supremacy, such pride is not entitled to any deference, when the stability of the Church and State of England may be shaken by its indulgence. If the supremacy of the Pope were strictly limited, so that its avowal meant nothing against the