discharge the duties of Roman-catholic clergymen in this kingdom, under ecclesiastical superiors of their own communion. "JOHN THOMAS TROY, R. C. Archbishop of Dublin, "January 14, 1794."* The language of this address is so plain, and the object is so distinctly advocated on the ground of its being the interest of the state to accede to the prayer of the memorial, that it seems self-evident to the writer of these remarks, that government in acceding to the memorial, and the legislature in giving the measure the sanction of law, did virtually enter into a compact with the Roman prelates, on the ground of advantages being guaranteed to both parties concerned. In giving the royal licence to the foundation, government undertook to connect the Roman-catholic clergy with the state, for the sake of the benefits the state was to derive from the connexion. And parliament sanctioned the connexion-the Irish parliament, a parliament composed exclusively of protestants. But parliament did more. All the Romish prelates asked for at least, in their memorial-was the royal licence for the endowment of academies or seminaries, which they themselves were willing to undertake to establish. Parliament did more. It granted a large sum for the building of the proposed college; and a further sum of 80001. for establishing the institution; besides repealing the Mortmain Act in its favour, to the extent of allowing the college to acquire lands to the value of 1000l. per annum. Besides this, government took an active share in arranging the details of the plan. "The Rev. Thomas Hussey, (a very clever Roman-catholic clergyman, who had been employed by the British minister, in 1780, in some secret diplomatic negotiations with the court of Spain, and returned from that country to London as chaplain to the Marquis Del Campo, the Spanish ambassador, and was greatly in the confidence of the leading Roman Catholics of England,) was brought to Ireland under the protection of government, for the express purpose of preparing and superintending the plan of education."+-Ibid. p. 17. To give the government a direct control in the management of the college, the chancellor, the four chief judges, and Dr. Hussey (who, as has been seen, was at that time in the confidence of government, and had been in its employment) were named in the act as trustees, (with certain of the Roman-catholic prelates and laity,) for the purpose of " establishing, endowing, and maintaining" the projected college. The Act also required the by-laws, made by the trustees, to be subject (except such as regarded religious matters) to the approval of the LordLieutenant. It gave the trustees the power of appointing not only officers, but fellows and scholars, on the foundation. It gave them visitorial authority, and authorized them to fill up vacancies in their own body. From this it is evident that, however defective the wording of the * Ibid, pp. 13-16. "See Mr. Pelham's speech, in the 'Debates of the Irish Parliament,' February 26th, 1798." VOL. XXVII.-May, 1845. 2 Q Act may be to erect the trustees or the college into a corporation, the legislature did certainly connect the Roman-catholic church, as far as the education of its clergy was concerned, with the state, by making the chancellor and judges ex-officio trustees and visitors of the new college, and by subjecting the statutes and laws to the approval of the Lord-Lieutenant. And it is equally obvious, likewise, that it intended to give, and did really give, perpetuity to the foundation, both by the appointment of trustees, for the purpose of "maintaining" it, and also by empowering them to appoint fellows and scholars, and to fill up vacancies in their own body. Let it be remembered that this was not a college for the education of Roman Catholics in general, but for the clergy alone. And further, it was clearly understood that this connexion between the priesthood and the state was made for the benefit of the state itself, and for the express purpose of protecting it against the introduction of political principles dangerous to its stability and peace. Here, then, was a pledge and a compact; and on the faith of this pledge and compact, persons were invited to contribute land and pecuniary en dowments. It is the fashion to speak slightingly of compacts and engagements; and the manner in which the Roman Catholics have disregarded the pledges they were so ready to give, of abstaining from every attempt to disturb the property and rights of the Established Church, has given but too much ground for the arguments of those who consider that the Romish hierarchy in Ireland have forfeited all right to plead a compact in their own favour. But a compact there certainly was. The whole of the arrangements established by the Act of 1795 imply such a compact and pledge on the part of the state as should be deemed binding among honourable men. And certainly it is not on light ground, or any lighter plea than this, that the maintenance of the pledge then given is incompatible with the public safety, the state can now refuse to maintain the institution it thus established and endowed. If it be urged, as it well may, that Maynooth has in no way answered the expectations of the State, or the hopes and inducements held out to Government at its foundation-if, instead of conducing to the public good, and protecting the population of Ireland from disloyal and seditious principles, it has proved but too plainly the reverse in both particulars-still it seems only just to inquire how far this failure is to be ascribed to the wrong conduct of the State itself. Persons will, no doubt, take widely different views of this question; but the writer of these observations has long been of opinion, that the faults of Maynooth, and they are great and flagrant, are to be attributed in no small degree to the manner in which it has been treated by the Legislature. When the Romish bishops asked for the sanction and licence of the Crown, in 1793, to enable them to establish a college for themselves, two courses were open to the Government. The one was, simply to grant them the licence prayed for, and to keep the Established Church and the State (at that time one and identical) wholly free from all connexion with the undertaking, either in the way of control, management, interference, or endowment. Had this course been adopted, it is most likely that the energies of the Roman Catholic clergy and aristocracy would have been concentrated in the project, and a really respectable and efficient college gradually endowed and established. But if the Government thought fit, for its own purposes and the benefit of the State, to connect the State with the undertaking, and to retain power and control over its management, then it seems as clear as any proposition can be, that it was the duty of the Legislature to make the college a really respectable institution, and to spare no expense which might be necessary to make it effective for the attainment of the object proposed, of furnishing a body of educated scholars and gentlemen, in order to preserve the population of the country in principles of morality, loyalty, and subordination. If it was wrong to connect the State with the education and endowment of the Romish priesthood, Government should have had nothing to do with the scheme beyond giving the royal licence, which was the only favour the bishops asked for. If it was right to connect the State with the project at all, it should have been done effectively. Having then voluntarily and deliberately connected the State, the Legislature and the Crown, with the education of the Romish clergy in Maynooth, it was beyond all question the duty of the Legislature to provide ample funds, and to leave no reasonable methods untried which could render the Romish clergy at least as well educated, and as well fitted to be guides and instructors of their flocks, as they had been under the old system, before the French Revolution had destroyed their foreign endowments. And if this was a duty then, it has remained to this hour a duty, for to this hour has the connexion been maintained by the Legislature between the State and the education of the priesthood in Ireland. If, indeed, it be proposed to dissolve that connexion, and turn over Maynooth to the charity and voluntary contributions of the Roman Catholics, and if the State can justly, honourably, or honestly, take such a step, without ever having made one single effort to discharge the duties which devolved on it by the connexion which it voluntarily and deliberately and of its own mere motion entered into for its own advantage-if it be right to stop the grant to Maynooth altogether and for ever, let it be stopped at once. But if it wrong to do this, or even if it be impossible, then on what grounds of honour or justice can the State any longer delay to discharge the duties to which it solemnly and advisedly subjected itself half a century ago? It will no doubt be asked-Can Maynooth receive this permanent addition to its endowment, without inflicting a blow on the United Church of Ireland? This is certainly a very serious question, and, it is to be hoped, will never be regarded in any other light by those who direct the counsels of the nation. Nor is it without much consideration, that the writer ventures to give an opinion on the subject. As far as the gratitude of the Roman Catholics is concerned, he cannot see any reason to reckon upon it. What is there within the boundaries of the Irish coast, which the imperial legislature could give them, that they do not look on as, in point of right, their own already? Give them any endowment you please for Maynooth, as a place for the exclusive education of their clergy, they will not be satisfied unless you give them the University of Dublin also. Endow their clergy, they will not be satisfied unless you dis-establish the Church. Give them the rent-charge the glebes and churches, the cathedrals, and the see lands of the Irish Bishops-and they will demand a restitution of the forfeited estates. There are undoubtedly many Roman Catholics in Ireland who are satisfied and thankful already, and who are candid enough to speak of the Protestant clergy with the respect and affection which they feel for them, and who look with extreme repugnance and apprehension on any movement which, by destroying the established church and the English connexion, would consign the quiet and peaceable of their own communion to the tyranny of priests and agitators, and eventually set the whole population by the ears in a general quarrel about the title and ownership of the soil. But those who come before the British parliament, and the English public, as the Roman Catholics of Ireland-whether lay or clerical, will never be satisfied or content with anything short of the whole property, lay and ecclesiastical, being transferred from its present possessors to themselves. They may say that they have no such intention,—some of them may be unconscious that they have; but those who recollect their self-denying professions when emancipation was the object to be obtained, will not think it uncharitable to suppose that they may deceive themselves, and that each new privilege and concession serves but to open new prospects to their ambition and their hopes. Nor is there anything in the circumstances of the present gift, to compel their gratitude. Had it come from the hands of those who have all along been the advocates of their claims, they might have been grateful-at least for a time-for their emotions are not so lasting as they are lively. But, in the present case, it would be folly to imagine that any considerable number of them view it as anything else than a concession extorted by fear. It is of no use to show that such a notion is as unjust as it is ungrateful to their benefactor. This is, and will be, their view, just or unjust. The Maynooth professors, indeed, may write a letter overflowing with gratitude. In 1793, the Roman Catholics determined to erect a statue to George III., in order to commemorate their gratitude to that monarch, for his consenting to the relaxation of the penal laws. In 1829, also, they resolved at a public meeting to erect a statue to the Duke of Wellington, to perpetuate the memory of their gratitude "to the remotest generations;" neither of these statues, however, have been yet erected, nor does it appear that any further steps were ever taken in the matter. Of course, if on cooler reflection they considered that these concessions, or any similar ones, ought not to be received as favours, but as restitution, and as the re-payment of debts, which had been always withheld as long as they could be withheld with safety, (and this seems pretty much their view of all transactions of the sort) it might be unjust to reproach them with ingratitude. And that there is nothing in Ireland which they do not consider to be their own rightful property, seems certain, as far as the lower classes are concerned; and, to a great extent, it is not unlikely to be those of the clergy also. On the whole, the gratitude of the Roman Catholics can never be relied on, to give security to the Established church: yet, notwithstanding, the writer does believe that this measure will serve the church, will tend to its stability and ultimate increase, and what it may not be wrong to consider even more important than this great object, that it will tend to the promotion of truth and real religion among the Irish people in general. For, in fact, what is the question between us and the Romish church in Ireland? Is it not a question between truth and error? between the Catholic church and a schismatical body? Perhaps neither community can reasonably object to this way of stating the case; but, believing as we do, that we have truth and catholicity on our side, and believing that the Divine presence and power are promised to truth and catholicity to the end of the world, is it not plain that all the church in Ireland can now desire is, that the battle between truth and error should be fairly fought? Give the church in Ireland gentlemen and scholars, and men who are sincerely pious in their own religious creed-give it such men as these for its antagonists, and the truth will find its own way, and prevail over every opposition. The truth fears not learning, nor morality, nor piety; it breathes more freely when it has such opponents to contend against; it finds itself at a disadvantage when opposition is clothed in the garb of ignorance, and vulgarity, and scurrilous ridicule, and political secularity and violence. Against such antagonists it knows not how to aim its weapons; and besides this:-make the Roman-catholic clergy scholars and theologians, and you at once force upwards the tone and standard of theological attainment in the church; divines who appeared learned beside an almost illiterate and half-civilized priesthood, must dig deeper into the foundations of their own theology, when they are to stand side by side with scholars and gentlemen. The more learning the church of Rome brings against the doctrine of our Reformation, the more will it bring to light, and detect the shallowness of its own pretensions, and the feeble sophistry of its defences. The more learned and scholar-like its attacks on us, the more does it compel the highest class of intellects among us to devote.their minds to the confirmation and defence of truth. The whole experience of the reformed church of England proves this. Whenever her antagonists have been learned and accomplished, then have her own clergy best understood her principles, and most ably defended them; and the truth, thus defended and illustrated by profound learning and unanswerable argument, has made way, and carried conviction to the public mind. The writer, therefore, sees in an improved education of the Roman-catholic clergy anything but an injury to the church of Ireland. He is persuaded that if their education be really improved,-if they be made such theologians as Bellarmine and Bossuet, truth, and the church which has truth and the Word of eternal truth on its side, will have no reason to lament the change. But besides this: this measure may reasonably be expected to benefit the church in another way, though indirectly. The greatest difficulty with which the church in Ireland has to contend at present, arises from the determined resistance of the present and preceding administration to the applications made by the prelates and clergy for |