when connected with Presbyterian meeting-houses, appear to us to stand upon the same principle as schools connected with communities of the Roman Catholic persuasion, and to these we have been, from the commencement of our labours, granting aid, having first communicated with his late Majesty's government upon the subject, and been sanctioned by it in doing so.' It now appears that the relaxation, which has been granted as a favour to the Presbyterians, had been, even from the beginning, and with the concurrence of the government, conceded to Roman Catholics; and it will be remembered that, in neither of the passages here cited, has any reference been made to the limitation of the indulgence to the case of school-houses erected without the assistance of the Board. We are left at liberty to believe, that to the Roman Catholics the relaxation of the principles of the Board, as it had been conceded from the beginning of the institution, before any difficulty rendering indulgence expedient had been experienced, was also perpetual, but only temporary to the Presbyterians, who were thus to be drawn into an ultimate acquiescence in the unmitigated system.

"Here is a consequence which every Protestant must embrace in the very act of connecting himself with the Board, by accepting its insidious accommodation. He must admit the Roman Catholic patrons of schools, and among these the Roman Catholic communities, to enjoy a similar privilege. He must consequently consent, that in these the doctrines of the Church of Rome should be exclusively taught, as those of Protestantism in his own; and that thus, while the children of Romanists are debarred from the opportunity of scriptural instruction which had been afforded to them in the schools of Protestants, the children of Protestants also, in many districts, might be given up to Roman Catholic instructors. Even the hour, conceded by the general rules to the Protestant minister for imparting religious instruction to the children of his congregation, is in these schools refused to him; for, in acceding to the applications from Presbyterians, it has been conditioned, that all religious instruction different from that of the patrons must be sought ' elsewhere ;** and we must presume that the same condition was admitted into those schools of Roman Catholic patrons, in which a similar relaxation had been from the beginning tolerated.

"We may now understand the following very remarkable declaration, made by the Duke of Wellington in a debate on a resolution proposed by the Bishop of Exeter, in 1838, that the working of the system [the national system] had tended to the undue encouragement of the Roman Catholic, and to the discouragement of the Protestant religion in Ireland;' for which I am again indebted to a recent number of The Christian Examiner :—

"I cannot help thinking, that there is great truth in the resolution moved by the right reverend prelate, that the system has operated as a discouragement to the Protestant religion in Ireland. I can have no hesitation in saying, that, if the evidence on the table be true, the system must have greatly tended, among other circumstances which have occurred within the last few years, to discourage the Protestant religion in Ireland. The truth is, that the clergymen have not the power of going into the schools and teaching the doctrines of Scripture; there are not the means of enabling them to give religious instruction to those who desire it.' "—pp. 15-20.

It is extraordinary that any one can seriously expect the clergyman of any established church to connect himself with any system of education in which he can take no part whatever, until he has relinquished his position as the minister of the parish. If he chooses formally to connect his school with the National Board, or to apply for a grant for a school to be placed under the management of the

* Return to an order of the House of Commons, p. 1.

Board, he may then interfere with the conduct of this school as patron. In truth, the Board have at all times been so anxious to obtain adherents, that, practically, the interference of the clergyman, under these circumstances, may (at least for the present, and until the preliminary operations of the Board have been completed) be carried almost to an unlimited extent. He may conduct the religious education of the children pretty much as he pleases. Of course, no one dreams of this connivance of the Board being extended one hour beyond the time when they shall have firmly established themselves, and got the protestant schools into their power, and a sufficient number of their own school-houses built. But, meantime, the parish clergyman may do pretty nearly what he pleases. But in what capacity can he do so? Why, as the patron of the school; in other words, as the official of the National Board. As parish clergyman, he has no power in the school whatever. He is not recognised there. He is admitted inside its door only by courtesy and on sufferance. Suppose a case, of not unfrequent occurrence :-A clergyman is not so far satisfied with the national system that he can conscientiously place his schools under their management; but he finds in his parish national schools already in existence, to which grants have been made by government; and, as the parish minister, as a member of the established church, and so part and parcel of the state itself, he considers it to be his duty to see that the government grant shall not be wasted and abused. He does not wish to meddle with the religious education of the children of the national schools in the school-room, or during school hours; but he thinks it would be no harm if he were to drop in now and then in the course of the week, and ask the children a few questions-suppose in arithmetic or geography; or hear a class read; or, in fact, in any other way take part in forwarding their secular instruction. He conceives that as parish clergyman he might do good; and, at all events, he would not be going out of his place if he should look after the schoolmaster's operations. Will the National Board permit him to do this? They will not. As parish clergyman, he has no right whatever to enter the doors of the schoolroom. If he attempt to do so, he renders himself liable to be insulted by the schoolmaster before his own parishioners-and Mr. Dunlop's pamphlet has sufficiently exposed the class of persons he would be likely to meet in that capacity. To say that, as the clergyman of the parish he cannot give the boys a lecture on the impropriety of lying or stealing-though this be true, it may yet seem irrelevant for a lecture of that sort might be thought to touch on theology, especially as the correction of such vices might raise a question as to the comparative guilt of venial and mortal sins, or the future punishment of those who indulge in such practices; but come to examine a class in spelling or arithmetic, he has no right; nor would he be suffered to do so as the clergyman of the parish. Unless he pledge himself to the whole system and principle, he cannot do it; and even then, he is allowed to interfere, not as the clergyman of the parish, but as the patron of the school-i. e., as the servant of the Board. This is the difficulty which cannot be got over. If government recognise the

rights of the parochial clergy in any way whatever, as such, the Roman-catholic priests will at once withdraw, and denounce the system. This being the case, so long as government continues to refuse to recognise their rights, or even their existence, as the parochial clergy, it seems an insult to common sense to expect the clergy to have anything to do with the system.

As to the attempts made to beguile the clergy into a compromise, and to induce them to avail themselves of favourable constructions of the rules of the National Board, which the Board will tolerate only until they have entrapped the clergy into committing themselves to the system, and relinquishing their place and existence in the education of the poor as the established clergy, Dr. Miller makes the following observations:

"The circular address of the Archdeacon of Meath holds out a hope to the clergy, that the indulgence already granted but revocably to the Presbyterians, may for them be allowed by the government to become permanent, so that the former of the two objections,-namely, that it might at some future time be withdrawn according to the pleasure of the Board,—would be obviated. It has not been intimated that this overture has been in any degree authorized; but the bishop suggests the scheme as one of the success of which he still entertains a hope, if he should be empowered by the united body of his clergy to offer it, as from them, for the approbation of the government. Assuming, however, that he has been in this overture, though without avowal or any direct authority, the organ of the government-and it is not easy to believe that he would have made it without authority-let us consider what opinion we should form of the expediency of complying with it, and thus ranging all our schools under the protection and superintendence of the National Board.

"If the grants to be thus made, were so secured to the clergy of the Established Church as to be permanent endowments of their schools, this would be a direct appropriation of some, perhaps a considerable portion, of the funds of the National Board. Now the government has resisted all applications for grants of money to be made separately to the Established Church; and within the present year, the minister has given a deliberate and decided refusal to a most reasonable proposal, that a grant for the support of the schools of the Established Church might be combined with that allowed for the national education in England, so that the whole of the United Church might, in this respect, be included in one common provision. It would appear, according to this view of the matter, that it might be expected that grants of money should be made for the schools of the Established Church, but that they must be received as grants issued by the National Board, though under the sanction and guaranty of the government. What could be the object of the govern ment in insisting upon this restriction? I cannot imagine any other than to degrade our church from its constitutional position, as it is the general organ of religious instruction to all who may be placed within its influence, and sinking it to the same rank with dissenters, whether Protestants or Romanists, to place it under the control of a Board which should for ever preclude it from all interference with their respective pretensions.

"This seems to be a first step in a formed plan for the ruin of the Protestant Church in Ireland, in accommodation to that supremacy of Rome, which it is hoped may establish its tranquillity, and give repose to the minister.

"This view of the matter agrees well with the interpretation, which I have always affixed to two very remarkable passages in a recent speech of Sir Robert Peel, concerning the true import of which, though veiled with some oracular obscurity, I must say I have never seen any reason to doubt. In

that record, to the fidelity of which all parties are accustomed to appeal, I find the following portentous passages :

"I think therefore I am not going too far in saying that, as far as compact and authority are concerned, they have as great weight as they possibly can have in favour of the Established Church; but it may be asked, are compact and authority to be conclusive and decisive, if we are now ourselves convinced, that the social welfare of Ireland requires an alteration of the law, and a departure from that compact, and a disregard of that authority; are our legislative functions to be so bound up, that we must maintain the compact in spite of our conviction? I for one am not prepared to contend for such a proposition. But at the same time, this compact is a most material claim for our consideration.'

"As he proceeds, he becomes bolder, for he ceases to consider the compact as constituting any difficulty in the case.

"I will not therefore defend the church on the comparatively narrow ground of compact, and will not say I wish I could alter it, I think it is for the interest of Ireland to alter it, but I am bound by a compact. That is not my impediment. My impediment to the undermining and destruction of the Protestant Church is derived from the conviction of my own mind.'

"In these passages the minister has declared, that the solemn compact for securing the stability of the Protestant Church of Ireland is no impediment with him to the undermining and destruction of that church; and that his sole impediment is derived from the conviction of his own mind. That compact he is accordingly prepared to disregard, whenever it should become his conviction, that the social welfare of Ireland required of him so to do.

"It has been held by jurists, that a compact concluded between two nations might then only be justifiably disregarded by a contracting party, when to adhere to it would be followed by the ruin of that party, this exception being allowed, because no government could by any compact be bound to effect the ruin of its own people. This was the utmost latitude, which they could sanction for the non-observance of a solemn treaty. Here, however, we find a much wider allowance for infidelity, and this not in an ordinary convention concluded between two states bound together by no permanent interest, but in a treaty of union between two countries so closely connected by natural position, that without a political union they must necessarily be involved in perpetual hostility. Such a compact the minister has declared himself ready to disregard, not when to maintain it would involve the ruin of England, for this calamity would rather result from the violation of it and consequent dissolution of the union, but whenever he should himself have come to the conclusion, that it was required for the social welfare of Ireland. And when would he come to such a conclusion? Whenever he should find his administration so disturbed by the agitations of this country, that he should be disposed to seek a short way to ministerial quiet by yielding an implicit submission to its authors. His present conviction appears to be that the National Board is at all hazard to be supported. The Protestant Church of Ireland accordingly is apparently doomed to abide the consequences of his steady adherence to that favourite measure, or, as it may be reasonably inferred, to be rejected and destroyed, as interfering with, and obstructing the social welfare of Ireland. He seems indeed plainly enough to have set this alternative before us, for as by acquiescence our church would be undermined, so in the case of continued resistance it appears to be menaced with being openly destroyed.

The compact, which has thus ceased to be in the mind of the minister an

*Speech on Captain R. Bernal's motion on the state of Ireland, Feb. 23, 1844. Hansard, vol. 73, series 3. pp. 244, 245.

impediment to either part of this disastrous alternative, is the fifth article of that solemn and most important treaty, by which the two countries, not yet fifty years ago, were united under a common legislature. This article stipulates in the strongest form of language, That the Churches of England and Ireland, as now by law established, be united into one Protestant episcopal Church, to be called the United Church of England and Ireland, and that the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government of the said united church, shall be, and shall remain in full force for ever, as the same are now by law established for the Church of England; and that the continuance and preservation of the said united church, as the Established Church of England and Ireland, shall be deemed and taken to be an essential and fundamental part of the union.' Well might this union of the two Churches be declared to be an essential and fundamental part of the union of the two countries. For where would be the union of the two countries, if no Protestant interest were preserved in Ireland, to maintain some community of religious and political feeling with the government of England? If the Protestant Church were prostrated, that no obstacle might remain to the predominance of the Church of Rome, no offensive establishment spreading the Scriptures of truth open before the eyes of the peasantry, and enabling them to read and consider for themselves the glad tidings of man's salvation, the continuance of the union would depend upon the continuance of the submissiveness of a Romish hierarchy to an heretical government. This might indeed subsist for a short time, that an effort might be more conveniently made for reducing England also under the same yoke. But whenever it should be found necessary to renounce this other hope of ecclesiastical ambition, a control so uncongenial would at the same time be renounced, and England would have to protect itself against the machinations of Romish independence.

"How strange is it to find the prime minister of this great Protestant empire thus making a common cause with the Romish agitator, who has so long and so seriously disturbed the peace of Ireland, and set the government at defiance! The agitator demands a repeal of the treaty of union, that he may have in this country a parliament, which he well knows he could mould and manage through the influence of the clergy of his church; and the minister declared that this treaty was no impediment with him in the way of any change for promoting the social welfare of Ireland, which, from his conduct, in endeavouring to force upon our clergy an adherence to the National Board, we must interpret to mean, for delivering up the country to the control of that same clergy. If I were disposed to be superstitious, I might be inclined to regard this most extraordinary concurrence as a judicial arrangement of the divine Providence, and despair of resistance. But I am not so disposed, and will trust in the continued protection of that God, who has hitherto preserved our church amidst many trials. To what new trials it may be exposed, it is not for me to predict; but I am humbly confident that it will come forth from them with a spirit, not subdued, but disciplined, and better prepared to perform its part in the religious destinations of this great Protestant empire."pp. 20-26.

The whole subject is one of far too much importance for a brief discussion. The writer has long been convinced that all questions affecting the church establishment are first tried in Ireland. In that country, the battle of the establishment and the protestant religion is fought, and will either be lost or won. Just now the question of education is to be decided. The Irish clergy have first been deprived of the greater part of their incomes. They are now to be forced to give up their position and existence as the clergy of the establishment. On no other terms will government give one single farthing towards the education of the children of the church in Ireland. When once