to Sir John Hippisley, that the Pope will engage that no person shall be named to any Roman Catholic vacant see in this country (Ireland) but such as shall be elected and presented by the Roman Catholic bishops,' who will engage' not to elect or present any but loyal persons.' In November, 1809, an appeal was made to the Pope by the bishops of Connaught against Dr. Troy and Dr. Reily, for supporting the last will of Dr. Dillon, [so-called] Archbishop of Tuam, who bequeathed his diocese, without consulting them, to Dr. Kelly.'. In 1810, the bishops pass another resolution, that the recommendation of us bishops when concurring had been progressively advancing in weight and authority with the Roman see;' and they recognise this new practice of confining the election of bishops to themselves, as being in progress to become a part of the ecclesiastical system; they add that the choice of bishops thus effectively originated and was circumscribed by them, so far as at least to make it inaccessible (except by their permission) to foreign temporal influence.' And thus it appears that to obtain this power, taken from the lower orders of the clergy, and contrary to the canons of the Romish Church, they were first willing to admit the veto from the Crown, and when that was inadmissible, they threw themselves on the Pope, and abandoned all their Gallican and canonical principles, receiving in return the Pope's full licence for all their proceedings. The truth is,' says Dr. O'Connor, that twenty-one suffragan bishops have entered into a solemn compact with the four archbishops of Ireland, that they the suffragans shall be allowed to bequeath their respective dioceses to whomsoever they please, provided the archbishops are allowed to do the same; and so Dr. Troy has bequeathed Dublin to a Mr. Murray, Dr. Dillon has bequeathed Tuam to a Mr. Kelly. Other bishops also have already elected their own successors, without the least reference to the feelings of the subordinate clergy, gentry, or nobility; and this is styled canonical election. This is the boasted, this the glorious spiritual independence of the Irish Church!"* The names of Dr. Troy and Dr. Murray have been already alluded to. As connected with them the inquirer might be recommended to ask-Who was Dr. Troy? Was he, as Dr. O'Connor says, 'a Dominican friar, of the order of the Holy Inquisition, and connected with Spain? Who was Dr. Kelly? Mr. Wyse, for one, will answer that he was the most active of political agitators-the Romish bishops of Connaught will add another character of him, which our readers may see in their Appeal against his Election.‡ Of Dr. Murray we have heard + Columbanus, No. 7, p. 23. See it in Columb. p. 5. 209. * Vol. i. p. 12. something something already. His connexion with Mr. Peter Kenny, at first his assistant at Maynooth, and subsequently president of the Jesuit College at Clongowes, is not to be overlooked. And thus a clue may be obtained to the origin of this remarkable movement, the end of which naturally would be to place the Priests at the mercy of the Bishops, and the Bishops at the disposal of the Pope, or rather of that secret influence by which the Pope is both supported and controlled. Notwithstanding this act of the bishops, in 1814 a very active movement seems to have been made by the priests in several dioceses-Dublin, for instance, Ossory, Cloyne and Ross, Cork, Dromore, Meath, Clonfert, Limerick, and Derry-against this usurpation, and against the veto as tolerated (the word, to ears familiar with Popish principles, is very significant) by the well-known letter of Quarantotti. Quarantotti was at the head of the Propaganda, and during the captivity of the Pope, assumed the management of affairs, and seems to have acted cordially with the Irish bishops; as Irish bishops, on many other occasions, have been found to act in maintaining a similar close correspondence with the agitating party at Rome, while the clergy and nobility kept aloof and maintained their loyalty and Gallican principles. But the release of the Pope seems to have extorted a new movement from the bishops. On the 27th May, 1814, they resolved that Quarantotti's Rescript was not mandatory,' and renounced altogether any notion of a veto connected with the concession of the Relief Bill. This change was evidently produced by the restoration of the Pope and the improved aspect of things. While he was in captivity, they were willing to make as good a bargain with government as possible. When he was restored to freedom, they resolved to take higher ground. The bishops also are in a great degree dependent for their incomes on the priests, and this consideration too may have had its weight. At some subsequent period-(when, precisely, we are not able to say, and the whole proceedings of the Romish system are so hidden from sight, that, except on the authority of their own writers, it is dangerous to speak positively)-the usurped power of nominating to bishoprics seems to have reverted again from the bishops to the clergy; and these now, we believe, nominate three persons, of whom one is selected by the Pope, and generally the first on the list. Still, it might seem, attempts were to be made, and they were not unsuccessful, to obtain, through some other means, the command over the parochial priests, without whose co-operation even Jesuitism could hope for little. Now, during the above negociations with the crown, was it one of the objects secretly settled settled at Rome, that, whilst with one hand concessions were made to the English government, the Inquisition should be introduced into Ireland in favour of absolute vicarial authority?" or, in words more intelligible to readers not familiar with the policy of Rome, was it now resolved, as a part of that policy, to break up the parochial system of Popery in Ireland; to bring the parish priests under the absolute control of their bishops; to place the bishops themselves under Vicars Apostolic, as 'Delegates of the Pope:' so that the Romish Church in Ireland might be converted from a quiet, well-disposed, religious community into an active, turbulent, overwhelming force, in the hands of the moving power of the Propaganda? And was this to be effected by introducing a branch of the Inquisition; such a branch as could be secretly established without attracting observation? In 1816, Dr. O'Connor positively affirms such to be the fact.* His own excommunication is a sufficient indication of something of the kind. In 1814, in a letter from a Roman Catholic priest on the subject of the election of bishops, many hints may be found of intentions to degrade the parish priests; of unsuccessful appeals from curates who had incurred bishops' displeasure, to the meeting of bishops at Maynooth;' of their being forbidden, under pain of canonical censure, to prosecute such appeals; of a random ad libitum' power of suspension; of meetings of clergy on the veto being discouraged, whereas on the same subject in 1799 they had been recommended permissu superiorum.' In 1821, Mr. Morrissy, a Roman Catholic priest, publishes an express declaration to the same effect;-exposing, in his own case, the existence of a secret tribunal, before which he was accused, and punished, according to the method of the Inquisition, without being confronted with witnesses, or allowed to make his defence; his real crime being, that he had come forward to maintain the laws, and reprobate the 'rebellious dispositions' of a body of agrarian outragists,' called Caravats.' His statement is entitled A Development of the Cruel and Dangerous Inquisitorial System of the Court of Rome in Ireland,' and is well worth studying. In a work before referred to, it is distinctly proved that the Appendix to Dens, circulated under the authority of Dr. Murray, recognises the existence of an Inquisition in Ireland. Dr. Doyle acknowledges the fact that Ireland is partly a mission, and partly an establishment;' a condition of things totally different from the Gallican view of the state of Ireland. With this we would couple the changes Part. vii. p. 8. Romanism as it Rules in Ireland, vol. ii. P 250. See Fleury, 'Discours sur les Libertés de l'Eglise Gallicane.' which have been made in the appointment to curacies, by which the whole body of curates are placed at the disposal of the bishop, to shift about from place to place as he chooses; the arbitrary withdrawal of faculties; the refusal to collate priests to parishes, as before-holding them, as it were, suspended, with a power of dismissal at pleasure; a plan which, it is stated in the Evidence before the Tithe Committee, had been adopted by Dr. Doyle, and which is also understood to be practised by Dr. Mac Hale, if not by other bishops. We will, add another question. Were there not secret bodies, especially one called Thrashers,' who rose up about this time-when the parochial priests, as it would seem, required coercion-not, as usual, against the landlords, but against the priests, threatening to reduce their dues, and often venturing on violence to them :-have they been heard of since? The inquirers may then proceed to ask a few more questions. Is it the present practice,* when the old priest is unwilling to agitate, to attach to him a coadjutor of a more violent character, with a greater or less amount of salary;—and to what extent does this prevail? Have these coadjutors been multiplied to the number of two, three, or even four, in one parish? How are the present priests selected? Are they drawn from respectable, independent families, or from the lowest part of the population; picked out by the priests from the cleverest boys in the parishschools, and recommended to the bishops; by the bishops placed at * Another series of circumstances has been traced by the diligent and acute authors of the Digest of Evidence : 1. In the year 1795, they say (vol. i. p. 314) the Treatise on Theology' was published for the use of the Maynooth students under the presidency of Dr. Hussey.'" Of this treatise it is unnecessary here to give any account. 2. In the year 1797 appeared the Pastoral Address' of Dr. Hussey, then Roman Catholic Bishop of Waterford, suggesting the tampering with the soldiery. 3. In the years 1800 and 1804, societies of humble persons for the education of the Roman Catholic poor were instituted, and taken under the protection of the Pope. The nature of the education which these societies imparted may be inferred from Mr. Dunphy's evidence (or rather his extreme unwillingness to give any evidence at all). 4. In 1814 the Jesuit college of Clongowes was established for the instruction of the gentry; and thus the education of the Irish Roman Catholics of the higher and the poorer classes was to become subservient to the designs or wishes of the Pope. 5. In 1816 tracts exciting to sedition, and containing sentiments of religious bigotry and superstition, were widely circulated; and the Rhemish Testament was published with Dr. Troy's approbation. 6. In the year 1822 Friar Hayes was permitted to preach and publish his 'incen tives to blood;' and when the nature and extent of the Ribbon Conspiracy had been fully disclosed to government, Dr. Doyle published a pastoral address, advising the discovered conspirators to desist from their attempts, but not commanding them to desist, nor threatening them with an anathema if they persevered, and concluding with wishing them, whatever their determination may be, peace and benediction.' 7. And in 1824 the same Dr. Doyle informed the Government in a published letter, that they ought not to depend on the Roman Catholic prelates or clergy; because, if a rebellion 'were raging from Carrickfergus to Cape Clear, no prelate would fulminate an excommunication.' Maynooth, Maynooth, and there educated almost, if not wholly, gratuitously— that is, at the expense of the English Protestant government? Is the system at Maynooth enlarged, elevated, capable of expanding the mind, and softening the heart-or the very reverse? What has been, and must be, the result of training up a body of ecclesiastics under the influence of Popery in a preparatory course of education, without association with laymen? Compare the system at Carlow, and other private institutions, and at Maynooth. Is the system at Maynooth one of severe coercion by espionage, by the dread of expulsion without appeal, and without any check on the arbitrary proceedings of the governor? As the whole future prospects of the student depend on his admission to orders, is this dependence sufficient to maintain implicit obedience, with scarcely any other punishment? What is the course of their studies? Is it confined to the lowest classical authors; to tracts on science written by professors of the college, who were never heard of beyond its walls; and to a system of polemical theology, in which Dr. Dens, even if they dare not avow it, is the standard book of reference? Are they trained up in feelings of hostility to Protestants and to Englishmen, and imbued with all the falsehoods respecting the English Church, which are subsequently found to be disseminated by them among the unhappy peasantry? Are their habits of life such as would form a body of men who might occupy that station among gentlemen, which, both for the peace and cementing of society, and for their own just influence over their flock, they ought to maintain? We are not speaking of false refinement, of luxuries, or comforts, but of those habits of general decency, of manly quietness, of a just appreciation of their own position-elevated as Christian ministers, lowly as citizens of respect without servility, of self-confidence without arrogance, and of benevolence without weakness, which constitute the character of an English or Irish gentleman, whether of the laity or the clergy. Can, in fact, the Irish gentry admit them generally to their society-as they did admit the generation before them? Above all, what hold have the Jesuits on Maynooth? To what extent prevails the Sodality of the Heart, or of the Propagation of the Faith among them? Are habits of truth carefully inculcated there? Is Dr. Dens the rule of their morals? If not, who is? These are questions bearing not only on the acknowledged fact that an extraordinary change has, by some instrument or another, been effected in the character of the parochial priests of Ireland-but also on the suggestion, that this instrument may perhaps be no other than what Dr. O'Connor asserts—viz., the same intriguing power which is now effectually swaying the general |