unprejudiced of all creeds, whether it is reasonable to make the assertion that Catholics do not colonize, and whether those who make the assertion can have rightly studied the question of colonization?

Persecution, revolution, and tyranny in Protestant and Catholic countries-Moral characteristics of the great French Revolution--Civil liberty in Italy--In Belgium-Meaning of the word political liberty in the mouths of the Neo-Protestant school of Continental liberals-Their object in preaching Protestantism in Catholic countries-Essays of Quinet and Eugène Sue-Discussion of liberty amongst Continental liberals.

JERSECUTION has not only been more generally practised by Protestants than by Catholics, but it has been more warmly defended and supported by the former

than by the latter.

Bergier defies Protestants to mention a single town in which their predecessors, on becoming masters of it, tolerated a single Catholic.

Rousseau, who was educated a Protestant, says,1 that "the Reformation was intolerant from its cradle, and its authors universally persecutors."

Bayle, a celebrated Calvinist, has published much the same thing.

The Huguenot minister Jurieu acknowledges the fact "that Geneva, Switzerland, the various principalities of Germany, England, Scotland, Sweden, and Denmark had all employed the power of the State to abolish Popery, and establish the Reformation." 2

The moderate Melancthon wrote a book in defence of religious persecution. Calvin was its great champion, and Beza, who succeeded him, wrote a folio work in defence of it."

John Knox advocates it in all his writings.5

Edwin Sandys, Bishop of London, published a book in vindication of it.6

James I. was repeatedly urged by parliament to enforce the laws against Catholics with greater rigour,

1 "Lettres de la Mont."

2" Tab. Lett.," quoted by Bossuet, avertiss., p. 625.

"De Hæretecis puniendis a civili magistratu, &c., a Theod. Beza."

"De Hæret. puniend.," Beza.

5 See Milner's "End of Religious Controversy," p. 439.

6 Ger. Brandt, "Hist. Reform.," abridg., vol. i. p. 234.

and Archbishop Abbott warned him against the sin of toleration. (See Rushworth's collection, vol. i. p. 144.)

Archbishop Usher and eleven Irish bishops presented an address to Charles I. against toleration, in which they declared that to give toleration to Papists was a grievous sin. (See Leland's "Hist. of Ireland," vol. ii. p. 482, and Neal's "Hist.," vol. ii. p. 469.)

The Presbyterian divines assembled at Sion College condemned as an error "the doctrine of toleration," under the abused term, as they expressed it, "of liberty of conscience." 1

James II. was deposed by the English nation because he wished that all his subjects should enjoy the same privileges; and to the present day, the mere fact of a man's being a Catholic is sufficient to make his return to Parliament in any English county almost an impossibility.

Dr. Milner says, with great justice, that when Catholic States and princes persecuted Protestants, it was done in favour of an ancient religion, which had been established in their country perhaps a thousand or fifteen hundred years, and which had long preserved the peace, order, and morality of their respective subjects, and when at the same time

1 66 History of Churches of England and Scotland,” vol. iii.

they clearly saw that any attempt to alter this religion. would unavoidably produce disorders and sanguinary contests among them.

Protestants, on the contrary, everywhere persecuted on behalf of new systems, in opposition to the established laws of the Church and of the respective States.

Nothing was ever more unfounded than the notion that Protestantism is favourable to freedom of conscience, or that Protestants were not persecutors.

Protestants not only persecuted Catholics, but they persecuted each other to the death.

In Scotland the Reformation may be said to have begun by the assassination of Cardinal Beaton, to which Knox was a party, and to which Fox, in his "Acts and Monuments," says the murderers were instigated by the Spirit of God. "With such indecent haste," says Robertson, "did the very persons who had just escaped ecclesiastical tyranny proceed to imitate the example" (Robertson's "History of Scotland"). See also the answer of the Presbytery to the King and Council in 1596, concerning the Catholic Earls of Huntley, Erroll, &c., which declared that the civil power could not spare them, as they were guilty of idolatry, a crime punishable by death.