Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

MINOR CORRESPONDENCE.

In reference to the Shirley family (see p. 400), A. B. observes :

"In 25 Hen. VI. W. Shirley was member for Ryegate in the Parliament then holden. Of the family of Shirley, the following have served the office of Sheriff of Surrey and Sussex, when the two Counties were under one Sheriff*.

1503, Ralph Shirleyt.

1513, 1525, Richard Shirley. In those days it appears that it was not uncommon for a gentleman to serve the office more than once.

1574, Francis Shirley. Died 1577, as in p.

400.

1578, Sir Thomas Shirley, of West Grinstead. Died 1606, ibid. 1617, Sir John Shirley.

In 1531 the manor of Burstone, near Ryegate in Surrey, was conveyed to Sir Thomas Shirley the elder, of Wiston in Sussex. Supposing him to have been son of Ralph, or Richard, he might have a son at that time, and it is probable that this son was the Sir Thomas who sold the manor of Burstow to one Quarles, but having been Treasurer at War under Queen Elizabeth, and become indebted to the Crown, this manor, and that of Cotesbach in Leicestershire, were extended and seized; but on 24th April, 44 Elizabeth, Quarles obtained a grant of these manors, in consideration of 800l. 11s. 8d. paid by him. ‡

By a monumental inscription in the church of Albury in Surrey, in memory of the family of George Duncomb, esq. it is stated, that John his eldest son, who died in 1640, had married to his second wife Eliz. daughter of Sir Thos. Shirley of Sussex.§ This could not be a daughter of Sir Thos. who was called the elder in 1531, and proves a second Sir Thomas to have existed. Of Francis or Sir John I know no more than that they served the office of Sheriff."

We are happy to announce the publication of a Second Number of Mr. SKELTON'S Engraved Illustrations of Arms and Armour.

F. B. A. observes, in reference to the remarks of our Reviewer in p. 524 of our

* Manning and Bray's Hist. Surrey, I. xxx. &c.

+ Beatrice, daughter of this Ralph, was second wife of Sir Edward Bray, of Vachery, in Surrey, from which match the present representative of Sir Edward's family in Surrey is descended.

Manning and Bray, II. p. 282. § Id. II. p. 129.

June number, that though Sir John Astley, the Champion, was only second son of a Knight, he was grandson of a Baron of Parliament (Thomas third Lord Astley, under the writ of 23 Edw. I.) and lineally descended from Philip de Estley, a Baron by tenure temp. Hen. II.

MENTOR is informed that the price of which he inquires after, Jan. 21, 1799, was 544.

The error in Lempriere's Dictionary (the word "Achilles" for Agamemnon) pointed out by Mr. PILGRIM in our last Volume, p. 386, requires no further elucidation, and is not disputed by C. W. p. 482; but can Mr. PILGRIM answer the queries put by the latter Correspondent?

S. H. remarks that "Curiosity is awakened by what is said in the Magazine for May, p. 401, of the Rev. Charles Joseph Douglas ; -it should be gratified."

C. K. asks if there is any such place as Feathercock Hall in Yorkshire. Lodge states it to have been an ancient seat of the family of King.

M. H. observes "I shall feel obliged to any of your topographical Correspondents, who will inform me where I can find any satisfactory account of Norwood in Surrey,to whom it belongs, and by whom it was planted. I have consulted Lysons' Environs, where it is merely observed, that a considerable part of Norwood is in the parish of Croydon. In a survey in 1646, it is described as being 830 acres, in which the inhabitants of Croydon have herbage for all manner of cattle and mastage for swine without stent.' Malcolm, in his Agricult. Survey of Surrey, drawn up for the Board of Agriculture in 1794, observes, The soil of Norwood is composed of a sandy loam upon clay or gravel, and is said to contain 600 acres, the greater part of which is in a neglected aud uncultivated state-250 acres is called an enclosed wood: no trees are, however, suffered to grow for timber, because they are cut or lopped every 10 or 11 years,' &c. These are all the notices I have found."

ERRATA. PART I.

Page 386, for Earl of Annesley, read Earl Annesley; p. 397, read Viscount Bernard, eldest son of the Earl of Bandon, there being no such person as Bernard Viscount Bandon; p. 416, read Earl of Tyrconnel; p. 476, read Peter Thellusson (not ThelJuson), esq. of Brodsworth Park, co. York, grandfather (not uncle) of the present Lord Rendlesham.

[blocks in formation]

GENTLEMEN,

July 27.
T last Annual meeting, held

Ayour last of June, you issued an Address, recommending to the notice of your Protestant fellow countrymen "a Declaration drawn up and signed by those Ecclesiastics, who, in this country, are the Expounders of your faith." The document alluded to was entitled, "a Declaration of the Catholic Bishops, the Vicars Apostolic, and their co-adjutors in Great Britain." Your Address was conspicuously placarded about the streets of London and other principal towns. You have also forwarded copies of both the Declaration and Address to the Royal Family, to all the Members of the Cabinet, to the Bench of Bishops, to the Members of the House of Commons, and to the Heads of the Universities in England and Scotland. "With the view also of extending the circulation of the above valuable document (says your Committee's Report of the 26th July) in quarters where it would probably excite attention, we have procured its distribution, attached to the various periodical publications that issue regularly from the public press; and the whole number distributed amounts to more than 80,000 copies." The Irish Bishops had preriously given a Declaration similar in effect to the above.

The object in issuing these documents, immediately antecedent to the Parliamentary election, was evidently to influence the votes of the electors, by attempting to soften down the odious tenets of Popery, and reconcile them, in some measure, to the feelings and religious notions of Protestants. It was intended to represent the Roman Catholic religion as the mildest and most rational, but at the same time the most persecuted on the face of the earth. Protestants are held forth to the world as the most heartless oppres

sors that ever disgraced society-whose unrelenting bigotry continues to de

prive a valuable portion of the community of all their political and municipal rights!

Unfortunately for your cause, Gentlemen, many of your assertions are founded on falsehood or evasion. Your statements and opinions are contradicted by every page in historyby the passing events of the last century-and even by facts which have occurred subsequently to the concoction of these precious documents. Even your own papal Church, in the plenitude of her eternal infallibility, would condemn your compromising spirit as a damnable heresy,' did she not imagine that this apparent dereliction was intended for time-serving purposes; and that when its objects had been effected she could grant absolution for the deed, or disclaim any participation with a production so contrary to the immutable tenets of "holy mother church."

It is true that you have "pinned your faith" to the Declaration of those Ecclesiastics who are its "Expounders," (for who ever heard of such a circumstance as a papistical layman daring to expound his own faith?), but if you had not prostituted your understanding at the altar of papal devotion, or your principles at the shrine of temporal interest, you would have discovered that the Declaration to which you so obsequiously bow, would not be acknowledged by the Romish Church, which has declared itself immutable, infallible, universal, the deposer of kings, and the eternal enemy of heretics. In the reign of Louis XIV. a similar declaration was issued by the French Clergy, of which the most important article was the denial of all temporal authority by the Church of Rome. But did the Vatican assent to this? No. She fulminated her

anathemas against the authors, whom, she branded with impiety, heresy, and rebellion. Now as the Romish religion is acknowledged by all good Catholics to be infallible and immutable, the same tyrannical principles, and the same intolerant and uncompromising spirit which have been manifested in all ages and in all nations, whenever the opportunity presented itself, must necessarily pervade her Church.

To your heathenish and idolatrous worship, politically speaking, we are indifferent; you may worship the "Holy Virgin," like another Juno, as the Queen of Heaven!*-you may offer " supreme adoration" to an inanimate thing of your own fashioning, and, as the untutored Indian exclaimed, you may, like cannibals, eat the god of your own creation;-you may continue to violate the express command of the Almighty, "thou shalt not bow down to any graven image, nor the likeness of any thing;"-all your besotted fooleries, which, in intelligent society, are "by children questioned, and by men despised," may be freely practised in this free land :— but whilst you acknowledge the supremacy of a foreign despot, whose predecessors have assumed the indefeasible right of deposing kings, and British monarchs among the rest, by virtue of their Catholic or universal anthorityno true Protestant, who values our national independence and glory, can ever think of investing you with political power and municipal autho-, rity, which, on the first opportunity, might be directed against the interesis of Protestantism and the State. "If once you could be brought (says Judge Blackstone) to renounce the supremacy of the Pope, you might quietly enjoy your seven sacraments, your purgatory and auricular confession; your worship of relics and images; nay, even your transubstantiation; but while you acknowledge a foreign power

The Reformers happily checked the zeal of the Fathers assembled at the Council of Trent, who were on the point of declaring the Virgin the fourth person of the Trinity! however, that they might not pass her over in silence, they decreed to her the titles of Mother of God, and Queen of Heaven," thus bestowing on her the title and attributes of pagan Juno. The ridiculous farce of addressing the Queen of Heaven was adopted by the late King John of Portugal.

superior to the sovereignty of the kingdom, you cannot complain if the laws of that kingdom will not treat you on the footing of good subjects."

It is true, Gentlemen, that in your Address you "disclaim the imputation of dividing the allegiance which is due to the King." Your spiritual guides, the "Expounders of your faith," have directed you so to do, without requiring you to offer any explanation. They, to be sure, have stated, among other plausible evasions, that by rendering obedience in spiritual matters to the Pope, Catholics do not withhold any portion of their allegiance to the King, and that their allegiance is entire and undivided; the civil power of the state, and the spiritual authority of the Catholic Church, being absolutely distinct."-If it were not for the subterfuge, to which it is well known by the Vatican these reverend timeservers can resort-or for the fear of ridicule and contempt-the Holy Conclave would not hesitate to proclaim these sentiments as impious and rebellious; and the history of ancient and modern times will prove their fallacy. From the establishment of Christianity under Constantine, the ecclesiastical and political interests of States have been one and undivided. "Church and State" have been considered as inseparable, both in Catholic and Protestant countries. A perpetual struggle has always existed between the Pope and the Sovereigns of Europe, which should have the ascendancy. Could the Pope and his reverend "Expounders" obtain political power in this country, their doctrines would soon appear to be the same as in times of papal glory, when the arguments of the priesthood, which none durst impugn, were to this effect:-"the laws of the Church and of

Christ's Vicar on earth,' are the infallible and immutable laws of God; the laws of the State are the mere laws of men; the laws of God are superior to those of man ; ergo, the laws of man must subserve to the laws of God." Thus the canon or papal law laid it down as an indisputable axiom, that priests were to be honoured, and not judged; "sacerdotes a regibus honorandi sunt, non judicandi." The Ro mish priests, according to their canon law, always pretended to have received a power of being superior to and independent of all civil authority. One of their canons refers to a decision of

1826.] Addressed to the British Roman Catholic Association.

Constantine in their favour, which states, that when "some petitions were brought to him, imploring the aid of his authority against certain of his Bishops, accused of oppression and injustice, he caused the petitions to be burnt in their presence, dismissing them with this valediction: Ite, et inler vos causas vestras discutite, quia dignum non est, ut nos judicemus Deos. Thus (as gods!) they claimed an exemption from civil law, when "accused of oppression and injustice." The above tale, like many others of Popish invention, is probably untrue; but at all events, it proves the audacious and over-ruling spirit of the Catholic priesthood. Indeed we have only to refer to the History of the Canon Law, which, the priests have contended, originated with the above decree of Constantine. With what desperate efforts did the Pope and the priests of this country resist the introduction of the common and statute laws, because they were aware that those laws could not tolerate such a monstrous assumption of civil and political power as those reverend despots continually arrogated to themselves.

With such historic facts before us, it is in vain to contend that the ecclesiastical agents of Popery have not always been aspiring to political ascendancy, at the instigation of the Vatican; and we have no hesitation in saying, that if a fitting opportunity presented itself, the "Expounders of faith" for the Catholic Association would soon declare that their allegiance was "entire and undivided,"-not to an heretical King, but to their lord and master the Pope, because "the laws of Kings must subserve to the laws of God." The spirit and laws of an infallible church, say the Papal canons, must be immutable; therefore what has been done before must necessarily be attempted again. The principles of the infallible Church, the good Catholic contends, can never change.

The doctrine of deposing Kings, and absolving subjects from their allegiance, under the plea that the political interests of a State were subordinate to and dependent on the ecclesiastical authorities, was first enforced by Pope Hildebrand, commonly nicknamed Saint Gregory VII. who was elected in 1073. See his celebrated bull In cœna Domini. Never did Papal pride so truly manifest itself as in

5

the conduct pursued by Gregory to wards the Emperor of Germany Henry IV. when summoned to attend him at the castle of Conosa; he was forced to walk bare-foot, and exposed to the elements in the dead of winter, from morning till night, without any sustenance whatever; while this sainted pontiff was revelling in sensual enjoyments with the Countess Matilda. In the same intolerant spirit did Innocent III. excommunicate King John, and interdict this kingdom for six years. Julius II. also, in effecting his political objects, sacrificed the lives of more than 200,000 men during his pontificate.

You will say, Gentlemen, (in the words of your Address), "why are we to be punished for excesses in which we bore no part?-If the professors of the Catholic faith were even peculiarly distinguished, in times long past, for their mistaken zeal, the more deeply should we lament their errors." A Protestant, whose very creed is universal toleration, can have no wish to punish you ;-his only object is to prevent you obtaining the means of punishing him. If you are the victims of intolerant bigotry, and a treasonable adherence to Papal despotism, we lament your condition. If you deny any adherence to the Pope, you have only to prove the truth of your assertions by taking the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance; but this you object to, notwithstanding your present disavowal of Popish supremacy, because you well know, that if you attested your asseverations on oath, which is all that is required, you would not be considered as good Catholics by your reverend "Expounders ;" and your refusal to give such a proof of sincerity shows that you cannot be good subjects. To what dangers then would this country be exposed, on a war with Papal Europe, if her Prime Minister or her Admirals were bigoted adherents to Popish Supremacy. The influence or even mandates of the Holy See might compel them, "from the terrors of another world," to betray the trust reposed in them.

Besides, you contend for the infallibility of your Church; you do not deny the enormities and errors of her Professors"in times long past," because "facts are stubborn things;" now if she is supposed to be infallible, the torrents of blood which "Christ's Vicar

[ocr errors]

on earth" and his priests have shed, and the horrible persecutions which they have incited—must have been infullibly to promote the cause of God;" therefore, as the spirit and doctrines of Popery are unchangeable, the same measures, for the deposition of Kings and the extirpation of heretics, must inevitably be pursued on every opportunity. The massacres of St. Bartholomew and the Sicilian Vespers-the fires of Smithfield-the relentless persecutions of a Bonnerand the demoniacal and assassinating spirit of a Raviliac, would be renewed, or at least attempted.

Though the Roman Catholic Association disclaim these deeds, as resulting from the intemperate zeal of "times long past," and even forego all pretensions to papal infallibility (which doctrine their "Expounders" have silently passed over, as being too ridiculous for the age), still the passing occurrences of the day falsify their asseverations, and display the malignant and ambitious spirit of Popery in its true colours. The recent Irish Elections have shown the Papal monster in its native deformity, and prove that the same deadly virus still flows through its system. Violence and assassination, for which Catholic bigots (and particularly the Irish, when instigated by their priesthood,) have always been notorious, annihilated every semblance of freedom in the late elections. The whole was under the direction of the priests, who have dissolved every tie between landlord and tenant. Their will has given law to the elections, and, regard less of human life and the destruction of private property, they have attained their political objects by means of their spiritual ascendancy. Yet the Catholic Association pretend most devoutly to believe that their mild and unassuming priesthood have no political objects in view! because their spiritual Expounders" have told them so!

66

"During the contest which has just ended, (says Mr. Maxwell, in his Address to the County of Cavan,) you have witnessed proceedings hitherto unparalleled in the history of Elections. You have seen the spiritual powers of the Romish Church openly employed for the promotion of political objects. You have seen Priests converted into furious demagogues, inciting their flocks to hatred of their fellow Christians, and ingratitude to their benefactors. What a scene did the first day of the Elec

tion exhibit! You beheld the Roman Catholic pastors marching into the County Town at the head of their respective flocks. You heard them denouncing eternal damnation against every one who withheld their support from their favoured candidate. You Crusaders mixing with the mob, and, by saw upwards of forty of these Spiritual their inflammatory harangues, stimulating

them to acts of violence and outrage.'

"The conduct of the Romish Clergy, at this Election, has afforded a practical illustration of the fallacy of the testimony given by their Prelates before the Committees of both Houses of Parliament."

"The Romish Church has ever used, and ever will use, all its spiritual powers to effectuate its political objects-the most and repeatedly avowed,) the subversion of prominent of which is, (as has been openly

the Established Church and the Protestant

Constitution of these Realms. Let it not be said, that we who wish to withhold from

it the power of effecting its mischievous pur poses, are intolerant, or that we deny our Roman Catholic fellow subjects an increase of political power on account of their religious opinions. Such is not the fact. It is not their belief in abstract points of doctrine, that in our eyes forms the barrier between them and the full enjoyment of all the utter prostration of their intellect, their the privileges of the Constitution; but it is submission in temporal as well as spiritual matters to an intriguing, intolerant, and ambitious Priesthood that renders them unfit guardians of public liberty. Look back to history-look at the present times, and see if you can find a single instance in which the Church of Rome has favoured, or even tolerated, Civil and Religious Liberty."

Ye Members of the Roman Catholic Association, ask your spiritual guides for an explanation of the above. The county of Cavan is not a solitary instance; but similar outrageous conduct has been pursued at every contested election in that ill-fated kingdom. Lord G. Beresford, who lost his election through the intrigues and anathemas of the reverend despots of Ireland, in an address to the inhabitants of Waterford, says:

"I propose to petition the House of Commons against the return which has been made of members to serve in Parliament for this county; and I will expose to the Legislature, and to the Empire at large, the means by which that return has been effected. I will prove that the Roman Catholic Clergy have exerted the vast spiritual powers of their Church, to accomplish a temporal object-that they have applied the terrors of another world to the political concerns of this—and have employed all their influence

« ПредишнаНапред »