Dominic was appointed the first inquisitor, by Alexander III., the bloodiest of all the popes. I give the following account of him from Limborch, who quotes from popish writers as his authorities, as indeed he generally does. When Dominic had received the pope's letters, appointing him to the holy office of inquisitor, "Upon a certain day, in the midst of a great concourse of people, he declared openly, in his sermon, in the church of St. Pruillian, that he was raised to a new office by the pope; adding, that he was resolved to defend, with his utmost vigour, the doctrines of the faith; and that if the spiritual and ecclesiastical arms were not sufficient for this end, 'twas his fixed purpose to call in the assistance of the secular, to excite and compel the Catholic princes to take arms against heretics, that the very memory of them might be entirely destroyed." The history of the thirteenth century shows how horribly faithful he was to his promise. That he was a bloody and a cruel man, is confessed by writers of his own order: thus, for instance, Camillus Campegius, a Dominican, and also an inquisitor, having recited certain letters of his founder, says, "I have the more willingly annexed to this treatise of punishments, these letters of St. Dominic, our father, who first exercised the office of inquisitor, that all may be able to make a comparison between the ancient severity made use of to stop the progress of these crimes, and the present moderation and tenderness of this holy tribunal." What must the Inquisition, in the thirteenth century, have been, when that of the sixteenth was declared to be, in comparison of it, moderation and tenderness! St. Dominic's "mother, before she conceived him, is said to have dreamed, that she was with child of a whelp, carrying in his mouth a lighted torch; and that after he was born, he put the world in an uproar by his fierce barkings, and set it on fire by the torch which he carried in his mouth. His followers interpret this dream of his doctrine, by which he enlightened the world; whereas others, if dreams presage any thing, think that the torch was an emblem of that fire and faggot, by which an infinite number of men were burnt to ashes." Limb. Hist. Inq. cap. x. The standard of the Inquisition at Goa, has, under a portrait of the saint, this figure of a dog, with a torch in his mouth, setting fire to a figure of the globe.

Now the devotions which Papists pay to the image, and to the memory of such a man, make it evident that his character and conduct are not only approved, but applauded by them. What, therefore, are we to expect from Papists any where, but the imitation of his conduct, whenever providential restraints are removed? The late atrocities in the south of France, and during the Irish rebellion, are no more than what might naturally be expected of persons who worship such a fiend as St. Dominic. The great business of his life was extirpation. His favourite employment was to persuade and compel princes to tread under foot, and destroy heretics, as venomous adders, who ought not to be suffered to live on the earth; and he was much more of an honest man than modern Papists, for he did not affect to conceal, but openly avowed what his object was; whereas his followers, of the present day, insidiously conceal and deny what their own principles would necessarily lead them to, if they had the secular power in their hands. Their venomous hatred of heretics is not the least abated; and it would be childish to expect that where such a principle exists, it

would not show itself by actual violence, whenever it could do so with impunity.

I have been led away a little from the subject of image worship, but these reflections will be found not unconnected with it; for it may be received as a general principle, that according to the representation of an object of worship, in the mind of a worshipper, such will be the character of the worshipper himself. It is no objection to this general principle, that some of the objects of popish worship were really saints,-holy men and women; for it is not their character of gospel holiness that has a representation in their minds, or that is the foundation of their worship. It is not, for instance, Peter as a zealous and affectionate preacher of the gospel of the grace of God, but Peter, the prince of apostles, and the first of the popes, whose image they worship in Rome. It is not Mary, the humble follower of Jesus, but an idol, who, they suppose, can protect them from evil, and who will connive at their crimes, that they worship under the title of the blessed virgin but when they worship such a one as St. Dominic, they do it under his true character, of which there is a resemblance in themselves.

I hope it will appear, from what I have said on this subject, that the church of Rome is convicted of the gross idolatry of image-worship. It was my intention to have followed up this immediately with an account of their doctrine concerning relics, and the worship which is given to them; but I must leave this till the commencement of my second volume, as the next, which is intended to be the concluding number of the present volume, will be taken up with some curious private matter relating to the conduct of our Papists at home. I shall fill up the remainder of the present sheet with an account of the mode of imposition practised in our own country, in former times, in order to support the credit of an image, and how an imposture was detected. I am indebted for it to Scott's History of the Lives of the Protestant Reformers in Scotland: Life of John Row.

About the year 1549, a poor friendless boy, of whose birth probably his parents had been ashamed, tended the sheep belonging to the nuns of Scienna, or Sciennes, about a quarter of a mile south of Edinburgh. It was one of his childish amusements to turn up the white of his eyes, and in doing it, he succeeded so well, as to be able, at his pleasure, to make himself appear perfectly blind. The nuns observed him in his amusement, and spoke of it to some priests and friars who were their visitors. It immediately occurred to them, that if proper care was taken of this young person, he might, in course of time, become the fit subject of a miracle.

66

The innocent child was secreted from public view, it has been said, seven or eight years, and mostly in one of the cells, or some retired apartment in the convent. At the end of that number of years, his stature and features were so much altered, that he could not easily be recollected by the very few persons who formerly had known him. He was now judged to be of a proper age to be sent forth as a blind mendicant, and to receive instructions how he should behave. A person was hired to conduct him, who believed him to have been born blind, and to have been hitherto supported chiefly by charitable contributions from the ladies of Sienna.

"This simple young man, who scarcely knew any other people in the world than those under whose tuition he had been held, readily promised to obey their injunctions. They bound him by a solemn, but rash vow, to affect blindness, and to beg alms, till they should advertise him to the contrary. He kept his promise, and, for a considerable space of time, was led through the country, receiving such alms benevolent people were pleased to give him."

as

"At last the period arrived when those priests and friars who were in the secret of his not being really blind, thought it expedient that he should be relieved from his hard condition.

"At the east end of the village of Musselburgh, in Mid-Lothian, was a celebrated chapel, dedicated to the honour of the Virgin Mary. Its proper name was Loretta, but it was vulgarly called Alareit, or Lawreit. There was also a chapel of the same name in Perth; and many credulous people in the Lothians, and at Perth, as well as the people of Loretta, in Italy, believed that their chapel contained within it the identical small brick built house in which the blessed mother of our Lord had dwelt when at Nazareth; and that it had been miraculously conveyed and upheld entire, from its original seat, by the ministry of angels."

It was in the well frequented chapel at Musselburgh, "and where miracles were most commonly expected to be seen, that the pupil of the nuns was to receive his sight. Public intimation of the miracle to be performed, was given in Edinburgh, and in the neighbouring parts, and on the day appointed, a prodigious number of people were assembled. They found that there was a stage erected on the outside of the chapel. Having waited a little while, they beheld, led forward upon this stage, the seemingly blind young man, whom many of them knew, and whose blindness they had probably often pitied. He was attended by priests and friars, and, no doubt, also by Thomas, the hermit, (a famous worker of miracles,) if he was then alive. After some time spent in the use of prayers and ceremonies, his eyes, to the satisfaction of the multitude, appeared to be perfectly restored. The young man, who had long been restricted from employing honest means for his subsistence, now sincerely rejoiced. He returned thanks to the priests and friars; and when he came down from the stage, was carressed and congratulated by the people, and some of whom gave him money.

A Protestant gentleman who was present, detected the cheat, and took the young man into his service.

CHAPTER L.

TESTIMONY CONCERNING THE STORY OF THE MAN IN THE WYND. CHARGE SUBSTANTIATED, THAT THE CATHOLIC VINDICATOR WAS GUILTY OF SWEARING. MR. SIMEON.

SATURDAY, June 26th, 1819. On the second of June, I was waited upon by two gentlemen of the Romish church, and one Protestant. "in pursuance,' as was stated in a card from one of them, " of the requisition contained in the twenty

fourth number of THE CATHOLIC VINDICATOR." Relating to the story of the man in the Wynd, I had said, in my forty-second number, "If any of my readers, Protestant or popish, doubt the truth of the story, or join with Mr. Andrews in calling it a forgery, I shall be ready, whenever required, to furnish them with sufficient evidence of the truth of my statement." Mr. Andrews quotes these words, partly in great capitals, to show his admiration of my boldness; and he adds, 'Well, then, I have no doubt but THE PROTESTANT has many readers, both popish and Protestant, who doubt his tale; I most earnestly request that some of them will call upon my adversary, and require to be furnished with that satisfactory evidence which he has pledged himself to furnish them with."

The hour having been fixed the day before, I had three women in waiting when the gentlemen called, ready to give their evidence upon oath, and a notary public to take it down. To my surprise, however, I found they did not want the evidence of witnesses, but that they came on purpose to examine me: and they presented me a string of questions, most of which, so far as I recollect, I could have answered; but I declined submitting to be interrogated, while I did not see what end it could serve, or to what discussions it might lead. I had a friend or two present, who, as well as myself, endeavoured to convince them of the absurdity of their demand. They professed the utmost respect for my character as a gentleman, and declared their willingness to receive my testimony, but as for my witnesses, they would not believe them. Mr. Simeon, who appeared to be the principal person of the party, made some unhandsome and cruel insinuations against the character of my witnesses, of which I shall say more hereafter; and positively declined hearing their evidence, but insisted on receiving from me answers to their written interrogatories. This appeared one of the most marvellous things I had ever seen. I had been repeatedly, and by handbills, posted on the corners of the streets, accused of forgery, and of fabricating a certain story. I had publicly pledged myself to prove, by sufficient evidence, that the story was true. The gentlemen came to me on purpose to receive this evidence, or they did not come for the purpose of receiving what I had promised to furnish, and what they themselves professed to seek; but they would take no evidence but my own word, while my own veracity was the very point in question. The Protestant gentleman who came along with them was a stranger to me, but I learned that he was a respectable lawyer, who fills a civil office under the sheriff. This rendered the procedure more suprising, as he could not but know what ought to be received as evidence, and what not. I intend, however, no reflection against him. He managed the business with the utmost politeness, and with as much liberality as was consistent with the part he had to perform; and I am persuaded he was not acquainted with the real state of the case. Had he known that the only point to be proved was, that, in a certain matter referred to, I had stated the truth, he would not have supposed that my bare word would be considered evidence; because, if persons would not believe what I had written, how could they believe what I should say?

Finding that they persisted in demanding of me answers to their questions, I protested before the whole company, in which were only

two friends of my own, besides the notary and his clerk, that I was ready to do all that I had promised to do; that is, that I would prove, by these three witnesses, that the story which Mr. Andrews called a forgery, was true in every material point; and I told the gentlemen who came to receive the evidence which I had promised to furnish, that I would proceed in taking the declarations of my witnesses: that I would be glad if they would stay, and hear, and cross-examine them; but that if they would not hear, they might read, as I would publish the whole matter.

They then consented to hear what the witnesses had to say, but they would have no hand in examining them, or so much as allow their names to be taken down, as present at, or parties concerned in, the examination. It was not convenient at the time and place to get a justice of the peace, but supposing the professional gentleman who came as the legal adviser of the other two, from the office he holds, to be qualified to administer an oath, I requested him to swear the first witness, which he declined. She was therefore admonished to speak, as upon oath, as she would probably be required to repeat her declaration, and swear before a magistrate.

"At Glasgow, the second day of June, eighteen hundred and nineteen years, compeared the following persons, and freely and voluntarily emitted the following declarations, namely:

"Margaret King, alias M Murray, wife of the deceased John M'Murray, late labourer in Glasgow, a Protestant,-Declares, that she was married about thirteen years ago to the said John M Murray who was a Catholic, by one of the justices of the peace of Glasgow, whom she supposes to be a Mr. Menzies; but she is possessed of a certificate to that effect, which she can produce: That her husband and she lived in the utmost friendship, except upon the point of religion, and that her husband continued for many years before his death urging her to become a Catholic, which she always declined: That her said husband has repeatedly threatened her with death and destruction, and sworn by the Holy Trinity that he would do so unless she became Catholic; and for the same purpose upon one occasion offered her money, which she resisted and refused: That her said husband left her for the purpose of going to Ireland, as he said, about three weeks before his death, although he continued to lurk in Glasgow: That he sent for her the day before he died, at the foot of the Saltmarket, in a friend's house, who kept lodgings, but the name of the person she does not know, but that he is a Catholic, and a brother-in-law of Patrick Thornton, a member of the Roman Catholic chapel in Glasgow; from which house she had her husband removed to the house of Elizabeth King, a cousin of the declarant's: That when her said husband was so removed as aforesaid, to her cousin's house, he declared his sorrow for having deserted her, but that it was by the advice of his priest, who had advised him, as he said he could not live with a woman with whom he could not associate on account of her religion, and being a heretic : That when her husband died in the declarant's cousin's house, he was removed to her own house; and that after his death, the letter quoted in the twenty-fifth number of the Protestant, for January the second, 1819, was found in his pocket, and that it is fairly quoted in the said VOL. I.-47