intrepid looking sailor was cutting a piece of bread for his breakfast. After severing it from the loaf, he broke it in halves, and, touching his forehead with it, he made the sign of the cross in the usual manner; my right hand man stared, blew a cloud from his cigar, and unceremoniously (I might add, ungentlemanlike) spit over the gunnel of the vessel, whilst my left hand companion smiled as in scorn, and gave me a look, as if to expect that I would participate in the feeling. The act seemed to me too respectable for contempt, too grave for the behaviour of our radical, but as I did not fully understand it, I ventured civilly to ask the seaman what it meant, 'It is," said he, " a silent grace, short, sincere, and inoffensive to every one; we ought to be grateful for the gifts of Providence, and the thanks of the heart of the poor man are acceptable to the Lord, The act which I have just performed reminds me first of the breaking of bread of our blessed Redeemer, and next of his sufferings on the cross; with these thoughts I sit down to my humble meal, and begin the day, and I feel the happier for them."-" Vile Popish superstition!" exclaimed the radical. "I wish we had more of it," said I, at the same time shifting my place, and getting rid of my uncivil companions, who had thus transgressed the laws of Christian charity towards the mild and well-deserving tar.

THE SAILOR'S OFFERING OF THANKS.

On our sailing safely into harbour, with every stitch of canvass in ribbons, the bold sailor gazed an instant on the shore, took off his hat, and, after looking pensive a moment, smiled, resumed his pipe, and said, "Welcome into port, gentlemen."-" Another popish superstition," exclaimed simultaneously my pale-faced fellow passenger, now free from fear, but not from prejudice. "I wish we had more of them," repeated I.

CHRISTIAN FORGIVENESS AND SELF-CONTROL.

On landing, after a rough and stormy passage, in which my two companions had evinced some unmanly fear, and during which the sturdy sailor performed his duty, active, calm, and unmoved, we were bargaining for a conveyance, when our English traveller put himself in a most violent, demoniac rage, stormed and swore, blasphemed and maltreated his courier (a very handsome Neapolitan) about some trifling circumstance of delay in getting post-horses, which was not the courier's fault; the abuse was abominable, and such as John Bull would have returned by blowing up his master sky

high, (to use a menial's phrase); the Neapolitan meekly made the sign of the cross, and continued to pack and perform his other duties. In a few moments our landlord convinced the proud master that he was in the wrong, on which the courier bowed respectfully, giving, at the same time, a dejected glance of his full black eye, which would have been a severe rebuke to one who possessed sensibility. This custom, in Italy, has for its object the checking vindictive, revengeful feeling, when provoked by violence and injustice, by bringing to mind the sufferings of our blessed Saviour, and the pardon of his enemies expressed on the cross. Upon this occasion, as before, "Another Catholic superstition!" was uttered, and I again cried, "I wish we had more of them."

ENMITY EXTINGUISHED BY THE EXTERNAL OBJECTS OF

MORTALITY.

Passing through a street in Flanders, still persecuted by the company of the two travellers already named, I beheld a coffin standing in a porch, with a vessel of water and a brush in it; a sullen-looking man approached it, looked altered and regretful, uncovered himself, muttered a prayer, and sprinkled holy water on the lid. This was one who had been an enemy of the deceased; but now resentment vanished, his heart smote him for not being reconciled sooner; here, however, he paid honour to his remains, and ejaculated a hearty orison for the repose of his immortal part. The ablution has nothing in itself without pious sentiments; but accompanied by them, the array of mortality inspires awe, penitence, and the thoughts of our approaching dissolution; thoughts which must tend to chasten the transgressor, and to awaken him from the sleep of sin, and the torpor of corrupt enjoyment; reformation may arise from this small incident, and by it a soul may be saved." Catholic superstitions!" may say the man of obdurate heart, but "I wish we had a great many more of them" says

PHILO SIMPLICITAS,

a Catholic Convert.

A COMPARATIVE VIEW OF THE EFFECTS OF THE REVOLUTION OF 1688, IN ENGLAND

AND IN IRELAND.

It is impossible to reflect on the yearly occurrences on the other side of St. George's Channel, without being shocked at the decre

pancy which exists there between actions and professions; and the ingenuity with which terms, expressive in England of real benefits, are in Ireland tortured into equivalents for mischief and injustice. The naturalist has long been puzzled to account for the extraordinary property which the atmosphere of Ireland is known to possess, of destroying venomous reptiles, when they chance to come within its influence; but surely the moralist has much more reason to wonder that men, who in England appeared chosen vessels for the dispensation of good, should, by mere transportation to Ireland become instruments of evil; and that none but those who actually suffer from the transformation seem at all sensible of the change. We hope our constitutional readers will not condemn us unheard, if we venture to employ as an illustration of our position, the glorious Revolution of 1688.

In however favourable a light we may be disposed to view that event, we cannot resist the conviction, that there never was an instance of more shameless inconsistency, than is to be found in the conduct of those who profess to extend the benefits of our Revolution to the sister kingdom. We cannot blind ourselves to the fact, that the very men to whom England and Scotland are said to be indebted for their civil liberties, for all in fact, which as a nation they possess, were the first to trample on the rights of Ireland; that the period at which the brightest prospects dawned on them, brought mourning into Ireland; and that 1688, the era which we celebrate as the birth day of our most valuable privileges, has entailed nothing upon Ireland but misery and oppression.

Now, if this be really the case, is it not natural to suppose, that the cause of so great a difference in the effects of two Revolutions, in both of which the same principles were asserted, and the same individuals were, in general, the agents, must have been some misapplication of those principles to the people which they have not benefitted, or some unaccountable desertion of them by those who professed to be guided by no other rule of conduct? It must, on the face of it, be evident that to produce results so diametrically opposed, means must have been employed, which, with the exception of their name, could in no one point have been alike; and that in order to arrive at this similarity of result, from which we are now so distant, we must pursue a line (modified of course by existing circumstances, and the interests which have since grown up) as near as possible to that from which we at first so unfortunately strayed.

In fine, to descend from generals to particulars, it does appear

to us indisputably true, that an Irishman might with perfect propriety, and with earnest gratitude, crown his bowl to the glorious and immortal memory of King William, if it were possible for him to consider himself merely as a member of that great community, of which Ireland is but a part. Had that king exhibited in his conduct towards Ireland the same character which he maintained in England, and which was probably his true one, an Irishman, as an Irishman, would be the last in the world to demur to the toast which records his virtues, or commemorates his atchievements. But should he find that after having publicly avowed sentiments so liberal and so just; after having put them into full operation in England, where it was his interest so to do, he afterwards basely deserted them when opposed to his ambition, why, let me ask, should he stoop to call the apostate his benefactor, or cherish any sentiment towards his oppressor, but one of abhorrence and contempt ?

Now we ask no man to surrender his admiration of principles to which he justly attributes the greatness of his country; we ask no man to join in invective against those to whom he imagines that by him a debt of gratitude is due; but we do call upon all those who are in this country so ready to proclaim their well-earned gratitude to the memory of King William, who are so loud in their praises of our truly glorious Revolution, to condescend at length to examine if those who use the same language in Ireland, are really of the same opinions as themselves; if they celebrate the separate establishment of the same system, or merely of a system established at the same time, but wholly different in their natures and operations. Experience has long since shown that the effects of the two are widely different; that the one is productive of prosperity, the other of misfortune; the one is the parent of tranquillity, content, and abundance, the other of nakedness, famine, insubordination, and war. Experience has also proved, that those, who from that period. to the present time have governed Ireland, have, with few exceptions, governed ill; that those who now govern there have effected but little good, and that these latter, though fairly administering the existing laws, still fail in the great ends of all law. Is it not as clear as noon-day, that the groundwork of the whole must be bad, and that it can bear no resemblance to the British constitution?

As soon as William had been put in possession of the supreme authority in England, in addition to other concessions, be immediately declared the religion of the people to be the religion of the state, not certainly upon his own private opinion, (for he did not C. M.-VOL. VIII. NO. 72.

3 с

even profess it), but according to the principles which Locke* and Paley have so strongly advocated. Precisely similar was his conduct towards Scotland, the people of which country differed, as they do still, in point of religion, from England. "You are," says William to his Commissioner in Scotland, " to pass an Act, establishing that "to church government which is most agreeable to the inclinations of the people." So that here we have a prince, in the first place regulating the established religion of an accession to his dominions, not by his own, nor by that of his former subjects: and in the second place, confirming the religion of a portion of that accession, merely because it was in unison with the wishes of the inhabitants.

Let us now examine the occurrences in Ireland immediately subsequent to the consolidation of William's power in England, that we may see how far the system pursued in the one country tallies with that adopted in the other. James, whatever were his faults in England, was certainly less unmindful of the attachment of his Irish subjects than any of his predecessors. Compelled to fly from England, he threw himself upon their loyalty; and they, unaccustomed to a prince who openly avowed himself a member of that church to which they themselves belonged, received him with open arms. The whole country, with the exception of the Protestants, who distrusted his promises of protection, and the puritans of the north, flocked to his standard. In Dublin he was received with royal honours, and there maintained the magnificence of his court, until roused by the appearance of William's general in the north with 40,000 men. Ireland soon became exposed to all the horrors of a civil war. The distinctions between Catholics and Protestants were merged in the almost respectively synonimous terms of Jaco

* "Concerning outward worship, I say in the first place, that the magistrate has no power to enforce by law, either in his own church, or much less in another, the use of any ceremonies whatsoever in the worship of God. And this not only because these churches are free societies, but because whatsoever is practised in the worship of God is only so far justifiable, as it is believed by those who practise it to be acceptable to God. To impose such things, therefore, upon any people contrary to their own judgments, is, in effect, to command them to offend God, which, considering that the end of all religion is to please him, and that liberty is essentially necessary to that end, appears to be absurd beyond expression."-Vide Letter on Toleration.

Paley carries this principle further, and asserts, that when the majority of a people have ceased to adhere to the church establishment, it ought to be modified or altered.