was not so much felt at a time when the will call for proof of the fact, and shew, report to the emperor, in which he goes the law which has been violated, before back as far as the reign of Peter I. This they urge such an iniquitous proceed- prince, in fact, did command the jesuits ing; or we flatter ourselves they will and their servants to quit Russia in 1719; feel “ the efficacy of public opinion," | but this measure, resorted to in a moment and learn that the spirit of our free of resentment against the court of Rome, constitution will not permit such fla- number of catholics in Russia was very grant acts of injustice to be committed small, compared with what it is now.here with impunity, We could say The extension of the empire has since much more on this subject, but our changed the state of affairs; and the occuroom will not allow us; at some future | pation of the Polish provinces in 1772 opportunity we may have occasion to placed the jesuit establishment situate recur to it: in the mean time, we sub- therein under the dominion of Russia. join an interesting account of the Russian proceedings relative to the affair of the jesuits, translated from a periodical work, published in Paris, called L'Ami de la Religion et du Roi, of the 3d of May instant, and beg the serious attention of every lover of justice and freedom of conscience to it. "THE storm which has just burst on the Russian jesuits had been long foreseen by every one acquainted with public affairs in Russia. Prince Alexander Galitzin, minister of worship, highly resented the conversion of his nephew, who had been educated by the jesuits. Several ladies of high rank at St. Petersburgh also embraced the catholic religion, and the jesuits were charged with perverting them. These complaints brought forth the ukase of January 1, 1816, banishing them from the capital. This first stroke was only a prelude to other harsh measures. The general of the jesuits was forbidden to leave Russia and repair to Rome, to which he was called by the restoration of his order. Its members, whether in colleges or missions, were kept in a constant state of alarm; their enemies availed themselves of every opportunity to put the worst construction on their conduct. The clergy of the established church could not endore men who certainly were greatly their superiors in learning, talents, and zeal, and who gained the esteem of the public by the regularity of their conduct, and the solidity of their instructions. The presence of such men amidst a clergy, whom all accotints represent as grossly ignorant, could not fail to produce comparisons not at all favourable to the latter. Hence sprung frequent complaints, which were seconded by bible-mongers and infidels, both like hating a body which has rendered such services to the church. Antiquated prejudices, modern envy, rivalship, infidelity, all conspired in fatiguing the Russian ministry with incessant complaints, clauaours, and accusations. The effect was as pernicious as it could be. The minister of wor`ship and public instruction presented a long | "Catharine II saw the utility of these establishments in a country affording such the jesuits, and wished to preserve them, scanty means of education: she protected when Clement XIV, yielding to the solici tations of some courts, issued his famous brief of suppression. The minister of worship, in his report, passes over in silence the protection which Catharine afforded to the Polish jesuits; indeed he could not speak of it, determined as he was to coun se:l the emperor to quit the line of conduct pursued by his grand-mother, and banish those whose services had been acknowledged by her. It is said that Alexander bas the greatest veneration for the memory ef his grand-mother, and glories in following her principles of government; and it is thought that she would have formed a better judgment of the consequences of the step that has just been taken. "Be this as it may, Catharine repre sented to the pope, that the suppression of the jesuits would greatly injure her catholic subjects; that the jesuits were in possession of the Polish colleges; and that their services were necessary in a country so ill provided with the means of instruction.By her authority, the jesuits assembled at Polocz, in 1780, and elected a vicar general. Paul I was as indulgent to them as his mother : he permitted them in 1800 to serve a catholic church in Petersburgh, and shortly after they forined a college there, which was soon filled with students. The minister of worship did not think fit to notice in his report the measures taken by Paul to procure from the holy see a formal sanction of the jesuit establishments in Russia; but it is well known, that, at his instance, Pius VII did issue a brief, dated March 7, 1801, repealing, in favour of Russia, the destructive brief of Clement XIV. "From this period the jesuits made greater progress; they were employed in colleges, parishes, and missions, under the jurisdiction of the ordinaries. At Petersburgh they built a large college, which was soon filled with students. Their success excited the euvy of the school-masters, who found the number of their pupils dimi to beg their bread in a foreign land, for no mention is made of any pension to be allowed them; yet one would think, that religion and humanity claimed some compen sation for men stripped of their all, and deprived of the means of subsistence.What are these poor exiles to do in countries, of the language and customs of which they are entirely ignorant? Are they all guilty, and all so guilty, as to deserve per nishing; and some conversions that took place at the same time drew complaints from the Russian metropolitan and his adherents. The accusations were listened to by prince Galitzin, aud produced the ukase of January 1, 1816. It is evident, fiom his late report, that he even then advised the banishment of all jesuits from the empire, but the emperor refused to sanction so severe a measure. The jesuits are reproached by the minister with having in-petual exile? Is this the application of curred debts; but need it excite surprise that they were forced to borrow sums to meet the expenses of building a large college, with its offices? The debt would have soon been liquidated, had they been suffered to retain their establishment: they asked no loans from government; nor is much merit to be claimed for undertaking to pay the debts of those whose property they have seized. "In fine, the emperor is advised by the min.ster to banish all jesuits from Russia, prohibiting them from ever setting foot, again in that country, under any pretence whatsoever their academy at Polocz is shut up, together with the schools appertaining to it. A seizure has been made of all their property, real and personal; the jesuits are to be immediately transported beyond the boundaries of the empire, at the expense of government. Governors of provinces are to send notice of the date of their departure, and the routes by which they are transported. "Such jesuits who are natives, and not in holy orders, may remain, on condition of quitting the society; those who have made Vows may either apply to the holy see for leave to enter any other religious order, or join the secular clergy. The emperor, March 25th, approved | of these arrangements, recommending at the same time, that those attentions should be paid to age and infirmity that humanity and religion prescribe. "We hope this recommendation will be attended to; but every one knows what generally takes place in the execution of rigourous measures. The spirit that dictates them presides at their execution, and the sovereign is not there to soften their severity. Orders are given to hurry them into exile; governors will hold themselves bound to comply with the decree in the strictest manner; and in all probability the Russian jesuits will meet with the same treatment which their predecessors experienced more than half a century ago in France, Spain, and Portugal, where every plea of justice and humanity was utterly disregarded. "Thus, by one stroke of the pen, three hundred and fifty religious men are banished and outlawed; they are driven out, without any means of support or asylum, ORTHOD. JOUR. VOL. VIII. the principles of toleration, so pompously displayed in the prefaces of imperial edicts? Is this one of the articles of the holy alliance? Ought we not to pity a sovereign whose name is used to sanction such cruelty? "The report says, that the catholic metropolitan will immediately send priests to replace the jesuits in the parishes they served: it is quite certain that this cannot be so easily effected in a country where there are so few priests? How many parishes are about to be abandoned! how many missions about to be deprived of spiritual assistance! "The new colonies on the banks of the Volga were committed to the care of the jesuits; we doubt if any priests can be found to succeed them; and if successors be procured, will they be animated with the same zeal? "At all events, education must suffer.Whoever is acquainted with the state of the universities in those regions, knows how valuable was the assistance afforded by the colleges of the society, and that it is im possible to find a substitute for them at this moment. In them was to be found more learning, order, and discipline, but, above all, more attention to religion and morality than elsewhere. The academy at Polocz was in a most flourishing state; it is to be shut up, and its alumni turned adrift. New establishments for education, it is true, are ordered to be formed: to make decrees of this kind is an easy matter, but able masters, possessing the confidence of the public, are not so easily found. We prefer that policy which preserves, to that which begins by destroying in order to renovate; and we fear that Russia will soon feel the evil consequences of this proscription, which will eventually prove more hurtful to herself, than to those who are now affected by it. "We offer one observation in finishing this melancholy article. There exists amongst us a class of writers who talk much of union and oblivion; who vauntingly hold out toleration as the distinctive characteristic of the present age; who censure every law of exclusion, and every severe enactment directed against any particular class of men; who are constantly crying up moderation, indulgence, and and fifty peaceable subjects: all those fine compassion for misfortune; yet these very men, who were so loud in their condemna-speeches about humanity are then only tion of a law, dooming a number of men to banishment, as an unjust and barbarous measure, now applaud the proscription of three hundred and fifty religious men; they see in it proofs of deep wisdom, and consummate policy, and foresight. The Constitutionel, amongst others, highly approves of the spoliation and exile of three hundred empty sounds, to amuse the credulous, and they condemn persecution only when their own party are made to suffer. Behold the true meaning of liberal ideas,' of that philosophism, with honied words in its mouth, that is all meekness and sensibility in its writings! Are we still doomed to be duped by it?" W EPITOME OF INTELLIGENCE. The disadvantages under which the British catholics have so long laboured, strange to say, may be traced to the purest sources; to their conscience and their king. If there be any chivalrous attachment to the throne still remaining in the country, it is found among the English catholics. How then can such men be dangerous subjects? But their political feelings are not their only recommendation. Examine the domestic circles of the catholic nobility of England, and say, where can be found more private virtue, more exemplary manners? Their moral character combines with their political integrity (Oh! the modesty of the writer!) to render them estimable in the eyes of the sovereign and of the country." E noticed in our last the measures | ly called the postscript :-"The address taken by the learned secretary of the British catholic BODY, presented of the Stone buildings junto to procure yesterday to his majesty, is given in signatures to the address to his majesty, another part of our paper. It is more and we passed some slight remarks on numerously signed than any former inthe inconsistency and inaccuracy of strument from this truly loyal and va the dialect of this profound document.luable portion of his majesty's subjects. Whether our observations made any impression on the more sensible part of the members of the club, we will not take upon us to say; but true it is, a meeting was held in the cellar on the 8th instant, at which a warm debate took place on the phraseology of the address, and some amendments were proposed to be made in it. These, however, were ultimately rejected, on the ground, that, as the signatures were affixed to the instrument with all its faults, it could not be altered; and the supporters of the alterations were told, that if they did not like the address in its present shape, they might draw up one for themselves, and get it signed. We regret, most sincerely do we regret, that the opposers did not take the approvers at their word, and call a Having taken a little time to recover general meeting, for the purpose of from the nausea created by this sickening framing an unexceptionable address to specimen of self flattery, for the reader the sovereign; they would have found must observe, that, notwithstanding their determination hailed with enthu- the fulsome panegyric appears as the siastic joy by the catholic public, and work of the editor, it is unquestionably backed with the concordance of the the production of a most sapient and great mass of the body. The final result unassuming member of the self-named of the meeting was, that the address board, we will just remark, that a should be presented at the levee of his "chivalrous attachment" to one partimajesty, to be held on the 10th, which cular branch of the constitution may was accordingly done, and the fact was lead to the injury of the other two, and announced in The British Press and therefore public opinion may consider The New Times of the 11th in the most those who hold it not the most trustpompous manner. Taking up the for-worthy to enjoy civil privileges under mer paper by accident, our eye was the British constitution. Let the Eng. struck with the following paragraph, as lish catholics manifest the most unthe leading article of what is technical-shaken attachment to the prerogatives of the crown, but let them venerate with equal fidelity the legislative branches of the constitution, and the just rights of the people, and they will not be dangerous subjects. How the writer came to discover that the British catholics labour under disadvantages, after having assured the sovereign that they were no longer considered a pro scribed and degraded race, we will leave him to explaim; but we wish to know in what part of our history he has found out that these disadvantages had their source from any particular attachment to their king. We have always been taught to look upon the disadvantages we labour under to have their origin in our conscientious adherence to truth, and the intolerant spirit of bigotry and error. When we were told to examine the domestic circles of the catholic nobility and gentry for exemplary manners, did the writer forget the conduct of the framer of the address? We are willing to allow that the catholic nobility and gentry are generally men of the most exemplary and virtuous demeanour; but, as exceptions may be taken to individuals, whose conduct will not bear examining according to the firm and unbending precepts of our holy religion, we think it would have been more prudent and more wise to let the praise come from a disinterested quarter, than for these "estimable" creatures," in the eyes of the sovereign and of the country," to act the part of puffing lottery-quacks. But why, we ask, did this paragraph-scribe presume that all the morality and political integrity of the body were centered in the English nobility and gentry? The address is stated to be from the British catholic body, by which the Scottish nobility and gentry are included; and why should they not come in for a share of the encomiums as well as their southern brethren ? We are sure they are equally entitled to it, and the distinction must be not only insulting to their feelings, but reflecting on their virtue and morality, and political integrity: we trust they will have spirit to resent it. thousand signatures attached, was yesterday presented at the levee to the king, by his grace the duke of Norfolk, earl marshal, accompanied by the lord Clifford, sir Carnaby Haggerston, bart. sir Richard Acton, bart. sir Thomas Clifford, bart. and Edward Jerningham, esq. &c. [Here was inserted the address, for which see The Orthodox Journal for February last, after which the following names were subjoined.] Norfolk, E. M. Surrey, Shrewsbury, Newburgh, Linton, Kinnaird, Stourton, Petre, Clifford; Wm. Gibson, vic. apost. in the Northern district; John Milner, vic. apost. in the Midland district; Peter Collingridge. vic. apost. in the Western district; Wm. Poynter, vic. apost. in the London district; Thos. Smith, coadjutor in the Northern district; Alexander Cameron, vic. apost. in the Lowland district of Scotland; Ronald Mac Donald, vic. apost. in the Highland district; Alexander Paterson, vic. apost. in the Lowland district; Hugh Clifford, Edward Stourton, Charles Langdale, Philip Stourton, Charles Petre, Philip Roper, Charles Clifford; Wm. Gerard, bart. Edward Hales, bart. Henry Englefield, bart, Henry Tichborne, bart. George Jerningham, bart. George Throckmorton, bart. Edward Blount, bart. Carnaby Haggerston, bart. F. Richard Acton, bart. Thomas Webbe, bart. Richard Bedingfeld, bart. Edward Smythe, bart. Thomas Stanley, bart. Thomas Gage, bart. Henry Lawson, bart. Pyers Mostyn, bart. James Gordon, bart. Thomas Clifford, bart. &c. &c. &c. &c. and upwards of 300 clergy with the superiors and members of every collegiate and ecclesiastical establishment in Great Britain. To behold such a list of respectable. names affixed to such a disgraceful document, is truly a heart-rending and lamentable circumstance; it forms an indelible stain upon the history of our affairs, and posterity will blush at the fallen state of catholic intellect and integrity. In the midst of our grief there is one ray of consolation, however, left us, which is, that there are many, many exceptions, in every class of our body, who have not sanctioned with their names this pitiable production of Stonebuildings, yet will not yield to any one for fidelity and allegiance to their sovereign. We rejoice to find that an Arundel, an Edward Petre, and a Vavasour, possessed public spirit and honesty to refuse their sanction to an instrument that belies their unmerited political condition and violates the precepts of their The following Address, with near twenty religion. The managers may boast of Quitting this profound and equitable panegyrist, we will now refer to the other part of the paper, from which the subjoined information is extracted. BRITISH CATHOLIC ADDRESS. the number of names which they obtained to their address, but when it is compared with the whole amount of the catholic body in Great Britain, and the means adopted to obtain them, we maintain that they have nothing to be proud of. We know for fact, that many individuals who put their signatures to this instrument, were not only ignorant of its contents, but actually considered it a petition to parliament, instead of an address to the throne; and we have strong reason to believe, that some of the persons engaged and paid to hawk about for signers, affixed the names of persons who were known to them without their consent. We are also willing to hope that most of the clergy, if not all of them, who signed, were not aware of the evil tendency of the language they were sanctioning, and we entertain the opinion that many of them will have the candour to retract their error, as in the case of The Protestation, of which this address will be found a counterpart. The New Times, of the 11th, in giv. ing publicity to the address, prefixes to it the following remark:-"The general participation of all classes of his majesty's catholic subjects throughout Great Britain in the sentiments contained in this highly proper, DIGNIFIED, and loyal address, cannot fail, we are sure, of making the deepest impression on every Englishman who peruses it, and will insure, we have no doubt, on the part of the sovereign, that immediate attention, which a body, SO EMINENTLY RESPECTABLĚ, as that of the British catholics, has so long merited." Here is another lottery. puff, for the insertion of which Dr. Slop, we have no doubt, was well paid. But, notwithstanding the propriety, dignity, and loyalty of our so eminently respectable" anticipators of chance, we feel confident, when the day of drawing come, they will have the misfortune to regard themselves, if their countrymen do not, a still proscribed and degraded race. That this "highly proper and dignified" address will make the deepest impression on every Englishman who peruses it, we do not believe, though we greatly fear the sensible part of our protestant countrymen will be impressed with the deepest feelings of dis. gust and contempt at the stupidity, weakness, and inconsistency of catholic understanding, and therefore we trust some measure will be proposed, that shall remove this impression before it takes too deep a root, and convince the people of this country that the catholic body is not devoid of common sense and political independence. The Dublin Weekly Register calls it " a very excellent address;" we wish the editor had condescended, at the same time, to point out the supereminent qualities it possesses over that voted by his countrymen at an aggregate meeting, and presented by the earl of Fingali. For our part, we can only say, that a comparison of the two documents involuntarily occasions a sensation of shame in our breast, at the contemptible diction of that approved by him and the selfnamed board sanctioners, as it partakes of all the frivolity and vanity of its coxcomical author. Our objections to this pitiful paper do not spring from captious motives, but from our veneration and attachment to consistency of language and conduct, aud our ardent desire to preserve the catholic name, free from strain and disgrace. The dialect of the address is contradictory to the principles of our holy religion; it is in violation of one of the commandments of God, and therefore highly improper for catholics, of all classes, to sanction with their names. The Doway catechism, which is put into the hands of all catholic children, teaches us, that we are forbidden by the eighth commandment to have recourse to false testimony, flattery, and lies; and that we are commanded by it, "to speak and witness the TRUTH in ALL things. For the devil is a liar, and the father of lies." Bishop Hornyhold, in his first discourse on this commandment, says, “To bear false witness is, to affirm a thing upon word or oath to be true, when we know or believe it to be false; or to declare a thing to be false which we know or think to be true; and this whether it be by word of mouth, or by writing, by signs, or any exterior behaviour, by which we discover our meaning. This may happen upon several occasions, in public or in private, in open court or upon ordinary occasions....Such as bear false witness out of fear, shew they fear men more than God; and choose to live easy here, whatever they may do hereafter....Such as commit |