oppressive Acts must long ago have been repealed.

Mr. D. W. Harvey expressed his surprise how the advocates of the Catholic claims, resting their argument in support of them on the broad ground of religious liberty, could continually overlook the claims of the Protestant Dissenters. Yet nearly forty years had elapsed since any serious view had been taken of the penalties and disabilities to which Protestant Dissenters were liable. They, too, might talk of their millions, and with some justice of their moral character--though they were by law excluded from every place under Government, and from every station in the Corporations. What could be more preposterous or intolerable, than that two millions of Protestant Dissenters should be precluded by law from holding any public office in the towns in which they had realised, and were expending their fortunes, and in which they had set the very best examples in upholding the principles of social order? He trusted, therefore, that before the Honourable Gentlemen to whom he alluded again pressed the claims of the Catholics upon the attention of the House, they would take some steps for emancipating the Protestant Dissenters from their thraldom. Considering their peacefulness of demeanour, sobriety of character, and uniform virtuousness of conduct, how much higher were their claims on the justice of Parliament, than those that were urged upon it more with the terror of numbers, and with the awe which they were calculated to inspire, than with reference to any practical inconvenience that might be produced from the actual state of things? The seven millions of Irish Catholics, of whose numbers the House was perpetually reminded, had been, since 1779, eligible to offices in corporations, from which Protestant Dissenters were excluded.

Не яп

move the repeal of those Acts? swered, that undoubtedly he would; but he added, that it was a question for them to consider what was the proper time for that purpose, and in whose hands they would place it. A noble Friend of his in the other House had, in like manner, always stated his readiness to bring forward the question, when the aggrieved body deemed it expedient and politic to have it discussed. His Honourable Friend (Mr. W. Smith) could testify to that fact. Having given those assurances, why were they to be taunted with party designs, and factious views, in bringing forward the claims of the Catholics? What interest had they but in the general prosperity of the empire? Yet it was urged as a charge against them, that they brought forward the question, which, having the name' popery attached to it, was exposed to prejudice; while, it was said, they neglected the cause of the Protestant Dissenters, against which the same prejudice did not exist. What reason could they have for following the course imputed to them? They could bring forward the claims of the Dissenters at any time without exciting any angry feelings or reviving any ancient prejudices; but there were not the same urgent reasons, as in the case of the Catholics. The Tests exacted by law from the Dissenters against the national religion, he was free to admit, were the most absurd, the most odious, and the most disgusting that were exacted by any Legisture. One instance he would cite-that of requiring them to take the sacrament against every feeling of their conscience, which, he would not hesitate to declare at once an act of mistaken policy, and a profanation of religion itself. Yet he would say, that the grievances of the Protestant Dissenters were not practically so great as those of the Catholics. The proof of this fact was before him. All the Catholics in the kingdom were excluded from Parliament, while his Honourable Friend (Mr. W. Smith) was able, though a Dissenter, to take his seat. The law, indeed, was founded on principles of persecution, but the annual Bill of Indemnity, in fact, gave that relief to the Protestant Dissenters which was denied to the Catholics.

Lord John Russell rose to defend himself and the great portion of his friends from the imputation made upon them by the Honourable Gentleman who had just resumed his seat-that, for the purposes of party, they brought forward the question of Catholic emancipation, while they did not equally insist on the restoration of freedom to the Protestant Dissenters. He was ready to declare, for one, and on behalf of the great body of his friends, thut, on the principle of general religious liberty, without any compromise or exception in favour of any one sect, he would give his support to any question that might come before the House. He would further state, that, on the subject of the Test and Corporation Acts, some very respectable persons, Protestant Dissenters, had applied to him-an humble individual, undoubt edly, in that House-to bring it forward. He was asked whether he was ready to

Sir Robert Wilson said, the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. D W. Harvey) had put the saddle on the wrong horse. The reason why the claims of the Dissenters had not been discussed was, that they had not asked for relief. If they had been prac tically excluded from the pale of the Constitution, there would have been as many petitions from them as from the Catholics. He confessed, however, that he thought it ungenerous in the Dissenters to withdraw their auxiliary support of the Catholics. The main body of the Dissenters were certainly more opposed to the Catholic

claims than even the members of the Established Church. The exceptions, he knew, were many and honourable, but he believed he had spoken correctly of the great body. The Honourable Gentleman closed his observations by remarking, that what he called the Government opposition to the Catholic claims, rested not so much on the fear of the admission of Catholics to that House, as on the fear that the concession to the Dissenters of all their rights and privileges would be a necessary consequence of the Bill of Emancipation to the Catholics.

Mr. Van Homrigh then addressed the Speaker, but for some time the impatience of the House rendered him inaudible, He complained of this inattention. He remarked, that he might have made a few observations to the House before, but this was the first time he had formally addressed them. He was sure more loyal subjects than the Catholics of Ireland could not be found, and they had been so from the earliest days of antiquity. At the time of the Revolution, they had sworn allegiance to a King to whom they faithfully adhered. He (Mr. Van Hom righ) had since seen the descendants of those men assembled, on the very spot on which the battle of the Boyne had been fought, under the eyes of his present Majesty, and he was sure that his Majesty, if he was asked, would say, that he never saw more cordiality and loyalty in his life than on that occasion-never since he came to the throne. The Catholics would be satisfied if they, like the Protestant Dissenters, had an annual bill passed in their favour; but as they were excluded from every privilege of the constitution, it was impossible they should be content. If, said the Honourable and Learned Gentleman, I may judge of the feelings of the Catholics by my own, I should say, that if I were a Catholic, I would never be be satisfied until my rights were given to

me.

Mr. Warburton said, the arguments of the Honourable Member for Colchester (Mr. D. W. Harvey) were peculiarly unfair, as they had been applied.

The House then resolved itself into a Committee.

Mr. W. Smith entreated, that the representation of the Protestant Dissenters by the Honourable Member for Southwark (Sir R.Wilson), might not be taken as a just representation of the opinions of the Dissenters. He could not bear to sit still and hear them represented in a point of view which, he believed in his conscience, was not deserved.

Mr. Hume, seeing the Right Honourable Secretary for the Home Department so attentive to the debate which was now going on, wished to ask him whether, in consistency with the declaration he had

made in that House, that he was a sincere friend to civil and religious liberty, and that he was willing to concede every thing that could be fairly asked for to the Catholics, short of political power--he would give his support to a measure for the total repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts?

Mr. Secretary Peel observed, that in the debate on the Catholic Question, he had not said one word on the subject of Protestant Dissenters. He had stated that he discharged a painful duty in opposing the Catholic claims, but that he was perfectly willing to assent to every privilege to which the Catholics were entitled by law, provided their qualifications were equal to those of Protestants in point of moral character and professional skill. He had said nothing of Protestant Dissenters in the debate on the Catholic claims, for, in his opinion, sufficient unto the day was the vote thereof; but he was now ready to give his vote for the measure annually passed for the relief of Protestant Dissenters. He certainly felt a little surprised at hearing the Hon. Member for Southwark (Sir Robert Wilson), assert that the Protestant Dissenters were not entitled to this annual measure of relief, because they had not petitioned Parliament in behalf of the Roman Catholics. It was unnecessary on the present occasion to enter into the question, whether it would be expedient to repeal the Corporation and Test Acts altogether. The Noble Lord opposite had intimated his intention of bringing the general measure under discussion; and whenever the subject was brought forward, he should be prepared to give an answer to the question which the Honourable Member for Aberdeen had administered to him.

Mr. D. Harvey observed, in explanation, that the great body of his constituents were Protestant Dissenters, and that they were opposed to the Catholic claims, because they were friends to religious liberty. They felt that concession to the claims of the Catholics would be incompatible with the maintenance of religious liberty.

Sir R. Wilson, in explanation, denied that he was opposed to the annual measure for indemnifying Protestant Dissenters.

Lord Rancliffe said, that the Protestant Dissenters who had given him their votes in the last three Parliaments were favourable to religious liberty, and that they had never called upon him to say, whether he should support or oppose the Catholic claims.

Lord J. Russell expressed his readiness to bring forward, at any time, a general measure for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, provided the Protestant Dissenters of this country should think it

their interest that such a measure should be brought forward.

The House resumed, the report was received, and ordered to be taken into further consideration on Monday.

DEBATE AT THE INDIA HOUSE ON THE

BURNING OF HINDOO WIDOWS.

At an adjourned Quarterly General Court of Proprietors of East India Stock, held on Wednesday, March 28, Mr. Poynder resumed the discussion of the subject of burning Hindoo widows, which he had the honour to introduce on a former Court day, and in a speech of great length, urged, that the time was now arrived for abolishing this odious practice; and moved,

"That this Court, taking into consideration the continuance of human sacrifices in India, is of opinion, that, in the case of all rites or ceremonies involving the destruction of life, it is the duty of a paternal government to interpose for their prevention; and therefore recommends to the Honourable Court of Directors to transmit such instructions to India as that Court may deem most expedient for accomplishing this object, consistent with all practicable attention to the feelings of the natives."

This was seconded by Sir C. Forbes, and supported by Messrs. Weeding, R. Jackson, Martin, and Sir J. Doyle. Amendments were proposed by Col. L. Stanhope, and the Chairman (Sir G. A. Robinson), which were supported by General Tuornton, Mr. Dixon, Capt. Maxfield, Mr. Twining, &c.; but after a very long and desultory debate, they were withdrawn, and the original motion carried with only four or five dissentient votes, and we trust it will receive the attention it merits from the Court of Directors.

RECENT DEATHS.

Died at Christchurch, Hants, February 27, 1827, Mr. JOHN HICKS, aged nineteen. The above youth had received a liberal school education, and was prosecuting his studies under the Rev. D. Gunn, with the view of entering Homerton College. His talents were of a superior order, his piety unfeigned, and his appearance prepossessing. He fell a victim to consumption. All that parental affection could desire for his recovery was done. Most respectable medical advice was secured; but his disorder, like the enraged elements, would suffer no control. A respectable father and fond family deplore his death, and the Independents have to lament the loss of a promising student.

Died, on the 20th March last, at his house in Hope Street, Liverpool, aged seventy-six years, WILLIAM HOPE, Esq. He maintained, during the whole of life, an uniform, consistent, and truly honour

able and exemplary character. His conduct, in every situation which he filled, was not only unblameable, but was also distinguished for social and Christian excellence, particularly for invariable integrity, unaffected kindness, and genuine simplicity, and was at the same time adorned by that meekness and modesty, which, instead of concealing his virtues from the notice of others, rendered them the more attractive and engaging. From the time of his retiring from the cares and fatigues of business, about 20 years since, he devoted himself to the public service, and made usefulness the employment of his remaining life. Some of the most valuable religious institutions, among which may be named, the Liverpool Bible Society owed to him instrumentally, not merely a large share of their prosperity, but their very existence; and nearly all of the numerous institutions designed to promote either the temporal comfort or the eternal welfare of the human race, with which that place abounds, have been deprived by his death of a most active, liberal, and zealous friend, patron, and supporter. Though he was attached, from conscientious conviction, to the principles of nonconformity, and connected with the Protestant Dissenters of evangelical sentiments, who justly regarded him as one of the brightest ornaments of their community, his temper was very much from whatever is narrow and sectarian. He was held in the highest esteem by persons belonging to every religious denomination, and by the inhabitants of Liverpool in general In short, to him may be justly applied the honourable testimony recorded by St. John of Demetrius," He had good report of all men, and of the truth itself;" an appeal similar to that which he subjoins may be made to the knowledge of not a few, for the truth of this brief and inadequate memorial concerning him

Died at Stebbing, Essex, on Lord's-day, March 25, aged seventy-three, the Rev. J. MORISON, late of Barnet, Herts. This estimable man was formerly engaged in business, and was in communion with the Scotch Church, Swallow Street, under the pastoral care of the excellent Dr. Trotter. At that time he was occasionally engaged in itinerant labours; but at length retiring from business, he accepted the charge of a small congregation, which was formed at Barnet by the exertions of some Ministers in London, in a deserted meeting-house, which had been for many years in ruins; the play-place of the children in the neighbourhood. Here Mr. M., by the humility and suavity of his manners, his exemplary conduct, and devotional spirit, gathered around him an affectionate people, and secured the respect of the inhabitants of the town in

WHILST none but Jesuits were preaching in China, Ricci's manner of converting and his connivances proved successful. The Christians, however oppressed in some parts, increased by these means exceedingly. But their tranquillity was disturbed by the Dominicans and Franciscans, who came in the year 1630 to assist the Jesuits, in cultivating the vineyard they had planted. The new labourers, being entirely unacquainted with the Jesuitical rules of converting, were astonished, when they saw Christians prostrate before Confucius and the tables of their ancestors, and boldly declared, that their conscience obliged them to condemn so superstitious and idolatrous a practice. A warm controversy ensued betwixt them and the Jesuits. Neither party being disposed to yield, the matter was referred to the decision of their supreme Judge at Rome. The enemies of the Jesuits were plaintiffs. A Dominican Friar, John Baptista Moralez, set out for Rome, and laid before the Congregation de propaganda fide, his own and his brethren's doubts concerning the Chinese ceremonies tolerated by the Jesuits among the proselytes. The Congregation, as usual, called in the opinion of many divines on the subject of this complaint, and at last determined, that those ceremonies were No. 29. N. S.

superstitious and intolerable. As the Dominican had represented the hall of the ancestors as a temple, and the whole ceremony as idolatry and sacrifice, they could not well pass a milder judgment. Pope Innocent the Tenth confirmed it on the 12th of September, in the year 1645, and commanded all preachers of Christianity in China, under pain of excommunication, to conform to this decree, till the holy See should determine otherwise. The Jesuits in China received this injunction with veneration, and laid it aside with contempt. This is their usual manner of treating those decrees of the bishops of Rome, which contradict the customs, maxims, and opinions of their Society. They are bound more strictly than any other order to obey the Pope, and no order obeys him less than they. It may be accounted for among other reasons by this, that their superiors, and their learned brethren, are esteemed by them to be better judges of what is useful and pernicious to the church, than the Popes and their Councils. To this injunction, at least, they paid so little regard, that several years passed before they sent a counterrepresentation to Rome. In the mean time they permitted what was forbidden by the decree, and thought themselves justified, because the decree was grounded on a false report. Their disobedience, 2 G