Your cross-examination of the witnesses of the miracle performed on Mrs. Stuart, cannot fail to bring the history of the blind man, recorded in the ninth chapter of St. John's gospel, to the recollection of every christian reader. The same perverseness in attempting to confuse and perplex a plain story, marks the language of the Pharisees and the Exposer, and the same uncandid cavilling, which in the latter descends even to verbal criticism, though this ill becomes a dabbler in divinity, who talks of Prince Hohenlohe having been a priest all his life." What you attempt to prove is that there was no Dignus vindice nodus, namely, that Mrs. Stuart laboured under no severe illness, none but such as might be naturally cured in a minute. How culpable, and even cruel, then were her physicians and surgeons in torturing her for four years with the lancet and the bistouri, with bleeding, and blistering, and scalping! What, sir, no severe illness, in suffering for four years a paralytic affection, which frequently deprived her of sight, and` hearing, and motion, which for the last half year rendered her unable to turn in her bed! and for the last month, to utter a word on the most necessary occasions!-And to be cured of all this in an instant, at the conclusion of her devotions, and of prayers offered up to God for her in Dublin and at Vienna, without any extraordinary interposition of the Almighty!Really, Sir, the Pharisees acted much more rationally than you do, when being unable to account for the prodigies wrought by Christ, on natural principles, and unwilling to ascribe them to God, they attributed them to the devil, saying: In Beelzebub, the prince of devils, does he cast out devils. Mat. xii. 24. With respect to the character of the witnesses against any cause, they are concerned in, I know that the gentlemen of the bar are accustomed to say any thing that suits their purposes, their prejudices, or their fancies, still I doubt much whether they are warranted, even by the law of the country, out of court and in print, to traduce any fellow subject, whose oath is admissible in a court of justice, as not deserving of credit, upon his or her affidavit. This, however, you do, with respect to five ladies at once, each of whom is of unsullied character; where you publish that "the united testimony of the five women,

"(the sworn witnesses of the cures in question) would scarcely "establish a controverted five shilling claim in any petty court ❝in Ireland." p. 4. You venture on this scandalous obloquy, without knowing any thing of the ladies whom you thus traduce; but will any individual who does know them, afford one glean of countenance to your shameful libel? I take upon myself to answer, NO! but much on the contrary. And, if some of the candid and upright members of your own communion should be excited by your publication to visit Mrs. Stuart and her fellow-witnesses, whom you represent as perjured impostors, confederated to impose a religious fraud upon the civilized world for the interested motives you ascribe to them, p. 81. and instead of such characters, should find them to be ladies of good understanding and polished manners, of subdued passions and unaffected piety and benevolence, who live for nothing but to serve God and benefit their fellow creatures, and who fear nothing but to offend God, which they themselves believe, and teach their numerous scholars to believe, would result from the least lie told to save the lives, or even the souls, of a million of people; if, I say, such upright Protestants should discover all this, in the traduced party, without being able to trace the same virtues and delicacy of conscience in the character and conduct of the traducer, will not you, Sir, have essentially injured the cause you took up your pen to serve? May not you, perhaps, gain more converts to the religion of your pious ancestors than Prince Hohenlohe can, with all his miracles? Be assured, Sir, by a person who speaks from long experience, that one of the most fruitful sources of conversion to the true Religion, is the detection of the calumnies and blasphemies which her imbitterred enemies are in the habit of vomiting out against her.

Gentle, however, and christian-like is your treatment of the Catholic Ladies, compared with that of the Catholic Bishops, especially of Dr. Murray and Dr. Doyle. With them you keep no terms of justice, charity, or decorum; and when reprehended by your dignified colleague, the Rhapsodist, for your unwarranted licentiousness of tongue, and scurrilous abuse of gentlemen and scholars of spotless reputation and behaviour, of

Prelates, according to your own law, and Bishops according to your own church, you excuse yourself in a second edition of your ribaldry with saying: "I plead, not guilty, to the charge "of using any language towards the bishops or clergy which the "occasion did not warrant, nay, which it did not demand." Pref. p. viii. Let me stoop and pick up, in order to exhibit to your view, some of those flowers of refined speech which your duty demanded of you to strew in the way of these christian Bishops and Clergymen. "Your miracles are imposi"tions, and those who have sought to pass them for mira"culous on the world, are themselves IMPOSTORS." p. 6.— "I leave it to your own conscience whether you have not much, "very much to atone for to the public, to your country, and "to your God, for having been the wilful and ready, I will not say, hypocritical and knavish, instrument of giving currency "to this most dangerous imposition." p. 19.-" The alleged "miracles I call palpable frauds, practised either on ignorance

or superstition, or fabricated by parties who have a disho"nest interest in establishing them." p. 47.-" So then, titular Archbishop, ponder for a while: compare the definition of 66 a genuine miracle with the facts which you have obtruded on "the world as miraculous, in my opinion to the scandal of the "christian church, and the disgrace of your own understanding ; "and either show this reasoning of mine to be fallacious, or "admit, by your silence, that you have lent yourself, through ignorance or through design, to a gross and mischievous imposture on your credulous and misled flocks." p. 53.— "Suffer me, Sir, before I take leave of what I must say is, from "the folly, ignorance, and knavery with which it is masked, a very disgusting one, &c." p. 61. After this last quoted passage, you that profess yourself to have been, "during your "whole life, a zealous friend to the Catholic claims," p. 2. proceed to alarm government against them by representing the publication of the late miracles as an attempt to shew that "the early miracles, on which the Christian system rests, are "no proofs of that system: that the catholic hierarchy and "priesthood are watching for a convenient opportunity, and a "fit purpose when they are to apply and appropriate these un

66

"occupied, these store miracles;" in one word you represent them as preparing to raise a rebellion and overthrow government!——And you have the heart and the effrontery to conjure up these frightful, yet baseless consequences, from two of our Prelates having merely said, what the Apostles said to Annas and Caiphas respecting the miracle they had wrought on the lame man, at the temple gate: We cannot but speak the things, which we have seen and heard. Acts. iv. 20. Prelates, I will add, who, unpensioned and unthanked, have rendered greater services to government than you, perhaps, have ever done, or are likely to do. I shall conclude this long Postscript with a reflection which will probably strike every other Englishman, who peruses your book as it does me: If the Protestant friends of the Catholics in Ireland are capable of employing such debasing language, and tyrannical threats against them, what are not their declared enemies capable of saying and doing against them! If such be the spirit of Irish Emancipators, what must be the spirit of Irish Orangemen !

THE CATHOLIC ENGLISHMAN.

ABBE DUBOIS AND THE BIBLEMEN.

In our review of the former we have stated, that the latter were called upon, and must come to the challenge. The war has already begun, but feeble are the weapons which have yet been hurled against the Abbé. In the Southampton Bible Anniversary, the secretary of the Parent Society observed, "That if the Abbé had extended his enquiries a little farther, he would have found that hundreds of Hindoo children in native schools are at this time receiving instruction out of the holy scriptures. Now did the Abbé ever say that there were not hundreds, or even thousands receiving instruction? Does he controvert the fact? No but he states what is notorious, that though they have for the last century been receiving instructions, they are not yet christians—and he argues from that fact, that it is not likely they will be christians. Why then talk to us about receiving instruction, which is not the question. Again, the secretary says, "He has overlooked the encouragement of the

of the college planned by the late Bishop of Calcutta, with the special view to the accurate translations of the bible into the oriental languages." What language! what logic! He has overlooked the encouragement, &c. therefore the bible will henceforward be better translated!!! The Abbè neither overlooked the college nor the worth of the collegians, but he stated what was fact, that all their translations were bad, almost unintelligible, and quite ridiculous-and he gave proofs that they were so. Can the secretary deny that the specimen of one of their translations given at the end of his letters, is a faithful specimen? The secretary thus continues: "The Abbé had evidently overlooked the blessing of the spirit of God as necessary to follow human efforts." Oh when will the day come when men shall dare to state in public nothing but truth? The truth then is, that the Abbé is so far from having overlooked that question, that he has actually discussed it at great length, and made it even one of the chief points upon which he rests his arguments, by wishing to make it appear that God himself had rejected the Hindoos for their enormous crimes. The question is not whether the Abbé be justified in making such an assertion-we ourselves think he is not justified; but, at all events, he has not overlooked it. We wish he had. This is all the secretary of the Parent Institution has to say against him—it is evident he must go to the arsenal for fresh weapons, or he will have no chance of success against our Abbé.

But no sooner had the secretary sat down, than Mr. John Buller advances to the combat and thinks he can give a more deadly wound to the poor Frenchman than his predecessor was able to do. This gentleman's speech is rather eloquent and rather lengthy. Indeed, so much so, that we cannot at all discover the drift of his reasoning, it is so immersed in the splendour of words. But if the reader complains of the want of substance, he must endeavour to compensate the loss by abundance of glitter. We cannot give him what does not exist. He begins by observing "that what the Abbé had stated, amounts to no more than what Gibbon had collected of the ancient polytheism." The reader will perhaps wonder what can the meaning of this sentence be-or what connection