the land, can we defend such a state of things, if it be true that the 4,000 Papists are to be left constantly out of view? We have been used to defend the Irish Church, as too small, rather than too large; having reference to the 8,000,000 of the whole population. But if it were really admitted, and laid down as a principal fact in the case, that the Protestant clergy of Ireland had no other charge than that of some 800,000 or 900,000 Protestants of the Episcopal Church, and that the whole body of the Romanists were altogether beyond their ken,-we certainly should find it rather difficult to defend the continuance of such an anomalous state of things.

ARTICLE VI.

We may now close the various notices of the two Churches of Wales and Ireland, which have been given recently in our columns, by drawing from the facts passed in review, a few practical results. And we may set these down, briefly and simply, just as they arise.

1. The idea of a Church Establishment, when rationally and honestly entertained, comprehends among its chief features, efficiency and fitness of adaptation to the people ;-the using right means, to achieve a right end.

2. English statesmen, when dealing with the Church in Ireland and in Wales, have, especially in times past, too much forgotten this; and have filled the places of influence and authority in those Churches,

too often with men possessing no spiritual or mental qualifications, and whose preferment has been clearly traceable to their family or political affinity to men in power.

3. Especially has this been the case with reference to the obvious point of language. The clergy in both countries have, in too many instances, been unable to speak to the people" in their own tongues, of the wonderful works of God." And hence the bulk of the people have been left in Ireland to the priests, in Wales to the Methodists, who took care to provide preachers capable of making themselves understood by the people.

4. In Ireland, it is an historic fraud and misstatement, to speak of the Romish priesthood as having been deprived of their property; or of the Protestant clergy as having taken it from them: it being abundantly certain, that the Irish priests and bishops at the time of the Reformation, did not resist its progress, and were not deprived. And hence, that the Romish sect in Ireland could only be resuscitated by injunctions, missionaries, and other aids from Italy; from which missionaries, and not from the ancient clergy of Ireland, must the present priests of that country trace their descent.

5. That in both countries, but in Ireland especially, it is certain that Protestantism has not had a fair trial. For that, what with downright plunder three centuries since,-nepotism and indifference at a later period, and a disregard of the bulk of the people, and of their language at almost all periods, the question, of what an efficient and well-supported Protestant Church could do with the people, has never yet been fairly tried. And now we have come to a state of things, in which the clergy, too commonly, have

become accustomed to regard the Protestants, and the Protestants only, as forming their proper charge; and in which statesmen, of nearly all parties, agree to regard Ireland as a country irreclaimably Popish ; and of which the priesthood, as it cannot be got rid of, ought to be brought into union with the State.

Such, then, is the state of the case in Ireland and in Wales. The Established Church, in both countries, might, if properly supported, armed with the language of the people, and zealously intent on "preaching the Gospel to the poor," do much, and that rapidly, in reclaiming the people from bye-paths. But the Government seems to have concluded the question to be practically settled; and that the only reasonable course now left is, for statesmen to watch for, and embrace, the earliest opportunity of endow. ing the priests of Ireland with a large revenue; as a mere scheme of so-called political expediency.

Practically, then, these lessons speak,

1. To statesmen, to abandon that style of speech which was used by Lord Stanley in the Maynooth debate, "My Lords, a Catholic country you find Ireland, and as a Catholic country you must legislate for her." If this were to be taken for granted, it would be clear that the Church of Ireland, on its present footing of a national Church, could no longer be supported.

2. To the Protestants of Ireland and of England. Forget not that the Reformation has never had free course in Ireland; that the power of Divine truth has not been fully tried there; and that, as to voluntary efforts, Sierra Leone and New Zealand have yielded more abundant fruit, partly because those countries have been better cultivated, than our neighbouring kingdom of Ireland.

Your excellent leading articles respecting the Irish Church have left but little to say on the subject of the Reformation in the sixteenth century, which commences the third period of its history. On that important occasion, the novelties of Romanism were discarded, and the primitive Irish Church became again the Established Church of Ireland; and "all sorts and conditions of men" gave in their adhesion

to it.

It is a well-established fact, as you have remarked, that in the reign of Elizabeth, the entire mass of the population, lay and ecclesiastical, outwardly conformed to the ritual ofthe Established Church, and that Ireland, for the first time of her annals, was then at peace under one acknowledged Sovereign. "That the Irish Church is an enormously wealthy Establishment, and that it was forcibly rent from its original owners, and given to the clergy of about one-tenth part of the people, is as gross a perversion of truth (as you have again remarked) as can anywhere be found, and yet such is the effect of a perpetual repetition of a falsehood, it is very generally believed." As a proof of the truth. of your observation, that "the falsehood is very generally believed," you may recollect that the Earl of

Harrowby, when Lord Sandon, in his speech on the Maynooth Endowment Bill, said, without one individual rising to contradict him, "that England was perfectly right, when she reformed herself, to take the National Church property with her; but what did they do in Ireland? Why, without any change in the religious principles of the people, their property was taken from them, so that he might now look upon this measure as some restitution for the spoliation then committed." The Noble Lord appeared on that occasion, strange to say, to be as ignorant of the history of his own country as he was of that of Ireland; and yet must not Lord Sandon be aware that in England the property (with one solitary exception) was taken from the entire Bench of Bishops, "without any change whatever in their religious principles." Restitution for " the spoliation then committed" may, therefore, according to his Lordship's views on the subject, be necessary there; but in Ireland the case was totally different, as the Reformation in that country was carried into effect by the unanimous concurrence of the whole body of the people; the faith of the primitive Irish Church was proclaimed by Act of Parliament, and joyfully received by all the inhabitants of the land.

If, however, restitution must be made, let Lord Sandon and others favourable to the measure adopt the only one compatible with justice. Let the abbey lands, originally granted for exclusively Romish purposes, and taken from the monks "without any change in their religious opinions," be restored by their present owners, so that if Romanism be endowed, let it be according to his Lordship's views, "by restitution for spoliation" for why tax the Church and the country with its endowment, when