Page images


In reference to the Shirley family (see p. 400), A. B. observes:

"In 25 Hen. VI. W. Shirley was member for Ryegate in the Parliament then holden. Of the family of Shirley, the following have served the office of Sheriff of Surrey and Sussex, when the two Counties were under one Sheriff*.

1503, Ralph Shirley +.

1513, 1525, Richard Shirley. In those days it appears that it was not uncommon for a gentleman to serve the office more than once.

1574, Francis Shirley. Died 1577, as in p.

We are happy to announce the publication of a Second Number of Mr. SKELTON'S Engraved Illustrations of Arms and Armour.

F. B. A. observes, in reference to the remarks of our Reviewer in p. 524 of our


1578, Sir Thomas Shirley, of West Grin-
stead. Died 1606, ibid.
1617, Sir John Shirley.

In 1531 the manor of Burstone, near
Ryegate in Surrey, was conveyed to Sir
Thomas Shirley the elder, of Wiston in Sus--it should be gratified."
sex. Supposing him to have been son of
Ralph, or Richard, he might have a son at
that time, and it is probable that this son
was the Sir Thomas who sold the manor of
Burstow to one Quarles, but having been
Treasurer at War under Queen Elizabeth,
and become indebted to the Crown, this
manor, and that of Cotesbach in Leicester-
shire, were extended and seized; but on 24th
April, 44 Elizabeth, Quarles obtained a
grant of these manors, in consideration of
800l. 11s. 8d. paid by him. ‡

By a monumental inscription in the church of Albury in Surrey, in memory of the family of George Duncomb, esq. it is stated, that John his eldest son, who died in 1640, had married to his second wife Eliz. daughter of Sir Thos. Shirley of Sussex.§ This could not be a daughter of Sir Thos. who was called the elder in 1531, and proves a second Sir Thomas to have existed. Of Francis or Sir John I know no more than that they served the office of Sheriff."

* Manning and Bray's Hist. Surrey, I. xxx. &c.

† Beatrice, daughter of this Ralph, was second wife of Sir Edward Bray, of Vachery, in Surrey, from which match the present representative of Sir Edward's family in Surrey is descended.

Manning and Bray, II. p. 282. § Id. II. p. 129.

June number, that though Sir John Astley,
the Champion, was only second son of a
Knight, he was grandson of a Baron of Par-
liament (Thomas third Lord Astley, under
the writ of 23 Edw. I.) and lineally de-
scended from Philip de Estley, a Baron by
tenure temp. Hen. II.

MENTOR is informed that the price of
which he inquires after, Jan. 21, 1799, was

The error in Lempriere's Dictionary (the word "Achilles" for Agamemnon) pointed out by Mr. PILGRIM in our last Volume, p. 386, requires no further elucidation, and is not disputed by C. W. p. 482; but can Mr. PILGRIM answer the queries put by the latter Correspondent?

S. H. remarks that "Curiosity is awakened by what said in the Magazine for May, p. 401, of the Rev. Charles Joseph Douglas ;

C. K. asks if there is any such place as Feathercock Hall in Yorkshire. Lodge states it to have been an ancient seat of the family of King.

M. H. observes "I shall feel obliged to any of your topographical Correspondents, who will inform me where I can find any satisfactory account of Norwood in Surrey,to whom it belongs, and by whom it was planted. I have consulted Lysons' Environs, where it is merely observed, that a considerable part of Norwood is in the parish of Croydon. In a survey in 1646, it is described as being 830 acres, in which the inhabitants of Croydon have herbage for all manner of cattle and mastage for swine without stent.' Malcolm, in his Agricult. Survey of Surrey, drawn up for the Board of Agriculture in 1794, observes, The soil of Norwood is composed of a sandy loam upon clay or gravel, and is said to contain 600 acres, the greater part of which is in a neglected aud uncultivated state-250 acres is called an enclosed wood: no trees are, however, suffered to grow for timber, because they are cut or lopped every 10 or 11 years,' &c. These are all the notices I have found."



Page 386, for Earl of Annesley, read Earl Annesley; p. 897, read Viscount Bernard, eldest son of the Earl of Bandon, there being no such person as Bernard Viscount Bandon; p. 416, read Earl of Tyrconnel; p. 476, read Peter Thellusson (not Thelfuson), esq. of Brodsworth Park, co. York, grandfather (not uncle) of the present Lord Rendlesham.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]


JULY, 1826.



Addressed to the British Roman Catholic Association.
July 27.



on the 1st of June, you issued an Address, recommending to the notice of your Protestant fellow countrymen "a Declaration drawn up and signed by those Ecclesiastics, who, in this country, are the Expounders of your faith." The document alluded to was entitled, "a Declaration of the Catholic Bishops, the Vicars Apostolic, and their co-adjutors in Great Britain." Your Address was conspicuously placarded about the streets of London and other principal towns. You have also forwarded copies of both the Declaration and Address to the Royal Family, to all the Members of the Cabinet, to the Bench of Bishops, to the Members of the House of Commons, and to the Heads of the Universities in England and Scotland. "With the view also of extending the circulation of the above valuable document (says your Committee's Report of the 26th July) in quarters where it would probably excite attention, we have procured its distribution, attached to the various periodical publications that issue regularly from the public press; and the whole number distributed amounts to more than 80,000 copies." The Irish Bishops had preriously given a Declaration similar in effect to the above.

The object in issuing these documents, immediately antecedent to the Parliamentary election, was evidently to influence the votes of the electors, by attempting to soften down the odious tenets of Popery, and reconcile them, in some measure, to the feelings and religious notions of Protestants. It was intended to represent the Roman Catholic religion as the mildest and most rational, but at the same time the most persecuted on the face of the earth. Protestants are held forth to the world as the most heartless oppres

sors that ever disgraced society-whose

continues to de

prive a valuable portion of the community of all their political and municipal rights!

Unfortunately for your cause, Gentlemen, many of your assertions are founded on falsehood or evasion. Your statements and opinions are contradicted by every page in historyby the passing events of the last century-and even by facts which have occurred subsequently to the concoction of these precious documents. Even your own papal Church, in the plenitude of her eternal infallibility, would condemn your compromising spirit as a damnable heresy,' did she not imagine that this apparent dereliction was intended for time-serving purposes; and that when its objects had been effected she could grant absolution for the deed, or disclaim any participation with a production so contrary to the immutable tenets of "holy mother church."

It is true that you have "pinned your faith" to the Declaration of those Ecclesiastics who are its "Expounders," (for who ever heard of such a circumstance as a papistical layman daring to expound his own faith?), but if you had not prostituted your understanding at the altar of papal devotion, or your principles at the shrine of temporal interest, you would have discovered that the Declaration to which you so obsequiously bow, would not be acknowledged by the Romish Church, which has declared itself immutable, infallible, universal, the deposer of kings, and the eternal enemy of heretics. In the reign of Louis XIV. a similar declaration was issued by the French Clergy, of which the most important article was the denial of all temporal authority by the Church of Rome. But did the Vatican assent to this? No. She fulminated her

anathemas against the authors, whom she branded with impiety, heresy, and rebellion. Now as the Romish religion is acknowledged by all good Catholics to be infallible and immutable, the same tyrannical principles, and the same intolerant and uncompromising spirit which have been manifested in all ages and in all nations, whenever the opportunity presented itself, must necessarily pervade her Church.

To your heathenish and idolatrous worship, politically speaking, we are indifferent; you may worship the "Holy Virgin," like another Juno, as the Queen of Heaven! *—you may offer " supreme adoration" to an inanimate thing of your own fashioning, and, as the untutored Indian exclaimed, you may, like cannibals, eat the god of your own creation ;-you may continue to violate the express command of the Almighty, "thou shalt not bow down to any graven image, nor the likeness of any thing;"-all your besotted fooleries, which, in intelligent society, are "by children questioned, and by men despised," may be freely practised in this free land: but whilst you acknowledge the supremacy of a foreign despot, whose predecessors have assumed the indefeasible right of deposing kings, and British monarchs among the rest, by virtue of their Catholic or universal anthorityno true Protestant, who values our national independence and glory, can ever think of investing you with political power and municipal autho-, rity, which, on the first opportunity, might be directed against the interests of Protestantism and the State. 66 If

superior to the sovereignty of the king-
dom, you cannot complain if the laws
of that kingdom will not treat you on
the footing of good subjects."

It is true, Gentlemen, that in your
Address "disclaim the imputation
of dividing the allegiance which is
due to the King." Your spiritual
guides, the "Expounders of your faith,"
have directed you so to do, without
requiring you to offer any explanation.
They, to be sure, have stated, among
other plausible evasions, that " by ren-
dering obedience in spiritual matters
to the Pope, Catholics do not with-
hold any portion of their allegiance to
the King, and that their allegiance is
entire and undivided; the civil power
of the state, and the spiritual authority
of the Catholic Church, being abso-
lutely distinct."-If it were not for the
subterfuge, to which it is well known
by the Vatican these reverend time-
servers can resort-or for the fear of
ridicule and contempt-the Holy Con-
clave would not hesitate to proclaim
these sentiments as impious and rebel-
lious; and the history of ancient and mo-
dern times will prove their fallacy. From
the establishment of Christianity un-
der Constantine, the ecclesiastical and
political interests of States have been
one and undivided. "Church and State"
have been considered as inseparable,
both in Catholic and Protestant coun-
tries. A perpetual struggle has always
existed between the Pope and the So-
vereigns of Europe, which should have
the ascendancy. Could the Pope and
his reverend "Expounders" obtain
political power in this country, their
doctrines would soon appear to be the
same as in times of papal glory, when
the arguments of the priesthood, which
none durst impugn, were to this ef-
fect:-"the laws of the Church and of
Christ's Vicar on earth,' are the infal-
lible and immutable laws of God; the
laws of the State are the mere laws of
men; the laws of God are superior
to those of man ; ergo, the laws of man
must subserve to the laws of God."
Thus the canon or papal law laid it
down as an indisputable axiom, that
priests were to be honoured, and not
judged; "sacerdotes a regibus hono-
randi sunt, non judicandi." The Ro.
mish priests, according to their canon
law, always pretended to have receiv-
ed a power of being superior to and
independent of all civil authority. One
of their canons refers to a decision of

once you could be brought (says Judge Blackstone) to renounce the supremacy of the Pope, you might quietly enjoy your seven sacraments, your purgatory and auricular confession; your worship of relics and images; nay, even your transubstantiation; but while you acknowledge a foreign power

The Reformers happily checked the zeal of the Fathers assembled at the Council of Trent, who were on the point of declaring the Virgin the fourth person of the Trinity! however, that they might not pass her over in silence, they decreed to her the titles of "Mother of God, and Queen of Heaven," thus bestowing on her the title and attributes of pagan Juno. The ridiculous farce of addressing the Queen of Heaven was adopted by the late King John of Portugal.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

Constantine in their favour, which states, that when "some petitions were brought to him, imploring the aid of his authority against certain of his Bishops, accused of oppression and injustice, he caused the petitions to be burnt in their presence, dismissing then with this valediction: Ite, et inler vos causas vestras discutite, quia dignum non est, ut nos judicemus DEOS. Thus (as gods!) they claimed an exemption from civil law, when "accused of oppression and injustice."The above tale, like many others of Popish invention, is probably untrue; but at all events, it proves the audacious and over-ruling spirit of the Catholic priesthood. Indeed we have only to refer to the History of the Canon Law, which, the priests have contended, originated with the above decree of Constantine. With what desperate efforts did the Pope and the priests of this country resist the introduction of the common and statute laws, because they were aware that those laws could not tolerate such a monstrous assumption of civil and political power as those reverend despots continually arrogated to themselves.

With such historic facts before us, it is in vain to contend that the ecclesiastical agents of Popery have not always been aspiring to political ascendancy, at the instigation of the Vatican; and we have no hesitation in saying, that if a fitting opportunity presented itself, the "Expounders of faith" for the Catholic Association would soon declare that their allegiance was "entire and undivided," not to an heretical King, but to their lord and master the Pope, because "the laws of Kings must subserve to the laws of God." The spirit and laws of an infallible church, say the Papal canons, must be immutable; therefore what has been done before must necessarily be attempted again. The principles of the infallible Church, the good Catholic contends, can never change.

The doctrine of deposing Kings, and absolving subjects from their allegiance, under the plea that the political interests of a State were subordinate to and dependent on the ecclesiastical authorities, was first enforced by Pope Hildebrand, commonly nicknamed Saint Gregory VII. who was elected in 1073. See his celebrated bull In cana Domini. Never did Papal pride so truly manifest itself as in

the conduct pursued by Gregory towards the Emperor of Germany Henry IV. when summoned to attend him at the castle of Conosa; he was forced to walk bare-foot, and exposed to the elements in the dead of winter, from morning till night, without any sustenance whatever; while this sainted pontiff was revelling in sensual enjoyments with the Countess Matilda. In the same intolerant spirit did Innocent III. excommunicate King John, and interdict this kingdom for six years. Julius II. also, in effecting his political objects, sacrificed the lives of more than 200,000 men during his pontificate.

You will say. Gentlemen, (in the words of your Address), "why are we to be punished for excesses in which we bore no part?-If the professors of the Catholic faith were even pecu liarly distinguished, in times long past, for their mistaken zeal, the more deeply should we lament their errors." A Protestant, whose very creed is universal toleration, can have no wish to punish you ;-his only object is to prevent you obtaining the means of punishing him. If you are the victims of intolerant bigotry, and a treasonable adherence to Papal despotism, we lament your condition. If you deny any adherence to the Pope, you have only to prove the truth of your assertions by taking the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance; but this you object to, notwithstanding your present disavowal of Popish supremacy, because you well know, that if you attested your asseverations on oath, which is all that is required, you would not be considered as good Catholics by your reverend "Expounders;" and your refusal to give such a proof of sincerity shows that you cannot be good subjects. To what dangers then would this country be exposed, on a war with Papal Europe, if her Prime Minister or her Admirals were bigoted adherents to Popish Supremacy. The influence or even mandates of the Holy See might compel them, "from the terrors of another world," to betray the trust reposed in them.

Besides, you contend for the infallibility of your Church; you do not deny the enormities and errors of her Professors "in times long past," because "facts are stubborn things;" now if she is supposed to be infallible, the torrents of blood which "Christ's Vicar

on earth" and his priests have shed, and the horrible persecutions which they have incited-must have been infullibly to promote the "cause of God;" therefore, as the spirit and doctrines of Popery are unchangeable, the same measures, for the deposition of Kings and the extirpation of heretics, must inevitably be pursued on every opportunity. The massacres of St. Bartholomew and the Sicilian Vespers-the fires of Smithfield-the relentless persecutions of a Bonnerand the demoniacal and assassinating spirit of a Raviliac, would be renewed, or at least attempted.


Though the Roman Catholic Association disclaim these deeds, as resulting from the intemperate zeal of "times long past," and even forego all pretensions to papal infallibility (which doctrine their Expounders" have silently passed over, as being too ridiculous for the age), still the passing occurrences of the day falsify their asseverations, and display the malignant and ambitious spirit of Popery in its true colours. The recent Irish Elections have shown the Papal monster in its native deformity, and prove that the same deadly virus still flows through its system. Violence and assassination, for which Catholic bigots (and particularly the Irish, when instigated by their priesthood,) have always been notorious, annihilated every semblance of freedom in the late elections. The whole was under the direction of the priests, who have dissolved every tie between landlord and tenant. Their will has given law to the elections, and, regardless of human life and the destruction of private property, they have attained their political objects by means of their spiritual ascendancy. Yet the Catholic Association pretend most devoutly to believe that their mild and unassuming priesthood have no political objects in view! because their spiritual Expounders" have told them so!

tion exhibit! You beheld the Roman Catholic pastors marching into the County Town at the head of their respective flocks. You heard them denouncing eternal damnation against every one who withheld their support from their favoured candidate. You Crusaders mixing with the mob, and, by saw upwards of forty of these Spiritual their inflammatory harangues, stimulating them to acts of violence and outrage."

"The conduct of the Romish Clergy, at this Election, has afforded a practical illustration of the fallacy of the testimony given by their Prelates before the Committees of both Houses of Parliament."

"The Romish Church has ever used, and ever will use, all its spiritual powers to effectuate its political objects-the most and repeatedly avowed,) the subversion of prominent of which is, (as has been openly

the Established Church and the Protestant

Constitution of these Realms. Let it not

"During the contest which has just ended, (says Mr. Maxwell, in his Address to the County of Cavan,) you have witnessed proceedings hitherto unparalleled in the history of Elections. You have seen the spiritual powers of the Romish Church openly employed for the promotion of political objects. You have seen Priests converted into furious demagogues, inciting their flocks to hatred of their fellow Christians, and ingratitude to their benefactors. What a scene did the first day of the Elec

be said, that we who wish to withhold from

it the power of effecting its mischievous purposes, are intolerant, or that we deny our Roman Catholic fellow subjects an increase of political power on account of their religious opinions. Such is not the fact. It is not their belief in abstract points of doctrine, that in our eyes forms the barrier between them and the full enjoyment of all the utter prostration of their intellect, their the privileges of the Constitution; but it is submission in temporal as well as spiritual matters to au intriguing, intolerant, and ambitious Priesthood that renders them unfit guardians of public liberty. Look back to history-look at the present times, and see if you can find a single instance in which the Church of Rome has favoured, or even tolerated, Civil and Religious Liberty."

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »